STORIES FROM THE SOUND

MERLE 'BAILEY' SAVAGE | LA TIMES | RIKI OTT, PhD | MARGARET DIANN | RICHARD D. NAGEL | PHYLLIS 'DOLLY' LA JOIE |

ATTENTION 1989 ALASKAN OIL SPILL BEACH CLEANUP WORKERS - PLEASE MAKE CONTACT:

The firm of Barnett and Lerner is able to represent anyone who was exposed to the poison vapors. I invite you to visit their web site http://www.barnettandlerner.com sign on as clients, and allow them to represent your interest against VECO.

This section has been added because of the contact made by workers on the Alaskan oil spill cleanup. It seems that there have been many deaths and even more have sickness who suffer with the same symptoms. Please read the stories below.

MERLE SAVAGE:

My name is Merle Savage, and I worked extensively as a female general foreman in Task Force One, during the oil recovery project in Prince William Sound, Alaska in 1989. My name during that summer was Bailey; however, in 1994 I obtained a divorce and retained my former name of Savage. This is why any one that worked the cleanup was unable to locate me until now.

Between May 5-September 15, 1989 I worked for Veco which was the company that was contracted by Exxon to supply boats, equipment, and personnel for the oil cleanup. The first weeks I cleaned the beaches with a 5 inch hose on my shoulder spraying hot water onto oily rocks. The spray mixed with crude oil was always coming up into our faces. Respirators were not available only paper masks. We were always covered with crude oil. On the beaches there was no way to wash our hands before eating and it was impossible not to get the crude oil on our food. The work day was anywhere from 12-16 hours a day, 7 days a week. We faced each day suffering from the Valdez Crud, which was like an extreme flu, with chills, fever, vomiting, headaches, and respiratory infections with chronic coughing that lingered throughout the 4 months.

After a few weeks I earned the position of general foreman. My first assignment as general foreman was the Bering Trader, with 160 personnel; after my first R&R I was general foreman on the Foss 180, until it was demobilized and then I was general foreman on the DB-100 a derrick barge that housed 0ver 200 workers, until September 15, when the cleanup was ended.

One of my responsibility on the berthing barges (housing boats) was to keep abreast of all personnel entries and exits of the boat and to oversee the de-contamination area. I maintained a crew of 6-12 people on the different boats, or barges that I was assigned to, who worked every day scrubbing rain gear with products like Simple Green and Citro clean and De-Solv-it. On the DB-100 when the workers came aboard the barge they would walk up stairs to the top of a tank that was about 12 feet, with grates covering the top, where their boots would be sprayed with hot water to rinse off the crude oil. The steam rising above the area with the fumes from the oil was a constant mist over the area where workers reported and took off their rain gear every day. Inside the connex trailers, rubber boots and plastic rain gear were hung after being cleaned with more De-Solv-it, at which time a gas power heater at the end of the trailer was turned on to blow heat and dry the gear. Because we were led to believe that Exxon had chemists who would oversee the chemical cleanup procedures, we were assured that the cleaning chemicals used was harmless.

There was always a line to visit the Doctor on board, but he only had limited medicine to offer, which was of little good to us. It was difficult to work daily and tolerate the conditions that we suffered, while working on the cleanup. I fell and injured my lower back, and was flown to the USS Juneau nearby for x-rays, and was never informed of the outcome. Upon returning to Anchorage after September, I was unable to sit in a straight position and continued to have pain in my back and lower spine. In 1990 I had x-rays where my Doctor discovered that my coccyx was broken. Surgery was performed to have the broken piece, which had become inflamed, removed.

All of my life I had been in great health and had endless energy. However, after returning from the oil spill cleanup I began to experience prolonged respiratory ailments similar to the "Valdez Crud" I had while on the cleanup. At first I assumed that living in the Anchorage weather gave me the reason of always having a cold, the flu or sinus infections, to the point of the Doctor prescribing allergy shots in an effort to help. There was always a cough which extended into bronchial infections. Along with the lungs, respiratory, sinus problems there was a stomach issue which eventually expanded to the entire digestion tract. I had always had a strong stomach and could eat anything without problems. But this was something new for me and I began to see the breakdown of my general health. My condition grew increasingly worse without explanation, so in 1994 I decided to leave my Real Estate business in Anchorage and relocate to a warmer climate thinking it would be healthy for me.

