Document QeNBQMZD00x0QgLe1Dvg9q95

COPY IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE CITY OF ST. LOUIS STATE OF MISSOURI UL'f*t' VA ftJ/ JUDITH and STEPHEN BECHTOLD, Plaintiffs, vs. MONSANTO COMPANY and WESTINGHOUSE ELECTRIC CORPORATION, ) ) ) ) ) ) rv1-"! VV Cause No. 862-00694 Division No. 1 " Defendants. DEPOSITION OF WILLIAM B. PAPAGEORGE, P.E. Taken on behalf of the Plaintiffs May 18, 1994 L.A.I. REPORTING 45 GAMLIN DRIVE FAIRVIEW HEIGHTS, ILLINOIS 1-800-289-7812 62208 WATER PCB-SD0000015240 IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE CITY OF ST. LOUIS STATE OF MISSOURI JUDITH and STEPHEN BECHTOLD, Plaintiffs, vs. MONSANTO COMPANY and WESTINGHOUSE ELECTRIC CORPORATION, Defendants. ) ) ) ) ) Cause No. 862-00694 ) ) Division ) ) No. 1 . ) ) DEPOSITION OF WILLIAM B. PAPAGEORGE, P.E., produced, sworn, and examined on behalf of the Plaintiffs, May 18, 1994, between the hours of eight o'clock in the forenoon and six o'clock in the afternoon of that day, at the offices of Wilburn, Suggs & Watkins, 1221 Locust Street, St. Louis, Missouri 63103, before VICTORIA MENAUGH FAUSER, a Certified Shorthand Reporter and a Notary Public within and for the State of Missouri. APPEARANCES The Plaintiffs was represented by Joseph A. Race and C. Joseph Murray of the Muray Law Firm, 650 Poydras Street, New Orleans, Louisiana 70130. The Defendant Monsanto Company was represented by Carol A. Rutter of the law offices of Husch & Eppenberger, 100 North Broadway, St. Louis, Missouri 63102. The Defendant Westinghouse Electric Corporation was represented by Richard A. Wunderlich of the law offices of Lewis, Rice & Fingersh, 8182 Maryland Avenue, St. Louis, Missouri 63105. WATER PCB-SD0000015241 IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED by and between Counsel for the Plaintiffs and Counsel for the Defendants, that this deposition may be taken in shorthand by VICTORIA MENAUGH FAUSER, a Certified Shorthand Reporter and Notary Public, and afterwards transcribed into typewriting and signed by the witness. 0O0 WILLIAM B. PAPAGEORGE, P.E., of lawful age, being produced, sworn and examined on the part of Plaintiffs, deposes and says: DIRECT EXAMINATION QUESTIONS BY MR. RACE: Q. Could you state your name for the record, please? A. William B. Papageorge. MR. RACE: For purposes of this deposition, I want the record to reflect that we had originally scheduled a corporate deposition of Monsanto. Counsel for Monsanto indicated that he would file and did in fact file a protective order. In an attempt to circumvent that impasse we agreed to go forward with the deposition of Mr. Papageorge with the hope WATER PCB-SD0000015242 4 1 that subsequent to this deposition we can reformulate a 2 corporate deposition premised on perhaps Mr. Papageorge's 3 independent recollection of events, how much he'll need 4 documentation, whether he can answer this without 5 documentation and if we can explore his background which may 6 provide us with an opportunity to reformulate a notice of 7 deposition which would be mutually agreeable to the parties 8 without requiring intervention of court. Okay? 9 MS. SUTTER: For the record, I would state that 10 there has been a lot of correspondence that has been exchanged 11 between counsel on this topic. It is true that a very broad 12 corporate designation notice was filed by Plaintiffs, that a 13 motion for protective order was filed by Monsanto, an argument 14 date was set and then Counsel discussed the matter and as a 15 result of that discussion Mr. Papageorge is here in his 16 personal capacity and it is my understanding that Counsel 17 intends to take this deposition and then perhaps reformulate 18 and narrow the deposition notice as you deem fit. 19 MR. RACE: Okay. 20 MS. SUTTER: Within the parameters permitted by 21 the Case Management Order in this case. . 22 Q. (BY MR. RACE) Mr. Papageorge, by whom are you 23 employed presently? 24 A. Presently I consider myself self-employed. 25 Q. Okay. And you do consulting work; correct? WATER PCB-SD0000015243 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 x22 23 24 25 5 A. Yes. Q. And you're consulting for Monsanto? A. That's one of the clients. Q. Do you consult for anyone other than Monsanto? A. On occasion, yes. Q. In what capacity do you consult for Monsanto? A. I consult with Monsanto on matters pertaining to PCBs as they occurred in the period of time prior to 1976. Q. And your consultation with Monsanto is in the context of PCB litigation; is that correct? A. Primarily, yes. Q. Is there any non-PCB litigation? A. No. Q. Okay. Just a couple of ground rules here. I known you've given a multitude of depositions, but if you do not understand any of my questions, please ask me to repeat them or rephrase them, because I will assume that your responses are answering my questions. Okay? A. I'll try. Q. Okay. Secondly, and occasionally this occurs where the witness attempts to answer the question before the question is completed, conversely attorneys try to ask the questions before answers are completed. Why don't we give ourselves a fair shake on this one and you wait until I'm finished and I'll wait until you're finished. Okay? WATER PCB-SD0000015244 6 1 A. Fine. 2 Q. Now, you said you're a consultant. In what 3 capacity -- excuse me. What do you charge per hour? 4 A. A hundred twenty-five dollars an hour. 5 Q. Okay. When working at -- let's go back to this. 6 How long have you been a consultant for Monsanto? 7 A. Since the beginning of 1987. 8 Q. And that's continuously through present? 9 A. Yes. 10 Q. How much do you derive on an annual basis from 11 your consulting work with Monsanto? 12 A. A hundred twothousanddollars. 13 Q. That's$102,000 fromthe period 1987 to present 14 or is that annual? 15 A. That's annual. 16 Q. Okay. Now, how many hours per week or per year, 17 can you give me an idea of how often you're doing the 18 consulting? 19 A. I've never kept score. It varies. 20 Q. Let me ask you this way: Does your income or 21 does your salary with Monsanto vary based on the work you do 22 or is that a flat rate? 23 A. Our agreement consists of two features: There is 24 the hourly rate I mentioned and then there is a retainer per 25 month and if the hours I devote to this activity exceed the WATER PCB-SD0000015245 7 1 multiplication of the 125 times the hour, if they exceed the 2 monthly retainer I am paid the difference. 3 Q. Okay. 4 A. And that 125 is really the retaining amount. 5 Q. Okay. Have you exceeded that hourly rate then? 6 A. I did one year. I can't recall just which year 7 it was. 8 Q. Can you give me an idea of how many litigations 9 you have testified in? 10 A. In trials or -- 11 Q. Yes. Or how many -- 12 A. Depositions? 13 Q. Let me rephrase the question. How many cases 14 have you been involved in since your retention by Monsanto in 15 the capacity as a consultant? 16 A. I have not kept a record. It's going to be a 17 best guess. 18 Q. Fine. 19 A. About a dozen. 20 Q. Okay. And each of those 12 cases involved PCBs? 21 A. Yes. . 22 Q. During any of those cases have you been 23 designated as a corporate representative for purposes of 24 deposition or trial? 25 A. Yes. WATER PCB-SD0000015246 8 1 Q. With respect to purposes of the deposition, have 2 you been assigned any area with respect to corporate 3 depositions? 4 MS. SUTTER: Objection to the overbroad and vague 5 form of the question. 6 Q. (BY MR. RACE) Subject to the objection, do you 7 understand the question? 8 A. I believe I do. 9 Q. Okay. 10 A. I don't know any specific area that I was 11 assigned. It seemed to we covered topics that in my mind 12 or my understanding involve different kinds of activities. 13 Q. Okay. Then let's go to -- back to when you were 14 last employed by Monsanto, and that was 1980 what? 15 A. The end of 1986 was my last working day. 16 Q. So you started as a consultant immediately upon 17 your retirement? 18 A. I think I had a three- or four-month period there 19 before I heard from Monsanto. 20 Q. Okay. What was your capacity at the time PCBs 21 were manufactured by Monsanto? . 22 MS. SUTTER: I would object to the overbroad form 23 of the question, but you may answer if you understand. 24 A. It would be all the positions I held within 25 Monsanto from the year 1951 until I retired in 1986. WATER PCB-SD0000015247 9 1 Q. Okay. How many of those are there? 2 A. Ten, twelve. 3 Q. Okay, can you give me anidea of -- first of 4 all, what's your educational background? 5 A. I have a Bachelor of Science Degree in chemical 6 engineering from Washington University in St. Louis which I 7 received in 1943. I have -- 8 Q. And a Master's of Science in chemical 9 engineering; correct? 10 A. I was going to add that. I mentioned the 11 Bachelor's and I have a Master's of Science from the same 12 institution in 1947. 13 Q. And when originally employed by Monsanto that was 14 in what capacity? 15 A. I was a process engineer in the plant engineering 16 department. 17 Q. Can you generally describe the areas to which you 18 were assigned? 19 A. Yes, I can. It involved -- half of my career 20 involved work in plants that manufactured chemicals. In those 21 plants I held positions in engineering departments, in. 22 maintenance departments and in production departments. 2 3 Q. When did you first become involved with PCBs? 24 A. In about 1957 or so I was in charge of a group of 25 maintenance personnel that in turn were involved with the \ WATER PCB-SD0000015248 10 1 occasional installation of electrical equipment which included 2 PCBs. 3 Q. Okay. Can you describe in broad terms, and I cut 4 you off, perhaps I did, what your involvement with PCB was 5 from the maintenance supervisor through your retirement? 6 A. All right. I was a superintendent at a plant to 7 which the utilities department reported. Now, utilities is 8 that department that concerned itself with electricity, steam, 9 water and the like, and there I was involved with PCBs in 10 their use in the electrical equipment in the electrical 11 distribution system of the plant. Also when I held that 12 superintendency I had a unit that blended chemicals and some 13 of the blending involved the use of PCBs in the mixture that 14 ended up in the product. That was about 1963. In 1964 as a 15 general manufacturing superintendent I was involved with PCBs 16 in that they were present in equipment used in the 17 manufacturing process, such as in air compressors and in heat 18 transfer systems that were operated by the people reporting to 19 my group. I forgot to mention that there was a period of time 20 in about 1957, '58 when I was a superintendent of maintenance 21 to which the mechanics in the plant, the maintenance people 22 reported and they of course were involved with all matters of 23 equipment that contained PCBs, whether they are in electrical 24 equipment, heat transfer systems, machinery like compressors. 25 Then in 1965 I was appointed the manager at the plant in WATER PCB-SD0000015249 11 1 Anniston, Alabama where PCBs were manufactured, so there of 2 course I had a broader involvement; manufactured the 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 trying to decide where you have previously testified and in 16 what areas you feel you have expertise to testify or in the 17 past on behalf of Monsanto. Okay? 18 A. Fine. 19 Q. The chemical composition of PCBs in the products 20 sold by Monsanto, to include Inerteen, have you previously 21 testified and have knowledge about that area? . 22 A. I have testified. I believe I have some 23 knowledge. 24 Q. Some knowledge. Is there somebody in Monsanto 25 who has more knowledge? WATER PCB-SD0000015250 12 1 MS. SUTTER: Objection. Calls for speculation 2 and conjecture. 3 A. I was trying to think. I just can't put myself 4 in the heads of other people. 5 Q. (BY MR. RACE) That's true. 6 A. I think I'm conversant with the kinds of things 7 that would be described in talking of these chemicals. 8 Q. Okay. So you have addressed the areas of, as a 9 represent -- now, all these questions I'm asking you now is 10 when you have testified on behalf of Monsanto in the capacity 11 of a designated corporate representative. Okay? 12 A. Yes, I understand. 13 MS. SUTTER: Well, for the record, that was not 14 made clear previously. You're now saying that that is what 15 you're doing. 16 Q. (BY MR. RACE) If I have not made that clear I'm 17 glad I'm doing so. Okay. The chemical compositions of PCBs 18 and related products, have you testified about that area? 19 MS. SUTTER: As a corporate designee? 20 MR. RACE: I said all these questions until I say 21 they do not do, otherwise I'm going to have to repeat that. 22 So does that create a problem for you, Carol? 23 MS. SUTTER: I think that's a confusing way to do 24 it, but you've said what you are doing. 25 A. I am having some difficulty because of the many WATER PCB-SD0000015251 13 1 times I've testified distinguishing or recalling when the -- 2 the situations when I was asked to describe the chemical 3 compositions of these materials as the corporate 4 representative - as distinguished from my personal 5 involvement. 6 Q. Okay. That would be the case in any question I 7 would phrase in that way; correct? 8 MS. SUTTER: Objection. Calls for speculation. 9 Q. (BY MR. RACE) Subject to the objection. 10 A. I believe so, yes. 11 Q. Let's make it easy on both of us: When you 12 testified in this PCB litigation -- let's broaden the 13 question. Have you testified concerning the chemical 14 composition? 15 A. I have. 16 Q. Okay. Have you testified about the toxicity of 17 PCBs? 18 A. I have -- yes, I have been involved with 19 questions and attempted to respond to those questions relating 20 to toxicity, yes. 21 Q. Would you defer to anybody else at Monsanto for 22 answering those types of questions on toxicity? 23 A. Certainly. 24 Q. Who would that be? Dr. Kelly, for example? 25 A. Dr. Kelly. WATER PCB-SD0000015252 14 1 Q. With respect to the chemical compositions, you 2 feel as though you could accurately represent Monsanto as to 3 what are contained in the products? 4 A. It depends on the detail of the explanation that 5 you're looking for. If you want someone to describe exactly 6 which of the isomers are present and what other materials are 7 present in this Inerteen mixture, for example, that would take 8 someone who has analytical chemistry expertise that I 9 personally do not have. 10 Q. That would be someone like Dr. Kaley? 11 A. Dr. Keller is certainly one of those individuals. 12 MS. SUTTER: I think he said Kaley and he 13 responded with Keller, just so -- 14 A. Well, Dr. Kaley is also knowledgeable. 15 Q. (BY MR. RACE) With respect to -- Strike that. 16 Have you testified with respect to the animal and human 17 studies conducted on behalf of Monsanto? 18 MS. SUTTER: Object to the compound form of the 19 question. 20 A. I have responded to questions with answers that I 21 would call a layman's understanding of the situation as 22 coached by medical experts and toxicologists. 23 Q. Do you have knowledge concerning which tests were 24 done on behalf of Monsanto? 25 A. I understand the studies -- that some studies WATER PCB-SD0000015253 15 1 were made using animals. 2 Q. Okay. 3 A. I have no information whatever relating to human 4 studies. 5 Q. Okay. Have you ever reviewed records by -- 6 Monsanto records regarding the number of studies that were 7 conducted and the types of studies that were conducted? 8 A. I have been privileged to review documents that 9 reflected the results of studies. 10 Q. Okay. 11 A. Which speak of records. I -- I don't know 12 exactly what you mean by that. 13 Q. Records or documents. I'm just saying documents. 14 Excuse me. 15 A. I have seen reports from laboratories describing 16 the tests and the results of the tests. 17 Q. Okay. And those documents help refresh your mind 18 as you sit here today? 19 A. Certainly. 20 Q. Okay. And you have not had the benefit of 21 reviewing any documents prior to this deposition in . 22 preparation for this deposition; is that correct? 23 A. I have reviewed a few documents. 24 Q. You have? 25 A. Uh-huh. (Yes) WATER PCB-SD0000015254 16 1 Q. What documents have you reviewed for this 2 deposition; do you recall? 3 A. I'm trying to remember. About a dozen at the 4 most. 5 Q. What are the nature of those documents? 6 A. I've seen these documents so often I can't place 7 them in time and to which case they involve. I recall some 8 Monsanto memoranda. I recall some correspondence between 9 Monsanto and Westinghouse. I recall excerpts of minutes of 10 meetings of Monsanto corporate committees. I recall a summary 11 of minutes of a meeting of a committee that I chaired relating 12 to the proper use of PCBs in electrical equipment. That's all 13 that comes to mind at the moment. 14 Q. When did you review those documents? 15 A. I'm trying to recall when we -- certainly last 16 Monday. 17 Q. Okay. 18 A. And there was a day prior to that, we looked at a 19 couple, three. It was a week before that. I don't remember 20 which day. And this morning a couple of them. 21 Q. Had you previously prepared to give a deposition 22 as a corporate representative in this case, this being the 23 Bechtold case? 24 A. Not that I was aware of. 25 Q. Okay. And those documents helped refresh your WATER PCB-SD0000015255 17 1 recollection of events that occurred over the past 30 years? 2 MS. SUTTER: Objection. 3 A. That's always the way, sir. 4 MR. RACE: I called for the production of those 5 documents. 6 MS. SUTTER: Counsel, for the record, you 7 produced a stack of documents to our office and I -- he's 8 testified to a dozen. I don't know if the dozen can be 9 windowed out of that set, but we will attempt to do so. 10 MR. RACE: I would appreciate that, if I could. 11 Were there any documents that he reviewed that were not 12 contained in that set? 13 MS. SUTTER: I don't know. 14 MR. RACE: Who would know? 15 MS. SUTTER: No. (Shakes Head) 16 MR. RACE: You don't know what your witness 17 reviewed? 18 MS. SUTTER: He reviewed documents that you 19 produced. 20 MR. RACE: Okay. And my question was did he 21 review any documents that I did not produce and you said you 22 don't know. That's fine. I mean, I'm not going to fight you 23 on this. That's fine. 24 MS. SUTTER: It's not my deposition. I'm not 25 being deposed, Joseph. I will cooperate with you in the WATER PCB-SD0000015256 18 1 manner in which I said I would cooperate with you before. 2 MR. WUNDERLICH: When were these documents 3 produced? 4 MR. RACE: These were my response to 5 interrogatories that were Fed Ex'd to you. 6 Q. (BY MR. RACE) Have you testified with respect to 7 indemnity agreements specifically between Monsanto and 8 Westinghouse? 9 A. I have answered to questions raised in that area, 10 yes. 11 Q. Once again, would you defer to anybody else with 12 respect to that from Monsanto? 13 MS. SUTTER: Objection to the vague form of the 14 question. 15 A. Yes, I would suggest that a person like Mr. 16 Gossage was a lot closer to it than I certainly was. 17 Q. Let me back up again. With respect to toxicity, 18 it was -- Strike that. With respect to the chemical 19 composition, it was Dr. Keller or Dr. Kaley, is that correct, 20 who you would defer to? 21 A. Yes, Dr. Keller is Dr. Kaley's supervisor.so they 22 both belong to the same team. 23 Q. With respect totoxicity? 24 A. Toxicity, I would go to Dr. Kelly. 25 Q. Kelly? WATER PCB-SD0000015257 19 1 A. Kelly. 2 Q. Okay. The tests performed by Monsanto, which 3 tests were performed by Monsanto, once again that would be Dr. 4 Kelly? 5 A. Yes. 6 Q. Indemnity, you have knowledge about the indemnity 7 agreements; is that correct? 8 A. I do. 9 Q. And you have testified as a corporate 10 representative with respect to indemnity agreements? 11 A. Yes, I believe I have. 12 Q. With respect to lawsuits, you have previously 13 testified, as you have today, in lawsuits in which Monsanto 14 was involved in; correct? 15 A. Yes, sir. 16 Q. Okay. With respect to contamination in dioxin? 17 MS. SUTTER: In dioxin? 18 Q. (BY MR. RACE) Excuse me. With respect to 19 contaminates in PCB. 20 MS. SUTTER: Just so your question is clear, your 21 questions relate to has he ever testified -- . 22 MR. RACE: On behalf of Monsanto. 23 MS. SUTTER: You're not limiting this as to 24 corporate designee? 25 MR. RACE: No. WATER PCB-SD0000015258 20 1 A. I don't recall testifying relating to 2 contaminates in PCBs as a corporate representative. 3 Q. (BY MR. RACE) Have you done so in any 4 deposition? 5 A. In deposition regarding my personal knowledge, 6 yes, I have tried to respond to the questions. 7 Q. Have you testified with respect to warnings 8 provided by Monsanto with respect to the use and potential 9 dangers of PCBs? 10 A. I've testified many times on that subject. I 11 believe I testified as a corporate representative. 12 Q. With respect to warnings, is that an area in 13 which you require or would benefit from having documentation 14 in front of you before testifying or is it -- 15 A. That's always the case, sir. 16 Q. So with each of these areas you feel more 17 comfortable -- is it a fair statement you feel more 18 comfortable having documentation in front of you while 19 testifying? 