30 Day FR Notice

95294

Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 248 / Tuesday, December 27, 2016 / Notices

asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

performed covered functions as defined
in § 199.3.
Reminder of Method for Operators To
Obtain User Name and Password for
Electronic Reporting
In previous years, PHMSA attempted
to mail the DAMIS user name and
password to operator staff with
responsibility for submitting DAMIS
reports. Based on the number of phone
calls to PHMSA each year requesting
this information, the mailing process
has not been effective. Pipeline
operators have been submitting reports
required by Parts 191 and 195 through
the PHMSA Portal (https://
portal.phmsa.dot.gov/pipeline) since
2011. Each company with an Office of
Pipeline Safety issued Operator
Identification Number should employ
staff with access to the PHMSA Portal.
The user name and password required
for an operator to access DAMIS and
enter calendar year 2016 data will be
available to all staff with access to the
PHMSA Portal in late December 2016.
When the DAMIS user name and
password is available in the PHMSA
Portal, all registered users will receive
an email to that effect. Operator staff
with responsibility for submitting
DAMIS reports should coordinate with
registered PHMSA Portal users to obtain
the DAMIS user name and password.
Registered PHMSA Portal users for an
operator typically include the U.S.
Department of Transportation
Compliance Officer and staff or
consultants with responsibility for
submitting annual and incident reports
on PHMSA F 7000- and 7100-series
forms.
For operators that have failed to
register staff in the PHMSA Portal for
Parts 191 and 195 reporting purposes,
operator staff responsible for submitting
DAMIS reports can register in the
PHMSA Portal by following the
instructions at: http://
opsweb.phmsa.dot.gov/portal_message/
PHMSA_Portal_Registration.pdf.
Pursuant to §§ 199.119(a) and
199.229(a), operators with 50 or more
covered employees, including both
operator and contractor staff, are
required to submit DAMIS reports
annually. Operators with less than 50
total covered employees are required to
report only upon written request from
PHMSA. If an operator has submitted a
calendar year 2014 or later DAMIS
report with less than 50 total covered
employees, the PHMSA Portal message
may state that no calendar year 2016
DAMIS report is required. Some of these
operators may have grown to more than
50 covered employees during calendar
year 2016. The PHMSA Portal message

VerDate Sep<11>2014

20:45 Dec 23, 2016

Jkt 241001

will include instructions for how these
operators can obtain a calendar year
2016 DAMIS user name and password.
Issued in Washington, DC, on December
21, 2016, under authority delegated in 49
CFR 1.97.
Alan K. Mayberry,
Associate Administrator for Pipeline Safety.
[FR Doc. 2016–31220 Filed 12–23–16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–60–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Pipeline and Hazardous Materials
Safety Administration
[Docket No. PHMSA–2015–0205]

Pipeline Safety: Information Collection
Activities
Pipeline and Hazardous
Materials Safety Administration
(PHMSA), DOT.
ACTION: Notice and request for
comments.
AGENCY:

On May 13, 2016, in
accordance with the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995, the Pipeline and
Hazardous Materials Safety
Administration (PHMSA) published a
notice in the Federal Register to invite
comments on an information collection
under Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) Control No. 2137–0522 to revise
three forms: (1) PHMSA F 7100.1
Incident Report—Gas Distribution
System; (2) PHMSA F 7100.2 Incident
Report—Natural and Other Gas
Transmission and Gathering Pipeline
Systems; and (3) PHMSA F 7100.3
Incident Report—Liquefied Natural Gas
(LNG) Facilities, and the instructions
associated with the Forms. PHMSA also
invited comments on PHMSA F 7000–
1 Accident Report-Hazardous Liquid
Pipeline Systems and its associated
instruction under OMB control number
2137–0047.
During the 60-day comment period,
PHMSA received 10 comments from
stakeholders in response to the
proposed form revisions. All
commenters, except one, supported the
overall proposed changes to enhance
pipeline safety. PHMSA is publishing
this notice to respond to the specific
comments received and to announce
that the information collection will be
submitted to OMB for approval.
DATES: Comments must be submitted on
or before January 26, 2017.
ADDRESSES: Send comments regarding
the burden estimate, including
suggestions for reducing the burden, to
OMB, Attention: Desk Officer for the
Office of the Secretary of
SUMMARY:

PO 00000

Frm 00197

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4703

Transportation, 725 17th Street NW.,
Washington, DC 20503. You may also
send comments by email to [email protected].
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Angela Dow by telephone at 202–366–
1246, by fax at 202–366–4566, or by
mail at U.S. Department of
Transportation, PHMSA, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., PHP–30,
Washington, DC 20590–0001.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background
Section 1320.8(d), title 5, Code of
Federal Regulations, requires PHMSA to
provide interested members of the
public and affected entities an
opportunity to comment on information
collection and recordkeeping requests.
This notice identifies proposed changes
to information collections that PHMSA
will submit to OMB for approval. In
order to streamline and improve the
data collection processes, PHMSA is
revising the incident report forms for
both hazardous liquid and gas operators.
OMB Control Number 2137–0047,
which covers the collection of
hazardous liquid incident data, expires
on December 31, 2016. OMB Control
Number 2137–0522, which currently
covers the collection of both annual
report and incident data for gas
operators, expires on October 31, 2017.
To simplify the renewal process of these
data collections in the future, PHMSA
proposes collecting gas incident and gas
annual reports under separate OMB
control numbers. To achieve this,
PHMSA plans to request a new OMB
control number for the three gas
incident forms currently under OMB
Control No. 2137–0522. The remaining
reports under this information
collection—the Gas Transmission, LNG,
and Mechanical Fitting Failure annual
reports—will remain under their current
OMB control number.
The 10 comments that PHMSA
received in response to the May 13,
2016, Federal Register notice and
request for comment, 81 FR 29943, came
from the following parties: one public
interest group (Pipeline Safety Trust
(PST)); five from industry organizations
(American Petroleum Institute (API)Association of Oil Pipelines (AOPL)
joint submission, API, American Gas
Association (AGA), Interstate Natural
Gas Association of America (INGAA),
and Common Ground Alliance (CGA));
three natural gas operators (DTE Gas
Company (DTE), Southwest Gas
Corporation (SW), Paiute Pipeline
Company (PPC)); and one manufacturer
of compression fitting (Norton

