MSHA Seeks Comments on Extending Information Collection for Safety Defects, Examinations, Corrections, and Records
More From This Agency
- Labor Department Reverses Jan. 7, 2026 OMB Control Number Revision for DOL‑Only Performance Accountability System July 27, 2026
- OSHA Susan Harwood Training Grant Quarterly Progress Report ICR Submitted for OMB Review July 27, 2026
- Proposed Extension of Mine Accident, Injury and Illness Reporting and Quarterly Employment/Coal Production Data Collection July 26, 2026
- Labor Department Seeks Comments on Extending Escape and Evacuation Plans Information Collection July 25, 2026
- Proposed Extension of Hoist Operators' Physical Fitness Data Collection by MSHA July 25, 2026
Plain-English Summary
The notice announces that MSHA is proposing to extend an existing information collection concerning safety defects, examinations, corrections, and related records in mines. It is seeking public comments on the proposed collection before it is cleared under the Paperwork Reduction Act. The extension would allow MSHA to continue gathering the same data in the format it currently uses. The agency emphasizes minimizing respondent burden while ensuring data quality for mine safety oversight.
Current Status
This is a notice that is currently open for public comment on the proposed extension of the information collection.
What This Means
Under the Paperwork Reduction Act, MSHA must obtain approval before collecting information from miners or operators, and this notice initiates that pre‑clearance consultation. The agency is asking stakeholders to comment on whether the collection format, frequency, and content are clear and not overly burdensome. Comments will help MSHA assess the time and financial resources required for respondents to complete the reports. If the agency incorporates feedback, it can adjust the collection instruments to reduce paperwork. The ultimate goal is to keep the data useful for safety oversight while limiting unnecessary reporting costs for mine operators.
Who Is Affected
Mine operators, mine workers, and contractors who must report safety defects and corrective actions are directly affected. MSHA staff who review and analyze the submitted records are also stakeholders. Other federal agencies that rely on mine safety data may indirectly benefit from the continued collection. The public and advocacy groups interested in mine safety have an opportunity to influence the collection requirements through comments.
Background
The notice follows MSHA’s ongoing effort to comply with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, which mandates agencies to justify the need for information collections and minimize burden. A prior collection for safety defects and related records is expiring, prompting the need for a renewal. The Department of Labor is using this pre‑clearance process to solicit feedback before the collection is officially extended. The abstract indicates that the agency seeks to ensure data can be provided in the desired format and that respondent impact is properly assessed.
Arguments For
Extending the collection helps MSHA maintain a consistent data set on safety defects, which is essential for identifying hazardous conditions and preventing accidents. The pre‑clearance consultation aims to reduce paperwork by refining the reporting format, which could save time and money for mine operators while preserving data quality for regulators.
Arguments Against
The abstract does not highlight any significant controversy, and no specific opposition has been identified. Potential concerns could include the cumulative reporting workload for small mining operations, but the notice itself emphasizes minimizing burden.
Economic Considerations
Because the notice does not provide a formal cost estimate, any economic impact analysis must be tentative. If the collection remains unchanged, the incremental cost to respondents is likely modest, reflecting the time needed to complete existing forms. Should MSHA incorporate comment‑driven improvements, those could further reduce reporting time and associated labor costs. Conversely, if the agency adds new data elements, respondents could face higher compliance costs, though the agency’s stated goal is to avoid that outcome.
Sections beyond the plain-English summary are AI-synthesized analysis based on the sourced Federal Register filing, read, edited where needed, and approved by a human editor before publication. Full methodology: Editorial & Methodology.
← All Records