AB58 Refuge Alternative Paperwork

AB58 Refuge Alternative Paperwork.pdf

Refuge Alternatives for Underground Coal Mines

OMB: 1219-0146

⚠️ Notice: This form may be outdated. More recent filings and information on OMB 1219-0146 can be found here:

Document [pdf]

Download: pdf | pdf

1219-AB58

SUPPORTING STATEMENT
Proposed Rule: Refuge Alternatives for Underground Coal Mines
Testing by Applicant or Third Party, 30 CFR Part 7
§ 7.503 – Application requirements.
Mandatory Safety Standards—Underground Coal Mines, 30 CFR Part 75
§ 75.221(a)(12) – Roof control plan information.
§ 75.360(d) – Pre-shift examination at fixed intervals.
§ 75.372(b)(11) – Mine ventilation map.
§ 75.1200(g) – Mine map.
§ 75.1502(c) – Mine emergency evacuation and firefighting program of instruction.
§ 75.1505(a) and (b) – Escapeway maps.
§ 75.1507 – Emergency response plan; refuge alternatives.
§ 75.1508(a) and (b) – Training and records for examination, maintenance and repair of refuge
alternatives.

JUSTIFICATION

1. Explain the circumstances that make the collection of information necessary. Identify
any legal or administrative requirements that necessitate the collection. Attach a copy of
the appropriate section of each statute and regulation mandating or authorizing the
collection of information.
The Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA) is issuing a proposed rule on Refuge
Alternatives for Underground Coal Mines. Under the proposed rule, a refuge alternative would
provide a protected, secure space with an isolated atmosphere that creates a life-sustaining
environment to protect miners when escape from the mine is not possible and assist them with
escape in the event of a mine emergency.
Section 13 of the Mine Improvement and New Emergency Response (MINER) Act (Public Law
109-236) requires that, not later than 180 days after receipt of the National Institute for
Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) report,
… the Secretary of Labor (Secretary) provide to the Committee on Health,
Education, Labor and Pensions of the Senate and the Committee on Education and
the Workforce of the House of Representatives a description of the actions, if any,
that the Secretary intends to take based on the [NIOSH] report, including proposing
regulatory changes, and the reasons for such actions.
Section 112 (b) of the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2008 (Public Law 110-161, December
26, 2007) requires that—
… not later than June 15, 2008, the Secretary shall propose regulations pursuant to
section 315 of the Federal Coal Mine Health and Safety Act of l969, consistent with
June 2008
1

1219-AB58
the recommendations of the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health
pursuant to section 13 of the MINER Act, requiring rescue chambers, or facilities
that afford at least the same measure of protection, in underground coal mines.
MSHA’s proposal on Refuge Alternatives for Underground Coal Mines would implement these
statutory requirements.
Under section 101(a) of the Federal Mine Safety and Health Act of 1977 (Mine Act), the Secretary
must develop, promulgate, and revise as may be appropriate, improved mandatory health or safety
standards for the protection of life and prevention of injuries in coal or other mines. In addition,
section 103(h) of the Mine Act authorizes MSHA to collect information necessary to carry out its
duty in protecting the safety and health of miners. MSHA has determined that refuge alternatives
are practical, as a general matter, and will increase the chance for survival for persons trapped in
underground coal mines, when integrated into the mine’s comprehensive escape and rescue plans.
In developing this proposed rule, the Agency used its own data and experience, recommendations
from NIOSH, research on available and developing technology, and regulations of several states.
Under section 2 of the MINER Act, underground coal mine operators are required to develop and
adopt a written Emergency Response Plan (ERP), which must be approved by MSHA. The ERP
must provide for the evacuation of all individuals endangered by an emergency and the
maintenance of individuals trapped underground. Consistent with the objectives of the Mine Act
and MINER Act, proposed § 75.1507 requires that mine operators’ ERPs include refuge
alternatives.
§ 75.1507. The proposed rule would require mine operators to provide in the ERP detailed
information about the refuge alternatives used in the mine. This information will assist miners,
supervisors, emergency responders, and MSHA in assuring that all essential preparations are made
and required materials are readily available and in working order.
§ 75.1508(a). This proposed provision would require the mine operator to certify that persons
assigned to examine, transport, maintain and repair refuge alternatives and components are trained
for those tasks. Training certifications assist MSHA in determining that persons received the
required training. The training certification for persons assigned to examine refuge alternatives
would be integrated into existing requirements for pre-shift examinations of the mine under
§ 75.360. The training certification for persons assigned to maintain and repair refuge alternatives
is included in this package under proposed § 75.1508(a).
§ 75.1508(b). This proposed provision would require a record of any maintenance and repair
performed on a refuge alternative. This record will assist MSHA in identifying design flaws or
other weaknesses in the refuge alternative or its components that could adversely impact the safety
of miners.
■ The following provision will affect information collection package, OMB 1219-0066 – Testing,
evaluation and approval of mining products.
§ 7.503. Proposed § 7.503 would require manufacturers of refuge alternatives or components to
include certain information in an application for MSHA approval, including specifications,
information, and drawings sufficient to satisfy the design and technical requirements for the
structural, breathable air, air-monitoring, and harmful gas components. The information required
in proposed § 7.503 is crucial for MSHA to evaluate and approve refuge alternatives and
components to assure that they are capable of sustaining persons trapped in a mine for a specified
June 2008
2

1219-AB58
duration. Like the existing requirements in 30 CFR 18.6, 19.3, and other approval regulations,
MSHA also needs the information to assure that refuge alternatives and components will not pose
a fire or explosion risk.
■ The following provision will affect information collection package, OMB 1219-0004 – Roof
Control Plans.
§ 75.221(a)(12). This proposed provision would require the roof control plan to include a
description of the roof and rib support necessary for the areas where refuge alternatives are to be
located. This revision of the roof control plan would be a one-page addendum. This provision is
necessary to assure that all requirements for roof and rib support are addressed in the same plan.
■ The following provision will affect information collection package, OMB 1219-0088 –
Ventilation Plans, Tests and Examinations in Underground Coal Mines.
§ 75.360(d). This proposed provision would require that persons conducting the pre-shift
examination check the refuge alternative for damage, the integrity of the tamper-evident seal and
the mechanisms required to activate the refuge alternative, and the ready availability of
compressed oxygen and air. MSHA assumes that the pre-shift examination would take place
before each shift. Because underground coal mines usually present harsh and hostile working
environments, pre-shift examinations as set out in proposed § 75.360(d) are necessary to assure
that changes that could adversely affect the integrity of the refuge alternative and its components
have not occurred.
■ The following provisions will affect information collection packages, OMB 1219-0073 –
Record of Mine Closures, Opening and Reopening of Mines and OMB 1219-0141 – Emergency
Mine Evacuation.
§ 75.372(b)(11). This proposed provision would require the mine ventilation map to include the
location of all refuge alternatives. MSHA assumes that all maps at a mine would be revised
together.
§ 75.1200(g). This proposed provision would require the mine map to include the location of all
refuge alternatives. MSHA assumes that all maps at a mine would be revised together.
§ 75.1505 (a) and (b). This proposed provision would require the escapeway map to include the
location of all refuge alternatives and to be kept current as refuge alternatives are moved. MSHA
assumes that all maps at a mine would be revised together.
Miners, mine operators, and MSHA need to have up-to-date maps to respond effectively in an
emergency. If a mine has a refuge alternative, the addition of the location of the refuge alternative
on maps is necessary for the proper functioning of a mine’s Emergency Response Plan (ERP).
■ The following provision will affect information collection package, OMB 1219-0054 – Roof,
firefighting, emergency evacuation and training and OMB 1219-0141 – Emergency Mine
Evacuation.
§ 75.1502(c). This proposed provision would require the mine emergency evacuation and
firefighting program of instruction to be revised to include information for miners in the activation
and use of refuge alternatives in an emergency, a summary of procedures for constructing and
activating refuge alternatives, and a summary of procedures for using refuge alternatives.
Inclusion of this information in the mine emergency evacuation and firefighting program of
instruction would assure that all critical steps of constructing, locating, and using refuge
June 2008
3

1219-AB58
alternatives are reviewed in training. Reviewing such information in training helps to keep miners
aware of the steps to take to use a refuge alternative in case of a mine emergency.
2.

Indicate how, by whom, and for what purpose the information is to be used. Except for a
new collection, indicate the actual use the agency has made of the information received
from the current collection.

Under 30 CFR part 7, manufacturers would need to prepare and submit an application for MSHA
approval of a refuge alternative or a component to be used in underground coal mines. MSHA
would evaluate the refuge alternative and component applications, including the test results, the
prescribed drawings, and product specifications. MSHA’s engineers and scientists would use this
information to evaluate the design, construction, manufacture, quality control, and other
requirements to protect the safety and health of miners prior to approval for use in mines.
The records required in 30 CFR part 75 give notice to mine management and miners that refuge
alternatives are provided and being maintained properly. MSHA inspectors use the records to
determine that tests, examinations, and training required by the standards are conducted.
3.

