Document p2Z57QoVBmaDyky307bLEx24k

CONTOENTIAL IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES TRANSWESTERN PIPELINE COMPANY, PLAINTIFF, VS. MONSANTO COMPANY AND DOES 1-200, INCLUSIVE, DEFENDANT. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) NO. B C 026959 DEPOSITION OF ROGER E. HATTON, PH.D. JANUARY 22, 1992 VOLUME II GORE REPORTING COMPANY 100 NORTH BROADWAY ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 63102 241-6750 WATER PCB-SD0000028162 IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES TRANSWESTERN PIPELINE COMPANY, ) PLAINTIFF, ) ) ) VS. ) NO. B C 026959 MONSANTO COMPANY AND DOES 1-200, INCLUSIVE, ) ) ) DEFENDANT. ) ) Deposition of Roger E. Hatton, taken on behalf of the Plaintiff, at the law offices of Bryan, Cave, McPheeters and McRoberts, 500 North Broadway, in the City of St. Louis, State of Missouri, on the 22nd day of January, 1992 before Sandra L. Ragsdale, Registered Professional Reporter and Notary Public. WATER PCB-SD0000028163 APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL: FOR THE PLAINTIFF Ms. Dana K. Welch Shearman & Sterling 555 California Street San Francisco, California 94194 FOR THE DEFENDANT Mr. Donald F. Zimmer, Jr. Bronson, Bronson & McKinnon 505 Montgomery Street San Francisco, California 94111 WATER PCB-SD0000028164 INDEX Examination by Ms. Welch PAGE 167 INDEX TO EXHIBITS 36 P. 167 37 P. 171 38 P. 172 39 P. 174 40 P. 179 41 P. 188 42 P. 199 43 P. 200 44 P. 204 45 P. 208 46 P. 209 47 P. 213 48 P. 218 49 P. 219 50 P. 223 51 P. 224 52 P. 226 53 P. 228 54 P. 229 55 P. 231 56 P. 233 57 P. 237 58 P. 240 Excerpt from Hatton deposition, 3-15-90 Letter, 2-6-50, Indiana State Board of Health to Monsanto HEW letter, 1-5-67, to Dr. Hunt Report, 6-29-64, by Hatton re Transfer to marketing and recommended product strategy Analysis of effect of discontinuing PCB-containing Pydrauls Memo, 2-23-71, Hatton to Howmet Corp. Letter, 4-2-71, Hatton to America; Hospital Supply Corp. 3-30-70 memo re Ohio silage problem Minutes, corporate management committee meeting, 3-8-71 Letter, 5-10-71, Hatton to TVA Memo, 5-28-71, Hatton to Bradford Call report, 6-28-71, by Frederik sen Cal1 report, 7-1-71, by Stegen Memo, 9-16-71, Bradford to Papageorge Customer Problem Report, 10-4-71, by Hatton Memo, 10-6-71, Bradford to Gossag Memo, 10-12-71 from Bradford to Stegen Letter, 10-25-71 from Hatton to Columbia Gulf Letter, 10-26-71, Papageorge to Mason Memo, 11-17-71, from Bradford and Johnson to Gossage Memo, 12-8-71, from Bradford and Davidson to Gossage Memo, 2-18-70, by Olson Memo, 12-13-71, from Hatton to Bradford WATER PCB-SD0000028165 59 P. 246 60 P. 248 61 P. 251 62 P. 255 63 P. 256 64 P. 264 65 P. 265 66 P. 267 67 P. 269 68 P. 271 69 P. 276 70 P. 278 Letter, 12-15-71, from Hatton to Industrial Hydraulics Dept. Memo, 1-7-72, Bradford to Gossagi Letter, 1-7-72, Bradford to Harrison re hold harmless agreement Call report, 1-7-72, by Stegen Call report, 1-14-72, by Hatton Call report, 2-3-72, by Stegen Call report, 2-4-72, by Hatton Letter, 5-11-72, Riall to Colvin and Hughes Call report, 6-2-72, by Davidson Memo, 8-28-72, Davidson to Paton Call report, 12-6-72, by Frederiksen Memo, 12-14-72, Davidson to Frederiksen WATER PCB-SD0000028166 GORE REPORTING COMPANY ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 167 1 EXAMINATION 2 QUESTIONS BY MS. WELCH: 3 Q. Back on the record. Good morning. Dr. 4 Hatton. 5 A. Good morning. 6 Q. This is a continuation of the deposition 7 that we adjourned temporarily last night. Dr. 8 Hatton, you understand that you're still under oath, 9 do you not? 10 A. Yes, I do. 11 Q. Okay. I believe -- and maybe you can 12 confirm this for me, Mr. Zimmer -- that we finished 13 with Exhibit 35? 14 MR. ZIMMER: That's what I have. 15 Q. So I would request that this be marked 16 as Exhibit 36 and to read the inside page of the 17 deposition transcript. By the way Exhibit 36 is a 18 one-page excerpt of the deposition transcript of 19 Roger Hatton taken on March 15th, 1990 in litigation 20 that's captioned: In re: Texas Eastern Transmission 21 Corporation PCB Contamination Insurance Coverage 22 Litigation. Dr. Hatton; do you recall giving 23 testimony in this deposition? 24 A. Yes, I gave this deposition. 25 Q. And if I could direct your attention to WATER PCB-SD0000028167 GORE REPORTING COMPANY ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 168 1 lines 13 through 20 on page 583 of the deposition 2 transcript. Does this refresh your recollection that 3 any of the past deposition testimony that you've 4 given related to litigation concerning PCB's? 5 A. No. Any such depositions that were in 6 my mind at that time, remembering back a couple years 7 ago, had to do with things that were -- occurred 8 while I was still with the company and I have no records of those and I don't remember specifically 10 what the cases were. 11 Q. Do you know if those depositions that 12 you referred to in these lines involved PCB*s? 13 A. They involved Pydrauls, yes. 14 Q. And do you recall what the names of 15 those litigations were? 16 A. No, I do not. 17 Q. Do you recal1 whatthe time period of 18 those depositions were, each one? 19 A. They were prior to 1982 at the time that 20 I was still employed by the company. 21 Q. Were they between 1970 and 1982? 22 A. I don't know. 23 Q. Approximately how many if you can recal1 24 of those depositions involved Pydrauls? 25 A. Since I don't remember the names and so WATER PCB-SD0000028168 GORE REPORTING COMPANY ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 169 1 on I don't know that I can give you an exact number 2 but it was one or two. Most of the depositions that 3 I gave while I was still working were on other 4 products than PCB's. 5 Q. I would like to focus on those one or 6 two depositions that involved PydrauIs. Do you 7 recal1 if either of those lawsuits or litigations 8 that you testified in related to any allegations of j damage from PCB products? 10 MR. ZIMMER: Objection. It calIs for a 11 legal conclusion. You can answer, Doctor. 12 A. No, I don't. As I've already indicated 13 I don't remember these cases. I just vaguely 14 remember that this type of operation went on while I 15 was working and when the legal department called me 16 over whatever they asked I gave and I did not follow 17 up on the cases afterwards nor did I get very much 18 involved in what was going on. 19 Q. Do you recal1 who represented you at 20 these depositions? 21 A. Somebody from the law department. 22 Q. Do you recal1 the individual's name in 23 the law department? 24 A. No. 25 Q. Do you recall the name of Mr. WATER PCB-SD0000028169 GORE REPORTING COMPANY ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 170 1 'Biceline'? 2 A. Certainly. I talked to Tom many times 3 over the past few years. 4 Q. Do you know if Mr. 'Biceline' 5 represented you in these depositions? 6 A. No, I do not. 7 Q. Do you have any idea where these 8 transcripts are located? 9 A. I can only state with certainty that I 10 don't have them. 11 Q. Okay. Do you know if Monsanto has them? 12 A. There's no way I would know whether 13 Monsanto's files contain things that I put in them 14 those many years ago. 15 Q. I'd like to turn back to Exhibit 35 if 16 we could for a minute. I have a few more follow-up 17 questions on this exhibit. This exhibit is a letter 18 if you recall. Doctor, from -- or a memo from Jack 19 Garrett of the medical department to Mr. Papageorge. 20 I'd like to refer you to the second page and ask you 21 whether you know whether at that time in February 22 1970 or any time around that period Texas Eastern was 23 informed about the danger of PCB's by any general PCB 24 information program from Monsanto? 25 A. I do not know. WATER PCB-SD0000028170 GORE REPORTING COMPANY ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 171 1 Q. Do you have any idea who would know 2 about that? 3 MR. ZIMMER: CalIs for speculation. I 4 assume you can start with maybe either the author or 5 recipient of this exhibit. 6 A. I don't have any -- I don't remember 7 seeing this memo unti1 yesterday and I don't remember 8 exactly. 9 MR. ZIMMER: That's fine. 10 Q. I'd like to have this marked as Exhibit 11 37 please. Dr. Hatton, Exhibit 37 is a memorandum 12 from the State of Indiana State Board of Health dated 13 February 6, 1950 and it's addressed to the toxicology 14 department. My question to you is whether you have 15 any recollection at the time about hearing about the 16 incident that's described in this document, in other 17 words, the fact that several workers have reportedly 18 become ill due to the inhalation of vapor from 19 Aroclor 1258? 20 MR. ZIMMER: Assumes facts as you put 21 them not in evidence as to the truth of what was in 22 this letter which is directed to the toxicology 23 department of which Dr. Hatton is not a member. But 24 if you have heard about any of these things discussed 25 please tell her. WATER PCB-SD0000028171 GORE REPORTING COMPANY ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 172 1 A. May I ask is this 1950 or 1960? 2 Q. I believe that it's 1950. 3 MR. ZIMMER: It's not clear from the 4 date on there but with that assumption, fine. 5 A. No. I would not have -- I do not 6 remember this spec ific incident and I was not 7 involved in heat transfer fluids at that time. 8 Q. You testified yesterday that you visited 9 Dr. Kelly in his office or had discussions with Mr. 10 Wheeler. Do you have any recollection of hearing 11 from either of those two gentlemen about this 12 incident? 13 MR. ZIMMERs Let me just object. The 14 question is argumentative as phrased because it's a 15 quantum leap that just because he did on occasion 16 visit Dr. Kelly or Mr. Wheeler that automatically he 17 would know about anything they learned. And so I 18 find that an unfair question in that regard. But if 19 you're asking him did he discuss this issue with 20 them. 21 Q. I think the question speaks for itself. 22 A. I don't know. I don't remember. 23 Q. I'd like to have this marked as Exhibit 24 38. If you could, Dr. Hatton, please take a few 25 minutes to read this. This is a letter to a Dr. Hunt WATER PCB-SD0000028172 GORE REPORTING COMPANY ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 173 1 at Monsanto Company from the Department of Health, 2 Education and Welfare, Food and Drug Administration, 3 dated January 5th, 1967. Dr. Hatton, could you tell 4 me if you know who Dr. Hunt is? 5 A. Yes, Dr. Hunt had joined the medical 6 department and I believe he was trained as a 7 toxicologist but I'm not sure of his exact 8 background. But he did beeome a member of that 9 group. 10 Q. Do you recal1 approximately when he 11 beeame a member of that group? 12 A. No, I do not. 13 Q. And did you have much contact with Dr. 14 Hun t ? 15 A. No. 16 Q. Do you know if Dr. Hunt is still alive? 17 A. I do not know. 18 Q. In or around 1967 did you ever hear 19 about this toxicology study that was performed by the 20 FDA at Monsanto's request? 21 A. I do not - 22 MR. ZIMMER: Thequestion assumes facts 23 not in evidence. She's asking you about the subject 24 matter of this letter if this is indeed true. 25 A. I have no recollection of this. WATER PCB-SD0000028173 GORE REPORTING COMPANY ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 174 1 Q. You have no recollections of any study 2 on chicks of the various formations of Aroclors and 3 the incidence of deaths and what the causes of deaths 4 were? 5 MR. ZIMMER: Asked and answered and I'll 6 object, the document speaks for itseIf and the 7 characterization of it is not necessarily accurate. 8 Q. You can answer. 9 A. I've never seen the document before. 10 Q. And you've never heard of this 11 particular study? 12 A. Not that I can remember. 13 Q. This will be Exhibit 39. This is a 14 document apparently authored by you. Dr. Hatton, 15 dated June 29th, 1964 , a document entitled MCS-153, 16 Transfer to Marketing and Recommended Product 17 Strategy. Do you recognize this document, Dr. 18 Hatton? 19 A. Yes. 20 Q. Could you tell me what the document is? 21 A. The document is a report which was 22 required to be put together before a product could be 23 transferred to the marketing department. Prior to 24 this time the handling of MCS-153 had been primarily 25 as a development product. This was to transfer into WATER PCB-SD0000028174 GORE REPORTING COMPANY ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 175 1 the marketing department and to make them completely 2 responsible for the product from then on. 3 Q. If you know could you tell me why the 4 product was transferred to the marketing department 5 at this point? 6 A. Any product that development ever worked 7 on that was going to be sold as a commercial product 8 eventually and hopefully large scale had to have a 9 transfer to a report to the marketing department and 10 this is the one for this particular product. 11 Q. So 1964 marked the approximate time when 12 the product was transferred from development to 13 marketing; is that correct? 14 A. That is correct, some time after this 15 because the document had to be prepared before the 16 exact date of transfer. 17 Q. I'm just going to ask you two questions 18 about this document. If you could turn to page 8 of 19 the document, the Bates stamp is TRANS 001347 please. 20 Read the section under the description of toxicity. 21 A. Yes. 22 Q. Is this paragraph correct, that the 23 toxicity statement for OS-81 was used for the 24 handling of MCS-153? 25 MR. ZIMMER: THE question asks for a WATER PCB-SD0000028175 GORE REPORTING COMPANY ST. LOUIS* MISSOURI 176 1 medical opinion as to the accuracy of the toxicity. 2 Q. I asked for the use. Is it correct that 3 the statement was transferred -- I'm not asking if 4 the statement is correct* if the toxicity statement / 5 is correct -- but just was the same statement used? 6 A. What I wrote says that the medical 7 department has agreed to that statement and since I 8 wrot e it my memory says yes * I remember that the 9 medical department supplied it. 10 Q. So there were no changes in the toxicity 11 statement when the product was changed from OS-81 to 12 MCS-153 to the best of your recollection? 13 MR. ZIMMER: Before you answer* Doctor* 14 piease let me object that that mischaracterizes his 15 statement. He didn't say anything at all about 16 changes. He referred to the medical department * s 17 agreement to do that as stated here. His answer also 18 evidences that he has no recollection of it other 19 than what is written in the document. The document 20 speaks for itself. I think you're asking him another 21 unfair question about whether there were changes in 22 something that he didn't supply. If you recall * 23 Doctor* whether there were any changes in the 24 document or not please tel 1 her but don't assume 25 something just because it's written here. WATER PCB-SD0000028176 GORE REPORTING COMPANY ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 177 1 Q. The question stands. Do you recall any 2 changes? 3 A. No, I do not recall. The complete 4 statement is attached to the document that was given 5 out to the customers. 6 MR. ZIMMER: You've answered her 7 question which was do you recall any changes. 8 A. And I don't recall whether they were 9 changed from one bulletin to the other. 10 Q. Let's turn to the statement which is 11 attached as Appendix VI, Bates stamp Tran 001380 and 12 please if you could read that. To the best of your 13 recollection, Dr. Hatton, is this the statement that 14 was given -- the toxicity statement that was given 15 for both OS-81 and MCS-153? 16 A. I don't recall. The indications in this 17 document are that it was but I do not recall it 18 specifically. 19 MR. ZIMMER: Let me caution you again. 20 She's not asking you to interpret a document. She's 21 asking you for your recollection. And so please just 22 tell her whether you recall or not and give her an 23 answer to her specific question. .I 24 A. I do not recall whether the exact words 25 her are the same ones that were used in the MCS-153 WATER PCB-SD0000028177 GORE REPORTING COMPANY ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 178 1 bulletin. 2 Q. Do you have any reason to doubt that 3 they were? 4 MR. ZIMMER: Don't answer that. 5 Q. Are you instructing him not to answer? 