Search Documents

By Lloyd A. Morley

This Bureau of Mines publication presents a comprehensive review of mine electrical power-system theory and practice. It discusses fundamental theory and the vital aspects to be considered in planning and designing mine electrical power systems. The report is divided into three major sections. The first presents the history of electricity in mining and the fundamentals of electrical phenomena and components. The second focuses on power-system components: motors, grounding systems, cables, and protective equipment and devices. The final section includes mine power-center equipment, switchhouses and substations, batteries, and mine maintenance.

Jan 1, 2003

To improve the ventilation of large-opening under-ground stone mines by using stoppings made from stone left in place. Background Underground stone mines typically use large room-and-pillar openings with little ventilation control. Stone miners may be exposed to contaminants that include silica dust, diesel particulate matter (DPM), exhaust gases, nuisance dust, and face shot (blasting) fume gases. The health risks from breathing these fine particles and toxic organic materials are well documented. Although contaminants such as dust or diesel exhaust can be some-what controlled at the source, the escaping contaminants are often diluted and removed from work areas using ventilation with minimal controls. In many cases, current mine ventilation practices use trial-and-error techniques to improve ventilation. The growing realization of the importance of a healthy work environment along with increased regulations will require many stone mines to implement new ways to improve ventilation. In-place stone stoppings are one option. Mine air flows from one point to another because of a pressure differential between those points. This pressure differential is established using a mechanical fan in conjunction with separations (stoppings) between high-pressure (intake) and low-pressure (return) airways. The separation of intakes and returns is an important concept that is used in most other types of mines. Normally, air moves through underground stone mines with minimal control technology. Fans are placed in locations where they are thought to be most beneficial, and intakes are not separated from returns. In a few smaller underground stone mines, proper ventilation can be achieved with a few strategically placed fans. However, as these mines increase in size, moving adequate quantities of air through-out the mine becomes harder, and separation of intakes and returns becomes a problem. Building traditional mine stoppings to separate the intake and return airways in entries with a cross-section area often exceeding 800 ft2 is difficult. The stoppings must be able to withstand both the dynamic pressure from face shots and the static pressures created by the fans. Construction and maintenance difficulties, as well as high costs, are the main factors preventing these traditional mine stoppings from gaining wide acceptance by the stone mining industry.

Dec 1, 2002

To improve the air quality in large-opening stone mines by developing better ventilation techniques, including appropriate fan selection in conjunction with air-coursing methods. Background Stone mines are the most common underground large-entry mines in the United States. Data from the Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA) for the year 2000 indicate that there were 162 active nonmetal underground mines in the United States, of which 117 were stone mines. Many underground stone mines are drift mines developed from previous quarry operations. Typically, these room-and-pillar mines have entries that are 20 ft or higher and at least 40 ft wide. These large dimensions lead to a very small ventilating pressure loss, even when significant air quantities move through the mine. This is especially true of drift mine operations where ventilating pressure losses of <0.25 in w.g. are common. Underground stone mines with shafts that are<200 ft deep typically have ventilating pressure losses that are <2 in w.g. The pressure losses through these mines are much lower than those of a typical coal mine or deep metal/nonmetal mine. Therefore, the ventilation techniques and principles are quite different. In addition, because of new MSHA regulations that limit the concentration of diesel particulate matter, these mines may need to greatly increase their ventilation airflow. Therefore, large-opening mines need a fan that can move large air quantities and operate at low static pressures. There are three fan types for mine ventilation: centrifugal, axial vane, and propeller. Centrifugal fans are uncommon in underground stone mines as they are often associated with mines requiring the highest of ventilation pressures. Axial vane fans are widely used in all types of mining operations. They are the most common fan type currently found in underground large-opening stone mines. However, they typically do not operate at low static pressures with high efficiency. Propeller fans are currently uncommon in underground stone mines. They are designed for low static pressures and large air quantities at higher efficiency. This fan type best suits the ventilation needs in large-opening stone mines?they produce large air quantities at low pressure losses. Mines with air shafts<100 ft long and at least 12 ft in diameter have fairly low mine static pressures and may also benefit from propeller fans.

