[Federal Register Volume 90, Number 124 (Tuesday, July 1, 2025)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 28454-28463]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2025-11741]



[[Page 28454]]

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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Mine Safety and Health Administration

30 CFR Part 75

[Docket No. MSHA-2025-0087]
RIN 1219-AB89


Electronic Surveying Equipment in Underground Mines

AGENCY: Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA), Department of 
Labor.

ACTION: Proposed rule; request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: MSHA is proposing to allow the use of electronic surveying 
equipment in high-hazard areas of underground coal mines, if the 
equipment meets certain technical specifications and is operated under 
specific conditions. This proposed rule would codify technical 
specifications and working conditions in MSHA standards to allow the 
use of electronic surveying equipment in underground gassy mines. This 
proposed rule would reduce burdens on underground coal mine operators 
because mine operators would no longer need to submit a petition for 
modification to use non-permissible electronic surveying equipment.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before July 31, 2025.

ADDRESSES: All submissions must include RIN 1219-AB89 or Docket No. 
MSHA-2025-0087. You should not include personal or proprietary 
information that you do not wish to disclose publicly. If you mark 
parts of a comment as ``business confidential'' information, MSHA will 
not post those parts of the comment. Otherwise, MSHA will post all 
comments without change, including any personal information provided. 
MSHA cautions against submitting personal information.
    You may submit comments and informational materials, clearly 
identified by RIN 1219-AB89 or Docket No. MSHA-2025-0087, by any of the 
following methods:
    1. Federal E-Rulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow 
the online instructions for submitting comments for MSHA-2025-0087.
    2. Email: [email protected]. Include ``RIN 1219-AB89'' in the 
subject line of the message.
    3. Regular Mail or Hand Delivery: MSHA, Office of Standards, 
Regulations, and Variances, Room C3522, 200 Constitution Avenue NW, 
Washington, DC 20210. Before visiting MSHA in person, call 202-693-9440 
to make an appointment.
    No telefacsimiles (``faxes'') will be accepted.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jessica D. Senk, Acting Director, 
Office of Standards, Regulations, and Variances, MSHA at 202-693-9440 
(voice). This is not a toll-free number.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

Electronic Surveying Equipment

    Safe underground mining depends heavily on accurate and up-to-date 
mapping. Not having accurate mine maps has been a contributing factor 
for several mine accidents in the United States. For instance, in 2002, 
there was a non-fatal entrapment accident at Quecreek Mine in 
Pennsylvania, caused by a water inundation due to the use of an undated 
and uncertified map that did not show the complete and final mine 
workings of the abandoned mine.\1\ Through accurate maps, miners can 
avoid mining at the intersections of a mine with the abandoned workings 
of another mine which may contain explosive gas or a large quantity of 
water.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA). 2003. Report 
of investigation: Underground coal mine nonfatal entrapment on July 
22, 2002. Retrieved at: https://www.msha.gov/sites/default/files/Data_Reports/QuecreekInvestigationReport.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    An integral part of creating maps in underground mining is 
surveying--measuring distances, angles, and elevations, relative to 
known positions. To carry out accurate mine surveying and mapping, 
operators need access to the most precise surveying technology that can 
be used safely in underground mine environments, where fire and 
explosion dangers abound. Modern surveying instruments are almost 
universally electronic and are powered by batteries, which can ignite a 
fire or explosion in a gassy mine.
    The Federal Mine Safety and Health Act of 1977, as amended, (30 
U.S.C. 801 et seq.) (Mine Act) requires MSHA to establish requirements 
for the technical design, construction, and testing of electrical 
products, including surveying equipment, that must be approved by MSHA 
prior to use in gassy mines. In underground gassy mines, flammable or 
explosive gases such as methane and/or float coal dust can form 
explosive mixtures when combined with air. Before electronic surveying 
equipment can be used in gassy mines in the U.S., it must first be 
approved by MSHA.
    MSHA's requirements in title 30, Code of Federal Regulations (30 
CFR) part 18 ensure electric motor-driven products are designed and 
manufactured so that they will not emit a spark strong enough, or 
temperature sufficient to cause a fire or explosion. Those seeking MSHA 
approval (applicants) are typically product designers and manufacturers 
of electrical products such as surveying equipment. MSHA's approval 
process includes testing and evaluating the electrical product to 
determine whether it performs according to certain technical and safety 
requirements. MSHA issues an approval if the electrical product passes 
all the tests and evaluations. Once the electrical product is approved 
by MSHA, it must display an MSHA approval marking indicating that the 
product is approved for use in gassy mines. MSHA sometimes refers to 
electrical products approved for use in gassy areas of mines as 
``permissible.'' To continue to use the MSHA approval marking, the 
approval holder must maintain the quality of the electrical product 
according to the technical requirements upon which its approval was 
based.
    Currently, there is no permissible electronic surveying equipment 
commercially available in the U.S. market. Mine operators must seek 
MSHA approval for the use of electronic surveying equipment in 
underground mines by filing petitions for modification under 30 CFR 
part 44.

Petitions for Modification

    Section 101(c) of the Mine Act, 30 U.S.C. 811(c), allows mine 
operators or representatives of miners to file a petition, or request, 
to modify the application of any mandatory safety standard to a mine. 
MSHA reviews petitions for modification to determine whether the 
petitioner's alternative method of achieving the result of the standard 
will at all times guarantee no less than the same measure of protection 
afforded by the standard, or the application of the standard will 
result in a diminution of safety to miners.
    30 CFR part 44 establishes the procedures and rules of practice for 
filing a petition for modification under section 101(c) of the Mine 
Act. Once a petition has been filed by a mine operator or 
representative of miners, a notice requesting comment on the petition 
is published in the Federal Register, and MSHA personnel investigate to 
promptly determine whether to grant or deny the petition. Taking into 
consideration the alternative methods proposed by the petitioner and 
any additional requirements, MSHA will grant the petition for 
modification if the Agency

[[Page 28455]]

determines that the alternative method of achieving the result of the 
standard will at all times guarantee no less than the same measure of 
protection afforded by the standard, or the application of the standard 
will result in a diminution of safety to miners. The granted 
modification, together with any conditions, will have the same effect 
as a mandatory safety standard.
    Through the petition for modification process, MSHA sometimes 
grants the use of non-permissible surveying equipment in areas of 
underground mines where the use of approved equipment is required. The 
granted petitions for modification generally propose very similar 
alternative methods, or conditions and terms, for the safe use of non-
permissible surveying equipment in gassy areas of underground mines to 
ensure that miners are at all times afforded the same measure of 
protection if using permissible equipment.

