43028 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 154 / Monday, August 11, 1997 / Notices

environmental issues related to the

alternatives. An information packet

describing the purpose of the project,

the proposed alternatives, the impact

areas to be evaluated, the citizen

involvement program and the

preliminary project schedule is being

mailed to affected federal, state and

local agencies and to interested parties

on record. Others may request the

scoping materials by contacting Mr.

Edward Taylor at the address above or

by calling him at (216) 566–5100.

Scoping comments may be made

verbally at any of the public scoping

meetings or in writing. See DATES and

ADDRESSES sections above for location

and times. During scoping, comments

should focus on identifying specific

social, economic, or environmental

impacts to be evaluated and suggesting

alternatives that are less costly or have

less environmental impact while

achieving similar transit objectives.

Scoping is not an appropriate time to

indicate a preference for a particular

alternative. Comments on preferences

should be communicated after the Draft

EIS has been completed. The meeting

will be held in an ‘‘open house’’ format

and project representatives will be

available to discuss the project

throughout the time period given.

Informational displays and written

materials also will be available

throughout the time period given. In

addition to written comments which

may be made at the meeting or as

described below, a stenographer will be

available at the meeting to record

comments. If you wish to be placed on

the mailing list to receive further

information as the project develops,

contact Mr. Edward Taylor as

previously described.

II. Description of Study Area and

Project Needs

The study area is wholly within

Cuyahoga County, Ohio. It is

approximately 2.5-miles long and

connects the central business district of

Berea, Ohio with the existing GCRTA

Red Line rapid transit terminus at

Cleveland Hopkins International

Airport. The corridor also connects the

International Exposition Center with the

airport and Berea. Existing traffic is

primarily carried by the Berea Freeway

(OH 237), Eastland Road, Front Street

and Prospect Street with high traffic

volumes at many of the signalized

intersections. The proposed rail

extension is intended to provide a high

quality connection between the existing

Red Line terminus at the Airport, the I–

X Center and Berea; to support

economic revitalization of the Berea

CBD through greater transit

accessibility; to stimulate economic

development at the I–X Center by

improving transit access between

Downtown Cleveland and the I–X

Center; contribute to higher transit

mode share for work trips between the

southwest suburbs and Downtown

Cleveland; improve opportunities for

reverse commute transportation options;

to help achieve regional clean air goals;

and improve travel efficiencies in the

Southwest Corridor.

III. Alternatives

Transportation alternatives proposed

for evaluation include a No-Build

Alternative which involves no change to

transportation services or facilities in

the corridor beyond those

improvements currently programmed; a

TSM alternative which includes a

package of improvements to one or all

elements of the transportation network

intended to improve travel time, reduce

congestion, and enhance land-use

development or redevelopment; and a

rail transit alternative which consists of

extending the GCRTA Red Line utilizing

varying alternative alignments, segment

lengths and technologies. It is

anticipated that the rail line extension

would involve streetcar style operations

in Berea.

IV. Probable Effects/Potential Impacts

for Analysis

FTA and GCRTA plan to evaluate in

the EIS all significant social, economic,

and environmental impacts of the

alternatives. Among the primary issues

are transportation service changes

including transit cost, service, patronage

and its financial implications; the effect

on traffic movement and railroad

operations; community impacts,

including land use planning and zoning

compatibility, neighborhood

compatibility, local and regional

economic change, aesthetics, and utility

relocation; cultural resource impacts,

including air quality, noise and

vibration, removal of pre-existing

hazardous wastes, and effects on water

resources and quality, natural features,

and ecosystems. The proposed impact

assessment and its evaluation criteria

will take into account both positive and

negative impacts, direct and indirect

impacts, short-term (construction) and

long-term (operation) impacts, and sitespecific and corridor-wide impacts.

Evaluation criteria will be consistent

with applicable federal, State of Ohio

and local standards, criteria,

regulations, and policies. Mitigation

measures will be explored for any

adverse impacts that are identified as

part of the analysis.

V. FTA Procedures

In accordance with the Federal

Transit Act, as amended, and FTA

policy, the Draft EIS will be prepared in

conjunction with a major investment

study and the Final EIS in conjunction

with Preliminary Engineering. After its

publication, the Draft EIS will be

available for public and agency review

and comment, and a public hearing will

be held. On the basis of the Draft EIS

and comments received, the GCRTA, in

concert with the Ohio Department of

Transportation and NOACA, and in

consultation with Cuyahoga County, the

Cities of Berea, Brook Park and

Cleveland and other affected agencies,

will select a locally preferred

alternative. The GCRTA will then seek

to have NOACA, the metropolitan

planning organization for the Cleveland

area, include the preferred alternative in

the regional transportation plan and

seek approval from FTA to continue

with Preliminary Engineering and

preparation of the Final EIS.

