Emergency Mine Evacuation
[12/08/2006]
Volume 71, Number 236, Page 71429-71455
[[Page 71429]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Part V
Department of Labor
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Mine Safety and Health Administration
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
30 CFR Parts 3, 48, 50, and 75
Emergency Mine Evacuation; Final Rule
[[Page 71430]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Mine Safety and Health Administration
30 CFR Parts 3, 48, 50, 75
RIN 1219-AB46
Emergency Mine Evacuation
AGENCY: Mine Safety and Health Administration, Labor.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA) is issuing
this final rule to revise the Agency's Emergency Temporary Standard
(ETS), which addresses standards in the Code of Federal Regulations
(CFR), title 30, parts 48, 50, and 75. The final rule includes
requirements for increased availability and storage of self-contained
self-rescue devices (SCSRs); improved emergency evacuation drills and
self-contained self-rescue device training; and the installation and
maintenance of lifelines in underground coal mines. In addition, the
final rule requires immediate accident notification applicable to all
mines. The requirements provide an improved, integrated approach to
emergency evacuation training and emergency preparedness. This final
rule does not reduce protections afforded miners under existing
standards.
DATES: Effective Date: This rule is effective December 8, 2006.
Compliance Dates:
Sec. Sec. 48.3 and 75.1502--The operator shall submit a revised
training plan and a revised program of instruction to the appropriate
District Manager for approval no later than February 6, 2007, and
conduct training within 30 days of plan approval.
Sec. 75.1504--The operator shall complete the initial quarterly
emergency mine evacuation training and drill no later than March 31,
2007.
Sec. 75.1504(c)(3)--The operator shall place purchase orders for
realistic SCSR training units or devices within 30 days of notification
by MSHA that the units are available, and conduct this component of
expectations training within 60 days of receipt of the units. MSHA will
notify mine operators of the availability of realistic SCSR training
units by publishing a notice in the Federal Register.
Sec. Sec. 75.1714-6 and 75.1714-7--The operator shall provide
emergency tethers and handheld, multi-gas detectors no later than
February 6, 2007.
Sec. 75.1714-8--The operator shall complete the self-contained
self-rescue (SCSR) device inventory no later than March 31, 2007.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Patricia W. Silvey, Director, Office
of Standards, Regulations, and Variances, MSHA, 1100 Wilson Boulevard,
Room 2350, Arlington, Virginia 22209-3939. Ms. Silvey can be reached at
silvey.patricia@dol.gov (internet e-mail), 202-693-9440 (voice), or
202-693-9441 (facsimile).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Introduction
The outline of this final rule is as follows:
I. Introduction
A. Background of the Final Rule
B. General Discussion of the Final Rule
II. Section-By-Section Analysis
A. Part 48--Training and Retraining of Miners
B. Part 50--Notification, Investigation, Reports and Records of
Accidents, Injuries, Illnesses, Employment, and Coal Production in
Mines
C. Part 75--Mandatory Safety Standards--Underground Coal Mines
III. Derivation and Distribution Tables
IV. Executive Order 12866
A. Population-at-Risk
B. Compliance Costs
C. Benefits
V. Feasibility
VI. Regulatory Flexibility Act and Small Business Regulatory
Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA)
A. Definition of a Small Mine
B. Factual Basis for Certification
VII. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
A. Summary
B. Procedural Details
VIII. Other Regulatory Considerations
A. The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
B. The Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act of
1999: Assessment of Federal Regulations and Policies on Families
C. Executive Order 12630: Government Actions and Interference
With Constitutionally Protected Property Rights
D. Executive Order 12988: Civil Justice Reform
E. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children from
Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks
F. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
G. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination with
Indian Tribal Governments
H. Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
I. Executive Order 13272: Proper Consideration of Small Entities
in Agency Rulemaking
IX. Final Rule Text
A. Background of the Final Rule
In developing the final rule, MSHA considered accident and injury
data, research studies and data, implementation and enforcement
experience, and the written comments and hearing testimony on the
Emergency Temporary Standard (ETS), as well as provisions of the Mine
Improvement and New Emergency Response Act of 2006 (Pub. L. 109-236)
(MINER Act).
1. Emergency Temporary Standard
MSHA issued an ETS on March 9, 2006 (71 FR 12252) in accordance
with Section 101(b) of the Federal Mine Safety and Health Act of 1977
(Mine Act). Mine emergencies in underground coal mines, particularly
the accidents at the Sago and Aracoma Alma mines in January 2006, led
MSHA to conclude that a more integrated approach to mine emergency
response and evacuation was necessary. In issuing the ETS, MSHA acted
to protect miners from a grave danger associated with mine emergencies
and evacuations. In accordance with the Mine Act, the ETS served as the
proposed rule, and was effective immediately upon publication. This
final rule addresses standards and issues in the ETS.
The ETS included requirements for underground coal mine operators
to: provide additional self-contained self-rescue devices (SCSRs) for
persons working underground; conduct improved SCSR training and more
realistic evacuation drills; and install and maintain lifelines in both
escapeways. The ETS also required all mine operators to immediately
notify MSHA of accidents within 15 minutes.
MSHA solicited public comments on the ETS and held four public
hearings. These hearings took place on: April 24, 2006, in Lakewood,
Colorado; April 26, 2006, in Lexington, Kentucky; April 28, 2006, in
Arlington, Virginia; and May 9, 2006, in Charleston, West Virginia (71
FR 15028). The public comment period, scheduled to close on May 30,
2006, was extended to June 29, 2006 (71 FR 29785), in response to a
request from the public and to allow the public additional time to
respond to the 17 questions and other issues raised in the ETS and in
MSHA's opening statement at the public hearings. Comments and public
hearing transcripts are available on MSHA's website at http://www.msha.gov.
MSHA considered all relevant comments when developing this final rule.
2. The Mine Improvement and New Emergency Response Act of 2006
Responding to the Sago and Aracoma Alma mine tragedies, Congress
enacted the MINER Act, which was signed by the President on June 15,
2006. The MINER Act amended the Mine Act and, among other things,
included provisions
[[Page 71431]]
that addressed some of the same requirements as the ETS. The MINER Act
included requirements for SCSR storage, training, lifelines, and
accident notification.
MSHA issued Program Policy Letter (PPL) No. P06-V-8 on July 21,
2006, PPL No. P06-V-9 on August 4, 2006, and PPL No. P06-V-10 on
October 24, 2006, providing guidance to the mining industry for
implementing Emergency Response Plans in accordance with Section 2 of
the MINER Act. In the final rule, MSHA reconciles the ETS with
applicable provisions of the MINER Act.
3. Timeline for Implementation of the Final Rule
MSHA provides mine operators additional time to comply with various
provisions of this final rule. The mine operator may have to revise
training, emergency evacuation, or firefighting plans; train miners in
new and revised provisions; determine the locations for SCSR storage;
purchase and install equipment, as applicable; or compile SCSR
inventories. Because of ETS and MINER Act requirements, operators will
already be in compliance with many of the provisions in this final.
Underground coal mine operators must submit a revised training plan
for part 48 and a revised program of instruction for Sec. 75.1502 to
the relevant MSHA District Manager for approval no later than February
6, 2007. The operator must train in accordance with the revised program
under 30 CFR 75.1502 within 30 days of plan approval. Any new or
revised training plan and program must incorporate new and revised
requirements, even if the equipment necessary to conduct the training
is not yet available. The final rule allows operators until February 6,
2007, to obtain tethers and hand-held, multi-gas detectors.
The final rule also allows operators until March 31, 2007 (the
first quarter of 2007) to complete the mine emergency evacuation
training and drill required by Sec. 75.1504 and the SCSR inventory
required by Sec. 75.1714-8. The final rule does not include a specific
compliance date for one component of ``expectations'' training required
by Sec. 75.1504(c) because realistic SCSR training units, or devices
that provide the sensation of SCSR airflow resistance and heat, are not
yet available for purchase. The final rule requires the mine operator
to have a purchase order for these realistic SCSR training units within
30 days of notification by MSHA that the units are available. The mine
operator must complete training on breathing through a realistic SCSR
training unit or equivalent device within 60 days of receipt of the
training units.
MSHA will accept, as good faith evidence of compliance with the
final rule, purchase orders for: SCSR training units and mouthpieces
(Sec. 75.1504); additional SCSRs (Sec. 75.1714-4); tethers (Sec.
75.1714-6); and handheld multi-gas detectors (Sec. 75.1714-7). The
Agency will also accept contracts with a training facility to provide
SCSR ``expectations'' training [Sec. 75.1504(c)] as good faith
evidence of compliance with the final rule.
B. General Discussion of the Final Rule
The final rule helps assure that miners, mine operators, and MSHA
will be able to respond quickly and effectively in the event of an
emergency. It includes requirements for mine operators to provide
increased capability for mine emergency response and evacuation and
covers SCSR availability and storage; training and drills; lifelines,
tethers, and multi-gas detectors; and accident notification.
1. Self-Contained Self-Rescue Devices (SCSRs)
Explosions and mine fires are an ever-present threat in an
underground coal mine and can present a grave potential hazard to
underground coal miners due to toxic atmospheres and limited
visibility. Contaminated air can contain volatile hydrocarbons,
chlorine, hydrogen cyanide, isocyanates, oxides of nitrogen, and oxides
of sulfur. These contaminants are more complex and potentially more
harmful than carbon monoxide and carbon dioxide, the ordinary
combustion products of coal fires.
SCSRs are closed-circuit breathing devices containing or producing
an independent supply of oxygen, enabling miners to breathe in the
presence of hazardous or life-threatening contaminants in the mine
atmosphere. SCSRs allow miners to escape from mine fires, explosions,
and other incidents where an irrespirable mine atmosphere is present.
Since 1980, MSHA has required that each person working in an
underground coal mine have immediate access to an SCSR.
The final rule adds requirements to assure that SCSRs are
maintained in good condition and are accessible to all underground
miners. The final rule also includes requirements to assure that miners
know when and how to use SCSRs effectively.
2. Effective Mine Emergency Training and Response
The best technology, equipment, and emergency supplies are of
little use if they are not used effectively or at all. Emergencies can
cause disorientation and panic. The appropriate response in a mine
emergency can be vital to survival. Training is critical to instilling
discipline, confidence, and skill necessary to successfully escape and
survive an emergency. The final rule requires more comprehensive
training and realistic mine emergency evacuation training and drills to
help assure that underground coal miners can respond quickly and
appropriately to life threatening mine emergencies.
3. Continuous Directional Lifelines and Tethers
MSHA intends that miners, not required to respond to a mine
emergency, evacuate the mine as quickly as possible. In this final
rule, MSHA reiterates that, in the event of a mine emergency, the first
line of defense is to evacuate the mine. To assist miners in evacuating
the mine under conditions of panic and poor visibility, the final rule
requires mine operators to provide both continuous directional
lifelines and tethers. Continuous, directional lifelines are required
to be installed and maintained in both the primary and alternate
escapeways to guide miners to a mine exit. Tethers are required to be
stored at inby storage locations and on mantrips so that members of a
mine crew can link together while evacuating the mine.
4. Notifying MSHA of Accidents
In emergencies, where delay in responding can mean the difference
between life and death, immediate notification leads to the
mobilization of an effective mine emergency response. Immediate
notification activates MSHA emergency response efforts, which can be
critical in saving lives, stabilizing the situation, and preserving the
accident scene. Immediate notification also promotes Agency assistance
of the mine's first responder efforts. In other situations, it allows
for a range of appropriate Agency responses depending on the
circumstances. It alerts MSHA to trends or warning signals that can
trigger a special inspection, an investigation, or targeted
enforcement. This communication also encourages operators and miners to
work with MSHA to develop procedures that prevent incidents from
resulting in more hazardous situations, ultimately leading to
disasters.
II. Section-By-Section Analysis
This final rule adds new requirements in 30 CFR parts 48, 50, and
75. In addition, this final rule makes non-substantive conforming
amendments to
[[Page 71432]]
30 CFR part 3 to reflect changed numbering of standards and to display
additional OMB control numbers under the Paperwork Reduction Act of
1995.
A. Part 48--Training and Retraining of Miners
The final rule makes several changes to the training standards in
30 CFR part 48. It modifies SCSR donning procedures by removing the
option allowing underground coal miners to simulate the insertion of
the mouthpiece while explaining this task.
