US ASsistant Secretary of State Rand Beers Deposition on Dyncorp Lawsuit Febrary 27, 2002: Drugwar.com

Rand Beers, Assistant Secretary of State for Narcotics and International Law Enforcement Affairs Deposition February 27, 2002

1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
2 FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
3 -----------------------------------x
4 VENACIO AGUASANTA ARIAS, et al., :
5 Plaintiffs, :
6 vs. : Case Number
7 DYNCORP, et al., : 1:01CV01908
8 Defendants. :
9 -----------------------------------x
10
11 Wednesday, February 27, 2002
12 Washington, D.C.
13
14 Deposition of RAND BEERS, held at the offices of
15 the International Labor Rights Fund, 733 15th
16 Street, N.W., Suite 920, Washington, D.C.,
17 commencing at 10:00 a.m., Wednesday, February 27,
18 2002, before SHIRLEY S MITCHELL, Notary Public for
19 the District of Columbia.
20
21
22

1 A P P E A R A N C E S O F C O U N S E L:
2 FOR PLAINTIFFS:
3 INTERNATIONAL LABOR RIGHTS FUND
4 BY: Terry Collingsworth, Esq.
5 Natacha Thys, Esq.
6 733 15 Street, N.W., Suite 920
7 Washington, D.C. 20005
8 (202) 347-4100
9
10 FOR DEFENDANT:
11 SPRIGGS & HOLLINGSWORTH
12 BY: Joe G. Hollingsworth, Esq.
13 1350 I Street, N.W.
14 Washington, D.C. 20005-3305
15 (202) 898-5842
16
17 FOR THE WITNESS:
18 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
19 BY: William Alvarado Rivera, Esq.
20 901 E Street, N.W.
21 Washington, D.C. 20530
22 (202) 514-6582

1 APPEARANCES (Continued):
2
3 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
4 BY: Leland S. VanKoten Esq.
5 P.O. Box 340
6 Ben Franklin Station
7 Washington, D.C. 20044
8 (202) 616-4230
9
10 DEPARTMENT OF STATE
11 Office of Legal Adviser
12 BY: Dennis J. Gallagher, Esq.
13 1701 N. Fort Myer Drive
14 Rosslyn, Virginia 22209
15 (703) 516-1535
16
17
18 P R E S E N T
19 R.Y. Morrel, Vice President
20 DynCorp
21
22

1 C O N T E N T S
2
3 WITNESS: Rand Beers
4
5 EXAMINATION BY: PAGE
6 Mr. Collingsworth 6
7
8
9
10
11 QUESTION MARKED: 42
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22

1 DEPOSITION EXHIBITS
2 (BEERS)
3
4 NUMBER DESCRIPTION IDENTIFIED
5 1 Declaration entitled 11
6 Exhibit B
7 2 Class Action Complaint 16
8 3 Letter dated 2/26/02 18
9 4 Portion of Contract 22
10 5 60 Minutes interview 44
11 6 Final Report 69
12 7 State Department Report 70
13 8 Narcotics Affairs report 72
14 9 Declaration 81
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22

1 P R O C E E D I N G S
2 Whereupon,
3 RAND BEERS
4 was called as the witness and, after having been
5 first duly sworn, was examined and testified as
6 follows:
7 EXAMINATION BY COUNSEL FOR PLAINTIFFS
8 BY MR. COLLINGSWORTH:
9 Q. Mr. Beers, I thank you for coming
10 today. My name is Terry Collingsworth, and I'm the
11 lawyer representing the plaintiffs in the Arias
12 litigation, and you're about to be deposed in that
13 action.
14 Do you understand that?
15 A. I do.
16 Q. Have you ever had your deposition
17 taken before?
18 A. Yes.
19 Q. In what circumstance?
20 A. I was --
21 Q. How many times?
22 A. Once.

1 Q. In what circumstance?
2 A. I was deposed in association with a
3 case involving the Golden Venture, a ship which
4 smuggled Chinese aliens into the United States
5 about eight or nine ago.
6 Q. Do you understand the process that I
7 ask you a question and you answer the question
8 truthfully?
9 A. Correct.
10 Q. If you don't understand the
11 question, I would like you to make that clear so
12 that I can try to restate it so that it is clear.
13 A. I understand.
14 Q. If you need a break for any reason,
15 please let me know and we will accommodate you.
16 A. That would be much appreciated if
17 necessary.
18 Q. What is your current position?
19 A. My current position is the Assistant
20 Secretary of State for International Narcotics &
21 Law Enforcement Affairs.
22 Q. How long have you held that

1 position?
2 A. I have been either the
3 congressionally-confirmed secretary or the acting
4 assistant secretary since the 5th of January 1998.
5 Q. Are you represented by counsel here
6 today?
7 A. I am.
8 Q. Who is your counsel here today?
9 A. These gentleman (indicating).
10 Q. All three of them?
11 A. All three of them.
12 Q. So you have three lawyers here today
13 to assure you that you are not going to spill any
14 State secrets; is that correct?
15 A. I have three counsel here. Thank
16 you.
17 Q. Prior to your current position, did
18 you hold any positions that had anything to do with
19 Plan Columbia?
20 A. Plan Columbia is a concept which did
21 not occur until after I became the Assistant
22 Secretary of State.

1 Q. Was there any predecessor program to
2 Plan Columbia that you did have some responsibility
3 for in a prior position?
4 A. The United States has had a
5 relationship with Columbia dealing with
6 counternarcotics for a number of decades. I first
7 began to work in the counternarcotics area in 1988
8 when I was on the National Security Counsel staff.
9 Q. Did you help in any way to design
10 that initial program?
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. What was your responsibility?
13 A. There was a series of strategy
14 developments dating back, in terms of my
15 involvement, to a 1999 development of a regional
16 strategy for the Andean region. I was involved in
17 the development of that strategy, and I had bits
18 and pieces to do with most of the further
19 development from a variety of different positions.
20 Q. What is the genesis of what we now
21 call Plan Columbia?
22 MR. RIVERA: Object to the form of the

1 question as vague. What do you mean by genesis?
2 BY MR. COLLINGSWORTH:
3 Q. When did what we now call Plan
4 Columbia officially start?
5 A. It officially became Plan Columbia,
6 if you will, in the summer of 1999.
7 Q. What was its purpose as you
8 understood it?
9 A. The purpose of Plan Columbia was to
10 deal with the increased cultivation and illegal
11 activity associated with that cultivation
12 concerning narco trafficking in Columbia.
13 Q. Was it exclusively in Columbia?
14 A. No.
15 Q. Where else was it applying?
16 A. It was looked at as, to a lesser
17 extent, a regional strategy which involved all of
18 the Andean nations.
19 Q. Was there any explicit component of
20 Plan Columbia at its beginning in 1999 that
21 contains an antiterrorist element?
22 A. No.

