Document npVBv3jQX8zgvQL9akvgXv5Bz

l 1 2 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA 3 INDIANAPOLIS DIVISION 4 5 CITY OF BLOOMINGTON, INDIANA; ) THE UTILITIES SERVICE BOARD ) 6 OF BLOOMINGTON, INDIANA; and ) MONROE COUNTY, INDIANA, ) 7 Plaintiffs, ) -vs- ) CIVIL ACTION NO. 8 ) IP 83-9-C WESTINGHOUSE ELECTRIC ) 9 CORPORATION, a Pennsylvania ) Corp.; and MONSANTO COMPANY, ) 10 a Delaware Corp. ) Defendants. ) 11 1 2 The deposition upon oral examination of ROBERT GEORGE KALEY II, PhD, a witness produced and sworn before me, 13 Patricia A. Cline, a Notary Public in and for the County of Marion, State of Indiana, taken on behalf of the 14 Plaintiffs at the law offices of Barnes & Thornburg, 1313 Merchants Bank Building, Indianapolis, Marion County, 15 Indiana, on the 25th of May, 1988, commencing at the hour of 9:00 a.m. pursuant to the Federal Rules of Trial 16 Procedure with Notice. 17 18 19 20 21 JOHN E. CONNOR & ASSOCIATES, INC. 22 1860 ONE AMERICAN SQUARE INDIANAPOLIS, IN 46282 23 (317) 632-5533 WATER PCB-SD0000028727 2 1 APPEARANCES 2 Plaintiffs: 3 4 Mr. Joe Karaganis KARAGANIS & WHITE 414 N. Orleans Suite 810 Chicago, IL 60610 5 Monsanto Company: Mr. Michael R. Fruehwaid ' 6 BARNES & THORNBURG 1313 Merchants BankBuilding Indianapolis, IN 46204 7 Westinghouse Electric Corp.: Not represented by counsel 8 INDEX OF EXAMINATION 9 DIRECT EXAMINATION ................................................... 10 Questions by Mr. Joe Karaganis Page .3 11 INDEX OF EXHIBITS 12 Deposition Exhibit No.: . Page 617 - Curriculum Vitae 3 13 618 - Monsanto's Second Supplemental Response 50 619 - Table 2 of Molecular Composition of Aroclors 58 14 620 - Reviews of Environmental Contamination and 105 Toxicology ' 15 621 - A Case Study of a Chemical Spill 105 622 - Solubility and Soil Mobility of PCBs 105 16 623 - U. S. Department of Commerce Report 105 624 - Kinetics of Biphenyl and PCB Metabolism in Soil 105 17 625 - Microbial Degradation of PCB in Soil 105 626 - The Degradation of PCBs by Micro-Organisms 105 18 627 - Movement of PCB's and Other Persistent Compounds Through Soil 105 19 628 - PCB Dechlorination in Aquatic Sediments 105 629 - Distribution of PCBs in a Municipal Wastewater 20 Treatment Plant and Environs 105 630 - Attenuation of Water-Soluble PCBs 105 21 631 - Attenuation of PCBs in Soils: Literature Review 114 632 - Biodegradation of PCBs 123 22 633 - Migration of PCBs in Soil Induced by Percolating Water 123 23 WATER PCB-SD0000028728 3 1 R-O BERT GEORGE KALEY II, having been 2 first duly sworn to tell the truth, the whole truth 3 and nothing but the truth relating to said matter, 4 was examined and testified further as follows: 5 6 DIRECT EXAMINATION, 7 QUESTIONS BY MR. JOE KARAGANIS: 8 Q Mr. Kaley, would you state your full name for the 9 record, please? 10 A Yes, Robert George Kaley II. 11 MR. KARAGANIS: Let the record show that 12 that this is the deposition pursuant to agreement of 13 Robert George Kaley who's been identified as a 14 prospective expert witness at the upcoming trial of 15 this cause. 16 (Bloomington Deposition Exhibit 617 was marked 17 for identification.) 18 Q Mr. Kaley, I show you what has been marked as 19 Deposition Exhibit, Bloomington Deposition Exhibit 20 617, which purports to be a curriculum vitae of 21 yourself; is that correct? 22 A Yes, sir. 23 Q Deposition Exhibit 617, does that correctly state WATER PCB-SD0000028729 1 your educational background? 4 2 A Yes, it does. 3 Q And since would it be correct to say upon receiving 4 your PhD you joined Monsanto? 5 A Yes, in fact I joined Monsanto, actually before the 6 degree was awarded but after I completed all the 7 requirements for the degree. 8 Q Would it be fair to say since receiving your PhD 9 degree that you have been employed by Monsanto ever 10 since? 11 A That's correct. 12 Q And you became employed by Monsanto in December of 1 3 '73? 14 A That's correct. , 15 Q You have a PhD in analytical chemistry. Is 16 analytical chemistry the specialty within chemistry 17 that we would talk about if we would say what is your 18 specialty? 19 A That's correct, yes. 20 Q What was your first contact with PCBs? 21 A Well, actually when I joined the company on December 22 of '73, I came into the group whose primary 23 responsibility at that time was investigating the WATER PCB-SD0000028730 5 1 environmental properties of PCBs and so immediately 2 upon my employment I began doing PCB analytical work. 3 Q What group was that? 4 A It was in the applied sciences section of what was at 5 that time the Monsanto Industrial Chemicals Company. 6 Q And who was in charge of the applied sciences 7 section? 8 A Robert Keller, K-e-I-l-e-r. 9 Q Who else was in it? I mean how big a group was it? 10 A The total group was probably about I would guess 11 about 50 people. 12 Q Bow many people working on PCBs? 13 A With significant involvement an the time I would say 14 there were probably 7 or 8. 15 Q Who werethey? 16 A The group leader was Scott Tucker, myself. 17 The other names that come to mind are Vic Saeaer 18 Orville Hicks, Bill Mees. 19 How many am I up to? 20 I think there was a guy, one of the technicians, 21 Hector Yepez. 22 Those are the names I think of who were in the 23 specific group I was in at the time. WATER PCB-SD0000028731 1 Q What were your duties upon joining the applied 6 2 science section? 3 A I joined as an analytical chemist and my duties 4 revolved around doing analyses of samples containing 5 a variety of materials including PCBs and devising 6 more appropriate and more accurate and precise ways 7 of doing those analyses. 8 Q By more accurate or precise ways, in defining the 9 quantities of PCBs or determining the particular 10 chemical composition of the PCB? 11 A Primarily the quantity. We did some work on 12 compositional type analyses, but not nearly as much 13 as quantitative analysis. . 14 Q Would that be a proper characterization of your work 15 from '13 to 78, as a senior research chemist? 16 A Probably for about the first 2 to 2 and a half years 17 of that period of time I was most deeply involved in 18 working with PCBs. 19 In '75 or '76 I transferred to another group 20 working for a gentleman named Martin Dietrich and 21 began to do gas chromatography/mass spectrometry. At 22 that point I still had some support involvement with 23 PCB work but my area of expertise broadened WATER PCB-SD0000028732 1 considerably and was not nearly as dedicated to PCB 2 work. . 3 Q When you say you became involved in gas 4 chromatography/mass spectrometry, weren't you doing 5 that in your earlier work on analyses? 6 A No, it was primarily just gas chromatography. Mass 7 spectrometry work had been done by other people. 8 Q Why don't, if you would be patient with me? 9 A Oh, I am. 10 Q Would you state what it is that gas chromatograph 11 does, then what mass spectrometer does in dealing 12 with the analysis for, for example, ?C3? 13 A Gas chromatography is basically a technique which 14 separates mixtures of compounds into their component 15 parts. 16 So that for instance, since we're talking about 17 PCB, if we talk about PCBs, if you look at a bottle 18 marked PCBs, there is a fluid in it, looks 19 homogenous, like a nice clear oil. In fact that 20 material is not made up of a single chemical compound 21 but is a mixture of many chemical compounds. 22 If you inject, using a syringe inject such a 23 mixture into a gas chromatograph and look at that WATER PCB-SD0000028733 8 1 time at the output of that you get peaks coming off 2 as an output of that instrument and each of those 3 peaks represents one or more of those compounds 4 contained in the PCB. 5 So it allows us to separate a mixture with some 6 hope then of either identifying what is in there or 7 more accurately measuring what is in there. 8 Q When you say it separates out the compound, how does 9 it do that physically? 10 A It passes through a what is called a column. There II are several types of columns but most of the work was 12 done with what is called a packed column. There was 13 a glass column. A tube which contains a very finely 14 divided clay-like or diatomaceous earth-like material 15 onto which is coated a.very thick organic compound. 16 The materials passing through a chromatograph 17 interact with the coating on this solid support and 18 by a variety of either chemical or physical 19 interactions are separated. Each compound is going 20 to interact a little differently with that coating on 21 the solid support and if it interacts a great deal , , 22 it will be held up on the column and will take it a 23 long time to get through the column. WATER PCB-SD0000028734 S 1 If it doesn't interact with the support, it zips 2 right through the column, comes out very quickly so 3 at the end of the column some sort of measurement 4 device which allows you to sense when a chemical 5 compound is exiting the column. That device then is 6 connected to a recorder which gives you the 7 chromatographic output. The chromatograph peaks on 8 it so it basically interfaces with the material in 9 the column. 10 Q So that the packed column media separates out the 11 chemical components of the chemical that your 12 testing; is that correct? 13 A Basically true. 14 Q Now then, what is the monitoringdevice or reading 15 device at the end of the column? 16 A There are several. And their choice is determined on 17 what exactly you want to measure. 18 There's, for instance, one of the simple ones 19 called a flane ionization detector. It's basically 20 what it sounds like. There's a little flame burning 21 at the end of the column and any time a 22 carbon-containing compound passes through that flame 23 it generates an electrical signal which is recorded. WATER PCB-SD0000028735 10 1 This is a very, this type of detector, as I said, 2 will measure any kind of carbon containing compound. 3 In the area of PCB analytical chemistry the 4 detector most often used is something called an 5 electron capture detector. 6 At the end of the column in this particular case 7 there is a radioactive foil which generates a stream 8 of electrons. When materials that have not only 9 carbon but also, for instance, chlorine in the 10 molecule pass through this stream of electrons, the 11 electrons are absorbed because of the chemical nature 12 of chlorine and this also generates a signal which 13 can then be recorded. 14 Q And the electronic signal is subject to graphing; is 15 that right? 16 A That's correct. It goes through an amplifier and 17 then is connected to a chart recorder which records 18 the intensity of the electrical signal. 19 Q And the intensity of the electrical signal generates 2 0 as graphs peaks and valleys; is that correct? 21 A That's correct. 22 Q And the peaks and valleys, how do you know what is 23 the chemical composition? WATER PCB-SD0000028736 11 1 A Well, in total reality you don't. Basically what you 2 do in any type of analyses where you're looking for 3 particular compound is to run a standard material 4 through your chromatographic procedures. So, for 5 instance, if we were interested in a PCB mixture, we 6 would have a standard that we knew to be that PCB 7 mixture, we would run it through chromatograph. 8 Record the pattern of its peaks and then compare the 9 pattern of peaks of our unknown sample to that 10 pattern generated by the standard. 11 In a more simple case if you have a single 12 compound you're analyzing, then you will get a single 13 peak on the output when you run the standard. If you 14 get a peak in your sample which corresponds in time 15 to the standard peak, then that gives you some 16 measure of qualitative or identity type analysis of 17 that material. 18 Q Now when you say standard material, who supplies the 19 standard material for chemists? 20 A That depends. The best, most reliable and most 21 supportable standards are supplied for instance by 22 the National Bureau of Standards and the best 23 analyses would be based on a standard obtained from WATER PCB-SD0000028737 1 the National Bureau of Standards. 12 2 In reality the standards are obtained from 3 whatever source is available. There are several 4 companies in the United States which supply standards 5 of various materials for purchase. In the case of an 6 industrial concern like Monsanto, the standards are 7 often supplied from the plant or from the research 8 laboratory which has generated that particular 9 material for investigation. So there are actually 10 several sources. 11 Q Who supplies standards for PCBs? 12 THE WITNESS: Today? 13 MR. KARAGANIS: Today. 14 A There's, the Analabs Corporation, which is a division 15 of the Foxborough Company is one company. Ultra 16 Scientific I think is another. There are several 17 companies today which supply for purchase. There are 18 also some standards available from the United States 19 EPA. 20 Q Are those standards with respect to PCBs, are those 21 by product line or the particular description that 22 Monsanto used for a given Aroclor like 1016? 23 A Some of them are available as Monsanto, WATER PCB-SD0000028738 13 1 representative of Monsanto products. Some of them 2 are available as single congeners of PCB; in other 3 words, one particular PCB compound. 4 Q Let's talk about what you mean by congeners and 5 isomers. 6 A All right. 7 Q What is a congener? 8 A Again let's use PCB as an example. 9 MR. KARAGANIS: All right. 10 A PCBs are as a generic term for a large group of 11 materials consisting of a chlorine, one or more 12 chlorine atoms on a biphenyl molecule. 13 In the case of PCBs there are 209 possible ways 14 to put 1 to 10 chlorine atoms on the biphenyl 15 molecule. Each of these individual compounds is 16 termed a congener. So there are 209 PCB congeners. 17 The next step of classification is to look at 18 how many chlorines are on the given molecule so we 19 can talk about a monochlorobiphenyl containing one 20 chlorine atom on the biphenyl molecule. Skipping up 21 to say 5 we talk about pentachlorobiphenyIs as those 2 2 congeners which have 5 chlorine atoms on the 23 molecule. This type of grouping where we're looking WATER PCB-SD0000028739 14 1 at chlorine content either one, 2, 3 up to 10 2 chlorines per molecule are called variously homologs 3 or congener classes. 4 Within each of these homologs or congener 5 classes, there are a number of different congeners. 6 For instance, in the simplest case if we look at 7 monochlorobiphenyl there are 3 possible ways to put 8 one chlorine on the biphenyl molecule and obtain 9 unique compounds. So each of those ways of putting a 10 single chlorine on the biphenyl molecule would 11 represent one of the isomers. So there are 3 isomers 12 of monochlorobiphenyl. 13 Q Let me just stop at step 2. The groups or classes 14 that characterize how many chlorines can be on the 15 molecule, on the biphenyl molecule, you indicated 16 those are called either homologs or congener classes? 17 A That's correct. 18 Q How many homologs are there? 19 A For PCB there are 10. 20 Q So meaning that there can be up to 10 chlorine atoms; 21 is that right? 22 A That's correct. 23 Q So within the category of 1 through 10 then as you WATER PCB-SD0000028740 1 indicated a monochlorobiphenyl? 15 2 A Monochlorobiphenyl. 3 Q For monochlorobiphenyl, there are 3 possible 4 variations of monochlorobiphenyl in terms of the 5 position of the chlorine atom; is that right? 6 A That's right. 7 Q And those 3 variations are called isomers? 8 A That's correct. 9 Q KoW'many possible isomers are there? 10 A Well, that depends on how many chlorines there are on 11 the ring. There are 3 possible isomers of 12 monochlorobiphenyl. I think it skips up to 12 13 possible combinations for trichlorobiphenyl 14 Q Of the total 10 homologs how many total isomers? 15 A There are 209. But it's not an appropriate term to 16 talk about 209 isomers of PCB. 17 You can only talk about isomers of the various 18 congener classes. I try to be picky on this and I'm 19 probably overly picky, but there are 209 congeners 20 which are the sum of all the isomers of all the 21 congener classes. I'm sorry about that. But, to get 22 it straight makes it easier in the long run. 23 Q With respect to a PCB compound such as Aroclor 1242, WATER PCB-SD0000028741 16 1 would one speak of that compound being made up of a 2 number of different isomers or a number of different 3 congeners or both? 4 A You could speak of it either way. 5 Q So how would you describe that, would it be fair to 6 say 1242 has different percentages of the various 7 homologs ? 8 A It has, yes, it has different percentages of the 9 various homologs or the various congeners or the 10 various isomers depending on what you want to focus 11 on . 12 Q In layman's terms I think I can understand the 13 description of various homologs like 14 trichlorobiphenyl or pentachlorobiphenyl. 15 A All right. 16 Q Kow would you describe differentially the issue of 17 congeners or isomers? 18 A Well, congeners are basically the simplest term. A 19 congener is simply one of the 209 possible compounds 20 that could be called or are called a PCB. So it's 21 just if we're talking.about a single polychlorinated 22 biphenyl with a given number of chiorobipheny1s on 23 the ring that is a single congener. Each PCB WATER PCB-SD0000028742 17 1 mixture, for example Aroclor 1242, would contain a 2 given amount of that single given congener. 3 Q All right. 4 A All right. That congener is then a member of a 5 homolog or a congener class depending on how many 6 atoms, chlorine atoms are on the biphenyl ring. It 7 also represents a single isomer of the possible 8 arrangement of that number of chlorines on the ring. 9 Let's take a very simple but probably doesn't 10 occur case. Let's look at a pentachlorobipheny1 11 which has all 5 chlorines on a single ring. That 12 would be called 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 pentachlorobiphenyl. 