II. Discussion

    In 2008, mine operators filed various petitions seeking to use non-
permissible electronic surveying equipment in high-hazard areas of 
underground coal mines where otherwise only permissible equipment was 
allowed. MSHA did not grant these petitions. Two rounds of litigation 
ensued, one ending in a 2016 ruling by the D.C. Circuit Court of 
Appeals (Rosebud Mining Co. & Parkwood Res., Inc. v. Mine Safety & 
Health Admin., 827 F.3d 1090 (D.C. Cir. 2016)) and the other ending 
with a 2018 Consent Order by the Assistant Secretary (In the Matter of 
Buchanan Minerals LLC, Consol PA and Southeastern Land LLC, 2018). 
While each of these litigation tracks involved different mines with 
unique and specific circumstances, a general set of terms and 
conditions for these petitions can be distinguished, such that, when 
these terms and conditions are met, non-permissible surveying equipment 
could be used without reducing the existing protections afforded to 
miners.
    MSHA proposes to codify certain technical specifications and 
working conditions to allow the use of electronic surveying equipment 
in specified underground areas of underground coal mines, so that mine 
operators would no longer need to file petitions for modification. This 
proposed rule would allow mine operators to safely use the best and 
most current technology available, while not reducing miner safety.
    This proposed rule would not revise the language of any Proposed 
Decisions and Orders granted by MSHA for non-permissible surveying 
equipment. Operators with petitions granted would decide between 
complying with the terms of their Proposed Decision and Order or 
complying with the requirements proposed in this rule and dismissing 
their petitions.
    Under the proposed rule, there would be no change to existing 
ventilation requirements, methane monitoring requirements, de-
energization requirements, and rock-dusting requirements. The Agency 
has preliminarily determined that this proposed rule, including the 
protective requirements that are generally consistent with the terms in 
granted petitions, would not reduce existing protection for miners.
    MSHA seeks comments on any aspects of this proposed rule, including 
what records are appropriate to maintain to ensure compliance.

III. Section-by-Section Analysis

A. Section 75.1800--Purpose and Scope

    This proposed rule would allow electronic surveying equipment that 
does not meet the requirements in part 18 to be used in high-hazard 
locations of a gassy mine. The proposed rule also establishes 
requirements for the features and maintenance of electronic surveying 
equipment and mandates the mining conditions where electronic surveying 
equipment can be used.

B. Section 75.1801--Definitions

    The proposed rule defines electronic surveying equipment as 
battery-powered equipment essential for surveying (i.e., total stations 
and theodolites). This does not include electronic devices or 
accessories that are not essential for surveying, such as keyboards, 
spare batteries, and remote controls. This standard is specifically 
limited in scope to apply only to two essential types of instruments, 
total stations and theodolites, and is consistent with the scope of 
litigation between MSHA and operators, which did not include other 
instruments.
    The proposed rule defines production activities as activities that 
generate coal dust or methane gas including, but not limited to, 
cutting, drilling, blasting, transporting, cleaning, loading, and 
unloading.
    The proposed rule defines specified underground area as an 
underground area located in or inby the last open crosscut, in the 
return air outby the last open crosscut, or within 150 feet of the 
pillar workings or longwall faces. These areas are considered the areas 
where explosive concentrations of methane gas are most likely to occur.
    The proposed rule defines underground mine surveyor as a qualified 
person for testing for methane under Sec.  75.151 (Tests for methane; 
qualified person; additional requirement) and for testing air flow 
under Sec.  75.152 (Tests of air flow; qualified person) and who also 
has experience or training in underground mine surveying.

C. Section 75.1802--Electronic Surveying Equipment

    Proposed Sec.  75.1802 would require that electronic surveying 
equipment taken into specified underground areas meet certain 
conditions. All petitions for modification granted since September 2018 
for electronic surveying equipment in underground coal mines include a 
list of surveying equipment with less than an 8-volt operating voltage 
range. Since many types of ``low-voltage'' surveying equipment exist, 
MSHA sees no need to permit electronic surveying equipment operating at 
or above 8 volts.
    Proposed paragraph (d) lists the nine voluntary consensus standards 
that MSHA would incorporate by reference in part 75 to be applicable to 
electronic surveying equipment taken into specified underground areas.
    The proposed incorporation by reference of the nine voluntary 
consensus standards is consistent with the Office of Management and 
Budget's (OMB) Circular A-119 (Jan. 27, 2016 (81 FR 4673)), which 
establishes policy guidance for Federal agencies. Circular A-119, based 
on the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 
U.S.C. 3701 et seq.), section 12(d), directs Federal agencies to use 
technical standards developed or adopted by voluntary consensus 
standards bodies to carry out policies or activities. Additionally, 
Circular A-119 directs agencies to use voluntary consensus standards in 
lieu of government-unique standards, except where inconsistent with law 
or otherwise impractical. The intent of the policy guidance in Circular 
A-119 is to minimize agency reliance on government-unique standards to 
decrease the burden of complying with agency regulations and promote 
efficiency and economic competition through harmonization of standards. 
(See https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/Circular-119-1.pdf).

D. Section 75.1803--Requirements Before the Use of Electronic Surveying 
Equipment

    Proposed Sec.  75.1803 would specify requirements to assure that 
surveying equipment be in a safe condition before

[[Page 28456]]

being used in the specified areas of an underground mine.

E. Section 75.1804--Continuous Monitoring During Electronic Surveying 
Equipment Operation

    Proposed Sec.  75.1804 would require surveyors to monitor with two 
portable methane detectors because of the risk of false negative 
readings or failures to detect methane entirely. Using two methane 
detectors would improve the safety of the surveyors and other miners in 
gassy mines because it offers an increased likelihood of detecting 
methane gas around the non-permissible equipment. Having two detectors 
lessens the likelihood of inadequate methane gas detection due to: 
sensor poisoning; physical damage from bumping or dropping; blockage of 
the sensor from dust, debris, and water; and any internal faults of the 
detector.

F. Section 75.1805--Requirements for the Use of Electronic Surveying 
Equipment on a Mechanized Mining Unit Where Production Activities Are 
Occurring

    Proposed Sec.  75.1805 specifies the requirements for the use of 
electronic surveying equipment on a mechanized mining unit where 
production activities are occurring. Because production activities may 
present conditions which are most hazardous in combination with non-
permissible equipment (i.e., total stations and theodolites), there 
would be more stringent requirements for any surveying during 
production. Because production generates methane and coal dust from the 
working face, surveying should not be downwind of their discharge under 
any circumstances, in the ventilation path used by the mine, including 
the specified ventilation controls.

G. Section 75.1806--Requirements for Batteries Contained in Electronic 
Surveying Equipment

    Proposed Sec.  75.1806 addresses requirements for the batteries 
used in electronic surveying equipment to ensure their safe operation 
if methane or float coal dust is present.

H. Section 75.1807--Electronic Surveying Equipment Maintenance and 
Examination

    Proposed Sec.  75.1807 addresses the maintenance and examination 
requirements for electronic surveying equipment.

I. Section 75.1808--Training

    Proposed Sec.  75.1809 addresses the importance of training miners 
and underground surveyors on safety practices where new technologies 
are utilized and would require specific training for those who would be 
involved with or affected by the use of electronic surveying equipment. 
In addition to 30 CFR part 48 training requirements, MSHA is requiring 
specific training under this proposed rule to address concerns 
regarding the use of this electronic surveying equipment in the 
specified underground areas.

