Document XO0q3dO6vRO16QG0mr6k3yMnx

ORIGINAL In the Court of Common Pleas Philadelphia County In Re: Paoli Railroad Yard PCB Litigation ) ) Master File Number ) 90-0609-C-6 In the United States District Court For the Eastern District of Pennsylvania In Re: Paoli Railroad Yard PCB Litigation ) Master File Number ) 86-2229 ) Relates to ail Actions July 17,1991 Deposition of WILLIAM B. PAPAGEORGE, taken on behalf of Plaintiffs. GORE REPORTING COMPANY Boatmen's Tower, Suite 1175 -100 North Broadway St. Louis, Missouri 63102 (314) 241-6750 STLCOPCB4031816 1 In the Court of Common Pleas 2 Philadelphia County 3 4 In Re : ) 5 Paoli Railroad Yard ) Master File Number 6 PCB Litigation ) 90-0609-C-6 7) 8 9 In the United States District Court 1 0 For the Eastern District of Pennsylvania 11 1 2 In Re: ) Master File Number 1 3 Paoli Railroad Yard ) 86-2229 1 4 PCB Litigation ) Relates to All Actions 15 16 17 1 8 Deposition of WILLIAM 1 9 B. PAPAGEORGE, taken on behalf of Plaintiffs, 2 0 at the offices of Brown & James, 705 Olive 2 1 Street, in the City of St. Louis, State of 2 2 Missouri, on the 17th day of July, 1991, 2 3 before J. Bryan Jordan, certified shorthand 2 4 reporter and notary public. 25 GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 2 STLCOPCB4031817 1 APPEARANCES: 2 FOR THE PLAINTIFFS: 3 Mr. Arnold E. Cohen 4 Klerh, Harrison, Harvey, Branzburg 5 & E 11 e r s ' 6 1401 Walnut Street - - 7 Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19102 8 9 Mr. John F. Innelli 1 0 Kohn, Savett, Klein, & Graf, P.C 1 1 2400 One Reading Center 1 2 1101 Market Street 1 3 Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19107 14 1 5 FOR THE DEFENDANT MONSANTO COMPANY: 1 6 Mr. Michael H. Malin 17 White & Williams 1 8 One Liberty Place, Suite 1800 1 9 1650 Market Street 2 0 Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103-7301 21 22 23 24 25 i | ! i I ! GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 3 STLCOPCB4031818 1 FOR THE DEFENDANT AND THIRD-PARTY DEFENDANT 2 GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY: 3 Mr. Stephen M. McManus 4 Liebert, Short & Hirshland 5 31st Floor ' 6 1901 Market Street .- 7 Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103 8 9 FOR THE DEFENDANT BUDD COMPANY: 1 0 Mr. R. Thomas McLaughlin 1 1 Kelly, McLaughlin & Foster 1 2 1700 Atlantic Building 1 3 260 Broad Street 1 4 Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19102 15 1 6 FOR THE DEFENDANT AMTRAK: 17 Ms. Suzanne H. Gross 1 8 Margolis, Edelstein, Scherlis, Sarowitz 1 9 & Kreamer 2 0 The Curtis Center 2 1 Fourth Floor 2 2 Independence Square West 2 3 Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19106-3304 24 25 GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 4 STLCOPCB4031819 1 FOR THE DEFENDANT CONSOLIDATED RAIL CORPORATION!: 2 Ms. Colleen F. Coonelly '~ 3 Pepper, Hamilton & Scheetz 4 3000 Two Logan Square 5 18th and Arch Streets ' - 6 Philadelphia, Pennsylvania .19109 7 8 FOR THE DEFENDANTS SOUTHEASTERN PENNSYLVANIA 9 TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY AND THE PENN CENTRAL 1 0 CORPORATION: 11 Mr. Roger F Cox 1 2 Blank, Rome, Comisky & McCauley 1 3 1200 Four Penn Center Plaza 1 4 Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 5 STLCOPCB4031820 i INDEX 2 3 EXAMINATION BY MR . INNELLI 4 EXAMINATION BY MR . COHEN PAGE 7 48 5 EXAMINATION BY MR . INNELLI ' 1 7 1- 6 EXAMINATION BY MS . COONELLY .. - 18 9 *"T EXAMINATION BY MR . McLaughlin 19 1 3 9 EXHIBITS 10 1 1 Papageorge No. 1 77 1 2 Papageorge No. 2 80 1 3 Papageorge No. 3 102 1 4 Papageorge No. 4 123 1 5 Papageorge No. 5 139 1 6 Papageorge No. 6 143 1 7 Papageorge No. 7 157 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 6 STLCOPCB4031821 1 J. Whereupon. 2 WILLIAM B. PAPAGEORGE, j i 3 of sound mind, having been first duly sworn j 4 to tell the truth, the whole truth, and ; 5 nothing but the truth in the case aforesaid, ; 6 testified upon his oath as follows., to-wit: 7 EXAMINATION 8 BY MR. INNELLI: ; 9 Q. Good morning, Mr.Papageorge. j 1 0 A. Good morning. | i 11 Q. My name is John Innelli. I'm one j i 12 of the counsel representing Plaintiffs in an j i3 action involving the Paoli rail yard. I will j 14 have a series of questions for you today. If 1 5 at any point in time you don't hear a I I 16 question that I've asked, I'll be happy to i 17 repeat it for you. If at any point in time j 1 8 you don't understand a question that I've j I 19 asked, please let me know and we willattempt j j 20 toclarifyit. | 21 Would you, for the record, please j j 2 2 state your name and current home address. j I 23 A. William B. Papageorge, 321 Pebble . 2 4 Valley Drive, St. Louis, Missouri, 63141. ; 25 Q. Would you also state for the j GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS,MISSOURI 7 f ^ STLCOPCB4031822 1 record your educational background, starting 2 with the high school you attended? j j 3 A. I attended McKinley HighSchool in I 4 St. Louis; graduated there in 1938. I j ii 5 attended Washington University in St. Louis-, | | 6 received a Bachelor of Sciencein Chemical j 7 Engineering degree in 1943, and again i j i 8 attended Washington University and received a j 9 Master of Science Degree in Chemical I ! 10 Engineering In 1947, and subsequent to that, | 1 1 I attended -- or, accumulated credits at j 12 Oklahoma State University toward a doctorate ; 1 3 degree. As I recall, I have about twelve I 1 4 units credited toward that. j i 1 5 Q. When you graduated from Washington j 16 University in 1943, did you go directly from | 1 7 the undergraduate program to the Master's 1 8 program at Washington University? i j j 1 9 A . No . i 20 Q. When did you enter Washington J 2 1 University in pursuit of your Master of | 2 2 Science degree? j 2 3 A. In August of 1946. i 2 4 Q. Can you describe for the record 25 what you did between 1943 and 1946 in the way i GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 8 j i ; STLCOPCB4031823 1 of employment? 2 A. Does military service count as 3 employment? 4 MR. COHEN: It sure does. 5 BY MR. INNELLI: ' i ' 6 Q. Itsuredoes. - 7 A. That's where I spent that period 8 of time . 9 Q Okay, which branch of the armed 1 0 services were you in? 11 A . The Army. 1 2 Q And when were you discharged from 1 3 the Army? 14 A. It was in August of 1946. I don't 1 5 remember the exact date. 1 6 Q Okay, and was it an honorable 17 discharge? 1 8 A. Yes . 1 9 Q. Did you become employed in 1947 2 0 after the completion of the Master's program 2 1 in science at Washington University? 2 2 A. Yes. 2 3 Q. And with whom did you become 2 4 emp1oy ed ? 2 5 A. Phillips Petroleum Company in GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 9 STLCOPCB4031824 1 Bartlesville, Oklahoma. 2 Q. And in what capacity did you 3 become employed by PhillipsPetroleum? 4 A. As a research engineer. 5 Q. Could you describe' for me what - 6 your responsibilities were as a. research 7 engineer for Phillips Petroleum when you 8 first became employed by Phillips Petroleum 9 in 1947? 1 0 A. I was involved with research 1 1 studies that related to drilling mud and its 1 2 properties, attempting to find improved types 13 of mixtures. I was also involved with 1 4 secondary recovery procedures. This is a 1 5 method where oil wells that are not producing 1 6 as much as they used to are reenergized by 17 various techniques,and I was involved in 1 8 studies relating to that. 1 9 Q. And for how long a period of time 20 did you have these duties? 21 A. About two years. 2 2 Q. So approximately sometime in 1949, 2 3 your responsibilities changed? 2 4 A. Yes. 2 5 Q. Were you still with Phillips GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 10 STLCOPCB4031825 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Petroleum in 1949? A . Yes. Q What new responsibilities did you assume in 1 9 4 9 ? | i A . I was a design engineer in the Refinery Department of Phillips Petroleum ! Company . Q. And what did those responsibilities entail? A. It involved the engineering calculations that led to the proposed design of equipment for refining petroleum products. Q. How long did you -- were you involved in the engineering calculations for the design of equipment? A. About two years. Q. What was your next job or responsibility? A. I then joined the Monsanto Company. Q. Okay, you joined Monsanto in 1951? A. Correct. Q. In what capacity? A. Design engineer. Q. Was there a particular reason for GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 11 STLCOPCB4031826 1 your leaving Phillips Petroleum and going to 2 Monsanto? ~ 3 A. Oh, I guess I would describe it as 4 looking for greener pastures. 5 Q. And where were you' employed with 6 Monsanto? _ 7 A. At the John F. Queeny plant 8 located in St. Louis, Missouri. 9 Q. Now, what did your 1 0 responsibilities as a design engineer for 11 Monsanto entail when you first joined them in 1 2 19 5 1? 1 3 A. I performed the necessary 1 4 engineering calculations that led to the 1 5 proposed design of equipment used in the 1 6 manufacture of a chemical. 1 7 Q. And what chemical was that? 1 8 A. Pthalic anhydride. 1 9 Q. Could you spell that, please? 20 A. P-h-t-h-a-1-i-c anhydride, 2 1 a-n-h-y-d-r-i-d-e . 2 2 Q. And what was that chemical used 2 3 for? 2 4 A. It's a starting material used in 2 5 the manufacture of plastics and paints. GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 12 STLCOPCB4031827 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Q. Which department were you in during this time period? A. At the plant, the department was called the plant -- I'm sorry, it was called the Process Investigation Gr ou p . Q . What were the functions., of the Process Investigation Group? A. They were a group of technical people assigned the task of reviewing the processes at the plant, in an attempt to make them more efficient or to expand them. enlarge them, t o make more material than t h e y were producing a t the time, or to introduce i new processes for the manufacture of new and : different products. Q. When you say that the Process Investigation Group would evaluate the processes used in the manufacture of products, would that involve evaluation of the process used in the manufacture of PCB's? A. Not at this plant, no. Q. Okay. You say "not at this plant," meaning the John F. Queeny plant? A. Correct. Q. Was there another plant where GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 13 STLCOPCB4031828 1 there was such production going on? 2 A . Yes. 3 Q And which plant was that? 4 A . There are two o f them; one in 5 Anniston, Alabama -- let m e correct myself.- 6 Two in the United States: One in A_n n i s t o n , 7 Alabama, and one at Sauget, Illinois. 8 Q. Now, at each of those plants, the 9 Anniston and the Sauget plant, would there be 1 0 a Process Investigation Group? 1 1 A. There would be a similar group, 12 yes. I don't know if they used the same 13 designation, same title. 1 4 Q. How long were you a member of the 1 5 Process Investigation Group at the John 1 6 F. Queeny plant? 17 A. About a couple of years. 1 8 Q. So that would take us to 1 9 approximately 1953? 20 A. Yes. 21 Q . At that point in time, what became 2 2 your responsibilities? 2 3 A. I became a supervisor in a 2 4 production unit at that plant. 2 5 Q. What do you mean by production GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 14 STLCOPCB4031829 1 unit? 2 A. This consists of a facility with 3 the necessary equipment which is designated 4 to produce a given product, a given chemical 5 from raw material to the f ini's hed product/ 6 Q. And which product was t-hat? 7 A. This was a unit that made 8 chemicals, a family of chemicals called 9 plasticizers . 1 0 Q. And what are plasticizers? 1 1 A. They are materials that can best 1 2 be described as the type that are introduced 1 3 into plastics to give plastics flexibility so 14 they don't crack or break, that they are not 1 5 brittle any longer. 1 6 Q. Were plasticizers -- excuse me. 17 Were PCB's used in the manufacture of 1 8 plasticizers? 19 A . No 2 0 Q. Were they a component part of 2 1 plasticizers? 2 2 A . No . 2 3 Q. What type of recordkeeping process 24 or procedure did you have as the supervisor 2 5 for the production unit? GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 15 STLCOPCB4031830 1 A. Would you help me with the 2 recordkeeping process? Is that the mechanics 3 of taking notes, or -- 4 Q. What type of records would you 5 keep as the production unit supervisor? 6 A. I personally did not . k e e.p records. 7 I had a clerk who assisted me in keeping the 8 appropriate records. 9 Q. Was there a Monsanto corporate 1 0 policy regarding what type of records should 1 1 be kept by a product unit or production unit 1 2 supervisor? 1 3 MR. MALIN: Could we define the 1 4 period of time. 1 5 MR. INNELLI: We're talking about 1 6 the 1953 period of time while Mr. Papageorge 17 was the supervisor for the production unit 1 8 that manufactured the plasticizers. 1 9 A. Well, I understood there certainly 2 0 was a policy that related to activity 2 1 assoc iated with that unit. yes. Or all 22 units , really. The policy extended through 2 3 all , throughou t the plant . 2 4 BY MR . INNELLI: 2 5 Q . And there was a uniform policy for GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 16 STLCOPCB4031831 1 the entire John F. Queeny plant? i2 A. There was a uniform basic policy. .! 3 This does not mean that the individual 4 supervisor cannot institute additional I ji i j | 5 records for his particular p u'r pose. j 6 Q Was that policy the same for other 7 plants, as well as the John F . Queeny pi ant? 8 A . The basic parts are the same. an d 9 as an example, for example, the overtime j 1 0 worked by the employees, that policy is 11 universal, so that kind of record would be j i i 12 the same throughout Monsanto. j 13 Q. Let's talk about production : 14 records, records dealing with the process of | 1 5 producing an end product. Was there a policy j 16 regarding the types of recordsthat would be 17 maintained covering the production process? jii! 18 A. I don't recall any statement that ii I i 19 I would characterize as a policy. I just j 2 0 don't know of any policy. The process, { 21 itself, by its nature, almost dictates that ; 22 certain records be kept, such as the weight : 2 3 of the batch, the quality of the material ; 2 4 produced, when it was produced, who the 2 5 operators were that were involved in its : GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 17 STLCOPCB4031832 1 production, what tank was it sent to. I 2 don't know that that policy was ever put 3 together to cover all those kinds of 4 ac xes . 5 Q I take it you had a predecessor as 6 a s u p e r v i s o r in the production unit that 7 produced the chemical -- family of chemicals 8 known as the plasticizer 9 A . Yes. 1 0 . . Q Did you learn from your 1 1 predeces s o r what type of records should be 1 2 kept regarding the production process? 1 3 A. Oh, yes, that's part of my 1 4 training period, yes. 15 Q. Okay. How long were you the 1 6 supervisor for the production unit that 1 7 produced the plasticizers? 1 8 A. A year or two. 1 9 Q. Okay, so we're talking about in 2 0 the 1954-1955 time period? 21 A. That's roughly so, yes. 2 2 Q. What became your next title and 2 3 area of responsibility? 2 4 A. I was appointed supervisor of 2 5 another production unit at that plant. GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 18 STLCOPCB4031833 1 And which production unit was 2 that? 3 A. This was the unit that produced 4 the chemical, or a family of chemicals that 5 were starting materials for rn bber chemical's 6 Q. And what is the family o-f those 7 chemicals known as? 8 A . They were nitroch1orobenzenes. 9 Q. And what were your 1 0 responsibilities as the supervisor for the 1 1 production unit for nitroch1orobenzenes? 1 2 A. I was responsible for the 1 3 production of a scheduled amount of material 1 4 of a given type, by a given date, and I was 1 5 responsible for meeting the quality standards 1 6 that were established for those -- for that 1 7 product. I was responsible for the costs 18 associated with making that chemical. I had 1 9 to keep within guidelines that were given to 20 me. I was responsible for the safety of the 21 employees and the preservation of the 22 facilities. I could not abuse theequipment, 2 3 could not allow it to catch on fire or to 2 4 corrode or erode unnecessarily, I had to make 2 5 certain that I got the proper maintenance GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 19 STLCOPCB4031834 1 attention, to keep it functioning properly. 2 I think that covers most of them, if not all 3 of them. 4 Q. Let's talk a little bit about 5 quality standards, and again,' we're talking 6 about the time period that you were the 7 supervisor for the production unit for 8 nitroch1orobenzenes . And we've established 9 roughly that that began in 1954-1955. 1 0 A . Yes . 1 1 Q - When did that time period end? 1 2 A . About 1956 or s o . 13 Q.. Okay. During that ' 55 , ' 5 5 to ' 5 6 1 4 time period, would you explain for me how 1 5 quality standards were established for the 1 6 nitroch1orobenzene production unit? 17 A. I can't claim that I know all the 1 8 steps in establishing those standards but 1 9 they originate in Monsanto's research 20 department, based on the research chemist a 21 study of the process and its capabilities, 22 and of course, it's influenced a lot by what 2 3 quality chemical is required for the next 24 step. In other words, in its use. Using 2 5 that information, the research chemist then GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI STLCOPCB4031835 1X puts together a list of criteria, and the 2 indices that must be looked at to meet those 3 criteria, and also either develop or fined in 4 the literature the appropriate test procedure 5 that is used by a laboratory 'to establish the 6 indice that was called for was, indeed, met 7 by that particular batch of material. 8 Q. Would you interact with the 9 research chemist as -- would you, as the 1 0 supervisor of the production unit, interact 1 1 with the research chemist in establishing the 1 2 quality standards? 1 3 A. I would interact only if there was 14 a change being considered. If this is a 1 5 well-established product that had been made 1 6 for decades and no reason existed for 17 changing anything, the occasion for 1 8 interacting would not have happened. - 1 9 Q. Did you come in contact or use as 2 0 component part PCB's while head of the 21 production unit for nitroch1orobenzenes? 22 A. Would you repeat the first part of 23 your question? 24 MR. INNELLI: Sure. Why don't 2 5 you - - GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 21 STLCOPCB4031836 j1 (The requested portion of the 2 record read by the reporter) 3 A . NNoo .. 4 BY MR. INNELLI: 5 Q. In 1956, what became your next ' 6 title and area of responsibility? - 7 A. I was appointed as a maintenance 8 supervisor at the same plant. 9 Q. And this is still the John 1 0 F. Queeny plant? 1 1 A . Yes. 1 2 Q Would you describe for me your 1 3 responsibilities as maintenance supervisor 1 4 for the John F. Queeny plant? 1 5 A. I was assigned the task of 1 6 supervising the activities of a small 17 construction group that worked throughout the 1 8 plant to install equipment on a small scale; 1 9 not major construction project, but such 2 0 things as replacing a pump with a bigger 21 pump, or a steel tank with astainless steel 22 tank, a pipeline of a small size with a 2 3 bigger-size pipeline; that type of activity. 2 4 Q. Was a chemical engineering degree 2 5 a prerequisite for holding the maintenance GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 22 STLCOPCB4031837 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 supervisor position? A. Only in that an engineering degree was required. It could have been mechanical, electrical, civil, orchemical.It didn't have to be a chemical engine e'r ing degree. j Q. And how long did you hold the position ofmaintenance supervisor? A. About a couple of years. ; | j Q. During the 1956 to roughly 1957 time period, did you come in contact with PCB's? A. No . Q. Did any of the individuals who j j ii I | j i ! were under your supervision, any of the ! members of the construction group, come in contact with PCB's? A. Some of the electricians assigned to me on a need basis, they would not be permanently assigned to help me, they, in performing their duties throughout the plant, would on occasion be exposed to PCB's, yes. i j i j j I ii : j Q. Now, their duties at come in contact when you say in performing j | the plant, would on occasion | lI with PCB's, would they come -------; in contact with PCB's while under ypur GORE REPORT. ING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 23 j -j I STLCOPCB4031838 1 supervision, or during the course of duties 2 they might be performing for other units at 3 the plant? 4 A. In that period that we're talking i ,,I 5 about, it would be under other supervision, ! 6 not mine. 7 Q. How were PCB's used at the John i 8 F. Queeny plant? 9 A. There were three different uses 10 that I recall. The obvious one was in the 1 1 electrical equipment, as a fluid in 1 2 transformers, and it was present in j ji i i 1 3 capacitors, electrical capacitors. The other I 1 4 use was as a, a fluid in compressors, and the 1 5 third use was as a fluid in heat transfer 1 6 systems . i i i l 17 Q Now, a s the maintenance 1 8 supervisor , did you have oversight j ii 19 supervision for the transformers, 2 0 compressors, and heat transfer systems at the 2 1 John F. Queeny plant? 2 2 A. As the maintenance supervisor in 2 3 the period we're talking about? 2 4 Q. Yes. !1I 2 5 A . No . GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 24 STLCOPCB4031839 1 Q. At any other point in time, did 2 you? 3 A . Later 4 Q Let's continue t o focus on the 5 1956 to '58 time period. Did ' you have any 6 discussions with the Medical Department at 7 Monsanto about the effects of exposure to ; 8 PCB's by the electricians at the John j 9 F. Queeny plant? | 10 A. Not at the period, during the i 1 1 period we're talking about, no. ' 1 2 Q . Prior to 1956, had you had any 1 3 such conversations? 1 4 A. No . ! I : 15 Q . After you were maintenance ; 1 6 supervisor at the John F. Queeny facility, j i 17 what became your next job title and area of | 18 1 9 A. I became the maintenance 2 0 superintendent at the same plant. I iI )I i i ii 2 1 Q And when was that? | 22 A . A s best as I can recall. i t w a s \ i 00 in r~- in 2 3 the period , something like that. :i 2 4 Q - And for how long did you hold that : 2 5 position? GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 25 | i STLCOPCB4031840 1 A . Again, a couple, three years. 