Document Xz2NBzLRq8My8oOEmo7pVzgBG

t IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT CF WEST VIRGINIA CHARLESTON, WEST VIRGINIA JAMES M. ADKINS, Administrator of ) the Estate of Ralph E. Adkins, ) Deceased, et al, ) ) Plaintiffs, ) ' - vs. ) ) MONSANTO COMPANY, a Delaware ) Corporation, ) No. 81-2098 )...... . ' V Defendant. ) Deposition of EDWIN L. HEAD taken on behalf of the Plaintiffs. Reporter: M. Joy Springer J am es M ay R epo rtin g S ervic e C E R TIFIE D S H O R TH A N D REPO RTERS R R 2 - BOX 65 ED W AR D SVILLE. ILLIN O IS 62025 i .1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT .. SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF WEST VIRGINIA 2. CKARU5STON, WEST VIRGINIA 3 4 JAMES M. ADKINS, Administrator of ) the Estate of Ralph E. Adkins, ) 5 Deceased, et al, ) ) 6 Plaintiffs, ) 7 vs. ) ) No. 81-2098 8 MONSANTO COMPANY, a Delaware ) ) Corporation, 9 ) ) Defendant. ) 10 11 APPEARANCES: 12 Messrs. Calwell, McCormick & 13 Peyton, by W. Stuart Calwell, Jr., Esq. For Plaintiffs, 14 Messrs. Bowles, McDavid, Graff & Love, 15 by Thomas E. Scarr, Esq. and Deborah A. Sink, 16 For Defendant. 17 18 IT IS STIPULATED AND AGREED by and between 19 counsel for the plaintiffs and counsel for the defendant 20 that the deposition of EDWIN L. HEAD nay be taken pur 21 suant to Rule 26(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Pro 22 cedure, on behalf of the plaintiffs, on July 7, 1983, 23 at the Radisson Hotel, Room 215, 9th Street and Conven 24 tion Plaza, St, Louis, Missouri, before M. JOY SPRINGER, 25 a Notary Public within and for the County of Madison, JAM ES MAY REPORTING SERVICE' 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEST VIRGINIA 2 CHARLESTON, WEST VIRGINIA 3 4 JAMES M. ADKINS, Administrator o ) the Estate of Ralph E, Adkins, ) 5 Deceased, et al, ) 6 ) Plaintiffs, ) 7 vs/ ) 8 MONSANTO COMPANY, a Delaware ) ) Corporation, 9 10 ) ) Defendant. ) ) No.81-2098 11 APPEARANCES : 12 Messrs. Calwell, McCormick & 13 Peyton, thby N* Stuart Calwell, Jr., Esq. For Plaintiffs, 14 Messrs. Bowles, McDavid, Graff & Love, 15 by Thomas E. Scarr, Esq. and Deborah A. Sink, 16 For Defendant. 17 18 IT IS STIPULATED AND AGREED by and between 19 counsel for the plaintiffs and counsel for the defendant 20 that the deposition of EDWIN L. HEAD'may be taken pur 2 r suant to Rule 26(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Pro 22 cedure, on behalf of the plaintiffs, on July 7, 1983, 23 at the Radisson Hotel, Room 215, 9th Street and Conven 24 tion Plaza, St. Louis, Missouri, before M. JOY SPRINGER, 25 a Notary Public within and for the County of Madison, JAM ES MAY REPORTING SERVICE 1 with Monsanto that caused you to be connected with or 2 have any relationship with the Nitro Plant? 3 A Not directly, I've not been associated 4 directly with any of the products of the Nitro Plant, 5 Q What are the duties of your present job? 6 A MIC is the basic chemical company at 7 Monsanto. My job is to direct the market research 8 activities, both for new growth and existing markets, 9 traditional market research. We have a small department 10 that does that for the chemical industry. I also have 11 the advertising and public relations functions for MIC. 12 Q Are you familiar with an Ad Hoc group 13 or Committee that has come to be known as the Nitro 14 Task Force? 15 A I'm familiar with that group, yes. 16 Q And were you a member of the Nitro 17 Task Force? 18 ' A No, I was not. 19 Q Did you receive memoranda and be on 20 the mailing list of the Nitro Task Force? 21 A I got copies of their meetings. 22 Q And why would you see copies of their 23 meetings? 24 A At that point in time my job with 25 Monsanto was not, not my present job, but I was Director JAM ES MAY REPORTING SERVICE 1 of Planning for tha Detergents and Phosphates Division ~ 2 at Monsanto Company, which no longer exists. It's 3 been integrated into another unit. 4 ; Q And X assume that the Nitro plant 5 had something to do with detergents and phosphates? 6 A No, it did not. 7 Q Why would you have been on the mailing 8 list for the minutes of this meeting? 9 A In this previous job we were conducting 10 a study of one of our businesses, a commercial and 11 technical study, of one of the businesses of that 12 group. One of the members of that study team, technical 13 member, was also a member of the Nitro team and suggested 14 that there might be methodology evolving from that study 15 that would be useful to the study we were conducting 16 in the Datergent/Phospate Division. 