GADSDENDefense testimony lurched toward its conclusion in the Bowie vs. Monsanto trial Thursday, after an environmental engineer and real estate appraiser testified on behalf of Monsanto that PCB contamination has not harmed western Anniston.
Monsanto attorneys are expected to present a final witness this morning, and closing arguments are expected to begin Wednesday.
The environmental engineer, John Woodyard, of Chicago, told the jury Thursday morning that PCB levels on the properties of most of the initial group of 17 plaintiffs are so low they don't need to be cleaned up and that no additional work is needed on the former Monsanto landfills.
The real estate appraiser, Bill Bliss, of Winterboro, told the jury that his analysis shows PCB contamination in western Anniston has not resulted in reduced property values. "The market does not recognize an impact due to the PCB issues," he said.
Bliss said he would not characterize the PCB-impacted areas of western Anniston as a "war zone," as described by plaintiff attorney Donald Stewart in his opening arguments. Rather, he described the whole of western Anniston as a place where new businesses and homes are sprouting. "There is a lot of activity in west Anniston that has been positive."
The experts were cross-examined Thursday afternoon by the plaintiff attorneys who represent the 17 residents and 3,500 additional people who are suing Monsanto and its spin-off Solutia for contaminating their properties and bodies with PCBs.
Attorney Charlie Cunningham questioned Woodyard about why Monsanto's spin-off company Solutia has voluntarily cleaned up other PCB soil contamination - at the Quintard Mall and the Oxford baseball complex - to no-detect levels but is fighting in court a no-detect cleanup on western Anniston plaintiffs' properties.
Currently, Solutia is required by EPA to clean up Calhoun County residential properties that have PCB levels higher than 10 parts per million in soil. EPA considers the 10 PPM cleanup standard an emergency action level, but it "could become the long-term level," Woodyard said.
Cunningham asked Woodyard why Monsanto voluntarily agreed to remove PCB-contaminated fill dirt from residential properties in Golden Springs. "Monsanto didn't establish an action level. They just took it away."
Woodyard answered that cleaning up properties to no-detect PCB levels is "an option," and he acknowledged that he has participated in no-detect PCB residential cleanups in other parts of the country. He added, "It's not something you do on a large scale."
During Bliss' cross-examination, plaintiff attorney Stewart asked him why he did not include PCB contamination in his market analysis of property values in western Anniston.
Unlike Richard Ellis, the appraiser who testified on behalf of the plaintiffs, Bliss did not include in his market analysis whether the individual properties were contaminated with PCBs and how that might impact property values. He defended his method, saying that he was trying to study the overall market reaction to the PCB issue. "There has been commercial activity in the area," he said.
He also did not include the potential costs of remediation or Ellis' estimated 50 percent reduction in market value for the PCB-contaminated homes.
He explained that he did not include remediation costs because Solutia has already agreed to clean up the properties designated by EPA. He said he did not include reduced property values because, unlike Ellis, he did not find any market resistance in western Anniston.
