(c) 2010-2023 Jon L Gelman, All Rights Reserved.
Showing posts sorted by relevance for query oil. Sort by date Show all posts
Showing posts sorted by relevance for query oil. Sort by date Show all posts

Thursday, September 16, 2010

Victory for an Aircrew for Breathing Contaminated Aircraft Air

A major global legal precedent has been established with an Australian flight attendant winning damages for injury from exposure to aircraft air contaminated by oil fumes and smoke.

The problem of aircraft cabin air becoming contaminated by synthetic jet engine oils containing organophosphates (such as Tricresyl Phosphate, TCP) and a wide range of chemicals has been ongoing sin

The aviation industry has known about the potential for exposure to oil fumes in the cabin and flight deck during normal commercial flights for more than 50 years. Instead of mandating air contaminant filters and monitors, the industry denies the problem and allows aircrew and passengers to breathe oil fumes that contaminate the aircraft air supply since the 1950s.

On  September 3, 2010 a former Australian flight attendant became the first person in the world to win a civil case resulting from breathing oil smoke and fumes in the aircraft cabin on a BAe 146 in Australia in 1992.

The legal precedent Joanne Turner v. Eastwest Airlines was made in the High Court of Australia. Ms Turner a former flight attendant with Australia’s Ansett and Eastwest Airlines, was exposed to smoke and fumes resulting from a failed oil seal on a BAe 146 flight between Sydney and Brisbane on 4 March 1992, while 5 months pregnant.

The court found that Ms Turner was exposed to oil fumes and smoke generated from engine oil that had leaked into a component of the aircraft air supply system called the Auxiliary Power Unit (APU -engine).

The failure of the APU oil seal was found to be foreseeable, as was the risk that smoke from the leaking oil would enter the aircraft cabin.

Cabin smells from oil were noted to be an ongoing problem acknowledged by the defendant, with numerous complaints about the cabin air prior to the incident on 4 March 1992, including an entry 10 days prior to the incident stating: ‘APU AIR NOT FIT FOR HUMAN CONSUMPTION.’

Ms Turner was found to have been exposed to Mobil Jet Oil II on 4 March 1992 with the court finding that ‘pyrolysed effects of Mobil Jet Oil II are harmful to the lungs.’ As such Ms Turner suffered from a pathological condition to the lungs caused by exposure to the smoke and that condition has continued for more than eighteen years and is expected to be life-long. As such Ms Turner was awarded $138,757 Australian dollars.

The defendant appealed the decision to the New South Wales Court of Appeal and then the High Court of Australia, however subsequently lost both appeals on 1 April 2010 and 3 September 2010 respectively.

It is well documented that synthetic jet engine oil leaks into aircraft cabin air (as a feature of using air supplied through the engines) and that such exposures are a flight safety and health concern, for both aircrew and passengers. Contaminated air exposures are now known to be a normal regular occurrence, an expected occurrence and regrettably an accepted occurrence within the aviation industry.

This court verdict supports the long held Global Cabinet Air Quality Executive (GCAQE) view that industry actions currently being undertaken to address the issue of exposure to aircraft bleed air are inadequate. The court verdict clearly demonstrates that the call by the industry for further research to determine what chemicals are present when engine oil leaks and how often this occurs is unwarranted. There is already enough evidence available to satisfy the duty of care requirements.

The benchmark has now been set supporting that exposure to oil leaking into the aircraft air supply is harmful to people, both aircrew and passengers.

The supply air for the cabin and flight deck is taken from either the engine or APU and is not filtered for engine oil fumes before people breathe it. Commercial aircraft are not equipped with detection equipment to alert the crew that the air is contaminated, creating an unacceptable flight safety and public health issue. The aviation industry inaction ignores the fact that aircrew and passengers are owed a duty of care and there is, without doubt, enough evidence to apply the precautionary principle and prevent oil contaminating the air supply with proactive maintenance and bleed air cleaners and monitors.

The GCAQE calls for all future aircraft to be designed using bleed free technology such as that used by the Boeing 787, for all current aircraft to be fitted with suitable filters and detection systems, and for airlines to service their fleets with less toxic oils. This court verdict supports that 60 years of unfiltered bleed air is no longer acceptable.
For over 3 decades the Law Offices of Jon L. Gelman 1.973.696.7900 have been representing injured workers and their families who have suffered occupational illnesses. Author NJ Workers Compensation Law (West).

Saturday, July 27, 2013

Corporate Liability: Halliburton Pleads to Destroying Evidence in Gulf Pil Spill 2010

The US Department of Justice has announced that Halliburton Corporate Services has pleaded guilty to destroying evidence arising out of the 2010 Deepwater Horizon oil spill that occurred in the US Gulf of Mexico.

