Fire Extinguishers in Underground Coal Mines, 72301-72307 [E7-24747]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 244 / Thursday, December 20, 2007 / Proposed Rules
337(f)(2) of the Tariff Act of 1930) to
recover for the United States the civil
penalty accruing to the United States
under that section for the breach of a
cease and desist order or a consent
order, and to obtain a mandatory
injunction incorporating the relief the
Commission deems appropriate for
enforcement of the cease and desist
order or consent order; or
*
*
*
*
*
(c) Court enforcement. To obtain
judicial enforcement of an exclusion
order, a cease and desist order, a
consent order, or a sanctions order, the
Commission may initiate a civil action
in the U.S. district court. In a civil
action under section 337(f)(2) of the
Tariff Act of 1930, the Commission may
seek to recover for the United States the
civil penalty accruing to the United
States under that section for the breach
of a cease and desist order or a consent
order, and may ask the court to issue a
mandatory injunction incorporating the
relief the Commission deems
appropriate for enforcement of the cease
and desist order or consent order. The
Commission may initiate a proceeding
to obtain judicial enforcement without
any other type of proceeding otherwise
available under section 337 or this
subpart or without prior notice to any
person, except as required by the court
in which the civil action is initiated.
40. Amend § 210.79 by revising
paragraph (a) to read as follows:
§ 210.79
Advisory Opinions.
(a) Advisory opinions. Upon request
of any person, the Commission may,
upon such investigation as it deems
necessary, issue an advisory opinion as
to whether any person’s proposed
72301
course of action or conduct would
violate a Commission exclusion order,
cease and desist order, or consent order.
The Commission will consider whether
the issuance of such an advisory
opinion would facilitate the
enforcement of section 337 of the Tariff
Act of 1930, would be in the public
interest, and would benefit consumers
and competitive conditions in the
United States, and whether the person
has a compelling business need for the
advice and has framed his request as
fully and accurately as possible.
Advisory opinion proceedings are not
subject to sections 554, 555, 556, 557,
and 702 of title 5 of the United States
Code.
*
*
*
*
*
41. Amend part 210 by adding
Appendix A to read as follows:
APPENDIX A TO PART 210.—ADJUDICATION AND ENFORCEMENT
Initial determination concerning
Petitions for review due
Response to petitions due
Commission deadline for determining whether to review the initial determination
Violation § 210.42(a)(1) ...................
12 days from service
determination.
10 days from service
determination.
10 days from service
determination.
10 days from service
determination.
8 days from service of any petition.
5 business days from service of
any petition.
5 business days from service of
any petition.
5 business days from service of
any petition.
60 days from service
determination.
45 days from service
determination.
45 days from service
determination.
45 days from service
determination.
5 business days from service of
the initial determination.
5 business days from service of
any petition.
By order of the Commission ........
By order of the Commission ........
30 days from service of the initial
determination on private parties.
90 days from service of the initial
determination on private parties.
Forfeiture of respondent’s bond
§ 210.50(d)(3).
Forfeiture of complainant’s temporary relief bond § 210.70(c).
Summary initial determination that
would terminate the investigation
if it became the Commission’s
final determination § 210.42(c).
Other matters § 210.42(c) ...............
Formal enforcement
§ 210.75(b).
proceedings
Issued: December 14, 2007.
Marilyn R. Abbott,
Secretary to the Commission.
[FR Doc. E7–24591 Filed 12–19–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7020–02–P
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Mine Safety and Health Administration
30 CFR Part 75
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSALS
RIN 1219–AB40
Fire Extinguishers in Underground
Coal Mines
Mine Safety and Health
Administration, Labor.
ACTION: Proposed rule; close of comment
period.
AGENCY:
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:37 Dec 19, 2007
Jkt 214001
of the initial
of the initial
of the initial
of the initial
SUMMARY: The Mine Safety and Health
Administration (MSHA), is proposing to
amend the current standard for the
quantity and location of firefighting
equipment and materials underground
to ensure that they are readily available
to quickly extinguish a fire. In lieu of
the current requirements for rock dust
and other firefighting materials, this
proposed rule would allow the use of
portable fire extinguishers in working
sections of underground anthracite coal
mines that have no electrical equipment
at the face and produce less than 300
tons of coal per shift. The rule also
would require an additional fire
extinguisher in lieu of rock dust at
temporary electrical installations in all
underground coal mines.
All comments must be received
at MSHA no later than midnight Eastern
Standard Time on February 4, 2008.
DATES:
PO 00000
Frm 00038
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
of the initial
of the initial
of the initial
of the initial
(1) Identify all comments by
‘‘RIN 1219–AB40’’ and send them to
MSHA as follows:
• Electronically through the Federal
e-Rulemaking portal at https://
www.regulations.gov or by e-mail to
zzMSHA-comments@dol.gov.
• By facsimile to 202–693–9441.
• By mail or hand delivery to MSHA,
Office of Standards, Regulations, and
Variances, 1100 Wilson Boulevard,
Room 2350, Arlington, Virginia 22209–
3939. If comments are hand-delivered,
please stop by the 21st floor first to
check in with the receptionist.
(2) MSHA will post all comments on
the internet without change, including
any personal information they may
contain. Rulemaking comments can be
accessed via the internet at https://
www.msha.gov/regsinfo.htm or in
person at MSHA’s public reading room
ADDRESSES:
E:\FR\FM\20DEP1.SGM
20DEP1
72302
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 244 / Thursday, December 20, 2007 / Proposed Rules
at 1100 Wilson Boulevard, Room 2349,
Arlington, Virginia.
(3) Subscribe to MSHA’s list serve at
https://www.msha.gov/subscriptions/
subscribe.aspx to receive an e-mail
notification when MSHA publishes
rulemaking documents in the Federal
Register.
Hearings: Public hearings will be
scheduled if requested.
Information Collection Requirements.
Comments concerning the information
collection requirements must be clearly
identified as such and sent to both the
Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) and MSHA as follows:
(1) To OMB: All comments may be
sent by mail to the Office of Information
and Regulatory Affairs, Office of
Management and Budget, New
Executive Office Building, 725 17th
Street, NW., Washington, DC 20503,
Attn: Desk Officer for MSHA; and
(2) To MSHA: Comments must be
clearly identified by RIN: 1219–AB40 as
comments on the information collection
requirements and transmitted to MSHA
as indicated above under ADDRESSES.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Patricia W. Silvey at 202–693–9440
(Voice), 202–693–9441 (Fax), or
Silvey.Patricia@dol.gov (E-mail).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Introduction
The existing safety standards under
30 CFR part 75, subpart L—Fire
Protection, are designed to ensure that
firefighting equipment and materials are
readily available to quickly extinguish a
fire and prevent its spread. Because of
the explosive nature of coal dust and the
possible presence of methane gas, there
is great potential for a fire to spread to
other areas of the underground coal
mine. Historical records demonstrate
that the consequences of a fire in an
underground coal mine can be
disastrous.
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSALS
II. Background
The Bureau of Mines in the U.S.
Department of the Interior (Bureau)
promulgated and enforced fire
protection standards under the Federal
Coal Mine Safety Act (30 U.S.C. 451–
483). These standards continued in
effect under the Federal Coal Mine
Health and Safety Act of 1969 (Coal Act)
through a transfer provision in the law.
On November 20, 1970 (35 FR 17890),
the Bureau revised its standards
addressing fire protection in
underground coal mines. The revised
standards continued in effect under the
Federal Mine Safety and Health Act of
1977 (Mine Act) through a transfer
provision in the law when the
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:37 Dec 19, 2007
Jkt 214001
enforcement of mine safety and health
standards was moved from the
Department of the Interior to the
Department of Labor. The standard
addressed in this rule has not changed
since that time.
A. Petition for Modification of a
Mandatory Safety Standard
Section 101(c) of the Mine Act allows
a mine operator or the representative of
miners to petition MSHA for a
modification of an existing safety
standard. After investigating each
petition, MSHA may grant a
modification from the application of a
safety standard when MSHA determines
that—
(1) The alternative method for
achieving the desired result will at all
times guarantee no less than the same
measure of protection as the existing
standard, or
(2) The application of the existing
standard will result in a diminution of
safety to miners at that mine.
This proposed rule would eliminate
the need for a mine operator to file a
petition for modification of an existing
standard in order to permit the use of
portable fire extinguishers in lieu of
rock dust and other firefighting
materials in the working sections of
underground anthracite coal mines that
produce less than 300 tons of coal per
shift and use no electrical equipment at
the face.
Also, many underground coal mine
operators have filed petitions for
modification to use portable fire
extinguishers at temporary electrical
installations. This proposed rule would
eliminate the requirement for rock dust
and instead would require portable fire
extinguishers at underground temporary
electrical installations. Adding this
requirement would eliminate the need
to petition for permission to use fire
extinguishers at these locations.
B. Rock Dust for Fire Protection
Rock dust is an inorganic, noncombustible dust, such as crushed
limestone, that the mine operator
spreads on coal surfaces to reduce the
chance of stirring up an explosive
suspension of coal dust. The rock dust
also can work as a fire suppressant by
smothering or quenching the flame. It is
widely used in coal mining to reduce
the likelihood of coal dust explosions or
flame propagation. A single bag of rock
dust weighs about 40 pounds when dry.