Dec 1, 2002

To determine the effectiveness of multiple types of fire sensors for early and reliable mine fire detection. Background The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) has evaluated the effectiveness of multiple types of fire sensors for early mine fire detection and nuisance signal discrimination. Reliable early fire detection in underground mine can be hindered by false fire alarms produced by carbon monoxide (CO) and smoke particulate emissions from diesel equipment, welding, and metal-burning activities. Another false fire alarm source is the cross-interference of hydrogen (H2) produced by battery-charging operations with a CO sensor&apos;s chemical cell. Workers can learn to ignore repetitious "false" alarms associated with these emissions. This jeopardizes their safety in the event of a mine fire.

Sep 1, 2002

Experience, it is said, is the best teacher. Some experiences, however, should be shared so that no one else will ever have to live through them again. The fire at the Sunshine Mine is one such experience. ?Hard-rock mines don?t burn.? The Sunshine Mine near Kellogg, ID, was the nation?s premier silver producer for many years. In 1972, the mine was nearly 6,000 feet deep, contained hundreds of miles of worked-out areas, and employed nearly 500 people. Because of its depth and the type of host rock for the silver (unburnable quartzite), the general thinking of the day was that fires in mines such as the Sunshine were impossible, because ?hard-rock mines don?t burn.? What wasn?t really considered was that timber supports, foam insulation, and mining equipment do burn and that the carbon monoxide gas produced by burning is far more deadly than fire itself. Thus, no one was prepared when, on May 2, 1972, a fire of un-known origin broke out below the 3100 level of the mine. Before long, 173 miners on the day shift were trapped by thick, black smoke. By the time the fire was out, 91 miners had died, and the Sunshine Mine Fire became known as one of the worst mine disasters of the 20th century. It became the catalyst for passage of the Metal/Nonmetal Health and Safety Act of 1977, which applied the same federal safety standards to hard-rock mines as those regulating coal. Mandated safety training, mine inspections, and equipment standards were brought into force.

Aug 1, 2002

Objective As mines become safer and disasters fewer, a time may come when no employees in the mining industry have any practical experience in managing a mine emergency. To fill an emerging gap in mine emergency response training, a multidisciplinary team of researchers and computer programmers from the NIOSH Pittsburgh Research Laboratory has developed an intervention for mining personnel who would be in leadership positions in the command center during emergencies. It is called MERITS, a computer-based emergency simulation exercise. MERITS is short for "Mine Emergency Response Interactive Training Simulation." It provides trainees an opportunity to gain command center experience during a simulated underground coal mine emergency. MERITS allows trainees to practice information gathering, situation assessment, decision-making, and coordination skills without risk to personnel or property. Individuals representing mine emergency response personnel, various State safety officials, and private mine management from three States have participated in MERITS training. What Is MERITS? MERITS is an extension of previous work that compiled a knowledge base relevant to mine disaster management via interviews, analysis of literature, reviews of past events, and observations of mock mine disasters. Findings from prior research found a need for an alternative method of command center training. This new computer simulation is being used to train emergency command center personnel to effectively manage an underground mine fire. Modeled after training simulations developed for other industries (e.g., to address nuclear accidents, chemical spills, evacuations, etc.), MERITS simulates underground and surface events related to the disaster. It exposes the user to events that typically occur during a mine emergency, such as lack of information and miscommunication. It also presents trainees with issues that must be addressed, such as making provisions for briefing news media and victims&apos; families, ordering needed supplies, interfacing with Government enforcement agencies, and housing mine rescue teams. The outcome of the scenario is determined by the users&apos; decisions and their emergency response plans. Field Results Field testing of MERITS was conducted with eight full-day training sessions at four different locations in Colorado, Pennsylvania, and West Virginia. These field tests benefited from the knowledge and experience of State of Pennsylvania inspection officials, representatives of the United Mine Workers of America(UMWA), and private mine management who served as trainees for the MERITS training sessions. Trainees self-reported an average of20 years of work experience in the mining industry. All trainees had participated in Mine Emergency Response Development (MERD) training exercises, and many had been involved in real mine emergencies. Trainee evaluation of the MERITS program is summarized below: •Twenty-six of the 27 trainees believed that the MERITS simulation helped them know how to prepare for a real emergency. •Twenty-five of the 27 trainees believed that the storyline for the MERITS simulation was either "very realistic" or "realistic." •All 27 trainees believed that the MERITS simulation helped them learn how to better handle a real emergency. •None of the 27 trainees stated that they were bored during the simulation. After the initial field tests, MERITS was refined and retested during training sessions for individuals from State agencies, the UMWA, and private industry. Mining personnel from underground coal and underground stone mines participated and responded positively to the learning experience. Technology Transfer Industry introduction to the MERITS program will occur throughout 2002. MERITS presentations at the Joseph A. Holmes Safety Association National Meeting in Virginia Beach, VA, in June.

