Proposed Rule2025-11647
Improving and Eliminating Regulations; Diesel Particulate Matter Emission Limits in Underground Coal Mines
Primary source
Metadata and text below are from the Federal Register, a public-domain U.S. government work. Always verify the official published version before relying on it for any legal matter.
Published
July 1, 2025
Issuing agencies
Labor DepartmentMine Safety and Health Administration
Abstract
MSHA is proposing to revise 30 CFR part 72 by removing outdated requirements for diesel particulate matter (DPM) emission limits for permissible diesel-powered equipment and non-permissible heavy-duty diesel-powered equipment operated in underground coal mines. These revisions would streamline the current requirements for underground coal mine operators while maintaining the same level of protections for miners who work with such equipment.
Full Text
<html>
<head>
<title>Federal Register, Volume 90 Issue 124 (Tuesday, July 1, 2025)</title>
</head>
<body><pre>
[Federal Register Volume 90, Number 124 (Tuesday, July 1, 2025)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 28418-28421]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[FR Doc No: 2025-11647]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Mine Safety and Health Administration
30 CFR Part 72
[Docket No. MSHA-2025-0074]
RIN 1219-AC05
Improving and Eliminating Regulations; Diesel Particulate Matter
Emission Limits in Underground Coal Mines
AGENCY: Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA), Department of
Labor.
ACTION: Proposed rule; request for comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: MSHA is proposing to revise 30 CFR part 72 by removing
outdated requirements for diesel particulate matter (DPM) emission
limits for permissible diesel-powered equipment and non-permissible
heavy-duty diesel-powered equipment operated in underground coal mines.
These revisions would streamline the current requirements for
underground coal mine operators while maintaining the same level of
protections for miners who work with such equipment.
DATES: Comments must be received on or before July 31, 2025.
ADDRESSES: All submissions must include RIN 1219-AC05 or Docket No.
MSHA-2025-0074. You should not include personal or proprietary
information that you do not wish to disclose publicly. If you mark
parts of a comment as ``business confidential'' information, MSHA will
not post those parts of the comment. Otherwise, MSHA will post all
comments without change, including any personal information provided.
MSHA cautions against submitting personal information.
You may submit comments and informational materials, clearly
identified by RIN 1219-AC05 or Docket No. MSHA-2025-0074, by any of the
following methods:
1. Federal E-Rulemaking Portal: <a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a>. Follow
the online instructions for submitting comments for MSHA-2025-0074.
2. Email: <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#f28888bfa1bab3df919d9f9f979c8681b2969d9edc959d84"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="1f6565524c575e327c7072727a716b6c5f7b707331787069">[email protected]</span></a>. Include ``RIN 1219-AC05'' in the
subject line of the message.
3. Regular Mail or Hand Delivery: MSHA, Office of Standards,
Regulations, and Variances, Room C3522, 200 Constitution Avenue NW,
Washington, DC 20210. Before visiting MSHA in person, call 202-693-9440
to make an appointment.
No telefacsimiles (``faxes'') will be accepted.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jessica D. Senk, Acting Director,
Office of Standards, Regulations, and Variances, MSHA at 202-693-9440
(voice). This is not a toll-free number.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
MSHA is proposing to remove existing provisions from 30 CFR part
72. Existing provisions in Sec. Sec. 72.500 and 72.501 contain
outdated requirements for DPM emission limits for permissible diesel-
powered equipment and non-permissible heavy-duty diesel-powered
equipment. The provisions in Sec. Sec. 72.500(a), 72.501(a), and
72.501(b) contain outdated effective dates that are no longer relevant.
Removing these provisions would not reduce protections afforded to
miners because the requirements are outdated and are no longer
applicable to underground coal mines.
II. Discussion
Existing paragraph (a) of Sec. 72.500 and existing paragraphs (a)
and (b) of Sec. 72.501 list outdated effective dates for DPM emission
limits for permissible diesel-powered equipment and non-permissible
heavy-duty diesel-powered equipment in underground coal mines. MSHA
proposes to amend Sec. 72.500 to remove existing paragraph (a). MSHA
also proposes to revise paragraph (b) which would contain the current
DPM emission limit for permissible diesel-powered equipment in
underground coal mines to remove the no longer necessary compliance
date. MSHA also proposes to amend Sec. 72.501 to remove existing
paragraphs (a) and (b). MSHA also proposed to revise paragraph (c) of
Sec. 72.501 which would contain the current DPM emission limit for
non-permissible heavy-duty diesel-powered equipment, generators and
compressors in underground coal mines to remove the no longer necessary
compliance date. Removing these provisions would not reduce protections
afforded to miners because they are outdated. As a result of removing
Sec. Sec. 72.500(a), 72.501(a), and 72.501(b), MSHA also proposes
conforming amendments to Sec. 72.503(e) to remove references to
Sec. Sec. 72.500(a) and 72.501(a). These proposed actions reflect
MSHA's experience and ongoing review of existing regulations to ensure
they remain necessary, effective, and aligned with current technologies
and mining practices.
