• Share
  • Email
  • Embed
  • Like
  • Save
  • Private Content
Mine Health Inspection Procedures
 

Mine Health Inspection Procedures

on

  • 1,033 views

Mine Health Inspection Procedures

Mine Health Inspection Procedures

Statistics

Views

Total Views
1,033
Views on SlideShare
1,032
Embed Views
1

Actions

Likes
1
Downloads
41
Comments
0

1 Embed 1

http://www.slideshare.net 1

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

    Mine Health Inspection Procedures Mine Health Inspection Procedures Presentation Transcript

    • MINE HEALTH INSPECTION PROCEDURES NOISE COAL AND METAL/NONMETAL
    • PURPOSE
      • Conducting Noise Sampling
      • Evaluating Sample Results
      • Implementing P-Code Policy
      • Verify operators are in compliance with the noise standard
      • Discuss technologically achievable engineering and administrative controls
    • A.&B. Noise Sampling Equipment
      • Sample for FULL SHIFT using a personal noise dosimeter -
      • Properly placed on the miner’s shoulder.
      • All Quest dosimeters must be set to parameters in Table 1. Quest Q-200, Q300, & Noise Pro DL personal noise dosimeters:
        • Have multiple internal dosimeters ; Nos. I, II & III.
      • Dosimeters and acoustical calibrators are required to be calibrated annually . Strictly adhere to the schedule to assure all dosimeters and calibrators are properly calibrated.
    • TABLE 1 Quest Parameter Settings After initial setup, Tech Support personnel will confirm the settings for Quest dosimeters during annual calibration and LOCK the codes in place. This will prohibit the settings from inadvertently being changed in the field. Measurement Parameter Value (If Applicable) Dosimeter I Dosimeter II Dosimeter III ( Action Level) (PEL) (PEL) Calibration (CA-10) 114 114 114 Range HI HI HI UL (Upper Limit Level) 117 117 117 CL (Criterion Level) 90 90 90 ER (Exchange Rate) 5 5 5 TL (Lower Threshold Level) 80 90 90 Fast/Slow (Response Time) Slow Slow Slow A/C (Frequency Weighting) A A A
    • C. Noise Sampling Strategy
      • 1-3. Identify Miner(s) to be Sampled
      • Considerations Include:
      • High Risk Occupations;
      • Exposure Conditions at the Time of Inspection;
      • Prior Sampling History at the Mine;
      • Reading of SLM or personal noise dosimeters; and,
      • Any Other Information Such as the Mine’s Sampling Records.
      • At a minimum, miners who have the greatest risk of overexposure to noise should be identified and sampled.
    • D. Pre-Inspection and Post-Inspection Procedures
      • MUST review MSHA records prior to beginning the inspection at the mine! Such as:
        • Previous Inspection Reports;
        • Previous Noise Technical Investigation results;
        • Listing of assigned P Codes (see Section N for description of P Codes); and,
        • The Uniform Mine File (Mine File).
    • Before Taking Each Sample….
      • Check the calibration label on the dosimeter and calibrator to ensure they have been calibrated within the past 12 months .
        • Note on the 2000-84 in comments section
      • Conduct a field calibration check before and after EACH sampling shift . Document on MSHA Form 2000-84
        • If check indicates dosimeter is more than +/- 1.0 dB of the calibrator, with either calibration check , the instrument or sampling results must not be used .
        • Procedural instructions for checking calibration of the instruments are contained in Appendix 1.
    • After Arriving at ANY Mine…….
      • The mine inspector must review:
      • All posted administrative controls; and, during the inspection, determine if they are being followed; and,
      • Any engineering controls put into place must also be checked to determine if they are being maintained.
      • Document this information in the notes.
      • Sampling Inspection Procedures
      • 1. Instructions to the Miner
        • a. Explain to the miner -
          • What you’re doing;
          • What the sampling device does; and,
          • Reason for the sampling (i.e., the hazard).
          • Emphasize that the personal noise dosimeter or sound level meter is not a tape recording device.
    • E. Sampling Inspection Procedures
      • 2. Dosimeters
      • Take noise exposure measurements in accordance with the instrument manufacturer’s recommendations.
        • This requires the dosimeter microphone to be located at the top of the shoulder ;
        • Midway between the neck and end of the shoulder ; and,
        • With the microphone diaphragm pointing in a vertical upward direction.
