ShareThis Page
Dozens of ‘problem’ coal mines hit with surprise inspections |

Dozens of ‘problem’ coal mines hit with surprise inspections

The Associated Press
| Thursday, April 22, 2010 12:00 a.m

CHARLESTON, W.Va. — Nearly 60 problem coal mines have been hit with surprise inspections aimed at preventing another explosion like the one that killed 29 miners in West Virginia, the nation’s chief mine safety regulator said yesterday.

The Mine Safety and Health Administration did not immediately reveal how many problems were found during the weekend crackdown. A spokeswoman said that information is still being compiled.

The raids targeted 57 mines, including 23 in West Virginia and 14 in Kentucky and involved 275 federal inspectors, MSHA said. Eight of the mines belong to Massey Energy Co., a $4.17 billion company that ranks among the largest coal producers in the United States.

Investigators suspect methane gas and excessive coal dust caused the April 5 blast at Massey’s Upper Big Branch mine.

“The purpose of these inspections is to provide assurance that no imminent dangers, explosions, hazards or other serious health or safety conditions and practices are present at these mines,” MSHA director Joe Main said.

Rick Abraham, whose mine was on the inspection list, defended his operation and blamed politics for forcing an unnecessary crackdown.

“The problem in the industry today is the professionals are being browbeaten by politicians. The know they would be better off in a more workable atmosphere without the press of politicians and headline seekers,” Abraham said. “The employees are on edge, everybody’s on edge and it’s from people who don’t know what the hell they’re talking about.”

MSHA said it targeted mines with a history of serious violations and focused on rules covering methane, ventilation and efforts to control coal dust.

A National Mining Association spokesman declined to comment. Massey did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Among the Massey operations on the list are the Aracoma Alma No. 1 Mine, where two men were killed in a conveyer belt fire in 2006. Massey eventually paid $4.2 million in civil and criminal penalties because of the fire. Also on the list was Massey’s Tiller No. 1 mine in Virginia, which MSHA warned to clean up its act last October or face stricter discipline for having a pattern of serious violations.

Categories: News
TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.