MSHA seeks comments on any aspects of this proposed rule.
[[Page 28419]]
III. Procedural Issues and Regulatory Review
A. Review Under Executive Orders 12866 and 13563
Executive Order (E.O.) 12866, ``Regulatory Planning and Review'' 58
FR 51735 (Oct. 4, 1993), requires agencies, to the extent permitted by
law, to (1) propose or adopt a regulation only upon a reasoned
determination that its benefits justify its costs (recognizing that
some benefits and costs are difficult to quantify); (2) tailor
regulations to impose the least burden on society, consistent with
obtaining regulatory objectives, taking into account, among other
things, and to the extent practicable, the costs of cumulative
regulations; (3) select, in choosing among alternative regulatory
approaches, those approaches that maximize net benefits; (4) to the
extent feasible, specify performance objectives, rather than specifying
the behavior or manner of compliance that regulated entities must
adopt; and (5) identify and assess available alternatives to direct
regulation, including providing economic incentives to encourage the
desired behavior, such as user fees or marketable permits, or providing
information upon which choices can be made by the public.
E.O. 13563, ``Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review'' 76 FR
3821 (Jan. 21, 2011), requires agencies to use the best available
techniques to quantify anticipated present and future benefits and
costs as accurately as possible. E.O. 13563 reaffirms the principles of
E.O. 12866 while calling for improvements in the nation's regulatory
system to promote predictability, reduce uncertainty, and use the best,
most innovative, and least burdensome tools for achieving regulatory
ends.
E.O. 12866 and E.O. 13563 direct agencies to assess all costs and
benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if regulation is
necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize net benefits.
E.O. 13563 emphasizes the importance of quantifying both costs and
benefits, reducing costs, harmonizing rules, and promoting flexibility.
Under section 3(f) of E.O. 12866, a ``significant regulatory
action'' is a regulatory action that is likely to result in a rule that
may:
(1) have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more,
or adversely affect in a material way he economy, a sector of the
economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public
health or safety, or state, local, or tribal governments or communities
(also referred to as economically significant);
(2) create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an
action taken or planned by another agency;
(3) materially alter the budgetary impact of entitlements, grants,
user fees, or loan programs or the rights and obligations of
recipients; or
(4) raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal
mandates, the President's priorities, or the principles set forth in
the E.O.
Under section 6(a) of E.O. 12866, the Office of Management and
Budget's (OMB's) Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA)
determines whether a regulatory action is significant and whether
Agencies are required to submit the regulatory action to OIRA for
review. Removing the provisions concerning outdated requirements for
DPM emission limits would not impose new compliance costs to
underground coal mine operators or reduce the protections afforded to
miners. This proposed rule is determined to not constitute a
``significant regulatory action'' because it does not meet any of the
four ``significant regulatory action'' criteria under section 3(f) of
E.O. 12866. Accordingly, this proposed rule was not submitted to OIRA
for review under E.O. 12866.
No alternatives were considered for this proposed deregulatory
action.
B. Review Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) of 1980, as amended by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA) of 1996,
requires preparation of an Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
(IRFA) for any rule that by law must be proposed for public comment,
unless the agency certifies that the rule, if promulgated, will not
have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities. The RFA defines small entities to include small businesses,
small organizations, including not-for-profit organizations, and small
governmental jurisdictions. MSHA reviewed this proposed rule under the
provisions of the RFA, which eliminates burdensome regulations.
Therefore, MSHA initially concludes that the impacts of the proposed
rule would not have a ``significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities,'' and that the preparation of an IRFA is not
warranted. MSHA will transmit this certification and supporting
statement of factual basis to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the
Small Business Administration for review under 5 U.S.C. 605(b).
C. Review Under the Paperwork Reduction Act
The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.)
provides for the Federal Government's collection, use, and
dissemination of information. The goals of the Paperwork Reduction Act
include minimizing paperwork and reporting burdens and ensuring the
maximum possible utility from the information that is collected under 5
CFR part 1320. The Paperwork Reduction Act requires Federal agencies to
obtain approval from OMB before requesting or requiring ``a collection
of information'' from the public.