Jun 1, 2002

1. A total of 14,413 mining operations reported employment to the Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA). Nearly half (48.9%) were sand and gravel operations, followed by stone (28.5%), coal (14.7%), nonmetal (5.7%), and metal mines (2.1%). 2. Mine operators reported 240,000 full-time equivalent workers1 (down 3.9% from 1999). Independent contractors reported 42,000 full-time equivalent workers working on mine property (up 8.6% from 1999). Coal operators accounted for 26.8% of reported employee hours, followed by stone operators (25.9%) and sand and gravel operators (12.1%). 3. Eighty-four (84) work-related mine fatalities occurred in 2000 compared to 90 the year before. •The mine fatality rate was 29.8 per 100,000 full-time equivalent workers compared to a fatality rate of4.6 per 100,000 employees for all private industry. •Thirty-one percent (31%) of the fatalities occurred in underground work areas, which account for only17% of total employment. •Although the largest number of fatalities (28) occurred among miners who work for coal operators, coal contractor employees had the highest fatality rate (61.1 per 100,000 full-time equivalent workers). 4.There were 10,839 nonfatal lost-time injuries reported to MSHA, occurring at a rate of 3.8 injuries per 100full-time equivalent workers, and resulting in a total of 417,918 lost workdays.2 •Among all employees,3 the highest injury rate occurred among coal operator employees (5.6 nonfatal injuries per 100 full-time equivalent workers). •The highest percentage (34.7%) of nonfatal lost-time injuries were due to handling materials (e.g., over-exertion in lifting, pulling, or pushing objects), which also accounted for the greatest percentage of lost workdays (29.3%). •Among the most frequently occurring injuries, the most severe (as measured by the median number of days lost) were associated with accidents involving falls of ground, the use of powered haulage, and slips or falls. •The most frequently reported part of the body injured was the back (22.9% of all injuries). Back injuries accounted for the highest percentage of lost workdays (21.6%). 5.Seven hundred sixty-seven (767) cases of occupational illness were reported to MSHA. •The most frequently reported illness was repetitive trauma, resulting in joint, tendon, or muscle inflammation or irritation (37.3%). •There were 155 (20.2%) illnesses reported as hearing loss. The majority (68.4%) of hearing loss cases occurred among surface workers. •Coal workers&apos; pneumoconiosis accounted for 14.5% of reported illnesses.

May 15, 2002

Objective To develop safety training tools for mine safety and health professionals that fill gaps in currently available materials. Background Over the past 4 years, NIOSH has developed and released a series of training videos targeted at underground mine safety. These videos were developed in close cooperation with the mining industry and safety training professionals and were intended to provide realistic, interesting, effective training to both new hires and experienced miners. The videos cover the mining cycle, starting with the breaking of the rock (Handling Explosives in Modern Mines), making certain the work area is safe after a blast (Rock Falls— Preventing Rock Fall Injuries in Underground Mines), installation of ground supports and recognition of failed supports (Miner Mike Saves the Day), and hauling both ore and materials in the mine (Hazards in Motion). A separate video (Hidden Scars) captures the story of a fatal rock burst through an interview with a miner who nearly died and who lost his partner in the accident. These videos have been extremely popular in the mining industry and are being used across the nation as well as in 18 other countries. Two of them, Rock Falls and Miner Mike Saves the Day, have won Alice Hamilton awards, NIOSH’s highest recognition for Excellence in Occupational Safety and Health, in the Educational Materials category. Approach A recently completed independent evaluation of the SRL mining videos identified five themes that mine safety trainers consider necessary for successful training materials: high quality, credibility, accurate content, effectiveness, and an engaging nature. All of the NIOSH videos were rated very high for each theme. Using these measures of effectiveness, a more difficult challenge has been undertaken. Much has been written in the mining industry about the coming turnover in employment. The average age of miners in the United States is approaching 50, and many of the “experts” will be leaving the industry as they reach retirement age. The mining industry, like many industries involving skilled labor, relies heavily on a master-apprentice relationship between new hires and older miners. New hands learn from experienced miners. Their learning falls into three primary categories—they learn what’s important to know, they learn how to do things correctly and safely, and they learn the culture.