Describe whether, and to what extent, the collection of information involves the use of
automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other
forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses, and
the basis for the decision for adopting this means of collection. Also describe any
consideration of using information technology to reduce burden.

MSHA accepts approval applications and other correspondence or information electronically via
the Internet or e-mail. Approval applicants are able to upload engineering drawings (images) and
files directly to the Arlington FTP (File Transfer Protocol) site server or via the [email protected]
e-mail account. Applicants have been electronically submitting applications to MSHA for over
8 years. In FY 2007, 560 of the 690 applications received at MSHA were submitted
electronically. The method used (mail, fax, or e-mail), to submit the applications to MSHA, has
only an insignificant effect on the burden hours for preparing the applications for submission.
4.

Describe efforts to identify duplication. Show specifically why any similar information
already available cannot be used or modified for use for the purposes described in Item 2
above.

The applications, consisting of design specifications and drawings and related correspondence, are
usually unique for each piece of equipment or product and any change in circuitry or parts may
result in an unsafe condition. Therefore, any similar information already available cannot be used
to evaluate and approve another piece of equipment or product for use in underground coal mine
operations.
When MSHA permits third parties or manufacturers to test the equipment or products, MSHA
retains the responsibility for evaluating the test results and issuing the approval for all products
tested under 30 CFR parts 6 and 7.
MSHA has modified existing standards in 30 CFR part 75 to include refuge alternatives. By
adding refuge alternatives to existing requirements for roof control plans; pre-shift examinations;
mine ventilation, escapeway, and mine maps; training program of instruction and drills for

June 2008
4

1219-AB58
emergency mine evacuation; and emergency response plans, MSHA would minimize the
information collection burden of the proposed rule on mine operators.
5.

If the collection of information impacts small businesses or other small entities (Item 5 of
OMB Form 83-I), describe any methods used to minimize burden.

The provisions of the Mine Act and MSHA regulations apply to all operations, both large and
small, because accidents, injuries, and illnesses can occur at any mine regardless of size. Congress
intended that the Secretary enforce the law at all mining operations within its jurisdiction
regardless of size and that information collection and recordkeeping requirements be consistent
with efficient and effective enforcement of the Mine Act. [See Rep. No. 181, 95th Cong., 1st
Sess. 28 (1977)]. Section 103(e) of the Mine Act directs the Secretary of Labor not to impose an
unreasonable burden on small businesses when obtaining any information under the Act.
Accordingly, MSHA takes this into consideration when developing regulatory requirements.
Different requirements for small and large mines exist when appropriate and consistent with
ensuring the health and safety of miners. Similarly, MSHA approval regulations apply equally to
all manufacturers to ensure that miners are protected from products that could cause a fire or
explosion or other safety hazard related to use.
MSHA needs the same information from all manufacturers, regardless of size, to determine if the
refuge alternative or component meets the requirements in the proposed approval regulations in
30 CFR part 7. The proposal would have no negative impact on manufacturers and may provide
an incentive by providing a market for refuge alternatives and components. The information
collection requirements would also apply to mine operators who choose to design and construct a
refuge alternative.
The proposed safety standards in 30 CFR part 75 would apply to 603 underground coal mines that
are considered small entities by the Small Business Administration. The proposed rule minimizes
the information collection burden on these small mines by: (1) requiring refuge alternatives for
outby areas to be within 1 hour of a refuge alternative or safe exit; and (2) providing an alternative
method that allows mine operators to determine the location or need for outby refuge alternatives
by evaluating the risk to outby miners. This proposed provision would allow 476 small
underground coal mines to provide no outby refuge alternatives. Using SBA’s definition of a
small mine, MSHA estimates that, of the 603 small underground coal mines affected by the
proposed rule, —
• 106 mines would not need an inby or outby refuge alternative because the working section is
within an hour of a safe exit;
• 207 mines would not need an outby refuge alternative because miners working in the outby
area would never be more than a 30-minute travel distance from a refuge alternative near the
working section or a safe exit; and
• 163 mines would not need a refuge alternative in an outby area based on an assessment of risk
to persons in the outby area.
6.

Describe the consequence to Federal program or policy activities if the collection is not
conducted or is conducted less frequently, as well as any technical or legal obstacles to
reducing burden.

June 2008
5

1219-AB58
The nature of underground coal mining is such that a mine emergency, such as a fire or explosion,
can have disastrous consequences. The proposed rule would improve the mine operator’s
preparation for mine emergencies by providing a means to sustain miners trapped by an event that
makes escape impossible. Refuge alternatives could also be used to facilitate escape. If the
information collection is not conducted or is conducted less frequently, the Agency could not
adequately implement the requirements of the MINER Act.
7.

Explain any special circumstances that would cause an information collection to be
conducted in a manner:
• requiring respondents to report information to the agency more often than quarterly;
• requiring respondents to prepare a written response to a collection of information in
fewer than 30 days after receipt of it;
• requiring respondents to submit more than an original and two copies of any
document;
• requiring respondents to retain records, other than health, medical, government
contract, grant-in-aid, or tax records for more than three years;
• in connection with a statistical survey, that is not designed to produce valid and
reliable results that can be generalized to the universe of study;
• requiring the use of a statistical data classification that has not been reviewed and
approved by OMB;
• that includes a pledge of confidentiality that is not supported by authority established
in statute or regulation, that is not supported by disclosure and data security policies that
are consistent with the pledge, or which unnecessarily impedes sharing of data with other
agencies for compatible confidential use; or
• requiring respondents to submit proprietary trade secret, or other confidential
information unless the agency can demonstrate that it has instituted procedures to
protect the information's confidentiality to the extent permitted by law.

This collection of information is consistent with the guidelines in 5 CFR 1320.5.
8.

If applicable, provide a copy and identify the data and page number of publication in the
Federal Register of the agency's notice, required by 5 CFR 1320.8(d), soliciting
comments on the information collection prior to submission to OMB. Summarize public
comments received in response to that notice and describe actions taken by the agency in
response to these comments. Specifically address comments received on cost and hour
burden.
Describe efforts to consult with persons outside the agency to obtain their views on the
availability of data, frequency of collection, the clarity of instructions and recordkeeping,
disclosure, or reporting format (if any), and on the data elements to be recorded,
disclosed, or reported.
Consultation with representatives of those from whom information is to be obtained or
those who must compile records should occur at least once every 3 years – even if the
collection of information activity is the same as in prior periods. There may be

June 2008
6

1219-AB58
circumstances that may preclude consultation in a specific situation. These
circumstances should be explained.
The proposed rule requests comments, suggestions, data, and information that would minimize the
information collection burden and the impact on small entities. There are 4 public hearings
scheduled at various locations. The deadline for comments is midnight, August 18, 2008.
9.

Explain any decision to provide any payment or gift to respondents, other than
remuneration of contractors or grantees.

MSHA does not provide payments or gifts to the respondents identified in this collection.
10. Describe any assurance of confidentiality provided to respondents and the basis for the

assurance in statute, regulation, or agency policy.
There is no assurance of confidentiality provided to respondents beyond that required by the
Freedom of Information Act (5 U.S.C. 522). Collection of information under this proposed rule is
consistent with the guidelines in 5 CFR 1320.5.
11. Provide additional justification for any questions of a sensitive nature, such as sexual

behavior and attitudes, religious beliefs, and other matters that are commonly considered
private. This justification should include the reasons why the agency considers the
questions necessary, the specific uses to be made of the information, the explanation to be
given to persons from whom the information is requested, and any steps to be taken to
obtain their consent.
There are no questions of a sensitive nature.
12. Provide estimates of the hour burden of the collection of information. The statement

should:
• Indicate the number of respondents, frequency of response, annual hour burden, and
an explanation of how the burden was estimated. Unless directed to do so, agencies
should not conduct special surveys to obtain information on which to base hour burden
estimates. Consultation with a sample (fewer than 10) of potential respondents is
desirable. If the hour burden on respondents is expected to vary widely because of
differences in activity, size, or complexity, show the range of estimated hour burden, and
explain the reasons for the variance. Generally, estimates should not include burden
hours for customary and usual business practices.
• If this request for approval covers more than one form, provide separate hour burden
estimates for each form and aggregate the hour burdens in Item 13 of OMB Form 83-I.
• Provide estimates of annualized cost to respondents for the hour burdens for
collections of information, identifying and using appropriate wage rate categories. The
cost of contracting out or paying outside parties for information collection activities
should not be included here. Instead, this cost should be included in Item 14.
Proposed § 7.503 would require manufacturers of refuge alternatives or components to include in
an application for MSHA approval of a refuge alternative or component information and drawings
sufficient to satisfy the design and technical requirements for the structural components under
June 2008
7

1219-AB58
proposed § 7.505, breathable air components under proposed § 7.506, air-monitoring components
under proposed § 7.507, and harmful gas removal components under proposed § 7.507.
MSHA estimates that, on average, there would be 3 applications annually for a pre-fabricated selfcontained refuge alternative, and 10 applications annually for a component of a refuge alternative.
MSHA assumes that, upon request from the Agency for additional information, each applicant
would have to make changes to the overall application. MSHA estimates that an applicant would
take an average of 400 hours to prepare an application for a pre-fabricated self-contained refuge
alternative (300 hours for the original application and 100 hours to make changes). MSHA
estimates that an applicant would take an average of 150 hours to prepare an application for a
component (100 hours for the original application and 50 hours to make changes).
Of the total time to prepare the application and to make changes, MSHA assumes that: 50 percent
would be spent by a supervisor; 40 percent would be spent by a chief engineer; and 10 percent
would be spent by a clerical employee. MSHA estimated a weighted average hourly wage rate of
$74.94 [(50% x $85.14 supervisor hourly wage) + (40% x $74.32 chief engineer hourly wage) +
(10% x $26.37 clerical employee hourly wage)] to calculate the cost of preparing and submitting
the application.
Table 1 shows 2,700 burden hours under OMB control number 1219-0066, and an annual cost of
$202,325 for approval of refuge alternatives and components of refuge alternatives.
Table 1: Annual Burden Hours and Cost to Prepare Refuge Alternative
Applications under Proposed § 7.503
(a)
Type of Application

(b)

(c)

(d)

Time to Prepare Data for
Original and Revised
No. of Annual
Applications
Applications (in hrs.)

