81 FR 55492 - Petitions for Modification of Application of Existing Mandatory Safety Standards
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Mine Safety and Health Administration Federal Register Volume 81, Issue 161 (August 19, 2016)
Mine Safety and Health Administration
Federal Register Volume 81, Issue 161 (August 19, 2016)
| Page Range | 55492-55494 | |
| FR Document | 2016-19802 |
[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 161 (Friday, August 19, 2016)] [Notices] [Pages 55492-55494] From the Federal Register Online [www.thefederalregister.org] [FR Doc No: 2016-19802] ----------------------------------------------------------------------- DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Mine Safety and Health Administration Petitions for Modification of Application of Existing Mandatory Safety Standards AGENCY: Mine Safety and Health Administration, Labor. ACTION: Notice. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY: 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. 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 19, 2016. ADDRESSES: You may submit your comments, identified by ``docket number'' on the subject line, by any of the following methods: 1. Electronic Mail: [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 copies of the petitions 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: Barbara Barron, Office of Standards, Regulations, and Variances at 202-693-9447 (Voice), [email protected] (Email), or 202-693-9441 (Facsimile). [These are not toll-free numbers.] SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 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 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-2016-006-M. Petitioner: Coeur Alaska, Inc., 1700 Lincoln Street, Suite 4700, Denver, Colorado 80203. Mine: Kensington Mine, MSHA I.D. No. 50-01544, located in Juneau County, Alaska. Regulation Affected: 30 CFR 57.11050 (Escapeways and refuges). Modification Request: The petitioner requests relief from the existing standard insofar as it applies to the development and exploration areas of the Kensington Mine. The petitioner states that: (1) Coeur Alaska owns and operates the Kensington Mine, which is an underground gold mine located in Juneau County, Alaska. Kensington utilizes both transverse and longitudinal long-hole stoping. In both methods, a single development drift is driven through waste rock adjacent to the ore body. When this drift reaches planned elevation, level accesses are developed to provide entry points to the ore body for exploration and later ore production. Once the level development and exploration are completed at a planned elevation, the ore is extracted either perpendicular (transverse stoping) or parallel to the strike of the ore (longitudinal stoping). (2) Coeur Alaska seeks a modification stating that during the exploration or development of an ore body within the mine, in order to comply with 30 CFR 57.11050(a), Coeur will not be required to continuously reposition a portable emergency refuge chamber (``refuge'') on the lowest decline within the mine or to continuously reposition the refuge to remain within 1,000 feet from the face of a development drift. (3) Coeur Alaska seeks relief because Kensington already has secondary escapeways constructed to the lowest level of the mine, and is constructing and planning to develop additional secondary escapeways to future levels of the mine. Kensington's existing [[Page 55493]] permanent refuge chamber already complies with the 30-minute travel time to a refuge chamber required by Sec. 57.11050(b). Training miners to rely on portable refuges that will change locations on frequent basis will result in a diminution of safety to the miners affected. (4) Installing and relocating refuge chambers to remain within 1,000 feet of each development drift face would subject miners to greater hazards than they are subjected to under current conditions. Like any underground mine, Kensington's underground operations take place in a dynamic environment, and its exploration and development areas are dominated by self-propelled mobile equipment and blasting activities. At desired development rates, Kensington typically advances its faces in development drifts twice per day, with each advance being a 12-foot length. If the portable emergency refuge chambers (`refuge'') were positioned at the safest distance away from the face while still being in compliance with MSHA's newly proposed 1,000 distance requirement, the refuge would have to be relocated twice each day (following each of the two advances) just to remain within that lateral boundary each time the face is advanced, or the Mine will be out of compliance. In order to reduce the number of relocations to less than one per day, the refuge will need to be positioned well within the 1,000 foot range. If Coeur places the refuge at 50 percent of the maximum allowable distance at the beginning of a development cycle (e.g. 500 feet from the face of a development drift), the refuge could remain in one place for a maximum of 21 days at typical development rates. However, during that 21-day cycle, the refuge will be repeatedly subjected to severe blast damage. The concussive forces from face blasts can be devastating at 500 feet. Over the course of 21 days blasting, the refuge would be exposed to 42 blasts. Accordingly, placing the refuge will inside of the 1,000 foot boundary increases the likelihood of mechanical damage to the refuge chamber. Moreover, Kensington only blasts during shift change, when the mine is completely evacuated, save one miner in the designated safe zone. No miners will be anywhere near the refuge chamber during blasting, or in a position to inspect the refuge chamber before the next shift arrives. Thus, any blast damage suffered by the refuge chamber will not be discovered until Coeur's miners arrive and inspect the chamber, exposing