Document QexoYVMDDKNeo8vyxmr6JrJR

1 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA 2 INDIANAPOLIS DIVISION 3 THE CITY OF BLOOMINGTON, INDIANA; ) THE UTILITIES SERVICE BOARD OF .) 4 BLOOMINGTON, INDIANA; andMONROE ) COUNTY, INDIANA, ) 5) Plaintiffs, 6 vs. 7 ) ) ) Civ No. ) IP 83-9-C ) S WESTINGHOUSE ELECTRIC CORPORATION,) a Pennsylvania corporation; and ) 9 MONSANTO COMPANY, a Delaware ) corporation, ) 10 ) PfifSDdSDiSj1 11 The deposition of PAUL G. BENIGNUS, 12 called for examination by the Plaintiffs, pursuant 13 to notice and pursuant to the provisions of the 14 Federal Rules of Civil Procedure of the United 15 States District Courts, pertaining to the taking 16 of depositions for the purpose of discovery, taken 17 before Jesse A. Longoria, a Notary Public and 18 Certified Shorthand Reporter within and for the 19 County of Cook and State of Illinois, at 216 North 20 Meramec, Clayton, Missouri 63105, commencing on 21 September 4, 1986, at the hour of nine o'clock 22 p. m. 23 24 Longoria & Goldstine 236 1030 Chicago STLCOPCB4023325 2 1 APPEARANCES: 2 Mr. Joseph V. Karaganis and 3 Mr. James G. McConnell Bell, Boyd & Lloyd 4 Three First National Plaza 70 West Madison Street 5 Suite 3200 Chicago, Illinois 60602 6 - and - 7 Mr. Geoffrey M. Grodner 8 Law Offices of Geoffrey M. Grodner One City Centre 9 Suite 100 Bloomington, Indiana 47401 10 appeared on behalf of the Plaintiffs; 11 12 Mr. Michael R. Fruehwald 13 Barnes & Thornburg 1313 Merchants Bank Building 14 Indianapolis, Indiana 46204 15 appeared on behalf of Defendant Monsanto Company. 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Longoria & Goldstine 236 1030 Chicago STLCOPCB4023326 3 1 2 DB2QMET I~N_.D_.E_Ji 3 PAUL G. BENIGNUS 4 Direct Examination by Mr. Me Connell ...Page 4 5 EXHIBITS 6 S-Bbifci.fc_.Nas.. 7 Pass 8 17 8 179 9 1 80 181 10 182 183 11 184 1 85 12 1 86 187 13 188 189 14 190 191 15 192 1 93 16 194 195 17 196 197 18 198 199 19 200 201 20 202 203 21 20 4 205 22 206 32 35 41 45 50 61 62 68 73 75 78 78 83 86 90 93 103 107 133 135 138 146 151 155 156 161 16 8 170 177 23 24 Longoria & Goldstine 236 1030 Chicago STLCOPCB4023327 4 1 MR. MC CONNELL: Would you swear the witness, 2 please. 3 (Witness sworn.) 4 PAUL G. BENIGNUS, 5 being first duly sworn, was examined and testified 6 as follows: 7 DIRECT EXAMINATION 8 By Mr. McConnell: 9 Q Would you state your full name, sir, and 10 spell your last name for the court reporter. 11 A Paul George Benignus, B-e-n-i-g-n-u-s. 12 MR. MC CONNELL: Let the record show that this 13 is the deposition of Mr. Paul George Benignus 14 taken pursuant to the notice and the applicable 15 provisions of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 16 and the local rules of the United States District 17 Court for the Southern District of Indiana, 18 continued from time to time to today's date, time 19 and place by agreement of counsel. 20 Mr. Benignus, this is Mr. Grodner, by the 21 way. He is the one from Bloomington. 22 THE WITNESS: Glad to know you. 23 MR. MC CONNELL: My name is Jim Me Connell, 24 and I represent the City of Bloomington, Indiana, Longoria & Goldstine 236 1030 Chicago STLCOPCB4023328 5 1 in.this case. I am going to ask you a series of 2 questions about your career at Monsanto and in 3 particular your involvement with the group of 4 products known as PCBs. 5 If at any time I ask you a question you 6 don't understand, please don't answer the 7 question. Tell me you didn't understand it, and I 8 will rephrase the question. 9 Will you do that for me? 10 A Yes. 11 Q And I am sure that Mr. Fruehwald has told 12 you you have to make all your answers spoken 13 answers because the court reporter, as qualified 14 as he is, can't record gestures of your head or 15 nods of your head. Do you understand that? 16 A Yes. 17 Q What is your present address? 18 A 47 Metcalf Drive, Belleville, Illinois. 19 Q Are you presently employed? 20 A I am retired. 21 Q When did you retire? 22 A 1974. 23 Q That was from Monsanto Company? 24 A From Monsanto. Longoria & Goldstine 236 1030 Chicago STLCOPCB4023329 S 1 -Q Do you have any present plans to move? 2 A No. 3 Q What is the extent of your formal 4 education? 5 A I have a Bachelor's fromIllinois 6 College, Jacksonville, Illinois, 1933; Bachelor of 7 Arts and Master of Science from Washington 3 University here at St, Louis, in 1934, in organic 9 chemistry. 10 Q 1934, you said? 11 A ' 34 . 12 Q What was the first job you had after you 13 graduated from the Master's program at Washington 14 University? 15 A The first job I had was at Western 16 Cartridge at East Alton, Illinois, manufacturing a 17 detonator. 1 8 Q What were your responsibilities at the 19 Western Cartridge Company? 2 Q A I was managing the process, what we were 21 making down there. I was there only six months. 22 Q What was the next job you had? 23 A Monsanto. 24 Q What were your first duties atMonsanto? Longoria & Goldstine 236 1030 Chicago STLCOPCB4023330 1 A Well, like most of us w ho came t b - re f: .r2 college, v;e were first assignee to the a r. a 1 v - i c a i 3 laboratory to analyze the chemicals. A Q And how long did you work in the 5 laboratory? 6 A In the analytical lab? 7 Q Yes. nn A Well, in this particular lab, I v; c r k e 9 there about a year and half. 10 Q And this was in St. Louis? 11 A This was at St. Louis. 1 2 O What was your next responsibility? 13 A Well, next responsibility was also in i . 1 4 analytical area, in analytical researc a, or 15 advanced analysis. 1-7 Q This was analysis of organic chemicals? 17 A This is correct. 1 0 0 How long were you in advanced r. n a 1 v -is ? IS A Oh, about a year. 20 Q W hat v/ a s the next thing you d i- d after 21 that? 22 A Well, then I was in a plant 1 abor a co r ' . n -> It was again doing analytical work on the pi:::: 2 4 operation a n d process , at. the same lcc a r ion. Longoria & Golcistine 10 3 0 STLCOPCB4023331 3 1 . Q How long were you in that job? 2 A About a year. 3 Q That was more directly related to the 4 manufacturing process that was going on at the 5 plant? 6 A Yes. 7 But it wasn't on PCBs. 8 Q Okay. After that, what job did you have? 9 A Well, after that I went into the research 10 department of the Organic Chemicals Division, more 11 strictly speaking it was application research. 12 Q How long were you in that job? 13 A I was there, I would say, two years. 14 Q Did that research involve PCBs? 15 A Not to any great extent. However, we did 16 a lot of work on plasticizers, and I was familiar 17 with what we called Aroclor, which was our trade 18 name. You call it PCB. Yes, I was familiar with 19 the materials at that point in time. It is a very 20 large family of chemicals, PCBs. 21 Q Right, I understand. 22 All right. What was the next job you had 23 after the research department in the Organic 24 Chemicals Department? Longoria & Goldstine 236 1030 Chicago STLCOPCB4023332 9 1 A Then I went into what they call the 2 Development Department, Organic Chemicals Division 3 Development Department. 4 Q What did you do there? 5 A Well, there I did some work with PCBs. I 6 did some work on the specifications of PCBs. They 7 have a very comprehensive list of physical and 8 electrical constants, and I handled that, although 9' the Organic Division didn't make them. That was 10 handled by the Inorganic Division at Anniston; but 11 other than that, my main job was in this 12 development department. 13 It got to be in the field of mycology. 14 Q What is that? 15 A Well, I didn't mean it this way. That is 16 a study of fungus. You got yourself into a 17 question, now. 1 8 Q Was there some particular reason that 19 you -- 20 A Yes, the war was coming along, and this 21 was before the advent of synthetic fiber, nylon 22 and others, and our military equipage was made of 23 cotton. So my interest -- mycology is the study 24 of fungus. This has to do with the preservation Longoria & Goldstine 236 1030 . Chicago STLCOPCB4023333 H* iq 1 of cellulosic material, wood and cellulesic 2 fibers. Do you want a comprehensive at:sver on 3 this? 4 Q Well, let me see if I can take a -- 5 A I don't know that you would want th 5 there. 7 Q The work was directed towards fin cinq a 8 way to preserve fiber-based military equipment i:: o the field? 10 A This is correct, because it was rout inn, 11 the tents and everything else, in the South 1 2 Pacific, and they had some horrible presc. rvatives, 13 1ikc wo ware preserving cellulosic materials, 14 which is military equipage, things made of cr. r o n , 15 and a lot of the military. Air Force, and so on, 15 so forth, tents, and all kinds of things used 17 cotton material, and this rotted, especially in 1 0 the South Pacific. 1 9 The v/ a r was or., that was one- of t h e 20 reasons I wasn't allowed to go into the military 21 service. I was a cavalry officer from Fort 22 Sheridan, but because of this need on behalf of 2 3 the government, why, that is all I was all ow cto 2 4 work on, was this preservation of mi 1 i tr v Don cor i a 5 to), n rtirie 735 1.0 3.7 C h l c ?. * r STLCOPCB4023334 11 1 equipage for the war effort which was in these 2 years. 3 Q Right, I understand. 4 How long were you in the development 5 department? 6 A Oh, I was there for about four years, I 7 guess. 8 Q How long were you in the research 9 department -- two years, you said? 10 A Two years of that. 11 Q Okay. What was the next job you had 12 after that? 13 A Sales Development. 14 Q Also in the Organic Chemicals Division? 15 A The Organic ChemicalsDivision. 16 Q Did that involve PCBs? 17 A No. It involved what I developed for the 18 military during the war. The war by now was over, 19 and the reason I went into the sales department 20 was to develop a commercial product for what I 21 developed for the military. That was the only, 22 reason. 23 Q How long did you have that job? 24 A Until 1947. Longoria & Goldstine 236 1030 - Chicago STLCOPCB4023335 12 1 Q What was your next position? 2 A The next position was to leave this 3 organic chemicals division where I made these 4 inventions, and so forth; and I joined the 5 Inorganic Division, and specifically was assigned 6 there to develop market use for non-electrical 7 application of PCBs. That was my assignment. 8 That was in October of 1947. 9 Q Would it be fair to say that that job was 10 your first serious involvement with PCBs? 11 A Right, correct. 12 Q How long were you -- what was your title 13 when you first moved over into the Inorganic 14 Division? 15 A This is neither here nor there, but my 16 title, if anybody knew it, but this is correct, I 17 was the Assistant Director of Development. Never 18 used the title. 19 Q How long did you have that particular 20 designation? 21 A Well, that continued until the early 22 1950's. 23 Q And what job did you change to in the 24 early fifties? Longoria & Goldstine 236 1030 Chicago STLCOPCB4023336 13 1 A I went back to the Organic Chemicals 2 Division, not because I arranged this myself, but 3 because, you see, the PCBs, as you call them, they 4 were made at Anniston, Alabama, and that was 5 Monsanto's Inorganic Division, This was the 6 organic chemical part of the Inorganic Division at 7 Anniston. 8 Well, in 1935 Monsanto bought Swan 9 Chemical, which is this installation at Anniston, 10 Alabama, so Monsanto had acquired Swan in 1935 11 which was, well, right after I came to work for 12 Monsanto in '34. Now we are coming up to, as I 13 told you early, I think it was in 1951 and the 14 company's reorganization, and this organic 15 chemicals operation, the organic part of the 16 Inorganic Division, was moved into the Organic 17 Division on a piece of paper, this sort of makes 1 8 sense, and I went with it. 19 As I told you, in 1947 my assigment was 20 to handle the development of markets for 21 non-electrical. Now you are asking what came 22 after this. 23 Well, when this move came about into the 24 Organic Division, I then was confronted with Longoria & Goldstine 236 1030 Chicago STLCOPCB4023337 1 Y. 1 handling both the non-electrical and the p electrical. So I handled both. That venc on for 3 some years. . A Then, finally, I specialize*:: entirely in 5 the electrical. 6 Q When did that take place? 7 A We are looking at going from, say, '51 to 3 about, oh, let's call it '53, something like tka t. 3 0 How long were you in the electrical? 10 A For the rest, until retirement. 11 Q Until you retired? l:: A Y c s . 13 o When you were sent to the Inorganic 1 4 Division in October of 1947, did you relocate to l: Anniston? 13 A No, I stayed at St. Louis. 17 0 So you were in St. Louis throughout,then? 1 8 A I was in St. Louis throughout, and I hnv- 10 lived at home in Belleville throughout, although 2 0 my work was world market manager. I werked nil 21 over the world but always lived in Illinois. 22 Q Okay. When you took over the 23 responsibility for developing non-electrical 24 applications for PCBs, in about October of 1 , Longoria & Ooldstine 1 r. ? n STLCOPCB4023338 15 1 did someone in Monsanto brief you on what was then 2 known about the toxicology of PCBs? 3 A Not on my arrival, no. But I appreciate 4 what you are asking, really not specifically, no, 5 not specifically. 6 Q Did you become aware at some time after 7 October of 1947 that Monsanto had at one time 8 performed some patch tests on volunteers? 9 A Yes, I reported that in the literature 10 that I wrote. 11 Q Okay. 12 A This was work onskin patch tests using a 13 synthesizer, that came from our medical 14 department. 15 Q When did they first tell you about that 16 work, if you can remember? 17 A I don't rememberthe exact date. But I 18 was informed about this, and we wrote brochures on 19 the Aroclors, as we call them, and I incorporated 20 that into my writings. 21 There was always a chapter on toxicology 22 and toxicity. 23 Q Did the medical department also supply 24 you with copies of the medical literature on Longoria & Goldstine 236 1030 Chicago STLCOPCB4023339 16 1 chi or acne that had been observed in heat transfer 2 applications of PCBs? 3 A Not on heat transfer, no, not 4 specifically heat transfer. I was the one who 5 developed heat transfer in 1949, specifically heat 6 transfer. 7 Q That was one of the non-electrical 8 applications that you created, so to speak? 9 A Right, correct, fire resistant nominal 10 pressure heat transfer, indirect heat. 11 Q Who were the primary users in the 12 beginning period 1947 through 1951 of PCBs as a 13 heat transfer medium, what industries? 14 A Well, there are a lot of government 15 industries. Do you want a comprehensive answer on 16 this? 17 Q Yes. 1 8 A You do. Well, during the war our plant 19 at Anniston had to manufacture a product for the 20 government that was quite flammable and dangerous 21 to handle, and they wanted an indirect heat 22 transfer medium to heat this stuff with, and PCBs 23 are very, or known to be very stable thermally, 24 very stable materials, and they don't boil until Longoria & Goldstine 236 1030 Chicago STLCOPCB4023340 17 1 about three hundred degrees Centigrade, which is 2 quite high. That is about 572 degrees Fahrenheit, 3 and a suitable thing is hard to find. But they 4 found this out in their own plant. They made 5 PCBs, and this looked to them as though this would 6 be a safe thing to use, and they used it, and it 7 worked out very well. 8 And the reason I got interested in it, I 9 thought if it worked that well for ourselves, why 10 not let other people share in this. 11 So I published a brochure on the Aroclors 12 1248 as an indirect fire resistant heat transfer 13 medium. That is what started it. 14 Well, now, this can get into all kinds of 15 applications. But, excuse me. 16 Q I was going to say what I am interested 17 in is what types of processes were customers 1 8 buying this for use as a heat transfer? 19 A Well, there were a number of government 20 applications where they were making airplane 21 wings, and things like that, that required 22 heating, and that was one industry that used this, 23 because they were resinous materials, and another 24 industry would be in the paint and resin business. Longoria & Goldstine 236 1030 Chicago STLCOPCB4023341 18 1 ___1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 3 24 Then it was used around airports and things like that as an indirect heating medium. What this was doing was potentially -- it was a replacement for high temperature heating with steam where you required by law a licensed engineer; but because PCB was used to nominal pressure, the expense of a licensed engineer was not required. In other words, the normal maintenance man could handle this situation; and it went into quite a number of different types of things. Q Did it go into the food processing industry? A Yes, it did. Q Did it go into the pharmaceutical manufacturing industry? A I do not know this specifically, but it could have. Q When was the first time that you can remember sales, of PCBs or Aroclors by Monsanto on a commercial scale to any customer in the food processing industry? A I can't give you the definite date, but definitely got into food processing. when you - Longoria & Goldstine 236 1030 Chicago STLCOPCB4023342 19 1 can- foods, for example, they are heated in the 2 cans, and it was used as an indirect heat-transfer 3 medium there, and it was also used in potato chip 4 making as an indirect-heating medium. The 5 potatoes aren't cooked in PCBs, you understand. 6 Q I understand. 7 A You understand. But as an indirect - 8 and you are understand the reason for using an 9 indirect medium here, I presume? 10 Q So the cooking oil doesn't catch fire? 11 A So the cooking oil doesnot overheat, 12 yes, correct. 13 Q I am trying to pin down as best I can a 14 year when sales for canning or potato chip 15 production first occurred on a commercial basis. 16 A Well, I don't remember the exact date, 17 no. But I told you I wrote a paper on this 18 subject in 1949. So it wasn't prior to that. It 1 9 was after that. 20 Q Early fifties? 21 A I would say in there. 22 Now, I also told you, to put this in 23 context, I told you that around 1953, or 24 thereabouts, I was going more into the electrical Longoria & Goldstine 236 1030 Chicago STLCOPCB4023343 20 1 end of the business. 2 Q Right. 3 A So it is somewhere in that time frame. 4 Q '51 to '53, somewhere in there? 5 A Somewhere in there, and that is when 6 Monsanto had a whole department on heat transfer, 7 and so forth. 8 Q When you switched over into the 9 electrical applications in about 1953, who took 10 over the -11 A I just told you? but I will expand on 12 this, if you want. 13 Q I am looking for the name of a person. 14 A Marne of a person? 15 Q Who took over the non-electrical sales. 16 A Well, that was spread out quite widely 17 through the Organic Chemicals Division. They had 18 people specializing in plasticizers, in resins and 19 in hydraulic fluid and heat transfer, and so on 20 and so forth. 21 Q There wasn't one person who replaced you? 22 A There wasn't one person. When I was 23 there, it was in the hands of myself. There was 24 one reason, I told you facetiously, it looked good Longoria & Goldstine 236 1030 Chicago STLCOPCB4023344 01 1 on paper/ but I would say this is one sensible 2 thing, the Organic Division was active in all 3 these areas, and the business was crowing. 4 0 At the time that Monsanto introduce 5 Aroclors for heat transfer applications in the 6 food processing industry, to your knowledge di,: 1 the company do any additional toxicology testin' 3 on the product? 9 A Mo, not to my knowledge. I den'c know 10 why they should. It wasn't to enter the food 11 product. 12 O It might, in the event of a lea!-:, !Un; 13 might it not ? 14 A It could, in the event of a lea!:, 15 correct. 15 0 In fact, there were some incidents in 17 Far East and in this country where this haooene 1 0 A I would like to bring this up, non "on 19 are not talking about PCr 3, are you awn re of th 2 0 O ''hat am I talking about? 2.1 A ! 7 h a t you are talking about now is rath 2 2 severely py roly zee! ?Cr., which is not normal PC~ 2 3 Mow you arc getting into a different area. 2 4 O Pit it was a heat transfer ami ice sit:: Longoria & Goldstine 235 1039 STLCOPCB4023345 22 1 that used PCB as the fluid? 2 A As it started out, this is correct, and 3 then it got damaged partially, pyrolyzed, and then 4 you run into toxicology of things that simply are 5 not PCBs. 6 Q The result of overheating the fluid? 7 A Under certain conditions, yes, 8 overheating the fluid, this is correct. 9 Q That is what you mean when you say 10 pyrolyzed? 11 A This is correct. 12 Q In any event, it wasn't only a 13 theoretical possibility that this type of leak 14 could occur, it did actually happen eventually? 15 A Oh, that happened in Yusho, in Japan, 16 this is true. 17 Q All right. In addition to the heat 18 transfer application, the plasticizer application, 1 9 what other non-electrical applications were 20 developed by you in the early fifties, or the late 21 forties and early fifties, for Monsanto's Aroclor 22 products? 23 A Well, I don't know exactly what you mean 24 by I personally developed these because it was -- Longoria & Goldstine 236 1030 . Chicago STLCOPCB4023346 23 1 Q Let me rephrase the question, then. Your 2 job during that period of time, as I understand 3 it, was not to develop the application 4 necessarily, but to develop the market? 5 A Yes, right; pursue, yes. 6 Q So you pursued the heat transfer 7 possibilities and the plasticizer possibilities, 8 and what others? 9 A Well, PCBs, as you just said, 10 plasticizers, they were used as standard 11 plasticizers in rubber-based paints, 12 styrene-butadiene and chlorinated rubber. Are you 13 familiar with rubber-based paints? Okay. 14 They were used as an ingredient and as a 15 plasticizer, certainly, in lacquers in the early 16 days, in natural cellulose. They were used as a 17 plasticizer in natural cellulose, lacquer used for 18 such things as the liner of straw hats would be 19 one application. One perspires, you know, and 20 PCBs are very stable. They are not water soluble. 21 So you have a very good stable 22 non-reactive inert plasticizer in natural 23 cellulose. I just mention one use. 24 But on wood, lacquers and varnishes, it Longoria & Goldstine 236 1030 Chicago STLCOPCB4023347 24 1 is used for other things than straw hats, one 2 would say they are used as coatings for furniture 3 woods, like we are sitting on, and metal coatings, 4 automobile finishers, and so on and so forth. 5 Q When was the first time that Aroclors 6 were used as a solvent in the carbonless paper? 7 A The first time -- that thing was under 8 investigation for at least ten years, it was being 9 studied, not by us. We merely made the material. 10 And the first time -- all right. I am trying to 11 answer your question. I can't give you the exact 12 date. 13 Q I understand. When, approximately, was 14 Aroclor first sold on a commercial scale for 15 carbonless paper production? 16 A At that time I would say I was still in 17 the Inorganic Division, so it was prior to 1951. 18 Q Okay. 19 A Somewhere in there. 20 Q Other than heat transfer,plasticizers 21 and solvent in NCR paper, is there any other group 22 of applications for which Aroclors were used 23 outside the electrical industry? 24 A Well, don't you have a copy of our Longoria & Goldstine 236 1030 Chicago STLCOPCB4023348 25 1 literature? 2 Q Some of it that still exists. 3 A Well, that presents the applications. 4 Q I have seen it mentioned that the 5 Aroclors were used at one time as what is referred 6 to as a pesticide extender. Can you describe for 7 me what that is? 8 A Well, now you are not talking about PCE. 9 Q What are we talking about? 10 A You are talking about -- well, in this 11 kind of terminology, I guess I would have to call 12 it PCT. In other words, what I am getting at, 13 PCT, the P means biphenyl; T, terphenyl, three 14 benzene rings, which is not polychlorinated 15 biphenyls. It polychlorinated terphenyl. That 16 was the material used. It was a resin binder. 