Document XRQ7yMOVRpGGYvBooZZrMpmDd

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, . \ Plaintiff, \ vs. OUTBOARD MARINE CORPORATION and MONSANTO COMPANY, Defendants. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) No. 78-C-1004 Deposition of R. Emmet Kelly Taken on behalf of Plaintiff March 26 and 27, 1981 cSuian czM. cRick cStenotiffn cRepoilet 4144 Uaft cfloenuc cSt. Mouii, cMissouxi 63116 >. .A ' t- ' WATER_PCB-00053707 1 2 MmmJmmrniilt 3 Humber Description Marked for Identification ' 4 7 Diphenyl, Description of Properties 5 8 Younger Laboratories, 6 Toxicological Investigation of Pydraul F-9, dated 7 November 9# 1966 8 9 Data Sheet for Toxicological and Safe Handling Information 9 10 Memo to R. Emmet Kelly from 10 Gene Wilde, dated 2/13/67 11 232 237 Piil 2*;: J | i| l !i : | 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 o wZ 21 bj 22 23 24 25 A ii WATER PCB-00053708 1 2 it 3 4 WITNESS: R. Barnet Kellv - PAGE 5 Direct Examination ( By Mr. Hynes). * 6 a 3 6 7 Kerch 27. 191) 8 9 WITNESS: R. Emmet Kellv 10 Direct Examination Continued (By Mr. Hynes) 159 11 Cross-Examination (By Mr. John) . . 161 12 Cross-Examination (By Mr. Peatherstone) . . 266 13 Redirect Examination (By Mr. Hynes) * * 291 14 Recroes Examination (By Mr. John) . * 2 op 15 16 mmm-' 17 ftumb^r Description Marked for 18 1 Letter dated 2/3/71 to Griffith E. Quinby, M.D. 20 19 2 Letter dated 2/14/50 to 20 Dr. Louis fipolyar 21 3 Memo dated 12A1/53 to Mr. H.S. Litrsinger 221 i 224 ! 1 22 4 Report on 4465 229 ;j 23 24 5 Cecil Drinker report dated 9/15/33 to Monsanto Company .1 229 1 ii 25 6 Swann Chemical Company report 232 ________on properties of Aroclore________ ___-----------_J i WATER PCB-00053709 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS 2 3 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 4 Plaintiff, 5 V3. 6 OUTBOARD MARINE CORPORATION 7 and MONSANTO COMPANY, > )V ) ) ) No. 78-C-1004 ) ) ) ) 8 Defendants. ) 9 10 BE IT REMEMBERED that, pursuant to the Federal Rules 11 of Civil Procedure, and on the twenty-sixth and twenty-seventh 12 days of March, 1981, commencing at the hour of nine a.m. 13 thereof, at the office of the United States Attorney, 14 1114 Market Street, Room 431, Saint Louis, Missouri, before 15 me, Susan M. Rick, Certified Shorthand Reporter and 16 Notary Public in and for the City of Saint Louis, State 17 of Missouri, personally appeared 18 R. EMMET KELLY, . ' I 19 a witness, called as a witness by the Plaintiff, who, being 20 by me first duly sworn, was thereupon examined and 21 interrogated as hereinafter set forth. 22 23 I 24 25 2 WATER_PCB-00053710 1 2 For the Plaintiff : 3 4 5 For the Defendant: (Outboard Marine) 6 7 8 For the Defendant: 9 (Monsanto Company) 10 Ag,E@aaces DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Chicago, Illinois BY : James T. Hynes -andElizabeth Stein PHELAN, POPE 6 JOHN 30 North La Salle Street Chicago, Illinois 60602 BY: Pater C. John -andjioseann Oliver KIRKLAND 6 ELLIS 200 East Randolph Drive Chicago, Illinois 60601 BY: Bruoe A. Featherstona 11 12 R. EMMET KELLY, 13 of lawful age being first duly sworn to tell the truth, 14 the whole truth and nothing but the truth, deposes and says 15 on behalf of the Plaintiff, as follows: 16 DIRECT EXAMINATION 17 QUESTIONS BY MR. HYNES: 18 Q This deposition is being taken pursuant to agreement 19 between the parties and the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. 20 Would you please state your full name and spell 21 your last name, please. 22 A R for Robert Emmet Kelly, K-e-l-l-y* 23 Q What is your address? ' 4 A 665 South Skinker, S-k-i-n-k-e-r, Saint Louis, 24 25 Missouri 63105. 3 WATER_PCB-00053711 1 Q Doctor Kelly, before we begin, either Mr. Featherstone 2 or one of his associates said that you won't be able to 3 go the full day today. 4 Do you Know how long, approximately, you will be ^ 5 able to be deposed here today? 6 A Z think I will be able to do a part of the day. 7 If I show signs of weakening, fine, lot me know. 8 Q But you don't have any -- 9 A No set time, no* 10 MB. FEATHERSTONE Mr. Hynes, we will see what will 11 happen. I oan't tell you in advance what will happen to 12 the witness in terras of endurance and stamina. 13 Q (By Mr. Hynes) What is your profession, Doctor? 14 A I am a physician. 15 Q Would you briefly trace your educational background 16 beginning in college? 17 A Yes, Z received a Bachelor of Science in medicine 18 from Saint houis University in 1930 and an M.D. degree in 19 1932. 20 Z spent three years at City Hospital as an intern, 21 resident, and assistant resident. 22 Z have taken various postgraduate courses at the 23 University of Missouri -- University of Michigan -- Mayo ,1 24 Clinic, and the College of Physicians courses. 25 Q Your internship, you said, was for three years? 4 WATER_PCB-00053712 1 A The internship was one year; assistant resident 2 was one year; and resident in internal medicine was a 3 third year. 4 Q What was the concentration in your internship and 5 residency# what branch ot medicine? 6 A The first two year were what was termed "rotating 7 internships" in which you had mod surgery# obstetrics# and 8 the various specialties. The third year was entirely 9 medicine. 10 Q Internal medicine? 11 A Internal medicine. 12 Q Subsequent to that training# you said you had 13 postgraduate courses at various facilities. 14 Would you state which ones they were# the time, 15 and the specialty that you studied in? 16 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Doctor Kelly, as a reminder# 17 please wait until Mr. Hynes completes his question. 18 THE WITNESS t Yes. Thank you. 19 Would you repeat the question? 20 Q (By Mr. Hynes) You stated that you had certain postgraduate work. 21 Would you please state where that was taken and 22 23 what field you took the work in. ' -i A They were at various institutions. I remember 24 25 Harvard. I remember the Mayo Clinic. I remember the 5 WATER PCB-00053713 1 University of Michigan. Z am sure there were others which 2 I forget, and they were in either internal medicine or 3 this occupational medicine. 4 Q Now, the three you remember were Harvard, the 5 Mayo Clinic, and the University of Michigan. 6 At Harvard, what did you study? 7 A These were all two-week courses, and they ware 8 general medical courses. 9 Q Something like a continuing medical education type 10 course? 11 A That* correct. 12 Q They were in the field of what? 13 A Internal medicine, and at least one was in 14 occupational medicine. I believe that was at the University 15 of Michigan, if I am correct. 16 Q Do you reaall when these courses of study occurred? 17 A Xn the '40s some time. 18 Q Would you please explain what the field of internal 19 medicine is? 20 A The field of internal medicine is that branch of 21 medicine that relates to the illnesses of the entire body. 22 It is the diagnosis of and treatment by nonsurgical means. 23 It does not include the specialties of urology/ sar nose 24 and throat, dermatology, neurosurgery, or toy of the 25 surgical things. 6 WATER_PCB-00053714 1 Q You Mid you took at least one two-week course, 2 you thought, in occupational medicine. 3 A That's correct# 4 0 Could you explain what occupational medicine is 5 and what the course concerned? 6 A Occupational medicine is that branch of medicine 7 that relates to the response of the human to products in 8 the environment, either work environment -- the work 9 environment. 10 Q What do you understand the work environment to 11 mean? 12 A The neighborhood and the atmosphere in which the 13 man spends eight hours a day working. 14 MR. PEATHERSTONE: In & plant? THE WITNESSi In a plant or outside. If he is in 15 16 outside construction, he works in the street. Q (By Mr. Hynes) Are you Board Certified in any 17 18 specialty? 19 A I am Board Certified in internal medicine, recertified in 1974, and Board Certified in preventive 20 medicine in a sub specialty of occupational diseases. 21 0 When were you Board Certified in internal medicine, 22 initially? 23 A Probably 1948 or 1949. 24 ; "1 ' Q And you say you were recertified in 1947. 25 7 WATER_PCB-00053715 1 Would you explain what recertification is? 2 A Tea. This is an occurrence that is happening in 3 medicine in all the specialties that under the theory that fc 4 certification at one time does not give you e lifetime 5 tenure like e judge or something like that so you have to 6 recertify yourself to show that you are still a specialist. 7 Q How does the process of recertification work? 8 HR. FEATHERSTONZ* You can describe it generally, 9 Doctor. 10 A It's an examination procedure. They look at what 11 papers you may have written, and an examination. 12 Q (By Mr. Hynes) A written examination? 13 A A written examinetion. 14 Q And you say you are also Board Certified in 15 preventive medicine? 16 A Preventive medicine, yes. 17 Q What does that specialty entail? 18 A As the name implies/ it's the part of medicine 19 that is supposed to prevent diseases. There are various 20 specialties -- one is public health, one is aviation 21 medicine, and one is occupational medicine, and there may 22 be tropical medicine, but 1 have a subspecialty in 23 occupational medicine. . 24 Q What does that entail? ' ! 25 A Occupational medicine is that branch of medicine that 8 WATER_PCB-00053716 1 relates to the worker and his work environment 2 Q When were you certified in preventive medicine 3 with the subspeci&lty in occupational medicine? ,4 A Z think some time around 1950 or 1952, 5 Q Have you gone through the process of recertification 6 in occupational medicine? 7 A No. They do not, as yet, have a recertification 8 program for occupational medicine. 9 Q Are you licensed to practice medicine in any state? 10 A Yes, at present, in Missouri. I was in Illinois, 11 and Z was in Arizona, but Z dropped those. 12 Q When ware you licensed to practice in Missouri? 13 A In 1933. 14 Q When were you licensed to practice in Illinois ana 15 Arizona? 16 A 1935 or 1936 in Illinois, and 1947 or 1948 in Arizona. 17 Q And am I correct in assuming you just voluntarily 18 dropped from the rolls of practicing medicine in Illinois 19 and Arizona? 20 A Yes, I voluntarily dropped Arizona because I thought 21 if I ever had a coronary I would go out and practice in 22 Arizona; and after I didn't have a coronary, 1 decided to 23 drop it a few years ago. 24 And in Illinois, after I retired from Monsanto, 25 I had no reason to go over to the hospitals in Illinois so 9 WATER_PCB-00053717 1 1 dropped my registration there. 2 0 About what year was that? 3 MR. PBATBERSTONEi When he retired. 4 A 1975 or 1976. 5 Q (By Mr. Hynes) That's when you withdrew from 6 Illinois, 1975 or 1976? 7 A Yes. 8 Q Are you a member of any professional organizations 9 currently? 10 A Yes. 11 Q Which? 12 A The American College of Physicians, the American 13 Occupational Medical Association, the American Academy of 14 Occupational Medicine, the American Heart Association, the Saint Louis Medical Society, the Missouri Medical Society, 15 16 the American Society for Therapeutics and Experimental 17 Pharmacology. There may be a couple more. 18 19 Q The last professional organization -- Therapeutics 20 and what? A Experimental Pharmacology. 21 Q Would you explain what that organisation is, the 22 goal8? 23 ,j 1 -4 A The goals, the society is devoted to the spread of 24 knowledge about therapeutics which means the branch of 25 10 WATER PCB-00053718 1 medicine which treats -- the medicine you give to people 2 to make people well, pharmacology is the study of chemicals 3 used in medicineo Experimental refers to the type of study ,, 4 done before the product is generally used. ,, 5 Zt may be clinical pharmacology rather than 6 experimental pharmacology. It's one of the two words. 7 Clinical would be the use of drugs in medicine, licit drugs -* 8 Q What type of drugs? 9 & Legal. 10 Q Were you or are you currently an officer in any of 11 these societies? 12 A Ho* I am a lifetime member of the Board of the 13 Saint Louis Heart Association, and I am not an officer in 14 any of the others. 15 Q Were you previously an officer in any of these 16 organisation? 17 A Whan the Society of American -- the American o o 18 Therapeutics Society was on its own before it joined ' 19 with The Society for Clinical Pharmacology, Z was 20 Vice-President of the council for the American Therapeutics 21 Society. 22 0 Whan was that? 23 A Some time in the late '40s or early *SQs. I 24 Q Are there any particular qualifications for . 25 fitambership in any of these societies other than having an M.D., 11 WATER_PCB-00053719 1 let's say? 2 A Yes. they all have their own qualifications. 3 The American College of Physicians requires that 4 you are accepted by your peers as an internist in one of 5 the specialty fields in internal medicine or in general 6 internal medicine. You are required to have passed the 7 Board of internal Medicine or a similar board/ and you are 8 supposed to have had a certain amount of publications/ 9 and Z think that is all. Z don't know what it is now. 10 That's when I went in. 11 The American Heart Association/ I think, is much 12 less demanding. All you have to have is an M.D. degree 13 and an interest in heart diseases. 14 The American Academy of Occupational Medicine, 15 you have to be full time in occupational medicine. 16 The American Occupational Medical Association, 17 you have to have an interest in occupational medicine. 18 Q Have you ever published any articles in professional 19 publications? 20 A Yes, Z have. 21 Q Offhand, do you recall how many you have published? A Pour or five. 22 > 23 Q Do you recall the subject matter of each and where . ;; i they were published and when? 24 25 A The last one was on the subject of bladder cytology 12 WATER PCB-00053720 1 in workers in a publication of the National Cancer 2 Institute about five -- the Journal of the National Cancer 3 Institute -- about five or seven years ago. .4 There was another article on roughly the sane topic f 5 in the Mew England Journal of Medicine ten years ago. 6 Then, Z had two or three on general occupational 7 medicine published in journals of like the Missouri Medical 8 Association and the American Journal of Public Health. 9 Q The subject matter of those two articles you spoke 10 of dealing with bladder cytology, could you briefly explain 11 what bladder cytology is? 12 A Bladder cytology is the microscopic study of cells 13 that are shed by the bladder similar to the Pap stain in 14 woman -- or the Pap stain anyplace, but it's most popular 15 in women. 16 Q Doctor Kelly, subsequent to your internship and 17 residency training, where did you begin working? 18 A I started practicing in Saint Louis in July of 1935. 19 X started part-time working with the Monsanto Company as 20 a plant physician in January of 1936. 21 1 went in service and continued that dual role -- 22 MR. FEATHERSTOHE8 I think all Mr. Hynes wanted to i 23 know was where your first job was. > 24 Q (By Mr. Hynes) Tour first private practice of 25 medicine was in July of 1935; is that correct? 13 WATER_PCB-00053721 1 A That'a correct 2 Q Am 1 correct that approximately the same time you 3 started doing part-time work for Monsanto? 4 A fix months later. r : 5 Q Six months later, part-time work for Monsanto. 6 And how long did your private practice and your 7 part-time work continue from January of 1936? 8 A Until March of -- when was Pearl Harbor? 9 Q December of 1941, 10 A March of 1942, then. 11 Q ffhat occurred in March of 1942? 12 A Z was called up by the Army. 13 Q Am I correct that, at that time, your part-time 14 work for Monsanto terminated together with your private 15 practice? 16 A Absolutely. 17 Q What were your duties in the Army? 18 A Well, X was in the medical corps. I was associated 19 with the chemical warfare service both in the Pine Bluff 20 arsenal in Arkansas and the Edgewood arsenal in Maryland. 21 Then, I had a couple of months at various Army < . hospitals and general hospitals, all in the United States. 22 23 Q What were your duties in the Army? -I 24 A It's pretty much like I did in the Service. I 25 was responsible for the occupational care of the military and 14 WATER_PCB-00053722 ] civilian worker* who worked at the chemical plants that 2 were run by the chemical warfare service. 3 Q Were those substantially your same duties throughout i 4 your career in the Army? < 5 A Yes, with the exception of a hospital at the 6 beginning of my service and at the end of the service 7 when I was doing general internal medicine in the hospitals. 8 Q When did you leave the Service? 9 A February of 1946. 10 q Beginning in February of 1946, what was your next 11 employment? 12 A 1 went practically full time with Monsanto. I 13 used the word 'practically" because I still did a very 14 occasional consult for other people, but X was geographically 15 full time with Monsanto. 16 Q Where were you working for Monsanto at that time? 17 A In the Saint Louis headquarters. 18 Q When did you stop doing this occasional consulting 19 work? 20 A I Still do it. 21 Q So, beginning in February of 1946, you were a full- 22 time employee for Monsanto; is that correct? 23 A Yea. 24 Q When did you retire? 25 A From Monsanto? *1 P E N G A D CO 15 WATER_PCB-00053723 1 Q Yes. 2 A December X, 1975 . 3 0 Prom February of 1946 through December of 1975, 4 you continually worked for Monsanto; is that correct? 5 A That's correct. 6 Q Now, beginning in January of 1936, when you started 7 working part time for Monsanto, what were your duties at 8 that time? 9 A At that time, my duties consisted of the treatment, 10 diagnosis and treatment of occupational conditions at the 11 Queeny Plant, which was a plant in Saint Louis, together 12 with the preemployment and periodic examinations of the 13 workers at that plant. 14 Q Basically, you were the plant physician -- 15 would that be a fair interpretation? 16 A Yes, that's correct. 17 Q Did those duties change prior to your going into 18 the Army in March of 1942? 19 A Yes. 20 Q When did those duties change, and what were the 21 changes? 22 A They changed approximately in 1938 or 1939. They i 23 changed in the sense that other duties were add^d. Questions 24 would come up -- 25 Q You say other duties were added. 16 WATER_PCB-00053724 1 Would you explain what those duties were? 2 A That's what I was going to say. 3 Questions would come up of medical practice in 4 various Monsanto plants at that time. Thera was no central 5 Medical Department; and in as much as X was the only 6 physician, even part time, associated with Monsanto in 7 the area, I would be asked to resolve these particular 8 problems which may come up. 9 Q Now, would these be health problems of workers 10 at other Monsanto plants other than the Queany Plant? A Either health problems or questions as to what 11 12 examination program or what facilities should be installed 13 at various Monsanto plants which were either changing their 14 type of manufacturing, having different products, or entirely 15 new plants that were being built. 16 Q What would the general subject matter of these 17 questions relate to? 18 MR. FEATHERSTONE: He already testified to that, 19 Mr. Hynes. He just told you concerning health problems 20 and medical procedures. Q (By Mr. Hynes) What type of health problems and 21 medical procedures? 22 MR. FEATHERSTONEx You can describe that generally. 23 A It would vary all over the place. For example, 24 if we were building a phosphorus plant, we would have to 25 17 WATER_PCB-00053725 1 cheak the people to see if there was any particular 2 treatment needed for phosphorus burns. W@ would have to 3 decide whether or not particular type of X-rays would 4 have to be carried on because of the people wording , t 5 in the phosphorus plants. 6 If we were building a plastics plant, we would have 7 to worry about solvents and plasticizersj and at that 8 point in time, in 1938 or 1939, the knowledge of the 9 toxicological properties of chemicals was very primitive 10 so that I would have to -scurry through the literature to 11 see if there was anything known about these particular things. 12 Q Now, you say those duties ware added to your other 13 duties beginning around 1938, 1933. 14 A That's correct. 15 Q Subsequent to that time, were other duties added 16 to your responsibilities, or were duties taken away from 17 your responsibilities? 18 MR. FEATHERSTONEs Before he went into the Army? 19 A NO. 20 Q (By Mr. Hynes) Between 1938 and 1939, you were both, 21 as I characterize it, the plant physician for the Quaeny 22 Plant and you gave advice as to problems that came up in 23 other Monsanto plants? ;/ A It could be characterized as a medical director 24 25 without a portfolio. 18 WATER_PCB-00053726 1 Q You did the work, but they didn't give you the 2 title or the money? 3 A Correct, - 4 Q Prior to your going in the Army in 1942, to your , 5 knowledge, did Monsanto have any programs for testing 6 ohemioals which ware being formulated -- or research being 7 done on them -- at Monsanto to check for toxicity or health 8 problems with workers or customers? 9 A Yes. 10 Q Do you know how that was done or how you best recall 11 that was done? 12 MR. PEATHERSTONE: What period of time are we 13 talking about, Mr, Hynes? 14 MR. HYNES: Prior to his going into the Army while 15 he was working at Monsanto. 16 MR. PEATHERSTONEs You mean in the late 1930s? 17 MR. HYNES: Yes. 18 MR. PEATHERSTONEi How is that germane in the 19 lawsuit? 20 MR. HYNES: How isn't it germane? 1 want to find 21 out what Monsanto's procedures were at that time, if they 22 had any, to see how they changed and how they came up to 23 date when he became medical director. I viat to see what a1 24 their procedures ware. 25 MR. PEATEHRSTONE: Doctor, you can describe that PENGAD C.O 19 WATER_PCB-00053727 1 generally; and we will see where he goes with that. 2 TOE WITNESS? Would you repeat the question, please. 3 (Whereupon, the court reporter read back the ,4 following questioni -; 5 ANSWER? "Do you know how that was done or how you 6 best recall that was done?") 7 Q (By Mr. Hynes) You stated that in the time you 8 were working at Monsanto, before you went into the Army, 9 Monsanto did have some processes for tasting chemicals. 10 My question was. Do you recall what the processes 11 were for testing chemicals for toxicity problems, worker 12 exposure, and the like? 13 A Yes. 14 Q Could you just briefly state what you recall that 15 procedure to be? 16 A Yes. As I say, the state of the art of toxicology 17 before I came with Monsanto -- and certainly, if we are 18 talking now in the time frame when I went into the Service -- 19 was quite primitive. We would respond in one of two ways. 20 By looking at a product and its intended use, we 21 might decide if there was sufficient exposure to run what 22 would be called acute screening testing on this particular compound. "i If word were brought to us that the compound -- that some of our customers or if some of our workers were 20 WATER PCB-00053728 1 developing ill affects that were alleged to be caused by 2 our chemicals, we would do toxicological work. 3 Q Now, you say "we". <4 Were you involved in that? %' A I would arrange for it to be done at outside 6 consulting laboratories. 7 Q Was there a procedure set up within Monsanto to 8 submit to you for your review research data, intended-use 9 data, on products before they were marketed by Monsanto? 10 A Not in those early days. 11 Q When these outside laboratories did this screening 12 for Monsanto, did the results come back to you for 13 evaluation? 14 A Yes. 15 Q What authority did you have to make decisions once 16 the data came back from the lab in terms of further 17 marketing the product or making changes in the workplace 18 and the like.7 19 MR. FEATHERS TONEs Why don't you ask the specific 20 question. 21 Q (By Mr. Hynes) Did you have any authority to 22 compel Monsanto not to market a product, to make changes 23 in the workplace? .i ; ;v 24 A As far as the workplace in the Queeny Plant was 25 concerned, I had what you could call absolute authority. 21 WATER PCB-00053729 1 1 was the plant Manager there 2 In ay role as acting medical director, 1 had also 3 almost unlimited authority to apply safe work -- rules for 4 safe working in all plants. _ 5 As far as the use of our products la concerned, it 6 was my duty to issue information tc the development people 7 about what X thought were the hazards involved. 8 X can not recall whether or not in 1933, 1939, 1940, 9 or 1942 Z had the authority to say don't make this or stop 10 making it. I can't answer that. 11 Q You just said you were plant manager. 12 A Plant physician. 13 Q X thought that was a misstatement. 14 MR. FEATHERSTONE: It was. 15 THE WITNESSj Did I say manager? 16 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Yes. 17 Q (By Mr, Hynes) Did anyone assist you at Monsanto 18 with regard to the evaluation process you just described? 19 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Other than the outside laboratories? 20 MR. HYNES: Yes, other than the outside laboratories, 21 A Yes. I probably had some contact with government 22 agencies at that time. 23 0 What X mean are other Monsanto employes. i A Well, I would talk to research chemists about what 24 25 their experience has been with the product in the research 22 WATER PCB-00053730 1 departments, yes. 2 I would talk to the development people to find out 3 what kindred products were being used by -- used or 4 manufactured by -- other companiesi and I would inquire from 5 the other medical directors of other companies what their 6 experiences with the particular products might have been. 7 Q Now, subsequent to your leaving Monsanto to go 8 into the Army, when you were discharged from the Array, 9 did you come right back to Monsanto as an employee? 10 A Yes. 11 Q When was that again -- March of 1946? 12 A March of 1946 13 Q When you came back to Monsanto, what were your 14 duties at that time in March of 1946? 15 A At that time, I was a formal medical director. 16 Q You were given the titlej is that correct. 17 A That's correct. 18 Q Did your duties change at that point from what 19 they were when you left Monsanto in 1942? 20 A X think so because before '42 I would probably 21 respond to calls from various plants; and after M6, I would then, on my own volition, go around to these plants and 22 23 check them out. .i 1 Q So, would you explain what this change was? 24 25 You say the plant used to call you and now you went out to 23 WATER PCB-00053731 1 the plants in *46. Would you explain what the difference 2 in duties were, specifically? 3 MR. FEATHERSTONE* Again, generally. Doctor. 4 A Generally, the duties were the same,.;'.I think it's 5 a question of who initiated the process. 6 Prior to 1942, I would wait for the plants to call 7 me, After 1946, I would go out and see if there were any 8 problems that had existed before the plants knew about it. 9 0 Were there any other duties that changed at that 10 point? 11 A You mean right in 1946 or -- 12 Q No. When you began formally as the medical director 13 in March of 1946, that first year, were there any other 14 changes in duties? 15 A I don't have a job description that was given to 16 me in 1946, so I can not say what was written down. I 17 feel -- 18 MR. FEATHERSTONE* All he wants is to the best 19 of your recollection. 20 A (Continuing) Well, with the exception that I would 21 be available for answering customer inquiries about the 22 safe use of our products in a more formal maimer -- in 23 other words, the development people and the sales personnel '1 24 would know at least that there was a Doctor Kelly in the 25 general office who had an office and a secretary and a 24 WATER_PCB-00053732 1 telephone# whereas when I was the part-time physician at 2 the Quaeny Plant these people wouldn't know 1 existed. Q (By Hr. Hynes) Now# after your first year back 3 at Monsanto in 1946# what subsequent changes occurred >;4 in your job and your duties? 5 A Prom then until 1975? 6 0 Prom then until the next change that you can recall 7 in your duties. 8 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Now# that doesn't make any 9 sense# Mr. Hynes. 10 If there was no change until the next change# how 11 is he going to answer the question? 12 0 (By Mr. Hynes) What was the next change? 13 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Okay. 14 A Z can't be specific about it because the job expands, 15 Q (By Mr. Hynes) This is just to the best of your 16 recollection# the change in your job# your duties# that 17 18 you felt was a significant change and when that occurred, 19 A Z don't know that what I think is significant 20 is what you think is significant# and I don't know if Z can put a particular mark on the spot in time. 21 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Doctor# I would advise you to do 22 the following: Hit for him the highlights of the changes# 23 -t if any, in your duties as medical director from 1946 until 24 the time you retired in 1975; and let's see if that doesn't 25 25 WATER PCB-00053733 1 advance the ball a little bit* Don't worry about the 2 significance to him or the lack of it. 3 A Okay. During the course of my time from 1946 4 until 1979# the duties were expanded -- i 5 MR. FEATHERS TONS s 1975. ` 6 A (Continuing) -- 1975, the duties were expanded 7 there. The contact with resaaroh people, the contact 8 with development people, the contact with sales people 9 and the contact with customer inquiries was expanded. 10 The field of industrial hygiene was just starting, 11 at that time,* and along about 1952 or something -- I am 12 not aura about tliat date -- we engaged an industrial hygienist. 13 And subsequently, then, by the time I left in 1975, we had 14 four industrial hygienists. 15 Some time along about 1960 or 1962, we engaged a 16 toxicologist in our department. 17 The duties extended, of course, with the demand 18 of the government in those later years for more exhaustive 19 testing -- by "later years", I mean the late sixties, all 20 through the seventies, up to 1975 -- so that our contacts 21 with the government, rather than being on a sporadic basis, 22 were almost all on a routine basis. 23 The duties of our department in the toxicity field 24 was expanded quite markedly, Prior to 1942 and at the 25 start of the year in 1946, all our testing was done in small 26 WATER_PCB-00053734 1 laboratories in acute types of testing; and later, we began 2 using rather exhaustive and sophisticated tests; at three 3 or four major consulting laboratories* \4 Q How, Doctor, one area of the expansion of your 5 duties related to more contact with research and development 6 people, sales people and customers. 7 Beginning in 194C, what was your contact, the form 8 of your contact, with the research and development people? 9 A It was much the same, but it was limited in scope. 10 We changed from a seventy million company to a four billion 11 dollar company in those years so that the number of compounds 12 that we had were enormously more whan we were selling 13 four billion dollars than when wo were selling seventy 14 million. It was more frequent, and it was more intent as 15 to the sophistication of toxicological techniques and 16 toxicological demands that occurred down the road. 17 Q Mow, what form did this contact take with the 18 research and development people? Did they formally refer 19 a compound under research to you? Was it informal? How 20 would you characterize it? 21 A Zt was informal at first and formal later on. 22 Q When you say it was informal at first, would you 23 explain what you mean by that? h; M 24 A They knew we were there -- "they" being the research 25 people -- and would have a product, and they would come 27 WATER_PCB-00053735 1 over end say hers is a product we think is going to be good 2 as a plasticizer, degreaser, adhesive, something like that -- 3 what do you think of it? That was the informal way. j .4 Later on -- I don't know exactly whan, X think it ; 5 was in about either the late sixties or early seventies -- 6 we started a formal procedure in which compounds that reached 7 a certain stage in either their developments or their 8 being sent out to customers was subjected to a more formal 9 type of evaluation by me. 10 Q Now, to the best of your recollection, this informal 11 process occurred up to sorafewhere in the late sixties and 12 early seventies? 13 A I could be wrong on that. That's twenty-five years 14 ago. 15 Q To the best of your recollection? 16 MR. FEATHERSTOME: He already testified he is not 17 sure. 18 Q (By Mr. Hynes) You say it was an Informal process. 19 Were there any formal procedures set up within the 20 company which required research and development people to 21 bring a compound to you for evaluation at any time? 22 MR. FEATHERSTONE: What do you mean "at any time"? 23 Q (By Mr. Hynes) At any time during this what you 24 characterize as an informal process. 25 A I can't remember that; I can't answer that. 28 WATER_PCB-00053736 1 Q Do you recall if it was a standard procedure or 2 routine procedure for the research and development people 3 to bring these compounds to you for evaluation? 4 A It was a standard procedure if the research people ' 5 were located in Saint Louis. 6 If the people were located in Springfield, Massachu 7 setts, it might not quite be that standard 8 Q Now, we are talking about prior to, say, the late 9 sixties. 10 A I am not sure if it was the late sixties. 11 Q That's fine 12 MR. FEATHERSTONE: The doctor said repeatedly he 13 can't recall that specifically, Mr. Hynes. 14 Q (By Mr. Hynes) Now, to your knowledge, if the 15 research people were in the Massachusetts plant, do you know 16 if they had any evaluations done? 17 MR. FBATHERSTONE: What does that have to do with* 18 anything in this lawsuit, Mr. Hynes? ' 19 MR. HYNES: This is a product liability case, and 20 I want to find out what research, what review of the products 21 if any with the chemicals, occurred. 22 MR* FEATHERSTONK* Which chemicals? 'i 23 MR. HYNES: We are talking about their general 24 procedures, their general practice. 25 MR. FEATHERSTONE: You do not have a lawsuit, 29 WATER_PCB-00053737 1 Mr. Hynes, that involves chemical* out of some plant in 2 Springfield, Massachusetts. You have a specific lawsuit 3 relating to a specific product and at best a specific chemical. 4 Mow, that's what we are here for. We have been here fifty minutes. I suggest you get on to issues germane to that. ;5 6 MR. HYNES: I would like to if you would stop 7 interrupting. 8 MR. FEATHERSTONE: He is not going to answer about 9 the Springfield, Massachusetts plant. Q (By Mr. Hynes) Doctor Kelly, was there any difference 10 in the procedure in the Springfield, Massachusetts plant 11 12 and that of Saint Louis in the evaluation of research 13 of chemicals in the research plant? 14 A My lawyer told me not to answer -- Q Are you represented by Mr. Featherstone? 15 MR. FEATHERS TONE: Yes, he is. 16 MR. HYNES: I am not asking you. 17 A Yes, I am. 18 Q (By Mr, Hynes) Have you retained him? 19 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Yes, he has. 20 A Yes. 21 MR. HYNES: I am not asking you. 22 A Yes, I have. 23 < MR. FEATHERSTONE: NOw, are you done playing games? 24 Get on to the questions. 25 30 WATER_PCB-00053738 1 MR* HYNESi Now, if anyone is playing games - 2 MR, FEATHERSTONE * It's what? Why don't you say it? 3 MR, HYNES; It's you. ;4 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Now go on. ;: * '5 Q (By Mr. Hynes) Doctor Kelly, the research which 6 was done in the research and development, who would 7 refer compounds to you for evaluation in Saint Louis? 8 How would that be done on a routine basis, the normal way 9 this occurred? 10 A To the best of my recollection, if people in 11 research or development had a product that was going to 12 be distributed either in a development phase or even 13 preliminary sales phase or an application phase, they would 14 come over to me and ask for information concerning the 15 safe handling of the material and whether or not there were 16 toxic properties that might need to be investigated depending \ 17 upon the use for which the compound was intended. 18 Q And would it be their initial review of the compound, 19 their own experience, as to whether or not they would 20 refer it to you -- 21 MR. FEATHERSTONE: How does he know that? 22 HR. HYNES: I am asking if he does know it. 23 MR. FEATHERS TONE: That's a different question. -i 24 MR. HYNES: I wasn't through with the question. 25 Or would it be they were required to refer all 31 WATER_PCB-00053739 I compounds to you? 2 A I can not remember how this occurred before we 3 started the actual procedure in which wa gave a form to ; 4 people and said if these occurrences are going to occur " 5 with a product, bring it over to the Medical Department. 6 I am sure there were instructions from the directors 7 of the various segments of research as to what they should 8 do to get them over to the Medical Department if there 9 were, prior to the formalitatlon of the Medical Department's 10 part. 11 Q Now, you say there was a form developed with different 12 criterion and when you should refer a compound to the 13 Medical Department. 14 Do you recall when that form was developed? 15 MR. FEATHERSTONE Objection as to the forra of 16 the question. That's not what his testimony was, Mr. Hynes. 17 THE WITNESSt What do you do, Mr. Lawyer? 18 MR. FEATHERSTONE: The question is. When was that 19 form that you testified to, whatever it contained, 20 developed? 21 A I think it'was some time in the sixties It could 22 be the late sixties. 'It could be the middle sixties. I 23 am not sure. * 1 24 0 Once you received a referral of a compound from 25 Research and Development, what would be the normal procedure 32 WATER_PCB-00053740 1 you would follow in evaluating that product? 2 A First, 1 would look at the compound. Second, 3 2 would look at the use f the compound. Third* 1 would c : 4 look at whether or not this compound was already in the 5 trade, was manufactured by someone else or used by someone 6 else. Then, I would look to see if there were toxicological 7 data on this product. Then, Z would look to see if there 8 were toxicological data needed for shipping, freight 9 classification, at cetera. 10 Then, I would make an evaluation as to whether or 11 not the data were sufficient that we could put on adequate 12 safe warning labels and adequate freight classifications; 13 and if they weren't, we would get it. 14 Q All right, now, you say, first of all, you looked 15 at the compound itself. 16 Zs this the basic chemical structure of the compound? 17 A Yes. 18 Q And the intended use of the compound, that 19 information would be given to you by Research and Development 20 or whoever referred it to you? 21 A That's correct. 22 Q Where would you get the information regarding 23 similar products that may be used by competitor^ or being 24 marketed by competitors? 25 A Z would ask those people, Does Du Pont make it? Does 33 WATER_PCB-00053741 1 Dow make it? They would may yes 2 Q They would refer that information to you. 3 Now, you also said you looked at any available 4 toxicity data. 5 What ware the sources for that data that you would 6 refer to? 7 MR. FEATHERSTONE t I think you can give him general 8 sources, Doctor. 9 A The general sources are the literature and medical 10 directors in my acquaintance. 11 Q (By Mr, Hynes) Medical directors of other organisa 12 tions that -- 13 A Yes. I would call the medio&l director of Du Pont 14 and say George, what do you know about this. 15 Q Would you also have available toxicity data that. 16 Monsanto had generated on similar compounds that they had f 17 marketed previously? 18 A Zf there were any toxicity data on Monsanto compounds, 19 it would be in the Medical Department files, 20 MR. FEATHERSTOME r Your answer is yes? 21 THE WITNESS: Yes. 22 Q (By Mr. Hynes) Now, you said that fyou also would 23 look at the data needed for shipping and labeling, /4 24 What would the sources of that data be, in general? 25 A That's confusing, Mr. Hynes. The sources of the data 34 WATER_PCB-00053742 .1 or the souroes of the requirements? 2 Q The requirements, 1 em sorry. 3 A The sources f the requirements would be railroad 4 regulations or government regulations. .. _ 5 Q And then, you said after you evaluated the data 6 you would make a determination yourself if the data was 7 sufficient for you to make a decision on the product. 8 If it wasn't sufficient, then what would you do? 9 A I would say we need to get this information. 10 0 What type of information would you generally be 11 looking for? Toxicity data? 12 A Toxicity data. 13 Q Zb there anything else that you can think of? 14 A Conceivably explosives, but 1 wouldn't get that 15 myself. 16 Q As to the toxicity data, how would you go about 17 getting that data? 18 MR. FEATHERSTONEj Zf it's not in the literature? 19 Q (By Mr. Hynes) Yes, or if the literature is 20 insufficient for you to make a decision. 21 A Zt would than be tested at consulting laboratories. 22 Q How would you yourself go about having these tests 23 made by consulting laboratories in terms oi ^ first of A`1 24 all, in terms of setting up the protocols? 25 A Z would, first of all, call the development people 35 WATER_PCB-00053743 ] and say sand me a sample * They would say how much I 2 would say give me two hundred liter* or two hundred cc's 3 or a half liter or something. 