6 MR. ZIMMER: I'm asking him to let me 7 state roy objection here. That was pausing him. 8 Q. If I might state something for the 9 record at this point, counsel. The record is going 10 to be replete with monologues from you basically 11 coaching the witness on how to answer a question. I 12 have no objection to you objecting, stating the basis 13 of your objection, but basically you're answering my 14 questions before the witness gets a chance to answer 15 them. 16 MR. ZIMMER: I think the record is also 17 going to be replete with questions from you about 18 documents that the witness neither authored nor was 19 copied on nor had anything to do with, that this is 20 one of the first documents that he had anything to do 21 with. However, you're focusing on a section that he 2 2 did not author. You're asking him whether he has any 23 doubt in his mind that that was not the same appendix 24 that accompanied two separate reports when he didn't 25 prepare the appendix. That's completely unfair. WATER PCB-SD0000028178 \ GORE REPORTING COMPANY ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 179 1 calls for obvious speculation. 2 Q. The question stands. 3 MR. ZIMMER: Fine. 4 Q. The question stands. 5 MR. ZIMMER: I am compelled to make my 6 objection on that basis, Doctor. You can answer. 7 It's obviously so argumentative. 8 A. I'll answer it this way, the statements 9 that were included with both products were approved 10 by the medical department and much of the wording in 11 there was -- in fact almost all that wording is 12 theirs, not mine, and what they supplied for 153, I 13 don't remember the exact word by word interpretation 14 of it. 15 Q. Okay. But you attached what they worded 16 to your product study? 17 A. Yes, I did. 18 Q. Mark this as Exhibit 40 please and I'd 19 like you to take a few minutes to read this complete 20 document. Dr. Hatton, have you ever seen this 21 document before? 22 A. No, I have not. 23 Q. Can you tel1 me to the extent that you 24 recal1 which individuals in approximately 1970 were 25 responsible for the marketing of Pydraul products? WATER PCB-SD0000028179 GORE REPORTING COMPANY ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 180 1 A. And the year you were referring to was 2 1970? 3 Q. That* s correct. 4 A. I cannot remember the specific 5 individuals involved who would have worked at that 6 time in a product group who would have been 7 responsible for al1 Pydrauls. 3 Q. How about individuals who would have 9 been responsible for the Pydrauls that are included 10 in this document, in other words, Pydraul 625, 11 Pydrau1 AC, Pydraul AC Winter Grade, Turbinol 153; 12 those in particular? 13 A. Your question was, was the marketing 14 department and the marketing department product group 15 would have handled al1 Pydraul products, whatever 16 their number? 17 Q. Okay. Do you have any recollection of 18 any of those individuals? 19 A. No. I've already answered that. 20 Q. Do you have any recollection of who 21 within the Monsanto organization would have been 22 responsible for the decision to terminate sales to 23 Pydrau1 customers? 24 A. There's no name on this document and I 25 can't remember one. WATER PCB-SD0000028180 GORE REPORTING COMPANY ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 181 1 Q. I'm not asking you for the author of 2 this document. I'm asking you to tell me who was 3 responsible for the termination of Pydraul products? 4 A. Same answer. 5 Q. You have no idea who that person wouId 6 be? 7 MR. ZIMMER: Asked and answered twice. 8 Q. If you could turn to the page Bates 9 stamped TRAN 002542, the headline on that page or 10 heading on the page is Maj or Customers and focus on 11 the dates that are mentioned there, 1969 sales and 12 197 0 sales through March. This document is not only 13 unauthored, it's undated. And would you agree with 14 me that the indication where it says 1970 sales 15 through March places this document some time in early 16 1970? 17 MR. ZIMMER: That's your interpretation 18 of the document. I mean he doesn't have to comment 19 on a document that speaks for itself without an 20 author indicated and without a date. 21 Q. Again you're coaching the witness. 22 MR. ZIMMER: No, I'm not coaching the 23 witness and I wasn't coaching the witness before. 24 I'm objecting to the objectionable portions of your 25 question and when they 're unfair I'm going to point WATER PCB-SD0000028181 GORE REPORTING COMPANY ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 182 1 that out. So I don't appreciate your colloquy on the 2 record about how I'm coaching the witness. He 3 doesn't have to agree with your interpretation. You 4 can save it for the jury. 5 Q. It's up to the doctor to tell me whether 6 he agrees with me, not for you to tell him not to 7 agree with me. 8 MR. ZIMMER: I told you to ask a fair 9 question which is what you're supposed to be doing. 10 Q. I think that's a fair question. Do you 11 agree with me this places the document some time in 12 eairly 1970, Doctor? 13 MR. ZIMMER: Objection that the document 14 speaks for itself, calIs for speculation. 15 A. I have no additional comment. 16 Q. Okay. I'd like you to turn to the page 17 that's Bates stamped TRAN 002540 under the section 18 Turbinol 153. Do you know if in early 1970 Texas 19 Eastern -- Strike that. Do you know if in early 1970 20 Monsanto was,still selling Turbinol 153 to Texas 21 Eastern? 22 A. Your date was early 1970? 23 Q. That's correct. 24 A. Yes. 25 Q. Until March 1970? WATER PCB-SD0000028182 GORE REPORTING COMPANY ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 183 1 A. Yes. 2 Q. Do you know from your recollection 3 whether Monsanto had informed Texas Eastern at this 4 point that it would terminate sales of Turbinol 153? 5 A. The date I remember of the meeting that 6 announced this which was preceded by some 7 negotiations was 1972. I believe sometime in 8 January. 9 Q. So your testimony is that as of this 10 point there had been no information given to Texas 11 Eastern that there would be termination of the sales? 12 MR. ZIMMER: Let me object. That 13 completely mischaracterizes what he just said. He 14 didn't comment at all on whether there was any 15 information given to them or not. 16 Q. Then I'll restate the question. To your 17 knowledge was any information given to them prior to 18 March 197 0 that sales of Turbinol 153 would be 19 terminated? 20 A. I do not know. 21 Q. Your only knowledge of the termination 22 stems from that January 197 2 meeting; is that 23 cor rec t ? 24 MR. ZIMMER: That also mischaracterizes 25 his testimony. He specifically referenced WATER PCB-SD0000028183 GORE REPORTING COMPANY ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 184 1 negotiations that preceded that date. 2 A. I was aware that there were discussions 3 going on before the of ficial meeting was held. 4 Q. Do you have any recollection of the time 5 of those discussions? 6 MR. ZIMMER: Asked and answered. 7 A. A few months. I think I answered before 8 and that's my memory. 9 Q. But certainly it wouldn't have been as 10 early as early 1970, would it have? 11 MR. ZIMMER: Argumentative, asked and 12 answered? 13 A. I do not remember. 14 Q. I'd like you to turn to the page that's 15 Bates stamped 002545 under the heading Summary, the 16 second sentence: We hope to have a straight 17 phosphate ester in 19 71. Could you explain to me 18 what a straight phosphate ester is? 19 MR. ZIMMER: You're asking him to 20 comment on what this undated and unsigned document 21 refers to as a straight phosphate ester, what that 22 term, if it's one that means something to him, means. 23 Q. What does the term mean to you, Dr. 24 Hatton? 25 A. Straight phosphate ester was commonly WATER PCB-SD0000028184 GORE REPORTING COMPANY ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI n 185 1 accepted by people working in these fie Ids at that 2 time as being a material which contained only 3 chemic ally phosphate esters plus minor amounts of 4 additives. Phosphate esters is a chemical class of 5 materials which have been known since -- at least for 6 a hundred years -- and you can prepare phosphate 7 esters of many different chemical types. And the 8 term straight phosphate ester just means that you did 9 not put anything else in the fluid, you didn't add a 10 PCB to it, you didn't add petroleum to it, nothing 11 else other than minor additives. 12 Q. To your knowledge in 1970 was Monsanto j 13 working on a straight phosphate ester? 14 A. Yes, they were. 15 Q. In 1970 did Monsanto havea commercially 16 viable straight pho sphate ester? 17 MR. ZIMMER: For what application, 18 counselor? For any application? 19 Q. For any application? 20 A. We sold phosphate esters. They were 21 part of the product line when I came with the company 22 in 1946 and they were being sold commercially. 23 Q. Was there a straight phosphate ester for 24 the application that would have been used for Texas 25 Eastern gas turbines? WATER PCB-SD0000028185 GORE REPORTING COMPANY ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 186 1 MR. ZIMMER: That calls for speculation 2 as to what would have been used for that purpose. 3 A. I can only indicate that the people who 4 were doing the research program at that time decided 5 that they needed a spec ific group of straight 6 phosphate esters for the Pydraul and similar 7 applications and were doing the work. Why the 8 decision was made not to take what was on the shelf I 9 do not know. 10 Q. Okay. Do you know who those people 11 were? 12 A. They were members of Bill Richard* s 13 activities. I do not know the specific people. I 14 know they were in his group. 15 Q. I might have asked you this yesterday 16 but is Bill Richards sti11 alive? 17 A. No, unfortunately within the last eight 18 or -- eight to ten months. 19 Q. Is there anybody else who you remember 20 who headed that group or had contact with the group? 21 A. I don't remember the organization that 22 well. I just don't remember organization charts that 23 wel 1. 24 Q. Please turn to the last page of the 25 document. And I'd 1ike you to turn your attention to WATER PCB-SD0000028186 GORE REPORTING COMPANY ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 187 1 the paragraph that begins with: Replacement of 2 remaining Aroclor 1242 is continuing. Did you ever 3 have any discussions with anyone at all about the 4 three alternatives that are presented in this 5 paragraph to the replacement of remaining Aroclor 6 1242? 7 MR. ZIMMER: Object, the question lacks 6 foundation in that you haven * t even asked him whether 9 he ever saw this document. 10 Q. I did ask him that and he answered that 11 he didn't. I'm asking him about discussion, not the 12 document. 13 A. I do not remember such a discussion. 14 Q. Did you know that Monsanto was 15 considering different alternatives for the 16 replacement of remaining Aroclor 1242? 17 MR. ZIMMER: In this time fraroe being -- 18 Q. Early 1970? 19 A. Yes. 20 Q. What's your recollection of the various 21 choices that faced Monsanto? 22 A. That any logical program that you would 23 develop for the replacement of any given product were 24 all being considered by those who were responsible. 25 Q. Do you know what the possibilities that WATER PCB-SD0000028187 GORE REPORTING COMPANY ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 188 1 were being considered were? 2 A. I do not remember outlining these 3 before. If you want me to sit here and speculate on 4 what they -- you might do if you had to take a 5 product off the market I can. 6 Q. I don't want speculation. I want your 7 recollection from that time period. 3 A. I do not have a recollection of all the 9 points of the replacement programs. 10 Q. Do you remember -- again I'm not asking 11 you to speculate, I'm asking for your recollection - 12 any problems that Monsanto faced in supplying a 13 replacement fluid? 14 A. I don't remember holding such 15 discussions. 16 Q. Do you remember in your general 17 knowledge of any problems that Monsanto might face? 18 A. No. 19 Q. From the time period early 1970? 20 A. No. 21 Q. I'd like to mark this as Exhibit 41 22 please. Dr. Hatton, can you tell me who C. L. 23 Bradford is? 24 A. That's Larry Bradford, usually referred 25 to. He at that point was my supervisor. WATER PCB-SD0000028188 GORE REPORTING COMPANY ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 189 1 Q. And what was his official position? 2 A. In '71 he was in the marketing activity. 3 I'm not sure that I know his title but he had several j 4 people working for him who did similar things to what 5 I did in terms of service and support products that 6 were in marketing. 7 Q. Do you know who else he had working for S him? 9 A. I think Jerry Davidson was in the group 10 at that time and maybe -- I won't say maybe -- there 11 was one or two others and I'm not sure of the 12 organization pattern within that group. 13 Q. Did Jerry Davidson have responsibility 14 for different products than you did? 15 A. Yes. 16 Q. Do you recall which products he had 17 responsibility for? 18 A. On February 23rd, 1971, no, I do not 19 remember which products fell under which person. 20 Q. Do you recal1 when Larry Bradford came 21 to Monsanto? 22 A. No. 1 23 Q. Who did Larry Bradford report to? 24 A. Again you're asking for my memory of 25 that organization chart at the time and I am not ! WATER PCB-SD0000028189 GORE REPORTING COMPANY ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 190 1 certain. I believe it was Gumming Paton but I am not 2 certain. 3 Q. Okay. This letter refers to a product 4 called Santovac 2; is that correct? 5 A. Right. 6 Q. Was that one of the products that you 7 were responsible for at this time? 8 A. At this particular point in time I was 9 assigned the responsibility of introducing Santovac 1 10 and 2. 11 Q. And so at this time in 1971 Monsanto was 12 stil1 selling and promoting Santovac 2; is that 13 correct? 14 A. Yes. I would like to point out that 15 Santovac 1 and 2 were very short-lived products. We 16 had not sold them as trade name products for only a 17 matter of months before they were removed from the 18 market. 19 Q. When did you first start selling them to 20 the best of your recollection? 21 A. Some time in 1970. . 22 Q. And when did you stop selling them to 23 the best of your recollection? 24 A. Very shortly after the date of this 25 letter, early '71 -- no, may I retract my -- WATER PCB-SD0000028190 GORE REPORTING COMPANY ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 191 1 Q. Certainly. 2 A. I just remembered it was more like 3 Christmastime of '71. 4 Q. So you sold them for approximately a 5 year? 6 A. Yes. 7 Q. And what was the application of Santovac 8 2, in this letter? 9 A. It is a vacuum pump fluid, a working 10 flu id in a vacuum pump system. 11 Q. And refer ring back toour discussion 12 yesterday of closed and opensystems, what kind of 13 system is a vacuum pump? 14 A. I think I indicated then that my example 15 of a closed system, the most closed system I knew of 16 was a vacuum pump application. A vacuum pump is used 17 to remove air and gases from a system. So that the 18 pressure within the system is quite low. 19 Q. And forgive me if I sound crude and 20 layman like but this again refers back to the 21 discussion of closed and open systems. Yesterday you 22 stated that you considered -- and today -- that you 23 would consider a vacuum pump the most closed system? 24 A. Yes. 25 Q. I believe yesterday you stated-- and WATER PCB-SD0000028191 GORE REPORTING COMPANY ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 192 1 correct me if I'm wrong -- that it was even more 2 closed than a gas compressor? 3 A. Yes. 4 Q. Could you tel 1 me why it's more closed, 5 what about it makes it more closed? To the best of 6 your ability? 7 A. That is a very difficult question 8 beeause of the complexity of the two systems. I'll 9 see if I can -10 Q. If you can reduce it to its most 11 explainable? 12 A. In a vacuum pump system the fluid is 13 actually boiled, turned into vapor. The vapor then 14 passes through certain parts of the system and as it 15 does it drags the gases out of the system. The 16 working fluid in the system is then condensed, turned 17 back to 1iquid form, and goes through the system and 18 repe at that. So that the amount of exposure to the 19 atmosphere is extremely small. 20 Q. And couId you contrast that with a gas 21 compressor? 22 A. In a gas compressor system you are first 23 dealing with much larger systems to begin with and 24 you are also circulating the fluid by pumps at 25 atmospheric pres sure around through the system. WATER PCB-SD0000028192 GORE REPORTING COMPANY ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 193 1 Atmospheric pressure and above in most cases. In a 2 vacuum pump you are dealing mostly under vacuum. 