[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:
    <bullet> Federal E-Rulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. 
Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments.
    <bullet> Email: <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#3d4747706e757c105e5250505853494e7d595251135a524b"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="eb9191a6b8a3aac6888486868e859f98ab8f8487c58c849d">[email protected]</span></a>.
    <bullet> Mail: MSHA, Office of Standards, Regulations, and 
Variances, 201 12th Street South, Suite 4E401, Arlington, Virginia 
22202-5452.
    <bullet> 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.
    <bullet> 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 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#e08d83838f8e8e858c8cce938885898c81ce81a0848f8cce878f96"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="472a2424282929222b2b69342f222e2b2669260723282b69202831">[email protected]</span></a> (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--
    <bullet> 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''.
    <bullet> 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.
    <bullet> Please identify the relevant information on which you 
rely. Include experiences, data models, calculations, studies and 
articles, and standard professional practices.
    <bullet> 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


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>