Issued on: August 6, 1997.

Joel P. Ettinger,

Regional Administrator.

[FR Doc. 97–21160 Filed 8–8–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–57–U

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Research and Special Programs

Administration

[Docket No. PS–142; Notice 7]

Pipeline Safety: Communications Plan

for Effective Public Communication

and Involvement in the Pipeline Safety

Risk Management Demonstration

Program

AGENCY: Office of Pipeline Safety, DOT.

ACTION: Notice.

SUMMARY: The Research and Special

Programs Administration’s (RSPA)

Office of Pipeline Safety (OPS) is

establishing and implementing a

Pipeline Risk Management

Demonstration Program (Demonstration

Program) in which pipeline operators

will propose their pipelines as projects

for the Demonstration Program.

Effective communication among OPS,

States, pipeline operators, community

representatives, and other interested

parties is a key part of this risk

management initiative. Effective means

for communication are vital to OPS

understanding local safety and

environmental conditions that may

affect the demonstration projects. This

document addresses how OPS intends

to inform the community, seek public
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 154 / Monday, August 11, 1997 / Notices 43029

input, and respond to public concerns.

This document also describes how OPS

will provide opportunities for

meaningful public involvement,

particularly for communities that may

be located within a demonstration

project area. Persons interested in

receiving information about specific

demonstration projects, or about the

Demonstration Program overall can

make their requests by commenting to

this notice. OPS also seeks public

comment on this Communications Plan.

DATES: Comments should be received no

later than October 10, 1997.

ADDRESSES: Comments should be sent to

the Dockets Facility, U.S. Department of

Transportation, Plaza 401, 400 Seventh

Street, SW, Washington, DC 20590–

0001. Comments should identify the

docket number (PS–142). Persons

should submit the original document

and one (1) copy. Persons wishing to

receive confirmation of receipt of their

comments must include a self-addressed

stamped postcard. The Dockets Facility

is located on the plaza level of the

Nassif Building in Room Number 401,

400 Seventh Street, SW, Washington,

DC. The Dockets Facility is open from

10:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., Monday through

Friday, except on Federal holidays

when the facility is closed.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Eben M. Wyman, (202) 366–0918, or by

e-mail (eben.wyman@rspa.dot.gov),

regarding the subject matter of this

Notice. Contact the Dockets Unit (202)

366–5046, for other material in the

docket.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

Today, pipeline companies must

comply with regulations that apply

relatively uniformly regardless of

conditions that are specific to the

location and the operation of the

pipeline. Although pipelines have

maintained a good record of public

safety and environmental protection

under the current regulatory structure,

government and industry are

continually looking to improve the

pipeline safety program.

Pipeline operators and OPS seek to

achieve a better understanding of the

risks related to pipelines, where the

risks are, and where and how operators

can use resources effectively to reduce

risk across the pipeline system, thereby

better protecting both people and the

environment. In addition, operators seek

to gain more flexibility to address

system-unique problems. Both

government and industry want to have

a greater knowledge and understanding

of how to achieve superior safety and

environmental protection, as well as

increase reliability of pipeline service.

Risk management offers government

and industry a comprehensive decisionmaking process. It includes the

identification and analysis of risks, the

identification, analysis and selection of

alternative measures to control risks,

and the subsequent evaluation of

performance. It is one means by which

an organization systematically identifies

and assigns resources to address safety

and environmental risks, as well as

other business risks that affect the

organization’s ability to meet its

objectives.

The Demonstration Program will give

operators the opportunity to

demonstrate that their risk management

programs can achieve superior safety

and environmental protection over and

above what they have already achieved

through their compliance with existing

pipeline safety regulations. Government

and industry will evaluate the benefits

of risk management as a regulatory

alternative, and will test whether or not

it should be considered as an ongoing

feature of the OPS regulatory program.

In a memorandum issued to the DOT

Secretary on October 12, 1996, the

President provided policy direction on

implementing the Demonstration

Program. Two goals were clarified: (1)

That OPS ensure that superior

protection would be achieved through

the Demonstration Program and, (2) that

adequate opportunity would be

provided for meaningful public

involvement in the overall

implementation and progress of the

individual demonstration projects.

To effectively implement the

Demonstration Program, OPS needs to

increase public awareness and

understanding of the value and

importance of the pipeline network

nationwide, provide a broad

understanding of how pipeline

companies operate their systems, and

allow ample opportunity to openly

discuss the possible impact of these

operations on public safety and the

environment.

