Document VjEw550QEZndkbRgGO7z8rRxp

STATE OF ALABAMA IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF ETOWAH COUNTY (Transferred from Calhoun County, Alabama} SABRINA ABERNATHY, et al. , Plaintiffs, versus CIVIL ACTION NUMBER CV-2001- 83 2 MONSANTO COMPANY, et al . , Defendants. / DEPOSITION OF CRAIG R. BRANCHFIELD The deposition of CRAIG R- BRANCHFIELD was taken before Janet F. Russo, as Commissioner, commencing at 10:00 a.m. on July 24, 2001, by the Plaintiffs, at the offices of Lightfoot, Franklin & White, The Clark Building, 400 North 20th Street, Birmingham, Alabama, pursuant to the stipulations set forth herein. Regional Reporting Service, Inc. 755 Walnut Street Gadsden, Alabama 35901-0755 3 1 INDEX 2 3 Stipulations 4 Reporter's Certificate Page 4 395 5 EXAM INATIONS 6 7 witness; Craig r. BRANCHFIELD Paqe 8 BY MR. STEWART - - . 9 E XH I B I TS 10 Plaintiffs' 11 Exhibit 1 12 Exhibit 2 Exhibit 3 13 Exhibit 4 Marked 228 247 334 375 5 Offered 14 No other exhibits were marked for identification, offered or attached as 15 exhibits hereto- 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. < 2 1 APPEARANCES 2 For the Plaintiffs: 3 DONALD W. STEWART, Esq 4 1131 Leighton Avenue Anniston, Alabama 36201 5 CHARLES CUNNINGHAM, Esq. 6 7 For the Defendants: a WILLIAM S. COX, III, Esq. LIGHTFOOT, FRANKLIN & WHITE, LLC 9 The Clark Building 400 North 20th Street 10 Birmingham, Alabama 35203 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 4 1 STIPULATIONS 2 IT IS STIPULATED AND AGREED, by 3 the parties, that the deposition of CRAIG R. 4 BRANCHFIELD may be taken before Janet F. 5 Russo, as Commissioner and Notary Public, 6 Alabama at Large, at Birmingham, Alabama, on 7 July 24, 2001, commencing at 10:00 a.in. 8 IT IS STIPULATED AND AGREED that the 9 signature to and reading of the deposition by 10 the witness is waived, the deposition to have 11 the same force and effect as if full 12 compliance were had with all laws and rules of 13 Court relating to the taking of depositions. 14 IT IS STIPULATED AND AGREED that it 15 shall not be necessary for any objections to 16 be made by counsel to any questions except as 17 to form or leading questions and that counsel 18 may make objections and assign grounds at the 19 time of trial or at the time said deposition 20 is offered in evidence or prior thereto. 21 IT IS STIPULATED AND AGREED that 22 notice of filing by the commissioner is 23 waived. REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. HARTOLDMON0031310 5 1 STATE OF ALABAMA, BIRMINGHAM, JULY 24. 2001 2 3 CRAIG R. BRANCHFIELD, 4 after having been first duly sworn, was 5 examined and testified as follows: 6 7 EXAMINATION 8 BY MR. STEWART: 9 Q. You are Craig Branchfield? 10 A, Yes. 11 Q. Can you give me a little bit of an idea 12 of your educational background and your 13 work history? 14 A. Sure. Starting with high school, 15 college? 16 Q. College is fine. 17 A. Well, I attended a school at the United 18 States Naval Academy in Annapolis where 19 I earned a bachelor of science degree in 20 physics. I graduated with merit. I was 21 in the top twenty percent of my class. 22 Q. What in? 23 A. It was a bachelor's degree in physics, REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC- 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 e 9 10 n 12 Q. 13 14 A. 15 0. 16 17 A. 18 19 20 21 22 22 relate to Naval nuclear power. And then I was able to qualify as a nuclear engineer officer in the Navy. After I left the Navy, I continued my education. I attended Washington University in St. Louis- And I received my master's degree in business, where I graduated once again high, in my class. I was accepted info the Beta Gamma Sigma Honor's Society. And that's the extent of my education. All right. Can you give me just a brief history of your work, employment? Sure. I assumed you served four years in the Navy. Did you leave the Navy? Five years in the Navy after I graduated from Annapolis. And I left the Navy back in 1992 and took a position -- I apologize. I have got a cough drop in my mouth. I have a sore throat. So if I'm chewing, I'm not trying to be rude. REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. * 6 1 is what my degree was in. 2 And fallowing my graduation from 3 the Academy, I was commissioned as an 4 officer in the United States Navy. 5 I went into the Navy's nuclear 6 power program. I attended the Navy's 7 nuclear power school in Orlando, fl Florida, for about six months in 9 postgraduate education. Primarily in 10 really a broad variety of subjects; from 11 engineering to chemistry to physics to 12 obviously reactor and physics types of 13 areas. 14 Following that I attended the 15 Navy's nuclear prototype school, where I 16 received six months of operational 17 experience in Naval nuclear proposal 18 systems. 19 While I was in the Navy I also 20 attended the Navy's nuclear engineer 21 officers school, where I just continued 22 that education in some of the 23 engineering and science subjects as they REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 3 1 Q. 2 A. 3 4 5 Q. 6 A. 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 That's okay. No problem. After I left the Navy I took a position with a company called Coin Acceptors in St. Louis. What? The company's name was Coin Acceptors. The position I took was as a test engineer, where I was responsible for developing testing programs for new products. Basically the company -- the products they produced were controllers and dollar bill validators and things like that you see in vending machines. And they come up with new products, and I test them to make sure they meet certain quality criteria. I held that job for about six months. I really lost interest in it, quite honestly. I didn't find it very challenging. So in January of '93 I took a job with Morrison Kanoots and Company. REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. HARTOLDMON0031311 9 1 They were working on a department 2 of engineering product in Weldon 3 Springs, Missouri, which iB just outside 4 of St. Louis. I took a job as a S construction engineer. 6 I was in charge of the -- I was 7 hired to be in charge of the operation S and maintenance of water treatment 9 systems that they had at this facility. 10 This was a facility that was being 11 essentially remediated by the Department 12 of Energy. 13 They used the facility in the past 14 for -- Well, it was used for a time by 15 the Army for basically building 16 munitions; TNT, primarily. 17 Then the Department of Energy 13 subsequently took it over and used it to 19 process broad uranium ore to get the 20 plutonium and highly enriched uranium 21 out of it before they would send it down 22 to Oakridge for use in whatever they use 23 it for down in Oakridge, Tennessee, I REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 11 1 2 3 4 5 <2. 6 A. 7 Q. 0 A. 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Q. 16 17 A. 18 19 20 21 22 23 I wasn't too involved in dealing with this. My primary role was in the operation of these water treatment plants. What did they do with that waste? With the 24 DNT? Yeah. My understanding was 1 that, they took the impacted soils, where they found impacted soil They would spread it out. And if you exposed this stuff to sunlight and ultraviolet radiation, it would break down naturally, is the way they were trying to manage it. what would they do with the radioactive waste? We would run it through, like I said, a water treatment system. And the radioactive particulates would bind -- we would run them through a clarification process, basically, where we would add palm or some things like that to it to make the little particles REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. . 10 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Q. S A. 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Q. 10 A. 19 Q. 20 A. 21 0. 22 23 A. believe, tied to nuclear weapons in some way, shape, or form. Anyway, they had left behind some -- there was radioactive waste, organic waste, things of that nature that were left behind at this facility. What kind of organic waste? It was primarily in the form of -- Well, there is one compound that sticks out in my mind that seemed to be a particular concern. It was a compound called 24 DNT. And I can't recall what the DNT stands for. But it was associated with the manufacturer of TNT, was my understanding. The primary contaminants -What' s TNT? Dynamite. What did they do with that? With the -That substance, that organic waste. Take it away? No. What we -- The primary means -- And REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Q. 11 A. 12 Q, 13 14 A. 15 16 17 IB 19 Q, 20 21 22 23 A. and the big particles -- they would settle out and form a sludge. And then we took this sludge and stored it. At the time I discontinued my employment there, the plan was to take this sludge, essentially stabilize it with concrete and fly ash and store it in a large disposal cell which they were constructing on site. On site? Right. When you left that company, I assume you say you left it at some point in time? Right. I worked there for approximately six years, up until 1998, when I took a position with Solutia as a manager of remedial projects. Of course, I have been working with Solutia since. Did you have any training in that time frame that we have just talked about, in '92 to '98, when you went with Solutia, in remediation? Well, my job was essentially a remedial REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. HARTOLDMON0031312 13 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 3 9 Q. 10 11 12 A. 13 Q. 14 A. 15 16 17 IB 19 Q. 20 21 A. 22 Q. 23 job. I was taking materials that were in the environment that we wanted to remove from the environment and place them in a stable form,- such that they could be controlled and managed and they wouldn't be available to the environment. So to that extent, that was my job for remediation. Other than your on-the-job training, did you have any training? I mean, did you go to any seminars -- Did I attend any specific Seminars. We would get training on the basics of RCRA, TOSCA, things of that nature to understand the -- you know, how you characterize hazardous materials and things of that nature. That's while you worked with this company? That's why I work with Solutia? That's while you worked with the company? ' REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 15 i 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 A. 16 Q. 17 ia 19 20 21 22 A. 23 background to find out what you know. If I ask a question that you don't understand, you have the perfect right to ask me to rephrase it. If you want to take a break at some time, you have a right to do that. If we can have this commitment: If I ask you a question and you don't ask me to rephrase it or don't say, "Donald, I don't understand it," then I'll assume that the answer you are giving is the correct one to what I'm asking you. Do we have that agreement? Sure. And one other thing that might help her. You have to speak out, verbalize what you say so she can take it down. Nodding your head is all right with me. But it's generally not all right with the court reporter. I understand. If I go down the wrong path, you guys just stop me and correct REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. * 14 1 A. 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Q. 14 15 A. 16 Q. 17 18 A. 19 Q. 20 A. 21 Q, 22 23 while I worked with Morrison and Kanoots I received that type training, that's correct. MR. COX: Make sure y'all don't talk over each other, because that makes Janet's job a lot better. THE WITNESS; I'm sorry. MR. COX: When Donald is guilty, I will talk to him. But right now you are guilty. MR. STEWART: Thank you, Buddy. (By Mr. Stewart) By the way, have you given a deposition before? No. This is my first time. The first time in the history of your association with this site? Yes. Have you ever given a deposition before? No. Of course, I'm here to ask you some questions about your work for particularly Monsanto -- but your REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 16 1 2 Q. 3 4 5 6 7 A. 8 9 Q. 10 A. 11 Q. 12 13 A. 14 Q. 15 16 A. 17 Q. 13 19 20 A. 21 22 23 me. We are here to find out what you know, Mr. Branchfield. Tell me, if you would, when you went to work in 1998 where you went to work. I went to work with Solutia at their corporate headquarters in St. Louis. Who was your immediate superior? Mike Foresman. Is he the one that actually interviewed you and hired you? Yes. What was your title when you went to work there? Manager of remedial projects. And when you say you worked in the headquarters there at St. Louis, what did you do? My primary role was to oversee Solutia1s participation in various Superfund related projects that we were involved in. I also oversaw our activities on REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. HARTOLDMON0031313 17 1 2 3 Q. 4 5 6 7 A. 8 9 10 Q. 11 A. 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Q. 19 20 21 22 A. 23 one RCRA facility investigation we were involved in. First, let me ask. you about the Superfund sites that you supervised. Were they under your immediate supervision, Mr, Branchfield? They were under my supervision from the perspective of Solutia's participation in the project. What does that mean? That means on a number of Superfund sites there is a number of potentially responsible parties. So Solutia was, on these sites, one of the potentially responsible parties. And we would participate in varying degrees, depending on the Can you list those sites for me that you supervised while you worked at the corporate headquarters after you went to work for them in 1990? Yes. Irli list as many as I can recall. There were a fait number of them, which REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 19 1 2 3 Q. 4 5 6 7 A. 8 9 10 11 12 Q. 13 A. 14 Q. 15 16 17 A. 18 19 20 Q. 21 22 A. 23 Monsanto at the time -- what their relation was to the site. You were working for Monsanto, or were you working for Solutia? Oh, that's a spin-off thing from -- Right. Monsanto -- I'm sorry, I'm talking over you. . Monsanto was the company that sent material to the site for purposes of being recycled. what was it they sent there? I don't know specifically, Mr. Stewart. Do you know what organic compounds they were looking at at the site that was the problem? I don't recall. Like I said, there is a long list of volatile organic compounds. I don't recall specifically. Had y'all assumed some responsibility for cleanup there? We had agreed to participate in the cleanup of that project. REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. - 18 1 2 3 4 5 6 Q. 7 A. a Q. 9 A. 10 11 12 Q. 13 14 15 A. 16 17 18 19 Q. 20 A. 21 Q. 22 23 A. I have since turned over to other people since I took the position down here. I will just start naming them. One was called the Spectron Galaxy Superfund site. Spectron -Galaxy, G-a-l-a-x-y. Where was that located? That's located in a town called Elkton, Maryland, E-l-k-t-o-n, which is about an hour outside of Baltimore, All right. What was the nature of the problem at that site that Solutia was involved in? That was -- that site was -- the main concerns on that site were related to volatile organic compounds that were in groundwater. What organic compounds? There was a long list of them. What was Solutia responsible for? What was y'all's problem? I don't recall specifically what REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 20 1 Q. 2 A, 3 4 5 6 Q. 7 8 9 A. 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 IS 19 20 21 22 23 What were you doing to clean it up? At the time I left the project, we were involved in the remedial investigation. characterizing the nature and extent of the groundwater contamination. What did y'all anticipate having to do? Did you have any determination at the time that you left? We had completed one activity where there was a creek that ran right through the middle of the site. Groundwater was discharging into this creek. It was in the bottom of really a very high valley. And we had just -- One project we completed while I was participating on this project was to line Che creek with layers of HDPE liner, a real heavy liner material, and restore the creek ecologically. And we also installed a collection system under the creek to collect the groundwater and treat it. And we anticipated in areas where REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. HARTOLDMON0031314 21 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 a 9 Q. 10 A. n 12 13 14 15 16 17 19 19 20 21 22 Q. 23 the groundwater was not flowing to the creek that we would also, upon completion of the remedial investigation feasibility study --a likely alternative was to collect that groundwater and treat it also in the facility that we had already built for that purpose. what was the cost of that to Solutia? Solutia's share of the project itself was approximately seven percent. The cost of the -- that particular remedy, as I recall, was on the order of three to four million dollars. That would include construction of the stream liner system itself and the water treatment system. So seven percent of that for that particular piece of work was approximately three hundred thousand dollars, somewhere in that neighborhood. What did y'all anticipate to be the cost of the whole thing? REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 23 1 2 A. 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Q. 18 A. 19 20 21 22 23 system? The reason for building a water treatment system was because before collecting the groundwater we needed to remove the contaminants from the groundwater. And a typical way to remove organic contaminants'from, groundwater is through an activated carbon system. where you run the water through carbon granules, and the organic material in the water will adhere to the carbon. That's the type of system we set up. It was a way to -- We had to collect the water and do something with it. And that was an appropriate measure to take. What was the liner put there for? The liner was put there to keep the water underneath the creek, the groundwater that was discharging from going up into the creek. we didn't want it to get into the creek and migrate downstream. So we REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 4 22 1 A. 2 3 4 5 6 7 0 9 10 Q. 11 12 A. 13 14 15 Q. 16 17 A. IS Q. 19 20 A. 21 22 23 Q. We had done a cost estimate as part of a diminumous, an attempt to reach a settlement with diminumous parties or parties who had contributed very little to the site. The cost estimate that was reached to complete the project, as I recall, was approximately thirty-five million dollars. What kind of area are you talking about cleaning up? The size of the project site was -- I don't know the exact size. I'd say. ballpark, twenty acres. How long was the stretch of creek that you lined? Approximately a quarter of a mile. And the cost of that was three to four million dollars to do that pare of it? To do that and to build a water treatment system, which we were using to treat the water that was collected. Why did you build a water treatment REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 24 1 2 3 4 5 6 Q. 7 a 9 A. 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 were able to capture it underneath and then treat it and remove those materials before we would then subsequently discharge it to the creek after it was treated. Okay. Did the organic matter or substance come from a landfill that was -- or a plant site? No. It was --my understanding of what the gentleman did who owned the property was he would take organic --or by-products from manufacturing processes from a variety of different companies; Monsanto, which was one of them. And then he would recycle that -- What he would do -- I don't know if he was trying to recover certain materials or what, honestly. But he would store drums of this material on the site. And some of these drums would leak. They would get into the soils and subsequently migrate into the groundwater water. That was the REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. HARTOLDMON0031315 25 1 2 3 Q. 4 A. 5 6 Q. 7 8 A. 9 Q. 10 11 A. 12 13 14 15 IS 17 Q. 10 19 20 21 22 A. 23 primary source of Che contamination at the site. what did he get from Monsanto? What did the owner of the property get from Monsanto? Yeah, what kind of things in drums did he get from Monsanto? I don't know specifically. You don't remember the organics -- It wasn't PCBs, was it? No. There were not PCBs. These were volatile organic compounds. As I recall, there weren't a large number of semi-volatile compounds they were addressing. They were primarily volatile in nature. Monsanto had given him drums to be recycled. How is it y'all got involved in that situation if you didn't have anything to do with the recycling? Well, when Monsanto became involved, I was not employed'. So I don't know the REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 27 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Q. 14 15 A. 16 Q. 17 A. 18 Q. 19 20 A. 21 22 23 both sides of the creek, as you got away from the creek, maybe a couple of hundred yards from the creek -- it wasn't that far -- on both sides there was big hills. And of course, when it would rain. the groundwater, just the natural gradings from those hills would flow towards the creek. And as it flowed underneath the site, it would pick up materials as it percolated down through the soils. So it came through the natural flow of water underground? That's correct. And ultimately wound up in the creek? Yes. How did y'all find out that stuff was coming from the site, do dye tests? I don't know if any dye tests were done. Mr. Stewart. To the best of my knowledge they were not done. Much of this work was done before REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. - 26 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 q. 8 9 A. 10 11 12 Q. 13 14 15 A. 16 17 18 19 20 Q. 21 22 A. 23 specifics. In general, when there is a site like this that is designated a Superfund site, the EPA identifies companies who sent materials to the site. And under the CERCLA laws they can -Y'all got involved under the CERCLA. I understand the CERCLA. Right. That's the process under which Monsanto became involved and subsequently Solutia. I was asking you if the recycling facility was located above the creek. Topographically -Topographically it was on the border of the creek. It did sit slightly above. There was a grade there. But it was a very slight grade. It was right on the banks of the creek. How is it that the groundwater got into the creek if that was the case? The creek itself was at the very bottom of a large valley. In other words, on REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 28 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Q. 11 12 A. 13 14 15 16 17 18 Q. 19 20 21 A. 22 23 I became involved with the project. But my understanding is that testing was done of the surface water, and we were detecting these compounds in the surface water. We would subsequently install monitoring wells to determine what the concentrations were in the groundwater. That's how we were able to determine the source of the materials. What was the nature of the ground under that recycling facility? There was a certain amount -- I can't recall the exact depth. But overburden soils, just regular soils. And then it was at really a fairly shallow -- at roughly twenty feet or so we started to hit bedrock. And when you hit the bedrock, is that where the stuff was pooling up and then picked up by the water and taken off? Yeah. I mean, the groundwater -- the bedrock would act as a barrier to keep further vertical migration of the REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. HARTOLDMON0031316 29 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Q. 11 A. 12 Q. 13 14 15 16 17 A. 18 19 Q. 20 A. 21 22 23 groundwater from occurring. So the groundwater didn't flow on the surface of the bedrock. There were some fractures in the upper portions of the bedrock which would see some groundwater flow. But it was really small in nature compared to the groundwater flowing through the overburden soils. What was the next site? There was two other sites. Before I leave that, you talked about the creek and you talked about the treatment facility. What else did y'all do there to remediate that site? At the time I left, the site, I believe that was all that had been done. What did you contemplate doing? What we were potentially looking at -We had just finished up the remedial investigation and beginning to conduct a feasibility study to determine what the REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC- 31 1 Q. 2 3 4 5 6 7 a 9 10 11 A. 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 Q. You had three to four million dollars that y'all put in this creek. You indicated the total thing was going to cost you about thirty-five million dollars. Where were you going to spend that other thirty-one million dollars? That's an awful lot of money for twenty acres. I just wanted to know where you were going to do it. The bulk of that cost, Mr. Stewart, would have come from the long-term operation and maintenance for running the groundwater treatment system. For those types of estimates we calculate a thirty^year present value for 0 and M costs. I can't recall the details from the cost estimate we did. But that's typically the biggest chunk of that portion of the money, is those long-term 0 and M processes. Operation of the monitoring well? REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. , 30 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Q. 20 21 22 A. 23 different remedial alternatives would be, I think some of the technologies we were looking at -- Although until we complete the feasibility study, you can't be sure. But some of the technologies we were looking at were soil vapor extraction. Certainly we were looking at the potential for additional groundwater collection, particularly in that narrow layer of fractured bedrock. It appeared there was some groundwater flow in there that we felt would be prudent to capture. And potentially capping the site with a layer of soil or asphalt or whatever was found to be the most effective cap. Was any soil taken off the site and placed in someplace like Emelle in Alabama? To the best of my knowledge, no soil was taken off site. REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 32 1 A. 2 3 4 5 Q. 6 7 A. 8 9 10 11 Q. 12 A. 13 Q. 14 A. 15 Q. 16 A. 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 Q. Operation of the groundwater treatment system and continuing, like you pointed out, the monitoring wells, that's correct. Where is the next site that y'all looked at that you were supervising? I was supervising our participation in two Superfund sites. One was called Bluff Road. Another was called Dixiana. Those were both located in -Two Superfund sites? Yes. I didn't get the names. The first one was Bluff Road, B-l-u-f-f. Where is that? That was located in the vicinity of Columbus. I can't remember if it was Columbia or Columbus, South Carolina. Whatever the capital of South Carolina is, MR. CUNNINGHAM: Columbia. THE WITNESS: Yeah. And the other one was? REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. HARTOLDMON0031317 33 1 A. 2 3 4 Q. S 6 A. 7 Q. 8 A. 9 10 11 12 13 14 IS 16 Q. 17 A. 18 19 q. 20 A. 21 Q. 22 A. 23 Was called Dixiana, D-i-x-i-a-n-a. That was also located in the vicinity of Columbia, South Carolina. Did y'all inherit these sites from Monsanto? Yes. And what was your problem at Bluff Road? Bluff Road was a similar problem. I'm not too familiar with the past at Bluff Road. By the time I became involved, the remediation had been completed at Bluff Road. We were primarily in an operations and maintenance phase of the groundwater treatment system. What was the problem at Bluff Road? It was once again volatile organic compounds in groundwater. Do you know what the compound was? Not specifically, no. Do you know how it got there? Same, similar to what I described to you at spectron Galaxy, where a gentleman REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 35 1 2 3 4 5 Q. 6 A. 7 Q. 8 9 A. 10 11 12 13 14 Q. 15 16 A. 17 18 19 Q. 20 A. 21 22 Q. 23 A- gentleman that owned Bluff Road owned Dixiana also. The same types of operations, the same types of materials we were concerned with. What was his name? I don't recall his name. Do you know what the cost was? Was it complete when you came aboard? it was also complete. We, once again, just had a groundwater treatment system that we were operating. It was in an operations and maintenance phase. And what had been contaminated at Bluff Road? Once again, it was groundwater. groundwater contamination from leaking -Was a creek involved? No. In this particular case there was no creek involved. What about Dixiana? No. There was no creek involved at REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. * 34 1 2 Q. 3 A. 4 Q. 5 A. 6 Q. 7 A. 8 9 10 ii 12 Q. 13 14 A, 15 16 17 18 19 20 Q. 21 22 23 A. used to collect -Another recycling facility? That's correct, yes. You don't know what Monsanto sent there? Not specifically, no. What was the cost of that one? Our cost -- Once again, we had approximately a seven percent share of the cost at that site. And our cost on an annual basis was on the order of twenty-five thousand dollars a year. What was the initial cost that y'all put into the site to put in all this stuff? I don't recall, Mr. Stewart. When I became involved at the site, we had already -- all that work had been completed, and I was only looking over the -- overseeing our participation as it relates to the O and M of the site. Y'all had a seven percent interest in that. Dixiana, what was that? Once again, similar in nature. The REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 36 1 2 Q. 3 4 5 A. 6 7 8 Q, 9 A. 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 Dixiana. Were any residential properties located in or around any of the three sites you've already mentioned? Yes. At Spectron Galaxy and Dixiana there were residential properties in close proximity. What did you do with those? At Spectron Galaxy, specifically, a number of those residents had wells in their yards that they used to get drinking water. And we would sample those wells on a regular basis. I think it was quarterly that we sampled those wells. But all these properties -- Once again, these were properties that were kind of up on the hills at Spectron Galaxy. So they were essentially upgradient from where the contamination was; except for -- I think one property we never found anything. At least to the point where I was participating in REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. HARTOLDMON0031318 37 1 2 3 Q. 4 A. 5 6 7 8 Q. 9 10 A, 11 Q, 12 13 14 A. 15 16 17 18 Q. 19 20 A. 21 22 23 Q. the project we never found anything in any of their wells* what about at Dixiana? At Dixiana I'm not aware of any dealings we had with the nearby residents other than communicating with them, answering questions they had on a regular basis. They wanted to know what the hell y'all were doing there? Basically, yeah. What was the cost of Dixiana? You told us the cost of the other one. What was the cost at Dixiana? Our cost at Dixiana --We were -- Our share at Dixiana was approximately thirty-five percent of the total operating costs. . Y'all were a big producer there, then, weren't you? Right. There were four -- I believe four potentially responsible parties at Dixiana. What was your cost? REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC, 39 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Q. 10 A. 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Q. 21 A. 22 Q. 23 responsibility. Some of the names of them -- There was one called SRSNE, which stood for Solvent Recovery Site of New England. That was located in -- I think it was located in Massachusetts, if I recall correctly. It might have been Connecticut. 1'. What was the problem there? Once again, the problem there was -- the main problem at that particular site was what we call DNAPLs or dense non-aqueous phase liquids. It's essentially oil in a simplistic sort of term. It had settled down on top of the bedrock. And that was the primary effort there, was somehow managing that DNAPL there/ which, of course, impacts groundwater. Is that a Superfund site? Yes. That's also a Superfund site. All of these are, that you're mentioning? REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. + 38 1 A. 2 3 4 5 Q. 6 7 A. S Q. 9 10 A. 11 Q. 12 13 A. 14 15 16 Q. 17 A. 18 19 20 21 22 23 Our cost while I was involved with the project --we were rather small -- was on the order of ten to fifteen thousand dollars a year. Was that groundwater monitoring and treatment? Yes. Do you know what the cost of the project there was? No, I don't. I don't. What was the next site that you supervised? Let me think. There were several sites. One was called -- And these sites -I'll begin -What was that? I'll begin to name these sites too. But we were relatively what I would define as small players on these sites; on the order of one percent. So we really left the overall oversight of these projects to the larger -- the PRPs that had a larger REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 40 1 A. 2 3 Q. 4 A. 5 6 7 8 Q. 9 A. 10 11 Q. 12 A. 13 14 15 Q. 16 A. 17 Q. 18 A. 19 20 21 22 23 Q. All that I am mentioning at this time, that's correct. Do you recall what your cost was there? It was relatively low. Once again, we were only about a one percent share at that particular site . What was it? As I recall, our cost was maybe on the order of ten thousand a year. Okay. What was the next one? There was a -- let's see -- Another site I recall was called Old Southington Landfill. Old what? Southington, S-o-u-t-h-i-n-g-t-o-n. Okay. And on that particular site -- I don't know much that I can share with you. We were a very small percentage; less than one percent on that particular proj ect. Where was it located? REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. HARTOLDMON0031319 41 1 A. 2 3 4 5 6 7 Q. 8 A. 9 Q. 10 11 12 A. 13 Q. 14 15 A. 16 17 ia 19 20 21 Q. 22 A. 23 It was located in the vicinity of the Solvent Recovery Site that I just described to you. As I recall, there was some relation between those two sites. I can't recall specifically what it was. what was the next one? As far as -By the way, what was the substance y'all were trying to take care of at the Old Southington Landfill. I don't recall. Something Monsanto made or produced or put in that landfill? I don't recall. I mean, our participation at Old Southington was so small that whatever Monsanto contributed -- it was minor compared to what some of the larger employers at that particular site would have contributed. What's the next one? Let me try to recall. There was -- The other project I was involved on -- There REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 43 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Q. 8 A. 9 10 11 12 Q. 13 A. 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 the east. This was all stuff I looked over almost two years ago. So I'm going through my memory. One other project that I had responsibility for was our Motco site. What? It's called Motco, Mjo--t-c-o. That was a Superfund site that was located just outside of Texas City, Texas. Kind of in the Houston area. What was the problem there? It was similar as I have described to you before. There was a gentleman who back in the '50s and '60s collected materials for manufacturing facilities in the Texas City area. He had placed -- excuse me -- he had placed a number of these materials in a number of -- I'll call them sludge pits. And those sludge pits had subsequently impacted groundwater in the area. REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. . 42 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Q. 8 A. 9 Q. 10 11 12 13 14 A. 15 Q. 16 A. 17 10 19 Q. 20 A. 21 22 23 are a number of real minor ones. Mr. Stewart. They are so minor, if I thought about them once every three months --We just weren't a large player on those sites and didn't have a reason to participate to any great extent. Were they Superfund sites? Yes. Sites where y'all had placed some substance either in the landfill or recycling facility and it had gotten off your manufacturing facility and somehow gotten into the environment? That's correct. Do you remember where they were located? As I recall, most of the sites were located in the northeast. I don't recall -Excuse me. Go ahead. I was just going to say I don't recall having responsibility for any projects that were -- that were anywhere west of St. Louis. They were all primarily in REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 44 1 Q. 2 3 A. 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Q. 21 A. 22 23 And what had y'all done there to remediate that site? There were really three primary activities that were done to remediate that site. The first would be the -- Well, we capped the site. It was one thing we did. We installed a barrier wall around the perimeter of the site, a low permeability barrier wall to essentially control or eliminate to the maximum extent practical any flow of groundwater away from the facility. We installed a series of recovery wells, groundwater recovery wells around the perimeter of the site and recovered groundwater and then subsequently sent that to a water treatment system for treatment. What was the cost to Monsanto for that? At the Motco site I believe Monsanto spent approximately -- I want to say close to eighty million dollars REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. HARTOLDMON0031320 45 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 a 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Q. 17 A. 18 19 20 21 22 23 Q. remediating that site, Mr. Stewart. I'll preface that. I have to clarify something, because I know we had a lawsuit with one of our contractors at that site regarding a project that didn't work the way it was expected. This was all before my time. This was easily six or eight years before I became involved on the project or was even hired by the company. But there was a lawsuit. I'm not sure. I know that lawsuit was settled- I'm not sure if that settlement cost is a part of that eighty million dollars or not. Monsanto had to pay him? Yes. It was a change order which we didn't agree with, and it resulted in a lawsuit from the contractor. I believe it was -- Well, no. It wasn't settled. I believe it went to a jury. We were found -- Y'all lost? REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 47 1 Q. 2 A. 3 4 5 6 7 B 9 10 11 12 Q. 13 A. 14 Q. 15 A. 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 Q. What did it cost? I don't know the specific cost of installing the barrier wall. But there were some challenges with doing that in that we had to cross a number of highways that went around in the vicinity of the facility. We had to work in the vicinityof those, that when you are doing that type, of work that can add to the time and expense of the project. Was that a Superfund site? Yes, it was a Superfund site. So it is now Solatia's? That's correct. There were -- The Motco site was identified as a Superfund site very early in the -- very soon after the Superfund laws were established. I believe there were three or four other companies that were named as potentially responsible parties at Motco. They spent something in addition to the REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. . 46 1 A. 2 Q. 3 4 5 A. 6 7 8 9 10 A. 11 12 Q. 13 A. 14 15 Q. 16 A. 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 We lost, yeah. Tell me, if you would, how big that site was. Do you have an idea? And what was remediated, capped? The site was approximately -- I would guess on the order of sixty to eighty acres. Roughly, it was fairly large, a fairly large site, geographically speaking. And specifically what was capped was an area near the center of the site. How big was that? The capped area was probably on the order of fifteen acres. Where did you spend all the money? Well, the money was spent in a -- Well, the money was spent on a number of activities. One, installing a barrier wall around an eighty-acre perimeter is a fairly -- that's a fairly long distance to install a barrier wall that was about forty feet deep. REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 48 1 2 A. 3 4 5 6 Q. 7 A. 8 Q. 9 A. 10 11 12 Q. 13 14 15 16 A. 17 Q. 18 A. 19 20 21 22 23 Q. eighty million? No. Those companies -- And I don't know the details of this, other than I know Monsanto allowed them to buy out of the project. What did they buy out for? I don't know the specific costs. What were the companies? I believe either Amoco or Exxon might have been one of the companies. I don't recall who the other ones were. In other words, they paid money to Monsanto, and it still cost eighty million after Amoco or Exxon put money in the kitty? Yes. Any other sites? There was one site I was involved in in St. Louis. It was our Queeny site. That was a RCRA facility investigation that I was overseeing at our Queeny plant. What were you looking for there, at REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. HARTOLDMON0031321 49 1 2 A. 3 4 5 6 7 q. 9 9 A. 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 Queeny? It was a variety of things. There was some volatile organic compounds. There were some metals that we were looking for. And there was one small area where we were looking for PCBs. where would the PCBs come from in Queeny? At this particular point there was a transformer that had been documented as it had leaked. And the transformer was a fairly large transformer. It had leaked PCBs into the ground. They had been discovered a couple of years earlier when the transformer had been removed and replaced. But not all of them had been cleaned up. So that was one area that we were --At the point in time where we had submitted a work plan to the EPA for conducting the RCRA facility investigation, that was one area we had identified for further sampling, to REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 51 1 2 Q. 3 4 5 A. 6 Q 7 S A. 9 Q. 10 A. 11 12 013 14 A. 15 Q16 A. 17 Q. IS 19 A. 20 Q21 A. 22 Q. 23 A . recall right now. Mr. Branchfield, were there other people who worked under Mr. Foresman similar to you in the corporate headquarters? Yes . How many who did work similar to what you did? Three or four. Let me think. What are their names? 1 Well, my current supervisor, Steve Smith. And did Mr. Smith supervise sites like you did? Yes. Were they Superfund sites? In some cases, yes. Were they sites that had previously been Monsanto's but then became Solutia's? Yes. Do you know how many he had in number? No, I don't. Who else? There is a gentleman named Jerry REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 50 1 2 3 Q. 4 A. 5 Q. 6 7 a A. 9 Q. 10 A. 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Q. 20 A. 21 22 Q. 23 A. better define the extent of the PCBs from that transformer spill. Is the Queeny plant located in Missouri? Yes. Did you deal with the counterpart to ADEM in Missouri on that RCRA site, or did you deal with the EPA? We dealt primarily with the EPA. Why? At the time the State of Missouri hadn't been given RCRA authority by the EPA. They were in the process -- I believe right about the time we were doing this work the state had just granted RCRA authority to the state. And at the time I left the project they were sort of in a transition phase. But the EPA maintained them, 1 believe. That was in '98? 1993 to late '99 that I was involved in that particular project. Any others? Those are the only sites that I can REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 52 1 2 Q. 3 A. 4 Q. 5 6 A. 7 Q8 A. 9 Q. 10 ii 12 A. 13 Q. 14 A. 15 16 Q. 17 A. IS Q. 19 20 A. 21 Q 22 A. 23 Q. Renaldi. Still there? Yes . And did he also supervise Superfund sites? Yes. Do you know how many he supervised? I don't know the specific number, no. Would the number be comparable that Mr. Smith and Mr. Renaldi supervised to you? Do y'all sort of even it out? I believe so, yes. who else worked there? As far as project managers go, there is a gentleman named Mike Light. Mike? Light, L-i-g-h-t. Okay. And did he do the same thing you did? Yes. Have Superfund sites too? I believe so, yes. That had previously been Monsanto's? REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. HARTOLDMON0031322 53 1 A. 2 Q. 3 A. 4 5 Q. 6 7 A. 3 Q. 9 A. 10 11 Q. 12 A. 13 14 15 16 Q. 17 A. IS Q. 19 20 21 22 23 A. Yes. who else? I believe those are the only ones that worked out of St. Louis. Did you have people that worked elsewhere? Yes. Sort of project managers like you are? Similar to me, yes, that's correct. Of course -- Well, yeah, that is correct. How many did you have of those? There were --at one point there were four that I'm aware of that worked off-site similar to how I'm working at Anniston. At big projects? Yes. Did they have more than one? MR. COX: More than one project -- MR. STEWART: Yes. MR. COX: '-or more than one person? If they had more than one, Mr. Stewart, REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 55 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 a 9 10 Q. n 12 A. 13 14 15 16 17 Q. 18 A. 19 20 Q21 A. 22 23 they made, Donald. MR. STEWART: I don't have to imagine, Buddy. MR. COX: The nitroglycerin -- I think that's the facility. Isn't that right, Charlie? MR. CUNNINGHAM:1 '(Nods head affirmatively.) (By Mr. Stewart) Tell me who else worked there, Mr. Branchfield. There was a gentleman named Larry Adams. He had some projects that I believe were in -- I want to say the San Francisco area. I knew they were in California. I believe it was the San Francisco area. Who else? For a period of time there was a gentleman named Ed Dondzilla. Ed who? How do you spell it? Dondzilla, D-o-n-d-z-i-l-l-a. He has since retired from Solutia. REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. * 54 1 2 Q. 3 A. 4 5 6 7 Q. 8 A. 9 10 11 12 13 Q. 14 A. 15 16 17 Q. 18 A. 19 20 21 22 23 I don't believe but maybe three or four. Three or four? They would have one major project they were working on. They might have a couple of smaller projects that didn't require much time. Who were those people? Well, at the time I was working in St. Louis there was Alan Faust who worked in Anniston, my predecessor. There was a gentleman named Tony Tuck who works at some projects we have in West Virginia. Where is that? The name of the facility is called Nltro. I don't know specifically where it is in West Virginia. what's the problem there? I don't know. I'm not familiar with that project. MR. CUNNINGHAM: Nitro is actually the name of the town. It's a quaint name for a city. MR. COX: You can imagine what REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 56 1 2 3 04 5 6 7 8 9 A. 10 Q. 11 12 13 14 A. 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Q. 23 But he worked at our Brio site, which is outside of Houston. I know about that. Now, did these gentlemen -- Mr. Smith, Renaldi, Light, Faust, Tuck, Adams, and Dondzilla -- did those gentlemen work on sites that had previously been owned by Monsanto but were transferred over to Solutia? Yes. And so the responsible party at the time, either EPA or the state or a combination of both that said, "Clean it up," was Monsanto? I believe that would be correct. There may be some sites that were identified after -- after we spun off from Monsanto. And I'm not sure whether Monsanto would have been named as the PRP or not at those sites. But certainly at past sites Monsanto was named as the PRP. Tell me, if you would, if you know if the number got as high as perhaps a REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. HARTOLDMON0031323 57 1 2 3 A. 4 5 Q. 6 7 S 9 10 11 A. 12 13 14 15 16 17 10 19 20 21 22 23 Q. hundred sites that Monsanto transferred over to Solutia. I believe that would be an accurate estimate. Is it fair to say that there was no manufacturing going on at any of these facilities; just cleanup or some manufacturing going on at some of these hundreds of sites; or just cleanup maybe of landfills or something like that? I believe most of them would have just been cleanups. Obviously there was some work going on at the facilities that were still being operated by Solutia. Obviously you are aware of the work at Anniston that is going on. And there are other plants sites. I was involved at the Queeny plant when there were still manufacturing operations taking place there, for example. I believe you indicated, REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 59 1 2 3 4 Q. 5 6 7 3 9 A. 10 Q. 11 12 A. 13 14 Q. 15 16 A. 17 Q. 10 19 20 21 22 23 charging your company. He does it every once in a while just to keep his hand in. (By Mr, Stewart) If you would, Mr. Branchfield, tell me if during that business course you read or studied about somebody who would buy sites like this from a company. - . I don't recall specifically. You really don't recall any in your studies, do you, Mr. Branchfield? Not in my studies. No, not in my studies at Washington University. Well, you had a pretty good course in business there, didn't you? That's correct. Well, you talked to somebody there; Mr. Foresman, I assume, when you went and took the job. What benefit did he tell you -what was the reason he told you that he took this -- this company, rather, took this stuff off of Monsanto? What was REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC, < 58 1 2 3 4 5 A. 6 Q. 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 Mr. Branchfield, that before you went to work for this first company and then for Monsanto you took some courses at Washington University in business? That's correct. During your course of study there, did you ever know of a business transaction in your studies where somebody would buy somebody else's problems,- similar to what we have talked about here? Did you ever run across one? MR. COX: Object to the form. You can answer if you understand the question. I'm just making a technical objection for the record. Go ahead and answer. THE WITNESS: Could you repeat the question, please? MR. COX: He was listening to me. I'm sorry. MR. STEWART: He has to do that because of the money he is REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC- 60 1 2 A. 3 Q. 4 5 6 7 8 A. 9 10 Q. 11 A. 12 13 Q. 14 15 A. 16 Q. 17 18 A. 19 20 21 Q. 22 A. 23 the reason they did that; do you know? I have no idea. It's our understanding -- And we are trying to figure this out. But it's our understanding that this company was spun off from Monsanto. Is that your understanding? Yes. Solutia was spun off as an independently traded company. And that occurred about '97? That's correct. September of '97, 1 believe. With how many of these sites do they have lawsuits pending? I don't know. Are there a number of them where there are lawsuits pending out of the hundred? The only one I'm familiar with. Mr. Stewart, was Anniston, quite honestly. Has everything been resolved elsewhere? I can't say for sure that everything has been resolved elsewhere. I can say the REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. HARTOLDMON0031324 61 1 2 3 Q. 4 5 A. 6 Q. 7 3 9 10 A. 11 12 13 Q. 14 15 16 17 A. 13 Q. 19 A. 20 Q. 21 22 23 projects I was involved with, there was no pending litigation that I'm aware of. But you don't know about the other sites? That's correct. Tell me, if you would, Mr. Branchfield, if Mr. Smith ever told you why they took these sites, why Solutia took these sites. No. I've never had any conversations with Mr. Smith about that particular subject. During the time that you were there working did Monsanto pay any part that you know of in the cost of operating any of these one hundred facilities? Not that I'm aware of. So Solutia took the whole apple? To the best of my knowledge, yes. Is there any money to be made to your knowledge from the sites that you supervised? MR, COX: Object to the form. REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 63 1 Q, 2 A. 3 Q. 4 A. s Q. 6 7 A. 3 Q. 9 10 11 12 A. 13 14 15 16 17 18 Q. 19 20 21 22 23 A. Would Mr. Smith be familiar with that? I don't know. Would Mr. Foresman? I don't know. Would Mr. Klausen? Do you know who that is? I know who Mr. Klausen is, yes. Would he be familiar'with why they would do such a stupid thing like that, take this liability on? MR. COX: Object to the form. I don't know. I was not a member of Solutia at the time of the spin. I really have no familiarity with any details related to the spin or what the individuals' roles were as associated with the spin from Monsanto. Are they all older and just don't know what they're doing? Could you tell us what the situation is, Mr. Branchfield? Do you have an idea? MR. COX: Object to the form. I can't tell you. REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE r INC. 62 i A. 2 3 4 Q. 5 6 7 A. 3 Q. 9 A. 10 Q. 11 12 A. 13 14 Q. 15 16 17 10 19 A. 20 Q. 21 A. 22 23 If I could clarify your question. Do you mean was there any revenue being realized by Solutia? Any revenue generated off those sites that y'all were operating that were Superfund sites? Not that I'm aware of. Dead cost? Yes. I didn't go to business school. But would you call that a liability? Certainly these would be -- I would call these environmental liabilities. Wouldn't it be fair to say that Solutia ate those environmental liabilities; just took it on the chin for Monsanto? Isn't that right? MR. COX: Object to the form. Once again, I'm not familiar with the -The details? -- the bases or the details of why things were done the way they were done during the spin from Monsanto. REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 64 1 Q. 2 3 4 A. 5 Q. 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 A. 16 17 13 Q. 19 A. 20 Q. 21 22 23 Are these people who now work for Solutia people who used to work for Monsanto? Is there someone specific or in general? The people who -- Did they just move down the hall? Is that basically what they did, the folks that run Solutia? I mean, it's not a new crop of fellows. It's some guys that had previously worked for Monsanto that said, "They've got a good deal for us. They have got all these Superfund sites. and they are going to form a company and operate them." My understanding is that the leadership of Solutia worked for Monsanto prior to the spin. Prior to the spin-off? That's correct, yes. Well, who would know, in your best judgment, best about why this deal was made? MR. COX: Object to the form. REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. HARTOLDMON0031325 65 1 A. 2 3 4 5 6 Q. 7 3 9 10 A. 11 12 Q. 13 A. 14 Q. 15 16 A. 17 Q. ie A. 19 Q. 20 21 22 A. 23 I really don't know, Mr. Stewart. I'm not familiar with how these transactions take place or what the basis was for the spin. Any answer I gave would be just pure speculation. I understand. Let me ask you who was in management at the time you were there. Was a Mr. Felder there? Mr. Felder worked for Solutia when I joined the company, yes. Had he previously worked for Monsanto? I believe sor yes. Do you think he might have some knowledge about that? Once again, I don't know. What about Mr. Smi.th? I don't know if Mr. Smith would either. Well, Mr. Klausen is the money man, isn't he? He's the guy that handles the cash. He's the company's chief financial officer. ' REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 67 1 2 3 A. 4 5 6 7 a Q. 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 A. 17 18 19 20 Q. 21 A. 22 Q 23 A. than the other two, wouldn't you? MR. COX; Same objection. Once again, I don't know what Mr. Klausen's role was during the spin. Any answer I would give you would just be speculation, and there would be no basis for fact. Well, who was it that was- the president of the company at the time the spin-off took place? MR. COX; I'm sorry. I don't mean to interrupt. The president of Monsanto or Solutia? MR. STEWART; Well, either one. At the time we - - Solutia spun off from Monsanto the chief executive officer -and I believe he also had the title of president -- was Bob Potter. Of Solutia? of Solutia, that's correct. Is Mr. Potter still there today? Mr. Potter has retired. REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. * 66 1 Q. 2 3 4 5 6 A. 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Q. 14 15 16 17 ia A. 19 20 21 Q. 22 23 Would you think perhaps, based on your business experience and everything and experience with the company, that he might have some idea about the details of the deal? Once again, I don't know who had what role or responsibilities during the process of the spin. I wasn't working for the company at the time. And even in my current position, I would have no knowledge of what the details were of that particular process. Would he be the person who would more than likely have some information about it as opposed to perhaps Mr. Felder or Mr. Smith? MR- COX: Object to the form. Once, again, I don't know what Mr. Klausen's role would have been in the spin of the company. As the chief financial officer you would assume he would have more knowledge about the details of the transactions REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 68 1 Q. 2 A. 3 4 5 Q. 6 A. 7 Q. 8 A. 9 010 A. 11 Q. 12 A. 13 14 15 Q. 16 A. 17 Q. 18 19 20 A. 21 22 Q. 23 who took his place? John Hunter is now the chief executive -- John Hunter is the chief executive officer of Solutia. Was he there at Che time the company -Spun from Monsanto? -- spun from Monsanto? Yes. What was his position at that time? He was the chief operating officer. Who holds that position today? A gentleman by the name of Mike Miller is the chief operating officer of Solutia. what was he before that? I don't know. But he did work for Monsanto; and so did Mr. Hunter and so did Mr. Potter at one t ime? I know Mr. Hunter and Mr. Potter did. I'm not familiar with Mr. Miller's past. Now, when you came to Anniston, to this sice here, can you tell me what your REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. HARTOLDMON0031326 69 1 2 3 A. 4 5 Q. 6 A. 7 Q. a A. 9 Q. 10 A. 11 12 13 Q. 14 15 16 17 IB A. 19 Q. 20 21 22 A. 23 supervisor'3 name was? Who sent you down here? Mike Foresman was my supervisor when I was assigned to Anniston. Is that who you directly reported to? Yes. And what was his title? Director of remediation. And who took his place? since Mr. Foresman retired, Mr, Felder has assumed the role of director of remediation. So if we want to find out about some of these sites in a little more detail, Mr. Felder would be the one who today could probably tell us generally what these projects are. all about? He's the director of remediation. Would he be familiar in that capacity with what you are doing here in Anniston and what these other guys are doing? Yes. Mr. Felder is familiar with what I'm doing in Anniston. REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 71 1 2 3 4 A. 5 6 Q. 7 e A. 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Q. 16 17 A. 13 Q. 19 20 21 22 23 A. Mr. Foresman you reported -- And Mr. Felder, You report directly to them? At this time I report to Mr, Smith. And Mr. Smith reports to Mr. Felder. Well, let's see. What is Mr. Smith's role? Mr. Smith is -- I don'tr know if you could really see it in the title. I believe his title remains manager of remedial projects. But he is responsible for the activities of the other managers for remedial projects within Solutia. So you report to Mr, Smith, and he in turn reports to Felder? Yes. Is there anybody on-site, Mr. Branchfield, here in Anniston, who has the same kind of authority, responsibility that you do, as far as the Anniston site is concerned? No. I'm the project manager for all REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. . 70 1 Q. 2 A. 3 0. 4 A. 5 6 Q. 7 A. S 9 Q. 10 A. 11 12 13 14 15 16 Q. 17 A. 18 Q. 19 20 21 A. 22 23 Q. who did he report to, if you know? Mr. Felder? Yes, Mr. Felder reports to a gentleman named Jerry Hayden. Jerry who? Hayden. H-a-y-d-e-n, I believe, is the spelling. What is his title? I believe his title is something to do with corporate services. I don't know whether it's vice president of corporate services or director. I don't know the specific title. But it's corporate services, is the -One of these? -- organization he oversees. One of those presidents in waiting or something; an upper level management type person? Yes. He's an upper level management type person. There was nobody in between you and REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 72 1 2 3 Q. 4 5 6 A. 1 Q. 8 9 10 11 A. 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 remedial activities related to the Anniston site. So if any remediation goes on or anything is done on that site, then that responsibility falls to you? Yes, that's correct. And in that capacity can you tell me what you understood first had been done, if anybody told you, at the site when you first got here? When I first arrived at the site -- I would define that, Mr. Stewart, as before I started the turnover process with my predecessor, Mr. Faust. But when i was first offered the opportunity to come to Anniston, I was aware that we had manufactured PCBs at the Anniston facility for approximately fifty years, that there were several landfills adjacent to the facility that we were actively managing, and that we were currently undergoing a RCRA facility investigation to address REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC- HARTOLDMON0031327 73 1 2 3 4 5 <2. 6 A. 7 Q. 8 9 10 11 A. 12 Q. 13 A. 14 15 Q. 16 17 IS 19 A. 20 Q. 21 22 A. 23 potential migration of PCBs from the facility to off-site areas as well as looking at other constituents, potential concerns on the plant site itself. What were those? At the time -- when you say time, before -- I hate to interrupt you. But before we go too much farther, so that this is related in time to some point, when was that? This was approximately October of '99. That's when you first came to the site? That's when I first visited the site to learn a little more about it, yes. You were telling us other constituents y'all were looking for that migrated -- that might be migrating off the plant. Is that fair to say? Constituents we were looking at -- Which might be migrating off the facility? . That had a potential to, that we needed to investigate to have a better REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC- 75 1 2 3 4 5 Q. 6 7 9 3 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 10 A. 19 20 21 22 23 being collected by groundwater treatment systems that we had installed on the plant site itself and were being collected. How is it that you sit here today, Hr. Branchfield -- And you know a lot more about this stuff than I do. I came from a little old town'in Alabama of about five hundred and sixty-five people. I have always been a lawyer. And I don't understand the chemistry and the physics and all that kind of stuff, or the hydrology or anything like that. Charlie knows all of that. So you just consider me real dumb. But how is it y'all know y'all were collecting all that? Because we had monitoring wells that were down-gradient or downstream of the wells that we were collecting groundwater from. And the data we were collecting from those wells suggests Chat we were capturing that groundwater. REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. * 74 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 S 9 10 11 Q. 12 A. 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Q. 21 22 23 A. understanding * I knew that we had had a number of different manufacturing processes on the plant site that we had groundwater collection systems. Because for most of these constituents of potential concern that would have been a potential mode of transport other than PCBs. PCBs were primarily transported via surface water. Who told you that? I can't recall specifically where I learned that. That was just something I picked up. I would assume it was when discussing the site with some of our consultants to develop a better understanding of the science and engineering behind why and what we were doing. So the other constituents you were looking for left by the way of groundwater? They didn't leave the site. They were REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 76 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Q. 8 A. 9 10 11 Q. 12 A. 13 14 15 Q. 16 A. 17 IS 19 20 21 22 Q. 23 Plus we measured the level of the groundwater in the vicinity of these wells. Based on that level we can determine the direction the groundwater is flowing to help ensure we are capturing what we want to capture. How many wells have y'all got out there? I don't know the specific number. It's probably on the order of -- around fifty wells total. Fifty; or maybe it's a hundred? No. I don't think we are even close to a hundred, Mr. Stewart. It's definitely closer to fifty. Are you sure? Yeah. They serve a variety of different purposes. I'm talking about wells in a very broad term. Some wells collect water; some wells are just there to monitor levels of groundwater. And when you say there, you are talking about the whole plant site. But it's REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. HARTOLDMON0031328 77 1 2 3 A. 4 5 6 7 8 9 Q. 10 11 A. 12 13 Q. 14 15 16 17 13 19 20 A. 21 22 23 your understanding y'all only have about fifty wells? That's correct. That's on the plant site itself and on adjacent properties we own. For example, the landfills, properties we have purchased east of the plant and north of the plant. So if someone told me y'all had maybe a hundred, that's not correct? I don't know the exact number. My estimate is it's closer to fifty. How many -- Well, I don't want to leave that deal. You were telling me -- And I want you to educate me. I didn't ask the question to be smart-alecky. I just want you to tell me how you know that y'all are collecting everything. Because of the way we have this collection system set up. There are wells around Che perimeter of the'facility that actually REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 79 1 Q. 2 3 4 A. 5 Q. 6 7 8 A. 9 0. 10 11 12 A. 13 Q. 14 15 16 A. 17 18 19 20 21 Q. 22 23 Well, wouldn't you have to know a little bit about that to know where to put your wells? Yes, you would. Y'all have done that work to determine where to put them; or had somebody do that? Yes. That's correct.' -- . Now, is this a reasonable number of wells -- this fifty -- to have around a site this size? I believe so, yes. Do you have any other site where you have that many wells around it that you've worked on? Our Queeny facility, for example, where I was involved in the RCRA facility investigation. We probably had roughly the same number of wells around the perimeter of that facility. Wouldn't you admit you have a pretty significant problem at Queeny that y'all had to remediate? REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. < 78 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 3 9 10 11 12 13 14 Q. 15 A. 16 Q. 17 13 19 20 21 A. 22 23 collect the groundwater. They collect it and pump it to a treatment system. Then we have wells which I would describe as downgrading, in other words, the groundwater is flowing through the plant site. It reaches the series of collection wells that actually capture the groundwater and send it to a waste treatment facility to be treated. And then we have wells that are farther downstream of that that check the groundwater to ensure that nothing is getting past those collection wells. So it's coming up clean? That's correct. Well, maybe I missed it. And I may come back to it later. But do you know anything about the hydrology of this property around the plant site? I know something about the hydrology around the plant site. I wouldn't consider myself an expert. REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 80 1 A. 2 3 Q. 4 5 6 A. 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Q. 19 A. 20 Q. 21 A. 22 23 1 don't believe it's a significant problem, no. Fifty wells is not out of the ordinary? That's what I'm asking, just for curiosity sake. The Queeny plant site was roughly the same size geographically as the Anniston plant site. When you are installing monitoring wells, you don't want the spacing to be too wide, because then you are not necessarily developing a good understanding of what may be leaving the plant site. Based on the size of the site and the length of the fence line, I believe it's a similar number of wells. How big is your deepest well there? In Anniston? Yeah. I don't know the specific depth. I'd have to look at the report to be sure, Mr. Stewart. But I believe the REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. HARTOLDMON0031329 81 1 2 3 4 5 6 Q. 7 8 9 A. 10 11 12 13 14 15 Q. 16 17 18 A. 19 20 21 22 Q. 23 deepest well we have is on the -- the deepest monitoring well we have is on the order of forty feet, fifty feet. I'd have to look at the report to be sure on that particular issue. What if something is leaving the reservation under that well? You just wouldn't pick it up, would you? Given the geology of the area, it's pretty solid bedrock under the facility. So we don't believe their is any vertical migration down into the bedrock where we can see migration of groundwater through the bedrock. What's the nature of the bedrock? I don't know anything about it. What's the nature of it? Our understanding, based on the studies that have been done on the geology around the plant site, it's a fairly solid bedrock. When you get down to forty to fifty feet, you are at'bedrock? REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 83 1 2 3 4 5 A. 6 7 e Q. 9 10 A. ii 12 13 14 15 IS 17 18 Q. 19 20 A. 21 22 23 in the groundwater? You said you weren't worried about PCBs in the groundwater. What constituents were you worried about? Well, I wouldn't say we are not worried about PCBs in the groundwater. We monitor for PCBs in the groundwater. You actually found therfi in there, didn't you? We found ground --We detected PCBs in samples we have taken from the monitoring wells. However, there is data that suggests that those PCBs are more associated with solids that are in there and are not actually in soluble form in the groundwater. I want you to explain that to me. When did you find those last? We detect in one or two of the wells that we sample on a semiannual basis -- we will regularly detect PCBs in unfiltered samples of the groundwater in REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. * 82 1 A. 2 Q. 3 4 5 6 7 8 A. 9 10 11 12 13 Q. 14 15 A. 16 17 IB 19 20 21 22 23 Q. Yes. Would it be fair to say, Mr. Branchfield, that if something slipped through the groundwater that it might make its way into Snow Creek and Choccolocco Creek at some point down through there? I don't believe that's possible through groundwater, Mr. Stewart. Anything that's making its way to Snow Creek or Choccolocco Creek would be through surface water. How is it that you arrived at that conclusion? Well, the fact that Snow Creek itself is approximately a mile from the facility. And we have monitoring wells that are between -- that are between the plant site and Snow Creek where we collect data. And we are not finding any indication that anything is migrating through groundwater in that direction. What constituents were you worried about REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 84 1 2 3 Q. 4 5 A. 6 7 Q. 8 9 10 11 A. 12 13 14 15 16 17 IS 19 20 21 22 23 one or two of the wells around the facility. And once you filter it, you don't find them? In most cases we don't find them after we filter the PCBs out. Let's see. Now, maybe I'm missing something. Once you filter the PCBs out you test it and you don't find it? That's correct. What we do is we will take the groundwater sample, Mr. Stewart, and then pump it through a filter. And if the PCBs are in a soluble form -- in other words, they are in the water and not attached to a solid particle -- they shouldn't get filter out. If they are attached to a sediment particle, which would suggest that sediments -- Well, what's the easiest way to describe it? REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. HARTOLDMON0031330 85 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Q. 14 15 16 A. 17 10 19 20 21 Q. 22 23 You don't expect sediments to migrate through dirt. You expect soluble forms of contaminants that are in the water itself to migrate with the water. So when we filter the sample and we find that -- we find that the data suggests that the PCBs are attached to the sediment particle, then that suggests chey wouldnJ t be migrating with groundwater because they are not in a soluble form. So you are telling me you are not finding it in the water once the filtering is done? Well, we find -- There are occasions -I would -- If I was to quantify it, I would say maybe five to ten percent of the time when we filter a sample that we still detect PCBs after filtering it. What amount of water are you testing in something like that? I don't know anything about it. REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 87 1 Q. 2 3 4 A. 5 6 Q. 7 A. S 9 Q. 10 11 12 A. 13 14 15 16 17 13 19 20 21 Q. 22 23 A. So once you filter the stuff out you are left with, say, a gallon or maybe less, and you test that to see if PCBs -- That actually get sent to the laboratory, that's correct. Who designed that testing technique? This testing is all done in accordance with EPA guidance. " And they approve y'all taking just a gallon out to see if it's going through the groundwater? Yes. These methods are all plans that have been approved by - - The groundwater monitoring program, just to clarify this, Mr. Stewart, is actually overseen by the State of Alabama, by the Alabama Department of Environmental Management. And the EPA doesn't have direct oversight over the groundwater program. Who suggested this groundwater testing program? This is a program that's been a part of REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC- 4 BS 1 2 3 A. 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Q. 20 A. 21 22 23 But you tell me what you are doing so that I do know. Well, with a typical groundwater sample, what we would do is we would first purge the well to -- in an attempt to get a representative sample so we are not detecting something that's just built up there over time. We would purge a certain amount of volume out of the well, allow groundwater to flow into it. We would then pump up a certain amount. It all depends on what we are analyzing as to how much water would actually be in the sample itself. But to give you an order of magnitude, during a complete sampling event from one well, it might be a gallon or two gallons of water. Just a gallon? That's how much is required for the laboratory to conduct their analysis; not just of PCBs but the other constituents that we analyze for also. REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. SB 1 2 3 Q. 4 A. 5 6 7 e 9 10 Q. 11 12 13 14 15 A. 16 Q. 17 13 19 20 A. 21 22 23 and approved in our RCRA permit for the facility. Who suggested it; y'all? I'm not familiar with who actually made the recommendation. This groundwater program was put in place ten, fifteen years ago. And I wasn't -- I obviously wasn't associated with the facility at that time. So the groundwater program and testing procedures that you are now using predated the determination that y'all had a PCB problem at this site in ' 93? MR. COX: Object to the form. It predated 1993. I don't know that -You are following the same protocol, as I understand it. Hr. Branchfield, that was put in place ten or fifteen years ago? I'm sure there have been some minor adjustments to the program in those ten to fifteen years. But I couldn't specifically tell you what they were. REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. HARTOLDMON0031331 89 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Q. 8 9 10 11 12 A. 13 14 15 16 17 Q. ia A. 19 Q. 20 A. 21 22 23 Q. Obviously, as time has passed, we have learned more and developed a better understanding of the groundwater issues at the facility, and we have made adjustments to better understand and better manage that particular issue. Would it be fair to say, Mr. Branchfield, that you are more likely to find -- Well, strike that. Who at ADEM do you deal with about this groundwater testing program? That's changed quite a bit in the last year. But right now my primary point of contact is a gentleman named Jeff Anderson. Jeff Anderson? Yes. Who did you first deal with? My first point of contact, when I began working at the Anniston facility, was Jim Grossiano. Where is Jim now? REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 91 1 A. 2 3 4 Q. 5 6 7 A. e Q. 9 10 11 A. 12 Q. 13 14 15 A, 16 17 Q. ia A. 19 20 21 Q. 22 A. 23 0- Not that I'm aware of. If it was done, it was done before I became associated with the facility. Have y'all ever tested any water in Snow Creek or tributaries that lead to Snow Creek? Yes. You did that test. Is It-what's called an aqueous phase test or something like that? Are you familiar with that term? No. I'm not familiar with that term. when you test the water, how much do you get out of Snow Creek, a gallon, when y'all do those tests, a teacup, gallon? Whatever is required for the laboratory to run their analyses, which -What do they say is required? I don't know the specific quantity. But it's on the order of -- it's less than a galIon. Less than a gallon? Yes. And you are looking for PCBs? REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 90 1 A. 2 3 4 Q. 5 6 7 S A. 9 10 11 Q. 12 13 14 15 16 A. 17 Q. 18 A. 19 Q. 20 21 A. 22 23 Q. I believe he has taken another position within ADEM. I'm not familiar with what that position is. Was he the first person you dealt with on this, and then he was replaced by Mr, Anderson or somebody else you worked on the project with before Grossiano? No, Mr. Grossiano was my primary point of contact when I began working at the Anniston facility. What did you actually do with Mr. Grossiano and what did you do with Mr. Anderson about these tests that you performed? What basis -- How often would you do the groundwork? Semiannually. Semiannually? Twice a year, yes. I assume those are the same people that you talked to about the dye test? I'm not aware of any dye testing that we have done at the facility. You haven't done any dye tests? REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 92 1 A. 2 Q. 3 4 5 6 7 A. 