81 FR 58422 - Examinations of Working Places in Metal and Nonmetal Mines
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Mine Safety and Health Administration Federal Register Volume 81, Issue 165 (August 25, 2016)
Mine Safety and Health Administration
Federal Register Volume 81, Issue 165 (August 25, 2016)
| Page Range | 58422-58424 | |
| FR Document | 2016-20395 |
[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 165 (Thursday, August 25, 2016)] [Proposed Rules] [Pages 58422-58424] From the Federal Register Online [www.thefederalregister.org] [FR Doc No: 2016-20395] ======================================================================= ----------------------------------------------------------------------- DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Mine Safety and Health Administration 30 CFR Parts 56 and 57 [Docket No. MSHA-2014-0030] RIN 1219-AB87 Examinations of Working Places in Metal and Nonmetal Mines AGENCY: Mine Safety and Health Administration, Labor. ACTION: Proposed rule; extension of comment period; close of record. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY: In response to stakeholder requests, the Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA) is extending the comment period for Agency's proposed rule on Examinations of Working Places in Metal and Nonmetal Mines. The document also clarifies and seeks additional comments on selected proposed provisions. [[Page 58423]] DATES: The comment period for the proposed rule published on June 8, 2016 (81 FR 36818), is extended. Comments must be received or postmarked by midnight Eastern Daylight Savings Time on September 30, 2016. ADDRESSES: Submit comments and informational materials, identified by RIN 1219-AB87 or Docket No. MSHA-2014-0030, by one of the following methods listed below:Federal E-Rulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments. Email: [email protected]. Mail: MSHA, Office of Standards, Regulations, and Variances, 201 12th Street South, Suite 4E401, Arlington, Virginia 22202-5452. Hand Delivery or Courier: 201 12th Street South, Suite 4E401, Arlington, Virginia, between 9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. Sign in at the receptionist's desk on the 4th floor East, Suite 4E401. Fax: 202-693-9441. Instructions: All submissions for the proposed rule must include RIN 1219-AB87 or Docket No. MSHA-2014-0030. MSHA posts all comments without change, including any personal information provided. Access comments electronically on http://www.regulations.gov and on MSHA's Web site at https://www.msha.gov/regulations/rulemaking. Docket: The proposed rule for Examinations of Working Places in Metal and Nonmetal Mines was published on June 8, 2016 (81 FR 36818). The document is available on https://www.regulations.gov and on MSHA's Web site at https://www.msha.gov/regulations/rulemaking/examinations-working-places-metal-and-nonmetal-mines. Review comments in person at the Office of Standards, Regulations, and Variances, 201 12th Street South, Suite 4E401, Arlington, Virginia 22202-5452. Sign in at the receptionist's desk on the 4th floor East, Suite 4E401. Email Notification: To subscribe to receive email notification when MSHA publishes rulemaking documents in the Federal Register, go to https://www.msha.gov. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sheila A. McConnell, Director, Office of Standards, Regulations, and Variances, MSHA, at [email protected] (email), 202-693-9440 (voice); or 202-693- 9441 (facsimile). These are not toll-free numbers. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background On June 8, 2016 (81 FR 36818), the Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA) published a proposed rule on Examinations of Working Places in Metal and Nonmetal (MNM) mines. The purpose of this proposed rule is to ensure that mine operators identify and correct conditions that may adversely affect miners' safety or health. MSHA conducted public hearings on the proposed rule on July 19, 21, 26, and August 4, 2016. In response to stakeholder requests, MSHA is providing additional time for interested parties to comment on the proposed rule. MSHA is extending the deadline for comments from September 6, 2016, to September 30, 2016. I. Request for Comments and Close of Record Under proposed Sec. Sec. 56.18002(a)(1) and 57.18002(a)(1), MSHA proposed that metal and nonmetal mine operators promptly notify miners in any affected areas of any conditions found that may adversely affect safety or health and promptly initiate appropriate action to correct such conditions. MSHA received comments and testimony requesting that the Agency clarify the proposed requirement ``to promptly notify miners.'' Upon consideration of such comments and testimony, MSHA clarifies that ``to promptly notify miners'' means any notification to the miners that alerts them to adverse conditions in their working place so that they can take necessary precautions to avoid an accident or injury before they begin work in that area. This notification could take any form that is effective to notify affected miners of the particular condition: Verbal notification, prominent warning signage, other written notification, etc. MSHA believes that, in most cases, verbal notification or descriptive warning signage would be needed to ensure that all affected miners received actual notification of the specific condition in question. MSHA also clarifies that a ``prompt'' notification would occur before miners are potentially exposed to the condition; e.g., before miners begin work in the affected areas, or as soon as possible after work begins if the condition is discovered while they are working in an area. For example, this notification could occur when miners are given work-shift assignments. MSHA seeks comments on proposed Sec. Sec. 56.18002(a)(1) and 57.18002(a)(1). MSHA also clarifies that the proposed rule would not change existing standards regarding conditions that present imminent danger. Like the existing rule, the proposed Sec. Sec. 56.18002(a)(2) and 57.18002(a)(2) continue to require that conditions that may present an imminent danger which are noted by the person conducting the examination shall be brought to the immediate attention of the operator who shall withdraw all persons from the area affected (except persons referred to in section 104(c) of the Federal Mine Safety and Health Act of 1977) until the danger is abated. As MSHA stated during the public hearings, the proposed rule would not change the existing definition of working place. Existing Sec. Sec. 56.2 