17 This use never amounted to anything, as 18 far as I know. 19 Q That was an Aroclor product, but it 20 wasn't a PCB? 21 A It had the name Aroclor. It was a 22 resinless Aroclor. It wasn't a PCB. It never got 23 into any commercial -- I never got involved with 24 it. But I was aware of this. Somebody had Longoria & Goldstine 236 1030 Chicago STLCOPCB4023349 25 1 looked at it. They call these things fixer/ a 2 resin binder. 3 Q It keeps the pesticide on the surface for 4 a long period of time? 5 A Yes, but it was never used that I know of 6 that amounted to anything/ at least. 7 Q PCBs were also used as hydraulic fluid, 8 is that correct? 9 A Right. 10 Q When was that use first developed on a 11 commercial scale? 12 A This was involved early on as a fire 13 resistant hydraulic fluid for die casting 14 machinery. 15 Q Was that one of the markets that you 16 pursued? 17 A One would say this, yes. It was in 18 existence before I arrived in marketing. 19 Q To your knowledge, was PCB Aroclor 20 material ever sold by Monsanto for use as a 21 cutting oil? 22 A Yes. 23 Q And how significant ofa market was that? 24 A I would say it wasused in what they Longoria & Goldstine 236 1030 Chicago STLCOPCB4023350 27 1 called the soluble-type cutting oil. Do you know 2 the difference between soluble and nonsoluble? 3 Q No. 4 A Well, it is simple. Soluble means that 5 it is used with water, soluble-type cutting oil, 6 and it was used as an extreme pressure lubricant, 7 that is why it is used, the PCBs were recognized 8 as EP lubricants, extreme pressure lubricants. 9 Q Meaning they wouldn't break down 10 physically under high pressure? t 11 A Correct, they couldwithstand extreme 12 pressure. That was the interest there. 13 Q To your knowledge, was Aroclor PCB ever 14 sold for medicinal, dental or cosmetic uses by 15 Monsanto ? 16 A Well, I don't know what you mean by 17 medicinal, dental. What do you mean? Is it -- 1 8 Q I don't know. I am reading off a 19 Monsanto document, and that's all it says. 20 A Well, I think I can enlighten you on 21 this. I don't want you to think it was sold as a 22 medicinal product. 23 Q I had hoped not. I am trying to find out 24 what this means. Longoria & Goldstine 236 1030 Chicago STLCOPCB4023351 28 1 A Well, I am sure you are sincere about 2 this, so I will try to answer it. PCB -- wait a 3 minute. This, again, is the terphenyl. It is not 4 polychlorinated biphenyl. It is not PCB. It was 5 resinless material, and it was based on the 6 terphenyl. It was polychlorinated terphenyl. 7 Q What was it used for? 8 A Making false teeth. 9 Q Okay. 10 A Are you familiar with the process? 11 Q Only in a general way. 12 A Well, all right. 13 Q But that is sufficient. 14 A It is your lost wax casting process, and 15 it was used because of being compatible with 16 carnauba wax, with very clear definition, and the 17 margins, when you make false teeth, you want them 1 8 to fit right, as with a gear that you are casting, 19 it has to be precision. These are the properties 20 for it. 21 And then when it is lost, when it is 22 melted, burned out, it doesn't leave a lot of 23 carbonaceous stuff. 24 Q So this was part of the wax material? Longoria & Goldstine 236 1030 Chicago STLCOPCB4023352 1 A Part of the wax, yes* It is used is lost 2 wax casting processes. - 3 0 Nov; it makes sense. 4 A I am glad to help you out. 5 Q That is why we are here. 6 Did that represent any kind of 7 significant sales volume? a A No, not large. Compared to the over;: II 9 business it was quite small. Dental labs boucht. 1 0 i t. 11 Q Okay. In about 1953 you began co ' 12 specialize in the electrical applications cf 13 Aroclors, is that correct 14 A That is correct. 1 5 o And what did that include besides use in. 13 transformers and capacitors, if anything? 17 A Almost nothing. Rut it did get into 18 electromagnets, and a few other things. It dien'r 1 9 amount to much. 20 O 7*7 e re you che person who was in charge of 21 the sales of Aroclors and PCB s for electrical uses 22 './hen the T,7estinghouse capacitor plant in 23 Bloomington, Indiana, was first built? 2 4 A I think I know what vou are asking. S" Longer ia f: Co Ids cine 2 35 in 30 : n i c u c c STLCOPCB4023353 3 '1 1 will say -- well, you asked this question in a 2 strange way. You know, you couldn't buy this 3 stuff anywhere else. So I don't know what you 4 mean "in charge of sales." You dicn"t go out an.', 5 sell it. 6 Q Were you the guy they would call to art 7 supply of PCRs when they started up the plant? 3 A Mo, they called our purchasing man. 9 Q Who was that? 10 A Well, whoever was in the district. Mow, 11 you are asking about Bloomington, I think that 1 2 would be -- it changed several times. I thin k it 13 was the Cincinnati office at that time. 14 0 Were you the person that Westinghousc 15 Bloomington Management would turn to for technic?.! 16 information about Monsanto's PCB products? 17 A For electrical use, yes. 13 I k n e v/ Ralph M arberry . Me was the o n 1 n IS charge cf capacitors at Wcstinghouse back in Mart 2 0 Pittsburgh, and I knew Tom Dakin very well. !r 21 was the research head. You are talking a b o ut 2 2 Bloomington. I know Cob Tunis. He was the hoac. 23 engineer, and Don McClain. These were all 24 technical people. That is what I say. W h - v u Longoria ft Colds tine 2 36 103 0 - Chic;, n.: STLCOPCB4023354 31 1 ask about selling or marketing, it was handled on 2 a technical basis, 3 Q All right. And you were the technical 4 person, so to speak? 5 A Yes. 6 Q Do you recall when it was that the 7 Bloomington Westinghouse facility first went into 8 production of capacitors? 9 A I don't recall this exactly, the exact 10 date, no. But if I dwelled on it I could probably 11 sort it out. They had moved from East Pittsburgh 12 to Bloomington. It was a new plant. I remember 13 having gone by that way. 14 Marberry was quite proud of that plant. 15 He had designed -- I think I was in it one time 16 early on. That is the only time I was ever in it. 17 He set up a manifold impregnation. He wanted me 1 8 to see it. 19 Q I am not sure. Is that in the fifties? 20 A Well, isn't it in the early fifties? You 21 ought to know this, I think. 22 Q I should, but I am trying to find out 23 what you recall. 24 A Well, I will do my best for you. Longoria & Goldstine 236 1030 Chicago STLCOPCB4023355 32 1 Q That'ss all we asskk. -2 MR. MC CONNELL: Would you mark this -- we are 3 going to show you some documents now to see if 4 that will help refresh your recollection -- as 5 178 . 6 (The document above referred to 7 was marked Deposition Exhibit 8 No. 178. For Identification.) 9 MR. MC CONNELL: For the record, the reporter 10 has marked as Exhibit 178 a one-page letter dated 11 July 17, 1956 from Elmer Wheeler to H.W. 12 Speicher ------ 13 THE WITNESS: Right. 14 MR. MC CONNELL: -- of Westinghouse. 15 THE WITNESS: I remember that. 16 By Mr. McConnell: 17 Q Would you take a look at that. 18 A Yes, I remember this. 19 Q According to the letter that has been 20 marked as 178 Mr. Wheeler of Monsanto asked you to 21 telephone Mr. Speicher and give him some 22 information as to the toxicity of Aroclor 23 products, is that correct? 5 24 A This is correct. Longoria & Goldstine 236 1030 Chicago STLCOPCB4023356 33 1 Q Why was it that he asked you to do that 2 by phone^ rather than in writing, if you recall? 3 A I don't know. It is not a big deal, is 4 it? 5 Q Well, I don't know. That is what I am 6 trying to find out. 7 A Well, I was going to pass on what 8 information I could or had. 9 Q Do you recall what information it was you 10 passed on about the disposal of Aroclors? 11 A Well, now, here, for instance, this, if 12 you are referring to this document specifically, 13 "Disposal of unusable Aroclors and the return for 14 credit of some Aroclor 1254 presently on hand." 15 Why would they have 1254 on hand? For a 16 very simple reason. Aroclor 1254, which is 17 pentachlorobiphenyl, had been used all through the 18 years up to approximately this time as the 19 impregnant for power capacitors, which is what 20 Westinghouse made. 21 Now, Marberry, who I referred to, . 22 switched out of 1254 and adopted 23 trichlorobiphenyl, which is Aroclor 1242. So they 24 had some perfectly good 1254 on hand that they Longoria & Goldstine 236 1030 Chicago STLCOPCB4023357 34 1 wanted to return, and I don't blame them for 2 asking would we take it back, and we certainly 3 did. 4 Q I am interested in the other part of that 5 sentence which refers to disposal of product that 6 was not usable. 7 A Well, disposal of something that -- what 8 were they asking about this? Will you enlarge on 9 this? 10 Q Well, it is my understanding they wanted 11 to know what they should do with their waste 12 Aroclor and that you were supposed to give them 13 some information about that. 14 A Well, isn't there - 15 MR. FRUEHWALD: Is there a basis for that 16 understanding, Jim? 17 Or is that speculation on your part? 18 MR. MC CONNELLS Well, it is the testimony of 19 the Westinghouse witnesses. 20 MR. FRUEHWALD: Wait a minute. Now, Mr. 21 Speicher or who? This is '56. No Westinghouse 22 witness has spoken about events in '56 before 23 Bloomington was set up. 24 MR. MC CONNELL: Let's take a break for about Longoria & Goldstine 236 1030 Chicago STLCOPCB4023358 1 a minute and a half. 2 (thereupon, a recess was had.) 3 MR. MC CONNELL: Do you want to mark this 172. 4 (The document above referred to 5 was marked Deposition Exhibit o No. 179 for Identification.) 7 MR. MC CONNELL: For the record, I have marker; 8 as Exhibit 179 a one-page letter from Nr. Secich e r 9 to Elmer Wheeler dated July 1(5, 19 55 . I will 10 acknowledge that it isn't the greatest copy, bur 11 it is the only one we have got right here cceay. 1 2 0 Ask you to take a look at that docume nr. 13 MR. FRUEKNALD: Off the record. 14 (Discussion had off the record.) 15 THE WITNESS: Here, this is the same thing I 15 was sayinq, 1254 , they had discontinued usinn, a n r 17 they had a thousand gallons of perfectly goon 1 0 stuff they wanted to return, since they are now 19 using Aroclor 1242, we, I am sur e, W 0 U 1 d h r. v: 2 0 taken that back. 21 0 Exhibit 179 is the 1 otter 0 f J U 1 Jr t-L V< f 22 w h i c h Exhibit 173 refer 3 tO. m mi ui;u n k you for v o ur 23 letter of July 15." Is th a t co r r o c t ? 2 4 A Well, it reads that w a y. He is r i tip " Lone or in (i do Ids tine STLCOPCB4023359 36 1 to Wheeler. 2 Q Now, Exhibit 179 in the first paragraph 3 refers to both scrap Inerteen and high temperature 4 Aroclor 1254 for disposal. "The question has 5 arisen as to how it can be safely disposed in 6 several of our plants. Our opinion is that if it 7 is poured on a dump or on the ground it can 8 penetrate sufficiently to contaminate a water 9 source for drinking purposes." 10 My question to you is: What was your 11 response to Mr. Speicher with respect to that 12 concern about possible contamination of water 13 sources? 14 A Well, first of all, the Aroclor 1254 15 wasn't going to go anywhere except back to us. So 16 you are eliminating that. 17 Q I am talking only about the scrap 18 Inerteen. 19 A What we would call scrap. Well, his 20 letter goes on here. It says, "but the odor and 21 taste may be objectionable." 22 If he is talking about PCB, it has no 23 odor . 24 If it is scrap PCB, scrap polychlorinated Longoria & Goldstine 236 1030 Chicago STLCOPCB4023360 37 1 biphenyl, either the 1254 scrap or the 1242 scrap 2 polychlorinated biphenyl, I would be amazed if it 3 had any odor, for one thing. 4 The next thing, taste, well, I have 5 worked with this thing through the years, have had 6 it on my hands and I am sure tasted it. It is 7 tasteless. 8 Q My question to you is what did you tell 9 Mr. Speicher about the possibility that if it was 10 poured on the ground it could get into the water? 11 A I don't know. I don't recall myself 12 telling him and answering this thing. I would 13 have thought that -- Wheeler handled this thing, I 14 guess. 15 Now, I may have talked to him over the 16 phone and said, yes, we will take back this 17 Aroclor 1254. I would have handled that part of 18 it, I am sure. If it was perfectly good 1254, we 19 would analyze it, and if we found it okay we would 20 certainly accept that back because we were well 21 aware they converted to 1242 Aroclor. 22 I would have certainly commented if it 23 had come up later and anybody asked me about the 24 odor and taste, well, I would say it doesn't have Longoria & Goldstine 236 1030 Chicago STLCOPCB4023361 i___ i ' 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 38 an odor or taste. Q What would you say to a person who asked how to dispose of the scrap? A I don't know how they disposed of their scrap up there. do. I surely didn't tell them what to Q They are asking you for advice or suggestions? A Well, I wouldn't give them any. Q all? You didn't give them any suggestions at A No, not to my knowledge. Q Did you ever give Westinghouse any suggestions as to how they should properly dispose of scrap Inerteen, as they call it? A No. Q Did you ever tell them it was all right to put it in a landfill? A No. - Q In youropinion, is that a proper way to dispose of PCBs? A Depends on when you are talking about. That's what they did. Q Right now we are talking about 1956. Longoria & Goldstine 236 1030 Chicago STLCOPCB4023362 39 1 A Well# I wasn't involved with this 2 disposal. I think maybe I ought to explain to 3 you, I spent my years concerned with protecting 4 PCBs from the environment, from this pure air that 5 we have in this room here, for getting into the 6 capacitor Aroclor. 7 Capacitor Aroclor -- the winding, which 8 was craft paper, which is very pure paper, only 9 three companies supplied it, it is not ordinary 10 paper by any means, this wasn't made with ordinary 11 mill water. It was made with distilled water, and 12 then in the room where the windings would be made 13 the air wasn't only conditioned, it was filtered, 14 and then the temperature adjusted usually to 72 15 and the humidity at 50 percent. 16 But in addition to that, the room would 17 be under positive pressure to keep any dust 18 particles from - 19 MR. FRUEHWALD: I don't know if this is 20 responsive to the question, Paul. I think the 21 question is whether you told them anything about 22 disposal or not. 23 THE WITNESS: I didn't, and I don't know. 24 Longoria & Goldstiue 236 1030 Chicago STLCOPCB4023363 40 1 By Mr. Me Connell: 2 Q Okay. 3 A I was never asked to answer that. I 4 didn't tell them to put it on a landfill or 5 anything. I told them we would take back the 6 1254 . 7 Q You didn't tell them anything at all 8 about the scrap? 9 A No, no; and they never told me what they 10 did with their scrap, and I don't know what they 11 did with it. 12 Q Did you write a manual, an internal memo, 13 for Monsanto's use with respect to the question of 14 how to dispose of PCB liquid scrap? 15 A Not in 1956. 16 Q At one time, at a later time, did you do 17 that? 18 A Well, after the PCB problem came up, 19 objection from the environmentalists, this was 20 very much to the point of our entire posture and 21 program, at ANSI, to write such a manual; this is 22 the ANSI, American National Standards Institute, 23 report on this whole subject. 24 Q Were you involved in that? Longoria & Goldstine 236 1030 Chicago STLCOPCB4023364 41 1 A I was Chairman of the Steering Committee 2 setting up the committees as ANSI. 3 Q Did you do any work before that, 4 internally, at Monsanto with respect to - 5 A I personally didn't, no. 6 MR. MC CONNELL: Do you want to.mark this as 7 180 . 8 (The document above referred to 9 was marked Deposition Exhibit 10 No. 180 for Identification.) 11 MR. MC CONNELL: The court reporter has marked 12 as Exhibit 180 a one-page memo dated July 22, 13 1971, from Mr. Benignus to C.L. Curtis. 14 Q I will ask you if you recognize that 15 document. 16 MR. FRUEHWALD: Just for the record, that 17 document is also Exhibit 136. 18 MR. KARAGANIS: For the record, we have 19 previously requested from you clean copies of all 20 the additions of the document entitled Askarel 21 Inspection and Maintenance Guide. 22 THE WITNESS: I recall this type of thing. 23 By Mr. Me Connell: 24 Q Who was Mr. Curtis? Longoria & Goldstine 236 1030 Chicago STLCOPCB4023365 42 1 A Well, he was somebody, a salesman or 2 somebody, out in the field in our sales department 3 or marketing department. 4 Q Exhibit 180 refers in the subject line to 5 a publication called the Askarel Inspection and 6 Maintenance Guide. Was that a Monsanto 7 publication? 8 A Yes. 9 Q When was that guide first produced, to 10 your knowledge? 11 A I think that was produced around 1958 or 12 '59, and I think it was also printed in 1960, I 13 think. Do you have the dates on that? Something 14 in that period of time. 15 Q Did you write it? 16 A Yes, I wrote that. 17 Q Did that guide, in its first edition, did 18 it have any information in it about proper 19 disposal practices for scrap Aroclors? 20 A I doubt it very much that it would have 21 at that point in time, because that was long 22 before this environmental thing came up, and I was 23 not concerned or involved with telling anybody 24 about scrap. Longoria & Goldstine 236 1030 Chicago STLCOPCB4023366 43 1 Now, this, you see, you are coming up 2 here, this is dated 1971. That was after the ANSI 3 and all of that business, and the pollution 4 problem came out. So it was looked at 5 differently. 6 Q According to this memorandum, the then 7 current edition in July of 1971 had a reference in 8 it to "Discard by dumping or burying where it will 9 not contaminate a water supply." 10 Do you know when that statement was first 11 inserted into the Askarel Inspection and 12 Maintenance Guide? 13 A I don't remember the exact date. But I 14 would say that this statement is appropriate; and 15 after the environmental objections came about it 16 would have been incorporated, and I guess it was. 17 But the dating on that, I don't know. 18 Q In any event, whether or not that 19 statement was in the manual from the time it was 20 first written and before that, that would be a 21 proper consideration in disposing of scrap 22 Aroclor, that is, that it should not be buried 23 where it could get into a water supply, is that 24 correct? Longoria & Goldstine 236 1030 Chicago STLCOPCB4023367 44 1 A I would say so, that certainly is a fair 2 statement. 3 Q And that would apply not only to scrap 4 liquid, but also to solid waste that was 5 contaminated with Aroclor, is that correct? 6 A Yes, I would say don't throw it in your 7 well where you are going to drink the water. 8 Q According to this memorandum, on July 22, 9 1971, you are asking that Mr. Curtis make a change 10 to supply some more detail with respect to 11 disposal of at least the liquid scrap, is that 12 correct? 13 A That's what it says here. 14 Q And the change was that the scrap liquid 15 should be destroyed by incineration? 16 A That would be ideal, yes. 17 Q And you further go on to advise Mr. 18 Curtis that the material can be returned to 19 Monsanto for appropriate incineration? 20 A This was the program involved, yes, that 21 was the purpose of this, at three cents a pound. 22 Q When was that program put into effect? 23 A Well, it was put into effect, about the 24 return of this, was put into effect before July Longoria & Goldstine 236 1030 Chicago STLCOPCB4023368 45 1 22, 1971. Now, I don't know -- I didn't do that. 2 I was merely passing this information along. 3 Q Who set up that program for the return? 4 Was that Mr. Papageorge? 5 A I really don't know who specifically set 6 this up. I specifically wasn't even involved with 7 setting it up. I knew about it. It was an effort 8 by the plant people and everybody. I don't know 9 specifically. 10 MR. MC CONNELL: Do you want to mark that as 11 181, please. 12 (The document above referred to 13 was marked Deposition Exhibit 14 No. 181 for Identification.) 15 MR. MC CONNELL: Exhibit 181 is a two-page 16 memorandum dated April 14, 1969 to Mr. Benignus 17 from W.R. Richard, subject. Disposal and 18 Incineration of Aroclor. 19 Q I will ask you if you recognize that 20 document. 21 A Yes, I recognize it. 22 Q Was that the first suggestion to you that 23 a program should be established at Monsanto for 24 the incineration of scrap PCBs? Longoria & Goldstine 236 1030 . Chicago STLCOPCB4023369 46 1 A Probably it was, I suppose. 2 Q What does Mr. Richard mean, what did you 3 understand him to mean, in the first paragraph 4 where he makes reference to the statement, "To 5 defend the Aroclor position, it seems that we 6 should provide for disposal of and incineration of 7 off-grade fluid"? 8 A Well, that is to help the situation 9 because by this time there was criticism about the 10 PCBs from the environmental people, so what he is 11 saying there is what it means. 12 Q To defend the product from - 13 A To assist, right. 14 Q To defend it from the accusations that it 15 was an environmental contaminant? 16 A I guess if you want to put it that way, 17 to assist with the handling of the material, yes. 18 Q Was there any reason before 1969 why 19 Monsanto couldn't have had a program for the 20 return and incineration of scrap liquid PCBs from 21 its customer? 22 A Well, I have my own personal view on 23 this. If you are asking for the company's 24 position on that', I think you ought to ask Longoria & Goldstine 236 1030 Chicago STLCOPCB4023370 47 1 that from some other people. 2 Q There was no technical reason before 1969 3 why it couldn't be done, was there? 4 A Was there a reason why it needed to be 5 done or should be done? I don't know what you are 6 getting at. We didn't have an incinerator, 7 neither did anybody else that I know of. 8 Q When did the Rollins-Purle incinerator 9 first go into operation? 10 A I don't know. I wasn't in this area. 11 You are sort of asking these questions to the 12 wrong person. 13 Q If you weren't in the area, why did he 14 send that memo to you? 15 A All right. I will have to explain this a 16 little bit. 17 This is logical for you to ask. This is 18 a sensible question for you to ask. 19 I was in this Aroclor area for many 20 years, and when things like this would come up 21 there was a tendency to address things to me, not 22 that I was the one handling it, not that I was the 23 one that was going to do anything, not that I was 24 the one responsible for this, because I was, as I Longoria & Goldstine 236 1030 . Chicago STLCOPCB4023371 43 1 told you, on the other side of the fence, 2 protecting PCBs from the environment. All right. 3 Q As opposed to protecting the environment 4 from PCBs? 5 A Right, this is correct. 6 Q All right, go ahead. 7 A So sort of keep that in mind when you are 8 talking to me, please. 9 Now, there is a distribution list here, 10 you see. So here is Bill Richard, Dr. Richard in 11 research, in the research department, who is he 12 supposed to address this thing to? 13 Well, Paul Benignus is a convenient one 14 to address it to. But you will see copies to 15 these other people. 16 Now, you get into people that are more 17 directly concerned with this than I. It was a way 18 of bringing this thing to people's attention. So 19 it was addressed to me. 20 Q Well, he is asking you, for you to do 21 something in that memorandum, is he not? 22 A Yes. But he knows that I am not the one 23 that is going to do it. I am telling you this. I 24 am not going to set up an incinerator. Longoria & Goldstine 236 1030 Chicago STLCOPCB4023372 49 ' 1 Q No. But he is asking for some figures 2 from you? 3 A Yes. The figures, now, this comes under 4 marketing history. This is marketing information 5 and data, which I am sure Bryant compiled, and it 6 was addressed to me. But Jim Bryant got these 7 numbers and figures together. So he wanted 8 background of the capacitor industry at present 9 and what kind of amount of stuff is disposable now 10 and what is the future, what does this encompass, 11 and this is information of interest to these 12 people. 