|
|
Post by John on Mar 13, 2008 11:40:39 GMT -5
Daz sent me the link to this report, thanks Daz.KENNEDY RELEASES NEW REPORT ON CRANDALL CANYON MINE DISASTER March 6, 2008 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE WASHINGTON, DC--Today, Senator Edward M. Kennedy, Chairman of the United States Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions (HELP) Committee, released an investigative report entitled “Report on the August 6, 2007 Disaster At Crandall Canyon Mine.” The report discusses the findings of Chairman Kennedy's investigation into the events leading up to the mine collapse. Chairman Kennedy said, “The Committee’s investigation has revealed that the owner of Crandall Canyon mine, Murray Energy, disregarded dangerous conditions at the mine, failed to tell federal regulators about these dangers, conducted unauthorized mining and -- as a result -- exposed its miners to serious risks. MSHA also unconscionably failed to protect miners by hastily rubber-stamping the plan. This is a clear case of callous disregard for the law and for safety standards, and hardworking miners lost their lives. This deserves a full criminal investigation by the Department of Justice. The report’s findings greatly underscore the urgent need for mine safety reform. I am committed to working on a bill that would prevent other such disasters from happening.” The full text of the report and exhibits are available at www.kennedy.senate.gov. Key findings are included below. * Murray Energy and its technical consultant, Agapito Associates, failed to make sufficiently conservative engineering assumptions and ignored the history of the mine’s instability. Had they been cautious and conservative, the company may have scaled down the plan, or perhaps done away with it entirely. Instead, they rapidly pushed it ahead. * MSHA missed significant flaws in Agapito’s analysis, dismissed critical findings by MSHA’s own engineer, and did not submit the plans – which proposed one of the most hazardous mining operations ever attempted – for review by MSHA’s expert technical staff. Had they been exacting and cautious in their review, MSHA may have significantly modified or refused to approve the plans. Instead, MSHA approved the plans with minor changes. * Murray Energy ignored substantial evidence of instability during mining operations, continuing to extract coal despite mounting evidence of danger in the North Barrier. The company could have taken the time to notify MSHA of these conditions, stop mining, and reassess the risks. Instead, they continued mining until stopped by a powerful, nearly tragic, bounce. * MSHA also ignored red flags during mining that should have prompted an exacting and cautious review of mining operations – the most obvious being the March bounce that closed the North barrier. Had they thoroughly investigated the March bounce, closely monitored conditions thereafter, and rigorously reviewed the company’s revised plan for the South barrier, MSHA may have required greater safety precautions or prohibited mining in the South entirely. Instead, MSHA allowed the company to continue. * Murray Energy encountered – and ignored – instability in the South Barrier Where the Accident Occurred. Again, they did not take the time to report to MSHA and reassess, but continued mining, retreating under deeper cover. * Murray Energy may have been conducting unauthorized mining right before the mine collapse. The evidence uncovered by the investigation reflects that Murray Energy was illegally mining the remnant barrier pillar just before the August accident. * MSHA entered into an illegal agreement with Murray Energy. The evidence strongly suggests that MSHA entered into an informal agreement with a Murray Energy official agreeing that MSHA would relax the reporting requirements for seismic events occurring at Murray Energy mines. ###
|
|
|
|
Post by John on Mar 13, 2008 11:43:53 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by John on Mar 18, 2008 16:13:25 GMT -5
I finally finished reading the report yesterday, read it over a couple of days to be able to digest all the info.
Looks like Mr Murray could well end up behind bars for a while, plus his company and his family could well be paying out in the billions in compensation.
Looks like there could well be some very rich Utah Lawyers by the time this has ended.
I'd also bet Murray Energy might lose it's mining leases elswhere.
|
|
|
|
Post by linbylad on Apr 14, 2008 16:10:59 GMT -5
MSHA have fined the Tower Mine, in Utah and owned by Murray Energy, 420 grand for safety violations. The mine has shut down although it doesn't say if it is permanent.
Home > Industry News > Utah Sudden Shut Down Over Safety Fears
Utah Sudden Shut Down Over Safety Fears
04 April 2008 16:20
A Utah coal mine has shut down with no prior warning, a week after its operator was hit with a huge fine following safety assessments.
The Tower mine, the deepest coal mine in the US, was shut due to "unexpected and unusual stress conditions", UtahAmerican Energy told Associated Press.
Last month the mine was charged US$420,000 in fines for "flagrant" safety violations involving explosive hazards by the federal Mine Safety and Health Administration.