I arrived in Las Vegas to be closer to my family. I began attending Real Estate School, but for the most part found myself struggling to attend classes. After passing the test I left my license inactive, because I couldn’t commit to a full time job. In the mean time my body became riddled with pain to the point that at times I couldn’t even get into a tub for a bath. Walking, bending and simply moving my limbs was painful every day, all day. This combined with the continuing respiratory condition, became unbearable. At one point I was taken to the emergency room after my body had swollen to the point of not being able to move at all. In 1998 I had angioplasty in two arteries in my heart. I struggled with recovery for a year, and then swelling took over my body, and dominated my every movement with pain. Because of my declining immune system over the past 19 years, my health has deterorated into heart problems, with angioplasty, chronic fatigue with muscle and joint pain, digestive problems, respiratory complications, cataracts in both eyes, Rheumatoid Arthritis and the latest discovery a mass on my liver. I do not smoke or drink, and have never had Hepatitis, so the doctors are questioning the reason for the liver problem.

I was forced to retire from a family owned business in 2002 for health reasons. I could no longer get through and complete a work day, not even with reduced hours. I continued going from one medication to another without relief. I was in the hospital twice with Pneumonia. The flu was a constant yearly occurrence that would last for weeks usually leading to a bronchial infection. At times I could see no way out of my predicament.

I was put in contact with Riki Ott, PhD in October 2007, and she sent me several of her books which help explain about the toxic materials that were used during the cleanup. Since then I have been in touch with workers who have contacted me and learned that there are many of us who are suffering from the same health issues.

I have been in touch with Riki Ott, PhD at www.soundtruth.info and Margaret Diann at www.valdezlink.com who have been in contact with workers who were on the Alaskan oil spill cleanup in 1989. Some have died with the same complications that I have, and others are extremely sick. Only after speaking with someone who knows the health issues pertaining to the toxic hot water spraying that was conducted on the beaches, did I have answers as to why I have suffered for 19 years, but there is no way to repair the damage that has been done to my body.

Please contact this site if you worked on the cleanup and have had any of these Symptoms, or know of someone who has been sick since the oil spill cleanup.

Back to top

LA TIMES:

EXXON SPILL'S CLEANUP WORKERS SHARE YEARS OF CRIPPLING ILLNESS:

LA Times
November 5, 2001
By KIM MURPHY
Times Staff Writer

VALDEZ, Alaska -- The toll of the 1989 Exxon Valdez oil spill is a sadly familiar one: dead birds, sea otters, harbor seals--all victims of the oil tanker that ran over a reef late one March night and drained 11 million gallons of oil into Prince William Sound.
There are others whom almost no one talks about, although unlike the birds, most of them are still alive. They are the people who scraped oil off the beaches, skimmed it off the top of the water, hosed it off rocks.* Workers who stood in the brown foam 18 hours a day, who came back to their sleeping barges with oil matted in their hair, ate sandwiches speckled with oil, steered boats through a brown hydrocarbon haze that looked like the smog from hell.

After that summer, some found oil traces in their lungs, in their blood cells, in the fatty tissue of their buttocks. They got treated for headaches, nausea, chemical burns and breathing problems, and went home. But some never got well.

Steve Cruikshank of Wasilla, Alaska, has headaches that go on for days. Two years ago, he was hospitalized when his lungs nearly stopped working. "The doctor said, 'I'm going to give you the strongest antibiotic known to man, and you're either going to survive or not survive. I don't know what's wrong with you.' What's wrong is, I haven't felt right since that oil spill."

John Baker of Kelso, Wash., has had nosebleeds "like gushers" that won't go away and growths in his lungs. "They say generally that people who work in underground mines and stuff get this kind of thing. But the only thing like that I ever worked on was the oil spill."

The lungs of Tim Burt of Seldovia, Alaska, were coated with oil while he was steam-cleaning oil tanks. As his lungs began to fail, he got wrenching headaches. None of the painkillers was strong enough. "'Just kill me,' he'd say.’I can't stand the pain anymore,' "recalls his sister, Sandy Elvsaas. Burt died in 1995 of a drug overdose. "He figured he had nothing to lose. He was dead already."

These people all have one thing in common. They were healthy when they arrived in Prince William Sound for a summer of hard work and good pay. They were sick when they left.

"There appear to be hundreds, maybe even thousands, of workers that were affected negatively, probably by their exposure to chemicals used in the cleanup process," said Anchorage attorney Michael Schneider, who is teaming with Westlake Village lawyer Ed Masry to take a new look at the 15,000 workers from all over the world who cleaned up the worst oil disaster in U.S. history.

Although no one has begun to document the number of workers affected, at least two dozen have gone to court with toxic injury claims in recent years. Among workers' compensation cases filed by oil spill workers, 34 claimed poisoning, while 264 claimed respiratory problems and 19 had injuries to the nervous system. About 60 listed petroleum as the source of injury or illness.

Cruikshank and Baker, among others, volunteered information about their health problems in a Times review of dozens of Exxon workers who, according to internal company documents, reported health problems ranging from sore throats to bronchitis and pneumonia during the cleanup. Other cases were obtained from court records and interviews with families.