4 Than, 1 would go to the toxicological laboratory 5 and say here is a product that we are going to have to test -- 6 and at that particular time, I recall in the forties after 7 I ease back from the Service, the testing that, was done, 8 the state of the art at that particular time, was the testing 9 for acute exposures. Here, we are talking about an 10 industrial chemical. 11 If we are talking about an industrial chemical, 12 we would then have -- 1 would set up a protocol in which vc 13 subjected the animal to dropping the material in its eyes 14 to see what would happen if a worker got acute contact 15 in the eyes. We would drop it on the rabbit's skin to see 16 if it were a skin irritant. We would leave it on the 17 rabbit, a moist cloth, to see -- covered over -- to see 18 if it were acutely toxic by skin absorption. We would feed 19 it to the rabbit to determine what is called an acute 20 lethal dose or LD5Q, which is a standard term; and we may 21 or may not have run inhalation studies, acute inhalation 22 studies. i 23 Q Were those various acute tests which you just A 24 mentioned, were they a standard battery you always ran, or 25 did you pick and choose between there depending upon the 36 WATER_PCB-00053744 1 compound? 2 MR. FEATHERSTONEi Or the exposure. 3 A It depended on the compound, the type of compound. 4 For example, if you had a powder, you wouldn't ttse -- you 5'' 5 wouldn't worry about inhalation of the material* You 6 wouldn't worry about skin absorption, because powders, as 7 a rule, are not absorbed through the intact skin. 8 If it were a compound that would be used in a method 9 in which there was no great likelihood,no appreciable 10 likelihood, of worker exposure, we may or may not have run, 11 the same types of tests. 12 Q Were there any other types of toxicity tests which 13 you ran other than those mentioned which you ran on a normal> 14 routine basis? 15 MR. FEATHERSTONE : Oil industrial chemicals, Mr. Hynes? 16 MR. HYNESt Yes. 17 MR. FEATHERS TONE s In the 1940s, which is the time 18 period of his previous answer, is that correct, Mr. Hynes? 19 MR. HYNES: Yes. 20 A In the 1940s, on industrial chemicals, a routine 21 we had was that which I have described to you. 22 Q I know tills is going bad; a long way. 23 Do you recall any other types of tests which you :i 24 routinely ran in the forties at all other than the acute 25 screening test you just referred to? 37 WATER_PCB-00053745 BAYONNE. N .J. 1 MR. FEATHERSTONE On industrial chemicals? MR. HYNES* On industrial chemicals. 3 A Not routinely, no. . ; 4 Q (By Mr. Hynes) Nonroutinely, do you recall running r 5 any other types of tests on industrial chemicals? 6 A Which years? 7 Q In the 1940s. 8 A I find it hard to be sure about your time. For 9 example, I know that some time in either the 1940s or the 10 early 1950s we had a compound that was going to go into 11 baking powder so we ran what was, at that time, the usual 12 tests for an intended food additive. That was what would 13 now be called a very meager test. It consisted of feeding 14 the material for thirty or sixty days to a group of 15 animals We would run that. 16 There may have been other instances where what 17 was considered a sophisticated test at that time was run 18 on compounds. I can't think of any one except the bakin-., ' 19 powder incident. 20 Q Fine. 21 Now, in the 1950s, to the best of your recollection, 22 did your procedures change in terms of evaluating these 23 ohemioals? .' . -1 24 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Now, do you mean the protocols ' 25 as he described the acute testing protocols? PENGAO CO. 38 WATER_PCB-00053746 1 MR. Hllfli s Yes 2 MR. VBASHBBSTONEt Mhy don't you rephrase the 3 question that way, then? ' *4 MR. HYNESt You just did. . 5 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Doctor, the question is, 6 In the 1950s, were there any changes in the acute testing 7 procedures or protocols that you have just described in 8 the 1940s. 9 A We tested things the same in the 150s as we tested 10 them in the '40s. 11 Q (By Mr. Hynes) The same general acute tests? 12 A Thatfe correct. 13 Q Did you do any other types of toxicity tests on 14 a routine basis in the fifties that you did not do in the 15 forties? 16 MR. FEATHERSTONE: On industrial chemicals? 17 MR. HYNES: Y@S. 18 A NO. 19 Q (By Mr. Hynes) In terms of setting up the protocols 20 in the 1940s with these outside laboratories, were you 21 the person who made the decision as to the type of protocol 22 to follow? 23 A Z made the decision, after consulting sjfjLth the 24 toxicologists at these various laboratories. The person 25 at Monsanto who made the decision was myself, yes. 39 WATER PCB-00053747 1 Q You said earlier, I believe, that early on in the 2 testing, the acute testing of the product* -- the forties, 3 maybe the fifties, X am sot clear on that -- you said you 4 used smaller labs; and subsequently, in later years, you 5'. used larger, more sophisticated labs. - 6 A More sophisticated techniques, and the labs were 7 larger, too; but even the smaller labs were getting more 8 sophisticated. 9 Q Can you say about what the time frame would be 10 when you were into working with the larger rather than the 11 smaller laboratories? 12 A Mo, X can't. 13 Q Can you put it in a decade? Would it be in the 14 fifties versus the sixties? 15 MR. FEATHERSTONE: For industrial chemicals? 16 MR. HYNES t X am talking industrial chemicals. 17 A I can't be sure of that. Are you talking about 18 routine testing or nonroutine, more sophisticated testing? 19 Q (By Mr. Hynes) X am talking about the routine 20 testing. 21 A We didn't need to go to the larger laboratories 22 with the routine testing. 23 MR. FEATHERS TONE t That answers the question, sir. ' "4 24 Q (By Mr. Hynes) Mow, in selecting these laboratories. 25 did you have the authority at Monsanto to choose whatever PENGAD CO.. BAYO NNE. N.J. 40 WATER PCB-00053748 1 2 3 .J .5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 - 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 laboratory you fait was appropriate for the tasting? A Yes. Q Zn your selection of these laboratories, did you make it a routine practice, yourself, to visit the laboratories, inspect their processes, their procedures and equipment and the like? A Yes. Q Doctor, we have been talking about industrial chemicals. Would you please state what your understanding of an industrial chemical is. A An industrial chemical is a chemical that is used in industrial processes. It is not a chemical that is intended to be taken by the human organism. It is also not a compound -- you want my interpretation? Q What you understand it to be. A It is a compound used in industry, and it is not a compound that is routinely used in agriculture, and it is not a compound that is used in the pharmaceutical industry, and it is not a compound that is for human ingestion either as a food or food additive. Q World DDT or any pesticide be considered an industrial chemical, in your opinion? /' 't A It could be considered either an industrial chemical j or an agricultural chemical. I 41 WATER PCB-00053749 1 Q You stated earlier that you hired an industrial 2 hygienist# 1 believe# soma time in 1952, somewhere around 3 that year. 4 A (Witness nods.) 5 Q Prior to that time, were you the only professional A 6 in the Medical Department? 7 A If by "professional1' you exclude nurses and 8 laboratory technicians# yes# I was. 9 Q Were you the only person doing the evaluation of 10 the chemicals referred from the Research and Development 11 Department? 12 A That's correct. 13 MR. FEATHERSTONE: You mean other than the outside 14 laboratories? 15 MR. HYNESs Agaxn# just inside Monsanto. 16 Q (By Mr. Hynes) And who was the industrial 17 hygienist hired in 1952, as you recall? 18 A Again# I am not sure on the date. The first 19 industrial hygienist we hired was Elmer Wheeler. 20 Q And when he was hired, am I correct that the two 21 of you would be the people working and evaluating these 22 chemicals referred from Research and Development? 23 A No. / 'i 24 Q You were still the only person that was working 25 on it? 42 WATER_PCB-00053750 1 A I was still the only one. 2 Q How, prior to Mr. Wheeler*e being hired, can you 3 give an estimate of how many compounds you would have 4 evaluated a year prior to Mr. Wheeler's being hired and 5 subsequent to when you came back from the Army? 6 A I haven't the foggiest idea. 7 Q Do you recall, prior to Hr. Wheeler's being hired, 8 ever evaluating a compound and sending it back to Research 9 and Development saying it should never be marketed because 10 it's too dangerous? 11 A I am sure I sent it back and said it's too dangerous 12 for this application. 13 Q And by "this application", you mean the intended 14 use that they told you was the intended use of the product? 15 A That * s correct. 16 MR* FEATKERSTOixT: Again, Doctor, wait until he 17 completes his question, no matter how long it takes him 18 to get it out. 19 Q (By Mr. Hynes) And again, I am talking the period 20 prior to when Mr. Wheeler was hired, between March of 1946 21 until he was hired in the early fifties. 22 What was the focus of your evaluation of these 23 chemicals? Was there any main focus to you r evaluation -- and what I moan, for example, problems with Monsanto 24 ' 25 employees in manufacturing it or problems with customers 1 43 WATER_PCB-00053751 1 using it# problems of it being exposed to the food chain 2 A You have asked me three questions 3 Do you want to break those down one at a time? 4 Q I naan# what was your focus at the time in your 5 valuation? 6 MR FEATKbRSTQNL: Do you understand that? 7 Q (By Mr. Hynes) Your main focus of evaluating these 8 chemicals'. 9 A I honestly do not understand the question. 10 Q When you evaluated these chemicals prior to 11 Mr. Wheeler being hired, did you evaluate the toxicological 12 problems for Monsanto employees? 13 A Yes. 14 Q Did you also evaluate the toxicological problems 15 to customers? 16 A Probably toxicological problems, yes. 17 Q Did you also evaluate the product in terms of 18 any exposure to the food chain? , 19 20 A What year was this? Q This is prior to Mr. Wuaeler being hired# between 146j 21 and '52# roughly. 22 MR. FEATHERSTONEt Are we on industrial chemicals# 23 Mr. Hynes? 24 MR. HYNESJ Yes. ,; "1 f 25 A First of all# Mr. Hynes# nobody talked about food j t*ENGD CO. 44 WATER_PCB-00053752 1 chains in 1942 and 1945 so I really couldn't evaluate that 2 as fax as the food chain was concerned. 3 Q (By Mr. Hynes) 1 am talking between *46 and '52, 4 A Even '46 and '52, nobody was talking about food 5 chains, 6 Secondly, our industrial products were not supposed 7 to be used as a food so you did not evaluate theru as far 8 as being used as a food. 9 Q So, based upon the intended-use information you 10 received from the research and development people, the 11 main focus would be on the exposure to a worker in a plant -- 12 either Monsanto's or a customer1*, plant -- is that correct? 13 A Yes. 14 Q Do you recall any industrial chemicals where the 15 intended use, where you were given information on the 16 intended use, wire re you were led to believe it would get 17 outside the plant, either Monsanto^ or the customer's? 18 MR, FEATHERSTONE; Any product manufactured by 19 Monsanto and shipped to a customer got outside of Monsanto's 20 plants. 21 What are you talking about? 22 THE WITNESS* Would you rephrase the question or 23 repeat it? 24 MR. FEATHERSTONE* Rephrase it. ' 4 25 Q (By Mr. Hynes) Do you ever recall receiving any 45 WATER PCB-00053753 1 information whore, other than transportation, the intended 2 use of the industrial product would get outside of the 3 workplace? 4 A Yes. ' ;; 5 Q An industrial chemical? 6 A Yes. 7 Q Do you recall in what situations that woulu be? 8 A Yes. Suppose you had an antioxidant that you put 9 in a rubber tire. It would be on every automobile in 10 the United States. 11 Q In a situation like that, I take it there wouldn't 12 be any toxicity problems on rubber tires outside of the 13 workplace? 14 A If you talk about 1942, yes. If you talk about 15 1975, I am sure some government person would say there is 16 a toxicity problem. 17 Q We are just talking *46 to '52. 18 A Okay, then. 19 Could I have a five-minute break? (Short recess.) 20 I 21 Q (By Mr. Hynes) Now, when Mr. Wheeler was hired 22 in the early fifties, what were his 'duties when he began? 23 A industrial hygiene evaluation of onr plant atmosphere ' 'i 24 0 Thau was at all the plants? 25 A Yes. 46 WATER_PCB-00053754 1 Q Would you briefly explain what those duties 2 entailed? 3 A He would walk in there and see if there were 4 hazards of chemicals or physical hazards -- in other words, 5 whether there was noise, whether there was adequate lighting, 6 excessive noise, adequate lighting, ^excessive dust, any 7 toxic fumes or any kind of fumes, chlorine, God knows what -- 8 and he would make evaluations and/or analyses of the 9 amount. 10 Q Was that part of your duties, also? 11 A Ho. Z was not trained in industrial hygiene. 12 Q But he reported to you and -- 13 A That * s correct. 14 Q -- and if he had any recommendations, he would go 15 through you? 16 A Correct. 17 Q When he began in the early fifties as the industrial 18 hygienist, did he have any duties in evaluating compounds 19 from research and development as you were discussing you did? 20 A No. 21 Q Old he subsequently take on any duties of that nature? 22 A 1 don't know what you mean by t>f that naturen. 23 He took on duties of an administrative type. Bp saw that 24 the people's bills were paid and that the samples got 25 there, but he did not set up the protocols or evaluate the 47 WATER PCB-00053755 1 protocols. 2 0 Now, you evaluated the protocols? and subsequent to 3 the test being run by the outside laboratories, you would : 4 evaluate the results? : 5 A Which time are we talking about, now? 6 Q Right after Mr. Wheeler began. 7 A Yea* 8 Q Did he subsequently take on any duties of evaluating 9 the results from outside labs? 10 A No. 11 Q And his duties as to the outside labs were as you 12 characterised them -- administrative -- making sure they 13 got all they needed and the bills were pain and tilings of 14 that nature; is that correct? 15 A Yes. 16 Q Did he have any other duties that you recall with 17 regard to the outside laboratories' evaluations or testing? 18 A Well, he had some in a sense that ha would be ir 19 a position to discuss Monsanto's findings, my evaluations, 20 with the industrial hygienists or other companies. i I 21 Q Now, in your evaluation of the compounds we just 22 discussed in the period, say, 1S46 to 1952, in the period subs e~ 23 quent to when Mr. Wheeler was hired through thm1 date, I ' :4 24 think you said, in the early sixties when you hired a 25 toxicologist, during that period of time prior to hiring ] I 48 WATER_PCB-00053756 1 the toxicologist, did the procedure that you used in ' 2 evaluating these compounds change in any manner? 3 A I am state I got smarter. I moan, I don't know 4 what you mean by "the procedure". : 5 Q Well, the procedure you used to evaluate -- other 6 than your, obviously, acquiring mere knowledge of the 7 toxicological properties of chemicals enC testing -- the 8 procedure for evaluating it, that you discussed previously, 9 MR. FEATHERSTONEt You mean how the product was 10 tested and by whom and the fact that ha had responsibility 11 for the protocols and the analysis of the results? 12 Is that what you are talking about, Mr. Kyr.es? 13 MR. HYNES: Right. 14 A No, it didrtt. 15 Q (By Mr. Hynes) Did the types of tests -- tile 16 ophistication of the tests may have changed, but the 17 procedure you used in evaluating the compounds remained 18 the same? 19 A Correct. 20 Q Now, am I correct that, the researcn and development 21 group of Monsanto would develop what they thought was a 22 good product for Monsanto, submit tae information for 23 intended use to you, and you would do your evaluation and 1 24 make whatever recommendations you would make back to 25 research and development. 49 WATER_PCB-00053757 1 One your Initial valuation was completed, did 2 you ever get that same compound referred back to you again 3 for subsequent evaluation prior to it being marketed? 4 A Yes. x 5 Q Was that a routine procedure up through 1960? 6 A If there were an additional use for the compound, 7 if it's intended use had changed, if information had occurred 8 that I found out about it or the research people found out 9 that there were additions to the toxicological information 10 available, it would be reevaluate^. 11 MR. JOHN: Read that answer back, please. 12 (Whereupon, the previous answer was read bade 13 by the court reporter.) 14 Q (By Mr. Hynes) And what form would your reovalus.ti.on 15 take if a situation like this occurred? 16 First of all, did you have a routine manner of 17 handling this subsequent referral? 18 A Well, the routine manner is if something croppe.- 19 up that I found about it -- or the research people found 20 out or the sales people found out -- then we would get 21 together and reevaluate it. 22 Q And if you needed subsequent tests, you would 23 contract out for them? ,/ . "i 24 A That's correct, or subsequent warnings 25 Q Warnings -- you mean warning labels on the product 50 WATER_PCB-00053758 1 or instruction manuals which would contain warnings that 2 would go to the customera? 3 A Something of that sort. 4 Q Ware the battery or the types of acuta teats which 7., 5 you would routinely order from outside laboratories, were 6 they the same general battery of tests in the fifties 7 that you had, that you stated .you had used in the forties? 8 MR. FEATHX<STONE: Would you read the question 9 back, ma'am? 10 (Whereupon, the previous question was read back 11 by the court reporter.) 12 MR. FEATHERS TONEt It's already been testified that 13 the tests got more sophisticated. 14 HR. HYNEd: I am not talking about the sophistication. 15 The same general types of tests. The LD s -- 50 16 (Whereupon, there was a telephone interruption; 17 and upon returning to the record, the following 18 proceedings were hadi) 19 Q (By Mr. Hynes) The question is, The types of acute 20 testings which were routinely done on compounds, was there 21 any difference in the generic types of the tests between 22 the forties and the fifties? 23 MR. FEATHERSTOKEs Putting aside any changes in A 24 sophistication? 25 MR. HYNES: Right. 51 WATER PCB-00053759 ] A There were refinements in amounts of animals used. 2 There would be that change, but the basic protocol of testing 3 for acute oral dose, acute skin lethal dose, acute Bkin 4 irritation, acute ocular irritation or injury, mnd on v'\ ' 5 occasion acute vapor inhalation were basically the same. 6 Q And again, in the fifties, tne focus of your 7 evaluation was the possible toxicity problems in the worker 8 place of tiie industrial chemicals; is that correct? 9 A In thie worker place of ours and oui customers. 10 Q Right. Were there any types of inauctrial 11 chemicals in which, in the fifties, routine subacute or 12 chronic type tests wereordered? 13 A In the fifties? 14 Q Yes. 15 MR. FEATHERSTONI i Taese are industrial chemicals? 16 MR. HYNES: Yes. I said industrial chemicals. 17 MR. FEATHERSTONE; I an* sorry. 18 A I can't be sure of the date -- whether it's the 19 fifties or sixties -- but I know there were times when we 20 ran more than acute screening tests. 21 Q And do you recall what the circumstances would oe 22 when you would run those other than acute screening tests? 23 MR. FEATHERSTONE: I think he is asking'for general 1 24 circumstances. 25 A Yes. We would understand that there would be the 52 WATER PCB-00053760 I possibility for acutat for repeated exposure to a worker; 2 and we would run a repeated test, either an inhalation 3 test or a skin test. 4 q What do you raean by a repeated inhalation or skin 5 test? 6 A You would repeat the same procedure that you do 7 in the acute test using a smaller dooe c_uhar on tuo skin 8 or a smaller dose inhaled and do that tor a period of 9 days or a couple of weeks. 10 Q Is there a general name for those 'types of tests/ 11 A I guess you could call it subacute. 12 Q How would that information come to you that there 13 was a possibility for repeated exposure to workers? 14 A Either from the development people, the sales 15 people, or the customer if it's in regard to use with our 16 customers or from Mr. Wheeler as far as our own workers 17 would be concernea. 18 Q Would it be a proper character!zation that these 19 would be products which have already been in use for a 20 while and additional information came in that exposure 21 like this was occurring -- it wasn't anticipated originally -- 22 would that be a proper characterization? 23 A Not necessarily. Conceivably, although* Z can not ' :4 24 think of an instance at the present time, we might be having 25 a compound that we would envision repeated contact of a S3 WATER_PCB-00053761 1 worker and de novo, a new operation 2 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Even before marketing? 3 THE WITNESS: Before marketing. 4 Q (By Mr. Hynes) In addition -- again, wa are talking 5 up through 1960 --- in addition to tiie industrial chemicals -- 6 A Througa 156 j or the sixties? 7 Q Through 13 i- 0. 8 A Nineteen six o? 9 0 Right. 10 MR. FEA'InjjrtSTOhL: The decade of u.iO 13d0s. 11 THE WITNESS: All right. 12 Q (By Mr. Hynes) Did the Medical Department, did you ] 13 also evaluates chemicals other tnan those w.JLch we 14 characterized as industrial chemicals? 15 A Yes. 16 Q Would it be the same basic routine that yon would 17 follow in evaluating, other than industrial chemicals 18 that you testifies -- that you used for evaluating indue-trial 19 chemicals? 20 A I don't know what you mean by 'routine". Are you 21 talking routine in the protocols of testing or my relationship 22 with the product and the development people? Which are 23 we talking about? J '' v'i 24 Q Your relationship with the product and research 25 and development people. 64 WATER_PCB-00053762 1 A Yes. My answer is yes. It is the same evaluation -- 2 I naan, the same relationship between the Medical Department 3 and the research and/or development or sales organization. 4 Q The main difference, again, would be the intended 5 use of the product would lead you to require additional 6 testing than those that you required in industrial 7 chemicals? 8 A In addition, there are -- the answer is yes -- 9 but in addition, sometimes some government regulations 10 came in at this time. 11 MR. FEATHERSTONEt That affected testing? 12 THE WI THi-Sn: Yes. It would affect the demands 13 that they would ask for. 14 Nov/, I am not sure if that was in the decade of 15 the fifties, but I know it was in the decaae of the sixties 16 and much more in the seventies. 17 Q You testified previously that some time in the 18 early sixties -- 1960, 1962 -- you thought you hired a 19 toxicologist for your department,* is that correct? 20 A That's correct. I know we hired one, but I do 21 not know the date. 22 Q I understand that. 23 Who was the toxicologist? 24 A Doctor William Hunt. f' ' " %i 25 Q Prior to Doctor Hunt being hired, were you and 55 WATER PCB-00053763 1 2 h: 3 4 '4 ;"5 I. 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 , 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Mr. Wheeler the professional people within the Medical Department other than, again, the nurses and the lab technicians that you would have? , A It all depends. We were professional, hut we had different duties. I said Mr. Wheeler did not do the toxicological -- Q I understand. A I think ve may have had another industrial hygienist by 1960. Q But other than that, you had no toxicologist prior to hiring Doctor Hunt? A Doctor Hunt was the first toxicologist v:e hired, yes. Q Am I correct in assuming that when he was hired he would assist you in evaluating these chemicals referred from research and development, thi toxicity of them? A Thatfs correct. Q And prior to that time, you had tU sole responsi bility for doing those evaluations? A I still had the responsibility afterwards. The responsibility wot mine, but Doctor Hunt helped me in evaluating it. t Q Do you recall what prompted you to hire a toxicologist * at that tine 7 A Ye 3. 5G WATER_PCB-00053764 1 0 What were the reasons? 2 A There were two reasons -- one, the area of 3 toxicology was becoming more sophisticated fend 1 needed a 4 specialist in that field; two, the demands of the government 5 were becoming so much greater that I could not carry out 6 the supervision of the outside laboratories in the way 7 that I was doing it before. So, I needed somebody else to 8 do that, to assist me in doing that, because I still did it 9 at times. 10 Q And even after Doctor Hunt started work for you, 11 you were the person responsible for making the final 12 decision on the evaluations; is that correct? 13 A Tnat's correct. 14 Q Do you recall at the time that you hired Doctor 15 Hunt how many chemicals, on an average, you would be 16 evaluating each year from research and development? 17 A No, 1 don't Mr. Hynes. 18 Q Did your procedures for evaluating the compounds 19 in the sixties change in any way other than the sophistication 20 of the tests? 21 A If I understand you correctly, you are saying, 22 again, the relationship of myself to the approval of the z,'i . 23 intended use or the possible hasard of the inta^ed use of 24 a product and how that information was given back to the 25 marketing or development people? 57 WATER PCB-00053765 1 Q Yes. 2 A It did notchange. 3 C Did the normal or the routine battery of the teste 4 which you would contract with the outside laboratories, 5 did that change in the 1960s, again, other than the 6 sophistication of the types of tests? 7 h In industrial chemicals? 8 0 Yes. 9 MR. FE/fTLhRSTONE: May I hear tuae question again? 10 (Whereupon, the court reporter reu^ bach the 11 following question and answer: 12 QUESTION. "Did the normal or the routine battery 13 of tests which you would contract with the outside labor 14 atories, did that change in the 1:jcC-s, again, other than 15 tire sophistication of the types of tests? 16 ANSWER: "In industrial cheiaicals? 17 QUEST 101.; `Yes.") 18 MR. FEATHERSTONE: This is acute testing you ax, 19 talking about? 20 MR. HYNES; Yes. 21 MR. FEAThERSTOh'E: Other tiian tire sophistication 22 of the tests, were those same types of tests run? 23 A Right. f 1 24 Q (By Mr. Hynes) Did you add any additional types 25 of tests in the routine battery you used for evaluation -- 58 WATER_PCB-00053766 1 for example, add any subacute or chronic tests of a 2 routine nature? 3 A Not routinely, 4 Q Again, whan would a subacute or an acute toxicity 5 study be run? In what situations? 6 MR, FEATilHROTOlJZ s You mean subacute or chronic 7 tests? 8 MR. IIYNRJ; Yes, 9 MR. FGA'ZIhRSTOHEt Would you rephrase it? 10 Q (By Hr, Hynes) When would you -- in what situations 11 would you order a 3ubaaute or chronic toxicity test in 12 your evaluation? 13 MR. FBATKnRSTOiiL; On industrial cnemicals? 14 THE WITJR33: On industrial chemicals? 15 Q (By Mr. Hynes) Righu. And this is in the six eras, 16 now. 17 A Tha whole decade of the sixties? 18 Q If fehoro is any point in time in tne sixties 19 where there was a change, I would appreciate knowing 20 when that change occurred, 21 MR. FEiATHlRSTOlSE2 I believe his question is seeking 22 the circumstances under which you would order a subacute 23 or chronic test of an industrial chemical during the 1960s, ; e, A1 24 Is that fair, i>Ir. Hynes? .- 25 MR. ilYNEC : Right. BAYONNE. N .J. 07002 59 WATER_PCB-00053767 1 A We would order a chronic inhalation test in the 2 sixties if we thought individuals were exposed repeatedly 3 to what could be potential, harmful concentrations of any .4 of our products and they could not be controlled by ordinary 5 means. We would have to find out whether or not any 6 possible ham was existing. 7 As far as chronic toxicity tests on an industrial 8 chemical, that was a relatively rare occurrence because, 9 I am sure -- I believe you are referring to chronic oral 10 tests -- because industrial chemicals, by their very nature, are not intended to be ingested repeatedly by humans -- or 11 12 animals, for that matter -- and that is the reason, the 13 only reason, to run a chronic feeding on an industrial 14 chemical if it .were not a food additive or a nonintentional food additive or a food itself. 15 16 Q Did it ever become routine in the 1960s to order either subacute or chronic tests? 17 A On industrial chemicals? 18 19 Q Tes. 20 A NO. Q Subsequent to hiring Doctor Hunt in the early sixties, 21 again during the decade of the sixties, were there any 22 other professional people hired for your staff?' 23 i A We hired a second toxicologist. Doctor Hunt died -- 24 and I am not sure of the year, I thought it was the lato 25 60 WATER PCB-00053768 1 sixties or early seventies, I am not sure -- and we hired 2 another toxicologist either before or after he died, I 3 don't know when. And I am not sure if we hired him in 4 the sixties or in the first part of the seventies 5 Q But other than that? 6 A In the sixties, you are talking about in the decade 7 of the sixties? 8 Q Right. Did you hire any other toxicologist other 9 than this person you were referring to? 10 A No. 11 Q Did you hire any other industrial hygienist? 12 A Yes. We hired, certainly, another one; and Z 13 would imagine that was in the 1960s. We hired a fourth 14 industrial hygienist, but I am not sure if that was in 15 the 1960s or the 1970s. 16 Q And did any of these people, other than Doctor Hunt 17 and this other toxicologist who may or may not have replaced 18 him "" 19 A We did replace him. 20 Q -- did anyone else assist you in evaluating the 21 compounds from a toxicological standpoint? 22 A Yes. 23 Q Other than the outside labs? 1 24 A Yes. ' ' ' 25 Q Who were they? 61 WATER_PCB-00053769 1 A Govenuatat people 2 0 tod how did they Assist you? 3 A I would go up and talk to some of the people in .4 the Food and Drug Administration or the various other 5 government agendas and say what do you know about this 6 oompound,here is what we know about it, and what do you 7 know about it, and they would give me their thoughts, 8 Q They would assist you by giving you additional 9 information that you might not have, by sharing information? 10 A Not only sharing information, but sharing expertise. 11 Q Did they ever assist you in establishing any 12 protocol for testing? 13 A Industrial chemicals? 14 Q Yes. 15 A No. 16 Q So, the protocols ware still your responsibility, 17 working with the outside labs? 18 A Correct. 19 Q In your evaluation -- and again, we are talking -- 20 well, not again--at any time in the forties, fifties, or 21 sixties, how would you characterise your evaluation; 22 and X am thinking in terms of a risk-benefit type of analysis. 23 Is that the type of analysis you would make? .i A I don't know what you mean by "risk-benefit''. 24 25 Q What I mean is; Here are the toxicological risks 62 WATER_PCB-00053770 1 in this product Tarsus here are the benefits to either 2 public or Monsanto or Monsanto8s customers? and then, 3 you would evaluate i that risk worth taking if given . 4 certain precaution. - 5 Was that the type of analysis you did? 6' A Wo, it was not. 7 X do not understand your phraseology. 8 Q Is your answer, then, that you don't understand 9 the phraseology or that is not the type of analysis that 10 you did? 11 A The answer ist X do not understand your 12 phraseology. 13 Q What I mean by a risk-benefit is that you would 14 determine what, if any, risk there is in marketing the 15 product, given the intended use. 16 MR. FEATHERSTONEt Medical risk, you are talking 17 about? 18 MR. HYNESi Right. 19 A Wh-buh 20 Q (By Mr. Hynes) Would you also evaluate the 21 potential benefit of that product to Monsanto or to the 22 public prior to it being marketed, and then with that 23 additional information -- 4- 24 MR. FEATHERSTONE Why dorft you stop the question 25 there. 63 WATER_PCB-00053771 1 0 (By Mr. Hynes) Would you? 2 * %ether or not it was a benefit to Monsanto never 3 entered into any thought as to how I would evaluate a 4 product as far as risk was concerned. If it made Monsanto 5 a million dollars and there was a risk entailed, Z wouldn't 6 approve it. 7 Q , your evaluation was as to the risk -- 8 A Correct. 9 0 -- and your responsibility was to inform research 10 and development or commercial development, whoever would 11 have referred the compound to you, these are the risks, 12 and you would make the determination from a medical 13 standpoint what the risks are, what precautions should fcs 14 taken with the products; is that correct? 15 A That's correct, Mr. Hynes. 16 There are two areas of risk. One is the inherent 17 properties of the compound, and the other is the way it is 18 being used and what controls can be applied to the way it 19 is being used. 20 Q And as to what controls can be -- 21 A -- applied -- 22 Q -- applied to the use -- 23 A Correct. ` H 24 Q --would you make a recommendation as to those contola? 25 MR. FEATHBRSTONE: Prom a medical standpoint? 64 WATER PCB-00053772 1 THE WITNESSt From a medical standpoint, yes 2 0 (By Mr. Hynes) And it is essential or was 3 essential for your being able to do a good medical 4 valuation of the product to know the intended ttse of 5 the product; is that correct? 6 A That's correct. 7 0 After you determined a protocol for a particular 8 test and selected a particular lab to run these tests, 9 once the results came back to you for evaluation, what 10 was your procedure in evaluating the accuracy of the work 11 done by the outside labs? 12 A Zn the first place, Mr. Hynes, we did not wait 13 until the report came back to us to evaluate the -- did you 14 say the efficiency or the accuracy? 15 Q Accuracy. 16 A -- the accuracy of the laboratory. 17 Either Doctor Hunt -- in the sixties? 18 Q Right. 19 A Either Doctor Hunt or myself would visit the 20 laboratories at various times during the course of the 21 experiment and see what was going on and then get an 22 appreciation of their facilities, their personnel; and 23 we also had an appreciation of what their $*ne*l relationship 24 was as far as the other people who used them aj&d as far as 25 what the government did as far as accepting their reports. 65 WATER PCB-00053773 1 Q So, it was a constant evaluation of the laboratory 2 itself? 3 A Correct. 4 Q And this is the procedure you normally used in 5 evaluating these outside laboratories and their work? 6 A All those factors come into play, yes. 7 (Whereupon, there was a short break; and upon 8 returning, the court reporter read back the 9 previous question and answer.) 10 Q (By Hr. Hynes) Doctor Kelly, are you familiar 11 with the Aroclor products of Monsanto? 12 A Yes. 13 Q Pydraul is one of those Aroclor products ? is that 14 correct? 15 A I am not sure if that is a correct description of 16 it. 17 Pydraul is an Aroclor based -- there are several 18 Pydrauls,by the way. There could be a dosen, two doacn 19 Pydrauls. They may have an Aroclor base. They may have 20 other additives along with it. They may have other 21 compounds in it. 22 Q What is your understanding of what the Aroclor 23 compounds are? i 24 A Aroclor compounds are chlorinated byphenyl. 25 Q Are the terms "chlorinated byphenyl" and "chlorinated 66 WATER_PCB-00053774 1 diphenyl" used synonymously? 2 MR. FEATHERS TONES By whom? 3 MR. Brassi By anyone. .4 MR. FKATHERSTOME * By anyone? How can lie answer -- 5 well -- 6 A Chlorinated diphenyl was, I believe, the tern 7 used first; and it has been changed to byphenyl as a more 8 correct terminology * But I would say that anybody in 9 Monsanto, if it's a byphenyl or diphenyl, they meant the 10 same thing. Z must also say when you use the word "Aroclors", 11 12 there are other Aroclors that are not chlorinated byphenyls. 13 There are chlorinated terphenyls. There are a 14 bunch of chlorinated materials that are not byphenyls. Q What is the difference between a chlorinated byphenyl 15 16 and a chlorinated terphenyl? 17 A One phenyl ring. 18 Q You san terphenyl has three and byphenyl has two? 19 A Zt has two. Q Do you recall your first contact with any Aroclor 20 compounds in your position as Medical Director? 21 A Yes. 22 23 Q And about when was that? / 1 A Zt was probably -- you said Medical Director -- 24 now, because if you want to change that to -- 25 67 WATER PCB-00053775 1 MR. FEATHERSTONE* He said Medical Director 2 Q (By Mr. Hynes) I said Medical Director. 3 Since you have been working at Monsanto, beginning .4 in 1936, I believe, what was your exposure professionally 5 to Aroolors? 6 A Some time in the late 1930s -- 1936, 1937 and 1938 -- 7 when I was going over the files of various plants, Z cane 8 across reports of toxicological studies done by a predecessor 9 company of Monsanto and the history of soma individuals who 10 developed a skin rash from contact from Aroolors. The skin 11 rash left, was cleared up. iI j12 Q Did you, at any point, evaluate the toxicity of any 13 Aroclor? 14 A Yes. 15 Q When was the first time you recall doing such an 16 evaluation? 17 A It probably was in 1937 or 1938. 18 Q Do you recall under what circumstances you were 19 called upon to do that? 20 A Yes. There was quite a series of newspaper articles 21 about the occurrence of ohloracne in workers who were 22 exposed to chlorinated napthalene, and there was alleged 23 to be a small, a certain percentage of Aroolor,' chlorinated i 24 byphenyl, used at the same time. 25 Q What did you do with this information? 68 WATER_PCB-00053776 1 A Hell, the information was that there was going to 2 be a meeting on Aroclors -- not Arodors -- on this problem . 3 So, I went to the meeting. 4 Q Was it a problem in a Monsanto plant? 5 A Wo, 6 Q It was in some outside plant? . 7 A That's right, 8 Q And the meeting was with Monsanto personnel? 9 A No. The meeting was with the people who sold them 10 the product, who sold -- they took this company ~ this company took our byphenyl, mixed it with their chlorinated 11 12 napthalene, and sold it to another company; and the meeting 13 was between all three of those people. 14 Q And do you recall what occurred at the meeting? 15 A Yes. It was discussed, and studies were decided 16 to be done on it. 17 Q Did Monsanto commission anystudies? 18 A Monsanto supported, in a small way, the studies 19 that were decided upon at this time. Q Do you recall what the results of those studies were? 20 MR. FEATHERSTONE* On what product, what compound? 21 MR. HYNES i He is just talking about the studies 22 that came out of this meeting, and I want to know what the 23 results of the studies were as best he recallsJ 24 MR. FEATHERSTONEs I guess that includes the 25 69 WATER_PCB-00053777 1 chlorinated naphthalene 2 THE WXTOESSs Chlorinated napthalene, chlorinated 3 byphanyl* of various ohlorinations. 4 Q (By Mr. Hynes) Right. 5 A. Yes. Z recall what came out of that. It was 6 reported in the literature. 7 Q Who did the study? Do you recall what laboratory? 8 A Professor Drinker at Harvard. 9 Q And this was published in the late thirties some time? 10 A '39, '40, around that time. 11 Q Do you recall if Monsanto did any subsequent 12 toxicity test of their Aroclors subsequent to that 13 Drinker study? 14 A Yes. 15 Q Do you recall when that occurred? 16 A It occurred right afterwards with Drinker because 17 in the first place, Professor Drinker -- 18 MR. FEATHERSTONE: He just asked when it happened. 19 Q (By Mr. Hynes) Would you explain what the study 20 was. 21 A Yes. It was a study of our chlorinated byphenyl. 22 This was done because the previous study was not chlorinated 23 byphenyl. It was given to Professor Drinker bjj>' a different 24 company and said this is Monsanto's chlorinated byphenyl 25 so we wanted to repeat the study with our chlorinated byphenyl, 70 WATER PCB-00053778 1 and that'a what we did 2 Q Do you recall what the results f that study were? 3 A Yes. 4 0 What were they? 5 A Doctor Drinker was very surprised that our material 6 was not nearly as toxic as the material he tested that was 7 purported to be chlorinated byphenyl. 8 Q Do you recall which Aroclor it was that was the 9 subject of Doctor Drinker's study? 10 MR. FEATHERSTOREs The second study, now? 11 MR. HYNESt The second study. 12 A One was sixty-five--one was twelve sixty-five, and 13 one was twelve sixty-eight. I don't recall which was the 14 first. 15 Q And the last two numbers would refer to a percent 16 of chlorine? 17 A Chlorination. 18 Q Zn your position as Medical Director, beginning in 19 1946, do you recall the first time that you commissioned 20 any toxicity studies on any Aroclors? 21 A Z don't recall the first time. 22 Q You do remember that studies were conducted; is 23 that correct? 24 A Yes. J I 25 Q Do you recall if any were conducted in the forties? 71 WATER PCB-00053779 1 A I can't remember, Mr. Hynes. 2 MR. FEATHERSTONEt When you My "studies", you 3 are referring to laboratory studies, X take it? . 4 MR. HYNESi Right. 5 Q (By Mr. Hynes) Do you resell evaluating any 6 products or compounds referred to your department from 7 research and development as to marketing new products 8 which would contain Aroclors? 9 MR. FEATHERS TONE: Could you read that question 10 back, please. 11 (Whereupon, the court reporter read back the 12 previous question.) 13 A Yes. 14 Q (By Mr. Hynes) Do you recall Pydraul being one 15 of those products? 16 A Yes. Remember, now, there are various Pydrauls 17 that we are talking about. 18 Q Z am talking about Pydrauls which contained Aroclors. 