Applications for Pre-fabricated
Refuge Alternatives
Applications for Components
of Refuge Alternatives

Annual
Burden
Hours a

(e)

(f)

Weighted
Average Hourly Annual Burden
Wage Rate
Cost b

400

1,200

$74.94

$89,922

150

1,500

$74.94

$112,403

Total
a
Annual Burden Hours = col. b x col. c.
b
Annual Burden Cost = col. d x col. e.

2,700

$202,325

This proposed rule would apply to an estimated 507 underground coal mines that would be
required to install refuge alternatives.
Proposed § 75.221(a)(12) would require the roof control plan to include a description of the roof
and rib support necessary for the location of the refuge alternatives. MSHA estimates that the
revision of the roof control plan would be a one-page addendum that would be filed with MSHA
once, with no additional revisions needed. MSHA assumes that the roof control plan would be
revised by a supervisor at an hourly wage of $85.14 and would take 30 minutes (0.5 hours), on
average, for all mines. In addition, MSHA estimates that a clerical employee would take a total of
3 minutes (0.05 hours) to copy and submit the addendum to MSHA.
Table 2 shows a total of 280 burden hours under OMB control number 1219-0004, and an
annualized cost of $3,168 for mine operators to revise their roof control plans.
June 2008
8

1219-AB58
Table 2: First-Year Burden Hours and Cost to Revise Roof Control Plan
under Proposed § 75.221(a)(12)
(a)

(b)

Mine
Size

(c)

(d)
(e)
(f)
(g)
(h)
Clerical
Clerical
Clerical
Supervisor Employee Supervisor Employee Supervisor Employee
Hourly
No. of Mines Time to
Hourly
Time to
First-Year First-Year
with Refuge
Wage
Burden
Wage
Revise
Submit
Burden
a
Hours b
Alternatives (in hrs.)
Rate
(in hrs.)
Rate
Hours

(i)

(j)

FirstYear
Burden
Cost c

Annualized
Burden
Cost

1-19

106

0.50

0.05

$85.14

$26.37

$4,644

$659

20-500

391

0.50

0.05

196

$85.14

$26.37 $17,215

$2,445

0.50

0.05

$85.14

$26.37

501+
Total

507
254
Supervisor Annual Burden Hours = col. b x col. c.
b
Clerical Employee Annual Burden Hours = col. b x col. d.
c
First-Year Burden Cost = (col. e x col. g) + (col. f x col. h).

$452

$64

$22,311

$3,168

Proposed § 75.360(d) would require that persons conducting a pre-shift examination check the
refuge alternatives for damage, the integrity of the tamper-proof seal and the mechanism required
to activate the refuge alternative, and the ready availability of compressed air and oxygen. MSHA
estimates that there would be: 106 refuge alternatives in mines with 1-19 employees, 939 refuge
alternatives in mines with 20-500 employees, and 123 refuge alternatives in mines with 500+
employees.
The pre-shift examination takes place before each shift. MSHA estimates the number of shifts per
mine to be 1 shift for mines with 1-19 employees, 2 shifts for mines with 20-500 employees, and
3 shifts for mines with 501+ employees. MSHA estimates the number of work days per year to be
260 days (5 days per week) for mines with 1-19 employees, 312 days (6 days per week) for mines
with 20-500 employees, and 365 days (7 days per week) for mines with 501+ employees. MSHA
estimates that a supervisor would perform the pre-shift examination and would take 6 minutes
(0.1 hours), at an hourly wage of $85.14, to examine each refuge alternative.
Table 3 shows 74,819 burden hours under OMB control number 1219-0088, and an annual cost of
approximately $6.37 million for mine operators to examine refuge alternatives during pre-shift
examinations.
Table 3: Annual Burden Hours and Cost to Examine Refuge Alternatives
during Pre-shift Examinations under § 75.360(d)
(a)
Mine
Size

(b)
No. of
Refuge
Alternatives

1-19
106
0.1
1
20-500
939
0.1
2
501+
123
0.1
3
Total
1,168
a
Annual Burden Hours = col. b x col. c x col. d x col. e.
b
Annual Burden Cost = col. f x col. g.

June 2008
9

260
312
365

(f)
Annual
Burden
a
Hours
2,756
58,594
13,469
74,819

(g)
Pre-Shift
Examiner Hourly
Wage Rate

(h)
Annual
Burden
Cost b

$85.14 $234,646
$85.14 $4,988,693
$85.14 $1,146,751
$6,370,090

1219-AB58
Proposed § 75.372(b)(11) would require the mine ventilation map to include the location of all
refuge alternatives. Proposed § 75.1200(g) would require the mine map to include the location of
all refuge alternatives. Proposed § 75.1505(a) and (b) would require the escapeway map to
include the location of all refuge alternatives and to be kept current as refuge alternatives are
moved.
MSHA assumes that all maps at a mine would be revised at the same time. Because mines require
maps under the existing standard, MSHA includes no filing burden in this estimate. MSHA
assumes that the initial revisions to the maps would be performed by a supervisor at an hourly
wage of $85.14 and would, on average, take 30 minutes (0.5 hours) for mines with 1-19
employees, 45 minutes (0.75 hours) for mines with 20-500 employees, and one hour for mines
with 501+ employees.
Table 4 shows 356 burden hours under OMB control numbers 1219-0073 and 1219-0141, and an
annualized cost of $4,304 for the initial revision of the maps.
Table 4: First-Year Burden Hours and Cost for Revising Mine Ventilation Map, Mine Map, and
Escapeway Map under Proposed §§ 75.372(b)(11), 75.1200(g), and 75.1505(a) & (b)
(a)

(b)
No. of Mines
with Refuge
Alternatives

Supervisor Time to
Revise (in hrs.)

(d)
First-Year
Burden
Hours a

1-19

106

0.50

$85.14

$4,512

$641

20-500

391

0.75

293

$85.14

$24,946

$3,542

501+

1.00

$85.14

$851

$121

Total

507

$30,309

$4,304

Mine
Size

a
b

(c)

356

(e)
(f)
Supervisor
Hourly Wage
First-Year
Rate
Burden Cost b

(g)
Annualized
Burden Cost

Annual Burden Hours = col. b x col. c.
First-Year Burden Cost = col. d x col. e.

To estimate the costs of revising maps when refuge alternatives are relocated, MSHA assumes that
a supervisor would take 90 seconds (0.025 hours) at an hourly wage of $85.14 to revise all maps
to reflect a relocation because such revisions would be computerized and would occur quickly.
MSHA assumes that outby refuge alternatives would not be relocated. MSHA estimates that each
refuge alternative near a working section (inby) would be relocated an average of 25 times per
year. MSHA estimates that there would be a total of 106 inby refuge alternatives in mines with
1-19 employees, 785 inby refuge alternatives in mines with 20-500 employees, and 95 inby refuge
alternatives in mines with 500+ employees. Table 5 shows 616 burden hours under OMB control
numbers 1219-0073 and 1219-0141, and an annual cost of $52,446 to revise maps when refuge
alternatives are relocated.

June 2008
10

1219-AB58
Table 5: Annual Burden Hours and Costs to Revise Mine Ventilation Map, Mine Map, and
Escapeway Map under Proposed §§ 75.372(b)(11), 75.1200(g), and 75.1505(a) & (b)
(a)

(b)

(c)

(d)

(e)

(f)

(g)

(h)

Mine
Size

No. of Inby
Refuge
Alternatives

No. of Times Each
Refuge Alternative
is Transported per
Year

No. of Revisions per
Year Due to Refuge
Alternative Being
Transported

Supervisor Time to
Revise Map to Show
Each Move (in hrs.)