        • The microphone must be located on the shoulder that is normally between the principal noise source and the miner's ear (see Figure 1).
    • To the extent practical, the dosimeter and microphone cable must be positioned underneath exterior clothing to minimize potential safety problems and damage to the instrument. The microphone must not be covered by clothing. A wind screen should be used at all times. Figure 1. Placement of the dosimeter microphone.
      • The dosimeter must be worn by the miner whose exposure is being measured for an entire normal work shift…… ,
        • Even if the normal work shift is in excess of 8 hours.
      • Sample ONLY when conditions are judged to be:
        • NORMAL and REPRESENTATIVE .
      • If unusual conditions arise during the sampling period then the sample may have to be VOIDED.
      • Resampling must be conducted as soon as possible.
      • During each full-shift sample, inspector must observe the miner being sampled as frequently as is necessary to determine that a representative sample of the normal activities is being conducted.
      • Inspector must observe enough of the work activity to ensure that:
        • Dosimeters remain in the environment being sampled;
        • Dosimeters are properly positioned or placed on the miner for sampling;
        • Dosimeters are not damaged;
        • Normal mining activities are taking place;
        • A determination of production is made;
        • Noise controls (including administrative controls) are documented, etc.
        • Inspectors normally accompany miners out of the mine.
    • F. Inspection Documentation – Coal
      • Observations that MUST be described in the field notes:
        • Administrative noise controls posted on the mine bulletin board. Detail whether they were followed during the sampling and if a copy was provided to affected miner(s).
        • A miner refusing to wear a dosimeter.
        • Interruptions in the sampling requiring the dosimeter to be placed in the “PAUSE MODE” (i.e., miner leaving mine property).
        • Factors requiring a sample to be voided. (Includes information from the miners being sampled.)
    • F. Inspection Documentation – Coal
        • The sources of noise for the miner(s) being sampled .
        • Engineering noise controls being utilized that could affect the dose of the miners being sampled; their condition and state of maintenance.
        • If a citation is being issued, list feasible noise controls not being used to reduce the affected miner(s) dose or any other action or inaction causing the citation to be issued. (Refer to PIB 04-18.)
        • During follow-up sampling on an existing citation, detail the noise controls implemented during the abatement period.
    • F&I. Inspection Documentation /Reporting – Coal
      • An MSHA Form 7000-10P, June 93 (Revised), Noise note page must be completed during an inspection when sampling.
      • Complete the latest MSHA Form 2000-84 for each inspection where noise samples are conducted and review the information for clarity, legibility, and accuracy. Within 30 calendar days from completion of the sample, the data on the Form 2000-84 must be entered into the Coal Noise Sampling Database at either the field office or the district office.
    • K. Determination of the Feasibility of Noise Controls
      • For a noise overexposure greater than or equal to 132% of the permissible dose a feasibility determination must be made prior to issuing a citation for lack of controls.
      • Feasibility = Technological and/or Administrative Achievability + Economic Achievability
    • K. Determination of the Feasibility of Noise Controls
      • THE PROCESS
      • Determine the miner (s) dose is over the PEL
      • Describe noise sources and the condition and use of controls in the notes
      • Using the list of controls in PIB 04-18 for noise sources describes in 2.
        • Determine which are achievable in this situation
      • If all achievable controls are determined to be properly selected, installed, used, and maintained, or there are none, do not issue a citation for lack of controls, rather, initiate the P-Code process
        • See PIB 04-5, “Basis for Assigning a P-Code for Noise Overexposure
    • K. Determination of the Feasibility of Noise Controls
      • When all achievable controls have NOT been implemented in this situation, determine whether the controls are economically achievable in this particular situation
        • A reasoned estimate of the cost of the control under consideration .
        • The nature and extent of the noise exposure.
