Search Documents

By James D. Reilly

The time-worn adage "an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure" was never more applicable than when used in reference to coal mine safety. Many individuals have dedicated many hours to developing effective accident prevention programs, and much has been accomplished. Each production escalation, however, creates new hazards and safety problems which need special study and research. It is a never ending cyle. To study the progress of coal-mine safety is to raise memories of many individuals who have been dedicated to removing the hazards that have developed with increased productivity and deeper penetration into the earth for coal. Some vivid examples of this dedication are the works of the men who pioneered the use of the safety lamp and the use of rock dust in mining.

Jan 1, 1968

By A Prill

Safety First and zero accidents are the targets most mines in Australia are aiming for, but manual processes and procedures limit the capabilities and response time in emergency situations. Even with a high safety focus, accidents and incidents still happen, too often with tragic outcomes. Dangerous areas, narrow roads and winding curves are all daily obstacles that threaten workforce safety. Every unforeseen event, such as traffic collisions and other accidents, puts lives in danger and weakens production. Safety must be guaranteed.

May 5, 2022

By Jeffrey Kohler, John J. Samrnarco, Thomas Novak, Lloyd Morley

Equipment control functions that were once hardwired are being implemented with software and very large scale integrated (VLSI) devices. Often this transition has resulted in increased flexibility, improved quality, and decreased costs. At the same time, it has created new concerns and challenges concerning worker safety. The visible and well-defined ladder diagram for relay-logic has been replaced by program in which the exact outcome for varied inputs can be more obscure. In the coal mining industry,-efforts to automate longwall mining systems hove resulted in semiautonomous machines operating within the same space as workers This paper describes an effort initiated by the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH to identify the safety rules related to the use of processor-controlled equipment in mining. Specific findings in the areas of human factors, hardware, and some safety are presented in this paper, and a brief description of a plan to address identified weaknesses is given.

By Harry Perry

In the United States the state mining laws enacted in the late 1800s were the first laws to recognize that an employer had a responsibility to provide the employee a place to work that met at least some minimum safety standards. The coal mining industry was also the first major industry in the United States to be regulated in 1952 by federal safety laws, although federal inspectors had the right-of-entry as early as 1941. Within recent years, however, the Congress has enacted a number of federal safety regulations for a variety of industries, such as the Aviation Act (1958), National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Act (1966), National Gas Pipeline Act (1968), and Radiation Control for Health and Safety Act (1968). The fatality and injury experiences of the mining industry in the United States, while at a significantly higher rate than for industry as a whole, showed a continuous improvement until the last decade or two-at which time the rate leveled off. Although fatality and injury rates in foreign countries have been generally lower than in the United States, further improvement in those countries also has been difficult to achieve in recent years. It appears, therefore, that some major change in mining laws, combined with a radical improvement in mining technology and a more effective labor-management safety program, will be needed if further reductions are to be achieved in fatality and injury rates. At the same time, there is a growing awareness by society that an employee's place of work, where he spends nearly half of his waking hours, should be made as safe as possible. As increased consideration is given to means for achieving greater safety in all industrial situations, it is becoming apparent that more is required than merely providing physical safeguards on tools and machines. Rigorous, strictly enforced safety standards are useful, but more important is the desire of labor and management to make certain that industrial accidents are prevented. The pressure to achieve increased productivity, and thus receive higher wages, can be a significant deterrent to safe working practices. The temptation can be great to "take a chance" or "cut a corner" in order to speed up production. Public concern over all types of industrial safety in the United States was reflected by the introduction of a number of general occupational health and safety bills in Congress for the first time in 1968. While no legislation resulted, the hearings revealed that, although there were differences in how standards should be set and who should administer them, there was agreement on the need for adequate laws. Since the mining industry has been subject to safety standards longer than other industries, it is not surprising that advanced safety concepts for mining are being explored by the industry and the enforcing agencies. More complete and sophisticated accident reporting is being planned that will reveal the

Jan 1, 1976

Safety Leadership The management and leadership of a mining operation is a challenge at all times. The pressure to make production, safety, and environmental goals is intense. At some point mining cycles will put every operator into periods of time where economic issues seem to over-ride all other concerns. This is when leadership is most needed.