In damp environments, a bag of rock
dust will absorb water, rendering it
unusable for fire prevention or
suppression purposes. Damp rock dust
becomes somewhat plastic in
consistency and dries into a hard, brick-
PO 00000
Frm 00039
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
like mass. The presence of bags of rock
dust can give a false sense of security for
firefighting purposes because the rock
dust can absorb water even through a
sealed bag. The miner or mine operator
can be unaware that the rock dust is
useless as a fire suppressant until trying
to use it. Bags of rock dust must be
protected from moisture, checked
frequently, and replaced if wet or
hardened. This lifting and moving of
heavy bags of rock dust increases the
risk of personal injury for miners.
C. Requirements for Portable Fire
Extinguishers
Existing standard § 75.1100–1 sets
minimum requirements for the type and
quality of firefighting equipment
required in 30 CFR part 75, subpart L—
Fire Protection. Paragraph (e) of
§ 75.1100–1 describes the criteria for a
portable fire extinguisher as follows:
(e) Portable fire extinguisher: A portable fire
extinguisher shall be either (1) a
multipurpose dry chemical type containing a
nominal weight of 5 pounds of dry powder
and enough expellant to apply the powder or
(2) a foam-producing type containing at least
21⁄2 gallons of foam-producing liquids and
enough expellant to supply the foam. Only
fire extinguishers approved by the
Underwriters Laboratories, Inc., or Factory
Mutual Research Corp., carrying appropriate
labels as to type and purpose, shall be used.
After March 30, 1971, all new portable fire
extinguishers acquired for use in a coal mine
shall have a 2A 10 BC or higher rating.
III. Section-by-Section Discussion
Existing standard § 75.1100–2 sets
requirements for the quantity and
location of firefighting equipment and
materials in underground coal mines. At
working sections, paragraph (a) requires
240 pounds of rock dust (about six
bags), two portable fire extinguishers,
and a ready supply of water or dry
chemical. At permanent electrical
installations, paragraph (e)(1) requires
two portable fire extinguishers or one
having twice the minimum capacity
specified for a portable fire extinguisher
in existing § 75.1100–1(e). Rock dust is
not required at permanent electrical
installations. At temporary electrical
installations, however, paragraph (e)(2)
requires one portable fire extinguisher
and 240 pounds of rock dust.
A. Section 75.1100–2(a): Working
Sections
Existing § 75.1100–2(a) includes
different requirements for readily
available firefighting equipment and
materials in working sections based on
the mine’s production. Because
anthracite coal mines typically produce
only 10 to 20 tons of coal per shift, they
E:\FR\FM\20DEP1.SGM
20DEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 244 / Thursday, December 20, 2007 / Proposed Rules
are covered by existing § 75.1100–
2(a)(2), which requires—
(2) Each working section of coal mines
producing less than 300 tons of coal per shift
shall be provided with two portable fire
extinguishers, 240 pounds of rock dust in
bags or other suitable containers, and at least
500 gallons of water and at least 3 pails of
10 quart capacity. In lieu of the 500 gallon
water supply a waterline with sufficient hose
to reach the working places, a portable water
car (500 gallons capacity) or a portable allpurpose dry powder chemical car of at least
125-pounds capacity may be provided.
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSALS
These options, however, do not
address or accommodate the typical
conditions in the working sections of
underground anthracite coal mines.
This proposed rule would add new
paragraph § 75.1100–2(a)(3) to provide
an additional compliance option for
underground anthracite coal mines and
make nonsubstantive format changes to
§ 75.1100–2(a)(2).
1. Addition of § 75.1100–2(a)(3) for
Underground Anthracite Coal Mines
New paragraph § 75.1100–2 would
apply only to underground anthracite
coal mines. Almost all of these mines
still use mining methods that were
developed over 150 years ago to suit
their unique geological characteristics.
Anthracite coal is a hard coal found in
undulating, steeply pitched veins, and
mined with slow, non-mechanized
mining methods. In contrast,
bituminous coal is softer and generally
found in horizontal veins. Bituminous
coal production uses highly mechanized
methods and depends on electricity for
face equipment.
Anthracite mining uses methods and
systems that rely on manual labor with
little or no mechanization. Electricity
that can cause or contribute to a fire
hazard is usually non-existent near the
face. Typically, anthracite coal mines
operate face equipment using air driven
motors for coal drills, air driven fans to
supplement face ventilation, and air
driven saws and hoists for the cutting
and placement of timber.
Mining conditions in underground
anthracite coal mines are generally wet
and removal of water from the face areas
is a major problem. The steep grade
permits natural water drainage in open,
on-grade ditches from the face area to a
slope sump where it is stored and
eventually pumped to a suitable water
treatment area. Waterlines are seldom
installed to the face.
Anthracite coal has a low volatile
ratio and the dust does not propagate an
explosion. Anthracite coal’s ignition
temperature is high (925 to 970 degrees
Fahrenheit) compared to bituminous
coal’s ignition temperature (700 to 900
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:37 Dec 19, 2007
Jkt 214001
degrees Fahrenheit). Thus, anthracite
coal dust is harder to ignite than
bituminous coal dust and the risk of a
fire is lower in anthracite coal mines
than in bituminous coal mines. There
has been only one reported fire
underground in an anthracite coal mine
since implementation of the Mine Act.
This fire occurred at a mine that used
electrical equipment at the face.
In summary, almost all underground
anthracite coal mines are steeply sloped
with little space underground for
storage of firefighting equipment or
materials; they use hand-operated or
mechanical equipment, rather than
electrical equipment (a potential
ignition source), underground at the
face where coal is mined; and they are
wet, causing rock dust to become hard
and unusable for firefighting. In
addition, anthracite coal mine dust has
low volatility, is difficult to ignite, and
does not propagate an explosion.
2. Discussion of Alternative for
Underground Anthracite Coal Mines
Because of the uniqueness of the
mining methods and conditions in
underground anthracite mines,
anthracite mine operators have
petitioned MSHA to allow the use of
only portable fire extinguishers to
replace existing requirements where
rock dust, water cars, and other water
storage are not practical. The mine
operators assert that the alternative
method will at all times guarantee no
less than the same measure of protection
as that afforded by the standard. From
1994 through 2004, MSHA received
over 60 petitions for modification of
existing paragraph (a)(2) of § 75.1100–2
and granted 54 for working sections at
underground anthracite coal mines. The
rest were dismissed for reasons
unrelated to the merits of the proposed
alternative method. For example, one
petition was dismissed because the
mine went out of business. None of the
petitions were denied for safety reasons.
MSHA granted the petitions for a
modification with the following
conditions.
1. Fire extinguisher(s) having at least four
times the minimum capacity specified for a
portable fire extinguisher in 30 CFR 75.1100–
1(e) shall be located no greater than 500 feet
from the working face.
2. Fire extinguisher(s) having at least six
times the minimum capacity specified for a
portable fire extinguisher in 30 CFR 75.1100–
1(e) shall be located at the entrance to the
gangway at the bottom of the slope.
There were no significant adverse
comments filed on these petitions.
Based on MSHA’s experience and
investigation of these petitions for
modification, MSHA concluded that the
PO 00000
Frm 00040
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
72303
use of fire extinguishers in the
situations addressed is a safe alternative
to existing requirements. The granted
alternative method provides for a quick
response to any fire on the section and
does not reduce protection for miners.
In addition, because there are a variety
of fire extinguishers currently available,
MSHA anticipates no problems in
obtaining fire extinguishers.
This proposed rule would incorporate
the language from these granted
petitions for modification into new
paragraph § 75.1100–2(a)(3). The
Agency has made changes to the
language from these petitions to clarify
the mine operator’s responsibility
regarding the size of fire extinguishers
required. Thus, this proposed rule
would eliminate the need to file a
petition for modification to use only
portable fire extinguishers, in lieu of the
firefighting equipment and materials
required by existing paragraph (a)(2), for
fighting fires at working sections of
underground anthracite coal mines that
have no electrical equipment at the
working section. The proposed rule
would not apply to the few
underground anthracite coal mines that
use electrical equipment at the working
section.
B. Section 75.1100–2(e): Electrical
Installations
Existing § 75.1100–2(e) causes
unnecessary compliance difficulties for
some mines with temporary electrical
installations underground. Under the
existing standard, permanent and
temporary electrical installations have
different requirements for firefighting
equipment and materials. Existing
§ 75.1100–2(e) requires that—
(e) Electrical installations. (1) Two portable
fire extinguishers or one extinguisher having
at least twice the minimum capacity
specified for a portable fire extinguisher in
§ 75.1100–1(e) shall be provided at each
permanent electrical installation.
(2) One portable fire extinguisher and 240
pounds of rock dust shall be provided at each
temporary electrical installation.
1. Characteristics of Underground
Electrical Installations
The difference between permanent
and temporary underground electrical
installations can be negligible in regard
to their potential fire hazard. For
example, MSHA generally considers
electrical installations located outby the
working section to be permanent and
those on the working section to be
temporary. However, MSHA considers a
battery charging station to be temporary
because it moves, even though it is
outby the working section. If the
electrical installation is in a fireproof
E:\FR\FM\20DEP1.SGM
20DEP1
72304
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 244 / Thursday, December 20, 2007 / Proposed Rules
enclosure, then MSHA considers it to be
permanent. If not, MSHA considers it
temporary. MSHA considers a power
center supplying the belt line to be
permanent, but one supplying a portable
compressor to be temporary. Typically,
temporary electrical installations are
unattended pumping stations located in
remote areas of the mine, battery
charging stations, power installation
transformers, and section power centers
for operating electrical face equipment.