"Halliburton Energy Services Inc. has agreed to plead guilty to destroying evidence in connection with the Deepwater Horizon disaster, the Department of Justice announced today. A criminal information charging Halliburton with one count of destruction of evidence was filed today in U.S. District Court in the Eastern District of Louisiana.

"Halliburton has signed a cooperation and guilty plea agreement with the government in which Halliburton has agreed to plead guilty and admit its criminal conduct. As part of the plea agreement, Halliburton has further agreed, subject to the court’s approval, to pay the maximum-available statutory fine, to be subject to three years of probation and to continue its cooperation in the government’s ongoing criminal investigation. Separately, Halliburton made a voluntary contribution of $55 million to the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation that was not conditioned on the court’s acceptance of its plea agreement.

Thursday, November 20, 2014

Exxon Mobil denies making spill papers secret

Today's post was shared by Take Justice Back and comes from

FILE - In this Monday, April 1, 2013 file photo, oil covers the ground around a slide in Mayflower, Ark., days after a pipeline ruptured and spewed oil over lawns and roadways. The Pegasus pipeline ruptured last March in Mayflower, spilling thousands of gallons of oil into the area. Exxon Mobil is denying claims from plaintiffs in an oil spill lawsuit that it made all information about the maintenance and repair of an oil pipeline secret. The oil giant has blamed the rupture on manufacturing defects. (AP Photo/Jeannie Nuss, File)
n this Monday, April 1, 2013 file photo, oil covers the ground around a slide in Mayflower, Ark., days after a pipeline ruptured and spewed oil over lawns and roadways. The Pegasus pipeline ruptured last March in Mayflower, spilling thousands of gallons of oil into the area. Exxon Mobil is denying claims from plaintiffs in an oil spill lawsuit that it made all information about the maintenance and repair of an oil pipeline secret. The oil giant has blamed the rupture on manufacturing defects. (AP Photo/Jeannie Nuss, File)

LITTLE ROCK, Ark. (AP) - Exxon Mobil has denied claims from plaintiffs in an oil spill lawsuit that it made all evidence about the maintenance and repair of the Pegasus pipeline in Mayflower secret.
Last month, the plaintiffs in the class-action suit said Exxon Mobil declared 872,000 pages of documents about the pipeline confidential. They asked a federal judge to order the company to prove why that information needed to kept from the public, arguing that the company was seeking “unprecedented judicial censorship of a dangerous and hazardous situation.”
The Pegasus pipeline ruptured last March in Mayflower, spilling thousands of gallons of oil into the area. The oil giant has blamed the rupture on manufacturing defects.
Exxon Mobil filed a response in court Thursday, saying it was untrue that it marked every single page given to plaintiffs as confidential, the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette ( ) reported.
The company has...
[Click here to see the rest of this post]

Friday, September 5, 2014

BP May Be Fined Up to $18 Billion for Spill in Gulf

Judicial review and enforcement of the Clean Water Act has resulted in major fines against BP flowing from the Gulf Oil Spill. Today's post is shared from

In the four years since the blowout on the Deepwater Horizon oil rig killed 11 workers and sent millions of barrels of oil gushing into the Gulf of Mexico, BP has spent more than $28 billion on damage claims and cleanup costs, pleaded guilty to criminal charges and emerged a shrunken giant.

But through it all, the company has maintained that it was not chiefly responsible for the accident, and that its contractors in the operation, Halliburton and Transocean, should shoulder as much, if not more, of the blame.

On Thursday, a federal judge here for the first time bluntly rejected those arguments, finding that BP was indeed the primary culprit and that only it had acted with “conscious disregard of known risks.” He added that BP’s “conduct was reckless.”

By finding that BP was, in legal parlance, grossly negligent in the disaster, and not merely negligent, United States District Court Judge Carl J. Barbier opened the possibility of $18 billion in new civil penalties for BP, nearly quadruple the maximum Clean Water Act penalty for simple negligence and far more than the $3.5 billion the company has set aside.The ruling stands as a milestone in environmental law given that this was the biggest offshore oil spill in American history, legal experts said, and serves as a warning for the oil companies that continue to drill in the deep waters of the Gulf of Mexico, where high pressures and temperatures in the wells test the most...

[Click here to see the rest of this post]

Friday, June 25, 2010

How to File a Gulf of Mexico Incident Claim

The Deepwater Horizon Unified Command has established the following process for submission of Deepwater Horizon incident claims.

