UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR MINE SAFETY & HEALTH ADMINISTRATION HEARING ON PROPOSED RULE FOR LOW AND MEDIUMVOLTAGE DIESELPOWERED GENERATORS NOVEMBER 4, 2004 1 P.M. LITTLE AMERICA HOTEL 500 SOUTH MAIN STREET SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84101 P.M. Panel: Rebecca J. Smith, Mediator Ronald Ford Arlie Massey Michele Curran Speakers: Tain Curtis William Farrar Jeffrey Anderson PROCEEDINGS 1 p.m. November 4, 2004    MS. SMITH: Good afternoon. My name is Becky Smith and I'm deputy director of MSHA's Office of Standards, Regulations and Variances. On behalf of Dave Loriski, assistant secretary of labor for Mine Safety & Health, I'd like to welcome you all to this public hearing this afternoon. This is the first of four hearings. The other hearings will be held as follows: On November the 16th in Birmingham, Alabama; on November the 18th in Lexington, Kentucky; and on November the 30th in Morgantown, West Virginia. The purpose of these hearings is to obtain input from the public on a proposed rule that was published in the Federal Register on June 25th, 2004. That rule would allow the use of low and mediumvoltage dieselpowered generators as an alternate  alternative means of powering electrical equipment. The generators are portable and are used to power electrical equipment in, out and around underground coal mines. Copies of the Federal Register notice containing the proposed rule are available at the registration table. I'd like to introduce the rest of the panel here with me today. On my left is Arlie Massey, who is with our technicalsupport organization. Michele Curran is with our solicitor's office, and Ron Ford is with our office of standards. This hearing is being held in accordance with Section 101 of the Federal Mine Safety and Health Act of 1977. As is the practice of MSHA, formal rules of evidence will not apply, therefore, cross examination of the hearing panel members will not be allowed but the panel may explain and clarify provisions of the proposed ruling. As moderator of this public hearing, I reserve the right to limit the amount of time each speaker is given as well as the questions of the hearing panel. Those of you who have notified us in advance of your intent to speak will be allowed to make your presentations first. I will call speakers in the order that requests were made. Following these presentations, others who request an opportunity to speak, will be allowed to do so. We invite all interested parties to present their views at this hearing and if you are sitting in the audience now and wish to speak, please sign in at the registration table. We will remain in session today until everyone who desires to speak has had an opportunity to do so. Also, if you are not speaking today, we would like for you to sign in at the attendance sheet so we will have an accurate attendance record of today's hearing. We will accept written comments and information at this hearing from any interested party, including those who are not speaking. When I call on you to speak, please come to the speaker's table and begin your presentation by identifying yourself and your affiliation for the record. If you have a prepared statement or any supporting documents that you would like to submit for the record, please leave a copy with us today. You can give written comments on this hearing to us today or you can send them to MSHA's office of standards electronically, by fax, by regular mail or hand carry using the address information in the Federal Register notice. The postcomment period on this proposed rule will end on December the 10th and submissions must be received by that date. A verbatim transcript of this hearing will be made part of the record and it will be posted on MSHA's Web site. If you would like a copy sooner, you can make your own arrangements with the court reporter. Before the speakers begin their testimony, I would like to give you some background on the proposed rule we are addressing today. Currently, 30 CFR, Section 75.701 and Section 75.901 establish the grounding requirements for electrical equipment and low and mediumvoltage threephase circuits. Over the last 13 years mine operators have been using portable low and mediumvoltage dieselpowered electrical generators as an efficient means of providing a portable source of power to move electrical equipment, however, when using these generators, mine operators are unable to comply with the electrical protection requirements of these two standards. To address their inability to comply, mine operators have requested petitions for modification from existing MSHA standards. From January 1990 through October 2003, there were 63 petitions requested and granted under 30 CFR, Section 75.701 and 75.901, affecting 56 underground coal mines. MSHA may grant a petition for modification of an existing standard as long as the alternative method proposed by the mine operator achieves the same measure of protection afforded miners at all times under the existing standard or the application of the existing standard reduces safety to miners. When MSHA grants a petition for modification, it applies only to the individual mine. Before we granted these