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSALS
2. Elimination of Separate Requirements
for Permanent and Temporary Electrical
Installations
From 1994 through 2004, MSHA
received 34 petitions for modification of
paragraph (e)(2) of § 75.1100–2 and
granted all of them. The petitioners
asserted that it is difficult to comply
with the current standard for temporary
electrical installations in wet and damp
environments, such as pumping
stations, because the rock dust becomes
unusable for firefighting purposes. The
mine operator must check these
locations frequently to assure that the
rock dust is kept dry for use in the event
of a fire. The petitioners assert that the
exclusive use of portable fire
extinguishers as an alternative means of
extinguishing fires is at least as effective
as the existing standard. They also have
asserted that, in some cases, portable
fire extinguishers may be a safer fire
suppressant because lifting the heavy
bags of rock dust increases the risk of
personal injury.
In granting these petitions, MSHA
acknowledged the tendency of rock dust
to harden over time and become bricklike when exposed to humidity, which
greatly reduces the value of the rock
dust as a firefighting tool. MSHA has no
evidence of adverse outcomes
associated with these granted petitions.
Although MSHA did not receive any
comments contesting the granted
petitions, MSHA received a few
comments on the petitions requesting
that the Agency require a minimum of
two fire extinguishers as the alternative
method. Two fire extinguishers may be
preferable in some situations to allow
two miners to fight the fire
simultaneously or to provide a backup
should one of the portable fire
extinguishers fail.
3. Impact of This Proposed Rule
This proposed rule would modify
existing § 75.1100–2(e) to eliminate the
separate requirements for permanent
and temporary electrical installations. It
would remove the requirement for rock
dust at temporary underground
electrical installations and require two
portable fire extinguishers, or one
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:37 Dec 19, 2007
Jkt 214001
having twice the minimum capacity, at
all electrical installations. Essentially,
the proposed rule would make the
requirements for fire extinguishers at
temporary electrical installations
identical to the current requirements at
permanent electrical installations. The
Agency has made changes to the
regulatory language to clarify the mine
operator’s responsibility regarding the
size of fire extinguishers required. This
revision would not reduce protection for
miners.
MSHA believes that all of the
proposed revisions offer greater
flexibility, provide no less protection to
affected miners, and do not result in a
diminution of safety to miners.
IV. Executive Order 12866
Executive Order (E.O.) 12866 requires
that regulatory agencies assess both the
costs and benefits of significant
regulatory action. Under the Executive
Order, a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’
is one meeting any number of specified
conditions, including the following:
Having an annual effect on the economy
of $100 million or more; creating a
serious inconsistency or interfering with
an action of another agency; materially
altering the budgetary impact of
entitlements or the rights of entitlement
recipients; or raising novel legal or
policy issues. MSHA has determined
that this proposed rule would not have
an annual effect of $100 million or more
on the economy and that, therefore, it is
not an economically ‘‘significant
regulatory action’’ under section 3(f) of
E.O. 12866. MSHA, however, has
concluded that the proposed rule is
otherwise significant under Executive
Order 12866 because it raises novel
legal or policy issues.
A. Population-at-Risk
As of 2006, this proposed rule would
apply to 670 underground coal mine
operators employing 42,667 miners
(excluding office workers).
B. Costs
This proposed rule potentially would
affect all coal mines that have temporary
electrical installations underground and
about 20 active underground anthracite
coal mines. As described below, MSHA
estimates that the annual cost savings of
this proposed rule would be $2,366.1
1. Costs of Portable Fire Extinguishers
and Rock Dust
MSHA experience indicates that a 10to 20-pound fire extinguisher is the
industry standard. In addition, existing
1 $2,366 = $929 (savings to new anthracite coal
mines) + $1,436 (savings to new temporary
electrical installations).
PO 00000
Frm 00041
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
standards already require the mine
operator to inspect and maintain the fire
extinguishers periodically and replace
them as necessary. The portable fire
extinguishers have a shelf life of about
4 years. The cost to refill an emptied fire
extinguisher is about 25 percent of its
initial cost of about $25.00 for an
industrial strength 2A:10B:C nominal 5pound fire extinguisher. MSHA does not
require mine operators to report fires
lasting less than 10 minutes from time
of discovery and, therefore, has no
estimate of the frequency with which a
portable fire extinguisher is used and
refilled. MSHA considers the
maintenance of portable fire
extinguishers to be an essential business
practice for underground coal mines.
The cost for 240 pounds of rock dust
(six 40-pound bags) is about $6.00
($1.00 per bag). Although rock dust
usually does not require maintenance, it
has to be replaced routinely in wet or
damp environments, or otherwise
protected to prevent it from becoming
unusable. The shelf life of rock dust
varies considerably in damp or wet
environments. In addition to the labor
cost for routine checking and replacing
bags of rock dust, the cost associated
with heavy, re-sealable plastic bags or
other methods of prolonging the shelf
life of rock dust under these conditions
is about $2 per bag.
2. Cost Savings for New Underground
Anthracite Coal Mines
MSHA estimates that this proposed
rule would have no cost impact on the
20 active underground anthracite coal
mines because, currently, they are
operating under an alternative method
that allows them to provide and rely
solely on portable fire extinguishers for
firefighting on the working section. This
proposed rule, however, would benefit
new underground anthracite coal mines
by eliminating the need for the mine
operator to file a petition for
modification in order to provide and
rely solely on portable fire extinguishers
in lieu of the water and rock dust
required by the existing standard.
MSHA estimates that the average cost
of filing a petition for modification is
$465. MSHA estimates that it takes a
mine supervisor, earning $57.82 per
hour, 8 hours to prepare the petition for
modification and that, on average, it
takes a clerical worker, earning $20.96
per hour, 0.1 hours to copy and mail a
petition.2 On average, two new
underground anthracite coal mines open
2 $464.66 = (8 hours × $57.82) + (0.1 hour ×
$20.96).
E:\FR\FM\20DEP1.SGM
20DEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 244 / Thursday, December 20, 2007 / Proposed Rules
each year.3 Therefore, the associated
annual cost savings for new
underground anthracite coal mines
would be about $929.4
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSALS
3. Cost Savings for Temporary Electrical
Installations at Underground Coal Mines
Existing paragraph (e)(1) of § 75.1100–
2 requires two portable fire
extinguishers, or one fire extinguisher
having at least twice the minimum
capacity specified in existing § 75.1100–
1(e), at each permanent underground
electrical installation. Existing
paragraph (e)(2) of § 75.1100–2 requires
one portable fire extinguisher and 240
pounds of rock dust at each temporary
underground electrical installation. This
proposed rule would eliminate the
distinction between permanent and
temporary electrical installations. It
would modify existing § 75.1100–2(e) by
removing the sub-paragraph
designations (1) and (2) and applying
the requirements for permanent
electrical installations currently in
paragraph (1) to all underground
electrical installations. For the purpose
of this analysis, MSHA estimates that
most existing temporary electrical
installations are already in compliance
with this proposed rule because they
contain two portable fire extinguishers
or one having at least twice the
minimum capacity.
As previously noted, from 1994
through 2004, MSHA received and
granted 34 petitions for modification of
existing § 75.1100–2(e)(2). This averages
to be about 3.1 petitions per year. Under
the proposed rule, it would be
unnecessary for a mine operator to file
a petition for modification to obtain
permission to rely exclusively on fire
extinguishers for fighting fires at the
mine’s temporary electrical
installations. Based on 3.1 petitions per
year at an average cost of $465 for filing
a petition for modification, MSHA
estimates that the annual cost savings
would be about $1,436 for underground
coal mines.5
replaced immediately by a more
effective and reliable fire suppressant, a
portable fire extinguisher. An additional
advantage of portable fire extinguishers
is that they are easier to transport. A
mine operator will usually be able to
replace a damaged or spent fire
extinguisher more quickly than 240
pounds of rock dust. MSHA also can
reasonably anticipate a decreased risk of
personal injury related to lifting and
moving heavy bags of rock dust that
have become hard and unusable.6
D. Feasibility
MSHA has concluded that the
requirements of the proposed rule
would be both technologically and
economically feasible. This proposed
rule would be technologically feasible
because it would not be technologyforcing nor involve activities on the
frontiers of scientific knowledge. This
proposed rule would be economically
feasible because it provides a cost
saving to underground coal mines. Cost
savings are based on new underground
anthracite coal mine operators not
having to file petitions for modification
to use portable fire extinguishers in lieu
of rock dust and other fire fighting
materials at the working sections of
underground anthracite coal mines that
use no electrical equipment at the face
and produce less than 300 tons of coal
per shift. Likewise, there would be a
cost savings for both existing and new
underground coal mine operators not
having to file petitions for modification
to use portable fire extinguishers in lieu
of rock dust at temporary underground
electrical installations.
V. The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
and the Small Business Regulatory
Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA)
C. Benefits
The proposed rule would allow the
exclusive use of portable fire
extinguishers in certain locations in the
mine without the need for a mine
operator to file a petition for
modification and wait for MSHA
approval.
The most significant benefit is that
rock dust, that can quickly be rendered
ineffective by dampness, can be
Pursuant to the Regulatory Flexibility
Act (RFA) of 1980 as amended by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act (SBREFA), MSHA has
analyzed the impact of the proposed
rule on small businesses. Further,
MSHA has made a determination with
respect to whether or not MSHA can
certify that the proposed rule would not
have a significant economic impact on
a substantial number of small entities
that are covered by this rulemaking.