1 MR. COLLINGSWORTH: I am now going to
2 hand you a document that I would like marked as
3 Plaintiffs' Exhibit 1. Just to be completely clear
4 in the record, this is Exhibit B to the DynCorp
5 Motion to Dismiss. It is the Declaration of Rand
6 Beers.
7 (Beers Deposition Exhibit No. 1
8 was marked for identification.)
9 BY MR. COLLINGSWORTH:
10 Q. Mr. Beers, can you take a moment to
11 look at Exhibit Number 1 and tell me if you can
12 identify it.
13 A. It is a document which I signed as
14 representing my views with respect to our
15 relationship with DynCorp and the U.S. government's
16 involvement in relations with Columbia.
17 Q. Are you aware that you signed it
18 under oath?
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. Who drafted this document?
21 A. The initial draft was done by
22 DynCorp. It was reviewed within the State

1 Department by my staff.
2 Q. Who is DonCorp?
3 A. DynCorp.
4 Q. Do you know which particular person
5 at DynCorp drafted this?
6 A. No.
7 Q. Do you know if it was outside
8 counsel that drafted it?
9 A. No, I do not know.
10 Q. How did it come to you first?
11 A. From my staff.
12 Q. Which person on your staff?
13 A. I believe it was Bob Etheridge.
14 Q. What is his position?
15 A. He's the head liaison officer for
16 the State Department Air Wing stationed in
17 Washington, D.C.
18 Q. Can you describe for me the
19 circumstances under which you first saw this
20 document?
21 MR. RIVERA: I'm sorry, are you speaking
22 to the first draft of this document?

1 BY MR. COLLINGSWORTH:
2 Q. Yes, your first experience with this
3 declaration.
4 A. When it was brought to my attention
5 by Mr. Gallagher and Mr. Etheridge as a document
6 which they had worked over and wanted me to look at
7 since I was to be the signer of that document.
8 Q. Did you review it at that time?
9 A. I did.
10 Q. Did you make any changes to it?
11 A. I believe I did.
12 Q. Did you make the changes in
13 handwriting on a draft?
14 A. I believe I did.
15 Q. Do you know if that document has
16 been preserved?
17 A. I do not.
18 Q. You do not know?
19 A. Correct.
20 Q. Tell me, looking at this document,
21 if you recall anything that you specifically added
22 to it or you specifically made as a change to it.

1 A. I don't recall.
2 Q. Did you make a lot of changes to it?
3 A. I don't remember.
4 Q. You don't remember?
5 A. (No response.)
6 Q. Is that a yes, you do not remember?
7 A. That is a yes, I do not remember.
8 Q. How long of a process was it in
9 terms of your time?
10 A. In terms of my time, I believe I
11 read the draft at least twice.
12 Q. Did you read a different draft?
13 A. The second draft that I would have
14 read would have reflected at least my changes.
15 Q. So you got a first draft and you
16 read it; is that correct?
17 A. I got a draft. I wouldn't call it a
18 first draft.
19 Q. The first draft you saw, you read
20 and you made some changes to?
21 A. That's correct.
22 Q. You believe you made changes in

1 handwriting on the document?
2 A. That's correct.
3 Q. You gave it back to whom?
4 A. It would have either been Mr.
5 Gallagher or Mr. Etheridge. I don't remember.
6 Q. Then did you get to view a
7 subsequent draft?
8 A. That's correct.
9 Q. You read that document?
10 A. That's correct.
11 Q. Did you make any changes to it?
12 A. I do not remember a second set of
13 changes.
14 Q. You believe you signed that second
15 draft after reviewing it?
16 A. That is my belief, that's correct.
17 Q. In the context of reviewing your
18 Declaration, did you review any external documents
19 to refresh your recollection about any of the
20 representations made in this Declaration?
21 A. No.
22 Q. Did you review a copy of the

1 Plaintiffs' Complaint in this case?
2 A. I don't remember.
3 MR. COLLINGSWORTH: Can we mark this as
4 Plaintiffs' Exhibit 2.
5 (Beers Deposition Exhibit No. 2
6 was marked for identification.)
7 BY MR. COLLINGSWORTH:
8 Q. Plaintiffs Exhibit 2 is a copy of
9 the Complaint filed in this action by the
10 plaintiffs. I again have a couple of extra copies
11 if anyone needs one.
12 Mr. Beers, we have handed you
13 Plaintiffs' Exhibit 2, it is the Plaintiffs'
14 Complaint in this case. I'm asking to you look it
15 over and tell me if you have ever seen this before.
16 A. I do to not remember having seen it.
17 Q. Mr. Beers, I want to be very clear
18 on this, and I'm not trying to be in any way
19 facetious.
20 Is it that you don't remember or
21 that you didn't see it?
22 A. Sir, I see a lot of documents in my

1 day-to-day business, and I can't tell you every
2 document that I've seen. It may have passed across
3 my desk. It may not have passed across my desk. I
4 truthfully cannot answer that question, other than
5 to say I don't remember.
6 Q. As you sit here today, do you have
7 any personal knowledge about the nature of the
8 Plaintiffs' Complaint in this case?
9 A. Yes, I have had the Complaint
10 explained to me.
11 Q. Tell me, if you can, what you
12 understand the Plaintiffs are attempting to achieve
13 here.
14 A. It is my understanding that the
15 Plaintiffs, Ecuadorians, are seeking to have some
16 kind of what you, a lawyer, might call injunctive
17 relief -- I'm not a lawyer, and that may not be the
18 correct term -- with respect to DynCorp's
19 activities in Columbia because of its alleged
20 effect upon the Plaintiffs.
21 Q. That's your understanding that you
22 believe that they are trying to get an injunction

1 to stop the spraying in Columbia?
2 A. I did not say that.
3 MR. RIVERA: Objection.
4 BY MR. COLLINGSWORTH:
5 Q. Then correct me because that's what
6 I heard. I'm sorry.
7 A. I said injunctive relief.
8 Q. What kind of injunctive relief?
9 A. I don't know.
10 MR. COLLINGSWORTH: Mr. Beers, I'm
11 handing you a document that we will call
12 Plaintiffs' Exhibit Number 3, which is a
13 February 26, 2002 letter to me from Mr. Gallagher.
14 (Beers Deposition Exhibit No. 3
15 was marked for identification.)
16 BY MR. COLLINGSWORTH:
17 Q. Mr. Beers, I would like you to
18 quickly review this list of documents here that
19 were transmitted to me by Mr. Gallagher.
20 A. (Examining.)
21 Yes.
22 Q. Did you review any of those

