[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 62 (Friday, March 31, 1995)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 16589-16591]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-8018]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Mine Safety and Health Administration
30 CFR Parts 14, 18, and 75
RIN 1219-AA92
Requirements for Approval of Flame-Resistant Conveyor Belts
AGENCY: Mine Safety and Health Administration, Labor.
ACTION: Proposed rule; reopening of the record; request for public
comment and notice of public hearing.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA) is reopening
the rulemaking record on proposed revisions to requirements for
approval of flame-resistant conveyor belts for use in underground
mines. Subsequent to the record closing on the conveyor belt proposal,
MSHA published another proposed rule which would allow independent
laboratories to test and evaluate certain products MSHA approves for
use in underground mines. To allow comment on the applicability of the
independent laboratory proposal to conveyor belt testing, submission of
new relevant data, or updating of comments previously submitted, the
Agency is reopening the rulemaking record on the conveyor belt proposal
and scheduling a public hearing.
DATES: Written comments must be submitted on or before April 21, 1995.
The public hearing will be held on Tuesday, May 2, 1995, beginning
at 9 a.m. All written requests to make oral presentations for the
record should be submitted at least 5 days prior to the hearing date.
Requests may also be made by calling the MSHA Office of Standards at
703-235-1910.
The public record for the rulemaking will close on June 2, 1995.
ADDRESSES: Send written comments and requests to make oral
presentations to MSHA; Office of Standards, Regulations, and Variances;
4015 Wilson Boulevard, Room 631; Arlington, Virginia 22203. Commenters
are encouraged to submit comments on a computer disk along with a hard
copy.
The location and address for the public hearing is: Holiday Inn
Meadowlands, 340 Racetrack Road, Washington, PA 15301. The Holiday Inn
is adjacent to the Meadows Racetrack in Meadowlands approximately 5
miles north of Washington, PA.
[[Page 16590]] FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Patricia W. Silvey,
Director, Office of Standards, Regulations, and Variances, 703-235-
1910.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
On December 24, 1992, MSHA published a proposed rule to implement
new procedures and requirements for testing and approval of flame-
resistant conveyor belts and requirements for their use in underground
coal mines (57 FR 61524). The proposed revision would replace the
existing flame test for acceptance of flame-resistant belts specified
in Agency regulations. Because of the fire hazards in underground coal
mines, existing MSHA safety standards require that conveyor belts be
flame-resistant in accordance with specifications of the Secretary and
pass the flame test for conveyor belting specified in 30 CFR 18.65. The
comment period closed on March 26, 1993. Several commenters requested
that the Agency hold public hearings.
On November 30, 1994, the Agency proposed a new part 6 to 30 CFR
which would allow independent testing laboratories to test and evaluate
certain mining products for use in underground mines, as well as allow
the use of equivalent testing and evaluation requirements (59 FR
61376). Under the proposal, an independent laboratory recognized by the
Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) as a nationally
recognized testing laboratory would conduct product testing and
evaluation currently done by MSHA according to MSHA's testing and
evaluation requirements. Upon request by an applicant, the new proposal
would also enable the Agency to approve products based upon testing and
evaluation requirements other than MSHA's, provided that the
alternative requirements are equivalent to the Agency's and provide at
least the same measure of protection to miners. Several commenters on
the independent laboratory testing proposal questioned how it would
relate to the conveyor belt proposal. Since publication of the
independent laboratory testing proposal occurred after the close of the
conveyor belt record, MSHA is reopening the conveyor belt record for a
limited period of time prior to holding a hearing. This will allow all
parties to comment on the applicability of the independent laboratory
proposal to conveyor belt testing, to submit new relevant data, or to
update comments previously submitted.
The purpose of the public hearing is to receive relevant comment
and to answer questions concerning the proposal. The hearing will be
conducted in an informal manner by a panel of MSHA officials. Although
formal rules of evidence will not apply, the presiding official may
exercise discretion in excluding irrelevant or unduly repetitious
material and questions. The order of appearance will be determined by
the Agency prior to the hearing, and any unallotted time will be made
available to persons making late requests.
The hearing will begin with an opening statement from MSHA. The
public will then be given the opportunity to make oral presentations.
The hearing panel will be available to answer relevant questions during
the presentations. At the discretion of the presiding official,
speakers may be limited to a maximum of 20 minutes for their
presentations. At the end of the hearing, time will be made available
for rebuttal statements. Verbatim transcripts of the proceedings will
be taken and made part of the rulemaking record, and will be made
available for review by the public.
At the time of the hearing, MSHA will also accept written comments
and appropriate data from any party, including those not presenting
oral statements. Written comments and data will be included in the
rulemaking record. The record will remain open until June 5, 1995, to
allow for the submission of any post-hearing comments.