The administration issued another set of fines later on in March for violations at the West Ridge coal mine, also owned by Utah American Energy, a subsidiary of Ohio-based Murray Energy.
In August last year, nine people died in two cave-ins at Crandall Canyon mine, also in Utah's coal district.
By Ozge Ibrahim[/i]
Also the Vice President of the company that runs the Crandall Canyon Mine said he has applied for a permit to mine in a different section of the mine but Bob Murray says he is going to seal it off.
Linby Lad.
|
|
|
|
Post by John on Apr 14, 2008 20:41:43 GMT -5
About time serious fines are handed out! It's also about time the Managers and owners started to get fined too.!
|
|
|
|
Post by John on Jul 25, 2008 8:16:15 GMT -5
Summary and conclusions from MSHA, although one fine was heavy, where's the indictment against the owner and his company??? I'd have thought Mr Murray and associates would have been charged. www.msha.gov [skip navigational links]Search MSHA Advanced Options | A to Z | Help Find It! in DOL | Compliance Assistance | En Español Printer Friendly Version Crandall Canyon Accident Investigation Summary and Conclusions On August 6, 2007, six miners were killed in a catastrophic coal outburst when roof-supporting pillars failed and violently ejected coal over a half-mile area. Ten days later, two mine employees and an MSHA inspector perished in a coal outburst during rescue efforts. * The August 6 catastrophic accident was the result of an inadequate mine design. o Flawed engineering analysis by Agapito Associates Inc. (AAI), resulted in an inadequate mine design, with unsafe pillar dimensions, which contributed to the accident. o AAI's inadequate engineering management review also contributed to the accident. o The mine operator, Genwal Resources Inc. (GRI), submitted a mining plan based on the AAI analysis. o GRI failed to revise its mining plan following coal bursts in March and as late as August 3, but rather continued to mine coal in areas with unsafe conditions. o GRI's unauthorized mining practices increased geological stress levels in the vicinity of working coal miners. o MSHA found no evidence that a naturally occurring earthquake caused the collapse on August 6. * The August 16 coal outburst accident. o Any hope of accessing the trapped miners required rescue personnel to remove coal debris that blocked them from the miners. o The mine operator withheld information about a recent coal burst which deprived MSHA of a complete picture of underground conditions. o The unexpected conditions in the mine caused a robust roof control system to fail during the attempt. Genwal Resources Inc. Actions * GRI misled MSHA about the extent of the March 10 coal burst and failed to immediately inform MSHA about the March 7 and August 3 bursts. * GRI submitted an inadequate roof control plan based on faulty AAI engineering analyses to MSHA. * GRI failed to adequately revise its roof control plan to provide better support after the March 7, March 10, and August 3 bursts and continued to expose miners to unsafe conditions. * GRI violated the approved roof control plan when coal was mined in a prohibited area. Agapito Associates Inc. Actions * AAI failed to recommend safe mining methods and pillar/barrier dimensions Fines * MSHA levies $1,636,664 in fines against GRI * MSHA levies $220,000 against AAI Changes to MSHA Policies and Procedures Completed: * Letter to Mine Operators with Requirements for Roof Control Plan Submittals-June 3, 2008 * Memoranda to District Managers o Approval of Complex and/or Non-typical Roof Control Plans and Amendments-June 5, 2008 o Corrective Measures for Inspection and Investigation Activities Related to Roof Control Plans and Related Miner Training - June 3, 2008 o Documentation of Roof Control Plan Reviews-June 6, 2008 * Procedure Instruction Letter o Technical Support Assistance in Reviewing Roof Control Plans-Effective May 25, 2008 * Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the Bureau of Land Management - April 8, 2008 * All Retreat Mining Plans with depths over 1,500 feet in District 9 reexamined - August 2007 * 17 ground control inspections by Technical Support of mines with bump-prone conditions - August 2007 - February 2008 * Developed and posted a list of Best Practices addressing "Ground Control for Deep Cover Coal Mines." - February 2008 # Program Information Bulletin o Precautions for the Use of the Analysis of Retreat Mining Pillar Stability (ARMPS) Computer Program - April 7, 2008 Pending Actions: * Future Program Information Bulletins o Guidelines for Use of Numerical Modeling, Type of Information to be Provided in Roof Control Plan Submittals o Guidelines for Use of LaModel Computer Modeling Program * Periodic Mine Emergency Response Development (MERD) Exercise and Training * Legal positions regarding 103 (j) and (k); authority of Primary Communicator and Family Liaison * Separate assigned persons as Person in Charge, Primary Communicator and Family Liaison * ERP reviews and updates for non-English speaking families * Review of MSHA emergency response equipment and deployment procedures * Wireless communications and tracking guidance.
