Testing, Evaluation, and Approval of Electric Motor-Driven Mine Equipment and Accessories
| Citation | 85 FR 73656 |
| Record Number | 2020-22589 |
| Published date | 19 November 2020 |
| Court | Mine Safety And Health Administration |
Federal Register, Volume 85 Issue 224 (Thursday, November 19, 2020)
[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 224 (Thursday, November 19, 2020)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 73656-73667]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-22589]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Mine Safety and Health Administration
30 CFR Parts 18 and 74
[Docket No. MSHA-2020-0018]
RIN 1219-AB93
Testing, Evaluation, and Approval of Electric Motor-Driven Mine
Equipment and Accessories
AGENCY: Mine Safety and Health Administration, Labor.
ACTION: Proposed rule; request for comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA) proposes to
revise its regulations that sets out the testing, evaluation, and
approval requirements for electric motor-driven mine equipment and
accessories intended for use in gassy mines. Under this proposal, MSHA
will accept voluntary consensus standards (VCS) that are suitable for
gassy mining environments and that provide protection against fire or
explosion dangers, to replace approval requirements in its regulations.
This proposal is intended to promote the use of innovative and advanced
technologies that lead to improvements in mine safety and health and to
improve the efficiency and effectiveness of MSHA's approval process.
DATES: Comment date: Comments must be received or postmarked by
midnight Eastern Daylight Savings Time on December 21, 2020.
ADDRESSES: Submit comments and informational materials, identified by
RIN 1219-AB93 or Docket No. MSHA-2020-0018, by one of the following
methods:
Federal E-Rulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the online instructions for submitting comments.
Email: [email protected]. Include RIN 1219-AB93 or
Docket No. MSHA-2020-0018 in the subject line of the message.
Mail: MSHA, Office of Standards, Regulations, and
Variances, 201 12th Street South, Suite 4E401, Arlington, Virginia
22202-5452.
Hand Delivery or Courier: MSHA, 201 12th Street South,
Suite 4E401, Arlington, Virginia, between 9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m.
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. Sign in at the
receptionist's desk on the 4th Floor East.
Fax: (202) 693-9441.
Instructions: All submissions must include RIN 1219-AB93 or Docket
No. MSHA-2020-0018. Do not include
[[Page 73657]]
personal information that you do not want publicly disclosed; MSHA will
post all comments without change, including any personal information
provided, to http://www.regulations.gov and on MSHA's website at
https://www.msha.gov/regulations/rulemaking.
Docket: For access to the docket to read comments received, go to
http://www.regulations.gov or http://www.msha.gov/currentcomments.asp.
To read background documents, go to http://www.regulations.gov. Review
comments and background documents in person at the Office of Standards,
Regulations, and Variances, 201 12th Street South, Suite 4E401,
Arlington, Virginia 22202-5452. Sign in at the receptionist's desk on
the 4th Floor East, Suite 4E401.
Email Notification: To subscribe to receive email notification when
MSHA publishes rulemaking documents in the Federal Register, go to
https://public.govdelivery.com/accounts/USDOL/subscriber/new.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Roslyn B. Fontaine, Deputy Director,
Office of Standards, Regulations, and Variances, MSHA, at
[email protected] (email), (202) 693-9440 (voice); or (202) 693-
9441 (facsimile). These are not toll-free numbers.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
The Federal Mine Safety and Health Act of 1977 (30 U.S.C. 801)
(Mine Act) requires the Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA) to
establish requirements for the technical design, construction, and
testing of electrical products that must be approved by MSHA prior to
use in gassy mines. These regulations are divided into separate parts
based on equipment type. Title 30 CFR part 18 (part 18) specifies the
procedures and requirements for obtaining MSHA approval, certification,
extension, or acceptance of electric motor-driven mine equipment and
accessories intended for use in gassy mines.\1\ Examples of this
equipment include portable two-way radios, remote control units for
mining machinery, longwall mining systems, portable oxygen detectors,
miner-wearable components for proximity detection systems, and powered
air-purifying respirators (PAPRs). MSHA approves, as ``permissible,''
completely assembled electrical equipment, components of electrical
equipment, and electrical accessories that manufacturers design,
construct, and install to meet MSHA's requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ MSHA's approval regulations (30 CFR parts 6, 7, 18, 19, 20,
22, 23, 27, and 28) govern the process through which manufacturers
may obtain MSHA approval, certification, extension, or acceptance of
certain electrical products for use in underground mines. Each of
these separate approval actions has specific application procedures
and technical requirements for testing and evaluation. Along with
``approval,'' the terms ``certification,'' ``extension,'' and
``acceptance'' also denote MSHA approval.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Requirements in part 18, including associated tests, are to ensure
that such equipment will not cause a fire or explosion (30 CFR 18.4).
Applicants must design electrical equipment so that it will not cause a
fire or explosion, using at least one of two recognized methods. One
way is to design equipment so that it cannot produce a spark strong
enough, or temperatures sufficient, to ignite a hazardous gas such as
flammable methane-air mixtures. Alternatively, applicants may house the
equipment in enclosures that will withstand internal explosions of
methane-air mixtures without damage to, or excessive distortion of, its
walls or covers, and without ignition of surrounding methane-air
mixtures or discharge of flame from inside to outside the enclosure.
Before electric motor-driven equipment or accessories can be used
in gassy mines in the U.S., they must first have been approved for such
use by MSHA. Those seeking MSHA approval (applicants) are typically
product designers and manufacturers of the equipment or accessories.
MSHA's approval process includes testing and evaluation of the
products, either by MSHA or by an independent laboratory. Applicants
that use an independent laboratory to conduct testing or evaluation
must submit the results to MSHA for review, along with written evidence
of the laboratory's independence and current recognition by a
laboratory accrediting organization.
When MSHA receives an application for approval of a completely
assembled electrical machine or accessory for use in gassy mines, MSHA
reviews the application using the following steps. First, MSHA examines
the documents in the application to determine whether the applicant has
met the technical requirements of the provisions of part 18. MSHA also
checks each drawing and specification in the application against these
requirements and, for some products, samples of the product or parts of
the product. MSHA may disassemble and examine parts of the product for
conformity to the drawings and specifications. Second, after MSHA
verifies that an applicant's product complies with the design and
construction requirements, MSHA tests the product to determine whether
it performs according to the approval requirements. MSHA issues an
approval if the product passes the tests and meets all of MSHA's
technical and safety requirements.
Once a product is approved, the applicant is becomes an approval
holder and must place an MSHA approval marking on the product to
indicate that the product is approved for use in gassy mines.
The use of the MSHA approval marking obligates the approval holder
to maintain the quality of the completely assembled product according
to the technical requirements upon which its approval was based. If an
approval holder wants to modify an approved product and maintain its
approval, then the approval holder must submit its proposed changes to
MSHA. If MSHA approves the changes, the Agency issues either an
extension of approval or a notice of acceptance of the modified product
to the approval holder.
II. Regulatory Review and Reform Comments
In 2018, the Agency announced its intent to review existing
regulations to assess compliance costs and reduce regulatory burden. As
part of this review, MSHA sought stakeholders' assistance in
identifying those regulations that could be repealed, replaced, or
modified without reducing miners' safety or health. MSHA published on
its website (https://www.msha.gov/provide-or-view-comments-msha-regulations-repeal-replace-or-modify) a notice that the Agency is
seeking assistance in identifying regulations for review. All comments
are posted on the Agency's website.
As a result of this solicitation, MSHA received a number of
recommendations regarding MSHA's product approval regulations. One
commenter recommended that MSHA replace part 18 with a modified set of
regulations to provide a clearer and timelier path for approval of new
technologies that will improve the health and safety of miners. The
commenter noted that many products approved for use under international
consensus standards in other countries could not be approved for use by
MSHA under part 18. The commenter stated that international coal
companies outside the United States may use products designed and
manufactured to these international consensus standards, and thus may
have access to the latest health and safety technology in their mining
operations.