and 57.2 define ``working place'' as: ``Any place in or about a mine where work is being performed.'' Regarding the timing of the examination, some commenters expressed concern that the proposed rule would require mine operators to conduct an examination of the entire mine before the start of each shift. It is not MSHA's intent for the mine operator to examine the entire mine before work begins. The proposal would require an examination of ``each working place'' ``before work begins in an area.'' A ``working place'' is not the entire mine unless miners will be working in all areas of the mine. ``Before work begins in an area'' may or may not coincide with the start of any particular shift; it depends on when miners actually will be working in any particular working place. The proposed rule, like the existing rule, would require examinations in only those areas where work will be performed. As MSHA stated in the preamble, a ``working place'' applies to all locations at a mine where miners work in the extraction or milling processes. (81 FR 36821.) MSHA clarifies that consistent with the existing definition of ``working place,'' this includes roads traveled to and from a work area. MSHA further explained that a working place would not include roads not directly involved in the mining process, administrative office buildings, parking lots, lunchrooms, toilet facilities or inactive storage areas. Unless required by other standards, mine operators would only be required to examine isolated, abandoned, or idle areas of mines or mills when miners have to perform work in these areas during the shift. In MSHA's June 8, 2016 Federal Register proposed rule (81 FR 36826), the introductory text of Sec. Sec. 56.18002(b) and 57.18002(b) stated that the person conducting the examination would be required to sign and date the record before the end of the shift for which the examination was made. MSHA has received a number of comments and [[Page 58424]] heard testimony at the public hearings on stakeholder concerns that the proposed requirement to sign the examination record would increase the potential for liability of miners under section 110(c) of the Mine Act for those who conduct workplace examinations. MSHA notes that Mine Act liability as an ``agent'' of an operator under section 110(c) relates to the substantive duties and delegated responsibilities of the person in question. The proposed rule language would not change the qualification requirements for the ``competent person'' (although MSHA asked for comments on this issue). The proposal also would not change the substantive requirements either for the areas to be examined or the adverse conditions for which the examination would be made. While the degree of responsibility a particular person may have at any given mine may vary widely, the single act of printing one's initials or name, as opposed to signing one's name, adds no more and no less to the substantive duties and qualifications of the person who conducts the examination. Nonetheless, some commenters were concerned that the signature requirement would discourage miners from conducting working place examinations and would have a negative impact on the quality of the examination. MSHA seeks comments on an alternative approach of simply requiring that the name of the competent person, rather than the signature, be included in the examination record. MSHA received a number of comments and heard testimony at the public hearings seeking clarification on the recordkeeping requirements for adverse conditions found that are immediately corrected. Some commenters were concerned that recording every condition and every corrective action would be an excessive burden to mine operators, especially for small operators. As MSHA stated, the Agency believes that making and maintaining a record of adverse conditions found and corrective actions taken would help mine operators and miners and their representatives become more aware of potential dangers and more proactive in their approach to correcting these issues before they cause or contribute to an accident, injury, or fatality. (81 FR 36819). MSHA seeks information on how mine operators have used the examination record to identify and correct systemic adverse conditions that may contribute to an accident, injury, or fatality. In addition, MSHA seeks comment on possible limitations that would be placed on the mine operators' ability to use the examination record to identify and correct systemic adverse conditions if a record of an adverse condition that is immediately corrected is not made. MSHA received a number of comments and heard testimony at the public hearings asking if MSHA would require the person conducting the working place examination to wait until the end of the shift to make the record. MSHA clarifies that the proposed rule would allow the competent person conducting the exam to make the record any time before the end of the shift. II. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 MSHA's proposed rule contains changes that would affect the burden in an existing OMB Control Number 1219-0089. MSHA, the Department of Labor, and the Office of Management and Budget are particularly interested in comments related to the recordkeeping requirement that: Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, 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; Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; 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. MSHA solicits comments from the mining community on all aspects of the proposed rule. Commenters are requested to be specific in their comments and to provide sufficient detail in their responses to enable proper Agency review and consideration. All comments must be received by September 30, 2016. Dated: August 17, 2016. Joseph A. Main, Assistant Secretary of Labor for Mine Safety and Health. [FR Doc. 2016-20395 Filed 8-23-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4520-43-P
![58422 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 165 / Thursday, August 25, 2016 / Proposed Rules
and/or go to the Division of Dockets the ‘‘farm’’ definition (i.e., the II. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
Management, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. definitions of ‘‘packing,’’ ‘‘holding,’’ and This draft guidance refers to
1061, Rockville, MD 20852. ‘‘manufacturing/processing’’) and added previously approved collections of
Submit written requests for single more examples of activities in each of information found in FDA regulations.