        • A comparison of cost estimates for original equipment, replacement, retrofit, and/or repairs.
        • Estimated costs of abatement would be reasonable to achieve benefits
    • K. Determination of the Feasibility of Noise Controls
      • When determining economic achievability
      • Is the cost of the controls wholly out of proportion to the reduction in noise exposure expected by their implementation?
      • If a technologically achievable or administratively achievable control is extremely costly for the operator but the expected reduction in noise exposure is minimal, it may be determined that it is not economically achievable for the operator to install the control
    • K. Determination of the Feasibility of Noise Controls
      • If a control is both technologically achievable or administratively achievable and economically achievable, then it is feasible for implementation by the mine operator.
      • Once feasibility (economic and technological or administrative achievable) is established for controls not in place, then issue the citation for the overexposure and set an abatement period.
      • Once all feasible controls are implemented and sampling indicates continued overexposure, proceed to a P-Code. (See Appendix 6, PIB 04-5, “Basis for Assigning a P-Code for Noise Overexposure.”)
    • K. Determination of the Feasibility of Noise Controls
      • In some cases, it will be necessary to seek supervisory guidance when making the decision whether to require a control. Consultation is strongly encouraged. Follow the district procedures for consulting with the field office supervisor, district staff, Division of Health or Technical Support staff for advice. Inform the operator or contractor that a miner’s noise exposure is at a citable level and a citation could be issued at a later date.
    • L. Compliance Determination
    • Hearing Conservation Program 62.150
      • A system of monitoring
      • Provisions for the use of hearing protectors (PPE)
      • Audiometric testing
      • Training
      • Record Keeping
    • System of Monitoring 62.110
      • Sound Level Meter or Dosimeter set at specific ranges
      • Dose determined without adjustment for the use of any hearing protector
      • Reflect the miners full work shift
      • Key words “evaluate sufficiently”
      • Levels obtained will determine which sections of HCP will apply to each miner
    • Operator Documentation of Monitoring
      • Notify miners of exposure level for any miners that equal or exceed action level 62.110(d)
      • Maintain records of notifications 62.110(e)
    • Divide employees into five groups:
      • Below Action Level…less than 50% dose, less than 85 TWA
      • Action Level…. 50% dose or above, 85 dBA TWA or more
      • PEL (permissible exposure level)…more than 100% dose or 90 dBA TWA
      • Dual Hearing Protection Level…more than 800% dose or 105 dBA TWA
      • Maximum Exposure Level…115 dBA for more than 15 minutes total or 30 seconds continuous
    • Step 1 - Eliminate Group 5 ‘Maximum Exposure Level’
      • No provisions for this group in program
      • Replace or substitute equipment
      • Engineer below that level
      • Isolate from human exposure
    • Requirements of remaining groups in Hearing Conservation Program
      • Below Action Level (No action required other than initial noise measurements) leaving three groups in program:
      • Action Level
      • PEL
      • Dual Hearing Protection
    • Action Level
      • Enroll Miner in HCP 62.120
      • Voluntary Use of Hearing Protectors... mandatory if 62.160(c) applies (chart)
      • Voluntary Audiometric Testing (chart)
      • Training 62.150
      • Record Keeping 62.150
    • Permissible Exposure Level (PEL)
      • Requirements of Action Level ( monitoring, voluntary audiometric testing, training, record keeping )
      • All feasible engineering and administrative controls to reduce exposure to below the PEL (even if these controls alone don’t achieve compliance) 62.130 (a) & (b)
      • Post administrative controls and provide copy to affected miner 62.130(a)
      • Mandatory use of hearing protectors (chart)
    • Dual Hearing Protection Level
      • Meet all the requirements of the PEL level ( monitoring, mandatory use of hearing protectors, voluntary audiometric testing, training, record keeping, engineering and administrative controls )
      • Ensure the concurrent use of both an ear plug and ear muff type hearing protectors 62.140
    • Enforcement Actions