20 MS. SUTTER: Objection. I object to the 21 incredibly overbroad and vague form of the question. We've 22 been in the deposition now for 40 minutes and I think the 23 question is far too broad. 24 Q. (BY MR. RACE) Can you answer? 25 A. Generally a document that's appropriate to the WATER PCB-SD0000015259 21 1 subject being discussed does help recall some details that my 2 memory may have failed me on. 3 Q. Okay. Are there any areas in which you feel 4 comfortable testifying that would not require or be assisted 5 by having a document in front of you? 6 MS. SUTTER: Objection. That's incredibly broad 7 and over vague. It's far too broad and over vague. As 8 phrased I don't see how it's capable of being responded to. 9 A. I don't quite know how to respond to your 10 question. I can respond to questions as best my memory can 11 help me. 12 Q. Okay. 13 A. Sometimes it's very, very vivid. The use of a 14 document is just a -- an additional assistance in recalling 15 the specifics that -- the detail that might or might not be 16 significant. 17 Q. Okay. You have testified with respect to 18 Monsanto's involvement with government regulations of PCB? 19 A. I have. 20 Q. You've testified with respect to the IBT studies? 21 A. I have responded to questions concerning IBT 22 studies, yes. 23 Q. Have you testified with respect to the 24 precautions installed by Monsanto with respect to their own 25 personnel and safety of their own personnel? WATER PCB-SD0000015260 22 1 A. Yes. 2 Q. Okay.Have you testified about alternatives to 3 PCBs, the development of alternatives? 4 A. The development? To a limited degree, yes, sir. 5 Q. Okay. Have you testified as to comparison of 6 European versus American PCBs? 7 A. Yes, in a limited area relating to those 8 materials, yes. 9 Q. Okay. Do you have any knowledge or -- Strike 10 that. Have you testified with respect to any threats of 11 lawsuits by Westinghouse, General Electric or any other 12 purchaser of PCBs which may result from -- which could have 13 resulted from Monsanto's unilateral decision to stop supplying 14 PCBs prior to the date upon -- prior to 1977? 15 A. I believe I've testified on that, but as a 16 personal piece of information, not with the corporate 17 representation, no. 18 MS. SUTTER: Mr. Papageorge, it's my 19 understanding, and Joseph, please correct me if I'm not 20 correct, when you're asking him these questions you're asking 21 him if he's testified ever on the topic, you're not limiting 22 it to a corporate designee. 23 A. I misunderstood. I thought we were still on the 24 corporate designee on all of these. 25 Q. (BY MR. RACE) No. Does it change -- well, WATER PCB-SD0000015261 23 1 you've just testified that you have in fact given testimony in 2 each of these areas? 3 A. Yes, I have. 4 Q. And now you're telling me each area that you've 5 responded that you've given testimony in these areas that when 6 you've responded yes you're indicating that you have done so 7 as a corporate representative; is that correct? 8 MS. SUTTER: Objection to the form of the 9 question. I think you're mischaracterizing his testimony. 10 A. When the question was asked of me I assumed going 11 back where we talked about as a corporate representative I 12 tried to respond with a definite yes as a corporate 13 representative. If I didn't answer as a corporate 14 representative I tried to make that distinction in my 15 response. 16 Q. Okay. So I can assume reading this transcript 17 that any time you said "yes, I testified," that would be as a 18 corporate representative unless you specifically denote that I 19 did so from a personal capacity; is that correct? 20 MS. SUTTER: Objection to the form of the 21 question. It is unfair based on the prior exchanges that have 22 gone on. You made one set of rules, Mr. Race, and then you 23 changed them in midstream. I objected at the outset that this 24 was a very confusing manner to conduct this questioning. The 25 transcript will reflect at one point in time you made one set WATER PCB-SD0000015262 24 1 of rules and at one point you made a set second set of rules 2 and at one point in time you asked about corporate 3 representatives when you stopped asking about that, so to try 4 to get a generalization is grossly unfair. 5 Q. (BY MR. RACE) Can you give me a general? 6 A. At this time I find myself somewhat confused. 7 Q. I apologize. I wasn't sure how to do it at the 8 outset. But the areas that we have talked about you have 9 testified either as a personal capacity or as a corporate 10 representative; is that a fair statement? 11 A. Yes, and I also mentioned others were better 12 qualified to respond than I am. 13 Q. Just for the completeness of the record, each of 14 the areas which we mentioned that you have testified on, 15 records would assist you in the accuracy and completeness of 16 your testimony; is that correct? 17 MS. SUTTER: Objection. Asked and answered and 18 mischaracterizes prior testimony. 19 A. Documents on occasion are helpful depending on 20 the amount of detail that's suggested in the question. There 21 are many areas where my recall is quite good and I can. respond 22 without the document. There are areas where some points of 23 that question I just -- it doesn't come to mind quickly and a 24 document helps. 25 Q. Okay. WATER PCB-SD0000015263 25 1 (WHEREUPON A BRIEF RECESS WAS HELD) 2 Q. (BY MR. RACE) At what point did Monsanto first 3 know that PCBs were contaminated with furans? 4 MS. SUTTER: Objection to the overbroad form of 5 the question. 6 A. Early -- well, at -- 7 MR. RACE: Counsel, for the record, what is wrong 8 with overbroad that is to form? Just take note that every 9 deposition I've given you or Tom are on every page and it must 10 be because my questions are all overbroad or poorly phrased. 11 Maybe you can enlighten me or maybe you want to be on every 12 page, I'm not sure. 13 MS. SUTTER: I am attempting -- let me attempt to 14 respond to make my objection as to form more specific, yet I 15 am trying very hard not to give -- make speeches and to keep 16 my objections succinct. I think that stating PCBs without 17 qualifying whose PCBs they are make the question overbroad as 18 to form. 19 Q. (BY MR. RACE) Okay. The question stands. Can 20 you give me an answer, please? 21 A. Would you -- 22 23 24 25 WATER PCB-SD0000015264 26 1 Q. Holland in specific, and it was Dr. Vos; is that 2 correct? 3 A. That's correct. 4 MS. SUTTER: Could you allow the witness to 5 finish his answer, please? 6 A. That group under direction of Dr. Vos had 7 determined the presence of furans in PCB industrial materials 8 manufactured by European companies but he did not find it in 9 samples of material obtained from Monsanto's unit out of the 10 United Kingdom. 11 Q. Okay. Did Monsanto U.S. send Dr. Vos any samples 12 of PCBs manufactured here in the United States? 13 A. Eventually, yes. 14 Q. And eventually is when? 15 A. Oh, between the period 1970 and 1974 or so. 16 Q. Somewhere between -- as early as 1970 or as late 17 as 1974? 18 A. Yes. 19 Q. Do you recall specifically when, more 20 specifically when? 21 A. No, Idon't. . 22 Q. Do you know anybody at Monsanto that does? 23 A. I certainly can't put myself in somebody else's 24 head as to what they recall, but Dr. Keller would have been 25 the person that I would consult with. WATER PCB-SD0000015265 27 Q. In fact. Dr. Keller conversed -- conveyed the findings to you; is that correct? The Vos findings? A. Well, the initial findings came out of Monsanto's European representatives and these findings were not specific in terms of amounts and which manufacturer's product was tested and so on until Monsanto people, including me, went to the laboratory in the Netherlands and talked with Dr. Vos and his team, and that's when to the best of my knowledge we got more specific numbers as to amounts of the furans found. Q. Okay. And do you recall what the contamination levels were? A. No, I don't. It's been over two decades. Q. When Monsanto sent the furans to Dr. Vos excuse me. Strike that. When Monsanto sent the PCBs, the U.S. PCBs to Dr. Vos in Holland and they were examined, did Dr. Vos substantiate that there were furan contamination in Monsanto U.S. PCBs? A. He did not. Q. When was it first learned that contamination was in Monsanto's U.S.-produced PCBs? A. The initial report that Monsanto received.came from the Food and Drug Administration laboratories in the United States, but that initial report was one of skepticism on the part of the FDA chemists as to were they really seeing the furans or were they misinterpreting their results. This WATER PCB-SD0000015266 28 1 was in 1975, as best I recall, early '75. 2 Q. Okay. Did they suspect that -- Strike that. So 3 in 1975 it was established that furans were in Monsanto PCBs; 4 correct? 5 A. In 1975 at a national meeting held on PCBs in 6 Chicago the Food and Drug Administration went on record as 7 having identified the furans in Monsanto-produced PCBs but 8 only as I recall two of the commercial mixtures that were 9 sold, not the third one. 10 Q. Do you know -- do you recall which two mixtures? 11 A. The mixture referred to by Monsanto is Aroclor 12 1242 and Aroclor 1254. 13 Q. When did Monsanto start making Aroclor 1242? 14 A. Well, Monsanto purchased a company that made the 15 1242 type of PCB in 1935, so that's Monsanto's first 16 involvement. 17 Q. Okay. Was the manufacturing process altered from 18 1935 to 1970? 19 A. Not significantly. 20 Q. Okay. Did Monsantosuspect by any means that 21 furans were inPCBs prior to 1970?. 22 A. No. 23 Q. Okay. If furans were found in polychlorinated 24 naphthalenes, would that lead you to suspect that furans may 25 also be present inpolychlorinated biphenyls? WATER PCB-SD0000015267 29 1 MS. SUTTER: Objection to the overbroad and vague 2 form of the question. 3 A. Oh, that's -- that would amount to scientific 4 speculation. There are chlorinations of the processes, but b c\ 5 not knowing -- I don't know the process 'of.-which chlorinated 6 naphthalene is made so I really don't know. 7 Q. Does the manufacturing process of trichlorophenol 8 parallel the chemistry of polychlorinated biphenyl? 9 MS. SUTTER: Objection to the confusing form of 10 the question. 11 A. I'm having difficulty with your use of the word 12 parallel. I don't know quite how to define that in my own 13 thinking. There are of course organic chemicals involved and 14 then there is chlorine involved. Other than that I don't know 15 of any other parallelism. 16 Q. Is Dr. Keller still alive, to your knowledge? 17 A. Keller? 18 Q. Keller. 19 A. As far as I know, yes, sir. 20 Q. Okay. Wheeler is now deceased? 21 A. Yes. 22 Q. Prior to 1970 was Monsanto aware that furans and 23 dioxins could be produced during the manufacture of 24 trichlorophenols? 25 A. I don't know that. WATER PCB-SD0000015268 30 1 Q. Is it not true that dioxin can be produced with 2 partial oxidation of chlorobenzenes? 3 MS. SUTTER: Could you repeat that, please, 4 Counsel? 5 Q. (BY MR. RACE) Is it true that dioxins can be 6 produced by partial oxidation of chlorobenzenes? 7 A. That is my understanding. 8 Q. Okay. And chlorobenzenes are added to PCBs in 9 transformer application; correct? 10 A. Some transformer applications, yes. 11 Q. And that's the Aroclor 1254; correct? 12 A. Well, that's one of the PCB mixtures used. There 13 is* others as well. 14 Q. Okay. Are there -- is there any chlorobenzene 15 added to Inerteen? 16 A. Some of Westinghouse's Inerteens contain 17 chlorobenzene. 18 Q. And that would be designated Inerteen PPO? 19 A. That's certainly one of the designations. 20 Q. Was the chlorobenzene added by -- added to 21 Inerteen added -- well, strike that. Was the chlorobenzene 22 added by Monsanto to the Inerteen? 23 MS. SUTTER: Objection. Calls for speculation 24 and conjecture. 25 A. You'll have to help me with the point in time. WATER PCB-SD0000015269 31 1 Q. (BY MR. RACE) Okay. Between 1965 and 1970 was 2 it added -- was chlorobenzene added to Inerteen by Monsanto? 3 MS. SUTTER: Objection to the overbroad form of 4 the question, contains undefined terms. 5 A. In the period of time you mentioned Monsanto did 6 blend its PCB materials with chlorobenzene for some of 7 Westinghouse's Inerteen formulations. 8 Q. (BY MR. RACE) Okay. And that was blended at the 9 Monsanto facility and then shipped to Westinghouse; correct? 10 A. Yes. 11 Q. Under what circumstances is dioxin derived from 12 chlorobenzene? 13 A. I don't pose to be the chemical expert on these 14 chemical reactions, but I have an understanding that it 15 takes -- of course the presence of the benzene ring has to be 16 present and oxygen of course has to be present togive the 17 dioxin combination. The chlorine is of course there because 18 it's present initially with the chlorobenzene and then a high 19 temperature must be achieved, and it's my understanding that 20 temperature has to be -- these are not the exact numbers, 300 21 to 600 degrees Centigrade, something like that. . 22 Q. (BY MR. RACE) And that would be the temperature 23 that would be produced or result from welding? 24 A. I don't know the temperature of welding so I 25 cannot relate that. WATER PCB-SD0000015270 32 1 Q. Was chlorobenzene added to any other Inerteens 2 other than Inerteen PPO? 3 A. At this point in time I don't recall all of the 4 Inerteens prepared for Westinghouse. I just -- I just can't 5 recall. But there were -- as best I recall there is certainly 6 more than just PPO. I don't recall all of them. And through 7 the period of time, as I recall, there were some changes made 8 with different Inerteen designations and different recipes, if 9 you will, for making them. 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 A. Yes. 23 Q. And that was known back in 1970; correct? 24 A. Yes. 25 Q. Mr. Papageorge, do you recognize -- why don't we WATER PCB-SD0000015271 33 1 mark this. Let me call your attention to the first paragraph. 2 That which I've handed the Doctor is a letter from Papageorge 3 to J.R. Savage dated October 26, 1970. 4 A. It looks like a copy of a memorandum that I 5 authored back in October of 1970. 6 Q. It indicates that dibenzylfuran is in Santowax R. 7 A. It does say that, yes. 8 Q. And the inference that we can assume is that 9 since dibenzylfuran is in Santowax, and Santowax is 10 manufactured -- is used in the manufacture of Aroclor, 11 therefore dibenzylfurans may be in Aroclors? 12 A. Santawax R is terphenyl, not biphenyl. The 13 Aroclors referred to here are the chlorinated terphenyls which 14 is the Aroclor 5,000 series, not the Aroclor 1200 series. 15 Q. Okay. 16 A. This is a different group of products. 17 Q. So it's not that furans were not in the 1242 but 18 Monsanto was recognizing that they were in an Aroclor; 19 correct? 20 A. No. They were recognizing the presence of 21 dibenzylfuran along with these other materials listed in the 22 starting material for the chlorinated terphenyls sold under 23 the trademark Aroclor. 24 Q. Okay. 25 A. 5,000 with some other numbers. That's to WATER PCB-SD0000015272 34 1 distinguish from the use of biphenyl in the manufacture of the 2 Aroclor 1200 series. It's two different starting materials. 3 Q. It does recognize the presence of dibenzylfuran 4 in a product manufactured by Monsanto? 5 A. True, yes. 6 Q. Okay. 7 A. It's a different product from biphenyl. 8 Q. What was the application of that Aroclor referred 9 to? 10 A. The Aroclor 5,000 series? 11 Q. Yeah. 12 A. They were solid materials used in such things as 13 plastic for fire retardancy, they were used in adhesives, they 14 were used in some paints. 15 Q. Okay. When did Monsanto commence chronic toxic 16 studies with respect to Aroclor 1242? 17 MS. SUTTER: Objection to the form of the 18 question, contains an undefined term. 19 Q. (BY MR. RACE) Do you understand the question? 20 A. I believe I do. Chronic studies with laboratory 21 test animals were begun on Aroclor 1242 as best I remember in 22 1969. 23 Q. Okay. And that was all the chronic toxicity 24 studies were done by IBT? 25 A. Yes. WATER PCB-SD0000015273 35 1 Q. Do you recognize this document dated November 2 3rd, 1970? I call your attention to No. 6: "No chronic 3 (two-year studies) would be anticipated." First of all, do 4 you recognize that document? 5 A. I recall the document, yes, sir. I'm reading to 6 help me refresh my memory on the considerable detail that's in 7 this document. 8 Q. Okay. Well, I would like you to -- 9 A. Well, I've quickly perused it. 10 Q. My question is with regard to -- 11 MS. SUTTER: Just a second. I would like an 12 opportunity to look at the document. 13 Q. (BY MR. RACE) Okay. With respect to No. 6, 14 could you explain why -- what was meant, or your understanding 15 of "no chronic (two-year studies) would be anticipated?" 16 A. This document is primarily put together for 17 budgetary purposes. That statement indicates that the monies 18 mentioned on Page 2 do not include any costs that might be 19 associated with longer studies. The decision regarding the 20 two-year studies would depend on what was found with the 21 shorter studies that were proposed. . 22 Q. Okay. But the two year-study had in fact been 23 initiated in 1969? 24 A. No, no, no. This reference to two-year study has 25 to do with the materials listed on the pages attached to the WATER PCB-SD0000015274 36 1 memorandum, and you will note that they refer to products that 2 are not studied as yet, like Aroclor 1221, MCS 1016, HB-40 and 3 so on. There are chemicals here that were being considered as 4 substitutes for the PCBs and they were being put into a 5 program to get some better understanding of their toxicity and 6 depending on those results either feel comfortable with what 7 the results show or do some more studies to determine their 8 overall toxicity. So this document does not refer to the 9 studies that were already in place in 1969. 10 Q. Okay. Was it -- while you were employed by 11 Monsanto was it Monsanto's position to freely disseminate 12 information that it had gathered with respect to animal 13 studies? 14 A. Yes. 15 Q. Do you recognize this document? 16 A. I have read the document. 17 Q. Okay. I draw your attention to the second 18 paragraph: "Although Kanegafuchi is asking, they also are 19 testing to see how far Monsanto will go in giving away 20 information." What is your appreciation of that statement as 21 directed to you? . 22 A. That just tells me a little bit about how 23 Kanegafuchi representatives might be thinking. There was 24 nothing there that we were refusing to tell them, as far as I 25 know. WATER PCB-SD0000015275 37 1 Q. Okay. Did in fact Monsanto -- Strike that. So 2 it's your testimony that Monsanto freely provided all 3 information that was requested with respect to the animal 4 studies? 5 A. By Kanegafuchirepresentatives? 6 Q. To anybody. 7 A. As far as I know, yes, sir. 8 Q. The FDA was studying Aroclor 1242 as well as 9 other Aroclors for carcinogenicity; is that correct? 10 A. I -- I need some help with your use of the word 11 study. Do you mean were they placing animal studies and so 12 on? 13 Q. Yes. 14 A. I don't recall the FDA having such a program. I 15 know that they were interested in any health effects, 16 including carcinogenicity. I don't recall any studies placed 17 by FDA with any laboratory to help get information. 18 Q. Isn't it true that you were informed that 1242 19 was more toxic to chickens than the higher chlorinated 20 Aroclors? 21 MS. SUTTER: Objection to the overbroad and vague 22 form of the question. 23 A. The test results from Monsanto's studies being 24 conducted by IBT did indicate that the chickens in the tests 25 were more sensitive to Aroclor 1242 than they were to Aroclor WATER PCB-SD0000015276 38 1 1254 or to Aroclor 1260 which were the other two Aroclors 2 being tested. 3 Q. (BY MR. RACE) So it's a safe statement that not 4 all animal studies indicated that the higher chlorinated 5 Aroclors were more toxic, in some cases the lower chlorinated 6 Aroclors were more toxic? 7 A. There were effects noted in the different test 8 animals and they did vary depending on the material that they 9 were exposed to and the type of animal, yes, there were 10 differences. 11 Q. Is George Levinskas still living? 12 A. As far as I know, yes, sir. 13 Q. And he lives in the Monsanto area -- I mean, 14 excuse me, the St. Louis area? 15 A. The last I heard he was, yes. 16 Q. Is he still employed by Monsanto or is he 17 retired? 18 A. He retired. 19 Q. There was no analysis done of the PCBs provided 20 to IBT with respect to contamination; was there? 21 A. At what point in time? . 22 Q. From 1970 to 1975. 23 A. I can't answer that. I do know that the 24 laboratory went back to the research samples of material 25 produced in that period of time and even prior to that. I WATER PCB-SD0000015277 39 1 personally do not know if they got any of the 1969 material 2 and tested it for the furans. 3 Q. Okay. 4 A. I can't speak to that. 5 Q. During some of the animal studies conducted, 6 particularly those of birds, is it not true that unusually 7 high levels of PCBs were found in brain tissues? 