19 A Yes. 20 Q Do you recall what the Pydral fluids, what their 21 intended use was? 22 A Pydraul fluids, yes. 23 Q What was their intended use? A They were used as hydraulic fluids, 1 24 25 Q Do you recall approximately when you first received 72 WATER_PCB-00053780 1 2 3 *,.4 i5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 - 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 a referral from research and development on a Pydraui product containing Aroclore? A I can't be exact about the date, Mr* -Hynes. Q To the best of your recollection. : A Probably some time from 1955 to 1965. I an not sure. That's twenty-five years ago. I can't squeeze it down any closer. I am sure there are reports around when we did it. q i understand. I am looking for your best recollection. Do you recall if there were more than one Pydraui product which you evaluated? A I am sure there were. Q To the best of your recollection, do you believe that you followed the normal routine that you followed in evaluating compounds referred from research and development? A No. Q I am not sure what the *now means -- no, you don't recallr or no, you did not follow the normal routine. A Yes, I do recall; and no, I did not follow the routine. Q What routine did you follow? A We added another test. Q And what test was that? / i A That was the Inhalation of fumes of Pydraui dropped on a hot metal surface. 73 WATER_PCB-00053781 1 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Was that the only change? 2 THE WITNESS: That was the only change. 3 Q (By Mr. Hynes) Do you recall why that change in ,.4 the testing occurred? 5 A Yes, because the hazard we envisioned with the 6 hydraulic fluid was there could be a rupture of a line 7 and these hydraulic fluids are used on the various machinery 8 that are hot, and if this came out -- and we knew that at 9 ambient temperatures the Pydraul was not particularly 10 toxic from the acute point of view -- we did not know what 11 would happen either to it or the decomposition products 12 at elevated temperatures * 13 Q And where did you get the information regarding 14 this potential hazard? 15 MR. FEATHERSTONE: You are talking about a rupture 16 in a line? 17 MR. HYNES: Right. 18 A I am sure I got it from the development people. 19 Q (By Mr. Hynes) Did you, yourself, have any firsthand 20 knowledge of hydraulic systems? 21 A Outside of brakes? I expect I might have seen 22 pictures of them and things in our annual reports, but 23 firsthand knowledge -- Z did have firsthand Jcncirledge of i 24 hydraulic fluids in an airplane, but these were not Pydraul. 25 Q So, it's fair to say you got most of the information 74 WATER_PCB-00053782 1 you needed from research and development rather than your 2 3 ,4 5 6 7 8 9 own experience; is that correct? A Yes. 0 And other than the inhalation test# you conducted the normal evaluation you did on any other chemical products in the industrial chemicals area, as best you can recall? A Yes. But as I recall# Z think we had some longerterm inhalation studies on Aroclor compounds themselves, and I do not know -- I think that was in the time frame s 10 of 1955 to 1965 -- and we used our knowledge of that to 11 evaluate a potential exposure to Pydraul. 12 G To the best of your recollection, the Pydraul 13 testing, your department's evaluation occurred in the 14 1955-1965 time frame;is that correct? 15 A Yes, I think so. 16 Q Do you recall more than one product being evaluated, 17 Pydraul products being evaluated# in that time frame? 18 A Yes. 19 Q Do you recall why you evaluated, the reasons for 20 the evaluation of the different products? 21 A Different formulations. 22 Q And do you recall the types of different formulations-- 23 and what I mean, was it a higher chlorinated A^oolor, is . S l 24 that the type of differences# or was there some other 25 difference? 75 WATER_PCB-00053783 1 A I don't recall, but 1 thought that some of the 2 Pydraul had phosphate esters in them along with the 3 Arodors. Now, I could be wrong on that, but 1 do remember .4 that there were a half dozen Pydraul names, and 1 do not 5 know whether they referred directly to changes in the 6 chlorination of the Aroclors, It may be varying contents 7 of Aroclors. It may be other things in the Pydrauls. 8 Q But you do recall more than one evaluation? 9 A That's correct. 10 Q As best you can recall, what were the intended 11 uses of Pydraul as you understood them from the Research 12 and Development Department? 13 A As a hydraulic fluid, 14 Q As best you can recall, what would that entail? 15 MR. FEATHERSTONEs What do you mean "what would 16 that entail"? 17 Q (By Mr. Hynes) What uses are made of the hydraulic 18 fluid? , 19 A Hydraulic fluid is intended to transmit pressure 20 from one object to another object. 21 Q Do you recall, at any time, receiving information 22 from anyone within Monsanto that the Pydraul fluid had 23 been getting out of the workplace into the nvjiromnant? 24 A What year? 25 Q Any time. BAYONNE. N.J. 76 WATER_PCB-00053784 ] Do you recall receiving Information of that nature 2 from anyone in Monsanto? 3 A Yes. 4 Q Do you recall approximately when you received 5 that information? 6 A Well, the most recent was about six months ago. 7 Q Oh, no, the first time you received that information. 8 A I don't recall when the first time was, no. 9 You will also have to be more precise in getting 10 outside into the environment. Do you mean by that in 11 a landfill or going out a chimney or what do you mean? 12 Q In the broadest sense, initially, going out a 13 chimney, a smokestack, getting into the sewer, going into 14 a river, a stream or lake, or to a landfill or being just 15 dumped onto land outside of a plant. 16 A I would say that that information, as best as I 17 recall, was some time around 1969. 18 Q Do you recall how you received that information 19 and what that information was? 20 A Yes. 21 Q Could you please state what your recollection is. 22 A This is going to be involved. 23 Q All right. M 24 A Some time in the late 1960s, there was a report 25 in the foreign newspapers, some foreign newspapers -- 77 WATER_PCB-00053785 1 MR. FEATHERSTONEt Walt a minute, Doctor. Before 2 you go on, the question asked for your knowledge about 3 Pydraul getting out of a workplace through the various 4 Mans that he described. 5 A Wall, with that delineation, I may have to say that 6 Z received information at about that time that 7 polychlorinated fcyphenyls were present, may be present, 8 in certain environments outside the usual workplace, and 9 I would say, at that time or subsequent to that, I 10 believe, then that somebody -- that there were discussions 11 as to what these polychlorinated byphenyls may be. And 12 at that time, I think the question was brought up that it 13 may have been Pydrauls. 14 Q Let's go back and talk, first of all, about PCBs -- 15 and if I may, I will use PCB rather than Aroclors. 16 A Rather than polychlorinated byphenyls? 17 Q Right. 18 A Because -- . 19 Q Fine, correct me. 20 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Wait a minute. You are using 21 PCBs now in place of polychlorinated byphenyls. You have 22 got an understanding of that. 23 Go ahead and answer. 1 24 Q (By fir. Hynes) Now, as to the question on PCBs, I 25 think you started to answer when was the first time you 78 WATER_PCB-00053786 o u { 1 2 3 i 4* V - 5 6 7 8 9 learned that there were reports of PCBs being out in the environment beyond a workplace. A PCB, polychlorinated byphenyls, not Monsanto's polychlorinated byphenvls. It was some time, I believe, in 1968, five or take a year. Q And what do you recall hearing or being informed of with regard to PCBs in the environment at that time? A I was informed that a Swedish analytical chemist 10 was reported in a Swedish newspaper to have used some new 11 analytical techniques and discovered that PCBs were present 12 in the ecosystem -- ecosystem meaning the environment.. 13 Q Do you recall how you learned of that information? 14 A Yes, as I believe that somebody in one of our 15 European installations wrote in to the headquarters in 16 Saint Louis and said here is what this man alleges to have 17 found. 18 Q Did you yourself take any action after receiving - 19 that report? 20 A Yes. 21 Q And what action did you take? 22 A I am sure we had a meeting -- I know we had a meeting 23 I don't know the time -- with analytical people', with our 24 toxicologists, with our development people, with our 25 marketing people to find out what is this man talking about 79 WATER_PCB-00053787 1 because the newspaper reports did not say PCBs, 2 polychlorinated byphenyls. They had polychlorinated 3 biphenols. That was what the newspaper clipping that we 4 got said. rB I said let's find out what this man is talking 6 about, so I asked what do you know about this, and they 7 said we don't know anything, let's find out. 8 Does that answer your question about what action 9 I took? 10 Q And did you direct anyone to find out what he was 11 talking about, or were you involved in someone being 12 directed to do that? 13 A No and yes. Z didn't direct anybody. I was 14 involved. 15 This was an analytical problem. 16 Q What do you mean by an analytical problem? 17 A This man is saying he has found something which 18 the newspaper called polychlorinated biphenols, but the 19 assumption is also being made by other means that it's 20 polychlorinated byphenyls -- that he is using a technique 21 that is more sophisticated than the Monsanto people had. 22 So, the problem was if he had really found this. It was 23 an analytical problem to decide on the validity of Ms i 24 finding. 25 Q What subsequently occurred after this meeting where 80 WATER_PCB-00053788 1 someone was directed to get more information? 2 A They got more information. 3 0 And what information did you get? 4 A They -- meaning Monsanto? . 5 Q Yes, Monsanto. 6 A They got some of his ideas about his analytical 7 testing. It did not seem that this problem could be 8 resolved by correspondence from the United States to Sweden 9 io at some .time in the late sixties, a delegation or -- 10 not a delegation -- some of our analytical peopla went 11 over to talk to this particular individual. 12 Q Did Monsanto subsequently verify the findings of 13 this Swedish person? 14 MR. FEATHERSTONE: What do you mean -- verify the 15 particular samples that he analyzed? 16 MR. HYNESj No. Verify that there were PCBs 17 in the ecosystem. 18 A Subsequently, Monsanto accepted the fact that there 19 were PCBs in the ecosystem. I can't tell you at what 20 particular date they accepted that -- whether that was 21 done on the basis of other workers or whether that was 22 done on the basis of refinement of the Swede's technique 23 by our people. Our people finally, at some date -- I don't ''i 24 know when, whether that was 1969 or 1970 -- had developed 25 an analytical technique that could pick up PCBs in quantities 81 WATER PCB-00053789 1 that could not have bean picked up previously. 2 Q (By Mr, Hynes) So, in other words, the analytical 3 techniques for detecting PCBs was refined subsequently to . 4 where Monsanto felt that findings using these particular 5 techniques ware accurate? 6 A Subsequent to what? 7 Q Subsequent to the Swedish study. 8 A Yes. 9 Q Do you recall approximately what yoar that would 10 have been? 11 A No, I don't. That's an analytical problem; that 12 w&sn't mine. 13 Q Do you recall at any point being informed by analytics 1 14 people at Monsanto that they accepted the technique as 15 being valid or a modification of that technique as being 16 valid? 17 MR. FEATHERSTONE: You have a compound question. o o s. 18 Q (By Mr. Hynes) I assume that the analytical , 19 people modified the original techniques used by the 20 Swedish scientist? 21 A Correct. 22 Q Were you informed subsequently that this modified 23 technique was capable of detecting PCBs in the Environment? -i 24 A I was informed that it was capable of picking up 25 PCBs in animal tissue. I can not tell you whether they told 82 WATER_PCB-00053790 1 me that it was capable of being picked up in the environment. 2 I don't know. 3 0 Subsequent to your first learning of this reported ,4 .5 finding in Sweden, were you involved in any action by 1 ' Monsanto to evaluate their products which contained PCBs | 6 to determine if those products were getting into the 7 environment? 8 A Would yon say that again? 9 (Whereupon, the court reporter read back the 10 previous question.) 11 A I lost you from the bottom line to where you 12 started. 13 Q (By Mr. Hynes) Subsequent to your receiving 14 knowledge of this reported finding by tha Swedish scientist 15 A How subsequent? 16 Q At any date subsequent -- did Monsanto take any 17 actions to evaluate their PCB product lines to determine if 18 these products were getting into the environment? 19 A That would have been a function of the analytical 20 department. I do not believe that was a function of mine, I 21 to evaluate it. 22 0 Do you have any knowledge if that was done? 23 A I don't have direct knowledge of #ws that it i 24 was done although -- the Medical Department was not the one , I 25 responsible for finding out if this material was out there I PENGAD CO .. BAYONNE. N .J. 33 WATER_PCB-00053791 I in the ecosystem. 2 Q What department would have had that function? 3 A The analytical section of the research group of 4 what was at that time called the organic division. 5 Q And did anyone in that division ever inform you 6 of the results of any of these evaluations that they ran? 7 A I can't remember if they did or not. 8 Q Did you ever subsequently learn that PCEs ware 9 identified in the ecosystem in the United States? 10 A Yes. 11 Q How did you learn that and when? 12 A Well, I think X learned that by talking to members 13 of the analytical group who said, I think, there are some 14 PCBs out there or found out there. 15 16 17 18 , 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 MR. HYNES: Would you repeat that answer, please. (Whereupon, the court reporter read back the previous answer.) Q (By Mr. Hynes) Do you recall who told you that and/or in what circumstances you learned that? ' HR. FEATHERSTONE: You mean learned that somebody in the analytical group thought there were PCBs out there? MR. HYNESt Right. A If anyone told me, it was Doctor Robert Keller who was head of the analytical group. 1 Q Do you have any recollection about when that PENGAD CO .. BAYO NNE. N.J. 84 WATER_PCB-00053792 1 occurred? 2 MR. PRATHERSTONE: He already stated 1969, 3 approximately. 4 A Give or take a year, 1969-1970. 5 Q (By Mr. Hynes) What did the Medical Department 6 do with regard to this new information that PCBs were in 7 the environment? Did the Medical Department take any action 8 with regard to that? 9 MR. FEATHERSTOME: Are you basing this on what 10 Doctor Keller stated to the witness, because the witness -- 11 MR. HYNES: No. I don't want what Doctor Keller 12 stated. 13 At some point, am I correct, at some point there 14 was a concern within Monsanto that PCBs may be in the 15 environment; is that correct? 16 A That* s correct. 17 --Q {By Mr. Hynes) With regard to that concern. 18 did the Medical Department take any action with regard to 19 PCBs? 20 A Yes. 21 Q Do you recall when the first action of any type 22 occurred and what your department did? 23 A The first action was relatively shortly after -i 24 we found out that it was true and validated that there 25 were PCBs in the ecosystem. Then, we decided let's analyze 85 WATER_PCB-00053793 1 this and see if there is any harm to the presence of this 2 PCB being in the ecosystem. 3 Q And how did you go about evaluating whether there 4 was any harm? .5 .A We evaluated it by trying to discover which PCBs 6 there were, where in the ecosystem they were, and whether 7 or not this would be a hazard in potable water or food 8 for humans, drink for humans. 9 Q How did you go about doing that, evaluation? 10 MR. FEATRFRSTONEt Which one? 11 Q (By Mr. Hynes) All right, did the Medical 12 Department have any involvement in determining what the 13 PCBs were in the environment? I take that to mean the 14 chemical structures of the PCBs found in the environment; 15 is that correct? 16 A We had no involvement in finding out which 17 PCBs were in the environment. 18 Q That would be the analytical department; ie that 19 correct? 20 A That's correct. 21 Q Did the Medical Department have any involvement 22 in determining where in the ecosystem the PCBs were or 23 would be found? -J ' . ,1 24 A No, sir. We had no analytical capability in our 25 department. 86 WATER PCB-00053794 1 0 Do you recall If anyone in Monsanto attempted 2 to determine where in the ecosystem PCBs were or might be 3 found? 4 A I can't recall whether they did or not* 5 Q Do you recall ever receiving any information 6 regarding the location of the PCBs in the ecosystem -- to 7 clarify that, inside Monsanto or outside sources? 8 ME. FEAT7TEHST011E; That's obviously compound. 9 Why don't you break it down, Mr. Hynes? 10 Q (By Mr. Hynes) Inside Monsanto. 11 A I don't know if Monsanto people, analytical 12 people -- I do not recall whether they told me we found 13 PCB samples in various places in the ecosystem. I can't 14 recall that. 15 Q Do you recall if you ever received such information 16 from any source? 17 A I can recall that Monsanto people who were 18 analytical chemists and capable of analyzing reports told 19 me that it appears that these PCBs are really present 20 in the ecosystem, that enough people have found them and 21 validated that is a true fact. 22 Q Do you recall about when you received that 23 information? Would it, again, be 1969-1970? / 24 A 1969, somewhere around there. 25 Q Did the Medical Department evaluate whether the 87 WATER PCB-00053795 1 PCBs were a hazard/ I think you Bald, in potable water 2 / 3 or in food for humans -- I am not clear on that/ first of all. . 4 MR. FEATHERSTONE: What's the question? 5 Q (By Mr. HYNES) Did the Medical Department 6 evaluate whether or not PCBs were a hazard in water? 7 A Yes. 8 Q How diu you go about doing that evaluation? 9 A We looked at what analyses were available showing 10 the presence or absence of PCBs in the water. We looked 11 at the physical characteristics of PCEs which ware almost 12 insoluble in water and could only be present in trace amounts 13 of water. We looked at what we knew about the acute 14 toxicity of the PCBs, and we evaluated the possibility of 15 trace elements of PCBs in water and any relevance to any 16 particular hazard. 17 Q Do you recall/ in regard to your evaluation, 18 if Monsanto commissioned any specific studies to evaluate , 19 the hazards in water other than what you already had in 20 your files? o o 21 MR. FEATHERSTONEs When you are talking about ft. 22 water, are you talking about drinking water? 23 MR. KYNESi Potable water, drinking ffcer. ' .':i ' 24 A We did not initiate any studies on the basis of 25 any remote, possible or remote/ hazard in drinking water. 88 WATER PCB-00053796 1 Q It would be a fair characterization that you 2 based your evaluation upon existing literature and previous 3 studies done on the Aroclors by Monsanto? - 4 A And what was known about the physical* chemical - 5 characteristics of the compound -- it's solubility, it's 6 stability, it's persistence in nature. 7 Q Did the Medical Department evaluate any other 8 potential hazards of PCB other than potable water? 9 A When? 10 Q In the same time period -- 1960, 1969, 1970 -- 11 that we were just talking about. 12 A Yes. 13 Q What did you evaluate, what hazards? 14 A In the time frame that you referred to, the 15 question was brought up as to whether PCBa might be present 16 in food that could be eaten by humans. 17 Q Do you recall how that was brought to your 18 attention, that there was a possibility PCBs might be Ul 19 present in food for humans? z z o 20 A I am sure it was brought -- yes. o u 21 Q What do you recall? 22 A I recall that some people said that this may .i 23 be present in fish. !' 24 Q In all probability, would that have been in 25 some literature? 09 WATER_PCB-00053797 1 A Literature or newspapers. 2 Q As to PCBs presence in fish, did your department 3 evaluate that hasard? - 4 MR. FEATHERSTONE! You mean vb** effoot it might : 5 ' have? 6 MR. HYNES: Yes. 7 A If people ate the fish? 8 Q (By Mr. Hynes) Did you evaluate the potential 9 hazard of PCBs in fish? 10 A Yes. 11 C With respect to consumption by humans? 12 A Yes. 13 Q How did you evaluate it? 14 A I took what we knew about PCBs and went to the 15 Food and Drug Administration and talked to them and said 16 here is what people say they are finding in fish, here is 17 what we know about fish, what do you think wa should do 18 about this -- not know about fish, but what we know about ' 19 PCB's toxicity. 20 Q Was it you yourself who went there? 21 A I myself, and I believe also we probably had 22 one of our consulting toxicologists that I had talked to 23 before. 24 0 Do you recall who that was? ! 25 A I imagine it was Doctor Calandra who came along 90 WATER_PCB-00053798 1 with me. I imagine Doctor Hunt came along with me# tooj 2 and 1 feel quite certain 1 talked to Doctor Garth Fitzhugh 3 or one of hie people. -4 Q Would you spell that? p 5 A Garth, G-a-r-t-h, Fitzhugh, F-i-t-z-h-u-g-h -- 6 who I think was retired, but I can not -- Doctor Fitzhugh 7 was there himself, as a rule, even in 1969 and 1970 when 8 we went down and talked to the Food and Drug Administration 9 people. There were eight people there. 10 Q Was he employed by the Food and Drug Administration^ 11 A He was the head pharmacologist. : 12 Q He is the only person at the FDA that you 13 specifically recall? 14 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Doctor, please wait until 15 Mr. Hynes is done with the question. 16 Q (By Mr. Hynes) With regard to the Food and 17 Drug Administration, is there anyone else you specifically 18 remember discussing this matter with at the Food and 19 Drug Administration? 20 A 1 have to say I am not a hundred percent sure 21 that I discussed it with Doctor Fitzhugh. I certainly 22 went into Doctor Fitzhugh*s office and talked to people i 23 in the Food and Drug department and it is ay impression 24 that 1 talked to Doctor Fitzhugh at that particular time. 25 I could be wrong about it. I know I talked to him subsequent| 91 WATER_PCB-00053799 1 to that on and off about that problem. 2 Q Do you recall anyone else specifically? 3 A I don't recall their names. -4 v 15 Q I tales it you had more than one meeting with regard to PCB's presence in food, in fish; Is that correct? 6 A Quite a few, yes. 7 Q Do you recall about whon the first meeting 8 occurred? 9 A I would say probably in 1959, again, whenever ve 10 had gotten our protocol for testing PCB. 11 Q As best you can recall, What was the content 12 of your conversations or meetings with the people in 13 the FDA, in general? 14 A In general, it was this: There have been reports, 15 and it appears that it's substantiated that PCBs are in the 16 cosystem and may be getting into food for human 17 consumption. The amount of information on PCBs up to the 18 present date is that of acute and possibly coma subacute ' 19 testing, not by feeding. If it is getting into the food 20 of people, it appears to us as a manufacturer of PCB that 21 even though we didn't intend it to get into food we should 22 find out something about it and here is what we propose 23 to do, and what do you think of it. 24 And they said fine. They might have given us 25 some other suggestions to include this or to include that -- BAYONNE. N .J. 92 WATER_PCB-00053800 1 they never said take it out# but include this--and that 2 3 4 : ' ' '5 was the gist of the nesting. Q Would it be a fair characterization# basically# that you were discussing the types of protocols for tests that Monsanto intended to run on these products or on the 6 PCBs? 7 A Yes. 8 Q Do you recall what type of tests you intended to 9 run? 10 A Yes. 11 Q What types were they? 12 A We intended to run what was considered to be the 13 most elaborate tests run in toxicological thinking of 14 whatever year that was# 1969 and 1970. We were going to run chronic feeding studies at three levels in two 15 16 species. We were going to use reproduction studies -- I *o 1 17 am not sure if we were going to use them in one study or two I 18 studies. We were going to use these studies to determine o * ' 19 it in avian species# also. We were going to use teratologies'. z z 0 1 20 and mutagenic studies which were the ones that were popular o s 21 at that time. z . 22 23 Q And you can't recall wnich of the two it was? - - A The science of toxicology is a moving target 24 from 1936 when I first became acquainted with toxicology; 25 and the rules -- not the rules -- but the extent of the tests PENGAD CO. 93 WATER_PCB-00053801 1 have bean expanded. In the early -- do t g on this way? 2 HR. FEATHERS TONEt No. I think the question 3 was you don't remember which one? . 4 A (Continuing) Except all that whole barrage of ' 5 tests that I included ~ chronic feeding of two species, 6 reproductive studies in one or two species, avian species, 7 hatchability studies, teratological studies, mutagenic 8 studies -- all were done. 9 Q What was the basic purpose of these studies? 10 A The basic purpose of these studies was to find 11 out the toxicological properties of PCBs at various levels 12 in the diet to human and avian species* 13 Q In this battery of studies that we were discussing, 14 were there any particular Aroclors, any particular Aroclors 15 which were of the most concern to Monsanto or the focus 16 of these particular, the particular focus of these studies, 17 the higher chlorinated or the lower chlorinated? 18 MR. FEATHERSTONE: You have a compound question, 19 Mr. Hynes. 20 Q (By Mr. Hynes) Were there any particular Aroclors 21 which were the particular focus of these studies? 22 A Yes. 23 Q Which were they? ^ 24 A I think we picked two or probably thre#, as well 25 as I can recall, which reflect the spectrum of Aroclors from 94 WATER_PCB-00053802 1 2 3 -4 *5 moderate chlorination to high chlorination. Q What would a moderate chlorination be? A 1242, 1248 -- I don't know if these ware the ones -- whereas 1266, 1268 were high. , q As best you can recall, two or three? 6 A There were two or three Aroclors run. 7 Q If you know, would a toxicity study of a lower 8 chlorinated hydrocarbon, would the result of a lower 9 chlorinated PC3, would that result of a test like that bo 10 able to be extrapolated to a higher chlorinated PCB? 11 A No. They are two different compounds. 12 Q Now, the same would be true at a higher? 13 A To be extrapolated to a lower? 14 Q To be extrapolated to a lower, 15 A I don't know whether I answered this -- how was 16 the question phrased? 17 MR. FEATHERSTONE: We don't have a question. 18 Q (By Mr, Hynes) Would you be able to extrapolate 19 the results of a toxicity study in a higher chlorinated 20 PCB, would you be able to extrapolate those results to a 21 lower chlorinated PCB? A In a ballpark figure, which is a ballpark figure -- 22 23 which means that you couldn't be precise and say if we found i 24 the toxicological properties of a compound with high 25 chlorination -- one could not presume that those properties 95 WATER_PCB-00053803 1 could be equated to a lower one. They might be of the 2 same general order, but how specific they would be, no one 3 could tell. 4 Q And this battery of tests that we were just 5 discussing where you had the various meetings with the '6 FDA talking over the protocols, did you subsequently 1 ec 7 out contracts to an outside laboratory to conduct these 8 tests? 9 A Yes. Q 1ST, was that the laboraLory? 10 A Industrial Bio-Test, right. 11 Q Did you subsequently get the results from then? 12 13 A Yes. 14 Q As best you can recall, generally, whut were the results of those tests? 15 HR. FEATHERSTONE: Which tests? 16 MR. HYHES: Ail of then. If he recalls a specific 17 test, that's fine -- in general, whatever your best 18 19 recollection is. MR. FEATHERSTOilE: Doctor, in responding to that 20 question, I instruct you, to tlie extent you remember specific 21 results, to tie that to a specific test; and by that, I 22 mean specific animals, specific dosage, that $fjpe of thing. 23 A Okay. I know that I recall that for some Aroclors, 24 and maybe all of the ones we tested, wc found a safe, tolerablje-25 9C WATER_PCB-00053804 1 safe at ten parts per million of the dye. 2 I know we had some problems at varying levels of 3 Ar odors, and I am not sure which levels, and I am not 4 sure which one in the hatachabi1ity of eggs , 5 ' That's as much as 1 can tell you without going 6 back and reading the data. 7 q Subsequent to those studies being let out and 8 the studies being concluded, do you recall any other 9 studies commissioned by Monsanto regarding the toxicity of 10 PCBs? 11 12 A 13 q MR. FEATHERS TONE.* Before what time? Any time up to now? (By Mr. Hynes) Any time up to tnat point wher- 14 you were medical director. 15 A Yes. 16 Q Do you recall what studies were initiated &nd 17 when? 18 A Some time probably in the early seventies we 19 must have done -- we did do some work on ducks and 20 mallard ducks and grouse and something else -- I mean, 21 wiId fowl -- I believe, but I am not at all familiar with 22 those. 23 Q Would you characterize them as similar types 24 of tests as were run that we were just discussing? 25 MR. FEATHERSTONE: I object to the lack of 97 WATER_PCB-00053805 1 foundation. Ba just told you he has no familiarity with 2 those, Mr. Hynes. 3 ME. BYMESt toad back the question. 4 (Whereupon, the court reporter read back the 5 following question: 6 QUESTION: "Would you characterize them as 7 similar types of tests as were run that we were just 8 discussing?") 9 MR. FEATHERSTONE: And the objection is the lack 10 of foundation. He told you he didn't have any familiarity. 11 Q (By Mr. Hynes) Do you recall? 12 A They were not the extensive type. 13 Q Would they be more of an acute versus a chronic? 14 A No. They were probably the hatchability studies. 15 Q Were you involved in the setting up of the- 16 protocols on those studies? 17 A No -- well, yes, I believe wa -- 18 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Wait a minute. What's the 19 answer? Were you involved in the protocol? 20 A Setting up the protocol, no, 21 Q (By Mr. Hynes) Do you recall who was involvei. 22 in setting up the protocol? 23 A I think the protocol was set up by the fish 24 and wildlife people, and we just borrowed their protocol. 25 0 Were the persons at Monsanto who decided to do I 98 WATER_PCB-00053806 1 this study using the fish and wildlife's protocol? 2 A Yes. 3 Q Do you recall why that study was done? \4 5 6 A Yea. : Q Why? A Because there were reports that PCB was involved 7 in the nonhatchability of subspecies of wild fowl. 8 Q And the purpose was to see if that was, in fact, 9 true; is that correct? 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 ' 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Read back the question. (Whereupon, the court reporter read back the previous question.) A Well, the purpose -- MR. FEATHERSTOHE: Thau's a yes-or-no response. A No. Q (By Mr. Hynes) What was tne purpose? A The purpose was to see what the effect of our PCB was on what particular wild species we could obtain. Q And you subsequently received the results? A I can't answer when we gou the results. Q Did you get the results? Do you recall? A I can't even answer that. Q Do you remember what laboratory it WAS that did 4 the study for you? A No. 99 WATER_PCB-00053807 1 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Well, that's an answer 2 MR. HYNES: Do you want to break, now? 3 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Yes. . 4 (Lunch break.) 5 Q (By Mr. Hynes) When we broke for lunch we were 6 discussing some wildlife studies, I think you called them? 7 and you thought they were on hatching of eggs. 8 Do you recall about when those contracts or 9 those studies were sent out to the outside lab to be done, 10 about what year? 11 A Probably in '70 or '71. 12 Q I think you mentioned the types of tests they 13 were. Do you recall what types of tests, toxicity tests, 14 they were? Were they acute, chronic, subacute? Do you 15 recall what type of study they were? 16 A Yes. 17 Q What type was it? 18 A Hatchability. . 19 Q Could you briefly describe what a hatchability 20 test is? 21 A Yes, sir. A hatchability test is a test in which 22 you give the fowl that laid the egg certain levels of a i 23 product or the compound and see what happens tQj the clutch 24 of eggs, how many eggs they lay. 25 Q Is there any other purpose of the study other than 100 WATER PCB-00053808 1 to see how many eggs they lay? 2 A The character of the eggs, the,eggshell thickness. 3 q is there anything else that is studied, do you 4 recall? 5 A I dont recall anything else. 6 Q Do you recall what Aroclor or what PCB product 7 was utilized in this study? 8 A No, I don't. 9 0 Do you recall -- I think you answered this 10 do you recall if Monsanto ever received the results bade 11 from the outside lab? 12 A I do not recall if we ever received a report. 13 Q Would it be the normal procedure that you would 14 have received a report back from an outside lab? 15 MR. FEATHERSTONE: I object. You have asked him 16 the question directly, Mr. Hynes. He doesn't recall 17 whether he got one in this case. 18 Q (By Mr. Hynes) I am asking again. Would it be 19 the normal procedure, unless you cancelled the contract, 20 to receive a final report back from a lab? 21 A Yes, unless the test could not be completed. 22 Q Under what circumstances would the test not 23 be completed? "j 24 A When you are dealing with wildlife, they don't 25 lay eggs every day. They lay eggs once a year or twice a 101 WATER PCB-00053809 1 year at the most -- probably once a year --- and if something 2 happens to the egg laying of the wildlife you are looking 3 for, the birds that you are looking for, and you miss that particular fall or spring laying, whenever was, you will r 5 have to wait another year to be able to do it. So, I don't 6 know if that whole test was dropped some place there along 7 the way. 8 Q Now, again, we are talking about other tests 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 ' 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 involving PCB. Do you recall any other tests tnat you haven't mentioned that Monsanto contracted to have done? A No, I don't. Q Do you recall that, at 3ome poinc in the late sixties and early seventies, that letters were sent out to PCB customers of Monsanto regarding this new information about PCBs being found in trie ecosystem? A Yes. Q Do you recall if you were involved in authorizing or reviewing any of those letters? A I may have reviewed them. I can't recall whether I did or not. Q Did you see the letters tnat went out? A I saw the letters. Whether I saw thp prior to i them going out or after they were out, I can*t answer.I I don't recall. 102 WATER_PCB-00053810 1 Q Do you recall if anyone, other than yourself, 2 in the Medical Department was involved in reviewing or -if 3 supplying information to go out in tnose letters? 4 A If I weren't involved, I don't think anyone else 5 would have been involved. 6 Q Do you recall whose responsibility it was to 7 send out those letters? 8 A No, I don't. 9 Q Do you recall who decided that those letters 10 should go out to the customers? 11 A I don't know what particular individual or 12 individuals decided that it was important to send a letter 13 out at the time you mentioned. 14 Q Do you recall what particular group of the 15 company or division of the company it would have beer, 16 that would have made that decision? 17 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Object to the form of the 18 question. 19 THE WITNESS: Would you repeat it, please? 20 (Whereupon, the court reporter read back 21 the following question: 22 QUESTION: "Do you recall what particular group 23 of the company or division of the company it would have 24 been that would have made that decision?") 25 A It would have been someone, some group, in the I i 103 WATER_PCB-00053811 1 Organic Division which vras the name of the group that 2 manufactured the PCBs. 3 Q And you don't recall any involvement of you or 4 anyone in your department in authorizing or Wxpplying ' *5 information to these letters. 6 MR* FEATHERSTONE: Asked and answered. 7 A I don't recall it. 8 Q (By Mr. Hynes) 1 believe you stated earlier 9 that labeling for products that were marketed was part 10 of your responsibility in evaluating the chemicals, what 11 type of warnings or what type of cautionary instructions 12 should be on the labels; is that correct? 13 A Correct. 14 Q Now, do you recall in general -- we are talking 15 the period, say, 1968, 1969, 1970 -- that any changes were 16 made on the labels of PCB-bearing products? 17 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Which period of time, now? 18 MR. HYNES: 1968 to 1970. 19 A 1 can't recall for sure, Mr. Hynes, if there 20 were any changes made. 21 Q (By Mr. Hynes) Do you recall if there were 22 changes made on the labeling of PCB-bearing products at A 23 any time in the early seventies? . *" ; 1 24 A I can't recall that. 25 Q If there were labeling changes, would it have 104 WATER_PCB-00053812 1 come through your department? 2 A I am sure it would have, yes. If there were 3 changes for safe handling of the material, it would have 4 come through our department. ' ' 5 Q Do you recall any changes on labeling of any PCB 6 products which related to adding in a cautionary warning 7 to customers to prevent the PCBs from getting into the 8 ecosystem, into the environment, words to that effect. 9 A No. 10 Do I recall what? 11 Q Do you recall doing it, or do you recall changes 12 of that nature being made in the labeling of PCB products? 13 A I do not recall doing it, and I don't recall 14 whether or not I saw labels with that change on it. 15 Q If there were labels with that change on it, 16 would they have to have come from your department or would 17 there have been another department at Monsanto which 18 would have authorized that change? 19 A The answer is no, it would not have to come from 20 my department; and two, it would have to come from another 21 department. 22 Q Do you know specifically of any other department 23 which had the responsibility for changing the labeling other 24 than your own? 25 A I did not have responsibility for changing labels. 105 WATER PCB-00053813 1 I had responsibility for changing the warning or caution 2 3 , \4 ' , "5 data on the labels. Each division had their own labeling group, and I would give my input into this particular group. Q And your input would be in regard to toxicity prob lems, cautionary instructions for workers and the like? 6 A From the health aspect, yes. 7 Q Do you recall if, at some time in the late sixties 8 and early seventies, a decision was made at Monsanto 9 to stop marketing certain products containing PCts? 10 A Say that over, please. 11 Q Do you recall, in the late sixties or early 12 seventies, a decision being made by Monsanto to stop 13 marketing certain products which contained PCBs? 14 A No, sir. 15 Q Do you recall a decision xa that same time frame 16 to reformulate some PCB products? 17 A I do not know if the time frame is correct, 18 whether it was in '70 or '71 or later on. 19 Q But at some point you do recall that there was 20 a decision made at Monsanto to reformulate some of their 21 PCB products? 22 A Yes, sir. ? i 23 Q Again, in the 1970s, was there a decision made at 24 Monsanto to terminate marketing some PCB products, at any 25 point in the 1970s, do you recall? 106 WATER_PCB-00053814 A For the product uses. 1 2 Q You are saying that uses for the products, some 3 uses of the products were terminated? 4 A Were advised we would not sell for certain uses. 5 Q Do you recall when that decision was made? 6 A Again, in the first part of some of tae earlier 7 ^years of the 1970s. 8 Q Do you recall what products or wnat uses thesu 9 were that the products were restricted? 10 A Predominantly plasticizers. Q What are plasticizers? 11 12 A A plasticizer is a chemical that, is put into 13 one or more resins to give it pliao^lizy in other 14 words, most plastic products, if you wane, to have suppleness, 15 if you want to have streuchadility, if you want to have other 16 products, you put in a plasticizer. 17 Q Do you recall any otnei uses waere sales were 18 restricted with PCB products? 19 A No, I don't. 20 Q Were you involved in making the decision to 21 restrict the use of any PCB products? A No, sir. 22 23 Q Was anyone in the Medical Department involved in 24 the decision of that nature? 25 A No, sir. 107 WATER_PCB-00053815 1 Q Were you, or anyone to your knowledge in the 2 Medical Department, asked to provide advice or information 3 regarding any PCB products with regard to these restrictions 1 $ of usage? ,. 5 A 1 think -- you will have to define what you 6 mean by "advice", Mr. Hynes. 7 Q Someone wants the knowledge that you have as 8 to the toxicity of PCBs, as to the results of various tests 9 that you have had ongoing with regard to potential toxicity 10 in the food chain, things of that nature. 11 MR. FEATHERSTONE: I believe, Doctor, he is 12 searching for whether or not the Medical Department had 13 any input into the people who made the decision on the 14 restriction of the uses. 15 Is that correct, Mr. Hynes? 16 MR. HYNES: Yes. 17 THE WITNESS: Well, his last statement used 18 the term "food chain"; and I can not answer that question 19 with all those ramifications. 20 MR. HYNES: 1 was just giving examples. 