E:\FR\FM\27DEN1.SGM

27DEN1

Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 248 / Tuesday, December 27, 2016 / Notices

asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

McMurray Manufacturing Company
(NORMAC)).
A. PHMSA F 7100.1 Incident Report—
Gas Distribution System
AGA, DTE, and, SW commented on
PHMSA F 7100.1, Gas Distribution
Incident Report. The comments are
summarized and addressed below.
1. DTE noted that ‘‘Day Light
Savings’’ in A4.b should be ‘‘Day Light
Saving.’’ PHMSA has made the
correction.
2. In response to removing the
questions about ‘‘Incident Resulted
From’’ (previous A8), DTE
recommended retaining the ability for
operators to report ‘‘NO RELEASE OF
GAS’’ or a volume of zero in the form,
particularly Parts A7 and A8. PHMSA
has ensured the electronic submittal of
the gas distribution form accepts ‘‘zero’’
in Parts A7 and A8.
3. DTE noted that there does not
appear to be a data entry field provided
for the ‘‘Initial Operator NRC Report
Number’’ in Part A18 and suggested
adding one. PHMSA confirms that Part
A19 reads ‘‘Initial Operator National
Response Center Report Number’’ and
the electronic submission will allow the
entry of the report number or the
operator can choose ‘‘NRC Notification
Required But Not Made.’’
4. DTE noted that ‘‘the statement in
the Federal Register Notice for this
Information Collection Activity
inferring that gas distribution systems
are not typically shut down during an
incident is inaccurate. While it is true
that operators generally wish to
minimize the effect of incidents on
customer supply, portions of the gas
distribution system may be isolated and
shut down to make repairs by closing
valves or by squeezing pipe on both
sides of the damage. However, there are
infrequent occurrences of having to shut
down an entire distribution system.’’ In
acknowledgement to the ‘‘infrequent
occurrence’’ of having to shut down
distribution systems, PHMSA has
proposed to remove those specific
questions for ‘‘shut downs.’’ PHMSA
acknowledges that pipeline operators
typically control the flow of gas in the
smallest possible portion of the system.
This change would allow stakeholders
to understand the actions taken by the
operator to control the flow of gas
during incident response and Part A20
should provide a more complete
understanding of the operator’s
response.
5. DTE recommended adding
‘‘unknown’’ to Parts A21a and A21c.
AGA recommended adding ‘‘unknown’’
to Part A21c. PHMSA does not believe
‘‘unknown’’ should be an option in Part

VerDate Sep<11>2014

20:45 Dec 23, 2016

Jkt 241001

A21 ‘‘Did the gas ignite?’’ Operators
should have that information during a
reportable incident. SW recommended
revising Part A21c to ‘‘Estimated
Volume of Gas Consumed by Fire’’ from
‘‘Volume of Gas Consumed by Fire.’’
PHMSA agrees and revised the form to
accommodate estimation rather than
precise volume information. PHMSA
understands that the calculation of gas
consumed by fire requires some
assumptions and estimates. However,
PHMSA believes this information is
important to understand the
consequence of gas releases.
6. DTE commented that it will be
unduly burdensome to determine the
number of persons evacuated and the
duration of each person’s evacuation in
order to provide a mathematical average
length of evacuation for Part A23. On
the current form, PHMSA collects the
number of persons evacuated from
buildings. To estimate the impact of
evacuations, it is necessary to determine
their length. This data would enable a
more thorough determination of the
benefit of proposed regulations. When
an incident includes evacuations,
pipeline operators may have to estimate
the length of evacuation for each
building and estimate the number
people evacuated from each building.
PHMSA revised Part A23 to say
‘‘Estimated Average Length of
Evacuation.’’
7. DTE recommended that PHMSA
allow the ability to report ‘‘zero’’ for
‘‘Depth of Cover’’ in Part B3a. PHMSA
confirms that operators will be able to
enter ‘‘zero’’ for the ‘‘Depth of Cover’’ in
Part B3a.
8. PHMSA will add ‘‘unable to
determine’’ as an option to Part C2e
‘‘Did the EFV activate?’’ as DTE
recommended. Actions taken by persons
other than the operator may not leave
sufficient evidence to discern if an EFV
activated.
9. DTE recommended the cost of gas
in Part D7 should be the unit cost rather
than the billed unit costs, exclusive of
operator overheads and taxes. PHMSA
is seeking market price of gas to
calculate the consequence of the
incident. The unit cost should include
all operator overheads, but not taxes.
PHMSA has revised the instructions
accordingly.
10. DTE recommends retaining the
cost of ‘‘operator’s emergency response’’
in Part D2c. PHMSA is seeking to
capture the consequence of an incident
in Part D2 where Part D2a is the cost of
public and non-operator property
damage and Part D2b is the estimated
cost of operator’s property damage and
repairs. AGA recommends that the
question be re-worded to ‘‘estimated

PO 00000

Frm 00198

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4703

95295

cost of emergency response incurred by
operator.’’ PHMSA understands that
emergency responses are provided by
both non-operator resources (city/town)
and operator’s resources and sometimes
operators reimburse the non-operator
emergency response portion. Therefore,
PHMSA is proposing to collect one
emergency response cost irrespective of
who provides the service. PHMSA does
not believe it should add ‘‘incurred by
operator’’ since it is requesting the
estimated cost of emergency response
for the incident. PHMSA understands it
is an estimated cost.
11. SW recommends ‘‘Total Cost’’ be
revised to ‘‘Estimated Total Cost’’ in D2i
to remain consistent with the
‘‘estimated’’ costs used to calculate this
total. PHMSA agrees and has made the
changes on the form.
12. In Part D PHMSA is proposing to
collect number of persons injured, but
not requiring overnight inpatient
hospitalization, in two categories. The
category proposed in D4 is for persons
treated in a medical facility, but not
admitted overnight. The category
proposed in D5 is for persons treated by
emergency medical technicians at the
scene of an incident. These additional
categories would more fully capture the
consequences of an incident. DTE is
concerned that PHMSA would ‘‘expect
a gas operator to chase ambulances to
determine how many on-site treatments
were administered by EMT.’’ Currently,
operators report the number of
overnight, inpatient hospitalizations
resulting from an incident. In order to
accurately report, operators must
communicate with injured parties or
medical providers to determine the
number of overnight, inpatient
hospitalizations. Operators need this
same communication to determine the
number of persons treated at a medical
facility but not admitted overnight.
Under the Health Insurance Portability
and Accountability Act of 1996, medical
providers are permitted, but not
required, to disclose protected health
information without an individual’s
authorization in a number of situations.
PHMSA encourages operators to
communicate directly with injured
parties and seek disclosure from
medical providers as a last resort.
PHMSA expects the number of persons
treated on scene, but not in a medical
facility, will be readily available. AGA
suggested allowing ‘‘Unknown’’ to be
reported instead of the number of
injuries. When an operator has no
knowledge of injuries in the new
proposed categories, PHMSA expects
the operator to report zero, not
unknown.