Under the SBREFA amendments to the
RFA, MSHA must include in the rule a
factual basis for this certification. If a
rule will have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small
3 This is the average number of underground
anthracite coal mines that opened in each year from
1999–2005.
4 $929 = 2 petitions × $464.66 per petition.
5 $1,436 = 3.1 petitions × $464.66 per petition.
6 MSHA injury data contain 332 injuries between
1999 and September 2005 where the phrase ‘‘rock
dust’’ appears in the accident narrative. Of these
332 injuries, 120 (≈39%) involved lifting, carrying,
or moving rock dust or bags of rock dust.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:37 Dec 19, 2007
Jkt 214001
PO 00000
Frm 00042
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
72305
entities, MSHA must develop a
regulatory flexibility analysis.
A. Definition of a Small Mine
Under the RFA, in analyzing the
impact of a rule on small entities,
MSHA must use the Small Business
Administration (SBA) definition for a
small entity or, after consultation with
the SBA Office of Advocacy, establish
an alternative definition for the mining
industry by publishing that definition in
the Federal Register for notice and
comment. MSHA has not taken such an
action and, consequently, must use the
SBA definition. The SBA defines a
small entity in the mining industry as
an establishment with 500 or fewer
miners.
MSHA has also looked at the impacts
of MSHA’s rules on a different subset of
mines that MSHA and the mining
community have traditionally referred
to as ‘‘small mines,’’ those having fewer
than 20 miners. In general, these ‘‘small
mines’’ differ from mines employing 20
or more miners not only in the number
of miners, but also in economies of scale
in material produced, in the type and
amount of production equipment, and
in supply inventory. Therefore, their
costs of complying with MSHA’s rules
and the impact of the rules on them will
also tend to be different. It is for this
reason that ‘‘small mines’’ employing
fewer than 20 miners are of special
concern to us.
This analysis complies with the legal
requirements of the RFA for an analysis
of the impacts on ‘‘small entities’’ while
continuing MSHA’s traditional
definition of ‘‘small mines.’’ MSHA
concludes that the Agency can certify
that the proposed rule would not have
a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities that
are covered by this rulemaking. MSHA
has determined that this is the case both
for mines affected by this rulemaking
with fewer than 20 miners and for
mines affected by this rulemaking with
500 or fewer miners.
B. Factual Basis for Certification
This proposed rule would provide at
least the same level of protection for
miners as the current standard. It would
result in a net cost savings and have no
adverse economic impact on the
underground coal mining industry.
MSHA estimated that 2006
production for underground coal mines
was 7,817,859 tons for mines that had
fewer than 20 miners and 277,634,777
tons for mines that had 500 or fewer
miners. Using the 2005 price of
underground coal of $36.42 per ton,
MSHA estimates the 2006 underground
coal revenues to be about $285 million
E:\FR\FM\20DEP1.SGM
20DEP1
72306
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 244 / Thursday, December 20, 2007 / Proposed Rules
for mines employing fewer than 20
miners and $10.1 billion for mines
employing 500 or fewer miners. Using
either MSHA’s traditional definition of
a small mine (those having fewer than
20 miners) or SBA’s definition of a
small mine (those having 500 or fewer
miners), MSHA estimates that the
proposed rule would result in a savings
in the compliance cost for underground
coal mines.
VI. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
B. The Treasury and General
Government Appropriations Act of
1999: Assessment of Federal
Regulations and Policies on Families
This proposed rule would have no
affect on family well-being or stability,
marital commitment, parental rights or
authority, or income or poverty of
families and children. Accordingly,
section 654 of the Treasury and General
Government Appropriations Act of 1999
(5 U.S.C. 601 note) requires no further
agency action, analysis, or assessment.
Due to this rulemaking, mine
operators would no longer have to
petition MSHA for a modification of
existing paragraphs (a)(2) and (e)(2) of
§ 75.1100–2 in order to rely exclusively
on fire extinguishers for firefighting
purposes. Existing Office of
Management and Budget (OMB)
paperwork package 1219–0065 includes
the annual paperwork burden related to
the preparation and filing of petitions
with MSHA, including petitions for
modification to use fire extinguishers.
This proposed rule would reduce the
paperwork burden in OMB paperwork
package 1219–0065 by $2,366 and 41
hours annually.7
Existing OMB paperwork package
1219–0054 includes the annual
paperwork burden related to examining
fire extinguishers every 6 months and
writing the date of the examination on
a tag attached to the fire extinguisher.
MSHA estimates that the paperwork
burden for examining and tagging
additional fire extinguishers at
temporary electrical installations would
be negligible because almost all
temporary electrical installations are
already in compliance.
C. Executive Order 12630: Government
Actions and Interference With
Constitutionally Protected Property
Rights (53 FR 8859)
This proposed rule would not
implement a policy with ‘‘takings’’
implications. Accordingly, Executive
Order 12630 requires no further agency
action or analysis.
VII. Other Regulatory Considerations
F. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
(64 FR 43255)
This proposed rule would not have
‘‘federalism implications’’ because it
would not ‘‘have substantial direct
effects on the states, on the relationship
between the national government and
the states, or on the distribution of
power and responsibilities among the
various levels of government.’’
Accordingly, Executive Order 13132
requires no further agency action or
analysis.
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSALS
A. The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
of 1995 and Executive Order 12875:
Enhancing the Intergovernmental
Partnership (58 FR 58093)
This proposed rule would not include
any Federal mandate that may result in
increased expenditures by State, local,
or tribal governments; nor would it
increase private sector expenditures by
more than $100 million annually; nor
would it significantly or uniquely affect
small governments. Accordingly, the
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (2
U.S.C. 1501 et seq.) requires no further
agency action or analysis.
7 $2,366 = $929 (savings for new anthracite coal
mines) + $1,436 (savings for temporary electrical
installations) and 41 hours = (8 + 0.1) hours per
petition × (2 + 3) petitions.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:37 Dec 19, 2007
Jkt 214001
D. Executive Order 12988: Civil Justice
Reform (61 FR 4729)
This proposed rule was written to
provide a clear legal standard for
affected conduct and was carefully
reviewed to eliminate drafting errors
and ambiguities, so as to minimize
litigation and undue burden on the
federal court system. Accordingly, this
proposed rule meets the applicable
standards provided in section 3 of
Executive Order 12988.
E. Executive Order 13045: Protection of
Children From Environmental Health
Risks and Safety Risks (62 FR 19885)
This proposed rule would have no
adverse impact on children.
Accordingly, Executive Order 13045, as
amended by Executive Orders 13229
and 13296, requires no further agency
action or analysis.
G. Executive Order 13175: Consultation
and Coordination With Indian Tribal
Governments (63 FR 27655)
This proposed rule would not have
‘‘tribal implications’’ because it would
not ‘‘have substantial direct effects on
one or more Indian tribes, on the
relationship between the federal
PO 00000
Frm 00043
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
government and Indian tribes, or on the
distribution of power and
responsibilities between the federal
government and Indian tribes.’’
Accordingly, Executive Order 13175
requires no further agency action or
analysis.
H. Executive Order 13211: Actions
Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use (66 FR 28355)
This proposed rule would not be a
‘‘significant energy action’’ because it
would not be ‘‘likely to have a
significant adverse effect on the supply,
distribution, or use of energy (including
a shortfall in supply, price increases,
and increased use of foreign supplies).’’
Accordingly, Executive Order 13211
requires no further agency action or
analysis.
I. Executive Order 13272: Proper
Consideration of Small Entities in
Agency Rulemaking (67 FR 53461)
MSHA has thoroughly reviewed this
proposed rule to assess and take
appropriate account of its potential
impact on small businesses, small
governmental jurisdictions, and small
organizations. As discussed in section V
of this preamble, MSHA has determined
and certified that this proposed rule
would not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small
entities. Accordingly, Executive Order
13272 requires no further agency action
or analysis.
VIII. Petitions for Modification
On the effective date of a final rule,
all existing granted petitions for
modification for the use of fire
extinguishers in lieu of rock dust and
other firefighting materials on working
sections in underground anthracite coal
mines and at temporary electrical
installations in underground coal mines
under § 75.1100–2 paragraphs (a)(2) and
(e)(2), respectively, would be revoked.
Thereafter, mine operators would be
required to comply with the provisions
of the final rule.
List of Subjects in 30 CFR Part 75
Coal mines, Fire prevention, Mine
safety and health, Safety, Underground
mining.
Dated: December 12, 2007.
Richard E. Stickler,
Assistant Secretary for Mine Safety and
Health.
For the reasons discussed in the
preamble, the Mine Safety and Health
Administration is proposing to amend
30 CFR part 75 as follows:
E:\FR\FM\20DEP1.SGM
20DEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 244 / Thursday, December 20, 2007 / Proposed Rules
PART 75—MANDATORY SAFETY
STANDARDS—UNDERGROUND COAL
MINES
32 CFR Part 199
Authority: 30 U.S.C. 811.
2. Amend § 75.1100–2 by revising
paragraph (a)(2), adding paragraph
(a)(3), and revising paragraph (e) to read
as follows:
§ 75.1100–2 Quantity and location of
firefighting equipment.
(a) * * *
*
*
*
*
(2) Each working section of coal
mines producing less than 300 tons of
coal per shift shall be provided with the
following:
(i) Two portable fire extinguishers;
and
(ii) 240 pounds of rock dust in bags
or other suitable containers; and
(iii) At least 500 gallons of water and
at least three pails of 10-quart capacity;
OR a waterline with sufficient hose to
reach the working places; OR a portable
water car of at least 500-gallon capacity;
OR a portable, all-purpose, dry-powder
chemical car of at least 125-pound
capacity.
