[Federal Register Volume 68, Number 44 (Thursday, March 6, 2003)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 10940-10952]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 03-5402]



[[Page 10939]]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Part X





Department of Labor





-----------------------------------------------------------------------



Mine Safety and Health Administration



-----------------------------------------------------------------------





Department of Health and Human Services





-----------------------------------------------------------------------



Centers for Disease Control and Prevention



-----------------------------------------------------------------------



30 CFR Part 72



Determination of Concentration of Responsible Coal Mine Dust; Proposed 
Rule

  Federal Register / Vol. 68, No. 44 / Thursday, March 6, 2003 / 
Proposed Rules  

[[Page 10940]]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Mine Safety and Health Administration

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

30 CFR Part 72

RIN 1219-AB18


Determination of Concentration of Respirable Coal Mine Dust

AGENCIES: Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA), Department of 
Labor, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, Centers 
for Disease Control and Prevention, Department of Health and Human 
Services (DHHS).

ACTION: Proposed rule; reopening of record; request for comments; 
notice of public hearings; correction; close of record.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Secretary of Labor and the Secretary of Health and Human 
Services (the Secretaries) are reopening the rulemaking record on a 
joint proposed rule that would determine that the average concentration 
of respirable dust to which each miner in the active workings of a coal 
mine is exposed can be accurately measured over a single shift. The 
Secretaries proposed to rescind a previous 1972 finding by the 
Secretary of the Interior and the Secretary of Health, Education and 
Welfare, on the accuracy of single shift sampling.
    The Secretaries are reopening the rulemaking record to provide 
interested parties an additional opportunity to comment on any issue 
relevant to the July 2000 proposed rule; and to solicit comment on new 
data and information added to the record.

DATES: We must receive your comments on or before June 4, 2003.
    The Agencies are also announcing that they will hold public 
hearings on this reopening notice. The hearing dates and times will be 
announced by a separate document in the Federal Register.

ADDRESSES: Comments must be clearly identified as such and transmitted 
either electronically to [email protected], by facsimile to (202) 693-
9441, or by regular mail or hand delivery to MSHA, Office of Standards, 
Regulations, and Variances, 1100 Wilson Blvd., Room 2313, Arlington, 
Virginia 22209-3939. You may contact MSHA with any format questions. 
Comments are posted for public viewing at http://www.msha.gov/currentcomments.htm.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Marvin W. Nichols, Jr., Director, 
Office of Standards, Regulations and Variances, MSHA; phone: (202) 693-
9440; facsimile: (202) 693-9441; E-mail: [email protected].
    This document is also available on MSHA's webpage at http://www.msha.gov, under Statutory and Regulatory Information; Federal 
Register Documents; Proposed Rules. You can view comments filed on this 
rulemaking at http://www.msha.gov/currentcomments.htm.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In accordance with sections 101 and 202(f) 
of the Federal Mine Safety and Health Act of 1977 (Mine Act), this 
document is published jointly by the Secretary of the Department of 
Labor, and the Secretary of Health and Human Services.
    This document should be read in conjunction with: (1) The July 7, 
2000 notice of proposed rulemaking (63 FR 42068) addressing 
``Determination of Concentration of Respirable Coal Mine Dust, ``Single 
Sample''; and (2) the notice of proposed rulemaking addressing 
Verification of Underground Coal Mine Operator's Dust Control Plans, 
``Plan Verification,'' 1219-AB14, published in today's Federal 
Register, and (3) the associated Preliminary Regulatory Economic 
Analysis (PREA) available on MSHA's webpage. The plan verification rule 
would require operators to verify that the dust controls specified in 
the ventilation plan protect miners from overexposure during normal 
operations.
    In addition to this rulemaking, today's Federal Register contains 
the Plan Verification notice of proposed rulemaking, (NPRM). In 
combination, these rules represent MSHA's revised program to meet the 
Mine Act's requirement that a miners' exposure to respirable coal mine 
dust be maintained at or below the applicable standard on each shift.

I. Introduction
II. Background
III. MSHA's Current Enforcement Policy
IV. Revisions to Update Data for Rulemaking Record
    (a) Health Effects
    (b) Quantitative Risk Assessment
    (c) Technological Feasibility
    (d) Economic Feasibility
    (e) Costs and Benefits: Executive Order 12866
    (1) Compliance Costs
    (2) Benefits
    (f) Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
    (g) Correction to July 7, 2000 Preamble (65 FR 42068)
V. Public Hearings
Appendix E. References
Appendix F. Supplemental References

I. Introduction

    This reopening notice includes supplemental information which 
updates the preamble of the July 7, 2002 notice of proposed rulemaking. 
This information concerns the background, MSHA's current enforcement 
policy, health effects, quantitative risk assessment, technological 
feasibility, economic feasibility, compliance costs and benefits, and 
the list of references and supporting documentation.
    The Agencies organized the July 2000 proposed rule (65 FR 42068) to 
allow interested persons to first consider pertinent material on the 
Agencies' 1972 notice followed by an overview of the NIOSH mission and 
assessment of the proposed rule, as well as those aspects of MSHA's 
coal mine respirable dust program relevant to this proposed rule. 
Following the introductory material is a discussion of the 
``measurement objective,'' or what the Secretaries intend to measure 
with a single sample measurement, and the application of the NIOSH 
Accuracy Criterion for determining whether a single sample measurement 
will ``accurately represent'' the full-shift atmospheric dust 
concentration. Next, the validity of the sampling process is addressed, 
including the performance of the approved sampler unit, sample 
collection procedures, and sample processing. The concept of 
measurement uncertainty is then addressed, and why sources of dust 
concentration variability and various other factors are not relevant to 
the proposed rule. In addition, the 2000 proposed rule summarized the 
health effects of occupational exposure to respirable coal mine dust 
and presented MSHA's quantitative risk assessment. Finally, the 2000 
proposed rule explained how the total measurement uncertainty is 
quantified, and how the accuracy of a single sample measurement meets 
the NIOSH Accuracy Criterion. Several Appendices, which contain 
relevant technical information, are attached and incorporated in the 
preamble to the 2000 proposed rule.
    The Secretaries are interested in further comment on all issues 
relevant to the July 7, 2000 NPRM. The July 7, 2000 NPRM is available 
on MSHA's webpage at http://www.msha.gov, under Statutory and 
Regulatory Information, Federal Register Documents, Proposed Rules; or 
you may contact MSHA at 202-693-9440 for a copy.

[[Page 10941]]

    The proposed rule, ``Determination of Concentration of Respirable 
Coal Mine Dust,'' has been referred to as ``Single, Full-Shift 
Sampling'' based on the Agencies' finding that a single, full-shift 
measurement would, after applying valid statistical techniques, 
accurately represent the atmospheric conditions to which the miner is 
continuously exposed. However, where appropriate, the term ``single, 
full-shift sample,'' will now be referred to as ``single sample'' in 
this document and any subsequent publications. This reopening notice 
does not change the actual finding as published in the July 7, 2000 
Federal Register.