8 A. I don't remember that detail. 9 Q. Okay. 10 A. I would have to see the reports. 11 Q. I'm going to show you a report dated October 12 10th, 1972. Do you recognize that, the one in which you were 13 cc'd? 14 A. Yes. (Nods Head) 15 Q. And I draw your attention to Toxicity, Section 16 No. Ill in which it is I believe underlined. 17 MS. SUTTER: Not on the -- 18 A. I recall the essence of this memo. 19 Q. (BY MR. RACE) And do you recall being informed 20 or having read that unusually high levels of PCB were found in 21 the brain tissue of birds? 22 A. I'm trying to recall. It's not too vivid in my 23 thinking but -- see, what I don't recall is what birds are 24 they referring to here. These are not the test birds that 25 Monsanto used. These -- the reference to mink and birds WATER PCB-SD0000015278 40 1 indicates studies by other than Monsanto. 2 Q. Who is M. -- W.M. Mees, being the author of this 3 report? 4 A. Mr. Mees was a member of Monsanto's analytical 5 chemistry research group who reported to Dr. Tucker, the 6 addressee of this report, who in return reported to Dr. 7 Keller, one of the recipients of the copy. 8 Q. Okay. You do recall this document? 9 A. Yes. 10 Q. Okay. I'm going to mark for identification No. 11 4. What is the relative toxicity of furans? 12 MS. SUTTER: Object to the overbroad and vague 13 form of the question. 14 Q. (BY MR. RACE) Strike the question. Is it not -- 15 would you agree that chlorinated dibenzylfurans are very 16 highly toxic? 17 A. That's my understanding as tutored by individuals 18 that are more knowledgeable in the area of toxicity. 19 Q. Do you recall this document dated December 6, 20 1974? I draw your attention to the handwritten note of which 21 you appear to be the author. Is that your note at the.bottom 22 of that? 23 A. Yes, it is. I recall this document. 24 Q. And it does in fact state that chlorinated 25 dibenzylfurans are very highly toxic; correct? WATER PCB-SD0000015279 41 1 A. It does. 2 Q. Then you continue to write: "Many effects on 3 birds and animals noted and originally attributed to PCBs were 4 later found to be due to furan --" What's the last word 5 there? 6 A. "Content." 7 Q. "Content." Which birds and animals are you 8 referring to; test birds or wild birds? 9 A. Wild birds. 10 Q. These are wild birds in the United States; 11 correct? 12 A. No, not necessarily. It's my recollection at the 13 time that all that I had read in a several-year period leading 14 to this particular time, December '74. 15 Q. So you don't know whether these birds and animals 16 were in the U.S. or whether they were abroad; is that what 17 you're telling me? 18 A. Some of them were abroad. For example. Dr. Vos' 19 group did some studies in Europe and attributed the effects 20 they saw or observed were due to furan content. 21 Q. The same furans that were noted later established 22 to be contained in PCBs in the United States; correct? 23 A. Chemically the same. The amounts were different. 24 Q. I'm marking for identification Plaintiffs' 25 Identification No. 5. What were the differences in the WATER PCB-SD0000015280 42 1 amounts? 2 A. I don't recall the numbers, but they were 3 significantly different. 4 Q. Was it higher abroad or lower abroad? 5 A. I don't mean to indicate that this higher level 6 of furans to which the animals and birds were exposed existed 7 only in the European work. It appeared to be general. 8 Q. So you had higher levels of furans in the birds 9 in the United States as well; correct? 10 A. I don't -- when you say higher, higher than what? 11 I don't know what to compare it to. It's a significant amount 12 that was fairly easily detectable; therefore, it had to be 13 above the very low levels that the analytical method could 14 detect. 15 Q. So there were high levels of furans found in 16 American birds andanimals;correct? 17 MS. SUTTER: Objection. Mischaracterizes prior 18 testimony. 19 A. There were detectable levels found. I don't know 20 how to compare it in terms of higher or lower. 21 Q. (BY MR. RACE) Okay. . 22 A. I don't have a base. 23 Q. And these levels were detected prior to 1974, 24 furan levels? 25 A. Yes. Keep in mind that isn't -- the source of WATER PCB-SD0000015281 43 1 furans is not known. 2 Q. Judging from what -- I came here trying to make a 3 good-faith effort to go through this, and unfortunately it's a 4 little lengthy because of the documents I brought with me. 5 And I'll try to go as quickly as I can. 6 Doctor, you would be available for another date if 7 we -- you have to break at 4:00, I'm given to understand 8 today; correct? 9 A. That's my understanding. 10 Q. You would be available, as opposed to 11 inconveniencing you and trying to keep you on today and not 12 breaking for lunch, you have no personal problem with that; do 13 you? 14 A. It depends on the day. I do have some 15 commitments in the future. 16 Q. You are not totally booked for the next two weeks 17 or three weeks? 18 A. Not totally, but spotty. I don't have my 19 calendar with me. 20 Q. With that caveat, why don't we break for a half 21 hour lunch or 45 minutes. . 22 (WHEREUPON A LUNCH RECESS WAS HELD) 23 MR. RACE: For the record, it's 1:30. The 24 documents are taking fairly long. Mr. Papageorge has outlined 25 certain areas and named expertise, I provided you with a list WATER PCB-SD0000015282 44 1 of areas, and perhaps for the remainder of this afternoon I'll 2 finish going through these documents and then talk to Tom 3 about how to formulate a corporate deposition; does that 4 appear reasonable to you? 5 MS. SUTTER: Based on our discussion off the 6 record where you gave me the number of paragraphs that you 7 were thinking of reducing your corporate deposition notice to, 8 it certainly sounds to me more reasonable than the original 9 document. I am concerned about the time frame in which we are 10 dealing under the Case Management Order to deal with all this 11 last-minute discovery that's being conducted, but the 12 paragraphs you mentioned to me sounded like an effort to 13 narrow the scope, we're appreciative of that, and Tom Carney 14 and I are both willing to meet with you and see what can be 15 worked out during the remaining time that we have under the 16 parameters of the Case Management Order. 17 MR. RACE: It's been expanded to June 8th by 18 agreement. 19 MR. RACE: Rick, I would like to do the same with 20 you. 21 MR. WUNDERLICH: You know, I suggested that 22 earlier. 23 MR. RACE: It takes time. You know, it's like 24 Mark Twain said, "If I had more time this letter would be 25 shorter." WATER PCB-SD0000015283 45 1 MR. WUNDERLICH: My only additional comment, Joe, 2 as I've told you, I have more difficulty in locating 3 someone -- we have to respond to certain areas and because of 4 the lack of people that are still employed with Westinghouse 5 who may have had knowledge concerning PCBs, you know, so the 6 quicker the better would be my response in terms of telling me 7 exactly -- if we can reach some sort of agreement on it. 8 MR. RACE: Part of the exercise is to take a look 9 at the documents and that's -- has been true in both cases. 10 And so that's being done and it will be done when I get back 11 to the office. 12 MR. WUNDERLICH: Okay. 13 Q. (BY MR. RACE) Okay. Do you recognize this 14 correspondence of June 16th, 1975, previously marked as 1505? 15 A. I have read the document. 16 Q. Do you recognize that document? 17 A. Yes, sir, I do. 18 Q. Okay. 19 A. I don't -- 20 Q. You were in fact cc'd on this document; correct? 21 A. Yes. To clarify, I do not recognize the . 22 handwritten notes on the document. 23 Q. Okay. With respect to the document, this 24 indicates that, as you've previously testified, that Vos had 25 substantiated that there was furans in chlorinated biphenyls; WATER PCB-SD0000015284 46 1 correct? 2 A. It does refer to Dr. Vos' study. He misses it by 3 a year or so in terms of time, what had happened. 4 Q. Who is D. Wood? 5 A. David Wood, a Monsanto employee. 6 Q. What capacity? 7 A. 1975, I don't recall his formal title. He was 8 the individual that was involved with the marketing back at 9 the home office of PCBs used in the electrical industry. 10 Q. And J.N. Haggart? 11 A. Haggart is his counterpart in the United Kingdom. 12 Q. Okay. Now, Wood is writing saying: "We need to 13 develop our own methods to determine if indeed chlorinated 14 dibenzylfurans are present and what is the potential hazard." 15 A. Uh-huh. (Yes) 16 Q. One, when did you know that furans were toxic? 17 A. I had a personal I'm going to call it inkling 18 that furans were potential health hazards, health problems not 19 only to humans but to wildlife about the middle of 1970, but 20 Emmett Kelly would be the one to -- 21 Q. Emmett Kelly would be the one to address that? 22 A. Yes. 23 Q. And he said "we need to develop our own method;" 24 from that am I correct in stating that at the time of this 25 correspondence Monsanto did not have a method similar to Vos? WATER PCB-SD0000015285 47 1 A. No, that is not correct. 2 Q. Okay. Tell me why Monsanto could not simply use 3 Vos' method of determining furan contamination. 4 A. We did. We were using it. It appears that David 5 Wood wasn't tuned in to what the research analytical chemists 6 were up to. 7 Q. Do you know why Vos' method was not successful in 8 determining contamination in American PCBs? 9 A. Vos' method was able to detect PCB -- furans in 10 PCBs down to a certain low level. The presence of furans in 11 Monsanto-produced PCBs was below that level so the instrument 12 couldn't see it no matter how much the fine-tune knob was 13 turned, so to speak, literally. 14 Q. Do you know what the level of furan 15 contamination, I think I've asked this, in the Vos studies 16 were, parts per million? 17 A. I don't remember now, no. 18 Q. And what level were the furan -- what was the 19 contamination level of furans in Monsanto PCBs ultimately 20 established in the seventies? 21 MS. SUTTER: Objection to the vague form of the 22 23 24 25 WATER PCB-SD0000015286 48 1 Q. (BY MR. RACE) Do you recognize that which is 2 dated August 15th, 1975? Actually, Doctor, I'm going to 3 address the first page of that. Do you recognize the first 4 page? 5 A. Yes, I do. 6 Q. Okay. This establishes that in 1975 7 dibenzylfurans were identified in PCBs, in Monsanto PCBs in 8 specific; is that correct? 9 A. That's the reference to Dr. Risebrough's work, 10 yes. 11 Q. We're going to mark that as Exhibit No. 7. I 12 call your attention to September -- internal memo September 13 25th, 1975. Do you recognize that? 14 A. Yes, I recognize it. 15 Q. I'll mark this now as Plaintiffs' Exhibit No. 8. 16 This is written by Mr. Levinskas? 17 A. Yes. 18 MS. SUTTER: Are you referring to the front page 19 of Exhibit 8 or the entire Exhibit 8? 20 Q. (BY MR. RACE) The front page. Do you know who 21 prepared the toxicity statement which is attached to that 22 memo? 23 A. I do not. 24 Q. Okay. Had you -- you've seen that toxicity 25 statement in -- as reflected in the memo on September 25th, WATER PCB-SD0000015287 49 1 1975? 2 A. On or about that period of time, yes. 3 Q. Okay. How many versions were written prior to 4 the final? 5 A. I have no way of knowing. I don't know. 6 Q. Okay. Down on the last page of the memo -- 7 statement, excuse me, the last page of the statement it says: 8 "Aroclors" and then penciled in above that is 1242 and 1254. 9 Do you know who was responsible for that? 10 A. I do not. 11 Q. To whom was this statement issued? 12 A. I just am having difficulty recalling exactly who 13 received copies of this. I just don't remember. 14 Q. Okay. Well, my question was who penciled in the 15 1254 and the 1254? 16 A. I answered that. I don't know. 17 Q. Excuse me. Do you agree with the statement that 18 "Not withstanding the furan contamination the 1242 and 1254 do 19 not present any unreasonable human health hazards?" 20 MS. SUTTER: Where are you finding that 21 statement? 22 A. The reference to furans, I don't see that here. 23 MS. SUTTER: Nor do I. 24 Q. (BY MR. RACE) At that point in September of 1975 25 it was known that Monsanto --Monsanto's PCB contained furans; K--; WATER PCB-SD0000015288 50 1 correct? 2 A. It was known that the Food and Drug 3 Administration laboratory had found what they noted as being 4 furans, chlorinated furans in Monsanto's Aroclors, yes. 5 Q. Did the existence of those furans ever change 6 Monsanto's position with respect to the health hazards 7 associated with PCBs? docket io 8 A. No. There was no new -- no new toxicity dated cx ned <J-o 9 indicate^ in--the|change. 10 Q. Was there any discussion as to the level of 'TO 11 contamination that would have to be reached before furans 5^ 12 posed a threat to human health? 13 A. I personally don't know. You have to ask Dr. 14 Kelly. 15 Q. I call your attention to an internal memo 16 November 20th, 1975. Do you recognize that? 17 A. I recall this memo, yes. 18 Q. Okay. This memo reflects studies of Dr. 19 Kimbrough in which carcinogens were found in rats exposed to 20 Aroclor 1260. It doesn't say in this study. The setting -- 21 do you recall the setting in which this -- . 22 A. This memo pertains to another memo in which the 23 two studies were reviewed and discussed. 24 Q. Okay. Now, Dr. Kimbrough's studies, you would 25 agree, found lesions or precancer tumors in rats exposed to WATER PCB-SD0000015289 51 1 PCB; correct? 2 A. That is correct. 3 Q. Now, do you recall -- Strike that. Monsanto's 4 response was to have the slides analyzed by pathologists 5 employed at IBT; is that correct? As well as the Eppley 6 Institute; is that correct? 7 A. That is correct. 8 Q. Now, how many Monsanto -- excuse me. Strike 9 that. How many pathologists in total reviewed those slides on 10 behalf of Monsanto? 11 A. I don't know the number. 12 Q. It was more than Dr. Pour; is that correct? More 13 than just Dr. Pour? 14 A. Certainly there were the pathologists at IBT and 15 there is at least two or three there. 16 Q. There is a Dr. Richter? 17 A. Dr. Richter, Dr. Gordon and others. 18 Q. Have you had discussions with any of those 19 pathologists personally? 20 A. At what time? 21 Q. Concerning Dr.Kimbrough's findings.. 22 A. Not me personally, no. 23 Q. Were you aware that Dr. Richter and Dr. Gordon 24 actually concurred with Dr. Kimbrough's findings? 25 A. Yes. WATER PCB-SD0000015290 52 1 Q. And it was only Dr. Pour who contested Dr. 2 Kimbrough's findings; is that not correct? 3 A. That's my understanding, yes. 4 Q. And Monsanto did not request Dr. Kimbrough or Dr. 5 Richter or Dr. Gordon to publish any statements concerning 6 their review of Dr. Kimbrough's slides; is that correct? 7 MS. SUTTER: Could I hear that question again, 8 please? 9 MR. RACE: Would you read it back? 10 (PENDING QUESTION READ BACK BY THE REPORTER) 11 A. If I understand the question correctly, Dr. 12 Kimbrough did publish her findings and -- 13 Q. (BY MR. RACE) But -- go ahead. 14 A. Now, in terms of whether Dr. Richter or Dr. 15 Gordon published findings, as I recall, a document was 16 prepared and issued by Dr. Callandra who was the top 17 individual at IBT to whom Drs. Richter and Gordon reported, so 18 IBT is represented by that document regarding these 19 observations, these findings. 20 Q. The statement issued by Dr. Callandra indicated 21 that Dr. Kimbrough's slides -- Dr. Kimbrough's interpretation 22 of the slides was correct? 23 A. Yes. It also indicated that the findings of the 24 two studies were different. 25 Q. Okay. Now, you say the findings of the two WATER PCB-SD0000015291 53 1 studies; did Dr. Pour actually conduct a study or did he just 2 review the Kimbrough -- Dr. Kimbrough's slides? 3 A. He reviewed both the IBT slides and the Kimbrough 4 slides. 5 Q. Okay. And Dr. Pour took the position that both 6 the Kimbrough slides and the IBT slides were negative insofar 7 as relationship between PCBs and cancer? 8 MS. SUTTER: Objection to the form of the 9 question. 10 Q. (BY MR. RACE) Isthat correct? 11 A. Yes. 12 Q. Let me mark that as Exhibit 9. Okay. I call 13 your attention to the January 29th, 1970 memo from Wheeler 14 which you are cc'd. Do you recognize that? 15 A. I do. 16 Q. Okay. I mark that as Exhibit 10. Which chronic 17 studies is Wheeler referring to? 18 A. He's referring to thelifetime studies with rats. 19 Q. Okay. 20 A. To which were exposed to Aroclors 1242, 1254 and 21 1260. He's also referring to long-term studies with Beagle 22 dogs and also with leg horn chickens. 23 Q. Now, these are studies that were conducted by 24 IBT? 25 A. That's correct. WATER PCB-SD0000015292 54 1 Q. Once again, all the chronic studies that Monsanto 2 directed were conducted by IBT; is that correct? 3 A. That is correct. 4 Q. Those studies commenced in 1969? 5 A. The chronic studies, yes. 6 Q. Is it true that even before the study was 7 completed it was recognized that PCBs are exhibiting a greater 8 degree of toxicity than anticipated? 9 A. That is true. 10 Q. Okay. But ultimately the IBT studies held that 11 PCBs were non toxic; correct? 12 A. No, no, no. 13 Q. Excuse me. Not non toxic, non carcinogenic? 14 A. Correct. 15 Q. You concur with the statement that PCBs are about 16 the same with respect to toxicity as DDT? 17 A. That's my understanding, yes. 18 MS. SUTTER: I would object in that Counsel 19 didn't complete the whole sentence. It says "about the same 20 as DDT in mammals." 21 Q. (BY MR. RACE) Are humans mammals? . 22 A. Yes, it's my understanding. 23 Q. Mr. Papageorge, are you aware of a bate stamp 24 method, have you come into that -- 25 A. I'm sorry? WATER PCB-SD0000015293 55 1 Q. Bate stamp, are you familiar with that? 2 A. Bate stamp? 3 Q. Yes. 4 A. I'm not familiar with that expression. 5 Q. Do you recognize any of the numbers on the bottom 6 of this page? Now I'm referring to -- I'm specifically 7 referring to SCM and then a series of numbers. Can you draw 8 any conclusions from looking at that number? 9 A. No, I'm sorry, Ican't. 10 Q. Okay. Did you give testimony in the Scott case 11 in Beaumont, Texas? 12 A. Yes, I did. 13 Q. Had you seen or reviewed this document that I'm 14 now referring to? 15 MR. WUNDERLICH: What's the date of that 16 document? 17 MS. SUTTER: The date of the document is December 18 17, 1951. I do have an objection to the form of question. 19 Are you asking him whether he ever saw it or whether he saw it 20 in connection with Scott? 21 MR. RACE: If he's ever seen it. . 22 MS. SUTTER: If he's ever seen it. All right. 23 A. I don't recall this document at all. 24 Q. (BY MR. RACE) Are any of the names of the 25 individuals there familiar to you? WATER PCB-SD0000015294 56 1 A. Mr. Mather and Dr. Weddell and Mr. Marshall are 2 Monsanto employees in Monsanto's research department. 3 Q. Okay. This appears to be an internal Monsanto 4 memo? 5 A. It appears to be so, yes, sir. 6 Q. Okay. Chlorinated diphenyl is the same as a 7 chlorinated biphenyl; is it not? 8 A. Yes. 9 Q. Okay. And are you aware that literature back in 10 1951 revealed a history of skin trouble or liver trouble 11 including some fatal cases attributed to heavy exposures to 12 chlorinated diphenyls? 13 A. I'm aware of literature that referred to those 14 kinds of symptoms and ailments as it related to commercial 15 mixtures of chlorinated naphthalenes with some chlorinated 16 diphenyls present, yes. 17 Q. Okay. Waschlorinatednaphthalene a contaminant 18 in Aroclors? 19 A. I don't believe I ever saw a report that reported 20 the presence of chlorinated naphthalenes in Aroclors. 21 Q. Is -- chlorinated naphthalene is a hydrocarbon; 22 correct; chlorinated hydrocarbon? 23 A. Yes. 24 Q. As PCB is a chlorinated hydrocarbon? 25 A. Yes. WATER PCB-SD0000015295 57 1 Q. Within the family of chlorinated hydrocarbons you 2 can break them into smaller categories; can you not? 3 A. I don't know what you mean by category. You mean 4 solids and liquids and gases? 5 Q. Is there not a category of chlorinated aromatic 6 hydrocarbon? 7 A. Yes. 8 Q. Okay. And both PCBs and the naphthalenes fall 9 into that category? 10 A. Yes, anything that has the hexagon formation 11 reflecting the benzene ring is called an aromatic. 12 Q. Okay. And there are recognized similarities of 13 substances within that I'm going to call it family; is that 14 correct? 15 A. Well, that's true of so many chemicals; there are 16 similarities and there are dissimilarities. I don't know how 17 to answer that. 18 Q. Okay. If you -- okay. Is it also true that the 19 chlorinated aromatic hydrocarbons tend to be the more toxic 20 chlorinated hydrocarbons? 21 MS. SUTTER: Objection to the form of the. 22 question. 23 A. You'll have to ask Dr. Kelly how that compares to 24 other chlorinated hydrocarbons like chloroform and carbon tet. 25 and literally hundreds of chlorinated hydrocarbons. WATER PCB-SD0000015296 58 1 MR. RACE: Premised on Mr. Papageorge recognizing 2 this as being a Monsanto internal memo, although he doesn't 3 have personal knowledge of the memo itself, but recognizing 4 the people mentioned in the memo I will attach it as 5 Plaintiffs' Exhibit No. 11. 6 Q. (BY MR. RACE) Doctor, is it true that the 7 chlorinated aromatic hydrocarbons have in common the fact that 8 they produce an odor? I don't know, I'm just guessing. 