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Q. 19 20 21 22 A. 23 Yes. You are actually looking for soluble -PCBs that are a part -- just for the guy who isn't a chemist -- not attached to -- not attached to a particle. It's actually a part of the water. Well, it's important to draw a distinction between what we look for in groundwater and what we look for in surface water. In surface water we look for both forms, soluble and non-soluble forms of PCBs; just as we do in groundwater. But how you interpret that data in surface water would be different than how you would interpret it in groundwater, I thought we were talking about water out of Snow Creek. Are you talking about surface water that comes off the plant site? That's what I'm -- Water that reaches Snow Creek would be surface water that REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. HARTOLDMON0031332 93 I 2 3 Q. 4 S A. 6 7 8 09 A. 10 Q. 11 A. 12 13 14 15 16 17 Q. 19 A. 19 20 0. 21 22 23 comes -- or potentially came from the plant site. Such that if PCBs are in Snow Creek, it came from y'all? I don't believe that's necessarily true in all cases. But there is a potential for chat, certainly. A potential for it? Yeah. What cases would that not be true? Well, we have done a number of -- We have taken a number of samples really all over in Anniston and Oxford where we have seen indications of PCBs and their association with different foundry sands and things of that nature. Foundry sands? Yes. That's the term we use to call it, at any rate. How is it that you determine -- where you take a particle that's filtered out of this water sample -- Is there somebody in your'operation or in your REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 95 1 2 3 4 5 A. 6 Q. 7 8 9 10 A. 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 13 19 20 Q. 21 22 23 samples you can't do it. What about the PCBs found in fish? Can you tell whether they came from the foundry or not? No. And as you sit here today, what hard evidence do you have that PCBs were used in any manufacturing `process at foundries? The only evidence I have is that we have conducted sampling at several locations in the Anniston and Oxford area where we have found PCBs in materials that aren't representative of floodplain deposits. They are more representative of a fill material. It's a black, sandy, gritty material; not a sediment deposit like you would expect to find in a floodplain. So am I to understand that your evidence as you sit here today -- and that would be Solutia's evidence -- for the fact that the PCBs you found in sediment off REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. - 94 1 2 3 A. 4 5 6 7 3 9 10 11 Q, 12 13 14 15 16 A. 17 18 19 20 21 22 Q. 23 analysis processes that can say that's foundry sand? When we are doing water samples, no, we can't differentiate between foundry sand or any other particular source of PCBs. All we know is there is a PCB in the water itself. When we get into soil samples, that's when we draw a distinction typically. Does that have to do with the sediment sample that y'all make in the creek? Is that how y'all make those kind of distinctions about the sediment in the creek, that it is a foundry sand? For the sediment samples in the creek, I don't believe it's too easy to make a distinction between foundry sand and other potential sources. It's primarily in the soils outside the banks of the creek. So you are telling me in these water samples you can't do it; in the sediment REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 96 1 2 3 4 A. 5 6 7 8 9 10 Q. 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 IS A. 19 20 21 22 23 your plant site came from foundries as a black, gritty material? MR. COX: Object to the form. I'm not sure if I really understand your question, Mr. Stewart. Allow me to clarify where my misunderstanding is. You are talking about sediments or soils? I'm talking about sediments. I thought you said you couldn't tell in sediments and you couldn't tell in water samples out of the creek and you couldn't tell it in fish; it was soil samples that you took elsewhere where you had arrived at the conclusion that it came from the foundry, the PCBs. In the fish, there is no way that I'm aware of that we can draw a distinction between where the PCBs came from other than the location of where the fish were at. For example, if it was four miles REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. HARTOLDMON0031333 9? 1 2 3 4 Q, 5 A. 6 7 Q. 8 a. 9 10 11 12 13 14 Q. 15 A. 16 17 18 19 Q. 20 A. 21 22 23 upstream of Snow Creek, that would not suggest that it came from Solutia, for example. How is that? Because water doesn't flow upstream. The PCBs move with the surface water. PCBs move otherwise, don't they? There is two primary means that a PCB can move. Either the move is attached to a dirt particle and it gets transported by the surface water or somebody picks it up and moves it physically. It could be moved by air, couldn't it? There is that potential, yes. If it's attached to a dirt particle and the wind blows it off the soil, it could be moved by air, yes. And also it volatilizes, doesn't it? It's a semi-volatile compound. Volatilization of PCBs is extremely low. It's not something you would typically expect to see in any REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 99 1 A. 2 3 4 5 6 7 Q 9 10 11 12 Q. 13 14 A. 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 Q. As far as who makes that determination -- I don't want to call it a hard and fast conclusion, Mr. Stewart. But it's based on the knowledge of the various consultants and people we have working on this project. The information chat I'm given and their conclusions are that the material is not associated with the floodplain deposits, that it's more associated with foundry sands. Who is the consultant that tells you that? I get To be honest, most of that feedback and most of that information comes from Dr. Kaley, who has given me a little bit of information about that; as well as an organization called Genesis Project, who does a lot of field sampling and is familiar with the different types of soils that they sample. Mike Price? REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. . 90 1 2 Q. 3 4 5 6 7 A. 3 9 10 11 12 Q. 13 14 15 16 17 10 19 A. 20 Q. 21 A. 22 Q. 23 significant quantity. Haven't y'all found that in your air monitoring process that there are high levels of PCBs in the air at the plant site? MR. COX: Object to the form. We conducted air monitoring around the plant site and have detected PCBs. We haven't differentiated as to whether they are in a dust form, a solid form. or a vapor phase form. Let's go back to this evidence that you all have. And I want to be sure about this . You are telling me so far, as I understand it, in these soil samples that you have got that you find a black, sandy, gritty material? That's correct. Is that correct? In sample cases. Who made the determination that that came from the foundry? REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC- 100 1 A. 2 3 Q. 4 5 6 7 0 A. 9 10 11 Q. 12 13 14 15 A. 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 Yeah. Mike Price is the principal at Genesis Project that we work with. Is he the one that has told you, or told Mr. Kaley and Mr. Kaley in turn told you, that the foundry sand is this black, sandy, gritty material that's found? That it appears to be consistent with what we have described as foundry sands, yes. What scientific basis, if you understand it, does Mr. Price have for making that particular determination in telling you that? It's based on the fact that it's -excuse me -- we know for a fact that it's not representative of what you would find to be associated with a floodplain deposit. It's not a sedimentary deposit. There is indications in the material that it's -- not only is it just the black, sandy type of stuff; but REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. HARTOLDMON0031334 101 1 2 3 Q. 4 A. 5 6 7 a 9 10 11 12 13 14 Q. 15 A. 16 17 18 Q. 19 20 21 22 23 A. there is evidence of other garbage in it. What? We'll find plastics. We find glass. We find concrete bunkers, for example. We find just a wide variety of stuff to suggest that it clearly shows that it's not from a floodplain deposit. You don't expect concrete bunkers to deposit due to flooding, for example, or glass or any things of that nature you found in the soils, big sheets of plastic. That comes from the foundry? It comes from a source certainly not associated with the floodplain deposition. You are saying that PCBs attach to the material -- in which those sheets of plastic mean it comes from a foundry -- I'm just trying to understand what your position is. All I'm saying is that is evidence that REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 103 1 A. 2 3 Q. 4 5 6 7 8 9 A. 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 It's the only explanation we can come up with. Is that the only one y'all can come up with? Is there a possibility that foundry sand might have been deposited in Snow Creek and Choccolocco Creek as a result of flooding at those facilities? I think if we are seeing foundry sand in -- What's the best way to put this? If we were seeing foundry sand consistently for the whole length of the creek and the whole length of the --of Choccolocco Creek and we are finding it consistently in the bottom sediment deposits of the creek, then you could say the foundry sands were transported via flooding. But the fact that we find it and it is very spotty, that it occurs in -When I Say spotty, I mean we find it in a specific geographic area. For example, we saw indications of REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. - 102 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Q. 15 16 17 18 19 20 A. 21 22 23 Q. supports a conclusion that it's not associated with floodplain deposits. Did it come from the same source? Your guess is as good as mine. But there is indications that based on evidence that it's -- The stuff we see in the soils, that we can visually see in the soils -- Once again, it is not indicative of a floodplain deposit, a sedimentation process. It's indicative of somebody picking it up from a location outside the floodplain and moving it to the floodplain. Is it your position here -- and Solatia's and Monsanto's position - there is never any foundry sand that has left those facilities other than somebody picking it up and taking it somewhere? The indications of what we see in the field would suggest that's what's occurred, yes. How do you know that? REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 104 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 B 9 10 11 12 Q. 13 14 15 16 17 10 19 20 21 22 A. 23 Q. it at Quintard Mall when we were doing work there. We saw indications of it at Highway 21. But in areas adjacent to those properties, we did not see indications of foundry sand. So that clearly suggests if it was due to flooding you would expect to see some sort of grading or even distribution of it. And we are not seeing that. Mr. Branchfield, have you ever been down a creek on a bright summer day, when you are just walking like a little ol' kid, like Snow Creek or something like that, and see a sandbar sort of appear and water pool up around it; and the bottom of the creek would just be old muddy stuff, and then all the sudden you see a bunch of sand there? Have you ever done that? Sure, yes. Wouldn't it be logical to assume that if REGIONAL, REPORTING SERVICE, INC. HARTOLDMON0031335 105 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 A. 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Q. 21 22 23 A. you see that kind of stuff in Snow Creek and Choccolocco Creek that that might have been deposited there by some kind of flooding deal? Are you saying to me and Mr. Cunningham here, as we are sitting here representing these plaintiffs, that that sand might have made its way to Quintard Mall from the foundry as a result of somebody picking it up and moving it there? Yes. That's what I'm saying. And I don't believe that that's an unreasonable idea; simply because when people want to build something close to a creek it's not unusual for one to want to raise the elevation to get it out of the floodplain or minimize the possibility of it flooding. So you are saying that the soil that's down there at the Quintard Mall that had the PCBs in it came from the foundry? I'm saying there are indications that REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 107 1 2 A. 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Q. 10 11 12 13 14 15 A. 16 17 ia Q. 19 20 21 A. 22 Q. 23 manufacturing process? I'm not aware of any specific evidence; other than I know that PCBs were used in the types of fluids that would -- excuse me - - were used in types of fluids that foundries might use, hydraulic fluids, heat transfer fluids, things of that nature. 1v . Well, what specific spills from hydraulic equipment or transformers that you have any evidence of that occurred at foundries that resulted in the PCBs being deposited in and around, let's say, Quintard Mall? Myself personally, I have no specific evidence; other than what we observed in the field of Quintard Mall. What evidence, other than what you already told us, does Monsanto have of that; or Solutia? None that I'm aware of. So the fact of the matter is that there is no hard evidence that you all have in REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 106 1 2 3 Q. 4 A. 5 Q. 6 A. 7 Q. 8 9 A. 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Q. 23 some of the soils were not a result of floodplain deposits, yes. Which one? Which one? Foundry. I don't know specifically which foundry. Why is it that you don't know which foundry, Mr. Branchfield? Well, there is no -- I guess the easiest way to answer that question, Mr. Stewart, is there is no signature that I'm aware of that you can use to isolate a particular foundry that it may have come from. They are on the order of -- I don't snow the specific number. My understanding is there were quite a number of foundries in the Anniston area until the 1970s. On the order of twenty maybe. I may be off on that number slightly. what evidence do you have that any of those twenty foundries use PCBs in their REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 103 1 2 3 4 5 A. 6 7 3 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 10 19 20 21 22 23 your possession that would indicate which foundry this stuff came from; if it in fact did come from a foundry? MR. COX: Object to the form. We have -- the evidence we used to draw that conclusion, Mr. Stewart, is the nature of what we are finding in the floodplains, the physical characteristics of the soil. And I don't know much about this. So I don't claim to be an expert on it. But my understanding is we had some documentation or evidence that the soil -- that the -- that the foundry sands we found in the vicinity of the Highway 21 bridge, where it crosses from Choccolocco Creek -- I believe there was some documentation or some literature that we came upon that identified the foundry that it may have come from. But I'm not --Me personally, I have not seen that documentation; other than having heard about it from REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. HARTOLDMON0031336 109 1 2 Q. 3 A. 4 Q. 5 6 7 S A. 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Q. 17 18 19 A. 20 21 Q. 22 A. 23 colleagues that I'm working with. Who? Buddy Cox, for one, and Dr. Kaley. Buddy Cox told you that y'all had documents that indicated that the foundry -- that was the source of the FCBs at Highway 21? I can't recall exactly what Buddy told me. MR. COX: Well, don't tell him what I told you. You are getting -- you are going too far afield on what I told you. You Can tell him what Dr. Kaley told you. (By Mr. Stewart) What did Bob Kaley tell you about the- evidence y'all had that would tie that to Highway 21? I can't recall specifically any direct evidence or any specific -Written documents? I don't recall any specific written documents that he would have told me REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. Ill 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Q. 17 18 19 20 A. 21 22 23 Q. certainly determining the characteristics of the soil is not a process that is just made up in the field. There is a science behind understanding the characteristics of soil; whether it's a sediment deposit; whether it's a clay; whether it's a silt; whether it's a1 sand-. There is a science to that process; looking at the soil and determining its potential source. So to the extent you ask for scientific evidence, looking at the physical characteristics of the material is a scientific test. Okay. Can you tell me what steps Mr. Price went through to make those determinations so I understand them clearly? I wouldn't know specifically; other than visual observation of the material. I don't know - Eyeballing it? REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. * 110 1 2 Q. 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 A. 15 16 17 Q. 18 A. 19 Q. 20 21 22 23 A. about. I asked you earlier, and I don't think I got an answer to it. I asked you about scientific tests that y'all had performed through Mike Price or Genesis Project or anybody else < Is there any scientific test that y'all performed on this particular soil sample or sediment sample that you took from around the mall -- It was a sediment sample, wasn't it, or was it a soil sample? Well, it was soil samples. And the fact that they were outside the banks of the creek. Outside the banks of the creek? That's correct. You took a soil sample. Any test that was performed on there that says, "This comes from a foundry?" When you ask for a scientific test, REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 112 1 A. 2 3 4 Q. 5 6 A. 7 3 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Q. 16 17 A. 18 19 20 21 Q. 22 23 If that's how you determine the characteristics of the soil, is by visually looking at it. And you compare it to what? You have to compare it to something, don't you? Well, you compare it -- as someone who is certainly with Mr. Price's experience in taking soil samples -- He has knowledge of the different types of soils and materials just from the process of testing them. You can differentiate between a sedimentation deposit, between a clay, between a sandy material. Tell me what you mean by a sedimentation deposit. Sediments are typically very fine-grained in nature; whereas, sands are very course in nature. You can make differentiations along those lines. You are saying if you find it in soil samples of course, grainy materials, that is foundry samples? REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. HARTOLDMON0031337 113 1 A. 2 3 4 Q. 5 6 7 S 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 That is an indication. If you find a course, sandy material, it's an indication of foundry sand. And let me ask you -- MB. COX: Can we take five? I had too much coffee this morning. I'm sorry. I was trying to wait until you finished a line of questioning; but you keep going and going and going. MR. STEWART: I'm not going to be too long. You can just leave, and I will ask the questions. MR. COX: I have got to earn that fee you-keep talking about. MR. STEWART: I want to ask him what you told him that got Mr. Kaley -- And I just wanted to know if you were like ol' Bob and a true believer and would be telling 1 REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 115 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Q. 13 A. 14 Q. 15 A. 16 Q. 17 A. 18 Q. 19 20 21 A, 22 23 of evidence -- that black, sandy type of material -- evidence of trash in the soil itself. We were also told by a gentleman who is now the city engineer for Anniston. At the time the parks were built he was associated in some way with the City of Oxford arid "the construction of parks. He told us that the foundry had previously placed material at the park. Who is that fellow? His name is Dale Garrett. Good 01' Dale? Good Ol' Dale. Which foundry did he say that came from? I don't recall. Well, now, do you know whether or not at some point in time PCBs were visible to the naked eye in Snow Creek? I'm not aware of any time when they were visible to the naked eye. Certainly not since I have been associated with the REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. " 114 1 2 3 4 5 Q. 6 7 8 A. 9 10 Q. 11 12 13 14 A. 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 Q. 22 A. 23 poor ol' Mr. Branchfield that. We can take a break. (A break was taken.) (By Mr. Stewart) You were telling me about the evidence you had. Is that all y'all have got that you know of? As it relates to foundry sand or Highway 21? Foundry sand or Highway 21. Have I got everything y'all have got by way of information that it is coming from the foundry? The only other piece of information I could provide to you, Mr. Stewart, is we saw indications of fill material during the work we did down at Oxford Park. I mentioned to you the concrete bunker. That's where we found the concrete bunker. That's the ball field? That's correct, yes. Once again, we saw similar types REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 116 1 2 Q. 3 4 5 6 7 A. 8 Q. 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 A. 16 Q. 17 IS A. 19 Q. 20 21 22 A. 23 Q. project. Oh, I don't mean since you have been associated with the project. I mean during that fifty-year period of time. Has anybody ever told you that PCBs were visible to the naked eye? No. If in fact you knew that PCBs were visible to the naked eye as you just stood there and watched it go down the creek, would that give you same cause in what you have already said about finding PCBs in this material down there? MB. COX: Object to the form. NO. Was the stuff on the ball field in a floodplain? Yes, it was in a floodplain. Is it possible that PCBs came out of the creek and out of the sediment and deposited along there? That is possible, yes. And it also could have been deposited in REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. HARTOLDMON0031338 117 1 2 3 4 A. 5 Q. 6 7 a 9 10 A. 11 12 13 Q. 14 15 16 17 IS A. 19 20 Q. 21 22 A. 23 that same fashion as this gritty material that you found on the ball field, couldn't it? It's possible, certainly, yes. Now, what about PCBs in the air? You mentioned that earlier. Is it not a fact that some of the foundries are located within the -- the way the air flows off that plant site? I'm not familiar with all of the foundries were located -- I'm sorry -where all the foundries were located. If they were, couldn't some of the PCBs that you're talking about that you found in the foundry sand have been deposited on those foundry sites similar to what it is otherwise? I don't believe we could see that in the concentrations we found, no. What were the concentrations that you found? we found concentrations in hundreds of parts per million in some of these ' REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 119 1 2 3 4 5 Q. 6 7 A. B 9 10 11 12 Q13 A. 14 15 16 17 IQ 19 20 Q. 21 A. 22 23 Q. concern that was covered under our RCRA permit, we felt it was a responsibility to work with the mall to continue with their construction. Was that sort of a good corporate citizen mode? I think you could define it as a good corporate citizen. We try to meet our responsibilities for dealing with the potential for PCB releases from that facility, yes. What about the ballpark? I think you can place it in that same category, Mr. Stewart. Where we find PCRs and where we think some corrective measures are necessary, we try to work with the regulatory agencies and the community and address those. Where you feel some responsibility? Yes. Where we feel there is a responsibility. For the PCBs being there? REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. * 118 1 2 Q. 3 A. 4 5 Q. 6 1 A. 8 9 Q. 10 11 12 13 A. 14 15 Q. 16 17 A. 18 Q. 19 A. 20 21 22 23 foundry sands. where? Quintard Mall is one example. Oxford Park is another example. You mean you found PCBs at a hundred parts per million? In some areas of the park and Quintard Mall and at Highway 21, yes. Well, now, I may be mistaken. I'm going to ask you more about this later. But is it not a fact that Monsanto removed the soil from the Quintard Mall? Some of the soils were removed from the Quintard Mall, yes. Which foundry was involved with y'all in doing that? There were no foundries involved. Why? We determined that it was the responsible thing to do, was to work with the mall and not stand in the way of that development. And given that these PCBs were found in an area of REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 120 1 A. 2 3 4 5 Q. 6 7 A. 8 9 Q. 10 11 A. 12 13 14 15 16 17 Q. 18 19 A. 20 21 22 Q. 23 For managing the PCBs that are there. We don't believe necessarily that all the PCBs there are the result of our operations, no. How much did y'all spend down there at the mall? At the mall to date, we have probably spent on the order of a million dollars. Already? What do you have projected to spend down there? I think we are pretty much done with the mall. There may be another fifty or seventy-five thousand dollars in writing final reports and things of that nature. But the bulk of the money has been spent down at the mall. How much of that stuff did you put in Emelle? I don't know the specific quantity. Mr. Stewart. That was done before I was associated with the project. How much of the million was spent taking the stuff to Emelle? REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. HARTOLDMON0031339 121 1 A. 2 Q. 3 A. 4 Q, 5 A. e 7 Q. 8 A. 9 10 11 12 13 14 Q. IB 16 A. 17 18 19 Q. 20 A. 21 Q. 22 23 I don't know specifically how much. How much was taken out of there? Taken out of the mall site? Right. It would have been the same quantity that was sent to Emelle. All of it was sent to Emelle? Any material that was removed from the mall site was sent to Emelle; with the exception of a small quantity of material which one of the mall's contractors removed from the site prior to our involvement. And put on properties down there in Oxford? Some properties in Oxford. And I believe there were- some in Anniston also. Y'all removed chose, didn't you? Yes. How many properties did y'all remove that soil from that the contractor had moved? ` REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 123 1 Q. 2 A. 3 4 Q. 5 A. 6 7 S 9 Q. 10 A. 11 12 13 Q. 14 A. 15 16 Q. 17 18 19 A. 20 21 22 Q. 23 A. What did you do with that soil? We sent that to a disposal facility up near Piedmont. What's the name of that facility? It's called -- I believe the name of it is Three Corners Landfill. I don't know the exact name of it. I think it's Three Corners something'. - Who regulates that? who regulates it; as in which governmental entity oversees the operation? Yeah. I don't know. I would assume the State of Alabama. It's not like a municipal entity, is it? It's regulated. It's certified to take that kind of -- That's correct. It's a Subtitle D facility, which is qualified to receive this type of material. Do you know what the tipping fee is? I don't know the fees off the top of my REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 122 1 A. 2 Q. 3 A. 4 5 6 Q, 7 8 A. 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Q. 20 21 A. 22 23 There were approximately ten properties. What was that cost? The cost for that work was -- has been on the order of a hundred and fifty to two hundred thousand dollars. Roughly twenty thousand, fifteen to twenty thousand dollars per property? If you were to average it like that that. The costs were used for a variety of things. There was initial investigation. We had to place advertisements in the paper. We had to, of course, do sampling on additional properties. We sampled approximately twenty to twenty-five properties and only found PCBs on around ten of them. What were the levels that you would find? Typically less than ten parts per million. More often on the order of two to three parts per million. REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 124 1 2 Q. 3 A. 4 5 6 Q. 7 8 9 10 11 A. 12 13 Q. 14 A. 15 16 Q. 17 A. 18 19 20 Q. 21 22 23 head, no. How did y'all transport it up there? Via truck. We put the material in roll-off containers and rolled them onto a truck and had them transported. Do you remember, as you sit here today. on those properties, that you took all the soil that was contaminated off those properties to this site in Piedmont, this landfill? You did, didn't you? I can't say it all went to this specific landfill. There is another landfill. In Atlanta? It was in the Georgia area. I can't recall the name of it. Live Oak? I believe that's it, yes. Some material may have gone to that landfill in the early stages of the project. So you took some to Atlanta. But for all intents and purposes, that soil that was contaminated on these properties in Oxford you took to one of REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. HARTOLDMON0031340 125 1 2 A. 3 Q. 4 A. 5 6 7 a 9 10 Q. li A. 12 Q. 13 A. 14 Q. IS 16 A. 17 Q. IS A. 19 Q. 20 21 A. 22 Q. 23 these regulated landfills? Yes. Who hauled it for you? I don't know the name of the specific hauler. We use several different companies to haul the material. One of my employees really oversees that particular part of the project. Who? His name is Jerry Hopper. Mr. Hopper? Yes. Does Bruce Espey work for you, by the way? Not directly for me, no. Who does he work for? He works for Dr. Kaley. What kind of doctor is he? Is he a Ph.D. or a medical doctor? He has a Ph.D. in chemistry. I just wondered. Now, on the ball field, what kind REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 127 1 2 3 4 5 6 A. 7 8 9 10 11 Q. 12 13 A. 14 15 16 17 0. 18 A. 19 Q. 20 21 22 A. 23 levels you were finding on the creek bank and the levels that you were finding in the creek? MR. COX; At the ball fields? MR. STEWART: At the hall field. At the ball fields, we did find a level that --We had a sample in the Bediments within the banks of the creek that had a result of approximately, forty parts per million. That's a heck of a lot of sediment,isn't it? In that vicinity it's probably about the average value we find in sediments down there where Snow Creek and Choccolocco Creek intersect. Forty parts per million? Yeah. Again, let me ask you. Isn't that a pretty high sediment level? MR. COX: Object to the form. High is a relative term. I don't consider it high. I REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. * 126 1 2 A. 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Q. 19 20 A. 21 22 23 Q. of soil evidence did y'all find? It varied with distance from the creek. In the areas closest to Snow Creek, we were finding levels -- It also varied with the depth of the soil. But in general, the areas closest to the creek had higher levels of PCBs. And the areas farthest from the creek -Although as we moved farther from the creek, it became more difficult to identify what I would call a nice, even gradient. Because we started getting into some of the fill material as we moved farther away from the creek, and the concentrations became very spotty. There was very --a lot of discontinuity in the sample results. That ball field is in sort of a flood area. Doesn't it flood quite often? Yes. It is in the floodplain. That's why we initially began investigating it, conducting an investigation. Tell me, if you would, what were the REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 128 1 2 3 Q. 4 A. 5 Q. 6 A. 7 B 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Q. 16 A. 17 IS 19 Q. 20 21 22 23 A. consider it moderate compared to what we are finding in some areas. So in some areas it's higher? Yes. where? Well, for example, along the -- excuse me -- along the banks of the creek, in the floodplain immediately adjacent to Snow Creek, This is just one example. But in the floodplain immediately adjacent to Snow Creek we were finding levels of PCBs between a hundred and two hundred parts per million in some of the deeper soils. How deep? I believe we tested down to a depth of six feet in the area between the softball fields and the creek. Do you know if these are the first sediment tests that have been performed by Monsanto where those kind of findings were made in Snow Creek? With respect to the levels of PCBs? REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. HARTOLDMON0031341 129 I Q. 2 A. 3 4 5 6 Q. 7 8 9 10 11 A. 12 13 14 15 Q. 16 A. 17 18 Q. 19 20 21 22 23 Yes. I'm aware that testing had been done in the past. I don't know specifically what was found or what levels were found. On the order of this magnitude of number of tests in the past? Has Monsanto ever done the number of tests it's now doing at Snow Creek in the past? As I said, I'm aware that some testing had been done in the past. I'm not aware of the size or scope of those investigations. In this number? Could you define number? Number of samples? However many samples y'all have taken today. Have they done it before? I'm just asking if to your knowledge has Good 01' Bob told you that they have done it before? ' REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 131 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 3 10 11 12 13 Q. 14 15 16 17 IS 19 A. 20 21 22 23 Q. leave the facility. And that directs our investigation what to look at. We are interested in past investigations to the extent that they can help supplement our understanding of those transport mechanisms. But things that were addressed fifteen years ago you know, whatever reVnetiiation or investigation was done, *you know, it what's there today is what's there today. And that's what I'm trying to manage, Wouldn't that give you what you were Calking about a minute ago; some kind of understanding of historically what had gone on as far as the handling of the PCBs,- how they happen to be in the creek? If there is historical data that we can use and that can help us better define the transport mechanisms of PCBs, then that information is useful, sure. Did Bob give you any idea about any REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. * 130 1 A. 2 3 4 5 6 Q. 7 8 A. 9 10 11 Q. 12 13 A. 14 15 16 17 Q. 18 19 20 21 A. 22 23 As I said, I know that some investigations had been done in Snow Creek I believe in the 1980s. But I'm not familiar with the size or nature of those investigations. You were told that just occurred in the 19S0s? 1 believe that -- I believe that's when some of those investigations occurred, yes. That's the only time you were told that they tested the sediment in Snow Creek? As I said, I'm not familiar with the size or nature or number of investigations that were done hack in that time frame. Well, as a person who is involved in remediation, would you not consider that to be something historical in nature and something you would want to know? Historically what I'm interested in is what was manufactured at the facility, what are the methods by which it can REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 132 1 2 3 4 A. 5 6 7 Q. a A. 9 10 li 12 13 14 Q. 15 A. 16 Q. 17 18 A. 19 Q. 20 A. 21 22 23 Q. testing that was done in the creek, sediment, the water, anything in the ' 60s? I'm not aware or familiar with any investigations that occurred back in the 1960s. So the answer to that is no? Yes. Well, the answer to the -- If your question is, irWere there any investigations," the answer is, "I don't know.,r If the question is, "Am I familiar with them," then the answer is, "No." Did Mr. Kaley tell you about them? Not to my knowledge, no. Did anybody with Monsanto tell you about them; or with Solutia? No. what about the '70s? Once again. I'm not familiar with any investigations that might have occurred in the '70s. what about fish tests? REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. HARTOLDMON0031342 133 1 A. 2 3 0. 4 A. 5 6 7 Q. 3 9 10 11 A. 12 13 Q. 14 15 16 A. 17 IS 19 20 21 Q* 22 A. 23 I'm not aware of any testing that Monsanto did on fish in the 1970s. Or f 60s? Or '60s. Which isn't to say it didn't occur,- just that I'm not familiar with it if it did occur. Wouldn't it help you in making your determination as to what to do on the creek? MR. COX: Object to the form. The simple answer to your question. Mr. Stewart, is no. Why would it not be important for you to know how much stuff got out and when it got off the reservation? What's important to me is where it might have gone and how it might have gotten there. Then I go to those areas and sample. That tells me what is there today. Wouldn't volume give you some idea? It doesn't necessarily change where or what we would sample for. It just REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 135 1 Q. 2 3 A. 4 5 6 7 B 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 13 19 20 21 Q. 22 23 A. As you moved into the ball field, what did you find? They fell off fairly rapidly. As we moved towards the ball field, the levels dropped -- dropped off, down into the -- they gradually dropped off to levels of ten to twenty parts per million once ve.got to the ball fields. '. I told you in the vicinity of the ball fields then the data got very high. All the sudden we were finding -- we would take one sample at one location and find non-detect. We would go twenty-five feet away and we'd find thirty parts per million. We'd go another twenty-five feet away and we'd find five parts per million. It got to be very spotty and very discontinuous in its nature. well, I assume y'all scooped all that dirt off and took it to Emelle. Some of the soil we removed went to REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. * 134 1 2 3 Q. 4 5 6 A. 7 8 Q. 9 1G 11 12 13 14 15 A. 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 changes what we would find when we collected the sample. But it certainly would tell you there was a heck of a lot of it that might be in the creek. Once again, ic wouldn't change the nature of our investigation today. All right. I'm back to the ball field. What did y'all find beyond the creek bank? Well, you said this was a sediment sample of forty parts per million. You got on the creek bank. What did you find? We did collect some samples close to the creek bank. We found levels of PCBs on the order -- you know, basically real close to the creek bank. I will define that within fifty yards of the creek bank. We were finding levels of PCBs on the order of twenty-five to a hundred parts per million. REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 136 1 2 3 4 5 6 Q. 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 A. 16 17 IS 19 20 21 Q. 22 A. 23 Emelle. Most of the material was stockpiled and is currently being placed under a parking lot that we are building at the park. Now, let's see. You all have found PCBs in soil contaminated to the level of thirty parts per million, forty parts per million, and twenty parts per million. What portion of that or what part of that did y'all --at this ball field -- leave there and are going to bury up under that parking lot? Approximately, I'd say, between eighty and ninety percent of the material removed from the ball fields was left on-site to be incorporated under the parking lot; with the remainder going to Emelle. What were the levels? Typically between fifty and a hundred parts per million is what went to REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE. INC. HARTOLDMON0031343 137 1 2 3 4 5 Q. 6 7 A. 8 Q. 9 10 11 12 A. 13 14 15 16 17 13 19 20 21 Q. 22 23 A. Emelle. The stuff that remained to go under the parking lot was all less than fifty parts per million. So the cut-off point was fifty parts per million? That's correct, yes. So if it was thirty parts per million or twenty parts per million or forty parts per million or forty-nine parts per million, it stayed there? Typically anything that was above forty parts per million we would err on the side of conservatism and go ahead and send it to Emelle just because there is some -- there can be some uncertainty in the analysis of PCBs; forty can be fifty or it can be thirty. So we take the conservative approach and go ahead and send anything above forty to Emelle. Who gave y'all permission to bury this under the concrete? To bury it under'the parking lot? The REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 13 9 1 A. 2 Q. 3 A. 4 5 Q. 6 A. 7 8 9 Q. 10 A. 11 12 Q. 13 14 A. 15 16 Q. 17 A. 18 19 Q. 20 21 A. 22 Q 23 A. It's a soil material. Yeah. Could you be more specific when you ask for the nature? Well, I mean, is it clay? What is it? It's a -- in that particular area it's primarily floodplain deposits, with some indication -Floodplain deposits? '. In that particular area where the parking lot is going. How deep are y'all going to bury this stuff? It's not going below ground. It's an above-ground parking lot. Above-ground parking lot? Yeah. Everything is being built up. We are not going down. What is going to be below this PCB material? The original material that was there. Dirt? Yes, dirt. REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 138 1 2 3 4 5 Q. 6 A. 7 q. a 9 A. 1G 11 12 13 14 15 Q. 16 A. 17 13 Q. 19 20 21 A. 22 Q. 23 material less than fifty --or less than forty that were buried under the parking lot -- all that activity has been overseen by the EPA. The EPA? Environmental Protection Agency. Who at EPA said y'all could bury it under the parking lot? We submitted a work plan to Steve Spurting at the Environmental Protection Agency. He reviewed and gave us the verbal authority, at any rate, to proceed with the project. Verbal authority? That's correct. We haven't received written authority from the EPA yet. Tell me, if you would, under what --Do you have anybody above Mr. Spurling that got involved in that? Not that I'm aware of. What's the nature of the ground underneath this parking lot? REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC, 140 1 Q. 2 3 A. 4 Q. 5 A. 6 7 a 9 Q, 10 11 12 13 14 A. 15 16 Q. 17 A. 10 19 Q. 20 21 22 23 And then you just put the parking lot over it? That's correct. What is going to be to the side of it? Clean soil; as well as a geo-fabric material that we are using to - - that we overlay over all of the impacted material. Is that a synthetic geo-membrane type thing, or is it a porous permeable type stuff that y'all put out there on the fifty-five acres? MR. COX: Object to the form. I'm not familiar with the fifty-five acres you're talking about. You can spit through it? You couldn't spit through it, but it is permeable to water. Isn't that really -- that kind of material really used to tell somebody that digs into it that they are getting into a waste site? That's not the container thing -- REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. HARTOLDMON0031344 141 1 A. 2 3 4 5 6 7 Q. 8 9 A. 10 Q. 11 A. 12 Q. 13 14 A. IS 16 17 Q. 18 19 20 21 22 23 A. That's the primary purpose of the material for the parking lot. It also serves as a base upon which to set the gravel that will provide the base for the parking lot. It provides some structural stability. So you put that over it, and then you put the gravel -The gravel and the asphalt, yes. And 01' Steve told you that's all right? That's correct. Where else have y'all done that with PCBs? Well, we have done similar measures at the Quintard Mall; although that was a situation -I'm talking about other than Anniston. I know they let you do anything you want to do in Anniston, Mr. Branchfield. I'm asking what they let you do somewhere else. MR. COX; Object to the form. Outside the Anniston area, on other REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 143 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Q. 8 9 A. 10 Q 11 A. 12 13 14 Q. IS A. 16 17 Q. 18 A. 19 Q. 20 21 22 23 A. We also made several presentations to the Oxford City Council, which was published in newspapers so the community -- there was ample opportunity for the community to be aware and to comment on what we were doing. How many people showed up that you met with? `" At the public availability session? Right. I would guess on the order of between twenty and twenty-five; maybe thirty people. How many times did you run the ad? It was in The Anniston Star, I believe, for three days. Three days? Yes. Tell me, if you would, when y'all made your presentation to the city council. is that the time y'all gave your check to the school? If you are -- Any money chat Solutia REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. < 142 1 2 3 Q. 4 s A. 6 7 a 9 Q. 10 11 12 A. 13 14 15 16 Q. 17 IB 19 A, 20 21 22 23 projects across the country? Is that what you're interested int? Yeah. I'm trying to find out what they let you do elsewhere. I'm not aware of any projects that Solutia has been associated with where we have had to address PCBg in this manner. where you were able to address PCBs in this manner or where you had to address PCBs in this manner? We address PCBs in this manner under the oversight of the EPA. We don't just go out and do this and hope that everybody will say it's okay. When were y'all going to allow the public to comment about y'all burying this wad of PCBs down there? We held a public availability session at the Oxford Civic Center and gave the public an opportunity to express any thoughts or concerns about this particular approach. REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 144 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Q, a A. 9 Q. 10 11 A. 12 13 q. 14 15 16 17 18 19 A. 20 21 22 23 provides to area schools is managed through the Solutia -- I don't know what they call it -- the Solutia Education Fund, which is managed by our plant manager. I have no association with that or ** Are you sure? I'm sure that I'm not familiar with - Didn't it come out of the remediation fund? No, it didn't come out of the remediation fund. If I saw something that indicated that y'all paid ten thousand dollars to the school in one of these documents that I have down here, it would be something that would not be related to the remediation? That's correct. There is a certain amount of money that Solutia sets aside for funding educational activities in the State of Alabama. But I have no association with that. REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. HARTOLDMON0031345 145 1 Q. 2 3 4 5 A. 6 7 <2 S A. 9 10 11 12 Q13 A. 14 Q. 15 16 A. 17 18 Q. 19 A. 20 Q 21 22 A. 23 Q. Well, my question to you was did y'all give the check about the same time frame to the school that y'all were having these public meetings? I don't know when the check was given to the school. Was it within the past six months? I don't know. To be honest. Mr. Stewart, 1 didn't even know we had given a check to the City of Oxford schools. You didn't know that? No . Who would have some knowledge about that ? Our plant manager, who administers those funds for the Anniston facility. David Cain? That's correct. Was Mr. Cain in on the meeting with the city folks down there? No. who all went down there for that? REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 147 1 2 3 Q4 A. 5 0. 6 7 A. 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Q. 16 17 A. 18 Q19 20 21 A. 22 23 removed materials down to one -- below one part per million. What? Yes. That's correct. Y'all moved it down below one part per million? We removed it from the areas where construction was occurring. And the material that was above.one part per million but less than fifty parts per million we essentially buried on the mall site, under the parking lots. The material greater than fifty parts per million went to Emelle. So you buried it under the parking lot there? Under the parking lots, yes. What did you clean up down to the part per million? I'm trying to understand that. Why did we clean up to -- MR. COX: No, no. He is asking where was that. REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 4 146 1 A. 2 3 Q. 4 A, 5 6 7 Q8 A. 9 Q. 10 11 12 A. 13 Q 14 A, 15 16 17 18 19 Q. 20 21 A. 22 23 For the city council meetings it was myself. You? Yes. Sometimes there were one or two meetings where Dr. Kaley attended with me, but -Bob came? Bob Kaley, yes. Did he and David Cain ever meet with the mayor and the city council with you not being present? No. Was Mr. Spurling there? At the -- Mr. Spurling attended one city council meeting that I attended. There were several city council meetings that I attended where Mr. Spurling did not attend. What was the clean-up level that y'all got to in that dirt at the mall? We removed materials -- When I say removed, I mean removed them from areas that required construction. But we REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 148 1 Q. 2 A. 3 4 5 6 7 Q 8 9 A. 10 11 12 Q. 13 14 15 A. 16 17 IS 19 Q. 20 21 A. 22 23 What did you clean up? where was that? Along the banks of the creek. In the vicinity -- in areas where the mall needed to disturb soil essentially in order to complete their expansion of the mall site. Didn't y'all have some negotiations with the people that owned the mall? There were some negotiations over responsibility. Those took place before I was associated with the project. Were there not some negotiations about what y'all were going to clean down there? I'm not aware of any negotiations with the mall. They may have occurred. If they did, it was before I became involved in the project. Who would those negotiations have been with, the EPA? Alan Faust would have been the Solatia project manager at the time. If those negotiations took place -- There were REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. HARTOLDMON0031346 149 1 2 3 4 Q. 5 6 7 A. 8 9 Q. 10 A. 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Q. 18 A. 19 Q. 20 21 A, 22 23 some work plans submitted to the Alabama Department of Environmental Management for addressing those soils. Was there ever a level that was less or more than a part per million, and was that changed? A level that we were cleaning up to that was more than a part per million? Yeah. No. Anywhere we removed material -- we removed it from the area -- If there was material there that was greater than one part per million and the mall needed that material removed to complete their construction, that material was removed from that work area. What if they didn't need it removed? Then it stayed in place. with contamination in it that would exceed one part per million? If there was not a need to disturb the soils, then they weren't removed? regardless of the" concentration. REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 151 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 A. 9 Q. 10 A. 11 12 Q. 13 A. 14 15 Q. 16 A. 17 ia Q. 19 A. 20 21 22 23 And it may be an unfair question to ask of you. I may need to ask somebody else. Didn't y'all have another site y'all were remediating when you were up there in '98 at the corporate headquarters here in this country? Another site in the St.'Louis area? Well, yeah. Well, there is the Krummrich facility that's across the river in Illinois. What was that about? I had very little involvement in that particular site, Mr. Stewart. What was the contaminant? There is -- I don't know specifically the contaminants. Could it be PCB? Well, we did have a PCB manufacturing facility up there. I'm sure that was part of the investigation. But I had no role in developing Che investigation that was done up there REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 4 150 1 Q. 2 3 A. 4 5 6 1 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Q. 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 where was that located? Was that on the creek bank? On the creek banks. There was some areas in the floodplain where they were installing utility corridors. MR. STEWART: I have to make a phone call and need to eat lunch. Is that okay with you? MR. COX: You need to eat? MR. STEWART: I'm not going to eat much. (A break was taken.) (By Mr. Stewart) Mr. Branchfield, we were talking about - - I think when we quit -- about some of this stuff that y'all were doing to remediate some of these sites down there. And it brought to mind something -- And maybe it just slipped your mind. And in listening to the sites that you mentioned - - and you may not have had any responsibility for it, but -- REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 152 1 2 3 Q. 4 A. s Q. 6 A. 7 Q. 0 A. 9 10 11 12 Q. 13 A. 14 IS 16 17 Q. IS A. 19 Q. 20 A. 21 22 Q. 23 A, and really had no familiarity with what work has been done or hasn't been done. Wasn't there a creek involved? I'm sorry? Wasn't there a creek involved? Yes. There is a creek. what are they doing to that creek? To the best of my knowledge they are removing some sediments within the banks of that creek and putting them in a disposal facility. They are dredging a part of the creek? I don't know if they are dredging or removing it with heavy equipment. But I do know they are removing some quantity of sediments from the creek. What distance? I'm sorry? What distance? Distance from -- MR. COX: How far in the creek -How long and what length of the creek? I don't know. REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE.. INC. HARTOLDMON0031347 153 1 Q. 2 3 A. 4 5 6 7 Q. B 9 A. 10 Q. 11 A. 12 Q. 13 A. 14 15 A. 16 17 18 Q. 19 A. 20 Q. 21 A. 22 23 Q. who is involved up there and regulating Chat? The EPA. The U.S. EPA and the Illinois state organization. I think they are called Illinois EPA. But I'm not sure. I know the United States is involved. Is it not a fact that Monsanto is responsible for the dredging? Solutia is involved. Oh, is it Solutia? Right, yes. They passed that on off to y'all too? It's a -- MR. COX: Object to the form. It's a site that Solutia is currently remediating and is taking responsibility for. Y'all took that? Yes. Did y'all take the Krummrich plant too? The Krummrich plant is a part of Solutia, yes. So y'all are making some money there at REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 155 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 3 9 10 11 12 13 14 IS Q. 16 17 18 A. 19 20 Q. 21 22 23 A. were specifically held for that purpose. I talk with Alan Faust periodically, my predecessor. I define periodically as once every several months. But it's usually more on a social basis, "What's going on with you,what's going on with me," that type of nature. we haven't had any one-on-one meetings, Mr. Stewart, or even group meetings to specifically compare notes about what we are doing at the Krummrich facility and what we are doing at the Anniston facility. Why would Mr. Faust be in a position to know what they are doing at the Krummrich facility? Mr. Faust currently works at the Krummrich facility. When you say he works there, does he work in remediation at the Krummrich facility? He has a role in the remediation. I REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. + 154 1 2 3 A. 4 5 6 Q. 7 8 9 10 11 A. 12 Q. 13 14 15 16 A. 17 10 Q. 19 20 21 22 23 A. that site in addition to spending money for remediation? It's an operating facility. I'm not familiar with the finances of the facility. And you don't know whether or not PCBs are being -- are a constituent, as you call it, of one of the contaminants they are attempting to do the remediation to remove from the creek? I don't know it for a fact, no. Am I to understand -- Well, let me lay a little predicate. Do you understand where they make PCBs in this country, Monsanto? Yes, They made them here and at the Krummrich plant. Is it my understanding, then, that you have not talked to the people who are remediating that site to find out what they are doing in conjunction with your work here? I haven't held any conversations that REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 156 1 2 3 4 5 Q. 6 7 A. a 9 10 Q. 11 12 A. 13 Q. 14 A. 15 Q. 16 A. 17 Q. 10 19 A. 20 21 Q. 22 23 A. don't know specifically what that role is. But his job is -- he's the environmental safety and health lead for the Krummrich plant. So he has some responsibility for the remediation? He has some involvement, certainly. I don't know what level of responsibility he has. Who is the person who is in charge of that project? Mike Light is the project manager. Mike who? Mike Light. Is that L-i-g-h-t? Yes . And what person would Mr. Light -- who would he respond to? He would report to Mr. Smith, Steve Smith. And would that be true also for Mr. Faust? No. Mr. Faust would report to the REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. HARTOLDMON0031348 157 1 2 Q. 3 4 5 6 7 A. 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Q. 15 A. 16 Q. 17 A. 18 Q. 19 A. 20 Q. 21 A. 22 Q. 23 Krummrich plant manager. If he did some work -- If Hr. Fauat did some work on the remediation of that plant site, would he have to do it under the leadership of Mike Light or Smith or who? Anything that's done - - I don't know specifically the organization up there, Mr. Stewart. I do know that Mr. Faust and Mr. Light work together on the remediation. But I don't know if there is any type of reporting. How much money have they spent there? I don't know. Would it be over a hundred million? I don't know. . Who would? Mr. Light would know. Would Mr. Smith know? Mr. Smith should know also, yes. And how far along are they on their remediation efforts up there? REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 159 1 A. 2 3 4 5 Q. 6 A. 7 8 9 10 11 Q. 12 13 14 15 16 17 A. IS 19 20 21 22 0. 23 A. I don't know the specific location; other than I believe it's located -it's located very close to the plant. It's within a mile or two of the plant. By here, I mean Anniston. Oh, I'm sorry. The location of this disposal cell in relation to Anniston?" Is that the question? Could you rephrase it, please? Perhaps I misunderstood. Maybe it was poorly worded. I assumed, from the fact that PCBs are made up there at Krummrich and here at Anniston, that there is remediation going on at both sites. And that's under RCRA up there, in Krummrich? I believe some agreements have been negotiated and reached with the EPA. I don't know whether that's being overseen under the RCRA process or the CERCLA process. You mean that's a CERCLA process? I don't know which process it is. REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. * 1S8 1 A. 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Q. 14 A. 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Q. 23 To the best of my knowledge, Mr. Stewart, they have begun removing some of the sediments from Dead Creek. I don't know how much progress they have made. I also know that they are in the process of getting approval -- I know they are also going to be building a disposal cell to put these sediments in. I don't know what stage of approval and construction that disposal cell is in right now, however. What is a disposal cell? It's a facility that is constructed in accordance with guidelines that are defined under the Resource Conservation Recovery Act. We call it a RCRA cell. That is designed to hold materials of the type that are being removed from the creek up there near the Krummrich facility. where is that type cell cn this property here? REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC- 160 1 Q. 2 3 4 A. 5 6 Q, 7 8 A. 9 10 11 12 Q. 13 A. 14 15 Q. 16 A. 17 18 Q. 19 20 21 A. 22 Q. 23 Well, you call it a RCRA cell. But are you just saying that as sort of a common term? It's a common term, yes. I don't know if -Where is the RCRA cell here in Anniston located? Well, we have one cell on the plant site that was closed out in accordance with the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act. Where is that? It's one of the cells on the south landfill Which one? The cells which are on the eastern portion of the landfill. While we are talking about that, didn't y'all put that synthetic membrane over the western portion? Yes. Well, if you were handling PCBs, Mr. Branchfield, why did you do that? REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. HARTOLDMON0031349 161 1 A. 2 3 4 Q. 5 A. 6 7 3 9 10 Q. 11 A. 12 13 14 15 16 17 13 19 20 21 22 23 I can give you a -- I'll start off by saying I wasn't the project manager back then. I don't know that -Did Bob tell y'all why they did that? No. This was part of what would have been turned over with me, my discussions with Alan Faust as I was preparing to assume responsibility for the Anniston projects. What did Alan tell you? That when we were doing the -- when we were characterizing the area to determine where PCBs were, in the vicinity of the plant we found that there were some PCBs in the surface soils on the western portion of the south landfill. There were no PCBs found on the eastern portion of the south landfill. And therefore, the western portion was selected for the inner measures that we performed, which were installing the various layers of HDP liner and the soil covering. REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 163 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Q. 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 A. 16 17 Q. 18 A. 19 20 21 Q. 22 23 Department of Environmental Management and the EPA describing what we were doing and presenting the data that we were using to support the course of action we were --we were submitting to do, basically. So am I to understand that in that plan, that interim plan that -was presented to the folks at ADEM, y'all told them that -- Monsanto told them -- and then later Solutia I guess assumed the responsibility of whatever they did -- I assume it was Monsanto when that was done. Is that right? I believe this was around the 1996, '97 time frame. And that's before the spin-off? Well, the spin was, what, September of '97, I believe? So right about the same t ime But the plan indicated chat the problem that existed on the western side of the southern landfill was PCBs? REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. < 162 1 Q. 2 A. 3 4 Q. 5 6 7 8 9 A. 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Q, 17 IS 19 20 A. 21 22 23 That's what Alan Faust told you? Yes. And that's what I have seen from the data I have looked at. And the data you have looked at in connection with that particular synthetic membrane that was put over those cells on the eastern side was what? Well, perhaps I misunderstood your question. We didn't install any synthetic membranes on the eastern cell, on the eastern cells of the west landfill. Those were installed on the western portions. Western. I'm sorry. What data did you look at to confirm the fact that that's why you did it? There would have been data -- I couldn't name the specific report, Mr. Stewart. There were inner measure reports that were submitted to the Alabama REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 164 1 A. 2 3 4 Q. 5 6 7 A. 8 9 10 11 12 13 Q. 14 IB 16 17 A. IB Q. 19 20 21 A. 22 23 The PCBs were detected in the surface soils on the western portions of the south landfill. That's correct. And that's why those cells in that landfill were covered with that synthetic membrane? That's correct. The objective would have been to isolate the PCBs on the surface soils from surface water running down Cold Water Mountain and prevent them from being mobilized away from the landfill. Now, when you say mobilized away from the landfill, what you are talking about is leaving the reservation. Is that what you mean? That's correct. Coming off that landfill and going onto some neighbor's property? MR. COX: Object to the form. Going -- Yeah. Wherever the water takes it. I don't know specifically it would go on the neighbor's property. It REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. HARTOLDMON0031350 165 1 2 3 Q. 4 5 A. 6 7 8 Q. 9 10 A. 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 q . ia 19 20 21 A. 22 Q. 23 depends on the drainage pathway of the facilityWell, It went onto somebody's property, didn't it? There were some PCBs detected In areas where there was residential property, yes . That came from the southern landfill? MR. COX: Object to the form. I'm not aware that conclusions were ever reached that it came from the southern 1andfill. Certainly the drainage from the southern landfill went through a ditch that went through these residential properties. Now, since y'all started the foundry, there was not a foundry located in between those residential properties on the southern landfill, was there? No. Not that I'm aware of. There wasn't another manufacturing facility located between the southern REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 167 1 Q. 2 3 A. 4 5 6 Q. 7 B 9 A. 10 11 Q. 12 a. 13 Q. 14 15 A. 16 17 Q. 18 19 A. 20 Q. 21 22 A. 23 Well, I mean, that's why you remediated the west side of the southern landfill. Because of -- to prevent the potential for PCBs from migrating from that landfill. That's correct. Have you told me all that Alan has told you about the work that was done over there and why it was done1 I have told you everything that I can recall, yes. That he told you? Yes. Did anybody ever tell you anything about parathion? I'm aware that we manufactured parathion at the Anniston facility. Did anybody ever tell you where it was buried? No. Did anybody ever tell you that it might have been buried on the south landfill? I don't recall having any discussions with anyone along those lines. REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC - 166 1 2 3 A. 4 Q. 5 6 7 a 9 IQ A. 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 Q. 22 A. 23 landfill and those residentials properties? No. Not that I'm aware of. So the logical conclusion would be -and that's the conclusion y'all came to, was it not -- because of the fact that you found them on there, on the residential properties that were north of the southern landfill? Certainly the data we collected showed that the PCBs followed a path from the vicinity of the south landfill down a drainage ditch through some residential neighborhoods. Now, I'm not aware of whether there is any other data that might suggest those PCBs might have come from another source. But that didn't change our approach, our desire to remediate that area. Because of PCBs? Yeah. There were PCBs in the area that needed to be remediated. REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 168 1 Q. 2 3 4 5 A. 6 7 8 9 10 11 Q. 12 A. 13 Q, 14 15 A. 16 Q. 17 10 A. 19 20 Q. 21 22 23 Did Alan Faust ever tell you that the parathion was found in groundwater and that's why they put the synthetic membrane over the landfill? I was never told that was Che reason for placing the synthetic membrane over the landfill. I was aware that we were detecting parathion in groundwater at some of our groundwater wells. Do you know Jerry Brown? I'm familiar with the name, yes. Have you ever talked to Mr. Brown about why they put that membrane over that? NoWhy they did the work on the western side of the southern landfill? No. I never talked to Mr. Brown about that. Well, if in fact that's why y'all did it, because of parathion as opposed to PCBs, then what Mr. Faust told you -- Is it safe to say for a hypothetical that's REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. HARTOLDMON0031351 169 1 2 3 4 Q. 5 6 7 A. 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Q. 20 A. 21 22 23 Q. why you did it or why Mr. Brown said you did ic? MR. COX: Objection. Wouldn't what Mr. Faust told you be a story? MR. COX: Object to the form. My understanding, based on my recollection, of the conversations with Mr. Faust and from what I have read in the reports that were prepared and submitted to the regulatory agencies was that the cap and the synthetic membranes were placed on top of the eastern -- I'm sorry -- the western portion of the south landfill to prevent migration of PCBs. I'm not aware if parathion was a factor in that decision. I'm not aware. No one told you that? No one ever told me; nor do I recall reading that in any of the reports that were prepared. Where are y'all doing your air samples REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 171 1 A. 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Q. 15 16 17 A. 18 19 20 Q. 21 A. 22 Q. 23 Potentially. I mean, the winds in that area -- like I said, because it's a valley, they are going to -- it's very hard to predict at all times because of the way they come out. But the primary reason for sticking it at the location it's at, Mr. Stewart, is because-it's at the fence line. And that's.what we are interested in knowing, where the fence line -- the concentrations of PCBs in the air that may be leaving the facility. Are you also trying to check that synthetic membrane to see if it's holding those PCBs in? I don't think with just one air sampler at one location you could draw any conclusions. You couldn't do that? I don't believe so. Where are you doing your vapor flux test as far as the south landfill is REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. . 170 1 2 3 4 A. 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Q. 18 A. 19 20 21 Q. 22 A. 23 0. on that -- While we are on the south landfill, where are you doing the air sampling; on that synthetic membrane? There are two air samplers located in the vicinity of the south landfill. One is up on top of the hill, above the south landfill. That's essentially intended to give us an idea of background concentrations. It's located where we would consider -- hopefully it would be upwind; although winds in the valley tend to move around a lot. There is another air sampler located near the base of the south landfill; near Highway 202? Why would you put it there? The prevailing winds in that area would blow across the landfill. I mean, it's -Off that west side of that landfill? I'm sorry? Off the west side of the south landfill? REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 172 1 2 A. 3 4 5 6 Q. 7 B A. 9 10 Q. 11 12 13 A. 14 Q. 15 16 A. 17 Q. 18 19 20 A. 21 22 23 Q. concerned; on that synthetic membrane? That particular work plan hasn't been approved yet. So the final locations for placing the flux chambers hasn't been finalized. Have y'all not done any vapor flux tests? That's correct. We haven't done a vapor flux test yet. All the air sampling that y'all have done has been done on the conditional basis? The ambient air monitors, yes. Those two little ambient air monitors are all you have got over there? All we have at the south landfill, yes. How many more do you need in order to make a determination whether there is really a problem? I couldn't answer that question for you. That's not an area I consider myself an expert in. Certainly you would need more than two, REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. HARTOLDMON0031352 173 1 2 A. 3 Q. 4 A. 5 6 7 a 9 10 11 12 Q. 13 14 15 A. 16 17 Q. 13 19 A. 20 21 22 23 wouldn't you? I believe so, yes. You certainly need more than five? It depends on what you were trying to learn. 1 mean, once again, I don't know -- I can't give you a good answer. I don't have the expertise to give you a good answer. That's why we hire consultants to provide me that type of information. Well, it would be good too if you put it on the side of the landfill where the PCBs were buried, wouldn't it? It depends on what we are trying to learn. Well, if PCBs are off-gas, that's really what you are trying to learn, isn't it? There is ~~ As I said earlier, it depends on what you are looking for. If you are looking for PCBs in a vapor phase, you might look at one place. If you look for them in a REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC- 175 1 2 3 Q. 4 5 A. 6 7 e 9 10 Q. 11 A. 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Q. 19 A. 20 21 Q. 22 23 now are detecting PCBs that would be in a particulate matter, yes. Has that been approved by the folks over at EPA in Region Pour? We have submitted a work plan describing the ambion air monitoring program. We have to ADEM and to EPA. But we have not received any formal approval of that work plan. What does a work plan consist of? It outlines the program that we currently have in place, which is setting up ambient air samplers of, I believe, six locations around the plant site and collecting that data and submitting it on a bimonthly basis to ADEM. And we copy EPA on that data. But they haven't given you approval? We have never received formal written approval for the program, no. All right. I want to ask you some more about that in just a minute. But before I leave this other REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 4 174 1 2 3 Q. 4 A. 5 6 Q. 7 8 A. 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Q. 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 A. 23 particular other phase, you might look for them in another place. What are y'all looking for? The current program we have wouldn't detect PCBs in a particular phase. So you're not even looking for whether or not PCB off-gas is off the facility? If there is -- First of all, PCBs being a semi-volatile compound -- they are just not readily off-gas. If they did -- It's just not in their chemical nature to volatilize in the air. The primary mode of transport for PCBs in air is through a particular pathway. I know what the parting line is, Mr. Branchfield. I have heard that before. But what I'm asking you is what you're looking for in the air samplers. And you have told me that you are looking for PCBs in particulate matter? My understanding is that the air monitors we have on the plant site right REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 176 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 A. a 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Q. 18 19 A. 20 21 22 Q. 23 subject we were on before I left, I wanted to ask you -- In connection with the PCBs that were remediated at the Queeny plant, how much did y'all leave behind on the Queeny plant property; nothing? Based on the data that I had seen before I turned the project over to somebody else, it was a very isolated area where we had found PCBs. I will call an isolated area -- I believe the area we were going to do the sampling on was on the order of maybe twenty-five to fifty square yards. It was a result of a transformer spill, so it was fairly -How much PCB did you leave behind when you remediated the Queeny plant? Well, the complete remediation had not been completed, the remediation -- I'm sorry -at the Queeny plant. What did you propose to leave behind; do you know? REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. HARTOLDMON0031353 177 1 A. 2 3 4 5 6 7 a Q. 9 10 A. 11 12 13 Q. 14 A. 15 16 17 Q. 18 19 20 A. 21 22 Q. 23 We had no data. We hadn't done any evaluation regarding the potential or Che need for corrective measures. We just hadn't reached that stage of the process where we were determining what if anything could or could not be left behind. Didn't you determine that you were going to clean down to non-detect there? No- We had not reached the stage of our investigation where that determination had been made. Did you get to any level? We did have data that showed that we did have PCBs in the soils in the vicinity of those transformers. Did you have any clean-up level that you had in the plan at the time you were working on it? To the best of my knowledge one had not been established. You mentioned this earlier. And these are just some questions about the ' REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 179 1 2 3 A4 5 Q. 6 A. 7 a 9 Q. 10 A. ii 12 13 14 15 Q. 16 17 18 A. 19 Q. 20 21 22 23 they are in the water that you bring up in the sediment that you filter out? We are detecting PCBs in the groundwater samples. What levels? Well, on the order of one to three parts per billion, maybe, at the most. Most of the samples are one part per billion. That's in the water? The groundwater. 