[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 22 (Friday, February 3, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 9234-9236]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-02297]


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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Mine Safety and Health Administration


Petitions for Modification of Application of Existing Mandatory 
Safety Standards

AGENCY: Mine Safety and Health Administration, Labor.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: Section 101(c) of the Federal Mine Safety and Health Act of 
1977 and Title 30 of the Code of Federal Regulations Part 44 govern the 
application, processing, and disposition of petitions for modification. 
This notice is a summary of petitions for modification submitted to the 
Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA) by the parties listed 
below.

DATES: All comments on the petitions must be received by MSHA's Office 
of Standards, Regulations, and Variances on or before March 6, 2017.

ADDRESSES: You may submit your comments, identified by ``docket 
number'' on the subject line, by any of the following methods:
    1. Electronic Mail: [email protected]. Include the docket 
number of the petition in the subject line of the message.
    2. Facsimile: 202-693-9441.
    3. Regular Mail or Hand Delivery: MSHA, Office of Standards, 
Regulations, and Variances, 201 12th Street South, Suite 4E401, 
Arlington, Virginia 22202-5452, Attention: Sheila McConnell, Director, 
Office of Standards, Regulations, and Variances. Persons delivering 
documents are required to check in at the receptionist's desk in Suite 
4E401. Individuals may inspect copies of the petitions and comments 
during normal business hours at the address listed above.
    MSHA will consider only comments postmarked by the U.S. Postal 
Service or proof of delivery from another delivery service such as UPS 
or Federal Express on or before the deadline for comments.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Barbara Barron, Office of Standards, 
Regulations, and Variances at 202-693-9447 (Voice), 
[email protected] (Email), or 202-693-9441 (Facsimile). [These are 
not toll-free numbers.]

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background

    Section 101(c) of the Federal Mine Safety and Health Act of 1977 
(Mine Act) allows the mine operator or representative of miners to file 
a petition to modify the application of any mandatory safety standard 
to a coal or other mine if the Secretary of Labor determines that:
    1. An alternative method of achieving the result of such standard 
exists which will at all times guarantee no less than the same measure 
of protection afforded the miners of such mine by such standard; or
    2. That the application of such standard to such mine will result 
in a diminution of safety to the miners in such mine.
    In addition, the regulations at 30 CFR 44.10 and 44.11 establish 
the requirements and procedures for filing petitions for modification.

II. Petitions for Modification

    Docket Number: M-2016-009-M.
    Petitioner: Coeur Alaska, Inc., 1700 Lincoln Street, Suite 4700, 
Denver, Colorado 80203.
    Mine: Kensington Mine, MSHA I.D. No. 50-01544, located in Juneau 
County, Alaska.
    Regulation Affected: 30 CFR 57.11052(d) (refuge areas).
    Modification Request: The petitioner requests a modification of the 
existing

[[Page 9235]]

