| OCR Text |
Show A3 The Emery County Review, Tuesday, July 29, 2008 Reports point finger at mine owners, MSHA Continued from Page A1. 7 and Aug. 3, submitting an “inadequate roof plan”, “failing to revise its roof control program” after the three previous bursts, continuing to “expose miners to unsafe conditions” and “violating the roof control plan when coal was mined in a prohibited area”. The report called the failure to adequately report the previous bounces “particularly critical,” because they “deprived MSHA of the information it needed to properly assess and approve GRI’s mining plans.” Because of the actions uncovered in the report, MSHA fined the mine’s operators over $1.6 million and fined Agapito Associates, who completed the engi- neering analysis on the mining plan, $220,000. In a statement, Genwal Resources rebutted the report. “We hoped that the accident investigation of the Mine Safety and Health Administration would provide objective and reliable findings to help bring helpful changes to the industry, additional insight to the company and some measure of closure for the families. But, regrettably, this report does not have the benefit of all the facts and appears to have been tainted in part by ten months of relentless political clamoring to lay blame for these tragic events,” they argued. “All of the facts must be acknowledged for the accident investigation process to yield the very best improvements in mine safety. As such, we pledge to learn as much as we can, especially in areas where this report appears deficient. We will do whatever we can to make mining safer.” The federal agency was similarly criticized by the independent report, prepared for Elaine L. Chao, Secretary of Labor, United States Department of Labor. The report revealed that MSHA failed to “fully meet its responsibility by approving the roof plans,” and that this failure “contributed to the occurrence of the August 6 accident.” The independent report censured MSHA for “inadequate evaluation of the engineering data”, “inadequate oversight of the plan evaluation and approval process”, “inadequate resolution of inconsistencies identified in the engineering data”, “failure to consider the impact” of the March 10 bounce, and more. After the report was issued, MSHA received especially heavy criticism from Mike Dalpiaz, who is the international vice president for the United Mine Workers of America. According to the Tribune, Dalpiaz said, “They approved it all. So, hell yeah, they deserve the blame. They could have stopped that thing in its tracks.” In their response to the report, MSHA stated, “While we disagree with some of the report’s findings, many of the recommendations are helpful, and MSHA intends to adopt changes that will be effective in moving forward toward that goal. With regard to the majority of deficiencies identified by the [independent report], additional improvements can and should be made. In fact, before issuance of the final report, MSHA fully implemented changes that address 13 recommendations.” Along with criticisms of the mine’s operators, the MSHA report also explained how, after three studies, the agency believes the accident happened. The report stated, “The outburst initiated near the section pillar line (the general area where the miners were working) and propagated toward the mine portal. Within seconds, overstressed pillars failed throughout the South Barrier section over a distance of approximately 1/2 mile. “Coal was expelled into the mine openings on the section, likely causing fatal injuries to Kerry Allred, Don Erickson, Jose Luis Hernandez, Juan Carlos Payan, Brandon Phillips, and Manuel Sanchez. The barrier pillars to the north and south of the South Barrier section also failed, inundating the section with lethally oxygendeficient air from the adjacent sealed area(s), which may have contributed to the death of the miners. As to the efforts of the three rescuers who were killed in the second incident on August 16, the report said, “The prospect of saving the entrapped miners’ lives warranted the heroic efforts of the rescue workers. The greater risks imposed on the rescue workers underscore the high degree of care that must be taken by mine operators to prevent catastrophic pillar failures.” Questions arise as companies eye industrial park for site of nuclear plant Continued from Page A1. ized through phone calls and emails and could become final in the next few weeks. So I guess my point is that if people in Green River or Emery County do have questions or concerns about this proposal, they won’t be able to turn to their local government once the SITLA deal is finished,” Urgo said. McCandless countered that even when the SITLA process is finalized there would