them to a greater risk of harm if use of the refuge chamber were necessary upon their arrival. Not only is the structural integrity of the refuge chamber at risk if it is habitually located near the blasting activities, if the refuge chambers are require to ``follow'' the face in a development drift on the lowest level of the mine, the physical locations of these refuge chambers will be continually changing. This means that miners will not have reliable, fixed locations to which they can travel in an emergency. Instead, they will be searching for a moving target. The added difficulty for miners and mine rescue teams to know with certainty the exact location of each mine refuge chamber is more hazardous than a situation where each refuge chamber's location is fixed, will-known and depicted on historical and current versions the mines' map. Because of Kensington's remote location, miners work long rotations and are away from site on Rest & Relaxation (``R&R'') for long periods of time. If refuge chambers must be moved as MSHA appears to require, it is highly likely that a miner could go home on R&R and return to a different refuge chamber location every rotation. The shifting locations will require each miner to continuously remember the current locations for the refuge chambers in his vicinity, as opposed to constant emergency egress routes that are more likely to be remembered during an emergency. This will undoubtedly lead to less familiarity with the location of the facilities and in times of an emergency people need to be ``programmed'' as to mitigate the risk of responding incorrectly. Not only will uncertainty arise from the change in physical location for the refuge chamber, but the maps and signs inside Kensington might have to be updated as well. To the extent there are more signs and maps than refuge chambers, the risk will increase that one or more of the maps or signs will not be updated to reflect a future change of location. This error could have a catastrophic effect for miners going to a location they believe has a chamber based on an obsolete map only to find that it had moved. In addition, in the event of a mine accident, mine rescue teams will need to validate that the location of each refuge chamber in which injured miners might be located, was in fact the current location of each refuge chamber in which injured miners might be located, was in fact the current location for that chamber. This uncertainty will complicate if not delay rescue efforts. Not only does MSHA's requirement that a refuge chamber be tethered to the location of the development drift's face add uncertainty regarding the chambers precise location, the movement of that chamber deeper into the mine increases the risk for miners working in the area in between the lowest level and the development and exploration activities. For example, miners on the 405 and 330 Level Access areas have a shorter travel time to reach the portable refuge installed on the 255 Decline than secondary escapeways at the 480 Level. As the 255 Decline face advances towards the planned 255 Level, if the portable emergency refuge chamber must follow along 1,000 feet behind the decline face, the travel time and distance to that portable refuge will be increasing for the miners on the 405 and 330 Level Access areas. Also, miners are trained first to try and evacuate the mine through the portal if possible, as opposed to going deeper into the mine if there is an emergency. If there is thick smoke in the mine, and the miners don their self-rescue breathing devices, they are trained to seek the nearest refuge. Not only does the movement of the portable emergency refuge chamber result in longer travel times for these miners, they are moving further underground and farther away from the escapeway, and trying to find a moving target in thick smoke. If MSHA's purported rationale for having the portable refuge within 1,000 feet of the face in the development and exploration area is that this area is the most likely source of hazards for miners, the miners on the 405 and 330 Levels who are traveling to the refuge are moving towards the likely source of hazards, not away from it. Hence, the frequent relocating of the portable emergency refuge chamber adds a greater risk of physical damage to the refuge and a greater level of uncertainty and risk for the mines working underground who need to navigate to the refuge. Conversely, keeping refuge chambers in fixed locations, compliant with the standard's travel time requirement, simplifies the miners' egress plans, which increases the probability of proper execution of these egress plans, and does not detract from their safety. (10) The proposed action by Coeur would provide no lesser degree of safety than application of the Sec. 57.11050. Another basis for permitting modification of the standard's application is that Coeur's proposed alternative method provides at least the same measure of safety contemplated by the standard. Repeated movement of the refuge puts miners at risk for several reasons. First, damage to the refuge will put miners at risk as the refuge may not function as intended. Second, the potential to damage the refuge chambers increases [[Page 55494]] significantly while they are being move. Third, the portable refuge chambers cannot simply be parked on the decline because of their size, they would block assess between the development drift face and the escapeways. To allow for the decline to remain clear, a cutout into the rib must be made to park the refuge chamber. Fourth, the refuge chambers are not available for use while being moved (and air and water are being reconnected), meaning that Kensington risks non-compliance with Sec. 5711010 each time it is attempting to comply with MSHA's directive to reposition the refuge to remain within 1,000 feet of the face. Taken to its logical conclusion, to ensure