Massey general counsel Shane Harvey told ILN today that Massey representatives were not present at the family briefing held Tuesday by investigators, or the press conference held Wednesday morning by telephone.

It also was not briefed by MSHA on the issues covered in the report, though he noted the producer had some understanding of the agency’s working theory based on media reports.

“Our findings are different than MSHA’s working theory, as we understand it,” Harvey said.

“We do not currently believe that there were issues with the bits or the sprays on the shearer that contributed to the explosion.”

Additionally, he noted, Massey does not feel that coal dust played a meaningful role in the blast, a theory maintained by federal officials.

“We currently believe the mine was well rock-dusted and that the mine exploded due to an infusion of high levels of natural gas.”

Massey is now planning a briefing of its own findings with victims’ families as soon as possible.

“We are also very interested in meeting with MSHA officials to understand their conclusions,” Harvey noted.

MSHA said in meetings earlier this week that it was looking at a small methane gas ignition fueled by accumulated excessive coal dust as the cause of the Upper Big Branch mine explosion.

In its update report, the agency specifically looked at worn longwall shearer head bits and missing operational shearer sprayers. Investigators continue to reject Massey’s opinion that a large burst of gas from a crack in the floor emerged suddenly and overtook alarms and preventive safeguards in place at the mine.

MSHA administrator for coal mine safety and health Kevin Stricklin was asked by several media outlets on Wednesday if the agency felt the mine had been operated in an unsafe manner.

While Stricklin did not directly place Massey at fault, he did state one opinion on which the agency remained firm.

“We’ve always taken a position that all explosions are preventable,” he said, noting that both the water sprays and rock dusting appeared to be inadequate.

While Massey did not make an immediate formal statement after the conference, late Wednesday Bloomberg quoted Harvey as saying that the company’s findings differed from those of MSHA’s investigators.

“We likewise do not believe that coal dust played a meaningful role in the explosion,” he said, noting that sprays may have been damaged in the blast and would not have suppressed a spark or fire at the shearer.