OCR Text |
Show Investigation Continues On Alleged Toxic Fumes Injuries At HAFB By GARY R. BLODGETT HILL AFB - An extensive investigation is being conducted con-ducted into the alleged charges that toxic fumes have caused employes of this northern Utah air base serious brain damage and other internal inter-nal injuries. AS A result of the complaints, three Hill Air Force base employestwo of whom have been medically retired-have filed an $8 million damage suit against the U.S. Government and a private company. The three workers have each filed a SI. 5 million suit against the U.S. Government under the Federal Tort Claims Act, and in addition have filed a joint $3.5 million suit against a private company com-pany they allege mislabeled a . toxic chemical sold to the Air Force as being a safe cleaning solvent, according to a base spokesman. THE employes-all ot whom worked in Building 100 at the base's Directorate of Maintenance-said in their suits filed through attorneys that the toxic materials resulted in physical damage to themselves and contend that a fourth employee who worked in the same building had died of cancer. Names of the plaintiffs can not be released by the Air Force because of restrictions in the U.S. Privacy Act. MAJ. GEN. James P. Mullins, commander of the Ogden Air Logistics Command, Com-mand, said Wednesday that a special office is being opened at Hill AFB to investigate the problem and have someone available to answer questions. He said the office will be headed by Col. Harry Russell, base environmental engineer, and will be located in Room 103D, Bay E of Building 100 at the base. COL. Russell's office will be open for inquiries telephone or mail weekdays from 7 a.m. until 5:30 p.m. with direct response re-sponse to the initiator, the AFLC commander noted. Meanwhile, tort claims may be filed against the government govern-ment asking for compensation involving civil loss, without having to prove criminal neglect, it was explained. THE plaintiffs are being represented by a prominent Salt Lake Attorney, Phil Hansen, Han-sen, who said the claims are being filed primarily on the basis of mislabeling of toxic' chemicals allegedly used by the plaintiffs. "Other employes may also have come into contact with the toxic chemicals and should step forward,' said Mr. Hansen. Han-sen. "They should know of their legal rights in cases like this." THE CIVIL suit alleging mislabeling of chemicals is filed against General Chemicals and Packaging, Corporation of Los Angeles, formerly known as BWI Plastics Plas-tics and Chemical Corporation. |