E:\FR\FM\27DEN1.SGM

27DEN1

asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

95296

Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 248 / Tuesday, December 27, 2016 / Notices

13. DTE requested that PHMSA
remove Parts D6 and D7 to report the
number of residential buildings and
business buildings affected. SW requests
PHMSA to define ‘‘affected.’’ In the
instructions, PHMSA proposes to define
‘‘affected’’ as ‘‘evacuated or required
repair.’’ PHMSA has added ‘‘Evacuated
or Required Repair’’ next to ‘‘Buildings
Affected’’ on the form.
14. AGA recommended that PHMSA
add § 192.621 (MAOP High pressure
distribution system) and § 192.623
(MAOP Low pressure distribution
systems) as sections listed under Part
E3a. PHMSA agrees and revised the
form to remove the option for ‘‘Other’’
and add code references § 192.621 and
§ 192.623.
15. DTE noted that the threshold of
110 percent of the MAOP in Part E4 is
not appropriate for all distribution
systems and recommended
incorporating the pressure limits
allowed in § 192.201(a). PHMSA agrees
and has revised Part E4 by removing
‘‘110% MAOP’’ and adding ‘‘the
applicable allowance in § 192.201.’’
16. DTE questioned the relevance of
the type of odorization system used for
gas at the point of failure. PHMSA
believes types of odorization in E5 is
important information it needs in its
incident report because it will help
PHMSA and its state partners to
correlate incident investigation findings
with the information submitted by the
operator on the form. PHMSA also notes
this information is easily available to
operators.
17. DTE noted that information
regarding the type and source of stray
current required in Parts G1.2a and
G1.2b may not be easily obtained and
readily available within the 30-day
reporting period. PHMSA already
collects information regarding whether
‘‘Stray Current’’ was the ‘‘Type of
Corrosion.’’ When an operator
determines stray current is the type of
corrosion, it will also know the data
required in Parts G1.2a and G1.2b.
PHMSA agrees with DTE that
determining the type of corrosion
typically requires metallurgical analysis
and comprehensive investigation of the
pipe environment. PHMSA expects that
operators would report the type of
corrosion in a supplemental report.
PHMSA does not believe this
information will cause any undue
hardship for gas distribution operators
since only one out of 701 gas
distribution incident reports submitted
to PHMSA since 2010 indicated stray
current as the type of corrosion.
18. DTE asks PHMSA to clarify Part
G2. PHMSA’s instruction on Part G2
says ‘‘High Winds’’ includes damage

VerDate Sep<11>2014

20:45 Dec 23, 2016

Jkt 241001

caused by wind induced forces. Select
this category if the damage is due to the
force of the wind itself. Damages caused
by impact from objects blown by wind
are to be reported under Part G4—Other
Outside Force Damage. PHMSA
provided Tree/Vegetation Root as a
separate category under Part G2 and as
per the instruction ‘‘Tree/Vegetation
Roots includes damages caused by tree
and vegetation roots.’’ Therefore, if high
winds topple trees or vegetation and
cause tree/vegetation roots to pull and
damage distribution mains or service
lines, the cause should be reported
Under Part G2 ‘‘Trees/Vegetation
Roots,’’ not under Part G4 ‘‘Other
Outside Force Damage.’’
19. PHMSA agrees with AGA’s
recommendation that ‘‘Damage from
Snow/Ice Impact or Accumulation’’
should be added to Part G2, Natural
Force Damage.
20. DTE was unable to identify new
reporting requirements for excavation
damage. The redlined form and
instructions in the docket reflect the
proposed addition of Parts E3b and E3c,
which address reporting requirements
for excavation damage.
21. API/AOPL recommended that
PHMSA add two additional fields to
Part G3 of the hazardous liquid accident
report form. The two additional fields
are ‘‘exempting authority’’ and
‘‘exempting criteria.’’ PHMSA agrees
this additional information would be
valuable on all PHMSA incident forms,
so it proposes adding them to the gas
distribution incident report as Parts
G3.3d and G3.3e.
22. While AGA commends PHMSA
for collecting additional information on
‘‘Damage by Car, Truck, or Other
Motorized Vehicle/Equipment NOT
Engaged in Excavation’’ in Part G4, DTE
alleges that it is not an operator’s
responsibility to investigate and
determine whether a driver violated
laws. PHMSA understands that
operators may not have answers to all
questions about driver conduct, and
points out that ‘‘unknown’’ is an option.
PHMSA will accept AGA’s
recommendation and clarify in the
instruction for Part G4.8 to note that
operator should answer ‘‘no’’ if the
driver was experiencing a medical
condition at the time of incident.
23. AGA noted that Part G4.12 should
refer to Part G4.11 and not Part G4.10.
PHMSA has revised the question.
24. AGA and DTE advised PHMSA to
consider Part G5 mechanical fitting
failure data in light of requirements
under § 192.1009, which requires the
submittal of PHMSA F 7100.1–2
Mechanical Fitting Failures after an
incident. In response, PHMSA proposes

PO 00000

Frm 00199

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4703

to replace all data about ‘‘Mechanical
Fitting’’ and ‘‘Compression Fitting’’
failures in Part G5 with the report ID for
PHMSA F 7100.1–2 Mechanical Fitting
Failures. If the PHMSA F 7100.1–2
report has not been submitted before the
incident report, ‘‘Report Pending’’ can
be submitted in Part G5. This change
will alleviate the concern of SW about
the lot number and model number for
mechanical fittings.
25. DTE requested an option of
‘‘Unknown’’ in Part G6.4b for
‘‘manufactured by’’ and in Part G6.4c for
‘‘Year Manufactured.’’ Part G6.4b is a
text field and operators can type
unknown in the field. PHMSA has
added ‘‘Unknown’’ as an option in Part
G6.4c.
26. DTE requested PHMSA remove
the ‘‘Contributing Factors’’ in Part J and
does not believe that the National
Transportation Safety Board’s (NTSB)
recommendation is applicable to gas
distribution system. PHMSA believes
this information would help
stakeholders develop a more thorough
understanding of the incident and ways
to prevent future incidents in all
pipeline systems. PHMSA agrees with
AGA’s recommendation to clarify that
Part J pertains only to the contribution
factor(s) while the apparent cause is
reported in Part G.
PHMSA F 7100.2 Incident Report—
Natural and Other Gas Transmission
and Gathering Pipeline Systems
PST, AGA, DTE, SW, PPC, and INGA,
and API commented on PHMSA F
7100.2, Gas Transmission and Gathering
Systems Incident Report. The comments
are summarized and addressed below.
1. DTE noted that ‘‘Day Light
Savings’’ in Part A4b should be ‘‘Day
Light Saving.’’ PHMSA has made the
correction.
2. INGAA recommended that PHMSA
incorporate logic in the online form to
require all times to be later than the
time entered in Part A4 for time and
date of the incident. API indicated it
believes ‘‘PHMSA is requesting the
same information in both A4 and A13’’
and requested that Part A4 be deleted.
PHMSA believes there are certain cases
where Part A4 will not represent the
earliest time reported. Part A4
represents the earliest date and time
when one or more definitions of an
incident in § 191.3 is met. Part A13
represents the earliest time the operator
identified the failure. In some cases, the
operator may become aware of a failure
before an incident reporting criteria is
met. In other cases, one or more
incident reporting criteria may be met
before the operator becomes aware of
the failure.