still be a great many possibilities for public involvement, starting with planning and zoning requirements. He said the option contract had very little significance at this point in time. “All it does is allow them to do some studies to see if it is even a feasible site,” he said, indicating that the option contract is not in effect today and wouldn’t be until a lease agreement is finalized with SITLA. During the meeting Urgo claimed that the county planned to use tax revenue for the development, but after the meeting he was able to get clarification on the issue from McCandless. “After talking with Mike McCandless, it is my understanding now that these are new tax dollars that would come from the sale of the land, not existing tax dollars. The contracts for the sale are also going to be written so that Mancos (company planning to develop a uranium mill at the industrial park) and Transition Power have to put up some of their own money for infrastructure improvements. So I do believe that the deal with SITLA is structured to protect the taxpayers of Emery County from having to put up existing revenues for improvements that could then be lost,” Urgo told The Emery County Review. With that said, Urgo pointed out that nuclear power is the most heavily subsidized energy sector in history and everyone will be paying tax dollars for any new nuclear power plants developed in the United States. “My argument is that we shouldn’t give more of our tax dollars to an industry that has been around for 50 years and should be required to stand on its own two feet,” Urgo said. During his discussion with the commissioner, Urgo said the county would be better served by looking at other, more environmentally friendly forms of power development. McCandless said that the county does talk to other developers. He indicated that he will talk to any developer that expresses an interest in the industrial park “We have talked to a lot of energy companies. We talk to them all of the time. But they have to get to where they’re willing to spend money and so far Transition Power has said they’re willing to spend money,” McCandless said. During the commission meeting Mark H. Williams of Castle Dale asked Urgo to tell him when the last nuclear accident had occurred in the country and indicated that he felt nuclear power was safe and would bring needed jobs into the county. Urgo acknowledged that there hadn’t been an incident at a nuclear plant for more than 20 years and, after the meeting, said he understood some of the hostility toward the message he was bringing regarding nuclear power. “I think the reaction was a result of me being perceived as an outsider trying to tell the county what to do. And I understand that, and the suspicion. I just hope people treat the companies coming in with the same suspicion. I also think people are suspicious because they’ve lived off the land for years, but in the last 25 years or so they’ve been told what they can and can’t do with their land more often. “While it’s always been public land, no one outside these communities really bothered for years and it was left to local control. Now, people are being told what roads they can drive on, what areas are now off limits, what you can do with livestock. I think the environmental movement has done itself a great deal of harm by promulgating regulations from above and not starting first in local communities to try to build support, or at least consensus, for some of these changes,” Urgo said. If the development of a nuclear power plant makes its first, tentative steps toward reality, it will be the second business for the industrial park with a nuclear theme. Manco Resources Inc. is moving forward with plans to develop a uranium mill through the lease of up to 800 aces of land at the park. The uranium mill would produce 1,200 tons of ore each day and produce 2.4 tons of yellowcake. The uranium mill would be the first tenant of the new industrial park once the agreement with SITLA is finalized. The plant is expected to cost $100 million to build. A public hearing regarding the uranium mill development is being planned for September. HEAL Utah is also opposed to the development of the uranium mill and points to the poor track record of uranium mills in the past in regards to safety and environmental stewardship. “We’re still dealing with the past legacy with Atlas, the cancer cluster in Monticello, and there are residents in Blanding concerned about groundwater contamination from the White Mesa mill. It’s going to cost over $1 billion just to remove the Atlas mill tailings, and it cost a few hundred million to remediate the other sites that existed in Utah. Again, these are costs to taxpayers, not to the companies that created these