3 Q. So the difference -- I'm getting two 4 differences from what you're stating, the size of the 5 system and the atmospheric pressure of the system; is 6 that correct? 7 A. Yes, those are two significant P differences. Another one is that in one case you're 9 using it as a vapor in a completely closed system 10 from which it can't escape and in the other you are 11 circulating it out at atmospheric pressure. 12 Q. Can it escape in that kind of system, 13 the second system you described? 14 MR. ZIMMER: Cal Is for speculation as to 15 the type of maintenance observed, what application is 16 used. I mean we're getting a little far afield here. 17 The Doctor is not an engineer nor an expert in either 18 of these two types of systems. I've let you get a 19 fair amount of free expert advice from him but I 20 think that' s who you ought to be consulting. The 21 question cal Is for speculation. You're not entitled 22 to his opinion on everything. I'm going to cut it 23 of f will soon. 24 Q. I'm not asking for an expert opinion. 25 To the extent that you know? WATER PCB-SD0000028193 GORE REPORTING COMPANY ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 194 1 A. In a vacuum system, the use of a vacuum 2 system, if you get any exposure to the atmosphere it 3 means you've broken the system and it's no longer 4 useful. It takes a major type of leak in a vacuum 5 system to get material out into the atmosphere. In a 6 circulating system of any type, breakage of a line, a 7 connection that isn't tight, things like that will 8 give leaks. 9 Q. Thank you. Correct me if I'm wrong but 10 I believe yesterday you testified that or you looked 11 at some documents from 1969, 1970 time period, that 12 there had been a decision at the corporate management 13 level to withdraw products that contained Aroclor 14 1254 and 1260. Am I wrong in that characterization? 15 MR. ZIMMER: Do you want to refer him to 16 a specific document that you looked at yesterday? Or 17 if you remember, Doctor. 18 A. I don't remember the dates that well. 19 Q. Certainly previously to 1971. We can 20 take a minute and look at the previous documents if 21 you want. 22 (A brief recess was taken.) 23 Q. Back on the record. Dr. Hatton, I found 24 two exhibits that I would like you to look at that we 25 referred to yesterday that talk about the termination WATER PCB-SD0000028194 GORE REPORTING COMPANY ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 195 1 of PCS Aroclor 1254 and 1260. One is Exhibit 29 and 2 one is Exhibit 25 and if you could -- I'm sorry to 3 disturb your exhibits, Mr. Zimmer, thank you for 4 letting me use them -- under recommendations -- this 5 is the recommendation of the Aroclor ad hoc 6 committee, and this is the report, we're unclear who 7 the author was. But if you could read just the 8 recommendations about 1254 and 1260 and the first 9 paragraph of this report to refresh your recollection 10 about the testimony yesterday. 11 MR. ZIMMER: I'll just object that both 12 of these exhibits obviously lack foundation in that 13 he had neither seen them before nor authored either 14 of them. So to that extent, Doctor, you can read 15 this section again then respond to her questions. 16 A. And the specific question again please? 17 Q. The spec ific question was do you recall 18 that as you testified yesterday -- I believe I'm 19 correctly characterizing your testimony -- that 20 around this time period which is the end of 1969 that 21 there had been a decision to terminate sales of 22 Aroclor 1254 and 1260? 23 MR. ZIMMER: Doctor, if you recall that 24 that's what you should tell Miss Welch. If you're 25 only responding to confirm what these documents say WATER PCB-SD0000028195 GORE REPORTING COMPANY ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 196 1 which have yet to be established as true, that's not 2 what you should do. 3 A. I remember that 1254 and 1260 were 4 singled out from the rest of the Aroclors. 5 Q. Okay. Do you recall ever being told as 6 this document states that there should be a 7 notification of al1 -- and the document underlines 8 al1 -- Aroclor 1254 and 1260 customers of the 9 environmental contamination problem? 10 A. I do not remember the last part of that 11 was true. I just remember that 54 and 60 were 12 considered to be different than the rest of the 13 products. 14 Q. Back to Exhibit 41 then. Do you recal1 15 if Santovac 2 contained Aroclor 1254? 16 A. Yes, it did. 17 Q. I can't read the name of this client 18 here. It's Howmet Corporation. Do you recall this 19 client? 20 A. Not specifically. 21 Q. Do you recall if there was any 22 notification of this client of the hazards of Aroclor 23 1254 at this time, 1971? 24 A. Certainly the second paragraph puts him 25 on notice as to what the product is and what the WATER PCB-SD0000028196 GORE REPORTING COMPANY ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 197 1 potential hazards may be. 2 Q. Let's review what paragraph two says. 3 It says that it contains PCB's - 4 Which some studies have shown to be an 5 environmental contaminant and that extreme 6 care should be taken to prevent any entry into 7 the environment through spilIs, leakage, use, b disposal, vaporization or otherwise. 9 Do you recal1 if there was any other 10 notification of any other possibilities, for 11 instance, of liver damage? 12 A. No, I do not. 13 Q. Do you recall if there was any other 14 notification of the possibility of environmental 15 damage beyond what was included in this letter? 16 A. I do not know. I do know that any such 17 questions would have been referred over to the people 18 involved and if this raised any questions he would 19 have come back to us. 20 Q. Do you have any recollection of why, 21 given the singling out of 1254 and 1260, this product 22 was sti11 being sold as of February 1971? 23 MR. ZIMMER: He hasn't given you any 24 time frame as to when that singling out occurred. 25 Q. I believe he did. WATER PCB-SD0000028197 GORE REPORTING COMPANY ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 198 1 MR. ZIMMER: The record will speak for 2 itself on that. I think your exhibits did and your 3 interpretation of them did. But the question is 4 argumentative. 5 A. I'd like to make this statement, during 6 the time period that we're talking about my functions 7 were extremely broad. I was primarily concerned 8 about aviation hydraulic fluids and that was where I 9 spent 95 percent of my time. Projects such as the 10 Turbinols, the Santovac's and these other things were 11 handled on an assignment basis, the boss would come 12 in and say will you take a day or two days and work 13 on this. So they were not my full-time 14 responsibility. The types of products I was working 15 with contained no PCB's at all, they were different 16 types of products and that's where I spent my time 17 and most of my intellectual curiosity was involved in 18 those products. And these other things were handled 19 on an assignment basis. I was assigned both the 20 product, that is of handling Santovac 2 in this type 21 of letter, any type of inquiry, getting it started, 22 and I was eventually handed the problem of getting -- 23 tel ling people they couldn't buy them any more. 2 4 Q. Who was your boss who gave you these 25 assignments? WATER PCB-SD0000028198 GORE REPORTING COMPANY ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 199 1 A. The man I sent the copy to. 2 Q. And were there any other products 3 besides Turbinol 153 and Santovac 2 that you were 4 responsible for on an assignment basis during this 5 period that contained PCB's? 6 A. I can't remember all the assignments 7 that I had. These two I have cited because I 8 remember those two. 9 Q. Okay, fair enough. Mark this as Exhibit 10 4 2 please. 11 (A brief recess was taken.) 12 Q. Back on the record. Dr. Hatton, do you 13 recal1 contacts with this client, American Hospital 14 Supply Corporation? 15 A. Only as triggered by the letter I wrote. 16 Q. Does that trigger your recollection or 17 just - 18 A. It just indicates that they were one of 19 many people that I talked to at this time period. 20 Q. Do you recal1 discussing with either 21 Jack O'Connell or David Swendson the composition of 22 Santovac 2? 23 A. I do not recall doing it but the letter 24 says I did. 25 MR. ZIMMER: Doctor, when a letter says WATER PCB-SD0000028199 GORE REPORTING COMPANY ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 200 1 something you don't need to respond that that is a 2 true statement unless it jogs your memory that that 3 occurred. Her question to you was do you recall 4 talking to them about it, not what the letter said. 5 A. The direct answer to that is no, I do 6 not recal1 these names. 7 Q. Do you recal1 any concern being raised 8 by this client about the composition of Santovac 2? 9 A. No. 10 Q. Do you recal1 discussingwith them 11 anything further beyond what's indicated in this 12 letter about the hazards of PCB's? 13 A. No. 14 Q. Now Iwant to apologizefor the next 15 exhibit and we're going to have to take some time to 16 read it. It is extremely difficult to read it. And 17 I have been able to decipher it so if we need reading 18 out loud again I'll be glad to do it. That's just 19 the way it was produced to us. This is Exhibit 43. 20 I think perhaps I should read it because it takes a 21 while. 22 MR. ZIMMER: I just want the record to 23 indicate we're not necessarily accepting the reading. 24 I appreciate your efforts in deciphering it but it is 25 virtually illegible. WATER PCB-SD0000028200 GORE REPORTING COMPANY ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 201 1 Q. This is dated March 30th, 1970. The 2 names in the upper right hand corner are H. S. 3 Bergen, M. L. Minckler, P. S. Park and J. E. 4 Springate. And on the left hand or left hand corner 5 it says W. D. Papageorge. The text of the letter 6 reads: 7 We have been in communication with a Dr. Hill 8 of the Ohio State Board of Health. He has 9 found PCB, particularly Aroclor 1254, in 10 samples of milk from at least three herd in 11 Ohio. He has traced this contamination back 12 to silos from three different -- to silage -- 13 from three different silos. Dr. Hill reported 14 concentrations of 0.2 PPM of PCB in the silage 15 in the center of the silo and up to 16 20 PPM in the material next to the walls. He 17 also stated that concentrations in the milk 18 were between 0.1 PPM and 0.6 PPM and that some 19 of the milk had been destroyed. The silos are 20 concrete silos whose interior surfaces were 21 painted in 1967 using a formulation that 22 contained 1254 . I don't know if there was any 23 other Aroclor in the formulation nor do we 24 know the coating manufacturer although this 25 couId be found out if important. The presence WATER PCB-SD0000028201 GORE REPORTING COMPANY ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 202 1 of PCB in the silage came from flaking off of 2 the material and possibly from leaching out 3 during the silage storage. At present they 4 would have to destroy about 150 tons of silage 5 which is valued at about $30 per ton. As a 6 rough guess they consider there may be 50 7 other silos involved in Ohio that were painted 8 with the same formulation. They are also 9 looking into the fat contamination of the cows 10 themselves. All in al1 this could be quite 11 a serious problem having legal and publicity 12 overtones. This brings us to a very serious 13 point. When are we going to tell our 14 customers not to use any Aroclor in any paint 15 formulation that contacts food, feed or water 16 For animals or humans. I think it is very 17 important that this be done. It may be that 18 some of the customers will assure themselves 19 on the basis of non-extractability that a 20 particular formulation might be safe but I 21 think we should make a blanket recomroendation 22 against these uses. 23 And it's signed R. Emmet Kelly, M.D. 24 Again you're not agreeing with the rendition but did 25 you note any differences in what you could decipher WATER PCB-SD0000028202 GORE REPORTING COMPANY ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 203 1 from the document than what I read? 2 A. I wasn't even sure it was Hill. I 3 thought it was Mill. 4 MR. ZIMMER: Let me note there's a 5 couple of places too where there might be either 6 something redacted from the document but there's some 7 blank spaces in between paragraphs that I can't tell 8 are just white space otherwise because of the fashion 9 in which it's blotted out but I'm not sure that's 10 sign ificant. I also want to note for the record that 11 as to this document and the one that came up 12 yesterday which on its face referred to legal advice 13 and/or recommendations, that we're not waiving the 14 privilege even if such things were inadvertently 15 produced. This one has such a reference in it and it 16 also notes a copy to an attorney named Park at the 17 top that I think was.identified yesterday as such. 18 So. 19 Q. Okay. Did you ever hear about this 20 incident in 1970 of leakage into silos? 21 MR. ZIMMER: If that indeed occurred. 22 A. I do not remember hearing about it. 23 MR. ZIMMER: Assumes facts not in 24 evidence. 25 Q. Were you aware in 1970 whether there had WATER PCB-SD0000028203 GORE REPORTING COMPANY ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 204 1 been disclosure of the hazards of PCB's to customers 2 who used Aroclors in these kinds of applications? 3 MR. ZIMMER: In paint? 4 Q. That's correct. 5 A. I don't remember. I'm not sure. 6 Q. Do you remember any concern being raised 7 about disclosure to customers who used Aroclors in 8 paint application? This is 1970. 9 A. I have no specific memory. 10 Q. Do you recall who the individuals were 11 at Monsanto who were re sponsible for these kinds of 12 products at this point in time, 1970? 13 A. I can only indicate that paint is not 14 considered a functional fluid if I may and therefore 15 it would not have fallen under the group of people 16 that I dealt primarily with. It would have been 17 another application group. I think we mentioned 18 plasticizers, for example. But I do not really know 19 who would handle paints. 20 Q. Okay. This is Exhibit 44. If you 21 could, Doctor, take a few minutes to read this 22 document. This document is the Minutes of a meeting 23 of the corporate management committee dated March 8, 24 1971. My first question -- I believe that most of 25 the individuals here have been previously WATER PCB-SD0000028204 GORE REPORTING COMPANY ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 205 identified -- can you identify J. Mason for me? 2 A. I believe it refers -- the only J. Mason 3 that I know is a roan by the name of Jay Mason -- John 4 Mason, I'm sorry. And he was -- may or may not have 5 been in St. Louis at this time but was heavily 6 involved in Monsanto Chemicals Limited in London and 7 that is where I first met him. 8 Q. Did you have any contact with him in St. ./ Louis? 10 A. No direct contacts other than personal. 11 Q. Do you know if he was responsible for 12 any a spect of the PCB program in 1971? 13 A. I do not remember what his assignments 14 were. 15 Q. This document refers to the six point 16 program which was previously approved by the 17 commit tee and I believe we discussed that six point 18 program yesterday. 19 MR. ZIMMER: We didn't establish that it 20 was approved by the committee, however. You've shown 21 him documents that refer to that which he had not 22 seen before nor participated in. 23 Q. This document states it was a six point 24 program previously approved by the committee. 25 MR. ZIMMER: This document can state WATER PCB-SD0000028205 GORE REPORTING COMPANY ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 206 1 whatever it wants. He doesn't have any foundational 2 information to establish that for you, that's all I'm 3 saying. 4 Q. Referring to those six points I'd like 5 to ask you if you were involved in any of those -- 6 any aspect of this program? Were you involved in the 7 first point which is termination of sales of 8 non-biodegradable PCB's to non-controllable end uses? 9 A. No. 10 Q. Were you involved in the discontinuation 11 of the sale of Aroclor 1242 to NCR? 12 A. No. 13 Q. Were you involved in closing the loop on 14 heat transfer applications where fire retardancy is 15 essential? 16 A. No. 17 Q. Were you involved in replacing 18 non-biodegradable PCB's in hydraulic applications? 19 A. This is in March of '71? 