petitions we evaluated the use of dieselpowered electrical generator equipment. We recognize that dieselpowered electrical generator equipment with sensitive electrical circuit protections reduces fire, explosion and shock hazards. When we granted the petitions, we included in the approval the requirements that the operator must follow to maintain the protection afforded by our existing standards. The major provisions of the proposed rule would require three main things. Number one: The grounding resistor to limit ground fault current to 0.5 amperes under a ground fault condition. Number two: The grounded face protection device to cause the circuit interrupting device protecting the electrical circuits to open and shut down the dieselpowered generator when not more than 90 milliamperes of fault current is detected by the system. And number three: The use of equipment testing devices and procedures that are designed to facila  facilitate safe testing of the dieselpowered electrical circuit prior to moving each piece of equipment or performing the work. We believe that this proposed rule increases miner safety by limiting the amount of voltage and current that miners can be exposed to under a ground fault condition and by reducing the possibility of a fire, shock or burn hazard through the safety features for personnel and equipment required by the standards. Our first speaker today will be Tain Curtis. MR. CURTIS: Again, for the record my name is Tain Curtis, Tain, and I'm a safety committee chairman for Local 1769 of the UMWA. I represent 268 miners at the Deer Creek mine. We produce 4 million tons annually, 4millionplus tons. We have three CM units and one longwall. From the portal  from the Deer Creek portal to the farthest penetration of the face is probably approaching 11 miles at our mine. So a diesel generator for moving equipment would probably be beneficial. At this time we do not have one. We do not use one. In Tain Curtis's opinion he sees no use for one because  and this has nothing to do with the grounding issue, it has to do with the diesel emissions, the diesel particulates in particular that are  that is emitted into the atmosphere of the coal mine. Everything that goes into the atmosphere upwind, we breathe downwind. So using a diesel generator for whatever reason would add to those emissions. Secondly, there is no provisions on this for the equipment that is being used. For example, if you was to use a long  use a generator to move a miner, there's no mention of any provisions of the requirements for moving that miner. The miner has got water jackets on the tram motors that require water to keep them under a safe operating temperature. There's no standard anywhere that I'm aware of that would require anybody to put water onto that miner to keep the tram motors cool. I understand the complexity of the grounding issue. Anytime you have a generator, you are moving the ground continually, which, in my opinion, 15 years of being a mechanic, you are opening Pandora's Box, essentially, to the grounding issue. You're moving the equipment, it's going to be bounced around, your terminals can become loose, there's  there is the stipulation in the provision that it be checked, that everything be checked prior to running it, which is a good idea, but, you know, anytime you go to move it, there's no  nothing in the standard that says that it needs to be checked during that shift that it's being used. I feel that it opens the door for the use of this equipment to be used outby simply because you don't want to take the time to put a transformer in. You could use it  there's nothing in the standard that tells how to exhaust the fumes into the returns. If it is used in a stationary position outby, that would be something that would be very beneficial to the miners, if it was vented to the return. There's so many things that are attached to the diesel, when you say the word diesel, that is detrimental to the health of the miners. I'm not saying that our company may not want one, but right now the horsepower requirements for a diesel generator are such that it's almost too big of an engine to have because of the deregulation that has to occur to a diesel engine. Having a diesel  having a diesel, anytime you use a diesel, this is attached to a generator so that means it has to run at a certain RPM for the frequency of the generator to work properly so a fire issue comes into play because usually this is on the top end of the idling  the RPM area of the generator. And I understand that we have diesel regs that would protect that but this would be a nonpermissible piece of equipment so it would not fall underneath the requirements for the safe operating temperature that is under  that is in place for permissible equipment. I have a question to ask: Would this be classified as a heavyduty piece of equipment? MS. SMITH: You want to answer that one, Ron? MR. FORD: I don't know the answer to that question. MR. CURTIS: Okay. I understand the requirements for diesel equipment and I'm not sure where this would fall under, for heavy duty or light duty or those areas. MS. SMITH: We'll take the question as part of the record and make sure that we address it  