 |
Former governor
planned to prevent more mine disasters in Pa.
Before leaving office, Governor Mark
Schweiker was pushing to update and digitize maps of the state’s coal
mines, and to create a mining safety commission so another incident like
Quecreek will not happen.
By NICOLE MARCELLUS
Advanced Reporting
Fall 2002
HARRISBURG, Pa. – In the twilight of his administration, former governor
Mark Schweiker wanted to help miners achieve unparalleled safety after the
unfortunate mining accident in Quecreek mine in Somerset, Pennsylvania.
Schweiker came up with the plan to establish a mining safety board and
digitize maps of each mine in Pennsylvania. Much to his surprise and
disappointment, he was met with opposition that he did not expect.
Schweiker and former
Department of Environmental Protection Secretary David E. Hess went to
a meeting back in late July and testified on behalf of the miners. Both
wanted nothing but the best and decided on a
Deep
Mining Bureau Safety Commission (DMBSC), which would ensure mining
safety for the miners. Unfortunately, after the eight of the nine miners
testified, they were met with opposition at the October 21, 2002 meeting.
Despite the various testimonies in favor of mining safety, Schweiker and
Hess were surprised that none of the miners wanted mining maps digitized.
 Pennsylvania is fourth on the mining safety list and Schweiker and Hess’
main responsibility and reason for trying to create a mine safety
commission was to keep Pennsylvania’s mining fatality numbers down. So
far, Pennsylvania has managed to do so.
The Governor’s Commission on Abandoned Mine Voids and Mine Safety was
set up promptly after the
 July 2002 incident to investigate and document
the hazards posed by abandoned mine voids. In the case of the Quecreek
Mine, an adjacent mine caused the flooding. Schweiker wants to make sure
another “Quecreek” does not happen in our time.
The procedure for the digitization process is as follows: Once the mines
are surveyed and inspected an accurate map is made along with
recommendations on how to deal with the mine’s hazards. The purpose of the
program is to include everyone in on the coal companies and the land in
Pennsylvania and to make mining a lot safer than in previous years.
Digitization is only one step closer to making maps more accessible and
easier to read for people who do not read maps well. Older maps for mining
are usually in contour form. Contour form maps are maps that have squiggly
lines and markings to know how high or low something is. The closer
together the lines are, the steeper the incline. Most people do not have
access to this kind of knowledge, so the maps will be on the Internet for
public access and safety concerning work and even recreation activities.
The chairman of the commission is
Dr. Raja V.
Ramani, professor emeritus of
mining and
geo-environmental engineering at Penn
State University.
The Quecreek Mining accident serves as a reference point for most
accidents and all of these issues will be addressed:
• The best engineering practices to be used in the design and layout of
modern mines next to abandoned mines;
• Policies and permits for going into mines next to abandoned underground
mines;
• Training of mine workers;
• Procedures of detecting mine voids;
• Rescue and response procedures, including policies to share information
with the families affected by the accident;
• Compliance with inspection requirements for mine operations and approved
plans to excavate.
The general public and the mining industry will also be consulted to make
the work easier.
The initial cost of the program was undisclosed. So far, the work has
taken almost a year to complete. Schweiker was trying his best to make
mine safety a policy and there will be stricter laws and regulations to
prevent another accident like this. But if Schweiker and Hess were only
trying to help why were they met with opposition from all of the miners?
Hess was Schweiker’s other half in this whole project. Hess was appointed
DEP Secretary in May 2001. He is no stranger to the environmental jobs
that need to be done. He has been working in the environmental field for
12 years. Hess worked more on the planning and execution of the Mining
Safety Commission. When he and Schweiker testified and thought that they
had made headway, they were stopped in their tracks.
Blaine Mayhugh was among the 16 miners who testified and he had the most
shocking and most honest of the testimonies. According to Mayhugh, foreman
Randy Fogel warned company officials that the conditions in the mine were
deteriorating. Fogel told the officials two days before the accident that
he was concerned about the unsafe condition. Black Wolf Coal Co. president
David Rebuck also expressed concern. “He was scared that we were mining up
there,” the foreman said. And Mayhugh said that, “…[Fogel] wanted to clear
his conscience.” It is apparent from this testimony that officials had
prior knowledge of the mine’s potential dangers. Fogel and Rebuck still
insist that they knew nothing about the mine being unsafe.
While the miners were trapped below, they said that conditions in the mine
became increasingly wet and the top of the mine was loose, causing
production to slow down. Three-dimensional maps showed that the miners
were surrounded by water on each side. It is also showed that the Saxman
mine, which is right next to the Quecreek mine, was uncharted and
abandoned. The National
Institute of Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) thinks that
Schweiker and Hess’ idea is a smart one because according to one official,
“Mining maps are supposed to be surveyed and mapped every year or when
someone goes in and the structure/integrity of the mine changes.”
