Document gaKNNqoO2gng6qvrRZeNQXopL

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA JACKSONVILLE DIVISION INDEPENDENT LIFE & ACCIDENT INSURANCE COMPANY, a FLORIDA corporation, Plaintiff, V. GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY, a foreign corporation, D<sf endant. ) ) ) ) ) ) Casa Ho. 83-613-CIV-J-12 ) ) ) ) ) ) DEPOSITION OF WILLIAM RICHARD, JR. TAKEN ON BEHALF OF THE PLAINTIFF. April 8, 1936 Michaud > Qcfaioed&t Qeglstelied ^HoffissionallQepo/rfeAs 818 OLIVE ST. LOUIS, MO. 63101 621-0107 HARTOLDMONOOQ9282 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURTMIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA 2 JACKSONVILLE DIVISION 3 INDEPENDENT LIFE A ACCIDENT ) 4 INSURANCE COMPANY, a FLORIDA ) corporation, ) 5 Plaintiff, -js ) 6 V, ) ) C.asa No, 83-613-CIV-J-12 7 ) GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY, a ) foreign corporation, 8 ) ) De fandant, ) 9 10 DEPOSITION OF WITNESS, taken to be used in an action 11. pending in the United States District Court, Middle District 12 of Florida, Jacksonville Division, wherein Independent Life & 13 .Accident Insurance Company, a Florida Corporation, is 14 plaintiff, and General Electric Company, a foreign corpora 15 tion, is Defendant,.pursuant to agreement between counsel, 16 under the provisions of Rule 26(a) of the Rules of Civil 17 Procedure, taken on the 8th day of April, A0D0, 1986, at the 18 law offices of Messrs, Paper, Martin, Jensen, Maichel & 19 Hetledge, in the City of St, Louis, State of Missouri, before / 20 Retha R, DeHartino, RPR. CSE. (XL) and Notary Public within 21 and for the County of St, Louis, State of Missouri, 22 APPEARANCES: 23 Messrs. Gallagher, Baumer, Mikals, Bradford, Cannon & Walters, 24 By; Lawrence J. Hamilton, II, Esq,, and Thomas M, Baumer, Esq, For the Plaintiff, 25 2 HARTOLDMONOOQ9283 1 Thomas M, Burke, Esq., For Che Defendant, 2 Messrs. Miller & Martin, By: George Derryberry, Esq.,, . , . For The Monsanto Company and William Richard, Jr, 3 4 5 T*..-T1.-TU4T4-T4JTU.Aru,VL Ci.VTJU /V*^Tv3LiAai.ti3.vrL)/ j >TJ DAA, O 6 of lawful age, produced, swom and examined on behalf of 7 the Plaintiff, deposes and says: 8 DIRECT EXAMINATION . 9 QUESTIONS BY MR. HAMILTON: 10 Q Would you please state your full name for the 11 reecru? 12 . A William Ralph Richard, Jr. 13 Q And your address?. 14 A 739 Dalchester Lana, Kirkwood, Missouri, 15 0 Could you run through your educational background 16 since high school? 17 A I'm a graduate of Elmhurst College, class of '43, 18 got out in December, '42. I have a Master's in Chemistry 19 from the University of Michigan in 547, and a Ph.D. in 20 Organic Chemistry from the University of Mis .organ in '51, 21 got out in 550. 22 Q Have you had any other training since your Ph.D,? 23 A Industrial courses and some one or two-week courses 24 such as Harvard Business School, things like that, 25 Q Management type courses? 3 HARTOLDMONOOQ9284 A Management courses. Q Since your Ph.D,, have you have any special training concerning polychlorinated hipnenyl3? x\ You mean special training? Outside training? Hr\ Rigut, A I've attended some conferences on the environmental aspects of it, I5ve read a good deal of literature up through 1974., We were pretty well posted in labor and so forth and newspapers, I was in the midst of most of that and after that time I paid vary little attention to it. Q After 1974? A '74, 175,, . Q What kind of conferences did you attend. A There were one or two executive-type conferences in Washington, D,,C,, that ware briefings on environmental law and environmental matters,, 13vs forgotten the name of the companies that put it on. Q About what time period? A 0hs in tha SQ's, I also had some. U,, S, Senate hearings in, oh, in, I guess the 1970's or '8Q3s, Q And at the conferences in Washington;in the 60's, PCS was one of the topics? A No, I think it was more general in that it was not geared to anyone, It was on things like product lia bility, 4 HARTOLDMONOOQ9285 1 Q Since your since you graduated with your ?h,,0, 2 from Michigan in 1951, could you go through your work 3 history? 4 Yes, Well, I actually cams back to Monsanto in 5 'Dtiytion ; On j,ostz ULu4S~S ^n51,--114*. iii Research Laboratories ,ucu.gh.ly 6 October of 1950, and 1st,ayed there and worked in the Central 7 Reaearcu Labs until 1961 when I came to St, Louis, And I 8 was a member of their Res earch and Engineering Division at 9 chat time, and in 1963 1 want to the Organic Division,, I 10 was in the Organic Division until, it was dissolved sometime 11 about 1973, and Monsanto Industrial Company was formed about 12 that time, I was made a manager of Research in 1961 until 13 the Organic Division, Previous to that time I had been a 14 research chemist group leader, section leader, project 15 manager, 1973, "74, in that region, MIC was formed and I 16 became Director of Research, And in 1976 I went to the 17 Intermediate Company, which was newly formed, as a Director, 18 Monsanto Intermediates -- Chemical Intermediates, MCI, is what they call it: 19 and I was Director of Process Chemicals, I was in there 20 until about 1982 when it was dissolved an^ * went back -- merged back into the Industrial Company, I was still a 21 Director of Research, and I had Special Chemicals at the 22 23 end of 1983, '84, 535. I resigned in December of '35 from 24 Monsanto,, 25 Q Are you retired now? 5 HARTOLDMONOOQ9286 1 A, I' n retired now from Monsanto, 2 Q Okay, Are yon working for someone else? 3 A I*m working for myself, I started a small com 4 pany , 5 nv 6 a mat's rxsnc. 7 Q During wnat time period did you work with chemicals 8 that contained FCBm? 9 A From "63 through '74a ,J75, I was Manager of 10 Researcn for the functional fluids part of the Organic 11 Division which was part of the Industrial Company as well, 12 Q What was your involvement as Manager of Research 13 for the functional fluids with PCB' s? 14 A Well, I was responsible for the research product 15 applications and for guidance of -- research guidance and 16 manufacturing of those products, 17 Q What kind of functional fluids did Monsanto pro 18 duce for what uses containing FCB's in 1963? 19 A Well* they were all for fire-resistant applications 20 One was heat transfer, Q What sort of products would heat transfer fluids 21 22 be used? 23 A It was used across the whole process industry for 24 transferring heat from a boiler fire to a - some sort of 25 process, all kind of processes. It was also used in part HARTOLDMONOOQ9287 1 as a fire resistant hydraulic fluid. It was used as a 2 capacitor impregnant dielectric properties. It was used in 3 transformers,, dot under my jurisdiction, but it was also 4 used in carbonless carbon paper. It was used as a plasti 5 ciser in certain industrial applications, . 6 0 Those latter two weren't under your jurisdiction? 7 A They were not, I think the product carbonless 8 carbon paper was at least initially in the plasticizer 9 group. It was later transferred to the fluids group, I 10 don't know tea enact date, 11 Q Was your involvement during this '63 to '74-"9 75 12 time period primarily with PGB's primarily because, you were 13 the Manager of Research-Functional Fluids? 14 A That's correct, 15 0 Did there coma a time, when there became a concern 16 or debate concerning PCB's? ' 17 A Why sure, yes, 18 Q At what point in time did it come to your atten 19 tion? A I think it was first called to our attention in 20 1966 or '67, 21 Q What brought it to your attention at that point? 22 A I think the first was a report from David Wood, 23 anc it started with Jensen's reports that it was a residue 24 along with DDT, a possible residence along with DDT, 25 7 HARTOLDMONOOQ9288 1 Q David Wood worked under you at Monsanto? 2 A Ho, David Wood was in England, did not report 3 directly to rae. I think he was in Marketing, 4 Q Okay, And he wrote a report that was brought to 5 your attention around 1966 or '67? 6 A That's correct. Probably 1966 or 57, yes, 7 Q Okay,, What involvement did you then have? 8 A Well, I think our first thing was to try to find 9 out whether the report was valid, scientifically valid or 10 no c, 11 Q How did you do that or other people in Monsanto 12 do that? 13 A Well, I know David want to Sweden to try to find 14 out more, I'm not sure exactly what ha found, but I'm 15 pretty sure he probably talked with Widnasis, I talked with 16 Bou Kelly, Dr. Robert Kelly, who was in charge of our 17 analytical section in the Organic Division, and he and I 18 discussed the situation auout waether it could be valid or 19 it could not be valid and what .to do about it. Q What did you all decide as far as whether it could 20 be valid? 21 A Y7all, what we thought we batter do was to find 22 23 the analytical methods and try to talk with Jensen to sas 24 what he had to say, whether he was a competent analytical 25 person, and try to find out what his methods ware to identify 8 HARTOLDMONOOQ9289 1 cneae taints. 2 Q bid you ail make a determination as to chat? 3 A :e triad to, Kelly and I and dimer Wheeler went 4 co Sweden,, I don't know the exact data. '67. '63, some- 5 z,i qxiin trliwiTw f. L w j-.4-i-A^i.vj. ucu<br;u , tVtic,-.; u-It--?u-\X! Uus. J- -utlCi 6 Jexisen. Jensen would not talk with us or we couldn't find 7 him. I don't know which, but we ditin!t talk with him, we 8 did -/isit IJidmark, who was presumably Jansen1 s, I think, 9 professor, I think Jensen was a Student at that time, either 10 j. 0.0 C u 0Z*L JL QIT post-doctor a1 student under Widmark, The 11 second thing ^wo did was to begin to gathe r what we thou. 12 would be a sensitive enough instrumentation to try to idem- 13 the araclor along with uux\-x f\r*i residues 14 n what Svorri Jensen itLi. b* v7i'dmark found was traces 15 of ?C3!s in toanv other materials? 16 Well 17 HR, BURKE; Object; leading. Excuse me, 18 A Well, they foun'd it peaked, 19 Q (By Hr, Hamilton) Tall me what -- tell me what Svom Jensen or VJidmark found, 20 A As far as I remember., they found peaks in the 21 22 gasdiranatic graphic tracss that ware unidentified at the time, and I think 23 I guess, suggested that they could be araclor or chlorinated biphenyls,, actually not araclors but 24 25 chlorinated biphenyl components, but the situation was really o HARTOLDMONOOQ9290 1 uxtramaly complicated, 2 Q Well, did Monsanto ever make its own determina 3 tion as to whether chlorinated biphenyls were the peak3 4 that were found? 5 A After we got ins truantat ion together, which pro 6 ceeded in '68-9, yes, we began to confirm that these peaks 7 were a chlorinated biphenyl, not necessarily araclor.. I 8 think Monsanto published and want ahead with analytical 9 methods and increased the sensitivity and also worked with, 10 other companies and ether agendas to try to confirm that this was true, 11 ' Q Was there a concern in tha scientific community 12 13 that PCS'a were being found? 