21 MR. FEATBERSTONE: The question. Doctor -- and correct me if I am wrong, Mr. Hynes -- is whether yor 22 i 23 or anyone in the Medical Department provided information to the people wno made the decision to restrict the usage of the PCB products? 108 WATER_PCB-00053816 1 A Yes, sir. 2 Q (By Mr. Hynes) Who provided the information? 3 A I did. f; V 4 Q What information was provided? . : S 5 A The toxicity data that we were establishing. 6 Q Who did you provide this information to? 7 A Presumably, the marketing and development people. 8 Q Why did you say "presumably"? 9 A Because I do not know if I sent it to the research 10 group, to the development people, to the sales people. I 11 just don't know. 12 Q You provided the information to these people. 13 Other than providing the information, what other 14 involvement did you or the Medical Department have in the 15 decision to restrict the use of PCB products? 16 A Hone. 17 Q Do you recall ever attending any management 18 ' 19 meetings where you were asked to give your opinion on toxicity or the health aspects of PCBs? 20 A Yes. 21 Q And again, we are talking about a time frame 22 of the early seventies -- is your answer still yes? 23 A Yes. .i , :1 24 q Do you recall how many meetings took place? 25 A Three or four. PENGAD CO.. BAYO NNE. N.J. 109 WATER_PCB-00053817 1 Q Do you recall when the first one was? 2 A In 1970 to 1973. 3 Q Am I correct, "three or four" means you can't ;"4 say, give an exact date for any of them; is that correct? 7 -S A Correct. 6 Q Other than yourself, who attended these meetings? 7 A Whichever -- I would imagine Doctor Levinsksas 8 may have attended. 9 Q If he weren't a toxicologist in your department? 10 A Correct. 11 Q And who else? 12 A I do not know if Mr. Wheeler did or not. 13 Q Anyone else that you recall at these meetings? 14 A No, from the Medical Department. 15 Q Now, other tnan from Medical Department, wnox.; 16 do you recall was at these meetings? 17 A One meeting that 1 recall, there were members 18 of the Corporate Management committee. 19 And one meeting, I recall was members of the 20 marketing, production and development, a meeting of the 21 Organic Division, if that was the name of the product 22 group at that time. 23 Q Any other people that you recall? y, 24 A I don't recall anyotaer people. 25 Q What is the CorporateManagement Committee? 110 WATER_PCB-00053818 1 A It was the group that ran the company. 2 Q The Chairman, President, executive officers, 3 of that nature? 4 MR. FEATHERS TONE s I object. j, - 5 A People of that nature. I do not know if it was 6 all those people. 7 Q (By Mr. Hynes) Would it be fair to say these are 8 the people that -- 9 A -- manage the company, yes. 10 Q That's fair enough. 11 Do you recall if you had more than one meeting -- 12 whether you attended more than one meeting with the 13 Corporate Management Committee regarding the restriction 14 of sales? 15 A That's the only one I recall. 16 Q Do you recall, other than the members of the 17 Corporate Management Committee, were there other people 18 from other divisions of the company there other than the 19 Medical Department? 20 MR. FEATHERSTONE: He already answered that, 21 Mr. Hynes. 22 MR. HYNES I I don't think he has. 23 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Yes, he has. fie told you there ^, , 24 were some members from the Organic Division, if that was 25 the name of the product group, that were there. Ill WATER PCB-00053819 1 MR. HYNES: I understood -- 2 A There was a separate meeting# but there were 3 some members of the Organic Division# the management of 4 the Organic Division, along with the Medical Department in "-5 the Corporate Management meeting. 6 Q (By Mr. Hynes) Any other persons or groups that 7 you recall? 8 A Not that I recall. 9 Q To the best of your recollection with regard to 10 PCBs# what was discussed at that meeting? 11 A As well as I can recall, the question discussed 12 was the presence of PCBs, the possibility of the presence 13 of PCBs# in the ecosystem and if this were true# what should 14 Monsanto do about it. 15 If it could be established, then this presence 16 of PCBs in the ecosystem, indeed, would have some adverse 17 effects. 18 MR. HYNES: Read back the answer, please. 19 (Whereupon, the court reporter read back the 20 previous answer.) 21 Q (By Mr. Hynes) Do you recall if any decisions 22 were made at that meeting with regard to whether PCBs were, ' 23 in fact, in the ecosystem? ^ 24 A I do not know of any decision made at that meeting. Q Subsequently, was a determination made that PCBs 112 WATER_PCB-00053820 1 were in the ecosystem? 2 MR. FEATHERSTONE: By whom? 3 MR. HYNES: By Monsanto. 4 A I do not know if Monsanto determined *the presence '5 of PCBs in the ecosystem. 6 Q (By Mr. Hynes) Do you know if Monsanto ever 7 accepted the fact that PCBs were present in the ecosystem? 8 A Monsanto accepted the fact that PCBs were alleged 9 by some to be present in the ecosystem, yes, sir. 10 MR. FEATHERSTONE: He already testified this 11 morning, Mr. Hynes, that at some point in time Monsanto 12 did, in fact, accept the fact that PCBs were identified 13 in the environment. 14 MR. HYNES: He did say tnat this morning. 15 Q (By Mr. Hynes) At this Corporate Management 16 Committee meeting, was the Medical Department assigned any 17 tasks with regard to anything dealing with PCBs? 18 A No specific tasks. 19 Q Any general tasks? 20 A No general tasks. 21 Q Were you asked to do anything? 22 MR. FEATHERSTONE: At tnis CMC meeting? i 23 MR. HYNES: Yes. ^ 24 A I think we were asked to go back and we will let 25 you know if you should do anything. We weren't given any 113 WATER_PCB-00053821 1 assigned job at that particular meeting. 2 Q Do you know if, at that meeting, any decision 3 was made to restrict the uses of PCBs at that point? 4 A Not while I was present in the meeting, and I 5 do not know if the meeting kept on after I left. 6 Q Subsequently, did you find out that such a 7 decision was made to restrict uses at that meeting? 8 A Yes, sir, -- not at that meeting -- if that 9 decision were at that meeting --the decision was made by 10 Monsanto at some point -- I don't know if that was the 11 meeting that caused the decision to be made. 12 Q The first restriction of uses that you recall 13 was as to plasticizers, is that correct, restricting the 14 use of PCBs for plasticizers? 15 A It was not only plasticizers. It was what could 16 be termed open uses, and plasticizers was, by far, the 17 majority. There may have been smaller uses which I do 18 not recall, but plasticizers was the major element. 19 Q Can you explain what you understand the meaning 20 of an "open system'' to be. 21 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Is this a phrase you are 22 using? 23 THE WITNESS: I said "open uses". ^ 24 MR. HYNES: I am sorry. 25 A Well, I can explain that by explaining what a 114 WATER_PCB-00053822 1 closed system is since an open uses everything else but 2 f . 3 that. Q (By Mr, Hynes) That's fine. . i 4 A A closed system is a system in which the material S' 5 is supposed to be inside containers and/or pipes during its 6 use. 7 Q So, an open system is everything other than that? 8 A Yes. 9 Q Do you recall if this restriction of use of PCB 10 products, restricting the open uses as you termed it,if 11 that decision was made subsequent to this Corporate 12 Management Committee meeting? 13 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Ha already testified he doesn't 14 know whether it was made at that meeting or whether it 15 16 17 18 ` 19 was made at a later time, Mr. hynes. MR. HYNES: 1 didn't say at the meeting. Q (By Mi. Hynes) Was it subsequent to the meeting, to the best of your recollection -- MR. FEATHERSTONE: But if he doesn't know whetner 20 it was made at the meeting or subsequently, how can he 21 answer the question other than what he told you? 22 THE WITNESS: Repeat the question, Mr. Hynes. 23 Q (3y Mr. Hynes) Was the decision made to restrict .1 24 the use of PCB products to an open system made at that meeting 25 or after that meeting? *F.NGAO CO 115 WATER_PCB-00053823 1 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Object to the form of the 2 question as baseless. 3 I would have her re-read it back to you? and if 4 you can understand it, you can answer it. .. 5 (Whereupon, the court reporter read back the 6 following question: 7 QUESTION: "Was the decision made to restrict 8 the use of PCD products made at that meecmg or after that 9 meeting?") MR. FEATHERSTOME; Just answer cue question. 10 THE WITNESS: Read it again. 11 12 MR. HYNES; Let me just give you the question 13 again. 14 Q (By Mr. Hynes) Either sousequent to or at 15 that meeting, the decisio/i was made not to use PCD products 16 for open system uses ? is that correct? 17 MR. FEATHERSTONE: I object to tne form of the 18 question. He has used the word "open uses'. 19 MR. HYNES: Open uses. 20 MR. FEATHERSTONE; Repnrase it with the proper 21 terms, Mr, Hynes. Q (By llr. Hynes) Do you understand the question? MR. FEATHERSTONE: There is no question. U MR. HYNES: I wasn't asking you a question, Bruce. Q (By Mr. Hynes) At that CMC meeting, either at that 116 WATER_PCB-00053824 1 meeting or subsequent to that meeting, was there a decision 2 made to restrict the use of PCB products to open uses? 3 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Do you follow that? .4 THE WITNESS: I am not sure that I got exactly 5 what I would be saying yes or no to. 6 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Off tiie record. 7 (Whereupon, discussion was had off the record.) 8 Q (By Mr. Hynes) Either at that meeting or 9 subsequent to that meeting of the Corporace Management 10 Committee, Monsanto made a decision to no longer sell 11 PCB products for open system use; is tnat correct? 12 MR. FEATHERSTONE: There nas been no definition 13 of the phrase "open system11. 14 MR. HYNES: Open uses. 15 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Court reporter, if yc~ strike 16 the word "open system use " and puL in "open use1', will 17 everybody agree to it? 18 MR. JOHN: Why don't you use "nonclosed use" 19 because he already defined that. 20 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Doctor Kelly, the question 21 is this: Either at the Corporate Management Committee 22 meeting or afterwards, was a decision made by Monsanto i 23 to restrict the use of PCB to closed system application? 24 THE WITNESS: Yes, sir. 25 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Mr. Hynes, was that the 117 WATER_PCB-00053825 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 question you were trying to get? MR. HYNES j That's fine. Q (By Mr. Eynes) To the Lest of your knowledge, were there any further restrictions in the use of PCB products subsequent to that decision? ' A Yes, sir. Q Do you recall when that occurred? A Yes, sir. Q When was that? A Some tire in the 1975s when the government restricted it -- or 1977s. Q Do you recall what that restrict:'on was? MR. FEATHERSTONE: Objection, relevancy. THE WITNESS: Do I ar.rver? ftp. FFATFERSTCITj Yc" I* the government warts to know what it did/ tell hir. A I thin1' ft y'ar the same restriction we put or after the meeting. They restricted it tc closed uses. 0 (By Mr. Hynes) Any other restrictions? A I don't know of any ethers. 0 Nov?, we are going bad:, again, to the early 1970s. I believe you stated that there were `some PCB ,i products which were reformulated ir that late 1969-1970-1971 time period , is that correct? i I 1.10 WATER_PCB-00053826 1 A Yes, sir. 2 Q Do you recall which products were reformulated? 3 A No, I don't. -,,4 Q Rather than specific products, do you recall the . 5 uses of the products that were reformulated? 6 A Would you rephrase or repeat tnat? 7 (Whereupon, the court reporter read 8 back the previous question.) 9 Q (By Mr. Kynes) By specific products, I meant 10 a brand name or trade name. 11 A Of what Kind of prouuccs; 12 G Of PCu-bearing products. 13 A I want to be sure about this. 14 I'Ll. rilAThZRSl'OIhi: bootor, t^e question is tm ^ -- 15 Mr. Hynes, correct me- i>. i a:; Witi,., -- you nave testif i ..w 16 tilat you don't remember specif icaliy wmcu PCu products 17 were reformulate^. Ml. Kynes wants to Know if you don't 18 know the specific products names, uo you remember the us^s 19 of tnose products for which the products were reformulated. 20 Is tnar correct, Mr . ny.uco: 21 . iitisttA'i Yes . 22 A We substituted some piouucts. .i 23 Q (Lv Mr. Hynes) What products were substituted? ~1 Do you recall? 24 25 A Wo substituted products for piastreizers. 1* WATER PCB-00053827 1 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Any others. Doctor? 2 Q (By Mr. Hynes) Any other that you recall? 3 A I don't recall. Q Now, as to Pydraul fluids, db you recall that they 4 5 were reformulated in the early seventies? 6 1 A At some time in the seventies, we came out with 7 a new Pydraul, yes, sir. 8 Q Do you recall about when that occurred? 9 A In the early seventies. I don't know when. Q Do you recall what the difference was between 10 the old and new Pydraul product that you came out with? 11 12 A I would think -- as well as -- yes, I do. 13 Q What is your recollection? 14 A My recollection is that some of the Pydraul 15 >roducts had phosphate esters in them. Whether or not that 16 was the change or not, I don't know. 17 Some of them had lower chlorinated Aroclors, 18 but I don't know whether those things went into commercial 19 practice. 20 Q What do you mean by "commercial practice"? 21 A By commercial use in sales. Q Do you recall that Pydraul was subsequently 22 23 changed to remove all PCBs from them? 24 A I don't recall that. ,A 25 Q To the best of your knowledge, the Corporate i 120 WATER_PCB-00053828 1 Management Committee would have been the group that made 2 the decision on restricting the use of the PCB products; 3 is that correct? . 4 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Objection. Lack of 5 foundation. 6 You can answer that, if you want to speculate. 7 A I don't know if it would be the Corporate 8 Management Committee or the management of the Organic 9 Division that would make that decision. 10 Q (By Mr. Hynes) But that decision was, in fact, 11 made; is that correct? 12 A Yes. 13 Q Do you recall being told or advised why that 14 decision was made? 15 MR. FEATHERSTONE: I have lost what "that 16 decision" means. 17 What does it mean, Mr. Hynes? 18 MR. HYNES: With restricting the uses of PCB 19 products that he just testified to, sir. 20 THE WITNESS: Repeat it, please. 21 (Whereupon, the court reporter read back the following question: 22 23 QUESTION: "Do you recall being told or advised i why that decision was made?") 24 25 A Yes, sir. 121 WATER_PCB-00053829 Q (By Mr. Hynes) And what do you recall? A I recall that members of Monsanto accepted the fact that PCBs would be found, might or could be found, in the ecosystem, and also that there was a belief in some areas that the presence of these compounds might affect avian species. Q Do you recall anything else? A No, sir. Q Do you recall who advised you of these consideration s? A Which considerations? Q That the PCBs would be found in the ecosystem and they might have an effect on the avian species. A There were many reports in all sorts of scientific journals. MR. FEATHERSTONE: The question is, Who in | Monsanto advised you that those were the considerations of whatever group who made the decision to restrict the uses. A I can't tell the specific person that advised me that that was the reason. Q (By Mr. Hynes) Can you tell what division or department that person or persons worked in? j A No, I can't be specific about that, bo. Q That's fine -- if you can't recall, that's fine. MR. FEATHERSTONE: Doctor, he is just testing your 122 WATER_PCB-00053830 1 recollection. If you have none, tell him. 2 THE WITNESSs Okay. 3 Q (By Mr. Hynes) Do you ever recall learning of .4 an incident in Japan where it was alleged that PCBs found 5 their way into fish oil and were eaten by quite a few 6 people? It's called the Yusho incident. 7 A Yes, sir. 8 Q Do you recall when you learned of that incident? 9 A Yes, sir. 10 Q When was that? 11 A 1968 or 1969. 12 Q What do you recall about the information you 13 received on that? 14 A Fish oil was adulterated with PCB of Japanese 15 origin in a manner that I was never sure of how it was 16 obtained, and that quite a few people cooked rice cakes 17 or something in this oil, this adulterated oil, and ate 18 this PCB fried rice cakes over a matter of several weeks 19 or several months -- I am not sure of the time frame -- and 20 developed some adverse effects. 21 Q Do you recall how you learned of this incident? 22 A No, sir. .... 23 Q Did you have any discussions with any people . 'll 24 in Monsanto concerning this incident, that you recall? 25 A I can't recall specific discussions -- obviously, 123 WATER_PCB-00053831 1 people talked about It, but 1 don't know who. 2 Q Did you take any action with regard to investigating 3 this incident, verifying any findings that nay have come 4 of that? .J 5 A No, sir. 6 Q Did anyone in Monsanto, to your knowledge, take 7 any action in that regard? 8 A They may have gotten in contact with the United 9 States Government who probably was investigating it. 10 Q But you yourself didn't have any involvement? 11 A I don't recall if I was one of the ones that did 12 it. There were two governments investigating it at that 13 particular time. 1 didn't investigate it. 14 Q Did you subsequently gain any further information 15 on the Yusho incident? 16 A Yes, sir. 17 Q Do you recall when? 18 A Yes, sir. Q When was that? 19 1 20 A Scattered data came out both in the scientific 21 literature and at meetings and in conversations with 22 various agency people over the next two or three years, 23 Q And what type of information did you'acquire? 1 24 A Information quite similar to what 1 described -- 25 that -- 124 WATER_PCB-00053832 1 MR. FEATHERSTONE: You have answered that. 2 Is there anything additionally? 3 .4 .5 6 Q (By Mr. Hynes) Anything in addition to other than what you had found out initially in the case? A With the one exception that some birth weights in fetuses were lower and that some fetuses may have had 7 skin discoloration after birth. 8 Q Did the information on that Yusho incident have 9 any effect on any decisions within Monsanto as to restricting 10 PCBs? 11 A 12 Q 13 No, sir. We didn't sell it for rice oil. No, sir. I am asking if it had any impact on any decisions. 14 A I don't know about Monsanto. 15 Speaking for myself, that didn't alter any 16 thinking of mine. 17 Q To the best of your knowledge, no one else at. 18 Monsanto? is that correct? 19 A That's correct. 20 Q Was Monsanto still marketing products containing 21 PCBs when you retired in 1975? 22 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Object to the relevancy. 23 A To the best of my recollection, I think they were. ,i 24 Q Do you recall what uses they were being marketed 25 for? 125 WATER_PCB-00053833 1 A Closed systems. 2 HR. FEATHERSTONE: Same objection. 3 Q (By Mr. Hynes) Do you recall any restrictions 4 on closed system uses? 5 A I don't recall. 6 Q And prior to your retirement, is it your best 7 recollection that the only uses that PCB product sales 8 were restricted, they restricted them from use in open 9 use; is that correct? 10 MR. FEATHERSTONE: I don't understand the 11 question. Try it again. 12 MR. HYNESi Let me try it again. I thing I have 13 a hang-up on this subject matter. 14 Q (By Mr. Hynes) Up to the time of your retirement 15 in December of 1975, do you recall any other restrictions 16 in the sale of PCB products other than those restrictions 17 that you talked about before -- that it was only sold for 18 closed system uses? 19 A I can not be specific, Mr. Hynes. I think they 20 may have put a terminal date on when they were liable to 21 be selling some things, but I don't know if that happened 22 in 1975, prior to my retirement or immediately afterwards. 23 I don't know. ' 24 Q What do you mean by the "terminal date"? 25 A We will cut you off at X period of time. 126 WATER_PCB-00053834 MR. FEATHERSTONE: You mean stop selling? 2 3 r4 :5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 THE WITNESS: Right. Q (By Mr. Hynes) For particular uses or particular customers; is that it? A At some point in time, they said we will stop, period. Q Do you recall if you or anyone in your department ever evaluated the effect of PCBs getting into the human food chain? A Would you explain to me what you mean by "getting into the human food chain"? Q Any vegetation, crops, fish, or animals which would acquire PCB and those vegetation, crops, fish or animals would subsequently be eaten by humans. Is that what you mean by food chain? MR. FEATHERSTONE: Is this in addition to the IBT testing that he already testified to? MR. HYNES: Yes. THE WITNESS: Will you repeat that? (Whereupon, the court reporter read back the following questions and answer: QUESTION: "Do you recall if you or anyone in your department ever evaluated the effect of PCBs getting into the human food chain? ^ ANSWER: "Would you explain to roe what you mean 127 WATER_PCB-00053835 1 by 'getting into the human food chain'? 2 QUESTION: "Any vegetation, crops, fish, or 3 animals which would acquire PCS and those vegetation, A crops, fish or animals would subsequently be eaten by humans.") 5 THE WITNESS: Your definition of "food chain" 6 is different than mine. Let's start off there. 7 If you say did we ever evaluate PCB getting into 8 vegetables or crops, we saw no likelihood of that ever 9 occurring. 10 Some time after 1969, the principle of magnification 11 of a compound in the food chain was brought forward. 12 MR. FEATHERSTONEs The question is, Doctor, 13 whether you did any testing or -- 14 THE WITNESS: I thought he said evaluate. 15 MR. FEATHERSTONE: -- other than the IBT test 16 to which you testified to. 17 A (Continuing) We evaluated the PCB in relation 18 to the IBT testing. 19 Q (By Mr. Hynes) Did you do any other evaluations? 20 A Mo, sir. 21 Q Did you do any literature reviews? 22 A We always kept abreast of the toxicological j 23 information in the English literature. i 24 Q Could you explain this principle of ~ you mentioned i the principle of magnification. 25 j 128 WATER PCB-00053836 1 A Yes, sir, biomagnification. 2 Q Can you explain what that is? 3 A Yes, sir. If a small unicellular organism like 4 a plankton or an algae eats a particular thing that is 5 present in very small amounts, in trace amounts, in any 6 area -- say an aquatic area ~ if it is one to ten 7 million concentration in the water and after the plankton 8 gets through eating it it gets up to be one in one million, 9 that's a magnification of ten. 10 Then, if the minnow eats the plankton, it may 11 concentrate and get up to one hundred thousand; and then, 12 if a larger fish eats the minnow, he may get up to a 13 higher level. And if an eagle eats the fish, then, he 14 may get a higher level. So, there is a magnification 15 of the concentration of the food level from the lowest level 16 of the food chain up to the highest level. 17 Q Did you or anyone in the Medical Department 18 evaluate PCBs under this principle of biomagnification? 19 A Mo, sir. 20 Q Were you familiar with any scientific literature 21 which did? 22 A You will have to -- Mr. Hynes, can you repeat 23 that last question? ` v' i i 24 When I say we evaluated, we evaluated in 25 relationship to the toxicity we have to mammals, the 129 WATER_PCB-00053837 1 mammalian species, which are as close to the human spades 2 as we could get at that particular time as far a the 3 toxicological art was concerned. We evaluated that in .4 relationship to the presence of PCBs in food that might 5 fee consumed by a human being* 6 So, as far as evaluating how that material got 7 up to where the person was going to consume it was not 8 our particular problem. OUT particular problem was if there 9 are going to be PCBs in food that is going to be ingested 10 by individuals then we did evaluate that in relationship 11 to ur long-term toxicity. 12 The process we did not evaluate/ how it got 13 up there. 14 Q Doctor/ in evaluating the various PCB products 15 that were marketed by Monsanto/ you stated earlier that 16 the intended use of the products was an important 17 consideration in your determination if there were any 18 hazards involved in the intended use of the products j 19 is that correct? 20 A Any ill effects. I don't like the word hazards, 21 Q Tine, ill effects. 22 Can you say if the information that was available 23 to you, to Monsanto, in the early 1970s with regard to the ' U' 24 discovery of PCBs in the ecosystem -- and Z take it that 25 information wasn't available to you, and I am talking about 130 WATER_PCB-00053838 1 you in the Medioal Department, say, in the 1950s -- 2 if that information was available to you in the 1950s, 3 how different would you have evaluated these products as . 4 they were referred to you from research and development? 5 A Repeat the question, as a starter. That's a 6 long one. 7 (Whereupon, the court reporter read back 8 the previous question.) 9 MR. HYNES: Let's run it over again. 10 Q (By Mr. HYnes) If the information which was 11 available to you in the early seventies with regard to 12 PCBs being in the ecosystem, if that information was 13 available to you in the 1950s, how would you have 14 evaluated, how differently would you have evaluated the 15 PCS products as they were referred to you from research 16 and development in the fifties? 17 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Which information are you 18 talking about? 19 MR. HYNES: PCBs that were in the ecosystem. 20 THE WITNESS: Where? 21 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Where in the ecosystem? 22 MR. HYNES: All right, in the water. 23 MR. FEATHERSTONE: That's the assumption you . ' -1 24 are making? 25 MR. HYNES: Yes. i 131 WATER_PCB-00053839 1 A If I understand your question# Mr. Hynes# 2 it is if information were available to me in the 1950s 3 that PCBs were present in water systems in the ecosystem ...4 would that have made any difference to me in evaluating 5 PCBs in the 1950s? is that right? 6 Q Yes. 7 A No# sir. 8 Q And why would it have not made any difference 9 to you? 10 A Because the standard of knowledge of biomagnifica tion was not present in the scientific community at that 11 12 time# certainly not in the medical community at that time. 13 PCBs were an insoluble compound ? and the 14 current belief was that insoluble compounds and nonbiodegrad15 able compounds -- there was no talking about biodegradation 16 or nonbiodegradation# so they thought the compound would 17 be a static compound. 18 And if this were in the water system# it would 19 sink to the ground and be covered over by the mud and gook 20 and sit like coal and not get into the water. So# the mere presence of the PCB does not signify that there would 21 be an adverse effect of the PCB in the water system. 22 23 Q If information which was available t& you in i the early seventies that PCBs were reported in fish tissue# 24 25 were found in fish tissue# if that information was 132 WATER_PCB-00053840 1 available to you in the 1950s, would your evaluation of 2 PCBs be any different? 3 A You will have to explain to me, Mr* Hynes, . 4 what levels in the fish and how widespread in the fish 5 and what fish. 6 Q All right, above levels in fish, above, say, 7 ten parts per million in fish that are a species of sport, 8 popular for sport fishermen. 9 MR. FEATHERSTONEs These are the only assumptions 10 you are making, now, Mr. Hynes? 11 MR. HYNES: ` Yes. 12 MR. FEATHERSTONE: 1 object to the hypothetical 13 as iracomplete and improper. 14 If you can answer, Doctor, go ahead. 15 THE WITNESS: Would you repeat the hypothetical? 16 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Jim, can you rephrase the 17 question using the additional assumption put on the record, 18 or do you want to call the question and my objection and 19 your statements back? 20 MR. HYNES: Read the question back. 21 (Whereupon, the court reporter read back the 22 following question and objection* I 23 QUESTION: "All right, above levels in fish, 24 above, say, ten parts per million in fish that are a species 25 f sport, popular for sport fishermen. 133 WATER_PCB-00053841 1 MR. FEATHERSTONE: "These are the only assumptions 2 you are making., now, Mr. Hynes? 3 MR. HYNES: "yes. 4 MR. FEATHERSTONEi "I object to the hypothetical 5 as incomplete and improper. 6 If you can answer, Doctor, go ahead.") 7 Q (By Mr. Hynes) Doctor, you were going to say 8 something. 9 A No. 10 MR. FEATHERSTONE: You are now back on the 11 record. You can now ask him the question. 12 THE WITNESS: You said "different than". 13 Different than what? When? 14 Q (By Mr. Hynes) If the information which was 15 available in the 1970s that PCBs were found in a species 16 of fish which were popular to sport fishermen in levels 17 above ten parts per million, if that information was 18 available to you in the 1950s, would your evaluation of 19 the PCB products change? 20 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Is that it? 21 MR. HYNES: Yes. MR. FEATHERSTONE: I object to the form of 22 23 the question as incomplete and improper and without foundation. 24 ^ 25 A It might and it might not. 134 WATER_PCB-00053842 1 Q (By Mr. Hynes) What do you mean by it might 2 and it might not? What additional factors would you need? 3 A 1 would need two types of factors -- one, ..'4 you are putting myself back twenty years and making a 5 scientific decision in the light of how decisions were made 6 at that time. I can not equate the way I would be thinking 7 in 1970 with what the general thinking might be as far 8 as the presence of ten parts per million in a sport fish. 9 You have not said whether this was in the edible 10 portion of the fish. You have not said what percent of 11 the diet of the sport fish it constitutes. So, I would 12 have to know those things; and then, I still have to get 13 how were the scientific people thinking, medical people 14 thinking, in 1952 vis-a-vis a compound with a relatively 15 low acute toxicity. 16 MR. FEATHERSTONEs Do you want to take a break 17 while you think about it, Mr. Hynes? 18 MR. HYNES5 All right. 19 (Whereupon, there was a short break; and 20 upon returning to the record, the previous answer was read 21 back by the court reporter.) 22 Q (By Mr. Hynes) Doctor, you stated earlier that 23 some time in the early seventies several studies were ' 'i 24 commissioned by Monsanto regarding two chronic feeding 25 studies -- you thought three different levels, two different 135 WATER_PCB-00053843 1 species, some reproduction studies, avian species studies, 2 teratological or mutagenic studies; is that correct? 3 A No, sir. That was the late sixties * ,4 5 Q I am sorry, Am I correct that the reason that those studies 6 were commissioned was because of the information that had 7 been coming out in regard to the PCBs in the ecosystem 8 at that time; is that correct? 9 A Yes, sir. 10 Q Now, if that information had been made available 11 to you in the fifties, would you have, at that time, 12 commissioned these additional studies so that you could 13 evaluate these products in the fifties? 14 A No, sir. 15 Q Why would you have not commissioned those types 16 of studies at that time? 17 A Number one, those types of studies were not even 18 dreamed of in the 1950s. The character of toxicity testing 19 was extremely meager in connection with what types of 20 testing were done in the late 1960s when we did them. 21 So, when you say would I have commissioned those 22 types of studies, I would not have been able to commission 23 them because nobody was doing that, nobody5thought of .i 24 doing them, of that type. 25 Q Were chronic feeding studies utilized in the 1950s? 136 WATER_PCB-00053844 1 MR. FEATHERSTONEi What do you mean by "chronic 2 feeding studies"? 3 MR. HYNES; Chronicslong-term feeding studies, , 4 feeding different levels of a substance to test animals ;'-5 over a period of two years. 6 A I think it would be extremely rare if this were 7 done for anything except a direct food additive. 8 Q But those types of studies were done, at least 9 in your recollection, for food additives? 10 A I am not even saying that because the first 11 work that we had done on food additives was with the 12 Food and Drug Administration. 13 MR. FEATHERSTONEs Is this in the 1950s? 14 A (Continuing) Earlier. 15 The first ones we had done were much smaller. 16 In fact, they were much shorter. In fact, they might 17 have been three months in one species or two months in 18 one species or six months. 19 The concept of two-year feeding was a later 20 development. I am not sure when it was. 21 Q (By Mr. Hynes) But there were such studies called chronic feeding studies, but the difference is -- 22 23 A How chronic, sir? '-.i 24 MR. FEATHERSTONE; What's the question? Is the 25 question the state of the art chronic feeding studies at 137 WATER_PCB-00053845 1 2 3 4 Xj.,. . TS the time? Q (By Mr. Hynes) In the 1950s, isn't it true that chronic, lifetime feeding studies were done -- there were protocols available in the 1950s, and I don't mean for industrial chemicals -- was the science there to be able 6 to do chronic lifetime studies? 7 A The science was there, yes. 8 Q Subacute studies, was that -- and by "subacute", 9 I mean a range finding -- thirty, sixty, ninety-day toxicity 10 studies. 11 A Let me elaborate. The science could obviously 12 have been there. You could still feed a rat. Whether those 13 were done or not, I do not believe is correct because I 14 do not think the two-year chronic feeding test was a 15 standard test in the 1950s. 16 Q What you are saying is the science was available 17 but whether they were done on a routine basis or not -- 18 is what you are saying you don't think they were done on 19 a routine basis; is that correct? 20 A I think what I am saying, Mr. Hynes, is that I 21 can not pass myself off as an expert in toxicology to say 22 what types of long-term testing may or may not have been 23 done in both halves of the decade of the 1950s* 1 24 Q Again, if the information which caused you to 25 commission these studies in 1969 that we have just discussed, 138 WATER_PCB-00053846 1 if that information was available to you in the first five 2 years of the 1960s, would your evaluation or testing of 3 PCB products have been any different? .4 MR. FEATHERSTONEi Repeat that question. 5 (Whereupon, the court reporter read back 6 the previous question.) 7 Q (By Mr. Hynes) The studies that you commissioned 8 in, I believe, 1969. 9 A Eight or nine, 1968 or 1969. 10 Q The information which was made available to 11 you which caused you to commission these studies, if that 12 information was made available to you in the first five years 13 of the sixties -- 1960 through 1965 -- would you have 14 evaluated the PCB products any differently or commissioned 15 similar studies in the period 1960-1965? 16 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Similar studies to what? 17 MR. HYNES: To those that were done in 1969. 18 A I am confused, again, sir. I am sorry. I 19 am confused. 20 Will you read it to me because I do not know 21 what information was given that I was supposed to know then. 22 Q (By Mr. Hynes) The information that was available i 23 as to the PCBs being in the ecosystem which caused you to ! 24 commission these various studies in 1969. 25 MR. FEATHERSTONE: What do you mean by getting 1 i | 139 WATER_PCB-00053847 1 into the ecosystem? 2 Well, what? He is not going to answer until you 3 explain it* Q (By Mr. Hynes) The information you had available [ 5 to you that PCBs were in the ecosystem in the lt68-1969 6 period, that information that you had which caused you to 7 commission these studies in 1969 that we just discussed, 8 if that information had been made available to you in the 9 period 1960 through 1965, would you have done an evaluation 10 of the PCB products that Monsanto was marketing at the time? 11 MR. FEATHERSTONE: What kind of -- well. 12 A Would you give your definition of ecosystem 13 so we know we are talking about the same problem? 14 Q (By Mr. Hynes) I have been, hopefully, using 15 the same definition you were using. 16 A Which is -- 17 MR. FEATHERSTONE: That's the problem, Mr. Hynes. 18 Q (By Mr. Hynes) What's your definition of ' 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 ecosystem? A I asked you first. MR. FEATHERSTONE: Mr. Hynes, you are the questioner. You are obligated to specify your assumptions, so do it. MR. HYNES: ecosystem is. I am asking what his definition of i You used the term before yourself. I want to PENGAD CO.. BAYONNE. N.J. 140 WATER_PCB-00053848 1 make sure I understand what you mean by "ecosystem". 2 A My definition of ecosystem is the atmosphere and 3 the aqueous and the terrestrial part of the globe. 4 Q (By Mr. Hynes) And the information that was 5 made available to you or you acquired in this period, 6 1968-1969, that PCBs were in the ecosystem which caused 7 you to commission these studies in 1969, if that same 8 information had been made available to you in the period 9 1960 through 1965, what evaluation would you have made 10 of the PCB products in Monsanto at that time? 11 MR. FEATHERSTONES Mr. Hynes, you are misconstruing $ 12 the witness t earlier testimony. The witness earlier 13 testimony was that Bio-Test's studies were commissioned 14 because it was thought the PCBs were in the human food 15 chain. 16 Now, is that the assumption you want the witness 17 to make? 18 MR. HYNESr Pine. 19 MR. FEATHERS TONE . So we can get away from 20 the ecosystem. 21 Is that the only assumption you are making? 22 Q (By Mr. Hynes) Was that the reason for 23 commissioning those studies? 24 A Yes. / .Vj 25 Q Then, if that information was available to you in PENGAO CO.. BAYONNE. 141 WATER_PCB-00053849 1 the period 1960 through 1965, what changes, if any, 2 would you have made in evaluating the PCB products at 3 Monsanto? ^ 4 MR. FEATHERSTONE: That's the only assumption 5 you are making, is that correct, Mr. Hynes? ' 6 MR. HYNES: Yes. 7 MR. FEATHERSTONE: I object to the hypothetical 8 as being incomplete, improper and without foundation. 9 THE WITNESS: Would you repeat the hypothetical? 10 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Doctor, Mr. Hynes wants 11 to know if you had known in the 1960 to 1965 period that 12 PCBs were in the human food chain would your evaluation 13 of PCB products somehow have been different -- and I 14 repeat that with my objections still pending. 15 Q (By Mr. Hynes) I didn't ask in the food chain. 16 1 am not sure. Did you? 17 A Did I what? o o 18 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Mr. Hynes, the testimony has 19 been that the tests in the late 1960s were commissioned 20 because of reports that PCBs may be in the human food chain. o 21 Q (By Mr. Hynes) Is that what your testimony was? * 22 A In the human food chain, yes. 23 MR. HYNES * Then, I have no objection to his i 24 form of the question. 25 If you would repeat it for the Doctor, please. 142 WATER_PCB-00053850 1 A Isa the sam levels that you talked about, tan 2 parts par million? 3 Q (By Hr. Hynes) No. We are talking about just ; 4 the Information that was available to you that caused you 5 to -- 6 A In the food chain, it might or might not. 7 Q What additional factors would you need to make 8 an answer? 9 A Again, there are two factors. One is the factor 10 of what was the state of the scientific thinking about 11 X parts of PCBs in human food in the early part of the 12 decade of the 1960s. If the thinking was, then, that the 13 material was taken up and excreted and no harm would 14 be done, that would be & factor in what we would have to 15 evaluate. 16 If the factor of storage was known widely at that 17 time that some compounds could be stored --- and if 18 it were shown that PCBs could bo stored, a factor which 19 was not present at that time, that# too, would have something 20 to 4@ with my evaluation. 21 MR. FEATHERSTONEI When you said a *factor not 22 known at that time", was PCB storage known? 23 THE WITNESSt It wasn't known at all*. 24 q (By Mr. Hynes) When you said "X parts", I 25 wasn't sure if you said X parts or exports, 143 WATER_PCB-00053851 I A X parts. 2 Q Now, information such as reports of PCBs in the 3 food chain in this question -- or reprots of PCBs being 4 found in quantities in water or in sediments, in sediments 5 in water, is that the type of information, if it were 6 available, that should have been provided to your department 7 by sales, by research and development, to make your 8 evaluations of products? 9 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Can I hear that question 10 back, please. 11 (Whereupon, the court reporter read back the 12 previous question.) 13 Q (By Mr. Hynes) I am talking first in the 1950s. 14 A We are back in the fifties? 15 Q Yes. ' 16 A You have three assumptions there. 17 Can I take them one at a time? 18 Q Sure. 19 A One, you say PCBs in water. The material is 20 eytreraely insoluble in water. There is a very slight 21 amount of it getting in water, so I can't agree with 22 'our assumption that PCBs would be in water. 23 Two, you said the presence of PCBs --* 24 MR. FEATHERSTONE: He doesn't care Whether you 25 agree or not. He wants to know if that type of information, j 144 WATER_PCB-00053852 I even if it's inconceivable, should be conveyed to you. 2 A No, it shouldn't -- what axe you telling -- I 3 am very confused myself. . 