Document empodEe360N96rpqY8Y0Qq0QM

Superior Court of the State of California For the County of Los Angeles TRANSWESTERN PIPELINE ) COMPANY, ) Plaintiff, ) ) ) vs. ) ) MONSANTO COMPANY and ) DOES 1 through 200, inclusive, ) Defendant ) ) Case No. BC 026959 Volume II June 12, 1992 Deposition of ROBERT ELLIS KELLER, taken on behalf ofPlaintiff. ! I GORE REPORTING COMPANY Boatmen's Tower, Suite 1175 -100 North Broadway St Louis, Missouri 63102 (314) 241-6750 HARTOLDMON0008443 1 Superior court of th State of California 2 For the County of Los Angeles 3 4 TRANSWESTERN PIPELINE ) 5 COMPANY, ) 6 Plaintiff, ) 7) 8 v. ) No. BC 026959 9 10 MONSANTO COMPANY and ) 11 DOES 1 through 200, ) 1 2 inclusive, ) 13 Defendants. ) 14 15 1 6 Volume II 17 1 8 Continuation of the deposition of 1 9 ROBERT ELLIS KELLER, taken on behalf of 2 0 Plaintiff, at the offices of Bryan, Cave, 2 1 McPheeters & McRoberts, 500 North Broadway in 2 2 the City of St. Louis, State of Missouri, on 2 3 the 9th day of January, 1992, before J. Bryan 2 4 Jordan, certified shorthand reporter and 2 5 notary public. GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 2 12 j HARTOLDMONOOQ8444 1 .1 APPEARANCES: 2 3 FOR THE PLAINTIFF: 4 John P. Tallon, Esq. 5 Shearman & Sterling 6 21st Floor 7 725 South Figueroa Street 8 Los Angeles, California 90017 9 (213) 239-0300 10 1 1 FOR THE DEFENDANTS: 1 2 Donald F. Zimmer, Jr., Esq. 1 3 Bronson, Bronson & McKinnon 1 4 505 Montgomery Street 1 5 San Francisco, California 94111-2514 1 6 (415) 986-4200 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 2 13 HARTOLDMONOOQ8445 1 INDEX 2 PAGE 3 EXAMINATION BY MR. TALLON (Cont'd) 215 4 5 6 EXHI BITS 7 8 Plaintiff ' s Exhibit 2 9 8 ..................... ................. . 2 16 9 Plaintiff ' s Exhibit 2 9 9 ..................... .................... 223 10 Plaintiff s Exhibit 3 0 0 ..................... .................... 225 1 1 Plaintiff ' s Exhibit 3 0 1 ..................... 12 Plaintiff ' s Exhibit 3 0 2 ..................... .................... 2 37 13 Plaintiff ' s Exhibit 3 0 3 ..................... .................... 239 14 Plaintiff'' s Exhibit 3 0 4 ....................... .................... 240 15 Plaintiff ' s Exhibit 3 0 5 ..................... .................... 242 1 6 Plaintiff 1' s Exhibit 3 0 6 ............................................ 2 4 5 17 Plaintiff'' s Exhibit 3 0 7 ............................................ 248 18 Plaintiff 1 s Exhibit 3 0 8 ............................................ 249 19 Plaintiff 1 s Exhibit 3 0 9 ............................................ 250 2 0 Plaintiff ' s Exhibit 3 10 ............................................. 2 5 0 2 1 Plaintiff' s Exhibit 3 11 ........................ 2 2 Plaintiff ' s Exhibit 3 12 ............................................. 2 5 3 2 3 Plaintiff ' s Exhibit 3 13 ........................ 24 Plaintiff' s Exhibit 3 14 ........................ ................. 2 57 25 Plaintiff' s Exhibit 3 15 ........................ ................. 259 GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 214 HARTOLDMONOOQ8446 1 JUNE 12, 1992 2 ( The deposition of Dr. Keller 3 was resumed beg inning at 9:00 4 a . m . , as follows:) 5 BY MR. TALLON: 6 Q. Doctor, do you have any knowledge 7 regarding the process that -- used by 8 Monsanto to manufacture aroclors in the 1200 9 series? 1 0 A. I had very little to do with the 1 1 processing, and I have -- don't recall the 1 2 process knowledge. 1 3 Q . Does it refresh your recollection 1 4 in any respect if I asked you whether the 1 5 manufacturing process involved running 1 6 chlorine ga s over hot b i p h e n y 1 s for a set 1 7 period of t i m e ? 1 8 A . I just mad n o i n v olvemen t with 1 9 that part o f i t . I h a v e no, no r e m embrance 2 0 of that. 2 1 Q . S o m y asking you that q u e s t i o n 2 2 does not re f r e s h your r e c o 1 1 e c t i o n in any 2 3 respect? 2 4 A . No , i t does not. 2 5 Q D o you have any r e c o 11 e c t i o n , GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 2 15 HARTOLDMONOOQ8447 -1 Doctor, of being involvedin anyanalysis of 2 mud samples from a river near Newport in the 3 United Kingdom? 4 A . No, I do not. 5 MR. TALLON: Let me show you a 6 document that we'll mark as the next exhibit 7 in order, which is 298. That's a two-page 8 documentbearing production numbers TRAN 9 023503 and 04. 1 0 (Plaintiff's Deposition 1 1 Exhibit 298 marked for 1 2 identification. ) 1 3 BY MR. TALLON: 1 4 Q. Take a moment and review that, 1 5 please . 1 6 (Witness peruses said 17 document.) 1 8 BY MR . TALLON: 1 9 Q. Have you reviewed that document, 2 0 Doctor? 2 1 A. Yes. 2 2 Q. Does having reviewed it refresh 2 3 your recollection in any respect as to 2 4 whether or not you participated in any 2 5 analysis of estuary mud samples from the GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 2 16 I HARTOLDMONOOQ8448 1JL Uskmcuth area? 2 A . No, this doesn't help me a bit. 3 Q Do you have any recollection 4 whether Mr . Tucker participated in such an 5 analysis? 6 A . Mr. Tucker? 7 Q Right, E. S. Tucker. 8 A . What was the question again, 9 please? i 1 0 Q Yes, do you know if he 11 participat ed inan analysis -- do you 1 2 recollect whether he participated in an 1 3 analysis o f estuary mud samples? 1 4 A . I recollect that he participated, i 1 5 yes. 1 6 Q E. S.Tucker is Scott Tucker? II 1 7 A . Correct . 1 8 Q Do you have any present 1 9 recollecti on of having communicated with Mr. 2 0 Tucker on the subject of his analysis? 2 1 A . I had no communication that I 2 2 recall . 2 3 Q. Are you able to state anything 24 other than that he participated in the 2 5 analysis? GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 2 17 HARTOLDMONOOQ8449 1 A . I can't recall anything else. 2 Q. Do you know whether there was a 3 plant or other -- do you know if there was a 4 plant i n Newport in the United Kingdom that 5 was -- that had PCB1 s in plant effluent o f 6 any t yp e ? 7 MR. ZIMMER: Calls for 8 speculation, assumes facts not in evidence, 9 lacks foundation. 1 0 MR. TALLON: You can answer. 