May 1, 2009

Legislation, if it is to be effective, must be enforceable by the state and acceptable to the industry. In the mining industry the relationship between the government inspector on the one hand and the mine management and employees on the other, must be one of full co-operation before the system can be effective. To understand our present system, which is-duplicated in most countries of the world, an examination of the history from which it evolved is necessary.

Jan 1, 1975

Coal mining safety and health legislation is more than typical of safety legislation which has been born of adversity. Indeed, in the main it has been the child of disaster. Requirements which now appear obvious were indeed only occasioned by either social injustice or more commonly by great disasters. Even then changes were often made only after months or years of deliberation by committees. Early mining legislation in New South Wales benefited from the experience in Great Britain. The pioneers of our industry were miners from there and brought with them the basic British legislation, so we started with knowledge gained the hard way. A review of accidents statistics provides a measure of the effectiveness of mine safety legislation, but unfortunately rules cannot control human nature. Miners, managers and inspectors must work as a team to make mines safe and new legislation in New South Wales is planned to this end.

Jan 1, 1975

By Golledge P

Safety legislation has a long history and widespread application, but how can one test its effectiveness? One way is to examine safety statistics. Another way is to compare the legislation with principles of good safety practice. Mine safety legislation contains many features that are widely accepted, and these should be examined critically to determine their importance. Uniform legislation and revision of legislation should be considered. INTRODUCTION

Jan 1, 1975

By D. L. Putnam

Snap Lake Mine ?? Complex dyke ore body ?? Underground operation ?? 1.1 million tonnes per annum ?? 1.2 carats per tonne ?? On-site diesel power generation ?? Supply by ice road and air ?? Milestones ? Construction commenced in 2005 ? Commissioning 2007 ? First diamonds August 2007

May 1, 2008

Improvements in mechanisation should not be considered independently of safety and of environmental hazards. The need to keep gas contents within statutory limits may make the time needed to partially drain a gassy seam the effective control on face development times. Dust levels may provide an effective control on coal extraction rates on any one face. The combination of gas and dust on high output longwall faces may make it necessary for each one to be treated as a separate mine in terms of ventilation, and the faceworkers may need special protection. Mechanisation and safety can be mutually beneficial when mechanisation combined with systematic safety assessment reduces accidents, and when a thorough study of how to reduce accidents and health risks indicates the best method to improve mechanisation.

Jan 1, 1988

In todayÆs demanding business landscape continual change and technological advancement is a given. With these changes there is now, more than ever, a need to ensure sustainable growth in respect of value protection and value adding whilst meeting the pressures and expectations of the societies in which we operate. Traditionally the management of safety has been a very reactive activity in the business, in some cases seen as an irritation and a disruptive process that demands a focus on preventing reoccurrences. This in turn has focused the measurement of safety performance on a range of lagging indicators û æafter the effect managementÆ. Gaining and maintaining a licence to operate is crucial to a sustainable business but as a prerequisite, organisations need to have a demonstrable ability to manage the safety of their people, as well as mitigating the people risk associated with the business activity. A major focus in the last decade has been on the implementation of enterprise risk management programs, where risk becomes embedded in all business systems and processes and the organisationsÆ genetic make up is programmed to analyse and integrate risk management into all facets of the business activity. The management of safety should be no different. One school of thought argues that there are no new accidents, but rather our inability to learn from the past. Others believe that as long as we have an appetite to achieve the unachievable, we will have to continue to push the boundaries, our safety comfort zones and inevitably take risks. Single reliance on highly evolved technical systems, elaborate processes, highly skilled people, safe equipment and safe work environments have shown one thing û they are not sustainable in providing adequate coverage in the business. In analysing a range of factors associated with some of the worst catastrophes of the 20th century, it can be suggested that they were in fact predictable and inevitable and that an integrated approach underpinned by sound risk management systems could have determined a different result. The key to a sustainable approach in the management of safety requires us to look at a multitude of aspects that collectively allow the performance of an organisation to be predictable. To have certainty in the business activities it is necessary to have controls in place that will mitigate the risks normally associated with unwanted events. It is ensuring that human factors effectively contribute to monitoring the planned approach and being able to safely adjust to any variability. In essence this is having the ability to proactively plan for the longer term. The sentiments articulated by organisational leaders echo that safety management is good business. Surely then a good business is a sustainable business, and a sustainable business is one that provides lasting benefits to its stakeholders.

