51638 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 168 / Wednesday, August 30, 2006 / Notices 

strive to achieve some common 

purposes shared with government—

reduction of welfare dependency, 

attainment of occupational skills, and 

entry and retention of all our citizens in 

good-paying jobs. Faith-based and 

community organizations benefit from 

having equal access to federal funds. 

DOL CFBCI intends to use this data to 

examine the impact that receiving and 

managing federal grants has on 

grassroots, faith-based and community 

organizations. 

II. Review Focus 

The Department of Labor is 

particularly interested in comments 

which: 

• Evaluate whether the proposed 

collection of information is necessary 

for the proper performance of the 

functions of the agency, including 

whether the information will have 

practical utility; 

• Evaluate the accuracy of the 

agency’s estimate of the burden of the 

proposed collection of information, 

including the validity of the 

methodology and assumptions used; 

• Enhance the quality, utility and 

clarity of the information to be 

collected; and 

• Minimize the burden of the 

collection of information on those who 

are to respond, including through the 

use of appropriate automated, 

electronic, mechanical, or other 

technological collection techniques or 

other forms of information technology, 

e.g., permitting electronic submissions 

of responses. 

III. Current Actions 

Type of Review: New collection of 

information. 

Agency: Center for Faith-Based and 

Community Initiatives. 

Title: Survey of PY 2002–2006 ETA 

Grassroots Grant Recipients 

OMB Number: 1290–0NEW. 

Affected Public: Non-profit. 

Frequency: Annually. 

Number of Respondents: 183. 

Number of Responses: 183. 

Average Time Per Response: 5 

minutes. 

Estimated Burden Hours: 91.5. 

Total Annualized Capital/startup 

costs: $0. 

Total Initial Annual Costs: $0. 

Comments submitted in response to 

this notice will be summarized and 

included in the agency’s request for 

OMB approval of the information 

collection request. Comments will 

become a matter of public record. 

Dated: August 25, 2006. 

Jedd Medefind, 

Director, Center for Faith-Based and 

Community Initiatives. 

[FR Doc. E6–14435 Filed 8–29–06; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4510–23–P 

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR 

Mine Safety and Health Administration 

Program Policy Letter P06–V–9: 

Section 2 of MINER Act; Emergency 

Response Plan, Post-Accident 

Breathable Air 

AGENCY: Mine Safety and Health 

Administration (MSHA), Labor. 

ACTION: Request for information. 

SUMMARY: On June 15, 2006, the Mine 

Improvement and New Emergency 

Response (MINER) Act of 2006 was 

enacted. In accordance with Section 2 of 

the MINER Act, each underground coal 

mine operator must submit an 

emergency response plan (ERP) to the 

appropriate MSHA District Manager. 

The ERP provides for the evacuation of 

all individuals endangered by an 

emergency and also for the maintenance 

of individuals trapped underground in 

the event that miners are unable to 

evacuate the mine. MSHA is soliciting 

comments that address the availability 

of readily accessible breathable air that 

would be sufficient to maintain miners 

trapped underground over a sustained 

period of time. MSHA will consider 

these comments in developing guidance 

to assist in assuring that the ERPs 

provide safe and reliable post-accident 

breathable air supplies for trapped 

miners. 

DATES: Comments must be received by 

MSHA on or before October 16, 2006. 

ADDRESSES: Comments must be clearly 

identified with ‘‘PPL P06–V–9—

Emergency Response Plan, PostAccident Breathable Air’’ and may be 

sent to MSHA by any of the following 

methods: 

(1) Electronic mail: zzMSHAcomments@dol.gov. Include ‘‘PPL P06–

V–9—Emergency Response Plan, PostAccident Breathable Air’’ in the subject 

line of the message. 

(2) Telefax: (202) 693–9441. Include 

‘‘PPL P06–V–9—Emergency Response 

Plan, Post-Accident Breathable Air’’ in 

the subject line. 

(3) Regular Mail: MSHA, Office of 

Standards, Regulations, and Variances, 

1100 Wilson Blvd., Room 2350, 

Arlington, Virginia. 

(4) Hand Delivery or Courier: MSHA, 

Office of Standards, Regulations, and 

Variances, 1100 Wilson Blvd., Room 

2350, Arlington, Virginia 22209–3939. 