1 1 A. Well, I recall that there was an 1 2 Aroclor plant and that's all. 1 3 BY MR . TALLON: 1 4 Q. An Aroclor plant in Newport? 1 5 A. Newport. 1 6 Q. And was there also a plant in 1 7 Ruabon ? 1 8 A. I'm not sure on that. 1 9 Q. Was there some Monsanto facility 2 0 in Ruabon? 2 1 A. Oh, yes. 2 2 Q. What? Whatthat facility? 23 A. It was amanufacturing facility 2 4 for a variety of products for Monsanto. 2 5 Q. And where is Ruabon? GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 2 18 | HARTOLDMON0008450 1 A . Ruabon is in North Wales. 2 Q . Doctor, just one point on that 3 Exhibit 298 which you have before you. You 4 appear to be a cc: of that memoranda -- 5 memorandum; correct? 6 A. Correct. 7 Q. And following your name is a 8 designation that says "S. 2nd." Do you see 9 that? 1 0 A. Yes. 1 1 Q. Do you have any understanding as 1 2 to what this designation signifies? 1 3 A. Yes. 1 4 Q. What is your understanding? 1 5 A. Chief chemist at Newport at that 1 6 point in time. 1 7 Q. The "2nd" signifies chief chemist 1 8 at Newport at that time? 19 MR. ZIMMER: He means the 20 indication following your name, not that 21 A . F . -- 2 2 A. I'm sorry, you aretalking about 2 3 the South 2nd Street. 2 4 Q. Right. Is that what that means? 2 5 A. That means the location where I GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 2 19 | HARTOLDMONOOQ8451 1 was located in Monsanto. 2 Q. At that point, that is to say, 3 October 8th, 1969, you were in a facility at 4 2nd Street? 5 A . Correct. 6 Q And Mr. Tucker was also there? 7 A . Correct . 8 Q Where was his o f f i c e in 9 onship to your offic e ? 1 0 A . His office was i n a laboratory 1 1 the laboratory facility at that location and 1 2 would have been approximately two to three 1 3 hundred feet from my office; that range. 1 4 Q. Was the GC mass system at South 1 5 2nd Street in October 1969? 1 6 A . Yes. 1 7 Q. How long did you have an office at 1 8 South 2nd Street? 1 9 A. Until approximately 1972, when the 2 0 Organic -- or, when the research laboratories 2 1 moved from that location out to the Creve 2 2 Coeur site. 2 3 Q. Did you ever have an office in a 2 4 facility with the name Queeny? 2 5 A. The research laboratories were a GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 220 HARTOLDMONOOQ8452 1 part of the Queeny plant location, yes. 2 Q. And where was the Queeny Plant 3 locationst? 4 A . That was at South 2nd Street . 5 Q . Doctor t do you rec all ever, 6 without specific r e ference to the analysis 7 estuary mud sampl e s from the Uskmouth area 8 reflected in this exhibit, do you have a 9 recollection of Aroclor 1242 being found in 1 0 mud samples from any location? 1 1 A . No . 1 2 MR. ZIMMER: In which time frame? 1 3 Well, I guess it's moot. 1 4 A. (Continuing) I don't have any 1 5 recollection. I 1 6 BYMR. TALLON: . 17 Q. Doctor, are you familiar with the i 1 8 term "electron capture fingerprints"? 1 9 A. I'm not a practicing gas , 2 0 chromatograph person, and I've been away from 2 1 that too many years and never did do the 2 2 technical experimental work, so my answer is 2 3 going to be no. 2 4 Q. You have no familiarity with that 2 5 term? GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 221 HARTOLDMONOOQ8453 1 I know what the term is. I know 2 it's a, a wayof monitoring what comes out of 3 a gas chromatograph, but I'm not in a 4 technical position to explain more to you. 5 Q. Without -- that's asufficient 6 response.I mean, I'm not going to question 7 you about the fine points of gas 8 chromatography. I was simply wanting to 9 establish a foundation for more general 1 0 questioning. 1 1 A . Okay. 12 Q. Do you know ifthere's any 1 3 information provided by electron capture 1 4 fingerprints which is indicative of or 1 5 relates to biodegradation? 1 6 MR. ZIMMER: Lacks foundation. He 1 7 just told you what he knew about it and 1 8 that's all he knew. 1 9 You can answer if you know. 2 0 THE WITNESS: Would you read the 2 1 question back, please? 2 2 THE COURT REPORTER: 2 3 "Q. Do you know if there's any 2 4 information provided by electron capture 2 5 which is indicative of or GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 222 | HARTOLDMONOOQ8454 i relates to biodegradation?" 2 A. I have no recollection of any 3 specifics on that. 4 MR. TALLON: Let me show you a 5 document, Doctor, which is a one-page 6 memorandum dated December 3rd, 1969, bearing 7 production number TRAN 022090, and after the 8 reporter marks that as Exhibit 299, we'll ask 9 you to take a moment and review that, please. 1 0 (Plaintiff's Deposition 11 Exhibit 299 marked for 1 2 identification. ) 1 3 (Witness peruses said 1 4 document.) 1 5 BY MR. TALLON: 1 6 Q. Having reviewed that document, do 1 7 you have any enhanced recollection with 1 8 respect to the relationship, if any, between 1 9 electron capture fingerprints and 2 0 biodegradation? 2 1 A . No . 2 2 Q. Do you have anyrecollection, 2 3 Doctor, whether Mr. Tucker did any work on 2 4 samples with respect -- samples obtained from 2 5 National Cash Register? GOREREPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 223 | HARTOLDMONOOQ8455 A . I have no recollection of his 2 working on any samples from National Cash 3 Register . 4 Q. Do you know whether National Cash 5 Register, which I will refer to as NCR, used 6 a Monsanto product? 7 A. No, I have no recollection of 8 that. 9 Q . Does it refresh your recollection 1 0 if I as k you whether Monsanto -- NCR used an 1 1 A r o c 1 o r 1242 in the manufacture of its I 1 2 c a r b o n 1 ess carbon paper? 1 3 A . It is my recollection that they 1 4 did use an Aroclor 1242-type product. 1 5 Q . Do you know whether or not the 1 6 product , the Aroclor 1242 product was used in 1 7 connect ion with NCR's carbonless carbon 1 8 paper? II 1 9 A. That was my understanding. 2 0 Q. Do you have any recollection as to 2 1 whether you met with officials or 2 2 representatives of NCR to discuss 2 3 biodegradabi1ity of Aroclor 1242? 