2 Q. How did your responsibilities as 3 superintendent, maintenance superintendent, 4 differ from your responsibilities as 5 maintenance supervisor? ' ' 6 A. Well, as maintenance supervisor, I I 7 had that limited activity that I described, 8 in terms of minor new construction. As 9 maintenance superintendent, I was responsible 1 0 for the activities relating to maintenance I 11 and construction for the entire plant, which I 1 2 involved 400 mechanics, and I use that nu mb e r i 13 to describe the magnitude of the assignment. I 1 4 Q. During your tenure as maintenance i 1 5 superintendent for the John F. Queeny plant, 1 6 did you have under your jurisdiction 17 employees who came in contact with PCB's? 1 8 A. Oh, yes. 1 9 Q. You identified electricians I i i II i ] Ii i 2 0 earlier as individuals who would come in 2 1 contact with PCB's. Were there any other job 2 2 classifications that would come in contact 2 3 with PCB's? 24 A. There were at least two others I 25 that I recall. One group was referred to as I GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 26 STLCOPCB4031841 1 the machinists . They, that was the group 2 that worked on compressors, and the other 3 group were the pipe fitters. who were more 4 likely to work with the heat transfer 5 systems. ' 6 Q. During the time that you were 7 maintenance superintendent, did you discuss 8 with anyone inthe Medical Department the 9 effects of exposure to PCB's upon human 1 0 beings? 1 1 A . Yes . 1 2 Q. What do you recall about those 1 3 conversations? 1 4 A. I was informed that the materials 1 5 should be respected like all industrial 16 chemicals, that the employee should not get 17 it on his skin. If so, he should wash it 1 8 off. If it got on his clothing, he should, 1 9 within a reasonable period of time, change 20 his clothing, to avoid skin contact, and the 2 1 employee should also avoid breathing fumes 2 2 from these materials. 2 3 I was also told that there were 2 4 symptoms that would serve as guidelines 2 5 regarding the amount of exposure that an GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 27 STLCOPCB4031842 1 employee might have had. For example, a 2 reddened skin would indicate too much skin 3 contact. That would be what I would call an 4 early warning symptom. A coughing and chest 5 pain like a severe chest cold' would be a 6 symptom of too much exposure to the vapor. 7 Those are very key early warning signals. 8 Further exposure, assuming you pay no 9 attention to those early warning signals, I 1 0 would be a skin breakout, referred to as 1 1 chloracne, which resembles teenage acne in 1 2 some respects. 1 3 I was also told that if you 1 4 continue to ignore these early warning 1 5 symptoms, it could lead to liver damage. 1 6 That was the information that I gathered I I 1 7 talking to the plant medical doctor, as well i 1 8 as the plant industrial hygienist, and 1 9 reading the Monsanto documents that covered 2 0 this. 21 Q . Okay. Who was the plant medical j 2 2 doctor at that point in time? 2 3 A . Dr. Bershe. 2 4 Q Could you spell the last name. 2 5 please? GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 28 STLCOPCB4031843 1 A. I believe it's B-e-r-s-h-e. I 2 have forgotten his first name. 3 Q. And who was the plant industrial 4 hygienist? 5 A. Sam Urban, U-r-b-a-n. I believe 6 he was the one who had that title at that 7 time. 8 Q . You made reference to Monsanto 9 documents. Is there a particular document 1 0 you have in mind? 1 1 A. There's, of course, the trade 1 2 literature that was published in pamphlet 13 form. I recall reading some of those, and 1 4 there were some portions of the, of the, what 1 5 Monsanto calls the standard manufacturing 1 6 process, and the other document, the standard 17 operating procedure. 1 8 Q Can you describe for me what the 1 9 s tandard manufacturing process document : 2 0 covered, whattopics? 2 1 A . This is the technically oriented 2 2 document prepared by the research chemist and 2 3 the engineers, describing the technical 24 features of a chemical process, what kind of 2 5 equipment is used, what temperatures are GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 29 STLCOPCB4031844 1 achieved, how much agitation is involved, 2 what the raw materials are, and how long must 3 it be under the temperature that is 4 specified, how samples are taken, what to 5 look for in the process. It is designed to' 6 be read by a technically trained pe-rson, 7 primarily the supervisor of the operation and 8 his superintendent, his boss, and so on. 9 Q. And this is a document that was 10 prepared by the Monsanto corporation, itself? 1 1 A . Yes . 1 2 Q. And it would set out warning signs 1 3 for different types of elements that may 1 4 arise from exposure to different types of 1 5 chemicals in the workplace? 1 6 A. You say was it designed for the 17 different exposures? 18 MR. INNELLI: Why don't you read 1 9 back the question. 20 (The requested portion of the 2 1 record read by the reporter) 2 2 A. As part of this document -- 2 3 BY MR. INNELLI: 2 4 Q. Right, that's my question. 2 5 A. -- there is a section that relates GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 30 STLCOPCB4031845 * J. to the proper handling of the chemicals 2 associated with that process. 3 Q . Okay. 4 A. Starting material, intermediate, 5 and the final product, and t he waste 6 material, so there are, depending on how many 7 chemicals are involved, the size of that 8 section would vary, and there would be 9 comments in there regarding the, the safe 1 0 handling of the material. 11 Q. You also identified a document as 12 the standard operating procedure. Could you 1 3 give us an explanation of what that document 1 4 entailed? 15 A. Thatdocument is designed to be 1 6 used by the operator in his initial training, 17 and later on for his own perusal regarding 1 8 refreshing his memory regarding what valve to 1 9 turn and what tank to use, and so on, and it 2 0 describes to the operator the procedure he 2 1 must follow as he works his shift to perform 2 2 the given task, and there are sections in the 2 3 book that apply to the, the process as each 2 4 operator gets involved. 2 5 I didn't make myself clear on GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 31 STLCOPCB4031846 1 that. 2 Q . No . 3 A. There's a beginning process with 4 one operator, an intermediate maybe with 5 another operator, and finally', the finishing 6 of the product and the packaging may involve 7 a third person. Each one can refer to his 8 section to refresh his memory should he want 9 to . 10 Q. Now, what was your understanding 1 1 of why the employees under your jurisdiction 12 when you were maintenance superintendent 1 3 should avoid breathing PCB fumes? 1 4 A. Well, my understanding was you 1 5 should avoid the continual, prolonged 16 breathing of fumes. If the situation called 17 for a need for them to be exposed for a 1 8 period beyond something that they could 19 tolerate, really it's a matter of irritation 2 0 and all, they were expected and trained to 2 1 put on a respirator, to go back into that 22 area to complete their duties. 2 3 Q. What was your understanding as to 2 4 why they were to avoid prolonged exposure to 2 5 the fumes? GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 32 STLCOPCB4031847 1 A. Oh, breathing the fumes would, of 2 course, introduce it into their bodies 3 through their lungs, and that was a method of 4 entry and would create the, the skin 5 condition I mentioned earlier', that chlora'cne 6 symptom, and it would also create,-if it n/ continued, would create the liver damage I 8 mentioned earlier. . 9 Q. So back in 1956 and 1957, you 1 0 understood that prolonged exposure to PCB 1 1 fumes, if continued, could result in liver 1 2 conditions? 1 3 A . Yes. 1 4 Q. What was your next position after 1 5 maintenance superintendent at the John 1 6 F. Queeny production facility? 1 7 A. I was assigned as a superintendent 1 8 in the plant Technical Services Department. 19 Q. Okay. Still at the John Queeny 2 0 plant? 2 1 A. Yes. 2 2 Q. And what responsibilities did you 2 3 have as superintendent in the Technical 2 4 Services Department? 25 MR. McLAUGHLIN: I'm sorry, for GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 33 STLCOPCB4031848 1 clarification, what time are we, now? What 2 year? 3 4 1958. 5 MR. INNELLI: ' Starting roughly THE WITNESS: '58,'59, *60, ' j | j | !! j 6 somewhere in there. ~. 7 A. My responsibilities involved the j i 8 supervision of a team of engineers and j 9 technicians who were assigned the duties of 10 investigating chemicalprocesses at the : 11 plant. ; 1 2 BY MR. INNELLI : j I 1 3 Q. What do you mean by investigating j 14 chemical processes at the plant? | 15 A. Reviewing the processes to j 1 6 determine whether there are better ways to \ 17 make the same product or ways to make a 1 8 better product, or ways to make more of that 19 product, or look into procedures and ; 2 0 equipment required to consider the i 21 manufacture of new products. ! 22 Q. How many products weremade at the i 2 3 John F. Queeny plant? 2 4 A. Yes, I don't know that I ever 25 heard a count. It was over a hundred. ! GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS,MISSOURI STLCOPCB4031849 1 Q. Did any of them use a chlorination 2 process? 3 MR. MALIN: Well, I'll object to 4 the form of the question unless you define 5 chlorination process. I guess there are a 6 lot of chlorination processes. There are a 7 lot of chlorination processes. Do you mean a 8 process other than using nascent chlorine or 9 using nascent chlorine only? 1 0 MR. INNELLI: Well, let's get an 1 1 answer to the question as to whether they 1 2 used a chlorinated -- chlorination process 1 3 first. 1 4 A. Not at the Queeny plant. 1 5 BY MR. INNELLI: 1 6 Q. At what plants were a chlorination 17 process used? 1 8 A. Certainly, the Anniston, Alabama, 1 9 plant, and the Sauget, Illinois, plant. 2 0 Chlorination also occurred at Luling, 21 Louisiana, plant, and as I recall, they 2 2 eventually started chlorination at the 2 3 Muscatine, Iowa, plant. 2 4 Q. How long did you hold the position 2 5 of superintendent of the Technical Services GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 35 STLCOPCB4031850 1 Department? j 2 A . Three years or so. j i 3 Q And what was your next job title | ! 4 and area of responsibility? 5 A . Next job title, st'ill, again, at j i i j6 the same plant, was general superintendent of t 7 qhi nni nrr warehousing and utilities. I | 8 believe that's the correctname. 9 Q. And what did thatentail? j j 10 .. A. That group provided services to ! 11 the manufacturing functionother than the j 1 2 maintenance service. We, of course, received j j i 13 the raw materials, distributed to the using j 1 4 locations at the plant, we received the I I 1 5 various packaging materialsfor packaging the : 16 final product, we provided for the delivery I 17 of all kinds of raw materials, some of it I 1 8 liquid, some of it solid, in various kinds of 1 9 containers. We picked up the finished I 20 product from the packaging line and took it j i 21 to the warehouse; we picked up waste, trash | 22 hauling function, and we provided the | j 23 utilities, which included electricity, water, i 24 ammonia, air, used by the different ; 2 5 departments. ; *i GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI ! 36 4 STLCOPCB4031851 1 Q. And how long did you hold that 2 position? 3 A. Till 1964. 4 Q. Okay, 1964, what job title and 5 responsibilities did you ass u'm e ? 6 A. I was appointed a general / superintendent of manufacturing at the 8 Sauget, Illinois, plant. 9 Q. And what responsibilities did that 1 0 entail? 1 1 A. I was responsible for the 1 2 operation of a group of production units in 1 3 that plant. 1 4 Q. What did supervision of a group of 1 5 production units entail? 1 6 A. I think I can best describe it as 17 saying that this, the kinds of 1 8 responsibilities I described earlier for the 1 9 supervisor are picked up by his 2 0 superintendent and in turn, by the general 2 1 superintendent, the title of it I had at that 2 2 time, so this meant that I had the composite, 2 3 not of just one producing unit, but, as I 24 remember, six or eight of them. In that -- 2 5 at that location. GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 37 STLCOPCB4031852 1 Earlier, in discussing the 2 responsibilities of the supervisor of the 3 production unit. you identified certain 4 responsibilities, such as quali ty 5 standards -- - 6 A . Yes. - 7 Q. So w o u Id that be one o f the 8 responsibilities you would have a s the 9 superintendent -- excuse me, as the general 1 0 superintendent of manufacturing 11 A . Yes. 1 2 Q. Cost assessment associate, 1 3 handling of associated budgets? 1 4 A. Yes . 1 5 Q. Safety of employees? 1 6 A. Yes. 17 Q. Preservation of the facilities? 1 8 A. Yes. 1 9 Q. Were PCB's one of the products 20 that were manufactured at the Sauget 2 1 facility? 22 A. PCB's were manufactured there but 2 3 they were not my responsibility. 24 Q. Okay. Whose responsibility were 2 5 they? GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 38 STLCOPCB4031853 1 A. One of the other general 2 superintendents. There were six general 3 superintendents . 4 Q. Okay. How long were you a general 5 superintendent of manufacturing in Sauget? 6 A. About a year and a half7 as I 7 remember . 8 Q. So in approximately 1966, you 9 assumed a new title with new 1 0 responsibilities? 1 1 A. About *65. 1 2 Q. About '65? And what was that new 1 3 title and area of responsibility? 1 4 A. I was assigned to plant manager at 1 5 Anniston, Alabama. 1 6 Q. Okay, and what responsibilities 17 did you have as plant manager? 1 8 A . I think I can best d e scribe by 1 9 saying I was responsible for eve r y t h i n g that 20 took place at that plant , and n o t only within 2 1 the plant fence, but its impact on the 22 community, as well. 2 3 (Discussion off the record.) 2 4 (Recess) 2 5 (The previous question and GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 39 STLCOPCB4031854 1 answer were read by the 2 reporter) 3 BY MR. COHEN: 4 Q. Mr. Papageorge, what do you mean 5 by the phrase "and its impact' on the ' 6 community, as well"? - 7 A. It covers a full gamut of actions 8 and reactions. The way that I or my staff, 9 would hire people, the salaries, and wages 1 0 and benefits that were offered to the workers 1 1 who, in turn, were part of the community, and 1 2 it impacted the community indirectly, of 1 3 course. The disposal of wastes had to meet 1 4 the local ordinances, as specified; the 1 5 behavior of my truck drivers in maneuvering 1 6 the local roads and highways, that was 17 important. They represented the company, and 1 8 the need to participate in local activities 1 9 such as United Fund charitable contributions, 2 0 and not only contributing money to these 2 1 funds, but also contributing help in terms of 22 Monsanto personnel being involved. The 2 3 cooperation with the, the leaders of the 2 4 community in terms of governmental affairs, 2 5 as well as the cultures, the music program GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 40 STLCOPCB4031855 1 that they wanted to sponsor, and Monsanto 2 would be asked to participate, either by ; 3 funding or by any other means. I'm sure I ; 4 didn't cover the whole bit. We had to keep a ; 5 cleanplant. ' 6 In other words, to summarize it 7 all, we tried to be a respected, good 8 neighbor. ; 9 Q. As plant manager, to whom did you 1 0 report? : 1 1 A. I reported to the Director of 1 2 Manufacturing, located in St. Louis. ' 13 Q. And who was theDirector of 1 4 Manufacturing? 15 Well, let me ask this first. For : 1 6 what time period were you the plant manager 17 of theAnniston plant? 1 8 A. 1965 through 1969. i ; I i 1 9 Q. During the 1965 to 1969 time 2 0 period, who was it that youreported to? ;i j 21 A. Initially, it was Robert Soden, i 22 S-o-d-e-n, and I think after, as I recall, a i | 2 3 couple of years later, he was replaced by , 2 4 Raymond Stratmeyer, S-t-r-a-t-m-e-y-e-r. ; 25 Q. What were the products that were ' '1 GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI ! 41 STLCOPCB4031856 1 manufactured at the Anniston plant? 2 A. I'll try to remember them all. 3 Q. Well, let me ask this first, then 4 How many were there, roughly? 5 A. Hmm. A couple of dozen. 6 Q. Okay. Was, were PCB's one of the 7 products manufactured there? 8 A . Yes . 9 Q. What percentage of total product 1 0 manufactured at the Anniston plant was the 1 1 PCB production? 12 A. I've never calculated that 1 3 percentage. The best I can do for you is to 1 4 estimate. It's roughly a third of the 1 5 plant's output was represented by the PCB 1 6 product line. 1 7 MR. MALIN: Is that in terms of 1 8 pounds, or volume? 19 THE WITNESS: I'm talking pounds, 20 now, which is the normal way to express 21 chemical production. 2 2 BY MR. INNELLI: 2 3 Q. And what was the production 2 4 capacity of the Anniston plant in terms of 2 5 total amount of pounds or tons of product GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 42 STLCOPCB4031857 l produced? 2 A. I just, I never had that number. 3 I never added up the individual units. 4 Q. For whom was the PCB's 5 manufactured at the Anniston plant? ' 6 MR. MALIN: I'll objec-t-to the 7 form of the question. I don't really 8 understand what you mean. 9 MR. INNELLI: Okay. 1 0 MR. MALIN: Are you talking about 1 1 what customers, if he knows? 1 2 BY MR. INNELLI: 1 3 Q. Was there a particular customer 1 4 for whom the Anniston plant produced the 1 5 PCB's? 1 6 A. About a thousand of them. 17 Q. Okay, was there a dominant 1 8 customer, a customer for whom a significant 1 9 percentage of the total production went to? 2 0 A. Yes, there was a dominant one, 2 1 yes. 2 2 Q. And which customer was that? 2 3 A. General Electric. 2 4 Q. Okay. Let's focus in on the 2 5 production for General Electric. Were the GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI STLCOPCB4031858 1 PCB's manufactured for General Electric 2 manufactured pursuant to specifications that 3 were different than the PCB's manufactured 4 for other customers of PCB's produced at the 5 Anniston plant? ~ 6 A. I hesitate because other customers 7 included all types of applications with a 8 different need than the GE people's need so 9 my answer would be yes, they were different. 1 0 Q. Would the specifications for the 1 1 production of PCB's for General Electric be 1 2 provided by General Electric? 1 3 A. Not for PCB's. 1 4 Q. Okay. What would be -- were 1 5 specifications provided by General Electric 1 6 to Monsanto for the production of a product 17 which utilizes PCB's? 1 8 A. Yes, but let me correct my 1 9 previous answer. 20 Q . Okay. 2 1 A. General Electric, when ordering 2 2 straight PCB mixtures, expected Monsanto to 2 3 meet their specifications. 2 4 Q. Okay. When you used the phrase 2 5 "straight PCB mixtures," what do you mean? GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 44 STLCOPCB4031859 1 A. These are mixtures in which only 2 those chemicals that can be classified as 3 chlorinated biphenyls are present. 4 MR. INNELLI: Let me hear the 5 answer read back. ' 6 (The requested portion of the 7 record read by the reporter) 8 BY MR. INNELLI: 9 Q. What do you mean by "those 10 chemicals classified as chlorinated 1 1 biphenyls ? 1 2 A. It's the material which results -- 13 MR. MALIN: If you want. I'll try 1 4 to describe it. 1 5 BY MR. INNELLI : 1 6 Q. Please give me a verbal -- 17 A. -- that results when biphenyl, 1 8 which is a chemical unto itself, is exposed 1 9 to gaseous chlorine, the chlorine combines 20 with the biphenyl to various degrees in terms 2 1 of amount of chlorine. That mixture that 2 2 results from this combination of chlorine and 2 3 biphenyl, once it's been purified and 2 4 distilled, is the material I had in mind when 2 5 I described that mixture classified as GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 45 STLCOPCB4031860 1 chlorinated biphenyls. 2 MR. INNELLI: Would you read back 3 the preceding answer? 4 (The requested portion of the 5 record read b'y 6 MR. INNELLI: Read back-the 7 question and answer three back, four and 8 threeback. 9 (The requested portion of the 1 0 record read by the reporter) 1 1 BY MR. INNELLI: 1 2 Q. Mr. Papageorge, what else would 1 3 straight mixtures of PCB's be mixed with? 1 4 A. It depends on the final mixture 1 5 being called for. They could be mixed with 1 6 mineral oil, phosphate esters, all kinds of 17 liquid chemicals. 1 8 Q. What GE products are you talking 1 9 about ? 2 0 A. Oh, you are talking GE products. 21 Q . Yes. 22 A. Oh. GE products that I have in 2 3 mind are products that are used in electrical 2 4 equipment. 2 5 Q. Such as? GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 46 STLCOPCB4031861 1 A. That contain PCB's and had the 2 trademark, the General Electric trademark of 3 Pyrano1 . 4 Q. So you would receive from General 5 Electric its specifications for the 6 manufacture of Pyranol? " 7 MR. McMANUS: Objection to the 8 form of the question. 9 MR. COHEN: What's the objection? 1 0 What part are you objecting to? 1 1 MR. McMANUS: Leading. 1 2 MR. MALIN: You can answer the 1 3 question . 1 4 MR. COHEN: Answer the questions. 1 5 THE WITNESS: I forgot the 1 6 question. 1 7 MR. COHEN: Read the question 1 8 back. 1 9 (The requested portion of the 2 0 record read by the reporter) 2 1 A. We did receive from General 2 2 Electric the characteristics, properties that 2 3 they expected the Pyranol mixture that they 2 4 were ordering would meet. 2 5 BY MR. INNELLI : GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 47 STLCOPCB4031862 1 Q. What was the procedure followed 2 between General Electric and Monsanto for the 3 conveyance of what characteristics you 4 expect -- they expected, GE expected Pyranol 5 to meet? '' 6 MR. MALIN: I'll object--on the 7 grounds that it's vague to me, but if you 8 think you understand it, go ahead and answer 9 it . 1 0 A. I think I understand the question. 1 1 The procedure could vary from time to time, 1 2 from person to person involved, GE person, 13 Monsanto person. It could be, for example, a ! 1 4 case of where the field representative of 1 5 Monsanto calling the right office at General 1 6 Electric would talk to the right person and 1 7 they would discuss the properties required 1 8 and the recipe for making the mixture, and 1 9 that person would convey it back to St. Louis 20 and the mixture would be prepared, or it 2 1 could be a case of a research person at 2 2 General Electric talking to a research person 2 3 in Monsanto, and the same kind of dialogue 2 4 taking place. The net result, however, is 2 5 that when a given mixture was acceptable to GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 48 STLCOPCB4031863 1 General Electric, they would be designated by 2 their trademark, Pyranol with a given letter 3 and number designation, and they would 4 forward to Monsanto, eventually the plant 5 would receive the, I'm going to call it the 6 recipe for making it and the conditions which 7 that mixture must meet before it's shipped. 8 EXAMINATION 9 BY MR. COHEN: 1 0 Q. They start off by giving you a 11 performance specification? 1 2 A. I would not call it a performance 1 3 specification. 1 4 Q. What did they tell you? Did they 1 5 tell you what they wanted the fluid to do? 1 6 A. I have a little difficulty with 17 what they wanted it to do, in this 18 application. Are you saying, "We need this 1 9 fluid to serve as a transformer fluid"? 2 0 That's one definition. 21 Q.That's a term they may give you 22 that information. The question I'm asking 2 3 you is, what information did they give you: 2 4 Physical characteristics, flash point, 2 5 viscosity? GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 49 STLCOPCB4031864 1 A. Viscosity, specific gravity, 2 dielectric constant, I've forgotten them all. 3 It's a full page. 4 Q. But they were basically 5 performance requirements that' the fluid had 6 to meet ? 