Annual
Burden
Hours a

Supervisor
Hourly
Wage Rate

Annual
Burden
b
Cost

1-19

106

2,650

0.025

$85.14

$5,619

20-500

785

19,625

0.025

491

$85.14

$41,804

501+

2,375

0.025

$85.14

$5,023

Total
986
a
Annual Burden Hours = col. d x col. e.
b
Annual Burden Cost = col. f x col. g.

24,650

616

$52,446

Proposed § 75.1502(c) would require the mine emergency evacuation and firefighting program of
instruction to be revised to include information for miners in the activation and use of refuge
alternatives in an emergency, a summary of procedures for constructing and activating refuge
alternatives, and a summary of procedures for using refuge alternatives.
MSHA estimates that revising the program of instruction would consist of a two-page addendum
that would be submitted to MSHA once, with no additional revisions needed. MSHA assumes
that this program of instruction would be revised by a supervisor at an hourly wage of $85.14 and
would take 30 minutes (0.5 hours), on average, for all mines. In addition, MSHA estimates that a
clerical employee would take a total of 3 minutes (0.05 hours) to copy and submit the addendum
to MSHA.
Table 6 shows a total of 280 burden hours under OMB control numbers 1219-0054 and
1219-0141, and an annualized cost of $3,168.
Table 6: First-Year Burden Hours and Costs to Revise Mine Emergency Evacuation and Firefighting
Program of Instruction under Proposed § 75.1502(c)
(a)

(b)

(c)

(d)

(e)

Supervisor
Clerical
Time to
Employee Time
No. of
Revise
to Submit
Supervisor
Mines with Program of Revised Program First-Year
Refuge
Instruction (in of Instruction (in
Burden
a
Alternatives
hrs.)
hrs.)
Hours

Mine
Size

(f)

(g)

Clerical
Employee
First-Year
Burden
b
Hours

Supervisor
Hourly
Wage Rate

(h)

(i)

(j)

Clerical
Employee First-Year Annualized
Hourly
Burden
Burden
c
Wage Rate
Cost
Cost

1-19
20500

106

0.5

0.05

$85.14

$26.37

$4,644

$659

391

0.5

0.05

196

$85.14

$26.37 $17,215

$2,445

501+

0.5

0.05

$85.14

$26.37

Total

507
254
Supervisor Annual Burden Hours = col. b x col. c.
b
Clerical Employee Annual Burden Hours = col. b x col. d.
c
First-Year Burden Cost = (col. e x col. g) + ( col. f x col. h).
a

June 2008
11

$452

$64

$22,311

$3,168

1219-AB58
Proposed § 75.1507 would require the mine emergency response plan (ERP) to include
information about the refuge alternatives used in the mine, including a description of the types of
refuge alternatives, procedures for maintaining them, the rated capacity and expected number of
occupants, details about the supply of breathable air, and suitable locations.
MSHA estimates that revising the emergency response plan would involve submitting an initial
revision and making changes in response to MSHA’s evaluation of those revisions. MSHA
assumes that these changes would be performed by a supervisor at an hourly wage of $85.14 and
would, on average, take: 12 hours for mines with 1-19 employees; 24 hours for mines with
20-500 employees, and 36 hours for mines with 501+ employees.
In addition, MSHA estimates that a clerical employee, working at a wage rate of $26.37, would
take a total of 6 minutes (0.10 hours) to copy and submit the emergency response plan information
for mines with 1-19 employees, 12 minutes (0.20 hours) for mines with 20-500 employees, and
15 minutes (0.25 hours) for mines with 501+ employees.
Table 7 shows a total of 11,108 burden hours and an annualized cost of $133,527 to revise the
emergency response plan.
Table 7: First-Year Burden Hours and Cost to Revise Emergency Response Plan
under Proposed § 75.1507
(a)

(b)

(c)

(d)

Supervisor
Clerical
Time to
Employee Time
Revise
to File Revised
Emergency
No. of Mines Emergency
with Refuge Response
Response Plan
(in hrs.)
Alternatives Plan (in hrs.)

Mine
Size

(e)

(f)

(g)

(h)

(i)

(j)

Supervisor
First-Year
Burden
a
Hours

Clerical
Employee
First-Year
Burden
Hours b

Supervisor
Hourly
Wage Rate

Clerical
Employee
Hourly
Wage Rate

First-Year
Burden
c
Cost

Annualized
Burden
Cost

1-19
20500

106

0.1

1,272

$85.14

$26.37

$108,588

391

0.2

9,384

$85.14

$26.37

$801,011 $113,744

501+

0.3

360

$85.14

$26.37

Total

507
11,016
Supervisor First-Year Burden Hours = col. b x col. c.
b
Clerical Employee First-Year Burden Hours = col. b x col. d.
c
First-Year Burden Cost = (col. e x col. g) + ( col. f x col. h).

$30,730

Proposed § 75.1508 (a)(2) would require the mine operator to certify that persons assigned to
examine, transport, and maintain and repair refuge alternatives and components are trained.
MSHA assumes training to examine refuge alternatives and components, and the certification of
that training, would be integrated into the existing requirements that govern training for persons
who conduct pre-shift examinations of the mine under § 75.360. Therefore, MSHA estimates no
burden associated with this proposed certification requirement.
For persons assigned to transport, and maintain and repair refuge alternatives and components,
MSHA estimates that 2 miners per mine would receive training from the manufacturer as part of
the purchase agreement. MSHA estimates that a record of the training would be made by a
supervisor at an hourly wage of $85.14 and would take about 3 minutes (0.05 hours).

$4,364

$940,329 $133,527

June 2008

$15,419

1219-AB58
Table 8 shows 27 burden hours and an annual cost of $2,299 for certification of training for the
transportation, and maintenance and repair of refuge alternatives and components.
Table 8: First-Year Burden Hours and Cost to Certify Transport and Maintenance and Repair
Training of Refuge Alternatives and Components under Proposed § 75.1508(a)(2)
(a)

(b)

(c)

(d)

(e)

(f)

Number of Mines
Supervisor Time to
First-Year
Supervisor Hourly
First-Year
with Refuge
Certify Maintenance and
Burden
a
Wage Rate
Burden Cost b
Alternatives
Repair Training (in hrs.)
Hours
106
0.05
6
$85.14
$511
391
0.05
20
$85.14
$1,703
10
0.05
1
$85.14
$85

Mine
Size
1-19
20-500
501+

Total
507
Annual Burden Hours = col. b x col. c.
b
Annual Burden Cost = col. d x col. e.

$2,299

Proposed § 75.1508(b) would require a record of any maintenance and repair performed on a
refuge alternative or component. MSHA estimates that the total number of repair and
maintenance cases per year on all refuge alternatives would be: 2 in mines with 1-19 employees;
9 in mines with 20-500 employees; and 2 in mines with 501+ employees. MSHA estimates that
recording of the maintenance and repair would be performed by a supervisor at an hourly wage of
$85.14 and would take about 1 minute (0.017 hours) for each event.
Table 9 shows 3 burden hours and an annual cost of $255 for recording maintenance and repair of
refuge alternatives.
Table 9: Annual Burden Hours and Cost to Make a Record of Maintenance and Repair of Refuge
Alternatives and Components under Proposed § 75.1508(b)
(a)

(b)

(c)

(d)

(e)

(f)

Total Refuge Alternative and
Supervisor Time to
Annual Supervisor
Hourly
Annual
Component Maintenance
Certify Maintenance and Burden
and Repairs per Year
Repair Training (in hrs.) Hours a Wage Rate Burden Cost b
2
0.017
1
$85.14
$85
9
0.017
1
$85.14
$85
2
0.017
1
$85.14
$85

Mine
Size
1-19
20-500
501+

Total
13
Annual Burden Hours = col. b x col. c.
b
Annual Burden Cost = col. d x col. e.

$255

SUMMARY OF PAPERWORK BURDEN HOURS AND RELATED COSTS
Item 12 Summary Tables
Table 10 provides a summary of the 90,189 burden hours for the first year that the rule
would be effective, and the 78,138 burden hours for the second year and all subsequent years that
the rule would be in effect. Table 11 provides a summary of the 309,309 responses for the first
year that the rule would be in effect, and the 307,268 responses for the second year and all
subsequent years that the rule would be in effect.
June 2008
13

1219-AB58
Table 10: Burden Hours in the First Year and Subsequent Years

Detail
Refuge Alternative & Component Applications
for Approval
Revise Roof Control Plan
Pre-Shift Examination
Initially Revise Mine Map, Ventilation Map, &
Escapeway Map
Revise Maps to Reflect Refuge Alternative
Relocations
Revise & Submit Mine Emergency Evacuation
and Firefighting Program of Instruction
Revise & File Emergency Response Plan
Certify Training to Transport, Maintain and
Repair Refuge Alternatives
Record Repairs of Refuge Alternatives &
Components
Total

Burden
Hours in
First Year

Burden Hours
in Subsequent
Years

Proposed Section

Table

7.503
75.221(a)(12)
75.360 (d)
75.372(b)(11); 75.1200(g);
& 75.1505(a) & (b)
75.372(b)(11); 75.1200(g);
75.1505(a) & (b)