II. Background

    In 1972, the Secretary of Interior and the Secretary of Health, 
Education, and Welfare issued a ``joint finding'' under the Federal 
Coal Mine Health and Safety Act of 1969. The finding concluded that a 
single, full-shift measurement of respirable dust would not, after 
applying valid statistical techniques, accurately represent the 
atmospheric conditions to which the miner is continuously exposed.
    In 1994, the Secretary of Labor and the Secretary of Health and 
Human Services tentatively concluded that the 1972 joint finding was 
incorrect. Therefore, on February 18, 1994, the Secretaries published a 
proposed Joint Notice of Finding in the Federal Register (59 FR 8537). 
The Joint Notice proposed to rescind the 1972 finding and, instead, to 
find that a single, full-shift measurement will accurately represent 
the atmospheric conditions with regard to the respirable dust 
concentration during the shift on which it was taken. Concurrently, on 
February 18, 1994 (59 FR 8356) MSHA published a separate Federal 
Register document announcing how MSHA intended to use both single, 
full-shift samples and the average of multiple, full-shift samples for 
noncompliance determinations, and solicited public comment on the 
proposed enforcement procedure.
    On February 3, 1998, MSHA and the National Institute for 
Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) published a final Joint Notice 
of Finding in the Federal Register, along with MSHA's enforcement 
policy implementing the joint finding (63 FR 5664 and 5687 
respectively).
    In May 1998, the National Mining Association and the Alabama Coal 
Association petitioned the United States Court of Appeals for the 11th 
Circuit to review the 1998 Notice of Finding. On September 4, 1998, the 
11th Circuit issued a final decision and order vacating the Joint 
Finding on the grounds that the Agencies failed to comply with all the 
requirements for a health standard under section 101(a)(6)(A) of the 
Mine Act (30 U.S.C. 811(a)(6)(A)).
    In response to the Court's ruling, on July 7, 2000, the Secretaries 
published in the Federal Register a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking 
(NPRM), Determination of Concentration of Respirable Coal Mine Dust 
(Single Sample) (65 FR 42068). In that document, the Secretaries 
proposed a new mandatory health standard in 30 CFR part 72 that stated 
that a single, full-shift measurement would accurately represent 
atmospheric conditions to which a miner is exposed during such shift. 
The proposed rule would rescind the 1972 Joint Notice of Finding.
    During August 2000, three public hearings were conducted. 
Transcripts of those proceedings are available to the public 
(www.msha.gov, under Statutory and Regulatory Information).

III. MSHA's Current Enforcement Policy

    The Federal Mine Safety and Health Review Commission's decision in 
MSHA v. Excel, 23 FMSHRC 600 (June 2001) precluded MSHA from citing an 
operator on the average of multiple samples collected by an inspector 
on a single shift. This decision affirmed an Administrative Law Judge 
dismissal of three citations alleging violations of the respirable dust 
standard based on the average of multiple inspector samples taken on a 
single shift. The Secretary's appeal of the Commission's decision is 
now pending before the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals (D.C. Cir. No. 01-
1335). Oral argument was held on October 7, 2002. In August 2001, MSHA 
ceased issuing citations on the average of multiple samples taken on a 
single shift pending a resolution of the appeal. Currently, all 
noncompliance determinations are based on the average of multi-shift 
sample results. Because this change has taken place since publication 
of the July 7, 2000 NPRM, references to enforcement action based on the 
average of multiple samples taken by inspectors on a single shift no 
longer reflect MSHA's current enforcement policy. The promulgation of 
the Single Sample rule would address the 1972 Finding and the 
consequences of the June 2001 Commission decision.

IV. Revisions To Update Data for the Rulemaking Record

    The Agencies also solicit comments on revised information to update 
the rulemaking record which address the following:

(a) Health Effects

(Please see Section VII, 65 FR 42075, of the July 7, 2000 notice of 
proposed rulemaking for a complete discussion of Health Effects). The 
following provides an update on the Miners' Choice Program.

    MSHA and NIOSH implemented the Miners' Choice Health Screening 
Program (Miners' Choice) in October 1999. The Miners' Choice program 
and Coal Workers' X-Ray Surveillance Program (CWXSP) identify cases of 
simple and complicated pneumoconiosis, including coal workers' 
pneumoconiosis and silicosis--hereafter referred to as ``CWP.'' All of 
the Miners' Choice x-rays were processed using the same procedures and 
criteria used in the CWXSP in accordance with the requirements of 42 
CFR part 37.
    MSHA and NIOSH are conducting preliminary analyses of the first 
three years of the Miners' Choice program. These data and analyses are 
being handled, conducted, and reported pursuant to the DOL's and DHHS's 
respective Information Quality Guidelines.\1\ Preliminary analyses of 
these data are expected in Spring 2003. The analyses will be made 
available to commenters through the MSHA and NIOSH Web sites, 
www.msha.gov and www.cdc.gov/niosh/homepage.html, respectively.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Specifically, the information is maintained in a 
confidential manner, all methodologies for data processing are 
transparent, and all available records were included. This 
information is reliable and accurate, and is presented in a clear 
and objective manner, as required by the Department of Labor's 
Information Quality Guidelines and the Department of Health and 
Human Services' Guidelines for Ensuring the Quality of Information 
Disseminated to the Public.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As of the end of fiscal year 2002, more than 19,500 active coal 
miners from 20 states voluntarily participated in Miners' Choice. The 
overall CWP prevalence rate for radiographic categories of simple CWP 
categories 1, 2, 3, and PMF combined was 2.8% (546/19,517) among miners 
examined in Miners' Choice during the 2000-2002 period. This is similar 
to the CWP prevalence rate of 2.25% for initial participants in the 
Miners' Choice Program reported in the 2000 NPRM (65 FR 42100). Among 
Miners' Choice participants, the CWP prevalence rate was higher among 
underground coal miners at 3.8% (356/9,265), than it was for surface 
coal miners, 1.8% (188/10,184). The CWP prevalence rate for independent 
contractors was 2.9% (2/68). These findings show that CWP continues to 
occur among coal miners working under the current program to

[[Page 10942]]

control respirable coal mine dust, including quartz.