(3) As an alternative to paragraph
(a)(2) of this section, each working
section with no electrical equipment at
the face of an anthracite coal mine
producing less than 300 tons of coal per
shift shall be provided with the
following:
(i) Portable fire extinguishers
containing a total capacity of at least 30
pounds of dry chemical or 15 gallons of
foam and located at the entrance to the
gangway at the bottom of the slope; and
(ii) Portable fire extinguishers
containing a total capacity of at least 20
pounds of dry chemical or 10 gallons of
foam and located within 500 feet from
the working face.
*
*
*
*
*
(e) Electrical installations. At each
electrical installation, the operator shall
provide two portable fire extinguishers
or one having at least 10 pounds of dry
chemical or 5 gallons of foam.
*
*
*
*
*
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSALS
*
[FR Doc. E7–24747 Filed 12–19–07; 8:45 am]
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:37 Dec 19, 2007
Jkt 214001
Office of the Secretary
[DOD–2007–HA–0010, RIN 0720–AB09]
1. The authority citation for part 75
continues to read as follows:
BILLING CODE 4510–43–P
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
TRICARE Program; Overpayments
Recovery
Office of the Secretary, DoD.
Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
SUMMARY: This rule proposes
amendments to the CHAMPUS and
TRICARE program regulation that
governs the recoupment of erroneous
payments. The proposed rule
implements changes required by the
Debt Collection Improvement Act of
1996 and the revised Federal Claims
Collection Standards.
DATES: Comments must be received on
or before February 19, 2008. Do not
submit comments directly to the point
of contact or mail your comments to any
address other that what is shown below.
Doing so will delay the posting of the
submission.
You may submit comments,
identified by docket number and or RIN
number and title, by any of the
following methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
• Mail: Federal Docket Management
System Office, 1160 Defense Pentagon,
Washington, DC 20301–1160.
Instructions: All submissions received
must include the agency name and
docket number or Regulatory
Information Number (RIN) for this
Federal Register document. The general
policy for comments and other
submissions from members of the public
is to make these submissions available
for public viewing on the Internet at
https://regulations.gov as they are
received without change, including any
personal identifiers or contact
information.
ADDRESSES:
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Gail
L. Jones, (303) 676–3401.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background and Purpose
On December 23, 1985, the Office of
the Secretary of Defense published a
final rule in the Federal Register (50 FR
52315), clarifying specific procedures
and criteria in the assertion, collection
or compromise of federal claims and the
suspension or termination of collection
action on such claims arising under the
operation of the Civilian Health and
Medical Program of the Uniformed
Services (CHAMPUS). Section 199.11,
PO 00000
Frm 00044
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
72307
‘‘Overpayments Recovery,’’ addresses
claims in favor of the United States
arising under the Federal Claims
Collection Act (recoupment claims).
This proposed rule implements
changes required by the Debt Collection
Improvement Act of 1996 (DCIA) and
the revised Federal Claims Collection
Standards, which were jointly issued by
the Department of the Treasury
(Treasury), and the Department of
Justice (DOJ). The DCIA centralized the
collection of most delinquent non-tax
debt at the Department of the Treasury
Financial Management Service
(Treasury). Agencies are now required
to refer debts to Treasury for centralized
administrative offset under the Treasury
Offset Program (TOP) and to transfer
debts to Treasury for collection on the
agencies’ behalf, a process known as
cross-servicing.
Section-by-Section Analysis
Paragraph (a) of this proposed rule
provides that it applies to the TRICARE
program and the Civilian Health and
Medical Program of the Uniformed
Services (CHAMPUS).
Section (b)(1) of this proposed rule
has been updated to include the DCIA
and the revised Federal Claims
Collection Standards, 31 CFR parts 900–
904, as authority for collection, as well
as Treasury regulations, found at 31 CFR
part 285, subpart A, implementing the
DCIA and related statutes governing the
offset of Federal salaries (5 U.S.C. 5514,
5 CFR 550, subpart K), administrative
offset (31 U.S.C. 3716), administrative
offset of tax refunds (31 U.S.C. 3720A)
and regulations implementing the offset
of military pay under Title 37 U.S.C.
1007(c). The reference to waiver of
collection authorized by Section 743 of
the National Defense Authorization Act
for Fiscal Year 1996 has been deleted.
The legislation authorizing waiver has
expired.
Paragraph (c) of this proposed rule
has been updated to reflect that the
Director, TRICARE Management
Activity (TMA), or a designee, is
responsible for ensuring that timely
collection action is pursued. The Office
of CHAMPUS (OCHAMPUS) has been
disestablished. The functions of
OCHAMPUS are now being performed
by the TMA. The current regulation
reflects that agency authority to
compromise, suspend, or terminate
collection action was limited to claims
that did not exceed $20,000. The
proposed rule increases this amount to
$100,000 at Paragraph (g), the amount
authorized by 31 U.S.C. 3711(a)(2).
Paragraph (e) of the proposed rule is
updated to reflect that the authority to
assert, settle, compromise or to suspend
E:\FR\FM\20DEP1.SGM
20DEP1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 244 (Thursday, December 20, 2007)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 72301-72307]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-24747]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Mine Safety and Health Administration
30 CFR Part 75
RIN 1219-AB40
Fire Extinguishers in Underground Coal Mines
AGENCY: Mine Safety and Health Administration, Labor.
ACTION: Proposed rule; close of comment period.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA), is proposing
to amend the current standard for the quantity and location of
firefighting equipment and materials underground to ensure that they
are readily available to quickly extinguish a fire. In lieu of the
current requirements for rock dust and other firefighting materials,
this proposed rule would allow the use of portable fire extinguishers
in working sections of underground anthracite coal mines that have no
electrical equipment at the face and produce less than 300 tons of coal
per shift. The rule also would require an additional fire extinguisher
in lieu of rock dust at temporary electrical installations in all
underground coal mines.
DATES: All comments must be received at MSHA no later than midnight
Eastern Standard Time on February 4, 2008.
ADDRESSES: (1) Identify all comments by ``RIN 1219-AB40'' and send them
to MSHA as follows:
Electronically through the Federal e-Rulemaking portal at
https://www.regulations.gov or by e-mail to zzMSHA-comments@dol.gov.
By facsimile to 202-693-9441.
By mail or hand delivery to MSHA, Office of Standards,
Regulations, and Variances, 1100 Wilson Boulevard, Room 2350,
Arlington, Virginia 22209-3939. If comments are hand-delivered, please
stop by the 21st floor first to check in with the receptionist.
(2) MSHA will post all comments on the internet without change,
including any personal information they may contain. Rulemaking
comments can be accessed via the internet at https://www.msha.gov/
regsinfo.htm or in person at MSHA's public reading room
[[Page 72302]]
at 1100 Wilson Boulevard, Room 2349, Arlington, Virginia.
(3) Subscribe to MSHA's list serve at https://www.msha.gov/
subscriptions/subscribe.aspx to receive an e-mail notification when
MSHA publishes rulemaking documents in the Federal Register.
Hearings: Public hearings will be scheduled if requested.
Information Collection Requirements. Comments concerning the
information collection requirements must be clearly identified as such
and sent to both the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and MSHA as
follows:
(1) To OMB: All comments may be sent by mail to the Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget,
New Executive Office Building, 725 17th Street, NW., Washington, DC
20503, Attn: Desk Officer for MSHA; and
(2) To MSHA: Comments must be clearly identified by RIN: 1219-AB40
as comments on the information collection requirements and transmitted
to MSHA as indicated above under ADDRESSES.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Patricia W. Silvey at 202-693-9440
(Voice), 202-693-9441 (Fax), or Silvey.Patricia@dol.gov (E-mail).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Introduction
The existing safety standards under 30 CFR part 75, subpart L--Fire
Protection, are designed to ensure that firefighting equipment and
materials are readily available to quickly extinguish a fire and
prevent its spread. Because of the explosive nature of coal dust and
the possible presence of methane gas, there is great potential for a
fire to spread to other areas of the underground coal mine. Historical
records demonstrate that the consequences of a fire in an underground
coal mine can be disastrous.
II. Background
The Bureau of Mines in the U.S. Department of the Interior (Bureau)
promulgated and enforced fire protection standards under the Federal
Coal Mine Safety Act (30 U.S.C. 451-483). These standards continued in
effect under the Federal Coal Mine Health and Safety Act of 1969 (Coal
Act) through a transfer provision in the law. On November 20, 1970 (35
FR 17890), the Bureau revised its standards addressing fire protection
in underground coal mines. The revised standards continued in effect
under the Federal Mine Safety and Health Act of 1977 (Mine Act) through
a transfer provision in the law when the enforcement of mine safety and
health standards was moved from the Department of the Interior to the
Department of Labor. The standard addressed in this rule has not
changed since that time.
A. Petition for Modification of a Mandatory Safety Standard
Section 101(c) of the Mine Act allows a mine operator or the
representative of miners to petition MSHA for a modification of an
existing safety standard. After investigating each petition, MSHA may
grant a modification from the application of a safety standard when
MSHA determines that--
(1) The alternative method for achieving the desired result will at
all times guarantee no less than the same measure of protection as the
existing standard, or
(2) The application of the existing standard will result in a
diminution of safety to miners at that mine.