compliance, Kensington would be forced to have two refuges in place, and ``leapfrog'' them during exploration and development. However, the spacing and cost associated with that approach are untenable. Each refuge chamber is roughly 15 feet long, and requires a cutout that is 30 feet deep. The development costs at Kensington are approximately $1500 per foot, meaning that each 30-foot cutout will cost $45,000 to create. Installing air, water and shotcrete will be in addition to the $45,000 figure. Moving the unit will take 2 miners approximately 12 hours, at a labor cost of $1136. In total, the average cost to relocate a portable refuge one time is almost $50,000. Assuming Kensington positioned the refuge at a distance that was 50 percent of the stated requirement, so that relocations were only required every ten days, the resulting 36 relocations per year will cost approximately $1.8 million for the 255 Decline alone. For these reasons, not only does MSHA's current interpretation of 30 CFR 57.11050 add a new requirement to the standard without undergoing the rulemaking process, the interpretation will result in a diminution of safety to the miners at Kensington Mine. There is no peer-reviewed empirical data to support this additional requirement, and the plain language of 30 CFR 57.11050 does not support the requirement either. The petitioner asserts that the proposed alternative method will provide the same or greater measure of safety as would be provided by application of the existing standard. Sheila McConnell, Director, Office of Standards, Regulations, and Variances. [FR Doc. 2016-19802 Filed 8-18-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4520-43-P
![55492 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 161 / Friday, August 19, 2016 / Notices
Order. The training will include the DEPARTMENT OF LABOR other mine if the Secretary of Labor
following elements: determines that:
Mine Safety and Health Administration 1. An alternative method of achieving
(a) The hazards that could exist if the
the result of such standard exists which
water level falls below the pump inlet Petitions for Modification of will at all times guarantee no less than
or the electric connections of the pump Application of Existing Mandatory the same measure of protection afforded
motor. Safety Standards the miners of such mine by such
(b) The safe restart procedures, which standard; or
AGENCY: Mine Safety and Health
will include the miner determining that 2. That the application of such
Administration, Labor.
the water level is above the pump inlet standard to such mine will result in a
and pump motor prior to attempting to ACTION: Notice. diminution of safety to the miners in
establish power and start the pump such mine.
SUMMARY: Section 101(c) of the Federal
motor. In addition, the regulations at 30 CFR
Mine Safety and Health Act of 1977 and
44.10 and 44.11 establish the
(15) The procedures of 30 CFR 48.3 Title 30 of the Code of Federal
requirements and procedures for filing
for approval of proposed revisions to Regulations Part 44 govern the
petitions for modification.
already approved training plans will application, processing, and disposition
apply. of petitions for modification. This notice II. Petitions for Modification
The petitioner further states that: is a summary of petitions for Docket Number: M–2016–006–M.
modification submitted to the Mine Petitioner: Coeur Alaska, Inc., 1700
1. Upon completion of excavation/ Safety and Health Administration Lincoln Street, Suite 4700, Denver,
construction of a shaft, the shaft begins (MSHA) by the parties listed below. Colorado 80203.
to accumulate water and personnel are DATES: All comments on the petitions Mine: Kensington Mine, MSHA I.D.
never required to go below the collar of must be received by MSHA’s Office of No. 50–01544, located in Juneau
the shaft for dewatering purposes. Standards, Regulations, and Variances County, Alaska.
2. In case there is a blind drilled shaft, on or before September 19, 2016. Regulation Affected: 30 CFR 57.11050
the shaft is fully lined with steel casing ADDRESSES: You may submit your (Escapeways and refuges).
and is grouted in place. This steel casing comments, identified by ‘‘docket Modification Request: The petitioner
and grout seal isolates the completed number’’ on the subject line, by any of requests relief from the existing
blind drilled shaft from any coal seams, the following methods: standard insofar as it applies to the
mitigating any possibility for methane to 1. Electronic Mail: zzMSHA- development and exploration areas of
enter the blind drilled shaft. comments@dol.gov. Include the docket the Kensington Mine. The petitioner
number of the petition in the subject states that:
3. In the case of a conventionally (1) Coeur Alaska owns and operates
constructed shaft, ventilation devices line of the message.
the Kensington Mine, which is an
are installed to ensure that potential 2. Facsimile: 202–693–9441.
underground gold mine located in
methane accumulations are mitigated. 3. Regular Mail or Hand Delivery:
Juneau County, Alaska. Kensington
MSHA, Office of Standards,
Dewatering significantly minimizes the utilizes both transverse and longitudinal
Regulations, and Variances, 201 12th
chance of these devices becoming long-hole stoping. In both methods, a
Street South, Suite 4E401, Arlington,
compromised. The electric motor of any single development drift is driven
Virginia 22202–5452, Attention: Sheila
submersible pump is located below the through waste rock adjacent to the ore
McConnell, Director, Office of
pump intake making it impossible for body. When this drift reaches planned
Standards, Regulations, and Variances.
the motor to be above the surface of the elevation, level accesses are developed
Persons delivering documents are
water. to provide entry points to the ore body
required to check in at the receptionist’s
for exploration and later ore production.
