Fees for Testing, Evaluation, and Approval of Mining Products, 45051-45057 [2015-18617]
Download as PDF
45051
Rules and Regulations
Federal Register
Vol. 80, No. 145
Wednesday, July 29, 2015
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER
contains regulatory documents having general
applicability and legal effect, most of which
are keyed to and codified in the Code of
Federal Regulations, which is published under
50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.
The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by
the Superintendent of Documents. Prices of
new books are listed in the first FEDERAL
REGISTER issue of each week.
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Parts 401, 413, and 414
[Docket No.: FAA–2015–1745; Amdt. Nos
413–11 and 414–3]
RIN 2120–AK58
Electronic Applications for Licenses,
Permits, and Safety Approvals
Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Direct final rule; confirmation of
effective date and response to public
comments.
AGENCY:
This action confirms the
effective date of the direct final rule,
request for comments, published on
May 27, 2015, and dispositions the one
public comment received. The rule
amends commercial space
transportation regulations to allow an
applicant for a license, experimental
permit, or safety approval the option of
submitting an application electronically.
DATES: The effective date of July 27,
2015, for the direct final rule published
on May 27, 2015 (80 FR 30147), is
confirmed.
ADDRESSES: For information on where to
obtain copies of rulemaking documents
and other information related to this
action, see ‘‘How To Obtain Additional
Information’’ in the SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION section of this document.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For
technical questions concerning this
action, contact Shirley McBride, Office
of Commercial Space Transportation,
Regulations and Analysis Division,
Federal Aviation Administration, 800
Independence Avenue SW.,
Washington, DC 20591; telephone (202)
267–7470; email Shirley.McBride@
faa.gov.
For legal questions concerning this
action, contact Alex Zektser, Office of
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:16 Jul 28, 2015
Jkt 235001
Chief Counsel, International Law,
Legislation, and Regulations Division,
AGC–250, Federal Aviation
Administration, 800 Independence
Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20591;
telephone (202) 267–3073; email
Alex.Zektser@faa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
Before publication of the direct final
rule on May 27, 2015 (Electronic
Applications for Licenses, Permits, and
Safety Approvals, 80 FR 30147),
applications for a license, an
experimental permit, or a safety
approval made under 14 CFR part 413
or 414 had to be submitted to the FAA
in paper form. The FAA determined that
this paper-based submission process
was unduly burdensome because an
electronically-submitted application
would provide the FAA with the same
information as a paper application. In
addition, the Government Paperwork
Elimination Act (GPEA) requires that,
when practicable, a federal agency must
provide the public with an option to
transact with the agency electronically.1
Accordingly, the FAA published a
direct final rule, request for comments,
amending the application process under
14 CFR part 413 for a license or
experimental permit, and under part
414 for a safety approval to allow
applicants to submit their applications
electronically.
The comment period on the direct
final rule closed on June 26, 2015. Only
one commenter submitted a comment
document.
Discussion of Comments
The FAA only received one comment
on June 3, 2015, from an individual
commenter supporting the final rule.
The commenter also recommended that
in addition to this rulemaking, the FAA
also institute a practice of providing an
electronic response acknowledging
receipt of the application.
Conclusion
1 Office of Management and Budget,
Implementation of the Government Paperwork
Elimination Act, https://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/
fedreg_gpea2 (explaining implementation of Pub.
Law 105–277, sec. 1704).
Frm 00001
Issued under authority provided by 49
U.S.C. 160(f), and 51 U.S.C. 50901–50923 in
Washington, DC, on July 23, 2015.
Lirio Liu,
Director, Office of Rulemaking.
[FR Doc. 2015–18502 Filed 7–28–15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Mine Safety and Health Administration
30 CFR Part 5
[Docket No. MSHA–2014–0016]
RIN 1219–AB82
Fees for Testing, Evaluation, and
Approval of Mining Products
Mine Safety and Health
Administration, Labor.
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
The Mine Safety and Health
Administration (MSHA) is revising the
Agency’s regulation for administering
fees for testing, evaluation, and approval
of products manufactured for use in
mines. This final rule revises the fees
charged for these services. The final rule
also includes a fee for approval services
that MSHA provides to applicants or
approval holders under the existing
rule, but for which the Agency currently
does not charge a fee, and for other
activities required to support the
approval process. This change will
allow MSHA to charge fees that reflect
the full cost of the approval services
provided.
SUMMARY:
The final rule is effective on
October 1, 2015.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Sheila A. McConnell, Acting Director,
Office of Standards, Regulations, and
Variances, MSHA, at
mcconnell.sheila.a@dol.gov (email);
202–693–9440 (voice); or 202–693–9441
(facsimile). (These are not toll-free
numbers).
DATES:
Because there were no adverse
comments submitted on this rulemaking
and the only comment submitted on the
rule supported the agency action, the
PO 00000
FAA has determined that no further
rulemaking action is necessary. The
direct final rule is effective on July 27,
2015. The FAA will consider the
additional suggestion submitted by the
individual commenter separately from
this rulemaking action, as the suggestion
was that the FAA institute a practice in
addition to the one that is the subject of
this rulemaking.
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\29JYR1.SGM
29JYR1
45052
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 145 / Wednesday, July 29, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. Executive Summary
II. Background
III. Section-by-Section Analysis
IV. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory
Planning and Review and Executive
Order 13563: Improving Regulation and
Regulatory Review
V. Feasibility
VI. Regulatory Flexibility Act, Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act, and Executive Order
13272: Proper Consideration of Small
Entities in Agency Rulemaking
VII. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
VIII. Other Regulatory Considerations
Availability of Information
Docket: Access rulemaking
documents electronically at https://
www.msha.gov/regsinfo.htm or https://
www.regulations.gov. [Docket Number
MSHA–2014–0016]. Obtain a copy of a
rulemaking document from the Office of
Standards, Regulations, and Variances,
MSHA, by request to 202–693–9440
(voice) or 202–693–9441 (facsimile).
(These are not toll-free numbers.)
Email Notification: To subscribe to
receive an email notification when
MSHA publishes rules, program
information, instructions, or policy, in
the Federal Register, go to https://
www.msha.gov/subscriptions/
subscribe.aspx.
I. Executive Summary
A. Purpose of Regulatory Action
As part of the U.S. Department of
Labor, under the Federal Mine Safety
and Health Act of 1977 (Mine Act), as
amended, MSHA’s mission is to prevent
death, disease, and injury from mining
and promote safe and healthy
workplaces for the Nation’s miners.
Since 1911, MSHA and its predecessor
agencies have evaluated and tested
products for use in mines to prevent
fires, explosions, and accidents.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES
B. Summary of Major Provisions
Under the final rule, MSHA revises
the hourly rate for the fees charged to
applicants and approval holders to
include all costs associated with the
approval program. MSHA calculates the
hourly rate by dividing the total
approval program costs (direct and
indirect) during a prior fiscal year,
including internal quality control
activities and post-approval product
audits, by the number of total direct
hours spent on approval program
activities for the same period. These
changes in how MSHA calculates fees
increase the hourly rate to $121.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:16 Jul 28, 2015
Jkt 235001
C. Costs and Benefits
This rule is not economically
significant. The final rule will produce
zero costs and zero benefits because the
fees MSHA collects are transfer
payments. MSHA discusses transfer
payments in section IV of this preamble.
III. Section-by-Section Analysis
II. Background
Under various authorities,1 MSHA
historically has collected fees for its
services in evaluating, testing, and
approving products. Originally, the U.S.
Bureau of Mines, an MSHA predecessor
agency, billed applicants for approval
services using published individual fee
schedules, e.g., each approval part in
Title 30, Chapter I, included a list of flat
fees for different tests, evaluations, and
other services performed for approval
activities (30 FR 3752–3757). On May 8,
1987 (52 FR 17506), MSHA eliminated
the individual fee schedules and
established part 5, which created an
hourly rate for administration and
calculation of fees for services in Title
30, Chapter I, Subchapter B, Testing,
Evaluation, and Approval of Mining
Products. On August 9, 2005 (70 FR
46336), MSHA revised part 5 and its fee
procedures. That rule eliminated the
application fee, allowed preauthorization of expenditures for
processing applications, and allowed
outside organizations to set fees when
conducting part 15 testing on MSHA’s
behalf.
Section 205 of the Chief Financial
Officers Act of 1990 (CFO Act) and
Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) Circular No. A–25 Revised, User
Charges (7/8/1993), require agencies to
review the user charges in their
programs to ensure that the charges
reflect the full costs of the services
provided. Traditionally, MSHA reviews
its user charges annually; however,
MSHA last revised its hourly rate under
part 5 to $97.00 on December 29, 2010
(75 FR 82074).
Under 30 U.S.C. 966, MSHA may
retain up to $2,499,000 of fees collected
for the approval and certification of
equipment, materials, and explosives for
use in mines.
MSHA proposed revisions to its
existing regulations on fees for testing,
evaluation and approval of mining
products on October 9, 2014 (79 FR
61035). This final rule addresses the
comments received in response to the
proposed rule.
A. § 5.10
1 These authorities are: Public Law 61–525, Ch.
285, 36 Stat. 1419 (1911); Public Law 62–386, Ch.