20 Q. That's what this document says. 21 A. I believe previously I indicated that at 22 that point in time I took whatever assignments would 23 be added to my list of projects and certainly the 24 Santovac and the Therminol we've talked about were 25 included. WATER PCB-SD0000028206 GORE REPORTING COMPANY ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 207 1 0. Do you mean Turbinol or Therminol? 2 A. Turbinol, 11m sorry. Therminol is the 3 previous one which I didn't have any contact with, 4 Therminol. 5 Q. So we're speaking of Turbinol and 6 Santovac? 7 A. Yes. 8 Q. Here it says that conversion has been 9 comp leted through substitution of phosphate esters 10 and terphenyls. Was conversion completed as of March 11 '71 with respect to Turbinol? 12 MR. ZIMMER: As you use that term. 13 Doctor, not reacting to whatever the author of this 14 had in his or her mind. 15 A. I do not know. 16 Q. Had there been conversion at Texas 17 Eastern to phosphate esters at this point in 1971 to 18 your knowledge? 19 A. No. 20 Q. Had there been conversion to terphenyls 21 at Texas Eastern to this point? 22 A. I have no specific knowledge as to what 23 that statement means. 24 Q. What is a terphenyl? 25 A. A chemical compound which has three WATER PCB-SD0000028207 GORE REPORTING COMPANY ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 208 1 benzene rings instead of two like a biphenyl. 2 Q. Were you involved in closing the loop on 3 non-biodegradable PCB's in transformer applications? 4 A. No. 5 Q. Were you involved in closing the loop on 6 c apac itor s? 7 A. No. 8 Q. This is Exhibit 45. This is a letter 9 apparently from you dated May 10th, 1971 to a Mr. 10 Galbraith of the Tennessee Valley Authority. First 11 of all, who is Mr. Benignus? 12 A. Paul at this time period was working in 13 one of the product groups in marketing which would 14 have been responsible for dielectric fluids. 15 Q. Do you know if he's still alive? 16 A. The last I heard he was still alive. 17 Q. Was he on thesame level of supervisor 18 as Mr. Bradford? 19 A. I believe so. 20 Q. Did you report tohim? 21 A. No. 22 Q. Would it be safe to say that as of May 23 10, 1971 that Monsanto was still promoting Turbinol 24 153? 25 A. Yes. WATER PCB-SD0000028208 GORE REPORTING COMPANY ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 209 1 Q. Do you recall any discussions with Mr. 2 Galbraith or anybody else at Tennessee Valley 3 Authority about the possible hazards of PCB's? 4 A. No. 5 Q. This is Exhibit 46. Take a few minutes 6 to read this, Dr. Hatton. Exhibit 46 is a memorandum 7 apparently authored by you, Dr. Hatton, and it's to 8 Mr. Bradford. First of all, who is P. D. Fowlkes? 9 A. Fowlkes. If I can just correct 10 pronunciation. 11 Q. Fowlkes, okay. If you recall. If you 12 don ' t recall. 13 A. The question is whether I remember this 14 document? 15 Q. No, no, no. Could you tell me who Mr. 16 Fowlkes is? 17 A. Research chemist that worked for Stark 18 in research. I thought I'd answered your question, 19 I'm s or ry. 20 Q. Turn to page 2 and could you tell me if 21 you know what Fyrquel 150 was? 22 A. Yes, Fyrquel 150 was a competitive 23 straight phosphate ester fluid marketed at this time 24 I think by Stauffer Chemical. The reason I cannot 25 answer this exactly is that the business was WATER PCB-SD0000028209 GORE REPORTING COMPANY ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 210 1 transferred from Celanese Chemical to Stauffer and I 2 do not recal1 the exact dates. 3 Q. By straight phosphate ester do I take it 4 to mean that there were no PCB's in this product? 5 A. Straight phosphate ester does not mean 6 no PCB's in the product. But yes, there were no 7 PCB's in this product. 8 Q. Do you know -- if you do please tell 9 me -- when Fyrquel 150 first came on the market if 10 you know? 11 A. No, I do not know. 12 Q. When were you first aware of Fyrquel 13 150? 14 A. Early fifties. 15 Q. Referring to the last paragraph, in this 16 memorandum you refer to the deep seated prejudice of 17 turbine OEM's toward chlorine containing lubricants. 18 A. On page 2, okay. I had the wrong page, 19 I' m s or ry. 20 Q. What were you referring to? 21 A. There was a phenomenon that was found in 22 turbines, both gas turbines and steam turbines, which 23 involved a bearing problem. This bearing problem was 24 eventually related back to a chlorine additive that 25 was used in petroleum base lubricants. An example in WATER PCB-SD0000028210 GORE REPORTING COMPANY ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 211 1 the laboratory did show that OS-81 could cause the 2 same phenomenon under certain circumstances, test 3 procedures. This whole field then led the 4 manufacturers of these turbines to be concerned about 5 anything that cpntained any kind of chlorine, either 6 as a major component or as an additive. 7 Q. So that's what that refers to is the 8 bearing problem? 9 A. Yes. 10 Q. On the last page of the document, page 11 3, under Recommendation you recommend that Monsanto 12 follow option 2 which is: Run field test and sell 13 fluid at same price as MCS-974. Can you tell me, do 14 you recall what you were recommending that there be a 15 field test run of, of what fluid? 16 A. No, I don't remember. 17 MR. ZIMMER: Don't speculate, Doctor. 18 A. I don't remember what specific fluid I 19 was referring to here. 20 Q. The last line says: 21 It will also provide us with an alternate 22 if Turbinol 153 must be discontinued due to 23 the PCB situation. 24 Do you recall what that alternate was? 25 A. No, I do not recall. WATER PCB-SD0000028211 GORE REPORTING COMPANY ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 212 1 Q. Do you recall whether it was a straight 2 phosphate ester that you were referring to? 3 MR. ZIMMER: Asked and answered. If he 4 doe sn't recal1 what it was -- 5 A. I can only speculate so. 6 Q. Referring back to the first page where 7 it refers to MCS-979 and MCS-974, are those 8 PCB-containing lubricants? 9 A. I do not remember. 10 Q. Referring to New Formulation, under the 11 paragraph New Formulation, please read that 12 paragraph. This paragraph says that this formulation 13 does not contain PCB's. Does that help you 14 understand what option 2 refers to on the last page? 15 MR. ZIMMER: She's asking you if this 16 refreshes your recollection as to what the last page 17 option 2 means. , 18 A. It still does not refresh my memory 19 completely so I cannot answer what option 2 really 20 meant. 21 Q. Does it refresh your memory partially? 22 MR. ZIMMER: He's indicated he can't 2 3 answer what option 2 is so he would be speculating. 24 Q. Do you recall at this time which was May 25 of 1971 if Monsanto was actively considering non-PCB WATER PCB-SD0000028212 GORE REPORTING COMPANY ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 213 1 lubricants for at least AGTL? 2 A. Yes. 3 Q. Exhibit 47. If you could please read 4 this document. This is a call report dated 6-28 '71. 5 First of all, I note. Dr. Hatton, that there are 6 initials here that are crossed out. The initials are 7 REH. Are those your initials? 8 A. Yes. I assume so. My initials are REH. 9 Q. Okay. Have you ever seen this call 10 report before? 11 MR. ZIMMER: Except as it may have been 12 shown you by counsel. 13 A. I do not recal1 this one at al1. 14 Q. Have youever seen a document with 15 initials crossed off before, a call report? 16 MR. ZIMMER: At any point in time? 17 A. At any -- 18 Q. I'm just wondering what it means that 19 your initials are crossed off if you know. Does it 20 mean that you saw the document or didn't see the 21 document if you know? 22 MR. ZIMMER: The question is if you know 23 what that means, that there are initials REH here 24 that are crossed out, tell her. How could you 25 possibly know that? WATER PCB-SD0000028213 GORE REPORTING COMPANY ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 214 1 Q. Don't coach the witness please. 2 MR. ZIMMER: I'm not coaching the 3 witness. I'm talking about how silly your question 4 is. 5 Q. I'm entitled to ask whatever questions I 6 want and if it's silly it's silly and the record will 7 show that. Please answer the question. 8 A. I do not know specifically what it means 9 in this case. 10 MR. ZIMMER: That's it, the question has 11 been answered. Doctor. 12 Q. Did you ever have any discussions with 13 anyone listed on this document about this call to 14 Texas Eastern Transmission Company? 15 A. I do not recall discussions on this 16 specific cal1, no. 17 Q. Who is Mr. Ford if you know? 18 A. At that point the Shreveport location 19 fell under the Atlanta office in the Monsanto 20 organization and Mr. Ford was in charge of the 21 Atlanta office. 22 Q. And by the Shreveport location you're 23 referring to Texas Eastern's office there I assume? 24 A. Yes. 25 Q. And who is Mr. Regold if you know? WATER PCB-SD0000028214 GORE REPORTING COMPANY ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 215 1 A. That does not ring a bell. 2 Q. Do you by any chance know when Mr. 3 Stegen started working at Monsanto? 4 A. No, I do not. 5 Q. Would it be safe to say that as of this 6 date which is May 28th, 1971 that Monsanto was still 7 selling Turbinol 153 to Texas Eastern? 8 A. What was the premise of your question? 9 Q. Would it be safe to say that as of this 10 date of the call report -- 11 A. Yes. 12 Q. It was still being sold? 13 A. Yes. 14 Q. Turn to page 2 please. Did you ever 15 hear that a competitor, possibly Stauffer, had 16 discussed Monsanto's position on the PCB problem as 17 of this date? 18 MR. ZIMMER: Discussed it with whom? 19 Q. Apparently Texas Eastern. 20 A. I was generally aware that our 21 competitors were discussing the problem. 22 Q. Did you hear any specifics of what they 23 had said about the PCB problem? 24 A. No. 25 Q. Do you know how you were aware of that? WATER PCB-SD0000028215 GORE REPORTING COMPANY ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 216 1 A. Reports back from field salesmen. 2 Q. Would those field salesmen include Mr. 3 Stegen? 4 A. Might have. 5 Q. How about Mr. Frederiksen? 6 A. I talked to all our field salesmen. 7 Q. What other field salesmen to your 8 knowledge had contact with. Texas Eastern? 9 A. Based on documents that counsel has 10 shown us in the past I think I've seen some from Carl 11 C lay. 12 Q. Was this of concern to Monsanto? 13 MR. ZIMMER: Was what of concern, Carl 14 Clay was having contact -- 15 Q. The discussion about the PCB problems 16 coming from competitors. 17 MR. ZIMMER: Hang on a second before you 18 answer that, Doctor. The question is incredibly 19 argumentative. It implies that there was more than 20 one discussion about that. All he has told you that 21 he knows so far is that he was generally aware that 22 competitors brought that issue up. 23 Q. My question is perfectly legitimate, 24 which is, was this of concern to you, you -- 25 A. To me personally, yes. WATER PCB-SD0000028216 GORE REPORTING COMPANY ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 217 1 Q. Why was it of concern to you? 2 A. Anything any competitor said about any 3 products of ours I would be concerned about. 4 Q. Were you aware of anything that was done 5 in response to these discussions -- 6 A. No. 7 Q. -- with customers? Are you aware of 8 whether there was any discussion with Texas Eastern 9 in response to these discussions? 10 A. I was not present at this meeting so I 11 do not know what the response was. 12 Q. Did you hear what the response was after 13 the meeting? 14 A. No. 15 Q. Okay. Did you hear about the concern 16 that was expressed apparently by Mr. Woods that 17 Turbinol 153 had been reformulated without Texas 18 Eastern's knowledge? 19 MR. ZIMMER: The question assumes facts 20 not in evidence. 21 A. This I do remember being of concern and 22 being raised by John Frederiksen and that my answer 23 back to him was that we would not formulate any 24 product with any of our customers without informing 25 them and specifically we would not reformulate 153 WATER PCB-SD0000028217 GORE REPORTING COMPANY ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 218 1 without informing Texas Eastern. 2 Q. So to your knowledge there had been no 3 such reformulation to this date? 4 A. That's right. 5 Q. Doctor, this document as it came to us 6 includes two call reports. I'm just going to ask you 7 about the first call report on the first page and 8 we'll talk about the second call report later in 9 another document. So if you could just read the 10 first page. This is Exhibit 48. This is a call 11 report dated July 1st, 1971 and it is from apparently 12 Don Stegen and once again your initials appear 13 crossed out. Do you recall ever seeing this call 14 report? 15 A. Not spec ifically. 16 Q. Did you do you recall ever hearing a 17 report of this call? 18 A. I believe I received an invitation to 19 come to Houston to visit with 01lie Fletcher. 20 Q. Did you in fact do that? In response to 21 this? 22 A. Andwe'retalking about this time 23 period? 24 Q. Yes. 25 A. No, I did not make a special call to WATER PCB-SD0000028218 GORE REPORTING COMPANY ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 219 1 Houston. 2 Q. Did you at any time during the summer of 3 1971 make a special visit to Houston to have dinner 4 with Mr. Fletcher? 5 A. Unfortunately, no. 6 Q. Or to meetwith him? 7 A. No. 8 Q. So you had no contact -- no direct 9 contact with him during this time period? 10 A. We're talking the summer of 1971? 11 Q. Yes. 12 A. No. 13 Q. Did you ever have contact with Ted 14 Harrison? 15 A. No, I did not. 16 Q. This is Exhibit 49. Please read the 17 document. Actually I'm most interested in paragraph 18 4 on the second page. You can scan the rest and just 19 get to paragraph 4. This is a document dated 20 September 16th, 1971 from Mr. Bradford to Mr. 21 Papageorge and you're cc'd on the top. Do you recall 22 ever seeing this document be fore? 23 A. Yes. 24 Q. Directing your attention to paragraph 4, 25 is it true that there was a decision made not to WATER PCB-SD0000028219 GORE REPORTING COMPANY ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 220 1 approach Texas Eastern until Monsanto received 2 approval from General Electric for the use of the new 3 NC esters in gas turbines? 4 MR. ZIMMER: I'11 object that the 5 question misstates what the document says but you can 6 answer, Doctor. 7 A. The next step in the program would have 8 been to have gotten General Electric approval and q that would have been important at that point. 10 Q. Prior to contacting TexasEastern? 11 A. Prior or coincident with. 12 Q. To this date which was September 1971 do 13 you know if that contact had been made? 14 A. With whom? 15 Q. General Electric? 16 A. I'm having very much problems with dates 17 by month. We're talking about here many years ago. 18 Q. It's a long time ago. 19 A. And whether it was just before, just 20 after or during I cannot pin down without further 21 documents. 22 Q. Okay, that's fair. Do you have any 23 recollection of when General Electric if ever 24 approved the use of the NC esters? 25 A. No, I do not remember the date that we WATER PCB-SD0000028220 GORE REPORTING COMPANY ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 221 1 were given permission to use them in turbines. 2 Q. Do you recall if you were given 3 permission? . 4 A. Yes, we were. 5 Q. Do you recall who the individuals who 6 contacted General Electric were? 7 A. I made at least one visit there. In 8 this time period, yes. 9 0. Anybody else? 10 A. I do not remember who waswith me at 11 that time. 12 Q. Why was it important to receive approval 13 from General Electric for the use in gas turbines? 14 A. In doing functionalfluids work it is 15 extremely important that the people who make the 16 machinery in which you are going to put the fluid 17 know that you're doing it and why you're doing it and 18 what may happen. Therefore the manufacturers of 19 equipment were always contacted by us with regard to 20 any new products we were trying to introduce. On 21 that basis then since GE sells the turbines we would 22 go see them. 23 Q. Why would you not go see Texas Eastern 24 first? 25 A. We had long -- many years before -- seen WATER PCB-SD0000028221 GORE REPORTING COMPANY ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 222 1 Texas Eastern on the lubrication of gas turbines back 2 in the early fifties. We had discussed with Ollie 3 Fletcher the fire-resistant turbine lubricants and 4 reports are available indicating this. So they were 5 well aware that we were working in the area of 6 lubricants for these turbines. So they knew what was 7 going on in general terms and specifics in most 8 cases. 