Source: http://www.msha.gov/REGS/FEDREG/PROPOSED/2005PROP/05-15494.asp
Timestamp: 2015-02-01 18:10:45
Document Index: 176209456

Matched Legal Cases: ['art 15', 'art 5', 'art 5', 'art 15', 'art 15', 'art 15', 'art 15', 'art 15', 'art 15', 'art 5']

MSHA - Proposed Rules - FR Doc 05-15494 - Fees for Testing, Evaluation, and Approval of Mining Products; Proposed Rule - 08/09/2005
[Page 46345-46353]
SUMMARY: We are proposing to amend our regulations to reflect established policy and procedures for administering fees for testing, evaluation, and approval of equipment and materials manufactured for use in the mining industry. This proposed rule would eliminate the application fee, allow applicants to pre-authorize expenditures for processing applications, allow outside organizations conducting part 15 testing (explosives and sheathed explosive units) on our behalf to set fees for this testing, incorporate changes concerning our programs and organization, and make non-substantive conforming changes to related regulations.
DATES: Comments must be received by October 11, 2005.
Existing section 5.10 sets out the purpose and scope of part 5. Revised section 5.10 remains substantially unchanged from the existing regulation. The term ``testing, evaluation and approval'' in existing paragraph 5.10(a) would be changed to ``services provided under this subchapter.'' This change would more clearly convey that part 5 applies to all services which the Center provides and for which a fee is charged. These services include ``approvals'' as defined in both the narrow and broad sense as explained earlier in Part II B, ``Scope of Approval Activities.'' The term ``Except as provided in section 5.30(a)'' would be added to the beginning of 5.10(b) to clarify that outside organizations conducting part 15 testing on our behalf may set the fees for this testing. These outside organizations will likely be government agencies or non-government organizations with laboratory facilities capable of performing part 15 tests.
Existing section 5.20 established the effective date of the 1987 rule. Such a notice is not needed at this time because the Federal Register document containing the final rule would provide the effective date for the rule. For this reason, this proposed rule would delete existing Sec. 5.20, which established the effective date of the 1987 rule.
Paying and processing this fee placed an additional administrative burden on the applicants and on us, and delayed the approval process. The applicant incurred the burden of remitting two payments during the application process, and we expended resources to process both payments. The technical evaluation could not begin until our finance office confirmed that the payment for the application fee had been posted. After reviewing this activity, we issued Program Policy Letter (PPL) No. 96-II-1, ``Waiver of the $100 Application Fee for Testing, Evaluation, and Approval of Mining Products,'' effective January 1, 1996. This policy is now incorporated into our Program Policy Manual. In proposed paragraph 5.30(a), the requirement for an application fee would be removed to reflect our elimination of this fee.
Proposed paragraph 5.30(a) would also incorporate and revise provisions from existing paragraphs 5.30(b) and (e). The provision from revised paragraph 5.30(b), which lists criteria for determining hourly fees, would contain three revisions. First, the term ``testing, evaluation and approval'' would be in existing paragraph 5.30(b) is changed to ``services provided under this subchapter'' and moved to revised paragraph 5.30(b). Second, the existing language concerning direct and indirect costs that is repeated from Section 5.10(b)(1) would be omitted to eliminate redundancy. Third, since these criteria for determining hourly fees also apply to any flat rate fees that we would establish, the term ``hourly fees'' would be changed to ``fees.'' As noted earlier, when the existing rule was promulgated, we charged flat rate fees for certain services for which turnaround time was predictable and stable. The shift to the current system of hourly fees was driven partially by concerns about the equitable distribution of costs among applicants.
As mentioned above, the provision in existing paragraph 5.30(e), concerning fees for tests conducted for MSHA by the former Bureau of Mines under part 15 (Requirements for approval of explosives and sheathed explosive units) would be incorporated into revised paragraph 5.30(a) and substantially revised. The existing paragraph provides that ``Tests conducted by the Bureau of Mines for MSHA under part 15 are flat rate items.'' When the existing rule was promulgated, the former Bureau of Mines conducted these tests on our behalf. After the Bureau was dissolved, its facility for conducting explosives testing was transferred first to the Department of Energy and subsequently to NIOSH as a purely research function (30 U.S.C. 1 note).
Proposed paragraph 5.30(a) would remove the term ``Bureau of Mines'' as well as the requirement to charge flat rate fees for part 15 testing. The proposed paragraph would provide that ``part 15 fees for services provided to MSHA by other organizations may be set by those organizations.'' That is, the proposed rule language would allow us to pass on the cost of services provided to MSHA by other organizations so that these costs could be billed to the applicant.
Paragraph 5.30(b)(2) would be added to reflect our policy of requiring a specific pre-authorized expenditure for applications submitted under the Revised Application Modification Program (RAMP). This program is discussed in the narrative for Sec. 5.30(d).
Finally, the existing rule uses the term ``estimated maximum fee (cap).'' For a number of reasons, including continuity, we no longer use the term ``cap'' to refer to this amount. The proposed rule would replace this term wherever it appears in the rule with the term ``maximum fee estimate.''
The first provision would be moved to paragraph 5.30(b), and is discussed above. The second provision would remain in paragraph 5.30(c), and third provisions would be moved to paragraph 5.30(d).
Proposed paragraph 5.30(c) would leave this provision substantially unchanged, but the concept would applied to any expenditure approved by the applicant, whether that expenditure is the estimated maximum fee or the applicant's pre-authorized expenditure. This provision is not applicable where the pre-authorized expenditure has no stated maximum. Additionally, the term ``cap'' would be changed to ``maximum fee estimate.''