Jan 1, 2006

By R. M. Guymon, D. D. Lauriski

Safety management can best be described as how each company deals with the control of hazards (human or mechanical) to reduce costly accidents and employee injury caused by accidents. Properly used, effective safety management can mean the difference between being a highly productive, cost-efficient operation or one that "walks the fence," that is less productive with higher product costs. At Utah Power & Light Co's mining division, effective safety management has been used as tool to achieve this difference and remains as the number one priority to maintaining that difference.

Jan 1, 1990

By V K. Singh, G Sural

The problem of spontaneous heating/fire is very common in coal mines all over the world. The coal industry faces many problems day by day due to the occurrence of spontaneous heating in the open pit coal mines. Presently, about 70 per cent of total coal production in Indian mines is being carried out by open pit mining. Fire in coal, particularly in open pit mines not only causes irreparable loss of natural wealth but also damages the surface structures and pollutes the environment. It is well known that 75 per cent of the fires occur due to the spontaneous combustion of coal. Spontaneous heating is a very common occurrence in coal mines and is a major factor contributing to mine fire. The liability of coal to spontaneous heating causes many serious problems before, during and after mining. In opencast mines, coal immediately oxidises and catches fire due to the intrinsic characteristics of coal, such as low rank, high moisture, high volatile matter, presence of sulfur in the form of pyrites, low crossing point temperature (CPT) and ignition point temperature (IPT) value and less incubation period. In opencast mines, when the coal benches are left idle for a longer time, heat accumulation takes place in favourable conditions and sometimes leads to fire. The purpose of this paper is to present the different successful case studies regarding the safety management of open pit coal mines from occurrences of spontaneous heating/fire.

Jan 1, 2007

"INTRODUCTION While the United States coal mining uses prescriptive regulation under the Title 30 Code of Federal Regulation enforced by the Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA), Australia uses a risk based approach. Australian regulation is individual to each state. In Queensland, Australia this risk based approach to address principal hazards is underwritten by the Queensland Coal Mining Safety and Health Act of 1999 and the Coal Mining Safety and Health Regulation of 2001. Each Queensland Mine is required to have an overarching Health Safety and Environment Management System, of which Safety Management Plans are an element. “Safety Management plans (SMP’s) are intended to formalise the process by which mines address principal hazards and other related matters to ensure the safety of mine personnel.”7 THE QUEENSLAND CONTEXT In Queensland, the basic elements of a coal mine’s safety and health management system must provide for risk identification and assessment, hazard analysis, hazard management and control, and the reporting and recording of relevant safety and health information and data.5 (Part 2 Division 1 Section 6(a-d)) The initial guidance for writing Safety Management Plans comes from the Approved Standard for Mine Safety Management Plans and Guidance Note QGN09- Reviewing the Effectiveness of Safety and Health Management Systems. The Guidance Note and Approved Standard are supplemental to the Act and Regulation, and put in place to provide more clarity around the topic. The definitions in this section come from the Approved Standard and are included to provide context for those who may not be familiar with Australian or Queensland law and regulation. A hazard is defined as a source of potential harm or a situation with a potential to cause loss, while a principal hazard is a hazard with a potential to cause multiple fatalities. A risk is the chance of something happening that will have an impact upon objectives which is measured in terms of consequences and likelihoods. It is important to be able to make the distinction between a hazard and a risk. For instance, a lion is a hazard, while the risk associated with a lion is getting eaten. As defined by the Queensland Approved Standard for Mine Safety Management Plans, a Safety Management Plan (SMP) requires a systematic definition of all the actions necessary to ensure that mining operations are carried out safely. A SMP includes, but is not limited to organisational structures, planning, activities, responsibilities, practices, risk identification, audits and reviews.7 The goal of a SMP management plans is to mitigate the risks to bring them to an As Low As Reasonably Achievable (ALARA) level."