1 should say those are samples that are not filtered. When we filter the samples, we see those levels consistently fall below one part per billion; if not non-detect. The non-detect would be dependent on your ability and the sensitivity of the detection devices? That's correct. If I wanted to define nothing, then what I would do is I would filter out sediment and then check the water and set my detection level high enough; and you never would find it, would you? REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. < 17B 1 2 3 4 5 6 A7 e 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 Q. cleanup, and then we get on to something else. How is the sediment with the entrain of PCBs getting into the monitoring wells? Well, when you install a monitoring well, particularly using some of the older techniques -- And I'm afraid I couldn't differentiate between the older techniques and the newer techniques. But there is potential to drag down surface soils along the casing of the monitoring well as you are installing it. So if we installed a monitoring well and there were PCBs in the surface soils or even the soils at depth, for that matter, within which that well was being installed, they could get dragged down to the bottom of the well and be in very fine-grained sediments- They could be very difficult to get out. But you are still getting results where REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 180 1 2 A. 3 4 5 Q. 6 7 a 9 10 A. n 12 13 14 Q. 15 16 17 18 19 20 A. 21 22 23 MR. COX; Object to the form. We are conducting the analyses of these groundwater samples in accordance with standard methods established by the EPA. I know what the parting line is. But I'm asking you if you set the detection levels high enough, you never would find it? MR. COX; Object to the form. You can always set your detection levels at any level you want. But we set our detection levels at levels that are consistent with EPA guidance. If you had somebody who was not very knowledgeable about PCBs to deal with to begin with at the state regulatory agency, you could sort of pull the wool over his eyes, couldn't you? MR. COX: Object to the form. One individual person in a regulatory agency would not approve or disapprove of a detection level. It would be done in accordance with standard operating REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. HARTOLDMON0031354 181 1 2 Q. 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Q. 14 15 A. 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Q. 23 procedures. SCeve Spurling, you cold us earlier this morning, from Che EPA, gave y'all verbal approval; a guy out there in the field, to bury a bunch of PCBs under a parking lot. And I believe you told me, Mr. Branchfield -- you correct me if I'm wrong -- But didn't you tell me you didn't know of a place where that had been done before? HR. COX: Object to the form. Isn't that right? Didn't you tell me that? It's correct that Mr. Spurling gave us verbal approval for placing material under the parking lot. That is different than giving us detection limits for an analytical method which is already defined by the EPA standard operating procedures. What have been the results of your testings in the water in Snow Creek.? ` REGIONAL REPOSTING SERVICE, INC. 183 1 2 A. 3 4 5 Q. 6 7 A. 8 9 Q. 10 11 12 13 A. 14 15 Q. 16 17 18 A. 19 20 21 0. 22 23 MR. COX: Object to the form. That is a way that they could get in the fish, by eating and ingesting sediments that have been impacted by PCBs. Now, why is EPA taking the lead in Oxford down there rather than ADEM? I couldn't answer that question. I don't know. Well, would it be fair to say that you all -- when you got to the ball field down there -- as y'all characterize that site -- Yes. We do characterize the softball field Isn't that a normal procedure that you would do in a site that you feel like PCBs are located on? Yes. If we believe there is an area where there may be PCBs, we will go out and characterize that area. Don't you do that by a series of tests that you performed and the soil -- you test the soil? REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. * 182 1 A. 2 Q. 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 A. 12 13 14 15 16 17 10 19 20 21 Q. 22 23 In the surface water? Uh-huh (indicating yes). MR. COX: You are talking about tests in the creek itself as opposed to the out-fall that's leaving the plant. Donald? I just want to make sure I understand your question. MR. STEWART: Yeah. Surface water in Snow Creek? Is that the question? Okay. I believe we have detected PCBs in surface water as part of your off-site RFI report, phase one report we submitted to ADEM about a year, a year and a couple of months ago. I can't recall specifically what the levels were without referring back to the report, however. And I would assume that's how it's getting into the fish's bio? It accumulates in the fish? REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 184 1 A. 2 Q. 3 A. 4 5 6 7 8 Q. 9 10 11 12 13 14 A. 15 16 Q. 17 10 19 20 21 22 A, 23 Q. Yes, that's correct. On a gridded basis? Sometimes it's a gridded basis. Sometimes the regulatories prefer you use composite samples from different points on the grid. But in general, that's correct. But if you want to characterize it and do it properly, you would do it in the fashion that I mentioned; where you would grid it and find out where the PCBs were? MR. COX: Object to the form. That's one way of characterizing an area, yes. One of the reasons you do that is what you told us earlier, isn't it, Mr. Branchfield? Because in one spot you would find non-detect and in the other spots you would find thirty parts per million, I believe you said? Some cases, yes. Well, that's what you found on the ball REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. HARTOLDMON0031355 165 1 2 A3 Q. 4 5 6 7 A. 0 9 Q. 10 11 12 13 14 15 A. 16 17 13 Q. 19 20 21 22 A. 23 field. Yes, that's correct. So if you were fair to somebody's property that you put PCBs on, that would be Che best approach to take, wouldn't it? I'm sorry. Could you repeat the question, please? If you were fair to somebody that you had caused to have PCBs on their property, then it would be -- the best approach would be to characterize it the way you did the ball field? MR. COX: Object to the form. The point you have to consider -- it depends really on what you are trying to accomplish. To get the PCBs off somebody's property, is what you were trying to do on the ball field, wasn't it? MR. COX: Object to the form. What we were trying to accomplish on the ball field was try to determine what the L REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC, 187 1 Q. 2 3 A. 4 5 Q. 6 7 A. e Q. 9 10 A. 11 Q. 12 A. 13 14 15 Q. 16 17 18 19 20 A. 21 22 Q. 23 A. Who does that under that consent order,you? Solutia does. We hire contractors to do that work for us in the field. That's before you do any remediation at all on the property? I'm sorry? That's before you do any remediation at all on that property? That's correct. Y'all pick the spot? We pick the locations, yes, with the -But the EPA is in the field overseeing those activities. Sort of like Mr. Spurling was when he called y'all up and told you you could bury that stuff under there, which had never been done anywhere else? MR. COX: Object to the form. I wouldn't say it's never been done anywhere else. You couldn't tell me anyplace? That doesn't mean it hasn't been done REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC, * 186 1 levels of PCBs were in the soils and 2 subsequently what -- you know, that 3 would help us define what if any 4 corrective measures were necessary. 5 That's obviously what you would 6 try to do if you were characterizing. 7 for example, a residential property. S However, residential property in 9 general in West Anniston -- I'm speaking 10 in general terms. But in West Anniston, 11 with residential property, a person's 12 yard is much smaller than three softball 13 fields. 14 So you may gridding may not be 15 the best method. What may be a more 16 appropriate method -- and what's been 17 specified in the administrative order on 18 consent that we signed with the EPA -- 19 is that we take a composite sample where 20 you pick five points within a yard, and 21 then we composite those five points into 22 one sample and send that to a laboratory 23 for analysis. REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 188 1 2 Q. 3 4 A. 5 6 Q. 7 e 9 10 A. n Q. 12 13 14 A. 15 Q. 16 17 A. 18 19 20 21 22 23 anywhere else. I was just wondering if it was the same kind of supervision that you had there. I guess I don't really understand what your question is. Well, I will go on to something else, if you don't understand that. Mr. Branchfield, let me ask you this. Sure. You indicated earlier that one method of characterizing it would be to take soil samples on a gridded basis? That's correct, yes. Isn't that what Monsanto did on its own property? I do not believe that on our own property we sampled on a grid methodology. I'd have to go back and look at the reports to be certain on that. But the folks who did the investigation at that particular time in REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. HARTOLDMON0031356 189 1 2 3 4 5 Q. 6 7 8 9 A. 10 11 12 13 Q. 14 15 16 17 A. is 19 20 Q. 21 22 23 the vicinity of our property were to sample within the drainage pathways from our property that we found PCBs. And then we began to work our way out. Would it be fair to say, Mr. Branchfield, that's what was done on the Miller property that y'all purchased and were going to lease to the city? I'm not aware of the method we used to characterize the Miller property. I'm also not aware of any plans to turn that property over to the city. Was there another piece of property that was adjacent to it that y'all were going to lease to the city for parking vehicles that you gridded off? Not that I'm aware of. If there was, that was done before X became the project manager. If I told you, in fact, that one of your predecessors, Mr. Faust, indicated that y'all did grid that property, what would that consist of? ' How would you grid a ` REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 191 1 2 Q. 3 4 5 6 7 e 9 10 A. n 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 yes. And if in fact they did that on the Miller property, that would be a better method of actually characterizing the property than the composite sampling that you talked about earlier? It would give you a better idea of what's on the property, wouldn't it? ' - MR. COX; Object t-o the form. I don't really think there is really any clear advantages or disadvantages of one method or another, Mr. Stewart. The whole goal is to determine really what the - - If you are looking for -- Once again, it gets back to the purpose. If you are looking for average concentrations for the purposes of understanding what potential corrective measures might be needed, a composite may be more appropriate. If you are looking at actually implementing the corrective measure in REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. - 190 1 2 A. 3 4 Q. 5 A. 6 7 S 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Q. 17 IS 19 A. 20 21 22 23 piece of property? For example, the Miller property or any property similar in size? Any property. You would essentially pick a distance. Typically you can do anything -depending on the size, perhaps -- of twenty-five up to a hundred foot. You know, once again, this varies based on the size of the property. And you grid it. And at those points you can collect a sample. Like I said, there is a variety of ways you can do it. But that's the basics. So when you find a hot spot, you test out from it until you get into a cold spot? If you find an area that you need to characterize more thoroughly to understand what the best and most effective way to manage that particular soil would be, that's what you would do, REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 192 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Q. 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 A. 22 Q. 23 characterizing the soil -- For example, if you had to send it to a disposal facility, like Emelle or Three Corners, for example, you would need -- a composite sample wouldn't necessarily be the best way to characterize that material appropriately. There is a point at which some material has to go to Emelle and a point at which the material goes to Three Corners. And a composite sample may cloud that picture a little bit. Isn't it a fact that what you're trying to do in both instances is to make a determination as to what corrective measure needs to be taken in order to protect future tenants, occupants, users, whatever you want to call it of that particular piece of property from exposure,- in both instances? I think that's a fair description, yes. And if your company chose the gridding method for the Miller property or the REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. HARTOLDMON0031357 193 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 S A. 9 10 11 Q. 12 A. 13 14 Q. 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 A. 23 property that was to be leased to the city, wouldn't that be their ultimate goal, to determine what corrective measures needed to be taken on that property to protect other people from being exposed? HR. COX: object to the form. Given the particular land use, yeah, you would want to know what the levels of PCBs were in the soils before you -Leased it to somebody else? If you had reason to believe there were PCBs there, I would think so, yes. And would you say that you would want to certainly with residential property be even more careful than you would on a piece of commercial property where people would just merely be putting gravel over a parking lot to park their cars? MR, COX: Object to the form. I wouldn't characterize it as being more careful. There is different land use REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 195 1 2 3 A. 4 5 6 7 Q. S 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Q. 16 A. 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 Q. the day or the night? MR. COX: Object to the form. Generally speaking, residential properties would have a lower clean-up level than industrial types or commercial types of facilities. Now, while we are talking about this creek -- I've sort of cleaned up those things that I wanted to-ask you about earlier that we perhaps didn't and I wanted to get some kind of response to. Y'all don't have any intentions at all of cleaning up that creek, do you? MR. COX: Which creek? I'm sorry. Choccolocco, Snow. We have every intention of completing our investigations. And if corrective measures are necessary, we have every intention of carrying out those corrective measures. I think it's premature to define just what cleanup might be. Tell me what you mean by what you just REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 194 1 2 Q. 3 A. 4 5 6 7 a 9 10 n 12 13 14 15 Q. 16 17 A. 18 Q. 19 20 21 22 23 there, so you have different concerns. What are those that would be different? Time spent on the property. For example, on a residential property the resident is there potentially twelve, sixteen, twenty-four hours a day? whereas a commercial property -- once again, depending on what the property is being used for -that person may only be there one or two hours a day. In the process of determining levels which to define your corrective measures, you -What you clean up to and what would be safe? Essentially, yeah. And you would admit that residential properties would certainly have a lower clean-up level than a piece of property for which -- or which was going to be used for parking their vehicle; somebody would come in, park it, and leave it for REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 196 1 2 3 A. 4 s 6 7 8 9 10 Q. 11 12 13 14 15 Q. 16 17 18 19 20 A. 21 22 23 got through telling me. I'm having trouble understanding that. All I'm saying is that we have to complete our investigations, characterizing the creek, characterizing the floodplains, and understanding what's there before we can begin an evaluation of what, if any, corrective measures may be necessary. Y'all don't intend -- Mr. Faust earlier I deposed. And he told me that y'all really don't intend to ever clean up that creek. MR. COX: Object to the form. Because you didn't feel like it was necessary. Is that your feeling, Mr. Branchfield? MR. COX: Object to the form. I can't speak as to what Mr. Faust may or may not have said. What I can tell you is in my role as project manager we will carry out the REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. HARTOLDMON0031358 197 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Q. 9 10 11 12 13 14 IS A. 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 Q. investigations we have been tasked to carry out and submit the required. reports, and we will go through the required process. And if corrective measures are required, we will implement those corrective measures. What is your opinion now, as we sit here today? I mean, you have got some sediment samples already that you've told us about that appear to me, just as a novice, to be pretty high? MR, COX: Object to the form. Any opinions I gave you right now would be premature simply because we don't have a complete set of data to draw any conclusions. My opinions don't matter compared to what we are going to end up doing. What matters is what somebody tells us -You are telling me as you sit here ' REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 199 1 2 3 4 5 Q. 6 7 A. 8 Q. 9 10 A. 11 Q. 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 A. 21 22 23 regarding community input and what the regulations require and so on and so forth. The data has to guide the investigation. And there is a fish advisory still in place; isn't there? On Choccolocco Creek, that's correct. And that's because ofJ PCBs that have been found in the fish? That's correct, yes. And did y'all find those same kind of levels on down the creek that y'all found at this area where Snow Creek, I believe, enters Choccolocco Creek? Did y'all find the same kind of levels on down the creek? MR. COX: Are you talking sediment or fish, Donald? MR. STEWART: Sediment. What we found was that within the banka of the creek -- And I will speak generally. Generally the higher REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. * 198 1 2 3 4 A. 5 6 Q. 7 e 9 10 A. 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Q, 21 A. 22 23 today, Mr. Branchfield, that what y'all plan to do -- Solutia -- And is it Solutia that plans to do it? Solutia is the company that is carrying out the investigation. What you all plan to do is you all plan to, I assume, remove sediment from Snow Creek certainly that is above forty parts per million? What we plan to do is complete our investigation and determine if corrective measures are required. It's premature to determine what corrective measures might be required, Mr. Stewart. I can't tell you what we will or will not do. I just don't have the data and haven't gone through the process to draw any conclusions in that regard. Does it really have to do with data? In my opinion it has as much to do with data as everything else. Certainly there are considerations REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 200 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Q. 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 A. 22 23 concentrations of PCBs were in the area where Snow Creek and Choccolocco Creek intersected. And it gradually decreased as you moved down the creek to -- MR. STEWART: Hold on just a minute. MR. COX: We will be right back. (A break was taken.) {By Mr. Stewart) Mr. Branchfield, I was asking you earlier -- And I may misspeak when I quote Mr. Faust, because Mr. Cox has said I did when I asked the question about what Mr. Faust said. But my reading of what he said in a prior deposition is y'all have no intentions of ever doing anything on Snow Creek or Choccolocco Creek like y'all are doing on Krummrich. Isn't that correct? MR. COX: Object to the form. Once again, I think there are two parts to that answer, Mr. Stewart. One is I don't feel we are at a REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. HARTOLDMON0031359 201 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 0 9 10 11 12 Q. 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 A. 20 21 22 23 point yet where we can determine what. if any, corrective measures are required on Snow Creek or Choccolocco Creek. While I am the project manager and the data suggests that corrective measures are required, we will propose those corrective measures to the agencies and implement them as they are approved. Now, why they did what they are doing up at Krummrich, I don't know. Well, really it would be fair to say that -- and I may be parceling words a little bit here -- but you are probably not going to do on choccolocco Creek anything at all; as opposed to Snow Creek? MR. COX: Object to the form. Once again, you know, until we have a complete set of data that allows us to draw those conclusions, I just believe it's premature to make any --to draw any conclusions regarding the potential REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 203 1 2 A. 3 4 5 6 Q. 7 B A, 9 10 11 Q. 12 A. 13 14 15 Q. 16 A. 17 19 19 Q . 20 A. 21 022 23 A. mean to you? Conservation corridor is a project that we are involved in to establish a row of conservation easements along Choccolocco Creek. Who are y'all involved with on that? Who are you working with? Well, there have been several different organizations that we have been involved with. Give me those, please, sir. The first organization that we worked with was an organization called the Conservation Fund. What is the Conservation Fund? They are a nonprofit organization whose mission it is to essentially conserve. quote, unquote, green space. Green space? Yes. What in the world do they have to do with this conservation corridor? At the time they were working with us to REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 202 1 2 Q. 3 4 A. 5 Q. 6 A. 7 Q. 0 9 10 A. 11 12 13 Q. 14 15 16 17 18 19 A. 20 21 22 23 Q. corrective measures. You have been the person in charge of this site since when? Approximately January of 2000. January of 2000? Yes. So the monthly report that I have in January of 2000 should reflect what you were planning on doing? It would reflect the status of the project at the time I submitted the report, yes. I guess what I'm saying is if I looked at a monthly report -- say for instance for August of 2000 -- then I might find something that would sort of tell me what y'all were doing on Choccolocco Creek? It should give you the current status on activities we are currently involved in on Choccolocco Creek as of that date, yes. Well, what does a conservation corridor REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC, 204 1 2 3 4 Q. 5 A. 6 Q. 7 A. 8 9 Q. 10 A. 11 12 13 Q. 14 15 A. 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 essentially put a program in place, to develop the corridor along Choccolocco Creek. Along Choccolocco Creek? Yes , Well, did y'all give them any money? Yes. We did pay some money for their assistance. What did you pay them? I believe it was on the order of sixty to seventy thousand dollars; in that range. That's a lot of assistance. How did they assist you? They assisted us in helping to really understand what a conservation corridor would be. A big part of developing a conservation corridor was depending -was reaching out to the community and sharing this idea with the community and getting feedback. Since this corridor would in fact REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. HARTOLDMON0031360 205 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Q. 9 A. 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 16 19 20 21 22 23 Q. be on private property, we would be asking property owners to donate or else in fact get paid for releasing their development rights on the property. And they basically just helped us define what it would take to implement a project like this. Is that sixty cents on the dollar? when we were talking to them about the potential cost for doing a conservation corridor, they told us on an average you could expect to spend about sixty cents on the dollar for the appraised value of the property. That was based on the idea that some property owners may realize tax benefits out of donating the easement as opposed to getting paid for the easement. That was just an estimate they gave us to better help frame just what that alternative would mean. Is that a 501C3 organization? REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 207 1 Q. 2 A. 3 4 5 Q. 6 7 8 A. 9 10 11 Q. 12 13 A. 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 Q. From large size landowners? I don't know. I'm not familiar with the details of their funding or revenue strengths. Tell me now, if you would, who else you worked with on this conservation corridor. We reached a point in the project where the Conservation Fund had fulfilled their role. which was what; to tell you how to do it? Give us an idea on the types of things that would have to be done. Just really how to put a project like this together. It's not the type of thing I had any familiarity with. And I just needed somebody to help guide me a little bit. We then subsequently went out and talked to another nonprofit organization in Alabama called the Alabama Forest Resources Center. Is that an offshoot of the forestry REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC- 206 1 A. 2 Q. 3 4 5 A. 6 7 8 9 10 Q. 11 A. 12 Q. 13 A. 14 15 Q. 16 A. 17 18 19 20 21 22 Q. 23 A. I believe the Conservation Fund is, yes. Did y'all get a tax break for the sixty to seventy thousand dollars you contributed? I don't believe we did. It came out of my remediation account. And I don't believe --To the best of my knowledge. that would not have been deducted for the company's tax purposes. who are the people you talked to? At the Conservation Fund? Yeah. A gentleman by the name of Larry Selzer was my primary point of contact. Who else? I also worked with a gentleman named Ed McMahan; just like the TV show host or the Tonight Show guy. Another gentleman named Ray -- I can't remember his last name. He worked out of their Atlanta office, though. Now, how is this organization funded? Primarily through private donations. REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 208 1 2 A. 3 4 5 Q. 6 A. 7 8 Q. 9 A. 10 11 12 Q. 13 14 A. 15 16 17 18 19 0. 20 A. 21 22 23 commission? I don't believe so, Mr. Stewart. I believe they are their own independent nonprofit organization. Who is it that you talked to there? Their executive director was a gentleman named Dan DuMont. Where is he located? I believe his offices are down in the Mobile area. I don't know specifically where. What was it that you sought from the Alabama Forest Resources Center? Basically we were looking for a nonprofit organization who would be willing to implement this conservation corridor program and hold the conservation easements. Did they agree to do it? They agreed to help us continue the process of putting the program together, to better define what the project should be, in what light. REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. HARTOLDMON0031361 209 210 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 q. 8 A. 9 10 Q. 11 A. 12 13 14 15 16 17 Q. 18 19 A. 20 21 22 Q. 23 A. We have not reached an agreement with them yet to hold the conservation easements. We are currently evaluating proposals from two different nonprofits who are interested in holding the two easements. Who are the other nonprofits? It's an organization called the Chactowah Land Trust. The what? Chattowah, C-h-a-^t-1-o-w-a-h. Land Trust. They are also -- I believe they are based out of Alabama, somewhere in Northeast Alabama; although I don't know the specific location. Who are the principals in that land trust? The primary point of contact is their executive director. Her name is Katheryn Eddins. Katheryn who? Eddins, E-d-d-i-n-s. . 1 Q. 2 3 4 A. 5 Q. 6 7 a A. 9 10 11 Q. 12 A. 13 Q. 14 15 A. 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 So as I understand what you all propose to do is you plan to buy these easements along the Choccolocoo Creek? (Witness nods head affirmatively.) And then you would in turn control development within the easement along the creek? That would be the basic concept. Not so much control development; but the goal is to -What could the landowner do? I'm sorry? What could the landowner do once he gave you the easement? They could continue to use the property for, you know, grazing their cattle or other -- you know, a variety of purposes, really. Most of the property along Choccolocco Creek is used for agricultural purposes; primarily for cattle grazing. The other remain as primarily -- REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 211 REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 212 1 2 3 4 5 Q. 6 7 8 9 10 A. 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 0. 20 A. 21 22 23 with some minor exceptions -- forestry. So it seemed as ideal a location for this type of program, for a conservation corridor So the conservation corridor would mean that Monsanto would basically, through the easements or this entity that you donated the easements, to, control what happened? We would only control what happened to the extent that development would be limited on the property. We would not specifically tell a person, "You can't do this on your property or you can't do that." The goal is to prevent, you know, any massive development of the property, to preserve the green space. Why? Well, there are several reasons. One, quite honestly, is that it could be an effective institutional control over the floodplain of 1 Choccolocco Creek to help eliminate the 2 potential to mobilize PCBs where they 3 may be located now. 4 This whole program was being done 5 prior to our conducting the floodplain 6 investigation. So we don't have very 7 good knowledge on where the PCBs are. 8 That is clearly one -- that is why 9 we became interested at first. 10 But as we began reaching out to 11 the community and understanding and 12 researching this program, we found out 13 that there is a great deal of concern 14 among the community -- and these include 15 property owners right alongside the 16 creek -- about the potential -- about 17 the development pressure that's ia occurring between that Birmingham and 19 Atlanta corridor. There is a lot of 20 interest in maintaining Choccolocco 21 Creek; as it is a very healthy 22 ecosystem. 23 And there was concern about losing REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. HARTOLDMON0031362 213 1 2 Q. 3 4 A. 5 Q. 6 A. 7 8 9 10 Q. 11 12 A. 13 14 15 16 17 IS 19 20 21 22 23 Q. that health from development pressure. Hr. Branchfield, isn't there is a fish advisory on that creek? Yes. You can't eat the fish? The fish exceed the FDA limits for PCB concentrations in fish. They recommend they not being consumed. That's correct. You call that a healthy ecological system? I think the health of an ecological system goes beyond PCB concentrations in fish. I mean, we have conducted an ecological assessment within the banks of the creek. And that's presented in our ROB report that was submitted to ADEM and EPA back in April of 2000. And the conclusion was that within the banks there is a fairly healthy ecosystem. You just can't eat it? REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 215 1 Q. 2 3 4 5 A. 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Q. 16 A. 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 Don't you estimate that it's going to cost you somewhere in the neighborhood of, what, a couple of million dollars to buy that corridor? Yeah. It would -- That's an approximate estimate - It's based on the sixty cents an acre -- or sixty cen^s^on the dollar value that the conservation -- I'm sorry -- the Conservation Fund provided us and some very broad assumptions. Until that appraisal is done, it's really -- you know, that's a rough order of magnitude estimate at best. Who else have you talked to about it? we have presented the concept, as I said, to a number of property owners along the creek. I couldn't tell you their names off Che top of my head. Primarily they were members of an organization called the Choccolocco Creek Conservancy District. REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 214 1 A. 2 3 Q. 4 5 A. 6 Q. 7 A. 8 9 10 11 Q. 12 A. 13 Q. 14 15 16 A. 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 You shouldn't eat the fish. That's correct. Let me ask you something. Who else is involved in this process? In the conservation corridor process? Right. Right now -- Well, I have -- there are some consultants that I have working for me that kind of oversee the day-the-day. They work with Golder and Associates. Who? Golder and Associates out of Atlanta. who are the appraisers you have got that are appraising the property along the creek? The Alabama Forest Resources Center did hire a company to appraise the value of the corridor. And the name of the company is slipping my mind right now. It may come to me. If it does, I will tell you. But I don't recall the name at this moment. REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 216 1 Q. 2 A. 3 4 5 6 7 8 Q. 9 A. 10 11 Q. 12 A. 13 Q. 14 A. 15 16 17 18 19 Q. 20 A. 21 22 23 Who put them together? I don't know who organized that group, Mr. Stewart. We've also presented the concept to the Natural Resource and Conservation Service that's in the Calhoun County area. Who was that that you presented that to? A gentleman named Randall -- I want to say Randall Wilson, I think is his name. Mr. Wilson? Yes. And who else? We have talked to -- we have spoken to the -- Well, we were talking to various government officials. We have spoken to members of the or a member of the Calhoun County Commission. Who? Robert Downing. I spoke to the Talladega County Commission about the concept in one of their public county commission meetings. REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. HARTOLDMON0031363 217 1 2 3 4 5 Q. 6 7 A. 8 9 Q 10 11 12 A. 13 Q 14 IS A, 16 17 18 19 0. 20 A. 21 Q 22 A. 23 0- I presented the concept to them there. We have spoken to -- Well, a gentleman named Pete Conroy at Jacksonville State. I be darn. 01' Pete. Just a big ol* environmentalist; isn't he? Pete has an interest in conservation. That is a fact. That's right. How much did y'all promise Jacksonville if Pete would support you? How much did we promise -Jacksonville State University if he would support you? We haven't promised them any -- Are you talking about in terms of money or resources? To the best of my knowledge -Whatever. I haven't promised them anything. Has the company promised him anything? Not to my knowledge. Who was Pete speaking for when he was REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC, 219 1 A. 2 Q. 3 4 5 A. 6 Q. 7 A. 8 9 Q. 10 A. 11 12 Q13 A. 14 Q 15 A. 16 17 18 19 20 Q. 21 A. 22 23 Q- Yes. Working group. Working group. Is that an official organization that's incorporated? No, it's not. Who all is in that one? A number of the people I have just mentioned to you. ,^ Mr. Wilson is there? * He attends the meetings that we have, yes . Mr. Conroy? Yes. He attends. Mr. Ghee comes every once in a while? No. Mr. Ghee hasn't attended any of these meetings. Although I have met with Mr. Ghee once and just presented the concept to him. And he liked it? He thought it was -- He thought it was a worthwhile project, I believe, yes. Did Mr. Ghee and Mr. Conroy say they REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 218 1 2 A. 3 C4 A. 5 6 7 S Q. 9 A. 10 11 Q 12 A. 13 14 15 16 Q. 17 18 19 20 21 22 A. 23 Q- talking to y'all -I don't know. -- about this conservation corridor? I don't believe he was speaking for anybody other than Pete and wanting to volunteer his time and services to help the project be successful. Pete wanted to help you out? He wanted to participate in the process, yes. Does he participate now actively in it? Only to the extent that we have developed what we call a Choccolocco Creek conservation corridor working group. Choccolocco Creek -- Let me get this down; because, Lord, I've got a lot of people that use Choccolocco Creek that may want to become members and may want to know where to go. So it's a Choccolocco Creek what? Conservation corridor. Conservation corridor? REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 220 1 2 3 4 A. 5 6 7 Q. 8 A. 9 Q 10 A. 11 12 Q 13 14 15 16 A. 17 18 Q19 A. 20 21 Q22 A. 23 would help you talk to the Governor about it, or did y'all just do that directly? I'm not aware of any conversations that have been held with the Governor about this project. Do you know David Roberson? Yes. I do know David Roberson. Have you talked to David about it? I believe David is aware of this proj ect. David is aware of this conservation corridor. Has he made this concept known to ADEM? I have made the concept known to ADEM. I don't know if David has. Who at ADEM have you talked to about it? I talked to people we work with in the land division. Steve Cobb. Is Steve on board with it? ADEM really hasn't taken -- I'd should say the land division really hasn't REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. HARTOLDMONOQ31364 221 1 2 3 4 5 6 Q. 7 S 9 10 11 A. 12 13 Q. 14 15 A. 16 17 Q. IS 19 20 21 22 23 A. taken a position as to whether they are for or against: it. I mean, they are going to have to -- There is a potential that we may present this as a remedial alternative. Goodness gracious. I was going to come to that, but you sort of leapt to that before me. So this would be an alternative for remediating the creek? It would be an alternative that could be considered, certainly. How is it that this would affect, if you know, the bottom line for Monsanto? It's difficult to predict. What would we compare it to? Well, if you had to dredge Choccolocco Creek to clean up all that PCB in the sediment that y'all put there, what would that cost be? Have y'all made an estimate of that? MR. COX: Object to the form. I'm not aware of the cost estimate REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 223 1 2 3 4 5 6 Q. 7 a 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 A. 17 IS Q. 19 A. 20 21 22 23 alternative that can be evaluated as part of the corrective measure of study process, I'm certainly not at a point where I'm willing to say that it's the final answer for Choccolocco Creek. What happens to the people who have to use Choccolocco and want to use Choccolocco Creek to fish in? I assume, based on what you're talking about, y'all plan to do no dredging and to leave the stuff on the bank over there in the floodplain if you get this conservation corridor idea sold. Isn't that correct? MR. COX: Object to the form. No. I wouldn't characterize that as correct, Mr. Stewart. What do you plan to do with it? Once again, we haven't completed collecting all the data from Choccolocco Creek. We completed a phase one investigation within the banks. REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 222 1 2 3 Q. 4 5 A. 6 7 a 9 Q. 10 A. 11 12 13 Q. 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 A. 21 22 23 that's been done to determine the cost of dredging it, no. You have been working how long on this conservation thing? The project more or less got off the ground about the time I came over and assumed responsibility. Alan Faust was the one -That dreamed it up? He initiated contact with the Conservation Fund. Then I subsequently took it over from him. Well, I guess I may be right and Buddy is wrong. Because 01' Alan was thinking about this at the time that I took his deposition and he just didn't tell me why he didn't think y'all were going to have to clean it up. Is that right? MR. COX: Object to the form. Once again, what Mr. Faust thought or what he said, I can't speak for. What I can tell you is that I'm not -- while I see this as an REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 224 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 e 9 10 11 12 13 Q. 14 15 A. 16 Q. 17 A. 18 19 Q, 20 21 22 A. 23 Q, We have a phase two investigation we need to do on the floodplain and we recommended in our phase one report. A phase three investigation to better understand --to better understand the distribution of PCBs in areas around the confluents of Snow Creek and Choccolocco Creek. And until we've collected that data and had a chance to evaluate it, it remains premature to determine what the final answer is for Choccolocco Creek. Have you recommended any dredging in Choccolocco Creek? Have I recommended any dredging?. Uh-huh (indicating yes). No. I never recommended that we dredge Choccolocco Creek. Has Solutia ever recommended any removal of sediment in Choccolocco Creek that has levels of PCBs in it? Not that I'm aware of, no. But it's -Do you know of anything that's on Che REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. HARTOLDMON0031365 225 1 2 3 A. 4 5 Q. 6 7 A. B Q. 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 A. 16 17 18 19 20 Q. 21 22 23 A. board right now that would compete with this conservation corridor idea? Until we complete our investigation, no. I mean -who else is involved in that organization besides Mr. Conroy? In the working group organization? Yeah. I want to know that. Because the people in Calhoun County are real interested in it. It's the first I have ever heard about it until I got these documents. I have lived there since '48, I haven't seen anything about it yet. Other members of the organization include -- Well, we have had --We have presented the idea to the members of the Logan Martin Lake Protective Association. Who is that? Is that that group that settled that deal down there on the lake or part of that? I'm not familiar with that particular REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 227 1 Q. 2 A. 3 4 Q. 5 A. 6 7 S 3 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Q. 18 19 A. 20 21 Q. 22 A. 23 0 - Do you know what she does in Birmingham? Not beyond her participation in the role with the Region 20-20 organization. Anybody else? As I said, we have held a -- excuse me -- we have held two meetings with -with members of the community; actual property owners along the creek. We had an attendance of approximately -- I guess maybe twenty-five different property owners and presented the idea to them. Also a number of -- several of those property owners participate in our working group meetings on a regular basis. How does this affect the work y'all are going to do on Snow Creek? It really has no bearing on what we do on Snow Creek. What is a Snow Creek liner system? A Snow Creek liner system? Right. REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 226 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 IB Q. 19 A. 20 21 Q. 22 A. 23 litigation. That occurred before I was involved. But it's my understanding that some members of that organization were plaintiffs in that lawsuit. So we presented the idea to them. We presented the idea to an organization called Region 20-20, which is really more based out of Birmingham. It is looking at greenways or conservation corridors as one way to promote smart growth in the greater Birmingham area, I guess, for lack of a better term. We spoke to them about the concept. As I have said, we have spoken to - Who is it that you spoke to? Specifically -- I'm not sure of the title. Her name is Ann Florie. Where does Ann live? I don't know. All I though is that she's -- REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 228 1 A. 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Q, 9 10 11 A, 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 I'm not aware that there is a liner system in place on Snow Creek. Is there something there I can -MR. STEWART: Mark that. (Plaintiffs' Exhibit Number One was marked for identification.) Tell me what -- This looks like Anniston Remedial Projects, 2001 Budget Plan, Long Term. It is a Snow Creek liner. What that is, Mr. Stewart -- this particular document is associated with my long-range planning process. I have to - - part of my job is to come up with cost estimates for, you know, potential activities that we may be involved with in the future. I make assumptions and provide rough order magnitude costs to put into that long-range plan. And certainly lining Snow Creek is a remedial alternative that would be considered. REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. HARTOLDMON0031366 229 1 Q. 2 A. 3 4 5 6 7 a 9 10 11 12 Q. 13 14 A. IS 15 Q. 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 When did y'all come up with that? When you say "you all" -- I mean, it was me that came up with it in the course of putting together this coat estimate. There has been no -- What's the term I'm looking for? There has been no predisposed idea that that's something we are aiming for. Once again, it's a matter of following the data and doing what's appropriate based on the data we get. That's a little different than what you had previously planned to do, isn't it? Could you be more specific in regard to what I previously planned to do? On Snow Creek. And that's what I thought we were talking about. If you want me to call it out each time, I will be glad to. To remediate Snow Creek. That's different The liner is different than what y'all had previously planned to do; isn't it? REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 231 1 2 3 Q. 4 5 6 1 e A. 9 10 11 Q. 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 A. 22 23 misunderstanding your question. But I never proposed - Was there another corrective measure that proposed -- let me ask it that way -- and discussed with you by Mr. Faust at some point in time before you came up with this liner idea? Mr. Faust and I never discussed potential corrective measures on Snow Creek that I recall. Was there ever any idea expressed to you by anybody that one of the possible methods for handling the problem in Snow Creek -- And that presumes you think there is a problem. And I assume since you put a liner there you thought maybe there was -- that you would do something different other than putting the liner in there? Did anybody ever tell you anything about that? No. Not to my knowledge. And regarding my assumptions about whether something is required in Snow REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 230 1 A. 2 3 4 5 Q. 6 7 5 9 10 11 A. 12 13 14 IS 16 17 Q. 18 19 20 21 22 23 A. I guess I'm confused by your question. I don't recall discussing anything that I previously planned to do on Snow Creek. I'm not talking about the discussions today. I'm talking about there was some corrective action that you all looked at in the past that is different from a liner of Snow Creek. I have little familiarity with any attempted corrective measures that were taken in the past on Snow Creek. MR. COX: No. You are misunderstanding. THE WITNESS: I must be. The proposal that had been made as to what to do on Snow Creek in connection with PCBs that are located there. Now, this is different. This liner is different than what previously had been proposed. I apologize. Perhaps I'm still REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC, 232 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Q. 10 11 A. 12 13 14 15 Q. 16 A. 17 10 19 20 21 22 23 Creek or not, we - - based on the data we collected in the phase one investigation that was -- which was submitted to ADEM, we did feel that based on what we found in Snow Creek that an evaluation of corrective measures was necessary, and we made recommendations to do that on certain portions of the creek. What is it that you recommended be done. this -Just that we evaluate the potential need for corrective measures on the creek, to do a study to determine what if any corrective measures -What did the study consist of? It would consist of an evaluation of various potential corrective measures . And you would evaluate those corrective measures based on the number of criteria, which are these criteria outlined in our RCRA program, if I'm not mistaken. And we submit that. And based on that evaluation you REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. HARTOLDMON0031367 233 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Q. 10 11 12 13 A. 14 IB Q. 16 17 18 A. 19 20 21 22 23 determine if corrective measures are required,- here is a recommended corrective measure that meets the criteria outlined in our RCRA permit. And that goes through a -- because it's a final corrective measure, it has to go through a public notice process and agency approval. What do you anticipate having to do on Snow Creek based on the levels that you have seen so far? Have you seen any levels in the sediment on Snow Creek? Yes. We have accepted PCBs in the sediment. Pretty high,- similar to what you found down there around the mall and the ball field? Yeah, relatively- In general what we found was we were finding PCBs in the upper third, roughly, of the creek. There was a middle section of the creek where we did not find any REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC, 235 1 2 3 4 Q. 5 6 7 8 9 A. 10 11 12 13 14 Q. 15 16 17 IS 19 A. 20 21 22 23 Q. corrective measure study one of the alternatives that is evaluated is removal. What about a diversion facility and a plan to divert the water from Snow Creek to that treatment facility before it reaches Choccolocco Creek? Have y'all looked at that? _ As far as diverting water to a treatment facility, no, we haven't looked at that. But once again, we haven't begun the process of doing a corrective measure study. So if your statement here today is that nobody has presented you something similar to that, that hasn't been discussed in the past as far as what to do on Snow Creek? No. No one has ever presented anything to me specifically. I mean, it's a process that we still have to go through on Snow Creek. So other than possibly dredging that REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 234 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Q. B A. 9 10 Q. 11 A. 12 13 14 15 Q. 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 A. 23 extensive amounts of PCBs. And then in the lower portions of the creek we began to see PCBs in the sediments again. Those were really the two areas we recommended for conducting the corrective measure studies. Did y'all do any aqueous phase testing? Aqueous phase meaning testing of the water? Yeah. I believe there was some testing of surface water in Snow Creek. But I can't recall the details of it without going back and referencing the reportYou talked about the lining system that you talked about doing for Snow Creek. Is there some removal of sediment that you contemplate that you would do in Snow Creek if those levels are consistent after you do this additional study? There is a potential that some sediments -- You know, in the course of doing the REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 236 1 2 3 4 5 6 A. 7 8 9 Q. 10 A. 11 Q. 12 A. 13 14 15 Q. 16 17 A. 18 19 Q. 20 A. 21 22 23 facility or dredging portions of the creek or removing sediment from portions of the creek and putting the liner in -What kind of liner are we talking about, Mr. - For the purpose of this cost estimate, Mr. Stewart, I'd have to go look -- I would have assumed a concrete liner. A concrete liner? Yes. All the way down Snow Creek? That would have been the basis for the cost that developed for the long-range planning process. And your anticipation than that cost would be what? The number that I have got here,- about two point eight million dollars. That's what y'all plan to do? No. Like I said, I had to make some very broad assumptions just to provide the -- my people I report to some flavor for what the future cost of Anniston REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. HARTOLDMON0031368 237 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Q. 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 A. 18 19 20 21 22 Q. 23 A. might look like. There is certainly no presumption of remedies. It's just what we consider potential alternatives that may be implemented. But that does not lock us into a predetermined path as far as evaluating remedial measures by any stretch of the imagination. Which would be cheaper -- while we are talking about expenses -- the corridor you are talking about -- not taking any sediment out of Choccolocco Creek and not removing any of the floodplain --or actually doing that? MR. COXr Object to the form. If I could just make sure I understand your question. What would be cheaper -Is your question would it be cheaper to do the conservation corridor than to dig up the PCBs? Right. Yeah. I don't think there is any REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. , 239 1 Q. 2 3 4 A. 5 6 7 3 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Q. 20 21 22 23 So it was certainly an indication that you removed it there? MR. COX: Object to the form. We removed -- First of all, there was only a portion of the material that was actually removed from the mall site. Most of the material was managed at the mall site. _^ Once again, we only removed materials in the areas where construction was going to be occurring at the mall, because we felt there was potential for if we did not do chat then the construction of the mall -- those materials could be mobilized and get back into the streams. I mean, that was the basis for being involved at the mall. But isn't one of the reasons they dredged Che creek up Chere -- Strike that. Don't you lose something when you do what you all are proposing to do,- REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 238 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Q. 9 10 A. 11 12 13 14 15 Q. 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 question about that. Once again, we don't have a thorough understanding of the distribution of PCBs. But from strictly a cost perspective, that's probably an accurate statement. And that's really what drives what y'all do? No. I wouldn't say the cost drives what we do at all. What drives what we do is the data we get and the interpretation of that data. Well, the data -- I believe you indicated earlier on Snow Creek -* indicates you probably ought to remove some of that sediment. You certainly removed it around the mall down there; almost down to one point per million, didn't you, because it was located along the creek? MR. COX: Object to the form. REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 24a 1 2 3 4 5 A. 6 7 8 9 Q. 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Q. 20 21 22 A. 23 both on Choccolocco Creek and on Snow Creek? Doesn't the community lose something, Mr. Branchfield? MR, COX: Object to the form. Once again, we haven't proposed anything to the community for a -- This is just for the purposes of budget planning, Mr. Stewart. It's not -Well, it appears to be that the budget planning is going along pretty good, and this complete conservation corridor and Snow Creek remedy is -- appears to be somewhat different than what happened in Sauget. I was just wondering if you recognized, Mr. Branchfield, that the community might lose something -- MR. COX: Object to the form. --in the way you all plan to approach this. MR. COX: object to the form. Once again, whatever -- whatever corrective measures were selected for REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. HARTOLDMON0031369 241 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Q. 10 11 12 13 A. 14 Q. 15 A. 16 Q. 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 A. Snow Creek and Choccoiocco Creek --be it lining the creek or removing the material or doing a conservation corridor --as being a part of a final corrective measure would go through a public notice period where the community would have an opportunity to comment on those particular remedies. If you lined the creek, you would basically lose the creek, wouldn't you? It becomes a concrete culvert, doesn't it? If you were to line it with concrete -A concrete ditch? Yeah. Essentially, yeah. And if you did not remove the PCBs from Snow Creek or you did not remove the PCBs from the sediment in Choccoiocco Creek, there is a continuing possibility that the fish will have PCBs and whoever fished Choccoiocco Creek wouldn't have that capability anymore, would they? Well, what we are seeing in Choccoiocco REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 243 1 Q. 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 A. 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Q. 19 20 21 22 23 Didn't the EPA want to dredge it -- require that it be dredged and that stuff be cleaned up on certain portions of the Hudson because of the contaminated fish and the danger to people? MR. COX: Object to the form. I know the EPA has issued something -- I don't know what -- either requesting or requiring ~- Once again, my familiarity is somewhat limited. They have issued something suggesting they would like to see the Hudson River dredged. I don't know the data or any other information that would have lead them to that conclusion. You would admit, Mr. Branchfield, that if in fact you don't remove the PCBs from the sediment in Choccoiocco Creek and Snow Creek there is a distinct possibility that the fish would continue to uptake PCBs and the danger still REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 242 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 S 9 10 11 12 13 Q. 14 15 16 17 18 19 A. 20 21 22 23 Creek -- and once again, you know, we don't have a complete set of data to complete that evaluation or draw any conclusions on that. But the preliminary data we have. when we look at the current data and historical data, suggest that the wells and PCBs in fish are declining. I'm not sure whether that would continue in the future. We have to do more study into that. But there certainly appears to be that potential. But isn't it a fact that it has been proven on the Hudson, Mr. Branchfield, that that stuff continues to move; PCBs continue to move that are trapped in sediment through the water colony? MR. COX: Object to the form. My knowledge of what's occurring at the Hudson River is what I read in the newspaper from time to time. I know very, very little about what is going on with the Hudson. REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 244 1 2 3 4 A. 5 6 7 0 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Q. 10 19 20 21 22 23 exists that caused the fish advisory in the first place? MR. COX: Object to the form. What you are asking, I believe, is for me to give an opinion on theoretically what may happen. I believe that theoretically there is a potential that over time those levels in fish will go down because the clean sediments that are coming into the system from tributaries to Choccoiocco Creek and Snow Creek will fill in on top of the sediments that are potentially impacted by PCBs,- and thereby reducing or even at some point in time perhaps eliminating their bioavailability. Well, that's what they have said in the Hudson. And they came to the conclusion that if they continue to move in the water colony it might be three hundred years before chat problem goes away. If that's correct on the Hudson, it certainly could be correct on REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. HARTOLDMON0031370 245 1 2 3 4 5 A. 6 7 Q, 8 A. 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Q. 20 21 22 23 Choccolocco, and you would take away the ability of people to fish, wouldn't you. Mr. Branchfield? MR. COX: Object to the form. Once again, I'm not familiar with the data that lead to those conclusions. Or consume those fish. what we have seen on Choccolocco Creek, though, is there has been a study of reduction in PCB levels in fish over time; suggesting that what we believe may be happening may in fact be happening. Do we have enough data to draw that conclusion at this point in time? I don't think so. But we are continuing to collect that data and evaluate that possibility. what you all basically have attempted to do here in Anniston, which is what you were not able to do in Sauget, when they dredged the creek in Sauget is to use your money and your political influence REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 247 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Q. 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 such that it's not available for -- to get into the food chain or -- dependent on what we are talking about -- if we are talking about the creek or residential properties or whatever -it's to eliminate the potential exposure pathways. And that's what we are trying to accomplish with remediation, and that's what we will continue to try to accomplish. (Plaintiffs' Exhibit Number Two was marked for identification.) Let me show you Plaintiffs' Exhibit Two and just ask you to take a look at it. And then I want to ask you if it in fact indicates that what you all are trying to do or what you all accomplished to dace, as far as remediation over there on that plant site and in the area immediately adjacent to it, was exactly what I said, to buy up what you needed in order to put a BandAid on the REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC T 246 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 A. 8 9 Q, 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 A. 18 19 20 21 22 23 and save the company millions and millions of dollars and not do for the people in Calhoun County or Talladega County what you did in Illinois; isn't that correct? MR. COX: object to the form. No. I would disagree with that statement. And in addition to being having that attitude about the creeks and the waterways, you had that same attitude. did you not, about the remediation of the property that's immediately around the plant site, didn't you. Mr. Branchfield? MR. COX: Object to the form. No. Our goal with remediation is to, once again, you know, collect the data, evaluate the data, and take the corrective measures to be sure the stuff that cannot be mobilized or transported from its current location and to remove it as a -- at least place it in a form REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC- 248 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 A. 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 13 19 Q. 20 21 22 23 situation, get out as cheaply as you possibly can, and control the contaminated area so you don't have to remediate . That's really what you did, isn't it? MR, COX: Object to the form. That's not my perception of it, Mr. Stewart. And certainly nobody has ever come up to me and told me that - suggested that cost has to be a factor in what we choose to do. What our goal is and what it will continue to be is to remediate the properties in accordance with - - I will use the term "environmental regulations that we are working under," and we will continue to do that. Now, here is a document that I put before you that's Exhibit Two that is called Anniston Remediation Cost, Storm Water and Sediments. And you have got storm water REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. HARTOLDMON0031371 249 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 A. 8 q. 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 A. 17 19 Q. 19 20 21 22 23 retention basins, south landfill cap and sediment control on east property. purchased property plus relocation of residents and a church. That's about two point seven five million dollars. Right. And back here on the next page, which is DSW 12211B of Plaintiffs' Exhibit Two to your deposition, would you read for the record for me paragraph three? MR. COX: You can read the whole document if you want to. He wants you to read paragraph three out loud. If I could read paragraph three out loud, then, so I can understand -That's fine. Why don't you read -- But first read that. And then I want to ask you some questions about it. If you need to refer to the whole document to try to figure that one out, that's fine with-me. REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 251 1 Q. 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 A. 14 Q. 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 A. 22 23 Okay. Now, I sort of understand that. But maybe I'm looking at it with a jaundice eye. But it appears to me that somebody was trying to control the issues that would be associated -- and if you read the first part of that -- with remediation on private .property. Isn't that right?; Isn't that what that says? That's the first one. You have to answer out. Yes. That's what I'm reading. And one of those issues that you all were worried about from the very beginning -- and this happened to be at the time y'all were determining what to do on the east side of the plant over there, as I understand it -- Because that is what it refers to; doesn't it? It appears to be talking about remediation on the east side of the plant, yes. REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC, 250 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Q. 17 18 A. 19 20 21 22 23 MR. COX: Not to belabor the point. I'm just going to object. Because it's not stated in the document, that would appear to be a document prepared before Mr. Branchfield was employed by Solutia. MR. STEWART: I think it was. That doesn't matter. I'm just asking him a question about what they decided to do. I know it was. (By Mr. Stewart) Go ahead. Read that out loud, please. What number three says is, "Avoid the issues associated with remediation on private property,- including how clean is clean exposure concerns, traffic, adverse PR associated with remediation in a low-income community, et cetera." REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 252 1 Q. 2 3 4 A. 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Q. 13 14 A. 15 Q. 16 17 10 19 20 A. 21 22 23 Q. And that's when you got over there on the people's property in the Cobb Town, Sweet Valley area; isn't it? I can only assume from the limited information that I'm reading here. I don't know the context or where this document came from. Certainly the fact that it talks about Mars Hill Church -- Mars Hill was located over in the vicinity you talked about, yes. And one of those is including how clean is clean. Is that right? Yes, that's correct. Which would mean that maybe a property owner who owned a house there would want you to remediate the property down to get it off the land. Isn't that right? MR. COX; Object to the form. That's certainly the potential that that's what a property owner would want, yes . And you would have to take it somewhere REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC- HARTOLDMON0031372 253 1 2 A. 3 4 Q. 5 A. 6 7 8 Q. 9 10 11 12 13 Q. 14 A. 15 16 17 0. 18 A. 19 Q. 20 A. 21 Q. 22 23 and dispose of it? If you were to dig it up, sure, you would have to do that. And test before you started doing that? Yeah. You would have to test before you could remove the material. That's correct. And if you owned it, you could just lay some old permeable geo-textile material over it and cover over it with a little clay and leave it just like it is. MR. COX: Object to the form. Isn't that right? You are correct; from the perspective that that's what we did on the east side property. That's what you did? Right. That's what you did? Yes And then exposure concerns in traffic -If you control that property, then you wouldn't have to.worry about the little REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 255 1 2 A. 3 4 5 Q. 6 7 A. 8 Q. 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 A. 19 20 21 22 23 isn't that what that means? In the context of this document, the way it's written, you could make that assumption, I believe, yes. Association with remediation in a low income community. Is that right? That's what it says, yes. If one really wanted,. Mr. Branchfield, to make sure that you accomplished that objective, one way to do it, isn't it, Bud, is to go into that community and not really tell them the truth about what you were doing, get the property that you needed for the remediation project, and you would have the bull by the tail, wouldn't you? MR. COX: Object to the form. Well, you are asking for my opinions on this, Mr. Stewart. I'm not -- Once again, I was not the project manager back then. So I'm not familiar with what the context within which these decisions were made. I'm not familiar REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 2 54 1 2 3 4 5 A. 6 7 8 Q. 9 A. 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Q. 17 18 19 20 A. 21 22 Q. 23 ol' children being out there or families using their property, raising gardens, hogs, chickens, having a community, would you? If you own the property, those are certainly things that you don't have to be concerned with. That's correct. The community is gone, right? I think that's a rather harsh way of putting it. But the community has been offered an opportunity to sell their property as opposed to having it being inconvenienced by people digging up their yards. And then they have got this thing called adverse PR. Is that public relations? Is that what that means? MR. COX: Object to the form. I'm not familiar with this document. I didn't write it. But -Wouldn't you assume, Mr. Branchfield -you seem to be a pretty bright fellow -- REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 256 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 0 9 Q. 10 11 12 13 A. 14 15 Q. 16 A. 17 18 Q. 19 20 A. 21 22 23 with what communication had been had with the community. Perhaps the community had expressed an interest in being purchased. I just don't know the answer to those questions. All I'm familiar with is what we did, which you're obviously familiar with. Isn't that what you did in paragraph three? Didn't y'all buy it all up for the very reasons that are stated in paragraph three? I know we bought it. I don't know that those are the reasons we did it. Wasn't it cheaper for you? I don't know. I'm not familiar with any cost evaluations that were done. Isn't that what you're planning on doing on Snow Creek, son? Once again, you know, there has been no -- I have no predisposed idea on what we are going to do on Snow Creek. We are going to follow what the data requires REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. HARTOLDMON0031373 257 1 2 Q. 3 4 A. 5 6 7 Q. a 9 A. 10 11 12 Q. 13 14 15 16 A. 17 18 19 20 21 Q. 22 23 us to do. Who makes y'all's political contributions? For the company as a whole or -- I mean -- I guess the simplest answer to your question -Who gets involve here in Alabama? Who makes the contributions here? x don't know specifically who decides who and how much money will be contributed to political campaigns. who would be most likely to contact the Governor about these kinds of things that you want done here in Calhoun County, son? Within the company, 1 think anything that was to be done along those lines would have to be approved by our vice president for government affairs, Glenn Rustin. That's the fellow that has previously asked Mr. Roberson to sort of keep the governor and his .wife and his assistant REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 259 1 A. 2 3 4 5 Q. 6 7 A. 8 9 10 Q. 11 12 A. 13 Q. 14 A. 15 Q. 16 17 A. 18 019 20 21 22 23 A. I believe Mr. Rustin and our plant manager, David Cain. There was one other person who attended; although I cannot recall who that person was. Was that shortly after the last election? I don't know that there was any -- I honestly don't recall the date that meeting was held. . You don't recall the date the meeting was held in Washington? It would have been last fall. Last fall? Yeah. Would it be sometime after the November vote? I don't recall what time. Of course, that took a little while to be counted. But was it after they counted it and told Junior he could have it? MR. COX; Which time? Once again, Mr. Stewart, I don't recall REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 2S8 1 2 A. 3 4 5 Q. 6 7 8 A. 9 Q. 10 11 A. 12 Q, 13 A. 14 15 Q. 16 A. 17 Q. 18 19 20 A. 21 22 23 Q. -- chief assistant up to date? I'm not familiar with any conversations that Mr. Rustin and Mr. Roberson have had. He's the one that would handle the contributions if there were any to the campaign? I believe so, yes. Who is it that arranged y'all's Washington trip about this site? Washington trip? Didn't you make one? I have not made any trips to Washington -Didn't somebody ---in the context of --- from your company recently make a trip to Washington to meet with the EPA about this site? There was a meeting that was held, Mr. Stewart. I'm trying to recall who attended that meeting. Tell me if you can remember. REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 260 1 2 3 4 5 Q, 6 A. 7 8 Q. 9 A. 10 Q. 11 12 A. 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 the date of that meeting. I wasn't really involved in any of the planning or preparations or anything else that went into that -Was the new group in there at the time? New group being -- MR. COX: The new administration. The new administration. Once again, I don't recall. What was the purpose of the meeting, if you recall? My limited understanding was that the purpose of the meeting was to speak with some of the -- some of the people within the EPA. Once again, I don't know who specifically was met with. Just to discuss with them, you know, Solutia's position with regard to the remediation in the Anniston area, that we were -- wanted to be proactive and work with the agencies and come up with --do what the --do what we were REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. HARTOLDMON0031374 261 1 2 3 Q. 4 5 6 7 A. 8 9 Q. 10 11 A. 12 13 14 Q, IS A. 16 Q. 17 A. 18 Q. 19 A. 20 21 Q. 22 23 required to do in the Anniston area. meet our remedial obligations. And Mr. Cain was there and Mr. Austin was there. Anybody else? Was Mr. Kaley there? Bob usually goes along on those trips. I don't believe Dr. Kaley attended that particular meeting. Was anybody other than Mr. Rust in there from the public relations side? I don't believe so. Like I said, I don't recall specifically who the third person who attended was. Who is it that you talked to at EPA? Who did I calk to at EPA? They. Who did they talk to? Right. 1 don't know specifically who they talked to. Was it the person that was the administrative assistant to the president and head of EPA? REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 263 1 A. 2 Q. 3 4 A. 5 6 7 Q. S 9 10 11 A. 12 13 14 15 16 17 0. IS 19 A. 20 21 22 23 Q. I don't recall the name of the person. Do you know whether or not they came from corporate headquarters in Monsanto? I'm not familiar what their role or position was within Monsanto, when they worked for the company. Did you receive a report about the results of that meeting from either Mr. Rustin or Mr. Cain?. Did y'all talk about it? No. I never had any specific conversations beyond, "How was the trip; the trip was -- I thought it was a good trip and it was" -- you know, that it was -- that it was a productive meeting, that it was useful. He told you that he thought it was a useful meeting? Only from the perspective that we just had a goal of, once again, introducing some of the people in Solutia and, you know -Sort of letting them know who you were? REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 262 1 A. 2 3 Q. 4 s 6 7 a 9 A. 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 i? Q. 18 19 A. 20 21 22 23 Q. I don't know who they talked to at the EPA. Do you know of anybody who has been appointed to the EPA, in any positions within the EPA, after this new administration has taken place -- or have taken their positions that came out of Monsanto? I believe that there is -- I don't know the position. But there is one person that was -- had some previous Monsanto experience that was appointed to a position within the EPA. But I don't know specifically what that position was other than it was on the federal level; not on a regional level. And it would be a person that would be close to the Governor? I don't know specifically the title or responsibilities. It's something I caught in the newspaper. It just caught my eye, whatever. Who was the person? REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 264 1 A. 2 3 4 5 6 7 Q. a 9 A. 10 li 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 Letting them know who we were and letting them know the company did have a proactive commitment to addressing its remedial obligations; not just in Anniston, necessarily, but the company in general; as we do on all our sites. But you talked about Anniston since Mr. Cain went along? Yeah. I believe that Mr. Cain did attend the meeting. Because this was at the same time, Mr. Stewart, that we were -- the EPA was just becoming involved in Anniston. So we thought -- The EPA had had limited involvement in Anniston up until, you know, last year, to the best of my knowledge. You know, we -- it was decided that it would be a good opportunity, if the EPA was going to be in town, to let them know that Solutia was a company committed to meeting its remedial obligations; specifically in Anniston, REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC- HARTOLDMON0031375 265 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Q. 3 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 13 19 20 21 22 23 but the company in general. MR. STEWART; Let's take a short break. MR. COX: I was going to ask you if we could do that. (A break was taken). (By Mr. Stewart) Let me show you something -- Let's look at something else, if you can, Mr. Branchfield, and ask you if you are familiar with these documents right here. We won't mark them at this time. But there is one entitled Contaminated Sediment News, Chlorination of Polychlorinated Biphenyl Congeners, Assisted Thermal Stripping Action for Removal of PCBs in Contaminated Soil, Sediment Remediation for Reducing the Toxicity, and Bio-accumulation of Chemical Contaminants, Site Demonstration of Terra Clean Responses, Mobile Solvent Extraction Process. And there is an Electric Blanket Boils PCBs REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 267 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 3 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Q. 18 19 20 21 22 23 information related to remediation. That may be tied up in that group of documents. There was a separate set of documents that were in the documents in Mr. Branchfield's file that mainly consist of his monthly reports he has done since he has been at the Anniston site; as well as some other budgetary information; one of which has been marked as Exhibit One. MR. STEWART: Right. (By Mr. Stewart) Now, let's go to another We talked about the Washington meeting. Let's go to another item, Mr. Branchfield. And it talks about a meeting that you attended in August of 2000, It says, "Attended an EPA REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 266 1 2 3 4 A. 5 6 Q. 7 a 9 A10 Q. n 12 13 14 A. 15 16 17 19 19 20 21 22 23 From the Soil. Are you familiar with any of those? I don't believe I have read any of these documents, Mr. Stewart. Did you gather any of those documents yourself, or did somebody make you familiar with those documents? No. Those were provided to me by your lawyer. Do you have any idea as to who might have gathered those documents? No. MR. COX; And those were specifically -- Let me just speak to that. Those were in response to a document request. We identified some other information that may have misstated, in terms of the specifics, as far as cost REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 268 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 9 A. 9 Q. 10 A. 