7 A . I would not call them all 8 performance requirements. 9 Q. Some of them you would call 1 0 physical characteristics? 1 1 A. Physical characteristics, yes. 1 2 Q. Such as flash point? 1 3 A. And its color, for example, is not 1 4 a performance so much as it is a physical 1 5 characteristic. 1 6 Q. Who determined the combination of 17 chemicals that would constitute the product? 1 8 A. General Electric. 19 Q. So when you said they gave you a 20 recipe for the product, is that what you are 21 telling us, that they gave you a description 2 2 of the chemicals that they felt would achieve 2 3 these performance and physical 2 4 characteristics? 2 5 A. That is correct. GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 50 STLCOPCB4031865 1 Q. And then you formulated the 2 compound for them and sent it back to them 3 for tests ? 4 A . Yes. 5 Q Did you test it? ' 6 A . Yes. ' 7 Q What type of testing did you do? 8 A . If the material was intended for 9 use in a capacitor, in some instances the 1 0 proposed mixture would actually be put i n 1 1 capacitors by Monsanto technical people and 12 tested in Monsanto's lab. 1 3 Q. So you put it in the capacitor, 14 you'd energize the capacitor, you'd run the 15 capacitor through various cyclings to see if 1 6 the dielectric fluid reached the performance 17 requirements ? 18 A. That is right. Now, this was not 1 9 done in every case, but enough so that the 2 0 Monsanto technical group kept up-to-date in 2 1 this technology. That was the primary 22 purpose for doing it. 2 3 Q. Monsanto was doing it to find out 2 4 if the product that they were manufacturing 2 5 for General Electric,a customer oftheirs, GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 51 STLCOPCB4031866 1 was capable of performance different from 2 their own product? 3 A. I don't know what you have with 4 reference with their own product. 5 Q. Well, they sold A ro clors and 6 dielectric fluid. '~ 7 A. Well, yes, to answer to that is 8 yes. The Aroclor product line was different 9 from the Pyranol product line. 1 0 Q. One was your product, one was GE's 1 1 product . 1 2 A. That is true, yes, but one was a 1 3 mixture of different kinds of chemicals, 1 4 whereas the Monsanto line was a mixture of 1 5 the same family of chemicals. 1 6 Q. Well, when you say a mixture of 17 the same family of chemicals, it was all 1 8 PCB's that were supposed to be distilled to a 1 9 point that it reached a certain degree of 2 0 chlorination. At least you intended it to be 2 1 all PCB's, didn't you? 22 A. Yes. Yes. 2 3 Q. You didn't intend it to be 24 anything else? 2 5 A. That is true. GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 52 STLCOPCB4031867 1 Q. You didn't intend it to contain 2 water? 3 A . True 4 Q. You didn't intend it to contain 5 any other chemical other than polychlorinated 6 biphenyls? - 7 A. Correct. 8 Q . It did contain other chemicals? 9 A. Sure. 10 Q. Sure. It contained dibenzofurans , 1 1 for example? 1 2 A. Yes. 1 3 Q. Chlorinated naphthalenes? 1 4 A. Yes, plus others we never found. 1 5 Q. Terphenyls? 1 6 A. Yes, but these are trace 17 quantities, now. They're not -- 1 8 Q. I unders tand. 1 9 A. They're not dominant at all. 2 0 Q. But you intended it to be, you 21 intended Aroclors to be PCB's. 2 2 A . Yes. 2 3 Q. You intended Pyranols to be PCB's 2 4 and something else. 2 5 A . Yes . GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 53 STLCOPCB4031868 1 Q. And you are telling me that your 2 research department would then check the 3 performance of Pyranols to stay up-to-date. 4 A. Yes. 5 Q. To what? Find out' if Pyranol 6 performed better than Aroclor? - 7 A . That's one o f their objectives. 8 Q . What were the others ? 9 A . The others , t o stay abreast of the 1 0 capacitor manufacturing technologies, because 1 1 there were changes in the, the craft paper 1 2 used in the windings, there were new plastic 1 3 films being evaluated, and I'm not a 1 4 capacitor designer, but I'm aware that there 1 5 are changes through time that do take place, 1 6 and for Monsanto to be a supplier of an 17 ingredient that goes into this product, its 1 8 technical people were expected to stay tuned 1 9 in to the evolving technology. How is this 20 new craft paper behavingin the presence of 2 1 our old product or should we change our 2 2 product to make the combination better, and 2 3 so on. 2 4 Q. So when you told me you were 2 5 testing the Pyranol, you were testing the GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 54 STLCOPCB4031869 1 Pyranol to see how it performed with changing 2 components of the capacitor or the other 3 device in which the dielectric fluid was 4 ultimately to be used. 5 A . That was, that was one of the 6 programs, yes, * i ; 7 Q - And did the same thing with 8 Aroclors, I a s s u m e . 9 A . Yes. ; 1 0 Q What were you doing to assure that ! 1 1 the Pyranol product you were preparing for GE 1 2 was the product that GE ordered? 1 3 A . It met the quality control tests 1 4 that were run. ; 1 5 Q How do you know that? 1 6 A . How do I know that? ; 1 7 Q Yes. ; 1 8 A . I have -- there were copies of the ! 1 9 quality control laboratory results that are 20 certified by the chemist of that laboratory. 2 1 Q Starting when? 22 A . Shoot, from the beginning. : 2 3 Q So as long as you were associated 24 with Monsanto Chemical Company, you ran a QC 2 5 lab in every production facility in which you GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 55 STLCOPCB4031870 1 were associated which had certified results? 2 A . Ye s . 3 Q. Were they just performance specs, 4 were they meeting performance specs? 5 A. Some I would classify as ' 6 performance specs, others were physical 7 properties. It depends on the chemical being 8 looked at, 9 Q. Did you do qualitative analysis? 1 0 A. Well, that is part of the, the 1 1 quality control -- 1 2 Q. So the answer is yes. 1 3 A. Yes. 1 4 Q. Did you do quantitative analysis? 1 5 A. Yes. 1 6 Q Did you keep records of them? 17 Yes. 1 8 Q. Records were kept of the analysis 1 9 of samples of production product at all the 2 0 plants with which you were associated since 2 1 you started in Monsanto? 2 2 A . Yes . 23 Q. Where are those records? 2 4 A. I don't know. 2 5 Q Did you see them at the time you GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 56 sSi-.lL STLCOPCB4031871 1 worked there? 2 A . Certainly. 3 Q. Did they print out what they found 4 in the substance they were testing? Did they 5 keep a record of what they f o'u n d , 6 qualitatively and quantitatively? ~ 7 A . Yes. 8 Q. So if they sampled a production 9 batchof 1242, they analyzed that it had an 1 0 overall assay of 42 percent chlorinated 1 1 polychlorinated biphenyls? 12 A. Well, the evaluation, the 1 3 information would lead to that conclusion, 1 4 but the item across the page would not be 1 5 worded just that way. It would say"Chlorine 1 6 contents, 42.3 percent," and the standard is 1 7 minimum 42. There's a double column that 18 it'scompared -- 1 9 Q What ' s the maximum ? 2 0 A . I've forgotten. 2 1 Q All right. 2 2 A . And when I picked 42, it was -- 2 3 Q All right, so you had a range? 2 4 A . Yes. 2 5 Q You had an acceptable production GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 57 STLCOPCB4031872 1 range. 2 A . Yes. 3 Q. You would call something Aroclor 4 1242 if it had a degree of chlorination 5 between X and Y? ' 6 A. Correct. - 7 Q. Whatever they were. 8 9 Q. Maybe 40 to 43 percent or 1 0 something like that. 1 1 A. (Nods head in affirmative manner). 1 2 Q. And what you did is, you sampled 1 3 the material and you tested it. 1 4 A. Yes. 1 5 Q. How often did you sample it? 1 6 A. Each batch of material that was 1 7 manufactured was sampled. 1 8 Q. Each production line run? 1 9 A. Each production tankful. The tank 2 0 was held intact until the sample went to the 2 1 laboratory, the analytical chemist looked at 2 2 it, and found that it was acceptable, and 2 3 then that tankful would be transferred to a 2 4 bigger storage tank and blended with the rest 2 5 of the production. GOREREPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 58 STLCOPCB4031873 1 Q Tell me about the production 2 process. 3 A . I'm sorry? 4 Q. You were going to say something, 5 sir. Tell me what you were going to say 6 first. Have you finished your ans we r ? 7 A. No, I was going to say that in 8 addition to that quality control check, there 9 is another one taken when the package is 1 0 filled, whether it be a steel drum of a 11 material, or a tank car or tank truckful. 1 2 Q. Tank wagon; right. So you would 1 3 sample the material on its way to the tank 1 4 wagon the rail car or the barrel? 1 5 A. Before it leaves the plant, it 1 6 gets another look. 17 Q . For what? 1 8 A. For the same properties. 19 Q. So you had a second QC check, same 2 0 sties? 2 1 A . Correct . 2 2 Q. So you are looking at physical 2 3 characteristics and performance specs again 2 4 A . Right. 2 5 Q Do you keep a record of that? GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 59 STLCOPCB4031874 1 A . Yes. 2 Q Where? 3 A . Idon'tknow. ; 1 4 Q But as long as you were associated i 5 with Monsanto, those records 'were kept? 6 A . Yes. '" i 7 Q Tell me about the production 8 process . Did you do this in lots? 9 A . Lots? i 10 Q Lots; some sort of lot of a j 11 quantity. Did you, for example, did you -- ; 1 2 A . Yes. ; 1 3 Q -- induce into the, into the 1 4 crucible or whatever it was in which you 1 5 create -- what do you do? You create a 1 6 vacuum in a chamber and you introduce into 1 7 that chamber liquid biphenyl and gaseous 1 8 chlorine? | 19 A . Well, I don't know you start off i 2 0 by creating a vacuum. We didn't create a 2 1 vacuum. 2 2 Q. You do it in the absence of 2 3 oxygen, don't you? 2 4 A . Yes . 2 5 Q So you exhaust somehow or another GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 60 STLCOPCB4031875 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 the air that would be in the chamber. A. Right. You bubble some chlorine through it. Q. And that takes the air out. A. And then you pump in the biphenyl right after that. Q. Do you do it in measured lots? In other words, do you introduce a hundred gallons, a thousand gallons, or whatever -- A. Yes. Q. -- of biphenyl? A. Each batch, is the expression commonly used, consists of a given amount of material. It's a fixed amount, and that is really selected based on the equipment size, how big a pot are you going to make it in. Q. Okay. A. So there are batches that are designated by number, and you used the word "lot." The "lot" designation was reserved for shipments, packaging the material, so many drums -- it came out of a tank, it was called a lot -- and given a number so you could trace the records back on what day was it packaged, and who packaged it, and what GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 61 STLCOPCB4031876 1 sample was taken, and who analyzed it, and so 2 on . 3 Q. But those lots already came out of 4 the finished product storage facility? 5 A. Yes. ' 6 Q. So it's no longer a bat ch in there 7 anymore? 8 9 Q. It's now just a storage, a 1 0 finished product. 11 1 2 Q. You dealt with batches, as you 1 3 called it, by number, in the production 1 4 process . 15 1 6 Q. The production process was not a 17 continuous process then? 1 8 A. No, I would not call it a 1 9 continuous process. 20 Q. I mean, it's not like Hershey bars 21 where they just keep injectingchocolate into 2 2 the mold and they keep dropping on to a tray 2 3 and keep on going. You had to stop the 2 4 process when it was finished, take the 2 5 finished product out, or send it to the next GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 62 STLCOPCB4031877 1 step, distillation or whatever, and then you 2 could start again by bubbling your chlorine 3 gas into the pot, and then introducing your 4 batch of biphenyl. 5 A. Yes . '' 6 Q. And that was the process'. *7 A. Yes. 8 Q. So you sampled each batch -- 9 A. Yes. 1 0 Q. -- and you kept QC records -- 1 1 A. Yes. 1 2 Q. And those records exist. 1 3 A. Existed. 1 4 Q. Existed. 1 5 A. I cannot speak for today. 1 6 Q. When was the first time your QC 17 laboratory tested for impurities or 1 8 contaminants in the product? 1 9 A. As best I recall, we started 2 0 looking for specific contaminants in 1970. 2 1 Following a report we got from Europe. 2 2 That's the earliest date that I'm aware of 2 3 where contaminants were considered, the 2 4 possibility for the presence of contaminants 2 5 was considered. GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 63 STLCOPCB4031878 1 Q. Well, prior to that time, you 2 didn't look for any contaminants or 3 appearance? 4 A. Not as a routine. If the material 5 did not meet the specification s called for, 6 we would suspect that it was conta nri n a t e d , 7 and in order to purify that bad batch, we 8 would take the necessary steps to identify 9 the contaminant, whether it be water, or 1 0 metal, iron, or whatever affected it. 1 1 Q. Something got into it in the 1 2 process? 1 3 A. But something got into it. But 1 4 there were no routine analytical steps taken 1 5 to look for contaminants, as such. 1 6 Q. Prior to 1970. 17 A. Well, the research program started 1 8 in 1970 , and I don ' t know that routine 19 contaminant analyses were ever placed in 2 0 practice a s long as PCB ' s were manufactured 2 1 Q. How did you know what was in the 2 2 PCB ' s ? 2 3 A. I'm sorry? 2 4 Q. How did you know what was in the 2 5 PCB's prior to 1970? GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 64 STLCOPCB4031879 1 A. Of course, starting in 1968, '69, 2 somewhere in there, when the methodology was 3 available, the analytical chemist was able to 4 identify the different kinds of PCB's by 5 chlorine number, the1 chlorine, the 2 6 chlorine, and so on. Prior to that, I 7 personally don't know how the chemist could 8 distinguish between the different PCB's in 9 the mixture. They would report the total 1 0 chlorine in the composite by percent by 1 1 weight. 1 2 Q. It was by weight? 1 3 A. By weight. 1 4 Q. So if they had 42 percent by 1 5 weight, that was 1242? 1 6 A. That's what Monsantocalled it, 17 yes. 1 8 Q. And if they got more chlorine into 1 9 it, which I gather they were able to control 2 0 in the production process to some degree, it 21 would be 54, or 60, or 68, or whatever? 2 2 A. That's correct. 2 3 Q. You said they did a purification 2 4 process. After it came out of the pot, it 2 5 went into a distilling process for GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 65 STLCOPCB4031880 1 purification. What were you distilling off? 2 A. The good material that we wanted. 3 Q. You were taking off the good 4 material, and I guess on the way through the 5 distilling process, you were fractionalizing 6 off and discarding other materials? 7 A . 11 's the other way around. What ' s 8 left in the pot after you distill off the 9 vapors and condense them and collect the 1 0 material you are looking for -- back in the 11 pot, you have what are called still bottoms 1 2 and they look like road tar. Black, m i x t u r e s 1 3 of many, many chemicals . We haven't analyzed 1 4 all of them. 1 5 Q. Never even found out what it was? 1 6 A . No . 17 Q. So the still bottoms, there's 1 8 where we're going to find lots of 1 9 naphthalenes and quarter phenyls, and things 2 0 like that? 2 1 A. Your guess is as good as mine. 2 2 It's a real mixture. 2 3 Q. What do they do with that? 2 4 A. That was put in, for some of them, 2 5 there was a market for it. It was sold as GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 66 STLCOPCB4031881 1 Montar, M-o-n-t-a-r. 2 Q I remember that name. 3 A . Whereas others were put in 4 Monsanto's landfill; disposed of. 5 Q Where is that? 6 A . Well, there's at least two o f 7 them. One is at the Anni ston plant has one, 8 and at the Sauget plant h as one. 9 Q Who determined the process o f 1 0 distillati on to yield the purified product? 11 A . The research c hemist would 1 2 establish the conditions under which the 1 3 distillati on should take place . 1 4 Q That preceded you? 1 5 A . Oh, yes, that goes back to 1929 or 16 so . 17 Q - What else were you looking for 1 8 when you were doing quality control 1 9 collection on the Pyranol product? 2 0 A. What else in addition to what? 21 Q. Well, you told me that you were, 2 2 you were testing the product so that you 2 3 could stay up-to-date. Why else were you 2 4 testing it? 2 5 A. I'm -- GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 67 STLCOPCB4031882 1 Q. Have I confused you? 2 A .. Alittlebit. , 3 Q . I don't want to confuse you. I'll ; 4 ask a different question. Let's see if we 5 can get to this one. Were y ou doing quality 6 control checks on the Pyranol? ~ 7 A Yes. 8 Q Were you doing the same sort of 9 analysis on the Pyranol that you were doing 1 0 on the Aroclor, which is, quantitative and 1 1 qualitative analysis looking for performance 1 2 characteristics and physical characteristics? 1 3 A . Yes. 1 4 Q. And you did that on a regular 1 5 quality control basis before the product got 1 6 shipped to GE . 1 7 A Correct. 1 8 Q Who put the labels on that said 1 9 GE ? 2 0 A . The operator assigned the tank car 2 1 filling function or the druming function. 2 2 Q - Somebody in Monsanto? 2 3 A . Yes. 2 4 Q So Monsanto put the GE labels on? 2 5 A . I don't want any misunderstanding. GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 68 STLCOPCB4031883 1 This is a label that exhibited the GE 2 trademark, with reference to the fact that 3 that trademark is a GE-registered trademark, 4 but it also had on it the Monsanto logo, 5 identifying it, Monsanto, as the source of 6 thematerial. 7 Q. Who supplied those labels? Do you 8 know? Did GE supply them or Monsanto? 9 A. Monsanto designed the label, got 1 0 GE's approval, if you will, or concurrence 11 that it was proposed, and then Monsanto would 1 2 place orders with the, either the in-house 1 3 printing department or outside shops, to have 1 4 them printed and then sent to the two plants 1 5 for use. 1 6 Q. So when the quantity, a lot, 17 whatever it was, of drums, 55 gallons each, 1 8 or whatever came down to the property person 1 9 in the department, if labels got applied? 2 0 A. Yes. 2 1 Q. And they went out the door as GE 22 products? 2 3 A. I have some trouble with the 2 4 expression, "GE product." It's a product 25 manufactured to GE specifications for use as GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 69 STLCOPCB4031884 1 -L GE determined. 2 Q. And sale by GE as they determined. 3 A . Ye ah . 4 Q. You didn't control it after that 5 point. - 6 A. Once it left the plant gate, we 7 had no control. 8 Q. WasthisGE's? 9 A. Unless it was going to a customer 1 0 o f GE * s . 11 Q. If they had paid for it, 1 2 obviously, they owned it, not GE? 1 3 A. Depending on who ordered it and 14 who paid for it. 1 5 Q. Okay, fine. Now, let's get back 1 6 to the recipe issue. What do those recipes 17 look like that GE gave you? 1 8 A. I don't remember that they took 19 any specific form. It was just a, a listing 2 0 of the ingredients and the amounts, the 2 1 ratios of oneingredient to the other to be 2 2 put together, to form the composite, the 2 3 desired end product. 2 4 Q. They didn't tell you how to make 2 5 it? GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 70 STLCOPCB4031885 1 A . No , they did use a word like 2 "blend in tank " for so many hours. 3 Q Oh , did they? 4 A . Based on their experience back in 5 their labs. I say hours; mi n'u tes, maybe, ' 6 timeperiod. 7 Q. Well, the question I'm trying to 8 get at is, did they give you the 9 manufacturing process? 1 0 A. They gave us the blending process. 1 1 Q. All right, so you call it 1 2 blending . 1 3 A . Yeah. 1 4 Q. That is, you took chemicals, one 1 5 of which you manufactured called PCB's -- 1 6 A . Correct. 17 Q. -- and one of which you bought 1 8 from someone else, whatever it was called 19 A . Yes 2 0 Q. And you blended them? 21 A. Yes. 2 2 Q. And out came Pyranol, or maybe 2 3 there were two products that you mixed 2 4 together and got, or three, or four, 2 5 whatever. GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 71 STLCOPCB4031886 1 A . Yeah. Yeah. 2 Q. But the process of blending, they 3 told you how to do it? 4 A. They told us, they gave us an idea 5 of what they determined in t h-e ir laboratory 6 was appropriate to reach that end p r o d u c t . 7 Q Well, did you test that t o see i f 8 there were better ways to do it? 9 A . Oh, yes. Yes, but the process i s 1 0 so simple and straightforward that there 1 1 isn't too much that you can introduce i n the 1 2 way of new technology. 1 3 Q This is a low-tech job here , this 1 4 blend? 1 5 A . It certainly is. 1 6 Q Pour 55 gallons of this and 4 0 17 gallons of that, mix it together. and you 1 8 come up with "X" percentage of the mixture, 1 9 or a mixture with "X" percentage of each 2 0 component. 2 1 A. That's, that's basically it, yes. 2 2 Q. But they told you to blend, not 23 how t o blend it? They told you how to blend 1 ! 24 i t , GE told you how to blend it? Monsanto i --i 2 5 d i d n ' t decide how to blend it? i GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS , MISSOURI 72 ! i STLCOPCB4031887 1 A. They did, when they conveyed their 2 specifications to us, will describe the 3 simple technology involved. I don't know how 4 else to put it. Yes, they did say blend it, 5 mix it, and take samples, and' have it run in 6 the laboratory, and it must meet t Ire s e specs. 7 I f not, you add a little bit more of this or 8 a little bit more of that until it meets it. 9 Q Do you know if GE ever 1 0 manufactured Pyranol themselves? 1 1 A. I understand they did, and they, 1 2 even when they brought the, bought the 1 3 finished product, they had the potential, but 1 4 I have no way of knowing whether they 1 5 exercised that, of still blending their own. 1 6 Q. After they bought Pyranol, they 17 could blend it again with something else? 1 8 A. They could, they had the 1 9 capability of buying the PCB mixture from 2 0 Monsanto, and the other ingredients from 2 1 other companies, in their own facilities and 2 2 blend their own Pyranol. 23 Q. Got you.They could have bought 2 4 Aroclor from you? 2 5 A. Yes. GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI STLCOPCB4031888 1 Q. And whatever else they were 2 putting in their mix, hexach1orobenzene or 3 whatever the heck it was, and they could mix 4 it together themselves? 5 A. Correct. ' 6 Q. Did they do that? Do- you know? 7 A. I am under an impression, an 8 understanding that at one time, that's the 9 only way it was done. Then Monsanto picked 1 0 up some of it and both were doing it . I have 1 1 n o way of knowing when , i f ever, G E phased 1 2 out of the blending altogether. 1 3 Q. But you, Monsanto, most certainly 1 4 blended this product for GE for a period of 1 5 time. 1 6 A. Yes. 1 7 Q. They never gave you a, what I 1 8 would consider a standard manual that 1 9 contained manufacturing processes for the i 2 0 creation of Pyranol? 2 1 A. I have not seen anything like 22 that. i 2 3 Q. You did, however, have your own 2 4 standard process manual for the manufacture 2 5 of the Aroclors? GORE REPORTING COMPANY ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 74 STLCOPCB4031889 1 A . And the Pyranols . 