14 A A concernno, It was news to us that they would be out there, It was kind of a surprise to us that they 15 would be found in residues, Certainly we were surprised 16 at that time and didn't want them there, but that's about it, 17 18 e didn't know there, was a concern or not. Q Why is that you didn't want them there, the PCB's? 19 A Well, just the presence, we didn't expect them to 20 be there. We were using them in industrial uses, I for one 21 thought that it would be entirely a different situation 22 between comparing DDT and chlorinated biphenyls, because 23 DDT was sprayed around the world and -was used as insecticide, 24 and chlorinated biphenyls ware everything but that. But I 25 10 HARTOLDMONOOQ9291 1 g'_ui3 3 2 v in tv: ally we had to say 'chat Jensen's, at least guess 2 or remarks, whatever, vara eventually valid, proved valid, 3 Q Did you have any discussions with, anyone from \, 4 General Electric cbncarnlng PCB* s being located in the 5 environment? 6 A It was not ny job to have conversations with 7 General Electric, It was usually up to the Marketing 8 Department. I think later we triad to later, I don't 9 know when it was, '72 or so, we tried to show General 10 Electric that we ware keeping, in the manufacture of chlorinated bipnenyla ,. 11 the handling of them, that we were keeping the product cut of the environment, cut of the 12 13 air and water streams,' Tula.is concerning the manufacture 14 and handling of the product. . Q This is around 1972? 15 ' A I would guess there, I don't -- I don't know 16 the exact dates, 17 n Who did you talk to at General Electric? 18 A I talked with their general manager named Hart, 19 V,' Named Clark? 20 A Har 21 . Hart? 22 Kart. I think it's spelled K-a-r-t. At that time 23 .is is in the Capacitor Division. 24 Q II.ore vhr. he locatad, do you know? 25 HARTOLDMONOOQ9292 1 a n:; was l.i Hudson Falls. Thara was a man named 2 A1 Pozafsky who was a research managar or something like 3 chat, I don't knew his exact tide. X talked with him about 4 it. At one time wa visited the Hudson Falls plants dis 5 cussed handling of the product, 6 0 Did you ever meet a Mr. Raab? 7 A Yea, at the 3ame'time we visited the Pittsfield 8 Transformer Plant of General Electric and walked through 9 their plant, told them of our experience in handling the 10 product,, 11 Q XTho else at Pittsfield did you seat? 12 A Oh, a number of people, but I can't remember 13 their names, 14 0 Prior to this time in 1972, you don't recall -- 15 or approximately 5 72 , you don't recall any ..meetings'or dis 16 cussions between yourself and General Electric? 17 A I don't think I had any direct discussions with 18 G,E, people, no formal ones, I don't think any informal ones, 19 0 Are you aware whether Monsanto was having those kinds of discussions? 20 A I feel sure they were, 21 Q At your visits to Hudson Falls and Pitt3fiald, 22 va3 the purpose of that to tighten control measures of PGB's 23 being released into the environment? 24 MR. BUS&E: Objection; leading. 25 12 HARTOLDMONOOQ9293 1 A We wanted co be sure chat G,. understood that 2 nousanto was controlling the affluence in our plant at 3 Sougat and we Wad taken 3taps at Anniston to prevent 4 any discharge to cue river. A-i A5 /*> T rw -r,,. ~ 4 r--uiv-.it . utc-xa-...:.j....j.u...-..a.-a / - zxikj .ua.j.-.vA a- ct.- T7T ^ ^ ,, *-` ^*-W7 ^ . ^ 11 c*. 6 you'it was taking to control PCSh being discharged? 7 A v/e never -- we never entered into a direct dis 8 cussion of mat they wars specifically doing. 9 0 uhay. Did you ever have such a conversation with 10 t ? 11 We never triad to tali G,,E, waac to do. We triad 12 to tW 'vr i. then what we were doing. 13 Q I hand you exhibits -- what has been marked in 14 connection with the deposition of Mr, Sics line as Exhibits 15 17 and 37 and ask you to taka a -look at those. 16 Are you able to identify Mo, 177 Do you recall 17 this meeting? 18 A Which is 17? The top one? 19 H This one here. It's dated March 10, 1969. and it purports to be notes or. a March. 6th, 1969 meeting with 20 Industrial Biotest Laboratories concerning araclor and 21 wildlife. Do you recall this nano being sent to you? 22 23 A I think I -wrote it, 24 Q Oh, you wrote thi3 mario, Okay, You attended 25 mao ting with Biocast Laboratories? 13 HARTOLDMONOOQ9294 1 2 C Til 1969' 3 Ua-huh. 4 IChat: "yes"? 5 - C^-%--* 6 What was the - - what was tha Purpose of chat r.ast- 7 nc'? 8 Wa'wancad Co tha potential environ.- 9 mental toxicity might be for araelor. 10 . *. n 11 Okay, And why wara you interested'in finding that 12 Well, we had always known, what the acute was, acute 13 but we didn't know what the chronic low level 14 effects of chlorinated biphenyls ware., 15 Q Okay, Why is it that in 1969 Honsanto decided to 16 find that out? 17 A Well, we thought it was tha thing to do, and it 18 was desirable to find out what the chronic tonicity was 19 in teres of science and not headlines. 20 0 What do you mean by, "toxicity"? 21 A Well, it's the effect of -- on tlxe test animal of feeding whatever chemicals you are trying to identify or 22 23 trying to tost. Q Okay, Did Biotast Laboratories perform sorts 24 25 experiments or tests as to toxicity? 14 HARTOLDMONOOQ9295 1 A Yes, I think subsequent to this meeting that they 2 did, 3 Q Do you recall what kind of tests they ran? 4 A I tuink caey ran tests on cuickeas, tnay ran tests Gu on mica or rata, probably rats, and dogs. 6 Q What were tae results of t-uair studies? 7 A Well, that's the province of the Medical Department, 8 dimer Wheeler was the Medical representative. He was at 9 that meeting. That was not my prerogative or duty to 10 interpret the medical results.. 11 Q Do you recall wnat tue results were? 12 A Well, it was a whole series of reports. You'd 13 have to look them up, get testimony from medical people, 14 Q Are you able to tell us what your best recollection 15 is? 16 A .Again itJ s not my -- the only part that we played 17 in the Research Department was to do the analytical work 18 on tissues, and ay main interest was to sea whether or not 19 they were -- that the products were -- would oiouegrada in the presence of the animals, whether they would be washed 20 out or degraded, 21 Q You ware then more interested yourself in bio 22 degradation and accumulation tuan actual toxicity? 23 A That's right. The toxicity part was not for us 24 to determine or pass judgment on. 25 15 HARTOLDMONOOQ9296 1 Q Qr ~~ is it Dr. Wheeler or Mr. 2 A Ho, I Chink itJa a Mr, Wheeler, 3 Q lie would be -~ 4 A he worked for or, ivaily in the Medical Department, 5 at Monsanto's Medical Department, . 6 Q Dr, Kelly would be able to testify'? 7 A To the results, lie should be more familiar. He 8 and Wheeler would be. more familiar than I was or am, 9 Q Okay, Is Dr, Cumming Paton involved? 10 A ho. He was in Marketing, I doubt whether he would 11 have too much information on that, 12 Q What did you find as far as accumulation or bio 1'3 degradation of PCS'a and tissue? 14 A The general results were Chat the Lower chlorinated 15 biphenyls were biodegradable and/or were easily eliminated 16 from the body, from the tissues. We found that the higher 17 chlorinated, 5 and 6 chlorinated products were fairly 18 resistant to either biodegradation or elimination, 19 Q Specifically would you call Araclor 1254 a lower 20 ox a higher chlorinated biphenyl? 21 A I think that's a -- it's oix the borderline, but 22 it tends to be on the high side, at least certain isomers 23 in 54. 24 Q Specifically, as far as Araclor 1254, what ware 25 the results? 16 HARTOLDMONOOQ9297 1 A They were slow to be degraded and slow to be 2 eliminated, 3 Q Eliminated fromtissue? 4 A un-nun. 5 4or ber - 6 A from tissue. 7 Mil. EER11Y3EREY: You got to say, 8 Q (By Mr, Hamilton) When you are talking about 9 elimination from tissue, are you speaking, for instance, 10 from an animal? 11 A From a test animal, . 12 Q How much PCB's would remain in it after so long 13 a time, is that the idea? , 14 A Well, the feeding studies were carried on where 15 they would feed the chlorinated biphenyl at certain levels 16 and for certain periods of time and we would watch if it 17 went up as weeks passed, and than we would stop feeding and 18 watch the elimination, 19 Q You don't believe -- you don't recall enough or 20 do not believe you are within the area exvough to testify as 21 to the toxicity studies? 22 A That's correct. 23 Q Were you involved or are you able to testify on 24 environmental studies of Monsanto? 25 A To a degree. 17 HARTOLDMONOOQ9298 1 Q Okay, What involvement did you have in any 2 Monsanto studies or experiments concerning the environment 3 and PCB's? 4 A I helped initiate some biodagraaat'ion work that 5 we carried on in Engianc. We were studying or triad to 6 study which particular chlorinated biphenyls.were biodegrad 7 able, which isomers, and which was carried on by Dr. Baxter 8 and Drs,, Mainprise and Lidgatt. 9 Q In England? 10 A In England in Ruoben, one of the Monsanto loca 11 tions, We also did work here. Dr. Kelly's group and Dr. 12 Sager, Ride Sager, aid a lot of work, Dr. Tucker did a lot 13 of work in sludge biodegradation, sewage sludge., trying to 14 find out at what rates, at what isomers would disappear, 15 . Q Do you know what the people in England found as 16 far as Araclor 1254 in its degradation? 17 A This was published, I think -- again I think it 18 seemed to confirm that probably isomers 5, chlorinated 19 5 and below were degradable, and say those 6 and 7, a few 20 8's we had, would not. 21 Q What is 1254? 22 A Well, lt3s a -- it's a 5 chlorine on an average 23 containing a mixture of chlorinated biphenyls. So the 24 average is 5, but there are some 2's, 3's, 4's, some o's, 25 7's in it. 18 HARTOLDMONOOQ9299 1 0 Okay.. 3y, ''degradation ,n what do you mean? 2 A That it would actually disappear, presumably be 3 dachlorinated or oxidized, 4 x Converted into - 5 A Converted into soma at-i.er products, yes. 6 Q What did the sludge studias reveal concerning 7 Araclor 1254? 8 A I think they substantiate what I've just said, 9 0 Okay, Are you aware of studies or experiments 10 concerning degradation 0f PCBks in tae environment by persons 11 other than Monsanto? A Oh, yes. We tried to follow the literature during 12 this period, and we also talked with the Wisconsin Alumni 13 Research Foundation who ware, I think, some of the early 14 - - initiated some of trie early studies. I might say also 15 that analytically we tried to make sure that people were 16 not getting laboratory contamination into their experiments. 17 There ware all sorts of difficulties in determining chlori 18 nated biphenyls and the standards that should be set up 19 during that period. 20 0 Okay. i)ia tue studies concerning degradation 21 and the presence of PCB's iu the environment reveal that tne 22 PCiS's appeared to be those like Araclors 1254 and 1260, 23 primarily? 24 A The environmental residues, yes, ware like that 25 HARTOLDMON0009300 1 ana net like the lower chlorinated, not like* Araclora 1242 2 and 1236, 3 .Q Did you discusa the degradation work being done 4 by Monsanto ox that you vara keeping up with in the litera 5 ture with anyone iron General Electric? 