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Q. 21 22 A. 23 community involvement conference in San Francisco where a presentation was made by EPA, Citizens Against Solutia, and Sweet Valley-Cobb Town Task Force regarding community involvement in the Anniston area. Do you remember that meeting? Yes, 1 do. Why is it that you went out there? Well, they were giving a presentation on issues related to the remediation, what was going on in Anniston. And we felt it was important to have a representative at that meeting to be familiar and knowledgeable with what was said. So I elected to go to that meeting so that i could -- so that we would know. When you say they, who are you talking about? Our project management group, the group I worked with conducting the remediation REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. HARTOLDMON0031376 269 1 2 Q. 3 4 A. 5 6 Q. 7 A. 8 Q. 9 10 A. 11 12 Q. 13 14 A. 15 16 17 18 19 20 Q. 21 A. 22 Q, 23 in Anniston. So "they" is your group that told you about it? Is that -The EPA actually informed me that the meeting was going to be taking place. The EPA did? Yes. Who is it at EPA that informed you that this meeting was going to take place? At the time her name was Cheryl Catinero; I believe was her last name. Why is it that she informed you, Cheryl Catinero -- Is that her name? Yes. I don't know why she informed me specifically; other than Anniston was on the agenda. I assume she thought it was --It would be complete speculation as to why she called me; other than out of professional courtesy. Professional courtesy? Yeah. Wasn't this a citizens group that was going out there to make this . REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 271 1 2 3 A. 4 5 <2, 6 A. 7 Q. 8 9 A. IQ 11 12 13 Q. 14 15 16 A. 17 18 19 Q. 20 A. 21 22 23 would talk to you about --or told her to tell you about going out there? No. She never told me somebody told her to tell me to go out there. Who is her boss, Wes Hardegree? I don't know who she reports to. Who do you deal with over there at Region Four? ,,, At this point in time primarily Steve Spurling, who is the on-scene coordinator for the EPA in the Anniston area. Who else have you dealt with, say, in the last couple of years over there at EPA? For a short period of time I dealt with Karen Knight, who was Steve Spurling's predecessor. Who else? Let me think. We worked with a gentleman named Wes Hardegree, who you mentioned. But primarily from the perspective of copying him on submittals REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 270 1 2 3 A. 4 5 6 7 8 9 Q, IQ 11 12 13 14 15 A. 16 17 18 19 Q. 20 21 22 A. 23 Q. presentation to -- What kind of organization were they making this to? It was primarily -- the people attending this conference were primarily people who in some, way, shape, or form were interested or involved with community involvement issues as related to remedial projects. So it wasn't a meeting where chemical manufacturer folks were there. It was a meeting that might have had something to do with contaminating an area like Anniston. It was people who were trying to get it cleaned up, citizens groups? I don't think it was folks so much on people trying to get it cleaned up as much as citizens participating in remedial processes. Well, did you say somebody from --in particular from -- She's an employer of Region Four? I believe she was at the time, yes. And did she say anybody in particular REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 272 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Q. 8 A. 9 Q. 10 11 A. 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 Q. 22 23 to the state, to ADEM. But I had very few direct conversations with Mr. Hardegree. I have had some conversations with a gentleman named Craig Brown who works with the T0SCA branch at the EPA. Craig Brown? Yes. What have your conversations with Mr. Brown been about? Once again, because he works in the TOSGA branch of EPA and was -- I'm not quite sure what his role was within EPA for overseeing activities at the Anniston site. But he had an interest in what we were doing, so we copied him on documents. I maybe talked to him two or three times during the course of my tenure down in Anniston. Anybody else that y'all worked with over there at EPA besides Craig and Karen; you did; Craig and Karen and Steve and REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. HARTOLDMON0031377 273 1 2 A3 4 5 6 7 3 Q. 9 10 A. 11 12 13 14 0. 15 16 A. 17 18 19 Q. 20 21 22 23 Wes? There is a gentleman named Russ McLean who was copied on a number of documents. He was also in the RCRA branch. But I never had any conversations with him that 1 can recall- I just know his name from copying him on documents. Why do you copy Russ when you don't have any contact with him? I believe he's associated with the RCRA Branch. And because for a period of time all of our activities were being done under the RCRA umbrella. Has that changed? Is it still under the RCRA umbrella? Some of the activities are under RCRA. Some of them, as we discussed earlier. are covered under the CERCLA. Which of those -- We sort of have trouble sometimes figuring out exactly who y'all are under. I understand earlier you were talking about the -- y'all sort of float REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC, 275 1 2 3 4 5 Q. 6 7 8 A. 9 10 11 12 q. 13 A. 14 15 16 17 18 Q. 19 20 21 A. 22 23 Those activities -- there is no question in my mind that the EPA is providing the primary oversight for those particular activities. How did they get control of the ball field? MR. COX: He's getting to that. Yeah. I was verbally notified that the EPA would be overseeing'activities at the ball field and that ADEM would not provide the primary oversight of that. who told you that? I can't recall, Mr. Stewart, specifically. I would assume it would have been communicated to me in a conversation with Mr. Spurling. I can't recall specifically. Is that because the community down there in Oxford didn't trust ADEM to supervise that activity? I really have no knowledge Of any discussions between the EPA and ADEM regarding who oversees what, I don't REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 274 1 2 3 4 s A. 6 7 s 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 back and forth. You talked about the ball field being under EPA. As I understand that, that's supposed to be an ADEM controlled area. Our understanding ia that -- what 1 have been told -- although I have not been given any written correspondence from the regulatory agencies to this effect -- but what I have been told is that certainly there are activities defined in the AOC that we have signed with the EPA under which oversight is done by the EPA. Specifically the residential sampling program around the area of the plant, the Eleventh Street ditch work, and work on another waterway which we call the 9th Street Creek. I believe the official title in the AOC is the West 9th Street and Eulaton Street Creek, if I'm not mistaken. Those activities -- I believe that more or less covers what's in the current AOC. REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 276 1 2 3 Q. 4 5 6 A. 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Q. 19 A. 20 Q. 21 A. 22 23 know what the basis is for the selection process, What did Mr. Spurling say about why he understood they were supposed to be in charge of it? He didn't give me any reason, other than EPA was going to be providing primary oversight for the work down at the Oxford ball fields. I didn't, you know -- And from my perspective, Mr. Stewart, whether I'm reporting to the EPA or ADEM, it doesn't change the process I go through to try to do my job. It's just who I talk to. So, you know, the whys and ifs and so on and so forth were really no consequence to me, and X didn't ask. Who do you report to on the creek? On Snow Creek or Choccolocco Creek? Both. For Snow Creek right now there is a zone --a residential sampling zone identified in the AOC that's in the REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. HARTOLDMON0031378 277 1 2 3 Q. 4 A. S 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 10 19 20 21 22 Q. 23 floodplain of Snow Creek. And I report to the era on that. Who at the EPA? I'm sorry. Yeah. That's correct. The EPA. Steve Spurling. It's under the AOC that we signed with them. As far as the actual area within the banks of the creek and areas -- with some exception outside the banks of the creek -- I still assume that I report to ADEM,- although there has been no correspondence regarding any work out in those areas. The exceptions to that right now are regarding the residential properties associated with Quintard Mall. I currently report to Mr. Spurling on those particular issues. Certainly the work at the Oxford park I report to Mr. Spurling on also. So the Quintard Mall you report to Mr. Spurling and the Oxford you report . REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 279 1 A. 2 Q. 3 A. 4 Q. 5 A. 6 Q. 7 8 A. 9 10 Q. 11 12 13 A. 14 Q. 15 A. 16 17 18 Q. 19 20 21 22 A. 23 Q. I don't know a specific title. who is his employer? who is over him? His supervisor? Right. I believe it's Mr. Crockett. And then who, if you understand, is over them? I believe Mr. Crockett reports to Mr. Cobb. So Steven Cobb is for all intents and purposes involved in the Anniston project? That's correct. Has the final say over it? I don't know if he has the final say or not. I'm not sure who has final say over activities in Anniston within ADEM. Tell me, if you would, if you all have been -- any of these things that you all have done as interim measures have been signed off as final on the plant site. On the plant site? Yeah. REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 279 1 2 3 4 5 6 A. 7 8 9 Q. 10 A. ii 12 Q. 13 14 A. 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Q. 23 to Mr. Spurling. The residential properties in Anniston you report to Hr. Spurling. But the -- What about the plant site? Who do you report to on that? The Solutia plant site I still report to ADEM for those activities,- as well as the adjacent properties, which we own. Who do you work with at ADEM? Primarily a gentleman by the name of Jeff Anderson. That's the person that took Grossiano's place? He's the person that I now report to. Whether he specifically took Mr. Grossiano's -- They did something organizationally down there at ADEM, Mr, Stewart, that I'm not familiar with. I actually believe there is a gentleman named Chip Crockett that took Mr. Grossiano's place. what is Mr. Anderson's position with ADEM? REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 280 1 A. 2 3 4 5 Q. 6 7 A. 3 9 10 11 12 Q. 13 14 A. 15 16 17 18 19 20 Q. 21 A. 22 Q. 23 Except for the -- Well, let me think. No. I don't believe anything has been signed off on as a final corrective measure. What about the work that's been done on the south landfill? I know that the cap and cover project that we did on the western portion of the landfill was done as an interim measure and has not been accepted as a final corrective measure. The west landfill? That's the one west of the plant? Right. The west landfill --my interpretation is that has been accepted as a final corrective measure, because it's not identified as a solid waste management unit in our RCRA permit. When was that done? The work on the west landfill? No. The acceptance by -- Is it ADEM that accepted it, the EPA? REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. HARTOLDMON0031379 281 1 A. 2 3 4 S 6 7 q. 8 9 10 A. 11 12 Q. 13 A. 14 Q. IS 16 17 A. 18 19 20 21 Q. 22 23 A. All I know, Mr. Stewart, Is it's not identified as a solid waste management unit in our permit. I don't know when or if any -- I don't know how that came to pass. It was before my time. It really wasn't ever identified, Mr. Branchfield, as a solid waste unit in your - It's not identified in our current permit, which is -When was that issued? 1997, I believe. Well, how in the world did you do the work on that, if it wasn't permitted? MR. COX: Object to the form. The work was -- There were some work plans submitted to the state, to ADEM, describing the work we were going to do on the west landfill. Well, the state administers RCRA; doesn't it? That's correct, yes. . REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 283 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 A. 14 15 16 17 Q. 18 19 20 21 22 23 had a facility like that, a waste facility like that. It wasn't in the RCRA permit of the plant that was involved with that property or on that property. It would go to CERCLA, wouldn't it? They are the ones that would do it if it wasn't in the RCRA permit. The state didn't administer any CERCLA problems, did they, or supervise the cleanup or remediation, did they? They generally don't do it. All the work on the west landfill. Mr. Stewart, was done before I became involved in the project. As I have said -I'm not talking about Anniston, Mr. Branchfield. Don't get me wrong. I'm trying to get you to answer the question. Normally if it's not in the RCRA permit it would be done under the EPA -- MR. COX: Object to the form. REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 282 1 Q. 2 A. 3 4 5 Q. 6 7 s A. 9 10 Q. 11 12 13 A. 14 15 Q. 16 17 18 A. 19 20 21 22 Q. 23 There wasn't any permit? It was not -- In our permit that was signed in 1997, it was not identified as a solid waste management unit. Was it identified at any point in time as a solid waste management unit under a RCRA permit over there? I'm not familiar with the status of the permit before 1997. Were they just sort of grandfathered in? Is that what happened? Is that what you understood happened? I don't know what happened with it, Mr. Stewart. Wouldn't it be normal if it wasn't in the RCRA permit that you would do it under CERCLA and do it through EPA? It was done with the oversight of the Alabama Department of Environmental Management. There were plans developed, characterization reports completed. I understand that. But I'm talking about normally what you would do if you REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 284 1 Q. 2 A. 3 4 5 Q. 6 7 B 9 10 11 A. 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Q. 20 21 22 23 -- supervision. Remediation work in general of that nature is done either under ADEM oversight or EPA oversight. That's generally when the RCRA permit that the entity has includes that as a landfill. And it didn't. I believe you told us it didn't. The one you oversaw in '97 didn't. MR. COX: Object to the form. Like I said earlier, Mr. Stewart, the only thing I can speak to is -- to the best of my knowledge it's not identified as a solid waste management unit under our 1997 RCRA permit, which would -- I mean, that's the only fact I can provide you, I'm afraid. I'm not familiar with what was done. You don't know what slight of hand was pulled to get that situation worked out so the state would regulate it rather than the EPA? MR. COX: Object to the form. REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. HARTOLDMON0031380 285 1 A. 2 3 4 5 Q. 6 7 A. S 9 10 11 12 13 14 Q. 15 A. 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Q. 23 I don't believe there was any slight of hand. Everything was done -- As I said, there were reports that were submitted; the EPA was copied on those reports. So that's been accepted, as you understand it, by whom? As I said, I don't know, you know --As far as it being accepted as a final corrective measure, all I can state is that it's not in our current permit. I do know that we are being asked to look at the west landfill under the current on-site R05 process. By whom? By the state, by ADEM. And we have done investigations of groundwater and have provided soil characterization data into the west landfill to the state. And that information is currently being reviewed by the state. Well, let me ask you something. On that landfill and on the landfill that's REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 287 1 A. 2 3 Q. 4 A. 5 Q. 6 A. 7 8 9 10 11 Q. 12 A. 13 14 15 16 Q. 17 A. 18 19 20 21 Q. 22 A. 23 Reviewed documents, to the best of my knowledge. Talk to you? They talked to me, yes. What documents did they review? A number of reports that we prepared and submitted to the regulatory agencies related to our on-site and the work we did on the landfills and also on the east side properties. Anything else they did? I'm not - - As I said, all I know is that they reviewed documents. And I don't know who else or what else they might have done in their evaluation. How long did they stay? They spent one day at the Solutia facility just looking at things, that I'm aware of. I don't know how long they were in Anniston. One day at the Solutia facility? One day in contact with me at the Solutia facility. I don't know how much REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 286 1 2 3 4 5 6 A. 7 8 Q. 9 10 11 12 n 14 15 A. 16 17 Q. 18 A. 19 Q. 20 21 A. 22 23 Q. south of 202, tell me, if you would, Mr. Branchfield, if anybody from Cincinnati -- some Tiger Team came in and looked at it from the EPA/ not ADEM, the EPA. I don't necessarily understand the term "Tiger Team." That's the term the EPA used with us. I'm just using -- Well, a group of people from Cincinnati connected with the EPA. MR. CUNNINGHAM: Cincinnati or Newark? MR. COX: Newark, New Jersey. There were several individuals who came down from New Jersey. When? Six months ago, eight months ago. What tests did they perform when they came down? I'm not aware of any tests that they performed. What did they do? REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC- 288 1 2 Q. 3 4 5 A. 6 7 8 9 Q. 10 A. 11 12 13 14 15 Q. 16 17 IS A. 19 20 21 Q. 22 A. 23 Q. time. Is that the day that -- the same day -is that when they looked at the documents? They discussed -- We had some discussions with them that the documents than we had generated in the past, I think - Such as - Reports that were done on the landfills and our inner measures reports, characterization reports, copies of our work plans for conducting the on-site R05. Reports of that nature. Well, they didn't do any tests. Did they look at any of your test results? Did you share that with them? Certainly. Any characterization results or test results that we had done were provided -- provided them. Soil? Soil, yes. Air? REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. HARTOLDMON0031381 239 A. 2 0. 3 A. 4 Q. 5 A. 6 7 a 9 10 n 12 13 Q. 14 15 16 A. 17 18 19 Q. 20 21 22 A. 23 0. Air. Did you give them well monitoring data? Groundwater monitoring data, yes. Anything else? Surface water data, which was collected as part of the R05 process. We gave them -- Specifically what they looked at, I can't say. But they certainly had access to reports regarding the engineering and design of the caps and cover systems that we put in place around the facility. Did they make any recommendations as to further testing that might need to he done? We have not seen their report or any recommendations that they might have made. Have you gotten any indications from Mr. Hardegree, Mr. Spuriing, or anybody else with the EPA there may be some? Wo. What did you understand the nature of REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 291 1 A. 2 3 Q. 4 5 6 7 A. S 9 10 Q. 11 A. 12 13 14 Q. 15 16 17 18 A. 19 20 21 22 Q. 23 A. We had no conversations as to why they were coming to look at that. Did you have any conversation with the people when they got there as to what they were looking for or why they were there? Only to the extent of asking them what type of reports or information they are interested in reviewing.. Have you - As far as why they were wanting to review those particular reports, we didn't ask those questions. Have you had any indication from Mr. Spuriing as to whether or not they are going to make recommendations or that they had made recommendations? Mr. Spuriing has told me that a -- that a report has been provided to the state, to ADEM, to review. And that's the extent of my knowledge. By this group? The report was prepared by this group, REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 290 1 2 3 4 A. 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Q. 13 A. 14 Q, 15 16 17 A. ia 19 20 Q. 21 22 23 this group coming to the facility was? What was the purpose of them being there? I don't know specifically why they were looking at the plant site other than to review what had been done in the past. And what was told to me was to make recommendations for collecting additional data, if any additional collection of data was required. That's really the extent of what I was -Who told you that? Mr. Spuriing. And why is it that Mr. Spuriing said this group was coming in to look at the landfill? He did not specifically provide me any information about why this specific group was selected. Why is it that he said -- not why they were selected. But why is it he said they were coming in and having a look at your landfill and remediation work? REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 292 1 2 3 Q. 4 5 6 A. 7 8 9 10 Q. 11 A. 12 13 14 15 Q. 16 17 A. 18 19 20 21 22 23 yes. And it was provided to the state to review. And what did you understand is going to happen to them once the state reviews it? My understanding is that after the state has completed their review that the report will be made available to the public; including Solutia. So you know sort of the time frame? I don't know the time frame, quite honestly. I was told this would be done several months ago. And it's not complete. And I don't know why. Mr. Spuriing has been keeping you up to date on when that will take place? I wouldn't say he's been regularly keeping me up to date. We have a natural curiosity as to what they may have found or recommended. So periodically I will ask him. I don't think he really has much control over the process. He can't REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. HARTOLDMON0031382 293 1 2 Q. 3 4 A. 5 Q. 6 7 8 9 A. 10 11 12 13 14 15 Q. 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 A. provide really any useful information. Do they look at any other entity's data other than your data, to your knowledge? Not to ray knowledge. No other air data, no other water data, no other groundwater monitoring? I guess yours would be the only that would be that. well, the EPA had collected quite a bit of data from the Anniston area/ including air data and soil data. I believe that data might have been part of their review process. But I don't know for sure. Do you understand that they are the sign-off on the workability of your interim measures to see if they are working or not? Is that your understanding of what they are going to do; tell you whether or not your system you have in place is preventing the off-migration of PCBs? I'm not aware if that's the specific REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 295 1 property is found to have greater than 2 ten parts per million in either the 3 front yard or the backyard or both -- 4 and that sample is taken from the 5 surface soils, the upper three inches -- 6 then what we are -- what we are required 7 to do under the AOC is to request 8 permission from that property owner to 9 get access to their property, to conduct 10 sampling at depth. Because we actually 11 have a two-tiered clean-up level with 12 ten parts per million being the trigger 13 -- I guess for lack of a better term -- 14 for initiating initial depth sampling. 15 If we find greater than ten, then IS we sample down to a foot between that 17 three inches and twelve inches level. " 18 And we collect samples there. 19 If we find that the levels there 20 are greater than two parts per million, 21 then we sample the next foot of soil. 22 And at that point in time the 23 clean-up level then goes back to ten REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 294 1 2 Q. 3 4 5 A. 6 7 s 9 10 Q. 11 12 A. 13 14 15 16 Q. 17 18 19 20 21 22 A. 23 objective of their review. what part did you play in brokering or working out the agreement with the EPA, the emergency clean-up level? We had no discussions with the EPA on the emergency clean-up level. That was a level that was presented to us in the initial draft of the AOC they presented to us. How did you understand they had put that together? I have no understanding how they put that together or how they came up with the ten parts per million clean-up level. What do you understand that to mean, if somebody has got ten parts per million on their property, that you would have to do to Mr. Jones' and Mr. Smith's and Mr. Roberts' yard under this consent order? Under the administrative order that we signed with the EPA, if a residential REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 296 1 2 Q. 3 A. 4 5 6 7 6 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 ia 19 20 21 22 23 parts per million. What is that, now? It is kind of confusing. Essentially the clean-up levels in the soils, Mr. Stewart, for the upper three inches of soil -- if it's greater than ten, that initiates a removal action. Removal action will have to be required to be done on that property. The next question that has to be answered is how deep do we go; how much soil do we remove if soil removal is the required remedy,- which in most cases it would be, obviously. So in order to answer that question we have to do sampling deeper down into the soil. The next range that we sample is between three inches and twelve inches. And if the PCB concentrations in that three to twelve inch range are greater than two parts per million, then we remove that soil from that three to REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. HARTOLDMON0031383 29? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 10 19 20 Q. 21 22 A. 23 twelve inch range. We also sample from twelve inches to twenty-four inches. If the levels are greater than ten parts per million between twelve and twenty-four, then we remove that from the soil, Then we continue that process down to maximum depth of forty-eight inches. And ten parts per million remains the trigger for initiating the cleanup at those depths; twenty-four to thirty-six and thirty-six to forty-eight inches. Now, when we remove the soil --Of course, by removing the soil you are essentially removing the PCBs, so you are cleaning up to a level of non-detect essentially. You are putting in clean soil. You are replacing that soil with clean soil on the property. But you do test first before you do anything? That's correct. We get access to the property. And w$ sample the soils at REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 299 1 2 3 Q. 4 5 A. 6 7 Q. 8 9 10 11 A. 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 additional depth sampling. That's correct. So there is a distinct possibility that you will not clean any properties up? If we can get access to the properties, we will clean them up. If you get access to the properties and don't find anything in^the first three inches of ten parts per*million, you don't clean it up; is that right? If the upper three inches are below ten parts per million, then there is no corrective measures required to that property under the current AOC. MR, COX: May I ask a question just to clarify? MR. STEWART: Yeah. MR. COX; If it's a property that the EPA has identified being greater than ten parts per million, you have to do something; and the sampling you do starts with three to REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 298 i 2 3 4 5 6 7 Q. 8 9 10 11 A. 12 13 14 Q. IS 16 17 A. 18 19 20 21 Q. 22 A. 23 those various depths and send those samples off to the lab so we only have to visit the property once. And obviously we want to minimize the inconvenience of the property owner in doing this. If you don't find anything in this ten parts per million in the first three inches, then you don't clean up anything? That's correct. If it's below ten parts per million, no removal action is required under the AOC. So if the EPA found ten parts per million, there is no requirement that they come in and clean it up? If the EPA finds a property that has greater than ten parts per million in the surface soils, they subsequently notify us. And then -And then you do this testing first? That's the first step for us, if we get access from the property owner to do the REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 300 1 2 3 4 s 6 7 B 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 IS 19 20 o. 21 22 A. 23 Q. twelve inches; is that right? THE WITNESS: Yeah. That'S correct. I apologize if that wasn't made clear. If the EPA has sampled the property and they have found PCBs between zero and three inches, then we don't re-sample that. That's the data we use for conducting the removal action. And we begin sampling at depth. But once the EPA data has shown that the level o PCBs are greater than ten, no removal action is required on that property because we have exceeded the action level in the AOC. (By Mr. Stewart) So you have to clean up the first three inches? At a minimum, yes. And then you test below that. And you REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. HARTOLDMONOQ31384 301 1 2 A. 3 4 Q. 5 A. 6 7 3 0. 9 A. 10 11 12 Q. 13 14 A. 15 16 17 Q. 18 A. 19 20 21 Q. 22 A. 23 have got to find ten below that? Well, from three inches to twelve inches, two parts per million. Two? And then below twelve inches, it goes back to ten parts per million. That's correct. How was the two arrived? Once again, that was a number that was - - I don't know how the EPA arrived at that number, Mr. Stewart. Didn't that come about through discussions with you all and EPA? If it did, I don't recall those discussions or I wasn't a party to those discussions. Who would have been; Mr. Faust? I attended all the meetings we had with the EPA when we were negotiating the terms of the order. Wasn't that one of the terms? Yes. The two parts per million was. yes. REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC 303 1 2 3 4 Q. 5 6 7 A. 8 Q. 9 A. 10 11 12 13 Q. 14 15 A. 16 17 10 Q. 19 20 21 A. 22 23 And Wes Hardegree attended. And there may have been one or two other attendees that I don't recall. Were there any discussions during these meetings about the long-term clean-up goal? No. The standard? No. The long-term clean-up level would be determined, you know, under a consent decree, which we were also negotiating with the EPA at this time. Any level in that negotiation that's less than two? We haven't begun any discussions with the EPA regarding clean-up levels under the consent decree. You are involved in negotiations about the ultimate clean-up levels, but you haven't discussed levels? Yeah. I mean, we have signed a letter -- I guess what would you call it -There has been a series of letters REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 302 1 Q. 2 3 4 A. 5 6 Q. 7 8 A. 9 Q. 10 11 A. 12 Q. 13 14 A. 15 16 17 IS 19 Q. 20 A. 21 22 23 And that wasn't in place at the time y'all initially discussed it. That was something that y'all put in, wasn't it? I can't recall what was in the initial draft regarding clean-up levels. I'm not talking about the trigger level of ten, I'm talking about the two. Yes. That's something you all asked for; isn't it? If it was, I don't recall, Mr. Stewart. Who all attended those meetings on behalf of Solutia? The meetings were attended by myself. Dr, Kaiey, Mr. Foresman, Mr. Biceline,and then a gentleman named Allan Topol, who is an attorney we work with on some of these issues. Who else attended from the EPA? Mr. Spurling was in attendance. Dustin Minor, Phyllis Harris. A gentleman named Dick Green attended some of the meetings; one or two of them, for sure. REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC, 304 1 2 3 4 5 6 Q. 7 A. 3 Q. 9 10 11 A. 12 13 14 15 16 17 Q. 18 A. 19 Q. 20 21 A. 22 23 q. arrived at in an agreement of principle for the consent decree. But beyond that agreement of principle we have had no further discussions with the EPA about the consent decree. On the long-term? On the long-term. What's the level that you recall that would be the long-term clean-up level in those letters? It wasn't discussed in those letters. What was discussed was conducting a remedial investigation and feasibility study; which as part of that process a long-term clean-up level would be evaluated and arrived at. At a later time? Yes. So what you would be talking about doing in that was sampling; is that correct? Well, more sampling would be a part of it, yes. what else? REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. HARTOLDMON0031385 305 1 A. 2 3 4 5 6 7 S 9 10 Q. 11 12 13 14 A* 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 Q. The consent decree was conducting a remedial investigation, feasibility study, the remedial investigation as essentially the sampling part of it. And the feasibility study would be an evaluation of corrective measures which would include an evaluation of the clean-up level, of the long-term clean-up level, There doesn't seem to be much there; except y'all have got a sampling program and an evaluation of what the clean-up level ought to be. Is that fair? Well, a feasibility study also is an evaluation of what correction measures need to be implemented. Once the feasibility is approved by the EPA, then the EPA would move on to write a record of decision for the site. And the record of decision would provide the final clean-up level and the corrective measures. Where is the public involved in that? REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 307 1 A. 2 Q. 3 4 A. 5 6 7 0 9 10 11 12 13 Q. 14 A. 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 No, we have not. Why is it that y'all pay for resources that are used at the EPA office? It's essentially -- Well, under CERCLA the EPA is entitled to recover their costs. The EPA can go out and rent their own office space or we can provide it. Either way, we end up paying for it. . So for whatever reason, we just -- under the terms of the AOC we agreed to provide the office space. What all do y'all provide? We provide -- I haven't been in it in about a year. I believe it's office space over on -- I you think it's on Wilmer Avenue over there in Anniston. I believe there is two offices, a conference room. There is also a separate, kind of like, garage type area where they can put materials and equipment. We also provide a copy REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC- 306 1 A. 2 3 4 5 6 7 3 9 10 11 12 13 14 Q. 15 16 17 A. 18 19 20 21 Q. 22 23 The record of decision goes through a public notice process. Officially that's where the public gets involved. But under the consent decree, Mr. Stewart, we are also going to be -at least under the agreement of principle that we have we have agreed to provide funds to establish a community advisory panel to the community to be involved in the process on a continuous basis and not just given something at the end of the day and asked to give their feedback or anything like that. Who all is going to be involved in that? Have you talked to community groups about that? There has been no discussions about who would be involved. Solutia has had no discussions with anyone about who would be involved. Have you talked to anybody at the EPA about who they would suggest be involved? REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 308 1 2 Q. 3 A. 4 5 6 7 Q. 8 9 10 11 12 A. 13 14 Q. 15 A. 16 17 Q. 18 A. 19 20 21 Q. 22 23 A. machine, fax machine, phones. Any pay? We don't -- not to the people. We pay for renting the office space and for renting the copy machine. We pay the phone bills and things of that nature. Does some of the cost involved that y'all incur pay for the people who work there? Do y'all reimburse the EPA for the salaries of the people who work there? Those are costs that would be recoverable under the CERCLA. Do you pay that? We haven't paid any of that money at this point in time. Is it anticipated chat you will? I would anticipate that in the future we will receive a cost recovery demand, yes. Have you indicated to them that you are willing to? Certainly it's within their rights under REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. HARTOLDMON0031386 309 1 2 Q. 3 <1 5 6 7 a A. 9 10 Q. 11 12 13 A. 14 15 16 Q. 17 A. 13 0. 19 20 A. 21 Q. 22 23 CERCLA to demand -I'm not asking you if it's within their rights, Mr. Branchfield. Do you understand what I'm asking you? Have y'all indicated to them in the conversations you have had with them that you are going to pay that? Yes. In the agreement of principle, we have agreed to pay past costs. What else do y'all pay for now? What about these contractors that they hire to do sampling? Do y'all pay for that? Once again, those are costs that could be recoverable under past costs and future costs. Are you paying for them now? No. We have not paid any money. In principle, you have agreed to pay for those? In principle, yes. Was Mr. Woodyard involved in any conversations with you or any of these people that met with the EPA about the REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 311 1 A. 2 3 Q. 4 5 A. 6 1 S 9 10 Q. 11 12 A. 13 14 15 16 17 18 Q. 19 A. 20 Q. 21 22 A23 Q. No. Once again, that's part of the data evaluation process. What data would have to be evaluated, Mr. Branchfield, to come up with that? There are things that would have to be considered chat would include land use, obviously. There is a whole process that I'm not an expert on, Mr. Stewart. We hire consultants. * Well, with what you are familiar with what has to be done - - what land use? For example, land use helps define how much of the property is used, what it might be used for, is the person on the property like we were discussing earlier --on the property eight hours a day or sixteen hours a day. Whether it's residential or commercial? Exactly, yes. Frequently used and all that kind of stuff ? That's correct. A day-care center might be different REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 310 1 2 A. 3 4 Q. 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 A. 13 Q, 14 A. 15 16 Q. 17 A. 13 Q. 19 A. 20 21 22 Q. 23 levels that ought to be set? Mr. Woodyard? That name doesn't ring a bell. An expert that's been designated in this case by Solutia. Mr. Woodyard, who is a remediation expert, was he involved in any conversations with you or to your knowledge with anybody else or with the EPA about the clean-up levels that ought to be set? Not to my knowledge. Was a Mr. Tucker? I'm not familiar with Mr. Tucker. So no. Scott Tucker? Excuse me. No. Do you remember him being involved? No. He never attended any of the meetings or participated in any of the conversations I was involved in. Do y'all have a clean-up goal that you are shooting for? REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 312 1 2 3 A. 4 E 6 Q. 7 A. 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 IS 19 20 21 Q. 22 23 from this parking lot we are talking about? It could -- The criteria you use for evaluating clean-up levels would certainly be different, yes. All right. What else? There is a number of factors that go into -- And I apologize. I don't know much about the science of going through that process. I just don't know what -- I don't know all the details. It gets into all types of things; like the amount of area of skin that may be exposed and certainly the concentrations that we see and the depths that it's at. There is -- I'd like to be able to provide you with more information. But it's, quite honestly, outside my area of expertise. what about an area where the person might be exposed to RGBs? That's also included in the -- REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. HARTOLDMON0031387 313 1 A. 2 3 4 Q. 5 A. 6 7 Q. 8 9 A. 10 11 12 13 14 15 Q. 16 17 IB A. 19 20 21 Q. 22 23 You evaluate all the potential pathways when you are evaluating the final clean-up level. And that's called risk assessment? Risk assessment or risk evaluation. That's correct. Are you familiar with the risk space concentrations that are used by the EPA? There are risk space concentrations that are used as part of the screening process, you know, in the process of conducting the risk assessment. Once again, the level of my knowledge is limited. Do you know whether or not one of those assessments was made in connection with the trigger level that was set at ten? If it was done, it was done by the EPA. I have no knowledge or familiarity with it. Did Karen Knight tell anybody -- you included -- how that number was arrived at? . REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 315 1 A. 2 3 4 5 6 Q. 7 3 9 10 A. 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Q. 13 19 20 21 A. 22 23 Q. There is a number of criteria within the regulations that the SPA can draw upon to determine emergency clean-up levels. Specifically what they drew upon, I don't know. Other than the risks imposed to people being exposed to that over an expended period of time or ov^r a short period of time, what else would you look at? There is -- And once again, I'm not familiar with the details. But there are criteria within TOSCA. There is a MEGA Rule that identified applicable -- I don't know what the term -- the ARs. There is different regulations -What does it say, if you know, in the MEGA Rules the level of concern is for property that would be residential property? I don't know what the MEGA Rule says about that. You are not familiar with that? REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 314 1 A. 2 3 Q. 4 5 6 A. 7 8 Q. 9 10 A. 11 12 Q. 13 A. 14 Q. 15 16 17 IS A. 19 Q. 20 21 22 23 No. She didn't tell me. I don't know if she told anyone else. Did you ever talk to a gentleman named Elmer Akin about how that number was arrived at? I never talked with him about how that number was arrived at. What about the level -- the clean-up level of two? I'm sorry, Mr. Stewart. I couldn't understand. Two. I had no conversations with -So sitting here today, as a remediation project person there in Anniston, you have no idea how they arrived at these numbers? No, I don't. Will you assume that the way that they should have arrived at it would have been an assessment of the risk that the people would be exposed to? MR. COX: Object to the form. REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 316 1 A. 2 3 4 5 6 Q. 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 A. 16 17 Q. IB A19 Q. 20 A. 21 22 23 Not the details of it, no. MR. STEWART: Can we take a short break? MR. COX: Yeah. (A break was taken.) (By Mr. Stewart) Mr. Branchfield, tell me -- And I want to go back to something that I asked you a minute ago that Charlie and I perhaps didn't understand. If you found twelve parts per million on Ms. Jones' property --or the EPA did --do you have to take three inches off the top of all of that backyard? Yes. If it was found in the backyard, that's correct. All of it? Yes. Where would you take that soil? Depending on the levels. We would likely place it either at the -- Well, one of our qualified Subtitle D landfills. Three Corners is the one we REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE. INC. HARTOLDMON0031388 317 318 1 2 3 Q. 4 5 6 A. 7 Q. e 9 10 11 12 A. 13 14 IS 16 Q. 17 18 19 20 21 22 A, 23 Q. are currently using. Or send it out to Emelle. So you would have to take it away- Y'all don't have a place to put it on your plant site? No, By the way, how were y'all able to take the Miller -- while we are on that -- how were y'all able to take the Miller contaminated soil and put it on the plant site? That was before I was associated with the project, Mr. Stewart. I didn't even know soil was removed from the Miller property, quite honestly. What is the level that you have negotiated with ADEM that you have to clean up on the property that is governed by them? We are talking ten and two with the EPA. What's their level? As it relates to a specific project? Wherever. . . 1 A. 2 Q. 3 4 A. 5 6 Q. 7 8 9 10 11 A. 12 13 Q. 14 15 A. 16 17 18 Q. 19 A. 20 21 22 Q. 23 A. I mean -What is their clean-up level? Is it different from the EPA? We have had no discussions about clean-up levels with ADEM. So you haven't had to remove anything with ADEM? For instance, on the east side. what was the level there that you could leave over on the east side? I don't know what level we left over on the east side. It was above ten parts per million,wasn't it? Yes. I believe there were soils left over there greater than ten parts per million. And it was covered with what? It was covered with HDP liners and a minimum of fourteen inches of clean material. What is that, now? The HDP liners, the high density REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 319 REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC- 320 1 2 3 4 5 Q. 6 7 8 9 A. 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Q. 23 polyethylene liners. And a minimum of fourteen inches of material; sometimes greater to make sure we had the proper grades for drainage purposes- Would that be true for the Iron Works facility over there, the Anniston Iron Works? Did y'all do the same thing over there? ., In the vicinity of the Iron Works building, some areas of the property were covered with HOPE liners. Other areas were just covered with the geo-fabric, the lighter weight material. It was all based on concentrations of PCBs that were in the soil that we were covering. Then, of course, we did add the minimum of - - I can't recall over there whether it was twelve or fourteen inches of soil. It was roughly a foot, maybe a little more, of soil. Where did y'all get that; from that area over there where you got the mining 1 2 3 A. 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Q, 11 A. 12 13 14 15 16 17 Q. 13 19 20 21 22 23 permit; where you went over to Mr. Clayton's property over there? I believe it was Mr. Clayton's property where we got the soil to do the second phase of the capping project on the north side properties. There was one section that was capped before I became involved with Anniston. Where did you get that? I don't know where we got the soil for that. But we did get it for the second phase of that capping project. We did get it from Ms. Clayton's property. I believe that was her name. Is the property that you are referring to at Anniston Iron Works where you put that liner you are talking about, that synthetic liner -- Is that property located out in front of the building out there? Is that where you put that liner? REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. HARTOLDMON0031389 321 1 A. 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Q. 9 a. 10 Q. 11 12 A. 13 14 IB 16 Q. 17 18 19 20 A. 21 22 23 There were some areas -- And I could be more specific by looking at Che report. But there were some areas that were essentially kind of in the north -I guess you'd say northwest -- I'm sorry northeast of the Anniston Iron works building. The northeast portion of the property? That's correct. You put a synthetic liner over there, and you put dirt down over it? That's correct. In some places we put asphalt as opposed to dirt. But we did put dirt over the better part of the area. And that's the thing that fronts on -mechanics the road of Clydesdale there right across from Williams Funeral Home,' that property? Right. And williams Funeral Home is right across the street there to the north. MR. COX: And 10th Street? REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC- 323 1 2 3 A. 4 5 6 Q. 7 A. 8 9 10 11 12 Q. 13 14 15 A. 16 17 Q. 18 A. 19 20 21 22 23 Q. here which is Plaintiffs' Exhibit One -What is Choccolocco Creek WWTP? That's the Choccolocco Creek Waste Water Treatment Plant, which is located down in Oxford, actuallyY'all did a removal there? We have not conducted any work down there at that plant yet; short of -- we have done some characterization work, some sampling. But we have not done any removal actions. Let me see. Is that the place where the guy got fined eighty-five thousand dollars for removing some soil? There was a fine issued. I don't recall the amount. Is that because of PCBs? I don't know the exact basis for the fine. But I do know that they did not have the appropriate permits for doing that work, and somehow that was tied to it. And they fined him. REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 322 1 2 3 Q. 4 A. 5 Q. 6 A. 7 Q. s 9 10 A. 11 12 13 14 Q. 15 16 A. 17 18 19 20 21 22 Q. 23 THE WITNESS: Yeah. That's weat 10th Street, West 10th? I think so, yeah. Kind of mechanics the road on out? Yeah. So you are saying there in the northeast corner of that property right there at the intersection of Clydesdale and 10th? Right. MR. COX: The old Stop and Go station is there somewhere; isn't it? Right there in the corner y'all put synthetic stuff down there? There were some areas -- It doesn't cover that complete area. But there were some isolated areas in that vicinity where we did put HDPE liners as opposed to just the lightweight geo-fabric. Okay. Tell me, if you would -- if you will take a look at this document right REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 324 1 2 3 4 A. 5 6 7 Q. 8 9 A. 10 11 12 Q. 13 A. 14 15 16 Q. 17 18 19 20 A. 21 Q. 22 23 Now, you all are going to characterize that, and that's the cost of doing that? My recollection is that the cost estimate there was for characterizing the property, yes. And then there is the Choccolocco Creek CMS. what is that? That's the cost for conducting a corrective measure study on Choccolocco Creek. How much is that? I believe I estimated approximately two hundred and fifty thousand dollars for conducting that study. So you are going to spend two hundred and fifty thousand dollars for the corrective measure study on Choccolocco Creek? It's a cost estimate. How much of the three million dollars -I said two earlier. But how much of that three million REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. HARTOLDMON0031390 325 1 2 3 A. 4 5 6 Q. 7 A, a 9 10 Q. li A. 12 Q. 13 14 15 16 17 A. 18 Q. 19 A. 20 21 22 0. 23 dollars of Chat corridor thing have y'all already spent? To date we have spent approximately two hundred thousand dollars on the corridor. Is that acquiring an easement? No, we haven't acquired any easements yet. It's only been preliminary work and preparation for -Have you --- obtaining easements. Have you spent all that two hundred and fifty thousand dollars on the deal for - - MR. COX: The CMS? MR. S TEWART: Yeah, On Choccolocco Creek? Yeah. We haven't conducted a corrective measure study on Choccolocco Creek yet. so we haven't spent that money. So you are holding back to see if the corridor works? . REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 327 1 2 3 4 Q. 5 A. 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Q. 15 A. 16 17 18 19 Q. 20 21 22 A. 23 capping that material in that area right there. That's what that cost estimate is for. What are the levels in that stuff? We haven't done a very thorough characterization of that yet. Our sampling plan by ADEM hasn't been approved. .,, But of the very limited sampling we have done we have found levels ranging from several parts per million up to " on the order of eighty, ninety parts per million. Why wouldn't you take it to Emelle? There is -- Well, first of all, we haven't adequately characterized the pile to determine whether that soil should go to Emelle. If it's above fifty, shouldn't you take it to Emelle even if it's on the plant site? Only if you excavate it and it's determined through a corrective measure REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 326 1 A. 2 3 4 5 6 7 Q. 8 9 A. 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 No. We are waiting for approval of our -- We can't conduct a corrective measure study until we have completed our floodplain investigation. So until we have all the data necessary to do the corrective measure study. What is a construction of containment cell on that Plaintiffs' Exhibit One? That is -- you briefly mentioned a contractor at the waste water treatment plant that excavated material and had gotten fined for doing that. You are probably aware there is approximately somewhere between sixty or eighty thousand cubic yards of matsrial that's currently covered up by plastic liners sitting on the property of the waste water treatment plant. And that is an estimated cost for -- that's what it would cost if we were to evaluate and determine the containment cell for that material. In other words, it's essentially REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 328 1 2 3 4 Q. 5 6 7 A. 8 9 10 Q. 11 12 13 14 A. 15 16 17 Q. IS 19 20 21 22 23 study that sending that material to a landfill is the most effective corrective measure. Weren't y'all excavating on your landfill at some point in time west of the plant and taking it to Emelle? I'm not aware of any excavation we have done west of the plant. If it was done, it was done while I wasn't associated -You excavated it and were taking it all to Emelle. That cost about eight hundred and fifty thousand dollars. Isn't that what it cost? Once again, I'm not familiar. That must have been work that was done before I became associated with the project. That was because it was the percentages in the soil and they were taking it there. On this stuff that's above fifty to a hundred parts per million, you say it has to be excavated. Didn't he excavate it? REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC- HARTOLDMON0031391 329 1 A. 2 3 4 Q. 5 6 7 8 A. 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 Q. The contractor at the waste water treatment plant excavated that soil, yes. So now it's in a position where somebody has to take it. Why are y'all involved in it if the contractor did it? We became involved in it simply because there were PCBs that were excavated. And the waste water treatment plant came and asked for our assistance. We agreed to assist. I won't beat around the bush. I mean, we have not yet determined what our final responsibility should be for managing that soil. We believe that the waste water treatment facility plant should bear a burden for managing those soils. But we are willing to work with them and try and work out an equitable solution to make sure that gets done. Whose waste water treatment plant is REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 331 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 A. Q 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 You didn't have any responsibility for digging it up. There is a fine of eighty-five thousand dollars being imposed against him. What in the world is Monsanto or Solutia doing there? The soil was excavated from the floodplain of Choccoloooo Creek, which is a part of our area of concern. And we have interest in what happens with the PCB impacted soils that are in that floodplain, because there is potential for it to affect our broader investigation. Those soils -- depending on how those soils are handled, it could affect the levels in fish, for example. If they are stirred up and moved around a lot and those PCB contained sediments that are going into the creek, then that could have an effect on the fish levels, which we are trying to evaluate. REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 330 1 2 A. 3 4 Q. 5 6 7 8 A. 9 10 11 12 13 Q. 14 A. 15 16 Q. 17 18 19 A. 20 21 Q. 22 23 that? It's Anniston Waterworks and Sewer Board. Y'all are still in negotiations with the Anniston Waterworks and Sewer Board over who is going to take the responsibility for moving that soil away? Are there active negotiations ongoing? No. Those negotiations will take place once the pile is completely characterized, I believe. Who is going to characterize it; y'all? Yeah. We have offered to characterize the pile. That still doesn't answer my question. What are y'all doing on that pile anyway? I guess I don't understand the question. MR. COX: He wants to know -The contractor excavated it and put it out there, and it has PCBs in it. Why are y'all there? REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 332 1 2 3 4 Q. 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 A. 15 16 17 18 19 20 Q. 21 22 A. 23 Q. Obviously, we would not like to see the fish levels go up. we would like to see them go down. Because mainly y'all might have to dredge a creek at some point in time if that stuff comes off that pile of dirt there. It may get in the creek and increase the level. The fish advisory may stay in effect, and there may be enough pressure to cause you to have to do something to Choecolocco Creek. Is that what you're saying? MR. COX: Object to the form. I don't think it's a bad thing, Mr. Stewart, to try and maintain conditions that allow the PCB concentrations in fish to go down; regardless of what the final remedy might be. What regulatory agency asked you to go down there and look at that? ADEM did. ADEM? REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. HARTOLDMON0031392 333 1 A2 Q. 3 4 A. 5 S Q. 7 3 9 10 11 A. 12 13 14 15 16 Q. 17 18 19 A. 20 21 Q. 22 A. 23 Q. Yea. Why is it that they said they wanted you to go down there and look at it? It was in our area of concern,- as defined in our post closure permit. Do you know of any other responsible party that they pointed to to go down there and look at it? Were y'all down there by yourselves? We are the organization that's doing the sampling. Obviously we are working in cooperation with the Water Board. They have to give us access and so on and so forth. I understand. It's not your position, Mr. Branchfield, that the Water Board generated PCBs? No. I don't believe the Water Board generated the PCBs. Or the waste treatment plant? NO. So other than the Water Board, y'all are REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC- 335 1 2 3 A. 4 Q. 5 6 7 3 9 10 11 12 A. 13 14 Q. 15 A. 16 17 IS Q. 19 20 A. 21 22 Q. 23 systematic grid overlay for the south landfill. Is that correct? That's correct, yes. Okay. Now, I'm looking at two six of Plaintiffs' Exhibit Three. And it appears to me that that gridding is going to be done on that synthetic membrane that^ was put over that stuff -- those cells that are in the western section of the southern landfill. That's correct. That's what this drawing shows. Isn't that a self-fulfilling prophecy? It was done in response to the request from ADEM. That was the area that they asked us to -Won't your results be sort of predetermined by where you test? They would be effected by the area where we test. But would they be -If the PCB cells that had been previously closed or where the PCBs are REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 334 1 2 A. 3 Q. 4 5 6 7 B 9 10 A. 11 Q. 12 13 14 A. 15 Q. 16 17 A. 18 Q. 19 A. 20 21 Q. 22 A. 23 Q. the only ones there? That's correct. Now, let me show you what would be Three and ask you if in fact this is the vapor flux, PCB vapor flux. And this is your letter? (Plaintiffs' Exhibit Number Three was marked for identification.) Yes. And it says, "Work Plan for Estimated PCB Vapor Flux from two landfills on over in there -- from Solutia. Right. Where did this deal come from, the vapor flux system? As far as whose idea it was or -- Absolutely. It was -- the work plan was provided in response to a request from ADEM. A request from ADEM? That's correct. Now, this shows on page two six a REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 336 1 2 3 4 A. 5 Q. 6 A. 7 3 9 10 11 12 13 Q. 14 15 16 Q. 17 A. 13 19 20 21 22 23 Q. east of this gridded area, you are missing the mark a little bit, aren't you, Mr. Branchfield? Well -They might should be somewhere else? I think it's important to point out that, yeah, the PCB cell is located over here. This work plan was submitted specifically in response to a request from ADEM and what they had asked us to do. What are you talking about, Mr. Branchfield? MR. COX: He is trying to explain. Please do. After we submitted this document we received comments from the regulatory agency. And one of those comments was a request that we install flux chambers on this portion of the landfill. Why? Why would you do that? REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. HARTOLDMON0031393 337 1 A. 2 3 4 5 6 7 S 9 10 11 12 Q. 13 14 15 A. 16 Q. 17 18 19 A. 20 21 22 23 Q. I think for the very reason you just mentioned. There is synthetic liner. And the sampling over this portion of the landfill, for whatever reason -they decided they were -- I don't know the whole thought process of what was going on within the regulatory agencies. But that was one comment to the work plan, was that it would be appropriate to collect some data from this portion of the landfill also. When you say this portion -- For the record, you keep pointing to the east side of that landfill. That's correct. And isn't it a fact they told you that because they felt like you perhaps had snookered them? There was no intention on our part to snooker them. We thought we were responding to their requests. You mean they asked you to do a vapor REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE , INC- 339 1 2 A. 3 4 5 6 7 a 9 10 Q. n 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 A. 23 MR. COX: Object to the form. I guess the simple answer to that question is I don't know specifically what was told to the community or the regulators. What I do know is that we found the PCBs in the surface soils on this portion of the landfill. That's why we capped -- I understand. And so those poor ol' folks down at ADEM thought y'all had spent that nine million up there. Rather than to contain parathion -- Y'all didn't spend it up there for the PCBs . And lo and behold, when y'all started doing this vapor flux thing. darned if you didn't tell them that's what you were going to look for. weren't you looking for PCBs with this vapor flux thing? That was the intent of the vapor flux study, was to determine if there were REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 338 1 2 3 4 A, 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Q. 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 flux grid deal and test on this south landfill on the west side? Are you telling me that today, Mr. Branchfield? I would have to see specifically what is in the letter that they sent to us, Mr. Stewart, requesting us to do this study. I don't recall any specific language. But it was never our intent to ignore or try and snooker them, to use your terms. We were just trying to respond to what we thought they were requesting of us. Well, isn't it a fact, Mr. Branchfield, that you had -- And by you I mean Solutia. I don't mean you in particular. But y'all had told the public and you had told the regulators that this deal y'all did -- which cost about nine million dollars, I think -- on the south landfill, on the west side, was for PCBs. Didn't you tell them that? REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC- 340 1 2 3 Q. 4 5 A. 6 Q. 7 8 9 10 11 A. 12 13 14 15 16 17 Q. 18 A. 19 20 21 22 23 any PCBs going in an air form in the vapor phase on the landfill. And they certainly didn't recommend it, did they? They didn't recommend -- ADEM did not recommend that y'all use the vapor flux system. They recommended against it, didn't they? MR. COX: Object to the form. No. Actually the request that we received to do the flux study was from ADEM. We did not suggest doing the flux study. We never proposed to do a flux study. Who asked you to do that? The letter I would have received would have either come from -- Without seeing the letter, I can't say for sure. But it would have been -- either Mr. Hardegree or Mr. Cobb usually signs the letters to me. REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. HARTOLDMON0031394 341 1 <3. 2 3 4 5 A. 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Q. 14 15 A. 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 Q. Didn't they tell y'all at some point in time they thought that vapor flux study was experimental in nature and you ought to use air monitoring? Well, we are doing conventional air monitoring in the vicinity of the landfills, I don't know what the basis was for them asking us to do a flux study. I will be very honest, Mr. Stewart. We didn't think it was a very worthwhile thing to do. The vapor flux thing wasn't a worthwhile thing to do? No. The exact reasons that you mentioned. There is an HDP cap here on the landfill. Plus when we catch this vapor flux, we kept asking the agencies when we get this data what are we going to do with it? And nobody could answer that question. So your statement to me as we sit here . REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 343 1 2 3 4 5 6 A. 7 8 9 10 Q. 11 A. 12 Q. 13 A. 14 Q. 15 16 17 A. 19 19 2G 21 22 23 Q. you said earlier -- Mr. Branchfield, I don't want to get off base with you. But I believe you said earlier y'all were continuing to propose this vapor flux thing yourself; you say. We responded to the request to perform a vapor flux study and responded by submitting a proposed glan for doing that study. . Who devised that plan? Inzer is our consultant. Inzer did it? Yes. And so now the EPA and ADEM said, "Move it over to the east side where the PCBs are" ? Actually they said in addition to. They still wanted us to do flux chamber studies on the western half also . To add the eastern portion in addition. What do your area exerts say about the REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 342 1 2 3 A. 4 Q. 5 6 A. 7 Q. 8 9 10 11 12 A. 13 14 Q. 15 16 17 IS 19 20 21 A. 22 23 Q. today, Mr. Branchfield, is that you all didn't recommend this study? No, we did not. And EPA didn't tell you that they recommended against it? No. So nobody at EPA ever sent you a document and said, "We recommend against using this study because it's experimental and it has deficiencies because of that"? No, Nobody from the EPA ever communicated that to me. To you at all. And did anybody ever say, from EPA or from ADEM, that what they felt like you ought to do is use conventional in addition to vapor flux because of the experimental nature of it and the problems they had with it? That was never communicated to me by anyone in EPA or ADEM. But now y'all have proposed -- I believe REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC- 344 1 2 A. 3 4 5 Q. 6 A. 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Q, 15 A. 16 Q. 17 A. IB 19 20 21 22 23 flux studies; that it's not any good? Our belief is that the flux study will not provide any usable data, quite honestly. Why? Well, one, because on -- certainly on the western portion of the landfill there is an HDPE liner. More importantly is the simple fact that PCBs do not readily go into the air in the vapor phase. They are semi-volatile in nature; as we talked about earlier. So that's the reason you think it is? That's the reason I think that -- That you shouldn't use it? Yeah. My belief is that we should continue to use the ambient air data and develop a process by which we can use that data to evaluate what if any impacts are occurring due to air. And if we find there are impacts from the air pathway, then let's go REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. HARTOLDMONOQ31395 345 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 a 9 Q. 10 ii 12 13 14 A. 15 16 17 IS 19 20 21 22 23 through the whole process. Let's get the data. Let's investigate it. Let's 3tudy it and understand it. I don't think the flux study is the right way to get it. Maybe it's a step that could provide value in the future. But I don't think it's going to provide value now. That's my opinion. So is it your statement that there is nothing wrong with the study itself; just because of the liner, it wouldn't -- it may show something over there where you don't have a liner? I don't know what it will show or what it won't show, Mr. Stewart. But what I don't know is what we are going to do with the data. So there is a flux. What does that mean? How do we conduct any remediation based on a flux number? To me that doesn't provide much useful information, quite honestly. REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC- 347 1 2 Q. 3 4 A. s 6 7 8 9 10 Q. 11 12 13 A. 14 15 16 17 Q. 18 19 20 21 A. 22 23 can't differentiate obviously. An acre or two? Is that all you understand it to be? Yeah. Really, Mr. Stewart, that's just based on my being up on the mountain and doing inspections of the landfill caps and people saying, "This is where the PCB cell was." And I look around and say, "This is where the, PCB cell was." Who has told you this is where the PCB cell was? Is it a person -- somebody connected with Monsanto or Solutia? Yeah. You know, obviously I read it in the reports that we submitted. And people I work with, Dr. Kaley, Jerry Hopper. Is that the thing that -- the report you are calking about, is that the assessment that was done by A. T. Kearney? Have you seen that before? I can't recall specifically the report. No. 1 don't recall reading a report by A, T. Kearney specifically. REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 346 1 Q. 2 3 4 A. 5 6 7 8 Q. 9 10 11 12 13 A, 14 15 Q. 16 17 18 A, 19 Q. 20 A. 21 22 23 Has anybody ever told you how big the cells are that have PCBs on the west side of the plant? I don't know the exact size. I'm sure I may have read it in a report or something in the past. It never stuck in my mind. Give me your best judgment as to what size that is and how many PCBs -- in pounds, millions of pounds. How many millions of pounds would you say are buried in the west landfill? I really have no idea. at all. I have no idea How big are the cells, if you understand it, that are located over there on the east side, in those -- Of the south landfill? Right. My understanding, based on where the PCB cell was on the south landfill, was maybe an acre or two. It's all capped right now. You REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 348 1 Q, 2 3 4 A. 5 6 Q. 7 A. 8 9 10 11 12 13 Q. 14 15 16 17 A. 18 19 Q. 20 A. 21 22 23 Q. Were you ever told what kind of waste stream came off the production there at the plant? From any particular process or the PCB process specifically? The PCB process. I'm sure I have been told, Mr. Stewart. I don't recall what the answer was, quite honestly. MR. STEWART; Let me check and see if we have got -- (Discussion held off record.) (By Mr. Stewart) Were you involved at all in the preparation of your EPA Section 104(e) letter in connection with the Anniston plant? No. I had very, very little involvement in that. Have you seen it at all? I believe I have a copy of the response in our project files. But I have never gone through it in any great detail. Are you familiar with what it asked for REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE r INC. HARTOLDMON0031396 349 1 2 A. 3 Q. 4 5 6 7 e 9 A. 10 ii 12 13 14 15 Q. 16 17 A. 18 19 20 21 Q. 22 23 A. and what has been responded to? In general terms, yes. There was a portion of this I want to ask you some questions about. And before I get to that, are you familiar with any monitoring that's done of the sewer system on the plant site itself? Yes. We currently collect water from the on-site system and treat it using the mechanical filtration and HR process. And we periodically test the affluent of that system just to confirm it's operating properly. Why is it -- Do PCBs have anything to do with that? Yes. That's the purpose of the water treatment system. It's to remove residual PCBs that may be still in the system. What happens to those? What do you do with that? That carbon is -7 when the carbon is REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 351 1 A. 2 3 4 5 6 7 Q. 8 9 10 11 A. 12 13 Q. 14 15 16 17 A. 18 19 Q. 20 A. 21 22 Q. 23 A. I know that --my knowledge is very limited. My understanding is that 202 may have cut into a small portion of the south landfill. But to what extent, I really have no knowledge. Did you understand that was moved, that parathion cell was moved at the time 202 was constructed, and put on the south landfill in another cell? I wasn't aware it was a parathion cell that would have been cut into, no. Are you familiar with the nature of the PCBs that were put into either the west landfill or the south landfill, the PCS waste? As far as -- Could you be more specific regarding the nature? Well, were they solid or liquid or what? I have no knowledge of what form it went into the landfills in. Would that make a difference? It wouldn't make a difference from my REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 350 1 2 3 4 5 Q. 6 A. 7 8 9 Q. 10 A. 11 12 Q. 13 14 15 A. 16 17 18 Q. 19 20 21 22 23 expired -- the carbon that's in the water treatment system is expired or no longer useful, then it's sent to an appropriate disposal facility. Eme11e ? I believe it typically goes to Emelle, yes. I'd have to check the records to be sure. How often does that happen? Since I have been down in Anniston, we have changed the carbon out once. And how many is involved in -- what kind of -- one truck, two trucks, three trucks? It's really not even a truckload. Mr. Stewart. It's maybe ten fifty-five gallon drums full. It's my understanding that at some point in time there was a parathion waste cell located south of the plant. And then 202 came in. Did you understand that was moved? Do you know anything about that? REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 352 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Q. 9 10 A. 11 12 Q. 13 14 15 16 17 18 A. 19 20 Q. 21 22 23 A. perspective, Mr. Stewart, because we are looking for PCBs that may be migrating from the landfills to be -- the three typical pathways, which would be groundwater, surface water, or air. We are collecting data to understand that and monitor that. But you don't know anything about that particular part of it? The specific details as far as what was placed in the landfills, no. Right. Have you ever talked to anybody like Jerry Brown or the people who might have been there, Mr. Branchfield, since you have been there in the remediation process, to find out the nature of the PCB material that was put in there? No. I've never had any discussions with them. Now, are you familiar with this article that came out about the mercury pollution? Specifically the story that was in The REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. HARTOLDMONOQ31397 353 1 2 Q, 3 4 5 A. G 7 Q. 8 9 10 11 A. 12 13 14 15 Q. 16 A. 