standard for refuge areas applied to the development and exploration 
areas at its Kensington mine. The petitioner seeks approval to use the 
recently installed Strata-manufactured, 12-person emergency refuge 
chambers--portable (ERCP), which are equipped with internal air and 
water supplies, without having to provide compressed air and 
waterlines. The petitioner states that:
    (1) On July 12, 2016, Coeur submitted a petition for modification 
(PFM #1) seeking relief from Sec.  57.11050. PFM #1 seeks relief from 
MSHA's requirement that Coeur provides a refuge chamber within 1,000 
feet of the development face in the mine. During Coeur's discussions 
with MSHA as part of the review of PFM #1 and Coeur's compliance with 
Sec.  57.11050, Coeur learned that a second petition for modification 
(PFM #2) was necessary to seek relief from Sec.  57.11052(d). The 
petitioner requests that MSHA consider PFM #2 in conjunction with 
information submitted previously for PFM #1 because the factual basis 
for both petitions and means of compliance for both standards are 
intertwined. These means of compliance will provide the same or greater 
measure of safety as the existing regulations.
    (2) The petitioner owns and operates the Kensington mine, an 
underground gold mine located in Juneau County, Alaska. Kensington 
utilizes both transverse and longitudinal long-hole stoping. In both 
methods, a single development drift is driven through waste rock 
adjacent to the ore body. When this drift reaches planned elevations, 
level accesses are developed to provide entry points to the ore body 
for exploration and later ore production. Once the level development 
and exploration are completed at a planned elevation, the ore is 
extracted either perpendicular (transverse stoping) or parallel to the 
strike of the ore (longitudinal stoping).
    (3) With PFM #1, Coeur sought relief from MSHA's interpretation of 
30 CFR 57.11050 that would require that a refuge chamber be located 
within 1,000 feet of the development face. Part of the basis for PFM #1 
is that the petitioner's miners at the development face can walk to the 
existing refuge chamber within 30 minutes as required by the standard 
and the existing location of the permanent refuge chamber complies with 
Sec.  57.11050. Also, the petitioner has voluntarily elected to provide 
an ERCP in the vicinity of the development face, and to reposition that 
ERCP from time to time as development advances.
    (4) Because ERCP is equipped with a minimum of a 72-hour internal 
air supply for up to 12 miners, and more than 20 gallons of potable 
water, the petitioner seeks relief from the requirement in Sec.  
57.11052(d) to connect compressed air and waterlines to the ECRP each 
time it is repositioned.
    (5) The ERCP as constructed by the manufacturer complies with Sec.  
57.11052 because the ERCP has internal air and water sources. 
Kensington has been in operation since 1987. The petitioner has 
operated the mine since 1995, and between 1995 and 2009, activities 
were exclusively exploration and development. Coeur did not begin 
production until 2010, with limited production areas. The portions of 
the Kensington mine that are relevant to PFM #2 are still in the 
exploration and development phases--no production is occurring in these 
areas. During the fourth quarter of 2016, Kensington typically had nine 
stopes associated with production, and approximately three main 
development drifts in which exploration and development are taking 
place. The precise number of stopes and drifts may vary slightly from 
one month to the next.
    Currently, 100 percent of Kensington's operations below the 480 
level are either development or exploration. At present, the ERCP is 
positioned within 1,000 feet from the development face, and the current 
location of Kensington's permanent refuge station adjacent to the 585 
Downramp complies with the requirements of Sec. Sec.  57.11050 and 
57.11052(d) because the miners working in the development area can 
reach it within 30 minutes, and compressed airlines and waterlines are 
installed at that station.
    (6) The ERCP is located directly below the 330 level access, and 
has air and waterlines connected to it. However, the ERCP will not 
remain in this location permanently. The petitioner will relocate the 
ERCP in the future as development activities advance. The ERCP is more 
than a reinforced metal compartment to physically shield miners 
following an underground emergency--it is a self-contained chamber with 
own sources for electrical power, breathable air, water, food, and a 
lavatory. Even without being connected to mine services, the ERCP can 
provide electrical power and breathable air to occupants for a minimum 
of 72 hours if the atmosphere outside the ERCP is contaminated. The 
ERCP is equipped with enough potable water to last three days with up 
to 12 occupants.
    (7) Section 57.11052(d) requires that every refuge area be provided 
with compressed air lines, waterlines, suitable hand tools, and 
stopping materials. Based on our research, there is no regulatory or 
judicial history that explains the purpose behind a requirement for 
compressed air lines and waterlines. Accordingly, petitioner assumes 
that these lines are intended to serve the purpose a reasonably prudent 
person, familiar with the mining industry, would expect--to provide a 
source of breathable air and potable water to miners inside a refuge 
area.
    As a matter of simple logic, an operator complies with Sec.  
57.11052(d) by prepositioning hand tools and stoping materials inside 
the refuge area for future use. Similarly, if air and water could be 
prepositioned in a refuge area for future use, the operator would be 
complying with the standard. Historically, it was difficult to ensure 
that sufficient breathable air and potable water would be available in 
a refuge area. Today, the technology behind the ERCP enables the 
petitioner to provide a sustainable environment for its miners and a 
viable time window for mine rescue teams to reach the ERCP following an 
emergency, thereby rendering the requirement for external air 
waterlines obsolete--particularly when the ERCP is a supplemental 
device in addition to Kensington's existing permanent refuge stations.
    (8) Section 57.11052(d) does not specify a minimum quantity, volume 
or pressure for air lines and water lines, and the regulation makes no 
mention of independent power sources or lengths of time the air and 
waterlines need to be available at the refuge area. The standard simply 
requires they be provided. The ERCP provides breathable air and potable 
water. Kensington already complies with the standards requirement. This 
capability to provide known quantities of air and water internally is a 
benefit to the ERCP occupants because there is no risk of interrupted 
air and water access from external damage to the lines, and the known 
quantities allow mine rescue teams to make informed decisions regarding 
the length of time that an ERCP can provide a sustainable environment 
for its occupants.
    (9) Installing air lines and water lines each time the ERCP is 
relocated to remain in proximity to the development face would result 
in a diminution of safety; however, requested relief provides an 
equivalent degree of safety to Sec.  57.11051(d).
    Kensington's underground operations take place in a dynamic 
environment, and its exploration and development areas are dominated by 
self-propelled mobile equipment and blasting activities. At desired 
development rates, Kensington typically advances its faces