13 So we're looking at a biphenyl molecule which has 5 14 chlorines all in one of the biphenyl rings. 15 Okay, that is one of the possible congeners of 16 the total class of PCBs. It is also one of the, I 17 think there are 46, possible pentachlorobiphenyl 18 isomers. It is a pentachlorobiphenyl, so it belongs 19 to that congener class or that homolog, and it is one 20 of 46 possible ways to put 5 chlorines on those 2 21 rings. 22 Q Would it be fair to say then as a layman that the 23 term isomer is used within the homolog class? WATER PCB-SD0000028743 1 A Yes, that is strictly correct. 18 2 Q Whereas the term congener is used across the entire 3 spectrum? 4 A That is exactly right. 5 Q I'm just trying to get the family straight, that's 6 all . 7 A That's right. The next guy will tell you something 8 different. 9 Q You mentioned that your work for the first 2 and a 10 half years was refining or making more precise the 11 quantification of PCBs? 12 A That's correct. 13 Q Kow does one use the gas chromatograph to determine 14 quantity? 15 A Well, as we look at the output, the actual 16 chromatogram as the output of gas chromatograph, we 17 can look at various measures of the sizes of the 18 peaks. We can look at the height of the peak or the 19 area under the peak. And both of those to a very 20 high degree represent a quantitative measure of the 21 amount of that material which has been detected. 22 Q So that would it be fair to say the output from the 23 chromatograph, the diagram, the shape of the diagram, WATER PCB-SD0000028744 19 1 the shape of the plot gives you the identity of the 2 compound; and the area under the peak be it either in 3 height or in area gives you an estimation of the 4 quantity? 5 A That's correct. 6 Q With respect to that. What work did you do on making 7 quantification more precise, what was the - 8 A Well, the actual final step of the measurement is in 9 fact the simplest of the many steps that go into 10 doing a PCB analysis. 11 If you start with a sample for instance of 12 water, you cannot take the water and take a sample of 13 that water and inject it into the chromatograph. 14 There are several reasons for that. Number one, 15 water is not particularly compatible with the 16 instrumentation. 17 The second reason is that in general in a water 18 sample the concentration of PCBs as they exist in 19 that water sample is much too small to be detected by 20 the detector on the instrument. And there are also 21 likely to be a wide variety of other chemical 22 compounds in that water sample which would interfere 23 or cause a spurious signal in the analysis for the WATER PCB-SD0000028745 1 PCBS . 20 2 So the steps in doing an analysis, the first 3 step is to get the PCBs into a form which is 4 compatible with the gas chromatograph and get them in 5 a more concentrated form so they can in fact be 6 detected by the instrument and to do whatever is 7 necessary to remove these other interfering 8 compounds. 9 In fact these steps are the most important in 10 any PCB analysis. So this is where a large part of 11 the research is done is in how to make the PCBs the 12 only compound that the instrument is looking at at a 13 particular time, so you're more confident in both 14 your quantitative and your quantitative results. 15 Q What do you do when you prepare a water sample? 16 A First step is generally, let's assume it's a dirty 17 water, a very murky cloudy muddy water sample. You 18 might for instance filter the sample to remove 19 particulate material. 20 The next step would be to extract the water 21 sample. This is done by adding some sort of organic 22 solvent to the water, material which is not soluble 23 in water and will form 2 phases with the water. This WATER PCB-SD0000028746 21 1 type, a good analogy is an oil and vinegar salad 2 dressing. If you will look at that salad dressing 3 that has set in the refrigerator for several days, 4 there are 2 separate phases there's a liquid, the 5 vinegar phase, and the vegetable oil phase. 6 If you shake it up, you get what looks to be a 7 homogenous mixture. And if you let then it settle in 8 the refrigerator for a couple hours, you will be back 9 to two phases. 10 We do the same thing with a water sample. We 11 take the water sample, we add an organic solvent, for 12 instance hexane is often used. You get 2 phases. 13 You shake the sample vigorously for some period of 14 time. The PCBs being organic molecules themselves 15 would prefer to be dissolved in hexane rather than 16 water. So they essentially transfer themselves from 17 the water phase to the oil phase. 18 You let the sample settle. You get your upper 19 and lower layer. You throw away the water phase 20 which no longer contains the PCBs. Take the hexane 21 phase and typically concentrate that sample by 22 evaporation. 23 There are several ways to do this. But WATER PCB-SD0000028747 22 1 basically just you reduce the volume of the organic 2 or the hexane phase to a very small amount. For 3 instance, you might start with a liter of water which 4 is about a quart. Shake that up with probably a 5 tenth of a quart or tenth of a liter of hexane and 6 then evaporate that hexane to say, for instance, one 7 milliliter. 8 So in effect you have not only removed the PCBs 9 from the water and put them in a solvent they like 10 but you have concentrated the PCB by a factor of one 11 thousand. So if you started out with a sample 12 containing one part per billion PCB, you now have the 13 hexane solution containing a thousand parts per 14 billion PCBs. 15 Q How do you prevent the PCBs from volatilizing? 16 A The PCBs compared to the hexane are very non-volatile 17 and you use relatively gentle evaporation conditions. 18 You don't just stick it under a flame and boil it as 19 fast as you can. You use very gentle evaporation 20 conditions. 21 Q Having concentrated, what's the next step? 22 A After that typically we go through some sort of clean 23 up phase. There are several available. The choice WATER PCB-SD0000028748 23 1 is often dependent on the particular sample. But 2 some of the choices are, for instance, to run this 3 hexane solution of PCBs through a column containing, 4 for instance, activated silica, which is a very sandy 5 like material. It has on its surface sites which 6 adsorbed different kinds of chemical compounds, but 7 they will not typically adsorb PCBs. 8 So we could run the PCBs through the silica 9 column wh^ch would remove materials like phenols 10 which have some sort of active site on the molecule. 11 If we know there's a lot of organic material present, 12 we may shake the hexane up with something like 13 sulfuric acid which would destroy a great number of 14 organic molecules but will not destroy PCBs. Those 15 are the types of things we do. We often run it 16 through a material which removes the little bit of 17 water that's in the hexane, leaving it a more pure 18 hexane solution of PCBs. 19 Q These's the purpose of that is to destroy or remove 20 interfering chemicals? 21 A That's correct. 22 Q How does this chemical interfere when they get on the 7 23 gas chromatograph? WATER PCB-SD0000028749 24 1 A He you can imagine there are millions of chemical 2 compounds. There are certainly thousands or tens of 3 thousands of materials which would respond to an 4 electron capture detector and pass through a GC. If 5 you look at a typical GC trace, it may represent 20 6 minutes of elution and there are hundreds or 7 thousands of materials which would come through the 8 chromatograph in the same time period that the PCBs 9 would. 10 So that in fact instead of seeing peaks only 11 representing PCBs in your chromatogram you would get 12 peaks from a wide variety of different materials that 13 are similar enough to PCBs that they would respond to 14 the detector. 15 Q So you might get a false positive? 16 A That's correct. Absolutely. Some of the pesticides, 17 for instance DDT are very similar to PCBs on a first 18 approximation basis and they would elute under the 19 same conditions as the PCBs. 20 Q What do you use to clean up the pesticides, for 21 example? 22 A The large silica column that I talked about does 23 retain compounds in a similar way to a gas WATER PCB-SD0000028750 25 1 chromatograph but it's actually in the liquid phase 2 so that you can by carefully monitoring of how much 3 material you're collecting at the bottom of the 4 column separate PCBs from things like pesticides. 5 Q So having cleaned up the sample, then what do you do? 6 A Then typically, you reconcentrate it. Usually most 7 of these types of clean up you have added more hexane 8 to the system for one reason or another. 9 The next phase would be to concentrate it back 10 to whatever your target level was, typically one 11 milliliter or whatever you decided you needed to 12 concentrate the sample so that you now have a known 13 volume of a hexane solution of your sample. 14 Q Why would you have added more hexane? 15 A Well, PCBs tend to adsorb to glass rather than - 16 especially in water, but even from a hexane solution. 17 So typically if you were doing this in a glass 18 system, you would want to take a little bit of hexane 19 and wash the glass after you were done with your 20 clean up to be sure all the PCBs were transferred to 21 the next step. 22 Going through the silica column, you put the 23 PCBs on top of the column and elute them through WATER PCB-SD0000028751 26 1 column with more hexane so the hexane or whatever 2 solvent you're using is being continually added in 3 small amounts throughout the process. 4 Q To make sure it comes off the silica, the PCBs? 5 A That's right. 6 Q So you end -- 7 A So then you go through a final concentration stage, 8 then it's ready for gas chromatography. 9 Q And then that final concentration if we started out 10 with a quart sample you indicated or a liter sample, 11 what is the concentration typically fed into the gas 12 chromatograph? 13 A Well, it depends on the detector. Usually if your 14 using an electron capture detector, which is one, you 15 would like to have a final concentration in the 16 solution of about a part per million give or take 10. 17 So you like to have a final solution which contains a 18 tenth to 10 parts per million of PCBs. 19 Q How do you know you have that? 20 A In general, if you're starting out blind, you do not 21 know. In fact in many cases you will inject a sample 22 and you will either find that you have no signal 23 whatsoever that represents PCBs, in which case you WATER PCB-SD0000028752 27 1 would have to concentrate the sample more or you may 2 find you have peaks that are so large that they go 3 off the scale of the chromatograph and you have to 4 dilute the sample or add more hexane back to it to 5 get it into the range you want to analyze. 6 Q So if you have a blind sample, you essentially do a 7 trial and error method to get the right influent 8 concentration? 9 A That's right. It's seldom you have no prior 10 knowledge; but if you had no prior knowledge, it is a 11 trial and error. 12 Q Then how do you deal with quantity? 13 A Okay. The quantity goes back to the standard we 14 talked about earlier. The simplest way and easiest 15 to see way to do the quantitation is to run a series 16 of standards containing different amounts of the 17 polychlorinated biphenyls. 18 So, for instance, you might run a standard 19 containing a tenth of a part per million, 5 tenths of 20 a part per million, one part per million and 5 parts 21 per million. You would then measure the response 22 generated by each of those standards and plot a graph 23 of signal intensity on the vertical axis versus WATER PCB-SD0000028753 28 1 concentration in the standard on the horizontal axis 2 and generate what is called a working curve. So that 3 you then have a plot of response versus 4 concentration. 5 You would then run your sample, by its intensity 6 determine where it falls on the curve and at that 7 intersection drop a perpendicular down to give you a 8 concentration in your final extract. Then that 9 concentration then would have to be adjusted for any 10 concentration or dilution you have done to the 11 original sample in order to get back to the 12 concentration of the original sample. 13 Q Now how do you deal with soil? 14 A Soil you would do typically the same type of 15 procedure. The main difference is in the first step 16 obviously although you can just shake a soil up with 17 organic solvent, the PCBs tend to be so tightly 18 adherent to the soil that you have to use some sort 19 of physical force to help the PCBs break away from 20 their soil matrix and be extracted into the hexane. 21 There are several ways to do this. One is to 22 use a ultrasonic instrument which is essentially a 23 grinder which uses ultrasound to generate a very high WATER PCB-SD0000028754 29 1 vibratory field in the sample so that PCBs are forced 2 to break away from the soil. 3 There's also another technique which is called a 4 Soxhlet extractor with the soil put in a little cup 5 and the solvent, again usually hexane or something 6 similar, is boiled and trickles down through the cup 7 for a period of 1 to 2 days slowly extracting the 8 PCBs from the soil. But it goes over such a long 9 period that you can do a fairly good job of 10 extracting the PCBs from the soil. 11 So typically just shaking the soil up with a 12 hexane solvent will not extract quantitative or a 13 high amount of PCB, you need to go to one of these 14 other techniques. After the PCBs have been 15 exstracted from the soil, the rest of the techniques, 16 the clean up and the analysis are the same. 17 Q How do you know you have gotten all the PCBs off the 18 soil ? 19 A Part of any good analytical technique is to do what 20 we call method development or method validation. So 21 in fact whether you're doing soil or water, you would 22 take what you hope to be a clean sample of soil or 23 clean sample, actually put PCBs into that sample by WATER PCB-SD0000028755 30 1 some means, and then perform your analysis and 2 measure how much you got out. So by comparing the 3 known amount that you put into the sample with the 4 amount you got out, you get a measure of how well 5 your technique is in fact recovering PCBs from the 6 matrix that you're interested in. '7 Q When you do a water sample, you say you filter it. 8 How do you filter it? 9 A If you decide you want to do a filtering, you 10 basically pour the sample through a funnel which has 11 a piece of filter paper or have what we call fritted 12 glass, a very fine glass, like mesh, to remove the 13 solid particles. It's a physical process much as 14 making coffee. 15 Q But the way you indicated, you have to do that in 16 order to run the gas chromatograph anyway, don't you? 17 A Well, no. Basically you would only use the filters 18 if you wanted to be sure you were only looking at the 19 water concentration versus any concentration of PCBs 20 or whatever analyte on the particles that might be in 21 that water. By the time you go through the 22 extraction and the clean up stages, that would remove 23 any particulates that might be there. In fact the WATER PCB-SD0000028756 31 1 extraction would generally remove all particulates in 2 and of itself. 3 Q The extraction being the shaking up? 4 A The shaking up with hexane. 5 Q When you say it will remove, it will bring in the 6 hexane phase? 7 A No. It leave it in the water phase. When you 8 discard the water phase, any of that particulate 9 matter will go. 10 Q When you're doing a water sample, how do you know 11 what's in the particulate matter with regard to PCBs? 12 A You don't unless you analyze the particulate matter 13 also, and typically that might be done if you're 14 interested in what percentage of PCBs were in the 15 water or in the particulate. You would filter it 16 through filter paper, collect the water for analysis. 17 Collect what was trapped on the filter paper for 18 analysis and do separate analyses on those the two 19 things. 20 Q If you didn't catch the filter paper, didn't catch 21 the solid on the water phase after do you the hexane 22 extraction, you would be only catching part of the 23 PCBs; is that right? WATER PCB-SD0000028757 1 A Yes. Clearly. 32 2 Q If you have this particulate matter on the filter 3 sample or in the settled material in the water phase, 4 you would go about testing for PCBs in the way 5 described for soil? 6 A Yes. 7 Q Now you mentioned that your first 2 years were 8 involved primarily in gas chromatography. Is that a 9 fair statement? 10 A Yes 11 Q Then you moved on to mass spectrometry? 12 A That's correct. 13 Q Would you describe mass spectrometry? 14 A Mass spectrometry is an analytical technique which is 15 most used for identifying chemical compounds, telling 16 what their chemical formula is and what their 17 structure is. 18 Basically it is a technique in which a chemical 19 compound is evaporated or put into the gas phase in 20 an instrument. These molecules are then struck by a 21 beam of electrons, more an energetic beam of 22 electrons, which essentially causes the molecule to 23 fly apart. It breaks it up. It's like hitting a WATER PCB-SD0000028758 33 1 clay pigeon with a bullet. It just shatters the 2 molecule. This shattering is very reproducible under 3 given instrumental conditions. 4 If you then cause these particles which are 5 charged and have electrical charge put on them in the 6 shattering process to go through either an electric 7 or a magnetic field, they are separated according to 8 their mass, actually their mass to charge ratio. But 9 in a first approximation they're separated according 10 to the mass of each fragment. 