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 Q. Anniston -I mean, the mercury contamination that came out in The Anniston Star, mercury discharges? The last writing? Yes, I'm familiar with chat article. When is the first time that you became aware of the fact that there had been mercury discharges that came out of this plant into Snow Creek? I was made aware that mercury was a constituent and potential concern as part of my turnover of the project with Mr. Faust back in late 1999. what did he tell you? That we had mercury cells on-site that were part of the chorine manufacturing process and because of that mercury was a constituent of potential concern that we were looking at in evaluating as part of both the on-site and off-site investigations, He told you that in addition to PCBs REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 355 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 Q. 22 23 have looked at? I would assume they would have looked at the RCRA facility assessment that was done in the early 1990s, up until 1992 or '93, if I'm not mistaken. That RCRA facility assessment -- there were discussions about all the different manufacturing processes that had been at one time or. another at the -- we had -- all the different manufacturing processes we were involved in on the Anniston facility. They could have looked at the on-site ROS program to define mercury as a constituent to the potential concern; being the chorine manufacturing process. There may have been other documents that they had access to. I wouldn't be aware of specifically what they looked at. Well, Mr. Kaley says in this article -- Dr. Bob Kaley -- He is quoted as saying that that firm that you are talking REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 354 1 2 A. 3 4 Q. 5 6 7 a 9 A. 10 11 12 Q. 13 14 A. 15 16 17 18 19 Q. 20 21 22 23 A. that's what y'all were looking for? It was one additional thing we were looking for, yes. Were the consultants who were assisting y'all in looking for that a group called Bouck Line, B-o-u-c-k, and Lee, Incorporated? Were those the consultants? They are the ones that were evaluating mercury as part of the off-site R05, yes. And how long had they been working with y'all? They have been working on the Anniston site since I have been there. I believe they had been working there for perhaps a year before I arrived,- maybe a little longer. Where would they get their information about where mercury would come from in conjunction with the operation of the Anniston plant? Specifically which documents they would REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 3 56 1 2 3 A. 4 Q. 5 6 7 0 9 10 11 12 13 A. 14 Q. 15 16 17 A. 18 19 20 21 22 Q. 23 about prepared this twenty-six-page study or reply, rather -- Yes. Which included an inaccurate statement about Monsanto's mercury emissions. And Mr. Kaley is quoted - - I don't know who they asked and who they didn't ask. I'm sure they felt they had made sufficient inquiries. Do you know who they talked to during that period of time? MR. COX: Object to the form. They being BBL. The company that did the study that you mentioned earlier. Do you call them BBL? Yes. We call them BBL for short. And to answer your question, no, I don't know who they talked to or what information was made available to them in their evaluation. Do you know this gentleman named Bryant who is quoted in the article? Have you REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. HARTOLDMON0031398 357 1 2 A. 3 4 Q. 5 6 7 3 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 ie 19 20 Q. 21 22 23 A. calked co him? No. I have never had any conversations with hint. In the reply he makes this response; It says -- This is what Che company, BBL, says. "While the records are not clear, it appears that chlorine was manufactured between 1952 and '69 using a mercury cell process. No records could be located describing the consumption of mercury. Although if noted that the process is a closed one in which mercury was recycled and reused11 - - which would indicate, would it not, Mr. Branchfield, that nothing got off the reservation as far as mercury is concerned? MR. COX: Object to the form. There wouldn't be any emissions off the plant site? MR. COX: Object to the form. I personally would not draw that REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 359 1 A. 2 Q. 3 4 5 6 7 6 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 A. 16 17 IS 19 20 21 22 23 I would disagree with Mr. Bryant. He worked at the Anniston plant from '64 to '68. And he said the mercury went into the storm sewer and left the plant that way as opposed to this closed loop system. Certainly the closed loop system. even as you mentioned it, doesn't involve mercury going into the storm sewer, does it? That is not contemplated in your closed loop process, is it, that you just described for us? MR. COX: Object to the form. You know, as far as how the mercury, where the mercury would have gone and my description of a closed loop process to you, I don't know what would have happened to the mercury. I assume it would have gone -there certainly is the potential it could have gone into the storm sewer. There is a potential it could have gone REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 3 58 1 2 3 Q. 4 A. 5 6 7 3 9 10 ii 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Q. 23 conclusion from the definition of a closed loop process. What would you draw? The closed loop process is -- Based on my experience and training in the Navy, a closed loop process -- I would characterize that - - I would -- for my own personal reference, I would look at a steam cycle, which typically is referred to as a closed loop process. Although, there are traced releases of steam from the process. It's just an inherent part of the process. Closed loop process does not mean air tight. What it means is that the material is used and regenerated and put back into the process. That doesn't necessarily mean that there were not potential releases from the process. Well, Mr. Bryant said that what that statement was is an outright lie. REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 360 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Q. 12 13 A. 14 15 16 17 IS 19 20 21 22 23 through drainage pathways from the plant site. But certainly all the data we have collected on the facility and off-site, for that matter, suggests that there were not quantities of mercury leaving the facility that Mr. Bryant claims there were. I don't believe Mr. Bryant's statements are accurate in that respect. what is it you believe about Mr. Bryant's statements? I believe if Mr. Bryant's statements were accurate that we would have found levels in much higher concentrations than we are finding them in the groundwater, in the surface water, and in the soils on the plant site, that we would have found concentrations much higher in the sediments of Snow Creek and Choccolocco Creek and we would have found higher concentrations in the fish. The levels that we found were all REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. HARTOLDMON0031399 361 1 2 3 4 5 Q, 6 7 B 9 10 11 12 13 14 IB A. 16 17 18 Q. 19 20 21 A. 22 Q. 23 low. I mean,, we are just not finding it in any quantities that would suggest we are releasing fifty tons of mercury from the plant. It's just not there. Well, apparently Dr. Kaiey disagrees with you. Dr. Kaiey is quoted -- And of course if he says something different. please be sure to correct me. But he said, "Is there a discrepancy?11 ''Sure. Apparently there was a discharge," is what he says on the first page of this article, on page one. Do you disagree with that? That quote, as it's written in the paper -- that is not how I would have characterized the process, no. I mean, did Dr. Kaiey tell you anything differently than what he is quoted as saying in the paper? Mo, no. That's an accurate statement? That's an accurate quote of what he said, that REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 363 1 2 Q. 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 A. 15 16 17 10 19 20 21 22 23 records they had access to. Well, Kaiey says on the same page -Dr. Kaiey -- that the consultants did not obtain access to all of the relevant documents which were buried deep within the company. They only had thirty days to - Is that what hq tells you the reason for this discrepancy or the failure to find, that there were in fact discharges made, mercury discharges that came out of that plant? MR. COX: Object to the form. No. In fact, Mr. Stewart, I'm the one that communicated that piece of information to Dr. Kaiey. It's not unreasonable at times when we are given a request for information from the agencies -- when there are years and years and years and decades of historical documents to review, that it is not practical to review all of those documents in a REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 362 i 2 3 4 5 6 7 A. 8 9 Q. 10 11 12 A. 13 Q. 14 15 16 17 A. 18 Q. 19 20 21 22 23 A. there was a discrepancy and apparently there was a discharge? MR. COX: Object to the form. If you know what he said to the reporter, you can Yeah. answer. I'm not familiar of his specific conversation with the reporter. Well, you've talked about that article with Dr. Kaiey since he made that statement, haven't you? Yes. And he hasn't denied the fact that he told that reporter that there was a discrepancy and obviously there was a discharge? He hasn't told me that, no. And this outfit that did this study had access to the records that pertained to the manufacturing process that go on -or went on at the plant site that made chlorine? Once again, I'm not familiar with what REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 364 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 e 9 10 ii 12 Q. 13 14 A. 15 16 17 18 19 20 Q. 21 22 23 A. thirty-day time period. So what we will typically do is we will review the documents that are readily available, draw any information we can from them, and then take a conservative approach. And that's what we did in this case; even though the documentation available to BBL suggested that it was a closed loop process. And theoretically it is a closed loop process -Where were the -- MR. COX: Wait a minute. We still included mercury in the list of constituents of potential concern to evaluate. We did not use the closed loop process as an excuse to not analyze for mercury, Tell me, Mr. Branchfield, where did they get these documents that they looked at, BBL. I don't know where they got the REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. HARTOLDMON0031400 365 1 2 Q. 3 4 5 6 7 S A. 9 10 Q. 11 A. 12 Q. 13 14 15 16 A. 17 IB Q. 19 20 A. 21 22 23 Q. documents. You said you thought you made them available to them and they looked at them. And you told Dr. Kaley they looked at the documents made available. Were they at the plant or in St. Louis? Where were they? X assume they used the documents that were available at the plant site. At the plant? Yes. And where are these documents that are buried deep in the company which Dr. Kaley refers to? Are they in St. Louis or at the plant? I don't know specifically where they are located. Did bb&l have access to documents that were in St. Louis? They certainly had access to them if there were documents there they felt they needed to review. Do you know within the time frame of the REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 367 1 Q. 2 3 4 A. 5 6 7 9 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Q. 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 A. 23 Q. But he was referring to some additional documents that they hadn't looked at? MR. COX: Same objection. I don't know specifically what he was referring to. I think -- I don't know specifically what he was referring to. Certainly that the documents that he became aware of when giving this interview were not reviewed by BBL. There is clearly no evidence that suggests that they did review them. That doesn't mean that they weren't available to them to review if they needed to. well, certainly they didn't say in the report that they provided to the regulatory agencies that forty to fifty tons of liquid mercury were dumped into the waste stream near the plant. They didn't say that, did they? MR. COX: Object to the form. No. That was not in the response. So if that's in the company records, REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 366 1 2 3 4 A. 5 6 Q, 7 8 9 10 11 12 A. 13 14 15 16 Q. 17 A. 18 19 Q. 20 21 22 A. 23 thirty days if they went to St. Louis and they looked at the documents up there? No. I don't know whether they did or not. Have you since seen documents that indicate to you and would indicate to BB&L that there was a discharge contrary to what they said about this closed loop system? MR. COX-. Object to the form. No. I have personally not seen documents that would suggest differently, that it was a closed loop process. Well, what, pray tell, was Dr. Kaley -- I'm sorry. I couldn't hear the question. What, pray tell, was Dr. Kaley referring to? MR. COX: Object to the form. I don't know specifically which document he was referring to. REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 368 1 2 3 4 5 A. 6 Q. 7 8 9 A. 10 11 A. 12 13 14 15 16 Q. 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 have y'all altered or amended your response about the mercury discharges today? MR. COX: Object to the form. No, we haven't- But we have still -- Do you have documents that indicate that those -- that that forty to fifty tons were not discharged? Based on the -- MR. COX: Object to the form. Based on the data we have collected on the plant site and in the off-site areas, the data clearly suggests that quantities in that amount were not discharged, I'm not talking about tests. I'm talking about company documents, is what this reporter is talking about. And apparently that is what Dr. Kaley is talking about. Has he seen some paper document that you haven't seen that indicates there were about fifty tons of mercury REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. HARTOLDMON0031401 369 1 2 3 A. 4 6 A. 6 7 8 Q. 9 A. 10 11 Q. 12 13 14 15 A. 16 17 Q. 18 19 A. 20 21 Q. 22 23 Chat might have been dumped off Che plant site? My understanding -- MR. COX; Object to the form. My understanding is that there is a plant standard operating procedure that -That talks about the waste stream? That talks about the waste streams from the chlorine process. Which would have indicated that the waste emissions that came off might have been as much as forty to fifty tons? MR. COX: Object to the form. Not if that mercury was recycled back into the process. Okay. So you are disagreeing with what the process said about the waste stream? I'm disagreeing that we discharged forty to fifty tons of mercury off-site. Y'all have the same feeling about the lead. Have yfall told EPA and ADEM REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 371 1 A2 0. 3 4 5 A- 6 7 8 Q. 9 A. 10 Q. 11 12 A. 13 14 15 16 Q. 17 18 19 A. 20 21 Q. 22 23 YesWho told you that that was the only lead-producing process that y'all operated out there on that plant site? Dr. Kaley did the research into the lead and its historical uses on the plant site. Good 01' Bob again did^that work? I'm sorry? . Dr. Kaley, Good ol' Bob, did that work coo? He did the research and provided the response to agency requests regarding what knowledge we had to lead use on the plane site. Who did he talk to in making that determination, if you know? MR. COX; Object to the form. I don't know specifically who he talked to. Jerry Brown, Gene Arnett, and Ronald Jones, Alan Faust, Craig Branchfield, Mr. Taffee? Those are the kind of REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 370 1 2 3 A. 4 5 6 7 Q. 8 9 A. 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Q. 17 18 19 20 A. 21 22 Q. 23 everything that you need to about the lead emissions from this plant site? We have given them ail the information we have on the processes that used lead. And that includes data that we collected for lead on the plant site. What is the processes, as you understand, that use lead? My understanding is that we -- in the biphenyl production process benzine was essentially molted up through lead pots and that the heat from the molted lead is what provided the catalyst for causing the benzine molecules to form biphenyl molecules. Is that the only process that you all have indicated to EPA or to adem or any regulatory agencies for which there would be lead emission? That's the only process that I'm aware of that used lead. Did you all say that that was a closed loop system? REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 3 72 1 2 3 A. 4 5 6 Q. 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 A. 19 20 21 22 23 people that he talked to? MR. COX; Object to the form. Once again, I don't know specifically who he talked to, which isn't to say he didn't talk to other people. Would y'all have been required to look through your records and determine from the processes that y'all -- the manufacturing processes that y'all operated on that plant site -- would y'all have been required under this 104(e) request for information related to the Anniston site to look back through the processes and find out if there were some other possible sources of lead in the manufacturing process other than this -- Is it biphenyls? Biphenyl. I can't recall what the specific requests were in 104 (e). I think it's a fairly standard request to provide information regarding past manufacturing processes on the plant site. REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. HARTOLDMON0031402 373 1 2 3 4 Q. 5 6 7 a 9 IQ 11 12 13 14 15 16 A. 17 Q. 18 19 20 21 22 A. 23 Once again, I don't know what the specific request was in our 104(e) request. In response to request number thirty, this saya -- Let's see. It says -- Thirty-one says, "Did any of the companies which operated the facility use lead in any of its production processes." And that response in this 104 (e) reads, "Lead was used in biphenyl manufacturing processes at the Anniston plant until about 1964." And it says, "See letter attached from Dr. Robert Kaley to Steven Cobb.1' Yes. And what it says is that was the process by which lead might have been released. That's the only manufacturing energy process that I saw in 104(e) . MR. COX: Object to the form. To my knowledge that was the only process that used lead. REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 375 1 2 3 Q. 4 5 6 7 Q. 8 A. 9 10 11 12 13 Q. 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Q, 23 involvement in the preparation of the 104 (e) response, Did you understand that that's how -that he was responsible for gathering that information? MR. COX: Object to the form. Dr. Kaley? He was responsible forgathering the information and responding to ADEM's request for information regarding lead. What Bob's role was in preparing the 104(e) response, I don't know. And then it asks on page thirty-eight. "Describe how lead" --in this same document -- 104(e) -- MR. STEWART: I may put this in for the record, Buddy, as Exhibit Number Four. (Plaintiff's Exhibit Number Four was marked for identification.) It says, "Describe how lead from other entities in Calhoun County got into the REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 374 1 Q. 2 3 A. 4 5 A. 6 7 Q. 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 A. 21 22 Q. 23 A. And in Dr. Kaley's process. I mean, that was in Dr. Kaley's zoning process? Yes, MR. COX: Object to the form. Yes. I'm relying on the research that Bob did for that information. Dr. Kaley. And it says, "Were PCBs or any material containing PCBs ever burned at the facility?" And the response to that request is "To the best of Solutia's knowledge, information, and belief neither PCBs nor materials containing PCBs were burned at the Anniston plant." Is that y'all's position; based on anecdotal or historical data you gathered from former plant employees and the records? I don't know what resources were drawn upon to develop that response. Did Bob Kaley define that? Once again, I had very little REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC- 376 1 2 3 4 5 6 A. 7 Q. 8 9 10 11 A. 12 Q. 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 Q. 22 23 soils of residential homes that are businesses in Calhoun County." It says Solutia doesn't have sufficient knowledge to answer this request. I would agree with that. And so what you are saying is that there is no way that Monsanto could be responsible for the lead based on that biphenyl process? I don't believe so, no. Now, were y'all asked about all of the manufacturing processes for which a toxic substance was -- a toxic substance might have been released either in the manufacturing process or a byproduct? Does that include everything, PCBs, lead, mercury, all Che known substances -- MR. COX: object to the form. -- that are toxic? In other words, in this request are y'all -- in Exhibit Four are y'all REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. HARTOLDMON0031403 377 i 2 3 4 A. 5 6 Q. 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 A. 14 15 16 Q, 17 A. IS 19 20 21 22 23 required to tell them everything that came off this plant site? MR. COX: Object to the form. I'd have to look at the specific request to know what specifically was asked for. Well, if something was a toxic substance -- Let's just say y'all had nerve gas that you produced and waste came off that nerve gas production. Are you required to tell them of this thing? MR. COX; Object to form. Once again, I'd have to see specifically what's requested in the 104(e) request. That wouldn't be an unusual request. Nerve gas? Obviously, to the best of my knowledge. we didn't manufacture nerve gas at the Anniston facility. For the things we did manufacture, that's -- based on my general knowledge of the 104(e) request, that's a fairly standard question. REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 379 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 s 9 10 11 12 13 A. 14 Q. 15 16 17 Q. 18 A. 19 20 Q. 21 22 23 Exhibit Four was produced to the government, to EPA or ADEM or whatever, if that had been done at some point in time, it should have been included in this document, shouldn't it? MR. COX: Object to the form. He's already said he can't tell without reading the entire document. MR. STEWART: Look at it. MR. COX: Can we go off the record? It's pretty lengthy. Specifically what was the If you manufactured it and had some potential waste product for it -- MR. COX: Nerve gas specifically. Serine? Was there a specific request number that you would like me to refer to? Any of them. You wanted to look at it. I gave you the opportunity to look at it. I don't want to take advantage of you. I want to be as kind as I can be REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 378 1 Q. 2 A. 3 4 5 6 Q, 7 8 9 A. 10 11 12 13 Q. 14 15 A. 16 17 Q. 18 19 20 21 22 A. 23 Q. If you did nerve gas? No. Asking questions regarding what our manufacturing processes were and what the potential waste streams might have been. Who told you you didn't manufacture nerve gas at this plant? MR. COX: Object to the form. Nobody has told me specifically that we didn't. I'm just not aware of it from my review and understanding of the historical operations of the facility. Wouldn't you want to know that? MR. COX: Object to the form. If it was necessary to conduct the remedial measures. Wouldn't you have to tell the truth in this document? Aren't you required to tell the truth in this document about what you did on the plant site? MR. COX: Object to the form. Certainly. If Exhibit Four -- If at the time REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 380 1 2 A. 3 4 5 6 7 8 Q. 9 10 11 12 Q. 13 14 A. 15 16 17 Q. 18 19 A. 20 21 22 23 to you; and to Buddy too. Well, Request Number Nine asks for information on waste residue or off-site products and other materials from Solutia's manufacturing process that may have bean placed and/or scored at the Anniston facility. And there is more. That would include that; wouldn't it? MR. COX: You are asking him to assume that they produced serine at the site now? If you did, it should have been included that, shouldn't it? I'm not familiar with serine or nerve gas. I mean, it's -- I just don't know how you produce it or -If the designation of it would be GR, do you see that anywhere in there? If you produced it, Mr. Stewart -- It's asking for what the waste residue, off-site products, and so on. So if it was a product -- I'm honest. I don't know if it was REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. HARTOLDMON0031404 381 1 2 3 4 5 Q. 6 7 A. B 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 something we manufactured at Anniston or not. I certainly don't recognize that name as anything that I'm currently looking in for our ongoing monitoring. I understand that. It asks about your manufacturing processes; doesn't it? It asks for specifically waste residue, off-site products, and other materials from che manufacturing processes. Let me go back. There may have been a specific request about -- Well, there is a request for an employee list of -- or a list of employees who may know information about Solutia and/or Monsanto's production processes for any chemicals or other products manufactured by Monsanto and/or Solutia at its Anniston facility. So I guess -- Well, that's a request for a list of employees that may know about production products; not a specific request for information on the manufacturing process. REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 3B3 1 2 3 4 5 <3. 6 7 A. 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 13 19 20 21 Q. 22 23 But certainly I'm not aware of any attempts to hide any manufacturing processes we had at the facility. There is no basis for it. No one has ever told you about it. though, have they? Once again, if I know about it, Mr. Stewart, it's because they were by-products from that manufacturing process that I'm having to monitor for or understand as part of our 0 and M activities. The specific names of the manufacturing processes you mentioned, I'm not familiar with the -- with that particular manufacturing process. But if there was a waste stream generated that created a constituent and potential concern, it would be covered under our monitoring requirements. Well, let's go back to Exhibit One, what monies do you have budgeted for remediation of residential REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 382 1 Q. 2 3 4 5 6 A. 7 8 9 10 11 Q. 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 A. 22 23 But you should, should you not, tell them about it in that thing, that y'all manufactured that? You should have told them about it. MR. COX: Object to the form. Once again, if there is a specific request for it in here, we provided that information to them. I could continue going through the document to see if there was one. It doesn't say -- It just asks about the specific manufacturing processes where you make something that might have some -- That's what it's looking for in that thing. They want to know what junk that might have left that facility that might have created some possible harm to the people. Isn't that what they are asking for? Based on what I have reviewed in this document, there has been a request for waste streams generated. REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC- 384 1 2 A. 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 IS 19 20 21 Q. 22 23 A. properties? Where is that on there? It's not specifically on here. Mr. Stewart, I don't believe. Let me take a quick look to make sure I'm not misleading you here. Well, there was some money set aside for EPA investigation for one hundred thousand dollars. And that was simply to identify the fact to my management that EPA was in Anniston and we could anticipate some sort of remediation being done under their oversight. The scope of that wasn't even defined at the time I prepared this. We hadn't even begun discussions with the EPA regarding AOC. We knew they were in the area and they were sampling residential properties. You knew they were in the area doing that? Yes. REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. HARTOLDMON0031405 38S 1 Q. 2 3 4 A. 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Q. 12 13 14 IB 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 A. But you just didn't budget anything for it, to speak of, out of those monies they planned to spend in the future? I had no idea what the potential scope of work might turn out to be if we ended up doing an investigation under CERCLA. Like I said/ that was merely placed there as a line item to make sure people were aware that we would incur expenditure of funds* Isn't that something if you really planned to do at some point in time -- you've got that corridor thing down pretty pat, don't you? You know exactly what that is going to cost, how much you will spend, what you are going to do. Now you get down to the residential properties- Could it be that you all have figured out that you are not going to have to do a blooming thing on those residential properties? MR. COX: Object to the form. No. It's always.been our intentions to REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 387 1 2 A. 3 4 A. 5 6 7 a 9 10 11 12 Q. 13 14 15 16 17 A. 18 19 Q. 20 21 22 23 it, did you? We have no -- MR. COX: Object to the form. Once again, there was never an intention to not address our remedial responsibilities for PCBs. The reason there is a small sum of money budgeted was, as,I said earlier. we have no idea the size or scope of the investigation the EPA might ask us to do. Well, at this point in time, if I look at your document, I don't see any expenditures. Yet y'all have already spent over a million dollars down there at the mall. Y'all spent the million. Approximately. I'd have to look at the documents to get the exact figure. Does it have to do with the person involved who might be a fairly sophisticated developer that had fairly significant connections as opposed to -how did Mr. --I guess it's Mr. Faust or REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 306 1 2 3 4 S 6 Q. 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 A. 14 Q. 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 follow the data. If the data lead us into the residential properties and suggested that there were PCBs there that we might be responsible for, then we would remediate them. At one time Mr. Faust told the people over there y'all weren't going north of 10th Street. But you bought the Miller property and did a lot of work over there north of 10th Street, on that property. That was y'all's. Yes. We clearly have done work -- Y'all leased it through the city and did the work on it. Y'all got business on it. What you got through telling me is that y'all have no intention of doing anything about the residential properties that exist at this plant site, around the plant. You have no intention of doing that. You didn't budget any money for REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC- 3 88 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 a 9 10 n 12 13 14 15 16 17 IS 19 20 21 22 23 Q. whoever authored this -- the low income. adverse PR associated with remediation in a low income community? I mean, is the treatment different because of the people that are there? MR. COX: Object to the form. Why don't you ask him how much they have already spent at the properties -- MR. STEWART: That's not an objection. If you want to testify, you do. MR. COX: I'm not testifying. MR. STEWART: But you'll get your chance in closing to do that. And it might not work any better there than it does here . Make an objection if you want to. MR. COX: Object to the form of the question. (By Mr. Stewart( Does it have to do REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. HARTOLDMON0031406 389 1 2 3 4 5 A. 6 Q. 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 A. 14 15 16 17 10 19 20 21 22 23 Q. with the people you are associated with, the low income people that are in the community? Is that the way you view the community? NO . So when Mr. Grimmer comes along and says, nHey, fellows, I'm one of y'all, and y'all messed me up down here; clean it up to a part per million and spend a million bucks down here" -- Is that right? MR. COX: Object to the form. The answer to your question, Mr. Stewart, is that I do not pick the areas that we are going to remediate based on income or who is our buddy or anything like that. I follow the data. And if the data suggests we need to conduct remediation in the area. that's where I go to conduct the remediation. That's why we signed the AOC with the EPA. Where in your document have you taken REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 391 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 A. 15 Q. 16 A. 17 Q. ia 19 20 21 22 23 where y'all said -- and I quote -"Although Solutia has accepted responsibility for investigating impacted materials within the one hundred year floodplain at Snow and Choccolocco creeks, we will not accept responsibility for materials which are disturbed in complete, disregard of ADEM regulations and directives. We therefore decline your request to submit an interim measures work plan for these materials," That is your writing; isn't it? That's exactly correct. In other words -- We're not the ones -- --y'all put them there. But if somebody happens to dig them up, then you are not going to take any responsibility at all for cleaning up the mess you made? telling us? Is that what you are MR. COX: Object to the form. REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 390 1 2 3 A. 4 5 6 Q. 7 A. 8 Q. 9 10 A. 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 Q. 22 23 the responsibility for cleaning up any residential property? We have taken the responsibility in the context of the AOC we signed with the EPA. Talking about that emergency stuff? That's correct. Where beyond that have you taken any responsibility for cleaning up anything? We have taken the responsibility in signing the agreement in principle with the EPA for the long-term consent decree. We have taken the responsibility in that we have addressed in remediated areas where there were PCBs on housing. And PCBs left the mall site and was taken to people's homes. We went out and addressed that. I think we have been very proactive. is that the way y'all took that proactive deal down there at the Anniston Waterworks and Sewer Board, REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 392 1 A. 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Q. 23 No. What I'm telling you is in that specific case the waste water treatment plant and the Anniston Water Board were negligent in their responsibilities. They did things that were not appropriate. And we are not going to assume responsibility for that. Now, we have agreed to move forward and work with them. We haven't tossed it by the side and walked away. We have agreed to move forward and work with them. But we are not going to at this point in time say we are going to accept complete responsibility for this pile that was generated in complete violation of ADEM regulations and directives. We are not there to fix the waste water treatment plant's problem. They created the problem. We will work with them - who created the problem? Why are the PCBs down there in the first place. REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. HARTOLDMON0031407 3 93 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 a 9 10 li 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 Mr. Branehfield? Didn't it come from your plant? MR. COX: Object to the form. There is a potential that they came from our facility. That's what you're doing down there, characterizing them, because they came from -There has been no final determination made that those PCBs came from our facility. I think that's important to know. But I would not draw a parallel between that and our commitment to dealing with residential properties. How many of them have you cleaned up? We have been -- to date we have cleaned up -- we have not cleaned up any residential properties. That's what I thought. We have begun preparations to clean up one. And the reason we haven't cleaned REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 395 1 I do hereby certify that the witness 2 whose attached deposition was taken before me 3 was by me first duly cautioned and sworn to 4 tell the truth in the cause aforesaid? that 5 the testimony contained herein was by me 6 reduced to writing in the presence of said 7 witnesses by means of stenography and 8 afterwards transcribed by means, of 9 computer-aided transcription.-' The foregoing 10 is a true and accurate transcript of the whole 11 of the testimony given by said witness, as 12 aforesaid. 13 I do further certify that I am not 14 connected by blood or marriage with any of the 15 parties or their attorneys or agents and that 16 I am not an employee of any of them, nor 17 interested in the matter of controversy. 18 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set 19 my hand and affixed my notarial seal at 20 Gadsden, Alabama, County of Etowah, this 29th 21 day of JULY 2001. 22 Janet FI Russo -- 23 Notary Public, Alabama-at-Large My Commission expires: 5-22-2004 REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC. 394 1 the rest is because we haven't received 2 access from the homeowners. They won't 3 give us access. 4 MR. STEWART: That's all I have 5 got. 6 mr. cox: All right. 7 8 (AND FURTHER DEPONENT SAITH NOT.) 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 REGIONAL REPORTING SERVICE, INC, HARTOLDMON0031408 BRNCHFLD.TXT Page 1 | 35203 2:10 j 35901-0755 1:23 acquired 325:7 acquiring 325:6 I 143 225:13 j 'SOfl 43:15 1 '60s 43:15; | 132:3; 133:3,4 j 36201 2:4.5 | 375 3 : 13 I 395 3 :4 4 acre 215:8; 346:22; 347:2 acres 22:14; 31:9; 46:7,14; 140:12,15 | $4 359:2 j 'S3 359:3 | ' 69 357:8 | r7Qs 132:19,22 j *92 12:21 4 3:3.5,13 400 1:18; 2:9.5 |5 across 58:11; 142:1; 151:11; 170:19; 321:18, 21 act 28:22; | 93 8:22; 88:13; 150:17; 160:11 | 355:5 j 97 60:10,11; | 5 3:8 j 5-22-2004 j 163:15,19; 284:9 | 395:23.5 action 1:6.5; 163:5; 230:8; 265:16; 296:8; [ 193 12:21; 50:19; J 501C3 205:23 298:12; 300:11, I 151:6 j '99 50:20; 73 :11 16, 18 7 actions 323:11 activated 23:9 1 755 1:22.5 active 330:8 actively 72:21; | 1 3 ; 11.5 | 104 348:15; [ 372:12,19; 9 9th 274:17,19 218:11 activities 16:23; 44:4; 46:13; t 373:2,10,20; 71:12; 72:1; ! 375:2,12,15; j 377:14,22 | 10:OQ 1:15; 4:7 | 10th 321:23; 1 322:2,3,9; | 386:8,11 A ! a.m 4 j7 | a.m. 1:15 | ABERNATHY 1:4.5 | ability 179:16; 144:21; 1B7 : 14; 202:20; 228:16; | 272:14; 273:12, j 16; 274:10,21; | 275:1,4,9; | 278:7; 279:17; i 1131 2:4 l 122110 249:9 ! 1952 357:8 j 1960s 132:6 j 1964 373:13 [ 245:2 i able 7:2; 24:1; | 28:3; 142:9; | 245:21; 312:17; j 317:7,9 I 383:12 \ activity 20:9; | 138:3; 275;20 j actual 227:7/ | 277:8 ^ | 1970s 106:19; | 133:2 | 1930b 130 :3,7 I 1990s 355:4 | 1992 7:19; 355:5 | 1993 88:15 | 1996 163:15 | 1997 281:13 ; 1 282:3,9; 284:15 | aboard 35:8 j above 26:13,16; j 137:12,20; | 138:19; 147:9; | 170:6; 19B:B; l 318:13; 327:19; t 328:20 j above-ground | 139:15,16 | actually 16:11; [ 54:20; 77:23; j 78:7; 83:8,16; j 86:14; 07:4,16; | 88:4; 90:11; [ 92:2,6; 191:4, | 22; 237:15; | 239:6; 269:4; j 270:19; 295:10; | 1998 12:15; 16:5; | Absolutely 334:18 | | 17:21; 50:20 | Academy 5:18; 6:3 | 323:5; 340:11; 343:17 | 1999 353:14 I2 I .............................................................- | 2 3:12 j 20-20 226:8; | 227:3 | accept 391:6; | ad 143:14 | 392:14 | Adams 55:12; 56:5 ( acceptance 280:22 I add 11--22; 47:10; | accepted 7:9; | 319:17; 343:21 | 233:13; 280:10, | addition 47:23; | 16,23; 285:5,8; | | 391:2 ' " '' [ 154:1; 246:9; 342:13; 343:17, | 2000 202:4,5,8, | 15; 213:19; | Acceptors 8:1,6 [ access 289:9; | 22; 353:23 I additional 30:10; | 267:22 I 2001 1:16; 4:7; j 5:1; 220:9; | 395:21 I 202 170:16; | 295:9; 297:22; | 122:14; 234:20; | 2 9 B : 2 3; 299:5,7; j 290:9; 299:1; | 333:14; 355:18; [ 354:2; 367:1 j 362:19; 363:1,4; | address 72:23; | 365:13,20; j 119:19; 142:7,9, j 286:1; 350:21; | 394:2,3 | 10,12; 387:5 I 351:3,8 I 20th 1:10; 2:9.5 | accomplish | 185:17,22; [ addressed 131:7; j 390:14,18 ! 21 104:3; 108 : 16; | 247:8,10 | addressing 25:15; | 109:7,18; 114:9, [ accomplished j 149:3; 264:3 j 10; 118:8 j 247:18; 255:9 | ADEN 50:6; 89:10; | 228 3:11.5 | accordance 87:7; | | 24 1:16; 4:7; j 158:15; 160:9; j | 5:1; 10:11; 11:6 j 180:3,23; 243:15 j 90:2; 163:9; 175 : 7,17; 102:16; 183:6; j 247 3 : 12 1 account 206:6 | 213:19; 220:15, 1 29th 395:20 | accumulates | 16,18,22; 232:3; 1 102:23 | 272:1; 274:4; | accurate 57:3; | 238:6; 360:10, j 275:10,19,22; | 276:12; 277:12; j 3 3:12.5 S 334 3 :12.5 | 14; 361:22,23; ! 395:10 | 278:7,9,17,23; | 279:17; 280:22; 281:18; 284:3; 285:15; 206:4; 291:20; 317:17; 318:5,7; 327:7; 332:22,23; 334:20,21; 335:16; 336:11; 339:11; 340:6, 13; 342:16,22; 343:14; 369:23; | 392:8,11 | ambion 175 : 6 j agreement 15:14; | amended 368:1 | 209:1; 294:3; | Amoco 46:9,14 | 304:1,3; 306:6; | among 212:14 j 309:8; 390:11 j amount 26:12; jj agreements 159:17 85:21; 86:9,11; j 144:20; 312:13; | agricultural | 210:21 | 323:16; 363:14 | ahead 42:19; j 58:17; 137:14, | amounts 234:1 [ ample 143:4 j | J | | [ j | j j 370:17; 379:2; 391:8; 392:16 ADEM'S 375:9 adequately 327:16 | j j j 19; 250:16 aiming 229-. 8 air 97:14,18; 98:2,4,7; 117:5, adhere 23:12 [ 9; 169:23; adjacent 72:20; [ 170:2,4,14; 77:4; 104:4; 171:12,17; 128:8,11; 189.-14; 247:21; 172:10,13,14; 174:12,14,19,22; 278:8 adjustments 175:6,13; 280:23; 289:1; 88:21; 89:5 administer 283:9 administers 293:5,11; 340:1; 341:4,5; 344:11, 18,21,23; 352:5; 145:16; 281:21 administration 350 : 16 Ahin 314:4 260:7,0; 262:6 administrative 186:17; 261:22; al. 1:4.5,3.5 ALABAMA 1:1,3,19, 23 ; 2:4.5,10; 1 analyses 91:16; | 180:2 | j | analysis 86:21; j 94:1; 137:17; j 186:23 | | | | analytical 181:19 | | analyze 86:23; [ 364:18 j j | analyzing 86:13 | and/or 300:6; | 381:15,17 | | l | Anderson 89:16, I 17; 90:6,13; j ] j 278:11 | | Anderson's 273:22 [ ] anecdotal 374:17 | I Ann 226:20,21 j | Annapolis 5:18; j 7:18 | | 294:22 4:6; 5:1; 30:21; { Anniston 2:4.5; ! admit 79:21; 75:8; 87:17; 53: 15; 54 :10 ; 194:18; 243:18 advantage 379:22 123:15; 144:22; 149:1; 162:23; 57: 17; 60:19 68: 22; 69:4, 20, advantages 191:11 adverse 250.-22; 254:17; 388:2 207:21; 208:13; 209:14,15; 214:16; 257:7; 23; 71 : 19,22 72 : 2,16 , 10; SO: 7,19 ; 39: 21; advertisements 122:13 advisory 199:5; 232:19; 395:20 Alabama-at-Large 395:23 90: 10; 95: 12 ; 115 : 6; 93 : 13 106:18; 121:17; 213:3; 244:1; Alan 54:9; 141 : 17, 19,23 ; 306:9; 332:8 148:21; 155:2; 143 : 15 ; 145: 17; affairs 257:19 affect 221:13; 227:17; 331:13, 161:7,10; 162:1; 167:6; 168:1; 222:7,14; 371:22 155 : 14 ; 159 : 5,8, 14; 160 ;6; 161 : 8 ; 167 : 1 6 ; 16 affirmatively 55:9; 210:4 affixed 395:19 Allan 302:16 allow 86:10; 96:6; 142:16; 332 :16 1B6 :9,10; 22 8:S; 236 : 23 ; 24 5 : 20; 248 : 21; 260 : 20; 261 : 1; 264:5 , 7 , affluent 349:13 afield 109:13 aforesaid 395:4, 12 afraid 173 : B , 204:17 allowed 48:4 allows 201:20 almost 43:3; 233:20 alongside 212:15 already 21:7; 13, 15,23; 267 ill; 268 : 6, 12; 269 : 1,15 ; 270 : 13; 271: 11; 272 : 15, 20; 278 : 2 ; 279:1 1, afterwards 395:8 agencies 119:18; 34:16; 36:4; 107:19; 116:12; 17; 2B3 : 17; 287 : 20 ; 293 : 10; 169:11; 201:8; 260:22; 274:8; 207:7; 337:7; 341:19; 363:19; 367:17; 370:18 agency 128:6,11; 180:17,21; 233:8; 332:20; 120:9; 181:20; 197:11; 325:2; 379:7; 307:14; 383:0 altered 368:1 alternative 21:5; 205:22; 221:5,9, 11; 223:1; 307 :18; 314 : 15; 319 : 6 ; 320 : 9 r 13; 321 : 6; 330:2 ,5; 348 : 16; 350: 10; 353 : 1,3 ; 354 : 14, 22; 355 ; 12 ; 359 : 2 ; 372:1 3 ; 373 : 12 ; 374 : 15; 336:19; 371:13 228:22 377 : 19 ; 380 : 7 ; agenda 269:16 agents 395:15 alternatives 30:1; 235:2; 381 :1,18; 334 = 11 ; 390 : 23; ago 43:3; 88:7, 237:4 3 92 : 3 19; 131:7,14; although 30:4; annual 34:10 182:17; 286:18; 292:13; 316:8 126:9; 141:15; 170:12; 209:15; another 32:9; 34 : 2; 4 0:12; agree 45:10; 208:19; 376:6 219:17; 259:3; 274:6; 277:12; 90: 1; 118:4; 120 : 12 ; 124 : 12; agreed 4:2,8,14, 21; 19:22; 208:20; 306:7; 357:11; 358:11; 391:2 ambient 172:13, 135 : 17 ; 165 ,22; 170 : 14; 151 : 4,8; 166 : 18; 174 : 2 ; 307:11; 309:9, 18; 329:11; 14; 175:13; 344:IS 1B9 : 13; 191 : 12; 206 : 19; 207 : 20; HARTOLDMON0031409 8RNCK7LD.TXT Page 2 231:3; 267:18, 19; 274:16; 351:10; 355:9 answer 15:11; 58:13,17; 65:4; 67:5; 106:10; 110:3; 132:7,8, 10,13; 133:11; 172:20; 173:7,9; 133:7; 200:22; 223:5; 224:12; 251:12; 256:5; 257:5; 283:19; 296:15; 330:16; 339:2; 341:21; 343:8; 356:13; 362:6; 376:4; 339:13 answered 296:11 answering 37:6 anticipate 20:6; 21:22; 233:9; 308:16; 384:11 anticipated 20:23; 308:17 anticipation 236 :15 anybody 71:18; 72:9; 110:6; 116:5; 132:16; 138:19; 167:13, 17,20; 218:5; 227:4; 231:12, 19; 261:4,9; 262:3; 270:23; 272:21; 286:2; 289:20; 306:21; 310:9; 313:21; 342:15; 346:1; 352:12 anyplace 137:22 anyway 10:3; 330:18 AOC 274:11,10,23; 276:23; 277:7; 294:8; 295:7; 298:13; 299:14; 300:19; 307:11; 384:17; 339:22; 390:4 apologise 7:20; 230:23; 300:3; 312:8 apparently 361:5, 11; 362:1; 368:19 appear 104:16; 197:12; 250:6 appeared 30:13 appears 100:8; 240:9,12; 242:12; 251:4, 21; 335:6; 357:7 apple 61:13 applicable 315:14 appointed 262:4, 12 appraisal 215:12 appraise 214:17 appraised 205:13 appraisers 214:13 appraising 214:14 approach 137:19; 142:23; 166:19; 185:5,12; 240:19; 364:6 appropriate 23:16; 186:16; | 191:21; 229:11; | 323:20; 337:9; | 350:4; 392:6 appropriately | 192:7 approval 153:7, j 10; 175:3,18,20; ] 181:4,16; 233:8; | 326:1 | approve 37:9; | 180:21 1 approved 37:13; | 88:1; 172:3; | 175:3; 201:9; | 257:18; 305:17; j 327:8 | approximate 215:5 | approximately | 12:14; 21:11,20; [ 22:8, 17; 34:3; \ 37:15; 44:22; | 46:5; 72:18; j 73:11; 32:16; | 122:1,16; 127:9; | 136:15; 202:4; | 227:10; 324:13; | 325:3; 326:14; | 307:17 j April 213:19 | aqueous 91:9; | 234:7,3 | area 22 :10; | 43:11,17,23; | 46:11,13; 49:5, | 10,22; 55:15,16; | 81:9; 95:12; j 103:22; 106:13; | 118:23; 124:14; j 126:19; 128:17; j 139:6,10; j 141:23; 144:1; j 149:11,16; 151:8; 161:12; j 166:20,22; 170:13; 171:2; j 172:21; 176:9, 11,12; 183:18, j 20; 184:15; 190:19; 199:13; | 200:1; 208:10; 216:7; 226:13; | 247:20; 248:3; | 252:3; 260:20; j 261:1; 268:6; j 270:12; 271:12'; | 274:4,14; 27.7:8; | 293:10; 307:21; | 312:13,19,21; j 319:22; 321:15; j 322:17; 327:1; 331:9; 333:4; | 335:16,20; | 336:1; 343:23; | 384:13,21; | 389:19 j areas 6:13; j 20:23; 73:2; ] 104:4; 118:7; | 126:3,6,8; j 128:2,3; 133:13; | 146:22; 147:7; \ 148:3; 150:4; [ 165:5; 224:7; I 234:4; 239:10; j 277:9,14; 1 319:10,12; | 321:1,3; 322:16, i 18; 363:13; | 389:15; 390:15 | aren't 95:13; | 336:2; 378=10 | Army 9 r 15 ] Arnett 371:21 j around 36:3; | 44:8,15; 46:20; | 47:6; 76:9; j 77:22; 70:19,22; [ 79:10,14,19; | 81:20; 34:1; | 90:7; 104:17; [ 107:13; 110:11; | 122:13; 163:15; j 170:13; 175:14; | 224:7; 233:16; [ 238:19; 246:13; j 274:14; 239:12; | 329:13; 331:19; | 347:8; 336:21 | arranged 258:9 | arrived 72:11; | 82:13; 96:15; | 301:8,10; 304:1, j 16; 313:22; j 314:5,7,16,20; j 354:17 | ARs 315:15 | article 352:20; i 353:6; 355=21; [ 356:23; 361:13; | 362=9 | ash 12:7 | aside 144=20; [ 384:7 asks 375:13; | 380:2; 381:5,7; | 382=11 j asphalt 30:17; | 141:9; 321:13 | assessment | 213:16; 313:4,5, | 12; 314:21; j 347:19; 355:3,6 | assessments j 313:16 | assign 4 = Id | assigned 69:4 | assist 204:14; j 329:12 | assistance 204=8, j 13; 329:11 | assistant 257=23; | 258:1; 261:22 | assisted 204:15; 265=16 | assisting 354:4 | associated 10=13; | 63:16; 83:15; j 88:8; 91:2; | 99:9,10; 100:18; j 101:16; 102:2; j 115:7,23; 116:3; j 120:21; 142=6; | 148:11; 228:12; | 250=19,22; | 251:6; 273:10; | 277:17; 317:12; | 328:9,16; 388:2; | 389:1 J Associates | 214:10,12 j association | 14:17; 93:15; | 144:5,23; | 225:19; 255:5 | as sume 12 = 12; | 15:11; 59:13; | 66:22; 74:14; | 90:19; 104:23; | 123:14; 135:21; | 161:8; 163:13; | 182:21; 198:7; j 223:9; 231:15; | 252:4; 254:22; j 269:16; 275:14; | 277=11; 314:19; | 355:2; 359:20; | 365:8; 380:10; 1 392:7 | assumed 7:15; j 19:20; 69:11; j 159:12; 163:11; j 222:7; 236:0 | assumption 255:4 | assumptions j 215:11; 223:18; j 231=22; 236:21 j ate 62:15 | Atlanta 124 : 13, j 20; 206:21; | 212:19; 214:12 j attach 101:18 | attached 3:14.5; | 04:17,20; 35:8; | 92:4,5; 97:9,16; | 373:14; 395=2 j attempt 22:2; | 86:5 | attempted 230:12; \ 245:19 \ attempting 154:9 \ attempts 333:2 j attend 11:12; j 146:18; 264:10 attendance 227:9; | 302:20 attended 5:17; | 6:6,14,20; 7:5; | 146=5,14,15,17; | 219:15; 258:22; | 259=3; 261:7,13; | 267:22,23; | 301=18; 302:12, | 14,19,22; 303:1; | 310=19 attendees 303:2 attending 270=3 | attends 219:10,13 attitude 246:10, 1 11 attorneys 395:15 August 202:15; | 267:22 authored 368:1 authority 50:11, | 15; 71:20; | 138=13,15,17 availability | 142=19; 143:9 available 13:6; 1 247:1; 292:8; 1 356:20; 364:4,8; | 365:3,5,9; | 367:13 Avenue 2:4; | 307:17 average 122:8; | 127:14; 191:17; | 205:11 Avoid 250:18 aware 37:4; | 53:13; 57:16; I 61:2,17; 62:7; 1 72:17; 90:21; | 91=1; 96=19; j 106:12; 107:2, j 21; 115:21; j 129:2,11,13; | 132:4; 133:1; | 138:21; 142:5; | 143:5; 140:15; | 165=10,21; | 166:3,15; | 167=15; 168=8; | 169:17,10; | 139:9,11,17; j 220:4,10,12; j 221:23; 224=22; [ 228:1; 286:21; | 287:19; 293=23; j 326:13; 328:7; | 351:11; 353;8, | 11; 355:19; | 367:8; 370:20; | 378:10; 383:1; | 335:9 1 away 10:22; 27:1; j 44:13; 126:14; 135:15,17; | 164:12,13; | 244:21; 245:1; | 317:3; 330:7; | 392:10 j awful 31=3 1 ......................................................... ' iB ! ................................................................. I B-l-U-f-f 32:14 | B-O-U-C-k 354:6 | bachelor 5=19 | bachelor's 5:23 j back 7:19; 43:15; | 78:17; 98:12; [ 130:15; 132:5; j 134:8; 161:2; j 182r19; 188:19; | 191:15; 200:7; | 213:19; 234:14; | 239:16; 249:8; [ 255:21; 274:1; | 295:23; 301:6; | 316:7; 325:22; ( 353:14; 358:18; | 369:15; 372:13; | 381:10; 383:21 | background 5:12; | 15=1; 170=9 backyard 295:3; | 316:14,15 | bad 332:14 ball 114:21; | 116=16; 117=2; | 125:23; 126:18; | 127:4,5,6; | 134:0; 135:1,4, | 9,11; 136:12,17; | 183:10; 184:23; | 185:13,20,23; | 233:16; 274:2; | 275:5,10; 276=9 | ballpark 22 :14 ,| 119:12 Baltimore 13:11 | BandAid 247 =23 j bank 127:2; | 134 = 10,13,16,18, 1 20; 150:2; j 223:12 | banks 26:19; | 94:20; 110:15, ] 17; 127:8; 1 128=7; 148=2; | 150:3; 152:9; j 199 .20; 213:16, j 21; 223:23; | 277 9, 10 | barrier 28:22; [ 44: B, 10; 46:19, | 22; 47:3 base 141=3,5; | 170 15; 343:2 | based 66=1; 76:3 | 80: 15; 81:18; | 99: 4; 100:15; | 102 6; 169:7; | 176 7; 190:9; | 205 15; 209:14; | 215 7; 223:9; | 226 9; 229:11; | 232 1,4,19,23; | 233 10; 319:14; | 345 31; 346:20; | 347 5; 358:4; | 368 9,11; ] 374 16; 376:9; J 377 21; 382=21; j 389 16 j bases 62:21 | basic 210:8 [ basically 8:11; | 9:15; 11:21; | 37:10; 64:6; | 134 17; 163=6; 205 5; 208:14; j 211 6; 241:10; ! 245 19 1 basics 13:14; | 190 15 | basins 249:1 | basis 34:10; 1 36:14; 37:7; | ;65: J 67:7; | 83:21; 90:14; | 100 11; 155=6; j 172 12; 175:16; j 134 2,3; 189=13 j 227 16; 236:12; j 239 17; 276:1; j 306 11; 323:18; j 341 8; 383=4 | BB&L 365:13; j 366 8 | BBL 356:13,16,17 | 357 5; 364:3,22 j 367 9 | bear 329:18 1 bearing 227:19 | beat 329:13 | became 25:22; j 26:10; 28:1; | 33:11; 34:15; | 45:9; 51:19; 1 91:: ; 126:10,15 j 146 17; 189:19; j 212 9; 283:14; j 320 3; 328:16; \ 329 3; 353:7; | 367 8 | become 218 :19 | becomes 241:11 | becoming 264:12 | bedrock 28:17,18 ! 22: 29:3,5; \ 30:12; 39:16; j 01:10,12,14,15, ! 21,23 | begsn 89:20; ! 90: J; 126:21; j 189 4; 212:10; [ 234 2 \ begin 38:15,17; HARTOLDMON0031410 BRKCHPLD.TXT Page 3 130:16; 196:7; 300:12 beginning 29:22; | 272:22 | best 27:21; | 30:22; 61:19; 251:16 begun 158:2; 235:11; 303:15; | 64:20,21; | 103:10; 152:8; | 158:1; 177:20; 334:16; 393:21 behalf 302:13 behind 10:3,6; 74:18; 111:4; 176:5,17,22; 177 : 7 behold 339:16 belabor 250:1 belief 344:2,17; 374:13 believe 10:1; 29:17; 37:20; 44:21; 45:20,21; 47;19; 43:9; 50:12,18; 52:12, 22; 53:3; 54:1; | 185:5,11; | 186:15; 190:21; | 192:6; 206:7; | 215:14; 217:17; | 264:16; 284:13; j 287:1; 346:8; | 374:12; 377:17 | Beta 7:9 i better 14:7; | 50:1; 73:23; | 74:16; 89:2,5,6; j 131:20; 191:3,7; | 205:21; 208:22; | 224:5; 226:14; j 295:13; 321:15; j 388:17 55:13,16; 56:14; 57:3,11,23; 60:12; 65:13; 67:18; 70:7,10; 71:10; 79:12; 80:1,16,23; 81:11; 82:8; 90:1; 93:5; 94:17; 105:13; 108:17; 117:18; 120:2; 121:17; 123:5; 124:17; 128:16; 130:3,8; 143:15; 159:2, 17; 163:15,19; 171:21; 173:2; 175:14; 176:12; 181:7; 182:13; 183:18; 184:21; 188:17; 193:12; 199:14; 201:21; 204:10; 206:1,5, 7; 208:2,3,9; 209:13; 218:4; 219:22; 220:10; | between 41:5; ] 70:23; 82:18; | 92:3; 94:4,13; j 96:20; 112:12, 1 13,14; 128:12, | 17; 136:15,22; | 143:11; 165:19, | 23; 178:9; | 212:13; 275:22; | 295:16; 296:19; | 297:5; 300:7; | 326:14; 357:8; | 393:14 f beyond i34;9; | 213:13; 227:2; ( 263:12; 304:2; | 390:8 | Bineline 302:15 1 big 12:1; 27:5; j 37:18; 46:2,12; | 53:16; 80:18; | 101:12; 204:18; j 217:5; 346:1,15 | biggest 31:20 j bill 8:13 234:11; 238:15; billion 179:7,8, 244:4,7; 245:11; 255:4; 258:8; 259:1; 261:7,11; 1 bills 308:6 | bimonthly 175:16 262:9; 264:9; 266:4; 269:11; 270:22; 273:10; 274 : 17,21; 273:19; 279:5,3; 280:2; 281:13; 234:7; 285:1; bind 11:19 j bio 182:22 | Bio-accusmlation j 265:19 ' ' | bioavailabili.ty 1 244:16 | biphenyl 265:15; 293:12; 307:16, 19; 318:15; 320:3,16; 324:13; 329:17; 330:12; 333:19; 370:10,15; | 372:18; 373:11; j 376:10 | biphenyls 372:17 j Birmingham 1:18; 342:23; 343:3; 348:20; 350:6; 354:15; 360:9, 11,13; 376:11; 384:3 believer 113:23 bell 310:3 below 139:14,19,- J 2:10; 4:6; 5:1; ] 212:18; 226:9, | 13; 227:1 bit 5:11; 79:2; | 89:12; 99:17; | 192:12; 201:14; | 207:18; 293:9; | 336:2 147:1,5; 179:13; 298:11; 299:11; 300:23; 301:1,5 benefit 59:20 benefits 205:17 bensine 370:10,14 besides 225:6; black 95:16; [ 96:2; 98:17; | 100:6,23; 115:1 [ Blanket 265:23 | blood 395:14 [ blooming 365:20 | blow 170:19 [ blows 97 : 17 f Bluff 32:9,14; j 33:7,B,9,12,16; | 35:1,14 | board 220:21; | 225:1; 330:3,5; | 333:13,17,19,23; | 390:23; 392:3 | Bob 67:19; | 109:16; 113:22; | 129:22; 131:23; j 146:7,8; 161:4; | 261:5; 355:22; | 371:8,10; 374:6, j 22 Bob's 375:11 j Boils 285:23 border 26:15 | boas 271:5 j both 27:1,4; j 32:10; 56:12; j 92:11; 159:15; j 192:14,20; j 240:1; 276:20; 295:3; 353:21 j bottom 20:13; 26:22; 103:15; I 104:17; 178:20; j 221:14 | Bouek 354:6 | bought 256:13; | 386:9 | branch 272:6,12,- j 273:4,11 j BRANCHFIELD 1:12, | 13; 3:7; 4:4; | 5:3,9; 16:3; j 17:6; 51:2; | 55:11; 58:1; | 59:5,11; 61:6; | 63:20; 71:19; | 75:6; 82:3; | 88:17; 39:8; l 104:12; 106:8; | 114:1; 141:19; [ 150:14; 160:23; t 174:16; 181:8; [ 164:18; 188:B; | 189:6; 196:18; j 198:1; 200:9; | 213:2; 240:3,16; | 242:14; 243:18; j 245:3; 246:15; j 250:8; 254:22; | 255:8; 265:9; | 267:20; 281:8; | 283:18; 286:2; 309:3; 311:4; | 316:6; 333:17; 336:3,14; 338:3, j 14; 342:1; 343:1; 352:14; j 357:16; 364:20; 371:22; 393:1 | Branchfield1s j 267:3 j break 11:13; j 15:5; 114:3,4; | 150:13; 200:8; | 206:2; 265:3,6; | 316:3,5 bridge 108:16 | brief 7:12 briefly 326:9 bright 104:13; | 254:23 bring 179:1 1 Brio 56:1 j broad 6:10; 9:19; | calculate 31:16 j 76:19; 215:11; J Calhoun 1:3; | careful 193:16,23 | Carolina 32:18, ] 236:21 | 216:6,18; 225:9; | 19; 33:3 | broader 331:13 | brokering 294:2 | brought 150:19 j Brown 168:11,13, | 246:3; 257:14; 375:23; 376:2 California 55:15 | call 39:12; | carry 196:23; j 197:2 | carrying 195:19; | 198:4 | 18; 169:1; 43:20; 62:11,12; | cars 193:20 | 272:5,7,10; | 352:13; 371:21 Bruce 125:14 j Bryant 356:22; | 93:18; 99:2; | 126:11; 144:3; | 150:7; 154:3; | 158:18; 160:1; | case 26:21; | 35:20; 310:5; j 364:7; 392:2 | cases 51:16; 358:22; 359:1; 360:7 | Bryant's 360:9, | 12,13 bucks 389:10 j Bud 255:11 | buddy 14:12; | 55:3; 109:3,4,8; | 176:11; 192:13; | 213:10; 218:13; | 229:18; 274:17; | 303:22; 356=15, 1 | called 8:3; | 10:11; 18:4,9; | 32:3,9; 33=1; | 84:5; 93:6,10; j 98:21; 184:22; j 296:13 | cash 65:21 | casing 178:12 | catalyst 370:13 j catch 341=18 j category 119:14 | 222:13; 375:17; j 380:1; 339:16 j budget 223:9; | 240:7,9; 385:1; j 386:23 | budgetary 267:13 j budgeted 383:22; | 387:8 | build 22:20,23; ] 105:15 | 38:14; 39:3; | 40:13; 43=8; | 54:14; 91:8; ( 99:IB; 123:5; 153:5; 187:16; | 203:13; 207:21; [ 209:8; 215:22; [ 226:8; 243:21; f 254:16; 269:18; [ 313:4; 354:5 j Catinero 269:11, ! 13 ) cattle 210:16,22 | 262 21caught : | cause 116:11; 1 332:10; 395:4 caused 135:10; 1 244:1 causing 370:14 cautioned 395:3 | building 1:18; E came 27:13; 35:8,- cell 12:8; 158:9, j 2:9; 9:15; 23:2,- j 68:22; 73:12; | 11,13,18,22; | 136:4; 158:8; | 75:7; 93:1,4; [ 159:7; 160:1.6, | 319:10,- 320:21; | 321:7 | 95:3; 96:1,16, [ 8; 162:12; j| 20; 97:2; 98:23; 326:8,22; 336:7; | built 21:7; 86:7; | 115:7; 139:17 j j 105:22; 103:2, 19; 115:16; | 346:21; 347:8,9, j 11; 350:19; bulk 31:11; | 120:15 1 bull 255:15 [ bunch 104:20; | 181:5 [ bunker 114:13,20 j bunkers 101: 5,9 i burden 329:19 | buried 138:2; j 147:11,15; j 167:18,21; j 173:14; 346:12; j 363:5; 365:13 j burned 374:9,14 | 116:19; 146:7; [ 351:8,10,11; j 165:8,11; 166:5; | 357:9 | 206:5; 222:6; j cells 160:13,16; j 229:3; 231:6; ! 162:7,13; 164:4; j 244:18; 252:7; f 335:9,22; 346:2, j 262:7; 263:2; I 15; 353:16 j 281:5; 286:3,15, \ center 46:11; 20; 294:13; j 329:10; 348:2; E 142:20; 207:22; | 208:13; 214:16; 350:21; 352=21; | 311:23 | 353:3,9; 363:12; j cents 205:8,12; 369:12; 377:2,8; | 215:7,8 | 393:4,7,10 | campaign 258:7 1 CBRCIA 26:6,7,B; j 159:20,22; j bury 136:13; | campaigns 257:11 j 273:18; 282:17; | 137:21,23; j 133:7; 139:12; | cannot 246:21; [ 259:4 | 283:6,9; 307:4; j 308:13; 309:1; | 181:5; 187:17 j burying 142:17 | bush 329:13 | cap 30:13; 1 169:12; 249:1; | 280:7; 341:16 385:6 | certain 6:17; | 24:17; 28:12; | business 7:7; | capability 241:22 | 36:9,11; 144:19; 58:4,7; 59:6,15; | capacity 69:19; j 62:10; 66:2; | 72 = 7 | 188:20; 232:8; | 243:3 386:15 | businesses 376:2 j capital 32:19 j capped 44:7; [ certainly 30:9; j 56:20; 62:12; | buy 48:4,6; 5B:8; j 46:4,10,13; | 93:7; 101:15; | 59:7; 210:2; | 320:8; 339:9; | 111:1; 112:7; ] 215:4; 247:22; I 346:23 S 115:22; 117:4; j 256:10 | by-products j 24:12; 333:9 capping 30:16; j 134:3; 156:7; j| 320:5,14; 327:1 165:13; 166:10; | caps 289:10; | 172:23; 173:3; byproduct 376:16 | 347:6 j 193:15; 194:19; ............................................ capture 24:1; 1c | 30:15; 76:6; . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . | 78:8 C-h-a-t-t-o-w-a-h capturing 75:23; 1 209:11 | 76:6 Cain 145:18,20; carbon 23:9,10, | 146:9; 259:2; | 12; 349:23; | 261:3; 263:9; | 264:6,9 | 350:1,11 care 41:10 ! 198:8,23; ! 221:12; 223:3; ! 228:21; 237:2; ! 238:18; 239:1; ; 242:12; 244:23; i 248:9; 252:8,20; ; 254:6; 274:10; i 277:20; 288:18; j 289:8; 308:23; HARTOLDMON0031411 BRNCHFLD. TXT 312:5,15; 340=3; 258:1 | 19; 290:9,16; 344:6; 359:7,21; children 254:1 | 299:4,6,10; 360:3; 365:20; 367:7,15; 378:22; 381:2; chin 62:16 | Chip 278:20 | Chlorination | 300:20; 317:18; | 318:20; 389:8; | 393:21 3 S3 : 1 Certificate 3:4 certified 123:17 certify 395:1,13 j 265:14 | chlorine 3 57:7,i 362:22; 369:10 | Choccolocco 82:6, | clean-up 146:19; | 177:17; 194:20; ! 195:4; 294:4,6, j 14; 295:11,23; cetera 250:23 | 11; 103:7,14; | 296:4; 302:5; chain 247:2 | 105:2; 108:17; | 303:5,9,16,19; challenges 47:4 | 127:15; 195:15; | 304:9,15; 305=8, challenging 8:21 | 199:7,14; 200:2, | 9,12,21; 310:10, chamber 343:19 chambers 172:4; | 17; 201:3,IS; | 202:17,21; | 22; 312=4; | 313:3; 314:8; 336:21 chance 224:10; | 203:4; 204:2,4; | 315:3; 310:2,5 j 210:3,20; 212:1, cleaned 49:17; 333:15 change 45:17; | 20; 215:22; | 218:13,16,18,21; | 195:8; 243:3; 270:14,16; 133:22; 134:6; | 221:17; 223:5,7, | 393:16,17,18,23 166:13; 276:13 | 8,20; 224:8,12, [ cleaning 22:11; changed 89:12; | 14,18,20; 235:7; [ 149:7; 195:13; 149:6; 273:14; 350:11 | 237:13; 240:1; | 241:1,18,21,23; l 297:16; 390:1,9; j 391:20 - changes 134:1 characteristics | 243:20; 244:11; [ cleanup 19:21,23; ! 245:1,8; 276:19; | 57:7,9; 178:1; 103:9; 111:2,5, | 323:2,3; 324:7, [ 195:22; 283=10; 14; 112:2 j 10,18; 325:17, | 297:10 characterization I 20; 331:8; | cleanups 57:12 282:21; 285=18; j 332:11; 360:21; | clear 191:11; ' 288:12,18; | 391:6 [ 300:4; 357:6 323:9; 327:6 characterize 13:17; 183:11, ) choose 248:12 [ chorine 353:17; j 355:16 | clearly 101:7; f 104:7; 111:19; f 212:8; 367:10; 13,20; 184:8; 185:12; 189:10; 190:20; 192=6; 193:22; 223:16; 1 chose 192:22 j chunk 31:20 | church 249:4; j 252:9 [ 368:13; 386:13 | Close 36:7; | 44:23; 76:12; | 105:15; 134:15, 324:2; 330:13, | Cincinnati 286:3, | 18; 159:3; 14; 358:7 1 10,12 | 262:18 character!zed 327:16; 330:12; 361 :17 characterizing I CIRCUIT 1:2 | citizen 119:6,8 | citizens 268:3; | 269:22; 270:14, closed 160:9; | 335:23; 357=12; | 358:2,4,6,10,15; | 359:5,7,12,17; 20:4; 161:12; 134:14; 186:6; 1 17 | city 43:10,17; | 364:9,10,17; | 366:9,14; 370:22 183:12; 191:4; 54:22; 115:5,8; closer 76:14; 192:1; 196:5; [ 143:2,20; [ 77:12 324:5; 393:7 145:10,21; closest 126:3,6 charge 9:6,7,156:10; 202:2; 146:1,10,14,16; | 189:8,12,15; closing 383:15 closure 333:5 276 : 5 charging 59:1 193:2; 386:14 1 Civic 142:20 l cloud 192:12 | Clydesdale CHARLES 2:5.5 | CIVIL 1:6.5 _ f 321:17; 322:9 Charlie 55:7; | claim 108:11 | CMS 324:8; 325:15 75:14; 316:9 | claims 360:7 - j Cobb 220:20,- Chattowah 209:9, | clarification | 252:2; 279:9,10; 11 cheaper 237:10, 13,19; 256:15 ! 11:21 | clarify 45:3; | 62:1; 87:15; | 340:22; 373:15 I coffee 113:6 | Coin 8:3,6 cheaply 248:1 96:6; 299:16 | cold 164:10; check 78:11; | Clark 1:17; 2:9 | 190:17 143:21; 145:2,5, class 5:21; 7:3 | colleagues 109:1 10; 171:14; 179:21; 348:10; clay 111:7; 112:13; 139:5; | collect 20:21; j 21:5; 23:14; 350:7 253:11 | 34:1; 76:19; chemical 174=11; Clayton's 320:2, [ 78:1; 82:19; 265:20,- 270:9 3,15 [ 134:15; 190:12; chemicals 381:16 chemist 92:4 chemistry 6:11; clean 2 0.-1; 56:12; 78:14; 140:5; 147:13, [ 245:17; 246:18; t 295:18; 337:10; | 349:9 75:11; 125:21 21; 148:1,13; [ collected 22 : 22 ; Cheryl 269 = 10,12 chewing 7:22 chickens 254:3 Chief 65:22; 66:21; 67:17; 177:9; 194:15; 196:12; 221:18; 222:18; 244:10; 250:20,21; 252:12,13; | 43:15; 75:1,4; | 134:2; 166:10; | 224:9; 232:2; f 289:5; 293:9; [ 360:4; 368:11; 68:2,3.10,13; 265:21; 297:17, [ 370:5 Page 4 collecting 23:4; | 15; 339:4; j 19,22 75:17,20,22; | 388:3; 389:3,4 j concept 210:8; 77:19; 175=15; | companies 24:13; j 215:16; 216:4, 223:20; 290:8; | 26:4; 47:20; | 22; 217:1; 352:6 collection 20:20; | j 48=2,8,10; 125:6; 373:7 | 219:18; 220:14, | 16; 226:16 30:11; 74:5; | company 1=8.5; | concern 10=11; 77:21; 78:7,13; 290:10 college 5:15,16 | 8:3,11,23; | 74:7; 119:1; j 12:12; 13=20,23; | 212=13,23; j 19:9; 45:10; | 315:18; 331:9; colony 242:17; | 58:2; 59=1,8,22; | 333:4; 353=12, 244:20 Columbia 32:18, | 60:5,9; 64:13; 65=11; 66:3,9, | 19; 355:15; | 364:15; 383:19 21; 33:3 Columbus 32:17,18 j j 20; 67:9; 60:5; 192=22; 198=4; concerned 35:4,| 71:22; 172:1; combination 56:12 j 214:17,19; | 254=7; 357:18 come 8:15; 24:7; | 217=21; 246:1; concerns 18:16; 31:12; 49:7; 72:16; 78=16; j 257:4,16; | 258:17; 263=6; | 73:4; 142=22; | 194:1; 250:21; 102:3; 103:1,3; j 264:2,5,21; | 253:21 106:14; 108:3, | 265:1; 356=14; conclusion 82:14; 20; 144:9,11; 166:17; 171:5; 194:23; 214=20; | 357:5; 363:6; | 365:13; 367:23; | 368:17 ] 96:16; 99:3; | 102:1; 108:6; | 166:4,5; 213:20; 221:6; 228:15; 229:1; 248=10; | company1 a 6:6; | 65=22; 206:9 i 243:17; 244:18; | 245:15; 358:1 260:22; 298:16; | comparable 52:9 | conclusions 99:8; 301:12; 311:4; j compare 112:4,5, [ 165=10; 171:19; 334=15; 340:19; 354:20; 393:1 comes 92:21; 93:1; 99:16; | 6; 155:11; | 221:16 \ compared 29:7; f 41:18; 12B:1; | 197:18; 198=19; 201=21,23; | 242:4; 245:6 | concrete 12:7; 101:14,15,20; | 197:19 | 101:5,9; 114:18, 110:21; 219:14; 332:6; 389:6 compete 225:1 complete 22:7; | 19; 137:22; j 236:8,9; 241:11, coming 27:19; 30:5; 35:8,9; | 13,14 73:14; 114:12; 86:16; 148:5; | conditional 164:18; 244:10; 290:1,15,22; 149:14; 176:19; 196:4; 197=17; | 172:11 | conditions 332:16 291:2 198:10; 201:20; | conduct 29:22; commencing 1:15; 225:3; 240:11; 86=21; 295=9; 4 =7 242:2,3; 269:17; | 326:2; 345:20; comment 142:17; 143:5; 241:7; 337:8 comments 336:13, 20 292:14; 322:17; 391:8; 392:14,15 | j 378:15; 389:19, 20 completed 20:9, 15; 33:12; 34:17; 176:20; | conducted 95:11; j 98:7; 213:15; j 323:7; 325:19 commercial 223:19,22; [ conducting 49=21; 193:17; 194:7; 195:6; 311:18 commission 203:1; 216:18,22,23; 395:23.5 282:21; 292:7; 326:3 completely 330:11 completing 195:16 completion 21:3 j j j j 126:22; 180=2; 212:5; 234:5; 268:23; 288=13; 300:10; 304:12; 305:1; 313:12; commissioned 6:3 compliance 4:12 324:9,15 commissioner composite 184:5; | conference 268=1; 1:15; 4:5,22 186:19,21; | 270:4; 307:20 commitment 15:7; 191:5,20; 192=5, | confirm 162:18; 264:3; 393:14 11 j 349=13 committed 264:22 compound 10=9,11; | confluents 224:7 common 160:2,4 33:19; 97:20; | confused 230:1 communicated 174:9 | confusing 296:3 275:15; 342:13, compounds 18:17, | Congeners 265=15 21; 363:15 19; 19:14,18; | conjunction communicating 25:12,14; 28:4; | 154:21; 354=21 37:6 33:18; 49:3 j connected 286:10; communication computer-aided j 347:12; 395:14 256:1 395:9 | Connecticut 39:6 community 119:18; concentration j connection 162=5; 143:3,5; 199:1; 149=23 | 176:2; 230:18; 204=20,21; concentrations j 313:16; 343=15 212:11,14; 227:7; 240:2,6, 17; 241:6; 250:23; 254:3,8, 28:7; 117:19,20, 22; 126:15; 170:9; 171:11; 191:18; 200=1; i connections \ 387:22 \ Conroy 217:3; | 219:12,23; 225:S 11; 255:6,11; 213:7,13; [ consent 166:13; 256 : 2 , 3 ; 268 : 1, 5; 270:6; 296:20; 312=15; 313:8,9; 319:14; | j 187:1; 294:20; 303:10,17; 275=18; 306:8,9, 332:17; 360=15, : 304:2,5; 305:1; HARTOLDMON0031412 BRKCHFLD.TXT Page 5 1 306:4? 390:12 | 267:22 ] 169:8; 220:4; | 9; 232:6,12,14, | 49:14; 54:5; | consequence I 276:17 | Conservancy | 215:23 | conservation | 158:16; 160:10; | contain 339:13 | contained 331:19; | 395:5 | container 140:23 | containers 124:4 ] containing 374:9, | [ | | j ] 258:2; 263:12; 272:3,4,9; 273:5; 291:1; 309:6,22; 310:3, 21; 314:13; 357:2 | [ j j j j 17,18; 233:1,3, 6; 234:6; 235:1, 12; 240:23; 241:5; 246:20; 230:3,11,17; 285:9; 299:13; | 182:17; 215:3; [ 271:14 | course 12:17? j 14:21; 27:6; | 39:18; 53:10; j 58:6; 59:6,14; | 202:23; 203:2,4, 1 14 | 14,15,22; | containment | 204:16,19; t 326:7,22 cooperation 333 :13 coordinator | 305:6,22; | 112:19,22; | 324:10,18; | 113:2; 122:14; 1 325:19; 326:2,6; j 163:4; 229;3; | 205:10; 206:1, j contaminant 1 11; 207:5,9; | 151:15 | 208:16,18; | contaminants | 209:2; 211:4,5; j 10:16; 23:5,8; 271:11 copied 272:16; 273:3; 285:4 copies 288:12 | 327:23; 320:3 f correctly 39:7 \ correspondence j 274:7; 277:13 ] 234:23; 259:18; j 272:19; 297:14; | 319:17; 361:8 courses 56:3 | 214:5; 215:9,10; | 35:3; 151:17; \ 216:5; 217:7; ! 154:8; 265:20 copy 175:17; 2 7 3 : B; 307:23 ; | corridor 202:23; 203:2,22; 204:2, l courtesy 269:19, | 20 j 218:3,14,22,23; | contaminated | 220:12; 222:4, j 11; 223:13; j 225:2; 226:11; | 35:14; 124:8,22; | 136:7; 243:5; | 248:3; 265:13, 308 : 5; 348 : 20 copying 271: 23; 273 : 7 comer 322:8 , 14 16,19,23; 205 :11; 207 : 7; 208 : 17 ; 211: 4,5; 212 : 19; 214: 5, | cover 253:10; j 280:7; 289:11; 322 : 17 covered 119:1 ; | 237:20; 240:11; | 17; 317:10 ! 241:3 j contaminating Comers 123: 6,8; 192 : 3, 11? 3 16:23 13; 215 : 4 ; 213 :3,14,22, 2 3 ; 164 : 5 ; 273:18; 318 : 18 , 19; \ conservatism | 270:12 corporate 16 : B; 220 : 13 ? 223 : 13 ; 319 : 11 , 12 ? | 137:14 1 conservative | contamination j 20:5; 25:1; 17: 20; 51:4 ; 70: 11, 12,14 ; 225 : 2 ; 237:11, 20; 240 til; 326 : 16 ,- 383: 19 covering 161: 23 ; \ 137:19; 364:6 | conserve 203:17 j consider 75:15; f 73:23; 127:23; | 35:17; 36:20; | 149:19; 353:2 | contemplate j 29:19; 234:18 119 : 5, 8; 151:6; 263 : 3 correct 14 : 3 ; 15: 12 , 23; 2 7:15; 241 : 4 ; 325 : 1 , 5, 23; 385 : 13 corridors ISO : 5; 226 : 11 319 ; 16 covers 274:22 COX 2 : 8 ; 14:4 ,9? 53 : 19, 21; 54 : 2 3 j 128:1; 130:18; | contemplated 32: 4 34:3; cost 21 : 9, 12 , 2 2 ; 55: 4 58:12, 20; | 170:11; 172:21; [ 359:11 40 : 2; 42 14 ; 22 : 1,6, 18; 3 1:4, 61: 23 ; 62 : IS ,- | 165:15; 237:3 | context 252:6; 47 : 15; S3 : 9 , 10; 11, 19; 34:6, 7,9, 63 : 11, 22; 64 : 2 3 | considerations S 198:23 | 255:2,22; j 258:16; 390:4 56 : 14 59: 16 50:5 60:11; 12; 35: 7; 37 ill, 12, 13,14,23 ; 66: 17; 67:2, 11 ; 88 : 14; 96:3; j considered | continue 119:3; 61: 5; 64 19 ; 38: 1,3; 40:3 ,9; 90; 6; 108:4; | 221:12; 228:23; | 208:20; 210:15; 67: 21; 72:6 ; 44: 20; 45 :13 ; 109 : 3 , 4,10; | 311:6 [ 242:10,16; 77 : 3,10; 78 : 15 ; 47 : 1,2; 48:13; 113 : 5 , 16; | consist 175:10; | 243:22; 244:19; 79: a 84 11 ; 61 : 15; 62:3; 116 : 14 ; 127: 4, ! 189:23; 232:15, | 247:9; 240:14, 87: 5; 90 19 ,20; 122 :2,3 ; 205 : 10 21; 133:10; I IS; 267:9 ] IS; 297:7; 110 : 18 ; 114 :22; 215 : 2 ; 221:2 o. 140 : 13 ; 141: 22 ; | consistent 100:3; | 180:13; 234:20 | consistently | 344:18; 382:9 | continued 6:21; s 7:4 123 : 19 ; 137 : 7 138 : 16 ; 140 : 3 141 : 11 ; 144 : 19; 23; 222 : 1 ? 22a : 15 ; 229: 4; 236 :6,13,15, 23; 147 : 2 2 ; 150: 10; 152 :21 ; 164 : 2 0 ; 153: 14 165: 9; i 103:12,15; j continues 242:15 145 : 19 ; 147 : 4 233 :5,10; 169 : 3 , 6; 180 : 1, 1 179:13 | constituent | 154:7; 353:12, ( continuing 32:2; j 241:19; 245:16; | 343:4 164 : 3, 7,17; 167 : 5; 172: 8; 179 : 18 ; 181 : 8 243 : 11, 21; 256 : 17; 266 : 23 ; 308 :7,19; 32 4:2, 9,1 9; 131:12 182 : 3 ; 133:1 184 :13 ; 185: 14 , | 19; 355:15; j continuous 306:10 15; 184:1,7 ; 4,9 ,20; 326: 1$, 21; IB 7:19; \ 383:18 j constituents j contractor 45:19; 1 121:22; 326:10; 185 : 2 ; 187 : 10; 108 : 14 ; 199 : 7 20; 327 :2; 328 : 11, 13; 191 : 9; 193:7 ,21 195 : 2 , 14 ; | 73:3,15,19; j 74:7,20; 82:23; j 83:4; 86:23; I 364:15 I constructed | 153:14; 351:9 I 329:1,7; 330:21 | contractors 45:4; [ 121:12; 187:3; \ 309:11 ., | contrary 366:8 | contributed 22:4; 10; 200:19; 213 : 9; 214 : 2 ; 223 : 14 . 17? 244 :22 ,23; 246 : 5; 252: 14; 253 : 7 , 14; 2 54:7; 338 : 2 0 ; 335: 15 costs 31 : 17; 37 : 17; 48:7; 122 : 10 ; 228 : 19; 307 : 6 ; 308:12; 309 :9,13,14, 15 196 : 14 ,19; 197 : 14 ; 199; 17 ; 200 : 7, 11,20; 201 : 18 ; 221: 22; 222 : 19 ; 223 : 15 230 : 14 ? 237: 16; to UJ | constructing 12:9 I | construction 9:5; | 41:17,20; 206:4; 257:11 277 :4; 279: 13; 281 : 2 3 ; 297 : 2 2 ; cough 7: 20 couldn1ti 88 : 22; 238 239: 3 240 : 4 , 18,21; [ 21:15; 115:8; j 119:4; 146:23; j 147:0; 149:15; | 158:11; 239:11, j contributions j 257:3,8; 250:6 | control 44:11; | 210:5,9; 211:0, 293 : 11 ; 299 : 2 300 : 3 ; 301: 7; 304 : 20 ; 311 ; 22 ; 313 : 6 ; 316: 16; 96: 11,12,13 ; 97: 14; 117 : 3 . 13, 140 : 17 ; 162: 20; 171 : 20 ; 172 : 20; 242 : 18 ,- 243: 7; 244 : 3 245 : 4 ; 246 6, 16; 248:7 249 : 12 ; 250: 1 ; | 14; 326:7 | 10,23; 248:2; I consultant 99:12; I 249:2; 251:5; l 343:11 | 253:22; 275:5; | consultants | 292:23 | 74:16; 99:5; | controlled 13:5; 321 : 9 , 12; 3 34:2, 22 335:2,3 , 12; | j 178:9; 180:18; 183:7; 187:22; 337 : 15 ; 361 : 9 ; j 215:19; 314:10; 390 : 7 ; 391: 14 | 366:17 ] correction 305:15 I council 143:2,20; \ 252 : 19 ; 253: 12 ; 254 : 19 ; 259 : 22 ; 255: 17 260: 7; 265 : 4 ; 266:1 5; 275 : 7 ; 281:1 6; | 173:10; 214:8; ! 274:4 | corrective j 311:9; 354:4,8; | controllers 0:12 | 119:16; 177:3; | 146:1,10,15,16 I j counted 259:19,20 | 283 : 2 3 ; 284: 10, 2 3 ; 286:14; i 363:3 ! consume 245:7 j controversy | 395:17 [ 186:4; 191:19, \ 23; 192:15; | counterpart 50:5 | country 142:1; 299 : 15 , 16 ; 314 : 23 ; 316: 4; | c onsumed 213:3 | conventional | 193:3; 194:13; | 151:7; 154:15 321 : 23 ; 322: 11; | consumption 1 357:11 | 341:5; 342:17 | conversation | 195:17,20; j 196:8; 197:5,7; | county 1:2,3; | 216:6,18,21,23; 325 : 15 ; 330: 2 0; 332 : 13 ; 336: 15; I contact 89:15,20; | 275:16; 291:3; ! 90:9; 206:14; | 362:0 | 209:19; 222:10; | conversations | 198:12,14; | 201:2,5,7; j 2 02:1,-22 3:2; | 225:10; 246:3,4; 339 : 1 340:10; | 257:15; 375:23; j 356 - 12 ; 357: 19, I 376:2; 395:20 | 22 ; 35 9:14; l 257:12; 273:9; | 61:10; 154:23; | 230:0,12; 231:3, | couple 27:2; \ 362 : 3; 363 13; | 364:13; 366:11, | | 21; 367:3,21; j | 368:4,10; 369:4, | | 14; 371:18; | 372:2; 373:21; j 374:4; 375:6; j 376:20; 377:3, 12; 378:8,14,21; [ [ 379:6,11,16; j 380:9; 382:5; I 385:22; 387:3; [ | | I 388:6,13,21; | j 389:12; 391:23; | j 393:3; 394:6 | j CRAIG 1:12,13; | j 3:7; 4:3; 5:3,9; | | 272:5,7,22,23; j 371:22 j created 382:18; j 383:18; 392:20, 22 I creek 20:10,12, | | | I | 16,18,21; 21:2; i j 22:15; 23:19,21, | | 23; 24:4; 26:13, | | 16,19,21,22; | 27:1,2,3,9,16; | | | 29:13; 31:2; i j 35:19,21,23; 82:5,6,10,11,15, | 19; 91:5,6,13; | 92:19,23; 93:3; [ j 94:12,15,16,21; i j 96:13; 97:1; | | 103:7,13,14,16; j I 104:13,15,18; j 105:1,2,16; I I j 108:17; 110:16, j | 17; 115:20; j j 116:11,20; ) j 126:2,3,7,8,10, 14; 127:1,3,8, 15,16; 128:7,9, j 11,18,22; 129:9; [ 130:3,12; j 131:18; 132:1; i | j 133:9; 134:5,10, j | 13,16,18,19; j j 148:2; 150:2,3; j | 152:3,5,6,7,10, j | 12,16,21,22; 154:10; 158:3, [ 20; 181:23; 1 | 182:4,11; 195:8, | | 13,14; 196:5,13; j j 198:8; 199:7,12, | | 13,14,16,21; | 200:2,4,17; | 201:3,15,17,- 202:18,21; [ 203:5; 204:3,4; j 210:3,7,20; | 212:1,16,21; [ 213:3,17; j 214:15; 215:18, j j | | j j [ | 23; 218:14,16, j 18,21; 221:10, | 18; 223:5,3.21; i | 224:8,12,14,18, ; 20; 227:8,18,20, j [ 21,22; 228:2,10, j j 21; 229:16,20; I | 230:4,10,13,18; ! | 231:10,14; | 232:1,5,8,12 ; j 233:10,12,21,23; ! 234:2,12,16,19; j 235:5,7,18,22; ! i HARTOLDMONOQ31413 BRNCHFLD > TXT Page 6 | 236:2,3,11; | 229:10,11; | define 38:18; | designated 26:3; | 237:13; 238:16, | 232:1; 238:12, | 50:1; 72:12; | 310:4 | 22; 239:20; J 14,15; 242:2,5, | 119:7; 129:16; | designation | 240:1,2,12; j 6,7; 243:15; 1 241:1,2,9,10,17, j 245:6,14,17; ! 19,21; 242:1; j 246:18,19; | 131:20; 134:18; j 155:3; 179:19; j 186:3; 194:13; | 380:17 | designed 87:6; j 158:19 ! 243:20,21; | 244:12; 245:8, | 22; 247:4; | 256:19,22; | 256:23; 285:18; j 195:21; 205:6; | 289:2,3,5; j 203:22; 311:12; j 290:9,10; 293:2, | 355:14; 374:22 j 3,5,10,11,12; | defined 158:16; [ desire 166:19 I detail 69:14; | 348:22 | details 31:18; | 274:17,20; j 276:18,19,21; | 277:1,9,11; | 300:10,13; | 181:20; 274:10; j 48:3; 62:20,21; | 311:1,3; 326:5; j 333:5; 334:15 j 63:15; 66:4,12, | 337:10; 341:20; | definitely 76:13 j 23; 207:3; ! 323:2,3; 324:7, | 344:3,18,20; j definition 358:1 | 234:13; 312:12; j 11,19; 325:17, | 20; 331:8,20; j 345:2,17; 352:6; | degree 5:19,23; j 360:3; 368:11, j 6:1; 7:7 | 315:11; 316:1; | 352:10 j 332:5,7,11; j 13; 370:5; i 353:10; 360:20, | 374:17; 386:1; | degrees 17:16 | demand 308:19; | detect 83:20,22; j 35:20; 174:5 i 21 ! creeks 246:10; | 389:17,18 | date 120:7; | 309:1 | Demonstration | detected 83 = 10; j 98:3; 164:1; | 391:6 j 202:21; 247:19; | 265:21 | 165:5; 182:13 [ criteria 8:17; 1 258:1; 259:8,10; | denied 362:13 | detecting 28:4; | 232:20; 233:4; | 260:1; 292:16, | dense 39:12 | 36:7; 168:8; | 312:3; 315:1,12 j 18; 325:3; | density 318:23 | 175:1; 179:3 | Crockett 278:20; [ 393:17 | department 9:1, | detection 179:17, | 279:5,8 [ David 14'5:18; | 11,17; 87:18; | 22; 180:7,10,12, | crop 64:8 f 146:9; 220:7,8, | 149:2; 163:1; | 22; 181:19 | cross 47:5 | 9,10,12,17; | 282:19 | determination | crosses 108:16 j cubic 326:15 | culvert 241:11 [ 259:2 | day 104:13; | 194:7,11; 195:1; [ dependent 179:15; \ 247:2 [ depending 17:17; I | | 20:7; BB:12; 98:22; 99:1; 100:13; 133:8; | CUNNINGHAM 2:5,5; | 287:17,21,22; f 190:7; 194:8; j 172:18; 177:11; j 32:21; 54:20; | 55:8; 105:6; | | 288:2;306:| 12;204:19; 316:20; 311:17;395:| 21 331:15 | 192:15; 371:17; | 393:9 j 286:12 | day-care 311:23 | depends 86=12; | determinations |curiosity 80:5; | 292:19 | current 51:10; j day-the-day 214:9 | 165:1;17| 3:41,1115:,18 | days 143 :16,17; J 20; 185:16 j determine 28:6,8; | 363:6; 366:1 | DEPONENT 394:3 f 29:23; 76:4; | 66:10; 174:4; | Dead 62:8; 158:3 ] deposed 196:11 f 79:5; 93:20; | 202:19; 242:6; | 246:22; 274:23; | 281:10; 285:10, | 13; 299:14 | currently 72:22; | 136:3; 153:15; | deal 50:5,7; j 64:11,21; 66:5; j 77:14; 89:10,19; | 105:4; 180:15; j 212:13; 225:21; I 271:7; 325:13; j deposit 95:17; | 100:19,20; | 101:8,10; | 102:10; 111:6; [ 112:13,16 [ deposited 103=6; [ 112:1; 161:13; 177:8; 185:23; 191:13; 193:3; 198 = 11,13; 201:1; 222:1; 224=11; 232=13; | 155:18; 175:12; | 334:15;338:1| , 105:3; 107:13; 233:1; 315:3; | 202:20; 209:3; | 20; 390:22 | 116:21,23; 326=21; 327:17; | 277:18; 235:20; | dealing 11:1; | 317:1; 326:16; | 119:9; 393:15 | 117:15 | deposition 1:12, 339:23; 372:7 determined | 349:9; 381:3 | dealings 37:4 | 13; 4:3,9,10,19; 118:19; 303:10; | cut 351:4,12 | dealt 50:8; 90:4; | 14:14,19; 327:23; 329=14 j cu t-off 137:5 | 271:13,16 | CV-2001-832 1:7.5 | decades 363:21 | cycle 358:9 j decided 25p:l4; | 264:18; 337:5 ' D | decides 257:9-` | 101:17; 200:15; j 222:16; 249:10; | 395:2 | depositions 4:13 | deposits 95:14; determining 111:1,11; 177:5; 194:12; 251:17 develop 74:16; 204:2; 344:19; | D-i-x-i-a-n-a | decision 169:18; | | 305:19,20; 306:1 | 99:10; 102:2; 103:16; 106=2; 374:21 developed 39:2; ! 33:1 | decisions 255:23 i D-o-n-d-z-i-l-l-a | decline 391:10 ! 55:22 | declining 242:8 | Dale 115 :13,14,15 | decreased 200:3 ' Dan 208:7 j decree 303:11,17; [ danger 243 : 5,23 | 304:2,5; 305:1; f dam 217:5 I 306:4; 390:13 I darned 339:18 I deducted 206:8 ! data 75:21; \ deep 46:23; | 82:20; B 3 :13; f 128:15; 139:12; j 139:7,9 j depth 28:13; j 80:21; 126:5; j 123:16; 173:17; 1 295:10,14; | 297:8; 299:1; | 300:12 [ depths 297:11; | 298:1; 312:16 | describe 78:4; 218:13; 236:13; 282 =20 developer 387:21 developing 3:9; 30:12; 151:22; 204:13 development 113:22; 205=4; 210:6,9; 211:11, 17; 212:17; | 05:7; 92:14; | 296:11; 363:5; | 84:23;375=1241,322:1 I 131:19; 135:11; | 365:13 | described 33:22; devices 179=17 | 162:3,4,17,20, | deeper 128:14; | 41:3; 43:13; devised 343:10 | 163:3; 166:10, | 296:16 | 100:9; 359:13 Dick 302:22 j 16; 175:15,17; | deepest 80:18; | 176:7; 177:1,14; | 31:1,2 | describing 163:2; j 175:5; 281:19; difference 351=22,23 | 197:17; 198:17, | Defendants 1:9.5; | 357:10 different 24:13; | 20,22; 199:3; I 2:7 | description 30:1; 74:3; | 201:5,20; | deficiencies | 192:21; 359:17 76:16; 92:15; | 223:20; 224:10; | 342:10 | design 239:10 93:15; 99:21; 112:9; 125:5; | discussing 74:15; | 131:13; 1B 4:5; | 230:2; 311:15 | 193:23; 194:1,2; | Discussion 348:12 | 203:8; 209:4; 227:11; 229:12, | discussions j 161:6; 167:22; | ] 21; 230:9,20,21; | 230:5; 275:22; j 231:18; 240:13; j 283:6; 294:5; j 311:23; 312:5; | 301:13,15,16; i 315:16; 318:3; | 303:4,15; 304:4; \ 355:8,10; 361:8; 388:4 | \ 306:17,19; 313:4; 352:IB; \ | dif ferentia te | 355:7; 384:16 | 94:4; 112:12; | disposal 12:8; | 178:9; 347:1 | 123:2; 152:11; j differentiated 9B : 9 | 153:9,11,13; | 159:7; 192:2; | j | differentiations | 350:4 | j 112:20 j differently j 361:19; 366:14 | dispose 253:1 J disregard 391:8 | distance 46:21; | | | | difficult 126:10; j 178:22; 221:15 ] | 126:2; 152:17, 19,20; 190:5 | | [ dig 237:20; | 253:2; 391:13 j distinct 243:21; | 299:3 i ; | digging 254:14; j 331:2 | distinction 92:8; ! | 94:9,18; 96:19 ; | digs 140:21 | distinctions | diminumous 22:2,3 j 94:14 | direct 37:19; | distribution j | | j 109:19; 272:2 | 104:10; 224:6; | j direction 76:4; | 233:4 i | 32:22 | directives 391:9; j District 215:23 j disturb 143:4; j : | 392:17 ! 