[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 123 (Tuesday, June 26, 2018)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 29716-29719]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-13603]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Mine Safety and Health Administration
30 CFR Parts 56 and 75
[Docket No. MSHA-2018-0016]
RIN 1219-AB91
Safety Improvement Technologies for Mobile Equipment at Surface
Mines, and for Belt Conveyors at Surface and Underground Mines
AGENCY: Mine Safety and Health Administration, Labor.
ACTION: Request for information.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Mining safety could be substantially improved by preventing
accidents that involve mobile equipment at surface coal mines and metal
and nonmetal mines and belt conveyors at surface and underground mines.
The Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA) is taking a number of
actions related to mobile equipment and belt conveyors to improve
miners' safety, including providing technical assistance, conducting
awareness campaigns, and developing best practices and training
materials. MSHA is also considering the role of engineering controls
that would increase the use of seatbelts, enhance equipment operators'
ability to see all areas near the machine, warn equipment operators of
potential collision hazards, prevent equipment operators from driving
over a highwall or dump point, and help prevent entanglement hazards
related to working near moving or re-energized belt conveyors. MSHA is
seeking information and data on engineering controls that could reduce
the risk of accidents and improve miner safety. MSHA is also seeking
suggestions from stakeholders on: Best practices, training materials,
policies and procedures, innovative technologies, and any other
information they may have to improve safety in and around mobile
equipment, and working near and around belt conveyors.
MSHA will hold stakeholder meetings to provide the mining community
an opportunity to discuss and share information about the issues raised
in this notice. A separate notice announcing stakeholder meetings will
be published in the Federal Register at a later date.
DATES: Comments must be received or postmarked by midnight Eastern
Daylight Time on December 24, 2018.
ADDRESSES: Comments must be identified with ``RIN 1219-AB91'' and may
be sent to MSHA by any of the following methods:
Federal E-Rulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments.
Email: [email protected].
Mail: MSHA, Office of Standards, Regulations, and
Variances, 201 12th Street South, Suite 4E401, Arlington, Virginia
22202-5452.
Hand Delivery or Courier: 201 12th Street South, Suite
4E401, Arlington, Virginia, between 9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays. Sign in at the receptionist's
desk on the 4th Floor East, Suite 4E401.
Fax: 202-693-9441.
Instructions: All submissions must include ``RIN 1219-AB91'' or
``Docket No. MSHA 2018-0016.'' Do not include personal information that
you do not
[[Page 29717]]
want publicly disclosed. MSHA will post all comments without change to
http://www.regulations.gov and http://arlweb.msha.gov/currentcomments.asp, including any personal information provided.
Docket: For access to the docket to read comments and background
information, go to http://www.regulations.gov, or http://www.msha.gov/currentcomments.asp. To review comments and background information in
person go to MSHA, Office of Standards, Regulations, and Variances, 201
12th Street South, Arlington, Virginia, between 9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m.
EDT Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. Sign in at the
receptionist's desk on the 4th Floor East, Suite 4E401.
Email Notification: To subscribe to receive an email notification
when MSHA publishes rulemaking documents in the Federal Register, go to
https://www.msha.gov/subscriptions.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sheila A. McConnell, Director, Office
of Standards, Regulations, and Variances, MSHA, at
[email protected] (email), 202-693-9440 (voice), or 202-693-
9441 (fax). These are not toll-free numbers.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Mobile Equipment at Surface Mines
Mobile equipment used at surface coal mines, surface metal and
nonmetal mines, and the surface areas of underground mines is a broad
category that includes bulldozers, front end loaders, service trucks,
skid steers, haul trucks, and many other types of vehicles and
equipment. Accidents involving mobile equipment have historically
accounted for a large number of the fatalities in mining, especially in
metal and nonmetal mines. In 2017, for example, nearly 40 percent of
the 28 mining fatalities and more than 30 percent of injuries involved
mobile equipment.
Since 2007, 61 miners have been killed in accidents involving
mobile equipment. MSHA conducted an investigation of all of these
accidents. MSHA determined that contributing factors in many of these
accidents included: (1) No seatbelt, seatbelt not used, or inadequate
seatbelts; (2) larger vehicles striking smaller vehicles; and (3)
equipment operators' difficulty in detecting the edges of highwalls or
dump points, causing equipment to fall from substantial heights.
