Page images
PDF
EPUB

а

hired, it will be next year before we even have a chance of meeting the new requirements of the law we finally passed, which provides inspection of these mines at least once during every 5 working days.

Is that an accurate estimate, and I guess Mr. Evans made that statement, and what did you base that on? Are we in that bad a shape in terms of new inspectors?

Mr. Evans. The last information I had from the Bureau was that they actually put on the payroll 100 additional inspectors, but they are in training and not out inspecting coal mines as such. So at this rate I would be very much surprised if the inspection requirements are being met even a year from now. It just is not possible.

Now, I saw here within the last couple of weeks that they have now cut the training period down from a year to 6 months and I think that this came about through my conversations with them, trying to get them to speed up the process of putting inspectors out in the field.

Senator SCHWEIKER. Well, I know in the gassy mines, which is where your explosions are most likely to occur, the amendment which I introduced provided for a daily inspection, a resident inspector, just like the Defense Department has on any of the missile projects. If these projects can have a resident inspector, why not have them in areas where human lives are involved in this country? We had a difference with the House bill on this, because the House had inspections every 25 working days in its bill, so we compromised on one inspection during every five working days. I gather from what you people said earlier we are nowhere near complying with this on the really ex'plosion-prone mines. We have not even begun to face up to that problem. Is that an accurate assessment ?

Mr. Boyle. That is right and, Senator, may I say this, that we felt very strongly about your amendment about having an inspector in mines that liberated quantities of methane gas and to have an inspector stationed at those mines constantly and when I testified before your committee and before the House committee, when the bill was before both bodies, I emphasized very strongly that that would eliminate, if that man is working for the Federal Government, paid by the Federal Government, not paid by the union, so they couldn't say that the union had any influence, not paid by the coal companies so they couldn't say they had influence, but paid by the Federal Government to perform a duty and be there every day that mine liberates gas in the quantities that the Farmington mine was liberating gas, then if his life was endangered, if you recall, I said he would be maybe more prone to be there and make these examinations and find this gas and do the things that maybe some of these other inspectors that come in and leave-that brought about the spot inspections for the first time under Jack O'Leary of the Federal, the Federal Director rather of the Bureau of Mines, and we didn't have spot inspections up until we demanded, we implored, we insisted, we pleaded, we begged, and finally we got spot examinations and the record will disclose that after we showed the Department of Mines it was necessary to double back on these coal operators who were having a housecleaning arrangement knowing that the Federal mine inspector would appear on X date and in some instances as I testified, have a nice hot lunch prepared for him, to give him a buggy ride in and a buggy ride out, that if the Federal Department of Mines would double back, make

[ocr errors]

a

an inspection and then double back unknown to the coal company, you would see what a surprise they would find, and they did that and they had 600 inspections immediately upon or after we proved to them it was necessary and I forget how many mines were involved.

Senator WILLIAMS. When was this, what are you talking about now?
Mr. BOYLE. When the bill was before Congress.
Senator WILLIAMS. Prior to enactment of the law?
Mr. BOYLE. Yes.

Senator Williams. Can we just get what you personally have done to correct this appalling situation where we have not had anywhere near approaching the number of inspections that are required under the law? What have you done personally?

Mr. Boyle. Well, I have sent a man who was paid by our organization to perform that work, I have sent him down there and he has gone of his own accord, I don't know how many times, Mr. Evans, he met with the different personnel of the Bureau of Mines, and the Department of Interior and we get nowhere.

Senator WILLIAMS. Have you personally gone down? Have you personally registered in writing?

Mr. BOYLE. I haven't. Oh, yes I have; oh, yes I have; and I sent a copy of my letter to each member of the subcommittee in both Houses that I sent down there.

Senator SCHWEIKER. I just want to say it is a matter of great concern to me where we can manage to have a resident inspector on any large defense production line where we send weapons of war to kill other people, but we won't even get activated and geared up to the point where we have somebody to protect American lives of miners down in the pits in these explosive-prone situations. I think it is an intolerable situation and I was hopeful the new law would do it, but we obviously are not going to do it without a Director of the Bureau of Mines. That is certainly a very important step.