6 During that satis visit that -- when we went to 7 Pittsfield Scott Tucker talked analytical methods wLthG.E. people, 8 Q Would one of than have bean Mr. ilaab? 9 A I don't know whether -- probably was raora likely 10 some of hia analytical people than Saab directly. 11 Q la Scoff Tucker still with Monsanto? 12 A no , 13 H Where is he now, do you know? 14 A i don't know where he is. 15 0 How about Elraer Wheeler? - .. ' 16 2A1 Ha's retired. 17 Q Is he in the - 18 North or South Carolina, I believe. 19 01 I want you to take a look at Exhibit -- well - 20 A It's marked 37 on the bottom, 21 Q I wanted you to see 27, One second. 22 Exhibit 27, there, do you recall a -- a lydQ ~23 1968 discussion with Dr. Calandra? 24 A Yes. 25 Q Who was Dr, Calandra? HARTOLDMON0009301 1 A lie was the head of or owner of the Industrial 2 Biotest Laboratories, 3 Q Okay, Was this preparatory to the later meeting 4 we just talked about in March, 1969? 5 A Yas. It probably was, yes, 6 Q And Biotest was going to perform studies as to 7 toxicity of PCB's? 8 A Right. 9 Q But I need to talk with one of the medical people 10 as far as their conclusions? 11 A That's correct,. .' 12 Q Okay, Did you discuss -- well, first of ail, are 13 you familiar with the Yusho incident? 14 A I'm not familiar with it, I know of it, but I'm 15 not familiar with it, 16 Q Did you ever discuss the Yusho incident with anyone 17 from General Electric? 18 A No, 19 Q Did you ever discuss with anyone from General 20 Electric any dangers in breathing vapors or fumes of 21 Askarel? 22 A There was a -- an air limit that had been imposed, 23 and I'm sure G,,E, was aware of that, 24 Q Who imposed the air limit? 25 A It's -- it was an unofficial body, I have forgotten 21 HARTOLDMONOOQ9302 1 who used Co do Che -- the publication of this, but they 2 were industrial standards, Industrial people had standards 3 which they triad to protect the workers in, the industries 4 involved, c Q Okay, Do you know why these limits were set up? 6 A Yes, To protect workers, make sure they weren't 7 getting into harmful situations, 8 Q Do you know what breathing vapors or fumes, PCS 9 vapors or fumes, what about that, made it a harmful situa 10 tion? 11 A Well, I think the main thing was to not gat it 12 in your lungs and have it present, 13 Q Do you know what harm there was in getting it in 14 your lungs? A It's a toxicity medical problem, again, 15 Q Are you familiar with the snipping and sales 16 17 invoices tiiat Monsanto used back in the early 703 s? 18 A Ho, I'm not, Q Okay, Are you aware of language on them concern 19 ing the presence of polychlorinated biphenyls? 20 A This language and shipping and so forth was the 21 province of Marketing, and to soma extent Manufacture, that's 22 not of Research, 23 Q You are not really familiar with it? 24 A I"m not. 25 22 HARTOLDMONOOQ9303 1 Q Who in Marketing or Manufacture would you think 2 would be most familiar with it? 3 A X would think Benignus would be familiar wit.* it 4 from a historical standpoint, and I think Papagaorge from 5 the time he cane on board a3 the environmental would be the 6 one familiar from that point on, 7 Q Are you aware of any reason why PCB should be 8 kept out of waterways? . 9 A Wall, it Js been legislated against, I've forgotten 10 .exactly when, but beyond the time period I had something to 11 do vita it. 12 Q Do you knew way? 13 A I think the general feeling was to keep foreign 14 substances out of water, and it wa3 legislated, I think, 15 on the pradence of things that were not supposed to be there 16 Q Are you familiar with the bioaccumulation of PCB's 17 within the food chain? 18 A In a general way. 19 Q What do you understand from a general standpoint? 20 A Well, I think that it's accumulated in fish if they are exposed. The FDA set limits on edible fish con 21 taining araclor. 22 Q What involvement,,if any, did you have with 23 actual or proposed governmental regulations of PCB's during 24 the early 1970's? 25 23 HARTOLDMON0009304 1 A Proposed -- Monsanto reported to the PCB Task 2 Force the results of our findings on biodegradation and 3 cur efforts to keep it out of the environment. I think we 4 also reported tnat it was possible to incinerate the product C axid oxidize it. This was a task fores which was formed in 6 washington, I guess around the early 70}a. Camming 7 P&ton was one of Cue presenters at this as far as Monsanto 8 is concerned, . 9 Q Okay,, 10 A I presume Bill Papageorga was also present. I'm 11 not sura of that. 12 Q I ask you to take a look at Exhibit 37 and ask 13 you if yourecognize that Monsanto May 20, 1968 memorandum? 14 A Yes. That's mine, 15 Q Did you write that? ' 16 A Yes, 17 Q Can you tell me why you were writing that? 18 A I was receiving telepaone calls from Dr, Glasgow 19 who wanted samples of araclor, as I said here, presumably 20 to look for parts per million tonicity or residues in wild life. 21 Q So in 1963 the FDA was looking into PCB's in 22 23 wildlife? A They began to, yes. I don't know exactly when 24 they actually undertook work, but certainly they were asking 25 24 HARTOLDMONOOQ9305 1 for aamp lea to do their analytical work. 2 Q And in the second paragraph you posed the question; 3 "Are we preparing ourselves and customers to minimise or 4 prevent process stream and air pollution?" 5 A Uh-huh. . 6 Q Did you get an answer to that question from anyone? 7 A. Yes, I think Davis wrote me a memo back, 8 q R. Davis? 9 A Yes. 10 0 Who was that? 11 Richard Davis, 12 \ Q What was his title? 13 A He was something like Manager in Marketing, I think 14 for the hydraulic fluids, hydraulic fluids, 15 Q Do you recall what he said in his memorandum, back 16 to you? 17 A I think tne drift was that hydraulics could be -- 18 hydraulic fluids could be and were being renovated and 19 reclaimed. I'm not sure whether he 3aid anything about heat 20 transformers or not. 21 Q I don't believe it says anything in here about 22 that. What did he tell you about Monsanto preparing its 23 cus toraer? 24 A I don't recall specifically. You'd have to show 25 me his memo back. I don't recall. HARTOLDMON0009306 1 Q Okay. Do you know if -- would chat: have been part 2 of the reason that you visited'the Hudson Falls and Pittsfield 3 plants of GyE,..? --y 4 A Well, our aim was to keep chlorinated biphenyls 5 cut of the atmosphere and out of .streams in its manufacture, 6 and this is what I wanted to do and what Monsanto wanted to 7 do, "' ' ' ' 8 Q , Wail, die you share that aim with your customers, 9 or did Monsanto? 10 A . I'm sura they did, . 11 Q Okay. Is Mr, Davis still with Monsanto? 12 A No, He's retired, 13 Q Is he in St, Louis? 14 A He'a in St, Louis, 15 Q I ask .you to take a look at Exhibit 39. Do you 16 recall this June 18, 1363 letter to a chemist at the IMS, 17 Department of Agriculture, Pesticides Regulations Division? 18 A I do now. I wouldn't of if you hadn't snowed it 19 to me, 20 Q Do you know why Mr, Blicken3taff, the chemist for . 21 the Department of Agriculture, wanted samples of various 22 Monsanto araclors? 23 A Like the FDA, I assume the Department of Agricul 24 ture wanted to begin analytical work on taose sort of resi 25 dues . HARTOLDMONOOQ9307 -IJ 1 Q This was.in 1963? 2 A It aaya June 18, 1963. 3 G Let me ask you to take a look at Exhibit 4, It's 4 a June 13, 1963, I guess, memorandum from Gumming Paton 5 o you, is that accurate? 6 A Uh-huh.. It looks -- it appears to be, yes, 7 0 Do you recall this memorandum? 8 A Met specifically, but tuat's to me, Guasaing wrote 9 it a TO Do you recall whether in 1963 the United Bureau 11 of Commarcial Fisheries based in Ann Arbor.,. .Michigan . and 12 studies- on pollutants in Laics Michigan? 13 AX Gumming reported, I had no direct contact with 14 Miss Gar olyn Chandler that I remember. 15 Okay, I ask you to take a look at Exhibit 80, 16 It's a March 7,, 1972, Monsanto sales information bulletin. 17 ho, 72 Do you recall these bulletins being distributed 18 periodically? 19 A Yes, Similar things 'would be distributed. Sales 20 information bulletins would go out periodically. 21 Q Do you recall this bulletin concerning proposed 22 Food and Drug Administration legislation on PCB!3? 23 A Mot specifically. 24 Q Do you recall the Food and Drug Administration 25 in the early 1972 time period proposing tougher PCB legisla- 27 HARTOLDMONOOQ9308 1 Cion? 2 A I think I would have expected it. 3 Q Tha t ' 3 - - 4 A I assume taat that /hat taay eventually did, 5 I don't know. 6 Q Okay, 7 A In other words, I mink to keep it out of the 8 food chain, was, you know, important and was a job of the 9 FDA, Maybe I shouldn't say keep it out, but keep Id at a 10 low level, 11 Q Okay, Did you discuss any of. these inquiries and 12 proposed legislations that you just testified about with 13 anyone from General Electric? 14 A Ho, I think that -- that was a job left to the 15 Marketing people, . 16 Q Mr, Eanignus or Papagscrge? 17 A Wells or maybe Gumming Paton, toe, 18 Q Let me ask you to take a look at Exhibit 37 19 wait a second. I'm sorry, 34, which is, let's see, a 20 September 9, 1969, it appears, memorandum from you to Mr, Wheeler ~21 A Right., 22 Q -- entitled, ''Subject: Defense of Araclor, Func 23 24 tional Fluids," is that correct? A Right, 25 HARTOLDMONOOQ9309 1 n'v uo you recall this memorandum? 2 A '/ti 3 3 Q Whan was cue background behind the preparation 4 of this memorandum? 5 A in J V/ ft ** 3. X"* f" 0 "K4 t* a 6 for me? 7 Q Why did it come about that you ware -- I guess 8 you all were having meetings or discussing this subject? 9 A Well, we were trying to find out, trying to 10 discern what Monsanto should do in light of the possibility 11 that araclor was found or would be found and what we were 12 going to do about it, 13 Q Okay. On the first page under "Probable Outcome,1' 14 you made the statement "We can't defend everything, some 15 animals or fish or insects will be harmed." Dc you recall 16 making t.iat statement? 17 18 Q Arc you talking about harmed from PCB's in that 19 sentence? 20 A Well. you have to define what you mean by "harmed." Q Okay. Well - 21 A I don't think -- I don't think I knew arid I still 22 do net know what a good definition of "harmed" is, 23 Q Okay, Well, what did you mean by "harmed"? First 24 of all, were you talking about from PCB's in that sentence? 25 29 HARTOLDMONOOQ9310 1 Yes . 2 Q What is your beat recollection of what you meant 3 uj "harmed" whoa you wrote that sentence? 4 A Some effect might be found, I guess, la what I was 5 caan.io.ng. 6 By ''affect do you mean an adverse effect or 7 neutral? 8 . A It could be beneficial or it could be non- 9 beneficial. I think in this sentence I was thinking it 10 would be nan-beneficial. 11 Q ' And at tne bottom of the first page you say, ''There-! 12 fora, we will have to restrict uses and clean up as much as 13 va can starting immediately." Was that undertaken by 14 Monsanto? . 15 A. Yes, I think from this time forward they began 16 to try to think of what to do in terms of cleaning it out 17 of the air and the water. 18 Q Okay. On the second page you discussed finding 19 of Araclor 1254 in the Gulf Coast. San Francisco area and 20 the Great Lakes. Do you recall that being found? 