72, Sec. 5, 37 Stat. 682 (1913); Public Law 72–212,
Ch. 314, Sec. 311, 47 Stat. 410 (1932); 30 U.S.C.
961(c)(2); and Title V of the Independent Offices
Appropriations Act of 1952, Public Law 82–137, 65
Stat. 290 (1951), as amended, 31 U.S.C. 9701.
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
In this final rule, the term ‘‘approval’’
includes approvals, certifications,
acceptances, and evaluations MSHA
issues under Title 30, Chapter I,
Subchapter B, Testing, Evaluation, and
Approval of Mining Products.
Purpose and Scope
Final § 5.10, like the proposal,
provides the purpose and scope of the
rule. It also establishes a system under
which MSHA charges a fee for approval
program services for products
manufactured for use in mines. Like the
proposal, the final rule identifies the
activities in the approval program.
The approval program represents all
the activities necessary for MSHA to
assure that products approved for use in
mines are designed, manufactured, and
maintained in accordance with approval
requirements. The approval program
includes: (1) Application processing; (2)
testing and evaluation; (3) approval
decisions; (4) post-approval activities;
and (5) the termination of approvals.
1. Application processing begins
when an applicant files a new
application for approval. MSHA
administratively reviews each new
application and, on determining that the
application is complete, prepares a
maximum fee estimate and sends it to
the applicant. The applicant must agree
to pay the estimated fee before MSHA
will begin testing, as needed, and
evaluating the product.
2. Testing and evaluation includes
technical evaluation, analysis, test set
up, testing, test tear down, any
consultation on the application, and
internal quality control activities.
MSHA uses internal quality control
programs to monitor and improve its
testing and evaluation processes (e.g.,
internal administrative and technical
reviews; internal audits; and calibration,
repair, and maintenance of test
equipment).
3. Following testing and evaluating a
product, MSHA makes an approval
decision and notifies the applicant by
letter of the Agency’s findings and
decision. If the product is approved, the
letter identifies the approved
specifications for the design,
construction, maintenance, and
conditions of use for the product. If the
product is not approved or if the
application is cancelled, the letter
identifies the reasons for the decision.
All approval documentation is kept on
file at MSHA.
4. MSHA also conducts the following
post-approval activities:
E:\FR\FM\29JYR1.SGM
29JYR1
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 145 / Wednesday, July 29, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES
• Changing approvals (e.g.,
extensions 2 of approvals, field
modifications, and modification through
the Revised Acceptance Modification
Program (RAMP)).
• Conducting post-approval product
audits and field audits.
• Responding to complaints.
• Investigating product failures.
• Monitoring regional or nationwide
product recall or retrofit programs.
• Conducting administrative actions,
such as transfer of approval numbers.
5. Termination of an approval may
occur when an approval holder
voluntarily requests termination of an
approval, when MSHA revokes an
approval because of compliance or
safety issues, or when MSHA issues
regulations that make an approval
obsolete.
MSHA did not receive any comments
on § 5.10 and it is finalized as proposed.
B. § 5.30 Fee Calculation
Final § 5.30, like the proposal,
addresses the hourly rate calculation,
the activities for which MSHA charges
a fee, activities that are not subject to a
fee, the fee estimate, and any changes to
the fee estimate. Section 5.30 is
finalized as proposed.
Under final § 5.30(a), like the
proposal, MSHA will continue to charge
a fee based on an hourly rate for
approval program activities and other
associated costs, such as travel expenses
and part 15 fees. Part 15 fees for services
provided to MSHA by other
organizations will be set by those
organizations.
Final paragraph § 5.30(b), like the
proposal, is derived from existing
§ 5.30(a) and identifies the costs MSHA
incurs in administering the approval
program. Under the final rule, like the
proposal, the hourly rate is calculated to
reflect the costs of the overall approval
program. Under the existing rule, the
hourly rate includes only the
application processing; testing and
evaluation; and approval decision costs.
Also under the existing rule, some
post-approval activities, such as changes
to approvals, are included in the
approval program costs used in
calculating the hourly rate. Under the
existing rule, however, MSHA had
excluded the costs of monitoring to
assure approved products continue to be
manufactured and maintained as
approved because MSHA considered
these activities to be enforcement
2 An extension of the approval is a document
MSHA issues that states that a change to the
product previously approved by MSHA is approved
and authorizes the continued use of the approval
marking with the appropriate extension number for
the change added.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:16 Jul 28, 2015
Jkt 235001
activities rather than approval program
activities (52 FR 17507–17508). As
stated previously, OMB Circular No. A–
25 requires that agencies recover the full
costs of services rendered. To more
accurately account for costs, MSHA
proposed to include the direct and
indirect cost of these post-approval
product activities in the hourly rate
calculation because these activities are
an important part of the approval
program. These activities assure MSHA,
operators, and miners that products
continue to be designed, manufactured,
and maintained in accordance with the
approval requirements.
Under the final rule, like the proposal,
MSHA will continue to determine an
hourly rate to cover direct and indirect
costs. MSHA bases the hourly rate on all
approval program costs the Agency
incurred during a prior fiscal year. The
hourly rate is the total approval program
costs (direct and indirect) divided by
the number of direct hours spent on all
approval program activities. Final
paragraph § 5.30(b) lists the approval
program costs that MSHA will include
in the hourly rate calculation.
Final paragraph § 5.30(b)(1), like the
proposal, defines direct costs as
consisting of compensation and benefit
costs for all hours worked in support of
the approval program and is derived, in
part, from existing § 5.10(b)(1) and
(b)(2). These costs include approval
program activities, such as testing and
evaluation, including internal quality
control; and post-approval activities,
including post-approval product audits.
Final paragraph § 5.30(b)(2), like the
proposal, defines indirect costs and is
derived, in part, from existing
§ 5.10(b)(3) and (b)(4). Indirect costs
include the approval program’s
proportionate share of the hours worked
to manage and operate the Approval and
Certification Center (A&CC). These costs
are associated with activities required
for information technology (IT) and
A&CC management and administration.
Indirect costs also include the approval
program’s proportionate share of
depreciation for buildings, their
improvements, and equipment; a
proportionate share of utilities,
equipment rental, facility and
equipment maintenance, security,
supplies and materials, and other costs
necessary for the operation and
maintenance of the A&CC; and a
proportionate share of Department of
Labor-provided services that would
include financial systems, and audit and
IT support.
A commenter asked what MSHA
considers to be indirect costs. Section
5.30(b)(2) in this final rule and in the
preamble to the proposed rule (79 FR
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
45053
61037) defines indirect costs. MSHA’s
definition of indirect costs is consistent
with OMB Circular No. A–25. MSHA
determined that the definition in the
final rule adequately addresses the
commenter’s question.
Final § 5.30(c), like the proposal, is
derived from existing § 5.10(b) and
includes activities for which MSHA
charges a fee. These activities continue
to include application processing (e.g.,
administrative and technical review of
applications, computer tracking, and
status reporting); testing and evaluation
(e.g., analysis of drawings, technical
evaluation, testing, test set up and test
tear down, and internal quality control
activities); approval decisions (e.g.,
consultation on applications, records
control and security, document
preparation); and post-approval
activities, such as changes to approvals.
Like the proposal, final § 5.30(c)
describes internal quality control
activities and post-approval product
audits as part of the approval program,
as MSHA is required to recover costs
associated with the approval program
(OMB Circular No. A–25).
A commenter objected to MSHA
charging for internal quality control.
Under the final rule, like the proposal,
MSHA will charge applicants and
approval holders a fee for internal
quality control activities. These
activities are an integral part of the
approval program. MSHA uses internal
quality control activities to monitor and
improve the Agency’s testing and
evaluation processes and for quality
control. These internal quality control
activities assure applicants and
approval holders that consistent,
accurate, and up-to-date scientific
methods are used when MSHA is
evaluating and testing products. For
example, MSHA has standard
procedures to repair, maintain, and
calibrate laboratory equipment in
accordance with the manufacturers’
specifications. Each applicant and
approval holder receives a benefit from
these internal quality control activities.
MSHA will distribute the hours
worked and costs of internal quality
control activities, based on the hours
worked on each application. Hours
worked on specific internal quality
control activities, however, are not
charged to a particular application.
Instead, MSHA will charge each
applicant a prorated share. MSHA will
calculate the prior year’s internal
quality control hours as a percentage of
total hours, multiply that percentage by
the number of direct hours worked on
a particular application, and add the
result to the number of direct hours
worked on that application.
E:\FR\FM\29JYR1.SGM
29JYR1
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES
45054
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 145 / Wednesday, July 29, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
A commenter objected to MSHA
charging a fee for post-approval product
audits stating that MSHA could charge
for exaggerated paperwork evaluations
and could audit the same company as
often as they want. Under existing 30
CFR 7.8(b), 14.10(b), and 15.10(b),
MSHA audits a specific product no
more than once a year, except for cause,
and the approval-holder may attend any
testing MSHA conducts on their
product. Post-approval product audits
are part of the approval program (postapproval activities) because they are
necessary to assure that products have
been manufactured as approved.
Under the final rule, like the proposal,
MSHA will charge approval holders for
the Agency’s post-approval product
audits, but will not charge for
investigations or audits based on
complaints about the products.