Commenters were concerned that ETS training requirements applied
only to underground coal mines. They stated that underground metal and
nonmetal mines face the same evacuation needs as coal mines when a
fire, explosion, or gas or water inundation occurs underground.
Commenters expressed concern that MSHA was making a substantive change
to the training courses in Sec. Sec. 48.5(b)(5) and 48.6(b)(5) by
referencing 30 CFR 57.11053 (escape and evacuation plans applicable to
metal and nonmetal mines). Another commenter expressed concern that the
ETS was ambiguous with respect to some provisions in 30 CFR part 48.
This commenter asked MSHA to clarify that the changes to part 48 apply
only to underground coal mines.
The training provisions in the ETS applied only to underground coal
mines, and not to metal and nonmetal mines. Similarly, the training
provisions in this final rule apply only to underground coal mines, and
not to metal and nonmetal mines. Although the final rule retains the
reference to 30 CFR 57.11053, it makes no change to the training
requirement for metal and nonmetal evacuation procedures. Changes to
metal and nonmetal emergency evacuation procedures in 30 CFR part 57
are beyond the scope of this final rule.
Some commenters were concerned that, by adding new or expanded
requirements, new miner and annual refresher training would become more
overloaded. These commenters recommended that MSHA remove mine
emergency training requirements from part 48 and consolidate them in
part 75. These commenters stated that consolidating mine emergency
evacuation training requirements in part 75 would emphasize the
importance of this training.
In response to commenters' concerns, the final rule transfers to
part 75, part 48 annual refresher training requirements on self-rescue
devices and on mine maps, escapeways, emergency evacuation, and
firefighting, and integrates them with mine emergency evacuation
training and drill requirements. By providing underground coal miners
with an integrated, more realistic training experience quarterly, this
final rule will increase training effectiveness. Because this training
now will be conducted under part 75, the time that was previously
allotted for it, in the 8 hours of annual refresher training required
under part 48, can be used for other health and safety subjects.
Under the final rule, independent contractors who do not receive
this training under part 75 will continue to receive it under part 48.
For these workers, this training will continue to count toward part 48
training requirements.
1. Section 48.3 Training Plans
This final rule modifies Sec. 48.3(p) to require each operator of
an underground coal mine, who is required to submit a revised program
of instruction for 30 CFR 75.1502, to also submit a revised training
plan under part 48. Consistent with MSHA's past practice, to minimize
administrative burdens, the Agency will provide coal mine operators
with a training plan addendum to address the change made in SCSR
donning procedures requiring insertion of the mouthpiece. Underground
coal mine operators can attach the addendum to their approved training
plan in lieu of resubmitting the entire part 48 training plan for
approval.
2. Sections 48.5(b)(2), 48.6(b)(12), 48.8(b)(8), and 48.11(a)(4) Self-
Rescue and Respiratory Devices
The final rule retains the ETS requirements for self-rescue and
respiratory device training, including instruction and demonstration in
the use, care, and maintenance of self-rescue and respiratory devices
used at the mine. The ETS standards required hands-on training in SCSR
donning procedures, including a requirement that the miner insert the
mouthpiece or simulate this task while explaining proper insertion, and
a requirement for hands-on training in transferring from a ``self-
rescue device to an SCSR.'' The final rule revises the existing
standard and removes the option allowing miners to simulate inserting
the mouthpiece while explaining proper insertion. The final rule also
clarifies MSHA's intent that transferring from a ``self-rescue device
to an SCSR'' applies to all applicable self-rescue devices at the mine.
Under the final rule, after receiving new or experienced miner
training, underground coal miners will receive SCSR donning and
transferring training under part 75, as part of the emergency mine
evacuation training and drills, rather than under part 48 annual
refresher training. Independent contractors who do not participate in
mine emergency evacuation drills conducted under part 75 must continue
to receive SCSR donning and transferring training under Sec. 48.8,
annual refresher training, and Sec. 48.11, hazard training.
The existing standards emphasize that proficiency in donning the
SCSR is essential for a miner to successfully escape the mine during a
mine emergency. The MINER Act further underscores this by requiring
SCSR ``training for each miner in proper procedures for donning self-
rescuers, switching from one unit to another, and ensuring a proper
fit.'' MSHA experience and data show that a simulation of inserting the
SCSR mouthpiece does not adequately provide the miner with the
necessary skills to obtain a proper fit of the mouthpiece. Benefits
supporting actual insertion of the mouthpiece include the miner's
experience of a proper fit of the mouthpiece and the sensation of
resistance breathing. This aspect of SCSR training is more effective
when taught and learned in a safe environment, rather than in an
emergency evacuation situation.
Some commenters pointed out that insertion of the mouthpiece is a
motor skill that requires practice to develop proficiency, and that
simulation does not really provide this type of training. Several
commenters supported training that included actual insertion of the
mouthpiece using a training mouthpiece. One suggested that an
economical disposable mouthpiece be developed for use in
``expectations'' training. Referencing his company's participation in
Bureau of Mines' research studies in the early 1980's, one commenter
stated that miners at his mine were each provided with their own
mouthpiece and corrugated hose, which would simulate breathing
resistance and function as a personal training unit. One SCSR
manufacturer makes a mouthpiece that not only simulates the breathing
resistance of their SCSR, but is easily removable from the SCSR
training unit. As pointed out by one commenter, these portable
mouthpieces could be purchased for each employee, which would alleviate
any hygienic concerns.
The mining public has expressed concern over sharing a training
mouthpiece even after it is cleaned and disinfected. Some miners have
resisted using these devices, stating that the sanitizing methods may
not be effective.
[[Page 71433]]
In ``Cleaning, Disinfecting, and Sterilizing Self-Contained Self-
Rescuer Mouthpiece Assemblies Used in Hands-On Training,'' \1\ the
Bureau of Mines describes some procedures for disinfecting mouthpieces.
MSHA understands that insertion of the mouthpiece may cause some
anxiety in miners; however, with proper cleaning and disinfecting, or
personal mouthpieces, miners' anxiety should be minimized. Cleaning and
disinfecting shared mouthpieces and providing disposable or personal
mouthpieces are acceptable for training.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ NIOSH, Information Circular IC 9236, 1989.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
One commenter pointed out that--
Information on the correct procedures [for transferring SCSR
units] is not provided by the manufacturer, especially from one
manufacturer's unit to another. Also, no instructions are available
to transfer from a chemical generating oxygen unit to a compressed
oxygen type unit or vice-versa.
MSHA has developed training materials to assist mine operators and
certified instructors in providing training on transferring between all
applicable SCSRs. MSHA will make training materials available to mine
operators and post them on the Agency's Web site.
3. Section 48.8(b)(4) Roof or Ground Control, Ventilation, Emergency
Evacuation and Firefighting Plans
The final rule makes a conforming amendment to Sec. 48.8(b)(4) to
clarify that underground coal miners who receive quarterly training on
emergency evacuation and firefighting plans in effect at the mine, as
part of the emergency mine evacuation training and drills under Sec.
75.1504, are not required to receive this training as part of their
annual refresher training.
4. Sections 48.5(e) and 48.6(f) Participation in Evacuation Drills
This final rule removes Sec. Sec. 48.5(e) and 48.6(f). These
paragraphs in the ETS had been added to require new or newly employed
experienced coal miners to participate in the next escapeway or
evacuation drill. The final rule consolidates and expands the escapeway
and evacuation drill requirements for underground coal mines under
Sec. 75.1504 and transfers the requirement for newly hired miners to
participate in the next evacuation drill to Sec. 75.1504(a)(1). The
initial drill requirements in Sec. Sec. 48.5(e) and 48.6(f) are no
longer needed.
5. Section 48.11(a)(4) Hazard Training
This final rule retains the existing requirement for hands-on
training in donning an SCSR and transferring from one self-rescue
device to an SCSR. The final rule revises the ETS requirement to
clarify MSHA's intent that hands-on training in transferring is between
all applicable self-rescue devices at the mine. This final rule also
revises the SCSR donning protocol to require insertion of the
mouthpiece. Section II.A.2. of this preamble discusses this change.
Some commenters stated that the requirements for hands-on training
in donning and transferring all types of SCSRs used at the mine is
unnecessary for non-mining personnel. They suggest that non-mining
personnel, such as visitors and vendors, can receive adequate training
via demonstration or video review of the use of an SCSR. Some suggested
limited training on a designated unit. Others stated that--
* * * with regard to hazard training, we recommend clearly providing
the operators the flexibility to accept form 5023 [sic]
documentation of applicable, up-to-date SCSR training in lieu of
hands-on training for non-mine employees * * *.
Commenters stated that training non-mining personnel on donning
multiple types of SCSRs would be counterproductive and that training on
transferring between all self-rescue devices at the mine would be
overwhelming and provide little benefit, especially for visitors.
Commenters pointed out that these persons are accompanied at all times
by an experienced miner who could assist them in the unlikely event of
a mine emergency requiring the use of an SCSR.
MSHA's experience and data suggest that all persons underground
must be provided practical, hands-on experience in donning and
transferring an SCSR. The final rule requires hands-on SCSR donning and
transferring training for visitors, short-term workers, or independent
contractors not regularly exposed to mine hazards under Sec. 48.11,
hazard training, rather than under Sec. 75.1504. If the mine uses only
one type of SCSR, these persons must be trained to don and transfer
only that one type. If visitors, short-term workers, or independent
contractors are going into the mine past an SCSR storage location that
contains a different type SCSR than the one carried, these persons must
be trained to don and transfer between both types of SCSRs before going
underground. Training in transferring from one SCSR to another SCSR
will provide them with skill needed to transfer to and don another
SCSR. Even though accompanied by an experienced miner, at a minimum,
visitors must be prepared to independently, quickly, and correctly don
and transfer an SCSR. MSHA agrees that SCSR training for visitors,
short-term workers, or independent contractors unfamiliar with mining
could be confusing and that they may not always retain all the steps
required to don and transfer. If these persons are involved in a mine
emergency, direct assistance or instruction may be impossible. The
better prepared these persons, however, the better their chance for
donning the SCSR correctly during the first few critical minutes of a
mine emergency.
B. Part 50--Notification, Investigation, Reports and Records of
Accidents, Injuries, Illnesses, Employment, and Coal Production in
Mines
Notifying MSHA of accidents must be a priority of the mine
operator. Any unnecessary delay can result in loss of life or other
harmful consequences. The final rule retains the requirement in the ETS
that mine operators notify MSHA of all accidents immediately and within
15 minutes. The final rule also revises the definition for two types of
reportable accidents, ``fire'' and ``entrapment.''
On January 2, 2006, the operator of the Sago Mine delayed notifying
MSHA of the explosion for more than 2 hours. MSHA issued the ETS with
the 15-minute immediate notification requirement, effective March 9,
2006. Subsequently, when the explosion at the Darby Mine occurred on
May 20, 2006, the operator alerted MSHA within 5 minutes of being aware
of the explosion. This allowed MSHA to immediately initiate a rescue
response.
1. Section 50.2(h) Definition of Accident
The final rule amends the definition for two types of reportable
accidents.
a. Section 50.2(h)(3): Accident Definition for Entrapment. Under
the ETS and the previous standard, ``accident'' included ``[a]n
entrapment of an individual for more than thirty minutes.'' Section
5(a) of the MINER Act amends Section 103(j) of the Mine Act pertaining
to the reporting of accidents to include an ``entrapment of an
individual at the mine which has a reasonable potential to cause
death.'' Thus, to conform with the MINER Act, the final rule amends the
definition of ``accident'' under Sec. 50.2(h)(3) to include such
entrapments.
In using the ``reasonable potential to cause death'' basis for
injuries and entrapments, the MINER Act and the final rule retain an
element of judgment. This ``reasonable potential'' language also
appeared under the ETS and the prior standard in relation to injuries.