To prepare to test risk management in

individual demonstration projects, the

Joint Risk Management Quality Teams

(JRAQT), made up of Federal and State

government, industry, and public

representatives, studied the benefits and

limitations of risk management as a

regulatory alternative. The JRAQT

investigated approaches that would

allow pipeline operators greater

flexibility to take site-specific

considerations into account in

addressing both hazardous liquid and

natural gas pipeline safety and

environmental protection. One of its

reports, ‘‘Survey of Regulatory Agency

Applications of Risk Management,’’

showed that risk management is already

widely and successfully used in other

industry and government practices.

The JRAQT designed a structured

program so that risk management could

be applied carefully, with results

monitored and adjustments made as

needed. The team created five

documents to guide implementation of

the Demonstration Program: the

Program Framework (62 FR 14719), the

Program Standard, Performance

Measures Guidance, a Training

Curriculum, and this Communications

Plan. These documents and related

information can be obtained by

contacting Eben Wyman at (202) 366–

0918.

Program Framework

This document provides information

on how pipeline operators can propose

and get approval of risk management

projects. The steps in the Program are

described, as well as the program

objectives, selection criteria, and

requirements, including how operators

must provide for communication with

the public.

Risk Management Program Standard

Requirements

The Program Standard calls for both

internal and external communications,

that is communications inside the

company as well as to outside

stakeholders. It describes the basic

elements and characteristics that should

be contained in a company’s risk

management program. The Standard

describes two sets of key elements:

program and process elements. Program

elements address the corporate

responsibility for the structure and

procedures to administer, document,

communicate, and evaluate a risk

management program. Process elements

describe technical and analytical

methods (i.e., the tools, models, and

type of analyses) used to identify

possible ways to control risks, allocate

resources to control risks, monitor each

project’s performance, and apply

information learned to improve the

process.

A variety of steps are involved in

identifying and reducing risks on a

pipeline system. First, a company

conducts a risk assessment, develops a

risk profile of current pipeline

conditions, and identifies possible

adverse events that could occur. The

likelihood and severity of these possible

events are also evaluated. Second, the

company examines the options for

controlling the risks identified in the

risk assessment and decides which
43030 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 154 / Monday, August 11, 1997 / Notices

actions it can take to control the risks.

Third, the company establishes

performance measures to track the

progress of the risk control activities

and to evaluate if the intended effect of

these actions is being achieved.

The Program Standard provides

operators the flexibility needed to

develop a risk management plan

appropriate to the nature and extent of

the risks being addressed in a

demonstration project. Because risk

management is a continuous

improvement process, as new data

becomes available, the operator can

make adjustments accordingly.

II. Purpose and Objectives of

Communications Plan

This Communications Plan (Plan)

describes how OPS and industry will

communicate with those who may be

affected by, or interested in, a

demonstration project. The Plan’s

purpose is to help communities and the

public understand the Demonstration

Program’s goals, processes, safety issues,

safety actions and anticipated outcomes

within each of the demonstration

projects. This communication will be

successful if OPS provides access to

information, receives feedback, interacts

and responds to national, state, and

community issues.

Both OPS and operators will work in

partnership to provide information to all

who may be affected by a demonstration

project so they may understand and

evaluate the potential benefits and

liabilities of risk management. The

success of the Demonstration Program

depends on the ability to demonstrate,

and therefore communicate, three goals:

(1) Risk management can result in

superior safety, environmental

protection, and service reliability than

could be achieved through sole

compliance with current pipeline safety

regulations; (2) resources will be better

prioritized and more effectively applied

under risk management; and (3)

government and industry’s discussion of

risks and risk control options, and both

their ability to impact desired outcomes,

will increase under risk management.

OPS is building a two-way

communication system designed to

collect and distribute information to and

from all parties that may be affected by

a demonstration project through

numerous direct mail and electronic

means, as well as through direct contact.

The goal is to enhance communication

among OPS and national organizations

and agencies, State and community

representatives. Additionally, pipeline

operators who apply to participate in

the Demonstration Program must

describe in their application how they

too will communicate with

communities affected by their projects.

Specific benefits of public

involvement in the Demonstration

Program for OPS, industry, State and

community representatives include:

• Exchange of information about

specific and relevant local factors

during the decision-making process that

may not be known at the Federal or

State level; and

• Feedback regarding the success of

the Demonstration Program in

accomplishing the goals for which it

was designed.

During the demonstration period, OPS

will:

• Inform and educate about risk

management;

• Provide project information and

methods to provide input or feedback;

• Interact in a timely manner, and

• Respond and report back to all

stakeholders.