2 Q Was that like the manual that was 3 prepared for the Aroclors, or was it as you 4 described, a low-tech operation that -- sort 5 just of a little pamphlet? ' ' 6 A. Well, the intent is ide n-t ical ; the 7 degree of complexity is different. One is 8 the size of a big telephone book and the 9 other is a thin pamphlet, because of the 10 difference in what's required. 1 1 Q. So the GE manual doesn't, as the 1 2 Aroclor manual would be, start off with 1 3 chlorine gas and a large pot, and introduce 1 4 biphenyl, but rather it starts off with. 1 5 start off with Aroclor 12 4 2 and add the 16 following, o r something t o that effect? 1 7 MR . McMANUS: I object to the term 1 8 "GE manual If 1 9 BY MR. COHEN: 2 0 Q. You know what I meant; the manual 2 1 for the GE product. 2 2 A. This is the Monsanto manual to 2 3 guide the operators on how to produce a 2 4 product specified by General Electric. 2 5 Q. Right. But in that manual, you GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI STLCOPCB4031890 1 don't start off with how you make Aroclor. 2 A . No . 3 Q. You start off with Aroclor. 4 A. Of a given quality. And 5 chlorobenzene of a given quality, and so on, 6 and you'd blend them in given aiiiou n't s . 7 That's all. 8 Q. What I'm trying to understand is, 9 that GE never gave you instructions in the 1 0 detail for the blending of their product that 1 1 was like the manual you had yourselves for 1 2 the manufacture of Aroclor. 13 MR. MALIN: Object to the form of I 1 4 the question because I don't understand it. 1 5 MR. COHEN: I'm sorry you don't 1 6 unders tand i t . 1 7 MR . MALIN: He's testified the 1 8 manufacture o f Aroclor involves a chemical 19 process where you actually combine atoms, and 2 0 the GE manual was merely taking 2 1 a 1ready-combined chemicals and mixing them 22 together, forming nothing more than a blend. 2 3 MR. COHEN: So what's your 2 4 objection? Are you saying they couldn't give 2 5 them a book that said start at the beginning. GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 76 I STLCOPCB4031891 X1 start with chlorine gas? 2 MR. MALIN: No, the two are not 3 equatable as manuals, so I don't understand 4 the question. 5 MR. COHEN: Well, I'm trying to' 6 find out whether they ever gave them 7 instructions that would have essentially 8 taken them back to step 1. 9 MR . MALIN: On how t o make 1 0 Aroclors 1 1 MR . COHEN: Right. 1 2 A . No . 1 3 MR . MALIN: Okay. 1 4 BY MR. COHEN: 1 5 Q Let me show you a document 1 6 that has been marked on more than one 17 occasion . We ' 11 make a copy that w e 1 8 here today. Have we marked anything yet with 1 9 you? 2 0 This is Papageorge 1. Papageorge 2 1 1 also known as a/k/a, Kelly 3, a/k/a Kaley 2 2 something or another. We'll mark it. 2 3 (Papageorge Deposition 2 4 Exhibit 1 marked for 2 5 identification.) GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 77 STLCOPCB4031892 1 (Witness peruses said 2 document.) 3 BY MR. COHEN: 4 Q. Did you ever see anything like 5 thatbefore? '' 6 A. This is the first time. I-'ve seen */T this document. 8 Q. That particular document? 9 A. Yes. 1 0 Q. Okay, have you ever seen anything 1 1 like that before where they gave you 1 2 information that they wanted this material 1 3 blended like that? 1 4 A. I have seen information that gave 1 5 me the essence of their needs, whereas this 1 6 document seems to show the changes in 1 7 mixtures through a period from 1932 to '76. 1 8 Q. And that refers, apparently, to a 1 9 number of General Electric plants. Those are 2 0 not Monsanto plants identified there, are 2 1 they? 2 2 A . There are four plants listed here 2 3 that are, I have to assume they are General 2 4 Electric. They are not Monsanto. 2 5 Q That's my question. But what I'm GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 78 STLCOPCB4031893 n asking you, sir, is whether they gave you 2 information in the form of a request for a 3 blend that looked like this, such as, "Make 4 us a product that we'regoing to call Pyranol 5 1488 that's 60 percent Aroclor 1260 and 40 6 percent tetrachlorobenzene"? '" 7 A. Yes. 8 Q. And/or make us a product that 9 we're going to call 1467 which is 60 percent 1 0 Aroclor 1260, 40 percent tetrachlorobenzene, 1 1 and let's see, what is that, "point" 12 one-eighth of one percent, I guess that is, 1 3 tin tetraphenyl. 1 4 A. (Nods head in affirmative manner) . 1 5 Q. They gave you specs like that? 1 6 A. Yes. 17 Q. You know that adds up to over a 1 8 hundred percent? 1 9 A. It's supposed to add up to a 20 hundred. 21 Q. Well, it adds up to a hundred and 2 2 an eigh th. 23 A. Well, okay. 2 4 Q. Just push the barrel, the bungs 2 5 down on the barrel, I guess. GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 79 STLCOPCB4031894 -1 i. Well, let's show you this document 2 which we'll mark as Papageorge -- 3 MR. COX: Just a moment. Before 4 you pass Papageorge 1, did that document have 5 atitleonit? ' 6 MR. COHEN: "PyranolCoitfpositions , 7 General Electric Company, 1932 to 1976." 8 This will have a label on it that will say 9 Papageorge 1 and be attached to the 1 0 deposition transcript. 1 1 There'll be no question that this 1 2 was Papageorge 1; is that right, Mr. Jordan? 1 3 BY MR. COHEN: 1 4 Q. Now let's look another at document 1 5 which we're going to mark as Papageorge 2. 1 6 (Papageorge Deposition 17 Exhibit 2 marked for 1 8 identification.) 1 9 (Witness peruses said 20 document . ) 21 THE WITNESS: I've reviewed. 2 2 BY MR. COHEN: 2 3 Q. Have you ever seen anything like 2 4 Papageorge 2 before? 2 5 A. Yeah, I recall seeing a similar GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 80 STLCOPCB4031895 1 type of document, yes. 2 Q What you are saying is you are not i 3 sure you saw this one but you saw something I 4 like it. 5 A . Correct. ' : 6 Q What is it? How would y o u 7 describe itforus? ; . 8 A . I would describe this as a copy of ; 9 a Westinghouse Electric Corporation 1 0 specification for one of the, of their 1 1 products which they call Inerteen, which they 1 2 expect to meet the listed properties to be 1 3 conducted under a specified procedure, ASTM 14 D-901 . 1 5 Q The testing is to be conducted 1 6 under ASTM 901. 17 A . Correct. : 18 Q To make sure that in accordance i 1 9 with that test protocol, these properties, 20 physical and chemical, and electrical, are 1 21 met. 2 2 A . Correct. j i 23 Q Did GE give you a document like i 2 4 that for Aronols, too? 2 5 A. Yes. GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 81 STLCOPCB4031896 1 Q. So in addition to seeing a 2 document that contained information like the I i 3 information contained on Papageorge 1, GE I j 4 also gave you a document that contained i 5 information like the information contained on I 6 Papageorge 2? - 7 A. Ye s . | 8 Q. And then you went about blending , 9 the product and testing it to make sure that ! 1 0 in accordance with their request, it met ' 11 these qualifications? Or that it had these ; 1 2 properties, if you will? 1 3 A . Yes . : 14 MR. COX: I would like the record . 1 5 to reflect something. You identified 16 Papageorge 1 as Kaley Exhibit 3. Kaley 17 Exhibit 3 was a multipage document. j I j i ! 1 8 Papageorge 1 is aone-pagedocument. j 1 9 MR. MALIN: Well, he wasn't sure 2 0 if he said Kaley 3 or Kaley 4. I don't think I 21 Mr. | 2 2 MR. COX: It's a piece of Kaley 3. j 2 3 BY MR.COHEN: : 2 4 Q. How often did you test the 25 production of the Pyranol or the Inerteen to - GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI STLCOPCB4031897 1 assure yourselves and your customers. 2 Westinghouse and GE, that the product met the 3 properties specified? 4 A. As I indicated earlier, they were 5 tested when the particular batch of material 6 was prepared, and they were tested again 7 before the material was shipped. 8 Q Same process as Aroclor, then? 9 A . Yes. 10 Q Every batch got tested by that QC 1 1 lab? 1 2 A . Yes. i 1 3 Q, And if I understand your testimony 1 4 correctly, no one ever tested still bottoms? 15 A . I don't know that I said that. : 16 Q Well, don't let me put words in | 17 your mouth.. Please tell me, did you the test : 1 8 still bottoms? 1 9 A. No one tested still bottoms to 2 0 determine its exact composition. They were 2 1 tested to meet some very basic properties, 2 2 and I don't claim to remember them all but I 2 3 do know that they did test for such things as 2 4 its viscosity and its -- I forget the 2 5 expression now, the point at which it GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 83 STLCOPCB4031898 1 hardens, the temperature at which it softens, 2 the softening point, I think that's the right 3 expression, and its gravity, how heavy is it. 4 Q. Specific gravity? 5 A. Specific gravity. " I believethose 6 were the three basic characteristie s that 7 were tested for that Montar that was sold. 8 Q. What was Montar used for to your 9 understanding? 1 0 A. I understand it was used in some 11 roofing tar compounds, it was used to some 1 2 degree in some road as fault blends, some of 1 3 it ended up in some of the old asphaltic 1 4 tiles used on floors, aspha 11-based tiles. I 1 5 don't propose to know all the uses but those 1 6 are examples of those that I recall. 1 7 Q. After the mid to late Sixties when 1 8 you developed the analytical ability, did 1 9 anybody test Montars to see what was in it? 2 0 A. No, because those analytical 2 1 abilities were specific to PCB's, not to this 22 unknown mixture of the Montars. 2 3 Q. What was it about the analytical 2 4 ability that restricted them to PCB's? 2 5 A. Oh, it's, has many facets to it. GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 84 STLCOPCB4031899 1 One is how the sample is prepared, what is 2 used in the gas chromatograph to absorb the 3 material -- I'm not an analytical chemist but 4 I'm sharing with you my understanding -- 5 Q. I'm not an analytical chemist, 6 either, so I'll take it for what it's worth. 7 A. How it responds as this material 8 flows through it and graphs the peaks and 9 valleys on a chart, those were all a result 1 0 of a very complicated and 11 specifica 11y-designed procedure, tested over 1 2 and over again to determine its specificity 1 3 to PCB's, and it would not apply to an 1 4 unknown chemical "X" that might exist in the 1 5 Montars. The graph that would come out would 1 6 be just meaningless. 1 7 Q. So in other words, in the mid to 1 8 late Sixties, the gas chromatograph was being 1 9 used to now analyze or a procedure had been 20 developed using gas chromatography to analyze 2 1 a compound for PCB's, for PCB content? 2 2 A. Gas chromatography was used for 2 3 other chemicals, not just PCB's. An example 2 4 is DDT. 2 5 Q. And it predated the late Sixties. GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 85 STLCOPCB4031900 1 A- Oh, yes, but the technology 2 continues to this day to be improved, so more 3 and more chemicals are being studied that 4 way. 5 Q. And to greater and' greaterdegrees 6 of sensitivity or detection limits.-- 7 A. Correct. 8 Q. But by the Sixties, sometime in. 9 the Sixties, late Sixties, the procedure as 1 0 you described it for detecting and 1 1 quantifying PCB's had emerged? 1 2 A. That is correct. 1 3 Q. Has anyone ever attempted to 1 4 analyze the Montars to find out what's in 1 5 them? 1 6 A. Not to my knowledge. 17 Q. Let's go further. I said Montars, 1 8 The s till bottoms. i 1 9 A. Not to my knowledge. 2 0 Q. And that's true to this date? 2 1 A. As far as I know. 2 2 Q. But Montar was sold as a product? 2 3 A . Yes. 2 4 Q. And other than the characteristics 2 5 that you described earlier, its content was GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 86 STLCOPCB4031901 1 unknown? 2 A . Basically so, yes. 3 Q. As a chemist, sir, prior to 1970, 4 could you have determined, knowing the 5 ingredients that make up polychlorinated 6 biphenyls, and knowing the process ~ of 7 manufacturing polychlorinated biphenyls, that 8 polychlorinated dibenzofurans could be formed 9 in the manufacturing process? 1 0 MR. COHEN: Hold that thought. 1 1 (Pause for telephone call.) 12 MR. MALIN: I'm going to object to 1 3 the question as speculative, but I'm going to 1 4 permit the witness to answer it. 1 5 MR. COHEN: Thank you. 1 6 MR. MALIN: And the witness has 17 not testified that he is a chemist. He's a 1 8 chemical engineer. 1 9 (Pause) 2 0 (Recess) 2 1 A. I'm not a pure chemist. I do have 2 2 basic chemical knowledge. You are asking me 2 3 to speculate, frankly. I know the process, 2 4 having lived with it, in a sense. I just 2 5 cannot, in an intellectual fashion, believe GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 87 STLCOPCB4031902 1 that the presence of oxygen is of such an 2 order of magnitude, and that the conditions 3 are such that the furans you mentioned or 4 other oxygen-containing compounds -- 5 BY MR. COHEN: ' 6 Q . Such as dioxins? - 7 A. Well, no, there's phosgene. You 8 could go in, you could fill an 9 encyclopedia -- 1 0 Q. There's quite a number? 1 1 A. -- with all kinds of combinations 12 of carbon, hydrogen and oxygen. It just 1 3 would have been difficult to intellectually 1 4 accept the concept that yes, you are forming 1 5 some oxygen compounds in this particular tank 1 6 under these conditions. No, I would not have 1 7 arrived at that speculative point. 1 8 Q. So from your understanding of 1 9 chemistry, the chemical you were 2 0 manufacturing and the process involved prior 2 1 to 1970, you would not have suspected that 2 2 you would be forming oxygen-containing 2 3 compounds such as furans? 2 4 A. That is true. 2 5 Q. There was, however, from time to GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 88 STLCOPCB4031903 1 time, testing done for water in the as a 2 contaminant of the PCB's? 3 A. Yes, but this is in a cold batch 4 in a tank with water condensation coming, 5 falling off the side of the tank into the 6 material, not in the process. ~ 7 Q. Not in the process batch? 8 A . No . 9 Q. You aren't looking for water in 1 0 the process batch? 1 1 A. No, at 400 degrees Fahrenheit you 1 2 wouldn't expect water to survive. 1 3 Q . I see. 1 4 What steps did you make or add to 1 5 your quality control procedures subsequent to 16 the ability to analyze with the gas 17 chromatograph, the product? 1 8 MR. MALIN: Object to that 1 9 question on the grounds I really don't 2 0 understand it. 2 1 MR. COHEN: Well, let's ask it 2 2 this way. 2 3 BY MR. COHEN: 2 4 Q. Did you make any changes to your 2 5 QC procedures? GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 89 STLCOPCB4031904 1 A. At the time this material was 2 detected in Monsanto's product, I was no 3 longer involved with the PCB issue. I do not 4 know whattook place in the operation since 5 then. ' 6 Q. You are talking about w Ken the 7 furans were discovered. 8 A . Yes . 9 Q. I'm speaking of the timewhen the 1 0 processor procedure was developed for using 1 1 gas chromatographs to analyze PCB's were 1 2 developed in the late Sixties, what changes 1 3 did you make in your QC procedures, if any? 1 4 A. None. 1 5 MR. MALIN: I'll object -- all, 1 6 right, never mind. My objection is that you 1 7 are saying using the gas chromatograph to 1 8 analyze PCB's. It was to analyze for PCB's, 1 9 is my understanding, unless that's incorrect. 2 0 BY MR. COHEN: 2 1 Q. To determine the presence of the 2 2 PCB's and the particular, I guess the 2 3 particular PCB compound that you were 2 4 detecting; is that correct? Is that a 2 5 correct way of saying it? GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI STLCOPCB4031905 1 A. I understand it, yes. 2 Q. You understand it, I understand 3 it . 4 A. Yeah. 5 Q. I think we'retalking about the 6 same basic terms. And to your knowledge no 7 changes were made in the QC procedures? 8 A . No . 9 Q. Either on the Aroclor product or 1 0 the Pyranol product or the Inerteen product? 11 A. That is correct. 1 2 Q. Subsequent to the time when the 1 3 gas chromatograph was further developed to 1 4 detect the presence of the furans, what, if 1 5 any, changes were made in your QC procedures? 1 6 A . I don't know of any personally, 17 but as I indicated earlier, I was not 1 8 directly involved any longer. 1 9 Q Do you know whether furans were 2 0 found in the Aroclor product? 2 1 A . Yes, I d o . 2 2 Q Were they? 2 3 A . Yes. 2 4 Q And in what quantities? Do you 2 5 know? GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 91 STLCOPCB4031906 1 A. As I remember, it was the low, 2 very small quantities. I don't remember the 3 numb e r s . 4 Q Do you remember when they first 5 detected f u r a n s in the PCB 's,' Aroclors: Not 6 just any PCB ' s , your PCB ' s , Aroclors? 7 A . Yes, it was, it was detected by an 8 outside laboratory in late 1975 and found and 9 d e t e c ted by Monsanto's analytical experts i n 1 0 about March o r so. At least, it was reported 1 1 March or so o f 1 9 7 6. 1 2 Q Who was the expert in Monsanto who 1 3 found it? Do you know? 1 4 A . 11 was either Dr. Kaley or his 15 prede ces sor There was a change taking place 1 6 in personnel at about that time. 1 7 Q. What did Monsanto Chemical Company 1 8 know about the toxicity of the tri- and 1 9 tetrachloro benzenes that they were blending 2 0 with Aroclors to produce Pyranol? 21 A. I cannot speak for Monsanto's 2 2 Medical Department and their total knowledge 2 3 of these materials. I can only speak from 2 4 the plant standpoint, where we handled the 2 5 material and we were informed to respect it GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 92 STLCOPCB4031907 1 in exactly the same way we respected the 2 PCB's and the benzene, and other materials of 3 that type. 4 Q. How about thetin tetraphenyl? 5 A. I know nothing ab o u t it. 6 Q. What were the other ingredients in 7 Inerteen other than PCB's? Do you know? 8 A. They also contained chlorinated 9 benzenes and they also contained an 1 0 ingredient that acted as a chlorine 1 1 scavenger, referred to by the acronym "PPO." 1 2 Q. PPO? 1 3 A. Yes. I've forgotten, it's -- I 1 4 forgot, some kind of oxide, propylene, phenyl 1 5 oxide, or -- I'm guessing, so -- 1 6 Q. What were the chlorobenzenes that 17 were used in the Inerteen? Do you know? 1 8 A. Tri- and tetrach1orobenzene . 19 Q. Were they in the same or similar 2 0 quantities in the mix as in the Pyranol 2 1 produc t ? 2 2 A. There were some similarities, but 2 3 I don't know if they were exactly the same 2 4 ratios . 2 5 Q. You have no recollection of what GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 93 STLCOPCB4031908 1 the ratios were in the mix? 2 A. No, I don't recall. In my mind, I 3 can't distinguish between the Pyranol and the 1 4 Inerteen ratios. 5 Q. Now,about the tinre that this ' j iIt 6 analytical process developed in the- late ] 7 Sixties for detecting PCB's, apparently PCB's : 8 were found to have gotten in, somehow or i j ] i 9 another gotten into the environment. Is that | 10 1 1 A . Yes . j 1 2 Q. Are you aware of any information I 1 3 that Monsanto had thatwould have indicated ! 1 4 that the substance was or could have been ; 15 getting into the environment prior to that | 1 6 time? i 17 A. Yes, wewere aware that therewere i i 1 8 occasional spills that would find their way 1 9 into the environment, yes, just like many 2 0 other industrial chemicals. It was not a 2 1 case of every molecule was accounted for, no. | 22 Q. Well, you were selling the I i 23 Aroclors in barrels that were going out the j 2 4 door, and in fact, in tank cars and tank 2 5 wagons. ' GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 94 i * STLCOPCB4031909 1 A . Yes. 2 Q. Where was it going? Do you know? 3 A. You mean geographically, or use 4 applications, or -- 5 Q. Yes, use applications. 6 A. Whew, hundreds of uses." All 7 kinds. About half of it was in what we 8 perceived to be closed systems. 9 Q. Transformers, capacitors and the 1 0 like? 1 1 A . And the like. The other half were 1 2 later described as open systems. The use in 1 3 caulking around skyscraper windows, the use 1 4 in adhesives, the use in paints, use in the 1 5 carbonless copy paper. 1 6 Q. Plastics? 17 A. I'm sorry. 1 8 Q. And in plastics? 19 A. And plastics, to soften, make them 20 pliable, yes. 2 1 Q Also used in hydraulic oils? 2 2 A . Industrial hydraulic fluid, yes. 2 3 Q . Did you consider that open or 2 4 closed? 2 5 A . Well, we considered those closed GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 95 STLCOPCB4031910 1 systems at the time. 2 Q A 1 th ough they tended to lose quite 3 a bit o f fluid. I gather. 4 A . Well , it depended on the attention 5 given t o the s y stems, the amount o f 6 maintenanc e . 7 Q. Were you aware of its use in 8 transformers on rail cars? 9 A. Yes. 1 0 . Q . Did you have any knowledge about 1 1 the particular vulnerability of transformers 1 2 mounted on rail cars? 1 3 A . No . 1 4 Q. Were you aware that those 1 5 transformers were frequently damaged by 1 6 accident, by objects striking them otherwise? 1 7 MR. MALIN: Object to the form of 1 8 that question. 1 9 A . No . 2 0 BY MR. COHEN: 2 1 Q. Were you aware that the product 2 2 was being sold as replacement fluid to fill 2 3 up transformers in rail cars? 2 4 A. Yes. 2 5 Q. GE was a customer for that use. GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 96 STLCOPCB4031911 1 also? 2 A. Yes. 3 Q. Other manufacturers of rail cars 4 were customers, also? 5 A. Manufacturers of rail cars? 6 Q . Yes . -- 7 A. Customers? I don't recall seeing 8 their names on a customer list. 9 Q. GE made rail cars; did you know 1 0 that? 1 1 A. No, I didn't. 1 2 Q. How about the Budd Company? 1 3 A. I don't recall seeing the Budd 1 4 Company listed. 1 5 Q. How about railroads, themselves: 1 6 Were you aware that they were buying the 1 7 product ? 1 8 A. I was aware of shipments made to 1 9 addresses referring to railroads. 2 0 Q. Such as Penn Central? 2 1 A. I don't recall it specifically. I 2 2 remember railroads being mentioned as a ship 2 3 to, as distinguished from bill to, to the 2 4 order that would be placed by, say, GE, to be 2 5 shipped to a site where it would be used. GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI STLCOPCB4031912 1 <2 Do you know what the use was at 2 that site, that remote location? 3 A. It was a transformer fluid. 4 Q. Did it occur to anyone at the time 5 that that transformer should have had fluid 6 initalready? " 7 MR. MALIN: I'll object to the 8 form of that question. I don't understand 9 it . 10 BY MR. COHEN: 1 1 Q. You understand it? 12 A. That's almost a given. A 1 3 transformer that's in service -- 1 4 Q. Has fluid in it. 1 5 A. -- has fluid in it. The fact that 1 6 more fluid is ordered could indicate many 17 conditions for its need. It does not clearly 1 8 define what happened to the old fluid. 19 Q. To your knowledge, didanyone in 2 0 Monsanto prior to 1970 question what was 2 1 happening to the fluid? 2 2 MR. MALIN: Object to the form of 2 3 that question because I don't know what you 2 4 mean by what was happening to the fluid, or 2 5 what fluid you are talking about. GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI STLCOPCB4031913 1 BY MR. COHEN: 2 Q. Do you understand what I am 3 speaking of, sir? 4 A. I think I do. I'm assuming you 5 are referring to the, the original fluid. 6 Q. Right, the transformer ras sold 7 with fluid. 