[[Page 9236]]

in development drifts twice per day, with each advance being a 12-foot 
length. If the ERCP will have to be relocated from time to time to 
remain in the vicinity of the development face, as contemplated in PFM 
#1, the ERCP would have to be relocated on a recurring basis.
    (10) Repeated movement of the ERCP puts miners at risk for several 
reasons. An ERCP cannot simply be parked on the decline because of its 
size--it would block access between the development drift face and the 
escapeways. To allow for the decline to remain clear, a cutout into the 
rib must be made to park the ERCP, making the relocation more complex.
    (11) Damage to the ERCP will put miners at risk as the refuge may 
not function as intended. Each time the ERCP is relocated, there is a 
potential that the ERCP will be damaged in some manner. Similarly, if a 
compressed air line and waterline need to be run and connected to each 
new location for the ERCP, there is a chance that the lines or the 
connections will be damaged. Potential damage to the ERCP and the 
external airline and waterlines increases each time they are moved, 
disconnected, rerouted, reconnected, and tested. The risk of damaging 
the lines and connectors is eliminated by relying on the ERCP's self-
contained capabilities.
    The ERCP can only provide a safety benefit to miners while the 
device is operational. To the extent an ERCP is unavailable while being 
relocated, that window of non-availability will increase while the air 
and water lines are being run, connected and tested for the new 
location. As such, complying with Sec.  57.11052(d) with respect to the 
relocating of the ERCP will have a detrimental effect on miner safety.
    (12) There are significant costs associated with each movement of 
an ERCP. The ERCP is roughly 15-feet long, and requires a cutout that 
is 30-feet deep. The development costs at Kensington are approximately 
$1,500 per foot, meaning that each 30-foot cutout will cost $45,000 to 
create. Installing air, water and shotcrete will add to the figure. 
Moving the unit will take 2 miners approximately 12 hours, at a labor 
cost of $1,136. In total, the average cost to relocate a portable 
refuge one time is almost $50,000. To the extent these costs can be 
controlled by alleviating redundant or unnecessary requirements, 
Coeur's submits this petition.
    The petitioner asserts that the alternative method will at all 
times provide the same measure of protection as the existing standard.

Sheila McConnell,
Director, Office of Standards, Regulations, and Variances.
[FR Doc. 2017-02297 Filed 2-2-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4520-43-P