11 After they are separated, they are detected 12 either -- nowadays they're always detected 13 electrically. But in the earlier days they were 14 detected on photographic plates and either the 15 photographic or electrical pattern of these fragments 16 gives the identity of the molecule. Because, as I 17 said, under a given set of conditions the 18 fragmentation is consistent. So that you get what is 19 often called a fingerprint of a chemical compound, 20 which is its mass spectrum. A trained chemist by 21 looking at mass spectrum of a compound can identify 22 that compound as to its component, as to its make up. 23 It can often tell its actual chemical structure. WATER PCB-SD0000028759 34 1 Q Would it be fair to say the mass spectrometry uses a 2 standard similar, same kind of standard you talked 3 about with respect to gas chromatography? 4 A Yes. In mass spectrometry you would run a standard 5 first and compare the material you were looking for 6 to the standard. 7 Now that is not strictly true because mass 8 spectrometry can be what we call a priori 9 identification technique where if you know anything 10 about the chemical compound, don't have a standard 11 available, you can still make some prediction of 12 structure by looking at the mass spectrum because 13 there are ways, compounds, fragmentation in a mass 14 spectrometry, there are certain rules that are 15 generally followed so can you actually do a priori 16 structure identification from an unknown compound. 17 But in the types of analyses that we're 18 interested in here basically you were comparing the 19 mass spectrum of a known material to the mass 20 spectrum of the unknown material. 21 Q Why would you do mass spectrometry with respect to 22 PCBs as opposed to gas chromatography? 23 A The reason is that, as I said, the mass spectrum is WATER PCB-SD0000028760 35 1 essentially a fingerprint of a given chemical 2 compound. So that if you get a fingerprint which 3 matches, for instance, a trichlorobiphenyl, you know 4 you have a trichlorobiphenyl and not something like 5 like DDT or another pesticide or another chlorinated 6 material; it gives you a more positive identification 7 that the material that you're in fact analyzing is a 8 PCB. So it reduces the possibility for 9 interferences . 10 Q Now just as a matter, does this mean that you would 11 always recommend mass spectrometry and essentially 12 discard chromatography or is this - 13 A Let's backup one step. One of the important 14 developments in analytical chemistry during the early 15 and middle 70's has been the combination of gas 16 chromatography with mass spectrometry. So in fact 17 you use the mass spectrometer as a detector for the 18 gas chromatograph. 19 That then gives you a very powerful technique 20 for separating a mixture and identifying each 21 component of that mixture. PCBs as they were 22 manufactured were fairly consistent manufactured 23 products. In other words, every batch of Aroclor WATER PCB-SD0000028761 36 1 1242 looked pretty much the same if you did gas 2 chromatography. So if you had a reasonably fresh 3 sample of an Aroclor 1242 and ran a chromatograph, a 4 trained analytical chemist would recognize a 5 chromatogram of an Aroclor 1242 as that particular 6 material. 7 However, if Aroclor 1242 were for whatever 8 reason discharged in the environment and were allowed 9 to sit in that environment for some period of time, 10 its chromatographic pattern would change because of 11 the effects of the environment on the components of 12 Aroclor 1242. 13 It may no longer resemble Aroclor 1242 if you 14 look at a chromatogram. And so that you would be 15 then required to use mass spectrometry to make an 16 identification of that material. 17 Q What would it resemble? 18 A It's hard to say. I mean there's no easy answer to 19 that. The earlier components would tend to have 20 disappeared, so you would see a relative elevation of 21 the peak heights of the later eluting components. 22 But you cannot predict exactly what it's going to 23 look like. WATER PCB-SD0000028762 37 1 Q So you're saying that basically that for every 2 environmental sample of Aroclor, that is Aroclors 3 that have been released into the environments that 4 you ought to use mass spectrometry instead of gas 5 chromatography? 6 A I don't think would I go that far. I think the best 7 technology would be to use GC mass spectrometry. I 8 don't know and honestly don't believe that that would 9 necessarily be required. 10 If a laboratory were experienced and capable of 11 doing a lot of PCB analyses and had a lot of 12 experience I think could probably do very well with 13 gas chromatography with an electron capture 14 detection. But, in the best of all possible world 15 you would use GC mass spectrometry. 16 Q So it would be fair to say in layman's terms that gas 17 chromatography for environmentally occurring PCBs is 18 sufficient but isn't ideal? 19 A In most cases it would be sufficient. I wouldn't say 20 that its sufficient in all cases. 21 Q But in most cases? 22 A In some cases. 23 Q Now mass spectrometry you indicated that gas WATER PCB-SD0000028763 38 1 chromatography actually gives you in our terminology 2 for PCBs, it's really giving you the -- if we're 3 looking at our standard, it's giving you the curve or 4 the peak for a mixture of homologs; isn't that right? 5 A It's given you a series of peaks. If you look at, 6 for instance, Aroclor 1242, you don't get a single 7 peak, you get what we call an envelope of peaks or a 8 mountain range of peaks representing that particular 9 material. 10 Q Now does each peak represent a given hoitiolog? 11 A No. 12 Q It just happens to be the characteristic series of 13 peaks or what? 14 A Right. The peaks are generated by their interaction 15 with this phase, this liquid phase in the GC column, 16 and so each peak depending on how you do your 17 analyses could represent for instance 5 or 6 18 congeners which could be of different homologs. For 19 instance, you could get a peak which contained a 20 trichlorobiphenyl and 2 tetrachlorobiphenyls under a 21 single peak in what we call packed column 22 chromatography. 23 From the middle 70's developing even to this day WATER PCB-SD0000028764 39 1 there is a new or a definitive technique called 2 capillary column chromatography which does a much 3 better job of separating the congeners of, for 4 instance, PCBs. So that in a packed column you may 5 see 10 to 15 peaks from Aroclor 1242. On a capillary 6 column might see 50 or 60 peaks, representing the 7 components of Aroclor 1242. 8 Obviously you have done a much better job of 9 separating the components. Your chance of having a 10 single congener represented by each one of those 11 peaks is much better. But in fact even in the best 12 columns today you cannot separate all of the 13 congeners. 14 A single very sharp peak which looks like a 15 single congener may still contain 2 or 3 or 4 or more 16 PCBs congeners. They may be of different homolog 17 classes. They may be tetrachlorobiphenyl, 18 pentachlorobiphenyl that acts the same time under the 19 best conditions today. So it's a very complicated 20 and still evolving field. 21 Q The mass spectrometry spectrum that you get is that 22 again of multiple congeners? 23 A The mass spectrum when attached to a gas WATER PCB-SD0000028765 40 1 chromatograph is essentially looking at a time cut of 2 the chromatography. So if there are 2 congeners or 2 3 representatives of 2 homolog classes coming out of 4 the gas chromatograph at the same time, the mass 5 spectrum will be a mixture of the mass spectra of 6 those 2 materials. 7 Q So let me go back a minute. The mass spectrometer is 8 used on the output from the column of the gas 9 chromatograph? 10 A Yes. It's looking at what is coming out of of the 11 column. 12 Q So it's not looking at the raw material, it's looking 13 at the effluent from the column? 14 A Yes . 15 Q Over a time series? 16 A That's correct. 17 Q You mentioned that you then moved into a group 18 dealing with mass spectrometry. Was that also 19 involving PCB? 20 A We did some PCB work, yes. The original group I was 21 in continued to do the environmental studies. But 22 did not have the access to the mass spectrometer. So 23 if there were samples which required mass WATER PCB-SD0000028766 1 spectrometry, I would do those samples. 41 2 Q So the original group was continuing in examining 3 environmental samples of PCBs using gas 4 chromatography exclusively; is that right? 5 A That's correct. 6 Q How long were you in this group that dealt with mass 7 spectrometry? 8 A Till 1978. 9 Q Was this group, you were not focusing on PCBs in this 10 group, you were just periodically providing a service 11 to the PCB group; is that right? 12 A That's correct. Exactly correct. 13 Q And then from '78 to '81 you're listed as research 14 group leader, environmental analysis. 15 What does that mean? 16 A At that point the simplest way to look at it is the 17 group that was original doing the PCB analyses and 18 Applied Sciences was split off into a separate 19 section call Environmental Sciences. 20 So we now had 2 large groups, an Applied 21 Sciences and an Environmental Sciences group. 22 When the Environmental Sciences group was 23 formed, I became a group leader in the Environmental WATER PCB-SD0000028767 1 Analysis section of that group. 42 2 Q And what were your duties? 3 A Primarily we were doing analytical chemistry relating 4 to environmental studies of a wide variety of 5 compounds. By this time Monsanto had been out of the 6 PCB business about 2 years. So we had less and less 7 interest in PCBs, but there was still some PCB work 8 involved. 9 Q What was the work that you did on PCBs in that group? 10 A Well, most of it was involved in what was at that 11 time a newly evolving area of concern which was 12 called incidental generation of PCBs. Cases where 13 PCBs were made in chemical processes where they were 14 not expected to be made. 15 And so we undertook a wide program to check all 16 of the Monsanto process and products which under any 17 possible conceivable mechanism PCBs could be formed 18 to see if in fact we measured PCBs in those products. 19 We also occasionally looked at some 20 environmental samples to see if PCBs were present. 21 Samples from plants or something like that where they 22 were concerned about the presence of PCBs. In an oil 23 sample or something like that. WATER PCB-SD0000028768 43 1 Those were the 2 main areas , spot checks of a 2 variety of samples for PCBs and involvement in the 3 incidental problem. 4 Q Then from '81 to '85 you were senior research 5 specialist in mass spectrometry; is that correct? 6 A That's correct. 7 Q What does that mean. What does those duties involve? 8 A Well, that was a move to our corporate analytical 9 group. And in that group I did exclusively mass 10 spectrometry on anything within the company that 11 involved a mass spectrometry question. 12 In fact I had essentially no involvement with 13 PCBs during this time as far as actual analyses were 14 concerned. 15 Q It says from May of '85 to September of '86 you 16 became Product and Environmental Safety Manager. 17 A That's correct. 18 Q Would you describe what that means? 19 A Well, in about 1980 a person was identified within 20 Monsanto to act as a focal point for questions that 21 were coming into Monsanto relating primary to PCBs. 22 This person had functioned as a single unit for a 23 period of approximately 4 to 5 years. And there was WATER PCB-SD0000028769 44 1 enough questions still coming into Monsanto, concerns 2 about PCBs that they decided that person could use 3 some help. And I was identified as the person to 4 help them. 5 Q So, who was this person? 6 A John Craddock. 7 Q You were assigned as his assistant? 8 A .That's basically correct. 9 Q You have the title of product and environmental 10 safety manager? 11 A That's correct. 12 Q What was his title? 13 A Probably product and environmental safety director? 14 Makes sense, right? 15 Q How long did you serve in that role? 16 A Till September of '86. So this would have been about 17 a year and a half. 18 Q Was he director of product and environmental safety 19 throughout that period? 20 A Yes. 21 Q And then since September of '86? 22 A Right. I have taken a job as manager of 23 environmental technical support, which is WATER PCB-SD0000028770 45 1 essentially, I manage a group within the same area 2 that John Craddock is actually, but I have a little 3 more wide involvement with chemicals besides PCBs. 4 And basically we serve as a resource within the 5 corporation for technical information on chemicals 6 that are of concern for one reason or another. 7 Q When you worked for Craddock, what department is 8 Craddock in? 9 A Part of the environmental policy staff, corporate 10 environmental policy staff. 11 Q And how is that organized? If we were to look at 12 flow chart of Monsanto organization, how is Monsanto 13 currently organized and how does the corporate 14 environmental staff fit into the scheme? 15 A In the broadest cut Monsanto is divided into 16 operating companies. We have a chemical company. We 17 have agricultural products company. We have an 18 electronic materials company. 19 There are other smaller groups. Searle 20 Pharmaceuticals is kind of off to the side as a 21 wholly owned subsidiary. But each of those companies 22 then has responsibility for their own operations. 23 There are certain concerns which are company WATER PCB-SD0000028771 46 1 wide and those are organized under a corporate 2 envelope. We operate under that corporate envelope. 3 And so we are part of a corporate staff function 4 actually. 5 Q Let's just deal with the corporate envelope meaning 6 the parent company? 7 A Well, yes. I guess that's basically one way to look 8 at it. It's not really, it's not operated as the 9 separate company. It's just kind of, as I say, a 10 cover all for functions which require a corporate 11 wide focus. For instance environmental policy, 12 accounting, the law department, most of that is a 13 corporate department. A typical corporation, finance 14 and things like that. 15 Q Let's deal with that. When you stay typical 16 corporation, at corporate headquarters is this where 17 you're located? 18 A Yes , I am . 19 Q Who is the head of the corporate environmental staff? 20 A Okay. I guess the head is Mr. Corbett, Hal Corbett. 21 Q Harold is that? 2 2 A I think it is. 23 Q C-o-r-b-e-t-t? WATER PCB-SD0000028772 1 A Correct. 47 2 He's like, he's corporate vice-president or 3 executive vice-president under something. And I 4 assume you're interested in my organization. So 5 going down -- 6 Q Down under him? 7 A Under him is a guy named Mr. Jim Senger. 8 Q What's his title? 9 A He's vice-president of the EPS, Environmental Policy 10 Staff. 11 Q All right. 12 A Then reporting to him are several regulatory affairs 13 directors. There are actually 3 of them. They have 14 responsibility in managing specific functions or 15 specific interactions with the environmental laws on 16 a federal level. 17 Do you want their names? 18 MR. KARAGANIS: Yes. 19 A Ron Condray has responsible for TSCA. And Charles 20 Malloch has responsibility for air and water issues. 21 Q Okay. 22 A And Dennis Reddington, that's a good question. RCRA 23 concerns. Also representing or reporting to Mr. WATER PCB-SD0000028773 48 1 Senger are the head of the medical department, Barry 2 Freidlander. 3 Q Who else? 4 A Okay. And then the other one is my supervisor which 5 is Bill McCarville. 6 Q And he heads what group? 7 A Environmental Affairs. 8 Q And within Environmental Affairs how many people are 9 we talking about? 10 A Okay. We have me, and John Craddock, and Jim Wilson. 11 Q Anybody else? 12 A And Sherwin Malt. 13 Q Sherwin Maid? 14 A Malt, M-a-l-t. Those are the people I -15 Q Is Craddock still involved with PCBs? 16 A Yes, he is. 17 Q And you provide as you indicated technical support 18 across the corporation? 19 A That's correct. 20 Q What does Wilson do? 21 A Basically he's got a P.R. type job. He's director of 22 technical communications or something. Represents us 23 on several industry wide committees. WATER PCB-SD0000028774 1 Q How about Malt? 49 2 A Malt is an M.D. who basically provides a medical 3 outlook on some of the questions that our group 4 becomes involved with. 5 Q When you worked with Craddock and currently in 6 Craddock's office, how are the files maintained for 7 PCBs ? 8 A Which files? I mean John obviously has files. He 9 does a lot of things. I mean John has a personal set 10 of files. 11 Q And did you have a personal set of files when you 12 were -- 13 A When I was working for John, we used a joint set. 14 Q So kind of an office set? 15 A Yes. 16 Q How extensive were the files? 17 A It was about, I guess 2 or 3 file cabinets. 18 Q . Going up the line, you mentioned that you report to 19 McCarville. How do you spell that? 20 A M-c-C-a-r-v-i-l-l-e. 21 Q And then he reports to Senger. S-e-n-g-e-r? 22 A Correct. 23 Q Who reports to Corbett? WATER PCB-SD0000028775 1 A Correct. 2 Q And who does Corbett report to? 50 3 A I really don't know the answer to that. I would 4 guess either to Harbison or Mahoney. Harbison is the 5 COO and Mahoney is the CEO. I don't know which one 6 he directly reports to, but I guess he reports to one 7 of them. 8 MR. KARAGANIS: Would you mark this 9 document as 618. 10 (Bloomington Deposition Exhibit 618 was marked 11 for identification.) 12 Q Doctor Kaley, directing your attention to what has 13 been marked as Bloomington exhibit 618, which 14 purports to be a document entitled Monsanto's Second 15 Supplemental Response to Plaintiffs' Interrogatory As 16 To Expert Witnesses. 