1 documents in your preparation to sign the
2 Declaration that we have called Plaintiffs'
3 Exhibit 1?
4 A. No.
5 Q. Do you know of any documents that
6 relate to Plan Columbia that have informed you of
7 your view that are not on this list?
8 A. No.
9 Q. Are there any other testing
10 documents about Plan Columbia that are not on this
11 list?
12 MR. RIVERA: Object to the form of the
13 question. Testing?
14 BY MR. COLLINGSWORTH:
15 Q. Are there any documents that discuss
16 testing the safety of the fumigant used in Plan
17 Columbia that are not on this list?
18 A. I don't know the answer to that
19 question.
20 Q. Who would know the answer to that
21 question?
22 A. People who work in the Air Wing of

1 the State Department.
2 Q. Can you give me a name or two of
3 someone on your staff who would be the person that
4 you would go to who is an expert on the testing of
5 the safety of Plan Columbia materials?
6 A. I would go to Mr. Etheridge, but Mr.
7 Etheridge may not be the expert on that particular
8 subject. He is the head of the Liaison office in
9 Washington D.C.
10 Q. Let's now focus on what we call Plan
11 Columbia. You said it began in 1999; is that
12 correct?
13 A. That's correct.
14 Q. Is there a particular statute that
15 authorizes Plan Columbia?
16 A. There is an appropriations document
17 which funds Plan Columbia which is self-authorized.
18 Q. I'm sorry?
19 A. Is self-authorized.
20 Q. What does that mean,
21 self-authorized?
22 A. In the normal appropriations

1 process, there is an authorizing bill and there is
2 an appropriating bill. The authorizing bill
3 authorizes the appropriations, and the
4 appropriation bill actually appropriates the money.
5 This was a supplemental
6 appropriation. There was no authorizing document,
7 bill, law passed separately. So the document, the
8 bill, the law authorizes itself. This is not an
9 infrequent device.
10 Q. Does any portion of the
11 appropriation bill authorize the spraying of
12 fumigants in Ecuador?
13 A. I do not remember.
14 Q. Is it your testimony, as you sit
15 here, that it might be that you're allowed to spray
16 in Ecuador under Plan Columbia?
17 A. I think it would be more likely that
18 it would not have been prohibited.
19 Q. Is there any contractual
20 authorization for DynCorp to spray in Ecuador?
21 A. No.
22 Q. Sorry?

1 A. No.
2 MR. COLLINGSWORTH: I'm going to hand you
3 another document and we're going to call this
4 Plaintiffs' Exhibit 4.
5 (Beers Deposition Exhibit No. 4
6 was marked for identification.)
7 BY MR. COLLINGSWORTH:
8 Q. Mr. Beers, the document I have
9 handed to you, Plaintiffs' Exhibit 4, is apparently
10 some portion of a contract between the State
11 Department and DynCorp for Plan Columbia. This is
12 the version that is available on the Internet.
13 I would first like you to review
14 that and tell me if it in fact is a portion of the
15 contract between DynCorp and the Department of
16 State.
17 A. (Examining.)
18 MR. HOLLINGSWORTH: Excuse me, I object
19 to that question on the grounds that I don't
20 understand it. Are you saying that this purports
21 to be the contract between DynCorp and the United
22 States?

1 MR. COLLINGSWORTH: Yes. I'm asking
2 Mr. Beers if he can tell me if it's true.
3 THE WITNESS: I don't know.
4 BY MR. COLLINGSWORTH:
5 Q. Have you ever seen the contract that
6 is between the State Department and DynCorp
7 authorizing the spraying in Columbia that is going
8 on now?
9 A. Not to my knowledge.
10 Q. Who in the State Department would
11 have signed such a contract?
12 A. I don't know the answer to that
13 specifically.
14 Q. You have never seen the actual
15 contract?
16 A. No, not to my knowledge.
17 Q. I just asked you, though, if the
18 contract authorizes DynCorp to spray in Ecuador,
19 and you said no; is that correct?
20 A. That is correct.
21 Q. What is the basis of your knowledge
22 of that if you have not seen the contract?

1 A. Being briefed on the contract's
2 contents.
3 Q. Who briefed you on the contents?
4 A. It would have been Mr. Etheridge or
5 other members of the Air Wing.
6 Q. The?
7 A. Air Wing.
8 Q. What is the Air Wing?
9 A. It's the office within the bureau of
10 International Narcotics & Law Enforcement Affairs
11 which is responsible for working the contract with
12 DynCorp.
13 Q. So it would be fair to say, then,
14 that if DynCorp sprayed in Ecuador, that would be
15 in violation of the contract?
16 MR. RIVERA: Object to the form of the
17 question. It mischaracterizes the witness's
18 testimony. For point of clarification, are you
19 talking about intentional spraying or unintentional
20 spraying into Ecuador?
21 MR. COLLINGSWORTH: Let's take a look at
22 both of those.

1 MR. HOLLINGSWORTH: Same objection.
2 MR. RIVERA: You can answer the question
3 if you understood it, or if you need it read back,
4 the court reporter can do that for you.
5 THE WITNESS: As I said, DynCorp is not
6 authorized to spray in Ecuador.
7 BY MR. COLLINGSWORTH:
8 Q. Are you aware of any requests made
9 by the government of Ecuador to the United States
10 government or the government of Columbia to stop
11 spraying in Ecuador?
12 A. No.
13 MR. GALLAGHER: Objection. Assumes facts
14 not in evidence.
15 BY MR. COLLINGSWORTH:
16 Q. The answer was?
17 A. I am not aware.
18 Q. Are you aware of a meeting that
19 occurred roughly on Wednesday, February 13th
20 between representatives of the government of
21 Ecuador and the government of Columbia and
22 Mr. Baca, who I believe works for you?

1 A. No, I'm not.
2 Q. Does Mr. Baca work for you?
3 A. Yes. He is the director of the
4 Narcotics Affairs Section in the U.S. Embassy in
5 Bogota. Technically, he works for the embassador
6 and not for me. The line of command is through the
7 embassador.
8 Q. Does he report directly to you
9 information?
10 A. He reports information to me. He
11 does not report directly to me.
12 MR. RIVERA: Do we have a first name for
13 Mr. Baca?
14 THE WITNESS: Richard.
15 MR. RIVERA: Just to make sure we're
16 talking about the same Mr. Baca for clarity on the
17 record.
18 BY MR. COLLINGSWORTH:
19 Q. Richard Baca.
20 Do you know if Mr. Baca is engaged
21 in discussions about the width of an area at the
22 border of Columbia where no spraying will be

1 permitted?
2 MR. RIVERA: Object to the form of the
3 question. Discussions with whom?
4 MR. COLLINGSWORTH: The government of
5 Ecuador and the government of Columbia.
6 MR. RIVERA: The witness may answer
7 subject to the restriction that may not reveal any
8 classified or State secret information.
9 THE WITNESS: I do not know.
10 BY MR. COLLINGSWORTH:
11 Q. Are you aware of any discussions
12 that have occurred between anyone on the issue of
13 creating an area from the Ecuadorian border into
14 Columbia where no spraying would be permitted to
15 avoid spraying in Ecuador?
16 MR. RIVERA: Same objection.
17 THE WITNESS: I am aware of that, yes.
18 BY MR. COLLINGSWORTH:
19 Q. What is your awareness?
20 MR. RIVERA: Same objection.
21 THE WITNESS: I'm following counsel's
22 advice on discussing the exact nature of it.

