Document RGR2pJJxKGDK6xGbBa94XQ17

'Monsanto' r - ' moM inamc-location-pmonei S. g . Collins - A3ND - 4-38 60 SUBJECT June 3, 1982 cc- J. R. Condray G. D. Ingenthron REFERENCE T O : R. T. Berendt - E2ND T. M. Bistline - E2NJ Attached is a Q/A on Agent Orange. May I have your comments please. :cm Attachment \CWv t Sarah Gainer Collins n A t/<~ 7- CONFIDENTIAL <5-3-82 Q/A AGENT ORANGE 1. Q. A GOVERNMENT DOCUMENT SAYS THAT A SAMPLE TAKEN FROM THE AGENT ORANGE SUPPLIED BY MONSANTO WAS HIGHLY CONTAMINATED WITH DIOXIN. IS THIS CORRECT? ^ l\ r piHpom A. We are aware of one government document that^-shows-numerical ranges for irndiv idua:! samples va-r^uc,,/Agent Orange Q^lAZru^producers^ including & Monsanto product-. f7Ff\ 2. Q. WHAT IS MONSANTOrs OPINION OF THE DOCUMENT? A c We do n d X A n ow what. Jthe-- samples or numbers represent -^ __W e ^ p n j t k h o w how the sampTe s were takpn, how/th^y were analyze<rr^Ti^i>T<>t-oo,o^f6 1 1 owed or/wherher an' individual sample/was r^presentat-ive of t^r~pToduct^^oa<ie. Therefore, $ it is difficult to. -draw-- an--overadS-~-.co.nj3lusion7~~"'^--'-- ^ 3. Q. DOESN'T THE DOCUMENT SHOW THAT THE AGENT ORANGE USED IN VIETNAM WAS HIGHLY TOXIC AND CONTAMINATED WITH DIOXIN? We donJ_t~k-now-what-- they'd!o'xTns'humhers Represent because / r\J u jsr we don't know what .dioxins were-.found. (There are overJ75 isomers or --members of the dioxin family _^nd--only" one, 2,3,7.,S-Tetra-chlor'od^'benzo-p-jdipjtin^-or' jTCDDvis the isomer regulated by tile goyejchmentr'because,of^JAs to\icity. The anaiytical-'te'chhiquess^pyisolate TCDD were\not developed until--1979sS-ODhe government document is dated around^ 1977 ^ -and does not break^.down-the- diox in-numbers intoLsp.ecif.ic.T'tt-^ ^-- isomer-s-r--"-- ~ 4. Q. DID MONSANTO KNOW ITS PRODUCT WAS CONTAMINATED WITH DIOXINS? m-sa n t o _ p r o d u c e iL-th-e--eompem niL ST tf" AgeirL- O ia n -go , 2 , 4 , 5 -T a. nid ^ 2 * 7 4 ^ L ^c c,, o rd ijig _ to ...g o .Y erjim e n t_ ,sp ec if ic a tio n s ';';* " The p r o d u c t s ^ s u p p 'r i e d ^ t p t h e g o v e rn m e n t w e r e - o f *h i g h - q u a l i t y amLm et or su rp asse d ^ th e -sp ec if-ic a'fT b n s . At the tim e o f p r o d u c t i o n ~ we' an a l y z e d ^ t h e-'"2~-4., 5 - T 'comp oh e n t ~ s I ng s t a t e - o f - the^art-^^rechnology and d id T in d ^ v e ry low l e v e l s o f ^ d i x o i n s ^ t h - at,_.v,-.QXC,,con^.ide r c d -_-fro ;be in c o n s e f r oc n t i a -i-. / m a M i j ju&JLlcA j jl>4 .A U / s . vf . I a a /t~ft^ 6/ 3/82 - 2- 5. Q. DOESN'T THE FACT DIOXINS WERE FOUND MAKE ANY LEVEL FOUND SIGNIFICANT? / k \sometimes fbuiid in it/ \ 1th prp-Dlems. the time \ onents AGent/Orange fpr \ iitific ,eyidence a/problem 6. Q. HOW MUCH AGENT ORANGE DID MONSANTO PRODUCE FOR THE GOVERNMENT ^ A?^Monsanto supplied approximately 2r<P million gallons for the U.S .government between the years 1963 and 1969. 7. Q. DOES MONSANTO STILL PRODUCE EITHER 2,4,5-T or 2,4-D? A. .No. We got out of those businesses in 1970 for economic reasons. & Aj-Mu M l ml {bcu^*h M i U/ \ .( W to + Au-h ^ b i A