J. Incorporation by Reference

    In proposed Sec.  75.1802(a), MSHA would incorporate by reference 
the following voluntary consensus standards.
    (1) American National Standards Institute (ANSI)/International 
Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) 60529-2020 Degrees of Protection 
Provided by Enclosures (IP Code) (Identical National Adoption of IEC 
60529: 1989/AMD2:2013/COR1:2019), dated September 23, 2020.
    (2) Underwriters Laboratories (UL) 1642 Standard for Safety, 
Lithium Batteries, Sixth Edition, September 29, 2020.
    (3) UL 1642, Standard for Safety for Lithium Batteries, Fifth 
Edition, March 13, 2012.
    (4) UL 1642, Standard for Safety for Lithium Batteries, Fourth 
Edition, September 19, 2005.
    (5) UL 1642, Standard for Safety for Lithium Batteries, Third 
Edition, April 26, 1995.
    (6) UL 1642, Standard for Lithium Batteries, Second Edition, 
November 18, 1992.
    (7) UL 1642, Standard for Lithium Batteries, First Edition, October 
24, 1985.
    (8) UL 62133, Secondary Cells and Batteries Containing Alkaline or 
Other Non-Acid Electrolytes--Safety Requirements for Portable Sealed 
Secondary Cells, and for Batteries Made From Them, for Use in Portable 
Applications, Edition 2 Published Date: September 5, 2017; and
    (9) UL 62133-2, Secondary Cells and Batteries Containing Alkaline 
or Other Non-Acid Electrolytes--Safety Requirements for Portable Sealed 
Secondary Cells, and for Batteries Made from Them, for Use in Portable 
Applications--Part 2: Lithium Systems, May 31, 2024.
    The ANSI/IEC sometimes interpreted as Ingress Protection Marking, 
classifies and rates the degree of protection provided against 
intrusion (body parts such as hands and fingers), dust, accidental 
contact, and water by mechanical casings and electrical enclosures. UL 
1642 (Ed. 1-6) addresses standards for non-rechargeable and secondary 
(rechargeable) lithium batteries for use as power sources in products. 
UL 62133 and UL 62133-2 are the most well-known lithium battery 
standards for safe use.

Availability of Standards To Be Incorporated by Reference

    MSHA proposes to incorporate by reference one ANSI standard. This 
standard is available for purchase at: www.webstore.ansi.org. Copies of 
standards produced by the voluntary consensus standards listed in this 
section may also be obtained from the American National Standards 
Institute (ANSI), 1899 L Street NW, 11th Floor, Washington, DC 20036, 
phone: (202) 293-8020; website: (www.ansi.org). In addition, during the 
comment period and rulemaking process, the ANSI/IEC standard will be 
available for review, free of charge, at MSHA, Office of Standards, 
Regulations, and Variances, Room C3522, 200 Constitution Avenue NW, 
Washington, DC 20210 and at MSHA's Approval and Certification Center 
(A&CC) at 765 Technology Drive, Triadelphia, WV 26059 (304-547-0400).
    There are eight UL standards that would be incorporated by 
reference in this proposed rule. These standards are available online 
and may be purchased on UL's website at: www.shopulstandards.com. They 
may also be obtained from UL Solutions (UL), Comm 2000, 151 Eastern 
Avenue, Bensenville, IL 60106, Tel: (888) 853-3503. In addition, during 
the comment period and rulemaking process, the UL standards will be 
available for review, free of charge, at MSHA, Office of Standards, 
Regulations, and Variances, Room C3522, 200 Constitution Avenue NW, 
Washington, DC 20210 and at MSHA's A&CC at 765 Technology Drive, 
Triadelphia, WV 26059 (304-547-0400).

IV. Procedural Issues and Regulatory Review

A. Review Under Executive Orders 12866 and 13563

    Executive Order (E.O.) 12866, ``Regulatory Planning and Review'' 58 
FR 51735 (Oct. 4, 1993), requires agencies, to the extent permitted by 
law, to (1) propose or adopt a regulation only upon a reasoned 
determination that its benefits justify its costs (recognizing that 
some benefits and costs are difficult to quantify); (2) tailor 
regulations to impose the least burden on society, consistent with 
obtaining regulatory objectives, taking into account, among other 
things, and to the extent practicable, the costs of cumulative 
regulations; (3) select, in choosing

[[Page 28457]]

among alternative regulatory approaches, those approaches that maximize 
net benefits; (4) to the extent feasible, specify performance 
objectives, rather than specifying the behavior or manner of compliance 
that regulated entities must adopt; and (5) identify and assess 
available alternatives to direct regulation, including providing 
economic incentives to encourage the desired behavior, such as user 
fees or marketable permits, or providing information upon which choices 
can be made by the public.
    E.O. 13563, ``Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review'' 76 FR 
3821 (Jan. 21, 2011), requires agencies to use the best available 
techniques to quantify anticipated present and future benefits and 
costs as accurately as possible. E.O. 13563 reaffirms the principles of 
E.O. 12866 while calling for improvements in the nation's regulatory 
system to promote predictability, reduce uncertainty, and use the best, 
most innovative, and least burdensome tools for achieving regulatory 
ends.
    E.O. 12866 and E.O. 13563 direct agencies to assess all costs and 
benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if regulation is 
necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize net benefits. 
E.O. 13563 emphasizes the importance of quantifying both costs and 
benefits, of reducing costs, of harmonizing rules, and of promoting 
flexibility.
    Under section 3(f) of E.O. 12866, a ``significant regulatory 
action'' is a regulatory action that is likely to result in a rule that 
may:
    (1) have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more, 
or adversely affect in a material way the economy, a sector of the 
economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public 
health or safety, or state, local, or tribal governments or communities 
(also referred to as economically significant);
    (2) create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an 
action taken or planned by another agency;
    (3) materially alter the budgetary impact of entitlements, grants, 
user fees, or loan programs or the rights and obligations of 
recipients; or
    (4) raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal 
mandates, the President's priorities, or the principles set forth in 
the E.O.
    Under section 6(a) of E.O. 12866, the Office of Management and 
Budget's (OMB's) Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) 
determines whether a regulatory action is significant and whether 
Agencies are required to submit the regulatory action to OIRA for 
review. Revising the provisions concerning the use of electronic 
surveying equipment in high-hazard areas of underground coal mines 
would not impose new compliance cost to underground coal mine operators 
or reduce the protection afforded to miners. This proposed rule is 
determined to not constitute a ``significant regulatory action'' 
because it does meet any of the four ``significant regulatory action'' 
criteria under section 3(f) of E.O. 12866. Accordingly, this proposed 
rule was not submitted to OIRA for review under E.O. 12866.
    No alternatives were considered for this proposed deregulatory 
action.
Background
    Currently coal mine operators have to file petitions for 
modification in order to use electronic surveying equipment in 
underground mine environments and are only granted permission for their 
use if the petition is approved. MSHA assumes that, without this 
proposed rule, 111 mine operators without existing petitions would file 
petitions over the next 5-years. Under the proposed rule, the mine 
operators would no longer need to file petitions to use electronic 
surveying equipment. Under currently approved petitions for electronic 
surveying equipment, MSHA already requires mine operators to monitor 
methane levels, inspect surveying equipment regularly, and provide 
hazard awareness training to miners. These requirements would continue 
to be in place under the proposed rule and mine operators would be 
required to comply.
    On average, each year there are 185 active underground coal mines 
that employ roughly 26,294 miners (excluding office workers) and 
produce an estimated 102.5 million tons of coal. All estimated figures 
are expressed in 2024 dollars.
    Under the baseline scenario, coal mine operators would continue 
their current practice of filing petitions to be able to use electronic 
surveying equipment in underground mine environments if the petition is 
approved. Under the proposed rule, mine operators would no longer need 
to file petitions to use electronic surveying equipment. There would be 
no change to the existing requirements for mine operators using 
electronic surveying equipment: methane monitoring, regular surveying 
equipment inspection, and hazard awareness training to miners. These 
requirements would continue to be applied to all underground coal mines 
that use electronic surveying equipment under the proposed rule.
Benefits
    This proposed rule would codify new standards for using electronic 
surveying equipment underground, based on technical specifications and 
working conditions. The proposed rule would substantially reduce future 
costs and delays related to filing and litigating petitions for 
modification. Out of 185 active underground coal mines, 42 mines held 
petitions concerning this type of equipment that had been granted by 
MSHA. These petitions show that, despite having to incur costs 
associated with filing a petition, a substantial number of mines find 
that using electronic surveying equipment is beneficial to their 
operations. Being able to use electronic surveying equipment (instead 
of non-electronic surveying equipment) would reduce the time needed for 
surveying underground mines, thus providing mine operators with both 
increased efficiency and accuracy in mine mapping, without diminishing 
safety.
Compliance Costs of Using Electronic Surveying Equipment
    The total compliance costs associated with using electronic 
surveying equipment would result from allowing underground coal mine 
operators to purchase and use electronic surveying equipment without 
having to file a petition for modification. MSHA assumes the cost of 
filing a petition currently presents a barrier to the use of electronic 
surveying equipment, and when that barrier is removed the purchase and 
use of electronic surveying equipment would be economically feasible 
for more mine operators. The total compliance costs of using non-
permissible electronic surveying equipment consist of the following:
    1. Equipment purchases: MSHA estimates that mine operators would 
need to purchase 113 total stations over 10 years at a cost of $7,374 
apiece. This results in a 10-year total cost of $0.83 million.
    2. Methane monitoring by surveyors: MSHA estimates that surveyors 
in coal mines earning $65.99 per hour would spend a total of 125,488 
hours over 10 years monitoring for methane, with a total cost of $8.28 
million.
    3. Examination of surveying equipment:
    a. Pre-use examinations: MSHA estimates that surveyors would need 
to conduct 40,216 pre-use electronic surveying equipment examinations 
over 10 years at a unit cost of $5.51, resulting in a total cost of 
$0.22 million for pre-use examinations.