MSHA acknowledges the benefits of using VCS and proposes that VCS
replace existing MSHA requirements as discussed below.
[[Page 73658]]
Two commenters suggested that MSHA adopt the International
Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) 60079 standards for use in approvals
of electrical mining equipment, including methane detectors. These IEC
standards address the safety of equipment used in explosive gaseous
atmospheres. One commenter stated that the IEC series of standards has
been adopted by many other countries for use in approving electrical
mining equipment for use in explosive atmospheres. For example,
Australia uses the IEC 60079 standards with national deviations that
are called the ANZEx 60079 standards. For approvals issued under part
18, MSHA agrees and is proposing to adopt VCS that provide protection
against fire and explosion dangers.
One commenter suggested that MSHA provide clearly-defined
requirements in part 18 for equipment approvals and certifications
based on standards that are maintained and updated by industry experts
and technical committees. The commenter stated that regularly updating
the standards would improve the safety of electrical mining equipment
and that allowing the standards to keep pace with technology (through
more recent versions of the standards) would improve the safety and
health of miners in the U.S.
MSHA agrees with these comments and would use the appropriate
rulemaking process with solicitation of public comment to adopt VCS
developed by standard-setting bodies that plan, develop, establish, or
coordinate standards through agreed-upon, transparent, and deliberate
procedures. MSHA further agrees that continuing to adopt VCS as they
are maintained and updated through the agreed-upon, transparent, and
deliberate procedures, can promote the availability of technologically
advanced equipment for use in U.S. mines, thus improving mine safety
and health.
III. Discussion of Proposed Rule
A. Voluntary Consensus Standards
MSHA proposes to incorporate by reference 14 VCS--8 American
National Standards Institute (ANSI) approved and 6 IEC approved--in
their entirety and without modification, to replace existing approval
criteria in part 18 for products covered by the incorporated VCS.\2\
MSHA has determined that these VCS (1) are suitable for gassy mining
environments and (2) will provide protection against fire or explosion
dangers, if substituted in their entirety for MSHA approval
requirements specified in part 18, subparts B through E. The existing
MSHA subparts B through E requirements would continue to apply to those
electrical components not covered by one of the 14 VCS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ MSHA has participated on Technical Advisory Groups to the
U.S. National Committee (USNC) of the IEC for the past several
years. The USNC of the IEC is an integrated body of ANSI. MSHA staff
have provided comments on proposed changes to IEC standards for
electrical equipment for use in hazardous locations. This includes
standards for intrinsic safety, flameproof enclosures, and
encapsulated assemblies.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 1 below lists the U.S. and international VCS that MSHA
proposes to incorporate by reference in part 18. As discussed below in
the section-by-section analysis, the ANSI standards are based on the
similarly-numbered IEC standards. The ANSI and IEC standards on
particular topics are generally similar but not identical, as the ANSI
standards include modifications of the IEC standards and U.S.-specific
requirements (U.S. deviations). IEC standards are prepared and
maintained by subject matter experts, using a rigorous and well-defined
process. Similarly, the U.S. deviations are developed by nationally-
recognized and vetted experts and are approved as American National
Standards only if the appropriate procedures are followed.
MSHA believes this approach would promote in U.S. mines the
availability of technologically advanced equipment that protects miners
against the risk of fire or explosion dangers. Many products conforming
to these VCS are broadly recognized across various industries and in
other countries as providing an appropriate level of safety for miners
and others in work environments with hazards similar to those
encountered in the mining industry. The proposed changes would allow
the introduction of products that further mine safety but that MSHA
could not otherwise approve because they do not conform to the existing
requirements in part 18.
This proposal is also consistent with the Office of Management and
Budget's (OMB) Circular A-119 (Jan. 27, 2016 (81 FR 4673)), which
establishes policy guidance for Federal agencies. Circular A-119, based
on the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15
U.S.C. 3701 et seq.) (Transfer Act), section 12(d), directs Federal
agencies to use technical standards developed or adopted by VCS bodies
to carry out policies or activities. Additionally, Circular A-119
directs agencies to use VCS in lieu of government-unique standards,
except where inconsistent with law or otherwise impractical. The intent
of the policy guidance in Circular A-119 is to minimize agency reliance
on government-unique standards to decrease the burden of complying with
agency regulations and promote efficiency and economic competition
through harmonization of standards. (See https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/Circular-119-1.pdf). Consistent with Circular
A-119, the use of VCS would streamline the MSHA approval process and
make it more effective and efficient for applicants by decreasing the
reliance on government-unique standards.
While this proposal lists 14 VCS for MSHA to incorporate by
reference, the Agency is interested in whether the proposal should be
expanded to include other VCS. Please provide rationale, with
definitive data and explanation of how this would improve safety, for
your position.
The VCS are summarized in the discussion related to Sec. 18.102.
Table 1--Voluntary Consensus Standards
------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
ANSI/UL 60079-0 Ed. 7, Explosive Atmospheres--Part 0: Equipment--General
Requirements (Group I) (2019). This standard provides the general
requirements for the construction, testing, and marking of electrical
equipment intended for use in explosive atmospheres.
ANSI/UL 60079-1 Ed. 7, Standard for Explosive Atmospheres--Part 1:
Equipment Protection by Flameproof Enclosures ``d'' (Group I, Level of
Protection `da') (2015). This standard contains specific requirements
for the construction and testing of electrical equipment, with the Type
of Protection flameproof (FP) enclosure designated ``d'' intended for
use in explosive gas atmospheres.
ANSI/ISA 60079-11 \1\ (12.02.01)--2014 Standard for Explosive
Atmospheres--Part 11: Equipment Protection by Intrinsic Safety ``i''
(Group I, Level of Protection `ia') (2014). This standard specifies the
construction and testing of intrinsically safe apparatus intended for
use in an explosive atmosphere and for associated apparatus, which is
intended for connection to intrinsically safe circuits that may enter
such atmospheres. This type of protection is applicable to electrical
equipment in which the electrical circuits themselves are incapable of
causing an explosion in the surrounding explosive atmospheres.
[[Page 73659]]
ANSI/UL 60079-11 \1\ Ed. 6, Standard for Explosive Atmospheres--Part 11:
Equipment Protection by Intrinsic Safety ``i'' (Group I, Level of
Protection `ia') (2013). This standard specifies the construction and
testing of intrinsically safe apparatus intended for use in an
explosive atmosphere and for associated apparatus, which is intended
for connection to intrinsically safe circuits that may enter such
atmospheres. This type of protection is applicable to electrical
equipment in which the electrical circuits themselves are incapable of
causing an explosion in the surrounding explosive atmospheres.
ANSI/UL 60079-18, Ed. 4, Standard for Explosive Atmospheres--Part 18:
Equipment Protection by Encapsulation `m' (Group I, Level of Protection
`ma') (2015). This standard provides the specific requirements for the
construction, testing, and marking of electrical equipment, parts of
electrical equipment, and components not intended to be used alone,
with the Type of Protection encapsulation ``m'' intended for use in
explosive gas atmospheres or explosive dust atmospheres.
ANSI/ISA 60079-25 \1\ (12.02.05)-2011 Standard for Explosive
Atmospheres--Part 25: Intrinsically Safe Electrical Systems (Group I,
Level of Protection `ia') (2011). This standard contains the specific
requirements for construction and assessment of intrinsically safe
electrical systems, intended for use, as a whole or in part, in
hazardous locations. A system approved under this standard is comprised
of equipment or components approved to the 60079-11 standard,
interconnected to form a system.
ANSI/UL 60079-25 \1\ Ed. 2, Standard for Explosive Atmospheres--Part 25:
Intrinsically Safe Electrical Systems (Group I, Level of Protection
`ia') (2011). This standard contains the specific requirements for
construction and assessment of intrinsically safe electrical systems,
intended for use, as a whole or in part, in hazardous locations. A
system approved under this standard is comprised of equipment or
components approved to the 60079-11 standard, interconnected to form a
system.