1 BY MR. COLLINGSWORTH:
2 Q. I'm not clear then.
3 You are aware that these discussions
4 are going on between the government of Ecuador --
5 A. No. I'm sorry, you asked me a
6 separate question. You said am I aware of
7 discussions about a buffer zone. The answer to
8 that is yes.
9 Q. The buffer zone being an area from
10 the border of Ecuador into Columbia where no
11 spraying would be permitted to avoid spraying in
12 Ecuador; is that correct?
13 MR. RIVERA: Object to the form of the
14 question as compound. You may answer.
15 THE WITNESS: I am aware of the
16 discussions of a buffer zone.
17 BY MR. COLLINGSWORTH:
18 Q. You're not aware that Mr. Baca is
19 participating in them?
20 A. No. I am not aware of discussions
21 with the government of Ecuador.
22 Q. There are discussions between the

1 government of Columbia and the government of the
2 United States; is that correct?
3 A. That's correct.
4 Q. Mr. Baca is leading those
5 discussions?
6 A. Those discussions transpired long
7 before Mr. Baca arrived at the post.
8 Q. When did those discussions occur?
9 A. At the early time of the initiation
10 of spring in the Putumayo department.
11 Q. That would have been in 1999?
12 A. No. That would have been in the
13 fall of 2000.
14 Q. How did those discussions conclude?
15 A. I'm not going to discuss that.
16 Q. You're not going to discuss that
17 because?
18 A. I don't want to draw attention to
19 the methods of operations of DynCorp and Columbian
20 pilots because we're talking about a matter that
21 may affect their safety.
22 MR. RIVERA: Just to be clear, I suppose

1 we're objecting on the basis of classified State
2 security, national security privilege.
3 MR. HOLLINGSWORTH: The same objection on
4 behalf of DynCorp. The basis for that is national
5 security, foreign policy and the contract itself.
6 BY MR. COLLINGSWORTH:
7 Q. Were the discussions concluded?
8 A. Yes.
9 Q. Is there a buffer zone?
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. The part you're objecting to is
12 telling me how wide it is?
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. Because that's a national security
15 secret?
16 A. Because we don't wish to preview
17 where people would have sanctuary. We don't wish
18 to preview where we might fly.
19 Q. Do you have any knowledge at all of
20 similar discussions involving the government of
21 Ecuador?
22 A. As I earlier said, no.

1 Q. What is the reason that there is a
2 buffer zone, however wide it is?
3 MR. RIVERA: Let me again just object on
4 the grounds to the extent that the witness would
5 have to reveal in his answer any information that
6 would be protected by State secrets or national
7 security or other privilege.
8 With that objection, you may answer to
9 the extent that you don't reveal such information.
10 THE WITNESS: As a concept, it is to try
11 to ensure that the areas to which a spray is
12 delivered are, in fact, most likely to hit targets
13 and most likely not to hit places that are not
14 targets.
15 BY MR. COLLINGSWORTH:
16 Q. Would it be fair to say, then, that
17 one purpose of the buffer zone is to insure that
18 the spraying does not enter into Ecuador?
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. Because Ecuador is not a target
21 of --
22 A. That is correct?

1 Q. -- the spraying?
2 MR. RIVERA: Make sure he finishes his
3 question before you answer.
4 THE WITNESS: The answer to the question
5 as completed is yes.
6 MR. COLLINGSWORTH: Thank you.
7 THE WITNESS: Thank you, Counsel.
8 BY MR. COLLINGSWORTH:
9 Q. Are you aware of any reports that
10 spraying has occurred in Ecuador?
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. Describe for me your knowledge along
13 those lines.
14 MR. RIVERA: I'm going to raise the same
15 objection with respect to the witness may answer
16 subject to preservation of any national security or
17 classified information.
18 THE WITNESS: I have heard press reports.
19 BY MR. COLLINGSWORTH:
20 Q. Press reports of spraying in
21 Ecuador?
22 A. Or drift of spray into Ecuador.

1 Q. Have you ordered any kind of
2 investigation of that?
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. Who is conducting that
5 investigation?
6 A. The embassy.
7 Q. The embassy in?
8 A. Bogota.
9 Q. The U.S. Embassy in Bogota?
10 A. That's correct.
11 Q. Is there any conclusion to those
12 investigations?
13 MR. RIVERA: I'm going to raise the same
14 objection I did previously.
15 THE WITNESS: The conclusions that I
16 understand are that the information does not stand
17 up to the allegations. The press reports do not
18 stand up discretely.
19 BY MR. COLLINGSWORTH:
20 Q. Is there a written report to that
21 effect?
22 A. No, not to my knowledge.

1 Q. How did you come to learn that
2 information?
3 A. It would have been communicated to
4 me by staff, from telephone conversations with
5 people in the embassy.
6 Q. Do you know who communicated that to
7 you?
8 A. I would have to ask Mr. Etheridge.
9 Q. I would like to direct your
10 attention to paragraph 9 of your Declaration.
11 A. (Witness complies.)
12 Q. The relevant portion is in the
13 second line of paragraph 9. "It should be noted
14 that the punitive class is drawn from a region
15 adjacent to one largely controlled by drug
16 traffickers and international terrorists."
17 What is the region that you are
18 referring to there?
19 A. The region within Ecuador or the
20 region within Columbia?
21 Q. The region within Ecuador.
22 A. To the best of my knowledge, it

1 would have involved Sucumbios and Carchi
2 departments, or provinces if that's what they're
3 called, in Columbia.
4 Q. What are you referring to in
5 Columbia?
6 A. I'm referring to the cultivation and
7 the trafficking and insurgent organizations which
8 are no different from trafficking organizations
9 that exist in the Putumayo region department and
10 the overlap of that department into Narino in
11 Southern Columbia.
12 Q. Are there any specific terrorist
13 targets in Sucumbios, Ecuador?
14 MR. RIVERA: I object to the question
15 again to the extent that it would call for
16 revealing information protected by State secrets,
17 privileged or other national security privileges.
18 THE WITNESS: I don't know what a target
19 is.
20 BY MR. COLLINGSWORTH:
21 Q. Are there any terrorist groups that
22 are on the U.S. government's list that are known to