17 Are you familiar with that document? 18 A Yes, I have seen it. 19 Q Did you assist in its preparation? 20 A Yes, I did. 21 Q Doctor, before we get into that, you mentioned that 22 in '73 to 75 you were doing gas chromatography on 23 PCBs ? WATER PCB-SD0000028776 1 A Correct. 51 2 Q And you had occasion to give a paper on the 3 characterization of PCBs at a conference in Chicago? 4 A I was coauthor on the paper. I did not deliver the 5 paper. 6 Q Who delivered it? 7 A Jim Mieure. 8 Q What were the circumstances, factual circumstances on 9 preparation of that paper? What do you remember 10 about, what was the - 11 A Well, basically I think the EPA, I believe, was 12 organizing a conference in Chicago to describe what 13 was known about PCBs in that time period. Jim Mieure 14 or somebody within Monsanto was asked to give 15 basically what was an introductory paper describing 16 what Monsanto knew about PCBs at the time, their . 17 physical properties, their environmental behavior and 18 things like that. 19 Jim Mieure had primary responsibility for 20 writing and delivering that paper. My name was on it 21 basically because I had done a significant portion of 22 the work that went into generating the tables and 23 things like that. WATER PCB-SD0000028777 52 1 Q When you came in '73, what was the position of 2 Monsanto with respect to the continued sale and 3 distribution of PCBs? 4 A When I came, Monsanto I guess 3 to 4 years before had 5 become aware of the environmental persistence of some 6 components of PCBs. 7 Prior to my arriving there they had discontinued 8 several applications and several product lines for 9 PCBs in areas where they thought that they had a good 10 chance of being discharged into the environment. 11 They had limited sales to what they termed closed 12 systems, basically electrical uses. There was an 13 active program to develop environmentally compatible 14 PCB products to replace some of those which had some 15 undesirable characteristics in the environment. 16 Q So would it be fair to say that as to some 17 applications they stopped selling because they feared 18 that PCBs when used would get out into the 19 environment? 20 A Well, to be perfectly honest, by the time I got there 21 they had realized that some applications for which 22 PCBs were being used were getting into the 23 environment. WATER PCB-SD0000028778 53 1 Q So they stopped those sales to those applications? 2 A That's correct. 3 Q Then there were other applications for which they 4 felt, you called them closed systems where PCBs would 5 not get out into the environment? 6 A Where they felt systems would be controlled such that 7 environmental discharges would be minimized at least. 8 Q And how did they proceed to control them? 9 THE WITNESS: To control the - 10 MR. KARAGANIS: Environmental discharges. 11 A Well, as far as I know, you know, the extent of my 12 knowledge is they limited sales to essentially 13 electrical manufacturers for capacitors and 14 transformers. 15 Q And how did they make sure that the electrical 16 capacitor manufacturers minimized discharges at their 17 facilities? 18 A I have no idea. You know, I know there was some 19 interaction with some of our customers in a variety 20 of ways, but I have no knowledge of the specific 21 actions that were taken with the customers 22 particularly. 23 Q What do you know with respect to -- WATER PCB-SD0000028779 54 1 A Basically what I know is the outgrowth of my work as 2 an analytical chemist. I interacted with analytical 3 chemists, for instance, from both Westinghouse and 4 General Electric, working with them to try to bring 5 their analytical capabilities up to the level that 6 ours were. We felt we had a very good analytical lab 7 for PCB analyses and were willing to work with those 8 customers with their analytical chemists to bring 9 their labs up to the ability to do more accurate 10 analysis. 11 Q I'm asking you a more specific question. If Monsanto 12 was continuing to sell to General Electric and 13 Westinghouse, how did Monsanto assure itself that 14 General Electric and Westinghouse weren't dumping the 15 PCB s ? 16 A I don't know the answer to that question. 17 Q What precipitated the decision, to your knowledge, to 18 stop selling PCBs? 19 THE WITNESS: To my knowledge -- to stop 20 selling PCBs altogether? 21 MR. KARAGANIS: Yes. 22 A Basically the fact that there was clearly regulatory 23 pressure developing. And the fact that in spite of WATER PCB-SD0000028780 55 1 our best efforts, it did the not appear that PCBs 2 were a viable product because of environmental 3 problems. 4 Q So despite the fact Monsanto was exercising its best 5 efforts PCBs were still getting out into the 6 environment; is that right? 7 A I don't know if they were still getting out into the 8 environment, but there was still regulatory pressure 9 to reduce their presence in the environment. 10 Q Would it be fair to say Monsanto's goal up until the 11 decision to stop selling PCBs was to restrict their 12 release into the environment? 13 A I think that was one of the purposes of the program. 14 I think there was a 2 phase was to restrict the 15 release to the environment and to develop more 16 environmental compatible products. 17 Q Until more environmentally compatible products were 18 developed -- 19 A Well, including more environmental compatible PCBs, 20 not excluding PCBs from the development of more 21 environmentally compatible products. 22 Q It says on exhibit 618 that you're expected to 23 testify as to the composition and physical properties WATER PCB-SD0000028781 1 of the Aroclor mixtures of PCBs. 56 2 What is it you expect to testify as to that 3 topic ? 4 A Basically what is known both from Monsanto work and 5 from the literature on primarily the homolog or 6 congener class composition of the materials, how they 7 differed in their gross chemical make up. 8 Q Please describe what it is you will testify to on 9 that subject. 10 A Well, basically that the Aroclor series of products 11 were formed by the direct chlorination of biphenyl in 12 the process at our plant. The number following the 13 Aroclor trademark designation designated in general 14 the percentage of chlorine by weight in those 15 compounds. 16 So, for example, Aroclor 1221 contained 21 17 percent chlorine by weight. Aroclor 1242 contained 18 42 percent chlorine by weight, et cetera. 19 An exception to this was Aroclor 1016, which 20 although given the Aroclor trade name, that 1016 21 number actually came from a research number given 22 that compound when it was under experimental 23 development. It actually contains about 41 percent WATER PCB-SD0000028782 57 1 chlorine by weight. And as the weight of the 2 chlorine content of the materials came up, that by 3 implication that means there were more chlorines on 4 the average on a given biphenyl molecule; 1221 was 5 primary made up of monochlorobiphenyls, biphenyls 6 with 1 or 2 chlorines on the molecule. Aroclor 1242 7 was primarily tri- and tetrachlorobiphenyl. Aroclor 8 1254 was primarily pentachlorobiphenyls and 9 hexachlorobiphenyIs. And that many of the 10 characteristics of each of those separate products is 11 in fact determined by not only the average chlorine 12 content but by the specific congener make up of those 13 materials . 14 Q Actually when you have been using the words tetra and 15 tri's, you have been referring to the terminology 16 homologs; is that correct? 17 A That's correct. 18 MR. FRUEHWALD: He used congener classes 19 to be the same as homologs. So I think he's been 20 saying congener classes. 21 Q Just so I get my terminology - 22 A I like congener classes. Everybody else likes 23 homologs and I don't. So I -- WATER PCB-SD0000028783 58 1 Q When you say congener classes, you mean homologs; is 2 that right? 3 I mean congener classes. Other people call them 4 homologs. 5 MR . KARAGANIS : Okay. 6 MR . FRUEHWALD : I think in terms of 7 specific testimony to be given here, basically we're 8 probably going to have with him a chart similar to 9 the one that appears here which will define the 10 percentage breakdown of the various products and so 11 to be more specific to what he said generally. But 12 this type of a chart would presumably be presented or 13 at least selections from it to explain the 14 distribution. 15 MR. KARAGANIS: Let's mark that as an 16 exhibit. Would you mark has 619, please. 17 (Bloomington Deposition Exhibit 619 was marked 18 for identification.) 19 Q Doctor Kaley, I show you was has been marked as 20 Deposition Exhibit 619, which is a chart showing I 21 take it the molecular composition; is that right? 22 A Yes, the approximate molecular composition. 23 Q Of the Aroclor. Where is that chart from? WATER PCB-SD0000028784 59 1 A It's from a volume one of a series of books called 2 PCBs and The Environment. 3 Q And who is that series published by? 4 A It's published by CRC Chemical Rubber Company. 5 Q Did you have a hand in putting that chart together? 6 A Not in its present form, no. Although some of the 7 data in it is Monsanto data, none of which I probably 8 had a direct hand in putting together. Some of the 9 data is the same as that presented in the Mieure 10 paper we discussed earlier presented at the Chicago 11 conf erence . 12 Q With other material did you bring with you today? 13 Are those exhibits that your planning on using? 14 A No, sir. These are materials which were reviewed 15 primarily relating to soil and biodegradation studies 16 of PCB . - 17 Q May I examine those? 18 A Certainly. 19 Q Okay, we'll mark these later. Now you've mentioned 20 as to the composition the fact that you will be 21 testifying as to molecular composition, the 22 percentage of chlorine, which congener classes 23 various products contain; is that correct? WATER PCB-SD0000028785 1 A That's correct. 60 2 Q Is there anything else about the composition and 3 physical properties that you will be testifying to? 4 A Well, physical properties certainly, depending on 5 what my actual testimony is required to do. We will 6 be prepared to talk about such things as the 7 solubility of the various Aroclor products and how 8 that relates to their environmental behavior. 9 Q Well, tell me what you mean by the solubility of the 10 various products. 11 A Okay. Solubility basically is a measure of the 12 tendency of the material to dissolve in water, 13 specifically water. 14 As it turns out polychlorinated biphenyls are 15 quite insoluble in water. Aroclor 1242, for 16 instance, appears to have a solubility of 17 approximately 200 parts per billion in a water 18 solution. This ability to dissolve in water will 19 have some effect on how the PCBs behave in the 20 environment. 21 Q If I have got, let's ask about 1242 in its pure 22 state. Is it a liquid or solid? 23 A It's a liquid. WATER PCB-SD0000028786 61 1 Q And is what you're saying to me is if I pour a vial 2 of liquid PCBs into a glass of water that only 200 3 parts per billion of the PCBs will dissolve in water? 4 A If you perform the experiment in the way you describe 5 it, a significantly lower amount of PCBs than you 6 describe, than 200 parts per billion, will dissolve. 7 The 200 parts per billion represents a number 8 which is a concerted attempt to get the most PCBs 9 possible to dissolve and involves a long-term shaking 10 process, things like that. 11 Just putting PCBs and water together, I don't 12 know what the number would be, but it would be a lot 13 lower than 200 parts per billion. 14 Q Do you have any experimental data as to what it is? 15 A No. 16 Q In terms of the relation of things, 200 parts per 17 billion is the maximum is what you're saying of PCBs 18 that can dissolve in water; is this right? 19 A That's the number which is given for that maximum, 20 typically. 21 Q Is that based on test data? 22 A I have done some of that testing. It's also based on 23 other literature that's available. WATER PCB-SD0000028787 62 1 Q What happens to the rest of the PCBs in our little 2 experiment ? 3 A In your little experiments they would sink to the 4 bottom of the glass and sit there. 5 Q In a liquid phase? 6 A In a liquid, yes. 7 Q What do you call that phase? It's liquid, but it's 8 not water. What do you call that, is there a term 9 given? 10 A It's basically a 2 phase system. 11 Q Both phases are liquid; are they not? 12 A Yes. It's back to the oil and vinegar scenario. 13 Q Now is there a difference solubility for 1016 than 14 for 1242? 15 A The numbers reported are very, very close. You would 16 not expect a very large difference. And the 17 experimental error in the experiments is probably 18 greater than the actual difference. You would expect 19 about a 200 parts per billion. It may be just in 20 actuality a teensy bit higher because of the lower 21 amounts of the higher chlorinated congeners in 1016, 22 but I would not expect a very large difference at 23 all. WATER PCB-SD0000028788 1 Q Anything other than solubility as to physical 2 properties ? 63 3 A Well, potentially questions could arise that would 4 relate to the vapor pressure, their ability to 5 evaporate from a system. 6 Q What is their ability to evaporate? 7 A Basically they do not evaporate very rapidly. But 8 over a long period of time they would be expected to, 9 lower chlorinated materials might be expected to 10 evaporate into the atmosphere. 11 Q Is that true for materials that are on the surface or 12 would this also be true of materials that are say 13 covered by soil? 14 A No, that would be strictly surface effects primarily. 15 Q Any other physical properties? 16 A As far as strictly physical properties, I don't 17 believe so. Well, yeah, I guess so. I guess soil 18 adsorption would be considered a physical property. 19 So that would be another. 20 Q What do you mean by absorption? 21 A Adsorption. 22 Q A-d? 23 A Ad. That's basically looking at their tendency to WATER PCB-SD0000028789 64 1 adsorb or adhere to particulate matter under whatever 2 conditions of experiment or environment you're 3 looking at. 4 Q And what is that tendency? 5 A Well, basically because PCBs are water insoluble and 6 not very volatile they will in fact tend to associate 7 with any particulate matter that is present in 8 certainly an aqueous system, a system containing 9 water, but probably also in a system which contains 10 very little water. 11 Q By associate they will attach themselves? 12 A Yes . 13 Q And they attach at a molecule level; is that right? 14 A Yes . 15 Q So the molecules of PCBs have a tendency to adhere to 16 soil? 17 A That's correct. 18 Q If I had a column of soil, and again using an 19 experiment, poured a vial of 1242 or 1016 into that 20 soil, would all of the molecules adhere to the soil? 21 A Well, obviously there's going to be some quantity or 22 capacity of that soil to adsorb PCBs. I think in 23 fact if you poured a bottle of pure PCB, depending on WATER PCB-SD0000028790 65 1 the length of the soil column, they may very well all 2 adhere. If there's enough soil capacity there to 3 hold all of them. 4 Q If there isn't enough soil capacity ? 5 A If there isn't enough, I suppose they would 6 eventually leach from the bottom of that soil column 7 Q Let's see if we can describe the process here. If I 8 have a soil column that's a hundred feet deep, a 9 hundred feet high - 10 A Okay. 11 Q -- and I pour PCBs down that column such that all of 12 them are adsorbed, all the molecules are adsorbed -- 13 A Okay. 14 Q -- is there any phenomenon which will over time 15 release any molecules of PCBs? I mean are they 16 permanently locked onto the soil? 17 A In general, that's probably true. I think if you 18 look, the literature says if you in fact took another 19 organic solvent, for instance, if you took hexane and 20 poured it over that soil column, I think that the 21 some of the PCBs would tend to dissolve in the hexane 22 and move on through column with that hexane as the 23 hexane moved through. WATER PCB-SD0000028791 66 1 Q Let's assume, let's hypothesize now if we have a soil 2 column and PCBs are leaching from it, one of the 3 possible causes of the leaching would be as you 4 indicated that the soil does not have the capacity to 5 adsorb all of the molecules; is that right? 6 A Yes. But in the experiment you described all the 7 molecules adsorbed. 8 Q But if we find at the bottom of a column of soil that 9 we have PCBs coming through, one possible explanation 10 for that is that the PCB, the capacity of the soil to 11 adsorb all of the PCBs was either exhausted or have 12 limited capabilities? 13 A One possibility, I would agree with that, yes. 14 Q Another possibility -- and that would be true 15 independent of whether any solvents were present, 16 isn't that right? 17 I mean if you found it there it means, if no 18 solvents were present, the soil couldn't absorb all 19 the PCBs? 20 A . That would be one possible explanation, correct. 21 Q Another possible explanation might be that the 22 presence of other solvents were causing the PCBs to 23 release from the soil, was that right? WATER PCB-SD0000028792 1 A Yes . 67 2 Q So that if another solvent comes into contact with 3 the PCBs, that solvent can actually break the 4 adsorptive bond; is that right? 5 A To some degree or another, That's correct. 6 Q Do you have any quantitive estimate as to what that 7 capability is? 8 A It's going to depend on the solvent, the soil and the 9 and a whole variety of different parameters. 10 Q Do you have any quantitative estimate or quantitative 11 capability to say independent of solvents that a 12 given column of soil or given column of materials 13 will adsorb a given amount of PCBs? 14 A I certainly don't have that information today. 