Document zd5Kb4qg1YMR4BL8M2xjyZ12R

i m THE CIRCUIT COURT IN AND FOR ESCAMBIA COUNTY, FLORIDA THE FIRST JUDICIAL CIRCUIT JOHN ALLEN, etal.. Plaintiffs, MONSANTO COMPANY, et al.. Defendants. ) ) ) ) ) Civil Action No. 08-CA-1762-B ) ) ) ) DEFENDANTS- SUPPLEMENTAL OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSES TO PLAINTIFFS* FIRST REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS TO DEFENDANTS COME NOW Defendants Monsanto Company, Pharmacia Corporation, Solutia He., and Gary Moore (collectively "Defendants") and submit their Supplemental Objections and Responses to Plaintiffs' First Request for Production ofDocuments to Defendants. GENERAL STATEMENT These answers and objections are made pursuant to the Florida Rules of Civil Procedure, and are subject to the General Objections and Limitations set forth at the end ofthese responses. CORPORATE DEFENDANTS' CORPORATE HISTORY Prior to 1997, Old Monsanto, now known as Pharmacia Corporation, was engaged in the manufacture of, among other things, chemicals, pharmaceuticals and agricultural products. In 1935, Old Monsanto acquired Swann Chemical Co. and from and after die date of that acquisition through 1977 Old Monsanto manufactured and sold polychlorinated biphenyls or PCBs. Old Monsanto manufactured PCBs at its plant in Anniston, Alabama (ceasing in 1971) and at the W.G. Erummrich Plant in the Village of Sauget, Illinois (ceasing as of August 31, 1977). On September 1,1997, Old Monsanto spun off certain of its chemical businesses into SLC-6030207-2 1 HARTOLDMONOOOOQ71 Solutia Inc,, an independent, publicly-owned company. One of the plants conveyed to Solatia as part of this spin-offwas the Pensacola Nylon Plant. In 2000, Old Monsanto merged with Pharmacia & Upjohn, Inc., a publicly-owned pharmaceuticals company, with Old Monsanto being the surviving corporation. Upon completion of the merger. Old Monsanto changed its name from Monsanto Company to Pharmacia Corporation. Later in 2000, Pharmacia transferred its agricultural business to a newly-created corporation named Monsanto Company ~ New Monsanto. New Monsanto later became an independent, publicly-traded company. The Pensacola Nylon Plant was sold to Ascend Performance Materials on June 1,2009. As used herein "Old Monsanto" refers to Pharmacia Corporation and "New Monsanto" refers to the currently existing Monsanto Company. . REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION 1. All correspondence, permits, applications, reporting forms, lab data, or other documents in Your possession, custody or control that originated from, or purport to originate from, or which were sent to, or purport to have been sent to, the Florida Department of Public Health, the Florida Department of Environmental Protection, the Agency for the Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, the federal Environmental Protection Agency, the state or federal Department of Transportation, the state or federal Occupational Safety and Health Administration or any other state or federal department or agency concerning PCXs generally or the Plant specifically. ^ RESPONSE: Defendants incorporate their General Objections and Limitations set forth below. Defendants farther object to this request as overly broad, unduly burdensome, seeks irrelevant information and is not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. The request is unlimited in time or to the Pensacola Nylon Plant. ' Subject to and without waiving these objections and the General Objections, Defendants will work with Plaintiffs' counsel to narrow this request and any agreed SLC-6030207-2 2 HARTOLDMONOOOOQ72 responses thereto to a reasonable scope sufficient to show the circumstances surrounding PCBs at the Pensacola Nylon Plant SUPPLEMENTAL RESPONSE: Subject to and without waiving any prior objections and the General Objections, and as set forth in Donald Stewart's letter of March 23, 2010 further limiting this request for documents "from 1965 to the present" and to the "facility located at or around 3000 Old Chemstrand Rd, Cantonment, Florida", Defendants refer Plaintiffs to the MONSOOOOOl - 100120 document collection, and to the DSW and URS document collections that have been made available to plaintiffs as they may relate to the circumstances surrounding PCBs at the Pensacola Nylon Plant. . ' 2. All documents and tilings to which You have referred or upon which You have relied in any manner in preparation of Your responses to Plaintiff's First Set of Interrogatories (and any sets filed thereafter throughout the course of this litigation) or which in any way support or substantiate your responses to those interrogatories. RESPONSE: Defendants incorporate their General Objections and Limitations set forth below. Defendants further object to this request on the grounds that it is overly broad, unduly burdensome and harassing. Defendants further object to this request on the grounds that it uses the ambiguous phrase "used by you." Defendants further object to this request on the grounds set forth in General Objection No. 1. Subject to and without waiving these objections and the General Objections, Defendants will produce the specific documents referenced in their Responses to Plaintiffs' First Set of Interrogatories to Defendants. 3. All documents, tapes or other records reflecting or describing meetings or other communications between You or any of Your employees, agents, representatives, or contractors and any Plaintiff. RESPONSE: Defendants incorporate their General Objections and Limitations as set forth below. Defendants further object to this request as overly broad, unduly burdensome, seeks irrelevant information and is not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. This request is overly broad in that it fails to specify or limit in any way the subject matter of "communications" or "meetings" and fails to specify any time period to which it refers. Subject to and without waiving these objections and the General Objections, Defendants are presently unaware of any responsive documents. To date, many of the SLC-6030207-2 3 HARTOLDMONOOOOQ73 Plaintiffs have not identified their properties with specificity and Plaintiffs' counsel have advised that they intend to add and drop Plaintiffs. 4. All documents in Your possession or control that refer or relate to any of the Plaintiffs or their properties. ' RESPONSE: Defendants incorporate their General Objections and Limitations set forth below. Defendants further object to this request as overly broad, unduly burdensome, seeks irrelevant information and is not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Defendants further object to this request on the grounds set forth in General Objection No. 1. Subject to and without waiving these objections and the General Objections, Defendants are presently unaware of any non-privileged. documents. To date, Plaintiffs have not identified their properties with specificity and Plaintiffs' counsel have advised that they intend to add and drop Plaintiffs. 5. All documents in Youx possession, custody or control reporting or reflecting tests or sampling or results of tests or sampling of dust, soil, water, air, sediment, tissue, blood, or other media for the presence of PCXs collected in the Escambia River, Escambia Bay or the areas surrounding these waters or at the Plant site. RESPONSE: Defendants incorporate their General Objections and Limitations set forth below. Defendants further object to this request as overly broad, unduly burdensome, seeks irrelevant information and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Defendants further object that the phrase "or in the areas surrounding these waters" is ambiguous. Defendants object to this request to the extent it seeks publicly available information since such documents are equally available to the plaintiffs. Defendants object to this request to the extent it seeks confidential medical information involving persons unrelated to this lawsuit. Subject to and without waiving these objections and the General Objections, Defendants will produce non-privileged PCD sampling results for PCBs in the environment on the Pensacola Nylon Plant premises as detected and reported to the regulatory agencies. SUPPLEMENTAL RESPONSE: Subject to and without waiving any prior objections and the General Objections, and as set forth in Donald Stewart's letter of March 23, 2010, further limiting this request to "PCS test or sampling results on the plant site or surrounding areas". Defendants refer Plaintiffs to the MONSOOOQ01 - 100120 document collection, and to the DSW and URS document collections that have been made available to SLC-6030207-2 4 HARTOLDMONOOOOQ74 plaintiffs as they may relate to PCB test or sampling results on or around the Pensacola Nylon Plant. ' 6. All photographs and maps of the Plant in Your possession, custody or control showing the present or historical layout, condition, or construction ofthe plant. RESPONSE: Defendants incorporate their General Objections and Limitations set forth below. Defendants further object to this request on the grounds that it is overly broad, unduly burdensome, seeks irrelevant information and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery admissible evidence. Defendants further object to this request on the grounds that it fails to specify any time period to which it relates and fails to define the ambiguous term "condition." Subject to and without waiving these objections and the General Objections, Defendants will work with Plaintiffs' counsel to narrow this request and any agreed responses thereto to a reasonable scope to provide exemplars of the layout of the Pensacola Nylon Plant sufficient to show the plant layout as it relates use of PCBs. SUPPLEMENTAL RESPONSE: Subject to and without waiving any prior objections and the General Objections, Defendants refer Plaintiffs to the MONS0O0OO1 100120 document collection, and to the DSW and TJRS document collections that have been made available to plaintiffs concerning the layout of the Pensacola Nylon Plant sufficient to show the plant layout as it relates use of PCBs. 7. All press releases, advertisements, public pronouncements, or warnings issued by this Defendant pertaining to PCXs generally and the threat, or lack of a threat, of same to the neighbors of the Plant or to Escambia River, Escambia Bay and all connected waterways. RESPONSE: Defendants incorporate their General Objections and Limitations set forth below. Defendants farther object to this request on the grounds that it is overly broad, unduly burdensome, seeks irrelevant information and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery admissible evidence. Defendants further object to this request on the grounds that it fails to define or limit in any way the subject matter of the requested "press releases," "advertisements," or "public pronouncements" other than to state "pertaining to PCXs generally," it fails to define the terms "threat" or "lack of threat," and it fails to specify and time period to which it relates. This request is overly broad in that the terms "neighbors of the Plant or to Escambia River, Escambia Bay and all connected waterways" is not limited to the geographic area at issue in Plaintiffs' Complaint. Subject to and without waiving these objections and the General Objections, Defendants will produce documents sufficient to show press releases and public SLC-6030207-2 5 HARTOLDMONOOOOQ75 announcements issued pertaining to the temporary accidental release of PCBs in 1969 from the Pensacola Nylon Plant. SUPPLEMENTAL RESPONSE: Subject to and without waiving any prior objections and the General Objections, Defendants refer Plaintiffs to the MONSOOOOOl 100120 document collection, and to the DSW and HRS document collections that have been made available to plaintiffs concerning press releases and public announcements issued pertaining to the temporary accidental release of PCBs in 1969 from the Pensacola Nylon Plant. 8. All correspondence, bid documents, contracts, specifications, invoices, or other documents pertaining to Your use of independent contractors to inventory, study, remove, apply or dispose oftoxic or hazardous substances or wastes at the Plant, including specifically PCXs. RESPONSE: Defendants incorporate their General Objections and Limitations set forth below. Defendants further object to this request on the grounds that it is overly broad, unduly burdensome, seeks irrelevant information and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery admissible evidence. Defendants further object to this request on the grounds that it fails to define the generic terms "toxic," "hazardous substances," or hazardous "wastes" or the ambiguous term "apply." Subject to and without waiving these objections and the General Objections, Defendants will work with Plaintiffs' counsel to narrow this request and any agreed responses thereto to a reasonable scope sufficient to show the circumstances surrounding remediation of PCBs at the Pensacola Nylon Plant. SUPPLEMENTAL RESPONSE: Subject to and without waiving any prior objections and the General Objections, and as set forth in Donald Stewart's letter of March 23, 2010 further limiting this request to " documents pertaining to the use of independent contractors to inventory, study, remove, apply or dispose of PCBs from the Pensacola Plant", Defendants refer Plaintiffs to the MONSOOOOOl - 100120 document collection, and to the DSW and URS document collections that have been made available to plaintiffs. 