Mar 1, 2002

Objective The main purpose of this video is to teach mine rescue personnel certain aspects of rescue work that are not traditionally taught. These include the strain caused by working continually under adverse conditions; the "survivor guilt" that occurs from being spared the fate of one&apos;s deceased cohorts; and the posttraumatic stress that may be experienced during the sometimes lengthy task of recovering the victims&apos; bodies. Background On November 20, 1968, an explosion rocked the Farmington No. 9 Mine in northern West Virginia (figure 1). The explosion killed 78 of 99 miners who were working in the mine, including all but one member of the mine&apos;s rescue team. Some 30 years after the event, researchers from the NIOSH Pittsburgh Research Laboratory (PRL) conducted a video interview with Danny Kuhn (figure 2), the only Farmington No. 9 mine rescue team member who was not working that day and who did not die in the explosion. According to the Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA), there are about 80 underground coal mine rescue teams in the United States, and according to the National Mining Association, there are more than 850 underground coal mines. This represents a significant decrease in both over the past decade. The low number of rescue teams is a concern because serious incidents, though fewer, still happen, and if a disaster occurs, there will be fewer rescue teams to respond. This would result in an increased need to use available human resources very efficiently. Much training to prepare these rescue teams still takes the form of what educators call "teaching to the test." In other words, teams practice in order to win mine rescue contests. This test-oriented approach has traditionally been augmented by interactions with others who have responded to real situations or by participating in actual incidents. Given few incidents and fewer rescue teams from whom to derive enrichment, the preparation of coal mine rescue personnel becomes a problem. Recently, more emphasis has been placed on active learning, such as working out problems in smoke. These sessions more nearly simulate the actual conditions that today&apos;s team members might rarely encounter. To properly prepare and retain the current coal mine rescue personnel who are left in the workforce, it is necessary not only to offer such hands-on experience, but also to replace the learning narratives that once were passed from team to team. The present video is intended to contribute in that capacity. Approach NIOSH researchers first learned of Mr. Kuhn in the fall of1998. Mr. Kuhn was contacted and agreed to an interview. An oral history interview was conducted with Mr. Kuhn in early November1998. After reviewing the videotape of the interview, researchers determined the content to be so rich as to warrant a second interview in a more formal setting. The second interview was done in early December 1998. During this interview, Mr. Kuhn spent about 2 hours describing the Farmington disaster, including the workplace climate leading up to the explosion, the events that took place in the 10 days after the explosion, and the nearly 10-year effort to safely and successfully recover most of the victims&apos; bodies. The videotape of the second oral history interview with Danny Kuhn was reviewed and edited by NIOSH researchers for content. Careful attention was used to ensure that valuable information was presented, but within a reasonable timeframe. A detailed map of the Farmington No. 9 Mine was edited into the final video and used to highlight critical features as they were being described by Mr. Kuhn. Results and Accomplishments A 60-minute videotape and instructor&apos;s guide for use in safety training or other settings was completed. The target audience consists of all those who work in underground coal mines. This training video will help safety instructors better prepare mine rescue team members for the situations that they will encounter when engaging in extended rescue and recovery work. As a result of this expectations training, team members will be more likely to serve their