Seatbelts
MSHA has preliminarily determined that mobile equipment operators
are more likely to survive rollover and tipping accidents when they are
wearing a seatbelt. MSHA examined 38 fatal accidents that occurred
since 2007 involving mobile equipment in which the deceased was not
wearing a seatbelt. MSHA determined that 35 of the victims (92 percent)
might have survived had they been wearing a seatbelt. The Agency
believes that engineering controls could increase the use of seatbelts
by equipment operators. For example, engineering control devices could
ensure that mobile equipment operators use a seatbelt by affecting
equipment operation in the event the operator does not fasten the
seatbelt.
Other engineering controls could increase equipment seatbelt use
without impeding or halting machine operation. These controls include
high-visibility seatbelt materials and warning devices, such as warning
lights and audible warning signals, that remind the equipment operator
to fasten the seatbelt. Some warning signals stop after a period of
time; others continue until the seatbelt is fastened. Additional
engineering controls could promote seatbelt usage by making equipment
operation impractical or uncomfortable, or by notifying mine management
if the seatbelt is not used (or not used properly).
Large Equipment Striking Smaller Equipment
There are areas around mobile equipment in which the equipment
operator cannot see other miners, equipment, or structures (i.e.,
``blind areas''). Mobile equipment size and shape and the operator's
cab location can each create unique blind areas. Blind areas have
contributed to mobile equipment operators driving over highwalls or
dump points, colliding with other equipment, and striking miners.
Engineering controls, such as collision warning systems and collision
avoidance systems, could provide equipment operators with additional
information about their surroundings and help reduce accidents. These
systems could provide warnings when other vehicles, miners, or
structures pose a potential collision hazard. Collision avoidance
systems could provide an additional level of safety by activating
machine controls, such as automatic braking, to avoid collisions.
Autonomous mining systems may also have the potential to improve
miner safety. Autonomous mining systems, which are controlled remotely,
do not require an on-board operator, thereby removing the miner from
hazardous situations. In addition, autonomous mining systems are
equipped with GPS technology and use enhanced safety features, such as
collision avoidance systems, which can indicate the location of other
nearby equipment and miners, thereby reducing striking accidents and
fatalities.
Highwalls and Dump Points
Since 2007, there have been 20 fatal accidents in surface coal and
metal and nonmetal mines involving bulldozer operators and haul truck
drivers who traveled over the edge of the highwall or dump point.
Systems that integrate technologies such as GPS, radar, and radio
frequency identification tagging could help equipment operators better
identify the edges of highwalls or dump points. Other practices, such
as ground markers and aerial markers, also could help equipment
operators identify their locations relative to the edges of highwalls
or dump points when pushing or dumping material. Devices that provide
visual, audible, or other signals could also warn equipment operators
of hazards surrounding their locations.
II. Belt Conveyors at Surface and Underground Mines
Since 2007, there have been 17 fatalities related to working near
or around belt conveyors, of which 76 percent were related to miners
becoming entangled in belt drives, belt rollers, and discharge points.
Factors that contribute to entanglement hazards include inadequate or
missing guards, inadequate or an insufficient number of crossovers in
strategic locations, and/or inappropriate lock out/tag out procedures.
Systems that can sense a miner's presence in hazardous locations;
ensure that machine guards are properly secured in place; and/or ensure
machines are properly locked out and tagged out during maintenance
would reduce fatalities.
IV. Information Request
MSHA is requesting information from the mining community regarding
the types of engineering controls available, how to implement such
engineering controls, and how these controls could be used in mobile
equipment and belt conveyors to reduce accidents, fatalities and
injuries. When responding--
Address your comments to the topic and question number.
For example, the response to questions regarding seatbelts, Question 1,
would be identified as ``A.1''.
Please provide sufficient detail in your responses to
enable adequate Agency review and consideration. Where possible,
include specific
[[Page 29718]]
examples to support the rationale for your position.
Please identify the relevant information on which you
rely. Include experiences, data models, calculations, studies and
articles, and standard professional practices.
Please provide specific information on the technological
and economic feasibility of the engineering and administrative controls
included in this notice, as well as any additional controls or
practices which you may suggest.
MSHA invites comment in response to the questions below as well as
on issues related specifically to the impact on small mines.
A. Seatbelts
Seat belt interlocks are engineering controls that prevent or
otherwise affect equipment operation. MSHA is particularly interested
in engineering controls that affect equipment operation when the
seatbelt is not properly fastened.
1. What are the advantages, disadvantages, and costs associated
with a seatbelt interlock system?
2. Are seatbelt interlock systems available that could be
retrofitted, and if so, onto which types of machines and how? What are
the costs associated with retrofitting machines with these systems?