Lawyers believe the actual number of injuries may be far greater than what has been reported so far. Many, they said, have never associated things like headaches, cancer, rashes, liver and kidney problems to a chemical exposure that happened more than a decade ago.

"Chemical poisoning can cause . . . health problems that manifest as many different symptoms," Los Angeles legal investigator Erin Brockovich said in a letter sent last week to public interest groups in Alaska, urging potential victims to come forward.

Brockovich, who works for Masry's law firm, successfully investigated Groundwater contamination by Pacific Gas & Electric Co. in the town of Hinkley, Calif., in a case settled in 1996.

Exxon, now ExxonMobil, says the cleanup operation was "remarkably safe" and involved a substance -- crude oil -- which is of very low toxicity after a few days of weathering. "Years of study of refinery workers and others in the oil industry have demonstrated that crude oil can be worked with safely," the company said. It added that fewer than 25 workers have filed suit for alleged exposures.
"Eight of those claims have been dismissed by the courts, and seven have been settled."

Public health officials say there was no sign of a health threat to cleanup workers, though they admit they never had access to data that would have answered the question conclusively. Investigators for the National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health said they were not able to conduct detailed surveys of worker illnesses, and said it was virtually impossible to detect signs of chemical exposure in workers after the cleanup was over. But most of the air samples they took detected only trace amounts of the most dangerous toxins, NIOSH said in its report.

The Valdez cleanup involved strong solvents in addition to the crude oil, which gives off extremely hazardous fumes when it is fresh. Even weathered oil contains some hazardous metals and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, or PAHs, a group of over 100 compounds, some of which can cause cancer. These materials could have entered workers' lungs as a mist or been absorbed through their skin when they hosed down contaminated beaches, some experts say.

But how many suffered health effects may never be known, in part because Exxon and its cleanup contractor, VECO Inc., denied government investigators access to medical records, saying at the time they were too "overwhelmed" to get the data together.

Some of the illness statistics showed up years later, in a confidential document unearthed in court records. It showed that a large number of workers visited clinics with upper-respiratory complaints--a potential warning flag of chemical exposure. Exxon concluded they were a result not of chemical poisoning but a viral illness--eliminating any obligation to report the cases to the government and set up a long-term health-monitoring program.

"The people in charge of it tried to get the records, and had trouble doing it. And for reasons I don't know, for some reason NIOSH didn't press its authority to get those records," said Mitchell Singal, who was NIOSH's medical officer during the oil spill.

In all, there were 6,722 patient visits for respiratory illness. While some workers may have gone to the clinic more than once, it potentially means that 40% of the work force had respiratory problems severe enough to see a doctor.

John Middaugh, Alaska's state epidemiologist, said the state health department attempted to get viral cultures of sick oil workers from VECO to see if they matched known viruses circulating in the state. But they were only given 17.

VECO officials say they have no recollection now of anyone denying access to medical records. "There wasn't any time our company took a position not to cooperate," said Jamie Slack, vice president for human resources.

Carl Reller, a biochemist who worked as an environmental quality control consultant for the cleanup contractors, sat in on many of the key planning sessions. He said Exxon lobbied successfully to avoid having the spill designated a hazardous waste cleanup, which would have required workers to have 40 hours of training in how to manage the dangerous materials they would be handling. Federal officials concurred that, given the reduced toxicity of the weathered oil, four hours' training was adequate.

"The decision was based on a conservative premise and not revisited," Reller said. "Was this because of legitimate oversight, incompetence, conspiracy, cost cutting or negligence? Based on my experience, I would say all of the above."

NIOSH agreed with Exxon's assessment that a virus was likely responsible for the respiratory problems, which affected not only cleanup workers, but office personnel and even lawyers.

Middaugh agrees. He said federal investigators took exhaustive air and water samples to make sure workers weren't being endangered. "It was concluded there was no risk," he said, "as long as there was meticulous adherence to standards developed by the company and NIOSH and OSHA."

The problem, say many of those studying the worker health issue, is that adherence to safety standards was far from meticulous.

Respirators often weren't available, or workers didn't wear them, which meant dangerous chemicals could be inhaled. Many didn't wear goggles, which allowed chemicals to be absorbed through the eyes. Gloves were often discarded because they didn't fit or got in the way, leaving the skin exposed to absorb toxics.

"Nobody complied with any of the health and safety rules, and everybody turned a blind eye," said Robert J. Gryder, a Coast Guard safety officer at the spill who has worked for decades in the field of hazardous materials handling and training. "They were issuing rain suits [as protective gear], and a rain suit is worthless as protective equipment except for one chemical: water."