Mar 1, 2002

By Thomas J. Fisher, John J. Sammarco, Gary L. Mowrey, Edward F. Fries

This report (Safety File 3.0) is the fourth in a nine-part series of recommendations addressing the functional safety of processor-controlled mining equipment. It is part of a risk-based system safety process encompassing hardware, software, humans, and the operating environment for the equipment’s life cycle. Figure 1 shows a safety framework containing these recommendations. The reports in this series address the various life cycle stages of inception, design, approval and certification, commissioning, operation, maintenance, and decommissioning. These recommendations were developed as a joint project between the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health and the Mine Safety and Health Administration. They are intended for use by mining companies, original equipment manufacturers, and aftermarket suppliers to these mining companies. Users of these reports are expected to consider the set in total during the design cycle. • 1.0 Safety Introduction.—This is an introductory report for the general mining industry. It provides basic system/software safety concepts, discusses the need for mining to address the functional safety of programmable electronics (PE), and includes the benefits of implementing a system/software safety program. • 2.1 System Safety and 2.2 Software Safety.—These reports draw heavily from International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) standard IEC 61508 [IEC 1998a,b,c,d,e,f,g] and other standards. The scope is “surface and underground safety-related mining systems employing embedded, networked, and nonnetworked programmable electronics.” System safety seeks to design safety into all phases of the entire system. Software is a subsystem; thus, software safety is a part of the system’s safety. • 3.0 Safety File.—This report contains the documentation that demonstrates the level of safety built into the system and identifies limitations for the system’s use and operation. In essence, it is a “proof of safety” that the system and its operation meet the appropriate level of safety for the intended application. It starts from the beginning of the design, is maintained during the full lifecycle of the system, and provides administrative support for the safety program of the full system. • 4.0 Safety Assessment.—The independent assessment of the safety file is addressed. It establishes consistent methods to determine the completeness and suitability of safety evidence and justifications. This assessment could be conducted by an independent third party. • 5.0 Safety Framework Guidance.—It is intended to supplement the safety framework reports with guidance providing users with additional information. The purpose is to assist users in applying the concepts presented. In other words, the safety framework is what needs to be done and the guidance is the how it can be done. The guidance information reinforces the concepts, describes various methodologies that can be used, and gives examples and references. It also gives information on the benefits and drawbacks of various methodologies. The guidance reports are not intended to promote a single methodology or to be an exhaustive treatment of the subject material. They provide information and references so that the user can more intelligently choose and implement the appropriate methodologies given the user’s application and capabilities. [ ]

Jan 5, 2002

By Theodore M. Katz, W. Stephen Brightwell, David E. LeGrande, Joseph J. Hurrell, Jane A. Lipscomb, Nancy Lessin, Lawrence R. Murphy, Michael J. Colligan, Steven L. Sauter, Richard A. Lippin

Revolutionary changes in the organization of work have far outpaced our knowledge about the implications of these changes for the quality of working life and for safety and health on the job. This gap in knowledge is one of the 21 priority areas for research under the National Occupational Research Agenda (NORA)—a framework crafted by the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) and its partners to guide research into the next decade. This report was developed under NORA as the first attempt to develop a comprehensive research agenda for investigating and reducing occupational safety and health risks associated with the changing organization of work. Research and development needs identified in the agenda include (1) improved surveillance mechanisms to better track how the organization of work is changing, (2) accelerated research on safety and health implications of the changing organization of work, (3) increased research focus on organizational interventions to protect safety and health, and (4) steps to formalize and nurture organization of work as a distinctive field in occupational safety and health.

Jan 4, 2002

By Nicholas Kyriazi, John P. Shubilla

The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, National Personal Protective Technology Laboratory, has undertaken a study to determine how well self-contained self-rescuers (SCSRs), deployed in accordance with Federal regulations (30 CFR 75.1714), hold up in the underground environment with regard to both physical damage and aging. This report presents findings regarding laboratory-tested SCSRs in the seventh phase of testing from May 1999 to August 2000. The SCSRs were tested on human subjects and on a breathing and metabolic simulator. The results indicate that most of the apparatus, if they pass their approved inspection criteria, perform satisfactorily. The deployed CSE SR-100s, however, exhibited significantly higher inhaled carbon dioxide (CO2) levels than new units, as they did in the previous two phases. Several Draeger OXY K-Pluses that rattled when shaken were found to have potassium superoxide (KO2) particles throughout the breathing circuit, including the mouthpiece. Draeger investigated the problem and developed a shake test to detect damaged units. The durations of new Ocenco M-20s were statistically significantly longer than those of deployed units, although only by 2 min.

Jan 3, 2002

By Charles Vaught, Kathleen M. Kowalski

Safety and health professionals from all sectors of industry recognize that training is a critical element of an effective safety and health program. A major concern in the mining industry is how to train both an aging workforce and the expected influx of new miners and mine managers as older workers retire. Thus, a review of some of the basic principles of adult learning may be helpful to mine trainers. This paper discusses the principles of adult learning based on research in education and psychology. It stresses the importance of taking a systems approach to training, focusing on the relationship between the environment and technology, and understanding how workers interact with both. The authors argue that the principles of adult learning and a systems approach are fundamental to the delivery of effective training in the mining industry. Examples of training programs developed by the Pittsburgh Research Laboratory of the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health are presented within two broad performance domains: routine and nonroutine skills. Basics of curriculum development are also briefly presented to provide the mine trainer with a template for program development.