9 Q. But in this document which is dated 10 September 1971, which is as we'll see close to the 11 termination of this product, it states that there's 12 no plan to approach Texas Eastern until approval is 13 received from General Electric. So the question is 14 time specific. 15 MR. ZIMMER: Right. And the question 16 assumes facts not in evidence, that that was the plan 17 that was adopted. And since once again he didn't 18 author the document nor make that decision as he's 19 already told you, it's argumentative. 20 Q. So the extent you know why was the 21 decision made? 22 A. No, I don't know. 23 MR. ZIMMER: If that decision was made. 24 A. Both had to be done. I have no 25 reference as to which was due when. WATER PCB-SD0000028222 GORE REPORTING COMPANY ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 223 1 Q. Do you recall visiting General Electric 2 before you visited Texas Eastern with respect to this 3 issue? 4 A. I think I indicated before that the 5 visit to General Electric was to discuss approval of 6 a new product, therefore -- period. 7 Q. Do you recall whether that occurred 8 before there was a discussion with Texas Eastern 9 about the termination of Turbinol 153? 10 A. Any discussion with anybody? 11 MR. ZIMMER: Any discussion? 12 Q. That's correct. 13 A. No, I do not recall. 14 Q. Do you recall if it was in the fall of 15 1971 that you visited GE? 16 A. The visit to GE? 17 Q. Yes. 18 A. Somewhere around that time, yes. 19 0. I apologize again. This document is 20 hard to read but again this was the way it was 21 produced to us. This is a Customer Problem Report 22 dated October 4th, 1971 and apparently authored by 23 you, Dr. Hatton. So if you could take a minute to 24 read it please. Dr. Hatton, do you recall this 25 customer, Columbia Gulf Transmission? WATER PCB-SD0000028223 GORE REPORTING COMPANY ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 224 1 A. I remember a trip down to Louisiana in 2 which I visited with them. 3 Q. Is it safe to say that as of this date, 4 October 4th, 1971 that Monsanto is still selling 5 Turbinol 153? 6 MR. ZIMMER: To whom? 7 Q. To Columbia Gulf Transmission. 8 MR. ZIMMER: You haven't established 9 that they ever sold it to them. But if you know, 10 Doctor. 11 A. I am not really aware that they were a 12 customer at this time or I don't remember that they 13 were. 14 Q. This is Exhibit 51. I'd like to direct 15 your attention on this report which is dated October 16 6, 1971 and which you're cc'd on to the two 17 paragraghs that refer to Columbia Gulf Transmission 18 and to Solar Engineering and ask this if that 19 refreshes your recollection that indeed Columbia Gulf 20 Transmission was a customer for Turbinol 153 in at 21 least September 1971 as was Solar Engineering? 22 MR. ZIMMER: Do you understand the 23 question, does this document refresh your 24 recollection if they were? You don't need to assume 25 this document is true. WATER PCB-SD0000028224 GORE REPORTING COMPANY ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 225 1 A. I still do not remember that Columbia 2 Gulf was an actual customer. 3 Q. Have you ever seen this document before? 4 Do you remember seeing this document before? 5 A. I do not recall ever seeing this 6 document before. 7 Q. Do you have any doubt that the cc 8 reflects that the document was sent to you? 9 MR. ZIMMER: Calls for speculation as to 10 whether it was or not. 11 Q. I asked him if he had any doubt. 12 MR. ZIMMER: It's argumentative too. 13 A. My name's on it. I assume I saw it. 14 Q. Do you have any recollection of whether 15 Columbia Gulf or Solar Engineering were told about 16 the hazards of PCB's at this time? 17 MR. ZIMMER: Argumentative since he 18 doesn't even remember them being customers. 19 A. I have no memory. 2 0 Q. Do you have any knowledge of why the 21 dec ision was made to continue to sell at this time 22 Turbinol 153 to new customers? 23 MR. ZIMMER: Again that assumes facts 24 not in evidence. If you're aware of such a decision, 25 Doctor, you can answer. WATER PCB-SD0000028225 GORE REPORTING COMPANY ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 226 1 A. As long as the product was still being 2 sold we would sell it to anyone. 3 (A brief recess was taken.) 4 Q. Back on the record. This is Exhibit 52. 5 The first page other than a 1ittle bit of the 6 handwriting is completely illegible but I'd like to 7 focus on the second page. Just turning to the first 8 page for a minute. Dr. Hatton, is this your 9 handwriting on the first page? 10 A. Yes. 11 Q. So I take it that --do you recall 12 seeing this document before? 13 A. No, I do not. 14 Q. This is a document dated October 12th, 15 1971 from Larry Bradford to Don Stegen and Dr. Hatton 16 and Mr. Ford are cc'd on it. The front page has a 17 handwritten note by Dr. Hatton. Turning your 18 attention to the first paragraph, Mr. Bradford states 19 that the economics of Turbinol 153 have been severely 20 damaged in recent months. Do you remember during 21 this time period of knowing that that was a concern 22 of Monsanto? 23 MR. ZIMMER: Calls for speculation as to 24 what Mr. Bradford meant by that. You can respond. 25 A. No, I don't recall that. WATER PCB-SD0000028226 GORE REPORTING COMPANY ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 227 1 Q. Do you recall any worries about the 2 success in terms of marketability of Turbinol 153 at 3 this time? 4 A. Your question was regarding the 5 marketability? 6 Q. The marketability of Turbinol 153? 7 A. What do you mean by marketability? 8 Q. The ability to sell the product at the 9 time. Let me rephrase that. The receptivity of 10 customers to the product at this time. 11 A. No. 12 Q. Do you recall whether Monsanto was 13 actively promoting the product at this time, October 14 1971? 15 MR. ZIMMER: Objection, it's vague and 16 ambiguous as to what actively means. You can answer, 17 Doctor. 18 A. The product was still in our line. I do 19 not know. 20 Q. Do you recall any discussion with either 21 Mr. Bradford, Mr. Stegen or Mr. Ford about what is 22 referred to in this paragraph about the long and good 23 history on this product with Texas Eastern in 24 reference to sales to Columbia Gulf? 25 A. I'm quite aware of the past history. I WATER PCB-SD0000028227 GORE REPORTING COMPANY ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 228 1 was involved in much of it. The past history was 2 also reported in the public record at that time in 3 some papers by Oilie Fletcher in the technical 4 literature and by Earl Farmer in 1970 that related to 5 the successful use by Texas Eastern of these 6 products. 7 MR. ZIMMER: I think her question was do 8 you recall discussing that history. 9 Q. I'll rephrase the question. Do you 10 recall any of these gentlemen discussing that history 11 with Columbia Gulf at the time of 1971? 12 A. No, I do not recall discussing it. 13 MR. ZIMMER: Do you recal1 any of these 14 gentlemen doing that which cal Is for speculation. 15 Q. Do you recall them discussing it with 16 you? 17 A. I do not, no. 18 Q. Did any of them come to you and ask for 19 that history that it so that it could be conveyed to 20 Columbia Gulf? 21 A. I don't know. 22 Q. Does thishelp refresh your recollection 23 about sales to Columbia Gulf at this time? 24 A. No. 25 Q. This is Exhibit 53. I just want you to WATER PCB-SD0000028228 GORE REPORTING COMPANY ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 229 1 look at the front page which appears to be a letter 2 from you to a Mr. David Moy at Columbia Gulf 3 Transmission Company on October 25th, 1971. Dr. 4 Hatton, does this help refresh your recollection 5 about any contacts with Columbia Gulf during this 6 period? 7 MR. ZIMMER: About any contacts with 8 them? 9 Q. Yes. 10 A. I still do not remember other than the 11 documents you've given me. 12 Q. Do you recall telling them that all the 13 lab data which are attached point to good fluid 14 performance? 15 A. I do not recall telling them that. 16 Q. So you similarly don't recall telling 17 them about any of the hazards of PCB's; is that 18 correct? 19 MR. ZIMMER: Asked and answered. 20 Assumes facts not in evidence. The document speaks 21 for itself. 22 Q. You can answer. 23 A. The answer is no. 24 Q. This is Exhibit 54. This is a letter 25 dated October 26th, 1971 from Mr. Papageorge to Mr. WATER PCB-SD0000028229 GORE REPORTING COMPANY ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 230 1 Mason. Have you ever seen this document before? 2 A. No. 3 0. Were you aware in October of 1971 that 4 samples were being sent of Aroclor 1254? 5 A. No. 6 0. Were you aware in October 1971 that 7 Aroclor 1232 was no longer being manufactured? 8 MR. ZIMMER: Assumes facts not in 9 evidence. 10 A. No. 11 0. I think we established yesterday that 12 Aroclor 1232 was one of the components of Turbinol 13 153 ? is that correct? 14 A. I would have to refer to the earlier 15 documents to confirm that but I believe we -- 16 0. Let's refer to them. Referring to 17 Exhibit 3 which you testified yesterday accurately 18 referred to the composition. Is Aroclor 1232 still 19 part of the composition? 20 A. Yes. 21 Q. Okay. My question to you, if you know, 22 was Turbinol 153 still being manufactured as of 23 October 1971 given that at least this document states 24 that Aroclor 1232 was no longer being manufactured? 25 If you know. WATER PCB-SD0000028230 GORE REPORTING COMPANY ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 231 1 MR. ZIMMER: Now you made it 2 argumentative. The question is defective in that 3 sense. If you know. 4 A. I do not remember specific manufacturing 5 details. 6 Q. Who would know whether Turbinol 153 was 7 still being manufactured at this time; do you know? 8 A. The manufacturing department. 9 Q. Would that be Mr. Springate who would be 10 responsible for that? 11 A. I do not know who it was at that time. 12 Q. This is Exhibit 55. Just take a few 13 minutes to read this which is a document to T. L. 14 Gossage from C. L. Bradford and N. T. Johnson. You 15 might scan it and I'm going to ask you questions 16 about the section on Turbinol 153. Who is N. T. 17 Johnson? 18 A. N. T. Johnson was in the marketing area 19 primarily working on Pydrauls. 20 Q. And what was his -- was he the same 21 level as Bradford or did he report to Bradford if you 22 know? 23 A. I don't know. 24 Q. Okay. Do you remember knowing that 25 Texas Eastern would require 5,000 hours of running WATER PCB-SD0000028231 GORE REPORTING COMPANY ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 232 1 time before agreeing to the switch, to a replacement 2 for Turbinol 153? 3 MR. ZIMMER: It assumes facts not in 4 evidence. 5 A. I dont remember the exact time but I'm 6 sure that I do not know -- remember the exact time 7 that would be required for testing. 8 Q. Do you know if any time was required for 9 testing? 10 A. Certainly, always, by the manufacturer. 11 Q. And would it be -- to your knowledge was 12 it an extensive time or a short time? 13 MR. ZIMMER: The question is vague and 14 ambiguous as to what extensive or short mean. He's 15 told you he doesn't know what the time required is or 16 was. 17 A. The time varied by manufacturer. 18 Q. Do you know in particular what GE's time 19 was? 20 A. No. As I've indicated before no, I 21 don't. 22 Q. Okay. On the second page these authors 23 recommend that Monsanto absorb the cost to incinerate 24 the current charge of Turbinol 153. Do you know if 25 in fact Monsanto did absorb that charge? WATER PCB-SD0000028232 GORE REPORTING COMPANY ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 233 1 A. I do not know. 2 Q. Do you know if at this time which is 3 November 1971 that it was accurate that there was no 4 approved fire-resistant lubricant that can directly 5 replace Turbinol 153? 6 A. I do not know exactly what they mean by 7 the term approved in this case. 8 Q. Do you know if there was no GE-approved 9 fire-resistant lubricant that could replace Turbinol 10 153? 11 A. I can't remember. 12 Q. This is Exhibit 56. This document has 13 many attachments to it. I would just like you to 14 take some time and read the print part of the 15 documents rather than the attachments. This appears 16 to be a document dated December 8th, 1971 and appears 17 to be written by Tom Gossage or maybe it was written 18 by Bradford and Davidson to Tom Gossage and you're 19 cc'd on it. I think that's correct. Have you ever 20 seen this document before? 21 A. I don't remember seeing it. 22 Q. Do you have any recollection of when you 23 first heard about the decision to terminate sales of 24 Turbinol 153 to Texas Eastern? 25 A. No, I do not have a specific date. WATER PCB-SD0000028233 GORE REPORTING COMPANY ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 234 Q. Do you have a general date, general time 2 frame? 3 A. In about the time of this memo. 4 Q. So some time late fall 1971 would be 5 accurate? 6 A. Yes. 7 0. Where it refers to -- let me back up. 8 Do you recal1 who told you of that decision? 9 A. No. 10 0. Do you recall a meeting youwere at 11 where the decision was announced? 12 A. No. 13 0. Do you have any recollectionof any 14 communication about the decision? 15 A. No. 16 Q. Did the decision come as a surprise to 17 you? 18 A. I cannot remember. 19 Q. Turning to the paragraph under Objective 20 where it states that the objective is to be out of 21 PCB's, PCT's by June 30th, 1972. Do you recall 22 agreeing with that plan, that there would be 23 termination within six months? 24 MR. ZIMMER: Objection, that it was up 25 to Dr. Hatton to agree or otherwise. WATER PCB-SD0000028234 WATER PCB-SD0000028235 GORE REPORTING COMPANY ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 235 1 A. I was asked -- 2 MR. ZIMMER: Let me finish' Dr. Hatton' 3 be fore you go on. 4 A. My temper got mad at this one. 5 MR. ZIMMER: The point is this is not 6 authored by him as you already pointed out and 7 whether he agreed or disagreed the implication is 8 that somehow that was requested of him. Go ahead. 9 Dr. Hatton. 10 A. I worked for Monsanto, Monsanto made the 11 decision and I have my choice of leaving or abiding 12 by their decision. 13 Q. Okay. That's fair. Did you have any 14 personal feelings about the six-month termination 15 plan? 16 A. I de not remember specific feelings. 17 Q. Were you worried about your relationship 18 with Texas Eastern given this plan? 19 A. Of course. 20 Q. Why were you worried? 21 A. I was worried about all of my customers. 22 Q. What made you worried? 23 A. Any time I would change relations or 24 products with a customer you worry until you get it 25 accomplished. WATER PCB-SD0000028236 GORE REPORTING COMPANY ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 236 1 Q. Were you worried that Monsanto would 2 lose the business? 3 A. That would be part of the concern. 4 Q. What was the other part of the concern? 5 A. Inconvenience to a customer and to their 6 customers if it affected production or some other 7 reason. For example, if they were pumping gas up 8 north and they suddenly had to change all of that 9 that would be of concern to me. If it was a 10 hydraulic area and they were selling die cast parts I 11 would be concerned about their customers as well. 12 Q. So in the Texas Eastern case were you 13 worried that it would cause a shut down of the 14 pipelines? 15 A. Yes. 16 Q. Turn to page 4 of the document please. 17 I want to direct your attention to the section under 18 Field Sales/Product Group Relationship. Reference is 19 made to a meeting that will be held in St. Louis 20 which will focus on strategic salesmen and their 21 managers who will be in attendance. Do you know if 22 such a meeting was held? 23 A. No, I don't remember. 24 Q. So you've no recollection of attending 25 such a meeting? WATER PCB-SD0000028237 GORE REPORTING COMPANY ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 237 1 A. No. 2 (A brief recess was taken.) 3 Q. Back on the record. This is Exhibit 57. 4 Would you know take a few minutes to read this 5 exhibit. Let the record reflect that there's 6 consultation and conversation between Mr. Zimmer and 7 Mr. Hatton. 8 MR. ZIMMER: So stipulated. I thought 9 that since I represented him I could do that. 10 Q. You can. I just want the record to 11 reflect it. Could you tel1 me if you know who Don 12 Olson is? 13 A. Yes, and the title given for him is 14 correct. 15 Q. He is director of sales? 16 A. He was director of field sales at this 17 time period. 18 Q. Do you know if he's still alive? 