ANSI/UL 60079-28 Ed. 2, Standard for Explosive Atmospheres--Part 28:
Protection of Equipment and Transmission Systems Using Optical
Radiation (Group I, Equipment Protection Level `Ma') (2017). This
standard contains the requirements and testing of equipment emitting
optical radiation intended for use in explosive atmospheres. It also
covers equipment located outside the explosive atmosphere but which
generates optical radiation that is intended to enter an explosive
atmosphere.
IEC 60079-0, Ed. 7, Explosive atmospheres--Part 0: Equipment--General
requirements (Group I) (2017). This standard provides the general
requirements for the construction, testing, and marking of electrical
equipment intended for use in explosive atmospheres.
IEC 60079-1 Ed. 7, Standard for Explosive Atmospheres--Part 1: Equipment
Protection by Flameproof Enclosures ``d'' (Group I, Level of Protection
`da') (2014). This standard contains specific requirements for the
construction and testing of electrical equipment, with the Type of
Protection flameproof (FP) enclosure designated ``d'' intended for use
in explosive gas atmospheres.
IEC 60079-11, Ed. 6, Explosive Atmospheres--Part 11: Equipment
Protection by Intrinsic Safety ``i'' (Group I, Level of Protection
`ia') (2011). This standard specifies the construction and testing of
intrinsically safe apparatus intended for use in an explosive
atmosphere and for associated apparatus, which is intended for
connection to intrinsically safe circuits that may enter such
atmospheres. This type of protection is applicable to electrical
equipment in which the electrical circuits themselves are incapable of
causing an explosion in the surrounding explosive atmospheres.
IEC 60079-18, Ed. 4.1, Explosive Atmospheres--Part 18: Equipment
Protection by Encapsulation `m' (Group I, Level of Protection `ma')
(2017). This standard provides the specific requirements for the
construction, testing, and marking of electrical equipment, parts of
electrical equipment, and components not intended to be used alone,
with the Type of Protection encapsulation ``m'' intended for use in
explosive gas atmospheres or explosive dust atmospheres.
IEC 60079-25 Ed. 3, Explosive Atmospheres--Part 25: Intrinsically Safe
Electrical Systems (Group I, Level of Protection `ia') (2020). This
standard contains the specific requirements for construction and
assessment of intrinsically safe electrical systems, intended for use,
as a whole or in part, in hazardous locations. A system approved under
this standard is comprised of equipment or components approved to the
60079-11 standard, interconnected to form a system.
IEC 60079-28 Ed. 2, Standard for Explosive Atmospheres--Part 28:
Protection of Equipment and Transmission Systems Using Optical
Radiation (Group I, Equipment Protection Level `Ma') (2015). This
standard contains the requirements and testing of equipment emitting
optical radiation intended for use in explosive atmospheres. It also
covers equipment located outside the explosive atmosphere but which
generates optical radiation that is intended to enter an explosive
atmosphere.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ For VCS that begin with ANSI/UL and ANSI/ISA and follow with a
common number, the versions are identical (co-sponsored and co-
published by UL LLC (UL) and the International Society of Automation
(ISA)).
B. Availability of Voluntary Consensus Standards To Be Incorporated by
Reference
The 14 VCS to be incorporated by reference are publicly available
and below is the availability information. A copy of each standard
proposed to be incorporated by reference is available for inspection at
MSHA, Office of Standards, Regulations, and Variances, 201 12th Street
South, Suite 4E401, Arlington, Virginia 22202-5452 and at MSHA,
Approval and Certification Center, 765 Technology Drive, Triadelphia,
WV 26059.
Copies of standards produced by IEC may be obtained from the
International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC), 3 rue de
Varemb[eacute], 1st Floor, P.O. Box 131, CH-1211 Geneva 20,
Switzerland, Tel: +41 22 919 0211, and are available for purchase at
the IEC website (www.iec.ch).
Copies of standards produced by the ISA, may be obtained from the
International Society of Automation (ISA), 67 T.W. Alexander Drive,
P.O. Box 12277, Research Triangle Park, NC 27709, Tel: (919) 549-8411,
and are also available for purchase at the ISA website (www.isa.org).
Copies of standards produced by UL, may be obtained from UL LLC
(UL), Comm 2000, 151 Eastern Avenue, Bensenville, IL 60106, Tel: (888)
853-3503, and are also available for purchase at the UL website
(www.ul.com).
Copies of each of the 14 VCS may also be obtained from ANSI at the
American National Standards Institute (ANSI), 1899 L Street NW, 11th
Floor, Washington, DC 20036, Tel: (202) 293-8020, and online at ANSI's
website (www.ansi.org).
Additionally, during the public comment period of this proposed
rule, a free, read-only copy of each of the VCS is available for public
inspection on ANSI's Standards Connect portal, which is accessible to
anyone who registers at https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/DQVJYMK.
C. Implementation Dates for Voluntary Consensus Standards
MSHA proposes the following dates for the implementation of the
voluntary consensus standard requirements under part 18, also
referenced in Table 2 below.
For the period that starts on [effective date of the final rule]
and ends on [12 months after the effective date of the final rule]:
New applications for approval may meet either subparts B
through E requirements, or the requirements of the VCS listed in this
part;
Applications for approval in process may meet either
subparts B through E requirements, or the
[[Page 73660]]
requirements of the VCS listed in this part; \3\ and
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ Applicants whose applications for approval use subparts B
through E requirements and are under MSHA review at the time the
final rule becomes effective may resubmit their applications using
the VCS if they so choose.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Applications for formal extensions of approval or
certification may meet the requirements under which the last approval,
certification, or formal extension was issued by MSHA, or the
requirements of the VCS listed in this part.
Starting on [date 12 months after the effective date of the final
rule]:
New applications for approval must meet the requirements
of the VCS listed in this part unless no VCS listed in this part apply;
and
Applications for formal extensions of approval or
certification may meet the requirements under which the last approval,
certification, or formal extension was issued by MSHA, or meet the
requirements of the VCS listed in this part.
Table 2--Implementation Dates for VCS
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Implementation date Types of applications Requirements to be used
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
For a 12-month period starting on New applications for approval. Either part 18, subparts B through E, or
[effective date of final rule]. voluntary consensus standards.
Applications for approval in Either part 18, subparts B through E, or
process. voluntary consensus standards.
Applications for changes to Requirements under which the last
existing approved equipment. approval, certification, or formal
extension was issued by MSHA, or
voluntary consensus standards.
Starting on [date 12 months after the New applications for approval. Voluntary consensus standards, and part
effective date of the final rule]. 18, subparts B through E, if no listed
voluntary consensus standard applies.
Applications for changes to Requirements under which the last
existing approved equipment. approval, certification, or formal
extension was issued by MSHA, or
voluntary consensus standards.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
D. Conforming Changes
The proposed rule also makes technical changes to 30 CFR part 74
(part 74) regarding the approval requirements for Coal Mine Dust
Sampling Devices to conform to the proposed changes in part 18.
IV. Section-by-Section Analysis
A. Section 18.2--Definitions
The proposed rule would revise the definition for ``permissible
equipment.'' The proposed rule also would add definitions for
``voluntary consensus standard'' and ``voluntary consensus standards
body.''
The definition for ``permissible equipment'' would be revised to
remove the reference to the Mining Enforcement and Safety
Administration (MESA). MESA and all its responsibilities were
transferred to MSHA in 1978 under the Mine Act. The reference to MESA
is no longer necessary (43 FR 12314, March 24, 1978).
The proposed rule would add two new terms and definitions to Sec.
18.2. One is ``voluntary consensus standard'' that references a safety
standard developed or adopted by a standard-setting organization.
Another is ``voluntary consensus standards body'' that means a domestic
or international standard-setting organization that plans, develops,
establishes, or coordinates VCS using agreed-upon procedures that are
consistent with the Transfer Act and Circular A-119.