1 be hiding or based in Sucumbios, Ecuador?
2 MR. RIVERA: Same objection.
3 THE WITNESS: There is general
4 information that the BART from time to time has
5 some of its elements within Ecuador.
6 BY MR. COLLINGSWORTH:
7 Q. Within Sucumbios, Ecuador?
8 A. Within Sucumbios.
9 Q. I don't speak Spanish. I'll do my
10 best.
11 A. Nor do I.
12 Q. I would like to direct your
13 attention to paragraph 25 of your Declaration.
14 It begins, "As directed by the
15 bureau, DynCorp International works directly with
16 the United States military," et cetera, et cetera.
17 Who within the Bureau would be the
18 person you're referring to, or persons, who are
19 directing DynCorp?
20 A. It would be me and through me the
21 office director of the State Department Air Wing,
22 Mr. John McLaughlin, and through him his

1 representatives in Columbia, and in a second chain
2 of command from the embassador through the
3 Narcotics Affairs Section within Columbia.
4 Q. Mr. Baca, does he work in
5 Narcotics --
6 A. He is the director.
7 Q. Thank you.
8 MR. RIVERA: Make sure that counsel
9 finishes his question before you answer.
10 THE WITNESS: I'm sorry.
11 BY MR. COLLINGSWORTH:
12 Q. How frequent are the interactions in
13 that chain you have just described between DynCorp
14 and the bureau? Is it a daily thing or a weekly
15 thing?
16 A. It is a constant relationship. It
17 is daily and hour to hour. They live and work
18 together.
19 Q. I understand the limitations on what
20 you can say here, but what are the general issues
21 that are being worked out on a day-to-day basis in
22 this relationship? Is it where to spray? Is it

1 what to spray? What are the general issues?
2 A. Logistics.
3 Q. What do you mean by that?
4 A. I mean the support for the aircraft
5 and associated material, gasoline, spray material
6 that are necessary for DynCorp to carry out its
7 function.
8 Q. In the next paragraph, paragraph 26
9 of your Declaration, you describe a process to
10 develop detailed flight plans.
11 Can you tell me how that works?
12 A. The government of Columbia with the
13 support of the United States determines where coca
14 cultivation exists with a degree of geographic
15 precision that allows a specific field to be
16 designated as a field to be sprayed.
17 The general geographic area and then
18 the fields themselves are determined with the final
19 responsibility for saying that those areas may be
20 sprayed residing with the government of Columbia.
21 The flight plans are then laid out
22 for a particular day to cover the fields from among

1 the list of fields which will be sprayed on that
2 day and by that flight. Prior to the take off of
3 the aircraft, the government of Columbia determines
4 whether or not the weather or wind conditions are
5 appropriate to being able to deliver the spray
6 effectively to the target selected and only if the
7 weather and wind are appropriate, it's not raining,
8 the wind is not above a certain velocity. The
9 aircraft are authorized to take off. They then
10 take off and return to base.
11 If an unusual condition results
12 during the course of the flight, then the pilot has
13 the authority to return to base on his own
14 recognizance. The planes that fly are a
15 combination of planes that are flown by DynCorp and
16 flown by the Columbian National Police.
17 Q. When you were speaking earlier about
18 the logistics and the interaction between the
19 bureau and DynCorp, is the government of Columbia
20 involved in those logistical coordination
21 activities as well?
22 A. Only insofar as it may involve a

1 flight clearance to move something from point A to
2 point B. We are responsible for supplying our own
3 DynCorp logistical back up.
4 Q. Is a computer program prepared based
5 on the aerial intelligence that is guiding the
6 spray pattern of the airplane?
7 A. There is a program set which is used
8 to guide it, yes, that's correct.
9 Q. How is that created?
10 A. It's created in the -- as a result
11 of some multispectral imagery, which is taken from
12 an aircraft which is flown by us. Not every field
13 which is sprayed is necessarily registered on that,
14 but most of the fields which are sprayed are
15 registered on that.
16 Q. Who creates the computer program in
17 cases where there is one?
18 A. It would be a, I believe,
19 subcontractor of DynCorp.
20 Q. A subcontractor of DynCorp.
21 Do you know the name of the
22 subcontractor?

1 A. I don't recall off the top of my
2 head.
3 Q. Do you know where that computer
4 program is created physically? Is it created in
5 Columbia, or is it created somewhere in the United
6 States?
7 A. I believe it's in Columbia.
8 Q. Do you know the lag time between
9 gathering the information and actually having the
10 computer program ready to be operational?
11 A. No.
12 Q. Do your flight plans take account of
13 the issue of drift?
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. How do they do that?
16 A. As I said earlier, they are not
17 allowed to fly if the wind is too great.
18 Q. Is that the only precaution taken?
19 A. Pilots can make a decision in
20 flight.
21 Q. Are you aware of any studies
22 conducted regarding the issue of drift with respect

1 to Roundup, the fumigant base that is being used in
2 Plan Columbia?
3 A. No.
4 Q. Are you aware that there are any
5 studies?
6 A. No.
7 Q. Do you know what kind of spray was
8 initially being used when Plan Columbia first
9 began?
10 A. No.
11 Q. Do you know what kind of spray is
12 being used now?
13 A. No.
14 Q. Is it a derivative of Roundup?
15 A. I am not at liberty to say.
16 Q. I'm sorry?
17 A. I am not at liberty to say.
18 Q. Is that a national security secret
19 what the actual spray is?
20 MR. RIVERA: I'm going to object to the
21 question on the grounds that the identity of the
22 particular spray would be protected by a privilege

1 concerning another national security law
2 enforcement privilege or the privilege for
3 information submitted upon a pledge of
4 confidentiality with the government.
5 MR. HOLLINGSWORTH: Same objection, also
6 based on the contract.
7 MR. COLLINGSWORTH: We're going to mark
8 that one because I don't believe that you will be
9 able to keep us from knowing what is the name of
10 the spray being used.
11 BY MR. COLLINGSWORTH:
12 Q. Is it a derivative of Roundup?
13 MR. RIVERA: Same objection.
14 MR. HOLLINGSWORTH: Same objection.
15 BY MR. COLLINGSWORTH:
16 Q. What company makes it?
17 MR. RIVERA: Same objection.
18 MR. HOLLINGSWORTH: Same objection.
19 BY MR. COLLINGSWORTH:
20 Q. Has the spray changed?
21 A. Yes.
22 Q. When did it change?

1 A. I don't know.
2 Q. Why was it changed?
3 A. I'm not sure.
4 MR. COLLINGSWORTH: Let's mark this as
5 Plaintiffs' Number 5.
6 (Beers Deposition Exhibit No. 5
7 was marked for identification.)
8 BY MR. COLLINGSWORTH:
9 Q. I've handed you Exhibit 5, which is
10 a transcript of your famous appearance on
11 60 Minutes. I'm wondering if you could take a
12 moment to review that and tell me if it accurately
13 reflects what you said.
14 MR. RIVERA: Do you want the witness to
15 read the entirety of the transcript, or are there
16 particular portions that you would like him to look
17 at?
18 MR. COLLINGSWORTH: It's not that long.
19 He can read the portions that he did actually say.
20 MR. RIVERA: Read through it and make
21 sure you're comfortable with what you have read.
22 THE WITNESS: (Witness complies.)