Senator Williams. Mr. Boyle, I would like to inquire a bit about the cases involving the miners' walkouts in the Pittsburgh, Pa., area. Now, the miners walked off work, and their basic complaint, as it reached us, was in the area we are addressing ourselves to now, the 'failure to enforce the strong coal mine health and safety law, and part of that was a failure to have inspectors there, and as a result of the failure of inspection and enforcement of the law, some of these situations were described to us, and these were the reasons for a very, very serious walkout by coal miners. And I can recall talking to one group of coal miners, just one example of the terror they felt, and they felt it because the law was not being en forced; a cable was dragging through a foot or so of water. Well, this is in total violation of the standards of law, where every power cable is to be kept above the water and not to trail through the water. This was just one example that I recall.

They walked off, and then a suit was brought to enjoin a walkout, and I am correct in that procedure. I did get complaints from the workers that their union had not supported them in their plea for the proper enforcement of their law.

Now would you comment on what you did in that lawsuit?

Mr. BOYLE. Yes, sir. General Counsel is here, and he knows that that is not 'factual, because we sent a lawyer immediately to Pennsylvania to be of aid and assistance to those coal miners, from the Washington headquarters, and he remained there all through the trials, or the strikes, with the court, and I was not there, but General Counsel's associate was up there, and I just talked with the General Counsel and told him he should dispatch someone up there, and he did.

Senator WILLIAMS. There is one more specific I did not mention was reported to me, and you can report what you feel was done. Some miners, rank and file, advised me that the union had agreed to the injunction.

Mr. CAREY. That is the most positive misrepresentation I have ever heard of in my life. Willard Owens of our staff was up there and defended the local unions who were involved in that, except a few. We opposed it vigorously. We took an appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit-rather Third Circuit, in Philadelphia, after the injunction was issued.

We were jointly successful in having the injunction reversed. But that is a matter of record; it is a matter of record in the Pittsburgh district, Pittsburgh Federal Court, and on record in the U.S. Court of Appeals located in Philadelphia; and the one who represented us—and we had two lawyers—one, Willard Owens, of the United Mine Workers legal staff, and Lloyd Engle, a lawyer in Pittsburgh, Pa., and they participated in the proceedings and participated in the arguments on appeal.

Senator Williams. Did they make any statements addressed to the men going back to work or any agreement that they go back or any agreement to the injunction; was there any action by the union law

yers on that?

a

Mr. CAREY. Absolutely not. That is a matter of record.

Senator RANDOLPH. I will point out that the chairman is not a nominee for the Supreme Court but a candidate for reelection to the Senate. Isn't that correct?

Mr. CAREY. What State is that?

Senator RANDOLPH. That is a State that needs fuel and energy. The coal mines of West Virginia have been trying to avert a power shortage all up and down the east coast, including New York and New Jersey.

Senator WILLIAMS. I mentioned in my opening statement, just the reliance of the public upon coal to create electric energy which we need almost every minute of our lives.

Senator RANDOLPH. I return to the subject of inspections for a moment, Mr. Chairman?

Senator WILLIAMS. Yes.

Senator RANDOLPH. I have certain material which I want to place in the record and it will take only 3 or 4 minutes.

I asked for the record of coal mine inspections during the period of July 12 through July 18, 1970. The record of inspections of large mines shows 25 and of small mines, 37. Partial inspections were 26 in the large and 23 in the small, and spot inspections were 31 in the large and five in the small.

The notices of violations under the act, Mr. Evans, that were issued were 326 in the large mines and 329 in the small and the notices of penalties issued were 327 in the large and 337 in the small.

I will say that more than half of those notices issued in large mines were in West Virginia.

To go to the period of July 19 through July 25 of this year: The regular inspections were listed as 26 in the large and 33 in the small, and partial inspections were 21 in the large and 14 in the small, and notice of violations issued under this act were 331 in the large mines and 323 in the small mines, and notices of penalty were 327 in the large and 325 in the small mines.

I want to ask you, Mr. Evans, how many regular, partial, and spot inspections would you feel can be made or should be made in the periods that I have mentioned, approximately 1 month?

Mr. Evans. Well, with the same number of inspectors now?
Senator RANDOLPH. That is right.

Mr. Evans. The Bureau had an inspection force under the 1952 act, which was repealed when titles 1 and 3 became effective under this act on March 30. In my opinion they are making far less inspections now than they did with the same number of inspectors under the 1952 act.