E:\FR\FM\27DEN1.SGM

27DEN1

asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 248 / Tuesday, December 27, 2016 / Notices
3. API questioned whether the time
zone specified in Part A4a is the default
time zone for the remaining questions in
the form. PHMSA confirms that the time
zone identified in Part A4a is the default
time zone (including day light saving
time in Part A4b) for the rest of the
form.
4. INGAA and DTE recommended
retaining Part A8 ‘‘Incident resulted
from’’ since those incidents that do not
involve a release of gas can be analyzed
separately. DTE recommended that
PHMSA should retain the ability for
operators to report ‘‘NO RELEASE OF
GAS’’ or a volume of zero in the form,
particularly Parts A7 and A8. PHMSA
has ensured the electronic submittal of
the form accepts zero in Parts A7 and
A8. INGAA recommended that PHMSA
keep Part A8 so that those incidents
without release of gas can be analyzed
separately from those that involve
release of gas. As PHMSA noted before,
volumes of zero in Parts A7 and A8 will
accomplish that goal.
5. API opined that the term
‘‘identified’’ is vague in Part A12 and
requested that it be replaced with
‘‘initial indication.’’ PHMSA does not
have any evidence that Part A12
wording ‘‘How was the incident initially
identified by the operator’’ is confusing
to operators as this question has been in
place since 2010 without issue. PHMSA
does not think API’s recommendation
‘‘What was the Operator’s initial
indication of the Accident’’ would add
value to the data collected.
6. API recommended replacing the
phrase ‘‘Local/State/Federal Emergency
Responders’’ with ‘‘Emergency
Responders (local/state/federal)’’ in Part
A17a–c. PHMSA does not believe this
change would add value to the data
collected.
7. API suggests that PHMSA define
‘‘Confirmed Discovery’’ in Part A19. On
July 10, 2015, PHMSA published a
proposed rule that includes defining
‘‘Confirmed Discovery’’ and adding it to
the form. 80 FR 39916. PHMSA is
currently reserving Part A19 for
‘‘Confirmed Discovery’’ until a Final
Rule is published.
8. DTE noted that there does not
appear to be a data entry field provided
for the Initial Operator NRC Report
Number in Part A20b and suggested that
PHMSA add one. PHMSA confirms that
Part A20 reads ‘‘Initial Operator
National Response Center Report
Number’’ and the electronic submission
will allow the data entry for the report
number or the operator can choose
‘‘NRC Notification Required But Not
Made.’’
9. DTE recommends adding
‘‘UNKNOWN’’ to Parts A21a and A21c.

VerDate Sep<11>2014

20:45 Dec 23, 2016

Jkt 241001

AGA recommends PHMSA adds
‘‘unknown’’ to A21c. PHMSA does not
believe ‘‘unknown’’ should be an option
in A21a ‘‘Did the gas ignite?’’ Operators
should have that information during a
reportable incident. PPC and SW
recommend that PHMSA revise A21c to
‘‘Estimated Volume of Gas Consumed by
Fire’’ from ‘‘Volume of Gas Consumed
by Fire.’’ PHMSA agrees and revised the
form to accommodate estimation rather
than precise volume information.
PHMSA understands it is sometimes
difficult for operators to accurately
determine the volume of gas consumed
by fire. However, PHMSA believes an
estimate is important to understand the
consequences of a gas release.
10. DTE recommended adding ‘‘Not
Applicable—One Way Feed,’’ and ‘‘Not
Applicable—No Downstream Valve’’ or
similar language in Parts 22d through
22f. PHMSA believes the option for
Operator Control (and associated
mandatory text field) in Parts A22a and
A22d will allow operators to enter an
explanation more efficiently than
adding an exhaustive list of options.
11. DTE noted that it has experienced
situations where a pipeline facility was
involved that had no unique milepost or
survey station associated with it, or had
multiple mileposts or survey stations
associated with it due to it being a
junction of several pipelines. DTE
requests PHMSA to expand Part B6 to
allow for a free entry of a facility name.
Part B6 is free text entry. PHMSA has
added an option to choose ‘‘Not
Applicable’’ in Part B6, which would
require no data in Part B7.
12. PHMSA does not believe INGAA’s
suggestion to change ‘‘Area of Incident
(as found)’’ in Part B10 to ‘‘Area of
Incident (at the time of incident)’’
would improve the quality of the data
collected. ‘‘As found’’ ensures that
operators report what they found upon
arrival at the incident site.
13. API noted there should be
additional questions and clarifications
on Part B11. API requested PHMSA to
add the option to select ‘‘Bored/Drilled’’
for water crossing under Part B11, and
also to add ‘‘Is this water crossing 100
feet or more in length from high water
mark to high water mark?’’ PHMSA
agrees with the API suggestions and has
revised the form accordingly.
14. DTE recommended adding
‘‘Unknown’’ as a response option for
Parts C2 through C5. In Part C2,
operators can choose ‘‘Material other
than Carbon Steel or Plastic’’ and
specify ‘‘Unknown’’ in the text field.
PHMSA does not believe ‘‘Unknown’’
should be an option for Part C3. If the
operator is reporting an incident, it will
know within 30 days which Part C3

PO 00000

Frm 00200

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4703

95297

option is applicable. Operators already
have the option to choose ‘‘Unknown’’
for Part C5 and PHMSA has added the
option for ‘‘Unknown’’ in Part C4.
15. PHMSA incorporated API’s
suggestion to add ‘‘Was this a Puddle/
Spot Weld?’’ when ‘‘Pipe’’ is chosen in
Part C3. API also recommended
removing ‘‘auxiliary piping’’ from all
items listed in C3 and keeping the term
as a separate item. PHMSA understands
that removing auxiliary piping will
impact long term trending, but is
proposing to look at the items, such as
compressor and regulator/control valve,
as whole items that include auxiliary
piping, connections, valves, and
equipment.
16. INGAA recommended entering the
original test pressure at the time of
construction in Part C3 if ‘‘Pipe or
Weld/Fusion, including heat affected
zone’’ is selected. PHMSA is proposing
to collect the ‘‘Post- construction
pressure test value’’ in Part G5.4.
PHMSA does not want to collect the
same data in multiple places.
17. INGAA recommended removing
‘‘Not Flammable’’ as an option in Part
D3. PHMSA believes the option for ‘‘Not
Flammable’’ is necessary since not all
pipelines subject to reporting on the
form transport flammable gas.
18. DTE recommended the cost of gas
in Part D7 should be the unit cost rather
than the billed unit costs, exclusive of
operator overheads and taxes. PHMSA
is seeking market price of gas to
calculate the consequence of the
incident. The unit cost should include
all operator overheads, but not taxes.
PHMSA has revised the instructions
accordingly.
19. PST recommended clarifying the
instructions for Part D7d, Property
Damage—Other, to state that any cost of
security used during investigation or
repairs following an incident must be
included in the property damage
calculation on the incident report.
PHMSA agrees and has modified the
instructions accordingly.
20. PPC recommended that ‘‘Total
Cost’’ be revised to ‘‘Estimated Total
Cost’’ to remain consistent with the
estimated costs used to calculate the
total. PHMSA agrees and has replaced
‘‘Total Cost’’ with ‘‘Estimated Total
Cost’’ in Part D7i.
21. AGA noted that Part D7c should
be consistent with gas distribution
incident form. PHMSA agrees and has
revised Part D7c to say ‘‘Estimated cost
of emergency response.’’ AGA
recommended that the question be reworded as ‘‘Estimated cost of emergency
response as incurred by the operator.’’
PHMSA does not think re-wording is
necessary because the instructions