3. Are some types of mobile equipment unsuited for use with
seatbelt interlock systems, and if so, which machines and why?
4. Reliability is the ability of a system to perform repeatedly
with the same result. Please provide information on how to determine
the reliability of seatbelt interlock systems.
Some engineering controls encourage and promote seatbelt use
without directly preventing or affecting equipment operation. These
engineering controls include audible and visual warning devices, such
as lights and buzzers/bells that remind equipment operators to fasten
their seatbelts.
5. What are the advantages, disadvantages, and costs associated
with these warning devices?
B. Collision Warning Systems and Collision Avoidance Systems
MSHA is also interested in collision warning systems and collision
avoidance systems that may help prevent accidents by decreasing
equipment blind areas and reducing collisions. These systems detect
obstacles and provide the equipment operators with information about
their location. The installation of the systems would likely need to be
customized to account for variations in height, articulation, and other
equipment design features. Such systems would likely also need to have
the capability to adjust to mining conditions and environments such as
road conditions, weather, and traffic patterns. They would also need to
be designed and installed to minimize distractions such as nuisance
alarms and unnecessary stops, and to be compatible with other
technologies, such as GPS, radar, radio frequency identification
tagging, electromagnetic systems, cameras, peer-to-peer networks, and
path prediction technologies.
6. What are the advantages, disadvantages, and costs associated
with collision warning systems and collision avoidance systems?
7. Please provide information on how collision warning systems and
collision avoidance systems can protect miners, e.g., warning, stopping
the equipment, or other protection. Include your rationale. Include
successes or failures, if applicable.
8. What types of mobile equipment can, and should, be equipped with
collision warning and collision avoidance systems? For example, systems
that work well on haul trucks may not work well on other mobile
equipment; certain types of equipment may be more likely to be used
near smaller vehicles; or some types of equipment may have larger blind
areas.
9. Collision warning systems and collision avoidance systems may
require multiple technologies that combine positioning/location,
obstacle detection, path prediction, peer-to-peer communication, or
alarm functions. What combination of technologies would be most
effective in surface mining conditions? Please provide your rationale.
10. Please describe situations, if any, in which it would be
appropriate to use a collision warning system rather than a collision
avoidance system.
11. Please describe any differences between a surface coal
environment and a surface metal and nonmetal environment that would
influence your response to the questions above.
C. Highwall and Dump Points
Various technologies, such as GPS, can be used to provide equipment
operators better information regarding their location in relation to
the edge of highwalls or dump points. Other mechanisms, such as ground
markers and aerial markers, also could help equipment operators
identify their location when pushing or dumping material.
12. Which technologies or systems can prevent highwall and dump
point overtravel? Please describe the advantages, disadvantages, and
costs associated with these technologies or systems.
13. Many surface mines use GPS on equipment for tracking,
dispatching, and positioning. How can these systems be used to provide
equipment operators better information on their location with respect
to highwall or dump points?
14. What are the advantages, disadvantages, and costs associated
with ground and aerial markers?
D. Autonomous Mobile Equipment
15. Please identify the types of autonomous mobile equipment in use
at surface mines.
16. Please describe the advantages and disadvantages associated
with autonomous mobile equipment.
17. Please provide information related to any experience with
testing or implementing autonomous mobile equipment, including costs
and benefits.
E. Belt Conveyors
18. What technologies are available that could provide additional
protections from accidents related to working near or around belt
conveyors? Can these technologies be used in surface and underground
mines?
19. Please provide information related to any experience with
testing or implementing systems that sense a miner's presence in
hazardous locations; ensure that machine guards are properly secured in
place; and/or ensure machines are properly locked out and tagged out
during maintenance. Please also include information and data on the
costs and benefits associated with these systems.
F. Training and Technical Assistance
20. Please provide suggestions on how training can increase
seatbelt use and improve equipment operators' awareness of hazards at
the mine site.
21. Please provide suggestions on how training can ensure that
miners lock and tag conveyor belts before performing maintenance work.
G. Benefits and Costs
MSHA requests comment on the costs, benefits, and the technological
and economic feasibility of suggested engineering controls to improve
miners' safety. Your answers to these questions will help MSHA evaluate
options and determine an appropriate course of action.
H. Other Information
22. Please provide any data or information that may be useful to
[[Page 29719]]
MSHA to determine non-regulatory initiatives the Agency should explore.
Authority: 30 U.S.C. 811, 813(h).
David G. Zatezalo,
Assistant Secretary of Labor for Mine Safety and Health.
[FR Doc. 2018-13603 Filed 6-25-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-43-P