9 A. All chemicals have a distinctive odor. 10 Q. Do you know what the aromatic specifically refers 11 to, what common property? 12 A. I'm not aware of any such description. 13 Q. PCB has an odor; does it not? 14 A. Yes. 15 Q. Can you describe that odor? 16 A. I can describe what I sense, and Iwould suggest 17 that this is quite subjective; different people smell 18 different odors. To me it reminds me of a mild disinfectant 19 type odor. 20 Q. And your ability to smell that odor indicates the 21 chemical is in the air? . 22 A. Oh, yes. Otherwise I wouldn'tsmell it. 23 Q. Okay. And the stronger the smell the greater the 24 volume the chemical would be in the air; is that correct? 25 A. That's generally the way with materials. WATER PCB-SD0000015297 59 1 Q. Okay. Now, do you recognize the document dated 2 8th September, 1955 and attached thereto I believe is a letter 3 dated September 20th, 1955? 4 MS. SUTTER: I would like a moment to take a look 5 at these documents, please. 6 A. I do not recall seeing any of these three -- 7 Q. (BY MR. RACE) Three documents? 8 A. -- documents. 9 Q. Could you tell me in the first document who is 10 Dr. H.R. Newman? 11 A. He was the -- I don't know the official 12 designation. He was the head medical person in Monsanto in 13 the United Kingdom. 14 Q. And the author of the letter on the first one is 15 J.W. Barrett? 16 A. Dr. Barrett was -- again, I don't recall his 17 official designated title, but he was a principle individual 18 in the research activities of Monsanto Europe. 19 Q. Okay. And the second document is authored by Dr. 20 Kelly and we can ask Dr. Kelly about that, I suppose? 21 A. I would suggest that, yes. . 22 Q. When you started with Monsanto in '57; was it? 23 A. '51. 24 Q. Excuse me. '51, until 1955 did you have 25 concern -- Strike that. Was it -- to the best of your X1 WATER PCB-SD0000015298 knowledge did Monsanto have concern prior to 1955 concerning the toxicology of Aroclors? A. Well, the -- there were guidelines as to the kinds of things to avoid doing to limit exposure. There were, for example, guidelines regarding the amount of PCBs that could be in the breathing air or the working environment. There were of course concerns regarding getting it on the skin. There were concerns about getting too much on your clothing and not changing it as appropriate. Yeah, there were concerns of that kind. Q. Do you know what Monsanto's policy was with v respect to advising client -- customers of the relevant -- not ^0 relevant, various toxicity of the different Aroclors? MS. SUTTER: Mr. Race, I apologize, I didn't understand that question. Q. (BY MR. RACE) Let me strike the question and try again. It's true that back in the early fifties Monsanto was of the opinion that higher chlorinated Aroclors were more toxic than the lower chlorinated Aroclors? A. Yes, they got that from the animal studies that were made up to that time. . Q. Okay. And did -- let me direct your attention to the September 20th, 1955 letter, the last paragraph. Will you agree with MCC's position, that's Monsanto Chemical Company; correct? The last paragraph of the -- the last paragraph on WATER PCB-SD0000015299 61 1 Page 1 of that correspondence. 2 A. Page 1. Yeah, MCC was commonly used to describe 3 Monsanto Chemical Company. 4 Q. Okay. I -- are you -- do you concur with the 5 statement in the last paragraph indicating Monsanto's position 6 can be summarized up in this fashion: "We know Aroclors are 7 toxic but the actual limit has not been precisely defined. It 8 does not make too much difference, it seems to me, because our 9 main worry is what will happen if an individual develops any 10 type of liver disease and gives a history of Aroclor exposure. 11 I am sure the juries would not pay a great deal of attention 12 to MACS." 13 A. I'm sorry, I missed the question. 14 Q. Would you agree with that statement? 15 A. Well, in essence I agree with it. Of course, it 16 doesn't describe what is meant by history ofAroclorexposure 17 and I would like -- a person would havepreferred seeing some 18 level of exposure, time, how long an exposure, but in my 19 viewpoint, yes, overexposure to these materials can lead to 20 health problems, that's well-known. 21 Q. MACS refer to what? . 22 A. Maximum Allowable Concentrations. I believe 23 that's -- it had to do with exposure levels in the workplace. 24 Q. Does this appear to be communications, the first 25 one, the letter from Monsanto U.K. to Monsanto U.S. and then WATER PCB-SD0000015300 62 1 the response by Dr. Kelly to the U.K.? 2 A. Well, as I see it, there are two responses that 3 Dr. Kelly made; he made the initial one on September 20 and 4 then apparently had some additional thoughts that he sent two 5 days later. 6 Q. Okay. I'll mark that as Plaintiffs' Exhibit 12. 7 I call your attention to the correspondence dated December 6, 8 1955. The first correspondence was written by D.V. Hardy. 9 MS. SUTTER: The witness is still reviewing the 10 document. Do you want to interrupt his review to ask one 11 question? 12 Q. (BY MR. RACE) Do you need to review the entire 13 document to ascertain whether you're familiar with it, if 14 you've ever seen it before? 15 A. No. I can say that I don't recall ever seeing 16 this document. 17 Q. Well, then I'm not trying to make you read it 18 now. That saves us time. You don't have to read the entire 19 thing. 20 A. I didn't know what kind of questions to expect. 21 Q. If -- let me try it this way. The -- this first 22 letter was written, it appears to be authored by D.V.N. Hardy; 23 correct? 24 A. Yes. 25 Q. It's marked confidential. Do you know who Mr. WATER PCB-SD0000015301 63 1 Hardy is? 2 A. Dr. Hardy was a medical doctor in Monsanto Europe 3 reporting to Dr. Newman. 4 Q. Okay. And this appears to be a Monsanto 5 correspondence; is that correct? 6 A. Yes. 7 Q. Okay. Is it true that the lower chlorinated 8 Aroclors are more vaporous? 9 A. I guess you could use that term. They are -- 10 they can form vapors at lower temperatures. 11 Q. Okay. So at a given temperature you may have 12 more of the lower chlorinated PCBs in the air than the higher 13 chlorinated PCBs; correct? 14 A. That is generally true, yes. 15 Q. Okay. And the toxicity is directly proportionate 16 to -- Strike that. A harmful effect would be directly 17 proportionate to an equation of toxicity and concentration; 18 correct? 19 MS. SUTTER: Objection to the vague and confusing 20 form of the question. 21 Q. (BY MR. RACE) In other words, Dr. -- 22 A. Yes. 23 Q. Would you agree with that statement? 24 A. I'm trying to recall your first words. 25 Q. Let me try to ask it this way: If you WATER PCB-SD0000015302 64 1 of a less toxic substance it may be equally harmful as if you 2 got less of a more toxic substance? 3 A. It's a combination of the type of material, how 4 much of the material, and of course, time. 5 Q. Okay. Now, if you will, could I call your 6 attention to last sentence of the second paragraph on Page 2. 7 MS. SUTTER: Just a minute. This is the document 8 that you said you weren't going to ask him questions about so 9 now the witness is going to complete his review of the 10 document that you're about to start asking him questions 11 about. 12 Q. (BY MR. RACE) Either that, or I'll ask you this 13 question: Do you agree or do you disagree: "It is now clear 14 that toxicity increases with degree of chlorination and that 15 this effect may cancel or even outweigh the advantage due to 16 decreased vapor pressure?" 17 MS. SUTTER: I object to the form of the question 18 in that you've picked one sentence out of a whole-page 19 document after encouraging the witness not to read the entire 20 document. I think he has a right to do that. 21 Q. I don't think it's necessary. Can you agree with 22 that statement or do you have to read the entire document? 23 A. No, I -- I heard some words you read off here and 24 I haven't found the words yet. 25 Q. The last sentence, right there. WATER PCB-SD0000015303 65 1 A. Well, I -- from what I understand of these PCB 2 materials, the reference to toxicity increasing with degree of 3 chlorination is not necessarily true. It depends on the 4 creature -- I'm looking for a word. That is exposed to it. 5 An example that we found out is that the chickens were 6 susceptible to the lower chlorinated materials, so that 7 contradicts this statement here. And then the second part of 8 that sentence when it says "may cancel or even outweigh," 9 that's speculative. There is no way to really equate that 10 with accuracy. 11 Q. Now, you recognize this as being a Monsanto 12 correspondence; correct? 13 A. Yes. It is a collection of documents from 14 Monsanto. 15 Q. What is the similarities between Pydraul 150 and 16 Aroclor 1242? 17 A. Pydraul 150 is a mixture of chemicals. As best I 18 recall one of the ingredients in that mixture is Aroclor 1242. 19 Q. Do you recall any of the other chemicals in 20 Pydraul 150? 21 A. Not in specific detail. . 22 Q. Who would know about that from Monsanto? 23 A. I'm trying to recall an individual in Monsanto's 24 research department that developed these mixtures. I would 25 suggest -- I don't know how available this person is. Dr. WATER PCB-SD0000015304 66 1 Roger Hatton, H-A-T-T-O-N, was an individual familiar with 2 Monsanto's hydraulic fluids. 3 Q. Are -- do you know whether any of the other 4 substances in the Pydraul 150 were of equivalent toxicity of 5 1242 or greater? 6 A. Not -- since I don't remember what they were I 7 can't answer. 8 Q. Okay. 9 MR. RACE: Off the record. 10 (WHEREUPON AN OFF THE RECORD DISCUSSION WAS HELD) 11 MR. RACE: Let me just say, just quickly, we're 12 going to agree -- I'll go through a few documents that I have 13 here and we have agreed to meet to try to work out some type 14 of corporate deposition as well as some stipulation as to 15 documents. Is that everybody's agreement? 16 MS. SUTTER: All counsel for all parties have 17 agreed that we will meet and attempt to stipulate to 18 documents. 19 MR. RACE: And work out something for the 20 corporate deposition. 21 Q. (BY MR. RACE) Do you recognize this memo, dated 22 July 30th, 1975? Have you previously seen that document? 23 A. I recall thedocument, yes, sir. 24 Q. Okay. We'll mark this as 14. Okay. This 25 document reflects that Monsanto acknowledged that -- WATER PCB-SD0000015305 67 1 acknowledged evidenceof Aroclor 1260being carcinogenic; is 2 that correct? 3 A. No. It acknowledges that a study which used a 4 strain of rats of one sex did show some liver effects that 5 could be construed as being carcinogenic in nature, but it 6 also points out that there are other studies that do not show 7 the same results. 8 Q. What is a carcinogenic effect -- or the 9 carcinogenicity of DDT? 10 A. I don't know. You'll have to ask Dr. Kelly. 11 Q. Do you have an opinion one way or another as to 12 whether Aroclor 1260 has a potency comparable to that of DDT? 13 A. I do not. 14 Q. I draw your attention to that which has 15 previously been marked Plaintiffs' Exhibit 817. Do you 16 recognize this document? 17 MR. WUNDERLICH: What's the date on that? 18 MS. SUTTER: April 17, 1970. 19 Q. (BY MR. RACE) I'm not going to ask you about the 20 attached documents,but only the first page. 21 A. I recall the document. . 22 Q. Okay. I'll mark it as 15. Now, what is meant by 23 the paragraph "Please do not present any Teach-In "visitors" 24 with prepared handouts on PCBs. You may use this information 25 in verbal conversation shouldthe occasion arise?" WATER PCB-SD0000015306 68 1 A. Well, just like it says; in other words, don't 2 give this to any individuals. 3 Q. What was your reasoning for not wishing to give 4 the question and answer sheet on PCBs to individuals? 5 A. Primarily because I personally saw this as a 6 highly technical kind of subject that could be misunderstood 7 by individuals who didn't have the -- what I felt was the 8 appropriate background and would be best to have someone 9 talking to them and finding out what the concerns if any might 10 be and then attempt to answer them and if the Monsanto person 11 couldn't answer them he could come back to people like me or 12 Dr. Kelly and get a -- and get an answer. 13 Q. Okay. You testified before concerning Dr. Pour's 14 evaluation of Dr. Kimbrough's study. Do you recall that? 15 A. Yes. 16 Q. Okay. I'm going to call your attention to a 17 letter dated November 17th, 1975. A memo, excuse me. In 18 which you were cc'd. Do you recognize that? 19 A. As I read it I recall it, yes. 20 Q. Okay. Doyouknow whoscribbled the handwritten 21 note on the bottom? . 22 A. I do not. 23 Q. Now, the Eppley Institute was an institute that 24 had -- Strike that. Dr. Pour was employed by the Eppley 25 Institute; correct? WATER PCB-SD0000015307 69 1 A. Correct. 2 Q. Do you know why the Eppley Institute did not want 3 to be associated with Dr. Pour's position on PCBs? 4 A. I don't think that's a correct interpretation of 5 the positions of the two. The Eppley Institute supported Dr. 6 Pour's position regarding the -- his findings, but they didn't 7 want his name, as well as Dr. Pour didn't want his name, in 8 the public press. Dr. Pour and the institute preferred to 9 deal with scientists on a scientist-to-scientist basis rather 10 than work through the public media. 11 Q. Do you know if Dr. Pour had made a statement that 12 he did not want his interpretation of Dr. Kimbrough's slides 13 subjected to peer review? 14 A. That I don't know anything about. I never heard 15 that before. 16 Q. Had you seen previously that handwritten note at 17 all? 18 A. I don't recall the handwritten note. 19 Q. Do you recall the memo? 20 A. I do. 21 Q. I call your attention to a handwritten note, the 22 top of which is written "charges against Monsanto products in 23 5-13-83 Wall Street Journal, WSJ." Do you recognize the 24 handwriting on this? 25 A. No. This is the first time I've seen this WATER PCB-SD0000015308 70 1 document. 2 Q. Were you aware that Levinskas caused Callandra -- 3 I call your attention to the second category, Callandra at IBT 4 to change language from mildly tumorigenic to does not appear 5 to be carcinogenic in an IBT report on toxicity of PCBs. 6 A. I'm aware of the proposed change in wording that 7 Dr. Levinskas made and it's based on the fact that there were 8 three studies run simultaneously. The data was similar so 9 that the conclusions were identical really. Two of the 10 reports had the expression "does not appear to be 11 carcinogenic," the third one had the phrase "mildly 12 tumorigenic," and Dr. Levinskas suggested that since the data 13 does not indicate otherwise why not have the same conclusion 14 for all three reports, and that's the basis for his 15 recommendation. 16 Q. Are the other two reports -- the other two 17 studies were also conducted by IBT? 18 A. Yes. 19 Q. When did Monsanto first insist on indemnity 20 contracts with theirpurchasers of PCBs? 21 A. The program was initiated in December of '71 to 22 become effective starting in1972. 23 Q. Okay. Had there been any indemnityagreements 24 prior to that date? 25 A. Not to my knowledge. WATER PCB-SD0000015309 71 1 Q. Do you have knowledge concerning those indemnity 2 agreements? 3 A. I have some knowledge. 4 Q. Who is primarily responsible for those? 5 A. I can give you my understanding.The director of 6 the product group, Howard Bergen was the person who came up 7 with this idea. 8 Q. And the understanding was if there was any harm 9 that was caused by the use or exposure to PCBs then Monsanto's 10 customers would pay rather than Monsanto if the PCB had been 11 resold or used by Monsanto customers; is that correct? 12 MS. SUTTER: I object to the relevance of the 13 inquiry. 14 A. I would suggest that the documents that were 15 prepared kind of speak for themselves. The wording is there 16 about Monsanto's roleand thecustomer's role should a 17 situation arise. 18 Q. (BY MR. RACE) Did Monsanto have indemnity 19 agreements concerning any other products other than PCB? 20 A. I don't know. 21 Q. I call your attention to that which has . 22 previously been marked as Exhibit 1536. 23 A. I'm having trouble locating it. 24 Q. Do you recognize that document? 25 A. I recognize the document. WATER PCB-SD0000015310 72 1 Q. Okay. I'll mark it as Exhibit 16. Now, this 2 document is talking about -- 3 MR. WUNDERLICH: What is the date on that 4 document, please? 5 MR. RACE: January 24th, 1977. 6 MR. WUNDERLICH: Okay. 7 Q. (BY MR. RACE) Do you recall the conversations 8 that you had in connection with this document, in connection 9 with the production of this document? 10 A. Yes, I do. 11 Q. Okay. What was Mobil's belief with respect to 12 PCB as being a possible carcinogen? 13 A. Well, more correctly it was the belief of an 14 investigator, and I don't at the moment remember whether she 15 was a -- an employee of Mobil Oil or Mobil Chemical or some 16 outside scientist, but she conducted a study that indicated 17 that cases of melanoma were due to exposure to PCBs. At a 18 meeting in Cincinatti with representatives of NIOSH, the Mobil 19 representative, and I must confess, I've forgotten his name, I 20 believe it was a Dr. Harbison, but I could be wrong, he was a 21 member of a committee of which I was a member, commenting on a 22 document that NIOSH was preparing for publication on PCBs and 23 he told the group that the study was incomplete, that he 24 preferred that any reference to that study be qualified and 25 that the study would be continued, as far as Mobil was WATER PCB-SD0000015311 73 1 concerned. 2 Q. Do you know who authored the study? 3 A. Her name starts with a B. B-A-H-N. I'm not 4 positive of that. 5 Q. Bahn? 6 A. The Bahn study, that's it. 7 Q. That was a study of Bloomington workers? 8 A. No, Mobil laboratory employees. With that 9 discussion I was speaking with the representative of NIOSH who 10 is mentioned in the document and he understood the comments 11 the way I did and that's what triggered this particular 12 document. 13 Q. Do you know of any other studies that have shown 14 positive association between PCB exposure and melanomas? 15 MS. SUTTER: I object to the form of the question 16 in that I think it mischaracterizes the studies and contains 17 undefined technical epidemiological terms, namely "positive." 18 Subject to that, you may answer. 19 A. I'm not aware of any studies that relate PCBs to 20 melanoma other than this initial work that we discussed here 21 regarding Mobil Chemical laboratory workers. . 22 MR. RACE: Okay. I would like to -- I tell you 23 what I'm going to do for the record, although it's only 3:00, 24 what I would like to do is I think in order to expedite this 25 matter, the easiest way to handle it at this juncture is to WATER PCB-SD0000015312 74 1 continue your deposition and hopefully in lieu of continuing 2 this one we will do a corporate deposition which will forego 3 any of this in the future, subject to working out some terms 4 with counsel here. 5 MS. SUTTER: I certainly don't control when you 6 conclude a deposition or what you ask. This is a 7 knowledgeable -- you know, Mr. Papageorge, you mentioned some 8 areas I think out in the hall, and it was my understanding 9 that you were going to ask him a number of questions here 10 today. You're now saying that you prefer to depose him as a 11 corporate designee rather than in his personal capacity. I 12 think he has a lot of knowledge that you haven't started to 13 cover here yet today. You've mentioned -- 14 MR. RACE: Well, he's got to go by 4:00 and I 15 can't cover everything by 4:00. 16 MS. SUTTER: I understand that, Counsel, and it's 17 now five after three, and I'm not trying to tell you what you 18 should or should not be doing, I am just -- it's difficult for 19 me to comment on the corporate designee notice that you're 20 anticipating when I haven't seen it yet and -- 21 (WHEREUPON AN OFF THE RECORD DISCUSSION WAS HELD) 22 MR. RACE: So for purposes of the record, I'm 23 going to say that my intent is if I have to continue this 24 deposition, if we can't agree on the parameters of a corporate 25 deposition, that's my position, for the record, so you know WATER PCB-SD0000015313 1 what it is. 2 MS. SUTTER: He will read it. 3 (SIGNATURE OF THE WITNESS NOT WAIVED) 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 75 WATER PCB-SD0000015314 76 original 1 v-/1 1 i, wWIiLlLlI:AM B. PAPAGEORGE, P.E., do hereby state that I have read the foregoing questions and answers appearing 2 in this transcript of my deposition, Page 3 through and including Page 73; that this is a true and accurate 3 (corrected) record of said answers given in response to the questions appearing herein. 4 5 6 u-.- c'4. 4- // i-*t / WILLIAM B. PAPAGEORGE, P.E. 7 8 CERTIFICATE 9 STATE OF MISSOURI ) 10 ) SS COUNTY OF ST. LOUIS ) 11 Before me personally appeared WILLIAM B. PAPAGEORGE, 12 P.E., to me known to be the person described in and who executed the foregoing instrument and acknowledged to and 13 before me that WILLIAM B. PAPAGEORGE, P.E. executed the said instrument in the capacity and for the purpose therein 14 expressed. 15 Subscribed to before me this /st CjU/ t 16 day of 19 . 