British Columbia’s Environmental Appeal Board (EAB) has upheld a $140,000 fine imposed on Teck Coal after a contract mechanic suffered ‘life-changing’ injuries at a site coal mining near Elkford in the southeast of the province.
The mine was condemned in January 2022, three years after the explosion on January 28, 2019 at the Greenhills mine, about 8 km from Elkford.
In a decision rendered last week, the EAB explained how the contract worker employed by Maxam Explosives was seriously injured after a truck wheel exploded.
According to a Teck investigation, the explosion occurred because a component of the tire rim was likely improperly installed.
Teck was fined after an investigation found the company had failed to ensure workers were properly trained, as required by mining regulations.
Open in full screen mode
The entrance to Elk Valley Resources’ Greenhills steelmaking coal operation near Elkford, British Columbia.
Photo : Google street view
The company appealed, saying the process was unfair and it had done due diligence, but the EAB rejected these arguments.
I noted that the procedure before the[inspecteur des mines] was fair; L'[inspecteur] applied the legislative regime and departmental policy in assessing the administrative sanction and exercised judgment based on these considerations.
Open in full screen mode
Swiss conglomerate Glencore now owns Teck’s coal operations in southeastern British Columbia.
Photo : Associated Press / Urs Flueeler
The Teck coal mines in British Columbia are now named Elk Valley Resources since July 2024 after its purchase by the Swiss raw materials giant Glencore.
The company says it has taken note of the decision of the EABstating that they prioritized worker safety.
The company indicated that a new safer wheel design
was now used in all of its activities.
An experienced worker
The EAB found that the injured worker, certified as a heavy-duty mechanic since 2010, was not warned of the hazards of the truck wheels he was working with or trained on how to avoid them.
Other employees confirmed that they were also unaware of the risks associated with multi-part wheel assemblies.
The mining inspector determined that the work plan did not identify these risks or the training needed to prevent them.
Teck claimed it was not responsible for training a contractor because it was not its own employee and cited the worker’s valid certification as a mechanic.
The EAB rejected this argument, finding that Teck had a responsibility to provide specific training and that it had failed to ensure safety.
With information from Akshay Kulkarni