"In 1989, we did not know what the adverse health effects would be of that exposure to Prudhoe Bay crude oil," Gryder said. "We simply didn't know, and we still don't know."

Ailments Range From Cataracts to Lung Cancer

Phyllis LaJoie had worked for years in Alaska's oil fields, and volunteered to work in Prince William Sound after the spill as a way of paying back. "I felt responsible when the spill happened," she said.

A former seal hunter and construction worker, LaJoie was put in the decontamination unit, where she cleaned oily coats, boots and gloves overnight.

"Of course, we were steaming all that stuff into our lungs," she said.

Later, she cleaned up beaches. "They ran out of equipment like masks, and they told us you could go home, or you could stay and work without it. We ended up with little paper masks."

LaJoie and almost everyone around her had a constant cough and runny nose. She went back to Hawaii, but couldn't seem to shake the illness. "I just kept getting sicker and sicker. Breathing and sinus, stomach, everything."

Finally, she was diagnosed with diabetes, along with emphysema, asthma and an enlarged liver. She has a bacterial overgrowth in her lower intestine.

"My goodness," she said, "this thing has ruined my life."

Randy Lowe, a commercial fisherman from Soldotna, Alaska, contracted his own boat to help collect oil during the cleanup for $600 a day.

"Oil was everywhere, and every single day, I would get covered with it," he said. "When I got done loading a boom, there'd be a foot of oil in the bottom of my boat, and I'd just shovel it out. You'd drink sodas that had oil on it, you'd smoke a cigarette, it had oil on it, if you ate a sandwich, it had oil on it.
"When I went out there, I was totally, 100% healthy," Lowe said. "Between 1990 and '97 I've been in the hospital 58 times. I've had pancreatitis, liver problems, spleen problems. I had a pancreas attack in '97, I went into septic shock and finally my body shut down. I was in a coma for 52 days, and after that I had to learn all over again how to walk, read and talk."

Lowe figures his medical bills, paid almost entirely by Medicaid, have reached $1.5 million. And he still is unable to work--too tired, can't concentrate enough.

"I went from making $55,000, $60,000 a year to drawing welfare. That was a pretty hard thing to swallow for me," he said. "I'm only 41 years old. I shouldn't be in the shape I'm in."

Jim Reynolds of Hampton, Va., was a mechanic on several oil-skimming boats. He had been working for three months when he woke up covered in a swollen, itchy rash, diagnosed as a reaction to the oil.

"And the thing is, it never really went away. Whenever I get hot or sweaty and irritable, then it comes back."

Stories like these abound. Gryder has seen lung cancer, cataracts, hair loss, hearing loss, skin rashes and respiratory problems among oil spill workers.

Riki Ott, a marine biologist from Cordova, Alaska, who has worked for years to document safety and environmental issues related to the spill, was one of the first to realize that the stories of health problems were similar.

"Back in 1989, I had a number of friends call me and say their son or daughter had come in from the oil spill cleanup on a break and their urine was black,"Ott said. "And what concerns me is every year since the spill I have been getting calls from people, and they all have this breathing you can hear, and they all say they're sick, and they say, 'You know, I think it's from the work I did on the oil spill.'"

After talking to more than a dozen such people, Ott began to suspect it was no coincidence that all of them were sick. She flew to Texas to meet with Dr. William Rea, who had treated many former cleanup workers and believed many of them were suffering the cumulative effects of chemical exposure to oil and solvents. Eventually, Ott contacted Masry and Schneider and persuaded them to try to find more injured workers and file lawsuits on their behalf.

Few of the previous lawsuits filed against Exxon ever went anywhere, including suits filed by LaJoie and Lowe, which were dismissed before going to trial. Experts like Rea were countered by medical experts put forward by Exxon, who said workers suffered no significant medical damage, or if they did, it could have come from anything. Stubblefield hasn't worked since. He gasps when he breathes, gets spasms when he is exposed to perfume, cigarette smoke, truck exhaust. "He'll never breathe right again. Never," said his former wife, Melissa Stubblefield. "If he even starts to laugh, he gets to coughing so he gasps for air."

All Safety Procedures Followed, Exxon Says.

Most health officials remain unconvinced that the cleanup left anyone sick.

"Right after the spill occurred; there was a tremendous focus on the potential toxicity of the oil. There was a question that if the oil contained substances that could potentially harm workers on a long-term basis, or on a severe short-term basis, and induce sterility or cancer or birth defects, then it would be unethical to undertake cleanup at all," recalled Middaugh, the state epidemiologist.