E:\FR\FM\27DEN1.SGM

27DEN1

asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

95298

Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 248 / Tuesday, December 27, 2016 / Notices

clarify Part D7c is seeking to collect
information regarding the costs incurred
by the operator.
22. PPC believes that operators will be
unable to account for persons seeking
outpatient care the in the days following
an incident. DTE believes that an
operator of a transmission system must
not be expected to ‘‘chase ambulances’’
to determine how many on-site
treatments were administered by EMTs
or the number of people treated at
medical facilities without admission.
PHMSA is proposing to collect number
of persons injured, but not requiring
overnight, inpatient hospitalization in
two categories. The first proposed
category is persons treated in a medical
facility, but not admitted overnight. The
second proposed category is persons
treated on scene. These additional
categories would more fully capture the
consequences of an incident. Currently,
operators report the number of
overnight, inpatient hospitalizations
resulting from an incident. In order to
accurately report, operators must
communicate with injured parties or
medical providers to determine the
number of overnight, inpatient
hospitalizations. Operators need this
same communication to determine the
number of persons treated at a medical
facility but not admitted overnight.
Under the Health Insurance Portability
and Accountability Act of 1996, medical
providers are permitted, but not
required, to disclose protected health
information without an individual’s
authorization in a number of situations.
PHMSA encourages operators to
communicate directly with injured
parties and seek disclosure from
medical providers as a last resort.
PHMSA expects the number of persons
treated on scene, but not in a medical
facility, will be readily available.
23. API recommended combining
Parts D8 and D9 to report the number
of individuals who sustained OSHA
recordable incidents. Parts D8 and D9
are not the same as OSHA recordable
incidents as the injured person may not
be a pipeline worker. PHMSA does not
need an OSHA recordable incident
number. PHMSA needs to collect the
data proposed in Parts D8 and D9 to
understand the total human
consequence of incidents.
24. INGAA recommended the word
‘‘affected’’ in Parts D10 and D11 be
changed to ‘‘damaged.’’ API offered
adding the words ‘‘evacuated or
required repair’’ next to ‘‘Buildings
Affected.’’ PHMSA accepts the wording
offered by API and added ‘‘Evacuated or
Required Repair’’ next to ‘‘Buildings
Affected.’’ This change alleviates

VerDate Sep<11>2014

20:45 Dec 23, 2016

Jkt 241001

INGAA’s and DTE’s concern about the
subjective nature of the word ‘‘affected.’’
25. INGAA noted that ‘‘if any ignition
occurs, there could be some terrestrial
impact. There could be a single bird
involved in the fire.’’ The questions
about terrestrial and wildlife impacts
have been part of the PHMSA hazardous
liquid accident report form since 2010
and pipeline operators have not
expressed any confusion over its intent.
Since INGAA has not proposed more
adequate instructions, PHMSA has
made no change in response to the
comment. Operators are able to explain
the extent of terrestrial and wildlife in
the Part H text field.
26. AGA noted that the reference to
maximum operating pressure (MOP) in
Part E2c is not appropriate for gas
transmission and gathering systems and
should be removed. DTE noted that Part
E2c should refer to maximum allowable
operating pressure (MAOP) rather than
MOP. PHMSA has revised Part E2c from
MOP to MAOP.
27. DTE recommended incorporating
all of the pressure limits allowed in
§ 192.201(a)(2), particularly for
pipelines operating near 75% of SMYS,
those at or above 12 psig but below 60
psig, and those operating below 12 psig.
PHMSA has revised the Part E3 to
remove 100% MAOP and adding ‘‘The
applicable allowance in § 192.201.’’
28. DTE recommended changing Part
E5 from ‘‘Was the gas odorized at the
point of failure?’’ to ‘‘whether the gas
was required to odorized in accordance
with § 192.615,’’ and ‘‘whether the gas
was odorized in accordance with
§ 192.615.’’ PHMSA acknowledges the
need for clarification and will revise
Part E5 to ‘‘Was gas at the point of
failure required to be odorized in
accordance with § 192.615?’’ and, if yes,
‘‘Was gas at the point of the failure
odorized in accordance with
§ 192.615?’’
29. API suggested changing Part E10c
to replace the word ‘‘detection’’ with the
phrase ‘‘initial indication.’’ PHMSA
does not believe this change would
improve the quality of the data collected
by the question. API also recommended
changing Part E10d to replace the word
‘‘confirmation’’ with the phrase
‘‘confirmed discovery.’’ On July 10,
2015, PHMSA published a proposed
rule that includes defining ‘‘confirmed
discovery.’’ 80 FR 39916. PHMSA will
not add the term ‘‘confirmed discovery’’
to the form as part of this information
collection.
30. PHMSA acknowledges DTE’s note
that Parts G1.2a and G1.2.b may not be
readily available within 30 days of the
incident. This data can be submitted

PO 00000

Frm 00201

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4703

through a supplemental report after the
information becomes available.
31. AGA recommended adding
‘‘Damage from Snow/Ice Impact or
Accumulation’’ under the Part G2 subcause. PHMSA has added it. DTE asked
which cause section should be used
when high winds topple tress and cause
tree roots to damage pipelines. In this
example, PHMSA advises the operator
to select ‘‘Tree/Vegetation Root’’ under
Part G2 because the tree roots created
the damage.
32. DTE was unable to identify new
reporting requirements for excavation
damage. The redlined form and
instructions in the docket reflect the
proposed addition of Parts E3.3b and
E3.3c, which address reporting
requirements for excavation damage.
33. API/AOPL recommended that
PHMSA add two additional fields to
Part G3 of the hazardous liquid accident
report form. The two additional fields
are ‘‘exempting authority’’ and
‘‘exempting criteria.’’ PHMSA
acknowledges this additional
information would be valuable on all
PHMSA incident forms, so it proposes
adding them to the gas transmission and
gathering incident report as Parts G3.3d
and G3.3e.
34. API requested adding a statement
on the form to ensure that operators are
aware they need to complete questions
5 through 11 when G4, ‘‘Damage by Car,
Truck, or Other Motorized Vehicle/
Equipment NOT Engaged in
Excavation’’ is selected. PHMSA’s
proposal includes the phrase
recommended by API prior to questions
5 through 11 in Part G4.
35. PHMSA acknowledges DTE,
INGAA, and API’s concerns that
operators may not have answers to
questions 5 through 11 under G4,
‘‘Damage by Car, Truck, or Other
Vehicle/Equipment NOT Engaged in
Excavation.’’ PHMSA’s proposal
includes ‘‘Unknown’’ as an option for
questions about driver conduct. PHMSA
does not believe these questions need to
be removed.
36. API requested examples or
clarification of the term ‘‘Designrelated’’ proposed in Part G5. PHMSA
has revised the instructions to include
an example of improper design
practices.
37. PHMSA understands that
information regarding ‘‘Hard Spot’’ in
Part G5.3 may not be readily available
to the operator as DTE noted. DTE also
noted that ‘‘it is not anyone’s interest to
file supplemental Incident reports to
add or correct information not readily
available at the time of the incident.’’
PHMSA disagrees and expects essential

