Mining Automation and Safety Research Prioritization
| Published date | 18 March 2019 |
| Citation | 84 FR 9798 |
| Record Number | 2019-04926 |
| Section | Notices |
| Court | Centers For Disease Control And Prevention |
9798
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 52 / Monday, March 18, 2019 / Notices
Quality Advisor/NEPA Program
Manager, GSA, at 415–522–3617. Please
also call this number if special
assistance is needed to attend and
participate in the public meeting.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
:
Background
The San Luis I LPOE is located on the
U.S.–Mexico international border in the
City of San Luis, Arizona. It is the
westernmost LPOE in Arizona and is
approximately four miles from the
California border. The San Luis I LPOE
was built in 1982 to accommodate
noncommercial traffic to and from
Mexico. The facilities at the LPOE are in
a deteriorated condition and are
inadequate for the present volume of
pedestrian and vehicle traffic. There has
been a 58 percent increase in the
number of personal vehicles processed
since 2010. The higher volume and
outdated facilities create long wait
times, leading to traffic backups in
downtown San Luis.
GSA is proposing to expand and
modernize the San Luis I LPOE to
correct operational deficiencies imposed
by deteriorating building conditions and
improve the LPOE’s functionality,
capacity, and security. Three
alternatives, the Proposed Action
Alternative, Alternative 1, and the No
Action Alternative, are evaluated in the
DEIS.
Proposed Action Alternative—
Demolition and Redevelopment. GSA
would acquire the land adjacent to the
western end of the LPOE, the former
Friendship Park, and the LPOE would
be reconfigured to streamline CBP
operations and inspection processes.
GSA would demolish the old,
deteriorated buildings and construct
new buildings and infrastructure on the
expanded site to accommodate the
increasing volume of pedestrian and
vehicle traffic. The Proposed Action
would be implemented in a phased
approach to alleviate potential
disruptions to operations at the LPOE.
Alternative 1—Renovate and
Modernize. GSA would not acquire
former Friendship Park, but would
renovate and modernize all existing
facilities and infrastructure at the LPOE.
The LPOE layout would remain as
currently configured, and current traffic
patterns entering and leaving the LPOE
would remain the same.
No Action Alternative. GSA would
not renovate or modernize any portion
of the LPOE. The LPOE would remain
as-is and continue its operations in
facilities as they are currently
configured.
Public Meeting
The meeting will be conducted in an
open house format, where project
information will be presented and
distributed. Comments must be received
by April 29, 2019, and emailed to
osmahn.kadri@gsa.gov, or sent to the
address listed above.
Dated: March 13, 2019.
Moonyeen Alameida,
Acting Director, Portfolio Management
Division, Pacific Rim Region, Public Buildings
Service.
[FR Doc. 2019–04985 Filed 3–15–19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6820–YF–P
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES
Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention
[Docket Number CDC–2019–0016, NIOSH–
325]
Mining Automation and Safety
Research Prioritization
AGENCY
: National Institute for
Occupational Safety and Health
(NIOSH) of the Centers for Disease
Control and Prevention (CDC),
Department of Health and Human
Services (HHS).
ACTION
: Request for information and
comment.
SUMMARY
: The National Institute for
Occupational Safety and Health
(NIOSH) of the Centers for Disease
Control and Prevention (CDC) has
recently established a research program
to address the rapidly expanding area of
automation and associated technologies
in mining. NIOSH is requesting
information to inform the prioritization
of research to be undertaken by The
Institute’s Mining Program. NIOSH is
seeking input on priority gaps in
knowledge regarding the safety and
health implications of humans working
with automated equipment and
associated technologies in mining, with
an emphasis on worker safety and
health research in which NIOSH has the
comparative advantage, and is unlikely
to be undertaken by other federal
agencies, academia, or the private
sector.
DATES
: Electronic or written comments
must be received by May 17, 2019.