149:21 j | directly 69:5; l 71:2; 125:16; [ disturbed 391:8 [ ditCh 165:14; ; i [ 220:3 l 166:13; 241:14; I | director 69:8,11, | 274:15 ; | 18; 70:13; | 208:6; 209:20 | directs 131:1 | dirt 85:2; 97:10, | 16; 135:22; | diversion 235:4 | divert 235:5 | diverting 235=9 | division 220:20, I 23 [ ! I j | | 139:22,23; | 146:20; 321:11, | Dixiana 32:9; | 33:1; 34:22; j , | 13,14; 332:6 | 35:2,22; 36:1,5; ! | disadvantages | 37:3,4,11,13,14, I 1 191:11 I 15,22 | disagree 246:7; | DNAPli 39:13 | 359:1; 361:14 | DNAPLa 39:12 | disagreeing | DNT 10:12; 11:6 j 369:17,19 | doctor 125:19,20 | disagrees 361:5 | document 228:12; j disapprove 180:21 | 248:19; 249:13, ; | i ! i | ! j discharge 24:4; | 22;250:5,6; ; | 361:12; 362:2, j 252:7; 254:20; j | 16; 366:8 j 255:2; 266:19; J j discharged 363:8, | 322:23; 336:17; ! | 15; 369:19 | 342:3; 366:22; j | discharges 353:4, | 368:21; 375:15; ; | 9; 363:11; 368:2 j 373:13,19; j | discharging j 379:5,9; 332:10r : I 20:12; 23:20 | 22; 387:13; ! | discontinued 12:4 | 389:23 : | discontinuity ; documentation | 126=16 | 103:13,18,22; | discontinuous | 364:8 : | 135:19 | discovered 49:14 | discrepancy j 361:11; 362:1, | documented 49:10 | documents 109:5, 21,23; 144:15; 225:12; 265:11; . . | 15; 363:9 266:5,6,8,13; : | discuss 260:18 267:4,6,7; | | discussed 231:5, j 272:17; 273:3,7; : | 3; 235:17; | 237:1,S,13; ; | 273:17; 288:5; | 233:4,6; 354 : 23; | 302:2; 303:20; | 355=18; 363:5, | 304:11,12 | 21,23; 364:3,21; , HARTOLDMON0031414 BRNCOTLD. TXT Page 7 | 365:1,5,3,12,18 187 :18, 20,23; | 21; 366:2,6,13; j 367:2,7; 368:6, j 17; 387:18 189 :6,18; 207 : 14 ,- 212 : 4 ; 215 : 12 ; 222 : 1 ; I doing 20:1; 232 : 9 ; 256: 17; 29: 19; 37:9 ; 257 : 14, 17; 47: 5,9; 50 : 13 ; 267 : 10 ; 273 j 13 ; 63 : 19; 69:20,21 274 : 12 ; 279 : 20 ,- 23 ; 74 : 19; 86:1 230 : 5,9 ,20; 94 : 3; 104:1 ; 282 : 18 ; 233 : 14, 118 : 16; 129 : 9; 22 ; 284 :3,18 ; 143 :6; 150: 17; 285 :2,16; 152 : 7 ; 154: 21; 287 : 15; 288 : 10, 155 : 22, 13,16; 19; 2391:15 ; 161 :11; 163 ; 3 ; 290 : 6; 292 : 12; 169 : 23 ; 170 2; 296 : 9; 311: 11; 171 to 197 : 20; 313 : 13; 323 : 9, 200 : 16, 18; 10; 327 :5,10; 201 : 11; 202 : 9, 323 : 3,9 r 15; 17; 205 : 10 ; 329 : 22 ; 335 : 7 , 229 : 10,- 234 : 16, 15; 347 : 19; 23 ; 235 : 12 ,- 349 : 6 ; 355 : 4; 237 : 15; 241 : 3 ; 379 : 3 ; 334 : 12; 253 : 4 ; 255: 13; 386 : 13 256 : 18; 272 : 16 ; down 9:2 1,23 ; 29B : 6; 304 : 19; 11: 13; ' 15:13,22, 323 ; 20; 324 : 3 ; 18:.2; 27:11 326 : 12 ; 330 : 17; 39: 15; 64 : 6 ; 331 : 6 ; 333: 11; 69::2; Bl:12 ,22; 339 ; 17 ; 340 : 14 ; 82: 6; 104:12; 341 : 5 ; 343 : 8; 105 : 2 1; 114 = 17; 347 : 6 ; 3 84 : 21; 116 : 10, 13; 335 : 6 ; 386 ; 18 , 120 :5,10r16 ; 22; 393 :b 121 ; 14 ; 127 : 14 ; | dollar 8:13; | 128 : 16 ; 135 : 6 ; j 205:8,13; 215:8 j 139 : IS; 142 : 18; f dollars 21:14,21; | \ 22:9,19; 31:1,5, j j 7; 34:11; 33:4; j | 44:23; 45:14; j j 120:3,13; 122:5, j 144 : 16; 145 ; 2 1, 23; 147 : 1,5 , 18; 148 : 13 ; 150 : IB ; 164 : 10; 166 : 12 ; 177 : 9 ; 178 : 12 , | 7; 144:14; | 20; 183 :6,11; [ 204:11; 206:3; | 199 : 12, 16; | 215:3; 236:13; ] 246:2; 249:6; \ 200 : 4 ; 208 : 9; j 213 : 17; 225 ; 21; | 323:14; 324:14, | 233 : 16; 236 : 11; [ 17,21; 325:1,4, [ 238 : 19, 2 0; | 13; 328:12; | 244 = 9; 252 : 17; f 331:3; 338:21; | 272 : 20 ; 275 : 18 ; 1 384:8; 387:15 | 276 -3; 278: 17; | DONALD 2:3.5; j 14:9; 15:10; | 286 : 16, 20; j 295 ; 16; 296 :17; | 55:1; 132:7; ] 297 : 7 ; 321: 11; | 199:13 | 322 : 15; 323 : 4,7 ; | donate 205:2 | 332 :3,17,21 ; ` [ donated 211:3 | 333 : 3,7 ,9; j donating 205:17 \ 339 ; 11; 350 : 10; | donations 206:23 | 335 : 13 , 17; | Dondailla 55:19, | 387 : 15; 389 : a, | 21,-56:5 | 10; 390 : 22 ; dene 22 11 ; 2 7 : 20 3 92 : 23 ; 393 : 6 22, 23 ; 29: 18; 62 ; 22; 28: 3 ; 44: 1 , 4 ; 72 : 4 , 8; | down-gradient J 75:19 | downgrading 78:4 79; 5; 81:19 ; Downing 216:20 85 : 1S; 87 : 7 ; downstream 23:23; 90 : 22, 23 ; 91 : 1, 75:19; 78:11 2 ; 93 : 11; draft 294: 8; 104 : 20 ; 12 0 11, 2 0; 12 9:2, 8 , 12, 302 :5 drag 178:11 20, 23; 130 2 , is dragged 178:19 131 : 9 ; 132 1 ; drainage 165:1, 141 : 12 , 14 ; 13; 166:13; 151 : 2 3 ; 152 2; 189:2; 319:4; 157 ; 7 ; 163 1 4 ; 360 : 1 167 : 7, 8; 1 7 2 : 6 , draw 92:7; 94:9; a, 1 1; 177 : 1 ; 96:19; 108:5; 180 : 2 2 ; 18 1 11; 171:18; 197:17; j 198:19; 201:21, j 22; 242:3; J 106:9 | easily 45:8 | 20; 137:1,15,20; | 274:2,12,13; j 147:14; 192:3,9; [ 275:2,9,22; | j | 245:14; 315:2; J 357:23; 358:3; | east 43:1; 77:7; j 317:2; 327:14, | 276:7,12; 277:2, | f 249:2; 251:18, j 18,20; 328:6,11; | 3,5; 280:23; | | 364:4; 393:13 | drawing 335:13 | drawn 374:20 \ 22; 253:15; | 287:1Q; 318:8, j 10,12; 336:1; | 350:5,6 | 292:17; 283:22; | | emergency 294:4, j 284:4,22; 285:4; | t 6; 315:3; 390:6 j 286:4,5,8,11; j | dreamed 222:9 j dredge 221:17; j 224:17; 243:1; j 332:5 | 337:13; 343:15; | 346:17 | eastern 160:16; j 161:13; 162:7, | dredged 239:20; j j 243:2,14; 245:22 j 12,13; 169:13; 343:21 j emission 370:19 | emissions 356:5; | 357:20; 369:12; | 370:2 | employed 25:23; | 250:8 [ 289:21; 293:9; | 294:3,5,23; j 298:14,17; j 299:19; 300:5, | 13; 301:10,13, | 19; 302:19; j j | | | | dredging 152:12, | easy 94:17 | employee 381:13; | 303:12.16; J | 13; 153:8; | eat 150:7,10,li; | 395:16 304:4; 305:18; | 222:2; 223:11; | 224:13; 235:23; j 236:1 j dredging? 224:15 | 213:5,23; 214:1 I eating 183:3 | ecological j 213:10,12,16 | employees 125:7; j 374:18; 381:14, 1 20 | employer 270:20; 306:21; 307:3,5, ( 6; 308:9; | j 309:23; 310:10; j ! 313:8,18; 315:2; i | drew 315:4 | ecologically | 279:2 | 316:12; 317:21; | | drinking 36:12 [ 20:19 ( employers 41:19 | 318:3; 342:4,7, | | drives 238:8,10, I 12 | drop 7:21 . | ecosystem 212:22; j 213:22 | Ed 55:19,20; | employment 7:13; | 12:5 | end 197.-20; I 12,15,22; | 343:14; 348:14; i 369:23; 370:17; | ! | dropped 135:5,7 | drums 24:19,21; j 25:6,17; 350:17 | 206:16 j Eddins 209:21,23 ] educate 77:16 ] 306:12; 307:3 | ended 365:5 | energy 9:12,17; | 379:2; 384:7,10, | 17; 387:10; | 389:22; 390:5,12 | 1 DSW 249:9 | education 6:9,22; | 373:19 equipment 107:10; | due 101:10; | 7:5,11; 144:3 | engineer 6:20; l 152:14; 307:23 | | 104:0; 344:21 | educational 5:12; | 7:3; 3:3; 9:5; | equitable 329:21 j | duly 5:4; 395:3 [ 144:21 1 115:5 | err 137:13 | ] dumb 75:15 j DuMont 203:7 | effect 4:11; j 274:3; 331:21; | engineering 6:11, | Espey 125:14 | 23; 9:2; 74:18; j Esq 2:3.5,5.5,8 | | [ dumped 367:18; j 369:1 | 332:9 | effected 335:20 f 289:10 | England 39:4 | essentially 9:11; | | 12:6,23; 36:19; | | during 58:6; j 59:5; 61:13; | effective 30:10; j 190:22; 211:22; | enough 179:22; | 180:7; 245:14; I 39:13; 44:10; j 147:11; 148:4; I 1 1 62:23; 66:7; | 328:2 | 332:10 ] 170:7; 190:5; | 67:4; 86:16; | effort 39:17 | enriched 9:20 194:17; 203:17; | 114:16; 116:4; [ 272:19; 303:4; J efforts 157:23 | eight 45:8; | ensure 76:5; j 78:12 204:1; 241:15; 296:4; 297:15, | 356:11 j dust 93:10 | Dustin 302 : 20 | 236:18; 286:13; | 311:16; 328:11 ] eighty 44:23; | enters 199:14 | entire 379:9 | entities 375:23 17; 305:4; | 307:4; 321:4; j 326:23; 370:11 [ [ | dye 27:19,20; | 90:20,21,23 | 45:14; 46:6; | entitled 265:13; j 48:1,13; 136:15; | 307:5 j establish 203:3; j 3 06:8 \ j | Dynamite 10:18 | 326:15; 327:12 | entity 123:11,16; | established [ eighty-acre 46:20 j 211:7; 284:6 j 47:18; 177:21; | | E j eighty-five j entity's 293:2 | 1B0:4 | j 323:13; 331:3 | entrain 176:4 j estimate 22:1,6; I | E-d-d-i-n-s [ 209:23 | either 42:10; | 48:9; 56:11; | environment 13:2, | j 3,7; 42:13 31:19; 57:4; 77:12; 205:20; i ] | E-l-k-t-o-n 18:10 | 65:18; 67:15; | environmental 215:1,6,14; | each 14:5; 229:13 | 97:9; 243:9; | 62:13,15; 87:18; 221:21,23; | earlier 49:15; j 110:2; 117:6; | 173:19; 177:22; [ 181:2; 184:17; | 263:8;284:3i; 138:6,10; 149:2; | 229:4; 236:6; [ j 295:2; 307:8; j 156:3; 163:1; j 324:5,20; 327:2 | j 316:21; 340:19, [ 248:16; 292:19 | estimated 324:13; | j 21; 351:14; | environmentalist j 326:19; 334:11 j | 108:11; 191:6; J 195:10; 196:10; | 200:10; 238:16; | 273:17,22; | 284:11; 311:16; 1 376:15 | elected 268:17 j election 259:6 I Electric 265:23 J elevation 105:17 \ 217:6 I BPA 26:4; 49:20; j 50:7,8,11,17; j 56:11; 87:8,19; | 138:4,5,7,17; | estimates 31:15; j 228:15 j et 1: 4.5,8.5 ,j 2S0:23 j ETOWAH 1:2; | j I j 324:22; 343:1,3; [ Eleventh 274:15 | 142:13; 148:20; 395:20 j 344:13; 356:15; [ eliminate 44:11; j 153:3,5; 159:10; | Eulaton 274:19 j | | 387:8 j 212:1; 247:6 S 163:2; 175:4,7, [ evaluate 224:10; | | early 47:17; | eliminating | 17; 130:4,13; | 232:11,13; | | 124:19; 355:4 | earn 113:16 | 244:16 j Elkton 18:9 | 181:3,21; 183:5; | 245:17; 246:19; | | 186:13; 197:13; | 313:1; 326:21; [ | earned 5;19 | easeaant 205:17, [ Elmer 314:4 j else1s 58:9 | 213:19; 243:1,3; | 331:23; 344:20; I | 258:13; 260:15; j 364:16 j | 19; 210:6,14; | elsewhere 53:6; | 261:14,15,23; | evaluated 223:1; j | 325:6 \ easements 203:4; | 208:18; 209:3,6; j 60:21,23; 96:15; | 142:4 | Smelle 30:20; | j j | 210:2; 211:7,8; [ 120:18,23; | 262:2,4,5,13; 264:12,14,20; 267:23; 263:3; 269:4,6,8; | 235:2; 304:16; | I 311:3 | | evaluating 209:3; j 237:7; 312:4; i | 325:7,11 j 121:6,7,9; | 271:11,15; 313:2: 353:20; i | easiest 84 : 22 ; | 135:22; 136:1, j 272:6,12,13,22; 354:9 : HARTOLDMON0031415 brnchfdd.txt I evaluation 177:2; j 354:18 I 196:8; 232:5,16, | executive 67:17; | 23; 242:3; j 68:2,3; 208:6; | 287:15; 305:6,7, j 209:20 | 12,15; 311:2; ] exerts 343 : 2 3 | 313:5; 356:21 | Exhibit 3:11.5, | evaluations | 256:17 | even 45:10; | S3:11; 66:10; 1 12,12.5,13; j 228:5; 247:11, j 14; 248:20; j 249:9; 267:15; | 76:12; 104:9; | 323:1; 326:8; | 126:11; 145:9; | 155:10; 174:6; j 334:7; 335:5; j 375:13,19; | 178:17; 193:16; | 376:23; 378:23; | 244:15; 317:13; | 379:1; 383:21 | 327:20; 350:15; j 359:8; 364:7; ] exhibits 3:14,15 | exist 386:20 | 334:14,16 | existed 163:22 | event 86:17 | exists 244:1 | everybody 142:14 | expansion 148:5 | everytiling 60:21, | expect 85:1,2; I 22; 66:2; 77:19; | 95:13; 97:23; | 114:11; 139:17; | 101:9; 104:8; | 167:9; 198:22; | 205:12 | 285:2; 370:1; | expected 45:6 | 376:17; 377:1 | expended 315:7 ] evidence 4:20; j expenditure | 95:7,10,20,22; | 385:10 | 98:12; 101:1,23; j expenditures | 102:6; 106:22; j 387:14 ! 107:2,11,16,18, | expense 47:io j 23; 108:5,13; | expenses 237:11 | 109:17,20; | experience 6:17; | 111:13; 114:6; | 66:2,3; 112:7; | 115:1,2; 126:1; | 262:12; 353:5 | 367:10 | experimental | exact 22:13; | 341:3; 342:10,19 | 28:13; 77:11; | expert 78:23; j 123:7; 323:18; | 108:11; 172:22; j 341:15; 346:4; | 310:4,7; 311:8 ! 387:13 | expertise 173:8; | exactly 109:8; | 312:20 ! 247:21; 273:20; | expired 350:1,2 | 311:19; 385:14; | expires 395:23-5 | 391:14 | explain 83:18; | EXAMINATION 5:7 l 336:15 | examined 5 : 5 ( explanation 103 : 1 | example 57:22; j exposed 11:11; | 77:6; 79:16; j 193:6; 312:14, [ 96:23; 97:3; j 22; 314:22; | 101:5,10; | 315:7 I 103:23; 118:3,4; | exposure 192:20; I 123:6,9; 186:7; | 247:6; 250:21; S 190:2; 192:1,4; | 253:21 ^ | 194:4; 311:12; | express 142:21' | 331:17 j excavate 327:22; | expressed 231:11; j 256:3 ! 328:23 | extensive 234:1 | excavated 326:11; | extent 7:11; i 328:10,22; [ 13:7; 20:4; | 329:2,9; 330:21; | 42:6; 44:12; j 331:7 I 50:1; 111:12; | excavating 323:4 i 131:4; 211:11; { excavation 328:7 j 218:12; 290:11; | exceed 149:20; \ 291:7,21; 351:5 j 213 : 6 \ extraction 30:9; | exceeded 300:18 ] 265:22 | except 4:16; \ extremely 97:22 | 36:21; 280:1; j Exxon 48:9,14 | 305:11 | eye 115:20,22; | exception 121:10/ | 116:6,9; 251:3; j 277:10 ] 262:22 | exceptions 211:1; \ Eyeballing 111:23 i 277:15 1 eyes 180:18 ; excus e 42:19; 1 43:18; 100:16; F : 107:4; 128:6; ! 227:5; 310:17; facilities 43:16; Page a 57:7,14; 61:16; 102:17; 103:8; 195:6 facility 9:9,10, 13; 10 : 6; 17:1; 21: 7; 26: 13 ; 28: 11; 29:14; 34: 2; 42 : 11 , 12; 44 : 13; 47:7 ; 48: 20; 49:2 1; 54: 14; 55:5 ; 72: 16, 20,23 ; 73: 2,21; 77 : 23 ; 78 : 9; 79: 16 , 17, 20; 81 :10; 82 : 16; 84:2 ; 83 : 2,9 ; 89: 4,21; 90: 10, 22; 91:3; 119 :11 ; 123 :2,4, 20; 13 0:22; 131 :1; 145: 17; 151 : 10 , 20; 152 : 11 ; 154 : 3,5; 155 : 13 ,14,17,19, 22; 158:14, 21; 165 2, 23; 167 : 16 ; 171 : 13 ; 174 : 7; 192: 3; 235 6,10; 236 : 1 ; 283 : 1,2; 287 : 18 ,21,2 3 ; 289 : 12 ; 290 : 1 ; 319 : 6 ; 329: 18; 350 : 4 ; 355 : 3,6, 12; 360:4,7 ; 373 : 7 ; 374 : 10; 377 : 19 ; 378 : 12 ; 380 : 7 ; 381 : 13; 382 : 17 ; 383 : 3 ; 393 -5, 11 fact 67:7; 82:15; 95: 22; 100: 15, 16; 103 : 19; 107 : 2 2 ; 108 : 3 ; 110 : 14 ; 116 : 8 ; 117 : 7 ; 113 : 11; 153 : 7 ; 154: 11; 159 : 12 ; 162 : 13 166 : 6 ; 168: 2 0 ; 139 : 2 0 ; 191 : 2 ; 192 : 13 ; 204 : 2 3 ; 205 : 3 ; 217: 8; 242 :13; 243 : 19; 245 : 12 247 : 16; 252 : 3 ; 284: 16; 334 : 4 ; 337: 16; 3 3 B : 14; 344 :10; 353 : 3; 362 : 13; 363 : 10, 14; 384 : 10 factor 169:18; 248:11 factors 312:7 failure 363:10 fair 17:23; 57:5; 62:14; 73:18; 82:2; 89:7; 183:9; 135:3,9; 189:5; 192:21; 201:12; 305:13 fairly 28 :15; 46:7,8,21; 49:12; 81:20; 135:3; 176:16; 213:21; 372:20; 377:22; 387:20, 21 fall 179:13; 259:12,13 falls 72:5 familiar 33:9; 54:13; 60:18; 62:19; 63:1,8; 65:2; 68:21; 69:19,22; 88:4; 90:2; 91:10,11; 99:20; 117:10; 130:4,13; 132:4, 12,20; 133:5; 140:14; 144:8; 154:4; 168:12; 207:2; 225:23; 245:5; 254:20; 255:21,23; 256:6,8,16; 258:2; 263:4; 265:10; 266:2,8; 268:15; 278:19; 282:8; 284:17; 310:14; 311:10; 313:7; 315:11, 23; 328:14; 348:23; 349:6; 351:13; 352:20; 353:5; 362:7,23; 380:14; 383:15 familiarity 63:14; 152:1; 207:17; 230:11; 243:11; 313:19 families 254:1 far 27:4; 41:3; 52: 14; 71:21 ; 98: 15; 99:1; 109 : 13 ; 131: 16; 152 ; 21 ; 157: 22 ; 171 : 23 ; 233 : 11; 235 : 9,17; 23 7:7, 247 : 19; 266 : 23 ; 277 : 8 ; 285:8 ; 291 : 11; 334 : 17; 351 : 17 ; 352 : 10; 357 : 17 ; 359 : 15 farther 73 : 9; | 73:11; 126:9,14 J farthest 126:8 I fashion 117:1; | 134:10 j fast 99:3 | Faust 54:9; 56:5; | 72:14; 143:21; | 155:2,15,18; j 156:22,23; j 157:2,10; 161:7; | 162:1; 163:1,22; j 169:4,9; 189:21; j 196:10,20; j 200:11,13; j 222:7,20; 231:5, | 8; 301:17; | 353:14; 371:22; | 386:6; 387:23 | fax 308:1 | FDA 213;6 | feasibility 21:4; | 29:23; 30:5; | 304:13; 305:2,5, | 14,17 | federal 262:15 | fee 113:17; | 123:22 [ feedback 99:15; j 204:22; 306:13 1 feel 119:20,21; ! 133:16; 196:15; | 200:23; 232:4 l feeling 196:17; j 369:21 | fees 123:23 ( fet 28:16; j 46:23; 81:3,23; f 128:17; 135:15, 1 17 | Felder 65:9,10; [ 66:15; 69:10,15, [ 22; 70:2,4; l 71:2,5,16 | fell 135:3 j fellow 115:12; j 254:23; 257:21 | fellows 64:9; | 389:7 | felt 30:14; j 119:2; 239:12; j 268:12; 337:17; j 342:16; 356:8; j 365:21 j fence 80 :16; j 171:9,10 j few 272:2 j field 99:19; | 102:21; 107:17; | 111:4; 114:21; j 116:16; 117:3; j 125:23; 126:18; j 127:5; 134:3; j 135:1,5; 136:12; j 181:4; 183:10, j 14; 185:1,13,20, | 23; 187:4,13; | 233:17; 274:2; | 275:6,10 j fields 127:4,6; j 128:18; 135:9, | 11; 136:17; j 186:13; 276:9 | fifteen 38:3; | 46:14; BB:7,13, j 22; 122:6; 131:7 j fifty 72:19; j 76:9,11,14; | 77:2,12; 79:10; j 30:3; 81:3,22; j 120:12; 122:4; | 134:19; 136:22; | 137:4,5,17; | 138:1; 147:10, | 13; 176:14; | 324:14,17; | 325:13; 327:19; | 328:12,20; | 361:3; 367:17; | 368:7,23; | 369:13,20 | fifty-five | 140:12,14; [ 350:16 f fifty-year 116:4 | figure 60:4; [ 249:22; 387:18 | figured 385:19 I figuring 273:20 j file 267:8 | files 348:21 | filing 4:22 j fill 95:15; | 114:16; 126:13; j 244:12 | filter 84:3,6,9, | 14,10; 85:6,19; j B 7 ; 1; 179:2,12, | 20 | filtered 93:21; I 179:11 filtering 85:15, | 20 j filtration 349:11 j final 120:14; | 172 : 3 ; 223 : 5; 224 : 12 ; 233 -6 ; 241 : 4 ; 279: 14, 15, 16, 21; 280:3, 11, 17; 285: a ; 305 :21 ; 313 -2 ; 329 : 15 ; 332 : IS ; 393 : 9 finalized 172:5 finances 154 : 4 financial 65 : 22 ; 66: 21 find 8 : 20; 15:1; 16: 2; 27:18 ; 69: 13 ; 83:19; 84 ; 3,5 ,10; 85 : 7. 16; 89 : 9; 95:18 98 : 17; 100: IS ; 101 : 4 , 5,6; 103 : 19 ,21; 112 : 2 1 ; 113 : 1 ; 119 : 15 ; 122 :20 ; 126 :1; 127 : 6, 14 134 :1, 9,14; 135 : 2 , 14,15 , 18 ; 142 : 3 ; 154 : 20 ; 179 : 2 3 ; 180 : 8 ; 184 :11 ,19,2 0 ; 190 : 16 ,19; 199 :11 ,15; 202 : 15 ; 233 : 2 3 ; 295 : 15 , 19; 29S : 7 ; 299: 8 ; 301 : 1; 344 : 22 ; 352 : 16 ; 363 : 10; 372 : 14 finding 82:20; 85 : 14 ; 103 : 14 ; 108 : 7 ; 116: 12 ; 126 : 4 ; 127: 1,3; 123 : 2 , 11; 134 : 2 1 ; 135 : 12 ; 233 : 2 0 ; 360 : 16 ; | 361:1 | | findings 128:21 j | finds 298:17 j fine 5:16; | | 249:18,23; | 323:15,19; 331:2 | | fine-grained | | 112:18; 178:21 I fined 323:13,23; \ j [ 326:12 | finished 29:21; | I 113:9 I l firm 355=23 | j first 5:4;14:15, | 16 ; 17 : 3; 32:1. 44 : 6; 58:2; 72 : 8,10,11, 15; 73 : 12, 13; 86:4 89: 19, 20; 90:4 123 : 19 ; 174 : 8 ; 203 :12 ; 212 : 9 ; 225 : 11 ; 239 : 4 ; 244 r2; 249: 19; 251 : 7, 11 ; 297 : 2 0 ; 298 : 8, 21, 22 ; 299: 8 ; 300 :21 ; 327 : 15 353 : 7 ; 361: 13 ; 392 :23 ; 395 : 3 fish 95 : 2 ; 96:1 ia, 21; 132: 2 3 ; HARTOLDMON0031416 BRMCHFIiD. TXT | 133:2; 182:23; | foregoing 395:9 ! 133:3; 199:5,9, | Foresman 16:10; j 10; 213:2,5,6,7, 1 j 14; 214:1; | 51:3; 59:18; 63:3; 69:3,10; | 223:8; 241:20; | 71:1; 302:15 j 242:8; 243:5,22; | Forest 207= 21; ] 244:1,9; 245:2, | 200:13; 214:16 j 7,10; 331:17,22; | forestry 207:23; | 332:2,0,17; | 211:1 | 360:22 j fish'd 182:22 | forfll 4:17; 10:2, | 8; 12:2; 13:4; | fished 241:21 | 58:12; 61:23; j five 7:17; 75:9; | 62:18; 63:11,22; j 85:18; 113:5; | 64:13,23; 66:17; ! 135:13; 173:3; | 83:16; 34:16; j 186:20,21; 249:5 [ 85:12; 83:14; | fix 392:18 \ 96:3; 93:6,10, j flavor 236:22 | 11; 108:4; | float 273:23 | flood 126:18,19 [ 116:14; 127:21; j 133:10; 140:13; ] flooding 101:10; f 141:22; 153:14; j 103:8,18; 104:8; t 164:20; 165:9; j 105:4,19 t 169:6; 180:1,9, | floodplain 95:14, [ 19; 181:12; J 19; 99:9; [ 183:1; 184:13; j 100:19; 101:8, | 185:14/21; j 16; 102:2,9,12, [ 187:19; 191:9; ! 13; 105:10; [ 193:7,21; 195:2; j 106:2; 116:17, s 18; 126:20; | 196:14,19; [ 197:14; 200:20; | 128:8,10; 139:7, [ 201:18; 221:22; | 9; 150:4; j 222:19; 223:15; | 211:23; 212:5; j 223:12; 224:2; j 237:14; 277:1; | 237:16; 238:23; j 239:3; 240:4,18, j 21; 242:18; | 326:4; 331:8,12; j 243 :7;'244 :3; j 391:5 j 245:4; 246:6,16, | floodplains j 108:0; 196:6 | Florida 6:8 j Florie 226:20 j flow 27:8,13; | 23; 243:7; | 252:19; 253:12; | 254:19; 255:17; | 270:5; 281:16; j 283:23; 284:10, | 29:2,6; 30:14; | 23; 314:23; j 44:12; 86:10; | 332:13; 339:1; I 97:5 [ flowed 27:9 | 340:1,10; j 351:20; 356:12; | flowing 21:1; | 357:19,22; I 29:0; 76:5; 78:5 | 359:14; 362=3; j flows 117:9 | | fluids 107:4,5,6, j 363:13; 366:11, 21; 367:21; !7 j flux 171 : 22 ; | 368:4,10; 369:4, | 14; 370:14; 1 172:4,6,9; | 371:18; 372:2; j 334:5,12,16; | 373:21; 374:4; j 336:21; 338:1; | 375:6; 376:20;` j 339:17,21,22; | 377:3,12; 37.&:8, j 340:7,12,14,15; | 14,21; 379:6; 1 341:2,9,13,19; { 382:5; 3S5:22; j 342:18; 343:5,7, | 387:3; 388:6,21; | IS; 344:1,2; j 389:12; 391:23; | 345:4,18,21 J 393:3 I fly 12:7 ] formal 175:8,19 | folks 64:7; | former 374;18 | 145:21; 163:9; | forms 85:3; 92:12 | 175:3; 188:22; | forth 1:20; | 270:10,15; | 199:3; 274:1; [ 339:11 | 276:16; 333:15 [ follow 256:23; | forty 46:23; \ 386:1; 389:17 | 81:3,22; 127:9, [ followed 166:11 | 17; 134:12; j following 6:2,14; [ 136:8; 137:9,12, i 88:16; 229:10 | 17,20; 138:2; i follows 5:5 | 198:8; 367:17; I food 247:2 | 368:7; 369:13,19 ! foot 190:8; { forty-eight j 295:16,21; I 297:8,12 j 319:20 j forty-nine 137:10 | force 4:11; 263 :4 | forward 392:9,11 found 11:9; 207:3 30:17; 36:22; funds 145:17; 37:1; 45:22; 306:8; 305:10 83:8,10; 95:2, Funeral 321=18,20 13,23; 98:2; further 20:23; 100:7; 101:12; 49:23; 289:14; 108:15; 114:19; 304:4; 394:8; 117:2,14,19,21, 395:13 22; 118:5,23; future 192:17; 122 : 17 ; 129:4,5; 228:17; 236:23; 134 :16 ; 136:6; 242:10; 303:13; 161 : 14 ,18; 309:15; 345:7; 166 : 7 ; 168:2; 385:3 176 : 10 ; 184:23; 189 -3; 199:9,13, G 20; 212:12; 232 : 4 ; 233:15, | G-a-l-a-x-y 18:7 19; 292:20; 295 :1; 293:14; | Gadsden 1:23; | 395:20 300 j 7 ; 316:10, 15; 32 7:10; 339 :6; 360:14, | Galaxy 18:4,7; j 33:23; 36:5,9,19 j gallon 86:18,19; 19, 22, 23 foundries 95:9; | 07:2,10; 91:13, j 14,20,21; 350:17 96: 1; 106:18,22; | gallons 86:18 107 : 6, 12; 117:8, | Gamma 7:9 11, 12 ; 113:17 | garage 307:21 foundry 93 :15,17; j garbage 101:1 94: 2,4 ,15,18; j gardens 254:2 95 : 3; 96:17; j Garrett 115:13 98 : 23 ; 99:11; ] gas 377:7,9,16, 100 : 5, 9; 101:14, 1 18; 378:1,7; 20; 102:16; | 379=16; 380:15 103 :6, 9,11,17; | gather 266:6 104 105:9,22; | gathered 266:13; 106 : 5 , 6,8,13; | 374:18 103 :2, 3,14,20; | gathering 375:4,3 109 : 6 ; 110:22; | gave 65 = 4; 112 : 23 ; 113:3; | 137:21; 138:12; 114 : 8, 10,13; [ 142:20; 143:21; 115 : 9, 16; | 181:3,15; 117 : 15 , i6; [ 197:15; 205:21; 113 : 1, 15; 165 : 17 r 18 S 210:13; 289:6; | 379:21 four 7: 15; 21:14; | Gena 371:21 22 : 18; 31:1; ] general 26:2; 37 : 20, 21; 47:19; j 64:4; 126:6; 51: 8; 53:13; 54 : 1,2 ; 96:23; 175 : 4 ; 270:21; 271 : 8 ; 375:10, | 184:6; 186:9,10; j 233:19; 264:6; j 265:1; 284:2; j 349:2; 377:21 20; 376;23; 378 : 23 ; 379:1 j generally 15:20; j 69:16; 195:3; fourteen 318:20; | 199:22,23; 319 2, 19 | 283:11; 284:5 fractured 30:12 fractures 29:4 | generated 62:4; j 288:7; 333=18, frame 12:20; 130:16; 145:2; | 20; 382:23; j 383:18; 392:15 163:16; 205:21; 292:10,11; | Genesis 99:18; j 100:2; 110:6 365 : 23 Francisco 55:14, | gentleman 24:10; j 33:23; 35:1; 16; 260:2 Franklin 1:17; 2 : 8 .S | 43:14; 51:23; j 52:15; 54:11; j 55:12,19; 60:12; Frequently 311:20 | 70:4; 89:15; front 295:3; | 115:4; 206:13, 320:21 1 16,19; 208:6; fronts 321:16 | 216:9; 217:3; fulfilled 207 : 9 | 271:21; 272:5; full 4:11; 350 : 17 | 273:2; 270:10, fund 144:4,10,12; | 19; 302:16,21; 203:14,15; | 314:3; 356:22 206:1,11; 207:9; | gentlemen 56:4,6 215:10; 222:11 | geo-fabric 140:5; funded 206:22 f 319:13; 322:21 funding 144:21; | geo-membrane Page 9 140:9 | 326:12 [ geo-textile 253:9 | governed 317:19 | geographic 103:22 | government geographically j 216:16; 257:19; 46:8; 80:7 j 379:2 | | j geology 81:9,19 Georgia 124:14 | governmental \ 123:11 \ j gets 97:10; | governor 220:1,5; | 191:15; 257:7; 306:3; 312=12; j 257=13,23; j 262:18 f | 329:22 | GR 380:17 | getting 78:13; 109:12; 126:12; | gracious 221:6 j grade 26:17,18 | | 140:21; 158:7; | grades 319:4 | 178:4,23; | gradient 126:12 | 182:22; 204:22; | grading 104:9 | 205:18; 275:7 J gradings 27:8 | Ghee 219:14,15, j gradually 135:6; | 17,23 | 200:3 | give 5:11; 7:12; j graduated 5:20; | 67:5; 86=15; ] 7:8,17 | 116:11; 131:13, j graduation 6:2 | 23; 133:21; | grainy 112:22 | 145:2; 161:1; 170:8; 173:7,8; | grandfathered | 202:10 | | 191:7; 202:19; J granted 50:14 | 203:11; 204:6; | granules 23:11 [ 207:13; 244:5; | gravel 141:4,8,9; \ 276:6; 289:2; 306:12; 333:14; | 193=19 | | grazing 210:16,22 j 346:8; 394:3 | great 42:6; | given 14:14,19; 25:17; 50:11; 81:9; 99:7,16; l 212:13; 348:22 | greater 147:13; \ 149:12; 226:12; | j j 118:22; 145:5, j 295:1,15,20; | 10; 175:18; j 296:6,22; 297:4; | 193:8; 274:7; j 298:18; 299:20; | 306:11; 363:13; 370:3; 395:11 giving 15:12; 181:18; 268=10; j 300=15; 310:16; j 319:3 j green 203=18,19; j 211:18; 302:22 | j | | 367:8 [ greenways 226:10 | glad 229:19 f grid 184:6,11; | glass 101:4,11 | 183:18; 189:22, | Glenn 257:19 [ 23; 190:11; | goal 191:13; j 335:1; 338:1 | 193:3; 210:10; ) gridded 134:2,3; | 211:16; 246:17; | 183:13; 189:16; | 248:13; 263:20; | 336:1 | 303:6; 310=22 Golder 214 :10,12 | gridding 186:14; | 192:22; 335:7 | j Goodness 221: 6 | Grimmer 389:6 | got 7 :20 ; 25: 19; | gritty 95:16; | 26: 7,20 ; 27: 1; 33 : 21; 56:23 64 : 11,12; 72 : 10 | 96:2; 98:10; | 100:6; 117:1 | Grossiano 39:22; I [ j 76: 7 ; 98:17 ; | 90:7,8,12 j 110 : 3 ; 113:16, | Grossiano's J 19; 114 : 7, 10 , 11 133 : 14, 15; | 278:12,16,21 | ground 20:10; | | 134 : 13 135 : 8, 11, 18; 138:2 0; | 49:13,-83:10 ; j 130:22; 139:14; | | 146 : 2 0 ; 172 : 15; | 222:6 | 183 : 10; 196 : 1; | grounds 4:13 | 197 : 10; 214 : 13 | groundwater [ 213 : 17; 222 : 5 ; j 18:18; 20:5,11, | 225 : 12 ; 236 17; 248 : 2 3 ; 252 : 1; j 22; 21:1,6; j 23:4,6,8,20; | \ 254 : 16; 291: 4; \ 24:23; 26=20; f 294 : 17; 301 1; | 27:7; 28:7,21; [ 305 : 11; 319: 23 320 :4,11; | 29:1,2,6.8; i | 30:11,13; 31:14; f 323 : 13 ; 348: 11 | 32:1; 33:15,18; f 357 : 16; 364 : 23 1 35:11,16,17; i 375 :23 385: 13 ; | 30:5,-39:19; j 386 : 15, 17; 3 94 : j 43:22; 44:12,15, ! gotten 42:11, 13; | 17;74:4,22; i 13 3 : 17; 289: 19; | 75:1,21,23; ; HARTOLDMON0031417 BRNCH7LD. TXT Page 10 | 76:2,4,21; 70:1, | 21; 272:3; j 5,8,12; 81:14; | 289:20; 303:1; j hire 173:9; j 187:3; 214:17; | 166:23 l 212:14; 225:16; f 305=7; 311:6; I 12,14 | ingesting 183 = 3 ! | | 32:4,9,22; 93:1, | 340:22 1 309:11; 311:9 j I [ 376:17; 380:3 | inherent 358:13 | j 3,6,7,17,23; | harm 382:18 I hired 9:7; 16:12; j included 312:23; [ inherit 33:4 j | 84:13; 85:11; j 86:3,10; 37:11, j 14,20,21; 33:6, j 10; 89:3,11; | Harris 302:21 | harsh 254;9 | hate 73:7 | haul 125:6 | 45:10 j historical j 130:19; 131:19; j 242:7; 363:21; I idea 5:11; 46:3; ] 60:2; 63:21; | 66:4; 105:14; ] 131:23; 133:21; ! 313:22; 356:4; | 364:14; 379:4; f 380:12 \ includes 284:6; | initial 34:12; j | 122:11; 294=8; | f 295:14; 302:4 | ( initially 126:21; | | 92:9,13,17; | 168=2,9,10; | hauled 125:3 | hauler 12S:5 j 371:6; 374:17; j 378:12 ] 170:8; 191:7; | 204:21; 205:15; f 370:5 | 302:2 | | including 250:20; : initiated 222:10 j | 179:3,10; 180:3; | Hayden 70:5,7 | historically | 207:13; 223=13; | 252:12; 292:9; j initiates 296:7 | | 285:17; 289:3; | 293:6; 352:5; | 360:17 | groundwork 90:15 | group 155:10; j 216:2; 213:15; j 219:1,2; 225:7, j 20; 227:15; | 260:5,6; 267:4; | 268:22; 269:2, | 22; 286:9; | hazardous 13:17 | HDP 161:2 3 | 318:19,23; | 341:16 | HDPH 20:17; | 319:11; 322:19; | 344:8 f head 15:19; 55:8; | 124:1; 210:4; | 215:20; 261:23 | headquarters j 130:21; 131:15 j history 5:13; j 7:13; 14:16 | hit 28:17,18 ] hogs 254:3 j hold 158:19; j 200:5; 200:17; | 209:2 | holding 171:16; | 209:5; 325:22 [ holds 68:11 | 225:2,17; 226:6, j 293:11 | 7; 227:12; | income 255:6; | 229:7; 231:7,11; | 388:1,3; 389:2, | 256=21; 266:12; l 314:16; 334:17; I 16 | inconvenience l 346:13; 385:4; | 298:5 [ 387:9 [ ideal 211:2 \ identification j 3:14,5; 228=7; | inconvenienced j 254:14 j incorporated j 136:18; 219:4; j 247:13; 334:9; ) 354:7 | initiating j 295:14; 297:10 | | | inner 161:21; j 162:22; 288:11 j input 199:1 | j ! | inquiries 356:9 ] | inspections 347:6 | | install 28:5; j 46:22; 162:11; | | j 178=6; 336:21 | I installed 20:20; I | 290:1,15,19; | 16:8,18; 17:20; [ 291:22,23; 354:5 | 51:4; 151=7; [ groups 270:14/ | 263:3 | 306:15 | health 156:3; \ Home 321:13,20 j homeowners 394:2 | homes 376:1; | 390:17 | 375:21 J increase 332:8 I 44:8,14; 75:2; | | identified 47:16; | incur 308:8; j 162:14; 178:15, j j 49:23; 56:15; | 385=9 | 19 ! j 103:19; 266:20; | independent 208:3 | installing 46:19; j | growth 226:12 j guess 46:6; | 213:1,12 I healthy 212:21; | hone St 99:14; j 145:8; 341:10; | 276:23; 280:13; | 281:2,7,10; | independently j 60:9 | 47:3/80:9; j 150=5; 161:22; | | j 102:4; 106:9; j 213:10,21 | 380:23 j 282:3,5; 284:13; j indicate 108:1; j 178:14 I j 143:11; 163:11; | hear 366:17 J 183:4; 202:13; I heard 108:23; I honestly 8:20; j 24:18; 60:20; j 299:19; 315:14 | identifies 26:4 j 357:15; 366:7; j 363:6 | instance 202.14; | 318:8 ' ! j 222:13; 226:13; j 174:16; 225:11 j 211:21; 259:8; | identify 126=11; | indicated 31:3; | instances 192:14, I j 227:10; 230:1; I heat 107:7; | 292:12; 312:19; | 384:9 j 57:23; 109:5; | 20 | | 257:5; 293:7; | 370:12 | 317:15; 344:4; j ifS 276:15 j 144:13; 163:21; | institutional | | 295:13; 303:22; | heavy 20=17; j 345:23; 348:9 | ignore 338:10 j 188:11; 189:21; | 211:22 | | 321:5; 330=19; | 339:2; 381:19; [ 152:14 j heck 127:11; | Honor's 7:10 | hope 142:14 j III 2:8 | Illinois 151:11; | 238:16; 308=21; j 309:5; 369:11; | int 142:2 [ j intend 196=10,12 | | 387:23 | 134:4 | hopefully 170:11 j 153:3,5; 246:4 j 370:17 | intended 170:8 [ | guidance 87:8; | 180:13 [ held B:18; j 142:19; 154:23; j Hopper 125:11,12; | imagination 237:9 | indicates 238:17; j intent 338=9; | 347:16 | imagine 54:23; j 247:17; 368=22 j 339:22 E | | guide 199r3; j 155:1; 220:5; | host 206:17 | 55:3 [ indicating 182:2; j intention 195:16, | | 207:18 j 227:5,6; 258:20; | hot 190:16 | immediate 16:9; j 224:16 j 19; 337:19; j | guidelines 158:15 [ 259:9,11; 348:12 j hour 18:11 | 17:5 | indication 82:21; j 3B6:18,22; 387:4 | | guilty 14:9,11 | guy 65:20; 92:3; | hell 37:8 | hours 194:7,11; | help 15:16; 76:5; | 311:16,17 | immediately | 128:8,10; j 113:1,3; 139=0; j 239:1; 291:14 | intentions j 195:12; 200:16; | | | 181:4; 206=18; 131:5,20; 133:7; | house 252:16 | 246:13; 247:21 j indications 1 385:23 I | 323:13 186:3; 205:21; | housing 390:16 j impacted 11:9,10; j 93:14; 100:21; I intents 124:21; I | guys 15:23; 64:9; 207:18; 208:20; j Houston 43:11; ] 43:22; 140:7; 1 102:5,20; I 279:10 [ [ 69:21 J 212:1; 218:6,8; j 56:2 | 183:4; 244:14; | 103:23; 104:2,5; | interest 8=19; j | 220:1 j however 83:13; | 331:11; 391:4 | 105:23; 114:16; | 34:20; 212:20; | B I helped 205:5 ] 129:18; 158:12; | impacts 39:18; | 289=19 | 217:7; 256=3; | | helping 204:15 1 182:20; 186:8 | 344=21,22 | indicative 102:9, t 272:15; 331:10 j | H-a-y-d-e-a 70:9 | helps 311:12 | HR 349:11 [ implement 197:6; I 11 | interested ] | half 343:19 | hereby 3 95:1_ | Hudson 242:14,20, j 201:8; 205:6; | individual 180:20 [ 130=21; 131:3; { | hall 64:6 j hand 59:3; j 284:19; 285:2; j 395:19 j handle 258:5 [ herein 1:20; * [ 3 95:5 ( hereto 3:15 j hereunto 395:18 j hide 383:2 | 23; 243:4,14; [ 244:18,22 | hundred 21:20; | 27:3; 57:1; | 60:17; 61:16; | 208:16 | implemented | 237:5; 305:16 ] implementing | 191:23 | individuals | 286:15 | individuals' | 63:16 [ industrial 195:5 f 142:2; 171:10; [ 209=5; 212:9; [ 225:10; 270:6; f 291=9; 395=17 [ interim 163:8; ] \ | ] ] | handled 331:16 | handles 65:20 | handling 131:16; j 160:22; 231:13 | high 5:14; 7:8; ] 20:13; 56:23; j 98:3; 127:20,22, j 23; 135:11; | | | | 75:9; 76:11,13; 77:10; 118:5; 122:4,5; 123:12, 13; 134:22; | important 92:7; | 133=13,16; j 268:13; 336:6; j 393:11 | influence 245:23 [ information 66=14; 99:7,15, 17; 114:12,14; [ 279=20; 280=9; \ 293:17; 391:11 | interpret 92:14, j 16 1 j | | | happen 131:17; | 244:6; 292:4; j 350:9 I happened 211:9, I 10; 240:13; j 179:22; 180:7; j 197:13; 233=15; | 318:23 j higher 126:7; j 128:3; 199:23; | 136:22; 157:16; j 190:8; 244:20; j 324:14,16; | 325:4,12; | 328:12,21; | importantly 344:9 j | imposed 315=6; | 331:4 j j | inaccurate 356:4 | Inc 1:22 | | 131=22; 173:11; 243:15; 252:5; 266:21; 267:1, 13; 285:20; 290:18; 291=8; | interpretation j 238:13; 280:16 | interrupt 67:12; I 73=8 | intersect 127=16 | | | | | ! 251:16; 282:11, | 12,13; 359:19 i happening 245:12, | 360:15,20,22 j highly 9:20 | Highway 104:3; | 384:8; 391:5 | hundreds 57:9; | 117:22 | inch 296:21; | 293:1; 312:18; j intersected 200:3 [ | 297:1 | 345:22; 354=19; | intersection [ | inches 295:5,17; | 356:20; 363:16, | 322:9 i : 13 i happens 223:6; | 108:16; 109:7, | 18; 114:8,10; | Hunter 68:2,3,IB, | | 20 [ 296:6,19; 297:2, | 3,8,12; 298:9; j 19; 364:4; 370:3; 372:12, | interview 367=9 | | interviewed 16:11 i : 331:11; 349=21; , 391:18 J hard 95:6; 99:2; ] 107:23; 171:4 ] Hardegree 271:5, | 118:8; 170:16 | hydraulic 107:6, | highways 47:6 I 10 j hill 170:6; 252:9 | hydrology 75:13; j hills 27:5,3; | 78:19,21 36:18 | hypothetical | 299:9,11; 300:1, | 21; 374=6,13; | introducing | 8,21; 301=2,3,5; j 375:5,9,10; | 263:20 j 316:13; 318:20; j 330:3; 381=14, j 319:2,19 | 22; 382:8 | investigate j 73:23; 345:2 ] include 21:15; | informed 269:4,8, | investigating I j | j | HARTOLDMON0031418 BRKCHFLD.TXT Page 11 126:21,- 391:3 investigation i 302:10; 322:13; | 10; 373:15; j 328:13; 335:14; | 374:7,22; 375:7 156:15 lab 298:2 | layer 30:12,16 | layers 20:17; | 17; 179:22; j 180:11,22; 17:1; 20:3; 21:3; 29:22; 48:20; 49:22; | 337:16; 338:14; j 372:4; 382:19; j 385:11; 391:12 [ Raley's 374:1,2 [ Kanoots 8:23; j 14:1 laboratory 86:21; | 161:22 ( 37:5; 91:15; | lead 91:5; 156:3 ; j 186:22 j 183:5; 243:16; j 194:20; 195:5; 262:15,16; 294:4,6,7,15; [ 72:23; 79:18; 122:12; 126:22; | isolate 106:13; 164:9 | Raren 271:17; j 272:22,23; lack 226:13; 295:13 3 245:6; 369:22; j 370:2,4,6,8,11, | 295:11,17,23; | 297:16; 300=14, 131:2,9; 134:7; | isolated 176:9, | 313:21 lake 225:18,21 j 12,19,21; 371:5, | 18; 302:6; 151:21,23; 11; 322:18 | Katheryn 209:21, land 193:8,23; | 14; 372:16; | 303:9,13; 304:8, 177:11; 188:23; 1 issue 81:5; 89:6 ! 22 209:9,11,17; ] 373:8,11,18,23; | 9,15; 305:8,9, 198:5,11; 199:4; j issued 243 : 8,12 212:6; 223:23; j 281:12; 323:15 | Kearney 347:20,23 | keep 23:18; 220:20,23; 252:18; 311:6, J 375:10,14,22; | 13,21; 313:3,13, | 376:9,18; 386:1 | 17; 314:8,9; 224:1,4; 225:3; 232:2; 304:13; 305:2,3; 326:4; j issues 89:3; | 250:19; 251:5, j 14; 268:11; | 28:22; 59:3; 113:10,17; j 257:22; 337:13 11,12 lead^producing | landfill 24:7; | 371:3 j 40:14; 41:11,14; leadership 64:15; j 315:10; 317:16, 21; 318:2,9,11; 332:8 331:14; 384:7; 385:6; 337:10 investigations 129:14; 130:2,5, 9,15; 131:4; | 270:7; 277:19; | 302:18 | item 267.-20; ; 385:8 | itself 21:10,16; | keeping 292:15,18 | kept 341:19 j kid 104:14 | kind 10:7; 22:10; | | 25:6; 36:18; 42:10; 123:6; 124:10,12,18; 160:14,17; 161:17,19; 162:13; 163:23; | 157:5 leading 4:17 | leak 24:21 | leaked 49:11,13 | leaking 35:18 levels 76:21; j 98:4; 122:19; | 126:4,7; 127:1, j 2; 128:12,23; j 129:4; 134:16, 132:5,10,21; | 26:22; 73:4; | 43:11; 71:20; 164:3,5,12,14, [ leapt 221:7 21; 135:5,7; 195:17; 196:4; j 75:3; 77:4; | 75:12; 94:13; 18; 165:8,12,14, | learn 73:14; | 136:21; 179:5, 197:1; 285:16; 353 : 22 involve 257:7; 359: 9 involved 11:1; 16:22; 17:2; 18:14; 20:3; 25:19,22; 26:7, | 82:15; 85:4; | 06:14; 94:7; | 115:3; 182:4; | 345:10,- 349:8 lj Jacksonville j 105:1,3; 123:18; | 125:19,23; . j 128:21; 131:14; i 140:19; 188:3; | 195:11; 199:11, j 15; 214:9; j 236:4; 270:1; j 296:3; 307:21; 20; 166:1,9,12; 167:2,5,21; 168:4,7,17; 169:15; 170:2,5, 7,16,19,21,23; 171:23; 172:16; 173:13; 249:1; 280:6,9,12,15, [ 173:5,16,18 : learned 74:13; | 89:2 [ lease 189:8,15 j leased 193:1, 11 i 386:14 j least 36:22; j 246:23; 306:6 | 13; 180:7,10,12, | 182:19; 186:1; i I 193:9; 194:13; i j 199:12,15; i j 224:21; 233:10, i j 12; 234:19; i | 244:9; 245:10; 1 295:19; 296:4; 1 10; 28:1; 33:11; | 217:4,10,13 | 311:20; 321:4; I 21; 281:20; | leave 7:16; | 297:3; 302:5; i 34:15; 35:19,21, 1 Janet 1:14; 4:4; | 322:5; 343:1; 283:13; 284:7; j 29:12; 74:23; | 303:16,19,20; I 23; 38:1; 41:23; 45:9; 48:18; 50:20; 57:19; 61:1; 79:17; 118:15,17; 130:17; 138:20; [ 395:22.5 [ Janet's 14:6 | January 8:22; ! 202:4,5,8 j jaundice 251:3 j Jeff 89:1S,17; | 350:12; 371:23; 1 285:12,19,23; | 77:13; 113:14; | 310:1,10; 312:4, ! | 379:23 290:16,23; | 131:1; 136:13; | 315:3; 316:20; ! | kinds 257:13 i kitty 48:15 328:2,5; 335:2, 11; 336:22; 175:23; 176:4, | 17,22; 194:23; | 318:5; 327:4,10; i | 331:17,22; i j Rlausen 63:5,7; 337:4,11,14; j 223:11; 253:11; [ 332:2; 360:15,23 i i 65:19 338:2,22; 339:8; j 31B:10 [ liabilities 148:18; 152:3,5; j 278:11 | Rlausen1s 66:19; 340:2; 341:17; | leaving 80:13/ [ 62:13,15 1 153:1,6,9; j Jerry 51:23; j 67:4 344:7; 346:12, | 81:6; 164:15; i liability 62:11; 202:20; 203:3,6, | 9; 214:4; 225:5; j 70:5,6; 125:11; 168:11; 347:16; | Knight 271:17; j 313:21 18,21; 347:6; 351:5,10,15 | 171:12; 182:6; j 360:6 | 63:10 j lie 358:23 1 226:2; 228:17; | 352:13; 371:21 | knowing 171:10 landfills 57:10; | Lee 354:6 j light 52:15,17; 239:13; 260:2; 264:12; 270:6; 279:11; 283:4, 15; 303:18; 305:23; 306:3, 10,14,18,20,23; 308:7; 309:21; | Jersey 286:14,16 | Jim 89:22,23 j knowledge 27:22; 30:22; 61:19,21; 72:20; 77:6; 125:1; 287:9; | left 7:4,18; 8:2; j j 10:3,6; 12:12, j 56:4; 156:12,14, 17; 157:5,11,19; | job 8:13,22; 9:4; j | 12:23; 13:1,8; j 65:15; 66:11,22; 99:4; 112:9; 238:10; 316:23; j 13; 20:2,8; 334:12; 341:7; j 29:17; 38:21; | 208:23 j lighter 319:13 j 14:6; 59:19; | 156:2; 228:14; i 129:21; 132:15; | 351:21; 352:3,11 j 50:16; 74:21; j 145:14; 152:8; landowner 210:11, | 87:2; 102:17; | Lightfoot 1:17; j 2:8+5 j 276:14 j 158:1; 177:20; 13 | 136:17; 176:1; | lightweight 310:7,18,21 ; | John 68:2,3 | 206:7; 212:7; landowners 207:1 | 177:6; 318:11, | 322:21 320:8; 329:6,8; joined 65:11 | 217:18,22; language 338:9 | 15; 359:4; likely 21:4; i 348:13; 350:12; | Jones 371:22 231:21; 242:19; large 4:6; 12:8; | 382:17; 390:16 1 66:14; 39:9; 1 355:11; 387:20 | Jones' 294:19; | 264:17; 275:21; t 25:13; 26:23; Leighton 2:4 [ 257:12; 316:21 i involvement | 316:11 '' - 284:13; 237:2; l 42:4; 46:7,B; length 80:16; | limited 211:12 ; i 121:13; 151:13; judgment 64 :2,1; 291:21; 293:3,4; 49:12; 207:1 | 103:12,13; | 243:12; 252:4; i 156:7; 264:15; | 346:3 | 310:9,12; larger 38:23; [ 152:22 j 260:12; 264:14; i 268:1,5; 270:7; 348:17; 375:1 | July 1:15; 4:7; 5:1; 395:21 | 313:14,19; j 351:1,6,20; 41: 19 Larry 55:12; [ lengthy 379:12 | j less 40:21; 87:2; | 313:14; 327:9; 351:2 i i Inzer 343:11,12 Junior 259:21 j 371:14; 373:22; 206:13 | 91:19,21; limits 181:19; i Iron 319:5,6,9; 320:18; 321:6 isn't 55:6; | junk 382:16 [ jury 45:22 j 374:12; 376:4; j 377:17,21 | knowledgeable last 83:19; 89:12; 205:20; 259:5,12,13; ] 122:21; 137:3; j 138:1; 147:10; j 149:4; 222:5; | 213:6 | line 20:16; | 80:16; 113:9; i ! 62:17; 65:20; 92:4; 127:12,19; 133:4; 140:19; 173:18; 181:13; !K 1 -------------------- ------------------- 1 Raley 99:16; | 100:4; 109:3,15, | 180:15; 268:15 | known 220:14,16; j 376:18 | knows 75:14 264:16; 269:11; 271:14; 353:5 late 50:20; 353:14 | 274:22; 303:14 j letter 303:21; j 334:6; 338:5; j 340:18,20; [ 171:9,11; j 174:15; 180:5; | 221:14; 241:13; j 354:6; 385:8 1 183:15; 184:17; | 16; 113:20; | Krunnnrich 151:10; later 78:17; | 340:15; 373:14 | lined 22:16; I 188:15; 192:13; | 125:18; 132:14; | 153:20,21; 118:10; 163:10; | letters 303:23; 199:6; 200:18; | 146:5,3; 261:5, j 154:17; 155:12, 1 304 : 17 | 304:10,11; | 241:9 | liner 20:17; i j 213:2; 217:6; | 7; 302:15; j 17,19,21; 156:4; laws 4:12; 26:6; | 340:23 | 21:16; 23:17,13; i 223:14; 229:13, j 347:15; 355:21, | 157:1; 158:21; 47:18 | letting 263 :23; | 161:23; 227:21, 23; 239:19; 242:13; 246:4; j 22; 356:6; j 361:5,7,18; 159:13,16; ] 200:18; 201:11 lawsuit 45:4,11, 12,19; 226:5 j 264:1,2 | level 70:19,21; | 22; 228:1,10; | 229:21; 230:10, i 248:5; 251:9; 252:3,18; 253:13; 255:1, | 362:10; 363:2,3, ............................................... | 16; 365:4,14; 1 L | 366:16,19; 1 .................. ...................... - lawsuits 60:14,17 lawyer 75:10; 266:11 j j | 76:1,3; 127:6, 20; 136:7; 146:19; 149:4,7; | j 21; 231:7,16,IS; 236:3,4,8,9; 320:19,20,23; 10; 256:9,18; | 368:20; 371:5, | L-i-g-h-t 52:17; lay 154:12; 253:8 | 156:8; 177:13, | 321:10; 337:2; HARTOLDMON0031419 BAMCHFLD. TXT Page 12 344:8; 345:11,13 liners 318:19,23; 319:1,11; | j j 21; 303:5,9; 304:6,7,9,15; 305:8; 390:12 | 9:4; 16:8,18; | 42:23; 48:19; [ 53:4; 54:9; 322:20; 326:17 lines 112:20; 167:23; 257:17 | longer 350:3; [ 151:8; 365:6,15, j 354:18 \ 19; 366:1 j look 80:22; 81:4; | low 40:4; 44:9; lining 228:21; 234:15; 241:2 | 92:8,9,11; | 131:2; 162:17; | 97:22; 255:5; j 361:1; 388:1,3; liquid 351:19; | 173:22,23; | 389:2 367:18 | 174:1; 108:20; | low-income 250:23 liquids 39:13 ] 236:7; 237:1; j lower 194:19; list 17:18,22; | 242:6; 247:15; j 195:4; 234:2 18:20; 19:18; | 265:8; 2B5:12; | lunch 150:8 364.-14; 331:13, | 288:16; 290:15, 20 | 22; 291:2; 1 M listening 58:20; 150:21 | 293:2; 315:9; j 322:23; 332:21; | M-o-t-C-O 43:8 literature 108:18 j litigation 61:2; j 333:3,8; 339:19; | machine 300:1,5 347:0; 358:8; | machines &:14 226:1 little 5:11; | 372:6,13; 377:4; | made 4:16; 41:13; j 379:10,20,21; j 55:1; 61:20; 11:23; 22:4; | 384:4; 387:12,17 [ 64:22; 88:4; 69:14; 73:14; | looked 32:5; | 89:4; 98:22; 75:3; 79:1; 99:17; 104:14; | 43:2; 162:3,4; | 202:13; 230:8; 105:8; 111:3; [ 128:22; 143:1, 151:13; 154:13; j 235:8,10; 206:4; j 19; 154:16; j172:14; 192:12; 288:3; 289:7; | 150:5; 159:13; 201:14; 207:18; | 355:1,3,13,20; i 177:12; 220:14, 229:12; 230:11; 242:22; 253:10, | 364:21; 365:3,5; j 16; 221:20; | 366:2; 367:2 j 230:17; 232:7; 23; 259:18; looking 19:15; | 255:23; 258:13; 319:21; 336:2; 348:17; 354:17; 374:23 live 124:16; 226:21 lived 225:13 \ 29:20; 30:4,0,9; | 268:2; 209:18; | 34:17; 48:23; | 291:17; 292:8; i 49:4,6; 73:3,16, | 300:4; 313:16; j 19; 74:21; j 353:11; 356:8, | 91:23; 92:2; j 2Q; 362:10,21; | 111:10,13; j 363:11; 365:2,5; LLC 2:8-5 lo 339:16 | 112:3; 173:20, j 21; 174:3,6,19, | 391:21; 393:10 magnitude 86:16; located 18:8,9; | 21; 191:14,17, | 129:6; 215:14; 26:13; 32:10,16; | 33:2; 36:2; j 22; 208:14; 226:10; 229:6; | 228:19 main 18:15; 39:11 39:5,6; 40:23; | 251:2; 287:18; 41:1; 42.15,17; j 290:5; 291:5; [ mainly 267:9; | 332:4 43:10; 50:3; 117:8,11,12; 150:1; 159:2,3; 160:7; 165:18, 23; 170:4,10,15; 183:17; 208:8; 212:3; 230:19; 238:21; 252:10; 320:21; 323:4; 336:7; 346:16; 350:20; 357:10; 365 : 17 location 96:21; 102:12; 135:13; 159:1,7; 171;7, 13; 209:16; 211:2; 246:22 locations 95:11; 172:3; 175:14; 187:12 lock 237:6 Logan 225:18 logical 104:23; 166 : 4 long 18:20; 19:18; 22:15; 46:21; 113:13; | 321:2; 335:4; E maintain 332:15 j 339:20; 352:2; | maintained 50:18 | |353:20; 354:1,3, maintaining | |5; 381:4; 382:14 212:20 looks 228:8 | maintenance 9:8; 1 loop 358:2,4,6, j 31:13; 33:14; |j 10,15; 359:5,7, 35:13 | :12,17; 364:9,10, \ major 54 3 j 17; 366:9,14; ] mall 104:1; 370:23 | 105:9,21; | :Lord 218 17 * | 107:14,17; 1 lose 239:22; ; | a,110:11; 118:3, |j 240:2,17; 241:10 12,14,21; 119:3; | losing 212:23 j 120:6,7,12,16; J lost 8:19; 45:23; j 121:3,9; 141:15; j 46:1 j 146:20; 147:12; | lot 14:6; 31:8; j 148:3,6,3,16; | 75:6; 99:19; 149:13; 233:16; | |126:16; 127:11; 238:19; 239:6,8, [ |134:4; 136:4,14, 12,14,18; | 19; 137:3,23; | 277:17,22; i 138:3,3,23; | 387:16; 390:16 ! 139:11,15,16; [ mall's 121;11 | | :140:1; 141:2,5; man 65 19 | 147:15; 170:13; manage 11:14; | 181:6,17; | 89:6; 131:12; | |193:19; 204:13; 190:22 152:22; 222:3; 223:10; 287:16, 19; 354:12 long-' range :223 13,20; 236:13 long-term 31:12, j 212:19; 218:17; j 312:1; 331:19; | 386:10 j lots 147:12,17 j loud 249:15,17; | 250:17 aj liQui 7:6; 8:4; managed 13:5; | 144:1,4; 239:7 J management 65:8; f 70:19,21; 37:18; s 149:2; 163:1; | 268:22; 280:19; | 281:2; 232:4,6, 20; 284:14; 384:10 manager 12:16; 16:16; 71:10,23; 144:5; 145:16; 140:22; 156:12; 157:1; 161:2; 189:19; 196:23; 201:4; 255:20; 259:2 managers 52:14; 53:8; 71:13 managing 39:17; 72:21; 120:1; 329:16,19 manner 142:8,10, 11,12 manufacture 377:18,20; 370:6 manufactured 72:17; 130:22; 167:15; 357:8; 379:14; 381:1, 17; 382:3 menu fac turer 10:14; 270:10 manufac turing 24:12; 42:12; 43:16; 57:6,0, 20; 74:3; 95:8; 107:1; 151:19; 165:22; 353:17; 355:8,11,16; 362:20; 372:9, 16,22; 373:12, 19; 376:13,16; 370:3; 380:5; 381:6,9,23; 382:12; 383:2,9, 14,16 many 17:22; 51:6, 20; 52:7; 53:11; 60:13; 76:7; 77:13; 79:14; 121:21; 129:18; 143:7,14; 172:17; 346:9, 11; 350:12; 393:16 mark 228:4; 265:12; 336:2 marked 3:10.5,14; 220:6; 247:12; 267:14; 334:3; 375:20 marriage 395:14 Mars 252:9 Martin 225:10 Maryland 18:10 Massachusetts 39:6 massive 211:17 master's 7:7 material 19:10; 20:10; 23:11; 24:20; 95:26,17; 96:2; 98:18; 99:3; 100:6,22; 101:19; 111:14, 21; 112:14; 113:2; 114:16; 115:2,10; 116:13; 117:2; 121:8,11; 123:21; 124:3, 17; 125:6; 126:13; 136:2, 16; 138:1; | 139:1,20,21; | 140:6,0,20; | 141:2; 147:9,13; | 149:10,12,14,15; j 101:16; 192:7,9, j 10; 239:5,7; | 241:3; 253:6,9; | 318:21; 319:2, | 13; 326:11,15, | 22; 327:1; j 328:1; 352:17; | 358:17; 374:9 | materials 13:1, | 17; 24:2,17; | 26:5; 27:11; | 20:9; 35:3; | 43:16,19; 95:13; | 112:10,22; j 146:21; 147:1; j 158:19; 239:10, | 15; 307:22; | 374:14; 380:4; | 381:8; 391:4,7, 1 12 [ matter 24:6; | 107:22; 174:21; | 175:2; 173:18; | 197:19; 229:9; ] 250:11; 360:5; | 395:17 | matters 197:21 | maximum 44:11; j 297:8 | mayor 146:10 | McLean 273:2 | McMahan 206:17 [ mean 13:10; | 17:10; 28:21; | 41:15; 62:2; | 64:8; 67:11; | 101:20; 103:21; ] 112:15; 116:2,3; | 118:5; 139:5; J 146:22; 159:5, | 22; 164:16; t 167:1; 170:19; j 171:1; 173:6; j 187:23; 195:23; | 197:10; 203:1; | 205:22; 211:5; | 213:15; 221:3; | 225:4; 229:2; | 235:20; 239:17; | 252:15; 257:4; j 284:16; 294:16; j 303:21; 318:1; j 329:14; 337:23; | 338:15,16; | 345:19; 353:2; | 353:15,19; | 361:1,18; | 367:12; 374:1; | 380:15; 388:4 | meaning 234:8 | means 10:23; | 17:11; 97:S; j 254:16; 255:1; | 358:16; 395:7,8 | measure 23:16; 162:22; 191:23; | 192:16; 223:2; | 231:3; 233:3,6; | 234:6; 235:1,13; j 241:5; 280:4,10, | 11,17; 285:9; j 324:10,18; 1 325:20; 326:2,6; | 327:23; 328:3 | measured 76:1 | measures 119:16; j 141:14; 161:21; 177:3; 186:4; j 191:20; 193:4; j 194:14; 195:10, | 20; 196:9; | 197:5,7; 190:12, j 14; 201:2,6,7; | 202:1; 230:12; | 231:9; 232:6,12, j 14,17,19; 233:1; ] 237:0; 240:23; | 246:20; 279:20; | 288:11; 293:17; | 299:13; 305=6, l 15,22; 378:16; \ 391:11 j mechanical 349:11 | mechanics 321:17; j 322:5 | mechanisms 131:6, 21 j medical 125:20 j meet 8:16; 119:8; j 146:9; 258:18; 261:2 | meeting 145:20; j 146:15; 258:20, j 22; 259:9,10; [ 260:1,10,13; j 261:3; 263:8,15, | 18; 264:10,22; i 267:19,21; | 268:7,14,17; | 269:5,9; 270:9, U meetings 145:4; [ 146:1,5,17; | 155:10,11; | 216:23; 219:10, ] 16; 227:6,15; j 301:18; 302:12, | 14,23; 303:5; | 310:20 | meets 233:3 j MEGA 315:13,18,21 | member 63:12; j 216:17 | members 215:21; | 216:17; 218:19; | 225:15,17; | 226:4; 227:7 membrane 160:19; | 162:6; 164:6; j 163:4,6,14; j 170:3; 171:15; j 172:1; 335:8 | membranes 162:12; | 169:12 | memory 43:4 | mentioned 36:4; j 114:18; 117:6; j 150:22; 177:22; | 184:10; 219:0; | 271:22; 326:9; | 337:2; 341:16; j 356:15; 359:8; | 383:14 mentioning 39:23; | 40:1 mercury 352:21; [ 353:2,3,9,11,16, | 18; 354:10,20; j 355:14; 356:5; ] 357:9,11,13,17; | 359:3,9,15,16, | 19; 360:6; HARTOLDMON0031420 BRNCHFLD.TXT Page 13 361:3; 363:11; | 22:8,19; 31:1,4, 364:14,19; [ 7; 44:23; 45=14; 367:13; 363:2, 23; 369:15,20; | 48:1,14; 117:23; j 118:6; 120:8,22; 376:IS j 122:22,23; merely 193:18; | 127:10,17; 335 : 7 | 120:13; 134:12, merit 5:20 | 23; 135=8,16,18; mess 331:21 | 136:8,9,10,23; messed 339:8 | 137:4,6,8,9,10, met 143:7; ] 11,13; 147:2,6, j219:17; 260:17; 10,11,14,19; 309:23 | 149:5,8,13,20; metals 49:4 [ 157:16; 184:21; method 181:20; | 198:9; 215:3; 136:15,16; 138:11; 139:9; 236:18; 238=20; | 249:6; 294:14, 191:4,12; 192:23 17; 295:2,12,20; methodology 188:19 j 296:1,22; 297:4, j 9; 296:3,12,15, methods 8 7:15; 130:23; 180:4; 231:13 middle 20:11; 233:22 might 15:16; 39:7; 46:9; 54:4; 65:14; 66:4; 73:17,20; 32:5; 86:17, 103:6; 105:2,8; j 18; 299:9,12,21; | 301:3,6,22; | 316:11; 318:13, | 17; 324:21,23; | 327:11,13; | 328:21; 338:21; | 339:12; 387:15, j 16; 389:9,10 | millions 246:1,2; | 346:10,11 | mind 10 :10, 107:6; 132:21; 133:16,17; 134:4; 166:16, f 150:19,20; | 214:20; 275:2; | 346:7 17; 167:20; [ mine 102:4 173:22; 174:1; minimize 105:18; 191:20; 195:22; ] 298:4 198:14; 202:15; | minimum 300:22; 237:1; 240:17; | 318:20; 319:1,IS 244:20; 266:13; | mining 319:23 270:11; 287:14; | minor 41:18; 239:14,17; 293:12; 311:14, 42:1,2; 88:20; j 211:1; 302:21 23; 312:22; 332:4,19; 336:5; 352:13; 369:1, | minute 131:14; j 175:22; 200:S; j 316:8; 364:13 12; 373:18; | misleading 384:5 376:15; 378:4; | missed 78:16 362:13,17; missing 84=7; 385:5; 386:4; | 336:2 387.10,20; | mission 203:17 388:16 Missouri 9:3; migrate 2 3 :2 3 ; j 50:3,6,10 24:22; 85:2,4 | misspeak 200:10 migrated 73:16 | misstated 266:22 migrating 73:17, | mistaken 118i,'9; 20; 32:21; 95:10; 167:4; ! 232:22; 274:20; j 355:5 352:2 j misunderstanding migration 28:23; | 96:7; 230:15; 73:1; 81:12,13; t 231:1 169:15 misunderstood Hike 16:10; | 159:10; 162:9 52:15,16; 6a : 12; Mobile 208:10; 69:3; 99:23; 265:22 100:1; 110:5; ! mobilize 212:2 156:12,13,14; j mobilized 164:12, 157 : 5 | 13; 239:15; mile 22 : 17; | 246:21 82:16; 159:4 | mode 74:8; 119=6; miles 96:23 | 174:13 Hiller 68:12; | moderate 12 S . 1 189:7,10; 190=2; | molecules 370:14, 191:3; 192:23; 15 317:3,9,14; j molted 370:ll,12 3B6 : 9 j moment 214:23 Miller's 68:21 [ money 31:8,21; million 21:14; | 46:15,16,17; 1 48:12,14; 58:23; 61:20; 65:19; 120:15; 143=23; 144:20; 153:23; 154:1; 157:14; 204:6,7; 217:16; 245:23; 257:10; 308:15; 309:17; 325:21; 184-.6; 386:23; 387:8 monies 333:22; 385:2 monitor 76:20; 83:7; 352:7; 383:10 monitoring 23:6; 31:23; 32:3; 38:5; 75:18; 80:9; 81:2; 82:17; 83:12; 87:14; 98:3,7; 175:6; 178:5,6, 13,15; 289:2,3; 293:6; 341:4,6; 349:6; 3 SI:4; 383:20 monitors 172:13, 14; 174:23 MONSANTO 1:8.5; 14:23; 13:1,3,7, 9; 24:14; 25:3, 5,7,17,22; 26:10; 33:5; 34:4; 41:13,17; 44:20,21; 45:16; 48:4,13; 56:7, 13,17,18,20; 57:1; 58:3; 59:23; 60:6; 61:14; 62:16,23; 63:17,- 64:3,10, 16; 65:12; 67:14,17; 68=6, 7,17; 107:19; 113:11; 128:21; 129:8; 132:16; 133:2; 153:7; 154:15; 163:10, 13; 188:15; 211:6; 221:14; 262:8,11; 263:3, 5; 331:5; 347:12; 376:8; 381:17 Monsanto's 51:18; 52:23; 102:15; 356:5; 381:15 monthly 202:7,14; 267:9 months 6:8,16,8:19; 42:4; 145:7; 155:5; 182:17; 286 = 13,292 :13 morning 113=6; 181:3 Morrison 8:23; 14 : 1 most 30:18; 42:16; 57:11; 74:6; 84:5; 99:14,15; 136:2; 179:7; 190:21; 210:19; 239:7; 257:12; 296:13; 328 : 2 MotCO 43;6,8; 44:21; 47:15,22 | mountain 164:11; | 347:5 | mouth 7:21 | move 64:5; 97:6, | 7,9; 170:13; | 242:15,16; j 244:19; 305:18; i 343=14; 392:8,11 | moved 97:14,17; j 121:23; 126:9, | 14; 135:1,4; | 147:5; 200:4; | 331:18; 350:22; j 351:7,8 | moves 97:12 | moving 102:13; \ 105:11; 330:7 Ms. 316:11; | 320:15 much 27=23; j 40:19; 54:6; j 73=9; 86:13,20; | 91:12; 108:10; j 113:6; 120:5,11, | 17,22; 121:1,2; | 133:14; 150:12; | 157:14; 15B:4; j 176=4,17; j 186:12; 190:21; | 210:9; 217:9,12; | 257:10; 270:15, | 17; 287:23; | 292:22; 296:11; j 305:10; 311:13; [ 312:9; 324=12, | 21,23; 345:22; 360:15,19; 369:13; 385:15; 388 = 8 | muddy 104:18 | municipal 123:16 | munitions 9=16 | must 230:16; | 328:14 myself 78 : 23 ; | 107:15; 146:2; | 172:21; 302:14 1N | naked 115=20,22; | 116:6,9 | name 8:6; 35:5,6; | 38:17; 54:14,21, j 22; 68:12; 69:1; [ 115:13; 123:4,5, | 7; 124:15; | 125:4,11; 162:21; 168:12; | 206:13,20; j 209:20; 214:19, | 22; 216=10; | 226=20; 263:1; j 269:10,11,13; j 273:6; 278:10; j 310:2; 320:16; | 381:3 j named 47:20; | 51:23; 52:15; | 54:11; 55:12,19; [ 56:18,21; 70:4; | 89:15; 206:16, | 19; 208:7; | 216:9; 217:3; | 271:21; 272:5; ] 273:2; 278=20; | 302:16,22; | 314:3; 356:22 | names 32:13; | 39:2; 51:9; j 215:19; 383:13 | naming 18 : 3 narrow 30:12 j natural 27:7,13; | 216:5; 292:19 | naturally 11:13 | nature 10:5; | 13:15,18; 13:12; | 20:4; 25:16; | 28:10; 29:7; | 34:23; 81:15,17; | 93:16; 101=11; | 107:8; 108:7; | 112:18,19; | 120:14; 130:4, ] 14,19; 134:7; j 135=20; 138=22; | 139:4; 155:8; | 174:12; 284=3; j 288:14; 289:23; 308:6; 341:3; j 342:19; 344=12; | 351:13,18; j 352:16 Naval 5:13; 6:17; 1 7:1 Navy 6:4,19; 7:3, ] 4,16,17,13; 8:2; j 358=5 | Navy's 6=5,6,15, | 20 | near 46:11; | 123:3; 158=21; | 170:15,16; j 367:19 | nearby 37:5 | necessarily | 80:12; 93:5; | 120:2; 133:22; J 192:5; 264:5; j 286:6; 353:19 | necessary 4:15; j 119:17; 186:4; | 195=18; 196:9, j 16; 232:6; j 326:5; 378:15 j need 149:17,21; j 150:7,10; 151:2; j 172:17,23; f 173:3; 177:3; | 190:19; 192:4; | 224:2; 232:11; J 249:21; 289:14; l 305:16; 370:1; j 389:10 | needed 23:4; j 73:22; 148:4; j 149:13; 166:23; j 191:20; 193:4; j 207:17; 247:22; | 255:14; 365=22; | 367:14 | needs 192:16 negligent 392:4 | negotiated | 159:18; 317:17 j negotiating ] 301:19; 303:11 | negotiation | 303=13 | negotiations 143:7,9,12,15, j 19,23; 303:18; | 330=4,8,10 [ neighbor's [ 164:19,23 | neighborhood | 21:21; 215:2 | neighborhoods t 166:14 | neither 374:13 | nerve 377:7,9,16, j 18; 378:1,7; | 379:16; 380:14 | never 36=22; | 37:1; 61:10; | 102=16; 163:5, | 18; 175:19; | 179:23; 180:7; j 187:18,20; j 224:17; 231=2,3; j 263:11; 271=3; j 273:5; 310:19; j 314:6; 338:9; | 340=15; 342:21; 346:6; 348:21; j 352:18; 357:2; j 387:4 t new 3:9,15; 39:4; j 64:9; 260=5,6,7, j 8; 262:5; 286:14,16 j Newark 286=13,14 | newer 178:10 | News 265:14 [ newspaper 242:21; | 262:21 newspapers 143=3 | next 29:10; 32:5; | 38:11; 40:11; l 41=7,21; 249:8; | 295:21; 296:10, 1 18 | nice 126:11 | night 195:1 | nine 338:20; 1 339:12; 380:2 ninety 136:16; | 327:12 | Nitro 54:15,20 | nitroglycerin 1 55:4 | nobody 70=23; 235:15; 248:9; | 341:21; 342:7, | 12; 378=9 | Nodding 15:19 | nods 55:8; 210:4 non-agueous 39:12 non-detect j 135:14; 177:9; | 179=14,15; | 184:19; 297:16 | non-soluble 92=12 | Nona 107:21 | nonprofit 203=16; | 207:20; 208=4,15 | nonprofits 209:4, 17 1 nor 169:20; | 374:13; 395:16 | normal 183:15; | 232:15 | normally 282:23; j 283:21 | north 1=18; j 2=9.5; 77:8; | 166:3; 320:6; j 321:4,22; 386:7, 1 1 northeast 42:17; | 209:15; 321:6,8; I 322:7 j northwest 321:5 i i t i i i \ ! i | i j i | i ! i i HARTOLDMON0031421 8RNCHFLD. TXT notarial 395:19 | 332:13; 339:1; j 274:IB Notary 4:5; | 340:10; 356:12; | Officially 306:2 395:23 [ 357:19,22; | officials 216:16 noted 357:12 | 359:14; 362:3; j offshoot 207:23 notes 155:11 nothing 78:12,- [ 363:13; 366:11, | 21; 367:21; | often 90:14; j 122:22; 126:19; 176:6; 179:19; 345:10; 357:16 notice 4:22; | 368:4,10; 369:4, ! 350:9 | 14; 371:18; I oil 39:13 | 372:2; 373:21; j okay 8:1; 24:6; 233:7; 241:6; 306:2 | 374:4; 375:6; 376:20; 377:3, j 40:11,17; 52:18; j 111:16; 142:15; notified 275:8 | 12; 378:8,14,21; j 150:8; 132=12; notify 298:20 379:6; 382=5; | 251:1; 322:22; November 259:15 | 335:22; 387:3; | 335:4; 369:17 novice 197:13 | 338:6,21; | olf 104:14; nuclear 6:5,7,15. | 339:12; 391:23; j 113:22; 114=1; 17,20; 7:1,2; | 393:3 j 115:14,15; 10 : 1 | objection 53:16; | 129:22; 141=10; number 1:6.5; 67:2; 169:3; j 217:5; 222:14; 17:11, 12,23; | 367:3; 383:11,19 | 254:1; 339=10; 25:13; 36:10; | objections 4:15, | 371:8,10 42:1; 43:19,20; 1 is | old 40:13,15; 46:17; 47:6; 51:20; 52:8,9; | objective 164:8; j 255:10; 294:1 | 41:10,16; 75:8; | 104:IB; 253=9; 56:23; 60:16; | obligations | 322:11 74:2; 76:8; j 261:2; '264:4,23 | older 63:18; 77:11; 79:9,19; j observation 80:17; 93:11,12; j 111:21 | 178:8,9 \ on-scene 271:10 106:16,18,20; J observed 107:16 \ on-site 71:18; 129:6,8,15,16; obtain 363:4 | 136=18; 205:13; 130:14; 215:17; obtaining 325:11 j 287:8; 288:13; 219:7; 227:13; obviously 6:12; | 349:10; 353:16, 228:5; 232:19; 1 57:13,16; 80:8; j 21; 355:14 236:17; 247:11; | 89:1;. 186:5; | on-the-job 13:9 250:18; 273:3; | 287:6; 301:9,11; | 256:7,-296:14; 298:4; 311:7; j Once 7:8; 33:17; j 34:7,23; 35=10, 312:7; 313:22; | 332:1; 333:12; | 16; 36:16; 314:4,7; 315:1; | 347:1,13; j 39:10; 40:5; 334:7; 345:21; | 362:15; 377=17 | 42:3; 59:2; 373:4; 375:18, 19; 379:18; 380 :2 occasions 85:16 | 62:19; 65:16; occupants 192:17 j 66:6,18; 67:3; occur 133:5,6 j 34:3,9; 85:14; numbers 314:17 occurred 60:10; 1 102:22,- 107:11; | 87:1; 102=8; j 114:23; 132:20; O | 130:6,9; 132:5, | 134:6; 135=8; | 21; 148:16; j 155:4; 173:6; Oak 124:16 | 226:1 | 190:9; 191=15; Oakridge 9:22,23 occurring 29:1; | 194:0; 200:21; object 58:12; 61:23; 62:18; l 147:3; 212:18; | 239:11; 242:19; | 201:19; 210=13; j 219:14,18; 63:11,22; 64:23; 66:17; 88:14; 96:3; 93:6; I 344:21 | occurs 103:20 | October 73:11 222:20; 223:19; j 229:9; 235:11; j 238:2; 239:9; 108:4; 116:14; j off-gas 173:],7; | 240=5,22; 242:1; 127:21; 133:10; I 174:7,10 | 243:11; 245:5; 140:13; 141:22; | off -migration | 246:18; 255=19; 153:14; 164:20; 293:22 1 256:20; 259:23; 165:9; 169:6; j Off-Site 53:14; ] 260:9,16; 180:1,9,19; j 73:2; 182=14; | 263:20; 272:11; 181:12; 183:1; j 353:21; 354:10; | 292:4; 2 9 B:3; 184:13; 185:14, | 360:4; 368=12; | 300:13; 301:9; 21; 187:19; I 369:20; 380:3, | 305:17; 309:13; 191:9; 193:7,21; | 21; 381:8 | 311:1; 313=13; 195:2; 196:14, [ offered 3:10.5, | 315:10; 328:14; 19; 197:14; ! 14.5; 4:20; ( 330:11; 350:11; 200:20; 201:18; | 72:15; 254:11; | 362:23; 372:3; 221:22; 222:19; 223:15; 237:16; j 330:14 | Office 206:21; \ 373:1; 374:23; j 377:13; 382:6; 238:23; 239:3; | 307:3,7,12,16; | 383=7; 307:4 240:4,18,21; | 308:4 [ one 10:9; 15:12, 242:18; 243:7; | officer 6:4; 7:3; [ 16; 16:11; 17:1, 244:3; 245:4; j 65:23; 66:21; s 14; 10:4; 20:9, 246:6,16; 248:7; j 67:17; 68:4,10, j 14; 24:14; 32=8, 250:3; 252:19; 1 13 \ 14,23; 34:6; 253:12; 254:19; ! officers 6:21 | 36:21; 37:12; 255:17; 281:16; j offices 1:16; j 38:14,20; 39:3; 283:23; 284:10, j 208:9; 307:19 j 40=6,11,21; 23; 314:23; j official 219:3; | 41:7,21; 43:5; Page 14 in r~- i--i 44: 46: 19; 48:10,IS; 49: 5,10 , 22; 53: 12,18,19 ,21, 23; 54: 3; 58:11; 60: 13; 61:16; 67: 15; 68:18; 69: 15; 70:16,18; 83: 20; 04:1 86: 17; 100: 3 ; 103 ; 3 ; 105: 16; 106 : 3 r 4 ; 109:3; 119 : 3 ,* 121: 11; 124 :23; 125 : 7 ; 12B : 9; 135: 13 ; 144 : 15; 146 : 4 , 14; 147 :1,2 ,5,9; 149 : 12 , 20; 154 : 8 ; 160 = 3,13, 15; 169 : 19, 20; 170 : 5 ; 171 : 17, 18; 173 : 22 ; 177 : 20 ; 179 : 6,3 , 13; 180 : 20 ; 1B2 : 15; 184 : 14 , 16, 13; 186 : 22; 108 : 11; 189 : 2 0; 191 : 11; 194 : 10; 200 = 23; 211 :21; 212 : 8; 216 : 22; 219 : 6; 222 : 8; 223 : 2 2 ; 224 : 3; 226 : 11 ; 228 : 6; 231 : 12 ; 232 : 2 ; 235 :1,19; 230 :20; 239 : 19; 249 :22; 251 : 11, 14 ; 252 : 12; 255 ; 8,10; 258:5, 259 :2; 262 : 10 ; 265 : 13 ; 267 : 13 , 15; 200 : 12 ; 234 : 8 ; 287 : 17, 21,22; 301 : 2 1; 302 : 23 ; 303 :2; 313 : 15; 316 : 22 , 23 ; 320 : 7 ; 323 : 1; 326 : 8 ; 336: 2 0; 337 -8; 344 : 6; 350 : 13 ; 354 : 2 ; 355 : 9 ; 357 = 12; 361 : 13 ; 363 : i 4 ; 382 :10; 3B3 : 5, 21; 384 : 7; 386 : 6; 389: 7; 391 : 4 ; 393: 22 one- on-one 1 55:9 ones 42 : 1; 48:11; 53 : 3; 283:7 ; 334 = 1; 354 9; 391 `.IS ongoing 330: B; 381 : 4 only 34 17; 4 0:5; 50: 23; 53 : 3 ; 60 : 13; 77:1 ; 95: 10; 100: 22 ; 103 : 1 , 3 ; 114:14; 122 : 17, 130 :11; 194 : 10, 211 :10; 218 : 12 , 239 = 5,9; 252 : 4 ; 263 ; 19; 284 : 12, 16; 291 : 7 ; 293 : 7; 298 2; 325 : 8; 327 : 2 2 , 334 : 1 ; 363 : 6; 370 : 16, | 20; 371:2; j 373:19,22 | operate 64 :14 | operated 57:15; j 371:4; 372:10; j 373:7 | operating 35:12; j 37:17; 61:15; j 62:5; 68:10,13; j 154:3; 180:23; j 181:21; 349:14; j 369:6 | operation 9:7; j 11:3; 31:13,23; j 32:1; 93:23; j 123:12; 354:21 | operational 6:16 | operations 33:14; | 35:3,12; 57:21; j 12 Q:4; 378:12 | opinion 197:8; | 198:21; 244:5; 345:8 | opinions 197:15, 19; 255:18 | opportunity j 72:16; 142=21; j 143:4; 241:7; j 254:12; 264:19; | 379:21 | opposed 66:15; 168:21; 182=5; j 201:16; 205:18; j 254:13; 321=13; j 322:20; 359:5; j 307:22 | order 21:13; j 34:10; 38:3,20; 40:10; 45:17; j 46:6,14; 76:9; j B1:3; 86=15; j 91:19; 106:15, j 19; 120:8; j 122:4,22; 129:6; j 134:17,22; | 143:11; 148:5; [ 172:17; 176=13; j 179:6; 186:17; j 137:1; 192:16; j 204:10; 215:13; j 228:19; 247:23; j 294:21,22; j 296:15; 301:20; j 327:12 | ordinary 80:3 | ore 9:19 organic 10:4,7, | 21; 18:17,19; | 19:14,18; 23:8, | 11; 24:6,11; | 25:12; 33:17; | 49:3 organics 25:9 organization | 70=17; 99:18; | 153:4; 157:8; | 203:12,13,16; | 205:23; 206:22; f 207:20; 20B:4, [ 15; 209:8; | 215:22; 219:3; f 225:6,7,15; [ 226:4,8; 227:3; | 270:2; 333:11 | organizationally | 278:17 | organizations ] 203:9 | organized 216:2 | original 139 : 2 1 | Orlando 6:7 | other 3:14; 13 9; | 14: 5; 15:16 ; j IS: 1; 26:23 ; | 29: 11; 31=7 ; j 32: 23; 37:5 , 12 ; | 41: 23; 43=S ; | 47: 20; 48:3 , 11, | 12, 17; 51:2 ; | 57: 18; 61:3 | 67: 1; 69:21 | 71: 13; 73:3 , 15; | 74 : 9,20; 78 : 4 ; | 79: 13; 84:1 6; j 86: 22; 94:5 , 19; j 96: 20; 101: 1; | 1Q2 :17; 107 : 3 | 16, 10; 10B: 22; 1 m :2 0 ; 114 : 14; j 141 : 17,23; | 159 :2; 166: 16; 174 : 1; 175: 23 ; j 184 :2 0; 193 : 5 ; | 209 :7; 210: 17, | 23; 218:5; j 225 : 15; 231 : 18; | 235 = 23 ; 243 : 15; | 259 : 3 ; 261: 9; | 262 :15 ; 266 : 20 ; | 267 : 12 ; 269 : 15, | IB; 276:6; j 290 : 5 ; 293: 2,3, | 5,6 ; 303:2; | 315 : 6; 319: 11; | 326 : 23 ; 333 : 6 I 23; 355:17; | 372 =5,15,17 | 375 : 22 ; 3 76 : 2 2 , | 300 : 4 ; 381: 8 , 16; j 391 : 15 | others 50:22 | otherwise 97 : 7 ; | 117 : 17 | ought 238:17 ; | 305 : 13; 310 : 1, 1 10; 341:3; | 342 : 17 | out 9:21; 10 :9. 1 11 : 11; 12:2 ; j 15 : 1,17; 16 : 2 ; | 27: 10; 32:3 ; j 48 : 4,6; 52: 11; 1 53: 4; 60:4, 17; 1 69: 13; 76:7 ; J 80: 3; 84:6, 9,19; | 36: 9; 87:1, 10; j 91: 13; 92:19; j 93 : 21; 96:13; J 105 :17; 116 : 19, 1 20; 121:2,3 j 133 : 14 ; 140 : 11; | 142 : 3, 14; 144:9, i 11; 154:2 0; | 160 :9; 171: 5; | 178 : 22 ; 179 --2, | 20; 181:4; | 183 :19; 184 - 11; | 109 :4; 190: 17; | 195 :19; 196 : 23 ; | 197 :2; 198: 5 ; j 204 :2 0 ; 2 05 17; 206 : 5,2 1 ; ! 207 :19; 209 : 14; ; 212 :10,12; i 214 = 12; 218 : 8 ; : 226 :9; 229: 18 ; HARTOLDMON0031422 BRtfCHTLD. TXT Page 15 j 237:13; 248:1; ! 249:15,16,22; | 250:17; 251:12; | 254:1; 262:7; | 260:9; 269:18, | 23; 271:2,4; | 273:20; 277:13; j 284 : 2 0; 294:3; | 307:6; 317:1; | 320:21; 322:5; [ 329:21; 330:22; | 336:6; 350:11; j 352:16,21; j 353:3,9; 363:12; i 371:4; 372:14; * 385:2,5,19; j 390:18 I out-fall 182:5 | outfit 362:18 | outlined 232:21; | 233:4 | outlines 175:11 | outright 358:23 | outside 9:3; I 18:11; 43:10; | 56:2; 94:20; | 102:12; 110:15, ! 17; 141:23; j 277:10; 312:19 | over 9:13; 14:5; | 18:1; 19:8; I 34:17; 43:2; i 56:0; 57:2; [ 86:8; 87:20; | 93:13; 140:2,7; | 141:7; 148:9; | 157:16; 160:19; | 161:6; 162:6; | 167:7; 168:4,6, | 14; 172:15; j 175:3; 176:8; | 180:18; 189:12; j 193:19; 211:23; | 222:6,12; ! 223:12; 244:8; [ 245:10; 247:19; j 251:18; 252:1, j 10; 253:10; I 271:7,14; | 272:21; 279:2,6, | 14,17; 282:7; | 292:23; 307:16, | 18; 315:7,8; | 318:10,11,16; | 319:6,7,10,23; i 320:1,2; 321:10, | 11,14; 330:5; j 334:13; 335:8; ; 336:7; 337:3; S 343:15; 345:12; | 346:16; 386:7, | 10; 387:15 ! overall 38:21 | overburden 28:13; | 29:9 | overlay 140:7; j 335:1 I oversaw 16:23; j 284:8 i oversee 16:20; | 214:9 j overseeing 34:13; j 48:21; 187:13; I 272:14; 275:9 j overseen 87:16; j 138:4; 159:19 I oversees 70:17; i 123:11; 125:8; | 275:23 | oversight 38:22; | 87:20; 142:13; | 274:12; 275:3, | 11; 276:8; | 282:18; 234:4; j 384:13 j own 77:5; 138:15, j 17; 208:3; 1 254:5; 279:8; ] 307:7; 358:8 | owned 24:10; | 35:1; 56:7; [ 148:8; 252:16; | 253:8 [ owner 25:4; f 252:16,21; | 295:8; 298:5,23 ! owners 205:2,16; j 212:15; 215:17; ] 227:8,11,14 | Oxford 93:13; | 95:12; 114:17; j 115:8; 110:3; j 121:15,16; j 124:23; 142:20; | 143:2; 145:10; j 183:6; 275:19; | 276:9; 277:20, | 23; 323:5 P | peg 3 : 2.5,7; i 249:8; 334:23; j 361:13; 363:2; ] 375:13 | paid 48:12; 1 144:14; 205:3, j IS; 308:15; | 309:17 | palm 11:22 | panel 306:9 | paper 122:13; t 361:15,20; j 368:21 j paragraph 249:11, | 14,16; 256:9,12 j parallel 393:13 | parathion 167:14, j 15; 163:2,9,21; j 169:17; 339:13; | 350:19; 351:8,11 | parceling 201:13 [ park 114:17; ' j 115:11; 118:4,7; | 136:5; 193:19; ] 194:23; 277:21 ] parking 136:4,14, | 19; 137:3,23; | 138:2,0,23; | 139:11,15,16; | 140:1; 141:2,5; | 147:12,15,17; | 181:5,17; | 189:15; 193:19; ) 194:22; 312:1 | parks 115:6,9 j part 22:1,19; | 45:14; 61:14; | 87:23; 92:3,6; | 125:8; 136:11; [ 147:2,5,9,18; | 149:5,8,13,20; ! 151:21; 152:12; j 153:21; 161:5; | 179:3,14; | 182:14; 204:18; | 223:2; 225:22; j 228:14; 241:4; j 251:7; 289:6; j 293:12; 294:2; | 304:14,21; j 305:4; 311:1; | 313:10; 321:15; | 331:9; 337:19; | 352:9; 353:13, j 17,20; 354:10; j 350:13; 383:11; j 389:9 | participate | 17:16; 19:22; [ 42:6; 218:9,11; [ 227:14 | participated j 310:20 | participating j 20:15; 36:23; j 270:17 | participation | 16:21; 17:0; | 32:7; 34:18; ] 41:16; 227:2 j particle 84:18, | 21; 85:9; 92:5; | 93:21; 97;10,16 | particles 11:23; | 12:1 | particular 10:10; | 21:12,19; 35:20; [ 39:11; 40:6,18, | 21; 41:19; 49:9; j 50:21; 61:11; | 66:12; 81:5; ] 89:6; 94:5; | 100:13; 106:13; 1 110:9; 125:B; j 139:6,10; | 142:23; 151:14; [ 162:5; 172:2; | 174:1,5,14; j 188:23; 190:22; | 192:19; 193:8; j 225:23; 228:12; j 241:8; 261:8; j 270:20,23; j 275:4; 277:19; [ 291:12; 338:17; j 348:4; 352:9; j 383:16 | particularly | 14:23; 30:11; j 170:7 ] particulate j 174:21; 175:2 | particulates | 11:19 | parties 4:3; l 17:13,15; 22:3, | 4; 37:21; 47:21; | 395:15 | parting 174:15; ) 180:5 j parts 117:23; | 118:6; 122:21, j 23; 127:9,17; j 128:13; 134:12, j 23; 135:8,16,18; j 136:8,9,23; j 137:4,5,8,9,10, | 13; 147:10,14; J 179:6; 104:20; | 198:9; 200:21; | 294:14,17; | 295:2,12,20; [ 296:1,22; 297:4, | 9; 298:8,11,14, | 18; 299:9,12,20; j 301:3,6,22; | 316:10; 318:13, j 16; 327:11,13; | 328:21 | party 56:10; | 301:15; 333:7 | pass 281:5 [ passed 69:1; [ 153:12 | past 9:13; 33:9; j 56:20; 68:21; | 73:13; 129:3,7, j 10,12; 131:3; | 145:7; 230:9,13; j 2 3 S : 17 ; 2 B 8 : 7 ; j 290:6; 309:9,14; ] 346:6; 372:22 | pat 385:14 j path 15:23; j 166:11; 237:7 | pathway 165:1; [ 174:14; 344:23 | pathways 189:2; [ 247:7; 313:1; | 352:4; 360:1 j pay 45:16; 61 : 14 ; 204:7,9; 307:2; 308:2,3,5,8,14; 309:7,9,10,12,19 paying 307:8; 309:16 PCB 88:13; 94:6; 97:8; 119:10; 139:19; 151:18, 19; 174:7; 176:17; 213:6, f 13; 221:18; | 245:10; 296:20; j 331:11,19; j 332:16; 334:5, j 12; 335:22; j 336:7; 346:20; j 347:8,9,10; j 348:4,6; 351=15; | 352:17 j PCBs 25:10,11; j 49:6,7,13; 50:1; [ 72:17; 73:1; | 74:9; 83:3,6,7, | 10,14,22; 84:6, j 9,15; 35:8,20; | 86:22; 87:3; j 91:23; 92:3,13; | 93:3,14; 94:5; | 95:2,7,13,23; | 96:17,20; 97:6, | 7,21; 99:4,8; [ 101:18; 105:22; | 106:23; 107:3, j 12; 109:7; j 115:19; 116:6,8, j 13,19; 117:5,13; j 118:5,23; | 119:15,23; [ 120:1,3; 122:18; | 126:7; 128:12, | 23; 131:17,21; | 134:16,21; j 136:6; 137:17; j 141:13; 142:7,9, j 11,12,18; 154:6, | 15; 159:12; ] 160:22; 161:13, | 15,17; 163:23; | 164:1,9; 165:5; | 166:11,17,21,22; | 167:4; 168:22; | 169:16; 171:11, | 16; 173:14,17, | 21; 174:5,8,13, | 21; 175:1; [ 176:3,10; | 177:15; 178:4, f 16; 179:3; j 180:15; 181:5; | 182:13; 183:4, j 17,19; 184:12; j 185:4,10,18; j 186:1; 109:3; j 193:10,13; i 199:8; 200:1; | 212:2,7; 224:6, j 21; 230:19; 1 233:13,20; j 234:1,3; 237:21; j 238:4; 241:16, | 18,20; 242:8,15; j 243:19,23; | 244:14; 265:17, j 23; 293:22; | 297:15; 300:7, j 15; 312:22; | 319:15; 323:17; j 329:9; 330:22; j 333:18,20; j 335:23; 338:23; j 339:7,15,20; j 340:1; 343:15; ! 344:10; 346:2,9; | 349:15,19; | 351:14; 352:2; j 353:23; 374:8,9, j 13,14; 3 76:17,- | 336:3; 387:6; 1 390:16; 392:23; | 393:10 | pending 60:14,17; | 61:2 | people 18:1; 51:2 ; 53:5; 54 : 7 ; 64:1, 2,5; 75:10; 90 :1 9 ; 99:5 ; 105:15; 143 : 7, 13; 148:8 154 : 19 ; 193 : 5, IB; 206:10; 218 : 18 ; 219 : 7 ; 220: 19 ; 223 : 6 ; 225 : 9 ; 236 : 22; 243: 6; 245 : 2; 246: 3 ; 254 : 14; 260: 14 ,- 263 : 21 ; 270 : 3, 4,13, 16; 286 : 10 ; 291 : 4 ; 308 : 3, 8,10,* 309: 23 ; 314 : 22 ; 315 : 6; 347: 7, 15 352 : 13 ; 372 : 1,5 382 : 19 ; 3S5 : 9 ; 386: 6; 3 8 B : 5; 389: 1, 2 peopl.e' fl 252 : 2 ; 390: 17 per 117 : 23 ; 118 : 6; 122 ; 7,21 23 ; 12 7:9,17; 128 : 13 ; 134 : 12 , 2 3; 135:8,16,18 136 : 8, 9,23; 137 : 4, 5,8,9 , 10, 13; 147:2,5 , 9, j 10,14,19; 149:5, | 8,13,20; 179:7, | 8,14; 184:21; | 190:9; 238:20; [ 294:14,17; | 295:2,12,20; j 296:1,22; 297:4, | 9; 298:8,12,14, | 18; 299:9,12,20; 1 301:3,6,22; j 316:10; 318:13, j 16; 327:11,13; ] 328:21; 389:9 | percent 5:21; | 21:11,18; 34:8, j 20; 37:16; | 38:20; 40:6,21; j 85:18; 136:16 | percentage 40:20 | percentages | 328:17 | perception 248:8 | percolated 27:11 | perfect 15:3 | perform 236:19; | 343:6 | performed 90:14; | 110:5,9,20; j 128:20; 161:21; ] 183:22; 236:22 j perhaps 56:23; 1 66:1,15; 159:10; | 162:9; 190:7; | 195:10; 230:23; | 244:15; 256:2; | 316:9; 337:17; I 354:16 | perimeter 44:9, j 16; 46:20; | 77:23; 79:20 j period 55 :18; j 116:4; 241:6; | 271:16; 273:11; I 315:8; 356:11; | 364:1 | periodically j 155:3,4; 292:21, j 349:12 | permeability | 44:10 | permeable 140:10, | IB; 253:9 | permission j 137:21; 295:8 | permit 33:1; j 119:2; 233:4; | 280:19; 281:3, I 11; 282:1,2,7,9, | 16; 283:3,8,22; | 284:5,15; | 285:10; 320:1; [ 333:5 | permits 323:20 j permitted 231:15 ] person 53:22; j 66:13; 70:20,22; | 90:4; 130:17; j 156:10,17; | 180:20; 194:10; | 202:2; 211:14; j 259:3,4; 261:13, | 21; 262:10,17, j 23; 263:1; j 273:12,14; j 311:14; 312:21; 1 314:15; 347:11; | 387:19 | person's 186:11 | personal 358:8 | personally | 107:15; 108:21; | | | | j j j j | ] j j j ] | | | | j j | | | I [ [ j j i | | j ! ! ; j j | j | j | | j I j | i i i | ; j I | | i : , | I i ! i ; j | | j j | j ! ` HARTOLDMON0031423 BRNCH7LD. TXT 357:23; 366:12 perspective 17:8; 238:6; 253:14; 263:19; 271:23; 276:11; 352:1 pertained 362:19 Pete 217:3,5,7, 10,23; 218:5,8 Ph-D- 125:20,21 phase 33:14; 35:13; 39:13; 50:17; 91:9; 98:11; 173:22; 174:1,5; 182:15; 223:22; 224:1,3, 4; 232:2; 234:7, 8; 320:5,14; 340:2; 344:11 phone 150:7,308 : 6 phones 308:1 Phyllis 302:21 physical 108:8; 111:14 physically 97:13 physics 5:20,23; 6:11,12; 75:12 pick 27:10,- 81:8; 186:20; 187:11, 12; 190:5; 389:14 picked 28:20; 74 :14 picking 102:11, 18; 105:10 picks 97:12 picture 192:12 piece 21:19; 114:14; 189:13; 190:1; 192:19; 193:17; 194:20; 363:15 Piedmont 123:3; 124 : 9 pile 327:17; 330:11,15,17; 332:6; 392:15 pits 43:21 place 13:3; 57=21; 65:3; 67:10; 68:1; 69:9; 88:7,18; 119:13; 122:12; 148:10,23 ; 149:18; 173:23; 174:2; 175:12; 161:10; 199:6; 204:1; 228:2; 244:2; 246:23; 262:6; 269:5,9; 278:13,21; 289:11; 292:16; 293:21; 302:1; 316:21; 317:4; 323:12; 330:10; 392:23 placed 30:20; 42:9; 43:18,19; 115:10; 136:3; 169:13; 352:11; 380:6; 385:8 places 321:12 placing 168:6; 172:4; 181:16 Plaintiff's 375:19 plaintiffs 1:5.5, 16; 2:2.5; | 105:7; 226:5 j Plaintiffs' 3:10,5; 223:5; j 247:11,14; j 249:9; 323:1; 326:8; 334:7; | 335:5 plan 12:5; 49:20; | 13B:9; 163:7,8, | 21; 172:2; j 175:5,9,10; j 177:18; 198:2,6, | 10; 210:2; | 223:10,18; | 228:9,20; 235:5; j 236:19; 240:19; j 327:7; 334:11, | 19; 336:9; 337:9; 343:8,10; j 391:11 | planned 229:13, | 15,22; 230:3; 335:3,12 | planning 202:9; | 228:13; 236:14; | 240:7,10; j 256:18; 260:2 | plans 87:12; j 149:1; 189:11; 198:3; 281:18; | 282:20; 233:13 | plant 24:8; | 48:22; 50:3; | 57:19.; 73:4,17; | 74:4; 75:3; j 76:23; 77:3,8; j 78:6,20,22; [ 80:6,8,14; | 81:20; 82=18; | 92:21; 93:2; | 96:1; 98:4,3; | 117:9; 144:4; | 145:16; 153=20, | 21; 154:17; | 156:4; 157:1,4; | 159:3,4; 160:8; | 161:14; 174=23; | 175:14; 176:4,5, | 18,21; 182:6; | 246:14; 247:20; | 251:18,23; | 259=1; 274:15; | 278:4,6; 279:21, ] 22; 280:13,V, . 3 283 : 4 ; 2 90 : 5 ,- ' | 317:5,11; 323=4, | 8; 326:11,18; | 327:20; 328:6,3; j 329:2,10,18,23; J 333:21; 346:3; j 348:3,16; 349:7; | 350:20; 353:10; | 354=22; 357:21; | 359:2,4; 360:1, | IB; 361:4; | 362:21; 363:12; | 365:6,9,10,15; | 367:19; 368:12; | 369:2,6; 370:2, | 6; 371:4,6,15; | 372:10,23; | 373:13; 374:15, | 18; 377:2; 1 378:7,20; | 386:20,21; 1 392:3; 393:2 | plant's 392:19 plants 11:4; | S7:18 | plastic 101:13, | 20; 326:16 | plastics 101:4 j play 294:2 player 42:4 j players 38:19 ] please 58:19; j 159:10; 1B5:B; | 203:11; 250:17; J 336:16; 361:9 plus 76=1; 249:3 j 341:13 | plutonium 9:20 | point 12:13; 36=23; 49=9,19; j 53:12; 73:10; 82:6; 89:14,20; j 90:3; 115:19; ] 137:5; 185;15; ] 192:8,9; 201:1; | 206:14; 207;8; | 209:19; 223:3; | 231:6; 236:18; | 238:20; 244:15; | 245:15; 249:5; | 250=2; 271:9; | 282:5; 295:22; | 308=16; 328=5; | 332:5; 336:6; | 341:1; 350:18; | 379:3; 385:12; [ 387:12; 392=13 pointed 32:2; [ 333:7 \ pointing 337:13 \ points 184:6; [ 186:20,21; | 190:12 [ political 245:23 [ 257:2,11 l pollution 352:22 [ Polychlorinated | 265:15 | polyethylene l 319:1 | pool 104:17 ( pooling 2B:19 \ poor 114:1; j 339:10 | poorly 159=11 | porous 140:10 | portion 31:21; | 136:11; 160:17, j 20; 161:16,18, | 20; 169:14; j 239:5; 230:8; | 321:9; 336:22; | 337:3,10,12; 339:8; 343:21; j 344:7; 349:3; j 351:4 | portions 29:5; j 162:15; 164:2; | 232:3; 234:2; | 236:1,2; 243:3 | position 7:19; j 0:2,7; 12:16; 18:2; 66=10; j 68:9,11; 90:1,3 101:22; 102:14, | 15; 155:15; 221:1; 260:19; | 262:10,13,14; | 263:5; 273:22; j 329:4; 333:16; 374:16 | positions 262:4, Page 16 possession 108:1 1 287:6; 291:23; l private 205:1; possibility | 356:1; 384:15 l 206:23; 250:20; 103:5; 105:19; | preparing 161:7 251:8 1 241:19; 243:22; | 375=11 l proactive 260:21; i 245:18; 299:3 J presence 395:6 l 264:3; 390:20,22 1 possible 82:8; j present 31:16; l probably 46:13; 1 116=19,22; | 146:11; 221:5 l 69:16; 76:9; 1 117:4; 231:12; 372=15; 382:18 | presentation j 143:20; 268:2, i 79:18; 120:7; 1 l 127:13; 201:14; ! possibly 235:23; | 10; 270:1 l 238:6,17; 326:13 i 248:2 | presentations l problem 8:1; 1 post 333:5 | 143:1 l 18:13,22; 19:16; 1 postgraduate 6:9 | presented 163:3 l 33:7,8,16; 39:9, 1 potential 30:10/ | 213:17; 215:16 i 10,11; 43:12; 73=1,3,22; 74:7, [ 216:4,8; 217:1 l 54:17; 79:22; 8; 93:6,3; | 219:16; 225:17 l 80:2; 88:13; 94:19; 97=15; | 226:6,7; 227:12; | 163:21; 172:19; 111:11; 119:10; | 235:15,19; l 231:13,15; 167:3; 177:2; | 294:7,8 l 244:21; 392:19, 178:11; 191:19; | presenting 163:3 | 20,22 201:23; 205=10; | preserve 211:18 l problems 58:9; 212:2,16; 221:4; | president 67:3, I 283:9; 342:20 228:16; 231:9; | 13,19; 70:12; l procedure 183:15 ; 232:11,17; | 257:19; 261:23 I 369:6 234:22; 237:4; | presidents 70:18 procedures 38:11; 239:13; 242:12; | pressure 212:17 l 181:1,21 244:8; 247:6; j 213:1; 332=10 l proceed 138 : 13 252:20; 313=1; | presumes 231:14 l process 9:19; 331:13; 353:12, | presumption 237 ^ l 11:21; 26:9; 19; 355:15; j pretty 59:14; i 50:12; 66:3,12; 358:20; 359:21, 1 79:21; 81:10; l 72:13; 95=3; i 23; 364:15; 376:4; 379:15; 383:19; 385:4; 393:4 j 120:11; 127:20 j 197:13; 233:15 j 240:10; 254:23 j 379:12; 385:14 i 98:3; 102:10; 1 l 107:1; 111:3,10; i i l 112:11; 158:7; l l 159:20,21,22,23; i potentially | prevailing 170:18 j 177:5; 194:12; J 17:12,14; 29=20; | prevent 164:11; 30:15; 37:21; j 167:3; 169:15; l 197:4; 193:18; 1 I 208:21; 214:4,5; 1 47:21; 93:1; | 211:16 l 218:9; 223:3; I 171:1; 194:6; | preventing 293:21 | 228:13; 233:7; I 244:13 | previous 262:11 l 235:12,21; 1 pots 370:11 | previously 51:17; | 236:14; 265:22; 1 Potter 67:19,22, | 52:23; 56:7; l 276:2,13; 1 23; 68=18,20 [ 64:10; 65:12; I 285:13; 289=6; 1 pounds 346:10,11 | 115:10; 229:13 i 292:23; 293:13; I power 6:6,7; 7:1 | 15,22; 230:3,21; | 297:7; 304:14; 1 PR 250:22; 254:17; 388:2 | 257:21; 335:23 j Price 99:23; l 306:2,10; 311:2, I l 7; 312:10; I practical 44:12; | 100:1,12; 110=6; | 313:11; 337:6; 1 363:22 pray 366:16,19 | 111:17 j Price's 112:7 l 344:19; 345:1; l 348:4,5,6; 1 l predated 88:12,15 | primarily 6:9; i 349:12; 352:16; 1 predecessor 54:10; 72:14; 155:3; 271:18 | 9:16; 10:8; j 25=15; 33=13; j 42:23; 50:8; l 353:18; 355:16; ! i 357:9,12; 353:2, | i 4,6,10,12,14,15, ! predecessors j 74:10; 94:19; l 18,21; 359:12, 1 189:21 j 139:7; 206:23; l 17; 361:17; 1 predetermined j 210:21,23; l 362:20; 364:9, l 237:7; 335=19 | 215:21; 270:3,4; | 11,18; 366:15; predicate 154:13 j 271:9,22; 273:10 | 369:10,16,18; 1 1 predict 171:4; | primary 10:16,23; | 370:10,16,20; 1 221:15 | 11:2; 16:20; l 371:3; 372:16; | predisposed | 25:1; 39:16; l 373:17,20,23; 1 229:7; 256:21 | 44:3; 89:14; I 374:1,2; 376:10, 1 preface 45:2 | 90:8; 97:8; i 16; 380:5; 1 prefer 184:4 j 141:1; 171:6; I 381:23; 383:10, 1 preliminary j 174:13; 206:14 16 242:5; 325:8 | 209:19; 275:3, I processes 24:12 ; 1 premature 195:21; j 11; 276:7 l 31:22; 74:3; 197:16; 198:13; j principal 100:1 I 94:1; 270:18; 201:22; 224:11 j principals 209:17 | 355:8,11; 370:4, i preparation 325:9; 348:14; | principle 304:1 I I 3; 306:7; 309:8, | 7; 372:8,9,14, 22; 373:9,12; 1 i 375:1 j 18,20; 390:11 I 376=13; 376=3; preparations 260:3; 393:21 prepared 169:10, 22; 250:7; j prior 4:20; j 64:16,18; j 121:12; 200:15 j 212:5 i 381:6,9,16; ! I 382:12; 393:3,14 1 produce 380:16 i i produced 8:12; HARTOLDMON0031424 BRNCKPLD > TXT Page | 41:13; 377:0; | | 379:1; 330:10,19 | | producer 37:18 | | product 9:2; [ 165:16,19; 166:2,8; 194:19; 195:4; 247:5; 243:15; 277:16; | 23; 312:18; | 344:3; 345:6,8, | 22; 372:21 ] provided 215:10; Q [ quaint 54:22 [ rain 27:6 [ raise 105:17 | raising 254:2 j ran 20:10 | 255:B,12; 260:2; j 275:21; 276:16; j 231:7; 290:11; | 292:22; 293:1; | 379:15; 380:22 j | production 348:2; j 1 370:10; 373:8; | | 377:9; 381:15,21 j | productive 263:15 | 273:2,8; 237:10; 299:4,5,7; 320:6; 334:1,20; 385:10,21; 3 B 6 : 2,2 0 ; 388:9; | | | j j 266:10; 285:17; 233:20; 291:19; 292:1; 334:19; 367:16; 370:13; 371:12; 382:7 [ qualified 123:20; | 316:22 | qualify 7:2 | quality 9:17 | quantify 85:17 | Randall 216:9,10 [ range 204 ; 12; j 296:18,21; 297:1 j 346:13; 347:4; 350:15; 351:6; 385:11 ranging 327:11 | reason 23:2; rapidly 135:3 | 42:5; 59:21; j products 8:10,12, | 393:15,19 ] provides 141:6; | quantities 360:6; rate 93:19; | 60:1; 168:5; I 15; 380:4,21; j 381:8,17,21 ] professional | property 24:10; | 25:4; 36:21; j 70:19; 122:7; | 144:1 j providing 27S:3; I 276:7 361:2; 368:14 quantity 91:18; 98:1; 120:19; 138:13 rather 38:2; 59:22; 183:6; l 171:6; 193:12; j 276:6; 307:10; | 337:1,4; 344:14, | 269:19,20 J program 6:6; | 158:22; 164:19, | 23; 165:3,6; | proximity 36:7 j PRP 56:19,21 121:5,10; 152:15 1 quarter 22:17 | 254:9; 284:21; 339:13; 356:2 | 15; 363:9; | 387:7; 393:23 | 37:15,20,22,23; | 176:5; 185:4,11, | PRPs 38:23 quarterly 36:15 | Ray 206:19 ( reasonable 79:9 | 33:6,10,21; [ 89:11; 174:4; \ 175:6,11,20; [ 18; 186:7,8,11; | prudent 30:15 j 187:6,9; 138:16, | public 4:5; | 13; 189:1,3,7, | 142:17,19,21; Queeny 48:19,21; [ RCRA 13:15; 17:1; | reasons 184:16; [ 49:1,8; 50:3; j 57:19; 79:16,22; 48:20; 49:21; 50:6,11,14; 211 :2 0; 239 : 19; 256 ill,14; j 204:1; 208:17, | 10,12,13,22; | 143:9; 145:4; | 80:6; 176:4,5, 72:22; 79:17; 341 : 15 | 21; 211:3; | 190:1,2,3,4,10; | 216:23; 233:7; | 18,21 88:1; 119:1; recall 10:12 | 212:4,12; | 191:3,5,8; | 241:6; 254:17; | question 15:2,8; 232 :21; 274:14; j 192:19,23; j 261:10; 292:9; I 50:14,19; 62:1; 305 :11; 355:14 | 193:1,5,15,17; j 305:23; 306:2,3; | 77:17; 96:5; programs 8 : 9 j 194:3,5,8,9,20; j 330:18; 395:23 j 106:10; 132:9, progress 158 : 4 j 205:1,2,4,14,16; I published 143:3 j 12; 133:11; 158:18; 159:16, 20; 160:1,6; 232:21; 233:4; 273:4,10,13,15, 16; 280:19; 17 : 22; 18:23; 19: 17,19; 21:13 22 : 7; 25:13 28 : 13; 31:18; 34 : 14; 3S:6 ; proj ect 17 : 9; | 210:15,19; | pull 180:17 | 145:1; 151:1; 281:21; 282:7, 39: 6; 40:3, 9, 13 19: 23; 20:2,14, | 211:12,15,17; j pulled 284:20 j 159:9; 162:10; 16; 283:3,3,21; 41 : 4,6,12,15.22 16; 21 : 10; 22:7 | 212:15; 214:14; pump 78:2; 84:14; | 172:20; 102:9, 234:5,15; 355:3, 42 : 16,18,20 ; 12 ; 28 : 1; 37:1; | 215:17; 227:8, 86 :11 | 12; 103:7; 6 48 : 11; 51:1 ; 38 : 2,3; 40:22; | 11,14; 246:13; purchased 77:7; | 135:8; 1S B:5; [ re-sample 300:9 59: 9,10; 74 : 12 ; 41 : 23 ; 43:5; | 249:2,3; 250:20; 139:7; 249:3; [ 200:12; 230,-1; | reach 22.