20660 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 80 / Monday, April 27, 1998 / Notices

Cite/reference Total

respondents Frequency Totalresponses

Average time

per

response

Burden

(hours)

77.1909–1 Permit Appl ................................................................. 5 On Occasion .... 5 1 hour .......... 5

Totals ........................................................................................ .................... ........................... 190 ...................... 110

Total Burden Cost (capital/startup):

$0.

Total Burden Cost (operating/

maintaining): $755.

Comments submitted in response to

this notice will be summarized and/or

included in the request for Office of

Management and Budget approval of the

information collection request; they will

also become a matter of public record.

Dated: April 20, 1998.

George M. Fesak,

Director, Program Evaluation and Information

Resources.

[FR Doc. 98–11109 Filed 4–24–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4510–47–M

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Mine Safety and Health Administration

Proposed Information Collection

Request Submitted for Public

Comment and Recommendations;

Hazardous Condition Complaints

ACTION: Notice.

SUMMARY: The Department of Labor, as

part of its continuing effort to reduce

paperwork and respondent burden

conducts a preclearance consultation

program to provide the general public

and Federal agencies with an

opportunity to comment on proposed

and/or continuing collections of

information in accordance with the

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995

(PRA95) [44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)]. This

program helps to ensure that requested

data can be provided in the desired

format, reporting burden (time and

financial resources) is minimized,

collection instruments are clearly

understood, and the impact of collection

requirements on respondents can be

properly assessed.

Currently, the Mine Safety and Health

Administration (MSHA) is soliciting

comments concerning the proposed

extension of the information collection

related to the submission of hazardous

conditions complaints addressed in 30

CFR 43.2, 43.4, 43.7, and 43.8. MSHA 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.

A copy of the proposed information

collection request can be obtained by

contacting the employee listed below in

the For Further Information Contact

section of this notice.

DATES: Submit comments on or before

June 26, 1998.

ADDRESSES: Send comments to Patricia

W. Silvey, Director, Office of Standards,

Regulations, and Variances, 4015

Wilson Boulevard, Room 627,

Arlington, VA 22203–1984. Commenters

are encouraged to send their comments

on a computer disk, or via E-mail to

psilvey@msha.gov, along with an

original printed copy. Ms. Silvey can be

reached at (703) 235–1910 (voice) or

(703) 235–5551 (facsimile).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

George M. Fesak, Director, Office of

Program Evaluation and Information

Resources, U.S. Department of Labor,

Mine Safety and Health Administration,

Room 715, 4015 Wilson Boulevard,

Arlington, VA 22203–1984. Mr. Fesak

can be reached at gfesak@msha.gov

(Internet E-mail), (703) 235–8378

(voice), or (703) 235–1563 (facsimile).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

Under Section 103(g) of the Federal

Mine Safety and Health Act of 1977

(Mine Act), 30 U.S.C. 813(g), a

representative of miners or any

individual miner may submit a written

notice of an alleged violation of the

Mine Act or mandatory health or safety

standard or an imminent danger

situation. Such notification requires

MSHA to make an immediate

inspection. A copy of the notice must be

provided to the operator.

Title 30, CFR part 43 implements

Section 103(g) of the Mine Act. The

regulations outline the procedures for

submitting notification of the alleged

violation and the actions which MSHA

must take after receiving the notice. If

MSHA determines that a special

inspection is not warranted, a written

notice of negative finding shall be

issued as soon as possible following the

determination. A miner or a

representative of miners has the option

of requesting in writing an information

review of MSHA’s decision that no

inspection is warranted or in those

instances where an MSHA inspector has

refused to issue a citation or order with

regard to the violation alleged to have

existed by the miner.

II. Current Actions

MSHA is required to conduct

inspections whenever and however

complaints of hazardous conditions are

made to the Agency by miners or

representatives of miners. This is an

Agency responsibility mandated by the

provisions of Section 103(g) of the Act

and implemented through the

provisions of 30 C.F.R. Part 43. MSHA

has minimized the paper work burden

by providing alternative toll free

telephone extensions for verbal and

anonymous complaints and providing

for the reduction of such complaints to

written format by agency personnel.

MSHA’s effectiveness in enforcing the

mandatory safety and health standards

is dependent in part on its ability to

provide a timely response to hazardous

condition complaints in order to retain

the confidence of miners and to

encourage compliance with health and

safety standards between the mandated,

periodic inspection events at

underground and surface mines and

mine facilities.

Type of Review: Revision (with

changes to include § 43.2 and 43.8).

Agency: Mine Safety and Health

Administration.

Title: Hazardous Conditions

Compliants—30 CFR § 43.2, 43.4, 43.7,

and 43.8.

OMB Number: 1219–0014.