19 A. Yes. 20 Q. Did you report to him or have any 21 relationship, business relationship, with him? 22 A. No, I think Larry Bradford's boss would 23 have been on an equivalent level with him but I can't 24 remember for sure who Larry's boss was. But it was 25 up in the management ladder at Monsanto, above where WATER PCB-SD0000028238 GORE REPORTING COMPANY ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 238 1 I was in the functional fluids activities. 2 Q. Have you ever seen this letter before? 3 Except in the context of your deposition dated 1-25 4 '90. It's noted that it was Exhibit 23 to that 5 deposition. But other than that have you seen this 6 document before? 7 A. Yes, I have. I received copies of al1 8 of the withdrawal letters. 9 Q. Directing your attention to numbered 10 paragraphs 1 and 2 at the bottom of the first page. 11 Is it fair to say or is it accurate to say that 12 Turbinol 153 has a chlorine content of less than 54 13 percent? 14 A. Yes, it is . 15 Q. Do you recall Monsanto saying or stating 16 at this time, which is February 18th, 1970, that 17 PCB's with a chlorine content of less than 54 percent 18 which would include Turbinol 153 have not been found 19 in the environment and appear to present no potential 20 problem to the environment? 21 MR. ZIMMER: Saying or stating in what 22 context, in this letter? 23 Q. In any context do you recall that? 24 A. No. I read the letter. But recalling 25 it other than from the letter, no, I don't. I do not WATER PCB-SD0000028239 GORE REPORTING COMPANY ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 239 1 remember that. 2 Q. But you testified earlier that you 3 recall getting this letter? 4 A. Yes. 5 Q. But you don't recall that statement as 6 part of the letter? 7 MR. ZIMMER: That's not what he said. 8 He said he didn't recall the statement independently 9 of the letter. 10 A. So I received the letter, I just accept 11 it. .12 Q. Does this refresh your recollection 13 about that statement having been made at that time? 0 14 MR. ZIMMER: Asked and answered. He 15 says he doesn't remember the statement except for 16 reading it in the letter. 17 Q. But I'm trying to understand the time 18 period that he understands. 19 A. The letter was dated February 18th. We 20 were undoubtedly -- I was supplied a copy either at 21 that time or within days. 22 MR. ZIMMER: Don't start guessing, 23 Doctor. You don't know -- unless you remember when 24 you got it? 25 A. I don't remember the day that the letter WATER PCB-SD0000028240 GORE REPORTING COMPANY ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 240 ] arrived in my office, no, but I do remember having 2 received the letter. 3 Q. Do you remember ever telling anybody at 4 Texas Eastern or showing them this letter or a letter 5 like this? 6 A. I do not remember showing it to them, 7 no. 8 Q. Do you remember ever telling Texas 9 Eastern that Turbinol 153 had not been found in the 10 environment and appeared to present no potential 11 problem to the environment? 12 A. I do not remember making such a 13 statement. 14 Q. Do you know if any such statement was 15 ever made to Texas Eastern? 16 A. I do not. 17 Q. This is Exhibit 58. This is a memo from 18 Dr. Hatton to Mr. Bradford dated December 13th, 1971. 19 Could you please take a little bit of time to read 20 this document. Do you recall writing this 21 memorandum? 22 A. Yes. 23 Q. Was this memorandum written if you 24 recall at Mr. Bradford's request? 25 A. Yes. WATER PCB-SD0000028241 GORE REPORTING COMPANY ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 241 Q. And what did he ask you to do that 2 prompted this memorandum? 3 A. He asked me to assist him in the 4 withdrawal of the PCB-containing Turbinols at Texas 5 Eastern. And in formulating the steps that might be 6 required to do this. 7 Q. Do you have any recollection of how 8 quickly you generated this memo after his request? 9 A. No, I do not. 10 Q. Do you have any recollection of when he 11 first asked you to formulate this program? 12 A. No. 13 Q. Do you recognize the handwriting over to 14 the left, the marginalia? 15 A. No. 16 Q. It's not your handwriting? 17 A. That is not my handwriting. 18 Q. Does this help refresh your recollection 19 at al1 to any more specific date about when you were 20 first told about the termination of Turbinol 153 21 sales? 22 A. No, it does not. 23 Q. Were there any meetings that were held 24 in this time frame that involved a large group of 25 people besides you and Mr. Bradford about the WATER PCB-SD0000028242 GORE REPORTING COMPANY ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 242 termination program? 2 MR. ZIMMER: That implies that there 3 were meetings between him and Mr. Bradford about the 4 termination program. 5 Q. He just testified that Mr. Bradford 6 asked him. 7 MR. ZIMMER: He didn't say he had a 8 meeting with him, he said he was asked to do a memo. 9 That's different. But you can answer, Doctor. 10 A. I do not recall any meetings. 11 Q. Do you recall if it was your 12 recommendation that Texas Eastern be given six months 13 regardless of whether they had a hold harmless 14 agreement in which to stop using Turbinol 153? 15 A. I do not recall the source of that 16 statement. 17 Q. Okay. Referring to point A, what were 18 you referring to when you wrote about the general 19 Monsanto PCB announcements? 20 A. My reference was with regard to I think 21 the previous exhibit that was sent out by Don Olson. 22 MR. ZIMMER: Doctor, when you say I 23 think, remember that she's not asking you to guess or 24 speculate. If you have a recollection that that's 25 what you mean please tell her. If not -- WATER PCB-SD0000028243 GORE REPORTING COMPANY ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 243 1 A. I recollect receiving that as being the 2 general announcement to the world that we were 3 withdrawing and I think that's what we were referring 4 to. 5 Q. This document, the previous exhibit, if 6 you might look at it, is dated February 18, 1970 and 7 still promotes Turbinol 153. 8 MR. ZIMMER: I completely disagree with 9 that characterization, counsel. It doesn't promote 10 Turbinol 153. That's your read on it. 11 Q. It says that Turbinol appears to present 12 no potential problem to the environment. This cannot 13 be a termination -- 14 MR. ZIMMER: Save your argument for the 15 jury. There's not a pending question. 16 Q. There is a pending question. 17 MR. ZIMMER: So this could not be a 18 termination document, is that the question? 19 Q. The question is do you recall what the 20 general Monsanto PCB announcement referred to? 21 A. I do not -- I am not sure what this memo 22 would include in that. 23 Q. Do you know if there was any general 24 Monsanto PCB announcement that postdated this letter? 25 A. Postdate means after, doesn't it? WATER PCB-SD0000028244 GORE REPORTING COMPANY ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 244 1 Q. Yes. 2 A. I can't recall the specific. 3 Q. Do you recall if management agreed to 4 the cut-off date of June 1st, 1972? 5 A. Would you define what you mean by 6 management? 7 Q. Whoever had the ultimate decision-making 8 authority about the sale of this product? 9 A. And the question then was whether I 10 remember any other documents? 11 Q. No, do you know -- 12 A. Would you rephrase the question or I 13 mean not rephrase it, wrong word. Would you repeat 14 the question please? 15 Q. The question was whether you knew 16 whether management agreed with the cut-off date 17 that's stated in this document of June 1st, 1972? 18 A. That date was supplied to me by 19 management. 20 Q. Can you tell me what you understood 21 about why Monsanto wanted a hold harmless agreement 22 from Texas Eastern? 23 A. I was not involved in that negotiation 24 so I do not understand all of the implications. 25 Q. When was a hold harmless agreement first WATER PCB-SD0000028245 GORE REPORTING COMPANY ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 245 first presented to you? 2 A. It was not presented to roe. This was 3 handled by others in my group. Specifically I 4 believe Larry Bradford. 5 Q. When did you first learn about the hold 6 harmless agreement? 7 A. I do not remember. 8 Q. Do you recal1 if at this time which was 9 December 19 71 MCS-12 23 was available? 10 A. MCS-123 was available in quotation marks 11 meaning that samples and data had been developed on 12 the product. 13 Q. In what sense was it not available then? 14 A. I do not have a specific date on 15 manufacturing startup and I cannot say on quantities, 16 I can only talk about the data. 17 Q. Do you know if it was contemplated that 18 MCS-1223 would be the replacement fluid for Turbinol 19 153? 20 A. We contemplated that a straight 21 phosphate ester would be the replacement fluid. 22 MCS-1223 and MCS- --I think you said 1122, you 23 referred to both products -- were straight phosphate 24 esters in different viscosity ranges. 25 Q. Those were the two products that were WATER PCB-SD0000028246 GORE REPORTING COMPANY ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 246 1 considered replacement fluids for the Turbinol 153? 2 A. Yes. 3 Q. Exhibit 59. This appears to be a letter 4 dated December 15th, 1971 by you, Dr. Hatton, to a 5 Mr. K. Flanagan at Industrial Hydraulics Department. 6 Would it be fair to say that Turbinol 153 was still 7 being marketed as of December 15th, 1971? 8 A. Yes. 9 0. Do you know why this was, given that 10 there were already plans to withdraw it, according to 11 the last document, from sale to Texas Eastern? 12 A. No. 13 Q. Did this raise certain concerns in your 14 mind? 15 MR. ZIMMER: If he doesn't know why it 16 was then how can he comment on your argumentative 17 question? ' 18 Q. He knew that it wasbeingmarketed and 19 he also knew that it was being withdrawn. 20 MR. ZIMMER: There were discussions 21 about its withdrawal. 22 Q. I'm wonderingwhether hewas concerned 23 about this seeming contradiction. 24 MR. ZIMMER: That's a problem, it's a 25 contradiction to you perhaps but he hasn't given you WATER PCB-SD0000028247 GORE REPORTING COMPANY ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 247 1 any -- 2 Q. We'll find out if it's a contradiction 3 to him. 4 MR. ZIMMER: My objection stands. 5 A. I cannot remember personal feelings from 6 twenty years ago so I do not know how I felt about it 7 right then. 8 Q. Did you raise any questions with anybody 9 about why it was still being marketed to one customer 10 when it was being withdrawn from another? 11 A. I don't remember. 12 Q. Do you recall ever telling anybody at 13 Industrial Hydraulics Department that there were 14 concerns about the product and in fact it was being 15 withdrawn from use with Texas Eastern? 16 A. I recal1 no discussions with them. 17 Q. Do you know who would have made the 18 decision to sell the Turbinol 153 to this customer? 19 MR. ZIMMER: Objection. That lacks 20 foundation incredibly because there was no such 21 decision either evidenced in this letter or anything 22 else that you've shown him. You can answer. Doctor, 23 if you know that such a decision was made. 24 A. I think your specific question related 25 to if I knew who made the decision, I do not. WATER PCB-SD0000028248 GORE REPORTING COMPANY ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 248 Q. Did anybody ask you to take care of this 2 customer, Industrial Hydraulics Department? 3 MR. ZIMMER: Same objection. It implies 4 that it's a customer. This letter indicates on its 5 face that it relays information. 6 Q. Customer or potential customer? 7 A. I'm not aware of the source of this 8 inquiry. 9 Q. By the way do you have any recollection 10 about whether Industrial Hydraulics Department ever 11 bought the Turbinol 153? 12 A. I have no information. 13 Q. This is Exhibit 60. This is a 14 memorandum dated January 7th, 1972. I'm not sure who 15 wrote this but the -- oh, C. L. Bradford wrote this, 16 Larry Bradford, and your name is on here, Dr. Hatton, 17 as is Tom Gossage's. So could you take a minute to 18 review this. Do you recall seeing this document 19 before? 20 A. No. 21 Q. This document states that it's -- or it 22 mentions the REH memo to CLB of 12-13 '71 and the CLB 23 memo to TLG of 12-15 '71. Exhibit 58 is the 12-13 24 '71 memo to CLB. So is it a fair assumption that 25 this is referring to that memo? WATER PCB-SD0000028249 GORE REPORTING COMPANY ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 249 1 MR. ZIMMER: Whether it's an assumption 2 or not this memo was not authored by Dr. Hatton and 3 so asking him what's in the mind of someone else and 4 what he referred to is an impossibility. You can 5 deduce that for yourself. 6 Q. You can respond to the question. 7 MR. ZIMMER: No, actually I'm going to 8 instruct him not to answer it because -- 9 Q. If he can't determine it he can say 10 that. 11 A. I can't -- I don't know. 12 Q. Thank you for coaching the witness. 13 MR. ZIMMER: I didn't coach the witness. 14 You don't need to tel1 me how to handle the witness. 15 And, Doctor, if I instruct you not to answer 16 something please don't do so. 17 Q. My understanding under California law is 18 the only time a witness should not answer is when the 19 material is privileged and if you have a new 20 interpretation of California law I'll be happy to 21 take that up to the judge. Your understanding should 22 be in accord with mine because you've attended many 23 depositions. 24 MR. ZIMMER: Thank you for noting that I 25 have indeed and I can instruct my witness to answer WATER PCB-SD0000028250 GORE REPORTING COMPANY ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 250 when I feel it's appropriate or not to answer when I 2 feel it's appropriate. 3 Q. Do you recall, Dr. Hatton, that there 4 was at this point, January 7, 1972, that there had i 5 been a decision made not to sell Turbinol 153 to 6 Texas Eastern after January 15th, unless they signed 7 a hold harmless agreement? 8 A. I was aware that such a program was 9 proposed. I do not remember when it was approved, 10 when it was started and what the dates specifically 11 were. 12 Q. Do you remember disagreeing with the 13 termination as of January 15th, 1972 unless the hold 14 harmless agreement was signed? 15 MR. ZIMMER: He just gave you an answer 16 that said he did not remember when the dates were. 17 So the question is just -- we keep doing this, you 18 keep trying to insert language, either words in his 19 mouth or have him assume what somebody else meant in 20 a particular document. That is argumentative, calls 21 for speculation and it completely flies in the face 22 of what his prior answer was. 23 Q. If you can answer. 24 A. Larry Bradford was in charge of this 25 withdrawal program. I did the items on the dates WATER PCB-SD0000028251 GORE REPORTING COMPANY ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 251 1 told. 2 Q. Referring back to your December 13th, 3 1971 memo which was Exhibit 58, you recommended 4 termination as of June 1st, 1972. And it seems 5 irrespective of the hold harmless agreement. I'm 6 just wondering if you know did Larry Bradford ever 7 tell you why that recommendation was not accepted? 8 A. I do not remember. 9 Q. Okay. Did Larry Bradford ever tell you 10 why the hold harmless agreement was necessary? 11 A. I do not remember discussion on that 12 question. 13 Q. Anyone else besides Larry Bradford ever 14 tell you? 15 A. Not to the best of my memory. 16 Q. Exhibit 61 is a letter dated January 17 7th, 1972 to Ted Harrison signed by Larry Bradford 18 and enclosing a hold harmless agreement or a proposed 19 agreement that's entitled Special Undertaking. If 20 you could briefly review the cover letter which is 21 what I'm going to ask you questions about. 22 A. Yes. 23 Q. Do you remember seeing this letter 24 before? 25 A. No. WATER PCB-SD0000028252 GORE REPORTING COMPANY ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 252 1 Q. Do you know whether the date of January 2 7th, 1972 is the first time that anyone at Texas 3 Eastern was informed of the withdrawal of Turbinol 4 153? 5 A. I do not know. 6 Q. Did you ever inform anybody else prior 7 to that date? 8 A. I do not remember. 9 Q. Did anyone ever tell you why Larry 10 Bradford wrote that if you or Oilie Fletcher would 11 like to bring our lawyer with us please phone me. Do 12 you ever recall any discussion about a lawyer being 13 present? 14 A. No, I do not. 15 Q. Do you know if there were lawyers 16 present at the meeting that's referred to? 17 A. No, I do not. 18 Q. It states here that the meeting is set 19 up for January 14th which is one week subsequent to 20 this letter. Do you recall any discussions with 21 Larry Bradford about the immediacy of the meeting 22 after the letter? 