      • Citations issued under 62.120 are based on readings taken from line “V. 85 Action Level Dose” MSHA Form 2000-84, if this dose is 66 percent or greater and the effected miner is not enrolled in a Hearing Conservation Program as defined under 62.150
      • Citations issued under 62.130(a) are based on readings from line “W. 90 PEL Dose”, if the dose is 132 percent or greater, deficiencies of the HCP are documented in section 8. “Condition or Practice” of the citation. (only one citation)
    • Hearing Conservation Program
      • A system of monitoring
      • Provisions for the use of hearing protectors (PPE)
      • Audiometric testing
      • Training
      • Record Keeping
    • Hearing Protectors 62.160
      • Provide to any miner who exceeds the action level 62.160(a)
      • Training 62.180
      • Ensure in good condition, fitted and maintained 62.160(a)(3)
      • Provide and replace at no cost to miner 62.160(a)(4)
      • Choice from at least two muff types….
    • … and two plug types 62.160(a)(2)
    • …hearing protectors
      • Allow for a change in choice if need be due to medical pathology of the ear 62.160(a)(5)
    • Hearing Conservation Program
      • A system of monitoring
      • Provisions for the use of hearing protectors (PPE)
      • Audiometric testing
      • Training
      • Record Keeping
    • Audiometric Testing 62.170 Voluntary on part of miner
      • By qualified personnel
      • At no cost to miner
      • Within 6 months of enrollment in HCP (will serve as baseline if one not currently existing)
      • Subsequent annual Audiograms every 12 months thereafter
    • Audiometric Testing records …62.171
      • Name and job classification of miner tested
      • Copies of all the miner’s audiograms
      • Evidence audiograms conducted per Part 62
      • Any exposure determinations and follow up examinations
      • Maintain these records length of employment + six months
      • Make records available for inspection by ARs
    • Results of audiogram...
      • Provide miner written results within 10 days of receiving results 62.175(a)
      • If STS occurred comply with 62.174
      • Mine operator must report any reportable hearing loss to MSHA in accordance with part 50 of 30 CFR
    • Hearing Conservation Program
      • A system of monitoring
      • Provisions for the use of hearing protectors (PPE)
      • Audiometric testing
      • Training
      • Record Keeping
    • Training…62.180
      • Within 30 days of enrollment into HCP and every 12 months thereafter as long as miner remains in HCP.
      • Affects of noise on hearing
      • Purpose and value of hearing protectors
      • Advantages and disadvantages of each type
      • Care fitting and use of each type
    • Training…62.180
      • Requirements of Part 62
      • Operator’s and miner’s tasks in maintaining noise controls
      • The purpose and value of audiometric testing and summary of procedures
      • Certify the date and maintain records for employment +6 months
    • Hearing Conservation Program
      • A system of monitoring
      • Provisions for the use of hearing protectors (PPE)
      • Audiometric testing
      • Training
      • Record Keeping
    • Records 62.190
      • Available to DOL and HHS
      • Available to miner or with miner’s written consent, the miner’s designee
      • Available to miner’s representative
      • First copy at no cost, subsequent at reasonable cost
    • Records 62.190
      • Must be transferred by operator to any successor operators, successor operator must maintain
      • Must use baseline obtained by original operator
      • Maintain for employment plus six months
    • Written records
      • Monitoring and miner notification 62.110(e)
      • Administrative controls 62.130(a)
      • Audiometric testing and evidence done in compliance with 30 CFR Part 62 62.171(c)
      • Certification of training 62.180(b)
    • Written records
      • would also recommend record of hearing protectors selected by each miner
        • was miner given a selection?
      • would also recommend record if miner declines to take an audiogram
        • was miner offered audiogram?
    • Is Dual Hearing Protection Worn? > 1056% Cite 62.140 Yes No Set Abatement Period L.2. Permissible Exposure Level
    • L. Compliance Determination
      • Consistent with the Commission decisions, in enforcing the noise standard, MSHA will continue to consider three factors in determining whether engineering controls are feasible at a particular mine. These factors are:
        • (a) the nature and extent of the exposure;
        • (b) the demonstrated effectiveness of available technology; and,