(b) Quantitative Risk Assessment

    The Quantitative Risk Assessment (QRA) in support of this rule has 
been updated to reflect more current data on the pattern of 
overexposures to respirable coal mine dust. The new data replaces some 
of the original information used to derive the risk estimates for the 
Single, Full-Shift Sample (65 FR 42068) and Plan Verification (65 FR 
42122) Notice of Proposed Rulemakings. The updated analysis of risk 
provides the best available evidence pursuant to the requirements of 
section 101(a)(6)(A) of the Mine Act. Please refer to section VI. of 
the July 7, 2000 (63 FR 42123) notice of proposed rulemaking for the 
previous discussion of the QRA.
    In this quantitative risk assessment (QRA), MSHA will demonstrate 
that eliminating overexposures on each and every shift would, over a 
45-year occupational lifetime, significantly reduce the cumulative 
exposure to respirable coal mine dust, thereby reducing the risk of 
both simple CWP and PMF among miners. This reduction in risk would be 
attributed to reducing concentrations on just that percentage of shifts 
currently exhibiting a pattern of recurrent overexposure.
    MSHA has estimated health benefits of the two rules based on 
eliminating excessive exposures at only those MMUs and roofbolter 
designated areas (RB-DAs) currently exhibiting a pattern of recurrent 
overexposures on individual shifts. In the previous proposed rule, MSHA 
used operator sampling data from the year 1999 to identify and 
characterize such MMUs. In the current proposed rule, MSHA has updated 
the analysis to 2001, included MSHA DO sampling data in addition to 
operator data, and expanded the quantitative analysis to include the 
reduction in risk expected for certain miners not previously considered 
(i.e., miners working in RB-DAs). As a result, MSHA believes it has 
more accurately quantified the expected reduction in risk for the most 
exposed miner population currently subjected to recurrent 
overexposures.
    By ``exhibiting a pattern of recurrent overexposures,'' MSHA means 
that, for the same DO (MMU) or RB-DA, at least two valid MSHA or 
operator bimonthly samples exceeded the applicable standard in a given 
year. MMUs exhibiting such a pattern are highly likely to have 
experienced excessive exposures on at least six shifts during the year 
under consideration.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ MSHA estimates an MMU average of 384 production shifts per 
year. At MMUs exhibiting a pattern of recurrent overexposures in 
2001, valid DO samples were obtained on an average of about 30 of 
these 384 production shifts. If dust concentrations on two or more 
of the sampled shifts exceed the standard, then it follows, at a 95-
percent confidence level, that the standard is exceeded on at least 
six shifts over the full year.
    If a different definition of ``exhibiting a recurrent pattern of 
overexposures'' had been used in the QRA, the estimate of the 
reduction in risk and associated benefits would have been different. 
For example, if the criterion were that four or more bimonthly DO 
exposure measurements exceeded the applicable standard then 
overexposures would be expected, with 95% confidence, to occur on at 
least 20 shifts in a year of 384 shifts. Using more than two 
recorded overexposures as the criterion would arbitrarily reduce the 
population for which MSHA is estimating benefits and decrease the 
estimated number of prevented cases.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Based on 2001 MSHA and operator data, there were 716 MMUs (out of 
1,256 total) at which dust concentrations for the DO exceeded the 
applicable standard on at least two of the sampling shifts (MSHA, 
datafile: DO--2001.ZIP). MSHA considers these 716 MMUs, representing 57 
percent of all MMUs and more than one-half of all underground coal 
miners working in production areas, to have exhibited a pattern of 
recurrent overexposures. Valid DO samples were collected on a total of 
20,905 shifts at these 716 MMUs, and the applicable standard was 
exceeded on 4,028 of these shifts, or 19.3 percent. For this 19.3 
percent, the mean excess above the standard, as measured for the DO 
only, was 1.04 mg/m \3\.
    These results are based on a large number of shifts (an average of 
nearly 30 at each of the 716 MMUs). Therefore, assuming representative 
operating conditions on these shifts, the results can be extrapolated 
to all production shifts, including those that were not sampled, at 
these same 716 MMUs. With 99-percent confidence, the overall percentage 
of production shifts on which the DO sample exceeded the standard was 
between 18.6 percent and 20.0 percent for 2001. At the same confidence 
level, again assuming representative operating conditions, the overall 
mean excess on noncompliant shifts at these MMUs was between 0.96 mg/m 
\3\ and 1.11 mg/m \3\. If, as some commenters on the earlier single 
sample proposed rule and the Dust Advisory Committee proceedings have 
alleged, operators tend to reduce production and/or increase dust 
controls on sampled shifts, then the true values could be higher than 
even the upper endpoints of these 99-percent confidence intervals.
    The available data suggest that, unless changes are made to bring 
dust concentrations down to at or below the dust standard on every 
shift, the same general pattern of overexposures observed in 2001 will 
persist into the future.\3\ Therefore, MSHA concludes that without the 
proposed changes:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Appendix VI.1 compares the pattern observed in 2001 to that 
in earlier years.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    [sbull] More than half of all MMUs would continue to have a pattern 
of recurrent overexposures on individual shifts;
    [sbull] At those MMUs with recurrent overexposures, average 
respirable dust concentrations for the DO would continue to exceed the 
applicable standards on about 20 percent of all production shifts;
    [sbull] Among those shifts on which DO exposure exceeds the 
applicable standards, the mean excess for the DO would continue to be 
approximately 1 mg/m\3\.
    If all overexposures on individual shifts are eliminated, the 
reduction in total respirable coal mine dust inhaled by a miner over a 
working lifetime will depend on three factors: (1) The average volume 
of air inhaled on each shift that would otherwise have exceeded the 
applicable standard, (2) the degree of reduction in respirable dust 
concentration in the air inhaled on such shifts, and (3) the number of 
such shifts per working lifetime. While the inhaled dose (mg) could not 
be measured directly, it is biologically and quantitatively related to 
the accumulated exposure (i.e., airborne concentration multiplied by 
duration, summed across jobs for each miner) used to predict CWP and 
PMF prevalences in the Attfield-Seixas models used in this QRA. If a 
miner inhales ten cubic meters of air on a shift (U.S. EPA, 1980), 
reducing the respirable coal mine dust concentration in that air by 
1.04 mg/m\3\ will result in 10.4 mg less dust inhaled on that shift 
alone. Assuming the miner works 240 shifts per year, then reducing 
inhaled respirable dust by an average of 10.4 mg on 19.3 percent of the 
shifts will reduce the total respirable coal mine dust inhaled by 482 
mg per year, or nearly 22,000 mg over a 45-year working lifetime:
    1.04 mg less respirable coal mine dust per m\3\ of inhaled air
    x 10 m\3\ inhaled air per shift
x 46.32 affected shifts (i.e., 19.3% of 240) per work year
    x 45 work years per working lifetime
    = 21,678 mg less respirable coal mine dust inhaled per working 
lifetime.

    In Section V, the strengths and weaknesses of various 
epidemiological

[[Page 10943]]