Affected Public: Business or other forprofit institutions.
Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 80 / Monday, April 27, 1998 / Notices 20661

Cite/reference Total respondents Frequency Total

responses

Average

time per

response

(hours)

Burden

(hours)

43.2 General ....................................... 272 verbal 350 written 622 total ........... On occasion ..... 622 .2 124

43.4 Giving notice ............................... All burden included under 43.2 .............

43.7 Informal review ............................ 15 ........................................................... On occasion ..... 15 .2 3

43.8 Informal review ............................ All burden included under 43.7 .............

Totals .............................................. 637 ......................................................... On occasion ..... 637 .2 127

Total Burden Cost (capital/startup):

$0.

Total Burden Cost (operating/

maintaining): $8.

Comments submitted in response to

this notice will be summarized and/or

included in the request for Office of

Management and Budget approval of the

information collection request; they will

also become a matter of public record.

Dated: April 21, 1998.

George M. Fesak,

Director, Program Evaluation and Information

Resources.

[FR Doc. 98–11110 Filed 4–24–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4510–43–M

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Occupational Safety and Health

Administration

[Docket No. NRTL–2–97]

Detroit Testing Laboratory, Inc.,

Recognition as an NRTL

AGENCY: Occupational Safety and Health

Administration; Labor.

ACTION: Notice of recognition as a

Nationally Recognized Testing

Laboratory (NRTL).

SUMMARY: This notice announces the

Agency’s final decision on the

application of Detroit Testing

Laboratory, Inc. for recognition as an

NRTL under 29 CFR 1910.7.

EFFECTIVE DATE: This recognition will

become effective on April 27, 1998 and

will be valid for a period of five years

from that date, until April 28, 2003,

unless terminated prior to that date, in

accordance with 29 CFR 1910.7.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Bernard Pasquet, Office of Technical

Programs and Coordination Activities,

NRTL Program, Occupational Safety and

Health Administration, U.S. Department

of Labor, 200 Constitution Avenue,

N.W., Room N3653, Washington, D.C.

20210, or phone (202) 219–7056.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Notice of Final Decision

Notice is hereby given that the

Occupational Safety and Health

Administration (OSHA) has recognized

Detroit Testing Laboratory, Inc. (DTL) as

a Nationally Recognized Testing

Laboratory for the equipment or

materials listed below. DTL applied for

recognition as a Nationally Recognized

Testing Laboratory, pursuant to 29 CFR

1910.7, and a notice of the application

was published in the Federal Register

(62 FR 62358, 11/21/97). The notice

included a preliminary finding that DTL

could meet the requirements for

recognition detailed in 29 CFR 1910.7,

and invited public comment on the

application by January 20, 1998. No

comments were received concerning

this request for recognition.

Copies of all application documents

(Docket No. NRTL–2–97) are available

for inspection and duplication at the

Docket Office, Occupational Safety and

Health Administration, U.S. Department

of Labor, 200 Constitution Avenue,

N.W., Room N2634, Washington, D.C.

20210.

The address of the laboratory covered

by this application is: Detroit Testing

Laboratory, Inc., 7111 E. Eleven Mile,

Warren, Michigan 48092.

Background

Detroit Testing Laboratory, Inc. (DTL),

according to the applicant, is a

Michigan corporation and was formally

incorporated in 1949. The applicant

states that the lab was originally

founded in 1903 as a partnership, that

ownership of the lab changed in 1948

and again in 1968, and that in 1976, the

current owner purchased DTL as sole

stockholder.

The applicant submitted an

application package, and separately

submitted a Quality Assurance (QA)

Manual (see Exhibits 2A and 2B). The

QA Manual includes: An organization

chart, position descriptions, and

re ́sume ́s of key personnel; department

descriptions including equipment and

standards used for departments

involved in testing; description of

certifications done and standards used

for certification; and the details on how

calibrations are handled, including

descriptions of equipment and

standards.

The four primary criteria for

recognition are presented below, along

with examples which illustrate how

DTL has met these criteria.

Capability

Section 1910.7(b)(1) states that for

each specified item of equipment or

material to be listed, labeled or

accepted, the laboratory must have the

capability (including proper testing

equipment and facilities, trained staff,

written testing procedures, and

calibration and quality control

programs) to perform appropriate

testing. The application and on-site

review report indicate that DTL meets

these criteria.

The applicant has one main facility at

its site in Warren, Michigan, and a

smaller test facility in Center Line,

Michigan. This smaller site is not

included in the applicant’s request for

recognition. The applicant has natural

gas, electric, compressed air, steam, and

water available in the laboratory for

product testing and for calibrations and

tests.

The applicant’s QA Manual shows the

testing experience of its key testing staff,

mentions its certification, and listing

and labeling experience with products,

and describes its testing capabilities and

experience in a number of specific

areas. It also contains a list of major

instrumentation and equipment.

Quality Assurance (QA) Procedures,

Test/Operating procedures (developed

on a form, the original of which is kept

by each lab), calibration procedures, and

audits (including proficiency audits

which depends in part on the use of

outside private services) are described

in the QA Manual. Furthermore, the QA

includes an Internal Corrective Action

Procedure whereby reports are issued to

an area when it operates outside the

guidelines of the QA System. The QA

Manual also contains a sample handling

procedure and procedures on employee

training. Written procedures exist for

typical tests, per QA Manual.