MSHA: High Negligence and Reckless Disregard
By Ellen Smith, Editor
Mine Safety and Health News
August 10, 2007

The world is glued to the news for any tidbit on the rescue of six men trapped in an underground coal mine in Utah. As Mine Safety and Health News reporter Kathy Snyder, wrote the morning of Aug. 8: "Right now, ground stability is a problem as the rescue effort progresses.

“In the deep western coal mines, ground pressures can be extreme. Mines have pushed deeper and faced tougher ground control problems as the easier coal has been mined already. Even in normal mining, significant roof falls are not that uncommon. Normally, no one is hurt, but there is always that potential.
The science of rock mechanics is complicated. An action in one part of a large mine can affect ground stability in ways that a non-specialist could not predict, and it can even be tough for specialists. A major collapse has the potential to cause an evolving chain reaction," Snyder said.

And she should know. As an MSHA employee and press officer for 20 plus years, she had to deal with mine rescue operations, including the Wilberg disaster that occurred in Utah 23 years ago.

We know there have been at least five mine collapses since 1990 that triggered seismic readings. Two of them major -- the Azko Salt Mine collapse in upstate New York and the Solvay Trona Mine collapse in Wyoming. At the Azko collapse, we lost a salt mine the size of Manhattan – the largest salt mine in the
U.S. At Solvay, the collapse measured 3,000 by 7,000 feet. Two miners initially survived that, but one died on his way to the surface after being trapped for almost 70 hours.

These were major failures that registered 3.6 and 5.1 on the Richter scale respectively.

So as someone who has covered the health and safety side of this industry for 18 years, and gone to both surface and underground mines, I could not believe what I was seeing on CNN news and reading on MSHA's website: a television crew and accompanying reporters, and family members, being allowed inside the mine to view the rescue operations.

I sat glued to the T.V. watching the CNN newscast -- speechless.

All I could think of was: What was Robert Murray thinking when he allowed these non-rescue personnel into the mine? What was MSHA thinking to allow non-rescue personnel into this mine? I was stunned. CNN reported they were at the mine rescue “face,” a 30 minute, 3-mile ride inside the mine, where rescuers are removing the debris trying to get to these trapped men.

While the reporters were filming, a severe bump occurred physically shaking the mine, crew and machinery – scaring everyone. As the CNN reporter said, “Frankly, this was very scary. I have to tell you that I have been in Afghanistan and Iraq and that was scary... this was very scary in another way.”

Mr. Murray later claimed that the area in which the film crew and families were allowed to tour was "safe." Mr. Murray said he’s in charge, and he has invited the family members to go back into the mine. Mr. Murray also said that MSHA approved of the news reporters and two family members, who have mining
experience, going into the mine.

Assistant Labor Secretary Richard Stickler said of the two family members who went into the mine, "It's been worth a million dollars to have those miners there" so they could explain to the families what is going on. He also said he will let them back in because ONE of them was trained as a rescuer. Regarding CNN being in the mine, Stickler said, 'Pictures are worth a thousand words."

I have a real problem with this.

First, the MSHA family liaison is supposed to be the one explain to the family what is going on in terms of the rescue. This is mandated under the MINER Act.

Second, animated pictures were used during the Quecreek Rescue five years ago. Those animations were able to show what was taking place. The press could have relied on animations in this very unsafe mine rescue operation.

Third, I have been told during my 18 years in this field by MSHA that during a rescue operation, the mine is made "safe-enough" for rescue, but that it certainly is not brought up to the same safety standard as if mining were taking place. There have also been occasions where rescuers were killed during mine rescue operations.

On Thursday morning, Mr. Murray noted the lack of progress because of “seismic activity,” and he stated in the press conference, “we could have more seismic activity.”

My point exactly. Why risk any more lives?

Let's look at this in a different context: we aren't even letting family members on "stable" portions of the Minneapolis bridge that collapsed. We don’t let people in damaged houses if there are aftershocks from earthquakes.

This isn't supposed to be a "feel good" operation. It’s a dangerous and unsafe mine rescue, in which MSHA can take the lead in assuring the families that everything possible is being done to get to their loved ones.

If the news crews want to see what it is like inside of a mine, go to one of the tourist mines or another underground mine in Utah that isn't under a rescue mode of operation. If the news crews want to experience the feeling of "seismic" activity, let them go on Disney's Big Thunder Mountain Railroad.

What did this accomplish, especially if another catastrophic failure or "seismic event" occurred? Would it have been worth “a million dollars” or “a thousand words” to lose more human lives?

I have defended the record of this mine from the first hour of this accident. I have defended the industry and the strides it has made since I began covering mine safety and health issues in 1989. But I will not defend what I see as high negligence and reckless disregard on the part of MSHA and Mr. Murray for allowing these people into the mine during this very serious rescue operation when "seismic activity" continues to occur, and when no one knows why such a catastrophic failure occurred to begin with.