studies were presented, supporting the selection of Attfield and Seixas 
(1995) as the study that provides the best available estimate of 
material health impairment with respect to CWP. Two strengths of this 
study are its quantitative description of exposure-response among both 
miners and ex-miners (who had worked as miners for approximately 13-40 
years) and the fact that it reflects recent conditions experienced by 
coal miners in the U.S. Using the exposure-response relationship it is 
possible to estimate the health impact of bringing dust concentrations 
down to or below the applicable standard on every shift. This is the 
only contemporary epidemiological study of CWP in U.S. miners providing 
such a relationship.
    Attfield and Seixas (op cit) used two or three B readers to 
identify the profusion of opacities based on the ILO classification 
scheme.\4\ The most inclusive category defined in their paper was CWP 
1+, which include simple CWP categories 1, 2, and 3, as well as PMF. 
The second category CWP 2+, does not include simple CWP, category 1, 
but does include the more severe simple CWP categories, 2 and 3, as 
well as PMF. The third category used in their report was PMF, denoting 
any category (A, B, or C) of large opacities. The authors applied 
logistic regression models to the prevalence of CWP 1+, CWP 2+, and PMF 
as a function of accumulated coal mine exposure calculated for each 
miner included in the study. In the absence of data differentiating the 
inhalation rates of individual miners, the accumulated exposures in 
these models were expressed in units of mg-yr/m\3\.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ If three readings were available, the median value was used. 
If two readings were available, the higher of the two ILO categories 
was recorded. Eighty radiographs were eliminated because only one 
reading was available.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At the MMUs being considered (those exhibiting a pattern of 
recurrent overexposures), bringing dust concentrations down to no more 
than the applicable standard on each and every production shift would 
reduce DO exposures on the affected shifts by an average of 1.04 mg/
m\3\. Assuming this average reduction applies to only 19.3 percent of 
the shifts, the effect would be to reduce cumulative exposure, for each 
miner exposed at or above the DO level, by 0.20 mg-yr/m\3\ over the 
course of a working year (i.e., 19.3 percent of shifts in one year, 
times 1.04 mg/m\3\ per shift). Therefore, over a 45-year working 
lifetime, the benefit to each affected miner would, on average, amount 
to a reduction in accumulated exposure of approximately 9.0 mg-yr/m\3\ 
(i.e., 45 years times 0.20 mg-yr/m\3\ per year). If, as some miners 
have testified, operator dust samples submitted to MSHA tend to under-
represent the frequency or magnitude (or both) of individual full-shift 
excursions above the applicable standard, then eliminating such 
excursions would provide a lifetime reduction of even greater than 9.0 
mg-yr/m\3\ for each affected miner.
    The Attfield-Seixas models predict the prevalence of CWP 1+, CWP 
2+, and PMF for miners who have accumulated a given amount of exposure, 
expressed in units of mg-yr/m\3\, by the time they attain a specified 
age. Benefits of reducing cumulative exposure can be estimated by 
calculating the difference between predictions with and without the 
reduction. For example, suppose a miner at one of the MMUs under 
consideration begins work at age 20 and retires at age 65. At these 
MMUs, the mean DO concentration reported in 2001 was 1.15 mg/m\3\; so, 
after 45 years, a miner exposed at this level can be expected to have 
accumulated a total exposure of nearly 52 mg-yr/m\3\ (i.e., 45 yr x 
1.15 mg/m\3\). By the year of retirement, such a miner is expected to 
accumulate, on average, 9.0 mg-yr/m\3\ less exposure if individual 
shift excursions are eliminated. For 65-year-old miners, reducing an 
accumulated total dust exposure of 52 mg-yr/m\3\ by 9.0 mg-yr/m\3\ 
reduces the predicted prevalence of ``CWP 1+'' by more than 16 per 
thousand (see the entry for affected DO miners in Table VI-1).\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ The Attfield-Seixas model predicts a higher prevalence of 
CWP, and consequently a greater risk reduction (35 per thousand DO 
miners at age 65), after 45 years of occupational exposure to coal 
mine dust in central Pennsylvania or southeastern West Virginia. 
(Attfield and Seixas attribute this effect to the type of coal mined 
in those geographic areas.) However, few underground coal mines in 
central Pennsylvania or southeastern West Virginia are still 
operating. In fact, only about 29 of the 716 MMUs exhibiting a 
pattern of recurrent overexposures in 2001 were from those areas. 
Therefore, the risk assessment presented here, along with projected 
benefits of the rule, are based on the lower risks predicted for 
miners working outside central Pennsylvania and southeastern West 
Virginia.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    This result, however, applies only to DO miners at age 65. The 
Attfield-Seixas models provide different predictions for each year of 
age that a miner attains. The predicted benefit turns out to be smaller 
for younger miners and larger for older miners. This is partly because 
younger miners will have accumulated less exposure reduction as a 
result of the single sample and plan verification proposals, and partly 
because the Attfield-Seixas models depend directly on age as well as on 
cumulative exposure. The health effects of recurrent overexposures can 
occur long after the overexposures occurred. Even after a miner retires 
and is no longer exposed to respirable coal mine dust, the additional 
risk attributable to an extra 9.0 mg-year/m\3\, accumulated earlier, 
continues to increase with age. Consequently, the benefit to be gained 
from eliminating individual shift excursions also continues to increase 
after a miner is no longer exposed. For example, assuming no additional 
exposure after age 65, the predicted reduction in average prevalence of 
CWP 1+ increases from 16.6 per thousand at age 65 to 21.4 per thousand 
at age 70. Presumably, the increasingly greater predicted reduction in 
risk of disease after age 65 is due to the latent effects of the 
reduction in earlier exposure and the progressive nature of CWP.
    To quantify benefits expected from eliminating overexposures on 
each and every shift, MSHA applied the Attfield-Seixas models to a 
hypothetical population of miners who, on average, begin working at age 
20 and retire at age 65, assuming different lifetimes.\6\ To show the 
range of potential reductions in risk depending on a miner's lifetime, 
Table VI-1 presents the risk reductions predicted at three different 
attained ages: 65, 73, and 80 years. The projected benefit increases 
with attained age. However, MSHA's best estimate of the benefit to 
exposed miners is expressed by the reduction in prevalence of disease 
predicted at age 73.\7\ Since not all underground coal miners are 
overexposed to dust with the same frequency or at the same level, Table 
VI-1 shows the risk reductions projected for three different categories 
of affected miners: (1) DO miners, (2) NDO miners who are faceworkers 
neither classified as a DO nor subject to a separate dust standard 
applicable to a RB-DA, and (3) DA roofbolters. The reduction in risk 
predicted for each of these three categories will now be discussed in 
turn.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ Appendix VI.2 contains a technical description of the 
Attfield-Seixas models and an explanation of how MSHA applied them 
to obtain the results shown in Table VI-1. The method used in 
applying the models differs slightly from that used in the previous 
proposed rule, and Appendix VI.2 also explains this difference. In 
addition, an EXCEL workbook entitled ``RiskRdxn.xlw'' showing the 
formulas used in the calculations has been placed into the public 
record for these proceedings.
    \7\ The expected lifetime for all American males, conditional on 
their having reached 20 years of age, is 73 years (calculated from 
U.S. Census, March 1997, Tables 18 and 119).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

(1) DO Miners
    As explained earlier, for DO miners the predicted lifetime exposure 
reduction accumulates at a rate of 0.20 mg/m\3\ of reduced exposure per 
year during the 45 ``working years'' between

[[Page 10944]]