Jan 1, 2016

By D. D. Lauriski

The Mining Division of Utah Power and Light Company is located in the coal fields of southeastern Utah -main office in Huntington, Utah. The Division will produce 6.5 million tons of low sulfur steam coal in 1988, making UP&L the largest underground mining operation west of the Mississippi. Coal is mined from three underground mines utilizing continuous miner and longwall mining methods. All coal produced by the Mining Division is utilized at UP&L's two largest steam-electric power plants, the Hunter and Huntington plants with a combined capability of 1,995,000 Kw. At UP&L we believe that to achieve success a company must have clearly defined goals which are understood, communicated and shared at each level of operation. We have also found from experience that a safe operation is generally an efficient and productive operation. As a Division, we have established a goal to achieve the safest, most efficient operation in the country. This is an ambitious goal. To achieve such a goal requires real commitment and a safety/training program capable of achieving needed results. The following is an overview of the program we have established at UP&L which has enabled us to reduce our accident frequency rate from over 40 in 1980 to 8.00 at present, as illustrated in Figure 1.

Jan 1, 1989

By Chas. Kohl

ABOUT 1929 an engineer was engaged to organize a Safety Department, lay out an educational program, and achieve a reduction in accident frequency. Due to the large number of employees, about 12,000, and the distances between the various properties, it was a big undertaking. Most of the workmen are from the Sierra and for generations have been agricultural people, with little conception of modern tools and machinery, and to a large degree are illiterate. However, gratifying results have been obtained, as evidenced by the accident frequency curve during the sixteen-year period. Safety offices have been established in each of the six major properties, staffed by men who devote their entire efforts to inspections of working conditions and equipment, instructions as to safe methods, and investigations of accidents. The Corporation is a member of the Inter-American Safety Council, receiving their publications and literature, which serve to keep us up to date and informed on modern methods. Dissemination of this material is accomplished chiefly through word-of-mouth and bulletin boards. When it is found that the accident rate is increasing in a certain occupation, as for instance underground haulage or mine hoisting, the operators so engaged are assembled and given renewed instructions on the safety code pertaining to their work. Inter-camp competitions in accident avoidance are being conducted, with annual awards for that unit having the lowest severity rate for the year.

Jan 1, 1945

By F. C. Miller

The Colorado Fuel and Iron Company has divided their coal mines into groups or divisions: Las Animas, Huerfano, Fremont and Gunnison counties. Each division is represented by a safety committee composed of three men appointed by the management and three men selected by the employes? representatives. The three men appointed by the management are usually from a group engaged in routine work that is primarily of a safety nature. Mr. Robert McAllister, chief mine inspector; Mr. George B. Parker, superintendent of first aid and mine rescue training; Mr. F. C. Miller, chief chemist, fuel department; and Mr. 0. C. Irwin, assistant chief electrician. The three men appointed by the management act in each of the four divisions. It is the duty of the safety commit- tee to visit each mine three times per year and make a thorough investigation of conditions underground and on top. Their report is in the form of recommendations to the management for their consideration. They are also called to investigate all fatal accidents and learn, if possible, the cause leading up to the accident and recommend precautionary measures that will prevent the recurrence. This committee inspects the haulage roads, air courses, manways, electrical equipment, ventilation, timbering, working places and humidity. In addition, each mine has a local safety committee with the superintendent acting as chairman. It is the duty of this committee to keep in daily touch with conditions underground and on top. They hold weekly meetings and discuss problems related to safety. These men work on local conditions that govern their affairs. As an example: One of the mines has a checking out board at the man-trip parting in addition to the regular checking in and out system as required by law, and this board is checked before the man-trip leaves for the outside, giving the officials a chance to take prompt action in looking up a man who may have become ill or injured. Should a man walk out and forget to check off, there is a penalty imposed. The ventilation of a coal mine is most important and the method of conducting the air to the working face is one of the greatest precautionary measures linked with safety. A quantity of air must be maintained at every working face to insure rapid diffusion of explosive or noxious gases and in a manner without interruption. With this intent in, view, the Colorado Fuel and Iron Company is installing fan equipments with capacities of 200,000 cubic feet per minute with dual drives, twin fans in some instances, for insured circulation. Dual drives consist of a steam engine using exhaust

