Petitions for Modification of Application of Existing Mandatory Safety Standard, 38646-38649 [2019-16840]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
38646
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 152 / Wednesday, August 7, 2019 / Notices
Management and Budget (OMB) for
review and approval in accordance with
the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.
DATES: The Department of Justice
encourages public comment and will
accept input until October 7, 2019.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If
you have additional comments
especially on the estimated public
burden or associated response time,
suggestions, or need a copy of the
proposed information collection
instrument with instructions or
additional information, please contact
Juliet Drake, Deputy Assistant Director,
Executive Office for United States
Trustees, 441 G Street NW, Suite 6150,
Washington DC 20530, Juliet.Drake@
usdoj.gov, (202) 307–3698.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Written
comments and suggestions from the
public and affected agencies concerning
the proposed collection of information
are encouraged. Your comments should
address one or more of the following
four points:
—Evaluate whether the proposed
collection of information is necessary
for the proper performance of the
functions of the United States Trustee
Program, including whether the
information will have practical utility;
—Evaluate the accuracy of the agency’s
estimate of the burden of the
proposed collection of information,
including the validity of the
methodology and assumptions used;
—Evaluate whether and if so how the
quality, utility, and clarity of the
information to be collected can be
enhanced; and
—Minimize the burden of the collection
of information on those who are to
respond, including through the use of
appropriate automated, electronic,
mechanical, or other technological
collection techniques or other forms
of information technology, e.g.,
permitting electronic submission of
responses.
jspears on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES
Overview of This Information
Collection
16:49 Aug 06, 2019
Jkt 247001
Dated: August 2, 2019.
Melody Braswell,
Department Clearance Officer for PRA, U.S.
Department of Justice.
[FR Doc. 2019–16873 Filed 8–6–19; 8:45 am]
1. Type of Information Collection:
Extension, without change, of a
currently approved collection.
2. The Title of the Form/Collection:
Application for Approval as a Nonprofit
Budget and Credit Counseling Agency
(Application).
3. The agency form number, if any,
and the applicable component of the
Department sponsoring the collection:
There is no agency form number for this
collection. The applicable component
within the Department of Justice is the
United States Trustee Program.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
4. Affected public who will be asked
or required to respond, as well as a brief
abstract: Nonprofit agencies that wish to
offer credit counseling services pursuant
to the Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and
Consumer Protection Act of 2005
(‘‘BAPCPA’’), Public Law 109–8, 119
Stat. 23, 37, 38 (April 20, 2005), and
codified at 11 U.S.C. 109(h) and 111,
and Application Procedures and Criteria
for Approval of Nonprofit Budget and
Credit Counseling Agencies by United
States Trustees, 78 FR 16,138 (March 14,
2013) (Rule).
The BAPCPA requires any individual
who wishes to file for bankruptcy to
obtain credit counseling, within 180
days before filing for bankruptcy relief,
from a nonprofit budget and credit
counseling agency that has been
approved by the United States Trustee.
The Application collects information
from such agencies in order to ensure
compliance with the law and the Rule.
5. An estimate of the total number of
respondents and the amount of time
estimated for an average respondent to
respond: It is estimated that 86
respondents will complete the
Application; initial applicants will
complete the Application in
approximately ten (10) hours, while
renewal applicants will complete the
Application in approximately four (4)
hours.
6. An estimate of the total public
burden (in hours) associated with the
collection: The estimated public burden
associated with this collection is 362
hours.
If additional information is required
contact: Melody Braswell, Department
Clearance Officer, United States
Department of Justice, Justice
Management Division, Policy and
Planning Staff, Two Constitution
Square, 145 N Street NE, 3E.405A,
Washington, DC 20530.
BILLING CODE 4410–40–P
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Mine Safety and Health Administration
Petitions for Modification of
Application of Existing Mandatory
Safety Standard
Mine Safety and Health
Administration, Labor.
ACTION: Notice.
AGENCY:
PO 00000
Frm 00060
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
This notice is a summary of
petitions for modification submitted to
the Mine Safety and Health
Administration (MSHA) by the parties
listed below.
DATES: All comments on the petition
must be received by MSHA’s Office of
Standards, Regulations, and Variances
on or before September 6, 2019.
ADDRESSES: You may submit your
comments, identified by ‘‘docket
number’’ on the subject line, by any of
the following methods:
1. Email: zzMSHA-comments@
dol.gov. Include the docket number of
the petition in the subject line of the
message.
2. Facsimile: 202–693–9441.
3. Regular Mail or Hand Delivery:
MSHA, Office of Standards,
Regulations, and Variances, 201 12th
Street South, Suite 4E401, Arlington,
Virginia 22202–5452, Attention: Sheila
McConnell, Director, Office of
Standards, Regulations, and Variances.
Persons delivering documents are
required to check in at the receptionist’s
desk in Suite 4E401. Individuals may
inspect a copy of the petition and
comments during normal business
hours at the address listed above.