20 and 65, reaching a maximum of 9.0 mg-yr/m\3\ upon retirement at age 
65. Between ages 65 and 80, the accumulated reduction in dust exposure 
remains at an estimated average of 9.0 mg-yr/m\3\, but (as also 
explained previously) the benefit in terms of both simple CWP and PMF 
risk continues to increase.
    The first row of Table VI-1 presents the reductions in risk 
expected among affected DO miners who work at an MMU exhibiting a 
pattern of recurrent overexposures. For this group of miners, the 
calculation at an average lifetime of 73 years shows that bringing dust 
concentrations down to no more than the applicable standard on each 
shift would:
    [sbull] Reduce the combined risk of simple CWP and PMF;
    [sbull] Reduce the combined risk of simple CWP and PMF by 24.4 
cases per 1000 affected DO miners; \8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ ``Affected DO miners'' include all miners who work at MMUs 
with a pattern of recurrent overexposures and who are exposed to 
dust concentrations similar to the DO over a 45-year working 
lifetime.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    [sbull] Reduce the combined risk of simple CWP (category 2 and 3) 
and PMF by 15.5 cases per 1000 affected DO miners;
    [sbull] Reduce the risk of PMF by 7.6 cases per 1000 affected DO 
miners.
    When the dust concentration measured for the DO exceeds the 
applicable standard, measurements for at least some of the other miners 
in the same MMU may also exceed the standard on the same shift, though 
usually by a lesser amount. Furthermore, although the DO represents the 
occupation most likely to receive the highest exposure, one or more of 
these other miners may be exposed to even higher concentrations than 
the DO on some shifts. Therefore, the second category of affected 
miners addressed in Table VI-1 is the population of NDO faceworkers 
other than those working in roofbolter DAs (who are addressed as a 
separate, third category).
(2) NDO Miners
    This category covers all faceworkers other than the DO, except 
those roofbolters for which a separate DA dust standard has been 
established. (Roofbolters not coming under a DA standard are included 
in the NDO category.) To estimate how NDO miners (other than those 
subject to a DA standard) would be affected by the proposed rules, MSHA 
examined the results from all valid dust samples collected by MSHA in 
underground MMUs during 2001 (MSHA, data file: Insp2001.zip). Within 
each MMU, MSHA typically takes one sample on the DO and, on the same 
shift, four or more additional samples representing other occupations. 
In 2001, there was an average of 1.0 NDO measurement in excess of the 
standard on shifts for which the DO measurement exceeded the 
standard.\9\ For non-DO measurements that exceeded the standard on the 
same shift as a DO measurement, the mean excess above the standard was 
approximately 0.6 mg/m\3\.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ With 95-percent confidence, on shifts for which the DO 
measurement exceeds the standard, the mean number of other 
occupational measurements also exceeding the standard is at least 
0.91.
    \10\ With 95-percent confidence, the mean excess is at least 
0.59 mg/m\3\.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Combining these results with the 19.3 percent rate of excessive 
exposures observed for the DO on individual shifts, it is reasonable to 
infer that, at the MMUs under consideration, an average of 1 other 
miner, in addition to the one classified as DO, is currently 
overexposed on at least 19 percent of all production shifts. In 2001, 
the mean of the highest dust concentration reported for any NDO miner 
on sampled shifts was 1.08 mg/m\3\. Over the course of each working 
year, the reduction in exposure expected for such miners as a result of 
implementing the proposed rules is 0.12 mg-yr/m\3\ (i.e., 19.3 percent 
of one year, times 0.6 mg/m\3\).
    To assess the reduction in risk expected from eliminating all 
single-shift exposures for these NDO miners, MSHA again applied the 
Attfield and Seixas models to miners who begin working at age 20 and 
retire at age 65, assuming lifetimes of 65, 73, and 80 years. This 
time, however, the resulting decrease in predicted prevalence was 
multiplied by 1.0/6 = 0.167, to reflect the fact that the assumed rate 
of overexposure applies, on average, to about one-sixth of the 
faceworkers not classified as the DO.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ There are an estimated 6 NDO miners for each DO miner, and 
an average of 1.0 of these 6 miners is overexposed. This does not 
include roofbolters working in designated areas, who are treated as 
a separate group in the present analysis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The second row of Table VI-1 contains the risk reductions for NDO 
miners expected as a result of eliminating all individual shift 
overexposures. Over an occupational lifetime, the average reduction in 
risk for simple CWP and PMF combined, and for PMF alone, increases with 
age. However, the risk reduction at each age is smaller for the 
affected NDOs than for the affected DOs. This is expected because the 
estimated probability that a NDO (other than a RB-DA) will, under 
current conditions, be overexposed on a given shift is only 16.7 
percent of the corresponding probability for the DO. For the MMUs under 
consideration, the predicted reduction in risk for faceworkers other 
than the DO who live an expected lifetime of 73 years is: 2.3 fewer 
cases of ``CWP 1+'' per thousand affected NDO miners; 1.5 fewer cases 
of ``CWP 2+'' per thousand affected NDO miners; and 0.7 fewer cases of 
PMF per thousand affected NDO miners.
(3) Roofbolter DA (RB-DA) Miners
    Because roofbolters are often exposed to higher quartz 
concentrations than other miners, the applicable dust standard for them 
is frequently different from the standard applicable to other miners 
working in the same MMU. Therefore, many roofbolters are classified as 
working in a ``roofbolter designated area'' (RB-DA). For purposes of 
this QRA, such roofbolters were excluded from the analysis of NDO 
miners presented above. Based on 2001 MSHA and operator data, 194 out 
of a total 659 RB-DAs met MSHA's criterion for exhibiting a pattern of 
recurrent overexposures--i.e., dust concentrations exceeded the 
applicable standard on at least two of the sampled shifts (MSHA, 
datafile: RBDA2001.ZIP). Valid RB-DA samples were collected on a total 
of 3477 shifts at these 194 RB-DAs, and the applicable standard was 
exceeded on 837 of these shifts, or 24.1 percent (95% confidence 
interval: 22.7 to 25.5). For this 24.1 percent, the mean excess above 
the standard, as measured for the RB-DA only, was 0.72 mg/m\3\ (95-
percent confidence interval: 0.64 to 0.80).
    At these RB-DAs (i.e., those exhibiting a pattern of recurrent 
overexposures), the mean concentration reported in 2001 was 0.94 mg/
m\3\; so, after 45 years, an RB-DA miner can be expected, if there is 
no change in current conditions, to have accumulated a total exposure 
of more than 42 mg-yr/m\3\. By retirement at age 65, such a miner would 
be expected to accumulate, on average, 7.8 mg-yr/m\3\ less exposure if 
overexposures on all individual shifts were eliminated. (45 years x 
24.1% of 0.72 mg/m\3\). The third row of Table VI-1 shows the estimated 
impact of the proposed rules on the risk predicted for RB-DA 
roofbolters. At age 73, reducing an accumulated total dust exposure of 
42 mg-yr/m\3\ by 7.8 mg-yr/m\3\ reduces the predicted prevalence of 
``CWP 1+'' by 19.6 per thousand, of ``CWP 2+'' by 12.1 per thousand, 
and of PMF by 6.0 per thousand.

[[Page 10945]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP06MR03.025

Appendix VI.1 DO Overexposure Patterns

    In 1998, MSHA attempted to enforce compliance on individual shifts. 
Therefore, to compare the 2001 pattern of excess exposures on 
individual shifts to that of previous years, MSHA examined the regular 
bimonthly DO sample data submitted by mine operators in the 10 years 
from 1990 through 1997 and 1999-2000. The same three parameters were 
considered as discussed above for 2001: (1) The percentage of MMUs 
exhibiting a pattern of recurrent overexposures, as indicated by at 
least two of the valid measurements being above the applicable standard 
in a given year; (2) for those and only those MMUs exhibiting recurrent 
overexposures, the overall percentage of production shifts on which the 
DO was overexposed, as estimated by the percentage of valid 
measurements above the applicable standard; and (3) for the MMUs 
identified as exhibiting recurrent overexposures, the mean excess above 
the applicable standard, as calculated for just those valid 
measurements that exceeded the applicable standard in a given year.
    Although MSHA found minor differences between individual years, 
there was no statistically significant upward or downward trend in any 
of these three parameters over the 1990-1997 time period (see Table VI-
2). Beginning in 1999, however, there was a significant and persistent 
decrease in the average excess above the applicable standard (Parameter 
3) for MMUs exhibiting recurrent overexposures. MSHA 
attributes this decrease to two important changes in the Agency's 
inspection program, beginning near the end of 1998. These changes, 
which both resulted in increased inspector presence, were: (1) An 
increase in the frequency of MSHA dust sampling at underground coal 
mines; and (2) initiation of monthly spot inspections at mines that 
were experiencing difficulty in maintaining consistent compliance with 
the applicable dust standard.

