While controversial mine safety and health legislation has passed the U.S. House of Representatives, the aggregates industry remains optimistic the bill will fail. Long-term prospects of the Supplementary Mine Improvement and New Emergency Response Act (S-MINER), however, are still unknown.

Introduced by Rep. George Miller, D-Calif., in June 2007, S-MINER aims to establish improved mandatory standards to protect miners during emergencies while serving other purposes. The bill would provide another layer of regulations atop the recently enacted Mine Improvement and New Emergency Response Act of 2006.

To many in the aggregates industry, though, the legislation wouldn't be an improvement. It would be a step in the wrong direction.

Points of discussion

"From my point of view, it's a silly piece of legislation," said industry veteran and consultant Carl Metzgar, Pit & Quarry's safety columnist. "To date, no one has demonstrated that the original act of 1977 has been effective. Fatality and other injury rates were falling when the 1977 law was passed. The rates have continued to fall, and there is no published research to demonstrate which part, if any, can be attributed to MSHA [Mine Safety and Health Administration] enforcement.

"We now have one major change in the law and are looking at this new legislation," he added. "Washington is parading out more abuse for the mining industry without any demonstration that the last regulatory waterboarding did any good."

According to the House Education and Labor Committee, which Miller chairs, the S-MINER Act would amend the mine acts of 1977 and 2006 to help prevent disasters, improve emergency response to a disaster and reduce long-term health risks facing miners. The committee said the legislation would address serious gaps in mine safety and health standards.

Opponents say the timing of S-MINER isn't right.

"The Miner Act was put in place in 2006, and it hasn't had adequate time to show results yet," contended Chris Upp, director of quarry operations for Conco Quarries Inc. in Springfield, Mo. "Having follow-up legislation makes it that much more difficult to do business."

Added Ellen Smith, publisher of Mine Safety and Health News and legal columnist for Pit & Quarry, "People are saying that some of the provisions in S-MINER are not a bad idea, but the industry is terribly overwhelmed right now just trying to deal with the provisions of the Miner Act, which don't come into play until 2009. People have said you need to get everybody caught up and take a breath. Right now operators are having a difficult time dealing with the provisions put in place in 2006."

Michael Heenan is an attorney for labor and safety law firm Ogletree Deakins and Pit & Quarry's law columnist. He has questioned why Congress would create enforcement mechanisms for mining and not other heavy industries that experience fatalities and injuries.

"The S-MINER Act would greatly increase MSHA's investigation and enforcement powers, introduce new and substantial minimum and maximum penalties and put a watchdog ombudsman over MSHA to make sure the agency enforces the law as Congress intended," Heenan said. "Operators' rights of privacy and property would be limited due to broad subpoena power bestowed on MSHA."