ADDRESSES
: You may submit comments,
identified by CDC–2019–0016 and
NIOSH–325, by any of the following
methods:
•Federal eRulemaking Portal http://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
•Mail: National Institute for
Occupational Safety and Health, NIOSH
Docket Office, 1090 Tusculum Avenue,
MS C–34, Cincinnati, Ohio 45226–1998.
Instructions: All information received
in response to this notice must include
the agency name and docket number
[CDC–2019–0016; NIOSH–325]. All
relevant comments received will be
posted without change to https://
www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information provided. For
access to the docket to read background
documents or comments received, go to
https://www.regulations.gov. All
information received in response to this
notice will also be available for public
examination and copying at the NIOSH
Docket Office, 1150 Tusculum Avenue,
Room 155, Cincinnati, OH 45226–1998.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
:
Jeffrey H. Welsh, NIOSH Office of Mine
Safety and Health Research, 315 E
Montgomery Ave., Spokane, WA 99207.
Phone: 412–386–4040 (not a toll-free
number).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
:
Background: The mining industry has
been undergoing significant changes as
companies look to adopt automation
technologies to decrease costs and
increase efficiency and, according to
some companies, improve safety. These
new technologies include automated
mobile equipment, robotics,
teleoperation, wireless communications
and sensing systems, wearable sensors
and computers, virtual and augmented
reality, and data analytics. Surface iron
ore mines in Western Australia are
moving rapidly to adopt automation
technologies, and they appear to be the
closest in achieving completely
autonomous mining. In U.S. mines, the
adoption of automation technology is
gaining momentum, with some of the
first automation having been applied to
processing facilities, drilling equipment,
underground coal mine longwalls, and
now pilot projects with automated
haulage trucks and loaders.
Information Needs: To prepare for
expanded use of automation
technologies, NIOSH seeks to both
proactively address worker health and
safety challenges that may be associated
with automation, as well as leverage
new technologies to improve miner
health and safety. To understand the
state of automation technologies, their
implementation in the United States,
and the health and safety concerns
associated with the technology, NIOSH
seeks public input on the following
questions:
1. To what extent will automation and
associated technologies be implemented
in mining and in what timeframe?
VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:23 Mar 15, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00056 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\18MRN1.SGM 18MRN1
9799
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 52 / Monday, March 18, 2019 / Notices
2. What are the related health and
safety concerns with automation and
associated technologies in mining?
3. What gaps exist in occupational
health and safety research related to
automation and associated
technologies?
While the above questions have
priority, NIOSH also seeks public
comment on the state of the technology
and the health and safety concerns
associated with the following specific
topics related to automation:
4. What are the major safety concerns
associated with humans working near or
interacting with automated mining
equipment? Have other organizations
addressed the safety concerns associated
with humans working near or
interacting with automated mining
equipment? If yes, please provide a
description.
5. What research has been conducted,
or approaches taken, to address the
potential for human cognitive
processing confusion,
misunderstanding, and task or
information overload associated with
monitoring or controlling automated
mining equipment or other monitoring
systems (e.g., fleet management,
environmental monitoring, safety
systems, health care systems)?
6. What is the state of the art for
display methodologies and technologies
to provide mine personnel and
equipment operators with information
on operational status, location, and
sensory and environmental feedback
from automated mining equipment or
systems?
7. What sensor technology
improvements are needed to ensure the
safety of humans working on or near
automated equipment?
8. How are existing methods of big
data analytics applied to automated
mining equipment or systems? Are there
health and safety benefits to these
applications? If yes, please describe.
9. Are there any needed
improvements to guidelines or industry
standards for automated mining system
safe design and operation practices? If
yes, please describe.
10. Are there any needed
improvements to training materials,
training protocols, and operating
procedures for system safety design
principles related to automated mining
systems? If yes, please describe.
NIOSH is seeking feedback on the
research areas identified above and on
any additional knowledge gaps, ideas,
innovations, or practice improvements
not addressed by these research areas, as
well as feedback on how the research
areas should be prioritized. NIOSH is
especially interested in any creative and
new ideas as they relate to protecting
the health and safety of miners today
and in the future. When possible,
NIOSH asks that commenters provide
data and citations of relevant research to
justify their comments. NIOSH is also
seeking key scientific articles addressing
worker safety and health related to
mining automation that could inform
our research activities.