-2 109 :8,19,22 ; 45 : 5,9; 47:11; j 251:8; 252:2,15, [ 256:4 48 : 5; 5 0:16,21; | 17,21j 253:16, pure 65:5 52 : 14; 53:8,19; | 22; 254:2,5,12; 54: 3,19 ; 71:23; j 255:13; 283:5; purge 36:4,8 purpose 21:8; 90 : 7; 99:6,19; | 294:18; 295:1,8, 141:1; 155:1; | 231:1; 237:13, | 19; 238:1; | 250:13; 257:6; j 275:2; 283:20; j 296:10,16; j reached 22:6; j 159:13; 165:11; j 177:4,10; 207:8; | 209:1 | reaches 78:6; 115 :17; 124 : 15 ; 167 : 10,2 2 ; 169 : 2 0; 182 ; IS ; 214 :22; 230 : 2 ; 231 :10; 234 : 13 ; 100 : 2 ; 110:6; | 9; 296:9; 116 = 1,3 ; 120:21 j 297:19,23; 124 : 19 ; 125:9; 1 298:3,5,17,23; 191:16; 236:6; 260:10,13; 290:2; 349:17 | 299:15; 330:16, | 92:22; 235:7 j 19; 339:3; j reaching 204:20; j 341:22; 356:18; j 212:10 253 :21; 259 : 4,8 10, 17,23; 260:9 11; 261:12; 138 : 14 148:11, | 299:14,18; purposes 19:10; | 366:18; 377:23; | reactor 6:12 263 :1; 273: 6; is. 22 ; 156:11, | 300:6,17; 76:17; 124:21; [ 338:22; 389:13 | read 59:6; 169:9; 275 =13,17; 12; 161 2; [ 311:13,15,16; 191:18; 206:9; [ questioning | 242:20; 249;10, 301 :14; 302 ; 4 , 176 : 8 ; 189:19; ! 315:19,20; l 210:13,21; | 113:10 | 12,14,16,IB,19; 11; 303:3; 196 : 23 ; 201:4; | 316:11; 317:15, | 240:7; 279:11; | questions 4:16, \ 250:16; 251:6; 304 :8; 319: 18; 202 :U; 203:2; 205 : 7 ; 207:8,15 208 : 22 ; 210:7; 219 : 22 220 : 6, 11; 222 : 5 ; 255 : 15 , 20; 268 ; 22 ; 279:12; 200 : 7 ; 283:15; 314 : 15 ; 317;13, 320 : 5 , 14 ; | 18; 319:10; j 320:2,3,15,17, | 20; 321:8,19; j 322:8; 324:6; j 326:17; 386:9, | 11; 390:2 | prophecy 335:14 | proposal 6:17; 230:17 . , proposals 209:4 | 319:4 | pursuant 1:19 | put 23:17,18; | 31:2; 34:12,13; | 41:14; 48:14; j 79:2,6; 88:6,IB; j 103:10; 120:17; j 121:14; 124:3; | 140:1,11; 141:7, | 8; 153:9; | 17; 14:22; 37:7; j 113:15; 177:23; | 249:20; 256:6; | 291:13; 349:4; | 378:2 j quick 384:4 j Quintard 104:1; ] 105:9,21; I 107:14,17; I 118:3,7,12,14; j 266:4; 346:5; j 347:13 | readily 174:10; | 344:10; 364:4 | reading 4:9; | 169:21; 200:14; j 251:13; 252:5; | 347:22; 379:0 j reads 373:11 j real 20 :17; 42:1; 323 :15; 33S : 8 ; 347 :21,22; 348 : 8 ; 372: 18 receive 123: 20; 263 : 7; 3 08: 19 received 6:16; 7:6 ; 14:2; 138 : 16; 175 : B, 19; 336 ; IS; 340 :12,18; 394 : to ro too 328 : 16 ; 348:21; 353 : 13 propose 176:2-2; 201:6; 2 1 0:1; | 160:19; 162:6; | 168:3,14; [ 141:15; 277:17, | 22 | 75:15; 134:17; | 225:10 recently 258 : 17 recognize 381:2 I projected 120:9 | projects 12:17; | 16:16,22; 38:22; | 42:21; 53:16; [ 54:5,12; 55:13; I 61:1; 69:17; 343:4 proposed 230:22; 231:2,4; 240:5; 340:15; 342:23; 343:8 proposing 239:23 | 170:17; 173:12; j 185:4; 204:1; j 207:15; 216:1; j 221:19; 228:19; j 231:16; 247:23; | 248:19; 289:11; j quit 150:16 j quite 8:20; | 60:19; 89:12; j 106:17; 126:19; j 211:21; 272:13; j 292:11; 293:9; | realize 205:16 j realized 62:3 | really 6:10; 8:19; 2 0:13; 28: 15; 29:7; 38 : 21; 44:3; recognized 240:16 recollection 169:8; 324:4 recommend 213:7; 340:3,5,6; 342:2,8 | 71:11,13; 142:1, protect 192:17; | 294:10,12; | 312:19; 317:15; 59: 10; 63 :14 ; recommendation | 5; 161:9; 228:9; 193:5 [ 302:3; 307:22; 1 344:3; 345:23; 65: 1; 71:9; 83:5 I 270:8 Protection 138:6, S I promise 217:10,12 j 10 j 317:4,10; 320:18,22; | 348:9 | quote 200:11; 93 : 12 ; 96:4; 125 : 7 ; 140:19, recommendations 232:7; 289:13, : promised 217:15, Protective 225:13 | 321:10,11,12,14; | 203:13; 361:15, 152 :1; 17; 290:3; ! 20,21 protocol 83:16 | 322:14,19; S 23; 391:1 172 : 19; 173 : 17; 291:16,17 I promote 226.12 prototype 6:15 | 330:21; 335:8; ) quoted 355:22; 185 : 16; 188 : 4 ; recommended | proper 319:3 1 proven 242 : 14 j 351:9,14; | 356:6,23; 361:7, 191 : 10, 14 ; 224:3,13,15,17, l properly 184:9; | provide 114:15; j 352:17; 358:17; 19 196 : 12 ; 198 : 20; 19; 232:9; \ 349:14 | 141:5; 173:10; | 375:16; 391:17 201 : 12 ; 204: 15; 233:2; 234:5; j properties 36:2, j 228:18; 236:21; | putting 152:10; R 207 : 14 210: 18 ; 292:20; 340:8; I 6,16,17; 77:4,7; j 275:11; 2B4 ; 16; 193:18; 208:21; 215 : 13 220: 22, 342 : 5 ! 104:5; 121:14, | 290:17; 293:1; | 16,21; 122:1,15, j 305:21; 306:8; j 17; 124:7,9,23; j 307:7,12,13,14, 229:4; 231:18; 236:3; 254:10; 297:17 radiation 11:12 radioactive 10:4; 11:15,19 23; 22 6 : 9; 227 : 19; 234: 4 ; 238 -8; 240 : 5 ; record 58:17; 249:11; 305:19, 20; 306:1; HARTOLDMON0031425 BRNCHF1iD.TXT | 337:13; 348:12; : regulatory | 260:20; 265:18; | 375:17; 379:12 | records 350:7; j 119:18; 169:11; | 267:2; 268:11, j 180:16,2D; J 23; 283:11; [ 357:6,9; 362:19; j 274:8; 287:7; f 284:2; 290:23; j 363:1; 367:23; | 332:20; 336:18; j 310:6; 314:14; \ 372:7; 374:19 \ recover 24:17; | 337:7; 367:17; j 370:18 j 345:20; 352:15; j 383:23; 384:12; | 307:5 | reimburse 308:9 | 388:2; 389:19,21 j recoverable | relate 7:1 | remedies 237:3; | 308:13; 309:14 | related 16:22; j 241:8 | recovered 44:16 | recovery 3 9:4; [ 18:16; 63:15; j 72:1; 73:9; | remedy 21:13; j 240:12; 296:13; | 41:2; 44:14,15; | 144:17; 267:1; | 332:18 | 158:17; 160:10; j 268:11; 270:7; | 308:19 j 287:8; 372:12 | remember 25:9; j 32:17; 42:15; | recycle 24:15 [ recycled 19:11; | relates 34:19; | 114:8; 317:22 | 124:6; 206:20; j 258:23; 268:7; | 25:18; 357:13; | relating 4:13 ] 310:18 | 369:15 | relation 19:2; | removal 224:19; | recycling 25:21; j 26:12; 28:11; | 41:5; 159:8 | \ relations 254:17; | 234:17; 235:3; 265:17; 296:7,8, | 34:2; 42:11 ! 261:10 f 12; 298:12; | reduced 395:6 | reducing 244:14; j relative 127:22 | | relatively 38:18; j 300:11,16; 323:6,11 - ! 265:18 | 40:4; 233:18 | remove 13:3; | reduction 245:10 | refer 249:21; [ 379:19 | reference 358:8 | released 373:18; [ 376:15 [ releases 119:10; j 358:12,20 | 23:5,7; 24:2; j 121:21; 154:10; j 198:7; 238:17; | 241:16,17; | referencing | releasing 205:3/ | 243:19; 246:22; | 234:14 | 361:3 j 253:6; 296:12, l referred 358:10 | relevant 363:4 | 23; 297:6,13; ] referring 182:19; | relocation 249:3 | 313:6; 349:18 | 320:17; 366:19, t relying 374:5 | removed 49:16/ | 23; 367:1,5,6 | refers 2 51 : 2 0; | 365:14 ) remain 210:23 | 118:12,13; | remainder 136:19 j 121:8,12,19; | remained 137:2 j 135:23; 136:17; ! reflect 202:8,10 | regard 198:19; | remains 71:10; j 224:11; 297:9 | 146:21,22; j 147:1,7; 149:10, j 229:14; 260:19 | regarding 45:5; | remedial 12.-17, | | 23; 16:16; 20:3; j 11,14,15,17,22; 158:20; 238:19; | 177:2; 199:1; | 21:3; 29:21; | 239:2,4,6,9; | 201:23; 231:22; | 30:1; 71:11,13; | 317;14 | 268:5; 275:23; | 72:1; 221:5; | removing 152:9, | 277:13,16; j 228:9,22; 237:8; j 14,15; 158:2; | 289.-9; 302:5; | 261:2; 264:4,22; | 236:2; 237:14; | 303:16; 351:18; | 270:8,18; | 241:2; 297:14, | 371:13; 372:21; | 304:13; 305:2,3; | 15; 323:14 l 375:10; 378:2; | 378:16; 387:5 \ Renaldi 52:1,10; | 384:17 | regardless \ remediate 29:16; j 44:2,4; 79:23; | 56:4 | rent 307:6 | 149:23; 332:18 | 150:17; 166:19; J renting 308:4,5 | regenerated | 358:17 j Region 175:4; 1 226:8; 227:3; | 229:20; 248:4, j 14; 252:17;^ j 386:5; 339:15 ` j remediated 9:11; | repeat 58:18; j 185:7 | rephrase 15:4,9; j 159:9 | 270:21; 271:8 i 46:4; 166:23; | replaced 49:16; J regional 1:22; | 167:1; 176:3,18; | 90:5 | 262:16 | 390:15 | replacing 297:18 j regular 28:14; | remediating 45:1; | reply 356:2; \ 36:14; 37:7; t 151:5; 153:16; 357 : 4 i--i or- j 227:15 | 154:20; 221:10 report | regularly 83:22; | remediation 71: 2,4 , 15; i 292:17 | 12:22; 13:8; 80: 22; 81 :4 ; | regulate 234:21 | 33:12; 69:8,12, 156 : 19 f 23; | regulated 123:17; | 18; 72:3; 162 : 21 ; 182 : 15, | 125:1 | 130:18; 131:8; 20; 202:7,12,14 | regulates 123:9, I 144:9,12,18; 213 : 18 ; 224 : 3 ; I io | 154:2,9; 155:21, | regulating 153:1 | 23; 156:6; | regulations [ 157:3,12,23; 234 : 14 ; 236 : 22 ; 263 : 7 ; 276 : 18; 277 : 1, 11, 18 ,21, | 199:2; 248:16; | 159:14; 176:19, 22 , 23; 278 : 2,4, | 315:2,16; 391:9; | 20; 187:5,8; 6,1 4 289:16; ! 392:16 | 206:6; 246:12, 291 : 19 ,23; | regulatories | 17; 247:8,19; 292 = 3 ; 321: 2 ; [ 184:4 | 248:21; 250:19, 346 : 5 ; 347 : 17, ^ regulators | 338:19; 339:5 j 22; 251:8,22; j 255:5,14; 21, 2 3; 367: 16 reported 69:5; Page 18 71:1 J| 384:19; 385:13, j 20; 292:2,7; reporter 15:21; 21; 386:2,19; J 293:13; 294:1; 362:5,8,14; 390=2; 393:15,19 | 363:22,23; 368:18 Reporter's 3:4 residential# 166:1 J 364:3; 365:22; I 367:11,13; reporting 1:22; residents 36:10; | 378:11 157:13; 276:12 37:5; 249:4 [ reviewed 138:12; reports 70:4; residual 349:19 t 285:20; 287:1, 71:5,16; 120:14; residue 380:3,20; | 13; 367:9; 162:22; 169:10, 381:7 | 382:21 21; 188:20; resolved 60:21,23 | reviewing 291:9 197:3; 267:10; Resource 156:16; | reviews 292:4 271:6; 279:8; 160:10; 216:5 | RFI 182:15 282:21; 285:3,4; 2B7:6; 288:10, 11,12,14; 209:9; resources 207:22; | rights 205:4, 208:13; 214:16; j 308:23; 309:3 217:17; 307:2; j ring 310:2 291:8,12; 347:14 374:20 | risk 313=4,5,7,9, representative respect 128:23; j 12; 314:21 86:6; 95:14,15; 360:10 | risks 315:6 100:17; 268:14 respond 1S6:13; | river 151:11; representing 338:12 | 242:20; 243:14 105:7 responded 343:6, | R05 213:13; request 266:19; 7; 349:1 [ 285:13; 288:14; 295:7; 334:20, responding [ 289:6; 354:10; 21; 335:15; 337:21; 375:9 j 355:14 336:10,21; response 195:11; | road 32:9,14; 340:11; 343:6; 363:18; 372:12, 266:18; 334:20; | 33:7,0,10,13,16, 335:15; 336:10; j 35:1,15; 321:17; 21; 373:2,3,4; 374:11; 375:10; 376:5,22; 377:4, 14,15,22; 379:18; 380:2; 348:20; 367:22; 357:4; 368:2; 371:13; 373:4, 10; 374:11,21; 375:2,12 | 322:5 j Roberson 220:7,8, j 257:22; 258:3 j Robert 216:20; j 373:14 381:11,12,20,22; Responses 265:21 j Roberts1 294:20 382:7,22; 391:10 responsibilities | role 11:2; 16:20; requested 377:14 requesting 243:9; 338 :6,13 66:7; 119:9; 262:20; 387:6; 392:4 | 66:7,19; 67:4; j 69:11; 71:7; j 151:22; 155:23; requests 337:22; responsibility | 156:1; 196:22; 371:13; 372:19 19:20; 39:1; J 207:10; 227:2; require 54:6; 42:21; 43:6; | 263=4; 272:13; 199:2; 243:2 71:21,-72:5; | 375:11 required 86:20; 91:15,17; 146:23; 197:2,4, 119:2,20,22; j roles 63:16 148:10; 150:23; j roll-off 124:4 153:16; 156:5,8; j rolled 124 :4 6; 198:12,14; 161:8; 163:12; j Ronald 371:21 201:2,6; 231:23; 222:7; 329:15; | room 307:20 233:2; 261:1; 290:10; 295:6; 330:6; 331:1; | rough 215:13; 390:1,3,9,10,14; j 228:19 296:9,13; 391:3,7,20; | roughly 28:16; 298:13; 299=13; 392:7,14 ] 46:7; 79:18; 300=16; 372:6, 11; 377:1,10; responsible 8:6; | 17:13,15; 18:21; | 80:6; 122:6; 233:21; 319:20 378:IS 37:21; 47:21; | row 203:3 requirement 56:10; 71:12; [ rude 7:23 298:15 110:20; 153:8; j Rule 315:13,21 requirements 383:20 333:6; 375:4,8; 1 rules 4:12 ; 376:9; 386:4 j 315:18 requires 256:23 rest 394:1 [ run 11:17,20; requiring 243:10 restore 20:18 | 23:10; 58:11; research 371:5, result 103:8; | 64:7; 91:16; 12; 374:5 researching 105:10; 106:1; 120:3; 127:9; | 143:14 j running 31:13; 212 :12 176:15 S 164:10 reservation 31:7; [ resulted 45:13; ; Russ 273:2,8 133:15; 164:15; 107:12 ] RUSSO 1:14; 4:5; 357:17 results 126:17; I 395:22.5 resident 194:5 178:23; 181:22; | Rustic 257:20; residential 36:2, 263:8; 288:16, | 253:3; 259:1; | 6; 165:6,15,19; 18,19; 335:18 | 261:3,9; 263 : 9 j 166:8,13; 166:7, retention 249.-1 [ 8,11; 193:15; retired 55:23; j S 194:4,18; 195:3; 247:5; 274:13; 67:23; 69:10 reused 357:14 j | S-o-u-t-h-i-n*g-- j 276:22; 277:16; revenue 62:2,4; | t-o-n 40:16 i 278:1; 294:23; 207:3 | SABRINA 1:4.5 | 311:18; 315:19/ review 287:5; \ safe 168:23; j 376:1; 333:23; 290:6; 291:12, ! 194=16 j HARTOLDMON0031426 BRNCHFtiD.TXT safety 156:3 | 103:17; 108:15; | 85:1; 96:8,10, SAITH 394:3 [ 112:18; 118:1 l 11; 112:17; sake 80:5 | sandy 95:16; | 127:7,14; 152:9, salaries 308:10 same 4:11; 33:22; 35:2,3; 52:18; | j j 98:18; 100:6,23; 112:14; 113:2; 115:1 | | | 16; 158:3,9; 178:21; 183:3; 234:3,22; 67 ;2; 71:20; 79:19; 30:7; 1 Sauget 240:14; j 245:21,22 ) 244:10,13; j 248:22; 331:20; 88:16; 90:19; [ save 246:1 | 360:20 102:3; 117:1; | a aw 103:23; | see 3:14; 29:6; 119:13; 121=5; 145:2; 163:19; j 104:2; 114:16, | 23; 144:13; | 40:12; 71:6,9; j 81:13; 84:7; 188:2; 199:11, | 373:20 | 87:3,10; 97:23; 15; 246:11; saying 101:18,23; l 102:7,8,20; 264:11; 288:2; 319:7; 363=2; 367:3; 369:21; j 105:5,12,20,23; f 104:5,8,16,19; j 112:21; 160:2; S 105:1; 117:18; j 161:2; 196:3; j 136:6; 171:15; 375:14 | 202:13; 322:7; | 179:12; 222=23; sample 36:13; 1 332:12; 347:7; 234:3; 243:14; 83:21; 34:13; | 355:22; 361:20; | 293:17; 312:15; 05:6,19; 86:3,6, j 376:7 j 323:12; 325:22; 14; 93:22; j says 110:21; | 332:2,3; 338=4; 94:12; 90:21; 1 250:18; 251:10; | 348:10; 373:5, 99:22; 110:10, 12,13,19; 126:17; 127:7; | 255:7; 267:23; | 14; 377:13; - | 315:21; 334:11; j 380:13; 382:10; j 355:21; 357:5,6; | 387:13 133 : 19,23; | 361:8,12; 363:2; seeing 103:9,11; 134:2,12; l 373:5,6,13,17; l 104:11; 241:23; 135:13; 186:19, j 374:3; 375=22; \ 340:19 22; 189:2; j 376:3; 389:7 | seem 254:23; 190:12; 192:5, | school 5:14,17; | 305:10 11; 295:4,16,21; | 6:7,15,21; j seemed 10:10; 296:18; 297:2,23 | 62:10; 143:22; | 211:2 sampled 36:15; 122:16; 188:18; 300:5 saa^ler 170.14,- | 144:15; 145:3,6 | schools.144:1; j 145:11 | science 5.-19/ | seen 93:14; j 103:22; 162=2; j 176:7; 225:14; j 233:11; 245=8; 171:17 1 6:23; 74:17; | 289:16; 347:20; samplers 170:4; 1 111:4,9; 312:9 | 348:19; 366:6, 174:19; 175:13 | scientific \ 12; 368:21,22 samples 83:11,23; | 93:12; 94:3,8, j 100:11; 110:4,8, | selected 161:20; 23; 111:13,15 j 240:23; 290:19, 16,23; 95:1; | scooped 135:21 I 21 96:12,14; 98:16; | SCOpe 129:13; 110:14; 112:8, j 384:14; 385:4; | selection 276:1 j self-fulfilling 22,23; 129:17, 13; 134:15; j 387:9 j Scott 310:16 | 335:14 j sell 254:12 169:23; 179:4,8, j screening 313:10 J Selzer 206:13 11,12; 180:3; | seal 395:19 semi-volatile 134:5; 188:13; second 320:4,13 l 25:14; 97:20; 197:11; 295:13; 298 : 2 sampling 49:23; [ section 233:22; j 320:7; 335:10; j 348:15 | 174:9; 344:12 | semiannual 63:21 | Semiannually 86:16; 95:11; 99:20; 122:14; 170:3; 172:10; 176:13; 191:5; 274:14; 276:22; 295:10,14; j sediment 34:20; | 90:16,17 j 85:9; 94:11,14, | seminars 13:11,13 j 16,23; 95 : 17-, 23 ; | send 9:21; 78:8; | 103:15; 110:10, j 137:15,20; j 12; 111:6; | 136:22; 192:2; j 116:20; 127:11, j 298:1; 317:1 296:16; 299:1, j 20; 128:20; sending 323:1 22; 300:12; | 130:12; 132:2; sensitivity 304:20,21; | 134:11; 178:3; | 179:16 305:4,11; J 179:2,21; [ sent 19:9,12; 309:12; 323:10; j 197:10; 198:7; | 26:5; 34:4; 327:7,9; 333:12; ! 199:17,19; | 44:17; 69:1; 337:3; 384:19 San 55:14,16; 2 6B : 1 ! 221:19; 224:20; | 233:12,14; | 234:17; 236:2; | 87:4; 121:6,7,9; j 123:2; 338:5; j 342:7; 350:3 sand 94:2,4,15, 18; 100:5; | 237:13; 238:18; j 241:18; 242:17; | separate 267:5; j 307:21 102:16; 103:6,9, | 243:20; 249:2; | September 60:11; 11; 104:6,20; j 265:14,18 | 163:18 105:8; 111:3; sedimentary \ series 44:14/ 113:3; 114:8,10; | 100:20 j 78:7; 183:21; 117:15 [ sedimentation | 303:23 sandbar 104:16 S 102:10; 112:13, | serine 379:17; sands 93:15,17; ! 15 | 380:11,14 99:11; 100:9; | sediments 34:22; | serve 76:16 Page 19 served 7:15 serves 141:3 Service 1:22,- 216:6 services 70:11, j sides 27:1,4 Sigma 7:10 | sign-off 293:16 | signature 4:9,| 106:11 | 151:4,8,14; [ 153:15; 154:1, | j | 20; 157:4; j | 160:3; 174:23; j j 175:15; 183:12, j 13,15; 218:6 session 142:19; 143:9 set 1:19; 23:13; 77:21; 141:4; 179:22; 180:6, | signed 186:18; j 274:11; 277:7; j 279:21; 280:3; | 282:3; 294:23; j 303:21; 389:21; j 390:4 | 16; 202:3; | j 239:6,3; 246:14; | | 247:20; 253=10, [ j 19; 265:20; | | 267:12; 272=15; j j 278:4,6; 279:21, | 10,11; 197:17; | significant 201:20; 242:2; j 79:22; 80:1; 267:5; 310:1,11; j 98=1; 337:22 | 22; 290:5; j 305:20; 317:5, j 11; 327:21; | | 313:17; 384:6; 395:18 sets 144:20 setting 175:13 ( signing 390;11 j signs 340:22 j silt 111:8 similar 33:8,22; | 349:7; 354=15; | 357:21; 360:2, | 18; 362:21; | 365:9; 368:12; | j j j settle 12:2 | 34:23; 43:13; | 369:2; 370:2,6; j settled 39:15; [ 51:3,6; 53:9,14; [ 371:4,7,15; 1 45:12,21; 225:21 | 58:9; 80:17; j 372:10,13,23; | settlement 22:3; | 114:23; 117:16; ! 377:2; 373:20; | 45:13 | 141:14; 190:3; | 380:11; 336:21; | seven 21:11,18; 34:8,20; 249:5 | 233:15; 235:16 j simple 133:11; | 390:17 [ j sites 17:4,12,14, | seventy 204,-11; 206:3 seventy-five 120:13 | 339:2; 344:9 | 18; 29:11; 32:8, | j simplest 257:5 11; 33:4; 36:3; | simplistic 39=14 j 38:13,14,17,19; | j aimply 105:14; j 41:5; 42:5,7,9, | several 33:13; | 197:16; 329:8; ] 16; 48:17; J 72:19; 95:11; | 384:9 | 50:23; 51:12,15, | 125:5; 143:1; | since 12:13; [ 17; 52:5,21; | 146:16; 155:4; t 18:1,2; 55=23; | 56:6,15,19,20; t 203:8; 211:20; \ 69:10; 115:23; \ 57:1,9,13; 59:7; ] 227:13; 286=15; | 116:2; 165=17; | 60:13; 61:4,3,9, 292:13; 327:11 sewer 330:2,5; ] 202:3; 204:23; | 225:13; 231:15; | 21/62:4,6; | 64:12; 69:14; | j 349:7; 359:4,10, | 264:7; 267:10; | 117:16; 150=18, | 22; 390:23 shall 4:15 | 350:10; 352=14; j 354:15; 362:10; 21; 159=15; | 264:6 1 ] Shallow 23:15 | 366:6 shape 10:2; 270:5 j sir 203:11 share 21:10,- j sit 26:16; 75:5; | sitting 105:6; | 314:14; 326:17 j situation 25:20; | j 34:8; 37:15; | 95:6,21; 124=6; | 63:20; 141:16; \ 40:6,19; 288:17 | 197:8,23; 341:23 | 248:1; 204:20 | sharing 204:21 [ site 12:9,10; | Six 6:a,16; 0:18; j sheets 101:12,19 | 14:17; 18:5,13, | 12:15; 45:8; | shooting 310:23 short 265:2; 271:16; 315:8; j 15,16; 19:2,10, | 128:17; 145:7; | j 15; 20:11; 22:5, [ 175:14; 286:18; [ j 12; 24:8,20; j 334:23; 335=4 1 316:2; 323=8; 356:17 | 25:2; 26=2,4,5; | sixteen 194:6; j 27:10,19; 29:10, j 311:17 1 j shortly 259=5 1 16,17; 30:16,19, | sixty 46:6; shouldn't 84:10; j 23; 32:5; 34:9, | 204:10; 205:8, J 214:1; 327:19; 344:16; 379:5; | 13,15,19; 38:11; | 12; 206=2; [ j 39:4,11,20,21; j 215=7,8; 326:14 j 380 :13 show 206:17,18; | 40:7,12,IB; | sixty-five 75=9 | 41:2,20; 43:6,9; j size 22:12,13; | 247:14; 265:7; | 44:2,5,7,9,16, | 79:11; 80:7,15; | 334:3; 345:12, 14, 15 showed 143:7; 166:10; 177:14 shown 300:14 [ 21; 45:1,5; | 46:2,5,8,11; j 47.-12,13,16; | 40:18,19; 50:6; j 56:1; 68:23; | 129:13; 130:4, | 14; 190:3,7,10; | 207:1; 346:4,9; j 387:9 j skin 312:14 | j 1 [ 1 Shows 101:7; 1 71:22; 72:2,4,9, | slight 26 = 18 ,- | 334:23; 335:13 | 11; 73:4,12,13; 1 264:19,- 285:1 I side 137:14; 140:4; 162:7; 163:22; 167:2; 168=17; 170:21, [ 74:4,15,23; j 75:3; 76:23; j 77:4; 78:6,20, | 22; 79:11,13; | slightly 26 = 16, j 106:21 | slipped 62:4; j 150:20 | ! j 1 23; 173;13; | 80:6,3,14,15; | slipping 214:20 J 251:18,22; | 81:20; 82:19; | sludge 12:2,3,6; | 253:15; 261:10; 287:10; 318:8, 10,12; 320:6; 337:14; 338:2, | 38:13; 92:21; [ 93=2; 96:1; j 98:5,8; 117:9; | 121:3,9,12; [ 43:20,21 | j small 29:7; 38:2, | j 19; 40:20; j 41:17/49:5; 1 | 22; 343:15; | 124:9; 140:22; I 121:10; 351:4; | 346:3,17; 392:10 | 147:12; 14B:6; | 387:7 j HARTOLDMON0031427 BRNCHFLD. TXT | Smaller 54:5; 24: 22 ; 27:12; | 186:12 28: 14 ; 29:9; | smart 226:12 94: 20; 96:9; I smart-alecky 99: 21; 101:12 ; i 77:17 102 -7,8 ; 106:1; | Smith 51:11,12; 112 : 10; 118:13 ; | 52:10; 56:4; 128 :14; 149:3, | 61:7,11; 63:1; 22; 161 : 16; | 65:17,13; 66:16; 164 :2,9 ; 177:15 [ 71:4,5,3,15; 178 : 12 , 17; | 156:19,20; 186 : 1; 193:10; ( 157:5,20,21 295 = 5; 296:5; [ Smith's 71:6; 297 : 2 3 298:19; i 294:19 318 : 15; 329:19; ] snooker 337:20; j 330:10 331 : 11, 15,16; 339 : 7 ; 360:18; I snookered 337:18 376 : 1 | snow 32:5,10,15, sold 223 : 14 19 7 91 : 4,5,13; solid 81 : 10,21; 92 j 19,23; 93:3; 97 : 1; 103:7; 84: 17; 98:10; 2B0 : 18; 281:2,8 104 : 15; 105:1; 2B2 : 4,6 ; 284:14 106 : 16; 115:20; 351 : 19 126 : 3 ; 127:15; solids 33:15 128 :9,11,22; soluble 83:16; 129 : 9; 130:2,12; 84: 15; 85:3,12 ; 181 : 23 ; 132 : 11 ; 92: 2,12 195 : 15; 198 :7 ; Solatia 12:16,IB 199 : 13; 200:2, 21; 13 : 21; 16:7 17; 201 :3, 16 ; 17 : 13; 13:13,21 224 : 7 ; 227:IB, 19: 4; 2 1:9; 20 , 21,22; 228:2, 26: 11; 55:23; 10 , 21; 229:16, 56: S; 5 7:2,15; 2 0; 230 :3,10,13, 60: 8;- 6 1:8,18; 18 ; 231 :9,13,2 3 ; 62 : 3,14 ; 63:13; 232 : 5; 233i10, 64: 2,7, 16; 12 ; 234 :12,16, 65 : 10; 67:14,16 19; 235 :5,18,22; 20, 21; 68:4,14; 236 : 11; 238:16; 71 : 14; 97 ; 2 ; 24Q : 1,12; 241:1, 107 : 20 ; 132:17; 17 ; 243 : 21 ; 142 : 6 ; 143:23; 244 : 12 ; 256:19, 144 :2,3 ,20; 22 ; 276 : 19,21 ; 148 : 21; 153:9, 277 : 1; 353:10; 10, 15,22; 360 : 20 ; 391 : 5 163 :11; 187:3 ; social 155:6 198 : 2,3 , 4 ; Society 7 :10 224 : 19; 250:9; softball 128:18; 263 : 21; 264:21; 183 : 13 ; 186:12 268 : 3 ; 27B:6; soil 11 : 10; 30:8, 287 : 17, 21,23; | 16,19,22; 94:8; | 292 9; 302:13; | 96:14; 97:17; | 306 : IB; 310:5; | 93:16; 105:20; | 331 : 6 ; 334:13; | 108:9,14; 110:9, | 338 : 16; 347^12; | 13,14,19; 111:2, | 376 : 3; 391:15, j 6,10; 112:2,8, | 18; 391 : 2 ' I 21; 115:3; j Solutia' 3 16:20; | 113:12; 121:22; j 17: 8; 21:10; | 123:1; 124:8,22; | 47: 14; 51:18; | 126:1,5; 135:23; | 95: 22; 102:15; | 136:7; 139:1; | 260 : 19; 374:12; | 140:5; 143:4; [ 3ao : 5 j 161:23; 183:22, j solution 329:21 23; 183:12; ! Solvent 39:4; ! 190:23; 192:1; | 41:2; 265:22 ! 265:17; 266:1; | somebody 58: 8,9 | 285:17; 280:21, j 59: 7, 17 ; 79 : 6 ; | 22; 293:11; j 90: 6; 93=23 ; | 295:21; 296:6, | j 12,17,23; 297:6, j j 13,14,18,19; j 97: 12 ; 102 : 11, 18 ; 105 :1G; 140 : 20 ; 151 : 2 ; | 316:19; 317:10, | 176 : 8; ISO : 14; j 14; 319:15,20, | IBS : 9; 193 : 11; ! 21; 320:4,11; ! 194 : 22 ; 197 : 2 1 1 323:14; 327:17; ! 207 : 18 ; 251 :4 ; : 328:18; 329:2, . 25B : 15 ; 266 : 7 ; : 16; 330:7; 331:7 j 270 : 19 ; 271 : 3 ; i soils 11:9; i 294 : 17; 329 : 4 ; | 347:11; 391:18 | somebody's 165:3; I 185:3,18 | somehow 39:17; | 42:12; 323:21 | someone 64:4; | 77:9; 112:6 j someplace 30:20 | something 23:15; j 41:13; 45:3; | 47:23; 57:10; J 70:10,19; 74:13; | 78:21; Si: 6; | 82:3; 84:8; | 85:22; 86:7; | 91:9; 97:22; | 104:15; 105:15; [ 112:5; 123:8; t 130:19,20; | 144:13,16; j 150:19; 178:1; j 1B 8:6; 202:16; | 214:3; 228:3; | 229:7; 231:17, | 23; 235:15; [ 239:22; 240:3, | 17; 243:8,13; j 262:20; 265:8; j 270:11; 278:16; | 235:22; 299:22; | 302:3,9; 306:11; | 316:7; 332:11; l 345:12; 346:6; [ 361:8; 377:6; j 3 B1:1; 382:13 ; | 385 :11 | sometime 259:15 | sometimes 146:4/ | 184:3,4; 273:20; | 319:2 | somewhat 240:13; | 243:12 | somewhere 21:21; j 102:19; 141:20; j 209:14; 215:2; | 252:23; 322:12; j 326:14; 336:5 | son 256:19; j 257:15 | soon 47:17 | sophisticated [ 387:21 j sore 7;21 | sorry 14:8; 19:7; j 58:21; 67:11; | 113:7; 117:11; j 152:4,18; 159:6; | 162:16; 169:14; j 170:22; 176:21; j 135:7; 18 7;7; ] 195:14; 210:12; j 215:9; 277:4; | 314:10; 321:5; | 366:17; 371:9 l sort 39:14; l 50:16; 52:11; j 53:8; 104:9,16; ! 119:5; 126:18; j 160:2; 180:17; | 187:15; 195:8; ) 202:16; 221:7; j 251:1; 257:22; | 263:23; 273:19, | 23; 282:10; | 292:10; 335:18; | 384:12 | sought 208:12 | source 2 5:1; Page 20 28:9; 94:5; 101:15; 102:3; | 290:4,17; 315:4; | stability 141:6 j 336:10; 330:4; | stabilize 12:6 | | 109:6; 111:11; 166:18 | 339:3; 347:21, | 23; 348:5; | stable 13:4 j stage 158:10; | j sources 94:19; 372:15 | 352:23; 354:23; [ 355:19; 365:16; | 177=4,10 | stages 124:19 | j south 32:18,19; [ 366:22; 367:4,6; j stand 118:21 [ 33:3; 160:13; 161:17,19; 164:3; 166:12; 167:21; 169:15; | 371:19; 372:3; j standard 180:4, j 377:5,13; 370:9; j 23; 181:21; j 379:13,16; j 303:8; 369:6; | 381:7; 384:2 | 372:20; 377:23 | | j j 170:1,5,7,15,23; | Specifics 26:1; 171:23; 172:16; j 266:23 249:1; 280:6; j specified 136:17 | Stands 10:13 | Star 143 :15; I 353:3 | | | 286:1; 335:1; ] Spectron 18:4,6; 1 Start 10:3; 161 : 1 | 338:1,21; 346:13,21; 350:20; 351:5,9, 15 I 33:23; 36:5,9,18 j | speculation 65:5; j 67:6; 269:17 j Spell 55:21 | | j started 28:16; 72:13; 126:12; 165:17; 253:4; 339:17 | f j j southern 163:23; [ spelling 70:8 I Starting 5:14 | 165:8,11,14,20, 23; 166:9; | spend 31:6; | starts 299:23 j 46:15; 120:5,10; j State 1:1; 5:1; | | 167:2; 168:17; 335:10 Southington | 205:12; 324:16; j 339:14; 385:3, ] 16; 389:9 | 50:10,14,15; j 56:11; 87:17; j 123:14; 144:22; | j | 40:13,16; 41:11, | spending 154:1 | 16 | spent 44 : 22; j space 203:10,19; | 46:16,17; 47:23; j 211 : 18 ; 307 : 7, [ 120:8,15,22; j 12 , 16; 308: 4 ; | 157:14; 194:3; j 153:4; 180:16; 217:4,13; 272:1; 281:18,21; 203:8; 284:21; 285:9,15,19,21; j | | J | 313 : 7,9 [ 237:17; 325:2,3, | 291:19; 292:1,4, | spacing 80:10 \ 12,21; 339:12; 16 I speakinc 46 : 9; 186 : 9 ; 195 : 3; i 387:15,16; 333:9 J stated 250:4; I Spill 50:2; | 256:11 j | 217 : 23 ; 218 : 4 | 176:15 | statement 235:14; | specific 13: 12; | Spills 107:9 | 238:7; 246:8; | 47: 2; 48:7; | spin 62:23; | 341:23; 345:9; | 52 : 3; 64:4; 70: 14; 76:8 ; B0: 21; 91:18; [ 63:13,15,17; j 64:17; 65:4; j 66:8,20; 67:4; [ 356:4; 358:23; j 361:22; 362:11 | statements [ | \ 103 :22 ; 106 : 16 | 163:18 | 360:10,12,13 j 107 :2f 9 , 15; 109 : 2 0, 22; 120 : 19; 124 : 11 125 : 4 ; 139: 3 ; | Spin-Off 19:5; j 64:18; 67:9; j 163:17 j spit 140:16,17 | States 5:18; 6:4; | j 153:6 j j station 322:12 j j status 202:10,19; | 159 l; 162 : 21; 209 : 16 ; 229 : 14 263 ill; 279 : 1; | spoke 216:21; | | 226:15,18 | | spoken 216:14,16; j 282:8 stay 287:16; 332:9 | | | 290 : 18 ; 293 : 23 | 217:2; 226:16 | stayed 137:11; j 317 : 22 ; 321 : 2 ; | Spot 134 :19; j 149:18 I 333 .-a,- 351; 17/ [ 187:11; 190:16, | steam 353.-9,12 | 352 : 10 ; 362 : 7 ; j 18 | stenography 395:7 j 372 : 19; 373 : 2 ; 377 : 4 ; 379: 18 ; 381 : 11, 22 ; | Spots 134:20 | j spotty 103:20,21; l j 126:15; 135:19 | step 298:22; 345:6 steps 111:16 \ ! | 3 82 :6,12; 383 : 13; 392 : 2 | spread 11:10 | Springs 9:3 | Steve 51:10; j 138:9; 141:10; | j specifically 18: 23 ; 19:13,19 | spun 56:16; 60:5, 1 156:19; 181:2; j B; 67=16; 68:6,7 j 220:20,21; | j in 25: 8; 33 :20 ; 34 : 5; 36:9; 41: 6; 46: 10 ; 54 : 59:9 74: 12; 83:2 3 ; I Spurling 138:10, j 19; 146:13,14, j 18; 181:2,15; j 187:15; 271:10; | 275:16; 276:3; | 271:9,17; j 272:23; 277:6 j Steven 279:10; | 373:15 j STEWART 2:3.5; | | | ! j 106 : 6 ; 109 : 19; | 277:6,18,21,23; | 3:8; 5:8; 14:12, | 111 : 2 0 ; 121 : 1; 129 : 3 ; 151: 16; | 278:1,3; 209:20; | 13; 19:13; | 290:13,14; j 27:21; 31:11; 155 : 1 , 11; 1 56 : 1 | 291:15,18; | 34:14/42:2; 157 : 3 ; 164: 22; f 292:15; 302:20 J 45:1; 53:20,23; j | | j 182 :18 ; 208 : 10 ; j Spurling'S 271:17 j 55:2,10; 58:22; | 211 : 13 ; 226 : 1 9 ; 235 : 2 0 ; 257 : 9 ; | square 176:14 j SRSKS 39:3 ] 59:4; 60:19; | 65:1; 67:15; | [ 260 : 17 ; 261 :12, | St 54:8; 365:14 | 72:12; 76:13; ] 19 262:14, 19; 264 : 23 ; 266 : 16 ; | St. 7:6; 8:4; | 9:4; 16:8,18; | 80:23,-82:9; [ 84:13; 87:16; i ! 269 : 15 ; 274 : 13 ; | 42:23; 48:19; j 96:5,-99:3; i 275 : 14 , 17; | 53:4; 151:8; j 106:11; 108:6; 276 : 15 ; 289 : 7; | 365:6,19; 366:1 | 109:16; 113:12, - HARTOLDMON0031428 BKNCHFLD. TXT Page 21 18; 114 : 5,1 5; 119 = 14; 120 ; 20 ; 127 : 5; 133: 12; 145 ; 9; 150: 6,11, 14; 151 : 14; 155 : 10; 157 : 9 ; 158 : 2 / 162 : 21; | strengths 207:4 | stretch 22 : 15; | 237:8 | strictly 238:5 | strike 89:9; | 239:20 | Stripping 265:16 | 316:22 | successful 218:7 1 sudden 104:19; | 135:12 j sufficient 356:9; | 376:4 | suggest 84:21; | | j j | | | 22:21; 23:1,3,9, | term 39:14; j 13; 31:14; 32:2; j 76:19; 91:10,11; | 33:15; 35:11; j 93:IS; 127:22; | 44:18; 77:2l; j 160:3,4; 226:14; [ 78:2; 213:11,13; 227:21,22; 228:2; 234:15; | j j 228:10; 229:6; 248:16; 286:6,8; 295:13; 315:15 107:7; 120:14; 122:11; 131:6; 195:9; 207:13; 254:6; 257:13; 279:19; 287:18; 308:6; 311:5; 312:13; 377:20; [ ! j j j | j 171: B; 132 : 10; j structural 141:6 I 97:2; 101:7; 191; 12; 198 : 15; | stuck 346:6 j 102:21; 166:17; 199: 19; 200 : 5,9. | studied 59:6 j 242:7; 306:22; 22; 208 ; 2 ; | Studies 58:8; j 340:14; 361:2; 216 = 3; 223 : 17; | 59:11,12,13; j 366:13 | 244:11; 293:20; | 334:16; 340:7; | 349:7,10,13,18, | terms 186:10; j 217:16; 266:22; j 301:20,21; | 20; 350:2; | 307:11; 338:11; j 359:6,7; 366:10; | 349:2 392:5 thinking 222 ; 14 third 233:20; 261:12 thirty 135=16; | | | | \ 228 : 4,11; 2 36:7, | 81:18; 234:6; | suggested 87:21; | 370=23 | Terra 265:21 136:8; 137:3,18; | 240 : 8; 248 : 9; 250 : 10, 16; | 343:19; 344:1 i s tudy 21:4; j 88:3; 248:11; | 364:8; 386:3 | systematic 335:1 | systems 6:19,- | test 8 :7,16; j 84:10; 37:3; 143:12; 184:20; 363:6; 366:1; ] ] 255 : 19; 25S : 21 ; j 29:23; 30:5; 259: 2 3 ; 264 : 11; | 50:6; 223:2; ] suggesting 243:13; 245:11 j 9:9; 74:5; 75:2; ] j 289:11 ] 90:20; 91:3,9, 12; 110:3,20,23; 373:4 thirty-day 364=1 j | 265: 2,7 ; 266:5; | 232:13,15; suggests 75:22; | 111:15; 171:22; thirty-eight j 267: 16, 17 ; | 234:21; 235:1, 83:14; 85=8,10; T | 172:9; 183:23; 375:13 | 275; 13 ; 276 = 11; | 13; 242:11; 104:7; 201:5; | 190:16; 253:4,5; thirty-five 22:8; | 278; IS; 281 : 1 ; | 245:9; 304:14; 360:5; 367:11, | Taffee 371:23 | 283:16,19; 31:4; 37:16 [ 232 : 14; 283 : 14 ; | 305:3,5,14; 284 : 11; 296 : 5; [ 324:10,15,18; 299: 17; 300 ; 2 0 ; I 325:20; 326:3,6; 301 : 11; 302 : 11; j 326:1; 338=7; 306: S; 311; 3 ; j 339:23; 340:12, 368:13; 389:18 sum 387:7 summer 104:13 sunlight 11:12 Superfund 16:21; | tail 255:16 | 297:20; 300:23; j talked 12:20; j 335:19,21; | 29:12,13; 58:10; j 338:1; 349:12 j 59:17; 90:20; j tested 91:4; | 154:19; 168:13, | 128:16; 130:12 thirty-one 31:7; | 373:6 I thirty-six j 297:11,12 | [ thirty-year 31:16 ! 314 : 10; 316 = 2,6; | 15,16; 341:2,9; 17:4,11; 18:5; | 18; 191:6; | testified 5:5 | thorough 238:3; ] 317: 13 ; 325 : 16; | 342:2,9; 343:7, 26:3; 32:8,11; | 206:10; 207:20; | testify 383:12 | 327:5 ! 332 : 15 ; 338 : 6; | 9; 344:2; 345:3, 39:20,21; 42:7; | 208:5; 215:15; | testifying 388:13 j thoroughly 190:20 I 341 : 11; 345 : 15; | 4,10; 356:2,14; 43:9; 47:12,13, | 216:14; 220:9, | testimony 395:5, j though 206 : 21; i 347: 4; 348 : 7,10, | 362:18 16,18; 51:15; | 13,19; 234:15, I 11 ] 226=22; 245:9; I 13 ; 350 : 16; I stuff 11:11; 52:4,21; 62:6; \ 16; 252:10; [ testing 8:9; I 364:7; 383:6 | 352 = 1; 363 : 14 ; 375 : 16; 379 : 10; 380 = 19; 383 : 8 ; 384 : 3 ; 388 : 10, 14,23; 389 = 14; 394: 4 sticking 171 ; 7 sticks 10 : 9 27 : 18 ; 28 = 1 9; 34 : 13; 43:2 ; 59: 23 ; . 75:7 ,12; 87 : 1; 100:2 3 ; 101 : 6; 102 : 6; 104 -'19; 105 : 1; 108 : 2 ; 116: 16; 120 : 17, 23 ; 64 : 12 j 261:14,20; I 28:2; 85:21; | thoughts 142:22 I superior 16:9 j 262:1; 264:7; | 87:6,7,21; [ thousand 21=20; ' supervise 51:12; j 267:18; 272:18; | 88:10; 89:11; j 34:11; 38:3; | 52:4; 275:19; | 274:1; 287=4; 90:21; 112:11; j 40:10; 120:13; | 283:10 j 306:15,21; 129:2,11; 132:1; | 122:5,6,7; | supervised 17.-4, j 314:6; 344:13; 133:1; 234:7,3, j 144:14; 204:11; | 19; 38:12; 52:7, j 352:12; 356:10, 11; 239:14; j 206:3; 323:13; | 10; 61:22 | 19; 357:1; 293:21 I 324:14,17; t still. 48 13 ; 133 : 14; 137 : 2 ; supervising 32:6, j 362:9; 371:19; testings 181:23 | 325:4,13; j 52 : 2 ; 59:15 ,20; 139 : 13 ; 140 : 11; 7 ] 372:1,4 tests 27:19,20; | 326=15; 328:12; | 67 :22 ; 85:2 0; 150 :16; 187 : 17; supervision 17:6, | talks 252:8; 90:13,23; 91:14; [ 331:3; 384=8 | 178 : 2 3 ; 199 : 5; 223 : 11 ; 242 : 15; 7; 188:3; 284:1 | 267:21; 369:8,9 110:4; 128:20; [ three 21:14,20; | 230 : 2 3 ; 235 : 21 ; 243 : 23 ; 273 : 14; 243 : 3 J 246: 20; 311 : 2 1 ; 322 : 15 ; supervisor 51:10; | Talladega 216:21; 69:3; 279:3 | 246:3 129:7,9; 132:23; | 172:7; 182:4; j 22:18;31:1; 36:3; 42:3; | | 277: 11; 278 : 6 ; 327 : 4 ; 328: 20; supervisor's 69:1 [ Task 268:4 183:21; 286:19, | 44:3; 47:19; | 330: 4,16; 332 : 6 ; 335: 9; 343 = 18; 349 : 19 ; 390 : 6 364: 14; 368 : 5 | Stupid 63:9 | STIPULATED 4:2,8, j Subject 61:12; I 14,21 j 176:1 | stipulations I subjects 6:10,23 | 1:19; 3:3.5 | stirred 331:18 | submit 197:2;. . | 232:22; 391:J.O supplement 131:5 Support 163:4; I 217:11,14 | supports 102:1 | supposed 274:4; | 276:4 j surface 28:3,4; j 29:2; 74:10; | tasked 197:1 j tax 205:16; | 206:2,9 | teacup 91:14 | Team 286:3,7 I technical 58:16 | technique 87:6 | techniques 178:8, 21; 288:15; 368:16 Texas 43 :10,11,17 theoretically 244:5,7; 364:10 thereby 244:14 therefore 161:19; 391:10 | j j j j j j | 51:8,-54:1,2; | 122:23; 123:6,8; 143:16,17; 179.-6/ 186:12; | j | 192:3,10; 224=4; | 244:20; 249:11, | 15,16; 250:18; j 256:10,12; i | stockpiled 136:3 ( Stood 3 9:3; | 116:10 ! stop 15:23; | 322:11 | submittals 271:23 | | submitted 49:20; l 138:9; 149:1; | j | 162:23; 169:11; [ 175:5; 182:16; | [ 82:12; 92:10,11, 15,20,23; 97:6, 11; 161:15; 164:1,9,10; 178:12,16; I 10 j technologies | 30:3,7 | tells 99:12; j 133:19; 197:22; thereto 4:20 Thermal 265:16 They've 64:11 thing 15:16; 19:5; 21:23; | 272:18; 295:5, | j 17; 296:6,19,21, j j 23; 298:8; j 299:B,11,23; j ! | 300:8,21; 301:2; [ | store 12:7; 24:19 i 202:11; 213:18; | 182:1,11,14; | 363:8 31:3; 44:7; | 316:12,23; j | stored 12:3; | 380:6 j 232:3; 281:18; j 285:3; 287:7; | 234:12; 289:5; j 295:5; 298:19; [ ten 38:3; 40:10; | 85:18; 88:7,18, 52:18; 63:9; 118:20; 140:10, [ 324:21,23; | \ 334=3,8; 335:5; j | storm 248:21,23; | 336:9, 17; 347.-14 | 339:7; 352:5; | 21; 122:1,18,21; 23; 207:16; | 350:13; 352:3 J | 359:4,9,22 [ story 16 9:5,| 352:23 I stream 21:16; | submitting 163:5; | 360:17 I 175:16; 343:8 | Sweet 252:3; | subsequently | 268 : 4 I 9:18,-24:3,22; | swom 5:4; 395:3 | 135:7; 144:14; j 294:14,17; j 295:2,12,15,23; j 296:7; 297:4,9; 222:4; 254:16; 284:12; 319:7; 321:16; 325:1; 332:14; 339:17, | throat 7:21 j tie 109:18 | i | tied 10:1; 267:3; ! j 323:21 ] ! 348:2; 367:19; ! 26:11/28:5; | synthetic 140:9; | 298:7,11,14,18; 21; 341:12,13, | Tiger 286=3,7 j i 369:8,18; 383:17 43:22; 44:17; \ 160:19; 162:6, j 299:9,11,20; 14; 343:5; | tight 358:16 | | streams 239:16; 186:2; 207:19; j 11; 164:6; ] 300:15; 301:1,6; 347:17; 354:2; | tipping 123:22 j | 369:9; 378:4; 222:11; 298:19 | 168:3,6; 169:12; | 302:7; 313:17; 377:11; 382:2, | title 16:14; j ! 382:23 substance 10:21; [ 170:3; 171:15; | 317:20; 31B:13, { 15; 385:13,21 i 67:18; 69.-7; | ! street 1:18,22.5; j 24:7,-41:9; | 172:1; 320:20; | 16; 350:16 \ things 8:13; 1 70:9,10,14; j : 2:9.5; 274:15, 1 17,19; 321:21, ; 42:10; 376:14; | 377:6 | 321:10; 322:15; [ tenants 192:17 j 335:3; 337:2 j tend 170:13 | 10:5; 11:22; | 71:9,10; 226:20; ! 1 13:15,18; 25:6; | 262:19; 274:18; t J 23; 322:2; | 386:8.11 | substances 376:19 j system 11:18; J Tennessee 9:23 j Subtitle 123:19; ] 20:21; 21:16,17; I tenure 272:19 | 49:2; 62:22; j 93:16; 101:11; | 279:1 1 TNT 9:16; 10:14, : j HARTOLDMON0031429 BRNCHFLD. TXT t 17 | transport 74:9; I turnover 72:13; j ultimate 193:2; | 154:18; 169:7; [ today 67:22; [ 124:2; 131:6,21; | 353:13 ] 303:19 | 174:22; 191:19; | 68 ill; 69:15; j 75:5; 95:6,21; [ 124:6; 129:19; [ 131:10,11; | 133:20; 134:7; | 197:9; 198:1; | 230:6; 235:14; | 314:14; 338:3; | 342=1; 368:3 | together 157:11; | 207:15; 208:21; | 174:13 [ transported ( 74:10; 97:11; j 103:17; 124:5; j 246:21 | trapped 242:16 | trash 115:2 j treat 20 ;22 j 21:6; 22:22; j 24:2; 349:10 | treated 24:5; | TV 206:17 | ultimately 27:16 j 196:2,6; 212:11; | twelve 194:6; j 295:17; 296:19, j 21; 297:1,2,5; J ultraviolet 11:12 | j umbrella 273:13, j ( 15 j 226:3; 230:3; 260:12; 274:5; 292:6; 293:19; j 300:1; 301:2,5; j 316:10; 319:19 J twenty 5:21; j 22:14; 20:16; j uncertainty | | 137:16 | | under 17:5,7; j | 20:21; 26:5,7,9; | 294:12; 346:20; 350:18; 351:3; 369:3,5; 370:9; 378:11 | 31:8; 106:19,23; | 28:10; 51:3; | understood 72:8; | 122:6,7,16; | 01:7,10; 119:1; j 276:4; 282:12 | 135:7; 136:9; | 136:4,14,18; j unfair 151:1 ] 216:1; 229:4; | 78:9 j 137:9; 143:12 j 137:3,22,23; j unfiltered 83:23 | 294:11,13 | Tonight 206:18 | tons 361:3; | 367:18; 368:7, | 23; 369:13,20 | treatment 9:3; j 11:3,18; 21:17; | twenty-five j 34:11; 122:17; 1 138:2,8,18; | unit 280 :19; ] 142:12; 147:12, | 281:3,8; 282:4, j 22:21,23; 23:3; | 134:22; 135:15, j 15,17; 157:4; j 6; 204:14 j 29:14; 31:14; 1 17; 143:12; J 150:16; 159:16, | United 5:17; 6:4; j 32:1; 33:15; | 176:14; 190:8; ] 20; 181:5,17; j 153:6 | Tony 54:11 | | took 7:19; 8:2,7, | 35:11; 38:6; 44:18,19; 75:1; ] 227:11 | twenty-four | 187:1,17; J University 7:6; | 243:17; 273:13, j 53:4; 59:13; | 22; 9:4,18; | 78:2,9; 235:6,9; j 194:6; 297:3,5, | 14,16,18,21; | 217:13 | 11:8; 12:3,15; | 323:4; 326:10, IU I 274:2,12; 277:6; j unquote 203:18 | 18:2; 58:3; | IS; 329:2,10,18, | twenty-six-page | 59:19,22; 61:7, | 23; 333:21; ] 356:1 | 282:6,17; | 283:22; 284:3, | unreasonable j 105:14; 363:17 | 8,18; 62:16; | 349:10; 350:2; | Twice 90:18 | 14; 285:12; j until 12:15; | 67:10; 68:1; | 388:4; 392:2,19 | two 29:11; 32:8, | 294:20,22; J 30:4; 106:19; | 69:9; 96:15; | trial 4:19 | 11; 41:5; 43:3; | 295:7; 298:13; | 113:9; 190:17; j 110:10,19; j tributaries 91:5; f 67:1,-83:20; | 299:14; 303:10, | 201:19; 215:12; j 124:7,20,23; j 244:11 [ 84:1,-86:18; j 16; 306:4,6; ] 224:9; 225:3,12; | 135:22; 148:10, ] trigger 295:12; [ 97:8; 122:5,22; | 307:4,11; | 264:15; 326:3,4; | 23; 153:18; j 297:10; 302:6; | 120:12; 146:4; | 308:13,23; | 355:5; 373:13 | 222:12,15; | 313:17 \ 159:4; 170:4; [ 309:14; 372:11; | unusual 105:16; l 259:18; 278:12, | trip 2,53 : 10,11, j 172:14,23; f 383:20; 384:12; j 377:15 [ 15,20; 390:21 j 18; 263:12,13,14 | 194:10; 200:21; | 335 ; 6 j up 3:15; 12:15; [ top 5:21; 39:15; ] trips 258:13; | 209:4,5; 224:1; j undergoing 72:22 20: 1; 22:11; f 123:23; 169:13; | 261:6 | 227:6; 234:4; \ underground 27:14 23 : 13,21; 27:10 | 170:6; 215:20; [ 244:12; 316:13 1 trouble 196:2; | 273:20 | 236:13; 247:12, j 14; 248:20; | underneath 23:19; f 24:1; 27:10; 16; 28 : 19,20; 29: 21; 36 : 18; | Topographically 1 truck 124:3,5; | 249:5,9; 272:18; \ 138:23 49: 17; 56:13; | 26:14,15 I 350:13 | 295:20; 296:22; \ understand 13:16; 74 : 14; 77:21; j Topol 302:16 | truckload 350:15 | 301:3,4,8,22; \ IS: 3,10 , 22 ; [ TOSCA 13:15; | trucks 350:13,14 | 302:7,23; 303:2, j 26: 8; 58:14 ; I 272:6,12; 315:13 | true 93 :5,10; j 14; 307:19; | 65 : 6; 75=11 ; 70 : 14; 81:8; 06 ; 7,11 ; 97:12; 102 :11, 18; | tossed 392:10 | 113:22; 156:21; | | total 31:3; 1 319:5; 395:10 j | 37:16; 76:10 j trust 209:9,12, | | towards 27:9; j 18; 275:19 | | 135:4 | truth 255:12; | I town 18:9; 54:21; | 378:17,19; 395:4 j 314:9,12; 317:20; 324:13, 16,22; 325:3,12; 334:12,23; 335:4; 346=22; 347:2; 350:13 [ | j j j j 00 : 17; 89:5 ; 95 : 20; 96:4 ; 93 : 16; 100: 11; 101 :21; 111 : 18 ; 147 : 19 ; 154 : 12 , 14; 163 : 7 ; 103 ; 1,3 ; 104:17 105 : 10 ; 111:3; 123 ; 2 ; 124:2; 136 : 13 ; 139:17; 143 : 7 ; 147 ; 18, 21; 143 : 1; [ 75:8; 252:2; | try 41:22; 119:8, | two-tiered 295:11 | 102 : 9; 108 : 4,7; 149 : 7; 151:5,20 ! 264:20; 260:4 j toxic 376:14,21; | 377:6 j Toxicity 265:19 I traced 358:11 | traded 60:9 | traffic 250:21; | 253:21 | 17; 185:23; | 106:6; 247:9; | 249:22; 276=.13; | 329:20; 332:15; | 330:10 ' [ trying 7:22; [ 11:14; 24:17; [ 41:10; 60:4; | type 14:2; 23:13; | j 47:9; 70:20,22; | j 100:23; 115:1; | j 123:21; 140:9, j j 10; 155:7; | [ 157:13; 158:19, j j 22; 173:10; | j 207:16; 211:3; | 190 : 21; 204 : 16 ; 210 :1; 224 : 5,6; 237 : 17 ; 249 : 17 ; 251 : 1,19; 273 : 22 ; 274 : 3 ; 279 : 6 ; 282 : 22; 285 : 6; 236 : 6; 289 : 23; 292 : 3; 23; 153 : 1; 157 : 8,2 3 ; 158 : 2 0; 159:13, 16; 170 : 6 ; 175 : 13; 179:1; 187 : 16; 190:8 ; 194 : 15; 195:8, 13; 196 : 12 ; | training 12:19; [ 101:21; 113:8; | 291:8; 307:21 | 293 : 15; 294 : 10, 197 : 2 0 ; 201:11; | 13:9,10,14; j 131:11; 142:3; I types 6:12; | 16; 309 : 4 ; | 14:2; 358:5 | 147:19; 171:14; j 31:15; 35:2,3; | 314 : 11; 316 : 9 ; | transaction 58:7 j 173:4,15,13; j 99:21; 107:4,5; j 330 : 19; 333 : 16; 221 : 18; 222:9, 13 ; 228 : 15; 229 : 1,3 ; 231:6; | transactions ! 105:16,19,22; j 112:9; 114:23; | 339 : 10; 345 : 3 ; 237 : 2 1; 239:20; | 65:2; 66:23 ) | transcribed 395:8 j 192:13; 247:7, 17; 251:5; | 195:5,6; 207:13; | 346 : 15; 347 : 3 ; | 312:13 | 350 ; 22 ; 351 : 7 ; 243 = 3 ; 247:22; 248 : 10; 253:2; | transcript 395:10 | | transcription | 258:21; 270:13, 16; 203:19; | typical 23:7; | 86:3; 352:4 | 352 : 6; 370: 3; j 375 : 3 ; 331 : 5; 254 : 14 ; 256:10; 258 : 1; 260:22; | 395:9 | 331:22; 336:15; | typically 31:20; | 383 : 11 264 : 15; 267:3; | transfer 107:7 | 330:11 | 94:10; 97:23; | unders tending 270 : 14, 16; | transferred 1:3; | Tuck 54:11; 56:5 | 112:17; 122:21; | 10:15; 11:8; 292 : 15, 18 ; | 56:8; 57:1 | Tucker 310:13,14, | 136:22; 137:12; | 24:9; 28:2; 294 : 13 ; 297:16; | transformer | 49:10,11,12,15; I 16 | turn 71:16; | 190:6; 350:6; | 358:9; 364:2 | 60:3,5,7; 64:15; | 74:1,17; 77:1; 290 :9,16; 299:4 6,10; 3 00:21; | 50:2; 176:15 | 100:4; 189:12; 80:13; 81:13; 307 :0 ; 311:4; | transformers | 210:5; 305:5 U 89:3; 106:17; 317 : 10 326:16; I 107:10; 177:16 | turned 18:1; 108:12; 111:5; 327 : 12 331:2, | transition 50:17 | 161:6; 176:0 U.S. 153:3 131:5,15; 13 ; 332 : 2 ; Page 22 339:12,14; 347:5; 355:4; 366:2; 370=11; 385:6; 389:S,9; 390:1,9; 391:18, 20; 393:16,IB,21 upgradient 36:20 upper 29:5; 70:19,21; 233:20; 295:5; 296:5; 299:11 upstream 97:1,5 uptake 243:23 upwind 170:12 uranium 9:19,20 usable 344:3 useful 131:22; 263:16,18; 293:1; 345:22; 350:3 users 192:18 using 22=21; 80:11; 140:6; 163:4; 173:7; 254:2; 206:9; 317:1; 342:9; 349:10; 357:0 utility 150:5 V validators 8:13 valley 20:13; 26:23; 170:12; 171:3; 252:3 Valley-Cobb 260:4 I | | [ j value 31:16; 127:14; 205:13; 214:17; 215:9; 345:6,B vapor 30:0; 93:11; 171:22; 172:6,8; 173:22; 334:4,5,12,15; 337:23; 339:17, 21,22; 340:2,7,341:2,13,18; 342:10; 343:4,7; 344:11 varied 126;2,4 varies 190:9 variety 6:10; 24:13; 49:2; 76:16; 101:6; 122:10; 190:13; 210:17 various 16:21; 99:4; 161:22; 216:15; 232:17; | ( ( | | | | ! | | \ | | | | | \ f f [ \ \ j 290:1 varying 17:16 vehicle 194:22 vehicles 189:16 vending 8:14 verbal 133:12,15; 181:3,16 verbalize 15:17 verbally 275:S versus 1:7 vertical 28:23; 81:12 via 74:10; 103:18; 124:3 vice 70:12; 257:18 vicinity 32:16; 33:2; 41:1; 47:7,8; 76:2; f | | | | | | | | ! | i ! | i | j | | HARTOLDMON0031430 BRNCHFLD.TXT Page 23 | 100:15; 127:13; | 135:10; 148:3; [ 161:14; 166:12; j 170:5; 177:15; 1 189:1; 252:10; | 319:9; 322:19; | 341:6 j view 389:3 ! violation 392:16 i Virginia 54:12,16 | visible 115:19, | 22; 116:6,9 j visit 298:3 | j | j | j j | [ [ | j j 23:2,10,12,15, 19; 24:23; 27:14; 28:3,5, 20; 36:12; 44:18; 74:10; 76:19; 82:12; B4:17 ; 05:4,5, 14,21; 06:13,18; 91:4,12; 92:6, 10,11,15,13,21, 22,23; 93:22; 94:3,7,22; 96:12; 97:5,6, ) 15,21; 281:20; | 283:13; 205:12, | 18; 322:1,3; j 328:5,8; 338:2, j 22; 346:2,12; | 351:14 | western 160:20; | 161:16,20; | 162:14,16; | 163:22; 164:2; | 168:16; 169:14; j 280:8; 335:10; | 343:19; 344:7 I 20 j willing 208:16; j 223:4; 308:22; | 329:20 | Wilmer 307:17 [ Wilson 216 :10,11; j 219:9 | wind 97:16 | winds 170:12,18; | 171:1 | within 71:14; j 90:2; 117:8; j 127:8; 134:19; j 287:8; 288:13; | 290:23; 302:17; | 308:8,10; 323:7, j 9,21; 325:8; j 328:15; 329:20, | 21; 334:11,19; j 336:9; 337:8; | 347:15; 371:8, | 10; 305:5; l 386:10,13,15; | 388:16; 391:11; | 392:9,12,20 j workability | | j | j j | [ \ | | | j | visited 73:13 I visual 111:21 j visually 102:8; j 112:3 | volatile 18:17; | 19:18; 25:12,16; | j j j | | 11; 104:17; 132:2; 140:10; 164:10,11,21; 179:1,9,21; 181:23; 182:1, 11,14; 234:9,12; | whatever 9:22; | 30:17; 32:19; | 41:17; 91:15; [ 131:8; 163:12; j 192:18; 217:19; j 240:22; 247:5; j 145:7; 152:9; | 159:4; 170:18; | 186:20; 189:2; [ 199:20; 210:6; | 213:16,20; j 223:23; 255:22; | 293:16 | worked 12:14; [ j | 13:19,22; 14:1; | | 16:17; 17:19; j | 51:3; 52:13; j j 53:4,5,13; 54:9; | | 33:17; 49:3 [ Volatilization ; 97:21 l 235:5,9; 242:17; | 262:22; 307:10; \ 244:20; 248:22, j 337:4; 379:2 | 23; 289:5; | whereas 112:18; j 257:16; 260:14; j j 262:5,13; 263:5; | j 272:13; 277:0; | 55:11; 56:1; 64:10,16; 65:10, 12; 79:15; 90:6; [ | | | volatilize 174:12 | 293:5; 323:3; | 194:7 | 279:17; 308:23; [ 203:12; 206:16, | | volatilizes 97:19 | | volume 86:9; j j 133:21 j 326:10,18; 329:1,10,17,23; 333:13,17,19,23; | WHERZO? 395:18 | Wherever 164:21; | 317:23 | 309:2; 315:1,12; j 20; 207:6; ] 337:7; 363:5; j 263:6; 268:23; ] 365:23; 391:4 j 271:20; 272:21; | j j I volunteer 218:6 [ 349:9,17; 350:2; | whether 56:17; | without 182:19; | 284:20; 359:2 | ! vote 259:16 j 352:5; 360:17; | 70:12; 95:3; | 234:13; 340:19; | working 9:1; j | 392:2,3,19 | 98:9; 111:6,7,8; [ 379:0 | 12: IB; 19:3 , 4; | W j waterway 274:16 j 115:13; 154:6; [ witness 3:7; j 53:14; 54:4 ,8; | | waterways 246:11 j 159:19; 166:15; j 4:10; 14:8; ] 61:14; 66:8 | | wad 142 :18 | wait 113:3; [ 364:13 | Waterworks 330:2, | 5; 390:23 | way 10.: 2; 11:13; | | [ 172:18; 174:6; 221:1; 231:23; 242:9; 263:2; ] 32:22; 58:18; ] 210:4; 230:16; j 300:2; 322:1; ] 89:21; 90:9 j 99:5; 109:1 | 177:19; 203 : 7 , [ | | [ waiting 70:18; | 326:1 | waived 4:10,23 | 14:13;.23:7,14; j 41:9; 45:6; j 62:22; 74:21; | 276:11; 273:15; j 291:15; 293:20; | 311:18; 313:15; | 395:1,11,10 | witnesses 395:7 ] wondered 125:22 | 23; 214:8; | | 218:14; 219 : 1 r 2 | | 222:3; 225: 7; | [ walked 392:10 | walking 104:14 ! wall 44:8,10; j 46:19,22; 47:3 [ 77:20; 82:5,10; j 84:23; 96:18; | 103:10; 105:3; | 106:10; 114:11; [ 319:19; 327:17; [ 366:4 I White 1:17; 2:8.5 | whoever 241:20; [ wondering 188:2; | 240:15 [ Woodyard 309:21,| 310:2,6 | 227:15; 248 : 17; j 293:18; 294 : 3 ; | 333:12; 354 ; 12 , j 14, 16 | j j | | Walnut 1:22.5 | 115:7; 117:9; | 388:1 | wool 130:17 j works 54:11; [ | wanted 13:2; | 31:9; 37:8; l 113:21; 176:2; ] 179:19; 195:9, 1 II; 218:8,9; | 255:8; 260:21; | 118:21; 125:15; [ 171:5; 183:2; | 184:14; 185:13; | 189:4; 190:22; | 192:6; 226:11; | 231:4; 236:11; | whole 21:23; | 61:18; 76:23; 103 : 12, 13; 191 :13; 212 : 4 ; 249 :12, 21; 257 : 4 ; 311: 7 ; | worded 159:11 j words 26:23; j 43:12,-78:5; j 84:16; 201:13; j 326:23; 376:22; | 391:15 j 125:18; 155:18, | 20; 272:5,11; | 319:5,7,9; \ 320:18; 321:6; | 325:23 | world 203:21; I j j | | | | 333:2; 343:18; | 379:20 \ wanting 218:5 ; I 291:11 | wants 249:14 ; | 330:20 | Washington 7:5; f 58:4; 59:13; ; 258:10,11,14,18; j 259:11; 267:19 j waste 10:4,5,7, | 21; 11:5,16; ! 240:19; 254:9; | 255:2,10; 270:5; | 307:8; 314:19; | 317:7; 345:5; | 359:5; 376:8; ! 389:3; 390:21 j ways 190:14 , | weapons 10:1 j weight 319:13 j Weldon 9:2 | wells 28:6; 32:3; t 36:10,13,15; 337 : 6 ; 345: 1; 395 : 10 whom 235 : 6,14 | work 5:13; 7:13; j 13:21; 14:22; j 16:5,6,7,15; whys 276 : 15 wide B0: 11; 101:6 wife 257 : 23 will 14 : 10; 18:3; 23: 12/ 83:22; 84 : :12 ; 113 : 14; | j j j j j 17:21; 21:19; 27:23; 34:16; 45:6; 47:8,9; 49:20; 50:14; 51:6; 56:6; 57:13,17; 50:2; 134 :10; 141 : 4 ; | 64:1,2; 60:17; 142 :15; 176 ;11; 183 : 19; 188 : 6 ; | 79:5; 100:2; | 104:2; 114:17; | 281:14; 331:5 | j worried 82:23; j | 83:2,4,5; 251:15 I | worry 253:23 j worthwhile | 219:22; 341:12, | 13 j wound 27:16 | | | f ) | write 254:21; | j 305:19 | writing 120:13; j 353:5; 391:12; | j j | 73:9; 140:22; | 37:2; 44:15; | 280:18; 281:2,0; | 75:18,20,22; ; 232:4,6; 283:1; | 76:3,7,10,18, 19, | 2 B4 :14; 323:3 ; | 20; 77:2,22; j 326:10,10; | 78:3,7,10,13; 196 : 2 3 ; 197 ; 3,6 ; 198 : 16, 17; 199 : 2 1; 200 : 7 ; 201 : 6; 214 : 21; 229 : 19; 241 ; 2 0; | j j j | 118:20; 119:3, [ 395:6 17; 122:3; | written 109 ;21, 125:14,17; j 22; 138:17; 138:9; 149:1,16; | 175:19; 255:3; 152:2; 154:22; | 274:7; 361:15 | j | [ | | 329:1,10, 17,23 ; | 79:3,10,14,19; | 333:21; 348:1; | 80:3,10,17; . 350:19; 351:16; | 82:17; 83:12,20; | 367:19; 369:8,9, | 84:1; 168:10; ! 12,18; 377:8; \ 178:5; 242:7 | 373:4; 379:15; | Wes 271 : 5,21; i 330:3,20; 301:7; | 273:1; 303:1 1 382:23; 383:17; | west 42 : 22; 244 : 9,12; 247:9; 248 : 13 , 15,17; 257 :1Q; 292 : 6 , 16, 21; 296: 8; 299 : 4,6 ; 300:17, 19; 314 : 19 ; 322 : 2 3 ; 330 : 10; 341 : 10; 344 : 2 ; | I | | f j | | 155:21; 157:2,3, 11; 167:7; 168:16; 172:2; 175:5,9,10; | WWTP 323:2 j jY j 107:4; 189:4; 214:10; 220:19; 227:17; 260:22; 274:15,16; | y'all 14:4; j 19:20; 20:6; | 21:22; 25:19; | 26:7; 27:13; j | | I | \ j | | 392:2,18 | watched 116:10 | water 9:8; 11:3, | 18; 21:17; 22:20,22,23 ; | 54:12,16; 1 162:13; 167:2; | 170:21,23; j 186:9,10; | 274:19; 280:12, 345 : 14; 364 : 2,3 ; 385 : 16 ; 391 : 6; 392 : 20 WILLIAM 2 : B williams 321 : 18 , j j j | | 276:8; 277:13, 2 0; 2 7 B:9; 280:5,21; 281:15,17,19; 283:13; 294:2; j 29:15; 31:2; | | 32:5; 33:4; | | 34:12,20; 37:8, [ | 13; 41:9; 42:9; j \ 44:1; 45:23; j 52:11; 62:5; 73:16; 75:16; 76:7; 77:1,9,19; | i | 79:5,22; 87:9; 88:3,12; 91:4, 14; 93:4; 94;12, 13; 90:2; 103:3; | | ) j 109:4,17; 110:5, 9; 114:7,11; 113:15; 120:5; | | j 121:19,21; 124:2; 126:1; 129:18; 134:9; | j | 135:21; 136:12; 137:21; 13B.-7; | | 139:12; 140:11; 141:12; 142:16, | | 17; 143:19,21; 144:14; 145:1,3; 146:19; 147:5; 140:7,13; 150:17; 151:4,5; 153:12,18,20,23; 160:19; 161:4; 163:9; 165:17; 166:5; 160:20; | | [ | | | | | j 169:23; 172:6, 10; 174:3; 176:4; 181:3; 183:11; 137:11, 16; 189:7,14,22; | | f j j 195:12; 196:10, 11; 190:1; 199:11,12,15; 200:15,18; 202:17; 203:6; | | ] l j 204:6; 206:2; 217:9; 210:1; 220:2; 221:19, 20; 222:17; | | | j 223:10; 227:17; 229:1,22; 234:7; 235:7; 236:19; 238:8; 251:17; 256:10; 263:9; | | | | | 272:21; 273:21, 23; 302:2,3; 305:11; 307:2, 13; 308:8,9; 309:5,10,12; | | ] | | 310:22,- 317:4,7, 9; 319:7,22; 322:14; 323:6; 325:2; 328:4; 329:6; 330:4,13, 17,23; 332:4; 333:9,23; 338:18,20; 339:11,14,16; 340:6; 341:1; l j | j t j | | i j 342:23; 343:3; 354:1,5,13; [ | 368:1; 369:21, 23; 371:3; 372:6,0,9,11; | | j 376:12,23; 377:7; 382:2; 386 : 7,14,15, 18; 307:14,16; 389:7,3; 390:21; 391:1,17 y'all1s 18:22; 1 j [ j \ i | 257:2; 258:9; 374:16; 336:12 yard 186:12,20; 294:20; 295:3 yards 27:3; 36:11; 134:19; j j I j j [ HARTOLDMON0031431 BRNCHFLD.TXT | 176:14; 254:15; | 326:15 | year 34:11; 38:4; | 40:10; 89:13; | 90:13; 102:16; j 264:16; 307:15; | 354:17; 391:5 | year* 7:15,17; \ 12:15; 43:3; I 45:8; 49:15; | 72:19; 88:7,18, | 22; 131:7; | 244:21; 271:14; | 363:20 | yourself 266:7; j 343:5 | yourselves 33 3:10 Z j zero 300:7 | zone 276:21,22 | zoning 374:2 i/ ] 1:10* i | 395:22 i Page 24 HARTOLDMON0031432 ANNISTON REMEDIAL PROJECTS 2001 BUDGET PLANNING BASIS FOR LONG TERM BUDGET 2001 Charges Against P&L New Work Identified Choccolocco Creek WWTP Air Monitoring First Missionary Baptist Church EPA Investigation Conservation Easements ' 1UUU $250,000 $250,000 $250,000 $100,000 $1,200,000 nnn nnn 2002 Cash Flow In Plant RFI Installation ofNew Wells Abandon W^ells Misc Support$50.000 $350,000 $100,000 Total $500,000 Off-Site RFI Snow Creek Liner Svstem Conservation Corridor (1) Lake/Choc. Creek Monitoring Choc. Creek CMS Misc. SuDOort $2,800,000 $1,200,000 $100,000 $250,000 $450,000 Total $4,800,000 Choccolocco Creek WWTP Construction ofContainment Cell $1,500,000 (1) Conservation Corridor assumes 6000 acres total in floodplain, 80% participation, and that easements are purchased at $0.60 on the dollar. $1.2 million purchased in 2001 and remainder in 2003 DSW168388 ADAD21-018111 HARTOLDMONOQ31433 2002 Charges Against P&L New Work Identified Snow Creek Remedy Additional Conservation Easements Corrective Measures for Choc. Creek Corrective Measures for WWTP O&M for 2003 thru 2005 Miscellaneous $2,800,000 $2,000,000 $500,000 $1,500,000 $3,000,000 $200,000 Total $10,000,000 2003 Cash Flow Off-Site RFI Choccolocco Creek Corrective Measures Complete Conservation Corridor Monitoring Miscellaneous Support $500,000 $600,000 $100,000 $100,000 Total $1,300,000 2006 Charges Against P&L O&M for 2006 thru 2010 $5,000,000 rtClAf 4COOOO ADAD21-018112 HARTOLDMONOQ31434 ANNISTON REMEDIATION COSTS - STORMWATER & SEDIMENTS PLAINTIFF'S exhibit ' Estimated remediation costs for the optimal stormwater remediation and sediment control project is as follows: Stormwater retention basins - $1.6M South landfill cap and sediment control on east property - $0.75M Purchase property plus relocation of residents & church - $0.4M Total (+/- 30%) $2.75M 122117 ADAD21-018113 HARTOLDMON0031435 ANNISTON SEDIMENT REMEDIATION OPTIONS In conjunction with the stormwater control options, the issue of soils contamination on and off Monsanto property in the Mars Hill area needs to be addressed. We are currently working under a WUM0VUV* ucwxec ivj.wu nyuu uu utUiXuv uac muul auu acvm v* contamination. Based upon a review of all off the issues associated with the contaminated soil, a decision has been made to pursue relocation of all of the Mars Hill residents including UMC WUUi. uu Benefits include: &K4 1 4--t ^ A '-JI I 4 AAAI i A a1 1 4>tl A AAA I A S 4*A/4 )A 1 2. Ability to construct a stormwater retention facility that would collect run-off from all of the plant property allowing for one discharge point for monitoring. Ability to economically add additional suspended solids removal facilities if required. 3. Avoid the issues associated with remediation on private property, including how clean is clean, exposure concerns, traffic, adverse PR associated with remediation in a low income community, etc. DSW 122118 ADAD21-018114 HARTOLDMONOQ31436 ANNISTON STORMWATER CONTROL OPTIONS Detailed below are several options for the control of stormwater ^tt_u___m_______c__u__t_s____s___u___u_j_tia_ anaj easu sxae ui uae iuuixi s--a^.u_n mnauw **4% + including the run-off from the south side landfills. The options include the purchase of available vacant property in the Mars Hill Area. Costs are +/** 30% estimates. OPTION 1 Includes one large sediment pond just south of 8th Street, with a W4 AA.k'JAA f <121 @iur^6ncy 1 1f.ratf /4 KS*if nvu^u v v ci. i.xwi? to the north; stormwater from south of Highway 202 would be routed through two 8' x 8 ' box culverts through the residential area. Approximate cost: $1.3M OPTION 2 Includes a smaller sediment basin at 8th Street and a large basin in the field immediately east of Mars Hill church. Stormwater from south (uphill) of the south landfills would be diverted in open ditches and/or culverts to Snow Creek along the south side of Highway 202; stormwater from the south landfills would be diverted to the large basin; stormwater from north of 202, the residential area and the plant would be routed to the smaller basin; a smaller culvert (48" diameter) would be needed through the neighborhood. Approximate cost: $2.0M __ OPTION 3 . Similar to Option 2, except that water from south of the landfills would go into the larger pond, the larger pond would be deeper to handle the extra flow. Approximate cost: $i.6M . OPTION 4 Includes the smaller pond at 8th Street and a larger pond on the west side of Clydesdale, north of the current plant parking lot. All water from south of Highway 202 and plant flow would be 1 1 a y/tay nAn/1 A O IV <4 4 t W 1 1A WVU1U still be required through the neighborhood to handle flow from north of the highway; this and flow from the residential area would flow through the smaller pond. Approximate cost: $1.8M OSH 122 LL9 ADAD21-018115 HARTOLDMONOQ31437 0 4 2630 * Applied Chemistry. Creative Solutions March 27, 2000 Solutia Inc. 575 Maryville Centre Drive St. Louis. Missouri 63141 P.O. Box 66760 St. Louis, Missouri 63166-6760 Tel 314-674-1000 Mr. Wm. Gerald Hardy, Chief Land Division Alabama Department of Environmental Management 1400 Coliseum Blvd. Montgomery, AL 36110 ' Re: Work Plan for Estimating PCB Vapor Flux From Solutia Landfills USEPA I.D. No. ALD 004 019 048 Dear Mr. Hardy: In accordance with your letter dated February 1,2000, and received by Solutia on February 8, 2000, Solutia has prepared a work plan to evaluate the potential for airborne releases of PCBs from Solutia's South Landfill and West End Landfill. Three copies of this work plan are enclosed for your review. 1 look forward to receiving your early approval of this work plan. If I can expedite approval by meeting with you to answer any questions, please let me know. Sincerely, ( Manager, Remedial Projects cc: Mr. Wesley Hardegree - EPA (3 copies) Mr. Russ McClean - EPA Ms. Karen Knight - EPA Anniston Mr. Craig Brown - EPA ADAD21-018116 HARTOLDMONOQ31438 ADAD21-018117 HARTOLDMONOQ31439 Solutia, Inc. Anniston, AL Work Plan for Estimating PCB Vapor Flux From Two Landfills ENSR March 2000 Document No. 6105-006-100 ADAD21-018118 HARTOLDMON0031440 SoJutia, Inc. Anniston, AL Work Plan for Estimating PCB Vapor Flux From Two Landfills ENSR March 2000 Document No. 6105-006-100 ADAD21-018119 HARTOLDMONOQ31441 CONTENTS ENSt 1.0 INTRODUCTION........................................................................................................................... 1-1 2.0 FLUX CHAMBER PROGRAM DESIGN........................................................................................ 2-1 2.1 Flux Chamber Design................................................................................................................. 2-1 2.2 Selection of Sampling Locations............................................................................................... 2-2 2.3 Flux Chamber Sampling............................................................................................................. 2-2 2.4 Sample Handling and Documentation.......................................................................................2-3 3.0 SAMPLE VALIDATION AND LABORATORY ANALYSIS........................................................... 3-1 3.1 Sample Validation Criteria.......................................................................................................... 3-1 3.2 Laboratory Analysis Methods.....................................................................................................3-1 4.0 DATA REPORTING.......................................................................................................................4-1 5.0 QUALITY ASSURANCE / QUALITY CONTROL.......................................................................... 5-1 5.1 Sample Documentation and Chain-Of-Custody....................................................................... 5-1 5.2 Field Blanks..................................................................................................................................5-1 5.3 Method Blanks..............................................................................................................................5-1 5.4 Internal Standards....................................................................................................................... 5-2 AA9698A-660.doc j March. 2000 ADAD21-018120 HARTOLDMONOQ31442 ;aa> LIST OF TABLES Table 1-1 Target Analytes.......................................................................................................................1-2 Table 3-1 Anticipated Sample Collection and Analysis Count...............................................................3-2 A:\9698A-660.doc jj March, 2000 ADAD21-018121 HARTOLDMONOQ31443 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 2-1 Schematic of Isolation Flux Chamber Sampling System................................................... 2-4 Figure 2-2 Flux Chamber Specifications............................................................................................... 2-5 Figure 2-3 Schematic and Grid Overlay for South Landfill...................................................................2-6 Figure 2-4 Schematic and Grid Overlay for West End Landfill.............................................................2-7 A:\9698-660doc jjj March, 2000 ADAD21-018122 HARTOLDMONOQ31444 1.0 INTRODUCTION ENSR has been retained by Solutia, Inc. of Anniston, AL to design and implement an emissions flux measurement program. Results from the study will provide a basis for estimating the flux of PCBs, if any, originating from the South Landfill and West Landfill areas of Solutia's facility property located in Anniston, AL. The study has been crafted to meet the request for PCB flux characterization contained in the correspondence from the Alabama Department of Environmental Management (ADEM) dated February 1,2000. The language of the aforementioned ADEM letter suggests that the program must `evaluate the potential for releases of gaseous and particulate PCBs into the air" from the South and West End Landfills. The flux chamber study will support this request through providing an assessment of gaseous PCB flux. Evaluating the potential for release of particulate-associated PCBs from the affected areas requires separate consideration, relating to the fact that the PCB release mechanisms would be expected to differ between vapor phase and particulate-associated PCBs. Fugitive dusts from surface soils containing PCBs could be viewed as a probable pathway for particulate-associated species to enter the ambient air. However, the use of clean fill at both landfills effectively eliminates the particulate-bound fugitive dust PCB issue from consideration. As such, the proposed flux chamber study has been designed to evaluate the vapor phase partition of potential PCB releases from the landfills. The program adopts technical elements from published EPA guidance for measurement of VOC flux and applies these technical tools to estimation of vapor phase PCBs flux at the Solutia landfills. Table 1-1 lists the target PCB analytes for this program. Though PCBs are semivolatile organic compounds with lower vapor pressure than VOCs, the vapor phase partition of these parameters is assumed to behave in a manner amenable to estimation via flux chamber methodology. Flux chamber sampling will be performed during one work day at each landfill, and result in collection of six (6) samples at each area. Laboratory analysis using state-of-the-art high resolution gas chromatography/high resolution mass spectrometry will provide the lowest feasible method detection limits to the study. Flux chamber design and operation along with site selection strategy are discussed in Section 2.0, sample validation requirements and laboratory analysis methods are described in Section 3.0, calculations are put forth in Section 4.0 and quality assurance/quality control elements are described in Section 5.0. A:969S-660 1-1 March, 2000 ADAD21-018123 HARTOLDMON0031445 Table 1-1 Target PCB Analytes Monochlorobiphenyl Dichlorobiphenyl Trichlorobiphenyl Tetrachlorobiphenyl Pentachlorobiphenyl Hexachlorobiphenyl Heptachlorobiphenyl Octachlorobiphenyl Nonachlorobiphenyl Decachlorobiphenyl AS69M60 1-2 March, 2000 ADAD21-018124 HARTOLDMONOQ31446 _______________ .________________EM3I 2.0 FLUX CHAMBER PROGRAM DESIGN The technical approach for the program relies upon design and operation of an emissions isolation flux chamber to estimate PCB flux, if any, from the South and West End Landfills. The flux chamber technique provides a direct means of estimating emission rates of target analytes from a given surface area per unit time. The subsections to follow describe the design and operation of tiie flux chamber apparatus, selection of measurement locations, and sample collection and laboratory analysis methods. Several key design elements have been considered for this program, as listed below: Flux chamber specifications for volume and surface area coverage Sweep gas selection and flowrate Flux chamber equilibration period Sample collection and laboratory analysis methods Sampling flowrate Selection of sampling locations Each of these design considerations are discussed in the subsections that follow. 2.1 Flux Chamber Design Figure 2-1 provides a schematic of the flux chamber apparatus. The flux chamber will consist of a sealed, non-reactive enclosure device with a single inlet and single outlet that will be placed over each defined sample collection area. Clean, dry sweep gas (zero air or nitrogen) will be introduced at a controlled rate to the flux chamber inlet, with the sweep gas flow directed parallel to the landfill surface and toward the center of the flux chamber. The sweep gas will capture vapor phase PCBs, if any, emanating from the surface area covered by the chamber and exhaust through the flux chamber outlet After allowing the sweep gas and surface area to reach a state of equilibrium, the sweep gas flowrate will be adjusted and recorded. A portion of the exhaust gas will then be collected over a onehour sampling period. The flux chambers will be constructed of a clear, plexiglass dome covering an area of approximately V* square meter and will have a volume of approximately 0.0125 cubic meters (see Figure 2-1). All flux chamber materials contacting the sample gas are either teflon, glass or stainless steel to provide an inert sample collection system. A:969M60 2-1 March, 2000 ADAD21-018125 HARTOLDMONOQ31447 2.2 Selection of Sampling Locations To provide as assessment of potential PCB flux from the two landfills, six sampling locations at each landfill have been selected for measurement. The number of sampling locations was chosen to provide a reasonably sized data set from which to evaluate the PCB flux while still considering program logistics. It is anticipated that the six sampling locations at each landfill can be accommodated over the course of two workdays (one day per landfill) using a two person field team. Figure 2-3 and Figure 2-4 provides a schematic of the South and West End Landfills, respectively. A grid system has been overiayed on to each schematic, with vertical and horizontal grid lines marked at approximately 100' intervals. This produces 45 and 39 points, respectively, for the South and West End landfills. On the day designated for field work, six grid points will be randomly selected for sampling. A single flux chamber sample will be collected at a suitable location nearest each selected grid point. Locations deemed unsuitable for sampling could include areas characterized by steep incline, standing water or significant ground moisture, rocky terrain, or presence of manmade obstacles such as roads. Sampling locations utilized for the program will be documented in the field log and staked / flagged in the field for future reference. 2.3 Flux Chamber Sampling Once sampling locations have been randomly selected on the day of field work, flux chamber sampling will be conducted based upon the specified protocol outlined below: 1. Place clean flux chamber apparatus on selected landfill location and secure to ground. The flux chamber apparatus will be initially solvent rinsed with acetone and allowed to air dry, then placed directly atop the landfill at the designated sampling location. To secure the chamber for sampling, a small trench corresponding to the outer dimensions of the flux chamber will be prepared using a solvent rinsed metal trowel. The flux chamber will then be secured into the small trench by physically sealing the chamber / ground interface with additional top soil. As mentioned above, the flux chambers will be constructed of a clear, plexiglass dome covering an area of approximately V* square meter and will have a volume of approximately 0.0125 cubic meters (Figure 2-1). 2. Initiate sweep gas and allow chamber to equilibrate. Prior to sampling, the flux chamber will secured and sweep gas flow initiated. The flux chamber will then be allowed to reach equilibrium. Published literature has suggested that it typically takes approximately four residence times to reach steady-state conditions within the flux chamber. Based upon a chamber volume of 0.0125 m3and a sweep gas rate of 2 liters per minute, equilibrium should be reached within approximately 25 minutes of beginning the sweep gas flow into the system. A:969&660 2-2 March, 2000 ADAD21-018126 HARTOLDMON0031448 3. Start pump and collect sample. After operating the sweep gas flow for the time period required to reach steady-state, the sampling pump will be started and allowed to run for a 60 minute period. The sampling train will consist of a V* teflon line attached to the flux chamber outlet and an XAD tube where target PCB analytes will be sorbed. Sampling pumps will be calibrated at the beginning and end of each field day using a traceable calibrator. The target PCB parameters will be collected from the flux chamber outlets based upon the solid sorbent technique outlined in EPA Method 18 (40 CFR 60, Appendix A). Specifically, sample gas will be passed through an XAD tube at an approximate flowrate of 2 liters per minute. This will produce a sample volume of approximately 120 liters (0.120 m3). XAD tubes will be subsequently analyzed using high resolution GC/MS to provide optimal method sensitivity to the program. PCBs will be reported for each of the mono through deca congener classes 4. Recover samples and ship to analytical laboratory. Following each 1 hour sampling period, samples will be collected, capped, labeled with a unique sample ID, and secured in a shipping cooler with chain-of-custody documentation. Samples will be shipped cool to the designated analytical laboratory via overnight courier. 2.4 Sample Handling and Documentation XAD sampling tubes will be purchased from SKC Inc. and shipped to the site for field use. When used for sampling, cartridge tips will be opened immediately prior to attaching the tubes to the sampling system. Sample coolers for sample shipment will be stored in a clean location with their lids sealed until use. After sampling, XAD tubes will be recapped and packed snugly in coolers with ice packs. Sample coolers will be shipped via overnight courier to the analytical laboratory. Chain-of-custody procedures will be employed to provide a mechanism for assignment of responsibility for sample integrity and to provide physical evidence of the history and integrity of each sample, from collection through analysis and data reporting. A:! 2-3 March, 2000 ADAD21-018127 HARTOLDMONOQ31449 FIGURE 2-1 Schematic of Isolation Flux Chamber Sampling System regulati rotometer ultra zero air cylinder sweep gas dispersion tube air sampling pump 2-4 ADAD21-018128 HARTOLDMON0031450 FIGURE 2-2 Flux Chamber Specifications Flux Chamber Specifications dimensions i ' iIBnIoVIhae i ! A - height; 3.9! : B-width i 19.7! I C-length j 19.71 mAtAm lligiC!9 f 1 io.iooo 0.5000! 0.50001 surface area i cvn| inIWrhI IoW !- ! 387.5 Cfl fIWoVfi%t 2.69 ij en mllivoficvrle^ : 0.250 volume ! cu inches cu feet ; cu meters ; 762.6 i 0.8826 i 0.0125 ------- B ------ A 2-5 ADAD21-018129 HARTOLDMONOQ31451 NOTE: ----------------- ------------ D .M2k104a.eps 200 0 FIGURE 2-3 Schematic and Grid Overlay for South Landfill 2-6 200 400 600 Scale in Feet March 2000 ADAD21-018130 HARTOLDMONOQ31452 Grid lines ovsriayed at 100' increments VI2kl04b.eps FIGURE 2-4 Schematic and Grid Overlay for West End Landfill 2-7 Scale in Feet March 2000 ADAD21-018131 HARTOLDMONOQ31453 A O fk uni P \ ltl IPS ft A kin Jk QAQ ATAn\/ A1IAI V!fi O.U OMIVITLC VMLIUH IIVJIN MIVU LMDUrVM I wru MWML. I OIO A formal validation and selection procedure will be implemented to select samples for analysis. This procedure assesses sample integrity, sampler operation, and sample identification issues for each individual sample. Only those samples deemed valid through application of the sample validation protocol discussed in this section will be considered for analysis. Sample validation criteria and laboratory analysis methods are described in the subsections to follow. 3.1 Sample Validation Criteria Physical Integrity. Field staff inspect each sample tube immediately prior to and at the completion of each sampling session to ensure the physical integrity of the collected sample. Glass tubes are inspected for cracks or chips which may prevent formation of an adequate seal while seated in the sampling train. Samples containing components which do not display appropriate physical characteristics as identified above may be invalidated and eliminated from consideration for analysis. Pump Calibration Check. Aii sample pumps undergo fuii calibration prior to and at the completion of each sample in order to confirm proper sampler operation. Pre- and post-calibration points should fall within 20 percent of each other to be considered valid. Samples collected by pumps not meeting this criterion may be invalidated and eliminated from consideration for analysis. Flow Rate Consistency. Accurate sample volume determination requires that a consistent flow rate be maintained throughout the sampling period. Flow rate consistency is confirmed by proper operation of the sampling pumps, which are flow-controlled. Sampling Duration. Abbreviated sampling sessions due to pump or flux chamber malfunction may be considered invalid and eliminated from consideration for analysis. Sample Identification. Any unresolvable ambiguities with sample identification or chain-of-custody uwiinll ri omeu11h14 Iiini oecnumiipnilac ii ivauviQuvi i. 3.2 Laboratory Analysis Methods A total of sixteen (16) samples will be collected and analyzed, consisting of six flux chamber samples and two QA/QC samples (one field blank and one method blank) per landfill, as summarized in Table 3-1. Samples will be analyzed via high resolution gas chromatography/ high resolution mass spectrometry (HRGC/HRMS) for the mono through deca PCB congener classes based upon the procedures detailed in EPA Method TO-9A and EPA Method 680. Anticipated detection limits of 2 ng/sample per congener class are anticipated, producing an overall method detection limit of 20 ng/sample for total PCBs (summation of the mono through deca congener classes). This analytical 3-1 Match, 2000 ADAD21-018132 HARTOLDMON0031454 detection limit coupled with the anticipated sample volume of 60 liters produces an overall method detection limit of 1.2 x 10'3 ug/m2-min. Calculation of PCB flux is described in Section 5.0. Table 3-1 Anticipated Sample Collection and Analysis Count Sample Type Flux Chamber Samples QA Samples (Reid Blanks) QA Samples (Method Blanks) Total South Landfill 6 1 1 8 West End Landfill 6 1 1 8 The PCB data set from the program will be evaluated based upon the following parameters: Recoveries of isotopically labeled PCB congeners spiked into samples prior to extraction. Acceptance limits for recoveries have been established as 50% to 125%. Results for the analyses of field and method blanks. Results of laboratory control spikes. Acceptance limits for PCB congener laboratory control spikes are relative percent difference of 40% and recovery limits between 50% and 125%. A:9G9B-660 3-2 March, 2000 ADAD21-018133 HARTOLDMONOQ31455 4.0 DATA REPORTING Vapor phase PCB flux will be estimated for the ten PCB congener classes (mono through deca) listed in Table 1-1. The following equation will be used to calculate PCB vapor flux for each sample: Flux = (C/Y)xS/A where: Flux = PCB Flux (ug/m2-min) C = Analytical Result (ug) V = Sample Volume (m3) S = Sweep Gas Flowrate (m2/min) A = Flux Chamber Surface Area (m2). A written data report summarizing results from the program will include PCB flux estimates as well as the following information: Laboratory data reports Copies of field data sheets (sampling dates, sample volumes, sampling periods) Copies of pump calibrations. A:969&660 4-1 March. 2000 ADAD21-018134 HARTOLDMONOQ31456 5.0 QUALITY ASSURANCE/QUALITY CONTROL This section is designed to assure that sampling and analysis procedures conducted during the flux chamber sampling program will provide consistent, high-quality data in accordance with the objectives of the program. 5.1 Sample Documentation and Chain-Of-Custody Sample control and chain-of-custody procedures document sample identity and handling from collection through laboratory analysis and data reporting. For this program, field custody records will trace a sample from its origin during sample collection and all transfers of custody until the sample is logged in at the analytical laboratory. Internal laboratory records will then document the custody of the sample through its final disposition. As samples are collected, each will be uniquely identified with a label that includes: landfill identification location code sample collection date. After collection, identification and preservation, the sample will be maintained under chain-of-custody procedures outlined above. In addition to the labeling of samples, a field sample log will be maintained by the field coordinator (or designee) in which a complete account of samples collected will be recorded. 5.2 Field Blanks One field blank per sampling day will be collected as part of the program. Field blanks will be handled as an actual sample except that they will not be exposed to flux chamber off-gas. Each field blank will be uniquely labeled and shipped to the analytical laboratory with the other field samples. Field blank results provide an assessment of field bias, if any, to results from actual program samples. 5.3 Method Blanks Method blanks are clean XAD tubes that are stored with the samples upon receipt at the laboratory. Method blanks, which remain at the laboratory and do not go to the field, are analyzed with actual samples and are used to assess laboratory-derived sample contamination. 5-1 March. 