4 Q (By Mr. Hynes) Let me do it one piece at a time. 5 It might help. 6 If information were available that PCBs were 7 in the food chain in the 1950s, is that the type of 8 information that should have been provided to the Medical 9 Department in evaluating a PCB product for marketing? 10 MR. FEATHERSTONE: I will make an objection 11 of foundation, but go ahead. 12 The answer to that is yes or no. 13 THE WITNESS: Repeat it, and let me find out 14 where you answer yes or no. 15 (Whereupon, the court reporter read back the 16 following questions 17 QUESTIONs "If information were available that 18 PCBs were in the food chain in the 1950s, is that the type 19 of information that should have been provided to the Medical 20 Department in evaluating a PCB product for marketing?") 21 A If such information were available to Monsanto 22 personnel, it should be provided to the Medical Department. '1 i 23 Q (By Mr. Hynes) If information were ayailable :i 24 that PCBs were found in sediments in lakes and rivers, 25 should that information have been provided to your department 145 WATER_PCB-00053853 1 for evaluating the PCB products in the fifties? 2 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Objection -- foundation, 3 no basis on the record. . 4 A No. ", 5 Q (By Mr. Hynes) That information should not 6 have been provided to your department for evaluation? 7 A No. 8 Q What do you base that answer upon? Why not? 9 A Because the mere presence of any compound -- 10 let's stick to PCSs in the 1950s -- with the knowledge 11 that we had of the stability of PCBs and the insolubility 12 of the product in water, in our thinking of the 1950s, 13 there was no likelihood of any adverse effects coming from 14 the material sitting down at the bottom of the stream 15 underneath X layers of mud. 16 Q In your evaluate on of a chemical referred to 17 your department from research and development, first of 18 all in the fifties, was the disposal of the product or 19 the anticipated disposal of the product 20 information that should have been provided to your 21 department for evaluation? 22 MR. FEATHERSTONE: May I hear that, please? 23 (Whereupon, the court reporter raad tack the 1 24 previous question.) 25 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Are we talking about PCBs? 146 WATER_PCB-00053854 1 HR. HYNES: I am talking about any product, 2 first. 3 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Well, that's the last . 4 "any product" question you get, Mr. Hynes. 5 A No, sir. 6 Q (By Mr. Hynes) Would your answer be the same 7 if I just changed the time frame to the 1960s? 8 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Is it any product, still? 9 MR. HYNES; Yes, any product. 10 MR. FEATHERSTONE: I instruct you not to answer 11 the question, sir. 12 Q (By Mr. Hynes) Do you mean the disposal of a 13 chemical product isn't a consideration in the evaluation 14 of the product? 15 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Well, the instruction is not 16 to answer. 17 Is that a question to me or him? 18 MR. HYNES: That's a question to him. 19 Is the disposal -- 20 MR. FEATHERSTONE: He is instructed not to answer 21 the question. 22 MR. HYNES: What is your basis for him not to 23 answer the question? 24 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Why don't you establish the 25 relevancy of it. 147 WATER_PCB-00053855 1 HR. HYNES: I want to find out why you are 2 instructing him not to answer. 3 MR. FEATHERSTONE! It's irrelevant. .. 4 MR. HYNES: I dorft think irrelevance is a basis 5 to instruct someone not to answer. 6 MR. FEATHERSTONEt You can take that up with 7 the judge. We have been there before, and you attempted 8 that argument, and you lost. 9 MR. HYNES: You can certify that question. 10 (The question to be certified may be found 11 on Page 298 of this deposition.) 12 Q (By Mr. Hynes) In any PCB product in the 1950s, 13 was the disposal or the disposal of that product, would 14 that information, should that information have been provided 15 to the Medical Department in evaluating the product? 16 THE WITNESS: Can I answer this one? 17 MR. FEATHERSTONE: The question is whether that 18 information should have been provided to you. 19 A No. 20 Q (By Mr. Hynes) Why shouldn't that have been 21 provided to you? 22 A Because the Medical Department are not experts on 23 how to dispose of a product. ' 1 24 Q I am not talking about methods of disposal -- 25 just the fact that it was disposed in a particular way, would 148 WATER_PCB-00053856 1 that have any relevance to your medical evaluation of the 2 product? 3 A Say it over, please. 4 (Whereupon, the court reporter read back the 5 previous question.) 6 A No. 7 Q (By Mr. Hynes) Why would it not have any 8 relevance to your evaluation of the product? 9 A We have the testing of the material. We test 10 the material. We tell the customer if they want us to what 11 the toxic properties are. 12 The disposal of the product -- 13 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Are we talking about a PCE 14 product? 15 A (Continuing) -- of the PCS product is a function 16 of the user aided by information from the Medical 17 Department as far as its toxicity is concerned and of our 18 production department as far as its neutralization might 19 be concerned, if such could occur. 20 0 (By Mr. Hynes) I don't understand what you 21 mean by the term "neutralization". 22 MR. FEATHERSTONE: For this line of questioning, 23 I think we are done for the day. 24 MR. HYNFSs Congratulations. ' \ 25 Q (By Mr. Hynes) What do you mean by the term 149 WATER_PCB-00053857 1 neutralization? 2 A I have used the neutralization term because on 3 some -- when you were talking about antiproducts, there 4 are some insecticides -- 5 MR. FEATHERSTONE: We are talking about PCB. 6 THE WITNESSs I am explaining neutralization. 7 I ran over from the antiproducts that could be neutralized. 8 PCB, obviously, can not be neutralized. 9 Q (By Mr. Hynes) Would any information with 10 regard to the disposal of a PCB product be a consideration, 11 or would that information be made available to the 12 Medical Department for evaluation in the 1960s? 13 MR. FEATKERSTONE: What do you mean was it? 14 MR. HYNES: Let me rephrase the question. 15 Q (By Mr. Hynes) Information with regard to 16 the disposal of a PCB product, should that information 17 have been made available to the Medical Department in the 18 1960s for your evaluation of that PCB product? 19 A I don't think I can answer that question. 20 Repeat it again. You are saying should it have 21 been done? That's what he said -- he said "should". 22 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Doctor, he wants to know whether 23 that information should have been given to you in the 24 Medical Department in connection with your evaluation of 25 the product -- and by "disposal", I take it he means disposal f^ENGAO CO. 150 WATER_PCB-00053858 1 into landfills, disposal into waterways, disposal however. 2 A Well, the function of disposal was not a 3 responsibility of the Medical Department. 4 Q (By Mr. Hynes) No. What I am saying. Should 5 information have been made available to the Medical 6 Department as to the disposal of PCB products? 7 A If such disposal were to constitute a harm, 8 it should be made available to the Medical Department. 9 Q Who would make the determination, to the best 10 of your knowledge, as to whether it would be a harm. 11 A I would think that it would have to be the 12 individual who knew about the way the material was going 13 to be disposed of would ask either the regulatory system 14 of people or ask us for the -- us, the Medical Department -- 15 for the toxicological data and then either the regulatory 16 data or the regulatory people and the individuals in 17 the Production Department with advice from the Medical 18 Department would arrive at a conclusion. 19 Q But your department would be the folks to have 20 the information on toxicity or harm before a decision 21 of that type would be made, whether to refer the information 22 to you or to not refer it? 23 A Say that over. :j 'A 24 Q Correct me if I am wrong. I think What you are 25 saying is, if the information as to disposal was then 151 WATER_PCB-00053859 1 available to someone in sales or production, the groups 2 that you talked about, somehow someone would have to clue 3 you in that there might be a harm on that particular type . 4 of disposal; is that correct? .,, 5 MR, FEATHERSTONE: May I hear that back, please? 6 (Whereupon, the court reporter read back the 7 previous question,) 8 MR. HYNES; Someone at Monsanto. 9 HR. FEATHERSTONE: You have a question pending. 10 14R. HYNES: Let's rephrase that. 11 Q (By Mi;. Hynes) I believe you said that if 12 someone at Monsanto suspected that there might be a harm 13 to the particular method of disposal, some form of harm 14 or some form of a problem, they would go to your department 15 to verify if, in fact, there was some harm; is that correct? 16 A They would go to us to find out what the toxicity 17 of the product was; and then, they would get an opinion. 18 If there were facts, enough facts on which a judgment 19 could then be made, the Medical Department would be in 20 a position to give these individuals that type of 21 judgment. 22 Q And the judgment would be the Medical Department's 23 judgment; is that correct? .i I 24 A As to the possibility of adverse effects,yes. 25 Q But, obviously, before you could make that 152 WATER_PCB-00053860 1 judgment, the Information would have to be made available 2 to you? 3 A Yes. r . 4 Q We are again talking in the 196Os/in this line v 5 of questioning -- why is that different from what you 6 stated earlier with regard to the 1950s as to PCB disposal? 7 A You are going to have to repeat all these 8 tilings I was supposed to have said earlier. I think 9 let's say this over and delineate it a little more 10 accurately for me. 11 Q I think you stated that in the 1950s -- I think 12 my question was, Should the information with regard to 13 disposal of a PCB product, should that information have 14 been made available to your department in evaluating the 15 PCB product; and you answered no because it was your 16 function to give adequate warnings, cautionary instructions, 17 to the customers and it was the customers' responsibility 18 to act accordingly within the confines of those cautionary 19 instructions or warnings. 20 A You are taking pieces out of several -- is this 21 a question? 22 MR. FEATHERSTONE: There is no question, Doctor. >4 . 23 Q (By Mr. Hynes) I am summarizing whai I understand 24 you to have said; and then, when I asked you A similar 25 question with regard to information that should have been 153 WATER_PCB-00053861 1 provided to you on disposal of PCBs in the 1960s, you 2 went on to explain that there was some -- someone would 3 have to make an evaluation as to whether there was any 4 apparent harm to this particular type of disposal. 5 What I am asking is, Would the relevance of tne 6 information with regard to disposal of PCF products, would 7 that information, the relevancy of that information, ho 8 different in your evaluation of the products in the 1950s 9 versus the 196Oe? 10 A Yes. 11 Q Why would it make a difference in those two 12 time frames? 13 A Because in the 1950s the principle of biomagnifica 14 tion was not widely accepted. The principle of 15 biodegradation or nonbiodegradation was not widely accepted. 16 In the 1950s, people thought that if materials -- 17 PCBs -- were disposed, of in current fashion, according 18 to good industrial practices at that time, in a landfill 19 or something else, then the PCBs would sit there. It would 20 not get into the ecosystem. In the late 1960s, when it was found that PCBs 21 were in the ecosystem, there was a different set of premises 22 23 as far as evaluating what should be done vis- a-vis disposal -i 24 and what the Medical Department's relationship at that 25 particular time to disposal would be. 154 WATER_PCB-00053862 1 MR. FEATHERSTONE; When Mr. Hynes referred to 2 disposal of PCB, did you understand him to mean disposal 3 of PCB into landfills? ^ 4 THE WITNESS: Yes. 5 MR. FEATHERSTONE: And that's true for the line 6 of questioning we have just been listening to? 7 THE WITNESS: Correct. 8 Q (3y Mr. Eynes) If inforrue cion were available 9 to Monsanto that the disposal was not to a landfill bu- 10 rather directly a river, lake, or stream, would tnat be 11 a factor in the 1950s which would change your answers? 12 A You hava to -- 13 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Wait a minute. 14 Change your answers to what? 15 MR. HYNES: You just changed his answer to mean 16 that his understanding of disposal was to a landfill. 17 MR. FEATER3TONE: That's what he understood you 18 to mean when you said disposal of PCB. 19 Q (By lie. Hynes) If disposal was not to a landfill 20 but rather to a lake, river or some body of water, would that disposal information, snould tnat disposal information 21 have been made available to your department in evaluating 22 23 those PCB products in the 1950s? 24 THE WITNESS: Can I answer this? * i 25 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Yes. 155 WATER_PCB-00053863 1 A No, it houldn't. 2 Q (By Mr. Hynes) Why not? 3 A Because in the 1950s the commonly accepted belief ; 4 was that if PCB, an insoluble compound, a very chemically 5 stable compound, were disposed into an aqueous environment, 6 putting it into a lake or river, it was insoluble in water. 7 It would not be picked up in the water by anybody drinking 8 the water. It would sink to the bottom. It would lie 9 there, be covered up, and would not -- while it would 10 be in the ecosystem, it would not have been -- it would 11 have been there, as I sard earlier, as a piece of coal would 12 be lying down in the bottom of the gook at the bottom of 13 the river. 14 Q (By Mr. Hynes) If information were available 15 as to the disposal of PCBs in a body of water in the 1960s, 16 in the 1960s should that information nave been made 17 available to the Medical Department in evaluating the 18 PCB product? 19 MR. FEATHERSTONE; Can I have the question back, 20 please? 21 (Whereupon, the previous question was read 22 back by the court reporter.) . 23 A No, sir. 24 Q (By Mr.Hynes) Why not? ' i ;1 25 A For tworeasons. 156 WATER_PCB-00053864 \ 1 One, until 1967 or 1968, nobody thought that 2 PCBs would get into the ecosystem. Until 1967 and 1968, 3 there were no analytical methods, as far as I know, to : 4 tell if small amounts of PCBs were in the layer of stuff at 5 the bottom of the river or in the river. 6 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Doctor, the two questions of 7 Mr. Hynes' -- the one pertaining to the 1950s and the one 8 pertaining to the 1960s -- was not whether it would hav^ 9 made an effect on your analysis of the medical risks but 10 whether that information should have been told to you. 11 That's all. 12 Now, what's the answer to that? 13 A In the late fifties? 14 Q (By Mr. Hynes) In the late fifties. 15 A It should not have been told to me. 16 MR. FEATHERSTONE: In tne sixties? 17 Q (By Mr. Hynes) Say 1967. 18 A No. 19 Q And their reason being, am I correct, that it | 20 would have made no difference in terms of your medical 21 evaluation of the product; is that right? 22 A The mere presence of PCB in the ecosystem did 23 not signal -- 1 j 24 MR. FEATHERSTONE: We are talking about bodies 25 of water. ! ; 157 WATER_PCB-00053865 1 A (Continuing) -- bodies of water does not signal 2 adverse effects in those years you quoted. 3 MR. FEATHERSTONEs Are you done with your line - 4 of questioning? - 5 MR. HYNES: We can continue tomorrow. 6 (Whereupon, the deposition was adjourned 7 for the day to be resumed at eight a.m. 8 on Thursday, March 26, 1981.) 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 20 21 22 i 23 i .1 24 25 158 WATER_PCB-00053866 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 continuation of the deposition of Doctor R. Emmet Kelly from Wednesday, March 25, 1981.) Q (By Mr. Hynes) Doctor Kelly, 1 show you what has been marked Defendant's Exhibit Number 8, dated 3/11/81? and it's an exhibit number from Mr. Wneeler's deposition. MR. FEATHERSTONE: 3/11/31? MR. HYNES: That's the date on it. MS. OLIVER: That's the date ox Wheeler's deposition. MR. FEATHERSTONE: 1 thougnt it was the date of the document. Q (By Mr. Hynes) And for identification, there is a stamp number at the bottom 0001^16. Would you please read tnat document, Doctor, and identify it? A Out loud? Q No. A Yes, sir. Q Do you recall seeing that document before, Doctor? ! A No, sir, Idon't. Q The language wliich is in quotations in the middle of the docuerant apparently suggested language for labeling. language? Did you have any input into suggesting 1 that | A I don't think so, Mr. Hynes, because this memorandum 159 WATER_PCB-00053867 1 is not addressed to me and when we filed copies -- if I 2 may explain -- 3 MR. FEATHERSTONE: No. I think you have answered 4 the question. * 5 Q (By Mr. Hynes) You don't think so. 6 Now, Mr. Wheeler1s name is on that document? 7 A Yes. 8 Q A number of names, and his is one. 9 Would that indicate to you that he had input 10 on the language of that document? 11 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Object to the form of the 12 qeustion. 13 A No -- sorry. 14 Q You can answer it. 15 A (Continuing) No. It appears to me that they 16 are asking him for any input with this document. 17 Q (By Mr. Hynes) Do you know if similar language 18 to that which is indicated there was ever used on any labels 19 for any PCB products or Aroclor products? 20 A You mean subsequent to this memorandum? 21 Q Yes. 22 A Well, it certainly could. I can't, offhand, 23 recall a label saying this. i , A 24 MR. HYNES: That's all I have. 25 160 WATER_PCB-00053868 1 CROSS-EXAMINATION 2 QUESTIONS BY MR. JOHN; 3 Q NOW/ Doctor Kelly, continuing to refer to '- 4 Defendant's Exhibit 8, as 1 understand your testimony, you ^ :s did have input into various labeling that went on 6 PCB products by Monsanto? 7 A Yes, sir. 8 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Again, wait until Mr. John 9 finishes his question. 10 Q (By Mr. John) Your answer is yes? 11 A Yes, sir. 12 Q Referring to Defendant1s Exhibit 8 and the -- 13 MR. FEATHERSTONE: We have no attachment if you 14 are looking at a -- 15 14R. JOHN: 1 am referring to tne front page on 16 it -- is it your opinion that tne wording suggested on that 17 page within the quotation marks was adequate warning 18 concerning the RGBs as of April 13, 197ur 19 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Object to tne form of the 20 question and object on the foundation, and I object on 21 relevancy. 22 Go ahead. 23 A Warnings as to what, Mr. John? , t 24 Q (By Mr. John) Warnings as to the potential 25 environmental contaminations of -- 161 WATER_PCB-00053869 1 A Mot medical warnings? 2 Q Mo # not medical warnings. 3 A Even though I had no input into it# it seems . 4 adequate. 5 0 Did you ever have any input into warnings or 6 information provided to a customer concerning the 7 environmental impact of Aroclors? 8 A Not that I can recall# Mr. John. 9 Q Whose responsibility was that? 10 A At the time, it was Papageorge after he was 11 made environmental manager of the Organic Division. That 12 is the man here on this exhibit. 13 Q Prior to the time Mr. Papageorge was made 14 environmental manager# who was responsible for warnings 15 concerning the environmental impact of Monsanto products, 16 A I think the ultimate decision was made by their 17 label committee, if I can term it a committee -- I don't 18 know if it was the committee or one person -- but he 19 would go out to various sections of the company and get 20 their input and then make up the label. 21 MR, FEATHERSTONEi I think Mr. John has gone 22 beyond labels, if I understand correct. f 23 I think your question was customer inquiries. 24 MR, JOHN: I believe Doctor Kelly understood - 25 at least he was responsive to my question. 162 WATER_PCB-00053870 1 Q (By Mr. John) Was there some reason, Doctor Kelly, 2 if the environmental impact had a health aspect to it that 3 your department wasn't in the review process of labeling 4 concerning the environmental impact? . 5 A Mr. John, you will have to define what "health 6 aspect" means and what is the context of "health aspect". 7 Q Any health aspect of an industrial product - 8 in other words, if it gets into the environment and does 9 pose some sort of health problem, as I understand your 10 testimony, you don't recall being involved in the labeling 11 or warning concerning any environmental impacts of 12 industrial products of Monsanto; is that correct? 13 A Repeat that. 14 Q As I recall your testimony, you, Doctor Kelly, 15 in your Medical Department, were not involved in the labeling, 16 warning function, on products with respect to environmental 17 impacts. 18 A That is not correct. 19 Q That is not correct? 20 A I do not think it is complete, 1 don't think 21 you are quoting me. 22 Q Please complete. . 23 A Yes. Unless there is an appreciable adverse .i 24 health effect, unless there is a suspected adverse health 25 effect, in that case, my department would have impact. .163 WATER_PCB-00053871 1 Q And who determines whether there is a suspected 2 adverse health effect? 3 A I think that is developed -- that is determined 4 by the general scientific knowledge with input from '5 various sources of which one mighc be the Medical Department. 6 Q Was not part of the Medical Department's function 7 to determine whether or not there were suspected health 8 hazards or effects from a particular product that was going 9 to be marketed by Monsanto? 10 A Say that over. I want to be sure. (Whereupon, the court reporter read back tire II 12 previous question.) 13 A Yes, sir. 14 Q (By Mr. John) So, would it not be the Medical 15 Department's responsibility to determine whether or not 16 there was a suspected or potential health hazard of a 17 product being marketed by Monsanto? 18 A Is that the same question? 19 MR. FEATKERSTONE: Yes, it is. 20 THE WITNESS: Would you repeat it? I want to be sure. 21 (Whereupon, the court reporter read back tire 22 23 following question: ' ; "1 24 QUESTION: "So, would it not be the Medical 25 Department's responsibility to determine whether or not 164 WATER_PCB-00053872 1 there was a suspected or potential health hazard of a 2 product being marketed by Monsanto?") 3 A Yes, sir. 4 Q (By Mr. John) While you were at Monsanto 5 through 1975, did you ever determine whether or not there 6 was a health hazard or effect from rCEs marketed under the 7 product name Pydraul? 8 A Yes, sir. 9 0 When did you make that determination? THE WITNESS: Read the question back. 10 (Whereupon, the court reporter read back the 11 12 previous question.) 13 A I said yes, and you said when? 14 Q (By Mr. John) Yes, sir, when did you .take that 15 determination? 16 A We made the determination in, as far as the 17 health hazard to workers is concerned, some time in the 18 1950s, before the material was marketed. 19 Q What was the health hazard you determined with 20 respect to workers in the 195Gs? A Repeated skin contact constituted a hazard, 21 inhalation of the fumes at elevated temperatures constituted 22 23 a hazard, or in confined stages. * Q (By Mr. John) Are those the orly hazards you 24 25 determined to workers in the 1950s? 165 WATER_PCB-00053873 1 MR. FEATHERSTONE; From Pydraul? 2 MR. JOHN* Right. 3 A If you got it in your eye, you would have a . 4 temporary burning, yes. { : 5 Q (By Mr. John) Any other health effects that 6 you determined in the 1950s, like workers' contact with 7 Pydraul? 8 A You would get dermatitis if you kept it on 9 your skin. You got prompt acute reddening of the skin if 10 it remained on for an extended period. 11 Q Are those all the effects that you determined 12 in the fifties? 13 A Yes, sir. 14 Q Did you determine, at any subsequent period, 15 additional effects on workers from contact with Pydraul 16 products? 17 A No, sir, with the exception of determining tnat 18 if the material hit a heat source of three to five hundred 19 degrees centigrade irritating and potentially harmful 20 fumes could be evolved. 21 Q When was that determination made? 22 A In the 19508 some time. i 23 Q Was that a result of an incident repotted to 24 you at a plant in Brazil, Indiana? 25 A No, sir. 166 WATER_PCB-00053874 1 Q Was there a different incident reported to you 2 other than the incident in Brazil, Indiana? 3 A Can I explain? 4 Q Yes, sir. : 5 MR. FEATHERSTONE: What is the question, Mr. John? 6 MR. JOHN; I would like him to explain --* 7 THE WITNESS: -- the Brazil. 8 MR. FEATHERSTONE; No. The question was, 9 Doctor, whether there was an incident reported to you 10 other than the one at the Brazil, Indiana plant. 11 A No, sir. 12 Q (By Mr. John) In the 1970s, did you determine 13 any additional health effects or impacts or hazards upon 14 workers exposed to Pydraul products? 15 MR. FEATHERSTONE; This is PCB Pydraul? 16 MR. JOHN: Yes. 17 A Yes, sir. 18 Q (By Mr. John) What? 19 A By that time, we had found that chronic feeding 20 at some levesl could cause toxic effects in mammals. 21 We had also, then, by relationship of intake, 22 decided that repeated low levels of-- repeated, prolonged or -- 23 MR. FEATHERSTONE; The question. Doctor, was the I 24 effect on workers. 25 A (Continuing) I am talking about workers. i i ii i j 167 WATER_PCB-00053875 1 We related the chronic toxicity from the feeding 2 test to the possibility of chronic exposure in workers. 3 Q (By Mr. John) What was the possible exposure 4 in workers that you perceived from the chronic feeding test? ^5 A It could be repeated or prolonged skin contact 6 which we warned against. 7 It could be repeated inhalation in confined spaces 8 which we warned against. 9 Q How about the ingestion of Pydraul from being 10 on the hands or the clothes or that, type of contact;? 11 A We did not envision any type of ingestion of an 12 industrial chemical in sufficient quantities to bother 13 anyone. 14 Q You testified that the chronic feeding can cause 15 toxic effects in mammals. 16 A Yes, sir. 17 Q What toxic effects in mammals does chronic 18 feeding cause? 19 A Effects on the liver, some effects on the 20 reproductive pattern. 21 Q When did you first suspect that feeding of PCBs 22 could have a toxic effect on the liver? 23 MR. FEATHERSTONEs You mean any feeding? Do .i 24 you have specific dosage in mind? 25 MR. JOHN: No. 163 WATER_PCB-00053876 1 A 1938, at the time of the Drinker work. 2 Q (By Mr. John) Was your knowledge concerning the 3 toxic effects on the liver of PCBs based solely on the -,4 Drinker reports? 5 A Mo, sir. 6 Q What else was it based on? 7 MR. FEATHERSTONEs His knowledge at what point 8 in time, Mr. John? 9 MR. JOHN; 1938. 10 THE WITNESS i Read back trie question, please. 11 (Whereupon, the court reporter read back the 12 following questions and answer; 13 QUESTION; "Was your knowledge concerning the toxic 14 effects on the liver of PCBs based solely on the Drinker 15 reports? 16 ANSWER: "No, sir. 17 QUESTION; "What else was it based on?") 18 MR. FEATHERSTONE: What else other than Drinker's 19 1938 -- 20 A Nothing. 21 Q (By Mr. John) Did you subsequently learn of any 22 other facts that led to your knowledge or Suspicion that i 23 PCBs could have an effect on the liver? , 1 24 A Yes. ^ 25 Q When? 169 WATER_PCB-00053877 1 A I will have to correct that. 2 At the time of 1938, we understood people had 3 liver troubles in this factory in Massachusetts in 193B. 4 MR. FEATHERSTONE: That was more than chlorinated 15 byphenyl? 6 THE WITNESS: I am sorry. That was chlorinated 7 napthalene, ninety percent. 8 Q (By Mr. John) But you stixl hud a suspicion, 9 based on the Drinker study and the possibility of a 10 connection due to the chlorinated oyphenyls in Boston in 11 1938, that there was an effect on the liver; is taat correct? 12 A No, it isn't correct, Mr. John. 13 The Drinker study of PCBs by itself showed a 14 very minor reversible attack on cue liver. It aid show 15 tile target organ was the liver Su nut it was -- we ha^ 16 a suspicion that if any organ were involved it would be 17 the liver. 18 Q Was that your only suspicion of a toxic effete 19 on animals or potentially humans who ingested PCBs between 20 1938 and 1969? 21 A No, sir. 22 Q I am talking about the internal ingestion of it. -i 23 A Yes, sir. "i 24 Q Wnat other toxic effects, besides an effect on 25 the liver ware you aware of? 170 WATER_PCB-00053878 1 A That wasn't the question you asked me. 2 Q Let's get itclarified. 3 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Do you want it read back? .4 MR. JOHN: I will just restate it* 5 Q (By Mr. John) As I understand your testimony, 6 you were aware that there was a potential toxic effect 7 on the liver based on chronic feeding of RGBs? is that 8 correct? 9 A When? 10 Q In 1938. 11 A It was not chronic feeding in 1938. 12 Q Was there any feeding in 1938? 13 A There was acute feeding in 1938. 14 Q Based on acute feeding; is that correct? 15 A No, sir. 16 Q What Drinker study or test led to his conlusion 17 that there were toxic effects on the liver in 1938? 18 A Repeated inhalation studies of PCB Aroclor 1265. 19 Q Besides the liver difficulties due to inhalation, 20 was there any other toxic effect due to inhalation that 21 you were aware of between 1938 and 1969? 22 A Yes, sir. 23 Q What? i j 24 A In 19 -- some time in the 1950s, an organization 25 in Brazil, Indiana reported that two or three workers were 171 WATER_PCB-00053879 1 exposed to a heat transfer unit that presumably contained 2 Aroclors that was in a makeshift temporary arrangement. 3 There were repeated leaks over a three-day . 4 period from this heat transfer unit, and two or three 5 workers developed liver damage which turned out to then 6 be reversible. 7 Q That is another instance that you became aware 8 where liver damage was a toxic effect; is that correct? 9 A Yes, sir. 10 Q Was tliere any other toxic effects besides liver 11 damage due to inhalation or ingestion of PCBs? 12 A Yas, sir. 13 Q What? 14 A Some time either in the fifties or the early 15 sixties, a Doctor Meigs, M-e-i-g-s, reported that people 16 had developed chloracne from inhalation of some sort of 17 PCB fumes at elevated temperatures. I am not familiar with 18 tile details of how long they developed or in truth if there 19 was ever any PCB found because as I understand there was 20 a retrospective study, a post hoc thing. 21 Q Whatis chloracne? 22 A It's a skin condition characterised by an 23 increase of fatty compounds in the sweat glands, and .1 24 sebaceous cells similar to teenage acne only worse. 25 Q Besides the knowledge that you have just testified 172 WATER_PCB-00053880 1 to concerning the toxic effects between 1938 and 1969, were 2 you aware of any other toxic effects on humans besides 3 the toxic effects with respect to the liver and chloracne? ,;4 A Yes, sir. - k5 Q What others? 6 A I went into a thermometer factory some time in 7 the forties, and individuals were dipping their hands into 8 PCB solutions to fill up billows for a transformer and 9 developed some chloracne. 10 MR. FEATHERSTONE: The question was whether you 11 knew of anything other than chloracne. 12 Q (By Mr. John) Other than liver damage or 13 chloracne. 14 A No, sir, I did not, except--what year did you 15 say? 16 Q Through 1969. 17 A The fetus problem in the Yusho incident had 18 been reported in 1969, yes. I do not know the exact 19 time that that fetus problem was reported. 20 Q Beteen 1938 and 1969, have you now testified to 21 all the toxic effects on humans that you were aware of 22 from inhalation or ingestion of PCBs? .i 23 A I think that includes all of them* ^ > 24 Q Now, between 1969 and the present time, are you 25 aware of any other toxic effects on humans from the 173 WATER PCB-00053881 1 inhalation or ingestion of PCBs? 2 34- A Between what years? Q 1969 and today. . 4 A I am not aware of any proven cases of human :^5 ill adverse -- adverse human effects in the years from 6 1969 up to today with the exception of the Yusho people. 7 Could I add "proven human adverse effects"? 8 Q Doctor Kelly, is it your opinion today that if 9 a human eats fish tissue containing FCEs iu tin levels 10 that have been reported in tire studies, he 'would have 11 adverse medical effects from eating that fish? 12 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Which studies? 13 MR. JOHN; Any studies. 14 THE WITNESS: Would you give me the levels, 15 sir? 16 Q (By Mr. John) I cun' c.. 17 Have you reviewed studies -- 18 A X don't recall any studies on tne toxicity 19 of PCBs in fish. Is that what you mean? 20 Q Yes, sir. 21 A I can't give you any of those. 22 Q Are you aware of any studies dealing with PCBs 23 that have made their way into the food chain since 1969? 1 24 A What does that question mean? I don't know. 25 MR. FEATKERSTOWE: You have answered it. 174 WATER_PCB-00053882 1 Do you mean an effect on humans, Mr. John? 2 MR. JOHN; Yes. 3 MR. FEATHERSTONE; Why don't you rephrase it 4 that way and help the witness? 5 Q (By Mr. John) What I am getting at, Doctor 6 Kelly, I want to determine your opinion today as to whether 7 your knowledge of the levels of PCha that have gotten 8 into the environment and then nave gotten into variouE 9 elements of the various food chain through the 10 biomagnification process, whether cue ingacolon of the 11 foods could have adverse effects on human beings. 12 A Do I have an opinion? 13 Q Yes, sir. 14 A Yes, sir. 15 Q What is your opinion? 16 A My opinion is that if tne levels of PCBs are 17 in accord with the government tolerances for PCBs in 18 food there is no ill effect. 19 Q What is that level that you arc referring to? 20 A I do not know what it is now. I know at one time it was five parts per million in the total diet. 21 Q Is it your opinion that, i PCBs are greater 22 23 than five parts per million in the total diet #iat there would be adverse effects? 24 25 A No, sir, it is not. 175 WATER PCB-00053883 1 Q Do you have a level at which you believe. 2 Doctor Kelly, that there would be adverse effects? 3 A I know of no level at the present time with ... 4 the exception of the levels used in the Yushc incident. a .' 5 I also would pick the level of the safety 6 factor that the Food and Drug people use in tneir -- 7 a hundred times their tolerance, that is supposed to be -- 8 their tolerance level is listed as one hundred. One 9 hundred, this is what they would third; would be a dangerous 10 level. 11 Q That's a tolerance level in humans? 12 A All human food, yes, sir. 13 Q Doctor, let me back way up. 14 When were you born? 15 A 1909, November 14. 16 Q You were retired from lions anto in 1975? 17 A That's correct. 18 Q What have you been doing since 1975? 19 A I have been engaged in occupational medicine. 20 I have been a consultant for various companies. I am 21 a part-time medical director of Consolidated Aluminum 22 Company and I spend ten to twelve hours a week at an i 23 industrial clinic doing industrial medicine and occupational .1 24 medicine. 25 Q Is that a clinic in Saint Louis? 176 WATER_PCB-00053884 1 A Yes, sir, Sutter Industrial Clinic. 2 Q Is Consolidated Aluminum in Saint Louis? 3 A It's headquarters is in Saint Louis. . 4 Q Have you performed any consulting services for 5 Monsanto since 1975? 6 A Yes, sir. The first year after I retired, I 7 was a consultant. 8 Q For Monsanto? 9 A For Monsanto. 10 Q Have you been a consultant for Monsanto since that first year? 11 12 A Ho, sir. 13 Q Are you on a retirement pension from Monsanto? 14 A Yes, sir, 15 Q Do you receive an^ other benefits from i-Dnsaimo 16 today other than a retirement pension? 17 A Do you call dividends a benefit? 18 Q I sure do. 19 You ot'n stock in Monsanto; is chat correct? A Yes, sir. 20 Q Do you have any othex benefits? 21 A I got the company magazine. 22 23 Q Anyt.hing else? * 1 A I am asked to the retirees' banquet* 24 25 Q But you have performed no services for Monsanto 177 WATER PCB-00053885 1 since 1976; is that correct? 2 A That's correct. 3 Q Have you ever given your deposition in any case prior to this deposition. Doctor Kelly? 4 5 A Any case in my life, anyplace? 6 Q Have you ever testified before? 7 A Yes. 8 Q Have you ever testified concerning PCBs? 9 A Yes, sir. 10 Q Where? A Knoxville, Tennessee. 11 12 Q When? 13 A Four to five years age. 14 Q Was that a litigated cane or a governmental 15 investigation? V7hat was it? 16 A It was a personal damage suit. 17 Q Do you remember the nano of the case? 18 A No, I don't. 19 Q Did the case go to trial? 20 A Yes, it did. Q War. it a jury case? 21 A ieO f Q A. e 22 23 Q Was there a verdict? A I believe there wan. 24 ' i 25 C Do you know what the verdict was? J. I o WATER_PCB-00053886 1 A I believe the verdict -- I do not know definitely 2 what the verdict was. 1 just -- 3 Q Do you know if Monsanto v?on or lost? 4 A Monsanto was not involved. 5 Q Who was involved? 6 A General Electric. 7 Q Do you know if General Electric won or lost? 8 A I don't know. 9 Q You said it was Knoxville, Tennessuo? 10 A That's right. 11 Q Do you know if it was the federal or state 12 court? 13 A State. 14 Q Did you also give your deposit-Lon i.i that case? 15 A Wo, sir. 16 Q Besides tue testimony in the case in Knoxville, 17 have you testified concerning PCIs? 18 A Yes, sir. 19 Q Where? 20 A Cincinnati, Onio. 21 Q When was that? 22 A Two to three years ago. 23 Q Was that a state or federal court case? i 24 A It was an OSHA hearing. It wasn*t a court. 25 Q Was Monsanto involved? 17 9 WATER_PCB-00053887 1 A No, sir. 2 Q Who was involved? 3 A Cincinnati Gas and Electric and OSHA* . 4 Q Were you acting as a consultant, at the time to 5 Cincinnati Gas and Electric? 6 A I was a consultant on tha., can., if that's what 7 you mean. 8 Q Do you know whatOSIIA'u claim was i.- tintcans? 9 A Yes, sir. 10 Q What was it? A That tv* Cincinnati Cun a.idElectric people who 11 12 were repairing capacitors were exposed t, in an undue 13 manner, to PCB vapors and/or flui k. . 14 0 Did they claim to enhitLi any adverse health 15 effects? 16 A Did vd.o claim? 17 Q The workers. 18 A No, sir, they did not. 19 Q Have you testified in at other hearing or court 20 case besides the two you havft i.iOri i"t-j. Oll&C-t, i A Yes, sir. 21 Q What? 22 23 A Ward Transformer Company Q Warror? 24 25 A Ward, W-a-r-d. 1 ICC WATER_PCB-00053888 1 0 When was that? ' 2 A That was two to four years ago. 3 Q What type of proceeding was that. Doctor Kelly? . i' 4 A That was a criminal case. -5 0 Against who? 6 A Mr. Ward. 7 O What was the claim that involved PC3? 8 A That he knowingly conspired to spill PCBs over 9 a hundred twenty miles of various state and county highways, 10 the shoul lers. 11 Q Where was that pending? 12 A I think it was Raleigh-Durham. 13 Q Do you know the result of that case? 14 A Yes, sir. 15 Q What was the result? 16 A The government claims were unfounded. 17 Q Is that the United States versus Ward? 18 A I think it was. 19 Q Or was that a state case? 20 A They had government attorneys in there, and they had government witnesses. I can not say, but -- I 21 j 22 don't know. | 23 Q If you don't know, that's all I need`to know. 1 Besides the three you have already testified 1 24 25 about, Doctor Kelly,have you testified at any other hearing 181 WATER_PCB-00053889 1 or proceeding? 2 MR. FEATHERSTONE: On PCBs? 3 MR. JOHN: Yes, sir. A No, sir. I can't thin): of any. r* ;' 5 0tlier than these three I mentioned? 6 Q (By Mr. John) Yes, sir. 7 A I can't think of any. 8 Q Have von consulted with anyon. else concerning 9 PCBs? A Yea, sir. 10 Q Who? 11 A American Steel Founderiou in Granite City, Illinois. 12 13 Q When was that consultation? 14 A Within the last year. Q What was the nature of too consultation.' 15 A There was a fire in vuic. PCB fluids wars 16 liberated from a transformer during the course of the fere, 17 18 and the -- 19 MR. FEATH .GRS TONE: Go ahead an? finish your answer. 20 A (Continuing) -- and toe company aslced me to 21 examine the workers to see if any harm had occurred. 22 Q (By Mr. John) Did you determine whether or not 23 , I any harm ha 1 occurred? 24 25 A Yes, sir. 1 c w 2 WATER_PCB-00053890 1 0 Had any harmoccurred? 2 A None. 3 Q Did you prepare a report? 4 A Yes, sir. 5 p Do you have a copy of that report in your 6 personal files? 7 A I presume I do. I don't know. 8 0 Doctor, do you keep an office for your consulting 9 business, now? 10 A Mot per se. I have an office in my hou^c. 11 Q Is tvv: where the files would be located that 12 you do have? 13 A That's right. 14 0 Have you done any other consulting concernin' 15 PCBs? 16 A Yes, sir. 17 Q What wu? that? 18 A Onion Electric. 19 Q When? 20 A Within the last year an I a half. Q What was the nature of tnat consultation? 21 A It was another case in wnicn 03HA stated -- 03HA 22 23 investigated an employee complaint that there iight be 1 24 adverse effects from PCBs. 25 Q What did you do? WATER_PCB-00053891 PENGAO CO .. BAYONNE. 1 A I talked to the OSHA people. I talked to employees, and I examined the reports that NIOSH gave Union 2 Electric. 3 Q What was the nature of the claim by the employee? -4 5 MR. FEATEERSTONE: Was it a claim by an employee? THE WITHES3: ' A claim to OSI-ISh. 6 MR. JOHN: Yes. 7 A We were wondering whether or not FCBs might 8 9 be harming us. Q (By Mr. John) Did you make a determination 10 based upon your review? 11 A Yes, sir. 12 Q What was yourconclusion'1 13 A I agreed with the 0E!!.