[[Page 28458]]

    b. Weekly examinations: MSHA estimates mine operators would conduct 
45,700 weekly examinations over 10 years at a unit cost of $9.48 per 
weekly examination, resulting in a total examination cost of $0.43 
million.
    4. Hazard awareness training for miners and surveyors: MSHA 
estimates mine operators would train 1,634 miners each year on the 
hazards involved in working with and around electronic surveying 
equipment. At an average wage of $57.85 per hour for coal miners and 1 
hour for the training, the 10-year cost of training would be $0.9 
million over 10 years.
Cost Savings
    MSHA estimates that mine operators would accrue a cost reduction 
from no longer having to file petitions for modification. Under the 
baseline scenario, MSHA believes mine operators would continue to file 
petitions to use electronic surveying equipment, while no new petitions 
would be filed under the proposed rule. Over the 10-year analysis 
period, MSHA estimates that there would be 6 petitions filed and 
approved without revision, 110 filed and approved with revisions, and 
13 petitions litigated. MSHA assumes that the associated costs are 
$6,367 per petition approved without revision, $25,468 per petition 
approved with revisions, and $397,943 per litigated petition.\2\ Under 
the proposed rule, mine operators would not have to file petitions and 
would thus avoid petition associated costs of $8.01 million 
undiscounted over 10 years. The annualized cost savings would be $0.80 
million at a 0 percent discount rate, $0.88 million at a 3 percent 
discount rate, and $0.99 million at a 7 percent discount rate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ The litigation of a petition by a mine operator can take 
several years to resolve, which could amount to hundreds, and 
possibly even thousands of legal hours.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Summary
    To use electronic surveying equipment, mine operators would incur 
compliance costs of $10.71 million undiscounted over 10 years, under 
both the baseline scenario (filing a petition in order to use 
electronic surveying equipment) or the proposed rule (using electronic 
surveying equipment without having to file a petition). Therefore, 
compliance costs are not considered incremental costs under the 
proposed rule.
    Under the proposed rule, there would be incremental cost savings 
from avoiding petition and litigation costs that would be $8.01 
million, when compared with the baseline scenario. MSHA estimates that 
the annualized cost savings for this proposed rule at discount rates of 
0 percent, 3 percent, and 7 percent would be $0.80 million, $0.88 
million, and $0.99 million, respectively.

B. Review Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) of 1980, as amended by the 
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA) of 1996, 
requires preparation of an Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 
(IRFA) for any rule that by law must be proposed for public comment, 
unless the agency certifies that the rule, if promulgated, would not 
have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small 
entities. The RFA defines small entities to include small businesses, 
small organizations, including not-for-profit organizations, and small 
governmental jurisdictions.
    Under the RFA, MSHA uses the Small Business Administration's (SBA) 
definition to set thresholds for small business sizes for the coal 
mining industry defined at the 6-digit North American Industry 
Classification System (NAICS) level. For underground coal mines the 
threshold is 1,500 employees.
    MSHA evaluated data routinely provided by mine operators related to 
the number of mines, employment, and production from MSHA's 
Standardized Information System (MSIS) for underground coal mines. MSHA 
calculated revenue as production times the average price of coal. Using 
internal data, MSHA estimates that small coal mines produce roughly 
92.1 million tons of coal annually. Using U.S Energy Information 
Administration Annual Coal Report 2023 Table 28, Average Sales Price of 
Coal by State and Mine Type, the average coal price was $54.04 per 
short ton in 2023. The price was then adjusted to 2024 dollars using 
CPI-U, $55.63 per short ton, to estimate national coal revenues of $5.1 
billion generated by small coal mines.
    MSHA assesses the impacts on small entities by comparing the 
estimated compliance costs of the proposed rule for small entities 
affected by the rule to the estimated revenues for the affected sector. 
When estimated compliance costs are less than 1 percent of the 
estimated revenues, the Agency believes it is generally appropriate to 
conclude that there is no significant economic impact on a substantial 
number of small entities. When estimated compliance costs exceed 1 
percent of revenues, MSHA investigates whether further analysis is 
required. The impact as a percentage of revenue is essentially zero 
under the proposed rule: for small coal mine operators average 
annualized cost is $1.07 million while annual revenue is $5,121 
million, resulting in the ratio of 0.021 percent. Thus, no further 
analysis is required.
    MSHA considered the compliance costs on small mines when developing 
the proposed rule. MSHA reviewed this proposed rule under the 
provisions of the RFA, which eliminates burdensome regulations. 
Therefore, MSHA initially concludes that the impacts of the proposed 
rule would not have a ``significant economic impact on a substantial 
number of small entities,'' and the preparation of an IRFA is not 
warranted. MSHA will transmit this certification and supporting 
statement of factual basis to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the 
Small Business Administration for review under 5 U.S.C. 605(b).