1
2
3

2,700
280
74,819

2,700
0
74,819

356

616

75.1502(c)
75.1507

6
7

280
11,108

0
0

75.1508(a)(2)

75.1508(b)

3
90,189

3
78,138

Table 11: Summary of Responses in the First Year and Subsequent Years

Detail
Refuge Alternative & Component
Applications for Approval
Revise Roof Control Plan
Pre-Shift Examination
Initially Revise Mine Map, Ventilation
Map, & Escapeway Map
Revise Maps to Reflect Refuge
Alternative Relocations
Revise & Submit Mine Emergency
Evacuation and Firefighting Program
of Instruction
Revise & File Emergency Response
Plan
Certify Training to Transport,
Maintain, & Repair Refuge
Alternatives
Record Repairs of Refuge
Alternatives & Components
Total

Average
Responses
No. of
Responses
in
Responses in First Subsequent
Units per Year
Years
Year

Proposed Section

Table

7.503
75.221(a)(12)

1
2

13
507

75.360(d)
75.372(b)(11);
75.1200(g);
75.1505(a) & (b)
75.372(b)(11);
75.1200(g);
75.1505(a) & (b)

507

75.1502(c)

507

75.1507

75.1508(a)(2)
75.1508(b)

1
1

13
507

13
0

282,494

507

24,650

507

13
309,705

13
307,170

557

* 282,494 / 507 = 557.19 (rounded to 557) and 24,650 / 507 = 48.62 (rounded to 49)
June 2008
14

1219-AB58

13. Provide an estimate of the total annual cost burden to respondents or record keepers
resulting from the collection of information. (Do not include the cost of any hour burden
shown in Items 12 and 14).
• The cost estimate should be split into two components: (a) a total capital and start-up
cost component (annualized over its expected useful life); and (b) a total operation and
maintenance and purchase of services component. The estimates should take into
account costs associated with generating, maintaining, and disclosing or providing the
information. Include descriptions of methods used to estimate major cost factors
including system and technology acquisition, expected useful life of capital equipment,
the discount rate(s), and the time period over which costs will be incurred. Capital and
start-up costs include, among other items, preparations for collecting information such as
purchasing computers and software; monitoring, sampling, drilling and testing
equipment; and record storage facilities.
• If cost estimates are expected to vary widely, agencies should present ranges of cost
burdens and explain the reasons for the variance. The cost of purchasing or contracting
out information collection services should be a part of this cost burden estimate. In
developing cost burden estimates, agencies may consult with a sample of respondents
(fewer than 10), utilize the 60-day pre-OMB submission public comment process and use
existing economic or regulatory impact analysis associated with the rulemaking
containing the information collection, as appropriate.
• Generally, estimates should not include purchases of equipment or services, or portions
thereof, made: (1) prior to October 1, 1995, (2) to achieve regulatory compliance with
requirements not associated with the information collection, (3) for reasons other than to
provide information or keep records for the government, or (4) as part of customary and
usual business or private practices.
Proposed § 7.503 would specify the items applicants must include in their application for MSHA
approval of a refuge alternative or component. MSHA estimates that copy and postage costs for
the submittal of an application would be $53 for an application for a pre-fabricated self-contained
refuge alternative and $27 for an application for a refuge alternative component. The estimated
annual filing cost for 3 pre-fabricated self-contained refuge alternatives a year is $159. Similarly,
the estimated annual cost for 10 refuge alternative components a year is $270.
Table 12 shows estimated annual filing cost of $429 to submit pre-fabricated self-contained refuge
alternatives and component applications.

June 2008
15

1219-AB58
Table 12: Annual Copy and Postage Cost for Refuge Alternative Applications
under Proposed § 7.503
(a)
Type of Application
Applications for Pre-fabricated
Refuge Alternatives
Applications for Components
of Refuge Alternatives
Total
a
Annual Cost = col. b x col. c.

(b)
No. of Annual
Applications

(d)
Annual Cost a

$53

$159

$27

$270
$429

MSHA charges a fee to applicants to cover direct and indirect costs for evaluation and approval
services performed by the Agency. As of January 1, 2008, the MSHA fee is $84 per hour for
services rendered. 1 MSHA estimates that the hours spent by the Agency on evaluating an
application and any changes would average 3,000 hours for a pre-fabricated self-contained refuge
alternative and 150 hours for a component.
MSHA’s charge for evaluating a pre-fabricated self-contained refuge alternative application is
equal to the $84 hourly MSHA fee multiplied by 3,000 hours, or $252,000. The estimated annual
cost for MSHA to evaluate 3 pre-fabricated self-contained refuge alternative applications a year is
$756,000. Similarly, MSHA’s charge for evaluating a component application is equal to the
$84 hourly MSHA fee multiplied by 150 hours, or $12,600. The estimated annual cost for MSHA
to evaluate 10 component applications a year is $126,000.
Table 13 shows estimated annual cost of $882,000 for MSHA to evaluate pre-fabricated selfcontained refuge alternatives and component applications.
Table 13: Annual Cost for MSHA Approval Services for Refuge Alternative Applications
under Proposed § 7.503
(a)

Type of Application

(b)
No. of
Annual
Applications

Applications for Pre-fabricated
Refuge Alternatives
Applications for Components
for Refuge Alternatives

(d)
MSHA
Hourly
Fee

(e)
Annual Cost a

3,000

$84

$756,000

150

$84

$126,000

Total
Annual Cost = col. b x (col. c x col. d).

$882,000

The proposal would require that tests be conducted by the applicant or a third party and the results
provided to MSHA for approval of a refuge alternative or component. This would include tests to
verify the performance of the refuge alternative for 96 consecutive hours and tests concerning
apparent temperature (under proposed § 7.504(b)(2)); carbon dioxide scrubbing (under proposed
§ 7.506(f)); oxygen delivery system (under proposed §§ 7.506(b), (c), and (d)); positive pressure
1

“Fee Adjustments for Testing, Evaluation, and Approval of Mining Products,” Federal Register, December
27, 2007, vol. 72, no. 247, pp. 73380-81.

June 2008
16

1219-AB58
(under proposed §§ 7.503(b)(3), 7.505(a)(3) and (c)(1); and 7.506(c)(1)(iv)); atmospheric
monitoring (under proposed § 7.507(c)); noise measurements (under proposed § 7.504(a)(2)); and
light measurements (under proposed § 7.504(c)(2)). In addition, applicant or third party tests
would also include the following adequacy tests: tests related to airlock purging (under proposed
§§ 7.503(c)(3) and 7.508(a)(1)); NFPA 2112 flash fire (under proposed §§ 7.505(b)(3) and (5));
gas analytical accuracy – both preconditioning and long term stability (under proposed
§ 7.507(c)); psi overpressure (under proposed § 7.505(b)(2)); carbon monoxide scrubbing (under
proposed § 7.508(c)(2)); carbon dioxide scrubbing (under proposed § 7.506(f)); and flame
resistance, explosion proof enclosures, and batteries (under proposed § 7.504(a)(1). Proposed
§ 7.504(a)(1) would require that refuge alternatives and components be intrinsically safe.
Intrinsically safe testing falls under existing § 7.27 for flame resistance; §§ 7.306 and 18.62 for
explosion proof enclosures; and § 18.68 for batteries.
Based on information from MSHA’s Technical Support, MSHA estimates that the total cost
(including setup and tear-down costs) of these tests for a pre-fabricated self-contained refuge
alternative application is $255,800. The estimated cost of tests for 3 pre-fabricated self-contained
refuge alternative applications a year is $767,400. Tests for a component application could
involve any one or a combination of the tests for the pre-fabricated self-contained refuge
alternative. MSHA averaged the costs of tests for a pre-fabricated self-contained refuge
alternative to derive an estimate of $21,300 for the testing cost of a component application. The
estimated annual cost of tests for 10 component applications a year is $213,000.
Table 14 shows an estimated annual cost of $980,400 for applicant or third party testing for prefabricated, self-contained, refuge alternatives and component applications.
Table 14: Annual Cost for Applicant or Third Party Testing under Proposed § 7.503
(a)
Type of Application

(b)
No. of Annual
Applications

Applications for Pre-fabricated
Refuge Alternatives
Applications for Components for
Refuge Alternatives
Total
Annual Cost = col. b x col. c.

(d)
Annual Cost a

$255,800

$767,400

$21,300

$213,000
$980,400

Proposed § 75.221 would require the roof control plan to include a description of the roof and rib
support necessary for the location of the refuge alternatives. This proposed requirement would
apply to all mines that would install one or more refuge alternatives, which would include 106
mines with 1-19 employees, 391 mines with 20-500 employees, and 10 mines with 501+
employees. MSHA estimates that the revision of the roof control plan would be a one-page
addendum that would be filed with MSHA once with no additional revisions needed. MSHA
assumes copy costs of $0.15 per page and $1.00 postage.
As Table 15 shows estimated a first-year cost of $583 for mines to copy and submit a revised roof
control plan.

