Document LgL6Nj74oJqGYOMBYyZgZpvLw

1 IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF MILWAUKEE COUNTY STATE OF WISCONSIN STROH DIE CASTING COMPANY, Plaintiff, vs. MONSANTO COMPANY, Defendant. ) ) ) ) ) Case No. 639887 ) ) ) ) DEPOSITION OF WILLIAM B. PAPAGEORGE Taken on behalf of Plaintiff August 10 and 11, 1988 8l8 ^)lxv ofi J?ouu. Qfhusoun 631c Sle-. \porting, oflenotype ^J^eporiers (3*4) 62< -4790 oTcR of SQ 0%. 43-1283603 WATER PCB-SD0000018873 IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF MILWAUKEE COUNTY STATE OP WISCONSIN STROH DIE CASTING COMPANY, Plaintiff, vs. MONSANTO COMPANY, Defendant. Case No. 639887 INDEX Direct Examination by Mr. Carlson........................................ Cross-Examination by Mr. Schink............................................. &se 4 310 E X H I B ITS Plaintiffs' Deposition Exhibit Papageorge NOS . 1-16 Plaintiff 1s Deposition Exhibit Papageorge Nos . 14A&E Plaintiff's Deposition Exhibit Papageorge NO. 17 Plaintiff's Deposition Exhibit Papageorge NOS . 18-29 Plaintiff's Deposition Exhibit Papageorge No. 30 Plaintiff's Deposition Exhibit Papageorge NO. 31 Plaintiff's Deposition Exhibit Papageorge NO. 32 Plaintiff's Deposition Exhibit Papageorge NO. 33 130 280 283 287 304 305 306 307 WATER PCB-SD0000018874 IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF MILWAUKEE COUNTY STATE OF WISCONSIN STROH DIE CASTING COMPANY, Plaintiff, vs, MONSANTO COMPANY, Defendant. Casa Mo, 639887 DEPOSITION OF WILLIAM B. PAPAGEORGB, produced, sworn and examined on behalf of Plaintiff, August 10 and 11, 1988, between the hours of eight o'clock in the forenoon and five o'clock in the afternoon of that day, at the Paul Brown Building, 818 Olive Street, St. Louis, Missouri 63101, before KATHRYN T. O'NEILL, a Registered Professional Reporter and a Notary Public within and for the State of Missouri. . APPEARANCES The Plaintiff was represented by Mr. Donald H. Carlson and Mr. John R. Pendergast, Jr. of the law firm of Messrs. Riordan, Crivello, Carlson i Mentkowski, 710 North Plankinton Avenue, Milwaukee, Wisconsin 53203. The Defendant and Mr. Papageorge were represented by Mr. James H. Schink of the law firm of Messrs. Kirkland & Ellis, 200 East Randolph Drive, Chicago, Illinois 60601. WATER PCB-SD0000018875 Computer Aiaed Transcription by Xscnoe ^ 1 IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED by and 2 btveen Counsel for the Plaintiff and Counsel for the 3 Defendant, that this deposition may be taken in shorthand 4 by KATHRYN T. O'NEILL, a Registered Professional Reporter 5 and Notary Public, and afterwards transcribed into typewriting and signed by the Witness. 7 8 o-O-o 9 10 WILLIAM B. PAPAGEORGE, 11 of lawful age, being produced, sworn, and examined on the 12 part of the Plaintiff, deposes and says: 13 DIRECT EXAMINATION 14 QUESTIONS BY MR. CARLSON: 15 Q. Would you be kind enough for our record to 16 state your full name and your home address, please? 17 A. William B. Papageorge, 321 Pebble Valley 1C Drive, Creve Coeur, Missouri 63141. 19 Q. Thank you. As you know, I'm Don Carlson, and 20 I represent Stroh Die Casting in this matter. During the 21 course of the deposition, if any of my questions don't 22 make any sense to you, either grammatically or 23 technically, let me'know, and I'll try to rephrase them. 24 If Mr. Schink makes an objection to a question, please 25 wait until we resolve the objection. He may object and -----------------------------------PERRY "REPORTING SERVICE------------------------------- WATER PCB-SD0000018876 Ubmpufer Aided Transcr iptioiTTjy Xscrlbe 1 ask you not to respond, and I suspect you'll take his 2 advice, or he may object to the form of question and ask 3 you to respond. Remember, and I'm sure you will, to let 4 me get the complete question set forth before you give 5 your response* I'll try not to ask another question until you complete your answer, and that way we won't be talking 7 at the same time, and the court reporter will get a 8 complete transcript. If you want to make a yes or no 9 answer, use the words rather than a nodding of the head or 10 and "uh-huri" or "uh-uh," again so we have a good 11 transcript. Okay? 12 A I understand. 13 Q. Okay. Are you currently employed? 14 A. Self-employed 15 Q. Okay. And do you do business under any 16 business name other than your own name? 17 A. No 18 Q. Okay. And what is the nature of your 19 self-employment now? 20 A. I help Monsanto Company in matters similar to 21 the one we are discussing today. 22 Q. Okay. And how long have you been 23 self-employed in such a capacity? 24 A. April, 1987 25 Q. Have you helped any other companies that have PERRY REPORTING SERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000018877 Computer Aided Transcriptlon by XscrTbe 1 been Involved in any litigation since April of 1987? 2 A. Indirectly, yes. 3 Q. Can you tell me what companies indirectly you 4 have helped? 5 A. Sangamo Electric Company and Westinghouse 6 Corporation. , i 0. And what was thenature of the help in just 8 very general terms -- I don't want to go into the 9 specifics of your work -- that indirectly helped Sangamo? 10 A. I was involved in depositions regarding PCS 11 matters, and I was requested by those companies to 12 participate. 13 Q. Okay. That was true for both Sangamo and 14 Westinghouse? 15 A. Yes. 16 Q. Was Monsanto a party to either of the cases 17 in which you were deposed by those companies? 18 A. I believe at one time they were, but not when 19 I was deposed. 20 Q. Okay. By any chance do you have any 21 recollection of how many depositions you have given in 22 litigation in which the subject of PCBs was at issue? 23 A. I don't have an exact record, but it's 24 approaching a couple dozen by now. This is trials and 25 depositions -----------------------------------PERRY REPORTING SERVICE---------------------------- -- WATER PCB-SD0000018878 Computer Aided Transcription oy Xscrxoe 7 1 Q. How many of those would be trials? 2 A. Five of them. 3 Q. In any of the trials that you have testified 4 in, was an issue whether or not PCBs -- strike that. In 5 any of the trials that you testified in, was there at 6 issue whether or not e product containing PCBs was t defective and unreasonably dangerous? And I differentiate 8 that between a claim of negligence. 9 A. I have to question -- I'm not totally 10 familiar with the legalistic meanings of some of these 11 words. 12 Q. Sure. I appreciate that. 13 A. As to the product being flawed, not that I -14 as best as I can determine, no, that was not an 15 allegation. 16 Q. Okay. Have you heard of Section 402(a) of 17 the Restatement of Torts 2nd? Is that a name of a section 18 that means anything to you? 19 A. 20 Q. Are you aware of any litigation that has been 21 brought against Monsanto by a die cast company, other than 22 ay client, in which the company was seeking to recover 23 damages it had incurred as the result of use or disposal 24 of PCBs? 25 A. Die cast company? Ho. . o SB PERRY REPORTING SERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000018879 Computer Aided Transcription by XscrTbe IT 1 Q. Just prior to -- I presume it was your 2 retirement at Monsanto? 3 A. Yes 4 Q. What was your position with the company? 5 A. I was manager, occupational health, for 6 Monsanto Chemical Company, an operating unit of Monsanto ' 7 Company 8 Q. And how long had you held that position? 9 A. One year, 10 Q. And prior to that, what position did you 11 hold? 12 A. I was director of environmental operations 13 for Monsanto Industrial Chemicals Company, an operating 14 unit of Monsanto Company. 15 Q. And how long did you hold that position? 16 A. From about 1983, to the end of 1905. 17 Q. And prior to that your position with the 18 company? 19 A. Prior to that I was director of environmental 20 operations for Monsanto Intermediate Chemicals Company, an 21 operating unit of Monsanto Company. 22 Q. And how long did you hold that position? 23 A. Prom 1977 to 1983. 24 Q. And prior to that position? 25 A. I was manager, product acceptability, for -----------------------------------PERRY REPORTING SERVICE------------------------------- -- WATER PCB-SD0000018880 Coaputer Aiaeu Transcription by Xscribe 9 1 Monsanto Intermediate Chemicals Company. 2 Q. And how long did you hold that position? 3 A. Oh, I held that about a year, late '76 to 4 late '77. 5 Q. Prior to that? 6 A. I vaa manager, product acceptability, and I 7 believe at that time it was called process chemicals 8 division of Monsanto Industrial Chemicals Company. 9 Q. And how long did you hold that position? 10 A. That was about 1973 to 1976. 11 Q. And prior to that? 12 A. Manager, product acceptability, functional 13 fluids group of the organic chemicals division of Monsanto 14 Company. That was -- 15 Q. Prom what period of time? 16 A. About 1972 to 1973. 17 Q. Prior to that? 13 A. Manager, environmentalprotection of the sane 19 division. 20 Q. And you held that post for howlong? 21 A. Prom about *71 to '72. 22 Q. Okay. Prior to `71? 23 A. I was manager, environmental control from 24 1970 to *71. 25 Q. When did you start with Monsanto? PERRY REPORTING SERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000018881 Computer Aided Transcription by Xscribe 10 1 A. 1951. 2 Q. Okay. Going back in time then prior to 3 becoming manager of environmental control in 1970. 4 A. I was plant manager at the Monsanto plant at 5 Anniston, Alabama* 6 Q. How long did you hold that position? 7 A. Prom 1955 to 1970. 8 Q. Prior to that? 9 A. I was general superintendent in manufacturing 10 at the W. G. Krummrich, K-r-u-m-m-r-i-c-h, plant in 11 Sauget, S-a-u-g-e-t, Illinois, from '63 to -- '64 to *65, 12 I'm sorry, about a year. 13 Q. Okay. And prior to that? 14 A. Prior to that I was at the John.F. Queeny 15 plant, Q-u-e-e-n-y, in St. Louis, Missouri, of Monsanto 16 Company. 17 Q. And what was your post there? 13 A. Going backward, I was general superintendent 19 of distribution warehousing, utilities, from about 1962 to 20 1964. 21 Q. Okay. And the other positionsthere? 22 A. Prior to that I was technical services 23 superintendent at that sane plant* 24 Q. And at what time period? 25 A. About 1960 to '62. ----------------------------------- PERRY HEPUKTIHG"SERVICE--------------------------- -- -- WATER PCB-SD0000018882 Lonpucrar Aioeo Transcription by xscrr&e----------- ox 1 Q. Okay, Prior to that? 2 A. Maintenance superintendent at the same plant. 3 Q. And what time frame was that? 4 A. *58 to '60, 5 Q. And prior to that? A, Prior to that I was maintenance supervisor, 7 Q, And -- 8 A, That's about 1956 to '58, 9 Q. Prior to that time? 10 A. Production supervisor# same plant. 11 Q. Okay. Time frame? 12 A. About '55 to '56. 13 Q. And prior to that? 14 A. Prior to that# I was design engineer, same 15 plant, from my starting date, '51 to '55. 16 Q. Okay. Did you have an appointment within 17 your profession prior to 1951? 18 A. Yes. 19 Q. And where were you working? 20 A. I was with the Phillips Petroleum Company in 21 Bartlesville# Oklahoma. 22 Q. And for how long a period of tiae? 23 A. Pour years. 24 Q. What kind of work were you doing there? 25 A. The first two years# *47 through *49# I was PERRY REPORTING SERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000018883 Computer Aided Transcrrption-By XscnBe- T2 1 in the research department as a research engineer on oil 2 field secondary recovery and in evaluating drilling 3 fluids. Prom 1949 *til 1951, I was a design engineer in 4 the refining department. 5 Q. Any other employment within your profession 6 prior to that time? 1 A. Ho. 8 Q. And what degrees do you hold? 9 A. I have a bachelor of science in chemical 10 engineering and a master of science in chemical 11 engineering, both from Washington University in St. Louis. 12 Q. Have you done any work towards a Ph.D? 12 A. I have about 15 credit hours earned at the 14 then Oklahoma A & M. I believe it's now Oklahoma State. 15 Q. Have you taught any courses? 16 A. No. 17 Q. Have you given any seminars to academic 18 groups in any of the areas of your expertise? 19 A. I have given seminars relating to PCBs to 20 groups that included representatives of the academic 21 field. 22 Q. How many seminars do you think you have given 23 on that subject? Lots? 24 A. I have never kept count; three or four. 25 Q, Okay.Were the seminars that you gave -------------------------------------PERRY REPORTING'SERVICE--------------------------------- -- WATER PCB-SD0000018884 UbmpuTTer Aided Transcription oy XscriW rj 1 sponsored by your employer? 2 A. No. 3 Q. Do you have some recollection of who may have 4 put on these seminars? 5 A. I recall a seminar in the -- let me think, in c Lansing, Michigan. I was under the impression it was given by a-- sponsored by the GreatLakes Governor's 8 Conference or some such title. 9 Q. Okay. 10 A. There was another conference in Madison, 11 Wisconsin on the university premises. To this day I don't 12 recall who sponsored it. I just don't remember that, who 13 sponsored it. 14 Q. Okay. How about the others? Do you have any 15 recollection? 16 A. Let me see if I can recall them. There was a 17 meeting in Duluth, Minnesota in March of 1970, sponsored 18 by the director of the Federal Water Laboratory there. 19 There were some scientific professors in the audience. 20 There were two meetings in North Carolina, as I 21 recall, about 1971 and again in '73, sponsored by the 22 National Institute of Environmental Health, at which 23 academic people were attending. There was a meeting -- 24 the dates escape me. I believe about 1974 ~ held in New 25 Orleans, at which there were many academic people, mfcY REPORTING SERVICE -- WATER PCB-SD0000018885 computer Aided Transcription oy Xscrioe ~^L4~ 1 scientists as well as economists and a variety of 2 backgrounds. I've forgotten vho sponsored that one. I 3 just don't recall. 4 Q. Any other seminars that you have participated 5 in or given that you recall? 6 ~ A. Kell, I suppose this fits under semijnars. I 1 have talked before the Federal Interdepartmental 'Task 8 Force on FCBs. I've participated in the National 9 Symposium on PCBs held in Chicago in November, 1975, 10 sponsored by the EPA. 11 Q. Let me ask you to go back. Do you remember 12 when the meeting was with the Federal Interdepartment Task 13 Force on PCBs? 14 A. There were two occasions. One occurred, as 15 best I remember, in early '71. The second occurred in May 16 of 1972. 17 Q. Any other talks that you have given or 18 presentations that you have made that you would believe 19 would fall into these same categories? 20 A. I have given these presentations before 21 customer and Industry groups. 22 Q. Any presentations to theAssociation of Die 23 Casting, die cast houses? 24 A. No. 25 Q. When was the Lansing, Michiganpresentation? ----------------------------------- PERRY'REPORTING"SERVICE----------------------------- WATER PCB-SD0000018886 Computer Aided Tra ns crlption toy Xsc r life T5 1 A. As best I recall, it was in 1970. 2 Q. And the conference that was apparently on the 3 grounds, anyway, of the University of Wisconsin? 4 A. 1973, '74. 5 Q. Okay. In any of the presentations that you 6 have made, did you as a part of your presentation give out 7 handout material? 8 A. I had handout material at the second session 9 with the Interdepartmental Task Force. I don't recall 10 having handouts at any of the others. 11 Q. Were any of the presentations given from a 12 prepared script? 13 A. Yes. 14 Q.. Do you have copies -- strike that. Were each 15 of those from a prepared script? 16 A. I'm sorry? 17 0. Were each of those presentations from a 18 prepared script? 19 A. Mot all of them. 20 Q. Can you tell me which ones were? 21 A. The presentations to the Industry and 22 customer groups was made from a prepared script. 23 Q. When was that? 24 A. Those were 1971. I didn't have prepared 25 scripts for the other presentations. I just don't believe : PERRY REPORTING SERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000018887 computer Aided Transcription by Xscribe 1* 1 I had, no. 2 0* Okay. Were the presentations to the 3 customers and industry groups sponsored by Monsanto? 4 A. HO. 5 Q. Can you toll me who did, which industry 6 groups we're talking about? 7 A. One of them was the national Electrical 8 Manufacturers Association, along with the American 9 National Standards Institute. Another was the PCB Ad Hoc 10 Committee of the Electronic Industries Association. 11 Q. Any others? 12 A. Those two. 13 Q. Okay. When was thepresentation to the 14 National Electrical Manufacturers Association? 15 A. As best I recall, that was September, *71. 16 Q. And the presentation to the PCB Ad Hoc 17 Committee? 18 A. I believe that came about either the latter 19 part of '71 or early '72. 20 Q. Okay. Was the prepared script used for 21 giving the presentation to NBMA? 22 A. Yes. 23 0. lave you written any articles that have been 24 published in any scientific journals or in any other 25 publications that were distributed publically? REPORTING SfcRVtCE " WATER PCB-SD0000018888 Computer Aided Transcription by Xscribe TT 1 A. No. 2 Q. Your first contact with PCBs In any working 3 capacity was when? 4 A. It was when I was maintenance supervisor at 5 the St. Louis plant at Monsanto. 6 Q. And what was your -- or how did your job T function bring you in contact with PCBs at that time? 8 A. I supervised the electricians in the plant, 9 who on occasion would do maintenance work or install 10 electrical equipment containing PCBs. 11 Q. Was that back beginning in what, 1956? 12 A. Yes. 13 Q. Okay. When you were a production supervisor, 14 you were not involved in the productionof PCBs? 15 A. I was not. 16 Q. Okay. Didyour positionas -- I'm not too 17 sure I have the title down here right -- technical service 18 supervisor or superintendent from 1960 to 1962, bring you 19 in contact with PCBs? 20 A. No. 21 Q. Bow about when you -- I think there were a 22 number of responsibilities you had as general 23 superintendent of the distribution warehousing utilities 24 back in '62 through '64. Did that bring you in contact 25 with PCBs? PfefcRY REPORTING SERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000018889 Computer Aided Transcription by Xscro.be 18 1 A. Yes. 2 Q. And in what respect? 3 A. In two ways. The utilities department, which 4 distributes electrical power throughout the plant, was the 5 unit that operated the electrical equipment that contained 6 PCBs. Also, as part of that assignment, I was responsible for a department that blended different chemicals to make 8 products for Monsanto. Some of that blending involved the 9 production of hydraulic fluids that contained PCBs. 10 Q. Which of the Aroclors were utilized in the 11 production of hydraulic fluid at that time? 12 A. As best I remember, there were Aroclor 1242, 13 Aroclor 1240. 14 Q. Do you remember which of the -- strike that. 15 Was Monsanto marketing under the name Pydraul at that 16 time? 17 A. Yes. IS Q. Do you remember which of the Pydraul fluids 19 were being blended where you were? 20 A. As best I remember, all of the product line 21 at different times in different amounts. 22 Q. If Pydraul was a 1242, would that mean that 23 1242 was the only Isomer that would be present in that 24 particular fluid? 25 A. I'm confused by your use of the word "isomer" ------------------------------------- PHHK KKFUKT1NG STTRVTCE---------------------------- "-- WATER PCB-SD0000018890 Computer Aided Transcription by XscrTBe T9 1 to describe Aroclor 1242. 2 Q. Would there be other PCBs present besides 3 1242 in a hydraulic fluid marketed as 1242? 4 MR. SCHINKi Object to the form of the 5 question. 6 A. I'm confused. - 7 0* (BY MR. CARLSON) 1242 is 42 percent 8 chlorine? 9 A. Yes. 10 0. Would there be PCBs with different 11 percentages of chlorine present in the hydraulic fluid 12 marketed as 1242? 13 MR. SCIIINI'.: Object to the form of the 14 question. 15 A. I think I understand your question. If sc, 16 the answer is no. The ingredient that's added is known as 17 Aroclor 1242. 18 0. (BY MR. CARLSON) Does that mean that is the 19 only PCB that would be present? 20 A. That is correct. 21 Q. When you were at the Krummrich plant in 22 Sauget, did that bring you in contact with PCBs, also? 23 A. Ho. 24 Q. And you were plant manager in Anniston before 25 that date? PeIRRY REPORTING SERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000018891 Computer Aided Transcription Dy Xscrioe YU 1 A. Yes. 2 Q. Were various Aroclors produced in the 3 Anniston plant? 4 A. Yes. 5 0* All of then? 6 A. All of then. T Q. Was anything else aade in the Anniston plant 8 besides PCBs? 3 A. Yes. 10 Q. Just in rough terms, what other kinds of 11 products? 12 A. I'll name a few that I recall. 13 Q. Sure. 14 A. Biphenyl, terphenyls, chlorine, caustic soda, 15 phosphorus penta sulphide, and the pesticide parathion, 16 p-a-r-a-t-h-i-o-n, and a similar material, niran, 17 n-i-r-a-n. We also made chlorinated terphenyls and IS hydrogenated phenyls. 19 Q. Okay. 20 A. I believe that covers the list. 21 Q. Have you, during the course of your 22 professional life, taken any courses in toxicology? 23 A. Ho. 24 Q. Have you taken any courses in epidemiology? 25 A. Ho. FERRY"REPORTING SERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000018892 Computer TiTdecTTranscription by Ascribe JX 1 Q. Monsanto obtained the right to aanufacture 2 PCBs in its purchase of Swan Chemical? 3 A. Yes. 4 Q. Do you know if Swan Chenical had done any 5 either animal or human studies on the potential effects of PCBs prior to Monsanto buying the company? 7 A. It's ay understanding they had done the acute 8 animal studies in the late 1930*s. X do not recall the 9 laboratory that they used. 10 Q. Do you know if Swan Chemical/ prior to 11 Monsanto purchasing the company# did any health surveys of 12 its employees? 13 A. I'm not aware of any such study. 14 Q. Can you tell me the first time that Monsanto 15 did a health survey of its employees that cane in contact 16 with PCBs? 17 A. Would you help me define "survey*? 18 Q. Determining whether or not the employees who 19 came in contact with PCBs were experiencing health 20 problems different than what would be generally expected. 21 A. Well# this would be done as part of the 22 annual medical physical examination -- 23 Q. Okay. 24 A. -- conducted on all employees in the plant. 25 If any problem unique to each operation would show up# it PERRY REPORTING 8ERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000018893 Coaputer Aided Transcription by Xscribe 2T 1 would be evident to the plant physician. | 2 Q. All right. Do you recall whether or not 3 Monsanto at any tine specifically looked at the medical 4 records or the results of the examinations of the 5 employees that were in contact with PCBs to determine 6 specifically whether or not they were experiencing any 7 Increased health abnormalities? 8 A. Well, ay exposure to that activity would 9 indicate that this was an ongoing activity on the part o 10 the plant physician. I'm not aware of any effort of when 11 the files were segregated and Swan sat down and addressed 12 specifically looking for anything. That doesn't mean it 13 didn't happen. 14 Q. Who was your plant physician or who were the 15 plant physicians when you were at Anniston? 16 A. Dr. James Francis. 17 Q. Was he aMonsanto employee? 13 A. Ho. 19 Q. Do you know if he's still in practice? 20 A. I understand he's retired. 21 Q. Do you know where he lives? 22 A. No, I do not. 23 Q. Do you know what state he lives in or at 24 least where he lived the last time you heard? 25 A. The last time he was in Anniston, Alabama. ------------------------------------- PERltY" REPORTING SERVICE------------------------------ -------WATER PCB-SD0000018894 Computer Aided Transcrlptiorfby Xscrihe 23----- 1 Q. As the plant physician -- strike that. As 2 the plant physician, was Dr. Francis charged with the 3 responsibility of reviewing the results of the 4 examinations of plant employees to see if there was any 5 increased rate of a particular disease or health problem? 6 A. Yes, sir. 7 Q. Would he issue an annual reportor any report 8 on that particular subject? 9 A. I did not Bee one. 10 Q. Do you have any understanding as to whether 11 or not he did issue such a report, although you may not 12 have been privy to it? 13 A. Dr. Francis reportedprofessionally to the 14 Monsanto medical director, who would make frequent visits 15 to the plant. They communicated in health matters 16 regarding the plant. I was not present at those meetings. 17 I don't know what exchanges took place or what reports 18 were issued from one doctor to the other. 19 Q. Who was the medical director at that time? 20 A. R. B. Kelly. 21 Q. Were there anyother plant physicians when 22 you were at Anniston? 23 A. No. 24 Q. When you were atAnniston, did Monsanto 25 monitor any waste water discharge or other plant effluents PERRY REPORTING SERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000018895 Computer Aided Transcription I>y Xscribe 24 1 for the presence of PCBs? 2 A. Tes. 3 Q. Can you tell me when that practice began? 4 A. I'm sorry? 5 Q. When did that practice start? A* I don't know. i Q. Was it prior to you being there? 8 A* That is right. Yes. 9 Q. Did they monitor for PCBs and plant effluent 10 at Krummrich as well? 11 A. At what point in time? 12 Q. At any time that you'ro aware of. 13 A. At any time. Yes, I was aware of it starting 14 in 1970. 15 Q. Do you know if they did it prior to that? 16 A. I was told they did it. 17 Q. Were you told when they started that? 18 A. No. I just don't remember the dates. They 19 had been ongoing for years. 20 Q. More than a decade? 21 A. Yes. 22 Q. What werethe detection limits for your 23 monitoring equipment when you were at Anniston? 24 A. I don't recall an exact number, but they were 25 in the high parts per million or tenth of a percent kind TERRY REPORTING SERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000018896 Computer Aided transcription oy xscnbW Y5 1 of numbers. 2 Q. Who had responsibility for monitoring at your 3 Anniston plant when you were there? 4 A. Initially it was the responsibility of the 5 quality control chemist in the plant laboratory, and as 6 best I remember, about 1966 or '<7, ve appointed an environmental engineer who took on that responsibility. 8 Q. Who was the Q.C. chemist when you were there, 9 or who wore they if there was more than one? 10 A. His last name was Dunlap, D-u-n-l-a-p. I've 11 forgotten his first name. 12 Q. Okay. Any others that served in that 13 capacity? 14 A. Not while I was there. 15 Q. And who was the environmentalengineer that 16 was appointed in '66 or '67? 17 A. His name escapes me. I just don't remember. 18 Q. While you were plant manager at Anniston, at 19 any time did you have to alter manufacturing practice or 20 practices with regard to discharge of plant effluent as 21 the result of PCBs being found in the effluent? 22 A. Yes. 23 Q. Can you tell me when that first occurred, as 24 best you can recall, and what happened? 25 A. Sometime in about 1966 ~ I can't recall the PERRY REPORTING SERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000018897 Computer Aided transcription by Xscribe Y5 1 exact period -- we changed the way we maintained the 2 limestone pits that were present at the plant for 3 neutralizing the acid water, and we put greater emphasis 4 on keeping the department dean, the floors clean, 5 stairwells. Q. Why was that? A. About 1966, about a year after I arrived. 8 Q. Okay. Why was that effort made? 9 A. We found that more PCBs ware ending up in the 10 pits, and the frequency at which the pits were dug up and 11 refurbished wasn't adequate for the additional amount of 12 PCBs that were getting into the pits. So, we increased 13 the frequency and reduced the amount leaving the 14 department. 15 Q. The function of limestone pits was to 16 neutralize the acid water? 17 A. That was one of its functions. 18 Q. And was it also to act as a filter for PCBs? 19 A. It acted as a crude filter as well as a 20 collecting pit, a sump, because they are heavier, will 21 sink to the bottom of the pit. 22 Q. How did Monsanto dispose of PCB's in those 23 years? 24 A. We had a Monsanto operated landfill on 25 Monsanto property. ----------------------------------- FERRY REPORTING SERVICE--------------------------- WATER PCB-SD0000018898 lit t 1 Q. Where was that located? 2 A. At the plant site. 3 0. Okay. Does Monsanto still own the site? 4 A. Yes. 5 Q. Between 1965 and 1970# did Monsanto have any 6 other landfill sites other than the one at Anniston which 7 received PCBs? 8 A. Yes. 9 Q. And where were they? 10 A. I don't claim to know all of them. 11 Q. Okay. 12 A. I'm positive there was one at the K. G. 13 Kruumrich plant, at least one. They may have had several 14 through the years. I cannot speak for all the other 50 15 Monsanto plants. Many of them have their own landfills. 16 Q. Did Monsanto at any time incorporate a 17 program of incinerating its own PCBs? 10 A. Yes. 19 Q. Whan did it start that? 20 A. They started Incinerating in 1971. 21 Q. was that program ever discontinued? 22 A Yes. 23 Q. And when was that? 24 A. 1977. 25 0. Do you know why it was discontinued at that PERRY REPORTING SERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000018899 AiQtfa Transcription oy ascuos 2$ 1 time? 2 A. Principally because Monsanto terminated the 3 manufacture and sale of PCBs. They used the incinerator 4 to dispose of any residual that was still at the plant 5 site# and the unit had reached the point where it needed 6 extensive maintenance and renewal. It became inefficient ' 7 and was a food time to dismantle it. 8 0. Did Monsanto make the incineration facility 9 available to its customers that had been using 10 Monsanto-produced PCB fluids? 11 A. Yes. 12 Q. Did it cake it available to all customers? 13 A. Yes. 14 Q. Did Monsanto continue to make the 15 incineration of the facility available to all customers 16 through 1977? 17 A. Yes. 18 Q. Do you know how the customers were made aware 19 of the existence of and their access to this Incineration 20 facility? 21 A. I do. 22 Q. And how was that? 23 A. Threedifferent ways that I recall. One is 24 by letters mailed to customers on record. Another is by 25 specific instructions on product labels with telephone PKHKY KEPORTINGTSEEVICE WATER PCB-SD0000018900 1 numbers and department designations. Another is via the 2 Monsanto salesmen, who carried copies of these letters 3 with them, as veil as special labels that he would leave 4 with the customer to affix to the container before 5 shipping it back to Monsanto, 6 Q. Were the letters mailed to customers of the 7 Monsanto products that utilized all or any of the e Ar odors? 9 A, Yes. 10 Q. So a product that had a 1242 Aroclor 11 incorporated in it -- strike that, A customer who 12 purchased a product that had the 1242 Aroclor would get a 13 letter advising that customer that the incinerator was 14 available? 15 A. Yes. 16 Q. Were there -- do you know whether or not 17 there were other incinerators available in the country 18 besides the one at Monsanto? 19 A. At what point in time? 20 Q, I'm sorry. You started that in 1971, '71 21 through '77? 22 A, Yes. 23 Q. Were there any available prior to that? 24 A. Not toay knowledge. 25 Q. Why did Monsanto build the first incinerator PERRY REPORTING SERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000018901 'Computer Aided Transcription by Xscribe W 1 for incinerating PCBs? 2 A. Primarily because there were none available 3 commercially that ve knew of. In fact, we feel that ve 4 helped develop some of the technology in designing the 5 unit, and ve felt that this was the best way to destroy the liquid PCBs. y Q. Did Monsanto incinerate PCBs for some of its 8 customers at no cost to the customer? 9 A. I believe in some instances, yes. 10 Q. And was there a cost to some of the other 11 customers? 12 A. Yes. 13 Q. Do you know what the criterion was in 14 determining whether or not there would be a cost charged 15 to the customer? 16 A. I don't know the details. It had to do with 17 the purchase of material that was tied in with selling 18 price, a package kind of deal. I really don't know the 19 details. 20 Q. Can you tell me the names of some of the 21 companies that had their PCBs incinerated by Monsanto for 22 free? 23 A. None really comes to mind at the moment. 24 There were a few. I know there were some cases, but the 25 names don't come to mind. PERRY REPORTING SERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000018902 Computer Aided Transcription Dy xacno* 3T 1 Q. Is It your understanding that the 2 availability of the incinerator free of charge to a 3 customer was tied or contingent upon the customer 4 purchasing certain Monsanto products in the future? 5 A. That was my understanding# yes. 6 Q. Does that somewhat go along with the idea yj that there's really no free lunch? 8 A. One could say that, yes. 9 Q. Okay. Were the products containing PCBs 10 monitored to determine whether or not dioxins were 11 present? 12 A. At what point in time? 13 Q. At any time. 14 A. At any time? As best I recall, in the middle 15 '60s, gas samples were taken off of Monsanto's incinerator 16 checking for the products of combustion, and dioxins were 17 looked for. And if my memory serves me right, this had to 18 do with the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency and 19 the permitting procedure and confirmation that the unit 20 was meeting the permit requirements. As best I recall, 21 also, no dioxins were found. ` 22 Q. Do you know what the detection limits were at 23 that time? 24 A. In the middle '70s, they were two parts per 25 billion, something like that. PERRY REPORTING SERVICE " WATER PCB-SD0000018903 Computer Aided Transcription by xscribe YZ 1 Q. Do you know if any time later any dioxins 2 were found? 3 A. At no time do I know of any Monsanto data 4 that showed dioxins were found. 5 Q. Whether or not it's true# I don't want to try 6 to get into that# but have you heard allegations made that 7 dioxins are formed in electrical fires where PCBs are 8 present? 9 A. I've heard that allegation# yes. 10 Q. Have you seen any scientific work that would 11 either confirm or refute that? 12 A. I have 3een no work that confirms it# and 13 traditionally, reports are not made for negative results. 14 So# at the same time I have not seen any reports saying it 15 won't happen. 16 Q. Have you seen studies of which the author has 17 claimed it happened? 18 A. Yes# and let me correct my previous answer. 19 There have been allegations of the presence of dioxins in 20 fires in which PCBs were present# but at the same time 21 there were other chemicals present -22 Q. Okay. 23 A. -- like chlorinated bensene. So, there's a 24 scientific question yet as to what is the source# if in 25 truth the dioxins were discovered. ---------------------------------------$EftSY REPORTING SERVICE------------------------------- " WATER PCB-SD0000018904 Computer Aided Transcription by Xsccibe XT 1 Q. Are there some researchers vho have concluded 2 in their own mind, again regardless of whether or not they 3 are right or wrong, it is the combustion of the PCDs which 4 produced the dioxins? 5 A. There are some that claimed that, yes. 6 Q. Do you know the names of some of those 7 researchers? 8 A. Gosh. I'm trying to remember a lady 9 scientist or spokesman for one of the environmental 10 groups 11 Q. Ellen Silbergeld? 12 A. Ellen Silbergeld, yes. She is convinced that 13 they were formed. I'm sure there are others, but their 14 names don't come to mind now. 15 Q. When is the first time that you had heard 16 that an Aroclor was found in the environment? 17 A. I first heard about it in the summer of '69. 18 Q. What was the source of your knowledge? 19 A. My supervisor. 20 Q. And at that time who was that? 21 A. That was Raymond Stratmeyar, 22 S-t-r-a-t-m-e-y-e-r. 23 Q. And did he indicate to you the source of his 24 knowledge? 25 A. As best I remember, he referred to Monsanto's PERRY REPORTING SERVICE ` WATER PCB-SD0000018905 Computer Aided Transcription by Xscribe 3T 1 medical department along with Monsanto's research people 2 and informed them of these findings in the environment of 3 a material that looked like PCBs. 4 Q. Bad either the medical department or the 5 research people, to your knowledge, informed Mr. 6 Stratmeyer by that time of the results of the Jensen t study? 8 A. I believe that was the topic of discussion. 9 Q. Was the Yusho incident also a topic of 10 discussion at that time, that is, when you first heard 11 about potential for PCBs being in the environment? 12 A. It was not mentioned at that time, not to mo. 13 Q. Were you given a copy of the Jensen study? 14 A. No. 15 Q. Were you given any written material at that 16 time which referenced the Jensen study or the findings of 17 anyone else with regard to PCBs in the environment? 18 A. In 1969, we're talking about? 19 Q. Yes. 20 A. Mo. 21 0. Whan ware you first given any documents of 22 any sort which referenced PCBs in the environment? 23 A. In January, 1970. 24 Q. And whatdocuments were you given at that 25 time? PERRY REPORTING SERVICE ' WATER PCB-SD0000018906 nxucu 44auawi wjf AaWi^ys `.3 1 A. It was a collection of articles in a 2 three-ring notebook that the medical department put 3 together, and most of the articles had to do with DDT, but 4 there were references to PCB. I recall a document 5 referring to the Jensen work. As best I remember, it 6 didn't appear to be a finished document. It appeared to 7 be a rough draft, typewritten, with many typographical 8 errors, spelling errors. I do not know the source of 9 that, but that was my first exposure to the instant work. 10 Q. The rough draft that you were given, was it 11 your understanding that that was a rough draft of the 12 Jensen study, or was that a rough draft of someone else's 13 analysis of the Jensen study, or was it some other study 14 all together? 15 A. I was led to believe it was an English 16 translation of the Swedish work. I do not know who the 17 translator was. 18 Q. Do you have some recollection of what the 19 conclusions were as set forth in that study? 20 A. As best I recall, the authors were convinced 21 that what they saw was not DDT, and they were fairly 22 certain, but not totally certain, that it was 23 polychlorinated biphenyls. 24 Q. Did the company -- did they come to any 25 conclusion or offer any opinions as to the source of the PERRY REPORTING SERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000018907 Computer Aided Transcription by Ascribe 36----- 1 PCBs if in fact, that's what they were? 2 A. No. 3 Q. When is the first time Monsanto did any work 4 to your knowledge on the biodegradability of PCBs? 5 A. Z believe they started in 1969. 6 Q. Prior to -- strike that. Are you aware o 7 any studies appearing in scientific literature addressing 8 the question of whether or not PCBs were biodegrading 9 prior to the beginning of Monsanto's work in 1969? 10 A. I'm not aware of any. 11 Q. Do you know why Monsanto in 1969 looked at 12 the subject or began a study of biodegradability of PCBs? 13 A. I think I do, yeah. 14 Q. Why was that? . 15 A. The reports up to that point kept referring 16 to what Monsanto called Aroclor 1254 and 1260 as being 17 found in the environment. This was puzzling to Monsanto IS because those two materials* although they were not sold 19 in -- they were not the large volume products. There were 20 greater volumes of 1232* 1242* 1248. The puzzling part 21 was why weren't these being reported? So then again* the 22 scientists began some scientific speculation as to could 23 they be degrading? Zf so* what's the mechanism? What 24 creates this loss or this disappearance? So in order to 25 establish that in truth degradation was taking place* they ---- ----- -------------------------PERRY 'REPONT INC SERVICE----------------------------- - WATER PCB-SD0000018908 ruus U UautfUU^>LlUil uy A tiiiCXOfi 4,7 1 went to the laboratory and conducted these tests or 2 started to conduct the tests at that time. 3 Q. Which of the Aroclors did they look at at 4 that time? 5 A. Oh# they looked at 1242# 1248# 1254 and 1260. Q. And do you know who developed the test 1 protocol? 8 A. The test protocol was developed by the 9 detergent industry. At the time there was a scientific 10 dispute about# you may recall# hard detergents and soft 11 detergents. So# that detergent protocol was taken and 12 used on PCBs. 13 Q. Was the study completed with regard to any or 14 all of the various Aroclors? 15 A. The work was eventually terminated# but it 16 was established that some of the PCBs do disappear. 17 Q. Which ones? 18 A. The monochlorals# the dichlorals# many of the 19 trichlorals# some of the four chlorines# but very few of 20 the 5# 6 and higher. 21 Q. With regard to the 1242 and 1248# were they 22 biodegradable or found to be biodegrading? 23 A. Members within that group? 24 Q. Within that group. 25 A. Yes# they were degrading. PERRY REPORTING SERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000018909 wwi/ucj. muau 'UAAdcupuoii oy Asccioe iu 1 Q. I see. Were members within the group not 2 biodegrading? 3 A. That is correct. Yes. 4 Q. Prior to 1969# did Monsanto have reason to 5 believe or did the company believe to your knowledge that 6 various Aroclors ware under soae cirouastances escaping into the environment? 8 A. Yes. 9 Q. Was itthe thought of the company prior to 10 1969, that those that were escaping to the environment 11 were biodegraded? 12 A. No. 13 Q. Can you tell me what the company's thought 14 was prior to 1969, as to what was occurring with regard to 15 Aroclors that were escaping to the environment? 16 A. Theywere perceived to be so stable 17 chemically and biologically and every other measure 18 available at that time, that they were perceived to be, if 19 I can use an expression, like pebbles on the beach. 20 They're there, but nothing happens. That was the common 21 understanding of these chemicals. 22 Q. When did Monsanto first -- strike that. 23 Prior to 1969, did Monsanto understand that or believe 24 that various Aroclors were getting into the food chain? 25 A. Ho. ----------------------------------- PERKY REPORTING SERVICE----------------------------- -- WATER PCB-SD0000018910 'Computer Aided Transcription t>y xscrYBe JJ 1 Q. It may not be a particularly good analogy. 2 If it's so far-fetched that it doesn't make any sense, let 3 me know. We'll try again. With regard to lead shot and 4 shotgun shells and ducks ending up getting lead poisoning, 5 if PCBs were present in the environment like pebbles on 6 the beach, why didn't Monsanto think it would get into the 7 food chain or was getting into the food chain? 8 MR. SCHINKt I object to the form of the 9 question. It implies that the frequency of PCBs in the 10 environment was equivalent to either shot in birds or the 11 number of pebbles on the beach. I don't think there's 12 been any indication of that, particularly given the kind 13 of product that it was and its intended use. 14 c. (BY MR. CARLSOII) You can answer the 15 question. 16 A. Well, again, it goes back to the 17 understanding that these are so inert, and if they do IS enter the environment in quantities, they just sit in the 19 soil if they are spilledj and the chances of moving from 20 that point into the food ahain were perceived to be so 21 remote, that problems in getting into a food chain were 22 just inconceivable. 23 Q. Prior to 1969, how did Aroclors get into the 24 environment? 25 A. How did they? PERRY REPORTING 8ERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000018911 A W w o 1 Q. Yes. 2 A. Primarily through accidental spills. 3 Q. Okay. And secondarily? 4 A. Secondarily, I gues3, since there was no way 5 to measure in very, very low amounts at that time, it's 6 conceivable that they could have gotten into the 7 environment, because it was assumed that there were none 8 there in the water stream, for example. If it was 9 analyzed from a plant, for example, it analyzed and found 10 no PCBs, and they would discharge it. 11 0. I guess I'm not looking right now at whether 12 or not anybody should have found them. What I'm just 13 looking at with hindsight, how did the PCBs get into the 14 environment at that time, by effluent? 15 A. That's one way it could happen. It could be 16 in plant effluent, but nobody knew then. 17 Q. I'm not saying they did, and I'm not trying 18 to imply that they did. I'm just saying that one of the 19 ways, that one way it's possible, and years later you 20 could go out and with the fine tuned instruments, you see 21 it.In your opinion, did that occur prior to 1969? 22 MR. SCBINKs Did what occur? 23 Q. (BY HR. CARLSON) Did PCBs get into the 24 environment as a result of discharge of plant effluent? 25 A. Yes. PERKY REPORTING SERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000018912 WWMf'UW'tf 4. *4/ ABW & 1M6 .4X 1 Q. Has Monsanto ever established its own 2 criterion? Porget about DPA and Ellen Silbergeld and lots 3 of others, but has Monsanto ever established its own 4 criterion as to vhat the coapany will use as a safe level 5 of PCBs in the environaent to be? A. Monsanto established early on a goal of 10 7 parts per billion in waste water leaving its plant that 8 was considered to be environmentally acceptable. 9 Q. When was that established? 10 A. When? 11 0. Yes. 12 A. About 1970, early 1970. 13 Q. Did Monsanto ever change that goal? 14 A. I'm not aware of a change in that target, but 15 I do know they better than achieved it. They did better 16 than that, but as a goal, that still seemed to be a 17 responsible one to Monsanto. 18 Q. Do you know vhat work that goal was based on? 19 A. Several things. One is the aedical 20 department's opinion that at those levels, the probability 21 of health risks was acceptable. Another is the ability of 22 aost laboratories to be able to take saaples and analyze 23 for that level and do it consistently so the numbers have 24 true meaning. And the third one was the engineering 25 feasibility of systems that could treat waste waters to PERRY REPORTING SERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000018913 WATER PCB-SD0000018914 Computer Aided TransccTption by Xscrs.be 12 1 reach such a level; and then, of course, engineering 2 feasibility is coupled with economic feasibility. 3 Q. What potential or possible health risks did 4 the aedical department think may occur if the target was 5 not reached? 6 A. Well, I can't speak for Or. Kelly and his 1 staff personally, but I had many discussions with them. 8 They were concerned with entering into the food chain in 9 the '70s, early '70s, and building up via what is known as 10 bioaccumulation and biomagnification up the food chain. 11 Examples given were such as fish caught by fishermen and 12 consumed, and by that time, as best I recall. Dr. Kelly 13 had reached the conclusion that based on the information 14 he had at the time, that 10 parts per billion is all 15 right. I don't know what else he thought professionally 15 or medically. 17 Q. Did he share with you the particular health 18 risks that he thought may occur if the accumulation was 19 greater -- strike that, if there was an abnormally high 20 accumulation of PCB's in the chain? 