23 A. I do not recal1 anything in that 24 specific time frame that you spelled out. Larry 25 Bradford was my boss and as as such we discussed the WATER PCB-SD0000028253 GORE REPORTING COMPANY ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 253 1 general things to be discussed at such a meeting. 2 Q. Did you yourself have any concerns about 3 having a meeting one week subsequent to this 4 notification? 5 A. Since I didn't know about this 6 notification I don't know as to how I could have any 7 concerns about it. 8 Q. When did you first hear that you were 9 supposed to be present at a meeting on January 14th? 10 A. The spec ific date I can't tell you the 11 first time I knew that the meeting was set for the 12 14th of January. 13 Q. Was it in 1971 that you first knew about 14 the meeting? 15 A. The assignment that Larry Bradford gave 16 said I should be prepared to get involved in a 17 meeting with Texas Eastern and as to the preparation 18 of the document which you've already put in that I 19 wrote for the program I do not know when he said we 20 were going to be at a certain place at a certain 21 time. 22 Q. Do you remember any concerns that you 23 had about the meeting? 24 MR. ZIMMER: Like what, whether there 25 would be lunch served, what time of day it would be? WATER PCB-SD0000028254 GORE REPORTING COMPANY ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 254 1 Q. Whatever comes to his mind. 2 A. No. 3 Q. Were you worried about your relationship 4 with Texas Eastern? 5 A. I've already testified that I was 6 concerned about withdrawal of any product from any 7 customer. That would include Texas Eastern. 8 Q. Say the week be fore the meeting were you 9 particularly concerned about the meeting? 10 A. I can only answer no. 11 Q. You felt completely confident about the 12 meeting? 13 MR. ZIMMER: Don't answer that. 14 A. Wait a minute. 15 MR. ZIMMER: Don' t answer that. That is 16 completely argumentative and you can call the judge 17 to see if he'll make him answer that or not. Don't 18 harass him, just ask him questions. 19 Q. I'm trying to determine whether he was 20 worried or his anxieties increased as the meeting 21 appro ached. 22 MR. ZIMMER: And he told you he did not 23 think they did so. He said -- 24 Q. So you felt completely confident of 25 that. WATER PCB-SD0000028255 GORE REPORTING COMPANY ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 255 1 MR. ZIMMER: Don't say anything else, 2 Doctor. Let her ask you a question. 3 Q. What kinds of preparation did you make 4 for the meeting during the week of January 7th? 5 MR. ZIMMER: January 7th, 1972 what 6 preparation did you make. Doctor? 7 A. I don't know. 8 Q. This is Exhibit 62.This appears to be 9 a call report from Don Stegen and you are cc'd on 10 this, Dr. Hatton. Could you take a few minutes to 11 read it. Who is Joe Kieffner; do you know? 12 A. Joe Kleffner worked in marketing 13 services. 14 Q. What were his responsibilities to the 15 extent that you know? 16 A. Scheduling deliveries, handling orders, 17 handling direct customer complaints and such similar 18 things. I don't know all his functions by any means. 19 Q. Did Mr. Stegen ever tell you why he was 20 not prepared to discuss replacement products for 153 21 as of this date on January 7th? 22 MR. ZIMMER: The question assumes facts 23 not in evidence, that that is indeed how Mr. Stegen 24 felt. 25 Q. That's what he stated in his memo. WATER PCB-SD0000028256 GORE REPORTING COMPANY ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 256 1 MR. ZIMMER: That may be and of course 2 you can ask him tomorrow when you take his 3 deposition. 4 Q. You can answer the question. 5 A. I do not remember. 6 Q. Did he ever tell you what he explained 7 to Ted about the action he was preparing to take or 8 Monsanto was taking regarding PCB's? 9 A. I don't remember that direct 10 conversation. 11 Q. Do you remember any discussions about 12 this call report or the discussion between Mr. Stegen 13 and Mr. Harrison? 14 A. I do recall being told that some drums 15 delivered down to Texas Eastern were leaking and I - 16 since this was not my area I just indicated to 17 whoever called that they should contact somebody in 18 marketing services which they did. 19 Q. Okay. Any other discussion that you 20 recal1 about this pertaining to the upcoming meeting? 21 A. All I remember from this, from the call 22 that I received, was that the drums were leaking. I 23 do not remember any of the rest of that. 24 Q. This is Exhibit 63. This is a call 25 report dated February 8th, 1972 about a call on WATER PCB-SD0000028257 GORE REPORTING COMPANY ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 257 1 January 14th, 1972. And the author of the report 2 appears to be you. Dr. Hatton. And if you could I'd 3 like you to take some time and read it. Okay? 4 A. Yes. 5 Q. Have you seen this document before or do 6 you remember authoring this document? 7 MR. ZIMMER: Which question do you want 8 him to answer? 9 Q. The second question, do you remember 10 authoring this document? 11 A. Yes. 12 Q. And is this a report of a January 14th 13 meeting which is mentioned in the previous letter, 14 January 7th letter? 15 A. Yes. 16 Q. Just some identification. Who is Mr. 17 Herber? 18 A. February '12, a group leader in 19 research. 20 Q. Why would he have been on this cC List? 21 A. The letter refers to providing data on 22 phosphate ester replacement fluids and John would 23 have been my source of such data. 24 Q. Do you know if he was at least partially 25 responsible for developing the phosphate esters? WATER PCB-SD0000028258 GORE REPORTING COMPANY ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 258 1 A. He reported to Bill Richard and I do not 2 know what John's spec ific assignment was at this 3 time. 4 Q. How about Mr. Slayton? 5 A. In 1972 the United States was divided 6 into four geographical sales territories or districts 7 or some such title. And they were headed by various 8 people. And I believe at that time that Slayton had 9 the New York office. , 10 Q. Why would he have been copied on this 11 document? 12 A. I don't know. 13 Q. How about Mr. Hansen? 14 A. Hansen worked -- Doug Hansen worked out 15 out of the -- I believe the office was in Santa 16 Clara, it was the West Coast office, and I believe 17 that's where it was at that time. 18 Q. Was he in the sales group? 19 A. Yes. 20 Q. And do you have any idea why you cc'd 21 him on this document? 22 A. Same answer as with Slayton, that list 23 was obviously provided by the department. 24 Q. How about Mr. Shimley? 25 A. I do not remember what his position was WATER PCB-SD0000028259 GORE REPORTING COMPANY ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 259 1 in this. 2 Q. Do you recall why it fell to you to 3 write this report? 4 A. I was the lowest man on the totem pole 5 at the meeting. 6 Q. That answers it. That means that in 7 terms of responsibility that you were lower than Mr. 8 Stegen or Mr. Frederiksen? 9 A. They were in a completely different 10 operation than I was. They were in field sales where 11 I was working out of the product groups in St. Louis 12 and I do not know the relationship of members between 13 the two groups. 14 Q. Okay. Do you recall who did most of the 15 speaking in this meeting for Monsanto if anyone did? 16 A. I discussed the new products, the new 17 products and their potentials, and that was my part 18 of the meeting. Mr. Bradford did most of the 19 discussion of the problems. 20 Q. And how about Mr. Stegen or Mr* 21 Frederiksen? .22 A. I do not remember specifically their 23 inputs. 24 Q. And if you recall do you recall who did 25 most of the speaking for Texas Eastern? WATER PCB-SD0000028260 GORE REPORTING COMPANY ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 260 1 A. No, I do not remember. 2 Q. Did you expect that there would be as 3 many as the nine people from Texas Eastern present as 4 were present? 5 A. Did I expect that there would be that 6 many? 7 Q. Was the meeting larger than you had 8 expected? 9 A. I can' t answer that question. I don't 10 remember my expectations at the time. 11 Q. Do you recall the general tenor of the 12 meeting? 13 A. Somewhat strained but generally business 14 like. 15 Q. Turning to the part on Summary, the 16 statement that Texas Eastern will not sign such a 17 letter and has sufficient material to finish out the 18 current season. Do you recall what was said if 19 anything by Texas Eastern about why they would not 20 sign the special letter? 21 A. I do not recall. 22 Q. Do you recall any discussion after the 23 meeting with anybody from the Monsanto group about 24 this decision by Texas Eastern? 25 A. I do not recall a specific conversation. WATER PCB-SD0000028261 GORE REPORTING COMPANY ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 261 1 Q. Do you recall generally conversations? 2 A. Two people from St. Louis would not have 3 traveled to Shreveport and back again without 4 discussing something. So I do not remember what we 5 discussed. 6 Q. Do you remember being disappointed that 7 they wouldn't sign the special letter? 8 A. I do not remember being disappointed. 9 Q. Turning to the second page, first full 10 paragraph: The environmental situation with the 11 PCB-containing Turbinol 153 was discussed in detail. 12 To the extent you can recall could you relate for us 13 what was said concerning the environmental situation 14 with PCB-containing Turbinol 153? 15 A. That part of the meeting was handled by 16 Larry Bradford and I do not remember what was -- what 17 he said. 18 Q. Do you have any recollection -- and I 19 know the answer is you don't recall but I'm going to 20 mention some things to see if they jog your memory - 21 do you recall whether he mentioned that there was 22 danger to wildlife? 23 A. I do not recall. 24 Q. Do you recall whether he mentioned that 25 there was some evidence that PCB might cause liver WATER PCB-SD0000028262 GORE REPORTING COMPANY ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 262 1 damage? 2 A. I do not remember. 3 Q. Do you recall whether he talked about 4 the biodegradability of PCB's? 5 A. I do not remember. 6 Q. Okay, fair enough. Do you recal 1 7 whether anybody at Texas Eastern raised questions 8 during this discussion? 9 A. I do not recall any specific questions 10 or people. 11 Q. Do you recal1 whether there was a lively 12 give and take or whether it was primarily a 13 presentation about this specific issue? 14 A. Which? 15 Q. The environmental situation with the 16 PCB-containing Turbinol 153? 17 A. No, I do not recall that portion of it. 18 Q. Do you recall whether any portion of the 19 meeting was a lively give and take or was it just a 20 presentation? 21 A. I recal1 some questions, somegeneral '' 22 questions being asked me about the replacement i 23 product s. 24 Q. Do you recall -- 25 A. And the reason I remember that they were WATER PCB-SD0000028263 GORE REPORTING COMPANY ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 263 1 there is because I made such notes so that I could 2 take care of the specific questions later. 3 Q. Did you retain those notes or did you 4 throw them away? 5 A. Threw them away as soon as I did this. 6 Q. Do you recall any of those questions? 7 A. Yes. They asked for more properties on 8 the replacement products, general compatibilities of 9 the replacement products and such questions. And 10 requested that I come back as soon as I had the data 11 and give them a detailed presentation on the 12 products. 13 Q. Did you have the data with you? 14 A. No, I did not. 15 Q. And by replacement products are we 16 referring to the two formulations that you referred 17 to earlier? 18 A. MCS-1122 and MCS-1223. 19 Q. Referring to the last paragraph on the 20 page. Was there discussion about GE approval of the 21 product? 22 A. Yes. 23 Q. Can you relate for us what that 24 discussion was? 25 A. Questions related to when, if and how WATER PCB-SD0000028264 GORE REPORTING COMPANY ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 264 such approvals would be given. 2 Q. Were you able to supply any answers? 3 A. The answer supplied at the time was that 4 we were working with General Electric in that area. 5 Q. This is Exhibit 64. This is a call 6 report dated February 3rd, 1972 by Mr. Stegen to Mr. 7 Bradford and you're cc'd on it. Do you recall seeing 8 this document before? 9 A. No, I do not recall it. 10 Q. Do you remember ever being asked for 11 your position on mixing Turbinol 15 3 with MCS-1223? 12 A. Yes. 13 Q. And do you recall what your response , 14 was? 15 A. My response to the first time it came up 16 was that we would run some data and that I would be 17 back to Texas Eastern with it when it was obtained. 18 Q. And that was approximately this time 19 period? 20 A. Approximately is correct. 21 Q. Do you remember what your ultimate 22 response to that question was? 23 A. That they were mixable and compatible. 24 Q. That they were? 25 A. Yes. WATER PCB-SD0000028265 GORE REPORTING COMPANY ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 265 1 Q. And what was that based on? 2 A. Based on laboratory tests. 3 Q. Do you know if that decision was 4 reported to Texas Eastern? 5 A. Yes, it was. 6 0. This is going to be Exhibit 65. This is 7 a call report dated February 4th, 1972 which I guess 8 is a call to Texas Eastern at Shreveport in which you 9 appeared to be present at this meeting. Can you take 10 a minute to look at this. And you appear to be the 11 author as well. Dr. Hatton; do you recall authoring 12 this document? 13 A. I recall the visit to Texas Eastern. 14 Q. Can you tell me the purpose of the 15 visit ? 16 A. To provide further information on the 17 potential replacement products. 18 Q. Was anything else discussed besides the 19 replacement products at this meeting that you can 20 recall? 21 A. After reading the document things were 22 brought to mind but not prior to that. 23 Q. Anything else that's not reflected in 24 the document, for instance -- 25 A. No. WATER PCB-SD0000028266 GORE REPORTING COMPANY ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 266 1 Q. Were there any discussions about why 2 Turbinol 153 had been terminated? 3 A. I do not remember specific discussions. 4 Q. I'd like to turn your attention to the 5 second page, the second full paragraph that begins: 6 The results of the undersigned's visit. It says it 7 was pointed out that this group -- meaning General 8 Electric -- will probably not give approval but will 9 hopefully indicate no objections to running actual 10 turbine tests on MCS-1223 or other synthetic 11 phosphate esters. Do you know why, was it ever 12 stated to you why the GE gas turbine group would not 13 give approval? 14 A. The explanation given by the General 15 Electric people was that this was a change in their 16 policy and that instead of approving products for use 17 they would give a no objection to using the various 18 fluid suppliers and I do not know why General 19 Electric changed their positively. 20 Q. I'm not asking for that, just whether it 21 was product specific or as you seemed to indicate an 22 across the board change? 23 A. This was a general change. 24 Q. So I take from that that you could 25 proceed to use the MCS-1223 in GE turbines from this WATER PCB-SD0000028267 GORE REPORTING COMPANY ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 267 1 point forward, am I wrong? 2 A. No, that is correct. 3 Q. The next page, page 3, the paragraph 4 that begins with Walter Woods, the first full 5 paragraph, there's a reference to the opposition by 6 certain units of GE to chlorinated materials. Is 7 this referring to the bearing problem that you 8 mentioned before? 9 A. Yes. 10 Q. Does it refer to anything else? 11 A. NO. 12 Q. Do you know where thingsstood at the 13 end of this meeting in terms of the decision by Texas 14 Eastern with respect to the new product? 15 A. I don't have any specificrecollection. 16 Q. Exhibit 66.I apologize. This Exhibit 17 is very hard to read. Dr. Hatton, Exhibit 66 is a 18 letter dated May 11th, 1972 apparently to Mr. Colvin 19 and Mr. Hughes from an E. L. Riall and it talks about 20 an incident in 1972 of apparent liver damage to a Mr. 21 Gordon Wood who was a station attendant at the 22 Huntsville station. Do you have any recollection of 23 any communication regarding this incident? 24 A. No, I do not. 25 Q. Have you ever had anycontact with Mr. WATER PCB-SD0000028268 GORE REPORTING COMPANY ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 268 1 Riall? 