News

A federal court awarded $36.7 million in 1988 to eight Apollo-area residents who sued Atlantic Richfield Co. and Babcock & Wilcox alleging radioactive releases from their plants caused various cancers.

Residents claim that the radioactive pollution came from the uranium fuel processing plant in Apollo, originally owned by Nuclear Materials and Equipment Corp. (NUMEC), and operated from 1957 to 1986 by NUMEC and its successors, Atlantic Richfield and Babcock & Wilcox.

But U.S. District Judge Donetta Ambrose set aside the verdict and granted a new trial to the two companies, saying there were errors in the first trial in the admission of evidence.

The trial served as a landmark victory for local residents and the law firm representing the plaintiffs, Baron & Budd of Dallas, Texas.

Fred Baron, ranked as one of the country's top plaintiff lawyers in Forbes magazine in May 2001, was contacted by Leechburg resident and environmental activist Patty Ameno.

Ameno found Baron's firm by way of a phone conversation with Bill Silkwood, the father of the late Karen Silkwood, a union activist at the Kerr-McGee plant in Oklahoma who died in a mysterious car crash in 1974.

Baron took the case on a contingency basis in 1994.

"Patty Ameno was very instrumental in assuring that this case would be handled by a law firm that had the capability of litigating a massive complex case," Baron said. "She was an impetus to the hiring of our firm and provided a great deal of guidance and information. This had been a long difficult case.

"I feel like a dog that grabbed onto to someone's pants leg," he said. "We're not going to let go until we find justice for our clients."

A new trial was scheduled to begin in January but was delayed. A settlement may be hammered out. But it won't be for just eight plaintiffs.

That list has grown to about 400. The original list of plaintiffs was more than 200 but only eight cases were taken to trial as a test case to see if their claims would hold up in court.

Of the expanded list, 300 claims are for death and illnesses - primarily cancer - caused by nuclear operations in Apollo and 100 claims for property damage, according to Baron.

This is not a class-action suit. Each case is handled individually because every case is different, Baron said.

"In class-action suits, plaintiffs can be left in the dust because they're grouped together and treated as one uniform case, and we know each individual has a different problem.

"The most important part of this lawsuit, from a precedent standpoint, is the fact that the jury found that our clients' injuries and diseases were indeed caused by exposure to radioactive materials coming from the facilities," Baron said. "It is very unusual for a case like this to be tried successfully from the plaintiffs' point of view. Even though the judge granted a new trial, the first jury's findings are important."

The defendant companies disagree.

"We have great compassion for all individuals who suffer from cancer and other serious diseases. However, we have never believed that the operations of the Apollo facility had any connection to the claims of the plaintiffs," said officials from BWX Technologies (formerly Babcock & Wilcox) in a statement in 1999.

Only about a dozen similar cases have made it to trial, according to Baron.

The law firm reviewed about 3 million pages of material for the trial. "That is unprecedented in my experience but, with all the agencies involved and the massive record-keeping requirements, it was not unexpected," Baron said.

The case documented high exposures to radiation from the Apollo plant.

For example: If someone was walking by the Apollo plant on Feb. 14, 1963, when a uranium fire erupted inside, dispersing seven pounds of radioactive dust into the air, the radiation they received would have been equivalent to 20,000 chest X-rays, according to nuclear researcher Bernd Franke, who testified on behalf of the plaintiffs.

"But the difficulty is proving the quantum of exposure that each individual sustained or had," Baron said.

The documentation for the case, provided by activists and research by the law firm, was instrumental for setting the stage for the trial, Baron said.

All of the investigations by the FBI, CIA and other agencies that were looking for the missing uranium they suspected of being diverted from the former NUMEC plants to Israel contributed to the case.

"The jury was aware that practices of the companies were less than optimal and were construed as uncaring," Baron said, "There was a whole pattern and practice of inappropriate conduct at that site."

No one was able to prove that uranium from NUMEC was given to Israel.

A new trial or settlement?

Judge Ambrose overturned the $36.7 million award to plaintiffs on appeal and ordered a new trial.

In granting a new trial, Ambrose in 2000 cited errors in the first trial in admitting evidence.

She also ruled that testimony from Mary Ann and Donald Hall should not have been permitted. The couple recounted their mental anguish when their 24-year-old daughter, Tina, died of leukemia on Christmas Day in 1992.

To complicate matters, Babcock & Wilcox filed for bankruptcy in February 2000 in New Orleans. The company blamed its financial problems in part on payments for asbestos-related illness claims filed by its workers.

Ambrose's ruling said a new trial would be based on the sole issue of whether violations of federal standards caused high emissions which caused cancers, including leukemia and breast cancer.

One of the technical issues for a new trial is the disagreement over cancer studies.

Baron said his firm and the defendants interpret the health studies differently. Baron's team of experts have found a higher rate of cancer within a one-mile radius of Apollo.

ARCO and Babcock & Wilcox attorneys argue there aren't increased cancer cases in the Apollo area.

• Most Read
• Most E-mailed
• Latest News