[[Page 10946]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP06MR03.026

Appendix VI.2 Application of the Attfield-Seixas Models

    Attfield and Seixas (1995) provide separate logistic regression 
models for CWP1+, CWP2+, and PMF as a function of cumulative dust 
exposure (mg-yr/m\3\). These models all have the following form:

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP06MR03.027

where p is the probability of disease at a specified age and cumulative 
exposure. The constant e is the base of the natural logarithms. The 
empirically estimated coefficients a0 (the intercept), 
a1, a2, and a3 differ for the three 
health effects considered and are presented in Table IV of Attfield and 
Seixas (op cit). The values for these coefficients are also shown in 
the Excel workbook (RiskRdxn.xlw) MSHA has placed into the public 
record as part of these proceedings. The coefficient (a3) of 
``rank'' refers to an additional effect of cumulative exposure to coal 
mine dust in central Pennsylvania or southeastern West Virginia, which 
the authors attribute to the rank of the coal mined in those areas. 
Since few mines in those areas are currently operating, MSHA did not 
employ this additional effect in its application of the Attfield-Seixas 
models (i.e., MSHA assumed that the value of the indicator variable for 
``rank'' is zero).
    From equation 1, assuming exposure outside central Pennsylvania and 
southeastern West Virginia, it follows that the prevalence of disease, 
assuming continued exposure at current levels and approximate linearity 
of the exposure effect, is (per thousand miners):

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP06MR03.028

    Similarly, the prevalence of disease, assuming reduced cumulative 
exposure attributable to implementation of the proposed rules is (per 
thousand miners):


[[Page 10947]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP06MR03.029

    Note that the ``reduced mean annual exposure'' is the current mean 
annual exposure (based on 2001 data) reduced by eliminating 
overexposures on just that percentage of shifts for which overexposures 
have been shown to currently occur.
    MSHA then estimated the impact of eliminating all overexposures on 
individual shifts by calculating (for ages 65, 73, and 80) the 
differences:

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP06MR03.030

    It is these differences that are presented in Table VI-1. The 
calculations for each specific entry are detailed in the EXCEL 
workbook, RiskRdxn.xlw, which has been placed into the public 
record.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ The method used here provides an approximation of the 
expected risk reduction ([xutri]), assuming approximate linearity of 
the exposure-response relationship over the exposure range of 
interest. This differs from the method used in the previous proposed 
rule, where lower bounds on the risk reduction were calculated. The 
calculations in the previous proposed rule defined

    [Agr] = Py, - Px,
    where y' = y / x and x and x' = ea0xage

    The previous method results in lower values than those 
shown in Table VI-1. For example, for ``CWP 1+'' among affected DO 
miners at age 73, applying the previous method to 2001 operator and 
MSHA data would have resulted in a calculated risk reduction of 16.3 
per thousand instead of the 24.4 per thousand presented in Table VI-
1. MSHA believes the method used in the current proposed rule more 
accurately represents the reduction in risk that can be expected if 
all individual shift overexposures are eliminated.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (c) Technological Feasibility
    The following discussion is a Summary of Chapters 3 and 4 of the 
Preliminary Regulatory Economic Analysis (PREA). The PREA is available 
in hard copy by request and also available on MSHA's Web page under 
Statutory and Regulatory Information. This discussion parallels the 
Regulatory Impact Analysis discussion in the accompanying notice of 
proposed rulemaking, ``Verification of Underground Coal Mine 
Operators'' Dust Control Plans and Compliance Sampling for Respirable 
Dust,'' published by MSHA, RIN 1219-AB14, in today's Federal Register.
    MSHA, in consultation with NIOSH, believes that compliance with the 
proposed Single Sample rule would be technologically feasible for the 
mining industry. The Single Sample rule would predominantly affect 
MSHA's procedures since MSHA alone conducts inspector sampling. 
However, due to the promulgation of the Single Sample rule, some 
operators would experience a slight increase in the number of abatement 
samples they would conduct using current technology. After the 
promulgation of the proposed Single Sample rule, coal operators would 
continue to comply with the existing respirable dust concentration 
limit of 2.0 mg/m3. Such compliance with the applicable 
standard has proven feasible over the years. Furthermore, compliance 
determination based on an inspector, single sample result was found to 
be technologically feasible during the prior effective Interim Single-
Sample Enforcement Policy (Single Sample), in effect from March 2, 1998 
through September 4, 1998.

(d) Economic Feasibility

    The following discussion is a Summary of Chapters 3 and 4 of the 
Preliminary Regulatory Economic Analysis (PREA). The PREA is available 
in hard copy by request and also available on MSHA's webpage under 
Statutory and Regulatory Information. This discussion parallels the 
Regulatory Impact Analysis discussion in the accompanying notice of 
proposed rulemaking, ``Verification of Underground Coal Mine 
Operators'' Dust Control Plans and Compliance Sampling for Respirable 
Dust published by MSHA, RIN 1219-AB14, in today's Federal Register.
    MSHA, in consultation with NIOSH, believes that the Single Sample 
rule would be economically feasible for the coal mining industry based 
on its most recent cost estimates. The coal mining industry would incur 
costs of approximately $3.1 million yearly to comply with the proposed 
Single Sample rule. Coal mine operators would also incur approximately 
an additional $1.7 million yearly in penalty costs associated with the 
additional citations arising from the proposed Single Sample rule.\13\ 
That the total $4.8 million borne yearly by the coal mining industry as 
a result of the proposed Single Sample rule is well less than 1 percent 
(about 0.03 percent) of the industry's yearly revenues of $17.7 billion 
provides convincing evidence that the proposed rule is economically 
feasible.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ The estimate of the number of additional citations MSHA 
anticipates issuing under the single sample rule reflects a 
substantial increase over the number of additional citations 
anticipated under the July 7, 2000 proposed rule. This is because 
the baseline period employed in the revised cost estimates (August 
through December 2001) reflects the time period after which MSHA 
ceased issuing citations based upon multiple samples collected over 
a single shift. As a result, the number of citations during the 
revised base period is lower than the number of citations for the 
base period used in the July 7, 2000 cost estimate. The estimate of 
the number of additional citations MSHA expects to issue under the 
single sample proposed rule rose from 561 in the July 7, 2000 PREA 
to 909 in the 2003 revised PREA. This increase in the number of 
additional citations is primarily responsible for the increase in 
the revised total cost estimate for the single sample proposed rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Since single sample and plan verification are complementary NPRMs 
intended to be promulgated at the same time, the detailed presentation 
of assumptions and estimates for each are available in the same 
Preliminary Regulatory Economic Analysis (PREA)(MSHA, February 2003).

(e) Costs and Benefits: Executive Order 12866

    In accordance with Executive Order 12866, the Agencies have revised 
the PREA of the estimated costs and benefits associated with the 
proposed rule for the underground and surface coal mining sectors. The 
key findings are summarized below.

1. Compliance Costs

    The Agencies estimate that the cost of this NPRM would be 
approximately $3.1 million annually, of which all but about $57,000 
would be borne by underground coal mine operators (the residual $57,000 
to be borne by surface coal mine operators). Table XIII-1 (Summary of 
Compliance Costs) summarizes the estimated compliance costs by 
provision, for underground and surface coal mines, for the following 
three mine size categories: (1) Those employing fewer than 20 workers; 
(2) those employing between 20 and 500 workers; and (3) those employing 
more than 500 workers.
    The compliance costs arising from the Single Sample NPRM would 
occur as a result of an increase in the number of MSHA inspector 
citations issued to underground and surface coal mine operators due to 
the determination of noncompliance being based on the results of a MSHA 
single sample rather than the average of multiple-shift sample results. 
The additional citations

[[Page 10948]]

would require mine operators to undertake the following actions and to 
incur associated compliance costs: take corrective action(s) in order 
to get back into compliance with the applicable dust standard; perform 
abatement sampling; complete dust data cards; send abatement samples to 
MSHA; post abatement sample results; write respirable dust plans; and 
post a copy of dust plans.
    In addition to these estimated compliance costs, mine operators 
would incur yearly penalty cost increases of about $1.7 million. 
Penalty costs conventionally are not considered to be a cost of a rule 
(and, in fact, are clearly not a compliance cost) but merely a transfer 
payment to the government from a party violating a rule. Therefore, the 
penalty costs are not included as part of the compliance costs of the 
proposed Single Sample rule. These penalty costs are relevant, however, 
in determining the economic feasibility of the proposed Single Sample 
rule.
    The derivation of the above cost figures are presented in Chapter 
IV of the PREA that accompanies this rule.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP06MR03.031