21 A Certainly, It was found in the -- in the affluent 22 at the Monsanto plant at Pensacola and it was used as a 23 compressor fluid, fire resistant compressor fluid in one 24 of their compressors. The second was reported in San 25 Francisco Bay. I don't know whether -- I guess wa didn't HARTOLDMONOOQ9311 1 confirm that. Tills is a newspaper report. There was 2 reported tain eggshells in'birds. We never confirmed that. 3 Q Was it Dr, Risabrough that had reported tnat? 4 A Risebrough reported it, right. 5 Q Okay. How anout in the Great Lakes, was Araclor 6 1254 found? 7 A Eventually it was. I don't know at this time. 8 We had Calked to WARF, and they were studying DDT, and we 9 talked to them at least once. 1 assumed that it was found 10 tnat it was. I was predicting that it would be found, 11 Q . Thank you. Let me show you now Exhibit 50, which 12 is "Transformer Askaral .Inspection and Maintenance Guide," 13 apparently prepared and, I guess, distributed by Monsanto, 14 Do you recognize this kind of guide? Did you sea - this 15 guide or - 16 A I've seen it but I did not prepare it and I can't 17 really vouch for all of the things that are in it, 18 Q Okay, Let me take a look at the last page. Do 19 you know if this '75 at the end of there would -- would this 20 12/73 be an indication of the date of publication? 21 A You'd have to ask one of the Marketing people, 22 Benignus I think would know, 23 Q In Appendix K, Page 25 of Exhibit 50, there is a, 24 what is labeled a "Caution ^abel" having to do with a 25 certain language concerning PCB's tnat was to be affixed 31 HARTOLDMONOOQ9312 1 on all containers of Askarel and tae transformers them 2 selves, Do you recall Monsanto recommending a caution label? 3 A I didn't write this, and you'll have to ask the 4 Marketing people on this. . 5 Q You do not recall if Monsanto recommended that 6 people .label transformers? 7 A ' Well, I'm sura we were going tnrough all our 8 applications and trying to warn people and make them aware 9 of possible problems . ' 10 Q But other people would have been undertaking to 11 do that within Monsanto? 12 A That's right,, That's not my job to do taat. 13 Q Who would that be? 14 A Marketing and -- principally Marketing., They 15 were the customer contacts. 16 Q Did you have any -- do you have any knowledge 17 concerning the NEMA Official Standards Proposal dated January 18 25, 1973? 19 MR. DERRYBERRY: What's the number on that? 20 MR. HAMILTON: That's Exhibit 88. 21 Q (By Mr. Hamilton) Do you recall NEMA meetings 22 concerning PCB's? 23 A I never attended NEMA. I knew tuat they had these 24 meetings, and I tnink our representative was probably 25 following this. 32 HARTOLDMONOOQ9313 1 Q Do you have any knowledge of what HEHA or Ah'S I 2 C-107 may have decided with respect to FCB's? 3 A .do, I don't, I don't have any direct recollection 4 of that, 5 Q That would be Mr,, Benignus or Mr. Papageorge? 6 A I would think Benignus, maybe Papageorge, too, 7 Q Let me show you Exhibit 273, which is an October 8 3, 1975 Monsanto memorandum which appears to be from David 9 Wood to you and Mr. Papageorge and a couple of other people. 10 Is that accurate? 11 HP., DERRYBERRYj You mean is your description of 12 if? 13 MR, HAMILTON3 Eight, 14 Q (By Mr, Hamilton) Do you recall this memorandum, 15 Dr, Richard? 16 A I'd have to read it. Mo, I don't recall without 17 reading the thing. 18 MR. DERRYBERRY: Look at it, 19 Q (By Mr. Hamilton) Do you recall meetings between 20 General Electric and the National Bureau of Standards in 21 1973? 22 A No, I wasn't I wasn't there. I don't recall. 23 Q Were you involved or have any knowledge concerning 24 the development of alternative fluids for transformers and 25 capacitors within the industry? 33 HARTOLDMONOOQ9314 1 A Yes. As far as capacitors, we -- we developed 2 Araelor 1016, which we thought would be an initial replace 3 ment, a good replacement for Araelor 1242, and later we 4 worked on combinations of sulfonss, aeromatic sulfones and 5 nydracarbons as replacement for capacitors. We never did 6 work on transformer replacement. 7 Q Do you have any really specific knowledge concern 8 ing the matters set form in the attached trip report? 9 A ho.I'm not familiar with this. 10 Q Okay. Let me ask you what knowledge you have con 11 cerning workers at Monsanto being treated for any complaints 12 associated with PCB's? 13 A 1 don't think we had any. If there were, I wa3 14 not aware of any, 15 Q Were you aware of any reports of chloracne or skin 16 rashes ? 17 A In the Araelor Department? 18 Q Yes. 19 A ho. 20 Q Was Dr, Kelly the medical director who would have 21 been most involved in seeing workers? 22 A Well, he might not have seen them directly, but cer 23 tainly he was responsible for the overall Monsanto, you know, 24 medical and worker thing during that -- during his stay, I've 25 forgotten when he retired. 34 HARTOLDMONOOQ9315 1 Wti?T3 '*011 i_nvc1v3--i in. Cii?~ rue )rn; 2 cii-CiOs 13 or worL<ra : 3 '0^0~n ^ 4 Q bo you know' if Monsanto at any time devaloped any 5 c-;--p--f-*--p- 0f7v--i--q---7- --H n <r*vr>--r* o> -rw t r-j cr t-*-*. *3 "W t>r* /-II ( <>- r\ --- -"0* -,J-' * q '*--Wo ^iw r*** r**; i--* :--i p {t*' 6 workers? ' 7 A I think we made concerned efforts to make sure 8 that it was contained in all our equipment, and I think we 9 also made stringent efforts to -- in terms of drum handling 10 and recovery! We installed an incinerator to make sure it 11 wasn't going to go to the dump. We triad to maintain a 12 spotless clant. 13 Q Okav, 14 l don't know.. We ware we exercised all sorts 15 of precautions to kesp it contained, 16 Q Were you involved in drafting Ezchibit 1, which, 17 I believe is properly labeled the Monsanto white paper? 18 Would that be a correct title for that? 19 A You better show it to me first, 20 Q Let ma find the original, (Handing document,) 21 A When was this pub lianad? 22 Q Well, that was one of the questions I was going 23 to ask you, 24 MR, DERRYBERRY: That's the. way it's supposed to 25 be, 35 HARTOLDMONOOQ9316 1 !r . Hamilton) Mv under a tar.di ng is "ha"; "his 2 war. t A, ave been, duon' su- e;t'. \'-r t*A; - 3cnetxtne an cne early 3 !80 'a . 4 A Wall, if it was aarly `80'3, titan 1 didn't have 5 anything to do with it. 6 0 You don51 recognize it? 7 A .1 probably have seen it, but I don't think I had 8 any -- anything to do with its preparation, 9 MR. riAidlLTOiJ: ukay. That's all I've got, 10 MR. BURKE: You want to cake five, Doctor? 11 MR. i>ESR.Y3ERRY; You want to take a short break? 12 A Sura, 13 (WEEBuUPOTL A SHORT RECESS WAS HAD.) 14 CROSS EXAMIrlATIOh 15 QUESTIONS BY MR. BURK&: 16 Q Dr, Richard, would you describe for us briefly 17 what analytical chemistry is? 18 A It's the determination of the presence of certain 19 compounds, identify them well enough to think you know what the compound is, 20 Q Is it methods and procedures that chemists use 21 to analyze waat is in a substance? Is that a good defini 22 tion? 23 A Well,, that definition uses analytical in it, so 24 I'm not sure that it is, but -25 36 HARTOLDMONOOQ9317 1 a 47 ' O r ;jv:iUU 1 i , U XT yoii il3.1I U g U ; o GIT Water 2 you van; a a fine oar. what was really in it, would you 3 use the methods of analytical chemistry? 4 A Yes. that would be the normal procedure, 5 0 Okay, Ar.d is it accurate cc say that analytical 6 chemistry is a precise and defined procedure 07; includes 7 defined and precise procedures to conduct an analysis? 8 A At any given cine I think that's true, but pro 9 cedures and methods change and .triers are always improvements 10 or sensitivity, I don't think they will aver find a. really 11 purs substance in terms of anatomic or molecular parity 12 wn 3 tan to minus ninth. You have to be to the ten 13 to minus twenty-third1s, The analytical chemists have a 14 ways to go. 15 Q Is it accurate to say that the methods and proce 16 dures of analytical chemistry in 1936 have improved over 17 the methods and procedures used in 1965? 18 A I think the answer is y&s, to sensitivity, 19 Q What do you mean by "sensitivity"? 20 A Ability to analyse small quantities. To nrobablv 21 make a more accurate definition, determination of what was 22 really there, 23 Q Is one part in a million a small quantity? 24 A In my language it is an exceedingly small quantity, 25 In terms of other disciplines, it might not be. 37 HARTOLDMONOOQ9318 1 ualv-ical chami sr? i .a 2 1i roar estimate of cue sensici'/it.' of measuring da vies s to 3 da tact parts p nr million back in 1166? 4 A A. L. ink It vas vary poor, I think you also should 5 as k an SXpS'ITlI , cnouga, mka D r, kelly or hr. Tucker in the 6 co s a o f chlori natad biphenyl., noc me, 7 Q Okay . Is one part in a billion smaller than one 8 part in a mill ion? 9 A V.-* e 3 by ten to the three, 10 Q Was the precision of analytical cheats try technology 11 in. 1966 zb your knowledge? capable of measuring parts per 12 billion? 6 -* 13 A 14 nK PCB's that 'ware appearing in a: u samo xet 15 as repo read by people like Jensen, can ; 16 of rr.^ range in terms of oa arts ter mill 17 billion that were being reported? 18 A Well, 1 don't remember what was in Jena ends paper, 19 but it certainly wasn't narts per billion. It was orobablv 20 high, maybe thousands of parts per million, I don't know, 21 Q Okay, Wow, was Jensen's work actually reported in scientific journals, to your recollection? 22 23 A I don't really recall. The reports I read had 24 more to do with David Wood's report, 25 Q And he was a Monsanto employee who was reporting 38 HARTOLDMONOOQ9319 1 Yurooe on v'mns bad learned? 2 A. Yas , 3 Q Do you recall whether Jensen simply had a sclenti 4 fi the or y chac PGB * 3 ware present: in cne samp las Chat ha 5 was working with or that ha had confirmed the. orasenca of 6 those PCB'a? 7 A Wall, Monsanto was not convinced., and that's the 8 reason we spent a lot of time and coney and effort to try 9 to convince ourselves that it really was true or was not. 10 Tb cur nos it tot '67, *63, '69, really. 11 Olcayv_0 And in terms of scientific study, isit 12 a good practice to verify and reproduce the results of one 13 scientist in order to be able to establish the orasenca 14 of something like PCB's? 15 A Yea. It's common in analytical to share proce 16 dures and to snare standards and share samples, 17 Q Is there opportunity in analytical chemistry for T8 error as a result of laboratory contamination or sample 19 cont amination? 20 A Yea, 21 Q Is that one of the reasons for the standardisation 22 of procedures? 23 A That8 s correct., 24 Q And the American Society for Testing Materials, 25 is that a body that, attempts to standardize procedures for J^ 2n HARTOLDMON0009320 1 chemistry, tor example? 2 V Thay standaraizu procedures . T > ,n not 3U" 3 confined to analytical samples , tuo-ugh, 4 Q It's for any one of a number of types of materials'! 5 A All sorts of standards. 6 Q And some of those apply to analytical chemical 7 procedures ? 