This proposed rule imposes no new information collection or record-
keeping requirements. Accordingly, OMB clearance is not required under
the Paperwork Reduction Act.
D. Review Under Executive Order 13132
E.O. 13132, ``Federalism'' 64 FR 43255 (August 10, 1999), imposes
certain requirements on Federal agencies formulating and implementing
policies or regulations that preempt State law or that have federalism
implications. The E.O. requires agencies to examine the constitutional
and statutory authority supporting any action that would limit the
policymaking discretion of the States and to carefully assess the
necessity for such actions. The E.O. also requires agencies to have an
accountable process to ensure meaningful and timely input by State and
local officials in the development of regulatory policies that have
federalism implications.
MSHA has examined this proposed rule and has determined that it
would not have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the
relationship between the national government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of
government.
E. Review Under Executive Order 12988
With respect to the review of existing regulations and the
promulgation of new regulations, section 3(a) of E.O. 12988, ``Civil
Justice Reform'' 61 FR 4729 (Feb. 7, 1996), imposes on Federal agencies
the general duty to adhere to the following requirements: (1) eliminate
drafting errors and ambiguity; (2) write regulations to minimize
litigation; (3) provide a clear legal standard for affected conduct
rather than a general standard; and (4) promote simplification and
burden reduction. Regarding the review required by section 3(a),
section 3(b) of E.O. 12988
[[Page 28420]]
specifically requires that Executive agencies make every reasonable
effort to ensure that the regulation: (1) clearly specifies the
preemptive effect, if any; (2) clearly specifies any effect on existing
Federal law or regulation; (3) provides a clear legal standard for
affected conduct while promoting simplification and burden reduction;
(4) specifies the retroactive effect, if any; (5) adequately defines
key terms; and (6) addresses other important issues affecting clarity
and general draftsmanship under any guidelines issued by the Attorney
General.
Section 3(c) of E.O. 12988 requires Executive agencies to review
regulations in light of applicable standards in section 3(a) and
section 3(b) to determine whether they are met or it is unreasonable to
meet one or more of them. MSHA has completed the required review and
determined that, to the extent permitted by law, this proposed rule
meets the relevant standards of E.O. 12988.
F. Review Under the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA)
requires each Federal agency to assess the effects of Federal
regulatory actions on State, local, and Tribal governments and the
private sector. Public Law 104-4, sec. 201 (codified at 2 U.S.C. 1531).
For a regulatory action likely to result in a rule that may cause the
expenditure by State, local, and Tribal governments, in the aggregate,
or by the private sector of $100 million or more in any one year
(adjusted annually for inflation), section 202 of UMRA requires a
Federal agency to publish a written statement that estimates the
resulting costs, benefits, and other effects on the national economy.
(2 U.S.C. 1532(a), (b)). The UMRA also requires a Federal agency to
develop an effective process to permit timely input by elected officers
of State, local, and Tribal governments on a ``significant
intergovernmental mandate,'' and requires an agency plan for giving
notice and opportunity for timely input to potentially affected small
governments before establishing any requirements that might
significantly or uniquely affect them.
MSHA examined this proposed rule according to UMRA and its
statement of policy and determined that the proposal does not contain a
Federal intergovernmental mandate, nor is it expected to require
expenditures of $100 million or more in any one year by State, local,
and Tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector. As
a result, the analytical requirements of UMRA do not apply.
G. Review Under the National Environmental Policy Act
The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969 (42 U.S.C.
4321 et seq.), requires each Federal agency to consider the
environmental effects of regulatory actions and to prepare an
environmental impact statement on Agency actions that would
significantly affect the quality of the environment; unless the action
is considered categorically excluded under 29 CFR 11.10. MSHA has
reviewed the proposed rule in accordance with NEPA requirements and the
Department of Labor's NEPA procedures (29 CFR part 11). As a result of
this review, MSHA has determined that this proposed rule would not
impact air, water, or soil quality, plant or animal life, the use of
land or other aspects of the human environment. Therefore, MSHA has not
conducted an environmental assessment nor provided an environmental
impact statement.
H. Review Under the Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act,
1999
Section 654 of the Treasury and General Government Appropriations
Act, 1999 (Pub. L. 105-277) requires Federal agencies to issue a Family
Policymaking Assessment for any rule that may affect family well-being.
This proposed rule would not have any impact on the autonomy or
integrity of the family as an institution. Accordingly, MSHA has
concluded that it is not necessary to prepare a Family Policymaking
Assessment.