13 Kountz was in engineering. This was the 14 purpose of this. 15 Q Isn't he asking you for figures on 16 transformers to add to those figures on 17 capacitors? 18 A He could have. Does he say this? Here 19 it says something about figures for capacitors, 20 "Add any disposal Aroclor from transformers." 21 Yes, this is as it says, capacitors, and 22 he wants to know if there is any information on 23 transformers. 24 Q Did you give him the information on Longoria & Goldstine 236 1030 Chicago STLCOPCB4023373 1 transformers? 2 A Well, I certainly would have if I h s c: 11 . 3 I don't remember exactly what I gave him. Wow, 4c this doesn't involve capacitors. It doesn't S' involve Westinghouse at Bloomington. 6 Q Did you support the idea of Monsanto 1 creating its own incinerator to dispose of serarni returned from customers? 9 A Sounded good to me. 10 0 In fact, you thought the company was 11 moving too slowly in that direction, didn't you? 1 2 A I would think so, ves. But I wou 1 r. a v e 13 been glad if that had been overnight. 1 4 HR. MC CONNELL: Would you mark this as 15 Exhibit 122. 15 (The document above referred to 17 was narkeo Deposition Exhibit. 1 8 Wo. 132 for Identification.) 19 HR. IIC CONNELL: The court reporter has m. -e r k t 20 as Exhibit 132 a one-page memo from p.enignus to 21 Olson, December 5, 1959. 22 THE WITNESS: That is subsequent to this, is 23 it? 24 Longoria fi Coldstine 235 1 03" STLCOPCB4023374 51 1 By Mr. Me Connell: 2 Q Yes. 3 A Yes. 4 Q That is April 14. 5 A Yes, okay; yes, sixmonths. 6 Q Do you recognize that memorandum? 7 A Yes, right. 8 Q The first sentence of the memo says, 9 "Over six months ago we pointed out impending need 10 for Monsanto to provide an incinerator." 11 Is that the Royal "we"? You mean "we, 12 Paul Benignus," or was there somebody else 13 included in that? 14 A The Royal "we"? Come on, now. 15 Q Well, the Queen always talks about "we" 16 instead of "I." That is why they call it the 17 "Royal we." 1 8 Who else did you mean by the "we"? 19 A Well, in general, the idea was they had 20 talked about an incinerator. I even heard about 21 it -- even "we" had heard about it. 22 Q Who are "we"? That is what I am trying 23 to get at. 24 A Who are "we"? Well, I don't know who all Longoria & Goldstine 236 1030 Chicago STLCOPCB4023375 52 1 "we" ace. But "we" is the people in the area, the 2 general people in the area. 3 Q Tell me as many of them as you can 4 remember. It would include you, would it not? 5 A Not actively, no. I was not in pursuit 6 of this thing. But I am not trying to sidestep 7 this by merely saying that. 3 Here again I was called on to bring it to 9 the attention of Olson, who was supposed to be 10 the -- who was the marketing manager under Bergen. 11 Here I am writing to Olson. I am writing to his 12 boss. I am writing to Kuhn, who was in the 13 engineering department, and Kountz -- or Kuhn was 14 in the plant, I think. Munch was in research. 15 Richard -- Munch reported to Richard; and Bryant 16 was the technical marketing man. So they called 17 on me to pass this along. 13 Q Who called on you, the people on that 19 distribution list? 20 A I would think so. I didn't originate it. 21 Q Well, you are the author of the memo, is, 22 that right? 23 A Yes. Well, I told you, they used me that 24 way. Longoria & Goldstine 236 1030 Chicago STLCOPCB4023376 53 1 Q Who are "they," the ones who are using 2 you that way? 3 A- Well, I would say people in general 4 there. 5 Q Bergen was your boss, was he not, at this 6 time? 7 A Well, Bergen was the marketing director. 3 Q Did you report to him either directly or 9 indirectly? 10 A I didn't report -- wait a minute. Leave 11 this off of your book here. 12 MR. FRUEHWALD: Well, we can't do that. If he 13 has a question that you can answer, go ahead. 14 THE WITNESS: No, I didn't report directly to 15 Bergen. 16 By Mr. Me Connell: 17 Q Did you report through somebody else to 13 him in 1969, December? 19 A Well, what do you mean by report through 20 someone else to him? 21 Q Was he your boss's boss? 22 A He was the boss of the department. He 23 was the director of the department. I am not 24 trying to confuse you. I have no reason to be Longoria & Goldstine 236 1030 Chicago STLCOPCB4023377 i----- 1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 3 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 54 confusing you on this. Q I understand. December of - Who was your boss in A This is what I am trying to say, and I just don't know. They had some organizational changes. I was sort of set off to the side as a technical person. Q You had a staff function, rather than a line function? A If you like to put it that way, yes. Maybe that is the best way to do this. I was a technical person involved with this marketing organization. Q Anybody in the marketing organization could call on you for your technical knowledge? A They did, and they would ask me to write such things. I was handy for that. Q The last paragraph of Exhibit 132 says, "At the present time our only means for disposal is to a landfill." Was Monsanto disposing of scrap liquid Aroclor to a landfill in December of '69? A Well, as I told you, I was not directly involved with what Monsanto or anybody else was Longoria & Goldstine 236 1030 Chicago STLCOPCB4023378 55 1 doing. 2 Q Where did you get that information? 3 A If I said this statement here, somebody 4 must have told me this, and I merely repeated it, 5 "At the present time our only means for disposal 6 is to a landfill." So somebody must have told me 7 this. 8 Q Who? 9 A Who? Somebody from the plant. 10 Q The Krummrich plant? 11 A The Krummrich plant, or Anniston, or 12 maybe research knew this. I wasn't involved in 13 this. I am sorry. You don't have quite the right 14 person here. 15 Q What I don't understand is if all of this 16 information in this memo came from other people, 17 how come the other people didn't write the memo 18 themselves? 19 A Well, they used me. I was handy to carry 20 it on. I can ask the same question. I wondered 21 sometimes myself. 22 .Q You had no personal knowledge of anything 23 that is contained in this exhibit, is that what 24 you are telling me? Longoria & Goldstine 236 1030 Chicago STLCOPCB4023379 56 1 A Well, now, what is all in the exhibit? I 2 don't want to be -- now, this "meeting last 3 Wednesday," I was not at that meeting. So that 4 was passed on to me. I do know that Bryant did 5 write that report there supplying Richard with the 6 marketing information he wanted on capacitors, and 7 this says about three hundred thousand pounds 3 needs to be incinerated. 9 Q Was that a number that you knew, or did 10 somebody tell you that? 11 A Somebody told me that. I didn't generate 12 this number. Bryant would have generated that 13 number, as was indicated in those numbers, he 14 generated those numbers. 15 Q Who told you that arrangements for 16 distillation remain unprovided? 17 A I don't know who told me that. Somebody 18 must have told me that. 19 HR. KARAGANIS: I would just indicate for the 20 record at this time, Mr. Benignus, and this is no 21 characterization of your testimony, but simply 22 that up until today Mr. Papageorge has given us 23 testimony regarding the program upon his arrival 24 at St. Louis, which was in 1970. Longoria & Goldstine 236 1030 Chicago STLCOPCB4023380 57 1 THE WITNESS: Yes. And this is '69. 2 MR. KARAGANIS: '69. What we are looking for 3 is people having information about what the 4 program was prior to Mr. Papageorge's arrival. if 5 it turns out that you were not involved except to 6 the extent you have so testified, Mike, we are 7 going to need to find out who is making the 8 decisions and have that witness supplied. 9 MR. FRUEHWALD: There is substance to what you io are saying, and I am trying to clarify this. I 11 know it is difficult for Jim here, but that's the 12 way it is. I understand what you are saying, but 13 we are talking about fifteen years ago, and it may 14 not be able to be reconstructed at this time. We 15 are giving you the document which indicates Mr. 16 Bryant did most of this stuff, and Mr. Bryant is 17 perhaps the person you want. 18 MR. KARAGANIS: I would just tell you with 19 respect to decisions being made on bringing the 20 stuff back, on distillation, of Findett, and all 21 the things that Mr. Papageorge said took place 22 before his arrival, we are looking to Mr. Benignus 23 to provide the details. Now, he has testified 24 this morning that he was out of the loop, really. Longoria & Goldstine 236 1030 Chicago STLCOPCB4023381 53 1 THE WITNESS: You are absolutely right. 2 MR. KARAGANIS: And if that is the case, we 3 want to find out who was in the loop, and we want 4 documentation with respect to that. 5 MR. FRUEHWALD: I understand, and we have 6 provided the documention that exists. 7 MR. KARAGANIS: I am not sure you have. 8 MR. FRUEHWALD: If we can't reconstruct it, we 9 can't reconstruct it. This is fifteen years ago, 10 and it may be something that is lost. 11 MR. MC CONNEL: Instead of talking about what 12 we can or cannot do, let's proceed. 13 THE WITNESS: And I am trying to help you, 14 believe me. 15 MR. MC CONNELL: I understand. But I have to 16 ask all the questions even if your answer is "I 17 don't know." I still have to ask the question. 18 So that is my job. Your job is to give us the 19 best recollection that you have. 20 THE WITNESS: Well, I am sure doing that. 21 MR. MC CONNELL: I understand. 22 Let's get back into some kind of 23 chronological sequence here. 24 MR. FRUEHWALD: Off the record. Longoria & Goldstine 236 1030 Chicago STLCOPCB4023382 D0 1 (Discussion had off the record.) 2 MR. KARAGAHIS: For the record, let's just 3 indicate that we were handed today four documents, `A4 the first document being a memorandum dared Aoril 5 11, 1950, by J.G. Bryant, subject: Scrap Aroclor 6 Disposal Plan. 7 The second document is dated March 2', 3 1970. It is a call report for the r'Testinghouse 9 Electric Bloomington, Indiana, plant. It is 10 prepared by R. Graham. It refers to a visit to 11 the Bloomington plant, and it is addressed to P.G. 12 Benignus. 13 Next is a document dated April 2 , 1 ? ~ 0, 14 and it is by P.G. Benignus to D.A. Olsen, subject: 15 Mestinghouse PCB Problem. 15 The fourth document is a document date: 17 9-3-71 by P.G. Benignus entitled Asksrel PCP. 1 3 Dielectric Fluids. 1 9 May I just, ask for purpose of inguiry, 20 these documents turned up in light of a subsequent 21 search for documents? > 22 MR. FRUEHMALD: Yes. Me are continuing to 23 search. 17o have been continuing to search f ? r a 24 long time in response to things you asked for in Longoria A Golds tine 23 5 10 3 0 STLCOPCB4023383 1 n 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 ` 22 23 9 24 50 Papageorge's deposition, and we have continued searching, and if we find things we will produce them. Those are the things we found, and they relate to Mr. Benignus, and we wanted to be sure you got them before today. to search all the time. But we are continuing By Mr. Me Connell: Q Let's go back and finish with 182 before we forget. The last paragraph, the second sentence of Exhibit 182, says, "We are warned that this will no longer be acceptable" -- "this" referring to disposal in a landfill. Who was it, if you remember, that gave you that information? A I don't know, specifically, who gave it to me. But that was the general tenor of things. Q Was there a reason why landfilling would no longer be acceptable, as you understood it? A Well, I keep having to tell you, I was not directly conversant with this. Mow, you say as I understood it, I guess we were running out of landfills. Would that be a logical answer? Longoria & Goldstine 236 1030 Chicago STLCOPCB4023384 61 1 A I don't know. I am just trying to find r 1------ 2 out what you understood as of the time you wrote 3 this memo, where you say,"We are warned that this 4 will no longer be acceptable." 5 Was it lack of space, or environmental 6 contamination if the material was buried, if you 7 recall? 8 A I don't recall, no, I don't. 9 MR. MC CONNELL: Would you mark this as 183. 10 (The document above referred to 11 was marked Deposition Exhibit 12 No. 183 for Identification.) 13 MR. MC CONNELL: Exhibit 183 is a letter from 14 Mr. Speicher of Westinghouse to Dr. -- is it Dr. 15 Wheeler? 16 A No. Elmer Wheeler. He was the head of 17 our industrial hygiene. 1 8 Q Kelly is the one -19 A Dr. Kelly was medical director, and 20 Wheeler reported to Kelly, right. 21 Q The date of the letter is July 19, 1956. 22 According to this letter, by the time Speicher 23 wrote that letter, he had already had his phone 24 conversation with you? Longoria & Goldstine 236 1030 Chicago STLCOPCB4023385 62 1 A Yes, he said he did. 2 Q And he is asking for some additional 3 information on the toxicity of Aroclors. Do you 4 see that reference in the firstparagraph? 5 A Right. 6 Q Do you know whether that was ever 7 provided? 8 A I don't know. But I don't know why it 9 wouldn't have been. That was published 10 information he is asking for. I would have to 11 assume we would have provided it. That is why it 12 was available. 13 MR. CIC CONNELL: Would you mark this as 134. 14 (The document above referred to 15 was marked Deposition Exhibit 16 No. 184 for Identification.) 17 MR. MC CONNELL: Exhibit 184 is a two-page 18 letter to Speicher from Wheeler dated July 25, 1 9 1956 . 20 Would you take a look at that. 21 A Yes, this is what we are sending him. 22 Q In the second paragraph, the "Two 23 detailed reports published by personnel at 24 Kettering Laboratories," is that the publication Longoria & Goldstine 236 1030 Chicago STLCOPCB4023386 63 1 you referred to in your last answer? 2 A Right, "The Toxicity of the Vapors of 3 Aroclors 1242 and 1254," exactly. 4 Q Do you know whether there are in 5 existence any copies of those documents today? 6 A I don't know that, no. 1 MR. FRUEHWALD: There should be some in your 3 production stack. 9 THE WITNESS: Ask the people here. They would 10 be able to tell you that. 11 By Mr. Me Connell: 12 Q Can you tell whose handwritten notes 13 these are in the margin of this letter? 14 A No, I can't. It is hard to read this, 15 even. 16 Q I appreciate that. We are all laboring 17 under the same handicap. 1 8 A In fact, I~don't know that I saw this. 19 Q I think you got a copy of that. 20 A I did. Oh, yes, okay. But there is 21 nothing in here that is different from what I 22 wou1d have.... 23 Q The last two big paragraphs of the letter 24 refer to the skin patch studies and the chloracnc Longoria & Goldstine 236 1030 - Chicago STLCOPCB4023387 1 problem. f'as there ever a published reoore to 2 your knowledge of those skin paten tests? 3 A I think there was. I would thin: no, 4 surely. The work was done. I don't know why 5 it wouldn't have been reported and published; and 6 that is where I got my guidance from. 7 Q There were published reports on the O J chloracne experience, is that correct? O A That's correct. i o 0 Do you know why those weren't forwarded n with this letter? 1 2 A Me, I didn't forward -- I am no- sure, 13 don't know. T7 e r c n ' t they forwarded? 1 A Q 17 ell, it indicates -- 15 A Maybe S p eic h e r had it. There were 15 telephone conversations with Spcicher, and thin, 17 what you are talking about, was publ ished in th 1 3 literature. I don't know that we wou1d have had 1 3 to have sent it. I would think "ncichor at 2 0 Oes'cinghouso would have had: that i n f o r:? t i o n . I 21 r o a 11 y d o . 2 2 0 Other than what is mentioned in that 23 letter v; i th respect, to the possibility of si: in 2 4 irritation and the possibility of chloracne, wer Longoria & Golds tine 235 1030 Chic toe STLCOPCB4023388 65 1 you aware at the time that letter was written in 2 1956 of any other human health problems that had 3 been associated with coming in contact with PCBs 4 A Well, in the literature that I wrote, 5 there are two things that you will read in 6 anything I ever wrote and published. One is this, 7 what you are talking about, is the skin patch test 8 and the assessment or judgment that normal skin 9 contact isn't really a problem. If it gets on the 10 hands you should wash with ordinary soap and 11 water. 12 Another thing I published is if Aroclor, 13 even hot Aroclor, gets in contact with the eye, 14 don't get all upset that you are going blind. 15 What you should do is wash with copious amounts of 16 water and then your eye will be irritated as it 17 would be with most any foreign substance. Go to 1 8 the eye doctor and get a soothing salve for this. 19 Other than that problem, there is no harm 20 to the eye. 21 Now, the thing that I have always 22 emphasized, and this is in answer to your 23 question, do not breathe the vapors continuously 24 emitted from PCBs at elevated temperatures. Longoria & Goldstine 236 1030 Chicago STLCOPCB4023389 66 1 Now, these vapors on long-term exposure, 2 and this is why I am answering your question, it 3 says the amount for the eight-hour work room 4 atmosphere, you can hardly read it here, but it is 5 a tenth of a milligram per cubic meter of air. 6 Now, that is the maximum safe working 7 level. 8 We have often -- not often, but I was 9 involved with this business, analyzed the vapor in 10 our plants, and so on and so forth, and 11 Westinghouse did this, too, I think. These 12 vapors, if they are in excess of this, will sound 13 really their own warning. They will smart the 14 mucous membranes and the eyes, and one will 15 normally withdraw from this. 16 But what is being said, and what I always 17 emphasize, is do not breathe the fumes of the 1 8 vapors at elevated temperatures. 19 Now, if we had it sitting here in an open 20 bottle, you wouldn't smell anything at normal 21 temperature. The vapor pressure is low. The 2 2 boiling point is 300 C. But if you heat it well 23 over the temperature of boiling water chances are 24 you will smell something here. Do not breathe Longoria & Goldstine 236 1030 Chicago STLCOPCB4023390 67 1 those fumes. 2 Now, that is what I always published in 3 the literature. 4 Q And the reason is that that is what 5 caused the chloracne, is that correct? 6 A Well, now you are getting into how it is 7 transmitted with chloracne. Is it ingested, or is 8 it -- 9 Q Let me ask the question in a different 10 way. Why was it that you cautioned so strictly 11 against breathing the vapors for a long period of 12 time? 13 A The reason this is cautioned is because 14 of the tests run by the Kettering Laboratories, 15 reported by our medical director Wheeler, and this 16 is all published in the literature. 17 This is what you are asking about, this 18 toxicity publication, where it was exposed to the 19 normal kind of test animals, rats and guinea pigs, 20 and so on and so forth. 21 There was evidence that prolonged 22 exposure to these vapors would cause, or could 23 cause, in certain test animals, tumors, and that 24 it would be injurious in long-term exposure based Longoria & Goldstine 2361030 Chicago STLCOPCB4023391 i----- i 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 63 on'these animal studies to the liver and maybe the kidney. That is what it is based on. Q Are we talking about malignant tumors? A No. Well, you are asking me the medical question. I am telling you -- Q Your best understanding, that is all we can ask for. A God, I was with this stuff all my life, you know. I am still around, if you want to know how old I am. MR. KARAGANIS: 37. ' THE WITNESS: You got part of this right. Add forty to it and you will be on the button, as of August 30, and this is what, September the 4th. MR. MC CONNELL: Would you mark this as 185. (The document above referred to was marked Deposition Exhibit No. 185 for Identification.) By Mr. Me Connell: Q Take a look at the one-page memorandum dated September 21, 1967, from Benignus to Harvey Pickett and Jim McNally, which has been marked as Exhibit 185. Do you recognize that? MR. FRUEHWALD: It is not addressed to Pickett Longoria & Goldstine 236 1030 - Chicago STLCOPCB4023392 1 r1 --i L2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 " 19 20 21 22 23 24 69 and McNally. It is addressed to Mr. Miller at Anniston. THE WITNESS: Anniston. It is addressed to Miller at By Mr. Me Connell: Q Re Pickett and McNally? A Re Pickett and McNally, who I didn't really know. Q They were Westinghouse people, were they? A Yes, at Bloomington. I had not known these people. Q According to this memorandum the two Westinghouse representatives, Pickett and McNally, wanted to visit Monsanto to discuss methods of handling 1242 to avoid problems of dermatitis and toxicology, is that correct? A Yes, that is the premises here. Q And when you wrote dermatitis and toxicology is the reference to toxicology what you just testified to about breathing the vapors and the animal tests that showed tumors? A I would say so, toxicology, yes. Q The next paragraph, the first sentence says, "Westinghouse admit to not being as careful Longoria & Goldstine 236 1030 Chicago STLCOPCB4023393 70 1 as they should be." 2 Who at Westinghouse admitted that? 3 A Well, I told you, I didn't know Pickett 4 and McNally to begin with. Somebody there must 5 have told that to our salesman, and Bryant may 6 have been calling there, or Graham, they must have 7 told that to somebody. 8 Q The paragraph goes on to say, "Frankly, I 9 believe there are elements of 'sloppiness,' such 10 as allowing the Inerteen to spill and soak into 11 workmen's shoes and clothing without then changing 12 the shoes and/or clothing." 13 Is that information that was related to 14 you by someone else at Monsanto? 15 A That is correct. 16 Q Do you know who it was that told you 17 about that? 18 A No, I don't. 19 Q Do you know whether the salesman that 20 called on Westinghouse Bloomington visited the 21 manufacturing area of the plant when they made 22 those calls? 23 A This I don't know either. I wouldn't 24 have had to. Somebody could have told him, I Longoria & Goldstine 236 1030 - Chicago STLCOPCB4023394 71 1 don't know that. He was out in the plant. I___ i 2 Q Who is Gerald Miller? 3 A He was in charge of the analytical 4 laboratory at Anniston. 5 Q And the memo says that they should 6 contact him in your absence, is that with respect 7 to the reference to upgrading 1242 with Porocel? 8 A No, that would have been Bryant. You 9 see, Bryant was at Anniston at this time, and he 10 is the one that did all of that work. He 11 developed the Porocel. Are you familiar with 12 this, and so forth? 13 Q Generally. 14 A . Yes, okay. That is really all -- it is 15 just a method of refining, rather than using the 16 batch and a sparkler filter. This is a continuous 17 column. And Bryant developed that. 18 We felt that we would like to show this 19 to Westinghouse. We were happy with it and had 20 shown it to others. It was patented, and we were 21 willing to give it to anyone. 22 Q What was it that Miller -- what area of 23 the meeting would Miller be filling in for you 24 with respect to the toxicology? Longoria & Goldstine 236 1030 Chicago STLCOPCB4023395 72 1 A Well, no, no, here again Miller is the 2 head of the analytical lab. I am addressing this 3 to him because I know he is there. And then I am 4 sending a copy to these other people, even the 5 Cincinnati people, so they would know about this. 6 And here is Cresce. He is the plant 7 manager, and Carder, I used him as a means of 3 disseminating that we wanted to have these 9 Westinghouse people as guests and get going and 10 set it up. That's it. 11 Q Did you go to the meeting that finally 12 took place? 13 A I wasn't there. But I did arrange this. 14 Q You set it up? 15 A Yes, I set it up. They used me for this 16 in many ways. It says here, "If I am out of 17 town...." 18 Q .That would have been out of town in 19 connection with your other duties? 20 A Yes. Well, I was worldwide in my 21 activities. I. could have been anywhere in the 22 world when these things were going on. I didn't 23 attend a lot of these things. 