Stop by the 21st floor and sign in at the 

receptionist’s desk. 

Docket: Comments can be accessed 

electronically at www.msha.gov under 

the ‘‘Program Policy Letter (P06–V–9)’’

link on the MINER Act single source 

page. MSHA will post all comments on 

the Web site without change, including 

any personal information provided. 

Comments may also be reviewed at the 

Office of Standards, Regulations, and 

Variances, 1100 Wilson Blvd., Room 

2350, Arlington, Virginia 22209–3939. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Patricia W. Silvey, Acting Director, 

Office of Standards, Regulations, and 

Variances, MSHA, 1100 Wilson Blvd, 

Room 2350, Arlington, Virginia 22209–

3939, silvey.patricia@dol.gov (e-mail), 

(202) 693–9440 (voice), or (202) 693–

9441 (telefax). 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 

MINER Act (Pub. L. 109–236) became 

effective on June 15, 2006. Section 2 of 

the MINER Act amends Section 316 of 

the Federal Mine Safety and Health Act 

of 1977 (Mine Act) to require that every 

underground coal mine operator have 

an emergency response plan which is to 

be approved by MSHA. The Act further 

requires MSHA, in determining whether 

to approve a particular plan, to consider 

comments from miners and miners’

representatives. The ERP must provide 

for the evacuation of miners endangered 

by an emergency and for the 

maintenance of miners trapped 

underground in the event that they are 

unable to evacuate the mine. The 

MINER Act requires that the ERP 

provide for ‘‘emergency supplies of 

breathable air for individuals trapped 

underground sufficient to maintain such 

individuals for a sustained period of 

time.’’

On June 27, 2006, MSHA solicited 

comments related to the implementation 

of emergency response plans for 

underground coal mines. Following 

review of these comments, MSHA 

issued Program Policy Letter (PPL) 

Number P06–V–8 on July 21, 2006, 

which established MSHA policy and 

guidance for mine operators to facilitate 

the development of their ERPs. 

In the PPL, MSHA stated that the ERP 

should address the amount of postaccident breathable air necessary to 

maintain individuals for a sustained 

period of time. The Agency suggested 

oxygen, compressed air, or other 

alternatives to meet the breathable air 

requirement. Further, MSHA stated that 

the Agency will need to review 

thoroughly and evaluate alternatives to 

ensure that all safety and health risks 

are taken into consideration. In the PPL, 


jlentini on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 168 / Wednesday, August 30, 2006 / Notices 51639 

the Agency also noted that additional 

time and information is needed to make 

decisions on the type, amount, and 

location of post-accident breathable air 

to be furnished for trapped miners. 

On August 4, 2006, MSHA reissued 

the PPL (as PPL Number P06–V–9) to 

include an alternative to the distance 

table for self-contained self-rescuer 

(SCSR) storage locations to allow mine 

operators to use a functionality test to 

establish distances between SCSR 

storage locations. 

At this time, MSHA is soliciting 

information from the mining 

community on topics related to postaccident breathable air that would be 

sufficient to maintain miners trapped 

underground for a sustained period of 

time. 

The MINER Act requires that all 

approved plans: 

(1) Afford miners a level of safety 

protection at least consistent with the 

existing standards, including standards 

mandated by law and regulation; 

(2) Reflect the most recent credible 

scientific research; 

(3) Be technologically feasible, make 

use of current commercially available 

technology, and account for the specific 

physical characteristics of the mine; and 

(4) Reflect the improvements in mine 

safety gained from experience under 

this Act and other worker safety and 

health laws. 

In making decisions on requirements 

for post-accident breathable air 

provisions in the plan, MSHA will take 

these factors into consideration. Please 

consider these factors as you develop 

your responses. 

When answering the questions below, 

please key your response to the topic 

and number of the question, and explain 

the reasons supporting your views. 

Please provide relevant information on 

which you rely, including, but not 

limited to, past experience, as well as 

data, studies and articles, and standard 

professional practices. Include any data 

related to technological feasibility or 

other related issues. 