MSHA will consider only comments
postmarked by the U.S. Postal Service or
proof of delivery from another delivery
service such as UPS or Federal Express
on or before the deadline for comments.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Roslyn Fontaine, Deputy Director,
Office of Standards, Regulations, and
Variances at 202–693–9475 (voice),
Fontaine.Roslyn@dol.gov (email), or
202–693–9441 (fax). [These are not tollfree numbers.]
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section
101(c) of the Federal Mine Safety and
Health Act of 1977 and Title 30 of the
Code of Federal Regulations Part 44
govern the application, processing, and
disposition of petitions for modification.
SUMMARY:
I. Background
Section 101(c) of the Federal Mine
Safety and Health Act of 1977 (Mine
Act) allows the mine operator or
representative of miners to file a
petition to modify the application of any
mandatory safety standard to a coal or
other mine if the Secretary of Labor
(Secretary) determines that:
1. An alternative method of achieving
the result of such standard exists which
will at all times guarantee no less than
the same measure of protection afforded
the miners of such mine by such
standard; or
2. That the application of such
standard to such mine will result in a
E:\FR\FM\07AUN1.SGM
07AUN1
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 152 / Wednesday, August 7, 2019 / Notices
jspears on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES
diminution of safety to the miners in
such mine.
In addition, the regulations at 30 CFR
44.10 and 44.11 establish the
requirements and procedures for filing
petitions for modification.
II. Petitions for Modification
Docket Number: M–2019–002–M.
Petitioner: Graymont (PA) Inc., 375
Graymont Road, Bellefonte,
Pennsylvania 16823.
Mine: Graymont (PA) Inc. Pleasant
Gap, MSHA I.D. 36–06468, located in
Centre County, Pennsylvania.
Regulation Affected: 30 CFR 57.14105
(Procedures during repairs or
maintenance).
Modification Request: The petitioner
requests a modification of the existing
standard to permit an alternative
method of compliance during its
automated and robotic bagging
operations. The petitioner proposes a
Category Three PLC Interlock energycontrol method (PLC Interlock) as a
means of compliance with existing
energy-control and lockout/tagout
methods.
The petitioner states that:
(1) The petitioner uses automated and
robotic bagging systems at the mine. The
bagging systems are equipped with area
guarding that includes a PLC Interlock.
(2) With the automated and robotic
bagging systems, miners need to
perform routine operational tasks such
as: Removing broken bags from the
hydrate spout, emptying bag falls on the
discharge conveyor, fixing pallet
alignment on the pallet infeed, adjusting
slip sheets on the pallet, replacing
empty or torn bags on the robot,
removing film from the stretch hood
machine, removing overweight bags
from the open mouth packer, removing
bags at the flattener if reset is tripped,
and cleaning sensors in order to ensure
good operating function of the
equipment. These tasks are routine, low
risk, very limited in duration, and
performed by miners trained on the
equipment.
(3) To perform such tasks, miners are
required to open the door and enter the
area beyond the physical guarding
(Operating Area), necessitating energy
control procedures.
(4) Isolating power from the control
computers upwards of 15–20 times per
shift to perform routine nonmaintenance tasks will cause computer
and mechanical failures that would
result in increased non-routine
maintenance tasks that pose greater risk
to miners. Only control power
shutdowns will uphold the level of
safety inherent in complete source
power shutdown and will further
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:49 Aug 06, 2019
Jkt 247001
maintain the lifespan and integrity of
the equipment. This would have the
effect of reducing required maintenance
and making the equipment safer, which
enhances miner safety.
(5) The PLC Interlock method does
not cut full source power to the area and
equipment surrounding the Operating
Area. The equipment adjacent to the
Operating Area does have electricity
flow, with power cables still carrying
power to the system as a whole, even
though control power to the Operating
Area where the miners work is cut off.
The petitioner proposes the following
terms and conditions:
(a) To control energy related to this
system, once a worker enters the
Operating Area, the PLC Interlock
system would engage and the electronic
Category Three interlocks within the
door completely cut control power to
the area in order to ensure there would
not be any unexpected reenergization or
movement of the equipment being
accessed.
(b) The PLC Interlock method also
includes lockable mechanisms on all
applicable doors whereby a miner can
lock the interlock with a traditional
lockout/tagout padlock, such that the
lock(s) can only be removed by the
miner who installed them or by other
authorized personnel.
(c) Suitable notices are posted at the
power switch and signed by the miner
assigned the tasks.
(d) Only upon completion of the
tasks, the miner would remove the lock,
unlock the gate, close the gate, leave the
Operating Area, walk to the control
panel, reset the system, and restart
operation by reenergizing the control
system while ensuring no miners are
exposed to an unexpected release of
energy or any associated potential
hazards. PLC Interlock devices are
designed so that the safety-related parts
of the control system do not have a
single fault that could lead to loss of
safety function. The PLC Interlock
devices are designed with redundancy
to ensure that a failure within the device
will not allow operation of the machine.
Additionally, miners are not exposed to
any live electrical conductors when they
work beyond the guarding.
(e) Component failures are protected
via redundant and fail-safe design, and
the computer program is not controlling
the system when the interlocks are not
met. Program errors, power surges, or
magnetic field interference could not
cause the equipment to operate because
every time an operator stops the system,
the computer program must be reset and
re-started.
