The Department of Labor's Mine Safety and Health Administration has
announced new screening criteria for the pattern of violations
enforcement program, which gives the agency additional enforcement
tools to use at mines with a history of violating safety standards.
This is a critical first step in reforming the current pattern of
violations enforcement program. The agency announced plans to draft new
regulations governing the program in the spring, and the new criteria
follow calls by Congress and the Department of Labor's Office of
Inspector General to fix serious flaws in the current system. MSHA will
implement new screening criteria and a new review process for
determining whether a mine has exhibited a potential pattern of
violations for its 2010 review of mine safety records.
"Since the passage of the Mine Act more than 30 years ago, not one
mining operation has ever been placed on a pattern of violations," said
Joseph A. Main, assistant secretary of labor for mine safety and
health. "We have known for some time that the current system is broken
and needs to be fixed. This new screening process improves upon the old
one, which cast too broad a net and did not distinguish mines with the
highest levels of elevated enforcement. This new system will let MSHA
focus its attention on those mines that are putting miners at greatest
risk."
"MSHA's changes to the POV program cannot fix shortcomings that
require legislation or changes to the existing regulations," Main
added. "This is a stop-gap measure until reform can occur. We are
aggressively pursuing both regulatory and legislative reforms, but in
the mean time this new policy improves our ability to identify problem
mines. Our goal with each of these reform efforts is to identify mines
with a pattern of dangerous conditions and encourage them to improve
their safety records. If a mine fails to do so, it will be placed into
POV status."
Section 104(e) of the federal Mine Safety and Health Act of 1977
(Mine Act) provides that mine operators with a pattern of significant
and substantial violations be subject to closure orders for areas of
the mine affected by those violations until the mine receives a clean
inspection. Under current regulations, MSHA uses a screening process to
determine whether a mine has a potential pattern of violations. A mine
operator found to have a potential pattern of violations is given a
period of time to reduce violations before MSHA uses its authority
under 104(e) to issue closure orders.
According to the legislative history of the Mine Act, POV provisions
are intended for use "at mines with a record of repeated [significant
and substantial] violations and where the other enforcement provisions
of the statute have not been effective in bringing the mine into
compliance with federal health and safety standards." The preamble to
the existing final rule states that "MSHA expects to reserve the use of
the 104(e) sanctions for mines where the operator has not responded to
an escalating series of enforcement actions by the Agency."
"MSHA's changes to the screening process are designed to meet these
statutory and regulatory objectives," said Main. "The new screening
criteria will draw more attention to the so-called 'bad actors' than
did the old criteria. They will focus on mines that exhibit chronic
failures to maintain safe working conditions, have repeated significant
and substantial violations, and have not responded to other enforcement
tools."
The new screening process is designed to identify mines that have
been subject to closure orders, including closure orders for serious
issues such as failing to correct violations after MSHA cites them,
unwarrantable failures to comply with health or safety standards,
failure to provide miners with required training and imminent dangers
in the mine. The criteria will better identify mines where these tools
have been used but have not been sufficient to improve compliance. The
criteria also will consider whether a mine has high numbers of
significant and substantial or S&S, violations involving elevated
negligence, as well as a mine's injury severity rate, targeting
operations with an above-average injury severity measure. All of these
factors are either new to the screening criteria or given greater
emphasis than before.
The quantitative criteria use the most recent available 12 months of
health and safety data to screen for mines. The screening criteria
address two categories of violators. In the first category, a mine must
exhibit high numbers of S&S violations (at least 50); have S&S
violations either issued at an elevated rate (eight per 100 inspection
hours) or at elevated levels (25 percent or more) of negligence; have a
high rate of elevated enforcement actions (.5 per 100 inspection hours)
(In almost all cases these must be closure orders for serious
problems.); and have an elevated record of severe injuries (above the
industry rate).
The second category targets mines that do not meet the above
criteria but still have high numbers of S&S violations and elevated
enforcement actions — at least 100 S&S citations/orders and at
least 40 elevated citations/orders.
In addition, as required under current regulations, the screening
requires mines in both categories to have either repeated S&S
violations of the same standard (at least five) or repeated S&S
violations caused by an unwarrantable failure to comply with the law
(at least two).