2 4 A. I personally can remember no such 2 5 meetings or contact with them. GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 224 | HARTOLDMONOOQ8456 1 Q. Do you recollect whether you or 2 persons working for you did any work to 3 analyze the biodegradation characteristics of 4 Aroclor 1242 for the benefit of NCR? 5 A. I don't recall any such work. 6 MR. TALLON: Let me show you a 7 document, Doctor, that's a multipage document 8 bearing production number 0, what appear to 9 be 0001248 through 1255. I'll ask the court 1 0 reporter to mark it. 1 1 (Plaintiff's Deposition 1 2 Exhibit 300 marked for 1 3 identification.) 1 4 (Witness peruses said 1 5 document.) 1 6 BY MR. TALLON: 1 7 Q. Did you get a chance to review 1 8 that, Doctor? 1 9 A. Yes. 2 0 Q. Have you seen that document 2 1 before? 2 2 A. I have no recollection of seeing 23 it . 2 4 Q. Do you have any recollection as to 2 5 whether Mr. Tucker, in 1970, did an initial GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 225 | HARTOLDMONOOQ8457 1 biologically populated river water 2 degradati on study 3 A . I just 4 Q Do you 5 learning in 1970 6 stable in certain 7 group? 8 MMRR.. ZZIIMMER: Lacks foundation 9 A . I have 1 0 BY MR. TALLON: 1 1 Q Doctor 1 2 understanding as 1 3 is requir e d in or 1 4 A . No . 1 5 Q You ha 1 6 A . No un d 1 7 Q Do you know if biphenyl occurs 1 8 naturally in the 1 9 A . No . 2 0 Q You do 2 1 A . I do n' 2 2 Q Doctor 2 3 recollection with respect to discussions 2 4 having to do with use of bromines? 2 5 Brominated compounds to replace GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 226 HARTOLDMONOOQ8458 1 polychlorinated biphenyls? 2 A . I recall no such discussions. .3J (Discussion off the record.) 4 MR. TALLON: We're back on the 5 record. 6 BY MR. TALLON: 7 Q Doc tor r do you hav e knowledge as 8 t o whether o r not i n 1969 or 1970, Monsanto 9 P e r f o r m e d any r i v e r die-away studies? 1 0 A . Yes , i t is my reco llection that 1 1 r i v e r die away t e s t s were per formed. 1 2 Q And f o r the record , would you 1 3 de fine what yo u u nd erstand to be the meaning 1 4 o f the term "r i v e r die-away s tudy " ? 1 5 A . A s I r e c all it, it 's simply taking 1 6 w a ter, and i n s o m e cases, for example,, river 1 7 w a ter, and d e t e r m i n ing the ra te at which \ 1 8 compounds in question or of i nterest are 1 9 being tested will degrade in that medium, 2 0 without adding purposely othe r materials or 2 1 chemicals. 2 2 Q. Did Monsanto conduct river 2 3 die-away studies with respect to 2 4 polychlorinated biphenyls? 2 5 A. Yes, it's my recollection that GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 227 HARTOLDMONOOQ8459 1 this was done. 2 Q. Do you know who was in charge of 3 those studies? 4 A. Yes. 5 Q. Who ? 6 A. ScottTucker. 7 Q. And do you know over what period 8 of time, those studies were conducted? 9 A. My best estimate would be 1970 to 1 0 '71. 1 1 Q Did you have any role with respect 1 2 to those studies, Doctor? 1 3 A . No, and only as manager of that 1 4 area. 1 5 Q. Do you have any present 1 6 recollection as to the results of those 1 7 studies? 1 8 A. I have a few,. I would call vague 1 9 recollections. 2 0 Q. Could you please tell me what your 2 1 vague recollections are? 2 2 A. That the river die-away test was 2 3 not a very good test because of the very slow 2 4 rate of degradation normally taking place 2 5 with chlorinated biphenyl-type products; slow GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 228 I HARTOLDMON0008460 1 degradation. 2 Q. What is the relationship of the 3 slow degradation to the river die-away test 4 not being a very good test? 5 A. Well, there wouldn't be enough 6 degradation with a period of time where you 7 could actually see changes over a period of 8 time, perhaps days or longer, to compare 9 different species of chlorinated biphenyls. 1 0 Q. Were those tests indicative to you 1 1 of the rate of degradation in naturally1 2 occurring water systems? 1 3 A. Not to me, but I would not be the 1 4 right one to answer that question. 1 5 Q Who would be; Mr. Tucker? 1 6 A . M r . Scott Tucker. 1 7 Q Do you recollect what, if any, 1 8 conclusion M r . Tucker reached in his river 1 9 die-away studi es with respect to the 2 0 degradation o f Aroclor 1242 or higher? 21 A . A t this point in time, I do not 2 2 recall that 2 3 MR . TALLON: Let me show you a 2 4 document that will be marked as 301. It's 2 5 three-page doc ument bearing production GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 229 HARTOLDMONOOQ8461 numbers TRAN 040011 through 13. 2 (Plaintiff's Deposition 3 Exhibit 301 marked for 4 identification.) 5 (Witness peruses said 6 document.) 7 THE WITNESS: Okay. 8 BY MR . TALLON: 9 Q. Doctor, does reviewing the exhibit 1 0 before you, and particularly the paragraph 1 1 which is numbered 1, "Monsanto-USA studies," 1 2 refresh your recollection in any respect as 1 3 to the results of river die-away studies 1 4 conducted in 1970? 1 5 A. Yes, now I see this, it does help 1 6 me reflect on our earlier discussion. 1 7 Q. Do you recall having reviewed this 1 8 exhibit, the results of river die-away 1 9 studies with respect to Aroclor 1242? 2 0 A . No. 2 1 Q. In what respect has your 2 2 recollection been refreshed as a result of 2 3 reviewing this exhibit? 2 4 A. Well, you asked me if I knew what 2 5 the difference of degradation would be in the GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 230 I HARTOLDMONOOQ8462 1 river die away test, and I believe I 2 responded that I could not recall that. 3 Q . Mm-hmm. 4 A. Now that I read this, I recall it, 5 but that's, that's all. 6 Q. And now what do you recall? 7 A. Just what Scott Tucker -- 8 presumably, this is out of his laboratory and 9 his work, and he participated in this meeting 1 0 with Papageorge for this document, concluded, 1 1 and I guess I can't go beyond that. 1 2 Q. You mean, are you referring to the 1 3 sentence that states, "River die-away studies 1 4 indicated Aroclor 1221 disappears, Aroclors 1 5 1242, 1248 and 1254 were undegraded"? 1 6 MR. ZIMMER: I don't think he 1 7 referred to a specific sentence. He 1 8 mentioned the document. 