The petitioner asserts that the
proposed alternative method will
PO 00000
Frm 00061
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
38647
provide no less than the same measure
of protection afforded the miners under
the existing standard.
Docket Number: M–2019–003–M.
Petitioner: Graymont (PA) Inc., 375
Graymont Road, Bellefonte,
Pennsylvania 16823.
Mine: Graymont (PA) Inc. Pleasant
Gap, MSHA I.D. 36–06468, located in
Centre County, Pennsylvania.
Regulation Affected: 30 CFR 57.12016
(Work on electrically-powered
equipment).
Modification Request: The petitioner
requests a modification of the existing
standard to permit an alternative
method of compliance during its
automated and robotic bagging
operations. The petitioner proposes a
Category Three PLC Interlock energycontrol method (PLC Interlock) as a
means of compliance with existing
energy-control and lockout/tagout
methods.
The petitioner states that:
(1) The petitioner uses automated and
robotic bagging systems at the mine. The
bagging systems are equipped with area
guarding that includes a PLC Interlock.
(2) With the automated and robotic
bagging systems, miners need to
perform routine operational tasks such
as: Removing broken bags from the
hydrate spout, emptying bag falls on the
discharge conveyor, fixing pallet
alignment on the pallet infeed, adjusting
slip sheets on the pallet, replacing
empty or torn bags on the robot,
removing film from the stretch hood
machine, removing overweight bags
from the open mouth packer, removing
bags at the flattener if reset is tripped,
and cleaning sensors in order to ensure
good operating function of the
equipment. These tasks are routine, low
risk, very limited in duration, and
performed by miners trained on the
equipment.
(3) To perform such tasks, miners are
required to open the door and enter the
area beyond the physical guarding
(Operating Area), necessitating energy
control procedures.
(4) Isolating power from the control
computers upwards of 15–20 times per
shift to perform routine nonmaintenance tasks will cause computer
and mechanical failures that would
result in increased non-routine
maintenance tasks that pose greater risk
to miners. Only control power
shutdowns will uphold the level of
safety inherent in complete source
power shutdown and will further
maintain the lifespan and integrity of
the equipment. This would have the
effect of reducing required maintenance
and making the equipment safer, which
enhances miner safety.
E:\FR\FM\07AUN1.SGM
07AUN1
jspears on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES
38648
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 152 / Wednesday, August 7, 2019 / Notices
(5) The PLC Interlock method does
not cut full source power to the area and
equipment surrounding the Operating
Area. The equipment adjacent to the
Operating Area does have electricity
flow, with power cables still carrying
power to the system as a whole, even
though control power to the Operating
Area where the miners work is cut off.
The petitioner proposes the following
terms and conditions:
(a) To control energy related to this
system, once a worker enters the
Operating Area, the PLC Interlock
system would engage and the electronic
Category Three interlocks within the
door completely cut control power to
the area in order to ensure there would
not be any unexpected reenergization or
movement of the equipment being
accessed.
(b) The PLC Interlock method also
includes lockable mechanisms on all
applicable doors whereby a miner can
lock the interlock with a traditional
lockout/tagout padlock, such that the
lock(s) can only be removed by the
miner who installed them or by other
authorized personnel.
(c) Suitable notices are posted at the
power switch and signed by the miner
assigned the tasks.
(d) Only upon completion of the
tasks, the miner would remove the lock,
unlock the gate, close the gate, leave the
Operating Area, walk to the control
panel, reset the system, and restart
operation by reenergizing the control
system while ensuring no miners are
exposed to an unexpected release of
energy or any associated potential
hazards. PLC Interlock devices are
designed so that the safety-related parts
of the control system do not have a
single fault that could lead to loss of
safety function. The PLC Interlock
devices are designed with redundancy
to ensure that a failure within the device
will not allow operation of the machine.
Additionally, miners are not exposed to
any live electrical conductors when they
work beyond the guarding.
(e) Component failures are protected
via redundant and fail-safe design, and
the computer program is not controlling
the system when the interlocks are not
met. Program errors, power surges, or
magnetic field interference could not
cause the equipment to operate because
every time an operator stops the system,
the computer program must be reset and
re-started.
The petitioner asserts that the
proposed alternative method will
provide no less than the same measure
of protection afforded the miners under
the existing standard.
Docket Number: M–2019–004–M.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:49 Aug 06, 2019
Jkt 247001
Petitioner: Solvay Chemicals, Inc.,
P.O. Box 1167, 400 County Road 85,
Green River, WY 82935.
Mine: Solvay Chemicals, Inc. Mine,
MSHA I.D. 48–01295, located in
Sweetwater County, WY.
Regulation Affected: 30 CFR 57.22305
(Approved equipment (III mines)).
Modification Request: The petitioner
requests a modification of the existing
standard to permit an alternative
method of compliance for the
respiratory protection of miners. The
petitioner proposes to use non-MSHA
approved, intrinsically safe batterypowered air purifying respirators
(PAPR) to protect miners from potential
exposure to respirable dust and
ammonia gas during normal mining
conditions in or in by the last open
crosscut and where methane may be
present.