2 A. Yes. 3 Q. Can you tell me who he was? 4 A. Works for Texas Eastern and I think 5 primari ly in a supervisory type of function over 6 stations, gas pumping stations. 7 Q. Have you ever heard of a Mr. Gordon 8 Wood? 9 A. I do not remember that specific name. 10 Q. Were you ever contacted by anybody at 11 Texas Eastern about any personal injury that they 12 claim may have stemmed from PCB's? 13 A. I do not remember beyond this document. 14 And again we 're back to the same place. I'm sorry. 15 MR. ZIMMER: I just don't want you to 16 take as true what's in this document, Doctor, since 17 you didn't write it. That's my only point. He's 18 already said he didn't remember. 19 Q. Do you recall seeing this document 20 before this time? 21 A. No. 22 Q. Do you recall any discussions with Dr. 23 Kelly about any personal injury at Texas Eastern? 24 A. No, Idon't recal1 any. 25 Q. Would it have been out of the ordinary WATER PCB-SD0000028269 GORE REPORTING COMPANY ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 269 1 or was it out of the ordinary for you to be contacted 2 about a personal injury with a product that you were 3 involved with? Was it unusual? 4 MR. ZIMMER: Don't answer anything yet. 5 To be contacted did you say about personal injury? 6 Q. Regarding a personal injury stemming 7 from a product you were involved with. 8 MR. ZIMMER: It's vague and ambiguous as 9 to what out of the ordinary means. Go ahead, Doctor, 10 if you have an answer. 11 A. My contacts at various companies would 12 have referred -- may have referred the question to me 13 since I was the one they knew within Monsanto and any 14 such question would have immediately been either 15 transferred or the number given so that they could 16 contact the medical department because I would not 17 attempt to answer such questions. 18 Q. Okay. This is Exhibit 67. This is a 19 call report dated July 24th, 1972 or the date of the 20 cal1 is that. The memo was dated August 2nd, 1972. 21 It appears to be authored by Dr. Hatton. If you 22 could take a minute to read it please, Doctor. I 23 want to direct your attention to page 3 of this 24 document. First before that do you recal1 authoring 25 this document? WATER PCB-SD0000028270 GORE REPORTING COMPANY ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 270 1 A. Yes. 2 Q. Do you recal1 the visit to Texas Eastern 3 that it describes? 4 A. Yes. 5 Q. I want to direct your attention to the 6 first paragraph and particularly to Walter Woods's 7 question as to what Monsanto's responsibility would 8 be along with Texas Eastern if the EPA banned PCB's 9 and told Texas Eastern that they would have to change 10 out all the remaining units. Do you recall that 11 question from Mr. Woods? 12 A. Yes. 13 Q. Do you recall indicating that you'd have 14 to take that question back to management? 15 A. Yes. 16 Q. And did you take the question back to 17 management? 18 A. Yes. 19 Q. Did management ever respond to the 20 question? 21 A. I do not know. 22 Q. Did they ever respond to you? 23 A. I do not recall such a response but -- 24 Q. Do you recall ever providing Texas 25 Eastern with a response to the question? WATER PCB-SD0000028271 GORE REPORTING COMPANY ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 271 1 A. No. 2 Q. Was the question ever asked to you again 3 subsequent to this time? 4 A. I don't remember. 5 Q. By the way who did you convey this 6 question to in management? 7 A. To Bill Papageorge although he is not 8 copied in on this. That was the gentleman to whom I 9 talked. 10 Q. So you actually had a face-to-face 11 discussion with him when you got back to Monsanto? 12 A. Yes. 13 Q. Do you recall what he said to you in 14 response to the question? 15 A. He'd take care of it. 16 Q. Did you have any subsequent discussions 17 with him about that question? 18 A. No. 19 Q. Or about the status of the question? 20 A. No. 21 Q. This isExhibit68. This is a 22 memorandum dated August 28th, 1972 authored by Mr. 23 Davidson to Mr. Paton and you appear to be cc'd on 24 this document. And if you could please take a minute 25 to look at it. WATER PCB-SD0000028272 GORE REPORTING COMPANY ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 272 1 Q. Have you ever seen this document be fore? 2 A. I do not recall. 3 Q. Do you recall the call report or the 4 meeting that you had some time in August with Texas 5 Eastern? 6 A. No. 7 Q. Do you recall a dec ision some time that 8 summer around August by Texas Eastern that they would 9 not use Turbinol 1122 in the gas turbine? 10 A. Yes, I recall that decision but I do not 11 remember who told me or if I heard it in a meeting. 12 Q. What was the impact of that decision on 13 Monsanto as far as you know? 14 MR. ZIMMER: The question is very vague 15 and ambiguous. If you have any understanding of 16 that, Doctor, you can tell her. Do you mean 17 economically, I mean it could be anything. 18 A. My only memory here is that I was really 19 not handling this project and I think it resulted in 20 somebody being assigned to it full time. 21 Q. By this project you mean the change 22 over? 23 A. I mean the development of new turbine 24 lubricants. 25 Q. I know you didn't author this but Mr. WATER PCB-SD0000028273 GORE REPORTING COMPANY ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 273 \ 1 Davidson states that we are essentially dead in the 2 water for six to eight months until we are able to 3 convince TransCanada Pipeline or another gas pipeline 4 to test Turbinol 1122 this fall. I don't want you to 5 tel1 me what was in Mr. Davidson's mind but I would 6 like to know whether to you there was a serious 7 impact by Texas Eastern not using the Turbinol 1122? 8 A. What do you mean by serious? 9 MR. ZIMMER: Yes, the document speaks 10 for it self. The question is vague and ambiguous, 11 calIs for speculation. 12 Q. I want to know if there was any -- why 13 it was so critical or whether it was critical for 14 Turbinol 1122 to be used by Texas Eastern? 15 MR. ZIMMER: Same objections. Whenever 16 we start using words like that that are argumentative 17 and thrust your interpretation of a particular event 18 into the question it makes it objectionable. 19 Q. He can tell me if it was not critical. 20 MR. ZIMMER: What do you mean by 21 critical. That's vague and ambiguous in and of 22 itself. He's just told you that he wasn't even 23 involved in this program to get the other lubricants 24 started. 25 A. If you'11 define what you mean by WATER PCB-SD0000028274 GORE REPORTING COMPANY ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 274 1 critical then I will -- 2 Q. How important was it to Monsanto to have 3 Texas Eastern use Turbinol 1122? 4 A. In terras of product development, having 5 some customer use the product was quite important. 6 Q. And why was that so? 7 A. Because future application of the 8 product would depend upon how the first customer's 9 equipment worked. 10 Q. At this approximate point in time which 11 is August 1972 was any customer using Turbinol 1122 12 to your knowledge? 13 MR. ZIMMER: Using -- do you mean that 14 to include testing, trialing? 15 Q. Yes, in use. 16 A. 1122 or 1223 or both? 17 Q. First 1122? 18 A. We had a field trial at TransCanada and 19 I am not --- I cannot remember the exact dates. That 20 would have been 1122. 21 Q. How about 1223? 22 A. I can remember none. 23 Q. I want to refer you to the paragraph 24 that's numbered 2. It starts with residual bad 25 feeling on the part of Texas Eastern toward Monsanto WATER PCB-SD0000028275 GORE REPORTING COMPANY ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 275 1 due to our precipitous withdrawal of Turbinol 153. 2 Did anyone at Monsanto tell you that they had bad 3 feelings about the withdrawal of Turbinol 153? 4 MR. ZIMMER: This they being Texas 5 Eastern? 6 Q. Yes. 7 A. I do not remember a specific reference 8 to that. 9 Q. Did you think that there were residual 10 bad feelings at Texas Eastern? 11 A. First the definition of what bad 12 feelings means obviously depends on a wide range from 13 minor irritation to complete irritation. 14 MR. ZIMMER: I think she's asking for 15 your opinion, Doctor. 16 A. In my opinion based on attending the 17 meeting which we've already described in one of the 18 attachments was that they were not enthused about the 19 decision. 20 Q. Did anyone ever say to you that they 21 viewed the withdrawal as precipitous? 22 MR. ZIMMER: When you say they once 23 again -24 Q. I mean Texas Eastern. Did Texas Eastern 25 ever say to you this withdrawal was precipitous? WATER PCB-SD0000028276 GORE REPORTING COMPANY ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 276 1 A. I do not remember that phrase. 2 Q. Did anyone ever use a phrase which was 3 synonymous with precipitous? 4 A. I do not remember. 5 Q. Did you ever have any contact with 6 Roland Moore? 7 A. If you look at attachment 63 you will 8 notice that an R. E. Moore attended the meeting of 9 January 14th, 1972. He was an attendee at the 10 meeting. 11 Q. Was that your first contact with Mr. 12 Moore? 13 MR. ZIMMER: We're looking at Exhibit 14 63. 15 A. I do not know. 16 Q. Do you recall any discussions in between 17 January and August of 1972 with Mr. Moore that you 18 may have had? 19 A. I do not recall any. 20 Q. This is Exhibit 69. This appears to be 21 a call report based on a December 6th, 1972 call. 22 The report was written by Mr. Frederiksen. It's of a 23 contact with Walter Woods and you are cc'd on it. Do 24 you recall ever seeing this call report before? 25 A. I do not recall seeing this specific WATER PCB-SD0000028277 GORE REPORTING COMPANY ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 277 1 call report, no. 2 Q. Do you recall any of the events that are 3 described in this call report? 4 A. I recall a request and I do not know how 5 it was related from Texas Eastern that I prepare a 6 presentation on the Turbinol 1122 and that it be 7 given to Vice-president Moore. 8 Q. And did you prepare that? 9 A. Yes, I did. 10 Q. And did you give that presentation to 11 Vice-president Moore? 12 A. Yes, and others at the same meeting. 13 Q. I'd like to refer you to the last 14 paragraph on that page. The sentence where it says: 15 Texas Eastern was put in a very difficult 16 position by our rapid exit of Turbinol 153. 17 We were sole supplier and we gave them very 18 little time to choose a replacement fluid. 19 Did anyone at Texas Eastern ever convey 20 this to you, what these two sentences say? 21 A. I do not remember a specific instance 22 when this happened. 23 Q. Were you under the impression that there 24 was a rapid exit of Turbinol 153? 25 A. My opinion was that it was a timely WATER PCB-SD0000028278 GORE REPORTING COMPANY ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 278 1 series of events based on the development of 2 information as it came about. 3 Q. Did you feel that Texas Eastern was 4 given adequate notice about the withdrawal of 5 Turbinol 153? 6 MR. ZIMMERs Objection, vague and 7 ambiguous as to adequate. It calls for a legal 8 conclusion. But you can answer, Doctor, if you have 9 an opinion about that. 10 A. I really don't remember an opinion at 11 that time. 12 Q. You had a long history that you've 13 testified to in both days of relations with Texas 14 Eastern that had built up through the years and I 15 gather good feelings between the two companies? 16 A. Yes. 17 Q. Did the events in January 1972 and 18 subsequent change that relationship? 19 A. Not as far as I know. I was no longer 20 responsible for such products and therefore the 21 contacts with Texas Eastern became less and less. 22 But the ones I did have were not unfriendly or -- 23 Q. Okay. This is Exhibit 70. Exhibit 70 24 appears to be a memorandum dated December 14th, 1972 25 from Mr. Davidson to Mr. Frederiksen and you are cc'd WATER PCB-SD0000028279 GORE REPORTING COMPANY ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 279 1 on this. Do you recall ever having seen this 2 document before? 3 A. No. 4 Q. This document refers to a meeting that 5 it states that you had in August at Texas Eastern 6 with Mr. Davidson and Mr. Woods. Do you recal1 that 7 meeting? 8 A. No, I don't recal1 that specific i 9 meeting. 10 Q. Do you recal1 ever hearing from Mr. 11 Woods or anybody else at Texas Eastern that Mr. Moore 12 was very upset with not having any notice on the 13 discontinuance of Turbinol 153? 14 A. No, I do not remember. 15 Q. Turning your attention to the first 16 paragraph, the sentence that says that: 17 Texas Eastern, because of their 18 standardization fluids, is virtually our only 19 opportunity to get into a GE turbine in the 20 near future. 21 Do you recall a concern at Monsanto 22 about the necessity to get into a GE turbine? 23 MR. ZIMMER: She's not asking you 24 whether you agree with that statement. 25 A. The start of your question is what's WATER PCB-SD0000028280 GORE REPORTING COMPANY ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 280 1 bothering me. Would you repeat it? 2 MS. WELCH: Can we have that read back? 3 (Reporter read from the record as directed.) 4 A. Yes. 5 Q. What was the basis of that concern as 6 far as you know? 7 A. It was necessary to get a field test 8 somewhere and relations with Texas Eastern were 9 better than any other potential customer at that 10 time. 11 Q. And was the necessity for a field test 12 as you stated before for future product development? 13 A. Yes. And to obtain the GE -- to get GE 14 to say something beyond it's okay to do it. 15 Q. What was the end result of that attempt, 16 in other words, did you ever get into a GE turbine? 17 A. Yes. 18 Q. And where was that GE turbine? 19 A. Texas Eastern. 20 Q. Which turbine; doyou know? 21 A. No, I don't remember which station it 22 was in. 23 Q. Let me just ask you if you remember 24 whether it was at the Corona station, New Mexico? 25 A. Until the time of this deposition I WATER PCB-SD0000028281 GORE REPORTING COMPANY ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 281 1 didn't know there was a Corona station. 2 MS. WELCH: Okay, that's all I have so 3 that concludes the deposition unless you have any 4 questions for Dr. Hatton. 5 MR. ZIMMER: I don't. 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 WATER PCB-SD0000028282 GORE REPORTING COMPANY ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 282 1 COMES NOW THE WITNESS, ROGER E. HATTON, 2 and having read the foregoing transcript of the 3 deposition taken on the 21st and 22nd days of 4 January, 1992 acknowledges by signature hereto that 5 it is a true and accurate transcript of the testimony 6 given on the date hereinabove mentioned. 7 8 9 10 ROGER E. HATTON 11 12 13 14 SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this 15 day of , 1992. 16 17 My Commission expires: 18 19 20 21 (Notary Public] 22 23 24 25 WATER PCB-SD0000028283 State of Missouri City of St. Louis ) ) ) I, Sandra L. Ragsdale, a Registered Professional Reporter and Notary Public within and for the State of Missouri, duly commissioned, qualified and authorized to administer oaths and to certify to depositions, do hereby certify that pursuant to Notice in the cause now pending and undetermined in the Superior Court of the State of California for the County of Los Angeles, to be used in the trial of said cause in said jurisdiction, I was attended at the law offices of Bryan, Cave, McPheeters and McRoberts, 500 North Broadway, in the City of St. Louis, State of Missouri, by the aforesaid witness; and by the aforesaid attorneys; on the 21st and 22nd days of January, 1992. The said witness, being of sound mind and being by me first carefully examined and duly cautioned and sworn to testify the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth in the case aforesaid, thereupon testified as is shown' in the foregoing transcript, said testimony being by me reported in shorthand and caused to be transcribed WATER PCB-SD0000028284 into typewriting, and that the foregoing pages correctly set forth the testimony of the aforementioned witness, together with the questions propounded by counsel and remarks and objections of counsel thereto, and is in all respects a full, true, correct and complete transcript of the questions propounded to and the answers given by said witness. I further certify that I am not of counsel or attorney for either of the parties to said suit, not related to nor interested in any of the parties or their attorneys. Witness my hand and notarial seal at St. Louis, Missouri, this 27th day of January, 1992. My commission empires June'Tl 1-^9 2. ^ot/^ry Publican and for the State of Missouri WATER PCB-SD0000028285