Day 009 - 08 Jul 94 - Page 31


     
     1        today because there are, to our knowledge, still a lot of
              open ended questions on this issue.  The science is still
     2        developing but, in particular, our push within
              McDonald's really to phase out of 22 actually was on our
     3        mind when we switched out of CFCs.
 
     4   Q.   Yes.  So were you unhappy that in 1990 there were still 21
              countries using HCFCs blowing agents in your system?
     5        A.  No, just the opposite.  I was very happy that our
              company was making significant progress because, in order
     6        to phase out of CFCs, what we needed to do immediately was
              to switch to another version, switch to another version of
     7        a blowing agent and your alternatives are fairly limited
              in terms of packaging we use.  The alternatives, in
     8        general, are pentane and HCFC-22.  For those suppliers
              switching from CFCs to pentane was a very complicated, a
     9        difficult process.  Switching from CFCs to HCFCs is a much
              simpler process.  It is not as simple as just changing
    10        your blowing agent, but it is fairly simple.  You can use
              your same equipment and fine tune some of the processes to
    11        substitute 22.  So when I look at that chart, what that
              tells me is I am very pleased we were able to rapidly
    12        phase out of CFCs worldwide and go to the next.
 
    13   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  If I understand it, if you carried on using
              CFCs, you would not have been in breach of the Montreal
    14        Protocol?
              A.  Because of the long phase out period.
    15
         Q.   A transitional period of some years was allowed to do
    16        that; is that right?
              A.  Yes.
    17
         MR. MORRIS:  As a whole country, I believe.  That Montreal
    18        Convention did not apply to a specific country.
 
    19   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  No.  You would not have been in breach, or
              would you, of any -- you would not, as a contributor to
    20        the use of CFCs in the United States, have been, as it
              were, helping the United States to be in breach of the
    21        Protocol?
              A.  That is correct.
    22
         Q.   You would not, as I understand it -- if I am wrong,
    23        I would like to be told -- have been in breach of any
              rules or regulations in the States by continuing at that
    24        time?
              A.  That is correct.  My knowledge of the Montreal
    25        Protocol -- I know what it is today; I do believe that
              CFCs cannot be sold after the calendar year 1995. 
    26 
         Q.   Yes.  So people might say you are not taking a responsible 
    27        attitude if you stuck with CFCs, but you would not have
              been breaking the law in any way?
    28        A.  Yes, that is correct.
 
    29   MR. MORRIS:  You said that now you appreciate just how accurate
              the scientists have been on CFCs, that you would not
    30        tolerate a country in the McDonald's system using CFCs.
              Why has McDonald's continued to tolerate countries using

Prev Next Index