Internal quality control activities and
post-approval product audits assure
MSHA, operators, and miners that
products are and continue to be
designed, manufactured, and
maintained in accordance with the
approval requirements to ensure the
health and safety of miners. For these
reasons, MSHA will charge a fee for
these activities.
Existing § 5.10(c)(1), (c)(2), (c)(3), and
(c)(4) are revised and redesignated, in
part, as final § 5.30(d). Final § 5.30(d),
like the proposal, addresses the
activities for which MSHA will not
charge a fee. These include technical
assistance not related to approval
applications; technical programs,
including development of new
technology programs; participation in
research conducted by other
government agencies or private
organizations; and regulatory review
activities, including participation in the
development of health and safety
standards, regulations, and legislation.
MSHA did not receive any comments
on proposed § 5.30(d) and it is finalized
as proposed.
Existing paragraphs § 5.30(b), (c), and
(d) are redesignated as final paragraphs
§ 5.30(e), (f), and (g) under § 5.30 Fee
Calculation.
Final paragraph § 5.30(e), like the
proposal, is revised by renumbering
existing paragraphs § 5.30(b)(1) and
(b)(2) as § 5.30(e)(1) and (e)(2),
respectively. Final paragraphs § 5.30(f)
and (g) remain unchanged.
MSHA did not receive any comments
on § 5.30(e), (f), and (g) and these
sections are finalized as proposed.
C. § 5.40 Fee Administration
Final § 5.40, like the proposal, is
revised by adding ‘‘approval holders’’ to
entities to be billed and replacing
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:16 Jul 28, 2015
Jkt 235001
‘‘processing of the application is
completed’’ with ‘‘approval program
activities are completed.’’ MSHA will
continue to charge applicants a fee for
approvals and some post-approval
activities (e.g., modification to
approvals), and will charge approval
holders a fee for post-approval product
audits when the approval program
activities are completed.
MSHA received no comments on
proposed § 5.40 and it is finalized as
proposed.
D. § 5.50 Fee Revisions
Final § 5.50, like the proposal,
replaces ‘‘fee schedule’’ with ‘‘hourly
rate’’ because MSHA no longer has a fee
schedule. A commenter questioned why
MSHA has a scheduling fee. As
discussed in this final rule and in the
preamble to the proposed rule, MSHA
eliminated the individual fee schedules
in 1987 and created a single hourly rate
for calculation of fees.
Like the proposal, MSHA is revising
the hourly rate from $97 under the
existing rule to $121 using fiscal year
(FY) 2012 data. A commenter objected
to MSHA raising the hourly rate, citing
challenging times being faced by the
coal industry. This commenter was
particularly concerned about the impact
of the increase in fees on a small
manufacturing company in the coal
service industry. In response to this
comment, MSHA states below, in
Section V. Feasibility, that the increase
in the hourly rate is below one percent
of the estimated annual revenues of the
impacted industries. The final rule, like
the proposal, removes the term ‘‘fee
schedule’’ from § 5.50 and it is finalized
as proposed.
E. Other Comments
MSHA received general comments
that objected to the overall rulemaking
and to MSHA collecting more money
than the Agency has the authority to
retain. Under OMB Circular No. A–25,
MSHA is required to review the user
fees in its programs to ensure that the
charges reflect the full costs of the
services provided. This action transfers
the cost of MSHA approval program
services from the taxpayer to the
applicants or approval holders who
benefit from these services. Fees
collected in excess of those the Agency
is authorized to retain are sent back to
the U.S. Treasury.
IV. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory
Planning and Review and Executive
Order 13563: Improving Regulation and
Regulatory Review
Executive Orders (E.O.) 12866 and
13563 generally direct agencies to assess
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
all costs and benefits of available
regulatory alternatives and, if regulation
is necessary, to select regulatory
approaches that maximize net benefits
(including potential economic,
environmental, public health and safety
effects, distributive impacts, and
equity). E.O. 13563 emphasizes the
importance of quantifying both costs
and benefits, of reducing costs, of
harmonizing rules, and of promoting
flexibility. To comply with these
Executive Orders, MSHA has included
the following impact analysis.
Section 3(f) of the E.O. 12866 defines
a significant regulatory action as an
action that is likely to result in a rule
that: (1) Has an annual effect on the
economy of $100 million or more, or
adversely and materially affects a sector
of the economy, productivity,
competition, jobs, the environment,
public health or safety, or State, local or
tribal governments or communities; (2)
creates a serious inconsistency or
otherwise interferes with an action
taken or planned by another agency; (3)
materially alters the budgetary impacts
of entitlement grants, user fees, or loan
programs, or the rights and obligations
of recipients thereof; or (4) raises novel
legal or policy issues arising out of legal
mandates, the President’s priorities, or
the principles set forth in the Executive
Order. OMB has determined that this is
a significant regulatory action.
The final rule would not have an
annual effect of $100 million or more on
the economy and, under E.O. 12866, is
not considered economically significant.
MSHA has not prepared a separate
regulatory economic analysis for this
rulemaking. Rather, the analysis is
presented below.
A. Overview
MSHA will continue to charge a fee
for approval services based on an hourly
rate. As under the existing rule, MSHA’s
hourly rate will include direct costs and
indirect costs. However, under the final
rule, MSHA will calculate the hourly
rate by dividing all approval program
costs incurred by the Agency during a
prior fiscal year by the number of direct
hours spent on approval program
activities for the same period.
The final rule will increase the hourly
rate from $97 to $121, an increase of
$24.
MSHA will also begin to charge a fee
for internal quality control activities and
post-approval product audits. In FY
2012, MSHA collected approximately
$1.2 million in fees. Under this final
rule, MSHA estimates that the Agency
would have collected a total of $2.7
million in fees in FY 2012, an increase
of $1.5 million.
E:\FR\FM\29JYR1.SGM
29JYR1
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 145 / Wednesday, July 29, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
The charges under the final rule are
fees and are considered transfer
payments, not costs, under OMB
Circular No. A–4, Regulatory Analysis
(09/17/2003). Transfer payments are
payments from one group to another
that do not affect total resources
available to society. Under the final
rule, the applicant or the approval
holder pays for services for which they
receive a benefit. These services are
currently paid for by the taxpayer.
Because the fees MSHA collects are a
transfer, there are zero costs and zero
benefits regardless of the discount rate
(OMB Circular No. A–4, Regulatory
Analysis (09/17/2003) Section (G)
Accounting Statement).
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES
B. Benefits
The rule will not produce any
quantifiable benefits because the only
impact is the transfer payment.
C. Projected Impacts
MSHA analyzed A&CC invoice data
from FY 2012. Using the U.S. Economic
Census North American Industry
Classification System (NAICS) data,
MSHA estimated the impact of the final
rule on mining and non-mining
industries. NAICS is the standard used
by Federal statistical agencies in
classifying business establishments for
the purpose of collecting, analyzing, and
publishing statistical data related to the
U.S. business economy (https://
www.census.gov/eos/www/naics/).
From the A&CC post-approval
product audit data and FY 2012
invoices, MSHA identified 30 industries
that received A&CC approval program
services. MSHA grouped this data into
three general industry categories: Coal
Mining, Other Mining, and Non-Mining.
MSHA estimated the fees that will be
collected under this final rule by
summing the impact of the hourly rate
increase and the increase from charging
for internal quality control activities and
post-approval product audits. Under
this final rule, fees will increase by
approximately $1.5 million annually
($0.3 million from the hourly rate
increase + $1.1 million for internal
quality control activities + $0.1 million
for post-approval product audit
activities). Of the $1.5 million, the
increase in fees for the coal and other
mining industries will total
approximately $0.9 million annually.
The remaining $0.6 million will be
distributed among the non-mining
industries that seek product approval
from MSHA.
MSHA estimated the fee increase from
the final hourly rate by multiplying the
number of chargeable hours for FY 2012
(12,189 hours) by the final hourly rate
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:16 Jul 28, 2015
Jkt 235001
of $121. In 2012, MSHA estimated that
the final hourly rate would have
resulted in approximately $1.5 million
in fees collected, an increase of
$300,000 (($121 new rate¥$97 old rate)
× 12,189 hours).
MSHA also estimated the fees from
charging for internal quality control
activities. MSHA uses internal quality
control activities to monitor and
improve the Agency’s testing and
evaluation processes. These activities
include internal process reviews;
maintaining laboratory equipment; and
repairing, maintaining, and calibrating
laboratory equipment to assure the
equipment produces reliable and
accurate results. In FY 2012, MSHA
spent 9,015 hours on these activities.
MSHA multiplied the 9,015 hours by
the proposed $121 hourly rate. This
results in an estimated annual impact of
$1.1 million.
In addition, MSHA analyzed postapproval product audit data from 2008
to 2012 to estimate the increase in fees
from charging for these services. In any
given year, post-approval product audits
are completed only on a subset of the
total products approved by the A&CC. In
2012, MSHA spent approximately 1,000
hours on 125 post-approval product
audits. Multiplying the 1,000 hours by
the proposed $121 hourly rate results in
an estimated annual impact of $121,000.
The average estimated impact would
have been $970 for each approval holder
audited in 2012.
V. Feasibility
MSHA concludes that the final rule
would be economically feasible.