The term ``Bureau of Mines, U.S. Department of the Interior'' would be replaced with the term ``designees of MSHA.'' As explained in the discussion of revised paragraph 5.30(a), the Bureau of Mines no longer exists.
In paragraph 18.6(a)(1), the term ``accompanied by a check, bank draft, or money order, payable to the U.S. Mine Safety and Health Administration to cover the fees,'' would be removed from the application instructions to reflect our policy of waiving the application fee. Additionally, language would be added to specify that the procedures for payment of fees are found in Sec. 5.40 of the proposed rule.
In paragraph (a), the term ``accompanied by a check, bank draft, or money order, payable to U.S. Mine Safety and Health Administration, to cover all the necessary fees,'' would be removed from the application instructions to reflect our policy of waiving the application fee. Additionally, language would be added to specify that the procedures for payment of fees are found in Sec. 5.40 of the proposed rule.
In paragraph (a), the term ``accompanied by a check, bank draft, or money order, payable to the U.S. Mine Safety and Health Administration, to cover all the necessary fees,'' would be removed from the application instructions to reflect our policy of waiving the application fee. Additionally, language would be added to specify that the procedures for payment of fees are found in Sec. 5.40 of the proposed rule.
In paragraph (a)(1), the term ``and also a check, bank draft, or money order payable to the U.S. Mine Safety and Health Administration, to cover the fees'' would be removed from the application instructions to reflect our policy of waiving the application fee. Additionally, language would be added to specify that the procedures for payment of fees are found in Sec. 5.40 of the proposed rule.
The existing section lists the ``application, payment of necessary fees, and submission of required material'' as criteria for determining the order of testing when more than one application is pending. The proposed section would remove the reference to payment of fees and would revise the sentence to conform to similar provisions in existing Sec. 18.8 (Date for conducting investigation and tests). The proposed sentence would read: ``The date of receipt of an application will determine the order of precedence for investigation and testing.'' The proposed section would reflect our policy of waiving the application fee.
Existing Sec. 28.10 requires applicants seeking approval of certain fuses to submit the fuses to a nationally recognized independent testing laboratory for examination, inspection, and testing prior to submitting an approval application to the Center. Paragraph 28.10(c) contains instructions for submitting these laboratory data and results to the Center, and includes a requirement that payment for the application fee accompany these documents. Proposed paragraph 28.10(c) would remove the requirement to send a payment with the laboratory documents. This proposed change corresponds to the elimination of the application fee. Additionally, language would be added to specify that the procedures for payment of fees are found in Sec. 5.40 of the proposed rule.
This section contains an outdated address for the Center and a reference to the former Bureau of Mines. The proposed section would update the Center's address and would replace the term ``Bureau'' with ``MSHA.''
In paragraph 33.6(a)(1), the term ``accompanied by a check, bank draft, or money order, payable to the U.S. Mine Safety and Health Administration, to cover the fees;'' would be removed from the application instructions to reflect our policy of waiving the application fee. Additionally, language would be added to specify that the procedures for payment of fees are found in Sec. 5.40 of the proposed rule.
In paragraph (a)(1), the term ``accompanied by a check, bank draft, or money order, payable to the U.S. Mine Safety and Health Administration, to cover the fees;'' would be removed from the application instructions to reflect our policy of waiving the application fee. Additionally, language would be added to specify that the procedures for payment of fees are found in Sec. 5.40 of the proposed rule.
Final rule                       Existing  section
Executive Order 12866, as amended by Executive Order 13258, requires that regulatory agencies assess both the costs and benefits of intended regulations. We have satisfied the requirement of Executive Order 12866 for this proposed rule and determined that the proposed rule would not have an annual effect of $100 million or more on the economy. Therefore, the proposed rule is not an economically significant regulatory action pursuant to Sec. 3(f)(1) of Executive Order 12866.
As noted earlier, existing Sec. 5.30(a) imposes a non-refundable standard application fee on each initial application. Since we eliminated this application fee in 1996, deleting the application fee language from existing Sec. 5.30(a) would not cause applicants to incur any costs or cost savings.
C. Executive Order 12630 Government Actions and Interference With Constitutionally Protected Property Rights
D. Executive Order 12988 Civil Justice Reform
E. Executive Order 13045 Protection of Children From Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks
F. Executive Order 13132 Federalism
This proposed rule does not have ``federalism implications'' because it does not ``have substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.'' Accordingly, Executive Order 13132, Federalism, requires no further agency action or analysis.
G. Executive Order 13175 Consultation and Coordination With Indian Tribal Governments
This proposed rule does not have ``tribal implications'' because it does not ``have substantial direct effects on one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal government and Indian tribes.'' Accordingly, Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination With Indian Tribal Governments, requires no further agency action or analysis.
H. Executive Order 13211 Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
This proposed rule regulates both the coal and metal/nonmetal mining sectors. Because this proposed rule would result in no yearly net cost to the coal mining industry, the proposed rule would neither reduce the supply of coal nor increase its price. This proposed rule is not a ``significant energy action'' because it would not be ``likely to have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use of energy (including a shortfall in supply, price increases, and increased use of foreign supplies).'' Accordingly, Executive Order 13211, Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use, requires no further agency action or analysis.
I. Executive Order 13272 Proper Consideration of Small Entities in Agency Rulemaking
Fees, Mine safety and health, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Research.
Sec. 5.20 [Removed]
(a)(1) Investigation leading to approval, certification, extension thereof, or acceptance of hose or conveyor belt, will be undertaken by
MSHA only pursuant to a written application. The application shall be accompanied by all necessary drawings, specifications, descriptions, and related materials, as set out in this part. Fees calculated in accordance with part 5 of this title shall be submitted in accordance with Sec. 5.40.