8 A. This is no different than any 9 other transformer application. I cannot 1 0 speak for others in Monsanto as to whether 11 the question rose in their minds as to what's 1 2 happening. I don't know that. 1 3 Q. Tell me what you knew about, prior 1 4 to 1970, with respect to any concern within 1 5 the Monsanto Chemical Company as to the 1 6 ultimate disposition of the PCB's that were 1 7 being sold as dielectric fluids. 1 8 A. What did I know prior to 1970? 1 9 Nothing. 2 0 Q. Did you ever hear the subject 2 1 discussed? 22 A. Not in my presence, no. 2 3 Q. What information did you have 2 4 regarding the toxicity of the substance prior 2 5 to 1970? GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 99 j ^ STLCOPCB4031914 1 A . Of which substance? 2 Q . PCB's, the dielectric fluids. ; 3 A . PCB's,themselves. 4 Q . The fluids, yes, right. Aroclors. ! _i 5 A . I described it ea r'l ier, the effect 6 on human beings and the prolonged,"high-level 7 exposure and the eventual damage to the j 8 liver. That's what I knew about the effects 9 on humans. 1 0 _ Q. Did you know of any potential 11 effects on the environment? 1 2 A . Not prior to '69. 1 3 Q. That was when the Jensen and 1 4 Widmark material became well-known? j i i 1 5 A. That's when I first heard about 1 6 it. The Jensen report was issued in December 17 1966, as I recall, under some doubts 1 8 regarding the findings and the conclusions. 1 9 but that' s the first report. j 20 Q So would it be fair to say that : 2 1 prior to that time, you personally had no I 2 2 knowledge that this material was out there | 2 3 and affecting the environment in any way | 2 4 whatsoever? 2 5 A. That is correct. !1 GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 10 0 ! ^ STLCOPCB4031915 1 Q. Did you ever hear it discussed 2 within Monsanto that the material was out 3 there and could be affecting the environment? 4 A. No such discussion was held to my 5 knowledge. ' 6 Q. Prior to the mid Sixties--; were the 7 still bottoms being buried in a landfill? 8 A . Yes. 9 Q - Do you know how they were packaged 1 0 burial ? 1 1 A . Yes. 1 2 Q How? 1 3 A . Steel drurns, and then they were 1 4 placed in a hole dug in the landfill, stacked 1 5 and buried. 1 6 Q. Right against the earth or was it 17 in some sort of vault? 1 8 A. Against the earth. 1 9 Q. Did you ever hear any concern 20 expressed regarding any effect on the 2 1 environment as a result of those still 2 2 bottoms being stored in that way? 2 3 A. No, they were just like the 2 4 blacktop roadway, hardened inside these steel 2 5 containers, and the site was perceived to be GORE REPORTING COMPANY ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 10 1 STLCOPCB4031916 1 appropriate in that there was no water 2 flowing through it, no ground water, 3 underground water, so we believed that that 4 was a responsible way to dispose of it. 5 Q. Let me show you a document that we 6 marked yesterday as Kelly 25. It consists of 7 six pages, although I believe that it's 8 actually two sets of the same three pages. 9 MR. COHEN: If you could mark this 1 0 as Papageorge 3. 1 1 (Papageorge Deposition 1 2 Exhibit 3 marked for 1 3 identification. ) 1 4 (Witness peruses said 1 5 document.) 1 6 BY MR. COHEN: 1 7 Q. Do you recognize those documents 1 8 that have now been marked as Papageorge 3. 19 A. This is the first time I've seen 20 these documents. 2 1 Q. Do you know what they are? 2 2 A. Well, I don't know where they came 2 3 from or who put them together, but they 2 4 describe some analytical results. 2 5 Q. But it's not a form of a document GORE REPORTING COMPANY ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 1 02 STLCOPCB4031917 1 that you recognize? 2 A. That is correct. 3 Q. Did you, during the time period 4 that's reflected on these documents, whic-h 5 would be in 1973, have occasion to see any of 6 the quality control documents that resulted 7 from the sampling of production material of 8 Aroclors? 9 MR. MALIN: Objection to the form 1 0 of the question; the time period does not 1 1 necessarily mean these documents are 1973 1 2 documents. It only says production date of 1 3 an Aroclor in '73, it doesn't say anything 1 4 about when they were analyzed. 1 5 Answer the question if you think 1 6 you understand it, though. 17 THE WITNESS; I've forgotten the 1 8 question. 1 9 MR. COHEN; Mr. Reporter. 2 0 (The requested portion of the 2 1 record read by the reporter) 2 2 A. During 1973, on occasion, I would 2 3 get to see documents that reflected the 2 4 quality control activities at the two plants. 2 5 BY MR. COHEN; -~ GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI STLCOPCB4031918 1 Q. Did they look like these? 2 A . No . 3 Q. Now, Mr. Malin has suggested the 4 possibility that the samples were produced in 5 October of '83 but analyzed at some later " 6 date. Were samples of production material 7 saved in some way to identify them to a 8 particular production date beyond the 9 immediate post production period? 1 0 A. Yes. 1 1 Q. How long were they saved? 1 2 A. Whew. It varied from chemical to 1 3 chemical. I've forgotten -- for PCB's, I 1 4 think they were kept for about ten years or 1 5 so. There is a sample storage room. 1 6 Q. Andhow were they kept? 17 A. Inthe glass bottle. 1 8 Q. So it would be glass bottles lined 1 9 up on shelves, indicating production dates, 2 0 and -- 2 1 A. Well, it would be by lot number 2 2 and the lot number, then, is listed on 2 3 another document that ties it into a date, a 2 4 plant, and the operator that took the sample. 2 5 MR. COHEN: Bear with me one GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 10 4 STLCOPCB4031919 1 sec ond . 2 (Pause) 3 BY MR. COHEN: 4 Q. Subsequent to the various events 5 that occurred in the mid to late Sixties 6 regarding, first, the ability to detect the 7 presence of PCB's using gas chromatography 8 and then later, the ability to detect it in 9 the environment, were you involved in any way 1 0 with Monsanto in dealing with the problem of 1 1 the presence of PCB's in the environment? 1 2 A . No . 1 3 Q. Did you ever get involved in 1 4 something -- there apparently was a monthly 1 5 report published called the "PCB 1 6 Environmental Problem Status Report"? Do you 1 7 recall that? 1 8 A. I recall similar reports. I don't 1 9 know which one you have in your hand, there. 2 0 If I could see it, I could identify it. 2 1 Q Do you recall seeing such reports? 2 2 A . May I see it so I can -- 2 3 Q Well , I guess what I'm trying to 2 4 determine is, were you involved in any 2 5 organized activity within the company in GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 10 5 STLCOPCB4031920 1 trying to deal with the problem of 2 environmental contamination of PCB's -- by 3 PCB ' s ? 4 A . But you had prefaced your previous 5 question with prior t o the late Sixties and 6 the development of the methodology ?n/ Q. I'm sorry. Did I say prior? 8 A. That's what I thought. 9 Q. I meant subsequent. 1 0 A. I heard "prior" butmaybe. 1 1 Q. My apologies, sir. 1 2 A. All right; subsequent to it? 1 3 Q. Yes. 1 4 A. I was involved, yes. 1 5 Q. Yes. Would you tell me about that 1 6 involvement? What happened inside the 17 company? How did you get tapped for the job, 1 8 and what was your job? 1 9 A. Starting in January 1st, 1970, I 2 0 was asked to take over a new, newly-formed 2 1 job with the title of Manager, Environmental 22 Control . 2 3 Q. Manager? 2 4 A. Manager, Environmental Control, to 2 5 help in coordinating the activities within GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 10 6 STLCOPCB4031921 1 Monsanto and Monsanto and the -- its , 2 customers, and the governmental agencies, and 3 universities, other laboratories, to assure !I 4 as much as we could that the information ; i 5 regarding PCB's was accurate, scientifically ' 6 sound, and that PCB's, if in use,would be : 7 properly handled to prevent entry into the 8 environment. That was roughly my assignment. ! i 9 Q. What did you do to carry out that I 1 0 assignment? i j | 1 1 A. Oh, I initially had, of course, to ; 1 2 familiarize myself wi th as much as I could [i 1 3 regarding all the fac ets of this problem, 1 4 including the health effects,the , ! ,, i 15 environmental effects , the uses, the amounts * 16 involved, the types o f customers, the other j . 1 7 producers throughout the world, what the i j i 18 governmental agencies knew about it orwanted i ii 19 to know about it, the stateoftheart j 2 0 regarding analytical methods. Once I did ; 21 that, then I found my self really serving as a j 2 2 communications focal point where inquiries 2 3 coming into Monsanto would flow through my 2 4 office, I would sort of, if it was within the : 25 realm of my expertise , I would respond. If ; GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI i n7 ! -i STLCOPCB4031922 1 not, I would ask the proper person within 2 Monsanto and elsewhere to respond. For 3 example, if it's a medical question, I'd go 4 to Monsanto's Medical Department. If it was 5 an analytical question, I'd go t o t h e 6 analytical research chemist. I .c o u-1 d handle 7 the manufacturing part fairly well, so I 8 guess I really served as the person who tried 9 to let the left hand know what the right was 1 0 doing, no natter whose arm it was, whether it 1 1 be government, or Monsanto, or Monsanto's 1 2 customer, or a university lab, or a foreign 1 3 producer . 1 4 Q. When you said if you had a medical 1 5 question, you went to the Medical Department, 1 6 who would you go to in the Medical 1 7 Department? 1 8 A. I would try to reach Dr. Kelly, 1 9 preferably, and in his absence, I would go to 2 0 his assistant, Mr. Elmer Wheeler. Of course, 2 1 if Mr. Wheeler wasn't available, I'd then 2 2 have to rely on others on the staff that were 23 available at the moment. If not, I would 2 4 have to ask the person making the inquiry to 2 5 wait until I caught up with the right people. GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 10 8 STLCOPCB4031923 1 Q. How long did you carry out this 2 role as sort of the communications focal 3 point? 4 A. From 19, starting in 1970 through 5 February '76. " 6 Q. And what happened in '7 6'? 7 A. I was assigned to a different part 8 of Monsanto, organizational part, which was 9 not involved with PCB's, and the PCB 1 0 assignment was transferred t o another person. 1 1 Q Who was that? 1 2 A . J. C. Weber. 1 3 Q And what's the " j " stand for? 1 4 A. I honestly don't know. The middle 1 5 name was -- he went by Cole, C-o-l-e, Cole 1 6 Weber. I don't know what the "J" stands for. 1 7 Q. And do you know where Mr. Weber is 1 8 today? 1 9 A . I do not. 2 0 Q. How long did he stay in the employ 2 1 of Monsanto, to your knowledge? 2 2 A. I really don't know. 2 3 Q. Now, if you had a question 2 4 regarding toxicology or the toxicologic 2 5 properties of PCB's, who would you go to? GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 10 9 STLCOPCB4031924 1 A . I ' d go to Mr. Wheeler. 2 Q And why would you go to Wheeler 3 instead of Kelly? 4 A. Well, Mr. Wheeler was designated 5 by Dr. Kelly as the person w ho would manage 6 and monitor toxicology studies plated with 7 private laboratories, so it was Mr. Wheeler's 8 responsibility to stay abreast of 9 developments, so he was the most 1 0 knowledgeable person regarding details of 1 1 these studies. 1 2 Q. How about Levinskas? 1 3 A . Dr . Levinskas joined the Medical 1 4 Department , I ' m going to say, about 1973-ish, 1 5 '72, '73. He came along later , but I still 1 6 relied on Mr . Wheeler as my principal 1 7 contact. 1 8 Q. And you started this activity in 1 9 the beginning of 1970? 2 0 A. Yes. 2 1 Q. Do you recall preparing a document 2 2 which was, "Management Plan, Polychlorinated 2 3 Biphenyl Environmental Problem"? 2 4 A. Yes, I do remember that. 2 5 Q. And was that sort of the genesis GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 110 STLCOPCB4031925 1 of the efforts that were made within the 2 company for dealing with this problem? 3 A. I wouldn't define it as the 4 genesis. This is more a, an attempt to 5 summarize the thinking then p'r evailing in 6 Monsanto in preparation for a reco Tfttn endation 7 to the top officials in the company for 8 actions to be taken. 9 Q. Did you begin, amongst other 1 0 things, monitoring the discharge of PCB ' s 1 1 from the various production facilities of 12 Monsanto? 1 3 A . Yes. 1 4 Q. And what did you discover? 1 5 A. We discovered that our wastes 1 6 coming from the two producing plants did 17 contain PCB's. Waste water. 1 8 Q. In what quantities? 1 9 A. Oh, I forgot the numbers. They 20 were, by today's standards, pretty high parts 2 1 per million. 2 2 Q. Do you know the source of the 2 3 waste water? 2 4 A. I'm sorry? 2 5 Q. Do you know the source of the GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 111 STLCOPCB4031926 1 waste water in the plant? 2 A. In the plant? It was primarily 3 one of hosing down the floors in sort of an 4 attempt to keep the place fairly clean. That j 5 would be the principal source'. |.. '| 6 Q. So the principal source--of the 7 PCB's in the plant would have been a j j 8 production facility which dripped on the j i 9 floor which then was hosed down into drains ! i 1 0 in the floor that ran into the sanitary sewer | i ! 11 from the facility, itself. j i 12 A. That is a good description, yes. j 1 3 Q. So then that waste water combined ! 'j 14 with other waste water from the plant would i i 1 5 enter into the public stream, sewerage stream ! 1 6 or discharge into rivers, whatever the j 17 particular arrangements were, and it was in j i j 1 8 those discharges that you found the ; i 1 9 quantities of PCB's? j i 20 A. When you say those -- it was in j 21 the discharge leavingthe Monsanto site, 2 2 headed for the municipal treatment plant that ; 2 3 wassampled. j I 2 4 Q. So you were sampling it before it j 2 5 went? : GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS,MISSOURI ! STLCOPCB4031927 1 A . Before it went to the municipal 2 plants? In both situations, they went to 3 municipal treatment plants. 4 Q. When I referred to status reports, 5 monthly status reports, you, in fact, were 6 the author of those status reports at least 7 during part of the time in 1970, were you 8 not? 9 A. Yes. I was the author of a series 1 0 of status reports. I don't know that there 1 1 are any other authors. I was the author. 1 2 Q. What was the information that you 1 3 were trying to communicate with those status 1 4 reports? 1 5 A. The intent of that report was to 1 6 communicate to the Monsanto people involved 17 with PCB's the activities as reported by each 1 8 of the functions within Monsanto so that 1 9 again, the left hand knew what the right was 2 0 doing, so the marketing man knew what the 2 1 research man was doing and thinking and vice 2 2 versa . 2 3 Q. You included within that report a 2 4 legal report on a monthly basis? 2 5 A. There was a contribution by the GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI STLCOPCB4031928 1 legal representative, yes. 2 Q. And this information then came to 3 you and you included it in the report for 4 Monsanto officials? 5 A . Yes . 6 Q. And what informationdid' you /<~r intend to communicate in the legalsection of 8 thereport? 9 A. Whatever the legal guy gave me. I 1 0 did the paste work. I just clipped out his 11 paragraph. 1 2 Q. But he sent these memos, you cut 1 3 them all up, put them together? 1 4 A. Put 'em together, and the 1 5 secretary typed it up and distributed it. I 1 6 had -- 1 7 Q. What sort of information did he 1 8 give you? What was he telling you was 1 9 happening? 2 0 MR. MALIN: Hold on a moment. 2 1 (Inaudible discussion between 2 2 Mr. Malin and the witness.) 2 3 MR. MALIN: Well, I'm going to 24 object to that question and direct him not to 2 5 answer. That's privileged information. GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 114 STLCOPCB4031929 1 MR. COHEN: You are claiming 2 privilege to what? Was legal advice given? 3 Are you contending legal advice was given? 4 MR. MALIN: The Legal Department, 5 we're taking the privilege, assuming that 6 that i t is . -- 7 MR. COHEN: Anything the Legal 8 Department said? If the Legal Department 9 said it was reported in the newspaper that 1 0 Monsanto may get sued for X, Y and Z, that 1 1 that's somehow privileged information? 1 2 MR. MALIN: Well, we don't know 1 3 that, do we ? 1 4 MR. COHEN: We don't know. That's 1 5 what I'm trying to find out what is the -- 1 6 MR. MALIN: I'm instructing him 1 7 not to disclose whatever information he got 1 8 from counsel. 1 9 MR. COHEN: Wait just a minute. 2 0 MR. MALIN: Monsanto's counsel. 2 1 BY MR. COHEN: 2 2 Q. Was this intended to be legal 2 3 advice to you, sir? 2 4 A. I have to confess, I don't 2 5 remember specifics, because latest versions GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 115 STLCOPCB4031930 1 of that document that I've been privileged to 2 look at did not contain that paragraph, so 3 I've not had the opportunity to refresh my 4 memory. It was not intended, as I recall, to 5 give me -- well, I just don't' remember 6 anymore. It's been twenty years a go. 7 Q. You were reporting on legal 8 developments, weren't you? 9 A. Sometimes, as I remember. I just 1 0 don't remember the details. 1 1 Q. Well, this status report wasn't 1 2 intended to be an organ of legal advice to 1 3 Monsanto Chemical Company or to Monsanto the 1 4 parent company, either, was it? 15 MR. MALIN: I'll object to the 1 6 form of that question, of what his intentions 1 7 were. Suffice it to say the witness is 1 8 directed not to answer any question about 19 what any communications he had with 20 Monsanto's counsel at or about that time 21 which even if they were contained in the 2 2 letter unless they are actually disclosed. 2 3 MR. COHEN: I didn't ask for 24 communications from counsel, I'm asking him 2 5 whether this memo was intended to be giving GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI STLCOPCB4031931 1 or communicating legal advice to Monsanto's 2 management. He prepared the document. 3 MR. MALIN: But it was also 4 prepared by counsel. He took whatever 5 counsel had to say and colla t~e d it, so he 6 coordinated the document, he didn't" 7 necessarily prepare what counsel had to say, 8 and that's a very large difference. I have 9 the same direction to the witness. 1 0 BY MR. COHEN: 1 1 Q. Did you read the information that 1 2 Counsel gave you before you put it into the 1 3 document? 1 4 MR. MALIN: You can answer that 1 5 question whether or not you read it. 1 6 A. Certainly I read it, yes. 1 7 BY MR. COHEN: 1 8 Q. And you described your activities 1 9 as basically cut and paste. Would it be fair 2 0 to say that whoever counsel or whoever the 2 1 contributor of the so-called legal section 22 was, was it your intention to change any of 2 3 that matieral in any way, or did you 2 4 literally cut and paste that material? 25 A. I did not change any of the pieces GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 117 ^ STLCOPCB4031932 1 that make up the whole document. I 2 literally -- well, I shouldn't say 3 literally -- I circled the paragraphs that I 4 wanted the secretary to type, which was, in 5 essence, a cut and paste. ' " 6 Q. Got you. Was the materi-al 7 contained under "Legal" always from 8 Monsanto's legal counsel? 9 A. Yes. 1 0 Q. Do you remember who legal counsel 11 was at that time? 1 2 A . Mr . Phocian Park. 1 3 Q . I ' m sorry? 1 4 A . Phocian Park , P - h - o - c - i - a - n ? 1 5 Q Did he get a copy of the document 1 6 back again? 17 A . He should have. He should be on 1 8 the list, I think. 19 Q. Okay, let's go down the list. 2 0 D. S. Cameron, who was that? 21 A. He was the European PCB 2 2 representative of the Marketing Group. 2 3 Q. W. S. Clark. 2 4 A. He was the representative of the 2 5 Monsanto Plasticizers Group in the U.S. GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 118 STLCOPCB4031933 1 Q . J . R. Durland. 2 A. He was Monsanto's representative 3 in Japan. 4 Q. M. W . , it looks like "Farrar; 5 could be "Farrar." ' 6 A. Oh, Farrar. 7 Q . Farrar. 8 A. He's Director of Research for the 9 Plasticizers Group in Monsanto. 1 0 Q. What's "Second Street" mean? 11 A. I'm sorry? 1 2 Q. What does "Second Street" mean? 1 3 A. That is the location of his 1 4 office . 1 5 Q. The plasticizers unit? 1 6 A. His office was still there. 17 Q. Okay. Mr. John, or E. V. John, 1 8 Mr. or Ms.? i 1 9 A. He's the representative of the 2 0 Public Relations Department. 2 1 Q. R. E. Keller. 2 2 A. He is the supervisor of the 2 3 analytical research group. 2 4 Q. R. N. Kountz? 2 5 A. He was the manager of GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 119 STLCOPCB4031934 1 manufacturing for PCB's. 2 Q . D . A . 01 son . 3 A . He was director of marketing for 4 the PCB 's sold as industrial fluids. 5 Q . And P. S. Park is -Phocian Park, ' 6 legal c o u n s e 1 . . . .. -- 7 A . That is correct. 8 Q . W. R. Richard. 9 A . Director of Research for PCB's 1 0 used as industrial fluids. 1 1 Q . E. P. Wheeler, we know. 1 2 A . Yes. 1 3 Q . H. S. Bergen. 1 4 A . He was the director of the 1 5 B u s i n e s s Group, responsible for PCB's sold as 1 6 industrial fluids. j 1 7 Q. J. Mason. 18 A. He was Mr. Bergen's boss. Hewas 1 9 an assistant general manager. 2 0 Q. And J. E. Springgate? 21 A. He was the director of the j 2 2 Business Group, responsible for the sale of 2 3 PCB's as plasticizers. ' 2 4 (Pause) , 2 5 BY MR. COHEN: j GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 12 0 j *" STLCOPCB4031935 1 J. Q. Let's see. So you were director 2 of, you have here, "Anniston plant PCB levels 3 in sewer," "Aroclor losses during November 4 average," then it says, "25," and there's 5 what looks like a tic-tac-toe- mark. Is that 6 pounds? You want to look at it? 7 A . The cross hatch? 8 Q Yeah 9 A . That's generally pounds, yeah. 1 0 Q That's what you meant by it. 1 1 anyway ? 1 2 A . That's what the author of that 1 3 paragraph meant. 1 4 MR. COX: Can we go off the 1 5 record? 1 6 (Discussion off the record.) 1 7 BY MR. COHEN: 1 8 Q. So that meant 25 pounds per day. 1 9 Do you know how that was measured? 2 0 A . I do, yes. 2 1 Q . Tell me. 2 2 A . You take a sample 2 3 Q. You can answer. 2 4 A. The sample is taken in such a way 2 5 that it represents a 24-hour period of time. GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 12 1 STLCOPCB4031936 1 A little bit is taken out every 15 minutes or 2 so, so the composite represents the 24-hour 3 output . 4 Q. Some sort of dipstick device or 5 something like that? 6 A. It's a pump, it's timed,-' it's got 7 the hoses, and I don't know how else to 8 describe it, but nevertheless, it's designed 9 to give a composite sample for a 24-hour 1 0 period. They also have ways of measuring the 1 1 flow in the sewer, so many gallons of water 1 2 in that 24-hour period. The laboratory 1 3 analyzes the amount of PCB's in that sample, 1 4 and they come up with so many parts per 1 5 million or parts per billion. They then go 1 6 through the necessary arithmetic to equate 1 7 the PCB's in that sample to the total flow 1 8 for a 24-hour period and that's how they come 1 9 up with 25 pounds a day. 2 0 Q. So if it says 4,620 parts per 2 1 billion, would that be the concentration of 2 2 PCB's in the sample? 