9. All' documents that evidence, refer or relate to the results or report of any environmental audits, risk assessments, or investigation at the Plant , RESPONSE: Defendants incorporate their General Objections and Limitations set forth below. Defendants further object to this request on the grounds that it is overly broad, unduly burdensome, seeks irrelevant information and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery admissible evidence. Defendants further object to this request on tbe grounds that it fails to define the generic terms "environmental audits," "risk assessments" SLC-6030207-2 6 HARTOLDMONOOOOQ76 or "investigation." Defendants further object to this request to the extent it seeks documents or information protected from discovery by the seif critical analysis privilege and/or any other applicable privilege or immunity. See General objection No. 1. Defendants object to this request on the grounds that it fails to specify any time frame, subject matter and is not limited to PCBs. Defendants further object to this request to the extent it seeks publicly available information, since such information is equally available to the plaintiffs. Subject to and without waiving these objections and the General Objections, Defendants will work with Plaintiffs' counsel to narrow this request and any agreed responses thereto to a reasonable scope sufficient to show the circumstances surrounding remediation of PCBs at the Pensacola Nylon Plant. SUPPLEMENTAL RESPONSE:. Subject to and without waiving any prior objections and the General Objections, and as set forth in Donald Stewart's letter of March 23, 2010 further limiting this request "specifically to PCBs" as it relates to "environmental audits, risk assessments or investigation at the Plant", Defendants refer Plaintiffs to the MONSOOOOOl - 100120 document collection, and to the DSW and URS document collections that have been made available to plaintiffs. 10. Any insurance policy which may provide Yon with coverage for the damages or relief sought herein. RESPONSE: Defendants incorporate their General Objections and Limitations set forth below. Subject to and without waiving the General Objections, see Defendants' response to Interrogatory No. 5. SUPPLEMENTAL RESPONSE: Subject to and without waiving any prior objections and the General Objections, see attached discovery responses dated 5/15/08 concerning insurance issues previously provided in the Corlew litigation. ' 11. The Chemical Safety Data Sheets, Material Safety Data Sheets, Chemical Safe Handling Information, etc. for any product made at the Plant or material used at the Plant. RESPONSE: Defendants incorporate their General Objections and Limitations set forth below. Defendants further object to this request on the grounds that it is overly broad, unduly burdensome, seeks irrelevant information and not reasonably, calculated to lead to the discovery admissible evidence. Defendants further object to this request on the grounds that it fails to limit the request to specific chemicals identified in the Complaint and the request is unlimited in time. SLC-6030207-2 7 HARTOLDMONOOOOQ77 Subject to and without waiving these objections and the General Objections, Defendants will work with Plaintiffs' counsel to narrow this request and any agreed responses thereto to a reasonable scope concerning PCBs used at the Pensacola Nylon Plant. . SUPPLEMENTAL RESPONSE: Subject to and without waiving any prior objections and the General Objections, and as set forth in Donald Stewart's letter of March 23, 2010 farther limiting this request "to PCBs" Defendants refer Plaintiffs to the MONSOOOOOl -- 100120 document collection, and to the DSW and TJRS document collections that have been made available to plaintiffs. 12. All meteorological data in Your possession, care or control pertaining to the Plant or its vicinity. ' RESPONSE: Defendants incorporate their General Objections and Limitations set forth below. Defendants further object to this request on the grounds that it is overly broad, unduly burdensome, seeks irrelevant information and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery admissible evidence. Defendants object to. this request on the grounds that it fails to specify any time period to which it refers. Defendants object to the ambiguous phrase "pertaining to the Plant or its vicinity." Defendants further object to this request to the extent that it seeks publicly available information, since such information is equally available to the plaintiffs. 13. All hydrogeologic data or reports in Your possession, care or control pertaining to the Plant or its vicinity. RESPONSE: Defendants incorporate their General Objections and Limitations set forth below. Defendants further object to this request on the grounds that it is overly broad, unduly burdensome, seeks irrelevant information and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery admissible evidence. Defendants object to the use of the undefined term "hydrogeological data" and to the ambiguous phrase "pertaining to the Plant or its vicinity." Defendants object to this request on the grounds that it fails to specify any time period to which it refers. Defendants further object to this request to the extent that it seeks publicly available information, since such information is equally available to the plaintiffs. 14. All documents relating to spills or releases of substances contaminated with PCXs. SLC-6030207-2 HARTOLDMONOOOOQ78 RESPONSE: Defendants incorporate their General Objections and Limitations set forth below. Defendants further object to this request on the grounds that it is overly broad, unduly burdensome, seeks irrelevant information and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery admissible evidence. Defendants further object to this request on the grounds that it fails to specify any time period, or any person or entity to which it relates. As phrased, this request seeks any document relating to any spill or release of any material in which PCBs, dibenzodioxins or dibenzofurans were present anywhere in the world at any time, by any person or entity, at any concentration, volume or weight. Subject to and without waiving these objections and the General Objections, Defendants will work with Plaintiffs9 counsel to narrow this request and any agreed responses thereto to a reasonable scope involving non-privilcged documents sufficient to show the circumstances surrounding any PCS spills or releases at the Pensacola Nylon Plant. SUPPLEMENTAL RESPONSE: Subject to and without waiving any prior objections and the General Objections, Defendants refer Plaintiffs to the MONSOOOOOl 100120 document collection, and to the DSW and HRS document collections that have been made available to plaintiffs concerning any PCD spills or releases at the Pensacola Nylon Plant. 15. All documents in Your possession, care or control relating to the toxicity, hazardousness, or environmental threat of PCXs. RESPONSE: Defendants incorporate their General Objections and Limitations set forth below. Defendants further object to this request on the grounds that it is overly broad, unduly burdensome, seeks irrelevant information and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery admissible evidence. Defendants object to the use of the undefined terms "hazardonsness" and "environmental threat." Defendants object to this request to the extent that this request fails to specify any time period to which it relates. Defendants further object to this request to the extent is seeks publicly available information since such information is equally available to the plaintiffs. Subject to and without waiving these objections and the General Objections and without adopting plaintiffs' terms and characterizations "toxicity," "hazardousness" or "environmental threat", Defendants will work with Plaintiffs' counsel to narrow this request and any agreed responses thereto to a reasonable scope concerning any alleged toxicity and environmental persistence of PCBs, dibenzodioxins or dibenzofurans. Defendants will make available its MONS bates set. SUPPLEMENTAL RESPONSE: Subject to and without waiving any prior objections and the General Objections, including continued objections to undefined terms, Defendants refer Plaintiffs to the MONSOOOOOl -- 100120 document collection, and to the SLC-6030207-2 9 HARTOLDMONOOOOQ79 DSW and TJRS document collections that have been made available to plaintiffs concerning any alleged toxicity and environmental persistence of PCBs. 16. The annual corporate reports to shareholders for this Defendant since 1950. RESPONSE: Defendants incorporate their General Objections and Limitations set forth below. Defendants further object to this request on the grounds that it is overly broad, unduly burdensome, seeks irrelevant information and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery admissible evidence. Subject to and without waiving these objections and the General Objections, Defendants have previously produced available annual reports to Plaintiffs' counsel in other litigation. Defendants will endeavor to identify the last date produced and supplement with more recent annual corporate reports. . SUPPLEMENTAL RESPONSE: Subject to and without waiving any prior objections and the General Objections, and as set forth in Donald Stewart's letter of March 23, 2010 further limiting this request to "annual reports for the last 10 years", see Monsanto Company, Pharmacia Corporation and Solutia Inc.'s 10K Annual Reports for the last ten years. Defendants refer Plaintiffs to the website http://www.sec.gov/edgar.shtml, which provides copies of the annual reports going back at least 10 years. 17. The annual budgets for the Plant since 1950. RESPONSE: Defendants incorporate their General Objections and Limitations set forth below. Defendants further object to this request on the grounds that it is overly broad, unduly burdensome, seeks irrelevant information and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery admissible evidence. Defendants further object to the request to the extent that it seeks proprietary, confidential business, confidential financial or trade secret documents. 18. All information provided to Defendants' customers pertaining to PCX containing products. RESPONSE: Defendants incorporate their General Objections and Limitations set forth below. Defendants further object to this request on the grounds that it is overly broad, unduly burdensome, seeks irrelevant information and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery admissible evidence. Defendants further object to this request because it fails to specify the time period to which it relates and fails to limit in any way the subject matter of the "information" provided other than to use the phrase "pertaining to PCX containing products." As phrased this request would seek advertising, invoices, price quotes, quality control data, etc. SLC-6030207-2 10 HARTOLDMONOOOOO8O Subject to and without waiving these objections and the General Objections, Old Monsanto has not manufactured, sold or distributed PCBs since 1977. Defendants will work with Plaintiffs' counsel to narrow this request and any agreed responses thereto to a reasonable scope sufficient to show information provided to Old Monsanto's customers pertaining to PCBs. Defendants will make available its MONS bates set. SUPPLEMENTAL RESPONSE: Subject to and without waiving any prior objections and the General Objections, including continued objections to undefined terms. Defendants refer Plaintiffs to the MONSOOOO01 - 100120 document collection and to the DSW document collection that have been made available to plaintiffs. 19. All waste manifests, analyses, bills of lading, internal memos, correspondence, invoices, logs or other documents pertaining to waste disposal at the Plant. RESPONSE: Defendants incorporate their General Objections and Limitations set forth below. Defendants further object to this request on the grounds that it is overly broad, unduly burdensome, seeks irrelevant information and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery admissible evidence. Defendants object to this request because it fails to specify the time period to which it relates. Defendants further object to this request in that the terms "waste" or "waste disposal" is not limited to PCBs at issue in the Complaint. Subject to and without waiving these objections and the General Objections, Defendants will work with Plaintiffs' counsel to narrow this request and any agreed responses thereto to a reasonable scope sufficient to show handling of any PCB-related wastes at the Pensacola Nylon Plant. SUPPLEMENTAT, RESPONSE: Subject to and without waiving any prior . objections and the General Objections, and as set forth in Donald Stewart's letter of March 23,2010 further limiting this request to "disposal of PCBs at the Pensacola Plant", Defendants refer Plaintiffs to the MONSOOOOOl --100120 document collection, and to the DSW and URS document collections that have been made available to plaintiffs concerning handling of any PCB-related wastes at the Pensacola Nylon Plant. 