Page images
[ocr errors]

could be more efficiently done with written questions. This we will think through, and we will be in communication with you. Thank you ever so much.

Mr. DOLE. This has been very beneficial to us, and we thank you, and we will look forward to meeting with you again.

Senator WILLIAMS. Mrs. Mazie B. Gutshall, executive deputy secretary of the Pennsylvania Department of Mines and Mineral Industries, from Harrisburg.

When I announced you were going to be here, there was a spontaneous applause. The staff people knew all about the good work you do in Pennsylvania.

Senator SCHWEIKER. I would like to say a word, if I may.

Senator WILLIAMS. All right. I should have let you heap the applause first, Dick, and I apologize.

Senator SCHWEIKER. It is all right. I am delighted to say we are happy to have Mrs. Gutshall with us. She has set quite a record in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. She was first appointed by Governor Scranton in 1964 as the first woman to be named to a subcabinet post in Pennsylvania. She has a very distinguished and outstanding record in her own right in this position.

She also comes from a mining family, so she knows the ins, outs, and the nitty-gritties from a first-hand experience. She has done a lot of personal inspection and traveling both in the hard and soft coal areas of Pennsylvania, and she has been working in this whole area of mines and mineral industries for many, many years beyond her recognition as deputy secretary.

So I am pleased to present to the committee our deputy secretary of mines, Mrs. Gutshall.

Senator RANDOLPH. Just a moment, Mr. Chairman.

You proposed Dr. Walker a day or two ago for the director of the bureau of mines.

Senator SCHWEIKER. I will amend it.
Senator RANDOLPH. Yes.

Senator SCHWEIKER. I think if we took her from Pennsylvania, the Department would collapse, so I am not sure we could spare her. STATEMENT OF MAZIE B. GUTSHALL, EXECUTIVE DEPUTY SECRE



As Senator Schweiker mentioned, I am Mazie B. Gutshall, executive deputy secretary of the Pennsylvania Department of Mines and Mineral Industries. With me is Charles B. Manula, our deputy secretary of the bituminous coal division.

We appear before you today in the absence of Dr. H. B. Charmbury, the secretary, who is both closely connected and vitally concerned with the health and safety of Pennsylvania's miners. Unfortunately he could not be reached in time to appear before you personally today in this specially called session.

47-135 0-71-39


Pennsylvania has the strongest set of laws in the Nation governing the mining of coal, and especially concerning the deep mining of this mineral resource.

Coal mining was a substantial commercial enterprise in Pennsylvania even before the Civil War, and our Commonwealth had trained mine inspectors in the field working towards better health and safety requirements since 1870, or precisely 100 years.

Through this century of time, gentlemen, both the role of our Commonwealth's mine inspector force and the laws they are charged with enforcing have been honed to the highest possible degree of integrity and efficiency.

Today a Pennsylvania deep mine inspector is quite more than just a professional person, highly qualified and trained for his job. And incidentally, it is interesting to hear and compare our own requirements in comparison to those of what is now required under Federal law. To become one, a person must posesss infinite knowledge of mining and then succeed in passing the most stringent examination of its kind in the Nation.

Of the many persons who periodically take these exams, which is about once every 2 years, less than 10 percent pass them or basically qualify for the position.

A Pennsylvania mine inspector is then appointed by the Governor and he has life tenure. But even before that, the man's personal integrity is subjected to the closest scrutiny upon appointment. He is beyond the realm of political life and interference, and removable from his position only under the severest breach of ethics and behavior.

A Pennsylvania mine inspector lives, eats, and breathes the concepts of safety as required-and even implied—in our laws. And enforcing those laws to the betterment of the health and safety of the men who work in the mines is his primary charge in safety of the men who work in this highly skilled and professional world of mining. He is an officer of our Commonwealth and possesses police powers when it comes to citing infractions of the laws he is charged with enforcing

To give you an idea of the intensity or the degree of intensity of Pennsylvania's deep mining health and safety laws: In a given deep mine even the assistant mine foremen—to say nothing of the foreman himself-must undergo rigid written and oral examinations before they can qualify for appointment to these positions. These men are also not only officials of their companies they become, like the inspector to which they are responsible, officers of the Commonwealth at the same time, charged like the inspector with enforcement of Pennsylvania's deep mine health and safety laws.

In other words, gentlemen, Pennsylvania, after a century of experience with the deep mining of coal, believe in placing responsibility for mine health and safety on those field people best qualified to do the job of enforcing its laws. I might add that penalties for infractions of these laws can be severe, not only for the companies themselves, but to the individuals at fault.

To give you some of the outstanding requirements of Pennsylvania's bituminous mining law, it requires as follows:

[ocr errors]

1. The approval of new and used mining equipment before it is taken into the mine.

2. The approval of a.c. electrical installations from the surface to the working face.

3. The approval of timbering and roof bolting plans for each mine.

4. Certification of miners, shot firers, machine operators, mine electricians, mine foremen, mine examiners, first aid and mine rescue trained personnel. 5. Map requirements:

(a) Mine map; and

(b) Map showing electrical installations.
6. The approval of work in safety zones.
7. Minimum fire protection requirements.

8. Requirements of strict compliance in the use of rock dust,
water sprays and dust-delaying methods on continuous mining
9. The control of mine ventilation :

(a) Install fan systems;
(6) Line brattice to the working face; and

(c) Ventilating fans in connection with continuous min-
ing machines.
10. Investigation of accidents and recommendations therewith.

11. Prohibiting the sealing of abandoned workings; requirement of ventilating abandoned working instead of sealing. Our safety record speaks for itself. In the anthracite region during 1969 there were 13 fatal accidents with 781,985 tons of coal produced per fatality. During the first 6 months of 1970, there were three fatal accidents with an estimated 1,498,181 tons of coal produced per fatality.