This proposed rule would eliminate the need for a mine operator to
file a petition for modification of an existing standard in order to
permit the use of portable fire extinguishers in lieu of rock dust and
other firefighting materials in the working sections of underground
anthracite coal mines that produce less than 300 tons of coal per shift
and use no electrical equipment at the face.
Also, many underground coal mine operators have filed petitions for
modification to use portable fire extinguishers at temporary electrical
installations. This proposed rule would eliminate the requirement for
rock dust and instead would require portable fire extinguishers at
underground temporary electrical installations. Adding this requirement
would eliminate the need to petition for permission to use fire
extinguishers at these locations.
B. Rock Dust for Fire Protection
Rock dust is an inorganic, non-combustible dust, such as crushed
limestone, that the mine operator spreads on coal surfaces to reduce
the chance of stirring up an explosive suspension of coal dust. The
rock dust also can work as a fire suppressant by smothering or
quenching the flame. It is widely used in coal mining to reduce the
likelihood of coal dust explosions or flame propagation. A single bag
of rock dust weighs about 40 pounds when dry. In damp environments, a
bag of rock dust will absorb water, rendering it unusable for fire
prevention or suppression purposes. Damp rock dust becomes somewhat
plastic in consistency and dries into a hard, brick-like mass. The
presence of bags of rock dust can give a false sense of security for
firefighting purposes because the rock dust can absorb water even
through a sealed bag. The miner or mine operator can be unaware that
the rock dust is useless as a fire suppressant until trying to use it.
Bags of rock dust must be protected from moisture, checked frequently,
and replaced if wet or hardened. This lifting and moving of heavy bags
of rock dust increases the risk of personal injury for miners.
C. Requirements for Portable Fire Extinguishers
Existing standard Sec. 75.1100-1 sets minimum requirements for the
type and quality of firefighting equipment required in 30 CFR part 75,
subpart L--Fire Protection. Paragraph (e) of Sec. 75.1100-1 describes
the criteria for a portable fire extinguisher as follows:
(e) Portable fire extinguisher: A portable fire extinguisher shall
be either (1) a multipurpose dry chemical type containing a nominal
weight of 5 pounds of dry powder and enough expellant to apply the
powder or (2) a foam-producing type containing at least 2\1/2\
gallons of foam-producing liquids and enough expellant to supply the
foam. Only fire extinguishers approved by the Underwriters
Laboratories, Inc., or Factory Mutual Research Corp., carrying
appropriate labels as to type and purpose, shall be used. After
March 30, 1971, all new portable fire extinguishers acquired for use
in a coal mine shall have a 2A 10 BC or higher rating.
III. Section-by-Section Discussion
Existing standard Sec. 75.1100-2 sets requirements for the
quantity and location of firefighting equipment and materials in
underground coal mines. At working sections, paragraph (a) requires 240
pounds of rock dust (about six bags), two portable fire extinguishers,
and a ready supply of water or dry chemical. At permanent electrical
installations, paragraph (e)(1) requires two portable fire
extinguishers or one having twice the minimum capacity specified for a
portable fire extinguisher in existing Sec. 75.1100-1(e). Rock dust is
not required at permanent electrical installations. At temporary
electrical installations, however, paragraph (e)(2) requires one
portable fire extinguisher and 240 pounds of rock dust.
A. Section 75.1100-2(a): Working Sections
Existing Sec. 75.1100-2(a) includes different requirements for
readily available firefighting equipment and materials in working
sections based on the mine's production. Because anthracite coal mines
typically produce only 10 to 20 tons of coal per shift, they
[[Page 72303]]
are covered by existing Sec. 75.1100-2(a)(2), which requires--
(2) Each working section of coal mines producing less than 300
tons of coal per shift shall be provided with two portable fire
extinguishers, 240 pounds of rock dust in bags or other suitable
containers, and at least 500 gallons of water and at least 3 pails
of 10 quart capacity. In lieu of the 500 gallon water supply a
waterline with sufficient hose to reach the working places, a
portable water car (500 gallons capacity) or a portable all-purpose
dry powder chemical car of at least 125-pounds capacity may be
provided.
These options, however, do not address or accommodate the typical
conditions in the working sections of underground anthracite coal
mines. This proposed rule would add new paragraph Sec. 75.1100-2(a)(3)
to provide an additional compliance option for underground anthracite
coal mines and make nonsubstantive format changes to Sec. 75.1100-
2(a)(2).
1. Addition of Sec. 75.1100-2(a)(3) for Underground Anthracite Coal
Mines
New paragraph Sec. 75.1100-2 would apply only to underground
anthracite coal mines. Almost all of these mines still use mining
methods that were developed over 150 years ago to suit their unique
geological characteristics. Anthracite coal is a hard coal found in
undulating, steeply pitched veins, and mined with slow, non-mechanized
mining methods. In contrast, bituminous coal is softer and generally
found in horizontal veins. Bituminous coal production uses highly
mechanized methods and depends on electricity for face equipment.
Anthracite mining uses methods and systems that rely on manual
labor with little or no mechanization. Electricity that can cause or
contribute to a fire hazard is usually non-existent near the face.
Typically, anthracite coal mines operate face equipment using air
driven motors for coal drills, air driven fans to supplement face
ventilation, and air driven saws and hoists for the cutting and
placement of timber.
Mining conditions in underground anthracite coal mines are
generally wet and removal of water from the face areas is a major
problem. The steep grade permits natural water drainage in open, on-
grade ditches from the face area to a slope sump where it is stored and
eventually pumped to a suitable water treatment area. Waterlines are
seldom installed to the face.
Anthracite coal has a low volatile ratio and the dust does not
propagate an explosion. Anthracite coal's ignition temperature is high
(925 to 970 degrees Fahrenheit) compared to bituminous coal's ignition
temperature (700 to 900 degrees Fahrenheit). Thus, anthracite coal dust
is harder to ignite than bituminous coal dust and the risk of a fire is
lower in anthracite coal mines than in bituminous coal mines. There has
been only one reported fire underground in an anthracite coal mine
since implementation of the Mine Act. This fire occurred at a mine that
used electrical equipment at the face.
In summary, almost all underground anthracite coal mines are
steeply sloped with little space underground for storage of
firefighting equipment or materials; they use hand-operated or
mechanical equipment, rather than electrical equipment (a potential
ignition source), underground at the face where coal is mined; and they
are wet, causing rock dust to become hard and unusable for
firefighting. In addition, anthracite coal mine dust has low
volatility, is difficult to ignite, and does not propagate an
explosion.
2. Discussion of Alternative for Underground Anthracite Coal Mines
Because of the uniqueness of the mining methods and conditions in
underground anthracite mines, anthracite mine operators have petitioned
MSHA to allow the use of only portable fire extinguishers to replace
existing requirements where rock dust, water cars, and other water
storage are not practical. The mine operators assert that the
alternative method will at all times guarantee no less than the same
measure of protection as that afforded by the standard. From 1994
through 2004, MSHA received over 60 petitions for modification of
existing paragraph (a)(2) of Sec. 75.1100-2 and granted 54 for working
sections at underground anthracite coal mines. The rest were dismissed
for reasons unrelated to the merits of the proposed alternative method.
For example, one petition was dismissed because the mine went out of
business. None of the petitions were denied for safety reasons. MSHA
granted the petitions for a modification with the following conditions.
1. Fire extinguisher(s) having at least four times the minimum
capacity specified for a portable fire extinguisher in 30 CFR
75.1100-1(e) shall be located no greater than 500 feet from the
working face.
2. Fire extinguisher(s) having at least six times the minimum
capacity specified for a portable fire extinguisher in 30 CFR
75.1100-1(e) shall be located at the entrance to the gangway at the
bottom of the slope.
There were no significant adverse comments filed on these
petitions. Based on MSHA's experience and investigation of these
petitions for modification, MSHA concluded that the use of fire
extinguishers in the situations addressed is a safe alternative to
existing requirements. The granted alternative method provides for a
quick response to any fire on the section and does not reduce
protection for miners. In addition, because there are a variety of fire
extinguishers currently available, MSHA anticipates no problems in
obtaining fire extinguishers.
This proposed rule would incorporate the language from these
granted petitions for modification into new paragraph Sec. 75.1100-
2(a)(3). The Agency has made changes to the language from these
petitions to clarify the mine operator's responsibility regarding the
size of fire extinguishers required. Thus, this proposed rule would
eliminate the need to file a petition for modification to use only
portable fire extinguishers, in lieu of the firefighting equipment and
materials required by existing paragraph (a)(2), for fighting fires at
working sections of underground anthracite coal mines that have no
electrical equipment at the working section. The proposed rule would
not apply to the few underground anthracite coal mines that use
electrical equipment at the working section.
B. Section 75.1100-2(e): Electrical Installations
Existing Sec. 75.1100-2(e) causes unnecessary compliance
difficulties for some mines with temporary electrical installations
underground. Under the existing standard, permanent and temporary
electrical installations have different requirements for firefighting
equipment and materials. Existing Sec. 75.1100-2(e) requires that--
(e) Electrical installations. (1) Two portable fire
extinguishers or one extinguisher having at least twice the minimum
capacity specified for a portable fire extinguisher in Sec.
75.1100-1(e) shall be provided at each permanent electrical
installation.
(2) One portable fire extinguisher and 240 pounds of rock dust
shall be provided at each temporary electrical installation.