24 Q Do you know whether there was any, as a Longoria & Goldstine 236 1030 Chicago STLCOPCB4023396 73 1 result of the meeting which took place according 2 to the notation on here, October 3, was there any 3 improvement? Did you learn of any improvement in 4 the housekeeping practices at Westinghouse 5 following that meeting? 6 A I wasn't there, and I don't know. I may 7 or may not have gotten a report. I wouldn't nave 8 followed it myself if I did get a report on it. 9 Somebody else would have, if there was anything to 10 follow. 11 HR. MC CONNELL: Would you mark this as 186. 12 (The document above referred to 13 was marked Deposition Exhibit 14 No. 186 for Identification.) 15 MR, MC CONNELL: Exhibit 186 is a two-page 16 memo from Mr. Kountz to Johnson, Eenignus and 17 Fallon, subject Aroclor Waste Disposal, dated 18 December 8 , 1 969 . I will ask you if y.ou recognize 19 that. 20 A I would recall this, yes. 21 Q And that is on the subject of the 22 possibility of building an incinerator at 23 Monsanto, is that correct? 24 A Yes; we already talked about that. Longoria & Goldstine 236 1030 Chicago STLCOPCB4023397 1 0 This precedes the one that we discusser, 2 earlier, I think. 3 A Oil, does it? I should think it m i c h r A have followed it. This is December 0. 5 Q Okay. There is one that was before it. 6 A Yes, that preceded it. 7 0 And this is immediately before it or-. 8 December 5. n A Yes, this follows these things, right, 10 that is Kountz's response to this. 11 Q To the concern that was expressed in verr 12 memo that six months has passed and nobody has 13 done anything about it, is chat correct? 14 A Well, yes. Well, now, wait a minute. 1 5 Let's be fair about this. 1-7 You say nothing was done. People dic n'c .17 just sit there on their duffs and co nothin.;;. l n This was not an easy thing to approach. And if 1 9 you have been in the business of chemicals, or :..' 2 0 operation like this, it takes some coing to 21 proceed and set up these kinds of operations. 2 2 So I just want to be fair to cur people 2 3 and ourselves here. It is not that no chine v-n s 2 4 done. The whole end point had not been Longoria & Goldstinc 2 37 10 3 0 STLCOPCB4023398 75 1 attained. I believe you believe this. 2 Q You are right. It is not that nothing 3 has been done. Your memo of December 5, the 4 concern that you expressed was that it hadn't 5 received support, isn't that what it says? 6 A I could have said that -7 Q This request has not received support? 8 A You read what it says, now? 9 I am passing this along. Somebody felt 10 this, and it is a pretty strong way to put it. 11 That doesn't mean that it didn't receive 12 attention, you know. People do use words that at 13 times are a little bit severe. I do this. 14 Q You were trying to give somebody a kick 15 in the pants? 16 A Exactly. 17 MR. MC CONNELL: If you would mark this as 18 187 . 19 (The document above referred to 20 was marked Deposition Exhibit 21 No. 187 for Identification.) 22 THE WITNESS: I wish the world were simple, 23 but it isn't. 24 MR. MC CONNELL: Exhibit 187 is a memo from Longoria & Goldstine 236 1030 Chicago STLCOPCB4023399 1 r' i___ 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ' 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 76 Mr. Kountz to H.A. Vodden, also dated December 8, 1969. MR. FRUEHWALD: prior exhibit. That one, I believe, is a MR. MC CONNELL: All right. MR. FRUEHWALD: Just so we all know it, it is Exhibit 104. MR. KARAGANIS: What is the date on it? MR. MC CONNELL: Also December 8, 1969. Q Now, I don't see you listed on there as having received a copy on it. A Don't tell me they missed me on one of these things? Well, I know who Vodden was. He was over in England. That is Ruabon. That is not even in this country. All right. What is your question? Q Did you get a copy of that, if you remember ? A I will have to read the darn thing. Did Rollins-Purle ever build twenty industrial waste collection treatment plants? Q I haven't the foggiest notion. I believe they built one. A Yes. Longoria & Goldstine 236 1030 . Chicago STLCOPCB4023400 1 Well r I don't remember getting this 2 There is no reason why I would have gotten it. 3 Hut he is trying to be helpful and pass this to 4 England. That is Ruabon. That is England. 5 had a plant there. And he is trying to be as 6 helpful as he can. 7 0 He is giving them, in 187, essentially 8 the same information that he provided to you a r. r. others in 135, is that a fair statemen-? 10 A I would think so. 11 Q It is worded a little differently, but i' 12 is basically the same information? 13 A Not that he gave it to me, but he gave i 14 to the concerned people. 15 o a whole list of people? 16 A Correct. I see Kuhn. Pie is in too 17 States. He is writing ever there to our people. 18 Iwondered how come the guy in England knew so 19 much. But it is Kountz writing toEngland., cka'-. 2 0 0 You also produced PCBs in England? 21 A Cor rect. 2 2 O In fact, it was in Europe that the first 23 reports of environmental contamination arose? 2 4 A From Sweden, right. Longoria & Gcldstine 238 1030 - Chicane STLCOPCB4023401 78 1 MR. MC CONNELL: Would you mark that as 188, 2 and 189. 3 (The documents above referred to 4 were marked Deposition Exhibit 5 Nos. 188 and 189 for 6 Identification.) 7 MR. MC CONNELL: All right. I have marked two 3 exhibits here, 188, which is dated February 2, 9 1970. It is a four-page memo from Bryant to 10 Papageorge. And then I marked 189, which is one 11 of the documents that you brought us this morning, 12 a five-page memo from Bryant to Benignus and a 13 long list of others, dated April 11, 1969. 14 MR. FRUEHWALD: I think that first one, 188, 1 5 is already an exhibit. It is going to happen, 16 inevitably. But I think that is already 102. 17 MR. MC CONNELL: 102. 18 MR. FRUEHWALD: Obviously, that was something 1 9 you asked Papageorge about. 20 MR. MC CONNELL: Yes, everything with his name 21 on it. 22 Q Okay. Take a look at, let's start with 23 189, since that is the earlier in time, I will ask 24 you if you recognize that memorandum. Longoria & Goldstine 236 1030 . Chicago STLCOPCB4023402 79 1 A Well, I am sure I would. I got a copy. 2 Q Do you know why it was that Mr. Bryant 3 was asked to prepare that scrap Aroclor disposal 4 plan? 5 A No, I don't. 6 Q Was that one of the early documents in 7 connection with what ultimately developed into the 3 incineration program for returned scrap? 9 A Well, this seems to be a summation as to 10 where we are. 11 Q As of the date -- it is a statement of, 12 yes, as of April 1969, this is the situation. 13 This is where we are, and this is what is being 14 done. Here he says the present situation. 15 This is a summary report, a review of 16 this thing. So people were really very actively 17 concerned with trying to be helpful. 18 Q And by trying to be helpful, you mean 19 helping your customers with the problem of 20 disposing of their scrap liquid? 21 A Yes. 22 Q And the reason for that was in order to 23 reduce or prevent contamination in the 24 environment, is that correct? Longoria & Goldstine 236 1030 Chicago STLCOPCB4023403 1 A Yes, to get rid of it. p "his involved not only "lo o n i r. n t a r., 3 although here under M o. 2 it talks abo u t 4 Ileyer/Garcia. These are salesmen our in the r : a 5 that called at Bloomington, Indiana, askod them t <5 work out a shipment system. And it gone - 7 MR. FRUEHT7ALD: That is the auostion no r. ; i r - ? Gj* MR. MC COMNRLL: I 'don't know that tner: ran n . one. .1 0 Q I guess the question is is that an 11 accurate - - to the bent of your line v: ledge, is t h: 1o -L /. an accurate description of what the situation v - 13 as of the date of that nemo? 14 A Yes, I would say sn. 15 Q Take a look at Exhibit 133, v/.nich is 15 dated February 2, 1370, also from Vr. R r y a na to 17 Mr. Papaceorge. 1 3 Sometime between April of 1 (5 3 a n: i 1? February of '70, ran when Mr . Pa pa ge or ge boo .. no an th e PCS coordinator, or v/ha tever his official 21 resignation was, is that correct? nO /. A PCR coordinator, yes, I guise that's - 2 3 he wculd be called. Re had been Plant n.r. na r er ? 4 Anniston, that is, Papsqcorgs was. Lor.n o r i a R G o 1 c .3 tine 2 3 ' 10 3 0 STLCOPCB4023404 81 1 Q And he was assigned to handle all of the r' L_ . 2 dealings with customers in government agencies 3 with respect to PCB environmental problems? 4 A Well, I appreciate what you said. He was 5 not everything. But, yes, he was the central 6 point. 7 .Q He was the coordinator? 3 A Yes, exactly; and a lot of agencies, 9 government agencies, EPA, and people got involved. 10 and, yes, he was the coordinator, yes, this is 11 correct. 12 Q Exhibit 188 talks about an effort to make 13 the waste disposal program pay for itself, is that 14 a fair statement? 15 A Well, it surely is a fair statement 16 because this was expensive for Monsanto to do all 17 of this. This is a very costly thing here that 18 was undertaken, and this is another progress 19 thing. 20 Q It describes the various alternatives for 21 either reprocessing or disposing of the liquid 22 scrap, is that correct? 23 A I would think so. Here it mentions 24 having disposed of some liquid in a landfill, and Longoria & Goldstine 236 1030 . Chicago STLCOPCB4023405 82 1 so on and so forth. 2 Q According to the last page of that 3 exhibit, 188, the reprocessing alternative was 4 inadequate to handle the material that was 5 returned from Westinghouse? 6 A This probably would have been true, yes, 7 as he thinks, in 1970, February of 1970, and they 8 want out of the -- if I remember right, 9 non-electrical was terminated in 1970. 10 Q So there would have been no place to use 11 the reprocessed product? 12 A That's how I would interpret it, yes. So 13 it made the problem more difficult, exacerbated 14 the problem. 15 O You have given depositions before? 16 A Not to know about. 17 Q One time? 18 A Yes. 19 Q Was that in a PCB lawsuit or in some 20 other kind of a case? 21 A One was I think PCB. One was -- they 22 were talking about that, yes. 23 Q Do you know where that case was pending? 24 A Well, I don't know. Ask him. Longoria & Goldstine 236 1030 Chicago STLCOPCB4023406 S3 1 _ MR. MC CONNELL: All right, we will do that. 2 Would you mark this as 190. 3 (The document above referred to 4 was marked Deposition Exhibit 5 No. 190 for Identification.) 6 MR. MC CONNELL: Exhibit 190 is a two-page 7 call report. Organic Division/ dated March 24, 8 1970/ from Graham to Benignus. 9 Do you recognize that Exhibit 190? 10 A Yes. Graham was a salesman -- he was a 11 little bit above a salesman. He was a specialist 12 salesman/ and he had called at Bloomington/ and he 13 wrote a standard sales report on his call. 14 I would have gotten a copy -- well, it 15 was addressed to me, yes. I remember this. 16 Q This had to do with a price increase on 17 the Aroclors that you sold to the Bloomington 1 8 plant? 19 A To everybody. We were not 20 discriminatory. 21 Q Well, according to the report some of the 22 other Westinghouse facilities had a year long, no 23 price increase deal, but Bloomington did not, is 24 that correct? Longoria & Goldstine 236 1030 Chicago STLCOPCB4023407 34 1 A Now, hold off a minute. Don't write this 2 down. 3 MR. FRUEHWALD: Paul, we can't do that. 4 THE WITNESS: What was the question, please? 5 By Mr. Me Connell: 6 Q Isn't it reflected in Exhibit 190 that 7 two other Westinghouse facilities had contracts 8 under which Monsanto couldn't increase the price 9 for a year because Westinghouse didn't have that 10 type of a contract, or Bloomington didn't have it? 11 A This could be. Now, you are talking 12 about two other Westinghouse places. You are not 13 talking about capacitor making at Westinghouse. 14 You are talking about transformer places, which 15 are altogether different; and this can be. I 16 don't know if it was. But if it says so, it 17 probably was. 18 There was a different price on the 19 transformer stuff than on the capacitor stuff. 20 This is semantics in the commercial part of it, 21 all of which was sold on a very economical basis. 22 This is why we are the only supplier of this, one 23 of the reasons, that and technology. 24 Q I am not attacking your pricing policies. Longoria & Goldstine 236 1030 Chicago STLCOPCB4023408 85 1 A Well, don't. 2 Q One of the problems that arose at about 3 this time, in March of 1970, in the dealings 4 between Monsanto and Westinghouse at Bloomington, 5 was the problem that Bloomington was going to have 6 to suffer a mid-year price increase, and some 7 other Westinghouse facilities were not, and they 8 got upset about that. 9 A I wouldn't blame them if they found this 10 out. I am surprised they ran across it. But I 11 wouldn't blame them. 12 But, remember, the other places are in a 13 different part of the country, and they deal with 14 transformer fluid. 15 I wasn't handling that detail. I am not 16 the one, best one to be asking about it. 17 Q One of the suggested actions on the 18 second page of the memo is that Monsanto should 1 9 attempt to assist Westinghouse Bloomington in 20 reducing the losses of scrap to help make up for 21 the increase in price. 22 Am I interpreting that correctly? 23 A That's what it says. 24 Q Did anybody ask you for technical Longoria & Goldstine 236 1030 Chicago STLCOPCB4023409 35 1 assistance in trying to help Westinghouse within 2 their process? 3 A Mo. 4 Q Did you know from talking to any of the 5 Monsanto people who dealt with the Westinghouse 6 Bloomington facility that they were literally 7 using boxcar loads of sawdust to soak up the PC3 8 liquid that spilled on their plant floor? 9 A I have read this in connection with some 10 of these things here, but I was not aware of this, 11 that they are using boxloads. 12 Q You didn'tknow about it at the time? 13 A No. 14 Q Did anybody ask youto contribute 15 technical information in an effort to cut down cn 16 the losses of scrap liquid at the Bloomington 17 plant? 13 A No. 19 MR. MC CONNELL: Do you want to mark this as 20 191. 21 (The document above referred to 22 was marked Deposition Exhibit 23 No. 191 for Identification.) 24 Longoria & Goldstine 236 1030 Chicago STLCOPCB4023410 37 1 By Mr. Me Connell: 2 Q Take a look at a one-page nemo dated 3 April 2, 1970, from you to Olson. That is marked 4 as Exhibit 191. I will ask you if you recall 5 sending that. 6 A Yes, exactly. 7 Q What did you mean by the reference in the 8 last sentence to ,rSaving the electrical use of 9 Aorclor and not to discontinue it, as may be the 10 immediate and simple thought entertained by 11 purchasing people"? 12 A Well, this was written in April 1970, and 13 it also refers to having brought General Electric 14 people into St. Louis, and the purpose of this 15 whole thing is to accord the same visit for the 16 people at Westinghouse. 17 Now, this is the purpose of the whole 18 thing. 19 Q My question is was there some concern on 20 the part of you and on the part of Monsanto in 21 April of 1970 that as a result of environmental 22 problems that the Aroclor, electrical uses of 23 Aroclor would be discontinued? 24 A That wasn't up to me, no. Longoria & Goldstine 236 1030 - Chicago STLCOPCB4023411 S8 1 Q I understand it wasn't up to you, but was 2 the company concerned about that possibility, they 3 wouldn't be able to sell -it any more to their 4 electrical customers? 5 A GE was concerned about it. 6 Q Was Westinghouse concerned about it? 7 A I should think they should have been. I 8 imagine they were, if they heard. 9 Q Was Monsanto concerned about it? 10 A Well, this is what the whole thing was 11 about. 12 Q To keep that product alive? 13 A Well, now you are putting -- I don't know 14 if that is the way I interpret it. 15 Q Well, how did you interpret it in April 16 of 1970? 17 A I was aware of the complaints against it, 18 from the environment, obviously, and by 1970 19 Monsanto had decided to discontinue the open 20 systems, and I am aware that a capacitor and a 21 transformer is a hermetically sealed system. So 22 there is some difference there. 23 Q I understand you had already discontinued 24 the non-electrical uses at about this time? Longoria & Goldstine 236 1030 . Chicago STLCOPCB4023412 r' 1 3 4 5 6 7 no 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 10 . 17 13 19 20 21 22 23 24 n r\ A Because an open systein, they are not closed, hermetically sealed systems, chat is cr.c factor in the technical consideration of this. Q I understand that. And mv trues - ion is was there some concern on your part that even though the electrical uses were closed that the government might decide that ?CBs could no longer be sold for that use as well as for electrical use? A You see, this is 1970 . Bov;, at this point in time not only PE and !7e s tingnou se, and the electrical industry, everybody, the government, the E P A, z h e Bureau of Standards , n v c have you, all these government agencies were b s in. ~ solicited to form a judgment and a consensus a bcur this whole thinq and be appraised of it. 0 And one thing they might do is shut co\::: the electrical use cf PCB s? A This would have been one option, a no t; nv wore certainly - - do you know w hat v: oulo h a v a happened? 0 I understand. But I am just asking w h e t h e r that is what you are referring to in t h last paragraph of that memo. Longoria & Goldstine 237 1 0 3 0 chicac c STLCOPCB4023413 1 i-- --i L. 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 90 A I don't know. At this particular point in time, take it however you wish. This is nc great statement on my part. When I say "simple thought entertained by purchasing people," I hope they didn't read this. No, I don't know.... Q My question is: What did you mean by "saving the electrical use of Aroclor," saving it from what? A Well, saving it from not having it, that is how one would interpret this. Q And did you ultimately have the meeting that you recommended in Exhibit 191? A Yes, right. MR. MC CONNELL: Do you want to mark this as 192 . (The document above referred to was marked Deposition Exhibit No. 192 for Identification.) MR. MC CONNELL: Exhibit 192 is a one-page memo from Benignus to Olson dated April 17, 1970, subject: Westinghouse - PCB Problem Discussion. Q I will ask you if you recognize that memo ? A I wrote it, yes, I recognize this, sure. Longoria & Goldstine 236 1030 Chicago STLCOPCB4023414 91 1 This was this meeting. 2 Q That was a schedule for the meeting that 3 you requested in Exhibit 191? 4 A Correct, sure. 5 Q Did that meeting actually take place as 6 scheduled? 7 A Oh, sure it did, yes. 8 Q And was that agenda that is shown on 9 Exhibit 192 essentially the same agenda that you 10 used in the meeting with GE? 11 A Yes, essentially the same sort of a 12 thing. 13 Q Different people would have been 14 involved, but the same subjects discussed? 15 A Yes, right. 16 Q Other than Westinghouse and General 17 Electric, were there other significant electrical 18 industry purchasers of Aroclors from Monsanto in 1 9 1970? 20 A Oh, sure. 21 Q Did you have similar meetings with those 22 other customers? 23 A All right, I will answer this. This is 24 why this whole program was extended to these Longoria & Goldstine 236 1030 Chicago STLCOPCB4023415 *n 1 technical committees, ASTH and IEEE, ana these 2 technical organizations, where not only people 3 from Westinghouse, as on here, and people from PE 4 who did come to St. Louis, everybody 'couldn't 5 come. It was too broad. This is why this thine S was fit into these technical organizations sc ch.it 7 not only TIestinghouse and GE would be conversant ;) and know what this whole thing is, where we are, n and put in their innut to get a consensus, but 10 everybody, so that we were passing it along to 11 everybody, not only to our customers, but all 1 2 their customers, which is very extensive. 13 So what I want to explain is these 14 meetings with T7es tinghouse and GE were the 15 forerunners to incorporating this at the national 1*5 technical organizations. The end point was 17 Committee C-107, American national Standards 1 3 Institute, which disseminated this for all our 19 customers, all their customers, all industry, 2 0 steel mills, paper mills, what have you, on bch v. 1 r. 21 of the government. 2 2 0 So I take your answer to mean that you 23 didn't have individual meetings like this with 2 4 other customers? Longoria & c-oldst ine 23 6 10 3 0 Chios STLCOPCB4023416 93 1 A Not with everyone. But to the extent and 2 where we could, we sure did, surely. We were 3 disseminating this information. 4 MR. MC CONNELL: Let's mark one more exhibit 5 and then we can break for lunch. 6 (The document above referred to 7 was marked Deposition Exhibit 8 No. 193 for Identification.) 9 By Mr. Me Connell : 10 Q Exhibit 193 is a one-page document 11 entitled PCB Meeting, St. Louis, 4-21-70. 12 Now, I will just show this to you and ask 13 you if this is a list of the people from 14 Westinghouse and from Monsanto who attended the 15 meeting that was the subject of Exhibit 192? 16 A Yes, I think so, yes. 17 Q So you were at that meeting? 1 8 A Yes, I participated in this meeting. 19 Q Did the meeting actually follow the 20 agenda that is shown in 192 pretty closely? 21 A Yes, yes. 22 Q What was the reaction of the Westinghouse 23 people to your presentation, if you can remember? 24 A I am sure they appreciated our effort to Longoria & Goldstine 236 1030 Chicago STLCOPCB4023417 94 1 be helpful in any way that we could and to pass on 2 and disseminate whatever knowledge and information 3 there was available. 4 Q Did they have questions about what they 5 could do to reduce their losses of PCB to the 6 environment ? 7 A Now you are asking a specific thing. I 8 don't really know. They didn't ask me anything. 9 Mainly, they sat and listened to this. And 10 another part of this whole thing was to solicit 11 input from these people. It is their material. 12 They are the ones using it. 13 Q And the meeting obviously then was 14 followed up with further communication back and 15 forth between Monsanto and Westinghouse? 16 A Yes. I would say the whole environmental 17 thing stimulated communication along the line. 18 Sure it did, obviously. 19 MR. MC CONNELL: This is a good place to break 20 for lunch. 21 MR. FRUEHWALD: Okay. 22 (Whereupon the deposition was 23 recessed until 1:00 o'clock p.m. 24 Longoria & Goldstine 236 1030 Chicago STLCOPCB4023418 95 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA 2 INDIANAPOLIS DIVISION 3 THE CITY OF BLOOMINGTON, INDIANA; ) THE UTILITIES SERVICE BOARD OF ) 4 BLOOMINGTON, INDIANA; and MONROE ) COUNTY, INDIANA, 5 ) ) Plaintiffs, ) 6) vs. 7 ) Civ No. ) IP 83-9-C ) 8 WESTINGHOUSE ELECTRIC CORPORATION,) a Pennsylvania corporation;and ) 9 MONSANTO COMPANY, aDelaware ) corporation, 10 ) ) _____________ ______________________________________ 1 11 The continued deposition of PAUL G. 12 BENIGNUS, called for examination by the 13 Plaintiffs, pursuant to notice and pursuant to the 14 provisions of the Federal Rules of Civil 15 Procedure of the United States District Courts, 16 pertaining to the taking of depositions for the 17 purpose of discovery, taken before Jesse A. 1 8 Longoria, a Notary Public and Certified Shorthand 19 Reporter within and for the County of Cook and 20 State of Illinois, at 216 North Meramec, Clayton, 21 Missouri 63105, commencing on September 4, 1986, 22 at the hour of one o'clock p.m. 23 24 Longoria & Goldstine 236 1030 Chicago STLCOPCB4023419 96 1 APPEARANCES: 2 Mr. Joseph V. Karaganis and 3 Mr. James G. McConnell Bell, Boyd & Lloyd 4 Three First National Plaza 70 West Madison Street 5 Suite 3200 Chicago, Illinois 60602 6 -and- 7 Mr. Geoffrey M. Grodner 8 Law Offices of Geoffrey M. Grodner One City Centre 9 Suite 100 Bloomington, Indiana 47401 10 appeared on behalf of the Plaintiffs; 11 12 Mr. Michael R. F r u e h w a1d 13 Barnes & Thornburg 1313 Merchants Bank Building 14 Indianapolis, Indiana 46204 15 appeared on behalf of Defendant Monsanto Company. 