21 A. Be just reminded me of the previous 22 discussion? we had about chloracne at certain levels, 23 which varied again from person to person. That's the skin 24 symptom. And he also reminded me if you get enough of 25 these, you get liver damage, and if that liver is damaged -----------------------------------PERRY REPORTING SERVICE----------------------------- WATER PCB-SD0000018915 computer Aide a Transcription oy xscrine 47 1 severely. It could result in death. That was not new 2 information. It was just reaffirmation of what was well 3 known. 4 Q. Was it your understanding that chloracne 5 would occur if someone were consuming food high in PCB 6 content? i A. It's possible if it*s high enough and long 8 enough. 9 Q. Did Dr. Kelly share with you his thoughts as 10 to any criterion that one could look to to determine how 11 much PCBs would have to be present in order to induce 12 liver damage? 13 A. Not that type of criteria, no. He just told 14 me about what he called the early warning symptoms that 15 were noticeable long before the liver was damaged. 16 Q. What were some of those symptoms? 17 A. As far as skin exposure was concerned, time 18 and time again he said look for redness of skin. If 19 you've got that, you're getting too much. That's long 20 before the liver has been damaged. If you continue that 21 chapped skin, red skin, you're going to next see 22 chloracne. That's another warning. 23 As far as breathing too many approximate PCBs, you 24 were cautioned to look for the breathing respiratory 25 symptoms, which were described to me as resembling severe PERRY REPORTING SERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000018916 Computer Aided Transcription by Xscribe 44---- 1 chest cold, painful, difficulty breathing, irritated. If 2 you reach that point, you*re breathing too ouch. Step 3 back and get away from that exposure. These were 4 considered to be very good indicators to avoid the 5 exposure, whether by skin or breathing or ingestion, 6 before you get to the point where liver is threatened. < ~ 7 Q. Are you aware of anyone, have you ever been 8 told of anyone ever developing chloracne as a result of 9 eating foods high in PCB content? 10 A. No. Let me correct that. I have an 11 understanding that the Japanese rice bran oil incident, 12 there were reports of chloracne, observed chloracne, which 13 was attributed to this ingestion of the contaminated oil. 14 Q. Has Monsanto formed any opinions within the 15 company or does it hold company opinions with regard to 16 safe levels of PC3s in fish? 17 HR. SCHINK* Currently? He's not employed by 18 Monsanto. 19 Q. (BY HR. CARLSON) Whatever you know. 20 A. I don't really know what their current 21 position is. 22 Q. When you left the company, did you know what 23 their position was? 24 A. At that time we were concurring with the FDA 25 approach. VERITY REPORTING SERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000018917 Computer XIded~Transcriptiori~by xacnoe 45 1 Q. Do you remember what the acceptable level was 2 at that point? 3 A. As I remember, it was five parts per million 4 in the edible filets. S Q. And can you tell ae why Monsanto thought or < concurred with the BPA that more than that would be Inappropriate? 8 A. Mo, Z can't. 9 Q. Are there PCBs in the American environment 10 that didn't come from Monsanto? 11 A. I personally suspect yes. 12 Q. Do you have some suspicion as to where they 13 may have come from? 14 A. I suspect they came from all over the world 15 carried by wind currents, Japanese sources, European 16 sources. 17 Q. Have there been any works that you have seen 18 addressing that particular issue? 19 A. No. 20 Q. Mere PCBs manufactured inJapan, at any time 21 manufactured pursuant to an agreement between the Japanese 22 company and Monsanto? , 23 A. Tea. 24 Q. How about for PCBsmanufactured inEurope? 25 Mere some of those manufactured by companies who did not PERRY REPORTING SERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000018918 Computer Aided Transcription by Xscribe 46 1 have agreements with Monsanto? 2 MR. SCHINK: Excuse me. Could you clarify 3 vhat you mean by "agreement"? 4 Q.(BY MR. CARLSON) Either a licensing 5 agreement, royalties are paid, or just an informal 6 agreement that Monsanto would share technology, 7 A. There were manufacturers in Europe that were 8 producing PCBs independent of Monsanto. 9 Q. Have you done any work in the area of how die 10 cast companies may have added to the PCBs in the 11 environment? 12 A. Have I personally? 13 Q. Yes. Have you done any work on that subject 14 to determine vhat it is about die.cast operations which 15 may result in PCBs getting into the environment? 16 A. I attempted to get familiar with that type of 17 operation by talking to Monsanto individuals whose job it 18 was to be familiar. These are primarily the marketing 19 people and the applications research people. And 1 was 20 made aware of some of the conditions that existed at the 21 die cast plants, of course, the high temperatures 22 associated with molten metals, the equipment that is 23 operated to perform the various tasks required, the fact 24 that this equipment is under pressure. And like all 25 industrial equipment, it will fail occasionally, and you -------------------------------------- PERRY REPORTING" SERVICE------------------------------- ----- - WATER PCB-SD0000018919 Computer Aided Transcription oy xscriDe 47 1 will get the leaks, and it's a question then of coping 2 with that leak, whether you shut down the line and repair, 3 or you capture the spillage, whatever is appropriate for 4 the particular operation. I was aware that cooling waters 5 are involved, and there's always the threat of water and 6 PCBs being mixed, which always causes problems because 7 they are difficult to separate. Z don't know how else to 8 answer the question. 9 Q. I can appreciate that. At some point in time 10 did you form an understanding as to whether or not 11 discharge of cooling water by die cast companies absent 12 PCBs would be permissible? 13 A. Yes. 14 Q. Did Monsanto embark on a program to educate 15 customers using products containing PCBs -- I'm talking 16 about die cast companies now -- on the necessity of 17 containing cooling water which may contain PCBs? 18 A. Yes. 19 Q. And when did itdo that? 20 MR. SCHINKi I object to the form of the 21 prior question. You say embark upon a program. It 22 implies that there was no prior program. 23 Q. (BY MR. CARLSON) Okay. Sometime in the life 24 of the product I suspect there was no prior program. Go 25 ahead. I guess I was trying to find out when Monsanto PERRY REPORTING SERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000018920 Computer Aided Transcription by Xscribe 411 1 started to tell customers utilizing Pydraul in die cast 2 machines of ways to contain -- strike that. What I was 3 looking at, I guess, was when Monsanto began to advise die 4 cast companies utilizing Pydraul with PCBs that waste S water that could have PCBs in it should be contained. A* Well, there was always a reference to keeping 7 an Industrial chemical like Pydraul out of water. This is 8 pretty general, even if the oil would have been mineral 9 oil. So, that kind of advice existed from the first pound 10 sold -- 11 Q. Okay. 12 A. -- as a replacement for a mineral oil in a 13 unit or whatever was used at the time. Beginning in 1970, 14 when it was well established that PCBs were being found in 15 the environment, there was additional emphasis made 16 centering on PCBs, per se, and that took place. That took 17 many forms. The primary one was proper disposal such that 18 it doesn't get into the environment, which is a very broad 19 sentence or statement, but it's an attempt to cover any 20 possible condition of use. So, it's up to the user to 21 decide if his practices will lead to environmental escape, 22 because Monsanto could not be in a position of knowing 23 what its thousands of customers were doing with a material 24 and write the right paragraph to cover them all. 25 Then that branched out into a little more specifics -----------------------------------PEKKY REPORTING "SEHVTCE--------------------------- WATER PCB-SD0000018921 ' Computer Aided transcription by Xscrioe OT 1 in terms of it's recommended that you curb any area that 2 contained a spill, direct the spill to some controllable 3 pit, or capture it in some absorbent material like sawdust 4 or clay or something that can be easily managed, rather 5 than get away from you down sever. Now, that evolved 6 through the years* 1 Q. Okay* Do you recall when Monsanto advised 8 its customers using Pydraul in die cast machines to curb 9 areas and to direct spills to a controllable pit? 10 A. That was taking place in 1970, as best I 11 remember. 12 Q. Okay. Prior to 1970, did Monsanto understand 13 that spills were occurring and hydraulic leaks were 14 occurring which resulted in, on occasion, Pydraul getting 15 into the sewer? 16 MR. SCHINKt Now, you're saying into the 17 sewer, not into the environment, but into a sewer that 18 might go into a treatment plant? 19 MR. CARLSONi That's right. 20 A. I did understood that incidents like that 21 were noted, yes. 22 Qt (BY MR. CARLSON) And you understood, too, 23 that incidents like that were understood to occur in the 24 die cast industry? 25 A. Yes. PERRY REPORTING SERVICE ` WATER PCB-SD0000018922 Computer Aided Transcription by xscribe 30 1 Q. Has there some belief or understanding on 2 Monsanto's part that PCBs that would get into a sever 3 system would not get into the environment? 4 MR. SCHINKt By sewer system, you're 5 referring to a collection system of some sort; is that 6 right, Mr. Carlson? Z object to the fora of the question 7 unless you clarify. 8 Q. (BT MR. CARLSON) Go ahead. 9 A. It was Monsanto's understanding that the 10 frequency of this happening was not so great that it was 11 intolerable. 12 Q. Okay. 13 A. It was happening. The amount it was getting 14 out was acceptable. The impact on the environment was not 15 known, but it was assumed that the materials were so inert 16 that that impact would be difficult to measure. 17 It was also believed at that time that when it went 1C to systems such as municipal waste treatment, waste water 19 treatment systems, that the PCBs, being heavy, would end 20 up in sludges, and the sludges in turn would be properly 21 disposed of. Even though the amounts were probably very 22 erratic, it wouldn't happen every day, and the amounts 23 would also be rather small, relatively speaking. So, it 24 was never perceived to be a problem that required any 25 specific and particular attention. -------------------------------------- FERRY REPORTING SERVICE------------------------------- ------- WATER PCB-SD0000018923 uter aj.qu rranscrlpcion oy xscixoe 51 1 Q. What work did Monsanto do to determine that 2 the frequency of such events and the amount getting out 3 was not intolerable? 4 A. This was primarily -- in fact, the only 5 source, really, was the personal contact by Monsanto 6 representatives with the customer, with the user. Q. Zs that particular subject something that 8 Monsanto's salespeople would report on to the company? 9 A. This was a judgment call on the part of the 10 representative of Monsanto. If he perceived it to be 11 noteworthy, he would call his supervisor, or he would put 12 it in what Monsanto calls a call report or trip report. 13 Q. Sure. 14 A. It was not mandated that each and every one 15 of these be reported. It was a judgment call on the part 16 of the Monsanto representative, whether to discuss it or 17 whether just talk to the customer and resolve it there, or 16 whether it was so small that he didn't feel it was an 19 issue. 20 0. Did the trip reports or sales call reports 21 have a particular section designated for them to report on 22 unusual spillages or leakages of hydraulicfluid? 23 A.. MO. 24 Q. Were the salespeople directedto determine 25 the frequency that die cast companies were experiencing PERRY REPORTING 8ERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000018924 Computer Aided Transcription by Xscribe 32 1 hydraulic leaks and having spills? 2 A. I'm not aware of any direction of that kind, 3 that specific kind* I don't know. 4 Q. Is it your understanding that almost all die 5 cast machines experience some leakage during the course of a week of the hydraulic fluid? 1 A, Yes. 8 Q. Was there ever an attempt made prior to 1970, 9 to quantify the amount of leakage from any die cast house 10 prior to 19 -- let's start over. At any time prior to 11 1970, was there ever an attempt by Monsanto to quantify 12 the amount of leakage? 13 A. I'm not aware of any such attempt. 14 Q. Was there any study performed by Monsanto to 15 determine where the Pydraul would end up that did leak 16 from a die cast machine or as a result of a spillage? 17 A. I'm not aware of any 3tudy that addressed 18 that, no. 19 Q. Prior to 1970# did Monsanto conduct any 20 studies to determine what the impact would be of Pydraul 21 being discharged from a die cast company that previously 22 had leaked from a die cast machine or had leaked as a 23 result of spillage? 24 A. I'm not aware of any study like that. 25 Q. Did Monsanto pay for any studies to be ---------------------------------------PERSY-REPORTING SERVICE-------------------------------- WATER PCB-SD0000018925 ^onpulfer Aided Transcription oy Xscri.De 'TT3 1 conducted by others on that particular subject prior to 2 1970? 3 A. I do not know. 4 Q. Did Monsanto at any time ever own any 5 companies whose principal business was conducting either 6 health tests on animals^ either human or animal tests or 7 environmental studies? 8 A. No. . 9 Q. If the PCBs ended up in the sledge in a 10 municipal waste water treatment system as the company 11 believed, how were the municipalities disposing of that 12 sludge? 13 A. It's my understanding that they ended up in 14 landfills. 15 Q. Do you know whether or not that sludge has 16 ever been used as a fertilizer? 17 A. Yes. In a few instances, yes. 18 Q. Do you know when it was first started to be 19 used as a fertiliser? 20 A. No. 21 Q. Do you know whether or not it was being used 22 as a fertiliser in the mid-1960's? 23 A. Z suspect it was. Now, we're talking about 24 sludges from municipal sewagetreatment plants -- 25 Q. That's correct. PERftY reporting Service WATER PCB-SD0000018926 computer Aiuea Transcription oy Asctroe 54 1 A. -- which may or may not have hydraulic fluids 2 In them? 3 Q. That's right. 4 A. All right. 5 Q. I'm not saying they do. I just want to know, 6 you know -- 7 A. Okay. 8 Q. Okay. Do you know, were they being used in 9 the 1960's? Was sludge being used in the 1960's as 10 fertilizer? 11 A. I'm aware, for example, of Milorganite, but I 12 don't know what year that was introduced to the 13 marketplace. I just don't know the dates. 14 Q. To your knowledge, did Monsanto, prior to 15 1969, actually go through that thought process? Now, I 16 appreciate that Monsanto's got a lot of employees, and you 17 can't be responsible for knowing what everybody is 18 thinking about, and I'm not trying to impose that 19 responsibility on you, but to your knowledge, were there 20 people at Monsanto that actually sat down and thought out 21 the process of where spillage of hydraulic fluid in die 22 cast houses ended up? 23 MR. 8CHINK1 Are you talking about spillage 24 that was not properly collected in Wisconsin, or are you 25 talking about spillage that was properly collected by Perry Reporting SERVICE " WATER PCB-SD0000018927 Conputr Aided Transcription by inscribe 5^5 1 using the aeans he discussed? 2 Q. Can you answer the question as it's phrased? 3 HR. SCHINKt I object to the question. 4 Q. (BY MR. CARLSON) Secondly, do you remember 5 the question? 6 A. I believe I do. 7 Q. Okay. 8 A. There were individuals in Monsanto that sat 9 down, as you say, and thought about it. 10 Q. Okay. Can you tell me -- 11 A. They addressed thosecases where control was 12 appropriate, the use of sawdust and clay and proper burial 13 and the proper kinds. And there were instances where they 14 were aware it was permitted to enter a municipal sewage 15 system, and they could speculate as to where that might 16 end up. They had no hard data to work from. 17 There were other instances where they frankly 18 didn't know. That went through their thought process. 19 They could come up with examples of excellent control and 20 to the other extreme of sloppy control. And so to answer 21 your question, yes, there were people in Monsanto that 22 went through this thought process, and this is really what 23 led to the conclusion that although most of the customers 24 are doing a good job, there are those few that can't or 25 won't lead us to replace that product. PERRY REPORTING SERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000018928 Computer Aided Transcription by xacnoe 1 Q. Okay. I'm not saying you didn't answer my 2 question^ but I want to refresh my own recollection. 3 Would you read my question back for me. 4 (Reporter read from record as directed.) 5 A. X have a correction to make in that last 6 answer. Tou mentioned 1969 and prior to. X would suggest b that starting in 1969# those thoughts were addressed. 8 Q. (BY NR. CARLSON) Okay. I thought that's 9 what you meant to say# but I wanted to be sure. 10 A. Yes. 11 Q. Okay. Starting in 1969 then/ who did go 12 through that effort in the company? 13 A. I can recall individuals that were involved. 14 There's Howard Bergen, the director of the business group. 15 Q. I'm sorry. His last name is? 16 A. Bergen, B-e-r-g-e-n. 17 Q. I keep calling it Bergen, so now I will 18 pronounce it right. 19 A. He preferred Bergen, soft *g." A Norman 20 Johnson, who was the marketing manager for the hydraulic 21 fluids; a Bill Richard, the director of research for those 22 fluids. 23 Q. Were those fluids generally categorised as 24 functional fluids? 25 A. They were part of the functional fluids, -------------------------------------- PEftftY REPORTING" SERVICE-------------------------------- - WATER PCB-SD0000018929 Computer Aided Transcription by Escribe *TT 1 which included hydraulic fluids as one category. 2 Q. Okay. Was Bill Richard director of research 3 for the hydraulic fluids? 4 A. For functional fluids. 5 Q. For functional fluids. A. How, working for Dr. Richard were individuals like Lou Stark. Z remember Mr. Stark was involved. So, 8 the names I have given you represent the business 9 function, the marketing function, the research function. 10 Q. Okay. Prior to 1970, was it generally 11 permissible -- and every time I use generally,* I'm going 12 to catch an objection, so I'll stipulate it will help me 13 into the subject. Was it generally permissible for 14 spilled hydraulic fluids to be flushed down storm sewer 15 drains? 16 MR. SCHINKi I object to the form of the 17 question. Are you talking about was it lawful in terms of 18 the Refuse Act, you're saying? 19 MR. CARLSONI Tea. 20 MR. SCHINKi You're asking for a legal 21 conclusion. Z don't think he's qualified to give one. 22 A. Zt's ay understanding prior to *70, before 23 EPA, states had statutes which described the kinds of 24 material permitted into public waterways in the states. 25 Industrial chemicals as a group were generally outlawed PERRY REPORTING SERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000018930 Computer Aided Transcription-by-XscrTbe 5 1 throughout the 48 states at a time, so a material like a 2 hydraulic fluid would be an industrial chemical that just 3 shouldn't be flushed down the sewer. 4 0. (BY HR. CARLSON) Okay. 5 A. Generally. < Q. Did you have -- strike that. Do you have an understanding of acceptable separation techniques used in 8 the die cast company to separate hydraulic oils from waste 9 water? 10 NR. SCHINIC: When? 11 Q. (BY MR. CARLSON) Any time prior to 1970. 12 A. The only technique I'm aware of prior to 13 1970, was gravitation where the heavier fluid would sink 14 to the bottom and have a water layer on top, and you 15 separate the two that way. 16 Q. Prior to 1970, did Monsanto recommend to its 17 customers utilizing a secondary or other separation 18 technique to separate PCBs from the water? 19 A. I'm not aware of any. 20 0. In those circumstances where there's a 21 mixture of kinds of oil that have, as a result of leakage 22 or spillage, worked their way into the waste water of a 23 plant, and there's an attempt to separate by skimming, 24 would the PCBs stay with the water? 25 A. To a degree. Some PCBs are in the water --------------- PEKRI REPORTING" SERVICE------------------------------ ------- WATER PCB-SD0000018931 Computer Aided Transcription Dy Xscrioe SJ 1 layers in tbs parts per billion range, but they would not 2 be visible to the naked eye. 3 Q. PCBs are heavier than water? 4 A. Yes 5 Q. Would soae of the PCBs be suspended in oil? 6 A. Zf there's -- you're talking now Mineral oil? Q. Yes. 8 A. If there's mineral oil, they would be very 9 much in the oil. They blend very perfectly. 10 Q. Okay. Who was responsible for marketing o 11 Pydraul F-9 and Pydraul 312 from '65 through '71? 12 A. The only individual I know was Norman 13 Johnson. I do not know who his predecessor was. 14 0. Without going into the details,.it may become 15 of interest to me later on, but right now were there other 16 fluids utilizing PCBs other than the hydraulic fluids --17 strike that. Prior to 1969, were there customers of 18 Monsanto using fluids utilizing PCBs which were given 19 specific directions with regard to oleanup -- strike that. 20 The question is never going to come out right. I'll try 21 one more time. Well, let me approach it this way. what 22 are some of the other liquids Monsanto manufactured which 23 utilized PCBs prior to '69? 24 A. Well, there were liquids used in turbines, 25 gas turbines, liquids used in vacuum pumps, liquids used PERRY REPORTING SERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000018932 AiUttu i'caascciptiufl oy Aocixuii 6Q 1 in electrical equipment, as veil as liquids used in heat 2 transfer assistance. I believe I've covered them all. 3 Q. Okay. Mere the liquids with PCBs utilized in 4 gas turbines prior to 1969, to your knowledge, did 5 Monsanto conduct studies as to whether or not the PCBs 6 used in that circumstance would potentially get out into the environment? 8 A* Z don't know of any formal study other than 9 the precautions about skin and breathing and the like that 10 called for responsible handling and use and disposal. 11 Q. Okay. 12 A. I don't know if that's what you had in mind. 13 Q. That's close. Is that answer also true with 14 regard to liquids used in heat transfer systems? 15 A. Yes. 16 Q. And the samewould be true with regard to 17 vacuum pumps? 19 A. Yes. 19 Q. And electricalequipment? 20 A. Correct. 21 Q. Prior to 1969, and for lack of a better way 22 of approaching it, when you use the terminology that you 23 had used earlier, I think it was sloppy controls and very 24 tight controls. The terminology is fine. What would 25 Monsanto's criterion be as to what would be an acceptably ------------------------ ------------- PERRY REPORTING SERVICE!------------------------------------ WATER PCB-SD0000018933 computer ATaea TranscrxptionHby Xscrioe 6T 1 tight control versus one vhich was unacceptable? We're 2 talking about now with regard to PCBs that get into the 3 waste water system. 4 A. I don't know that Monsanto had any 5 quantifiable criteria in mind in terms of so many pounds 6 or what have you# and Monsanto was never in a position to 7 know all of the circumstances that surrounded each 8 customer's particular situation. So it would be very 9 difficult to come up with a Monsanto concept of what's 10 acceptable. It depends on the total situation. 11 If the customer, as an example, had an agreement 12 with the local sewage treatment plant to discharge a given 13 amount of waste, and the local treatment plant handled it 14 properly, used the proper landfills or whatever, that 15 would be one set of circumstances that would call for *X" 16 pounds of material could go into the system. In another 17 situation where there just was no such agreement or the 18 local treatment plant could not tolerate it for reasons 19 that are unique to them, a much lesser amount would have 20 to serve as acceptable. So, it's a long way of going 21 around saying that I'm not aware of Monsanto, first of 22 all, being in a position to quantify it. So, no such 23 number ever evolved. 24 Q. Okay. Each case would have to be judged 25 independently? PERRY REPORTING SERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000018934 wjr A0W4 Q4 1 A. Correct. Yes. 2 Q. Are there die cast companies, other than my 3 client, that you're aware of, that you have heard about, 4 which have had to remove soil from around the premises 5 because of PCB content? 6 A. This is the first one Z've heard of and the 7 only one I've heard of. 8 Q. Okay. Are there any die cast companies 9 you're aware of, manufacturers who are using die cast 10 systems as a part of the manufacturing operation which 11 have incurred liability to either a state or to the 12 Federal Government as the result of discharge of PCBs? 13 MR. SCHINK: Are you talking about deliberate 14 discharges like the one involved in this case, deliberate 15 or accidental? Otherwise, I object to the form of the 16 question. 17 MR. CARLS01J: You can make your objection to 18 the form of the question, and the question stands as it's 19 phrased. 20 MR. SCHINKs He wants to know either a 21 deliberate discharge or an accidental discharge. 22 Maybe you want to read the question back. 23 (Reporter read from record as directed.) 24 MR. SCHINKi I don't know whether he knows 25 whether you incurred liability. -----------------------------------PKKRY'~KEPORTING "SERVICE---------------------------------- WATER PCB-SD0000018935 computer Aided Transcription oy Xacrloe 1 MR. CARLSON: Yeah, I know. I appreciate 2 that. 3 A. I'm kind o fuzzy. 4 Q. (BY MR. CARLSON) You can ask me. I'll 5 rephrase the question if you've got a problem, and I'm willing to admit the phrasing of that question isn't the greatest, but -- 8 A. All right. I'm not aware of all the details 9 of the Milwaukee Harbor situation. 10 Q. That's an example where there was a problem? 11 A. There were some cleanup possibilities talked 12 about. I don't know whether they had a die casting 13 operation inside that operation, so I'm kind of fuzzy in 14 terns of answering your question. Other than that, I 15 don't know of any other die casting related situation. 16 Q. Would it be more correct to say you don't 17 know with regard to my client what its responsibilities or 18 liabilities have been in the past, do you? 19 MR. 8CHINKi You have to answer audibly. 20 Q. (BY HR. CARLSON) You have to answer yes or 21 no. 22 A. I'm sorry. No, I don't. 23 Q. 8o when you say, "I'm not aware of any other 24 situation," actually what you're saying is, "I'm not aware 25 of any situation where a die cast company has incurred Perry reporting service ~ WATER PCB-SD0000018936 Conputer Aided Transcription by Xscribe 64 1 liability to either a state or to a governmental agency as 2 a result of discharge of PCB's? 3 A. That's corrects 4 Q* Okay. Other thanthe translation of the 5 Jensen study, have you reviewed any other studies which 6 addressed the question of potential adverse health effects 1 of PCB's? Strike that. Have you reviewed any studies 8 addressing the question of potential adverse health 9 effects of PCB's? 10 A. Yes, I have. 11 Q. Okay. Can you tellme of thosethat you have 12 read? 13 A. There's a report that was issued by Dr. 14 Risebrough, University of California at Berkeley, in which 15 he claimed that his study shoved that the brown pelicans 16 off the southern coast of California were being affected 17 by PCBs. There was a report issued out of Cornell 18 University by Dr. Peacall, P-e-a-c-a-1-1. As I remember 19 there, he was alleging that the PCBs were harming wild 20 birds, as I remember, the peregrine falcon in particular. 21 There were reports that came out of an incident 22 that occurred in the North Sea up near Great Britain 23 involving seals and sea birds, sea fowl. There was a 24 report issued out of the Commercial Fisheries Laboratory 25 in Gulf Breeze, Plorida, in which they reported that the --------------------------------- FERRY REPORTING SERVICE------------------------------ ~ WATER PCB-SD0000018937 Computer Aided Tcanscription by Xscribe 65 1 juvenile ahrlap were extremely sensitive to PCBs. At the 2 moment I can't think of any more. 3 Q. Any human health studies that you have 4 reviewed? 5 MR. 8CHIMK1 You're asking now whether they 6 showed adverse effects or no effects? * MR. CARLSONt That's right. I'm not looking 8 just for -- 9 A. I'm aware of some epidemiology studies made 10 on workers in the electrical equipment industry that were 11 exposed to PCBs in their places of employment. I have to 12 confess I haven't read the reports, per se. I have just 13 heard of these reports. I was informed that they were 14 conducted. I'm aware, of course, of Monsanto's animal 15 studies that were sponsored by Monsanto. 16 Q. (BY MR. CARLSON) Have you read those? 17 A. I'm 3orry? 18 Q. Have you read those? 19 A. The Monsanto's? 20 Q. Yes. 21 A. I have read the summaries. I have not read 22 the full technical report. 23 Q. Okay. Any others? 24 A. I can't recall at the moment any other 25 reports that I've seen or have heard of. PERRY REPORTING SERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000018938 Computer Aided Transcription by XscrTbe 66 1 Q. Has Monsanto, to your knowledge, accepted 2 that the presence of PCBs in the environment has damaged 3 reproduction of certain birds? 4 HR. SCHINKi At what level? 5* HR. CARLSONi At any level. 6 MR. SCHINKi Object! vague. 7 A. Monsanto, because of its leghorn chicken 8 studies and the results from those studies, concluded that 9 birds can have problems with eggs and reproduction when 10 exposed to PCBs. The levels are unknown regarding wild 11 birds. 12 The studies that were reported in early '70s by 13 investigators such as Peacall and Risebrough, I later was 14 informed by Government authorities in Patuxet, Maryland, 15 and they published a report on this, that the problem 16 chemical there was for DDT, not the PCB. So, there is no 17 good, hard data associating PCEs with wild birds, but 18 Monsanto's conclusion based on the chicken study is that 19 it's very likely that wild birds could be harmed. 20 0. (BY MR. CARLSON) It's hard to find birds 21 that aren't exposed to the DDT alone or the PCBs alone? 22 A. That is correct. 23 Q. Has anybody done any work to determine 24 whether there's a synergistic effect of DDT with PCBs or 25 vice versa? PERRY REPORTING SERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000018939 __ compucer Aided Transcription oy Xscrioe 67 1 A. I'm not aware of any. 2 Q. Do you know if Monsanto agrees or disagrees 3 with the idea that the gulf shrimp is particularly 4 sensitive to PCBs? 5 A. Monsanto aocepted that study and findings of 6 that study. There's no reason not to. T Q. Did the Commercial Fisheries Laboratory study 8 address the effects of PCBs on those shrimp that were 9 sensitive? What were the effects of PCB's? 10 A. Well, it killed them. 11 C. Okay. In the study which addressed the 12 question of PCBs and seals, apparently looking at what 13 occurred in the North Sea, what was the effect of PCB's on 14 the seals there? 15 A. As I understand it, they found bodies of dead 16 seals washed up on the shores. The seals were emaciated, 17 and there were many pups involved. The tissues were 18 analyzed, and PCBs were found, so PCBs were the suspect. 19 The last I recall is that the authorities in charge 20 of that study concluded that it's very likely that the 21 seals, especially the new mothers, were not getting enough 22 nourishment from wherever their surroundings were) and, 23 therefore, they became emaciated, and this is why the pups 24 were in turn affected. They couldn't nurse. And then 25 unfortunately, they found themselves in a violent sea PERRY REPORTING SERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000018940 coupucec Aiaa Transcription oy xscnoe 68 1 storm. All of those impacts combined killed them. That's 2 my understanding of the final analysis. 3 Q. Was there some relationship thought to exist 4 between the levels of the PCBs and the eventual death? 5 A. No. There was no relationship established, 6 because what had happened, they were so emaciated and lost 1 so much weight, that it was difficult to come up with a 8 number that says so many PCBs were present in the living, 9 healthy animal to start with. They just could not make 10 any good conclusions from their data. 11 Q. Did they make some conclusions, regardless of 12 whether or not they were good? 13 A. Well, like I said earlier, they concluded 14 that it was a lack of food that led to malnutrition, and 15 then the storm cane along, and that killed them. 16 Q. Was the lack of food related, at least in the 17 author of the study's mind, to the presence of PCBs? 18 A. No. They didn't associate that with PCBs. 19 Q. Were the presence of the PCBs coincidental to 20 the lack of food? I'm not talking about specifically what 21 happened. What was being reported as happened, though, 22 was that coincidental to what had occurred in the North 23 8ea? 24 A. That's the conclusion, yes. 25 Q. As expressed by those authors? -----------------------------------PERRY REPORTING SERVICE------------------------------ WATER PCB-SD0000018941 A4 a 4 A UU W V 4 2 4 ** W 4. 4WV> 1 A. Yes. *) 0. The Monsanto animal studies began when? And 3 let me back up. Monsanto, I presume -- and I know they 4 conducted tests periodically, you know, skin type tests on 5 animals on PCBs. A. Yes. Q. Did Monsanto conduct any studies looking at 8 the long-term effect of exposure to PCBs in the food chain 9 of the animals? 10 A. Yes. 11 Q. And when did they start doing that? 12 A. They started about 1968, with some studies to 13 establish feeding levels for the long-term study. 14 Q. Who actually was doing that work? 15 A. Industrial Bio TestLaboratories, Northbrook, 16 Illinois. 17 Q. Were they doing that on contract to Monsanto? 18 A. Yes. 19 Q. Do you know who owned Industrial Bio Test at 20 that time? 21 A. I believe it was a NALCO company, M-A-L-C-O. 22 Q. Do you know who owned HALCO? 23 A. Ho, I don't. 24 Q. What was Industrial Bio Test -- strike that. 25 To your knowledge, was there a contract entered into PERRY REPORTING SERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000018942 AlUtiU uy Aotaw /u between Monsanto and Industrial Bio Test, a written contract? 3 A. I've never seen one. 4 Q. What is your understanding of specifically 5 what Industrial Bio Test was to do originally when they 4 were first commissioned to do this study? I think you * already answered that for me, and if I'm being repetitive, 8 I apologize. I'a looking really what their first charge 9 was. 10 A. Their first charge? 11 Q. Yes. 12 A. Was to treat a small group of animals at as 13 high a dose level as possible without killing the animal 14 to help establish a level that could later be fed to 15 another group of test animals for their lifetime, and have 16 as many survivors as possible to be able to study the 17 effects. 18 Q. Okay. And the specific animal being looked 19 at was the chicken? 20 A. It was the white rat, the beagle dog, and the 21 leghorn chicken. 22 Q. Did Industrial Bio Test determine the amount 23 that could be fed to each of the animals and to the bird without killing them? A. They determined an amount that would give -----------------------------------FEH'RY REPORT IHG TTBR7TCE----------------------------- --- WATER PCB-SD0000018943 wu^ucdi: <uau xcanscrxpcxon oy Aaccxoe il 1 this survival rate that was suitable for a good study. 2 Q. Okay. Do you know about how long it took 3 theia to arrive at these numbers? 4 A. That*a called a 90-day study. So given a 5 normal follow-up, I would suggest that it took them about 6 four months. Q. Okay. And then what was done with that data? 8 A. That data then was used to establish feeding 9 levels for the. two-year rat study and the 18-month dog 10 study, and I believe it was 18 months for the chicken 11 study. 12 0. Were the results of the original work, that 13 is, the results of the 90-day study, published in a report 14 to Monsanto? 15 A. There is a report to Monsanto, yes. 16 Q. Okay. And do you know, were the two-year, 17 18-month and 18-month studies carried out? 18 A. Yes. 19 Q. And do you know what the results were 20 generally with regard to those studies? 21 A. Zn the rat studies, the higher chlorinated 22 types of FCBs at the high dose level, which was 100 parts 23 per million in their total daily diet, lifetime diet, 24 produced enlarged livers and decreased gain in weight, and 25 had some reproduction problems in terms of number of pups PERRY REPORTING SERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000018944 Aiao 'iianficcipcioa oy Ascuoe 72 1 that were born. 2 In the chicken study, they seemed to tolerate the 3 higher chlorinated PCBs better. The effect was noted with 4 the lower chlorinated PCB, the 1242, end soaewhere between 5 the one and 10 part per aillion feeding level there was an C effect on the egg shell thickness and on the hatchability of the eggs* The tests were then reran, and it was 8 established that at about three parts per Billion in the 9 diet of the chicken, this effect on eggs was noted. So, 10 it took less than three parts per aillion to be 11 acceptable. 12 HR. SCHINKj Three parts per million? 13 A. Per million, yes. In the dogs, the dogs 14 seeaed to suffer from gastric problems. As I remember, 15 they had at the higher levels bleeding ulcers or the 16 equivalent of that. That's all I remember about the dog 17 study. 10 Q. (BY MR. CARLSON) Do you know if they seemed 19 to tolerate the higher chlorinated or the lower 20 chlorinated Aroclors better? 21 A. I * a sorry? 22 Q. Z'a talking about the dogs now. Did they 23 seea to tolerate the higher or the lower chlorinated ~ 24 A. There didn't seea to be that auch difference 25 in the materials tested. ---------------------------- :--TERRY REPORT INC" SERVICE--------------------------- ----- WATER PCB-SD0000018945 ww 4 a 44 uiaw a V4 **JL v4 /3 1 Q. Okay. 2 A. But it was the higher doses that, of course, 3 gave that effect. 4 Q. In response to the results of this study, did 5 Monsanto take any specific action with regard to either 6 continuing or discontinuing sales of FCB products or * advice given to customers handling PCB products? 8 A* So. This data confirmed that what we had 9 been saying on the labels and literature and all was still 10 appropriate. 11 Q. Okay. And that study was completed when? 12 A. The final reports were available in *71 or 13 '72. 14 Q. To your knowledge, has any human health 15 researcher opined that exposure to PCBs has or causes any 16 particular form of cancer? 17 A. I've read and heard that allegation. I have 18 seen no formal report supporting that. 19 Q. Where have you read the allegation? 20 A. Mostly in the popular press. 21 Q. The press has an interesting role I'm sure 22 that we're all aware of with regard to industrial 23 chemicals, but do you have some recollection of what 24 Btudies or what it was that the press was latching on to 25 that they used to -- or the press used to support the PERRY REPORTING SERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000018946 computer Aided transcription Dy xscra.be 1 stories that there was a cause/effect demonstrated? 2 MR. SCHINKx You're talking now about human 3 health? 4 MR. CARLSONx That's right, human health. 5 A. I don't recall any specific reports or 6 specific person mentioned. It is a belief held by some 7 scientists. They have expressed this belief in meetings. 8 The press picked it up, and it's been ay observation that 9 now any time a PCB article appears in the popular press, 10 in the newspapers, it's followed by the word "cancer," the 11 cancer-causing chemical or a probable cancer causer; but 12 anyway, the word "Cancer" is associated with PCBs, but I 13 don't recall any scientific report that deals with human 14 cancer and PCBs. 15 Q. (BY MR. CARLSOH) Do you recall any case 16 reports in which the author linked exposure to PCBs and 17 cancer? 1G A. Case reports? 19 Q. Do you recall any epidemiological work such 20 as you referenced for me with regard to the electrical 21 workers? 22 A. I don't recall any. 23 Q. Can you give me the names of some of the 24 scientists that you have heard express the opinion or have 25 read that have expressed the opinion that there's a --------------------:-------------- PERRY REPORTIRG SERVICE--------------------------- ----- WATER PCB-SD0000018947 v.uu aa a< u i'(4ac[i^tioa oy Aficuoe <75 1 cause-effect relationship between exposure to PCBs and 2 cancer? 3 A. This Mrs, Silbergeld stands out in my mind. 4 There are others, but I really can't remember. Barry 5 Commoner is another name that comes to mind. There are at times, as I remember, some of Nr. Ralph Nader's team that made statements of this type. I've forgotten their names 8 now. I just can't think of them anymore. 9 C. Do you have some understanding or have you 10 heard what these people are basing their contentions on? 11 A. I don't know what they're basing them on. 12 Q. Other than the ~ strike that. Did Biotest 13 do the second stage of the study that you have referenced 14 for me? 15 A. The chicken study? 16 Q. Yes, the chicken, rat and dog. 17 A. They did all those studies, yes. 18 Q. Did all of them. Okay. Has Monsanto 19 commissioned any other animal studies looking at 20 potentially adverse health effects of PCB's? 21 A. Z wasn't involved, but I understand that 22 there was a study placed somewhere with Monsanto 23 companies, and that's all I personally know. 24 Q. Has it your understanding that Monsanto paid 25 for the study or did it in-house or -- PERRY REPORTING SERVICfe WATER PCB-SD0000018948 computes Aide a Transcription oy iscnoe 76 1 A. No, they did not do it in-house. It was done 2 elsewhere. 3 Q. Any idea what part of the country it was done 4 in, or perhaps what laboratory it was? 5 A* Just oast is all I reaeaber. < Q. Do you reaeaber when that was? "7 A. Zt was after 1977, 1980. 8 Q. And have you heard just in general teras what 9 the results of that study were? 10 A. No, I haven't. I don't know either the 11 conditions of the test or the results. 12 Q. At the tirae Monsanto decided to discontinue 13 oanufacturing and sale of Pydraul 312 that contained -- I 14 think it vaG what, Aroclor 1242, wasn't it? 15 A. Yes. 16 Q. Did you agree with that decision or disagree? 17 A. Yes. 18 Q. Was in part your agreement based on any 19 concerns that you had with regard to the effect of 20 Aroclors on the environaent? 21 A. Yes. 22 Q. And was italso in partbased onconcerns you 23 had about potentialor at least possiblehealth effects of 24 the Aroclor? 25 A. Yes. KEFUKTiNU SERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000018949 <Coaputer Aided Transcription by Xacrxoe 77 1 Q. And was the information you had at your 2 disposal at that tine that allowed you to cone to an 3 opinionr that in this particular case you agreed with 4 Monsanto's action that was developed between 1969 and 5 whenever that decision was nade? 6 A. Tea. 7 Q. Zf Monsanto solely* as the result of the 8 Jensen work in 1966* had decided to discontinue 9 manufacturing and sale of Pydraul 312 with the 1242 10 Aroclor* would you have disagreed with the decision based 11 on that information? 12 A. Yes. 13 Q. You would have thought it appropriate to have 14 more data available before either agreeing or disagreeing? 15 A. Yes. 16 Q. Was Monsanto -- strike that. Do you know 17 when Monsanto was first aware of the Swedish study? 18 A. The Swedish study? 19 Q. Tes* the Jensen study. 20 A. It's my understanding we were first aware of 21 it in late '66* early '67. 22 Q. It may be difficult to pin down* but do you 23 have some idea or do you have some understanding of who it 24 was at Monsanto that first became aware of the study? 25 A. I have an understanding. PERRY REPORTING SERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000018950 1 Q Who was It? 2 A. The best I recall, there was a Monsanto 3 representative in the United Kingdom named Don Cameron, 4 who was marketing sales representative, heard about a 5 report from somewhere -- I don't know where -- that 6 referred to chlorinated biphenol, spelled p-h-e-n-o-1 7 instead of p-h-e-n-y-1. And at first the thought was that 8 this is an entirely different chemical than the one we 9 were selling, but as I understood it, Mr. Cameron then 10 arranged through the Swedish Monsanto representative to 11 get a copy of that report, which in turn was translated, 12 and this is the report I mentioned earlier. It finally 13 got to Monsanto-St. Louis, like I said, late '66, early 14 '57. 15 Q. Okay. 15 THE WITNESSi Can we take a break? 17 MR. CARLSON: Oh, sure. This is not an 18 endurance contest. I didn't mean to imply that it was. 19 (A brief recess was taken.) 20 Q. (BY MR. CARLSON) When we were discussing 21 PCBs found in the environment, found in the food chain, I 22 guess one of the questions that comes to my mind is how do 23 birds endup with PCBs in their tissue? Zn other words, 24 are they eating foods that have PCBs in them, or are they 25 getting it from the dirt? Do you have some understanding? -----------------------------------PERRY "REPORTING"SERVICE---------------------------------- WATER PCB-SD0000018951 Computer Aided transcription Dy xscnoe T? 1 A. 1*11 give you my understanding. 2 Q. Okay. 3 A. The birds that seem to have the most trouble 4 with PCBs or chemicals like PCBs are the fish-eating S birds, falcons and the like, and the pelicans. And the 6 way this happens is that PCB, once It finds its way into 7 waterways, is, of course, present in that water. Then you 8 have the different species of aquatic life from the water 9 on up to the big fish. The big fish eat the little fish. 10 The little fish eat the smaller ones. Each one has soae 11 PCBs in it started from the water flea, which iE the 12 aaphnea. You may have heard of it. 13 Anyway, the PCB accumulates in each creature and 14 concentrates in the fatty tissue of that creature such 15 that when it's eaten, all the PCBs go into the next 16 creature. So by the time you get to the top of the food 17 chain, the PCBs have been concentrated, sometimes quite 18 dramatically. They have found -- some studies show that 19 75,000 times more PCBs are in the fish than there was in 20 the water that the fish lived in. 21 So, that fish now has the PCBs in it. It*s eaten 22 by the bird, pelican or falcon or hawk. Zt in turn builds 23 it up in its tissues. Some of it is eliminated. Some of 24 it is retained. Some of it is metabolized, and it then 25 begins to affect its reproduction, its ability to use PERRY REPORTING SERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000018952 Computer Aided Transcription by Xscribe --80 1 calcium properly to make the egg shells and so on. That's 2 my understanding of how it can happen in the food chain. 