8 A I don't know chat AS'lli is noted for its analytical 9 procedures. Thera may be soma in there. They are certainly 10 procedures for testing, testing all sorts of things. 11 Q I3 there a body cast recommends standards far 12 tasting procedures for analytical chemists to use? 13 A I'm not familiar with a body that does just that, 14 Q but there are recognized standards for analytical 15 chemists to follow? 16 A There may be, if they are published and they are 17 ever agreed to. The National Bureau of Standards certainly 18 would be one of the outstanding sources of this sort of 19 information, 20 Q The object of the exercise is for a caeird.st in 21 Country A using a similar sample as a chemist in Country B 22 to have a chance of verifying the same results as reported 23 by the first chemist, correct? 24 A That:5 3 correct,, Q Why didn't Monsanto simply accept Jensen's report 25 AO HARTOLDMONOOQ9321 1 a3 being valid? 2 A Well, firs" thing, we couldn't find Jansen. I 3 don't kmrw way we couldn't find him or why he wouldn't talr., 4 I think second, I think that all these tnings had to be 5 -- tiie analytical .methods had to be sat up and determined, 6 and we wanted to be in a position tc verify the find.in.g3 7 in our own laboratory. Equipment was ordered. We spent a 8 great deal of effort trying to gat results, I think also 9 that: there is no such thing as an environmental standard 10 sample. If you are taking a sample out of a plant affluent, 11 you are going to gat certain results. If you take them .as 12 background in the Antarctic or the Arctic, that's scmetuing 13 else. So there are no -- as far as I know, there are no 14 such things as environmental standards, standard samples, 15 Certainly there weren't, then, ' 16 Q Did you work with gas chromatography In your work? 17 A Not specifically, but the analytical people did, 18 Q Were you familiar with the capability of gas 19 chromatogr&puy equipment back in the middle 60's'? 20 A Only in a general way. You have to - you'd have 21 to ask a good analytical man for details, 22 Q Would you say that the ability of gas chroma 23 tography, or the advances in gas chromatography are part of 24 what made it possible to measure parts per million and parts 25 per billion of certain materials, including PCB'b? 41 HARTOLDMONOOQ9322 1 A I7eil,, X think principally It's part of it, but 2 the other cuing was metuods of isolation of the sample 3 extractions, and chat * a -- that * s usually a non-standard 4 procedure. 5 Q What do you mean by that, sir? 6 A Wellc how you perform the extractions and what 7 solvents you use, and that5 s ~~ that's critical in -deter 8 mining how low you can go and what equipment you use and 9 under what conditions of light and in a laboratory and 10 whether there is .stuff in the air. or not. All that's t'echniq me , 11 Q A rather difficult technique, just to be simple? 12 A Yes, Yas. it13 a difficult technique, 13 Q Why waa Monsanto surprised to find, after their 14 own work, that PGBhs ware present in environmental samples? 15 A Well, I know why I was surprised. We were con 16 fined with major applications, anyway. We ware *- we felt 17 we ware pretty well confined to hardware, industrial hard 18 ware, I think we at that time probably expected to find 19 it in plant affluence, but I certainly did expect it to be 20 spread in large bodies of water, nor did I expect it to be 21 found in the air. It was, I thought, pretty high molecular 22 weight, pretty dam insoluble, 1 thought it would stay 23 put, 24 Q bow useful to industry did PCB's prove to be up 25 until 1973, for example? 42 HARTOLDMON0009323 1 A Wall, che Indus cry demanded chat chat vs con- 2 Cinue making aracLor. and it was particularly true of the 3 dielectric industry, felt they could not replace it, 4 Q. What was so special about the properties of PCB's 5 chat made then useful in industry? Let's talk about the 6 dielectric capacitors and transformers. 7 A At first they ware stable in terms of normal 8 operations, normal industrial operations. They were stable 9 electrically. In terms of capacitors, they had the correct 10 dielectric constant and correct dielectric strength so. tuat 11 the capacitor could be made small or could be made effi 12 ciently, it could be aiade without failure, witu few failures. 13 In terms of transformers, same thing was true, except that' 14 in here they would not generate hydrogen in terms of partial 15 breakdowns and they were good impregtiants, 16 Q Was there anything unique about the flammability 17 characteristics of PCB's that made them suitable for capa 18 citors and transformer dielectrics? 19 A Yes, They were tua most fire-resistant compound 20 that were useful in that application, I think, in fact, 21 they were the only ones that ware useful, 22 Q Mineral oil is also a transformer dielectric, isn't 23 it? 24 A Yes, 25 Q Do you have any experience with it? 43 HARTOLDMONOOQ9324 1 1'Icnc 2 n You sav the Indus try insis tad that Monaanto con 3 tinue. to produce the araclors for dielectrics, for trans 4 formers and capacitors., What do you naan by that? 5 A Welly X W2.5i?kp w Ived in dir^c- . 6 but I think the electrical industry asked Honsante to 7 continue, and I think Monsanto made demands on tna electrical 8 industry as to hov? they would use it, how they would police 9 it and how they would taka care of the recycled product and 10 so forth. 11 < The purpose was to prevent the escape of the 12 fluid into the environment any further, is tnat accurate? 13 A That was the purpose. 14 Hn Is it accurate also to say that the primary con' 15 earn of Monsanto was the presence in the environment? 16 A That's correct, 17 Q And to prevent further escape of more fluid into 18 the environment? 19 A Yes, We didn't want any build-up, any further 20 build-up in the anviomcent, 21 Q Did that explain Monsanto's decision to terminate 22 production and sales of all PCS fluids to anyone except 23 those in tne capacitor and transformer business? 24 A I think if eventually got to that stage. We tried 25 to restrict sales where the customer couldn't prove that he 44 HARTOLDMONOOQ9325 1 could cont.airs. Che fluid, be careful of it, 2 Q Once a tran^fenter lias been manufactured, delivered,, 3 and installed, is there any reason to believe Cast properly 4 maintained and properly cared for, that that transformer 5 presents an opportunity for the escape of fluid into the 6 environment? 7 A I'm not an expert on transformer applications. 8 On the other hand., it was. my personal opinion that they 9 should not escaoe. 10 Q Did you participate at all in the decision by the 11 folks in charge at Monsanto to continue 3aj[a of PCB fluids 12 to transformer manufactures? 13 A I was not directly involved in that decision, 14 Q Okay, You told us earlier that the acute toxicity 15 of PGB's was known. What did you mean by that? 16 A Well, Monsanto had conducted studies in animals 17 and so fortn by normal industrial standards at that time 18 and knew what the known effects were in that set of studies, 19 Q And this would be with respect to an industrial 20 worker, for example? 21 A Well, not so much that, but they would be test 22 animals, rats, and I don't know what else they normally 23 U3ed in their screening methods. But two tilings 3 One was 24 that Monsanto had the history of having manufactured 25 araclor for some time, and also they had laboratory tests 45 HARTOLDMONOOQ9326 1 dene on the compound or compounds chans sivs s , 2 C Industrial Biotssc is essentially a laboratory t at 3 will conduce toxicity studies for -- on a fee for services 4 basis, correct? 5 A Right. 6 Q ted at that point in time they ware -- they would 7 do tests for Monsanto on PCB!s and for anybody else on any 8 other substance chat was requested and for which an agree 9 ment 'was reached? 10 A Right. 11 0 They were essentially a testing laboratory fox 12 toxicity, correct? 13 A Right. 14 Q And by using standard toncological procedures they could then report on the effects of the substance known or 15 the substar.es being tested? 16 A Well, reasonably standard methods,, 17 Q Reasonably standard methods, yes, sir. And basicTM 18 ally the way they did their 19 one of the ways they did this was to actually feed the material to the test specie, 20 teat animal, correct:? 21 A That:ss correct, 22 Q And it was fed at a dose rate intended, at least 23 at one level, to produce an effect, correct? 24 A Yes, that's right. 25 46 HARTOLDMON0009327 1 0 And once* chat efface was ereduced in a test 2 animal, it could ha analysed and the results reported? 3 A. Riyht, 4 r, the effect in an animal is not ne cessarily g equatab1 a with the effect in a hum an.. Is V. 1 6 X Not in every case, no. 7 0 But it's the best that science C3.I1- do in atteGpts' 8 >M\ ;rn *^<3 y.o. toxici tv ? 9 A It's one measure of toxicity, i/3 . 10 0 Okay, Now, 1Mons< 11 tain.ir.g ?CB' s s in.c3 out ' 12, A Yes,, I w as not 13 abouZ it ,, 14 Q Yes , sir, ,And :is it also accurate to say that 15 ova r the 33 or 36-year -oaf'. 16 that Mon3an to1s iC-tr'OP withpr .-'Q the toxicity of aracicr; v 17 to in dus t.rial workars, the' .r own, was a good one in ter 18 of a cute illne3 ses of indui 19 A Well, as I repea- quas tion to Dr. Kelly, Bu 20 prob lens in the araclor mai 21 MR, B UR1CE: Can ' 22 you were using, please , Mr 23 HR. HAMILTON: here's some cf them, if: not most 24 or ttien.. 25 47 HARTOLDMONOOQ9328 1 X. . DEBRYULREY: get soma nunoers aere, 2 ? !.* YT ''z scr.c! nunf coo. 3 MR. DERRYBCEEY My intares t Is to net th** 4 wrtnas s -- 5 MR, BAUKEP-: Let him handle his ovrt case. You 6 it not in cb.is C3.3S. 7 MR., 0ERRYE.YRRY: Well, I represent the witness. 8 MR. BAUMER: That * s right. In a. trial you vouldn'91 9 be able to say a word. 10 MR, DERRY3LBR.Y: That3 s right, 11 MR. BADMEBc That's the sams thing that happens 12 in this deposition, because you are taking it rot trial pur 13 pose: 14 0 (v Mr, Surka) Goins back to Exhibit 17, Dr. 15 Richard, that's essentially an internal memorandum of 16 Monsanto Company, correct? 17 A Yes 18 Q And isn't it accurate that Monsanto's policy is 19 net to distribute such memos outside the cornu anv? 20 a .cat s true. 21 Q And in the ordinary course of business, that 22 memorandum Exhibit 17 would not have been sent to anybody 23 from General Electric, would it? 24 A This memo would not have been sent to Genera], 25 Electric, I wouldn't think. HARTOLDMONOOQ9329 1 0 Ar,d ass sentially '"hat memo discusses Monsanto ' 3 2 tdertaking with Industrial Biotest to do some studies on 3 ;-;c Lei C* of PCB's usiaz animal medals? 4 5 0 It really doesn't have anything to dc with trans 6 ferrer dielectric fluids and their suitability in use of 7 transformers, air, does it? 8 A Mo. . 9 Q :*<ow. you wars telling us earlier about a body that 10 set the levels for industrial exposure to various chemicals 11 in the workplace, but you couldn't remember the nana, Does 12 ACGIIi, does that ring a ball. Doctor? The American Conference 13 of Govammsntal and Industrial Hygienists? 14 A I'm not sure of the word "gevsrnaarxtal, " but car** 15 tainly with the industrial - I don't o ^ timu 16 Industrial ~-* r ' -_ . 