20. All recordation or memorialization of communications with elected officials concerning the allegations ofpollution-related problems at the Plant RESPONSE: Defendants incorporate their General Objections and Limitations set forth below. Defendants further object to this request on the grounds that it is overly broad, unduly burdensome, seeks irrelevant information and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery admissible evidence. Defendants further object to this request because it uses the vague, undefined phrase "the allegations of pollution-related problems at the Plant." SLC-6030207'2 11 HARTOLDMONOOOOQ81 21. Diagrams or lists of the chain of command, or managerial hierarchy at the Plant from 1969 until the present. RESPONSE: Defendants incorporate their General Objections and Limitations set forth below. Defendants farther object to this request on the grounds that it is overly broad, unduly burdensome, seeks irrelevant information and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery admissible evidence. As phrased, this request seeks "diagrams" or "lists" of the "chain of command" or "managerial hierarchy" at the Pensacola Nylon Plant from 1969 to the present. Subject to and without waiving these objections and the General Objections, Defendants will work with Plaintiffs' counsel to narrow this request and any agreed responses thereto to a reasonable scope sufficient to identify supervisory personnel that addressed PCBs at the Pensacola Nylon Plant. SUPPLEMENTAL RESPONSE: Subject to and without waiving any prior objections and the General Objections, and as set forth in Donald Stewart's letter of March 23, 2010 further limiting this request to "diagrams or lists of the chain of command or managerial hierarchy that addressed PCBS at the Plant from 1969 until the present", Defendants have not located any "diagrams or lists of the chain of command or managerial hierarchy that addressed PCBs at the Pensacola Plant." However, Defendants refer Plaintiffs to the MONSOOOOOl - 100120 document collection, and to the DSW and URS document collections that have been made available to plaintiffs, which identify various individuals involved in addressing PCB issues at the Pensacola Nylon Plant 22. All patents at any time held by, sought by, or licenses to, this Defendant pertaining to PCX containing products, PCX manufacturing, pollution control or pollution remediation. RESPONSE: Defendants incorporate their General Objections and Limitations set forth below. Defendants further object to this request on the grounds that it is overly broad, unduly burdensome, seeks irrelevant information and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery admissible evidence. Subject to and without waiving these objections and the General Objections, Defendants will work with Plaintiffs' counsel to narrow this request and any agreed responses thereto to a reasonable scope concerning patents held by Old Monsanto and/or Swann Chemical Company as it concerns PCBs identified as the substance at issue in this litigation, if any. . S3-C-6030207-2 12 HARTOLDMONOOOOQ82 23. Data, reports, or studies pertaining to the toxicity or health effects of PCXs. RESPONSE: Defendants incorporate their General Objections and Limitations set forth below. Defendants further object to this request on the grounds that it is overly broad, unduly burdensome, seeks irrelevant information and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery admissible evidence. Defendants object to this request because it fails to define any time period or relevant "health effects." Defendants further object to this request to the extent that it seeks publicly available information, since such information is equally available to the plaintiffs. Subject to and without waiving these objections and the General Objections, Defendants will work with Plaintiffs' counsel to narrow this request and any. agreed responses thereto to a reasonable scope concerning PCBs identified as the substance at issue in this litigation. Defendants will make available its MONS- bates set. 24. Any warnings issued by this company concerning the toxicity or threat of the environment ofPCXs. RESPONSE: Defendants incorporate their General Objections and Limitations set forth below. Defendants further object to this request on the grounds that it is overly broad, unduly burdensome, seeks irrelevant information and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery admissible evidence. Defendants further object to this request because it fails to define any time period and uses the ambiguous, undefined phrase "threat to the environment." Subject to and without waiving these objections and the General Objections, see Defendants response to Request No. 18. Defendants will work with Plaintiffs' counsel to narrow this request and any agreed responses thereto to a reasonable scope concerning PCBs identified as the substance at issue in this litigation. Defendants will make available its MONS bates set. SUPPLEMENTAL RESPONSE: Subject to and without waiving any prior objections and the General Objections, including continuing objections to ambiguous terms, and as set forth in Donald Stewart's letter of March 23, 2010 further limiting this request to the time frame "from 1960 until the present. Defendants refer Plaintiffs to the MONSOOOOOl - 100120 document collection, and to the DSW and URS document collections that have been made available to plaintiffs concerning warnings issued concerning PCBs. 25. All logs, maps, analyses, and qualitative or quantitative water data, etc. derived therefrom for any wells at the Plant or wells in the vicinity ofthe Plant under Your control. SLC-6030207-2 13 HARTOLDMONOOOOQ83 RESPONSE: Defendants incorporate their General Objections and Limitations set forth below. Defendants further object to this request on the grounds that it is overly broad, unduly burdensome, seeks irrelevant information and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery admissible evidence. Defendants object to this request because it is not limited to specifically identified chemicals at issue in the Complaint. Subject to and without waiving these objections and the General Objections, Defendants will work with Plaintiffs' counsel to narrow this request and any agreed responses thereto to a reasonable scope of non-privileged documents concerning PCBs identified as the substance at issue in this litigation. SUPPLEMENTAL RESPONSE: Subject to and without waiving any prior objections and the General Objections, including continuing objections to ambiguous terms, and as set forth in Donald Stewart's letter of March 23, 2010 further limiting this request to "wells at the Plant or wells in the vicinity of the Plant under your control concerning PCXs", Defendants refer Plaintiffs to the MONSOOOOOl - 100120 document collection, and to the DSW and URS document collections that have been made available to plaintiffs. 26. All reports of discharges or releases into the environment at the Plant pursuant to any permit to do so including both air and water discharges as well as copies ofthe said permits. RESPONSE: Defendants incorporate their General Objections and Limitations set forth below. Defendants further object to this request on the grounds that it is overly broad, unduly burdensome, seeks irrelevant information and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery admissible evidence. Defendants object to this request because it is not limited to the subject matter of PCBs identified in the Complaint or in time. Defendants further object to the extent that the permits and monitoring reports are in the public domain and equally accessible to the Plaintiffs. Subject to and without waiving these objections and the General Objections, Defendants will work with Plaintiffs' counsel to narrow this request and any agreed responses thereto to a reasonable scope of . non-privileged documents concerning PCBs identified as the substance at issue in this litigation. SUPPLEMENTAL RESPONSE: Subject to and without waiving any prior objections and the General Objections, including continuing objections to ambiguous terms, and as set forth in Donald Stewart's letter of March 23, 2010 further limiting this request to "reports of discharges or releases of PCXs ... at the Pensacola Nylon Plant", Defendants refer Plaintiffs to the MONSOOOOOl -- 100120 document collection, and to the DSW and URS document collections that have been made available to plaintiffs. SLC-603 0207-2 14 HARTOLDMONOOOOQ84 27. All internal memos, correspondence, notes, phone logs, or other documents, not previously provided, hut pertaining to pollution, waste disposal, PCXs or litigation issues at the Plant. RESPONSE: Defendants incorporate their General Objections and Limitations set forth below. Defendants further object to this request on the grounds that it is overly broad, unduly burdensome, seeks irrelevant information and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery admissible evidence. Defendants object to this request because it fails to define or limit in any way the overly broad, generic terms "pollution," "waste disposal," or "litigation issues." Defendants object to this request because it is not limited to the subject matter of PCBs identified in the Complaint or in time. Defendants object to this request on the grounds that it fails to describe the documents requested with sufficient particularity or specificity to allow any meaningful response to this request. Defendants further object to the extent this request seeks discovery of "litigation issues" protected by attorney-client and/or attorney work product. STJPPLEMENTAL RESPONSE: Subject to and without waiving any prior objections and the General Objections, including continuing objections to ambiguous terms, and as set forth in Donald Stewart's letter of March 23, 2010 further limiting this request to "PCX pollution or waste disposal at the Plant", Defendants refer Plaintiffs to the MONSOOOOOl - 100120 document collection, and to the DSW and URS. document collections that have been made available to plaintiffs concerning PCB issues at the Pensacola Nylon Plant. 28. All documents pertaining to any Criminal investigation, indictment, conviction, or judgment against this Defendant. RESPONSE: Defendants incorporate their General Objections and Limitations set forth below. Defendants further object to this request on the grounds that it is overly broad, unduly burdensome, seeks irrelevant information and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery admissible evidence. Defendants object to this request because it fails to define any time period to which it relates and fails to define or limit in any way the subject matter of any "criminal investigation, indictment, conviction, or judgment" covered by this request. Subject to and without waiving these objections and the General Objections, and without adopting plaintiffs" terms criminal "investigation, indictment, conviction, or judgment," while it was not a criminal matter, Defendants will produce the Notice of Violation and Consent Order referred to in Interrogatory No. 3. SUPPLEMENTAL RESPONSE: Subject to and without waiving any prior objections and the General Objections, and as set forth in Donald Stewart's letter of March SLC-6030207-2 15 HARTOLDMONOOOOQ85 23, 2010 further limiting this request to the Notice of Violation and Consent Order, see attached documents. 29. Any compilation of guidelines, standards, or methods Yon assert You complied with in the operation of the Plant to industry standards or to the state of the art. RESPONSE: Defendants incorporate their General Objections and Limitations set forth below. Defendants further object to this request on the grounds that it is overly broad, unduly burdensome, seeks irrelevant information and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery admissible evidence. Defendants object to this request on the grounds that it is a premature contention request as discovery is ongoing and incomplete. Defendants further object to this request on the grounds that it does not define, specify or limit in any way the time period to which it relates or the particular processes, procedures, actions or operations at the Pensacola Nylon Plant relating to PCBs. SUPPLEMENTAL RESPONSE: Subject to and without waiving any prior objections and the General Objections, and as set forth in Donald Stewart's letter of March 23, 2010 further limiting this request to "PCX", Defendants refer Plaintiffs to the MONSOOOOOl - 100120 document collection, and to the DSW and URS document collections that have been made available to plaintiffs. 30. AJ1 documents exchanged between You and any and all governmental agencies or authorities referring or relating to the storage, transportation, use, disposal or accidental or intentional discharge or spill ofPCX containing products at the Plant. RESPONSE: Defendants incorporate their General Objections and Limitations set forth below. Defendants further object to this request on the grounds that it is overly broad, unduly burdensome, seeks irrelevant information and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery admissible evidence. Defendants object to this request because it fails to identify "all governmental agencies or authorities" with any specificity. Defendants also object to this request as unlimited in time. Subject to and without waiving these objections and the General Objections, with respect to PCBs, please see Declaration of Amy Dyer, Paragraphs 16 - 19, filed herein on October 8, 2008, concerning the accidental leak from PCB-containing equipment at the Pensacola Nylon Plant, the Federal Bureau of Commercial Fisheries' notification of the Plant about the leak in approximately August 1969, and the prompt cessation of the leak thereafter. Old Monsanto later entered into a Consent Order with the Florida Department of Air and Water Pollution, to build a dam restricting the outfall from reaching the Escambia River and Bay, and to build a new outfall to bypass any potentially impacted soil. The new outfall (which remains in operation) is maintained and operated in compliance SLC-6030207-2 16 HARTOLDMONOOOOO86 with all applicable Federal and/or State regulations, specifically the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System ("NPDES"). See Dyer Declaration, referenced above. Defendants will identify and produce documents sufficient to show their notification about the accidental leak, the cessation of the leak, and the subsequent Consent Order building a dam restricting the outfall. SUPPLEMENTAL RESPONSE: Subject to and without waiving any prior objections and the General Objections, and as set forth in Donald Stewart's letter of March 23, 2010 further limiting this request to the United States Environmental protection Agency, Florida Department of Environmental Regulation, Florida Department of Environmental Protection, Florida Department of Air and Water Pollution, or the Bureau of Commercial Fisheries that refer or relate to the storage, transportation, use, disposal or accidental or intentional discharge or spill of PCB containing products at the Plant from 1960", Defendants refer Plaintiffs to the MONS00O0O1 - 100120 document collection, and to the DSW and URS document collections that have been made available to plaintiffs. 