"But in a very short period of time, all of the parties, NIOSH, the American Federation of Labor, OSHA, all looked at it and said, this oil has not been refined, it's naturally occurring crude oil, and under proper conditions of worker safety, of injury prevention, with personal protective equipment, training and oversight, there should be no component of the oil that should provide any toxicity that would induce any of these long-term problems," he said.

Singal also doubts there were long-term health threats. "Most of the illnesses were, as far as we could determine at the time . . . associated with living in close quarters," he said.

"We kept hearing about chronic effects later on. I couldn't think of any reason why it would have been related to the cleanup activity. But I can't say one way or another, because we never looked into it."

In Exxon's view, one of the most important stories of the cleanup is what didn't happen: the workers in heavy gear who didn't fall into the water and drown, who didn't suffer hypothermia or get injured by heavy equipment.

"Safety was the No. 1 concern. We took all the proper safety procedures to protect workers," said company spokesman Tom Cirigliano. "We have paid more than $300 million to more than 11,000 Alaskans and to others who were directly affected by the spill. This is not a company that by any sense of the imagination ran and hid."

FAIR USE NOTICE: This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.
For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

Back to top

RIKI OTT, PhD:

Author - Public Speaker - Marine Toxicologist
Dr. Riki Ott is a dynamic, passionate speaker who combines scientific research with wisdom from the heart. She offers contemporary problems, ripe for class or group projects, and inspires practical use of academics for activism.

LECTURES

From Academics to Activism: Making a Difference from the Front Line of the Exxon Valdez Oil Spill Oil is far more toxic than most people realize. Dr. Ott speaks about the ongoing effects of the Exxon Valdez oil spill, its worldwide ramifications for humans and the environment, and the on-going corporate coverup of oil's long-term effects to people and wildlife. Paradigm shifts in oil toxicity to humans and wildlife are further discussed in the award-winning Sound Truth and Corporate Myth$ (2005), now available for course adoption. Sound and Corporate Myth$ may be ordered at www.sundtruth.info

LETTER FROM RIKI OTT, PHD TO Congressman Waxman - October 29, 2007

Riki Ott, PhD
P.O. Box 1460
Cordova, Alaska 99574
907.424.3915
www.soundtruth.info - info@soundtruth.info

Congressman Henry Waxman
Chairman, House Oversight
and Government Reform Committee
2204 Rayburn House Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20515

Re: Downstream Health Effects of Oil Production

Dear Congressman Waxman,

I am sending a complimentary copy of my book, Sound Truth and Corporate Myth$, on the effects of the Exxon Valdez oil spill (EVOS) on workers and wildlife in response to your committee hearings on U.S. energy industries.

I urge you to also look at the downstream costs of oil production on cleanup workers, public health, and the environment. Two people who testified at your October 31, 2007, hearing—Dr. Theo Coburn and Dr. Daniel Teitelbaum—are featured in Sound Truth. There is proof that the 1989 cleanup harmed the health of thousands of cleanup workers; that Exxon was aware of this harm; and that government regulators were misled by Exxon. For example:

p. 12 shows the MSDS for crude oil and chemical products used on the EVOS cleanup (Note products that contain the human health hazard 2-butoxyethanol specifically warn to keep product out of waterways: Why were these products used in Prince William Sound?)
p. 33 Exxon’s partial release form showing it paid workers $600.50 to waive future health claims arising from cleanup work (once it realized workers were getting sick)
p. 57 Exxon’s clinical data showing a total of 6,722 upper respiratory “infections” were reported during the 1989 cleanup (I obtained these data before court records were sealed.)
p. 450 Exxon’s air quality monitoring data showing workers were overexposed to oil vapors, mists, and particulates as well as a variety of chemical products (I also obtained these data before court records were sealed.)

I have been working to hold Exxon and the federal government accountable for chemical injury to EVOS cleanup workers ever since workers first started calling me in May 1989. Exxon’s worker safety program failed to adequately protect cleanup workers and it is likely literally thousands (est. 3,000 from Yale survey, p. 164) are suffering chronic health problems stemming from the EVOS cleanup. Given the chronic illnesses stemming from the cleanup, the “Valdez Crud” was likely symptomatic of a chemical poisoning epidemic caused by breathing oily particulates generated by the high-pressure wash—not simple “colds and flu” as Exxon medical doctors claimed.

I have also contacted Congressmen John Dingell (Oversight Investigation Committee) and George Miller (House Education and Labor Committee) about this matter (letter attached). I urge you to consider removing the 2-year statute of limitations for filing toxic torts in hazardous waste cleanups retroactive to the Exxon Valdez cleanup. I welcome the opportunity to speak with you about remedial action for past workers—and proactive steps to safeguard health of future cleanup workers.