17 JOSEFHifE B. H1BL0CK My Notary commission expires:MOTARYPiMic state re rwsntnt. 18 ST. LOUIS COUNTY tiv ccmssioN exp. jam. is.jcct 19 20 U7 [NOTARY' PUBLIC] 21 22 JUDITH and STEPHEN BECHTOLD VS. MONSANTO COMPANY and 23 WESTINGHOUSE Cause No. 862-00694 24 25 WATER PCB-SD0000015315 CASE NAME: Bechtold v. Monsanto, Case # 922-00911 WITNESS NAME: William B. Papageorge DATE: May 18, 1994 DEPOSITION CORRECTION SHEET Upon reading the deposition and before subscribing thereto, the deponent indicated the following changes should be made: Page $ , Line // Should read: 55/ q ned. - ^ deemed -fa mz, cc rcre cf f ,1 /?!'/ /V7 rl cf_________________________________________ Reason for change: _________1n ca r red a,' o rd. Page ^ , Line Should read: ei c Tnou.Jirc, ~-~- Jpn^ ^mccu 'hint. P n?c bi-i ujhi'cb r. i / Cri erg fee/ Reason for change: _______Tnc^rrec^ cycrd Page 3 o , Line 13 Should read: a re, o4-yher^ a5 use t / , ~X i't co r sec 1 c<jcrcj. Reason for change: Page T~o , Line & Should read: Mo. There. no n Cl.<u 4-c i., c <' A,, / -l~c Reason for change: ________C far, L, eg faTM________________________________________ Page To, Line 7 Should read: / ne!> c a le. c( si Cf/ chaste, ^ ^ Reason for change: 5 (a rL, Cn fa L/C C fa Signature of Witness ____ WATER PCB-SD0000015316 76 ORIGINAL 1 B. PAPAGEORGE, P.E., do hereby state that I have read the foregoing questions and answers appearing 2 in this transcript of my deposition, Page 3 through and including Page 73; that this is a true and accurate 3 (corrected) record of said answers given in response to the questions appearing herein. 4 5 (30^ 6 WILLIAM B. PAPAGEORGE, P.E. 7 8 CERTIFICATE 9 STATE OF MISSOURI ) 10 ) SS COUNTY OF ST. LOUIS ) 11 Before me personally appeared WILLIAM B. PAPAGEORGE, 12 P.E., to me known to be the person described in and who executed the foregoing instrument and acknowledged to and 13 before me that WILLIAM B. PAPAGEORGE, P.E. executed the said instrument in the capacity and for the purpose therein 14 expressed. 15 /Jt 16 Subscribed to before me this day of 19 17 JOSEPHINE B. HIBLOCJs My Notary commission expires:. KOTARY PUBLIC STATE OF Kiras Bl 18 ST. L0UI3 COUNTY MY COMMiSSiON EXP. JAM. 15.JK3 19 20 JJ 1 [NOTARY' PUBLIC] 21 22 JUDITH and STEPHEN BECHTOLD VS. MONSANTO COMPANY and 23 WESTINGHOUSE Cause No. 862-00694 24 25 WATER PCB-SD0000015317 CASE NAME: Bechtold v. Monsanto, Case # 922-00911 WITNESS NAME: William B. Papageorge DATE: May 18, 1994 DEPOSITION CORRECTION SHEET Upon reading the deposition and before subscribing thereto, the deponent indicated the following changes should be made: Page $ , Line / / Should read: 4 55/*/''/ ec{,-If ^ ,-/> et/ -4? rnc, ct~e QH'Crcc/ OlC. < t I't /K if !Y1 : c{ Reason for change: _________~Xn co rec 1 coc <rci. Page , Line S' Should read: f^-nocc; / ng - - ~L don't `-^ncuj Cine. process b i/ uj h / cb r 11 I cn >na (<c/ Reason for change: _______Tr-c ^ ct-'c rt{ Page 3 c , Line l3 Should read: Q pCher^ a5 cc/ f ( , "X tn co f ret i co> 0 rc{. Reason for change: Page , Line o Should read: 3/g. t here. u/Q -s o nCoQ 4-c j < c ( t-it o(q i-g Cq Reason for change: ___ C (an eg frm___________________________ Page 5~o, Line i Should read: / ^ ci / c a i-c_______c( m e ec-f Ci c< s/c, t Reason for change: C ( Q /T / in C a t-7 t? <--7 CCs' (,- Co C3 GZ> Signature of Witness WATER PCB-SD0000015318 76 1 I, WILLIAM B. PAPAGEORGE, P.E., do hereby state that I have read the foregoing questions and answers appearing 2 in this transcript of my deposition, Page 3 through and including Page 73; that this is a true and accurate 3 (corrected) record of said answers given in response to the questions appearing herein. 4 5 6 WILLIAM B. PAPAGEORGE, P.E. 7 8 CERTIFICATE 9 STATE OF MISSOURI ) 10 ) SS COUNTY OF ST. LOUIS ) 11 Before me personally appeared WILLIAM B. PAPAGEORGE, 12 P.E., to me known to be the person described in and who executed the foregoing instrument and acknowledged to and 13 before me that WILLIAM B. PAPAGEORGE, P.E. executed the said instrument in the capacity and for the purpose therein 14 expressed. 15 16 Subscribed to before me this day of 19 . 17 My Notary commission expires: 18 19 20 [NOTARY PUBLIC] 21 22 JUDITH and STEPHEN BECHTOLD VS. MONSANTO COMPANY and 23 WESTINGHOUSE Cause No. 862-00694 24 25 WATER PCB-SD0000015319 77 NOTARIAL CERTIFICATE STATE OF MISSOURI CITY OF ST. LOUIS ) ) ) I, VICTORIA MENAUGH FAUSER, a Certified Shorthand Reporter and a duly commissioned Notary Public within and for the State of Missouri, do hereby certify that there came before me at the offices of Wilburn, Suggs & Watkins, 1221 Locust Street, St. Louis, Missouri 63103, WILLIAM B. PAPAGEORGE, P.E., who was by me first duly sworn to testify to the truth and nothing but the truth of all knowledge touching and concerning the matters in controversy in this cause; that the witness was thereupon examined under oath and said examination was reduced to writing by me; that the signature of the witness was not waived by agreement of all parties; and that this deposition is a true and correct record of the testimony given by the witness. I further certify that I am neither attorney for, counsel for, nor related, nor employed by any of the parties to the action in which this deposition is taken; further, that I am not a relative or employee of any attorney or counsel employed by the parties hereto or financially interested in this action. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and seal May 24, 1994. My commission expires March 4, 1997. NOTARY PUBLIC WATER PCB-SD0000015320 V. B. PAPA CEOME Octobor 26, 1970 J. R. Savage H. S. Bergen V. R. Richard R. . Keller JS. P. tfceelar Recent data froa Dr. J. P. Kieure*a work Indicates the presence of naphthalene In biphenyl and anthracene or phenanthrene and dlbenxofuran la Santovax R used In the manufacture of Aroclors. The naphthalene, anthraoene or phenanthrene could be present in the benzene used in the diphenyl unit or could be co-produced with the biphenyl, terphenyl and quaterphenyl. The dlbenxofuran could result froa oxygen contain ing contaminants in the benzene or, more likely, be formed because of the presence of the promoter, acetone. The Anniston Plant should design and execute a program for determining the source or sources of these contaminants. r\ ( V. B. PAPAQQORQS BS 027158 I CA No. B-84-1103-CA WATER PCB-SD0000015321 V. B. PAPA CEOME Octobor 26, 1970 J. R. Savage H. S. Bergen V. R. Richard R. . Keller JS. P. tfceelar Recent data froa Dr. J. P. Kieure*a work Indicates the presence of naphthalene In biphenyl and anthracene or phenanthrene and dlbenxofuran la Santovax R used In the manufacture of Aroclors. The naphthalene, anthraoene or phenanthrene could be present in the benzene used in the diphenyl unit or could be co-produced with the biphenyl, terphenyl and quaterphenyl. The dlbenxofuran could result froa oxygen contain ing contaminants in the benzene or, more likely, be formed because of the presence of the promoter, acetone. The Anniston Plant should design and execute a program for determining the source or sources of these contaminants. r\ ( V. B. PAPAQQORQS BS 027158 I CA No. B-84-1103-CA WATER PCB-SD0000015322 Monsanto fm0m <n*mt^TM>"Medlca 1 Department_ MT< m.v.ct critfsci November 3, 1970 Status of Toxicity Studies and Needs--Aroclora and Substitutes H. S. Bergen, HBERO M. W. Farrar, Queeny R. E. Keller, S. Second St. V. R. Richard, WRICH J-. E. Springgate, JSPRI TO : W. B. Papageorge WPAPA Confirming our discussions, I have attached copies of tables showing the information available and what we we may need if the current plan for continued sales for some members of the Aroclor family and substitutes for other3 is to be implemented. The enclosed may not be a complete listing and will have to be reviewed and updated occasionally. Particularly lacking may be references to non chlorinated plasticizer materials. Premises on which the "needs" are based include: 1. The determination that the chlorinated terphenyls can and will be found in environmental samples. 2. Biodegradation of the chlorinated terphenyls is virtually impossible. 3. Escape to the environment cannot be prevented in all proposed applications (including disposal of products containing them). 4. The lower chlorinated biphenyls may be biodegradable (metabolized in the mammalian species) with more toxic effects than the higher chlorinated PCB's-- or at least at lower levels of insult. 3* Nothing more than acute data would be obtained for mixtures of the lower chlorinated biphenyls and the chlorinated terphenyls. 6. No chronic (two year studies) would be anticipated. 7. No sub-acute or chronic data would be obtained on non-halogenated substitute products such as phoBphate esters, glycols, etc. ijpu 027159 WATER PCB-SD0000015323 Mr. V. B. Papageorge November 3, 1970 Paga Two For budgetary purposes fairly definite coats are indicated. The total of the coats are aa follows: I. Those studies I feel we cannot avoid--$191,300 II. Studies to be deferred for the time being--$287,000 In the case of Item I, we can make arrangements to pre pay Industrial Bio-Test prior to the end of 1970.for any amount you have available. The remainder can be paid whenever you wish in 1971* We can also include next year any portion of the costs for the, studies to be deferred as time and circumstances dictate. EPW:Ju Enclosure SCM 0*4585 027160 WATER PCB-SD0000015324 (R tp iit) C o n tro l group co a t $2,100 ssg no' ir M s|7 52 O rf *rr i0 B 7*n* & s a aa* Q*a1 "S s IMs* -2 3 dl wo1 a4r 1 a 4 II 4a 44 3 * '"S a 1 2* *: ~2 hS rig M5 5 * *o ah n3 S>* ?5 a s7 *a_ha H*j 3 ?M *n3l gS s Is d wmji| o cO i 64OHo** 5 7 It 4 J * -N*O VJ as 5 4 O O* '1 1 i 1 44 n s S a 2 8 It l 38 5 t n 22 s 4NroO44jOO4 SS 14*-1?> 7*414 4*7h1 4VrOoMNJ--O4 st S' *1 77 ^ *1 >411 . V%fOOf4OO 22 7 *1 77 4*1 4*1 U O 4 11 i * ^M -os H -* * * U OM 4* 9t 8 > a >w - os -^v. . a u* i %O Os 9* *^ -OS MN\* 1 a ' U* i M O 4 M sii N -os On 8 a a' # 8S a* ro 83 ,. a3 H aa aa m 3 aa aa MX 44 4 4 4 1 If . ** 44 H M N om Cqui 44 m m ro 8 38 p* *p** , ,3> OVJI a u> ** O\ M MM 44 I 7s 27 37 7Ck 7 4 I 4 s-5 7 4a " 8 S* g 1 t4d 28 3 *4 II 7 A 7 4 4 4X4a >X 3 a HH a^8>v OuHs u4 28 0*1 Uro 3 * -ui M a ONmSW 4 7A MM 44 H-- m ro 8 38 "f 'i a 49+M9* *OHM\ a a-4-UmJ NH OX 7 4> 0 X3 44a 4 i4n* 28 ro 3S 7A 4 01 Nhm- 4 u\-r \ ^3: SCM 0**586 OS WATER PCB-SD0000015325 ft I , WATER PCB-SD0000015326 ArtOCLOn TOXICITY IWTA r {lU poat) I ' AClroenatdroy l pgariodup ooot $2*100 xlcltv Datq :ut nat'lOjo abblta-MLD (dtnsal) 3hln Xrr(rabbit) . Eye Irr. (rabbit) vapor Inhala tion (Rata) Coat E lava Mead Anocixm toxicity data Mvno-Cbloro Date Banin End flava Heed Banin End Have Hono-Bromo Head Basin End Have $ 200 250 100 125 200 $ . 200 3rd lat itr. 71 qtr. 890 *Z* j 100 ft ' V 125 ft ' 200 n ft $ 200 3rd 1st 250 Itftm '71 qtr 7H 2 100 ft ft 125 ** n 200 n it $ 200 3M 1st X ltn^'7' qtr. 250 7ft2 X 100 H If X 125 If If X 200 ft ft ` (lab (2 opaclaa) 'U-ftCUttf M-doy rat ** JO-day dof Flab (30-90 day) 600 6,000 10,000 3,000 (eat) 600 n. . . 6,000 10,000 3,000 m n n m ft n n H 600 6,000 10,000 3,000 H ft tt ft it n. n * 600 6,000 10,000 3.000 If n If ft If If n If 'production data Chlckena cratoioiur Hnbblta 17,000 8,000 *>,500 Defer Defer Defer Defer Defer Defer Defer Defer Defer ITAL: CKD HOWI iiKEIUlEDi 1*9,975 $20,475 $29,500 V (nopeatY r Control group ooat $2,100 $20,475 $29,500 $20,475 $29,500 j Do to Head Batin End * SCH 0 4 4 5 8 8 * i jf * 027163 WATER_PCB-SDOOOO015327 WATER_PCB-SD0000015328 (Repeat) C o n tro l group oosfc $2,100 MITSUBISHI MONSANTO CHEMICAL COMANY Tokyo Dictmber 28, 1970 OATS Your Memo Dec. 21, 1970 Mr* W. B. Papageorge St. Louie, Mo. 1 eMuin. J. Muon H. Bergen Wheeler Animal feeding studies sponsored and paid for by Monsanto are the property of Monsanto, obviously. Although Kanegafuchi is asking, they also are testing to see how far Monsanto will go in giving away information. Reftisal to give them details will have no real effect on our relationships with Kanegaftichi here in Japan. If Mon.: nto files any of its data, with FDA or other governmental agen cies, Kansgafuchi will try that route too. MMK will work closely with Kanegafuchi to try to establish a PCB marketing plan in Japan that is consistsnt. In the absence of limitations on use by country in the form of regulations or laws, it will be impossible to prevent exports. Wo can persuade them to limit applications in Japan from self interest, but cannot significantly influence exports to a country which has no regulations. I'm afraid this includes the U.S. A. until formal regulations issue. JRD:fu R. Durland ilium 027254 WATER PCB-SD0000015329 MITSUBISHI MONSANTO CHEMICAL COMANY MOM LOCATION Tokyo December 28, 1970 SLMJCCT e* Your Memo Dec. 21, 1970 Mr. W. B. Papageorge St. Louie, Mo. D- cMmim. J. Mil*on H. Bergen fC. Wheeler Animal feeding etudie* aponeored end paid for by Monaento ere the property of Monaento, obviously. A1 though Kanegafuchi is asking, they also are testing to see how far Monsanto will go in giving away information. Refusal to give them details will have no real effect on our relationships with Kanegafuchi here in Japan. If Mon. nto files any of its data, with FDA or other governmental agen cies, Kanegafuchi will try that route too. MMK will work closely with Kanegafuchi to try to establish a PCB marketing plan in Japan that is consistent. In the absence of limitations on use by country in the form of regulations or laws, it will be impossible to prevent exports. We can persuade them to limit applications in Japan from self interest, but cannot significantly influence exports to a country which has no regulations. I'm afraid this includes the U.S.A. until formal regulations issue. JRD:fu yn c R. Durland WATER PCB-SD0000015330 Monsanto industrial chem \ls co. ^T^I. v H Meaa . T2y MTI October 10# 1972 ivuier TRIP REPORT RfMNNU TO : E. S. Tucker T2F - " R.E. Keller - T1B< R. H. Munch - TIB W. B. Papageorge - B2NA W. R. Richard - T3A J. F. Stapleton - B2SA R. A. Stohr - A3SB E. P. Wheeler - A2SA Meeting: Symposium on PCBs - 164th ACS National Meeting, New York Date: August 29 and 30, 1972 For Monsanto: W. M. Mees Purpose of Trip: * To keep abreast of the research being carried out on the environmental aspects of PCBs. To identify future problems with PCBs for Monsanto. * The twenty-six papers presented were divided into three categories: ubiquity (6), analysis and degradation (7), and toxicity (13). I. Ubiquity Researchers continue to document the presence of PCBs in the environment and the transport of these materials to the higher members of the various food chains. The papers dealt primarily with aquatic systems, and in several cases significant decreases in the PCB levels were noted. Decreased PCB levels were observed; by Dr. Y. A. Greichus in the Lake Poinsett, South Dakota ecosystea (^50%, '70 vs *71), by Dr. 0. W. Berg in sediments from lakes and rivers in Ontario, and by Dr. D. R. Nirnmo in samples from Escambia Bay, Florida (10 fold, '70 vs '71). - Dr. Hans J. Crump - Weisner reported on the U.S. Geological Survey's monitoring of surface waters for PCB contamination (10 states). The levels found ranged between 0.1 and 4 ppb. Confirmation was accomplished by gas chromatography-mass spectrometry. Dr. A. R. Yobs of the EPA who has been monitoring human adipose samples, reported the results of a larger sampling. PCB in Human Adipose Tissues Negative 1001 Trace - <1 ppm 370 1-2 ppm 651 >2 dot 167 2T5? 45.7* 16.9% 29.8 7.6% Iffo7ff% No comment was made regarding the significance found in humans. SCM 054138 im- io *tv n t imp 027824 WATER PCB-SD0000015331 E. S. Tucker October 10, 1972 Pag* NO. 2 i II. Analytical and Degradation The papers dealing with analytical techniques, often quite exotic, netted very little useful information. Or. O. L. Stallings, using GC/MS, has verified a significant decrease in the penta isomer content of Aroclor 1016 vs Aroclor 1242. He is planning to publish his data in JAOAC soon. Or. O. Hutzinger discussed his photochemical degradation experi ments with pure isomers. Using both lab and natural conditions he has observed isomerization, condensation, polymers, polar materials, higher PCS formation and terphenyls. Experiments were carried out with thin films in the presence of' water. Alteration of the 2,2*,5,S' tetrachloro homolog was complete in 80 hours. No alteration was observed with the 2,2V4,4',5,5' hexachloro homolog. ` III. Toxicity One day was devoted to papers on toxicity studies with the Aroclors. The feeding studies discussed involved Aroclor 1016, Aroclor 1242, Aroclor 1248, Aroclor 1254, and Aroclor 5460 with invertebrates - fish, birds, and mammals. The data presented was at times confusing and occasionally contradictory. Consider able effort was directed toward detailing the various changes occurring in animal systems upon exposure to the Aroclors. Much less effort was spent on detailing the reversal of the toxic effects observed. Metabolism of the Aroclors in birds and mammals appears to proceed as expected via hydroxylation without the loss of chlorine. No hydroxylated metabolites were observed in excretions of rats and pigeons exposed to the 2,2*,4,4',5,S' hexachloro biphenyl. No hydroxylated metabolites were detected in any of the studies with trout. Somewhat surprising were the unusually high levels of PCB found in the brain tissues of birds and minJc? The significance of this~observation was not discussed. Dr. D. Nimmo reported Aroclor 1016 was as toxic as Aroclor 1242 to shrimp, oysters and fish in chronic dynamic bioassays. Dr. R. Ringer reported on the growth and reproduction problems of mink apparently caused by PCB contamination of Lake Michigan coho - salmon. All of the animals orally exposed to the Aroclor died during the test. A total of 45 mink were divided into 3 groups (12 females and 3 males per dietary treatment group). The treat ments were a basal diet containing ocean fish, substitution of coho salmon for the ocean fish, and the basal diet supplemented with 10 ppm each of Aroclors 1242, 1248, and 1254. Additional feeding studies are being carried out with Aroclor 1254. SCM 054139 I 027825 WATER PCB-SD0000015332 E. S. Tucker October 10, 1972 Page MO. 3 i A discussion on directions for future PCB research was led by Dr. J. C. Street. Perhaps the most significant comment was to the effect that researchers should look for impurities, specifically dibenzofurans, in the Aroclors to explain the erratic toxicity data. . Dr. A. C. Kolbye discussed FDA regulation of PCBs as well as the prospects regarding future PCB tolerance limits. His presenta tion amounted to a justification of the FDA's proposed guidelines on the basis of available animal and human toxicity data. Dr. Kolbye made favorable comments about Monsanto's restrictions on sales and uses. He indicated that, in his opinion, Monsanto has acted responsibly and the restrictions should minimize the levels of PCB in the environment. Dr. Kolbye alluded to the fact that consumption of sport fish could be potentially hazardous to humans, primarily because at this point, it is an unregulated area. In summary, the academic community appears anxious to initiate more research on the PCBs and to use the PCB problem as a source of research funds. The regulatory agencies, notably the FDA, seem to view the PCB situation as a problem which currently is under control. W. M. Mees db SCM WATER PCB-SD0000015333 Mopsar.U) 9W*m <( * t- TO J. P. Mleure - T2B B2SK H. 8. B*n?en R. B^Keller O. J. Levlnskaa W.'R. Richard J. R. Savage P. L. Wright B. P. Wheeler Attached la a copy of a paper which la being offered for publication in the "Bulletin of Environmental Contamination and lbxlcology." Dr. Kimbrough has solicited our comments. If you or any of the recipients of copies of this memo have any consents to offer, please submit them to me by December 16. V. B. Papageorge A m -V* X i* * ,,^ / rT-* * 028331 SCM 068595 WATER PCB-SD0000015334 D. Wood - St. Louis June 16. RINATED DIBENZYLFURANS J. M. Haggart 5040 B. S. Bergen - B2SL W. B. Papageorge - B2SK J. Mleure - T2F R. H. Munch - TIB C. Paton - B2SC John, You will recall that Dutch researchers (Voss at al) found furans in chlorinated biphenyls produced by Prodelec and Bayer some four years ago. Recently FDA has claimed to have detected these products In Aroclor and we will possibly see Increased publication about these toxic contaminants develop. It would be appropriate to establish a technical dialogue with Bayer If they have carried out "In house" work in this area and Ralph Much will be writing to Dick Baxter about this. Ve need to develop our own methods to determine If Indeed the chlorinated dlbenzylfurans are present and what is the potential hazard. I am asking Ralph to send copies to you when he contacts Dick In case there are any business Implications In establishing such a technical contact of which we are not aware. WATER PCB-SD0000015335 I'cnsanlo industrial chemicals co. In June this year a plan was developed with Bill Papageorge and others to learn more about chlorinated dlbenzofurans In our Aroclor products. As a part of this plan It was decided that furans standards should be prepared and analytical methodology developed for the detection of at least 0.1 ppm for each furan homo log. Laboratory mixtures of monochlorothrough hexachlorodibenzofurans have been prepared and characterization for homolog distribution Is underway. Also, we have about one-man con tinuous effort on the method development work. As part of the plan It was decided that we should determine If Bayer has carried out "In-house" work of this type. The attached June 16 memo from Dave Wood to J. N. Haggart covers a request for this Information. We have had no reply to this correspondence to our knowledge. Any Infor mation or assistance you can provide on this point will be appreciated. During the past week a publication has appeared In the literature entitled "Identification of Chlorinated Dlbenzofurans In American Polychlorinated Biphenyls" by R. W. Rlsebrough et al. of the University of California. A copy of this paper Is attached. It shows the Identification of chlori nated dlbenzofurans In our Aroclor products except Aroclor 1016. We are now anxious to develop our own data for comparison with this publication. Reaards, ss Attachments(2) R. E. Keller ?4 .9 RCV i Ji ilium 028631 SCH 068698 WATER PCB-SD0000015336 D. Wood - St. Louis June 16. 