1 15 don't know whether such a calculation could be made 16 from what's available in the literature or not. 17 Q So in our situation where we're finding PCBs leaking 18 from the bottom of a soil column, we know that one 19 possible cause is the lack of soil capacity to adsorb 20 all the molecules; is that right? 21 A That's correct. 22 Q Another possibility might be the presence of solvents 23 which are causing the break up of the adsorptive WATER PCB-SD0000028793 1 bond; is that right? 68 2 A That's correct. 3 Q Any other causes? 4 A Not that I can think of. You know, in the situation 5 we described. 6 Q So the only two ways that PCBs are going to get 7 through the bottom of a soil column are either lack 8 of adsorptive capacity of the soil or some other 9 solvent causing the adsorptive bond to break; is that 10 right? 11 A Those are two ways we have discussed today. I 12 hesitate to say those are the only two ways. 13 Q But to your knowledge those are the only two ways; is 14 that recollection? 15 A As I sit here today, that's correct. 16 Q Now is it at all possible for the, what's the term 17 used to characterize the non-water phase of liquid 18 PCBs? Is there any terminology used? Is the term 19 miscible ever used or immiscible? 20 A Well, miscible basically means mixable. And 21 immiscible means not mixable. 22 I mean if you had a water system and it had 23 another liquid phase, you would say the other liquid WATER PCB-SD0000028794 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 69 phase was immiscible with water or two phases were immiscible, they weren't mixable. They would just mutually dissolve each other. Q As to the use of solvents to break the bond, if solvents were breaking the bond, PCBs could be released both as in a soluble form, ie., in water up to the limits of solubility as well as the non-soluble portion isn't that right? A I'm not sure I understand the question. Q You indicated that if you poured liquid PCBs into a jar of water that 2 phases would develop. A That's correct. Q One would be the soluble phase in the water and the other would be the non-water liquid phase of PCBs? A Okay. Correct. Q And I'm asking you if solvents were used, hexane or whatever in soils, would the released PCBs be both that which is soluble in water and that portion, some of that portion which is non-soluble in water? THE WITNESS: You're asking 2 questions. Are you asking about leaching by water are are you asking questions about leaching by solvent? Q Let's deal with the leaching by solvent situation? WATER PCB-SD0000028795 1 A Okay. 70 2 Q Leaching by solvent situation in the environment for, 3 let's say hexane were to come into contact with the 4 soils. You indicated that in terms of the water 5 phase the maximum amount that could get into the 6 water and out from the soil column would be 200 parts 7 per billion; is that right? 8 A That would be the maximum, right. 9 Q Could there also be PCBs in the non-water phase also 10 released in the environment? 11 A A material like hexane essentially the solubility, 12 PCBs are probably soluble in hexane from anywhere to 13 a hundred percent. So if you leach hexane through a 14 soil column, certain amount of the PCBs may very well 15 dissolve in that hexane and travel down the soil 16 column with the hexane. 17 Now I don't think it would travel down as 18 quickly because there's going to be a continuing 19 interaction of the PCBs between the solvent and 20 between the soil. There is a relative tendency for 21 the PCBs to either be dissolved in the hexane or be 22 adhered to the soil. So you're not going to put in 23 the hexane, it's going to shoot down the hexane. WATER PCB-SD0000028796 71 1 It's going to adhere to solvent and redissolve into 2 hexane. 3 But you really don't, you don't have an aqueous 4 phase. You don't have a 3 phase system. Okay. You 5 have got an oil phase, I mean you have a hexane phase 6 which may or my not contain some dissolved PCBs, and 7 you're going to have a soil solid phase, which will 8 have PCBs adhering to it. 9 I don't think you're going to have -- if I 10 understand your question, you're asking me are you 11 also going to have free globules of PCBs floating 12 down through that system. My answer to that question 13 is no if there's what you're asking. 14 Q Let's go back a minute. Let's take the system. You 15 indicated there's going to be some degree of elution 16 into the hexane; is that right? 17 A Yes. 18 Q And is that term elution e-l-u-t-i-o-n. Am I using 19 the right term? 20 A I think the term is dissolution, d-i-s. 21 Q So when it desorbs, it desorbs into the hexane, there 22 will be a hexane phase? 23 A That's correct. WATER PCB-SD0000028797 72 1 Q You indicated that could be substantially above 200 2 part per billion, indeed all the way up to a hundred 3 percent of the PCBs theoretically? 4 A Theoretically I would say those 2 were completely 5 mixable at any -6 Q And depending on whether a solvent other than hexane 7 was being used, other solvents would have different 8 degrees of solubility in the PCBs, is this correct? 9 A That's right. 10 Q But certainly all of the solvents have a higher 11 capacity for mixing or dissolving PCBs than water; 12 isn't that right? 13 A Using a general term for solvent I would say 14 generally they're going to be higher than water, yes. 15 Q For example, toluene? 16 A Yes, that would be higher than water. 17 Q Then you indicated there would still be material in 18 the soil phase? 19 A That's correct. 20 Q And if there were water present, would there also be 21 material, PCBs in the water phase? 22 THE WITNESS: Along with the hexane and 23 the soil? WATER PCB-SD0000028798 73 1 MR. KARAGANIS: Yes . 2 A There would probably be extremely, extremely small 3 amounts present, yes. 4 Q Theoretically up to 200 parts per billion? 5 A Not in the phase you're -- no, there's no way it 6 would approach the water, no, because otherwise our 7 analytical experiments wouldn't work. 8 No, if you have water competing with soil and 9 hexane for PCBs, there's no -- 10 Q Who's going to win? 11 A The water will lose clearly and it will lose at a 12 much lower level than the 200 parts per billion of 13 maximum solubility. 14 Q Do you know what the level is? 15 A I sure don't. 16 Q Now let's take the process of water independent of 17 solvents. . 18 A Okay. 19 Q Will water cause desorption over time? 20 A I hesitate to say absolutely no. But it will 21 certainly not desorb very much, very quickly. And in 22 fact what environmental evidence there is in the 23 literature says that PCBs do not move under water WATER PCB-SD0000028799 1 leaching conditions. 74 2 Q They do not move at all? 3 A That's what the literature says. Within the 4 uncertainties of the measurements that's basically 5 true . 6 Q So if we were to find it moving, it would be because 7 of either solvents present or an incapacity of the 8 soil to adsorb; is that right? 9 A Well, I mean that's where we're coming from, yes. 10 Basically as I sit here today those are the processes 11 I'm thinking would be available, yes. 12 Q Are you familiar with the Bloomington, Indiana 13 situation? 14 A In outline form, yes. 15 Q Have you looked at the data from Bloomington? 16 A I probably have in the past couple years. I don't 17 have any specific recollection of it. 18 Q And you do not intend to give any opinions as to 19 Bloomington in this case, do you? 20 A As far as I know, other than how PCBs, their physical 21 properties would be expected. As far as I know I'm 22 not to comment on the actual data. 23 Q So you can't say whether PCBs are leaking from either WATER PCB-SD0000028800 75 1 the landfills or from any other locations; is that 2 right ? 3 A Not as I sit here today. 4 Q Based on your characterization of PCBs and their 5 ability to adhere to soil and not move in a water 6 situation, would it be fair to say as long as you 7 keep PCBs away from solvents that putting them in a 8 landfill is not a bad idea from an environmental 9 s t andpoint ? 10 A Let me back off a little bit, okay? 11 First of all, PCBs obviously since they have a 12 limited solubility in water will dissolve to a 13 limited extent in water. I don't know what that 14 extent is. So to say there's absolutely zero 15 leaching with water is incorrect. There is certainly 16 going to be some trace amount. Okay? 17 Q You don't know what that is, but it's theoretically 18 up to 200 parts per billion, right? 19 A I would guess in actuality it's much lower than that. 20 Q But you don't know what it is? 21 A Not a given number. Okay? 22 MR. KARAGAN1S: All right. 23 A I think as I sit here today that in a well designed WATER PCB-SD0000028801 76 1 and well controlled landfill that disposal of PCBs in 2 such a landfill probably is appropriate. 3 Q What is a well designed and well controlled landfill? 4 A Well, I guess looking at it from a 1988 perspective 5 it would be a landfill in a geologically secure area 6 where you wouldn't expect earthquakes to occur. An 7 area probably with some sort of clay liner. Probably 8 some sort of artificial plastic or some interliner to 9 maintain the integrity of the clay liner. 10 Q Would you put it in an area that had fractured 11 limestone? 12 A I don't have a clear picture of what fractured 13 limestone actually would mean. I don't know the 14 answer to that. 15 Q If the subsurface conditions underneath the land were 16 in fact fractured limestone, would you put it there? 17 THE WITNESS: Would I put it there with 18 my knowledge today? 19 MR. KARAGANIS: Yes. 20 A Probably not. 21 Q Would you put it in an area that had sink holes, in a 22 landfill that had sink holes? 23 A Probably not with my knowledge today. WATER PCB-SD0000028802 1 Q And why is that? 77 2 A Well, if we're talking about designing a well 3 controlled landfill from whatever material is put in 4 there, it's put in there with the intent to stay in 5 there, I think the conditions you described you would 6 expect that there would be some potential at least 7 for whatever material you put in there to move from 8 the landfill. Or given conditions over a given 9 period of time. 10 Q How would it move? 11 A I think in cases where there's actually voids in the 12 system where there are no, there's no soil, I think 13 it would just move by essentially a channeling type 14 phenomenon. 15 Q If it moved by a channel type phenomenon, could it 16 move in the water phase? 17 A At a very small amount I suppose it could. I don't 18 think that would be a major transport mechanism. 19 Q Could it move in the liquid phase that isn't in 20 water? 21 MR. FRUEHWALD: Let me interpose, Bob's 22 answering in terms of whatever substance you put in 23 there. I detect maybe your questions are PCBs. But WATER PCB-SD0000028803 78 1 his answers are more general, but you're now back to 2 PCBs . 3 Q Well, when you referred to substances, you would not 4 put PCBs in a landfill over fractured limestone, 5 would you? 6 A With the state of knowledge I have today, no. 7 Q And you wouldn't put PCBs in a landfill over sink 8 holes, would you? 9 A With the state of knowledge I have today, probably 10 not . 11 Q And with respect to the mechanisms for movement you 12 indicated in voids, PCBs would move essentially in a 13 channeling effect, isn't that right? 14 A That potential certainly exists, yes. 15 Q I asked you now with respect to its movement, PCBs 16 movement in voids, would that move in a water phase? 17 A Probably not to a significant extent in a water 18 phase , no. 19 Q Would it move in the non-water liquid phase? 20 A Very well could slowly, yes. 21 Q And could it also move in a solid phase, attached to 22 particles? 23 A Yes. WATER PCB-SD0000028804 79 1 Q So the 3 methods of movement, the 3 possible options 2 that we have or 4 would be, one to move as water or 3 move in water, dissolved? 4 A That's one of the options. 5 Q Two, to move as in a form of particulate in water? 6 A Okay. That's an option. 7 Q Three is to move in its non-water liquid phase? 8 A Okay. 9 Q And four would be if we had a solvent present to move 10 in a solvent phase; is that right? 11 A That's correct. 12 Q Any other phases that I missed or any other 13 possibilities? 14 A I don't believe so. 15 (A recess was taken.) 16 Q Doctor Kaley, is there anything else about the 17 physical properties? 18 We mentioned solubility. We mentioned soil 19 adsorption. Anything else about the physical 20 properties of Aroclor mixtures that you're going to 21 testify about? 22 A Not that I can think of right now. 23 Q Wh^,t do you know about the medical effects of PCBs or WATER PCB-SD0000028805 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 the toxicological effects of PCBs? 80 A I have a general understanding of what is in the literature. I'm certainly not trained to interpret what's in the literature. Q Would it be fair to say that at least there's a significant body of literature whether you agree or disagree with it that says that PCBs in certain concentrations are toxic? A Well , yes. Q Would it be fair to say that without getting into the debate over whether they are carcinogens or not carcinogens that PCB as an industrial chemical have been known to have toxic potential for sometime? A I would say that PCBs as a general chemical compound, as any general chemical compound have some properties which would require some sort of hygienic procedures to minimize exposure to those materials. "i Q By hygienic procedures you mean keeping them away from human contact? A I would say keeping them away from excessive human contact. Q Would it be fair to say again without getting into concentration levels that it's been known at least as WATER PCB-SD0000028806 81 1 early as the 40's and early 50's that you didn't 2 expose people to pure PCBs if you could avoid it? 3 A It's hard to avoid concentration effects when your 4 talking about pure PCBs. I'm not sure I would agree 5 with that, no. 6 Q Well, there were recommended hygienic levels for PCBs 7 in the 40's and 50's, were there not, for air 8 exposure, for example? 9 A I believe there were air exposure levels. 10 Q So there was recognition above certain levels of air 11 exposure there was potential for toxic effects, isn't 12 that right? 13 A I would say that's true. Potential was certainly 14 there. 15 Q How did they determine that potential? Do you recall 16 how they established those air standards? 17 A As I recall they were basically based on animal 18 tests. 19 Q Is that a typical way of determining potential 20 toxicity? 21 A If there is no human evidence available, I think 22 there is a tendency to extrapolate from animal 23 studies. WATER PCB-SD0000028807 82 1 Q As a matter of fact Monsanto has used animal studies 2 in a number of areas to evaluate potential toxicity, 3 have they not? 4 A Certainly. 5 Q It's a standard toxicological approach, is it not? 6 A Yes 7 Q Your next topic which is the history of the 8 development of technology and methodology for 9 detection and quantification of low levels of PCBs in 10 various media. 11 What are you going to testify to about that? 12 A Basically just outline what kinds of techniques were 13 available and how the analytical chemistry of PCBs 14 has evolved since about the mid 60's to the prior day 15 or whatever. 16 Q What was their availability in the mid 60's? 17 A Well, basically the technology that really allowed 18 PCBs to be measured in the environmental samples at 19 the levels, the low levels they were found to be 20 occurring was the development of the electron capture 21 detector. And that really wasn't developed until the 22 early 60's, was not in wide usage until really the 23 late 1960's. WATER PCB-SD0000028808 83 1 Q That's the device that is at the end of the gas 2 chromatograph? 3 A That's correct. That technology continued to evolve 4 through the mid and late 70's, the early detectors 5 were not very sensitive. They were very 6 temperamental, very difficult to use, were not widely 7 available. 8 That technology has continued to improve. The 9 ability to connect a gas chromatographic to a mass 10 spectrometer really didn't develop until the late 11 1960's. Again that technology continued to improve. 12 I would say by about the mid to late 1970's, that 13 technology was well established and you could do much 14 more precise, much more certain PCB analyses with the 15 mass spectrometer than the early days 16 I think the development of the capillary column 17 to do better separations of the PCBs in a gas 18 chromatograph, the technology was available in a 19 rudimentary state in the early 1970's but really not 20 until about 1980 was that commonly available. 21 And again all those developments will have some 22 effect on what levels were able to be measured in 23 what matrices and determines to a certain extent the WATER PCB-SD0000028809 84 1 degree of criticality that you need to observe 2 analytical data. 3 Q What do you mean by that? 4 A Well, I mean basically that if you look at a body of 5 data, this was generated in 1970's, which purports to 6 measure a part per trillion of PCBs in water, for 7 instance. I think you need to be very critical and 8 look at this data very critically with a historical 9 knowledge of the fact that in reality the ability to 10 do that analysis was not possible. I would say a 11 report of a part per trillion, maybe even a part per 12 billion in water in 1960 probably doesn't have the 13 reliability it would have today. 14 Q Let's talk about gas chromatography. What would you 15 say the reliability levels of detection were for the 16 60 ' s? 17 A For the 1960's I would say in the -- certainly, of 18 course, we're talking in the late 1960's now because 19 the technology wasn't even available till the mid 20 1960 ' s . 