1. Characteristics of Underground Electrical Installations
The difference between permanent and temporary underground
electrical installations can be negligible in regard to their potential
fire hazard. For example, MSHA generally considers electrical
installations located outby the working section to be permanent and
those on the working section to be temporary. However, MSHA considers a
battery charging station to be temporary because it moves, even though
it is outby the working section. If the electrical installation is in a
fireproof
[[Page 72304]]
enclosure, then MSHA considers it to be permanent. If not, MSHA
considers it temporary. MSHA considers a power center supplying the
belt line to be permanent, but one supplying a portable compressor to
be temporary. Typically, temporary electrical installations are
unattended pumping stations located in remote areas of the mine,
battery charging stations, power installation transformers, and section
power centers for operating electrical face equipment.
2. Elimination of Separate Requirements for Permanent and Temporary
Electrical Installations
From 1994 through 2004, MSHA received 34 petitions for modification
of paragraph (e)(2) of Sec. 75.1100-2 and granted all of them. The
petitioners asserted that it is difficult to comply with the current
standard for temporary electrical installations in wet and damp
environments, such as pumping stations, because the rock dust becomes
unusable for firefighting purposes. The mine operator must check these
locations frequently to assure that the rock dust is kept dry for use
in the event of a fire. The petitioners assert that the exclusive use
of portable fire extinguishers as an alternative means of extinguishing
fires is at least as effective as the existing standard. They also have
asserted that, in some cases, portable fire extinguishers may be a
safer fire suppressant because lifting the heavy bags of rock dust
increases the risk of personal injury.
In granting these petitions, MSHA acknowledged the tendency of rock
dust to harden over time and become brick-like when exposed to
humidity, which greatly reduces the value of the rock dust as a
firefighting tool. MSHA has no evidence of adverse outcomes associated
with these granted petitions. Although MSHA did not receive any
comments contesting the granted petitions, MSHA received a few comments
on the petitions requesting that the Agency require a minimum of two
fire extinguishers as the alternative method. Two fire extinguishers
may be preferable in some situations to allow two miners to fight the
fire simultaneously or to provide a backup should one of the portable
fire extinguishers fail.
3. Impact of This Proposed Rule
This proposed rule would modify existing Sec. 75.1100-2(e) to
eliminate the separate requirements for permanent and temporary
electrical installations. It would remove the requirement for rock dust
at temporary underground electrical installations and require two
portable fire extinguishers, or one having twice the minimum capacity,
at all electrical installations. Essentially, the proposed rule would
make the requirements for fire extinguishers at temporary electrical
installations identical to the current requirements at permanent
electrical installations. The Agency has made changes to the regulatory
language to clarify the mine operator's responsibility regarding the
size of fire extinguishers required. This revision would not reduce
protection for miners.
MSHA believes that all of the proposed revisions offer greater
flexibility, provide no less protection to affected miners, and do not
result in a diminution of safety to miners.
IV. Executive Order 12866
Executive Order (E.O.) 12866 requires that regulatory agencies
assess both the costs and benefits of significant regulatory action.
Under the Executive Order, a ``significant regulatory action'' is one
meeting any number of specified conditions, including the following:
Having an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more;
creating a serious inconsistency or interfering with an action of
another agency; materially altering the budgetary impact of
entitlements or the rights of entitlement recipients; or raising novel
legal or policy issues. MSHA has determined that this proposed rule
would not have an annual effect of $100 million or more on the economy
and that, therefore, it is not an economically ``significant regulatory
action'' under section 3(f) of E.O. 12866. MSHA, however, has concluded
that the proposed rule is otherwise significant under Executive Order
12866 because it raises novel legal or policy issues.
A. Population-at-Risk
As of 2006, this proposed rule would apply to 670 underground coal
mine operators employing 42,667 miners (excluding office workers).
B. Costs
This proposed rule potentially would affect all coal mines that
have temporary electrical installations underground and about 20 active
underground anthracite coal mines. As described below, MSHA estimates
that the annual cost savings of this proposed rule would be $2,366.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ $2,366 = $929 (savings to new anthracite coal mines) +
$1,436 (savings to new temporary electrical installations).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Costs of Portable Fire Extinguishers and Rock Dust
MSHA experience indicates that a 10-to 20-pound fire extinguisher
is the industry standard. In addition, existing standards already
require the mine operator to inspect and maintain the fire
extinguishers periodically and replace them as necessary. The portable
fire extinguishers have a shelf life of about 4 years. The cost to
refill an emptied fire extinguisher is about 25 percent of its initial
cost of about $25.00 for an industrial strength 2A:10B:C nominal 5-
pound fire extinguisher. MSHA does not require mine operators to report
fires lasting less than 10 minutes from time of discovery and,
therefore, has no estimate of the frequency with which a portable fire
extinguisher is used and refilled. MSHA considers the maintenance of
portable fire extinguishers to be an essential business practice for
underground coal mines.
The cost for 240 pounds of rock dust (six 40-pound bags) is about
$6.00 ($1.00 per bag). Although rock dust usually does not require
maintenance, it has to be replaced routinely in wet or damp
environments, or otherwise protected to prevent it from becoming
unusable. The shelf life of rock dust varies considerably in damp or
wet environments. In addition to the labor cost for routine checking
and replacing bags of rock dust, the cost associated with heavy, re-
sealable plastic bags or other methods of prolonging the shelf life of
rock dust under these conditions is about $2 per bag.
2. Cost Savings for New Underground Anthracite Coal Mines
MSHA estimates that this proposed rule would have no cost impact on
the 20 active underground anthracite coal mines because, currently,
they are operating under an alternative method that allows them to
provide and rely solely on portable fire extinguishers for firefighting
on the working section. This proposed rule, however, would benefit new
underground anthracite coal mines by eliminating the need for the mine
operator to file a petition for modification in order to provide and
rely solely on portable fire extinguishers in lieu of the water and
rock dust required by the existing standard.
MSHA estimates that the average cost of filing a petition for
modification is $465. MSHA estimates that it takes a mine supervisor,
earning $57.82 per hour, 8 hours to prepare the petition for
modification and that, on average, it takes a clerical worker, earning
$20.96 per hour, 0.1 hours to copy and mail a petition.\2\ On average,
two new underground anthracite coal mines open
[[Page 72305]]
each year.\3\ Therefore, the associated annual cost savings for new
underground anthracite coal mines would be about $929.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ $464.66 = (8 hours x $57.82) + (0.1 hour x $20.96).
\3\ This is the average number of underground anthracite coal
mines that opened in each year from 1999-2005.
\4\ $929 = 2 petitions x $464.66 per petition.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. Cost Savings for Temporary Electrical Installations at Underground
Coal Mines
Existing paragraph (e)(1) of Sec. 75.1100-2 requires two portable
fire extinguishers, or one fire extinguisher having at least twice the
minimum capacity specified in existing Sec. 75.1100-1(e), at each
permanent underground electrical installation. Existing paragraph
(e)(2) of Sec. 75.1100-2 requires one portable fire extinguisher and
240 pounds of rock dust at each temporary underground electrical
installation. This proposed rule would eliminate the distinction
between permanent and temporary electrical installations. It would
modify existing Sec. 75.1100-2(e) by removing the sub-paragraph
designations (1) and (2) and applying the requirements for permanent
electrical installations currently in paragraph (1) to all underground
electrical installations. For the purpose of this analysis, MSHA
estimates that most existing temporary electrical installations are
already in compliance with this proposed rule because they contain two
portable fire extinguishers or one having at least twice the minimum
capacity.
As previously noted, from 1994 through 2004, MSHA received and
granted 34 petitions for modification of existing Sec. 75.1100-
2(e)(2). This averages to be about 3.1 petitions per year. Under the
proposed rule, it would be unnecessary for a mine operator to file a
petition for modification to obtain permission to rely exclusively on
fire extinguishers for fighting fires at the mine's temporary
electrical installations. Based on 3.1 petitions per year at an average
cost of $465 for filing a petition for modification, MSHA estimates
that the annual cost savings would be about $1,436 for underground coal
mines.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ $1,436 = 3.1 petitions x $464.66 per petition.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
C. Benefits
The proposed rule would allow the exclusive use of portable fire
extinguishers in certain locations in the mine without the need for a
mine operator to file a petition for modification and wait for MSHA
approval.
The most significant benefit is that rock dust, that can quickly be
rendered ineffective by dampness, can be replaced immediately by a more
effective and reliable fire suppressant, a portable fire extinguisher.
An additional advantage of portable fire extinguishers is that they are
easier to transport. A mine operator will usually be able to replace a
damaged or spent fire extinguisher more quickly than 240 pounds of rock
dust. MSHA also can reasonably anticipate a decreased risk of personal
injury related to lifting and moving heavy bags of rock dust that have
become hard and unusable.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ MSHA injury data contain 332 injuries between 1999 and
September 2005 where the phrase ``rock dust'' appears in the
accident narrative. Of these 332 injuries, 120 ([ap]39%) involved
lifting, carrying, or moving rock dust or bags of rock dust.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
D. Feasibility
MSHA has concluded that the requirements of the proposed rule would
be both technologically and economically feasible. This proposed rule
would be technologically feasible because it would not be technology-
forcing nor involve activities on the frontiers of scientific
knowledge. This proposed rule would be economically feasible because it
provides a cost saving to underground coal mines. Cost savings are
based on new underground anthracite coal mine operators not having to
file petitions for modification to use portable fire extinguishers in
lieu of rock dust and other fire fighting materials at the working
sections of underground anthracite coal mines that use no electrical
equipment at the face and produce less than 300 tons of coal per shift.