BP has established an Online Claim Form as well as a Claims Line for oil spill-related claims.  
Online Claim forms are available in three languages:
The toll-free number for the claims line is 1-800-440-0858. The line is available 24 hours a day, 7 days a week.
  • Personnel at the Claims Line will provide each caller with information on how to submit a claim.
  • Each claim will be assigned to an adjuster and the claim will promptly be investigated and evaluated.
  • Larger and more complex claims may require additional investigation and documentation prior to evaluation and resolution.
  • BP will pay resolved claims promptly. 
BP takes responsibility for responding to the Deepwater Horizon oil spill. We will clean it up. BP has established a robust process to manage claims resulting from the Deepwater Horizon Incident.
BP will pay all necessary and appropriate clean-up costs.
BP is committed to pay legitimate and objectively verifiable claims for other loss and damage caused by the spill – this may include claims for assessment, mitigation and clean up of spilled oil, real and property damage caused by the oil, personal injury caused by the spill, commercial losses, including lost of earnings, profit and other losses as contemplated by applicable laws and regulations.
Additionally, BP has established several claims offices along the Gulf Coast. The office hours are from 8 a.m. to 7 p.m. each day. BP has posted a video about the claim center on their Web site: click here to watch the video.
For more detailed information regarding BP claims process, click here
Federal disaster assistance information: 
Individuals and businesses looking for information on how to obtain Federal assistance for dealing with the impacts of the current oil spill should visit Before applying for Federal assistance, individuals should first make a claim with the responsible parties. See information on this page above for that process. includes information on the types of Federal assistance that individuals and businesses can apply for such as nutrition programs, business disaster loans, temporary assistance for needy families and unemployment insurance.
Click on the oil spill box at the top of the homepage to take you to a page with oil spill specific information. Individuals seeking oil spill related assistance should not use the registration function at this site, but should follow the instructions laid out on the oil spill specific page instead.
Claims Office Locations
New Orleans, La.
4375 Michoud Blvd.
New Orleans, LA 70129

Friday, January 3, 2014

North Dakota blast prompts review of oil train safety

A federal safety alert Thursday warned that crude oil flowing out of new fields in North Dakota may be more flammable than expected, a caution that comes several days after a train carrying about 3.5 million gallons of the same oil crashed in the state and set off a massive explosion.
The accident on the BNSF Railway, the fourth such explosion in North America involving crude oil trains, has fed mounting concerns over public safety as the rail industry sharply increases the use of rail to transport surging crude production in North Dakota, Texas and Colorado.
Following the latest derailment and crash, which forced the evacuation of more than 1,000 residents from the town of Casselton, the National Transportation Safety Board has launched the nation's first broad examination of the safety of moving petroleum by rail.
Trains carrying oil have multiplied across the country as environmental concerns and political maneuvering have delayed approval of a major new pipeline to transport oil to Gulf Coast refineries. The issue may be most crucial for cities in the West, which were often founded and developed by railroads so that main lines go directly through the centers of today's urban areas.
Crude oil shipments by rail have shot up 25-fold in the last several years as producers rush oil from newly developing shale fields to market. California alone has seen a fourfold increase over the last year, with current shipments of about 200,000 barrels a month.
Refinery operators this...
[Click here to see the rest of this post]

Monday, December 29, 2014

In North Dakota, a Tale of Oil, Corruption and Death

Today's post is shared from
Tex G. Hall, the three-term tribal chairman on this remote, once impoverished reservation, was the very picture of confidence as he strode to the lectern at his third Annual Bakken Oil and Gas Expo and gazed out over a stuffed, backlit mountain lion.
Tall and imposing beneath his black cowboy hat, he faced an audience of political and industry leaders lured from far and wide to the “Texpo,” as some here called it. It was late April at the 4 Bears Casino, and the outsiders endorsed his strong advocacy for oil development and the way he framed it as mutually beneficial for the industry and the reservation: “sovereignty by the barrel.”
“M.H.A. Nation is No. 1 for tribal oil produced on American soil in the United States right now currently today,” Mr. Hall proudly declared, referring to the Mandan, Hidatsa and Arikara Nation.
But, in a hall decorated with rigs and tepees, a dice throw from the slot machines, Mr. Hall’s self-assurance belied the fact that his grip on power was slipping. After six years of dizzyingly rapid oil development, anxiety about the environmental and social costs of the boom, as well as about tribal mismanagement and oil-related corruption, had burst to the surface.
By that point, there were two murder cases — one person dead in Spokane, Wash., the other missing but presumed dead in North Dakota — tied to oil business on the reservation. And Mr. Hall, a...
[Click here to see the rest of this post]