MSHA has traditionally used a
revenue screening test—whether the
annualized compliance costs of a
regulation are less than one percent of
revenues (dollar change/revenue), or are
negative (i.e., provide net cost savings)
to establish presumptively that
compliance with the regulation is
economically feasible. MSHA relies on
Agency data to identify revenue for
covered mining entities and the 2007
Economic Census data to identify
revenue by NAICS industry categories
for non-mining entities.
MSHA performed the revenue
screening test comparing the annual
impact to annual revenues for all three
categories and found that the percentage
impact rounds to zero percent of
revenue in each case. Given the
relatively small impact compared to
industry total revenues, any further
analysis would not be productive.
Because the estimated impacts are
below one percent of estimated annual
revenue of the impacted industries,
MSHA concludes that compliance with
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
45055
the provisions of the final rule is
economically feasible.
VI. Regulatory Flexibility Act, Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act, and Executive Order
13272: Proper Consideration of Small
Entities in Agency Rulemaking
The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980
(RFA) as amended by the Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 and other statutes,
and E.O. 13272 requires agencies to
consider the effects of their final and
existing regulations on small entities
and to examine alternatives that would
minimize the small entity impacts while
still meeting the regulations’ purposes.
MSHA has reviewed the final rule to
assess the potential impact on small
businesses, small governmental
jurisdictions, and small organizations.
The applicants who will be affected
by the final rule represent 30 industries.
The Small Business Administration’s
(SBA’s) size standard for a small entity
(13 CFR 121.201) differs by industry
code. For mining, SBA defines a small
entity as one with 500 or fewer
employees. For non-mining industries
that would be impacted by this rule,
SBA defines a small entity as one that
has revenues of $7.5 million or less.
MSHA used the SBA’s definitions for a
small entity, FY 2012 invoice data, and
NAICS industry data to evaluate the
small business impact.
For the non-mining industries, the
affected industries represent small
business revenues of approximately
$474 billion. The final rule will increase
fees for non-mining industries by
approximately $0.5 million. The impact
from an increase in fees is essentially
zero percent of revenue ($0.5 million/
$474 billion).
For the mining industries, MSHA data
shows small coal mine revenues of $30
billion. The final rule will increase fees
for small coal mines by approximately
$0.9 million. MSHA data shows other
small mine revenues (not coal mines) of
$57 billion. The final rule will increase
fees for small mines other than coal by
approximately $6,000. The impact from
an increase in fees is zero percent for
both mining categories.
Approximately $100,000 in increased
fees is primarily attributable to foreign
entities. MSHA concludes that the
impact on the U.S. economy and its
businesses would be de minimis.
Several commenters stated that large
companies could absorb the increase in
fees and that the small companies
would be adversely affected. MSHA’s
analysis determined that the impact of
the final rule for both small mining and
small non-mining entities is essentially
E:\FR\FM\29JYR1.SGM
29JYR1
45056
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 145 / Wednesday, July 29, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
zero percent of annual revenues.
Additionally, considering MSHA’s
traditional definition of small mines (1–
19 employees), the impact of the final
rule is essentially zero percent. The
Agency concludes that one rate is
appropriate for all company sizes.
MSHA certifies that the final rule will
not have a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small
entities.
VII. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
This final rule contains no
information collections subject to
review by OMB under the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995. The paperwork
associated with applications for
approval are considered under the
specific part in Title 30, Chapter 1,
Subchapter B that contains the
requirements for the specific product
submitted for MSHA approval.
VIII. Other Regulatory Considerations
A. The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
of 1995
MSHA has reviewed the final rule
under the Unfunded Mandates Reform
Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1501 et seq.).
MSHA has determined that this final
rule does 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 (adjusted for
inflation) in any one year or
significantly or uniquely affect small
governments. Accordingly, under the
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act, no
further Agency action or analysis is
required.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES
B. The Treasury and General
Government Appropriations Act of
1999: Assessment of Federal
Regulations and Policies on Families
Section 654 of the Treasury and
General Government Appropriations
Act of 1999 (5 U.S.C. 601 note), as
amended, requires agencies to assess the
impact of agency action on family wellbeing. MSHA has determined that this
final rule would have no effect on
family stability or safety, marital
commitment, parental rights and
authority, or income or poverty of
families and children. Accordingly,
MSHA certifies that this final rule will
not impact family well-being.
C. Executive Order 12630: Government
Actions and Interference With
Constitutionally Protected Property
Rights
Executive Order 12630 requires
Federal agencies to ‘‘identify the takings
implications of final regulatory actions
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:16 Jul 28, 2015
Jkt 235001
. . . .’’ MSHA has determined that this
final rule will not include a regulatory
or policy action with takings
implications. Accordingly, under E.O.
12630, no further Agency action or
analysis is required.
D. Executive Order 12988: Civil Justice
Reform
Executive Order 12988 contains
requirements for Federal agencies
promulgating new regulations or
reviewing existing regulations to
minimize litigation by eliminating
drafting errors and ambiguity, providing
a clear legal standard for affected
conduct rather than a general standard,
promoting simplification, and reducing
burden. MSHA has reviewed this final
rule and has determined that it would
meet the applicable standards provided
in E.O. 12988 to minimize litigation and
undue burden on the Federal court
system.
E. Executive Order 13045: Protection of
Children From Environmental Health
Risks and Safety Risks
MSHA has determined that this final
rule will have no adverse impact on
children. Accordingly, under E.O.
13045, no further Agency action or
analysis is required.
F. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
MSHA has determined that this final
rule does 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,
under E.O. 13132, no further Agency
action or analysis is required.
G. Executive Order 13175: Consultation
and Coordination With Indian Tribal
Governments
MSHA has determined that this final
rule does 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, under E.O. 13175, no
further Agency action or analysis is
required.
H. Executive Order 13211: Actions
Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use
MSHA has reviewed this final rule for
its impact on the supply, distribution,
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
and use of energy because it applies to
the coal mining industry. Insofar as the
final rule would result in an increase to
the yearly transfer of $0.9 million for the
coal mining industry relative to annual
revenues of $41 billion in 2012, it is not
a ‘‘significant energy action’’ because it
is not ‘‘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, under E.O. 13211, no
further Agency action or analysis is
required.
List of Subjects in 30 CFR Part 5
Mine safety and health.
Dated: July 23, 2015.
Joseph A. Main,
Assistant Secretary of Labor for Mine Safety
and Health.
For the reasons set out in the
preamble, and under the authority of the
Federal Mine Safety and Health Act of
1977, as amended, MSHA is revising 30
CFR part 5 to read as follows:
PART 5—FEES FOR TESTING,
EVALUATION, AND APPROVAL OF
MINING PRODUCTS
Sec.
5.10
5.30
5.40
5.50
Purpose and scope.
Fee calculation.
Fee administration.
Fee revisions.
Authority: 30 U.S.C. 957.
§ 5.10
Purpose and scope.
This part establishes a system under
which MSHA charges a fee for services
provided. This part includes the
management and calculation of fees for
the approval program, which includes:
Application processing, testing and
evaluation, approval decisions, postapproval activities, and termination of
approvals.
§ 5.30
Fee calculation.
(a) Fee calculation. MSHA charges a
fee based on an hourly rate for Approval
and Certification Center (A&CC)
approval program activities and other
associated costs, such as travel expenses
and part 15 fees. Part 15 fees for services
provided to MSHA by other
organizations may be set by those
organizations.
(b) Hourly rate calculation. The
hourly rate consists of direct and
indirect costs of the A&CC’s approval
program divided by the number of
direct hours worked on all approval
program activities.
(1) Direct costs are compensation and
benefit costs for hours worked on
approval program activities.
E:\FR\FM\29JYR1.SGM
29JYR1
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 145 / Wednesday, July 29, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
(2) Indirect costs are a proportionate
share of the following A&CC costs:
(i) Compensation and benefit hours
worked in support of all A&CC
activities;
(ii) A&CC building and equipment
depreciation costs;
(iii) A&CC utilities, facility and
equipment maintenance, and supplies
and materials; and
(iv) Information Technology and other
services the Department of Labor
provides to the A&CC.
(c) Fees are charged for—
(1) Application processing (e.g.,
administrative and technical review of
applications, computer tracking, and
status reporting);
(2) Testing and evaluation (e.g.,
analysis of drawings, technical
evaluation, testing, test set up and test
tear down, and internal quality control
activities);
(3) Approval decisions (e.g.,
consultation on applications, records
control and security, document
preparation); and
(4) Two post-approval activities:
changes to approvals and post-approval
product audits.
(d) Fees are not charged for—
(1) Technical assistance not related to
processing an approval application;
(2) Technical programs, including
development of new technology
programs;
(3) Participation in research
conducted by other government
agencies or private organizations; and
(4) Regulatory review activities,
including participation in the
development of health and safety
standards, regulations, and legislation.
(e) Fee estimate. Except as provided
in paragraphs (e)(1) and (2) of this
section, on completion of an initial
administrative review of the
application, the A&CC will prepare a
maximum fee estimate for each
application. A&CC will begin the
technical evaluation after the applicant
authorizes the fee estimate.
(1) The applicant may pre-authorize
an expenditure for services, and may
further choose to pre-authorize either a
maximum dollar amount or an
expenditure without a specified
maximum amount.