2 3 A . Yes. 2 4 Q. And from that, they make a 2 5 calculation to the total pounds of PCB's in GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 12 2 STLCOPCB4031937 1 the sewerage for 24 hours? 2 A . Correct. 3 Q . Okay. 4 MR. COHEN: We'll have to make 5 extra copi es, here, and this is a lengthy 6 document . Why don't we have t h is nra r k e d a s 7 Papageorge next, then you can i d e n t i f y it for 8 the record , we'll get it all into the r e c o r d , 9 here. 1 0 (Papageorge Deposition 1 1 Exhibit 4 marked for 1 2 identification.) 1 3 (Witness peruses said 1 4 document.) 1 5 (Discussion off the record.) 1 6 (Luncheon recess from 12:25 1 7 to 1:25.) 1 8 BY MR. COHEN: 1 9 Q. Okay, so you have had a chance to 2 0 look at that exhibit that's now been marked 2 1 as Papageorge 4, I think? 2 2 A. I have. 2 3 Q. And can youtell us what is 2 4 Papageorge 4, sir? 2 5 A. This is acopy of a status report GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 12 3 STLCOPCB4031938 1 that I've edited, and issued on December 7th, 2 1970, and it was addressed to Monsanto people 3 involved with the PCB environmental issue, 4 Q . And -- 5 MR. McLAUGHLIN: Excuse me, how 6 many pages is that? 7 MR. COHEN: Thirteen, I think. 8 A. The last page is numbered Page 11. 9 MR. McLAUGHLIN: Thank you. 1 0 BY MR. COHEN: 1 1 Q. So would I take it that if I were 1 2 to look at another similar report for another 1 3 month where it said that PCB levels in the 1 4 sewer were calculated at 75.1 -- I'm sorry, 1 5 71.5 pounds per day, that that would mean 1 6 that the same calculation, same measurement, 1 7 same calculation had been made? 1 8 A . The calculation made in the same 19 manner. I don't know at this point whether 2 0 such information was reported each month. It 21 depended on the activity that took place 2 2 during the month. 2 3 Q. Well, for example, I'm looking at 2 4 a report dated October 6, 1970, referring to 2 5 September. GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 12 4 STLCOPCB4031939 1 A . September. 2 Q. And it says, "Current losses to 3 the river from the treatment plant range from 4 12 to 742 parts per billion with an average 5 loss of 311 parts per billion' for 11 samples. 6 This is an equivalent average loss "of 71.5 7 pounds per day." That would be the same 8 calculation? 9 A. Yes. 1 0 Q. So in the month of September, 1 1 then, the Krummrich plant, which this is 1 2 under, was putting out 71.5pounds of PCB's 1 3 in its sewerage every day? 1 4 A. Yes. 15 Q. Andwhere was that other one that 1 6 we -- do you know, sir, when did this 1 7 monitoring of sewerage for PCB output begin? 1 8 A . To the best of my recollection. 1 9 began in ' 6 9 or 1 7 0 . 2 0 Q - So was i t something that was 2 1 started prior t o the time you were issuing 2 2 these status reports? 2 3 A. Yes. 2 4 Q. Were records kept of the output of 2 5 PCB's in the sewerage from the time they GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 12 5 STLCOPCB4031940 1 started? 2 A . Yes. 3 Q Do you know o f 4 been made prior to the 5 monitoring the output that w o'u Id have had any 6 impact on the amount of PCB's that"were 7 getting into the sewerage? 8 A. Well, certainly, changes were made 9 in the equipment and the arrangement of that 1 0 equipment in each of the producing units at 11 each of the plants. Some of these changes 1 2 were made to increase production, which means 1 3 increased activity. Assuming -- and this is 1 4 only an assumption -- that the amount of 1 5 material that found its way into the sewer 1 6 was a function of the amount produced, I 17 could see where the amount increased with 1 8 some of those changes. On the other hand, 1 9 there were some changes made that helped the 2 0 spill problem by improving the equipment. An 21 example. Better pumps were selected that did 2 2 not leak as much as the old pumps, so we have 2 3 examples, I have examples in mind of where 2 4 some of the changes reduced the amount and 2 5 yet others could have increased the amount. GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 12 6 STLCOPCB4031941 1 prior to the sampling program we discussed. 2 Q. Do you have any idea of the amount 3 of increase or decrease in what would have 4 been the PCB's getting into the sewers prior 5 to the time they started the monitoring? 6 A. No, I don't, because ' th e "r e was no 7 way to measure it so we really didn't know. 8 Q. Well, was there any type of 9 significant exchange -- strike that. 1 0 I gather from what you've said 1 1 earlier that the PCB's that got into the 1 2 sewerage got into the sewerage as a result of 1 3 cleanup activities in the plant. 1 4 A . Yes. 1 5 Q. They would do regular, ordinary 1 6 housekeeping practices, and in the course of 17 doing housekeeping practices, they were 1 8 washing spilled product down drains. 1 9 A. That's the major source, yes. 2 0 Q. Well, what other sources were 21 there that were of significance? 2 2 A. Well, it's a form of washing but 2 3 it is not man-induced. I have in mind a 2 4 situation where a spill could have occurred, 2 5 staining an area of the concrete pavement. GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 12 7 STLCOPCB4031942 1 heavy rainfall occurs before you've had a 2 chance to soak it up with, say, sawdust or 3 some other retrieving type of material. That 4 heavy rain could wash across that floor, pick 5 up the PCB's and end up either in the sewer, 6 the process sewer, or the storm sewers. 7 Q So t h i s, of necessity. would have 8 occurred outside of the building? 9 A . Well, the operation is an outside 1 0 operation 11 Q . So the process, itself , was 1 2 conducted outside ? 1 3 A Yes. 1 4 Q At all the plants? 1 5 A . Yes. 1 6 Q Any other significant sources you 1 7 can think of ? 1 8 A. Well, there is the occasional 1 9 rupture of a pipeline, a more or less 2 0 catastrophic kind of thing compared to the 2 1 small leakage. This didn't happen often but 2 2 when it -did, it was a source of PCB's that 2 3 did get into the sewer system. 2 4 Q. So when there's a reference, for 2 5 example, to one very bad day at Snow Creek GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 12 8 STLCOPCB4031943 1 where 400 pounds of the material got into the 2 sewer, that would be an example of -- 3 A. That's an example of something 4 unusual happened there because Snow Creek is 5 not a normal drainage -- it's' a, it's a dry6 creek except when there's heavy ra i'n s , so 7 this tells me that there's something happened 8 on the surface, on the ground, a rain came 9 along and helped push it into that creek. 1 0 Q. When it refers to the pounds of 1 1 PCB's, that's talking about product, like an 1 2 Aroclor, one of the Aroclors. 1 3 A. Yes. 1 4 Q. That's actually pounds of the PCB 1 5 product itself. 1 6 A. Yes. 17 Q. Is there any reason for you to 1 8 believe that there's been any significant 1 9 change in the amount of discharge over the 20 years prior to the time that you actually 2 1 began the monitoring program, other than 22 increases that might coincide with increases 2 3 in production? 2 4 A. Significant changes? I don't know 2 5 of anything that I would consider GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI STLCOPCB4031944 1 significant, no. 2 Q. So would it be fair to say, 3 without speculating too greatly, that the 4 same sort of discharge was occurring for some 5 time prior to the monitoring activities? ' 6 A. That is reasonable, yesr 7 Q. Did anyone, to your knowledge, in 8 Monsanto raise anyconcern about that? 9 A. At what point in time? 1 0 Q. Well, at any time prior to 1970 1 1 that you are aware of? 1 2 A. Prior to 1970, the amount 1 3 certainly was not known. The perception of 1 4 PCB's at the time was such that they were 1 5 considered to be innocuous. It was known 1 6 that the material was going to a municipal 17 treatment plant, and it was known that PCB's 1 8 were heavier than water, they would end up in 1 9 the treatment plant sludge, and we knew the 2 0 sludge was being disposed of in landfills, so 2 1 based on the knowledge available at the time, 2 2 this was not perceived to be a serious 2 3 problem. It seemed to be under control. 24 Q. When you sayunder control, it 2 5 really wasn't under your control anymore GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 13 0 STLCOPCB4031945 1 because it was going out of the plant plant 2 and into a municipal facility. 3 A . Very true. It was under control 4 of some -- somebody. Some person. 5 Q From what source did the belief" 6 derive that PCB's were innocuous? - 7 A. I personally don't know where the 8 thought originated. I do know that this was 9 a, an accepted opinion amongst the research 1 0 chemists that live with this material day in, : i 1 1 day out. They knew that the material was not | 12 reactive chemically, it was very stable, so ; 1 3 it was a, a natural assumption, almost, that 1 4 it's so stable under, with acids and alkalis 1 5 and what have you, surely it's stable out 1 6 there in sewerage water, for example. ! I j1 1 7 Q . Stable in what way? That it would j 1 8 not convert into other compounds? 1 9 A . That is a definition of stability, 2 0 yes. It does not change its chemical and ! 2 1 physical form. 22 Q Is that the definition you were | 2 3 using when you said that it was believed by 2 4 research chemists that it was stable? 2 5 A. Yes. GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 13 1 STLCOPCB4031946 1 Q. So what was believed to be the I 2 ultimate disposition? It would end up in the 3 sludge and not go any further? 4 A . Yes. i 5 Q. I'm sorry, you had' more to say? ' I 6 didn'tmeanto -- 7 A. No, that' sit. . . ., -- ; i | 8 Q. To your knowledge, were people . , i 9 surprised to learn that itwas getting into iI 1 0 riversandstreams? j l 1 1 A. It depends on where the sample was ; 1 2 taken. It was surprising to be found in ; 1 3 remote, nonindustrial areas. It was not i I 1 4 necessarily a surprise next to a factory, l 15 just like our own plants. We wouldn't have | 16 been surprised if it had been found, at the i j 1 7 municipal treatment plant, as an example, but ! I 1 8 to find it in what appeared to be virgin j i 1 9 timberland in Arkansas was the type of 2 0 surprise that Monsanto people had. j i I ! 21 Q. Did anyone ever determine how it j 2 2 got to the virgin timberland? | 23 A. No one has determined in a j 2 4 scientific way how it got there, but there's 2 5 an awful lot of hypotheses offered. Air : GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 13 2 ; ^ STLCOPCB4031947 1 movement, rainfall, but none of it has ever 2 been demonstrated scientifically. 3 Q. Any of these hypotheses you 4 accept? 5 A. That I accept? ' i I j i ! 6 Q . Yes. 7 A. I find it easy for me to accept 8 the concept that, as an example, the normal 9 burning of waste paper, which included the 1 0 carbonless copy paper, the temperatures are 1 1 not reached where the PCB's are altered 1 2 chemically, they're just volatilized, go up 1 3 the stack, find themselves in the atmosphere, 1 4 and the wind movements circulate them, and 1 5 they're involved with some kind of rainfall, 1 6 and I can accept the fact that that rainfall 1 7 washes down, in essence, the PCB's in the air 1 8 and they are then found on the -- in this 19 virgin timberland I talked about. I can see 2 0 that happening. 2 1 Q. Any others you accept? 2 2 A. Well, that's an example of a free 2 3 release into the environment. "I can see also 2 4 where, to pick another example, the white and 2 5 yellow traffic paint on highways and GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 13 3 STLCOPCB4031948 1 roadways, there is wear and tear, as we know. 2 Those little particles break away from the 3 surface, a rainfall comes along, and takes 4 this down some creek into a river, and the 5 next thing you know, that ri v'e r or small 6 stream ends up in some area far removed from 7 any industry, so I can see that being a 8 source. Those are just a couple of examples 9 of the kind of thing that could reasonably be 1 0 expected to have happen. 1 1 Q. By the way, did workmen in any of 12 the plantswhere the product was manufactured 1 3 wear clothing that was issued by Monsanto? 1 4 A. Oh, yeah. That's, that's a union 1 5 agreement, a change of clothing. 1 6 Q Was 17 Monsanto? 1 8 A . Yes 1 9 Q At 2 0 A . No , 2 1 Q So 2 2 A . Yes 2 3 Q So 2 4 from the plant 2 5 anything that GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 13 4 STLCOPCB4031949 1 workers' garments? 2 A. That is correct. "t Q. Perhaps the waste stream of the 4 laundry that had the contract for laundering 5 the clothing worn by the workers could have 6 waste, -- PCB's in its waste strearn? 7 A. Depends how dirty the clothes 8 were. Of course. they launder all the 9 clothing, which includes a hundred different 1 0 or 200 different chemicals. Assuming all the 1 1 clothes are very dirty, well, they're not 1 2 that dirty, really. 1 3 Q. So do I understand it that you 1 4 have never heard anyone, prior to 1970, 1 5 expressing any concern within Monsanto 16 regarding the waste stream of PCB's because 1 7 of this belief of their innocuous and stable 1 8 quality ? 1 9 A. That is correct. 2 0 Q. Do you know anybody who made any 21 tests of the material, exposing it to 2 2 sunlight, exposing it to wind, exposing it to 2 3 water, exposing it to a combination of those 2 4 events, in order to determine its stability? 2 5 MR. MALIN: What time period are GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI STLCOPCB4031950 1 we talking about? 2 MR. COHEN: Prior to 1970. 3 A. I don't know of any. This does 4 not mean that it did not take place. 5 BY MR. COHEN: ' 6 Q. You were not aware of tire m having 7 not been done at that time? 8 A . That is correct. 9 Q. I know you did a lot of the 1 0 toxicologic studies on laboratory animals. 1 1 Did anyone make any tests to determine 1 2 whether the animals excreted the PCB's after 1 3 having injested the PCB's? 1 4 A. Again, what point in time? 1 5 Q. Prior to 1970. 1 6 A. Prior to? I'm not aware of any 1 7 test of that type. 1 8 Q. So prior to the news, basically, 1 9 coming from Europe in 1966, I believe you 2 0 said -- 2 1 A . Yes. 2 2 Q. Other than the toxicity tests that 2 3 were being done, there were no tests that you 2 4 know of to determine in any way the impact on 2 5 the environment generally of the product, the GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 13 6 STLCOPCB4031951 1 PCB ' s? 2 A. True, because the analytical 3 procedure wasn't available. You can't 4 conduct tests unless you can analyze for very 5 low quantities to detect cha n g e s . 6 Q. Is that the only reason -it wasn't 7 done? Do you remember someone proposing, 8 gee, it might be a good idea if we go out and 9 dig up soil in the virgin woodlands and see 1 0 if. there's any PCB's there? 1 1 A. Well, like I say, I wasn't 1 2 involved personally so I don't know what 1 3 discussions took place in the research 1 4 department. 1 5 Q Do you have any knowledge of what 1 6 Monsanto was doing, if they were doing 17 anything, prior to the time that you became 1 8 involved in this environmental study in 1970, 1 9 to determine if PCB's were finding their way 2 0 into the environment? 2 1 A . I ' m not aware of any personally. 2 2 Q Now you said earlier that tests 2 3 were not being done because the analytical 2 4 tool was not available. Are you saying -- 2 5 A . Well , I said the tests could not GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI STLCOPCB4031952 1 have been done. 2 Q I see 3 A. But they were not feasible. 4 Q. To your knowledge, no one ever 5 proposed doing the tests? ' 6 A. That I don't know. -- 7 Q. I'm saying to you, though -- 8 A. Somebody may have proposed it. 9 Q. You are not aware of anyone 1 0 proposing? 1 1 A. To my knowledge, no one spoke to 1 2 that subject in my presence, no. 1 3 Q. You are not aware of anyone 1 4 proposing tests; you know that tests were not 1 5 done, is that correct? 1 6 A. No, I don't know that. I just 17 have never heard of them. 1 8 Q. So if there were any tests, no one 19 ever told you about them. 2 0 A. That's true. 2 1 Q. And you believe that technically, 2 2 tests were not feasible in any event. 2 3 A. That is correct. 2 4 Q Very early on in the investigation 2 5 of the so-called PCB pollution problem, a GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 13 8 STLCOPCB4031953 1 meeting was held with General Electric 2 representatives in St. Louis. Do you recall 3 that? 4 A. I recall -- of course, there were 5 several meetings. The earliest was early " 6 19 -- the earliest at which I was ab1e to 7 attend was early 1970. 8 Q. Mm-hmm. 9 A February or so, March. 1 0 Q Do you remember having a meeting 1 1 in St. Louis with representatives of General 1 2 Electric? 1 3 A. Yes. 1 4 Q . I'm not sure I can pronounce this 1 5 name right. B-e-n-i-e-n-g-u-s (sic) . 1 6 A . Bengignus ? 17 Q. Benignus. What was his capacity 1 8 in and around that time? 1 9 A. He was the Manager, Marketing for 2 0 Dielectric Fluids. 2 1 MR . COHEN: Let me show you 2 2 document, sir. that we can have marked 2 3 Papageorge 5. 2 4 (Papageorge Deposition 2 5 Exhibit 5 marked for GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 13 9 STLCOPCB4031954 1 identification.) 2 (Witness peruses said 3 document.) 4 A. I have scanned the document. 5 BY MR.COHEN: ' 6 Q. Do you recall ever having seen it 7 before? 8 A . Yes . 9 Q. Who is theauthor of the document? 1 0 A. Mr. Paul Benignus. 1 1 Q. Do you see that that document 1 2 has-- strike that. 1 3 Do you notice that some of the 1 4 material that was originally in thatdocument 1 5 has been somehow or another eradicated from 1 6 the document? 1 7 A. Yes, I did. 1 8 Q. Do you know whatit said 19 ] 2 0 A . I can only guess, because some of 2 1 them involve proper names of a person or 2 2 persons, and some, it appears, might be 2 3 referring to a company. 2 4 Q . Do you know what company they are 2 5 referring to? GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 14 0 STLCOPCB4031955 1 A . Again, I'd guess. I don't know. 2 Q . Do you know why the information 3 was deleted? 4 A . No, I don't. 5 Q . Why don't you identify the 6 document for the record. " 7 A . This document is a copy, a 8 ten-page copy of what appears to be, in 9 essence , minutes of a meeting entitled, "The 1 0 PCB Pollution Problem, January 21 and 22, 1 1 1970, St. Louis Meeting with General 1 2 Electric," and this is a meeting with 1 3 Monsanto personnel. 1 4 Q . And you were present? 1 5 A . I was present, yes. 1 6 Q . Do you recall the meeting? 17 A . Yes, I do. 1 8 Q . What was General Electric's 19 concern at that time in January of 1970? 2 0 MR. MALIN: I'll object to the 2 1 form of the question, but answer the question 22 if you think you understand it. 2 3 Do you mean the stated concern at 2 4 the meeting, or -- 2 5 MR. COHEN: I'm asking him if he GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 14 1 STLCOPCB4031956 1 recalls, being at the meeting, what was the 2 concern . 3 MR. MALIN: All right, state the 4 concern at the meeting. 5 A. I don't recall a c'oncern as much 6 as it was a desire on the represeh t'a t i v e s of 7 General Electric to be you the toward and 8 brought up-to-date onthe current status Of 9 the PCB environmental issue as Monsanto knew 1 0 it at that point in time, and an attempt to 1 1 determine from Monsanto what possible actions 1 2 they should be taking, and so that their 1 3 activities coordinated well with Monsanto's 1 4 activities regarding continued use, control 1 5 of use, type of PCB to use, and so on. 1 6 BY MR. COHEN: 17 Q. Did they express any concern about 1 8 having available a continuing source of 1 9 product? 2 0 A. I don't remember the issuecoming 2 1 up in that fashion so much as what type will 2 2 be available, not so much will any be 2 3 available. Because at that time, the focus 2 4 was on the higher chlorinated PCB's as being 2 5 the problem and it was presumed then that the GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 14 2 STLCOPCB4031957 1 lower chlorinated were not a problem; 2 therefore continue to be available. 3 Q. Which PCB's did you think would 4 continue to be available in the market? 5 A. At that time, it was the type 6 represented by the Monsanto Arocldr 1242 and 7 lower . 8 Q. What is lower than 1242? 9 A. There's a 1232, a 1221, those 1 0 three mixtures. 1 1 Q. Do you recall receiving a report 1 2 of atmospheric -- I'm sorry, of environmental 1 3 sprinkling being done in the early spring of 14 1970? 1 5 A. I've seen so many reports of that 1 6 type, it doesn't stand out in my memory. 17 MR. COHEN; Well, let's take this 1 8 and mark this document, then. 1 9 Let's mark it Papageorge 6. 2 0 (Papageorge Deposition 2 1 Exhibit 6 marked for 2 2 identification. ) 2 3 (Witness peruses said 2 4 document. ) 2 5 THE WITNESS; I have reviewed the GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 14 3 STLCOPCB4031958 1 article. 2 BY MR. COHEN: 3 Q . What is the document, sir? i 4 A . The document is a Monsanto : 5 memorandum authored by Dr. R.' E. Kelly -- ' 6 Keller, addressed tc me, dated Apr i-1 17th, 7 1970. It summarizes the results of analysis 8 of various samples for the presence of PCB's. 9 Q. If you'll allow me to come around 1 0 there, sir. I'll show you something and 1 1 perhaps you can clarify it for me. 1 2 We have a first page which is a 1 3 memorandum summarizing work that has been 1 4 done? 1 5 A . Yes. 16 Q And then we have a three-page i 17 chart that gives us information regarding the ; 1 8 tests that were done; is that correct? 1 9 A . That is correct. ; 20 Q We start off with industrial i 21 applications, industrial locations, and 2 2 identifying the particular industry that's 2 3 involved. Isthatright? ! 2 4 A . That is correct. 25 Q . Then we have the waterway that : GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 14 4 STLCOPCB4031959 1 we're looking at. Now, from which we're 2 taking samples. Is that correct? 3 A. That is correct. 4 Q. Then this says, "Matrix and number 5 of samples analyzed." "Matrix" refers to 6 what was the actual element that was being 7 sampled, is that correct? 8 A . Yes 9 Q . For example, air. water, sediment. 1 0 w h_i c h I gather is stream sediment, fish? 1 1 A . Yes 1 2 Q . And then, we have the number of 1 3 samples; three air samples. 23 water samples, 1 4 12 sediment, two fish. Is that correct? 1 5 A . That is correct. 1 6 Q Then it says, "PCB 's found most 1 7 typical o f Aroclor ," and then numbers 1 2 4 2, 1 8 1 2 4 8, 12 5 2 and 1260; is that correct? 1 9 A . That is correct . 2 0 Q So does this tell me that i f 2 1 there 1 s a n " X " in one of thos e columns , the 2 2 samples that they examined by gas 2 3 chromatography most resembled the tracing for 2 4 that particular Aroclor? Is that correct? 2 5 A. That is correct. GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 14 5 STLCOPCB4031960 1 Q How did they to do that? Do you 2 know what was the technique that was used? 3 A . We describe how the GC works, and 4 so on. 5 Q - Well, however you "have t o do it to 6 tell me how these tests were done t o your 7 understanding. 