ShareThis Page

MSHA investigators: Massey mine tragedy was preventable

| Wednesday, Jan. 19, 2011

A deadly explosion inside a West Virginia coal mine last year was preventable, officials with the federal Mine Safety and Health Administration said Wednesday.

Worn bits and a deficient spray system on a longwall shearer likely led to a small methane ignition that grew into a massive coal dust explosion inside Massey Energy Co.'s Upper Big Branch mine in Montcoal on April 5, MSHA Coal Administrator Kevin Stricklin said.

"The most likely source (of ignition) is the longwall shearer," Stricklin said. "Ignitions do occur. It's not a common thing; it's not something we like to see happen, but it does occur. Fortunately, in most situations there are other safety measures in place to keep that ignition from becoming an explosion."

Massey officials disputed what they called MSHA's "working theory."

"We do not currently believe that there were issues with the bits or the sprays on the shearer that contributed to the explosion," the company's general counsel, Shane Harvey, said in an e-mail. "We likewise do not believe that coal dust played a meaningful role in the explosion."

He said employees kept the coal dust under control with powdered limestone, a process known as "rock-dusting." Massey officials believe "that the mine exploded due to an infusion of high levels of natural gas."

Stricklin stressed MSHA's findings are not final and the investigation continues. The agency will conduct an internal review to see whether it could have better enforced regulations, he said.

In the months leading up to the explosion, federal investigators issued more closure orders for unsafe conditions at Upper Big Branch than at any mine in the country, MSHA officials said.

Mine operators are accountable, MSHA Director Joe Main said.

"They have a responsibility to be conducting investigations and examinations to protect their miners," Main said. "MSHA cannot be there all the time."

MSHA hopes to release a final report on the explosion in 60 to 90 days, Main said.

MSHA presented a "very viable scenario," said R. Larry Grayson, professor of energy and mineral engineering at Penn State University. If water sprayers were not working, they would not cool sparks created by frictional ignitions or dampen dust the shearer created, he said.

"When you wet the dust, it is then very unlikely to be involved in an explosion," Grayson said, noting that worn bits would not cut as cleanly as sharp bits and would generate more dust.

Based on investigators' findings so far, Stricklin painted a vivid image of the miners' last moments.

"There was an ignition, like a flame or burst of flame that would have gone on for anywhere from 70 to 90 seconds before it became a massive explosion," Stricklin said.

At least two miners apparently realized something was wrong and started running from the shearer, he said. They made it 400 to 500 feet.

"I would say they were moving as quickly as they could. ... I really don't know what they're thinking, I just know that they know they're in a bad situation and they're trying to get out," " Stricklin said.

The bits would have sparked if they had struck sandstone that surrounded the coal seam, Stricklin said.

The blast snaked two miles underground, twisted rails and destroyed machinery. It killed 29 miners, making it the deadliest U.S. mine disaster in 40 years.

It should not have happened, Stricklin said. With good airflow, a properly working water spray system, good dust control and vigilant operators willing to fix problems, such explosions will not occur, he said.

"From day one, we've always taken the position that all explosions are preventable, and we still stand by that today," Stricklin said. "If you follow all four of those things, we don't think an explosion would occur."

MSHA posted photos on its website of the shearer's severely worn-down bits. Investigators posted a "call out" order showing that mine operators reported no problems with the shearer 20 minutes before the explosion.

Had it worked properly, the spray system on the shearer would have helped extinguish an ignition and keep down dust levels, Stricklin said. More than 80 percent of samples taken from the mine show a high level of coal dust, which is highly flammable, he said.

Investigators interviewed 261 people, not including 18 potential witnesses who refused to testify, Stricklin said. Former Massey Chief Executive Officer Don Blankenship, who retired Dec. 31, was among those who refused to testify. Two Massey employees who entered the mine immediately after the blast and made their way toward the longwall also won't talk, Stricklin said.

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.