Document jyG9k1xvXjYbnJO04LOozrvwy

p'n'v:' CONFIDENTIAL Subject to Protective Order in Bobs v. Conoco, Inc., Ho. 90-4837 14th Judicial District Court Caloasleu Parish, Louisiana 149 3 MINUTES of the two hundred thirty-sixth meeting of the Board of Directors of the Manufacturing Chemists' Association, Inc. , held at The Madison, Washington, D. C. , Tuesday, January 14, 1975, at 10:00 a.m. Directors: Edward R. Kane, Chairman James M. Gill Jack B. St. Clair, Vice Chairman Robert D. Goodall James G. Affleck John R. Hall Howard Barkell Harry T. Marks Frederick L. Bissinger Harry D. McNeeley E. E. Chipman H. Barclay Morley Thomas C. Dabovich Robert M. Morris William J. Driver Joseph A. Neubauer J. Morris Evans Donald D. Pascal Thomas S. Farmer Robert T. Powers James H. Gardner Harvey J. Taufen Alternates: Stanley H. Anonsen (for Harold E. Thayer) David H. Bradford, Jr. (for Frederick L. Bissinger) Werner C. Brown (for Harvey J. Taufen) J. Earl Burrell (for Joseph A. Neubauer) C. Preston Cunningham (for John W. Hanley) Richard E. Heckert (for Edward R. Kane) Paul F. Hoffman (for Robert M. Morris) Robert C. Hyndman (for Thomas C. Dabovich) L. H. Johnstone (for William C. Douce) James E. Magoffin (for Harry D. McNeeley) Harold S. Mickley (for H. Barclay Morley) E. A. Von Doersten (for John R. Hall) Outside Counsel: * Lloyd N. Cutler ) * John H. Pickering ) * Daniel K. Mayers ) Wilmer, Cutler & Pickering Secretary-Treasurer: George E. Best By Invitation: Robert C. Busch, Diamond Shamrock Corporation Robert B. Chapman, Monsanto Company A. C. Clark, MCA William B. Daume, Monsanto Company V. H. Peterson, MCA W. M. Stover, MCA John G. Tritsch, MCA R. E. Varnerin, MCA David C. Williams, MCA CMft 012550 $&"" CONFIDENTIAL ' Subject to Protective Order in Ross v. Conoco, Inc., No. 90-4837 I4th Judicial District Court Calcasieu Parish, Louisiana SPECIAL MESSAGE OF THE CHAIRMAN OF THE BOARD Exhibit D He now are midway through our fiscal year. This might be the time for some general remarks and forward-thinking about our Association's organization and program, how we develop that program and what additional steps might be taken to increase Its effectiveness. The effectiveness of MCA is obviously an increasingly vital consideration, as Issues which could affect our Industry In major ways continue to provoke public attention and governmental action. In the first half of 1973, a study by a Board Committee of three members reconnended Improving MCA's effectiveness on the Washing ton scene. In view of the proliferation of federal legislation and regulatory developments Impacting the chemical industry. This trend has not diminished. The study also highlighted the need for Improved external and internal comnunlcatlon, but the success of comunlcatlons In Washington and In other arenas as well depends on the substance, time liness and clarity of our positions and the coordination of related actions taken Individually by member companies. Improvement In these respects has been central to our thinking and planning since then. We believe definite progress has been made; however the complexity of the task keeps growing and we have to make continuing Improvements to remain conpetltlve in the area of public Ideas and governmental action. *u CMA 012551 ri\ CONFIDENTIAL Subject to Protective Order in Boss v. Conoco, Xnc^, No- 90-4837 >SC> V . vwi.*w^-T 14th Judicial District Court -3 * On MCA's overall role, much of our policy reflects require ments of the antitrust laws. On this account, for example, MCA in the past has minimized the collection of chemical industry statistics, has refrained from developing standards, has organized along function al lines rather than product groupings, and has been particularly circumspect in product-oriented activities. MCA's posture certainly has been conservative, with full intention that we should be above suspicion. MCA and se* But has this interpretation of MCA ruled out Association services which our member companies might reasonably expect? You are aware of MCA's limited participation in the pending litigation on EPA's effluent guidelines, and of the Association's declining to repre sent the vinyl chloride and polyvinyl chloride producers in recommend ing specific occupational exposure limits. r*. r .rrrr-rn.rM FS?*n ft HTPH CMA 012552