\ fin lings than PChs wo re 14 no t harming their employees. 15 Q Did you prepare any resorts? 16 A No, sir. 17 0 v Have you done any otner consulcations with 18 respect to PCBs"5 19 A Not that I can recall. 20 Q Besides your consultatio.. and the testimony 21 in the proceedings that you indicated to us, have you 22 given a statement in any other matter to the newspapers, 23 i to a magazine, to anyone else concerning PCBs since you 24 left Monsanto? 25 10 1 WATER_PCB-00053892 1 A You mean a written statement? 2 Q Yes, sir. 3 A No, sir. 4 Q Or an oral statementthat someone elsetranscribed 5 into a written statement? 6 A Ho, sir. 7 Q I would like to go back to tnu period after 8 the war, 194 6 , when you returned a.mi became me medical,, 9 director of Monsanto. 10 A Yes, sir. Q Wh.' w-> j in the MedicalDepartment resides yourself 11 12 between the time tnat you jjecumc mei-.cal director and 13 Doctor Wheeler joined the :iadicu_ Department as a 14 toxicologist? 15 A V<Y hH-J i:\ Sait, c i<oaio .. nurse and technician -- 16 that is, the Central Mediccti Department. 17 It's hr. VTheeler, by tee wav, not Doctor Wheeler. 18 0 I am sorry. 19 A We had doctors in various plants of Monsanto. 20 We had nurses in various planus or Monsanto. If you are speaking -- 21 Q I air. talking about the Central Medical Department. 22 23 A We had a nurse, a medical technician,^ secretary I and myself. 24 25 Q And the medical technician's job was to revie.r, 10 u WATER_PCB-00053893 ] take blood samples, and do clinical tests? 2 A That's correct. 3 Q After Mr. Wheeler arrived and became a part - 4 of the Medical Department, was there any additional staff 5 in the Medical Department? 6 A Another secretary. 7 Q How about between 1952 -- which is, I believe, 8 when Mr. Wheeler came to your best recollection -- and 9 the time that you left 2>lonsanto in 1975? 10 A Did you finish the sentence? I don't know 11 what you asked. 12 Q Who else was in the Medical Department? 13 A We engaged, during the course of those years 14 from 1952 when Mr. Wheeler came, tnree industrial hygienists, 15 one toxicologist -- Doctor Hunter who died. Doctor Levinsksas, 16 a toxicologist -- we engaged a Doctor Johannesburg (phonetic) 17 not Johannesburg -- Johannson (phonetic) as another 18 toxicologist. 19 Q Were these all the people, other than secretaries, 20 who were in the Medical Department between the time 21 Mr. Wheeler arrived and 1975 when you left Monsanto? 22 A Yes, sir. , 23 HI;. FEATHERS TONE: Do you understand he question 24 goes through 1975? 25 Q (By Mr. John) When you retired. 186 WATER_PCB-00053894 1 MR. FEATHERSTONE: X mean, if you answered -- 2 A (Continuing) I am sorry. There was also -- 3 we also had two part-time doctors in the -- we had two 4 part-time doctors, a Doctor Mezera who is now dead and 5 a Doctor Malt (phonetic) who is still doing part-time clinical 6 work in the dispensary. We had a Doctor Morris Johnson 7 who was the assistant medical director vno left us about 8 three years before X retired, and a Doctor George 9 Rausch (phonetic) who succeeded me as medical director. 10 Ho was there during the last two years, 1973 to 1975. 11 MR. EHhEIERSTONE: How aoout Doctor Wrignt? 12 A (Continuing) Doctor Paul Wrignt was another 13 toxicologist. 14 Q {?>/ Mr. Joan) Does thuc exnaust your recollection 15 as to the people who wore there during tnat period? 16 THE WITNESS s Off the record. 17 MR. FEATHERSTONE: No. Answer the question a; 18 best you can. 19 A Yes, as best.I can. f .! 20 Q (By Mr. John) Doctor Xoiiy, wnat is a toxicologist; 21 A 1. toxicologist is an individual who by training 22 and experience devotes himself to the properties, to the i 23 pharmacological and/or harmful -- and/or potential 24 harmful effects of compounds. ! i i | 25 Q Jr it a branch of medicine or a branch of science? I io WATER_PCB-00053895 1 A Those two words are not different. Medicine 2 is a science. 3 Q Is that a branch of medicine? ' 4 A It can be. j s 0 Is it normally? ,, 6 A There are physicians who are uoxicologists; 7 there are physicians of medicine who arc toxicologists. 8 There are doctors o.^ veterinary medicine wno are toxicologists 9 There are biochemists who are toxicologists. There arc 10 pharmacologists who are toxicologists. 11 Thar.: is no strict discipline to say I am a PaD 12 in toxicology. They might be offering then now; bat up 13 to now, the toxicologists were gotten from those disciplines. 14 In the early days, all toxicologists were 15 physicians. 16 Q Are you a toxicologist? 17 A No, sir. 18 Q Have you ever been a toxicologist? 19 A No, sir. 20 Q Do you profess any expertise m toxicology even 21 though you wouldn't describe yourself as a toxicologist? 22 A Yes, sir. 23 Q How would you describe your expertise in toxicology? .\ 24 hh. FEATHERSTONE: Today? ' 25 MR. JOHN: Yes, today. 153 WATER_PCB-00053896 1 A My expertise in toxicology is as one who can 2 interpret toxicological reports, who can determine on 3 the basis of my past education, experience and contact 4 with toxicologists whether or not a toxic, a hazardous 1 i 5 occurrence might occur, a hazardous event 'might occur given j 6 if I were to know the duration, the extent of the exposure- 7 and the compound to which the individual was exposed. 8 Q Before Mr. Wheeler arrived in 1952, did you rely 9 upon outside toxicologists to determine the toxicity as to J 10 the various compounds that you were reviewing for Monsanto? | 11 A Yes, sir. ; 12 Q And then,you would .interpretthe toxicological 13 reports that were provided you by the outside sources; ; I i j 14 is that correct? j 15 16 17 18 ' 19 A Yes, sir. Q I take ityour expertisedeveloped from reviewing these toxicological reports and combining them with your medical background to determine what potential effects they would have on human beings? j i 20 A No, sir. : 21 Q That is not correct? ; 22 A No, sir. 23 Q Correct me where I am wrong. : j 1 ; 1 j ! i 24 A Because, in addition tothosetwo things you | i 25 mentioned, there were frequent consultations with toxicologjsfcs. 189 WATER_PCB-00053897 1 There were frequent meetings, scientific sessions, at 2 which toxicological papers were given and discussed. 3 Q You mean you attended various meetings where 4 toxicological papers were discussed? 5 A Yes, sir. 6 Q You mean general toxicology papers or the specific 7 reports of compounds you were having investigated? 8 A Repeat that question because I can not answer 9 it in the form you have given it to me 10 Q My changed question, Doctor Kelly, is, Did II you attend toxicological seminars to enhance your knowledge 12 of toxicology? 13 A Yes, sir. 14 Q During this period of time? 15 A Yes,sir. 16 Q Are those the meetings where various papers 17 were reviewed? 18 A Yes, sir. 19 Q So, it was general seminars concerning toxicology 20 as opposed to a particular product that Monsanto was 21 marketing? 22 A No, sir. There were general seminars which 23 included specific toxicological discussions of jvarious 24 compounds some of which might have been products Mons ary 25 used, some of them products that Monsanto might have 190 WATER_PCB-00053898 1 manufactured 2 0 And you were a regular attendee of these various 3 meetings? 4 A What do you mean "regular", sir? 5 Q A couple times a year. 6 A No, sir, it was not that often. 7 Q How often was it? 8 A Once a year, probably) and these were not only 9 toxicological seminars. Toxicological papers were given 10 at industrial medicine raeetigs. As part of an industrial 11 meeting, a half day might be devoted to toxicology. 12 0 Besides what you have already testified to, 13 Doctor Kelly, what other input did you have in the dis:*.ir.d inc 14 of toxicology up to the time that Mt: . Wheeler arriw 15 at Monsanto? 16 MR. FEATHERSTONE; What other input? 17 MR. JOHN) Yes, sir. 18 MR. FEATHERSTONE. You mean what other source.;.' 19 of knowledge did ha have about toxicology? 20 MR. JOHN) Right. 21 A X read all the toxicological journals in the 22 English language that I knew of. 23 Q (By John) All of them? , 24 A There were only three or four. 25 0 Those were regular publications? 191 WATER_PCB-00053899 1 A Yes, sir 2 Q Do you remember what they ware? 3 MR. FEATHERSTONE: This is up to the time 1952 4 or whenever Mr. Wheeler came on board. 5 A One was, I think, Annals of Environmental Toxicology. 6 One was the British Journal of Industrial Hygiene and 7 Toxicology -- I am not sure about these names, what the j i j 8 titles wore thirty years ago. In the industrial medical J 9 journals, toxicology items were toxicology article.'. i j j 10 were there. That was the American Journal of Occupational j ' ~ 1 11 Medicine, the American Public Health Journal. Science j 12 was another one. 13 There may be others that I forget, but they ! s ! 14 changed from the time of 1936 when I came with Monsanto 15 until Mr. Wheeler came, I do not knov: if more were ; 16 added at that time, but there were only three or four or j 17 five that were subscribed to. | 18 Q Mr. Wheeler was an industrial hygienist? 19 A Yes, sir. 20 Q Did he have a toxicological background? 21 A No, sir. j i l i 22 Q Was he involved at all in your determination ox 23 evaluation of the toxicological reports on various 24 compounds that you sent to outside lab8? 25 A No, sir. 192 WATER_PCB-00053900 1 Q When was the first time that you had a toxicologist 2 in the Medical Department? 3 A Whan Doctor Hunt was engaged, which I think 4 was '62, around there. 5 Q So, between the time that you started and 1962, 6 you were the sole person at Monsanto who evaluated 7 toxicological reports concerning compounds; is that right? 8 A Yes, sir. 9 Q After Doctor Hunt arrived in 1962, did he 10 evaluate the toxicological reports? 11 A Yes, sir. 12 Q Did you both do it at that time, or did he 13 assume that function? 14 A No. We both did it. He evaluated it, and he 15 talked it over with me. 16 Q So, it would be fair to say that no compound 17 that was studied for its toxicological effects went out 18 of Monsanto without you having reviewed it? 19 A No, sir, that's not fair to state. 20 0 State it fairly for me. 21 A There were minor compounds that were subjected 22 to acute screening that he had to do just to find out i 23 what the freight classification was that went jut, and he 24 would do those routinely, and I would never see them, 25 Q 1 believe you testified yesterday that you 193 WATER_PCB-00053901 1 considered part of your responsibilities in the Medical 2 Department to determine the toxicological effects of 3 various compounds upon workers at Monsanto. 4 A Yes, sir. 5 Q Do you consider it a part of your responsibility 6 to determine the toxicological effects of various 7 compounds on wildlife? 8 MR. FEATHERSTONE: What date? Do you have a 9 pretty good date in mind? 10 MR. JOHN: Any time up through the period 1969. 11 A Yes, sir. 12 Q (By Mr. John) What did you consider that part 13 of your responsibility? 14 A In 1968 or 1969, when it was alleged to shovr 15 that Monsanto products had an effect on wildlife. 16 MR. FEATHERSTONE: These are PCBs, now, Doctor? 17 THE WITNESS: PCBs. 18 Q (By Mr. John) Prior to 1968 and 1969, were 19 there any other products at Monsanto that were determined 20 to have an effect on wildlife? 21 A Yes, sir. 22 Q What? 23 A Product 1080, a phosphate ester insecticide. 24 Q When was that determined? 25 A I would gather some time in the late fifties.. j j j i j j j 194 WATER_PCB-00053902 1 Q What was your involvement in that circumstance 2 or situation? 3 MR. FEATHERSTONE: We are talking about the 4 1080 insecticide, now, Mr. John? 5 MR. JOHN: Yes. 6 MR. FEATHERSTONE: What's the relevancy of that 7 to this litigation? 8 MR. JOHN: To find out the scope of the Medical 9 Department during the period that we considered to be 10 relevant in this litigation. 11 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Which is? 12 MR. JOHN: As far as Doctor Kelly, from the time 13 he started with Monsanto until he left Monsanto, 14 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Doctor, have you given a 15 date on when this was done? 16 MR. JOHN: He said the fifties, late fifties, 17 THE WITNESS: Probably the fifties. 18 MR. FEATHERSTONE: You can describe generally 19 for Mr. John at this stage what your involvement was. 20 A 1080 was an insecticide that was used for rat 21 killing. It would kill the rats; and if the pet dog would 22 eat the rat, there was enough 1030 left in the rat to * 23 kill the dog. j 24 Q (By Mr. John) What was your involvement, 25 Doctor Kelly, with this situation? is my question. 195 WATER_PCB-00053903 1 MR. FEATHERSTONE: I think he wants to know whether 2 you had any test done or something like that. 3 Q (By Mr. John) Had you had tests done prior to 4 the time this product was marketed? 5 A Yes, sir. 6 Q Did it deal with the problem that was discovered 7 about the -- 8 A It was not discovered. This was a product known 9 to kill, put out to kill rats, to kill mammals, so it 10 did not come as a surprise it would kill dogs. 11 MR. FEATHERSTONE: You knew before it was 12 marketed? 13 THE WITNESS: Yes. 14 Q (By Mr. John) And you did testing to determi 15 the lethal dose effect of it? 16 A Yes, sir, 17 Q And those were the same acute tests that were 18 used to test PCB? 19 A Yes, sir. ' 20 (Snort break.) 21 Q (By Mr. John) Doctor Kelly, we were discussing 22 the responsibility for determining toxicological effects 23 on wildlife. j 24 A Yes, sir. 25 Q In order to make that determination, you would 196 WATER PCB-00053904 1 have to determine, 1 would suspect, what possibilities 2 there were for a particular product to get into an area 3 where it could affect wildlife; is that right? 4 A Say that over -- would I have to determine? 5 Q Yes, sir. 6 A Repeat that. 7 MR. JOHN: Read the question back. 8 (Whereupon, the court reporter read back the 9 1 10 following question: QUESTION: "In order to make that determination, ^ 11 you would have to determine, I would suspect, what ! 12 possibilities there were for a particular product to get i 13 into an area where it could affect wildlife; is that right?",1 i1 14 A No, sir. ! 15 Q (By Mr. John) You would not need to know? ; 1 16 A That's not what you asked. You said I would 17 have to determine. 18 Q All right. I don't want to get caught up in 19 semantics 20 A Determine means to me I would have to find it 1 f 21 out myself. 22 Q Finding out yourself could be by asking other 23 people? ' i ! 24 A Or having other people tell me. ! 25 Q Did you feel it was a part of the responsibility j i 197 WATER_PCB-00053905 1 to ask other people about the possibilities or potential 2 for a particular product to be in areas where wildlife 3 could be affected? 4 A When? 5 Q Between 1946 and 1969. 6 A Yes, sir. 7 Q HOw did you go about becoming aware of whether 8 a particular product would be in an area where it would 9 affect wildlife? 10 A In 1967, there was a newspaper report by a 11 Doctor Jensen who stated that a PCB was found in an area 12 where it could affect wildlife. 13 Q I would like to be a little more general than 14 that, 15 First of all, Doctor, let me restate it. 16 I am talking about your general responsibilities 17 as the madical director of Monsanto to determine 18 toxicological effects of various products. All right? 19 A Yes, sir. 20 Q I believe you testified yesterday that in order ! 21 to make -- part of your determination was the various uses , 22 for which the product was made. , 23 A Yes, sir. i 24 Q What I would like to find out is how did you go 25 about acquainting yourself to the uses of a particular prodv`4 198 WATER_PCB-00053906 I in your evaluation of that product? 2 A By reading copy that would be put out in bulletins 3 of Monsanto, by talking with the commercial development 4 people who explained to me the proposed uses of a Monsanto 5 product. 6 Q Are those the technical bulletins that you 7 referred to? 8 A Yes, sir, technical or developmental bulletins. 9 Q Once you became aware of the information with 10 respect to the uses, what would you do with it? How would 11 it become part of your evaluation? 12 A If any of the proposed uses appeared to me to 13 present any risk to humans, I would then make an evaluation 14 of that compound in regard to what we knew about the 15 toxicology and what we knew about the extent, the anticipated , 16 or expected exposure. f 17 Q Would you also take that information to determine 07002 00 what warnings or labeling would be necessary or adequate 2 19 for a particular product? j I 20 A Yes, sir. i j oi 21 Q Between 1946 and 1969, can you think of any z a. , 22 product that was manufactured by Monsanto whose intended 23 use was to be used in a closed system but that product. 24 to your knowledge, could escape from that closed system 25 due to various breakdowns or occurrences? 1 1 99 WATER_PCB-00053907 1 A Yes, sir. 2 Q What? . 3 MR. FEATHERSTONEs Are you asking for specific 4 product names? 5 MR. JOHN: Well, generally. If he wants to 6 use specific product names, that's fine; but I am asking 7 for a general product where he took into consideration 8 that product would escape from a closed system, 9 MR. FEATHERSTONE: I would not refer to specific product names. You can describe it by use. 10 MR. JOHN: Thats fine. 11 12 A Of course, the general principal of a closed 13 system is the material is closed. I also know that on ! j 14 rare occasions closed systems break so that any compound j 15 that might be in a closed system could, on occasion, escape 16 to the atmosphere. 17 Q (By Mr. John) Did you take that into consideration 18 in your evaluations of the various products? 19 A Yes, sir. Q Can you tell mewhat youwould do once you 20 ' i I i 21 determined that a particular product used in a closed ! I 22 system could escape to the atmosphere or to the environment? i ;i 23 A Yes, sir? ^ 24 Q What? 25 A If a compound couldescape tothe atmosphere -- j 200 WATER PCB-00053908 1 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Is this work atmosphere? 2 A (Continuing) Yes. 3 I was going to say I would be concerned with 4 the effects on the individual or individuals who would 5 come in contact with that product following its escape. 6 Q (By Mr. John) And I take it you translate that 7 into the warnings or the precautions on a particular 8 product? 9 A That's correct, or safe handling procedures. 10 Q So, you did take into consideration that products 11 designed for closed systems could escape into the work 12 environment? 13 A Might escape. 14 Q Into the work environment? 15 A Yes, sir, 16 Q And you considered it part of your responsibility 17 to deal with that potentiality insofar as it affected or 18 could affect health? 19 MR. FEATHERSTONEr Workers' health? 20 MR. JOHN; Right. 21 A Yes, sir. 22 Q (By Mr. John) Now, let's go a step further. 23 Did you understand, during the period^ that you 24 were a medical director, that various products designed 25 for closed systems could escape into the environment, outside 201 WATER_PCB-00053909 1 of the workers * environment due to malfunctions, spillage, 2 breakdowns, whatever? 3 h Say that over. 4 (Whereupon, the court reporter read back the 5 previous question.) 6 7i A Yes, air. Q (By Mr. John) Did you take that into consideration 8 in your evaluation of a product for marketing by Monsanto'?' ! 9 A Yes, sir. i i 10 Q What would you do in your evaluation with the j i 11 knowledge of a potential that the product could accidentally j 12 escape into the environment outside of the workers1 13 environment? 14 A I would put on a warning such as "Do not alio, 15 to get in contact with feed or grain" or other warnings 16 of that type. 17 MR. FEATHERSTONE j If there was a perceived risk? 18 ' 19 THE WITNESS: If there was a perceived risk. Q (By Mr. John) That's another element. ! 20 risk? 21 Would you only put it on if there was a perceived j i | I 22 A Yes, sir. ; 23 QCan you give me an example of a product, i ' 24 Doctor Kelly, that you did put on such a warning or a 25 precaution? i 202 WATER_PCB-00053910 1 A Every one of our insecticides we ever shipped 2 had that warning on it -- "Do not allow to come in contact 3 with feed or grain". 4 0 But insecticides are not designed for a closed 5 system, are they? 6 A No, but if -- 7 MR. FEATHERSTONE: You answered the question, 8 Doctor. 9 A (Continuing) No, sir. 10 Q (By Mr. John) Can you think of any product 11 designed for a closed system that you anticipated would 12 get outside of the closed system under the circumstances 13 we have been discussing where you did put such a precaution 14 or warning or labeling concerning not to allow it to 15 get into grain or feed or whatever? 16 A 1 can't recall. 17 Q Fair enough. 18 You testified that you would put the labeling 19 or warnings on the products that you would have expected -- 20 that you could have expected -- to got out if you perceived 21 a risk. 22 A If I perceived arisk, yes, sir. i 23 Q And I take it that's a risk to eitherjwild.!:) fe 24 or human health? 25 A No, sir. Human health. 203 WATER PCB-00053911 1 0 Not the wildlife? 2 A Yes, air. 3 Q What factors would youtaka intoconsideration 4 to determine whether or not there was a risk to human 5 health? 6 A We are talking, now, about a closed system in 7 a factoryr is that correct? 8 Q Correct. 9 A The factors I would take into consideration would 10 be the amount of exposure, the type of exposure and the 11 toxicity of the product. 12 Q How would you obtain the information to make 13 those determinations, Doctor Kelly? 14 A The toxicity information,obviously, is gained 15 by toxicological testing. 16 The other possibility of the exposure and the 17 extent of exposure was gained, was obtained, by me through 18 reading the proposed technical bulletins and my general 19 knowledge of industrial applications. 20 Q Would you talk to the salesmen in the field of. 21 Monsanto concerning their knowledge about the potentiality 22 of the escape of these particular products? 23 A No, sir, unless an occurrence had occurred * 24 Q Why wouldn't you talk to the salesmen if you 25 wanted to know tha exposure and the potential exposure of 204 WATER_PCB-00053912 1 human* to a particular product? 2 A Because the people who designed the products 3 and who wrote the bulletins and who developed the uses of 4 the products were the ones that were closer to fee and 5 would know what the material was being sold for. 6 Q Is that the Research and Development Department? 7 A The Development Department and the Marketing 8 Department in Saint Louis. 9 0 Would you ask them about the particular uses 10 and the potentiality of the escape of these products for 11 use in your evaluation? 12 A Escape where? Onto the worker? 13 Q Yes, or into the environment< 14 A There are two questions there 15 As far as the workers are concerned, the. bulletin 16 would say what the uses were. 17 MR. FEATHERSTONE; Doctor, the question was, 18 Did you discuss these things with the research and 19 commercial development people? 20 MR. JOHN; I believe he said it was the 21 Development Dapaxtment. 22 THE WITNESS: I could have. 23 Q (By Mr. John) Do you recall that youj did? 24 MR. feathersTONE: Do you have a specific product 25 in mind, Mr. John? 205 WATER_PCB-00053913 MR. JOHN* No, any product. I am still talking 1 2 generally, and I believe the doctor is still talking 3 generally. MR. FEATHERSTONE: 1 believe the question is one 4 of procedure -- do you recall that you did that from time 5 6 to time 1 7 A Yes, from time to time, 1 did. 8 Q (By Mr. John) Do you recall under what 9 circumstances you would do it and under what circumstance:: you would not do it? 10 A Well, I can give you a circumstance 11 did it. 12 vM i 13 0 Okay. 14 A A man came to me and said we h?vo a plastic we are manufacturing that has various ingredients in il, 15 16 and they are used for surveyors' stakes, and cows art eating them. Is this liable to hurt the cowg? 17 Q Then, you would look at your toxicological 18 19 data to determine whether or not, in your opinion, the amount of paint on the stakes would affect the cows? 20 A It wasn't the paint. These were vinyl atripr 21 that were hanging -- in fact, in that particular case, 22 i we fed it to cows to see if it did really hurt them, 23 I Q Did you ever do that prior to the time the prodact 24 was marketed -- when I say "do that", I mean make that type 25 206 WATER_PCB-00053914 1 of analysis that this product is going to be out in 2 the environment or can get in the environment and could 3 possibly affect -- 4 A No, sir. 5 Q So, it was an after-the-fact analysis; is that 6 correct? 7 A Yes, sir. if we perceived a risk, however, we 8 might have. 9 Q But generally, it was an after-the-fact annlyri r- 10 of particular situations brought to you of problems that 11 had been developed? 12 MR. FEATHERSTONE: We are talking about industrial 13 chemicals, now? 14 MR. JOHNJ Yes. 15 A Yes. 16 MR. JOHN: All ray questions are dealing with 17 industrial chemicals. 18 19 1969? MR. FEATHERS TONE; Are you still up to the pe.. 20 MR. JOHN; Yes. THE WITNESS; Were you in 1969? 21 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Up to the period 1969. 22 23 THE WITNESS s You mean up to the timej of the Jensen work? 24 25 MR. JOHN; Yes, sir. 207 WATER PCB-00053915 1 MR* FEATHERSTONEi And he is talking about PCB 2 products. 3 THE WITNESSi Yes, sir* 4 Now, would you tell me what you asked me? 5 MR. JOHN: Strike it. 6 Q (By Mr. John) Doctor Kelly, what is an extender 7 used with insecticides -- do you knov; what an extender is? 8 A An extender is something if used in insecticides 9 it prolongs the use of the product. 10 Q What's the mechanism that prolongs the use? 11 A I don't know. 12 (Whereupon, Kelly Deposition Exhibit 1 marked 13 for identification by the court reporter.) 14 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Do you want him to read 15 the thing, the document? 16 MR. JOHN: No. 1 just want to point out and 17 ask him about a particular aspect of it, 18 ' 19 MR. FEATHERSTONE? Is there any reason, Mr. John, you have a May 25, 1972 attachment to a February 3, 1971 20 letter? 21 MR. JOHN; Because that's the way it was produce" j 22 to us, as I understand. I j 'i 23 MR. FEATHERSTONEi The question is, IB there any j 24 reason to introduce it this way? i ; 25 MR. JOHN: Not to my knowledge. I am not interested 208 WATER_PCB-00053916 1 in the last page of it, 2 Q (By Mr. John) Take a look at it. Doctor Kelly, 3 and see if you recognize -- 4 MR. FEATHERSTONEi Look at it long enough to see 5 if you recognize it. 6 0 (By Mr. John) Do you recognise that document? 7 A Yes. 8 Q You are the author of that document? 9 A Yes. 10 Q Do you know who Griffith E. Quinbyf M.D. is? 11 A Yes, sir. 12 0 Who is ho? 13 A He is a physician and a -- I do not knew if he 14 ever had any public health appointment, but he is an 15 individual very interested in the environment on the 16 West Coast. 17 Q Where does he live? 18 A Washington, California I don't know what hi;1 19 address is there. 20 Q It's not. on there. 21 Does he have any affiliation with any company, 22 to your knowledge? 23 A Not tliat I know of. j 24 Q This was a private inquiry to you; is that 25 correct? 209 WATER_PCB-00053917 1 A Yes, air. 2 Q Would you turn to Page 2 of Kelly Deposition 3 Exhibit 1; and under Number 2, it says "Monsanto has been 4 aware that in the early and mid 1950s there was some use 5 of PCBs as extenders for pesticides where the formulations 6 were applied to field crops or, in the case of research 7 sponsored in New York State not participated in by Monsanto, 8 on forests for attempted control of elm tree disease." 9 A Yes, sir. 10 Q Where did you learn that, that PCBs were used for 11 extenders for pesticides in the fifties? 12 A Some time later in the fifties, after they were 13 used. 14 Q Do you remember when, Doctor Kelly? 15 A No, I don't; I don't know the date. , 16 Q Was it in the fifties? o 1 17 MR. FEATRERST0NE: He already answered that. 00 A I am not sure of that; I don't know when we learned 2 ' 19 it. PENGAO CO.. BAYONNE. I 20 Q (By Mr. John) Do you recall how you learned it? i o o A Yes. Somebody told me in our company that the j 3 21 2 i a. I 22 Department of Agriculture has been using and recommending : 23 PCBs for an extender in some insecticides -- we;don't know j 24 whether anybody ever did it or not -- did we ever sell it 25 for that And wc said no, we never sold it for that. j 07002 210 WATER_PCB-00053918 1 So, as far as I know -- I don't know when 2 we found out. I certainly never knew before it was used 3 that it was going to be used. 4 Q What did you do after you learned it had been 5 used? 6 A It happened years before, I did nothing, I 7 said was anybody selling it for that, and they said no. 8 Q Did you perceive any potential health hazard 9 from using PCBs as extenders in pesticides and applied to 10 field crops? 11 A Health hazards to -- 12 0 Human beings. 13 A I didn't know how they were used. I didn't know 14 how much they were being used > I didn't know hov,' ofte^ 15 they were being used. I didn't know about the crops they 16 were being used on. I didn't know how the applier usee 17 it, so I had no baric to make a judgment. 18 Q Did you undertake to find the answers to the 19 questions you just elaborated on? 20 A No, sir. 21 Q Did you undertake to determine whether or not this was still e use that was being made of PCBs? 22 23 A Yac. j 24 Q Hov did. you go about that inquiry? 25 A I asked our development and sales people are these 211 WATER_PCB-00053919 1 people up in New York still doing this, and they said no. 2 I don't know how much they used. It was years 3 ago, and I don't know anything about it. 4 Q Doctor Kelly,do you have an opinion today as to 5 whether the use of PCBs as extenders for pesticides being 6 applied to field crops could present a health hazard? 7 A I still don't -- I can't have an opinion unless 8 I know how much is liable to be used. I don't know the 9 mechanism. 10 Q So, you don't have an opinion? 11 A I don't have an opinion. 12 Q Based on a number of factors supplied to you to 13 reach an opinion; is that correct? 14 A Yes, sir. 15 Q Now, the next sentence after the one that 1 16 initially read, Doctor Kelly, states: "These experiments 17 were based on research efforts of the USDA." 18 A Yes, sir. 19 Q What is your knowledge in regard to that 20 information? 21 A In 3one publication of the United States Department of Agriculture they have a footnote saying that 22 23 PCBs oould or have been used as an extender in pome sort 24 of pesticides. That's all I know about them. 25 0 Do you know what that publication was? 212 WATER_PCB-00053920 1 A No, because when I saw it it was a five-to-ten- 2 year-old publication. 3 Q Did you have a file in the Medical Department 4 that would contain the information dealing with this 5 subject? Do you know? 6 A It might have it. 7 Q Do you recall one as you sit here today? 8 A Yes, sir, I recall a Department of Agriculture 9 bulletin or release that had this mentioned in the footnote. 10 MR. FEATHERSTONE: What is this? You mean 11 the substance of this sentence? 12 TEE WITNESS: That PCBs have or arc being used 13 as an extender or have a possibility of being used for 14 an extender, 15 Q (Fy Mr. John) Did you ever incorporate in any 16 of your cautionary labeling not to use PCBs as an extender? 17 A No, sir. 18 Q Now, the next sentence says: "As far as our 19 records indicate these were abortive attempts in using 20 the PCBs in 'broadcast applications' on perhaps all kinds 21 of crops". What do you mean by "broadcast applications"? 22 23 A You put a tractor, you put an instrument on a 24 tractor, and you send the tractor down the row of 25 crops? and this instrument scatters out like water from a 213 WATER_PCB-00053921 1 water sprinkler. 2 Q Skipping a sentence, the next sentence: "I don't 3 have exact figures but I would estimate that something 4 less than one hundred thousand pounds of PCBs were ever 5 used in experimental or semi-commercial applications." 6 Do you know where you obtained that information? 7 A I don't now. I don't recall where I got that 8 information. 9 Q here yov ever asked by anyone at Monsanto tc 10 evaluate PCBs for the use indicated in this letter a? 11 extenders in per-ti cider? 12 A ho, sir. 13 0 Prior to 1908, did you ever reevaluate PCBr 14 based on additional user of PCB products? 15 16 17 18 ' 19 A Yes, sir. Prior to 1908? Q Yes, sir. A Yes, sir. Q Let me limit it more. Let's take the Pydraul 20 PCB products, How nvsny times were they evaluated by you as 21 22 medical director'' | i ! j 23 -- A Whenever a proposed use came -- how Many times? j 24 I don't kno'' hoo many times. 25 Q Car you estimate how many times? j j ........................................................................................................................................... ......... ........ ............. i 214 WATER_PCB-00053922 1 A Three, four, five -- I can't estimate them. 2 Q It's not ten or twenty, I take it? 3 A No, I don't *-- I can't estimate it. It's not 4 two hundred. I know that. 5 Q It was reevaluated when you were advised of a 6 new proposed use for the product? is that correct? 7 A Yes, sir. 8 0 Was there ever a time when you learned of a 9 proposed use and asked yourself to reevaluate it for the-, 10 use? 11 MU. FEATHERSTONE: This is Pydraul? 12 MR. JOHN.- Yes, this is Pydraul, 13 A Yes, si r . 14 Q (By Mr. John) Under what circumstances? 15 A If *a situation occurred where we knew that the 16 use would involve confined spaces, then I would evaluate 17 whether or not we had adequate information to put enough 18 safe handling data on the material. 19 MR. FEATHERSTONE: This is a worker exposure? ! j I I 20 THE WITNESS: Worker exposure. 21 0 (By Mr. John) Doctor Kelly, let me make sure I understand. 22 23 Were there circumstances when you, reading the 24 Literature or the technical bulletins without officially 25 having been asked to reevaluate Pydraul, that you determined II ;I 215 WATER PCB-00053923 1 that you should reevaluate it based upon uses that you 2 became aware of? 3 A I never became aware of any uses that, to me, 4 purported any risk to humans so 1 did not have the 5 necessity for reevaluating Pydraul. 6 MR. FBATHERSTONE: You mean after it was marketed? 7 THE WITNESS: After it was marketed, 8 si (Hy Mr. John) Were there any circumstances with 9 any of the industrial division products where, you woull .10 initate a reevaluarion based upon your independent 11 determination tnne the product was being used in a way that 12 you previously were unaware of? 13 A 1 am sure there were, 14 Q How would you go about doing that? 15 A I would hear or a customer would call rae and say 16 these people are doing this with this product, and then 17 I would look at w'wt we knew about t~ne product, and say 18 either stop it or let's find out more about it. 19 Q You felt it was your responsibility to initiate 20 reevaluations of industrial products based upon your learning s 21 of different uses than you wore previously aware of; is 22 that a fair statement? 23 A Aio, six'. | 24 Q How ia it unfair? 25 A You are saying "uses". 216 WATER_PCB-00053924 1 Q Yes, sir. 2 A You have to qualify that by saying uses that 3 would present a hazard to people. 4 Q So qualified. 5 Then, the statement is fair? 6 A Let's repeat it to be fair. 7 MR. JOHN; Read back the question. . 8 HR. FEATHERSTONFi Do you want it reread, 9 Kr. John? 10 I-IR. JOHN: I would like the question reread. 11 (VTuoreupon, the court reporter read back 12 the following questions and answers: 13 QUESTION: "You felt it was your responsibility 14 to initats reevaluations of industrial products based 15 upon your learning o* different uses than you were previously 16 aware of; is that a fair statement? 17 ANSWER, "Ho, sir. 18 QUESTION; "Kow is it unfair? 19 ANSWER: You are saying 'uses'. 20 QUESTIOH: "yes, sir. 21 ANSWER: You have to qualify that by saying uses 22 that would present a hazard to people.") 23 Q (By Mr. John) I believe you indieat@4 that that 24 is a fair statement if it's qualified that the uses would 25 present a potential health risk. 217 WATER_PCB-00053925 1 A Yes, sir. 2 Q Can I see Kelly Deposition Exhibit 1, please? 3 In the first page of the letter, you refer to 4 Doctor Drinker's study at Harvard which I believe you 5 previously testified took place in 1933 . 6 A Yes, sir. 7 Q How many studies did Doctor Drinker do fo" 8 Monsanto? 9 A Two. 10 0 Waat was the time period for the first study? 11 A It was in 19, I guess, 6b. 12 MR. FEATHERSTONE: I960? 13 THE WITNESS: I'm sorry -- 1938 . 14 Q (By Mr. John) And, generally, what did that 15 study involve? 16 A He did two studies for Monsanto, either in 1!-3 17 or 1937 or 1538, around that. One was 1265 -- IS MR. FEATHERSTONEs Aroclor 1265? 19 A (Continuing) -- which is chlorinated byphenyl. 20 He did that and made us a report on it. He did Aroclor 1254, an inhalation study. We 21 never got any details of that particular report; but in 22 i 23 his publication he gave a safe, a maximum, tolerable love: 24 on 1254 at that particular time. 25 Those are the ones ne did for Monsanto. 218 WATER PCB-00053926 1 Q (By Mr. John) Was it as a result of those 2 two studies that an opinion or conclusion was reached that 3 the lower chlorinated byphenyl was more toxic than the 4 higher chlorinated byphenyl? 5 A Concluded by whom? 6 Q By Drinker. 7 A I can't answer tnat -- whet Drirher -- how 8 Drinker concluded, I dent know. 9 C You were never advised of hie conclusions in that 10 regard? 11 Kiv. nddd.nriETQNE; You have two different 12 questions. 13 One io, What was the basis of Drinker's conclusion; 14 and secondly, whether Doctor Kelly was advised of the 15 conclusion. ; i , 16 0 (By Hr. John) I misspoke if that's what I said. I 17 !#faat I .:.* a.siting is, Did Doctor Drinker's studies ! indicate that ti.^ lower chlorinated byphony 1 was more 07002 So * 19 toxic than the higher cLlorinuuod bypehnyl? i 20 A I don't til ini; it did. ` o 3 21 z Cl Q Arc you aware of any study that indicated that i !1 22 the higher chlorinated byphanyl, 1265, was more toxic i i 23 than the lower -- I mean, was lens toxic than t^ie lower? ; 24 iiZx. FLATHB hiTO!II!; Why don't you read back the 25 question, mu'an. >1 n WATER_PCB-00053927 1 (Whereupon, the court reporter read back 2 the previous question.) 3 MR. featherstone: I think Mr. John can restate 4 it. 5 C (By Mr. John) Let me go at it another way. 6 Doctor holly, as you sit here today, do you have 7 an opinion as to whether a higher chlorinated byphenyl 8 is more tonic or less toxic than a lower chlorinated byphenyl" 9 Ilh. ri.2'/Jill'RETONE s In what circumstances, j 10 Mr . John? 11 ML. JOIhi. In Pydraul. 12 HR. FLJ.TKDHSTONE: More toxic or less toxic to 13 what and under what circumstances? ! j j j 14 ft.. J To humane . i j 15 Mh. PLhillL'hTTOr.L: Can you answer that question? ( 16 TEE WITLESS: Not baaed just on that. 17 Q (2y Mi . dour.) What else do you need? 18 A You haw to find out, you have cc te.ll me what 19 the exposure is. There are different exposure rates. 20 There are different absorption rates. Higher chlorinatedc 21 are more viscous, or are more solid, chlorinated PCBs that 22 the lower ones. i 23 If a person would get the same amount]of 126 or 24 1242 into the body, 1 do not knot what the difference in 25 toxicity is. j Ii , I 1 ; WATER_PCB-00053928 Q My question was, Assuming the same concentrations 1 2 of inhalation or ingestion or exposure of toxicity, 3 I take it your answer is, then, you don't know? 4 A I don't knew. 5 MR. FEATHERSTONE` He doesn't know, Mr. John, 6 he told yon based on what information you gave him. 7 (Whereupon, Kelly Deposition Exhibit 2 marked 8 for identification by the court reporter,) I i j 9 O (Ry Mr. John) Doctor Kelly, would you. loch at i Kelly Deposition Exhibit 2 and identify that for me'7 10 A Mould !> 11 0 Mould you., please? 12 13 A Yes, sir. * ' ; ! 14 This 5s a letter from no to Doctor Spolynr dated February 14, 19 5 n, 15 16 0 Please refer to the second, third parag ran1 of that letter. 17 18 A Second paragraph? 19 Q Third paragraph. ! j j j ! I j * A Yes, sir. 20 0 Do you. recall that therewas someconfusion 21 concerning the toxicity on inhalation of Aroclor 1254 and 22 Aroclor 12fp^ 23 A Yes, sir, 24 , I Q What was that confusion, in youro\rr, mind? 25 ' : i 221 WATER PCB-00053929 1 A Wo never knew what Drinker tested, 2 Q Do you know, today, what he tested? 3 A We still do not know what he tested* 4 Q Do you know or do you have an opinion today as 5 to whether or not, as indicated in your letter, in 6 Kelly Deposition Exhibit 2, whether Aroclor 1254 is more i 7 or less toxic tha*. Aroclor 1268? 8 Mk. FLAVkERSl'OllL': In an inhalation test, 9 Mr*. John? 10 Hk. JOik,; Yes, on inhalation. 11 A I do noc .have an opinion based if the same 12 concentrationi Wt- IT C inhalaed? 13 Q (By llr. John) Yes, I am assuming the same concen 14 tration . 15 h 1 do not have an opinion based on the same 16 concentration being innaled, no, sir. 17 Q Did Monsanto ever do any studies to resolve the 18 confusion which is indicated in your letter of February 14, j 19 1950? 20 A Yes, sir. Q What studies were done? 21 ! | j 22 A We ran some inhalation studies at the.Kettering j Laboratory some time in the 1950s on two Aroolots, as 1 23 J !i 24 can recall. 1 am not familiar with which ones we ran, and ; i!I 25 I can't tell you the exact findings, but 1 am sure the reports WATER_PCB-00053930 1 are in the literature 2 Q Do you recall whether the higher chlorinated 3 Aroclors were more, less toxic on inhalation? 4 A I don't recall the details. 