31. All documents exchanged between You and any and all third parties, excluding governmental agencies or authorities, referring or relating to the storage, transportation, use, disposal or accidental or intentional discharge or spill of PCX containing products at the Plant or into the Escambia River or any of its tributaries or Escambia Bay. ' RESPONSE: Defendants incorporate their General Objections and Limitations set forth below. Defendants further object to this request on the grounds that it is overly broad, unduly burdensome, seeks irrelevant information and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery admissible evidence. Defendants object to this request because it fails to identify "third parties" with any specificity. Defendants also object to this request as unlimited in time. Defendants further object to the extent that this request seeks discovery of documents protected by attorney client privilege, attorney work product doctrine or other applicable privileges. Subject to and without waiving these objections and the General Objections,, with respect to PCBs, please see Declaration of Amy Dyer, Paragraphs 16 - 19, filed herein on October 8, 2008, concerning the accidental leak from PCB-containing equipment at the Pensacola Nylon Plant, the Federal Bureau of Commercial Fisheries' notification of the Plant about the leak in approximately August 1969, and the prompt cessation of the leak thereafter. Old Monsanto later entered into a Consent Order with the Florida Department of Air and Water Pollution, to build a dam restricting the outfall from reaching the Escambia River and Bay, and to build a new outfall to bypass any potentially impacted soil. The new outfall (which remains in operation) is maintained and operated in compliance with all applicable Federal and/or State regulations, specifically the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System ("NPDES"). See Dyer Declaration, referenced above. Defendants will identify and produce documents sufficient to show their notification about SLC-6030207-2 17 HARTOLDMONOOOOQ87 the accidental leak, the cessation of the leak, and the subsequent Consent Order building a dam restricting the outfall. SUPPLEMENTAL RESPONSE: Subject to and without waiving any prior objections and the General Objections, and as set forth in Donald Stewart's letter of March 23, 2010 further limiting this request to PCB-containing substances but not identifying "third parties" with any specificity, Defendants refer Plaintiffs to the MONSOOOOOl 100120 document collection, and to the DSW and HRS document collections that have been made available to plaintiffs. 32. AH documents that display, list or represent, in whole or in part, the corporate organization of Monsanto Company, Pharmacia Corporation, Solntia, hie.; and all subsidiaries and their various operating entities, groups, teams, divisions, departments, units or subdivisions, and that of their predecessors, if any, during the Subject Time Period. RESPONSE: Defendants incorporate their General Objections and Limitations set forth below. Defendants further object to this request on. the grounds that it is overly broad, unduly burdensome, seeks irrelevant information and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery admissible evidence. Defendants further object that request does not identify the sought after documents with sufficient particularity and seeks discovery of subsidiaries and their various operating entities, groups, teams, divisions, departments, units or subdivisions, and that of their predecessors, if any, wholly-unrelated to the Pensacola Nylon Plant and PCBs. Subject to and without waiving these objections and the General Objections, see Corporate Defendants' Corporate History set forth above and the response to Interrogatory No. 14. SUPPLEMENTAL RESPONSE: Subject to and without waiving any prior objections and the General Objections, and as set forth in Donald Stewart's letter of March 23, 2010 further limiting this request as it relates to the Pensacola Nylon Plant, see documents produced in response to Request 16. 33. All documents that describe, list or represent, in whole or in part, the relationship between Monsanto Company, Pharmacia Corporation, Solutia, Inc. and all their subsidiaries and their various operating entities, groups, teams, divisions, departments, units or subdivisions, and SLC-6030207-2 18 HARTOLDMONOOOOO88 that of their predecessors, if any, including that part of the relationship referring or relating to the administration or operation of the Plant during the Subject Time Period. , . RESPONSE: Defendants incorporate their General Objections and Limitations set forth below. Defendants further object to this request on the grounds that it is overly broad, unduly burdensome, seeks irrelevant information and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery admissible evidence. Defendants further object that request does not identify the sought after documents with sufficient particularity and seeks discovery of subsidiaries and their various operating entities, groups, teams, divisions, departments, units or subdivisions, and that of their predecessors, if any, wholly-unrelate.d to the Pensacola Nylon Plant and PCBs. Subject to and without waiving these objections and the General Objections, the land on which the Pensacola Nylon Plant is located was purchased in 1951 by Chemstrand Corporation, which was half-owned by old Monsanto. In 1961, Old Monsanto acquired the Pensacola Nylon Plant, which became known as the Chemstrand Division of Old Monsanto. In 1966, it was renamed the Textiles Division of Old Monsanto. Eor further corporate history, please see "Corporate Defendants' Corporate History" set forth above and the response to interrogatory No. 14. SUPPLEMENTAL RESPONSE: Subject to and without waiving any prior objections and the General Objections, and as set forth in Donald Stewart's letter of March 23, 2010 further limiting this request as it relates to the Pensacola Nylon Plant and PCBcontaining products, see documents produced in response to Request 16. In addition, Defendants refer Plaintiffs to the MONSOOOOOl - 100120 document collection, and to the DSW and HRS document collections that have been made available to plaintiffs. 34, All documents that evidence, refer or relate to the nature and extent of involvement of Monsanto Company, Pharmacia Corporation, Solutia, Inc. and all of said entities' parents, subsidiaries, predecessors, successors, corporate affiliates and divisions with storage, transportation, use, disposal or accidental or intentional discharge or spill of PCX containing products at the Plant or into the Escambia River or any of its tributaries or Escambia Bay. RESPONSE: Defendants incorporate their General Objections and Limitations set forth below. Defendants further object to this request on the grounds that it is overly broad, unduly burdensome, seeks irrelevant information and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery admissible evidence. Defendants further object that request does not identify the sought after documents with sufficient particularity. Defendants further object to the phrase "nature and extent of involvement" as vague and ambiguous. SLC-6030207-2 19 HARTOLDMONOOOOQ89 Subject to and without waiving these objections and the General Objections, see responses to Request No. 33 and Interrogatory No. 3. Defendants will work with Plaintiffs' counsel to narrow this request and any agreed responses thereto to a reasonable scope concerning PCBs identified as the substance at issue in this litigation. SUPPLEMENTAL RESPONSE: Subject to and without waiving any prior objections and the General Objections, and as set forth in Donald Stewart's letter of March 23, 2010 further limiting this request as it relates to "PCB-containing substances at the Plant", Defendants refer Plaintiffs to the MONSOOOOOl --100120 document collection, and to the DSW and URS document collections that have been made available to plaintiffs. 35. Documents sufficient to evidence Your policies, practices, procedures and guidelines concerning communications, reporting, supervision, and/or "chain of command" referring or relating to the following: a. Efforts to comply with each statute, regulation, code or standard identified in Your response to Interrogatory Number 31; b. Monitoring or testing as to the medical, physical, or intellectual status of Plant employees or contractors; c. Monitoring or testing as to the occurrence or existence of any spills, leaks or releases of substances from the Plant; d. Disposal of PCX containing substances or waste-water from the floors of Your manufacturing facilities after said substances spilled or leaked from machines, equipment or other means; . e. . Remediation of any and all known or suspected spills, leaks, or releases of substances from the Plant; and f. Handling or responding to formal or informal complaints received concerning environmental, hazardous, or toxic nuisances or wasted emanating from the Plant SLC-6030207-2 20 HARTOLDMONOOOOQ90 RESPONSE: Defendants incorporate their General Objections and Limitations set forth below. Defendants further object to this request on the grounds that it is overly broad, unduly burdensome, seeks irrelevant information and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery admissible evidence. Defendants further object to this request as not limited to PCBs. Subject to and without waiving these objections and the General Objections, Defendants will work with Plaintiffs' counsel to narrow this request and any agreed responses thereto to a reasonable scope concerning PCBs identified as the substance at issue in this litigation. SUPPLEMENTAL RESPONSE: Subject to and without waiving any prior objections and the General Objections, and as set forth in Donald Stewart's letter of March 23, 2010 further limiting this request as it relates to "PCXs", Defendants refer Plaintiffs to the MONSOOOOOl - 100120 document collection, and to the DSW and URS document collections that have been made available to plaintiffs concerning PCBs identified as the substance at issue in this litigation. 36. Documents sufficient to evidence Your policies, practices, procedures, manuals, forms, and technology during the Subject Time Period concerning the retention of documents, e mails, computer files and records, electronic communications and all forms of electronically stored documents or information. RESPONSE: Defendants incorporate their General Objections and Limitations set forth below. Defendants further object to this request on the grounds that it is overly broad, unduly burdensome, seeks irrelevant information and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery admissible evidence. Defendants object to this request as a grossly overbroad fishing expedition particularly since PCBs have not been manufactured by Old Monsanto since 1977. Defendants further object that request is not tailored to the types of documents sought in the document request or to PCBs or the Pensacola Nylon Plant. Defendants object to this request to the extent that it seeks information which is protected from disclosure by the attorney-client privilege and/or work product doctrine or any other applicable privilege or immunity. Defendants further object to this request insofar as it seeks proprietary, confidential business or trade secrets information. ' . Subject to and without waiving these objections and the General Objections, Plaintiffs' counsel herein, Donald Stewart, in connection with Alabama litigation, has already reviewed Defendants' preserved PCB document collections and selected the documents he deems relevant. As Plaintiffs' counsel is aware, many years ago, historical documents in the possession of Old Monsanto relating to the manufacture, sale and use of PCBs were collected and maintained under the control of Old Monsanto's Law Department, including certain documents concerning the temporary accidental leak in SLC-fi030207-2 21 HARTOLDMONOOOOQ91 1969 of PCB-containing hydraulic fluid from the Pensacola Nylon Plant. Documents sufficient to show the circumstances surrounding this historical 1969 accidental leak from the Pensacola Nylon Plant, and the cessation and correction thereof will be produced. SUPPLEMENTAL RESPONSE: Subject to and without waiving any prior objections and the General Objections, and as set forth in Donald Stewart's letter of March 23, 2010 further limiting this request as it relates to "PCB-containing products at the Pensacola Nylon Plant", Defendants refer Plaintiffs to the MONSOOOOOl - 100120 document collection, and to the DSW and URS document collections that have been made available to plaintiffs, including certain documents concerning the temporary accidental leak in 1969 of PCB-containing hydraulic fluid from the Pensacola Nylon Plant and the cessation and correction thereof. 37. Documents sufficient to evidence Your policies, practices, procedures, manuals, forms, and technology since 1950 concerning the retention of documents, records, microfiche or other similar non-electronic media. Defendants incorporate their General Objections and Limitations set forth below. Defendants further object to this request on the grounds that it is overly broad, unduly burdensome, seeks irrelevant information and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery admissible evidence. Defendants object to this request as a grossly overbroad fishing expedition particularly since PCBs have not been manufactured by Old Monsanto since 1977. Defendants further object that request is not tailored to the types of documents sought in the document request or to PCBs or the Pensacola Nylon Plant. Defendants object to this request to the extent that it seeks information which is protected from disclosure by the attorney-client privilege and/or work product doctrine or any other applicable privilege or immunity. Defendants further object to this request insofar as it seeks proprietary, confidential business or trade secrets information. Subject to and without waiving these objections and the General Objections, Plaintiffs' counsel herein, Donald Stewart, in connection with Alabama litigation, has already reviewed Defendants' preserved PCB document collections and selected the documents he deems relevant. As Plaintiffs' counsel is aware, many years ago, historical documents in the possession of Old Monsanto relating to the manufacture, sale and use of PCBs were collected and maintained under the control of Old Monsanto's Law Department, including certain documents concerning the temporary accidental leak in 1969 of PCB-containing hydraulic fluid from the Pensacola Nylon Plant. Documents sufficient to show the circumstances surrounding this historical 1969 accidental leak from the Pensacola Nylon Plant, and the cessation and correction thereof will be produced. SUPPLEMENTAL RESPONSE: Subject to and without waiving any prior objections and the General Objections, and as set forth in Donald Stewart's letter of March 23, 2010 further limiting this request as it relates to "PCX-containing products at the SLC-603G207-2 22 HARTOLDMONOOOOQ92 Pensacola Nylon Plant", Defendants refer Plaintiffs to the MONSOOOOOl - 100120 document collection, and to the DSW and HRS document collections that have been made available to plaintiffs, including certain documents concerning the temporary accidental leak in 1969 of PCB-containing hydraulic fluid from the Pensacola Nylon Plant and the cessation and correction thereof. 