4. Currently there are no electric desk in Suite 4E401. Individuals may
Once the level development and
submersible motor/pump assemblies inspect copies of the petitions and
exploration are completed at a planned
manufactured that will effectively pump comments during normal business
elevation, the ore is extracted either
water at the current and future depths hours at the address listed above.
perpendicular (transverse stoping) or
of mine workings that are permissible as MSHA will consider only comments
parallel to the strike of the ore
required by 30 CFR 77.1914(a). postmarked by the U.S. Postal Service or
(longitudinal stoping).
proof of delivery from another delivery (2) Coeur Alaska seeks a modification
5. The alternative method outlined in
service such as UPS or Federal Express stating that during the exploration or
this petition is consistent with prudent on or before the deadline for comments.
engineering design pursuant to 30 CFR development of an ore body within the
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: mine, in order to comply with 30 CFR
77.1900 since it minimizes the hazards
Barbara Barron, Office of Standards, 57.11050(a), Coeur will not be required
to those employed in the initial or
Regulations, and Variances at 202–693– to continuously reposition a portable
subsequent development of the shaft.
9447 (Voice), barron.barbara@dol.gov emergency refuge chamber (‘‘refuge’’) on
The petitioner asserts that the (Email), or 202–693–9441 (Facsimile). the lowest decline within the mine or to
proposed alternative method will at all [These are not toll-free numbers.] continuously reposition the refuge to
times guarantee no less than the same SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: remain within 1,000 feet from the face
measure of protection afforded by the of a development drift.
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with NOTICES
existing standard. I. Background (3) Coeur Alaska seeks relief because
Sheila McConnell,
Section 101(c) of the Federal Mine Kensington already has secondary
Safety and Health Act of 1977 (Mine escapeways constructed to the lowest
Director, Office of Standards, Regulations, level of the mine, and is constructing
Act) allows the mine operator or
and Variances.
representative of miners to file a and planning to develop additional
[FR Doc. 2016–19803 Filed 8–18–16; 8:45 am]
petition to modify the application of any secondary escapeways to future levels of
BILLING CODE 4520–43–P mandatory safety standard to a coal or the mine. Kensington’s existing
VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:08 Aug 18, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00065 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19AUN1.SGM 19AUN1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/81_FR_55653/page/1.svg)
![55494 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 161 / Friday, August 19, 2016 / Notices
significantly while they are being move. LEGAL SERVICES CORPORATION on www.lsc.gov in the ‘‘Our Grant
Third, the portable refuge chambers Programs’’ section. Applications should,
cannot simply be parked on the decline Notice of Instructions for Emergency at minimum, address the following
because of their size, they would block Relief Grants topics.
assess between the development drift AGENCY:Legal Services Corporation 1. Resources, Needs, and Objectives
face and the escapeways. To allow for
ACTION:Notice—Instructions for a. A description of the damage
the decline to remain clear, a cutout into
emergency relief grants. sustained by applicant and/or the surge
the rib must be made to park the refuge
chamber. Fourth, the refuge chambers SUMMARY: Generally, the Legal Services in demand for services as a result of the
are not available for use while being Corporation (LSC) has funds available to emergency.
moved (and air and water are being b. An estimate, in dollars, of lost
help meet the special needs of LSC
reconnected), meaning that Kensington property, including records, and
grantees in areas experiencing
risks non-compliance with § 5711010 equipment.
emergencies recognized through
each time it is attempting to comply c. The amount of emergency funds
government declarations. This Notice
requested.
with MSHA’s directive to reposition the sets forth instructions for current LSC
d. A brief narrative stating the
refuge to remain within 1,000 feet of the grantees with such needs affecting their
purpose of the requested funds.
face. offices or parts of their service area who e. The grantee’s current annual budget
Taken to its logical conclusion, to wish to apply for emergency relief of revenue and expenses including both
ensure compliance, Kensington would funding when such funds are available. LSC funds and non-LSC funds.