3 Q. Okay. 4 A. If it is dirt* as you indicated earlier# it's 5 really a dirt particle that gets into the water and is suspended in the water# gets into the fish gills# and the PCB off of that dirt then is extracted by the fish gill# 8 gets into the bloodstreaa that way# in addition to the 9 eating process. 10 Q. Okay. PCBs aren't being picked up by plant 11 roots, are they? 12 A. I haven't heard of any plants that pick up 13 PCBs, except that they were found in the pine needles in 14 Sweden, which many investigators suspect were from fallout 15 rather than from the soil. 16 Q. Has Monsanto undertaken some studies to 17 determine either where in the world or where in this 18 country most of the PCB problem is? 19 A. NO. 20 MR. SCHINKt What do you mean by "problem,* 21 the prasenoe? 22 Q. (BY MR. CARLSON) When we ware talking about 23 a targat of 10 parts par billion in discharge of waste 24 water as being an acceptable limit# first of all# am I 25 correctly stating Monsanto's position at the time you were ---------------------------------- PERRY REPORTING SERVICE----------------------------- --- WATER PCB-SD0000018953 Computer Aided"Transcnpf ion "by Xscrioe 81 1 with the company? 2 A. Yeah/ where discharged. It's not into the 3 environment. It's into a sewer system, leaving the plant 4 In the sewer system. 5 0. All right. Leaving the plant in the sewer 6 system. Zs there or was there an expectation that 7 further, after the material left the plant, it would then 8 result in the PCBs either being filtered out or breaking 9 down? 10 A. Yes. Those thoughts were considered, yes. 11 Q. We get into the subject of the municipal or 12 treatment of municipal sewage. 13 A. Correct. 14 Q. Okay. Has there been work done which shows 15 that this does or does not occur? 16 A. What doesn'toccur? 17 Q. That treatment of municipal sewage will cause 18 biodegradation of PCBs. 19 A. Yes. 20 Q. All right. And does it? 21 A. Yes. 22 Q. Okay. When was that determined? 23 A. The biodegradation studies that Monsanto 24 conducted simulated in the laboratory what happens in a 25 municipal treatment plant that uses bacteria to digest the PERRY REPORTING SERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000018954 Computer Aided Transcription by Xscri.be 82 1 sludge. In fact, the culture for these studies was 2 obtained from the St. Louis municipal sewage plant, taken 3 to the laboratory, and innoculated each of the test stands 4 for each of the products, and that demonstrated that yes, 5 bacteria from the treatment plant do digest some of the 6 PCBs. And also, they demonstrated during the analyses . 7 that the PCBs had adhered to the particles in that test 8 system. 9 Q. Do the remainder of the PCBs, those that were 10 not digested, adhere to the particles? 11 A. Yes. 12 0. And when was that done? When was the work 13 completed on that? 14 A. It was completed in early *72. 15 Q. From this could I infer that if companies 16 using the PC5 hydraulic fluid had a waste water treatment 17 plant on their premises comparable to a municipal plant, 18 and could contain PCBs and treat them as the 19 municipalities were doing, that Pydraul with the PCBs 20 would still be a viable product today? 21 A. I suspect not, because the PCBs that are not 22 degraded would still be detectable with the analytical 23 methods now available, and as long as they are detected, 24 that just doesn't seem to be acceptable anymore. PCBs are 25 just not desirable. -----------------------------------PERRY REPORTING SERVICE---------------------------- --- WATER PCB-SD0000018955 Computer Aidea Transcription oy Xscnoe ST 1 Q. Okay. Because of the potential impact on the 2 environment? 3 A. That's the probability of an impact, is 4 really the thought that controls this undesirability of 5 PCB1 a. Q. Prior to 1969# did Monsanto think that all 7 die cast waste water discharge was going into a sever 8 system where there would be municipal treatment of the 9 water? 10 A. Ho. Many did# but there are others that did 11 not. 12 0. What were the other -- I hate to use the word 13 "acceptable#" but I guess I will# either acceptable or 14 common ways that the waste was being discharged by die 15 cast companies prior to '69? 16 A. Well# I understand that some companies had 17 their own discharge system before they discharged to a 18 local stream# and some thought that they controlled the 19 losses to the point where the water that did get sway 20 could be discharged without any further treatment. Just 21 release it to the nearest creek bed and so on. And then 22 there were soae that# as I said earlier# either could not 23 or did not understand the need to be careful# and they 24 would discharge. 25 Q. Por a die cast company that was skimming off PERRY REPORTING SERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000018956 ''wxf'Mos* /vo w 1. AU8 046 1 oil# okay, mineral oil from the water, from waste water, 2 and then seeing if one saw the remaining water in the 3 tank, if it's relatively clear, typically would that, 4 prior to 1969, be thought to be waste water which could he 5 discharged into a local ditch or a stream bed? 6 NR. SCHZHKt Now, is this a die caster using " 7 Pydraul or not? e NR. CARLSON* Yeah, Pydraul 312. 9 MR. SCHINKs Along with mineral oil? 10 MR. CARLSON* No, not along with, but mineral n oils in the plants that have gotten into that same waste 12 water. 13 MR. SCHINKt And is this an open tank? 14 What's the depth of the tank? I object to the form of the 15 question. 16 Q. (BY MR. CARLSON) Go ahead. 17 A. Prior to 1969? 18 Q. Yes. 19 A. Any PCB type fluids that were with water 20 would be visible, because it would form a separate layer, 21 and the two would be separated. In fact, there was 22 literature that told the customer how to reclaim that 23 hydraulic fluid at the bottom of the water and reuse it to 24 save himself some money. 25 Q. Okay. PERRY REPORTING SERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000018957 Computer Sided Transcription by Xscrine 1 A. Now, there's an oil machine that you +2 mentioned. Mineral oil would float. You remove that, and 3 if you looked at the water and didn't see a bottom layer, 4 that would tell you that there were no heavy PCB hydraulic 5 fluids present. There was none present. 6 Q. And if you saw that bottom layer? 7 A. If you saw that bottom layer, you better be 8 careful. It very likely has PCB because it is heavy, 9 unless it's a mud or metal waste or some other types of 10 material. You have to determine that. 11 Q. Did Monsanto, prior to '69, know the various 12 methods that die cast companies were using to treat their 13 waste water? 14 A. In most cases, the Monsanto sales 15 representative knew quite a bit about the operation, 16 because they have -- that was a responsibility. "Know 17 your customers and his operations so you can help them 18 better to use your product, continue to use our product," 19 that sort of thing. 8o, most of them were quite familiar 20 with the operation. How, this does not mean that he knew 21 every minute of the day what was taking place. 22 Q. Oh, no. But he knew generally how the plant 23 plant worked? 24 A. Yes, Yes. 25 Q. And if a plant had a procedure for separating PERRY REPORTING SERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000018958 computer Aiaaa Transcripcion oy xeccioe 36 1 mineral oils from waste water, but didn't have a separate 2 procedure for separating waste water from Pydraul, would 3 that salesman then recommend that another separation 4 system be employed? 5 A. Very likely, yes, sir, because that fluid that was being lost was higher cost than that oil that T they were recovering. It would behoove them to recover 8 that heavier layer. 9 Q. Okay. And in some of your earlier literature 10 with Pydraul, that's set out? 11 A. Yes. 12 C. Would it be recommended to the customer as a 13 cost savings measure that you could reclaim that Pydraul 14 fluid and reuse it in your system? 15 A. Oh, yes, because Pydrauls are more expensive 16 than other competitive fluids. This is one way to balance 17 out the costs. 18 Q. Would the recommendation have been made for 19 any other reason? 20 A. Well, it's the overridingreason, "Don't put 21 industrial chemicals down the sewer." 22 Q. Do you know if, in fact,yoursalespeople 23 calling on customers did make those recommendations to die 24 cast companies? 25 A. Yeah. "PERRY REPORTING" SERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000018959 Computer Aided Transcription by ~Xscribe <87 1 Q. Are you aware of any particular instance 2 where that occurred? 3 A. It was throughout the industry. There is no 4 one case that stands out. 5 Q. I appreciate that, and that may have been. 6 Z'a not saying it wasn't. I'm just wondering if you can :~y point ma to a situation where you know, in fact, that 8 occurred? 9 A. Ho. I don't remember any salesman telling me 10 specifically a customer by name, no. This was sort of 11 like breathing. They do it all the time. 12 Q. Were salesmen directed to tell their 13 customers this? 14 A. Yes. That's part of their training, to sell 15 this product. 16 Q. And they were directed to tell the customers 17 to put in a separation system which would draw out the 18 Pydraul that had been lost through leakage or spillage 19 from the waste water? 20 A. They were directed to discuss with the 21 customer the advantages of doing so and sharing with them 22 some ideas, but let the customer design his system, 23 depending on his factory, and the layout, and his 24 resources, what have you. 25 Q. In situations where salespeople were calling PERRY REPORTING SERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000018960 Coapucer Aided Transcription by Xscribe 87 1 on new customers, but old plants, that you were able to 2 pick up from, you know, your salesman was able to get in 3 there and sell Pydraul as a replacement hydraulic fluid 4 for something Bade by one of your aoapetitors, if there 5 wasn't a separate systea in place for drawing out Pydraul 4 froa the waste water at the bottoa, would that be a ~7 recommendation that would be Bade for a new account? 8 A. Sure, yeah, but in something to catch the 9 loss or the drippage or the spill or the broken pipeline, 10 trap it and treat it as follows, and as I remember, the 11 brochures had even some sketches in some schemes of work 12 somewhere. 13 0. In any of the brochures or publications 14 Monsanto had prior to '69, demonstrating ways of 15 accomplishing the separation, did Monsanto reference this 16 as a way to alleviate discharge of the material into 17 either a sewer system or the waterways? 18 A. I don't recall the wording. I just don't 19 remember the exact words. I do remember this emphasis on 20 reclamation and the aixture of water and Pydrauls and 21 separating them. 22 Q. It could well be that the separation system 23 that we're talking about for separating Pydraul from waste 24 water was only advanced by Monsanto as a technique for 25 reclamation to save money by the consumer so that fluids ----------------------------------- PERR7 REPORTING SERVICE----------------------------- - WATER PCB-SD0000018961 computer Aiaea Transcription by xscribe 89 1 could be used, rather than to aid in treating of waste 2 water that was going to be discharged either into a 3 system, a sewer system or a waterway? 4 MR. SCHINKi I object. It asks for the S witness to speculate. 6 ~ A. Zt could be as you say. 7 0. (BY MR. CARLSON) Okay. 8 A. At the sane tine, X find that hard to believe 9 that the thought of "Don't expose people" isn't there 10 somewhere, "Don't get it out there where others can be 11 exposed." I'm thinking of the label and the handling 12 section in these brochures we talked about. 13 Q. Well, the label doesn't have anything on it 14 about reclaiming using the kind of system we're talking 15 about? 16 A. Ho. No. 17 Q. I'm talking about particular -- 18 MR. SCHINK: Let him finish his answer. 19 MR. CARLSON* I'm sorry. I thought he did. 20 A. The label refers to waste that human beings 21 can be exposed. 22 Q. (BY MR. CARLSON) All right. 23 A. The idea being that once you get that 24 message, then you control how it's handled in this 25 workplace, how it might get down the sewer, what affect it PERRY REPORTING SERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000018962 Computer Aided Transcription by Xscribe JO 1 will have on the sewage plant people, and what night 2 happen later i they dump it in the wrong place and out in /. 3 the local lake. The people night be swimming or fishing. 4 Just don't expose people to this chemical, and that 5 Includes the whole bit from handling, use, disposal. 4 Q. doing back to the original thought, that is, T the brochures which demonstrated ways of reclaiming 8 Pydraul from waste water, that was as a reclamation method 9 to aid the customer in treating his waste water? 10 A. I'd have to reread it. I don't remember the 11 exact words. I do remember the sections on reclamation. 12 I remember schematic sketches of how it might be done. I 13 remember a reference to, "You can reuse this." 14 It seems to me I also remember even a 15 recommendation where you might send it to have it cleaned 16 up a little more to some companies that were in this 17 business, but a specific wording as it relates to, "Don't 18 put it down the sewer," I don't know if that was in that 19 section or some other section. I just don't remember 20 those words. 21 Q. Do you remember when the brochure first came 22 out that we're discussing? 23 A. X think the earliest brochures came out when 24 the product was first introduced in the middle '50s. 25 Q. Do you remember about how many revisions ----------------------------------- PERRY-RE PORTING "SERVICE---------------------------- --- WATER PCB-SD0000018963 ` computer Aided Transcription by XWcrlbe 1 there were of It? 2 A. I'm under the impression about three. 3 Q. Just a few minutes ago in responding to a 4 question you had discussed the label and its advising the 5 customer of what would happen to people, for example, who 6 were exposed to this material when they were fishing or t swimming or that kind of thing. What hazards were there 8 to people that were fishing or swimming that were exposed 9 to this particular product after it had already been 10 disbursed in a lake or a river? 11 A. Well, hopefully, none, but it's again a 12 matter of quantity and periods, prolonged exposures. And 13 i it's just a water solution, as I said earlier, if it's 14 in a part per billion, I would not expect any effect. 15 On the other hand, if it's down in the bottou 16 sediment in high concentrations, and people wade or walk 17 in that too often, and it will vary from the small child 18 to the adult, and even between adults and children, it's 19 possible, for example, to get a reddening of the skin on 20 the feet that were in this muck too long. Exaggerating 21 somewhat, continuing in that, you might start getting some 22 chloracne appearing on your cheek bones because you did 23 this too often every day all summer long, maybe, again to 24 make the point. So, in order to avoid any of that, just 25 don't even get close to exposing people. Just don't PERRY REPORTING SERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000018964 1 dispose of it improperly 2 Q. If the 10 parts per billion of -- I suppose 3 we ought to talk about which of the Aroclors we want to 4 address. Is the 10 parts per billion any of the PCBs? S A. Any of them. 6 Q. Okay. If that target la being met by a i company discharging waste water into a waterway for over a 8 period of 20 years, is there a potential then for the 9 sediment in the bottom of the receiving stream, receiving 10 lake, receiving pond, whatever it may be, then to reach an 11 unacceptable high level? 12 MR, SCHINK: I object to the form of the 13 question. The 10 part per billion figure that the witness 14 testified, I thought, was with reference to discharges to 15 municipal treatment plants, not discharges to streams. 16 Q. (BY MR. CARLSON) Let's discuss that for a 17 second. Does Monsanto have a different recommendation if 18 there was discharge into holding ponds? 19 MR. SCHINKi I object to the form of that 20 question. I don't think Monsanto had a recommendation. I 21 thought you asked him with reference to an internal goal 22 that Monsanto set for discharges from its plants to sewage 23 treatment plants. 24 Q. (BY MR. CARLSON) You can answer the 25 question. PSRRY REPORTING" SERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000018965 computer Aiaea Transcription by Xscnoe ST 1 A. He did not have a goal for free discharge 2 into a public waterway. We shared with our customers our 3 goal, telling them that this in turn goes to a treatment 4 plant, and we expect in that treatment plant for some of 5 it to be degraded and the rest to be trapped by the 6 aludge, and the sludge has to be properly disposed of. f9 And we anticipate that the water that Is finally 8 discharged is acceptable, you know, measurable in terms of 9 analytic, current analytical methods. 10 Q. And that was first the goal as of 11 approximately when? 12 A. 1970. 13 Q. Okay. How did you feed that information to 14 your customer? . 15 A. Word of mouth, these presentations I 16 mentioned earlier. In some instances I recall responding 17 to a letter, answering back in that kind of language, 18 Monsanto's goal is 10 parts per billion in their 19 discharge, so on. 20 Q. Into the sewer systems where it was going to 21 the waste water treatment plant? 22 A. Yeah. 23 Q. Was that ever put on the label of any of your 24 products? 25 A. No. tBkRY REPORTING SERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000018966 Computer Aided Transcription by Xscribe 9T 1 Q. Has that ever put in the brochure that was 2 nailed generally to the known customers? 3 A. No* 4 Q. Prior to 1970, did Monsanto sake 5 recommendations to its customers with regard to different < handling of waste water that was going to be discharged 7 into a municipal sewer system and waste water which would 8 be discharged into a waterway? 9 A. I'm not aware of a distinction being made. 10 Word of caution was, "Don't mix the two. Don't dump it 11 freely. If it does get mixed, salvage." That was the 12 message prior to '69. 13 Q. Bov was that message conveyed? I mean, was 14 that an important message Monsanto wanted to get to the 15 customer? 16 A. Which message is this? 17 Q. The one you just mentioned to me that if 18 you're going to have a mixing of the water and the PC9s, 19 don't mix, salvage* 20 A. Salvage, yeah. 21 Q. Okay. 22 A, That was a pretty Importantmessage. 23 Q. Okay. Do you know who hadthe responsibility 24 of determining the appropriate labels that would be put on 25 the Pydraul products to convey that message? Perry REPORTING SERVICE " WATER PCB-SD0000018967 tauvl*)(b*Wli WJf AIWUUC ai 1 A. The primary responsibility was the medical 2 department, 3 Q. Mould they, that is, would people in the 4 medical department draft the original label in that 5 regard? 4 A. Tea. Zn the majority of eases, they would '"7 make the original draft# would eoasalt with the marketing 8 people# the research people, the label people. There was 9 a label department# and# of course# the lawyers# get a 10 consensus# but the medical department had the control. 11 They could overrule any other suggestions that they didn't 12 feel were appropriate. 13 Q. Okay. And they would originate the label, 14 the warning aspects of the label? 15 A. In most cases# nine out of 10. Once in a 15 while someone would start something with his 17 understanding# go by the medical department# say# "Here's 18 what I'm thinking. What do you think?" And they would 19 sit down and revise it if appropriate. 20 Q. How about for the Pydraul 312 prior to 21 reformulation? Do you know where that label came from? 22 A. That label was a copy of the PCB wording# and 23 that wording originated in the medical department. 24 Q. Okay. I don't know if it's either fair or 25 possible to approach it this way# but if Monsanto was PERRY REPORTING SERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000018968 -----K------------------ ----------------- -J ABW4.AWC 1 still manufacturing and selling Pydraul 312 with the 1242 2 Aroclor, do you have some opinion as to what the label 3 language looked like, that is, what language you had on 4 it? 5 A. Teah, I have an opinion. 6 Q. Can you tell me what it would be? ? A. Z would say the label that existed prior to 8 determination la today still appropriate, because if those 9 words of caution are followed, I think it would achieve 10 what you're trying to achieve. Avoid exposing people. 11 Avoid harm to the environment. All of those things are 12 there, and they still are appropriate today. 13 Q. Do you remember how many revisions of the 14 Pydraul 312 label there were from *65, through the 15 termination of the product? 16 A. '65 to '71, I'm aware of only one addition. 17 Q. And when was that? 18 A. This was in 1970. 19 Q. And what was the addition? 20 A. If* had a paragraph referring or 21 re-emphasizing, really, the impact, the possible impact on 22 the environment, and to keep it out of waterways, property 23 handling and disposing. 24 Q. In 1970, were there landfills that existed 25 that would have approval from some governmental agency, -----------------------------------PERRY REPORTING SERVICE---------------------------- ------ WATER PCB-SD0000018969 Computer Aided Transcript ion oy Xscnoe 9T 1 whether it be a local, state or Federal agency, for the 2 receipt of PCB material? 3 A, Yes. 4 Q. First of all,were they sites that were 5 approved Federally in 1970? A. Ho. 1 Q. Sites that were approved locally by states? 8 A. Host of them were locally approved. A few 9 states were approving, but most of them were municipally 10 approved, county or city approved. 11 Q. Over the years have there been sites that 12 were municipally approved that later had to themselves be 13 cleaned up? 14 A. Yes. 15 Q. Why was that happening? Can you give me a 16 brief background of what occurred and why sites which 17 originally apparently were licensed or were approved to 10 receive PCB materials then later on had to go through 19 another cleanup process? 20 A. Oh, I canonlyattribute that to a changing 21 perception of the potential hasards of PCBs with time. 22 Q. Okay. 23 A. Back before '70, itwas innocuous, perceived 24 to be innocuous, and free dumping was permitted. As the 25 public became more aware of PCB's and the regulatory PERRY REPORTING SERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000018970 1 agencies began asking questions and scrutinizing, the 2 permitting procedure changed, and some of the landfills 3 that at one time would permit PCBs would no longer do so 4 Q. And if they were weren't, they would have to 5 be cleaned up in some instances? 6 A* In some instances, yes* 7 Q. Do you have any understanding as to whether 8 or not the originators of the PCBs, that is, the company 9 that used the PCBs, in this case a manufacturing 10 operation, would still be responsible for the cleanup? 11 A. I'm aware of at least one case, yes, sir. 12 Q. If a company -- strike that. Is it possible 13 for a company to have believed it was disposing of PCBs in 14 an appropriate manner by having them taken to a licensed 15 landfill and then subsequently being found financially 16 responsible for the then removal of the PCBs from that 17 landfill? 18 A. You say is it possible? 19 Q. Yes. 20 A* Theanswer Is yes. 21 Q. Are you personally familiar with the 22 landfills that were accepting PCBs in Wisconsin in 1970? 23 A. WO. 24 Q. Are youaware of landfills in Wisconsin that 25 received PCB material prior to 1970, which have ---------------------------------- PERRY REPORTING SERVICE------------------------------ --- WATER PCB-SD0000018971 Compoter XTded Transcription oy xscrxoe - 1T5T 1 subsequently been ordered to be cleaned up? 2 A. I'm not aware of any. 3 Q. You're not aware that it didn't happen# 4 either? You just don't have any knowledge? 5 A, That is correct. 6 Q. Okay. As has Monsanto had to pay for cleanup EU. costs for any landfills that it used prior to 1970# for 8 disposal of PCBs? 9 A. Mould you help me with the word# your 10 understanding of the word "cleanup". 11 Q. Where the material# that is# the actual soil 12 had to be removed and taken somewhere else. 13 A, NO. 14 Q. When is the first time you recall there being 15 a maximum amount of PCB'e that could be present in 16 hydraulic flood and die cast machines? 17 MR. SCHINKt Are you talking about when there 18 was a regulation? 19 MR. CARLSONi Yes. 20 A. I first became aware of this about 1980# *81. 21 Q. (BY MR. CARLSON) Do you recall what the 22 standard was at that time? 23 A. If I have ay dates correct# I believe# as 24 best I remember# it was 50 parts per million. 25 Q. Do you know whether or not Monsanto PERRY REPORTING SERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000018972 computer Aided Transcription by Xscribe 100 1 provided -- that was set by the BPA? 2 A. Tee. 3 Q. Did Monsanto provide any information to EPA 4 vhich EPA, to your knowledge, relied upon In part in 5 coming to that standard? 6 A. A Monsanto representative participated in ff those discussions. I cannot personally say that I an 8 aware exactly what he proposed, but Z do know he acted. 9 MR. SCHINK: His question is what EPA relied 10 on. 11 A. I don't know. 12 Q. (BY KR. CARLSON) Did Monsanto produce any 13 such information for EPA to review and take into account? 14 A. I don't know. 15 Q. Who was the person for Monsanto that had that 16 responsibility of providing information to EPA? 17 A. Dr. Craddock,C-r-a-d-d-o-c-k. 18 Q. What was his position at that time? 19 MR. SCHINKt He's already been deposed by you 20 in this proceeding. 21 Q. (BT MR. CARLSON) What was his position at 22 that time? 23 A. I believe he was product director, safety and 24 environment, some such title. That's not exactly it, 25 but -- FERRY"REPORTING'SERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000018973 -- Computer Aiaed Transcription oy aacnoe 101 1 0. Did you participate in the decision for Or. 2 Craddock to be the person to have contact with EPA? 3 A. No. 4 Q. Have the standards for allowable PCBs and 5 hydraulic fluid in die cast machines changed since 1980? 4 A. Z don't know. Q. Do you know what the standard is today? 8 A. No# Z don't. 9 o. Okay. Did Monsanto ever recommend to 10 customers that die cast machines which had Pydraul 312 in 11 it at one time be cleaned in an attempt to limit the 12 amount of PCBs present? 13 A. I would only be speculating. I don't know. 14 Q. The hydraulic fluid which followed the 15 Pydraul 312 would have been the terphenyl? 16 A. Yes. 17 Q. Has that a hydraulic fluid which could be 18 added to the Pydraul 312 which had the 1242 Aroclor? 19 A. Yes. 20 Q. At that time did Monsanto make any 21 recommendation that the 1242 Aroclor be drained from the 22 machine and then the 312 -- was it 312-A? 23 A. MO. 24 Q. Which one was it? Oh, okay. The answer was 25 no, you didn't have to drain it? PERRY REPORTING 8ERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000018974 Computer Aided Transcription by Ascribe IB? 1 A, That'8 correct, 2 Q. The next Pydraul 312 that came waswhich? 3 A. 312-A, I believe was the designation, which 4 was the terphenyl. Is that what you mean? 5 Q. Okay. And which followed the terphenyl? 6 A* One of them followed, bat Z don't remember 7 the designation. 8 Q. Do you remember, was that a phosphate ester? 9 A. Yes. 10 Q. Could that be used with the Pydraul 312 or 11 312-A? 12 A. I understood it can, ye3. 13 Q. If a die cast company were to clean a die 14 cast machine and get the PC3 concentration and the 15 hydraulic fluid down below the 50 parts per million, will 16 it stay at that level, or will it be at less, or can it 17 get more without the introduction of new PCBs? 18 A. This depends really on the procedure used to 19 clean up the system before the next, the new fill. Zf 20 there are pockets where liquid can collect that aren't 21 drained properly, if there are gaskets that soak up, if 22 there are old porous metal surfaces that a*5t like sponges 23 where the PCBs can be trapped, all of these can be sources 24 of PCBs. The PCBs from these sources would be extracted 25 into the new oil and eventually, if analyzed, it could -----------------------------------PERRY REPORTING SERVICE----------------------------- WATER PCB-SD0000018975 computer Aided Transcription by xsenne T07 1 exceed the 50 part per Billion, So, it all depends on hov 2 thorough the cleanup job was done and the condition of 3 that piece of equipment at the time the cleanup was done. 4 MR, 8CHINK* I think hie question was if all 5 that's done, if all the PCBs were removed and you put in 6 the new fluid, aould you have more than 30 parts per y million of PCB? 8 A, Where would it come from? Zf it's all 9 removed, there is nowhere it would come from. Therefore, 10 you shouldn't see it. 11 MR. CARLSON: Why don't you go back and read 12 my original question for me. 13 (Reporter read from record as directed.) 14 MR. CARLSON: Move to strike counsel's 15 comment, the witness' further voluntary discussion and 16 response to counsel's comment. If he moves it stands, 17 then that's fine. 18 In your opinion, is it possible to clean a die cast 19 machine that's over 10 years old of all PCBs if the die 20 cast machine was using Pydraul 312 for five years? 21 MR. SCHINKi Whan? 22 A. I'll qualify ay response by reminding you I 23 don't know an awful lot about die cast machines. I do 24 know about Monsanto's system that made the Pydrauls. It 25 includes pipelines, steel tanks, reservoirs, pumps, hoses, PERRY REPORTING SERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000018976 Computer Aided Transcription oy xscribe TOT 1 and the like. Our experience has shown when we cleaned 2 out that unit, our first attempt was not successful until 3 we went back and did an extremely thorough job, virtually 4 dismantling the whole system and rebuilding it. Then we 5 succeeded. If the similarities are there, I personally 6 believe a machine can be cleaned up properly, 7 Q. (by MB, CARLSON) Do you think it could be 8 economically cleaned up towards the value of the machine? 9 A. That I don't know, because I don't know the 10 value of the used machinery. 11 Q. Do you have opinions on exactly what a die 12 cast company should do to properly clean the machine? 13 A. I have some opinions, yes. 14 Q. Okay. Can you tell me what those are? 15 A. Well, such things as -- 16 Q. When I say "properly," can we limit that to 17 being realistically proper? 18 A. That's correct. Yes. 19 MR, SCHINKt This is not with reference to 20 the 50 part per million standard? 21 HR. CARLSON! That's right. That's right. 22 A die cast company wants to clean up a machine to 23 the best that it's possible, that's realistic. How should 24 that be done? 25 A. I would look for the obvious traps in the* *ERRV REPORTING SERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000018977 *w w ,, a -w ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ a* *rj' v 4 ^ 1 system where liquid can accumulate and resist drainage. I 2 would look for ways to get to that point in the system. I 3 would look at the piping system to see if there's material 4 in there that acts as a sponge, if you will, of the 5 liquid, such as gaskets, rubber hoses and the like. I would use a solvent of the petroleum mature, and needless P to say, it should be a safe solvent that wouldn't explode a or catch fire. And I would circulate it through that 9 system and, if necessary, drain it and do it several 10 times, and before each drainage, I would take a sample and 11 analyze it for the presence of PCBs to the point where 12 it's non-detectable. 13 If time permitted, I would allow that solvent to 14 stay in the system as long as I can, over a weekend or 15 something, if possible, circulate it. And, of course, I 16 would drain it entirely, put in new gaskets, new hoses, 17 and then put in my new fluid. I would then set up a 18 program for taking samples of this new fluid on some basis 19 periodically, and have it analysed to see if PCBs are 20 8till at work showing up again. How, the number of 21 flushes, rinses and refills of the solvent and the number 22 of samples will vary from system to system, but Z think 23 that procedure will eventually lead to a clean system. 24 Q. The reason for setting up the program for 25 samples after the first or second or third time, though, PERRY REPORTING SERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000018978 computer A^uea Transcription oy Xscribe TO6 1 is to ensure yourself that indeed you have gotten all the 2 PCBs? 3 A* That is correct, yes. 4 Q. Because even if you go through the procedure 5 as you outlined carefully a couple of tines, you do not 6 necessarily have all the PCBs out, do you? I* A. That's very possible. Z'a talking about the 8 machine. Let's not forget the reservoir fluid, the whole 9 system -- 10 Q. Right. 11 A. -- from beginning to an end. 12 Q. Has the company ever outlinedfor customers 13 the appropriate cleaning procedures that you outlined? 14 A. I do not know. . 15 0. In your opinion, is the cleaning procedure 16 that you have outlined necessary for machines that have in 17 the past used the Pydraul 312 with the Aroclor 1248 as the 18 hydraulic fluid? 19 NR. SCHINKt I object to the fora of the 20 question. By "necessary," do you mean necessary to comply 21 with the applicable regulation or necessary for some other 22 reason. 23 NR. CARLSONt Necessary for any reason. 24 HR. SCHINKt Object to the form of the 25 question. It's purposely vague, misleading. ----------------------------------- PETfKY "REPORTING SERVICE-------------------------------- - WATER PCB-SD0000018979 Computer ATde~<r~Transcriptlon by Ascribe IWT 1 A. Well, if there's a regulation, naturally it's 2 necessary to comply with that regulation. My personal 3 opinion regarding the -- other than the need to conply 4 with statutes and regulations, this depends guite a bit on 5 how carefully the systea is aaintained. What happens when < it starts to leak? Where does that material end up, and P Is it carefully managed? If so, than Z see no problems 8 personally. Zf it's aisaanaged and could lead to other 9 problens, certainly we ought to do a better job in 10 cleanup. 11 Q. Even if it's managed properly, though, you 12 still have a risk of something occurring which will allow 13 the PCBs to escape, wouldn't you? 14 A. Well, it could escape, but how would it 15 escape? It might escape through a pump plan. It might 16 escape through a ruptured hose, but I'd like to think that 17 by now we have been sensitized enough to PCBs that we've 18 got a curb and a concrete floor and a curb basin 19 somewhere. It's just not going to flow across the floor 20 into a sewer or out in the backyard somewhere. 21 Q. By now based on the literature that's come up 22 between 1969 and today? 23 A. That's right, yes. Our perception today is 24 such that the chance of it getting away from us is quite 25 remote. PERRT REPORTING SERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000018980 Computer Aided Transcription by XscriDe ~ 3T08T 1 Q. But if a coapany were to spend -- forget the 2 EPA exists. Okay. We're just looking at handling 3 aachines that previously had the Pydraul 312. Even# you 4 know, with a good curbing and dike aystea and management # 5 the owner of the equlpaent could be better served by 6 cleaning the equipment than aiaply building a wall around it, wouldn't it? 8 A. Is it one or the other? 9 Q. If you had to make that choice. 10 A. That choice? Yes# I would concentrate on 11 cleanup first# but at the same tine I can't forget that 12 the new fluid is an industrial chemical. It shouldn't be 13 sloshed around into the environment# either. 14 0. Okay. 15 A. So that curbing would help me in any event. 16 Q. And the curbing is going to help because 17 whatever fluid is in there now# even if it doesn't have 18 any PCBs# it shouldn't go out the door? 19 A. That's right. Mineral oil# you can't just 20 dump your motor oil out of your car anywhere. You 21 shouldn't. 22 Q. But because of the nature of the PCBs# you 23 would still recommend cleaning up the machine? 24 A. Yes. 25 Q. Has Monsanto at any time made a program --------------------------------- PERRY REPORTING SERVICE ~ WATER PCB-SD0000018981 ***40W* A W44 ewjf AAW4 4U0 1 available to customers to aid In the cleaning up of die 2 cast machines of PCBs? 3 A. I don't know that I recall a program so much, 4 but it's the continuing assistance from the sales 5 representative in matters relating to the proper handling ( of these fluids* * 0. Z guess what I'm looking for is have you had 8 any customers that you have paid for the cost of the 9 cleanup in return -- for example, we had the Incineration 10 program where if they burned, I mean, you would burn for 11 them if they bought from you? 12 MR. SCHINK: I think he testified they made 13 package deals with some customers that included that, yes. 14 Q. (BY MR. CARLSON) All right. And what I'm 15 looking for is did you have any package deals where you 16 cleaned or paid for the cost of cleanup of the machines if 17 they continued to buy? 18 A. I'm not aware of any. 19 Q. Was there any other component of Pydraul 312 20 besides the Aroolor 1248 which had a potential for causing 21 some adverse human health reaction, regardless of how 22 slight? 23 A. Well, I'm a proponent that all chemicals 24 eventually at some dose can cause some effect. 25 Q. Sure. Was there anything in Pydraul that was PERRY REPORTING SERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000018982 Computer Aided Transcription by Xscribe T1T5------- 1 of particular significance? 2 A. Mot that I'm aware of. 3 Q. Do you know particularly what input the 4 labeling department had on the language that was on the 5 Pydraul 312 label? 4 A. Ohf their input was primarily one of f appearance, graphics and printing case and legibility and 8 layout, not the words. 9 Q. I might have asked you, and you might have 10 said you don't remember. I don't recall anymore, but who 11 was in charge of the labeling department at any time that 12 the Pydraul label was being reviewed? 13 A. Oh, that was Robert Sido, S-i-d-o. 14 Q. Anybody else you recall in that capacity? 15 A. Mr. Sido had some assistance, but he's the 16 principal person. I don't recall his assistance. 17 Q. Do you know what filing system, if any, the 18 labeling department had for the different products? 19 A. Mo. It was a numbering system cataloging, 20 very much like a library, but I never became familiar with 21 it. 22 Q. Where was the labeling department located? 23 A. Zn St. Louis at the headquarters, Monsanto 24 headquarters. 25 0. The script that you had for one of the ----------------------------------- FIRRY "IEPORT IMG SERVICE------------------------------- -- WATER PCB-SD0000018983 J A W W* * 1 presentations, and I think it was one of the industry 2 groups, do you have a copy of that yourself? 3 A. I don't have a copy, no. 4 Q. When was the last tine -- strike that. Do 5 you know where any copies are? A. Mo, X don't. Q. When is the last tine you did know where a 8 copy was? 9 A. When I turned over ay assignaent to my 10 successor back in '76| it was in ay file cabinet. 11 Q. Was it in a folder that had a title to it? 12 A. Yes, it was in a folder. The title would be 13 under ANSI," A-N-S-I, on the tab of the folder. 14 Q. When you made your other presentations, did 15 you do those from prepared notes? 16 A. Well, as I indicated, some were prepared, and 17 some were from handwritten notes, key words that I would 18 look at and then talk extemporaneously. 19 Q. Did you keep any of your handwritten notes? 20 A. So. 21 Q. Do you know if any of your presentations were 22 tape recorded or taken down by a stenographer? 23 A. They were not. 24 Q. What was the reason labels weresubmitted to 25 the legal department for review? PERRY REPORTING SERVICE " WATER PCB-SD0000018984 Computer Aided Transcription by Xscribe XT? 1 A. It's Monsanto practice for all labels. I 2 don't know the reason. 3 Q. Okay. 4 A. They are part of the reviewing team is all I 5 know. 4 Q. With regard to any of the labels on 312 that P were used for 312, do you know what input, if any, the 8 legal department had? 9 A. I don't recall any input other than their 10 approval. They didn't change anything. 11 Q. Did you correspond with people at EPA 12 regarding PCBs? 13 A. Yes, sir. 14 Q. Do you remember the names ofthe people at 15 EPA that you corresponded with? 16 A. Oh, there was Dr. John Buckley, Kenneth M. 17 Kenthum, K-e-n-t-h-u-m. I've forgotten most of them. 18 Thomas Kopp, K-o-p-p. There were so many, I've forgotten 19 them all. There must be a docen more. 20 Q. Okay. 21 A. Those are the key people, though, program 22 managers and so on. 23 Q. Did you have more than one file set up for 24 your correspondence with EPA, both to and from? 25 A. No. As I recall, I just had one tag, "EPA," ----------------------------------- PBRRY REPORTING SERVICE----------------------------- -- WATER PCB-SD0000018985 ~UOBputer Arced Transcription By Xscribe ITT 1 but it became several sections because it got too thick. 2 Q. About how thick was it at the tine you left? 3 A. Oh, gosh. I would suggest that it was about 4 three folders, each about, oh, roughly two inches deep. 5 0* Were they in the file drawer when you last 6 left the eonpany? '1? A. Tea. 8 MR. SCHXNKt Did you say when he left the 9 company or when he left his position in '76? 10 Q. (BY MR. CARLSON) When you left your position 11 in *76, is what I meant to say. 12 A. Yes. That*e right. Yes. 13 Q. Okay. Did you make any presentations to any 14 Congressional committees? 15 A. Yes. 16 Q. How many? 17 A. One. 18 0. And when was that? 19 A. *74 or *75. 20 Q. Mas your presentation froa a prepared script? 21 A. Yes. 22 Q. And do you currently have a copy of that? 23 A. I don't. 24 Q. Where was it the last tiae you saw it? 25 A. In my files that I turned over. PERRY REPORTING SERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000018986 44aiaW4 WA VM **i A4W44WC 1 Q. Okay. What was that file antitied, oc vhat 2 was the file entitled that had that script in it? 3 A. As best I recall, just plain "Congress." 4 Q. Did Monsanto have a manufacturing plant in 5 Pensacola for producing? 6 A. Tea. t Q. Wore PCBs used in that plant? 8 A. Yes. 9 Q. Did you ever visit the plant? 10 A. Yes. 11 Q. Did you ever visit the plant prior to a 12 discharge of PCBs fron the plant? 13 A. Yes. 14 Q. Did you have an opinion prior to the 15 discharge as to whether or not the plant was well run with 16 regard to maintenance and attempts to contain fluids? 17 A. Yes. 18 Q. Did you think it was a well run plant? 19 A. Yes. ' 20 Q. Bov did the fluids get out? 21 A. There was an accidental leak out of a 22 compressor. 23 Q. But where was -- 24 A. Pipeline. 25 Q. Pipeline failure? -----------------------------------PERRY REPORTING SEHVTCT5 WATER PCB-SD0000018987 Computer 'AideS Transfeription by xscrlbe ITT 1 A. Pipeline break/ yes. 2 Q. And what was It discharged into? 3 A. It eventually ended up through a dry creek 4 bed, sort of drainage ditch/ into the estuary there/ the S channel/ the Scaabla Bay. c 0. Did Monsanto have to oloanup that area? 7 A. Tes. They didn't have to. Theydid it. 8 Q. They did it? 9 A. Yeah. 10 Q. Okay. And when was that? 11 A. '69 or *70. 12 Q. Have you been at some die cast companies 13 ' where Pydraul was being used? 14 A. No. 15 Q. Have there been changes in proper disposal 16 methods by die cast companies of residual fluids 17 containing PCBs over the years? I guess that's 18 self-evident. There have been changes over the years in 19 how you are legitiaately or reasonably to dispose of PCBs, 20 haven't there? 21 HR. 8CHINKi Well/ he hasn't been in a plant. 22 I don't see how he has a foundation. 23 A. Z have no basis for evaluating personally the 24 changes that have taken place/ but there have been 25 regulations and all/ so there nust be attempts in PERRY REPORTING 8ERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000018988 Aiuu 14 UJf AbCl X *2 iiO 1 complying. 2 Q. (BY NR. CARLSON) Do you have a working 3 knowledge of currant regulations regarding disposal of 4 PCB'e? 5 A. Ho. 6 Q. Have you at some time in the past had that 7 knowledge that vas then current? 8 A. Tea. Op to 1976, I was up to date. Since 9 then I don't believe I'm up to date. 10 Q. Okay. As of '76, or in 1976, what were 11 permissible ways of disposing of PCBs? 12 A. In early '76, February, '76? 13 Q. Right. 14 A. All right. At that time liquids could be 15 incinerated in approved units, incinerating units. Solid 16 materials such as rags, sawdust, contaminated clay, 17 equipment that was used with PCBs, could be deposited in 18 approved landfills. I think that takes care of both the 19 olids and the liquids. 20 Q. Okay. Do you remember or do you have some 21 recollection of how many incinerators there were that were 22 permitted to incinerate PCBs in February of '76? 23 A. '76, Rollins Company had three units. There 24 was one located in Arkansas, Eldorado, Arkansas, and there 25 was one located in Illinois. I believe it was Sheffield, ------- :------------------------- PERRY REPORTING SERVICE-------------------------- - WATER PCB-SD0000018989 Computer Aided Transcription by xscrine XT7 1 Illinois. And for a while there was a unit up in New 2 York, Blasdell, B-l-a-s-d-e-1-1, New York, near Niagara. 3 MR. SCHINKt This is in addition to the 4 Monsanto unit, X asauae? 5 MR. CARLSONt Right. Monsanto had it until *77? - 9 A. Yea. 8 0. When we're talking about -- whenyou're 9 talking about approved landfills, the landfills would be 10 approved by who for receipt of PCB's? 11 A. In 1976, the states certainly, and I believe 12 EPA became active at that time. 13 Q. When were the rules with regard to disposal 14 of PCB'8 and landfills -- strike that. Do you know if 15 Monsanto had looked at alternatives for Pydraul with the 16 1242 Aroclor prior to 1969? 17 A. Not to my knowledge. 18 Q. Were there other companiesselling products 19 that would have the same function as the Pydraul 312 prior 20 to 1969? 21 MR. fCHINKt What do you mean by "the same 22 function"? 23 Q. (BY MR. CARLSON) The hydraulic fluid in die 24 cast machines in this instance. 25 A. There were competitive hydraulic fluids, yes. PERRY REPORTING SERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000018990 Computer Aided Transcription by Xscrlbe ni 1 other companies manufacturing these other products. 2 0* Do you know what the principal components of 3 those were? 4 A. I1a aware of two coaponents. Actually, it's 5 three, A mixture of water and ethylene glycol was quite 6 popular, and then there were some phosphate eaters used. w That*s the extent of ay knowledge pf the competitive 8 fluids. 9 Q. Did Monsanto make a hydraulic fluid utilizing 10 a phosphate ester prior to 1969? 11 A. Some of the Pydrauls in addition to PCBs had 12 phosphate esters in them. 13 Q. I'm going to switch subjects entirely just 14 for a second. Why didn't any other company in the United 15 States ever make PCBs, or did they? 16 A. Well, there's rumors that some tried it. 17 I've been asked that question. Are we on the record? 18 Q. Teah, we're on the record, but I can tell you 19 that I haven't read it from any transcript. Z was 20 curious. 21 A. The PCB business was driven prlnarily by the 22 dielectric applications. The big ones, General Electric 23 and Westinghouse, had put so much in the way of resources 24 in making sure this dielectric fluid was just right for 25 their uses. They had worked with Monsanto and its ----------------------------------- PERRY REPORTING SERVICE---------------------------------- WATER PCB-SD0000018991 JL. A J 1 predecessor, Svan Chemical, for so many years, and they 2 had gotten the relationship such that they were getting 3 what they wanted at a price that they felt was reasonable. 4 They were not willing to start a competitor down that same 5 road of experience producing the right quality consistently, and they were satisfied that Monsanto, starting in the '40s, had two plants. So if one exploded 8 or had a fire, there would still be a continued source. 9 So, they were quite satisfied, and they were not willing 10 to give business to anyone else. Anyone else getting into 11 that business could not make a profitable product line 12 without the dielectric business, so they were discouraged 13 from even trying it. That's my understanding. 14 Q. How about importing of some of the PC3s for 15 hydraulic fluid? Apparently they were being made in 16 Europe. 17 A. Yes, they were. I was never able to 18 establish from the records kept by the tariff people 19 whether any liquids came in for that purpose, because they 20 were not identified as such. They would always be marked 21 what*8 known as HOI chemicals, not otherwise identified. 22 There's some Indication, in my opinion kind of strong, 23 some of the hydraulic fluids were brought in for use in 24 mining equipment because of the tie-in with the machinery 25 and the source of supply. That's all I know. I've never PERRY REPORTING SERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000018992 computer Aiaed Transcription oy xscnne 120 1 been able to substantiate that. 2 Q. Have there been studies addressing themselves 3 to PCBs becoming airborne and moving about in the world's 4 atmosphere and being deposited in different locations? 5 A. Not to ay knowledge. 6 Q. Earlier this aorning ve talked a little bit 7 about aonitorlng of effluent froa Anniston and Krummrich 8 for the presence of PCB's. What kind of analytical 9 equipment was being used for analysis of the PCBs at 10 Anniston starting as far back as you can recall? 11 A. By today's standards they are very crude. It 12 was based on, first of all, a big, bold assumption that 13 the material you're looking at i3 PCBs. 14 Q. Okay. 15 A. Then you analyzed for the chlorine that's in 16 that material, and by my arithmetic, you calculate back 17 how much PCBs would create that much chlorine. This is 18 why the detection level was high or in the thousands of 19 parts per million or tenths and hundredths of a percent. 20 It'8 a very crude method, but that was the method used up 21 until the 8wediah work came along. 22 Q. What development was used prior to the 23 Swedish protocol being published? 24 A. Oh, there was no single piece of equipment. 25 It was a matter of taking the unknown material ~ ----------------------------------- FERITY REPORTING SKKVTCK------------------------------ --- WATER PCB-SD0000018993 4<<l 1 Q. All right. 2 A. -- and in essence burning it in a crucible, a 3 platinum crucible, converting the organic chloride to a 4 sodium chloride or calcium chloride, and then they would 5 analyse for the chlorine with water chemistry. 6 Q. When did Anniston get more sophisticated 7 equipment then? 8 A. Anniston never did get the latest. They took 9 a step in the right direction in about early 1970, but the 10 unit was shut down in *71. So, no further refinements 11 were made. So at best they got what you may have heard of 12 as a GLC unit, gas liquid chromatogram. 13 Q. How about Krummrich? Prior to 1970, were 14 they using the sane technique as Anniston? 15 A. Correct. 16 Q. And what additional equipment did they get 17 there? 18 A. They got -- starting in about 1970, they got 19 a GLC unit. In about 1974, they added to that a mass 20 spectrophotometer. 21 Q. Did people from Monsanto talk to those ~ 22 talk to Jensen and others that worked with them in the 23 Swedish study? 24 A. Yes. 25 Q. When did that occur, or if it was more than PERRY REPORTING SERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000018994 1 one time 2 A. There was a discussion held, as best I 3 recall, in about 1968, and then ~ 4 Q. Who was Involved with your company? 5 A. At that time it was Mr* Elmer Wheeler, 6 medical department, and Robert Keller, Monsanto's 7 analytical services center. And Z joined those two 8 individuals for another visit in 1970, and we talked to 9 Mr. Widmark or Dr. Widraark, Dr. Jensen's supervisor. 10 Q. The visit in 1968, was that with Jensen? 11 A. I understand Jensen was in the audience, yes. 12 Q. Okay. Did Elmer Wheeler and Robert Keller go 13 over to Sweden to meet with Dr. Jensen in 1968? 14 A. Yeah. 15 Q. Okay. And were there others in attendance at 16 that meeting other than the people from your company and 17 Dr. Jensen? 18 A. I'm not aware of any others, just the 19 university people, Widmark and Jensen and the Monsanto 20 people; and then Mr. Wheeler and Dr. Keller were 21 accompanied by a Monsanto from Europe, representative from 22 Europe, but I don't know who that individual was. 23 Q. Did that meeting generate any reports? 24 A. Not to my knowledge, no. 25 Q. Did you discuss with Elmer Wheeler and/or Bob --------------------------------- PffRRY 'REPORTING SERVICE-------------------------- ------- WATER PCB-SD0000018995 Computer Sided Transcription Dy Ascnoe T2T 1 Keller the results o the 1968 meeting? 2 A. Yes. 3 Q. And when you went over in 1970# was there any A new information given to you by Dr. Widmark which you did 5 not receive or your company did not receive# to your 6 knowledge# at the 1968 meeting? ? A. HO. 8 Q. Did Monsanto ever fund any additional studies 9 to be performed by Dr. Widmark# Dr. Jensen# or others who 10 participated in that study -- 11 A. No. 12 Q. ~ as it followed? Did Monsanto try to 13 reproduce that study? 14 A. Yes. . 15 Q. In Sweden? 15 A. No. I misled you there. 17 Q. Okay. 18 A. We tried to reproduce their protocol# their 19 methodology. That was the intent of the first visit# was# 20 Let's get a copy of their method# go back to St. Louis# 21 and try it.* 22 Q. What were they using ftr their analytical 23 equipment in looking for PCBs in 1966# when Jensen was 24 doing his work, or prior to? 25 A. Who was# Dr. Jensen? PERRY REPORTING SERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000018996 \.WW^Ub61 IUU4U lidaiiCt Xp tXUH iSjf AtUXO< 124 1 Q. Yes. 2 A. Re was using a GLC with mass spec 3 confirmation. 4 Q. Okay. In 1966# did Monsanto own a GLC? 5 A. We had a GLC# but not in mass spec. 6 Q. Did Monsanto have a tasting laboratory that - 7 it would refer aaterlal to if mass spec analysis was 8 necessary? 9 A. That I don't know. I do know that they 10 purchased a mass spec. 11 Q. Do you know when they bought it, the first 12 one? 13 A. The first one arrived in about, as best I 14 remember, in '67, sometime in '67, and it was replaced 15 with a more sophisticated unit in about 1974. 1C Q. Without my dragging out the letters, do you 17 have a working knowledge of the series of letters that 18 were sent in 1970, 1971, to Monsanto customers who used 19 the Pydraul 312? 20 A. I believe I do, yes. 21 Q. Okay. Did the author of those letters 22 actually draft them, or at least the person who signed the 23 letters actually draft them? I guess the author always 24 drafts them, but did the person who signed the letters 25 actually draft them? --------------------------------- PERRY REP0RTING"3ERVI'CE----------------------------- --- WATER PCB-SD0000018997 1 A As best I recall in these letters, he 2 prepared the initial draft, had it reviewed starting in 3 1970. I was one of the reviewers and would make my 4 comments. He had had it reviewed by the key functions 5 associated with PCBs, the research representative, the 6 medical representative, the public relations guy, and the 1 legal people, and the business people. Anyone who had an 8 interest in the product was involved. In most cases they 9 couldn't contribute much, but at least they were informed 10 of what was being proposed. Occasionally there would be a 11 suggested paragraph added or a word change here and there. 12 Q. Did Monsanto ever go out into the field and 13 seek to have the Pydraul 312 with the 1242 Aroclor 14 returned to the company, that is, the material that was 15 unused? 16 A. NO. 17 Q. Why not? 18 A. Keep in mind in 1970, our state of knowledge 19 then. The PCBs that seemed to be on the environment were 20 the 1254, 1260, not the 1242. This was 1970, when we 21 first informed our customers that, "There's a presence out 22 there. You ought to be aware of it. Your product 23 contains PCBs." 24 Shortly after that vent out, we embarked, Monsanto 25 embarked on a program of finding a replacement, and it PERRY REPORTING SERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000018998 wvnputti aiqou xcniiccipcxofl oy Ascaoa 1<26 1 looked promising. So ve had a target then of phasing out 2 of that application by the end of *70. Nov, ve missed 3 that, as I remember, by a couple, three months. But 4 anyway, by early *71, we had no longer any hydraulic fluid 5 with PCBs in them that we were marketing or selling. Still through '71 and all, there was no evidence, if no information that says 1242 is a problem to anybody. 8 So, there was no perceived need to do anything unusual and 9 upset the whole industry, have to drain machines, ship 10 material on the highways back to Monsanto. It looked 11 irrational. That's really the principal reason. 12 Q. Okay. When the replacement fluid was being 13 developed, were there studies done on the potential 14 environmental effects of the product? 15 A. Yes. If you include animal testing as part 16 of that knowledge with potential impact to the 17 environment, yes. The replacement esters were tested. 10 0. Okay. What test protocol did the replacement 19 esters go through? 20 A. It was the lifetime rat feeding study was the 21 best test available. 22 Q. We're looking at this in1970? 23 A. In '70, yes. 24 Q. Okay. 25 A. And then some biodegradation studies to ----------------------------------- PERRY REPORTING SERVICE-------------------------- -- WATER PCB-SD0000018999 --'ar - - ^ m A4 V44 ^2 AAW4 AWC i 1 confirm that these phosphate esters would degrade. 2 Q. Why was that important? 3 A. We didn't want to have any experience -- 4 having experienced the PCB issuer we didn't want to 5 introduce another chemical that was fairly stable and 6 would again be an environmental contaminant. We wanted to 7 avoid that. 8 Q. Did Monsanto make DDT? 9 A. No. 10 Q. Okay. Who did the biodegradation studies on 11 the phosphate ester hydraulic fluid? 12 A. It was the same laboratory in Monsanto that 13 did the PCB biodegradation studies. 14 Q. Okay. Were lifetime rat feeding studies done 15 when the terphenyl was apparently marketed for a short 16 period of time? 17 A. No. 18 Q. Were biodegradation studies done? 19 A. Some, yes. 20 Q. Why were the terphenyls discontinued? 21 A. The biodegradation studies showed that they 22 were kind of persistent. They didn't degrade too readily, 23 and since the phosphate esters looked promising, at least 24 suitable, Monsanto decided that it preferred going to the 25 more degradable material. PERRY REPORTING SERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000019000 Computer Aided Transcription by Xscribe r2R 1 Q. Here the terphenyls marketed for that short 2 period of time while the company was still looking at the 3 phosphate ester hydraulic fluid? Has it kind of a stop 4 gap measure? 5 A. Tee* 4 Q. Here there any products that you're aware of 7 that were aanufsetured by Monsanto prior to 1969, which 8 had been looked at for the ability of the product to 9 biodegrade? 10 MR. SCBINK: You're talking now any product? 11 HR. CARLSON: Any product. 12 MR. SCHINR: Not just hydraulic fluids? 13 MR. CARLSON: That's right. 14 A. The only one I'm aware of is the detergents 15 that I mentioned earlier today. 16 Q. (BY MR. CARLSON) Okay. Why was 17 biodegradation looked at with regard to the detergents? 18 A. There was a period of time when synthetic 19 detergents ware manufactured that didn't degrade in the 20 environment, and the consumption increased to the point 21 where there were many small rivers and streams that 22 started to foam because the detergent was still active, 23 would not degrade. This became quite a problem, and the 24 industry then had to go back to the research bench and 25 find a detergent that would degrade, leading to today's -------------------------------------PERRY TIE PORTING HKKV1CE----------------------------- -- WATER PCB-SD0000019001 Lei axUbu wj( Aottiuo 4,^,9 1 so-called soft detergents. 2 Q. When did the biodegradation studies occur in 3 the detergents? 4 A. I'm going to say 1960's, early '60s. 5 Q. Technically, could biodegradation studies of 6 PCB's have been done in the early '60s if Monsanto had ' 7 chosen to do so? 8 A. I would suggest that if once the detergent 9 degradation protocol was in place and demonstrated to be 10 reliable, if there had been an indication that PCBs or any 11 chemical other than detergents should be tested, yes, that 12 protocol could have been applied. 13 Q. Okay. It's not terribly relevant, but do you 14 remember when the DDT issue came about? 15 A. I'm trying to remember when "Silent Spring* 16 was published. 17 Q. I remember spraying it with my little pump 18 gun, but - 19 A. *54 comes to mind. 20 Q. Okay. 21 MR. SCHIHKt I think the book was published 22 in 1962, Rachel Carson's book, but in any event -- 23 A. Somewhere I've got 1954 in mindhere. 24 Q. (BY MR. CARLSON) Okay.Sometime in the 25 early '60s, or sometime in the mid-'50s to early '60s? PERRY REPORTING SERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000019002 AWW 1 A. That*8 my understanding, yes. 2 NR. CARLSONt Let's nark these. Off the 3 record. 4 (A brief recess was taken.) 5 (Plaintiff's Deposition Exhibit Papageorge 6 Nos. 1 through 18 narked for identification.) i Q. (BY NR. CARLSON) Why don't you, if you 8 would, start with Papageorge Deposition Exhibit No. 1, and 9 the first page of that is, if you could describe for for 10 me generally, what, sir? 11 A. The first page is a Monsanto memorandum 12 addressed to six individuals, dated April 7, 1970, and 13 signed by me. 14 0. And attached to that memo is there a 15 "Management Plan, Polychlorinated Biphenyl Environmental 16 Problem"? 17 A. Yes. 18 Q. Did you draft thatdocument? 19 A. Yes. 20 Q. The problem is stated in the first section of 21 the paper? 22 A. Yes. 23 Q. And in the second section of the paper 24 entitled "Basic Strategy," the second full paragraph, the 25 last sentence reads, "We are deliberately assuming an --------------------------------- PERRY REPORTING 'SERVICE------------------------------- WATER PCB-SD0000019003 computer axou icanscripcion oy xscrioe 131 1 aggressive posture and working closely with customers, 2 co-producers, and regulatory agencies to prevent 3 precipitous action." Pirst of all, did I correctly read 4 that sentence? 5 A. Yes. 6 Q. Can you tell me, first of all, what 7 precipitous action was it that you were attempting to 8 prevent? 9 A. Primarily the total ban of the use of PCSs in 10 those applications for which there were no acceptable 11 fire-resistant substitutes. 12 Q. And can you tell me specifically which 13 applications those would be at that time? 14 A. At that time, the hydraulic fluids and the 15 dielectric application. 16 Q. With regard to the hydraulic fluids, how did 17 your competitors' phosphate ester-based fluids compare 18 with your PCB-based fluids in performance? 19 A. They were not quite as good as the PCB types. 20 PCB types were considered the premium product and the 21 preferred product in terms of fire retardants and all the 22 other properties, corrosion resistance to the parts of the 23 machinery, the lubricating, the lubricity characteristics, 24 stability under all kinds of conditions. 25 Q. How did your company's phosphate ester PERRY REPORTING SERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000019004 W ** * --V. *4 M44rf V* Af V* V<4 *+ ^ ^%WW4^<WW ^1^4* 1 hydraulic fluid compare to your competitors when you put 2 It on the market? 3 A. The final? 4 Q. Tea. 5 A. They war* equivalent, basically. 4 Q. Bave there been any studies, reports "7 demonstrating increased costs incurred by die cast 8 companies as a result of not having PCB fluid available? 9 A. I have not seen any. 10 Q* There is also reference toworking closely 11 with customers and co-producers. Who were some of the 12 co-producers that you were working closely with? 13 A. Bayer in Germany, Rhone-Poulenc in France, 14 Kuhlman, and Caffaro in Italy. 15 Q. Did Bayer, to your knowledge, do any work on 16 biodegradability of PCBs? 17 A. Not to my knowledge. 18 Q. Did any of the othersthat you referenced? 19 A. No. 20 Q. Bad any of them, to your knowledge, either 21 conducted or paid for long-term health effect studies for 22 people exposed to PCBs? 23 A. Bot to my knowledge. 24 Q. When you indicate that you are working 25 closely with them, what was the nature of the working -----------------------------------PERRY REPORTING SERVICE-------------------------------- WATER PCB-SD0000019005 W. **' - - -- 4^^ 1 relationship with Bayer on this subject? 2 A, Well, we took the initiative to go and ask 3 for an audience with their representatives. We shared 4 with then our understanding of the issue, tried to 5 convince then of the seriousness of the matter as it 6 regards that product line and the applications, and tried 7 to get them to -- we were hoping that they would conduct 8 some studies on their own. As it turned out, they 9 preferred to have Monsanto lead the way, and they chose 10 not to take any initiative on their own. 11 Q. Were there any reports of the meetings that 12 Bayer prepared? 13 A. No. 14 Q. Did you participate in any of those meetings? 15 A. Yes. 16 Q. Bow many meetings with Bayer did you have on 17 that subject? 18 A. I personally attended only that one. There 19 were other contacts with Monsanto representatives in 20 Europe and Bayer people in Germany at Industry association 21 meetings and telephone conversations and the like. 22 Informal contacts. 23 0. Did Rhone-Poulencperform anystudies? 24 A. No. 25 Q. Did you participate inconferences with any PERRY REPORTING SERVICE " WATER PCB-SD0000019006 Computer: Aided Transcription by Xscribe T3T 1 of their representatives? 2 A. Yes. 3 Q. Did you alsowith Kuhlman? 4 A. Yes. 5 Q. And Caffaro? A. And Caffaro. Q. Did any of them provide any funds that were 8 used for studies that wereconducted? 9 A. No. 10 Q. They seemed to think this was an American 11 problem, and the Americans should take care of it? 12 A. Well, to be more blunt, they thought it 13 was -- Monsanto was making a problem, that it really 14 wasn't anybody's problem. 15 Q. Okay. Back in 19 -- let's see. The memo was 16 April of 1970. What regulatory agencies were you working 17 with? 18 A. Oh, in1970, theDepartment of Agriculture; 19 the Department of Interior, through their fish and 20 wildlife people; the beginnings of BPA, which had just 21 been approved and not fully organised as of yet; the Pood 22 and Drug Administration; the Department of Commerce; the 23 Council of Environmental Quality; the Office of Science 24 and Technology of the Executive Office of the President; 25 and I was in contact with regulatory people in Michigan. PERRY REPORTING SERVICE : WATER PCB-SD0000019007 computer aiqqu Transcription oy Ascrioe 13.5" 1 I believe I had started some initial contacts with 2 regulatory people in Wisconsin, the DNR, primarily their 3 laboratory people. That's all I can think o now. 4 Q. For each of the agencies that you had contact 5 with, did you have a separate file set up? 6 A. Yes. 7 Q. And when you left your post in 1976, were 8 those files referable to those agencies still in the files 0 where the other ones were that we mentioned? 10 A. Yes. 11 Q. Was there a separate file for each of those, 12 separate file for the Department of Agriculture, a 13 separate file for the Department of Interior, et cetera? 14 A Yes. 15 Q. What did those files consist of? What would 16 be in those generically? 17 A. Whatwould be in them? 18 Q. Yeah. Was itcorrespondence back and forth 19 to the agencies -- 20 A. Yes. 21 Q. -- or notes of telephone conferences? I'm 22 not saying that that was in there. I'm just trying to 23 give you an idea of the things I'm looking for. 24 A. Primarily letters, memoranda to and from the 25 agencies. Occasionally I would put in to that file a copy PERRY REPORTING SERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000019008  *#j AOW4 4UC A JO 1 of the "Federal Register" that referred to the agency and 2 PCBs, so that I would have a "Federal Register" file, in 3 addition a copy in, say, the FDA file or the U.S.D.A. 4 file. There might be clippings from journals, the popular 5 press that referred to that agency and to PCBs. That 6 Would be -- 1 Q. Okay. Did you use a numbering system for the 8 pages in your file? 9 A. No. It was chronological. 10 Q. Did your office ever make up an index for the 11 contents of any of the files? 12 A. No. 13 Q. Do you know whether or not the files exist 14 today in the sane format as they were when you left that 15 position? 15 A. I do not. 17 Q. Do you have some recollection with regard to 18 what specifically your correspondence with the Wisconsin 19 Department of Natural Resources was about? 20 A. As best I remember, 2 don't remember the 21 specific documents,but the subject was primarily one of 22 analytical methods and findings in some of their samples, 23 water samples, fish samples, and that was trying to get 24 their laboratory in touch with Monsanto's laboratory so the labs could talk to each other, compare notes and --------------------------------- PERRY REPORTING SERVICE------------------------- " WATER PCB-SD0000019009 computer Aided TranscriptionHby Xacri5e 137 1 exchange samples. I have copies of the correspondence 2 that took place between the two labs, and I would get a 3 carbon copy. It was that type of thing, primarily 4 analytical at that time. 5 Q. Whan you say "at that time," was there a 6 change in the subject of the correspondence later on? % A. Later on, it became -- oh, there were, as I 8 remember, some meetings called by the DNR, and in that 9 file would be the notice of the meeting and the invitation 10 to attend. These kinds of things would appear. I can't 11 remember any other specifics, but that's in general the 12 kinds of things that would appear in any of these files. 13 Q. Okay. If you would be kind enough to take a 14 look at page 2 of the paper, beginning two-thirds of the 15 way through the fourth line on the top paragraph, 16 beginning with the phrase, "It appears that." 17 A. I see it. 18 Q. Okay. The sentence reads, and correct me if 19 I read it incorrectly, "It appears that in those uses 20 where control of spillage and disposal can be rigidly 21 exercised and the Aroclors are in sealed containers) e.g. 22 capacitors and transformers, the manufacture of Aroclor 23 1254 and 1260 should be continued." That's the end of 24 that particular sentence. With regard to 1242, does this 25 sentence mean that you thought the 1242 should be PERRY REPORTING SERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000019010 v.ojapucex Axueu xtanscxi.pcj.ofi uy Ascrxoe 136 1 discontinued? 2 A. No. 3 Q. Okay. At the time that this paper was 4 prepared, was the 1242 still thought to be not a problem? 5 A. Correct. 6 Q. When did the status of the 1242change? 7 A. X'a assuming by"status,* you mean the 8 decision? 9 Q. To treat it as the 1254 and 1260. 10 A. It occurred really at about this time. I 11 don't know if it's in this particular write-up, but a 12 meeting following this one, that the corporate management 13 committee -- there's a program outline for phasing out of 14 such uses as the hydraulic fluids, irrespective of the 15 type of PC3. So, I would say in response to your question 16 at about this time it was decided, whether or not 1242 was 17 being identified in the environment, where we can, we will 18 discontinue selling to some uses. 19 Q. In Section III, there are a series of 20 objectives which are stated. First was, "Reduce and 21 effectively control the PCB content of all effluent from 22 Monsanto plant.* At that tine, that is, at the time this 23 paper was prepared, in your opinion, did the Monsanto 24 plant effluents contain higher amounts of PCBs than were 25 desirable? FERRT"REPORTING SERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000019011 TompuFer Aided Transcription oy xscnoe XTF 1 A. Yes. 2 Q. Okay. Was that true for both Anniston and 3 Kr ununrich? 4 A. Yes. 5 Q. Was it true for any other Monsanto plants? A. Mo. 7 Q. The phrase "all effluent," I suppose, is 8 somevhat all encompassing. Does that include effluents 9 that vent into municipal sever systems as veil as into the 10 vatervays of the country? 11 A. Yes, anything that left the plant fence. 12 Q. Okay. 13 MR. SCHINK: I think he's asking you about 14 specifically Anniston and Rrummrich. 15 Q. (BY MR. CARLSON) No, I'm talking more about 16 the phrase. all effluent." 17 A. This is all Monsanto plants. 18 Q. I'm a little bit puzzled, and I think maybe 19 you can help me. Earlier today ve discussed the concept 20 that die cast companies, prior to 1970 and post 1970, but 21 die cast companies at all times should have been cognizant 22 of the chemicals that were being used and take steps to 23 see that they did not get into the open vatervays, or, I 24 guess, into the open vatervays as a concept. We discussed 25 that, didn't ve? PerrY reporting service WATER PCB-SD0000019012 Computer Aided Transcription by Xscnbe 1 A. In concept, yes, but I'd like to suggest that 2 we're not talking zero molecules, either. 3 Q. I appreciate that. 4 A. It's controlling the discharge to a point 5 that the environment can tolerate or the neighborhood can tolerate, the community. 7 Q. Sure. 8 A. Yes. 9 Q. I'm not saying, you know, one molecule, you 10 know, that kind of thing. What I am looking at is the 11 question of in 1970, hov was Monsanto determining what 12 would be an acceptable discharge level, PCS discharge 13 level, into the waterways from its own plants? 14 A. It wasn't addressing the nation's waterways. 15 It was addressing the amount that left its plant -- 16 Q. Okay. 17 A. -- going into the municipal treatment plant. 18 Q. But you were also discharging some that were 19 going into the waterways, weren't you, waste water? 20 A. With PCBs in them? 21 0. Yes. 22 A. I'm not aware of any. 23 Q. Okay. All of the waste water discharge from 24 any Monsanto plant prior to 1970, went into municipal 25 treatment systems or your own company's treatment system? -----------------------------------PERRY REPORTING SERVICE--------------------------------- WATER PCB-SD0000019013 1 NR. 8CHINKj Ace you talking about the plants 2 where it was manufactured? 3 MR. CARLSONt No, where PCBs were present. 4 A. If PCBs were present in the water effluent. 5 I'm only familiar with those systems that did go to 6 municipal treatment plants. 7 Q. (BY NR. CARLSON) Okay. 8 A. I'm not aware of any plant that discharges 9 into creeks and river beds freely that had PC3s in that 10 effluent. 11 Q. Okay. When you used the phrase discharged 12 into the creeks and river beds freely," does that mean 13 that on occasions it would occur when there were flood 14 conditions, or valves that broke, or what have you? 15 A. That's a poor choice of words. What I meant 16 is it did not go into a system for further treatment. 17 Q. Okay. 18 A. It got some preliminary treatment. It might 19 have gotten filtered. It might have gotten aerated, and 20 then it goes out into the public waterways. It doesn't go 21 to a municipal treatment system. 22 Q. Okay. 23 A. Under those conditions I'm not aware of any 24 plant that had PCBs in that effluent. 25 Q. In those plants effluent was looked at for PERRY REPORTING SERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000019014 Computer Aided Transcription by Xscribe 142 1 the purpose of seeing whether or not PCBs were present? 2 A. If PCBs were in that plant in the first 3 place, yeah. 4 Q. Okay. For example, in Pensacola where they 5 are using it in compressors, you check the effluent to see whether it made its way into those waters? 1 A. Right; downstream from that compressor. You 8 wouldn't check the effluent going out the other end of the 9 plant where nylon is made and no PCBs are present. 10 Q. Why was it necessary at that point to then 11 reduce the PCB content of all effluent? 12 A. I don't know that it was necessary; only 13 because Monsanto's management as represented by this group 14 of us working felt that this was the prudent thing to do. 15 Q. Was that sparked by a concern that there 16 could be a potential adverse effect on the environment? 17 A. Could be, yes. 18 Q. The third objective is stated to be, "Develop 19 products to replace Aroclors for those uses in which 20 Aroclors have been demonstrated to be harmful to the 21 environment and cannot be prevented from escaping into the 22 environment." First of all, did I correctly read that 23 objective? 24 A. Yes. 25 Q. Did that Includedevelopingproducts to --------------------------------- fttRR? fcftMfcTINC SERVICE--------------------------- --- WATER PCB-SD0000019015 t'ubsi mueu naasccipcion oy ascribe 143 1 replace the then PCB-based hydraulic fluid? 2 A. Yes. 3 Q. Including the Pydraul 312? 4 A. Yes, which is a more conservative 5 interpretation of the intent if it goes further. 6 0. On page 3, under number 1 of the action plan, 7 first it's stated the objective and then the status, and 8 in the status it says, aA tentative target of 10 ppb in 9 PCB in plant liquid effluent has been established." First 10 of all, I guess I've got to stop right there. Did I 11 correctly read the sentence? 12 A. Yes. 13 Q. And the target of 10 pbb is the same as we 14 discussed earlier this morning? 15 A. That is correct. 16 Q. There were no regulations which required you 17 to limit PCB discharge to 10 pbb at that point? 18 A. That is correct. 19 Q. Did you advise any customers that were 20 purchasing PCB fluids from you of any nature that if they 21 were using those fluids, they should try to limit their 22 effluent to 10 ppb of PCBs? 23 A. Yes. 24 Q. Were these just particular customers that 25 received that information, or was there an attempt to get PERRY REPORTING SERVICE ~ WATER PCB-SD0000019016 Computer Aided Transcription by Xscrioe *441-- 1 that information to all customers? 2 A. The Intent was to get it to all customers. 3 Q. And how was that to be -- 4 A. I personally don't know how well that was 5 done. Q. How was it to be done? ? A. The marketing representatives, who were the 8 primary contact# when discussing PCBs and control, were to 9 use this as an example of a good target that Monsanto had 10 established and that Monsanto was striving for, and ve 11 recommended that they might consider it. 12 Q. Was there consideration given to providing 13 this information to customers in written form? 14 A. Yes* by some of the marketing managers, yes. 15 Q. Can you tell me why that wasn't done? 16 A. Oh, I didn't say it wasn't done. 17 Q. I'msorry. I thought you did, and maybe I 13 misinterpreted. 19 A. I know that I recall definitely that in the 20 electrical applications it was done. I was personally 21 Involved in that one. 22 Q. Okay. 23 A. Z do not recall at this moment the specifics 24 of how it was done for hydraulic fluids. That'6 why I 25 made the earlier remark that I don't know the extent that ----------------------------------- FERRY "REPORT!H5" SERVICE--------------------------------- WATER PCB-SD0000019017 Computer Aiaed Transcription by xscribe T45 1 this was carried out. 2 Q. Okay. When the technology to detect PCBs 3 down to the 10 part per billion level or lower was 4 available at Monsanto, do you recall, when they checked 5 the effluent from Anniston, what that level was for PCBs? A* The nuabers escape ae. As X ceaeaber, the rl best X reaeaber, the parts per alllion range, and it was 8 above the solubility, which would indicate that the water 9 was turbid, had particulate matter in it, and the PCBs 10 were associated with that particulate matter. I just 11 don't recall the numbers, but it was hundreds of times 12 bigger than the 10 parts per billion. 13 0. Was that true, also, for the Sauget plant? 14 A. Yes. 15 Q. Was the soil around the manufacturing 16 facility ever checked by Monsanto to determine PCB 17 content? 18 A. I believe it was, yeah. 19 Q. Do you know how that came up? 20 A. Xt was in the percent level. 21 Q. Oh, was it? 22 A. One percent, very high, thousands of parts 23 per million. 24 Q. How was it getting outside the building? 25 A. This is not a building. It's an outdoor PERRY REPORTING SERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000019018 4. * U 1 structure. 2 Q. I'm sorry. Okay. Every time there's a 3 leak -- 4 A. In the old days it used to kind of dribble on S to the concrete pad and on to the soil, until the curbs were built later. Q. But in those days there really was no concern e about what was going to happen to it? 9 A. Mo. It just stayed there. 10 Q. Do the records of each of the plants n somewhere have the effluent PCB studies? 12 A. They did. I don't know what they have today. 13 Q. When you had the accidental pipe rupture in 14 Pensacola, did any of the PCBs get into the soil outside 15 the building? 16 A. Yes. Yes, and it formed, of course, a trail 17 on down, so that that whole area was dug up, carried away. 18 Q. Switch subjects again. I'm not trying to 19 deceive you, but if I don't remember to ask you now, I may 20 never remember. By any chance do you happen to know who 21 was calling on customers for Monsanto and selling 22 hydraulic fluid back in the middle '60s and early '70s? 23 A. NO. 24 Q. See, I wouldn't have missed anything, anyway. 25 A. There were just too many salesmen. I ------------------------------------- PERRY" REPURTIHG'S'ERVICE------------------------------------ WATER PCB-SD0000019019 Computer Aided Transcription by Xscrloe 147 1 couldn't remember. And there was turnover. 2 Q. How was the sales organization structured? 3 Would there be a salesman assigned to Milwaukee or 4 Wisconsin, and would he report to some regional manager? 5 I'm not trying to suggest that's how it was done, but I'm 6 just trying to find out. 7 A. That's very close. There would be a salesman 8 assigned the hydraulic fluid accounts in a geographic 9 area, and as best I recall, he would report 10 administratively to the regional manager in the Chicago 11 office, and he would report functionally to a marketing 12 manager in St. Louis assigned to that product. In some 4 13 instances these salesmen would handle more than one 14 product-line, depending on the voluae of business, the 15 area covered, the number of customers, and so on. 16 Q. Thank you. Monsanto didn't deliberately dump 17 any amount of PCBs on the ground outside their plants or 18 manufacturing areas? 19 A. Not that I'm aware of. They had their own 20 landfill. They wouldn't need to do that. 21 Q. Okay. But are those circumstances where they 22 would be -- I'm talk about pre-1969 now, where there would 23 be spillage on to your own soil, that wouldn't be of any 24 concern to you because you didn't think that would cause 25 any problem, anyway? PERRY REPORTING 8BRVICE WATER PCB-SD0000019020 Computer Aided Transcription by xscribe I4B 1 A. No. They would just cover It with crushed 2 rock. That's it. 3 0. If you go to page 4, we're on the third 4 objective now, and I'll just read it for the record. 5 "Develop products to replace Aroclors for those uses in 4 which Aroclors have been denonstrated to be harnful to the 7 environment, are resistant to biodegradation, and cannot 8 be prevented fron escaping to the environment." Again, 9 have I read that properly? 10 A. Yes. 11 Q. And again,that included the 1242? 12 MR. SCHII7Ki What included the 1242? 13 Q. (BY MR.CARLSON) I'msorry. Developing 14 products to replace the 1242 Aroclor. 15 A. It did by a very conservative interpretation 16 of that statement you just read. 17 Q. If we could turn to page 6, the fifth 1C objective, it reads at the top of the page, "Develop 19 methods for effective disposal of wastes containing PCB 20 without contaminating the environment." First of all, 21 have I correctly read the sentence? 22 A. Yes. 23 Q. And from this would I be correct in inferring 24 that, in your opinion, at that time better methods were 25 needed for effective disposal of PCB waste? -----------------------------------PERRY ' REPORTING-SERVICE--------------------------------- WATER PCB-SD0000019021 computer Aloe a iTanscription-by Xscribe ni 1 A. Well, I don't know so much better as a 2 variety of ways were to be explored to give much more 3 flexibility for different circumstances that might arise. 4 Q. Which methods were explored besides the 5 incineration and landfill? A. Oh, sand bed filtering, carbon bed filtering, 1 removal by centrifuging, all of these. I don't claim to 8 know them all. The laboratory tried everything that came 9 to mind. Many of them were failures. 10 Q. Any of them that proved to be economically 11 effective? 12 A. Mot really. The best way was to prevent it 13 from mixingwith water to start with. That was the best 14 way. . 15 Q. If we could turn to page 7, at the top it 16 reads, "Evaluate alternate methods of disposal by 17 incineration - Monsanto operated vs. contract." Again, I 18 correctly read the sentence? 19 A. Yes. 20 Q. Did Monsanto ever have a contract with other 21 concerns for incineration of PCBs? 22 A. Eventually. 23 Q, When was that? 24 A. We had arrangements with the Rollins unit in 25 Baton Rouge and in Deer Park, Texas. As best I remember. PERRY REPORTING SERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000019022 Computer Aided Transcription by Xscrioe iru 1 there were contractual arrangements, and this was in 2 addition to the Monsanto-operated unit in Illinois. 3 Q. Can you tell me when those contracts were 4 first entered into? 5 A. Starting in about 1977# as best I recall. :jk . Q. Did you enter into those oontracts about the it tine that you were phasing out your own incinerating? 8 A. About that time# yes. 9 Q. Did Monsanto pay for the incineration of PCBs 10 of any of its customers at those plants? 11 A. I don't know. 12 Q. Were the incinerators of Rollins ever checked 13 for determining whether or not dioxin had been formed in 14 the combustion process of the PCBs? 15 A. I don't know. 16 Q. Page 8, item number 7, the top line reads, 17 "Objective - Determining effects of PCB's on birds, 18 aquatic life, animals and humans." Again, I read it 19 correctly? 20 A. Yes. 21 Q. In your opinion, hasMonsanto satisfactorily 22 now determined the effects of PCBs on the birds, aquatic 23 life, animals and humans? 24 A. In ay opinion,yeah. I think there's enough 25 good basic data that can lead to the conclusions that were -----------------------------------FERRY "REPORTING SERVICE---------------------------------- WATER PCB-SD0000019023 Computer Aided Transcription oy xsctioe r5T 1 arrived at. 2 Q. Okay. Who at Monsanto, if you know, with a 3 background in toxicology and/or epidemiology now believes 4 that he or they, he, she or they have sufficient 5 information to finally conclude what the effects of PCBs 6 are? 7 A. Well, two individuals that I can think of. 8 Dr. William Gaffey, the epidemiologist, G-a-f-f-e-y, and 9 Dr. George Levinskas, L-e-v-i-n-s-k-a-s, the toxicologist. 10 Q. Do you happen to know if Dr. Gaffey has 11 testified in any litigation regarding PCBs? 12 A. No, I don't. 13 Q. Do you happen to know if Dr. Levinskas has 14 testified in any litigation regarding PCBs? 15 A. Yes, he has, in depositions. 16 Q. Can you tell me which cases, or are there a 17 lot of thorn? 18 A. I don't know that I know all the cases. I 19 know of one for certain, what I call the Scott case in 20 Texas. 21 Q. Okay. 22 A. My understanding is he's been involved in 23 others, but I don't know which. 24 Q. Did heget involved in the City of 25 Bloomington case? PERRY REPORTING SERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000019024 Computer Aided Transcription by Xscribe 152 1 MR. SCHINK: You should know. You had 2 somebody at the trial. 3 MR. CARLSON: I know he didn't testify at 4 trial* but I don't know if he testified in a deposition. 5 A, His name was Mentioned to ae during ay deposition. I don't know if he was deposed hiaself. 1 0. (BY MR. CARLSON) Have either of these 8 gentleaen authored any articles on the potential health 9 effects of PCBs? 10 A. I believe Dr. Gaffey prepared a paper. I 11 don't know if it was published or not* He was working on 12 it. 13 Q. Did Dr. Gaffey* to your knowledge, design any 14 epidemiological studies to determine potential health 15 effects of PCBs? 16 A. I hesitate, because I don't know what you 17 mean by the word "design." Dr. Gaffey took the work of a 18 previous Monsanto group that worked on an epidemiology 19 study of the Krummrich plant personnel* and added more 20 information to that data bank, and came up with his paper. 21 Q. Okay. 22 A. That's all Z really know at the moment. 23 Q. Who originally gathered the information from 24 the Krummrich plant? 25 A. It was a Miss Sack. Judy Zack was the ---------------------------------- PgRRY~RE PORT I NG~Bfc!KVlCE---------------------------- --WATER PCB-SD0000019025 v.odpuces Aiaea Transcription Dy Ascrioe ~T5^r X principal one. 2 Q. Do you know generally what Miss Jack had 3 concluded, if anything, in her work? 4 A. She concluded, as best 1 remember, that the 5 nuaber of lung cancers in that population was 6 statistically significantly aore than the national 7 experience, but equivalent to the county in which the 8 plant is located. 9 Q. And did Dr. Gaffey's work, to your knowledge, 10 lead to the confirmation of the regional thoughts of Hiss 11 Zack, or has there been some change? 12 A. I will really don't know. 13 Q. Did Miss Zack attempt to identify the reason, 14 if there is any identifiable reason, why the lung cancers 15 in that particular county were higher than the national 15 average? 17 A. No, she didn't. 18 Q. Zack's work was completed when? 19 A. '75, 1975. 20 Q. And Dr. Gaffey's work was completed when? 21 A. About 1982. 22 Q. Okay. Can you turn to Exhibit 2? The first 23 page is a memo from J. Coleman Weber to a number of 24 people, including yourself, dated November 17, 1975. 25 A. Yes. pe!rr? reporting service WATER PCB-SD0000019026 1 Q. And then there's several otherdocuments in 2 the exhibit. The next document is entitled "PCB 3 Discussions, Governmental Agencies, November 13 and 14, 4 1975." 5 A. Yes. 6 Q. And that hasapparently also been authored by 1 j. Coleman Weber* 8 A* Yes* 9 Q. And I have a blank page for some reason, and 10 the next page of the exhibit is November 10, 1975. 11 MR. SCHINK: It looks like the blank page was 12 inserted by your Xeroxer, since the succeeding pages or 13 the following pages are sequential in number. 14 Q. (BY MR. CARLSON) It is dated November 10 of 15 1975. The subject is "PCB Discussions," and it's a 16 two-page document authored by yourself? 17 A. Yes. 18 Q. On the second page of the document, the first 19 page of the Weber memo, it is stated that the purpose of 20 the discussions first is, "To show that positive action 21 was taken by Monsanto in response to Dr* Kimbrough's 22 report that Aroclor 1260 caused malignant tumors in the 23 liver of the ret." Is thatcorrect? 24 A. Yes. 25 Q* Do you know if Dr. Kimbrough has changed her ----------------------------------- PERRY REPORTING SERVICE------------------------------- -- WATER PCB-SD0000019027 uoapucer Aiaea Transcription oy XscrTbe 1 mind in that regard? 2 A. Dr. Kimbrough has not changed her mind in the 3 findings of her study. 4 Q. Okay. 5 A. Is that yourquestion? 6 Q. Yeah. That's right. Has Monsanto paid for 7 Dr. Kimbrough to do any further work? 8 ' A. No. 9 Q. Has Monsanto had discussions with Dr. 10 Kimbrough relative to her findings? 11 ' A. Oh, yes. 12 Q. Can you name some of the people in Industrial 13 Bio Test that were working on the subject of lung tumors 14 in rats caused by PCB exposure? 15 A. Yes. There was Joseph Calandra, president of 15 Industrial Bio Test, and a Dr. Keplinger. His first name 17 starts with an "M." I've forgotten what his full first 18 name is. I believe there was a Dr. Don Gordon. There 19 were others who I don't remember and had never personally 20 met who were involved, also. 21 Q. Has Monsanto accepted that for the particular 22 strain of rat that was utilised by Dr. Kimbrough in her 23 test in looking at the potential for malignant tumors in 24 the liver -- I lost track of my thought. Has Dr. 25 Kimbrough's work been duplicated by anyone else? PERRY REPORTING SERVICE ' WATER PCB-SD0000019028 computer Aiaeci Transcription ay &scaoe 156 1 A. No. 2 Q. Have others attempted to duplicate the work? 3 A. Not to ay knowledge, unless you call 4 Monsanto's previous work using this sane material out of 5 the same lot nuaber a duplication. Q. Okay. 7 A. But not with the saae species of rat. 8 Q. Okay. Did Dr. Kiabrough's rats develop 9 malignant tumors of the liver? 10 A. Yes. 11 Q. Is that a species that was found to be 12 particularly susceptible to developing malignant tumors? 13 A. I have never heard that species described as 14 such, but it was different. 15 Q. Okay. Monsanto did a comparable test? 16 A. Yes. 17 Q. It resulted in what, enlarged lives? 18 A. Enlarged livers, loss of weight gain at the 19 high levels of feeding, but -- 20 Q no aalignancy? 21 A. -- didn't see any aalignancy. 22 Q. Have Monsanto's nedical people aade a 23 determination as to why this difference in results? 24 A. They attempted. 25 Q. Okay. -----------------------------------PERRY REPORTING SERVICE-------------------------- ----- WATER PCB-SD0000019029 Computer Aieked Transbrlptioh oy Xscrioe T57 1 A. And this is why the president of Industrial 2 Bio Test was personally asked to be involved, and this is 3 why Monsanto also went to the Eppley Institute for a third 4 independent opinion. 5 Q. Okay. A. The eonclusion was that there is a difference 7 in the cells, but no one, I think, to this day can explain 8 why the difference. 9 Q. Has Dr. Kimbrough offered her opinion as to 10 why the difference? 11 A. No. She was just as baffled as we were, so 12 it's an open question. 13 Q. OSHA one time was considering requiring a use 14 permit for those that were using PCBs? 15 A. Yes, it was. Itwasconsideringsuggesting 16 that. They can only recommend. 17 Q. That wasn't considered to be a practical 18 recommendation by Monsanto? 19 A. I don't know thatMonsanto hadany strong 20 opinions regarding use permits. 