Jan 1, 2002

By Michael A. Trevits

Mine fires can be especially perilous because toxic products can quickly spread well beyond the fire zone thereby exposing all underground miners to dangerous and deadly conditions. Since November 1998, there have been six major underground coal mine fires or explosions in the United States (Willow Creek (twice), Sanborn Creek, Loveridge No. 22, West Elk and the Jim Walter Resources No. 5 Mine). In each case, the entire mine or specific areas of the mine had to be sealed due to the build-up of dangerous gases and the fear of uncontrolled spread of the fire. Effective placement of mine seals can deprive a mine fire of oxygen and is often followed by water flooding or injection of inert gas into the affected area. When access to the fire zone is impossible because of safety reasons, airtight mine seals can be constructed, in the area of the fire, remotely from the surface through vertical boreholes. Remotely constructed mine seals are commonly made from cementitious material. Since these mine seals are typically erected blindly, it is difficult to determine if mine roof-to-floor and rib-to-rib closure has been obtained. This paper provides a review of the available materials and technology used to remotely construct mine seals through vertical boreholes.

Jan 1, 2002

By Robert F. Randolph, Jeffery L. Kohler, David C. Byrne

Multiple versions of an educational message can reach a diverse population more effectively than a single version. For instance, some workers are trained in formal classrooms while others are self-taught. The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health has developed multiple versions of a hearing loss simulator (an interactive software package, a Web-based module, and an electronic slide show) to show how a single set of information can be readily adapted to different delivery methods. The three versions of the simulator were developed with a minimum of effort and expense compared to a single, less-flexible version. The interactive software is best for training sessions led by a hearing conservation professional, the Web pages are best suited for an individual worker, and the slide show is best for a small, more-generalized, training class. This paper will describe additional advantages and disadvantages of different delivery systems and will show what considerations are helpful in designing content that can be readily adapted to alternate presentations.

Jan 1, 2002

By Dana Reinke, Launa Mallett

Interest in training evaluation in the mining industry was piqued with the promulgation of Title 30, Part 46, of the Code of Federal Regulations. Under Part 46.3, a training plan is considered to be approved if it contains certain information, including “The evaluation procedures used to determine the effectiveness of training.” The present paper is a broad overview of training evaluation and is intended to give trainers and decision-makers a framework for planning or assessing training evaluation strategies. It discusses questions to consider when starting an evaluation plan, Kirkpatrick’s model of evaluation categories, and various ways to collect data. It does not provide detailed instructions on how to develop evaluation methodologies, but reviews topics to consider when creating an evaluation plan. Training evaluation is a term that has many different meanings: assessing the quality of a course, effectiveness of materials used, teaching style of an instructor, or the comfort of a classroom. An evaluation can be done informally over lunch or with highly structured data-gathering tools. It can produce results that are useful to trainers, program administrators, corporate decision-makers, or no one. The key to a worthwhile evaluation is clearly defining why the evaluation is being conducted. Once the purpose is defined, planning the evaluation strategy can begin. For an evaluation to be effective, it should be incorporated into the development of the training activity itself. The training evaluation worksheet at the end of this paper can be used to guide evaluation planning.