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Longoria & Goldstine 236 1030 Chicago STLCOPCB4023420 1 PAUL G. BENIC-NUS, 2 being previously sworn, was examined and testified 3 further as follows: 4 DIRECT EXAMINATION (Continued) 5 By Mr. Me Connell: 6 0 I will show you what has been marked 7 previously as Exhibit IGA, which is a two-pace 3 letter from Mr. Bryant to Mr. Shoaff of o Ncstinghouse , dated April 24 , 1 970 , which purports 10 to summarize the April 21 meeting. I will ask you 11 to take your time and look that over and if chat 12 to your recollection is an accurate summary cf 13 what took place at that meeting. 14 Is that an accurate summary? 15 A That's right. 16 Q In the second paragraph under Mr. 17 Mheeler's name on the first page it refers to 1 0 studies on rats and dogs using Aroclors 1 2 4 2 , .1 2 3 4 1 9 and 1250. 20 Is that a reference to r.h a stuo ios : h > t 21 were cone for Monsanto by Industrial Motcst? 2 2 A I d o n 1 t k now. I really don't k r. o . But 23 such tests were done. 2 4 Q Do you know - - Longoria & G o1d s tin e 234 10 3 0 C hic:g o STLCOPCB4023421 o .3 1 A I don't know this Industrial "iotcst. 2 Q Is that name familiar to you? 3 A No, it isn't. 4 Q Do you know whether there was more zb. 5 one outside laboratory that Monsanto used for 6 animal tests on Aroclor PCR products? 7 A I don't, no. I think you better ask tho medical people on this. n o That v/ou 1 d be under Dr. Kelly's 10 jurisdiction? 11 A Under Kelly's jurisdiction and ^heeler . 12 He is not around. He would know. 13 0 The last sentence on the first pace, 14 coming over to the top of the second page, refer 15 to the Ryan report and the Monsanto reply. 16 A I heard of that. 17 Q Is that Congressman Ryan? .1 8' A Right. 1 9 Q And he had to release seme kind of 20 statement to the press about the environmental 21 problems with PCRs? 2 2 A I assume so. 23 0 Dc you know who it was that replied, or. 2 4 behalf of Monsanto? Mas that John Mason? Lonnoria r.- C o 1 d s t i r. e 237 1030 STLCOPCB4023422 99 1 A I specifically do not know. It could r' L - 2 have been. 3 Q In formulating Monsanto's reply to 4 Congressman Ryan, did anybody come to you for 5 technical information on PCBs? 6 A No. 7 Q Under w. Richard there is a sentence that 8 says, "He discussed complete control for water. 9 land and air." 10 A Are you laughing? 11 Q What does that mean? 12 A I don't know. Jim Bryant wrote this. 13 Q Is that the closed system concept that 14 you mentioned this morning? 15 A No. 16 Q Something different from that? 17 A It must be. Sometimes people say things 13 that they don't understand what they are saying, I 19 guess. 20 Q The last sentence of the letter refers to 21 "Also please advise when you plan to go to bulk 22 shipments of scrap." 23 Is that a reference to the return of 17 24 scrap liquid for incineration? Longoria & Goldstine 236 1030 Chicago STLCOPCB4023423 100 1 A Yes, that is. 2 Q And they originally were shipping it in 3 drums? 4 A That is correct. 5 Q And then some time after this letter was 6 written they were going to switch over to tank 7 cars, is that what bulk shipment refers to? 3 A At our insistence, yes. 9 Q Because it was easier for you to handle 10 at the incinerator that way? 11 A Well, the drum situation was pretty sad. 12 Q How do you mean? 13 A Well, I mean it that way. It was not a 14 satisfactory way for transporting it and handling 15 this thing. 16 Q The drums were shipped by truck? 17 A Yes, you would ship drums by truck. This 1 8 is cor rect. 19 Q And that was in your -- in the estimation 20 of Monsanto that wasn't appropriate? 21 A It was better to ship in a tank car in 22 bulk, and drums are a problem. We would have to 23 store these drums. We received them. And we had 24 a lot of drums on hand. Longoria & Goldstine 236 1030 Chicago STLCOPCB4023424 101 1 Q Is there a greater problem with spillage 2 en route, from drums, if you know, or was it just 3 the storage problem? 4 A Well, I think that is obvious. One would 5 have to assume this, I would think. 6 Q Do you know if there was ever a situation 7 where - 8 A There is another important thing here. 9 If you have this stuff in drums, and every drum is 10 different, you can have in one truck shipment all 11 these analytical problems. Whereas if you have 12 the -- 13 Q You have to check every drum, in other 14 words? . 15 A Sure. Whereas if you have it in one 16 container you have a greater opportunity to assume 17 this stuff is uniform; whereas if somebody sends 18 you a drum you are not going to be sure of what is 19 in one drum versus the other. This was so-called 20 "scrap," and it would vary, obviously. 21 Q Well, if you are going to incinerate it, 22 why did you have to know what was in it? 23 A Why don't you ask somebody who was at 24 that end of it? Longoria & Goldstine 236 1030 Chicago STLCOPCB4023425 10 2 1 n 2 Q That wasn't your bailiwick? A It was not my concern, no, it wasn't. 3 Q To your knowledge was there ever 4 instances where railroad tank cars either going to 5 Bloomington, or coming from Bloomington, leaked 6 PCBs? 7 A Would you expand on what you mean by 8 "leaked"? What do you mean by "leaked"? 9 Q Well, in such a way that PCBs were 10 spilled from the tank car onto the ground 11 someplace other than the loading or unloading 12 place. 13 A To my knowledge, no. 14 MR. MC CONNELL: Do you want to mark this as 15 194. It is Benignus to McClain, May 26, 1 97 0 . 16 . MR. FRUEHWALD: It is Exhibit 79. 17 MR. MC CONNELL: All right. it is right on 18' there. the No. 79 appears on it, so that must be 19 right. 20 Q Take a look at the letter, one-page 21 letter, and a one-page attachment that was 22 previously marked as Exhibit 79, from you to Don 23 McClain , dated May 26 , 1970. I will ask you if 24 you recognize that. Longoria & Goldstine 236 1030 Chicago STLCOPCB4023426 103 1 A Yes. 2 Q You were transmitting to him some 3 information on the comparative biodegradability of 4 two different products, is that correct? 5 A Yes, this was indicating that we had this 6 approach to 1016 which involved taking out the 7 slower to biodegrade higher chlorinated biphenyls, 8 PCBs, and that was the purpose of 1016. The other 9 reason being in contact with McClain, he was a 10 technical man there, and he had to demonstrate for 11 himself that electrically and physically there was 12 essentially no change in this that would involve 13 or require any change in their capacitor designs. 14 That was the other part of this equation. 15 So it was information I was passing to 16 him. 17 Q The letter refers to 1242B, is that the 18 same product that ultimately was 1016? 19 A Yes, right. In fact, there is a note 20 heie to that effect. 21 Q And they ultimately, they being 22 Westinghouse, ultimately switched over to the 1016 23 product for most of their capacitor applications, 24 did they not? Longoria & Goldstine 236 1030 Chicago STLCOPCB4023427 104 1 A I would say for all. In fact, the whole 2 industry did, right. That was a big effort on the 3 part of Monsanto to satisfy the environmental 4 people with something that was more biodegradable. 5 MR., MC CONNELL: Okay. This will be 194. 6 (The document above referred to 7 was marked Deposition Exhibit 8 No. 194 for Identification.) 9 By Mr. Me Connell: 10 Q Exhibit 194 has been marked. This is a 11 one page letter dated June 2, 1972, to you, Mr. 12 Benignus, from F.R. Viland, Senior Buyer at 13 Westinghouse Transformer Division at Sharon, 14 Pennsylvania. I ask you if you recall receiving 15 that letter. 16 A Yes, I recall this. 17 Q Did Monsanto ever agree to the change 1 8 that is being requested in the shipment material? 19 A I don't know. Is there something 20 subsequent? 21 A I have no record that they ever did agree 22 to it. That is why I am asking. 23 A I really don't know. 24 Q The issue is who is responsible fer what Longoria & Goldstine 236 1030 Chicago STLCOPCB4023428 10 5 1 happens between your place and their place. r-1 2 A In transit, this is correct. 3 Q All right. Here is a letter from Mr. 4 Papageorge to Carlington Wilburn, dated July 6 , 5 1970, previously marked as Exhibit 121. It shows 6 a blind copy to you. I will ask you if you recall 7 receiving a copy of that document. 3 Do you know who it was that requested 9 that Monsanto have the opportunity to review 10 Westinghouse1s process specification on 11 disposition of scrap Inerteen? 12 A No. 13 MR. FRUEHWALD: Assuming that was done. I 14 don't know that -- is there some specification 15 number ? 16 MR. MC CONNELL: It says, "I have read your 17 Process Specification 89140GA." 1 8 MR. FRUEHWALD: Your question was whether 19 Monsanto 20 MR. MC CONNELL: Asked for it. 21 MR. FRUEHWALD: Right. 22 By Mr. Connell: 23 Q I suppose the other possibility is that 24 they sent it to you voluntarily? Longoria & Goldstine 236 1030 Chicago STLCOPCB4023429 106 1 A I would think so. 2 Q In any event, Mr. Papageorge reviewed it 3 according to that letter? 4 A And he did, so correctly this is true. 5 Q Did you see that document - 6 A This? 7 Q Let me finish the question. 8 A Oh. 9 Q Did you see the process specification in 10 July of 1970? 11 A Westinghouse's, no, I don't recall that 12 at all. 13 Q In other words, Papageorge didn't ask you 14 for any technical input on his review of that 15 specification? 16 A Mo, and he was acquainted with this 17 requirement. 18 Q Referring to the incineration 19 temperature? 20 A Yes, right. 21 Q Did you ever discuss with Mr. Papageorge 22 around July of 1970 procedures that were in effect 23 at Bloomington Westinghouse for disposing of scrap 24 PCB ? Longoria & Goldstine 236 1030 Chicago STLCOPCB4023430 107 1 A No, I didn't know what they were, either. 2 MR. MC CONNELL: Let's mark this as 195. 3 (The document above referred to 4 was marked Deposition Exhibit 5 Mo. 195 for Identification.) 6 By Mr. Me Connell: 7 Q We have marked as Exhibit 195 a two-page 8 form letter bearing your signature -- excuse me, 9 dated August 6, 1970, subject: MCS 1016. I will 10 ask you if you recall that letter. 11 A Yes, Ido. 12 Q Was a copy of that sent to Westinghouse 13 Bloomington? 14 A Well, this ties into this prior thing 15 that you showed me and asked -- you know, the 16 1016? You asked me -17 Q Right. 18 A This ties in with that. 19 Q You are sending them a sample for their 20 use in product testing? 21 A Correct. 22 Q And ultimately it was successfully put 23 into their production? 24 A This is correct. Longoria & Goldstine 236 1030 . Chicago STLCOPCB4023431 10 8 1 Q It is my understanding that in the 1200 2 series of products the last two digits of the 3 number, 42, 54 or 60, is the percentage by weight 4 of chlorine in the mixture? 5 A Correct. 6 Q It is also my understanding that this was 7 not the case with 1016, that is, 1016 was not 16 8 percent chlorine, is that also correct? 9 A That's correct. This No. 1016 is out of 10 the framework of the normal nomenclature. 1016 11 doesn't fit the 1200 things. 12 Q 1016 was actually, also, about 42 13 percent, was it not? 14 A Correct. What it was was 1242, and some 15 of these documents indicate that, whatever was 16 feasible to remove from the higher chlorinated 17 isomers. 18 Q Some of the lower chlorinated would also 19 have to be removed to retain the same overall 20 percentage by weight, isn't that correct? 21 A This would be true, yes. 22 Q Do you know why the No. 1016 was chosen 23 for that product? 24 A That has to do with our research Longoria & Goldstine 236 1030 Chicago STLCOPCB4023432 10 9 1 department, just like MC, you know, what is that, 2 Monsanto Chemical. I don't know. It is a 3 research notebook number, or number; and 4 commercially it got to be known as 1016. 5 Q Westinghouse, of course, had a different 6 name for it? 7 A Yes, they had a number of their own. 3 MR. KARAGANIS: For the record, Mike, I am 9 going to give you a copy of a memo written by one 10 of our associates on the question of required 11 production of documents, or documents shown to a 12 witness, which cites appropriate Seventh Circuit 13 authority. 14 If you have any contrary authority, I 15 would appreciate it if you would share it with me 16 because if there is a contrary authority and if 17 those cases are what we believe them to be, we 18 will be moving for a motion to compel; and we have 19 an obligation to try to resolve our differences 20 short of bringing it to the attention of the 21 court. 22 MR. FRUEHWALD: All right, I will read these 23 cases, which I think I recognize, and reply to you 24 before we get into it further. Longoria & Goldstine 236 1030 Chicago STLCOPCB4023433 110 1 By Me. Me Connell: 2 Q Mr. Benignus, I am handing you a memo 3 from Mr. Graham dated October 16* 1970* which was 4 previously marked as Exhibit 113, and it has some 5 attachment including two pages of address lists 6 and two form letters. I will ask you if you 7 recall that document. 3 A Yes, I recall this was done. Yes, I 9 remember this was done, letter 1 and letter 2, 10 they are different size customers. 11 Q Mr. Graham was one of the sales 12 representatives, was he not? 13 A Yes. He was a technical -- called a 14 technical sales specialist. He specialized in 15 this area. 16 Q In PCBs and other so-call-J functional 17 fluids? 18 A Yes. He got into that, too, correct. 19 Q The last page of this exhibit, which is 20 marked in handwriting Letter No. 2, has a 21 paragraph in it that reads as follows, the second 22 paragraph: The significance of this information 23 is no longer can we dump scrap Aroclor or spent 24 transformer Askarel down the sewer. Longoria & Goldstine 236 1030 Chicago STLCOPCB4023434 Ill 1 f-- ' Does that indicate to you that at least i___ _ 2 as of October 5, 1970, Monsanto was aware that 3 some of its customers were in fact dumping PCBs 4 into the sewer? 5 A I personally didn't know what they did 6 with it. Now, it could be that others may have 7 had more input or information. The implication 8 here by Graham is that he seemed to feel this was 9 the case. 10 Q In any event, he is telling them to stop 11 that, is that correct? 12 A Yes, that's essentially what it says. 13 Now, who he talked to, I don't know. 14 Q In your own understanding, during the 15 period of time from October of 1947, when you 16 first became involved significantly with PCBs, was 17 there ever a time when you undesrstood it was 18 proper disposal technique to dump scrap Aroclor 19 down the sewer? 20 A Not to my knowledge, no. 21 Q So the idea that "We can't dump it down 22 the sewer" wasn't something that was new in 23 October of '70, was it? You have to answer out 24 loud. Longoria & Goldstine 236 1030 Chicago STLCOPCB4023435 112 1 A I am sorry. I agree. 2 Q I am going to hand you a document 3 consisting of three pages, which was previously *.11 marked'as Exhibit 61, dated October 23, 1970, from 5 J.G. Bryant to M.F. Baber, subject testingho use 6 Electric Visit. I will ask you if you recall 7 the meeting to which that document refers. n A Yes, I remember this. It was a 9 meeting -10 Q Did you go to the meeting? 11 A I think I probably did. 1 2 Q -he third page is a list, I guess, 13 ocople who attended, and your name is on there. 14 A Yes. Okay. 1 5 Q This is another in the series of me- e t i r. g c 16 between Monsanto and Ncstinghouse tc discuss the 17 environmental problems of PCR pollution, is that, a 13 fair statement? 19 A Right. New, who vas there? 20 Does it say w h o from r,J e s t i n g h o u s e V/ a 21 there? 2 2 0 I think the first paragraph says w 23 expected. 2 4 A Yes, it was Kelly, Tyson anu "cCiain. Longoria & Gold stine 23 6 1030 STLCOPCB4023436 113 1 Q Kelly and Tyson were in the purchasing 2 function, and McClain was the engineer, is that 3 correct? 4 A Correct. 5 Q What was the purpose of that meeting? 6 A Well, again, todiscuss this entire 7 subject, to the best of the information that was 8 at hand, and that we knew about, and to be sure 9 that Westinghouse had it, which they probably did 10 have. 11 I don't know if they had it, or exactly 12 who had it. 13 Q Just to bring them up to date on what you 14 were doing with respect to developing alternative 15 fluids? 16 A Well, that, too. It discusses new 17 dielectric. It brings them up to date. It 13 disusses 1016 . 19 Q Take a look at a one-page letter that 20 previously has been marked Exhibit 67, dated 21 February 16, 1971. I will ask you if you recall 22 receiving a copy of that. 23 A Yes, I remember this. 24 Q Do you agree with Mr. Bryant's statement Longoria & Goldstine 236 1030 Chicago STLCOPCB4023437 114 1 in that letter that it is not necessary to isolate 2 paper towels, et cetera, "where you wipe your 3 hands when handling Aroclor"? 4 A Oh, I would have agreed with this, yes. 5 Q Do you still agree with that today? 6 A Yes. 7 Q Let's take a look at a letter that has 8 previously been marked as Exhibit 78, dated 9 February 22, 1971, from Mr. Tyson to you, and I 10 will ask you if you recall receiving that letter. 11 Do you recall that? 12 A Yes. 13 Q In the next to the last paragraph Mr. 14 Tyson suggests the establishment of periodic 15 report on the industry's progress in containing 16 PCBs 17 Do you know whether such a periodic 18 report was ultimately established? 19 A No, I don't. 20 Q !7as this C-107 committee operating as 21 early as February of '71, if you remember? 22 A I don't recall specifically. This is 23 February. That is early '71. It was in the mill 24 by then to get going, I would think. Longoria & Goldstine 236 1030 Chicago STLCOPCB4023438 115 1 Q You can't say for sure? 2 A I can't say for sure. But I think if it 3 wasn't, the plans were in effect towards this end. 4 Q Take a look at a one-page letter dated 5 April 5, 1971 that has previously been marked as 6 Exhibit 63. Do you know what is referred to in 7 the second paragraph of this letter by the 8 reference to some new internal policies and 9 procedures for environmental compatibility? 10 A Mo. I am a bit confused with that. 11 Q You don't know what specific document 12 that refers to, the internal draft that is 13 enclosed? 14 A I would have to see it. 15 Q If I knew what it was, I would show it to 16 you. 17 MR. FRUEHWALD: If we knew what it was, we 18 would have produced it. 1 9 MR. MC CONNELL: None of us have been able to 20 identify what it might be. 21 Q Let me ask you to take a look at, this is 22 Exhibit 189, which is dated April 11, 1969, or 23 almost two years before that letter, but is that 24 the document that is referred to, or possibly some Longoria & Goldstine 236 1030 Chicago STLCOPCB4023439 116 1 latec version of that same draft? 2 A No, I don't think this ties in with this 3 thing at all. No, I don't think so at all. 4 Q Do you know of -- well, let me ask you 5 this. Was it a common phenomenon at Monsanto for 6 the company to share confidential internal 7 preliminary drafts of policy documents with its 8 customers? 9 A Not overall, if it is a confidential 10 thing; but I don't see where this is confidential 11 to begin with. In fact, it seems as though we 12 were planning this, and we certainly were telling 13 them we are willing to share it. 14 Q But you are asking them not to share iz 15 with anybody else? 16 MR. FRUEHWALD: This is Mr. Bergen's letter. 17 THE WITNESS: I can only guess. 1 8 MR. MC CONNELL: I am just trying to find out 19 if in the opinion of the witness, Mr. Renignus, if 20 that was an unusual thing for the company to have 21 done. 22 MR. FRUEHWALD: Okay, that is a different 23 question, then, than Mr. Bergen's intention by 24 this letter. Longoria & Goldstine 236 1030 Chicago STLCOPCB4023440 117 1 - By Mr. Me Connell: r L2 Q My question is as you, Mr. Benignus, 3 review this letter, does that strike you- as being 4 something out of the ordinary at Monsanto? 5 A I don't think it is anything critical. I 6 think the thing was in a state of intended 7 formation, and this was sort of premature 8 announcement, is how I interpret this thing. 9 Q My question isn't whether it was 10 critical, but whether it was unusual to make such ' 11 an advance disclosure of a proposed and not final 12 policy to a customer. 13 A I don't know what Bergen was thinking 14 about. 15 Q My question is to you was that unusual? 16 A I didn't see many of these, no. So I 17 guess my answer is, yes, it is unusual. 18 MR. FRUEHWALD: Of course, I don't think Mr. 1 9 Benignus knew what Mr. Bergen did all the tire, 20 seeing as how he was too rungs above on the 21 ladder. I am not sure if he knew what Mr. 22 Bergen's usual procedure v/as. 23 MR. MC CONNELL: I am sure that is true. 24 Q I am going to show you a two-page memo Longoria & Goldstine 236 1030 Chicago STLCOPCB4023441 r' 1 dated June 1/ 1971, marked yesterday as Exhibit 2 166 from you to Bergen and others. I will as': you * if you recognize that. 4 A Yes, I remember this. 5 0 Here you the one who contacted the 6 persons listed opposite the de si gnat ion persons 7 contacted? a A Right. 9 Q I assume that was by telephone. Hell, 10 maybe not. n A Mo, I wouldn't think so . 1 2 Q Either they went to see you, or you c? 13 to see them? 14 A I would say I went to see them. 15 0 Okay. By "them" we are talking about 16 McClain and Mr. Kelly? 17 A Right. 1 0 0 In Bloomington. 19 The second paragraph of the summary sa 20 "Kelly appreciates and thanks for revision of 21 unrealistic contract clause." 2 2 To your recollection is. that reforrinc 2 3 the termination clausa whereby Monsanto reserve 2 4 the right to stop shipping Aroclors if it caul: Longoria & Goldstine 2 3 6 10 3 0 Chic a o o STLCOPCB4023442 119 1 be controlled in the environment? 2 A I am not sure. I know that there was 3 something going on between Kelly and I believe 4 Gossage or Bergen, or somebody about something. I 5 wasn't in on that. There was something in the 6 back of that. 7 Q Did you ask Mr. McClain to join the ANSI 8 PCB Pollution Committee? 9 A I certainly would have, yos. 10 Q And he said he would do that? 11 A This is correct. 12 Q Did you ask representatives of customers 13 other than Westinghouse also to join that 14 committee? 15 A Oh, yes. We asked all of our customers 16 to join and participate. 17 Q All of your PCB customers? 18 A Yes * 19 Q What was the reason for that? 20 A We wanted the input f r cm everybody, ana 21 all Monsanto did here was make the material and 22 supply it. The electrical industry was the one 23 that governed this whole thing. They were the 24 ones using it, and that's it. Longoria & Goldstine 236 1030 Chicago STLCOPCB4023443 12 0 1 Q I;7 ell, it is not entirely accur:. te, is it, 2 to say that all I'onsanto did was make it ar.d 3 supply it. You also tool: back scrap and 4 incinerated it, or for a while incinerated it? 5 A Originally, that was ilonsanto's only 6 function, was to produce this in accordance with 7 very strict specifications, refined to a very nigh 8 degree of purity, and essentially that's all we o did until this environmental thing came along. 10 Then we stepped in to do what we could co 11 give guidance and help to these `O a op1e who were 1 2 greatly concerned 12 Q Is the committee that you referred c c i." 14 Exhibit, whatever it was, 16 6, 3 S the ArPI-'-Cp 15 Pollution Committee, is that the committee that 16 was ultimately designated as C-10 7 ? 17 A This is right. 18 0 Okay. And one of the purposes of that 1 9 committee, in any event, was to attempt to 20 establish an industry standard for the handlin'21 and disposal of PCPs? A This is correct, the American national 23 Standards Institute, that covered tne entire 2 4 industry of the electrical manufacturers ana or. sir Longoria & holder i:*c 23^ 1030 STLCOPCB4023444 121 1 entire mode of customers, steel mills, utilities. 2 It was on behalf -- it is sponsored by our 3 government, the ANSI. 4 Q And if ANSI promulgates an industry 5 standard, it is not uncommon, is it, for 6 government regulatory agencies to adopt that as 7 their own regulatory standard, is that correct? 