Mining

Documented Instances of Drug / Alcohol Use & Accidents

Including Use of Prescription Pain Relievers

Source: 2008, United States Department of Labor (DOL) – Federal Registry  

Unfortunately accident investigations do not routinely include an inquiry into the use of alcohol or drugs and this is a failure of executive management, safety & risk management professionals, and unions. 

Although there are limited data, data does exist demonstrating the linkage between alcohol and drug use and accidents.   

The below information specifically relates to the mining industry, however, can be transferred to most safety sensitive positions / occupations - construction, manufacturing, transportation, oil & gas / utilities.

Incident #1

In 2003 after a blasting accident at an Eastern Kentucky coal mine (Cody Mining Co. in FloydCounty) in which one miner was killed and another seriously injured. Marijuana was found at the scene, and a witness reported having seen the miners snorting crushed painkillers. An autopsy of the dead miner confirmed the presence of painkillers. The surviving minerwas not tested, and there was no federal or state requirement to do so.  

Incident #2

In December 2005, a 29-year-old miner (at No. 3 Mine of HandD Mining, Inc.) diedafter an overloaded coal hauler severed his legs. Although no discussion was included in the fatality report about whether drug use may have contributed to the accident, the hauler's driver and the dead miner both tested positive for painkillers and marijuana.    

Incident #3

Another incident occurred at Langley Hill Quarry where a truckdriver apparently fell from a parked truck onto a concrete pad,sustained facial and skull fractures and died sometime later. Thereport noted that ``medical records showed a blood alcoholconcentration (BAC) level of 0.04 percent,'' but went on to conclude``it could not be determined why or exactly from where [the driver]fell. There was no apparent need to have climbed onto the handrail orthe rear of the truck.'' No explanation was given for why the BAC leveldoes not specifically appear in the conclusion as a causal orcontributing factor despite the fact that a 0.04 percent BAC, under theDOT regulations, is considered high enough to cause impairment and is aviolation of the DOT drug rule.   

Incident #4

At East Volunteer, a victim was operating a malfunctioningtelescopic lift and was pinned between the lift platform rail and partof the ceiling infrastructure. The victim was noted in the report,under the ``human factors'' section, as having a toxicology analysisthat ``revealed methamphetamine intoxication,'' but it was notmentioned in the root-cause analysis or conclusion. It is reasonable toquestion whether the victim's intoxication may have impacted hisobservation skills as the malfunction was happening and possibly slowedhis decision-making on how to respond.