1 Those are all my words to the best of my
2 recollection.
3 BY MR. COLLINGSWORTH:
4 Q. Mr. Beers, on page 3 of this
5 document near the top, it's your first appearance,
6 I think, Mr. Rand Beers: "That's correct. By
7 comparison, table salt and baby shampoo are more
8 toxic or as toxic as glyphosate."
9 MR. RIVERA: I'm sorry, what page are you
10 on?
11 THE WITNESS: We haven't found the point
12 you're making.
13 It's on page 2 of mine.
14 MR. RIVERA: Let's make sure we're on the
15 same page, literally.
16 MR. COLLINGSWORTH: Yes, my pages somehow
17 are different. Sorry.
18 BY MR. COLLINGSWORTH:
19 Q. On page 2 at the top, you are quoted
20 as saying, "That's correct. By comparison, table
21 salt and baby shampoo are more toxic or as toxic as
22 glyphosate."

1 A. Glyphosate.
2 Q. Is glyphosate one of the chemicals
3 being sprayed in Columbia?
4 A. Glyphosate is the generic name of
5 the chemicals that are being sprayed in Columbia.
6 Q. In the next set of questions,
7 Mr. Croft asks you about Roundup. There, you don't
8 claim any kind of national security privilege, and
9 instead you answer the questions about the
10 commercial applicability of Roundup. That's what
11 it appears to be saying.
12 Am I incorrect there?
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. What are you intending to answer
15 there?
16 A. I'm doing two things at the same
17 time. I am talking about glyphosate, the generic,
18 and I am responding to his question about how a
19 specific commercial vendor might set up their own
20 guidelines.
21 Q. But you don't --
22 A. But I am not confirming that Roundup

1 is what is being used in Columbia.
2 Q. For purposes of our going to the
3 court and trying to get a court order, the issue
4 you are claiming national security on here is
5 whether or not this glyphosate that you are
6 spraying --
7 MR. GALLAGHER: Glyphosate.
8 MR. COLLINGSWORTH: We all know what we
9 mean.
10 BY MR. COLLINGSWORTH:
11 Q. -- is in fact Roundup?
12 A. We are not acknowledging the name of
13 the supplier.
14 Q. That is a national security secret?
15 A. Counsel made the objections.
16 MR. RIVERA: Again, it's information
17 protected by one of the governmental privileges
18 including information submitted to the government
19 on a pledge of confidentiality, as well as the law
20 enforcement privilege and possibility the national
21 security privilege.
22 BY MR. COLLINGSWORTH:

1 Q. But we can say that glyphosate is
2 one of the chemicals?
3 A. We can certainly talk about
4 glyphosate.
5 Q. Are there any other chemicals that
6 are added to the mixture that is being used in Plan
7 Columbia besides glyphosate?
8 A. When one speaks of glyphosate as the
9 generic active agent that is used to actually
10 affect the plan, there are another set of chemicals
11 which are included, and they are called
12 surfactants. Their purpose is to allow the
13 glyphosate to remain on the leave long enough to
14 have its active effect on the plant. It is like
15 baby shampoo.
16 Q. Is one of the ingredients that
17 you're describing called Cosmo-Flux?
18 A. That is correct.
19 Q. Is Cosmo-Flux part of the mixture
20 that is being used in Plan Columbia?
21 A. That is correct.
22 Q. Is another one something called

1 Poea, P-o-e-a?
2 A. I believe that is the correct name.
3 Q. What is the difference, as you sit
4 here, between Cosmo-Flux and Poea?
5 A. They're produced by different
6 manufacturers.
7 Q. But they do the same thing?
8 A. Yes.
9 Q. Which of them is being used in Plan
10 Columbia?
11 A. Both.
12 Q. Together?
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. Why would you need two of them?
15 A. Because in the commercially
16 available mixture which we purchase, the second of
17 the two surfactants is already an ingredient of the
18 mixture which we purchase. We add the Cosmo-Flux
19 in addition to that to have an additional
20 surfactant effect.
21 Q. Where is the Cosmo-Flux that you are
22 adding manufactured?

1 A. I don't know.
2 Q. Do you know the name of the company
3 that manufacturers it?
4 A. No.
5 Q. Has the company that is supplying
6 it, the Cosmo-Flux that is being used in Plan
7 Columbia, has the company changed from the
8 beginning of the program until now?
9 A. That supplies the Cosmo-Flux?
10 Q. Yes.
11 A. I don't know.
12 Q. Let me direct your attention to
13 page 3. About halfway down the page it says,
14 Mr. Beers: "There is no question that at certain
15 dosage levels, glyphosate or the commercial mixture
16 can injure people or kill them. What I'm trying to
17 say is that the levels that we apply are well below
18 any of those levels."
19 Did you, in fact, say that?
20 A. I did.
21 Q. What are the dimensions or factors
22 in your mind that would determine whether a certain

1 dosage level would kill someone?
2 A. The science, as I understand it, is
3 that the dosage level would have to be a
4 considerable degree greater than the very small
5 amount of dosage that a single flight would allow
6 to land on an individual.
7 The actual mixture of either
8 glyphosate or surfactant which would fall on an
9 individual, a naked person of approximately
10 150 pounds standing in a field, which would never
11 happen, would have approximately 12 milligrams of
12 the total amount of substance. Nine plus
13 milligrams would be glyphosate, the remaining 2
14 plus milligrams would be surfactant.
15 That's hardly anything,
16 approximating what the standard tests have
17 suggested would be the dosage level for glyphosate
18 and its surfactant as manufactured in the United
19 States and testing would be.
20 Q. Is there any process under which
21 someone is testing what is actually being sprayed,
22 the content of it?

