Requirements for Approval of Flame-Resistant Conveyor Belts

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Mine Safety and Health Administration

30 CFR Parts 14, 18, and 75

RIN 1219-AA92

Requirements for Approval of Flame-Resistant Conveyor Belts

AGENCY: Mine Safety and Health Administration, Labor.

ACTION: Proposed rule; reopening of the record; request for public

comment and notice of public hearing.

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

SUMMARY: The Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA) is reopening

the rulemaking record on proposed revisions to requirements for

approval of flame-resistant conveyor belts for use in underground

mines. Subsequent to the record closing on the conveyor belt proposal,

MSHA published another proposed rule which would allow independent

laboratories to test and evaluate certain products MSHA approves for

use in underground mines. To allow comment on the applicability of the

independent laboratory proposal to conveyor belt testing, submission of

new relevant data, or updating of comments previously submitted, the

Agency is reopening the rulemaking record on the conveyor belt proposal

and scheduling a public hearing.

DATES: Written comments must be submitted on or before April 21, 1995.

The public hearing will be held on Tuesday, May 2, 1995, beginning

at 9 a.m. All written requests to make oral presentations for the

record should be submitted at least 5 days prior to the hearing date.

Requests may also be made by calling the MSHA Office of Standards at

703-235-1910.

The public record for the rulemaking will close on June 2, 1995.

ADDRESSES: Send written comments and requests to make oral

presentations to MSHA; Office of Standards, Regulations, and Variances;

4015 Wilson Boulevard, Room 631; Arlington, Virginia 22203. Commenters

are encouraged to submit comments on a computer disk along with a hard

copy.

The location and address for the public hearing is: Holiday Inn

Meadowlands, 340 Racetrack Road, Washington, PA 15301. The Holiday Inn

is adjacent to the Meadows Racetrack in Meadowlands approximately 5

miles north of Washington, PA.

[[Page 16590]] FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Patricia W. Silvey,

Director, Office of Standards, Regulations, and Variances, 703-235-

1910.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

On December 24, 1992, MSHA published a proposed rule to implement

new procedures and requirements for testing and approval of flame-

resistant conveyor belts and requirements for their use in underground

coal mines (57 FR 61524). The proposed revision would replace the

existing flame test for acceptance of flame-resistant belts specified

in Agency regulations. Because of the fire hazards in underground coal

mines, existing MSHA safety standards require that conveyor belts be

flame-resistant in accordance with specifications of the Secretary and

pass the flame test for conveyor belting specified in 30 CFR 18.65. The

comment period closed on March 26, 1993. Several commenters requested

that the Agency hold public hearings.

On November 30, 1994, the Agency proposed a new part 6 to 30 CFR

which would allow independent testing laboratories to test and evaluate

certain mining products for use in underground mines, as well as allow

the use of equivalent testing and evaluation requirements (59 FR

61376). Under the proposal, an independent laboratory recognized by the

Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) as a nationally

recognized testing laboratory would conduct product testing and

evaluation currently done by MSHA according to MSHA's testing and

evaluation requirements. Upon request by an applicant, the new proposal

would also enable the Agency to approve products based upon testing and

evaluation requirements other than MSHA's, provided that the

alternative requirements are equivalent to the Agency's and provide at

least the same measure of protection to miners. Several commenters on

the independent laboratory testing proposal questioned how it would

relate to the conveyor belt proposal. Since publication of the

independent laboratory testing proposal occurred after the close of the

conveyor belt record, MSHA is reopening the conveyor belt record for a

limited period of time prior to holding a hearing. This will allow all

parties to comment on the applicability of the independent laboratory

proposal to conveyor belt testing, to submit new relevant data, or to

update comments previously submitted.

The purpose of the public hearing is to receive relevant comment

and to answer questions concerning the proposal. The hearing will be

conducted in an informal manner by a panel of MSHA officials. Although

formal rules of evidence will not apply, the presiding official may

exercise discretion in excluding irrelevant or unduly repetitious

material and questions. The order of appearance will be determined by

the Agency prior to the hearing, and any unallotted time will be made

available to persons making late requests.

The hearing will begin with an opening statement from MSHA. The

public will then be given the opportunity to make oral presentations.

The hearing panel will be available to answer relevant questions during

the presentations. At the discretion of the presiding official,

speakers may be limited to a maximum of 20 minutes for their

presentations. At the end of the hearing, time will be made available

for rebuttal statements. Verbatim transcripts of the proceedings will

be taken and made part of the rulemaking record, and will be made

available for review by the public.

At the time of the hearing, MSHA will also accept written comments

and appropriate data from any party, including those not presenting

oral statements. Written comments and data will be included in the

rulemaking record. The record will remain open until June 5, 1995, to

allow for the submission of any post-hearing comments.