Under Circular A-119, a voluntary consensus standards body is
recognized if it develops VCS in accordance with the following
attributes: Openness, balance of interest, due process, an appeals
process, and consensus. This standards body also must adopt, publish,
and make available to the public the VCS it adopts. Lastly, the
voluntary consensus standards body must maintain each voluntary
consensus standard through a schedule of review. As a Federal agency,
MSHA relies upon OMB guidance in determining whether to incorporate by
reference a voluntary consensus standard.
B. Section 18.6--Applications
Currently, Sec. 18.6(e) requires that each drawing an applicant
submits as part of the approval application under part 18 include a
warning stating that changes in design must be authorized by MSHA
before they are applied to approved equipment. This assures that all
approval holders understand the importance of the approval for
equipment safety and the impact any changes, made by any parties, have
on the approval. MSHA proposes to remove this requirement because MSHA
specifies in the approval letter sent to applicants that approval
holders cannot make changes to designs without MSHA approval. The
Agency has determined that the drawing-warning requirement is
unnecessary because MSHA ensures throughout the approval process that
approval holders are aware of their responsibility to notify MSHA of
changes to approved equipment.
C. Section 18.15--Changes After Approval or Certification
Currently, Sec. 18.15 requires approval holders to submit an
application to extend an approval if they want to change any feature of
approved equipment or a certified component. Under Sec. 18.15(c), MSHA
proposes to add new paragraphs (c)(1) and (2).
Proposed paragraph (c)(1) would allow the application for a change
after approval or certification to be made based on the requirements in
subparts B through E or the VCS, whichever of these requirements
applied to the last approval, certification, or formal extension issued
by MSHA. Proposed paragraph (c)(2) would allow an application for a
change after approval or certification to be made using the VCS listed
in proposed Sec. 18.102 that apply to those components if the
applicant chooses to use the VCS requirements even though the last
approval, certification, or formal extension issued by MSHA was based
on subparts B through E requirements. If no VCS requirements listed in
this part apply to a component, then subparts B through E requirements
would apply.
Thus, under these proposed changes, approval holders would have the
option to make changes based on either the last approval,
certification, or formal
[[Page 73661]]
extension issued by MSHA, or the VCS listed in this part, so that they
could make a decision that suits them best. MSHA solicits comments on
this aspect of the proposal.
D. Section 18.101--Acceptance and Use of Voluntary Consensus Standards
MSHA proposes to add a new subpart F, Voluntary Consensus
Standards, consisting of proposed Sec. Sec. 18.101 through 18.103.
Proposed Sec. 18.101 is a new section that allows applicants to
seek approval under part 18 for designs of electrical machines,
accessories, or components that conform to the requirements in the VCS
listed in proposed Sec. 18.102. The VCS listed in proposed Sec.
18.102 would apply to many of the components of the completely
assembled equipment.
Under this proposal, applications for approval would require
specifications to meet the VCS listed in this part, or existing
subparts B through E requirements, or both, depending on the types of
components in the fully assembled machines and accessories. Powered
air-purifying respirators are examples of fully assembled machines that
may be approved using only VCS requirements. However, certain
completely assembled equipment such as longwall mining systems,
continuous mining machines, shuttle cars, and roof-bolters, would not
be covered entirely by any VCS of which MSHA is aware. For example, a
continuous mining machine is made up of several components such as
motors, lights, explosion proof enclosures, and other types of
electrical components that are parts of the completely assembled
machine. For this type of machine, some components will be subject to
VCS requirements and other components will be subject to the subparts B
through E requirements for MSHA approval.
Under proposed Sec. 18.101(a), MSHA would replace the requirements
specified in subparts B through E for components, accessories, and
completely assembled electrical machines with applicable VCS that are
suitable for gassy mining environments and that provide protection
against fire or explosion dangers.
In proposed paragraph (b), MSHA is providing a transition period
for the optional use of VCS for an applicant who submits an application
within the first 12 months after the final rule becomes effective. In
proposed paragraphs (b)(1) and (2), the applicant may choose to use
either the subparts B through E requirements for any components or the
VCS listed in proposed Sec. 18.102 for components to which the listed
VCS apply.
In proposed paragraph (c), once the 12-month transition period
ends, MSHA would require the use of VCS in new applications for
approval. Proposed paragraph (c)(1) would require applicants to use the
VCS listed in proposed Sec. 18.102 for components to which the listed
VCS apply. In proposed paragraph (c)(2), MSHA would allow applicants to
use subparts B through E requirements for a component to which no VCS
listed in proposed Sec. 18.102 would apply.
MSHA believes that a 12-month transition period will provide
manufacturers, approval holders, and applicants enough time to make
design and build changes necessary to meet the required specifications
of the VCS for new applications.
MSHA requires marking requirements to indicate that a product is
approved for use in gassy mines under Sec. 18.11, subpart A. MSHA
recognizes that the proposed VCS include non-technical requirements,
such as marking requirements. Some of the markings required under Sec.
18.11 may overlap with some of the markings required by the VCS;
however, required VCS markings are not necessary for an approval. MSHA
will provide the applicant with the required markings upon approval of
an application. Therefore, the MSHA marking requirements in Sec.
18.11, subpart A, would still apply to approved products. The MSHA
marking on an approved product would continue to signify to the end
users that the product is safe for use in gassy mines.
MSHA believes that the use of VCS under proposed Sec. 18.101 will
promote the use of innovative and advanced technologies that lead to
improvements in mine safety and health. MSHA expects that the use of
VCS would provide applicants and manufacturers with additional product
design options for products and equipment with potential use in the
mining industry without sacrificing the safety assurances associated
with approvals. The use of VCS may also provide applicants and
manufacturers access to other markets for products and equipment they
currently only sell to the U.S. mining industry. Given the small U.S.
market for products that the mining industry uses, designing products
to meet MSHA-specific approval criteria can be costly, and in some
cases may be financially prohibitive, for manufacturers who produce
products for broader commercial use. The proposed changes would allow
the introduction of products that conform to the VCS requirements and
that further mine safety, but that MSHA could not otherwise approve
because the Agency does not currently recognize VCS requirements.
Further, MSHA has determined the VCS that the Agency proposes to
incorporate by reference are developed in accordance with the following
attributes: Openness, balance of interest, due process, an appeals
process, and consensus. The use of VCS would make technologically
advanced equipment available for use in U.S. mines in a quicker and
more cost-effective manner, which could improve miner safety and
health.
E. Section 18.102--Approved Voluntary Consensus Standards
Proposed Sec. 18.102 is a new section. Proposed paragraph (a)
establishes that MSHA has determined that the list in proposed
paragraph (b) is suitable for gassy mining environments and will
provide the protection against fire or explosion dangers if used in
their entirety to replace MSHA approval requirements specified in
subparts B through E.
The design of the electrically operated equipment must comply with
the Types of Protection and Levels of Protection in the relevant VCS,
as specified in proposed paragraph (b).
In proposed paragraph (b), MSHA would incorporate by reference the
VCS listed in this section.
Proposed paragraphs (b)(1) through (3) include the VCS and specify
the category of equipment (Group) and Level of Protection applicable to
approvals.
These standards are from three sources. For the IEC standards
listed in proposed paragraph (b)(1), the source is the International
Electrotechnical Commission. For American National Standards listed in
proposed paragraphs (b)(2) and (3), the two sources are the
International Society for Automation (ISA) and UL LLC (UL). The IEC
approves and publishes consensus-based International Standards and
manages conformity assessment systems for electric and electronic
products, systems and services, collectively known as
electrotechnology. ANSI approves the American National Standards and
supports the U.S. voluntary standards and conformity assessment system.
In the case of the standards that begin with ANSI/ISA or ANSI/UL and
follow with a common number, the ISA and UL versions are identical (co-
sponsored and co-published). For example, ANSI/ISA 60079-11 and ANSI/UL
60079-11 refer to the same voluntary consensus standard with the
specified Types of
[[Page 73662]]
Protection and Levels of Protection indicated.
Either ANSI or the IEC has approved all of the standards listed in
proposed Sec. 18.102. In the discussion below, ``60079-0,'' ``60079-
1,'' ``60079-11,'' ``60079-18,'' ``60079-25,'' and ``60079-28'' refer
to all three numbered versions of the VCS established by IEC, ISA, and
UL.