Riki Ott, PhD

LETTER FROM RIKI OTT, PHD TO ALASKAN GOVERNOR SARAH PALIN - OCTOBER 27, 2007

Riki Ott, PhD
Author - Public Speaker - Marine Toxicologist
P.O. Box 1460 • Cordova, Alaska 99574 • 907.424.3915
www.soundtruth.info - info@soundtruth.info

Governor Sarah Palin October 27, 2007
Office of the Governor
POB 110001
Juneau, AK 99811-0001

Dear Governor Palin,

Enclosed please find a complimentary copy of my book, Sound Truth and Corporate Myth$, on the effects of the Exxon Valdez oil spill (EVOS) on workers and wildlife. I am an independent researcher and author. I am sending it in response to a question you asked of Diann Hursh. Yes, there is proof that the 1989 cleanup harmed the health of thousands of cleanup workers—and that Exxon was aware of this harm. For example:

p. 12 shows the MSDS for crude oil and chemical products used on the EVOS cleanup (Note products that contain the human health hazard 2-butoxyethanol specifically warn to keep product out of waterways: Why were these products used in Prince William Sound?)
p. 33 Exxon’s partial release form showing it paid workers $600.50 to waive future health claims arising from cleanup work (once it realized workers were getting sick)
p. 57 Exxon’s clinical data showing a total of 6,722 upper respiratory “infections” were reported during the 1989 cleanup (I obtained these data before court records were sealed.)
p. 450 Exxon’s air quality monitoring data showing workers were overexposed to oil vapors, mists, and particulates as well as a variety of chemical products (I also obtained these data before court records were sealed.)

I have been working to hold Exxon and the federal government accountable for chemical injury to EVOS cleanup workers ever since workers first started calling me in May 1989. 18 years later, I am still receiving phone calls from former workers with health problems. (See enclosed.)

Given the chronic illnesses stemming from the cleanup, the “Valdez Crud” was likely symptomatic of a chemical poisoning epidemic caused by breathing oily particulates generated by the high-pressure wash—not simple “colds and flu” as Exxon medical doctors claimed.

The bottom line is: Exxon’s worker safety program failed to adequately protect cleanup workers and it is likely literally thousands (est. 3,000 from Yale survey, p. 164) are suffering chronic health problems stemming from the EVOS cleanup. I welcome the opportunity to speak with you about remedial action for past workers—and proactive steps to safeguard health of future cleanup workers.

Riki Ott, PhD

Back to top

MARGARET DIANN:

Below are stories Diann has collected and are on her web site www.valdezlink.com. Please visit her site for more information about toxic sprays, health issues, more stories and photos.

Introduction:

I am just an ordinary person in a remote area of Alaska whose relative got sick and I am asking the question why? I have done no scientific research of my own, but have looked at studies done by others. I pass on what I have found as a service to others. It is up to them whether they reach the same conclusions I did. I am not trying to sell anything. It is as simple as that.

I hope that others will not be harmed by this chemical, as many of the tests just to see what is wrong, (when doctors don't know) can be painful, expensive, and many times unnecessary (?)

Now how can you tell if you ARE harmed by this 2-butoxethanol? Well, there are a lot of odd add on symptoms, however, I theorize that the blood will all look alike. Do you have acquired autoimmune hemolytic anemia? That should start right away & last, regardless of the symptoms piled on top of it. That's my theory and it is provable. Track the retic rate and red blood counts over time. Are your red blood cells immature? Have you had trace blood in urine? These should be the 'clues' This is the fatigue that shows up differently than doctors expect. (Not in hemoglobin or hematocrit until a LONG time later) Too many immature red blood cells and other tests are off, like liver, for example.

More information at http://www.valdezlink.com/inipol/pages/symptoms.htm

What happened to the Inipol EAP 22 workers of 1989 and 1990 should not happen to anyone ever again!

"The human toll alone is not worth it" Dr. John Middaugh, Alaska State Dept of Epidemiology
Exxon was making the concentration of poison, 2-butoxyethanol, 10-12 times as strong as the poison in a pesticide...C6H14O2/CH3(CH2)2CH2OCH2CH2OH.