8 A. As the sample is processed through 9 the instrument, the end result is a chart of 1 0 peaks and valleys which graphically shows the 1 1 response of the instrument to the presence or 1 2 absence of the PCB. The analytical chemist 1 3 then runs a known type of PCB through that 1 4 same instrument at roughly the same level of 1 5 concentration and he will again get a peak 16 and valley pattern. He will then look at the 17 two patterns and he will then describe the 1 8 unknown as equivalent to a particular 1 9 Monsanto Aroclor mixture, depending on how 2 0 close the peaks and valleys match. It very 2 1 seldom is a perfect match, but it's closer to 22 one than it is to allthe others, so when the 2 3 chemist reports a certain concentration of a 2 4 PCB as equivalent to Aroclor 1242, he is 2 5 saying that, "As best I can tell, it looks GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 14 6 : s; STLCOPCB4031961 1 like 1242 It may nc: exactly be that, but 2 that's what it looks 1 ike to me." That's 3 what is meant by this "most typical of 4 Aroclor," s o and so, s o when he puts an "X" 5 in there, i t shows tha t the sample that he 6 looked at o r at least one of the samples he 7 looked at looked like the type of PCB listed 8 above the "X M 9 Q. And you would agree that for 1 0 samples that were taken from fish, for 1 1 example, that would be from the flesh of 1 2 fish? 1 3 A. In general, it is. They fillet 1 4 the fish and analyze, yes. 1 5 Q. That would be PCB's that would 1 6 have already been metabolized by the 1 7 organism, the animal? 1 8 A. That's a reasonable assumption, 1 9 yes. 2 0 Q. Well, if it had gotten into the 2 1 flesh, that's about the only way; wouldn't 2 2 you agree? 2 3 A. Unless there's some entrapment in 2 4 the -- it depends on how they cut that fillet 2 5 with the skin on or not, and so on, so GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 14 7 STLCOPCB4031962 1 generally, it would have to go through the 2 metabolic process to get into the tissue. 3 Q. Now let's see. This first one, 4 here, the first sample, we have air samples 5 is a, three air samples that most typically 6 resemble 1242. Is that correct? *"' 7 A . That's what it says, yes. 8 Q. Then it says "PCB levels," and it 9 says, ".05 milligrams PCB per cubic meter," 1 0 so is that the measure of how much they found 1 1 in the air? 1 2 A. That's a way to express 1 3 concentrations in air, yes. 1 4 Q. Then it says "Analysis Techniques, 1 5 "ECGC," electron capture gas chromatography? 1 6 A. That's what that says, yes. 17 Q. What were the PCB levels found? 1 8 A. I'm sorry? 1 9 Q. What were the levels found? 2 0 A. Like you read, .05 milligrams, 2 1 or -- yes, milligrams of PCB per cubic meter 2 2 of air. 2 3 Q. Okay, how about the water sample, 2 4 what were the levels found? 2 5 A. The water, they don't give us GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 14 8 STLCOPCB4031963 1; 2 II 3 ;i 4 ii ii 5 l| 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 numbers, they just say they found them from the part per billion level up to the part per million level. Q. And in sediment, they found them in the part per billion level' to percentages? A. Right, so the wider irarige of results there. Q. But the levels, themselves, are not expressed in the chart anyway. A. Not on this chart, no. Q. And apparently, the 1242 did continue to persist in the environmental specimens that were tested at theindustrial sites . A . Yes. Q. Then we go to another series of samples, and again the 1242 persisted. A. Near the sites, yes. Q. And this is nonindustria 1 sites A . That is correct. Q. And all they found were tracings similar to 1254; is that correct? A. That is right. Q. Even in the flesh of fish, human fat biopsy? GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 14 9 STLCOPCB4031964 1 A . Yes. 2 Q. They found 1254, specimens most 3 like 1254? 4 A. Yes. 5 Q. Towhom was this report 6 disseminated? Do you know? ~ 7 A. Let me see. You want me to 8 describe who these individuals are that are 9 listed here? They got copies of this report. 1 0 Q. Did anyone else get the 11 information contained in that report? 1 2 A. I do not know. These individuals 1 3 could have shared this information with 1 4 others that I'm not aware of. 1 5 Q. Do you knowif anyone outside of 1 6 Monsanto received the information contained 1 7 in that report? 1 8 A. I do not know that. 1 9 Q. Do you know if Monsanto was at 2 0 that time making an effort to make the 2 1 results of this report known? 2 2 A. I do know that the intent was that 2 3 the samples, for example, taken at the 2 4 customer sites that are listed on this 2 5 report, those customers were informed of the GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 15 0 STLCOPCB4031965 1 data prior to the issuance of this report, so 2 the information was shared by others, but 3 whether they received copies of this report, 4 I do not know. 5 Q. Do you know if the' information 6 contained in that report was given ~'t o any 7 governmental agencies? 8 A. Information was given or shared 9 with governmental agencies, but I don't 1 0 know -- I'm trying to think. Some of this 1 1 information was shared with representatives 1 2 of government agencies and laboratories at a 1 3 meeting held in Duluth in March of 1970, a 1 4 month before the date of this report, so what 1 5 information was available a month before the 1 6 issuance was shared, Dr. Keller, himself, 1 7 stood up before the audience and reported 1 8 them. 1 9 Q Were you there? 2 0 A . Yes . 2 1 Q And you recall that? 2 2 A . I ' m sorry? 2 3 Q And you recall that? 2 4 A . Yes. In fact, it seems that those 2 5 comments were published in a summary report GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI STLCOPCB4031966 1 issued out of that laboratory covering that 2 meeting. 3 Q. Which laboratory was that? 4 A. The Duluth, Minnesota, EPA water 5 laboratory. ' 6 Q. Can I see that report again for 7 just one moment, please? 8 (Witness complies) 9 MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Off the record a 1 0 second. 1 1 (Discussion off the record.) 1 2 BY MR. COHEN: 1 3 Q. To your knowledge, sir, was this 1 4 the first such environmental analysis of 1 5 PCB's done under the aegis of Monsanto? 1 6 MR . MALIN: Object to the form o f 17 the question. I don't know what you mean by 1 8 environmental analysis. Obviously, there 1 9 were plenty of other environmental analyses, 2 0 depending on how you are defining 2 1 environmental analyses. If you think you 2 2 understand the question, Mr. Papageorge, 2 3 attempt to answer it. 2 4 THE WITNESS: I think I do. It's 2 5 oriented, of course, to PCB's, and he's GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 15 2 STLCOPCB4031967 1 asking if there were -- if this is the first 2 report. 3 MR. MALIN: Is that by Monsanto 4 you are talking about? 5 MR. COHEN: I asked him, "done ' 6 under the aegis of Monsanto." That's what I 7 asked him. 8 A. I believe, yes, as best I recall, 9 yes. 1 0 BY. MR. COHEN: 1 1 Q. This would have been the earliest 1 2 one? 1 3 A . Yes. 1 4 Q. As you sit, or towards PCB's you 1 5 were looking for PCB's in the environment? 1 6 A. Yes. 1 7 Q. This would have been the first one 1 8 done under the aegis of Monsanto, looking for 1 9 PCB ' s in the environment , and this i s the 2 0 results of that? 2 1 A . Yes. Keep in mind some o f those 2 2 studies started back in '69. This i s the 2 3 first summary of that activity, yes. 2 4 Q. Do you recall having an analysis 2 5 done on Pensacola bay shrimp? GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI STLCOPCB4031968 1 A . I recall, I recall analyses 2 related to Pensacola, yes, at '69 or so, as I 3 remember . 4 Q. Is that the Pensacola Bay, 5 Pensacola, Florida? ' 6 A . Yes. 7 Q. Who was responsible for ordering 8 these studies done? Do you know? 9 A. I don't know. 1 0 Q Do I take it from that it wasn't 1 1 you? 1 2 A . I wasn't involved when the 1 3 incident occurred down there at Escambia Bay 1 4 which is the name of that bay. 1 5 Q. What incident occurred? 1 6 A. PCB's were detected in the bay and 17 traced back to a leaking compressor on 1 8 Monsanto's property. There was a leak in the 1 9 piping of that unit, a small leak that was 2 0 not noticeable, and they traced it back to 2 1 that point. As a result, there were samples 2 2 taken, as I remember, of the sediment around 2 3 the compressor, the dirt around the 2 4 compressor, and the water nearby, and yes, 2 5 they did look at the shrimp, because there is GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 15 4 STLCOPCB4031969 1 a commercial fisheries laboratory located at 2 Gulf Breeze, Florida, that determined that 3 the shrimp were sensitive to PCB's, and 4 Monsanto was trying to determine the presence 5 of PCB's in that area. 6 Q Let 's talk about the compressor 7 for a moment. What was the PCB fluid being 8 used for? 9 A . 11 1 s a lubricant in the 1 0 c ojpressor. 1 1 Q A s a lubricant in the compressor? 1 2 A . In the moving par t s . 1 3 Q Not a dielectric fluid, more like 1 4 a hydraulic fluid but not as a working fluid 1 5 A. Pretty much like the motor oil in 1 6 your car engine. 1 7 Q. Just as a lubricant? 1 8 A. A lubricant, yes. 19 Q. Was that a usual use for PCB 2 0 fluid? 21 A. It's a, a common use. I don't 2 2 know if it's usual. There are other oils 2 3 available for compressors. This type is the 2 4 fire resistant so when you get high 2 5 temperatures, you don't have the potential GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 15 5 STLCOPCB4031970 1 for fires and explosions. 2 Q. What type of compressor was it? 3 Do you know? Refrigerant compressor, air 4 compressor? 5 A. Air, air compress or . ' 6 Q . Now you said that the -s- h'r imp were 7 sensitive to PCB's. What did you mean by 8 that? 9 A. The laboratory in Gulf Breeze 1 0 exposed some new1y-hatched, I think that's 1 1 the right term -- shrimp. 1 2 Q Whatever shrimp d o . 1 3 A . Juvenile shrimp in a static tank 1 4 not out there in the bay. and they 1 5 determined that these juvenile shrimp did not 1 6 survive at very low-level concentrations of 1 7 PCB's. They were quite sensitive. 1 8 Q. So it was highly toxic to shrimp? 1 9 A. To the baby shrimp. The adult 2 0 shrimp tolerated it, not the baby shrimp, and 2 1 that information was relayed to Monsanto 2 2 Medical Department. Mr. Wheeler was active 2 3 in that program. 2 4 Q. What does "GO" mean, next to a 2 5 person's name? GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 15 6 STLCOPCB4031971 1 A . "GO "? General offices . 2 Q Let me show you a document, sir. 3 see if you can identify it for us. 4 MR . COHEN: We' 11 mark it as 5 Papageorge n e x t . 6 (Papageorge Deposition 7 Exhibit 7 marked for 8 identification.) 9 (Witness peruses said 1 0 document.) 11 MR. MALIN: Do you have a question 12 on Papageorge 7? 13 THE WITNESS: I have reviewed the 1 4 document . 1 5 MR. COHEN: Thank you, sir. 1 6 BY MR. COHEN: 17 Q. What is it? 1 8 A. It's a copy of a memorandum dated 1 9 December 3, 1970, authored by Dr. 2 0 E. S. Tucker, addressed to me. The subject. 2 1 PCB content of Pensacola whit e or bay shrimp 2 2 i n which he reports analyses of these shrimp 2 3 for the presence of PCB's. 2 4 Q. Did they find PCB ' s in them 2 5 A. They did. GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 15 7 STLCOPCB4031972 1 Q Which PCB? 2 A. Aroclor, equivalent to Aroclor 3 1 2 5 4. 4 Q Apparently, they made four 5 separate samples out of the shrimp. They 6 treated them differently, lsomewere whole, 7 some wer e shelled, et cetera, et cetera? 8 A . Yes , s ir . 9 Q Processed them in different ways? 1 0 A . Yes. 1 1 MR. COHEN: They were deveined. 1 2 MR. McMANUS: Were they boiled 1 3 or -- 1 4 BY MR. COHEN: 1 5 Q There i s a n attachment that says 1 6 "Retention times o f EC peaks for unknown s and 17 Aroclor 1254." Do you know what that is, 1 8 sir? 1 9 A . I be1 i eve I do . 2 0 Q Would you t e 11 us? 2 1 A. It's a listing by peaks in which 2 2 the peaks are designated by numbers 1 through 2 3 16, followed by a column entitled "Aroclor 2 4 1254 standard," so they used the Monsanto 2 5 product as the standard and determined for GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 15 8 STLCOPCB4031973 1 peak 1 retention times 2.1 seconds, peak 2, 2 2.6, and so on down the list. 3 They then took the samples 1 4 through 4 that were described previously and 5 compared the retention times for each of the 6 peaks with the retention time determined for 7 Aroclor 1254 and there appears to be, as I 8 look through here, a close -- 9 Q. Almost identical? 1 0 A. Almost identical, yes. 1 1 Q. Except for peak number 7, which 1 2 appears to be absent from the samples. 1 3 A. 7 is missing, in the samples. It 1 4 is present, of course, in the Aroclor 1254. 1 5 Q. Nonetheless, the technician who 1 6 analyzed these samples concluded that this 17 was Aroclor 1254 in the samples; is that 1 8 correct? 1 9 A. Well, they normally don't say, 2 0 "I'm positive, it's --" they usually report 2 1 it as saying, "The material I have observed 2 2 in this, with this procedure, is equivalent 2 3 to or similar to Aroclor 1254." 2 4 Q. And then we have one more 2 5 attachment which is a map of where the GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 15 9 STLCOPCB4031974 1 sampling was taking place? 2 A . That is correct. 3 Q. Do you know where the Monsanto 4 plant is with respect to the area samples? 5 A. Let's see if I can' locate it. " 6 It's a very poor reproduction. - 11 us in the 7 upper part, a little bit left of center, in 8 this general area (Indicating) is where the 9 plant is located. 1 0 Q. Okay, do you want to draw a circle 1 1 with the court reporter's red pen which he's 1 2 been kind enough to agree to allow us to use 1 3 for that purpose? 1 4 A. It's in this general direction or 1 5 area there (Indicating). 1 6 Q. Let the record reflect that a 17 circle was drawn on the third page of 1 8 Exhibit, reflecting the location of the 1 9 plant. 2 0 BY MR. COHEN: 2 1 Q. Now with respect to Papageorge 7, 2 2 sir, can you tell me, was thisinformation 2 3 shared with anyone? 2 4 A. As best I recall, I shared that 2 5 personally with Dr. Thomas Dugan at the GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 16 0 STLCOPCB4031975 1 federal laboratories in Gulf Breeze, Florida, 2 where the original shrimp studies were 3 conducted 4 Q You say you shared it personally. 5 Under what circumstances? - 6 A . Oh , I made it a point t5` drop by 7 every four to six months to exchange notes 8 with them and find out wh at they were doing 9 and share with them what we had done, and I 1 0 reported that we had done this work. 1 1 Q Thi s was at th e laboratory a t 1 2 Escambia Bay? 1 3 A.. 11 ' s Gulf Bree ze, Florida, is the 1 4 official a d d r e s s . It's j ust outside 1 5 Pensacola 1 6 Q . Do you know if it was shared with 1 7 any other r e p r esentative of any federal or 1 8 state agency? 1 9 A, Not that I know of. 2 0 Q. Do you know what the gross sales 2 1 of Aroclor products were i n and around that 2 2 time period in 1970 on an annual basis? 2 3 A . Whew. I used t o know . I don't 24 remember the number. I -- the closest I can 2 5 come to that is, it's about 80 million pounds GORE REPORTING COMPANY ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 16 1 STLCOPCB4031976 1 a year. I don't know how that translates to 2 dollars . 3 Q. You don't remember the price per 4 pound? 5 A. It changed with time. I just 6 don't remember what it was at that "point. 7 Q. If I were to suggest to you 21 8 million in sales in a given fiscal year, 9 would that make sense to you? 1 0 A. I have no way of evaluating that. 1 1 Q. The information at one time was 1 2 available, though, I gather? 1 3 A. Oh, yes, yes, it was available, 1 4 just don't remember the number. 1 5 Q. Was the Aroclor business, to your 1 6 knowledge, profitable for Monsanto? 1 7 A . It was profitable, yes. 1 8 It's apparent from the review of 1 9 the documents that we've just had, that you 2 0 apparently -- that your analytical abilities 21 in that time period in 1970 permitted 2 2 detection levels in the parts per billion 2 3 range . 2 4 A . Oh, yes. Yes 2 5 Q. Do you remember when you first had GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 16 2 STLCOPCB4031977 1 analytical abilities to detect presence of 2 PCB's in the parts per billion range? 3 A. About the third quarter of 1969. 4 Q. Do you remember when your 5 laboratories developed the ability to have 6 detection limits in the parts per t'r i 11 i o n 7 range? 8 A. Trillion? Hmm, as best I recall, 9 that occurred about eight months to a year 1 0 later . 1 1 Q. So that would have been in '71? 1 2 A. 1970. 1 3 Q. I'm sorry, 1970. 1 4 A. '69 to '70, yes. 1 5 Q. Do you know when products that 1 6 were substitutes for dielectric fluids 17 containing PCB's were developed? 1 8 MR. MALIN: Object to the form of 1 9 that question because I don't understand what 2 0 you mean by "similar." There always were 2 1 substitutes for it, they simply weren't as 2 2 suitable, so I don't know what that means. 2 3 MR. COHEN: Well, why don't I hear 2 4 that from your witness. I'm sure he can say 2 5 the same thing if he knows. GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 16 3 STLCOPCB4031978 1 A. There were available materials 2 that could have been used as dielectrics and 3 were being used. Examples include mineral 4 oil, and of course, the air, or gas-filled 5 units. The introduction of different kinds 6 of materials, as best I recall, beg-a n in '77. 7 The materials I have in mind include 8 dioctophtha 1 ates for capacitors, and 9 silicones for transformers. 1 0 BY MR. COHEN: 1 1 Q. These were products that had 1 2 performance characteristics similar to the 1 3 Aroclor products? 1 4 A. Well, there were slight 1 5 differences. The principal difference, as I 1 6 understand it, with capacitors, the 1 7 dioctophtha 1 ate is not inflammable, it will 1 8 burn, so that as I understand it, they had to 1 9 do, redesign the ballast units and include a, 2 0 a fuse-type device in it to trip when 2 1 temperatures or conditions reached an 2 2 unfavorable point. 2 3 I understand that the silicones, 2 4 when used to retrofit a PCB-type unit, had to 2 5 be downgraded. In other words, they could GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST . LOUIS , MISSOURI 16 4 STLCOPCB4031979 1 not do the job they originally could do in 2 terms of the transfer of electrical power. 3 Q. A transformer had to be 4 downgraded? 5 A. A transformer had to be 6 downgraded, yes. That's just an "' 7 understanding I have. I'm not a transformer 8 designer. That's really all I know about the 9 substituted materials. 1 0 Q Who developed the substituted 1 1 materials? Do you know? 1 2 A. Would you help me with the word 1 3 "develop"? 1 4 Q. Yeah, was it Monsanto, was it GE, 1 5 was it Westinghouse, was it Samsung, was it 1 6 Coneco? 17 A. Well, again, the word 1 8 "development," I have trouble with that, in 1 9 that you can develop a chemical by mixing 2 0 other chemicals and producing an end product, 21 or you candevelop technology for the 2 2 application of that chemical. I personally 23 don't know who is responsible for the 2 4 development of dioctophtha 1 ate. That's a 2 5 common plasticizer that many a chemical GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 16 5 STLCOPCB4031980 1 company makes or can make. I have an I 2 understanding that General Electric took that ; 3 material, available material, and tried it ! 4 out in capacitors and eventually reached a ; 5 point where they felt that it' was feasible.' : I t 6 On silicones, I do know that the j I 7 Dow-Corning Company was interested, I also \ 8 know that GE had their own capabilities for i 9 the manufacture of silicones. I personally ! 10 do not know who took them to the laboratory s | 11 and put them in transformers and tested it. ! 1 2 That's all I really know. i 1 3 Q. Do you know if Monsanto is in the I 1 4 business of selling dielectric fluid at this 1 5 time? ! 1 6 A. No. They did notsucceed in 1 7 staying in the business. j I i j 1 8 Q. So they have gone out of the 1 9 business of selling dielectric fluid for , | j 2 0 transformers? j 2 1 A . Yes . ! 22 Q. They did not succeed in coming up i 2 3 with a successor to their Aroclor product i 2 4 line? 2 5 A. That is correct. : GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 16 6 i ' STLCOPCB4031981 1 MR . INNELLI: Let's go off the 2 record for one second. 3 (Discussion off the record. 4 BY MR. COHEN: 5 Q Mr. Papageorge, do' you know who 6 J . A . Z a c h is? "" 7 A . Yes. 8 Q Whoishe? 9 A . She was a member of Monsanto's 1 0 Medical Department. I, I believe that she 1 1 had training in toxicology, and she also had 1 2 some training in epidemiology. 1 3 Q Do you know what her degree was? 1 4 A . No , I don't. 1 5 Q To your knowledge, did she or does j 1 6 she hold a Ph.D.? 17 A . I do not know. 1 8 Q . Do you know where Ms. Zach is at 1 9 this time? 2 0 A . No . 21 Q She was an employee, however, of 2 2 Monsanto Chemical Company? 2 3 A . For a period of time, yes. 24 Q Do you know what that time period j 2 5 was? GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI ! STLCOPCB4031982 1 A. Oh, in the middle Seventies, as 2 best I recall. 3 Q. Do you know who R. R. Suskind is? 4 A. I believe, yes. Dr. Suskind, he's 5 associated with -- in Cincinnati. I forget, 6 I forget the institution. I just. . don ' t 7 remember the details. I've met the man and 8 that's all I know. 9 Q. Were you aware of a recent 1 0 allegation made by the United States 1 1 Environmental Protection Agency against Ms. 1 2 Zach and Dr. Suskind regarding some 1 3 epidemiological studies that they had done on 1 4 employees of Monsanto Chemical Company? 1 5 A. I'm not aware of any EPA comments. 1 6 no . 17 Q. Were you involved in asking either 1 8 of these people to do any epidemiological 1 9 studies on any employees of Monsanto Company? 2 0 A. I have discussed the matter with 2 1 the dir ector of Monsanto 's Medical Department 2 2 a t that period of time, and he agreed that 2 3 such a study might be in order and a study 2 4 was ini t i a t e d . 2 5 Q. And who was that person you GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 16 8 STLCOPCB4031983 1 discussed it with? Dr. Kelly? 2 A. No, Dr. Kelly had retired and it 3 was Dr. George Roush. 4 Q. So this is Dr. Roush? 5 A. R-o-u-s-h. ' ' 6 Q. What time period are -you-- referring 7 to? 8 A. Oh, somewhere around '75, '76. 9 Q. This would be what, tests on 1 0 employees exposed to PCB's? 1 1 A. As best I recall, there was a 1 2 study of employees who had died and had at 1 3 least a six-month tour of duty in the PCB 1 4 department. It was a mortality study, in 1 5 other words. 1 6 Q. And do you recall the results of 1 7 tha t s tudy ? 1 8 A . Yes. 1 9 Q. What were they? 2 0 A. It was found that increased lung 2 1 cancer incident amongst thatpopulation when 2 2 compared to the national average, but it was 2 3 the same as the county average in which the 2 4 plant was located and which many of these 2 5 employees live. GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 16 9 STLCOPCB4031984 1 Q. So it was not something that you 2 or the analysts involved related to their 3 exposure to PCB's in the plant? I j j 4 A. Well, the summary report that I I 5 saw indicated that this could' not be ' 6 attributed to their PCB exposure.a n-d it was 7 further complicated by the fact that because 8 of the assignment practices in the plant . 