5 Q Going to the second paragraph of Kelly Deposition I i 6 Exhibit 2, the second to the last sentence -- that 7 paragraph which war dealing with the Brazil, Indiana : i I 1 j 8 incident -- sayo; "I suspected the possibility that the j 9 Aroclur fuiaec night have caused liver damage, but wat ! j 10 unable to obtain thic information over the phone," 11 A Yes, tit. 12 C Did yon ever attempt to determine whether your 13 suspicions were correct about whether the Arcelor caused ; I | ^ j 14 liver damage? | 15 Yeo, s-^r. i 16 Q What? 17 A It wn.. reported that the men shoved up with ! 18 jaundice which t:, a symptom o adverse effects on the liver. j 19 Q Is tliat where you concluded that you suspected 20 a liver problem cue. to the report that they had jaundice? 21 A Kc, sir. Y7e knew that -- no, sir, 22 G What was your suspicion founded on? j l 23 A All the work prior to that that was &^>ne vi th ; 24 PCBs with Arociors shoved that the liver was the toxic, 25 was tlie target organ. ' f i 9 n *> WATER_PCB-00053931 1 Q So, that was your suspicion? 2 A Yes. 3 MR. FEATHERSTONS I Are you done with Exhibit 2, 4 Mr. John? 5 MR. JOHN: Yes. ' 6 (thereupon, Kelly Deposition Exhibit 3 marked 7 for identification by the court reporter.) 8 Q {By Mr. John* Mr. Kelly, would you identify 9 Kelly Deposition Exhibit 3, please. 10 A Yes, six. It is a letter from nc to Mr. Litzsingor 11 discussing toxic." ty data on OS-95. 12 Q On th-- first page, the last sentence, it cays; 13 "It is, of course., based on our long-tern studies with 14 the basic chonioa? makeup o' 0E-n5." 15 A Y ; S , 3 ` r r . 16 Q What long-term studies are you referring to in 1 17 that memo? A The repeated inhalation studies with the Aroclors * 19 at the Kettering Laboratory. i 20 Q And those were the only studies you were referring o 5 21 to in that memo-1 z CL 22 A Yes, sir. ' 23 MR. FEATHERSTONE: You mean the long-^erm studies? 24 ME. JOHN: Right. 25 Q (By Mr. John) Dr. Kelly, yesterday I believe you : f 07002 00 224 WATER_PCB-00053932 1 testified that your first knowledge that Pydraul was in 2 the ecosystem was in 1969. 3 A No, sir. 4 Q When was your first knowledge of Pydraul being 5 in the ecosystem? 6 A I don't ever remember that Pydraul was told 7 to me to be in the ecosystem. 8 Q When was your first knowledge that Pydraul was 9 in the enviroumena? 10 A I think during this discussion, Pydraul per sc. j j : i! j 11 MR. FLATUS RS TONE { I think, Mr. John, if you recall' 12 the testimony yesterday, there was a confusion between 13 the witness and in.. Hynes as to whether the reference was j 14 to PCB or Pydraul. .: 15 Q Mx, uonn) Let1s take PCB. ; 16 A Ail right. | 17 Q When was your first knovjledge that PCBs were j 18 in the ecosystem; 19 MR. FLATHDRSTONL: Firm knowledge or a report 20 that they might be there? ! I i j 21 MR. JOHli; Areport. : 22 A What do you mean by the "ecosystem"? : 23 Q (By Mi-. John) In the water, in the lnd. i 24 A At the time of Jensen's work -- it was what - 25 1967 or 1963. i WATER_PCB-00053933 1 C You knew at that time, prior to 1967-1968 that 2 PCBs were nonbiodegradable? is that correct? 3 A No, sir, I didn't know that. 4 Q You did not knew that? 5 A No, sir, 6 C When did you first learn that PCBs were 7 nonbiodegradable 7 8 ME. FEATIIFPSTOtTE: Wait a minute . That's net 9 even a scientific fact. 10 Are you referring to certain FCTo that may be 11 more slowly degraded than others? 12 MP. Jy": Yes, that were extremely slowly 13 biodegradable. 14 V:'\ FT? A TRIERS TON' : Whan did he learn that so-. 15 PCBs were slowly biodegradable? 16 A Some time in late 1969 or the 1970c. 17 0 (By Mr. John) Did you have any idee a?: to how 18 long it too!: PC- . to biodegrade prior to that.period of 19 time? 20 A Prior t: 1969 or 1970, I had no idea how long it 21 took them. 22 Q Had any studies been undertaken by Monsanto to 23 determine ho." long they would take to biodagrad^? 24 A I can .net recall. 25 ML. FEATTIERSTONL: Wait until ho is done with WATER_PCB-00053934 ] his question. 2 Q (By Mr. John) Prior to 1967, what did you think 3 happened to PCBs after they were used for the industrial 4 purposes for which they were used? 5 A After they were -- say that over -- PCBs? 6 Q Yes, PCZ..: , 7 HP. FEAthERSTOKE: He wants to l;nov,' ho.; you 8 thought they were disposed of. 9 A 1 dor.' v 3:now. Maybe they stave-' with the product 10 for all I know. It depends on what TCP \,u.s being used for. 11 If PCB was being trod in an adhesive, it was probably on 12 a package; and tr.o;. the package may have been turned if 13 the package nay have been discarded. 14 If PCir were in use at an industrial chemical 15 in other waye and was found -- and they decided they 16 weren't going to be used any more or it was contaminated, 17 it was disposed --- it was my knowledge or my opinion tnst 18 they w'ere disposed according to industrial practices in 19 those days which I believe was a landfill. 20 Q Were yo~ aware that some industrial practices 21 in those days was to allow' some of these products to go 22 into waterways as a means of disposal? 23 Ml;. FEATHERSTOKE: PCB products? ( 24 Mh. JCMht Yes, PCB products. 25 A K o, a i r * WATER_PCB-00053935 1 Q (By Mr. John) You only thought they went into 2 landfills; is that correct? 3 A Yes, sir. 4 Q Did they pose any health hazards in landfills, ! 5 to your knowledge? 6 A Ho, sir. 7 Q Drd you nave any idea, prior to 1957 , how long /I | ! ; 8 these products would stay in a landfill? i 9 A hu, s*x. 'inis was an unreactive soluble compound, ` 10 unreactive cheiin.c&lly, unreactivo soluble compound; and 11 I thought iu 3tuyou in the landfill until it mignt be 12 broken down like other compounds in the landrill by soil ;I i ! | 13 and bacteria. | 14 C mat xo wnuu 1 aw; trying to gee at. 15 lour first knowledge that PCBs were in the I i 16 environment, in 19 5 7 or 1963, based on Jensen's study - 17 HR. FbAThiLkdTOiJh. Or Jensen's report in the 18 newspaper. 19 Q (Continuing) -- in the newspaper, I take it, ' 20 was a surprise to you? 21 A Yes, Sxr. 22 Q Was is a surprise because you thought,that PCBs 23 would biodegraut; or return to their basic molecular : i ! 24 structure and turn's why you didn't expect them to be in 25 tire environment, or wao it you were surprised because you : j -> ?n WATER_PCB-00053936 I assumed whatever PCBs were out there were in landfills? 2 MR. FEATHERSTONE: And I take it you don't mean 3 to exclude one or the other or both? 4 MR. JOHNS No. 5 A Read that again. 6 (Whereupon, the court reporter read back the 7 following questions 8 QUESTION? "Was it a surprise because you tnoughi 9 that PCBs would biodegrade or return to their basic ir.olcjula"; 10 structure and that's why you didn't expect then to be in 11 the environment, or was it you were surprised because you 12 assumed whatever PCBs were, out there were? in landfills? } 13 A I was surprised because when I thought it v,a 14 in the landfill I thought it stayed there and that. id 15 soil and bacteria would have the opportunity to break tnot : i 16 down which is the purpose of landfills. o * j 1 17 (Whereupon, Kelly Deposition Exhibits 4 and , Io 18 marked for identification by tne court repoi ..or.) 5 ' 19 Q (By Mr. John) Doctor Kelly, let me show you l 20 Kelly Deposition Exhibits 4 and 5. o 5 21 z a. Please identify Four for me,first. 22 A Yes, sir. i i 23 MR. FEATHERSTONE: You better look through it a : i 24 little bit. 25 Q (By Mr. John) Would you please identify ther 229 WATER_PCB-00053937 1 A Kelly Deposition Number 4 is a report dated 2 1937. The report is not signed, and it doesn't say whos2 3 it was, but I presume it was Doctor Drinker's. 4 Q Is Doctor Drinker still alive today? 5 A No. 6 Q Do you know when he died? 7 A Twenty years ago. 8 Q When we were previously discussing Drinker's 9 study you said you did not know what products no used ir i 10 his study. Now, do you recall tn&z. testimony? 11 12 A Yes, sir. 13 Q You can not tell from nxuioii ^ what prouuc; 14 was used in his study? 15 A If this is a report on 4^6t, 44 u 3 is not a 16 chlorinated byphenyl. That is a cnlorinated tarphyny1 end i I j I! j 1 | j I 17 a mixture of stuff which is at the bottom of the pots after 18 distilling the diprenyl off. 19 4465 was not given to Drinker Lj us, so I don't , 20 know, really, if tnis is truly 4465 especially since he was mixed up on 1268, I am not sure tnat tre product he go- 21 from this customer was really 4465. 22 23 At any rate, 4465 is not a polychlorinated j 1 I I 24 byphenyl. 25 Q You don't know that he did not receive 4^5? j 230 WATER_PCB-00053938 A No , I don't know. 2 Q Take a look at Exhibit 5. 3 Can you identify that, please? 4 A That is a report from Drinker dated September 15, 5 1938 to Monsanto indicating chlorcosane, diphenyl phthaiate, 6 chlorinated diphenyl 1268, and chlorinated diphenyl and 7 chlorinated diphenyl benzene. 8 Q Does he identify an Aroclor in there that he tested? 9 A Yes, sir. 10 Q What is it? 11 A He identified two Aroclors a chlorinates 12 dipehnyl 1268 and Aroclor 5460. 13 Q Again, you did not provide him with those ies? 14 A May I look through this and see which one u v,as? 15 Q Sure * 16 A 1268 was provided by Monsanto Company. 17 MR. FEATHERSTONE: According to the report? 18 A (Continuing) According to the report, and 19 Aroclor 5460 was also provided for by Monsanto Company. 20 Q (By Mr. John) So, would your answer with respect 21 his test concerning those two Aroclors be that as far &z 22 you know he did use those two Aroclors m his test? 23 A Yes, sir. j 24 MR. FEATHERSTONE; Is their Aroclor 5460 a 25 diphenyl? 231 WATER_PCB-00053939 1 THE WITNESS: No. It is a mixture of 4465 plus 2 chlorinated diphenyl benzene -- in other words, we have 3 4465 which is a gamosh (phonetic) of chlorinated stuff 4 some of which is diphenyl. 5 MR. FEATHERSTONEt But, Doctor, 5460 is not a 6 polychlorinated diphenyl? 7 THE WITNESS: Correct. 8 Q (By Mr. John) Do you know if you received any ij j ! !I j 9 other materials frorr. Doctor Drinker other than that, : Exhibit 4 and Exhibit 5? 10 11 A No, sir, I do not. 12 (Whereupon, Kelly Deposition Exhibits 6 and 7 ! | j j | 13 marked for identification byth^ court reporter.) : 14 Q (By Mr. John) Doctor Kelly, looking at Exhibits 6 ! 15 and 7, I believe yesterday you testified that you reviewed j 16 some toxicological data from Swann Chemical Company that 17 had been done on 05-35 before you arrived. 18 A No, sir. 19 Q Do you recall that testimony? 20 A Ho, sir. I think I said I reviewed either reports of-- 21 no, sir. Q What did you say? 22 23 A I thought I said I either read raeiaorajjida or 24 reports abot toxicological data. 25 Q Taking a look -- 232 WATER_PCB-00053940 1 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Also, Mr. John, for your 2 information, OS-95 was not a compound or mixture until 3 the 1960s. Your question was some toxicological data 4 from the Swann Chemical Company. 5 Q (By Mr. John) Is the toxicological data that 6 you are reviewing now the material that you reviewed from 7 Swann Chemical Company? 8 A I haven't the slightest idea if this is it o: 9 not. I don't know. 10 Let me look it over. 11 Q Would you take a look? 12 All I am trying to find out is if you can ree-.l] 13 if the information in Six and Seven was the only information 14 you had available when you first started at Monsanto. 15 A I don't see any toxicological data on Exhi^.v i 7, 16 Q What is Exhibit 7? 17 A It's a description of the properties of diphery 18 which is not chlorinated at all. 19 Q That's what the heading says, Doctor? 20 A Yes, "Swann Diphenyl, Technical". 21 Q And the date is January 1, 1935? 22 A Yes, sir. 23 Q Do you know if you reviewed the information 24 in Exhibit 7 at any time? 25 A That's what we are talking about, Seven? I| i i 233 WATER_PCB-00053941 1 Q Yes, sir. 2 A No, I don't recall reviewing it at all. No, sir. 3 I don't. 4 Q How about Kelly Deposition Exhibit 6? 5 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Better look through it, 6 Doctor. 7 A Yes, sir, what is the question? 8 Q (By fir. John) Do you recognize that? 9 A As what? As anything. 10 Q 11 A I recognize part of tne exnimr. 12 Q What do you recognize? 13 A I recognize the safe handling data referring 14 to Aroclors. 15 Q Were you the author ox mat text? 16 A I can't say if I was tne author. I dorft kno. , | i ; 17 Q What do you recall about that material, the 18 handling of Aroclors? 19 A I recall that this seemed to be adequate safe ; 1 20 handling data for Aroclors in 1937. ! j Q For identification purposes, that's on Page 0090029.| 21 22 On Page30 of Exhibit 6, there is a memo from j an L.A. Watt dated October 11, 1937. 23 ; I j 24 Do you know who L.A. Watt was? ; 25 A He is a man who was in charge ofwhat wascalled ! 234 WATER_PCB-00053942 1 the Technical Service Department of the old Organic Division. 2 Q Of Swann or of Monsanto? 3 A Of Monsanto. 4 Q Was he responsible at the time for the development 5 of the precautions and warnings on the products at 6 Monsanto -- 7 A Yes, sir. In 1937, yes, sir. 8 Q -- for compounds relating to the Organic Division? 9 Did Monsanto ever have an in-house labors.to* 10 for testing products, evaluating products? 11 A For what purposes? 12 Q Toxicology. 13 A Yes, sir. 14 Q When? 15 A 1977, around that, 1977-1978, 16 Q Was that after you left Monsanto? 17 A Yes. 18 Q But there was never any in-house toxicologies 19 lab while you were there? 20 A No, sir. 21 Q It was all done by outside consultants? 22 A All done by outside consultants. 23 Q Doctor Kelly, yesterday I believe youjsaid you 24 did the first subacute evaluations in the sixties of PCbs; 25 is that correct timing? 235 WATER_PCB-00053943 1 A No, air 2 Q What was the timing on the first subacute testing? 3 A We did repeated inhalation studies of PGBs, 4 which I think might be termed subacute, 1 thought, in 5 the fifties. 6 Q Why were those done in the fifties? 7 A As best I can recall, we must have had information 8 come to us that people might be exposed to repeated small 9 amounts of this material by vapor inhalation. 10 Q Do you recall under what circumstances you learned 11 that people might be exposed? 12 A No, I don11. 13 Q Do you remember the industrial use? 14 A It might have been when it was started to be 15 a plasticizer, and incorporating PCB in plasticizers, involves 16 an open use. 17 Q That's your best recollection? 18 A That's my best recollection. 19 Q Do you recall, after those subacute tests in 20 the fifties, the reason subacute tests were done on PCBs? 21 A Yes, sir. Q What are those reasons? 22 23 A In 196 8, we found out that PCBs were pjresent in ~~ 24 could be present in *-- human food) and we ran -- did yo 25 say subacute or chronic? 236 WATER PCB-00053944 1 Q Subacute. 2 A The only other subacute tests we might have done -- 3 no, I don't recall any others. 4 Q Our records indicate that the Younger Labs on j 5 October 20, 1958 did a toxicity test on OS-95 by skin 6 absorption in rabbits. 7 Do you recall that test? I 8 A No, sir, 90 10 test? Do you recall why it was done in 1.958, an ae T o.i !I j 11 A It must have been done because we had a formulation 12 that we hadn't tested and we wanted to see what the acute 13 effect was if people had prolonged contact with the 14 material. 15 (Whereupon, Kelly Deposition Exhibit 8 marked - I i i | l , 16 for identification by the court reporter.) 17 Q (By Mr. John) Doctor Kelly, take a look at 18 Kelly Deposition Exhibit 8. 19 A Yes, sir. j 20 Q Is that areport of YoungerLaboratories in196C 21 on Pydraul F-9? 22 A Yes, sir. i ! i j ' 23 Q Do you know whyF-9 wasretested forxicity in i 24 1966? 25 A I can't recall a reason. 237 WATER_PCB-00053945 ] Q Do you know where I would look or inquire to 2 determine the reason? 3 A I wouldn't have the slightest idea. 4 Q Under what circumstances would F-9 be evaluated? 5 A It may have been reformulated, or it may have 6 been that additives were added to it. 7 Q If additives were added to F-9, wouldn't it 8 be redesignated at a different number? 9 A No. 10 Q Would it stay the same? 11 A That's right. 12 Q Were additives added to F-9 when you were 13 there, to your knowledge? 14 A I can't answer that. I know additives were 15 added to various compounds for various reasons -- corrosion, , 16 inhibition, to lower viscosity, for any number of reasons, o 1 17 0 Would you retest or reevaluate those product1. 00 07002 whenever an additive was added? PENGAD CO .. BAYONNE. ; ' 19 z I 20 u 21 Czl. 22 A Yes, sir. Q Without exception? A Yes, sir. Q And when was that policy in effect at Monsanto? 1 i 23 A Ever since we started the policy of testing j 24 products that went out in a routine manner, that went out 25 to the customers or developmental samples, which was some time. 238 WATER_PCB-00053946 1 in the forties. 2 Q Is it possible, by determining from prior testing 3 in the chemical composition of a product, what the increase what effect, what toxicity efface, an additive would have 4 without doing testing? 5 j 6 A No, sir. | 7 Q Testing is the onlymeans to determine the 8 toxicity of a product? 9 A ho, sir. j I j i\ | Say that over. 10 j 'I Q What i am getting at ii>,Chan youtake a 100k at | 11 i ! a formulation of a product and determine that the toxicity j 12 13 would not change based upon adaii.g whatever might ue ; 14 added to it. : A Yes, you can. 15 : 16 Q So, in those cir turns canoe t>, th^re would probaoiy 17 be no need to retest the product 11 you can tell by tun. 18 formulation the toxicity would not be airected? 19 A By the complete formal a cion i f you added wa ter i to the product or something, you would not retest it. 20 1 Q Or if you addedsome iiit. v. compound that you knov: j 21 i had no toxicity value, you coulu undermine without retesting ! 22 _ i that that would probably not affect tne toxicity of the existing 23 < ! ' product? 24 A Yes,sir, butnot on tnac, Ax. John. 25 J 43 ~i WATER_PCB-00053947 1 If someone would inquire to us about what is 2 the toxicity of Pydraul E-9, we felt scientific;!.!-!;/ ant 3 morally obligated that t..a Aaca v,u- a- rdm was the cun ar. 4 Pydraul F-9 and not a ryhrc.u.' ?-. tesued five ye^rt ago. 5 Q You would rets > _ the tt- 6 A Yes. 7 Q Are you talking about a cm; cor..rr' i> i wy w~. 8 A Yes. We got customer iu^uiric.-. all :.m~> tin-. 9 Q Did you update your toxicological u*ca rase! on customer inquiries? 10 A Not only on customer inquiries. We would update 11 12 our toxicological information if wo had an idea that to 13 product was maybe altered in any way; bur even it we tmaght 14 the material woula not be ai cere:; we wourd teat it sr 15 that we could give our data on out currently man -u actor -o 16 material. 17 MR. FEATHERS TOD o .* ,y. , vo.. or,- rh .rug 18 to tiie alteration of the toxi - i 19 THE WITNESS: ic: . MR. FEATHERS TC*.;: nr. x t. s in reference to i .0 20 addition of an additive? 21 THE WITNESSi Yes, air. 22 i 23 Q (By Mr. John) Doctor Kelly, when you,were updating, would you run a whole new screen of tests with an independent 24 25 lab? 240 WATER_PCB-00053948 1 A We would run that type of battery tests. 2 That was not a very expensive test. 3 Q The acute test you indicated in Kelly Deposition 4 Exhibit 87 5 A Yes, sir, we would run taut type of test. 6 (Whereupon, Kelly Deposition Exhibit 9 marked 7 for identification by trie court reporter.) 8 Q (By Mr. John) Doctor Kelly, would you pleas: ' 9 identify Kelly Deposition Exhibit 9? 10 A Yes, sir , Tnis is a "Dana Sheet for Toxicological 11 and Safe Handling Information1' supplied oy Monsanto Company 12 on Pydraul A-200. 13 Q Is that a Monsanto Company ion,.? 14 A bo, I think this was -- zw. 15 Q Do you know whose form j. t is? 16 A 1 think it was somethin^ taken from one of 17 the government agencies in -- ok, yes -- the Industn;. 18 Hygiene Section, Division of Safety, Department oi La... 19 and Industries, General Administration Building, Olympia, 20 Washington, MR. FEATHERSTONE; Thau s what it says Oh 21 Page 3 of the document? 22 23 THE WITNESS; Yes. An:i thatfe 1 think^ the on. I 24 that put that out. 25 Q (By Mr. John) How did Monsanto use that form 241 WATER_PCB-00053949 1 A Mostly for freight classification and in answer 2 to inquiries from customers. 3 Q If you had an inquiry from a customer, for 4 instance, you would send them that form filled in concerning 5 the toxicology of the product? 6 A Their inquiries on this form had to do with 7 freight classifications that were put in around that dave, 8 If you notice, it refers to fire, flash point , 9 how to put out a fire and everything else, 10 MR. FEATHERSTONEs Mr. John's question was, 11 vould you send that form to customers? 12 A I would send that form to customers who as}; for 13 it. 14 Q (By Mr. John) Would you send it to them oth'.:. 15 than in freight classification circumstances? 16 A I would send it to them whenever they asked for 17 it. 18 Q How would they ask for it -- say will you provide 19 roe with the toxicological information, or will you provide 20 me with this form? 21 A Yes on the first, sometimes no on the first; 22 sometimes no on the second. 23 Q You may explain your answer. j 24 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Well, he has answered the 25 question. 242 WATER_PCB-00053950 1 Do you have a particular question in mind, 2 Mr. John? 3 Why don't you explain? I will humor Mr. John. 4 A At the time this form was developed the government 5 made everybody -- some part of the government made everybody 6 have in their files tills type of information on almost 7 every product that came into their plant or was shipped | 8 out through the plant. So, they would ask for this just to 9 stick it in the file, and there it was. They really I 10 wouldn't do an awful lot with it, but they had the 11 information. 12 So, if people called us and asked would you send 13 me industrial safety section form so-and-so, we would send 14 them this. We might send them this on 45 compounds. 15 If they wrote me and said tell me about the |; : ! 16 toxicological data of Product X, I would write them a letter 17 if we did not have a particular form of our own made v 18 for that purpose. 19 Q This was not the form, though, made up by 20 Monsanto for the toxicological data on a particular product? j 21 MR. FEATHERSTONEiYou mean the blank form itself? | MR. JOHN: Right. 22 1 23 Q (By Mr. John) Let me put it this way^ You 24 would have a separate form if a customer asked for toxicological 25 data on a particular product? j ___________________________I 243 WATER_PCB-00053951 A No, sir. Q You would use this for both purposes? A No, sir. Q Would you explain? A Yes. We had safe handling data sheets. We had sheets that described toxicology. MR. FEATHERSTONEt You mean toxicological data? A (Continuing)Toxicological properties on son: products. If this sufficed, we would send them that. If it didn't suffice, we would write an individual letter. Q When the requests were made for the data or the requests were made for the document which has bee:, identified as Kelly Deposition 9, would you perform additional toxicological tests on tne product? MR. FEATHERSTONE: May I hear that back. m&'am? Q (Continuing) To update your information before you sent out tne information on the form which is Kelly Deposition Exhibit 9? MR. FEATHERSTONE: Still, I would like to hear the question bach. (Whereupon, the court reporter read back the previous question.) , I MR. FEATHERSTONE Are you assuming there ha. been a change in the product from the time -- 24 4 WATER_PCB-00053952 MR. JOHN: No change. A No, sir, we would not. Q Doctor Kelly, yesterday you were talking about the period after the Jensen purported findings reported in the newspaper. A Yes, sir. MR. FEATHERSTONE; Excellent. Q (By Mr. John) You indicated that subsequent that period of time your people developed an analytical technique to pick up PCBs in tissue. A Yes, sir. ' Q What people were you talxing about? A The analytical group of wnatevcr the inuustr... j j j chemical division was called at that time -- whether t_, ...t was the Organic Chemical Division or industrial, Cnemic Division -- the analytical group of the section of , Monsanto that manufactured -- j Q Was that done in-house by Monsanto research people? j 1 A I can't answer that. That was an analytical problem. Q I don't know. You were not involved in that yourself? A No, sir. j j (VTheraupon, Kelly Deposition Exhibit 10 i marked for identification by the court reporter.) THE WITNESS: Yes, sir. 245 WATER_PCB-00053953 1 Q (By Mr. John) Do you recognize that document? 2 A I do now, yes, sir. 3 Q Will you please identify it? 4 A Yes. It is a letter to me from a Gene Wilde in 5 the General Office at Monsanto with the topic "Evil 6 Publicity on Chlorinated Biphenyls". 7 Q Who was Gene Wilde? 8 A I think he was a sales correspondent in the 9 overseas division. 10 Q What I am interested in, on Page 2 of that 11 document, there are lists of things, I believe, that 12 were proposed that you were going to do concerning 13 the purported discovery of PCBs in the environment, 14 A Yes, sir. 15 Q Did you do what is listed there on Page 2, tru 16 five items? 17 MR. FEATHERSTONE: He is asking for your 18 recollection. 19 A I know I never did Number 5. 20 Q (By Mr. John) Number 5 is "Arrange for contsc: 21 with Bayer and Prodelac." 22 A I never did Number 4, "Talk to the NCR people'. 23 Q Did you do any of them? , 24 A I feel quite sure I did One, Two, and Three. 25 Q So, you were involved in the preparation of a 246 WATER_PCB-00053954 1 statement or letter for use by Marketing with customers 2 who inquired about the publicity? 3 A Yes. 4 Q Doctor Kelly, do you know what a nanogram is? 5 A Yes. It's either one billionth or a trilliontn 6 of a part. It's a very small amount. 7 Q Doctor Kelly, during the perioa that you won.d 8 for Monsanto, did you have any contact with Johnson Mot' r* 9 in Waukegan, Illinois? 10 A No, sir, not that I can recall. 11 Q Did anyone at Monsanto report to you of contacts 12 with people at Johnson Motors in Waukegan? 13 A No, sir, not that 1 can recall. 14 Q As you sit here today, do you have any infer..tion 15 concerning purported health concerns an Johnson Motor. .n 16 Waukegan due to discharge of PCBs? 17 A No, sir. 18 Q Prior to the time that you left Monsanto in , 19 197s, i take it you had no information, no involvement 20 and no discussions concerning anything about the use of o u o 21 PCBs by Johnson Motors in Waukegan? 22 A That's correct. 23 Q As far as you know, you knew nothing fbout Johnson i 24 Motors in Waukegan, Illinois in relation to PCBs? 25 A Except what I have heard in the last few day-'. 247 WATER_PCB-00053955 1 Q I am discounting any discussion you may have 2 had with Mr. Featherstone as to what this is all about, 3 but I am trying to find out if you had any contact whatsoever 4 with Johnson Motors. 5 A Not that I can recall, Mr. John. 6 Q Did you evaluate 50-E Pydraul fluid before it 7 was marketed? Do you know? 8 A I don't know. 9 Q You were aware that there war, a substitutio:> 10 for PCB hydraulic fluid made by Monsanto in the seventies? 11 A I know that there was talk of a substitution. 12 I don11 know whether it actually went into, passed the 13 development stage. 14 Q Were you ever in any discussions or conversaticns 15 concerning whether it was advisable to cease using PC^ 16 in hydraulic fluid? 17 A I do not believe any discussion I had was liiri.ted 18 to hydraulic fluids. 19 Q It was more general to no longer using -- 20 A Limit the use of PCBs in open systems. 21 Q I am trying to shortcut this. 22 Were you aware that PCB, hydraulic fluid Pydrn.ii, 23 was discontinued and that PCI, terphenyls, werejuaec in 24 lieu of the dyphenyls? 25 A No, sir, I can not recall that. 248 WATER PCB-00053956 ] Q And also, you were not aware that subsequently 2 phosphate esters were used in lieu of PCTs? 3 A I can't recall that now. 4 Q So, you just don't recall studying the toxicity 5 or the potential toxicity of those alternate products; is j | I I I 6 that a fair statement, Doctor Kelly'? 7 A VJell, wo might have, but i can't recall, it, 8 Q That's what I mean -- as yu.j t here, I ecu'. . 9 ask questions until I'm blue in une lace, and you don't i ! 10 recall if you tested or what you laxynt ii&ve found? ; 11 A Yes, true. 12 Q Did you ever do any toxicological testing on 13 ! PCTs while you were medical dir cuor lL .x>ns>6i.tc n any 14 product? 15 16 A 17 PCBs. 18 Q I Ll * PEATHERSTOiT, We ju^ _ S6-ej> sontt* tc-. y* Yes, Aroclor 4465 was a mixtuio of PCTs and (By hr. John) X am nor talking about a mixta. a, i v 19 now. I am talking about FCT a ion a without any PCBs in it, 20 A I can't recall tha w lit . John , 21 Q Would you expect there co be a toxicological 22 difference between PCTs and PCBs? ! 23 A There might and there mignt non. \ ! ; 24 Q Does that mean you can't tell from a chemica! 25 formulation the potential difference in toxicity? [ : 245 WATER_PCB-00053957 1 A No, sir. 2 Q You would have to test? 3 A We would have to test. 4 Q And you are not aware of any toxicological tests 5 that were performed? 6 MR. FEATKBRSTONE: He said he doesn't recall. 7 A I don't recall. 8 MR. FEATHERSTONE: There is & difference. 9 C (By Mr, John) You said there wasa report tin-t 10 you saw today that was a combination oi tCBs and PCTs, 11 A Aroclcr 4465 had PCTs in tnis mixture, 12 Mr. FEATHEtTONE; I i 13 was a combination of PCBs. Did it have i-CBs -- his question 14 A It was a mixture oi cnlormateo bypnenyis an. 15 ; terphenyls. 16 Q (By Mr. John) That was a product that war17 supposed to be tested by Doctor Drinker back in .1535; ;E 18 that correct? 19 h Yes, sir. 20 Q Since the time you verc- at Monsanto, did you 21 know of any product that was tested for toxicity that 22 contained a combination of PCBs and PCTs? 23 A Repeat that, please; read back the question, 1 24 (Whereupon, the court reporter read back tin 25 previous question.) 250 WATER_PCB-00053958 I A Yes. 2 Q (By Mr. John) What? 3 A Aroclor 4465. 4 Q Besides Aroclor 4465? 5 A Not that I can recall, no, sir. 6 Q Is it fair to say that you were not involved in 7 the discussions concerning products, alternate products, 8 for PCBs? 9 A No, sir. 10 Q You were involved in discussing alternate 11 products? 12 A I am sure that -- yes. 13 Q Didyou recommend any alternates to PCbs? 14 A No, sir. 15 Q Wnat was your role in too discussions cone-.; - ny 16 alternates to PCBs? 17 A They would ask me the toxicological characteristics 18 of these alternate products. 19 Q You would be provided v;ith a potential alternate 20 product and you would be asked to advise of the toxicological 21 properties of that product? 22 A Yes, sir. 23 Q That was your sole contact with the discuss!o.. 24 concerning alternate products? 25 A No, sir. 251 WATER_PCB-00053959 1 Q What else were you involved in? 2 A Safe handling data along with it, precautionary 3 statements that should be used. 4 Q And that came from the toxicological data? 5 A That's correct. 6 Q Any other involvement besides those two aspect? ! I I 7 of a substitute product? 8 A Which year? Are we taliving abouv alternate 9 products? 10 Q Yes, alternate products after the PCD problem 11 arose. 12 A 13 Q 14 A Yes, sir, I would have hau other thoughts. Who would you provide those- thoughts to? To whoever the meeting was. 15 Q That's the analytical greupV 16 A And the research group wno were talking abouu 17 these new products. . 18 0 Do you recall any of your thoughts as to -- 19 A Yes 20 Q What were they? i 21 A Are w sure this isn't going into the food chair 22 like the PCBs did? 23 Q Way was that your concern? , 24 A Because the reports that PCBs might be in th 25 food chain constituted a potential for adverse human effects; 252 WATER_PCB-00053960 1 and if we were going to get out of PCBs into another 2 product that could also be in the food chain I thought, 3 also, we would have adverse effects from this particular -- 4 a possibility of adverse effects from this new product. 5 Q So, were you suggesting that a product be found 6 that had a lower toxicity than PCBs on the assumption it 7 might also find its way into the food chain? 8 A No, sir. 9 G What were yousuggesting? 10 A That wa find a product that would nor find its 11 way into the food chain. 12 Q How would you do that? By finding one that v.'ould 13 biodegrade, for instance, immediately? ; 14 A Yes, sir. | I ! ! 15 Q Was there any ouier natnod tnat you were tt.; ;-ng 16 about? 17 A Easily destroyed by implant methods. | ; j 18 Q Was there anything else? j 19 A I can't think of anything else at the moment. 1 20 Q Do you know what happened to the inventory of j 21 your Pydraul products that contained PCBs when it was decided j 22 to no longer market them? ; 23 A No, sir. j 24 Q Were youinvolved in anydetermination as to now 25 to dispose of them? ! 253 WATER_PCB-00053961 1 A If you say -- yes, sir. 2 Q What? 3 A It depends on what you mean by "involvement". 4 I knew they had built an incinerator, and I 5 knew they were incinerating some Pydraul products. 6 k Were you involved in any studies or did you 7 review any studies about, for instance, what temperatm..u 8 they would have to be incinerated c.t not to have problems 9 with the vapors? 10 A 1\0 , Ell . 11 Q Do you know who did that? 12 A I wound imagine the research people. 13 Q Why wouldn't you have been involved in tnat xi 14 you are incinerating a product? 15 A because X reccci.isrod that the people wbc wer. 16 building the incinerator had followed the specification 17 of the research people who knew they had to break dove 18 the product and destroy it. I knew they were smart enough 19 to do it. 20 I was not involved ir: it because that was not my 21 responsibility. Tncy said they would destroy this stuff, 22 and I -- I wouldn't check these experts, no, sir. 23 Q They said they would destroy them without any 24 adverse effects to the environment? 25 A That's correct. 254 WATER_PCB-00053962 1 Q And you took their word for it? 2 A Yes, sir. 3 Q Doctor Kelly, at some point in time, did you 4 learn that a Monsanto plant in Pensacola, Florida was having j 5 difficulties due to discharge of PCBs? i | 6 A What typo of difficulties? I 7 Q That PCDs were being found in fish. 8 A I don't recall if they were found La fit.:. 9 Q Let me make it more general, ! 10 Are you aware in the late 1900s or the early 11 1970s that any Monsanto plant was discharging PCBs iw> i j ' 12 the environment ' 13 MR. FE ATI ICRS TO MS: Ho.; i_ tear relevant, Mr. JonrC i 14 MR. JO!IM: To find Iris knowledge of what to 15 about it from a health standpoint and wnut to advru- - 16 customers to do in similar situations. j I i l 17 MR. FEATHERSTONE: From a health standpoin.? j 18 MR. JOER: Sure. ! I I! 19 THE V7ITNL33: Would you repeat the question, : 20 Mr. John, please? ; 21 Q (Ry Mr. Jonn) Did yon become aware in the ia. e 22 sixties or early seventies that any Monsanto plant wa.. 23 discharging PC3e into the environment? i , | ! ! ! 24 MR. FEATHERSTONE: With healthramifications . , 25 A IJ a didn't say -- he said was I ever aware -- i 253 WATER_PCB-00053963 1 that your question -- was I ever aware that any Monsanto 2 plant -- 3 Q (By Mr. John) Right. 4 A --- has discharged soruo PCBs into where? 5 Q The environment, ' 6 1 Yes. 7 Q When did yor become aware? 8 P. I can't recall the exac: claim. . f tb . , .Tt 9 was i~ the time frame between 191 a and 1575. 10 sure. 11 0 V,In at (i i ' you learn? 12 rrhc.t ; plant in ox nr,:.-.i i LV.Sttu.la ha 13 been cited or hr " said o: had h .< iou.o; cj'iai" 14 had escaped. fror a. .a i r plan:: . 15 Q Wore vov. asked to ' ct';,,. j . o.; ij tb. a . ati on 16 by Monsanto? 17 A No, sir:. 18 Q Were you involved in taut situation by irons a.i. j? 19 A No, sir, 20 Q Bo, your Knowledge is just, from what you hav, 21 been told; is th- correct? 22 A Yes, sir. There were no healtn aspects involved, 23 so I didn't ge: involved. ' i 24 0 You wore not asked to give an evaluation as t 25 whether or not there v?ere health aspects involved? 256 WATER_PCB-00053964 1 A As best 1 can recollect, they said to me is 2 there any particular health hazard involved; and after 3 looking over what fragmentary data they had, it did not 4 appear to me -- I can not recall -- 1 feel quite sure that 5 it w3 brought to my attention' to see whether there wan 6 a health hazard involved? and from the data that was 7 given to me, whic,. 1 can not recall at the present tin- , 8 I said I see no health hazard. 9 G Were yce ever asked to make that de tormina tod .. 10 in any other -- with respect to any other Monsanto plant? 11 A do, sir. 12 Q VJere you ever asked to make that determination 13 with regard to any other customer's plant? 14 A Wo. " 15 Q So, year only involvement with tue escape o. 16 PCBs into the environment from an industrial plant va-i 17 the Monsanto Pensacola plant? 18 MR. FKATHERSTONH: Can I hear that back, please? 19 (Whereupon, the court reporter read back the 20 previous question.) 21 MR. PRATHERSTONE! Are you talking about health 22 aspects? 23 MR. JOHN: Yes, health concerns. j 24 A Yes, sir. 25 Say that over. 1 don't know if tnat's yes o: no ! 1 i : i ; | ! j 1I J ji ! i | j I 237 WATER PCB-00053965 1 what I am supposed to answer. 2 Q (By Mr. John) Was your only involvement with 3 health concerns with respect to the escape of PCBs from 4 an industrial plan!: your experience with regard to the 5 Pensacola plant of Monsanto that you have just testified 6 to? 7 A Yes, sir. . 8 0 Were you in any meeting or discussion or heard, 9 any conversation about what to do with existing fluids 10 containing PC13 in industrial plants when it was determined 11 to stop marketing PCDs? 12 A Ye.--, 13 C What'' 14 7: they would tell rue ve ait.. goiny to take bad., 15 fluid from transfer:.:: plant, hi- she tic *.e protec v u 16 workers wht are taking this out and bringing it bad. t us 17 for incineration. 18 C Via at would you do? 19 A Follower t.'i? safe nandirng procedures that we 20 had our customers do, the same tning. 21 Q Were you everasked the same question concern: :g hydraulic fluids? 22 23 A No, sir. j 24 Q So, it was only in the transformer situation? 25 A Yen, sir. Co WATER PCB-00053966 1 Q Doctor Kelly, did you ever review the Bio-Test 2 results of their evaluation of PCB in water or fish tissues? 3 A Yes, sir 4 Q When did you cto that? 5 A If you have a copy of that evaluation, I could 6 tell you. 7 Q Was it shortly after it was made? 8 A I dor.'t h nor;. I don't know the date of it. " 9 reviewed it son; time, but I think I reviewed it sore trva 10 after I left Monsanto. 11 MR. FEMTBBRSTORE: I tliirr. he xs talking about 12 tire Industrial B-o-Test saudioe . 13 THE WIT.''EBB; l>o. Ho sale the evaluation of .. 14 in water. That's what he tola me - it that what you:, 15 statement v/u .? 16 Q (By Mr. Joki.) Right. 17 A I don't oven know if that was the study I so-. . 18 I saw a Bio-Test evaluation of the occurrence, of PCBs i: 19 the environment. 20 Q Ri gh t. 21 A I saw that particular report soma time in 1977 or 22 1979 . 23 Q i So, ycv. did not see or review it with .respect to 24 your duties and responsibilities at Monsanto when you wara 25 still there; is that correct? 259 WATER_PCB-00053967 1 A No, sir, it we are talking about the same report. 2 What is the date of the report? 3 Q We have a report dated November, 1972'which is 4 a four-page fish toxicity study dated November, 1972. 5 A I am sure I saw that. I have no recollection of 6 the details, 7 lht. FEATHERS T01JS: Doctor, was that the one 8 you were referring to? 9 Tiir WITNESS: Ho, six, that was not the o;v> I 10 was referring to. 11 0 (By Mr. John) Which one were you referring to? 12 A There was a report by Doctor Caiandra, and I 13 thought that war subsequent to my leaving Monsanto thei 14 gave iiis opinion as to his enough!a on tne whole pro-bio.-; 15 of PCBs m ana environment. It \m.v nor a report, < 16 toxicological report. 17 MR. JOHN Let's take a break. 18 (Short break.) 19 Q (By Mr. John) Doctor Kelly, it a Pydraul 20 containing PCBs were in a machine and you added to the*, 21 a Pydraul product containing PCTs, could you tell me the ; 22 toxicity of tha _ combined product without testing? , i. 23 A In a rough way, yes, sir. , * ii i I 24 Q In vhae rough waycouldyou tell me? ; .i 25 A If someone knew thetoxicity ofthe particular PCB j 260 WATER_PCB-00053968 1 and if he knew the toxicity of the particular PCT involved, 2 then he would have to decide what this physical combination 3 could do as far as the absorption of one or the other through 4 the human system and what that physical condition would do j 5 as far as the inhalation of one or the other of the 6 components. 7 Q Would you expect there to be any chemical i i j I i j 8 interreaction between the PCBs and PCTs? 9 A Not an organic chemical mixture, I can't ansv?-r 10 that. | 11 Q That would cause a toxicological effect? 12 A I still can't answer it. 13 Q Would your answer be the same with respect to 14 combining products containing PCBs,PCTs and phosphate 15 esters in the same machine? 16 A The same. | I ; i 17 Q You wouldn't know? 18 A I wouldn't know what the combined mixture of this 19 particular combination would be, 20 Q Could you give me a rough idea like you could if you had PCBs and PCTs combined in the same machine? 21 22 A No, because the phosphate estersolution i& a ' | i i ; 23 general -- we have to define"phosphate" which isall j 24 varying toxicities. 25 The answer is no, I couldnot. ; j 261 WATER_PCB-00053969 ] Q You would have to test? 2 A Yes, sir, 3 Q Do you know if you performed any such test in 4 the seventies before you left Monsanto, or had it performed? 