MR. CURTIS: Okay. MS. SMITH:  in the preamble of the final rule. Thank you. MR. CURTIS: I would like to say that as far as the issue with the grounding goes, again, you know, you are moving the grounded field and to the workers around it, that becomes more dangerous because it's moving with the equipment. I don't see any stipulation to have a solid ground between the generator and the piece of equipment being moved that is independent from the one in the cable. And, again, would encourage to look at the new technologies for diesel engines, the electrical engines burn better, burn cleaner. To me this is all part of a package for a diesel generator. The grounding issue is one that has been around for a long time, but to me the greater issue is the diesel motor. Again, I appreciate your time, your coming to Utah to hear from us and thank you for that opportunity. MS. SMITH: Thank you for  you mind taking a question or two? MR. CURTIS: Okay. MS. SMITH: Thank you. PANEL MEMBER: Tain, could you expand upon your statement concerning the grounding, how you feel people are exposed to added dangers there? MR. CURTIS: Okay. I'm not an electrical engineer but I understand that when you ground, you move  the ground field is going to be  with an earthground system you have a way for the current to go back to earth without exposing a person or an individual to that current; is that correct? I mean, I'm not an electrical  PANEL MEMBER: Somewhat correct. MR. CURTIS: Okay. With a diesel generator this ground  you have no field ground or earth ground, it is moving with the generator. So you eliminate that way for the current to get back if there is a disruption in the current flow. If my understanding is correct. I worry about roadways and things like that, the disruption that would happen because of vibrations, that happens in all equipment. I've not ever seen it as a big problem because of vibrations. I worry about the ground, grounding resistor, the connections made, the ground. I mean, it would be a case ground, it would have to be some way to prevent it from being able to be vibrated loose, because not only is the generator going to be vibrating from the elec  from the diesel generator, but it will also be vibrating because of the movement of dragging it along. So I don't know if that answered your question. PANEL MEMBER: Yes, it did, but I have another. MR. CURTIS: Okay. PANEL MEMBER: So you're worried that the resistor itself would become detached and that the system would not be grounded back to the neutral of the transformers. Is that your alarm? MR. CURTIS: That's part of my concern. Because this is different. In the electronics of the mine, the power circuits at the mine, power centers don't generally move. There's only one ground that moves with the equipment and that's on the end  that's at the end of the trailing cable. Now we're moving  not only moving that grounded connection but we're also moving the one on the end of the generator also just because we're simply moving it down the entry as we're tramming it along. And that does raise more of a concern because now you've got two potentials instead of just one. PANEL MEMBER: You answered my question. Thank you. MS. SMITH: Okay. Others? Thank you very much, Mr. Curtis  MR. CURTIS: Okay. Thank you. MS. SMITH:  we appreciate your testimony. Our next speaker is William Farrar. MR. FARRAR: I'm Bill Farrar. I'm a safety committeeman also, UMWA, worked at Deer Creek 29 years. I've been a diesel mechanic for about the last 15 years. And I've got a couple of safety issues that I would like to be required on the amendment that you guys are putting in for this. The first one is require CO and NO monitoring on the inby operator where all the air that's over the equipment being moved is being monitored continuously while they're taking stuff in and out of the mine. Like Tain says, when they're moving a miner, you'll have one piece of equipment dragging a 5,000gallon water tank, you'll have one pulling the generator because the miner will heat up if they're trying to pull that generator. You'll have several pieces of equipment. You might have halfamillion cubic feet of air in certain places in the mine, but we got three intakes coming into our mine. For example  a lot of mines are like ours I'm sure, there's a lot of dead air spaces in there. These guys that's moving this equipment are the ones that's getting the harmful effects of the diesel emissions, the CO and the NO, and I'd like to see it required that it be monitored when they're moving the equipment. Okay. And my second one is our mine's a big mine, like Tain was saying, it's 10, 11 miles in. When they're dragging equipment like a miner, miners are big, you can't get out of the way and our intake is our main escapeway. I would like to have a requirement that if you're moving equipment, that you have a transport vehicle on the outby side in case anything happens in the mine where any emergency or  to where somebody's got to get out. Let's see, how did I have it put? Well  okay. I'm not good at this but . . . MS. SMITH: Take your time. We got lots of time. MR. FARRAR: Several times  I mean, they break down, the equipment breaks down, it's blocking the primary