June 2008
17

1219-AB58
Table 15: First-Year Copy and Postage Cost ToSubmit Revised Roof Control Plan
under Proposed § 75.221(a)(12)
(a)
Mine Size
1-19

(b)

(c)

(d)

(e)

No. of Mines with
Refuge Alternatives

Cost per Mine to Submit
Revised Roof Control Plan

First-Year
Cost a

Annualized
Cost

20-500

106

$1.15

$122

$17

391

$1.15

$450

$64

501+

$1.15

$12

Total

507

$583

$83

First-Year Cost = col. b x col. c .

Proposed § 75.1502(c) would require the mine emergency evacuation and firefighting program of
instruction to include instructions for miners on the activation and use of refuge alternatives in an
emergency, a summary of procedures for constructing and activating refuge alternatives, and a
summary of procedures for using refuge alternatives. This proposed requirement would apply
only to those mines that install refuge alternatives.
MSHA estimates that the revision of this program of instruction would be a two-page addendum
that would be submitted to MSHA once, with no additional revisions needed. MSHA assumes
copy costs of $0.15 per page and $1.00 postage. MSHA calculates the total copy and postage cost
per mine to submit the program of instruction to be $1.30.
Table 16 shows estimated first-year cost of $659 for all mines to submit revisions to the mine
emergency evacuation and firefighting program of instruction.
Table 16. Annualized Cost for Revisions to Mine Emergency Evacuation and Firefighting
Program of Instruction under Proposed § 75.1502(c)
(a)

(b)

Mine
Size

No. of Mines with
Refuge Alternatives

(d)
First-Year Cost to
Revise Program of
Instruction a

(e)
Annualized Cost to
Revise Program of
Instruction

1-19

106

$1.30

$138

$20

20-500

391

$1.30

$508

$72

$1.30

$13

$659

$94

501+

Total
507
First-Year Cost = col. b x col. c.

Under proposed § 75.1507, the emergency response plan (ERP) would include the following for
each refuge alternative and component: type and location of the unit in use; procedures for
maintaining the unit; the unit’s rated capacity; and duration of breathable air for each person. In
addition the ERP would specify the methods for providing: breathable air; removal of carbon
dioxide; backup oxygen controls and regulators; an airlock and breathable air in the airlock;
sanitation facilities; harmful gas removal; monitoring of gas concentrations; and lighting.
For refuge alternatives constructed in place, the ERP would specify that the breathable air
components are MSHA approved, and the unit can withstand exposure to a flash fire of 300º
Fahrenheit for three seconds. For refuge alternatives consisting of materials pre-positioned for
June 2008
18

1219-AB58
miners to use to construct a secure space with an isolated atmosphere, the ERP would specify: the
means to store and protect materials; that the unit can withstand exposure to a flash fire of 300º
Fahrenheit for three seconds; a method that assures that the unit is constructed and functional in
10 minutes; that all necessary materials have been provided as a self-contained unit ready to be
activated; and the means to assure establishment of breathable air after construction of the unit.
For refuge alternatives that sustains persons for only 48 hours, the ERP would describe advanced
arrangements that have been made to assure that persons who cannot be rescued within 48 hours
will receive additional supplies to sustain them until rescued. The ERP would also specify that the
refuge alternative is stocked with a specified amount of food and water per person, refuge
alternative and component manuals, materials and tools sufficient to make repairs on the unit, and
first-aid supplies.
MSHA estimates that, for the 507 mines with refuge alternatives, the revision process for the
emergency response plan would include an initial revision plus necessary changes that would be
submitted to MSHA. MSHA assumes that the information on refuge alternatives would be
included in 12 pages of the emergency response plan for mines with 1-19 employees, 24 pages for
mines with 20-500 employees, and 36 pages for mines with 501+ employees.
MSHA assumes copy costs of $0.15 per page. Postage costs are assumed to be $1.00 for mines
with 1-19 employees, $2.00 for mines with 20-500 employees, and $3 for mines with 501+
employees. MSHA calculates copy and postage costs per mine of about $2.80 for mines with 1-19
employees, $5.60 for mines with 20-500 employees, and $8.40 for mines with 501+ employees.
Table 17 shows estimated first-year cost of $2,571 for all mines to submit revised emergency
response plans.
Table 17. First-Year Copy and Postage Cost to Submit Revised Emergency Response Plan
under Proposed § 75.1507
(a)
Mine Size

(b)
No. of Mines with
Refuge Alternatives

(d)
First-Year
Costa

(e)
Annualized
Cost

1-19

106

$2.80

$297

$42

20-500

391

$5.60

$2,190

$311

$8.40

$84

$12

$2,571

$365

501+

Total
507
First-Year Cost = col. b x col. c.

Table 18 shows a summary of the total Item 13 costs. The estimated total cost for Item 13 is
$1,866,643 for the first year that the rule would be in effect, and $1,862,829 for the second year
and subsequent years that the rule would be in effect.

June 2008
19

1219-AB58
Table 18: Summary of Item 13 Costs

Description

Total
Cost in First
Subsequent
Year
Years Cost

Proposed Section

Table

Applications for MSHA Approval

7.503

$429

MSHA Approval Services

7.503

$882,000

Testing

7.503

$980,400

75.221(a)(12)

$584

75.1502(c)

$659

75.1507

$2,571

$1,866,643

$1,862,829

Submission of Roof Control Plan
Submission of Mine Emergency Evacuation
and Firefighting Program of Instruction
Submission of Emergency Response Plan
Total

14. Provide estimates of annualized cost to the Federal government. Also, provide a
description of the method used to estimate cost, which should include quantification of
hours, operational expenses (such as equipment, overhead, printing, and support staff),
and any other expense that would not have been incurred without this collection of
information. Agencies also may aggregate cost estimates from Items 12, 13, and 14 in a
single table.
There are no Federal costs associated with this collection of information package.
15. Explain the reasons for any program changes or adjustments reporting in Items 13 or 14
of the OMB Form 83-I.
The burden hours apply to an estimated 507 underground coal mines. MSHA estimates that in the
first year that the proposed rule would be in effect there would be 90,189 burden hours,
$1,866,643 of burden costs, and 309,705 responses.
Of the 90,189 burden hours:
•

280 burden hours from proposed § 75.221(a)(12) should be accounted for under OMB
information collection package 1219-0004;

•

2,700 burden hours from proposed § 7.503 should be accounted for under OMB
information collection package 1219-0066.

•

74,819 burden hours from proposed § 75.360(d) should be accounted for under OMB
information collection package 1219-0088;

•

280 burden hours form proposed § 75.1502(c) should be accounted for under OMB
information collection packages 1219-0054 and 1219-0141;

•

972 burden hours from proposed §§ 75.1200(g), 75.372(b)(11), and 75.1505(a) & (b)
should be accounted for under OMB information -collection packages 1219-0073 and
1219-0141;

June 2008
20

1219-AB58
•

the remaining 11,138 burden hours from proposed §§ 7.503, 75.1507, 75.1508(a)(2) & (b)
should be accounted for in this new information collection package.

16. For collections of information whose results will be published, outline plans for

tabulation, and publication. Address any complex analytical techniques that will be
used. Provide the time schedule for the entire project, including beginning and ending
dates of the collection of information, completion of report, publication dates, and other
actions.
MSHA does not intend to publish the results of this information collection.
17. If seeking approval to not display the expiration date for OMB approval of the

information collection, explain the reasons that display would be inappropriate.
There are no additional forms associated with this information collection; therefore, MSHA is not
seeking approval to not display the expiration date for OMB approval of this information
collection.
18. Explain each exception to the certification statement identified in Item 19, "Certification

for Paperwork Reduction Act Submission," of OMB 83-I.
There are no certification exceptions identified with this information collection.

COLLECTION OF INFORMATION EMPLOYING STATISTICAL
METHODS

The agency should be prepared to justify its decision not to use statistical methods in any
case where such methods might reduce burden or improve accuracy of results. When
Item 17 on the Form OMB 83-I is checked "Yes", the following documentation should be
included in the Supporting Statement to the extent that it applies to the methods proposed:
1. Describe (including a numerical estimate) the potential respondent universe and any
sampling or other respondent selection methods to be used. Data on the number of
entities (e.g., establishments, State and local government units, households, or persons) in
the universe covered by the collection and in the corresponding sample are to be
provided in tabular form for the universe as a whole and for each of the strata in the
proposed sample. Indicate expected response rates for the collection as a whole. If the
collection had been conducted previously, include the actual response rate achieved
during the last collection.
2. Describe the procedures for the collection of information including:
• Statistical methodology for stratification and sample selection,
• Estimation procedure,
• Degree of accuracy needed for the purpose described in the justification,
• Unusual problems requiring specialized sampling procedures, and
• Any use of periodic (less frequently than annual) data collection cycles to reduce
burden.
June 2008
21

1219-AB58
3. Describe methods to maximize response rates and to deal with issues of non-response.
The accuracy and reliability of information collected must be shown to be adequate for
intended uses. For collections based on sampling, a special justification must be provided
for any collection that will not yield "reliable" data that can be generalized to the
universe studied.
4. Describe any tests of procedures or methods to be undertaken. Testing is encouraged as
an effective means of refining collections of information to minimize burden and improve
utility. Tests must be approved if they call for answers to identical questions from 10 or
more respondents. A proposed test or set of tests may be submitted for approval
separately or in combination with the main collection of information.
5. Provide the name and telephone number of individuals consulted on statistical aspects of
the design and the name of the agency unit, contractor(s), grantee(s), or other person(s)
who will actually collect and/or analyze the information for the agency.
The collection of this information does not employ statistical methods.