I. Review Under Executive Order 12630
Pursuant to E.O. 12630, ``Governmental Actions and Interference
with Constitutionally Protected Property Rights'' 53 FR 8859 (March 18,
1988), MSHA has determined that this proposed rule would not result in
any takings that might require compensation under the Fifth Amendment
to the U.S. Constitution.
J. Review Under the Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act,
2001
Section 515 of the Treasury and General Government Appropriations
Act, 2001 (44 U.S.C. 3516, note) provides for Federal agencies to
review most disseminations of information to the public under
information quality guidelines established by each agency pursuant to
general guidelines issued by OMB. OMB's guidelines were published at 67
FR 8452 (Feb. 22, 2002). MSHA has reviewed this proposed rule and has
concluded that it is consistent with applicable policies in the OMB
guidelines.
K. Review Under Executive Order 13175
E.O. 13175, ``Consultation and Coordination With Indian Tribal
Governments'' 65 FR 67249 (Nov. 9, 2000), requires agencies to consult
with tribal officials when developing policies that may have ``tribal
implications.'' This proposed rule does not have ``tribal
implications'' because it will not ``have substantial direct effects on
one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes.''
Accordingly, under E.O. 13175, no further Agency action or analysis is
required.
L. Review Under Executive Order 13211
E.O. 13211, ``Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly
Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use'' 66 FR 28355 (May 22,
2001), requires agencies to publish a statement of energy effects when
a rule has a significant energy action that adversely affects energy
supply, distribution, or use. MSHA has reviewed this proposed rule for
its energy effects. For the energy analysis, this proposed rule will
not exceed the relevant criteria for adverse impact.
M. Review Under Additional Executive Orders and Presidential Memoranda
MSHA has examined this proposed rule and has determined that it is
consistent with the policies and directives outlined in E.O. 14154,
``Unleashing American Energy'' 90 FR 8353 (Jan. 29, 2025); E.O. 14192,
``Unleashing Prosperity Through Deregulation'' 90 FR 9065 (Feb. 6,
2025); and the Presidential Memorandum, ``Delivering Emergency Price
Relief for American Families and Defeating the Cost-of-Living Crisis''
90 FR 8245 (Jan. 28, 2025). This proposed rule is expected to be an
E.O. 14192 deregulatory action.
List of Subjects in 30 CFR Part 72
Coal; Mine safety and health.
For the reasons set forth in the preamble, and under the authority
of the Federal Mine Safety and Health Act of 1977, as amended by the
Mine Improvement and New Emergency Response Act of 2006, MSHA proposes
to amend chapter I of title 30 of the Code of Federal Regulations as
follows:
[[Page 28421]]
SUBCHAPTER O--COAL MINE SAFETY AND HEALTH
PART 72--HEALTH STANDARDS FOR COAL MINES
0
1. The authority citation for part 72 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 30 U.S.C. 811, 813(h), 957.
Subpart D--Diesel Particulate Matter--Underground Areas of
Underground Coal Mines
0
2. Amend Sec. 72.500 by removing and reserving paragraph (a) and
revising paragraph (b) to read as follows:
Sec. 72.500 [Amended].
(a) [Reserved]
(b) Each piece of permissible diesel-powered equipment operated in
an underground area of an underground coal mine must emit no more than
2.5 grams per hour of diesel particulate matter.
0
3. Amend Sec. 72.501 by removing and reserving paragraphs (a) and (b)
and revising paragraph (c) to read as follows:
Sec. 72.501 [Amended].
(a) [Reserved]
(b) [Reserved]
(c) Each piece of nonpermissible heavy-duty diesel-powered
equipment (as defined by Sec. 75.1908(a) of this part), generator or
compressor operated in an underground area of an underground coal mine
must emit no more than 2.5 grams per hour of diesel particulate matter.
* * * * *
0
4. Revise Sec. 72.503(e) to read as follows:
Sec. 72.503 Determination of emissions; filter maintenance;
definition of ``introduced''.
* * * * *
(e) For purposes of Sec. 72.502(a), the term ``introduced'' means
any piece of equipment whose engine is a new addition to the
underground inventory of engines of the mine in question, including
newly purchased equipment, used equipment, and equipment receiving a
replacement engine that has a different serial number than the engine
it is replacing. ``Introduced'' does not include a piece of equipment
whose engine was previously part of the mine inventory and rebuilt.
James P. McHugh,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Policy, Mine Safety and Health
Administration.
[FR Doc. 2025-11647 Filed 6-30-25; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4520-43-P
</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>Indexed from Federal Register on July 1, 2025.
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.