1 9 MR. TALLON: That's why I 2 0 mentioned it. 2 1 MR. ZIMMER: Okay, Doctor, let me 2 2 ask you again not to speculate about what Dr. 2 3 Tucker and others may have done to contribute 2 4 to this document, but please tell him your 2 5 recollection. GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 231 I HARTOLDMONOOQ8463 1 A. Right. Well ' I think I have t o 2 conclude with tha t that I r e ally d o n ' t h a v e a 3 recollecti on, and I'll r e s t a t e t h e r e a s o n , 4 which its obvious , this c a m e out o f Dr . Flan 5 (Phonetic) , he pa rticipat e d in t h i s m e e ting, 6 put together this , and I r e a 1 1 y c a n ' t 7 contribute beyond that. 8 Q So you have n o r e c o 11 e c t ion o f the 9 conclusions of th e rive r die -away s tudi e s -- 1 0 A . No . 1 1 Q And t h is doc u m e n t does n ' t re f r e s h 1 2 your recollection ? 1 3 A . No . 1 4 Q Okay, what m e e ting are y o u 1 5 referring to? 1 6 A. Well, I presume that it was -- 17 this may have been an assumption on my part, | 1 8 but the opening sentence of this saysl 1 9 reviewed studies with these persons. Whether 2 0 there was a meeting or not, I don't know. 2 1 MR. TALLON: Okay, that's fine. 22 MR. ZIMMER: Mr. Tallon doesn't 2 3 want you to guess, presume or to speculate. 2 4 THE WITNE SS : Okay . 25 MR. ZIMMER: He can interpret the GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 232 HARTOLDMONOOQ8464 doc um e n as well. 2 THEWITNESS: Okay. 3 BY MR. TALLON: 4 Q. Doctor, were you ever part of a 5 PCBtaskforce? ! 6 A . I don't recall being ever so 7 identified. 8 Q. All right. In1970, do you know i l 9 approximately how much of Mr. Tucker's time i I 1 0 was spent on degradation studies with reflect I 1 1 t o PC B ' s ? i j I 1 2 A. Relative to his total PCB efforts? ' 13 Q . Yes . 1 4 A. At least half would be my i I i 1 5 estimate. 1 6 Q. Is that half of the total time he 1 7 worked, or half -- 1 8 A. Half of thetotal time. 1 9 Q. And whatpercent of his total time 2 0 was directed to his PCB efforts, as you -- 2 1 A. A hundred percent. 22 Q. A hundred percent? So that was, 2 3 basically, his job, is to work on the PCB 2 4 issues? 2 5 A. Right. GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 233 HARTOLDMONOOQ8465 1 Q. And how does his time in 19 -- the 2 expenditure of his time that you've just 3 described compare with his, the expenditure 4 of his time in 1969? Was it different? 5 MR. ZIMMER: Calls for 6 speculation. 7 A. As I best recall, he was, in '69, 8 also full-time on PCB's. , 9 BY MR. TALLON: j 10 Q. And Mr. Tucker was hired in 1967 ? 1 1 or -- j 12 A. ' 67 . : 1-3 Q . 1 6 7 ? j j 14 A . ' 67 . | i| 15 Q. Do you. have any knowledgewith j 1 6 respect to how much time Mr. Tucker was 1 7 spending on PCB-related studies in 1968? 1 8 A. Essentially full-time, as I ! i ; 1 9 recall . 2 0 Q. And what about the period or the 2 1 portion of 1967 that he was working for 2 2 Monsanto? 2 3 A. He was in the process of phasing 2 4 into that, with hisentry into Monsanto, and 2 5 by the end of the year, he was essentially GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 234 HARTOLDMONOOQ8466 1 full-time . 2 Q. After 1971, did Mr. Tucker 3 continue to work or continue to focus his 4 work on PCB studies? 5 MR. ZIMMER: Calls for 6 speculation. 7 A . Well, after '71, S c o t t con t i n u e d , 8 to my best recollection , and I ' m not sure for 9 how long, and other per sons, perhaps , got 1 0 involved, also. 1 1 BY MR. TALLON: 1 2 Q Were other p e r s o n s who w e r e 1 3 reporting to you or per sons w ho were 1 4 reporting to persons wh o were r e p o r t i n g to 1 5 you, also involved in d e g r a d a t i o n work in the 1 6 late Sixti es and early S e v e n t i e s ? 1 7 A . Yes. 1 8 Q Could you id e n t i f y any persons by 1 9 name? 2 0 A . The only per son t h at comes to my 2 1 mind would be Saeger, S - a - e - g - e - r 2 2 Q Is that Mr. Saeger ? 2 3 A . Dr. Saeger. 2 4 Q Dr. Saeger? And what was his job, 2 5 as best you recall it? GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 235 HARTOLDMONOOQ8467 A . He was a res earch chemist a n d he 2 was -- I'm not s u re if he was assigned t o 3 Scott at that p o i n t , b u t he was, to m y best 4 recoil e c t i o n , i n v o 1 v e d with biodegradat ion 5 s t u d i e s, work. 6 Q Do you know if Mr., Dr. S a e g e r is 7 still working for M o n s a nto today? 8 A . As far as I know, he is. 9 Q . Oth e r than D r. Saeger and M r 1 0 Tucker , do you r e c o 1 1 e c t whether the r e are 1 1 other persons i n your g roup who were w o r k i n g 1 2 on degradation studies in the late Sixties or 1 3 early Seventies? 1 4 A . No. 1 5 Q . Are you -- 1 6 MR. ZIMMER: It's Dr. Tucker, by 1 7 the way. 1 8 BY MR. TALLON: 1 9 Q. Is it Dr. Tucker?? 2 0 A. It is Dr. Tucker. 2 1 Q. Are you familiar with the name 2 2 Dick Baxter? 2 3 A. Yes. 2 4 Q. And tell me what Mr. Baxter's 2 5 position was in 1971. GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 236 I HARTOLDMONOOQ8468 A . As I recall, he was a manager of 2 research located at either Ruabon or Newport; 3 I believe, Ruabon, 4 Q. Did Mr. Baxter have any 5 responsibility with respect to degradation 6 studies in Europe, so far as you know? 7 A. I don't know. I don't recall. 8 MR. TALLON: Let me show you a 9 document that's going to be marked as Exhibit 1 0 Number 302, a two-page document. One of the 1 1 two pages bears production number TRAN 1 2 063363, and the other does not appear to be 1 3 related, so we won't mark it. 1 4 (The page bearing production 1 5 number TRAN 063363 was marked 1 6 as Plaintiff's Deposition 1 7 Exhibit 302 marked for 1 8 identification. ) 1 9 (Witness peruses said 2 0 document . ) 2 1 THE WITNESS: Okay. 2 2 BY MR. TALLON: 2 3 Q. Does reviewing that exhibit, 2 4 Doctor, refresh your recollection in any 2 5 respect as to whether or not Mr. Baxter was GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 2 37 | HARTOLDMONOOQ8469 involved in degradation work in the early 2 Seventies? 3 A . No,itdoesnot. 4 Q. Do you recognize the handwriting 5 that appears on the bottom of that one-page 6 exhibit? 