38. Documents sufficient to-evidence Your policies, practices, procedures, manuals, forms, and technology during the Subject Time Period concerning the deletion, purging, destruction or erasure or archiving of e-mails, computer files and records, electronic communications and all forms of electronically stored documents or information. Defendants incorporate their General Objections and Limitations set forth below. Defendants further object to this request on the grounds that it is overly broad, unduly burdensome, seeks irrelevant information and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery admissible evidence. Defendants object to this request as a grossly overbroad fishing expedition particularly since PCBs have not been manufactured by Old Monsanto since 1977. Defendants further object that request is not tailored to the types of documents sought in the document request or to PCBs or the Pensacola Nylon Plant. Defendants object to this request to the extent that it seeks information which is protected from disclosure by the attorney-client privilege and/or work product doctrine or any other applicable privilege or immunity. Defendants further object to this request insofar as it seeks proprietary, confidential business or trade secrets information. Subject to and without waiving these objections and the General Objections, Plaintiffs' counsel herein, Donald Stewart, in connection with Alabama litigation, has already reviewed Defendants' preserved PCB document collections and selected the documents he deems relevant. As Plaintiffs' counsel is aware, many years ago, historical documents in the possession of Old Monsanto relating to the manufacture, sale and use of PCBs were collected and maintained under the control of Old Monsanto's Law Department, including certain documents concerning the temporary accidental leak in 1969 of PCB-containing hydraulic fluid from the Pensacola Nylon Plant. Documents sufficient to show the circumstances surrounding this historical 1969 accidental leak from the Pensacola Nylon Plant, and the cessation and correction thereof will be produced. SUPPLEMENTAL RESPONSE: Subject to and without waiving any prior objections and the General Objections, and as set forth in Donald Stewart's letter of March 23, 2010 further limiting this request as it relates to "PCX-containing products at the Pensacola Nylon Plant", Defendants refer Plaintiffs to the MONSOOOOOl - 100120 document collection, and to the DSW and TJRS document collections that have been made available to plaintiffs, including certain documents concerning the temporary accidental leak in 1969 of PCB-containing hydraulic fluid from the Pensacola Nylon Plant and the cessation and correction thereof. SLC-6030207-2 23 HARTOLDMONOOOOQ93 39. Documents sufficient to evidence Your policies, practices, procedures, manuals, forms and technology during the Subject Time Period for storing, backing up, archiving, disaster recovery, and otherwise preserving e-mails, computer files and. records, electronic communications and all forms of electronically stored documents or information. Defendants incorporate their General Objections and Limitations set forth below. Defendants further object to this request on the grounds that it is overly broad, unduly burdensome, seeks irrelevant information and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery admissible evidence. Defendants object to this request as a grossly overbroad fishing expedition particularly since PCBs have not been manufactured by Old Monsanto since 1977. Defendants further object that request is not tailored to the types of documents sought in the document request or to PCBs or the Pensacola Nylon Plant. Defendants object to this request to the extent that it seeks information which is protected from disclosure by the attorney-client privilege and/or work product doctrine or any other applicable privilege or immunity. Defendants further object to this request insofar as it seeks proprietary, confidential business or trade secrets information. Subject to and without waiving these objections and the General Objections, Plaintiffs' counsel herein, Donald Stewart, in connection with Alabama litigation, has already reviewed Defendants' preserved PCB document collections and selected the documents he deems relevant. As Plaintiffs' counsel is aware, many years ago, historical documents in the possession of Old Monsanto relating to the manufacture, sale and use of PCBs were collected and maintained under the control of Old Monsanto's Law Department, including certain documents concerning the temporary accidental leak in 1969 of PCB-containing hydraulic fluid from the Pensacola Nylon Plant. Documents sufficient to show the circumstances surrounding this historical 1969 accidental leak from the Pensacola Nylon Plant, and the cessation and correction thereof will be produced. SUPPLEMENTAL RESPONSE: Subject to and without waiving any prior objections and the General Objections, and as set forth in Donald Stewart's letter of March 23, 2010 further limiting this request as it relates to "PCB-containing products at the Pensacola Nylon Plant", Defendants refer Plaintiffs to the MONSOOOOOl - 100120 document collection, and to the DSW and URS document collections that have been made available to plaintiffs, including certain documents concerning the temporary accidental leak in 1969 of PCB-containing hydraulic fluid from the Pensacola Nylon Plant and the cessation and correction thereof. SLC-6030207-2 24 HARTOLDMONOOOOQ94 40. Documents sufficient to evidence the configuration, topography, and/or organizational access for each and every e-mail system, document management system, database or other electronically-stored information repository used by You during the Subject Time Period. . Defendants incorporate their General Objections and Limitations set forth below. Defendants farther object to this request on the grounds that it is overly broad, unduly burdensome, seeks irrelevant information and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery admissible evidence. Defendants object to this request as a grossly overbroad fishing expedition particularly since PCBs have not been manufactured by Old Monsanto since .1977. Defendants further object that request is not tailored to the types of documents sought in the document request or to PCBs or the Pensacola Nylon Plant. Defendants object to this request to the extent that it seeks information which is protected from disclosure by the attorney-client privilege and/or work product doctrine or any other applicable privilege or immunity. Defendants further object to this request insofar as it seeks proprietary, confidential business or trade secrets information. Subject to and without waiving these objections and the General Objections, Plaintiffs' counsel herein, Donald Stewart, in connection with Alabama litigation, has already reviewed Defendants' preserved PCB document collections and selected the documents he deems relevant. As Plaintiffs' counsel is aware, many years ago, historical documents in the possession of Old Monsanto relating to the manufacture, sale and use of PCBs were collected and maintained under the control of Old Monsanto's Law Department, including certain documents concerning the temporary accidental leak in 1969 of PCB-containing hydraulic fluid from the Pensacola Nylon Plant. Documents sufficient to show the circumstances surrounding this historical 1969 accidental leak from the Pensacola Nylon Plant, and the cessation and correction thereofwill be produced. SUPPLEMENTAL RESPONSE: Subject to and without waiving any prior objections and the General Objections, and as set forth in Donald Stewart's letter of March 23, 2010 further limiting this request as it relates to the "Pensacola Nylon Plant", Defendants refer Plaintiffs to the MONSOOOOOl - 100120 document collection, and to the DSW and URS document collections that have been made available to plaintiffs, including certain documents concerning the temporary accidental leak in 1969 of PCB-containing hydraulic fluid from the Pensacola Nylon Plant and the cessation and correction thereof. 41. Documents sufficient to evidence any and all asset tracking inventories for the Subject Time Period that refer or relate in any way to computer hardware, including without limitation all servers, personal computers, laptop computers, PDAs, BlacfcBerrys or similar SLC-6030207-2 25 HARTOLDMONOOOOQ95 devices, and offline storage media such, as compact discs, thumb drives, hard drives, floppy dies, diskettes, or storage tapes. Defendants incorporate their General Objections and Limitations set forth below. Defendants further object to this request on the grounds that it is overly broad, unduly burdensome, seeks irrelevant information and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery admissible evidence. Defendants object to this request as a grossly overbroad fishing expedition particularly since PCBs have not been manufactured by Old Monsanto since 1977. Defendants further object that request is not tailored to the types of documents sought in the document request or to PCBs or the Pensacola Nylon Plant. Defendants object to this request to the extent that it seeks information which is protected from disclosure by the attorney-client privilege and/or work product doctrine or any other applicable privilege or immunity. Defendants further object to this request insofar as it seeks proprietary, .confidential business or trade secrets information. Subject to and without waiving these objections and the General Objections, Plaintiffs5 counsel herein, Donald Stewart, in connection with Alabama litigation, has already reviewed Defendants' preserved PCB document collections and selected the documents he deems relevant. As Plaintiffs' counsel is aware, many years ago, historical documents in the possession of Old Monsanto relating to the manufacture, sale and use of PCBs were collected and maintained under the control of Old Monsanto's Law Department, including certain documents concerning the temporary accidental leak in 1969 of PCB-containing hydraulic fluid from the Pensacola Nylon Plant. Documents sufficient to show the circumstances surrounding this historical 1969 accidental leak from the Pensacola Nylon Plant, and the cessation and correction thereof will be produced. SUPPLEMENTAL RESPONSE: Subject to and without waiving any prior objections and the General Objections, and as set forth in Donald Stewart's letter of March 23, 2010 further limiting this request as it relates to the "Pensacola Nylon Plant", Defendants refer Plaintiffs to the MONSOOOOOl - 100120 document collection, and to the DSW and HRS document collections that have been made available to plaintiffs, including certain documents concerning the temporary accidental leak in 1969 of PCB-containing hydraulic fluid from the Pensacola Nylon Plant and the cessation and correction thereof. 42. All access control lists identifying all users (e.g., all individuals, departments, entities or organizations, whether internal or external to Your corporate or organizational structure) for each and every e-mail system, document management system, instant messaging system, electronic database or other electronic information system identified by You in Your responses to requests for production ofdocuments contemporaneously served herewith. SLC-6030207-2 26 HARTOLDMONOOOOQ96 Defendants incorporate their General Objections and Limitations set forth below. Defendants further object to this request on the grounds that it is overly broad, unduly burdensome, seeks irrelevant information and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery admissible evidence. Defendants object to this request as a grossly overbroad fishing expedition particularly since PCBs have not been manufactured by Old Monsanto since 1977. Defendants further object that request is not tailored to the types of documents sought in the document request or to PCBs or the Pensacola Nylon Plant. Defendants object to this request to the extent that it seeks information which is protected from disclosure by. the attorney-client privilege and/or work product doctrine or any other applicable privilege or immunity. Defendants further object to this request insofar as it seeks proprietary, confidential business or trade secrets information. Subject to and without waiving these objections and the General Objections, Plaintiffs5 counsel herein, Donald Stewart, in connection with Alabama litigation, has already reviewed Defendants' preserved PCB document collections and selected the documents he deems relevant. As Plaintiffs' counsel is aware, many years ago, historical documents in the possession of Old Monsanto relating to the manufacture, sale and use of PCBs were collected and maintained under the control of Old Monsanto's Law Department, including certain documents concerning the temporary accidental leak in 1969 of PCB-containing hydraulic fluid from the Pensacola Nylon Plant. Documents sufficient to show the circumstances surrounding this historical 1969 accidental leak from the Pensacola Nylon Plant, and the cessation and correction thereof will be produced. SUPPLEMENTAL RESPONSE: Subject to and without waiving any prior objections and the General Objections, Defendants refer Plaintiffs to the MONSOOOOOl - 100120 document collection, and to the DSW and TJRS document collections that have been made available to plaintiffs, including certain documents concerning the temporary accidental leak in 1969 of PCB-containing hydraulic fluid from the Pensacola Nylon Plant and the cessation and correction thereof. ' 43. Documents sufficient to evidence Your policies, practices, procedures, manuals, forms, and technology during the Subject Time Period concerning the maintenance, retention and/or distribution of each class or category of documents sought in these Requests, as well as any Requests