escapeway. When you're tramming a miner, a great big feeder, you're pulling the shear, whatever you're pulling in there, we need to have an emergency vehicle on the outby side to transport people in case of an emergency or an accident. MS. SMITH: Okay. MR. FARRAR: And really that's my only two major concerns on that. MS. SMITH: Okay. Questions for Mr. Farrar? PANEL MEMBER: Can I ask a question, Bill? MR. FARRAR: Yeah. PANEL MEMBER: The  I'm not quite certain I understand what you want this emergency vehicle to do if it's maintained. For instance, is this vehicle with the equipment that I'm taking inside or  MR. FARRAR: Or behind  PANEL MEMBER:  you're going to be following me inside with this emergency transport? MR. FARRAR: Within a certain distance so that if something  somebody gets hurt or if there's a mine emergency, that there is transportation, because you can't get a miner out of the way, I mean, within a few minutes or whatever and there should be something behind it. We're doing it right now at our mine. If we're moving a miner in a section that's four miles in there, we'll talk to our boss, we need to have a vehicle behind us because there's a section in there cutting the coal, anything could happen  if an emergency happens, there's something out there to get them out. PANEL MEMBER: I think I understand. I  I think you did a good job but I do want to make sure that I do understand. Okay. The purpose of this emergency vehicle would be when I come to the blocked intake, all I have to do is walk around it and I can get in the other emergency vehicle and be transported outside; is that what you're telling me? MR. FARRAR: That's what I'm saying. PANEL MEMBER: Okay. Very good. That's the only question I had. MS. SMITH: Mr. Farrar, thank you very much. We appreciate your testimony. MR. FARRAR: Okay. MS. SMITH: Our next speaker is Jeffrey Anderson. MR. ANDERSON: Ms. Smith, ladies and gentlemen, I'm Jeff Anderson, I work at the Deer Creek coal mine for Energy West, member of Local 1769. Couple of concerns I'd like to bring up. First, the petition deals mainly with grounding. And one concern is in that grounding it talks about all the tests that are to be done on this grounding system each and every time this piece of equipment's used. Nowhere in there  I may have looked over it but is it possible  if that grounding resistor fails, can the frame of the machine become live from a conductor? The reason I say that is because all the tests are  to me appear to be done with power already on this machine with the electrical system. How do I ensure this grounding resistor is intact prior to even starting the machine? Everything is chassis grounded, the way this design looks to me. That's the only concern I have. If there's some way we could put a lookahead system, anything in there to ensure this grounding resistor  this grounding system is intact before the machine is ever started to, you know, avoid the potential of the frame of the machine becoming hot. Another thing it talks about is not only using diesel generator for move  transporting equipment in and around the mine, it also talks about using it for nonpermissible equipment in other parts of the mine, which to me states it could be a stationary piece of equipment. It doesn't state, you know  it talks about nonpermissible equipment, it doesn't really outline what type of equipment that would be. To me in our mine all our belt drives are nonpermissible. And the way this is wrote, it doesn't make a stipulation of what type of equipment. So, in fact, could I not take a diesel generator in and, say, run a belt drive, if for whatever reason I've lost power to my main power source, or even at an extreme extent make that a permanent power supply for a belt drive? I didn't see anywhere where it says, you know, as far as temporary operating for repairs or whatever else. Maybe there needs to be something in there that talks about a time limit to use a diesel generator to operate outby equipment. Because currently the way it looks to me is I could set it there and leave it set up there for so long. Also, once I set that in an outby area, you know, when it talked about the grounding and it's still only frame grounded, if it's sitting in a stationary location, it should be earth grounded, I feel. It would be a better protection. Also, you know, they talked about the diesel and the emissions, I'd just like to make one comment on that. The current regulations, an example being, we have 30  30 exit scoops diesel powered that we move large equipment with. The engine in that piece of equipment will produce 300 horsepower. They've been tuned to a hundred horsepower to meet the regulations. To me that's making a very inefficient engine. And going with the diesel generator, to run a generator, we're going to do the same thing. If I have a generator that requires 300 horse to run, am I going to have to triple the size of my diesel engine to run that generator like we are with our equipment now? So  and there is  you know, talking to my maintenance superintendent, there are diesel engines out there now that will produce twothirds less emissions than what we're currently running. But the approval process of getting