What really went wrong was the amount of time workers were exposed and inadequate protection and the hazards of a high concentration of 2-butoxyethanol in the product! Well, it was their own product, Inipol EAP 22 and Corexit 9500, and they were experimenting on the environment and the people, too. They stood to earn a lot of money if a product was perceived to be a success? And they plan to do it again. You have to help STOP them. You are the only Evidence left!
Sincerely,
Mother Margaret
1-888-853-5333

Letter to ... Detroit News ... from a Worker
Victoria Mcbryde saw "Steve Wilson 7 Action News Reporter - Chief Investigator" on WXYZ.com | Detroit
Mr. Wilson

I am one of the workers who worked on the Valdez Oil Spill. We all have high chemical exposure to butoxyethanol and inipol. Osha and Exxon allowed us to work in very toxic conditions. There are many of us who are dead as matter of fact whole crews are dead. The US Coast Guard and the US Navy, some of them are sick as well but civilian workers suffered the worst. Captain Richard Nagel has been trying to get medical help and compensation for all the workers who are alive. We need your help like never before. Captain Nagel has been in the hospital 52 times due to the chemicals he was exposed to. We have a court date January 10, 2008 but judges keep getting fired, not by us I'm thinking Exxon? and we get no results. Captain Nagel's phone number (352)753-9944. No one will help us and we need help. We can't fight this battle by ourselves and no one is paying attention. Exxon is a big corporation; they have money to throw away. People’s lives are on the line, we are not lab rats!!! When the EPA goes in to do clean ups, they have full gear and rebreathers. We were not given proper gear, nor were we told that inipol was a deadly toxin. They ripped lables off before they gave us these chemicals. The French Defense Team told Osha and Exxon that these chemicals were not safe for humans. We trusted these people basically with our lives and they did nothing to protect us. If they would have consulted us on these chemicals, then we might have had a choice, but we got no word. Hundreds of people have died. If you do not want to get involved in this case, would you please steer me towards some one who will.

Thank you for your time I am Victoria Mcbryde

Back to top

RICHARD D. NAGEL:

EXXON'S COVERUP:

Capt. Richard D. Nagel died July 9, 2009

My name is Capt Richard D. Nagel and I worked the largest oil spill in this hemisphere for three years in a row beginning in 1989, continuing through 1990 and 1991. I was a licensed Master Captain (still am) and also I worked as an advisor. Plus I was on the Prince William Sound Advisory Committee for several years and oversaw arrivals and departures of tankers in Prince William Sound.

What I am about to tell you is of my own free will, it is all true and I assume full responsibility and no one else shall be held accountable in any way whatsoever. This is not fiction, even though at times it might sound like it, I assure you it's all true.

Beginning in 1989 (the year of the spill) I worked half a dozen or so different vessels through out Prince William Sound from Valdez to Cordova to Whittier. Most of what I did in 89 was support, but also I understood that Exxon had begun spraying test sites on Knight Island with Inipol EAP 22 and Corexit to see the effects on oily beaches and to see if indeed spraying chemicals would be more effective than the hot water spraying that was going on everywhere in the summer of 89.

One question that puzzles me is: did Exxon take into consideration the effects on the people that would be working with these chemicals? Did they have a long or even short term health monitoring system in operation to treat exposed workers? The answer is a flat "NO". There was more concern for the wild life habitat than that of humans working with untested chemicals. Please do not take me in the wrong context for I am a very firm believer in all animal and environmental issues, I would not have worked the oil spill for three years in a row if I did not believe that I could make a difference.

In the spring of 1990 I joined several survey teams in Prince William Sound to see the effects of what the winter storms had on the oily beaches. It was my conclusion that the Winter storms did more of a cleanup than all the hot water spraying in the late summer of 1989 did, believe me, I feel that Mother Nature takes care of her own quite well, of course as I have stated before that's my own assessment. In May of 1990 I slipped on some oily rocks and shattered my right knee and was side lined from the oil spill cleanup, but not for long. In June I returned to Prince William Sound with a leg brace and continued working the oil spill on board the Landing Craft Pegasus * * as a pilot. The Pegasus had a very large tank of Inipol 22 on her deck, just how many gallons I don't recall.

But let's back up for a second. During the surveys and shortly thereafter there was a berthing vessel in Bay of Isles, Knight Island called the M/V Columbia. * What's interesting about this is the M/V Columbia had her own fresh water salivation system. This is all fine and dandy, except for one thing, just a stone's throw away from where the M/V Columbia was anchored Exxon was spraying Inipol 22 all over the beaches, which at high tide went into the water and eventually into the water system of the M/V Columbia. Now my question is does a salivation system filter out chemicals? I think not.

At any rate on board the Pegasus as I stated before we had a very large tank of Inipol 22 that we used to supply beach workers: they had back packs full of Inipol 22 that they used to spray beaches, we also supplied pontoon vessels with Inipol 22. Exxon's main objective in 1990 was to spray chemicals all over Prince William Sound and the Kenai Peninsula, and this we all did.

The important thing to note here is that Exxon never trained anyone, well at least not anyone directly associated with the transporting or spraying of Inipol 22. We were told by Exxon that Inipol 22 was as safe as honey on toast which is why once the transferring and spraying started there were no Exxon supervisors to be found anywhere. Now on this web site there are photos of beach workers spraying beaches; no real protection is being used, why? Because none was issued.