1 MR. HOLLINGSWORTH: I object to the form
2 of that. It's unclear to me.
3 THE WITNESS: Nor me.
4 MR. COLLINGSWORTH: I'm sorry, I'll try
5 again.
6 BY MR. COLLINGSWORTH:
7 Q. You're getting this fumigant and
8 spraying it. Is anyone testing the actual chemical
9 compound that is being sprayed on some sort of
10 random basis to make sure that we're clear on what
11 it is made of?
12 MR. HOLLINGSWORTH: Same objection.
13 THE WITNESS: I have indicated that
14 products which are manufactured and sold in the
15 United States are tested regularly. That's the
16 test data we have.
17 BY MR. COLLINGSWORTH:
18 Q. Is anyone using commercially in the
19 United States the exact same chemical formulation
20 with the addition of these two surfactants that
21 you've described in testing it?
22 A. Cosmo-Flux is not sold within the

1 United States.
2 Q. When you say that the people who are
3 testing it in the United States, that would be
4 irrelevant to whether the chemical as used is the
5 same, right?
6 MR. RIVERA: Object to the form of the
7 question.
8 MR. HOLLINGSWORTH: Objection.
9 BY MR. COLLINGSWORTH:
10 Q. Everyone objected to the form of the
11 question, but the issue is whether you understood
12 the question.
13 MR. RIVERA: If you understand the
14 question, you may answer subject to the objection.
15 THE WITNESS: As to the matter of the
16 irrelevance of the test that has been done in the
17 United States, I believe it is relevant to the
18 matter at hand.
19 BY MR. COLLINGSWORTH:
20 Q. Why is that?
21 MR. RIVERA: I'm sorry, Counsel. I'm
22 going back and flipping through Mr. Beers'

1 Declaration, and it seems that we're going a bit
2 far afield from what he was supposed to be
3 testifying to today. Obviously, we've been giving
4 some latitude to talk somewhat about the herbicide.
5 But my understanding of his authorization and the
6 request for his testimony today really concerns the
7 policy position of the State Department and various
8 aspects of the impact of this litigation on
9 national security and other concerns that are
10 described in the Declaration rather than the
11 science or the health effects, for the most part,
12 of the herbicide.
13 MR. COLLINGSWORTH: I'm going to direct
14 you to paragraphs 22 and 23 of Mr. Beers'
15 Declaration, both of which involve his assertions
16 that there are no grounds to suggest concern for
17 human health. I believe that my questions are
18 extremely relevant there, and I have just a few
19 more which I would like to complete.
20 BY MR. COLLINGSWORTH:
21 Q. You were beginning to explain to me
22 the relevance of the testing that is done on one

1 compound to the actual health effects of the
2 compound being used in Columbia which is different.
3 Why did you say that it was
4 relevant?
5 A. When you get to the actual mixture
6 that is being sprayed in Columbia, that is when it
7 is mixed with the water, which is the largest
8 single content of the mixture, the glyphosate and
9 the surfactant that comes with the glyphosate
10 represent a certain proportion which is the bulk of
11 the combination, and 1 percent of the actual out
12 the nozzle of the spray is Cosmo-Flux.
13 We have, because it is not sold in
14 the United States, asked EPA to look at the
15 ingredients as provided on a proprietary basis by
16 the manufacturer. And EPA has, after looking at
17 the contents, judged the contents of Cosmo-Flux as
18 safe to be sprayed on food crops in the United
19 States.
20 That, in combination with the
21 testing against the commercially available products
22 which are comparable to what we use, gives us the

1 view that is contained in the statement.
2 Q. Is it true that no one has actually
3 tested on humans the specific compounds together
4 that are being used in Plan Columbia?
5 A. To the best of my knowledge, no one
6 tests on humans or any of the herbicides or
7 pesticides. They are all done on animals.
8 Q. Are you aware of any scientific
9 tests done on animals to test the effects of the
10 specific combination of compounds being sprayed in
11 Plan Columbia?
12 A. No.
13 Q. Are there any plans to do such a
14 test?
15 A. We are considering the possibility.
16 Q. Who would conduct the test that you
17 are considering?
18 A. I don't know.
19 Q. Are you working with the EPA on
20 that?
21 A. The EPA would certainly be involved.
22 Q. Are you familiar with any legal

1 requirement under the Executive Order 12114 to test
2 these materials prior to using them in a context
3 that might harm humans?
4 A. I'm not familiar with that executive
5 order and would need to review it before I could
6 answer your question.
7 Q. Are you aware of any discussions
8 that have occurred in your bureau about the need to
9 conduct an environmental impact study?
10 MR. RIVERA: I'm going to object to the
11 question to the extent it requires the witness to
12 reveal any information that would be protected by
13 the deliberative process or any other applicable
14 privilege.
15 BY MR. COLLINGSWORTH:
16 Q. I believe you can answer the
17 question without giving up the details that counsel
18 has enumerated.
19 MR. RIVERA: If you understand the
20 question.
21 THE WITNESS: I guess you're going to
22 have to reformulate the question.

1 BY MR. COLLINGSWORTH:
2 Q. Have there been any discussions
3 inside your bureau regarding the need to comply
4 with environmental regulations by testing the
5 impact of the compound that you are spraying in
6 Columbia?
7 MR. RIVERA: Just a question of
8 clarification. The impact on the environment?
9 MR. COLLINGSWORTH: No. Humans or the
10 environment.
11 MR. RIVERA: I thought I heard
12 environment somewhere in your qualifications.
13 MR. COLLINGSWORTH: Humans are existing
14 in the environment.
15 MR. RIVERA: That's helpful to be clear
16 on the question.
17 THE WITNESS: At this particular point in
18 time, I am not aware of any specific plans to do
19 any environmental impact study of this particular
20 spray compound.
21 BY MR. COLLINGSWORTH:
22 Q. You're not familiar with Executive

1 Order 12114?
2 A. No.
3 Q. Are you aware of whether there are
4 any laws in Columbia that would require an
5 environmental impact study to be done before you
6 could spray something like the fumigant you are
7 using?
8 A. I'm not specifically aware of any,
9 no.
10 Q. Are you aware of any discussions
11 about whether the program is in compliance with the
12 law in Columbia on that dimension?
13 A. Yes. It is my understanding that it
14 is in compliance with the law in Columbia.
15 Q. Does the fumigant that you are using
16 in Columbia kill food crops like corn, yucca, et
17 cetera?
18 A. It kills plants.
19 Q. So if a farmer's plants were sprayed
20 by this fumigant, it would kill them, just as it is
21 killing the cocaine?
22 A. It could.

1 Q. There is no way that this fumigant
2 distinguishes between cocaine and corn. It kills
3 plants; is that correct?
4 A. That is correct.
5 Q. You had earlier said that the dosage
6 is low enough that it cannot hurt humans in terms
7 of the spray that you are using in Columbia,
8 correct?
9 A. I said that it is not significant
10 enough to kill humans.
11 Q. Could it injure humans?
12 A. The studies that have been done on
13 glyphosate have suggested that there is a mild eye
14 irritation that results.
15 Q. Are you aware of any other health
16 effects just from the glyphosate?
17 A. No.
18 Q. Again, that study did not introduce
19 the Cosmo-Flux; is that correct?
20 A. But it did have the surfactant that
21 is part of the glyphosate mixture.
22 Q. Which surfactant, what is the word?