8 A Right, this is correct. 9 Q So if Monsanto can control the process 10 and get a standard that is written the way 11 Monsanto would like it to be, that gives you a 12 greater influence on what the government does, is 13 that a fair statement? 14 A That is unfair. 15 Q Why is it unfair? 16 A Because it wasn't done this way at all. 17 Q How was it done? 18 A It was done in collaboration with the 19 entire electrical industry, with government 20 agencies that run all the way from the Health, the 21 Army, the Military, the Navy, EPA, and what not, 22 in collaboration with their own consensus and 23 their views, and this was set up -- you have this 24 ANSI report, that is the ANSI guide. Longoria & Goldstine 236 1030 Chicago STLCOPCB4023445 0 Who was the Chairman of the Committee? A All right. I was Chairman of the Steering Committoe. How, the reason for this is I knew the people at these .other technical organisations who should participate. I knew who the users that we shipped the dielectric to were, and that I would know who to contact there and invite them to participate. I either knew or would know others who would invite people from the government, SPA, Environmental Protection Agency people. P.uckelnaus was invited. He didn't attend, but they did send their representatives, and so on down the line. So I was there sort of as a benchmark or point to get this thing together and get it established. Mow, at AMS I there were two prime committees. One was on capacitors and one was on transformers, and those were called, then., the working committees that these people did their wc r k on. o Did Papagsorge ultimately take over the chairmanship of that committee? Was he ever Longoria & '"olds tine 23 10 3 0 . Ch i c :o STLCOPCB4023446 Chairman? A ANSI, no. was there. But he was very active. He Q Was he the reporter, so to speak? A I think that is probably a fair way -- he would have reported things back to Monsanto, this is correct, as would Westinghouse and GE participants report to their respective companies. Q That is not how I meant to use the term. Every committee needs somebody to keep a record of what was discussed and what actions were taken, and then when a proposed standard was prepared somebody had to write up the first draft of that. In the legal arena that person is often referred to as a reporter or as a recorder. MR. FRUEHWALD: Or secretary. THE WITNESS: This definitely was the reason this thing went to ANSI to begin with, because they carried out this function. They had the finances, the government backing, and they are responsible to the government, and everything else, they had the facilities to do this. Monsanto didn't do this. ANSI did on Longoria & Goldstine 236 1030 Chicago STLCOPCB4023447 124 1 on behalf of everyone. This was not a, per se, r ^ - 2 i-lonsanto thing. We helped organize it. 3 By Mr. McConnell: / 4 Q And run it? 5` A What? 6 Q And run it, did you not? Were you the 7 chairman of the group? 8 A Oh, well, thank you. No, I wasn't 9 chairman of the group. In fact, to be honest with 10 you, I was Chairman of the Steering Committee. 11 Personally, I was on my way. I retired in 1974. 12 So now that you are asking in this tenor, I was on 13 my way out. I wasn't even a member on the sub -- 14 on these committees that did the actual work. 15 I was there when they were doing things 16 and working, but I wasn't a member of the 17 Capacitor Commitee, or was I am member of the 18 Transformer Committee. 19 Q Who from Monsanto was on those 20 committees? 21 A Papageorge attended these meetings, and 22 Bill Papageorge was active there, but he wasn't on 23 the Capacitor Committee or Transformer 24 Committee -- well, I shouldn't say he wasn't. No Longoria & Goldstine 236 1030 Chicago STLCOPCB4023448 125 1 was there more in terms of -- because I don't r '-----1 2 know. He was there more in terms of an 3 environmental person. 4 Q That was his job at Monsanto at that 5 time ? 6 A That's correct. But the people who 7 established the manual and the guide at ANSI were 8 the same people who previously had established. 9 for instance, the Askarel transformer guide at the 10 Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers. 11 So the framework of that committee was 12 the same people who worked on the transformer 13 guide at ANSI. This work at ANSI was essentially 14 the incorporation of what had been developed, 15 information and knowledge regarding the 16 environmental thing. It was the incorporation of 17 that information and knowledge into the previous 1 8 existing Transformer Guide at IEEE and/or similar 1 9 guide in the capacitor area. It was NEMA, the 20 National Electrical Manufacturers Association. 21 They had their guide. 22 Q For capacitors? 23 A For capacitors, yes. This is why there 24 were the two committees, separate committees, at Longoria & Goldstine 236 1030 Chicago STLCOPCB4023449 126 1 ANSI, because the capacitor man isn't the man who r L 2 makes transformers. 3 Q I understand that. Was there ever an 4 ANSI standard promulgated as a result of the C-107 5 Committee work? 6 A Well, I would assume that ANSI, American 7 National Standards Institute, is the official 3 standard and guide, yes. 9 Q My question is did such a thing actually 10 ever come to completion as a result of this 11 process that you organized and launched? 12 A Now, I retired in '74, okay. I am not 13 supposed to ask questions, right? 14 Q If you don't know, say you don't know. 15 MR. FRUEHWALD: They have a copy of it, but 16 they are asking if there is such a thing. 17 . By Mr. Me Connell: 18 Q Do you know about it? 19 A Do I know anything other than ANSI 107? 20 The answer is no. 21 Q . Do you know what the final result of that 22 process was, that's the question, or was it not 23 completed until after you retired? 24 A I can't speak to what happened after I Longoria & Goldstine 236 1030 Chicago STLCOPCB4023450 1 retired. I retired in '74. This AHsi was 2 completed, I think, in '73, if I am not mistakan. 3 I personally have nothing subsequent to that: from 4 AMS I. 5 0 Did you initiate the organisation of the 5 C-107 Committee on your own initiative, cr did 7 somebody higher up in the Monsanto or can i z =-i or. oo sugge st that that be done? n A I think the latter. 10 0 Mho was it? 11 A Higher up in Monsanto, and also cutsiae 12 of Monsanto, PS and Hestinghouse, and sc forth, 13 the industry people. I didn't dc this persona 11y, 14 no; and I didn't initiate it. 15 Q And I take it in the position that ycu 15 v? e r e in in Monsanto ycu wouldn't have dene that 17 v; i t h o u t checking with your boss, in any event, ycu 10 just wouldn't go out on your ov/n and say lot's 1 2 an A'.TSI committee goino on this subject of PC' 2C A Mo. In fact, I don't think the thing 21 originated at Monsanto. It or igina tec: wi ch 22 people. I would say very much so, people at 23 General Electric and Testing house. 2 4 0 Hut they asked you, Mr. Denignus, tn Longoria a Go1d s tino 23 C 1070 STLCOPCB4023451 123 1 organize it? 2 A I was picked as a matter cf convenience 3 to tie this down somewhere and was given this 4 title Chairman of the Steering Committee, which 5 really says I wasn't active on the committees. 6 The Steering Committee isn't the active committee. 7 The people who wanted this are the people from the 8 electrical industries. I told you, it is General 9 Electric, Westinghouse and others who are active 10 people in the Transformer Committees and the 11 Capacitor Committees. They are the ones that 12 wanted this. 13 Q Well, who was it that made you the 14 Chairman of the Steering Committee? 15 A I really don't know. It could have been 16 any one of a number of people. I would say this, 17 to try to answer your question. I don't think 18 this originated at Monsanto, if that is what you 19 are asking. 20 Q Well, that is one question. But the 21 other question is, without regard to where it 22 originated, at some point Paul Benignus was the 23 Chairman of the Steering Committee. That didn't 24 come down from heaven. How did it happen? Longoria & Goldstine 235 1030 Chicago STLCOPCB4023452 129 1 A I don't know. Now, this sounds rather - 2 I am a bit embarrassed to answer this. I am not 3 being evasive. I hope you understand this. 4 Now, the thing had to be started 5 somewhere, and I am telling you it was started, to 6 my knowledge, in the industry by GE and 7 Westinghouse, and the .electrical industry 8 initiated this, and they picked me at Monsanto 9 because I was active, particularly at ASTM and at 10 the IEC, International Electrotechnical 11 Commission. So I was just a convenient place, 12 where somebody wanted to do something, and they 13 would address it to Paul Benignus. That was a 14 convenient place to drop it. And then everybody 15 is informed as to what is wanted, and then the 16 committee members were selected. 17 These weren't selected by Monsanto. 18 Q By whom were they selected? 19 A By the people in the electrical industry, 20 are the people who selected these people, they 21 themselves. ' 22 Q People just volunteered to be on this 23 Steering Committee? 24 A Mo. You had to ask them. This is why I Longoria & Goldstine 236 1030 . Chicago STLCOPCB4023453 13 0 1 was selected on the Steering Committee/ to 2 facilitate -3 Q To ask the other people? 4 A To help ask the other people. 5 Q What human being came to you, either over 6 the phone or in a letter/ or in person/ and said, 7 "Paul Benignus, we want you to be Chairman of the 8 ANSI-PCB Pollution Steering Committee"? 9 A I will do my best to answer this for you, 10 and I would say it was A1 Salazar who was the 11 secretary at American National Standards Institute 12 in Washington. I think it was A1 Salazar. And 13 then who at Monsanto? It could be, and I am not 14 sure it is, it could be the first one I heard 15 about this at Monsanto, that this had been done, 16 was perhaps Papageorge. 17 Q So A1 Salazar didn't contact you. He 18 contacted Papageorge, and he said, "We want 19 somebody from Monsanto to be Chairman of this 20 Committee"? 21 A I don't know. I answered your question. 22 Q But he didn't contact you directly? 23 A Not to my knowledge. He may have. But 24 to my knowledge -- there is no great significance Longoria & Goldstine 236 1030 . Chicago STLCOPCB4023454 13 1 1 to this, that I was Chairman of the Steering 2 Committee. 3 Q I am just trying to undestand the fact of 4 what happened and how it came to be. In my life's 5 experience people who become chairmen of 6 committees usually get there by campaigning for 7 the job, just like the President of the United 8 States. You get tapped on the shoulder. Or if 9 you don't shov; up - 10 A I never campaigned for a damn thing. I ir assure you. This was another way of getting the 12 ball rolling. As I told you, I was being retired, 13 on my way out. You should ask me who the active 14 chairmen were. 15 Q Well, I will get to that. 16 A Okay. 17 Q I am trying to find out how you got the 13 job in the first place. To the best of your 19 recollection it was Papageorge who asked you to be 20 Chairman of the Steering Committee? 21 A I would think. I don't really know. It 22 is not of any importance to me. 23 Q If he did that, that is kind of a 24 request, but it is not a request. At that point Longoria & Goldstine 236 1030 Chicago STLCOPCB4023455 13 2 1 you can -2 A I could have said no. 3 Q You could have said no? 4 A Sure. 5 Q But you didn't? 6 A No, I had no reason to say no. 7 Q Who were the individuals that were in 8 charge of the two working committees, as you 9 desribed them? 10 A All right. It is documented in these 11 things, and I will give it to you as I thought it 12 was. There was Ed Raab from General Electric, and 13 he was with General Electric at Pittsfield, 1 4 Massachusetts, which is a transformer plant. He 15 was a Chairman. And Dr. Sloat of Westinghouse may 16 have been a Chairman; and in the capacitor area 17 maybe Ray Clark from, what's the name there, they 18 make capacitors in Connecticut. He may have been 19 a Chairman. 20 These things are documented. The 21 composition on these committees is given. . 22 MR. MC CONNELL: Well, let's mark this. This 23 is a memo of five pages dated September 15, 1971, 24 subject: ANSI C-107, PCB Environmental Pollution, Longoria & Goldstine 236 1030 . Chicago STLCOPCB4023456 133 1 toBrittain from McClain. 2 (The document above referred to 3 was marked Deposition Exhibit 4 No. 196 for Identification.) 5 By Mr. Me Connell: 6 Q Take a look at Exhibit 196, which I 7 recognize is not a Monsanto document, rather it is 3 a Westinghouse document. 9 A Yes, that was the first meeting, that's 10 correct, 1971 . 11 Q The meeting that was referred to in 12 Gaithersburg, Maryland, was the first meeting? 13 A Yes, that was the first meeting. 14 Q According to that exhibit, 196, I 15 Papageorge was elected permanent chairman. Does 16 that agree with your recollection? 17 A Well, this is what it says. 18 Q Well, that is different from what you 1 9 testified to earlier. I am trying to find out who 20 is right here. Does that refresh your 21 recollection? 22 A Well, this agrees with what I thought I 23 told you. The chairman was authorized to appoint 24 a Steering Committee, that was me, and appropriate Longoria & Goldstine 236 1030 Chicago STLCOPCB4023457 I..J 1 1 subcommittees. These are the important people, 2 the subcommittees, to deal with establishing 3 recommended procedures for PCB control and /It disposal in the capacitor and transformer 5 industry. e, ' The important committees are the work i nq 7 committees, and the subcommittees, that is v/hao 3 you want to look for. That is where the nut of o this thing is. 10 The fact that I was nominated Chairman of 11 the Steerinq Committee is neither here nor there. 12 And Papageorge was elected permanent chairman - 13 well, that tells you I wasn't the permo no.no 14 chairman, he was. 15 HR. FROEHWALD: Okay. The aucstion is what? 16 F!y fir. He Connell: 17 0 The question is that is the fact. "a s 1 3 Papageorge elected chairman? 1 0 A Yes. 2 0 Q Permanent chairman? 21 A Yes, this says so, and I have no reason 22 to refute that. 2 3 o Were you at that meeting in Gaithecsburg? 2 4 A I was at that meeting, yes. Longoria Goldstins 236 103 0 C rico e n STLCOPCB4023458 13 5 1 Q I have got another exhibit that has a 2 roster, which I will go over with you. 3 A Yes, that's what you want to look at. 4 What was the date of that meeting? 5 MR. FRUEHWALD: 9-14-71. 6 THE WITNESS: September 14, '71. 7 MR. MC CONNELL: Would you mark this as 197. 3 (The. document above referred to 9 was marked Deposition Exhibit 10 No. 197 for Identification.) 11 By Hr. Me Connell: 12 Q I have marked as Exhibit 197 a document 13 dated November 18, 1971, of three pages with 14 attachment 1 of 2 additional pages and attachment 15 1 of 5 additional -- 4 additional pages, and 16 attachment 3 of one page. 17 So there is a total of ten pages. I will 1 8 ask you if you recognize that. 19 A Right, these are the committees. The two 20 committees -21 Q The exhibit itself is the minutes of - 22 well, I guess it is more of an agenda for a 23 forthcoming meeting? 24 A Well, by this time it lists the Longoria & Golastine 236 1030 Chicago STLCOPCB4023459 136 1 composition of the committees respectively for the 2 Transformer Committee, which was headed by Raab of 3 GE, and the Capacitor Committee which was headed 4 by A1 Pozefsky of GE, as chairman. 5 Q And you were on both committees according 6 to that list? I 7 A Well, it says ex officio. 8 Q By virtue, of being Chairman of the 9 Steering Committee, you were on both committees? 10 A It carried through. 11 Q And by virtue of being permanent chairman 12 of the C-107 Committee Mr. Papageorge was on both 13 of those working groups? 14 A Yes. 15 Q Did you go to the meetings of those 16 working groups? 17 A Oh, yes. 18 Q Did Mr. Papageorge also attend? 19 A I would have hoped so. 20 Q Well, when you were there was he there, 21 or did you take turns? 22 A No. We didn't take turns. I am sure I 23 would have attended every ANSI meeting, and he I 24 am sure would have. Longoria & Goldstine 236 1030 Chicago STLCOPCB4023460 137 1 Q All right. How many meetings were there 2 all together? 3 A I don't know the exact number, but there 4 were several meetings. It started out there at 5 Gaithersburg, and then they were held in various 6 parts of the country. One was in Cincinnati, I 7 remember. One was in Cana"da, I think in Toronto. 8 Q When you would attend those meetings, did 9 Monsanto pay your expenses? 10 A Well, I was an employee of the company, 11 sure. 12 Q Part of your job was to go to those 13 meetings? 14 A I would think so; I would hope so. 15 Q I mean, if you were at one of those 16 meetings, as far as Monsanto was concerned, you 17 were working for Monsanto on the day you were at 18 the meeting? 19 A I was working on behalf of the whole 20 industry. I have been accused of working for 21 Westinghouse and GE, more than I did for Monsanto. 22 Q Well, Monsanto - 23 A Paid my expenses. 24 Q They paid your expenses,and they paid Longoria & Goldstine 236 1030 Chicago STLCOPCB4023461 r~ ' -. ' 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 13 8 your salary, too, for being there? It wasn't a vacation day. A It wasn't a vacation day, no. Q And there wasn't anybody else paying you for the workyou did in connection with these two committees? A No. Q And the same, I take it, is true of Nr. Papageorge? AHe was a Monsanto employee. MR. MC CONNELL: Let's mark this as whatever it is. (The document above referred to was marked Deposition Exhibit No. 198 for Identification.) By Mr. Me Connell: Q Take a look for a moment at an exhibit that has been marked as 198, which is dated on the last page September 3, 1971, entitled Askarel (PCB) Dielectric Fluids. I will ask you if you recognize that document. A Yes, I wrote this. Q You are the author of that, is that correct? Longoria & Goldstine 236 1030 Chicago STLCOPCB4023462 13 9 1 A That's correct. 2 Q For what purpose was it written? 3 A Well, what is the date on this? It must 4 be -5 Q September 3, '71. 6 A Yes, all right. This, again, is a 7 summation of the overall situation, and it brines 8 in all the people that have gotten involved in 9 this thing. 10 Well, here is Ruckelhaus. He was the 11 Administrator of EPA. And here is the 12 Commissioner of Food and Drugs, and all these 13 people. 14 Q Was this the document that you prepared 15 in getting ready for the first meeting of the 16 C-107 Committee, kind of a background document fer 17 yourself and perhaps for Mr. Papageorge as well? 18 A Whatisthequestion? 19 Q Did you prepare Exhibit 198 in the course 20 of" getting ready for the first ANSI C-107 meeting? 21 A This could very well be. As it says 22 here, Composition of ANSI - C-107. It indicates 23 the people who have been invitee to participate. 24 So it was either in preparation for it, or it was i Longoria & Goldstine 236 1030 Chicaco STLCOPCB4023463 140 1 in response to the first meeting. I don't know 2 which. 3 Q Well/ the first meeting wasn't until 4 September 14. 5 A When was this written? 6 Q September 3. 7 A Well, thenf obviously itwasn't before. a This was written after/ was it? 9 A Mo. It was written beforethe first 10 meeting. I am suggesting that that was part of n the work you did to get ready for that first 12 meeting. 13 A Right/ I would agree, you are right. 14 Q Okay. And you had been in touch with the 15 people that are listed in Exhibit 198 and invited 16 them also to participate in the first meeting? 17 A I was in touch with many of them/ some, 18 not all of them. But others then in turn were in 1 9 touch with people here. 20 Q If you didn't know somebody on the list 21 you might ask somebody else/ "Do you know so anc 22 so? Why don't you call him up." 23 A Like Rol1ins-Pur1e, I never talked to 24 anyone at Rollins-Purle. Tennessee Valley Longoria & Goldstine 236 1030 . Chicago STLCOPCB4023464 141 1 Authority, there is 2 whole list of people here. 2 I don't know them all, no. 3 0 You knew a lot of them, dicin't you? 4 A I knew a lot of these peopl0, or he; to 5 get in touch with them, or I would knew to cell on 5 someone and request them to get in touch with 7 them. This was one reason for taking this up at 3 ANSI. They knew most of these people. And 9 were the ones that really proceeded to gee in 1 0 touch with them. Salazar, the secretary there. 11 0 Let's go back to Exhibit 197, in 1 2 particular Attachment 2 to that exhibit. Is c i. a t 13 minutes or a summary that you prepared? 1 4 A Did I write it? 15 0 You signed it at the end, 11-19-71. 16 A Did I what? 17 Q It is not a signature, but it has coo 1 3 your name typed down there. The question is did 19 you prepare that? 20 A Well, that is an ANSIletterhead. 21 0 This is an attachment. I just want tc 2 2 know if you prepared the attachment beginning on 2 3 that page. It is labeled as Attachment 2. 24 A No, I don't think I wrote this. Longoria 4 Golcistine 23 6 1 0 3 0 C h i c r. o o STLCOPCB4023465 142 1 I don 1t think so . 2 Q Do you know who did? 3 A Yes, I an sure I didn't write this. This A I can't read. 5 Q 17hy would somebody else writs it and 6 attribute it to you? 7 A I do n't know. <n) 0 As you have had an opportunity tc look i r. 9 over, does it accurately reflect what t r a n s p i r e c 10 at that first meeting? 11 A I would say so, yes. 1 2 MR. FRUEHWALD: Wait a minute. Are you 13 representing this is supposed to be someth, i ng t h r. c 14 transpired at a meeting? It appears to bo a 15 statement, and probably the transmittal letter 16 describes what it is. 17 MR. KC CONNELL: This describes it as ""r i o f 1 G session on the items of information listed in 1? Attachment Mo. 2." 2 0 I guess that was prepared in anticips tion 21 of a moating. This is on Page 2 of the letter 2 2 portion of the exhibit. 23 THE WITNESS: Yes, this was preparatory t o t h n 24 me e ting . Longoria r* Coldstine 236 103D STLCOPCB4023466 143 1 By Mr. Me Connell: 2 Q "Members are urged to review Attachment 3 No. 2 in advance of the meeting and be prepared to 4 discuss any questions at the meeting." 5 A Now, what you have just now read was 6 written by Salazar, I gather, right? 7 Q Yes. 8 A Okay. Now, that is this. Hedid that. 9 Now, this is supposed to be - 10 MR. FRUEHWALD: That is Attachment No. 2. 11 THE WITNESS: This is Attachment No. 2. Well, 1 2 since he is writing this, and this comes from 13 ANSI, he must have had knowledge of Attachment No. 14 2, and I don't remember writing Attachment No. 2. 15 I don't think -- I don't recall writing this. No, 16 I don't recall that. 17 Q Do you know whether someone else at 1 8 Monsanto wrote it? 1 9 A I don't know. I can speculate, but I an 20 not being asked to speculate. 21 Q You have testified earlier that you wrote 22 some other memos over your signature which 23 contained information that you were given by ether 24 people that you didn't have any personal knowledge Longoria & Golastine 236 1030 Chicago STLCOPCB4023467 14 4 1 of. 2 Could this be another instance of that 3 same phenonemon? 4 A It could bef yes. I am not in 5 disagreement with what it says. Did I tell you 6 that earlier? 7 Q No. But that would have been my next 8 question. 9 A Oh. 10 Q You have answered it. 11 MR. FRUEHWALD: Except for Page 3, that can't 12 be read. I don't know that you can say you agree 13 with that. 14 MR. MC CONNELL: Well, if we had a better one, 15 I am sure we would use it. 16 Q Did Monsanto ever take the position 17 publicly that its 1016 Aroclor product was in fact 1 8 biodegradable, or did it rather take the position 19 that it was relatively more biodegradable than 20 1242? 21 A The latter. 22 0 To your knowledge, has Monsanto over done 23 soil migration studies of its PCB fluids? 24 A I think in research, yes. Longoria & Goldstine 236 1030 Chicago STLCOPCB4023468 145 1 Q . Do you know when that work was done? 2 A Not exactly, no. But it is in this time 3 frame. 4 Q Forties, fifties, seventies? 