7 A. No, I cannotidentify that 8 writing. 9 Q. Is Dr. Saeger's first name Victor? 1 0 A. Yes, it is. 1 1 Q. Was he known as Vic? 1 2 A. Vic; correct. 1 3 Q. Doctor, do you knowwhether 1 4 bipheny1-adapte1 organisms have any effect on 1 5 the degradation of PCB's? 1 6 A . No . 1 7 Q D o you recall any work d one by 1 8 Monsanto in the 1 ate Six t i e s o r S e v e n t i e s 1 9 having to d o with the e f f e c t o f b a c t e r i a 1 2 0 organisms o n the degradat ion o f PCB ' s ? 2 1 A . We -- Comment fur t h e r on bacterial 2 2 organisms 2 3 MR . TALLON: L e t m e show you a 24 document that may or may not b e o f 2 5 assistance. GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 238 HARTOLDMONOOQ8470 1 We'll mark this as 303. It's a 2 one-page document bearing production number 3 TRAN 060457. 4 ( P 1 a i n t i ff's Depos i t i o n 5 Exhibit 303 marked for 6 identifi cation. ) 7 (Witness peruses s aid 8 document . ) 9 BY MR. TALLON: 1 0 Q. Have you read that document? ii! 1 1 A . Yes . 1 2 Q. Have you ever seen that before? 1 3 A. I don't remember. 1 4 Q. Does reviewing that document 1 5 refresh your recollection in any respect as 1 6 to whether there is any relationship between 1 7 bipheny1-adapte1 organisms and the 1 8 degradation of PCB ' s ? 1 9 A . No . 2 0 Q . Are you familiar with the term 2 1 "Trigger substrate" as it relates t o bio 2 2 or, to degradation of PCB's? 2 3 A . No . 2 4 MR. TALLON: Let me show you a 2 5 document, Doctor, which we'll mark as Exhibit GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 239 HARTOLDMONOOQ8471 3 " 4 , a multipage document bearing production 2 numbers BIR 007951 through 7962. 3 (Plaintiff's Deposition 4 Exhibit 304 marked for 5 identification. ) 6 BY MR . TALLON : 7 Q. The question, Doctor, will 8 be whether you have seen this document 9 before. 1 0 (Witness peruses said 11 document. ) 1 2 A. I don't recall seeing this. 1 3 Q. Could you look at Page 4 of that 1 4 document? I'm referring now to the numbers 1 5 which appear at the top of the memorandum 1 6 pages. There's a notation under the caption 1 7 "Research: Biodegradation Studies -- 1 8 Ruabon," referring to a biphenyl degrading 1 9 culture C2," do you have any knowledge or 2 0 information as to what biphenyl degrading 2 1 culture C 2 is referring to there? 2 2 A. No. None. 2 3 Q. Were biodegradation studies being 2 4 conducted by the European offices of Monsanto 2 5 contemporaneously with work going on in St. GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 240 | HARTOLDMONOOQ8472 1 Louis l n the late Sixties and early 2 Seventies? 3 A . It's my recollection that some 4 work was being done at the Ruabon facility, 5 with their biodegradation facility. That's 6 all I recall. : 7 Q. Do you have any recollection as to 8 who was involved in such work? 9 A. I can't come up with a name, no. li 1 0 Q. Do you have any recollection as to I 1 1 whether that work was independent of or I i 1 2 coordinated with the work underway in St. 1 3 Louis? 1 4 A. I can't recall that. 1 5 Q. Do you recall or have any ii j j i j 1 6 recollection whether, in connection with j j 17 biodegradation studies being performed inthe j i 1 8 United States, biodegradation field tests : I 19 were ever conducted? And by field tests, I . 2 0 mean outside the laboratory. 2 1 A. I don't recall any field tests. 2 2 MR. TALLON: Let me show you a 2 3 document, Doctor, which we'll mark as the 2 4 next exhibit. This is a multipage document 2 5 bearing production numbers 0007267 through GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 24 1 HARTOLDMONOOQ8473 "07302. 2 (Plaintiff's Deposition 3 Exhibit 305 marked for 4 identification. } 5 (Witness peruses said 6 document.) . 7 BY MR. TALLON: 8 Q. Did you get a chance to review 1 ( 9 thatdocument? i 1 0 A . Ye s . i | I 11 Q. Do you recollect ever having seen | 1 2 thatbefore? ; [ 13 A. I don't recall seeing this. ( ! 14 Q. Do you know whether there was an , 15 R. A. Lidgette workingfor Monsanto in 1971? | 1 6 A. Yes. 1 7 Q. And what was Mr. Lidgette's 1 8 position in 1971? j i 1 I 19 A. He was laboratory supervisor in , i 2 0 charge of, including ana 1ytica 1-type work at 2 1 Ruabon. 2 2 Q. Could you know if Mr. Lidgette is 2 3 still living today? 2 4 A. Yes, he is. 2 5 Q. Is he retired? GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 242 HARTOLDMONOOQ8474 1 3 : 4 `I i> ii 5j 6 7| 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 A . Yes. Q. Do you know where he is? A . Yes. Q . Where? A. It's near -- and don't ask me to spell this -- Llangollen in North Wales, which is, I would guess, fifteen, ten, fifteen miles from the Ruabon plant. Q. And do you know whether H. A. Vodden, V-o-d-d-e-n, was working for Monsanto in 1971? A . Yes. Q And what was his p o s i tion as you best know it? A . As I best recall, h e was involved with proce ss researching of f u n c t i o n a 1 fluid-type products, perhaps i n c luding Aro - I'll strik e that. Period. Q Do you know where h e was physically located in 1971 f or h is office? A. Q today? A. Q Ruabon. Do you know if he i s still living No, I don't. And where was he when you last GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 243 HARTOLDMONOOQ8475 /. new his whereabo u t s ? A . At R u a bon twenty years ago 3 Q And d i d y o u know a P. E . G i 1 b e r t 4 working f or M o n s a n t o in 1971? 5 A . I can' t re call Mr. Gilbert 6 Q Withou t re gard to your a b i 1 i t y 7 recollect in g ever h a v ing seen thi s pa rticular 8 document, do you have any recolle c t i o n of 9 work done by Lid g e 11 e and Vodden h a v i n g to do 1 0 with the degradat ion of Aroclors 12 4 2 and 1 1 10 16? 1 2 A . No . 1 3 Q Do you h a v e any recoil e c t i on of 1 4 work done by Lidg e 11 e and Vodden h a v i n g to do 1 5 with bipheny1-degrading organisms C2 and C3? 1 6 A . No . 1 7 Q. Do you know what a 1 8 bipheny1-degrading organism C2 is? 1 9 A . No . 2 0 Q. And would it, therefore, follow 21 that you don't know what a bipheny1-degrading 2 2 organism C 3 is? 2 3 A. Correct. 