Mine Safety: Canada vs. U.S. (Update) genre: Indie-Script & Little Red Ribbon-Hood & Six Degrees of Speculation

Update:

President Bush signed into law a new bill that improves U.S. mine safety standards, however the law remains far short of the measures in place in Canada that have saved the lives of numerous miners that would have likely been fatalities under the older or current U.S. safety requirements. Read the full story here.

The new law, the first of its kind since 1977, requires miners to have two hours' worth of oxygen on hand while they work, rather than one.

Mine operators also must store additional oxygen supplies underground and must put new communications equipment and devices to track lost miners in mines within three years.

The new safety law includes a requirement that rescue teams be located within an hour of each mine, rather than two hours away.

The law also calls for the government to study whether mine rescue chambers ought to be built into underground coal mines. Such refuges are credited with saving the lives of 72 potash miners in Canada earlier this year.

In reality, this new legislation would likely have had little impact on the mining deaths recorded this year. Without the rescue chambers, which were responsible for the successful rescue of the Canadian miners, it is doubtful that any lives would have been saved under these new measures. The provision to study the rescue chambers is, in my opinion, simply a deferral of necessary and proven life saving improvements that would be the most costly element of meaningful mine safety reform.

__________________________________________________________________
Original Posting:

Two recent mining disasters clearly demonstrate the differences in mine safety standards between the United States and Canada. Further, the two events illuminate the inadequacy of American safety measures. According to Randal McCloy, the lone survivor of the recent Sago mine disaster, in a letter written to the families of the deceased miners, four of the emergency oxygen devices failed to operate. Twelve miners died in that ordeal. In contrast, just this January, a Canadian mine disaster ended with the successful rescue of 70 miners. The following excerpts explain the Canadian safety procedures that prevented the loss of life.

On Sunday morning, at about 3 a.m., a fire broke out more than half a mile below the surface at a potash mine in eastern Saskatchewan owned by Mosaic Co., a US-based firm that extracts the mineral used in fertilizer production.

According to the Canadian press, the miners reported smoke and then went into “refuge stations" for protection until rescuers arrived. These safe rooms are sealed-off areas as large as 15 meters (49 feet) to 45 meters (148 feet) that have an internal supply of oxygen lasting up to 36 hours, along with food, water, chairs and beds.

Throughout the ordeal, rescuers were able to stay in regular communication with two groups of mine workers in separate safe rooms. A company spokesman said they were in phone contact with the miners, as well as family members, and were able to give them reports on the progress of rescuers.

In contrast, the miners in the Sago mine, following mining safey guidelines, found an area where they could take refuge behind a makeshift curtain that they put in place after the explosion. Absent a safe room with a supply of oxygen and with only a one hour supply of oxygen, it isn't difficult to calculate the odds of a successful U.S. mine rescue.

If such safe rooms, caches of oxygen and other basic safety equipment that are commonly used in Canada, Australia and other countries were mandated in the US, it is likely that most of the men killed at the Sago Mine and the Alma Mine would be alive today. However, US mining laws do not mandate these technologies and protections. Therefore, refuge stations, for example, exist only in a handful of the largest mines and have not been widely adopted by mine companies, especially smaller ones.

US miners are only required to wear Self-Contained Self-Rescuers (SCSR)—a breathing apparatus that provides just one hour’s worth of oxygen. Even this technology—which was developed 50 years ago—was sternly opposed by the coal bosses and their representatives in government. It took 13 years after the 1968 explosion that killed 78 miners in Farmington, West Virginia, which led to the passage of the Mine Act the following year, before the adoption of SCSR regulations in 1981.

In his recent testimony before a Senate hearing, Davitt McAteer, the former head of the Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA), admitted that mine safety methods and technology in the US were still in “the dark ages." He noted that the lack of equipment to track the location of miners trapped underground and communicate with them had contributed to the loss of precious hours during the attempted rescue at Sago.

Unfortunately, mine safety gets little attention except for brief periods following highly publicized disasters. Sadly, the mining companies often oppose any significant safety modifications and given their financial clout, they have been able to defeat any wholesale safety reform. In this particular industry, out of sight, out of mind seems an appropriate summation of the plight of the American mine worker.

Daniel DiRito | June 15, 2006 | 2:51 PM
AddThis Social Bookmark Button

Comments

1 On May 3, 2006 at 11:00 AM, johnsnakecusak wrote —

Great Blog on this important subject.
The real enemy to progress in Mine Safety in the U.S. is the same enemy faced by nearly every important protection of the public good.

The important measures to better mine safety are nothing but pawns in the movement of money between the lobbyists, (the mining industry) and the politicians.

As long as we allow the Culture of Corruption be in charge of the lives of our miners, they will die.