|
|
|
|
Post by John on Jul 25, 2008 13:16:48 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by dazbt on Aug 15, 2008 5:37:58 GMT -5
A bit of a slew on earlier claims; “This independent review team determined that the company did in fact alert MSHA to a significant bounce event five months prior to the collapse. It was MSHA's failing, they said, to appropriately investigate and assess that event.” Worth a read, I can’t see these claims of the report of earlier bumps to the MSHA being made without proof, and it seemed to me the main defense of MSHAs alleged shortcomings. www.sltrib.com/opinion/ci_10207382 |
|
|
|
Post by John on Aug 15, 2008 7:38:39 GMT -5
From what I read last year Daz, there were three agencies involved, BLM, state of Utah and MSHA. As the reserves were under federal park land the BLM was informed first, state second and MSHA didn't know until after the accident.
Since that accident, the state of Utah has taken total control of mining law enforcement stating the BLM and MSHA are a joke!! They do have that right too!
Before the federal mines act came into play, all states administered there own mining law. Some were pretty lax, so the feds passed the miner act in the 70's and took over policing mines nation wide. The states were only too pleased to let them do it, saved them money!!!
BUT, after the last few years, it's shown that favours can be called in at the federal level!!
I wouldn't be surprised if more states take over inspections and fining violators, good source of state revenue!!!!
I'd still be interested how US mines could operate under the strict rules we had!!! I know we broke them, but on the whole, we applied common sense to our M&Q Act.
|
|
|
|
Post by dazbt on Aug 24, 2008 12:34:32 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by John on Aug 24, 2008 13:02:58 GMT -5
I can see more and more mining states taking over 100% the Inspections and enforcements of their mining industries. It's only by consent that MSHA has enforcement duties. |
|
|
|
Post by dazbt on Aug 28, 2008 6:20:32 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by John on Aug 28, 2008 11:43:36 GMT -5
Once the dust settles and everyone has forgotten, it's business as usual until the next big "accident".
|
|
|
|
Post by coalfire on Sept 4, 2008 15:30:58 GMT -5
I really hate that they didn't get those guys out. It seemed really strange because they just gave up and no one really talked about it anymore. I still think they should have sunk a bore hole large enough to send someone down just to see if they could find anything. The company and state and country owe it to the families to try and recover something. We had a mine blow up in 1969 in Northern WV that killed, I think 78 miners, several of which were never found but, they did try. I know that this incident is probably the worst case scenario, I mean fires can be put out, water can be pumped, gas can be ejected but, when the hand of God comes down and roof and floor come together there isn't much that can be done.I'm sorry to rant and rave and take up your time and space but, this reminds me of the early part of the twentieth century when a mine accident would happen the company would worry more about the mules that were lost than the miners.
|
|
|
|
Post by John on Sept 4, 2008 16:30:26 GMT -5
Hell no Lannie, voice your opinions, thats what the sites for! The big problem with that "accident" was IT WASN'T an accident, it could have been avoided. Over two hundred years ago, Lords of the Manors learn't that if you took too much coal out, convergence took place. Seems Mr Murray didn't learn very much about mining when he worked "on the tools"! The majority of the male members of this site who worked in mining on this site started there lives in UK mines under pretty strict rules. Sure we broke them, BUT, beware if the Manager caught you doing it!! He'd fine you on the spot! When I was about 18, I was sat at the main gate end of a face where the gate end boxes were reading a magazine. Who should walk up and catch me?? The Undermanager in Charge, 2nd in command. He took the magazine off of me, checked it's contents, wrapped it around some coal and threw it on the belt. He turned around to me and told me to report to him in his office after the shift was over. It was against the rules to have none technical reading matter underground, fire hazard! My boss laughed when I was sent to him for a reprimand, he said "Oh your the dozy bast*$#@ Mr Ward caught reading, were you" "Don't let the idiot catch you again" That was it, but I could have been fined! From the records, it appears the original company that owned Carndwell Canyon, pulled out of the area where the accident happened as being unsafe to work. So why was Murray allowed to work that and another hazardous area?  ?? To be honest, it's time MSHA was given a big shake up at the top and some of the chiefs reduced to braves once more at a much lower salary! Another thing would be to make the coal industry a closed union shop, examine mining laws in other countries and introduce the best legislation at state levels and police them rigidly, making the man in charge of a mine liable, together with ALL certificated workers. Believe me, we were very nervous when an Inspector was underground, nobody, until he arrived, knew where he was going for that days inspection. As Daz will tell you, to keep the Inspectors, electrical in my case and Mechanical in his case, happy, we used to leave something minor for him to find. That way he kept off our backs! At one pit I worked, Cotgrave Colliery in Nottinghamshire, the electrical Inspector sometimes requested to examine our feeler gauges!! Wo betide you if you hadn't got a set! AND no longer than one inch long too! Thats the only mine I have ever worked at where a government Inspector ever asked that one!! |
|
|
|
Post by coalfire on Sept 4, 2008 21:35:33 GMT -5
Speaking of Electrical feeler guages I've got a tip for you all , you may already know this but, when I worked as a face electrician or even the outbye electrician we would get a magnet about 2 inches long hot glue it to the bottom of the brim of our hard hat and vola! a place to keep your feeler gauge and you allways had it on you.