Typically, the voluntary consensus standard-setting bodies base the
ANSI standards on similarly-numbered International IEC standards. The
ANSI standards are modifications of the IEC standards and include U.S.
deviations and encompass both additional and deleted information.
Experts prepare and maintain IEC standards using a rigorous and well-
defined process. Similarly, the U.S. deviations are developed by
nationally-recognized and vetted experts and are approved as American
National Standards only if the appropriate procedures are followed.
The listed ANSI standards are interdependent with each other and
with the NEC. Also, the listed IEC standards are interdependent with
each other. For intrinsically safe devices, for example, 60079-0
provides the general requirements, and 60079-11 supplements and
modifies the general requirements of 60079-0 (with documented
exceptions). Similarly, for intrinsically safe systems, the 60079-25
standard supplements and modifies the general requirements of 60079-0
and the intrinsic safety standard 60079-11. For encapsulated electrical
equipment, the 60079-18 standard also supplements and modifies the
general requirements of 60079-0. For equipment and transmission systems
using optical radiation, the 60079-28 standard also supplements and
modifies the general requirements of 60079-0.
The 60079-0 standard provides the general requirements for the
construction, testing, and marking of electrical equipment intended for
use in explosive atmospheres.
The 60079-1 standard contains specific requirements for the
construction and testing of electrical equipment, with the Type of
Protection flameproof (FP) enclosure designated ``d'' intended for use
in explosive gas atmospheres.
Similarly, 60079-11 specifies the construction and testing of
intrinsically safe apparatus intended for use in an explosive
atmosphere and for associated apparatus, which is intended for
connection to intrinsically safe circuits that may enter such
atmospheres.
Also, 60079-18 provides the specific requirements for the
construction, testing, and marking of electrical equipment, parts of
electrical equipment, and components not intended to be used alone,
with the Type of Protection encapsulation ``m'' intended for use in
explosive gas atmospheres or explosive dust atmospheres.
The 60079-25 standard contains the specific requirements for
construction and assessment of intrinsically safe electrical systems,
intended for use, as a whole or in part, in hazardous locations. A
system approved under this standard is comprised of equipment or
components approved to the 60079-11 standard, interconnected to form a
system.
Finally, 60079-28 contains the requirements of equipment emitting
optical radiation intended for use in explosive atmospheres. It also
covers equipment located outside the explosive atmosphere but which
generates optical radiation that is intended to enter an explosive
atmosphere.
The listed standards apply to equipment for use in all explosive
atmospheres and locations that are likely to include those hazardous
atmospheres. For the risk of ignition associated with gas
concentrations, electrical equipment is divided into two broad
categories: Group I and Group II.
Group I electrical equipment is intended for use in mines
susceptible to firedamp, a flammable gas found in coal mines. Group II
electrical equipment is intended for use in places with an explosive
gas atmosphere, other than mines susceptible to firedamp. Both the ANSI
and IEC standards note that firedamp consists mainly of methane, but
also contains small quantities of other gases, such as nitrogen, carbon
dioxide, and hydrogen, and sometimes ethane and carbon monoxide. The
terms ``firedamp'' and ``methane'' are used frequently in mining
practice as synonyms. In further discussions below, only the term
``methane'' will be used for simplicity.
The protections in these standards for Group I electrical equipment
account for the ignition of both methane and coal dust, along with
enhanced physical protection for equipment used underground. Thus, in
this proposed rulemaking, MSHA proposes to use the requirements
associated for Group I equipment in the listed standards.
As explained above, Group II electrical equipment is intended for
use in places with an explosive gas atmosphere other than mines
susceptible to methane. Also, Group II electrical equipment is
subdivided according to the nature of the explosive gas atmosphere for
which it is intended. Group II subdivisions are as follows: IIA, a
typical gas is propane; IIB, a typical gas is ethylene; and IIC, a
typical gas is hydrogen. Because gassy mines where coal dust is
commonly present may vary from the environments in which Group II
electrical equipment is intended to operate, this proposed rule does
not allow the use of Group II requirements in the listed standards.
The standards further define various ``Types of Protection,'' such
as intrinsic safety. These ``Types of Protection'' are subdivided into
``Levels of Protection'' that differentiate the likelihood of the
equipment becoming a source of ignition. For example, Type of
Protection ``intrinsic safety i'' is defined by National Fire
Protection Association (NFPA) 70, National Electrical Code (NEC), as
Type of Protection where any spark or thermal effect is incapable of
causing ignition of a mixture of flammable or combustible material in
air under prescribed test conditions. In U.S. industries other than
mining, and in mines internationally, the required Level of Protection
is defined by the exposure to the hazard. These hazardous locations are
divided into Zones, based on the level of exposure to the hazard. There
are three such Zones defined in the NFPA 70, NEC, which is based on
international standards. For explosive gases, for example, a Zone 0
location has ignitable concentrations of flammable gases or vapors
either continuously present or present for long periods of time. A Zone
0 location, by definition, requires the highest protection levels
against fire or explosion for equipment when used in Zone 0
atmospheres. The likelihood of exposure to flammable gases or vapors is
lower in Zone 1 locations, and is further reduced in Zone 2 locations.
Therefore, Zones 1 and 2 locations have reduced Levels of Protection
requirements for equipment used in these locations compared to the
Level of Protection for equipment used in Zone 0 locations. The NFPA
70, NEC subdivides Type of Protection ``intrinsic safety i'' into
Levels of Protection ``ia,'' ``ib,'' and ``ic'' and designates that
Level of Protection ``ia'' is appropriate for Zone 0, ``ib'' is
appropriate for Zone 1, and ``ic'' is appropriate for Zone 2. Thus,
Level of Protection ``ia'' is the highest Level of Protection.
To simplify the selection of electrical equipment for a given
purpose, the standards also incorporate ``Equipment Protection
Levels,'' or EPLs. These EPLs are assigned to equipment based on its
likelihood of becoming a source of ignition and distinguishing the
differences between explosive atmosphere types. For example, EPL G is
intended for explosive gas
[[Page 73663]]
atmospheres, EPL D is intended for explosive dust atmospheres, and EPL
M is intended for explosive atmospheres in mines susceptible to
methane. The EPLs are further subdivided into protection levels Ga, Da,
and Ma for very high protection suitable for a two-fault scenario; Gb,
Db, and Mb for high protection suitable for a single fault scenario;
and Gc and Dc for enhanced protection to minimize ignition risk. Thus,
EPLs Ga, Da, and Ma are the highest protection levels for explosive gas
atmospheres, dust atmospheres, and mine atmospheres susceptible to
methane, respectively.
In 2018, researchers at the National Institute for Occupational
Safety and Health (NIOSH) presented a paper to the Institute of
Electrical and Electronics Engineers'(IEEE) Industry Applications
Society titled ``Intrinsically Safe Systems: Equivalency of
International Standards Compared to U.S. Mining Approval Criteria.''