21 Q. On page 4 of Hr. Weber's memo, the second 22 line begins end then reads, "In general, this group of EPA 23 was not receptive to our concept that PCB's are not cancer 24 causing agents." Did they tell you why not? 25 A. No. PErry reporting service ~ WATER PCB-SD0000019030 1 Q. They just ~ 2 A. They just expressed a disbelief in our 3 conclusion. 4 Q. Okay. But without having anything further to 5 support their contention? 6 A. That is correct. 7 Q. Did they rely on Kimbrough's studies? Is 8 that the only thing they were relying on, or did they even 9 rely on that? 10 A. I think that personally I believe that 11 Kimbrough's results confirmed a suspicion they had, and 12 their lead spokesman was Dr. Pallotta, their toxicologist 13 consultant, who had never done any testing personally. 14 Q. Had he reviewed any literature? 15 A. Yes. He kept up to date on all the 1G literature. 17 Q. Did you have some discussions with Dr. 18 Pallotta about this? 19 A. Oh, yes. 20 Q. Why did he think that the PCBs were 21 cancer-causing agents? 22 A. He had a subjective belief. That's all. 23 Q. Were there any that reported to Dr. Pallotta 24 that you are aware of who did not share his belief that 25 PCBs were cancer-causing agents? -----------------------------------PERRY REPORTING SERVICE------------------------------ --- WATER PCB-SD0000019031 computer Aided Transcription by Xscrioe TSJ 1 A. Were there any people reporting to? 2 Q. Reporting to him that it was ---did you have 3 contact with EPA people that reportedto Dr. Pallotta who 4 were of a contrary opinion? 5 A. I'm sorry. Dr. Pallotta at that time was a 6 consultant, self-employed, working under a contract to 7 EPA. 8 Q. Okay. 9 A. I don't know that Dr. Pallotta had any staff 10 at all. 11 Q. Where is he located? 12 A. The last I heard, it was theWashington, DeC. 13 area. 14 0. Do you know if he had consulted the EPA in 15 other matters? 16 A. Yes. 17 Q. Other chemicals? 18 A. Yes. 19 Q. Do you know some of the chemicals that he's 20 consulted on? 21 A. Hot anymore. I used to. 22 Q. Do you know a little bit or anything more 23 about his background other than he was a toxicologist? 24 A. That's all I know. 25 Q. One of the things that occurs in the course PERRY REPORTIKG SERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000019032 Computer Aided transcription Dy Xscribe T&tf 1 of litigation is lawyers hear all sorts of rumors, and if 2 I hear a rumor, I've got to ask you about it. Has 3 Industrial Bio Test ever been indicted or looked at or 4 criminally charged for anything resulting from teBt 5 reports it has made or any of the warnings done? 6 A. Yes. 7 0. Can you tell me what that was about? 8 A. Z can share with you my understanding. 9 Q. Okay. 10 A. A3 I understand it, they wereaccused of 11 fraudulent data relating to some tests of chemicals by 12 several companies. As I understand it, some of the 13 employees and ex-employees of Industrial Bio Test 14 Laboratories were found guilty on several counts. I also 15 understand that some served some prison sentences, but 16 none of these allegations or problems are associated with 17 PCBs. 18 Q. Do you remember whichchemicals were 19 involved? 20 A. The only one I'm familiar with is another 21 Monsanto product called TCC, which is a bacteriostat. I 22 don't recall the other products. 23 Q. Were any of the people that were Involved in 24 this particular biotest problem people that worked on any 25 of the studies on PCBs? -----------------------------------PERRY REPORTING SERVICE---------------------------- WATER PCB-SD0000019033 Computer Aided Transcription oy Xscnoe ITT 1 A. Yes. 2 Q. Were the PCB studies of Industrial Bio Test 3 audited by any outside concern? 4 A. Mo. 5 Q. Were they audited by Monsanto? 4 A. Yes. 7 Q. When was the auditing done? 8 A. I understand they were audited in about 1978, 9 '79. 10 Q. Do you know who at Monsanto was responsible 11 for having the audit performed? 12 A. Dr. Levinskas. 13 Q. Was there a formal report issued as a result 14 of the audit? 15 A. I didn't see it. I don't know. 16 Q. To the best of your knowledge, did the audit 17 confirm that the reporting by Industrial Bio Test on the 18 PCB work was accurate? 19 A. Yes. 20 Q. Did everybody heave a sigh of relief? 21 A. Oh, I did. 22 Q. Mo natter how oareful you are in choosing 23 people, sonatinas things go awry. 24 A. That's true in nost things. 25 Q. Including selecting people to haul PCBs PERRY REPORTING SERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000019034 Computer Aicte3~Transcri.ption By Xscribe 1 around, I guess. Okay. Let's take a look at Exhibit 3. 2 I guess I better check and make sure to see how many 3 documents there are. I don't know if this is out of order 4 or what's happened here, so I guess I'll just try to go 5 through it as bast I can. The first page is entitled, 6 *Outline - CMC Presentation. PCB Bnvironmental Problem," 7 correct? 8 A. Tea. 9 Q. And the second page i9 Section IV of that 10 report, which is similar? 11 A. Yes. 12 Q. And the next page, is that a statement of the 13 actual presentation? 14 A. It appears to be a copy of the script that I 15 used in making the presentation. 16 Q. And that's four pages, the last page being 17 about a third of the page of printed material? 18 A. I didn't get the last part. 19 Q. Pour pages, with the last page being about a 20 third of a page of printed material? In other words, four 21 pages to the script, the last page only being -- 22 A. Mo. Following the fourth page, that's an 23 interruption, followed by a copy of a transparency which 24 is projected on the screen. The script continues then. 25 Q. I see. PERRY "REPORTING SERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000019035 Coaputer Aided Transcription by Xscribe I7T3 1 A. The inal transparency and another narrative. 2 Q. Okay. Thank you. The third page of the 3 document, which would be, as I understand it, the first 4 page of the script presentation, the first paragraph, 5 there's the sentence, referring back to your November 17, 6 1969 presentation, "Since then, as you well know, the 7 pollution hysteria continues to grow and specifically in 8 the area of PCB's, the number of laboratories, 9 governmental and university involved continues to increase 10 as we predicted." Can you define for me what you meant by 11 the term "hysteria" in that presentation? 12 A. Maybe it's a misuse of the word, but this 13 referred to the concerns expressed about DDT and all these 14 other chemicals in the environment, and the press coverage 15 that was being loaded, and the proposed allegations that 16 were being proposed throughout the country, the increase 17 in the number of articles, both in the technical journals 18 and popular press, referring to the chemical pollution of 19 the environment. That's what that was Intended to cover. 20 Q. Based on today's knowledge, looking back at 21 the time this presentation was made, in your opinion, was 22 the attention given to the problem by the media and by the 23 public unwarranted? 24 A. That's a subjective kind of question, but in 25 ay opinion, there were situations that warranted this kind pe&ry reporting Service WATER PCB-SD0000019036 computer Aiaeu xransccipcion oy xscrioe 164 1 of attention# and in my opinion, it probably required this 2 kind of emphasis to get such agencies as EPA approved and 3 organised and functioning. So although it might have been 4 overstated, the need was there, and it helped satisfy that 5 need up to a point. Q. Bow about with regard to the potential Mr environmental ramifications of oontinued use of PCBs? Do 8 you think that the concerns expressed by the media back in 9 1969 and *70, in retrospect was unwarranted? 10 A. I think I understand your question. 11 Would you read that again? 12 (Reporter read from record as directed.) 13 A. In general, I don't believe they were not 14 warranted, but soae of the specifics were proven 15 erroneous. 16 Q. (BY HR. CARLSON) At the bottom of the same 17 page you reference the discussions with Dr. Risebrough and 19 Dr. Olcutt at Berkeley. Did Dr. Olcutt have any opinions 19 referable to potential adverse health effects of PCBs 20 which were different than Dr. Risebrough's? 21 A. Dr. Olcutt was more suspicious of DDT than 22 Dr. Risebrough was. There was a difference of emphasis 23 between the two. It was not open warfare, but it was a 24 professional difference of opinion. 25 Q. Did Monsanto, either directly or indirectly, FERRY REPORTING SERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000019037 Computer Aided Transcription by Xscribe UT5 1 pay foe any additional studies to be done by Dr. 2 Risebrough or Dr. Olcutt? 3 A. Mot to ay knowledge. 4 Q. The first transparency, which I believe is 5 entitled, "PCB Content, Plant Effluent,* references both in real anounts, apparently, and in parts per billion PCBs 7 found in the discharge. 8 A. 1 see that. 9 Q. Okay. Where did you get those numbers from? 10 A. This came from the laboratories at the two 11 plants. 12 Q. Okay. From the past work in the plants, did 13 those numbers appear to be accurate as far as you were 14 concerned? 15 A. Yes. 16 Q. The next page of the presentation, the first 17 paragraph, last sentence, says, "These substitutes must be 18 thoroughly evaluated to determine long term effect of the 19 environment to avoid problems in the future." That would 20 be in the nature of the biodegradability studies and 21 lifetime rat studies that we hadearlier talkedabout? 22 A. Tea. 23 Q. By themid-1960'a, and looking back with 24 hindsight now, which I appreciate is usually, but not 25 always, clearer than our present sense, do you think PERRY REPORTING SERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000019038 Computer Aided Transcription by Xscribe T6IT 1 Monsanto should have looked at the biodegradability of 2 PCBs earlier than it did? Strike that. Do you think that 3 Monsanto should have looked at the biodegradability of the 4 PCBs earlier than it did? 5 A. No, 1 don't think so. There vas nothing to C indicate that such a study would be appropriate, and anyone suggesting it would have been perceived to be 8 irrational. Nobody ever looked at industrial chemicals 9 this way. That was a first as it was when it was done. 10 Q. All right. 11 A. So putting myself in I960,knowing that 12 biodegradation testing protocol night be available -- 13 Q. Right. 14 A. -- but not having any real reason to do it 15 with so nany other important studies to do, I don't think 16 that any responsible company would have done it, not 17 having any other information than it had. 18 Q. The information that it eventually received 19 came from an outside source -- 20 A. Correct. 21 Q. -- which then prompted looking at the 22 question? 23 A. Correct. 24 Q. Monsanto ~ this is going to sound a little 25 bit argumentative, and I don't mean it to be, but it's -----------------------------------PERRY REPORTING SERVICE ~ WATER PCB-SD0000019039 'Computer Aided Transcription by Xecrioe 167 1 obviously a subject of concern to your company, or to your 2 past employer and current company that you consult to, and 3 my client as veil. In earlier years, pre-1966, Monsanto 4 knew that it was marketing extremely stable material, S correct? 6 A. Yes. 7 Q* And you really had no reason to think that it 8 wasn't biodegrading? 9 A. Correct. 10 Q. And didn't knowwhat, ifany, environmental 11 problems maybe associated with its presence in the 12 environment? 13 A. Correct; but itsstability led the research 14 minds that were studying it to conclude that its 15 characteristics were such that metabolism is almost out of 16 the question. Therefore, it couldn't hurt anything. I 17 used an expression earlier, pebbles on the beach. They 18 are there. I'll admit their presence, but presence alone 19 doesn't necessarily mean effect, end that's the context in 20 which it was perceived. 21 Q. Okay. We go back, when looking at that 22 subject then, to the question of who actually at Monsanto 23 looked at whether or not the PCBs were accumulating in 24 eventually the fatty tissue of animals, for example, or 25 fish. Back in the early '60s, no one was looking at that. PERRY REPORTING SERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000019040 -- --/ <W4 AW AOO 1 were they? 2 A. That is true. 3 Q. And as I understand it, no one was looking at 4 it primarily because it was thought there was no reason to 5 look at it? A. That is right. Q. If there had been soae reason to look at it, 8 either other related acientific literature, then would you 9 expect Monsanto to have done the work that began in *69 10 earlier? 11 MR. SCHINK: That assumes that the 12 instrumentation, for example, existed to enable one to do 13 that. I don't know if you laid that foundation, so I 14 object. There's no foundation. 15 A. When you say do the work, are we talking now 16 about animal toxicity studies or biodegradation studies? 17 Q. (BY MR. CARLSOU) Both. I don't mean to 18 limit it. 19 A. Okay. The answer to your question would be 20 yes, animal toxicity studies would have been started given 21 this hint that they're out there. The next question is. 22 If they are, are they harming any creature? Vow, the 23 biodegradation study was Initiated primarily to help 24 explain why, with the millions of pounds of, for example, 25 1242 sold, and put in such things as carbonless copy paper ----------------------------------- PEKEY-EEPORT INC5 SERVICE----------------------------- ----- WATER PCB-SD0000019041 Computer XXbed Transcription by Xscribe 169 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 and paint, things that are right out there in the environment, no laboratory up to this point in time was finding it. The suspicion centered on biodegradation. Nov, let's confirm it. That's why the biodegradation studies were started. We knew they were stable. In our minds ve were convinced. We weren't surprised 1254 was out there, but why not 1242? Does that help a little? Q. Yeah. Have you discussed with people in the medical department at Monsanto or others what scientific literature existed in the late '30s through the '40s, which arguably could relate to the question of potentially adverse health effects of PCBs? A. Yes. Q. And what have you been told by these folks? A. The published reports in those early years included not only PCBs, but the materials trademarked halo wax. This was chlorinated napthylamines. The two chemical families were used together in a coating operation, apparently quite extensively, in which electrical wire was coated with this material as an insulation. Employees were exposed, and there was evidence of health effects. That's the early literature. Dr. Kelly and Elmer Wheeler both indicated that that was used as a guideline respecting PCBs, although the data was not real crystal clear as to which of these PERRY REPORTING SERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000019042 Computer Aided Transcription~Sy Xacribe 170 1 chemicals was the culprit, and that's where the initial 2 words of precaution were derived, such as, "Don't breathe 3 it. Don't get it on your skin," and so on. And it was 4 later confirmed by the acute toxicity testing that was 5 conducted for Monsanto through the years, '50s, '60s. 6 There was some repeated testing, and the medical 7 department took considerable comfort in the fact that as 8 the years of experience went on and no employees showed 9 any serious health affects, they took that as a good 10 signal. We knew how to handle it. 11 Q. With PCBs being introduced into the food 12 chain as we now know, what were the potential dangers to 13 humans if PCBs had continued to be used as before? 14 A. . The introduction in the food chain occurred 15 in two ways. One is via the wildlife through the fish. 10 The other is through accidents that occurred, such as 17 happened in Japan with the rice oil and happened in the 18 United States with that chicken feed ingredient that ended 19 up in poultry and eggs. Those were accidental 20 contaminations. It was the considered opinion of the Pood 21 and Drug Administration that PCBs ought to be -- without 22 any PCB testing, ought to be considered similar to DDT. 23 That was their guideline. 24 Q. Okay. 25 A. So the standard they had set for the amount -----------------------------------PERRY REPORTING SERVICE----------------------------- WATER PCB-SD0000019043 ............ computer Aided Transcription "by Ascribe I'TI" 1 of DDT that they would tolerate In food as an adulterant 2 would be used for PCBs in food, again as an adulterant. 3 It'8 not intended to be in there. It serves no useful 4 purpose, but it's there. He are going to control the 5 aaount. I personally have never heard any discussion by individuals in PDA saying that, "This aaount will create 7 this hara in huaan beings, and, therefore, we apply a 8 safety factor and end up with this tolerated aaount.* 9 That has never been conducted in ay presence, and I don't 10 know of any discussion of that kind. The similarity was 11 always to DDT. 12 0. What about the effect of the product on the 13 environment, the product being PCBs generically? 14 A. PCBs in the environment? . 15 Q. If they had been continued to be used as 16 prior to 1969? 17 A. Well, there's evidence that is pretty good 18 supported by the chicken study that birds could be 19 affected if it kept building up just the way DDT did. 20 Eventually it would reach the point where it would be PCBs 21 and DDTs are dropping. So, I predict that that could have 22 happened with continued releases. 23 There are some creatures that are very sensitive, 24 as shown by the shrimp studies. The baby shrimp just 25 don't survive in very low levels. Parts per billion, very PERRY REPORTING SERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000019044 Computer Aided TranscrTption by Ascribe T?2 1 low levels of PCBs kills them. It's highly toxic. So, 2 that kind of says that there are some creatures out there 3 that we may not have studied yet that could be hurt badly. 4 So in answer to your question# with continued uses# it's 5 very likely that a level could have been reached to hurt some creature in the environment. 7 Q. Could you include man on that list of 8 creatures? 9 A. Well# if carried to extremes# yes. I don't 10 know what that number would be# but I would suggest that 11 we would have other symptoms before that. 12 Q. PCBs obviously served a very worthwhile 13 purpose for a period of time# didn't they? 14. A. I'm convinced that# yes# theyreduced the 15 danger of fires# which I admit are difficult to quantity. 16 Q. Sure. 17 A. The benefits# I'm pretty sure# are there. 18 Q. Okay. Do you think that they were there for 19 hydraulic fluid to the same axtentf that is# the benefits 20 were there for hydraulic fluid to the same extent that 21 they were there as used as a dielectric? 22 A. 1 personally believe that# and I base that on 23 what I understand of the serious fire General Motors had 24 in Livonia# Michigan. You may not remember that# but they 25 burned down a plant. ------------------------------------- PERRY REPORTING SERVICE------------------------------- - WATER PCB-SD0000019045 CoapuforAIdd transcription oy Xscnoe TTJ 1 Q. What were they UBing? 2 A. Mineral oil inthier hydraulic systems. 3 Q. When was that? 4 A. Sarly '50s. It was anOldsnobile 5 transaission plant aa Z reaeaberi but anyway, that was the start of the interest in fire-resistant hydraulic fluids, helped a lot by the need for hydraulic fluids in aircraft, 8 fire resistant. 9 Q. Are PCBs still used in any capacity or any 10 application today in this country? 11 A. Oh, they are still in use in electrical 12 systems. There's not a new system made, but they are in 13 place. 14 Q. But systems that are still in use? 15 A. 1 suspect this building has a PCB 16 transformer, and I suspect the ballast unite up here are 17 PCB. 18 Q. Tour comparison with -- strike that. The 19 question of the usefulness of PCBs in hydraulic fluid and 20 the reference to the General Motors fire I appreciate. I 21 wonder if, in looking at the phosphate esters that came on 22 to the aarket, if you at that point would still think that 23 PCBs were as laportant for the hydraulic fluid in usages 24 as PCBs were for the dielectric usages? 25 MR. SCHINKi I object to the form of the : PERRY REPORTING SERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000019046 ..... Computer Aided Transcription by Xscribe 174 1 question. I don't understand it. 2 HR. CARLSON: I'll rephrase it. 3 The phosphate esters came into use in hydraulic 4 fluids when? 5 A. Some*phosphate esters were used as a f co-ingredient with PCBs early on. Q. Okay. When did they come into their own? 8 MR. SCHINK: You're talking about by Monsanto 9 or by other companies selling hydraulic fluids? 10 Q. (BY MR. CARLSON) By anybody selling 11 hydraulic fluids. 12 A. I don't propose to know all the answers to 13 this, but it's my understanding that there were 14 competitive fluids available that contained phosphate 15 esters certainly in the early '60s. I am also under the 16 understanding that they were not quite as good. They had 17 some shortcomings. 18 Q. We talked about those a little bit earlier. 19 A. We talked about those earlier. In terms of 20 Monsanto's replacement, you will note that the phosphate 21 esters that were eventually used were not the old time 22 products that were in existence back in the 'CO's and 23 '70s. These were -- I'm going to call them custom made 24 phosphate esters to give the right kind of corrosion 25 control on bearings and what have you in machinery, the --------------------------------- PERRY REPORTING-SERVICE-------------------------- ------ WATER PCB-SD0000019047 Computer Aided Transcription oy Xscri&e T75 1 right kinds of lubricating properties# as veil as fire 2 resistance# although that fire resistance isn't quite as 3 good as the PCBs. As I understand it# you can still get 4 flashes of fire when a phosphate eater hits hot molten 5 metal. Q. Okay. On the aaae page that ve're looking at# the second paragraph# the last sentence, "ffe have 8 recommended to the O.S. Department of Agriculture to 9 reject Aroclors as an approved inert material when 10 pesticide registrations occur this year." Why was that? 11 A. The O.S. Department of Agriculture had done 12 some research work back in the '50s# looking for materials 13 that would extend the effective life of insecticides for 14 crawling insects in households# on shelving and the like. 15 They found that PCBs made good tacky material and were 16 recommending that Lindane and these others# Heptachlor and 17 these other insecticides that existed at that time be 18 blended with PCBs to extend their useful life. That was 19 never a very common application# but there were some small 20 companies making such insecticides. 21 When we heard about it# we did two things. First 22 of all# we told our distributors# "Don't sell to that 23 application. And then Dr. Kelly wrote to the Department 24 of Agriculture# telling them# "Do not reregister these 25 formulations. We don't recommend it." PERRY REPORTING SERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000019048 r\ ucu Lsjf Aawiiua X /O 1 Q. Why didn't he recommend it? 2 A. Why didn't he? 3 Q. Yes. 4 A. Well, this was in ensver to the question of 5 why ere they found in so many strange places? At one time 6 it was thought that PCBs were sprayed from aircraft with 7 insecticides, and this is why you found it in places far 8 removed from industry. Well, our studies show that wasn't 9 true, but we did run across this one, and since it wasn't 10 very popular, not a big use, you might as well discontinue 11 it. 12 Q. Okay.On the last page of the presentation, 13 the top paragraph reads, "Toxicity studies are now in the 14 tenth month. Data to date indicate that Aroclors arc 15 mildly toxic to manuals, however, it is highly unlikely 16 that this will be a significant factor in any decision 17 regarding the banning or restricting of the use of 18 Aroclors." Why did you feel that the mild toxicity would 19 not be a significant factor at that point? 20 A. We felt it was not a significant factor. 21 Q. Right. Why not? 22 A. Because there aremany, manyindustrial 23 chemicals in commerce that fit this mildly toxic 24 characterization or description. 25 Q. If you take mildly toxic and add to it not -----------------------------------PERRY REPORTING' SERVICE------------------------------ --- WATER PCB-SD0000019049 Computer Aided Transcription~by XscriSe 1T7 1 biodegrading, then you would have a different answer? 2 A. No, because that's coupled with the 3 probability of exposure, and if it's -- we were talking 4 here in steel containers. Who's going to get exposed to 5 it in closed systems? They are referring here to the 6 banning at restricting the use. . 7 0. Are you talking about restricting the use? 8 Are we talking about no nore Pydraul with PCBs? 9 A. Ho. We're talking about uses over and above 10 Monsanto's restrictions. 11 Q. Okay. 12 A. They are referring here to Governaental 13 restrictions over and above the prograai we were describing 14 here. 15 Q. That paragraph is talking about governaental 16 decisions regarding the banning of restricting use? 17 A. Yes. That was the intent of that. It's not 13 well written, but -- 19 Q. It's better written than most of ay questions 20 have been phrased, so that's all right. Did Monsanto, at 21 the time you made that presentation, expect that there 22 would be a governaental ban or a restriction in the use of 23 PCBs? 24 A. There was -- yeah. The likelihood was pretty 25 good. It was fairly high that such a ban eventually would : Pe&r? REPORTING service ' WATER PCB-SD0000019050 Computer Aided Transcription oy xscnoe TTff 1 occur. 2 Q. And that was understood by you as early as 3 when? 4 A. 1970, not only by me personally, but the 5 group of us who were working on this* 6 Q* Were there any people at Monsanto that you 7 worked particularly close with in the ?CB question? 8 A* Tes. 9 Q. Who would those people have been? 10 A. If I understand your description of 11 particularly close* -- 12 Q. Yes. I'm sure that you reported to a lot of 13 people, and you had a lot of discussions, but were there 14 any. people that you worked with almost on a day-to-day 15 basis? 1G A. All right. The key people were individuals 17 that represented each of the functions: Elmer Wheeler, 18 the medical department; Bill Richard, the research 19 function; and Bob Keller, the analytical chemistry 20 function. And I worked closely with the directors of 21 marketing, Don Olson initially, and he was replaced by Tom 22 Gossage and individuals like Bob Sido in the labeling 23 department. Those were the key people, and their staffs, 24 I'd be in touch with their lieutenants, 60 to speak. 25 Q. Okay. Did you meet with any resistance from -----------------------------------PERKY REPORTING"SERVICE--------------------------- ------- WATER PCB-SD0000019051 Computer XTdecPTranscription by Xscrioe F7U 1 marketing people with regard to any programs that you 2 wanted to see implemented with regard to the customers* 3 handling of PCBs and what marketing was willing to tell 4 the customers? 5 A. Well, there was some of that# but I don't recall any incident where it was so heated and it had reached the point where we couldn't resolve the 8 differences. 9 Q. I can't believe anybody could get heated with 10 you# anyway, and that they couldn't resolve their 11 differences with you, so that doesn't surprise me. But 12 there must have been some people who said, "Hey, wait a 13 second. We can't do that." 14 A. That's right. That did happen, but 15 eventually they would come around. There were people who 16 did object. "Don't put anything else on the label. We 17 don't need it. Don't tell the Government anything. They 18 don't need to know." But all that was eventually, I 19 think -- I like to think that I kind of persuaded them to 20 think the way I did. 21 Q. Okay. Was the 312 label changed? I know 22 that the 1242 labe? had an addition to it, but was the 312 23 label changed? 24 A. There was a paragraph, a little stick-on 25 label that was attached that referred to re-emphasize. PERRY REPORTING SERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000019052 coapucer Aiaea Transcription oy xscrxoe 180 1 really, but this had wording specific to the environment. 2 Q. Right. 3 A. "Studies show this is a potential pollutant. 4 Don't let it get in the waterways," that kind of thing. 5 0. Did that go on the Pydraul 312 label? 6 A. Tea, sir, 7 Q. As veil as when you were selling, I suppose, 8 the raw material, the Aroclor 1242? 9 A. Well, with Aroclor 1242, eventually it was 10 right on that label, not only as an addendum label, 11 affixed on. 12 Q. Okay. We'll get that a little bit later, I 13 guess. On the same page, the third paragraph reads, 14 Biodegradation studies have, thus far, confirmed our 15 initial beliefs that the lower chlorinated biphenyls would 16 degrade easily. We were disappointed in the resistance to 17 degradation of the some of the isomers in Aroclor 1242." 18 What was occurring with regard to the 1242? 19 A. The PCBs in 1242 had the 5 chlorine and 6 20 chlorine, which are also in the 1254 cut, and those 21 fractions were not degrading, and you'll see that it 22 explains what we concluded from that. 23 Q. Okay. Did the research in looking at the 24 possible use of distilled Aroclor 1242 pan out? 25 A. Yes. PfcftRY REPORTING SERVltE WATER PCB-SD0000019053 Computer Aided Transcription by Xscribe TffT 1 Q. Was that ever marketed commercially? 2 A. Yes, for dielectric uses. 3 Q. Okay. Why wasn*t any used in the 4 hydraulic -- why wasn't it applied in the hydraulic side? 5 A. We had already substituted the phosphate 6 esters in hydraulic fluids. This came along later, later 7 in *71, and at that time we were only selling the 8 electrical people. 9 Q. Okay. 10 HR. SCHINKx Let's take a break. Off the 11 record. 12 (The deposition was adjourned until Thursday, 13 August 11, 1988, at 9x00 a.a.) 14 Q. (BY HR. PEIJDERGAST) Mr, Papageorge,again, 15 my name is John Pendergast, and I'm going to be continuing 16 the deposition ve started yesterday. First, I just wanted 17 to ask you if you understand you are still under oath 18 today? 19 A. I do. 20 Q. Okay. I'd just like to, before weget back 21 into the monotony of going into some of these documents, I 22 have a couple of questions just to follow up on some of 23 what we did yesterday, and the questions may appear 24 disjointed, jumping from subject to subject, and that's 25 only because I've pulled then out of my notes from PERRY REPORTING SERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000019054 Conputer Aided TranserTption-by^Xacribe 182 1 yesterday. So I hope you'll bear with me for that. 2 I think you stated yesterday that you have given 3 about 24 or two dozen depositions in cases for Monsanto. 4 Do you recall that? 5 A. Z do. 6 0. Okay, lave any of those -- strike that. * Have you ever testified on behalf of anyone other than 8 Monsanto? 9 A. Yes. I mentioned the two cases yesterday you 10 may recognize. 11 Q. Right. And one was the Westinghouse case? 12 A. A Westinghouse case. 13 Q. And that was the one that was venued in 14 Indianapolis, Indiana? 15 A. No. 16 Q. Okay. Which one is that? 17 A. This was in San Francisco. 18 Q. And can you tell me what the nature of that 19 case was? 20 A. As I understand it, it involved transformers 21 in a fire, in an office building. 22 Q. Was Monsanto involved in that case? 23 A. At one time, I understood, but it is no 24 longer a defendant. 25 Q. Okay. Do you know what the allegations PERRY REPORTING SERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000019055 uoupucer Aiaea Transcription oy Ascrioe ltf/3 1 against Monsanto ware in that case? 2 A. They were related to product, product 3 labeling, product information. 4 Q. Zt had to do with warnings about fire 5 hazards, that sort of thing? A. Ho. It had to do with the proper handling of 7 dielectric fluids that contained PCBs as an ingredient. 8 Q. And how was the handling of the materials 9 involved in the lawsuit? 10 A. Well, I can't speak for the attorneys that 11 asked the question. I was questioned in the area of what 12 did the labels say, and when were they changed, and why 13 were they changed, and some questions regarding my 14 knowledge of health effects of PCBsj also, any knowledge I 15 had regarding the burning of PCBs and the health effects 16 of the products of burning. 17 Q. Was there an allegation in that case that 18 someone's health had been adversely affected by the 19 inhalation of fumes containing PCBs? 20 A. Ho, not to my knowledge. 21 Q. And what was the other case that you 22 testified in or where you were not involved with Monsanto? 23 A. This was the Sangamo Blectric case Z 24 mentioned yesterday. 25 Q, And where was that? PERRY REPORTING SERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000019056 computer Aided Transcription oy Xscrioe 184 1 A. This was in Greenville, South Carolina. 2 Q. And what was the basic fact situation in that 3 case? 4 A. This was a setter of water containing PCBs 5 entering public waterways and the presence of PCBs in potable water. J Q. Vaa Monsanto ever involved in that lawsuit? 8 A. Initially, yes. 9 Q. In the Westinghouse case, do you know who 10 brought the suit? 11 A. The owners of the building. 12 Q. In the Sangamo Electric case, do you know who 13 brought that case? 14 A. I referred to it as the Wright case. I 15 understand there's a Mrs. Wright, plus others whose names 16 I was never told. 17 Q. And had Mrs. Wright and others alleged that 18 they had sustained some adverse health effects from 19 drinking the water? 20 A. Tea. 21 Q. Do you have any knowledge of what level of 22 PCBs were involved in that case? 23 A. X don't recall any nuabers. I don't. 24 Q. Do you remember what Mrs. Wright's alleged 25 symptoms were? PERRY REPORTING SERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000019057 v>va^Ubl nlucu Jf asClluc 403 1 A. I don't know that I was aver told. Ho. 2 Q. Okay. Do you know how many plaintiffs there 3 were in that case? 4 A. Ho, I don't. 5 Q. Who were the other defendants in that case? 4 Do you know? p A. Sangamo Electric is the only other one I'm 8 aware of. 9 Q. Do you know how the PCB materials were 10 discharged frora Sangamo? 11 A. I personally don't know. 12 Q. Did anyone ever give you any impression as to 13 how that happened? 14 A. During my deposition I had an impression that 15 they were a part of the plant's waste water as well as 16 runoff from rain storms. 17 Q. What kind of plant was that? 18 A. A capacitor manufacturing plant. 19 Q. And do you know what product they used in 20 that plant that was manufactured by Monsanto? 21 A. Aroclor 1242 was the PCB. 22 Q. Here there any other Monsanto products used 23 there? 24 A. Hot to my knowledge. 25 Q. Okay. Maybe this is a good point for me to PERRY REPORTIHG SERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000019058 wwM^ynluou 'UanCU|it.iOii wjr aacuuc 400 1 clear up some misunderstanding in my mind. We have been 2 referring to Aroclors, numbers such as 1242, 1248, 1254, 3 1260. I think we identified yesterday that the last two 4 numbers in that four-digit number represented the 5 percentage of chlorine in that Aroclors is that correct? A. That is correct, 7 Q. Okay, And just now you referred to Aroclor 8 1242 as being the PCB that was involved? 9 A. Yes. 10 Q. Is it correct for me to say that the Aroclor 11 1242 contained a number of different polychlorinated 12 biphenyls? 13 A. Yes. 14 Q. Oo youknow what thepredominant 13 polychlorinated biphenyl was in Aroclor 1242? 16 A. It was the 3chlorine type. 17 Q. Do you know how the Wright case was resolved 18 finally? 19 A. No, I don't, 20 Q. Did you testify at trial on that case? 21 A. No. 22 Q. Did you ever see anymedical literature 23 relating to Krs. Wright or any of the other plaintiffs in 24 that case? 25 A. No. REPORTING SERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000019059 computer Aided transcription dy XscrT&e 187 1 Q. Go ahead. 2 A. Mo. 3 Q. Have you been involved in any other cases in 4 which there is an allegation of hunan health problems from 5 contact with PCBs? 6 A. Tea# Z have. t 0. Okay. Can you tell ae whichcasesthose 8 were? 9 A. Let me think a moment here. There was the 10 incident in Tennessee where a transformer enroute to the 11 customer from General Electric's plant developed a leak. 12 The driver drained the contents on the Bhoulder of the 13 roadway, and then the people living in that area, as well 14 as a passing motorist, claimed that they were injured by 15 this disposal of the fluid. ............ ................. 16 Q. Do you remember what the first plaintiff's 17 name was in that case? 18 A. I do not. . 19 Q. Monsanto was a defendant in that case? 20 A. Tea# initially. 21 Q. And was General Electric as well? 22 A. Tea. 23 Q. Were there any other defendants in that case? 24 A. Not to my knowledge. 25 Q. And you believe that was venued somewhere in PERRY REPORTING SERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000019060 v-oapucer Axaeu Transcription oy Aacrioe iaa 1 Tennessee? 2 A. it was, Knoxville. 3 Q. Are there any other cases that you have 4 worked on where there was an allegation of human health 5 effects? 6 A. Tea. There's a silo, dairy silo case in 7 Michigan. The plaintiff's name was the Haley family, 8 farmer, dairy farmer. They claimed adverse health effects 9 from drinking milk that in turn contained PCBs that 10 originated in the silage fed to the dairy cattle. PCBs 11 were alleged to have cone off of a coating that was 12 applied to the internal surface of the silo. 13 0. Is that case still pending? 14 A. No. That's been tried. 15 Q. Do you know what year thatwas tried? 16 A. 1984. 17 Q. How about the General Electric case? 18 A. I think that was about 1980,*79, '80. 19 Q. Did Monsanto go to trial in the Haley family 20 case? 21 A. Yes. 22 Q. Do you know what the verdict was in that 23 case? 24 A. The jury gave an award to the plaintiffs. I 25 don't know that I ever heard the amount personally. -----------------------------------FERRY 'REPORTING SERVICE---------------------------- ------ WATER PCB-SD0000019061 **Jf Aa<4 **o MO,J 1 Q. Do you have any understanding vhat the 2 quantity of PCBs Involved in that volume? 3 A. Oh# I only recall that it vas above the limit 4 established by the Pood and Drug Administration for 5 permissible PCBs in the butter fat in the milk. 6 Q. And what was that limit? 7 A. Z believe at that time it was five parts per 8 million in the butter fat. 9 Q. How about the Knoxville# Tennessee case? Sow 10 was that resolved? 11 A. I'm under the impression -- I wasn't there. 12 I was dismissed# but I am under the impression that the 13 jury found for the plaintiffs. 14 Q. Monsanto vas dismissed from that case? 15 A. Yes. 16 Q. Do you know vhat the basis for that dismissal 17 was# any understanding of it? 18 A. All I know is that while I'm still in the 19 witness chair# the judge asked everybody in the room# 20 "What's Monsanto doing in this case?" And then the 21 lawyers approached the bench# and they had a conversation. 22 I vas excused# and that vas the end of it. Z don't know. 23 Q. Okay. What year was the Wright case? 24 A. It's been filed for several years# and I gave 25 a deposition# video# which was videotaped in early '87. PERRY REPORTING SERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000019062 Computer Aided Transcription by XscrTbe 190 1 Q. Is that case still pending? 2 A. I don't know. That's my last exposure to it. 3 Q. And Monsanto is no longer a party to that 4 case? 5 A. That's my understanding. 6 Q. Okay. Did you have any understanding of what '7 the basis of their being on that ease was? 8 A. Ho, I do not. 9 Q. Okay. Any other cases in which there was an 10 allegation of human health effects? 11 A. I can't think of any at the moment. 12 Q. On any cases where there has been an 13 allegation of adverse health effects on livestock? 14 A. Yes. 15 Q. Okay. And can you tell me what those cases 16 were? 17 A. Well, the Haley case we just talked about, 18 the cattle were alleged to have been affected, and their 19 health was harmed. There was a case involved or two cases 20 that I recall involving poultry and affecting 21 reproduction. 22 Q. Do you remember any of the plaintiffs' names 23 in those cases? 24 A. Holly Farms. I can't recall the one up in 25 New York. PKHKY REPORTING SERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000019063 Computer Aided transcription oy ascribe i9i 1 Q. Do you remember what county that was In? 2 A. I'm aorry? 3 Q. Do you remember what county or city of New 4 York that wa6 entered in? 5 A. My deposition was held in Middletown, Hew York. S? Q. And the Holly Farna ease, what year waa that 8 around? 9 A. About *74. 10 Q. Do you know howthat case was resolved? 11 A. No, I don't. 12 Q. How about the Middletown, New York case? 13 A. I don't know, either. Neither of those went 14 to court. 15 Q. Okay. Do you remember what the date was on 16 the Middletown? 17 A. About 1978. Now, those are not the dates the 18 auits were filed. They were the dates I got involved. 19 Q. Okay. Any other cases wherethere's an 20 allegation of huaan health effects or effects on livestock 21 or aniaals? 22 A. There were cases in Ohio, dairy cases again, 23 which was alleged that the dairy herd were adversely 24 affected. There was a case in New Haapshire where sink were alleged to have been affected by PCBs. PERRY REPORTING SERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000019064 v,wui^ut.at. ajl ucu xiansctiption oy &scuds 192 1 Q. Do you remember the plaintiff's name in that 2 case? 3 A. I'm sorry? 4 Q. Do you remember the plaintiff'sname in the 5 New Hampshire case? 6 A. Yes. It was referred to as the Bethlehem 7 mink case. 8 Q. Do you know how that was resolved? 9 A. The jury found for the plaintiff and 10 apportioned the award to the three or four defendants. I 11 don't remember just how and the amounts. 12 Q. Was Monsanto a defendant? 13 A. Yes. 14 Q. Do you remember# about# the year on that, 15 that it want to trial? 16 A. '74. 17 0. How about the Ohio cases that you referred 18 to? Do you remember any of the plaintiffs' names in 19 those? 20 A. Let me think. One of the dairy farmers was a 21 Mr. Sohwartxwalder# and I can't recall the others. 22 Q. Were these separatecases that were brought? 23 A Yes. 24 Q. Were theyconsolidated at some time or not? 25 A. I'm not ~ I was never told they were ----------------------------------- PURRY' REPORT INU'UURVTUU---------------------------- ----- WATER PCB-SD0000019065 v.apaci Aiaea Transcription oy Ascribe 193 1 consolidated, no. 2 Q. Okay. Do you know the outcome of the 3 Schwartzvalder case or any of the other cases? 4 A. I do not. 5 Q. Any other cases that you worked on that 6 involved human health effects, allegations of human health *7 effects or effects on livestock? And maybe we can extend 8 that into fish and game. 9 A. Pish and game. There was the case in Texas 10 referred to as the Scott case where factory workers in 11 several types of industries alleged health effects. 12 Q. What was the year on that? 13 A. The trial was held last year, '87. 14 Q. And was Monsanto in that case when it went to 15 trial? " 16 A. Yes, 17 Q. And what was the result of the trial? 18 A. The jury found for Monsanto. 19 0. Do you know what the exposure levels were 20 there? 21 A. They were mentioned at the trial, but there 22 were different levels for each *f the situations. There 23 was some question about the validity. I really don't 24 know. 25 Q. What kindof factory workers were involved in PERRY REPORTING SERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000019066 Computer Aided Transcription by Xscribe T9T 1 that? 2 A. There were workers from a capacitor plant, 3 workers from the Ford Motor Company, and employees of the 4 Tennessee Valley Authority, TVA. it seems to me there was 5 one additional industry representative. I just don't who 6 that was. 7 Q. Were any of the people from Ford Motor 8 Company who alleged adverse health effects working in die 9 casting to your knowledge? 10 A. That's my understanding. 11 Q. Was Ford Motor Company also a party defendant 12 in that case? 13 A. No. * 14 Q. Any other cases now? 15 A. I can't recall any more at the moment. 16 Q. Okay. The cases we have discussed, would 17 that cover about half of the cases that you have testified 13 in? 19 A, Roughly so, yes. 20 Q. Okay. Is there some general category that 21 the other half pertained to? 22 A. Yes. The other cases are predominantly the 23 presence of PCBs and the need for or the perceived need to 24 clean up and properly dispose and the related costs. 25 Q. To your knowledge, has the EPA ever brought -----------------------------------PERRY 'ftaWkfXHS "SERVICE---------------------------------- WATER PCB-SD0000019067 computer Aidea Transcription by Xscribe T93 1 an action against Monsanto for cleanup? 2 A. I'm under an impression that EPA was a 3 plaintiff in the Waukegan Harbor cleanup situation, and 4 Monsanto was a defendant in that particular case. 5 Q. Any other cases other than the Waukegan Harbor case where the BPA had brought an action in which 7 Monsanto was a party? 8 A. Hot to ay knowledge. 9 Q. Have any of these other cases been cases in 10 which a user of Monsanto products had alleged that 11 Monsanto was liable to then for the cost of disposal and 12 cleanup? 13 A. What was the first part of your question? 14 Q. In this category of cases we have called 15 other, were any of those cases cases in which a user of 16 Monsanto products containing PCBs alleged that Monsanto 17 was liable to them for the cost of cleanup or disposal? 18 A. Yes. 19 Q. Okay. Can you describe those cases for me? 20 A. I'll try to remember them. There was a case 21 in Texas. A transformer manufacturing company was ordered 22 to dean up their plant site and believed that Monsanto 23 ought to pay for that cost. 24 There was a case in Indiana, City of Bloomington, 25 who believed that Monsanto ought to pay for the costs of PERRY REPORTING 8ERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000019068 computer Aided Transcription by Xscribe T96 1 oversight related to a cleanup activity of several sites 2 in that city area. The San Francisco fire case was also 3 one where the building owners felt that Monsanto ought to 4 help pay for the costs of cleanup. 5 There was a slailar -- there was a situation in 6 Florida in which the transformers in an office building J that contained PCBs were removed and replaced with non-PCB 8 transforaers, and the owners of that building believed 9 that Monsanto ought to pay for the cost of what they 1C called cleanup. 11 Chattanooga, Tennessee, there was a transformer 12 fire in a building. The owners of the building believed 13 that Monsanto ought to help pay for that cleanup. 14 In Wyoming -- or let me think. Montana. In 15 Montana, there was an incident in an animal 16 slaughter-packing house in which a leaking transformer 17 resulted in contamination of that site and the neighboring 18 grounds. They were ordered to clean up. The owners of 19 that packing company felt Monsanto ought to pay for the 20 cleanup as well as the replacement of the transformer. 