Coal Age

NOV 2014

Coal Age Magazine - For nearly 100 years, Coal Age has been the magazine that readers can trust for guidance and insight on this important industry.

Issue link: https://coal.epubxp.com/i/421812

Contents of this Issue

Navigation

Page 46 of 69

able to construct a model of the judgment and decision-making process (Figure 1). To understand this model, it is useful to ana- lyze two key findings revealed by the research: how escaping miners perceive the problem in an emergency and how they act on the problem in an emergency. Perceiving the Problem In the Vaught et al. 2000 study, researchers learned that escaping miners go through a multistep process in judgment and decision- making. This process is ongoing and continues from when they first recognize there is a problem until they reach safety. First, miners are presented with an initial problem. In the case of the miners who were interviewed for the cited study, the problem was the underground mine fire. As the miners began to perceive what was going on, various background problems factored in, such as not knowing the fire's location, the smell of smoke, and so forth. The context or perspective of the event was also a factor. When the miners smelled smoke, they initially placed the fire events within the framework of a normally occurring event, such as bonds being welded at track rail joints or mechanics using cut- ting torches. Acting on the Problem In the case of the Vaught et al. 2000 study, miners eventually per- ceived that a problem existed and then entered a diagnosis or analysis phase. Miners experienced stress from a variety of sources, including information uncertainty, which affected their ability to analyze the situation. After analyzing the situation, miners began to look at available options for responding to the circumstances. Once options were evaluated, miners made decisions on the best option to select and then executed their decision. Overall most miners made good decisions during their escape ordeals. But in some instances, miners made choices and executed decisions only to find that they made the wrong choice. They would then be required to re-evaluate the situation, perhaps through further diagnosis, and then look at other choices and make new deci- sions on courses of action they would follow. In the cited study, NIOSH researchers identified several important points about judgment and decision-making in mine emergencies: • First, miners tended not to identify the problem adequately. Often they tried to place the problem within the context of normal activities, such as equating the smell of smoke to mechanics using cutting torches. • Second, escapees' diagnoses were affected by the nature of the warning message they received. At one mine, the call came into the section reporting a fire. The continuous miner opera- tor and helper on this section were simply told to shut down their machines — "…we're going home." These miners went through their normal end-of-shift routine before going to the mantrip. • Third, miners' feelings about available options and choices were impacted most by their knowledge of the mine and the quality of information available. Generally researchers found that the more knowledge escapees had about the mine and the better the quality of information available to them, the more miners studied choices more carefully and made better decisions on actions to take. Judgment and Decision-making Training: What Companies Are Doing Prior research and published post-disaster reports have estab- lished the importance of and need for teaching judgment and decision-making to help escaping miners deal with emergency situations. To better understand what industry is doing, NIOSH researchers interviewed mine safety personnel representing six different underground coal mine operators in the United States about how they conduct mandated quarterly escape training. Personnel interviewed included individuals from four companies operating large underground mines in the southern U.S., Northern Appalachia, and the western U.S. The other individuals were from two companies operating small one- and two-unit underground mines in Northern Appalachia. During the interviews, company personnel were asked to describe aspects of their quarterly escape training including if they teach judgment and decision-making. The various compa- nies take a range of approaches to conducting quarterly escape training at their operations. In general, safety and/or training department personnel develop the quarterly scenarios. These scenarios and any additional information are then typically passed to the foremen who are often responsible for conducting the training. The six companies follow the basic mandated content require- ments for conducting quarterly escape training. It appears all six operators are incorporating some elements of judgment and decision-making into their training. But the nature and variety seems to vary widely among the six companies. However, several operators have shown creativity in their approach. For example, one company may pull a person out of an escape group, unbe- knownst to the foreman. If the foreman did a head count, he would note the miner was missing. The foreman would then need to make the decision whether to look for the missing miner or evacuate with the rest of the crew. At one operation, the foreman leading the training inserted "obstacles" along the route for the crew to encounter. This chal- lenges the crew and requires them to decide what to do. At anoth- er mine, the safety personnel developed a flowchart for trainers to follow when conducting quarterly escape training. The flowchart provides guidance to trainers when conducting the training and helps in teaching decisionmaking skills during the evacuation exercise. While the representatives from the six companies said they incor- porate some level of judgment and decision-making into escape e s c a p e t r a i n i n g c o n t i n u e d Figure 1: Model of judgment and decision-making (after Vaught et al. 2000). November 2014 www.coalage.com 45

Articles in this issue

Links on this page

Archives of this issue

view archives of Coal Age - NOV 2014