NIOSH handles all of the worker safety and health claims that come from
unsatisfied workers and the Quecreek mining incident was never brought to
them. Most of the claims that they deal with are restaurant and code
issues, but their concern is still people. This mining accident was a big
event. Even though the claim was not brought to them why wasn’t anything
done?
For some reason, the miners appeared to have something to hide. Schweiker
said, “I didn’t understand why they didn’t want this. It’s for their
benefit. So I had to find out why.”
The Mining Health and Safety Administration
(MHSA) and the DEP interrogated the miners. None of the miners had a
lawyer presents so of course they were going to say what was in their best
interest before the October 21, 2002 testimonies. At those hearings MSHA
and DEP found out that a company cover-up might be to blame for Mayhugh’s
shattering testimony. October 21 was also when Hess and Schweiker found
out that their battle would still be hard, but not be as hard as they
thought.
Evidence was presented that the maps used for the Quecreek mining project
dated back to 1957. A final map, one that was the last survey done a nd no
more were done after it, of the adjacent Saxman mine was used and it was
dated 1964, the year the Saxman mine closed. This was discovered only one
month after the Quecreek accident. That means that the miners were using a
map that was more than 40 years out of date for the main area they were
digging. They had no idea how much the area changed in that time. The
Saxman mine, a dangerous abandoned mine, overlapped where the miners were
supposed to be.
Can only maps be blamed?
There is a lot more to the problem than the maps, even though coal
industry officials say that it is the only issue. The maps were more than
40 years out of date, but after a survey of the Black Wolf Mining Company,
someone noted that there was no horizontal drill present. The horizontal
drill is a vital piece of equipment that is used to check the mining site
for gases and potential water hazards.
Even after all of this information came to light, eight of the nine miners
still insist that it is the government’s regulatory failings and bad maps.
They also defended the company’s safety record. “Looks like they were
trying to halt investigation,” said an MSHA official. Investigators know
and still insist that these maps should not have been used, because they
found that the miners were hundreds of feet away from the old workings.
Tony Lane, the Socialist Workers candidate in the 2002 gubernatorial race,
is a coal worker himself near Pittsburgh and a member of the
United Mine Workers of
America (UMWA). Lane wanted an investigation done so miners can see
what the government is doing to make things safer for them. He believes
that MSHA has been dragging their feet to investigate problems when mining
disasters to occur.
Mining disasters have been on the rise nationwide and Schweiker did not
want Pennsylvania to have numbers that are a part of that total. Schweiker
also realized that under this mapping project, it will make coal companies
realize that they are even more accountable for the safety of their
workers. In an article in the October 25, 2002 issue of the
Pittsburgh Tribune Review,
UWMA international president Cecil Roberts wrote, “…that several miners
had sounded the alarm to the Black Wolf Coal bosses about the safety
hazards in the mine.” He also said that if the Quecreek miners had been
members of the UWMA they would have had the “contractual right” to refuse
to work. The UWMA would have intervened and made sure that the miners
rights were protected. “Miners know and are trained to know what problems
exist in a mine and should exercise their best interest always,” said a
UWMA spokesperson. “And because they are not in our union we could do
nothing to help their situation.”
It does not look as if any of the miners will press charges against the
company, even though they technically have the right to. The fact that the
government and land surveyors should know what is going on as well as the
coal companies places the blame on both parties, but eight of the nine
trapped miners genuinely believe that it is the fault of the government.
The miners do not realize that Pennsylvania’s mining safety numbers speak
for themselves and with the advent of the digital maps their access to
maps will be more accessible to them and the public. “I want to make sure
that if another accident like this does occur that families will have the
proper information and channels to go through,” Schweiker said.
The Next Opposition
Blame is being cast back and forth and everyone wants to blame someone for
something. The next reason why miners are opposed to the new plan is
because they feel that by adding a technical aspect, the hands that make
the maps will be put out of business. “Jobs need to be protected,” one
miner said. “What about those of us who don’t have computer access or
computer knowledge.” There will be people who are technically adept making
and transferring these maps, but companies, officials, and the public will
be instructed on how to use these maps. The digitization of the maps will
be used for easier access and so that the companies will have constant and
updated records.
This may eliminate jobs, but will make map access more convenient and
actually more readily accessible to people outside of the mining circle
that have questions. “The public should have every right to look at maps
and see where their loved one is going, and if it looks dangerous they
have every right and proof that something wasn’t right,” Hess said.
The digitization process is all done in good faith. Maps are not yet on
the Internet for public use, but soon will be. As for Schweiker and Hess,
they were only looking for the ability to eliminate occupational hazards
and step up their jobs a notch as protectors of the public. The testimony
of Sean Mayhugh was what made the whole digitization process possible.
All stories in this magazine are the intellectual property of the
individual authors
You may
email comments about this story to:
nem127@psu.edu |
|