[[Page 10949]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP06MR03.032


[[Page 10950]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP06MR03.033

2. Benefits
    This benefits analysis is in support of the proposed Single Sample 
and Plan Verification rules, and updates information used in the Single 
Sample NPRM (65 FR 42068) and Plan Verification (65 FR 42122) NPRM. The 
revised Plan Verification NPRM is published elsewhere in today's 
Federal Register. This benefit analysis has been updated to include the 
revised QRA;\14\ the reduction in the number of active mines (and 
miners); and more recent information on the Black Lung Compensation 
Program.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ The revised QRA is published in full in section VIII of the 
Plan Verification NPRM. The QRA has been expanded to include 
quantitative estimates of reduction in CWP risk estimates for 
affected roofbolters working in designated areas (RB-DA).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For all categories of simple coal workers' (CWP) pneumoconiosis and 
progressive massive fibrosis (PMF) combined, MSHA estimates, over an 
occupational lifetime (45-years) for miners who live to age 73 and who 
worked at MMUs exhibiting a pattern of recurrent overexposures, a 
minimum of 42 fewer cases among affected DO, NDO, and RB-DA miners than 
would otherwise occur without the promulgation of the Single Sample and 
Plan Verification rules. MSHA and NIOSH believe that the 42 prevented 
cases of CWP identified understate the true benefit of these proposed 
rules. The

[[Page 10951]]

Benefits chapter of the PREA and the Benefits section of the proposed 
Plan Verification rule delineate the reasons why this quantitative 
estimate understates the health benefit to all coal miners (http://www.msha.gov/flex.htm).

(f) Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995

    The proposed Single Sample rule contains information collections 
which are subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget 
(OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA95). The proposed 
Single Sample rule would increase paperwork for surface and underground 
coal mine operators. Surface coal mines would incur an additional 323 
burden hours annually costing $9,278. Underground coal mines would 
incur an additional 5,354 burden hours annually costing $142,690. All 
of the additional burden hours and costs for underground coal mines 
arising from the Single Sample rule would be eliminated as a result of 
the promulgation of the plan verification rule.
    We invite public comments and are particularly interested in 
comments which:
    (a) Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information 
(presented here and in the PREA for the proposed Single Sample rule) is 
necessary for the proper performance of the functions of MSHA, 
including whether the information would have practical utility;
    (b) Evaluate the accuracy of our estimate of the burden of the 
proposed collection of information, including the validity of the 
methodology and assumptions used;
    (c) Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to 
be collected; and
    (d) Minimize the burden of the collection of information on 
respondents, 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.
    We have submitted a copy of this proposed rule to OMB for its 
review and approval of these information collections. Interested 
persons are requested to send comments regarding this information 
collection, including suggestions for reducing this burden, if under 10 
pages, by facsimile (202) 395-6974 to Attn: Desk Officer for MSHA; or 
by e-mail to: [email protected]. All comments may be sent by mail 
addressed to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, OMB New 
Executive Office Building, 725 17th St., NW, Rm. 10235, Washington, DC 
20503, Attn: Desk Officer for MSHA. Please send a copy of your comments 
to MSHA at the address listed in the ADDRESSES section of the preamble. 
Submit written comments on the information collection not later than 
June 4, 2003.
    Our paperwork submission summarized above is explained in detail in 
the PREA. The PREA includes the estimated costs and assumptions for 
each proposed paperwork requirement related to the proposed Single 
Sample rule. These paperwork requirements have been submitted to the 
Office of Management and Budget for review under section 3504(h) of the 
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. Respondents are not required to 
respond to any collection of information unless it displays a current 
valid OMB control number. The PREA is located on our Web site at http://www.msha.gov/REGSINFO.HTM. Comments may be sent to the addresses 
listed in the ADDRESSES section of the preamble.

(g) Correction to the July 7, 2000 Preamble (65 FR 42068)

    On page 42076, column two, line 25, change ``4.8%'' to ``5.6%''. 
The sentence should read, ``Across the eight surface cohorts surveyed, 
the prevalence rate of simple CWP and PMF combined, among participants 
was 5.6%.''

V. Public Hearings

    MSHA and NIOSH plan to hold public hearings on the reopening 
notice. The hearings will be held under Section 101 of the Federal Mine 
Safety and Health Act of 1977. The hearings will be held in the 
following cities:
    (a) Evansville, Indiana;
    (b) Charleston, West Virginia;
    (c) Grand Junction, Colorado;
    (d) Birmingham, Alabama;
    (e) Lexington, Kentucky; and
    (f) Washington, Pennsylvania.
    The specific dates, times and facilities for the hearings will be 
announced by a separate notice in the Federal Register.

    Dated: March 3, 2003.
Elaine L. Chao,
Secretary, Department of Labor.
    Dated: March 3, 2003.
Tommy G. Thompson,
Secretary, Department of Health and Human Services.

Appendix E--References

    The following is a list of references cited in this document. Some 
of these are additions to the existing rulemaking record.
    Attfield, M.D. and Noah S. Seixas. Prevalence of pneumoconiosis and 
its relationship to dust exposure in a cohort of U.S. bituminous coal 
miners and ex-miners. Am. J. Ind. Med., Vol. 27, pp. 137-151, 1995.
    Mine Safety and Health Administration, Excel File, RiskRdnxn.xlw, 
2002.
    Mine Safety and Health Administration, Number of Percentage of RB-
DAs by Mine Size of Underground Coal Mines, and Number of Production 
Shifts, September 4, 2002.
    Mine Safety and Health Administration, Designated Occupations 
Sampling Data, MSHA Data File DO--2001.zip, 2001.
    Mine Safety and Health Administration, Roof-bolter Designated Area 
Sampling Data, MSHA Data File RBDA2001.zip, 2001.
    Mine Safety and Health Administration, Bimonthly Operator Samples 
for Designated Occupations, MSHA Data File OP--2001.zip, 2001.
    Mine Safety and Health Administration, Inspector Samples, CY 2001, 
MSHA Data File Insp2001.zip, 2001.
    Mine Safety and Health Administration, Preliminary Regulatory 
Economic Analysis, (PREA), Chapter 4, February 2003.
    National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, Work-Related 
Lung Disease Surveillance Report: 1999. DHHS (NIOSH) Number 2000-105, 
1999.
    U.S. Bureau of the Census, Current Population Reports, Table 18. 
Resident Population, by Race, 1980 to 1996, and Projections, 1997 to 
2050, P25-1095 and P25-1130; and Population Paper Listing PPL-57, March 
1997.
    U.S. Bureau of the Census, Current Population Reports, Table 119. 
Expectation of Life and Expected Deaths, by Race, and Age: 1994, March 
1997.
    U.S. EPA, Guidelines and methodology used in the preparation of 
health effects assessment chapters of the consent decree water criteria 
documents. 45 FR 79347-79357, 1980).