Jan 1, 2002

This Information Circular from the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) documents and supplements the information presented in a series of workshops held during 2002 and 2003. The primary intended audience consists of all who are involved in developing and conducting miners&apos; training. According to the Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA), mine operators reported 240,000 full-time equivalent workers and independent contractors reported 42,000 full-time equivalent workers working on mine property during the year 2000. Unfortunately, these workers have a relatively high risk of suffering serious work-related injuries and illnesses. The mining industry has the highest rate of occupational fatalities among all U.S. industries. The fatality rate is 30 deaths per 100,000 workers compared to 4.6 for all private industry (Morbidity and Mortality Week Report, 2001; NIOSH, 2002). Compared to workers in other industries, miners also have a relatively high rate of nonfatal lost-time injuries, and their injuries tend to be more severe (Bureau of Labor Statistics, 1999). Many miners are also exposed to significant health hazards, including coal and silica dust, diesel exhaust, and noise. More than 1000 U.S. miners die of lung disease each year (NIOSH, 1999). Mine safety and health professionals have long recognized training as a critical element of an effective safety and health program. Federal regulations (30 CFR, Parts 46 and 48) require mine operators to provide initial safety and health training to all new miners, as well as a minimum of 8 hours of refresher training each year. The time and money being spent to train U.S. miners is substantial, and so there is a strong and steady demand for new and better mine training materials and methods. A growing concern among mine safety professionals regards the training of new workers. A major change in the mining workforce is anticipated within the next decade. In major segments of mining, especially coal, relatively few workers have been hired since the 1970&apos;s. Thus, as an entire cohort of miners in the current workforce nears retirement, the replacement of these employees will require an influx of new workers. New miners may be young people who lack the ability to recognize and respond to mining hazards in an appropriate manner. They may also have had different educational experiences than their older counterparts. Many safety professionals believe that these two cohorts require different approaches to training. The papers in this report should help prepare mine trainers for the changes about to occur in the workforce and acquaint them with strategies they can use to enhance the effectiveness of their training. The first three papers present basic principles for teaching adults. The five remaining papers are intended to illustrate how these principles can be applied to the development and imple¬mentation of effective training for miners. Below is an overview of these papers. 1. Kowalski and Vaught review the process and principles of adult learning. The learning model they present includes a discussion of goals, content, delivery, assessment, and remediation. Adults are viewed as active learners, experienced-based, expert in their own right in specific areas, independent, real-life centered, task-centered, problem-centered, solution-driven, skill-seeking, self-directing, and internally and externally motivated. Basic aspects of curriculum development are briefly reviewed. For further information about adult learning, see Camm and Cullen&apos;s paper. 2. Mallett and Reinke&apos;s first paper discusses issues related to training new miners who have recently or will soon be entering the mining workforce. These new generations of miners have different learning style preferences and training needs than Baby Boomers and other older miners. Even trainers who have been highly effective in the past should reassess their training styles and their classroom materials to determine if they are prepared to meet the needs of these young new workers. This paper provides information that will help mine trainers communicate across the generation gap. 3. Mallett and Reinke&apos;s second paper provide an overview of training evaluation. Trainers and decision-makers are given a framework for planning and assessing training evaluation strategies. The authors present Kirkpatrick&apos;s (2001) model of evaluation categories and discuss how to start an evaluation plan and various ways to collect data. They do not provide detailed instruction in evaluation methodologies, but give trainers a review of the things they need to consider when developing an evaluation plan. A good evaluation plan can inform revisions to a training course, assess trainee learning, and/or answer managers&apos; questions about program effectiveness. 4. Brnich, Derick, Mallett, and Vaught discuss a technique for incorporating worker participation into fire prevention and safe equipment operation training. This technique involves development of short (5 to 7 minutes) videotapes coupled with toolbox talks that ground the content of the videos within the context of a miner&apos;s workplace. An example of one of these training modules is presented, along with the results of an evaluation performed on its effectiveness at improving miners&apos; understanding of what types of information they should be sure to communicate during a mine emergency. 5. Wiehagen, Conrad, Friend, and Rethi discuss on-the-job training (OJT) as a method for teaching miners safety and production skills. Much of the training is done by experienced workers. This paper describes how small investments can help improve the effectiveness of on-the-job training. Effective on-the-job training involves some structure and planning in the transfer of responsibility for task performance from the trainer to the novice. Assisting the trainer could involve helping develop up-to-date job analyses and offering strategies for teaching and evaluating job skills. This paper addresses organizational considerations supporting structured on-the-job