During the year 1969 there were 25 fatal accidents in the Bituminous Coal Division with 3,127,401 tons of coal produced per fatality. During the first 6 months of 1970, there were 15 fatal accidents with an estimated 2,640,776 tons of coal produced per fatality.

We have been pleased with the interest that has been taken by the U.S. Congress in attempting to create a safer environment for our coal miners of this Nation to work in and are willing to cooperate or coordinate with Federal Government in any manner to promote and attain a better mine sa fety record nationally.

We regret, however, that in our opinion this has not yet been accomplished. To date there seems to be absolute agreement among Pennsylvania State mine inspectors, the miners themselves, as well as the operators that about the most significant achievement of the new Federal Mine Health and Safety Act is mass confusion, which has resulted in the following:

1. Instead of promoting better safety standards and accomplishments in the mines and among the miners, enforcement of the new law has gone 180 degrees away from this objective, so much so in fact that accidents and fatalities are on the increase, not decreasing, in Pennsylvania.

2. Harassment of mine operators by obsessive enforcement aimed at trivialities that have no real bearing on mine health and safety is causing the operators to rebel and become uncooperative.

3. Enforcement of this law—and I mean the Federal law, to the letter of the law is isolating and neutralizing the State mine inspectors. In fact, in Pennsylvania at least, it is destroying the image of the State inspector, something that has taken exactly 100 years to construct.

4. The law makes no distinction whatsoever between bituminous and anthracite mining and this fact is both inconceivable as well as totally illogical.

5. The law places the sole responsibility for mine health and safety upon the owner himself, not upon the shoulders of the men who actually work in the mines who have a definite responsibility. Supervision for the most part has been directed away from face operations resulting in neglect to areas of greatest exposure.

6. No one, even the Federal inspector, knows just how to comply with the law.

7. The new law does not lend itself at all to uniformity of inspections between Federal and State laws.

8. As an example, requirements for application of rock dust under this law contribute to white lung, creating an additional hazard for the miner himself instead of relieving a condition. Many

other examples could be cited. As you know, the manner in which an efficient, effective program of mine safety could be implemented has been a major public issue for many months. Our Secretary, Dr. H. B. Charmbury, and our staff have given a great deal of consideration to this and I would summarize in the following manner the conclusions which have been reached by our Department in creating an effective program:

1. The Federal Mine Safety Legislation is now law and a joint effort by State and Federal officials should be put forth to permit this legislation to achieve its goal—a better mine safety record. This could be done by:

(a) An advisory committee appointed by the Federal agency responsible for enforcing this law to work with them in establishing policies, procedures and regulations. I would recommend that the committee include, among others, the Safety Director of the United Mine Workers of America and the Safety Director of the Bituminous Coal Operators' Association, two persons located here in Washington who are daily involved in mine sa fety problems and represent two groups who are keenly interested in operating safe mines in this Nation.

(b) Officials of the U.S. Bureau of Mines should meet periodically with heads of the mining departments of all States to review, coordinate and establish one set of rules with which employees of the coal mining industry must comply.

To date we know of no meeting ever called by the U.S. Bureau of Mines with the heads of the departments of coalproducing States in order to discuss or formulate such a

plan. 2. Every State that has strong, effective mining laws and strong enforcement of those laws should have the responsibility of administration of mine sa fety. If it is determined by the officials of the

U.S. Bureau of Mines and their Advisory Committee that the State laws are not strong enough and enforced rigidly enough to promote mine safety, Federal inspectors should then be given that responsibility.

3. One of the most confusing issues for the coal miner attempting to do his job is the requirement of complying with regulations and laws of two different agencies—State and Federal. Dual enforcement is creating a problem.

4. I have read in the newspapers, and heard today, of the large number of inspectors which the U.S. Bureau of Mines feels must be hired to assume Federal responsibility required of them. This, too, is creating a problem for industry, because the only place these people can be secured would be from industry itself, and one of the most difficult problems with which we are presently involved is that of the scarcity of experienced, qualified persons to perform

the required safety precautions in our coal mines. I trust that my remarks will be considered as constructive comments. We recognize the magnitude of the problem and feel that mine safety can be best achieved by those closest to the working face of a mine, and, therefore, the responsibility of achieving mine safety should be first that of the State.

We really appreciate the opportunity of talking to you. We shall be glad to answer any questions that you may have.

Senator WILLIAMS. You have a magnificent statement, Mrs. Gutshall. I appreciate it.

I believe in Congress here we thought we had indicated the need for Federal-State coordination and cooperation. Evidently this has not in fact come to pass.

Mrs. GUTSHALL. It has not come to pass. We have had one meeting with the U.S. Bureau and with Mr. O'Leary to attempt to come to some sort of agreement.

Senator WILLIAMS. Was that Pennsylvania-Federal, or the other States?

Mrs. GUTSHALL. It was just Pennsylvania, at our request.

Senator WILLIAMs. There is a provision for Federal aid to State programs in our laws. Has that been put into effect in any way?

Mrs. GUTSHALL. In the last couple of days we received a copy of material from our Office of Administration indicating there would be grants available under the Federal act. That is the only notification we have had.

Senator Williams. I will say after a long day here, and at the table, too, the Department people just left and didn't hear your statement. You had better be sure that they get advised of what you have said here, and the recommendations you are making. They are all very strong, very important.

Senator RANDOLPH. Mr. Chairman, she is more critical of us than she is the Bureau of Mines.

Mrs. GUTSHALL. Not really.
Senator RANDOLPH. She said it is a bad bill.

Senator WILLIAMS. No, the bill has set in motion bad results. It is not the law.

Mrs. GUTSHALL. Legislation is now passed, and we are interested in coordination and cooperation between Federal and State.

« PreviousContinue »