2 4 Q. As a chemist, do you know if C 2 2 5 refers to a particular compound? GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 244 I HARTOLDMONOOQ8476 1 A. I can't answer that. When they n use this in connection with bio-information 3 studies, I'm not familiar with their 4 terminology. 5 Q. Okay. Doctor, do you recollect 6 ever having attended a meeting in 1970 with i 7 representatives of General Electric? 8 A . No. l 9 MR. TALLON: Let me show you a i 1 0 document which we'll mark as the next exhibit ! 11 in order. That is a multipage document | 1 2 bearing production numbers TRAN 023509 1 3 through 0 23 51 8. 14 (Plaintiff's Deposition ; II 15 Exhibit 306 marked forI! 1 6 identification.) 1 7 (Witness peruses said 1 8 document.) 1 9 BY MR. TALLON: 2 0 Q. Does reviewing Exhibit 306 refresh 2 1 your recollection in any respect, Doctor, as 2 2 to whether you attended a meeting with 2 3 representatives of General Electric in 1970? 2 4 A. I can't recall anything about such 2 5 a meeting. GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS , MIS SOURI 245 HARTOLDMONOOQ8477 1 Q Do you have any recollection, Doctor, of ever having met with any customers 3 of M o n s a nto to discuss the biodegradability 4 of A r o c1 or 1242? 5 A. I can'trecall where I personally 6 participated with that. 7 Q. Does the term Aroclor 1242-B have 8 any meaning to you? 9 A . No . 1 0 Q. Does the term MCS 1016 have any 1 1 meaning to you? 1 2 A. I -- the name of the term is 1 3 familiar. I recall tha t name. 1 4 Q. Do you have anymore recollection 1 5 than simply of the name ? 1 6 A. It's my best recollection that was 1 7 a, an experimenta 1-type product as a 1 8 potential replacement f or Aroclor 1242. 1 9 Q. Did you pers onally have any 2 0 ibility for the testing of MCS 1016? 2 1 A . Not that I r e c a 11 . 2 2 Q. Do you know whether MCS 1016 was 2 3 used as a replacement f or Aroclor 1242 in any 2 4 respect? 2 5 A . No . GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST . LOUIS, MISSOURI 24 6 HARTOLDMONOOQ8478 1 Q. You do not know? o A . I do not know. 3 Q. Do you know whether Mr. Tucker or 4 anyone working for you co 5 respect to the biodegrada 6 A . I can't recall 7 Q Are you famili 8 name of J . H. Mainprize? 9 A . Yes. 1 0 (Discussi 1 1 BY MR. TALLON: 1 2 Q You said you d 1 3 Mainprize? 1 4 A . I think I do. 1 5 recall who Mainprize was. 1 6 Q What do you re 1 7 A . I couldn't hav 1 8 name myself, but now that I hear it, it's my 1 9 best recollection he was involved with or 2 0 possibly supervised the biodegradabi1ity-type 2 1 functions at Ruabon. 2 2 Q. All right, let me ask you if you 2 3 can identify the document that we will mark 2 4 as the next exhibit, a multipage document 2 5 bearing two series of production numbers. GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 24 7 I HARTOLDMONOOQ8479 1 The first is 0001966, and that runs through o 0002006, attached to pages TRAN 066313 and 3 066312 . 4 (Plaintiff ' s Deposition 5 Exhibit 307 marked for 6 identification, ) 7 (Witness peruses said 8 document. ) 9 BY MR. TALLON: 1 0 Q. Have you seen that before, Doctor? 1 1 A. I have no recollection of this 1 2 report at all. 1 3 Q. Does reviewing that exhibit 1 4 refresh your recollection in any respect as 1 5 to work done on the biodegradation of Aroclor 1 6 1242 in comparison with potential substitute 17 cts? 18 A . No . 1 9 Q Do you know wh e ther MCS 1016 2 0 c e d Aroclor 1242 in a ny product? 2 1 A . No . 2 2 Q You do not know whether or not it 2 3 did? 2 4 A . I did not know that. 2 5 Q . Do you recollec t ever having been GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 248 I HARTOLDMON0008480 1 a participant in any discussion or o communication in which the use of MCS 1016 as 3 a replacement for Aroclor 1242 was a subject? 4 A . No . 5 MR. TALLON: Let me show you a 1 6 document bearing production numbers TRAN ; 7 042387 through 389, which we will mark as the 8 nextexhibit. 9 (Plaintiff's Deposition 1 0 Exhibit 308 marked for 1 1 identification.) j i I i \ l | 12 (Witness peruses said j 1 3 document . ) 1 4 BY MR. TALLON: 1 5 Q. Did you review that, Doctor? 1 6 A . Yes. 1 7 Q. Does review of that document 1 8 refresh your recollection in any respect as 1 9 to whether you had any participation in 2 0 discussions or communications regarding the 2 1 substitution of MCS 1016 for Aroclor 1242? 2 2 A . No . 2 3 Q. In particular, does reference to 2 4 the paragraph numbered 2 on Page 1 under 25 "Biodegradation Studies" enhance your , GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 249 HARTOLDMONOOQ8481 *_1L recollection in that regard? o A . No . 3 MR . TALLON: Let's mark as the 4 next exhibit a one-page document bear i n g 5 production number TRAN 009721. 6 (Plaintiff's Deposition 7 Exhibit 309 marked for 8 identification.) 9 MR. TALLON: Please review that. 1 0 (Witness peruses said 1 1 document.) 1 2 (Plaintiff ' s Deposition 1 3 Exhibit 310 marked for 1 4 identification. ) 1 5 BY MR. TALLON: 1 6 Q. Did you ever see that document 1 7 before, Doctor? 18 A. No. I don' t recall this document. 1 9 Q. Do you reca 11 planning for a 2 0 meeting with represent atives of NCR? 2 1 A. I have no r ecollection of that, 2 2 Q. Let me show you a document that 2 3 the court reporter has now marked as the next 2 4 exhibit, Exhibit 310, and ask you whether a 2 5 review of this documen t enhances your GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 250 | HARTOLDMONOOQ8482 1 recollection in any respect with regard to a 2 meeting or meetings conducted between Monsanto and representatives of NCR. 4 A . No, I can't, I can't recall 5 anything out of this. 6 Q. Do yourecollect, Doctor, ever 7 meeting with representatives of Westinghouse 8 in 1970 to d'i s c u s s PCB's? 9 A. It's my recollection there was a ; 1 0 meeting with Westinghouse. I can't recall 1 1 1 participants, or time frame, or anything. 12 MR. TALLON: Let me show you a : 1 3 document that bearsproduction number 1154 i 14 and which we will mark as t he next exhibit. i I 15 (Plaintiff' s Deposition , 1 6 Exhibit 311 marked for 1 7 identificat ion.) i 1 8 BY MR. TALLON: i j 1 9 Q. I ask you to tak e a look at that 2 0 and see if reviewing it ref reshes your 2 1 recollection in any respect as to a meeting 2 2 with Westinghouse. 