The petitioner states that:
(1) The operator may use the
following battery-powered PAPR units
to provide respiratory protection for
personnel, subject to the conditions of
this petition:
—Sundstro¨m SR 500 EX
—Drager X-plore 8000
—3M TR–800 Versaflo
The petitioner proposes the following
terms and conditions:
(a) The batteries for the PAPRs will be
charged outby the last open crosscut
when not in operation.
(b) Affected miners will be trained in
the proper use and care of the PAPR
units in accordance with manufacturers’
instructions.
(c) If methane is detected in
concentrations of 1.0 percent or more,
procedures in accordance with 30 CFR
57.22234 will be followed.
The petitioner asserts that the
proposed alternative method will
provide no less than the same measure
of protection afforded the miners under
the existing standard.
Docket Number: M–2019–05–M.
Petitioner: Nevada Gold Mines, LLC,
1655 Mountain City Highway, Elko,
Nevada 89801.
Mine: Genesis Mine, MSHA I.D. 26–
00062, 26 Miles on SR766, North of
Carlin, Carlin, Nevada 89822, located in
Eureka County, Nevada.
South Area Mine, MSHA I.D. 26–
00500, 6 Miles on SR766, North of
Carlin, Carlin, Nevada, located in
Eureka County, Nevada.
Regulation Affected: 30 CFR
56.6309(b) (Fuel oil requirements for
ANFO).
Modification Request: The petitioner
requests a modification of the existing
standard to allow the use of recycled
used waste oil blended with diesel fuel
PO 00000
Frm 00062
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
(blended oil) to prepare ammonium
nitrate fuel oil (ANFO).
The petitioner states that:
(1) On July 1, 2019, petitioner
assumed the operation of multiple gold
mines in Nevada, including Goldstrike
Mine, Genesis Mine and South Area
Mine.
(2) Blended oil has been approved for
use to prepare ANFO at petitioner’s
Goldstrike Mine, pursuant to MSHA’s
Amended Decision and Order of
December 1, 1998, reinstated by
Decision and Order of November 4,
2011, granting modification of the
application of 30 CFR 56.6309(b) at
Goldstrike Mine (Goldstrike
Modification Order). The petitioner
states that it seeks only to use the
blended oil that has already been
recycled and tested at Goldstrike Mine
according to the conditions set out in
the Goldstrike Modification Order in its
ANFO blasting agents, and use the
blended oil prepared and approved for
use at Goldstrike Mine in ANFO
mixtures at petitioner’s Genesis Mine
and South Area Mine.
(3) The Genesis Mine and South Area
Mine are open-pit gold mines that
consist of series of sediment hosted
Carlin-style gold deposits. The Genesis
Mine is adjacent to the Goldstrike Mine.
The principle blasting method to be
applied at both mines involves the use
of ANFO loaded in pre-drilled blast
holes, similar to the blasting methods at
Goldstrike Mine. The petitioner states
that it intends to ignite approximately
1,000 blast holes per month at each
mine.
The petitioner proposes the following
terms and conditions:
(a) The ANFO blasting agents the
petitioner seeks to load in its blast holes
at Genesis Mine and South Area Mine
will consist of blended oil prepared at
Goldstrike Mine according to the
conditions set forth in the Goldstrike
Modification Order, combined with
ammonium nitrate.
(b) The ammonium nitrate to be
combined with the blended oil to create
ANFO will be stored separate and apart
from the blended oil in three 100-ton
silos in a locked and secured compound
in the same vicinity at Goldstrike Mine.
Only authorized blasting personnel will
have access to the blended oil and
ammonium nitrate storage facilities.
(c) The blended oil and ammonium
nitrate will be transported from
Goldstrike Mine to the respective blast
sties at Genesis Mine and South Area
Mine in separate containers and will be
combined at each mine only as part of
the actual process of loading the blast
holes. The same certified blasting
personnel operating at Goldstrike Mine
E:\FR\FM\07AUN1.SGM
07AUN1
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 152 / Wednesday, August 7, 2019 / Notices
will perform blasting operations at
Genesis Mine and South Area Mine.
(d) The ANFO will not be used in
confined spaces or underground
blasting operations. The ANFO will be
used only at Genesis Mine and South
Area Mine, and not be sold or
transported to other mine properties.
(e) The petitioner will maintain a
daily ‘‘load’’ and ‘‘shot’’ report detailing
all holes loaded and shots fired which
contain the ANFO.
(f) Emulsions (heavy ANFO) will not
be used with the recycled oil unless the
emulsion manufacturer certifies
compatibility of the product with the
oil.
(g) Misfires/hangfires which are
reasonably suspected to have been
caused by the blended oil will be
reported to the MSHA District Manager
in a timely manner.
The petitioner asserts that the
proposed alternative method will at all
times guarantee no less than the same
measure of protection afforded by the
existing standard.
McConnell, Director, Office of
Standards, Regulations, and Variances.
Persons delivering documents are
required to check in at the receptionist’s
desk in Suite 4E401. Individuals may
inspect copies of the petition and
comments during normal business
hours at the address listed above.