copies of the draft guidance to the Office these definitions. The farm definition These collections of information are
of Food Safety, Center for Food Safety rulemaking also established a new subject to review by the Office of
and Applied Nutrition (HFS–300), Food definition associated with the ‘‘farm’’ Management and Budget (OMB) under
and Drug Administration, 5001 Campus definition (i.e., the definition of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
Dr., College Park, MD 20740. Send two ‘‘harvesting’’) and included examples of (44 U.S.C. 3501–3520). The collections
self-addressed adhesive labels to assist harvesting activities in the definition. of information in 21 CFR part 1, subpart
that office in processing your request. During the farm definition rulemaking, H have been approved under OMB
See the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION several comments asked us to classify control number 0910–0502. The
section for electronic access to the draft specific on-farm activities as harvesting, collections of information in part 117
guidance. packing, holding, or manufacturing/ have been approved under OMB control
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: processing so that an operation that number 0910–0751. The collections of
Jenny Scott, Center for Food Safety and conducts these activities on a farm can information in 21 CFR part 507 have
Applied Nutrition (HFS–300), Food and determine whether conducting that been approved under OMB control
Drug Administration, 5001 Campus Dr., specific activity is within, or outside, number 0910–0789. The collections of
College Park, MD 20740, 240–402–2166. the ‘‘farm’’ definition. Some comments information in 21 CFR part 112 have
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: asked us to make a table of activities been approved under OMB control
prominently available on our Internet number 0910–0816. The collections of
I. Background information in 21 CFR part 121 have
site for easy access whenever the public
We are announcing the availability of seeks out information regarding been approved under OMB control
a draft guidance for industry entitled regulations to which these activities number 0910–0812.
‘‘Classification of Activities as apply. (See 80 FR 55908 at 55920.) To III. Electronic Access
Harvesting, Packing, Holding, or address these comments, we announced
Manufacturing/Processing for Farms Persons with access to the Internet
our intent to issue a draft guidance with may obtain the draft guidance at either
and Facilities.’’ We are issuing the draft our current thinking on the
guidance consistent with our good http://www.fda.gov/ForIndustry/Color
classification of activities as Additives/GuidanceCompliance
guidance practices regulation (21 CFR ‘‘harvesting,’’ ‘‘packing,’’ ‘‘holding,’’ or
10.115). The draft guidance, when RegulatoryInformation/ucm153033.htm
‘‘manufacturing/processing’’ (80 FR or http://www.regulations.gov. Use the
finalized, will represent the current 55908 at 55921). The draft guidance that
thinking of the FDA on this topic. It FDA Web site listed in the previous
we are making available implements sentence to find the most current
does not establish any rights for any that stated intent.
person and is not binding on FDA or the version of the guidance.
public. You can use an alternate The draft guidance provides examples Dated: August 19, 2016.
approach if it satisfies the requirements of activities classified as ‘‘harvesting,’’ Jeremy Sharp,
of the applicable statutes and ‘‘packing,’’ ‘‘holding,’’ or
Deputy Commissioner for Policy, Planning,
regulations. ‘‘manufacturing/processing,’’ as well as Legislation, and Analysis.
Section 103(c) of the FDA Food Safety activities classified in more than one
[FR Doc. 2016–20301 Filed 8–24–16; 8:45 am]
Modernization Act (FSMA) directed us way. We note that the list of examples
BILLING CODE 4164–01–P
to conduct rulemaking to clarify the on- of activities classified as ‘‘holding’’ in
farm activities that would, in part, the draft guidance does not include
determine when an establishment is ‘‘repacking and blast freezing . . . when
product is not exposed to the DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
required to register with us as a
‘‘facility,’’ or is not required to register environment,’’ despite our statement in Mine Safety and Health Administration
with us because the establishment is a the farm definition rulemaking that such
‘‘farm.’’ To do so, we conducted activities would be considered practical 30 CFR Parts 56 and 57
rulemaking to revise and add farm- necessities for distribution and therefore
‘‘holding.’’ See 80 FR 55908 at 55934 [Docket No. MSHA–2014–0030]
related definitions to our existing
regulation for Registration of Food (Comment/Response 44). We made RIN 1219–AB87
Facilities in the same rulemaking similar statements in a related
documents that we issued to establish rulemaking to establish our regulation Examinations of Working Places in
our regulation entitled ‘‘Current Good entitled ‘‘Current Good Manufacturing Metal and Nonmetal Mines
Manufacturing Practice, Hazard Practice, Hazard Analysis, and Risk- AGENCY: Mine Safety and Health
Analysis, and Risk-Based Preventive Based Preventive Controls for Food for Administration, Labor.
Controls for Human Food’’ in part 117 Animals’’ in part 507 (21 CFR part 507)
ACTION: Proposed rule; extension of
(21 CFR part 117). (See the final rule at (80 FR 56170, September 17, 2015). See
comment period; close of record.
80 FR 55908, September 17, 2015). For 80 FR 56170 at 56192 (Comment/
the purposes of the draft guidance, we Response 39). Our prior statements were SUMMARY: In response to stakeholder
call that rulemaking ‘‘the farm incorrect and we hereby withdraw requests, the Mine Safety and Health
Lhorne on DSK30JT082PROD with PROPOSALS
definition rulemaking.’’ The farm them. Neither ‘‘repacking’’ nor ‘‘blast Administration (MSHA) is extending
definition rulemaking revised the freezing’’ should be considered a the comment period for Agency’s
‘‘farm’’ definition to provide for two ‘‘holding’’ activity. We have thought proposed rule on Examinations of
types of farms: (1) Primary production more about what should be considered Working Places in Metal and Nonmetal
farms and (2) secondary activities farms. a ‘‘practical necessity’’ and are Mines. The document also clarifies and
The farm definition rulemaking also explaining our thinking more in the seeks additional comments on selected
revised three definitions associated with draft guidance. proposed provisions.
VerDate Sep<11>2014 13:57 Aug 24, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\25AUP1.SGM 25AUP1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/81_FR_58587/page/1.svg)
![58424 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 165 / Thursday, August 25, 2016 / Proposed Rules
heard testimony at the public hearings mine operators’ ability to use the DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
on stakeholder concerns that the examination record to identify and
proposed requirement to sign the correct systemic adverse conditions if a Mine Safety and Health Administration
examination record would increase the record of an adverse condition that is
potential for liability of miners under immediately corrected is not made. 30 CFR Parts 57, 70, 72, and 75
section 110(c) of the Mine Act for those [Docket No. MSHA–2014–0031]
MSHA received a number of
who conduct workplace examinations.
MSHA notes that Mine Act liability as comments and heard testimony at the RIN 1219–AB86
an ‘‘agent’’ of an operator under section public hearings asking if MSHA would
110(c) relates to the substantive duties require the person conducting the Exposure of Underground Miners to
and delegated responsibilities of the working place examination to wait until Diesel Exhaust
person in question. The proposed rule the end of the shift to make the record. AGENCY: Mine Safety and Health
language would not change the MSHA clarifies that the proposed rule Administration, Labor.
qualification requirements for the would allow the competent person
ACTION: Request for information;
‘‘competent person’’ (although MSHA conducting the exam to make the record
extension of comment period.
asked for comments on this issue). The any time before the end of the shift.
proposal also would not change the SUMMARY: In response to requests from
substantive requirements either for the II. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
the public, the Mine Safety and Health
areas to be examined or the adverse MSHA’s proposed rule contains Administration (MSHA) is extending
conditions for which the examination changes that would affect the burden in the comment period on the Agency’s
would be made. While the degree of an existing OMB Control Number 1219– request for information on Exposure of
responsibility a particular person may Underground Miners to Diesel Exhaust.