filed subsequent hereto. Defendants incorporate their General Objections and Limitations set forth below. Defendants further object to this request on the grounds that it is overly broad, unduly burdensome, seeks irrelevant information and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery admissible evidence. Defendants object to this request as a grossly overbroad fishing expedition particularly since PCBs have not been manufactured by Old Monsanto since 1977. Defendants further object that request is not tailored to the types of documents sought in the document request or to PCBs or the Pensacola Nylon Plant. SLC-6030207-2 27 HARTOLDMONOOOOQ97 Defendants object to this request to the extent that it seeks information which is protected from disclosure by the attorney-client privilege and/or work product doctrine or any other applicable privilege or immunity. Defendants further object to this request insofar as it seeks proprietary, confidential business or trade secrets information. Subject to and without waiving these objections and the General Objections, Plaintiffs' counsel herein, Donald Stewart, in connection with Alabama litigation, has already reviewed Defendants' preserved PCS document collections and selected the documents he deems relevant. As Plaintiffs' counsel is aware, many years ago, historical documents in the possession of Old Monsanto relating to the manufacture, sale and use of PCBs were collected and maintained under the control of Old Monsanto's Law Department, including certain documents concerning the temporary accidental leak in 1969 of PCB-containing hydraulic fluid from the Pensacola Nylon Plant. Documents sufficient to show the circumstances surrounding this historical 1969 accidental leak from the Pensacola Nylon Plant, and the cessation and correction thereof will be produced. SUPPLEMENTAL RESPONSE: Subject to and without waiving any prior objections and the General Objections, and as set forth in Donald Stewart's letter of March 23, 2010 further limiting this request as it relates to "PCB-containing substances located, used, transported, spilled or released at the Pensacola Plant", Defendants refer Plaintiffs to the MONSOOOOOl - 100120 document collection, and to the DSW and UJRS document collections that have been made available to plaintiffs concerning PCBs at the Pensacola Nylon Plant. 44. All documents that evidence, refer or relate to the spill or discharge of PCXs from the Plant between 1968 and the present, including all records, reports, analyses, internal memoranda, and correspondence with state and federal regulatory authorities concerning the same. RESPONSE: Defendants incorporate their General Objections and Limitations set forth below. Defendants further object to this request on the grounds that it is overly broad, unduly burdensome, seeks irrelevant information and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery admissible evidence. Subject to and without waiving these objections and the General Objections, Defendants will work with Plaintiffs' counsel to narrow this request and any agreed responses thereto to a reasonable scope concerning non-privileged documents involving PCBs identified as the substance at issue in this litigation. See response to Interrogatory No, 3. SUPPLEMENTAL RESPONSE: Subject to and without waiving any prior objections and the General Objections, and as set forth in Donald Stewart's letter of March SLC-6030207-2 28 HARTOLDMONOOOQ098 23, 2010 further limiting this request as it relates to the "spills or discharges ... PCBcontaining substances from the Pensacola Plant from 1968 until the present", Defendants refer Plaintiffs to the MONSOOOOOl - 100120 document collection, and to the DSW and URS document collections that have been made available to plaintiffs concerning spills or discharges of PCBs at the Pensacola Nylon Plant. 45. All documents that evidence, refer or relate to the spill or discharge of PCXs from any other facility (other than the Plant) owned or controlled by You or your predecessor entities, including all records, reports, analyses, internal memoranda, and correspondence with state and federal regulatory authorities concerning the same. RESPONSE: Defendants incorporate their General Objections and Limitations set forth below. Defendants further object to this request on the grounds that it is overly broad, unduly burdensome, seeks irrelevant information and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery admissible evidence. Defendants object to this request where it is not limited to the Pensacola Nylon Plant. 46. Documents that evidence, refer or relate to the origins of PCXs stored in Holding Ponds 327A, 327B and 327C and where said PCXs have been stored by the Plant from the date ofreceipt or manufacture until the present. RESPONSE: Defendants incorporate their General Objections and Limitations set forth below. Defendants further object to this request on the grounds that it is overly broad, unduly burdensome, seeks irrelevant information and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery admissible evidence. Defendants object to this request as a grossly overbroad fishing expedition. Subject to and without waiving these objections and the General Objections, Defendants will work with Plaintiffs' counsel to narrow this request and any agreed responses thereto to a reasonable scope concerning non-privileged documents involving PCBs identified as the substance at issue in this litigation. SUPPLEMENTAL RESPONSE: Subject to and without waiving any prior objections and the General Objections, and as set forth in Donald Stewart's letter of March 23, 2010 further limiting this request as it relates to the "PCB-containing substances that were placed in holding Ponds 327A, 327B and 327C", Defendants refer Plaintiffs to the MONSOOOOOl - 100120 document collection, and to the DSW and URS document collections that have been made available to plaintiffs. SLC-6030207-2 29 HARTOLDMONOOOOQ99 47. All documents that evidence, refer or relate to flow of PCXs into Pond 327B and the clean-up or remediation of the same, including all records, reports, analyses, internal memoranda, and correspondence with state and federal regulatory authorities concerning the same. RESPONSE: Defendants incorporate their General Objections and Limitations set forth below; Defendants further object to this request on the grounds that it is overly broad, unduly burdensome, seeks irrelevant information and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery admissible evidence. Defendants object to this request as a grossly overbroad fishing expedition. Subject to and without waiving these objections and the General Objections, Defendants will work with Plaintiffs' counsel to narrow this request and any agreed responses thereto to a reasonable scope concerning non-privileged documents involving PCBs identified as the substance at issue in this litigation. SUPPLEMENTAL RESPONSE: Subject to and without waiving any prior objections and the General Objections, and as set forth in Donald Stewart's letter of March 23, 2010 further limiting this request as it relates to the "PCB-contaming material" and Pond 327B, Defendants refer Plaintiffs to the MONSOOOOOl - 100120 document collection, and to the DSW and URS document collections that have been made available to plaintiffs. 48. All documents that evidence, refer or relate to the disposal or redirection of process water from Pond 327B, including all records, reports, analyses, internal memoranda, and correspondence with state and federal regulatory authorities concerning the same. RESPONSE: Defendants incorporate their General Objections and Limitations set forth below. Defendants further object to this request on the grounds that it is overly broad, unduly burdensome, seeks irrelevant information and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery admissible evidence. Defendants object to this request as a grossly overbroad fishing expedition. Subject to and without waiving these objections and the General Objections, Defendants will work with Plaintiffs' counsel to narrow this request and any agreed responses thereto to a reasonable scope concerning non-privileged documents involving PCBs identified as the substance at issue in this litigation.' SLC-6030207-2 30 HARTOLDMONOOOOI00 SUPPLEMENTAL RESPONSE: Subject to and without waiving any prior objections and the General Objections, and as set forth in Donald Stewart's letter of March 23, 2010 further limiting this request as it relates to the "PCBs" and Pond 327B, Defendants refer Plaintiffs to the MONSOOOOOl - 100120 document collection, and to the DSW and UPS document collections that have been made available to plaintiffs. 49. All reports, tests, analyses, and reviews of outflow waters originating from the Plant during the Subject Time Period that refer or relate to the detection of PCXs or other hazardous substances in storm or wastewater runoff collected in ponds before being discharged into the Escambia River. RESPONSE: Defendants incorporate their General Objections and Limitations set forth below. Defendants further object to this request on the grounds that it is overly broad, unduly burdensome, seeks irrelevant information and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery admissible evidence. Defendants object to this request as hot limited to PCBs, Defendants object to this request as a grossly overbroad fishing expedition. Subject to and without waiving these objections and the General Objections, Defendants will work with Plaintiffs' counsel to narrow this request and any agreed responses thereto to a reasonable scope concerning non-privileged documents involving PCBs identified as the substance at issue in this litigation. SUPPLEMENTAL RESPONSE: Subject to and without waiving any prior objections and the General Objections, and as set forth in Donald Stewart's letter of March 23, 2010 further limiting this request as it relates to the "PCB-containing substances", Defendants refer Plaintiffs to the MONSOOOOOl ~ 100120 document collection, and to the DSW and URS document collections that have been made available to plaintiffs. 50. All reports, tests, analyses, and reviews of outflow waters originating from the Plant during the Subject Time Period that refer or relate to the detection of PCXs or other hazardous substances in storm water, waste water, or cooling water runoff discharged into the Escambia River. RESPONSE: Defendants incorporate their General Objections and Limitations set forth below. Defendants further object to this request on the grounds that it is overly broad, unduly burdensome, seeks irrelevant information and not reasonably calculated to SLC-6030207-2 31 HARTOLDMONOOOOI01 lead to the discovery admissible evidence. Defendants object to this request as not limited to PCBs. Defendants object to this request as a grossly overbroad fishing expedition. Subject to and without waiving these objections and the General Objections, Defendants will work with Plaintiffs' counsel to narrow this request and any agreed responses thereto to a reasonable scope concerning non-privileged documents involving PCBs identified as the substance at issue in this litigation. SUPPLEMENTAL RESPONSE: Subject to and without waiving any prior objections and the General Objections, and as set forth in Donald Stewart's letter of March 23, 2010 further limiting this request as it relates to the "PCBs or PCB-containing substances". Defendants refer Plaintiffs to the MONSOOOOOl - 100120 document collection, and to the DSW and TJRS document collections that have been made available to plaintiffs. 51, All schematics, blue prints, diagrams or similar documents that show the drainage or discharge systems at the Plant during the Subject Time Period which refer or relate to storm water, waste water, or cooling water runoff. RESPONSE: Defendants incorporate their General Objections and Limitations set forth below. Defendants further object to this request on the grounds that it is overly broad, unduly burdensome, seeks irrelevant information and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery admissible evidence. Defendants object to this request as not limited to PCBs. . Subject to and without waiving these objections and the General Objections, Defendants will work with Plaintiffs' counsel to narrow this request and any agreed responses thereto to a reasonable scope concerning PCBs identified as the substance at issue in this litigation. SUPPLEMENTAL RESPONSE: Subject to and without waiving any prior objections and the General Objections, Defendants refer Plaintiffs to the MONSOOOOOl 100120 document collection, and to the DSW and URS document collections that have been made available to plaintiffs. 52. Documents sufficient to evidence Your policies, practices, procedures and guidelines concerning disposal of PCXs and PCX waste. RESPONSE: Defendants incorporate their General Objections and Limitations set forth below. Defendants further object to this request on the grounds that it is overly broad, unduly burdensome, seeks irrelevant information and not reasonably calculated to SLC-6030207-2 32 HARTOLDMONOOOOI02 lead to the discovery admissible evidence. Defendants object to this request as unlimited in time or to the Pensacola Nylon Plant. Subject to and without waiving these objections and the General Objections, Defendants will work with Plaintiffs' counsel to narrow this request and any agreed responses thereto to a reasonable scope concerning PCBs identified as the substance at issue in this litigation. . SUPPLEMENTAL RESPONSE: Subject to and without waiving any prior objections and the General Objections, and as set forth in Donald Stewart's letter of March 23,2010 further limiting this request as it relates to "disposal of PCBs and PCB-containing wastes at the Pensacola Plant", Defendants refer Plaintiffs to the MONSOOOOOl - 100120 document collection, and to the DSW and HRS document collections that have been made available to plaintiffs. 