21 I would say that probably in water maybe a tenth 22 of a part per million, a hundred parts per billion 23 would be a good measure of quantitation. I think in WATER PCB-SD0000028810 85 1 soil an order of magnitude more than that, a part per 2 million or 2 or 10 parts per million in soil. 3 Q That's in the late 60's? 4 A Right. 5 Q Let's to go the 70's. 6 A Okay. Again it's going to be a continual 7 development, but starting from those numbers I think 8 by '75 we could drop it down to low parts per billion 9 in water fairly reliably. 10 Q By low parts per billion? 11 A One to ten parts per billion would be fairly 12 reliable, maybe even a little lower than that. Soil 13 probably 10 to a hundred parts per billion. 14 Q All right. And then from '75 to '80? 15 A Probably slight improvements by '80. I guess we 16 would probably be able to measure 10 to 100 parts per 17 trillion in water. Maybe 100 parts per trillion to 1 18 parts per billion in soil for it to be reliable. 19 Q A hundred to one, one to a hundred you mean? 20 A Okay, I think I said one to 10 parts per trillion in 21 water. And a hundred parts per billion -- no, 10 to 22 a hundred parts per billion -- no, I'm sorry, hold 23 it, stop. One to ten parts per billion in soil. WATER PCB-SD0000028811 1 Q And then from '80 to '88? 86 2 A Okay, I don't think things, as far as actual 3 detection limits I would say things haven't developed 4 too much. 5 I think what has developed in that time period 6 is the ability to look at specific single congeners 7 of PCBs and worry about what is happening to an 8 individual, one of the 209 individual compounds 9 rather than looking at the manufactured mixtures. 10 There's probably been some slight improvements in 11 detection limits and things like that, but probably 12 not significant. 13 Q What's the significance from the standpoint of 14 environmental contamination and prevention of 15 contamination? What's the significance of the fact 16 that increasing levels of sophistication have 17 developed? 18 A Well, I think there are two things. I think it's 19 allowed us to have a better understanding of what is 20 really happening to PCBs in the environment. It's 21 allowed us if we talk about single congeners we can 22 begin to worry about are the materials that are found 23 found in the environment, are they in fact the ones WATER PCB-SD0000028812 87 1 that have for whatever reason been shown to have some 2 toxicity in animals. So we can say if congener X 3 turns out not to be toxic to animals, do we need to 4 worry about congener X in the environment or 5 conversely congener Y is toxic in animals, maybe we 6 should have a little bit more concern about that 7 presence in the environment. I think that that's 8 clearly the way that PCB analysis and toxicity 9 studies and to some extent even regulatory pressure 10 is starting to look at the PCB problem. Not so much 11 about is there Aroclor 1242 there but is congener X 12 there, congener Y. 13 Q When you say regulatory pressure - 14 A Well, the regulatory agencies continue to be 15 concerned about the presence of PCB in the 16 environment. And the recognition is there that PCBs 17 are not necessarily all the same. That there are 18 within that 209 compounds, there are some we need to 19 be more concerned about than others. And there is 20 some movement within the regulatory community to 21 begin to look at those specific congeners. 22 Q What movement is that? 23 A Well, I mean just the way the EPA for instance is WATER PCB-SD0000028813 88 1 looking at the regulation of PCB. Perhaps in' 2 drinking water. They're now looking at techniques of 3 measuring specific congeners in drinking water rather 4 than looking to see whether there is an Aroclor 5 product in drink water. 6 Q They have proposed a drinking water standard, have 7 they not? 8 A Yes, I think that's true. 9 Q Do they separate out the different kinds of congener? 10 A There are discussions, that is my understanding is 11 that drinking water standard has been proposed and 12 there are discussions on whether that drinking water 13 standard ought to be, the measurements required to 14 meet that standard ought to be done on single 15 congeners or a group of particular congeners versus 16 total PCB content, yes. 17 Q And what is the theory of that that certain 18 congeners - 19 A Well -- 20 Q -- are toxic? 21 A Yes. 22 Q What congeners? 23 A The list is in the literature. I don't know which WATER PCB-SD0000028814 1 offhand- Basically they're looking at 89 2 pentachlorinated and hexachlorinated congeners with 3 certain patterns of chlorine substitution. 4 Q Do you know of any toxicologists that have tested 5 toxicology of certain congeners? 6 A Certainly Steve Safe of Texas A & M has made a 7 career. 8 Q Studying the toxicology of individual congeners? 9 A That's right. 10 There are other people doing it, too. 11 Q But we don't have pure congeners in the environmental 12 mixtures, do we? I mean in the sense - 13 A Well, sure you do. Each peak from a of GC is a pure 14 congener. I mean obviously the PCBs that are in the 15 environment are not, I mean there isn't one congener 16 in the environment to the exclusion of all others. 17 They're there because the products that are 18 manufactured that escaped to the environment were 19 mixtures. But they contain some number of these 20 congeners. 21 And, as I said, the feeling is or the science is 22 today that we need not worry about all of those 23 congeners. That there are certain of the ones that WATER PCB-SD0000028815 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 90 we need to worry about and maybe not worry about the other ones so much. Q You're not a toxicologist, are you? A No, I 1m not. Q And with respect to the toxic effect. Potential toxic effect of the 1242 or 1016, you're not prepared to give expert testimony on their potential for toxic impact, are you? A No, I'm not. Q Now let me ask you a practical question. You have mentioned the increasing sophistication of the technology and methodology for detection of quantification. I'd like you to go back to the 50's and early 60 ' s. A Okay. Q Does the fact that the technology was not there to detect parts per trillion levels of PCBs in water or soil, would that have been a justification for dumping PCBs down a sewer because you couldn't detect them? A Because you couldn't detect them, no. The answer to that is no. Q Based on what you know now or if you were in the 50's WATER PCB-SD0000028816 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 and 60's would it have been sound environmental practice to dump PCBs down the sewer? 91 THE WITNESS: Based on what I know now? MR. KARAGANIS: Yes. A No. Q Based on what was known about PCBs as an industrial chemical then, would it have been a sound environmental practice to dump PCBs down a sewer? A I think there could be some justification for that. Q By what was known then? A By what was known in the 50's and 60's. Q Was that a Monsanto recommendation at that time? A Was at Monsanto recommendation? I don't know the answer to that. I doubt it. Q Did Monsanto have a position whether it was a good idea to dump PCBs down the sewer? A I have no idea. Q Based on what was known in the 50's and 60's would it have been good sound environmental practice to dump PCBs into landfills built on fractured limestone or sink holes? THE WITNESS: I'm sorry, am I basing my answer on what I know now or what was known then? WATER PCB-SD0000028817 92 1 Q Known in the 50's or 60's would it have been a good 2 environmental practice to dump PCBs in landfills 3 built on limestone, fractured limestone or sink 4 holes? 5 A Well, since I was less than ten years old at the 6 time, I really don't know the answer to that. 7 I would say that it would have been probably 8 standard practice to dispose of industrial materials 9 in landfills near the site they were used and that's 10 really all I can say. I don't know, I do not in my 11 mind know what the standards were were for siting of 12 the landfills the 50s and 60's, I clearly don't. 13 Q Let's talk about common sense. Had we made such 14 strides in science that we know scientifically 15 something we didn't know then which was that we 16 didn't know in the 50's that it was a bad thing to 17 place contaminants in landfills based on fractured 18 ' limestone? 19 MR. FRUEHWALD: In other words you - 20 A I think those concerns were not addressed to the same 21 extent in the 50's. The concerns we have today were 22 not addressed to the same extent that they were. 23 They are not addressed today, excuse me, let me start WATER PCB-SD0000028818 1 over . 93 2 The concerns that we have today were not 3 uppermost in people's minds in the 50's and 60's 4 concerning siting of landfills and what to do with 5 waste. 6 Q Now let's go back a minute. Let's take today. You 7 agreed, did you not, earlier that it would not be a 8 good idea knowing what you know today to dump PCBs 9 down sewers? 10 A Yes . 11 Q And you agreed, did you not, that knowing what you 12 know today it would not be a good idea to place, to 13 deposit PCBs in landfills based on fractured 14 limestone or sink holes? 15 A Yes. 16 HR. FRUEHWALD: That could be anything, 17 it could be fill in the blank, PCBs or a lot of other 18 substances. It could be fill in the blank, not just 19 PCB . 20 MR . KARAGANIS: I want to be specific on 21 22 MR . FRUEHWALD: I know 23 MR . KARAGANIS: If you want to talk about WATER PCB-SD0000028819 1 other industrial, Mike, that will be - 94 2 MR. FRUEHWALD: They could be generically 3 as to industrial chemicals generally. 4 Q We're talking about PCBs. 5 A Okay. . 6 Q And your answer I take it would be the same on both 7 of those points if you talked about industrial 8 chemicals? 9 A In general, yes. 10 Q Now from the standpoint of scientific knowledge, 11 isn't it a fact that there has been nothing from a 12 standpoint of scientific knowledge that we have 13 learned about sink holes, fractured limestone or 14 sewers between today and the 50's and 60's which 15 would change that opinion? 16 A I think that's putting an unfair cast on the 17 situation, because I think our knowledge of the 18 toxicity of industrial chemicals and our concerns 19 about environmental effects of industrial chemicals 20 has progressed greatly since the time period that 21 your describing. 22 I think in fact did we know in 1950 that if we 23 poured something in a hole, it was going to go the WATER PCB-SD0000028820 95 1 bottom of the hole? Probably not. I mean certainly 2 we knew that in the 50's. If you take in the 50's 3 and pour something in the hole, it's going to go the 4 bottom of the hole. 5 But I think clearly our concerns about what 6 happened after it gets to the bottom of the hole has 7 progressed greatly since the 50's and 60's. I'm not 8 even sure I would agree with the first part of that. 9 I think since hydrogeology has probably progressed 10 greatly. What happens to material in hole, how long 11 does it take the material to get to ground level, how 12 long does it take it to get into a stream from a 13 given point, I think clearly the science has 14 progressed greatly. 15 Q Let's talk about methods and rates of degradation of 16 various Aroclor mixtures. 17 What is your testimony going to be on methods 18 and rates of degradation? 19 A I think basically since scientists out there say that 20 in spite of the "conventional" knowledge, 21 conventional in quotes, PCB are non-biodegradable, in 22 fact PCBs containing up to 4 chlorines per molecule 23 are in most cases quite biodegradable. WATER PCB-SD0000028821 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 A material such as 1221 which has 2, 1 or 2 96 chlorines per molecule is almost totally degradable in laboratory tests and to a certain extent that has been shown in the environment. As we go up in chlorine content the biodegradability of the mixture as a whole tends to decrease. When we get as high in chlorine content as Aroclors 1254, we see a material which probably 10 percent or less degradable over a given period of time in a given test system. But clearly certain of the PCBs are biodegradable. It turns out that these have been studies in a variety of systems. In fact there's research going on now which says even some of the higher chlorine materials are biodegradable in a different kind of system than was studied earlier. So I think as we interpret what is the significance of PCBs in the environment we need to look at biodegradation results that are out there and consider what is happening to these materials in natural systems or sewage treatment systems. Q Let's talk about either a natural system or sewage treatment systems. If we have a given concentration of 1242 or 1016 in sewage sludge, you indicate that WATER PCB-SD0000028822 97 1 according to summary of grounds in Deposition Exhibit 2 618, you say 1242 and 1016 degrade at a rate of 3 approximately 30 percent in 48 hours. 4 A That's correct. 5 Q If I have got a given concentration of 1242 or 1016 6 in my sewage sludge, how long do I need to wait 7 before it's gone, before the 1016 and 1242 are 8 totally degraded? 9 THE WITNESS: What's your definition of 10 gone? 11 MR. KARAGANIS: I can't measure it. 12 A You can't measure it? I think you would probably 13 have to wait a significant period of time. 14 We tend to talk about half-lives of these 15 materials. Certainly in the case of 1242 there are 16 going to be a certain level of pentachlorobiphenyls 17 in there that are probably going stick around for 18 months to years. 19 Q What do you mean months to years, how long? 20 A I don't know the exact number. It depends on your 21 system. 22 Q How long do pentachlorobiphenyls take to degrade in 23 the environment before they're gone? WATER PCB-SD0000028823 98 1 THE WITNESS: In what environment? 2 MR. RARAGANIS: Well, let's talk sewage 3 sludge. 4 A Which treatment plant? It depends on the treatment 5 plant. It depends on the concentration. You're 6 giving me a bunch of assumptions which -- 7 Q Let's talk worst case. 8 THE WITNESS: Worst case? 9 Q Yes. How long? 10 A Certainly components maybe five to ten years. 11 Q Five to ten years? 12 A In a sewage treatmeant plant. 13 Q So that's the worst case. After ten years - 14 A That's my guess as a worst case. 15 Q After ten years there shouldn't be anymore; is that 16 right ? 17 A As long as you're not putting anymore in there. 18 Q So if I have got a sewage lagoon containing sludge I 19 haven't put any in in ten years, I should be able to 20 test that and find none? 21 A If the bugs in the lagoon are acclimated to PCBs and 22 are in fact degrading PCBs I, would say that's a 23 reasonable assumption. WATER PCB-SD0000028824 99 1 Q And if I per chance were to find that the material 2 still contains high concentrations of PCBs, that 3 would be because the bugs aren't acclimated or are 4 not degrading; is that right? 5 A I would say that's true, yes. 6 Q And there can be indeed situations with such lack of 7 degradation occur; is that right? 8 A I would guess that there are, yes. 9 Q You're not in any position to predict when and if the 10 PCBs in the Bloomington sewage lagoon would degrade 11 to non-detection levels are you? 12 A I don't have any specific information about their 13 system, so I don't know. 14 Q You don't know whether there is biological 15 degradation taking place; and if any at what rate, is 16 that right? 17 A I would assume there's some. I certainly don't know 18 at what rate. 19 Q It's possible that conditions that were not conducive 20 to degradation might exist in such a lagoon; is that 21 right? 22 A Conceivable. 23 Q Basically let me get this straight. If I were to WATER PCB-SD0000028825 100 1 find under your hypothesis, I just want to make sure 2 your testimony is clear on this, if I have a sewage 3 lagoon contaminated with PCBs say in the order of 4 1242, several thousand pounds per million? 5 A Can we step back because the first assumption was a 6 sewage treatment plant, which I in my mind consider 7 as an active plant with ongoing inputs of sewage and 8 an ongoing influent/effluent system in active plant. 9 If you're talking about a lagoon which is just 10 sitting there after ten years and there's no input, 11 there's no output, there's no active treatment, 12 there's no trickle .filters or stuff like that, you 13 know, that's different. 14 Q Well, you have just identified characteristics that 15 might be classified for Bloomington sewage lagoon. 16 THE WITNESS: Which one, the fact it's 17 just sitting there? 18 Q It's just sitting there. 19 A Okay. With no stirring. 20 Q No stirring. 21 A Okay. Well, I mean part of biodegradation is the 22 fact that you have a system where you have oxygen 23 inflow for instance. WATER PCB-SD0000028826 1 Q No. 101 2 A I'm not asking a question. I say to have 3 biodegradation of PCB under the common system you 4 need oxygen. I mean that's the first step is adding 5 oxygen. If you have an oxygen poor system, if you're 6 not controlling pH, I mean there are lots of things 7 in a lagoon which could stop biodegradation clearly. 8 Q If we're not adding oxygen, we're not stirring the 9 system, we have just got 7 acres of sludge, how long 10 could that take before it broke down? 11 A If there's no biodegradation, no other process, I 12 mean it could be tens of years. I really don't know. 13 Q Could it be hundreds of years? 14 A Could it be hundreds of years? I don't know the 15 answer to tha t. 16 Q So, you do not have -- 17 A I would not say that it was not impossible after a 18 hundred years there would be detectable PCB in there. 