21 I can't think of any more. I'm sure there's some 22 more. I just can't think of them anymore. 23 Q. Okay. Zf you remember any of them during the 24 course of the morning while we're talking, let me know. 25 A. All right. I'll do that. -----------------------------------PERRY REPORTING"SERVICE------------------------------- --- WATER PCB-SD0000019069 computer Aided TranscriptxorTTjy Xscribe ITT 1 Q. Do you remember the names of any of the 2 plaintiffs in the Texas case brought by a transformer 3 manufacturer? 4 A. Texas case. That is the Bnsco Company, 5 H-n-s-c-o. 6 Q. And vhat Aroclor was involved in that? 7 A. Zt was Aroclor 1254. 8 Q. How about the City of Bloomington case? Do 9 you know what Aroclor was involved in that? 10 A. Aroclor 1242. 11 Q. How was the Ensco case resolved? 12 A. I don't know. 13 Q. What was the Aroclor involved in the San 14 Francisco fire case? . 15 A. I'm somewhat confused, because in that case 16 they used a Westinghouse formulation referred to as 17 Inertee. It could have been either Aroclor 1242 or 18 Aroclor 1254. 19 Q. That's the case we also referred to as the 20 Westinghouse case? 21 A. Yes, sir. 22 Q. How about the case in Florida? Do you 23 remember the plaintiff's name in that? 24 A. It's an insurance company, Independent Life. 25 Q. Do you remember Aroclor involved there? PERRY REPORTING SERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000019070 Computer Aided Transcription oy Xscrioe T98 1 A. No, I don't, 2 Q. How about the Chattanooga, Tennessee case? 3 Do you remember any o the plaintiffs' names in that or 4 the plaintiff's naae in that? 5 A. That's the Electric Power Board of 6 Chattanooga* . * Q. Bov was the Independent Life case resolved? a Do you know? 9 A. I don't know. 10 Q. How about the Electric Power Hoard case? 11 A. That's 3till active. 12 Q. How about the Montana case with the 13 slaughterhouse? Do you remember the plaintiff's name in 14 that? 15 A. Pierce Packing Company, P-i-e-r-c-e. 16 0. And do you know how that was resolved? 17 A. I do not. 18 Q. Do you know what the Aroclor involved was? 19 A. Ho. 20 Q. How about the Electric Power Board case? Do 21 you know what the Aroclor Involved was? 22 A. Let ae think. I believe it was Aroclor 1254 23 as best I can recall. 24 Q. Do Aroclor 1242, 1254 and 1260 all contain 25 the same PCBs? PERRY REPORTING SERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000019071 Computer Aided Transcriptioiniy xscribe T$9 1 A. Not really. There are overlaps. 2 Q. Okay. 3 A. You start with the low chloral to the high 4 chloral spectrum, and as you Increase the percent 5 chlorine, you pick np some of those isomers that are 6 existing in the lower chlorinated mixture* 1 Q. So they share many, but not all, of the same 8 PCBsj is that fair? 9 A. They share some. I don't recall many. They 10 do share a few. There is a little overlap. 11 Q. Okay. Did you do anythingto prepare 12 yourself for your deposition yesterday and today? 13 A. I had a discussion with Hr. Schink. 14 Q. And when did that discussion take place? 15 A. Let's see. Today is Thursday. It was 16 Tuesday afternoon, Tuesday morning. Tuesday morning. 17 Q. Was there anyone else present at that 18 meeting? 19 A. Another attorney. 20 Q. And what was that attorney's name? 21 A. Gerard Davidson. 22 Q. Is he with Monsanto? 23 A. No. 24 0. Do you know who he's with? 25 A. Smith, Helms, Mulli6 fc Moore, Greenboro, PERRY REPORTING SERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000019072 Computer Aided transcription by Ascribe TOXT 1 North Carolina, 2 0. Was he there in connection with another case 3 or in connection with this case? 4 A. Ohf I don't know. 5 Q. Okay. How long did you aeet with Mr. Schink 6 and Mr. Davidson? ? A. Proa about 9t30 'til 12s30, three hours. 8 Q. Did you review any docunents at that time? 9 A. A few, yes. 10 Q. Do you remember what those documents were? 11 A. Not specifically. If I'd see then again, I 12 probably would. 13 Q. Do you generally remember what they were? 14 A. We looked at a few yesterday, and at least 15 one of those was one of the documents we reviewed, the 16 script for a presentation, copies of memorandum, letters 17 to customers, material that I'm led to believe was 18 submitted during your discovery process here. 19 Q. Okay. Do you remember how many documents you 20 looked at? 21 A. I didn't count them. I would suggest that 22 the stack looked to me like a two-inch stack, and I may 23 have looked at personally about eight or 10 of those. 24 Q. Okay. Is it your testimony then you don't 25 have any specific recollection of any of the docunents ------------------------------------- PBRRY REPORTING-SERVICE-----------------------------~-- WATER PCB-SD0000019073 Computer Aided Transcription by Escribe zoi 1 other than the script? | 2 A. Z remember a copy of a letter to customers 3 dated February, 1970. I remember other letters to the 4 customers vritten by other Monsanto people that referred 5 to changing formulations of Fydrauls when the new 6 materials mould be available. Z remember something like 1 that. That's all that comes to mind. Like Z said, if I 8 see them. I'll refresh my memory, but right now Z don't 9 recall them all. 10 Q. Did you review any papers or notes that you 11 keep personally for the deposition? 12 A. Currently? 13 Q. Yes. 14 A. Oh, no. I don't have any such documents. 15 Q. Do you personally have any documents in your 16 possession relating to your work with PCBs or your work at 17 Monsanto? 18 A. I do not. 19 Q. With respect to the files you kept at 20 Monsanto, do you have any idea where those files are 21 today? 22 A. MO. 23 Q. Okay. They were turned over to who when you j 24 left? 25 A. J. C. Weber, Coleman Weber. PERRY REPORTING SERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000019074 Computer Aided Transcription~6y xscnoe 202 i Q. And that was in what year? 2 A, February, 1976. 3 Q. Do you know if Mr. Weber maintained those 4 files as they were? 5 A. I do not. 6 Q. Do you have an understanding that Monsanto 7 has placed many of its PCB correspondence into a central 8 area? 9 A. Well, I personally started the collection of 10 documents and sent them to Monsanto's records center for 11 long-term storage. Since I was no longer involved with 12 PCBs starting in *76, I don't know whether that collection 13 is intact or added to or distributed. 14 Q. So in 1976, you sent many of your records to 15 Monsanto's records center? 15 A. Ho. No, Imisled you. 17 Q. Okay. 18 A. Records that were in Monsanto's possession, 19 not ay collection, but others, of individuals who were 20 transferring to other assignments, or the Anniston plant, 21 for example, closing down its PCB operation, they wanted 22 someplace to send all the records, and X was the one 23 attempting to coordinate all this and had all these boxes 24 of material sent to Monsanto's central records collection 25 center. These were inactive files. --------------------------------- PITERY REPORTING~SERVTCE------------------------------ ----WATER PCB-SD0000019075 Computer Aided transcription tty xscribe 1 Q. Other than Anniston's files, what other files 2 did you receive? 3 A. Individuals, as indicated earlier, would 4 change assignments, would cone by my office with two or S three folders of papers, and say, "I'a no longer with PCBs What do Z do with these?" Z'd say, "Well, leave sL. -7 thea here." I would collect those, leave them in a file 8 box, and ship it to the center. Z did not keep a score of 9 just who these people were, because there is a turnover. 10 Some people come, and they return, and others leave the 11 assignment and never get involved again. 12 Q. Did you receive files from any of the other 13 Monsanto plants? 14 A. We're talking PCBs now? 15 Q. Right. 16 A. I don't remember any. 17 Q. Okay. Who at central records did you send 18 the records to? 19 A. As I remember, there was a Mr. Porter was the 20 custodian, P-o-r-t-e-r, Z guess. 21 Q. Do you remember if Mr. Porter was an 22 attorney? 23 A. Mo. I say no, he's not an attorney. 24 Q. Okay. At that time were you making any 25 arrangement with Mr. Porter as to what was going to be PERRY REPORTING SERVICE ' WATER PCB-SD0000019076 Computer Aided Transcription by xscribe "27T4 1 done with these documents ultimately? Did you have a 2 plan? 3 A, The plan was keep them forever until further 4 notice. 5 Q. Have you ever been to the central records? * A. Z wee there once, yes. Q. When was that? 8 A. I believe *72 or '73. 9 Q. Do you know how the records are kept there? 10 MR. SCHINKx Now or then? 11 MR. PENDERGASTx Well, he was only there 12 once, so I will say then. 13 A. I will tell you what I went in and observed. 14 Q. (BY MR. PENDERGAST) Okay. 15 A. There were steel rings like an erector set 16 type facility, and shelving was made, compartments. And 17 then on these shelves were stacked corrugated paper boxes, 18 letter size, and they were numbered with numbers with the 19 system he used. This would refer back to a fora that was 20 filled out each time that a box was sent to his center, 21 and on this fora one could find the general description of 22 the contents, not specific letter by letter, but in 23 general! And that's the system that Z observed in the 24 early '70s, '72, thereabouts. 25 Q. At that time were the forms then kept in some -------------------------------------PERRY REPORTING SERVICE----------------------------- --WATER PCB-SD0000019077 Computer- Aided Transcription by JCsccibe 205 1 sort of catalog? 2 A. He had a three-ring loose-leaf binder. 3 Q. And had he devised different category 4 sections that you could look to? 5 A. He had it* as I recall, indexed to natch the 6 numbers on the shelving. Pick that number and go to the 1 book. Find that number and flip the page, and then you 8 can find the box with an additional designation, and the 9 box then would have a sheet that would say in this box are 10 manufacturing records or analytic chemistry records or 11 whatever the appropriate title would be. 12 Q. After you hadgiven your records or the 13 records from Anniston and the other individual files that 14 you had received, after you had given them to Mr. Porter, 15 and let's say you wanted to retrieve part of that, let's 16 say you wanted to find out what memos had been sent to 17 Anniston on maintenance. How could you find that with Mr. 18 Porter's system? 19 A. You want ne specifically -- I had a little 20 more information than the average person. 21 Q. Okay. 22 A. Z would go to my copy of that form that Mr. 23 Porter received and do my own initial search, and then I 24 would fill out another form to send to Mr. Porter, 25 requesting that box number so and so be sent to my office. PERRY REPORTING SERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000019078 Computer Aided~Transcripti6n by Xscribe 206 1 And I'd sign for it to say that I intended to keep this 2 box for "X" days or "X" months, and return it by a given 3 date, and that's the way he kept track of the whereabouts 4 of that particular box. . 5 Q. Okay. So> you kept copies of the forms you 6 sent in to Porter? 7 A. Tea. 8 Q. So you wouldn't actually know which box or 9 which box number it was in to begin with; would that be 10 fair? 11 A. Yes. Yes. He would send me back, say, 12 "These boxes you sent me were numbered as follows. Here 13 are the forms or copies of the forms with the numbers 14 added to them." . 15 Q. All right. 16 A. So my files hadreference tohis numbers. 17 Q. What about information that you had not 18 previously had? How could you retrieve that from records? 19 A. I never had to do that. I suppose I would 20 have called Hr. Porter and asked him, "How do I go about 21 it?" \ 22 Q. Okay. Do you have any understanding of how 23 that system has been changed and how it exists today? 24 A. I do not. 25 Q. Did Hr. Porterhave anykind ofcomputer PERRY REPORTING SERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000019079 ~' : Computer Aided Transcription by xscribe 1 system in which he kept records on or cataloged records? 2 A. Not when I was involved with him. 3 Q. Okay. During the course of your employment 4 with Monsanto, did Monsanto have a department or a 5 division or a department or division of any of its companies that was referred to as applications research? 7 A* That expression was used* The function 8 existed. I*m not aware of any group having that specific 9 title, but the function was a responsibility of the 10 research department. 11 0. Particularly with respect to the die cast 12 industry, was there anybody in the research department 13 specifically who was charged with the responsibility of 14 knowing how Monsanto's products were being applied in the 15 die cast industry? 16 A. Perhaps we have a different understanding of 17 the term "application and research." 18 Q. Why don't you tell me what you understand 19 that term to mean. 20 A. This is the research that's conducted to find 21 new uses of Monsanto old products or proposed new 22 products. That's what I call applications research. It's 23 not a market research of where are these products used, 24 and what kind of industries and what kinds of machines, 25 and what is the experience regarding that. That's a PERRY REPORTING SERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000019080 -- Computer Aided Transcriptiori~5y XscrTbe IDIT 1 marketing function. 2 Q. Okay. Was there someone then in marketing 3 who was charged with the responsibility to go see what the 4 customers were doing with the product and find out if 5 there's ways Monsanto oould improve its product or 6 marketing to better serve them? T A. There were individuals assigned in the 8 marketing department that fulfilled that role, yes. 9 Q. Okay. Prior to 1969, would you know who any 10 of those individuals would have been? 11 A. Prior to 1969, no, I do not. 12 Q. At any time would you know who would have 13 been involved in that? 14 A. . For which product? 15 Q. For the hydraulic fluids. 16 A. Hydraulic fluids. Well, I remember a Roger 17 Hatton, a Larry Bradford. Those are two individuals I 10 recall involved with that kind of activity. 19 Q. Do you know where Mr. Hatton is today? 20 A. The last I heard, he's still working for 21 Monsanto. 22 Q. Is Mr. Bradford also working for Monsanto? 23 A. No. Mr. Bradford left Monsanto in the '70s, 24 late 70's, as I recall. I don't know where he is. 25 Q. Okay. In the late '60s, you were approached -------------------------------------PKKKY REPORTING SERVICE------------------------------------ WATER PCB-SD0000019081 Computer Aided Transcription by Xscrloe 209 1 by -- I'a going to say Bergen, Howard Bergen, in 2 connection with a request that you assume some 3 responsibilities with respect to the PCB question that was 4 being raised at that tiae. Is that air to say? 5 A, Tes. 8 Q. Z triad not to use any charge teras in that s description* fasentially, Mr. Bergen asked you if you 8 were interested in a new job relating to the broader PCB 9 question; is that correct? 10 A. Yes, sir. 11 Q. And at that time you were at Anniston? 12 A. Yes. 13 Q. And you accepted that job; is that correct? 14 A. Yes. 15 Q. And you commenced work as of January 1, 1970? 16 A. Yes. 17 Q. What did youunderstand your new duties to be 18 at that time, generally? 19 A* Well, in siaple words, I was to kind of keep 20 as inforaed as I could be of the situation with a fast 21 aoving kind of scenario with lnforaatlon coming from nany 22 many sources, and act as a focal point where this 23 lnforaatlon would be gathered and dlsseainated, both 24 within Monsanto and externally, and to make sure that 25 there was some consistency as to the way this information PERRY REPORTING SERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000019082 Computer Aided Transcript!on-by XscrTbe 21U 1 was conveyed. That's my perception of the assignment. 2 Q. Okay. Obviously part of your qualifications 3 for that job was your experience at the Queeny plant as 4 well as the Anniston plant. Were there any other 5 qualifications which Mr. Bergen felt suited you for that task? 7 A. Of eourser Z can't presume to speak for what 8 Mr. Bergen was thinking* but as I recall* the interview 9 with Mr. Bergen* he felt that my experience* not only with 10 the chemicals themselves, but also dealing with many kinds 11 of functions* research* manufacturing* and personnel and 12 the whole spectrum* would be invaluable* and I'd have a 13 better feel for where others might be coming from 14 regarding this issue; and I guess he felt that I had 15 enough experience behind me that my audience would listen 16 better. This is all speculative. I don't know really 17 what went on in Mr. Bergen's mind. 18 Q. Old you understand part of your new function 19 to be a public relations kind of function? 20 A. Well* that was certainly a part of it* but I 21 had a public relations person* Monsanto public relations 22 person* helping me. So* that was a resource that I could 23 use as well as the researchers and so on. 24 Q. Who was the public relations man that was 25 working with you again? PERRY "REPORTIHti SERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000019083 Computer Aided Transcription oy xscnoe 211 1 A. There were several through the years. The 2 initial one was Hr. Ed John. 3 Q. Bad you had any prior experience dealing with 4 the press or with any governmental agencies prior to 5 January# 1970? 6 A. Well# as plant aanager# yes# I had experience 7 with the press# the local press# local town newspaper# and 8 the reporters and the editor and the like. You also asked 9 about governmental agencies. Again# as plant manager# I 10 had experience with the State o Alabama and the 11 regulatory agencies in the state# and I also had some 12 exposure and experience with the legislature in Alabama. 13 That was all perceived to be a good background for the 14 kinds of things that they thought I would get involved in. 15 Q. As far as your involvement with the Alabama 16 Legislature# were you involved in any discussions on any 17 particular legislation that was going to affect Monsanto's 18 practices there? 19 A. Yes. Certainly I don't recall specifics# but 20 I know there were tax matters. There were water pollution 21 control matters. None of these were specific to Monsanto. 22 They were statewide. I don't recall all the others. 23 There were many activities that go on in the 8tate 24 Legislature that would affect business# and I was involved 25 in that. PERRY REPORTING SERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000019084 Cenpuc Aiuttu xtanactApuxou u* aocuue 212 1 Q. As one component of your new job, you 2 undertook to find out everything Monsanto knew about its 3 PCB-containing products to the best- you could? 4 A. Y68 5 Q. Did part of that also involve finding out C what Monsanto knew about how its products were being used '7 by consumers? 8 A. Yes. ' 9 Q. Now, as part of your review of that 10 information, did you determine whether Monsanto had any 11 understanding of how its products were being used by the 12 die cast industry? 13 A. I believe I had an understanding. How 14 correct that was, I have no way to measure. 15 Q. Okay. And what was your understanding of the 16 die caster's use of Monsanto products? 17 A. I don't quite know where to start. 18 Q. Primarily they used the hydraulic fluids. 19 Would that be fair to say? 20 A. They used the hydraulic fluids in the 21 operation. I had an understanding that many times there 22 were document complaints about the high cost. It costs 23 more than the competitive material. I had an 24 understanding that the reason the fire resistance is 25 important is because there are breaks in the system -------------------------------------tftR'RY RERyftT IMS'"SERVICE------------------------------ WATER PCB-SD0000019085 Computer XIaed Transcription by xscribe 2I^T 1 creating a spray of liquid on hot, molten metal that would 2 Ignite. 3 I also had an understanding that cooling vater is 4 used in these systems. There is an opportunity for vater 5 and the fluid to mix, and I also had an understanding that 6 that didn't necessarily daaage that fluid. Xt could be t recovered. 8oae of the custoaers were recovering it. 8 Some felt they needed some help, and Monsanto was able to, 9 as I recall, mention a few small chemical companies that 10 were in this business o reprocessing fluid. 11 As to the degree of care in handling the material, 12 it was fairly typical. The majority of them did a real 13 good job. There was always a few bright stars that 14 supercleaned, and then there were always a few at the 15 other end that they either don't understand or just don't 16 have the resources to do what's right, and they are the 17 worrisome type in terms of proper handling of the material 18 and exposing their workers and exposing the communities. 19 I did hear of a few of those that Monsanto people were 20 working with to see if they could improve their situation. 21 I don't know if that helps any, but that's ay general 22 understanding. And these, of course, range from the super 23 big companies, world class. General Motors and so on, down 24 to the mom and pop shop in the back alley somewhere. 25 Q. Do you have any idea to what degree die PERRY REPORTING SERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000019086 mueu i(avCiptxoa oy Aocrxoe XX4 1 casters were reclaiming Monsanto fluids in their die cast 2 operation? Has that a widespread practice or not? 3 A* It was widespread, but as to the degree, I 4 don't know how to measure that. X don't recall any 5 numbers given to me. Z just don't know. 6 Q. With respect to the die eastern, the 7 troublesome ones you referred to, you stated that Monsanto 8 was trying to help them with their practices, in what way 9 did Monsanto help some of these customers? 10 A. Hell, I don't have a specific case in mind, 11 but in general, the way it would be done is our field 12 sales representative would be the principal contact, would 13 go to them and discuss with them why he might be ordering 14 a little bit more of the replacement material. "Do you 15 need some help with recovery? As an example, here's a 16 brochure. Here's a sketch. Here's the kind of thing you 17 do, and it won't cost you much. All you need is a steel 13 dr un here." And this is the scenario that I'm describing 19 here. 20 Depending on the customer's reaction to this offer 21 to help, we can go further, or if he discourages us, there 22 is an awful lot you can do, because Monsanto in the first 23 place was not trying to be an all purpose consulting 24 engineering company. They were just talking about its 25 product and what we knew about its product, rather than -----------------------------------PBHKX HEPORT IWC"SERVICE------------------------------ - WATER PCB-SD0000019087 - Computer Aided Transcription by Xscrine 215 1 try to tell them hov to design his shop, his facility. 2 If the salesnen couldn't handle a technical 3 problem, he could go back to this technical person in the 4 marketing department, like the Roger Hattons and the Larry 5 Bradfords, and if they couldn't cope with it, they in turn could go either to Monsanto's research department or Monsanto's engineering department and get some ideas and 8 feed it back to the field salesman* Zt was at times they 9 would have a Larry Bradford or a Roger Hatton or Mr. 10 Engineer to go to that site along with the salesman 11 together, sit down and talk. This was not beyond the -- 12 this was not beyond reality at all. 13 Q. Okay. With respect again now to the case you 14 referred to as troublesome, do you have any knowledge -- 15 A. Did I use the word "troublesome"? I meant 16 worrisome. 17 Q. Okay. Worrisome. Anyway, in this category 18 of die caster8, do you have any knowledge of anyone from 19 Monsanto aver going into one of these plants and saying, 20 "Mot just that we can help you save money by reclaiming 21 some of these fluids that are laying around here, but that 22 you've got a messy plant here, and you better do something 23 about it, because it's getting out the door or it's 24 harmful to your workers"? 25 A. Yeah. With my many conversations with many PERRY REPORTING HHRVttE WATER PCB-SD0000019088 n^ueu iiauoi>i^|<Lxwu Aawl xue iiO 1 representatives of Monsanto, yes, this kind of discussion 2 did take place. 3 0. Have you ever seen any documents relating to 4 that? 5 A. I have a vague recollection of seeing -- 6 you're talking about docuaents, seeing a document which .* was a letter Dr, Kelly wrote to a hydraulic fluids user e prompted by a sales representative's request. "Dr. Kelly, 9 would you write to this customer?" I don't recall the 10 specifics, but I do recall that type of letter. I've seen 11 it in the past five years or so. 12 Q. Do you remember who that user was? 13 A. No, I don't. I don't remember the specifics, 14 but -- 15 Q. And what was the general tenor of the letter? 16 A. The general tenor was -- these are not the 17 exact words -- something to the effect that, "As a medical 18 director of the company, I was approached by Mr. So and 19 So, who suggested that I write you something about the 20 health affects of these materials and how they should be 21 handled. I'm sure you know this, but" -- you know how a 22 letter can flow, that kind of thing, and then go on to say 23 you shouldn't breathe it. You shouldn't eat it. You've 24 got to wash it off your clothes, the very things that 25 appear on the label. Don't breathe it. Don't get it on -----------------------------------PERRY REPORTING SERVICE---------------------------------- WATER PCB-SD0000019089 compucer Aid#a Transcription"by Xscribe TFT 1 your skin, and so on. You would just reemphasize. And 2 this was done not only for this product, but any product, 3 as a sort of an emphasis, like underlining a word to 4 highlight. These are the things you should do, 5 Q. Do you remember what the time frame was as far as that letter goes? A, Let me think a bit, X*m going to say the 8 '60s, I don't recall any closer than that, 9 Q. He discussed yesterday that one of the 10 products of the PCBs is that in water the PCBs will 11 separate from the water; is that correct? 12 A. Yes. 13 Q. And they would be heavier than water and Bink 14 to the bottom of a container containing both. Is that 15 fair to say? -- ........... 16 A. Yes. 17 Q. Okay. Do you haveany knowledge as to 18 whether the phosphate ester fluids which would be marketed 19 during the '60s also had this property? 20 A. The mixtures were heavier than water, yes. 21 Q. Okay,Has Monsanto's 312-C also heavier than 22 water? 23 A, As best I recall, yeah. As I recall, yes, 24 they were. 25 Q. Okay, For a good period of time before the PERRY REPORTING SERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000019090 Computer Aided Transcription by xscribe 218 1 advent of PCBs, mineral oils were also used in hydraulic 2 applications; is that correct? 3 A. That's my understanding. 4 Q. Do you have any knowledge as to whether those 5 were heavier or lighter than water? 6 A. Oh, they're lighter. T Q. Okay* Bov about the water glycols being used fi in the '60s, to your knowledge? 9 A. Tea. 10 Q. Do you have any information as to whether 11 they were heavier or lighter than water? 12 A. They are soluble with water, so they would 13 mix. It's the same material in your automobile cooling 14 system, antifreeze. 15 Q. Are you aware of any information -- and again 16 now, I'm going to jump through a few categories of things 17 here. Are you aware of any information that would suggest 18 or anyone who has suggested that Monsanto and Industrial 19 Bio Test ever agreed in any way to fabricate results o 20 tests, testing done by that laboratory? 21 A. Bo, I'm not. 22 Q. Okay. To yourknowledge, did Monsanto have 23 any ownership Interest in Industrial Bio Test? 24 A. Mo. 25 Q. Is the Queenyplant still inoperation? ----------------------------------- PERRY-IMPORTING SEWTCE-------------------------- ---" WATER PCB-SD0000019091 Computer Aided Transcription &y~Xscribe YI3T" 1 A. Yes. 2 Q. What do they produce there? 3 A. They produce an ingredient that goes in weed 4 killer* 5 Q What ia that ingredient? 6 A. Oh, Z forget the chemical* It's the one that 7 appears in Monsanto's Lasso, an agricultural product. 8 Q. Okay. 9 A. They produce some phosphateesters. I'm 10 hesitating because they have shut down so many units here 11 in the past couple years. Aspirin, there's a big aspirin 12 unit at that plant. They produce a baceteriostat, TCC, we 13 mentioned yesterday. I believe they still produce methyl 14 salicylate. That's all I can recall at the moment. 15 Q. Do you know what the area that formerly had 16 been used for PCB production is presently being used for? 17 MR. SCHIHK: At Queeny? 18 Q. You mean the blending. 19 Q. (BY MR. PENDBRGAST) Blending. I'm sorry. 20 A. On the blending operation -- I'm sorry, what 21 it's being used for? 22 Q. Right. 23 A. Oh, it's used now to drum the phosphate 24 esters. And they still make Pydrauls. They still use the 25 facility for that. PERRY REPORTING SERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000019092 computer Aiaea Transcription by xscrrbe ....... 220 1 MR* SCHINKi Are you saying today they do 2 that, or that was what they were doing at the time you 3 left the company, or do you know? 4 THE WITNESS! Both. 5 MR. SCHINKi Okay. 6 0. (BY MR. PENDBRGAST) Youalso worked at the 7 Krumarich plant? 8 A. Tea. 9 Q. At Krummrich theyactuallymanufactured PCBs; 10 is that correct? 11 A. They did manufacture, yes. 12 Q. Do you know what the manufacturing area is 13 presently being used for? 14 A. It's leveled off and covered with crushed 15 rock. 16 Q. Is there anything going on at that plant now? 17 A. At the plant? 18 Q. Right. 19 A. Yes. 20 Q. What's being done there now? 21 A. They still make nitrol chlorobensenes. They 22 make phosphorus trichloride, phosphorus oxychloride, 23 hydrochloric acid. I believe they are still asking 24 chlorine and caustic soda. They sake many rubber 25 chemicals. These are cheaicals added to rubber items. ---------------------------------- PERRY REPl)KTlHU"~BERVTl'b'---------------------------------- WATER PCB-SD0000019093 computer Mdto Transcriptxon oy Xscrloe Y2X 1 They make phosphorus pentasulphide. There must be more. 2 I just can't remember them. 3 Q. Was Krummrich an outdoor production facility 4 for PCBs? 5 A. Tea. 6 Q. Save the PCBs ever been removed from that * site? 8 A. Youmean a totalcleanup? 9 Q. Right. 10 A. No. It*s my understanding they did clean up 11 down to a predetermined level three or four feet, and then 12 backfilled, and that's the extent of the cleanup. 13 Q. Okay. Was Monsanto ordered to do that? 14 A. No. 15 Q. Howabout Anniston? That was a production 16 facility? 17 A. Yes. 18 Q. And what is presently being done in that 19 manufacturing araa? 20 A. That's nothing. It's leveled off, graded, 21 backfilled. Grass is growing on it. 22 Q. Okay. Do you have any idea what the PCB 23 content in the soil at the Krummrich plant was before the 24 excavation? 25 A. No. No one ever told me. PERRY REPORTING SERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000019094 computer Aided Transcription by Xscribe 12* 1 Q. Okay. How about Anniston? Did you say that 2 was -- I think you said yesterday it was approaching one 3 percent in the area around the production facility? 4 A. In some oily spots, yes. 5 Q. Okay. 6 A. Visibly you oould see it. 1 Q. Zs anything being done atAnniston now? Is 8 there any production of any kind? 9 A. Yes. 10 Q. Okay. When was the cleanup of the Krummrich 11 plant done? 12 A. It started in late '77, and was completed in 13 1973. 14 Q. How about Anniston? 15 A. Anniston, I believe they completed it, as I 16 remember, about 1972. 17 Q. At the Queeny plant was there any actual 18 excavation around the property? 19 A. No. 20 Q. Okay. The Machines were just cleaned? 21 A. Yes. I don't want to mislead you. The 22 Queeny plant was an Indoor facility, except for the big 23 tanks that were outside, but the material was brought in 24 and blended and packaged indoors. There was no 25 opportunity for aaterial to spill on the ground, so to PERRY REPORTING..SERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000019095 Computer Aided 'Transcription~by"Xscrioe TZ3 1 speak. 2 Q. Okay. Nonetheless, all the production 3 machinery had to be cleaned for the application to the 4 phosphate ester products? 5 A. Yes. 6 Q. And we discussed that yesterday? 7 A. Yes. 8 Q. Okay. Do you remember what year that was 9 done? 10 A. Well, it was done when the transition was 11 made. I would say early 1971, it was completed, or middle 12 of 1971. 13 Q. Did Monsanto have any other production 14 facilities other than Krummrich and Anniston? 15 A. Yes; in the United Kingdom. 16 Q. Okay. Any others in the United States? 17 A. No. 18 Q. To your knowledge, where was the plant in the 19 United Kingdom located? 20 A. It was at Newport, Wales. 21 Q. Is that plant still in operation? 22 A. No. 23 Q. Is there any production being done there at 24 all of anything? 25 A. At Newport? PERRY REPORTING SERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000019096 Computer Aided Transcription by Ascribe 224 1 Q. Yes. 2 A. Yes. 3 Q. When was theNewport plant shut down for 4 PCBs? 5 A* Z wasn't directly involved when it happened. 6 At about the time the Krummrich plant was shutting down, 7 they were shutting down. 8 Q. Do you have any understanding of whether PCBs 9 have been regulated or banned in the United Kingdom? 10 A. I have not heard that they were officially 11 banned and regulated. I just don't know where that stands 12 today. 13 Q. Have you been involved in any litigation 1A involving PCBs outside the United States? 15 A. No. 16 Q. Are you aware ofany? 17 A. No. 18 Q. As part of our discussion yesterday, we were 19 discussing different governmental agencies which you had 20 been in contact with as well as other organisations. 21 Off the record. 22 (Discussion held off the record.) 23 Q. (BY UK. PENDBRGAST) All right. I guess I'm 24 looking at my notes now again. We were discussing Exhibit 25 No. 1, which was the management plan you recall, and part --------------------------------- PERRY "REPORTING SERVICE-------------------------- -- WATER PCB-SD0000019097 Computer Aided Transcription-^y xscriDe 1 of the plan was for you to contact various governmental j 2 bodies and act as a liaison of sorts with them; is that 3 correct? 4 A. That was part of ay assignment, but not 5 Halted just to me. Other Monsanto people were expected to help as appropriate. 7 Q. All right. Two of the governmental bodies 8 that you spoke of were the State of Michigan and the 9 Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources. Do you recall 10 that? 11 A. Yes. 12 Q. Were there any other state bodies that you 13 initially cane in contact with? . 14 A. The Ohio Department of Agriculture. I had 15 just one encounter with a representative of Georgia, and I 16 think it was the State Department of Agriculture, the 17 dairy branch of the Georgia state system. That's all that 18 comes to mind at the moment. 19 Q. Mas there -- how was your contact with the 20 Wisconsin DNR initiated? Let me strike that. Of the 50 21 states, was there any reason that Wisconsin and Michigan ; 22 were one of your contacts? Was that initiated by you, or 23 was that precipitated by some event? 24 A. As I understood it, the Interest really was 25 centered around the Great Lajies and the presence of PCBs PERRY REPORTING SERVICE --I WATER PCB-SD0000019098 Computer Aided Transcription by Xscribe 22T 1 in some fish that were taken in that area, and the concern 2 of the fate of the recently stocked coho salmon, and how 3 that might affect the coho salmon. All of that stimulated 4 the states around the Great Lakes, and it seemed to center 5 in the university area, Lansing and Madison, where apparently the technical people were located and, also, 7 the governmental agencies were located. 8 Q. Did you initiate the contact with the 9 Wisconsin DNR? 10 A. Mo. I wasn't even aware of who it would be. 11 I don't recall how that was. Somebody from their office 12 called Monsanto looking for a contact, and my name was 13 given. 14 Q. I guess now we are going to get back into the 15 less entertaining aspects of the deposition. I'm going to 16 show you what's been marked as Exhibit No. 4, and that is 17 a -- I guess it's entitled "Pollution Letter," and it's 18 from K. T. Johnson to a number of people. Have you ever 19 seen that before? 20 A. Yes. This is one of the letters that Mr. 21 Schink showed me the other day. 2? Q. Okay. Were you at all involved in the 23 formulation of that letter? 24 A. I couldn't recall ever seeing this letter 25 before the other day. -----------------------------------PERRY REPORTING 'SERVICE---------------------------------- WATER PCB-SD0000019099 Computer Aided Transcription oy Xscnoe TTT 1 Q. Okay. 2 MR. SCHINKx By that letter/ you're referring 3 to the first two pages of this document -- 4 THE WITNESS< Yes. 5 MR. SCBINKt ~ or are you referring to the entire document? 1 MR. PBNDERGASTx No, just the first two 8 pages. 9 MR. SCHINKx All right. 10 Q. (BY MR. PENDERGAST) The second paragraph, 11 first sentence, reads, "We want to avoid any situation 12 where a customer wants to return fluid." Did I read that 13 correctly? . 14 A. Yes, you have. 15 Q. Okay. Do you recall any discussions at 16 Monsanto as to why or why not Monsanto would want any of 17 its customers to return PCB-containing fluids? 18 MR. 8CHINKt You're referring specifically to 19 the fluids that that document references, or are you 20 referring to other fluids? 21 HR. PENDERGASTi Any fluids. 22 A. Well, the intent was to accept fluid that was 23 perceived to be a potential problem, and back in early 24 1970, that seemed to center around 1254 and 1260. So your 25 question did Monsanto refuse to accept any fluid, that's PERRY REPORTING SERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000019100 Computer Aided Transcription by Xscribe 1 not quite -- that's not correct. It was a selective 2 return of material, 3 Q. (BY MR. PENDERGAST) Okay. Nov, you're 4 saying at that time or the time this letter was sent out, 5 Monsanto was willing to accept 1254 and 1260, because those were perceived to be the problem fluids? J A, Yes, We did take some back, as I remember, 8 not limited to hydraulic fluids, 9 Q. Okay, You do not recall then any discussions 10 as to why Monsanto would not want to accept the return of 11 any 1254 or 1260? 12 A. Ho, I don't recall any such discussion. 13 Q. And, in fact, it was your belief that the 14 idea was those were the fluids, at least initially, that 15 you would want to help the customers out with and take 16 back; is that correct? 17 A. If he had a problem with them, yes. 18 Q. Okay. 19 A. But if he had good control, kept them in his 20 system when he had to dispose of them and did it properly, 21 there was no need to take it back. 22 Q. Okay, Then under what circumstances did you 23 perceive that the users would be returning these higher 24 numbered Aroclors? 25 A. This is a personal opinion. It would have to -----------------------------------PERRY REPORTING-SERVICE---------------------------- ------ WATER PCB-SD0000019101 l^mputer Aidea Transcription by xscribe T79 1 be someone who emotionally couldn't cope with that drum of 2 material in the corner of his building, I don't know what 3 other reason he might have. 4 Q. Do you have any idea why Monsanto, as of 5 February 16, 1970, would be Instructing its distributors C not to take back any of these fluids? * A. Z do not, 8 Q, Zn late 1969 and early 1970, was there anyone 9 at Monsanto who felt that telling the ultimate users of 10 the PCB-containing products everything Monsanto knew about 11 then might cause hysteria or panic in the users such that 12 they would discontinue purchasing products from Monsanto? 13 A. Well, that was a recognized business risk, 14 but it had to be taken. Yes, that was discussed. 15 Q. And I think we talked briefly yesterday that 16 there were those at Monsanto who felt the customers and 17 the public and the Government should be told less than you 18 wanted to tell them, but that those disputes were resolved 19 in a friendly manner between those Involved? 20 A, True, I don't want to give the impression 21 there were many. That's the minority, as in any group. 22 Q, Okay, People were throwing out ideas, "I 23 think it should be done this way. Z think it should be 24 done this way," and the divergent views eventually came 25 around to what you felt was the reasoned view? PERRY REPORTING SERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000019102 Computer Aidsa Transcription by Xscnoe T3T1 1 A. That's true. Keep in Bind the individuals 2 who felt this way in virtually every case were people who 3 had spent 20, 30 years with the material, and suddenly 4 they were faced with information that they hadn't heard 5 before* hadn't realised. They found it hard to believe, C hard to accept, 0, Was there anybody involved in the discussions B particularly pertaining to what inforaation should be 9 conveyed to the customers and users who felt the changes 10 in the labels or the letters sent were not sufficient to 11 let the customers and users know what was going on? 12 A. I don't recall any such belief, although in 13 every case if a customer wanted more information, it was 14 well known, that Monsanto resources would be available. As 15 an example, if a customer's physician wanted to talk to 16 another physician, Monsanto's Dr. Kelly was available. We 17 didn't want the physician to be forced to talk to a 18 salesman who didn't understand medical problems. This was 19 true of chemist to chemist. Analytical chemist to 20 analytical chemist, engineer to engineer. That was always 21 available. So, the wording in brochures and labels was 22 designed in such a way that the layman would understand it 23 and respect the chemical and treat it properly, but if 24 more information was needed, certainly we would get it. I 25 would never put on a doctor's hat. For example, if I were -----------------------------------PERET REPDRTIHG SERVICE---------------------------------- WATER PCB-SD0000019103 ^bmputer Aided transcription ny Ascribe 2T3T 1 talking to a physician, I would say, "I'll have Dr. Kelly 2 call you right back," and that's the way we tried to 3 handle it. 4 Q. All right. How was it convoyed to the 5 customers that Monsanto was willing to address these 6 concerns or questions and that the Monsanto professionals t were available to discuss any probleas to the customer? 8 A. To the salesmen. 9 Q. And the salesmen were charged with the duty 10 of conveying that information out to users and customers? 11 Ai Yes. 12 Q. To your knowledge, is there anytraining 13 program for salesmen, any basic -- 14 A. Sure, there is. 15 Q. Okay. Do you know who was in charge of that? 16 A. I don't remember their names. There were 17 several individuals through the years. About every four 18 or five years a new person would take over, but there was 19 sales training of the classroom type, and then there's the 20 field type where he pairs off and is coached by an 21 experienced person, and then he's given his own district 22 or area. 23 Q. Do you know whothe present custodian of any 24 training materials might be for the salesmen in the 25 hydraulic fluid area? PERRY REPORTING SERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000019104 Computer Aided TranscrTption~by XscrTbe 232 1 A. Ho, I don't. 2 Q. Okay. Do you know o anyone who would know 3 who keeps those records now? 4 A. I don't. 5 Q. Who would have been in charge of training of 6 saresaen of the hydraulic fluid area in 1970? A. Z just don't reaeaber his naae. This 8 training individual was not specific to ay department. He 9 would set up the courses and invite the proper people to 10 act as instructors. 11 Q. If you don't remember the individual's name, 12 do you know who his immediate supervisor would have been 13 then? 14 A. No, I don't. 15 Q. Taking a look at page 2 of Exhibit No. 4, 16 second to last paragraph, the first sentence reads, 'We 17 can't afford to lose one dollar of business." Did I read 18 that correctly? 19 A. Tes, you did. 20 Q. Was there a concern in early 1970, late 1969, 21 that the information that was coming out about the PCBs 22 was going to cause Monsanto a substantial loss in 23 revenues? 24 A. There was a concern that it might cause, yes. 25 Q. Was there any effort made in late 1969 or -----------------------------------MRR7 MPOrTXNC SrV1---------------------------------- WATER PCB-SD0000019105 Computer XTded Transcription by Xscribe TT5 1 early 1970, to boost production of PCBs? 2 A. Not to my knowledge, no. 3 Q. Was there any suggestion Bade by anyone that 4 the production of PCBs at that early date should be 5 curtailed? A. In '<9 and *70, there was a growing consensus 7 that eurtailaent was a viable option and could come about 8 fairly quickly. So, that thought was being considered 9 very seriously. 10 Q. Were there any proponents in early 1970 of 11 boosting production? 12 A. No, not to my knowledge. 13 Q. Turning to page 3 of Exhibit 4, memo dated 14 February 6, 1970, from J. R. Fallon to a number of 15 individuals. Have you ever seen that document before? 16 A. I saw it the other day for the first time. 17 Q. Okay. The first paragraph refers to 18 inquiries from heat transfer customers? 19 A. Tea. 20 Q. Does that include purchasers of hydraulic 21 fluid? 22 A. Zt could. A customer may buy the two 23 different products for their different machinery, but they 24 are not necessarily the same. 25 Q. You then had no input as to what should be PERRY REPORTING SERVICE ' WATER PCB-SD0000019106 . - ' Computer Aided Transcription-^ xacrTbe "23T" 1 contained in this letter? 2 A. That is correct. 3 MR. SCHINKi Which letter are you referring 4 to? 5 Q. (BY MR. PENDBRGAST) I'm sorry, in this nemo, ( February , 1970. Faragraph number 4, or the. fourth -7 paragraph, I should say. In the indented portion begins 8 with the words, aWe recognise it will be impossible to 9 obtain names of individuals at each customer location." 10 It continues, "The use of the a/R customer list was the 11 best list available. We realize most of your contacts 12 will not receive the letter. This is both good and bad. 13 Can you tell me what the a/R customer list is? 14 A. Accounts receivable. 15 Q. Okay. Do you rememberany concern in early 16 1970 -- strike that. Prior to your meeting with Mr. 17 Schink, you had no knowledge of this February 6, 1970 18 memo; is that correct? 19 A. That is correct. 20 Q. Did you have any knowledge,without knowing 21 of the existence of the memo itself, of the contact by Hr. 22 Johnson with the field representatives on this topic? 23 MR. BCHINXi On the topic of heat transfer 24 customer notification? 25 Q. (BY MR. PENDBRGAST) Right. That is, have -----------------------------------PERRY "TIE PORTING SERVICE---------------------------- ----- WATER PCB-SD0000019107 Computer Aided transcription by Xscribe 2T5 1 you road the Pebruary 6# 1978 nemo? 2 A. Tea. Tea, 3 Q. Okay. Here you aware of the general contents 4 of that peso without having actually seen the peso prior 5 to your seeting with Mr. Schink? 