The Blast in Centralia No. 5 Megan Moore Mr. Joseph McCue Modern Public Administration October 23, 2011

The explosion at Centralia No 5 was a great tragedy in the State of Illinois that created over 90 widows and 70 fatherless children. Unfortunately, it was a tragedy that could have been avoided had action been taken sooner. Today it is easy to be shocked and appalled that this would have happened. However, looking at this from a worldview in the 21st Century is not the same as looking at the events in the worldview of someone in the 1940s. Coal production was once a big business producing thousands of tons of coal a week but at the time of the events in Centralia No 5 production had dropped due to advancement with oil and gas development. The war brought about increased demand for coal. It was in 1909 when a mine fire in Cherry Illinois killed 259 mineworkers that the call for safety and monitored regulations came to the forefront of coal production. (Fleege, A. 2009) Those involved in the coal mining industry knew of the hazards of the trade. Coal dust and gas were the main hazards in mining. In today’s industry these hazards are monitored by different agencies, both public and private, and as it the case in most industrial environments unions and Occupational Safety and Health Administration maintain strict reporting and monitoring procedures. (www.osha.com) Driscoll Scanlon, the inspector assigned to Centralia No 5, did not have the benefit of easy communication and the assistance of multiple agencies. There were procedures to follow and the Department of Mines and Minerals to report to. However, the system appeared to have flaws that cost 111 miners their lives. Few individuals held the position of mine inspector and Driscoll Scanlon was one of sixteen such inspectors. Scanlon spent the majority of his life, from the age of 16, inside a coalmine either as an employee or an inspector. It was well known that being a mine inspector was a position of political patronage. Scanlon studied engineering and was an inspector for a coal company before advancing to inspector. Given that he had risen to one of sixteen state inspectors it would have been well known to him the politics involved within the Department of Mines and Minerals and the way to make the system work to your advantage. He knew that this was not simply a job that he would go to, write a report and leave and that to take action would require more than just paperwork. Standard procedure was to inspect the property, type up a report containing an overview of the inspection and specifying violations in need of immediate or planned attention. The reports were sent to the Department of Mines and Minerals. Once checked typographical errors the report was forwarded, signed and sent to the mine stating that the DMM agreed with the recommendations and that violations should be fixed. The reports were not actually read by those who had the power to make a change and the company controlling the mine was expected to make the corrections without follow up. Scanlon followed the procedures to the letter and had faith that the appropriate action would be taken. He felt an obligation to the miners and to his position to see that the mine managers or those in upper levels of company did not sway his reports. He knew that other inspectors schmoozed with the miners but he had no intention of letting a relationship interfere with the integrity of his reports. He was known for writing long and in-depth reports. He didn’t fraternize with the managers or owners within the mines he was assigned. Scanlon took the words of Governor Dwight H. Green seriously. Green had stated that he would enforce mining regulations to “the letter of the law”. Unfortunately, his administration didn’t get the message. Driscoll Scanlon understood. He did his inspections and he sent his reports. In the case of Centralia No 5 Scanlon realized that there were major violations within the mine and action needed to be taken. However, after years of making the same report and no action being taken Scanlon still did nothing but file his reports. He followed the channels as was instructed and did not vary from it. He made an assumption that if he deviated from the standard procedure that he would either be fired or ignored. Scanlon failed to see that he was in a position to cross the boundaries of political lines. He had been given a position that was as powerful as he chose. He could shut a mine down if he felt passionately enough about it. The biggest mistake of Scanlon’s career would be to not take advantage of his position. He assumed that the system wouldn’t work. Perhaps if he had gone beyond the standard letter action would have been taken. Scanlon met with Local 52 about their concerns and assured them that he had passed along the reports and was as concerned as they were. He did what was expected but didn’t make it happen. He understood that the Governor wanted enforcement and did what he could to inform the department but the department failed to enforce. Scanlon was so aware of the bureaucracy involved in the mining community that he forgot that as one of only sixteen inspectors that enforcement was also his job. It would not have been a convenient trek for Scanlon but if he felt as passionate about the violations as his report seemed then they should have been walked through the agency. Sometimes a person needs to see your passion and not just read your words on paper. Another option would have been for Scanlon to used his power to its fullest. Instead of pushing and taking action he worried about overstepping. He wanted the process to work as it was designed to work. Unfortunately, the process was far from perfect. The question to be asked is; did Scanlon or the Department of Mines and Minerals know the process was flawed? Scanlon could have shut down the mine until the DMM could have inspected the mine personally and not sent another organization to do the job. Scanlon could have also taken advantage of the Unions. The UMWA was accused of not properly training the mineworkers. The UMWA denied that this was their responsibility and claimed it was the responsibility of the company itself. Scanlon could have encouraged the union to appeal to the Governor. The words he spoke were “to the letter of the law”. This obviously was not happening and he needed to be aware. Even in the 1940s unions were powerhouses when the need would arise. Miners in a small mining community did not have a loud voice and it was the responsibility of the union to give them volume. Another option would have been to close the mine. It was within his power to shut the mine down until the corrections had been made. Internal influences were stopping Scanlon from shutting down the mine. Even if shutting down the mine was a temporary solution it would have brought attention to the issues at hand. Today we have many watchdog organizations. They are waiting and watching for someone to not follow the rules and to let the world know that there is danger. However, in the 1940s the media outlets were nothing compared to what there is. There were newspapers and radio shows. It would have been beyond his scope and would most likely have gotten him in trouble with his superiors however the Department of Mines and Minerals and the Governor would have been forced to act upon the violations had the public known before the explosion. It was known that a mining inspector was a position of patronage and this could have been used to his advantage. This mine was located in a small community with limited ways to communicate. Scanlon could have taken advantage of the resources that he had. Driscoll Scanlon was not aggressive enough to tackle such serious violations within the mine. Had he stepped up and used the UMWA, the DMM, Local 52 and Governor Green action would have been taken. If it were possible to bring the leaders of each group together inside the mine and shown the violations first hand by an employee of Centralia No 5, or by Scanlon himself, action would have been taken. When it comes down to it Scanlon was afraid and simply not prepared for the job at hand. He was not responsible for the explosion but he could have stopped it had he confronted the procedure that was so obviously failing the men at Centralia No 5.

Fleege, A. (2009)1947 Centralia Mine Disaster, The. Journal of the Illinois State Historical Society

www.commerce.state.il.us

http://www.legendsofamerica.com/il-zeigler.html

www.osha.com

Stillman, R., (2009). Pubic Administration Concepts and Cases, Mason: Cenage Learning.

http://www.zeigleril.com/pages/zighist.htm