II. Issues
Although commenters questioned a number of provisions contained in
the proposal, some portions of the rule raised issues of particular
concern and MSHA will address the following issues at the public
hearing and specifically solicits comments, data, and pertinent
information on them, in addition to any other aspect of the proposed
rule.
A. Proposed Test
The repeatability and reproducibility of the proposed conveyor belt
test was questioned by several commenters. The Agency considers
``repeatability'' to mean the degree of duplication of test results for
a sample using a single apparatus in a specific laboratory or location.
``Reproducibility'' is considered by MSHA to mean the degree of
duplication of test results for a sample using the same type of
apparatus in a multitude of laboratories or locations. More than 700
individual tests have been conducted by MSHA and serve as a data base
to address this issue. MSHA will make available its data on
repeatability of the proposed test. In addition, MSHA requests any
information or data regarding repeatability and reproducibility,
particularly from those parties and individuals who have installed the
proposed test apparatus and have used the proposed test in evaluation
of conveyor belts.
Several commenters indicated that parameters such as humidity,
temperature, atmospheric pressure, and airflow changes affect the
proposed test results. In the development of the proposed test, factors
such as airflow and temperature were considered. The proposal specifies
controlling the temperature of the roof of the test apparatus and the
temperature of the air entering the test chamber. Also, the proposal
specifies control of the airflow through the apparatus to 200 plus or
minus 20 ft/min (61 plus or minus 6 m/min). In addition, a variety of
other parameters, such as different airflows, different lengths and
widths of test samples, and variations in the duration of the ignition
time, were evaluated during development of the proposed test. This
information was used in designing the proposed test and establishing
its comparison with the large-scale fire test results. MSHA requests
specific information or data on the experience that manufacturers and
other parties may have with respect to the effect of parameters on the
proposed test, such as temperature, humidity, atmospheric pressure, and
airflow changes.
In its comments on the proposed rule, Factory Mutual, Norwood, MA,
suggested that MSHA consider a conveyor belt test developed by its
personnel from which a ``fire propagation index'' could be determined.
Factory Mutual indicated that its test correlated with large-scale
conveyor belt fire tests conducted by the U.S. Bureau of Mines in
conjunction with MSHA. MSHA requests information from Factory Mutual
and other organizations and individuals that have used or have obtained
data from the Factory Mutual test or any other test that compares to
the proposed test.
B. Pollution Control
Another issue on which commenters expressed concern was the impact
the proposed test may have on the environment and what pollution
controls may be necessary as a result of the emissions from the testing
of conveyor belts. MSHA is interested in hearing from manufacturers who
have installed the proposed conveyor belt test apparatus and performed
testing of [[Page 16591]] conveyor belts as to the method of pollution
control that is used or is necessary to perform testing using the
proposed test.
C. Combustion Toxicity
Some commenters indicated that conveyor belts passing the proposed
tests would present more of a toxic hazard than conveyor belts meeting
the present MSHA acceptance test. MSHA requests any information or data
from manufacturers and other parties on the comparison or assessment of
the combustion toxicity of conveyor belts meeting the present
acceptance test and belts meeting the proposed test.
D. Quality Assurance
Commenters also questioned the proposal regarding the quality
assurance (control) program for maintaining conveyor belt as approved.
One commenter suggested that inspection of ingredients alone could not
ensure that conveyor belting is manufactured as approved, suggesting
that a flame test is needed for this assurance. MSHA requests
information on the current practices manufacturers use in their quality
control programs to maintain a product as approved. MSHA is
particularly interested in whether manufacturers flame test belts using
the MSHA acceptance test indicated in 30 CFR 18.65, inspect or control
ingredients, or perform a combination of both.
E. Cost Data
Commenters provided a range of data on the financial impact of the
proposed rule, which included costs of belting passing the proposed
flame test (``new'' belt), total dollar amount of the conveyor belt
market, and belt service life information. MSHA solicits comments and
data on the economic impact to all belt manufacturers and all
underground coal mines, including small manufacturers and small mine
operators. In particular, MSHA requests information for both rubber and
PVC types of conveyor belt on: (1) the quantity of belt (in feet or
meters) currently in use that would pass the proposed test; (2) the
total quantity (in feet or meters) and dollar amount of the market for
conveyor belt used in underground coal mines; (3) the cost of belt that
will pass the proposed flame test (``new'' belt) versus belt that
passes the current MSHA flame test (``old'' belt); (4) whether costs of
the ``new'' belt will decline as production increases and by how much;
and (5) the life and warranty of ``new'' belt versus ``old'' belt.
Some manufacturers and other parties have installed the proposed
MSHA test apparatus to conduct research and testing on samples of
conveyor belts. MSHA also requests information from interested parties
on the research and development costs for conveyor belt meeting the new
test.
Dated: March 27, 1995.
J. Davitt McAteer,
Assistant Secretary for Mine Safety and Health.
[FR Doc. 95-8018 Filed 3-30-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-43-P