According to the Federal Mine Safety and Health Review Commission
(Commission), the operator's decision as
[[Page 71434]]
to what constitutes a ``reasonable potential to cause death'' ``cannot
be made upon the basis of clinical or hypertechnical opinions as to a
miner's chance of survival.'' The judgment is based on what a
reasonable person would discern under the circumstances, particularly
when ``[t]he decision to call MSHA must be made in a matter of minutes
after a serious accident.'' [See Cougar Coal, 25 FMSHRC 513 at 521
(September 5, 2003)]. Based on MSHA experience and common medical
knowledge, some types of ``injuries which have a reasonable potential
to cause death'' include concussions, cases requiring cardio-pulmonary
resuscitation (CPR), limb amputations, major upper body blunt force
trauma, and cases of intermittent or extended unconsciousness. These
injuries can result from various indicative events, including an
irrespirable atmosphere or ignitable gas, compromised ventilation
controls, and roof instability.
b. Section 50.2(h)(6): Accident Definition for Mine Fires. Mine
fires have been an ongoing Agency concern. Underground fires can lead
to catastrophic consequences under certain conditions. The prior
standard required operators to report fires not extinguished within 30
minutes of discovery. Almost all fires occurring in underground mines
are extinguished within 30 minutes of discovery. Many of those fires,
however, have the potential to cause injury or death, particularly if
the underlying causes are not addressed. Knowing the locations of these
fires can help miners, mine operators, and MSHA identify problem areas
requiring corrective action.
In the ETS, MSHA solicited comment on Sec. 50.2(h)(6). MSHA was
concerned that some fires extinguished within 30 minutes, such as fires
occurring in the same place, can signal a serious or potentially
serious hazard. MSHA specifically asked whether the definition should
be revised to cover all unplanned underground mine fires, or fires of
particular types, duration, or locations.
Some commenters supported retaining the existing definition. They
said that the 30-minute cut-off is adequate and clear, and there is no
compelling reason to change it. They said that fires extinguished in a
shorter period of time include many fires that do not present any
significant hazard. They said that reporting all fires would be
burdensome and involve an unnecessary use of resources. A log was
suggested to alleviate the reporting burden.
Other commenters, however, said that the definition should be
broadened to include all unplanned underground mine fires. These
commenters pointed out that fires can be devastating to a mine and the
miners. They said that it should not be left up to mine operators to
decide how long it takes to extinguish a fire. They said that fires are
seriously under-reported. They also said that if fires remain
unreported, then the mine operator is less likely to eliminate the
source of the problem. Another commenter urged MSHA to consider the
issue of belt flammability stating that belt fires ``require escape in
many instances.''
The final rule retains the existing requirement for reporting fires
for surface mines and surface areas of underground mines. Surface fires
do not involve the hazard potential that underground fires present in a
confined environment. For unplanned underground fires, the final rule
expands the definition of accident to include all fires not
extinguished within 10 minutes of discovery.
We agree with a commenter who, basing the comment on experience in
the Pittsburgh seam, said that 30 minutes is ``entirely too long,''
because a fire that's been burning for 30 minutes can be ``totally out
of control.'' Similarly, belt fires that include open flame, smoldering
coal, smoking belts, or hot glowing rollers, can be hard to control.
MSHA experience and data include a number of belt fires, among them the
Alma Aracoma fire on January 19, 2006, that could not be contained by
the miners at the scene. MSHA expects that the increased reporting of
unplanned underground fires, including belt fires, will help focus
attention on problems that need to be identified and corrected before
developing into an uncontrollable fire.
The requirement to report all underground fires not extinguished
within 10 minutes of discovery will address those fires requiring
activation of the fire-fighting plan and evacuation of miners. Based on
Agency experience and data, MSHA determined that 10 minutes is a
reasonable time for attempting to extinguish a fire and to notify the
surface. In an underground environment, if miners attempt to fight the
fire for 30 minutes and are unsuccessful, the fire will probably become
uncontrollable. The revised reporting requirement will result in
earlier plan activation as miners will more quickly notify supervisors
who can call in firefighting crews while the other miners get out of
harm's way. The final rule's requirement to report fires not
extinguished within 10 minutes targets fires that can jeopardize safety
while excluding minor, nuisance events.
2. Section 50.10 Immediate Notification
The final rule retains the requirement in the ETS that mine
operators notify MSHA immediately of all reportable accidents.
Immediate notification is defined as ``at once without delay and within
15 minutes.'' It is significant to note, however, that the higher
penalties, for failing to ``provide timely notification'' to MSHA,
apply only to those accidents that are specified in Section 5(a) of the
MINER Act. These are accidents that involve ``the death of an
individual at the mine, or an injury or entrapment of an individual at
the mine which has a reasonable potential to cause death.'' The final
rule, like the MINER Act, does not include any exceptions to the 15-
minute notification provision.
a. Notifying MSHA within 15 Minutes. Before the ETS, the standard
required operators to contact MSHA ``immediately'' if an accident
occurred. The ETS required that all accidents be reported at once
without delay and within 15 minutes, with an exception for lost
communications. While many commenters said they supported the goal of
notification, they opposed the 15-minute requirement. Commenters said
that 15 minutes passes too fast, is too short, and does not allow for
the gathering of sufficient information. Instead of 15 minutes,
commenters suggested 30 minutes and an hour or more as alternatives.
Other commenters suggested that MSHA eliminate any specified time
requirement and revert back to the general pre-ETS ``immediately
contact'' standard. They said it was flexible, acknowledged those
situations where operators ``did the best they could,'' and allowed for
``wiggle room.'' Commenters noted that about 90 percent of the
accidents reported to MSHA in 2005 were ``unplanned roof falls at or
above the anchorage point, and damage to hoisting equipment,'' and did
not involve an injury to a miner. These commenters stated that the 15-
minute requirement should not apply in those non-emergency cases, and
that MSHA could be overwhelmed with reporting and false alarms. Other
commenters stated that the 15-minute requirement should not apply in
situations in which the operator had to perform rescue or life-saving
actions.
Other commenters supported the 15-minute requirement for all
accidents. They said that MSHA can best decide what to do with the
information it gets. They said the problem is one of under-reporting
accidents, not over-reporting. These commenters said that delays in
[[Page 71435]]
reporting accidents, like the delay in reporting the Sago accident, are
unacceptable. The commenters also said that requiring notification
within 15 minutes actually aids operators by removing uncertainty
concerning when to notify MSHA.
As mentioned above, the MINER Act was signed into law on June 15,
2006. Several comments suggested retaining the 15-minute requirement
for only the accidents specified in the MINER Act. In addition,
commenters suggested limiting that requirement to underground coal
mines or including a life saving exception. Other comments, however,
supported the 15-minute reporting requirement in the ETS. One commenter
said that the sooner individuals with expertise arrive at the scene
``the better the chances for a successful outcome.''
MSHA's experience with implementation of the ETS indicates that the
15-minute requirement for reporting all accidents is working. The
operator's reporting of the Darby explosion serves as an example of how
timely reporting can result in effective mobilization of emergency
response resources. Operators of varying mine sizes and types have been
able to meet the 15-minute requirement under the ETS. Some operators
may have had to alter their response procedures to ensure quicker
notification.
Timely reporting can be crucial in emergency, life-threatening
situations to activate effective emergency response and rescue. Not
only can this be vital to the saving of lives, but it can be
instrumental to having expert Agency personnel at the scene with
authority to assure that the accident site remains undisturbed and
preserved for investigation into causes. For remote operations, it
enables MSHA to quickly communicate with local rescue and emergency
services. While many reported accidents do not involve an injury or are
non-emergencies, they may be near misses or signify a trend or problem
that left uncorrected can be extremely hazardous. Fires, explosions,
and gas and water inundations are of special concern.
In making the decision to retain the notification requirement in
the ETS, MSHA considered the dynamic nature of the mining industry. The
mining environment is ever-changing; there is always the threat of new
hazards or dangers. The reporting of roof falls, unplanned explosions,
haulage accidents, or unstable conditions at impoundments, for example,
may necessitate critical, pro-active corrective actions and the need
for emergency response assistance. The demand for many mining
commodities is accelerating. Production growth can push mining into
depths with more structural instability. As the chance for encountering
older underground works and strata increases, so does the potential for
gas and water inundation.
Based on MSHA's experience under the ETS, ``within 15 minutes''
provides adequate time for operators to notify MSHA with sufficient
information. For example, the mine operator often knows the general
character of an event, such as an explosion or inundation, and can
report it under the 15-minute requirement before knowing whether a
person has been injured or killed or whether the event is life
threatening. MSHA's experience and data reveal that reportable
accidents are not common. The 15-minute requirement poses no
significant increased burden on the mining industry while providing
improved protection for miners.
A number of commenters stated that having to notify MSHA within 15
minutes could interfere with the operator's rescue efforts and calling
911. They said that operators should not be expected to divert from
life saving and emergency activities to phone MSHA. This can arise
particularly with small operators who may need to engage any and all
available personnel to respond to an emergency. They said there should
be an exception for those life saving and emergency activities in
addition to the exception for loss of communications.
Other commenters, however, disputed the need for any exception. One
commenter pointed out that loss of communications in a mine is an
indicator of a problem, and the mine operator ``must be required to
contact MSHA with the information available to him within the mandatory
time frame.'' Some commenters objected to saying that the 15-minute
notification requirement could interfere with rescue or life saving.
They said operators can anticipate problems in their emergency plans.
Moreover, the commenters said that operators can use cell phones,
blackberries, or other communication devices, which they readily use to
make other calls in emergency situations. One commenter stated that
``[A]ny operator who cannot initiate onsite emergency efforts and call
the regulatory agency should not be in the mining business.''
The final rule, like the MINER Act, does not include any exceptions
to the 15-minute notification provision, including one for loss of
communications. As noted above, some commenters sought an exception for
life saving, or for directing rescue efforts. If a situation were to
arise involving extenuating circumstances, such as an operator having
to choose between saving someone's life and notifying MSHA, enforcement
discretion would take those circumstances into account. MSHA does not
expect that an operator who has to make a decision between rendering
life-saving assistance and calling MSHA would be penalized for
providing that assistance.
Pointing out that the ETS addressed events in underground coal
mines, a few commenters said that the 15-minute notification provision
should apply only to underground coal or other underground mines. Other
commenters said that MSHA activation of a response team does not
usually occur for accidents at surface operations. Consistent with the
MINER Act, the final rule does not limit the notification provision to
underground mines. Accidents and deaths occur at all types of mines.
Surface mines, for example, over the years have suffered numerous
fires; serious haulage, equipment, and explosives accidents;
electrocutions; highwall failures; explosions; and impoundment
failures. Prompt notification focuses MSHA, operators, and miners on
problem areas. Even where MSHA does not activate an emergency response,
the Agency conducts an investigation. Prompt notification enables MSHA
to secure an accident site, preserving vital evidence that can
otherwise be easily lost. In addition, prompt notification provides
MSHA with data to accurately determine trends and means of prevention.
There also was comment on what triggers the 15-minute period. Some
commenters said that the MINER Act should be followed literally with
one commenter stating that the 15-minute period should commence once
the operator ``realizes'' an accident has occurred. While the MINER Act
uses ``realizes,'' that commenter conceded that there is ``some
ambiguity'' in the term.
Consistent with current case law and interpretation of the
notification provision, the final rule alternatively uses the
clarifying terms ``once the mine operator knows or should know,'' based
on the judgment of a reasonable person. MSHA acknowledges that the
operator needs time to determine whether an accident has occurred in
the first place. As stated in the preamble to the ETS, the Federal Mine
Safety and Health Review Commission (FMSHRC) interpreted the
notification standard to allow reasonable time for the operator to make
that determination. MSHA recognizes that an operator may not know
instantly when an accident occurs, but emphasizes that the operator
[[Page 71436]]
must make that determination promptly, consistent with the underlying
purpose of the standard. Thus, an operator, like any reasonable person
under the circumstances, is held to know or realize that an accident
has occurred.
The final rule retains the ETS terms ``at once and without delay,''
which highlight that reporting must be done promptly. Though a
commenter said that these terms are synonyms and should be deleted, the
terms are dictionary references used by the Commission in defining and
emphasizing what is intended by ``immediately.'' [See Consolidation
Coal, 11 FMSHRC 1935 at 1938 (October 31, 1989).] ``Immediately'' is to
be understood ``in light of the [notification] regulation's command of
prompt, vigorous action.''
b. Method of Notification. Many commenters stated that the method
of contacting MSHA needed to be improved and streamlined. In the ETS
and prior standard, operators were directed to first contact the
appropriate MSHA District Office and, failing that, to use a 1-800
number to an MSHA headquarters answering service. Commenters said that
this system was often inefficient and time consuming, taking a number
of phone calls to accomplish notification. Many commenters advocated a
nationwide call center, staffed by knowledgeable persons, where the
mine operator could place one call to take care of notification. Other
suggestions included a District system of emergency phone numbers with
staff coverage 24 hours a day, 7 days per week, or a one-call system to
voice mail.
MSHA agrees that the system for contacting the Agency needed to be
improved. MSHA has acquired a nationwide call system; thus, the final
rule eliminates the requirement that mine operators first notify the
appropriate District Office. MSHA has set up an improved system that
provides a person to answer calls 24 hours per day, 7 days per week.
The final rule lists the toll-free number, which is the same number
mine operators currently use for notification purposes. Once the mine
operator calls the toll-free service, notification is achieved.
C. Part 75--Mandatory Safety Standards--Underground Coal Mines
This final rule does not address Sec. Sec. 75.350(b)(7),
75.380(n), and 75.383(c), which were deleted in the ETS. The final rule
also makes organizational changes and adds paragraph headings and
numbers to make specific requirements easier to find and understand, to
clarify existing provisions, and to accommodate new and transferred
provisions. These non-substantive revisions do not reduce protection
for miners.
1. Sections 75.380 and 75.381 Lifelines in Escapeways
The final rule retains ETS requirements Sec. Sec. 75.380(d)(7) and
75.381(c)(5) that provide for the use of directional lifelines in both
the primary and alternate escapeways for underground bituminous,
lignite, and anthracite coal mines. The final rule requires that a
continuous, directional lifeline be installed and maintained in each
escapeway. The lifeline must: be marked with a reflective material
every 25 feet; be located in a manner that allows miners to use it
effectively to escape; have tactile directional indicators signifying
the direction of escape placed at intervals not exceeding 100 feet; and
be attached to and mark the location of stored SCSRs. The final rule
also adds a requirement that lifelines be made of flame-resistant
material upon replacement, and that all lifelines be flame-resistant no
later than June 15, 2009, to conform with Section 2 of the MINER Act.
A directional lifeline is generally a rope made of durable
material, although the final rule, like the ETS allows an equivalent
device, such as a pipe or handrail. Some commenters stated that a track
or belt structure could be considered an equivalent device. MSHA has
clarified in this final rule that a lifeline must provide tactile
feedback to indicate the direction of escape. In an emergency,
visibility may be limited and render devices, such as a track or belt
structure, ineffective as a means of indicating direction. MSHA is
concerned that the mine operator will be unable to attach tactile
directional indicators, which are resistant to physical damage, to a
track or belt structure. Because tactile directional indicators on a
track or belt structure are likely to be damaged during normal mining
activities, MSHA does not believe that a track or belt structure would
provide safety equivalent to a lifeline and considers them to be
unreliable and impractical. In addition, MSHA is concerned that a
conveyor belt structure used as a lifeline presents a significant
potential hazard to escaping miners, unless the belts are both de-
energized and locked-out. Further, a track used as a lifeline would
require escaping miners to crawl to use the tactile indicators on the
track.
a. Continuous Lifeline. The final rule, Sec. Sec. 75.380(d)(7)(i)
and 75.381(c)(5)(i), requires that durable, continuous lifelines be
installed and maintained in both escapeways leading from the working
sections or areas where mechanized mining equipment is being installed
or removed. The lifelines must be continuous throughout the entire
length of each escapeway to the surface escape drift opening, to the
escape shaft or slope facilities to the surface, or to the surface, as
applicable.
Most commenters supported the installation of lifelines in
escapeways. Other commenters expressed concerns that the installation
of a lifeline in escapeways where mechanized mining equipment regularly
travels could result not only in damage to the lifeline, but a damaged
lifeline could become a potential hazard to personnel. MSHA agrees that
care needs to be taken when lifelines are installed in escapeways that
are also used as travelways for mechanized mining equipment.
Installation techniques are available that will permit lifelines to be
protected from damage from mobile equipment while still being readily
available to miners during emergencies. These provisions remain
unchanged from the ETS.
b. Flame-Resistant and Reflective. The final rule, Sec. Sec.
75.380(d)(7)(ii) and 75.381(c)(5)(ii), adds new requirements that
lifelines be flame-resistant upon replacement of existing lifelines;
but in no case later than June 15, 2009. This requirement was added to
respond to comments and to conform the final rule with Section 2 of the
MINER Act.
Many commenters stated that lifelines should be made of flame-
resistant material and some suggested that MSHA require lifelines to be
flame-resistant. MSHA agrees that flame-resistant lifelines provide an
added degree of protection for miners and the final rule requires that
lifelines be ``Flame-resistant in accordance with the requirements of
part 18 of this chapter upon replacement of existing lifelines; but in
no case later than June 15, 2009.'' The flame-resistant requirements
contained in part 18 are currently applied to other materials used in
mining, such as conveyor belt, hose conduit, and packing gland
materials. MSHA has determined that the Agency's requirements for
flame-resistant materials are also appropriate for lifelines used in
underground coal mines. MSHA anticipates that lifeline manufacturers
will be able to meet the flame-resistant requirement under part 18 and
will submit products for approval prior to the time specified in the
final rule.
The final rule, Sec. Sec. 75.380(d)(7)(iii) and 75.381(c)(5)(iii),
requires that lifelines be marked with a reflective material every 25
feet, so that miners can locate
[[Page 71437]]
the lifeline using their cap lamps in low-visibility conditions, such
as when smoke is present. No comments were received on these provisions
and they remain unchanged from the ETS.
c. Lifeline Accessibility. The final rule, Sec. Sec.
75.380(d)(7)(iv) and 75.381(c)(5)(iv), requires that lifelines be
positioned so that miners can use them effectively to escape. Proper
positioning of the lifeline regarding height, accessibility, and
location as determined by mining conditions improves the ability of
miners to effectively use lifelines to escape during emergency
situations. No comments were received on this provision and it remains
unchanged from the ETS.
d. Tactile Indicators. The final rule, Sec. Sec. 75.380(d)(7)(v)
and 75.381(c)(5)(v), requires that lifelines contain tactile indicators
signifying the direction and route of escape, placed at intervals not
to exceed 100 feet. In the public hearings, MSHA asked whether
``direction indicators on lifelines [should] be standardized.'' MSHA
also asked whether ``the point end of the cone [should] be toward the
face?'' Most commenters supported standardization of directional
indicators. This provision in the final rule is changed from the ETS to
include a new requirement that ``[w]hen cones are used as directional
indicators, they shall be installed so that the tapered section points
inby.'' This new requirement is consistent with NIOSH's recommendation
\2\ and supported by commenters.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ NIOSH, IC 9481, p. 9, 2005.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The final rule, Sec. Sec. 75.380(d)(7)(vi) and 75.381(c)(5)(vi),
requires that lifelines be ``securely attached to and marked to provide
tactile feedback indicating the location of any SCSR storage locations
in the escapeways.'' When visibility is restricted during an emergency,
tactile feedback is necessary to guide miners to exit the mine and
would also be necessary to locate additional SCSR storage along the
escapeway. For this reason, the final rule clarifies that the indicator
on the lifeline for locating additional SCSRs be tactile.
2. Section 75.383 Escapeway Maps and Drills
This final rule transfers existing requirements from Sec.
75.383(a) to a new Sec. 75.1505 and combines Sec. 75.383(b) and ETS
Sec. 75.1502(c) into a new, improved and expanded Sec. 75.1504.
Therefore, Sec. 75.383 is no longer necessary and the final rule
removes it.
Section 75.383(b)(1) required all miners to participate in a
practice drill every 90 days; but, the miners only had to travel a
portion of the escapeways. On the other hand, the drills in Sec.
75.383(b)(2) and (3) required a supervisor and two miners to travel the
entire escapeway every 6 weeks. In addition, Sec. 75.383(b)(2) and (3)
required the operator to rotate miners for these 6-week drills, so that
all miners participated, and to alternate escapeways, so that the
escapeways from all sections were traveled to the surface or to the
exits at the bottom of the shaft or slope. MSHA has determined that
requiring all miners to travel an entire escapeway each quarter
provides increased safety for miners and eliminates the need for the 6-
week drill requirement.
In the opening statement at the public hearings, MSHA stated the
Agency's intent to incorporate the drill requirements in Sec. 75.383
with the emergency evacuation drill requirements in ETS Sec.
75.1502(c) and solicited comments on this approach to emergency
evacuation drills. Commenters generally supported the elimination of
the Sec. 75.383 escapeway drills. In response, the final rule
incorporates requirements from Sec. 75.383(b) into Sec. 75.1504 and
expands these requirements. These expanded requirements make escapeway
drills more realistic and, therefore, more effective.
3. Section 75.1502 Mine Emergency Evacuation and Firefighting Program
of Instruction
Final rule Sec. 75.1502 contains the requirements for a written
plan for conducting the training and drills required under Sec. Sec.
75.1503, 75.1504, and 75.1505. In general, the training plan provisions
in ETS Sec. 75.1502(a) become Sec. 75.1502; the firefighting
provisions in Sec. 75.1502(b) become Sec. 75.1503; the evacuation
training and drill requirements in ETS Sec. 75.1502(c) become Sec.
75.1504; and the mine and escapeway map requirements in Sec. 75.383(a)
become Sec. 75.1505. Almost all of the requirements in Sec. 75.1502
are derived from existing requirements. The final rule conforms the
program of instruction in Sec. 75.1502 with the requirements added to
the quarterly training and drills and annual expectations training in
Sec. 75.1504.
Commenters were concerned that the ETS had not included miners or
miners' representatives in the process for developing emergency mine
evacuation training and drills. MSHA anticipates that mine operators
will work with miners in developing the program of instruction and
implementing the mine emergency evacuation training and drills.
a. Introduction to Sec. 75.1502. The final rule retains
introductory language from ETS Sec. 75.1502(a); adjusts the frequency
of training and drills from every 90 days to quarterly; defines the
quarter based on a calendar year; and includes new implementing
language. This new implementing language requires that operators submit
a revised program of instruction to MSHA for approval by February 6,
2007, and initiate the revised training within 30 days of plan
approval.
In the final rule, MSHA adjusts the frequency of training and
drills from every 90 days to quarterly in response to comments and to
provide flexibility. MSHA recognizes that some training is more
appropriately given in a classroom or a simulated mining environment.
Added flexibility in scheduling will allow operators time to give all
miners this critical training and drills quarterly. An operator may
find it more convenient to schedule training and drills over several
days or weeks depending on the availability of instructors, training
equipment, or facilities.
Under the final rule, operators will have the flexibility to
conduct quarterly mine emergency evacuation training and drills, either
the first, second, or third month of the quarter. The month in which a
miner completes mine emergency evacuation training and drills, in
effect, becomes that miner's ``anniversary'' month for this quarterly
training. For example, a miner receiving quarterly mine emergency
training and drills in January, the first month of the first quarter,
is required to complete the second quarterly training no later than the
end of April, the first month of the second quarter. If a miner
completes the training before that miner's anniversary month, then the
month the training and drills were completed establishes a new
anniversary month for subsequent training and drills. This is
consistent with MSHA policy for part 48 annual refresher training.
Commenters suggested that the requirement for emergency evacuation
drills be changed from every 90 days to quarterly. One commenter
suggested that training during a specific month each quarter would
allow for more effective scheduling of people and resources. Another
commenter stated that switching to quarterly training would make it
easier to schedule training in a timely manner if the miner misses a
drill. This commenter stated that, if a miner is off, more flexibility
allows the operator time to schedule makeup training and still be in
compliance.
[[Page 71438]]
The final rule's change in mine emergency evacuation training and
drills from every 90 days to quarterly increases flexibility, makes
recordkeeping easier, and better ensures that all miners participate
quarterly.
b. Section 75.1502(a) and (b): Program Approval and New or Revised
Provisions. The final rule Sec. Sec. 75.1502(a) and (b) retain the
requirements in ETS Sec. 75.1502(a)(3). Like the ETS, the final rule
requires the operator to submit a program of instruction, and any
revisions, for approval to the District Manager of the Coal Mine Safety
and Health district in which the mine is located. Before implementing
any new or revised approved plan provision, the operator must instruct
miners in the changes.
c. Section 75.1502(c): Instruction Plan Contents. The final rule
has consolidated the requirements for mine emergency evacuation
training and drills from 30 CFR 48.8 and part 75 in the instruction
plan under final Sec. 75.1502. Contents of the instruction plan
include: Mine and escapeway maps; evacuation and firefighting plans;
locations of abandoned areas, escapeways, exits, and routes of travel
to the surface; and the location and use of firefighting and fire
suppression equipment and materials. Although MSHA considers
consolidation of these requirements to be an administrative change, it
improves an operator's ability to provide more comprehensive and
effective evacuation training and drills.
The final rule retains the existing requirements from ETS Sec.
75.1502(a)(1); includes evacuation-related training requirements from
Sec. 48.8; enhances the scenario training; and requires annual
expectations training. Like the ETS, the final rule requires operators
to develop scenarios for mine emergencies, including fires, explosions,
and gas or water inundations, and to develop best options for
evacuation under each type of emergency. Under the final rule,
scenarios must include conditions in the mine or circumstances that
require immediate donning of self-rescue devices. In response to
questions, the final rule clarifies that scenarios must also include a
discussion of options and a decision as to the best option in each
situation.
To ensure that the scenarios address the various conditions that
miners may encounter in the event of an emergency, the final rule,
Sec. 75.1502(c)(2)(ii), includes more examples. It clarifies that the
scenarios must include, as applicable, instruction in locating and
using continuous directional lifelines, tethers, and doors; traversing
undercasts or overcasts; and switching escapeways. MSHA includes this
requirement to emphasize the importance of using scenarios to conduct
mine emergency evacuation drills so that miners will be familiarized
with emergency equipment, including conditions that may be encountered
in escaping the mine.
The final rule retains and combines the requirements of ETS Sec.
75.1502(a)(1)(v) and (vi) in Sec. 75.1502(c)(3). This provision
requires training on the operation of fire suppression equipment and
the location and use of firefighting equipment and materials. These
requirements are unchanged from the ETS.
ETS Sec. 75.1502(a)(1)(vii) required training on the location of
escapeways, exits, and routes of travel to the surface, including the
location [and use] of continuous directional lifelines or equivalent
devices. The final rule retains this requirement in Sec. 75.1502(c)(4)
and transfers training on the use of lifelines to evacuation scenarios
in Sec. 75.1502(c)(2)(ii).
ETS Sec. 75.1502(a)(1)(viii) required that the instruction plan
include training on the locations, quantity, types, and use of stored
SCSRs, if applicable. The final rule retains this requirement in Sec.
75.1502(c)(5). This provision will help assure that miners receive
appropriate donning and transfer training on all applicable SCSRs.
Annual refresher training in Sec. 48.8(b)(4) requires a review of
the mine map; the escapeway system; the escape, firefighting, and
emergency evacuation plans in effect at the mine; and the location of
abandoned areas. The final rule transfers this training requirement to
Sec. 75.1502(c)(6) for underground coal miners. Miners who receive
this training as part of their quarterly drills under 30 CFR
75.1504(b)(4) are not required to take it under part 48. The Agency
transferred this provision so that emergency evacuation training and
drills would be consolidated in part 75.
Final rule Sec. 75.1502(c)(7) includes a new provision requiring
operators to describe how miners will receive annual expectations
training, which is an integral component of mine emergency evacuation
training. This new provision complements the integrated approach to
training as reflected in the mine emergency evacuation drill
requirement in final Sec. 75.1504.
MSHA addresses commenters' concerns about Sec. 75.1502 Mine
Emergency Evacuation and Firefighting Program of Instruction in Sec.
75.1504 Mine Emergency Evacuation Training and Drills, which addresses
the implementation of this program of instruction.
d. Section 75.1502(d): Instructors. Final rule Sec. 75.1502(d)
retains unchanged ETS Sec. 75.1502(a)(2) that requires operators to
designate persons with the appropriate abilities, training, knowledge,
or experience to provide training and conduct mine emergency evacuation
drills in his or her area of expertise. The final rule also retains the
ETS requirement that persons conducting SCSR donning and transferring
training must be able to effectively train and evaluate whether miners
can successfully don the SCSR and transfer between all applicable SCSR
devices.
MSHA experience and NIOSH research \3\ indicate that, in an
emergency, effectively trained miners are more likely to recall needed
knowledge and skills. NIOSH recognizes that a key component of
effective training is the instructor's ability to communicate their
knowledge and skills to others and to evaluate performance. Further,
NIOSH states that good trainers must have extensive knowledge or
competence in the task or job they are teaching. There were no comments
on this provision.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ NIOSH, ``Strategies for Improving Miners' Training,''
Information Circular IC 9463, DHHS (NIOSH) Publication No. 2002-156,
September 2002.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
4. Section 75.1503 Use of Fire Suppression Equipment
The final rule transfers the requirements for use of fire
suppression equipment from Sec. 75.1502(b) to new Sec. 75.1503. It is
administrative and makes no substantive change to the existing
requirements.
5. Section 75.1504 Mine Emergency Evacuation Training and Drills
The mine operator's approved program of instruction, in Sec.
75.1502, contains requirements that the miner must experience in the
Sec. 75.1504 training and drills. This final rule renumbers and
revises ETS Sec. 75.1502(c) as final Sec. 75.1504. It also removes
ETS Sec. 75.1502(c)(4) that had allowed evacuation drills to satisfy
escapeway drill requirements in Sec. 75.383. Because there are no
longer any escapeways drills under Sec. 75.383, Sec. 75.1502(c)(4) is
no longer necessary.
The ETS enhanced the requirements for evacuation training and
drills by requiring that these drills be more than a simulation. The
final rule retains and further enhances evacuation drill requirements
by integrating mine emergency training from Sec. 48.8 and Sec. 75.383
into Sec. 75.1504.
a. Introduction to Sec. 75.1504. In the introductory text to Sec.
75.1504, the final
[[Page 71439]]
rule incorporates the existing introductory language from ETS Sec.
75.1502(c). The final rule requires all miners to participate in the
training and drills. This includes independent contractors who must
participate in the quarterly drill when it is being conducted in the
section or working place where they are located.
b. Section 75.1504(a) Schedule of Training and Drills. As discussed
previously, the final rule provides mine operators flexibility in
completing drills on a quarterly basis. This change provides a
reasonable, defined period of time to complete drills and allows for
adjustments to accommodate work schedules or conflicts.
As stated in the ETS, MSHA recognizes that regular and frequent
participation in emergency evacuation training and drills reinforces
the miner's knowledge and skill necessary to respond effectively in a
mine emergency. Frequent drills lessen disorientation, stress, and
panic that may cause miners to hesitate in making critical decisions or
to make poor decisions. For this reason, the final rule retains the
requirement that all miners participate in evacuation training and
drills, and includes a new requirement for annual expectations training
under paragraph (c).
In Sec. 75.1504(a)(1), the final rule requires that a newly hired
miner, who has not participated in an evacuation training and drill at
that mine within the previous 3 months, must participate in the next
applicable drill. This provision provides flexibility to the mine
operator by allowing up to 3 months for newly hired miners to complete
the quarterly mine emergency training and drill. This requirement is
transferred from Sec. Sec. 48.5(e) and 48.6(f).
In new Sec. 75.1504(a)(2), the final rule requires that a section
or outby foreman travel both escapeways in their entirety prior to
assuming duties on the section or outby work location.
In the opening statement at the public hearings, MSHA asked if
section bosses should travel both escapeways in their entirety prior to
assuming duties on that section. Several commenters said that a foreman
should not be required to travel both escapeways in their entirety.
Commenters generally agreed that a foreman should travel those portions
of both escapeways that the foreman has not traveled within the
previous 3 months. In fact, one commenter stated that this requirement
makes good practical sense and that all supervisors should be familiar
with the escapeways prior to assuming their responsibilities.
MSHA agrees that a foreman needs to have traveled both escapeways
prior to assuming duties on the section. A foreman is responsible for
training miners in escapeway drills and must have the training,
knowledge, or experience to conduct these drills. Also, the foreman is
in a leadership position and, in the event of an emergency, is
entrusted with the responsibility for leading miners out of the mine
safely. To do this, the foreman must have the necessary skills,
including complete familiarity with both the primary and alternate
escapeways. MSHA experience is that a well-trained foreman can instill
confidence in miners and gain their trust. The final rule, accordingly,
requires a foreman to travel both escapeways prior to assuming duties
on the section. This includes walking portions as necessary and to
focus on unique and lifesaving features.
c. Section 75.1504(b) Content of Drills. Final rule Sec.
75.1504(b) retains and clarifies ETS Sec. 75.1502(c)(2) requirements
for a comprehensive, realistic mine emergency evacuation drill, and
incorporates escapeway drill requirements from Sec. 75.383(b)(1).
(i) Section 75.1504(b)(1) Hands-On SCSR Training. Before going
underground, all persons must be able to demonstrate proficiency in
donning and transferring of SCSRs used in that mine. After initial
training under 30 CFR part 48, the miner continues to receive ``hands-
on'' training for donning and transferring of self-rescue devices as
part of the quarterly mine emergency evacuation training and drills.
If an emergency arises, many miners may have to escape through long
and difficult underground escapeways containing irrespirable air. MSHA
has identified problems related to skill degradation in the use of
SCSRs in mine emergencies. In a series of studies from 1990 through
1993, the U.S. Bureau of Mines, University of Kentucky, and MSHA
researchers measured skills degradation. In one study, the proficiency
rate for donning an SCSR dropped about 80 percent in follow-up
evaluations conducted about 90 days after training. MSHA recognizes
that with any nonroutine task, such as donning and transferring of
SCSRs, knowledge and skill diminish rapidly. SCSR donning is a motor
skill and research indicates that reinforcing motor skills, through
more frequent training, will substantially reduce motor-skill
degradation. In another study \4\ researchers concluded that
``companies should adopt a hands-on training protocol that allows them
to integrate SCSR donning practice into other workplace routines such
as fire [drills].''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ The U.S. Bureau of Mines (Vaught et al., 1993).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The ETS reflected MSHA's conviction that more frequent and
effective SCSR training is necessary. Based on skills degradation
research \5\ supporting additional SCSR training, and past experience
where improved training might have made a difference in an escape,
final rule Sec. 75.1504(b)(1) retains the ETS requirement for ``hands-
on'' training in the complete donning and transferring of each type of
SCSR used at the mine.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ Ibid.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
To assure that miners can obtain a proper fit of the SCSR
mouthpiece, the final rule changes the requirement in Sec.
75.1504(b)(1)(ii) from ``inserting the mouthpiece or simulating this
task while explaining proper insertion of the mouthpiece'' to
``inserting the mouthpiece.'' MSHA is concerned that without actually
physically inserting the mouthpiece, a miner may not gain the skills to
effectively and properly perform this action. This change is consistent
with language in the MINER Act that requires all operators to develop
``an emergency response plan'' for ``ensuring a proper fit'' of an
SCSR.
(ii) Section 75.1504(b)(2) Comprehensive SCSR Training. MSHA is
concerned that some miners may not have been receiving adequate
emphasis on three important instructions for using an SCSR. Even though
much of this information is included in existing training courses and
manufacturers' instructions, the final rule includes these instructions
to emphasize their importance. This requirement poses no additional
burden on mine operators.
In Sec. 75.1504(b)(2)(i), the final rule emphasizes the importance
of recognizing when the SCSR is not functioning properly and
demonstrating how to initiate and reinitiate the starting sequence.
MSHA is concerned that miners may not be able to recognize when an SCSR
is functioning properly. This may have caused miners to remove their
SCSRs prematurely, thinking that the device was not working when
breathing became difficult. Also, miners need the skills and knowledge
to initiate (cold start) an SCSR if it fails to start automatically
after the starting sequence is initiated.
In Sec. 75.1504(b)(2)(ii), the final rule requires that the SCSR
training emphasize the importance of not removing the mouthpiece until
the miner is out of the mine. MSHA is concerned that miners may remove
their mouthpiece before reaching fresh air or to communicate. Even
though a miner may believe that the air is breathable
[[Page 71440]]
because it appears clear and there is no smoke, the mine air may
contain high levels of toxic gases or have insufficient oxygen to
sustain life.
In Sec. 75.1504(b)(2)(iii), the final rule requires operators to
instruct miners about the effects of over-breathing the capability of
the SCSR. SCSRs produce oxygen at a specific flow rate. Rapid and deep
breathing (over-breathing) caused by panic or physical exertion can
potentially create more demand for oxygen than an SCSR can supply. Like
all other respiratory devices, SCSRs are more effective when the miner
is better trained to understand their capabilities and to use them
properly.
(iii) Section 75.1504(b)(3) Realistic Training and Drills. In Sec.
75.1504(b)(3), the final rule retains and clarifies ETS Sec.
75.1502(c)(2) requiring a comprehensive, realistic mine emergency
evacuation drill and integrates the escapeway drill requirements from
Sec. 75.383(b).
NIOSH studies \6\ relating to stress and its effect on behavior
during an emergency noted that miners who had more experience or
training also tended to report less stress during the exercise. MSHA
agrees with the NIOSH assessment that miners will be better prepared to
react more effectively if they are more familiar with and have a better
appreciation of the requirements for evacuating the mine. By traveling
both escapeways in their entirety and practicing using the other
required evacuation tools, miners will gain confidence and a better
understanding of the time and effort required to evacuate the mine
successfully in an actual emergency.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ NIOSH. ``Judgment and Decision-Making under Stress: An
Overview for Emergency Managers,'' (Kowalski and Vaught, YEAR).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Scenarios. In Sec. 75.1504(b)(3), the final rule enhances the
requirement for a realistic mine emergency evacuation drill by
specifying that the drill must be initiated based on one of the
approved mine emergency scenarios from the Mine Emergency Evacuation
and Firefighting Program of Instruction. To ensure that the four major
scenarios (fire, explosion, gas or water inundation) are covered each
year, Sec. 75.1504(b)(3)(i) requires that a different scenario be used
each quarter. Although ETS Sec. 75.1502(a)(1) included a requirement
for scenarios, it did not state specifically that these scenarios were
to be used for conducting the evacuation drills.
In the opening statement at the public hearings, MSHA stated that
it intended that scenarios required by the Approved Program of
Instruction would be used to start and to conduct the mine emergency
evacuation drills. Commenters generally supported the concept of using
mine-specific scenarios to conduct mine emergency evacuation drills.
One commenter recognized the importance of providing ``* * * training
scenarios that simulate the actual experience.'' Another commenter said
that operators should routinely update and change the scenarios to
ensure that they are an adequate learning tool.
MSHA agrees with commenters that a variety of scenarios provide
miners with a better, more realistic and effective drill. Depending on
the conditions at the mine, the mine operator may need to develop more
than one scenario for each type of mine emergency. The final rule does
not limit the mine operators' choices of scenarios, but rather includes
a requirement that scenarios require a discussion of options and a
decision as to the best option for evacuation in each scenario.
Traveling Escapeways. The final rule, like the ETS, requires miners
to travel the primary or alternate escapeway to the surface or exits at
the bottom of a shaft or slope, physically locating continuous,
directional lifelines or equivalent devices, tethers, and stored SCSRs,
as part of their quarterly evacuation drill. To ensure that miners are
familiar with both escapeways, the final rule retains the requirement
that the drill be conducted in a different escapeway than the previous
quarterly drill. Traveling both escapeways provides miners with a more
realistic experience of unique escapeway conditions they may encounter
in evacuating the mine, including uneven terrain, ladders, doors,
airlocks, and overcasts. Hands-on experience with these conditions
helps assure that the miner can successfully escape the mine in an
actual emergency. Under the final rule, travel can be by any means of
conveyance, including mantrips, mobile equipment, or walking.
The ETS required the mine operator to have miners travel the
escapeways and physically locate the lifelines and stored SCSRs. MSHA
stated that miners should be able to safely evacuate a mine without the
use of mechanized transportation. In both the preamble and MSHA's
opening statement at the public hearings, MSHA requested comments about
whether miners should be required to walk the escapeway rather than use
mechanized transportation during the drills.
Most commenters expressed concern about the safety and usefulness
of requiring miners to walk the escapeways. Commenters acknowledged the
value of physically using lifelines, finding SCSR storage locations,
and traversing unique or difficult portions of the escapeways; but,
considered walking an entire escapeway to be unnecessary. These
commenters were concerned that requiring miners to walk the escapeway
each quarter would be counterproductive, and urged the Agency to allow
miners to walk the escapeways in segments. Many commenters expressed
concern that walking an escapeway would expose miners unnecessarily to
increased risk of injury, especially the aging workforce. These
commenters pointed out that a few injuries during an actual emergency
are acceptable; but, they are not acceptable during a drill.
MSHA received several comments that addressed underground mine
firefighting drills (Sec. 75.383). Commenters acknowledged that miners
walked the escapeways under existing Sec. 75.383(b) drills and were
concerned that, in combining the escapeway and evacuation drills,
miners would be required to walk an escapeway every 90 days.
MSHA considered commenters' concerns and agrees that walking each
escapeway in its entirety is not necessary to provide the miner a
realistic experience of evacuating the mine. Furthermore, MSHA agrees
that requiring all miners to walk entire escapeways may expose miners
unnecessarily to physical strain. An evacuation may involve a
combination of travel modes, including both mechanized transportation
and walking. MSHA encourages rapid evacuation of all miners in an
emergency. In most cases, this will involve the use of mechanized
transportation. The unique characteristics of the escapeways,
conditions caused by the emergency, or required training such as
physically locating lifelines and SCSRs, however, may prevent the use
of mechanized transportation. Walking may be necessary in those
circumstances. In response to commenters' concerns, the final rule
includes a performance-based requirement that miners travel the
escapeway, including traversing or negotiating specific portions and
switching escapeways, as applicable. This means that miners will walk
certain portions to complete the required training, such as in
physically locating and practicing the use of lifelines.
(iv) Section 75.1504(b)(4) Review of Emergency Escapeway Maps and
Plans. Final rule Sec. 75.1504(b)(4) combines requirements for a
review of the mine and escapeway maps, the firefighting plan, and the
mine emergency evacuation plan in effect at the mine
[[Page 71441]]
[from existing Sec. Sec. 48.8(b)(4), 75.383(b)(4), and 75.1502(a)]. In
Sec. 75.1504(b)(4)(i), the final rule requires the operator to inform
miners of the locations of fire doors, check curtains, changes in the
routes of travel, and plans for diverting smoke from escapeways. In
Sec. 75.1504(b)(4)(ii), the final rule requires that, in reviewing
maps and plans, the operator train miners in locating abandoned areas,
escapeways, exits, and routes of travel to the surface, including the
location of continuous directional lifelines or equivalent devices.
This training complements Sec. 75.1504(b)(3) by having miners learn to
locate on the mine map the key items that they must physically use or
locate during the realistic escapeway drill.
(v) Section 75.1504(b)(5) Firefighting Training. Final rule Sec.
75.1504(b)(5) combines requirements for training miners on the
operation of the fire suppression equipment available in the mine and
the location and use of firefighting equipment and materials [from ETS
Sec. 75.1502(a)(1)(v) and (vi)]. This paragraph contains no new
requirements.
(d) Section 75.1504(c) Annual Expectations Training. Section
75.1504(c) is a new requirement that provides miners with a realistic
experience of using an SCSR in an emergency situation. MSHA is
concerned that miners do not always understand what to expect when
using an SCSR. The SCSR expectations training requires the miner to don
and transfer an SCSR in smoke, simulated smoke, or an equivalent
environment. It also requires the miner to breathe through a realistic
SCSR training unit or an equivalent device that provides the actual
sensation of SCSR airflow resistance and heat.
In 2005, NIOSH provided a guidance document to the mining industry
that identifies training techniques for increasing skill levels of
miners. NIOSH concluded that training is more effective when it is both
realistic and experiential.\7\ Training that provides the miner with a
more realistic experience of both the physical and emotional challenges
that the miner may encounter in an actual life-threatening emergency is
commonly referred to as ``expectations'' training. NIOSH \8\ has been
conducting trials with non-toxic smoke in underground mines. NIOSH
notes that--
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ NIOSH, ``Fire Response Preparedness for Underground Mines,''
Informational Circular IC 9481, 2005.
\8\ NIOSH, ``Emerging Technologies: Aiding Responders in Mine
Emergencies and During the Escape from Smoke-Filled Passageways,''
2002.
Quality training enhances the awareness of mine fire hazards and
promotes self-confidence. One of the strong points of the
underground smoke training exercise was that miners felt they were
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
better prepared for a real life situation.
While the NIOSH research was conducted in underground mines, MSHA
recognizes that conducting SCSR smoke training in an active mine may be
difficult, and agrees with commenters that, in most cases, this
training can be provided on the surface. MSHA expects that some state
agencies and private vendors will develop portable expectations
training facilities that can be brought to a mine for this training.
In response to recent mine accidents requiring emergency evacuation
of the mine in a toxic environment, MSHA has determined that miners
need SCSR expectations training. The final rule requires this training
annually. Expectations training can be used to comply with the
requirements for donning and transferring the SCSR under paragraph
(b)(1) as part of a mine emergency evacuation drill.
In the preamble and in the opening statement at the public
hearings, MSHA asked whether it would be more instructive to conduct a
more realistic drill. As an example, MSHA suggested using smoke, or a
realistic mouthpiece that provides the user with the sensation of
actually breathing through an SCSR. In general, the responses to this
question were supportive. Commenters recognized that training is more
effective when it is more realistic. One commenter said that realistic
training would be more meaningful. One commenter stated that, for the
best results, the drill should require the same action as if it were a
real emergency. Another commenter, who had received SCSR training in
smoke, said ``I want to be as sincere as possible when I tell you that
this was the single most enlightening experience of my 35 years
underground.'' Several commenters were concerned that conducting
training in smoke would be hazardous to the miners and another was
concerned that providing this training in an underground mine would be
difficult. As indicated by several commenters, in most cases, this
training is better when conducted on the surface in an environment that
can be controlled. Commenters recommended a truck or trailer designed
for this training and the possibility of developing additional
simulation laboratories in the coal fields where miners could go to
receive SCSR expectations training.
While some mine operators or training facilities may use actual
smoke, it was never MSHA's intention to require this training to be
done in actual smoke. Operators can use a non-toxic smoke, such as
theatrical smoke, which is harmless. MSHA intends that this training
help miners realize the burden of donning, transferring, and using an
SCSR in conditions of low visibility and stress.
In Sec. 75.1504(c)(2), the final rule requires a miner to
participate in annual expectations training within one quarter of being
employed at the mine. Likewise, for a miner returning to work after an
absence during which the miner missed this training, the miner must
receive the training within one quarter.
One issue with providing realistic SCSR training is the
availability of ``live'' training units. Currently, there is only one
manufacturer who has developed a prototype training unit; this unit is
not yet in production. MSHA expects that, based on the requirements of
this rule, other SCSR manufacturers will develop, produce, and market
realistic SCSR training units. For this reason, in Sec. 75.1504(c)(3),
the final rule requires the mine operator to have a purchase order for
realistic SCSR training units or devices within 30 days of notification
by MSHA that the units are available. MSHA will notify mine operators
of the availability of realistic SCSR training units and where to
purchase them by publishing a notice in the Federal Register. The final
rule also requires the operator to provide expectations training within
60 days of receipt of the units. MSHA will accept, as good faith
evidence of compliance, purchase orders or contracts to buy realistic
SCSR training units.
e. Section 75.1504(d) Certification of Drills. The final rule
retains the requirement that the mine operator certify, by signature
and date, that the mine emergency evacuation training and drills were
held in accordance with the requirements of this section. The final
rule also retains the ETS requirements that mine operators keep the
certifications for one year and make them available to authorized
representatives of the Secretary and to miners' representatives.
The final rule expands the certification to include foremen
traveling both escapeways prior to assuming their duties and annual
expectations training for all miners. The final rule also expands the
certification to require that it be made at the completion of each
quarterly drill, annual expectations training, or other training. The
certification must identify miners, by name, who participated in each
emergency evacuation training and drill or other training. For each
miner, the certification must list the content of
[[Page 71442]]
the drill completed, including the escapeway traveled and scenario
used.
The final rule also adds a requirement that the operator provide
each miner a copy of the certificate for his or her own training when
the miner requests a copy. This requirement reflects industry practice
to provide the miner access to and a copy of his or her own training
record at no cost to the miner.