5 A No, it was after this environmental 6 thing. 7 Q Did it ever come to your attention that 8 there was a plot of land somewhere where in the 9 course of some early product development 10 experiments PCBs had been spread on the land and 11 it was suggested at one point that somebody ought 12 to go back and take a look and see if it was still 13 out there? 14 A No. Why v/ould somebody spread it on the 15 land? 16 Q Well, that would be my next question, if 17 you knew about that. 18 A No, this doesn't make sense to me. 1 9 Q It was done in connection with the 20 pesticide extender application? 21 A I don't know. 22 Q You don't know about that? 23 A That wouldn't have been PCB in this case. 24 That v/ould have been terphenyl Aroclor. Longoria & Goldstine 236 1030 Chicago STLCOPCB4023469 146 1 MR. MC CONNELL: Let's mark this the next 2 exhibit, 199. 3 (The document above referred to 4 was marked Deposition Exhibit 5 No. 199 for Identification.) 6 By Mr. tic Connell: 1 Q Take a look at what has been marked as 8 Exhibit 199. I will ask you if you recognize that 9 as being the minutes of one of the ANSI C-107 10 meetings . 11 A Correct. 12 Q Were you at that meeting? 13 A Yes, I would say so. This was Chicago, 14 wasn't it? It says Chicago. 15 Q That's what it says. 16 A Yes, that is another place where we met. 17 Yes, I remember this meeting. 18 Q And one of the things that took place at 19 that meeting, according to the minutes, is that 20 Mr. Papageorge made a presentation on the latest 21 government action? 22 A I would think so. 23 Q Was that one of the principal concerns of 24 the C-^107 Committee, to keep up with what the Longoria & Goldstine 236 1030 . Chicago STLCOPCB4023470 147 1 government was doing about PCBs? 2 A Oh, sure. We sought to have full 3 government participation on these, on this 4 committee. 5 Q So that industry could exercise some kind 6 of influence over what the government ultimately 7 did about the problem? . 8 A No 9 Q You are not serious about that answer, 10 are you? 11 A Pardon me? 12 0. I withdraw the question. 13 A Yes, I would think you would. 14 Q There were representatives of all of the 15 affected government agencies, -- that is inartfully 16 phrased. 17 The C-107 Committee included 18 representatives from all of the government 19 agencies that were concerned about PCB in the 20 environment, is that correct? 21 A To the best of our ability; they were all 22 invited, and we sought to have their attendance 23 for their input so they could express their views 24 and say what should be done. Longoria & Goldstine 236 1030 Chicago STLCOPCB4023471 14 8 1 Q So they could hear your views and what 2 you thought should be done? 3 A No. 4 Q You didn't care whether they listened to 5 you at all? 6 A Well, you are not asking me personally. 7 All right. 8 Q Well, you personally, and them Monsanto. 9 A All right. No, I would differ with you 10 on this. What they were to listen to primarily 11 was the people from the industry, number one; but 12 that does not exclude Monsanto. Monsanto would be 13 included. But this is not a unilateral Monsanto 14 thing here. 15 Q No, I understand that. You enlisted the 16 cooperation and participation - 17 A Of everybody. 18 Q -- of all of yourcustomers as well, did 19 you not? 20 A Yes. 21 Q Okay. And everybody in the UnitedStates 22 who used PCB in any manufacturing process was a 23 customer of Monsanto because you were the sole 24 source? Longoria & Goldstine 236 1030 Chicago STLCOPCB4023472 14 9 1 A Yes. 2 Q Okay. And then the government 3 representatives were involved, so there could be 4 an exchange of views between government and 5 industry, and industry and government, is that a 6 fair statement? 7 A I think.that is a fair statement, yes. 8 Q Okay. And the idea being that whatever 9 the government ultimately did with respect to 10 regulation of PCBs the industry could live with 11 it? 12 A They would follow this, yes, what 13 Congress finally decreed, yes. That was up to 14 Congress. 15 Q You don't mean to tell me that there was 15 no intention of the various industry members of 17 the C107 Committee to exercise any influence ever 18 what Congress ultimately did? 1 9 A Oh, I can't say that, no. 20 Q During the period of time between late, 21 mid-1971, when the ANSI C-107 Committee was first 22 being formed and getting started in 1974, when the 23 standard was finally issued, there were meetings 24 between Monsanto and Monsanto customers outside Longoria & Goldstine 236 1030 . Chicago STLCOPCB4023473 150 1 the context of the C-10 7 Committee as well as at 2 the C-107 meetings, is that a fair statement? 3 A I would think so; I would think so. 4 Q And in fact, when proposed regulations 5 were issued by one or another federal agency, 6 Monsanto often shared with its customers the 7 comment that Monsanto proposed to make in response 8 to those regulations and invited its customers 9 also to submit comments on the proposed 10 regulations, is that a fair statement? % 11 A I would think that's a fair statement:. 12 Q Once again, in an effort to have the 13 industries' views presented to the regulatory 14 agencies before their action became final? 15 A Correct. 16 Q Did you have any kind of coordinating 17 role in that communication effort outside the 1 8 C-107 process? 19 A Mo, I didn't, because by this time I was 20 on the way to retirement. 21 Q Do you recall a meeting in December cf 22 1971, here in St. Louis, with various Westir.ghouse 23 representatives? 24 A If I saw it, I think I would recall it. Longoria & Goldstine 236 1030 Chicago STLCOPCB4023474 I 51 1 Q Let's mark this, I guess it is 200 n c v? 2 The document I have is headed Meeting with 3 Monsanto on Inerteen. It is apparently a 4 Wostinghouse document. But there is really no 5 indication here who the author is. 6 (The document above referred ~ o 7 was marked Deposition Exhibit 3 Mo. 200 for Identification.) o 3y Mr. Me Connell: 10 O Do you recall that meeting? 11 A Yes. I think w e covered this meeting 1 2 before, although thi s is written up d i f r r u n c 1 13 I think wo are covering the same meeting. 14 MR . FRCJSHWALD : It is a diff erant mee c i r.a . 15 THE WITNESS: This is differ ant? 15 MR. FRUEHWALD: Yes. 17 HR. HC CONNELL: This is -- 1 3 HR . FRUEHWALD: '71 . 19 MR. KC CONNELL: -- a 1971 n e e t i n g . 20 O We talked a bout one in ' 70 . 21 . A Oh, all right. 22 O This meeting that is referred to Fx 23 200 was after the ANSI C-107 was organizec; a: u nder w ay? Longcria & ooldstine 236 1030 STLCOPCB4023475 152 1 A Oh, well, then this is another meeting 2 where we tried to keep Westinghouse in this case 3 informed and posted and knowledgeable of 4 everything we knew. 5 Q And you were one of the presenters at 6 that meeting, is that correct? 7 A Yes, I was there and introduced speakers, 8 and so forth. 9 Q Take your time and look that over because 10 I am going to ask you if, to the best of your 11 knowledge, that is an accurate reflection of what 12 took place at that meeting. 13 A Well, why don't you ask. I can pick it 14 up. 15 Q I want to give you a chance to read all 16 of it. 17 A Read all of it? 18 Q The whole thing. 19 A Someone from Westinghouse wrote this. Is 20 that the idea? 21 A Yes. 22 A Okay. 23 Q My question is whether there is anything 24 in there that you disagree with. Longoria & Goldstine 236 1030 Chicago STLCOPCB4023476 153 1 MR. FRUEHWALD: As having occurred at the 2 meeting? 3 MR. MC CONNELL: Anything that they say took 4 place at the meeting that you either say didn't 5 take place, or you don't remember it taking place. 6 THE WITNESS: All right. I have read it. 7 By Mr. Me Connell: 8 Q That is an accurate summary of the 9 meeting? 10 A Yes. 11 Q Okay. In the course of the work that the 12 ANSI C-107 Committee did, various members of the 13 two working groups were assigned to prepare drafts 14 of the different parts of the document that 15 ultimately came out of that committee, is that 16 correct? 17 A Correct. 1 S Q To yourknowledge as any of theinitial 19 drafting work done by any of the government 20 representatives? 21 A Other thanserving on the committee and 22 being a part of the process of the committee, 23 knowing what the committee is doing, knowing what 24 the committee intends to establish, and giving Longoria & Goldstine 236 1030 - Chicago STLCOPCB4023477 154 1 concurrence with this, or objection to it, I would 2 have to say that was a role government people 3 played. 4 Q In other words, all of the actual initial 5 drafting work was done by the industry members? 6 A I would have to say yes, with the 7 concurrence and approval of the government people. 8 Q After the drafts were presented and they 9 were worked over by the committee? 10 A Pardon me, after what? 11 Q One person prepares a draft, then it is 12 presented to the committee, and it is circulacea, 13 and everybody gets a chance to look at it? 14 A No, this is backwards. The committee 15 prepares the draft, che committee, like we people 16 here, paragraph by paragraph,'establish the draft. 17 This is how it is done. 1 8 Q Well, let me show you another document. 19 A To my knowledge this is how it was done, 20 not one person prepares a draft and then the 21 committee either approves it or disapproves it, 22 no. 23 Q Let's look at the minutes, Mr. Benignus. 24 I am going to show you another document. Longoria & Goldstine 236 1030 Chicago STLCOPCB4023478 155 1 (The document above referred to 2 was marked Deposition Exhibit 3 No. 201 for Identification.) 4 By Nr. He Connell: 5 Q Take a look at what has been marked as 6 Exhibit 201, which is a marginally legible 7 document of two pages, authored by Robert D. 3 McClain, and I really don't see a date on it 9 anywhere, according to this, which appears to me 10 to be minutes of one of these working group 11 meetings. 12 It says assignments for first drafts by 13 mid-January were made by the Chairman, and there 14 is a list of subjects and the name of an 15 individual opposite certain subjects as being the 15 one who is supposed to prepare the initial draft. 17 A Yes. I can understand that one person 1 3 wasn't assigned the whole thing. 19 Q Each person had a little section? 20 A Yes, I agree with this. It would have 21 been asking too much for -- I misunderstood. 22 You said one person prepared a section, 23 and then the committee met, and then they all 24 passed judgment on this section. Oh, that's Longoria & Goldstine 236 1030 Chicago STLCOPCB4023479 15- 1 absolutely correct. I am sorry. 2 0 Bat the real point is that each of tnr3 draftsmen of each one of those sections was an 4 industry member and not a government member, is 5 that correct? 6 A From what I see here, t h a c would certain. 7 yes. 3 Q Okay. 9 H-2. MC CONNELL: "ark this as 20 2 . 10 (The document above referred to 11 was marked Deposition exhibit 12 No. 202 for Identification.) 13 By i'r. Me Connell: 14 Q Marked as Exhibit 202 is a document 1 5 consisting of three pages dated March 22, 1072, 16 subject: PCB in Japan, to Beni gnus from 17 Katayama, ask you if you recognize that. 10 A I sure do. 1 9 Q Mho is .Mr. Katayana? 2 0 A Katayama was the head of Monsanto's 2.1 marketing effort in Japan on PCD s. 2 2 0 The company nano at the top of the first 23 mage of that exhibit says Mitsubishi Monsanto? 2 4 A Correct. Loncoria & Ooldscine 2 3 6 10 3 0 r% i 'C STLCOPCB4023480 13 i 1 '0 Is that a joint venture v/i th the -Ja pane sc 2 company? 3 A This is correct. 4 Q In the period we are talking about, in 5 '71, that is the only way you could do business ir. 6 Japan? 7 A Oh, that's right, there was this joint 3 company. . S Q Did Monsanto sell PCBs in Japan? 10 A Monsanto built the plant in Japan tc sell 11 PCBs. Vie built a plant in Japan. 12 0 Okay. And it was operating as of the 13 date of this exhibit? 14 A It didn't operate long. I don't know 15 exactly whether the plant was in operation. I 10 haven't read the nemo. Maybe I should read it. 17 Should I? 1 0 p. Please , take your tine 19 A Okay. Yes, I r a n e p.ber this. 20 n That E :: h i b i t 202 is a respons c- t o you i n 21 respons e to an inquiry you made about the status 22 of the PCD s in Japan, is that a fair sta tenant? 23 A Yes. 2 4 o vias that a written inouiry or a then Longoria & G o 1 d s t i n e 2 3 J 1030 Chica o STLCOPCB4023481 1 call? 2 A I think it was written. It was not that 3 argent that I would have phoned to Japan; muse 4 have been written. 5 Q What was the reason you 'wanted to kr.cw 6 what was going on in Japan with respect ;o ?C?s? 7 A Well, certainly a logical thing to want oO to know about, I wanted to know about it. q 1 Was that in connection with the C-107 10 comnitteo ? li A Well, to the extent that the people 12 working at C-107 certainly ought to knew about it, 13 yes . 14 Q One way to find out was to contact 15 Monsanto, which was a company that also was 16 involved with that product in Japan, and that 17 would be a quick way to find out what was going 1 0 on ? 1 9 A Sure, it would be, because we ban pc ogle 20 in Japan that could inform -- I was askee. to write 21 this to Kstayam a and find cut what does he k now, 2 2 but I assure you I wasn't the only one that was 2 3 looking into it. 2 4 0 Nov;, this was about the time of, or Longoria St Golc'stine 236 10 30 Chicac a STLCOPCB4023482 159 1 within a short period after, the so-called Yusho 2 incident? 3 A I would say so. This was after the Yusho 4 incident, correct. 5 Q Exhibit 202 refers on Page 3 to a company 6 called Kaneka. 7 A It is Kaneka Foods, that is an 8 abbreviation for Kaneka Puchi. 9 Q They were also producers of PCBs in 10 Japan, were they not? 11 A They produced it. 12 Q Under the name of Kanechlor? 13 A Kanechlor, yes. And we built a plant and 14 looked at the market, we really never got the 15 thing going. 16 Q They banned PCBs in Japan before your 17 venture went commercial? 18 A Essentially this is correct, essentially, 19 yes. 20 Q In fact, it was a Kanechlor product that 21 was involved in the Yusho incident in Japan, was 22 it not? 23 A This is correct. 24 Q Now, the next to the last full paragraph Longoria & Goldstine 236 1030 Chicago STLCOPCB4023483 on Page 3 of Exhibit 202 says, "The grand funeral of PCB in Japan is close at hand." Was there some concern at Monsanto and Monsanto's customers, and other members of the ANSI C-107 Committee, that the grand funeral of PCBs in the United States might also be close at hand? A Would you mind repeating that? f!e is making a conjecture in Japan. Q He turned out to be right, didn't he? A He turned out to be right. Mow, this was of no commercial import to us because, as I told you, we were really not selling any commercially in Japan. We hadn't gotten that far. And then this thing came along. We had introduced material to the capacitor people. Japanese people are not easy to sell to, you know, and it took quite a while for someone from America to try to do business there, so on and so forth. MR* FRUEHWALD: The question deals with - By Mr. Me Connell: Q My question is having received this exhibit which says shortly it is going to be all over in Japan, did that raise a concern in your Longoria & Goldstine 236 1030 . Chicane STLCOPCB4023484 161. 1 mind that the United States Government might do 2 the same thing in this country? 3 A I didn't know what the U.S. Government 4 would do. But it certainly is something to bring 5 to the attention of everyone who was interested in 6 this thing, and it certainly was, yes. 7 Q The fact that some other country banned 3 PCBs might increase the political pressure for the 9 United States Government to do the same thing? 10 A Well, one would assume so. One would 11 want to know what is going on here, and at this 12 point it was very clear that this was pyroly zed 13 PCB to begin with, rather than normal PCB, which 14 is a different ballgame. 15 MR. MC CONNELL: Let's mark this as 203. 16 (The document above referred to 17 was marked Deposition Exhibit 18 No. 203 for Identification.) 19 By Mr. Me Connell: 20 Q We have marked as Exhibit 203 a document 21 consisting of 13 pages, including the cover 22 letter, which is dated April 12, 1972, from 23 Pozefsky of General Electric to Benignus, among 24 others, and I will ask you to take a look at that Longoria & Goldstine 236 1030 Chicago STLCOPCB4023485 16 2 1 document, and I will point out to you it appears 2 to me that although the production stamp numbers 3 that are on there are in sequence, the page number 4 of the document attached to the letter appears to 5 be missing pages 1 and 2, just so you don't get 6 any more confused than I am about it. 7 A Yes. Pozefsky was the Chairman of the 8 Capacitor Committee. So this is correct. 9 Q And he is circulating his proposed - 10 A Yes. 11 Q -- draft as of that date to the people 12 who are listed as addressees? 13 A Yes. He is circulating this in 14 accordance with what evolved from discussions at 15 ANSI meetings prior to this, this is correct. 16 This evolved into a final -- well, it 17 wasn't necessarily final, it may not have been 18 final, but this evolved into whatever it was at 1 9 this point in time, and then evolved from prior 20 consideration, discussion of the subject matter, 21 at these 'various ANSI meetings, yes. 22 Q One of the things that Mr. Pozefsky 23 suggests in his letter is that the guideline, 24 which the full title of it, I guess, is Guideline Longoria & Goldstine 236 1030 Chicane STLCOPCB4023486 163 1 for the Capacitor Group on Askarel Disposal, that 2 the guideline be promulgated by either the 3 National Electrical Manufacturers Association, or 4 the Electrical Industry Association, pending 5 formal action by ANSI? 6 A I would say that's correct. 7 Q In other words, that would be a way to 8 get it on the street faster while the ANSI bureaucracy is grinding its way through the 10 process? 11 A The ANSI bureaucracy worked very rapidly 12 on this thing. I wouldn't use those terms when I 13 would refer to what was done at ANSI. 14 If you will look at the timetable at 15 ANSI, they got th i s out in a hurry, with dispatch 16 nobody fiddled around. 17 Q I understand what he is suggesting is a 1 8 way to move it along faster? 1 9 A Yes, I don't quarrel with that. yes. 20 Q Okay. 21 The last paragraph of the letter says 2 2 that " The full ANSI committee should be meeting 23 w i t h i n about a month to finally approve th e 24 guidelines for review by government and other Longoria & Goldstine 236 1030 Chicago STLCOPCB4023487 16 4 1 members of the committe"? 2 A Yes. 3 Q I notice that on the address list of 4 people to whom that was sent, none of the 5 government members received a copy of that, is 6 that correct? Those are all industry people cn 7 that list. 8 A These are all industry people, this is 9 cor rect. 10 Q Why is it that the industry people were 11 working over the draft before they showed it to 1 2 the government side? 13 A Why was it that the industry people 14 worked this over before -15 Q Before they showed it to the government 16 members of the committee? 17 A All right. Let's start from the 1 8 beginning, in answering this. 19 First of all, as we have said, the 20 government agencies were all invited to 21 participate in this thing. Everyone would have 22 been most grateful if they had diligently attended 23 each and every meeting that was held. 24 Q But they didn't do that? Longoria & Goldstinc 236 1030 Chicago STLCOPCB4023488 r' L 6 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 16 5 A It varied. We were dissatisfied with SPA that they didn't have more representation at all meetings, and so on and so forth. So I guess they were waiting for the final thing to go over it. Q Isn't it a fact that the industry members wanted to iron out all their differences so they could present a united front before they presented the draft to the government? A No, absolutely not. I don't understand your question, really I don't, and I am sincere about this. There was nothing along the implication lines, if I interpret your question right, believe me, and I hope you will, nothing. It keeps coming out here that you seem to think that the industry was trying to railroad' something along the line here. This is absolutely incorrect. It is not true, in any respect. Q I am asking what the document reflects, that is, that all of the industry input was solicited before it was shown to the .government. A All I can say is this is an interim, this is not the final thing. This is interim, along the road to arriving at the final thing. Longoria & Goldstine 236 1030 Chicago STLCOPCB4023489 15 5 1 I assure you if anyone from the 2 government would have participated, this was all 3 open to the government people as we went along. 4 Now, Pozefsky wrote this out, you see. 5 Q He could just as well have circulated the 6 draft at that point to the government 7 representatives? 3 A He could have sent it to every government 9 agency in the country, but he didn't do this. Rut 10 it is not along the implication here, I assure 11 y ou. 12 MR. FRUEHWALD: Well, it.is Mr. Pozesfkv's 13 letter, of Mr. Pozefsky's activities. You are 14 assuming he didn't send it to the government, sc 15 it is a matter of pure speculation as to why h e IS did what he did. 17 MR. MC CONNELL: Certainly, but that wasn't my 18 question. I think he has answered my question. 19 MR. FRUEHWALD: He has answered your question. 20 Your implication is wrong. 21 THE WITNESS: The list here is, in answer to 22 Jim's question, it is industry people, that's 23 true, but there is nothing surreptitious about 24 this whole thing, I assure you. Longoria & Goldstine 236 1030 Chicago STLCOPCB4023490 157 1 By Mr. Me Connell: 2 0 I am not suggesting that there is 3 anything surreptitious. 4 A Ne 11 , it sounds that wav to ns, Jin. 5 Now, you are a lawyer. 6 Q Only that the industry members wants:" to 7 present a united front with respect to what they 8 anticipated the government might do, which was bun g PCBs altogether. - 10 A Excuse me. On this list here, Sals car is 11 not the capacitor industry, which these other 12 people are. Salazar is a government agency, , 13 National Electrical Manufacturers Association. 14 0 17 a i t, I beg to differ with you. MEM/, is 15 not an agency of the government of the United 15 States. It is an industry trade association. 17 A ANSI is. Excuse me. Here he has 1 0 Salazar, NSHA, which is National Electrical 1? Manufacturers Association. 20 Nov/, Salazar, as I remember, was 21 connected with NNUA, also, and had responsibi1ity. 2 2 Jut wha t I am getting at is this, Salazar was 23 ANSI, American National Standards Institute, a n c 2 4 it sure is my understanding this is government Longoria & Goldstinc 236 1030 Chicago STLCOPCB4023491 16 S 1 sponsored, and Salazar had the liberty to pursue 2 anything that he felt should be done. 3 Q Okay. 4 HR.FRUEHWALD: I think the question has been 5 answered. We don't have to beat this letter to 6 death. 7 THE WITNESS: Well, I didn't write it. 8 MR. FRUEHWALD: I know. n By Mr. Me Connell: 10 Q No, you received it, that is all I was 11 trying to find out. 12 A Yes, I received it. 13 MR. MC CONNELL: Did we mark this before? I 14 don't think so. May 2, 1972, Papageorge to 15 Benignus, and a lot of other people. 16 MR. FRUEHWALD: No, I don't have that listed. 17 MR. MC CONNELL: All right, let's make this 18 204 . 19 (The document above referred to 20 was marked Deposition Exhibit 21 No. 204 for Identification.) 22 By Mr. Me Connell: 23 0 Exhibit 204 is a three-page memo dated 24 May 2, 1972 from Papageorge to Benignus, Bergen Longoria & Goldstine 236 1030 Chicago STLCOPCB4023492 16 9 1 and others, subject: PC3 Task Force Presentation. 2 Was the PC3 Task Force an internal group 3 of people within Monsanto? 4 A Yes. It was a group of Monsanto pconie, 5 and Warren Easley, who was in Washington as a 6 Monsanto representative, in Washington. He was 7 apprised of this. 3 Office of Science and Technolgy, Mew 9 Executive Office Building, Washington, D.C., well, 10 this was the government. 