2 3 (Witness pe ruses said 2 4 document.) 2 5 BY MR. TALLON: GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 251 HARTOLDMONOOQ8483 1 Q. Does review of that exhibit 2 refresh your recollection in any respect 3 No 4 about the meeting with 5 Westinghouse? 6 A . (Witness shakes head in negative 7 manner.) 8 Q. Do you recall anything about any 9 meeting with Westinghouse other than that one 1 0 occurred? 1 1 A . No . 1 2 Q. Doctor, are you familiar with a 1 3 Monsanto product known as Aroclor 5460? 1 4 A. I recall the terminology, Aroclor 1 5 5460. That much I recall, as a Monsanto 1 6 product. 1 7 Q. Do you know if Aroclor 5460 was a 1 8 chlorinated terphenyl? 1 9 A. That's my recollection, a 2 0 chlorinated polyterphenyl, probably; 2 1 terphenyl. 2 2 Q. Do you have any understanding as 2 3 to whether Aroclor, or excuse me, yes, 2 4 whether Aroclor 5460 contained any 2 5 chlorinated biphenyls? GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 252 HARTOLDMONOOQ8484 -1 A. I don't recall. MR. TALLON: Well, let me show you 3 a document, a two-page document bearing 4 production numbers TRAN 058001 and 002. 5 (Plaintiff's Deposition 6 Exhibit 312 marked for 7 identification.) 8 (Witness peruses said 9 document. ) 1 0 BY MR . TALLON: 1 1 Q. Did you review that, Doctor? 1 2 A. Yes. 1 3 Q. Does your review of Exhibit 312 1 4 refresh your recollection in any respect as 1 5 to whether Aroclor 5460 was composed in part 1 6 of chlorinated biphenyls? 1 7 A . No . 1 8 Q. Doctor, do you recall ever 1 9 attempting to determine a test method for 2 0 determining chlorinated biphenyl content of 2 1 Aroclor 5460? 2 2 A . No . 2 3 Q. Do you recollect whether anyone in 2 4 your group did so? 2 5 A. I have no recollection of that. GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 253 HARTOLDMONOOQ8485 1 Q. Just for the sake of clarity, do you have an understanding one way or the 3 other as to whether Aroclor 5460 was composed 4 in part of polychlorinated biphenyls? 5 A. I don't know that. 6 MR. TALLON: Okay. 7 Why don't we take a two-minute 8 break t 9 (Recess) 1 0 BY MR . TALLON: 1 1 Q. Doctor, are you familiar with the 1 2 term "Semi-continuous activated sludge test? 1 3 A. Yes. 1 4 Q. And can you state for the record 1 5 your understanding of that phrase? 1 6 A. It's a test that is designed to 1 7 simulate a secondary sewerage disposal plant 1 8 treatment where microorganisms in the test 1 9 are used along with certain nutrients to show 2 0 degradation of tested materials under 2 1 controlled conditions with that experimental 2 2 parameter. 2 3 Q. Did someone in your group perform 2 4 semi-continuous activated sludge tests with 2 5 respect to PCB degradation in the late GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 254 HARTOLDMONOOQ8486 1 Sixties or early Seventies? 2 A . Yes. 3 Q . Who ? 4 A . Well, this would have been Scott 5 Tucker , Victor Saeger, primarily. 6 MR. TALLON: Let me show you a 7 documen t, Doctor, that bears production 8 numbers 3485 and 3486, and we'll mark that as 9 Exhib i t 3 13. 1 0 (Plaintiff's Deposition 1 1 Exhibit 313 marked for 1 2 identification.) 1 3 BY MR. TALLON: 1 4 Q. Can you identify the document? 1 5 (Witness peruses said 1 6 document.) 1 7 A. Okay. 1 8 Q. Can you identify the document? 1 9 A. I don't recall this correspondence 2 0 or the document. 2 1 Q. Do you have any recollection as to 2 2 the results of semi-continuous activated 2 3 sludge tests and river water die-away tests 2 4 as of June 1970? 2 5 A . No . GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 255 | HARTOLDMONOOQ8487 1 Q Do you have any recollection 2 whether e arly results from such tests 3 indicated that a major number of the two 4 chlorine and three chlorine isomers degrade 5 under cer tain conditions? 6 A . What I remember from the test is, I 7 you could show more rapid b i odegradabi1ity of 8 the lower -chlorinated isomers of PCB's 9 relative to the higher-ch1orinated isomers, 1 0 I don ' t r ecall more than that, and I'm not I 1 1 sure what time frame that work was done in. 1 2 Q By lower chlorinated, are you 1 3 referring to two chlorine and three chlorine 1 4 isomers? 1 5 A. Yes, and also three and four, 1 6 Q. And is it your recollect ion that 1 7 the five, six and higher chlorine i somers did 1 8 not degrade to the same extent or a t the same 1 9 rate as the lower chlorinated isome r s ? 2 0 A . Yes. 2 1 Q Do you have any recollec tion as to 2 2 when you acquired that information? 2 3 A . No , I do no t . 2 4 Q Do you r e c a 11, Doctor, e ver doing 2 5 any work to determine whether PCB's were GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 256 HARTOLDMONOOQ8488 1 present in Monsanto food or medicine 2 products? 3 A . No . 4 MR . TALLON: Let me show you a 5 document which we'll m a rk as the next 6 exhibit, bearing produc tion number TRAN 7 021409. , 8 (Plaintiff's Deposition ; 9 Exhibit 314 marked for !f i 10 identification.) j 1 1 (Witnessperuses said l 1 2 document.) ; 13 A . Okay, I don't recall generating | 1 4 this document, but -- ! 1 5 BY MR. TALLON: i 1 6 Q. Do you know what cresy1d i pheny1 1 7 phosphate is? 1 8 A. Ibelieve it's anadditive used in 1 9 some Monsanto products. 2 0 Q. Do you know what the purpose of 21 theadditive is? 2 2 MR. ZIMMER: In which product? 2 3 MR. TALLON: I don't know. I'll 2 4 find outfrom the doctor what it is. 2 5 A. No, I really don't know the GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 2 57 HARTOLDMONOOQ8489 J. purpose o f it as an additive. 2 BY MR. TALLON: 3 Q Do you know what saccharin is? 4 A . Yes. 5 Q It's a sweetener; correct? 6 A . Correct. 7 Q And do you know what Santicizer 8 3 3 4 F is? 9 A . No, I do not. 1 0 Q Do you know what Santicizer 711 1 1 is? 1 2 A . No . 1 3 Q Santicizer 160, do you know what 1 4 that is? 1 5 A . That's a plasticizer product. And 1 6 I would assume the other Santicizers are 1 7 plasticizer products . 