17 Q You had a health study underway? 18 A No, It was a commercial and technical 19 study of one of our processes and businesses. 20 Q And there was a member of the Nitro 21 Task Force -- 22 A I'm not sure he was a member of the 23 Nitro Task Force. He was at least an advisor to that 24 Task Force and also an advisor to the other Task Force. 25 The idea was that we might be able to use some of the JA M E S MAY R E PO R TIN G SER V IC E J* * 5 7 methodology that they were using in the other study. 2 ; Q In the Hitro Task Force study? 3 A * We might be able to use things that 4 they were doing in terms of analytical procedures. 5 . ... Q What was the Nitro Task Force doing? " 6 A Well, as best I recall the minutes of 7 the meeting, they were looking at the environmental 8 health or status of some of the units of that plant. 9 Q At least, somebody in the company or i 70 you felt that there was some connection between that 71 undertaking and the undertaking you were involved in? 12 " A It was recommended to me that they 13 might be developing some information and methodology 74 that could be useful to the study that I was conducting, 75 that my team was conducting. 16 Q But your team had nothing to do with 77 health or hygiene? 18 A No. We were looking specifically at 79 a business that was losing money and also had potential 20 environmental problems that would require infusion of 27 capital long term. 22 Q So it was from the potential environ 23 mental problems standpoint? 24 A ' Yeah, and also economic. 25 Q Would these problems have anything to JAM ES MAY REPORTING SERVICE 1 do with chloracne or dioxins? =2 A Dioxins were involved. 3 Q And what product were you working with? 4 A Monsanto's trade name for it is . 5 Santophen, S-a-n-t-o-p-h-e-n. See if I can recall what 6 it is chemically, It's ortho-banzyl-para-chlorophenol. 7 It's a chlorinated phenol compound, it's a derivative 8 of chlorinated phenol, and in the process the potential 9 for producing dioxin exists. 10 Q You were chlorinating a benzene ring 11 in there some way? 12 A Chlorinating phenol. 13 ; <J You knew what isomer you thought you 14 might have a potential problem with? 15 A The potential exists for all types of 16 dioxin in this distillation process, and we were de17 veloping analytical procedures to see if they existed, 18 and if so, where. 19 Q Did you expect in your process that 20 2,3,7,8 tetrachlorodibenzo-para-dioxin would be created? 21 A My technical people told me we had 22 the potential of producing that isomer. 23 -Q From your knowledge of that project, I 24 was that the one you were most concerned about, or did 25 you make any differentiation between the isomers? JA M E S MAY R E P O R T IN G SER V IC E 1 - 7 A I believe that there was more concern expressed about that isomer than the other isomers. We were interested in eliminating, if they existed, all forms of dioxin, but I believe X was advised that 2,3,7,8 had greater potential health hazards. Q And who advised you of that? A I can't give you a name. We had a number of technical advisers. It would be from Mon santo's Research Department. Q Anybody from the Medical Department? A , We did have a member of the Medical Department that was not on the team, but he did dis cuss with us-about what was known in the state of the art of dioxin and its impact on health, Q And what did that person or the Medi cal Department tell you in that regard? A They told me that the impact or effect of dioxin on human health was not fully defined. They had the potential in certain applications or certain exposure conditions to be harmful, that they have definitely been proven to cause chloracne in some cases, i including an incident in Italy which they cited as the first reference to it, and that the impact on health in other forms was being studied and wo did not know them. Q Were you advised as to what was suspected JAM ES MAY REPORTING SERVICE * i ZZT 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 - in terms of health problems with 2*3,7,87 A No. As I recall, I asked the question and they answered, "we don't know yet." Q So you asked, well, you knew it causes chloracne, what else does it do? A Yeah. Q And the response you got was, "We don't know"? A "We don't know," Q Were you briefed at all on the chloracne problem at the Nitro Plant in connection with your conversations about -- A X was not. Q Is Santophen a new product, an experimental product? A No. Santophen has been on