Re: Restrictions on travel
 

Claims to have direct experience. Check. Provides nothing to corroborate said claim. Check. Belittles poster who actually posts corroboration of what he posts. Check. In other words, morpeth's normal schtick.

Fortunately, there is much of public record on that mine disaster, including the fact that the mine owner was found criminally liable. And that that company had repeatedly spun out the appeals process rather than fixing serious safety issues regarding the ventilation system. Interestingly, you fail to acknowledge any of this, but merely point fingers at regulators and politicians. In fact, the only thing you have posted on the Massey mine disaster is your anecdote about trash can lids. Very telling.

I don't "portray" myself as anything, but I am most certainly going to continue to call out the modus operandi you've exhibited in this thread and others.

But, yeh, "lid off a trash can" .

Re: Restrictions on travel
 

On the particular event you referred to my post I think I was clear that I wasn't aware of the details enough to comment on, and what I had heard from a good friend who actually has experience of in that region wasn't positive about that CEO. There was nothing to acknowledge as I didn't know the case well enough- but yes I do think that safety regulator's time should be spent on serious issues not many not so serious issues or required to give a certain amount of citations as a way to judge their performance.

As far as ventilation issues not being addressed in a coal mine, I am unsure why an appeal should have drug too long on such a critical issue- in particular for a coal mine.

If you took my comment as belittling on a personal level pointing out you have had no actual experience with the subject at hand, you have my apology as nothing was meant to be insulting on a personal level. We are different, I actually like to hear from people who have had actual experience, especially since there appears to me so much partisanship in news these days.

I could post articles from industry press but based on past posts in this regard, they are instantly dismissed because of the source, therefore didn't see the point.

As regards to my own experience what was I supposed to , walk around with a tape recorder and video camera ?

The idea that every regulation is actually reasonable and needed, and that regulators don't have their own agenda at times, leads to the type of situation I described. Could give a lot more examples.

Yes the case about the trash lid happened, and actually worse- because the rule covered underground trash cans but inspector applied to an above-ground area, but when pointed out it wasn't violation the response was that he had to give out so many violations per visit so if he had to go back underground he would find a more serious violation, so company just said ok and accepted the fine. (EPA is even worse in that regard).It had nothing to do with that disaster as you implied I was referring to, and a simple readily understood example of inane regulations and implementation of the same.

It is precisely the idea all regulation is sensible and needed, and Congress putting pressure on regulators, that causes such a waste of money and the time of regulators, and industry. And at least in case of MSHA, I don't think it is the lower level inspectors at fault, a lot from pressure from higher ups who get the pressure from higher ups in executive or legislative branches of government.

You are quite correct anecdotal evidence can not always be indicative of the majority of incidents that occur, but certainly that is a different argument than saying I "claim" to have experience. Evidently by the way MSHA feels differently than you,awarding an operation I managed a national safety award.