Jan 1, 2002

By Floyd D. Varley, C. M. K. Boldt

Toolbox training is often described as short, informal training conducted at a worksite by technically competent persons for the benefit of a work team. The key feature of toolbox training is the focus on a work team and what is important to that group in its workplace. Toolbox training conducted by peers can connect miners and establish the feeling that the hazard is a real threat to them. This feeling can bridge the gap between delivery of a safety message and behavioral changes that can prevent an accident. Toolbox training is a popular form of "maintenance" training that should not be used to teach a new skill. The 10- or 15-minute toolbox session is simply too short a time to teach or learn a new skill and test for skill development. However, the toolbox format is an excellent way to inform workers of changes in workplace rules, conditions, or hazards by bringing the discussion of change to the level of the work group and suggesting how a change will affect the way workers perform their jobs. Toolbox training should be structured to address a very specific hazard. That is, the hazard source should be identified and the effect of the hazard on the worker described. The temptation to discuss a safety subject in broad terms will result in an equally vague result. For instance, discussing "equipment guards" is inappropriate for a 15-minute training session. There simply is not enough time to cover all the hazards and their remedies. A more appropriate topic would be "placing guards on a conveyor return roller" or "hazards of cleaning a conveyor return roller." Each topic is concise enough to allow the trainer time to define a particular threat to the safety of miners and discuss ways to defend against that threat. The clearest way to a safe workplace is to identify hazards methodically and eliminate them. This cannot be done with sweeping, generalized training. Some best practices that will protect a worker from the hazard should be presented, and the hazard should be located at the specific worksite. Toolbox training is an opportunity for the work team to participate in learning and share experiences and knowledge, often through storytelling. Storytelling is an ancient form of passing along information in an entertaining way. It is entertaining because it draws the listener in with imagination and creativity. Stories told within work groups are a way for miners to exchange experiences in which they made mistakes that resulted in an accident or a near-miss and learned a valuable lesson. Thus, co-workers can learn from others without the pain or fear that accompanied the storyteller&apos;s learning path. To encourage these shared experiences, the people in the group must be comfortable with one another. Participation doesn&apos;t stop with listening to a near-miss story or informing the group of an unsafe work practice. Participation by sharing experiences, knowledge, and skills should lead toward action in changing the unsafe tool, practice, or machine (Wallerstein, 1992). This power to change is called empowerment. Empowered workers use toolbox training sessions to discuss a problem; direct their own knowledge, experience, and talents in the context of their work environment to solve the problem; and put into practice what they have learned by sharing (Baker, 1992). A worker is much more likely to implement changes they have contributed to creating than changes forced upon them. Toolbox training functions best when the group size is small (under 20) and composed of workers with similar job functions. While combining all workers on a shift or multiple shifts may be convenient, the level of participation will drop dramatically as group size increases and participants are less connected. Similarly, when the work group participants are from different job functions, keeping the materials relevant to the individual becomes more difficult. The role of management in the toolbox training system is to communicate among various groups so that all groups at a mine site are hearing the same message. In very small operations, combining work groups can be productive if the trainer can promote open discussions and lead the group to solutions that address the needs of all and not let one group or individual dominate the discussion. WHY USE NARRATIVE METHODS An effective communications tool is to use stories as a means of describing a hazard and its consequences. Historically, using stories to transfer knowledge between individuals of the same and different generations is well established. All good stories share the same elements required to communicate safety principles. Stories require a setting (the part of the workplace), a plot (the circumstances that lead to a hazard), the solution (best practices), the lesson (what can happen), and the result (what will be done to prevent the hazard) (Dennehy, 1999).

Jan 1, 2002

By Don Conrad, Tom Friend, Bill Wiehagen, Lynn Rethi

On-the-job training (OJT) is a very common method of teaching job skills. Much of the training is done by experienced workers. This paper discusses small investments that can help improve the effectiveness of OJT. Effective OJT involves some structure and planning in the transfer of responsibility for task performance from the trainer to the novice. Assisting the OJT trainer could involve helping develop up-to-date job analyses and offering strategies for teaching and evaluating job skills. The scope of this paper addresses (1) organizational considerations supporting structured OJT, (2) general strategies for structuring OJT, (3) a typical approach for conducting OJT, (4) characteristics and duties of OJT trainers, and (5) limitations of OJT as a teaching method. Health, safety, and operational skills can be connected through training. Haul truck operator training is used to illustrate some of the concepts discussed in this paper.

Jan 1, 2002

By Dana Reinke, Launa Mallett, Michael J. Brnich

Some segments of the mining industry, especially underground coal, have seen a large influx of inexperienced miners in recent years. It is anticipated that this trend will reach other mining segments over the next 10 years. This paper discusses the training needs of the younger generation of inexperienced workers who have just entered or are soon to enter the mines. Currently, many trainers are of the so-called Baby Boom generation. Can these different age groups learn to communicate across the generation gap? Even trainers who have been highly effective in the past should reassess their training styles and their classroom materials to determine if they are prepared to meet the needs of these new trainees.

Jan 1, 2002