Massey Coal Mines, Fatalities, And Indictments; and

Case 7.4 Massey Coal Mines, Fatalities, and Indictments In 2010, an explosion at the Upper Big Branch mine in West Virginia resulted in the loss of the lives of twenty-nine miners at the site. The mine was owned and operated by a subsidiary of Massey Energy. The Mine Safety and Health Administration conducted an investigation, and its report on the accident concluded that Massey had a “dubious” record of safety documentation that involved the use of multiple sets of records that resulted in problems at the mine being concealed from federal inspectors. As a result of the investigation, a series of criminal charges were brought against man- agers and other employees at the mine. One employee, who was transferred from the Upper Big Branch mine before the 2010 explosion, was convicted of lying to safety offi- cials and sentenced to ten months in prison. David Hughart, the president of the mine- operating unit, entered a guilty plea to conspiracy to defraud the U.S. government by impeding mine safety inspectors and conspiracy to violate safety laws. When asked by the federal judge who ordered him to give miners advance notice of inspections, he responded that his orders came from the CEO.3 The charges indicate that Mr. Hughart and others ordered workers to violate airflow and coal-dust standards. Hughie Elbert Stover was the security chief for the Upper Big Branch mine and was indicted on federal charges including lying to investigators, destroying mine records, and alerting employees when federal mine inspectors were coming to the mine. The charges that Mr. Stover faced involved training security guards on how to use their radio systems to alert employees that federal mine inspectors were on the premises. Mr. Stover took the stand at his trial, and his testimony included the following state- ments about his disposal of the records, which he admits doing but claims that he did not understand that what he was doing was criminal: It never crossed my mind that I was doing something illegal ... There’s nothing on earth that would make me commit a crime. I wouldn’t wish on anyone the heartache and misery I’ve put them [his family] through.”4 Mr. Stover said on the stand that he was simply destroying documents because the mine’s warehouse was full, and it was routine to destroy documents as they made room for new records. Mr. Stover’s lawyer argued in his opening statement that the records were destroyed mistakenly and that federal officials were able to obtain the lost informa- tion from other company sources. As to the advance notification of the presence of mine inspectors, Mr. Stover, accord- ing to the Wall Street Journal, testified that he was told by an Upper Big Branch mine superintendent that security guards could announce over the mine radio that safety inspectors were on the site. He said he believed that was an acceptable practice, approved by company lawyers, and different from calling mine managers individually on the phone. He said that he did not lie to investigators when they asked him if he notified miners of an impending inspection because he did not notify anyone individually.5 Mr. Stover was found guilty of obstruction, lying to investigators, and giving advance notice of inspections, and was sentenced to three years in prison.6 The superintendent that Mr. Stover referred to in his testimony was Gary May. Mr. May entered a guilty plea to conspiracy to defraud the United States. The U.S. attorney handling the case made a statement at the time of the plea indicating that “laws were routinely violated” because of the company’s and individual managers’ beliefs that “following those laws would decrease coal production.”7 Don Blankenship, the CEO of Massey Energy at the time of the mine explosion, resigned as CEO in December 2010. Massey was sold to Alpha Natural Resources, Inc., in June 2011.

Discussion Questions

1. Describe the ethical categories involved in the explosion and conduct of the managers of the mine.

2. Why does Mr. Stover say he did not have any intent to violate the law that prohibits advance notification of the presence of inspectors?

3. Should the CEO be held accountable?