MSHA will consider only comments
postmarked by the U.S. Postal Service or
proof of delivery from another delivery
service such as UPS or Federal Express
on or before the deadline for comments.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Sheila McConnell, Office of Standards,
Regulations, and Variances at 202–693–
9440 (Voice), mcconnell.sheila.a@
dol.gov (Email), or 202–693–9441
(Facsimile). [These are not toll-free
numbers.]
Sheila McConnell,
Director, Office of Standards, Regulations,
and Variances.
I. Background
[FR Doc. 2019–16840 Filed 8–6–19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4520–43–P
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Mine Safety and Health Administration
Petitions for Modification of
Application of Existing Mandatory
Safety Standards
Mine Safety and Health
Administration, Labor.
ACTION: Notice.
AGENCY:
This notice is a summary of
petitions for modification submitted to
the Mine Safety and Health
Administration (MSHA) by the parties
listed below.
DATES: All comments on the petitions
must be received by MSHA’s Office of
Standards, Regulations, and Variances
on or before September 6, 2019.
ADDRESSES: You may submit your
comments, identified by ‘‘docket
number’’ on the subject line, by any of
the following methods:
1. Electronic Mail: zzMSHAcomments@dol.gov. Include the docket
number of the petition in the subject
line of the message.
2. Facsimile: 202–693–9441.
3. Regular Mail or Hand Delivery:
MSHA, Office of Standards,
Regulations, and Variances, 201 12th
Street South, Suite 4E401, Arlington,
Virginia 22202–5452, Attention: Sheila
jspears on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:49 Aug 06, 2019
Jkt 247001
Section
101(c) of the Federal Mine Safety and
Health Act of 1977 and Title 30 of the
Code of Federal Regulations part 44
govern the application, processing, and
disposition of petitions for modification.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Section 101(c) of the Federal Mine
Safety and Health Act of 1977 (Mine
Act) allows the mine operator or
representative of miners to file a
petition to modify the application of any
mandatory safety standard to a coal or
other mine if the Secretary of Labor
determines that:
1. An alternative method of achieving
the result of such standard exists which
will at all times guarantee no less than
the same measure of protection afforded
the miners of such mine by such
standard; or
2. That the application of such
standard to such mine will result in a
diminution of safety to the miners in
such mine.
In addition, the regulations at 30 CFR
44.10 and 44.11 establish the
requirements and procedures for filing
petitions for modification.
II. Petitions for Modification
Docket Number: M–2019–025–C.
Petitioner: Blue Diamond Coal
Company, One Oxford Centre, 301 Grant
Street, Suite 4300, Pittsburgh,
Pennsylvania 15219.
Mines: No. 88 Mine, MSHA I.D. No.
15–19400, located in Knott County,
Kentucky.
Regulation Affected: 30 CFR
75.1002(a) (Installation of electric
equipment and conductors;
permissibility).
Modification Request: The petitioner
requests a modification of the existing
standard to permit an alternative
method of compliance to allow the use
PO 00000
Frm 00063
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
38649
of battery-powered nonpermissible
surveying equipment including, but not
limited to, portable battery-operated
mine transits, total station surveying
equipment, distance meters, and data
loggers, within 150 feet of pillar
workings and longwall faces.
The petitioner states that:
(1) To comply with requirements for
mine ventilation maps and mine maps
in 30 CFR 75.372, 75.1002(a), and
75.1200, use of the most practical and
accurate surveying equipment is
necessary. It is necessary to determine
the exact location and extent of mine
workings to ensure the safety of miners
in active mines and to protect miners in
future mines which may mine in close
proximity to the active mines.
(2) Application of the existing
standard would result in a diminution
of safety to miners. Underground
mining by its nature, size, and
complexity of mine plans requires that
accurate and precise measurements be
completed in a prompt and efficient
manner.
As an alternative to the existing
standard, the petitioner proposes the
following:
(a) The operator may use the
following total stations and theodolites
and similar low-voltage battery-operated
total stations and theodolites if they
have an ingress protection (IP) rating of
66 or greater within 150 feet of pillar
workings or longwall faces subject to
this petition:
—TopCon GTS 233 W
—TopCon GPT 3003 LW
—TopCon GTS 223
—TopCon GTS 243 NW
(b) The nonpermissible electronic
surveying equipment is low-voltage or
battery-powered nonpermissible total
stations and theodolites. All
nonpermissible electronic total stations
and theodolites will have an IP 66 or
greater rating.
(c) The operator will maintain a
logbook for electronic surveying
equipment with the equipment, or in
the location where mine record books
are kept, or in the location where the
surveying record books are kept. The
logbook will contain the date of
manufacture and/or purchase of each
particular piece of electronic surveying
equipment. The logbook will be made
available to MSHA on request.
(d) All nonpermissible electronic
surveying equipment to be used within
150 feet of pillar workings or longwall
faces will be examined by the person
who operates the equipment prior to
taking the equipment underground to
ensure the equipment is being
maintained in a safe operating
E:\FR\FM\07AUN1.SGM
07AUN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 152 (Wednesday, August 7, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 38646-38649]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2019-16840]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Mine Safety and Health Administration
Petitions for Modification of Application of Existing Mandatory
Safety Standard
AGENCY: Mine Safety and Health Administration, Labor.