19 Q So it is possible that after a hundred years - 20 A If there's no process to change those PCBs going on 21 in that lagoon, clearly yes. 22 Q And you're not in a position to say that there are 23 certain process or not at the Bloomington lagoon? WATER PCB-SD0000028827 1 A No, I'm not. 102 2 Q But if there weren't oxygen and stirring and other 3 activities going on, such activities are necessary 4 for biodegradation? 5 A You clearly need a viable micro-organism. 6 Q And oxygen and stirring, do you not? 7 A Certainly oxygen. I think stirring would help. 8 otherwise you're going to get the materials settled 9 into the bottom and covered up and unavailable. 10 Q Unavailable to the bugs? 11 A To the bugs that require oxygen. 12 Now as I have said, there is some new research 13 coming out of General Electric which says that there 14 are processes which even in the absence of oxygen can 15 degrade PCBs. Those have been shown primarily in the 16 Hudson River. But basically what those processes 17 generate are lower chlorinated PCBs and there would 18 then be stirring required to get those chlorinated 19 PCBs up to the level where oxygen were available. 20 Q Now how about landfill conditions if I put 1242 or 21 1016 in landfills? 22 A Yes . 23 Q How long does at that time to degrade so it won't be WATER PCB-SD0000028828 1 detected? 103 2 A I don't have any idea. 3 Q Could it also be hundreds of years or in excess of a 4 hundred years? 5 A I would say that potential is there. 6 Q And your experience here on 1242 and 1016 of 7 degrading 30 percent in 48 hours is an active sludge 8 sewage treatment plant? 9 A It's in a laboratory system which simulates secondary 10 sewage treatment. 11 Q So you have got active bug population, you have got 12 aeration? 13 A That's correct. 14 Q And that was in a lab experiment? 15 A That's correct. 16 Q Did you ever follow on to see how much degradation 17 occurred for the remaining 70 percent? 18 A There have been experiments done to do that. I think 19 there are experiments in the literature and in fact 20 one of our European labs looked at long-term and 21 found for Aroclor 1016 over 90 percent degradation 22 again in a laboratory system over a period of I think 23 it was a hundred days or something like that. WATER PCB-SD0000028829 104 1 Q Has Monsanto ever done any experimentation on 2 degradation in the field? 3 THE WITNESS: Actually in the field? 4 MR. KARAGANIS: Yes. 5 A Not to my knowledge. 6 Q In preparation for this deposition or in preparation 7 for your testimony do you intend to examine any 8 Bloomington data? 9 A I haven't been asked to. If I'm asked to, I will. 10 MR. KARAGANIS: Mike, this is a 26B4? 11 MR. FRUEHWALD: That's rioht. I'm not 12 purporting to have anymore than these principle s as 13 being his testimony. Now, he was supplied the 14 Peoples paper which described the system there, the 15 sewage treatment plant system. But that was just for 16 general background as to what he was here. 17 But I don't intend to give him a lot of data and 18 have him spout opinions on those. Just as many of 19 your witnesses experts deny the ability to. So this 20 is a similar situation. 21 MR. KARAGANIS: We do have an expert 22 testifying about Bloomington. 23 MR. FRUEHWALD: But many of your experts WATER PCB-SD0000028830 105 1 say they're not going to state opinions on that and 2 likewise I'm not expecting to ask Bob to do so 3 either. 4 Q Doctor Kaley, have you been asked to review any data 5 with regard to what has been collected in the 6 Bloomington area with regard to PCBs to determine its 7 accuracy or to evaluate the methodology used to 8 analyze the data? 9 A I don't believe so. 10 (Bloomington Deposition Exhibits 620 through 11 630 were marked for identification.) 12 Q We talked about soil. We talked about water. Kow do 13 you analyze for PCBs in animal tissue? 14 A Well, basically the first step is what's different. 15 If you're talking about animal fat, basically you 16 have to mascerate the fat for instance with a 17 ultrasonic generator or ultrasonic nebulizer to get 18 it in the very small particles so that the solvent 19 can extract the PCBs from the fatty tissue. 20 In the case of fat there's a real problem 21 because the fat is also soluble in the solvents used 22 to extract PCBs, so you have to go through a 23 secondary, usually a column treatment to remove the WATER PCB-SD0000028831 106 1 PCBs from the fat by traveling through a column. 2 After that procedure is done, then the procedure is 3 the same. 4 Q How about tissue, non-fat tissue? 5 A Well, that would be basically the procedure for any 6 tissue except blood. Blood you have to go through 7 several steps to breakdown the protein matter in the 8 blood and again remove the PCBs from the fat 9 component of the blood and things like that. 10 Q You have mentioned in exhibit 618 your proposed 11 testimony under rule 26B4 that the lower chlorinated 12 congeners degrade more rapidly. If you're doing gas 13 chromatography, you indicated that you work off of a 14 standard? 15 A That's correct. 16 Q And I take it the standards if you're looking at 1242 17 are either, there's a 1016 standard and a 1242 18 standard and a 1254 standard; is that correct? 19 A That's correct. 20 Q If the lower chlorinated congeners degrade more 21 rapidly that would indicate that the remaining 22 material, let's say it was 1242, would have a higher 23 percentage of the higher chlorinated congeners? WATER PCB-SD0000028832 1 A That's correct. 107 2 Q So that when we talk about the percentages in exhibit 3 619, when we talk about the various congeners in 619, 4 a degraded 1242 would have a higher percentage of the 5 higher chlorinated congeners, would it not? 6 A That's correct. 7 Q And analytically would that mean that the material 8 might start looking like one of the higher 9 chlorinated PCB compounds such as 1254? 10 A Without being cute the answer to your question is 11 basically yes. It doesn't become another Aroclor. 12 But the analytical gas chromatogram more closely 13 resembles an Aroclor 1248 or 1254 than it does the 14 original 1242. 15 Q And again I'm just trying to use layman's terms. If 16 I had say 2 gallons of 1242 that has been subject to 17 degradation in the soil, after a certain period of 18 time I might have something that's akin to say one 19 gallon of 1248? 20 A I would guess it would be lower than that. But -- 21 Q Lower in quantity? 22 A Right. It may be a half gallon of 1248 or something. 23 Q But the remaining half gallon would be like 1248? WATER PCB-SD0000028833 108 1 A It would like -- it would look like it analytically. 2 Q From a chemical standpoint it would be somewhat 3 similar, would it not? 4 A To a first approximation, yes. Maybe. But I mean 5 those kinds of arguments get you into mighty shaky 6 ground down the road, which is why I'm being 7 hesitant. 8 Q Can you explain? 9 A Yes. They don't become Aroclor 1248 because there 10 are components of Aroclor 1248 that probably would 11 not be present in that residue of Aroclor 1242. So 12 it doesn't really become that material. 13 Analytically it looks like that material and is 14 often reported as that material by an analytical 15 chemist. But it isn't the same mixture. 16 Q While it doesn't have some of the components of 1248, 17 its relative percentages of higher chlorinated 18 homologs are closer to 1248 than they are to the 19 original 1242; are they not? The ones that are in 20 both? Because some of them are in 1248, right? 21 A To a first approximation, that's probably true. 22 Q So what we have got with respect to the -- let me 23 just direct your attention to 619 here. Would you WATER PCB-SD0000028834 109 1 read off the -- would you explain what tables 2 and 2 table 3 mean? 3 A Okay. We really haven't relied on table 3 4 particularly yet. But we can talk about it. 5 THE WITNESS: Do you want me to just read 6 the whole table? 7 MR . KARAGANIS: Yes . 8 MR . FRUEHWALD: No , just explain it 9 MR . KARAGANIS: Just explain it. 10 A Explain it. Okay. Table 2 is entitled Approximate 11 Molecular Composition of Aroclor. 12 Basically this is looking at the congener class 13 composition of the materials of increasing chlorine 14 content. And the general trend of the table is that 15 as the materials increase in Aroclor number, they 16 also increase in the percentage of higher chlorinated 17 congener classes that occur in that material. 18 So, for instance, if we would look at Aroclor 19 1242, the table said that approximately half or 49 20 percent of that material is a trichlorobiphenyl 21 congener class. If we would step up to 1254 for 22 instance, approximately 50 percent, 48 percent of 23 that material is pentachlorobipheny1. WATER PCB-SD0000028835 110 1 So that if we look at half of the material in 2 each of the cases, half of Aroclor 1242 is 3 trichloro-. Half 1254 is pentachloro-. 4 Q Now after degradation over a period of time would it 5 be fair to say that the percentages change, the 6 tables shown in Bloomington exhibit 619, table 2, 7 that if one were to look at 1242 after a period of 8 degradation, a percentage of tri and, I'm sorry, 9 pentachlorobiphenyl is listed there? 10 A Yes, it is. 11 Q The percentage of pentachlorobiphenyl would increase? 12 A That's correct. On a relative base, that is correct. 13 Q And so would the percentage concentration of tetra? 14 A Probably to a certain extent, although the tetras are 15 biodegradable. I would expect the biggest increases 16 in the penta and hexachlor and higher congener 17 classes. 18 Q So the hexa 1242 had what, one percent? 19 A One percent. 20 Q In its -- 21 A Original form. 22 Q -- original formulation? 23 A Yes . WATER PCB-SD0000028836 111 1 Q And over time what do these percentages of the hexa 2 and penta grow to? 3 A I don't know those numbers offhand. I think in the 4 literature there is some date on that, but I don't 5 know the numbers offhand. 6 Q Would it be fair to say their percentages increase 7 significantly? 8 A On a relative base, yes, itwould. 9 Q So I guess from the standpoint of over time if one 10 were exposed to an environmentally degraded sample of 11 1242, one would be exposed to perhaps a lesser total 12 amount of the material but an amount which had a 13 higher concentration of hexa and 14 pentachlorobiphenyls; is that right? 15 A That's correct. . 16 Q Just parenthetically did that experiment that you 17 mentioned of the sewage treatment, was that a 30 18 percent degradation of all of the congeners or just 19 the lower? 20 A That was an average. 21 Q That was a - 22 A It was an average of all congeners, yes. 23 Q So that would it be be fair to say that the WATER PCB-SD0000028837 112 1 pentachloro and hexachlorobiphenyls degrade if at all 2 substantially slower? 3 A That's correct. 4 Q I'd like to read into the record, you came this 5 morning with a group of documents that you indicated 6 you reviewed; is that correct? 7 A That's correct. 8 Q Were these provided by counsel or did you gather 9 these documents? 10 A I gathered them. 11 MR. FRUEHWALD: I think the Peoples memo 12 or article was among those. So that's one I did 13 supply. 14 THE WITNESS: Right. 15 MR. FRUEHWALD: But the rest, if it's 16 there -- 17 Q For purposes of identification for the record 18 Bloomington Deposition Exhibit 620 is entitled 19 Reviews of Environmental Contamination and 20 Toxicology. 21 Directing your attention to Bloomington 22 Deposition Exhibit 620, can you tell me what 23 publication that's from? WATER PCB-SD0000028838 113 1 A Okay. What you have already read into the record is 2 the publication. The Reviews Of Environmental 3 Contamination and Toxicology is the publication. 4 Q And then was there a particular article in that 5 publication? 6 A Yes. 7 Q What is that article? 8 A The article is entitled Attenuation of 9 Polychlorinated Biphenyls in Soils. 10 Q Directing your attention to exhibit 621, it's 11 entitled A Case Study of a Chemical Spill: 12 Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs) 3. PCB Sorption and 13 Retardation in Soil Underlying the Site; is that 14 correct? 15 A Yes, it is. Yes, that's correct. 16 Q And 622 is an article by Chou and Griffin entitled 17 Solubility and Soil Mobility of PCBs; is that 18 correct? 19 A That's correct. 20 Q 623, I'll just read it for the record. I will then 21 hand you the document. If I incorrectly characterize 22 it, please correct me. 23 623 is a Follow-Up Study of the Distribution and WATER PCB-SD0000028839 114 1 Fate of Polychlorinated Biphenyls and Benzenes in 2 Soil and Ground Water Samples After an Accidental 3 Spill of Transformer Fluid. U. S. EPA, Atlanta, 4 Georgia, 1976. 5 624 is Kinetics of Biphenyl and Polychlorinated 6 Biphenyl Metabolism in Soil. 7 625 is entitled Microbial Degradation of 8 Polychlorinated- Biphenyls in Soil. 9 626 is entitled The Degradation of 10 Polychlorinated Biphenyls by Micro-Organisms by 11 Baxter, Gilbert, Liagett, Mainprize and Vodden. 12 627 is Movement of PCBs And Other Persistent 13 Compounds Through Soil. 14 628 is Polychlorinated Biphenyl Dechlorination 15 in Aquatic Sediments. 16 Exhibit 629 is entitled Distribution Of 17 Polychlorinated Biphenyls In A Municipal Wastewater 18 Treatment Plant and Environs by Bergh and Peoples. 19 A That was the article that was supplied by counsel. 20 Q 630 is Attenuation of Water-Soluble Polychlorinated 21 Biphenyls by Earth Materials, publication by EPA 22 dated May 1980. 23 And then exhibit 631 -is a publication entitled WATER PCB-SD0000028840 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 115 Attenuation of Polychlorinated Biphenyls in Soils: Literature Review by EPRI, Electric Power Research Institute. For exhibits 620 through exhibit 631 you have indicated earlier in your testimony that you reviewed these materials in preparation for your testimony? A That's correct. Q Dealing with 1242 and/or 1016, what is the rate of degradation that can be expected in landfills in the Bloomington area? A I have no idea. Q You indicated you have no basis for calculating what the degradation could be but under a variety of conditions there could be materials, PCB materials in such landfills after a hundred years; is that correct? A I said that was conceivable. Q That's possible, is it not? A I would think it's possible. Q You have no quantitative basis of saying that it's not possible, isn't that right? A That's correct. Q You have no quantitative basis of saying that WATER PCB-SD0000028841 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 116 degradation will occur prior to a hundred years in these those landfills; is that correct? A I have no knowledge of what kind of bacterial action is going on in the landfills at all. Q And that is also true with respect to the sewage treatment facilities at Bloomington; isn't that correct? A Well, by the very fact that it's a sewage treatment facility I would have to assume that there is some degradation going on. I don't know what the rate would be nor do I know what the long-term retention of the PCBs in that system would be. I think by the very fact it's an active microbial system in the sewage plant there would be some degradation going. Q You would assume it's an active plant? A I'm assuming it's an active plant. Q I'm going to ask you and suggest to you that it is not an active plant, that it's a plant that is not processing sewage at this time. A Okay. Q And that the plant has been closed, indeed the sewage lagoon and sludge drying beds have been inactive for WATER PCB-SD0000028842 1 many years. 117 2 Can you state what the rate of degradation, 3 biological degradation is likely to be? 4 A Under those conditions, no. 5 Q Isn't it a fact that if there is not an active 6 biological degradation process in the sewage sludge 7 that PCB could exist in that material in excess of a 8 hundred years? 9 A My testimony has been that it's conceivable, yes. 10 Q And it's possible, is it not? 11 A Yes . 12 Q And you have no basis for any quantitative statement 13 or qualitative statement that it's going to be less 14 than that? 15 A That's correct. 16 Q With respect to the mobility of PCBs at the 17 Bloomington sites, be they the landfill or the sewage 18 treatment plant, you have no quantitative basis for 19 saying that the soils will retard the movement of 20 PCBs at a given rate; isn't that correct? 21 A I think they will retard them. I don't know what 22 that retardation rate will be. 23 Q When you say retard, that is leaving open the WATER PCB-SD0000028843 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 118 possibility that some portion of the PCBs that reach the soils can move through those soils, isn't that correct? A There are conditions as we have discussed under which that movement could be possible, that's correct. Q Have you been given any facts with regard to the 2 sites at issue in this litigation, the Lemon Lane landfill and the Winston-Thomas treatment plant as to their current status? A I can't say that Mike hasn't said something about their status now, I don't really have any specific recollection of what was said. Q I would ask you to assume that the Lemon Lane landfill is built upon fractured limestone and contains a number of sink holes and that an unknown but significant quantity of PCBs was deposited in the landfill from over a period of many years. I would ask you to assume further that there is evidence that the landfill, that PCBs from the landfill are reaching the ground water below the landfill. Given your position as manager, environmental technical support, would it be your position that it WATER PCB-SD0000028844 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 119 would be appropriate to leave the PCB contaminated material in their present position? MR. FRUEHWALD: Let me interpose an objection and I will instruct the witness not to answer. He is here speaking as an expert witness in his capacity as an analytical chemist. He is not here in a position as a Monsanto employee in that position to state positions in this litigation. So I'm going to instruct the witness not to answer that question. MR. KARAGANIS: Well, he is here giving opinions that are purportedly relevant to whether it's a good idea or not to leave the things where they are? MR. FRUEHWALD: No, he's not. He's given the opinions I state it in interrogatory answer and not other opinions. MR. KARAGANIS: Well, I will reserve the right to seek sanctions and as well to ask this question on cross-examination when you put him on. Q Doctor Kaley, would it be fair to say that you're being asked to give the opinions that are set forth in Deposition Exhibit 618 as they relate to the WATER PCB-SD0000028845 120 1 current litigation regarding the City of Bloomington 2 and its landfill and sewage treatment plant? 