\4\ The researchers concluded that the relative Level of Protection
afforded miners by the application of the ANSI/ISA 60079 two-fault
intrinsically safe (IS) standard is a safe alternative to MSHA's
requirements when such electrical equipment is installed in mines. They
also concluded that the use of such equipment would provide at least an
equivalent level of safety as that provided by equipment approved under
MSHA criteria. MSHA is proposing to allow the use of the latest
versions of the ANSI and IEC intrinsic safety standards.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ William Calder, David P. Snyder, John F. Burr, Intrinsically
Safe Systems: Equivalency of International Standards Compared to
U.S. Mining Approval Criteria, DOI 10.1109/TIA.2018.2804322, IEEE
Transactions on Industry Applications.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The ``two-fault IS standard'' to which the NIOSH researchers refer
above is the 60079-11 standard, Level of Protection ``ia.'' This means
that the researchers concluded, for intrinsically safe equipment and
associated apparatuses, Level of Protection ``ia'' in the 60079-0,
60079-11, and 60079-25 standards provide miners with protection against
fire and explosion dangers. The researchers subsequently concluded that
the use of such equipment would provide at least an equivalent level of
safety as that provided by equipment approved to MSHA criteria.\5\ MSHA
agrees with this conclusion. Thus, because the NIOSH researchers have
determined that Level of Protection ``ia'' provides miners with
protection against fire and explosion, MSHA is proposing to require
that manufacturers seeking approval using the incorporated VCS conform
to the ``ia'' Level of Protection where designated in this proposal.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ Ibid.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Further, as discussed above, NFPA 70, NEC notes that intrinsic
safety is the designated Type of Protection ``ia'' (intrinsic safety)
for use in Zone 0 locations. The only other types of protection that
NFPA 70, NEC allows for use in Zone 0 is Type of Protection ``da''
(flameproof enclosures) as defined in 60079-1 and Type of Protection
``ma'' (encapsulation) as defined in the 60079-18 standard. MSHA
believes that ``ia,'' ``da,'' and ``ma'' will provide the necessary
Level of Protection for miners because the NEC allows ``ia,'' ``da,''
and ``ma'' for use in Zone 0. MSHA has allowed encapsulated assemblies
to be approved under part 18, since 2009, as noted in MSHA's
Encapsulation Criteria, ACRI2010.\6\ ACRI2010 was based, in part, on
the requirements of 60079-18 in place at the time it was created. MSHA
has received no reports that encapsulated assemblies tested and
evaluated to ACRI2010 have failed to provide the intended protection.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ https://arlweb.msha.gov/techsupp/acc/application/acri2010.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
MSHA is proposing to include the 60079-1 standard for FP
enclosures, but only Level of Protection ``da'' which is suitable for
use in Zone 0 locations. Level of Protection ``da'' is applicable only
to catalytic sensors of portable combustible gas detectors. Levels of
Protection ``db'' and ``dc'' are not being included because they do not
provide miners with suitable protection against fire and explosion in
gassy mines.
MSHA proposes to include the 60079-18 standard (Level of Protection
``ma'') based on the following: (1) MSHA's experience with ACRI2010 and
(2) the fact that the hazardous locations community allows the use of
``ma'' equipment in Zone 0, coupled with the determination by NIOSH
researchers that the only other Level of Protection allowed in Zone 0
(``ia'') provides miners protection against fire and explosion.
Similarly, the 60079-28 standard (Equipment Protection Level Ma) is
included based on the same factors.
In conclusion, the proposed rule would allow for the use of the
latest versions of the ANSI and IEC standards for intrinsic safety
(``ia''), flameproof catalytic sensors (``da''), and encapsulation
(``ma'') as they apply to Group I (Zone 0) (mining) equipment.
MSHA is interested in whether the proposal should be expanded to
include other VCS. Please provide the rationale, with definitive data
and explanation, for your position.
In summary, MSHA proposes to incorporate by reference the IEC
standards in proposed paragraph (b)(1) and the ANSI standards in
proposed paragraphs (b)(2) and (3), which are appropriate for use in
Zone 0 locations. MSHA has determined that the VCS in proposed Sec.
18.102 would provide protection against fire or explosion if used in
their entirety to replace MSHA approval requirements specified in
subparts B through E. However, the marking requirements in subpart A of
this part would not be superseded by the requirements specified in the
proposed VCS. The marking requirement in the existing rule would be
included in the approval marking requirements as specified in Sec.
18.11, subpart A.
F. Section 18.103--Review and Update of Applicable Voluntary Consensus
Standards
Proposed Sec. 18.103 is a new section about updating the existing
list of VCS. To ensure timely updating of the list in Sec. 18.102,
MSHA would review more recent editions of the listed VCS and determine
whether to accept them. Also, MSHA may review other VCS that are not
listed in Sec. 18.102 and determine whether they are suitable for
gassy mining environments and provide protection against fire and
explosion dangers. After such thorough reviews, MSHA would use the
appropriate rulemaking process to publish an updated list of VCS that
the Agency would accept to replace approval requirements in subparts B
through E in part 18. MSHA also may remove a standard from the list in
Sec. 18.102 if it is withdrawn by a voluntary consensus standards body
or for other reasons.
MSHA is aware that manufacturers of approved products currently
used in mines may wish to design and manufacture products to more
recent versions of MSHA-accepted VCS to keep products up-to-date for
improvements and marketability.
Under proposed Sec. 18.103, MSHA would consider updates and
alternatives to existing standards that promote the efficiency and
effectiveness of the MSHA approval process, which could lead to the use
of innovative and advanced technologies in U.S. mines and to
improvements in mine safety and health.
Conforming Amendments
This proposal would require conforming amendments to Coal Mine Dust
Sampling Devices in existing part 74 based on the proposed changes in
part 18.
[[Page 73664]]
Part 74--Coal Mine Dust Sampling Devices
MSHA proposes to change cross-references in Sec. Sec. 74.5(b) and
74.11(d) for evaluation and testing for permissibility of Coal Mine
Dust Sampling Devices from Sec. 18.68 to part 18. This change in part
74 would conform to the proposed changes in part 18 and would allow the
use of MSHA-designated VCS for the approval of coal mine dust sampling
devices.
V. Regulatory Economic Analysis
A. Executive Orders 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review, and 13563:
Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review
Executive Orders (E.O.s) 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess
all costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if
regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize
net benefits (including potential economic, environmental, public
health and safety effects, distributive impacts, and equity). E.O.
13563 emphasizes the importance of quantifying both costs and benefits,
of reducing costs, of harmonizing rules, and of promoting flexibility.
Currently, MSHA or an independent laboratory conducts the testing
and evaluation of electrical products for which applicants seek MSHA
approval for use in gassy mines. For new approval applications, this
proposal would allow applicants to use either existing MSHA
requirements or VCS for the first 12 months after the final rule
becomes effective. After 12 months, MSHA will require new applicants to
(1) use VCS requirements that apply to the components of the electrical
machine or accessory and (2) use existing MSHA requirements for the
components of the electrical machine or accessory to which no listed
VCS apply. Under current regulations, costs to approve equipment are
defined as transfers and not E.O. 12866 costs. In this case, costs
represent MSHA's costs recovered from approval applicants via a fee.
Under the proposed rule, it is unlikely that the number of approval
requests will change much. Based on discussions with past applicants,
MSHA understands that many products submitted to MSHA for approval have
been accepted using VCS for mining outside the U.S. or for other
industries (e.g., oil and gas extraction) that have similar safety
standards. Applicants submitting these types of products for MSHA
approval would likely experience substantially lower approval costs.
Because their products already meet VCS listed in this proposed rule
and would no longer need to meet MSHA-specific requirements, no
additional technical drawings, documentation, and testing would be
necessary beyond that submitted elsewhere for VCS approval.
Some current approval holders may incur costs because of the
requirement to use VCS after the 12-month transition period.\7\ For
those requesting new approvals, the costs would be mostly attributable
to the approval holder having to create new design and build
specifications using VCS requirements instead of using already existing
design and build specifications based on part 18, subparts B through E,
requirements. By contrast, current approval holders that are requesting
only a minor modification of an approval should not incur costs,
because they would be allowed to choose to use the requirements (either
part 18, subparts B through E, or VCS) under which the last approval,
certification, or formal extension was issued by MSHA. Based on
discussions between MSHA and applicants during past approvals, MSHA
concludes that a small number of current approval holders may decide
not to stay in the mining market.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ Applicants may choose to use VCS for new approvals for the
first 12 months after the effective date of the final rule. After 12
months, new applications for approval must use VCS, if applicable.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
This proposed rule will provide benefits to both manufacturers of
electrical products and the consumers of those products--mine operators
and miners. Currently, some products that use modern technologies that
could improve the safety and health of miners are not being introduced
into the U.S. mining market. One reason may be that technical
requirements set by MSHA differ from those that apply in other
countries. These MSHA-specific technical requirements may slow, or even
prevent, these new technologies from being implemented in U.S.
underground mines. Use of VCS to replace MSHA-specific requirements
would likely reduce the overall design and approval costs for many
manufacturers; as a result, manufacturers introducing new technologies
may experience fewer barriers for product market entry into the mining
industry.