messes,” he said. Also speaking to the commission during the July 15 meeting was Sarah Fields of Uranium Watch in Moab. She expressed concern about the proposed uses of the industrial park and said that if the county sold as much as 1,600 acres to Transition Power for a nuclear power plant and another 700 to 800 acres to Mancos Resources for a uranium mill, that would leave very little of the 3,300 acres left at the industrial park for anything else. “The plans for a nuclear power plant are going on under the radar. I have no knowledge of Transition Power having any meetings to discuss what they are wanting to do. I don’t think the county has a very good picture of what a nuclear power plant will mean next to the Green River,” Field said. McCandless and the commission again stressed that everything is in a preliminary stage and there is no evidence, as of yet, that the development of a nuclear plant at the site is even feasible. Citizens’ concerns dominate Castle Dale City Council meeting Josie Luke Life Is Discussion of citizens’ concerns dominated the Castle Dale City Council meeting held July 23. The council addressed several concerns, including holiday fireworks displays scaring animals. Carl Bott approached the council with his concerns of the large fireworks scaring animals. Bott explained that he hears about animals being frightened every year after the city’s fireworks, with many dog owners trying to find missing dogs the next morning. He also said he knew of a horse that had been hurt going through a fence because it was frightened by the fireworks and expressed concern that he has sheep in a field near the location where the fireworks are set off. Swell Emery and Carbon Counties, Utah u Living in the San Rafael Swell Area u Know of an event happening in Emery or Carbon counties? Submit your event or happening to The Emery County Review’s Life is Swell Section. This new section of your locally owned newspaper is designed to inform the people who live, work and play in the San Rafael Swell area of the many events that occur weekly and the opportunities for entertainment awaiting residents and visitors to Castle Country. For more information call 748-2541 or by email at jldavis@theemerycountyreview.com You’re News to Us! Bott stressed it was not his desire to discontinue the display; rather he wanted to see if there was another solution to the problem, possibly relocating the place where the fireworks were set off. The council discussed the issue and decided that before making such a large change, they would first attempt to solve the problem by eliminating the loudest booming fireworks after the Emery County’s New Newspaper 685 South Main Street P.O. Box 487 Orangeville, UT. 84537 www.theemerycountyreview.com Phone: 435-748-2541 Fax: 435-748-2543 Established January 2, 2007 Published Every Tuesday Publisher / Editor James L. Davis jldavis@theemerycountyreview.com Co-Publisher / Office / Advertising Manager Colleen A. Davis cdavis@theemerycountyreview.com Assistant Editor Josie Luke Advertising Design / Office Lyndsay Reid Advertising Sales Charlotte Williams Editorial Staff Kathy P. Ockey Webmaster Casey Wood Postmaster: Send change of address to The Emery County Review, 685 South Main Street, P.O. Box 487, Orangeville, UT. 84537. Publication No: (USPS 6) issued once a week at Orangeville, Utah. Standard postage paid at Orangeville, Utah. Subscription Rates 1 Year (52 Issues) In-State $23.00 1 Year (52 Issues) Out-of-State $26.00 Copyright 2008 The Emery County Review rodeo on Thursday night. In a phone interview on Friday, Bott revealed that the animals’ initial reaction was as severe as usual, but as the display continued, it “wasn’t quite as bad.” He said the elimination of the louder fireworks “was a good starting point.” Huntington Film Fest October 10, 2008 at 7:00 PM The Star Theatre Huntington, UT Call for details Film entry deadline is September 30, 2008 Get Started Now! Films must be made for viewing of all age audience Rating PG Bring your DVD copy into the the Star Grill Family - Fun - Food - Entertainment Starts 11:00 AM to 9:00 PM Monday thru Saturday Fun Shakes & Kids Combo Meals Mini Burger, Fries & Drink $1.29 Mini Cheese Combo $1.89 Mini Bacon Combo $2.89 Mini Bacon Cheese Combo $3.29 Mini Mushroom Swiss Combo $2.89 Add a 12 oz. Rock Climber for just 39¢ Kid Grilled Cheese 99¢ Combo $1.99 Kid Grilled ham & Cheese $1.99 Combo $2.99 Personal Size Pizza $2.99 Kids 5 Piece Chicken Nugget Meal $4.99 Corn Dog $1.99 Comb $2.99 Star Fun Center Grill & Arcade Star Theatre Show Times Your Family Hot Spot Friday 7:00 PM For Food & Saturday 4:00 PM & 7:00 PM Entertainment Admission $3.00 Children 11 & under, Adults $6.00 133 N Main Huntington 435-687-(STAR)7827 |