the market for I don't know hew many years, at least twenty. It's used in hard surface cleaners. The most popular one is Lysol. It's the disinfectant in the disinfectant Lysol. Q Where is it manufactured? A It's manufactured in Monsanto's Krummrich Plant in Sauget, Illinois. Q And what was your mission involving Santophen? A My primary objective in our mission was JA M E S MAY R E PO R TIN G SER V IC E *1 1 to make a recommendation to Monsanto management as to 2 the future economic viability of that unit. We have 3 since made that recommendation, and it was to close 4 the unit. The problem is there is a lower cost dis 5 infectant available on the market today. We do not 6 compete costaise, and our major customer switched to 7 another product and the writing was on the wall. 8 Q I think I can see why you would have 9 been included on the Nitro Task Force mailing list be 10 cause that product had the potential of creating or n throwing this isomer of dioxin. 12 A The process has that potential. One 13 of the things, of course, we were trying to determine 14 is whether to recocmnend whether we stay in this business 15 or not for the future environmental integrity as well 16 as economic. 17 Q And was the environmental assessment 18 in terms of health and exposure on the part of the 19 worker a factor in your decision to discontinue the 20 product? 21 A That's hard to say. I can tell you it 22 was not a major factor in my recommendation. The de 23 cision, the recommendation was made on the fact that 24 we were losing money and we saw no way of reversing 25 that position because of our cost position due to these JAM ES MAY REPORTING SERVICE *1 competitive products. Q At that production unit were you ex periencing thesan or any problems with chloracne or the associated complaints that the Nitro Plant had ex perienced in the 'dO's? A I don't believe so. X don't know any reports of chloracne from this unit in the plant. I'm not entirely sure of that, but it did not surface in our review. It was not a problem that was considered, Q Is the entire product manufactured at the Krumarich Plant? A Let's see if there's any imported raw materials. Hie raw materials for benzene -- It's a self-contained unit, Q And at the intermediate step -- A tfe buy some chlorine. Q But the step in the manufacture of Santophen where you might create one of these dioxins takes place at the Krummrich Plant? A It does, yes. It's a distillation operation in the unit. Q Did pu remain on the mailing list for the Nitro Task Force through Its entire -A .I'm not sure how long they were in existence. I didn't follow that activity because It JAM ES MAY REPORTING SERVICE 1 wasn't my responsibility. I stopped receiving their 2 reports when we completed our study. I know we com 3 pleted our study before they were through with theirs. 4 I suspect* don'tkiow, there were additional reports I 5 did not receive, 6 Q When were you first advised about 7 dioxin? When X say "dioxin/! I'm.1generally referring 8 to 2,3,7*8-TCDD. 9 A I believe that my first knowledge 10 that there was even such a compound as dioxin in any 11 form came when I read a report of. a Seveso incident 12 in Italy in the mid-170's some time, I think about 13 1975 or '6. I read a report of that eruption and 14 followed through some of the problems that ensued. 15 Q And was that in connection with your 16 work or just a general reading? 17 A It was general reading. I think I 18 re a d i t in F o rtu n e m a g a z in e . 19 Q And as far as Monsanto is concerned* 20 the only briefing -- and we'll call it briefing -- that 21 you had ^as in connection with your investigation of 22 the Santophen process about dioxin? 23 A I can't say that for sure because it 24 was connected to Santophen in some way. I was also 25 recipient of some information about the Sturgeon spill JAM ES MAY REPORTING SERVICE 'I 1 because that product, orthochlorophenol, cams out of 2 the same unit, and the Onager of the Detergent and 3 Phosphates Division had a number of briefings about 4 the Sturgeon incident and the dioxin and contents of 5 that car. 6 Q Did you ever work for Dr, Callis? 7 A I know Dr. Callis, I've never worked 8 for him. " I worked with him. 9 r-;Q In the Phosphates Division or the 10 operational division that cakes phosphates, is that 11 generally where you run into the orthochlorophenols? 12 A Yes. 13 Q Is that where you have spent most of 14 your career with Monsanto? 