(i) All applications containing a preauthorization statement will be put in
the queue for the technical evaluation
on completion of an initial
administrative review.
(ii) MSHA will concurrently prepare a
maximum fee estimate for applications
containing a statement pre-authorizing a
maximum dollar amount, and will
provide the applicant with this estimate.
(2) Where MSHA’s estimated
maximum fee exceeds the pre-
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:16 Jul 28, 2015
Jkt 235001
authorized maximum dollar amount, the
applicant has the choice of cancelling
the action and paying for all work done
up to the time of the cancellation, or
authorizing MSHA’s estimate.
(3) Under the Revised Acceptance
Modification Program (RAMP), MSHA
expedites applications for acceptance of
minor changes to previously approved,
certified, accepted, or evaluated
products. The applicant must preauthorize a fixed dollar amount, set by
MSHA, for processing the application.
(f) If unforeseen circumstances are
discovered during the evaluation, and
MSHA determines that these
circumstances would result in the actual
costs exceeding either the preauthorized expenditure or the
authorized maximum fee estimate, as
appropriate, MSHA will prepare a
revised maximum fee estimate for
completing the evaluation. The
applicant will have the option of either
cancelling the action and paying for
services rendered or authorizing
MSHA’s revised estimate, in which case
MSHA will continue to test and
evaluate the product.
(g) If the actual cost of processing the
application is less than MSHA’s
maximum fee estimate, MSHA will
charge the actual cost.
§ 5.40
Fee administration.
Applicants and approval holders will
be billed for all fees, including actual
travel expenses, if any, when approval
program activities are completed.
Invoices will contain specific payment
instruction, including the address to
mail payments and authorized methods
of payment.
§ 5.50
Fee revisions.
The hourly rate will remain in effect
for at least one year and be subject to
revision at least once every three years.
[FR Doc. 2015–18617 Filed 7–28–15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510–43–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
Financial Crimes Enforcement Network
31 CFR Part 1010
RIN 1506–AB27
Imposition of Special Measure Against
FBME Bank Ltd., Formerly Known as
the Federal Bank of the Middle East
Ltd., as a Financial Institution of
Primary Money Laundering Concern
Financial Crimes Enforcement
Network (FinCEN), Treasury.
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
45057
In a Notice of Finding (NOF)
published in the Federal Register on
July 22, 2014, the Director of FinCEN
found that reasonable grounds exist for
concluding that FBME Bank Ltd.
(FBME), formerly known as the Federal
Bank of the Middle East, Ltd., is a
financial institution of primary money
laundering concern pursuant to the
United States Code (U.S.C.). On the
same date, FinCEN also published in the
Federal Register a Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking (NPRM) to propose the
imposition of a special measure
authorized by the U.S.C. against FBME.
FinCEN is issuing this final rule
imposing the fifth special measure
against FBME.
DATES: This final rule is effective August
28, 2015.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The
FinCEN Resource Center at (800) 767–
2825.
SUMMARY:
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
A. Statutory Provisions
On October 26, 2001, the President
signed into law the Uniting and
Strengthening America by Providing
Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept
and Obstruct Terrorism Act of 2001,
Public Law 107–56 (the USA PATRIOT
Act). Title III of the USA PATRIOT Act
amends the anti-money laundering
provisions of the Bank Secrecy Act
(BSA), codified at 12 U.S.C. 1829b, 12
U.S.C. 1951–1959, and 31 U.S.C. 5311–
5314, 5316–5332, to promote the
prevention, detection, and prosecution
of international money laundering and
the financing of terrorism. Regulations
implementing the BSA appear at 31 CFR
chapter X. The authority of the
Secretary of the Treasury (the Secretary)
to administer the BSA and its
implementing regulations has been
delegated to the Director of FinCEN.
Section 311 of the USA PATRIOT Act
(Section 311), codified at 31 U.S.C.
5318A, grants the Director of FinCEN
the authority, upon finding that
reasonable grounds exist for concluding
that a foreign jurisdiction, financial
institution, class of transaction, or type
of account is of ‘‘primary money
laundering concern,’’ to require
domestic financial institutions and
financial agencies to take certain
‘‘special measures’’ to address the
primary money laundering concern.
This rulemaking imposes the fifth
special measure, codified at 31 U.S.C.
5318A(b)(5), against FBME. The fifth
special measure allows the Director to
prohibit or impose conditions on the
opening or maintaining of
E:\FR\FM\29JYR1.SGM
29JYR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 145 (Wednesday, July 29, 2015)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 45051-45057]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-18617]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Mine Safety and Health Administration
30 CFR Part 5
[Docket No. MSHA-2014-0016]
RIN 1219-AB82
Fees for Testing, Evaluation, and Approval of Mining Products
AGENCY: Mine Safety and Health Administration, Labor.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA) is revising
the Agency's regulation for administering fees for testing, evaluation,
and approval of products manufactured for use in mines. This final rule
revises the fees charged for these services. The final rule also
includes a fee for approval services that MSHA provides to applicants
or approval holders under the existing rule, but for which the Agency
currently does not charge a fee, and for other activities required to
support the approval process. This change will allow MSHA to charge
fees that reflect the full cost of the approval services provided.
DATES: The final rule is effective on October 1, 2015.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sheila A. McConnell, Acting Director,
Office of Standards, Regulations, and Variances, MSHA, at
mcconnell.sheila.a@dol.gov (email); 202-693-9440 (voice); or 202-693-
9441 (facsimile). (These are not toll-free numbers).
[[Page 45052]]
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. Executive Summary
II. Background
III. Section-by-Section Analysis
IV. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and
Executive Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review
V. Feasibility
VI. Regulatory Flexibility Act, Small Business Regulatory
Enforcement Fairness Act, and Executive Order 13272: Proper
Consideration of Small Entities in Agency Rulemaking
VII. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
VIII. Other Regulatory Considerations
Availability of Information
Docket: Access rulemaking documents electronically at https://www.msha.gov/regsinfo.htm or https://www.regulations.gov. [Docket Number
MSHA-2014-0016]. Obtain a copy of a rulemaking document from the Office
of Standards, Regulations, and Variances, MSHA, by request to 202-693-
9440 (voice) or 202-693-9441 (facsimile). (These are not toll-free
numbers.)
Email Notification: To subscribe to receive an email notification
when MSHA publishes rules, program information, instructions, or
policy, in the Federal Register, go to https://www.msha.gov/subscriptions/subscribe.aspx.
I. Executive Summary
A. Purpose of Regulatory Action
As part of the U.S. Department of Labor, under the Federal Mine
Safety and Health Act of 1977 (Mine Act), as amended, MSHA's mission is
to prevent death, disease, and injury from mining and promote safe and
healthy workplaces for the Nation's miners. Since 1911, MSHA and its
predecessor agencies have evaluated and tested products for use in
mines to prevent fires, explosions, and accidents.
B. Summary of Major Provisions
Under the final rule, MSHA revises the hourly rate for the fees
charged to applicants and approval holders to include all costs
associated with the approval program. MSHA calculates the hourly rate
by dividing the total approval program costs (direct and indirect)
during a prior fiscal year, including internal quality control
activities and post-approval product audits, by the number of total
direct hours spent on approval program activities for the same period.
These changes in how MSHA calculates fees increase the hourly rate to
$121.
C. Costs and Benefits
This rule is not economically significant. The final rule will
produce zero costs and zero benefits because the fees MSHA collects are
transfer payments. MSHA discusses transfer payments in section IV of
this preamble.
II. Background
Under various authorities,\1\ MSHA historically has collected fees
for its services in evaluating, testing, and approving products.
Originally, the U.S. Bureau of Mines, an MSHA predecessor agency,
billed applicants for approval services using published individual fee
schedules, e.g., each approval part in Title 30, Chapter I, included a
list of flat fees for different tests, evaluations, and other services
performed for approval activities (30 FR 3752-3757). On May 8, 1987 (52
FR 17506), MSHA eliminated the individual fee schedules and established
part 5, which created an hourly rate for administration and calculation
of fees for services in Title 30, Chapter I, Subchapter B, Testing,
Evaluation, and Approval of Mining Products. On August 9, 2005 (70 FR
46336), MSHA revised part 5 and its fee procedures. That rule
eliminated the application fee, allowed pre-authorization of
expenditures for processing applications, and allowed outside
organizations to set fees when conducting part 15 testing on MSHA's
behalf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ These authorities are: Public Law 61-525, Ch. 285, 36 Stat.
1419 (1911); Public Law 62-386, Ch. 72, Sec. 5, 37 Stat. 682 (1913);
Public Law 72-212, Ch. 314, Sec. 311, 47 Stat. 410 (1932); 30 U.S.C.
961(c)(2); and Title V of the Independent Offices Appropriations Act
of 1952, Public Law 82-137, 65 Stat. 290 (1951), as amended, 31
U.S.C. 9701.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Section 205 of the Chief Financial Officers Act of 1990 (CFO Act)
and Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Circular No. A-25 Revised,
User Charges (7/8/1993), require agencies to review the user charges in
their programs to ensure that the charges reflect the full costs of the
services provided. Traditionally, MSHA reviews its user charges
annually; however, MSHA last revised its hourly rate under part 5 to
$97.00 on December 29, 2010 (75 FR 82074).
Under 30 U.S.C. 966, MSHA may retain up to $2,499,000 of fees
collected for the approval and certification of equipment, materials,
and explosives for use in mines.
MSHA proposed revisions to its existing regulations on fees for
testing, evaluation and approval of mining products on October 9, 2014
(79 FR 61035). This final rule addresses the comments received in
response to the proposed rule.
III. Section-by-Section Analysis
In this final rule, the term ``approval'' includes approvals,
certifications, acceptances, and evaluations MSHA issues under Title
30, Chapter I, Subchapter B, Testing, Evaluation, and Approval of
Mining Products.
A. Sec. 5.10 Purpose and Scope
Final Sec. 5.10, like the proposal, provides the purpose and scope
of the rule. It also establishes a system under which MSHA charges a
fee for approval program services for products manufactured for use in
mines. Like the proposal, the final rule identifies the activities in
the approval program.
The approval program represents all the activities necessary for
MSHA to assure that products approved for use in mines are designed,
manufactured, and maintained in accordance with approval requirements.
The approval program includes: (1) Application processing; (2) testing
and evaluation; (3) approval decisions; (4) post-approval activities;
and (5) the termination of approvals.
1. Application processing begins when an applicant files a new
application for approval. MSHA administratively reviews each new
application and, on determining that the application is complete,
prepares a maximum fee estimate and sends it to the applicant. The
applicant must agree to pay the estimated fee before MSHA will begin
testing, as needed, and evaluating the product.
2. Testing and evaluation includes technical evaluation, analysis,
test set up, testing, test tear down, any consultation on the
application, and internal quality control activities. MSHA uses
internal quality control programs to monitor and improve its testing
and evaluation processes (e.g., internal administrative and technical
reviews; internal audits; and calibration, repair, and maintenance of
test equipment).
3. Following testing and evaluating a product, MSHA makes an
approval decision and notifies the applicant by letter of the Agency's
findings and decision. If the product is approved, the letter
identifies the approved specifications for the design, construction,
maintenance, and conditions of use for the product. If the product is
not approved or if the application is cancelled, the letter identifies
the reasons for the decision. All approval documentation is kept on
file at MSHA.
4. MSHA also conducts the following post-approval activities:
[[Page 45053]]
Changing approvals (e.g., extensions \2\ of approvals,
field modifications, and modification through the Revised Acceptance
Modification Program (RAMP)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ An extension of the approval is a document MSHA issues that
states that a change to the product previously approved by MSHA is
approved and authorizes the continued use of the approval marking
with the appropriate extension number for the change added.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Conducting post-approval product audits and field audits.
Responding to complaints.
Investigating product failures.
Monitoring regional or nationwide product recall or
retrofit programs.
Conducting administrative actions, such as transfer of
approval numbers.
5. Termination of an approval may occur when an approval holder
voluntarily requests termination of an approval, when MSHA revokes an
approval because of compliance or safety issues, or when MSHA issues
regulations that make an approval obsolete.
MSHA did not receive any comments on Sec. 5.10 and it is finalized
as proposed.
B. Sec. 5.30 Fee Calculation
Final Sec. 5.30, like the proposal, addresses the hourly rate
calculation, the activities for which MSHA charges a fee, activities
that are not subject to a fee, the fee estimate, and any changes to the
fee estimate. Section 5.30 is finalized as proposed.
Under final Sec. 5.30(a), like the proposal, MSHA will continue to
charge a fee based on an hourly rate for approval program activities
and other associated costs, such as travel expenses and part 15 fees.
Part 15 fees for services provided to MSHA by other organizations will
be set by those organizations.
Final paragraph Sec. 5.30(b), like the proposal, is derived from
existing Sec. 5.30(a) and identifies the costs MSHA incurs in
administering the approval program. Under the final rule, like the
proposal, the hourly rate is calculated to reflect the costs of the
overall approval program. Under the existing rule, the hourly rate
includes only the application processing; testing and evaluation; and
approval decision costs.
Also under the existing rule, some post-approval activities, such
as changes to approvals, are included in the approval program costs
used in calculating the hourly rate. Under the existing rule, however,
MSHA had excluded the costs of monitoring to assure approved products
continue to be manufactured and maintained as approved because MSHA
considered these activities to be enforcement activities rather than
approval program activities (52 FR 17507-17508). As stated previously,
OMB Circular No. A-25 requires that agencies recover the full costs of
services rendered. To more accurately account for costs, MSHA proposed
to include the direct and indirect cost of these post-approval product
activities in the hourly rate calculation because these activities are
an important part of the approval program. These activities assure
MSHA, operators, and miners that products continue to be designed,
manufactured, and maintained in accordance with the approval
requirements.
Under the final rule, like the proposal, MSHA will continue to
determine an hourly rate to cover direct and indirect costs. MSHA bases
the hourly rate on all approval program costs the Agency incurred
during a prior fiscal year. The hourly rate is the total approval
program costs (direct and indirect) divided by the number of direct
hours spent on all approval program activities. Final paragraph Sec.
5.30(b) lists the approval program costs that MSHA will include in the
hourly rate calculation.
Final paragraph Sec. 5.30(b)(1), like the proposal, defines direct
costs as consisting of compensation and benefit costs for all hours
worked in support of the approval program and is derived, in part, from
existing Sec. 5.10(b)(1) and (b)(2). These costs include approval
program activities, such as testing and evaluation, including internal
quality control; and post-approval activities, including post-approval
product audits.
Final paragraph Sec. 5.30(b)(2), like the proposal, defines
indirect costs and is derived, in part, from existing Sec. 5.10(b)(3)
and (b)(4). Indirect costs include the approval program's proportionate
share of the hours worked to manage and operate the Approval and
Certification Center (A&CC). These costs are associated with activities
required for information technology (IT) and A&CC management and
administration. Indirect costs also include the approval program's
proportionate share of depreciation for buildings, their improvements,
and equipment; a proportionate share of utilities, equipment rental,
facility and equipment maintenance, security, supplies and materials,
and other costs necessary for the operation and maintenance of the
A&CC; and a proportionate share of Department of Labor-provided
services that would include financial systems, and audit and IT
support.
A commenter asked what MSHA considers to be indirect costs. Section
5.30(b)(2) in this final rule and in the preamble to the proposed rule
(79 FR 61037) defines indirect costs. MSHA's definition of indirect
costs is consistent with OMB Circular No. A-25. MSHA determined that
the definition in the final rule adequately addresses the commenter's
question.
Final Sec. 5.30(c), like the proposal, is derived from existing
Sec. 5.10(b) and includes activities for which MSHA charges a fee.
These activities continue to include application processing (e.g.,
administrative and technical review of applications, computer tracking,
and status reporting); testing and evaluation (e.g., analysis of
drawings, technical evaluation, testing, test set up and test tear
down, and internal quality control activities); approval decisions
(e.g., consultation on applications, records control and security,
document preparation); and post-approval activities, such as changes to
approvals. Like the proposal, final Sec. 5.30(c) describes internal
quality control activities and post-approval product audits as part of
the approval program, as MSHA is required to recover costs associated
with the approval program (OMB Circular No. A-25).
A commenter objected to MSHA charging for internal quality control.
Under the final rule, like the proposal, MSHA will charge applicants
and approval holders a fee for internal quality control activities.
These activities are an integral part of the approval program. MSHA
uses internal quality control activities to monitor and improve the
Agency's testing and evaluation processes and for quality control.
These internal quality control activities assure applicants and
approval holders that consistent, accurate, and up-to-date scientific
methods are used when MSHA is evaluating and testing products. For
example, MSHA has standard procedures to repair, maintain, and
calibrate laboratory equipment in accordance with the manufacturers'
specifications. Each applicant and approval holder receives a benefit
from these internal quality control activities.
MSHA will distribute the hours worked and costs of internal quality
control activities, based on the hours worked on each application.
Hours worked on specific internal quality control activities, however,
are not charged to a particular application. Instead, MSHA will charge
each applicant a prorated share. MSHA will calculate the prior year's
internal quality control hours as a percentage of total hours, multiply
that percentage by the number of direct hours worked on a particular
application, and add the result to the number of direct hours worked on
that application.
[[Page 45054]]
A commenter objected to MSHA charging a fee for post-approval
product audits stating that MSHA could charge for exaggerated paperwork
evaluations and could audit the same company as often as they want.
Under existing 30 CFR 7.8(b), 14.10(b), and 15.10(b), MSHA audits a
specific product no more than once a year, except for cause, and the
approval-holder may attend any testing MSHA conducts on their product.
Post-approval product audits are part of the approval program (post-
approval activities) because they are necessary to assure that products
have been manufactured as approved.
Under the final rule, like the proposal, MSHA will charge approval
holders for the Agency's post-approval product audits, but will not
charge for investigations or audits based on complaints about the
products.
Internal quality control activities and post-approval product
audits assure MSHA, operators, and miners that products are and
continue to be designed, manufactured, and maintained in accordance
with the approval requirements to ensure the health and safety of
miners. For these reasons, MSHA will charge a fee for these activities.