17 Q' ' Hygienists? 18 k -- hygienis ts, I don't think the government was 19 involved; at least not early on,- 0 Right, Well3 I think the is an unofficial 20 group composed of these folks who recommend these TLV's. 21 Does that ring a bell with you In. terms _f process? 22 A mat's the extent of it, yas. 23 n*X And the process by which they make these recom 24 mend a a ions for esee o sura levels is reduced to what's called 25 49 HARTOLDMONOOQ9330 1 r>,,.. j -a. -v u*. v. c 2 That's one measure standards , 3 O-.- F.t'or li.eoda, xor axompi. 4 :or =i, ;C;iar tyres o f -i r , 1 .U acai-j used m zn<= 5 . 7 - - * 7 6 > VJ Ir* Va*> ll others, but soma oth; 7v 8 .th WIHTu- m > QX G tZ.wC.i. s , 9 Q And the idea of threeAhold limit values thresh- 10 holc limit value or TLV. is the amount cf exposure that 11 industrial workers can experience eight hours a day. XV 3 12 days a week, forty weeks a year eight hours a day, five 13 days a reek, forty hours per wask for his working lifetime 14 without experiencing an ill-affect ' ' " n r* c: r* mr* pi * 15 16 A That's about correct, yss} my understanding, 17 Q And simply because there is a TLV cr there is a 18 limit on that exposure doss not mean that tha matsrial is 19 -- that any exposure to the material is going to be harmful 20 to the worker, correct? 21 A A1 s medical question, Ihs exposures are sat 22 with the idea of making tha wcrxcrs safe, 23 MR. EUERL .* Okay, You want to get exhibit 27 cut 24 ag a m, a at ry 25 MR. HAMILToX: It should be there, HARTOLDMONOOQ9331 1 HR. BURKE.: Well, it's not. 2 HR. BAUNER-, The box la right there, 3 MR. HAMILTON,: I didn't put any back. It's right 4 here, (Handing document,) g Q (By Hr, Burke) Locking at Exhibit 27, Dr, Richard, 6 again tuis is an internal memorandum of the Monsanto Company? 7 A Yes, 8 Q Which, in the ordinary course of Monsanto Company's 9 business, would not have been distributed outside the company? 10 A That's correct. 11 Q And in the ordinary course there3 a no way that 12 that would have been sent to anybody-at General Electric? 13 MRo HAMILTON; I don51 knew how he can answer 14 that, 15 A X never - "ordinary course," I'm not sure what i 16 "ordinary course" is, 17 Q (By Hr0 Burke) Would you expect in your work with 18 Monsanto at this period of time, 1968, for a memorandum like 19 Exhibit 27 to have bean forwarded to anybody at General 20 Electric? 21 A I would not have forwarded it to General Electric, 22 Q And it was addressed to you? 23 A ITn-huh. Right, 24 Q And again that discusses tue work that Monsanto 25 was going to be doing with Industrial Biotest? 51 HARTOLDMONOOQ9332 1 A That'3 correct,, 2 q And does not address in any way tha suitability 3 ox araclors for dielectric fluids in transformers, does it? 4 A It doesn't address that issue. 5 u txnroit J! is an o mar xntarorrice memo or tna 6 Monsanto Company ., correct? 7 A Uh-huh, Right, 8 Q And it concerns an inquiry from the Federal Food 9 and Drug Administration? 10 A Right, 11 0 Sent by Mr, Davis to you? 12 A The other way around, 13 Q Sent to Hr, Davis by you? 14 A Right, 15 Q Again is that something you would have sent to 16 General.Electric? 17 A No, 18 Q The Food and Drug Administration has responsibility 19 for the purity of food and drugs, correct? 20 A Correct. 21 Q Or they did at this time? 22 A Yes. 23 Q Are you aware of any ability of the -- or regula 24 tory authority of the FDA in 196S to regulate what kind of 25 transformers a building owner could put in his building? 52 HARTOLDMONOOQ9333 1 A Nona,, 2 Q Exhibit 39 is simply forwarding certain samples of 3 araclors to somebody at the United States Department of 4 Agriculture, correct? 5 A That's correct, . 6 Q For their analytical chemical work? 7 A . Right, 8 Q A worthwhile scientific undertaking? ' 9 A Yas, 10 Q Which Exhibit 39 really has nothing to do with 11 the use of transformers using PCS fluids, Doctor, does it? 12 A Mo, Non, 13 Q Exhibit 40 is requesting you to send some samples 14 to the UoS. Commercial Fisheries of araclors, correct? .15 A Uh-huh, 16 Q And again is that a worthwhile scientific 17 undertaking, to confirm the presence or absence of araclors 18 in environmental samples? ' 19 A It is. 20 Q Really has nothing to do, Doctor, with the use 21 of PCS dielectric fluids in transformers in commercial 22 buildings, does it? 23 A No ,, 24 Q Exhibit 80 is a sales memo to -- which is attached 25 to a Wall Street Journal article, correct? 33 HARTOLDMONOOQ9334 1 A Riga?:, 2 Q Tie FDA at that tine was at tempting to impose 3 limits through ins regulatory authority on the level of PCS 4 content in. foods? g A Correct, . 6 0 And before this time was not the paper packaging 7 incustry using PGB fluids in papar packaging for foods? . 8 A I don it know whether it was used in any packaging. 9 It was used in carbonless carbon paper, in paper, 10 Q Are you aware -- - 11 A I don't think -- I don't think well, go ahead., 12 I3m not sure on packaging, situations. 13 Q Are you aware of use of PCS fluids in the manu 14 facture of paper packaging and the subsequent introduction 15 of PCS materials into the paper packaging by that route? 16 A I think the answer is no, I'm not familiar with 17 that, 18 Q Okay, Apparently Mr, Paton was of the opinion 19 that the FDA wanted to eliminate the use of PC3, except the dielectric fluids. Is that accurate, in Paragraph 1 of 20 Exhibit Wo, 80? 21 A "All applications except dielectrics," that's what 22 he says. 23 Q Would that be consistent, with your understanding 24 for the continued use of PCB fluids in dielectrics at or 25 54 HARTOLDMONOOQ9335 1 about this i 2 A iCS ,i c.. ink the die actrfcs ware the most impor- 3 cant. and the a a, o -3 q- ** o rn tj 1r .i c* . e they weren't put into the 4 environment:. 5 Q You told us earlier about the government inter 6 agency task force on or task force on PCS'a. Did you 7 participate in the work of that task force at all? 8 A .We reported to that task force, but I was not . 9 present,, Some of the work that was done the Research Depart 10 ment was used, but I don't think Monsanto participated as 11 such, I think we reported to it our findings, 12 0 Okay, Are you familiar with the recommendation 13 of that task force in March of 1972 that PC35s, that they 14 recommended continued to be permitted for use as dielectric 15 fluids in transformers? 16 A assume that s correct. 17 Q Did you understand the effort of the FBA to be too 18 much like Monsanto3s effort, to reduce as much as possible 19 the release of FGB's into the environment? 20 A I don't thick the FDA participated, I think they 21 set the regulations to protect the food for human consumption, 22 I don't think they did anything to restrict in a physical 23 way anyway, ' 24 Q Essentially that was on the community that was 25 being regulated to comply with those regulations? 55 HARTOLDMONOOQ9336 1 A 4. are , 2 Q And again those regulations, as far as you krw, 3 when they were pronesod in f 72 and adopted, I believe now, 4 late '73, really bad nothing to do with tna use of a trans 5 former containing the PCB fluid in a commercial building, 6 did it? 7 A ifej it did not. 8 Q The efforts that Monsanto undercook in 1969 and 9 '70 forward were essentially voluntary, correct? 10 A Correct,, 11 Q Uo governmental agency at that time had the 12 ability or the authority to regulate Monsanto's sals of 13 PGB's, is that correct? 14 A Correct,, 15 Q And Monsanto spent, a good' deal of its own time and 16 money in an attempt to ascertain the nature of the presence 17 of PCB's in the environment? 18 A We supplied analytical, We did soma ourselves and 19 we tried to follow the literature and reports, visited laboratories , 20 Q And then voluntarily restricted sales except to 21 what they considered to be a closed system use? 22 23 A That's correct, 24 Q And again teat was without any governmental inter vention or regulation? 25 36 HARTOLDMONOOQ9337 1 A "UB 2 n In ycur dealings, as limited as they ware, with 3 representatives of General Electric, did you find that they 4 were supportive of Monsanto*a policies? , E u Yes 6 Q Exhibit 34, which is a Monsanto interoffice memo, 7 is that -- is that correct? 8 A That's right. 9 n Was that sent to you, sir? 10 A So, I wrote it, ' 11 Q It was from you? 12 Uh-liuh, 13 Q .As an interoffice memo, would you have forwarded 14 that to anybody from General Electric? 15 A Ho, - ' 16 Q And again that was a discussion in your mind of 17 the review of the currant status of araclors in the environ 18 ment and their continued production, they ware suggestions 19 and recommendations? 20 A They were suggestions and recommendations as the 21 course that Monsanto might pursue with regard to manufacture of araclor, 22 23 Q Did you feel in September of 1969 that the con 24 tinued production and sale of araclors or Askaral or PC3 25 fluids for transformers, for use in transformers was a o/ HARTOLDMONOOQ9338 1 reasonable chin is co do at that time? 2 \ X A. Vo T phnuorn r ie was reasonable. 3 o Were you aware of any other liquid dielectrics 4 non-flammable that was available in 1969? 5 A There was none, 6 0 Isn't it true that as of the end of 1973 it was 7 also tha case? 8 A I think that's right, FX6 was around as a gas 9 under pressure, but that's the only - 10 0 In the 1969-1970 periods where you indicated in 11 Exhibit 34 that there aaj be some animalsa fish or insects 12 that may be harmed as a result of the introduction of PCB's 13 into the environment, did you faal at that tins that the 14 presence of PCB's in the environment justified the cessation 15 of tha manufacture of PCS fluids for transformers-? " 16 A 1 did not think that transformers would contaminate 17 the environment, 18 Q You told us earlier that Monsanto or your research 19 facility within Monsanto was unable to verify the tain egg shells in birds reported by Risebrough? 20 A I said we. were unable to, and I think it had to do 21 with tne cnickan studies at Industrial Biotest, not in our 22 23 laboratory, 24 Q Okay, You asked the Industrial Biotesc folks to 25 see if they can replicate or duplicate Dr, Hisabrough's 53 HARTOLDMONOOQ9339 1 .nui-rra as part or Che Case process? 2 A b'oLl, Chat's one raascti 'a i.d'-.'i`i clnicl^Gns al 3 1331 a bird n denes tic bird. 4 Q And the thin eggshells could not be duplicated? 5 A I chink chat's correct, That's what my memory 6 serves 7 C In the course of scientific research and study 8 does the inability to duplicate a result raise soma question 9 or at least call for continued research in order to verify 10 that finding? 11 A The answer is yes.. Conditions from laboratory 12 animals to wild birds and so forth would vary, but some of 13 the accusations were, I think, far afield, 14 Q And chess accusations were by people claiming 15 certain effects on wildlife from PC35s? . - . 16 Alyut TIiat ' s correct, 17 Q How, exhibit 50 is the Askarel transformer guide 18 which, I understand, that you played no part in in terms 19 of its preparation or distribution, correct? 