be forced to have two refuges in place, This information is also posted to the
and ‘‘leapfrog’’ them during exploration LSC Web site at www.lsc.gov. 2. Operational Procedures
and development. However, the spacing DATES: These instructions are effective a. The anticipated length of time
and cost associated with that approach September 19, 2016. needed to restore operations from
are untenable. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: emergency status to normal and/or the
Disaster Grants Coordinator, Office of anticipated length of time of the
Each refuge chamber is roughly 15
Program Performance, Legal Services expected surge in demand.
feet long, and requires a cutout that is
Corporation, 3333 K St. NW., b. The anticipated term of the
30 feet deep. The development costs at
Washington, DC 20007, (202) 295–1500, emergency grant (i.e., proposed
Kensington are approximately $1500 per
emergencygrants@lsc.gov (preferred beginning and termination dates).
foot, meaning that each 30-foot cutout c. A description of the project,
contact).
will cost $45,000 to create. Installing air, including criteria to be used for
water and shotcrete will be in addition SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
determining successful completion.
to the $45,000 figure. Moving the unit Emergency Relief Grants
will take 2 miners approximately 12 3. Budget—A Detailed Budget of
hours, at a labor cost of $1136. In total, A. Eligibility Expenses for the Emergency Relief Grant
the average cost to relocate a portable Generally, the Legal Services C. Approval Criteria
refuge one time is almost $50,000. Corporation (LSC) has funds available to
Assuming Kensington positioned the help meet the special needs of LSC Given the nature of these emergency
refuge at a distance that was 50 percent grantees in areas experiencing situations, LSC will process requests for
of the stated requirement, so that emergencies recognized through assistance on a priority basis. The
relocations were only required every ten government declarations. When funding primary emphasis will be on restoring
is available, current LSC grantees are or expanding, as quickly as possible, the
days, the resulting 36 relocations per
eligible to apply for such emergency program’s capacity to serve eligible
year will cost approximately $1.8
funds only if they provide services or clients.
million for the 255 Decline alone.
For these reasons, not only does have an office located in an area subject D. Accounting and Reporting
MSHA’s current interpretation of 30 to an emergency declaration or similar
determination by a government entity or 1. Accounting for the Grant
CFR 57.11050 add a new requirement to
equivalent, at any level, including tribal The grant must be separately reported
the standard without undergoing the
governments regardless of federal by natural line item in the grantee’s
rulemaking process, the interpretation
recognition. Such determinations could annual audit(s). This reporting may be
will result in a diminution of safety to
address disasters, public health done either on the face of the financial
the miners at Kensington Mine. There is
emergencies, droughts, or other statements, or in a schedule attached to
no peer-reviewed empirical data to
circumstances warranting emergency- the financial statements. The grant will
support this additional requirement,
response actions and services. This provide additional instructions as
and the plain language of 30 CFR
policy supersedes LSC’s prior policy needed.
57.11050 does not support the
that limited these grants to Federally
requirement either. 2. Case Service Reporting
declared disaster areas. Information
The petitioner asserts that the regarding this grant program is available In times of crisis, the immediate
proposed alternative method will at www.lsc.gov in the ‘‘Our Grant needs of victims supersede the need to
provide the same or greater measure of Programs’’ section. adhere to the grantee’s established
safety as would be provided by priorities. Thus, grantees confronted by
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with NOTICES
application of the existing standard. B. Applications natural disasters or emergencies
Interested grantees should contact the generally dispense with the stated
Sheila McConnell, LSC Office of Program Performance to priorities to respond to the most
Director, Office of Standards, Regulations, discuss the application process, pressing needs of their clients.
and Variances. standards, and selection criteria. Depending on the extent of the disaster
[FR Doc. 2016–19802 Filed 8–18–16; 8:45 am] Information about the application forms and the impact it has on case activities,
BILLING CODE 4520–43–P and method of submission are available the grantee may process a substantial
VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:08 Aug 18, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00067 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\19AUN1.SGM 19AUN1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/81_FR_55653/page/3.svg)
Document Created: 2016-08-19 01:34:57
Document Modified: 2016-08-19 01:34:57
| Category | Regulatory Information | |
| Collection | Federal Register | |
| sudoc Class | AE 2.7: GS 4.107: AE 2.106: | |
| Publisher | Office of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration | |
| Section | Notices | |
| Action | Notice. | |
| Dates | All comments on the petitions must be received by MSHA's Office of Standards, Regulations, and Variances on or before September 19, 2016. | |
| Contact | Barbara Barron, Office of Standards, Regulations, and Variances at 202-693-9447 (Voice), [email protected] (Email), or 202-693-9441 (Facsimile). [These are not toll-free numbers.] | |
| FR Citation | 81 FR 55492 |
2025 Federal Register | Disclaimer | Privacy Policy
USC | CFR | eCFR