6 A. Tea. Q. Old you have any knowledge of the use of the 8 accounts receivable customer list as the basis for the 9 notification of prior customers? 10 MR. SCHINKt Wait a minute. I object to the 11 form of the question, unless you clarify notification of 12 whom. 13 Q. (BY MR. PENDERGAST) Okay. This memo 14 references the process by which heat transfer customers 15 would be advised of developments in the -- 16 MR. SCHINKt Not Pydraul customers now. We 17 are talking about a different subject, a different product 10 unrelated to this lawsuit. Okay. 19 Q. (BY MR. FBNDSRGAST) Hell, let ae ask this 20 question. As far as the heat transfer customers are 21 concerned, did that not include Pydrauls? 22 A. Ho. that's a different aarketing group. 23 Q. Okay. Mow, going down to paragraph 4 of the 24 indented portion, were you aware of any discussions 25 concerning the use of the accounts receivable customer PBRRY REPORTING SERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000019108 computer Aidd~Trinscription by Xscribe 236 1 list to notify these heat transfer customers? 2 A. Yes. 3 Q. Okay. Were you also aware that it was at 4 least believed by Mr. Fallon that this was not the best 5 list available for contacting all of the heat transfer 4 customers? ? MX. SCBZNKt Well, I object to the form of 8 the question. Zt says the use of this list was the best 9 list available. 10 MR. PENDERGASTt Oh, I'm sorry. 11 MR. SCHINK: You misread it. 12 MR. PENDERGAST: I misread it. 13 Were you aware of Mr. Fallon's sentiment that most 14 of the sales people's contacts would not receive copies of 15 the letter if the accounts receivable list was used? 16 MR. SCHINK] This is now again with respect 17 to heat transfer customers, not Pydraul customers? 18 MR. PENDERGASTt Correct. 19 MR. 8CHINK t Okay. 20 A. Let me try to help. 21 Q. (BY MR. PENDERGAST) Please do. 22 A. Beat transfer customers in general are 23 represented by two types. One is the user of this heat 24 transfer fluid in his equipment, who purchased that 25 material from Monsanto under his name. Company "X" at -----------------------------------PERKY REPORTING SERVICE--------------------------------- WATER PCB-SD0000019109 Coaputer Aided Transcription by Xscrlbe 237 1 this address wants so many barrels of this material 2 shipped to this address. It could be the same. It could 3 be another. 4 There's another type of customer# was really an 5 engineering construction kind of company# that is going to 6 Install the unit at Company X." That material was 7 purchased by Engineer A# and our list shows him as the 8 customer# whereas the material really ends up at Company 9 X." That's what Mr. Fallon was trying to point out as a 10 weakness in our system# but it was hoped that Engineer A# 11 when he gets that letter# would go to Company *C" and say# 12 "Hey, read this." 13 Q. Did anyone perceive there to be a similar 14 problem with the Pydraul customers? 15 A. That was discussed# but it was concluded that 16 most fluids in machines that use hydraulic fluids were 17 shipped to the site# and the functional fluids group used 18 the three lists# the accounts receivable# bill to# and 19 ship to. They had three different lists that they looked 20 at. 21 Q. It was felt with respect to the hydraulic 22 fluid customers then you had a higher probability of 23 getting the letter to the Intended parties? 24 A. That's what the managers of that business 25 felt# yes# and theyhad a longer list of customers. PERRY REPORTING 8ERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000019110 computer Aided Transcript!onHby XscrTbe 238 1 Q. Okay. 2 A. More of them. 3 Q. Who was involved in that, those discussions 4 in that analysis? 5 A. It would bethe market managers. I was involved. Nr. Bergen, who was the business director, was 7 tuned in. Be oouldn*t attend all of these discussions. 8 And, of course, they called in individuals who managed the 9 accounts receivable department and so on to see what their 10 records were like tohelp the discussion. 11 Q. Turn to the page that is identified as STR 12 002115, entitled "Polychlorinated Biphenyls, Control of 13 Escape to the Environment." Do you know who drafted this 14 document? 15 A. This was drafted by at that time Mr. Ed John, 16 taking input from several people. I was one of those that 17 he talked to. 18 Q. On the last page of Exhibit 4, paragraph 19 number 2, which refers to action taken by Monsanto in the 20 area of industrial usage, "Phased out the PCB*8 as 21 components of Industrial and hydraulic fluids where 22 control of spillage and collection of spent material is 23 not possible." Did I read that correctly? 24 A. Yes, you did. 25 Q. Was it the consensus at Monsanto at the time -----------------------------------PERRY KBPUKT1NU SERVICE---------------------------------- WATER PCB-SD0000019111 wopuc<* AiusQ Transcription oy Xscribe ~TTST 1 this document was written? 2 HR. SCHINKi Well, now wait. I don't think 3 you've established when that document was written. 4 Q. (BY MR. PENDBRGAST) Well, do you have any 5 idea when this document was produced? A. Yes. That would happen ebout before 7 mid-1970. 8 HR. SCHINKi But it was not at the time of 9 these other documents? 10 THE WITNESS< It was after the previous, yes. 11 Q. (BY HR. PENDERGAST) And this is indicating 12 that PCB use in hydraulic fluid had been phased out of 13 Monsanto's production? 14 MR. SCHINK: Well, that's not what it says. 15 It says that Monsanto is there for taking the following 16 actions. It doesn't say necessarily -- 17 A. It was under way. The phase-out of the 18 hydraulic fluids was under way when this document was 19 prepared, and the statement you just read was really a 20 goal, an intended goal. And the total phase-out of PCBs 21 in hydraulic fluids went even a step further than the 22 statement would imply. We removed all PCBs from hydraulic 23 fluids irrespective of whether control of spillage or 24 collection of material is not possible. 25 Q. Okay. Does the paragraph number 2 represent PERRY REPORTING SERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000019112 compucer Aiaea Transcription oy racrioe 24.0 1 a thinking and opinion o Monsanto at the time that 2 document was written? . 3 A Yefl. 4 Q. Okay. Let me hand you what's been marked as 5 Exhibit No. 5. Do you know who drafted this document? 4 A. Mo, 2 don't. ? Q. Have you ever seen it before? 8 A. Ho. Z don'tremember. 9 Q. On page 2, under "General Strategy," the 10 first sentence, a statement is made, "We will maintain our 11 present customers by exploiting to the fullest our 12 recognized technical leadership in the field of synthetic 13 fire resistant fluids and by contract proposals at large 14 accounts tieing in the new fluid purchases with disposal 15 of PCB and PCT containing fluids." Did I read that 16 statement correctly? 17 A. You did. 18 Q. Whoat Monsanto was responsible for that 19 strategy? 20 A. Ultimately, it would have been Mr. Howard 21 Bergen. 22 Q. And was it the thought that Monsanto could 23 retain a large share of its market by tying in an 24 agreement to dispose of PCB and PCT-containing fluids with 25 those customers' purchase of the new phosphate ester PERRY REPORTING SERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000019113 Computer Aided Transcription~by xscrlW TIT 1 fluid? 2 A. That's what the sentence indicates, yes. 3 Q. Was that, in fact, the strategy of Monsanto 4 for 1972? 5 A. I understood that, yes. Q. Okay. When did Monsanto discontinue t"7 aanufacturing Pydrauls that contained PCBs? 8. A. Z believe they finally discontinued in about 9 after the first quarter of 1971. 10 Q. Was Monsanto convinced at that point that 11 further production of PCB-containing Pydrauls presented an 12 unreasonable risk of adverse ecological effect? 13 A. Yes. And the unreasonable risk consensus was 14 reached after it was determined that the phosphate esters 15 proposed for these fluids at the alternate material were 16 acceptable to the customer. Once that was known and they 17 were acceptable in spite of some shortcomings, once that 18 was known, then there was no good basis for continuing to 19 use PCBs. 20 Q. Okay. Was it also the consensus as of the 21 date that the PCB-containing fluids, Pydraul fluids, were 22 discontinued, that further use of those fluids would 23 present an unreasonable risk of human health effects? 24 A. The continued use of the old fluids? I -- 25 Mo. No, I don't recall that thought at all, because it PERRY REPORTING SERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000019114 Coapater Aided Transcription-By Xscribe 242 1 was perceived that proper care would be taken. It's 2 coupled with the way it's handled, and as long as it's 3 handled properly, there is no unacceptable risk involved. 4 Q. Okay. There was the ecological factor that 5 was the concern? 6 A. The potential for he eoological impact was 7 always in the discussions, yes. 8 MR. SCHINKi That's if handled iaproperly by 9 the customer? 10 THE WITNESS: That is correct. 11 MR. PSHDERGAST: I move to strike that. That 12 is not what he testified to. 13 MR. SCHINKi Well, I would like to nave the 14 question then read back, because he didn't testify to 15 that, and it wasn't taken down properly. 16 Could you repeat the last two questions and 17 answers. 18 (Reporter read froia record as directed.) 19 MR. SCHINKi Do you understand your answer to 20 that question, Mr. Papageorga? 21 THE WITNESS! Yes, I do. 22 Bearing that, I have an addition to sake. I 23 aentloned the availability of phosphate esters and their 24 acceptance in the interim before all of the formulations 25 included phosphate esters. We went through a chlorinated -----------------------------------PERRY"REPORTING"SERVICE--------------------------- WATER PCB-SD0000019115 Computer Aided Transcription oy xscrxDe 1 terphenyl formulation, so that formulation vaa also 2 acceptable. Therefore, the need to continue with PCBs had 3 to be reviewed in light of that. 4 MR. PBNDERGASTs Off the record. 5 (Discussion held off the record.) 6 Q. (BY MR. P8HDERGAST) Ixhiblt Ho. 5, page 2, ft states the 1972 goals with respect to the marketing of 8 Pydraul. Goal number 1, "Sell all inventory of chlorine 9 containing Pydraul fluids by June 30, 1972." Did I read 10 that correctly? 11 A. Yes, you did. 12 Q. And the chlorine containing Pydraul fluids 13 were the PCB-containing fluids and the 312 series/ is that 14 correct? 15 A. I don't know what you mean by 312. 16 Q. I'm sorry. 312, the terphenyls or the -- is 17 that correct? 18 A. Chlorinated terphenyls? Is that what 19 you're -- yes. The reference to chlorine containing 20 includes the original PCB types and the interim 21 chlorinated terphenyl types, but at this point in time the 22 PCB types were gone already, ao it it's limited then to 23 the chlorinated terphenyls. 24 Q. Do you know when this marketing plan was 25 drafted? PERRY REPORTING SERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000019116 Computer Aided Transcription by Xscribe 244 1 A* No* Since I hadn't seen this before, I can't 2 help you there* 3 Q. I'm sorry. Were you involved in discussions 4 concerning the sale of the Pydraul inventory in the plant 5 to have that sale concluded by June 30, 1972? A* I was knowledgeable at the time. I don't know that I -- I don't recall a formal session in which I 8 participated* Z did know that the chlorine-containing 9 types were being discontinued. That's the extent of my 10 involvement. 11 Q. As of January 1, 1972, did Monsanto have in 12 its inventory any PCB-containing Pydrauls? 13 A. Hot to my knowledge. 14 Q. Okay. Did Monsanto incinerate any of its 15 inventory of PCB-containing Pydrauls? 16 A. No, not to my knowledge. This is unused 17 Pydraul? 18 Q. Right. 19 A. NO. 20 Q. Were you aware of the deadline of selling the 21 inventory of chlorine-containing Pydrauls by June 30, 22 1972? 23 A. Eventually I was, yes. 24 Q. Subsequent to June 30? 25 A. No, at about the time just before that. --------- PERRY REPORTING"SERVICE---------------------WATER PCB-SD0000019117 Computer Aided Transcription by xscribe Tf5 1 Q. Did anyone at Monsanto express the opinion 2 that as opposed to selling the inventory of the 3 chlorine-containing Pydrauls, that they should be 4 incinerated? 5 A. Mo, that was not discussed. It was not 6 perceived to be appropriate. * Q. And why was that? 8 A. Because there's no known problems with the 9 chlorinated terphenyls. 10 Q. At that time you didn't know that the 11 terphenyl products also contained PCBs? 12 A. Yes; as a contaminant, that's true. 13 Q. How about the remaining inventory of the 14 PCB-containing fluids? Was there anyone who suggested, as 15 opposed to selling that stock, that that be incinerated? 16 A. Not to my knowledge. 17 Q. Take a look at the last page of Exhibit 5, 18 under the "1972 Pydraul Action Plan," the first paragraph, 19 *Review old Pydraul fluid inventories with Distribution on 20 a weekly basis until all chlorine fluid inventories are 21 sold out.* And the responsibility apparently for that was 22 given to three individuals. Do you know whose initials 23 those are? 24 A. I believe the middle set of initials, EMP, 25 refers to Earl M. Potter, P-o-t-t-e-r. The first set of PERRY REPORTING SERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000019118 Computer Aided Transcription by Xscribe 14'5 1 initials refers to Herb Day. The initials are JHD, Herb 2 Day. These two individuals were production planners with 3 Monsanto. I do not recognize the initial RS. 4 Q. Okay. Let ae show you what's been marked as 5 Fapageorge Bxhibit So. 6. Have you ever seen that before? A. X oannot be certain* but these appear to be 7 copies of organisation charts that X was once shown during 8 the previous deposition* but I've forgotten just which 9 case was involved. 10 Q. Okay. 11 A. They look like the same charts. 12 Q. Do you happen to know if there's a larger 13 version of that? Is this a reduced copy? 14 A. I don't know where it came from. 15 Q. Okay. The only other time you saw it, it was 16 in this form? 17 A. Yes, sir. It appears to be the same form. 18 There's an awful lot of detail on those charts. I don't 19 know if they are the identical set. 20 MR. PBNDERGASTi Well, I'll show it to 21 counsel. If we could, I'd like to request a more legible 22 copy of that. 23 MR. SCHXNKs It's the best copy we have. 24 Q. (BY MR. PENDERGAST) I show you what's been 25 marked as Exhibit Ho. 7. Have you ever seen that document ----------------------------------- PERRY"REFORTIHG SERVICE--------------------------------- WATER PCB-SD0000019119 nxuau i^aUdk^ipCxUil oy AttCflOe MAI 1 before? 2 A. I don't recall ever seeing this before. 3 Q. Do you have any idea when Monsanto prepared 4 it from looking at it? 5 A. Zn the code in the bottom left corner of the cover page* Z would suggest that this was printed In 7 October, 1970* You see the numbers 1070? 8 Q. Yes. 9 A. That tips me off that that might well be the 10 publication date, and it seems to fit from the products 11 listed and their formulations, and timewise it seems to 12 fit that date. 13 Q. Is Industrial Fluids a division of Monsanto 14 Company? 15 A. It's a sub-group. 16 Q. Okay. What I'm getting at is the term 17 "Industrial Fluids" there is not being used as a generic 18 term, but as an indication of the source of the document, 19 or don't you know? 20 A. I would suggest it's generic. 21 Q. Okay. I want you to turn to the second to 22 last page, which Indicates the policy on returned fluids. 23 The first paragraph reads, "All customers should be 24 discouraged from draining present fluid from their 25 machines. It is very costly to refill machines and PERRY REPORTING SERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000019120 Computer Aided Transcription oy Xscrloe 248 1 returned fluid will add to our already overwhelming 2 inventory of fluid for incineration." Did I read that 3 correctly? 4 A. That is correct. 5 Q. Do you recall a concern by anyone at Monsanto 6 that if customers were encouraged to return PCB~containing ? fluidsf that that would create an inventory problem for 8 Monsanto? 9 MR. SCHINKi You're asking as of October# 10 1970? 11 MR. PENDERGAST: No. I'm asking if this 12 refreshes any memory in his mind as to whether that was 13 ever the sentiment of someone at Monsanto. 14 A. There was on occasion discussions about the 15 inventory. The facilities aid have-limits. Storage tanks 16 did fill up, and it was a matter of proper management of 17 this whole activity. So yes, there were concerns 18 expressed about the size of the inventory, the type of 19 inventory, and the proper control. 20 Q. (BY MR. PENDERGAST) Was there ever any 21 analysis done to determine what the inventory capacity was 22 for Monsanto18 incineration program? 23 A. The use of the word "analysis" implies a very 24 formal task force approach to me. We, of course, knew how 25 much warehouse space we had for drum material. We knew -----------------------------------PESKY "RBPCRTTNGnffERVrrE---------------------------------- WATER PCB-SD0000019121 computer Aiaea Transcription by Xacrlbe 2i9 1 how much outdoor space could be set aside for drum 2 material. He knew how many tanks we had for the bulk 3 material. So, that assessment was part of the initial 4 incinerator project. Ho subsequent assessment was made, 5 because nothing had changed. 0* Who was in charge of assessing the ability to 7 manage the waste to be incinerated or the fluids to be 8 incinerated? 9 A. Hell, that was the initial responsibility of 10 the engineering department, Robert Kountz, K-o-u-n-t-z. 11 He was the engineer in charge. 12 Q. Has there ever an attempt made to estimate 13 the amount of fluids which would be received by Monsanto 14 for incineration? is A. Yes. - 16 Q. And who conducted that assessment? 17 A. Each of the marketing groups, through their 18 salesmen, were to take a reading from all their customers 19 to determine just how much material might be expected 20 initially and how much on a steady basis. 21 Q. And was that information organized into any 22 kind of report or memo that was generated? 23 A. I don't recall a single report. I do recall 24 reports referring to each of the different business groups 25 and at different times. PERRY REPORTING SERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000019122 Computer Aided TranscriptionHoy Xscribe 250 1 Q. Was it ever concluded by anyone -- strike 2 that. Was there an assessment made as to Monsanto's 3 capacity for incineration, the volume that would be 4 incinerated over a given period of time? 5 A* That was limited by the incinerator, and it was calculated to be able to burn so many pounds per unit Y time, and it was calculated that it would be onstream in a 8 given percentage to allow for repairs and the normal down 9 times expected. So, the incinerator was the controlling 10 device in that whole system. 11 Q. Was the assessment of the capacity of the 12 incinerator ever committed to writing? 13 A. Yes. I used to know it at one time. 14 Q. Based on this information, was it ever 15 concluded that Monsanto did not have the capacity to IS incinerate the volume of fluids that were going to be or 17 that it was anticipated would be returned to them? 18 A. I never heard that we couldn't eventually 19 burn. It's a matter of time, because the information we 20 bad led us to believe that the material being returned for 21 incineration, although it was not arriving at a uniform 22 rate, would peak and valley to a point where we could 23 catch up. 24 Q. During periods of peak periods, did Monsanto 25 ever undertake a program or take any initiative to --------------------------------- PERRY'REPORTI NS- SERVICE------------------------------- - WATER PCB-SD0000019123 coapucer Aiaea Transcription oy Xacrioe 251 1 dissuade its customers from returning materials? 2 A. Rot to my knowledge. 3 Q. Okay. Would you have been in disagreement 4 with such a policy? 5 A. Certainly. Q. Let's take a look at Inhibit Mo. 8, which 7 appears to be a lengthy letter authored by w. R. Corey# 8 Monsanto; is that correct? 9 A. That is correct. 10 Q. In 1978# do you know what Mr. Corey was doing 11 for Monsanto? 12 A. Well# he was# as shown under his name on this 13 document# a director of the Toxic Substances Control Act 14 Administration within Monsanto. 15 Q. Okay. Did you ever have any contact with Mr. 16 Corey while at Monsanto? 17 A. Yes# sir. 10 Q. What did his job entail? 19 A. At what point in time? 20 Q. Well# when did you come in contact with him 21 first? 22 A. There was a point in time r*hen he was my 23 immediate supervisor. As I remember# that was about 1974# 24 '75. 25 Q. Was Mr. Corey still working for Monsanto PERRY REPORTING SERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000019124 --r A Mil M * | A ^ W<4W4 Mj A0 Vi 4 1 after 1970? 2 MR. SCHINK* After 1970? 3 MR. PENDERGASTs I'm sorry. I'm having a 4 lapse here. 5 Zn 1974, Mr. Corey was your direct supervisor? 6 A. Tes, sir. 7 Q. Okay. Have you seen this letter before? 8 A. This is the first I've seen it. 9 Q. Did you participate in it all? 10 A. No. I knew nothing of this. 11 Q. What were Mr. Corey's job responsibilities in 12 1974? 13 A. In 1974, Mr. Corey was, I believe -- this may 14 not be word for word -- director of administration for the 15 Monsanto Industrial Chemicals Company, which is an 16 operating unit of Monsanto's company, Monsanto Company. 17 Q. Were you aware of any calculations done to 18 determine the cost of cleaning die cast machinery for the 19 removal of PCBs? 20 A. No. 21 Q. Did you at any time become aware of anyone 22 who was of the belief that it would not be possible to 23 remove residual PCBs from die casting machinery? 24 . MR. SCHINKt Object to the form of the 25 question. What do you mean by "residual PCBs"? --------------------------------- PERRY REPORTINS'SERVICK-------------------------------- WATER PCB-SD0000019125 Computer Mded Transcription by xscnoe T5T 1 A. No, I'd not aware of any. 2 Q. (BY MR. PENDERGAST) Okay. Let me show you 3 Exhibit No. 9, which is, I believe, another copy of a 4 document we looked at yesterday. 5 MR. 8CHINK1 We did. 6 A. Z don't remember this yesterday. 7 Q. (BY NS. PENDERGAST) Well, regardless,have 8 you seen this document before? 9 A. NO. 10 0. On the page identified STR 002158, there are 11 handwritten notes. Do you recognize that handwriting? 12 A. I believe I do. 13 Q. And whose is it? 14 A. It's Mr. Bergen's penmanship. 15 Q. Okay. And on the next page, is that also his 16 notes? 17 A. That looks like it to me, yes. 18 Q. Would you turn to the document STR 002166, 19 which is handwritten notes on lined paper. Have you ever 20 been seen this before? 21 A. Z have not. 22 Q. Do you have any idea of whose writing that 23 is? 24 A. No. 25 Q. Were you aware of anyone at Monsanto who PERRY REPORTING SERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000019126 coapucer Aiaea Transcription oy xscnoe 254 1 attempted to calculate the cost of replacing 2 PCB-containing hydraulic fluids with either a phosphate 3 ester fluid or a water glycol fluid? 4 A. No. I'm not familiar with that. 5 Q. When you came on in January of 1970 with the PCB unit, if Z can call it that, were there any discussions as to estimated costs of replacing 8 PCB-containing fluids in customers' die cast machines? 9 A. Not in my presence. 10 Q. Was that raised as one of the concerns as to 11 the potential costs of replacing these fluids in these 12 systems? 13 A. Not in the discussions that I was involved 14 with. 15 Q. Okay. On page 002168, which is the third 16 page following, are those handwritten notes there? Do you 17 recognize those as Hr. Bergen's as well? 18 A. The bottom half are Mr. Bergen's notes, and 19 as I look at that, I see Nr. Johnson's initials. 20 Q. Okay. That's Norman Johnson? 21 A. Yes, sir. 22 Q. The following page starts, "History of 23 Monsanto Production and Sales of Chlorinated Biphenyls." 24 Have you seen that document before? 25 A. Briefly glancing at the contents, it appears -----------------------------------PERRY REPORTING'SERVICE--------------------------------- WATER PCB-SD0000019127 Computer AidecT^Transcript ion~by xscribe 255 to resemble, although It's in a little bit different format, it appears to resemble a document I had seen 3 before. This appears to be a draft vereion of a document 4 that Z have seen. 5 Q. Okay. Do you remember what that other 6 document is entitled? * A. Z have forgotten the exact title, but it was 8 referred to at least in ay -- Z referred to it as the ?CB 9 White Paper. 10 Q. All right. Turning to page 002179, which 11 would be the third to last page, if you want to maybe back 12 up one page so we can get the introduction discussing Dr. 13 Jensen's work in Sweden, the next page begins, "Before the 14 findings could be confirmed or duplicated in the U.S., 15 analytical methods had to be refined in order to 16 definitely separate PCBs from other chlorinated 17 hydrocarbons that were known to be present in the 18 environment." Did I read that correctly? 19 A. That is correct. 20 Q. Had Dr. Jensan developed the analytical 21 methods necessary to distinguish PCBs from other 22 chlorinated hydrocarbons? 23 A. Tea. He had developed methods that went a 24 long way toward this, but it was still at that time 25 questionable whether he had actually achieved that PERRY REPORTING SERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000019128 wowpute* Aidea Transcription oy xscnoe 256 1 capability, and that*s the reason that all the emphasis 2 went into further study of analytical methods. 3 Q. How long did it take Monsanto to develop what 4 they felt were the necessary analytical methods? 5 A. It took them from 1967 to the early part o 6 1970, about three years. '1 Q. Who was working on that project? 8 A. It was a group under Dr. Keller, led by Dr. 9 Scott Tucker. 10 Q. And it's your understanding they began that 11 work in 1967? 12 A. I'm sorry? 13 Q. It's your understanding that they began that 14 work in 1967? 15 A. That's my understanding, yes. 16 Q. All right. Let's take a look at Exhibit No. 17 10. This is an October 6, 1970 memo authored by yourself; 18 is that correct? 19 A. That is correct. 20 Q. All right. In the first paragraph under the 21 heading "General,* the third sentence states, "However, it 22 was emphasised that we will continue to emphasise to all 23 remaining users of PCB's the importance of preventing 24 escape to the environment and we must ensure that these 25 warnings are fully documented so that they will support ----------------------------------- PERRY REPORTING SERVICE------------------------------------ WATER PCB-SD0000019129 TJoapufer Aided Transcription oy Ascribe T5T 1 the action ve have taken In this area should we become 2 Involved in legal actions.* Did I read that correctly? 3 A. Except that up above where it says, "we must 4 continue," I think you said, "we will continue." 5 Q. Okay. 6 A. Other than that, you did. 7 Q. As far as the warnings concerning the 8 importance of preventing escape to the environment, was 9 this precipitated by information Monsanto had that, in 10 fact, users of PCBs were allowing escape of PCBs into the 11 environment? 12 MR. SCHIHKi Was what precipitated by that? 13 MR. PEHDERGASTi Well, I think the question 14 is clear. 15 Do you understand the question? 16 MR. SCHIHKi Object to the form. 17 A. I think I do. There was no specific incident 18 that triggered this. It was the reported presence in, 19 say. Lake Michigan or up in Sweden that led us to believe 20 that somehow this material was being released into the 21 environment. Therefore, ve better get back to our 22 customers and tell them don't let it get into the 23 environment, and make certain that we documented that we 24 did this in case questions are raised later. That was the 25 intent of all that. PERRY REPORTING SERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000019130 ------ jr------ -------------* -- -j, *./, 1 Q. Down the pager paragraph number 2 concerns 2 the reformulation of Aroclor 1242/ does it not? 3 A. No. It talks about reformulation of products 4 containing Aroclor 1242. 5 Q. Okay. And it indicates an extension was 6 granted for the reformulation/ I believe/ of the products 7 containing Aroclor 1242/ but that particular extension 8 would be the last extension; is that correct? 9 A. That is correct. 10 Q. Why were you drawing the line at that point 11 as to getting the reformulation done as opposed to letting 12 then continue until they came up with a new product? 13 A. Well/ we had self-imposed a target date to 14 get it all done by the end of the year/ and we committed 15 this to the top corporate committee at a meeting. We 16 found that we were too optimistic in establishing that 17 datef and we felt some obligation then to the top 18 executives in Monsanto to either meet that date or go back 19 and ask for an extension. I hope that answers your 20 question. 21 Q. Okay. Was there a concern that a number of 22 your marketing people would essentially be idle as they 23 had no product to market for a period of time as the 24 period of time between discontinuing the PCBs and the 25 PCB-containing products and the start-up of the new -----------------------------------PERRY REPORTING SERVICE---------------------------- - WATER PCB-SD0000019131 ***xwxj Oy A&CtlOe 259 1 product? ffas that at all a factor in that? 2 A. No, because in many cases our marketing 3 people were selling other products. So, it's not a case 4 of having nothing to do. In fact, with all the questions 5 arising about industrial hydraulic fluids, they vere 6 overvhelaed with things to do, not only selling, but 1 comnunicating and visiting and talking and so on. 8 Q. I guess ny concern is that this nay not be an 9 important point at all, but the Interest part of that 10 paragraph is the statement that if the reformulation is 11 not concluded by a given date, it will be necessary to 12 discontinue that business, and where did the necessity 13 come from? 14 A. Like I said, self-imposed, very conservative 15 approach, and since there vere' competitors on the markret 16 claiming fire resistance and good performance, we either 17 had to meet that or get out. 18 Q. Okay. Bow often were status reports, such as ' 19 the October 6, 1978 report, prepared by yourself? 20 A. Bach month. 21 Q. And between what years? 22 A. X believe it started in 1970, and X believe 23 it went through 1971, and it was discontinued then because 24 activity dropped to a very low level, and the need to 25 communicate as extensively was not there. j PERRY REPORTING SERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000019132 Computer Aided TranscrTptlonnby Xscrlbe 260 1 Q. I'm sorry. When was that practice 2 discontinued? 3 A. I believe about the end of 1971. 4 Q. Okay. Was there then a periodic reporting 5 system different than the monthly reporting system in use? 6 A. There was no periodic* mo* not for ay office. Q. Okay. Was there any periodic reporting from 8 any central office? 9 A. Not that I saw. 10 Q. Was there ever a suggestion by anyone at 11 Monsanto that discussions on this topic not be committed 12 to writing for any reason? 13 A. No. 14 Q. Okay. Take a look at page 001735, under the 15 heading `Industrial"Hydraulics. Was it your 16 understanding in October of 1970, that the Pydraul 312 17 reformulation resulted in a product with a greater fire 18 resistance than the original PCB-containing material? 19 A. Tes, sir. 20 Q. From this paragraph were you referring to the 21 312-A? 22 A. Tes. 23 Q. Was that also true of the phosphate ester 24 product that was eventually developed? 25 A. Not to my understanding, no. ----------------------------------- PERRY REPORTING SERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000019133 v-umpuAiaeci xranscrxpcion oy Xscri.be 261 1 Q. The second paragraph, is that intended to 2 address Monsanto's production of hydraulic fluids? 3 A. This is in general, not specific to Monsanto. 4 Q. Okay. So this was information that applied 5 to hydraulic fluid custoaers as well as to Monsanto's own 6 use of those produota? -7 A. Tea* 8 Q. Okay. Was it ever conveyed by Monsanto to 9 any of its customers the idea of using the absorption 10 system as referred to under number 2 in that paragraph? 11 A. Yes, sir. 12 Q. And was that given to all Monsanto's 13 customers, hydraulic fluid customers? 14 A. To my knowledge, yes.. 15 Q. Okay. That paragraph states, "It will be 16 desirable to make the hydraulic fluid application into a 17 closed loop system. We cannot expect to stop leaks but we 18 can expect to minimize contamination of water by (1) 19 minimizing run-off to severs; (2), treating contaminated 20 water by absorption of water (Anniston had no detectable 21 PCB after passing through a limestone bed); (3), recycling 22 absorbents to remove Aroclor by squeezing, by extraction 23 or by devolatilisation-destruction.* Did I read that 24 correctly? 25 A. That is correct. ' Jerry reporting service WATER PCB-SD0000019134 Computer Aided Transcription by xscribe 262 1 Q. Was that Information that you felt should be 2 conveyed to Monsanto customers In October of 1970? 3 A. Yes. 4 0* Turn to page 7 of the report. Paragraph 3 5 indicates arrangements have been made to sample# take samples of fish in the Anniston area# Zs that correct? 7 A. That is correct. 8 Q. Was that ever done? 9 A. Yes. 10 Q. And what were the results of that testing? 11 A. I don't remember the numbers, but there were 12 PCBs found in some of those fish samples. 13 Q. Who conducted the test? 14 A. That was Dr, Scott Tucker's group. 15 0. Do you remember what-the levels were? 16 A. No, I don't. 17 Q. Was there someconcern by the Monsantopeople 13 that PCBs were found in the fish there in aquatic life? 19 A. Yes. We attempted to determine where the 20 exposure might have come from# and as I remember# the 21 study was frustrating because we couldn't determine where 22 these fish had spent their lifetime# what waters did they 23 come from# and so on. 8o the study was just never 24 completed because of that lack of information. 25 Q. Who undertook the study to find out where the PBRKY~REPORTING SERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000019135 -------------- ~J, AWW 1 PCBs came from? 2 A.. Plant people did some of this, and as I 3 remember, they hired a fish biologist from the University 4 of Mississippi to help them. 5 Q. And that was being done in late 1970, early 6 1971? i A. Zt started the summer of 1970. 8 0. Do you remember the biologist's name? 9 A. No, I don't. 10 Q. Did you ever see a draft copy of the report 11 or an Internal report that was done on that? 12 A. No, I did not. I saw a summary report from 13 the plant. I did not see the original. 14 Q. Who prepared the summary of the report? Do 15 you know? .. . 16 A. It would be one of two individuals. It would 17 be either the supervisor, Vince Haupt, H-a-u-p-t, or Jerry 18 Miller, the chief chemist at the Anniston plant. 19 Q. When is the last time you saw a copy of that. 20 years ago? 21 A. When I was preparing these. That would be 22 the input for these reports. 23 Q. Okay. Well, at the time the report was done, 24 you were just preparing to do the survey! is that correct? 25 A. At the time of thiB particular report, yes. PERRY REPORTING SERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000019136 C^baputer Aided Transcr iption~bjT~XscFI be IE* 1 Subsequent reports was trying to report the progress of 2 that study. 3 Q. All right. Page 9 indicates - now, with 4 respect to the Anniston plant, where is Snow Creek? 5 A. Oh, it's about 100 yards or so froa the plant fence line. 1 Q. And in 1970, testing was done of that creek, 8 and PCBs were found? 9 A. Yes, sir. 10 Q. Why was the creek tested? 11 A. Well, because of its proximity, and during 12 flash rain storms and all there would be a lot of surface 13 water going in to that creek, and there was a suspicion 14 that lots of the soil, the dirt particles that went with 15 that water, could have contained PCBs in it through 40 16 years. The question was how much is still there in Snow 17 Creek, and that's the purpose for some of these studies. 18 Q. What was the source of the information that 19 the contamination of Snow Creek was due to one very bad 20 day? 21 NR. SCHIRKi Well, I object to the form of the question. It doesn't say that it was Snow Creek that was contaminated. Q. (BY NR. PENDERGAST) Okay. Were PCBs found in the creek? -----------------------------------FURRY" REPORTING SERVICE-------------------------------- WATER PCB-SD0000019137 Axau xranscrxpcxoa oy Asccxoe 2,6 5 1 A. This doesn't tell me that. I don't know. 2 It's entitled "Snow Creek," but the wording is such that 3 that loss could have been from the production unit, not 4 necessarily into Snow Creek. It's not clear. 5 0. Do you have any recollection or understanding that samples were taken from Snow Craak, and it was 1 determined that PCBs were present? 8 A. There was a program involving Snow Creek as 9 well as other creeks and lakes in the area. So this 10 isn't -- this is nothing new as far as I was concerned. 11 0. Did Monsanto at its Anniston plant undertake 12 any efforts to prevent the flow of PCB-containing 13 materials into the creek? 14 A. Yes. I remember yes, they did try. They did 15 a lot of bulldozing, either moving to build a dam to 16 deflect the flow. There was an attempt to reduce that. 17 Q. When was that undertaken? 16 A. 1971 or so. 19 Q. Prior to that, had there been any efforts 20 made to prevent the flow of PCB-containing materials into 21 the creek? 22 MR. SCBIHKt Are you talking about in 23 addition to what was done within the plants to control its 24 loss, or are you talking about outside the plant? 25 HR. PEHDERGASTs I think the question is PfiRRY REPORTING SERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000019138 Computer Aided Transcription by Xscribe 266 1 clear. 2 MR. SCHINKt I object to the form of the 3 question. It's ambiguous. We are referring now to storm 4 water now? 5 Q. (BY NR. PENDERGAST) Right. That's the 6 source into that creek. 1 A. Z'a not aware of any special program directed 8 at the creek. Programs are always to keep it controlled 9 in the plant, and then you'll avoid the secondary problem 10 such as the creek. The emphasis was back in the plant. 11 Q. Okay. I may be getting the sites confused. 12 Anniston was an outdoor production area? 13 A. Both plants were what we call outdoor 14 structures. There are no walls, just steel structures, 15 concrete base floor. 16 Q. Okay. And at the Anniston plant was there 17 anything in the floor, on the floor, or around the floor 18 to prohibit the flow of water off the floor? 19 A. At what time? 20 Q. Prior to 1989. 21 A. Prior to *69, there were a few places that 22 had curbing, but there were also places that did aot have. 23 Q. Bow high was the curbing? 24 A. About six, eight inches. 25 Q. Was there any question in your mind when you ----------------------------------PERRY REPORTIHSTffRV ICE----------------------------- --- WATER PCB-SD0000019139 coapu&er axocu utuisctipcion y Aficuoe 267 1 were working at Anniston that rain water was washing off 2 the protectionary floor and into the surrounding soil? 3 A. Well, it wouldn't be the floor so much, 4 because there was a roof over this structure. So unless 5 it was a driven rain, the floors would not get that wet. Back in the late '80a, when I was Involved with our 1 understanding and our then understanding of the way PCBs 8 are inert, and we just did not see this as a serious 9 problem. Certainly we didn't want it to be abused, 10 overdone, and it was never a situation where ve could 11 visually see PCBs in the creek, like an oily stain or 12 anything like that. 13 Q. Okay. Would the PCBs create an oily stain on 14 the creek if they're in there, or would they sink to the 15 bottom? 16 A. Only if it's an awful lot. This is a dry bed 17 creek. It only has water in it when it rains, so there 18 are no fish. There aren't even any grasshoppers there. 19 It'8 just a gully. 20 Q. Okay. 21 A. It's called Snow Creek. 22 Q. Okay. One of the contributing causes listed 23 in the section entitled "PCB Levels in Snow Creek" is 24 detergent cleaning of the department. Was that intended 25 to mean that the cleaning of the department somehow led to PERRY REPORTING SERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000019140 Computer Aided Transcription Dy XscrTBS JFB 1 PCBs winding up in Snow Creek? 2 A. The implication is there* but this paragraph 3 is to me* as I read it now* rather confusing. Detergent 4 cleaning on occasion was used to wash down handrails and 5 sticky spots and the floor and so on* but the only reference to Snow Creek that X read in this now is the * last paragraph of that section. You will note* leaching 8 of PCBs from the creek bed results in a plant effluent 9 level* or in other words* 1.1 to 2.8 pounds per day they 10 are attributing to the PCBs in the creek. That varies 11 from the 32 pounds that they refer to in the first 12 paragraph. 13 Q. Okay. Do you know where these measurements 14 were being taken? . 15 A. I'm confused by your question. 16 Q. It's probably because I'm confused by the 17 paragraph. The limestone bed was used to purify waste 18 water? 19 A. To pretreat* yes. 20 Q. Pretreat? 21 A. Yes. 22 Q. Okay. And depending on -the ability of the 23 limestone bed to handle the amount of material put through 24 it* you would have varying levels of PCBs in the water 25 effluent; is that fair? ---------------------------------- PERKY REPORT INC BBRVTCB---------------------------- ------ WATER PCB-SD0000019141 computer Aided transcription Dy xscrloe 1 A. All right. 2 Q. Is that correct? 3 A. Yes. 4 Q. And is that what the sero to three pbb or 5 parts per billion PCBs refer to, the pit effluent? 6 A. Yes. 7 Q. Where did the piteffluent go? 8 A. 9 plant. It vent to the aunicipal sewage treatment 10 Q. Okay. Now, separate and apart from the 11 limestone bed, we have the reference to leaching of PCBs 12 from the creek bed. 13 A. Yes,sir, and I don'tremember where they 14 could have taken a sample of water then to be able to come 15 up with that 1.1 and 2.8 pound per day number. 16 Q. My questionis, as I read this paragraph, to 17 say that there are PCBs in the creek bed and that somehow 18 affected the waste watereffluent? 19 A. Yeah. It'scombined. 20 0. Okay. How did the PCBs in the creek bed 21 affect the waste water effluent? 22 A. I don't remember where the tie-in is made. 23 It's been so long. This implies that whatever was in the 24 creek eventually joins what's leaving the plant, and the 25 sample is then taken. The sample measures that zero to PERRY REPORTING SERVICE " WATER PCB-SD0000019142 v-oapucet Aiaea Transcription oy Xscrioe ~27,TT~ 1 three parts per billion as a concentration, but it 2 calculates the 32 pounds per day. 3 Q. Okay. Has that creek bed ever cleared up or 4 cleaned up to your knowledge? 5 A. There vas a cleanup effort made. I'm under 6 an impreaalon In early 1980 there vas a cleanup of some T kind made. Z don't know the details* 8 Q. Okay. Let's take a look at page 10. It 9 refers to the W. G. Krummrich plant, also indicates that 10 as of October 6, 1970, Monsanto had identified a loss to 11 the river" ranging from 12 to 742 parts per billion with 12 an average los3 of 311 parts per billion for 11 samples; 13 is that correct? 14 A. That is correct. 15 Q. What is the river that's being referred to? 16 A. Mississippi. 17 Q. Okay. So it vas identified at the Krummrich 18 plant that PCBs were leaving the plant and entering the 19 Mississippi River? Is that generallywhatthat tells us? 20 A. Tea. 21 Q. That last sentence in that first paragraph 22 says, "This is an equivalent average loss of 71*5 23 lbs/day," Is that pounds per day of PCBs? 24 A. Yes. 25 Q. How were the PCBs getting from the Krummrich ------------------------------------- PERRY"RE PORTINGSE KVICE------------------------------------- WATER PCB-SD0000019143 Computer Aided Transcription Dy xscrioe TTT 1 plant to the Mississippi? 2 MR. SCHINKt No, it's the treatment plant. 3 Q. (BY MR. PENDERGAST) I'm sorry, from the 4 treatment plant to the Mississippi. 5 A. That's the water that results from their 6 treatment, separated from the sludge, and then eventually 7 it's pumped out to the river. 8 Q. Okay. You testified yesterday that Krummrich 9 had its ovn waste disposal facility on sitej is that 10 correct? 11 A. NO.. 12 Q. No? Then I'm confused. 13 A. It goes to a municipal treatment plant, and I 14 talked about the sludge being taken to the landfill and so 15 on. 16 Q. All right. What prompted Monsanto to go 17 check the effluent from the municipal treatment plant? 18 A. Kell, that's where its wastes go, and that's 19 the appropriate place to look for water, or that water 20 which is entering the environment. There is no point 21 between the manufacturing unit and the river other than 22 getting it at that treatment plant. 23 Q. Okay. Was Monsanto ever Involved in the 24 cleanup of that treatment plant or the Mississippi in that 25 area? PERRY REPORTING SERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000019144 computer Aiaea Transcription oy xscrioe 272 1 A. No. 2 Q. ExhibitNo. 11, this is a duplicate of a 3 document we looked at earlier today. It's not an exact 4 duplicate* It doesn't have Nr* Bergen's notes on it. Do 5 you know who gave this presentation to the corporate 6 development committee? # A* It's my understanding that this was presented 8 by Mr. Bergen, and he introduced Nr* Wheeler and Mr. 9 French as the principal speakers of the contents of this 10 document 11 Q. Turningto page 001567 -- 12 A. I have it. 13 Q. When you came on board then in St. Louis in 14 January of 1970, did you move your office to St. Louis? 15 A. I was between the two locations, but i was -- 16 the job was mine no matter where I was. 17 Q. Okay. On 1567 it refers to four 18 alternatives. Did you understand in January of 1970, that 19 Monsanto was considering these four alternatives as to how 20 to react to the PCB question? 21 A * Yes 22 Q* Did Monsanto eventually adopt one of these 23 alternatives? 24 A. The alternative that was adopted was 25 alternative 4. PERRY REPORT INCUIRVTCE WATER PCB-SD0000019145 Computer Aided Transcription oy xscnDe TFS 1 Q. And was a specific action plan actually 2 drafted by someone for each of the action groups and 3 customer market situations? 4 A. Yes. 5 0. And then ve saw the 1972 marketing plan for 4 Pydraul. Was that a result of that program? 7 A. Well, that was the aftermath of the original 8 plan. 9 Q. Okay. Was there any actual plan drafted as a 10 result of this discussion in Exhibit No. 11? 11 A. Yes. 12 Q. Okay. And what form didthat document take? 13 A. This was the plan presented to the corporate 14 development committee in May of 1970. 15 Q. Have we seen thatdocument today? 16 A. I don't know. 17 MR. SCHINKt No, we saw it yesterday at some 18 length. 19 Q. (BY MR. PBNDERGAST) Okay. Is that attached 20 to Exhibit No. 1? 21 A. Now, this was the draft document from which a 22 presentation that I made was developed and further 23 finetuned by Mr. John Mason. 