My company marketed Mine Safety Software that was nearly put in place by the Dept. of Labor under the Clinton Administration.
At the time of the shift to the Bush Administration it was dropped, because.....

and this is important,, everyone KNEW that under a Bush administration, the mining safety laws would not be enforced as strongly as they had been previously, so there was no incentive to put new mine safety record keeping software into place.

A few years of lax implementation of mine safety laws went by under the Bush Admin. and Voile! we start having rashes of deaths in the industry. This is cause/effect. Less enforcement- More deaths.

The laws need to be made stronger to compare with the laws in Canada, but this administration has not even enforced the laws on the books with as much vigor as they previously were enforced.

Thanks for the blog, this whole area of public safety has to be changed from a political/lobbyist football.

2 On May 3, 2006 at 12:31 PM, Ralph Christensen wrote —

If the current laws were enforced - and enforced properly, there would be less disasters and accidents by far. Mining companies and mine officials and supervisors need to be accountable. Mining supervisors should be certified and strictly required to follow federal mining regulations. That segment of enforcement is still very weak. The statutes need to be upgaded as technology changes and advances - that has not been done. (Example, safety belts instead of harnesses is still in the statute - harnesses are newest technolgy and safer and been in existence for years - but the regulations remains ancient). In Metal/Nonmetal, the confined space rule was shelved years ago. The revision of new electrical standards was commented on so severely by some industry representaqtives - that the agency pulled them from promulgation. Proposed Powered Haulage regulations, which is the largest accident fatality catagory every year, was shelved when the Bush Administration came on board... The current administration in power influences how strictly the laws will be applied, and how severely the companies will be fined. There is also internal politics within MSHA the sways what is going to be enforced and how it will be enforced - or if it will be enforced at all. Everyone has their own opinion on how they should perform. Accountability programs are far-fetched. Much enforcement actions today are nickel/dime issues while the real hazards enforcement is cushioned to not to cause too much fines to the often times very rich mining compnaies. We can do much better in the United States if we can do away with the politics and lobbyist when it comes to safety issues for the protection of each and every worker in this country. In coal, people in charge know what the regulations call for but it takes a little time and money to implement and to stay in compliance. Most coal miners know how to do it right. Either the company puts pressure on them for production - or some coal miners get lax and think that there will be no disaster. The bottom line is - we have to comply and do it right. Every life is more important than any product we mine. That has to be the mind set.

3 On May 3, 2006 at 1:44 PM, Daniel wrote —

John & Ralph,

Thank you for you insights and observations. This really is a topic that gets limited attention and even less action. I grew up around mining and I can still recall the numerous stories of tragedy and disaster.

Sadly, little has been done to assure safety in the event of a disaster. MSHA, while it has some merit, is more about window dressing than progressive safety measures. Politics and lobbying definitely hinder the implementation of new procedures.

I just hope that people will pay a little more attention now rather than waiting for the next mining disaster.

I hope to hear more of your thoughts. Thanks again for your comments.

4 On May 5, 2006 at 9:53 AM, Jake H. DeHerrera wrote —

Politics and pressure from large mining companies have weakened federal regulations and are easily defeated by large company attorneys. MSHA does not have the resources to fight strong mining company attorneys and therefore settle for a lesser fine or simply downgrade or vacate citations/orders. The inspectors, I feel, are doing a good job of enforcement but are not backed by MSHA's top staff. The miner is the ultimate loser.

5 On May 5, 2006 at 10:49 AM, Daniel wrote —

Jake,

Thanks for your insights. It is unfortunate that the leadership is lacking to support the safety measures that are available. I think you are spot on regarding money and politics playing a large part in the eventual outcome of citations and enforcement actions.

I appreciate your comments and I hope to hear more of your thoughts. Thank you.

Daniel

6 On August 15, 2007 at 6:19 PM, Dot wrote —

My husband was killed in a mine explosion in October since the investigation began I have found so many instances that the state and fedral inspectors were not doing their jobs there were 22 violations most of them listed as flagrant this was the first mine in the US to get flagrant violations the mine maps were over a year old and not updated no iinspectors ever took notice I have to wonder if they were doing their jobs my husband might be here today.

7 On July 21, 2011 at 1:40 PM, e-ticaret wrote —

very good site for a long time looking for a site like this just add frequently used sites. In addition, the site design of the landing speed is very good, but if the page is no longer such a little slow on this site you will see me very much thanks to everyone who contributed ...

Thought Theater at Blogged

Post a comment


Trackback Pings

TrackBack URL for this entry


© Copyright 2024

Casting

Read about the Director and Cast

Send us an email

Select a theme:

Critic's Corner

 Subscribe in a reader

Encores

http://DeeperLeft.com

Powered by:
Movable Type 4.2-en

© Copyright 2024

site by Eagle River Partners & Carlson Design