3 MR. FRUEHWALD: Let me interpose an 4 objection. His being asked to give the opinions show 5 no evidence they relate to the specific facts of that 6 situation. And as a result your question is 7 ambiguous in the sense in which it relates to. It's 8 in that case, but the opinions do not relate to the 9 specific s. 10 Q I'm asking Doctor Kaley, and he's being put on the 11 stand as a witness, whether given what he knows that 12 these facts are available and applicable to a jury in 13 deciding whether or not it was good idea to removed 14 the waste? 15 MR. FRUEHWALD: That's not his decision 16 to make. That is mine and the Judge's .decision. 17 He's answering questions about opinions. And whether 18 they're relevant or not the Judge will decide and you 19 may object or whatever. That's not his bailiwick. I 20 object to that question and instruct him not to 21 answer it. 22 Q Doctor, again on 618 you have a statement here that 23 based on physical properties PCBs would not be WATER PCB-SD0000028846 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 121 expected to percolate through soils, especially clay, in the groundwater. Is that statement made that no amount of PCBs will percolate through soils? A No. I think basically the results in the literature show that there is minimal and in some cases barely measurable but barely measurable levels of percolation in laboratory systems. I think there is some evidence in field testing that such migration is also in fact non-measurable. Q Is not measurable usually? A That's correct. Q Is it your statement that in the field you could not measure the PCBs that would go through a landfill? A No, no, no. What I said was the literature, among some of which is in the literature that has been marked, states that in certain field conditions that it has been shown that PCBs do not migrate. The literature does not necessarily relate to, it wasn't a landfill. It was a spill site. Q Are you aware of literature conditions or real world conditions where PCBs have left landfills, have percolated through landfills? WATER PCB-SD0000028847 1 A I don't have any specific recollections. 122 2 Q Did you ever have any discussions with any people at 3 Westinghouse as to whether or not PCBs had percolated 4 through landfills? 5 A No. 6 Q Based on our previous discussions you did indicate 7 agreement with the fact there are circumstances where 8 PCBs placed in a soil environment with either 9 fractures or voids could be released into the 10 environment; isn't that right? 11 A Well, they would move downward through those 12 fractures and voids. I don't agree with released 13 into the environment necessarily. 14 Q It's referenced in here and I didn't bring it with 15 me, that the summary of grounds for your degradation 16 testimony is Monsanto document 1874, the published 17 research? 18 A Yes . 19 Q Which documents are we referring to? 20 MR. FRUEHWALD: That's not an extra copy. 21 If you want to make it a copy, I'll make a copy. 22 MR. KARAGANIS; Yes. 23 MR. FRUEHWALD: Are you going to do the WATER PCB-SD0000028848 1 same thing with the other one? 123 2 MR. KARAGANIS: Yes, let's do them. 3 MR. FRUEHWALD: It's on migration. Mine 4 has some markings on it. 5 MR. KARAGANIS: I promise not to read the 6 markings. 7 MR. FRUEHWALD: No, I just underlined 8 various portions if you don't mind that. 9 MR. KARAGANIS: No, we don't mind at all. 10 (Bloomington Deposition Exhibit 632 and 11 633 were marked for identification.) 12 Q Directing your attention to what has been marked as 13 Bloomington Deposition Exhibit 632 a paper entitled 14 Biodegradation by Tucker, et al. Is that the 15 document you referred to in support of your opinion 16 on degradation on page four of exhibit 618? 17 A Yes. 18 Q Direct your attention to what has been marked as 19 Bloomington Exhibit 633 Migration of Polychlorinated 20 Biphenyls in Soil Induced by Percolating Water by 21 Tucker, et al. Is that the document that you 22 referred to in support of your opinion on percolation 23 under subparagraph D of exhibit 618? WATER PCB-SD0000028849 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 A Yes . 124 Q Going back to our earlier discussion, absent voids and fractures, you indicated at one point that simply in a soil column the adsorptive capacity of that soil column could be overloaded by the amount of PCBs that are put there resulting in the discharge of PCBs at the bottom of the column; is that correct? A Yes, I think that would be possible. Depending on if you're talking about an experiment, talking about an experimental setting. Q We also talked about if we find PCBs coming out of the bottom of a landfill which is a soil column, is it not? A Yes. Q That one of the causes would be that the adsorptive capacity of the soil had been exhausted? A It was one of the causes we discussed, yes, possible explanations we discussed. Q Do you have any information on the solubility of the individual congeners? A That information is in the literature. I don't have it with me. I don't recall it particularly. Q When you say 1016 or 1264 having a solubility of 200 WATER PCB-SD0000028850 1 ppb, that's an average? 2 A That's correct. 125 3 Q Is that also true on the adsorption? 4 A Yes. 5 Q Due to different congeners have different adsorption? 6 A Yes, they do. 7 Q Is there anything about the opinions in testimony you 8 intend to present at trial that we haven't covered? 9 A I don't believe so, no. 10 Q Why don't you we take subparagraph d of 618? 11 A Okay. 12 Q I'm doing this because we may finish early and I want 13 to make sure I have covered the ground. What is it 14 you're going to testify with regard to subparagraph 15 d, the opinions in subparagraph d? 16 A Basically that the fact that the solubility of 17 Aroclor 1242 has been measured in water. It's 18 approximately 200 parts per billion. 19 These measurements are done under conditions 20 which will maximize the solubility of the particular 21 PCB mixture in the water. In other words, PCBs in 22 the liquid states are added to water. They are 23 shaken for a period of time, up to 24, possibly even WATER PCB-SD0000028851 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 126 longer hours so that the maximum amount of PCBs do solubilize. The materials that actually go into the water solution tend to be the lower chlorinated materials. So that in fact if you look at a chromatogram of the water phase of such an experimental system, the percent composition of the lower chlorinated compound will be increased relative to the more chlorinated compounds. This basically has an implication in the environment that if there is any kind of leaching at all it will tend to be the more water soluble materials, that is lower chlorinated materials, which will leach. Those tend then to be the more biodegradable as we have discussed earlier. Again, based on what I have seen, the water solubility of the Aroclor 1016 is about the same as that of Aroclor 1242. Q Now when you say leaching, that the materials that will leach have a higher percentage of the lower chlorinated congeners; is that correct? A Yes. WATER PCB-SD0000028852 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 127 Q That's true if we're talking about the water phase? A That's correct. {A discussion was held off the record.) Q Back on record. The concept of the lower chlorinated congeners being more water soluble and thus being more biodegradable relates to the water phase leaching, doesn't it? A Right. Q To the extent there is the non-water phase liquid leaching, that would not be the case; isn't that right? A Well, yes. I mean we're talking about a leaching situation now with the higher chlorinated materials. Those materials which are less soluble in water are also the ones that more tightly adhere to soil or more tightly "adsorb" to soil. You would expect them to stay in the soil phase of a leaching type system. Q But that assumes that the soil has the capability of, enough adsorptive capability to handle a total load? A Right. It's going to be competitive among the phenomena we talked about before, the capacity of the soil, the retentivity or the retention capability of the soil, a variety of things. WATER PCB-SD0000028853 128 1 Q Would you state what you're testimony will be on 2 subparagraph C? 3 A I think we have discussed this previously. Basically 4 the testimony will be that components or certain of 5 the polychlorinated biphenyls do degrade biologically 6 both in soil and in activated sludge type systems. 7 The materials which do degrade tend to be lower 8 chlorinated materials up to and including 9 tetrachlorinated biphenyls. 10 The higher chlorinated materials do not degrade 11 at measurement rates or basically at measurable rates 12 in the system. So that has been looked at. And that 13 the rates measured for Aroclor 1242 and 1016 have 14 been approximately 30 percent in 48 hours. Those 15 tend to be lower chlorinated components of those 16 mixtures. 17 Q Let's deal with the tri and tetra chlorinated 18 congeners ? 19 A All right. 20 Q Do you have any idea what the degradation rates in a 21 sludge lagoon such as the one I described at 22 Winston-Thomas in Bloomington would be? 23 A Well, if we rely on the literature that we have WATER PCB-SD0000028854 129 1 available to us, since Aroclor 1242 and 1016 are 2 primary tri and tetra chlorinated materials, you 3 would expect rates of ten percent. Now these -- 4 Q Rates of ten percent? 5 A 10 to 20 percent. 6 Q Per what? 7 A Per 48 hours. But now this is what the literature is 8 saying. Now we have to keep in mind that these are 9 acclimated sludges and they're used to having PCBs as 10 a food source. 11 So in the real world the rate would be slower 12 than that and I don't have the information to specify 13 what the actual rate would be in an active sewage 14 treatment plant. 15 Q What would be the real world rate in a non-active 16 sewage treatment plant? 17 A That's going to depend on what independent kind of 18 bugs were left over and what's going on there. I 19 would expect it to be somewhat slower as we have 20 discussed. If you have an oxygen depleted system or 21 a bug depleted system, you would expect the rates to 22 become very slow actually. 23 Q And in soils, what would you expect the rate to be WATER PCB-SD0000028855 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 for 1242 and 1016? 130 A I don't know. I don't really have specific recollections of the actual soil rates. I think they're quite low. I'm not sure I have even seen data on the soil -- well, I obviously have. I don't recall the data that was on there. I think the rates are lower although they are still significant. I think some of them are reporting actual disappearances of materials or 90 percent disappearances over periods of hundreds of days . Q And if we were to find significant quantities of PCBs over tens of years, that would be an indication that the rate of degradation is a lot slower than what has been reported; isn't that right? A That's true, in a particular situation. Q And that could exist in a particular situation; isn't that right? A Certainly. Q What are you going to testify about subparagraph b? A I think basically as again I think we've covered this i quite thoroughly earlier that the analytical WATER PCB-SD0000028856 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 131 chemistry of PCBs has tended to improve in the period since it was really first developed in late 1960's through current day. I think this relates to the ability to actually detect and measure PCBs in a variety of environmental or other type of media actually. And the long-term implication is that earlier data and some of even the later data needs to be looked at very and not accepted on face value. Q What do you mean looked at very and not accepted on face value? A I think we need to look at what kind of method validation was done to determine whether the methods were actually measuring the PCBs accurately. We need to look at sampling methods to be sure that the samples were taken in such a way that wouldn't introduce PCBs. We need to look at quality assurance data to be sure there wasn't cross contamination in the laboratories. There are a whole variety of effects surrounding the analytical chemistry of PCBs which could lead to erroneous effects. WATER PCB-SD0000028857 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 132 Q Would that be -- I'm going to throw some lawyers' language at you. Would these defects go to the weight that you might give such data? A Yes, certainly. Q Whatever the data is, you would look at it and discount it or accept it in varying degrees depending on these various infirmities; is that correct? A That's correct. Well, yes, you have to look at the data and make an expert judgment on the reliability of that data and how much weight should be put on it. In some cases it may turn out to be perfectly acceptable. In certain cases it may have to be thrown out altogether and have' no reliability. MR. KARAGANIS: Just so we have no confusion on this, Mike, is there any of the data sets that we have looked at, the Bloomington data, the State data, EPA data, Blasland and Bouck, Westinghouse data, is any that's going to be subject to admissibility challenge on this basis? MR. FRUEHWALD: Well, I don't know. I'm not prepared at this time to commit myself on that till we get around as we have said so many times to showing me what data we're actually talking about WATER PCB-SD0000028858 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 there . 133 So, I suspect not. But I can't come in and give you a blank check that all the data that's floating around, particularly some of the data that goes way back is going to be accepted without some qualification. But once we see what the data is, believe me I'm not going to raise questions that are not - - MR. KARAGANIS: You have seen all the Bloomington data that goes way back into the 70's. You have seen the Westinghouse data that goes way back into the 70's. MR. FRUEHWALD: I have seen some of it, yes. I think I have seen all of it. MR. KARAGANIS: I mean is there any that's particularly suspect or that's been - MR. FRUEHWALD: I have some suspicions about certain samples, yes. MR . KARAGANIS: Which ones ? MR . FRUEHWALD: Well, certainly the first round of sampling at Lemon Lane . Groundwater sample. But I mean that 's a matter beyond Bob's thing. But there are problems I think with some of them. WATER PCB-SD0000028859 134 1 MR. KARAGANIS: Let's find that out 2 today. I mean you're talking about - 3 MR. FRUEHWALD: Like I said, we were 4 proposing at some point in time for you to supply me 5 with the data you wanted to admit and I would analyze 6 it and give you a response in time to respond it to. 7 You haven't done that yet; and rather than doing not 8 gross, I'm not going to do it today. 9 (A discussion was held off the record.) 10 MR. KARAGANIS: Subject to being limited 11 to the opinions that have been set forth in 12 deposition 617 I have no further questions at this 13 time of this witness. 14 MR. FRUEHWALD: I have none. 15 AND FURTHER DEPONENT SAITH NOT 16 17 ROBERT GEORGE KALEY II, PhD 18 19 20 21 22 23 WATER PCB-SD0000028860 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 STATE OF INDIANA COUNTY OF MARION ) ) ) 135 I, Patricia A. Cline, a Notary Public in and for the County of Marion, State of Indiana at large, do hereby certify that ROBERT GEORGE KALEY II, PhD, the deponent herein, was by me first duly sworn to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth in the aforementioned matter; That the foregoing deposition was taken on behalf of plaintiffs at the law offices of Barnes & Thornburg, 1313 Merchants Bank Building, Indianapolis, Marion County, Indiana, on the 25th day of May, 1988, commencing at 9:00 a.m. pursuant to the Federal Rules of Trial Procedure; That said deposition was taken down in stenograph notes and afterwards reduced to typewriting under my direction, and that the typewritten transcript is a true record of the testimony given by the said deponent; and thereafter presented to said deponent for his signature; ' That the parties were represented by their counsel as aforementioned. I do further certify that I am a disinterested WATER PCB-SD0000028861 136 I person in this cause of action; that I am not a relative 2 or attorney of either party, or otherwise interested in 3 the event of this action, and am not in the employ of the 4 attorneys for either party. 5 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand 6 and affixed my notarial seal on this 7th day of June, 7 1988. 8 9 10 11 NOTARY PUBLIC 12 13 My Commission Expires: 14 November 12, 1990 15 County of Residence: 16 Marion County 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 WATER PCB-SD0000028862