Lack Of Ventilation In Mine Denied

Press, Volume CVII, Issue 31380, 27 May 1967, Page 3

Lack Of Ventilation In Mine Denied

(From Our Own Reporter)

GREYMOUTH, May 26.

A witness before the Strongman Mine Commission of Inquiry said today that the two miners in O’Donnell’s workplace on the morning of the explosion were to break into an adjacent worked-out area (or goaf) to establish an air circuit, but denied a suggestion that they were suffering from a lack of ventilation.

The witness, Richard Francis Thomas, was underviewer of the section where the explosion occurred. The commission comprises Mr J. K. Patterson, S.M., chairman, and Messrs W. Elliott, S. R. Eyeington, A. V. Prendiville and T. H. McGhie. Counsel are Mr R. C. Savage, of Wellington, for the Mines Department; Mr D. J. Tucker, of Greymouth, for the New Zealand State Coalmines; Mr R. A. Young, of Christchurch, for the Grey Valley Deputies’ and Underviewers* Union; and Mr W. D. Taylor, of Greymouth, for the United Mineworkers of New Zealand and relatives of the men who were killed. Mr Thomas said there had not been daily reports on steps needed to mitigate coal dust. Roads were cleaned periodically and stonedusted, but he had no recollection of the roofs and sides being cleaned. To Mr Patterson, he Mid that there was no material change in the amount of dust before and after the Christmas holiday. The fan in O’Donnell’s heading would have cleared dust quicker after shot-firing if it had been placed in the actual working level, he told Mr Taylor. About Minimum Mr Thomas Mid he considered that the ventilation in O’Donnell’s breakaway was more than the 150 cu ft minimum. Mr Thomas said the two deputies in that area were aware that O’Donnell’s workplace was nearing the goaf. He could not recall a conversation with O’Donnell but Mid he did not doubt there had been one. Mr Taylor Mid evidence would be given that the witness had shown O'Donnell his map, and that O'Donnell had then told another miner that he had further to go than he thought. To Mr Patterson, the witness said O’Donnell was an experienced miner in time, but suffered in comparison with his crossmates. The senior miner in the place was the back-shift crossmate, J. P. Rooney. He had no recollection of

a record book entry of the nearness to breaking through into the goaf, nor had he told a deputy, Eggleton, of the possibility. Green’s No. 2 section was not normally the deputy Kinsey’s area, and he bad not been in Green’s No. 2 for some time before January 19. "Normal Practice” The witness said he told Kinsey that O’Donnell’s place could be possibly breaking through in the deputy's cabin before shift He had not suggested any special precaution to the miners on the previous day. The only routine was to test bore ahead, which was the normal practice, but he could not recall giving them special instruction* to that effect. Breakthroughs to a goaf had teen common in the mine but there had been no explosions. To Mr Patterson he Mid it was not a standing joke to take the stonedust samples, and he denied a suggestion that they were taken from the nearest stonedust bag. Mr Taylor produced an entry from an instruction book dated September 10, 1965, referring to work required in O’Neill’s section in the east heading, and the witness Mid he was shocked to know that air compressors were used to clear gas. To Mr Patterson, Mr Thomas said the amount of explosives and detonators issued was controlled strictly on the day and back-shifts. The dog-watch deputy would be expected to draw sufficient to do the work he had been instructed to carry out, but within the authority given him a deputy could do something wrong. "Not Justified” The dog-watch deputy was not justified in blasting out timber* instead of using the extracting apparatus, said the witness. Blasting was probably done because It required less effort, but it was a dangerous practice. Mr Thomas said that In withdrawing sets he had always specified that the Silvester apparatus was to be used, had detailed where it was to be found, and had also demonstrated its use to those unfamiliar with it. He said he had not followed up these Instructions. He agreed with Mr Savage that he would expect a subordinate official to carry them out Asked if the deputy Syme had been alone in disobeying his instructions, he Mid he had no knowledge of any others disobeying. Asked about any connexions between the worked-out high-

er Green's No. 1 and the No. 2 section, he said there was no water but there was always the possibility of gas breaking through. The tests had not shown any quantity of gas in No. 2 on the regular tests. The brattice leading into the goaf was sufficient to ventilate it and remove any accumulation of gas at the highest point The bratticing wa« of a very high standard because of the smooth roof and because Mr Smith had taken great pride in his brattice work. The dissipation of coal from the blown-out cavity must have been the result of fragmentation and its being thrown out and scattered across the goaf, said the witness. Questioned by Mr Elliott, the witness Mid that special men on dog-watch were now engaged on stonedusting. Previously the work had been done by shiftmen or deputies. Soft Area The witness said he could see no reason for three holes bored near one another, low down on the face in O’Donnell's place. One of the other holes in the face containing stonedust had been so filled the previous night because the drill had struck a soft spot It would be reasonable to assume that the soft area indicated a weakness in the face. Mr Elliott suggested that the explanation for a reported missing detonator was that in the first or second holes, the tamping was blown back, and the hole was recharged, and while the third shot was being connected, the explosion occurred. Mr Thomas said he had assumed that the third shot had not been fired when he first entered the place alone after the explosion, but the inspection team found that it had been.

The witness agreed with Mr Prendiville that it was his responsibility to have done something to have had the pre-shift examination made In the proper time. The hearing will continue tomorrow morning, the eleventh day of the inquiry .