        • (c) whether the committed resources are wholly out of proportion to the expected results.
    • 3. Citations and Orders
      • Single noise source causing an overexposure to multiple miners
        • One citation
      • Multiple noise sources causing an overexposure to multiple miners
        • Each overexposure cited separate
      • For each overexposure cited
        • One citation incorporating all provisions of Part 62
    • 3. Citations and Orders
      • Where a mine has been assigned a "P"-code, failure to comply with any of the conditions of the "P"-code, including provisions of 30 CFR 62.150, will result in a separate citation for each miner affected. For example, if three miners exposed to the noise generated from a single piece of equipment that is covered by a "P"-code are observed not wearing hearing protection, three separate citations will be issued.
    • M. Violation Abatement Procedures
      • 1. Upon issuance of a citation for a violation of 62.120, Action Level, the following abatement procedures must be followed:
        • a. The citation can be terminated when it is determined that the mine operator has enrolled the affected miner(s) in a Hearing Conservation Program that fully complies with all elements of section 62.150.
        • b. The citation can be terminated when audiometric testing has been scheduled. If subsequent inspections reveal the miner is still exposed at or above the Action Level and did not receive the testing another citation is issued. If circumstances warrant, this citation should reflect a higher degree of negligence and/or gravity.
    • M. Violation Abatement Procedures
      • If the mine operator fails to abate the citation within the abatement period, re-sample and if a citable action level exposure is found, issue a 104(b) order.
      • If a 104(b) order is issued, the affected miner(s) must be withdrawn from the “affected area” and the “affected area” portion of the order must list the miner’s location and occupation. The order cannot be lifted until compliance with all five elements of 62.150 has been achieved. Documentation outlining what actions were taken to terminate the citation is required.
    • M. Violation Abatement Procedures
      • 2. Upon issuance of a citation for a violation of 62.130, Permissible Exposure Level, the following abatement procedures must be followed:
        • a. The inspector must conduct a follow-up full-shift noise exposure sample upon expiration of the abatement time as originally set or extended if feasible noise controls have been implemented which may achieve compliance.
        • b. If the sample shows compliance:
    • M. Violation Abatement Procedures
          • (1) The citation must be terminated; and
          • (2) Documentation outlining what actions were taken to terminate the citation is required.
        • c. If compliance is not achieved and MSHA determines that additional feasible controls exist:
          • (1) Additional engineering and/or administrative controls are required to be installed or implemented to lower the miner’s noise exposures further.
    • M. Violation Abatement Procedures
        • d. If compliance is not achieved and MSHA determines that all feasible engineering and administrative controls have been installed or implemented, and all other requirements of 62.130 have been met (e.g., feasible engineering controls are being maintained, miners are enrolled in an HCP that complies with all parts of 62.150, operator-provided hearing protection is being worn, and administrative control procedures are being followed, have been posted on the mine bulletin board and copies provided to affected miners):
    • M. Violation Abatement Procedures
      • (1). A P-code will be assigned for MSHA recordkeeping purposes;
      • (2) The citation will be terminated; and
      • (3) The termination language will reference the P-code minimum acceptable engineering and administrative controls and conditions in detail.
    • M. Violation Abatement Procedures
      • For violations of the permissible exposure level, a citation will not be terminated until the operator has complied with each of the following requirements:
        • (1). All feasible engineering and administrative controls have been implemented and maintained; and
        • (2). Administrative control procedures have been posted on the mine bulletin board, copies have been provided to affected miners, and the procedures are being followed; and
        • (3). Affected miners have been enrolled in an HCP that complies with ALL of section 62.150; and
    • M. Violation Abatement Procedures