ACTION: Notice.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This notice is a summary of petitions for modification
submitted to the Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA) by the
parties listed below.
DATES: All comments on the petition must be received by MSHA's Office
of Standards, Regulations, and Variances on or before September 6,
2019.
ADDRESSES: You may submit your comments, identified by ``docket
number'' on the subject line, by any of the following methods:
1. Email: [email protected]. Include the docket number of the
petition in the subject line of the message.
2. Facsimile: 202-693-9441.
3. Regular Mail or Hand Delivery: MSHA, Office of Standards,
Regulations, and Variances, 201 12th Street South, Suite 4E401,
Arlington, Virginia 22202-5452, Attention: Sheila McConnell, Director,
Office of Standards, Regulations, and Variances. Persons delivering
documents are required to check in at the receptionist's desk in Suite
4E401. Individuals may inspect a copy of the petition and comments
during normal business hours at the address listed above.
MSHA will consider only comments postmarked by the U.S. Postal
Service or proof of delivery from another delivery service such as UPS
or Federal Express on or before the deadline for comments.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Roslyn Fontaine, Deputy Director,
Office of Standards, Regulations, and Variances at 202-693-9475
(voice), [email protected] (email), or 202-693-9441 (fax). [These
are not toll-free numbers.]
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section 101(c) of the Federal Mine Safety
and Health Act of 1977 and Title 30 of the Code of Federal Regulations
Part 44 govern the application, processing, and disposition of
petitions for modification.
I. Background
Section 101(c) of the Federal Mine Safety and Health Act of 1977
(Mine Act) allows the mine operator or representative of miners to file
a petition to modify the application of any mandatory safety standard
to a coal or other mine if the Secretary of Labor (Secretary)
determines that:
1. An alternative method of achieving the result of such standard
exists which will at all times guarantee no less than the same measure
of protection afforded the miners of such mine by such standard; or
2. That the application of such standard to such mine will result
in a
[[Page 38647]]
diminution of safety to the miners in such mine.
In addition, the regulations at 30 CFR 44.10 and 44.11 establish
the requirements and procedures for filing petitions for modification.
II. Petitions for Modification
Docket Number: M-2019-002-M.
Petitioner: Graymont (PA) Inc., 375 Graymont Road, Bellefonte,
Pennsylvania 16823.
Mine: Graymont (PA) Inc. Pleasant Gap, MSHA I.D. 36-06468, located
in Centre County, Pennsylvania.
Regulation Affected: 30 CFR 57.14105 (Procedures during repairs or
maintenance).
Modification Request: The petitioner requests a modification of the
existing standard to permit an alternative method of compliance during
its automated and robotic bagging operations. The petitioner proposes a
Category Three PLC Interlock energy-control method (PLC Interlock) as a
means of compliance with existing energy-control and lockout/tagout
methods.
The petitioner states that:
(1) The petitioner uses automated and robotic bagging systems at
the mine. The bagging systems are equipped with area guarding that
includes a PLC Interlock.
(2) With the automated and robotic bagging systems, miners need to
perform routine operational tasks such as: Removing broken bags from
the hydrate spout, emptying bag falls on the discharge conveyor, fixing
pallet alignment on the pallet infeed, adjusting slip sheets on the
pallet, replacing empty or torn bags on the robot, removing film from
the stretch hood machine, removing overweight bags from the open mouth
packer, removing bags at the flattener if reset is tripped, and
cleaning sensors in order to ensure good operating function of the
equipment. These tasks are routine, low risk, very limited in duration,
and performed by miners trained on the equipment.
(3) To perform such tasks, miners are required to open the door and
enter the area beyond the physical guarding (Operating Area),
necessitating energy control procedures.
(4) Isolating power from the control computers upwards of 15-20
times per shift to perform routine non-maintenance tasks will cause
computer and mechanical failures that would result in increased non-
routine maintenance tasks that pose greater risk to miners. Only
control power shutdowns will uphold the level of safety inherent in
complete source power shutdown and will further maintain the lifespan
and integrity of the equipment. This would have the effect of reducing
required maintenance and making the equipment safer, which enhances
miner safety.
(5) The PLC Interlock method does not cut full source power to the
area and equipment surrounding the Operating Area. The equipment
adjacent to the Operating Area does have electricity flow, with power
cables still carrying power to the system as a whole, even though
control power to the Operating Area where the miners work is cut off.
The petitioner proposes the following terms and conditions:
(a) To control energy related to this system, once a worker enters
the Operating Area, the PLC Interlock system would engage and the
electronic Category Three interlocks within the door completely cut
control power to the area in order to ensure there would not be any
unexpected reenergization or movement of the equipment being accessed.
(b) The PLC Interlock method also includes lockable mechanisms on
all applicable doors whereby a miner can lock the interlock with a
traditional lockout/tagout padlock, such that the lock(s) can only be
removed by the miner who installed them or by other authorized
personnel.
(c) Suitable notices are posted at the power switch and signed by
the miner assigned the tasks.