Issues on Which Information is 

Requested 

MSHA requests information on the 

following issues related to the 

breathable air provision of the MINER 

Act: 

A. Emergency Supply of Breathable Air 

1. What factors should MSHA 

consider in determining a ‘‘sustained 

period of time?’’ Should a specific time 

period be adopted? If so, what is the 

appropriate time period and why? The 

Agency has received suggestions 

ranging from one hour of post-accident 

breathable air to a continuous supply. 

Please include the rationale for the 

recommended period of time. 

2. Should factors such as mine size, 

mine design and layout, number of 

miners potentially affected, and 

distance from the portals to the working 

section be used, and if so, how, in 

determining the sufficient quantity of 

breathable air? What other factors 

should be considered and how should 

they be considered? 

3. Where should the post-accident 

breathable air supply be located in 

relation to: working sections; outby 

work stations; and along travel routes? 

4. The MINER Act requires that plans 

be periodically updated to reflect 

changes in operations in the mine. What 

specific changes in operations would 

result in a need to update the breathable 

air provision of the plan? 

B. Oxygen Sources 

1. Please provide information and 

make recommendations on the best way 

to provide breathable air. Please 

elaborate on the arguments for and 

against using oxygen, compressed air, or 

chemically-induced oxygen to maintain 

trapped miners for a sustained period of 

time. What other available means of 

technology appropriate to maintain 

miners would you recommend, and 

why? 

2. MSHA solicits information on how 

compressed air lines routed through 

mine openings could be protected 

against damage from explosion or fire. 

How could techniques such as burying 

or armoring air lines provide adequate 

protection? 

3. MSHA solicits information on 

availability and possible obstacles in 

developing and deploying systems for 

providing oxygen. 

C. Emergency Shelters 

Section 13 of the MINER Act requires 

the National Institute for Occupational 

Safety and Health (NIOSH) to conduct 

research concerning various types of 

refuge alternatives, including 

commercially-available portable refuge 

chambers. In the interim, MSHA solicits 

comments on the use of emergency 

shelters which contain sufficient 

quantities of post-accident breathable 

air to maintain trapped miners. 

1. Until specifications for refuge 

alternatives are developed, what type of 

emergency shelters (e.g., inflatable or 

other portable quick-deploy designs) 

should be provided, what safety features 

should they offer, where should they be 

located, and why? 

2. How should the use of emergency 

shelters be tied to emergency supplies of 

breathable air? 

3. If post-accident breathable air is 

provided through emergency shelters, 

provide information on appropriate 

distances between installations and 

proximity to working sections. Please 

provide specific feasibility 

considerations, if any. 

4. Under what circumstances, if any, 

could a barricade be used as an 

emergency shelter to provide postaccident breathable air? 

Dated: August 25, 2006. 

David G. Dye, 

Acting Assistant Secretary for Mine Safety 

and Health. 

[FR Doc. 06–7260 Filed 8–29–06; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4510–43–P 

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR 

Occupational Safety and Health 

Administration 

[Docket No. ICR–1218–0184 (2006)] 

Standard on 4,4′-Methylenedianiline 

(MDA) in General Industry; Extension 

of the Office of Management and 

Budget’s Approval of Information 

Collection (Paperwork) Requirements 

AGENCY: Occupational Safety and Health 

Administration (OSHA), Labor. 

ACTION: Request for public comment. 

SUMMARY: OSHA requests public 

comment concerning its proposed 

extension of the information collection 

requirements specified by the Standard 

on 4,4′-Methylenedianiline in General 

Industry (29 CFR 1910.1050). The 

standard protects employees from the 

adverse health effects that may result 

from occupational exposure to MDA, 

including cancer and liver disease. 

DATES: Comments must be submitted by 

the following dates: 

Hard copy: Your comments must be 

submitted (postmarked or received) by 

October 30, 2006. 

Facsimile and electronic 

transmission: Your comments must be 

received by October 30, 2006. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, 

identified by OSHA Docket No. ICR–

1218–0184 (2006), by any of the 

following methods: 

I. Submission of Comments 

Regular mail, express delivery, hand 

delivery, and messenger service: Submit 

your comments and attachments to the 

OSHA Docket Office, Room N–2625, 

U.S. Department of Labor, 200 

Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, 

DC 20210; telephone (202) 693–2350 

(OSHA’s TTY number is (877) 889–

5627). OSHA Docket Office and 


jlentini on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES