We in the media continue to follow the twists and turns of leaks and whatever tidbits about the Upper Big Branch Mine Disaster that we can squeeze out of government officials or have spoon-fed to us by Massey Energy’s public relations officials.
If you missed it, we had a decent overview of the recent back-and-forth regarding the mine’s methane monitoring system here. We put that story together on Friday, and since then there have been more developments …
On Sunday, Howard Berkes at NPR reported that testing had found that two methane monitors from the Upper Big Branch longwall section showed no evidence of tampering.
We’ve followed upon on that, as have a number of other news organizations, including the AP, West Virginia MetroNews and the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, which did an initial story last evening and then updated it for this morning to describe the findings as supporting “Massey’s narrative” of how the disaster occurred.
Also worth a look is this piece by Kris Maher at The Wall Street Journal, which adds some interesting information from Massey about what it says were the readings on handheld methane monitors at Upper Big Branch:
In an interview Monday, Massey general counsel Shane Harvey said the two handheld monitors recovered from the mine both registered 0% methane at 2:57 pm and then 5% methane at 3 p.m., close to the time the explosion occurred.
He said manually shutting off the mining machines was unusual. Often at shift changes, miners stay with their equipment and keep it running until the next shift arrives. “It’s possible they witnessed the methane inundation and tried to turn something off. That’s just a possibility,” Mr. Harvey said.
Massey said the exact time of the accident hasn’t been determined yet because clocks on various equipment in the mine weren’t synchronized.
The 5% methane reading is the highest that the devices register, so the actual concentrations could have been higher, Mr. Harvey said. One was found near a victim at the longwall and another near a victim 3,200 feet away, he said.
The handheld monitors, which record readings every three minutes, also registered a surge in carbon monoxide to the maximum reading of 500 parts per million after the blast, as well as a rise in temperature of 10 degrees to 20 degrees Celsius, Mr. Harvey said.
Massey put out a news release that summarized its views on what the methane monitoring test results mean, and MSHA responded with just a very short statement that added little new information:
While some of the methane monitoring equipment has been examined, the question of tampering with these monitors is still a matter of investigation.
So what we’ve got is information being dribbled out, either by Massey’s press releases, leaks or what little can be squeezed out of state or federal officials … MSHA or the state can complain all they want that Massey is only releasing partial information and not telling the whole story …
Is anybody ready yet for MSHA and the state to open up this investigation to the public, so we can get the full story as the evidence comes in?
Updated: MSHA has scheduled a press briefing on its investigation for tomorrow morning … we’ll have a report as soon as the briefing occurs.
Subscribe to the Coal Tattoo
Drip, drip, drip . . ..
What we still have not seen is an unabashed admission by Massey and MSHA that they blew it. Apparently neither Massey nor MSHA “gets it” that these miners were in their care — and that they died because the system did not work. Now, even though investigations have not been “completed,” apologies are in order. Meanwhile, let’s have full sunshine, not dribbles!
And where are the “open hearings” that MSHA promised?
I am relieved to know that the miners who were working that day and died that day cannot be blamed now for tampering with methane monitors. They were just doing what they were supposed to be doing. A nagging question I have is how did massey officials know to tell families that methane monitors were not tampered with BEFORE the monitors were tested to verify the findings in the Howard Berkes piece? How were they so sure about the results?