(d) Only upon completion of the tasks, the miner would remove the
lock, unlock the gate, close the gate, leave the Operating Area, walk
to the control panel, reset the system, and restart operation by
reenergizing the control system while ensuring no miners are exposed to
an unexpected release of energy or any associated potential hazards.
PLC Interlock devices are designed so that the safety-related parts of
the control system do not have a single fault that could lead to loss
of safety function. The PLC Interlock devices are designed with
redundancy to ensure that a failure within the device will not allow
operation of the machine. Additionally, miners are not exposed to any
live electrical conductors when they work beyond the guarding.
(e) Component failures are protected via redundant and fail-safe
design, and the computer program is not controlling the system when the
interlocks are not met. Program errors, power surges, or magnetic field
interference could not cause the equipment to operate because every
time an operator stops the system, the computer program must be reset
and re-started.
The petitioner asserts that the proposed alternative method will
provide no less than the same measure of protection afforded the miners
under the existing standard.
Docket Number: M-2019-003-M.
Petitioner: Graymont (PA) Inc., 375 Graymont Road, Bellefonte,
Pennsylvania 16823.
Mine: Graymont (PA) Inc. Pleasant Gap, MSHA I.D. 36-06468, located
in Centre County, Pennsylvania.
Regulation Affected: 30 CFR 57.12016 (Work on electrically-powered
equipment).
Modification Request: The petitioner requests a modification of the
existing standard to permit an alternative method of compliance during
its automated and robotic bagging operations. The petitioner proposes a
Category Three PLC Interlock energy-control method (PLC Interlock) as a
means of compliance with existing energy-control and lockout/tagout
methods.
The petitioner states that:
(1) The petitioner uses automated and robotic bagging systems at
the mine. The bagging systems are equipped with area guarding that
includes a PLC Interlock.
(2) With the automated and robotic bagging systems, miners need to
perform routine operational tasks such as: Removing broken bags from
the hydrate spout, emptying bag falls on the discharge conveyor, fixing
pallet alignment on the pallet infeed, adjusting slip sheets on the
pallet, replacing empty or torn bags on the robot, removing film from
the stretch hood machine, removing overweight bags from the open mouth
packer, removing bags at the flattener if reset is tripped, and
cleaning sensors in order to ensure good operating function of the
equipment. These tasks are routine, low risk, very limited in duration,
and performed by miners trained on the equipment.
(3) To perform such tasks, miners are required to open the door and
enter the area beyond the physical guarding (Operating Area),
necessitating energy control procedures.
(4) Isolating power from the control computers upwards of 15-20
times per shift to perform routine non-maintenance tasks will cause
computer and mechanical failures that would result in increased non-
routine maintenance tasks that pose greater risk to miners. Only
control power shutdowns will uphold the level of safety inherent in
complete source power shutdown and will further maintain the lifespan
and integrity of the equipment. This would have the effect of reducing
required maintenance and making the equipment safer, which enhances
miner safety.
[[Page 38648]]
(5) The PLC Interlock method does not cut full source power to the
area and equipment surrounding the Operating Area. The equipment
adjacent to the Operating Area does have electricity flow, with power
cables still carrying power to the system as a whole, even though
control power to the Operating Area where the miners work is cut off.
The petitioner proposes the following terms and conditions:
(a) To control energy related to this system, once a worker enters
the Operating Area, the PLC Interlock system would engage and the
electronic Category Three interlocks within the door completely cut
control power to the area in order to ensure there would not be any
unexpected reenergization or movement of the equipment being accessed.
(b) The PLC Interlock method also includes lockable mechanisms on
all applicable doors whereby a miner can lock the interlock with a
traditional lockout/tagout padlock, such that the lock(s) can only be
removed by the miner who installed them or by other authorized
personnel.
(c) Suitable notices are posted at the power switch and signed by
the miner assigned the tasks.
(d) Only upon completion of the tasks, the miner would remove the
lock, unlock the gate, close the gate, leave the Operating Area, walk
to the control panel, reset the system, and restart operation by
reenergizing the control system while ensuring no miners are exposed to
an unexpected release of energy or any associated potential hazards.
PLC Interlock devices are designed so that the safety-related parts of
the control system do not have a single fault that could lead to loss
of safety function. The PLC Interlock devices are designed with
redundancy to ensure that a failure within the device will not allow
operation of the machine. Additionally, miners are not exposed to any
live electrical conductors when they work beyond the guarding.
(e) Component failures are protected via redundant and fail-safe
design, and the computer program is not controlling the system when the
interlocks are not met. Program errors, power surges, or magnetic field
interference could not cause the equipment to operate because every
time an operator stops the system, the computer program must be reset
and re-started.
The petitioner asserts that the proposed alternative method will
provide no less than the same measure of protection afforded the miners
under the existing standard.
Docket Number: M-2019-004-M.
Petitioner: Solvay Chemicals, Inc., P.O. Box 1167, 400 County Road
85, Green River, WY 82935.
Mine: Solvay Chemicals, Inc. Mine, MSHA I.D. 48-01295, located in
Sweetwater County, WY.