This proposed rule would not affect currently approved equipment,
as it would allow manufacturers and mine operators to continue to sell
or purchase all currently approved equipment. If at a future date, a
current approval holder wishes to alter approved equipment, the
application could comply with the requirements on which the approval
was based or with the VCS requirements listed in this part.
Therefore, MSHA does not anticipate that manufacturers will have
difficulties in meeting these requirements. MSHA's acceptance of VCS
would provide more choices of mining products to mine operators and
miners, as these VCS are used by the broader market. MSHA does not
anticipate problems in manufacturing or purchasing products that meet
VCS, as such products are already in use in markets outside of U.S.
mining.
In summary, under this proposal, approval holders would not be
required to alter equipment or incur any new costs for existing
approvals. New applicants may choose the standards most beneficial to
them during the 12-month transition period. For those applicants whose
products already meet VCS requirements, they would likely experience
either no new costs, or cost reductions. Overall, net costs are more
likely to go down than up.
The Agency is interested in whether the proposal to include VCS may
result in cost differences for applicants due to the proposal to
eliminate subparts B through E requirements for new approvals. Please
provide the rationale, with definitive data and explanation, for your
position.
Under E.O. 12866, a significant regulatory action is one meeting
any of a number of specified conditions, including the following:
Having an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or
more;
Creating a serious inconsistency or interfering with an
action of another agency;
Materially altering the budgetary impact of entitlements
or the rights of entitlement recipients; or
Raising novel legal or policy issues.
MSHA has determined that this is a not a significant regulatory
action under E.O. 12866.
B. E.O. 13771: Reducing Regulation and Controlling Regulatory Costs,
and E.O. 13924: Regulatory Relief To Support Economic Recovery
This proposed rule is not expected to be an E.O. 13771 regulatory
action, because this proposed rule is not significant under E.O. 12866.
As discussed above, the proposed use of VCS would have minimal total
costs, but it would have the benefit of streamlining product approval
and providing greater flexibility to potential market entrants and
therefore MSHA believes it will be deregulatory.
[[Page 73665]]
MSHA also believes the proposal meets policy goals of E.O. 13924:
It reflects the efforts of businesses to comply with often-complex
approval regulations, and it provides businesses with the confidence
that requesting approvals covered by this proposal will allow them to
meet a single set of standards as they plan product development for
global markets.
VI. Feasibility
Economic feasibility is related to an entire industry rather than
individual firms. In the E.O. 12866 and E.O. 13563 section above, MSHA
discussed that global manufacturers of products for mining already
successfully use the VCS for mining outside the U.S. The proposal would
provide MSHA and most manufacturers increased flexibility for approval
of existing or new equipment for use in gassy mines. Although some
businesses might choose not to seek new approvals, MSHA could not
identify any product that would likely leave the U.S. market without
the availability of an alternative. MSHA has concluded that the
requirements of the proposed rule would be both technologically and
economically feasible.
VII. Regulatory Flexibility Act; Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act; and E.O. 13272
MSHA has analyzed the overall compliance cost impact of the
proposed rule on small entities. No current approval holder would be
required to make a product change due to this proposal. A small entity
would make application for an extension or new approval only if the
financial benefit outweighs new costs. For new product approvals, the
existing MSHA approval requirement costs would be replaced by
compliance costs of the VCS. Because MSHA cannot know what products
would be submitted for approval, it is not possible to quantify how
much different the costs would be. Based on the discussions between
MSHA and applicants described previously, MSHA believes the MSHA
standards to be more burdensome, and the Agency projects cost
reductions for some small entities. For E.O. 13272 considerations of
the applicable statutes, there are no new mandated direct costs of this
proposed rule. MSHA proposes to certify that the rule would not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
Therefore, the Agency is not required to develop an initial regulatory
flexibility analysis.
VIII. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
The Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) provides for the Federal
Government's collection, use, and dissemination of information. The
goals of the PRA include minimizing paperwork and reporting burdens and
ensuring the maximum possible utility from the information that is
collected (44 U.S.C. 3501). There are no new information collections
associated with this proposed rule.
IX. Other Regulatory Considerations
A. The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
MSHA has reviewed the proposed rule under the Unfunded Mandates
Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1501 et seq.). MSHA has determined that
this proposed rule does not include any Federal mandate that may result
in increased expenditures by State, local, or tribal governments. Since
the proposed rule does not have any costs, the rule is not a major rule
under the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995. Accordingly, the
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 requires no further Agency action
or analysis.
B. E.O. 13132: Federalism
The proposed rule does not have ``federalism implications'' because
it would not ``have substantial direct effects on the States, on the
relationship between the National Government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of
government.'' Accordingly, under E.O. 13132, no further Agency action
or analysis is required.
C. E.O. 12630: Government Actions and Interference With
Constitutionally Protected Property Rights
The proposed rule does not implement a policy with takings
implications. Accordingly, under E.O. 12630, no further Agency action
or analysis is required.
D. E.O. 12988: Civil Justice Reform
The proposed rule was written to provide a clear legal standard for
affected conduct and was carefully reviewed to eliminate drafting
errors and ambiguities, to minimize litigation and undue burden on the
Federal court system. Accordingly, the rule meets the applicable
standards provided in section 3 of E.O. 12988, Civil Justice Reform.
E. E.O. 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian Tribal
Governments
This proposed rule does not have ``tribal implications'' because it
would not ``have substantial direct effects on one or more Indian
tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian
tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between
the Federal Government and Indian tribes.'' Accordingly, under E.O.
13175, no further Agency action or analysis is required.
F. E.O. 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect
Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
E.O. 13211 requires agencies to publish a statement of energy
effects when a rule has a significant energy action that adversely
affects energy supply, distribution, or use. MSHA has reviewed this
proposed rule for its energy effects. There are no costs associated
with this proposed rule. For the energy analysis, this rule would not
exceed the relevant criteria for adverse impact.
G. Congressional Review Act
Pursuant to the Congressional Review Act (5 U.S.C. 801 et seq.),
this proposed rule is not a ``major rule,'' as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2).
List of Subjects
30 CFR Part 18
Incorporation by reference, Mine safety and health, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
30 CFR Part 74
Mine safety and health, Occupational safety and health.
For the reasons set out in the preamble, and under the authority of
the Federal Mine Safety and Health Act of 1977, as amended by the Mine
Improvement and New Emergency Response Act of 2006, MSHA proposes to
amend chapter I of title 30 of the Code of Federal Regulations as
follows:
PART 18--ELECTRIC MOTOR-DRIVEN MINE EQUIPMENT AND ACCESSORIES
0
1. The authority citation for part 18 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 30 U.S.C. 957, 961.
0
2. Amend Sec. 18.2 by:
0
a. Revising the definition for ``Permissible equipment''; and
0
b. Adding in alphabetical order the definitions for ``Voluntary
consensus
[[Page 73666]]
standard'' and ``Voluntary consensus standards body.''
The revision and additions read as follows:
Sec. 18.2 Definitions.
* * * * *
Permissible equipment means a completely assembled electrical
machine or accessory for which an approval has been issued.
* * * * *
Voluntary consensus standard means a safety standard that:
(1) Is developed or adopted by a voluntary consensus standards
body; and
(2) Prescribes safety requirements applicable to equipment for
which applicants are seeking approval, certification, extension, or
acceptance under this part.
Voluntary consensus standards body means a domestic or
international organization that plans, develops, establishes, or
coordinates voluntary consensus standards using agreed-upon procedures
that are consistent with the National Technology Transfer and
Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 3710) and the Office of Management
and Budget's Circular A-119 (Jan. 27, 2016).