20 A Right, 21 Q Given your experience with PCB's and your under 22 standing of -- of their human health effects, do you have 23 any disagreement with the material beginning at Paragraph S 24 on Paga 4 in terms of the personnel precautions for use 25 while working with tne transformer? HARTOLDMON0009340 1 MR. H/C'TILTON: I object, I don't believe this 2 witness is qualified co give that op in'.on, 3 MR. BURKE; Ha can tell ma if he's not. 4 A Yea, I chink tills is a medical question and I C think I should leave it at that, u 6 Q (By Mr, Burke) Are. you aware of substantially 7 more stringent precautions for other caramon industrial 8 chemicals used in the workplace over and above what's sol 9 forth for those folks using PCS'a in Exhibit 50? 10 A Again, it's a hygiene. -- industrial hygiene ques tion , 11 .Q Okay, And as 1 understand your testimony, you 12 13 did not participate in the American National Standards 14 Institute C-1G7 Committee who were attempting to set a standard for the disposal of Askarel materials? 15 A Yes, I was not a Monsanto representative nor did 16 17 I attend any of their -18 Q Mr, Papageorge, I understand, was cuairman of that committea? 19 A Could have been. 20 Q The work of the C-107 Committee and the work of 21 the American National Standards Institute in general is a 22 voluntary effort by industry to set standards for ~~ for 23 their conduct in tae maintenance of certain operations that 24 they do, correct? 25 60 HARTOLDMONOOQ9341 1 A Correct, . 2 Q And if- the purpose of the C~107 Committee was to 3 sat standard guidelines for the' handling and disposal of 4 capacitor and transformer grade Asharela so as to limit or 5 prevent further release into the environment, that would 6 be consistent with Monsanto'5s goal and policies? 7 A Exactly, 8 Q It would, be a worthwhile effort, correct? 9 A Correct, 10 Q And then back in the period of time when taasa 11 folks were doing this, January, 1973, there was no Federal 12 aid or. state agency, for that matter, that could regulate 13 the disposal of these materials, isn't that true? 14 A That's true, 15 Q As a scientist. Dr, Richard, do you expect the 16 work of the C-107 Alls I Committee as being a worthwhile 17 scientific and industrial endeavor? 18 A I have no evidence to the contrary, 19 Q Back in 1973, if industry had not gotten together with the ANSI folks or under the auspices of the ANSI 20 organization, there would have been nobody to prescribe 21 a standard procedure for the handling and disposal of 22 Askarel fluids, would there? 23 MR. HAMILTON! I object, I don't believe he can 24 answer that question. 25 61 HARTOLDMONOOQ9342 1 q (By Mr, Burke) I forget your testimony about 2 exhibit 275, Doctor, You did not recall the letter until 3 you were shown it today or -- 4 A I still don't really recall this. 5 Q Okay, 6 A I don't think I had much to do with the latter, 7 I received a copy of it., but I didn't have anything to do 8 with the contents of it, 9 Q Was this -an attemptty Mr,, Wood to keep you informed -- 10 A That7s right,, ' 11 Q -- as part of the intercorporate communication 12 sys tern? 13 A Sight, 14 Q Okay, And he's reporting essentially on his trip 15 to G,E, transformer laboratory In August of 1975 at 16 Pittsfield, Massachusetts, correct? 17 A Yes, 18 Q And as of August, 1975, were you aware of any 19 State or Federal regulation that prohibited the owner of a commercial building from owning and maintaining a PC3 fluid 20 transformer? 21 A There ware none, 22 23 Q An of the end of 1973p Dr,, Richard, did you see any scientific or technical reason why Monsanto should not 24 continue to manufacture and sell PGB fluids for use in 25 62 HARTOLDMONOOQ9343 1 t T SX!3 * O i. T 3 ? 2 A I saw xicnaa 3 Q Thank yon, sir. That's all I have. 4 MR,. liAMI.uTGN: I've got 3one more questions, 5 REDIRECT EXAHIiliiTION 6 QUESTIONS BY MR. HAMILTON: 7 Q You testified earlier as to tua relative amounts 8 of one part par million of a substance. Are there sub 9 stances where one part per million can be toxic? 10 A Yes; some, 11 Q liner, did Monsanto verify that Jensen's finding of 12 RGB's in the environment was correct? 13 A I don't think there's any one date, I think it's - 14 Q Approximate year, 15 A -- just a question of gradual amounting evidence, 16 '69, '70, '71, throughout that time period. 17 Q Is it good scientific practice if a study concludes 18 that a chemical is dangerous to take safeguards even while 19 additional testing is being done to verify that conclusion? MR. BURKE; I object to the form of the question. 20 It's vague and speculative. Go ahead, 21 Q (By Mr, Hamilton) Do you understand the question? 22 A You want to define "dangerous"? 23 Q Wells toxic. 24 A You have to define ''exposure," It's -- it's 25 63 HARTOLDMONOOQ9344 1 prudent Co make sura that the exposure to the chemical in 2 question is low enough or infrequent enough that you don't 3 get a toxic affect, ' 4 Q Okay, Would you recommend that industry ignore C findings of toxicity until additional tests can confirm 6. seen a finding? 7 A if your evidence is such that the chemical in 8 question is not harmful at the exposure, then I taink you 9 can continue, the practice. If the evidence is in the othes 10 way, that it is harmful at the exposure levels you are 11 talking about, then obviously you should take corrective 12 act loti. 13 Q Did you testify earlier that it was your under 14 standing that Monsanto proposed ceasing the manufacturing 15 and selling of ?CB7s as dielectrics before any government 16 agency told it to? 17 A I never recommended that we cease the araclor 18 use in dielectrics, 19 Q Do you know if Monsanto ever proposed ceasing use 20 before the government told Monsanto to do so? 21 A I couldn't -- couldn't answer after '75, I don't 22 know, 23 Q Do you know if before then if the industry ever 24 asked Monsanto not to cease producing it? 25 A To my knowledge, we did not recommend ceasing 64 HARTOLDMONOOQ9345 1 productiou of araclor for dielectric uses 2 Q hid Monsanto require customers to sign an indemni- 3 ficarion agreataen- as a condition to continuing to sell to 4 that customer? 5 A They did. I don't know what the dates were. 6 Q bo you knew why Monsanto required an indemnifies.7 tion agreement to sell to a customer? 8 A I think they wanted to make sura it.was handled 9 properly the product was handled properly. 10 n< Was it -- do you know if it was also to insulate 11 Mens auto from liability? 12 A Could have been. You'd have to ask the lawyers. o' 13 Do you know if Monsanto required the company signing 14 the indemnification to supply them -with the financial state 15 ment to ascertain their relative net'worth? 16 17 point0 n 18 I had no part in the contract negotiations at that Is that true that under TGSCA, the EPA eventually 19 prohibited the manufacture and sale of PCS's as dielectrics for transformers? 20 \ I don't know. TOSCA was later than ? 75. 21 PCS "a aren't manufactured in the U.S. any longer,, 22 are they? 23 A I think the answer -- yes, the answer is no. 24 25 Q But you don't know If this was voluntary or 65 HARTOLDMONOOQ9346 1 government impos ad? 2 A I don't know which way ic want , 3 Q You. testified chat in normal use PG3 transformers 4 should not permit PCB'a into the environment,, is that correct?] c A Well, I thought that the exposure and the risk 6 would be very limited. It doesn't say that they would never 7 permit, but at leasc the information that I had and predic 8 tions that I would personally make, I Chink that would be 9 very infrequent and would not liana the environment, 10 Q Okay, Die you ever taka.it upon yourself to study 11 or read reports as to failure rates of transformers? 12 A Banlgnus, Paul Benignus kept better track than I 13 did3 but they were fairly .infrequent, 14 Q Are you familiar with any accidents or incidents 15 where PCSs have escaped from transformers? 16 A I'm sure they had., but I'm not familiar with any 17 partrcuxar one, 18 Q Are you familiar with the or have you heard of 19 the byproducts of combustion that can occur when PCB's are heated in tha presence of oxygen to certain temperatures 20 for certain durations of time? 21 A I had no knowledge up through 175 of that, I have 22 23 indirect knowledge now of that situation, 24 Q Hava you heard 25 A Yes, heard rumors. 66 HARTOLDMONOOQ9347 1 .rars or whatever or the . .gueaa 2 .ns from ir3nULo) t .-3 o. TA.C^J L.J.4C& U 3 hoard? 4 action; loading. 5 Q (By Mr, Haiti Icon,) Have you he CLif (1 "* let me reask 6 it sitea iis o oj act ad. What b ypreduces have you heard 7 result V 8 A In terms of rcconc his tory? 9 Yi- -i %. 10 A I guess the etily thing x'va heard 1 s in o onnec- 11 k> W*ITL wi th this trl:al. 12 A. that is that what have you heard? 13 A I heard tners was a case taut CLX D .X 0 furans j I 14 don't know whether dioxins or not, chlorinated dibenaofurans 15 ware present after a fire in some building that had an 16 Askarel transformer. . 17 Q That would have bean in Binghamton, New York, do 18 you know? 19 A That's the nans of the town, yes. Q Are you aware who manufactured those transformers? 20 A ho, I dor.'t know who manufactured the transformers, 21 Q Do you hare any knowledge as to the relative 22 23 toxicity of furans or dioxins versus PCB's? 24 A Relative toxicity has been reported in test animals 25 to be considerably more toxic. 67 HARTOLDMON0009348 1 Okay, Did you know that in 19 73 wneti you ceased 2 being Involved with PCS'3? 3 A Did I know what? 4 That furans were a possible by product of combos- 5 cion and that they ware more toxic than PCS8 3? 6 a we didn't consider it because under the normal. 7 elrcuns sane as , and I'd say even whan a transformer', if it - 8 if it :?ot too hot, the. chances o the araclor or tha Askarel 9 oxidising were vary limited. It's only in the secondary, 10 fire, as far as I could tell, there would be enough oxygen 11 around to make any significant amount of dioxins or dibanzo, 12 chlorinated dibenaofurans, so up through '75 I was not 13 worried about transformer applications. 14 Q Ware you aware that some transformers had a 15 ceramic bushing underneath the .fluid line? ' 16 A I've seen theta manufacture transformers, but I 17 don't know all of the details of tha exact manufacture. 18 Q Were you aware of there being any work or studies 19 on human3 that have concluded that thare is some adverse health effect of FCB's? 20 A. Studies I am, yes, 21 Q Studies of exposed populations? 22 A Wall, I assume they studied General Electric 23 population. I think wa probably study the Kremarick 24 population, W. G. Kremericl PPulation, Gosh, I don't know, 25 HARTOLDMONOOQ9349 1 Ihera'3 literature which may have contained a number of them. 2 It wad identified in many ways. 3 q rid you follow that literature? 4 Yes, I tried to, I think that the interpretation 5 I think. again would be medical interpretation, was found 6 in corner5 a milk and reported and that, and we never veri 7 fied that situation, .' 8 Q Are you aware of any effect found in any of the 9 studies on livers? 10 A On human livers? 