|
|
|
|
Post by John on Sept 5, 2008 6:27:48 GMT -5
Speaking of Electrical feeler guages I've got a tip for you all , you may already know this but, when I worked as a face electrician or even the outbye electrician we would get a magnet about 2 inches long hot glue it to the bottom of the brim of our hard hat and vola! a place to keep your feeler gauge and you allways had it on you. I used to carry a folding set Lannie, the ones with heavy steel sheath, 1.5 right up to 25 thou. Usual Elec Engineers recommended a max gap of 10 thou, even though the law stated 20 thou on a one inch face. I'm retired now if there is such a word. |
|
|
|
Post by dazbt on Sept 5, 2008 15:48:03 GMT -5
Speaking of Electrical feeler guages I've got a tip for you all , you may already know this but, when I worked as a face electrician or even the outbye electrician we would get a magnet about 2 inches long hot glue it to the bottom of the brim of our hard hat and vola! a place to keep your feeler gauge and you allways had it on you. I always carried a set of mechanical feeler gauges, well, that's to say, I carried as many as I could, the 1.0000inch to 2.5000inch feeler gauges weren't too bad, but when you got up to the 12.0000inch long reach gauges they became a bit heavy, so I had a long shafted 18lb hammer with graduated notches along the shaft, which was fairly accurate to the nearest inch or so and a lot easier to carry in your pit helmet. |
|
|
|
Post by John on Sept 5, 2008 16:04:20 GMT -5
Speaking of Electrical feeler guages I've got a tip for you all , you may already know this but, when I worked as a face electrician or even the outbye electrician we would get a magnet about 2 inches long hot glue it to the bottom of the brim of our hard hat and vola! a place to keep your feeler gauge and you allways had it on you. I always carried a set of mechanical feeler gauges, well, that's to say, I carried as many as I could, the 1.0000inch to 2.5000inch feeler gauges weren't too bad, but when you got up to the 12.0000inch long reach gauges they became a bit heavy, so I had a long shafted 18lb hammer with graduated notches along the shaft, which was fairly accurate to the nearest inch or so and a lot easier to carry in your pit helmet. Typical Barnsley pit humour! ;D ;D |
|
|
|
Post by coalfire on Sept 5, 2008 18:31:22 GMT -5
We only really used two feeler gauges. .004 for typical plane flange panels and .006 for step joints.
|
|
|
|
Post by John on Sept 6, 2008 6:19:47 GMT -5
We only really used two feeler gauges. .004 for typical plane flange panels and .006 for step joints. Why so tight a tolorance Lannie?? It's internationally recognised that 20 thou for a one inch flamepath and 10 though for a half inch flamepath and of course no more than 10 thou on a one inch flamepath in oil circuit breakers as they produce acetylene gas internally during arcing. All the collieries I worked at both UK and Australia, the Elec Engineers in charge set their standards as ten thou over everything. They can go under the law, but not outside of it. Once set at a limit, it was considered law should anything happen. |
|
|
|
Post by John on Apr 17, 2011 13:08:04 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by dazbt on Aug 4, 2012 2:11:48 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by John on Aug 4, 2012 6:19:51 GMT -5
Doesn't make any sense at all, both he, mining engineers and the state and federal government know exactly what caused the "accident" they are going to allow him to start mining again??
The original owners report stated they would cease all operations as the mine presents a danger to all who work in it should have been enough!
Those men should never have perished if the government had forbid any company from working down there.
And now Murray wants to risk more lives??? It's obvious to a blind man who knows nothing of mining that more men are going to get killed if they start extracting more pillars, either support or barrier.
I just hope the Utah department of mines refuses permission to enter that mine.
|
|
??