II. Issues

Although commenters questioned a number of provisions contained in

the proposal, some portions of the rule raised issues of particular

concern and MSHA will address the following issues at the public

hearing and specifically solicits comments, data, and pertinent

information on them, in addition to any other aspect of the proposed

rule.

A. Proposed Test

The repeatability and reproducibility of the proposed conveyor belt

test was questioned by several commenters. The Agency considers

``repeatability'' to mean the degree of duplication of test results for

a sample using a single apparatus in a specific laboratory or location.

``Reproducibility'' is considered by MSHA to mean the degree of

duplication of test results for a sample using the same type of

apparatus in a multitude of laboratories or locations. More than 700

individual tests have been conducted by MSHA and serve as a data base

to address this issue. MSHA will make available its data on

repeatability of the proposed test. In addition, MSHA requests any

information or data regarding repeatability and reproducibility,

particularly from those parties and individuals who have installed the

proposed test apparatus and have used the proposed test in evaluation

of conveyor belts.

Several commenters indicated that parameters such as humidity,

temperature, atmospheric pressure, and airflow changes affect the

proposed test results. In the development of the proposed test, factors

such as airflow and temperature were considered. The proposal specifies

controlling the temperature of the roof of the test apparatus and the

temperature of the air entering the test chamber. Also, the proposal

specifies control of the airflow through the apparatus to 200 plus or

minus 20 ft/min (61 plus or minus 6 m/min). In addition, a variety of

other parameters, such as different airflows, different lengths and

widths of test samples, and variations in the duration of the ignition

time, were evaluated during development of the proposed test. This

information was used in designing the proposed test and establishing

its comparison with the large-scale fire test results. MSHA requests

specific information or data on the experience that manufacturers and

other parties may have with respect to the effect of parameters on the

proposed test, such as temperature, humidity, atmospheric pressure, and

airflow changes.

In its comments on the proposed rule, Factory Mutual, Norwood, MA,

suggested that MSHA consider a conveyor belt test developed by its

personnel from which a ``fire propagation index'' could be determined.

Factory Mutual indicated that its test correlated with large-scale

conveyor belt fire tests conducted by the U.S. Bureau of Mines in

conjunction with MSHA. MSHA requests information from Factory Mutual

and other organizations and individuals that have used or have obtained

data from the Factory Mutual test or any other test that compares to

the proposed test.

B. Pollution Control

Another issue on which commenters expressed concern was the impact

the proposed test may have on the environment and what pollution

controls may be necessary as a result of the emissions from the testing

of conveyor belts. MSHA is interested in hearing from manufacturers who

have installed the proposed conveyor belt test apparatus and performed

testing of [[Page 16591]] conveyor belts as to the method of pollution

control that is used or is necessary to perform testing using the

proposed test.

C. Combustion Toxicity

Some commenters indicated that conveyor belts passing the proposed

tests would present more of a toxic hazard than conveyor belts meeting

the present MSHA acceptance test. MSHA requests any information or data

from manufacturers and other parties on the comparison or assessment of

the combustion toxicity of conveyor belts meeting the present

acceptance test and belts meeting the proposed test.

D. Quality Assurance

Commenters also questioned the proposal regarding the quality

assurance (control) program for maintaining conveyor belt as approved.

One commenter suggested that inspection of ingredients alone could not

ensure that conveyor belting is manufactured as approved, suggesting

that a flame test is needed for this assurance. MSHA requests

information on the current practices manufacturers use in their quality

control programs to maintain a product as approved. MSHA is

particularly interested in whether manufacturers flame test belts using

the MSHA acceptance test indicated in 30 CFR 18.65, inspect or control

ingredients, or perform a combination of both.

E. Cost Data

Commenters provided a range of data on the financial impact of the

proposed rule, which included costs of belting passing the proposed

flame test (``new'' belt), total dollar amount of the conveyor belt

market, and belt service life information. MSHA solicits comments and

data on the economic impact to all belt manufacturers and all

underground coal mines, including small manufacturers and small mine

operators. In particular, MSHA requests information for both rubber and

PVC types of conveyor belt on: (1) the quantity of belt (in feet or

meters) currently in use that would pass the proposed test; (2) the

total quantity (in feet or meters) and dollar amount of the market for

conveyor belt used in underground coal mines; (3) the cost of belt that

will pass the proposed flame test (``new'' belt) versus belt that

passes the current MSHA flame test (``old'' belt); (4) whether costs of

the ``new'' belt will decline as production increases and by how much;

and (5) the life and warranty of ``new'' belt versus ``old'' belt.

Some manufacturers and other parties have installed the proposed

MSHA test apparatus to conduct research and testing on samples of

conveyor belts. MSHA also requests information from interested parties

on the research and development costs for conveyor belt meeting the new

test.

Dated: March 27, 1995.

J. Davitt McAteer,

Assistant Secretary for Mine Safety and Health.

[FR Doc. 95-8018 Filed 3-30-95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4510-43-P