53. All documents, correspondence, corrective action plans, reports, tests, analyses, reviews or photographs concerning or referring to the two soil samples collected from, the area of a Solid Waste Management Unit in November 1998 that tested positive for PCXs. RESPONSE: Defendants incorporate their General Objections and Limitations set forth below. Defendants further object to this request on the grounds that it is overly broad, unduly burdensome, seeks irrelevant information and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery admissible evidence. Defendants further object to the request as not identifying the specific samples or the Solid Waste Management Unit in question. Subject to and without waiving these objections and the General Objections, Defendants will work with Plaintiffs' counsel to narrow this request and any agreed responses thereto to non-privileged documents sufficient to show investigation and/or remediation of PCBs identified as the substance at issue in this litigation. SUPPLEMENTAL RESPONSE: Subject to and without waiving any prior objections and the General Objections, Defendants refer Plaintiffs to the TJRS document collection that have been made available to plaintiffs. 54. All documents, correspondence, reports, tests, analyses, reviews or photographs concerning or referring to the remediation of the area where two soil samples tested positive for PCXs in November 1998. RESPONSE: Defendants incorporate their General Objections and Limitations set forth below. Defendants further object to this request on the grounds that it is overly SLC-6030207-2 33 HARTOLDMONOOOOI03 broad, unduly burdensome, seeks irrelevant information and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery admissible evidence. Defendants further object to the request as not identifying the specific samples or the Solid Waste Management Unit in question. Subject to and without waiving these objections and the General Objections, Defendants will work with Plaintiffs' counsel to narrow this request and any agreed responses thereto to non-privileged documents sufficient to show investigation and/or remediation of PCBs identified as the substance at issue in this litigation. SUPPLEMENTAL RESPONSE: Subject to and without waiving any prior objections and the General Objections, Defendants refer Plaintiffs to the URS document collection that have been made available to plaintiffs. 55, All documents, correspondence, reports, tests, analyses, reviews, maps or photographs concerning or referring to the EPA's inspection ofthe Plant in February 2001. RESPONSE: Defendants incorporate their General Objections and Limitations set forth below. Defendants further object to this request on the grounds that it is overly broad, unduly burdensome, seeks irrelevant information and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery admissible evidence. Defendants further object to the request as not limited to PCBs. Subject to and without waiving these objections and the General Objections, Defendants will work with Plaintiffs' counsel to narrow this request and any agreed responses thereto to a reasonable scope concerning PCBs identified as the substance at issue in this litigation and the Pensacola Nylon Plant. SUPPLEMENTAL RESPONSE: Subject to and without waiving any prior objections and the General Objections, and as set forth in Donald Stewart's letter of March 23,20X0 further limiting this request as it relates to "PCXs", Defendants refer Plaintiffs to the URS document collection that have been made available to plaintiffs. 56. All documents, correspondence, reports, tests, analyses, reviews, maps or photographs that originated from, or purport to originate horn, or which were sent to, or purport to have been sent to Federal Bureau of Commercial Fisheries. RESPONSE: Defendants incorporate their General Objections and Limitations set forth below. Defendants further object to this request on the grounds that it is overly broad, unduly burdensome, seeks irrelevant information and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery admissible evidence. Defendants further object to the request as not SLC-6030207-2 34 HARTOLDMONOOOOI04 limited to the Pensacola Nylon Plant or to PCBs - the only chemical specifically identified in the Complaint . Subject to and without waiving these objections and the General Objections, Defendants will work with Plaintiffs' counsel to narrow this request and any agreed responses thereto to a reasonable scope concerning PCBs identified as the substance at issue in this litigation and the Pensacola Nylon Plant. See response to Interrogatoiy No. 3. SUPPLEMENTAL RESPONSE: Subject to and without waiving any prior objections and the General Objections, and as set forth in Donald Stewart's letter of March 23, 2010 further limiting this request as it relates to "Pensacola Plant", Defendants refer Plaintiffs to the MONSOOOOOl - 100120 document collection and to the DSW and URS document collections that have been made available to plaintiffs. 57. All documents, correspondence, reports, tests, analyses, reviews, maps or photographs that concern or relate to the decommissioning of the equipment that used or contained PCXs. RESPONSE: Defendants incorporate their General Objections and Limitations set forth below. Defendants further object to this request on the grounds that it is overly broad, unduly burdensome, seeks irrelevant information and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery admissible evidence. . Subject to and without waiving these objections and the General Objections, Defendts will work with Plaintiffs' counsel to narrow this request and any agreed responses thereto to a reasonable scope concerning PCB containing electrical equipment and the decommissioning thereof. SUPPLEMENTAL RESPONSE: Subject to and without waiving any prior objections and the General Objections, and as set forth in Donald Stewart's letter of March 23, 2010 further limiting this request as it relates to "Pensacola Plant", Defendants refer Plaintiffs to the MONSOOOOOl - 100120 document collection and to the DSW and URS document collections that have been made available to plaintiffs. 58. All documents that relate to the purchase agreement between Solutia and Ascend Performance Materials. RESPONSE: Defendants incorporate their General Objections and Limitations set forth below. Defendants further object to this request on the grounds that it is overly broad, unduly burdensome, seeks irrelevant information and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery admissible evidence. SLC-6030207-2 35 HARTOLDMONOOOOI05 Subject to and without waiving these objections and the General Objections, see Defendants' response to Interrogatory No. 37. SLC-6030207-2 36 HARTOLDMONOOOOI06 GENERAL OBJECTIONS AND LIMITATIONS APPLICABLE TO ALL REQUESTS AND RESPONSES: A. Defendants object to Plaintiffs' First Requests for Production ofDocuments to the extent they seek information or documents protected from discovery by any privilege, including the attorney-client privilege, the attorney work-product doctrine or any other applicable privilege or immunity or information or information or documents that Defendants are prohibited by law, contract, or Court Order from disclosing. B. Defendants object to Plaintiffs' First Requests for Production of Documents to the extent they seek information or documents that invade the rights ofnon-parties to the litigation, including the rights ofthe current Pensacola Nylon owner and the privileges and rights of privacy applicable to current or former employees' medical histories, personnel records, and health histories. C. Defendants object to Plaintiffs' First Requests for Production of Documents to the extent they seek confidential, proprietary or sensitive business or personal information, without the benefit of an appropriate Protective Order. Defendants long ago submitted a proposed Protective Order to Plaintiffs, however. Plaintiffs have not agreed to such an Order. D. Defendants object to Plaintiffs' First Requests for Production of Documents because some of them are virtually unlimited in time and scope and, as phrased, appear to seek information and documents about events occurring more than seventy years ago. Any responses provided by the Defendants herein will be based upon such information as is reasonably available to the Defendants and susceptible to retrieval through reasonable efforts. E. Defendants object to Plaintiffs' First Requests for Production of Documents to the extent they seek information or documents other than as kept by Old Monsanto in the ordinary SLC-6030207-2 37 HARTOLDMONOOOOI07 course of its former business with respect to the manufacture and sale ofpolychlorinated biphenyls. . F. Defendants object to Plaintiffs' First Requests for Production of Documents because they are overly broad, vague and burdensome and, because ofthe overbreadth, the requests seek information which is irrelevant and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. The Defendants' further object to Plaintiffs' First Requests for Production of Documents to the extent they request the Defendants to identify "all information" or similar "catch-all" requests for information that are impermissible fishing expeditions which do not specify the information and documents requested with the reasonable particularity required by the Florida Rules of Civil Procedure. The information and documents provided by the Defendants will be limited to the information and documents specifically described in the Defendants' narrative written responses herein. G. Defendants object to Plaintiffs' First Requests for Production of Documents to the extent they seek information about PCBs other than PCBs used at the Pensacola Nylon Plant. H. By producing certain documents or providing certain information herein, including information about PCBs or litigation in other states or locations and documents pertaining to products formulated with PCBs other than products used at the Pensacola Nylon Plant, Defendants are not conceding the relevance or admissibility of any such documents or . information, but instead fully reserve their rights to object to the admissibility at any time before or during the trial ofthis matter. I. By agreeing to produce non-privileged documents meeting a certain description, the Defendants are not hereby representing that any such documents presently exist in the ' Defendants' possession or ever existed. SLC-6030207-2 38 HARTOLDMONOOOOI08 J. Defendants object to the overbroad nature of Plaintiffs' Definitions and Instructions and to the extent they purport to impose obligations on the Defendants inconsistent with, or greater or different than, those required by the Florida Rules of Civil Procedure and the local rules of Court. K. Defendants object to any and all Requests for Production ofDocuments to the extent that they prematurely seek expert discovery and to the extent they seek expert discovery other than as provided for under the provisions of the Florida Rules of Civil Procedure and any applicable scheduling order or pretrial order. ' ' L. Defendants object to any and all Requests for Production of Documents to the extent that they do not refer or relate to polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), the only substances referred to in the complaint with any specificity, on the grounds that such Requests for Production of Documents are overbroad and burdensome fishing expeditions and seek information which is irrelevant and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. M. Defendants object to any and all Requests for Production ofDocuments to the extent that they seek information or the identification of documents, writings, records or publications in the public domain since such information is equally available to Plaintiffs. 1ST. Defendants object to the term "PCXs" used by the Plaintiffs to refer collectively to three separate and distinct groups of chemical compounds. Polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), . polychlorinated dibenzofurans (PCDFs), polychlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxins (PCDDs) are different groups of compounds which can be differentiated by their chemistry and toxicology as groups, and more specifically by the different chemistry and toxicology ofthe various congeners of the groups. SLC-6030207-2 39 HARTOLDMONOOOOI09 O. Defendants object to any and all Requests fox Production of Documents to the extent that they call for speculation, are vague and ambiguous, and are, therefore, incapable of meaningful response, including but not limited to Requests for Production of Documents that use ambiguous and undefined geographic terms such as terms "surrounding neighborhoods," "or in the areas surrounding these waters" and "in the vicinity ofthe plant" or undefined terms such as "litigation issues." P. Defendants object to any and all Requests for Production ofDocuments to the extent that they call for speculation, are vague and ambiguous, and are, therefore, incapable of meaningful response as stated, including, but not limited to, Requests for Production of Documents that use ambiguous and undefined terms and-phrases such as "pollution releases, noxious odors, chemical spills", "pollution," "hazardous or toxic wastes or waste disposal," "toxic substances," and "hazardous waste", and including Requests for Production of Documents that fail to limit their subject matter to polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), the only chemicals identified with specificity in the complaint. Q. Defendants object to the Requests for Production ofDocuments that seek information relating to other litigation to which Defendants have been or are a party. Such discovery is inappropriate and beyond the scope ofpermissible discovery under the Florida Rules of Civil Procedure. The information sought by such Requests for Production of Documents is not "reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence" as it relates to this lawsuit brought by residents of Pensacola Nylon County, Florida. R. Defendants object to any and all Requests for Production of Documents to the extent that they seek information submitted to public officials and elected representatives or that relate to discussions with such officials and representatives on the grounds that such SLC-6030207-2 40 HARTOLDMONOOOO110 communications are privileged and protected by the First Amendment ofthe United States Constitution. Any information provided in response to Plaintiffs' discovery shall not operate as any