C. Review Under the Paperwork Reduction Act

    The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) 
provides for the Federal Government's collection, use, and 
dissemination of information. The goals of the Paperwork Reduction Act 
include minimizing paperwork and reporting burdens and ensuring the 
maximum possible utility from the information that is collected under 5 
CFR part 1320. The Paperwork Reduction Act requires Federal agencies to 
obtain approval from OMB before requesting or requiring ``a collection 
of information'' from the public.
    This proposed rule imposes no new information collection or 
recordkeeping requirements. The requirements for training recordkeeping 
are fully covered in a currently approved information collection 
request, OMB Control Number 1219-0009 ``Training Plans and Records of 
Training for Underground Miners and Miners Working at Surface Mines and 
Surface Areas of Underground Mines.'' There is no change to this 
information collection request.
    However, this proposed rule would result in substantive changes to 
another currently approved information collection request, OMB Control 
Number 1219-0065 ``Petitions for Modification of Mandatory Safety 
Standards.'' The currently approved information collection request 
covers requirements in 30 CFR part 44, which set forth the procedures 
and rules to govern petitions for modification of mandatory safety 
standards filed under section 101(c) of the Mine Act.
    Under this proposed rule, coal mine operators would no longer have 
to file

[[Page 28459]]

petitions to use electronic surveying equipment in underground mine 
environments. This proposed change would decrease the paperwork burden 
and costs to mine operators as they would no longer file petitions for 
modification for using electronic surveying equipment in underground 
coal mines. MSHA proposes to revise the supporting statement for the 
information collection request 1219-0065 to reflect this and to seek 
public comment on these changes.
    Type of Review: Substantive Change to currently approved 
information collection.
    OMB Control Number: 1219-0065.
    Title: Petitions for Modifications of Mandatory Safety Standards.
    Description of the ICR:
Background
    Under 30 CFR 44.4, mine operators can file a petition for 
modification to use an alternative method of achieving the same result 
of an existing standard that will at all times guarantee no less than 
the same measure of protection afforded by the standard. Currently, 
this is the only way mine operators are able to use electronic 
surveying equipment underground. Under the proposed rule, the 
requirements for using such equipment would be codified and mine 
operators would no longer have to file a petition for their use.
    Based on MSHA records of petitions for modification received 
between 2021 through 2023, on average there were 46 total petitions 
submitted each year. Of these petitions, roughly 6 were requests to use 
non-permissible surveying equipment. Under this proposed rule, the 
Agency estimates that the average annual petitions would be reduced 
from current submissions of 46 to 40 petitions, as the 6 petitions for 
the use of non-permissible surveying equipment would no longer be 
needed. MSHA assumes that all 6 of those petitions would have been 
filed by underground coal mines, and that therefore, there would be a 
decrease in petitions from coal mines from 43 to 37 and no change in 
the number of petitions from MNM mines, 3.
Summary of Changes
    This substantive change request will change the supporting 
statement for this information collection request due to an addition in 
the recordkeeping requirements in 30 CFR 75.1800 through 75.1808. 
Forty-six mines are affected by the existing standards and 40 mines 
would be required to provide information by the proposed rule. This 
change does not modify the authority or number of affected mine 
operators and contractors, but it decreases the paperwork burden and 
costs associated with filing petitions as captured by this information 
collection request.
    The number of respondents, frequency of response, annual hour 
burden, and recordkeeping cost are described below.
1. Preparing and Filing Petitions for Modification (30 FR 44.10 and 
44.11(a))
    Under 30 CFR 44.10 and 44.11(a), a mine operator or any 
representative of miners may file a petition for modification of the 
application of a mandatory safety standard. MSHA assumes that all 
petitions will be filed by mine operators or by third-party sources on 
behalf of mine operators. MSHA assumes that approximately 31 of the 
annually submitted petitions would be prepared by mine operators, 29 
petitions from coal mines and 2 from MNM mines. MSHA estimates that it 
takes 40 hours to prepare and file a petition, which will be completed 
by a coal or MNM mining supervisor, earning $95.72 or $75.63 per hour, 
respectively.
    As related to these requirements the proposed rule would reduce the 
number of annual respondents from 37 to 31, the number of annual 
responses from 37 to 31, and the annual burden hours from 1,480 to 
1,240.
    Additionally, MSHA assumes that the 9 remaining petitions would be 
prepared by third-party sources (independent legal counsel) each year. 
MSHA estimates that it takes an independent counsel, earning $182.79 
per hour, approximately 16 hours to prepare a petition. This will be a 
total of $26,322 spent preparing the 9 petitions. MSHA assumes that due 
to their simplicity all the non-permissible surveying equipment related 
petitions would have been prepared by mine operators and not third 
parties, therefore this recission does not impact the costs related to 
third-party preparations of petitions. There is an increase over the 
previous estimate of $24,814 however, it is due to an increase in wages 
and not the proposed rule.
    The prepared petitions must be submitted to MSHA for review and 
approval. MSHA estimates that each year only 2 petitions are submitted 
by mail and 38 are submitted electronically. MSHA assumes that there is 
no filing cost if submitted electronically. MSHA estimates the mailing 
costs for petitions for modification is $8.00 for a certified mail from 
USPS, for a total cost of $16.00 to mail in petitions, this is 
unchanged from the previous estimate of recordkeeping costs.
2. Posting Copies of Petitions on the Mine Bulletin Boards (30 CFR 
44.9)
    Under 30 CFR 44.9, a mine operator must, when there is no 
representative of miners, post a copy of each petition for modification 
concerning the mine on the mine bulletin board and must maintain the 
posting until a ruling on the petition becomes final. MSHA assumes that 
all mine operators will post the petition for modification on the 
mine's bulletin board.
    MSHA assumes that 37 petitions would come from coal mines and 3 
from MNM mines. MSHA estimates that it takes 10 minutes to make copies 
of the petition and to post the petition to the mine bulletin board. 
This will be done by a coal or MNM clerk, earning $44.53 or $45.42 per 
hour, respectively.
    As related to this item the proposed rule would result in a 
reduction of information collection cost. It would reduce the number of 
annual respondents from 46 to 40, the number of annual responses from 
46 to 40, and the annual burden hours from 7.67 to 6.67.
    Additionally, MSHA assumes that on average a petition for 
modification is 3 pages long and the printing cost is $0.15 per page, 
so the material cost of printing a copy of the petition would be $0.45. 
By reducing the number of petitions to be posted at the mine bulletin 
board by 6 this recission reduces the annual recordkeeping cost to 
respondents by $2.70. The annual recordkeeping cost to respondents 
would decrease from $20.70 to $18.00.
3. Serving Representatives of Miners With Petitions (30 CFR 44.10)
    Under 30 CFR 44.10, if a petition is filed by a mine operator, a 
copy of the petition must be served to a representative of miners at 
the affected mine. MSHA assumes 40 petitions would be filed each year, 
37 from coal mines and 3 from MNM mines. MSHA estimates that it takes 
10 minutes to make copies of the petition and serve the petition to a 
representative of miners. A coal or MNM clerk earns $44.53 or $45.42 
per hour, respectively. For a total cost of $297, this is an increase 
from the previous figure of $267 because while the decrease in the 
number of petitions submitted lowers the estimated cost an increase in 
wages more than offsets the decrease.
    As related to this item the proposed rule would result in a 
reduction of information collection cost. It would reduce the number of 
annual respondents from 46 to 40, the number of annual responses from 
46 to 40, and the annual burden hours from 7.67 to

[[Page 28460]]