In the opening statement at the public hearings, MSHA specifically
asked whether the training record for the mine emergency evacuation
training and drill should include additional information, such as a
checklist. MSHA stated that the checklist could be used to itemize the
successful completion of each step of the training, as outlined in the
approved program of instruction. Considering the number of aspects to
be addressed in each drill and the flexibility built into the various
requirements, MSHA expects that mine operators would need to keep track
of this training to facilitate compliance.
Commenters generally supported a checklist as an effective tool for
managing and evaluating this training; however, they felt that a
checklist should be optional. Commenters recognized the usefulness of a
checklist to itemize the successful completion of each step of the
training and for keeping track of those components of the drills that
change, such as scenarios. They stated that a checklist helps assure
that the training and drills include all the topics that are required
by the standard. Another commenter stated that--
When you use that checklist, if there is something people
struggle with, it gives you that information. You know where to
focus your efforts, particularly in between drills.
One commenter further stated that developing performance-based
checklists that identify self-escape competencies would be a valuable
tool to evaluate the proficiency of miners. Others stated that
checklists can vary in size and complexity; that a checklist is not the
only way to manage; a list of names, simply put on paper, does nothing
for anyone. Another commenter stated that the energy required for
maintaining these checklists could be better spent on training miners
rather than dealing with another recordkeeping issue.
Although acknowledging that a checklist of activities is
beneficial, one commenter was convinced that ``requiring this limited
documentation is ineffective for assuring that the training was
successfully performed, in whole or in part.'' This commenter said that
MSHA has a responsibility beyond paperwork compliance to ensure that
the training was conducted. This commenter also cited several examples
of cases where the recordkeeping was kept, but the training was not
completed. This commenter recommended that, to ensure that evacuation
training and drills are completed, MSHA must be present to witness this
activity.
In response to comments, the final rule does not include a
requirement for a checklist. MSHA does recommend, however, that mine
operators develop a system to help manage these drills. MSHA expects
that mine operators will use some type of system, such as a checklist
or other effective alternative, to track the completion of the various
components of these drills for each miner, so as to assure that all
miners receive the required training. The final rule lists the
information to be included on the training certificate, but does not
specify how the operator is to keep track of this information. To
facilitate operator compliance with the drill requirements, MSHA will
develop a sample checklist and make it available in the Compliance
Guide for this final rule, which will be posted on MSHA's Web site at
http://www.msha.gov.
6. Section 75.1505 Escapeway Maps [Existing Sec. 75.383(a)]
The final rule transfers the escapeway map requirements in Sec.
75.383(a) to Sec. 75.1505. This change is administrative only. MSHA
received no specific comments on transferring this paragraph.
7. Section 75.1714 Availability of Approved Self-Rescue Devices;
Instruction in Use and Location
The final rule revises Sec. 75.1714(b) to clarify that all persons
must have SCSR donning and transferring training before going
underground. This administrative change eliminates duplication of
requirements and potential confusion or conflicts.
8. Sections 75.1714-2(f), 75.1714-2(g)(2), and 75.1714-4(e)
Identification and Directional Signs for SCSR Storage Locations
Like the ETS, final Sec. Sec. 75.1714-2(f), 75.1714-2(g)(2), and
75.1714-4(e) require signs made of reflective material to identify SCSR
storage locations and to direct miners to those locations. The
requirements for these signs were similar for all three provisions in
the ETS; MSHA evaluated the comments accordingly.
One commenter thought the requirement for direction signs was vague
``as to where these signs should be posted.'' A more specific
requirement for posting direction signs leading to an SCSR storage
location would be counterproductive because the location for storing
SCSRs will vary from mine to mine. Each mine operator must determine
the best place for hanging these signs, considering the condition of
the area surrounding the storage locations.
MSHA specifically requested comments in the ETS preamble and at the
public hearings, on the appropriateness of requiring reflective signs
to help locate SCSR storage locations and whether alternative methods
are available for making storage locations easier to locate when
conditions in the mine might obscure visibility. Many commenters agreed
that reflective signs could be useful. One commenter thought that SCSR
storage locations should have reflective doors, or the doors should be
outlined in reflective material, so that miners could find SCSRs even
if they were crawling. Some commenters pointed out that reflective
signs would not be useful when thick smoke was present and that other
steps would be needed, or that other options, such as strobe lights,
sirens, or attaching lifelines to the SCSR storage containers, should
be allowed. Other commenters thought that strobe lights were not
necessary and could present an explosion hazard in the presence of
methane.
While MSHA realizes that reflective signs may not be helpful in all
situations, the requirement that a sign be made of a reflective
material enhances miner safety by increasing the visibility of SCSR
storage locations and by making them easier to locate. The reflective
quality provides an advantage, such as when power is out in the mine:
reflective signs allow the miner to locate an SCSR and evacuate the
mine more quickly. A cap-light or outside light can reflect off the
sign making it much more visible than one not made of a reflective
material. For this reason, the final rule retains the requirement that
signs identifying SCSR storage locations and directing miners to these
storage locations be made of reflective material.
Although the ETS did not revise the words required to be displayed,
MSHA received many comments requesting that MSHA allow signs to use the
term ``SCSRs'' instead of ``SELF-RESCUER'' or ``SELF-RESCUERS.'' One
commenter stated that MSHA was being too prescriptive in requiring such
specific wording. These commenters stated that the term ``SCSRs'' is
used industry-wide.
The terms required to be displayed on the signs predated the ETS:
Sec. 75.1714-2(f) required the signs to say ``SELF-
[[Page 71443]]
RESCUER'' or ``SELF-RESCUERS'' and Sec. 75.1714-2(g)(2) required the
signs to say ``SELF-RESCUERS.'' The purpose for requiring signs to
display specific terms is to maintain consistency throughout the
underground coal mining industry. Requiring consistent wording enhances
safety by helping to ensure that, in an emergency situation, a miner
will be able to readily identify where SCSRs are stored, even when the
miner works at a different mine. MSHA agrees with commenters that
``SCSR'' is a commonly used term; therefore, the final rule permits the
use of either term, ``SCSRs'' or ``SELF-RESCUERS,'' to indicate the
location of stored SCSRs.
Final Sec. 75.1714-2(f) inserts a provision inadvertently omitted
from former Sec. 75.1714-2(f) when the ETS was published. That
requirement read, ``If a SCSR is not carried out of the mine at the end
of a miner's shift, the place of storage must be approved by the
District Manager.'' Since the requirement was inadvertently omitted,
the ETS did not discuss it. MSHA received no comments on the omission.
Therefore, this final rule adds the omitted portion of former Sec.
75.1714-2(f).
9. Section 75.1714-4 Additional Self-Contained Self-Rescuers
Final Sec. 75.1714-4 addresses the need to provide and store
additional SCSRs that will offer protection for the maximum number of
people in the mine if an emergency occurs. The final rule revises the
ETS requirements for additional SCSRs and the location of stored SCSRs.
Changes to this section include: revised methods for determining SCSR
storage locations in each escapeway and for miners who do not have a
fixed work location; and, removing the requirement to provide an outby
storage plan. The final rule also makes non-substantive editorial
changes.
a. Additional SCSRs in Work Places. Final Sec. 75.1714-4(a)
retains the ETS requirement that mine operators provide all persons
with an additional SCSR at their underground work locations. Section 2
of the MINER Act reiterated the ETS requirement. MSHA revised the ETS
to clarify requirements for providing additional SCSRs to persons who
do not work at a fixed location by adding Sec. 75.1714-4(a)(2).
Specifically, MSHA was concerned that persons who work alone in
various parts of the mine, i.e., pumpers and examiners, could not carry
an extra SCSR with them and generally did not have access to an
additional SCSR. For this reason, in the preamble and its opening
statement at the public hearings, MSHA requested comment on how SCSR
storage locations could be made readily accessible to persons with no
fixed work location, such as pumpers, outby crews, and examiners
working underground.
Some commenters stated that the SCSR storage locations should be
figured on a mine-by-mine basis due to the different mine conditions
and situations. Other commenters suggested that these locations should
be addressed in the outby SCSR storage plan. Another commenter
suggested using the time-distance tables in MSHA's Program Policy
Manual (PPM), Volume 5, Sec. 75.1714-2, ``Self-Rescue Devices; Use and
Location Requirements,'' for pumpers and examiners; outby crews, such
as belt maintenance and supply personnel; and others who are similarly
situated.
MSHA considered these comments and adds a requirement in final
Sec. 75.1714-4(a)(2) that the mine operator store additional SCSRs
along the normal travel routes for pumpers, examiners, and other
persons who do not have a fixed work location. These SCSRs must be
stored at a distance no greater than the average miner could walk in 30
minutes. The final rule uses the 30 minute SCSR storage location
spacing to be consistent with the MINER Act requirement for escapeways.
The distance between SCSR storage locations must be determined by using
one of the methods found under paragraph (c)(2) of this section.
b. Additional SCSRs on Mantrips. Final Sec. 75.1714-4(b) retains
the requirement from the ETS that all persons using a mantrip or mobile
equipment to enter or exit the mine have an additional SCSR, which
provides protection for one-hour or longer, available from portal to
portal. At many mines, persons use mantrips or mobile equipment, such
as scoops, ramcars, or pick-up trucks, to enter or exit the mine and
travel to and from their working station. A mine accident or emergency
that requires evacuation could occur while crews are traveling. If
miners traveling on mantrips or mobile equipment are using filter self-
rescuers they must be provided with two SCSRs, each of which provides
protection for a period of one hour or longer. If SCSRs with a capacity
of less than one hour are worn by miners, the additional SCSR required
by Sec. 75.1714-4(b) may be stored along the escapeway at intervals
that are readily accessible to the miners.
Mine operators may use additional SCSRs stored on the mantrip or
mobile equipment to comply with Sec. 75.1714-4(a) for persons either
at a fixed work location or a non-fixed location, if the mantrip stays
on the section or near the work location. If the mantrip leaves the
section or the work location, the operator can comply with Sec.
75.1714-4(a) by removing the SCSRs from the mantrip and keeping them on
the section or near the work location.
One commenter strongly agreed with the requirement to have
additional SCSRs available on the mantrip or mobile equipment, and
stated that the explanation made ``great sense.'' Another commenter
stated that some MSHA districts were misinterpreting the requirement in
that they were requiring the mine operator to supply two SCSRs per
employee on the personnel carrier if a one-hour belt-wearable unit was
not employed. Another commenter believed that this requirement limits
the option of wearing a unit smaller than a one-hour unit for ergonomic
reasons. The commenter stated that the provision should permit each
personnel carrier to store one hour of oxygen for each person traveling
on that vehicle provided that the travel distance to exit the mine on
the vehicle's normal route is no further than an average miner can walk
in 30 minutes.
MSHA has considered these comments and the final rule retains the
ETS requirement that an additional SCSR be available to all miners
traveling on mantrips or mobile equipment. All miners are required to
have two SCSRs available to them while using mechanized transportation
to or from their work locations.
c. Additional SCSRs in Escapeways. Final Sec. 75.1714-4(c) retains
the ETS requirement that the mine operator store additional SCSRs in
the required escapeways when each person underground cannot safely
evacuate the mine within 30 minutes. MSHA has changed this provision to
be consistent with the MINER Act by specifying that the spacing between
SCSR storage locations in each required escapeway be no greater than
the distance an average miner can walk in 30 minutes. As discussed
later in the preamble, the final rule provides two methods for
determining spacing.
(i) Additional SCSRs. Final Sec. 75.1714-4(c)(1) retains the ETS
requirement that each SCSR storage location in the required escapeways
contain at least one SCSR, which provides protection for a period of
one hour or longer, for every person who will be inby that location.
(ii) Spacing of Stored SCSRs. ETS Sec. 75.1714-4(c) required the
mine operator to submit an outby SCSR storage plan to the appropriate
District Manager for approval. The final rule eliminates the
requirement for an outby
[[Page 71444]]
SCSR storage plan because it will be addressed in the Emergency
Response Plan required by Section 2(b) of the MINER Act.