Likewise, there would be a cost savings for both existing and new
underground coal mine operators not having to file petitions for
modification to use portable fire extinguishers in lieu of rock dust at
temporary underground electrical installations.
V. The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) and the Small Business
Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA)
Pursuant to the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) of 1980 as amended
by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA),
MSHA has analyzed the impact of the proposed rule on small businesses.
Further, MSHA has made a determination with respect to whether or not
MSHA can certify that the proposed rule would not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities that are
covered by this rulemaking. Under the SBREFA amendments to the RFA,
MSHA must include in the rule a factual basis for this certification.
If a rule will have a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities, MSHA must develop a regulatory flexibility
analysis.
A. Definition of a Small Mine
Under the RFA, in analyzing the impact of a rule on small entities,
MSHA must use the Small Business Administration (SBA) definition for a
small entity or, after consultation with the SBA Office of Advocacy,
establish an alternative definition for the mining industry by
publishing that definition in the Federal Register for notice and
comment. MSHA has not taken such an action and, consequently, must use
the SBA definition. The SBA defines a small entity in the mining
industry as an establishment with 500 or fewer miners.
MSHA has also looked at the impacts of MSHA's rules on a different
subset of mines that MSHA and the mining community have traditionally
referred to as ``small mines,'' those having fewer than 20 miners. In
general, these ``small mines'' differ from mines employing 20 or more
miners not only in the number of miners, but also in economies of scale
in material produced, in the type and amount of production equipment,
and in supply inventory. Therefore, their costs of complying with
MSHA's rules and the impact of the rules on them will also tend to be
different. It is for this reason that ``small mines'' employing fewer
than 20 miners are of special concern to us.
This analysis complies with the legal requirements of the RFA for
an analysis of the impacts on ``small entities'' while continuing
MSHA's traditional definition of ``small mines.'' MSHA concludes that
the Agency can certify that the proposed rule would not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities
that are covered by this rulemaking. MSHA has determined that this is
the case both for mines affected by this rulemaking with fewer than 20
miners and for mines affected by this rulemaking with 500 or fewer
miners.
B. Factual Basis for Certification
This proposed rule would provide at least the same level of
protection for miners as the current standard. It would result in a net
cost savings and have no adverse economic impact on the underground
coal mining industry.
MSHA estimated that 2006 production for underground coal mines was
7,817,859 tons for mines that had fewer than 20 miners and 277,634,777
tons for mines that had 500 or fewer miners. Using the 2005 price of
underground coal of $36.42 per ton, MSHA estimates the 2006 underground
coal revenues to be about $285 million
[[Page 72306]]
for mines employing fewer than 20 miners and $10.1 billion for mines
employing 500 or fewer miners. Using either MSHA's traditional
definition of a small mine (those having fewer than 20 miners) or SBA's
definition of a small mine (those having 500 or fewer miners), MSHA
estimates that the proposed rule would result in a savings in the
compliance cost for underground coal mines.
VI. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
Due to this rulemaking, mine operators would no longer have to
petition MSHA for a modification of existing paragraphs (a)(2) and
(e)(2) of Sec. 75.1100-2 in order to rely exclusively on fire
extinguishers for firefighting purposes. Existing Office of Management
and Budget (OMB) paperwork package 1219-0065 includes the annual
paperwork burden related to the preparation and filing of petitions
with MSHA, including petitions for modification to use fire
extinguishers. This proposed rule would reduce the paperwork burden in
OMB paperwork package 1219-0065 by $2,366 and 41 hours annually.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ $2,366 = $929 (savings for new anthracite coal mines) +
$1,436 (savings for temporary electrical installations) and 41 hours
= (8 + 0.1) hours per petition x (2 + 3) petitions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Existing OMB paperwork package 1219-0054 includes the annual
paperwork burden related to examining fire extinguishers every 6 months
and writing the date of the examination on a tag attached to the fire
extinguisher. MSHA estimates that the paperwork burden for examining
and tagging additional fire extinguishers at temporary electrical
installations would be negligible because almost all temporary
electrical installations are already in compliance.
VII. Other Regulatory Considerations
A. The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 and Executive Order 12875:
Enhancing the Intergovernmental Partnership (58 FR 58093)
This proposed rule would not include any Federal mandate that may
result in increased expenditures by State, local, or tribal
governments; nor would it increase private sector expenditures by more
than $100 million annually; nor would it significantly or uniquely
affect small governments. Accordingly, the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
(2 U.S.C. 1501 et seq.) requires no further agency action or analysis.
B. The Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act of 1999:
Assessment of Federal Regulations and Policies on Families
This proposed rule would have no affect on family well-being or
stability, marital commitment, parental rights or authority, or income
or poverty of families and children. Accordingly, section 654 of the
Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act of 1999 (5 U.S.C.
601 note) requires no further agency action, analysis, or assessment.
C. Executive Order 12630: Government Actions and Interference With
Constitutionally Protected Property Rights (53 FR 8859)
This proposed rule would not implement a policy with ``takings''
implications. Accordingly, Executive Order 12630 requires no further
agency action or analysis.
D. Executive Order 12988: Civil Justice Reform (61 FR 4729)
This proposed rule was written to provide a clear legal standard
for affected conduct and was carefully reviewed to eliminate drafting
errors and ambiguities, so as to minimize litigation and undue burden
on the federal court system. Accordingly, this proposed rule meets the
applicable standards provided in section 3 of Executive Order 12988.
E. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental
Health Risks and Safety Risks (62 FR 19885)
This proposed rule would have no adverse impact on children.
Accordingly, Executive Order 13045, as amended by Executive Orders
13229 and 13296, requires no further agency action or analysis.
F. Executive Order 13132: Federalism (64 FR 43255)
This proposed rule would not have ``federalism implications''
because it would not ``have substantial direct effects on the states,
on the relationship between the national government and the states, or
on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various
levels of government.'' Accordingly, Executive Order 13132 requires no
further agency action or analysis.
G. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian
Tribal Governments (63 FR 27655)
This proposed rule would not have ``tribal implications'' because
it would not ``have substantial direct effects on one or more Indian
tribes, on the relationship between the federal government and Indian
tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between
the federal government and Indian tribes.'' Accordingly, Executive
Order 13175 requires no further agency action or analysis.
H. Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use (66 FR 28355)
This proposed rule would not be a ``significant energy action''
because it would not be ``likely to have a significant adverse effect
on the supply, distribution, or use of energy (including a shortfall in
supply, price increases, and increased use of foreign supplies).''
Accordingly, Executive Order 13211 requires no further agency action or
analysis.
I. Executive Order 13272: Proper Consideration of Small Entities in
Agency Rulemaking (67 FR 53461)
MSHA has thoroughly reviewed this proposed rule to assess and take
appropriate account of its potential impact on small businesses, small
governmental jurisdictions, and small organizations. As discussed in
section V of this preamble, MSHA has determined and certified that this
proposed rule would not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities. Accordingly, Executive Order
13272 requires no further agency action or analysis.
VIII. Petitions for Modification
On the effective date of a final rule, all existing granted
petitions for modification for the use of fire extinguishers in lieu of
rock dust and other firefighting materials on working sections in
underground anthracite coal mines and at temporary electrical
installations in underground coal mines under Sec. 75.1100-2
paragraphs (a)(2) and (e)(2), respectively, would be revoked.
Thereafter, mine operators would be required to comply with the
provisions of the final rule.
List of Subjects in 30 CFR Part 75
Coal mines, Fire prevention, Mine safety and health, Safety,
Underground mining.
Dated: December 12, 2007.
Richard E. Stickler,
Assistant Secretary for Mine Safety and Health.
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Mine Safety and
Health Administration is proposing to amend 30 CFR part 75 as follows:
[[Page 72307]]
PART 75--MANDATORY SAFETY STANDARDS--UNDERGROUND COAL MINES
1. The authority citation for part 75 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 30 U.S.C. 811.
2. Amend Sec. 75.1100-2 by revising paragraph (a)(2), adding
paragraph (a)(3), and revising paragraph (e) to read as follows:
Sec. 75.1100-2 Quantity and location of firefighting equipment.
(a) * * *
* * * * *
(2) Each working section of coal mines producing less than 300 tons
of coal per shift shall be provided with the following:
(i) Two portable fire extinguishers; and
(ii) 240 pounds of rock dust in bags or other suitable containers;
and
(iii) At least 500 gallons of water and at least three pails of 10-
quart capacity; OR a waterline with sufficient hose to reach the
working places; OR a portable water car of at least 500-gallon
capacity; OR a portable, all-purpose, dry-powder chemical car of at
least 125-pound capacity.
(3) As an alternative to paragraph (a)(2) of this section, each
working section with no electrical equipment at the face of an
anthracite coal mine producing less than 300 tons of coal per shift
shall be provided with the following:
(i) Portable fire extinguishers containing a total capacity of at
least 30 pounds of dry chemical or 15 gallons of foam and located at
the entrance to the gangway at the bottom of the slope; and
(ii) Portable fire extinguishers containing a total capacity of at
least 20 pounds of dry chemical or 10 gallons of foam and located
within 500 feet from the working face.
* * * * *
(e) Electrical installations. At each electrical installation, the
operator shall provide two portable fire extinguishers or one having at
least 10 pounds of dry chemical or 5 gallons of foam.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. E7-24747 Filed 12-19-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-43-P
