A special session at the conference entitled “Increasing the Effectiveness of Mine Disaster Prevention, Escape, Evacuation, Response and Rescue” served as the perfect platform to exchange ideas and discuss protocols. The topic was certainly on the mind of San Juan Coal projects and development engineer supervisor Andy Erickson, who presented on how shelters were incorporated into the safety procedures at his mine.
In addition to outlining the proactive and reactive activities put in place for emergencies, Erickson noted the operation’s overall philosophy is “escape if feasible”
“Emergency shelters can play a significant role in the entire mine escape system. However, they are not a stand-alone ‘one cure fits all’,” he said, adding that the shelters can serve a dual purpose to assist in escape as well as being a refuge.
The dual application, he said, works for escape in the fact that it provides an area for workers to convene, rehydrate themselves, and change their rescuers if needed. The chamber would also house supplies and would serve as a device to help miners gauge where they are in their escape and measure the distance they still had to travel. It would also provide miners with a mental goal to reach during an escape situation.
Erickson noted in his presentation that for refuge purposes, the chamber would provide shelter and a barricade from dangerous gasses; long-term air supply and other supplies, including food and water, could also be stored there. He said that in addition to the vital communications equipment that would be available there during an emergency, simply the knowledge that the room exists often eases the mind of those involved.
Concurring on the topic of “escape first” were Dr Jan Mutmansky and Dr Raj Ramani, who served as co-chairs for the event in early June. Both noted the importance of discussion of the issue and its principles and shared insight into the industry’s thinking as well as their own.
“The philosophy in the US – mine layout, mine design, miner training, mine ventilation planning … everything is directed towards creating a person who can either escape on his own or can be evacuated safely from the mine. Refuge chambers are there as the last resort,” said Ramani.
He said the other philosophy that is present more internationally takes a slightly different stance: “It is the thinking of ‘I can’t locate each of you, I can’t design a mine where you can escape, so what I want you to do is – if something happens, you go into this chamber and lock yourself up. And because we know exactly where the chamber is and that you’re supposed to be there, we will have a drill … ready to drill a hole’.” That option is not as feasible in the US given a number of issues, including the consideration that many areas have significant depth of cover, such as the mountainous areas of southern Appalachia.
Both Mutmansky and Ramani agreed on the theory of “escape first” for mine emergencies as a standard procedure.
“Escape, evacuate, barricade, rescue – and you want to have all four. If anything fails, we always look for the next one, [looking] for you to barricade yourselves if escape and evacuation are not possible,” Ramani said.
Mutmansky concurred. “I agree – with the strategy [and] generally,” he said.
Ramani said while other topics in miner health and safety had made significant progress, the area of emergency rescue and recovery still had a lot of ground to cover to bring it up to those levels because “it has gotten behind”
That progress will require commitment, effort and resources from all sides, from the industry to the government, they said.
“Research needs to be more accelerated, needs to be more challenging and more focused. That is a tall order that requires a lot more funding and research, and there needs to be significant support for that kind of work,” Ramani said.