Appendix F--Supplemental References

    The following references have been added to the Single Sample 
rulemaking record.
    Ahmad, D.; Morgan, W.K.C; Lapp, N.L.; Reger, R.; and J.J. Renn. 
Meretricious effects of coal dust [letter]. (see Beeckman-Wagner et 
al., 2002 for authors' response). AM J Respir Crit Care, Feb 15; 
165(4):552-43, 2002.
    Althouse, R.B.; Castellan, R.M.; Attfield, M.D.; Bang K.M.; and 
J.E. Parker, ``Surveillance of Pneumoconiosis morbidity in U.S. 
underground coal miners: 1975-1995.'' 1998 Elsevier Sciences BV. 
Advances in

[[Page 10952]]

the Prevention of Occupational Respiratory Diseases. K. Chiyotani, Y. 
Hosoda and Y. Aizawa, editors.
    Attfield, M.D.; Vallyathan, V. and F.H.Y. Green. ``Radiographic 
Appearances of Small Opacities and their Correlation with Pathology 
Grading of Macules, Nodules and Dust Burden in the Lungs.'' Annual 
Occupational Hygiene, Volume 38, Supplement I:783-789, 1994.
    Beeckman-Wagner, L.F.; Wang, M.; Petsonk, E. and G.R. Wagner. 
Meretricious effects of coal dust [authors' response]. American Journal 
of Respiratory Critical Care Medicine. February 15; 165(4):553, 2002.
    Beeckman, L.F.; Wang, M.L.; Petsonk, E.L.; and G.R. Wagner. ``Rapid 
Declines in FEV1 and Subsequent Respiratory Symptoms, 
Illnesses, and Mortality in Coal Miners in the United States. American 
Journal of Respiratory Critical Care Medicine. Vol 163:633-639, 2001.
    Castranova, V. and V. Vallyathan. ``Silicosis and Coal Workers'' 
Pneumoconiosis,'' Environmental Health Perspectives, Vol 108, 
Supplement 4:675-684, August 2000.
    De Vuyst, P. and P. Camus. The past and present of pneumoconioses. 
Service de Pneumologie, Hopital Erasme, Bruxelles, Belgique. Curr Opin 
Pulm Med; 6(2):151-6, March 2000.
    Douglas, A.N.; Robertson, A.; Chapman, J.S.; and V.A. Ruckley. Dust 
exposure, dust recovered from the lung, and associated pathology in a 
group of British coalminers.'' British Journal of Industrial Medicine. 
43:795-801, 1986.
    Employment Standards Administration, U.S. Department of Labor. 
Office of Workers' Compensation Programs, Compliance Guide to the Black 
Lung Benefits Act, May 2001.
    Employment Standards Administration, U.S. Department of Labor, 
Office of Workers' Compensation Programs, OWCP Annual Report to 
Congress FY 2000, Submitted to Congress 2001.
    Fernie, J.M. and V.A. Ruckley, ``Coalworkers'' Pneumoconiosis: 
Correlation Between Opacity Profusion and Number and Type of Dust 
Lesions with Special Reference to Opacity Type.'' British Journal of 
Industrial Medicine, 44:273-277, 1987.
    Heederik, D. and M. Attfield, ``Characterization of Dust Exposure 
for the Study of Chronic Occupational Lung Disease: A Comparison of 
Different Exposure Assessment Strategies.'' American Journal of 
Epidemiology, Volume 151, Number 10, 982-990, 2000.
    Jimenez-Ruiz, C.A., Masa, F.; Miravitlles, M., Gabriel, R.; Vieho, 
J.L.; Villsante, C.; Sobradillo, V.; and the IBERPOC Study 
Investigators, ``Smoking Characteristics: Differences in Attitudes and 
Dependence Between Healthy Smokers and Smokers with COPD.'' Chest, 
119:(5):1365-1370, May 2001.
    Kuempel, E.D.; O'Flaherty, E.J.; Stayner, L.T.; Smith, R.J.; Green, 
F.H.Y.; and V. Vallyathan. ``A Biomathematical Model of Particle 
Clearance and Retention in the Lungs of Coal Miners.'' Regulatory 
Toxicology and Pharmacology, 34:69-87, 2001.
    Kuempel, E.D.; Tran, C.; Smith, R.; and A.J. Bailer. ``A 
Biomathematical Model of Particle Clearance and Retention in the Lungs 
of Coal Miners.'' Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology, 34:88-101, 
2001.
    Lin, L.C.; Yang, S.C.; and K.W. Lu. ``Ventilatory Defect in Coal 
Workers with Simple Pneumoconiosis: Early Detection of Functional 
Abnormalities. Kaohsiung J Med Sci. 17(5):245-52, May 2001.
    Meyer, J.D.; Holt, D.L.; Chen, Y.; Cherry, N.M.; and J.C. McDonald. 
SWORD '99: surveillance of work-related and occupational respiratory 
disease in the UK. Occup Med (Lond), 51(3):204-8, May 2001.
    Mine Safety and Health Administration, Chart, Number and Percentage 
of MMUs by Mine Size of Underground Coal Mines, and Number of 
Production Shifts, July 10, 2002.
    Mine Safety and Health Administration, Chart, Mines and Entity in 
Producing Status, May 14, 2002.
    National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, Letter from 
Dr. Michael Attfield, to Melinda Pon, Chief, Division of Health, Mine 
Safety and Health Administration, dated September 30, 2002, correcting 
a July 11, 2002 letter from Dr. Wagner to Ms. Pon, Re: CWXSP.
    Page, S.J.; and J.A. Organiscak, ``Suggestion of a Cause-and-Effect 
Relationship Among Coal Rank, Airborne Dust, and Incidence of Workers' 
Pneumoconiosis.'' AIHAJ, Volume 61: 785-787, November/December 2000.
    Ruckley, V.A.; Fernie, J.M.; Campbell, S.J.; and H.S. Cowie. H.S., 
``Causes of Disability in Coal Miners: A Clinico-Pathological Study of 
Emphysema, Airways Obstruction and Massive Fibrosis.'' Report No. TM/
89/05, UDC 622.872:616 24-007.61.
    Ruckley, V.A.; et al., ``Comparison of Radiographic Appearances 
with Associated Pathology and Lung Dust Content in a Group of 
Coalworkers.'' British Journal of Industrial Medicine, 41, 459-467, 
1984.
    Scarisbrick, D., ``Silicosis and Coal Workers'' Pneumoconiosis. The 
Practitioner, 246(1631):114:117, February 2002.
    Singh, N.; and G.S. Davis, Review: Occupational and Environmental 
Lung Disease. Curr Opin Pulm Med. 8(2):117-125, March 2002.
    Tyson, P.A.; Stuffer, J.L.; Mauger, E.A.; Caulfield, J.E.; Conrad, 
D.W.; and K.G. Stricklin. ``Silicosis Screening in Surface Coal Miners-
Pennsylvania, 1996-1997.'' MMWR, Volume 49, Number 27:612-615, July 14, 
2000.
    Vallyathan, V.; Goins, M.; Lapp, L.N.; Pack, D.; Leonard, S.; Shi, 
X.; and V. Castranova. Changes in Bronchoalveolar Lavage Indices 
Associated with Radiographic Classification in Coal Miners. Am J Respir 
Crit Care Med. 162(3 Pt 1):958-965, September 2000.
    Wang, X. and D.C. Christiani, ``Respiratory Symptoms and Functional 
Status in Workers Exposed to Silica, Asbestos, and Coal Mine Dusts.'' 
Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, Volume 42, Number 
11: 1076-1084, November 2000.
    Yucesoy, B.; Vallyathan, V.; Landsittel, D.P., Sharp, D.S.; 
Matheson, J.; Burleson, F.; Luster, M.I. Polymorphisms of the IL-1 Gene 
Complex in Coal Miners with Silicosis. Am J Ind Med, 39(3):286-291, 
March 2001.

[FR Doc. 03-5402 Filed 3-5-03; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-43-P