Local miners and their families believe they were unknowingly exposed to deadly chemicals while working at the Squaw Creek Mine three decades ago. Now, they say the response from Alcoa, which owned the mine and dumped the chemicals, has not been fast nor thorough enough.

On Feb. 20, several miners and their families signed up to be a part of a class-action lawsuit brought by one former miner against Alcoa. The suit alleges that the more than 65 million gallons of toxic waste -- called "green goo" by the miners -- that was buried at the mine has caused various health concerns over the years.

Bil Musgrave, the miner who filed the lawsuit, had a rare form of bile-duct cancer in 2000. Musgrave was originally told the cancer was terminal, but a liver transplant and extensive chemotherapy helped him survive. He believes his illness was caused by exposure to toxic material at Squaw Creek.

Other miners and their families who attended the Feb. 20 meeting contended that they, too, had suffered from various forms of cancer and breathing ailments since being exposed to chromium hydroxide sludge at the mine north of Boonville between 1965 and 1979.

"I'd like to see me get my health back, for everyone who is affected to get their health back," said Musgrave. "And I'd like to have assurances that the past and future health of miners and management personnel who worked at Squaw Creek aren't impacted in a negative way."

Miners also contend that a health screening program set up by Alcoa through the University of Cincinnati Center for Occupational Health has not been helpful. Miners say they believe the doctors were not thorough enough in the exams, and that the results of the health screenings -- mostly conducted in the summer of 2005 -- have not yet been made available.

Alcoa Warrick Operations spokesperson Sally Rideout-Lambert said that the company has gone above and beyond requirements to see that the miners' health care concerns have been addressed.

"These health assessments are not required to be done, they are something we offered to the mine workers to address their questions," said Lambert. "It was a two-fold issue: one, to address individual questions and two, so that if there was something there that we needed to know, the health screenings would show that."

At the meeting, some miners complained that they had been unable to get their test results even after making many inquiries. Others worried that the miners' mortality rate wouldn't be included in final health statistics, and still others wanted to know if the health screening results could somehow be used against a lawsuit.

"The UMWA Local 1189 leadership will be meeting in the future with Alcoa to address those health concerns," said Musgrave.

Alcoa owned the Squaw Creek Mine through a subsidiary known as Alcoa Fuels, Inc. Company officials have admitted that waste was dumped at the mine, though they have contended it was done by the rules.

"The disposal was done within the rules and regulations of the time," said Lambert. "It was approved by the Indiana State Board of Health. Those materials were not regulated in the same way they are regulated today."

Alcoa has also requested that the case be moved from state to federal court. After the venue is determined, a judge will decide whether to allow the case to proceed as a class-action.

There are at least 12 identified waste disposal sites in the north field of the Squaw Creek Mine. How much material was actually dumped at the mine is unclear. The union estimates that approximately 71 million cubic feet of chromium sludge and 69 million gallons of coal tar pitch were dumped. Lambert says those figures are estimates, generally based on how much waste could have been produced rather than by actual counts.

Mining ended in the north field in 1987, and the mine stopped all production in 1998. But a 2004 report from the Indiana Department of Environmental Management indicates that the waste material has not moved or become a health hazard.

Alcoa still owns the mine property, but has no plans to resume mining operations there. Musgrave says he would like to see all of the material removed and put into a hazardous waste landfill.

Lambert, however, says the company regularly monitors ground water and surface water at the site.

"Parts of the mine lands up there have won awards for reclamation," said Lambert. "I think that is a demonstration of our commitment to managing that land well. And that is the same commitment we will have as long as that land is owned by us."

Musgrave's lawsuit alleges that Alcoa was negligent because it failed to warn miners of potential health effects of exposure to the waste material, and failed to provide a safe work environment.

The suit does not seek specific monetary damages, but does seek compensation for "past and prospective damages including, but not limited to, lifetime health care and medication." The suit also seeks punitive damages against Alcoa for "Willful and reckless misconduct," payment of attorneys' fees and an order to allow the case to proceed as a class action.