1 8 Q And do you know what Vanillin is? 1 9 A . Yes. 2 0 Q What is it? 2 1 A . That's a synthetic vanilla product 2 2 produced by Monsanto. 2 3 Q Do you know for what use that 2 4 product i s put to? 2 5 A . Flavorings . GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 258 HARTOLDMON0008490 Q . Having reviewed this list, do you have any enhanced recollection of testing for 3 PCB's in certain Monsanto products? 4 A . I have no recollection. 5 Q . Do you have any recollection, 6 Doctor of ever being told by Mr. -- Dr. 7 Tucker that he had found PCB's in dishwasher 8 detergents? 9 A . No . 1 0 Q. Do you have any specific 1 1 recollection, Doctor, of Dr. Tucker ever 1 2 telling you that he had found Aroclor 1242 1 3 present in dishwasher detergents? 1 4 A. No, I don't recall that. 1 5 MR. TALLON: Let me show you a 1 6 document that we'll mark as Exhibit 315, 1 7 bearing production number TRAN 023044, and 1 8 ask you to take a moment and review it. 1 9 (Plaintiff ' s Deposition 2 0 Exhibit 315 marked for 2 1 identification. ) 2 2 (Witness peruses said 2 3 document. ) 2 4 BY MR. TALLON: 2 5 Q. Have you reviewed it? GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 259 HARTOLDMONOOQ8491 1 A . Yes. 2 Q. Does reviewing it, or has 3 reviewing it refreshed your recollection in 4 any respect about any work done by Dr. Tucker 5 in connection with identifying PCB's in 6 dishwasher detergents? 7 A . No . 8 Q. Do you recollect ever having had 9 discussions with Pap -- Dr. Tucker about the 1 0 presence of PCB's in household products of 1 1 any kind? 1 2 A . No. 1 3 Q. Do you recollect ever having had 1 4 any discussions withMr. Papageorge about the 1 5 presence of PCB's in household products of 1 6 any type? 1 7 A . No . 1 8 Q. Doctor, does the handwritten 19 notation in the upperright-hand corner of 2 0 this exhibit that appears to say "Aroclor 2 1 SP," do you see that? 2 2 A. Yes. 2 3 Q. Can you identify that handwriting? 2 4 A. Itlooks like it could be mine. 2 5 Q. Did you have a file denominated GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 260 HARTOLDMONOOQ8492 1 " Aroclor SP" in 1972? 2 A. If you are asking what "SP" means, 3 I think I would have had a file -- at that 4 time, I think the business unit was called, 5 perhaps, Specialty Products. That would be 6 Aroclor, perhaps, in the specialty products 7 file. That's about as far as I can go with 8 it. 9 Q. Did you keep files in your office 1 0 in 1972? 1 1 A. Mm-hmm, yes. 1 2 Q. Did you have any files that 1 3 related particularly to testing with respect 1 4 to PCB ' s ? 1 5 A. No separate files apart from 1 6 products, et cetera; that I recall. 1 7 Q. Do you recollect whether, if you 1 8 received written reports of studies relating 1 9 to PCB's, where you filed such reports? 2 0 THE WITNESS: Would you read that 2 1 back, please? 2 2 THE COURT REPORTER: 2 3 "Q. Do you recollect whether, if 2 4 you received written reports of studies 2 5 relating to PCB's, where you filed such GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 261 HARTOLDMONOOQ8493 -1 reports? " 2 A . No. I don't recall that. 3 MR. TALLON: All right, thank you. 4 MR. ZIMMER: Thank you, Doctor. 5 THE WITNESS: Thank you 6 (Whereupon, at 10: 4 5 a.m . , 7 the deposition was 8 concluded. ) 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 262 I HARTOLDMONOOQ8494 1 COMES NOW THE WITNESS, ROBERT 2 ELLIS KELLER, and having read the foregoing 3 transcript of the deposition taken on the 4 11th and 12th days of June, 1992, 5 acknowledges by signature hereto that it is a 6 true and accurate transcript of the testimony 7 given on the date hereinabove mentioned. 8 9 10 1 1 ROBERT ELLIS KELLER 12 13 1 4 Subscribed and sworn to before me 1 5 this _/_b____ _ day of___ -z_________________, 1 9 9 2. (j J 1 6 BROMA J. ROBINSON NOTARY PUBLIC-STATE OF MISSOURI ST. LOUIS COUNTY 1 7 My Commission expires: _______JLxiiRiLs 1395. _ 18 19 20 21 2 2 Notary Public 23 24 2 5 ORIGINAL GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 263 HARTOLDMONOOQ8495 ] STATE OF MISSOURI ) 2 SS : ) 3 CITY OF ST. LOUIS ) 4 I J. Bryan Jordan, notary public 5 in and for the State of Missouri, duly 6 commissioned, qualified and authorized to 7 administer oaths and to certify depositions, 8 do hereby certify that pursuant to agreement 9 in the civil cause now pending and 1 0 undetermined in the Supeiror Court of the 1 1 State of California, to be used in the trial 1 2 of said cause in said court, I was attended 1 3 at the offices of Bryan, Cave, McPheeters & 1 4 McRoberts, in the City of St. Louis, State of 1 5 Missouri,by the aforesaid witness and by the 1 6 aforesaid attorneys, on the 11th and 12th 1 7 days of June, 1992. 1 8 The said witness, being of sound 1 9 mind and being by me first carefully examined 2 0 and duly cautioned and sworn to testify the 2 1 truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the 2 2 truth in the case aforesaid, thereupon 2 3 testified as is shown in the foregoing 2 4 transcript, said testimony being by me 2 5 reported in shorthand and caused to be GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 264 HARTOLDMONOOQ8496 1 transcribed into typewriting, and that the 2 foregoing pages correctly set forth the 3 testimony of the aforementioned witness, 4 together with the questions propounded by 5 counsel and remarks and objections thereto, . 6 and is in all respects a full,true, correct : 7 and complete transcript of the questions ; 1 8 propounded to and the answers given by said ; 9 witness; that signature of the deponent was ! i I 1 0 not waived by agreement of counsel. | I 1 1 I further certify that I am not of ; 1 2 counsel or at torney for e i t h e r of the pa r t i e s 1 3 to said suit, not related to nor i n t e r e s ted 1 4 in any of the parties or their attorneys. 1 5 Witness my hand and notarial seal 1 6 at St. Louis, Missouri, this JSzL day of 1 7 . 1 9 9 2. 1 8 My commission expires July 20, 1 9 1 9 9 4. 20 21 2 2 J. Bryan Jordan 2 3 Notary Public in and for the 2 4 State of Missouri 25 GORE REPORTING COMPANY - ST. LOUIS , MIS S OURI 265 HARTOLDMONOOQ8497