Sec. 18.6 [Amended]
0
3. Amend Sec. 18.6 by removing the third sentence in paragraph (e).
0
4. Amend Sec. 18.15 by revising paragraph (c) to read as follows:
Sec. 18.15 Changes after approval or certification.
* * * * *
(c) An application for a formal extension of approval or
certification must have a list of new or revised drawings,
specifications, and information related to the changes to be added to
those already on file for the original approval or certification. MSHA
will issue a formal extension of approval or certification to a
completely assembled electrical machine or accessory, if each component
of such electrical machine or accessory:
(1) Meets the requirements applied to the last approval,
certification, or extension thereof; or
(2) Meets voluntary consensus standard requirements listed in this
part that apply to those components if the applicant chooses to use the
requirements of the voluntary consensus standards.
* * * * *
0
5. Add subpart F, consisting of Sec. Sec. 18.101 through 18.103, to
read as follows:
Subpart F--Voluntary Consensus Standards
Sec.
18.101 Acceptance and use of voluntary consensus standards.
18.102 Approved voluntary consensus standards.
18.103 Review and update of applicable voluntary consensus
standards.
Sec. 18.101 Acceptance and use of voluntary consensus standards.
(a) MSHA will accept voluntary consensus standards that are
suitable for gassy mining environments and that provide protection
against fire or explosion, if used in their entirety and without
modification to replace the requirements in subparts B through E of
this part.
(b) For applications submitted on or after [effective date of final
rule] until [date 12 months after the effective date of final rule], an
approval will be issued in accordance with subpart A of this part for a
completely assembled electrical machine or accessory, if each component
of such electrical machine or accessory:
(1) Meets the requirements in subparts B through E of this part; or
(2) Meets voluntary consensus standard requirements listed in this
part that apply to those components.
(c) For applications submitted on or after [date 12 months after
the effective date of the final rule], an approval will be issued in
accordance with subpart A of this part for a completely assembled
electrical machine or accessory, if the components of such machine or
accessory:
(1) Meet the requirements of the voluntary consensus standards
listed in this part that apply to those components; and
(2) Meet the requirements of subparts B through E of this part that
apply to components if no voluntary consensus standard listed in this
part applies.
Sec. 18.102 Approved voluntary consensus standards.
(a) MSHA has determined that the provisions associated with the
Group and Levels of Protection provisions of the voluntary consensus
standards listed in paragraph (b) of this section are suitable for
gassy mining environments and will provide the protection for against
fire or explosion if used in their entirety and without modification to
replace the requirements in subparts B through E of this part.
(b) Certain material is incorporated by reference into this section
with the approval of the Director of the Federal Register under 5
U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. All approved material is available for
inspection at U.S. Department of Labor, Mine Safety and Health
Administration, 765 Technology Drive, Triadelphia, WV 26059, Tel: (304)
547-0400, and is available from the sources indicated in this paragraph
(b). It is also available for inspection at the National Archives and
Records Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of
this material at NARA, email [email protected] or go to
www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.
(1) International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC), 3 rue de
Varemb[eacute], 1st Floor, P.O. Box 131, CH-1211 Geneva 20,
Switzerland, Tel: +41 22 919 0211 (https://www.iec.ch/).
(i) IEC 60079-0, Ed. 7, Explosive atmospheres--Part 0: Equipment--
General requirements (Group I), dated December 13, 2017;
(ii) IEC 60079-1 Ed. 7, Standard for Explosive Atmospheres--Part 1:
Equipment Protection by Flameproof Enclosures ``d'' (Group I, Level of
Protection `da'), dated June 27, 2014;
(iii) IEC 60079-11, Ed. 6, Explosive Atmospheres--Part 11:
Equipment Protection by Intrinsic Safety ``i'' (Group I, Level of
Protection `ia'), dated June 30, 2011;
(iv) IEC 60079-18, Ed. 4.1, Explosive Atmospheres--Part 18:
Equipment Protection by Encapsulation ``m'' (Group I, Level of
Protection `ma'), dated August 25, 2017;
(v) IEC 60079-25 Ed. 3, Explosive Atmospheres--Part 25:
Intrinsically Safe Electrical Systems (Group I, Level of Protection
`ia'), dated June 26, 2020; and
(vi) IEC 60079-28 Ed. 2, Standard for Explosive Atmospheres--Part
28: Protection of Equipment and Transmission Systems Using Optical
Radiation (Group I, Equipment Protection Level `Ma'), dated May 27,
2015.
(2) International Society of Automation (ISA), 67 T.W. Alexander
Drive, P.O. Box 12277, Research Triangle Park, NC 27709, Tel: (919)
549-8411 (https://www.isa.org).
(i) ANSI/ISA 60079-11 (12.02.01)--2014 Standard for Explosive
Atmospheres--Part 11: Equipment Protection by Intrinsic Safety ``i''
(Group I, Level of Protection `ia'), dated March 28, 2014; and
(ii) ANSI/ISA 60079-25 (12.02.05)--2011 Standard for Explosive
Atmospheres--Part 25: Intrinsically Safe Electrical Systems (Group I,
Level of Protection `ia'), dated December 2, 2011.
(3) UL LLC, Comm 2000, 151 Eastern Avenue, Bensenville, IL 60106,
Tel: (888) 853-3503 (https://www.ul.com).
(i) ANSI/UL 60079-0 Ed. 7, Explosive Atmospheres--Part 0:
Equipment--
[[Page 73667]]
General Requirements (Group I), dated March 26, 2019;
(ii) ANSI/UL 60079-1 Ed. 7, Standard for Explosive Atmospheres--
Part 1: Equipment Protection by Flameproof Enclosures ``d'' (Group I,
Level of Protection `da'), dated September 18, 2015;
(iii) ANSI/UL 60079-11 Ed. 6, Standard for Explosive Atmospheres--
Part 11: Equipment Protection by Intrinsic Safety ``i'' (Group I, Level
of Protection `ia'), dated February 15, 2013;
(iv) ANSI/UL 60079-18, Ed. 4, Standard for Explosive Atmospheres--
Part 18: Equipment Protection by Encapsulation ``m'' (Group I, Level of
Protection `ma'), dated December 14, 2015;
(v) ANSI/UL 60079-25 Ed. 2, Standard for Explosive Atmospheres--
Part 25: Intrinsically Safe Electrical Systems (Group I, Level of
Protection `ia'), dated December 2, 2011; and
(vi) ANSI/UL 60079-28 Ed. 2, Standard for Explosive Atmospheres--
Part 28: Protection of Equipment and Transmission Systems Using Optical
Radiation (Group I, Equipment Protection Level `Ma'), dated September
15, 2017.
(4) The voluntary consensus standards listed in this paragraph (b)
may also be obtained from the American National Standards Institute,
1899 L Street NW, 11th Floor, Washington, DC 20036, Tel: (202) 293-8020
(https://www.ansi.org).
Sec. 18.103 Review and update of applicable voluntary consensus
standards.
(a) MSHA will review more recent editions of voluntary consensus
standards listed in Sec. 18.102 to determine whether they can be used
in their entirety and without modification to replace the requirements
in subparts B through E of this part.
(b) MSHA may review voluntary consensus standards not listed in
Sec. 18.102 to determine whether such standards are suitable for gassy
mining environments and whether they provide protection against fire or
explosion, if substituted in their entirety and without modification to
replace the requirements in subparts B through E of this part.
(c) Following such review and determination, MSHA will use the
appropriate rulemaking process to publish a list of voluntary consensus
standards that it accepts in lieu of the requirements in subparts B
through E of this part.
PART 74--COAL MINE DUST SAMPLING DEVICES
0
6. The authority citation for part 74 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 30 U.S.C. 957.
Sec. Sec. 74.5 and 74.11 [Amended]
0
7. In Sec. Sec. 74.5(b) and 74.11(d), remove ``30 CFR 18.68'' and add
in its place the term ``30 CFR part 18.''
David G. Zatezalo,
Assistant Secretary of Labor for Mine Safety and Health.
[FR Doc. 2020-22589 Filed 11-18-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4520-43-P