E:\FR\FM\27DEN1.SGM

27DEN1

asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 248 / Tuesday, December 27, 2016 / Notices
data may not be available within 30
days of the incident.
38. API requested clarification of
‘‘erosion/abnormal wear’’ under
question 6 in Part G6, ‘‘Equipment
Failure.’’ The words used in all 15
factors under question 6 in G6 have
common meanings found in the
dictionary. PHMSA does not believe
that additional definitions would
increase the value of the instructions.
39. API suggested updating the list in
Part J2 to include more specific tools
and currently available In-Line
Inspection (ILI) technology. Under API’s
proposal, two ‘‘Ultrasonic’’ tool runs
could be entered in Part J2. However,
API proposes collecting additional data
about the tool once. The additional data
proposed by API must be collected for
each tool run. API also recommended
collecting the tool propulsion system.
Under API’s proposal, twenty-two tool
runs could be reported in Part J2. The
tool propulsion system must be
collected for each tool run. PHMSA has
modified Part J2 in response to API’s
comments. PHMSA has made additional
improvements to the ‘‘Tool Technology’’
options and additional tool data for each
technology. Also, PHMSA proposes
collecting the tool propulsion system
and detailed tool data for each run
reported in Part J2.
40. INGAA proposed changing Part J2
to read, in part, ‘‘Other than an initial
pressure test recorded in G5,’’ however,
Part J2 is applicable for Parts G1, G3,
G4, and G5. PHMSA has added
clarification to the form that the initial
post-construction pressure test is not to
be reported in Part J2.
41. INGAA and AGA recommended
revising the introduction to Part K,
‘‘Contributing factors’’ to ensure that the
apparent cause of the incident is not
selected in Part K. PHMSA has revised
the introduction to Part K to emphasize
that apparent cause is not to be reported
in Part K.
42. INGAA recommended providing
operators with access to the original
report format for all supplemental
reports. In January 2015, PHMSA began
collecting data regarding the method
operators used to establish MAOP in the
form, as approved by OMB. All original
reports submitted in January 2015 or
later include data indicating the method
used by the operator to establish the
MAOP of the item involved in the
incident. When PHMSA added ‘‘MAOP
established by’’ to the incident report in
January 2015, PHMSA populated all
existing incident reports with ‘‘NOT ON
OMB-APPROVED FORM WHEN
SUBMITTED’’ as the ‘‘MAOP
established by’’ value. Operators have
since submitted supplemental reports

VerDate Sep<11>2014

20:45 Dec 23, 2016

Jkt 241001

for 500 of the 600 total reports. One
hundred one (101) of these
supplemental reports actually specify
‘‘MAOP established by.’’ Three hundred
ninety-nine (399) supplemented reports
still have a value of ‘‘NOT ON OMBAPPROVED FORM WHEN
SUBMITTED.’’ Essentially, operators
have had the choice to provide the
actual MAOP determination method in
supplemental reports, but have not been
required to. If PHMSA implemented
INGAA’s recommendation, operators
would not be able to include data
approved for collection by OMB after
the original report has been submitted.
PHMSA prefers to continue giving
operators the option to provide newlyapproved data in supplemental reports.
43. DTE requested PHMSA revise the
burden for each report to 24 hours.
PHMSA believes operators may need 24
hours to complete reports for some
incidents with serious consequences.
However, the majority of reports do not
include serious consequences and may
take less than 12 hours. PHMSA
believes 12 hours per report represents
the average burden.
C. PHMSA F 7100.3 Incident Report—
Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) Facilities
PPC, SW and AGA commented on
PHMSA F7100.3, Liquefied Natural Gas
Incident Report. The comments are
summarized and addressed below.
1. To be consistent with PHMSA’s
other gas incident report forms, PHMSA
has added ‘‘Time Zone’’ and ‘‘Day Light
Saving Time’’ in Part A4.
2. PPC and SW recommended that
PHMSA revise Part A15a to ‘‘Estimated
Volume of Gas Consumed by Fire’’ from
‘‘Volume of Gas Consumed by Fire.’’
PHMSA agrees and has revised the form
to accommodate estimation rather than
precise volume information.
3. PPC and SW recommended that
‘‘Total Cost’’ be revised to ‘‘Estimated
Total Cost’’ in Part C1i to remain
consistent with the estimated costs used
to calculate this total. PHMSA agrees
and has made the change on the form.
4. PHMSA is proposing to collect
number of persons injured, but not
admitted to the hospital overnight to
more fully capture the consequence of
an incident. DTE commented that
PHMSA does not ‘‘expect a gas operator
to chase ambulances to determine how
many on-site treatments were
administered by EMT.’’ PHMSA is
proposing to collect number of persons
injured, but not requiring overnight,
inpatient hospitalization in two
categories. The first proposed category
is persons treated in a medical facility,
but not admitted overnight. The second
proposed category is persons treated on

PO 00000

Frm 00202

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4703

95299

scene. These additional categories
would more fully capture the
consequences of an incident. Currently,
operators report the number of
overnight, inpatient hospitalizations
resulting from an incident. In order to
accurately report, operators must
communicate with injured parties or
medical providers to determine the
number of overnight, inpatient
hospitalizations. Operators need this
same communication to determine the
number of persons treated at a medical
facility but not admitted overnight.
Under the Health Insurance Portability
and Accountability Act of 1996, medical
providers are permitted, but not
required, to disclose protected health
information without an individual’s
authorization in a number of situations.
PHMSA encourages operators to
communicate directly with injured
parties and seek disclosure from
medical providers as a last resort.
PHMSA expects the number of persons
treated on scene, but not in a medical
facility, will be readily available.
5. SW and PPC requested a definition
of ‘‘affected’’ in Parts A21 and A22.
PHMSA has added ‘‘evacuated or
required repair’’ to clarify ‘‘affected’’ in
Parts A21 and A22.
6. AGA noted that PHMSA should be
consistent across all its incident reports
in its wording of ‘‘Estimated Cost of
Operator’s Emergency Response’’ in Part
C1c. PHMSA revised the form to be
consistent with its other incident
reports and removed the word
‘‘Operator’s’’ from Part C1c.
D. PHMSA F 7000–1 Accident
Report—Hazardous Liquid Pipeline
Systems
API/AOPL commented on PHMSA F
7000–1, Hazardous Liquid Pipeline
Systems Accident Report. The
comments are summarized and
addressed below.
1. API/AOPL stated they believe
‘‘PHMSA is requesting the same
information in both A4 and A13’’ and
requested that Part A4 be deleted.
PHMSA notes that Parts A4 and A13
represent two distinct times. Per the
instructions, the earliest date/time than
an accident reporting criteria is met
should be reported in Part A4, whereas
Part A13 collects the earliest time the
operator identified the failure. In some
cases, the operator may become aware of
a failure before an accident reporting
criteria is met. In other cases, one of
more accident reporting criteria may be
met before the operator becomes aware
of the failure. API/AOPL also
questioned whether the time zone
specified in Part A4a is the default time
zone for the remaining questions in the