References
DoD [2000]. Standard practice for system
safety. U.S. Department of Defense, MIL–
STD–882D.
Endsley MR [1995]. Toward a theory of
situational awareness in dynamic
systems. Hum Factors 37(1):32–64.
USBM [1988]. Human factors in mining. By
Sanders MS, Peay JM. Pittsburgh, PA:
U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau
of Mines, IC 9182.
Frank J. Hearl,
Chief of Staff, National Institute for
Occupational Safety and Health, Centers for
Disease Control and Prevention.
[FR Doc. 2019–04926 Filed 3–15–19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4163–19–P
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES
Centers for Medicare & Medicaid
Services
[CMS–3370–FN]
Medicare and Medicaid Programs:
Approval of an Application From the
Accreditation Association for
Hospitals and Health Systems/
Healthcare Facilities Accreditation
Program for Continued CMS Approval
of Its Hospital Accreditation Program
AGENCY
: Centers for Medicare and
Medicaid Services, HHS.
ACTION
: Final notice.
SUMMARY
: This final notice announces
our decision to approve the
Accreditation Association for Hospitals
and Health Systems/Healthcare
Facilities Accreditation Program
(AAHHS/HFAP) (formerly known as the
American Osteopathic Association/
Healthcare Facilities Accreditation
Program (AOA/HFAP)) for continued
recognition as a national accrediting
organization for hospitals that wish to
participate in the Medicare or Medicaid
programs.
DATES
: This final notice is effective
September 25, 2019 through September
25, 2023.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
: Tara
Lemons (410) 786–3030, Mary Ellen
Palowitch (410) 786–4496, or Monda
Shaver, (410) 786–3410.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
:
I. Background
A healthcare provider may enter into
an agreement with Medicare to
participate in the program as a hospital
provided certain requirements are met.
Section 1861(e) of the Social Security
Act (the Act) establishes criteria for
providers seeking participation in
Medicare as a hospital. Regulations
concerning Medicare provider
agreements in general are at 42 CFR part
489 and those pertaining to the survey
and certification for Medicare
participation of providers and certain
types of suppliers are at 42 CFR part
488. The regulations at 42 CFR part 482
specify the specific conditions that a
provider must meet to participate in the
Medicare program as a hospital.
Hospitals that wish to be paid under the
Medicaid program must be approved to
participate in Medicare, in accordance
with 42 CFR 440.10(a)(3)(iii).
Generally, to enter into a Medicare
hospital provider agreement, a facility
must first be certified as complying with
the conditions set forth in part 482 and
recommended to the Centers for
Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) for
participation by a State survey agency.
Thereafter, the hospital is subject to
periodic surveys by a State survey
agency to determine whether it
continues to meet these conditions.
However, there is an alternative to
certification surveys by State agencies.
Accreditation by a nationally recognized
Medicare accreditation program
approved by CMS may substitute for
both initial and ongoing state review.
Section 1865(a)(1) of the Act provides
that, if the Secretary of the Department
of Health and Human Services (the
Secretary) finds that accreditation of a
provider entity by an approved national
accrediting organization meets or
exceeds all applicable Medicare
conditions, we may treat the provider
entity as having met those conditions,
that is, we may ‘‘deem’’ the provider
entity to be in compliance.
Accreditation by an accrediting
organization is voluntary and is not
required for Medicare participation.
Part 488, subpart A, implements the
provisions of section 1865 of the Act
and requires that a national accrediting
organization applying for approval of its
Medicare accreditation program must
provide CMS with reasonable assurance
that the accrediting organization
requires its accredited provider entities
to meet requirements that are at least as
stringent as the Medicare conditions.
Our regulations concerning the approval
of accrediting organizations are set forth
at § 488.5. The regulations at §
VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:23 Mar 15, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00057 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\18MRN1.SGM 18MRN1
