THE MINE SAFETY AND HEALTH ACT: LEGISLATIVE, POLICY, AND ENFORCEMENT INITIATIVES FOLLOWING THE UPPER BIG BRANCH EXPLOSION

摘要

In 2006, the Mine Improvement and New Emergency Response Act ("2006 MINER Acf), Pub. L No. 109-236, 120 Stat. 493 (2006) was enacted in a bi-partisan move to strengthen the 1977 Mine Safety and Health Act. This action followed several underground coal mining accidents at the Sago and Aracoma Mines in West Virginia and the Darby Mine in Kentucky. The focus of that legislation was, in part, to force technological development and implementation. It involved the recomposition and training of rescue teams. Requirements for sealing worked out areas of mines were changed when MSHA invoked its Emergency Temporary Standard ("ETS") authority for the first time in many years. Increased penalty amounts were established for certain types of violations for all types of mining, and minimums were set for unwarrantable failure violations issued under Section 104 (d)(1) and (d)(2); 30 U.S.C. Section 814 (d)(1),(2). The entire 30 C.F.R. Part 100 penalty criteria was revamped in a rulemaking, effective in April 2007.The visions were ambitious and noteworthy and those in industry and government have spent the last four years working through the aftermath of intended and unintended consequences of these changes. The penalty structure arrived at in 2007 has proven unwieldy and has contributed to the increase in contested caseload now before the Federal Mine Safety and Health Review Commission. In essence, litigation under the Mine Act ground to a virtual halt when the number of cases increased but the budget for Administrative Law Judges, who hear the cases, and the Solicitor's office who represents MSHA, was not increased. Addressing the backlog effectively was one of the major challenges when Joe Main was confirmed as Assistant Secretary in early 2010.