11 Q Okay. 12 A Monsanto went to thegovernment, 13 Executive Office of the President, Office of 14 Science and Technology, Washington, D.C., sc this 15 was a presentation to the government. 16 Q Okay. And as Iunderstand it, the 17 complete title, which is shorthanded there as PCP 1 8 Task Force, was the interdepartmental task force 19 on PCBs, is that correct? 20 A Yes, this is correct, interdepartmental. 21 Q And there was to be a meeting in 22 ' Washington on May 15? 23 A I assume so. Papageorge handled this. 24 Q And did Papageorge make the Monsanto Longoria & Goldstine 236 1030 Chicago STLCOPCB4023493 170 1 presentation? 2 A I would assume so. I wasn't there. 3 Q Okay. And the memo refers to putting 4 together the presentation and rehearsal to be held 5 on May 8, is that correct? 6 A That is correct. 7 Q Did you have any part in preparing the 3 document that was ultimately the written 9 presentation of Monsanto? 10 A No. 11 Q All right. There was a written 12 presentation? 13 A Right. 14 Q Did you ever see that? 15 A Yes, I saw that. 16 A Okay. 17 MR. MC CONNELL: Let's mark this as 205. 13 (The document above referred to 19 was marked Deposition Exhibit 20 . No. 205 for Identification.) 21 By Mr. Me Connell: 22 Q Let meshow you a multi-page document 23 that has been marked as Exhibit 205 and the title 24 page says, "Presentation to the Interdepartmental Longoria & Goldstine 236 1030 . Chicago STLCOPCB4023494 17 1 1 Task Force on PCEs, Hay 15, 1972." 2 Take your time and look that over an' 3 tell me if you recognize that to be the written A presentation by Monsanto at that mooring. 5 A Yes, right. 5 Q Did you attend the rehearsal? 7 A Mo. Yes, this is it. n.) Q Okay. I think what I am noinc to do, 9 let's put that aside for now. There are some 10 other things I want to go through that we can 11 finish up today, and then we will come bade end go 12 through this in detail in the morning. 13 MR. FRUEHMALD: Are you sure you want tc ~o 14 into it in detail by this witness? Me was n o c 15 of the presenters, Mr. Papageorge being one. 1 5 MR. MC COMNELL: Ho was not a presenter. I 17 want to find out what was in there. It won't tko 1 7 long. Let's go through this and spend some tin. ID on that, if we have time. -! n By Mr. Me Connell: 21 0 Take a look at what has previously been 22 ma r k c d as Exhibit 15 3, which is a th reo-p ag e me~o 23 from you to Cumming Paton, dated September ", 2 4 1972. Do you recognize that? Longoria & Golastine 235 1030 . Chicago STLCOPCB4023495 17 2 1 A Yes . 2 Q This is a visit to Westinghouse 3 Bloomington? 4 A Right. 5 Q And Exhibit 153 is your report on that 6 visit? 7 A Yes. 8 . Q And Mr. Shimley went with you on this 9 occasion? 10 A Yes. 11 0 Who is Shimley? 12 A Well, he was in the marketing departmer. 13 Q The first paragraph of your summary in 14 Exhibit 153 refers to Monsanto's studies and 15 actions were portrayed using ample slides. 16 Do you know v/hether those were the same 17 slides that were part of the interdepartmental 18 task force presentation? 19 A I would think so. I wouldn't know that 20 we had any others than that. Yes, I would think 21 so. 22 MR . FRUEHWALD: We have a separate exhibit, 23 we not. of those slides? 24 MR . MC CONNELL: I thought so. But I don't Longoria & Goldstine 236 1030 . Chicago STLCOPCB4023496 17 3 1 think I have it here. Maybe if you can take your 2 book out to 153, maybe they are attached to the 3 memo. 4 This document was previously marked as 5 Exhibit 64, and although this says September 1972, 6 you are reporting that the call was in August. 7 But we have kind of determined that this 8 is probably the presentation that went with that 9 meeting, and my question to you is does that agree 10 with your understanding? 11 THE WITNESS: I would say so, yes. 1 2 MR. FRUEHWALD: Well, Mr. Shimlcy's call 13 report of the same meeting indicates that the call 14 occurred on September 7, '72, instead of A u n u s t 7, 15 as indicated in your memo. 16 It appears to be a typographical error, 17 secretarial error, that the meeting actually 1 8 occurred in September. 19 THE WITNESS: We have human secretaries. 20 MR. FRUEHWALD: That's right. That is whv 21 this would match up with-the September '72 22 presentation. 23 THE WITNESS: Good enough. 24 Longoria & Goldstine 236 1030 . Chicago STLCOPCB4023497 17 4 1 By Mr. Me Connell: 2 Q Now, can you tell whether the slides in 3 this presentation that was previously narked as 4 Exhibit 64 are some of the same ones in 205? 5 A We can look at them. I would think so. 6 Where do we start? 7 Yes, it is the same thing. 8 Q The second item in Exhibit 153 refers to 9 leaky tank cars. Was this meeting that you had in 10 September of 1972 at Westinghouse the first time 11 that you learned about problems with leaky tank 12. cars? 13 A No. I think I would have learned about 14 this prior to it and said something about it. I 15 only hope the subject of leaky tank cars isn't 16 taken out of context, though. 17 Q Well, I assume we are not talking about 18 loss of the whole carload of material. 19 A We are talking about a little bit cf 20 weeping, and we are not talking about the material 21 at all. 22 What we are talking about is this weening 23 around the dome of the car. That indicates that 24 the dome gasket was not sealed properly. Longoria & Goldstine 236 1030 Chicago STLCOPCB4023498 17 5 1 Now, when one observes this, and as I 2 already told you, my concern was protecting this 3 very highly refined PCBs from this environment we 4 live in. 5 My concern on this thing is that these 6 cars will breathe because when it is filled the 7 car is usually warm, and if this weeping is noted 3 at the dome, when that happened, air, and the 9 concern here is moist air, can be sucked into this 10 car. 11 So it is a matter of contamination of the 12 PCB, not environmental contamination. I just 13 wanted to clarify that. 14 Q So that would cause a problem in 15 Westinghouse's use of the product once they 16 received it? 17 A It could, yes; because they expect us to 13 supply it under these very critical electrical 19 quality specifications and, yes, this could affect 20 this. 21 Q Did you kr.ow that Westinghouse had a 22 process at the Bloomington plant whereby they 23 purified the PCBs in their plant with the Fuller's 24 earth process? Longoria & Goldstine 236 1030 . Chicago STLCOPCB4023499 176 1 A This is correct. But they expected to 2 receive it from us in perfect condition so they 3 wouldn't have to analyze it, go through all this 4 comprehensive analysis. 5 In other words, they trusted us 6 implicitly on the quality that we were delivering 7 to them. 8 And I am questioning a situation like 9 this, not from the standpoint of Westinghouse, 10 from the standpoint of your own people, and I said 11 I want to know about this. 12 Q And your request of Westinghouse was that 13 if they observed that, that they should leave it 14 alone and call you? 15 A Right, this is correct. 16 Q The final item that was taken up in the 17 call report is the need by Westinghouse for seme 1 8 lead time in changes in their prices and 19 availability of the product so they can make 20 whatever adjustments they had to do? 21 A That is correct, they didn't want any 22 surprise coming. 23 Q It seems to be a reasonable position? 24 A Well, it sure is. In fact, that is why Longoria & Goldstine 236 1030 Chicago STLCOPCB4023500 177 1 we are here, 2 Q Today? 3 A Yes. Well, now, maybe you misunderstood 4 what I said. This is an economic thing, right? 5 All right. 6 I started to answer. I will continue. 7 Price per pound kind of thing, let's not have any 8 surprises without forewarning. 9 Q In other words, their product prices 10 depend on, among other things, the cost of their 11 raw materials? 12 A That is correct, and whether or not they 13 stay in business depends on whether they are going 14 to get this stuff or not, which is highly 15 important to these people. 16 HR. MC CONNELL: Take a look. Hike, at 17 September 29, 1972, Ray Luzar to Scott Tucker. 18 HR. FRUEHWALD: No, we haven't narked that. 19 MR. MC CONNELL: Let's mark this 206. 20 (The- document above referred to 21 was marked Deposition Exhibit 22 No. 206 for Identification.) 23 By Mr. Me Connell: 24 0 Exhibit 206 is a one-page letter from Ray Longoria & Goldstine 236 1030 Chicago STLCOPCB4023501 17? 1 Luzar of Westinghcuse co Scott Tuck or of Mensanco, 2 dated September 2 9 , 1 97 2 , with a cony to v o u . 3 you recall Hr. Luzar sending some'water samples A for analysis? 5 A Yes. 5 0 That v/as the reason for that? 7 A That was for analyzing them. 3 Q Analyzing them for PCBs, I take it? 9 A They wanted us to analyze these. They 10 didn't do it themselves, no, at this stage. That 11 is why they sent the samples. 1 2 Q Was it because they couldn't do it cr 13 because they wanted to check on their own 1 4 laboratories, if you recall? 15 A Mo. My understanding is it was tovonr 13 what thev had. Mow, they are talking about os r t ~ 17 per million, which is a very small amount. i -n'1 0 Did you perform such w a t e r sample19 analysis on more than one occasion for 20 Testinghouse Bloomington? 21 A I think maybe it was more than once, 22 maybe twice, I am not sure. But I know we did it 2 3 as a request from them to sample to determine the 24 amount of PCD in this effluent, or whatever ic Longoria & Moldstine 237 1030 STLCOPCB4023502 1 was. 17 9 f / 2 Q In the sewer discharge from their/^Cfft? 3 A I think this was it. What I did here was 4 merely -- again, I was called on, I was c'ne 5 convenient one to use to-arrange for Scott Tucker 6 and Monsanto to do this. 7 Q You were the person that Westinghouse 8 knew to contact, in other words? 9 A Yes, and I didn't do this, but I passed 10 it along. I set it in motion. 11 Q They called you because they didn't know 12 who Scott Tucker was? 13 A You are getting onto it. 14 Q So you said I will get in touch with cur 15 analytical people? 16 A I will get in touch with Paul as to some 17 of these things here. 10 Q Was there anycharge for the analytical 19 services, as far as you recall? 20 A Not that I recall. There were only about 21 three samples. 22 Q And, as I understand it, this is done by 23 gas chromatography? 24 A Yes. Longoria & Goldstine 236 1030 Chi ca cc STLCOPCB4023503 180 1 Q It is more or less an automated 2 procedure? 3 A It is not standard analytical procedure; 4 and it required having -- see, Tucker is in 5 research. He is not in our analytical lab. It is 6 an extra procedure and it took somebody to say, 7 well, now I will do this for these people. It was 3 not a routine thing. 9 Q So the research lab was where the 10 equipment with the appropriate degree of 11 sensitivity was located, rather than at a standard 12 analytical lab? 13 A Exactly. 14 Q Where in the productionprocess you would 15 be analyzing comparatively pure product, here you 16 are looking for a much smaller amount? 17 A Well, this is not a standard analysis at 1 3 all. 1 9 Q While we are on thesubject ofanalytical 20 methods, you were involved in the American Society 21 for Testing of Materials? 22 A Surely. 23 MR. MC CONNELL: Let's mark this as 207. 24 Longoria & Goldstine 236 1030 Chicago STLCOPCB4023504 181 1 (The document above referred to 2 was marked Deposition Exhibit 3 No. 207 for Identification.) 4 By Mr. Me Connell: 5 Q Marked as Exhibit 207 is a form latter of 6 three pages with a fourth page containing a list 7 of addressees dated January 23, 1976, signed by a 8 James Mieure, M-i-e-u-r-e. 9 A I have heard of him, yes. 10 Q And if you look at this, it refers to a 11 round robin testing of certain analytical 12 procedures regarding PCBs. Did you have anything 13 to do with that? 14 A Well, I was retired by 1976, but I knew 15 about this, and so on and so forth. 16 Q The idea of the round robin, I take, is 17 to come up with an analytical procedure that will 18 produce consistent results from one laboratory to 19 the next? 20 A The reliability and the reprocuccability, 21 both are to be established statistically on these 22 methods. I was chairman of this committee, D-27, 23 before I retired. So I am familiar with all of 24 this, yes, and you do this with a round robin. Longoria & Goldstine 236 1030 Chicago STLCOPCB4023505 132 1 Q In other words, you take a sample and 2 divide it into the relevant number of parts and 3 send the same material to all the laboratories, 4 and they turned their results in? 5 A Yes. Then you run a statistical 6 analysis, which is what this is. 7 Well, there is a deviation, and so forth. 3 And through this process you establish some ides 9 of the reproduceability and reliability of this 10 methodology, so you can set a spec against it and 11 know where you are. 12 Q You are determining that if you have a 13 particular report according to this procedure, 14 then you know what the margin of error is? 15 A Right. IS Q Around that reported value? 17 A And all through the years this was very 1 8 much a part of my work, was this type of thing. 19 o Not only with respect to PCBs, but other 20 materials as well? 21 A No. I am talking wi-th respect to PCP.s 22 and dielectric at ASTM, American Society for 23 Testing of Materials, and also world-wide at the 24 International Electrotechnical Commission, which Longoria & Goldstine 236 1030 Chicago STLCOPCB4023506 183 1 was an extension of this NEKA, IEEE, and ANSI, 2 from this country world-wide to all countries 3 interested in using PCBs, so that the methodology 4 would be disseminated. 5 Q The particular methodology that is 6 discussed in Exhibit 207, is that for analysis of 7 the pure product or for water sample analysis? 8 A Well, it says here water, round robin 9 testing of the water portion of ASTM. This had to 10 do with analysis of environmental material for 11 polychlorinated biphenyls. So it wasn't only the 12 pure PCBs. It was a sample, evidently, from the 13 environment. 14 Q This is the same sort of analysis that 15 you did for Westinghouse in Exhibit 206 that we 16 discussed? . . 17 A Yes, it would be the same sort of a 18 thing. 19 Q Marked as Exhibit 157 are two letters 20 identical except for the addressee, dated March 7, 21 1974, from Cumming Paton. One of them is to K. 22 Sheppard of Westinghouse, and the other one is to 23 N.H. Smith of Westinghouse, and then attached to 24 the two letters is a multipage document entitled Longoria & Goldstine 236 1030 Chicago STLCOPCB4023507 1 84 1 Minutes of Meeting on Proposed PCB Effluent 2 Standards, and Mr. Benignus is shown as the 3 recipient of a blind copy of this. 4 I will ask you if you recognize that 5 document. 6 This is before you retired, was it not? 7 A Shortly before I retired, yes. 8 Q And I take it the PCB effluent standards 9 meeting that is referred to there is something 10 other than the ANSI C-107? 11 A Yes* oh, yes, yes. 12 Q Was that meeting done in response to the 13 EPA proposed standards that were published in late 14 1973, if you know? 15 A I don't know, but it sounds reasonable. 16 I don't know. I wasn't active at this stage any 17 more. 1 8 Q Okay. To your knowledge did Monsanto 19 respond to the EPA's proposed effluent standards? 20 A I don't quite understand. What is it you 21 are asking? 2 2 Q Well, as I understand the process, the 23 EPA publishes a proposed standard in the Federal 24 Register and they give you 90 days or so in which Longoria & Goldstine 236 1030 Chicago STLCOPCB4023508 ri ' L. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 13 19 20 21 22 23 24 135 to submit a written comment, or some other kind of appropriate response. A Oh, to what is in the Federal Register? Q To what is in the Federal Register, and then they either decide to adopt what they published before, or they revise it in response to the comments received, or they give up on the idea altogether after the comment period has expired. My question is when the proposed standards were published, first published in the Federal Register, did Monsanto submit some kind of a response to the EPA, if you know? A I don't know. I wasn't active in this. I really don't know. Q Okay. Other than as a person who was, I forgot how you described it, the technical resource person with respect to PCBs -- is that a fair statement? A Fair enough. Q -- did you have any active role in preparing of the PCB labeling that went on Monsanto's products? A I didn't prepare the label, but I knew what the labeling was about and v/hat was being Longoria & Goldstine 236 1030 Chicago STLCOPCB4023509 136 1 done. I was cognizant of that. 2 Q Did anybody ask for your input in the 3 preparation of those? 4 A No. 5 Q Okay. But theykept you advised of 6 revisions, and so forth? 7 A Sure;I v/as cognizant of that. S Q Did you ever have anything to do with the 9 Monsanto Corporate Management Committee, the CMC, 10 so to speak? 11 A No. 12 Q That is probably a blessing, based or. 13 what we heard from the witness yesterday. 14 We talked a little bit this morning about 15 closed systems, capacitors and transformers being 16 closed systems, and during the time that you were 17 involved with PCBs at Monsanto did you ever come 1 8 in contact with the term closed loop or closing 19 the loop, as a way of controlling PCB 20 environmental discharges? 21 A Well, I have heard this term used, yes. 22 Q What did it mean to you? 23 A I think to me it meant beyond the face 24 that a capacitor is indeed a hermetically sealed Longoria & Goldstine 236 1030 Chicago STLCOPCB4023510 r L. 9 137 1 closed system, and a transformer is a sealed 2 closed system. I think closing a loop would 3 indicate that the material be confined within the 4 manufacturing process and procedure. That is how 5 I would interpret it. 6 Q Let me show you diagram No. 4 to Exhibit 7 176, which we marked earlier, and I would ask you 8 if you have ever seen that diagram before. 9 A No. Did this come after I retired? 10 Q No. It came at a level that probably was 11 above you in the organization. This is the CMC 12 that I was talking about. 13 Is there anything else I ought to as!: you 14 about that I haven't mentioned? 1 5 A Well, yes, this was up there a bit. 16 Q By the time you retired, was Monsanto out 17 of the PC3 business altogether? 1 3 A I retired in '74 and, no, they were still 19 supplying the electrical industry. 20 Q But that was the only purpose for which. 21 they were selling the product at the time you 22 retired, is that right? 23 A This is correct. 24 Q Everything else had been dropped, or Longoria & Goldstine 236 1030 Chicago STLCOPCB4023511 133 r L. 1 there was some substitute product? 2 A There wasn't any substitute product. 3 Q For some of the other uses, for some of 4 the other non-electrical uses? 5 A Oh, well, God, there is no problem there. 6 The problem is here. There was no substitute. 7 Q To your knowledge, did Monsanto ever 3 develop a substitute? 9 A Not that got commercial, and neither did 10 anybody else; although for thirty years we tried 11 to find what other kind of a system might be 12 useful. We were not successful, neither were any 13 of the other people world-wide. 14 Q What do they make capacitors with now, if 15 you know? 16 A Yes, I know what they make them with. 17 You want me to answer that? 18 Q Yes. 19 A Well, all right. I will start this by 20 saying the capacitor uses -- the types of 21 capacitors that PCBs v/ere used for exclusively are 22 essentially three kinds. One was power factor 23 correction capacitors. This is what Westing house 24 made at Bloomington. Longoria & Goldstine 236 1030 Chicago STLCOPCB4023512 139 1 Those were the large ones that are op. the 2 utility lines and lines serving factories and 3 those sort of things. Those are the large 4 capacitors. 5 Then there are the motor run type 6 capacitors. They are used for appliances, large 7 appliances. This is again to relieve the stress 8 and strain on the power line so they don't burn 9 out. 10 Then finally the small capacitor is the 11 lighting, the ballast lighting capacitor. 12 Now, what is being used in the ballast 13 and motor run, like a washing machine, or some 14 other motor in a factory, is diethyl phthalate, 15 and as I recall, Westinghouse was probing and 15 trying to pursue, and I think have pursued the use 17 of isopropyl biphenyl, v/hich is a hydrocarbon. 1 8 Q In the power capacitors 19 A In the power capacitors. As far as I 20 know, that is what they are using now. And these 21 weren't easy things to come by in this industry. 22 It is a very involved and in fact critical thing 23 to probe out and establish that something 24 different can be used, how strong a dielectric do Longoria & Goldstine 236 1030 Chicago STLCOPCB4023513 190 1 we have here, because in the event of failure this 2 can be a very costly, in fact dangerous 3 experience. So this requires very thorough 4 testing and probing. 5 Q In fact, they did that when they switched 6 from 1242 to 1016? 7 A Well, this was not a critical -- those 8 materials were so similar, you know. In fact, we 9 said you can switch here, no problem at all, which 10 made it easy for these people. We as much told 11 them this is one on one interchangeable. You have 12 no design problem. But when you switch to some of 13 these other things you run into a difference in 14 capacitance, difference in stability, altogether 1 5 difference in handling characteristics. 16 MR. MC CONNELL: Okay, that's all I have. 17 MR. FRUEHWALD: Okay. 18 19 20 21 DEPOSITION CONCLUDED 22 23 24 Longoria & Goldstine 236 1030 Chicago STLCOPCB4023514 191 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT . SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA 2 INDIANAPOLIS DIVISION 3 THE CITY OF BLOOMINGTON, INDIANA; ) THE UTILITIES SERVICE BOARD OF ) 4 BLOOMINGTON, INDIANA; and MONROE ) COUNTY, INDIANA, 5 ) ) Plaintiffs, ) 6) vs. 7 ) Civ No. ) IP 83-9-C ) 8 WESTINGHOUSE ELECTRIC CORPORATION,) a Pennsylvania corporation; and ) 9 MONSANTO COMPANY, a Delaware ) corporation, ) 10 ) --------------------- flfiifiDdSDiSj1 11 12 I hereby certify that I have read the ' 13 foregoing transcript of my deposition given at the 14 time and place aforesaid, consisting of Pages 1 15 through 190, inclusive, and I do again subscribe 16 and make oath that the same is a true, correct and 17 complete transcript of my deposition so given as 18 aforesaid, as it now appears. 19 j- 2 0 v'"-' * PAUL G. BENIGNUS 2-1 SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO 22 before me thisday of, 198_________________________ . 23 24 NOTARY PUBLIC Longoria & Goldstine 236 1030 Chicago STLCOPCB4023515 F~ .- 192 1 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA ) NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS ) 2 EASTERN DIVISION ) STATE OF ILLINOIS ) 3 COUNTY OF C 0 0 K ) 4 5 6 7 SS: 8 I, Jesse A, Longoria, a notary public and 9 Certified Shorthand Reporter in and for the County 10 of Cook and State of Illinois, do hereby certify 11 that the aforesaid deponent was by me first duly 12 sworn to testify the whole truth, and that the 13 foregoing deposition was recorded stenographically 14 me and was reduced to typewriting by 15 computer-aided transcription under my personal 16 direction and supervision; and, that the said 17 deposition constitutes a true and accurate record 18 of the testimony given by said deponent. 19 . 20 I further certify that the reading and 21 signing of said deposition was not waived by the 22 deponent or counsel. 23 24 Longoria & Goldstine 236 1030 Chicago STLCOPCB4023516 193 1 I further certify that we I am not a 2 relative or employee or attorney or counsel of any 3 of the parties, or a relative or employee of such 4 attorney or counsel, or financially interested 5 directly or indirectly in this action, 6 7 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set 8 my hand and affixed my seal of office at Chicago, 9 Illinois day 10 1986 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Notary Pu /Certified snortiia'na Reporter Longoria & Goldstine 236 1030 Chicago STLCOPCB4023517