Jan 1, 1925

By Howard Eavenson

THE mines of the United States Coal & Coke Co. are located in the Pocahontas coal field, in McDowell County, West Virginia. Twelve plants have been opened and equipped, of which, by reason of the present business depression, only nine are now in operation. These twelve plants serve eighteen mines; some of the plants having several openings, in either the same seam or in different seams, tributary to the same tipple. Only nine of these mines are now being worked at the plants in operation. Construction work was begun in 1902, and coal from the first three plants started was shipped in December of that year. An additional plant was opened in 1903, two in 1904, two in 1905, two in 1907 and the last two in 1908. On Jan. 1, 1915, the plants have been in operation an average period of 8.8 years. The rules of the company, which have been in operation since work was first begun, are similar to those in use by the H. C. Frick Coke Co. at its mines in Pennsylvania, in which "Safety First" was incorporated as early as 1907; and it has always been the policy of both companies to look carefully after the safety of their employees. Although the field is an extension of the old Pocahontas field, the mines, located upon a new branch railroad, are away by themselves, and, as is usual in such cases, the class of labor attracted at first was temporary in character. The rapid development of the mines required the employment of many new men and officials each year; and, while the accident record from 1904 to 1909 was as good as the average of the field, it was felt to be not as good as it could be made, and a determined campaign was inaugurated for preventing accidents of all kinds. Fig. .1 shows the tonnage of coal produced per fatality, both total and for inside accidents only, at our mines; the tonnage per fatality of all West Virginia mines, and of those in the Pocahontas field.

Jan 2, 1915

Discussion of the paper of HOWARD N. EAVENSON, presented at the New York meeting, February, 1915, and printed in Bulletin No. 98, February, 1915, pp. 413 to 430. WILLIAM H. GRADY, Bluefield, W. Va.-Mr. Eavenson gave a comparison between accidents in the State of West Virginia and in the Pocahontas field. The figures quoted are, I presume, taken from the reports of the State Mine Inspector. There are no statistics available, in readily accessible form, giving a comparison between the Pocahontas field and the mines of the United States Coal & Coke Co. which are a part of the field. It occurs to me that the paper would be more complete with these data and I will say that the mines of the Pocahontas field produced during the year 1913 about 15,000,000 tons, about 3,000,000 tons of which was produced by the United States Coal &Coke Co. This gives an indication of the extent of its operations. The Pocahontas field lies largely in the counties of McDowell, Mercer, and Wyoming in West Virginia, and Tazewell in Virginia.: Without consulting maps, I should say that all of the acreage under operation at present by this company lies wholly in McDowell County and that the average conditions off roof top and bottom in its mines are the average of the county, but that the worst conditions in some of these mines are the worst to be found in the county. The average conditions in Tazewell County are about the same as in McDowell County, except that the average thickness of the seam is much greater. The average conditions of top and roof and bottom are better in Mercer and Wyoming counties than in the mines of the United States Coal &. Coke Co.; the worst conditions in these counties are not so bad as in McDowell and Tazewell counties and the best are better than those encountered in McDowell and Tazewell counties; also the thickness of seam is less in Mercer and Wyoming counties. THOMAS W. DAWSON, Scottdale, Pa. (communication to the Secretary*).-The H. C. Frick Coke Co., the mines of which are in Fayette and Westmoreland counties, Pennsylvania, in the Connellsville coke region, has been pursuing a safety campaign for a number of years and a short resume .of its practices will be of interest in connection with Mr. Eavenson's paper.

Jan 5, 1915

By B. F. Tillson

ALTHOUGH most accidents occur through the A carelessness or misfortune of the workmen; that is no reason why we should not take all physical precautions practicable. The best way to approach the problem of mine safety is to acquire a personal feeling of responsibility for the accident and then plan how it might have been prevented had we known that it was to occur. A statistical analysis of the physical conditions contributory to accidents will give an indication of some of the methods or mechanisms that should be revised or safeguarded. The handling of rock or ore is a common source of minor injuries. Freedom from accident when mucking largely depends on the skill and care of the workman; this also is true, to a certain degree, to loading cars from chutes, but much can be done in the layout of chutes and their equipment to provide equal safety with less skill. Permanent stagings, or rigid units that may be easily assembled, should be provided so that the men handling the chute boards or gates and barring the jammed chunks will have a convenient safe footing for their operations. A stance to the side of the chute mouth is to one in front, because a man will not be liable to be struck by flying lumps or his bar, should it he caught in the mass, yet in many mines the workmen face the chute when loading a car. Fig. 1 shows the operation of a plank chute having special latches which support the chute boards in such manner that they may be conveniently dropped into place to stop the flow of ore.

Jan 1, 1926