6.67. The annual burden cost increases from $267 to $297, however this 
is due to an increase in wages and not the proposed rule.
    Additionally, MSHA assumes that on average a petition for 
modification is 3 pages long and the printing cost is $0.15 per page, 
so the material cost of printing a copy of the petition would be $0.45. 
By reducing the number of petitions to be served to miners' 
representatives by 6 this recission reduces the annual other cost 
burden by $2.70. The annual recordkeeping cost to respondents would 
decrease from $20.70 to $18.00.
4. Serving Miners' Representative With Copies of the Final Actions 
Granting Petitions and Posting Copies to the Mine Bulletin Boards (30 
CFR 44.5(b))
    Under 30 CFR 44.5(b), every final action granting a petition for 
modification must be posted by the operator on the mine bulletin board 
at the affected mine and remain posted as long as the modification is 
effective. If a summary of the final action is posted on the mine 
bulletin board, a copy of the full decision must be kept at the 
affected mine office and made available to the miners.
    MSHA assumes that 30 petitions would be approved each year, 
including 28 from coal mines and 2 from MNM mines. For the 6 annual 
petitions concerning the use of non-permissible surveying equipment, 
MSHA assumes on average 1 would have been denied petition and 5 
approved. MSHA estimates that it takes 10 minutes to make copies of the 
final action and then to serve them to the miners' representative or 
post on the mine bulletin board. This will be done by a coal or MNM 
clerk, earning $44.53 or $45.42 per hour, respectively.
    As related to this item the proposed rule would result in a 
reduction of information collection cost. It would reduce the number of 
annual respondents from 46 to 40, the number of annual responses from 
35 to 30, and the annual burden hours from 5.83 to 5.00.
    Additionally, MSHA assumes that a mine operator will make 2 copies 
of each final actions granting petitions: 1 to be posted on the 
bulletin board and 1 copy available to miners. MSHA assumes that on 
average a petition for modification is 3 pages long and the printing 
cost is $0.15 per page, so the cost of printing a copy of the petition 
would be $0.45. This recission would reduce the number of copies of 
final actions made by 10 (5 served to miners' representatives and 5 to 
posted to mine bulletin boards). This recission reduces the annual 
other cost burden from $32 to $27. The annual recordkeeping cost to 
respondents would decrease from $31.50 to $27.00.
Summary of the Collection of Information
    Under the proposed rule, the estimated number of respondents, 
responses and annual burden hours would decrease from the currently 
approved information collection request. The reduction comes from the 
decrease in the number of petitions being submitted. Annual 
recordkeeping costs to respondents would increase slightly due to 
increases in wage rates, not the proposed rule.
    Affected Public: Businesses or For-Profit.
    Estimated Number of Respondents: 40 (-6 from proposed rule).
    Frequency: On occasion.
    Estimated Number of Responses: 141 (-23 from proposed rule).
    Estimated Number of Burden Hours: 1,258 (-243 from proposed rule).
    Estimated Recordkeeping Costs to Respondents: $26,401 ($1,571 from 
wage increases).

D. Review Under Executive Order 13132

    E.O. 13132, ``Federalism'' 64 FR 43255 (August 10, 1999), imposes 
certain requirements on Federal agencies formulating and implementing 
policies or regulations that preempt State law or that have federalism 
implications. The E.O. requires agencies to examine the constitutional 
and statutory authority supporting any action that would limit the 
policymaking discretion of the States and to carefully assess the 
necessity for such actions. The E.O. also requires agencies to have an 
accountable process to ensure meaningful and timely input by State and 
local officials in the development of regulatory policies that have 
federalism implications.
    MSHA has determined that the proposed rule would not have 
federalism implications because it would 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, 
E.O. 13132 requires no further action or analysis.

E. Review Under Executive Order 12988

    With respect to the review of existing regulations and the 
promulgation of new regulations, section 3(a) of E.O. 12988, ``Civil 
Justice Reform'' 61 FR 4729 (Feb. 7, 1996), imposes on Federal agencies 
the general duty to adhere to the following requirements: (1) eliminate 
drafting errors and ambiguity; (2) write regulations to minimize 
litigation; (3) provide a clear legal standard for affected conduct 
rather than a general standard; and (4) promote simplification and 
burden reduction. Regarding the review required by section 3(a), 
section 3(b) of E.O. 12988 specifically requires that Executive 
agencies make every reasonable effort to ensure that the regulation: 
(1) clearly specifies the preemptive effect, if any; (2) clearly 
specifies any effect on existing Federal law or regulation; (3) 
provides a clear legal standard for affected conduct while promoting 
simplification and burden reduction; (4) specifies the retroactive 
effect, if any; (5) adequately defines key terms; and (6) addresses 
other important issues affecting clarity and general draftsmanship 
under any guidelines issued by the Attorney General.
    Section 3 of E.O. 12988 contains requirements for Federal agencies 
promulgating new regulations or reviewing existing regulations to 
minimize litigation by eliminating drafting errors and ambiguity, 
providing a clear legal standard for affected conduct rather than a 
general standard, promoting simplification, and reducing burden. MSHA 
has reviewed the proposed rule and has determined that it would meet 
the applicable standards provided in E.O. 12988 to minimize litigation 
and undue burden on the Federal court system.

F. Review Under the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA) 
requires each Federal agency to assess the effects of Federal 
regulatory actions on State, local, and Tribal governments and the 
private sector. Public Law 104-4, sec. 201 (codified at 2 U.S.C. 1531). 
For a regulatory action likely to result in a rule that may cause the 
expenditure by State, local, and Tribal governments, in the aggregate, 
or by the private sector of $100 million or more in any one year 
(adjusted annually for inflation), section 202 of UMRA requires a 
Federal agency to publish a written statement that estimates the 
resulting costs, benefits, and other effects on the national economy. 
(2 U.S.C. 1532(a), (b)). The UMRA also requires a Federal agency to 
develop an effective process to permit timely input by elected officers 
of State, local, and Tribal governments on a ``significant 
intergovernmental mandate,'' and requires an agency plan for giving 
notice and opportunity for timely input to potentially affected small 
governments before establishing

[[Page 28461]]

any requirements that might significantly or uniquely affect them.
    MSHA examined this proposed rule according to UMRA and its 
statement of policy and determined that the proposed rule does not 
contain a Federal intergovernmental mandate, nor is it expected to 
require expenditures of $100 million or more in any one year by State, 
local, and Tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the private 
sector. As a result, no further Agency action or analysis is required.

G. Review Under the National Environmental Policy Act.

    The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 
4321 et seq.), requires each Federal agency to consider the 
environmental effects of regulatory actions and to prepare an 
environmental impact statement on Agency actions that would 
significantly affect the quality of the environment; unless the action 
is considered categorically excluded under 29 CFR 11.10. MSHA has 
reviewed the proposed rule in accordance with NEPA requirements and the 
Department of Labor's NEPA procedures (29 CFR part 11). As a result of 
this review, MSHA has determined that this proposed rule would not 
impact air, water, or soil quality, plant or animal life, the use of 
land or other aspects of the human environment. Therefore, MSHA has not 
conducted an environmental assessment nor provided an environmental 
impact statement.

H. Review Under the Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act, 
1999

    Section 654 of the Treasury and General Government Appropriations 
Act, 1999 (Pub. L. 105-277) requires Federal agencies to issue a Family 
Policymaking Assessment for any rule that may affect family well-being. 
This proposed rule would not have any impact on the autonomy or 
integrity of the family as an institution. Accordingly, MSHA has 
concluded that it is not necessary to prepare a Family Policymaking 
Assessment.