RELEVANT STATUTORY AND REGULATORY PROVISIONS:
Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2008
SEC. 112. (a) * * *
(b) Not later than June 15, 2008, the Secretary of Labor shall propose regulations pursuant to
section 315 of the Federal Coal Mine Health and Safety Act of 1969, consistent with the
recommendations of the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health pursuant to section
13 of the MINER Act (Public Law 109-236), requiring rescue chambers, or facilities that afford at
least the same measure of protection, in underground coal mines. The Secretary shall finalize the
regulations not later than December 31, 2008.

Mine Improvement and New Emergency Response (MINER) Act of 2006
SEC. 2. EMERGENCY RESPONSE.
*****
“(a) * * *
“(b) ACCIDENT PREPAREDNESS AND RESPONSE.—
“(1) IN GENERAL.—Each underground coal mine operator shall carry out on a continuing
basis a program to improve accident preparedness and response at each mine.
“(2) RESPONSE AND PREPAREDNESS PLAN.—
“(A) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 60 days after the date of enactment of the Mine
Improvement and New Emergency Response Act of 2006, each underground coal mine operator
shall develop and adopt a written accident response plan that complies with this subsection with
respect to each mine of the operator, and periodically update such plans to reflect changes in
operations in the mine, advances in technology, or other relevant considerations. Each such
operator shall make the accident response plan available to the miners and the miners’
representatives.
“(B) PLAN REQUIREMENTS.—An accident response plan under subparagraph (A) shall—
June 2008
22

1219-AB58
“(i) provide for the evacuation of all individuals endangered by an emergency; and
“(ii) provide for the maintenance of individuals trapped underground in the event that miners
are not able to evacuate the mine.
“(C) PLAN APPROVAL.—The accident response plan under subparagraph (A) shall be
subject to review and approval by the Secretary. In determining whether to approve a particular
plan the Secretary shall take into consideration all comments submitted by miners or their
representatives. Approved plans shall—
“(i) afford miners a level of safety protection at least consistent with the existing standards,
including standards mandated by law and regulation;
“(ii) reflect the most recent credible scientific research;
“(iii) be technologically feasible, make use of current commercially available technology, and
account for the specific physical characteristics of the mine; and
“(iv) reflect the improvements in mine safety gained from experience under this Act and other
worker safety and health laws.
“(D) PLAN REVIEW.—The accident response plan under subparagraph (A) shall be reviewed
periodically, but at least every 12 months, by the Secretary. In such periodic reviews, the
Secretary shall consider all comments submitted by miners or miners’ representatives and
intervening advancements in science and technology that could be implemented to enhance
miners’ ability to evacuate or otherwise survive in an emergency.
“(E) PLAN CONTENT – GENERAL REQUIREMENTS.—To be approved under
subparagraph (C), an accident response plan shall include the following:
“(i) POST-ACCIDENT COMMUNICATIONS.—The plan shall provide for a redundant
means of communication with the surface for persons underground, such as secondary telephone
or equivalent two-way communication.
“(ii) POST-ACCIDENT TRACKING.—Consistent with commercially available technology
and with the physical constraints, if any, of the mine, the plan shall provide for above ground
personnel to determine the current, or immediately pre-accident, location of all underground
personnel. Any system so utilized shall be functional, reliable, and calculated to remain
serviceable in a post-accident setting.
“(iii) POST-ACCIDENT BREATHABLE AIR.—The plan shall provide for—
“(I) emergency supplies of breathable air for individuals trapped underground sufficient to
maintain such individuals for a sustained period of time;
“(II) in addition to the 2 hours of breathable air per miner required by law under the
emergency temporary standard as of the day before the date of enactment of the Mine
Improvement and New Emergency Response Act of 2006, caches of self-rescuers providing in the
aggregate not less than 2 hours per miner to be kept in escapeways from the deepest work area to
the surface at a distance of no further than an average miner could walk in 30 minutes;
“(III) a maintenance schedule for checking the reliability of self rescuers, retiring older selfrescuers first, and introducing new self-rescuer technology, such as units with interchangeable air
or oxygen cylinders not requiring doffing to replenish airflow and units with supplies of greater
than 60 minutes, as they are approved by the Administration and become available on the market;
and
“(IV) training for each miner in proper procedures for donning self rescuers, switching from
one unit to another, and ensuring a proper fit.
“(iv) POST-ACCIDENT LIFELINES.— * * *.
“(v) TRAINING.— * * *.
June 2008
23

1219-AB58
“(vi) LOCAL COORDINATION.— * * *.
“(F) PLAN CONTENT – SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS.—
“(i) IN GENERAL.—In addition to the content requirements contained in subparagraph (E),
and subject to the considerations contained in subparagraph (C), the Secretary may make
additional plan requirements with respect to any of the content matters.
“(ii) POST ACCIDENT COMMUNICA1TIONS.—Not later than 3 years after the date of
enactment of the Mine Improvement and New Emergency Response Act of 2006, a plan shall, to
be approved, provide for post accident communication between underground and surface
personnel via a wireless two-way medium, and provide for an electronic tracking system
permitting surface personnel to determine the location of any persons trapped underground or set
forth within the plan the reasons such provisions can not be adopted. Where such plan sets forth
the reasons such provisions can not be adopted, the plan shall also set forth the operator’s
alternative means of compliance. Such alternative shall approximate, as closely as possible, the
degree of functional utility and safety protection provided by the wireless two-way medium and
tracking system referred to in this subpart.
“(G) PLAN DISPUTE RESOLUTION.— * * *
SEC. 13. RESEARCH CONCERNING REFUGE ALTERNATIVES.
(a) IN GENERAL.—The National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health shall provide
for the conduct of research, including field tests, concerning the utility, practicality, survivability,
and cost of various refuge alternatives in an underground coal mine environment, including
commercially-available portable refuge chambers.
(b) REPORT.—
(1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 18 months after the date of enactment of this Act, the
National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health shall prepare and submit to the Secretary of
Labor, the Secretary of Health and Human Services, the Committee on Health, Education, Labor,
and Pensions of the Senate, and the Committee on Education and the Workforce of the House of
Representatives a report concerning the results of the research con2ducted under subsection (a),
including any field tests.
(2) RESPONSE BY SECRETARY.—Not later than 180 days after the receipt of the report
under paragraph (1), the Secretary of Labor shall provide a response to the Committee on Health,
Education, Labor, and Pensions of the Senate and the Committee on Education and the Workforce
of the House of Representatives containing a description of the actions, if any, that the Secretary
intends to take based upon the report, including proposing regulatory changes, and the reasons for
such actions.

Federal Mine Safety & Health Act of 1977 (Mine Act)
MANDATORY SAFETY AND HEALTH STANDARDS
SEC. 101. (a) The Secretary shall by rule in accordance with procedures set forth in this
section and in accordance with section 553 of title 5, United States Code (without regard to any
reference in such section to sections 556 and 557 of such title), develop, promulgate, and revise as
may be appropriate, improved mandatory health or safety standards for the protection of life and
prevention of injuries in coal or other mines.
June 2008
24

1219-AB58
INSPECTIONS, INVESTIGATIONS, AND RECORDKEEPING
SEC. 103. (h) In addition to such records as are specifically required by this Act, every
operator of a coal or other mine shall establish and maintain such records, make such reports, and
provide such information, as the Secretary or the Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare may
reasonably require from time to time to enable him to perform his functions under this Act. The
Secretary or the Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare is authorized to compile, analyze,
and publish, either in summary or detailed form, such reports or information so obtained. Except
to the extent otherwise specifically provided by this Act, all records, information, reports,
findings, citations, notices, orders, or decisions required or issued pursuant to or under this Act
may be published from time to time, may be released to any interested person, and shall be made
available for public inspection.

