JULIAN, W.Va., June 23 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- Massey Energy
Company (NYSE: MEE) announced today it has sued the U.S. Mine
Safety and Health Administration over its improper use of
regulatory authority to control the design of ventilation systems
and to limit the use of scrubbers in underground mines.
(Logo:
http://photos.prnewswire.com/prnh/20071031/MASSEYENERGYLOGO
)
(Logo:
http://www.newscom.com/cgi-bin/prnh/20071031/MASSEYENERGYLOGO
)
"We hope the principal beneficiary will be miners, who will have
cleaner air, safer mines and more secure jobs," said Don Blankenship, Chairman and CEO of Massey.
The lawsuit was filed in the U.S. District Court in Washington, DC. It asks the court to declare
that MSHA has violated Massey's constitutional right to due process
and to require MSHA to justify its actions whenever it demands
changes in ventilation plans submitted by coal operators or limits
the use of scrubbers.
Defendants are the U.S. Department of Labor; MSHA; Kevin Stricklin, Administrator for MSHA's
Division of Coal Mine Safety and Health; and Robert Hardman, District Manager of MSHA Coal
District 4, which has headquarters in Mt.
Hope, WV.
Ventilation plans for mines are critical in ensuring the safety
and health of miners, who need to breath air as clean of coal dust,
methane and other noxious fumes as possible. No standard
ventilation plan can exist for all mines because each mine has its
own particular geological and construction features. Therefore, to
a large extent, each ventilation plan must be custom made.
Regarding ventilation plans, the suit makes the following
points:
- MSHA has exceeded its regulatory authority to enforce mine
safety and health laws by effectively dictating the ventilation
plan for each mine. The law says only that MSHA must ensure
such a plan is consistent with prudent mining engineering and
safety and health practices. MSHA may not lawfully reject a plan
simply because it has a preferred way to ventilate.
- MSHA indirectly forces mine operators to design a ventilation
plan the way MSHA wants by refusing to approve the operator's plan.
Mining cannot start until a ventilation plan is approved by MSHA.
Yet MSHA not only has no deadline to grant or deny such approval,
there is no appeal if it is denied or forum for the operator to
state its case.
- Coal miners and operators are "at the mercy of MSHA with
respect to the implementation of their (ventilation) plans," as the
suit says, because MSHA is "free, over the mine operator's
objection, to do literally nothing" if it does not like a
ventilation plan.
Though it requires coal operators to shape their ventilation
plans to MSHA personnel's own preferences, MSHA does not accept any
responsibility for the effectiveness of those plans -- or their
ineffectiveness.
Furthermore, the lawsuit says, MSHA has established "a pattern
and practice of refusing to allow the Plaintiffs' mines to
implement any number of sound practices" aimed at providing a
steady, dependable source of clean air for miners at work.
"Particularly troubling" is MSHA's refusal to allow the use of
scrubbers, which are used on mining machines to reduce sharply the
amount of coal dust in the air and to also help dilute methane in
the area where miners are working.
MSHA has failed to provide any rational, non-arbitrary reason
for denying the use of scrubbers. This refusal is potentially
dangerous because scrubbers have been shown to be extremely
effective at reducing the inhalation of coal dust, which can lead
to black lung disease.
The lawsuit asks the court to declare that MSHA has no authority
under the Mine Act to dictate ventilation plans for mines; that a
coal operator has a constitutional right to a hearing on a
ventilation plan of which MSHA disapproves; and that coal operators
have a right to use scrubbers unless MSHA can provide "objective,
verifiable, and reviewable information" that their use would lessen
miner health or safety.
The lawsuit is not the first time Massey has raised these
issues. Over the past few weeks, in Congressional testimony, in two
detailed letters to Joseph Main, the
Assistant Secretary of Labor for Mine Safety and Health, and in
letters to the governors of coal states, Mr. Blankenship has raised
these issues.
A copy of the lawsuit can be found on the Massey UBB website at
www.masseyubb.com.
Massey Energy Company, headquartered in Richmond, Virginia, with operations in
West Virginia, Kentucky and Virginia, is the largest coal producer in
Central Appalachia and is included
in the S&P 500 Index.
SOURCE Massey Energy Company