8o, there are at least four 24 documents that kind of show the evolution of the plan. 25 Q. Okay. Which document that we have seen PERRY REPORTING SERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000019146 Computer Aided Transcription by xscribe 274 1 represents the final plan? 2 NR. SCBINK: I think it say be one he's 3 narked and hasn't shown you yet. 4 A. Yeah, I think it's coning up. 5 0. (BY HR. PBHDERGAST) Okay. On page 1579, item nunber 4 Indicates that part of the reconnended 7 action plan was to educate custoners on the need for 8 cleanup at their plants within four nonthsi is that 9 correct? 10 A. That is correct. 11 Q. Was that done? 12 A. Yes. 13 Q. Was the corporate development committee in 14 existence prior to January, 1970? 15 A. There was always a committee of similar 16 structure that at times had different names, corporate 17 management committee, corporate development committee, 18 corporate administrative committee, but a group of that 19 type has been in existence in Monsanto for decades. 20 Q. Let ne show you what's been narked as Exhibit 21 No. 12. Bave you seen that document? 22 A. I have seen it before, yes. 23 Q. Do you have any idea -- the first page, 24 there'8 a large blank space. Do you have any idea whether 25 there was ever any typing in there, any print? -----------------------------------PERRY "REPORTING SERVICE-------------------------- -- WATER PCB-SD0000019147 Computer AXded Transcription by Xscribe 175 1 A. I have never seen it, but this ie -- this 2 tells me that another item was under the agenda that was 3 covered, and it doesn't relate to this at all. 4 Q. Okay. You can also see on the aide there 5 appears that this has been taken froa a binder. Would you 6 have any idea or impression as to whose binder or what 1 binder that was kept in at any point in time? 8 A. No, I do not know. 9 Q. On page 2 under the "Legal Aspects," one o 10 the items recommended by Legal was to, "Take steps to 11 insure that PCB's are contained and not discharged in 12 planted effluent." Did I read that correctly? 13 A. Yes, you did. 14 Q. Was that referring to Monsanto plant.effluent 15 or plant effluent of customers? 16 MR. SCHINKi If you know. 17 A. I don't know. 18 Q. (BY MR. PENDERGAST) Were you privy to any 19 discussions or meetings when that was discussed as the 20 position of the legal department? 21 A. No. 22 Q. Okay. How about number 2, "Provide adequate 23 warnings to customers and users, including advice as to 24 disposal methods"? That had been a concern when you came 25 on board as well, was it not? PEkRY REPORTING 8ERVICE ' WATER PCB-SD0000019148 Computer Aided Transcription by xscribe TVS 1 A. Yes. 2 Q. The next page under "Plan of Action," number 3 4, subsequent to your coming on in St. Louis, did it 4 continue to be a concern that the customers be educated on 5 the need to reduce and effectively control PCB effluents 6 at their plenty la that correct? T A. That's correct. 8 Q. Again,the information Monsanto had 9 concerning plant effluents of Monsanto's customers came 10 through their sales people; is that correct? 11 A. Yes. 12 Q, Okay. HadMonsanto accumulated or organized 13 any of this kind of information obtained by salespeople 14 containing kind of a binder or booklet as to the title, 15 something like information from customers or information 16 on customers' usage, something like that? 17 A. I never saw such a document. 18 Q. Okay. What made Monsanto think that any 19 further education of their customers was necessary? 20 A. Well, you're asking me to get as to what Mr. 21 Bergen and Mr. Springgate were thinking. 22 Q. That continued tobe theconcern of what's 23 enumerated there in paragraph 4, continued to be a concern 24 of Monsanto after you came on as well, was it not? 25 A. That's right. -----------------------------------PEKKY HE PORTING SERVICE---------------------------- ----- WATER PCB-SD0000019149 Computer Aided Transcription oy Xscrioe' T7T 1 Q* And my question iss Why was it after you 2 came on that it was Monsanto -- why was Monsanto concerned 3 about that? 4 A* After I came on# we felt it was a pretty 5 critical part of the overall program, and we fully recognised that in spite of past efforts, there are always 7 new customers. There are always changes in people at the 8 old customers* plants, so the education is continuing. o You never finish. And new information that Monsanto had 10 could well lead to new types of programs that had to be 11 passed on. 12 Q. I'm going to show you what's been marked as 13 Exhibit No. 13. Have you ever seen that document before? 14 A. Yes, I have, or it looks like a good copy of 15 what I've seen before. 16 Q. We haven't looked at that document yet, have 17 we? 18 A. I don't believe we have. 19 MR. 8CHINE1 Maybe is that one we looked at 20 yesterday? I'm pretty sure we looked at this one 21 yesterday, several of these pages. 22 A. May I see yesterday's exhibits? 23 Q. (BY MR. PENDERGAST) Sure. 24 MR. SCHINKs They seem pretty similar. 25 A. Okay. This is an earlier draft of this final PERRY REPORTING SERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000019150 v,uu^ucci Aiuou uaAdUi^Liuti uy Aduixue 27b 1 script. 2 HR. SCHINK: So Exhibit 3 is an earlier 3 draft -- 4 A. An aarliar draft, and this Exhibit 13 is the 5 script that I used in Baking a presentation for the CMC in 6 April of 1970. 7 0. (BY HR.PENDERGAST) Okay. So Exhibit No. 8 13, that*s the final draft we were looking for? 9 A. It looks like --* well, I don't knov that ve 10 were looking for this as the final plan. This is the 11 third of the four documents I referred to earlier. 12 Q. Okay. Did you get a chance to look this over 13 the other day? 14 A. Yes. 15 Q. Was this one of the documents you looked at? 16 A. Yes. 17 Q. I'd like to refer you to page 7. The 18 references down at the bottom of the page would be the 19 second to last sentence concerning the reduction in PCD 20 contents in plant streams. Do you see that? 21 A. I do. 22 Q. What did that refer to? 23 A. This is the plant waste water discharge from 24 the total plant site. 25 Q. And that went to the municipal treatment? ------------------------------------- PBERY HE PORTING SERVICE----------------------------- ------ WATER PCB-SD0000019151 Cdmpucer aicftfd Transcription by Xscribe T7 1 A. Correct. 2 Q. The next page refers totoxicity studies 3 which indicate the Aroclors are mildly toxic to mammals, 4 and goes on to say, " .it is highly unlikely that this 5 will b a significant factor in any decision regarding the banning or restricting of the use of Aroclors." Do you ft see that? 8 A. We do. X do. 9 Q. Who was the -- strike that. Who at Monsanto 10 felt that this level of toxicity wasn't going to be a 11 significant factor in the banning or restricting of 12 Aroclors? 13 A. The medical department, primarily the medical 14 director. 15 Q. That was Mr. Kelly? 16 A. Dr. Kelly, yes. 17 Q. Did Dr. Kelly explain to you why he felt that 18 it wouldn't be a significant factor? 19 A. Yes. 20 Q. And why was that? 21 A. Prom his knowledge of other chemicals and how 22 they tested using similar tests that the Aroclors were 23 undergoing, and his knowledge that these other chemicals 24 were still in commerce, he was drawing direct analogies 25 that the toxicity of these materials would not be a key PERRY REPORTING SERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000019152 . Computer Aide<3 Transcription by Xscribe 280 1 factor in any governmental regulatory agency's decision 2 making process regarding banning or restricting. 3 NR* PENDERGASTi Could you read that back to 4 me. 5 (Reporter read from record as directed*) 6 NR. PENDERGASTt Okay. Maybe we can mark 7 these separately so that there's no oonfusion. 8 (Plaintiff's Deposition Exhibit Papageorge 9 Nos. 14-A and 14-B marked for identification.) 10 Q. (BY MR. PENDERGAST) I show you copies of 11 Exhibits 14, 14-A and 14-B. Yesterday we were talking 12 about Monsanto literature which indicated methods for 13 reclamation. Do you recall that? 14 A. I do. 15 Q. Okay. Have you seen anyliterature like this 16 before you? 17 A. Yes, I have. 18 Q. Okay. Are you aware ofany otherliterature 19 that Monsanto produced concerning its PCB-containing 20 Pydrauls? 21 A* Z have seen earlier versions, so these would 22 be the replacement copies* This covers the literature 23 that's available* 24 Q. Have you had a chance to review that 25 literature recently? -----------------------------------PERRY REPORTING"BEKVTCE---------------------------------- WATER PCB-SD0000019153 Computer Aiaea Transcription oy xscnoe 7BT 1 A. Very briefly the other day I glanced at a 2 couple pages here. 3 Q. Okay. Thiswas onTuesday? 4 A. Tes. 5 Q. Okay. Yesterday you were talking about the fact that this literature Indicated means for reclamation, and you thought that it also might contain information 8 about making sure PCB-oontalning materials were not 9 discharged or allowed to escape from the unit. Can you 10 tell me where in that literature that that is Indicated? 11 A. I have read these three documents. I do not 12 find any specific reference referring to avoiding 13 discharge into sewer systems. I believe that was your 14 question. 15 MR. SCH'IHKt Could you read the question 16 back? 17 MR. SCHINK: I don't understand by the 18 *that." Are you talking about means of reclamation or 19 keeping it away from water? You referred to both in the 20 question. 21 Q. (BY HR. PENDERGAST) Mr. Papageorge, did you 22 understand my question? 23 A. X think X do. 24 Q. Okay. 25 A. X may not, but Ithink I do. Youused the PERRY REPORTING SERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000019154 Computer Aided Transcription by Xscribe 287 1 reference to escape from the unit. I earlier had referred 2 to escape down the sewer, 3 Q. Okay. 4 A. Escape from the unit relates very closely to 5 exposure to employees, and that Is covered here under 6 proper handling. Escape to the sewer would imply mixing 7 with water, and Z would relate that to the reclaiming 8 chapter. Zf Z combine the two sections here and follow 9 those, I think I've achieved or the user will have 10 achieved what was proper and appropriate for handling this 11 material. 12 Q. Okay. You would agree, however, there's no 13 specific or direct reference to allowing these materials 14 to escape into waste.water effluent or escape into the 15 surrounding environment; is that true? 16 A. There is no direct reference. It's implied. 17 0. Okay. I show you what's been marked as 18 Exhibit No. -- what are we up to, 15? 19 A. Sixteen. 20 Q. Sixteen. Do you know who prepared this 21 document? 22 A. I prepared the initial draft and then 23 consulted with several people within Monsanto, and with 24 minor minimal change, I came up with this final version. 25 Q. Who was this document intended for? -----------------------------------PERRY REPORTING "SERVICE----------------------------- ---- WATER PCB-SD0000019155 computer Aiaea Transcription oy Ascnoe 28T 1 A. This was for the advisory committee to the 2 SPA on water standards, water quality standards. 3 Q. Okay. On the second page of text, page 2, 4 under, "Firsts We Limited Sales," the first paragraph S says, "We limited sales of PCB for use In many, many applications where there was any danger of It getting into 7 the environment," Did that include the use of 8 PCB-contalning hydraulic fluids In die casting plants? 9 A. Yes. 10 Q. Under the secondcategory, control of 11 programs at the manufacturing locations, reference is made 12 that the departments were converted into concrete 13 bathtubs. Do you see that reference? 14 A. I do see it, yes. 15 Q. Was that done inresponse to someconcerns by 16 Monsanto people that PCBs from the production areas were 17 getting out of the production area and into the 18 surrounding environment? 19 A. Certainly in the 40 years of use, some were, 20 but this was Intended to even prevent that from happening. 21 This is the curbing and sump activity. 22 NR. FENDERGASTs Let's mark that, 23 {Plaintiff's Deposition Exhibit Papageorge 24 No. 17 marked for identification.] 25 Q. (BY MR. PENDERGAST) Exhibit 17, is this the PERRY REPORTING SERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000019156 Computer Aided Transcription by XscrTbe "2HT 1 White Paper we were looking for? 2 A. This is what I had in mind when I referred to 3 the White Paper? yes. 4 Q. Okay. For whose use was this intended? 5 A. Anybody that had any interest. 6 Q. Was this disseminated to the public? 7 A. Z was told so? yes. Z wasn't personally 8 involved. 9 Q. Okay. Was it the intent that if inquiries 10 were made to Monsanto as to what was going on with the 11 PCBs? that they could be provided with this type of 12 literature that would get then up to speed quickly as to 13 what was being done? 14 A. Yes, 15 Q. Take a look at page 001269? "PCB 16 Manufacturing and Sales? Monsanto Industrial Chemicals 17 Coapany." Particularly take a look under the category? 18 "Hydraulics/Lubricants. 1-9 A. I see it. 20 Q. And I guess you have to refer to thenext 21 page to find the figures for 1969 end 1970. Would it be 22 fair to say that 1969 and 1970 were two of the highest 23 years in Monsanto's history for the production of 24 PCB-containing hydraulics and lubricants? 25 A. Yes. PERRY REPORTINd SERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000019157 jt*w<*w udiisCipbioa uy AdCdoe 2<SO 1 Q. is that also true of aost of its 2 PCB-containing products? 3 A. I haven't studied the chart recently# but 4 that's generally true. It was a growing narket. 5 Q. Okay. By 1969# it was known to Monsanto# was 6 it not# that there was at least soae concern with the presence of PCBs in the environment? 8 A. That concern was rather alniaal in *69. 9 There were still many questions not answered. 10 Q. Page 1273 indicates that in 1970# Monsanto 11 decided to restrict sales of chlorinated biphenyls. 12 A. Yes. 13 Q. That's -- I'm sorry. Down under#"Monsanto's 14 Withdrawal from the Chlorinated Biphenyl Business" -- 15 A. I found it# yes. The answer is yes. 16 Q. At the same time that Monsanto decided to 17 restrict sales# did it make any efforts to restrict 18 production of PCBs in 1970? 19 A. Certainly. 20 Q. Okay. And if we took a look at a graph to 21 see what the production levels were for PCBs in 1970# 22 would we see then declining towards the and of the year? 23 A. Yes. In fact# the numbers would show up at 24 the top of the page marked 1269 and 1270. Page 1270 will 25 show the production number# which is the first number -- PERRY REPORTING SERVICE ' WATER PCB-SD0000019158 Computer Aided Transcription by Xscribe SB* 1 Q. Right. 2 A. -- dropping from 85,000,000 in 1970, to 3 45,000,000 in *71. 4 Q. Okay. Whan was the production -- whan was 5 tha dacision made to curtail production? $ MR. CCBZHXi Of which Arodors? 1 NR. FBKDSRGASTs Of any of than. 8 A. Tha dacision was aada at that aaatlng I 9 referred to to the CMC in May of 1970. That's when the 10 program was finalized and approved. 11 Q. (BY MR. PENDERGAST) Didanybody -- who was 12 in charge of telling production that production should be 13 winding down? 14 A. That would be Mr. Bergen as the business 15 director, along with Mr. Springgate, the other business 16 director, informing the manufacturing manager, who in turn 17 informed the plants. 18 Q. You felt it would have been a good policy as 19 of May of 1970, to begin winding down production of 20 PCB-containing -- or production of PCBs? 21 A. Yes. 22 Q. Okay. Page 1283references astudy by 23 Monsanto of its employees exposed to PCBs at the Krummrich 24 plant in Sauget, Illinois. 25 A. 1 see that, yes. -----------------------------------PERRY ITSPORT IMG SERVICE---------------------------------- WATER PCB-SD0000019159 Computer Aided Transcription by Ascribe 2T8T 1 Q. Was that study completed? 2 A. This is the study ve referred to yesterday 3 that was broadened, as I understood it, by Dr* William 4 Gaffey. I do not know if it's considered complete* 5 Q. All right* Do you recognise Exhibit No. 15? 6 A. No, Z do not. Z have never seen this before. ? NR. PBNDERGASTs Let's mark that and that. 8 tPlaintiff's Deposition Exhibit Papageorge 9 Nos. 18 through 33 marked for identification.] 10 Q. (BY HR. PENDERGAST) I've got here a number 11 of documents starting with Exhibit No. 8, which I believe 12 are form letters sent out by Monsanto on various dates, 13 and I guess I just wanted to go through them quickly one 14 by one. The first is a February 9, 1970 letter, is it 15 not? The first exhibit. No. 18 -- 16 A. Eighteen. 17 Q. -- is a February 9, 1970 letter? 18 A. Yes. 19 Q. Were you involved at all in the decision to 20 send that letter and the formulation of its language? 21 A. Yes. 22 Q. Okay. Andwhat wasthe basic Intent in 23 putting together this letter? 24 A. This was anattempt to inform ourcustomers 25 on record of Monsanto's current knowledge of what Monsanto PERRY REPORTING SERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000019160 Computer Aided Transcnption oy xscrxoe 1 perceived to be an evolving environmental situation 2 regarding the PCBs. 3 Q. Has this to be sent to all of Monsanto's 4 customers who had PCB-containing products? 5 A, Correct. 6 Q. Would it also include customers who had in 7 the past purchased PCB-containing products, but no longer 8 did? 9 A. As far back as we could go, for three years 10 for sure. 11 Q. What was the source of the mailing list? 12 A. As we discussed earlier, it was primarily the 13 ship to list, bill to list, which could be different, and 14 the accounts receivable, which reflects the bill to. And 15 there is also a summary report that Monsanto had that went 1C back three years, two prior years' sales to this customer 17 at this address, and a projection for the current year, 18 and how much he was buying each month. So, that gave us 19 at least three years of history. 20 Q. Was it intended that this letter reach 21 purchasers of Pydraul 312? 22 A. Tea. 23 0. Was thisletter sent regular mail? 24 A. Yes. 25 Q. Okay. This letterdoesn'tindicate that FERRY REPORTING SERVICE "" WATER PCB-SD0000019161 computer AxamQ transcription toy Ascribe 289 1 there Is any problem with Pydraul 312 products; is that 2 fair to say? 3 MR* SCHINKi What do you mean by "problem"? 4 NR* PBNDBRGASTs Well, I'll stand with my 5 question* 6 MR* SCHZMRi Object to the form* ? A* Well, the word "problem" does appear in this 8 write-up as a problem of environmental contamination as it 9 relates to Aroclor 1254 and 1260. Nothing at this point 10 in time was known about 1242 in the environment. 11 Therefore, there was nothing to relate to the customer. 12 Q. (BY MR. PENDERGAST) Okay. Looking at 13 Exhibit No. 19, which is a letter, who did Monsanto intend 14 would receive this letter? 15 A. This letter was intended to be mailed to 16 purchasers of Monsanto's PCBs who were in what Monsanto 17 called the plasticizer applications, which really 18 interprets into miscellaneous, other than industrial 19 fluids. 20 Q. Both Exhibit Mos* 18 and 19 have the 21 paragraph, "As your supplier of Aroclor 1254 and 1260," et 22 cetera; is that correct? 23 A* Tes, they both have that sentence* 24 Q. Okay* Pydraul 312 did not contain Aroclor 25 1254 or 1260, did it? * PBRRY REPORTING SERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000019162 Computer Aided Transcription oy xscriDe 290 1 A. That la correct. 2 Q. Okay. Is it your still your testiaony that 3 Exhibit No. 8 was intendad to be sent to all customers 4 with products containing PCBs? 5 A. Ho. Z should have bean aora spacific. This 6 specific latter and the wording is designed to be sent to % the purchasers of industrial fluidsf which include the 8 hydraulic fluids. 9 Q. The Pydraul 312 does not contain Aroclor 1254 10 or 1260# does it? 11 A. That is correct. 12 Q. Just so I*m clear on this# was this letter# 13 February 9# 1970# intended to be sent to users of Pydraul 14 312? 15 A. Yes. The letter we are looking at marked 16 Exhibit 18 was intended for that type of customer. 17 Q. Okay. 16 A. You will note -- 19 Q. Go ahead. 20 A. You will note the last paragraph and the 21 emphasis on Industrial chemicals -- 22 Q. Eight. 23 A. -- how eachstate regulates. A key purpose 24 of this letter is to reemphasise that# and this gave us an 25 opportunity to do it. -----------------------------------PERRY HEPORTING'SEKVICE------------------------------ --- WATER PCB-SD0000019163 Computer Aided Transcription oy xscrxoe 29T 1 Q. Okay, My confusion is with the terms of, "As 2 your supplier of 1254 and 1260." Neither of those 3 Aroclors were contained in Pydraul 312. 4 A. That is correct. 5 0. So a manufacturer who had received Pydraul 4 312 would not be receiving Aroclor 12S4 or 1260? I* A. That is true. Be would read that sentence, 6 and it would not relate to him, and he had to read further 9 down and find the product that he can relate to. 10 Q. Okay. So this sentence, "As your supplier of 11 Aroclor 1254 and 1260," didn'tapply to everybody? 12 A. That is true. 13 Q All right. Let's take a look at Exhibit No. 14 20, which is a duplicate of Exhibit No. 19 but for the 15 cover sheet; is that correct. 16 MR. SCHINKs No, it's a duplicate of Exhibit 17 18. 10 MR. PENDERGAST: I'm sorry, 18. 19 MR. SCHINKi Right. It doesn't have the 20 Stroh mailing label on it. 21 A. Right. 22 Q. (BY MR. PENDERGAST) Let's take a look at 23 Exhibit Mo. 21. Do you recognise that at all? 24 A. I do recognize this. It appears to me to 25 consist of two parts. The first two pages are a draft PERRY REPORTING SERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000019164 Computer Aided Transcription by Xscribe f]T2 1 version of what finally became the next tvo pages, which 2 is identical to Exhibit 19. 3 Q. Okay. Let's take a look now at Exhibit No. 4 22# which is a June 11# 1970 letter. Did you have any 5 input into the development of this letter? 6 A. Tea. Q. Who was the Intended recipient of this 8 letter? 9 A. This would be purchasers of PCB-containing - 10 this would have to be the PCB type Aroclors, purchasers of 11 Aroclors that contained PCBs. 12 Q. Okay. Why don't you take a look back at 13 Exhibit No. 15, because that's what I've been referring 14 to. Does that indicate that that letter was to be sent 15 to -- it says "Industrial." 16 A. Yes. 17 0. The letter.Exhibit 22,references aletter 18 of February 27# 1970# which was sent to the ~ I think we 19 already talked about the plasticiser customers. 20 A. Tes. 21 Q. Do you know if Exhibit No. 22 was mailed to 22 the plasticiser customers only# or whether it was mailed 23 to everyone? 24 A. No. Thiswouldbe mailed topurchasers of 25 the Aroclor PCB materials that related to the functional ---------------------------------- PERRY WEPORTXNS-SERVICE----------------------------- --- WATER PCB-SD0000019165 Computer Aided Transcription by xscribe TOT 1 fluid sales group, not to the plasticiser group, because 2 Hr. Olson would have nothing to do with plasticizer 3 customers. 4 0. Okay. The February 27, 1970 letter 5 referenced, however, was apparently sent to the 4 plasticiser group? ? A. Tes. 8 Q. Okay. So there's some -- if this letter was 9 sent to the functional fluids group, the reference to the 10 February 27, 1978 letter probably wouldn't be understood 11 by those people? 12 A. Oh, this does not mean that Hr. Olson didn't 13 also send a letter out on the 27th, which is very, very 14 likely, analagous to what Mr. Schalk did. 15 Q. Okay. Let's take a look at the August 27, 16 1970 letter from Norman T. Johnson, marked as exhibit 17 what, 23? 18 A. Yes. 19 Q. Mho was the intended recipient of that 20 letter? 21 A. This is purchasers of Pydraul F-9. 22 Q. Okay. So this letter should have been mailed 23 to all purchasers of Pydraul F-9? 24 A. Correct. 25 Q. Bow far back did you go to see who had PERRY REPORTING SERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000019166 Computer Aided Transcription~by Xscribe 1 purchased P-9? 2 A. As I indicated, three years as a minimum, and 3 occasionally they were able by other records to find 4 fourth and fifth year back. 5 Q. Has the sending of this letter an important 6 part of your campaign to educate customers on the need to 7 properly contain and handle PCB-containlng fluids? 8 A. It's part of the overall program, yes. 9 Q. Okay. Were each of these letters that we 10 have referred to so far part of that, also part of that 11 campaign? 12 A. Yes. 13 Q. And they were sent out because Monsanto felt 14 that it was important that their customers have the 15 up-to-date information on the handling of Monsanto 16 PCB-containing products; is that correct? 17 A. Thatis correct. IS Q. Take alook at Exhibit 24,the February 1, 19 1971 letter. By the way. Exhibit 23, did you have input 20 into all these letters? 21 A. Yes. 22 Q. Along the line was there anybody in 23 particular who felt that these letters should contain more 24 information than they did? 25 A. No. I don't know ofanybodyin particular, -----------------------------------PERRY REPORTING SERVICE---------------------------------- WATER PCB-SD0000019167 Computer Aiaea Transcription by Xsenoe 2T5 1 no. 2 Q. Okay. Can you think of anybody who on 3 occasion did say, "We should really put a little sore 4 information in this letter*? 5 A. Yeah. Z for one mould vent to add a sentence or a word, or at the same time on a subsequent letter I may ask for deletion. 8 0* Okay. Was it ever the ease in which you were 9 overruled that, "No, Bill, we're not going to put that in 10 there. We don't need that,* or something to that effect? 11 A. No. I don't recall any suggestion made that 12 was overruled, no. 13 Q. Was there anybody during the time these 14 letters were being formulated, was there anybody at 15 Monsanto who felt that Monsanto was not doing enough to 16 educate their customers in the public about the PCB 17 question? 18 A. I'm not aware of anyone. 19 Q. Okay. The letter of February 1, 1971, who 20 was to receive a copy of that? 21 A. Purchasers of the Pydrauls listed in the 22 second paragraphs 23 0. Okay. Is the sseond page of that exhibit -- 24 MR. SCHINKt It's the sane as the first page. 25 Q. (BY MR. PBMDERGAST) -- same, just different PERRY REPORTING SERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000019168 ^.OMtpucer Aiueu iidnsctipcion oy xscrioe 296 1 type? 2 A. Different typewriter to speed up the process. 3 0. Okay. Taking a look at Exhibit 25, the April 4 15, 1971 letter, again, that exhibit consists of two 5 copies apparently typed on different typewriters, same letter* Who is the Intended recipient of that letter? A* These are all Pydraul custoners. 8 Q. In this letter, Mr. Bradford Indicates that, 9 "Over the past year or so we have written you several 10 letters concerning polychlorinated biphenyls and have 11 urged that care be taken to escape of hydraulic fluids 12 containing PCBs into the environment." Is that correct? 13 A. That is correct. 14 Q. Looking at the letters we have looked at, can 15 you tell me which ones indicate that care should be taken 15 to prevent the escape of hydraulic fluids into the 17 environment? 18 A. The first one with the "Chemical Week" 19 article attached. Exhibits 18, 19, .20 and 21 refer to all 20 possible care be taken to prevent environmental 21 contamination, and that's it. 22 Q. Okay. Which exhibit was that? 23 NR. SCHINKt There were four of them he 24 referred to. 25 A. 18, 19, 20 and 21. -----------------------------------PERRY REPORTING SERVICE----------------------------------- WATER PCB-SD0000019169 computer Aided Transcription by Xscribe 797 1 Q. (BY MR. PENDERGAST) And what Is the language 2 In each o those exhibits that refers to that? 3 A. They all contain paragraphs that refer, that 4 read as follovss "We feel that all possible care should 5 be taken in the application, processing and effluent 6 disposal of these products to prevent them becoming environmental contaminants." 8 Q. Okay. And Exhibit 28, this letter was 9 intended to advise Pydraul customers that the 312-A was 10 being ~ that production was being ceased on 312-A? 11 A. We're talking now Exhibit 28? 12 0. Right. 13 A. I don't see a reference specific to 312-A. 14 Q. Okay. 15 A. This refers to all Pydrauls which were sold 16 at that tine. 17 Q. It states in the second sentence, "We have 18 decided to stop using polychlorinated terphenyls as a 19 component in our fluids." Is thatcorrect? 20 A. That is correct. 21 Q. At that time did Monsanto know that the 22 products using the polychlorinated terpheuyls also 23 contained PCBs? 24 A. I don't think so. This was early *72. No, I 25 don't believe so. PERRY REPORTING 8ERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000019170 444IOV4 4^W4V44 /J AOV4 <490 1 Q. When do you think that discovery was made? 2 A* As best I remember, about 1973, '74. 3 Q. Okay. Next exhibit, 27, I believe; is that 4 correct? 5 A. I have it. Q. Is the February 28, 1972 letter Indicating 7 that the new PCS or the new Pydraul fluid was compatible 8 with the old formulation, and that the systems would not 9 have to be drained of PCB containing fluids; is that 10 correct? 11 A. That is correct. 12 Q. In February, 1972, was there anybody at 13 Monsanto who felt that the user should be told to remove 14 the PCB-containing fluids from their machines or plants? 15 A. No. It's not perceived to be a problem when 16 it's contained and handled right. 17 Q. Okay. After you came on in fit. Louis in 18 January, 1970, was there never any discussion after that 19 as to the cost to users of cleaning up PCBs out of their 20 systems? 21 A. There was never any discussion in which I 22 participated. 23 Q. Okay. 24 A. I was not present. I don't know. 25 Q. Do you know if anyone had those discussions? TTSKKY REPORTING SERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000019171 Computer Aided Transcription by xscrioe 1 A. I don't know. 2 Q. Zn formulating this letter, there was no 3 concern given to the cost of removing PCBs from systems in 4 use? 5 A* Oh, Z oan't speak for others. Z don't know. Q. Okay. Were you involved in the drafting of this letter? 8 A. Z saw a draft before it was finalised. That 9 was my involvement. 10 Q. Okay. Who besides Hr. Bergen was involved in 11 drafting the letter, to your knowledge? 12 A. In '72, I believe Mr. Johnson was still 13 involved, and Mr. Bradford and, I believe, at that time 14 Mr. Gossage was a director of marketing. He was involved, 15 also. 16 0. Was there any thought given at that time to 17 advising customers to monitor the discharge into the 18 municipal waste water system for PCBs? 19 A. That was a continuing thought as part of this 20 "Don't Let Zt Escape" program. 21 Q. Okay. Monsanto had found, did it not, that 22 despite its best efforts to contain PCBs in its own 23 plants, that PCBs had gotten into the waste water effluent 24 that was taken to the municipal sever, correct? 25 A. On occasion, yes. PERftY fcfiPORTING SERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000019172 Computer Aided Transcription by Ascribe 1 Q. Okay. Was it a concern of anyone that the 2 users of Monsanto's products be told, "Check your waste 3 water and see if there's PCBs in it"? 4 A. Yea. 5 Q. Okay. And when was that done? Were they ever advised to do that? 7 A. All the marketing people were advised of this 8 early on as a oontinual thing. As 1 indicated earlier, 9 the education part is evergreen. There are new people at 10 all the plants that they call on, and that was their 11 responsibility. 12 Q. Okay. Was that ever sent out in a letter? 13 A. I don't recall seeing one. Thatdoesn't mean 14 it was never done. 15 Q. Did you think it was important to advise 16 users of Pydraul products that they should check their 17 sewage discharge for the presence of PCBs? 18 A. Certainly not only is it important, I think 19 that should be a way of life for them. 20 Q. Beginning when? 21 A. At any timef any plant ought to be 22 knowledgeable what it's sending down the sewer. 23 Q. Okay. Prior tp 1969, did Monsanto believe 24 that die casters were checking their plant effluent for 25 the presence of PCBs? PERKY TrePUKTlNC~ggHVTCE WATER PCB-SD0000019173 Computer Aides Transcription oy xscrioe TOT 1 A. No, because there was no good way to test for 2 PCBs. The methodology wasn't available. 3 Q. Did Monsanto ever disseminate any information 4 to its customers concerning methodology for testing for 5 PCBs after 1969? 6 A. Yes. * X Q. When was that done? 8 A. We had methodology available in early 1970, 9 before the middle of the year. 10 Q. And was that information disseminated to all 11 Monsanto's PCB customers? 12 A. I don't know about all, but the salesmen had 13 copies. They were aware of the availability, and I do 14 know that we got many requests for this methodology. 15 Q. Were the salespeople directed to inform 16 customers of the availabilityof thattechnology? 17 A. Yes. 18 Q. Take a look at the March 15, 1972 letter, 19 again, a letter to Pydraul customers referencing the 20 availability of a new Pydraul product not containing 21 chlorinated hydrocarbons; is that correct? 22 A. That is correct. 23 Q. The August 3rd, 1973 letter. Exhibit ~ 24 MR. SCBINKt Is there some reason you removed 25 the Stroh mailing label from that one? I think that was PERRY REPORTING SERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000019174 Computer Aided Transcription by Xscribe 1 the first page of that exhibit. Is there some reason that 2 isn't a complete document or -- 3 MR. PENDERGAST No. 4 MR. SCHINKi I'm talking about Ixhibit 29. 5 MR. PIMDERGASTt Z was just looking to see 4 whether we had document number 1299 here. MR. SCHINKi I think* yeah* that's the first 8 page of that. X don't see it here. 9 Q. (BY MR. PENDERGAST) In any event, the letter 10 of August 3, 1973 -- 11 MR. SCHINKs Here. I have a copy of it. Why 12 don't you make your exhibit complete. 13 MR. PENDERGAST* All right. Well, I'm not 14 going to ask any questions about document 009299. 15 MR. SCHINK: The point is if you're going to 16 mark an exhibit that's been a produced document in this 17 case, you should mark the complete document rather than a 18 fragment of an incomplete document. 19 Q. (BY MR. PENDERGAST) Well, let me ask. As 20 the document is here -- 21 And if you want to mark this as an exhibit, that's 22 fine. 23 As the document is marked Exhibit 29 in the form 24 that is before you, it's a form letter from Cunning Paton 25 to Monsanto Pydraul customers; is that correct? -----------------------------------I'Irr fcfiPM* ING SERVICE---------------------------------- WATER PCB-SD0000019175 1 A That is correct 2 Q. And have you seen this document before? 3 A. Yes, I have. 4 Q. Okay. And the rest of the documents, 5 including the sections of the "Federal Register" and memo 6 on the incineration services, were all intended to be ily attachments to that letter? 8 A. That is right. 9 Q. Okay. And this advises customers as of 10 August 3rd, 1973, that they should in paragraph 3, 11 ". .review your procedures and inspect your facilities 12 at this time to insure that your operations are in 13 compliance with the new regulations." Correct? 14 A. That is correct. 15 Q. And did Monsanto feel that this was important 16 that this information be disseminated to its product 17 users? 18 A. Yes. 19 Q. And this again was part of your program to 20 keep the customers informed as to the developments on the 21 FCB question? 22 A. Yes. 23 Q. Also, letting the customers know the 24 availability of incineration, correct? 25 A. Yes. FfcRRY REPORTING SERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000019176 Computer Aided Transcription-]^ xscnbe 304 1 Q. Did Monsanto fel at that time that 2 incineration was the best method for disposal of PCBs? 3 A. Yes. 4 Q. This inforaation you felt was important 5 enough to your custoaers to put in a letter and send to then apparently, correct? A. Tes. 8 MR* PBNDERGASTt Okay, X guess we can mark 9 that. 10 [Plaintiff's Deposition Exhibit Papageorge 11 No. 30 marked for identification.) 12 Q. (BY MR. PENDERGAST) For the sake of the 13 record. I'm showing you Exhibit No. 30, which is a 14 document numbered 1299, which was produced by Monsanto to 15 Stcoh in this case, together with Exhibit No. 29, and that 16 appears tobe a mailing label of some sort,correct? 17 A. That is correct. 13 Q. I guess maybe one aore question if I can, and 19 I think a quick way to do this is this way. Yesterday you 20 testified concerning the labeling on the Pydraul products, 21 and particularly, I believe, after 1970, you said it was 22 decided that a sticker should be added to the Pydraul 23 label with an additional warningj is that correct? 24 MR. SCHINKs Mo, he didn't say that. Be said 25 to reemphasize. --------------------------------- PERRY REPORTING SERVICE-------------------------- -------- WATER PCB-SD0000019177 computer Aiaaa Transcription oy xscrioe 305 1 Q. (BY MR* PENDERGAST) I'm sorry. I didn't 2 mean to misconstrue your testimony* Generally speaking, 3 though, to reeaphasize the warnings that had previously 4 been on the labelj is that correct? 5 A. That is correct. 6 Q* Okay* Z have no Interest in going through 7 all of these labels. X have these Identified as labels 8 and inforaation regarding labeling that we have received 9 from Monsanto. If you could, and aaybe -- I would like to 10 find the sticker that I'm looking for. If you could find 11 that for me, we won't have to mark them all and go through 12 them all. 13 A. The sticker that I had referred to earlier is 14 copied on this sheet that is marked is STR 002837. 15 MR. PENDERGAST* Let's mark this. 16 (Plaintiff's Deposition Exhibit Papageorge 17 No. 31 marked for identification.] 18 MR. PENDERGAST* That's now been marked as 19 Exhibit No. 31? 20 A. Yes. 21 Q. And that was added to the Pydraul labels at 22 what time? 23 A. Beginning about April or May of 1970. 24 Q. And which labels was that added to? 25 A. It was added to a label similar to the sheet PERRY REPORTING SERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000019178 computer Aided Transcription Dy Ascribe W 1 that is the document marked STR 002854. 2 0. Why do you say similar to? Was that not ~ 3 A. Because there are others that would show 4 different Pydrauls -- 5 Q. Okay* 6 A* -- to designate the oontents of the package. Q. But with respect to the Pydraul 312# the 9 label that was In effect or in use# I should say# in 1970 9 was STR 002854? 10 A. Yes. 11 HR. PENDERGAST: Let's mark that. 12 (Plaintiff's Deposition Exhibit Papageorge 13 No. 32 marked for identification.] 14 Q. (BY MR. PENDERGAST) That's now been marked 15 as Papageorge Exhibit No. 32 as the Pydraul label that was 16 in use in 1970, Pydraul 312 label? 17 A. Yes. 18 Q. How long hadthat been inuse? 19 A. As best as I can determine# that was in the 20 '50s or '60s# decades. 21 Q. Okay. Howabout for Pydraul P-9? What was 22 the period that that product was -- 23 A. About the sane time; most of these were 24 developed in the '50s. 25 Q. When did Monsanto cease marketing Pydraul -----------------------------------PERRY REPORTING "SERVICE----------------------------- ----- WATER PCB-SD0000019179 WJf AOW44U7 JV/ 1 P-9? 2 A. Oh, I don't know the exact date, but it had 3 to occur the latter part of 1970, early part of 1971. 4 Q. Okay. Was the sticker. Exhibit No. 31, also 5 added to those labels? A. Yes. 7 Q. Can you pick out there the Pydraul P-9 label 8 that was in use at that time? 9 A. It appears that STR 002862 is a copy of that 10 letter 11 Q. And how long had that been in use? 12 A. That particular one, I would suspect about 15 13 years or so. 14 Q. Dating back to 1955? 15 A. '53. 16 MR. PEHDERGASTt Okay. Let's mark that. 17 [Plaintiff's Deposition Exhibit Papageorge 18 No. 33 marked for identification.] 19 Q. (BY NR. PENDERGAST) Showing you Exhibit No. 20 33 then, that was the Pydraul P-9 label in use between 21 1953, until it discontinued production? 22 A. Yes. 23 Q. On each of the labels that we have down in 24 the bottom right-hand corner of the last number, does that 25 indicate on the ones where it's shown the year that that PERRY REPORTING SERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000019180 Computer Aided Transcription by Xscribe 108 1 label, the first year that label was used? 2 A. Tes. 3 Q. Okay. Good enough. 4 Q, Again, the reason for adding the sticker to 5 the label, as opposed to changing labels, was because at < the time it vaa added, Monsanto had already decided that the Pydraul 212 would be discontinued! is that fair? 8 A. That is correct, 9 Q. Okay. Did Monsanto disseminate information 10 to each of its plants in 1970 and thereafter concerning 11 handling of PCB-containing materials and their proper 12 disposal? 13 A. Yes. 14 Q. Okay. . 15 A. It didn't just happen then. It's an ongoing 16 communication. 17 Q. Okay. And those instructions or that 18 Information was committed to writing? 19 MR, SCHXNKi Are you asking about something 20 in addition to the warnings and other literature that we 21 have already looked at that went to all other customers? 22 MR, YKMDBRGASTs I'm talking about within the 23 company right mow, 24 MR. SCHINKs But I mean, for example, if you 25 have a 55-gallon drum of material, whether it goes to a -----------------------------------PERRY REPORTING-SERVICE------------------------------- WATER PCB-SD0000019181 wompucer Aiaea xcanacupcion oy Ascrioe 309 1 die cast manufacturer or a Monsanto plant, it's going to 2 have the same information about handling and proper 3 disposal. 4 Q. (BY MR. PBNDERGAST) I'm talking about an 5 additional internal system of communication. 6 A. Mo. The field salesman would treat the t Monsanto plant in their district as a customer of that 8 product# and he would communicate with the Monsanto 9 people# say# at Pensacola that ve talked about. 10 Q. Bow about at the production facilities? 11 A. I'm sorry? 12 Q. At the production facilities. 13 A. Production facilities? That would be through 14 the manufacturing manager located in St. Louis to 15 communicate to the two producing plants# and he was very 16 well tuned in# and all of it really happened over the 17 telephone# and plus his personal visits. 18 Q. Okay. Have you ever seen any documents 19 relating to the communications between the St. Louis 20 office and the production plants concerning the handling 21 of the PCB-containing -- or PCBs? 22 A. Well# I certainly have seen documents# yes. 23 There are operating procedures# standard manufacturing 24 process manuals. They have paragraphs in them that are 25 reviewed and modified# and yes# there are documents PERRY REPORTING SERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000019182 Computer Aiaa Transcription by Ascribe 310 1 reinforced by the personal contact. 2 MR. PENDERGAST: Okay. Well, that's all I 3 have. 4 MR. SCBINKj I have a couple questions for 5 you, Mr. Papageorge. CROSS-EXAMINATION 8 QUESTIONS BY HR. SCHINKl 9 Q. What vere the risks of ecological effects for 10 the use of PCB Pydrauls by die cast custom% ers at the time 11 the sale of PCB Pydrauls was terminated by Monsanto? 12 A. What were the ecological risks? 13 Q. Right. 14 A. Well, at that time it was perceived that if 15 enough of the PCBs ended up in the environment in a spot 16 that was vulnerable and sensitive, which would include 17 spots such as I had mentioned, or where juvenile shrimp 18 might be located, or the peregrine falcon might be nesting 19 and all, the ecological risks would be one of if enough of 20 this material was available, and the wild creatures in the 21 environment would be exposed, some harm could be noted, 22 and this was undesirable, 23 Q. Onder what circumstances did you believe that 24 this risk might be unreasonable at that time? 25 MR. PENDERGASTi Object to the form of the PERRY REPORTING Service : WATER PCB-SD0000019183 computer Aiaea Transcription by Yscrilae TIT 1 question, 2 A, I would suggest that the circumstance that 3 comes to mind is just careless handling or mishandling, 4 really, 5 Q, (BY MR, 6CHINK) By whoa? * A, By the person -- NX. PENDBRGASTt Object to the fora. 8 A, By the person in possession of the material. 9 MR, PENDERGASTi Object to the form of the 10 question, 11 Q. (BY MR. SCHIHK) Where a die caster using a 12 PCB Pydraul hydraulic fluid had in place at its plant a 13 system to collect any leaked fluid, did you believe that 14 there.was an unreasonable risk of an ecological effect? 15 MR. PENDSRGAST: Object to the form of the 16 question. 17 A. If it's properly collected, it's not going to 18 get into the environment. It's contained and under 19 control. That's the key word, control. 20 Q, (BY MR, SCHINK) And under those 21 circumstances where it was properly contained and 22 controlled by the die cast customer, did you believe there 23 was an unreasonable risk of ecological effects? 24 MR. PENDERGAST* Object to the form of the 25 question. PERRY REPORTING SERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000019184 w VMf WWW* OA MVM *AVU49V4 A W A WU W Jf AO V4 AMO d X.4 1 A. Mo. I do not see any risk. 2 MR. SCHINKt I have nothing further. 3 MR. PENDERGASTs Fine. 4 MR. SCHINKi I think we will have signature 5 before any notary if that's acceptable. 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 PERRY REPORTING SERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000019185 Computer Aided Transcription" by xscrioe JTJ 1 2 WILLIAM B. PAPAGEORGE 3 4 Subscribed end sworn to before me this _ ,5 day of 1988. My commission expires* % 8 9 [Notary Public] 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 frERRY REPORTING SERVICE WATER PCB-SD0000019186 NOTARIAL CERTIFICATE STATE OF MISSOURI CITY OF ST. LOUIS ) ) ) I, KATHRYN T. O'NEILL/ a Registered Professional Reporter and a duly commissioned Notary Public within and for the State of Missouri/ do hereby oertify that pursuant to notice there case before ae at the Paul Brown Building/ 818 Olive Street/ St. Louis, Missouri 3101/ . WILLIAM B. PAPAGBORGE, who was by ae first duly sworn to testify to the truth and nothing but the truth of all knowledge touching and concerning the aatters in controversy in this cause; that the witness was thereupon carefully examined upon oath and said examination was reduced to writing by me; that the signature of the witness was not waived by agreement o all parties; and that this deposition is a true and correct record of the testimony given by the witness. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and seal this 19th day of August, 1988. My commission expires June 3rd, 1990. CNotary Public] WATER PCB-SD0000019187 Percy Reporting Service S18 Olive Street^ Suite 462 St. Louis, Missouri 63101 August 19, 1986 Mr. James B. 8chlnk Messrs. Kirkland k Bills Attorneys at Law 200 Bast Randolph Drive Chicago, Illinois 60601 B< gtroh_Ple_Castlnq Co. -vs- Monsanto Company Dear Mr. 8chlnkt Enclosed please find a carbon copy of the transcript of Mr. Papageorge's deposition, which was taken August 10 and 11, 1988, together with the original signature page and errata sheet. Please have Mr. Papageorge read his deposition at his earliest opportunity, making any changes he feels necessary on the errata sheet and stating his reason for making such change. He should then sign the original signature page and errata sheet in the presence of a notary public and return both to Mr. Carlson, who has the original transcript. Thank you for your assistance in this matter. Very truly yours. Enclosures Kathryn T. O'Neill, R.P.R. WATER PCB-SD0000019188