      • 3. Upon issuance of a citation for a violation of 62.140, Dual Hearing Protection Level, the following abatement procedures must be followed:
        • a. If the operator does not provide the miner with dual hearing protection within the short abatement period, and an extension is not warranted, issue a 104(b) order. If a 104(b) order is issued, the affected miner(s) must be withdrawn from the “affected area” and the “affected area” portion of the order must list the miner’s location and occupation. Upon the abatement of the conditions or practices cited in the original citation the order can be terminated. Documentation outlining what actions were taken to terminate the citation is required.
    • M. Violation Abatement Procedures
        • b. After the miner is provided with dual hearing protection, the mine operator must continue actions to lower miners’ exposures to the PEL, using the 90 dBA PEL dose. The citation should be extended to allow the mine operator time to comply with the requirements of 62.130.
        • c. The inspector must conduct a follow-up full-shift noise exposure sample upon expiration of the abatement time as originally set or extended if feasible noise controls have been implemented which may achieve compliance.
        • d. If it is found that the noise exposure has been reduced to or below the DHPL, but still exceeds the PEL, compliance with 62.130 must still be achieved before the citation can be terminated. (See PEL abatement procedure Section M.2.)
    • N. P-codes
      • There are two scenarios where a P-code will be issued.
      • They are……
    • 1. No Citation Issued
      • MSHA determines that a miner’s full shift exposure exceeds the PEL; and,
        • All feasible engineering and administrative controls have already been put in place and are maintained and,
        • All affected miners are enrolled in a Hearing Conservation Program that complies with all elements of 62.150 and,
        • Hearing protection is being provided and worn and,
        • The mine operator has posted and provided affected miners with copies of any procedures for administrative controls being used.
      • Then, NO Citation will be issued & P Code review process will be initiated . (Appendices 3, 4 & 5)
    • 2. Citation Issued
      • MSHA determines that a miner’s full shift exposure exceeds the PEL; and,
        • All feasible engineering and administrative controls have not been implemented, or are implemented but not maintained;
        • All affected miners are not enrolled in a Hearing Conservation Program that complies with all elements of 62.150;
        • Hearing protection has not been provided or is not being worn; or
        • The mine operator has not posted or provided affected miners with copies of administrative controls being used.
      • A citation will be issued and an abatement period set.
      • If compliance still cannot be achieved after ALL conditions above have been met, then a P Code review process will be initiated.
      • P Code documentation must be developed in accordance with the P Code Documentation Checklist (See Appendix 3).
      • Information will then be referred to the District Manager for a recommendation.
        • If the DM believes P-code is warranted, Manager reviews the situation in consultation with field enforcement staff, headquarters’ officials, and MSHA technical experts.
        • Review includes evaluation of the circumstances surrounding the overexposure, with particular emphasis on assessing the feasibility and effectiveness of control options.
      If either scenario exists:
      • If MSHA determines that a P Code is warranted-
        • It will be assigned to the miner’s occupation .
        • P CODES ARE NOT ASSIGNED TO SPECIFIC PIECES OF MINING EQUIPMENT OR AREAS OF THE MINE.
        • The approved P Code will be transmitted to the mine operator through the DM.
        • All P Codes will be identified by a tracking number.
      • If a P Code is issued –
        • Operator must continue to abide by requirements in 62.130 and the P Code parameters, whether a citation has been issued or not.
      • District offices will assure that -
        • Periodic review of the P Code determines the parameters of the P Code are being followed.
      • P Codes can be rescinded
        • Operator fails to comply with specified P code parameters; or,
        • Sampling demonstrates the operator has reduced miners’ exposures to PEL; or,
        • New feasible technology becomes available and mine operator refuses to implement the technology; or,
        • Any requirements of 62.130 are not complied with.
    •