them is  you know, the mining industry is a very small portion of manufacturers' total business as far as diesel engines go. Now, the regulations and the standard needs to be set but somehow we need to fix that problem  there's a problem, I think, of getting those diesel emissions  those diesel engines approved, you know, for the safety and the wellbeing of the miners. That's all I have. MS. SMITH: Thank you, Mr. Anderson. Questions for Mr. Anderson? PANEL MEMBER: I don't have any. PANEL MEMBER: I just have one question. I just wanted to ask: Are you saying that the  the turning of better diesel engines, that could reduce emissions that are not getting into the mines, the manufacturers just don't have an incentive to come in and get the approval up for that? MR. ANDERSON: I don't think they do. I think the mining industry is such a small portion of their business  PANEL MEMBER: Right. MR. ANDERSON:  that, you know, the way current things are now, that it's more of a hassle for them and it's nonprofitable where maybe if we could look at, all right, here's the standard, even if  at a mine by bringing an engine in there and the operator goes ahead and does the study on that and that engine meets the standard, that that should be able to be approved there and possibly not at the manufacturer. PANEL MEMBER: Now, are these engines for mobile diesel pieces of equipment or used also for  MR. ANDERSON: The ones I've talked to, mainly the superintendent, yes. PANEL MEMBER: But you're not talking about the generator. MR. ANDERSON: Well, I think the same would apply with the generator. PANEL MEMBER: It would apply to a generator, too? MR. ANDERSON: I'm sure the emissions standards, as it talks in here, are the same. It has one paragraph in this approval that talks about the emission standard of the diesel  of the generator and the diesel emissions, which would apply to that as well as any other piece of diesel equipment. PANEL MEMBER: Okay. MR. ANDERSON: So, you know, the technology's out there that we can improve our emissions and the health and welfare of our miners by looking at that. PANEL MEMBER: Okay. Thank you. MR. ANDERSON: Thank you. MS. SMITH: I'd like to ask, Mr. Boring, Mr. Stahlhut, do either of you have any questions of any of the gentlemen this morning? PANEL MEMBER: I still have one, if it's okay, Jeff. Have  are you aware of any applications for electronicapproved engines that are not being processed quickly or anything of that nature where applications have been made and they're just not going through? MR. ANDERSON: Well, currently at our mine site we have, for an example, four Dodge pickups. The engine approved  the ones we were running were approved a certain year, a certain time. They've made all the necessary adjustments to these engines and that to meet the parameters of the approval that whatever it is, we have four new trucks in there that we can't use because, you know, the  yes, they fall within the parameters of what's allowed but yet we don't have the approval on them. PANEL MEMBER: Are you saying that you don't have the Part 7 approval on these engines? MR. ANDERSON: Yeah. PANEL MEMBER: Okay. And they're Dodge trucks so we're talking about the Cummins engine. MR. ANDERSON: Yes. As I say, it's the same type of truck we're currently running, it's just a different year/model. PANEL MEMBER: And I understand it. Another question that I would like to clarify, if I could continue, is you mentioned because of  and I'm familiar with detuning engines because of the altitude. Are you asking if the same requirement would apply to a diesel engine turning a generator, was that your statement? MR. ANDERSON: Yes, you know, if we have an engine capable of doing the work. So currently by detuning those engines, instead of using one piece of equipment to move something, we use two. So to do that same work, we're using two pieces of equipment instead of one. Where one, if it was not detuned, could do that job. You know, with the diesel, if we're going to detune that engine so much, it's going to take so much horsepower to turn that generator, and if I need a hundred horse to turn the generator but I have to detune an engine, I can't use a hundred horse gen  motor for a generator, I have to go to a 300 horse. PANEL MEMBER: I understand. Thank you. That was all I had. MS. SMITH: Mr. Anderson, thank you very much for your testimony. MR. ANDERSON: Thank you. MS. SMITH: Do we have any other individuals in the audience who would like to present testimony at this time? If not, I think we'll go off the record until a quarter after two and at that time we'll come back on the record to see if we have anyone else who has come in that would like to add additional comments. And if not, then we'll close this hearing at that time. Thank you very much. (Off the record.) MS. SMITH: I'd like to go back on the record and ask if there's anyone in the audience who would like to provide further testimony at this time? Given we have no further speakers, we will close the record on this hearing. Thank you very much. (The P.M. Proceedings were concluded.) ?? NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W. (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com