E:\FR\FM\27DEN1.SGM

27DEN1

asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

95300

Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 248 / Tuesday, December 27, 2016 / Notices

form. PHMSA confirms that the time
zone identified in Part A4a is the default
time zone (including day light saving
time in Part A4b) for the rest of the
form.
2. API/AOPL noted that the term
‘‘identified’’ is vague in Part A12 and
requested that the sentence be modified
to include ‘‘initial indication.’’ PHMSA
does not have any evidence that Part
A12 wording, ‘‘How was the incident
initially identified by the operator,’’ is
confusing to operators as this question
has been in place since 2010. PHMSA
does not think API/AOPL’s
recommendation, ‘‘What was the
Operator’s initial indication of the
Accident,’’ would improve the quality
of the data collected by the current
question.
3. API/AOPL recommended replacing
the phrase ‘‘Local/State/Federal
Emergency Responders’’ with
‘‘Emergency Responders (local/state/
federal)’’ in Part A18a-c. PHMSA does
not believe this change would improve
the quality of data collected by the
current question.
4. API/AOPL suggested defining
‘‘Confirmed Discovery’’ in Part A20. On
July 10, 2015, PHMSA published a
proposed rule that includes defining
‘‘Confirmed Discovery’’ and adding it to
the form. 80 FR 39916. PHMSA is
currently reserving Part A19 for
‘‘Confirmed Discovery’’ until a Final
Rule is published.
5. API/AOPL recommended defining
the terms ‘‘activate’’ and ‘‘mobilize’’ in
Part A24. PHMSA has changed ‘‘activate
the plan’’ to ‘‘notify a qualified
individual.’’ PHMSA has changed
‘‘mobilize OSRO’’ to ‘‘activate ORSO.’’
The terms ‘‘notify’’ and ‘‘activate’’ in
these contexts have common meanings
found in the dictionary.
6. API/AOPL noted there should be
additional questions and clarifications
on Part B12. API requested adding the
option ‘‘Bored/Drilled’’ for water
crossing under Part B12 and adding, ‘‘Is
this water crossing 100 feet or more in
length from high water mark to high
water mark?’’ PHMSA agrees with the
suggestions and revised the form
accordingly.
7. PHMSA incorporated API/AOPL’s
suggestion to add ‘‘Was this a Puddle/
Spot Weld?’’ when ‘‘Pipe’’ is chosen in
C3. API/AOPL also recommended that
PHMSA remove ‘‘auxiliary piping’’ from
all items listed in Part C3 and keeping
the term as a separate item. PHMSA
understands that removing auxiliary
piping will impact long term trending,
but is proposing to look at the items,
such as pump and control valve, as
whole items that include auxiliary

VerDate Sep<11>2014

20:45 Dec 23, 2016

Jkt 241001

piping, connections, valves, and
equipment.
8. API/AOPL requested removal of
Part D2a, which collects data about the
amount of soil hauled away plus the
amount treated on site. API/AOPL noted
that soil absorption rates will differ
based on the product released and the
soil type. PHMSA understands that soil
absorption rates will differ based on the
product released and would like to
capture the soil impact of the releases.
API/AOPL also noted that operators
may remove soil that was not
contaminated as precautionary measure
during spill response and clean up. Part
D2a requests information on the overall
impact on soil, including soil removed
or treated on site as a result of the spill,
therefore, any soil removed as a direct
result of the spill would be reported.
PHMSA has not removed this question.
9. API/AOPL requested clarification
about water contamination in Part D5.
Specifically, API/AOPL asked if the
answer should be limited to permanent
bodies of water. Surface water can be
intermittent, especially in arid portions
of the country. If a surface waterbody
were dry and spilled product entered
the surface body, the operator should
report no water contamination. API/
AOPL also asked for clarification
regarding whether rain water caught in
a berm should be considered water
contamination. Surface waterbodies
include creeks and rivers. Rain water
caught in a berm is not a surface
waterbody.
10. API/AOPL recommended
combining Parts D8 and D9 to report the
number of individual who sustained
OSHA recordable incidents. Parts D8
and D9 are not the same as OSHA
recordable incidents as the injured
person may not be a pipeline worker.
PHMSA does not need the OSHA
recordable incident number. PHMSA
needs to collect the data proposed in
Parts D8 and D9 to understand the
human consequence of accidents.
11. API/AOPL offered adding the
words ‘‘Evacuated or Required Repair’’
next to ‘‘Buildings Affected’’ in Parts
D11 and D12. PHMSA accepts the
wording offered by API/AOPL and
added ‘‘Evacuated or Required Repair’’
next to ‘‘Buildings Affected.’’
12. API/AOPL noted that the response
options on the form for Parts E2a are
solely focused on a hydrostatic test
conducted post-construction. API/AOPL
requested that more options be available
to the operator and that PHMSA clearly
define the current options or reference
the appropriate regulation. Part E2a
includes four response options. The first
option is ‘‘post-construction hydrostatic
testing.’’ Contrary to the API/AOPL

PO 00000

Frm 00203

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4703

comment, the remaining three options
are not focused solely on hydrostatic
test during post-construction. PHMSA
has added the regulation applicable to
each response option to provide clarity.
13. API/AOPL recommended allowing
six digits for length of segment in Part
E5. PHMSA will ensure that the online
application allows six digit entry.
14. API/AOPL suggested changing
Parts E9 and E10 to replace the word
‘‘detection’’ with the phrase ‘‘initial
indication.’’ PHMSA does not believe
this change would improve the quality
of the data collected by the question.
API also recommended changing the
word ‘‘confirmation’’ with the phrase
‘‘confirmed discovery’’ in these parts.
On July 10, 2015, PHMSA published a
proposed rule that includes defining
‘‘confirmed discovery.’’ 80 FR 39916.
PHMSA will not add the term
‘‘confirmed discovery’’ to the form as
part of this information collection.
15. API/AOPL recommended adding
exempting authority and exempting
criteria in G3, Excavation Damage.
PHMSA acknowledges this additional
information will be helpful and has
added the recommended questions.
16. API/AOPL asked for a statement
on the form to ensure that operators are
aware they need to complete questions
5 through 11 when they pick Part G4‘‘Damage by Car, Truck, or Other
Motorized Vehicle/Equipment NOT
Engaged in Excavation. PHMSA’s
proposal includes the phrase
recommended by API prior to questions
5 through 11 in Part G4. PHMSA
acknowledges API/AOPL’s concern that
operators may not have answers to all
questions and recognizes that
‘‘unknown’’ may be a valid response to
those questions.
17. API/AOPL requested examples or
clarification of the term ‘‘Designrelated’’ in Part G5. PHMSA has revised
the instruction to include an example of
improper design practices.
18. API/AOPL requested clarification
of ‘‘erosion/abnormal wear’’ in Part
G6.6. The words used in all 15 factors
under Part G6.6 have common meanings
found in the dictionary. PHMSA does
not believe that additional definitions
would improve the instructions.
19. API suggested updating the list in
Part J2 to include more specific tools
and currently available ILI technology.
Under API’s proposal, two ‘‘Ultrasonic’’
tool runs could be entered in Part J2.
However, API proposes collecting
additional data about the tool once. The
additional data proposed by API must
be collected for each tool run. API also
recommended collecting the tool
propulsion system. Under API’s
proposal, twenty-two tool runs could be