Regulation Affected: 30 CFR 57.22305 (Approved equipment (III
mines)).
Modification Request: The petitioner requests a modification of the
existing standard to permit an alternative method of compliance for the
respiratory protection of miners. The petitioner proposes to use non-
MSHA approved, intrinsically safe battery-powered air purifying
respirators (PAPR) to protect miners from potential exposure to
respirable dust and ammonia gas during normal mining conditions in or
in by the last open crosscut and where methane may be present.
The petitioner states that:
(1) The operator may use the following battery-powered PAPR units
to provide respiratory protection for personnel, subject to the
conditions of this petition:
--Sundstr[ouml]m SR 500 EX
--Drager X-plore 8000
--3M TR-800 Versaflo
The petitioner proposes the following terms and conditions:
(a) The batteries for the PAPRs will be charged outby the last open
crosscut when not in operation.
(b) Affected miners will be trained in the proper use and care of
the PAPR units in accordance with manufacturers' instructions.
(c) If methane is detected in concentrations of 1.0 percent or
more, procedures in accordance with 30 CFR 57.22234 will be followed.
The petitioner asserts that the proposed alternative method will
provide no less than the same measure of protection afforded the miners
under the existing standard.
Docket Number: M-2019-05-M.
Petitioner: Nevada Gold Mines, LLC, 1655 Mountain City Highway,
Elko, Nevada 89801.
Mine: Genesis Mine, MSHA I.D. 26-00062, 26 Miles on SR766, North of
Carlin, Carlin, Nevada 89822, located in Eureka County, Nevada.
South Area Mine, MSHA I.D. 26-00500, 6 Miles on SR766, North of
Carlin, Carlin, Nevada, located in Eureka County, Nevada.
Regulation Affected: 30 CFR 56.6309(b) (Fuel oil requirements for
ANFO).
Modification Request: The petitioner requests a modification of the
existing standard to allow the use of recycled used waste oil blended
with diesel fuel (blended oil) to prepare ammonium nitrate fuel oil
(ANFO).
The petitioner states that:
(1) On July 1, 2019, petitioner assumed the operation of multiple
gold mines in Nevada, including Goldstrike Mine, Genesis Mine and South
Area Mine.
(2) Blended oil has been approved for use to prepare ANFO at
petitioner's Goldstrike Mine, pursuant to MSHA's Amended Decision and
Order of December 1, 1998, reinstated by Decision and Order of November
4, 2011, granting modification of the application of 30 CFR 56.6309(b)
at Goldstrike Mine (Goldstrike Modification Order). The petitioner
states that it seeks only to use the blended oil that has already been
recycled and tested at Goldstrike Mine according to the conditions set
out in the Goldstrike Modification Order in its ANFO blasting agents,
and use the blended oil prepared and approved for use at Goldstrike
Mine in ANFO mixtures at petitioner's Genesis Mine and South Area Mine.
(3) The Genesis Mine and South Area Mine are open-pit gold mines
that consist of series of sediment hosted Carlin-style gold deposits.
The Genesis Mine is adjacent to the Goldstrike Mine. The principle
blasting method to be applied at both mines involves the use of ANFO
loaded in pre-drilled blast holes, similar to the blasting methods at
Goldstrike Mine. The petitioner states that it intends to ignite
approximately 1,000 blast holes per month at each mine.
The petitioner proposes the following terms and conditions:
(a) The ANFO blasting agents the petitioner seeks to load in its
blast holes at Genesis Mine and South Area Mine will consist of blended
oil prepared at Goldstrike Mine according to the conditions set forth
in the Goldstrike Modification Order, combined with ammonium nitrate.
(b) The ammonium nitrate to be combined with the blended oil to
create ANFO will be stored separate and apart from the blended oil in
three 100-ton silos in a locked and secured compound in the same
vicinity at Goldstrike Mine. Only authorized blasting personnel will
have access to the blended oil and ammonium nitrate storage facilities.
(c) The blended oil and ammonium nitrate will be transported from
Goldstrike Mine to the respective blast sties at Genesis Mine and South
Area Mine in separate containers and will be combined at each mine only
as part of the actual process of loading the blast holes. The same
certified blasting personnel operating at Goldstrike Mine
[[Page 38649]]
will perform blasting operations at Genesis Mine and South Area Mine.
(d) The ANFO will not be used in confined spaces or underground
blasting operations. The ANFO will be used only at Genesis Mine and
South Area Mine, and not be sold or transported to other mine
properties.
(e) The petitioner will maintain a daily ``load'' and ``shot''
report detailing all holes loaded and shots fired which contain the
ANFO.
(f) Emulsions (heavy ANFO) will not be used with the recycled oil
unless the emulsion manufacturer certifies compatibility of the product
with the oil.
(g) Misfires/hangfires which are reasonably suspected to have been
caused by the blended oil will be reported to the MSHA District Manager
in a timely manner.
The petitioner asserts that the proposed alternative method will at
all times guarantee no less than the same measure of protection
afforded by the existing standard.
Sheila McConnell,
Director, Office of Standards, Regulations, and Variances.
[FR Doc. 2019-16840 Filed 8-6-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4520-43-P