1975 J. W. Haggart 5040 Q Ve- fl Util-"- H. S. Bergen - B2SL W. B. Papagcorge - B2SK J. Mieure - T2P R. H. Munch - TIB C. Paton - B2SC John, You will recall that Dutch researchers (Vosa et al) found furana In chlorinated biphenyls produced by Prodelec and Bayer some four years ago. Recently PDA has claimed to have detected these products In Aroclor and we will possibly see increased publication about these toxic contaminants develop. It would be appropriate to establish a technical dialogue with Bayer if they have carried out "in house" work in this area and Ralph Much will be writing to Dick Baxter about this. - We need to develop our own methods to determine if indeed the chlorinated dlbenzylfurans are present and what is the potential hazard. X am asking Ralph to send copies to you when he contacts Dick in case there are any business implications in establishing such a technical contact of which we are not aware. /| /pep SCM 068699 WATER PCB-SD0000015337 tors (2) lion and* core t: (3) data t a ' usly lion dry west :iow inny ' in rd- the the onic -- I i.i ........ .............. nnffin--uwi-iwnTW San Francisco. These conditions would lead to increased tree grossth during the following growing season (Fig. 4). Autumn and winter climatic anomaly features, com* bined with spring climate and the year-to-year autocorrela tion of tree-ring widths, produce the other ring-width anomaly features in Fig. 4 for the following growing season. Narrow ring widths south of San Francisco, for example, imply below normal precipitation--an expected feature since winter precipitation in the Pacific North-west it negatively correlated with winter precipitation in southern California'. The reconstructed values of alhacore catch distribution data (Fig. 3) and inferred population distribution also seem to exhibit long term changes over intervals of 100 yr or metre, which suggest the possibility that long term fluctua tions in the ocean-atmosphere system may he involved. The success of the calibration of tree rings with alhacore catch indicates the possibility of relating ta-c-nng varia tions to any type of biological variations which are affected by large scale climatic fluctuations. Such relationships may he quantified and used to reconstruct objectively other climatically-caused biotic variations in the past. N. E. Clam National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. Notional Marina Fisheries Service. Southwest Fisheries Center, La Jolla. California 9JOJ7 * T. J. Bi amici Laboratory of Tree-Ring Research. II. C Fatm University of Ari;ona. Tucson, Arizona 93721 gmwmtS ISauMWtr 5. lh; stay 4, Ittt. llllmli.y r.. s,*ir. iaj. UM.t IMS IICMt * J . ta* M,*M. Mr, . I> . Ore Unr.,O.IT).MIIWI| I Lmi. K. SI ,.i a . AfWI W A--, IjimmI 11. . I (A fir. Vfk mm I.mm I H~4 W-, I mU. Irj Omm* 1111 iSjlMMa 11 --- l-JM, Vf lS--hvo4 IhktlM, (.'mill, 1.4 SatU. IVM, irw.il` Cv--It. . MW (IHI. W. I .. Cmty. Itryl liOt --a Cmmm. InA AMI.. Its Vh. II. I .IU4 (* It.rmmrn I nl. hint. 0m. . HI IW4 11X4*1. * 1*11 f. 1* A . A*.44,4 a .......- 4.1 l(-->Mi A4hlM m I 4ll*i4W mmt *r-- IUwiimi m f iW-- W444V Anwtn (. 4*441. KM|. Oals may grow heller in water ' depleted in oxygen 18 and dculerium Wittla growing oats at different temr*ratures in water of different "O and deuterium (1)1 abundances, we notke-J that oals grown in Antarctic water in whicli a depicted in `*0 and Dhy -49% and -400'.,, relative tosundord mean ocean water (SMOW used as a comparative reference in hydrogen and oxygen isotope studies!, showed initial growth 1-2 weeks sooner than did oats grown in water containing greater '*0 and I) concentrations. 1 lie oats tcvmed to grow better m water winch was most depleted in the stable isotopes throughout the growth period. The oats were grown from the same batch of iccds in two scaled glass-covered glass jars (approximately 10 /). Twentyfits; oat seeds were added to each jar, containing the same amount of vcrmieulite and 300 ml water in w hich 3.0 g RapidCiro, a commercial fertiliser, had been added. One jar coniaincJ melted glacial ice from the Antarctic with isotope concent rations of 49% 6"O (SMOW) and 400'. il) (SMOW). Tlie other jar containcd.disiincd ocean water with 1.0% i"0 (SMOW) and 4-17% 50 (SMOW). Both jars were placed in the chamber at the same time. The experiment was repeated three times with new matcrials: once the grow th chamber w as maintained between 1.7 and 3.3 C. once between 24 and 26.6 (*; and once the temperature fluctuated between 1.7 and 26.6 "C. Each tunc the oats in the jar containing water depleted in the heavy ootopcs showed germination 1-2 weeks curlier end seemed to grow belter throughout the growth period, than oats grown in tlisidfal ocean water. . Using oats grown at IS C, the fini sign of germination in the jar containing water depleted in the heavy isotopes was 4 d after Naming. On the day 6. eight plants (out of 23) had attained a height of 6 cm. The first sign of germinaiiOA in the tar with water containing the heavier isotope concentration, was alicr 17 d. By the time live plants had attained a height of 6 cm in this jar. in that with water depleted in the isotopes. 23 plants that had reached the top of the jar (approximately 23 cm). Kashuim* observed that snow-water depkied in l) increases the yield of cucumbers, radishes and spring wheat compared with controls grown m ordinary water of unspecified isotopic composition. Ik cites expmmcnt* on the egg productivity of hens and the weight gain of suckling pigs. In both cases waicr depleted in D was especially efficient in promoting product mi > Although much has been done on the effect of D-enrichcu water on biological systems, wc suggest Hut research on the cffect D-dcpktcd water on plant and animal growth may prose fruitful. A major source of water depleted in 17 hy oicr *CIT_ (40*jcpmparcd with SMOW is snow* and ice from the Aniaret k polar plateau. Water depleted by 130-1*0% h readily available in the USA from Rocky Mountain snow precipitating above I0.C00 feet ekvil ion. ' * - Jim D. Giiason Using Fkuoman US Ceitlogktd Surrey, Dearer, Colorado 90223 Bfcllid MiIff 19; MHVlH Ki 1. I9f|. I Kvlmm, L M, iT Identification of chlorinated dibenzofurans in American polychlorinated biphenyls kbwiAt.iis of embryos has contributed to the icproducii'c failures of several bird species, including the sparrow luwks (.1 . ipilcr mwri) of southern Scotland*. I Ik while-tailed afks (Iht.'aieetas aHneilla) of Schleswig I loKtcin', and IIk hernng SCN 068700 028633 WATER PCB-SD0000015338 .vh* j;ull< O.arut arc<> ia:in) of Laic Ontario*. Suspected :* include (2.2-6tt-</xhtorophenyIH. I -dichlor. ... Icnc). other cidorm.ned biocides andnr their deriv ;iev. and the poiychl.-: cited biphenyls (PCB). ail of which .ire prevent as coni.m;. >antt in the ftp1'1. PCIts are present m high concentraii<*nx in the bird populations which suffer embryonic mortality1'*. Other orianoehlorine compounds which may be present in food webs include (he chlorinated dibenredioftins and the cWortnaicd dihcniofurans (Fig. I). which are loxic to embryos in amounts4*' less than I tig. They are theicforc among the most tone substances known and are possible causes of the observed mortality. The chlorinated dibcnzodioxins and chlorinated diben/o- furans. however, have prosed exceedingly diiTicuit to detect in environmental samples in the concentrations at which they arc expected to he embryofOXc**,* The chlorinated diben* eodioxins enter the environment as contaminants in preparations of the herbicide 2,4.3-T (refs 3 and II) and the fungicide pentachlorophenoi"*". Chlorinated dibenaofurans have been found in a French (Phcnodor DP&I and a German fOnphcn AM) PCD and were shown to be the acme cmbryotaxic agent in tlwic preparations*. The techniques used, however, did not detect chlorinated dibenrofurans in an American PCB. Arodor 1200. We report here the presence of chlorinated dibenaofurans in Arodor PCB. widely used in North America and Great Britain, and in the same Arodor I2M preparation examined previously with negative findings*. Samples of PCB examined include: Arodor 124(1. I2S4, and 1260 (1969); Arodor I2S4 (1970): Arodor 1016 (1972): and the same three preparations studied bv Vos et */.*: Arodor 1260. lot No. AKO; Clophcn A-M. lot No. 9I24J4; and Phenoclor DP-6, lot not specified. The latter three PCBs were obtained from Dr Vos, the others from the Moosaoto Company in the scars indicated in parentheses. PCIJs extracted from environmental umplcs most often have gas chromatographic profiles similar to those of PCB formula tions containing approximately 4f, 54 or 60% chlorine. In the Arodor scries, the former two PCBs art equivalent to Aroclor 124A and Arodor 1254. respectively. Arodor 1260, Phenoclor DP6. and Clophcn AM all contain approximately 60*1 chlorine. Chlorinated dibenzofurans were identified in all Arodor preparations except Arodor IUI6, as well as in Clophcn A60 and Phenoclor DP6. Aroclor 1016 is a PCB mixture containing Fig. I Skeletal structures of:. chlorinated biphenyl, x+y 1-iO: 6, chionnaicd diben/oftwaas, x+jr - l-t; e. chlorinated d/brnrodtQMJM, x-f/ IS. C H'eiure v,,; Jy-< Table I Chlorinated dihoi/ufuran coKcn>utlont* .. Clophcn am! llicnecA* ' PCI Arodor 12-M tl6l Aroclor 1254 II9M) Artwlor 1234(19X1) Ansclor 1260 (1969) Aroclor l2f((M. AK3) Aroclor 10160972) Clophcn A-40 Phcnodor DP-6 4-0 0.3(25) 0.1 (6) 0.2 OJ) 0.1 (10) 0.2 (23) ND 1.4(17) 0.7(3) 3-0 *-o 12 (6i*) 0 1 (15) 0.2 02) 1.4 1X2) 04 (27) 0 9 |M*>) 0.4 (40) b * (501 OJ Otl OJ tMl ND SO 3.0 (39) 2.2C6) 10.0(74) 2.9,21) Teul 2a |7 1.3 10 01 14 136 Expressed as ua **' PCB. Valua ui parentheses represent quantity as pcrveniafc trul drbcnzefmn. Nl>. not deteoed (<0.001 nf *'). Amounts of PCB ranging from 1.0 to 2.0 t sere disimed m 400ml hexane.piaccil on a Florwl crhirnn (tang. micrrui <hareicr 31.3 mm), and (failed with: an additional l.6flu mi hexaac, and successive W0 ml sphimes each of 35; dicihyfaeiha-hesane. 23'. diethyl^iher-hevanc and acetone. at a rate of approimuKfc 7 ml mm Thcmaiur psirtion of the PCD was eluted in the hevane (ranion. wjtidi was discarded. On addition of the S ?. mixture, the elviaws were collected in sia successive 400 mi volumes. To etnmnaie the polar solvents, each rtuau was evaporaied twice just to dryness and taken up each time in a minimal amount of hexane. Eads fraction, w I nil hevane. wax placed on a Microalumina column" arJ chord v.m IO ml each of I % and 30?; methylene chloride in hevane Thor were aho taken twice jusl to donew and made to up a volume of I ml m hexane to cfamusaic die methylene chloride before gas efarenuto- graphie analysis. Aliquots of ail fraction* obtained bcfuri aad ai icr partitioning on alumina warn miceted mto a mv foot gla*a cNum.i containing 3?i OVI on 110-120 mesh .Supekopon m Tracer WT22'> and Itcwlcu-Paclanl 37(0 gaa chromatographs equipp'd wnn **Ni ckctruo-carturx drseciors. PCBs were round to be present in each fraction eluted from the Horoil cohunn in amnums lurt-e.cr.i to interfere with the detection of trace contamnvaMi. Partmonmc . n the alumina columns separaud most nf the PCB interferenut mi me I*: maths lent chloride fractions. On removal of dus imerfettwc. different peak patterm appeared in the chromatograms of me methylene chloride fractions. Compounds chiting in (he 3)?: mem> kite chloride fraction were collected for mass vneettoowux anabv-t toing a 30:1 effluent aphuer. and a trap constsime of a eapnbry iufc (I mm internal diameter, |(U mm long) tent to a U share, mantnec in a liquid nitrogen hath. Methylene cMondc (2U*;; 4 ul) m iicvsre was infevted intn the capiUary as a rmse. removed with a I > ui nucropipetlc. and placed dtrevily on the mavs xpcctrenirtsT proec The probe was tmened uuo a GEC AEI MVA>2 hign rcvoiuiwvi m.i vx spectrometer and the sohent removed by the force ptunp. 7 ae prone was rapidly inserted into the ion source an-1 multiple scaes were recorded m the on-line high resolution mode". approximately 42?; chlorine and has replaced Aroclor (2-2 in many applications, principally as the dielectric fluid in capacitors1*. Values reported in Table I represent the i.'uf of those compound* found in 400 ml Flcrixii fractions 2-6. A total of 10-12 isomers was identified in each PCB. Twochiormated dibcnxofuran contaminants have been reported for tire Oofshen and Phcnodor previously*; our lint analysts of me Clophcn revealed an additional five chlorinated dtbenrefurunv The structures contained fourtoiixcldonncaiorm. Other diben- zofurans including those chlorinated to a leaver extent nu> hu- r becn present in the lint 4U> ml fraction but this w as not cvarr.irv a in detail as it contained substantial PCB interference. Kcecm \ synthesised 2J.7JMetra-. 2J.4.7.)fapenta- an-J 2J,4.6.7..k:hcxadtloroditai/ofuran were ucd to quantify teira-. pent a-, and hexaddorodihenzofurara. respeettvdy. The footwr two authentic standards had retention times on the OVI column the same as thoac of two dibenzofurans isolated from the PCD. Vos et of.* detected no chlorinated dibenzofurans in an Arodor I2M preparation at a detection limit of I p p m. Fractionation and. examination of the identical Arodor 12(0 in our study confirm their finding! based on i!>c si.ncd limn, but reveal the presence of II chlorinated diK-tt/ofuranv n ti e preparation. having a total concentration h O.z in*. t ' l k (Tabic I). The same workers aHo found diethyl edict of the CTophcn A(4) and Phenoclor 01*6 to be mu. h nxve to to chick entbrytst than diethyl eilter extracts of Ariwlor 12- ` Our study confirms those findings on the basis of viuuci;ui..i SCH 068701 WATER PCB-SD0000015339 containing a mixture of chlorinated biplwnyls. dihcnrofuranx. and naphthalenes. Identities of peaks a.-e given in the teal. b, Maax tintruffl of peak 2. a tcirachlorodibcn/efuran. dibenzofuran content: the identical Clophen and Phenodor contain II and 17 times more total chlorinated dibcruofurans, respectively, than the Aroclor 1260. - A gas chromatogram showing components derived from the Aroclor 1234 obtained in 1949 is represented in Fig. 2. The components were eluted in the Second 400 ml Florist! fraction and recovered from the alumina column in 20% methylene chloridc-hcxanc. Each of the numbered peaks was trapped as described here, and identified by mass srectromctric analysis. A nominal mass plot of the high resolution mass spectrum of peak 2 is shown in Fig. 2. The plot includes all the ions with elemental compositions ranging to the maximum empirical formula C,,H,0"CV'CI,,'C,. The molecular ion cluster at nominal mlr 304-310 fragments by successive losses of Cl to yield the ions at m/t 269-273 and CO to the ions at m/r 241-243. A minor loss of O from the peaks at mlt 269-273 also occurs to yield the ions at mle 234-231, followed by CO elimination to We 206-210. The group of peaks at mlt 132-134 are the doubly charged molecular ions. An identical spectrum was obtained from an authentic standard of 2-3,7,6-tetracWofodibentofuran. This latter compound has a retention time identical to that of peak 4. Peak 2 is. therefore, a positional isomer. The accurate mass measurements for the characteristic ions are within 2 p.p.m. of the calculated exact masses. Peaks identified on this chromato gram and their retention limes relative to dieldrin are as follows: a mixture of tetra-and pentachktrobiphenyW 1.02): teirachtoco- dibenzofuran (1.30): peniaehlorobiptienyl (l.46|; ictrachlorodi- benrofuran 11.37); hexachloronaphiluletie (1.7$); penta- chlorohiphenyl Cl.*6): hcaachloronaphthaknc (2.00); and heptacMoronaphthalcne (3.46). An aliquot of combined fractions derived from the same Aroclor 1254 was treated with dia/omcihanc to assess w hether any chlorinated onho-hydmxy- biphenyls (pre-furanx) were present. Cas chromatographic analysis of tIvc sample before and after treatment resulted m Hlcnlical chromatograms. As large quantities of PCDs have entered the global environ mentit may he assumed that the contaminant dihenzofurjns .J also have been vd in pn-r-'r: tonal amou-aj. T! :t z<r- sisicncc. chctix, - . significance rem.i.n io be - -J * We thank J. A. Marie, M. L. Porter and ) C. \rj V diseuxsionx; A. S. Kendc for siand.irds of cOn-aiec benzofurans: and F. C. Walls for assistance ,<n the -'SJ spectrometry. This work was suppoued by the Can.c'n Wildlife Service, National Science Foundation, and Na3a. Canadian Wildlife Sendft. Gmaid W. Bowu* Micm/.cl 7. Mulvihil. Toxic Chemicals Srrlian, Ottawa, Canada kid O/tJ Space Sciences laboratory. OrtNo R. T. SimomA. L Burlingame University of California, Berkeley, California 94720 Bodega Marine Laboratory, University of California, R. W. Riscbkough . ... Bodega Bay, California 94923 RxcaKsA hUuq IS; MrvMS May 2S, 1173. '1 'Pnww mUtnit CaMaraia Wawr Inmin Cmural hut*. Onaaa *C Ihkx a*a InaiKt, lIS Nwa Suxxi. Sw,'mw. CaStwau Jit II. 1 WMa. I- uj tivgaa. Komr. 111. IIINi. > K.<xm*x. J. M. HaaaarMtk. R. It. ra K.ArvrtJ, SI. ft L K Sol. C*urr,. 4. JJJJTIl IX7I1. Gilfenxj*. St..awl Malt. R..Cxx. WAV . M. i)4.)Mlir>*. IlylMaullian. o. h'vtmr. Si*. W.MIIItUL Swiften*. G. Owl*. S'. I-- aaaa Roxx. V. K, f-WCnaf. f.-, *. MS-uZ 11*111. Vm. I. U. Kavail i. It . Vaa Axt Uan. II. M Naa,af a> lta. U. C. aM ac v.k. a. ii.r-a r->. >,.. i. ci-in<i*tri. > Vn. J G. Tarivaa. Mila Aria,, I. In'.117'1X7<L . 1 *. la. w, Siawwta. R R . awc-xiM. A. I.. Ax Laaaa. S. w,, a*a Rat. tatafl. R- W,, liltS n*Hl..S, in. las 11X711. laa|Snua. M. lal Uialvai, SI., laara. Illas Cr*aa ,S. J7'M 11*73). Wia.ahmaA R..aaa Mrwli M . aur. firm . IJ*. *Z-IM IIX7fe StiMiaa! i.M n.vavTanva ASaailia Siwka.liaail AAixar>Cinix--. UrikiaVaactaJ la*waS*ar. slai,N. 1x711 Inva. I, aaj lcaat(|. I... 4-au,. I. O * int.'L iifatiuai. D.. Revs. 3.. Mas *. 1. Itaataa. R. ft, aaM Pawif. J. . J. Ail. Of. AaylM. Cana . St. IS-OllUI. Paaiaa. si. l.aatj WaaU. 1. A..J. Au ne twJri. CSraa. SI. Ii-'i:l nrv Rwlwfaaaa. A. L . OWa*. R. W. aaj M.l-*r,r*x. R. V, IA u.:t s.-n >. I. I0J3-IV** ll7ii < Mnkxf. I. C. T .asJ SirrAai. A. V^CmOim. MAS fmr.. I. :t.l llkljl. Inn. G W.. tml Stmktt, V. J. f.A *j Cm In ika r-t,,> iiaaa. X . JaAwaK. A. C . Ofcxa*. SI., aaj OiwfhaA. U- A-r. 111. 111 ."70 iixiAi. X Sixaua. I. M.. lax Kat.aa Ax Raaxw, M. C- Md A* Vat. R. M. Him*. 