9 whereby the employees, by union agreement, 1 0 have opportunities to bid on jobs that are 1 1 open, there's an awful lot of movement i 1 2 through that plant, which makes the study 1 3 extremely difficult. There are hundreds of 1 4 chemicals. It was difficult to really arrive 1 5 at a conclusion. 1 6 Q. Were you involved in any way in 1 7 getting any of the records regarding these 1 8 employees for the individuals who were doing 1 9 the tests? 2 0 A . No . i 2 1 Q. Were you involved in any way in 2 2 any aspect of the tests other than having 2 3 discussed it with Dr. Roush in order to 2 4 determine to do the test? 25 A. I was only involved in the | GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI | i 17 0 STLCOPCB4031985 1 discussion . 2 Q. Were you involved in any other 3 tests on Monsanto employees who were exposed 4 to any other substance? 5 A. No. ' 6 Q. Do you know anything' ato u t the / mortality tests or the epidemiological study 8 that Dr. Suskind and Ms. Zach did regarding 9 the mortality experience of workers exposed iii 1 0 to tetrach1orodibenzodioxin? 1 1 A. No. I've heard of it, but that's 1 2 it. Tetrach1orodibenzodioxin . 1 3 Q. And you are unaware of any 1 4 criticism that has been directed against 1 5 those individuals as a result of their tests? 1 6 A. That is correct. i i 1 7 MR. COHEN: Okay. 1 8 FURTHER EXAMINATION 1 9 BY MR. INNELLI: ii i 2 0 Q. Mr. Papageorge, earlier you had 2 1 stated that you were the plant manager at the 2 2 Anniston, Alabama, plant. When you took on 2 3 your new assignment sometime in 1970, what 2 4 was the title that was given to you? 2 5 A. Manager, Environmental Control. GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 17 1 STLCOPCB4031986 1 Q. Was a new unit established called 2 "Environmental Control"? 3 A . It wasn't so much a unit, it was a 4 one-man operation with a part-time secretary, 5 and I don't know that you'd call that a unit, 6 but -- ~ 7 Q. Okay, so you were the 8 environmental control person for Monsanto? 9 A. No, I was the environmental 1 0 c on trol person for the PCB issue in that, in 11 those business groups that sold PCB's. 1 2 Q Okay. 1 3 A . Not for all of Monsanto. 1 4 Q To whom did you report? 1 5 A . Mr. Howard Bergen, B-e-r-g-e-n. 1 6 Q And what was Mr. Bergen's title 1 7 and responsibility? 1 8 A. He was Business Group Director, 1 9 Fungal Fluids. In your capacity as Director 2 0 of Environmental Control for PCB's, did you 21 become aware of any studies that Monsanto was 2 2 involved in regarding the toxicity of PCB's? 2 3 A. Certainly. 2 4 Q. When was the earliest date you 2 5 became aware of such a study? GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 17 2 STLCOPCB4031987 1 A . When I became plant manager at 2 Anniston in 1965, and in preparing myself for ; 3 the job, I read some reports and talked with : 4 the plant physician, and he made me aware of 5 the toxicity studies that had been with PCB's 6 in the Forties and Fifties. That was my 7 first exposure to toxicity studies with test 8 animals and PCBs. 9 Q . What was the name of the plant, ' 1 0 Doctor? 1 1 A . Dr. Francis, Jim, James Francis. 1 2 Q . The toxicity studies that you just 1 3 referred to, were they studies in which 1 4 Monsanto was a participant? , 1 5 A . I would call them more Monsanto 1 6 was a sponsor that requested the work and it 17 was done by commercial laboratories in this 1 8 kind of work. 1 9 Q. It was February of 1970 that you 2 0 assumed your new duties as Director of 2 1 Environmental Control for PCB's? 22 A. It was January -- as manager, not . 2 3 director. 2 4 Q Manager? 2 5 A . Director is a step above. GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 17 3 STLCOPCB4031988 1 Q. Just trying to -- 2 A. You promoted me. 3 Q. -- give me some additional income, 4 right? Were there any ongoing toxicity 5 s t u d i e s in January of 1970? ' 6 A . Yes. -- 7 Q Were you made aware o f those 8 s t u d i e s at that p o i nt in time? 9 A . Yes . 1 0 Q . Can you describe for m e what 1 1 studies were taking place? 1 2 A. At that point in time, the ongoing 1 3 studies included a lifetime rat feeding 1 4 study, an 18-month white leghorn chicken 1 5 feeding study, there was a rat reproduction 1 6 study, there was an 18-month Beagle dog 17 feeding study. That's all that comes to mind 1 8 at the moment. 1 9 Q. Okay. 2 0 Do you know who was conducting the 2 1 lifetime rat feeding study? 2 2 A. It was at the Industrial Bio-Test 2 3 Laboratories, Northbrook, Illinois. 2 4 Q. Now, how long had the lifetime rat 2 5 feeding study been going on when you became GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 17 4 STLCOPCB4031989 1 aware of it? 2 A. Nine months to a year. 3 Q. Do you know who commissioned this 4 study? 5 A. You mean who in Monsanto was -- 6 Q. Yes, who in Monsanto repested the 7 study. 8 A. Of course, it came out of 9 Monsanto's Medical Department so that 1 0 officially would be Dr. Kelly, but it was 1 1 managed for Dr. Kelly by Elmer Wheeler. 1 2 Q. Now, when you say managed for Dr. 1 3 Kelly by Elmer Wheeler, what do you mean by 1 4 managed? 1 5 A. He is the individual in Monsanto 1 6 who was the closest to this work in terms of 17 discussing the protocols to be used, the 1 8 number of test animals involved, the feeding 1 9 levels, the dates of starting the tests, the 2 0 kinds of reports that were expected, the 2 1 types of chemicals to be tested, and the 2 2 levels . 2 3 Q. Who would have been involved in 2 4 selecting Industrial Bio-Test? 2 5 A. Primarily, Dr. Kelly, assisted by GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI STLCOPCB4031990 0) i--1 1 Elmer Wheeler, and it's quite likely, 2 although, of course, I wasn't there when they 3 started, there, at that time there was a Dr. 4 Bill Hunt, a toxicologist on the staff who 5 would participate in that kind of discussion. 6 Q. Do you know what criteria were 7 used for selecting the laboratories to run 8 the tests? 9 A. No, I don't. 1 0 Q. Who would know what criteria was 1 1 used? 1 2 A. Dr. Kelly for sure. 1 3 Q. Anyone else? 1 4 A . He's the only one living, s o 1 5 Q I underst and that Mr. Wh e e 1 6 no longer alive. Wh at about Dr . Hun t ? 1 7 A . He died. 1 8 Q What was the objective of the 1 9 lifetime rat feeding study? 2 0 A. The purpose of the study was to 2 1 establish whether -- what, if any, effects 2 2 are possible in mammals by exposure to the 2 3 different kinds of commercial PCB's. There 2 4 was no known protocol for evaluating 2 5 industrial chemicals. There were, of course, GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 17 6 STLCOPCB4031991 1 protocols for evaluating pesticides and for 2 evaluating food additives in drugs. 3 Monsanto,, as I understood it, through its 4 contacts in the governmental agencies, tried 5 to come up with some government-approved test 6 methods and did not succeed in g e t t~i" n g any 7 agency to support any kind of program. 8 Therefore, Monsanto chose to mimic the 9 testing that's done for food additives, 1 0 although we had no intention in the world of 1 1 putting PCB's in foods, it was considered to 1 2 be the most severe test, so the objective of 1 3 that was to try to establish some kind of 1 4 test that would show an effect, if any, that 1 5 could later be looked at by those that 1 6 understand toxicology and attempt to 1 7 extrapolate it to human beings and to 1 8 wildlife, if possible. 1 9 Q. What is your understanding of what 2 0 prompted Monsanto to have a protocol for such 2 1 a test developed? 2 2 A. It's really stimulated by the 2 3 reports that they were present, alleged to be 2 4 present in wild birds, pelicans and peregrine 2 5 falcon being two examples that were quite GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 17 7 STLCOPCB4031992 1 popular in those days, much speculation about 2 what effect it might have on mammals, 3 warm-blooded mammals, and of course, there's 4 also some speculation at the time what effect 5 is it going to have, if any, on fish, and 6 this is why the rat was selected as something 7 that was available for testing that could 8 represent the mammals, and the dog being a 9 higher species of that same group, the white 1 0 leghorn chicken was picked, as I understood 1 1 it, because it was the only available bird, 1 2 available in controlled quantities, you know, 1 3 health-wise, as well as numbers, because 1 4 Monsanto missed an opportunity to place an 1 5 order for mallard ducks, which only hatch 1 6 once a year, and didn't want to lose a full 1 7 year waiting for the next opportunity, and 1 8 there were some fish studies planned to be 1 9 conducted also by Industrial Bio-Test 2 0 Laboratories to represent the aquatic species 2 1 and what effect that might have. So really, 2 2 the testing was done in response to the, the 2 3 question of what effect, if any, are the 2 4 PCB's in the environment having or could 2 5 have. GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 17 8 STLCOPCB4031993 1 Q. Now, the lifetime rat feeding 2 study, how long was that to last? 3 A. Oh, the rats, most of them will 4 live about two years, so the tests are 5 designed with two years in mind, with the ' 6 sacrifices periodically, to see if -anything 7 is developing. 3 Q Now, when was that study to be 9 concluded? Or when was it concluded? 1 0 A . As I remember, the tool study was 1 1 concluded and reported in 1972. 1 2 Q. Now, when you say reported, in 1 3 what form was it reported? 1 4 A . It's a bound report from the 1 5 to Monsanto. 1 6 Q . From Industrial Bio-Test? 1 7 A . No . 18 Q Monsanto? 1 9 A . Yes. 2 0 Q And to whom was the record made at 2 1 a Monsanto. 2 2 A . To Dr. Kelly and his department. 2 3 Q Did you, were you a recipient of 2 4 the report? 2 5 A. I received a copy, yes. GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 17 9 STLCOPCB4031994 1 Q. And did you review it? 2 A. I only reviewed the summary 3 sections, because I'm not qualified to 4 understand the detailed technical parts, the 5 pathologist's report, and all' the technical 6 details. I wouldn't have -- I did "hot 7 understand them. 8 Q. Were there any plans to prepare 9 any articles for medical journals arising 1 0 from the findings of the report? 1 1 A. There were plans. In fact, there 1 2 was a report given before a 1 3 government-sponsored meeting by the Bio-Test 1 4 Laboratories. 1 5 A. Director of the studies, reporting 1 6 the status of the studies by December 1971, 1 7 as I recall. 1 8 Q. And who was the director of 1 9 Industrial Bio-Testing? 2 0 A. Dr. -- let me think. The original 2 1 director was Dr. Otis Fancher, F-a-n-c-h-e-r , 2 2 but he retired, and as best I recall, Dr. 2 3 Kepplinger, K-e-p-p-l-i-n-g-e-r, reported the 2 4 status of the studies to this group in North 2 5 Carolina in 1970, December 1970. GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 18 0 STLCOPCB4031995 1 Q. DDiidd DDrr.. Otis Fancher participate 2 in the study, itself? 3 A. Oh, yes, when he was still 4 employed by the laboratories, he was the 5 director and he participated in the, whatever 6 a director does in such a laboratory. He 7 didn't massage the rats himself, but he made 8 sure the program was started properly. 9 Q. Did he participate in the 10 establishment of the protocols? 1 1 A. Yes, he did, yeah, along with 12 Elmer Wheeler, yeah, he was involved in all 1 3 of that. 1 4 Q So - - 1 5 A . And he picked the staff, the 1 6 personnel that's going to do the work, and so 17 on . 1 8 Q. Explain for me the lines of 1 9 communication between Monsanto and Industrial 2 0 Bio-Test during the course that the studies 21 were running. 2 2 A. Well, the primary contact, from 2 3 where I was situated, was Elmer Wheeler. 2 4 Initially, he was held by Dr. Bill Hunt until 2 5 Dr. Hunt died, and Dr. Hunt was replaced by GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 18 1 STLCOPCB4031996 1 Dr. Levinskas. Dr. Hunt and Dr. Levinskas 2 were the individuals who helped Dr. Wheeler 3 in making trips to the laboratory and 4 communicating as appropriate, and -- by 5 telephone or by mail, keeping on top of 6 things. I don't know how el s e to thatwas 7 the line of communication. 8 Q. Now, you've indie ated or testified 9 that Elmer Wheeler was invol ved in the 1 0 development of the protocol for these tests. 1 1 A . Yes. 1 2 Q. Did Monsanto, thr ough Elmer 1 3 Wheeler, establish the proto col and send it 1 4 to Industrial Bio-Test? 1 5 A. No, it was a case of Elmer Wheeler 1 6 sat down with representative s of Industrial 17 Bio-Test Laboratories in St. Louis, the 1 8 Bio-Test es repres entatives came to 1 9 St. Louis. They sat down and talked about 2 0 what is the best way to do the study, and 2 1 they discussed different kinds of protocols 2 2 in terms of how to establish the feeding 2 3 levels that would be appropriate, how many 2 4 animals to start in the study, were the 2 5 animals available, and from what animal GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI STLCOPCB4031997 1 breeding laboratory, what kind of testing 2 would be done as the program progressed, in 3 terms of blood samples, tissue samples, how 4 many animals would be sacrificed, and when, 5 how many -- and what kind of samples would be 6 taken, and how would these sauiples" be 7 preserved. There's details that I even don't 8 understand, but that's the kind of discussion 9 that was held. 1 0 Dr. Fancher and his staff then 1 1 went back to the laboratory and put this all 1 2 down in a document, summarizing the approach 1 3 that they felt was proper, and mailed it back 1 4 to St. Louis and St. Louis concurred, through 1 5 Elmer Wheeler, that this was okay, let's get 1 6 started . 1 7 Q. Was there a regular schedule where 1 8 information garnered from the study would be 1 9 sent to Monsanto via Dr. Wheeler? 2 0 A . Yes 2 1 Q . Who besides Dr. Fancher was 2 2 involved for Industrial Bio -Test? 2 3 A . Oh , I mentioned Dr. Kepplinger 2 4 Q - Was he involved in the initial 2 5 meeting in St. Louis? GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 1 fi 8 STLCOPCB4031998 1 A. Oh. There were so many meetings 2 held, I can't distinguish one from the other. 3 I believe he was, yes. 4 (Pause for court reporter to 5 change notep ad s) 6 (Recess) .-- 7 (Discussion off the record.) 8 BY MR . INNELL I : 9 Q Mr . Papageorge, to whom did Dr. 1 0 H u_n t report 1 1 A . To Mr. Wheeler. 1 2 Q To Mr. Wheeler? 1 3 A . Yes 1 4 Q And when Dr. Hunt died, his 1 5 replacement w a s ? 1 6 A . Dr . Levinskas. 1 7 <2 Dr . Levinskas. Dr. Levinskas in 1 8 turn reported to Mr. Wheeler? 1 9 A . Yes 2 0 Q And Mr. Wheeler reported to Dr. 2 1 Kelly? 2 2 A . Yes 2 3 Q To your knowledge, was Mr. Wheeler 2 4 aware of all communications between Monsanto 2 5 and Industrial Bio-Test on the series of GORE REPORTING COMPANY ST. LOUIS, MIS SOUR I I i 18 4 STLCOPCB4031999 1 tests that we've talked about, the lifetime ! j 2 rat feedi ng study, the 18-month white-leg 3 chicken, the rat reproduction, and the 4 18-month Beagle dog studies? 5 A . Yes. 6 Q. If correspondence was to be 7 exchanged between Monsanto and Industrial 8 Bio-Test regarding the results of any of 9 those tests, to your knowledge would Mr. 1 0 Wheeler have to review the correspondence 1 1 before it went out? 1 2 A. That would be the normal 1 3 procedure, yes. 1 4 Q. Would you have an opportunity to 1 5 review any of the correspondence? 1 6 A . No . 1 7 Q. Would Dr. Kelly review any of the 1 8 correspondence? 1 9 A. Yes. 2 0 Q. All of it? I 2 1 A. When he's available, in town, not 2 2 traveling . 2 3 Q. Dr. Kelly left Monsanto in 2 4 November of 1974? 2 5 A. Yes. GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 18 5 STLCOPCB4032000 1 Q . And who was Dr. Kelly's 2 replacement? 3 A. Dr. George Roush. 4 Q. Now, did the procedure change 5 after November of 1974? 6 A . No . 7 Q . So Dr . -- 8 A. Just Dr. Roush replaced Dr. 9 Kelly -- 10 Q . So Dr . -- 1 1 A . -- in -- 1 2 Q. I'm sorry, go ahead. 1 3 A. In theline of communication. 1 4 Q. So Dr. Roush, then, would have to 1 5 review and approve any correspondence that 1 6 would be exchanged between Monsanto and 17 Industrial Bio-Test? 1 8 A. Yes. 1 9 Q. And where is Dr. Roush today? 2 0 A. The last I heard, he is still in 2 1 the St. Louis area. He retired. 2 2 Q. I'd like to show you a document 2 3 which we will have marked as Papageorge 8. 2 4 The form I'm going to give it to you in is as 25 follows. The first page is a letter which GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 18 6 STLCOPCB4032001 ! 1 bears your signature, and then the next two 2 pages have been previously marked as Kelly 3 26. I'm going to ask you to take a look at 4 all three pages and identify it for the 5 record. 6 (Witness peruses s a~i d 7 document.) 8 A. I have reviewed the documents. 9 BY MR. INNELLI: 1 0 Q. It is my understanding that the 1 1 letter dated March 18, 1975, is the cover 1 2 letter to the pages which have been marked as 1 3 Kelly 26. 1 4 A. That is correct. 1 5 Q. Could you then identify what will I 1 6 become Papageorge number 8? 1 7 A. This exhibit is a letter dated 1 8 March 18, 1975, and authored by me and mailed 1 9 to Dr. -- or to Mr. Dan Albert, Westinghouse 20 Electric Corporation. Attached to that I 2 1 letter is a three-page question-and-answer 2 2 summary. This is in response to Mr. Albert's 2 3 letter that he had sent to me in early 2 4 February of '75. 2 5 Q. Now, you've said that you authored GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 1 fi 7 STLCOPCB4032002 1 the letter. Did you author the three-page ii 2 question-and-answer sheet? 3 A . No. 4 Q. Do you know who did author it? 5 A. Yes. ' 6 Q. Who was that individual?" 7 A. Mr. Elmer Wheeler. iI 8 Q. Were you the recipient of the 9 questions? 1 0 A. Yes. 1 1 Q. And did you turn them over to Mr. 1 2 Wheeler? 1 3 A, Yes. 1 4 Q. And asked him to prepare the 1 5 responses? 1 6 A. Yes. 17 Q. Did you have any input or any 1 8 participation in the preparation of the 1 9 responses? 2 0 A. Oh, I had discussions with Mr. 2 1 Wheeler. I don't know that I added anything 22 to what he was proposing. I was interested 2 3 in what his reaction and comments might be. 2 4 Other than that, I just told him,"Will you 2 5 please put it all in writing so I can forward GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI . 18 8 STLCOPCB4032003 1 it to Mr. Albert. 2 Q. You say that you don't know 3 whether you had any additions. Did you have 4 any deletions from comments Mr. Wheeler may 5 have made? 6 A . No . 7 MR. INNELLI: I have no further 8 questions at this time. Thank you. 9 MR. McMANUS: Mr. Papageorge I 1 0 have no questions for you, thank you. 1 1 MR. McLAUGHLIN: Can I ask off the 1 2 record? 1 3 (Discussion off the record.) 1 4 MR. COHEN: Does anybody have any 1 5 questions? 1 6 MS. GROSS: No. Thank you. 17 MS. COONELLY: I have one 1 8 question. 1 9 EXAMINATION 2 0 BY MS. COONELLY: 2 1 Q. Mr. Papageorge, you asked earlier 2 2 about after the PCB products leaving the 2 3 plant, you knew that some PCB products were 2 4 shipped to railroad locations; is that right? 2 5 A. Did I say it with those words? GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI STLCOPCB4032004 1 Q No, you didn't say it in those 2 words . 3 A. I recall seeing lists which refer 4 to railroads. I am -- my memory is fuzzy in 5 terms of whether it was dielectric fluid or 6 other chemicals. I do not have the records 7 to peruse personally so I cannot determine 8 that for a certainty, but it is possible and 9 quite likely, because it was a very common 1 0 practice, for the servicecompanies like the 1 1 GE's and the Westinghouses and others, to 1 2 order the material, charge it to their 1 3 account, but ship it to this address, is what 1 4 I meant earlier with my reference to "Bill 1 5 to" and "Ship to." 1 6 Q. Thank you. I know you were no 17 longer the plant manager in 1976 or 1 8 thereafter, but are you aware of any shipment 1 9 of PCB's to Conrail -- 2 0 A. I'm not -- 2 1 Q. -- from Monsanto? 22 A. I don't recall any personally. 2 3 Q. But you probably wouldn't have had 2 4 knowledge of that anyway? 2 5 A. Not that kind of detail, unless I GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 19 0 STLCOPCB4032005 1 had a chance to look at records. 2 MS. COONELLY: Thank you. 3 EXAMINATION 4 BY MR. MCLAUGHLIN: 5 Q. Have you retired from Monsanto. 6 A. Yes,sir. 7 Q. And when did you retire? 8 A. Mylast working day. I'll have to 9 think, December 31st, 1986. I have to think 1 0 about it. 11 MR. McLAUGHLIN: Are we done? 1 2 MR. COX: I think we're done. 1 3 MS. COONELLY: No further 1 4 questions. 1 5 (Whereupon, at 3:15 p.m., the 1 6 deposition was concluded.) 17 18 19 20 21 22 II 23 24 25 GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 19 1 STLCOPCB4032006 1 COMES NOW THE WITNESS, WILLIAM 2 B. PAPAGEORGE, and having read the foregoing 3 transcript of the deposition taken on the 4 17th day of July, 1991, acknowledges by 5 signature hereto that it is a' true and 6 accurate transcript of the testimd n'y given on 7 the date hereinabove mentioned. 8 9 10 I 1 1 WILLIAM B. PAPAGEORGE 12 13 14 1 5 this Subscribed and sworn to before me day of 19 9 1. Ii JOSEPHINE S. NIBLOCK 1 6 NOTARY PUBLIC STATE OF MISSOURI ST. LOUIS COUNTY 17 My Commission expires: _____ jan. _1_5JW5 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 19 2 STLCOPCB4032007 1 STATE OF MISSOURI ) 2 SS : ) 3 CITY OF ST. LOUIS ) 4 I J. Bryan Jordan, notary public 5 in and for the State of Missouri, duly 6 commissioned, qualified and authorized to 7 administer oaths and to certify depositions, 8 do hereby certify that pursuant to agreement 9 in the civil cause now pending and 1 0 undetermined in the Court of Common Pleas of 1 1 the County of Philadelphia, State of 1 2 Pennsylvania, and in the United States 1 3 District Court for the Eastern District of 14 Pennsylvania, to be used in the trial of said 1 5 cause in said court, I was attended at the 1 6 offices of Brown & James, in the City of St. 17 Louis, State of Missouri, by the aforesaid 1 8 witness and by the aforesaid attorneys, on 19 the 17th day of July, 1991. 20 The said witness, being of sound 2 1 mind and being by me first carefully examined 2 2 and duly cautioned and sworn to testify the 2 3 truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the 2 4 truth in the case aforesaid, thereupon 2 5 testified as is shown in the foregoing GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 1 93 STLCOPCB4032008 1 transcript, said testimony being by me 2 reported in shorthand and caused to be 3 transcribed into typewriting, and that the 4 foregoing pages correctly set forth the 5 testimony of the aforementio n e d witness, 6 together with the questions propounded by 7 counsel and remarks and objections thereto, 8 and is in all respects a full, true, correct 9 and complete transcript of the questions 1 0 propounded to and the answers given by said 11 witness; that signature of the deponent was 1 2 not waived by agreement of counsel. 1 3 I further certify that I am not of 14 counsel or attorney for either of the parties 1 5 to said suit, not related to nor interested 1 6 in any of the parties or their attorneys. 1 7 Witness my hand and notarial seal 1 8 at St. Louis, Missouri, this 1 9 _, .19 91 day of 2 0 My commission expires July 20, 21 19 9 4 . 22 23 2 4 Notary Public in and for the 2 5 State of Missouri GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 19 4 STLCOPCB4032009