Existing Sec. 5.10(c)(1), (c)(2), (c)(3), and (c)(4) are revised
and redesignated, in part, as final Sec. 5.30(d). Final Sec. 5.30(d),
like the proposal, addresses the activities for which MSHA will not
charge a fee. These include technical assistance not related to
approval applications; technical programs, including development of new
technology programs; participation in research conducted by other
government agencies or private organizations; and regulatory review
activities, including participation in the development of health and
safety standards, regulations, and legislation.
MSHA did not receive any comments on proposed Sec. 5.30(d) and it
is finalized as proposed.
Existing paragraphs Sec. 5.30(b), (c), and (d) are redesignated as
final paragraphs Sec. 5.30(e), (f), and (g) under Sec. 5.30 Fee
Calculation.
Final paragraph Sec. 5.30(e), like the proposal, is revised by
renumbering existing paragraphs Sec. 5.30(b)(1) and (b)(2) as Sec.
5.30(e)(1) and (e)(2), respectively. Final paragraphs Sec. 5.30(f) and
(g) remain unchanged.
MSHA did not receive any comments on Sec. 5.30(e), (f), and (g)
and these sections are finalized as proposed.
C. Sec. 5.40 Fee Administration
Final Sec. 5.40, like the proposal, is revised by adding
``approval holders'' to entities to be billed and replacing
``processing of the application is completed'' with ``approval program
activities are completed.'' MSHA will continue to charge applicants a
fee for approvals and some post-approval activities (e.g., modification
to approvals), and will charge approval holders a fee for post-approval
product audits when the approval program activities are completed.
MSHA received no comments on proposed Sec. 5.40 and it is
finalized as proposed.
D. Sec. 5.50 Fee Revisions
Final Sec. 5.50, like the proposal, replaces ``fee schedule'' with
``hourly rate'' because MSHA no longer has a fee schedule. A commenter
questioned why MSHA has a scheduling fee. As discussed in this final
rule and in the preamble to the proposed rule, MSHA eliminated the
individual fee schedules in 1987 and created a single hourly rate for
calculation of fees.
Like the proposal, MSHA is revising the hourly rate from $97 under
the existing rule to $121 using fiscal year (FY) 2012 data. A commenter
objected to MSHA raising the hourly rate, citing challenging times
being faced by the coal industry. This commenter was particularly
concerned about the impact of the increase in fees on a small
manufacturing company in the coal service industry. In response to this
comment, MSHA states below, in Section V. Feasibility, that the
increase in the hourly rate is below one percent of the estimated
annual revenues of the impacted industries. The final rule, like the
proposal, removes the term ``fee schedule'' from Sec. 5.50 and it is
finalized as proposed.
E. Other Comments
MSHA received general comments that objected to the overall
rulemaking and to MSHA collecting more money than the Agency has the
authority to retain. Under OMB Circular No. A-25, MSHA is required to
review the user fees in its programs to ensure that the charges reflect
the full costs of the services provided. This action transfers the cost
of MSHA approval program services from the taxpayer to the applicants
or approval holders who benefit from these services. Fees collected in
excess of those the Agency is authorized to retain are sent back to the
U.S. Treasury.
IV. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and Executive
Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review
Executive Orders (E.O.) 12866 and 13563 generally direct agencies
to assess all costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives
and, if regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that
maximize net benefits (including potential economic, environmental,
public health and safety effects, distributive impacts, and equity).
E.O. 13563 emphasizes the importance of quantifying both costs and
benefits, of reducing costs, of harmonizing rules, and of promoting
flexibility. To comply with these Executive Orders, MSHA has included
the following impact analysis.
Section 3(f) of the E.O. 12866 defines a significant regulatory
action as an action that is likely to result in a rule that: (1) Has an
annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more, or adversely and
materially affects a sector of the economy, productivity, competition,
jobs, the environment, public health or safety, or State, local or
tribal governments or communities; (2) creates a serious inconsistency
or otherwise interferes with an action taken or planned by another
agency; (3) materially alters the budgetary impacts of entitlement
grants, user fees, or loan programs, or the rights and obligations of
recipients thereof; or (4) raises novel legal or policy issues arising
out of legal mandates, the President's priorities, or the principles
set forth in the Executive Order. OMB has determined that this is a
significant regulatory action.
The final rule would not have an annual effect of $100 million or
more on the economy and, under E.O. 12866, is not considered
economically significant. MSHA has not prepared a separate regulatory
economic analysis for this rulemaking. Rather, the analysis is
presented below.
A. Overview
MSHA will continue to charge a fee for approval services based on
an hourly rate. As under the existing rule, MSHA's hourly rate will
include direct costs and indirect costs. However, under the final rule,
MSHA will calculate the hourly rate by dividing all approval program
costs incurred by the Agency during a prior fiscal year by the number
of direct hours spent on approval program activities for the same
period.
The final rule will increase the hourly rate from $97 to $121, an
increase of $24.
MSHA will also begin to charge a fee for internal quality control
activities and post-approval product audits. In FY 2012, MSHA collected
approximately $1.2 million in fees. Under this final rule, MSHA
estimates that the Agency would have collected a total of $2.7 million
in fees in FY 2012, an increase of $1.5 million.
[[Page 45055]]
The charges under the final rule are fees and are considered
transfer payments, not costs, under OMB Circular No. A-4, Regulatory
Analysis (09/17/2003). Transfer payments are payments from one group to
another that do not affect total resources available to society. Under
the final rule, the applicant or the approval holder pays for services
for which they receive a benefit. These services are currently paid for
by the taxpayer.
Because the fees MSHA collects are a transfer, there are zero costs
and zero benefits regardless of the discount rate (OMB Circular No. A-
4, Regulatory Analysis (09/17/2003) Section (G) Accounting Statement).
B. Benefits
The rule will not produce any quantifiable benefits because the
only impact is the transfer payment.
C. Projected Impacts
MSHA analyzed A&CC invoice data from FY 2012. Using the U.S.
Economic Census North American Industry Classification System (NAICS)
data, MSHA estimated the impact of the final rule on mining and non-
mining industries. NAICS is the standard used by Federal statistical
agencies in classifying business establishments for the purpose of
collecting, analyzing, and publishing statistical data related to the
U.S. business economy (https://www.census.gov/eos/www/naics/).
From the A&CC post-approval product audit data and FY 2012
invoices, MSHA identified 30 industries that received A&CC approval
program services. MSHA grouped this data into three general industry
categories: Coal Mining, Other Mining, and Non-Mining.
MSHA estimated the fees that will be collected under this final
rule by summing the impact of the hourly rate increase and the increase
from charging for internal quality control activities and post-approval
product audits. Under this final rule, fees will increase by
approximately $1.5 million annually ($0.3 million from the hourly rate
increase + $1.1 million for internal quality control activities + $0.1
million for post-approval product audit activities). Of the $1.5
million, the increase in fees for the coal and other mining industries
will total approximately $0.9 million annually. The remaining $0.6
million will be distributed among the non-mining industries that seek
product approval from MSHA.
MSHA estimated the fee increase from the final hourly rate by
multiplying the number of chargeable hours for FY 2012 (12,189 hours)
by the final hourly rate of $121. In 2012, MSHA estimated that the
final hourly rate would have resulted in approximately $1.5 million in
fees collected, an increase of $300,000 (($121 new rate-$97 old rate) x
12,189 hours).
MSHA also estimated the fees from charging for internal quality
control activities. MSHA uses internal quality control activities to
monitor and improve the Agency's testing and evaluation processes.
These activities include internal process reviews; maintaining
laboratory equipment; and repairing, maintaining, and calibrating
laboratory equipment to assure the equipment produces reliable and
accurate results. In FY 2012, MSHA spent 9,015 hours on these
activities. MSHA multiplied the 9,015 hours by the proposed $121 hourly
rate. This results in an estimated annual impact of $1.1 million.
In addition, MSHA analyzed post-approval product audit data from
2008 to 2012 to estimate the increase in fees from charging for these
services. In any given year, post-approval product audits are completed
only on a subset of the total products approved by the A&CC. In 2012,
MSHA spent approximately 1,000 hours on 125 post-approval product
audits. Multiplying the 1,000 hours by the proposed $121 hourly rate
results in an estimated annual impact of $121,000. The average
estimated impact would have been $970 for each approval holder audited
in 2012.
V. Feasibility
MSHA concludes that the final rule would be economically feasible.
MSHA has traditionally used a revenue screening test--whether the
annualized compliance costs of a regulation are less than one percent
of revenues (dollar change/revenue), or are negative (i.e., provide net
cost savings) to establish presumptively that compliance with the
regulation is economically feasible. MSHA relies on Agency data to
identify revenue for covered mining entities and the 2007 Economic
Census data to identify revenue by NAICS industry categories for non-
mining entities.
MSHA performed the revenue screening test comparing the annual
impact to annual revenues for all three categories and found that the
percentage impact rounds to zero percent of revenue in each case. Given
the relatively small impact compared to industry total revenues, any
further analysis would not be productive.
Because the estimated impacts are below one percent of estimated
annual revenue of the impacted industries, MSHA concludes that
compliance with the provisions of the final rule is economically
feasible.
VI. Regulatory Flexibility Act, Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act, and Executive Order 13272: Proper Consideration of Small
Entities in Agency Rulemaking
The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (RFA) as amended by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 and other
statutes, and E.O. 13272 requires agencies to consider the effects of
their final and existing regulations on small entities and to examine
alternatives that would minimize the small entity impacts while still
meeting the regulations' purposes. MSHA has reviewed the final rule to
assess the potential impact on small businesses, small governmental
jurisdictions, and small organizations.
