Document jmrQzYYNqGz5LNwYQekK56kw9
1 IM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA
2 INDIANAPOLIS DIVISION
3 THE CITY OF BLOON I MGTON, INDIANA; )
THE UTILITIES SERVICE BOARD OF
)
4 BLOOMINGTON, INDIANA; and MONROE )
COUNTY, INDIANA,
}
5 )_
Plaintiffs,
)
6)
vs. ) CivNo.
7 ) IP 33-9-C
)
3 WESTINGHOUSE ELECTRIC CORPORATION,)
a Pennsylvania corporation; and
)
9 MONSANTO COMPANY, a Delaware
)
corporation,
)
10 )
Defendants*1
11
12
13 The deposition of W. b. PAPAGEORGE,
14 called for examination by the Plaintiffs, oursuant
15 to notice and pursuant to the provisions of the
16 Federal Rules of Civil Procedure of the United
17 States District Courts, pertaining to the taking
18 of depositions for the purpose of discovery, taken-
1 9 before Arnold N. Goldstine, a Notary Public and
20 Certified Shorthand Reporter within and for the
21 County of Cook and State of Illinois, at 1313
22 Merchants Bank Building, Indianapolis, Indiana,
23 commencing on June 25, 1936, at the hour of nine
24 o fclock a.m.
Longoria & Goldstine
236 1030
Chicago
HARTOLDMONO012268
A . Mot specifically. Other than Mr. covered the activities prior to my arrival in new assignment then. And later I got un and talked, and this covered the Swedish work, one Or. Risebrough's report out of California and the like.
And I got up then later in the day ah morning and spoke on, as I remember, cur plans to pursue this information personally by going cc Europe, and also our plans in visiting ourcustomer sites and our review of .Monsanto's marketing policies, as to which of the Aroclors to sell and to whom.
So I was kind of forecasting what v;a !-:n-av? then as to what we might be doing.
0. Let rae see if I can have a summary of zhe status at that time. You had this program underway where you were taking back scram liguic Arocloc^'sending it to Findett for reprocessing. Any material that.couldn't be reprocessed was being ^dlsgijjiied of in landfills-by Monsanto, isn't that
A. Yes. ^ Q. And- because you were paying for th^t.
V
Longoria & Goldstine
236 1030
Chicago
HARTOLDMON0012269
1 Monsanto was paying for that, you didn't like chat
2 program and wanted to go to a progran v/hcr:
3 costs would either get reduced or get down to
4 zero, is that right?
5 A. That was an objective.
6 Q. And your ultimate goal, recognizing chat
7 landfills were not a long-term solution, was to
8 either recycle it or incinerate it; is that right?
9 A. That's right.
10 Q. Was that sequence of reasoning and v/har
11 you had done and where you were going explained to
12 Westinghouse at that time?
13 A. Let me think. That was assigned to Dr.
14 Richard on the agenda.
15 Q. Okay.
IS A. And he did touch on that.
17 Q. Did he touch on -
1 3 A. Yes.
19 Q. -- the whole idea of trying to keep ns
20 much out of the environment as possible?
21 A. Yes.
22 Q. So he was saying to Westinghouse, try and
23 keep it from being discharged into the
24
environment; is* that right?
-
Longoria & Goldstine
236 1030
Chicago
HARTOLDMONO012270
23 9
1 A. All right. Yes.
2 Q. Did you ever develop a solid waste
3 destruction system?
A A. Yes.
5
Q. Is it in operation now?
~
6 A. Wo.
7 Q. Why not?
3 A. We could not find enough support for the
9 use of that unit to justify building it.
10 Q. Hot enough customer base?
11 A. Correct.
12 Q. But it is technically feasible, is it
13 not?
1 4 A. We demonstrated it. Yes.
15 Q. So that the goal of destroying soli'.;
15 wastes through -- peb contaminated solid v/astoc
17 through incineration, has been demonstrated to he
1 8 technically feasible, isn't that correct?
19 A. Yes.
20 (The document above-referred to
21 was marked Bloomington Deposition
22 Exhibit Ho. 128 for identification.)
23 Q. Directing your attention to what has been
24 marked as Exhib.it 128, which is a trip report
Longoria & Goldstine
235 1030
Chicug
HARTOLDMON0012271