0089. MSHA, the Department of Labor,
have at any given mine may vary This extension gives stakeholders
and the Office of Management and
widely, the single act of printing one’s additional time to evaluate the
initials or name, as opposed to signing Budget are particularly interested in
comments related to the recordkeeping comments and testimony received thus
one’s name, adds no more and no less far and submit information to the
to the substantive duties and requirement that:
Agency.
qualifications of the person who • Evaluate whether the proposed
conducts the examination. DATES: The comment period for the
collection of information is necessary
Nonetheless, some commenters were request for information published on
for the proper performance of the
concerned that the signature June 8, 2016 (81 FR 36826), is extended.
functions of the agency, including
requirement would discourage miners Comments must be received by
whether the information will have midnight Eastern Standard Time on
from conducting working place practical utility;
examinations and would have a November 30, 2016.
negative impact on the quality of the • Evaluate the accuracy of the ADDRESSES: Submit comments and
examination. MSHA seeks comments on agency’s estimate of the burden of the informational materials for the
an alternative approach of simply proposed collection of information, rulemaking record, identified by RIN
requiring that the name of the including the validity of the 1219–AB86 or Docket No. MSHA–2014–
competent person, rather than the methodology and assumptions used; 0031, by one of the following methods:
signature, be included in the • Enhance the quality, utility, and • Federal E-Rulemaking Portal:
examination record. clarity of the information to be http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the
MSHA received a number of collected; and on-line instructions for submitting
comments and heard testimony at the comments.
public hearings seeking clarification on • Minimize the burden of the • Email: zzMSHA-comments@
the recordkeeping requirements for collection of information on those who dol.gov.
adverse conditions found that are are to respond, including through the • Mail: MSHA, Office of Standards,
immediately corrected. Some use of appropriate automated, Regulations, and Variances, 201 12th
commenters were concerned that electronic, mechanical, or other Street South, Suite 4E401, Arlington,
recording every condition and every technological collection techniques or Virginia 22202–5452.
corrective action would be an excessive other forms of information technology, • Hand Delivery or Courier: 201 12th
burden to mine operators, especially for e.g., permitting electronic submission of Street South, Suite 4E401, Arlington,
small operators. As MSHA stated, the responses. Virginia, between 9:00 a.m. and 5:00
Agency believes that making and p.m. Monday through Friday, except
MSHA solicits comments from the
maintaining a record of adverse Federal holidays. Sign in at the
mining community on all aspects of the
conditions found and corrective actions receptionist’s desk on the 4th Floor East,
taken would help mine operators and proposed rule. Commenters are Suite 4E401.
miners and their representatives become requested to be specific in their • Fax: 202–693–9441.
more aware of potential dangers and comments and to provide sufficient Instructions: All submissions must
more proactive in their approach to detail in their responses to enable include ‘‘RIN 1219–AB86’’ or ‘‘Docket
correcting these issues before they cause proper Agency review and No. MSHA–2014–0031.’’ Do not include
or contribute to an accident, injury, or consideration. All comments must be personal information that you do not
fatality. (81 FR 36819). MSHA seeks received by September 30, 2016. want publicly disclosed; MSHA will
Lhorne on DSK30JT082PROD with PROPOSALS
information on how mine operators Dated: August 17, 2016. post all comments without change to
have used the examination record to Joseph A. Main,
http://www.regulations.gov and http://
identify and correct systemic adverse arlweb.msha.gov/currentcomments.asp,
conditions that may contribute to an Assistant Secretary of Labor for Mine Safety including any personal information
and Health.
accident, injury, or fatality. In addition, provided.
MSHA seeks comment on possible [FR Doc. 2016–20395 Filed 8–23–16; 8:45 am] Docket: For access to the docket to
limitations that would be placed on the BILLING CODE 4520–43–P read comments received, go to http://
VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:42 Aug 24, 2016 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\25AUP1.SGM 25AUP1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/81_FR_58587/page/3.svg)
Document Created: 2016-08-25 00:34:26
Document Modified: 2016-08-25 00:34:26
| 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 | Proposed Rules | |
| Action | Proposed rule; extension of comment period; close of record. | |
| Dates | The comment period for the proposed rule published on June 8, 2016 (81 FR 36818), is extended. Comments must be received or postmarked by midnight Eastern Daylight Savings Time on September 30, 2016. | |
| Contact | Sheila A. McConnell, Director, Office of Standards, Regulations, and Variances, MSHA, at [email protected] (email), 202-693-9440 (voice); or 202-693- 9441 (facsimile). These are not toll-free numbers. | |
| FR Citation | 81 FR 58422 | |
| RIN Number | 1219-AB87 | |
| CFR Citation | 30
CFR
56 30 CFR 57 |
2025 Federal Register | Disclaimer | Privacy Policy
USC | CFR | eCFR