5 A On wha t? 6 Q On a combination of hydraulic fluid containing 7 PCB, PCI, and phosphate esters, 8 A If those compounds were ever put out into 9 commercial application or in a development stage, we tested 10 them. 11 MR. JOHN: That's all I have. 12 MR. HYNES: I have a couple of questions, 13 REDIRECT EXAMINATION 14 QUESTIONS BY MR. HYNES:* I 15 Q On an answer to a series of Mr* John's question'* 16 earlier today, you mentioned that there were some warnings ~~ 17 I am not sure if it was on labels or what -- given or. sot: 18 Monsanto products to the effect that they should not be ' 19 allowed to come in contact with feed or grain. 20 Do you recall saying that? 21 A Yea, sir, 22 Q Was that only in relation to that insecticide 1030? 23 A No, sir. | 24 Q Do you recall at least more than one product 25 where that type of warning was given? 262 WATER_PCB-00053970 ] A More than one type of product? 2 Q Or more than one product. 3 A Yes, sir. 4 Q Do you recall any similar warnings given in 5 the 1970s for the Therminal (phonetic) heat transfer fluids? 6 A No, sir. 7 Q If such warnings were given, should they have 8 come from your department or should your department have 9 been advised on those precautions? 10 A If our department thought that Therminal 11 products created such an acute hazard that we had to put 12 that warning on, that warning would have come from our 13 department. 14 Q But -- I'm sorry, 15 A But -- that's the answer, 16 Q But for Monsanto to give out a precautionary 17 warning of that type, that did not necessarily have to com*18 through your department* is that correct? 19 A I can't answer that. I don't know -- what time 20 frame? 21 Q Early to mid seventies( 22 A I think if the shipping people thought that t 23 shipping a product would involve a possibility cf that 24 leaking and getting into feed or grain they would put on 25 that particular warning based on information of the toxicity 263 WATER PCB-00053971 1 that we had and the safe handling characteristics that we ha5 2 on the product. 3 If we do not think it should be taken internally 4 and the type of shipping was such that it may have cams 5 in contact with feed and grain th.y might have put it on. 6 I do not know, 7 Q Earlier you answered a series of questions on 8 that US DA suggestion to use PCB as an insecticide ev:tej;d. u . 9 A Yes,sir. 10 Q What was an extender? Could you say what an 11 extender was? 12 A It prolongs the action of the insecticide. 13 Q It prolongs the action rather than adds more 14 volume to the pesticide beingsprayed? isthat right? 15 A That's right, 16 Q Just to refresh your recollection- tu.-. x.. rt 17 exhibit today had been marked as Defendant's Kxhibit 6 i ro:.. 18 Mr. Wheeler's deposition. 19 The quoted language ir the raid-J.lt? there about the 20 precautionary language to preven t environ rental let 21 me look at that "'Care should be taken to prevent any lost 22 into the environment through spills, leakage, disposal, 23 evaporation or otherwise.'" ^ ; I 1 24 A Yes, sir. 25 Q Do you recall if that language or similar language j 264 WATER_PCB-00053972 1 was ever put out to customers of PCB products? 2 MR. FEATHERSTONE: He has already been asked 3 that question, Mr, Hynes. 4 MR. HYNES: I think he has, and I don't recall 5 the answer right now. 6 A I don't recall if this actually got on a label, 7 I don't know whether that was put out. 8 Q (By Mr. Hynes) I don'tmean to limit itjust 9 to labels but any type of precautionary instructions to a 10 customer about it -- a label, a technical bulletin, a 11 letter. 12 A I am sure some such warning was sent to customer? 13 at some time before I left Monsanto, I do not know the 14 form this took or at what particular time it was done, 15 Q And am I correct that you don't specifically 16 recall being involved yourself in that precautionary 17 warning to customers? 18 A I myself? 19 Q You yourself. 20 A No, sir. 21 MR. HYNES: I don't have anything further. 22 MR. FEATHERSTONE: I do, but I suggest we break 23 for lunch and come back at one, > ^ 24 (Lunch break.) 25 265 WATER_PCB-00053973 1 CROSS-EXAMINATION 2 QUESTIONS BY MR. FEATHERSTONEi 3 Q Doctor Kelly, you have used the term "industrial ! 4 chemical* during your deposition. 5 What did you mean by that? i 6 A An industrial chemical is a compound that is used. j 7 in industry that is a compound that is not expected to be 8 used either as an agricultural chemical, a food chemical ! 9 or a food additive chemical. ! 10 Q Is it used in things known as industrial products? ' 11 A Yes, sir. i 12 Q When you have used the term "stable*', what do 13 you mean by that? 14 A I mean by that chemically stable. I mean by 15 that that it is not easily broken down into its component 16 parts and is not easily metabolized. ; i | !i ' i 17 Q Does the term "chemically stable" have anything 18 to do with its ability to reactwith otherchemicals? | 19 A Yes. 20 Q If the product is chemically stable what doen 21 it mean in terms of reacting with other chemicals? | 22 A It would be less likely to react with other chemicals. 23 Q Is a PCS orAroclor anindustrial chenjical? , 24 A Yes, sir. 25 Q Doctor, you testified that to your knowledge the 266 WATER PCB-00053974 1 PCB Pydraul fluids were used as an industrial hydraulic 2 fluid; is that correct? 3 A Yes, sir. 4 Q What exposures did you anticipate from the use 5 of PCB Pydraul as an industrial hydraulic fluid up to the 6 period of the late 1960s? 7 MR. JOHN: Exposure to whom or what? 8 MR. FEATHERSTONEt Any type of exposure. 9 A I expected exposure only to handlers,, shippersf 10 and workers. I expected only acute exposures from the 11 dermatological point of view or the inhalation point cf 12 view during filling. I expected exposures from the 13 dermatological and/or inhalation point of view if ruptured 14 lines occurred. 15 Q Would you characterize these as acute exposmesl 16 A Yes, sir. 17 Q And if I understand you correctly, what you 18 anticipated were acute exposures for workers? 19 A Yes, sir. 20 Q As a result of these anticipated exposures, wlxat 21 types of testing was done on the Pydraul fluids? 22 A An acute type of testing which involved ocular 23 contact, skin contact and inhalation -- acute inhalation 24 toxicity and acute oral intake in a case where, for some 25 reason, a dose were taken internally by the worker. 267 WATER_PCB-00053975 1 Q That would be an accidental dose, I take it? 2 A Yes, sir. 3 Q When you say "ocular", is that pertaining to 4 the eyes? 5 A Dropped in the eye. 6 Q Did you anticipate any type of chronic exposure 7 to workers or anything else from the use of PCB Pydraux 8 as an industrial hydraulic fluid? 9 A Yes. I thought that there might be occasional 10 lov; levels of inhalation at times, so -- yes. 11 Q Would that have been on a repeated basis? 12 A I thought it was possible. 13 Q Were the PCB Pydraul fluids tested on a repeated 14 basis for that exposure? 15 A We did -- yes, sir, we did repeat inhalation 16 studies over a period of two or three weeks. 17 Q Other than that repeated exposure I take it 18 there were no other chronic exposures anticipated? 19 A No, sir. 20 Q To turn to PCB or Aroclor products generally in 21 the 1950-1960 period, did you anticipate any exposure from 22 the use of those products other than acute exposures? 23 A Yes, sir. , 24 Q Let's break it down. 25 First, I take it you did anticipate some acut^. 268 WATER PCB-00053976 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 ' 19 exposures from the use of Aroclor products? A Yes, sir. Q And what kind of testing was done in connection with -- A The acute battery of tests that I explained earlier. Q The same tests done on the Pydraul fluids? A Yes. 0 What type of chronic exposure did you anticipate in the use of Aroclor based products? A I did not expect any exposure -- Q Any repeated exposure? A I expected that there might be repeated exposure. Q Did you do any testing or repeated testing because of that anticipated exposure? A We did repeated vapor inhalation of Aroclors, and we did a repeated two-week or three-week testing of skin contact with Arodors. Q Other than repeated testing, if you will of 20 that nature, did you anticipate any other chronic exposure 21 or do any chronic testing? 22 A No, sir -- until when? 23 Q Prior to the late 1960s when the Industrial 24 Bio-Tests were done. 25 A None prior to chat. 269 WATER_PCB-00053977 1 Q Doctor, in your capacity as medical director 2 at Monsanto Company, were you the fellow who had ultimate 3 supervisory responsibility for the health of workers in 4 Monsanto plants? 5 A Yes, sir. 6 Q I take it that would include any plant at which 7 Monsanto manufactured Aroclors? 8 A Yes, sir. 9 Q Were you aware of any problems to Monsanto 10 workers as a result of their handling of the Aroclors in 11 Monsanto plants? 12 A If you include manufacturing to include handling, 13 yes, sir. 14 Q And this questioning involves the period of time 15 roughly from 1936 to 1975 when yon left Monsanto Company ,, 16 A Yes, sir, but it was all from 1936 to 1939. 17 Q Can you describe for me any exposure problem?, 18 that you were aware of to Monsanto workers as a result 19 of handling Aroclors? 20 A Yes -- well, when you handled it, you had an 21 exposure problem. 22 Is that what you are asking? 23 Q What was the effect of that exposure problem, 1 24 if any, that you knew? 25 A The effect wan chloracne. 270 WATER_PCB-00053978 1 Q Was there anything done to handle that exposure 2 problem? 3 A Yes, sir. 4 Q What was that? 5 A We instructed the workers on how to handle it 6 safely by using gloves, by using clean coveralls and by 7 washing their hands if they had the material on then. 8 Q In other words, certain hygienic practices war- 9 instituted? 10 A Hygienic and good housekeeping practices, 11 Q When did this happen, approximately? 12 A Immediately after we found the chloracne which 13 was in 1937 to 1939. 14 Q After the institution of those simple hygienic 15 practices were there any problems among Monsanto workers 16 in connection with the handling of the product? a o 17 A No, sir. 18 Q Were there any problems -- and I may have ' 19 you this already -- were there any problems to the Monsanto 20 workers other than the dermatitis problems you have 21 described as a result of handling Aroclors? A No, sir, with the possible exception if they 22 23 had something in their eye an irritation could occur, but i 24 nothing else, no, sir. jj j ; jl j i ; 25 Q Did the fact that the only exposure problem not j 271 WATER_PCB-00053979 1 being dermatitis and the fact that it can be 2 remedied with simple hygienic practices have any medical 3 significance in your analysis of Aroclors? 4 A Yes, sir. 5 Q what was that? 6 A As an industrial compound, this is a relatively 7 low order of toxicity. 8 Q There has been testimony earlier, Doctor, on 9 the Drinker studies that were done at Harvard in the late 10 1930s. 11 A Yes, sir. 12 Q There has been testimony from you that Professor 13 Drinker did some studies of the effect of Aroclor exposure, 14 inhalation exposure using Aroclor 1268; is that correct? 15 A Using a compound purported to be Aroclor 1268. 16 Q Did Professor Drinker report any effects front 17 inhalation exposure of Aroclors? 18 A Yes. 19 Q What were those effects? 20 A He developed -- he found transient cellular J i o o 21 changes in the liver characterized by cloudy swelling which ; 22 is the first instance -- which is an example of low liver !i | 23 injury --which was reversible in nature following cessation i 1| 24 of the study. i 25 Q X am sorry. Did Professor Drinker state that the j ! 272 WATER_PCB-00053980 1 liver changes were, in fact, reversed? 2 A To the best of my recollection, I thought he did. 3 I can't be certain about it, but I thought he did. 4 Q Based on Professor Drinker's tests and observations, 5 did you make any medical opinion about the toxicity of 6 Aroclors? 7 A Yea. 8 Q What were they? i9 A It was the s, ame as before -- it was a compound j 10 that had a low order of toxicity but should also be handled j /I 11 safely. j | 12 Q What were the instructions that youhad given ! j 13 to Monsanto workers or customers ofMonsantowho had a | 14 potential inhalation exposure? j 15 A At what time? : 16 Q At approximately the time of the Drinker study 17 or as a result of the Drinker study or thereafter. 18 A I am not sure if at 1936 when I came with Monsanto 19 I had said any more than avoid repeated or prolonged skin 20 contact. I am sure at some time at or about the Drinker 21 study I added to notbreatheat elevated temperatures or j in confined spaces avoid repeated breathing or skin contact. ! 22 ii .i 23 Q There was some questioning of you earlier. Doctor, j 24 about an incident at a plant in Brazil, Indiana in the 1950s, 25 Do you recallthat? ; 273 WATER PCB-00053981 A Tm, air. ;fyf- . 2 3 f>. Q Do you remember that it was an incident involving leakage of PCB fherminal fluid? lf'^'" A Tea, sir, rf h r- s nym-e* 6 Q From a heat transfer system? A Yes, sir. 7 q Do you recall. Doctor, whether the workers there 8 were in a confined space or we11-ventilated space? 9 A Confined space. 10 Q And do you recall the duration of the exposure 11 of the workers? 12 A It was two or three days. 13 Q Did the fact that the inhalation took place in 14 a confined space over a two-to-three day period have any 15 aadiaal significance to you? 16 A Yes, sir. 17 Q What was that? 18 A Tm things -- one, you should not breathe Aroclor I 19 vapors at a high temperature; and two, you should not breathe 20 t.-'ivli'lj, '*?> * ' Pi^kri w1* .Vo t-im them in a confined space 1 and three, it doesn't seem like this is a particularly toxic industrial compound from the exposure description they gave me and the ^su^S'Of the workejrs 23 who had temporary liver problems. 24 Q Doctor, when you were advised of the exposure 25 and the results of the mxpousre in the workers, was this Ba y o n n e , n .j . 274 WATER_PCB-00053982 something that you had not anticipated from prior testing? A Ho, sir. Ha had warned against it. ><k Q Doctor, there were several PCS PyJkanis marketed W^w tells#1 sjF-rrr t-VSf 1 ( by Monsanto in the 1950s and the 1960s; is that1 correct? & . /. . .. A Yesr sir. Q Am I correct that as you testified earlier the 7 anticipated exposures were acute exposures? 8 A Correct. 9 Q And the testing done was the acute screening 10 testing that was routinely done? 11 A With the exception of the addition of the testing 12 of the dropping on a hot metal plate 13 Q With that exception? 14 A With that exception, yes. 15 Q Z take it you reviewed the data from the acute 16 toxicological studies? 17 A Yes, sir. 18 Q Did you form an opinion as to the toxicity of 19 the pydrmtal fluids? 20 v- A Yes, sir. Q What was that? A I have an opinion A, that it was inl^katively low Industrial toxic chemical; B, that you |th^.d'.Avoid - repeated or prolonged skin contact; and C, mt It should not be breathed in confined spaces at elevated temperatures. P6N G A0 CO .. BAYONNE. N .J. 275 WATER_PCB-00053983 1 Q Z take it during the 1950s and 1960s there was similar acuta testing on the other Aroclor products? 3 *#}$?! A Yes, air. JP!.'' Bfr & Q Did you learn anything from the ftesults of those studies that caused you to change those conclusions 6 in any way? 7 A Ho, sir. 8 Q Doctor, during the tin period roughly from 1936 9 until we will say the late 1960s, did you learn of any 10 other toxicological effects or potential problems from 11 exposure to PCS Pydraul other than what you have already 12 testified to? 13 A Ho, sir. 14 Q And the same question with respect to Aroclor 15 products during the same time period? 16 A Aroclor products, yes, sir. 17 Q What was that? 18 A Z said the same Aroclors as PCBs. 19 Q Wall, the question is. Doctor, Did you learn anything 20 different? Aa-vt A Ho. Q Doctor, you were asked some questionsAbout a 23 Yusho incident in Japan. 24 Do you recall that? 25 A Yes, sir. m' .'-m1 '- 276 WATER_PCB-00053984 1 m 3 Q Wh*af approximately, was that -- sot the questioning, but when was the incident? A I thought it was either in the la$tt-.part of 0r]- 1968 -- 1967 or the early part of 1968. It.;|WUl|;in that time frame, give or take six months, X think. ` 6 q Was it roughly the time period of which the 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 few- - testing was commenced at Industrial Bio-Test by Monsanto? A I think we had already finished our range-finding test. We had established the protocols for the chronic test. Whether we had actually started the chronic test or not, I can't say? but certainly, it was right around that time. Q Doctor, you testified that -- in part, anyway -- that the situation at Yusho was the Aroclor PCB contamination of some rioe oil. A No, sir -- certainly not Aroclor. Q Was it PCB contamination of rice oil? A It was purported to be somebody's PCB? it was not Monsanto's PCB. Q It was not Monsanto'a PCB? is that correct? A Yes, it is. Q In your knowledge of the Yusho ixpident, did you ifow- ?' i- ? 23 24 25 pick up any information about the dosages l^u*t$bha eaters of the rice oil were subjected to? A Yes, sir. ' BAYONNE. 277 WATER_PCB-00053985 Q What was that? A they tad a very high aeute dose of over a period of som>mee weeks, repeated high acute doosseess, - ' Q I think you testified that the < >n of the exposure was roughly two weeks to two nonithiV'5!' that correct? A Something of that order ~ three weeks to three months, 1 believe. Q Do you recall how high the dosages were? A About two to three hundred parts per million -- two to three thousand parts per million. Q Was this essentially an acute poisoning incident? A Yes, we could consider it that. Q Z think you testified, Doctor, that the symptoms shown by the rice oil eaters were principally liver damage and chloracne; is that correct? A With the addition of skin discoloration, but that also Accompanies chloracne. Q the fact that this was an acute poisoning case, did those symptoms surprise you? A No. We would have -- no, sir. Q Why not? :. A We would have expected that toxicological information. We kqew eh We knew the target was the liver 278 WATER_PCB-00053986 1 Q At some later point in time. Doctor, did you 2 obtain any information that the polychlorinated byphenyls involved in Yusho may have contained impurities? A Tea, sir. Q Which impurities were those? & ' 4# A 1 can not be sure whether they were dioxins 7 or dibenzofurans. It was a different compound from 8 Monsanto, so I don't know what the impurities were. 9 Q Were you aware of the scientific literature 10 that reported the toxic 'effects noted in the Yusho patients 11 were attributable to impurities? 12 A I have seen scientific reports bearing on that. 13 Q Did you attach any medical significance or health 14 significance to the fact that PCBs have low volatility? 15 A Yes, sir. 16 Q What was that? What significance? 17 A If there is volatility, there is less chance of 18 it being Inhaled at ambient temperatures or at somewhat 19 over ambient temperatures. 20 Q In other words, it's less likely to have en WgjW-*' Plf'f exposure? A Yes, sir. Q Did you attach any significance, l&ecfe 24 fact that PCBs were insoluble in water? 25 A Yes, sir. FORM 404 PSNGAO CO .. BAYONNE. N .J. 07002 279 WATER_PCB-00053987 Q What was that significance? A if m compound is insoluble, it is less likely to cause adverse effects when put on the skill r taken 't r internally. ft-' Q Doctor, did you attaioh any medical significance to the fact that PCBs were chemically stable? A Yes, sir. Q What was that? A If a compound is chemically stable, it would not be as likely to react with other chemicals which could be present in the organism and as such might be excreted, might be more likely to be excreted, in an unchanged fashion. Q Doctor, during the period 1950 to the late 1960s, assume that you were advised that PCBs had found their way into lakes and rivers and assume only that additional fact that you knew at the time. Would you have attached any medical or health significance to that? A Where did you put an upper date on that 1960s? Q Op to, say, 1967 A Now, would you repeat the questi " (Whereupon, the court reporter r the following question* QUESTION* "Doctor, during the period 1950 to 280 WATER_PCB-00053988 1 the late 1960a, assume that you ware advised that PCBa had 2 found their way into lakes and rivers and assume only that 4 .^>4; I additional fact that you knew at the time# - "Would you have attached any medical,.health significance t that?*) A Mo, Z wouldn't have. 7 Q And why not? 8 A Because we were dealing with a compound that, 9 as far as we knew, was a stable compound. We were dealing 10 with an insoluble compound and would -- your previous 11 question, where was it? 12 Q In lakes and rivers. 13 A Zt was our belief that this material would settle 14 to the bottom of the lakes and rivers and would be covered 15 over then by the layer of slime, mud, and whatnot and would -- 16 17 18 ' 19 20 due to its insolubility, only minute traces of the material would be present in the water. Q Tour answer. Doctor, you attached some significance to the fact that PCB was stable. Are you again saying -- 4.:>ir|f. -y f<J#2- -*'25* 24 A Chemically stable, yes, sir. Q When you say it was insoluble, . that mean . ; t it does not mix frith water? f\ -t A It does not mix, does not dissolve ^ If You add 25 a teaspoonful of PCB into a quart of water, it doesn't enter 281 WATER PCB-00053989 the water except for minute traces. 1 you put sugar into the water, it would dissolve and "" ` *' -- * --- this _ la the 1950s or the early 1960s, would you have attached any medical significance to that? A No, sir. Q Why not? A I would not expect anything except minute inconsequential traces of the chemical to be present in water being drunk. Q Did the fact that humans would only consume trace amounts of PCBs in the water have any significance in connection with the low acute toxicity of PCBs? A Yes, sir. Q Can you explain that? A Well, it enhances the safety, if that is the term you want to use, of the situation. If you are taking a trace amount of a compound with a low oral toxicity, from the acute point of view. an added factor, a low oral toxicity, and it was trace 282 WATER_PCB-00053990 1 amounts, If any. 2 Q Assume further. Doctor, that there were fish Its r--^4k' twM in this water. * ft1?' i Would the fact that FCBs were in |ti'~Jliedlment, f"f given the thinking and knowledge in the 195$f Wnd early 1960e, have had any significance to you? 7 A WO, sir. 8 Q And why not? 9 A Because my thinking and opinion would be the 10 same for fish as it would be for humans -- that fish have 11 an alimentary canal, they ingest water through their 12 alimentary canal. If there were only trace amounts in 13 the water, they would only receive trace amounts through 14 their water Intake. Q You have referred to something known as the 15 16 concept of storage of PCBs, Doctor. 17 A Yes. 18 Q Can you tell us what that means? - 19 A Yes, sir. 20 Storage of FCBs or storage in general? - m. , ., *Aj . . It&r i;V'. " "*23-> Q Storage of FCBs. A Storage of FCBs means if an organism,takes in a certain amount of FCBs they probably metabojypee ;a certain amount of this, they excrete a certain 24 and the residue is stored. It is usually stored in the fat 25 113 WATER_PCB-00053991 although it ay be stored in other areas of the body. 0 When was it first known in the medical community I;, that PCBs could be stored in fats or tissue^-*, *r A In late 1969 -- 1968, 1969, 1970, 'in 4hat order. I v! Q Before that time, was the theory that FOB, if it got in an organism, would be excreted or metabolized? 7 A Yes, sir. 8 Q Doctor, you have referred to a concept known as 9 biomagnification. 10 A Yes, sir. 11 Q Can you briefly describe what biomagnification 12 of PCBs Mans in connection with the food chain? 13 A Yes, sir. 14 In the food chain, let's postulate that there are 15 five lesser organisms to go up to the human. 16 We start with a plankton. Then, we go to a two-or17 three cellular organism. Then, we go to a small minnow, 18 a bigger silnnow, a fish and a human. . 19 The lowest member of this food chain picks up 20 PCB from its diet or from the water -- from its water. If fafe. $... ' P fjs&Srt -<v|23-'a the PCB is in concentration in the water in a minute amount. after this lowest organism gets finished with it/ it stores JV * 7-.- a certain amount of PCB. So, if the water using 24 these figures very generally just for desci 25 Q Doctor, is it fair to say that the concentration 284 WATER_PCB-00053992 1 in PCBs increases up the food chain? 2 1W3 S& A Xt*s enhanced. X will give rough figures, but -the lower on may have X parts of PCBs in i^,..,.- She next |v\v- has 10 X, the next 15 X? and when you get up toj_ the fish which the human is likely to eat, it has a hundred X so the concentration has increased. 7 0 When was it first known or accepted in the 8 medical community that PCBs would be biomagnified in the 9 human food chain? 10 A In the late 1960s. 11 Q At approximately the same time the concept of 12 storage was known? 13 A You have to have storage if you have 14 biomagnification. 15 Q I take it, prior to the late 1960s, it was assumed 16 then that PCBs did not biomagnify if they somehow got 17 into the food chain? 18 A It was not known; X don't think it was thought of. 19 Q Doctor, assume that you were made aware In the 20 1950a-190s, up before the late 1960s, that PCBs ware found F.. .* & _<?. if*-' in the human food chain. Would that have had any medical significance to you? 24 A Yes. 25 Q How so? PCNGAD C O .. BATON NE. N J 285 WATER_PCB-00053993 1 A Wall, as the only United States manufacturer of 2 PCBs and if it vece in the human food chain, this would -|C| make me realise that Ve haw got a food additive end we f,|j- " f- ' better find out what the chronic oral toxic!.tgfjbf PCBs is. Q Would there have been state of thf^itirt chronic testing done at whatever point you would have learned of 7 that? 8 A Yes, sir. 9 Q And I take it this would have been initiated 10 had you been aware of more than just an isolated instance 11 of PCBs in the food chain? 12 A When we say the food chain, yes, sir. 13 If someone said there was an isolated lake in 14 South Dakota that they found a fish with X amount of PCBs 15 in it, that would be one thing. If it were found that 16 fish up and down the Mississippi River had PCBs in them 17 and these fish were obviously in the food chain, that would 18 make it different, yes, sir. - 19 Q I take it, in the first instance, you may or 20 nay not do the testing. ,VW?J . A This might be an isolated <case. This could be ;&- the result of spillage. But the other one V--' 'n- ` v, .. i>, Q The other one being the second instance? A The second where the fish in wide ttriks fere showing 24 A? ' t . 25 up with PCBs, that means something is happening and that it is 286 WATER_PCB-00053994 1 a widespread use of -- a widespread possibility for adverse 2 3 effects. Q Wien you hear the term "PCB" in tfrehunan food ' 4r' chain, do you understand that t include knpl^B -of the ppf- ^ concept of the blomagnlfication f PCBs and ^Btdraga of PCBs? 7 A Yes, sir. 8 Q Again, these concepts of biomagnification and 9 storage with respect to PCBs weren't known until the late 10 1960s? 11 A Weren't known in -- as far as PCB is concerned. 12 yes, were not known. 13 Q Doctor, there has been some reference to state 14 of the art chronic testing. 15 16 17 18 - 19 A Yes, sir. Q Doctor, the chronic testing that was done in the late 1960s, was that an advancement over the chronic testing that was done in the 1950s? A Yes, sir, that was as much of an advancement 20 as a 747 over the Wright brothers' plane. 0 Well, is it fair to state that the state of the art chronic toxicological testing changed a number of times during the period 1950 to 1970? |||$|$ . A Yes, sir. 24 jlQlfc;.{& 25 Q In the 1950s -- the early 1950s, for instance -- PENCAO CO .. BAYONNE. N .J. mm -- ii* . 287 WATER_PCB-00053995 did Monsanto do any chronic testing? A On what? Anything? Q 7s, A Yes, we did. 'Sv~ .f !1; Q On what types of chemicals? w A We did it on food additives. We did it on 7 unintentional food additives. We did it on agricultural 8 chemicals which were unintentional food additives. 9 Q How was it determined what protocols to use in 10 connection with the chronic testing of these chemicals 11 in the 1950s? 12 A It was a combination of myself, our consulting 13 toxicological laboratories, and the government people 14 in either the Department of Agriculture or the Food and 15 Drug Administration, whoever had the final say in that 16 particular time. 17 Q Doctor, in the 1950s, were there any mutagenicity 18 tests in these chronic protocols? 19 A Mo, sir. 20 Q W*y was that? ft A The concept was sot either accepted or known or important. m' Q Were there any teratological tests 24 protocols? 25 A No, %- in those v 288 WATER_PCB-00053996 1 2 #3 Q Why not? A The thalidomide disaster had not occurred. It was not known. Q Were there any reproductive tests fai&liLn this ;V#' - ' A No, sir. 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 , 19 20 r-^2 J 3 Q Why was that? A That concept was either not known or not given nuch attention. Q Is it fair to state that the state of the art chronic testing done in the 1950s on food additive type chemicals did not include these sorts of tests? A That is correct. Q Doctor, if you had learned in the 1950s that PCBs were in the human food chain, would you have done state of the art chronic testing of PCBs assuming it was other than an isolated report? A Yes, sir, I would have done state of the art testing as of that date that I started testing * 6 MmA this would have been the same type of testing done to food additive products? A Yes, sir. pfw Q Doctor, 1 mm going to put in front ^f^you what 24 has been previously marked as Kelly Depositin'ipfKJLbit 1 25 and turn your attention to paragraph numbered Two on Page 2. fEM6AD C O .. BAYO NNE. N .J. 289 WATER_PCB-00053997 1 A Yea, sir 2 Q This la the same paragraph shown to you earlier today by counsel for Outboard Marine Corporations ' fv\'Sv ; .-? There is a reference there to the|^i#|'o>f'-Aroelors as a pesticide extender. #4v::r-v., . A Yes, sir. 7 Q Doctor, there is reference in that paragraph to 8 some testing done for the use of Aroclors in that connection 9 by the OSDA; is that correct? 10 A Z do not it says here OSDA. Whether it was 11 the OSDA or the Hew York Department of Agriculture I don't 12 know -- probably OSDA. 13 Q Do you have a recollection that the federal 14 government did engage in some testing? 15 A It was a government agency, and I believe it 16 was the federal government. o o 17 Q Is it your recollection that that government 18 agency approved Aroclors for that use or recommended , 19 Aroclors? 20 A Recommended, because I do not think there was an approval necessary at this particular time by a government agency. MR. FEATHERSTONES No further 7 24 MR. HYNES* I have a couple, 25 290 WATER_PCB-00053998 1 REDIRECT EXAMINATION 2 QUESTIONS BY MR. HYNES 8 f' v: , "Wife -i ' Q Doctor, when Mr. Feathers tone asked jfou some f *.:&: questions about the Yusho incident, you tho9^%r-you understood that there war also possibly earn dtbenzofuran or dioxins :-s in the PCB fluid that contaminated the rice oil 7 is that correct? 8 A Yes, sir. 9 Q Could you just briefly tell us what those two 10 chemicals are? . 11 A They are normally toxic compounds of the magnitude 12 of several magnitudes greater, than PCB. 13 Q Do you know if dioxins can be formed by 14 the heating or burning of PCBs? 15 A I do not know that. 16 Q The same answer for dibenzofuran. 17 A Yes, sir. 18 Q Do you know if they can be formed by a chemical - 19 reaction with PCB or a reaction with another chemical? 20 */>- < f-488 ` K So, sir, I do not. Q I think you stated that In the late 1960s, early seventies, the knowledge of PCBs in terms cj| ;#;bQra#e was that some of the PCBs will metabolise and some ^sul4' be'cexcreted, 24 some would be stored in the body or in the 25 is that correct? fils sue? 291 WATER_PCB-00053999 A Ton will have to repeat that one, please, Q Let as do it again. l3 You stated, I believe, that PCBs, PCBs, v* if ingested in an organism would metabliz@||.oie Wuld be excreted, some would be stored most llkelyin the fatty -f tissue. 7 A Mo, sir, that wasn't what I said. 8 Z said amounts of PCB could be excreted, some 9 could be metabolized and seme could be stored. 10 Z am talking about the same PCB. You said 11 "same" PCBs, some part of the particular PCB, yes, sir. 12 Q Z believe you stated that prior to the state 13 of science knowledge now on the process of storage, prior 14 to that, it was your opinion that the scientific community 15 thought that the PCBs which were ingested would either 16 metabolise or be excreted from the body? is that correct? 17 A M6, sir. 18 Q Mow am I mischaracterising what you said? 19 A Z do not know if the scientific community ever 20 anticipated that PCBs would be taken internally. So, , :*tr I don't know if the scientific community ever gave a thought to the fact as to whether or not PCBs were jpdng to be 13 stored. 24 0 25 A Did you ever give a thought to No. I never expected it to be taken internally. 292 WATER_PCB-00054000 1 2 f3 either* MR. HYNESs 1 don't have anything else. RECROSS EXAMINATION fr~r& QUESTIONS BY MR. JOHNt V-'-# Pfit Q Was the scientific concept of storage first developed in 1969? 7 A No, sir. 8 Q Was it first developed in relation to PCBs in 9 1969? 10 A Yes, sir. 11 Q That's true of biomagnification, also? 12 A Yes, sir. 13 Q So, the scientific concept of biomagnification 14 existed long before the PCB problem was determined? 15 A No, sir. 16 Q Did the concept of biomagnification first arise 17 in the study of the PCB problem in the late 1960s? 18 A SO, sir. . 19 Q Zt was a scientific concept prior to that, too? 20 A Yes, sir, but you said "long before". : 21 - iMilf m>^T< *: Q When was It developed? A I thought it was about the time of Ahf.middle mm* or early sixties in connection with insect' Q And that was, to your knowledge, ^lr'%<X|Septipn 24 25 of the concept of biomagnification? P tN ftA O CO.. BAYONNE. N .J. 293 WATER_PCB-00054001 1 A The general acceptance of the knowledge. I 2 am sure that somebody someplace in some country brought W3 out the theory of storage of compounds in people; but the .ttN :Wf storage of industrial chemicals ~ the storage >jbf insecticide! fekV-f: ' I think, was the first time it was talked about generally in the scientific community that Z had dealings with. 7 Q If in the fifties you had done chronic studies 8 on PCBs, would you not have discovered the storage of 9 PCBs in tissue? 10 A Not necessarily. 11 Q Why not? 12 A In the fifties we did not have analytical methods 13 that would be sufficient to find PCBs in animal tissues. 14 That was just developed in 1967, 1968, 1969, 1970. 15 Q That is your opinion, is that correct, or have 16 you studied the literature to determine whether or not 17 that capability existed? 18 A That was my opinion and the opinion of the - 19 analytical chemists of the company that made the PCBs. 20 0 Doctor Kelly, you so indicated that the eoacentraticj m-: 1 *5 ' * $?* 1 23- of PCS A Q 24 A 25 Q Two to three thousand, yes, sir. t4. % ^ Two to three thousand parts per ajjL-|,X6yi of what? Of PCBs in the rice oil, is my If it's parts per million, it had to be relative 294 WATER_PCB-00054002 1 to mm otter entity* A Tif tiro to three thousand part* per Billion of M3 POa in mine hundred ninety-saw thousand mart* of rice ;sf oil in a million parts , parts In the rice : -: lit ,y." Q Part* of the rice Ilf V|. ^- A Or three thousand parts of the rice oil or PCBs, 7 yes, sir. 8 Q When you talk about PCBs in parts per million of 9 mater, then you are talking about the number of PCBs -- 10 A And units. 11 Q -- in a million units of water? 12 A Yes, sir. 13 Q What are the sites of those units? 14 A Well, if you have a gallon of water and you have 15 mm part PCBs per million units of water, whether its a 16 million quarts of water or a million ounces of water or a 17 million grams of water, its the same. It's one part 18 per slUili -- one unit in a million units of the other * 19 material* 20 Q Wo, if you aay there is tan parts per million in ftalh feieira -- ^3V A Yes, sir. ft -- then, pou are talklpg about * -n In a 24 million units of fish? 25 A That's correct* 295 WATER_PCB-00054003 1 Q And it's not material what the size of those units are? A No. ft*8 the concentration -- noj^At 4 not material. lj| Say that sentence over. I am notiunsclentific about this. 7 Q I am saying it's not relevant when you quote 8 ten parts per million in a tissue of fish, the size of the 9 units you used for the fish tissue? 10 A 11 game 12 Q 13 14 No, as long as the ten and the million are the Right. That's all Z have. (Witness excused) 15 16 17 18 - 19 20 m 21 s&M: of R. EMMET KELLY Subscribed and sworn to before this _ 1981* I^y commission expires Notary Public day PCNGAO C O .. BAYONNE. N.J. 24 25 296 WATER_PCB-00054004 1 STATE OF MISSOURI ) CITY OP ST. LOUIS ) Xr Susan M. Rlckr a Notary Public duly commissioned and qualified in and for the City of Saint I^ouis, State of Missouri, do certify that, pursuant to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, there came before me on '''ttie.'twenty-sixth and twenty-seventh days of March, 1981, at wLoafa^s. thereof, at the office of the United States Attorney<|jfche following named person, to witt R. EMMET KELLY, 7 who was by me duly sworn to testify to the truth and nothing 8 but the truth of his knowledge touching and concerning the matter in controversy in this cause; that he was 9 thereupon carefully examined upon his oath and his examination reduced to writing under ray supervision; that the deposition 10 is a true record of the testimony given by the witness; and that the said witness read the same and subscribed 11 his name thereto. I further certify that I am neither attorney or counsel for, nor related to or employed by, any of the parties to the action in which this deposition is taken, and further that X am not a relative or employee of any attorney or counsel employed by the parties hereto or financially interested in the action. In witness whereof I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my notarial seal this day of , 1981. 17 18 Notary Public commission expires December 26, 1982. 20 297 WATER_PCB-00054005 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OP ILLINOIS 2! 3 UNITED STATES OP AMERICA, v&tfi j -i-ssa- *' - , K -te I, C \sl > A. * <*.;** 'Ml ^w-J 7 Plaintiff, vs. OUTBOARD MARINE CORPORATION and MONSANTO COMPANY, 8 Defendants. ) l-^f S No. 78-C-1004 9 10 I, Susan M. Rick, a Notary Public within and 11 for the State of Missouri, hereby certify that on the 12 twenty-sixth and twenty-seventh days of March, 1981, there 13 came before me R. EMMET KELLY, a witness of lawful age, 14 who was by me first duly sworn to testify the whole truth 15 f his knowledge touching the matters in controversy in 16 the above-entitled cause; that thereafter, the witness 17 was examined, and during the course of said examination, 18 the following question was asked and proceedings had; . 19 Q 1.) In your evaluation of a chemical referred 20 to your department from research and development, first of all in the fifties, was the disposal of the product or y-,.ii-j.*iiu-vjfi-A*' the anticipated disposal of the product : information that should have been provided *- department for evaluation? 24 ^4, - 25 MR. FEATHERSTONE* May I hear that, please? f k S C N 6A 0 C O .. BAYONNE. N.J. 298 WATER PCB-00054006 (Whereupon, the court reporter read back the previous question.) > PCBs? k MR. FEATHERSTONEi Are we ta|isif About WrA : MR. HYNES: I am talking about ahy product, first. 7 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Well, that's the last 8 "any product" question you get, Mr. Hynes. 9 A No, sir. Q (By Mr. Hynes) Would your answer be the same if 10 1 just changed the time frame to the 1960s? 11 12 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Is it any product, still? 13 MR. HYNES: Yes, any product. 14 MR. FEATHERSTONE: I instruct you not to answer the question, sir. 15 Q (By Mr. Hynes) Do you mean the disposal of a 16 chemical product isn't a consideration in the evaluation 17 of the product? 18 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Well, the instruction is ' 19 20 >481 i# 'Kv.23-' not to answer. Is that a question to me or him? MR. HYNES: That's a question to him. Is the disposal -- 4V*-' MR. FEATHERSTONE: He is in 24 to answer the question. 25 not PENGAO CO .. BAYONNE. N .J. 07002 299 WATER PCB-00054007 1 MR. HYNESi What is jour basis for him not 2 to answer the question? MR. FEATHERS TONE: Why don1 t^you., establish ff.;t > rS^SJ >v- % Kill the relevancy of it. MR. HYNES ? 1 want to find o|p why you are miwif instructing hi not to answer. 7 MR. FEATHERSTONE: It's irrelevant. 8 MR. HYNESt Z don't think irrelevance is 9 a basis to instruct someone not to answer. 10 MR. FEATHERSTONE t You can take that up 11 with the judge. We have been there before, and you attempted 12 that argument, and you lost. 13 Thereupon, counsel for Plaintiff requested 14 that the foregoing question be Certified to this Honorable 15 Court, and in accordance with said request this matter is 16 now Certified for the Court's ruling and further direction. 17 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, X have hereunto set my hand 18 and Seal this day of , 1981. 19 20 --x mmm #22; ilfe: 4s,3 24 .25 Susan M. Riok, Certified Court Reporter and Rotary Publie State of Missouri IS- m; i > 'v; Si 300 PC N G AO CO WATER PCB-00054008