Final Sec. 75.1714-4(c)(2) provides two methods for determining
the 30-minute spacing of SCSRs storage locations in escapeways. The
first method, found in final Sec. 75.1714-4(c)(2)(i), requires the
mine operator to calculate the spacing based on a sample of typical
miners walking a selected length of each escapeway. A sample of typical
miners is a cross-section of the population of all miners who would
have to evacuate the mine and use the SCSRS stored in the escapeways.
In general, operators using this option must use a sample that includes
miners of various ages, weights, levels of physical fitness, and
smoking habits; and a selected portion of the escapeway that reflects
entry height, slope, and underfoot conditions representative of the
entire escapeway.
The second method, found in final Sec. 75.1714-4(c)(2)(ii),
requires a mine operator to use a table that specifies maximum SCSR
storage location spacing based on average entry height, except
escapeways with grades over 5 percent. This table is based on
statistical data collected from the MSHA-NIOSH study from 1997.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ MSHA-NIOSH study, ``The Oxygen Cost of a Mine Escape''
(Kovac, Kravitz, and Rehak, 1997).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(iii) Comments on Performance-Based Approach to Spacing of SCSR
Storage Locations. The ETS included a ``heart-rate method'' as an
option for determining SCSR storage location spacing. Many commenters
stated that they were ``very concerned about this suggested method,''
and did ``not believe it is practical, effective or reliable to expect
those working underground to determine a `worst case scenario.' ''
These commenters stated that the heart rate method required a judgment
about which miner appears to be the slowest to evacuate. These
commenters also stated that the slowest miner could change from day to
day, depending on the employees available, whether someone was injured,
or even whether one miner did not feel well on a particular day. Some
commenters were concerned that requiring the miner to participate in
the ``heart-rate'' test would be hazardous to the miner's health.
Although some commenters favored the ``heart-rate method,''
commenters generally opposed solely using this method, but supported a
performance-based approach. One commenter supported the heart rate
method, but also suggested a combination of methods. This commenter
stated that the age and size of a miner (factors of the heart rate
method) could be combined with the 2,500 to 5,000 foot requirements
(escapeway intervals posed in the ETS based on the average entry
height), with storage being located at the shorter distance. Other
commenters stated that escapeway conditions vary; yet timed walks can
provide necessary information to determine the distance between SCSR
storage locations. One of these commenters stated that it was hard to
imagine one standard that would work for every mine. One commenter
stated that, for mine operators who do not want to conduct performance
testing, prescriptive standards could be allowed as an alternative. One
commenter suggested the actual capacity of the SCSR be used to
determine the distances between SCSR storage locations, rather than the
unit's certified capacity.
In response to comments, final rule Sec. 75.1714-4(c)(2)(i)
includes an option that allows the mine operator to calculate the
distance between SCSR storage locations by using the average distance
walked in 30 minutes over a typical length of each escapeway by a
sample of typical miners. Because the MINER Act requires SCSR storage
locations in escapeways to be no further than the average miner could
walk in 30 minutes, MSHA has eliminated the ``worst case'' scenario as
a requirement.
(iv) Comments on Prescriptive Spacing of SCSR Storage Locations.
Many commenters were in favor of a prescriptive approach to determining
spacing for SCSR storage locations. Commenters encouraged MSHA to set
an objective standard to achieve uniformity throughout the industry.
One commenter stated that MSHA should use a design type standard as the
maximum required distance, and allow mine operators to use performance
testing to decrease the distance of the storage locations. Another
commenter stated that MSHA, NIOSH, and miners' representatives should
determine, through studies, the specific distances between SCSR storage
locations. This commenter opposed permitting different distances under
storage plans because plans become ``unwieldy'' and the operator
``can't keep monitoring them constantly.'' This commenter stated
further that mine operators do not need flexibility.
Some commenters suggested that MSHA incorporate the height/distance
chart in MSHA's Program Policy Manual (PPM), Volume 5, Sec. 75.1714-2,
``Self-Rescue Devices; Use and Location Requirements,'' into this final
rule. Commenters stated that the chart has been used to convert travel
time to distance and could be used for that purpose in the final rule.
Other commenters stated that the West Virginia chart, which was
originally developed by MSHA, should be the standard used. Some
commenters stated that this issue was made moot by the new MINER Act,
which states that the self rescuer distances are based on the distance
that an average miner can travel in 30 minutes.
Some commenters, however, stated that a prescriptive standard would
not be appropriate because it is uniform across all mines and mining
conditions, regardless of differences. One commenter stated that
prescriptive standards of this sort are inherently inaccurate and fail
to take account of numerous relevant variables, such as seam height, or
other unique mine characteristics, as well as the physical condition of
the miners involved in evacuations. The commenter quoted MSHA's
compliance guide (Volume 2, at Q. 26), in which MSHA stated that such
uniform specifications ``do not take into account the slope of the
escapeway, travel conditions, or the age of the escaping miner.''
In response to comments and to retain flexibility, MSHA developed a
table that provides maximum distances for spacing SCSR storage
locations in Sec. 75.1714-4(c)(2).
(d) Additional SCSRs in Hardened Rooms. The final rule adds an
alternative in Sec. 75.1714-4(d) to allow mine operators to store
SCSRs between adjacent escapeways in a hardened room.
MSHA asked, in its opening statement at the public hearings, if
there were circumstances under which it would be appropriate to share
SCSRs between adjacent escapeways in a hardened room or ``safe haven''
that is constructed using permanent seal techniques. Several comments
were received that were both for and against this alternative. Some
commenters preferred to store one SCSR per miner in a structure between
adjacent escapeways that was accessible through doors from either
escapeway.
MSHA has considered these comments and determined that allowing one
SCSR per miner to be stored between adjacent escapeways, which would
serve both escapeways, can provide improved protection for miners if
certain conditions are met. The SCSR storage location must be secured
against damage from explosions in either escapeway. Requiring that the
hardened room be designed and constructed to the same explosion force
criteria as seals can provide greater protection than
[[Page 71445]]
SCSR storage arrangements in escapeways.
The final rule also requires that the hardened room contain an
independent source of air. At this time, MSHA has reviewed several
alternatives for providing independent, positive pressure ventilation
from the surface to a hardened room. Some of these alternatives
include: (1) A vertical bore hole from the surface; (2) directionally
drilled holes and suitable piping within the mine; or (3) a robust
insulated compressed air distribution system.
These hardened rooms would provide a smoke-free environment for
transferring SCSRs and communicating with the surface and with other
miners. This would facilitate SCSR transfer and miners' successful
evacuation. The agency expects that, on balance, hardened rooms would
not usually be a less costly alternative. MSHA does believe that this
alternative would provide for improved safety. If an operator intends
to use a hardened room for SCSR storage between escapeways, the
location and construction parameters must first be included in the
mine's ventilation plan approved by the District Manager.
e. Storage Location Accessibility. Final Sec. 75.1714-4(e) retains
the ETS requirement that all SCSRs be stored according to
manufacturers' instructions in locations that are conspicuous and
readily accessible by each person in the mine. Manufacturers'
instructions are included in the documentation for all SCSRs submitted
to MSHA and NIOSH for approval under 42 CFR part 84. Additionally, the
instructions are included with all SCSRs from each manufacturer.
The first ETS Compliance Guide, Training Questions for Emergency
Mine Evacuation, contains guidance on how to make the storage location
conspicuous. This requirement minimizes the time it takes a miner to
locate an SCSR when it is needed following an accident or emergency. An
SCSR conspicuously stored or readily accessible could make the
difference between the success or failure of an emergency mine
evacuation.
The manufacturer's instructions for a specific type of SCSR include
a shake test, to check the integrity of the internal SCSR chemical
beds, for SCSRs not transported or carried by the miner. Several
commenters requested that MSHA eliminate the shake test. Because the
shake test is included in the instructions for maintaining the
reliability of the SCSR and is included as a condition of its approval,
failure to conduct the shake test would invalidate the SCSR approval
under 42 CFR part 84. As such, MSHA has no authority to eliminate this
requirement. The final rule requires inspections and tests of SCSRs to
be implemented according to the manufacturer's instructions. For
certain SCSRs, this includes a shake test every 90 days.
10. Section 75.1714-5 Map Locations of Self-Contained Self-Rescuers
Final Sec. 75.1714-5 retains the requirement for the mine operator
to mark the SCSR storage locations on the Sec. 75.1505 (formerly Sec.
75.383) posted mine escapeway map and on the Sec. 75.1200 mine map.
Mine maps help assure that all persons are aware of the storage
locations of all SCSRs in the mine and the Sec. 75.1200 mine map is
used for mine rescue response.
11. Section 75.1714-6 Emergency Tethers
Final Sec. 75.1714-6 is a new requirement and addresses MSHA's
concern that miners not become separated when escaping from a smoke-
filled environment. Tethers are durable ropes or equivalent material
designed to permit members of a mine crew to link together while
evacuating the mine during an emergency. The final rule requires that
at least one tether, of sufficient length to link together members of a
mine crew, be placed with the additional SCSRs stored at fixed
underground work locations and on mobile equipment used to enter or
exit the mine. If the mining conditions require miners to walk out of
the mine, tethers will help keep individual miners from becoming
separated from the crew. Tethers, however, do not have to be stored
with the additional SCSRs for pumpers, examiners, and other persons who
generally work alone.
In the ETS preamble and in the opening statement at the hearings,
MSHA requested comments on whether miners should have the ability to
tether themselves together during escape through smoke-filled
environments. MSHA also asked for input regarding storage, method of
attachment, and placement of tethers. Commenters generally supported a
requirement that tethers be made available for miners to use, but did
not want MSHA to require their use. Commenters expressed a variety of
opinions as to where tethers should be stored. Some stated that tethers
should be stored at the beginning of the lifelines. Commenters did not
support prescriptive requirements for tether construction. They
believed that this should be left to the discretion of the mine
operator.
MSHA agrees that specific requirements for the length, method of
attachment, and other details of construction should be left for the
mine operator to address based on the specific needs and conditions of
the mine. In response to commenters' concerns, the final rule provides
miners with the capability of tethering together, but does not require
miners to use them.
12. Section 75.1714-7 Multi-Gas Detectors
Final Sec. 75.1714-7 is a new requirement and addresses MSHA's
concern that miners make a more informed decision about when to don an
SCSR. This section requires that the operator provide an MSHA-approved,
handheld, multi-gas detector, which can measure methane, oxygen, and
carbon monoxide, to each group of miners and to each miner working
alone; that at least one miner in each group be a qualified person
under Sec. 75.150; and that each miner working alone be trained to use
the detectors to take gas readings and to interpret the readings. In
addition, the detector must be maintained and calibrated as specified
in existing Sec. 75.320.
During the ETS hearings, MSHA asked for comment on whether mine
operators should be required to provide miners with handheld, multi-gas
detectors in connection with MSHA's request for comment about when
miners should don their SCSRs. MSHA was concerned that during a mine
emergency, a miner might have difficulty determining when to don an
SCSR. A toxic gas or reduced oxygen levels can be colorless and
odorless; often, these potentially fatal hazards are undetectable
without the use of a gas or air-quality detector. MSHA is requiring
approved, handheld, multi-gas detectors to enable miners to measure
critical mine gases during an emergency.
MSHA received a variety of comments on this issue. One commenter
stated that MSHA should immediately mandate this requirement. Multiple
commenters stated that this requirement would be burdensome to comply
with for each person, but thought that it would be a good idea for
section crews and other groups. One commenter thought that the
requirement was a good one, but was concerned about monthly calibration
for that amount of equipment. This commenter also expressed concern
about miners needing training to use the multi-gas detectors.
Commenters suggested that a patch that changed color or some other
indicator of harmful levels of carbon monoxide would be helpful.
While personal monitors or badges may assist in the decision to don
an SCSR, no product of this type is
[[Page 71446]]
currently approved by MSHA for use in underground coal mines. A multi-
gas detector is a viable alternative. MSHA-approved, multi-gas
detectors can simplify measuring gasses because separate detectors for
each gas would have different operating instructions and calibration
procedures requiring additional burden. Generally, this requirement can
be satisfied by units that are already in use in the coal mines.
Existing standards require that tests be made for excess methane,
oxygen deficiency, and carbon monoxide, and that a qualified person
take these measurements.
MSHA received many comments on the issue of when miners should don
SCSRs. Commenters stated that individuals working alone could be
instructed to don an SCSR when smoke was encountered. Several
commenters thought that MSHA should allow more than one way to compl |