15 A Most of my career, a substantial part 16 of my career, has been associated with inorganic chemi 17 cals, detergent phosphates and alkyJL benzenes, sur 18 factants, products that serve the detergent industry, 19 Q Many of those products have the capa 20 bility of throwing an isomer of dioxin, do they not? 21 A The only one I'm aware of -- I'm not 22 an organic chemist -- the only one I'm aware of is the 23 orthochlorophenol unit. I don't believe the capability 24 exists -- Almost all of our other products are inorganic 25 and they are derivatives of white or yellow phosphorus. JAM ES MAY REPORTING SERVICE 'I 1 The one exception would be what's called detergent 2 alkylate, which is an alkylated benzene ring, but I 3 don't think from my limited knowledge of chemistry -4 The surfactant in detergents like Tide and heavy-duty 5 laundry detergents are either an alkylbanzene or alcohol. 6 We do not make the alcohols. We make alkylbenzene -- 7 but I doubt if there is any. 8 : Q In the work that you have done that 9 may have involved an orthochlorophenol, did you receive 10 any instruction or information from Monsanto regarding 11 .the potential there for throwing a tetra level dioxin? 12 A ' Yeah. It's the same source, same 13 potential source as the one that would get into the 14 Santophen. The orthochlorophenol, the material that 15 was spilled in the train wreck at Sturgeon, Missouri, 16 is a byproduct of the Santophen process. You chlorinate 17 phenol and you react it with benzylchloride, you make 18 Santophen. A byproduct is orthochlorophenol, which 19 Monsanto sold to makers of pentachlorophenol. 20 Q Were you given any instructions or 21 cautions about the potential in the byproduct ortho 22 chlorophenol for the dioxin contamination? 23 A I was not, 24 Q And did you learn in connection with 25 your Santophen project that there was in fact an ongoing JAM ES MAY REPORTING SERVICE I body of knowledge that Monsanto had about potential for these 2,3,7,8 tetrachlorcdibenzo-para-dioxins in connection with the orthochlorophenol? A I don't believe so. My first knowledge that there could have been dioxin in orthochlorophenol came from the Sturgeon spill, but X don't know what existed prior to that. Q When did you lose contact with the Nitro Thsk Force? A I don't know, X think it must have been the fourth quarter of 1979. We were conducting this study in 1979. X believe we had completed it by the third quarter and I would have had no further need, Q Did you have any contact with Raymond Suskind in connection with your work -- A No, I've never met Dr. Suskind*. Q Any inquiry made of you by the Medical Department or Dr. Suskind or anybody else regarding any health problems that the workers involved with the Santophen might have had? A Not of me, q And you know of nosuch inquiry o r study? A I'm not aware of it if it has. I've read that Dr. Suskind had done some work involving the ! JAM ES MAY REPORTING SERVICE STATS OF ILLINOIS ) ) ss. COUNTY OF MADISON ) I, M. JOY SPRINGER, a Notary Public, duly commissioned and qualified in and for the County of tfedison, State of Illinois, do hereby certify that pursuantjto notice came before me on the 7th day of July, 1983, at the Radisson Hotel, Room 215, 9th Street and Convention Plaza, St. Louis, Missouri, EDWIN L. HEAD, who was by me. duly sworn to testify 'to the truth and nothing but the truth of his knowl edge touching and concerning the matters in contro versy in this case; that he was thereupon carefully examined upon oath, and his examination reduced to writing under my supervision; that the deposition is a true record of the testimony given by the witness; and signature of the witness was not waived. - I FURTHER CERTIFY that I am neither attorney nor counsel for nor related to nor employed by and of the parties to the action in which this deposition is taken; and further, that I am not a relative or em ployee of any attorney- or counsel employed by the parties hereto, or financially interested in the action. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my JAM ES MAY REPORTING SERVICE July 18, 1983 JW- 2 Qm T. M. Bis tline - E2ND - 4-2989 TO E. d B2SB Attached is the transcript of your deposition which was recently'taken in the Nitro litigation. Would you please review the attached to make certain all your answers have b recorded accurately. If the transcript is accurate, please sign on the page indicated and return to me. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call. TMB/vf/b6 Enclosure T . M. Bistline IN-IOC (REV. 2/78)