1 A. The other one, the Bpoe.
2 Q. Would someone increase their chances
3 of suffering an injury if they are sprayed
4 frequently? Is frequency a factor in your
5 determination?
6 MR. RIVERA: I'm sorry, I object to the
7 form of the question.
8 BY MR. COLLINGSWORTH:
9 Q. I will be happy to try again if you
10 don't understand it, Mr. Beers.
11 A. There is a second set of studies
12 that are done on most herbicides, and they are
13 exposure -- prolonged exposure to the substance.
14 It is my understanding that those studies are
15 conducted over a 90-day period, and they presume a
16 certain dosage level administered on a daily basis.
17 Those studies with respect to
18 glyphosate do not suggest a long-term effect.
19 However, and more importantly, it is unlikely that
20 an individual would be sprayed more than once. It
21 is highly unlikely that an individual would ever be
22 sprayed more than twice, period.

1 Q. But that would be a factor if in
2 fact they were? In increasing the risk to a
3 person, the dosage is one factor, but the frequency
4 is another factor?
5 A. That's what I said.
6 Q. Are you aware of any rules or
7 recommendations by the commercial manufacturers of
8 this kind of fumigant that you are using in
9 Columbia dealing with the altitude from which it
10 should be sprayed?
11 A. I believe there are some references
12 in the guidelines.
13 Q. Do you have any knowledge of what
14 those guidelines are? Should it be sprayed very
15 high up or close to the ground?
16 A. It should be sprayed close to the
17 ground.
18 Q. How close to the ground?
19 A. I don't remember precisely, but the
20 guidelines say.
21 Q. Do you believe, as you sit here,
22 that the DynCorp program in Columbia is in

1 compliance with those guidelines in terms of
2 altitude?
3 MR. RIVERA: Object to the question.
4 Could you clarify, whose guidelines?
5 BY MR. COLLINGSWORTH:
6 Q. The guidelines that you referred to
7 that the commercial manufacturers recommend.
8 A. As I cannot remember what the
9 commercial guidelines are, I'm at odds to respond
10 to your question.
11 Q. Is it part of the direction that the
12 bureau is giving DynCorp to be in compliance with
13 the commercially-recommended applications of the
14 fumigant?
15 A. We have our own guidelines.
16 Q. Are they different in terms of the
17 altitude recommendation than the commercial
18 guidelines?
19 A. Our guidelines are 50 to 150 feet.
20 Q. What are the commercial --
21 A. I don't know.
22 Q. Do the commercial vendors put a

1 warning label on the fumigant if it has glyphosate
2 in it?
3 A. I believe so.
4 Q. Does the warning include telling
5 humans to be out of the area?
6 A. I'm not positive about that.
7 Q. Let's go back to your 60 Minutes
8 transcript, page 2. You are specifically asked the
9 question near the top of the page by Mr. Croft that
10 the commercial Roundup says that people should stay
11 out of area, as well as pets, if the area is being
12 sprayed, and you respond to the question.
13 Do you have any knowledge at all of
14 the commercial regulations?
15 A. I'm sorry, I still don't see it on
16 the page.
17 Q. Page 2, the second question
18 Mr. Croft asks you, it begins, "If you looked at
19 the --
20 A. Okay, got it.
21 Q. Could you review both the question
22 and your response.

1 A. (Examining.)
2 Q. Do you have any knowledge of the
3 commercial warning that Roundup is using?
4 A. Mr. Croft, I believe, is correct in
5 quoting the Roundup web site.
6 I have never said we're using
7 Roundup, sir.
8 Q. Is it your position that it is okay,
9 that you would not warn people to be out of the
10 area when you're about to spray the actual fumigant
11 that you're using in Columbia?
12 A. We do not warn people to be out of
13 the area when we are spraying.
14 Q. Because it's perfectly safe to be
15 sprayed?
16 A. It is also a risk.
17 Q. Could you acknowledge the first part
18 of the question, though.
19 Is it your position that it is
20 perfectly safe to be sprayed by the actual fumigant
21 that you are using in Columbia?
22 A. As I have said earlier, there are

1 testing indications that it could be mildly
2 irritating to the eye. If you judge that to be
3 unsafe, then I'm not in a position to say it's
4 safe. We do not judge it to be harmful to the
5 health of individuals.
6 Q. You also say on that same page that
7 you compare it to table salt, is that correct, on
8 the level of toxicity?
9 A. That's correct.
10 Q. Are you aware that the New York
11 Attorney General in 1996 got an injunction against
12 Monsanto for saying that glyphosate is as safe as
13 table salt because it was proved to be untrue?
14 A. No, I'm unaware of that.
15 Q. What do you base your statement on
16 that it is as safe as table salt?
17 A. Information that has been provided
18 to us in comparing the toxicity levels, which are
19 done by independent testers to determine what the
20 toxicity of table salt or baby shampoo is. So I'm
21 looking at test results. We are looking at test
22 results.

1 Q. But you said the specific compound
2 that you are using has not been tested on humans;
3 is that correct?
4 A. That's correct. Nor are any of the
5 tests, to the best of my knowledge, on humans.
6 Q. What date are you referring to?
7 A. I'm referring to the standard tests
8 that EPA sets up to look at toxicity levels of
9 substances.
10 Q. As part of the bureau's oversight in
11 coordination with DynCorp, is there any attempt to
12 try to spray areas when populations are not likely
13 to be there?
14 A. Sure.
15 Q. What kinds of guidelines are you
16 providing?
17 A. The general guideline, which is to
18 not spray people if it is at all avoidable, to not
19 spray houses, to not spray fields that are clearly
20 food crop fields. But if food crop is intercropped
21 with coca, then it is coca.
22 Q. Are these guidelines in a written

1 form, or are they part of the contract?
2 A. I'm not sure.
3 Q. But you are sure that that is one of
4 the factors in entering into this coordination with
5 DynCorp?
6 A. Yes.
7 Q. Do you know if the pilots themselves
8 are instructed as to the possible risks of spraying
9 humans?
10 A. I don't know that for a fact.
11 Q. Do you know if the containers for
12 the fumigant that you are using contain warning
13 labels of any sort?
14 A. I don't know that.
15 Q. Should they, according to your
16 understanding of the safety precautions?
17 MR. RIVERA: Object to the form of the
18 question. You're asking him should the --
19 BY MR. COLLINGSWORTH:
20 Q. Is there any regulation, guideline
21 or requirement of the contract or any other
22 direction that your bureau has given to DynCorp to

1 say that the barrel storing this material for use
2 must have a warning label as to its possible
3 negative health effects?
4 A. I don't know.
5 MR. COLLINGSWORTH: Let's mark this as
6 Plaintiffs' Exhibit 6.
7 (Beers Deposition Exhibit No. 6
8 was marked for identification.)
9 BY MR. COLLINGSWORTH:
10 Q. Mr. Beers, I've handed you
11 Plaintiffs' Exhibit 6, which is a report on the
12 study of health complaints in Columbia related to
13 aerial eradication. This was produced to me by
14 Mr. Gallagher, and it's on the list that I showed
15 you earlier of the documents produ