It may be of some interest to you, Senator, to know that since the act became effective, at least titles 1 and 3, on March 30, 1970, and title 3 of the safety provisions of the act, the number of violations found in large mines is 7,547 and in small mines it is 5,062 for a total of 12,609 violations on which coal operators have taken 2,000 appeals approximately to the Board of Mine Operations Appeals that the Secretary set up under this act. It is pretty difficult to believe.

I have six girls in my office and myself and an assistant and we are shoveling paper all day long and I imagine and know that at the Bureau of Mines they are shoveling paper all day long, 2,000 appeals.

If we had hearings asking for a review of these penalties by coal operators, and many of them they have already abated the violation, many of the violations were even violations under the 1952 act, and if hearings were to be held in all of these cases and no more would come in, they couldn't hold these hearings in the next 4 or 5 years.

Now, this is the bureaucratic redtape that is confronting us. We are bogged down. We are up to our chin in paper. I used to get out in the field regularly and go into coal mines all over this country from Pennsylvania to Alabama and attend meetings and safety meetings with coal miners and I have been out of the office very little in the last 2 or 3 months and I would like to tell you how we are staffed and we started this before this act was signed by the President on December 30, anticipating that we were going to get a new act and that we had to be better staffed than we had been for 20 years before that.

I have six girls working in the office here in Washington and myself and an assistant and I have an assistant out in the field constantly and he spends 90 percent of his time in the State of West Virginia and in addition to that in all of our districts with the exception of a couple of small districts where there is very little membership we have a safety coordinator in each district and at every mine where we have a contract we have three safety committeemen who have authority under the provisions of that contract to close the mine down at any time their life is being endangered and they are told constantly by this union to do that.

Senator WILLIAMS. Does that answer your question?

Senator RANDOLPH. Yes; I just wanted the record to show what the numbers of inspections were and what notices of penalties were.

Senator WILLIAMS. While we are having a lawyer like conversation here on the committee, this record is left with my report and conclusion of your report of the facts as you knew them at the Pittsburgh trial, Philadelphia appeal, and Pittsburgh rehearing, and can you give us copies of the records of these proceedings?

Mr. CAREY. I will be most happy, to.

Senator RANDOLPH. One final question, Mr. Chairman, of Mr. Boyle or, if he desires, someone else could respond.

Mr. Boyle, if Congress passed an effective law, do you think this law can be enforced ?

Mr. BOYLE. Yes; I think it can.
Senator RANDOLPH. Thank you.

Senator WILLIAMS. I have one final question. On the question of the enforcement of the law by the Bureau, if the union has not gone to court to demand enforcement, I wonder why that has not been done?

Mr. BOYLE. We haven't done what?
Senator WILLIAMS. Go to court to demand enforcement of the law.

Mr. Boyle, since we are running out of time, just if you can give us this, have you gone to court for what lawyers call mandamus, under a mandamus proceeding, Mr. Boyle?

Mr. CAREY. No; that has been done by Congressman Hechler and Congressman O'Hara, of Michigan for the enforcement of this statute. Our position was that if we filed suit, we would be tied up in court probably for the next year and a half or 2 years and we didn't think it was the most strategic manner in which to approach it. We think the best way to approach it is protests from the union and also pressure from Senators and Congressmen on the Hill who passed the statute to put pressure on the Secretary of Interior.

We had no ambition to be involved in a morass of legal entanglemerts because it would be 2 years by the time it was heard, going to court of appeals and petition on a writ of certiorari and would lose effectiveness and we thought as a matter of strategy it was best to use what we are using, to use political pressure and what other pressures can be asserted on the Secretary of Interior and I think it was you, Senator, or Senator Randolph stated that a telegram be directed to the President of the United States signed by this committee, which obviously is a body which is not specifically involved in this particular matter as a participant but as a progenitor of the legislation. I would say in my opinion that that would be much more effective, it would get more expeditious activity from the President of the United States than a lawsuit which would tie us up for years.

Mr. BOYLE. When I answered, Senator, I thought you had reference to the Abingdon, Va, case.

Senator WILLIAMS. Well, I will say that we certainly agree with you in part. We feel in our oversight responsibility here that pressure and force and investigation is part of our job and I think it has had some salutary effect. I think it did in Pennsylvania and I do think

a

a

« PreviousContinue »