23). ll3*-ll)l't***L WRKaain(k. K. w , Ranka. P.. rxrtak. O. - Maiavan t. G. aaA Km, kl. N,, hmtmtr. IX*. IOXt-1 IR2 (IT|4|. Niche breadth in Bryozoa as a test of competition theory ' ; Cosipctitiow theory predicts that inraspecific and in:e*specific competitu<n should often base opposite eif.'C'.v ~n the use of resources hy a population, the former increas ing. the latter decreasing, the range of resource actua.:v used'-*. Field data supporting these predictions art wt.i known for the interspecific case* * hut are scarce for i^e intraspcciltc condition, and we have been unable to i^j any reference demonstrating both effects within a rr; ; species. We therefore report here the verification of bc presliclkms in respect of competilum for space by cpipliytic hryo/iun AlctoniJium liirsiilum: less exur.v..; ddta suggesting the same effects within other hryozoans a.e also reported. Lntraspecilic competition should result in an increase in the range of a resource spectrum used hy a species, as at high population levels the advantages to any indisidual f being at the competition-free optimum of a resource gradient are offset hy the intense intraspecific competu> n found there (Fig. lit); this is the 'principle of equal iTP.ttiumy' of Mae.Arthur'. Interspecific competituni. on r c other hand, should tend to restrict the range of the rcvr.urrr 'iK'strum used hy a species, ax indivuluais aticiupnng u ctploit marginal resources cannot do so as cflicicmty as SCM 068702 028635 WATER PCB-SD0000015340 Monsanto rmom * * woC*tioi. # J. Levinskas - A2SC 0*T( September 25, 1975 PCBs C* C*C*Ct TO . G. Roush, Jr. A2SA H. S. Bergen - B2SL 0. R. Bishop - BIND W. B. Papageorge - B2SK R. G. Potter - B3SA W.W. Withers - B2SA The attached represents a final (?) version of the toxicity statement on PCBs. This cakes note of all the comments which have been received since the version mailed to you on August 29, 1975. This was discussed on the phone with Wayne Withers, and he agreed that it was acceptable. Since Wayne was the only one who had comments regarding the August 29 version, this should be satisfactory to all concerned. /bkp att. George J. Levinskas mum 028661 WATER PCB-SD0000015341 PCBs Recently, we were Informed that liver carcinomas were observed in female Sherman strain rats fed AROCLOR 1260 for 20^ months. This prompted us to re-examine livers from male and female rats of the Charles River strain which had been fed AROCLOR 1242, AROCLOR 1254 or AROCLOR 1260 for 2 years in earlier studies conducted for Monsanto Cpmpany. There are 4 elements which are closely interwoven in this matter: (1) differences in test procedures, (2) differences in results obtained by various investigators, (3) definition of what is a cancer, and (4) evaluation of potential risks, if any, to man. These will be summarized briefly. (1) Several animal studies have been conducted with various brands PCBs. In some studies, the test material has teen identified by trade name (AROCLOR, KANECLOR). In others, there was Just a general reference to PCB. Consequently, the quality of test material with respect to the amounts and nature of contaminating impurities or by-products cannot be determined OK in -ail case. In addition, several-strains of test animals were used, the duration of the experimental periods varied, and there was a wide range in the depth of detail with which the observa tions wer,e reported. Consequently, it is difficult to make comparisons between these studies. (.2) In general, studies have shown mice to be more susceptible than rats and females to be more sensitive than males to the liver effects of PCBs. Beyond these generalizations, the results have not been consistent. Some investigators have - . SCH 019717 IP WATER PCB-SD0000015342 reported liver carcinomas. Others have observed only benign tumors. Several have noted changes in liver tissue without detecting tumor formation. For the reasons Just cited, it is difficult to determine the bases for these different results. The most direct comparison can be made between the 2 studies on AROCLOR 1260 since the same high dosage level of the same lot of AROCLOR 1260 was employed in both experiments. In the studies reported to us, liver carcinomas occurred in approximately 8# of female rats of the Sherman strain (the only sex used), In Monsanto's study, none of the liver lesions had progressed beyond the stage of benign tumors (hepatomas) despite a slightly longer duration of feeding of AROCLOR 1260 to rats of Sprague Dawley, Charles River strain. The Monsanto study employed rats of both sex and it did confirm the previously noted greater sensitivity of female rats`to liver effects of PCBs. (3) A review of the liver alterations seen in all 3 AROCLORS in Monsanto's studies shows that the lesions were benign in character in the traditional pathologic sense. An evaluation of all Information available to us, including the contradiction between the recent data showing AROCLOR 1260 to be a carcinogen and our earlier negative results on the same product, leads to a conclusion that AROCLOR 1260 is not carcinogenic to all commonly used strains of laboratory test animals. ' (4) In 1972, the manufacture of AROCLOR 1260 was dis continued in the United States and the sale of AROCLORs was restricted to a single use, i.e., as dielectric fluids. As such they are used in closed systems which will at least mini mize additional environmental contamination. Considering the WATER PCB-SD0000015343 high degree of fire risk associated with this use, and recognizing that AROCLOR 1260 may have a weak carcinogenic potency which has not been fully proven and that AROCLORS 1242 and 1254 have not been shown to be carcinogens. it is /concluded that the continued use of AROCLORS^as dielectric \ fluids will not present an unreasonable human health hazard. SCM 019719 I II I1K1IBU 028664 WATER PCB-SD0000015344 Elmer P. Wheeler, Medical Department January 29, 19T& Status of Aroclor ToJclco)- logical Studies I J. S. Barrett, London gr 'Bci gun,' HLlflJlu W. B. Papageorge, WPAPA D. S. Cameron Brussels Enclosed is a copy of the reports from our consulting laboratory Indicating the status of the animal toxicity studies. Z have summarised the pertinent findings separately and as indicated in the table. We have given copies of these dsta to one 0. S. custo mer, the U. S. FDA and one or two other state agen cies. Z don't see why this information cannot be released with discretion in Britain or Europe. Our interpretation is that the PCB's are exhibiting a greater degree of toxicity in this chronic study than we had anticipated. Secondly, although there are variations depending on species of animals, the PCB's are about the same as SOT in mammals. We have additional interim dsta which will perhaps be more discouraging. We are repeating some of the experiments to confirm or deny the earlier findings and are not distributing the early results at this time. EPW:Ju Enclosure Elmer P. Wheeler 026614 SCH CA No. B-84-1103-CA WATER PCB-SD0000015345 St. Louis Nr. ?. J. c. Haywood lewport (Alra&il) Deceaber 17/51 Nr.V.E.Baaer, Ruabor. .V.H.Ritchie, Ruabcr. Er.H.R.Rewaan, Ruabon Mr.S.N.KUllfay, &uncric.. Or.O.S.Weddell, St.Louis Kr.P.T.Marshall, St.Loui: AROCLOBSt Tonoin f Since writing ay note of Oee.U/51 Z hare ahanced ,to learn that Anniston people had Quite serious sldn troubles! boils, blackheads and the like, anong workers In Aroelors, especially 1269 around 1933* A little browsing Into the literature reveals quite a history of skin troubles and liver troubles (Including sons fatal eases) attributed to heavy exposure to chlorinated diphenyls. The chlorinated diphenyls are stated to be worse than ohloroaphthalenes, and to be aore haraful the nore chlorine they contain. I still think, however, that the exposure In ordinary analytical work should not cause any trouble. E. Mather to WATER PCB-SD0000015346 I Blcc: Dr. D.V.N. Hardy^/ MR. H.K. H A3 ON. St.Pauli (2) JWBtVBi eoi Dr. H.R. Newman. . 8th September* 1955* IgOLW Dear Howard* You will readily appreciate that we are wary wuch ooneamad with tha tozloology of Aroelors* particularly as our davalopaant sales efforts in this field of Monsanto products have* in the last six months or so* really begvn to pay off. Recently we received through Dr. Kelly the findings of the Kettering Laboratory whloh as far as we were concerned included entirely new data. Xn particular* the toxicity of Aroclor 1254 was demonstrated with a range of an Inals at a level of 1*5 ign./ou.i. At the sane tine there was no toxicity found for 1242 at concentration of 1*9 mgzm./cu.a. This In itself night be said to bo surprising and perhaps Indicate sene specific differences between the tcxleltles of various grades of Aroclor* We would be nost anxious to learn froa you whether you aooept the Kettering results as fully significant In a broad way* and whether this data Is going to be node available to all* Fortunately* our Chief Medical Officer* Dr. H.R. Vewnan* Is visiting 81.Louis and will be discussing the significance of this Kettering voile with Dr. Kelly. Here there Is a convention that a factor of 10 is used In translating anlaal tcxleltles to hwan tcxleltles. Xn other words there would be an Interpretation that Aroclor 1254 should not be used whore atmospheres containing a quantity something less than . 0*15 mgiw./ou.n. results. Both Sales and Development here are very anxious to handle this sideward problem in the right way and to remain In complete liaison with you on actions whloh might be neoessary* Perhaps It is particularly important to us as a WATER PCB-SD0000015347 2 We had been giving eonaldaratlan to fatting tone toxleolo*lo*l data eetabllahed for ua on tha Aroelora by Battalia In Oaraany who have good faollltlaa for thla typa of worn. However, we would eartalnly not do thla without full dlaouaalon with you. To ua thara aaau tha naoaaalty of aatabllahlng qulta a lot aora data and wa would ba willing to arranga for aoaa of thla to ba obtalnad if you think that thla la a raaaonabla auggaatlon. Dr.Woman a vlalt la particularly approprlata at thla a tag* and of oouraa It would ba poaalbla for no to dlaeuaa tha natter broadly during ny vlalt in lata October. However# meanwhile we would be aoat grateful to gain aa nuoh of the N.C.C. point of view aa poaalble. SCH 0*8758 lllllllll 025660 WATER PCB-SD0000015348 CQFY Dr. D.V.N. Hardy Dr. H.R. Newman. Monsanto Chenleal Company St. Louis, Missouri September 20, 1955 Dr. J.nf. Barrett London Your memo September 8 to Mr. NascAROCLOR TOCICHY Howard Nason has given me your memo of September 8. I will be happy to discuss this with Dr. Newman during his visit here. I think, however, there are several points that I can answer you now. You comment upon the difference in toxicity between Aroclor 1254 and 1242. This is not particularly surprising because in the earlier work it was found that toxicity increased with chlorination. Of course, from the standpoint of vol atility in the case of inhalation or absorption from the gut from the point of view of ingestion are important. Frankly, there was not too great a difference between the two compounds, however. As you Know, the maximum allowable concentrate is 0.1 ml/cublc meter in the case of 1254, and as high as 10.0 mgm in the case of 126S. I think the former is too low and the latter is too high. In this country they don't use the KACs very routinely, but certainly in England I think it would be alright to consider 0.2 mgm/cublc meter as perfectly safe. I don't know how you would get any particular advantage in doing more work. "rfhat is it that you want to prove? I believe your work should be directed towards finding out what the'concentrations are of Aroclor during different operations whether it is Industrial or painting. The re ports you have seen from Kettering Laboratory are the re sult of approximately 215)000 to 220,000 expenditure by MCC. . MCC's position can be summarized in this fashion. He know Aroclors are toxic but the actual limit has not been pre cisely defined. It does not make too much difference, it seems to me, because our main worry is what will happen if an individual developes any type of liver disease and gives a history of Aroclor exposure. I am sure the juries would not pay a great deal of attention to MACs. SCM 0*8759 WATER PCB-SD0000015349 Fage 2 September 20, 1955 jiROCLOA TOXICITY fe, therefore, review every new Aroclor use from this point of view. If it is an industrial application where we can get air concentrations and have some reasonable expectation that the air concentrations will stay the same, ve are much more liberal in the use of Aroclor. If, however, it is distributed to householders where it can be used in almost any shape and form and we are never able to know how much of the concentration they are exposed to, we are much more strict. No amount of toxicity testing will obviate this last dilemma and therefore I do not believe any more test ing would be justified. Let's see what our discussions with Dr. Newman and yourself bring out. A. Emmet Kelly, K.D. SCH CK8760 IHIIIIII 025662 I WATER PCB-SD0000015350 COFY Dr. D.V.N. Hardy Dr. H.H. Newman Monsanto Chemical Company St. Louis, Missouri. September 22, 1955 Dr. J.n/, Barrett London Office AROCLOR IOXICHY On rereading my memo of September 20 to you I noticed an error in the second paragraph. I feel that this corres pondence is sufficiently important to correct this para graph. This paragraph should read: You commented in your letter about the difference in toxicity between Aroclor 1254 and 1242. These differences are not surprising because in the earlier work it was found that toxicity increased with degree of chlorination. Of course, the vol atility is important in the esse of inhalation toxicity, and absorption into the intestinal tract is important from the point of oral toxicity. Fran.<ly, there was not a great deal of difference between the two subject compounds. As you know, the maximum allowable concentration is 0.1 mg/cubic meter in the case of 1254 and is as high as 10.0 mg/cubic meter in the case of 1266. I thinx the former is too low and the latter is too high. In the United States they don't use maximum allowable concentrations (MAC/- very routinely but certainly in England I think it would be alright to consider 0.2 mg/cubic meter as perfectly safe. REK;k R. Emmet Kelly, M.D. SCM 048761 025663 WATER PCB-SD0000015351 1 * roi DR. J.V. BAARBTT DVIH/teB CCPIPgglL c.o. Dr. J.A. Gardner. Dr. V.MoG. Morgan. Mr. W.g. laaar. Mr. C.G. Wickham Dr. H.R. lewan Dr. D.3.P. Boebook Mr. J.3. Banter Mr. I.L. Pixten Mr. l.G.H. Thomas. Mr. J.l. Brlndle. 6th December 1955 AROCLOBS . TOXICOLOGICAL manati cm Since sy communication of 19th Aagaet 1955* Aon I en--eil up the position confronting us following the receipt of the reports of the lettering Laboratory, Dr. lawman has discussed with Dr. Kelly the significance of the Kettering results in relation to M.C.C. thought and policy. M.C.C. 's immediate action is to subnlt the reports to the Aaeriean Conference of Goveroaental Industrial Hygienists in support of a clain that the official taole of aaxlnua permissible vapours concentration* diould include the lteesi- I i2% Chlorinated Diphenyl (Aroelor 1242) 54)1 * 1 (Aroelor 1254) 2 agrns./a3 1 agra./m* The lettering results indicated in brief that prolonged exposure to Arooler 1242 vapour at 1.9 agrm.^ gars so sign of daaage to the test animals but that; Aroelor 1254 at 1.5 agzn./m3 caused slight but positive signs of injury. * Ton will note that K.C.C. do not introduce a safety footer in translating these animal test results to human beings, and in fact regard such a factor as unnecessary in animal tests of such thorough ness as those carried cut at Kettering. It vill be sometime Wore we know the decision.. In ay view it would not be unrealistic to assign a value of 2 agru./e? te drooler 1242 but the case fer setting the limit at 1 agrm.A3 fear Aroelor 1254 is not so logical. After all 1254 eaa cause slight but perceptible damage at 1.6 and who can say whether it would be harmless at huhh 025665 WATER PCB-SD0000015352 -2- 1 Mra./a^. However, IT the M.C.C. recommendations art eooepted there sill be an implication that Arcelor toxicity increases with chlorine content, a reversal of the position suggested in M.C.C. technical literature. M.C.C. Application Data Bulletin Vo. P-115 states aIf Aroclors are ased at elevated temperatures snoh as 200 or 300C. in open systems methods must be designed to exhaust any vapours arising from these open systems. This applies especially to lower ohlorinated Aroelors where experimental work on animals indicates that the aaximum safe concentration in workrooms is in the range of 0.5 - 1.0 milligrams per cubic meter of air. In the case of more highly chlorinated Aroclors such as Aroelor 1268 the ' allowable limit is about 10 milligrams per cubic meter of air and accordingly. Aroelors of this type are believed to be of a much lower order of toxicity. Whatever the outcome, there will be no impact on K.C.C. policy regarding the uee of Aroclors in paints since M.C.C. have long ceased to recommend the use of Aroclors for this purpose. However, M.C.L. has continued to offer Aroclors for use in paints on the basis that the evidenoe for rejection was slim, and that the risk is reduced by resorting to the use of more highly chlorinated Aroclors. This was thought to have the duel advantage of using a material of (a) lower intrinsic toxicity (b) lover vapour pressure. It is now clear that toxicity increases with degree of chlorination and that this effect may cancel or even outweigh the.advantage due to decreased vapour pressure. We have tended to draw a distinction between the use of Aroclors in latex paints on the one hand and in conventional paints an the other, the concensus of opinion being that the rate of volatilisation from the former is greater than from the latter, and as a result we are no longer reconaendiag Aroclors for latex paints. The decision now before us is whether we should continue to sell Aroclors for use in conventional paints. Cta this issue, the recent decision by I.C.I. to discontinue their usage' of droolers in ordinary paints is considered to bo an indication of the lino that may well taken by our other customers. Broadly speaking the main objections are that the paint manufacturer cannot control the paint user tfco aay apply in the form of spray, and say use on hot surfaces. In either case a degree ef risk must be admitted. As to how carious the risk may be it depends naturally on the total time for tdiieh aay individual is exposed during his life time. There mast clearly be eircumetanoes under ufaiah the use ef Aroelor containing paints will con stitute e health hasard, partioularly to individuals tfte for one reason or another are eonstitutiaally leas resistant than the nem^ . The I.C.I. decision east have boon iafluanoed quite materially by a letter fren Dr. tally te Mr. toy Kitteraohain (dated 15.7.55.)* a eojgr ef uhiab reached then through Canadian Industries Ltd. The relevant passages are as follows! - WATER PCB-SD0000015353 3 "iroclor should not bo sprayed on the Job In in industrial plant where there are plant personnel who tin breathe the vapours. There Is no danger at all if tha aatarlal is brushed cc, and there is no danger in spraying it if the workers nse a booth or nse an approved respirator and no ana inhales the spray. "Iroclor fnses at rooa temperature ery probably would not present any hazards. Mist or spray* however, is another problem entirely and that is the reason for the above recommendation. After all* the tozicity of Iroclor anst take into ooneideratian how anoh oan get into the air. It is oar belief that at room teaperatnre not enough oan get into the air to cause any trouble. At elevated tenperatares and if the material is dispersed as a mist or aerosol a different Interpretation has to be placed on its toxicity^. The passages of partionlar significance to I.C.I. Paints are underlined and aay be conaidered to be reflected in their conclusions which I now quote below:- In brief (a) The spraying of iroclor paints appears to involve precautions which would be so inconvenient as to limit unduly their application by this aethod. (b) Apart from questions of spraying there appear to be cases where Aroclor-ccntaining paints would involve tozio hazards either during appli cation or subsequently* and where cautionary advice would be appropriate. The need for special precautions would limit the use of iroclor paints in these cases. (c) As far as the paints in question are ocncerned it ia impossible to know how any particular can aay be eventually used* so every can would need to show the warnings and precautions for all foreseeable eventualities. The presence of those warnings would tend to deter people fr; \ using the paints even' in oases lAere no special precautions were needed." * With reference to the impression generally given that cold Aroelors are safe* recent determinations of vapour pressure (Southern Research Institute Final Report to M.C.C. an Project 526 by W.M. lolan) permit the saturated vapour concentrations to be calculated as follows:- apour Concentration (narm./m^) Arcelor 1242 Aroclor 1243 Arcelor 1254 20C. 4.7 2.1 0.8 3.0 1.1 sc* 0<8153 WATER PCB-SD0000015354 4 Hence air saturated with cold Aroclor is at or shove the maximum permissible concentration. In general we have to accept Or. Kelly's leading remarks and the conclusions of I.C.I. Paints, but an7 consideration of the risk under a given set of conditions oust involve the total exposure factor as well as the concentration. It is in this area that constructive answers could be made if the necessazy background of data were available. However, the issue oefore us is whether .'i.C.L. should align its policy on the use of Aroclors in paint with that of and as I see it we have little alternative when M.3.3. can be quoted against us. The use of aroclors in paints based on chlorinated rubber warrants special consideration in view of the following circumstances (a) aroclors are of such value for the purpose that the manufacturers sight well be embarrassed if we withdraw our recommendation (b) the/ are not used for ordinary decorative and protective purposes in domestic and industrial premises, but to protect metals from corrosion, (c) tb7 are not applied to hot surfaces under conditions which would constitute a hasird to nearby personnel. ' My recommendations are accordingly as follows:- 1. M.5.L. continues to sell Aroclors for use in the manufacture of paints based on chlorinated rubber. 2. a.S.L. continues to sell Aroclors for production of paints intended for exterior application. 3. A.Z.L. discontinues the sale of Aroclors for use in the manufacture of all other paints. SCM 048754 ilium 025668 WATER PCB-SD0000015355 Ctt. J. 1. BiBBBTT IBB/OB. *7,2.