2000 ADAD21-018135 HARTOLDMONOQ31457 ; 5.4 Internal Standards Isotopically labeled internal standards will be fortified into each program sample prior to conducting the sample preparation regime. Native PCB measurements are then quantified against recoveries of these internal standards. Acceptance limits for recoveries have been established as 50% to 125%. A:969M60 5-2 Match, 2000 ADAD21-018136 HARTOLDMON0031458 ENSR. AL, Florence (256) 767-1210 AK, Anchorage (907) 561-5700 rL\Vi\, Ci uamirhu^uritLiiw'e (907) 452-5700 CA, Alameda (510) 748-6700 na on, wai i iai mu (805) 388-3775 CA, Glendale (818) 546-2090 na i -- UM, IfVIJIB (949) 752-0403 CA, Sacramento (976) 362-7100 CO, Ft. Coiiins (970) 493-8878 Ft. Collins Tox Lab (970) 416-0916 CT, Stamford (203) 323-6620 GA, Norcross (770) 209-7167 GA, Savannah (972) 898-0015 IL, Chicago (630) 836-1700 LA, Lafayette (318) 896-2430 ME, Portland (207) 773-9501 MD, Columbia (470) 884-9280 MA, Acton (978) 635-9500 MA, Buzzards Bay (508) 888-3900 MA, Northborounh (508) 393-8558* MA, Woods Hole (508) 457-7900 MiviMm, mMuinnna^n/Mie (672) 924-0117 MO, Ballwin (636) 386-3020 NJ, Piscataway (732) 457-0500 NY, Albany (578) 453-6444 NY, Metro Area (974) 347-4990 NY, Rochester (776) 381-2210 NY, Syracuse (375) 432-0506 NC, Raleigh (979) 571-0669 OH, Cincinnati (573) 985-9186 OR, Portland (503) 224-7338 PA, Langhorne (275) 757-4900 PA, Philadelphia (670) 834-7288 PA, Pittsburgh (472) 261-2910 PR, Rio Piedras (787) 753-9509 SC, Columbia (803) 216-0003 TX, Austin (572) 336-2426 TX, Dallas (972) 960-6855 TX Houston (773) 520-9900 TX, San Antonio (270) 590-8393 \A/A D n, ix^uiiiuiiu (425) 887-7700 ENSR iiilci iiduunai Acton, MA (978) 266-4232 Bolivia Brazil Canada Czech Republic Ecuador France Germany Greece Italy Malaysia Mexico Spain Ti uuirkt\\csayw United Kingdom Venezuela Internet www.ensr.com ADAD21-018137 HARTOLDMONOQ31459 RESPONSE OF SOLUTIA INC. TO CERCLA SECTION 104(e) REQUEST FOR INFORMATION RELATING TO THE ANNISTON SITE The information contained in this Response to EPA's Request for Information, dated July 27, 2000, is provided solely to satisfy obligations imposed on Solutia Inc. ("Solutia") pursuant to CERCLA 104, 42 U.S.C. 9604. The information contained in this Response is not in any way to be construed as an admission of fact or concession of law by Solutia, or any of its officers, agents, or employees. Request No. 1: Identify the person(s) answering these Requests on behalf of Respondent. Response to Request No. 1: These responses were prepared by counsel for Solutia after reviewing documents and consulting with the following current or former Monsanto and Solutia employees: Dr. Robert G. Kaley, II, Jerry L. Brown, Gene Arnett, Alan G. Faust, Craig R. Branchfield and Robert T. Jones. Request JNoJ: For each and every Request contained herein, identify all persons consulted in the preparation of the answer. Response to Request No. 2: See the Response to Request No. 1. ADAD21-018138 HARTOLDMON0031460 Request No. 3: For each and every Request contained herein, identify all documents consulted, examined, or referred to in the preparation of the answer or that contain information responsive to the Request and provide true and accurate copies of all such documents. Provide an index of all documents submitted and indicate the Request(s) to which each document corresponds. Response to Request No. 3: Solutia has previously collected and numbered (using a DSW prefix) approximately 160,000 pages of documents for production in pending litigation relating to the Anniston plant. Solutia has also previously produced to the EPA a set of 5833 pages of numbered documents using the prefix "EPA." Those document sets have been reviewed prior to responding to these requests. Additional documents responsive to these requests that have been located by Solutia or that are located by Solutia in the future will also be numbered with the DSW prefix. Where feasible, Solutia has attached documents as exhibits to these responses and has identified documents by title or by title and production numbers in response to various requests. In addition, Solutia is segregating other numbered documents for the EPA's review in response to various requests. Given the number and bulk of these documents, they will be made available for review at the offices of Lightfoot, Franklin & White in Birmingham, Alabama, at a mutually agreeable time. Request No. 4: Provide all documents and pleadings associated with the civil lawsuits filed against Solutia or Monsanto regarding Solutia's and/or Monsanto's operations 2 ADAD21-018139 HARTOLDMONOQ31461 W1 - -/ 'nfthe Facilitv.1 . Response io Request No. 4: See letter from Allan J. Topol to Dustin Minor dated August 23,2000 (attached as Exhibit A), and letter from William S. Cox III to Dustin Minor dated September 22, 2000 (attached as Exhibit B), regarding availability of production documents and pleadings from pending litigation for review and transmitting pleadings and summary information regarding the pending litigation. c. rAcifUPaL jnu. Describe ths dr8in3gs and surfacs water pathways surrounding 1) the Facility in Anniston during the following time periods: (include specifics regarding the drainage and surface water pathways surrounding the areas known as the "south landfill" and the "west end landfill") a. The earliest time period for which you have any information. b. Any year(s) that these pathways were modified. c. 1970. d. Prior to modifying the flow during the 1990's. e. Describe the new drainage and surface water pathways and any storm water piping put in place after the water control remediation project was completed in the late 1990's. 'See, definition of Facility as it differs from the statutory definition of the term. 3 ADAD21-018140 HARTOLDMON0031462 Response to Request No. 5: (a), (b), (c) and (d): Solutia will make available topographic maps, drawings, aerial photographs and other such documents that Solutia has been able to locate showing drainage and surface water pathways and discharge points at the Anniston plant, including the areas now known as the "South Landfill" and the "West End Landfill." The earliest maps and drawings located are dated in the 1920s. Solutia will also make available rulvAj/u'iuim11iov>niifieo thari&nrsrA\jt1r\r1* i.i piaiil o rif^QuQoK uQuC iD\u^Di\An iPderiimmit oQpPp\niiliuf*aiitiiuf\niii fmheft pf'.SidGiru'.t'oc IMNPruHcPo^ Permits, the plant's current RCRA Permit and the plant's groundwater monitoring and collection system that contain information regarding surface water drainage and collection, routing of surface water and the location of discharge points at the plant site. Solutia is aware of the following construction or demolition activities at the plant site that modified or could have modified drainage pathways and surface water collection over time: (1.) In or about 1960, through an exchange of properties between Monsanto Company and Alabama Power Company, the power company took title to property that includes the area now known as the West End Landfill. In or about the mid 1970s, Alabama Power Company constructed a power substation on that property. That construction project included some excavation that would have modified the tOIDoWaraD hic contours------------- -----of that piece of property. While surface water would, therefore, ADAD21-018141 HARTOLDMON0031463 flow in a somewhat different pattern over this property, Solutia believes that the surface water ultimately reached the same discharge point that it reached prior to the exchange of property with Alabama Power Company. \ A r\'7A III Ul ciUUUl 127/ I Monsanto bsgsn a projsct of upgrading th landfill area now known as the South Landfill to sanitary landfill status. During that project, waste cells were constructed and catch basins were installed below the cells to collect surface water. The surface or storm water then evaporated over time from those catch basins. In addition, as waste cells were established on the landfill, the construction included trenches above the cells designed to route surface water around the cells. The catch basins were eliminated in or about the early 1980s as part of the plant's construction of the groundwater monitoring and collection system at the plant site. (3.) In or about 1958, as part of the construction of the parathion manufacturing operation, concrete curbing and diking was installed to collect storm water and route that storm water to a concrete trench. That concrete trench led to the in-plant sewer At Am oyoiem Ml 4a A IStMAniAM A L a J mat iuuicu me weuei iu a iimesiunt? ut?U tur 5 ADAD21-018142 HARTOLDMONOQ31464 mi! am TU a /J'a a 4U a I m a a^a m a Ua^I 1 A aJ +a a ii6uucuiz.cujuii. i uc uiouiidiye iium uie umccjiuiic ueu teu iu o holding tank where pH was adjusted to a neutral range. The holding tank then discharged to the sewer system that ultimately carried water to the City of Anniston's wastewater treatment facility (POTW). In or about 1960, Monsanto constructed a waste treatment facility on the plant site, and the storm water was then routed through the concrete trench to the iInII -nlanIkt V/W1I/Wolr WcjuVshtoVImIII TI hIIWe |n^IlUaInIkt Wcolw> Wolr cuWstkoWmI I I mi.I .W..W.i.tk.aW..Vr.iI tho.il..I.V. water to the limestone neutralization bed that then discharged to the holding tank in which pH was balanced. The holding tank fed to Monsanto's on-site waste treatment facility. Surface drains located inside the parathion manufacturing area were connected to the in-plant sewer system that led to the limestone neutralization bed that discharged to the holding tank that fed to Monsanto's on-site waste treatment facility. The parathion manufacturing operation, P2S5 manufacturing operation, and most of the on-site waste treatment facility were demolished during the period from about 1986 to 1988. The surface area where these operations were located is covered by areas of concrete and gravel. (4.) The para-nitrophenol (PNP) manufacturing operation was constructed in 1965. The PNP manufacturing area was lined ADAD21-018143 HARTOLDMONOQ31465 with acid brick that sloped to drsins connected to sewers that were routed to the limestone neutralization bed that discharged to the holding tank that fed to Monsanto's waste treatment facility. Surface drains located inside the PNP manufacturing area were connected to the in-plant sewer system that was routed to the limestone neutralization bed that discharged to the holding tank that fed to Monsanto's on-site waste treatment facility. In the 1970s, a project was undertaken to construct a berm and curbing to route additional storm water from the area immediately outside the PNP manufacturing operation through the steps described above and then to Monsanto's on-site waste treatment facility. (5.) In 1970, Monsanto installed additional curbing and diking at and around the Arnnlnr rnnlv/rhlnrinatad hinhenvk and . > r*''j,w polychlorinated terphenyls) manufacturing area for collection of storm water which was then routed to a iimestone neutralization pit before discharge to a drainage ditch (at what is now known as Discharge Point 001). Prior to installation of this curbing and diking, surface water from that area was collected by storm drains, and the sewers from those storm drains also routed that water to the same limestone pit. (A second limestone neutralization pit was constructed in this *7 / ADAD21-018144 HARTOLDMON0031466 same area in 1970 to perform this same function, alternating with the original neutralization pit. The discharge from this second pit was also at Discharge Point 001.) Surface drains located inside the Aroclor manufacturing area were connected to the sewer system that routed the water to the limestone neutralization pit(s). The manufacturing of polychlorinated biphenyls in the Aroclor department ceased in 1971; the manufacturing of polychlorinated terphenyls in the Aroclor department ceased in 1972; and the Aroclor department was dismantled in 1972. The surface area where those operations were located is covered by areas of concrete and asphalt. (6.) Surface water from the biphenyl/polyphenyls manufacturing area flowed to storm sewers that were routed to the limestone pit(s) that discharged at what is now known as Discharge Point 001. The routing of this surface water was changed in connection with the recent on-site remediation projects. (7.) The chlorine manufacturing area was an enclosed area and surface water did not flow through that manufacturing area. Surface water from outside and around the building housing the chlorine manufacturing operations flowed to surface drains connected to the in-plant storm water sewer system. That 8 ADAD21-018145 HARTOLDMON0031467 oyoici I I IIWUUllIoQHU LI IQ oi trfrmei qui iqwq \v..A.v.../w..a...s.f.vn. .i.r......f...n........t...h....o..........l.i..m.....I..DW....W.c...f.tc..nW....nI...I.oV- neutralization pit that discharged at what is now known as Discharge Point 001. The chlorine manufacturing process ceased and the department was dismantled in or about 1969. The surface area where this operation was located is covered by areas of concrete and gravel. (8.) In or about the late 1960s, trenching was constructed on the west side of the plant property to prevent storm water run on to the west side of the plant's manufacturing area. That collected storm water was channeled to the drainage ditch north of the plant site that was then channeled through a culvert under the railroad tracks north of the plant site. Prior to construction of this trenching, surface water flowed to surface drains connected to the storm water sewer that routed the surface water to the drainage ditch that was channeled through a culvert under the railroad tracks north of the piani. (9.) The construction of the new Highway 202 in the mid to late 1970s changed the topography at the base of the eastern portion of the South Landfill area to some degree, but it did not modify the ultimate routing of the drainage from this area. That construction required the waste cell designated as 2W (a Q ADAD21-018146 HARTOLDMON0031468 parathion waste cell) to be relocated to a new waste cell (4E). The new Cell 4E was constructed on what is now the south side of the new Highway 202. Surface water from the eastern portion of the South Landfill that reached the new Highway 202 drained through a culvert under the highway and continued to flow through a drainage ditch that flowed north toward Tenth Street. This drainage ditch was the same drainage ditch that received this water before the highway construction. Drainage from the western portion of the South Landfill that reached the new Highway 202 was routed through a culvert under new Highway 202, traveled north for a short distance on the west side of Clydesdale Avenue, and then was routed through a culvert under Clydesdale Avenue. From there, the drainage flowed north through a drainage ditch on the east side of Clydesdale Avenue and joined the drainage ditch that then flowed east toward Bethel Missionary Baptist Church. This routing of drainage from the western portion of the South Landfill differed from earlier routing by having the drainage flow on the west side of Clydesdale for a short distance prior to being routed under Clydesdale and then connecting with the drainage ditch on the east side of Clydesdale. Solutia will make available work plans and reports regarding the remediation 10 ADAD21-018147 HARTOLDMON0031469 activities undertaken since 1994 which describe modifications to drainage and surface water pathways and discharge points and describe the current drainage and surface water pathways and discharge points. Rpgiiftst No. 6: Describe in detail what was done to modify the drainage and surface water pathways from the Facility in the late 1990's. Response to Request No. 6: See the Response to Request No. 5e. Request No. 7: Describe the 100 year flood plain for all streams, ditches, and creeks which are/were part of the drainage and surface water pathways of the Facility and provide a map depicting it. Describe how you determined what the 100 year flood plain was for these waterways. Response to Request No. 7: Solutia is not aware of historical investigations of the flood plain for the identified areas. Solutia will make available documents and maps regarding flood plains prepared by Solutia in connection with current remediation projects. Request No. 8: Provide a map showing all areas which are/were part of the drainage and surface water pathways from the Facility indicating all areas which have flooded since 1917 and indicate the year(s) in which these floods occurred. 11 ADAD21-018148 HARTOLDMON0031470 Response to Request No. 8: Ses the ResponsGS to Requests Nos. U ClIIU i u uie ueaiui ouiuuct^ tMiuwieuye, information and belief, floods have not occurred at the plant site's manufacturing and landfill areas. Solutia is aware of episodic flooding from drainage ditches in areas east and north of the plant site during storm events. Those areas have been investigated and remediated as part of the remediation activities ongoing since 1994. See the Response to Request No. 5e. Dannaet Mn i w^yvwl i ivi Ti hi iri rwuuin^Ki irvMui u ^iQ0A_7i fv\g, Mvrkuioooi+wo ri gogciiurlunwaeg, |rgvirunurtui uio aoni i/u4 other materials from Solutia's (its predecessors and successors) manufacturing process may have been placed, stored, and/or disposed of at the Facility, or at various cleared areas owned by Solutia (or its predecessors), or at areas known now as the south landfill, or at areas known now as the west end landfill, and/or at public municipal landfills or neighboring properties. Provide information and documents demonstrating what was done with the various waste residues, off-spec products and other materials that may have been placed/disposed of at or from the Facility beginning in 1935. Response to Request No. 9: A. General Monsanto's general practice was to dispose of solid waste materials and construction or demolition debris in the landfill area now known as the West End Landfill from approximately 1935 to approximately 1959 and in the landfill area now known as the 12 ADAD21-018149 HARTOLDMONOQ31471 iviwi iocji ilw o ^AcAiAicaricnili n|^rioaua+uIauqc uvv/oapo to collect and reprocess "off-spec" product so that the product met product specifications. Office trash, noncontaminated wood from items such as wood pallets, and noncontaminated cardboard boxes and other such paper trash were also landfilled prior to the early 1980s, except that such noncontaminated paper and wood trash was burned in a teepee burner located on the South Landfill from about 1973 to about 1974. Beginning in or about the early 1980s, nonhazardous office trash was collected in nonhazardous dumpsters or rolloffs, and Monsanto contracted with BF! to transport this nonhazardous trash to the sanitary landfills that were used by BFI for the disposal of such trash. Those sanitary iandfiils included the ADEM-approved Calhoun County sanitary landfill and, after the Calhoun County sanitary landfill was closed, other ADEM-approved sanitary landfills. To the best of Solutia's knowledge, information and belief, with the exception of this transport of nonhazardous office trash to sanitary landfills by BFI, Monsanto did not use public municipal or county landfills or neighboring properties for disposal of waste, off-spec products or other materials from Monsanto's manufacturing processes. B. Solid Waste Disposal at Plant Landfills ou.1ii!uJ .w. as--Ate uis__p__o__s___e__a_1 o_t^oy Monsanio at Monsanto s lanatins at the Anniston plant site included the following: (1.) Construction and/or demolition debris, including equipment and debris from the demolition of the chlorine manufacturing operation in about 1969, the demolition of the Aroclor manufacturing operation in about 1972, the demolition of the i ADAD21-018150 HARTOLDMONOQ31472 UUUkiIIIU/4I'Imimy 1M/nIUAWiimII CmIaO ODiUmlNlUimllimy cO.Qu i!lnl wr\ir anku/uMuili1 I*1*3OUQCQ>, onrl giiiu utkica demolition of the parathion manufacturing operation and most of the on-site waste treatment facility in about 1986 to 1988. Still bottoms or Montars from the Aroclor (both polychlorinated biphenyls and polychlorinated terphenyls) manufacturing process were packaged and sold as a product. Amounts of t.thl..IWo..W.c.Wo.. matorialc....I...I..M.....k...W.......I...I..U.....I..W..... ovnoorlinn.W...../..^...W...W..W..VIII ImII Va< Irl(kWekt VH<VoI mI IMaI nI Mrl fu /Vo*rWo VHIVic|/nVnWcVeVHI Wrvl f as solid waste in the two landfill areas. Still bottoms or Santotars from the biphenyl manufacturing process were routed to an area on the plant site west of the biphenyl manufacturing process area where those still bottoms were allowed to cool and harden. After hardening, those still bottoms were collected and transported to the landfill areas at the plant site for disposal. From about 1957 to 1974, sulfur from the process of manufacturing parathion intermediates was incinerated at the plant site. Beginning in 1974 and continuing to about 1979, the sulfur was landfilled in the South Landfill. In the 1978 to 1979 time period, a process was installed to purify the sulfur for use as a raw material in the P2S5 manufacturing process. ADAD21-018151 HARTOLDMON0031473 /c \ \V.) Xiu me Uuejsa4i ui oOuaiIui ii4ida*da \m*niauiwicuyc, iiiiuiiiiaAu^ui/\ini artrns^uJ 1u^rctu11 r^tif, phosphate residues from the early manufacturing processes were landfilled in the area now known as the West End Landfill. (6.) Contaminated rags, gloves, empty sample bottles from quality control samples, equipment, piping, etc. were landfilled in the lanrlfill arooc 2+ tho nlant cito IWIIWIIII UI VWW U h II IW f^lUI II smv> If v/accolc nlninn nr nthor I f UWWVIU) ^||J|| 1 ^ ui Ull IVI equipment were not contaminated or were decontaminated and suitable for further manufacturing or other industrial use, such vessels and equipment were generally handled by a central department at Monsanto's St. Louis headquarters, and that department determined the distribution of that equipment either internally to other Monsanto facilities or externally to outside Purchasers {(.) Noncontaminated or decontaminated scrap metal was generally sold to a local salvager of scrap metal. _ (8.) Contaminated sand or chaff or rags used to clean up leaks or spills from manufacturing processes, including the Aroclor, parathion, PNP, P2S5, chlorine and biphenyl/polyphenvl manufacturing processes, were disposed of in the landfills at ADAD21-018152 HARTOLDMONOQ31474 the piant siie. (9.) Contaminated soil, for example, soil excavated at the time of the demolition of the parathion manufacturing process, was transported to the landfill at the plant site for disposal. (10.) Hydrochloric acid that was not marketed as a product (muriatic dA oAiiJu;\ IwllAciAd yMdAMieAtKaanII*yI uaI!iIi|u4ieaauJ lwilUmUi IwIIAc^uAcIi* aA nA/uJ ImIa AoAil lA I iIa^I iuulcu ^A iu uiA limestone neutralization pit(s) for neutralization of the remaining acid prior to discharge at what is currently known as Discharge Point 001. Those limestone neutralization pits were periodically excavated, and that material was transported to the landfill at the plant site for disposal. mi \ V ' 1 / Rinlnnirnl wiviwvjivui \vAv/uatojitua m wauii^iu dnHna firtrvjim11 u vi i--nvv/oaoko treatment facility was removed from the clarifiers by use of a high pressure filter press to dewater the sludge. The solid sludge was then transported to the landfill for disposal. (12.) As inert sands built up in the limestone beds associated with parathion waste treatment, those beds were excavated and that material was transported to the landfill at the plant site for disposal. 16 ADAD21-018153 HARTOLDMON0031475 C. Waste Disposal Contractors Beginning in or about the early 1980s, Monsanto contracted on a case-by-case basis with Chemical Waste Management to transport hazardous waste to Chemical Waste Management's waste disposal facility in Emelle, Alabama. Beginning in or about the middle 1980s, Monsanto entered corporate level contracts with Chemical Waste Management for disposal of hazardous waste, including disposal of hazardous waste from the Anniston plant to the waste disposal facility at Emelle. The Anniston plant's procedure is to deploy rolloff bins at the site, and any material with process contamination, whether hazardous or not, is placed in the rolloff bins to be collected by Chemical Waste Management and transported to the waste disposal facility at Emelle. * Beginning in or about the late 1980s, Monsanto contracted on a corporate basis with Rollins Environmental (now SafetyKleen)forthe disposal of liquid waste such as laboratory solvents by incineration at that company's incineration facilities. D. Documents Solutia will make available the following documents regarding waste disposal at and from the plant site and the handling of off-spec products from the plant's manufacturing processes: , (1.) Standard Manufacturing Process documents (SMPs), Standard Operating Instructions (SOIs) and Work Instructions Manuals (successors to SMPs and SOIs) regarding the manufacturing processes at the plant. An index of those documents is attached as Exhibit C. Solutia has marked on that index the documents that are 17 ADAD21-018154 HARTOLDMON0031476 protected confidential business/trade secret documents (manufacturing process documents for products currently manufactured at the Anniston plant or other Solutia or Monsanto sites). (2). Anniston Plant Site Development Manual (DSW 091891-092182) (3.) Hazardous Waste Manifests. (4.) Records of transport of materials to the South Landfill for disposal. Monsanto began keeping these records in or about 1982. (5.) Environmental Safety and Health Manuals for the Anniston plant. (6.) The PCB Annual Document maintained by Monsanto and now Solutia for the Anniston plant site pursuant to 40 C.F.R. 761.180(a). (7.) Hazardous Waste Manifests and other documents reflecting the transport of debris and waste in connection with the remediation activities conducted by Monsanto and now Solutia from 1994 to the present. (8.) Appendix A to the April 1997 RFI/CS Workplan (DSW 042574 042614) attached as Exhibit D and pertinent references listed on pages DSW 042613-042614 of Exhibit D (Solutia has prepared an attachment to Exhibit D to show the DSW numbers assigned to those references.) (9.) April 1994 Workplan for the West End Landfill Site Investigation (DSW 062030-062196); August 1994 Site investigation Report for the West End Landfill (DSW 017328-017816). 18 ADAD21-018155 HARTOLDMON0031477 ( .) oontracis wiin on,iuiA f\ \ ____A _ .. 'll ^ ^I Chemical Waste Management and Rollins/SafetyKIeen. ... Request No. 10: Identify all persons having knowledge or information about the generation, transportation, treatment, disposal or other handling of material at the Facility from 1917 to the present. n.4a Dammaa4 KIa a l\CrO|JUIIOC i\J r\CV|UC9l l*VS. IV. Solutia cannot respond to this request as currently drafted since, read literally, the request would include every person who has worked at the plant site from its origin in 1917 to the present. Solutia believes that current or former Monsanto or Solutia employees with the most comprehensive knowledge regarding these subject matters from 1935 to the present include: William Taffee (Mr. Taffee, based on his physician's evaluation, has not been available for an interview for some years), Jerry L. Brown, Gene Arrwa'tt Rnhort T Innoc f'.rain R Rran/'hfualH anH Alan CZ fPal lot iw.l) 1VWWI k I WWIIWWj WI MIM I A* Wl UI IVI I I Ik/IVI UMU / UW4I I .| Request No. 11: Provide the name and addresses of all past and present employees working at Monsanto and Solutia from 1935 to the present that may know information about Solutia's and/or Monsanto's waste disposal practice and/or production processes. a. SDecifv which of these emolovees mav know information - \~ j - - - - ------ y -------------------------------- ------------- about Solutia and/or Monsanto's waste disposal practices. ADAD21-018156 HARTOLDMON0031478 u. Specify whiuh uf th6s6 mpioyGGS may know infon i iSiion about Solutia's and/or Monsanto's production processes for any chemicals or other products manufactured by Monsanto and/or Solutia at its Anniston Facility. c. Specify which employees are/were in charge of waste disposal during the years that Solutia and/or Monsanto owned the Facility. Response to Request No. 11: Solutia cannot respond to this request as currently drafted since, read literally, the request would include every employee who has worked at the Anniston plant from 1935 to the present. The current or former Monsanto and Solutia employees with the most comprehensive knowledge regarding the subject matters covered by this request are identified below. a. occ uie iAee|JUM^e uj in<j. iu. b. Solutia believes that persons with comprehensive knowledge about the manufacturing processes at the Anniston plant are Jerry L. Brown and Gene Arnett. c. Prior to 1970, no one person was designated to be in charge of waste disposal on a plant-wide basis. Generally, waste disposal was managed by the department foreman in a nart*i!m<liar rvlwnpnrMari tmI IpVInt nVr nrnHnrtinnI nrWnWraWcWcWt, RWn^nlilnIInIIiIn|n^ IinII nWIr about 1969, William Taffee became the person in charge of 20 ADAD21-018157 HARTOLDMON0031479 waste disposal. Mr. Taffee, based on his physician's evaluation, has-not been available for an interview for some years. Current and former employees who can describe waste disposal from the 1950s to the present include Jerry L. Brown, Gene Arnett, Robert T. Jones, Alan G. Faust and Craig R. Branchfield. Request No. 12: Did Solutia or Monsanto sell, give, or otherwise provide foundries in Calhoun County waste residues, off-spec products, and/or other materials from Monsanto's or Solutia's manufacturing processes? Response to Request No. 12: To the best of Solutia's knowledge, information and belief, Monsanto did not sell, give or otherwise transfer waste residues or off-spec products to foundries in Calhoun County. There is sales information indicating that Monsanto sold hydraulic fluids formulated with PCBs to entities that operated foundries in Calhoun County. See the Response to Request No. 15. Request No. 13: Provide the name, addresses and points of contact for foundries (and other past or present entities in Calhoun County) that Solutia suspects of accepting Monsanto's or Solutia's waste residues, off-spec products and other materials from Monsanto's or Solutia's manufacturing process. 21 ADAD21-018158 HARTOLDMON0031480 Response to Request No. 13: See the Responses to Requests Nos. 12 and 15. Request No. 14: Describe any transfers of waste residues, off-spec products and other materials from Monsanto's or Solutia's manufacturing process to any past and present entities in Calhoun County including, but not limited to municipal, county, or state landfills. Include the type of material and quantity for each known incidence and any documents related thereto. Response to Request No. 14: See the Response to Request No. 9. Request No. 15: Did Monsanto or Solutia sell, give, or otherwise transfer PCBs to foundries in the area? Response to Request No. 15: There is sales information indicating that Monsanto sold hydraulic fluids formulated with PCBs to entities that operated foundries in Calhoun County. See letter from Dr. Robert G. Kaley, II to Wm. Gerald Hardy at ADEM dated October 1, 1999 (DSW 156853 -156973) attached as Exhibit E, specifically the pages of Exhibit E numbered DSW 156864-156866. Request No. 16: Did foundries in Calhoun County use PCBs in their production 22 ADAD21-018159 HARTOLDMONOQ31481 *p*\ Ii'urtbrtrctOoo(%0: l-f pa r^APAnha hA\i Anri fr mi#Ka+ DPQc \R;Dro UCoH II ou. ucav/iiu^ i iuvv ui iu iui vvnai i wuw hwiw www. Response to Request No. 16: See the Response to Request No. 15 and Exhibit E, specifically the pages of Exhibit E numbered DSW 156864-156866. Request No. 17: Did foundries intentionally mix PCBs into foundry sands? If so, provide any documentation Respondent has regarding this matter. Response to Request No. 17: See the Response to Request No. 15 and Exhibit E, specifically the pages of Exhibit E numbered DSW 156864-156866. While Solutia understands that PCB products were used as casting waxes in certain metal casting processes, Solutia has not located documents or other information showing that foundries in Calhoun County intentionally mixed PCBs into foundry sand. Request No. 18: if Monsanto or Soiuiia soid, gave or otherwise transferred PCBs to foundries in the area, then provide the following information about each transaction: a. The quantity of PCBs involved in the transaction. b. The date of the transaction. Z.J ADAD21-018160 HARTOLDMONOQ31482 T11Uiv uoc u IV (a..m^Ii >!/%<% ivui iui ICO IIIC1UV ^1 fl^o U 1C DPDe I VU^J. d. How the foundries disposed of the PCBs. Response to Request No. 18: See the Responses to Requests Nos. 15,16 and 17 and Exhibit E, specifically the pages of Exhibit E numbered DSW 156864-156866. Request No. 19: Was any of the Facility area which became Highway 202 ever used to dispose of wastes or hazardous substances, including PCBs? Describe the wastes and/or hazardous substances disposed of on the part of the Facility which became Highway 202. Provide information regarding the concentration of hazardous substances, including PCBs, in the soil that were removed from the Facility during the construction of Highway 202. Response to Request No. 19: The construction of new Highway 202 required the relocation of a waste cell containing parathion contaminated waste (Cell 2W) at the South Landfill. Monsanto conducted that cell relocation. Part of Cell 2W was located where the southern portion of the new Highway 202 construction was to occur. The cell was relocated to Cell 4E that was constructed at the South Landfill to receive the material that was in Cell 2W. Solutia will make available drawings that show the location of what was Cell 2W and the location of Cell 4E. Sampling was conducted for the presence of residual parathion and PNP to ADAD21-018161 HARTOLDMON0031483 determine the area to be excavated and to confirm that the excavation was complete. Sampling was not conducted for the.presence of PCBs in Cell 2W, since this was a cell for -- parathion-contaminated waste. Solutia has searched for, but has not located, documents reflecting the sampling conducted in connection with this project. Request No. 20: Where were the surface and subsurface soils that were removed from the Facility during the construction of Highway 202 disposed of? Response to Request No. 20: See the Response to Request No. 19. Request No. 21: What was the total volume of soil removed from the Facility during the construction of Highway 202? Provide soil volumes and ultimate disposition of all soils removed from the Facility during the construction of Highway 202. Response to Request No. 21: See the Response to Request No. 19. Solutia has searched for, but has not located, documents showing the volume of soil relocated from Cell 2W to Cell 4E. Request Na. 22: Provide information and records for any entities (public and private) including, but not limited to industrial/commercial manufacturing plants, municipal properties, or residences in Calhoun County that may have received surface or subsurface soils from the Facility or from any other properties that are currently or have been owned 25 ADAD21-018162 HARTOLDMONOQ31484 by Monsanto and/or Solutia in Calhoun County. Include the following for such transaction: a. State whether these soils contained hazardous substances, including, but not limited to, PCB products, off-spec manufacturing wastes, lead or any other products or wastes. b. State the location from which any such soils originated. c. State the location to which any such soils were taken. Response to Request No. 22: To the best of Solutia's knowledge, information and belief, surface or subsurface soils from the plant site or other properties owned by Monsanto and/or Solutia in Calhoun County have not been transported to industrial/commercial manufacturing plants, municipal properties, or residences in Calhoun County, except as follows: In connection with the ongoing remediation at and around the plant site, Solutia established a borrow area at the northeast corner of the plant site and used clean fill dirt from that borrow area in connection with Monsanto/Solutia's remediation of properties owned by Monsanto/Solutia east of the plant (including some properties purchased under the Property Purchase Program) and Monsanto/Solutia's remediation of a parcel of commercial property owned by John Blair immediately east of Clydesdale Avenue across from the plant site. In addition, Solutia provided clean fill dirt from this borrow area to Wellborn High School west of Anniston for the school's use in a project requiring fill dirt. 26 ADAD21-018163 HARTOLDMONOQ31485 Request No. 23: Did any residents of Calhoun County ever take, receive, or purchase fill dirt from the Facility? ... Response to Request No. 23: See the Response to Request No. 22. Request No. 24: If the answer to the previous Request is yes, did Respondent maintain records for any such transactions? If so, provide these records and any information Respondent may have regarding this matter. Response to Request No. 24: See the Response to Request No. 22. To date, Solutia has not located records regarding these uses of clean fill dirt from this borrow area. Request No. 25: Describe the general handling of wastes over the years and for the various owners of the Facility. Include all of the information Respondent has regarding this matter. Include the following information in your response: a. How were hazardous and non-hazardous wastes, hazardous substances, and off-spec materials handled and released by various owners and operators of the Facility. b. State whether these materials were discharged into the tributaries, 27 ADAD21-018164 HARTOLDMONOQ31486 treated on-site, and/or put in landfills. Response to Request No. 25: See the Response to Request No. 9, including the documents that are identified in response to that request. SMPs and SOIs for the parathion, PNP and P2S5 manufacturing operations contain responsive information regarding the plant's on-site waste treatment facility. Most of the on-site waste treatment facility (including the associated limestone beds and holding tanks, four of the eight waste treatment basins, and the in-ground sewer system (except a small portion of the sewer system running from the PNP department to the remaining waste treatment facility)) was removed in connection with demolishing the parathion and P2S5 manufacturing operations in the 1986 to 1988 time period. Two of the four remaining waste treatment basins were converted to above-ground holding tanks and two continue to operate as waste treatment basins associated with the PNP manufacturing operation. Request No. 26: Describe in detail any accidental releases of products, including PCBs, from the Facility. Include the following information about any accidental releases. a. The date of the release. b. The specific type of material released. c. The quantity of material released. 28 ADAD21-018165 HARTOLDMONOQ31487 Response to Request No. 26: cioiUiia is segregating ana_________if. . _________i .will maKe a__v___a_'iIi-aLuIi-e Juxo.a.unients responsive to this request. Request No. 27: Was mercury ever used at the Facility as part of the production process of any chemicals manufactured at the Facility, or for any other purpose? Response to Request No. 27: Yes. See the Response to Request No. 28. Request No. 28: Was mercury used in the process of making/producing chlorine for chlorinated phenols and/or PCBs? Response to Request No. 28: Mercury was used in the process of manufacturing chlorine for use in the Aroclor (both polychlorinated biphenyls and polychlorinated terphenyls) manufacturing process at tIIhIoV A n n ieton r~ii n iioiui a n|VIlOoHnIkt. Phlnrin^tarl nhiinnle viiiviinaivu ivi iviv manufacturing process at the Anniston plant. 11nnt mom ifopfi irar\ ivi iai iuiuviui v>u a yi icorl In UOOU III 11 Request No. 29: Describe the process of using mercury as a catalyst for chlorination or how mercury is/was used in any production process at the Facility. In addition, describe how and where wastes from these processes were disposed of. 29 ADAD21-018166 HARTOLDMON0031488 n_______________ n. -- ..vi. response 10 hu. 49; ................................................. Solutia will make available SMPs and SOIs for the chlorine manufacturing process at the Anniston plant. Those SMPs and SOIs are listed in Exhibit C. The chlorine manufacturing process ceased in 1969. There was not a waste stream from the chlorine manufacturing process. If a leak of caustic occurred during the manufacturing process, the caustic was routed through the in-plant sewer to the limestone neutralization pit that discharged at what is now known as Discharge Point 001. Request No. 30: Did any of the companies which have operated the Facility use lead and/or lead lined vats or vessels, tanks or other containers for any materials including pesticides, PCBs, polyphenyls, parathion, or other substances during any phase of the production or the waste disposal processes. a. If so, describe the process of producing, handling, and/or disposing nf thoco matorialc IWWV I I IWlkWI IWIWi b. State whether these materials were discharged into tributaries, placed in landfills, or treated on-site. Response to Request No. 30: To the best of Solutia's knowledge, information and belief, neither lead-constructed nor lead-lined vats, vessels, tanks or other containers were used in manufacturing processes or waste disposal processes at the Anniston plant. The laboratory facilities in ** a ADAD21-018167 HARTOLDMON0031489 Buiiding 28 had iead sinks with iead pipeleading from those sinks. To the best of Soiutia's knowledge, information and belief, .when Building 28 was demolished in or about 1989 1990, lead and other salvageable metals were recovered and sold as salvage. Request No. 31: Did any of the companies which have operated the Facility use lead in any of its production processes? Response io Request No. 31; Lead was used in the biphenyl manufacturing process at the Anniston plant until about 1964. See letter (attached as Exhibit F (DSW 159040-159255)) dated October 12, 2000, from Dr. Robert G. Kaley, II to Stephen Cobb at ADEM providing information with regard to the former use of lead in the biphenyl manufacturing process at the Anniston plant. That letter attaches pertinent portions of SMPs for that process. Those SMPs are included on the index attached as Exhibit C and complete copies will be made available. VUICI UUUUIIICIIld ICICICIIVrfCQ lif U\ , Kaiey's letter will also be made available. Request No. 32: Provide any and all information about the release of lead from the Facility and/or the disposal of lead at the Facility. Response to Request No. 32: See the Response to Request No. 31 and Exhibit F and the Response to Request No. 37. 31 ADAD21-018168 HARTOLDMON0031490 Request No. 33: Were PCBs, or any material containing PCBs ever burned at the Facility? If so, provide the following information about such activities: a. The type of material burned (for example, off spec product or PCB contaminated soil). b. The quantity of material burned. c. Information about the aerial transport of PCBs burned. d. Describe where the residues from the burned material was stored and/or disposed of. e. Provide all documents related to a - d above. Response to Request No. 33: To the best of Solutia's knowledge, information and belief, neither PCBs nor materials containing PCBs were burned at the Anniston plant. Request 34: Provide all information about known or suspected releases of PCBs into the air from the Facility between 1917 and the present. 32 ADAD21-018169 HARTOLDMONOQ31491 rwdpuiidc iu r\uquu$i raw. oh; - Solutia will make available documents that have been located regarding sampling efforts and calculations in 1970 regarding potential levels of PCBs in air at the PCB manufacturing process. As reflected in those documents, that sampling was very limited and the samples were taken at the point in the manufacturing process most likely to produce emissions to the air within the department. In addition, air sampling methodology and technology were quite primitive at that time, causing the analyst to have to use r.v..'.va....m.l.r...'./i..u.i..l.i.a.u...tn..i..nv....in..i.w..c.........i..v.........firj\r/ itvrk wociufiimiwoitvo ufhiwia fr^vuNistA^iniuftuail iwvuwv ifvn ufhiia* <air uii sf thi noinf (JVIIIL in III u hiva manufacturing process. Further, it is most probable that any PCBs emitted to the air at this point of the manufacturing process would precipitate from the air in the immediate vicinity of the manufacturing department. Solutia will also make available the results of recent (from 1997 to the present) sampling of air for the presence of PCBs conducted at and around the Anniston plant, including the air sampling conducted in connection with pending litigation regarding the Anniston plant. See also letters dated October 1,1999, and November 22,1999, from Dr. Robert G. Kaley, ii to Wm. Geraid Hardy at ADEM. Those letters are attached as Exhibits E and G. The bimonthly reports of air sampling results referred to in those letters are included in the documents Solutia will make available in response to this request. Request Nfl.--35: Describe how PCBs from the Facility got into the soils of residential homes and/or businesses in Calhoun Countv. * ADAD21-018170 HARTOLDMONOQ31492 Response to Request No. 35: See the Affidavit of Robert G. Kaley, II dated August 1,2000, attached as Exhibit H (exhibits that are referenced in that affidavit are voluminous and will be made available for review) and the letter from Dr. Kaley to Wm. Gerald Hardy at ADEM dated October 1, 1999, attached as Exhibit E. Request No. 36: Describe how PCBs from any other entities in Calhoun County got into the soils of residential homes and/or businesses in Calhoun County. Response to Request No. 36: Solutia does not have sufficient knowledge or information to answer this request in full at this time. The letter from Dr. Robert G. Kaley, II to Wm. Gerald Hardy at ADEM dated October 1,1999, attached as Exhibit E contains responsive information. In addition, Solutia notes that Alabama Department of Environmental Management Study Plans (See DSW 039158-039166, 039167-039181, and 039182-039211) for the Choccolocco Creek Watershed dated November 1993 and January 1994 identify the following "possible pollutant sources" to the Choccolocco Creek Watershed: Various unknown sources upstream of the survey reach and two Large Tributaries, Story's Scrap Yard, Plater near Choccolocco Creek Highway 78 crossing, Skyway Scrap Yard, Gold Bond, Gypsum Plant, Anniston Army Depot, 78 West Auto Parts, Tull Chemicals, U.S. Pipe, An Old Foundry near U.S. Pipe, Shorty's Scrap Yard, Defense Research, Two Large Scrap Yards near U.S. Pipe, Union Foundry, M&H Valve, Monsanto, West End Landfill (Alabama Power Substation), Huron Valley Steel, Cooper Scrap Yard, Magic Chef, Lee Brass, Triangle 34 ADAD21-018171 HARTOLDMONOQ31493 Refineries, Triangle Gas Terminal, Aluminum Plant (near Triangle). Request No. 37: Describe how lead from the Facility got into the soils of residential homes and/or businesses in Calhoun County. Response to Request No. 37: To the best of Solutia's knowledge, information and belief, lead from the Anniston plant was not released to soils of homes or other businesses in Calhoun County. See letter (Exhibit F) from Dr. Robert G. Kaley, II dated October 12, 2000, to Stephen Cobb at ADEM regarding the former use of lead in the biphenyl manufacturing process at the Anniston plant. Request No. 38: Describe how lead from other entities in Calhoun County got into the soils of residential homes and/or businesses in Calhoun County. Response to Request No. 38: Solutia does not have sufficient knowledge or information to answer this request. Request No. 39: Identify all persons who have arranged or may have arranged for disposal or treatment, or arranged for transportation for disposal or treatment, of hazardous materials ("materials") at or to the Facility. In addition, identify the following: a. The persons with whom you or such other person(s) made such 35 ADAD21-018172 HARTOLDMONOQ31494 arrangements; b. Each date on which such arrangements took place; c. For each transaction, the nature of the material, including the chemical mntpnt rharartArtetirn nhvsiral ststA /a n solid linnid^ and thA nrnrAss for which the material was used or the process which generated the material; d. The owner of the materials so accepted or transported; e. The quantity of the materials involved (weight or volume) in each transaction and the total quantity for all transactions; f. All tests, analyses and analytical results concerning the materials; g. The persons(s) who selected the Facility as the place to which the materials were to be transported; h. The amount paid in connection with each transaction, method of payment and identity of the person from whom payment was received; \wA fUiioAil>c/\ uic fjcioun^; llyuj aciiuiieau Sn mi Ay., cmtUuauviita?, uueiiueau<J 4a iu Lnaa>v<ea s..u.u.Ln --m- a-- it.eria-lIs- transported and all evidence of this intent; 36 ADAD21-018173 HARTOLDMONOQ31495 j. Whether the materials involved in each transaction were transshipped through, or were stored or held at, any intermediate site prior to final treatment or disposal; k. What was actually done to the materials once they were brought to the Fa- cilitvv :' i ne Tinai oisposmon ot eacn ot me materials invoivea in sucn transactions; m. The measures taken by you to determine the actual methods, means and site of treatment or disposal of the materials involved in each transaction; n. The type and number of containers in which the materials were contained when they were accepted for transport, and subsequently until they were <4CUt i nil mm nt tnU nnn^nlnnrm ucpuoiicu cu liit? rdbiiuy, oiiu an menr\ulyo un ouoii uuiiiauiaia, o. The price paid for (i) transport, (ii) disposal, or (iii) both of each hazardous material; p. Copies of all documents containing information responsive to a - o above; a. All persons with knowledge, information or documents responsive to a - p above. 37 ADAD21-018174 HARTOLDMONOQ31496 4a. DaM..aa4 iu on. rwapuiioe iu rw^uesi mu. ^9. The long standing practice of.Monsanto and now Solutia at the Anniston plant site is not to receive hazardous materials for disposal or treatment at the plant site from any other Monsanto or Solutia plant or any non-Monsanto or non-Solutia person or entity. To the best of Solutia's knowledge, information and belief, that practice has been followed and hazardous materials have not been received at the Anniston plant from other Monsanto or Solutia plants or entities or from non-Monsanto or non-Solutia persons or entities. Request No. 40: Provide a detailed listing of products, including by-products, manufactured or produced at the Facility for the time period 1917 to the present. Response to No. 40: See Exhibit I to these responses for a listing of products manufactured at the Anniston plant, including those which, to the best of Solutia's knowledge, information and belief, were manufactured from 1917 to 1935. Request No. 41: Describe the manufacturing and recycling processes for each group of chemicals produced at the Facility from 1917 to the present. Response to Request No. 41: Solutia is able to provide manufacturing information for the chemicals manufactured at the Anniston plant from 1935 to the present. That information is contained in the SMPs, SOIs and Work Instructions Manuals identified in Exhibit C, which will be made available r> -JS ADAD21-018175 HARTOLDMONOQ31497 in response to these requests. Request No. 42: Identify the raw chemical products received (e.g., benzene, chlorine, acids, etc.) at the Facility and the additives and catalysts used to produce finished products between 1917 and the present. Response to Request No. 42: Responsive information from 1935 to the present is contained in the SMPs, SOis and Work Instructions Manuals identified in Exhibit C, which will be made available in response to these requests. Request No. 43: List the specific types of organic and inorganic substances used or aWenerated at the Facilit4v from 1917 to the D resent.' alonWa with the SIDecific time IDeriods in which each was used or generated: a. Provide the weight and/or volume of the total quantity of each organic or inorganic substance used or generated at the Facility; b. Describe the nature of the substance, including the chemical content, characteristics, physical state (e.g., solid, liquid), and; HL' /"UflOe"UoIr...i.h...a.- thiica? nranaoe far ivi u/hir*h vvi iiui i +uhn e*11/-\* fU/-v ouuoiai iuc vvao uocu \ji li ic pi -\^n iWklUHIOaIUl generated the substance. 39 ADAD21-018176 HARTOLDMONOQ31498 Response to Request No. 43: Responsive information from 1935 to the present is contained in the SMPs, SOIs and Work Instructions Manuals identified in Exhibit C, which will be made available in response to these requests. Request No. 44: Were off-specification products treated as wastes at the Facility? Provide information and documents concerning the treatment and disposal practice or policy concerning off-specification products from 1917 to the present. Response to Request No. 44: Monsanto's, and now Solutia's, practice is to collect and reprocess "off-spec" product to have that product meet product specifications. See the Response to Request No. 9. At times, off-spec PNP was collected and drummed to be used to "feed" the biological organisms in the waste treatment beds when the manufacturing operation was down and not providing waste to the waste treatment facility. Request No. 45: Describe Monsanto's and Solutia's practice of selling by-products to other companies or transferring by-products to other Monsanto or Solutia plants. Response to Request No. 45: Whether denominated as a "product" or a "by-product," gaseous hydrochloric acid from thf'-t*Ar' onlnrm--a m -- ifantiirinn nrwnwrowcwc w* vatws |^ni rwnwrowcucwovwH uaiinvH cnlrl wwim WaWs |m11 vui IrIMiaktIWic UaVotiWU WCIVM11DOo for muriatic acid are included on the index attached as Exhibit C and will be made available 40 ADAD21-018177 HARTOLDMON0031499 11In i>AAr>An(A 4a rAA> iaa4a III icopunoc IU IIICOC I^UCOIO. KAi ipSa^ia iviui lauu aaS/4 aoiu u/aa vvao mArl/ofn/^ icu r\ci^u a iu o a Ilaataiaimiuiimi tKusauir nf wi ai ictnmare uuoiwii leig through Monsanto's headquarters in St. Louis. The muriatic acid manufacturing process ceased in or about 1972. (Soiutia has not located old sales records for that product.) To the best of Solutia's knowledge, information and belief, muriatic acid was not sold to customers in Calhoun County, except for small quantities sold to some local hardware stores and individuals for use in cleaning bricks. Tho ctill hnftnme f1r1 nwmi i tMhIWo ArnHnr I II WWIWI Zywhwntbhl l nKnWl,\J/n'..hI...I.II..Wn....I.r..iI..nI...I.I.a....t..a....r...l hWIi|>nShI IoWmI I j/lIcW anrl polychlorinated terphenyls) manufacturing process were sold as a product under the trade name Montar. Montars were marketed through Monsanto's headquarters in St. Louis and sold to a large number of customers; Montar production from the polychlorinated biphenyl manufacturing process ceased in 1971, and Montar production from the polychlorinated terphenyl manufacturing process ceased in 1972. (Soiutia has not located information or documents indicating that Montars were sold to customers in Calhoun County.) Request No. 46: List the other companies or other Monsanto or Soiutia plants to which by-products have been soid or transferred and list the types of by-products sold or transferred. Identify any by-products the Facility received from other Monsanto or Soiutia plants. Describe what these by-products are and their uses. Response to Request No. 46: See the Response to Request No. 45 with regard to sales of muriatic acid and Montars. A1 HI ADAD21-018178 HARTOLDMON0031500 Request No. 47: As the Facility evolved over the years, how has the disposal of obsolete process equipment been handled? Describe the disposition of such equipment. Response to Request No. 47: See the Response to Request No. 9. DiMa A Q rA r*ucouuuc meA rVN A+U A iiicuiuuo IuIAoAe/*u1 +tuA nKaanau^Iiea u/^AuAiu+AariViAiumiaA+ieAu/J oAuAuI I, contaminated clothing/protective gear and laboratory wastes at the Facility. Were these items commingled with undefined hazardous or non-hazardous materials before disposal? Response to Request No. 48: See the Response to Request No. 9 regarding solid waste disposal. With respect to liquid laboratory waste, prior to RCRA, solvents used in the sampling procedures in the ylloaKuuAiraeiivnin/uvv/vo^ri co HvjiiirAc/Av/itva>Hu tv/ tuhiav/ oau/ar jl/vasrcaiHvjiiriwjy-i Itva/ Inhiac vPu!fj\r/ vn/if mAnnnuiAo+ivn/inI IDvHTi \vAv/, DPDA nuui i\ui\n, those solvents were collected for incineration by Rollins. Product sent to the laboratory for quality control sampling was collected and returned to the manufacturing process. Request No. 49: Does Solutia disagree with the contention that hazardous substances, including PCBs were disposed of at the Facility, including the west and south end landfills? If Solutia so disagrees, provide all information and documentation which suD *Dorts this iDosition. 42 ADAD21-018179 HARTOLDMON0031501 Response to Request No. 49: See the Response to Request No. 9. Request No. 50: Does Solutia disagree with the contention that hazardous substances, including PCBs, were transported from the Facility via surface and subsurface waterways including ditches and creeks (including Choccolocco Creek and Snow Creek) to Lake Logan Martin? If Solutia so disagrees, provide all information and documentation which supports this posiiion. Response to Request No. 50: Solutia does not disagree that some PCBs were released from the Anniston plant and some sediment containing such PCBs was transported through drainage ditches and other waterways, including Snow Creek and Choccolocco Creek, to the embayment area of Lake Logan Martin. Solutia does not believe that PCBs released from the facility were transported through "subsurface waterways" to ditches, creeks or Lake Logan Martin, if that term is meant to include groundwater. . Request No. 51: Does Solutia disagree with the contention that at least a portion of the PCBs which have been found to exist within the flood plain between the Facility and Lake Logan Martin originated from the Facility? If Monsanto so disagrees, provide all information and documentation which supports this position. 43 ADAD21-018180 HARTOLDMON0031502 4a Dam.*aa4 Ma C4| r\6dpuiide iu rvu^ucoi uu. wi. Solutia does not disagree that some of the PCBs which have been found to exist within the flood plain of Snow Creek and near the confluence of Snow Creek and Choccolocco Creek originated from the Anniston plant. On April 15, 2000, Solutia submitted to ADEM a Phase II Off-Site (Floodplain) RFI/CS Investigation Work Plan for ADEM's review, comment and approval. Pom loot Mn 59- SIPrn\/irlo all infnrmatinn anH rlnn imontatinn that PO.Rc in anrl I W f l\i W Will IMIWIIIIWIIWtl IW IWI I around Anniston came from sources other than Solutia and/or Monsanto. Response to Request No. 52: See the Response to Request No. 36. Request No. 53: Provide all documents, including internal documents, of Solutia and/or Monsanto, that indicate that PCBs and/or other hazardous substances were being discharged from the Facility between 1917 and the present. Response to Request No. 53: Solutia is segregating and will make available documents responsive to this request. Request No. 54: Identify all waste disposal contractors employed or used by the Facility operator's (including Monsanto and Solutia) between 1917 and the present. Also: ADAD21-018181 HARTOLDMON0031503 a. Describe how these disposal contractors handled Monsanto's non-hazardous and hazardous materials, including the terms of any contractual arrangements with each; b. Describe how Monsanto controlled where and how these waste disposal contractors disposed of these materials; c. Was it Monsanto's practice or policy to dictate or choose where these materials would be disposed of or did Monsanto leave the disposal of the materials up to its waste disposal contractors? Response to Request No. 54: See the Response to Request No. 9. BFI, Rollins (now SafetyKIeen) and Chemical Waste Management had designated facilities to which waste materials were transported for disposal. Demolition debris from recent remediation activities was transported by Chemical Waste Management to the Live Oak Landfill in Atlanta, Georgia (a Subtitle D Landfill built to Subtitle C specifications). Request No. 55: When did the Facility hook up to a sewer system? Describe in detail any discharges from the Facility of PCBs or any other hazardous substances into any sewer system. Indicate whether these hazardous substances were pretreated prior to being discharged into the sewer system(s). 45 ADAD21-018182 HARTOLDMON0031504 Response to Request No. 55: Monsanto connected a process sewer to the City of Anniston sewer system leading to the Anniston POTW during the construction of the parathion manufacturing process in the 1958 to 1960 time period. After construction of the on-site waste treatment system, the process waste and storm water from the parathion and PNP areas discharged to the on site waste treatment facility which then discharged to the City's sewer system leading to the Anniston POTW. See the Responses to Requests Nos. 5 and 9. Sanitary sewers conveying domestic sewage from the laboratory building, the main office building, the shipping office and the warehouse, the central maintenance shop and the service building conveyed the sewage to a gravity line to the City's sewer system leading to the Anniston POTW. Solutia has not been able to determine when that system was first installed and connected to the City's sewer system. Other areas of the plant site directed domestic sewage to septic tank and tile field systems. Request No. 56: Identify and describe all past and present solid waste units (e.g. waste piles, landfills, surface impoundments, waste lagoons, waste ponds or pits, tanks, container storage areas, etc.) on the Facility property. For each solid waste unit identified, provide the following information: a. A map showing the unit's boundaries and the location of all known solid waste units, whether currently in operation or not. This map should be drawn to scale, if possible, and clearly indicate the location and size of all past and present units; 46 ADAD21-018183 HARTOLDMON0031505 Ti ln___e_X.type ot unit ^e.g., storage area, lariuim, wa_s_te p_n;ie^, e_xtc^ .\; a..nu me dimensions of the unit; The dates that the unit was in use; The purpose and past usage (e.g., storage, spill containment, etc.); I l*\ A Af I in i i ic ijuai imy at iu iyyco kji i i taici taio ia At t W a^a a a a a a a aI //m a At # a^U a# ia^.ai uuuo ouuoiai iuco at tu/ui at ty uu ici chemicals) located in each unit; and The construction (materials, composition), volume, size, dates of cleaning, and condition of each unit; If the unit is no longer in use, when and how such unit was closed and what aMrvttiinwni icw \iat/voirav tiauli/vavni iwn nrav/vr/vain1f1 uoir uauHu/*iwirawewe nAfanmtienni uoir aovoitui laoil irAlnoefip vo-iF \vav/oaoo+ioc constituents from the unit. A complete description of any and all releases, spills or leaks of hazardous substances, or any materials or liquids containing or contaminated with hazardous substances, from the unit. Any data from tests performed on the unit. 47 ADAD21-018184 HARTOLDMON0031506 Response to Request No. 56: See Appendix A to the April 1997 RFI/CS workplan (DSW 042574-042614) attached as Exhibit D; the 1991 RCRA Facility Assessment (RFA) prepared by A.T. Kearney, Inc. as a contractor for the EPA; Monsanto's comments to the 1991 RFA; the 1997 RCRA Part B Post-Closure Permit; the On Site and Off Site RCRA Facility Investigations and Work Plans; and SWMU Effectiveness Reports submitted to ADEM and EPA. Solutia is segregating and will make these and other responsive documents available in response 4a IKJ 4UUliUd I^CaLaj.U.aCad4l. Request No. 57: Provide copies of all state and local environmental permits or licenses ever granted for the Facility or any part thereof. Response to Request No. 57: Solutia is segregating and will make available documents responsive to this request. Request No. 58: For each disposal of PCBs, material containing PCBs, PCB Articles, PCB Equipment, and PCB Containers (as defined at 40 C.F.R.761.3) from the Facility or on Facility property and which contained PCBs at concentrations of 50 ppm or greater, provide the following information: a. Identify the type of materials containing PCBs, PCB article, PCB Equipment and PCB Containers, as well as its contents. Give any serial numbers or identification numbers or codes; 48 ADAD21-018185 HARTOLDMON0031507 h Ouantrh/ rvf mo+orial rontaininn Pf^Rc nnH mimher nf Pf^R ArtinlPfi Pf^R Wt \KWWI Ulbj VI IIIWIVVMWI VVI IhWII III ly WtafV im IIMIKWI --' H -- Equipment and PCB Containers, as well as the quantity of their contents; c. PCB concentrations; d. Dates of disposal; e. Name and location^ of the olacelsl where PCBs were disDOsed or stored: i------------------\ - / tt. Location ana aescription r ot meit. _ rur\or aisposai or tiii areas at me racmty. Response to Request No. 58: Solutia does not have documents prior to 1978 responsive to this request. Solutia is segregating and will make available documents from 1978 to the present responsive to this request. Prior to the 1978 time period, Monsanto disposed of PCB solid waste, PCB contaminated solid waste, and PCB contaminated equipment and demolition debris first cu mmAe 1laA iiuim Aali*cAaA i iwv l/rAvAiiwt iwIAii AcAxo me41*1 A \ Av/vacAo^ iCi_(iAiuaI LI aAiAiu/4ufnill dAiAm/I 4mU eAnA cAu+ uicA iIdaiAiu^iAiuII dAieAdA nAuAwIII known as the South Landfill. See the Response to Request No. 9. Solutia will make available maps and drawings to show the location of PCB disposal areas at the landfills on the plant site. Request No. 59: Provide the following information for chlorobenzenes, chlorophenols, chloroanilines, nitrophenols, nitroanilines, lead, and PCBs: 49 ADAD21-018186 HARTOLDMON0031508 a. A description of how the substance is or was generated and/or used at the Facility; ... b. An estimation of the quantity of the substance generated or used at the Facility; c. A description of Monsanto's, Solutia's and Monsanto's predecessor's storage, treatment and/or disposal policies or practices for each substance throughout the operating history of the Facility; d. Any and all documents, reports, forms, permits or manifests indicating the substance's transportation to and/or disposal at the Facility or any other location. Rpnonp in Ronnoet Kin 5Q* Chlorobenzenes, chlorophenols, chloroanilines, and nitroanilines were not generated or used by Monsanto or Solutia at the Anniston plant. Para-nitrophenol (PNP) is a product that was first manufactured as a raw material or intermediate for use in the parathion manufacturing process and has since been manufactured for other uses. See the SMPs, SOIs and Work Instructions Manuals for the PNP and parathion manufacturing processes included on the index attached as Exhibit C. Those documents also describe Monsanto's on-site waste treatment facility that treated f r\ ou ADAD21-018187 HARTOLDMON0031509 waste from these manufacturing processes. Solutia has attached to these responses as Exhibit J a chart showing PNP production volumes from 1984 through 1999. See also the Response to Request No. 9. See the SMPs and SOIs for the Aroclor manufacturing process that are included in the index attached as Exhibit C. Solutia has attached to these requests as Exhibit K an interrogatory answer from the pending litigation that provides the information located by Solutia regarding volumes of PCB production at the Anniston plant. See also the Response to Request No. 9. As described previously, lead was used for a period of time ending in 1964 in the biphenyl manufacturing process. See the Response to Request No. 31 and Exhibit F. To the best of Solutia's knowledge, information and belief, when all twelve lead pot process units were in operation, the quantity of lead in the units at any one time would have approximated 150,000 pounds. Request No. 60: For each spill, discharge or release of any hazardous materials used or generated by the Facility, including chlorobenzenes, chlorophenols, chloroanilines, nitrophenols, nitroanilines, lead, and PCBs, provide the following information: a. Source of spill, discharge or release; b. Concentration of the source; 51 ADAD21-018188 HARTOLDMON0031510 c. Location of spill, discharge or release; d. Type of material onto which spill or discharge occurred; e. Area over which spill or discharge occurred; 4 n\/"+/*\ r\4 or-ull r\r r/i/*** L/au? ui uis? ojjiii wi uiooi laiy g. Summary of any test results from the area where spill or discharge occurred; h. Diagram or map of spill or discharge area showing location of any sampling points; i. Description of any cleanup activities and summary of any post cleanup verification sample results; j. Disposition of any hazardous material from any cleanup; k. All reports, memoranda, or analysis concerning the spill, discharge or release. JC4O. ADAD21-018189 HARTOLDMONOQ31511 Response to Request No. 60: See the Response to Request No. 59. Solutia is segregating and will make available documents responsive to this request with respect to PNP and PCBs. See Exhibit F with respect to lead. Request No. 61: For each pit, pond, lagoon, settling tank, oil/water separator, water treatment unit or similar structure located at the Facility, provide the following information: a. Location and description of these areas or structures; b. Dates of any and all cleanings or removals of any material from these areas or structures. List most recent cleanings or removals first; c. Reason for each cleaning or removal; d. Description of method employed for each cleaning or removal; e. Description of any hazardous material removed, including PCBs, and quantity of material removed; f. Concentrations of hazardous materials removed, including PCBs, released or discharged on or off site from these areas or structures; 53 ADAD21-018190 HARTOLDMON0031512 y-n nuiiconpAucoim+iAuini urvif m11 iAq+iuAinlAail rarmrw/o/H* h. Any test data, including PCB test data, concerning these areas or structures not associated with a cleaning or removal; i. Identification and description of any release or discharge on or off site from these areas or structures; j. Dates when release or discharges occurred; k. Type of material and concentrations of releases or discharges; l. Description of any cleanup activities for releases or discharges; m. Summary of any post-cleanup verification sampling and disposition of material from the cleanup. Response to Request No. 61: See Exhibit D and documents referenced on pages DSW 042613-042614 of Exhibit D. Solutia is segregating and will make available additional documents responsive to this request. Request No. 62: Provide a copy of any annual documents required to be kept for ADAD21-018191 HARTOLDMON0031513 me rauimy in auuuiuanue wiui o.r.r\.hu_____ __ _______;i_?_j____.__!___ __________________________._._._u__u_ ___4_A____r_>___r____n__ 03-/70014 . 4looun^/ea\j. Response to Request No. 62: Solutia is segregating and will make available documents responsive to this request. Request No.63: Provide any information you have generated or gathered on groundwater flow and groundwater quality on or around the Facility. Response to Request No. 63: Solutia is segregating and will make available documents responsive to this request, including groundwater related documents listed on pages DSW 042613-042614 of Exhibit D. Request No. 64: Provide any information you have generated or gathered on c..u.....r..f...a....r...o... ...\...../. .a..+....o....r....f..l..n...u...../....a....n....H....../..n....r.....we....ow....H.M.....i.im.i..i.i..wo....ni..i.x..t....fu..l.m.w.....*n../....mh...v.o../...fu.u...i.mw.....w.a....n.i......t..h... Wo IPUoVoIiIlIiV+jxr/ WaInIIMrl UI UoIXl/Wa I rwiUaInI IMVICo4rI+Uinl I. Response to Request No. 64: Solutia is segregating and will make available documents responsive to this request. Request No. 65: Provide any information and documents you have generated or gathered (including documents obtained in discovery in any of the several lawsuits) about or in any way concerning the Facility activities, including, but not limited to any information concerning the source or release of PCBs in and around Anniston. 55 ADAD21-018192 HARTOLDMON0031514 DAc*M\nn 4m D ami ia4 KIm fiC* r\09punav iu ixcvfucoi i^u. uw. Solutia is unable to respond.to this request since, read literally, the request for all documents and information about Facility "activities" would include the universe of knowledge and documents concerning the entire history of every aspect of the plant's operations. Solutia will make available documents responsive to the request regarding the source or release of PCBs in and around Anniston. See Responses to Requests Nos. 15 (including Exhibit E), 26, 35, 36 and 52. Request No. 66: Describe all measures taken by Monsanto or Solutia or their consultants which have been taken to characterize, measure, sample or in any way test for the presence of hazardous materials at or around the Facility. Provide the results of such testing. Response to Request No. 66: Solutia is segregating and will make available documents in response to this request. Request No. 67: Provide copies of any sampling analytical reports which are responsive to any of these Requests and clearly indicate on each analytical report copy, the Request(s) to which it is responsive. . Response to Request No. 67: Solutia is segregating and will make available documents responsive to this request. ADAD21-018193 HARTOLDMON0031515 Request No. 68: Identify all persons who may be responsible for the liabilities of Respondent arising from or relating to the release or threatened release of hazardous substances at the Site, including but not limited to successors and individuals. Response to Request No. 68: Monsanto Company was the owner and operator of the Anniston plant site from 1935 to 1997, but, by agreement, Solutia has assumed liabilities of Monsanto with respect to the Anniston plant and agreed to indemnify Monsanto with respect to such liabilities. Request No. 69: Provide copies of any aerial photographs or aerial photography reports for the Facility and/or Calhoun County, and/or investigations related to the Facility. Response to Request No. 69: Solutia will make available documents resnonsive to this renuest ' ' " --------------------- -------- --- -------i--------------- ~ ~ --------- ----------1------------- Request .No. 70: For each and every owner, operator, iessor, or iessee of any portion of the Facility: a. Identify such person and the nature of their operation at the Facility. b. Describe the portion of the Facility owned, operated, or leased by each such person and state the dates during which each portion was owned, operated, ADAD21-018194 HARTOLDMON0031516 or leased. c. Provide copies of all documents evidencing or relating to such ownership, operation or lease, including but not limited to, purchase and sale agreements, deeds, leases, etc. Response to Request No. 70: uCvaiIui ua twa /iinll mniaarl/xAc aaxv/aanIIaaKuIiac /Iaai inrtAA+f* uuouiiiciiio ricA?AyaariWuinaiay tukA Iui*aa riitocficAir ui Miviva^ai laoaA iail^vaj pa irAwpaca;ir+lvy/ at the Anniston plant site to Alabama Power Company in or about 1960. (See DSW 128953-959; DSW 128963-983.) That property was transferred back to Monsanto in December 1993, and Solutia will make available documents regarding that transfer. Request No. 71: Provide all evidence that hazardous materials were released at the Facility prior to the period that Monsanto owned the Facility. Response to Request No. 71: Solutia has looked for, but has not located, responsive information or documents. Request No. 72: Describe all leaks, spills or releases or threats of releases of any kind into the environment of any hazardous substances or materials that have occurred at or from the Facility that are not addressed in a previous Request, including but not limited to: PA 38 ADAD21-018195 HARTOLDMON0031517 a. When such releases occurred. b. How the releases occurred. c. What hazardous substances or materials were released. d. What amount of each such hazardous substance or material was so e. Where such releases occurred. f. Any and all activities undertaken in response to each such release or threatened release. n All norcnne \A/ith irrfnrmati/in rola+inn tr> cnhnarte a thrr>iinh n nf thie / *u ^viwwiiw iiiwi n iiv/i i i iviiivi i i viuiii iij iw wviw^ui *w w illlWWVJII VI *1 I V Request. Response to Request No. 72: To the best of Solutia's knowledge, information and belief, such leaks, spills or releases are addressed in the responses to previous requests. Request No. 73: If you have reason to believe that there may be persons able to provide a more detailed or complete response to any Request contained herein or who ^ r\ oy ADAD21-018196 HARTOLDMON0031518 may be able to provide additional responsive documents, identify such person and the additional information or documents that they may have. Response to Request No. 73: See the Response to Request No. 15 regarding foundries in Calhoun County and the Response to Request No. 36 regarding the possibility of the presence of PCBs from and at other entities in and around Calhoun County. Request No. 74: For each and every Request contained herein, if information or documents responsive to this Information Request are not in your possession, custody or control, then identify the persons from whom such information or documents may be obtained. Response to Request No. 74: See the Response to Request No. 73. 60 ADAD21-018197 HARTOLDMON0031519