The applicants who will be affected by the final rule represent 30
industries. The Small Business Administration's (SBA's) size standard
for a small entity (13 CFR 121.201) differs by industry code. For
mining, SBA defines a small entity as one with 500 or fewer employees.
For non-mining industries that would be impacted by this rule, SBA
defines a small entity as one that has revenues of $7.5 million or
less. MSHA used the SBA's definitions for a small entity, FY 2012
invoice data, and NAICS industry data to evaluate the small business
impact.
For the non-mining industries, the affected industries represent
small business revenues of approximately $474 billion. The final rule
will increase fees for non-mining industries by approximately $0.5
million. The impact from an increase in fees is essentially zero
percent of revenue ($0.5 million/$474 billion).
For the mining industries, MSHA data shows small coal mine revenues
of $30 billion. The final rule will increase fees for small coal mines
by approximately $0.9 million. MSHA data shows other small mine
revenues (not coal mines) of $57 billion. The final rule will increase
fees for small mines other than coal by approximately $6,000. The
impact from an increase in fees is zero percent for both mining
categories.
Approximately $100,000 in increased fees is primarily attributable
to foreign entities. MSHA concludes that the impact on the U.S. economy
and its businesses would be de minimis.
Several commenters stated that large companies could absorb the
increase in fees and that the small companies would be adversely
affected. MSHA's analysis determined that the impact of the final rule
for both small mining and small non-mining entities is essentially
[[Page 45056]]
zero percent of annual revenues. Additionally, considering MSHA's
traditional definition of small mines (1-19 employees), the impact of
the final rule is essentially zero percent. The Agency concludes that
one rate is appropriate for all company sizes.
MSHA certifies that the final rule will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
VII. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
This final rule contains no information collections subject to
review by OMB under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. The paperwork
associated with applications for approval are considered under the
specific part in Title 30, Chapter 1, Subchapter B that contains the
requirements for the specific product submitted for MSHA approval.
VIII. Other Regulatory Considerations
A. The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
MSHA has reviewed the final rule under the Unfunded Mandates Reform
Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1501 et seq.). MSHA has determined that this
final rule does 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
(adjusted for inflation) in any one year or significantly or uniquely
affect small governments. Accordingly, under the Unfunded Mandates
Reform Act, no further Agency action or analysis is required.
B. The Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act of 1999:
Assessment of Federal Regulations and Policies on Families
Section 654 of the Treasury and General Government Appropriations
Act of 1999 (5 U.S.C. 601 note), as amended, requires agencies to
assess the impact of agency action on family well-being. MSHA has
determined that this final rule would have no effect on family
stability or safety, marital commitment, parental rights and authority,
or income or poverty of families and children. Accordingly, MSHA
certifies that this final rule will not impact family well-being.
C. Executive Order 12630: Government Actions and Interference With
Constitutionally Protected Property Rights
Executive Order 12630 requires Federal agencies to ``identify the
takings implications of final regulatory actions . . . .'' MSHA has
determined that this final rule will not include a regulatory or policy
action with takings implications. Accordingly, under E.O. 12630, no
further Agency action or analysis is required.
D. Executive Order 12988: Civil Justice Reform
Executive Order 12988 contains requirements for Federal agencies
promulgating new regulations or reviewing existing regulations to
minimize litigation by eliminating drafting errors and ambiguity,
providing a clear legal standard for affected conduct rather than a
general standard, promoting simplification, and reducing burden. MSHA
has reviewed this final rule and has determined that it would meet the
applicable standards provided in E.O. 12988 to minimize litigation and
undue burden on the Federal court system.
E. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental
Health Risks and Safety Risks
MSHA has determined that this final rule will have no adverse
impact on children. Accordingly, under E.O. 13045, no further Agency
action or analysis is required.
F. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
MSHA has determined that this final rule does 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, under E.O. 13132, no further
Agency action or analysis is required.
G. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian
Tribal Governments
MSHA has determined that this final rule does 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, under E.O. 13175, no further Agency action or analysis is
required.
H. Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
MSHA has reviewed this final rule for its impact on the supply,
distribution, and use of energy because it applies to the coal mining
industry. Insofar as the final rule would result in an increase to the
yearly transfer of $0.9 million for the coal mining industry relative
to annual revenues of $41 billion in 2012, it is not a ``significant
energy action'' because it is not ``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, under E.O. 13211, no further Agency action or
analysis is required.
List of Subjects in 30 CFR Part 5
Mine safety and health.
Dated: July 23, 2015.
Joseph A. Main,
Assistant Secretary of Labor for Mine Safety and Health.
For the reasons set out in the preamble, and under the authority of
the Federal Mine Safety and Health Act of 1977, as amended, MSHA is
revising 30 CFR part 5 to read as follows:
PART 5--FEES FOR TESTING, EVALUATION, AND APPROVAL OF MINING
PRODUCTS
Sec.
5.10 Purpose and scope.
5.30 Fee calculation.
5.40 Fee administration.
5.50 Fee revisions.
Authority: 30 U.S.C. 957.
Sec. 5.10 Purpose and scope.
This part establishes a system under which MSHA charges a fee for
services provided. This part includes the management and calculation of
fees for the approval program, which includes: Application processing,
testing and evaluation, approval decisions, post-approval activities,
and termination of approvals.
Sec. 5.30 Fee calculation.
(a) Fee calculation. MSHA charges a fee based on an hourly rate for
Approval and Certification Center (A&CC) approval program activities
and other associated costs, such as travel expenses and part 15 fees.
Part 15 fees for services provided to MSHA by other organizations may
be set by those organizations.
(b) Hourly rate calculation. The hourly rate consists of direct and
indirect costs of the A&CC's approval program divided by the number of
direct hours worked on all approval program activities.
(1) Direct costs are compensation and benefit costs for hours
worked on approval program activities.
[[Page 45057]]
(2) Indirect costs are a proportionate share of the following A&CC
costs:
(i) Compensation and benefit hours worked in support of all A&CC
activities;
(ii) A&CC building and equipment depreciation costs;
(iii) A&CC utilities, facility and equipment maintenance, and
supplies and materials; and
(iv) Information Technology and other services the Department of
Labor provides to the A&CC.
(c) Fees are charged for--
(1) Application processing (e.g., administrative and technical
review of applications, computer tracking, and status reporting);
(2) Testing and evaluation (e.g., analysis of drawings, technical
evaluation, testing, test set up and test tear down, and internal
quality control activities);
(3) Approval decisions (e.g., consultation on applications, records
control and security, document preparation); and
(4) Two post-approval activities: changes to approvals and post-
approval product audits.
(d) Fees are not charged for--
(1) Technical assistance not related to processing an approval
application;
(2) Technical programs, including development of new technology
programs;
(3) Participation in research conducted by other government
agencies or private organizations; and
(4) Regulatory review activities, including participation in the
development of health and safety standards, regulations, and
legislation.
(e) Fee estimate. Except as provided in paragraphs (e)(1) and (2)
of this section, on completion of an initial administrative review of
the application, the A&CC will prepare a maximum fee estimate for each
application. A&CC will begin the technical evaluation after the
applicant authorizes the fee estimate.
(1) The applicant may pre-authorize an expenditure for services,
and may further choose to pre-authorize either a maximum dollar amount
or an expenditure without a specified maximum amount.
(i) All applications containing a pre-authorization statement will
be put in the queue for the technical evaluation on completion of an
initial administrative review.
(ii) MSHA will concurrently prepare a maximum fee estimate for
applications containing a statement pre-authorizing a maximum dollar
amount, and will provide the applicant with this estimate.
(2) Where MSHA's estimated maximum fee exceeds the pre-authorized
maximum dollar amount, the applicant has the choice of cancelling the
action and paying for all work done up to the time of the cancellation,
or authorizing MSHA's estimate.
(3) Under the Revised Acceptance Modification Program (RAMP), MSHA
expedites applications for acceptance of minor changes to previously
approved, certified, accepted, or evaluated products. The applicant
must pre-authorize a fixed dollar amount, set by MSHA, for processing
the application.
(f) If unforeseen circumstances are discovered during the
evaluation, and MSHA determines that these circumstances would result
in the actual costs exceeding either the pre-authorized expenditure or
the authorized maximum fee estimate, as appropriate, MSHA will prepare
a revised maximum fee estimate for completing the evaluation. The
applicant will have the option of either cancelling the action and
paying for services rendered or authorizing MSHA's revised estimate, in
which case MSHA will continue to test and evaluate the product.
(g) If the actual cost of processing the application is less than
MSHA's maximum fee estimate, MSHA will charge the actual cost.
Sec. 5.40 Fee administration.
Applicants and approval holders will be billed for all fees,
including actual travel expenses, if any, when approval program
activities are completed. Invoices will contain specific payment
instruction, including the address to mail payments and authorized
methods of payment.
Sec. 5.50 Fee revisions.
The hourly rate will remain in effect for at least one year and be
subject to revision at least once every three years.
[FR Doc. 2015-18617 Filed 7-28-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-43-P