RELEVANT REGULATORY PROVISIONS:
PART 7—TESTING BY APPLICANT OR THIRD PARTY—[AMENDED]
§ 7.503 Application requirements.
(a) An application for approval of a refuge alternative or component shall include:
(1) The refuge alternative or component’s make and model number, if applicable.
(2) A list of the refuge alternative or component’s parts that includes—
(i) The MSHA approval number for electric-powered equipment;
(ii) Each component’s or part’s in-mine shelf life, service life, and recommended replacement
schedule; and
(iii) The materials used in each component or part with their MSHA approval number or a
statement that the materials are noncombustible.
(3) The capacity and duration (the number of persons it is designed to maintain and for how
long) of the refuge alternative or component on a per-person per-day basis.
(4) The length, width, and height of the space required for storage of each component.
(b) The application for approval of the refuge alternative shall specify the following:
(1) A description of the breathable air component, including drawings, air-supply sources,
piping, regulators, and controls.
(2) The maximum volume, excluding the airlock; the dimensions of space provided for each
person using the refuge alternative; and the interior dimensions of the airlock.
(3) The maximum allowable positive pressures in the interior space and the airlock and
describe the means used to limit or control the positive pressure.
(4) The maximum allowable apparent temperature of the interior space and the airlock and the
means to control the apparent temperature.
(5) Drawings that show the features of each component and contain sufficient information to
document compliance with the technical requirements.
(6) A training manual that contains sufficient detail for each refuge alternative or component
addressing in-mine transportation, operation, and maintenance of the unit.
(7) A summary of the procedures for constructing and activating refuge alternatives.
(8) A summary of the procedures for using the refuge alternative.
(9) The results of inspections, evaluations, calculations, and tests conducted under this subpart.
June 2008
25

1219-AB58
(c) The application for approval of the air-monitoring component shall specify the following:
(1) The operating range, type of sensor, gas or gases measured, and environmental limitations,
including the cross-sensitivity to other gases, of each detector or device in the air-monitoring
component.
(2) The method for operation of the individual devices so that they function as necessary to
test gas concentrations over a 96 hour period.
(3) Procedures for monitoring and maintaining breathable air in the airlock, before and after
purging.
(4) Instructions for determining the quality of the atmosphere in the airlock and refuge
alternative interior and a means to maintain breathable air in the airlock.
(d) The application for approval of the harmful gas removal component shall specify the
following:
(1) The volume of breathable air available for removing harmful gas both at start up and while
persons enter through the airlock.
(2) The maximum volume of each gas that the component is designed to remove on a perminer per-day basis.
(e) The applicant shall certify that each component is constructed of suitable materials, is of
good quality workmanship, is based on sound engineering principles, is safe for its intended use,
and is designed to be compatible with other components in the refuge alternative, within the
limitations specified in the approval.
PART 75—MANDATORY SAFETY STANDARDS—UNDERGROUND COAL MINES—
[AMENDED]
§ 75.221 Roof control plan information.
(a) * * *
(12) A description of the roof and rib support necessary for the refuge alternatives.
§ 75.360 Pre-shift examination at fixed intervals.
(d) The person conducting the pre-shift examination shall check the refuge alternative for
damage, the integrity of the tamper-evident seal and the mechanisms required to activate the
refuge alternative, and the ready availability of compressed oxygen and air.
§ 75.372 Mine ventilation map.
(b) * * *
(11) The location of all escapeways and refuge alternatives.
§ 75.1200 Mine map.
(g) Escapeways and refuge alternatives;
§ 75.1502 Mine emergency evacuation and firefighting program of instruction.
(c) * * *
(3) The activation and use of refuge alternatives.
(4) * * *
June 2008
26

1219-AB58
(iv) Switching escapeways, as applicable;
(v) Negotiating any other unique escapeway conditions; and
(vi) Using refuge alternatives.
*****
(8) A review of the mine map; the escapeway system; the escape, firefighting, and emergency
evacuation plans in effect at the mine; and the location of refuge alternatives and abandoned areas.
(9) * * *
(10) A summary of the procedures related to constructing and activating refuge alternatives;
and
(11) A summary of the procedures related to refuge alternative use.
§ 75.1505 Escapeway maps.
(a) Content and accessibility. An escapeway map shall show the designated escapeways from
the working sections or the miners’ work stations to the surface or the exits at the bottom of the
shaft or slope, refuge alternatives, and SCSR storage locations. The escapeway map shall be
posted or readily accessible for all miners—
(1) In each working section;
(2) In each area where mechanized mining equipment is being installed or removed;
(3) At the refuge alternative; and
(4) At a surface location of the mine where miners congregate, such as at the mine bulletin
board, bathhouse, or waiting room.
(b) Keeping maps current. All maps shall be kept up-to-date and any change in route of travel,
location of doors, location of refuge alternatives, or direction of airflow shall be shown on the
maps by the end of the shift on which the change is made.
§ 75.1507 Emergency response plan; refuge alternatives.
(a) The Emergency Response Plan (ERP) shall include the following for each refuge
alternative and component:
(1) The types of refuge alternatives used in the mine, i.e., a pre-fabricated self-contained unit;
a secure space, constructed in place, with an isolated atmosphere; or materials pre-positioned for
miners to use to construct a secure space with an isolated atmosphere.
(2) Procedures or methods for maintaining approved refuge alternatives and components.
(3) The rated capacity of each refuge alternative, the number of persons expected to use each
refuge alternative, and the duration of breathable air provided per person by the approved
breathable air component of each refuge alternative.
(4) The methods for providing breathable air and removing carbon dioxide with sufficient
detail of the component’s capability to provide breathable air over the duration stated in the
approval.
(5) The methods for providing ready backup oxygen controls and regulators.
(6) The methods for providing an airlock and methods for providing breathable air in the
airlock; except where adequate positive pressure is maintained.
(7) The methods for providing sanitation facilities.
(8) The methods for harmful gas removal (if necessary).
(9) The methods for monitoring gas concentrations, including charging and calibration of
equipment.
June 2008
27

1219-AB58
(10) The method for providing lighting sufficient to perform tasks.
(11) Suitable locations of the refuge alternatives and an affirmative statement that the locations
are—
(i) Not within direct line of sight of the working face; and
(ii) Where feasible, not placed in areas directly across from, nor closer than 500 feet radially
from, belt drives, take-ups, transfer points, air compressors, explosive magazines, seals, entrances
to abandoned areas, and fuel, oil, or other flammable or combustible material storage.
(b) For a refuge alternative constructed in place, the ERP shall specify that—
(1) The breathable air components shall be approved by MSHA; and
(2) The refuge alternative can withstand exposure to a flash fire of 300° Fahrenheit (F) for
3 seconds and a pressure wave of 15 psi overpressure for 0.2 seconds.
(c) For refuge alternatives consisting of materials pre-positioned for miners to use to construct
a secure space with an isolated atmosphere, the ERP shall specify—
(1) The means to store and protect materials from being damaged when moved;
(2) That the refuge alternative can withstand exposure to a flash fire of 300° F for 3 seconds
and a pressure wave of 15 psi overpressure for 0.2 seconds prior to construction and activation.
(3) The method to assure the refuge alternative is constructed and functional in 10 minutes
after a person arrives at the pre-positioned materials;
(4) That all necessary materials have been provided as a self-contained unit ready to be
activated and used within the secure space once constructed; and
(5) The means to assure establishment of approved breathable air in the refuge alternative
promptly after construction.
(d) If the refuge alternative sustains persons for only 48 hours, the ERP shall detail advanced
arrangements that have been made to assure that persons who cannot be rescued within 48 hours
will receive additional supplies to sustain them until rescue. Advance arrangements shall include
the following:
(1) Pre-surveyed areas for refuge alternatives with closure errors of less than 20,000:1.
(2) An analysis to indicate that the surface terrain, the strata, the capabilities of the drill rig,
and all other factors that could affect drilling are such that a hole sufficient to provide required
supplies and materials reliably can be promptly drilled within 48 hours of an accident at a mine.
(3) Permissions to cross properties, build roads, and construct drill sites.
(4) Arrangement with a drilling contractor or other supplier of drilling services to provide a
suitable drilling rig, personnel and support so that a hole can be completed to the refuge alternative
within 48 hours.
(5) Capability to promptly transport a drill rig to a pre-surveyed location such that a drilled
hole would be completed and located near a refuge alternative structure within 48 hours of an
accident at a mine.
(6) The specifications of pipes, air lines, and approved fans or approved compressors that will
be used.
(7) A method for assuring that within 48 hours, breathable air shall be provided.
(8) A method for assuring the immediate availability of a backup source for supplying
breathable air and a backup power source for surface installations.
(e) The ERP shall specify that the refuge alternative is stocked with the following:
(1) A minimum of 2,000 calories of food and 2.25 quarts of potable water per person per day
in approved containers sufficient to sustain the maximum number of persons reasonably expected
June 2008
28

1219-AB58
to use the refuge alternative for at least 96 hours, or for 48 hours if advance arrangements are
made under paragraph (d) of this section;
(2) Manuals for the refuge alternative and components;
(3) Sufficient quantities of materials and tools to repair components; and
(4) First aid supplies.
§ 75.1508 Training and records for examination, maintenance, transportation, and repair of
refuge alternatives and components.
(a) Persons who examine, maintain, transport, or repairing refuge alternatives and components
shall be instructed in how to perform this work.
(1) The operator shall assure that all persons assigned to examine, maintain, transport, and
repair refuge alternatives and components are trained.
(2) The mine operator shall certify, by signature and date, the training of persons who
examine, maintain, transport, and repair refuge alternatives and components.
(b) At the completion of each repair, the person conducting the maintenance or repair shall
make a record of all corrective action taken.
(c) Training certifications and repair records shall be kept at the mine for one year.

June 2008
29

File Type	application/pdf
File Title	SUPPORTING STATEMENT
File Modified	2008-06-24
File Created	2008-06-24