waiver of Defendants' rights and privileges under the First Amendment ofthe United States Constitution, including its rights to petition the government. S. In providing responses to Plaintiffs' discovery requests. Defendants have undertaken a reasonable effort to locate records and to provide information. However these Requests for Production of Documents seek information and documents about events occurring as long as sixty years ago. Documents and persons with relevant knowledge are quite often no longer available after the passage of so many years, and other persons who may have had relevant knowledge or information at one time may now have little or no specific recall of such knowledge or information. Defendants' investigation is continuing, and the following responses are based upon such information as is reasonably available to Defendants and susceptible to retrieval through reasonable efforts. Defendants reserve the right to supplement any or all of these responses. T. These "General Objections" are applicable to and incorporated in each of Defendants' responses, infra, as if specifically set forth therein. The stating of specific objections to a particular Requests for Production of Documents shall not be construed as a waiver of Defendants' "General Objections" nor does the restatement of or specific reference to a "General Objection" in the response to a particular Requests for Production ofDocuments waive any other "General Objection." Additionally, unless otherwise specifically stated. Defendants' objections to each Request for Production of Documents apply to the entire Request, including each and every subparagraph of the Request. Defendants reserve the right to supplement these responses and to make further objections. SLC-6030207-2 41 HARTOLDMONOOOO111 HUSCH BLACKWELL SANDERS LLP _, imitted Pro Hac Vice Carol A. Rutter, Admitted Pro Hac Vice Adam E. Miller, Admitted Pro Hac Vice Jerry K. Ronecker, Admitted Pro Hac Vice 190 Carondelet Plaza, Suite 600 St Louis, Missouri 63105 Telephone: (314)4804500 Facsimile: (314)480-1505 Stephen F, Bolton, Esq. Hook & Bolton, P.A. Jefferson Office Park P.O. Box 30589 Pensacola, Florida 32503-1589 Telephone: (850) 433-0809 Facsimile: (850) 433-8284 Attorneys for the Defendants SLC-6030207-2 42 HARTOLDMONOOOO112 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE The undersigned hereby certifies that a true and correct copy of the foregoing document was sent via U.S. Mail, postage prepaid, this 6th day of April, 2010, to the following counsel of record: Samuel W. Bearman, Esq. Samuel W. Bearman, P.A. 802 N. 12th Avenue Pensacola, FL 32501 Tara Robinson, Esq. Donald W, Stewart, P.C. 1826 Third Avenue North, Suite 301 Bessemer, AL 35020 Donald W. Stewart, Esq. W. Taylor Stewart, Esq. Donald W. Stewart, P.C. 500 Wachovia Bank Building 1000 Quintard Avenue Anniston, AL 36202 Dagney Walker, Esq. Donald W. Stewart, P.C. 2100 3rd Avenue North, Suite 810 Birmingham, AL 35203 SLC-6030207-2 43 HARTOLDMONOOOO113 HUSCH BLACKWELL SANDERS LLP * Carol A, Rutter DIRECT 314.430.1934 FAX 314.430.1505 .carol.ruttenaMlusdlblackwell.com 190 CARONDELET PLAZA, SUITE SOD, ST. LOUIS, MO 63105 www.huschblachwelf.com May 15,2008 Privileged &. ConfidentialInformation Pursuant To FEE 408 Via E-mail Lawrence P. Biondi, Esq, Law Offices ofLawrence Perry Biondi 81 Main Street, Suite 504' . White Plains, New York 10601 Re: Abbatiello, et at v. Monsanto Company, et al. Abele, et al. v. Monsanto Company, et al. Corlew et al. v. GeneralElectric Company et al. Dear Larry: The following is the basis for the Pharmacia Defendants' Initial Disclosure response about insurance coverage. A. Insurance - Old Monsanto policies Due to prior payments exhausting policy limits, settlements ofcoverage issues, bankruptcies and/or insolvencies ofvarious carriers, and policy exclusions, the only theoretically remaining insurance coverage for product liability claims rests primarily with certain London Market Companies, who have only a modest percentage of the historical coverage, particularly in light ofthe many decades of alleged PCB use and exposure at G.E. Schenectady alleged in your complaints. The London Market Companies have denied the existence of any coverage for Abbatielio. Abele, or Corlew on grounds that those cases involve claims for bodily injury and property damage from exposure to environmental contamination that have been settled and released. New Monsanto directs and controls its own defense ofthese cases and makes settlement decisions without regard to insurance. The insurance companies do not participate in settlement discussions, because they do not control the defense or have authority to settle, nor would they respond directly to pay any judgment, even assuming that they agreed there was coverage and were financially able to do so. Instead, to the extent there were ajudgment, and New Monsanto paid it, it in turn could request reimbursement from and then, if it deemed it appropriate under all the facts and circumstances, litigate with the insurers when the reimbursement request is denied in accordance with the coverage denials mentioned above. HARTOLDMONOOOO114 HUSCH BLACKWELL SANDERS LLP Lawrence P. Biondi, Esq. May 15,2008 Page 2 B. Insurance - General Electric . The Pharmacia Defendants have no information that suggests that Old Monsanto might be a named insured on any policy of insurance issued to General Electric that wouldprovide indemnity for these lawsuits. C. Indemnity Agreement In relation to these lawsuits. General Electric Companyhas not agreed to defend and indemnify the Pharmacia Defendants pursuant to the Special Undertaking by Purchasers of Polychlorinated Biphenyls, dated January 21,1972, that is referenced in the response to Plaintiffs' Request to Produce No. 75. X trust that this is responsive to your letter ofJanuary 29,2008. Thank yon. Very truly yours. CAR/tg cc: James Leader, Esq. Carol A. Rutter HARTOLDMONOOOO115 .V, BEFBHB' tins FLORIDA DBPAIWHBW OS AIR AHD HAMS rOtLUIXGH OOKTROLj' In the .Hatter ofi -HOWSAHTO OOHFAHV } Escambia County* Florida j "J.................... _ ,, . . Rgafrpndanfr CASE HO. ZW-3$2-71 HOEICE HO.. U? , OflDTEFl-HO- . SOD JfQgXOg OP yiyLAElOH . TO l MHfldor.nhsHtanaMtlota?nC?aogTme.pra'nOyllne* , anil' T1R3iisothaliCdKoolotripe^o.Arr,agetFinoltonriCdoampTanityle Bldg. Fa 0. box 1507 - Pensacola, Florida, 32502 , J1a10ckWseosnt vFiollrea,yfFehlorida 32252 % Pursuant to Florida Sbnbufeo fe03*121 (l)i the Department of * ' 'i'Air add,'Hatcl* Pollution Control `doea^hnreby piece the Rsepcndent >' ]' Koneanbp CoiApany* on Hotluo'of tho follOwintJi ,, S Upon complplntj report (tfni investigation, thlo department : ' hat rerfttton to holiovo that Respondent deoa maintain or opo^ate jrmnufao&uritsis plant that pradugua nylon,which in located adjaoant- ' to the fcooambio ftiver approximately 2.5 miles north or Highway 9U' in Etca^liia County, Florida i nd suoh const!tutus a aouroe of -' water, pollution in that. Kaston, difieh&rgea, or effluents contain- ` ' ins poJjrobloririELted biphenyls are, dieebargod by ohd through two 1 ditches > designated as the Wain Ditch Mid the Hor.tl) Ditch, into . ' and polluHns tho wabera OF the etate, to wit, Xsmttbia River ' and fcaoemW* B*yj and suph water pollution la in violation of Department rules and regulations. Specificallyi . '-Aiierafelom 'Violation of- Department Suite 17-3.02 (4) ". and 17-3.09 (5) Florida Acbolntutrativo Code iMt; aquatic life* Spaoififlollyt ?D JftB * f H?1 1 On O&tobar 27, 1$70 polychlorinated Wphenylj* V*ro detectid in the waters flbtfinB from re- . ,v eponaent'a installations in concentrations or - 2,5 Dpbi | - -`. .-'. , .. i .. - ' AMUillMPAltM wMi. ' HARTOLDMONOOOO116 ;. \- ... J': C/.Bl! Mo. IW-Mg-TI HCfTICS HO. HIT I omum-HO. aco' .''I ". p/isb ho. I * t' , .a * * . ' ' . ' ? kfiU6h ucncjenfcrafciotte of polychlorinated *' j ' . `' " 5 ` biphenylo hav ft pbrotatont chrcnio toxic . . \. .1pi '* ' -^ . effect On fia)i, fish food* and other aquatic' b - -." ) - j: -`ml` ,|; or narlne life in, that the poiyohlorinafcad pf <?* j7r| j ' blphopyla are readily absorbed and .coniieTitratefi *., \ ' . * . "'\\ * , in the titfflueB of said arganisima* whoro ths " * d. .`odnacntrafcions continue to inaraXBa to fcoxio . '-I j'.*'-'- \ r'.:v' * *h4 deleterious level! and, ' ' ' ,, . : ir . . * .^V* ' . -*> * ; * 'Phfit ydpidua leVsls of polychlorinated biphenyls **, . in the ."flash of .rich taken from the BsoMribin Bay * ond Bayou TeJfar have exceeded the -Federal Pure Feed end Drug Administration Action level11 of \5#0 ppw. ' . s, " ; PurthoWj residues of Polyohlorinated biphenyl of up to . DiXty-four (64> ppm have boon detached in the canals? channels, %\ , and outfall structures of Respondent's installations} snd residues. - - resulting fremi ftewponiont'* die charges kave been detested in the Escambia River bottom, , on August<7, l&fiJJ aodlmcnt sample 'fron the Eunambia River at Highway 90 contained 19 ppm of the - polyahlorinabed biphenyls Auoolor l5f|* and on October 2fl, 1970, _ ( Dsdinsnt aftmplaB from the Efcofunbla River bolpw Menonflto'a skimmer * butCall contalnB^d from *46 to 23 ppm of' said Arooior} and further " , such residues of'polychlorinated biphenyls Continually release low sonoontratione of the poly ohlorlngted biphenyls which over fin extended period of time are toxic and deleterious to Fis, fish food, aQuatiq life sn<l marine life. Therefore,, it is; ' ' ORDERED by the Department Of Air ftfid Water Pollution control , tfifttJ . :wa ... i-'-i*- orakbs wh domyiEtyg tsmxosi .>. . - I* Hsspundeftt shall done* and prevent the discharge from -/ ' its lnstnllatlona any efflusnfa ccmtainlbE polychlorinated biphenyls and to this Brti, noapondent shallt Hithin thirty C30J days from effective data hereof, submit to the Department a work plan end a Schedule of specific corrective action it Will taka to eliminate*and * prevent effluent oontslninB polyohlorlnated blphet^r^a from entering waters of the state, duoh carreOtiva aatlan nhall include, but not fl^mn CASE NO, IW-392-71 HQTIM! WO. H7 X1 , I- OHDEH WO. ECO 'f PACE no. 3 be limited to the renival'-Trtai Eoo'pojident's outfall ntruofcurs, _ . ditohea, ate.all aollmento and residues uontelnlns polyohlorjnstnt! biphenyls, Iho naeesaaey corraotivo aetlnn shall bs .planned and ' .lehsdulad to be tfomplotoa ns expedltloualy ns possible. - . ^ospontient shall iuwo lively (10*01000* the 'nsoasssry , f iocufrtfatlve fiction span notification at approval of said plan. 3- Until submission aftd approval of laid plan and up to m 1 completion or the- oorraofciVe action^ PaepontJftnt irhnll toka 4\ caarfienaj? measured to redu&a endt prevent the imneoeHairary din* btwgnn'pff vatera oontuininc polyobiorinaoed biphAnyls. . * Failure bo comply with a Separtraent Order trill result In legal nation purau&nt to Florida Statute ^03.161* trhloh provides a civil penalty of $5,0D0 per day,for eftoh day that tbs vitiation of a Dopnrfchentr order pcaura, .* Reaponffont shall have* fifteen'(1?) days from data of ^pooipfc hereof within which tra requaat a public hearing on any of the matters contained heroinj *rhe Above Order* shall bo erfeetiv<r .upon expiration of the fiTfeean day period if ho request for a public hearing la filed* ZJOlfE and OUPEnED this at ^fllliihaHaoe, Florida* ^` Jy f ', 1971, _ _________ qgi^l^^giafiLCiL-,-.. --~i 7^r^^y-vr.rj,^'`r - -f.'+i'- -. '-1 - Ulrnctor Suito 300 - Otallahaaao* Dink 315 fiauth Oalltbun fitroot Vallahacnoe, Florida 1 3*3W ..', %0>. HARTOLDMONOOOO118 * BEFORE THE FLORIDA p&PAIlTWIiHT OF AIR AND TOMCA PODLUVIOrf CONl'JiOl* Xr> tho Hsttvr of; ) JtQtfSANTQ COHFAW _ j Eacfflbia County t Florida J *_ - Respondent ) CA3E HO, IW-39g-7a Gt&m HO. 215 CPH55HT DBOEft On January 2?* 1971, Respondent mss served with a notice of t 'Violation' iti the abave~<raptlaned pjattBf, stating that the Bejm.rtiAe.nfc f Mr end Hater Pollution Control had reason ta believe that . Respondent was violating Department rulea and regulations t by dis charging through Its Installation polychlorinated biphenyls Into the vater* of tft-a state, to nit, Esgamblu River and fiscEmbi* Hay. , *Oit parties,, waiving their1 rights fcei a public hearing, hereby `a^esQ and ent^r into this Concent Order' which binds the parties 1 9 fully no if issued by the Department of Air and Water Pollution .Control Board subsequent to a public bearing, 4 `. f - 4 An entry into this Consent Order between Respondent and the J?opetfcment does not nonstitute an admission by Heagondent or fXndi N- ing by the Department as to the validity of any stotenentt and/or allegations contained In-said Notice of Violation, 'This Consent --. ` - * * 1 "1 --i .h.ii.. -- 9 Order supersedes and supplants Orders for Corrective Action Number 20a* ' -** , -4 ' In consideration of the above, the Department Of Air and Hater follutlon Control Orders that) . /1, Respondent shall diligently and as expeditiously ft*" possible Implements the proposed interim solution as outlined by'Koepondent: and accepted by the Department, to wit; the construction or a dak behind the presept weir, provided that Respondent shell receive prior oonaent of adjoining landowners beforp diverting waters from the main out flow dUch onto the property of such adjoining landowners. Respondent ehell have thfr interim aolufcion completed within seven days after peMivjng consent of adjoiirinfi Isndotfnnra, 2. Respondent cb&ll forthwith apply for all necessary state and federal approval and permits for the proposed permanent solution- ' ' CASE HO. XH-393-71 OJUJfiR D. 215 ,, PAGE MO* a 3, Upon approval by thfc appropriate abate and federal aganfrlni and issuance of all necessary permits,. tae .Respondent shall Qojnnence* the corrective action. She corrective action shall be completed within forty-five (45} day* after ell neoEsaajcy pernite have bean issticd* DONE end E/IECDIEB -this '// day of k^.ju^r* 1971, at Tallahassee, Florida. . ,* TOR IRS DjfleARTMEHF OF AIR. AR1> WATER POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD: n- e Rin^iEU J`. seed, chairman ite 30Q *- Tallahassee Baink gHiilldl'ing i\S South Calhoun Street t ^Tallahassee, Florida ' 32301 FOR THE RESPONDENT! a. Cx JOaammeessJJEEddwwin hips, General supenindent Wanuracturlng Technology Konsanto Company Pensacola* Florida i HARTOLDMONOOOOI20 HARTOLDMONOOOQ121