I. Review Under Executive Order 12630

    Pursuant to E.O. 12630, ``Governmental Actions and Interference 
with Constitutionally Protected Property Rights'' 53 FR 8859 (March 18, 
1988), MSHA has determined that this proposed rule would not result in 
any takings that might require compensation under the Fifth Amendment 
to the U.S. Constitution.

J. Review Under the Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act, 
2001

    Section 515 of the Treasury and General Government Appropriations 
Act, 2001 (44 U.S.C. 3516, note) provides for Federal agencies to 
review most disseminations of information to the public under 
information quality guidelines established by each agency pursuant to 
general guidelines issued by OMB. OMB's guidelines were published at 67 
FR 8452 (Feb. 22, 2002). MSHA has reviewed this proposed rule under the 
OMB and has concluded that it is consistent with applicable policies in 
the OMB guidelines.

K. Review Under Executive Order 13175

    E.O. 13175, ``Consultation and Coordination With Indian Tribal 
Governments'' 65 FR 67249 (Nov. 9, 2000), requires agencies to consult 
with tribal officials when developing policies that may have ``tribal 
implications.'' This proposed rule does not have ``tribal 
implications'' because it will 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, under E.O. 13175, no further Agency action or analysis is 
required.

L. Review Under Executive Order 13211.

    E.O. 13211, ``Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly 
Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use'' 66 FR 28355 (May 22, 
2001), requires agencies to publish a statement of energy effects when 
a rule has a significant energy action that adversely affects energy 
supply, distribution, or use. MSHA has reviewed this proposed rule for 
its energy effects. For the energy analysis, this proposed rule will 
not exceed the relevant criteria for adverse impact.

M. Plain Language

    Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 require regulations to be written 
in a manner that is easy to understand. MSHA has drafted the proposed 
rule in plain language.

N. Review Under Additional Executive Orders and Presidential Memoranda

    MSHA has examined this proposed rule and has determined that it is 
consistent with the policies and directives outlined in E.O. 14154, 
``Unleashing American Energy'' 90 FR 8353 (Jan. 29, 2025); E.O. 14192, 
``Unleashing Prosperity Through Deregulation'' 90 FR 9065 (Feb. 6, 
2025); and the Presidential Memorandum, ``Delivering Emergency Price 
Relief for American Families and Defeating the Cost-of-Living Crisis'' 
90 FR 8245 (Jan. 28, 2025). This proposed rule is expected to be an 
E.O. 14192 deregulatory action.

List of Subjects in 30 CFR Part 75

    Electric power, Incorporation by reference, Mandatory safety 
standards, Mine safety and health, Reporting and recordkeeping 
requirements, Training, Underground coal mines.
    For the reasons set out in the preamble, and under the authority of 
the Federal Mine Safety and Health Act of 1977, as amended by the Mine 
Improvement and New Emergency Response (MINER) Act of 2006, MSHA is 
proposing to amend chapter I of title 30 of the Code of Federal 
Regulations as follows:

PART 75--MANDATORY SAFETY STANDARDS--UNDERGROUND COAL MINES

0
1. The authority citation for part 75 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  30 U.S.C. 811, 813(h), 957.

0
2. Add Subpart S, consisting of Sec. Sec.  75.1800 through 75.1808, to 
read as follows:

Subpart S--Electronic Surveying Equipment


Sec.  75.1800  Purpose and Scope.


Sec.  75.1801  Definitions.


Sec.  75.1802  Electronic surveying equipment.


Sec.  75.1803  Requirements before the use of electronic surveying 
equipment.


Sec.  75.1804  Continuous monitoring during electronic surveying 
equipment operation.


Sec.  75.1805  Requirements for the use of electronic surveying 
equipment on a mechanized mining unit where production activities are 
occurring.


Sec.  75.1806  Requirements for batteries contained in electronic 
surveying equipment.


Sec.  75.1807  Electronic surveying equipment maintenance and 
examination.


Sec.  75.1808  Training.


Sec.  75.1800  Purpose and Scope.

    (a) This subpart establishes requirements for electronic surveying 
equipment taken into and operated in or inby the last open crosscut, 
Sec.  75.500(d), in the return air outby the last open crosscut, Sec.  
75.507-1(a), or within 150 feet of the pillar workings or longwall 
faces, Sec.  75.1002(a), when electronic

[[Page 28462]]

surveying equipment that meets the permissibility requirements in part 
18 of this chapter does not exist.
    (b) This subpart also establishes requirements for the features, 
use, and maintenance of electronic surveying equipment and the training 
of the personnel using such equipment. This part includes requirements 
for the use of electronic surveying equipment when production 
activities are occurring and when production activities cease.


Sec.  75.1801  Definitions.

    The following definitions apply to this subpart:
    Electronic surveying equipment. Battery-powered equipment essential 
for surveying, (i.e., total stations and theodolites). This definition 
does not include electronic devices or accessories that are not 
essential for surveying, such as keyboards, spare batteries, and remote 
controls.
    Production activities. Activities that generate coal dust or 
methane gas including but are not limited to cutting, drilling, 
blasting, transporting, cleaning, loading, and unloading.
    Specified underground area. An underground area located in or inby 
the last open crosscut, in the return air outby the last open crosscut, 
or within 150 feet of the pillar workings or longwall faces.
    Underground mine surveyor. A qualified person for testing for 
methane under Sec.  75.151 and for testing air flow under Sec.  75.152 
and who also has experience or training in underground mine surveying.


Sec.  75.1802  Electronic surveying equipment.

    Electronic surveying equipment taken into specified underground 
areas must meet the following conditions:
    (a) Electronic surveying equipment, including batteries when 
assembled for use, must have an ingress protection (IP) rating of 66 or 
greater under ANSI/IEC 60529-2020 and must operate at a voltage of less 
than 8 volts DC. Lithium batteries must also meet the Underwriters 
Laboratories (UL) 1642 safety standards for lithium batteries. 
Surveying equipment must only have onboard or integrated battery packs 
and no external battery packs.
    (b) A theodolite must be no older than 5 years from the date of 
manufacture.
    (c) A total station must be no older than 10 years from the date of 
manufacture.
    (d) The material listed in this paragraph (d) is incorporated by 
reference into this section with the approval of the Director of the 
Federal Register under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. All approved 
incorporation by reference (IBR) material is available for inspection 
at U.S. Department of Labor, Mine Safety and Health Administration 
(MSHA) and at the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). 
Contact MSHA at 200 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20210. For 
information on the availability of this material at NARA, visit 
www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations or email 
[email protected]. The material may be obtained from the following 
sources in this paragraph (d).
    (1) American National Standards Institute (ANSI), 1899 L Street NW, 
11th Floor, Washington, DC 20036; phone: (202) 293-8020; website: 
www.ansi.org
    (i) ANSI/IEC 60529-2020 Degrees of Protection Provided by 
Enclosures (IP Code) (Identical National Adoption of IEC 60529: 1989/
AMD2:2013/COR1:2019), dated September 23, 2020.
    (ii) [Reserved]
    (2) UL Solutions. Comm 2000. 151 Eastern Avenue, Bensenville, IL 
60106; phone: (888) 853-3503; website: www.ul.com.
    (i) UL 1642 Standard for Safety, Lithium Batteries, Sixth Edition, 
September 29, 2020.
    (ii) UL 1642, Standard for Safety for Lithium Batteries, Fifth 
Edition, March 13, 2012.
    (iii) UL 1642, Standard for Safety for Lithium Batteries, Fourth 
Edition, September 19, 2005.
    (iv) UL 1642, Standard for Safety for Lithium Batteries, Third 
Edition, April 26, 1995.
    (v) UL 1642, Standard for Lithium Batteries, Second Edition, 
November 18, 1992.
    (vi) UL 1642, Standard for Lithium Batteries, First Edition, 
October 24, 1985.
    (vii) UL 62133, Secondary Cells and Batteries Containing Alkaline 
or Other Non-Acid Electrolytes--Safety Requirements for Portable Sealed 
Secondary Cells, and for Batteries Made From Them, for Use in Portable 
Applications, Edition 2 Published Date: September 5, 2017.
    (viii) UL 62133-2, Secondary Cells and Batteries Containing 
Alkaline or Other Non-Acid Electrolytes--Safety Requirements for 
Portable Sealed Secondary Cells, and for Batteries Made from Them, for 
Use in Portable Applications--Part 2: Lithium Systems, May 31, 2024.