E:\FR\FM\27DEN1.SGM

27DEN1

Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 248 / Tuesday, December 27, 2016 / Notices
reported in Part J2. The tool propulsion
system must be collected for each tool
run. PHMSA has modified Part J2 in
response to API’s comments. PHMSA
has made additional improvements to
the ‘‘Tool Technology’’ options and
additional tool data for each technology.
Also, PHMSA proposes collecting the
tool propulsion system and detailed tool
data for each run reported in Part J2.

asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

E. Miscellaneous Comments
NORMAC believes that the proposed
contributing factors on PHMSA’s form
should be eliminated. PHMSA added
the contributing factors in response to
NTSB recommendation P–15–16 and
several other commentators agree with
the usefulness of the information.
PHMSA believes that NORMAC’s other
comments regarding the data quality are
outside the scope of this Federal
Register notice. PHMSA acknowledges
PST’s recommendation to lower
reporting requirements for natural gas
transmission line. However, as PST
acknowledges, such a change would
require a rulemaking and is beyond the
scope of this data collection effort.
Common Ground Alliance (CGA) noted
that several of PHMSA’s questions in
Forms 7100.1 and 7100.2 (G3) parallel
CGA’s Damage Information Reporting
Tool and these questions may be revised
in 2018. PHMSA participates in CGA
and plans to propose changes as needed
in response to CGA DIRT question
changes.
II. Summary of Impacted Collection
Section 1320.8(d), title 5, Code of
Federal Regulations, requires PHMSA to
provide interested members of the
public and affected agencies an
opportunity to comment on information
collection and recordkeeping requests.
This notice identifies two information
collection requests that PHMSA will
submit to OMB for renewal. PHMSA
expects many of the new data elements
are already known by the operator and
that no report requires the completion of
all fields on the forms. PHMSA has
estimated the burdens below by adding
20% to the previous burdens, resulting
12 hours instead of 10 for the
completion of each report.
The following information is provided
for each information collection: (1) Title
of the information collection; (2) OMB
control number; (3) Current expiration
date; (4) Type of request; (5) Abstract of
the information collection activity; (6)
Description of affected public; (7)
Estimate of total annual reporting and
recordkeeping burden; and (8)
Frequency of collection. PHMSA will
request a three-year term of approval for
each information collection activity.

VerDate Sep<11>2014

20:45 Dec 23, 2016

Jkt 241001

PHMSA requests comments on the
following information collections:
1. Title: Incident Reporting for Gas and
LNG
OMB Control Number: PHMSA will
request from OMB.
Current Expiration Date: N/A.
Type of Request: Approval of a new
collection.
Abstract: PHMSA is proposing
revision to the following incident report
forms to improve the granularity of the
data collected in several areas: Gas
Distribution Incident Report (PHMSA F.
7100.1); Incident Report—Natural and
Other Gas Transmission and Gathering
Pipeline System (PHMSA F 7100.2); and
Incident Report—Liquefied Natural Gas
Facilities (PHMSA F 7100.3). PHMSA is
also requesting a new OMB Control
Number to collectively cover these
forms.
Affected Public: Pipeline Operators.
Annual Reporting and Recordkeeping
Burden:
Estimated number of responses: 301.
Estimated annual burden hours:
3,612.
Frequency of collection: On occasion.
2. Title: Transportation of Hazardous
Liquids by Pipeline: Recordkeeping and
Accident Reporting
OMB Control Number: 2137–0047.
Current Expiration Date: 12/31/2016.
Type of Request: Revision.
Abstract: This information collection
covers recordkeeping and accident
reporting by hazardous liquid pipeline
operators who are subject to 49 CFR part
195. PHMSA is proposing to revise the
form PHMSA F7000–1 to improve the
granularity of the data collected in
several areas.
Affected Public: Hazardous liquid
pipeline operators.
Annual Reporting and Recordkeeping
Burden:
Annual Responses: 847.
Annual Burden Hours: 56,229.
Frequency of collection: On occasion.
Comments are invited on:
(a) The need for the renewal and
revision of these collections of
information for the proper performance
of the functions of the agency, including
whether the information will have
practical utility;
(b) The accuracy of the agency’s
estimate of the burden of the proposed
collection of information, including the
validity of the methodology and
assumptions used;
(c) Ways to enhance the quality,
utility, and clarity of the information to
be collected; and
(d) Ways to minimize the burden of
the collection of information on those

PO 00000

Frm 00204

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4703

95301

who are to respond, including the use
of appropriate automated, electronic,
mechanical, or other technological
collection techniques.
Issued in Washington, DC, on December
21, 2016, under authority delegated in 49
CFR 1.97.
Alan K. Mayberry,
Associate Administrator for Pipeline Safety.
[FR Doc. 2016–31221 Filed 12–23–16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–60–P

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
Office of the Comptroller of the
Currency
Agency Information Collection
Activities: Information Collection
Renewal; Comment Request; Generic
Clearance for the Collection of
Qualitative Feedback on Agency
Service Delivery
Office of the Comptroller of the
Currency (OCC), Treasury.
ACTION: Notice and request for
comments.
AGENCY:

The OCC, as part of its
continuing effort to reduce paperwork
and respondent burden, invites the
general public and other Federal
agencies to take this opportunity to
comment on a continuing information
collection as required by the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA).
In accordance with the requirements
of the PRA, the OCC may not conduct
or sponsor, and the respondent is not
required to respond to, an information
collection unless it displays a currently
valid Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) control number.
The OCC is soliciting comment
concerning the renewal of its
information collection titled, ‘‘Generic
Clearance for the Collection of
Qualitative Feedback on Agency Service
Delivery.’’
DATES: Comments must be submitted on
or before February 27, 2017.
ADDRESSES: Because paper mail in the
Washington, DC area and at the OCC is
subject to delay, commenters are
encouraged to submit comments by
email, if possible. Comments may be
sent to: Legislative and Regulatory
Activities Division, Office of the
Comptroller of the Currency, Attention:
1557–0248, 400 7th Street SW., Suite
3E–218, Mail Stop 9W–11, Washington,
DC 20219. In addition, comments may
be sent by fax to (571) 465–4326 or by
electronic mail to [email protected].
You may personally inspect and
photocopy comments at the OCC, 400
SUMMARY:

E:\FR\FM\27DEN1.SGM

27DEN1