}*. aOCLO TQIICITT. T<tr mb* sf February-5}rd. .o. Dr. D.Til* 1ardp fir. V*MdO. Mm*put. Dr. BJL. Dim. After gsiag throu^i ew flits at Buabea sad Bespn-t ss hast only been Ala is find sas Arts lor rspsrt cental aid data sa iraelsr Taxlelty, This ropvt Is* 221^* Final Bspsri a 'Areola* Data Book) * 7 B.1* ml*!. datsd iprll 27th. 194* lai a am11 seotlea sa ph/slolagleal effects. Ttas first dsals slth skia sffsots aad Is based sa laforaatlsB frsa BIS rtpsris. It ladleatss has sash troubles as ohlvaoas aid lberaal slokassa experienced la tht sarlj da/s when psspla art handling shlsrlaatad ipdrocarbona could bs aselded b/ adoption of suitable asthods of hygiene, and tbs uss of a oaltabla bnrier srsaa. C&isnmJtiJi t^Lwvr* Jju4 Tbs asosid osotlaa ehioh Is taken fron lbs Journal of Industrial Byglene aad Toxloelogy, Tolas 20, lab** 2, ribroarjr 1JJB, glass a brief description of tbs sTstsalo taxlelty effect shloh ohl*laatsd hjdroon*bea laslading ehlarlaatsd bypbeaols 00a oaass, Liver danago la sf sauras tbs oatstaadlag offset aad sf tbs carious/hydrocarbons tested ,/dipfceayl ^ce ssidsaos as bo lag tbs asst tads. It la ladlaatad that la bits rats brsatblag air esntaialng around 0*27 agna. par eu. a* osar a period sf 1)4 - 145 d^o caused User lajsrj* w. a. bai. SCM 048755 WATER PCB-SD0000015356 Dr. U levport, England. r*bwu7 12th, 1954 Ve do not know what tho Mart-- allowable concentration of Iroolor in. 0x milligram per cubic n*tr ha* been **t op. V* bar* run for about 60 days at 7 tin** thla and found sons llrar daaaga. V* ara now running thla at a lowar lrral. . V* bar* never found any llrar tronbl* in any of th* workers la our plant, but wa watch th* control of th* fuass In our sustonars' plant* and always r*oo--nd exhaust ventilation. Z an aur* ye* r*alla* that 1 ag par auhio natar 1* r*eoaand*d for an Wwur day for Indefinite p*rlod* of tin*. In painting a roon wo hero food 1 - 2 ng for a day or *o, but after that th* l*r*l drop* down to nothing. Vhat v* war* really worrying about wa* th* possibility that a nan would d*r*lop hepatitic, on an idlopathlo. rlral, or aarun basis and on questioning would reeall that h* had painted a roon with Iroolor paint and stats that h* bad *nalltd it vary strongly. Z an afraid then we night be oonrlctsd by aaaoeiatlan srsn though we wore sure on* oould not get a lsrsl high enough to eaueo trouble. Va bare, horevar, been concerned with the lerC of Iroolor during spray painting, but I think that lerel can only be detemlned by actual measurement*. Please do not worry about asking n* these questions beoanso wo certainly want you to bare the entire plotur* about iroolor tcnlolty. Is aoon u Z get a report on the work at Kettering, I will let you know. 1. tenet Kelly, XJ>. 1KZ/MPL. SCH 0<8756 WATER PCB-SD0000015357 Monsanto .ere wtifCT <'CfhCl TO George Roush, Jr., M. D July 30, 1975 PCB's Memo HSB to FJF 7/17/75 H. S. Bergen B2SL G. L. Bratsch - B3NA D. L. Eby - A3NA J. T. Garrett - A2SA T. L. Gossage - B2SL G. J. Levinskas - A2SC W. B. Papageorge - B2SK R. G. Potter - B3SA K. W. Easley - 1920 W. W. Withers - B2SA Attached is a draft for the toxicity section of the Monsanto statement under Action No. 5 of the ref erence memo. I believe this draft contains the essentials which must be included. It will undoubtedly need to be revised before it becomes a part of the final statement which should be completed in late August. Comments are solicited. GR/ln att. George Roush, Jr., M. 0. [ CJL Na. BBAHOfrCA ] r.? SCM 019723 013704 WATER PCB-SD0000015358 PCBs Recently, we were Informed that liver carcinomas were observed in female Sherman strain rats fed AROCLOR 1260 for 20 1/2 months. This prompted us to re-examine livers from male and female rats of the Charles River strain which had been fed AROCLOR 1242, AROCLOR 12$4 or AROCLOR 1260 for 2 years in earlier studies conducted by Monsanto. In addition, we have discussed our findings and those reported to us with scientists working in the field of carcinogenicity. There are 4 elements which are closely interwoven in this matter: (1) differences in test procedures, (2) differences in results obtained by various investigators, (3) definition of what is a cancer, and (4) evaluation of potential risks, if any, to man. These will be summarized briefly. (1) Several animal studies have been conducted with various brands of PCBs. In some studies, the test material has been SCM o 19 72 iRmi->i-i9ma s 'i WATER PCB-SD0000015359 2 Identified by trade name (AROCLOR, KANECLOR). In others, there was just a general reference to PCB. Consequently, the quality of test material with respect to the amounts and nature of contaminating impurities or by-products cannot be determined in all cases. In addition, several strains of test animals were used, the duration of the experimental periods varied, and there was a wide range in the depth of detail with which the observations were reported. Consequently, it is difficult to make comparisons between these studies. (2) In general, studies have shown mice to be more susceptible than rats and females to be more sensitive than males to the liver effects of PCBs. Beyond these generalizations, the results have not been consistent. Some investigators have reported liver carcinomas. Others have observed only benign tumors. Several have noted changes in liver tissue without detecting tumor formation. For the reasons just cited, it is difficult to determine the bases for these different results. . SCM 019725 WATER PCB-SD0000015360 3 The ooat direct comparison can be aade between the 2 studies on AROCLOR 1260 since the same high dosage level of the same lot of AROCLOR 1260 was employed in both exper iments. In the studies reported to us, liver carcinomas occurred in approximately 8 of female rats of the Sherman strain (the only sex used). In Monsanto's study, none of the liver lesions had progressed beyond the stage of benign tumors (hematomas) despite a slightly longer duration of feeding of AROCLOR 1260 to rats of Sprague Dawley, Charles River strain. The Monsanto study employed rats of both sexes and it did confirm the previously noted greater sensitivity of female rats to liver effects of PCBs. (3) In the traditional pathologic sense, liver alter ations seen with all 3 AROCLORS in Monsanto's studies were benign in character. Lesions of the type seen may be induced by other chlorinated aromatic and aliphatic hydrocarbons such as aldrln, dleldrln, and carbon tetrachloride. In fact, the experts whom we consulted expressed opinions ' 'c** that the potential carcinogenicity of PCBs was comparable to that of DOT, aldrin, dieldrin and carbon tetrachloride. (NIMH SCM 019726 WATER PCB-SD0000015361 4 The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the National Cancer Institute (NCI) have redefined the traditional concept of benign and malignant tumors. Those agencies now view any tumor Induced by a chemical as malignant despite the absence of the classical histologic features of malignancy. The legal division of EPA has used this redefinition of carcinogenicity to cancel the registrations of dieldrln and aldrln and It Is about to launch litigation against chlordane and heptachlor. In this connection, it should be noted that, by virtue of their intended use as pesticides, these materials were Intended to be used in a dispersive manner. (4) Commenting upon EPA's reclassification of tumors, the Food and Drug Administration's (FDA) Associate Commissioner of Science remarked that . . . "It should be emphatically emphasized that there is by no means i universal acceptance of . . . the above ... classification of tumors." In addition, it should be noted that FDA has had the microscope slides of tissues, including livers from SCM 019727 013708 WATER PCB-SD0000015362 5 rata on the Monsanto studies with the 3 AROCLORS for about three years, and that the FDA has been Informed of the more recent study on AROCLOR 1260. To this date, no adverse comments have been received. After a review of all information available to us, we conclude that AROCLOR 1260 has been shown to be a carcinogen in one strain of rat. It is not carcinogenic in the traditional meaning of that word to all commonly used strains of laboratory test animals. Our overall interpretation of the available data is that AROCLOR 1260 has a carcinogenic potency comparable to that of DDT and carbon tetrachloride. AROCLORS 1242 and 1254 have not been shown to be carcinogens. 013709 SCM 019728 WATER PCB-SD0000015363 I. Ihasuti 11 W. 1. Ptoaraoria Cwnl Offleea April 17, 1970 Barth Day -- Tha Queaelon of Pdf TO : Regional Vice President* plant Manager* Diatrict Salaa Manager* U.S. Subaldlarlaa U.S. Plane Coonunleaeora Aa a raaule of racane public ley abouC polychlorinated blphanyl (PCB) and tha poaalbla throat thia chanlcal poaaa Co tha environment, va hava praparad background information for your uaa on Barth Day, April 22. Va hava anelclpaead aana queatlona you night ba aakad and provided aona anavara. Plaaaa do not praaant any Teach-In "viaitore" with praparad handouta on PCB. You nay uaa ehla infomaeloo in varbal convaraaeiooa ahould tha occaaion arlaa. Praaa quart** on PCB nay ba anavarad with a copy of eha attached nova ralaaaa. Praaa quarlaa for furthar information ahould ba dlrecCed to B. . John, Organic dlviaioo public ralaelona manager, in St. Loula. tv Attachment V. B. PejUgabrga WATER PCB-SD0000015364 QCUTICi AMD AMSVII SHUT OH POLTCHLOtHATlD BIPHPfTL This queation and anever aheat, for varbal uaa only by Monaanto peraonnel, la accoapaniad by oar racanC newa ralaaaa replying Co chargee that PCB thraatana tha environment. . 1. How vaa PCB flrat Identified In tha environment? Lata In Fab., 1969, tha San Franc laco Chronic la earrlad a major feature atory about Ha menacing now pollutant" found In tha San Franclaco Bay araa. Tha artlcla vaa baaad on raaaarch dona by Dr. Robart Rleebrough of tha Unlvaralty of California. In hla aaarch for raalduaa of paatlcldaa (DOT and DOB) ha ancountarad "interfering aubatancaa." A few yeara prior to Dr. Rleebrough'a work, two 9vadlah aclantlata at Stockholm Unlvaralty'a Inatitutlon of Analytical Chamietry reported they, too, had ancountarad thaaa other aubatancaa. Tha Swedlah aclantlata vara able to Identify acme of thaaa material# aa polychlorinated blphanyla or PCB. Baaad upon thla work, other aclantlata. In thla country and throughout tha world, have looked for and identified PCB. -more- SCM 0*2317 024726 WATER PCB-SD0000015365 2 They subsequently uk4 themselves two questions -- is PH e threat Co the environment, and, how 1 KB entering the environment? Sine* PCBa ere not broadcast or spread around the land, at ci pesticides, cha scientists theorized cha source oust be industrial wastes. Monaetto Company haa bean In eoncaec with many of thaaa aelaxclata and aganclaa throughout tha world. Honaanto la ai cone amad aa anyona about thla potantlal problam. Va aa continuing our own raaaarch programs aa wall aa cooperating fully with othar studlaa. Sines Monsanto la tha aola manufacturer of PCB In thla coutcry (there are othar producara, worldwide\ It waa obvina from tha beginning that we would be alngled out for criticism. 2. la P3 aa hasardoua to tha environment aa recant charge* wouji Indicate? The meat Ion of hazard to tha environment la relative. Soma *c lent let a have discovered It la harmful to certain apache of fiah and blrda. Whether It la harmful to men la t quaatIon which la atlll under study. -more* sc,, 042318 024727 WATER PCB-SD0000015366 3 '* N Uet charges, regarding the hmrca ini, have been based upon technical bulletin toxtci^r description* and warning labels carried on shipping cotalners. Thaaa varnlnga ara common throughout tha rnuatry. Uaars of Industrial chemicals ara accustomed s handling these materials with caution. As far as * know, at this time PCBs are not a threat to tha world penlet Ion. 3. What is Monsanto doing about this poalble threat to tha environment? (See attached news release.) Whan the subject first came to our creation in 1968, we began a six-point program. Tha progme cone lets of: A. Working with scientists arotsr the world to properly identify and measun ?CB in tha environment. Our contacts haw resulted in meaningful exchanges of sd.edflc data. This effort has been directed towei locating tha source of PCB emissions. B. One possible source of PCB lx rhe environment could be from manufacturing ncilltlas. For this reason, we have been moanlslng many of our manufacturing techniques installing new pollution abatement devices cai generally have "tightened up" our plant tecxdques. -SOr*. ............................... SCN 042319 ipm 024728 WATER PCB-SD0000015367 * 4 C. Karller thia yaar, we alerted all our cuatoaera Co tha poeelble throat poood to eho environment bf PCS. At the fame time, wo off#rod our technical aervicea to oaalot than in tha proper handling, uaa and dlapoaal of thaaa producca. 0. Vo hova had undar way for nearly a year toxiological atudlaa to determine tha a ffact of higher chlorinated hydrocarbona on aniaale. Early raaulta fraa thaaa atudlaa Indicate PCS la not highly tootle oa haa bean charged. I. Va hove alao begun atudlaa to determine tha blodegradablllty of PCB. Va have coma to early conclualona which Indicate lower chlorinated producca are degraded In tha environment. Highar chlorinated aubatancaa do appear to raalat degradation. Va are oo tha trail of come promising laada to olve thla problem. . Finally, we are working toward tha Introduction of alternate producta which will be either new formulatlona or rapidly degrading compound# which retain the functional characterla tic of PCB but poee no threat to the environment. IIIIIIII 024729 WATER PCB-SD0000015368 3 4. I* the public in any immediate danger? Ic It our opinion that cho public li not faced with any lancdlatc danger to ltc health from PCBa. Contrary to the aeneatlooal headllnee of recant daye, PCS la not commonly found around the houaehold. The major market for PCB-contalning producte ia la electrical equipment. It ia aleo uaed in cloaed ayetern heat-tranafer application. The "plaaticlser" uaea are very limited and are reetricted to apecialty producte. 3. Since PCB doea linger In the environment and could be e long-term threat elallar to DDT, ahould it not be banned? Monaanto Company and the electrical indue try believe thaee producte ere ao vital to our eoclety that they ahould not be banned. One major electrical equipment manufacturer hae told ue that a ban on the uee of PCBcontalning producte would mean major power falluree throughout the world. Ve believe that etrlct control over the uee and diapoeal of PCB, and aubctitutlon in uaea that cannot be controlled, ia the anewer to thia problem. Ve are working toward thia aolution. SCI. <*** iiiiiiii 024730 WATER PCB-SD0000015369 ft ft. If PCS Is only used la iptclilaad or "closed systems", why would Koossato publish s bulletin which said PCS Is used la smay other ways? Our bullstla 0/PL-306, re ferret to la rsesat publicity, was first published in 1960 whm chars was oo avldanca that PCS could ba a throat Co sm environment. Whan tha possible throat waa brougic co our attention two years ago, wo discontinued clralatlon of the bulletin. Tha bulletin was designed to bi a naalas tool." It had many suggested applications lx order to Increase our sale of these chemicals. Monsanto is not unique la this narksting approach. To our knarledge, PCS has never been used In all these applications as has been charged. 7. Where does Monsanto produce Its Aroclor products? Monsanto produces Aroclor profects containing PCS at Its William G. Knmmrlch Plant, Seuget, 111., and Its Anniston, Ala., plaat. 8. Bow long has the company produced these chemicals? About 40 years. -more- SCH 042322 tf!> WATER PCB-SD0000015370 7 9. Sow ouch PCI hu ba produced? Monaonto't produceloo flfurtt oro confidential tad will b rtloutd only to eho ppproprlae* fovtrnMnul **ncU*. 0O0- sc 042323 SMC WATER PCB-SD0000015371 NEWS for RELCAS8 Monsanto *. V. John (314) 694-2891 *Juc Munota opmthb<t . VlHM CMNtf * UMtarF ktlKul * UM. Hiwri (til* MOSAHTO imns TO CHARGE THAT PCB THUATEMS KHVIXONMEHT ST. LOUIS, April 10 -- Monsanto Company said today it was wall awara of tha eoncarn ovar poaalbla environmental contamination by polyehlorinatad biphanyl (KB), an Industrial chemical nada by tha coe^any. Tha eoapany began a six-point program in 1968 to proparly ldantlfy and aaasura PCB In tha environment. Stops hava baan takan to strictly control uss of tha chamlcal and raplaca thosa grades of PCB which linger in nature. Monsanto's statement ema In response to charges by Congressman William T. Ryan (Dam.) of Saw York that tha discovery of PCB in tha ecology represented a major threat. Howard L. Mlnckler, Monsanto vice president and general manager of Its Organic Chemicals Division, said, 'Ve have and will continue to cooperate fully with governmental agencies Investigating this problem. We also have been in close contact with our customers. Monsanto has spent over $1 million to verify or correct scientific reports, monitor the use of PCB end eearch for substitute products where Deeded. This program will be successfully concluded this year. jre- SCM 04232% tup 024733 WATER PCB-SD0000015372 ISAMTO: KirtT TO PCS CJUBCI "It la unfortunate chat Congressman tyan evidently dif --c have all chla Information at his disposal. Just laac aoai we partlclpaead la a 0.8. Oapartaaat of tha Interior mwr'n where va exchanged ldaaa with iom 40 scientists and tola than of our findings and actions," Klaeklar said. Tha Monsanto axacutiva also notad chat tha usa of Pa is nisundsrstood by sons investigators. "Tor example, va dc arc know of any currant usa of PCB in insactlcldas. Ivan so, wc ci asking tha 0.8. Department of Agrlcultura to rsjact any Insecticide which has PCB as an inart carrier," Mlncklar said. "PCB is not a household product, as scan hava suggastad," Kizcklsr continued. "To our knowledge, it is not used in plastic fax vrapa, house paints, cellophane, asphalt or tires. Tha principal market is electrical applications vhara tha chanlcal performs a vital function as an insulating fluid. In this usa. Pa is completely sealed in a metal container. Other major markets employ similar closed systems." Monsanto's PCB program was initially directed at proper id--dfleatlon of chlorinated hydrocarbons appearing in the environment. This research, confirmed by othem^ found only the higher chlorinated materials. At tha same time, Monsanto uxnertook animal feeding studies which ahow PCB is not a highly talc material. sea 042325 WATER PCB-SD0000015373 ' -3 MVSAJRO} UFU 10 KM C8AB ns aaterlsl. The Meood part of Honaera'a investigation mi '* coordination with all customers m a rigid critique of lea PCB manufacturing units. Althou loss of PCS during manufacturing was negligible, production technique were further nodarnlsad and aaw pollution abatement devioe ra continually balng upgraded. Monaanto haa coneantram lea further reaaarch on thota few PCB conpounds which defade a lowly. Alternate products for these grades, which retain tbi functional properties of PCB and present no potential threat, nil be introduced later this year. Mlnckler concluded, 'taaanto la seeking the best solution to this potential enviroaental problem. Action not based on reason and scientific fees can only result In greater problana. For exaa^le, we have ben advised by one electrical equipment nanufacturer that an lmndlate ban on PCB would result In aajor power failures throughout :ha world. This la not the answer. Proper use of this vital mnical and substitution, .v . where appropriate, la the answer.* w-- -r *4 .. * Or* SC 3Zt WATER PCB-SD0000015374 * R. A. Stehtt- 321* -January 24, -1177 . HOWL. 5TUBT OM PCI'S r ** George Roush r A2SX Hi M*. 3randstetter f. B, Pip|or| . R. G. Potter J. C. tfeber P. L. Wright 3330 3233 s:sx use Attacked la the latest correspondence in afcat appears to be a najer error by Mobil when It indicted, polychlonfe** anted bipkeayls as a possible carcinogen saoagit* Bill Papageorge's recast discussion vttkJoks Fsjes.e? certainly supports our understanding that Mobil in Afv nr* pudiatinf Its initial study. . * '- r * ` wO'jT * Bill Ptpsgeorgr has been atteuptlag^e ottsfli. addltldad^ * i i details fron his contacts at Mobil. An yoa ksr,`ith*,f3s<J*. he has not experienced significant cooperation ^ * * and has .detected sone reluctance, to discuss, the XimmBi '> *'.* ~ In order to-make sure that Mobil does not sorely aJX*tb M*'- to "fado. away" and because of your earlier contacts e ' ^ ' ' natter with Mobil. I would like to suggest that Mobil to deternlne the*exact status of the cent and to urge that Mobil take pronpt steps ts correct: t* initial rapoTts. In ny vies. Mobil*-ha^an obligation.to* - ''X-c. correct ianedlately the* allegations agnibsc pol7chloriaatad*~,^jCf v_- biphenyls even thou^ tha actual cohort -kaa not been? k ~ identified. Tho barn caused bjr the erroneous report* ken * '. bees slgnifleast*thn least Mooli can do is to acknowledge . t pub 1 leally that-polychlorinated biphenyls are not involved^ -- ." *: . RAStinfBnclosures .,RfHatd A. stohr Cenany Counsel ^ .to mm 028842 WATER PCB-SD0000015375