Sec.  75.1803  Requirements before the use of electronic surveying 
equipment.

    (a) The underground mine surveyor must conduct a safety examination 
of electronic surveying equipment prior to taking it into the specified 
underground areas. The examination must include:
    (1) Checking the equipment for any physical damage and integrity of 
the case;
    (2) Examining all contact points to ensure a secure connection to 
the battery;
    (3) Inspecting the battery pack for debris or corrosion;
    (4) For equipment utilizing lithium type cells, ensuring that the 
lithium cells are not damaged and have not swelled in size;
    (5) Reinserting the battery pack and powering up and shutting down 
the equipment to ensure proper connections;
    (6) Checking the battery pack to ensure that it is securely 
fastened, with no dust or water ingress into the battery compartment; 
and
    (7) Conducting all manufacturer-recommended checks and tests to 
ensure proper operations.
    (b) If the approved mine ventilation plan requires a minimum air 
quantity in a specified underground area, then an underground mine 
surveyor will measure the air quantity immediately before taking the 
surveying equipment into that area.
    (c) An underground mine surveyor must test for methane in the areas 
to be surveyed, in accordance with Sec.  75.323. If excessive methane 
is found, then the mine operator must take actions specified under 
Sec.  75.323 before surveying equipment is taken into a specified 
underground area.
    (d) Prior to setting up and energizing the electronic surveying 
equipment in the specified underground areas:
    (1) A certified person must conduct a visual examination to 
determine compliance under Sec.  75.402, and to check the presence of 
accumulated float coal dust.
    (2) The equipment may not be energized until rock dust has been 
applied under Sec. Sec.  75.401-1, 75.400-2, and 75.403.
    (e) Surveyors must be able to effectively communicate with the 
section foreman or equivalent mine official and miners on the working 
section at all times while the surveyor is conducting the surveying in 
a specified underground area.


Sec.  75.1804  Continuous monitoring during electronic surveying 
equipment operation.

    (a)
    (1) Underground mine surveyors must continuously monitor for 
methane immediately before and during the use of electronic surveying 
equipment in the specified underground areas. The underground mine 
surveyor(s) must monitor for methane with two portable detectors. All 
portable methane

[[Page 28463]]

detectors must be MSHA-approved and maintained in permissible and 
proper operating condition as required under Sec.  75.320.
    (2) All methane detectors must provide visual and audible warning 
signals when methane is detected at or above 1.0 percent.
    (b) When 1.0 percent or more of methane is detected, the electronic 
surveying equipment must not be energized or must be immediately 
deenergized if in use and immediately withdrawn from specified 
underground areas to outby the last open crosscut, out of the return, 
or more than 150 feet from pillar workings or longwall faces under 
Sec.  75.323.


Sec.  75.1805  Requirements for the use of electronic surveying 
equipment on a mechanized mining unit where production activities are 
occurring.

    On a mechanized mining unit where production activities are 
occurring, the following requirements must be met.
    (a) Electronic surveying equipment may be used except as provided 
in paragraphs (a)(1) and (a)(2) of this section:
    (1) Electronic surveying equipment must not be used downwind of the 
discharge point of any face ventilation controls, such as tubing or 
curtains.
    (2) Electronic surveying equipment must not be used in a split of 
air ventilating a mechanized mining unit.
    (b) Electronic surveying equipment must not be used within 150 feet 
of pillar workings or longwall faces.
    (c) When surveying cannot be completed with ventilation controls in 
place, the underground mine surveyor must notify the mine operator for 
approval of any changes. All changes must comply with approved 
ventilation plans.
    (1) Before and while any ventilation controls are changed, all 
production activities must cease in areas affected by the change.
    (2) Once production activities cease and approved ventilation 
changes have been completed, a certified person must notify underground 
mine surveyors when surveying may resume.
    (3) Ventilation controls must be reestablished immediately after 
the change is no longer necessary.
    (4) Production activities may resume only after all ventilation 
controls are reestablished and are in compliance with the approved 
ventilation plan.


Sec.  75.1806  Requirements for batteries contained in electronic 
surveying equipment.

    (a) Before each shift of surveying, all batteries for the 
electronic surveying equipment must be charged sufficiently to function 
the entire shift.
    (b) Replacement batteries for electronic surveying equipment must 
be carried underground only in the compartment provided for a spare 
battery pack in the electronic surveying equipment carrying case. 
Replacement batteries must not be taken into the specified underground 
areas.
    (c) Batteries contained in the electronic surveying equipment must 
be changed out in intake air outside of the specified underground 
areas.
    (d) No batteries may be charged underground.


Sec.  75.1807  Electronic surveying equipment maintenance and 
examination.

    (a) All electronic surveying equipment must be maintained to ensure 
safe operating condition. When a potentially dangerous condition is 
found with the equipment, such equipment must be immediately withdrawn 
from the specified underground areas and taken out of service and must 
be repaired before returning to service.
    (b) As specified under Sec.  75.1803(a), electronic surveying 
equipment must be examined weekly by a qualified person as defined by 
Sec.  75.153 to assure safe operating condition.
    (c) The mine operator must ensure that all electronic surveying 
equipment is serviced according to the manufacturer's recommendations.


Sec.  75.1808  Training.

    (a) Miners and underground mine surveyors who will be involved with 
or affected by electronic surveying operations must be trained on the 
requirements of this subpart before the electronic surveying equipment 
can be used.
    (b) Mine operators must train new miners and underground mine 
surveyors under Sec.  48.5, train experienced miners and surveyors, 
under Sec.  48.6, and train miners and surveyors assigned new work 
tasks under Sec.  48.7 on the requirements of this subpart. The 
training must include hazard recognition specific to the mine.
    (c) Mine operators must provide annual retraining to all miners and 
underground mine surveyors involved with or affected by surveying 
operations under Sec.  48.8.
    (d) Miners and underground mine surveyors using electronic 
surveying equipment must be trained to recognize the hazards and 
limitations associated with the use of electronic surveying equipment 
in the areas where methane could be present.
    (e) Records of training required under this part must comply with 
part 48.
    (f) Mine operators must provide such records to MSHA upon request.

James P. McHugh,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Policy, Mine Safety and Health 
Administration.
[FR Doc. 2025-11741 Filed 6-30-25; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4520-43-P