11 Q Yea, 12 A It's a medical question. .13 Q Okay, How aoout as to carcincgenify on humans? 14 A It's bean reported, but I don't think I've'seen 15 truck in the way of evidence. 16 Q Okay, 17 A Certainly not through ' 75 18 Q How about respiratory tract problems? 19 A You've got to talk to the medical people about 20 specific medical stuff, not me, 21 Q Okay, In the absence of your going and reading 22 that information of those studies, are you able to render 23 an opinion as to the health, human health effects of PCB's? 24 A 1 don''t know the human health measures or tue 25 human health affects of PCB's, HARTOLDMON0009350 1 0 Mr, Burk a asked you about various internal 2 Monsanto memorandun and you testified that you did not 3 ouliave you would nave 3ant chose memorandum to General 4 Electric, is that true? 5 A Thai; *3 true. 6 Q So you know if other people in Monsanto nay have 7 either sent that memoranda or cue information in those 8 memoranda to General Electric? 9 A I have no dract knowledge. You'd have to ask - 10 or I think Marketing people would he the most knowledgeable 11 people in this area, I don't know waat was sent in that 12 regara, 13 Q Do you know if there was -- would the policies in 14 Monsanto have been to keep knowledge from General Electric 15 and its customers or to share it? 16 A I think when it became factual knowledge I chink 17 probably shared, but whan it became -- wuen it was specu 18 lative knowledge I think we probably would not have shared 19 that much. 20 Q Do you know if the Marketing people had ongoing 21 discussions or meetings with General Electric during the 22 time period up to 1975? 23 A I'm sure that Benignus called on General Electric, 24 Q Do you believe that, assuming PCB's to be toxic, 25 that you would nevertheless recommend taa use of PCB's in 70 HARTOLDMONOOQ9351 1 transformer3? 2 MR, BURKE; Objection. It's vague and specula 3 tive, Go ahead, air, . 4 A well, I I reminded you that it's a question 5 of exposure and the affect of concentrations, and if the 6 effect levels ~~ I mean if Che concentrations are below 7 effect levels, I think, it'3 safe to use, 8 Q (By Mr, Hamilton) Do you know enough about con 9 centrations and exposures and effect levels to, testify as 10 to that? 11 A I couldn't testify, but it was my opinion at that 12 time that parts per million which were found in environ 13 mental samples were not being detrimental to human life, 14 because the FDA standards were , in food where people ware 15 eating the stuff, were in parts per million levels, so-the 16 FDA was certainly a guideline as to what kind of levels TM~ 17 no-effect levels they wars experiencing in food where people 18 eat the stuff. Wow, I don51 expect taem to eat Askars1, 19 Q Do you know what levels, if any, have bean set by 20 the EPA as to dibensofurans or dioxins in food? 21 A I don't know the levels, but I assume it's low, 22 Q Does the generation of those materials from PGB's 23 have any effect on your opinion as to whether the continued 24 use of PCB's in transformers is a good idea? A I think the chances of widespread or contamination 25 71 HARTOLDMONOOQ9352 1 of food from dibenzo, chlorinated dibenzofurana from Askarel 2 transformer problems are vary remote, 3 Q Ara you aware of tha racant Federal regulations 4 cast by the EPA concerning the continued owuersnip of PC3 5 transformers inside a building? 6 A I* ve had nothing to do with aracior since really 7 ! 7o, 8 Q Okay, You ara unaware of those regulations? 9 . A I don't knew what the regulations say, 10 Q Are you aware that -- are you aware whether General 11 Electric developed the use of PCB3s as dielectric fluid? 12 A Would you repeat that, please? 13 Q Are you aware of whether General Electric developed 14 the use of PCS'5a as dielectric fluids in transformers or 15 capacitors? . 16 A Yes, I think they ~~ they did develop the use, 17 Q Ara you - 18 A Application, 19 Q Ara you aware of whether General Electric received 20 a royalty for permitting Monsanto to manufacture PCB's as 21 dielectric fluids? 22 A I'm not familiar with the details, but I think 23 taey may have for -- might have for a while, 24 Q Is it your recollection that in tne 1972 time 25 period industry and government representatives were unani- 72 HARTOLDMONOOQ9353 1 mous in b a Having that PCB's should continue to be used as 2 dielectric fluids? . 3 A Were tuey unanimous? 4 Q Right. 5 A I don'c know, 6 Q Do you know if there were soma who were opposed 7 Co even those uses? . 8 A I couldn't tell you. I'm. not familiar with that, 9 Q In 1968, say, to the 1972 time period, did Monsanto 10 know how far variousgovernmental regulatory agencies were 11 going to go in regulating PCS'a? 12 A ho o , 13 Q Do you know if it was Monaanto's policy to ignore 14 the government and possible regulations until such time as 15 they ware promulgated? . A I think it was a policy to stay ahead of that 16 17 situation, to not be forced by regulations. I think we 18 talked with government people, tried to visit laboratories. 19 I think we triad to do a - a job,with some foresight, but I don't think we had direct knowledge of any stanuards that 20 were to be promulgated. 21 Q Okay, Did Monsanto recommend to its customer 22 tuat it ignore the government until regulations were passed? 23 A I don't knov/ that they did that. 24 Q Wall, do you know if Monsanto communicated with 25 73 HARTOLDMONOOQ9354 1 customers concerning proposed regulations? 2 A. You got co ask t..at question to cue Marketing 3 Department. 1 don't know, 4 Q You never had such discussions with anyone at 5 C-. E, ? 6 A I never discussed that with G.E. 7 Q Are you familiar with the amount of research and 8 development required of General Electric-to develop tne use 9 of silicone in transformers as a dielectric? 10 A ho, I have no knowledge, 11 Q Do you know if there was anytaing that precluded 12 General Electric from developing silicone fluids for use in 13 transformers prior to 1973 or so? 14 A no, I guess they could have, I suppose * 15 MR, DERRYBERRY: Listen to his question, 16 MR. HAMILTON: Okay, That's all I have. 17 RECSOSS EXAMIbtATION 18 QUESTIONS BY MR. BURKE; 19 Q Dr. Richard3 you are not a dielectric chemist, 20 are you? 21 A Ko. And I'm not an electrical engineer. 22 Q So the mechanical obstacles, if any, to the research 23 and development of alternative dielectric fluids, is it 24 accurate to say, are as much of a mystery to you as they are 25 to me? 74 HARTOLDMONOOQ9355 1 HR.. HAMILTON; I object to that question, I don't 2 think Mr, 3 A I have no knowledge of all the testing and so 4 forth that G,,L. would have to do In developing that -- Tmr,.1uawtt 5 kUVii Vixii IWi , 6 A -- for transformer dielectric use. Certainly 7 they had years of testing to .do, 8 Q (By Hr, Burke) Do you know to what extant G.E, 9 had made efforts bafora 1975 to produce alternative dielec 10 tric fluids? 11 A i suppose they must have gone on for 12 HR, DERRYBERRYs Listen to his question, please, 13 HR, SAUMERi Wait a minute, Counsel, You can't 14 say anything in this deposition, please, 15 MR. DERRYBERRY; We can go off the record for -- 16 HR, BAUMER: Ho, we3re not going off the record, 17 MR. DERRYBERRYi Thea stay on the record, I 18 represent this witness, 19 MR. BAUME'Ri But you can't tail him how to answer the quastion, 20 21 MR, DERRYBERRY3 I can tell him to listen to a question. 22 Mil. BAUMEE; Ho, you can't. If he wants to ask 23 you a question, then we'll go off tue record and he can ask 24 you a question, but you cannot interject yourself into this 25 75 HARTOLDMONOOQ9356 1 record. . 2 MR, DERRYBERRY: I'm net interjecting. 3 MR, BAUMER; You are, and you can't do .it at trial 4 and you can't do it at this deposition. 5 MR., DERHYBERRY? I assume tuis is a discovery 6 deposition - 7 MR, BAUMER; It's not a discovery deposition. 8 MR, DEiiRYBEPblY: -- as wall as a trial deposition? 9 ME.,, BAUMER: It *3 a trial deposition. 10 MR, DERRYBER11Y; In any event, I am going to advise tills witness whenever I think he - needs reminding that ha 11 12 should listen to a question and answer the question, 13 MR. BAUMER: You can advise him anytime you so 14 choose off the record and not during the course and net 15 during the course of a conversation, of a question, MR. DERRYBERRY; All right. We'll be happy to 16 17 go off the record at any time and get ~~ 18 MR, BAUMER: I don'J c care when you want to go 19 off the record if ha wants to talk to you, not if you want to talk to him, 20 MR, DERRYBERRY: I am not going to be bound by 21 your assessment, sir, 22 MR. BAUMER: You are not going to be invited to 23 this deposition. You are not entitled to oe hare, 24 MR. DERRYBERRY: Are you serious? 25 76 HARTOLDMONOOQ9357 1 MB., BAUMER; I'm serious. 2 MR. DERRY'S EERY; Wa' 11 sea how far that gats you. 3 Just proceed. 4 Mil, BUPuUi; 'Would you read the question back. 5 please? 6 (WHEREUPON, THE REPORTER REED FROM THE RECORD AS 7 ij IRCiGTc.0 ,) 8 A The answer is "no,-" . 9 MR, BURKE: Thank you, sir, That:s all I have, 10 MR0 HAMILTON: ho questions. 11 You have the right to read your deposition after 12 it's transcribed or you can waive that right, 13 A I want to read it. 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 77 HARTOLDMONOOQ9358 1 2 Signature of witness. 3 Subscribed and sworn to before na on this day 4 ofA,D., 1936. 5 My commission will expire. 6 7 8 Notary Public 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 ' 73 HARTOLDMONOOQ9359 1 STATE OF MISSOURI ) ) ss 2 COUHTY OF ST, LOUIS) 3 4 I, Retha DeHartiao, RPR, GSR (IL) and Hotary Public 5 duly commissioned and qualified in and for the County of 6 Sta Louis, which adjoins the City of St, Louis, State of 7 Missouri, do hereby certify that pursuant to notice there 8 came before me on. the Stii day of April, A.D. , 1936, between 9 the hours of aigut o'clock in the forenoon and six. o'clock 10 in the afternoon, at the law offices of Messrs, Paper, 11 Martin, Jensen, Mai dial & Hetledga, in tne City of St. 12 Louis, State of Missouri, the following named person, 13 WILLIAM RICHARD, JR,, who was by me duly sworn to testify 14 to the truth, and nothing but the truth of his knowledge . 15 touching and concerning the matters in controversy in this 16 causa; that he was thereupon carefully examined upon his 17 oath and his examination reduced to writing under my super 18 vision; that the deposition is a true record of the testi 19 mony given by the witness; and taat tae deposition was 20 signed by the witness, 21 I FURTHER CERTIFY THAT I am neither attorney nor 22 counsel for, nor related to, nor employed by any of the 23 parties to the action in which this deposition was tauen, 24 and further, that 1 am not a relative or employee of any 25 attorney or counsel employed by the parties hereto, or finan cially Interested in this action. 79 HARTOLDMONOOQ9360 1 Xu WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and 2 affixed my notarial seal on this day of May, A.D. 3 1936. 4 My commission will expire January 20ch, 1939, 5 6 Notary Publ 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 80 HARTOLDMONOOQ9361