This is a 'preview' version
Starting in early 1993 I started getting sick. Seems like every time there was a flu going around I always got it and it stayed with me longer than anyone else. It's been a lot of years since the spill and my health has gotten worse and worse; I once weighed a robust 260 lbs at the beginning of the spill, today a mere 172 lbs and still losing.

First stomach cancer & here are my problems now: I have hypocalcaemia, (& hemolytic anemia), Hepatitis C, seizures, severe pain in my back and right leg, hot flashes, night sweats, severe depression, acute anxiety, loss of balance, blurred vision, no appetite, calcium breakdown, memory loss and severe migraine headaches, weight loss and more.

So why am I writing all this? I want everyone that worked the oil spill or even if you didn't but you know someone who did... to stand up and be heard.

Captain Richard D. Nagel - Update:

Sent December 8, 2007
Chemical Exposure
Administration Headquarters,

My name is Captain Richard D. Nagel and I supplied the Chemical's you and OSHA approved for the Exxon Valdez Oil Spill. Now I am the only person still alive that worked the Vessel Pegasus that carried the Chemical INIPOL and from time to time since I am 100% disabled I wonder how You and OSHA could have approved a Chemical that you had not researched. I wonder how you could approve a Chemical that Exxon said was totally safe even though the French Corporation that Exxon bought the Chemical INIPOL caused cancer in Laboratory Mice. Apparently you and the head of OSHA took payoffs to let Exxon to print their own MSDS report after there was not a anyone except myself that no body would listen to me, even though I was on board of the Regional Citizens Advisory Committee to over look Tanker traffic in and out of the Port of Valdez and was instrumental in requiring double hulled Tankers I also raised concern's about using Chemicals to treat the Beaches of Prince William Sound .We had no hard fact's about INIPOL except the MSDS report from the French Corporation, that mysteriously was never brought up to the general public , Do you think that these people that have died from Chemical Exposure would have put their own selves in harm's way if they were told the truth ???

Hundreds have died because of Chemical Exposure and it's because of your agency and OSHA. Why I am now writing this letter is I believe that the Statutory time limits for the victims of the Chemical exposure that are still alive should be able to hold You, OSHA and Exxon should be held accountable for all these peoples' medical problem's arising from the Chemical Exposure of INIPOL , which now according to OSHA has labeled it a Hazardous Chemical and any exposure should be taken seriously .Now do the right thing and drop the Statutory time limits ( just like the people exposed to Asbestos ) . There will be an informal hearing in January held in Jacksonville , Florida at The Longshore and Harbor Workers Compensation Fund office since I also worked on shore as a Haz-Mat Supervisor. You can contact;
Charles Coffey at 904-357-4788 U.S. Department of Labor

Captain Richard d. Nagel - Update

Dec 9,2007
Look I have worked very closely with Dianne and Riki and now I have another hearing on the 10th of January in Jacksonville,Florida, of course my chances of winning aren't very good, but every little bit of information I get helps. I was the Captain that supplied the Chemicals for Exxon, I knew that INIPOL 22 was not good for anyone and yes I had a copy of the MSDS from the French Corporation that Exxon bought it from, I tried to inform people about INIPOL and that indeed it was a Hazardous Chemical, but nobody listened. I am sorry that you are sick and I'll let the Truth be known in Jan.

Captain Richard D.Nagel
2302 Lake Griffin Road
Lady Lake , Fl. 32159
E-Mail---CaptainSnaggs@aol.com
352-753-9944

Have a Happy Holiday Season,
Captain Richard D. Nagel

Captain Richard D. Nagel passed away in July, 2009. He fought a hard fight, but in the end he was Exxon's Collateral Damage. Our fight isn't over, so Richard help look out for us.

Back to top

PHYLLIS 'DOLLY' LA JOIE:

Phyllis LaJoie had worked for years in Alaska's oil fields, and volunteered to work in Prince William Sound after the spill as a way of paying back. "I felt responsible when the spill happened," she said. A former seal hunter and construction worker, LaJoie was put in the decontamination unit, where she cleaned oily coats, boots and gloves overnight. "Of course, we were steaming all that stuff into our lungs," she said. Later, she cleaned up beaches. "They ran out of equipment like masks, and they told us you could go home, or you could stay and work without it. We ended up with little paper masks."
LaJoie and almost everyone around her had a constant cough and runny nose. She went back to Hawaii, but couldn't seem to shake the illness. "I just kept getting sicker and sicker. Breathing and sinus, stomach, everything." Finally, she was diagnosed with diabetes, along with emphysema, asthma and an enlarged liver. She has a bacterial overgrowth in her lower intestine.
"My goodness," she said, "this thing has ruined my life."

Back to top