To guide national and local

communication initiatives, OPS

expanded the communications

workgroup within the JRAQT to involve

other government agencies, public

interest groups, environmental groups,

industry and community

representatives. The workgroup

currently includes:

• National League of Cities

• National Association of Towns and

Townships

• National Fire Protection Association

• International Association of Fire

Chiefs

• Fairfax Virginia Fire Department

• Environmental Defense Fund

• Port of Houston Authority

• International City/County

Management Association

• Gas Research Institute

• Local Emergency Planning

Committees

• Interstate Natural Gas Association of

America

• American Petroleum Institute

• Shell Oil Products Company

• Northwest Pipeline Company

• New Hampshire Public Utilities

Commission

• Arizona Corporation Commission

• National Transportation Safety Board

• Federal Emergency Management

Agency

For further information about

participation in the communications

workgroup, contact Eben M. Wyman on

(202) 366–0918.

National Communications

1. By working through national

organizations and agencies on the

national level, OPS will continue to

provide information about the

Demonstration Program to other Federal

agencies and to national public interest

and environmental organizations that

maintain outreach programs to

community representatives. Our

primary means to reach federal agencies

is through the National Response Teams

(NRT). Comprised of fifteen Federal

agencies, the NRT representatives have

agreed to identify any issues of concern

they may have regarding potential

demonstration sites. These agencies

include the Environmental Protection

Agency, Federal Emergency

Management Agency, General Services

Administration, Nuclear Regulatory

Commission, and the Departments of

Agriculture, Commerce, Defense,

Energy, Health and Human Services,

Interior, Justice, Labor, State,

Transportation, and Treasury. OPS will

provide designated NRT regional

officials with both national and projectspecific information throughout the

project review, approval, and

monitoring process so they can identify

issues of concern and provide feedback

on individual demonstration projects in

their regions.

2. Federal Register Notices:

Opportunities for public comment will

be provided following the publication of

Federal Register notices during various

stages of the Demonstration Program: (1)

OPS will publish a notice describing the

risk management proposals selected for

consideration and consultation. This

notice will describe the candidate’s

‘‘Letter of Intent’’ (The number of

proposals described in each notice will

depend on the number submitted and

screened for consultation at the time of

publication.); (2) OPS will publish a

follow-up notice once the consultation

is underway to provide updated project

information and to describe OPS

outreach activities; and (3) another will

be published announcing the final

approval of the demonstration projects.

These notices will include information

describing the demonstration project,

how the operator approaches external

communication, and a list of contacts

from whom to obtain additional

information. Additionally, OPS will

provide a prospectus to national, state,

and community representatives that

describes information specific to each

demonstration project.

3. Internet Information System:

PRIMIS—As part of its national

communications efforts, OPS is also

making information about pipeline risk

management available via the Internet

on the OPS Home Page (HTTP://

ops.dot.gov/riskmgmt.htm). Internet

access will provide additional means to

locate information, as well as to solicit

public comment. The OPS Home Page
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 154 / Monday, August 11, 1997 / Notices 43031

will be used to disseminate information

and to provide the public a central point

of access to technical assistance.

OPS is creating a new data system,

accessible to all interested parties

through the Internet, to collect and

exchange project information. It is

called the Pipeline Risk Management

Information System (PRIMIS). This data

system will help OPS perform project

consultation, approval and audit

functions during the Demonstration

Program, and will help facilitate

communication of the resulting

information. PRIMIS will serve as a

repository of information on the Risk

Management Program as a whole and

will provide details concerning each of

the demonstration projects. It is a place

where interested parties can provide

information, comments or questions for

OPS.

Each of the incoming letters of intent,

as well as other significant

documentation, will be entered and

retained in the PRIMIS system. PRIMIS

will include a company profile

developed by OPS, specific information

on the company’s demonstration

project, including the risk control

alternatives proposed in the Letter of

Intent, and follow-up information

through the screening, consultation, and

implementation phases. The system will

also be used to track significant

meetings, program milestones, events,

commitments, and follow-up dates

during the consultation process. PRIMIS

will be accessible via the OPS Home

Page in September, 1997.

4. Electronic ‘‘town meetings’’: To

provide further access to information on

the Demonstration Program, OPS aired

an electronic town meeting to discuss

the risk management program and

candidate projects. Based on feedback

received from this effort, OPS is

considering using this method as a

regular feature of future communication

efforts. This two-way live broadcast was

aired on June 5, 1997, through the

Federal Emergency Management

Agency’s Emergency Education Network

(EENET). Use of EENET was intended to

involve thousands of public safety and

emergency management officials.

During the live broadcast, viewers had

an opportunity to pose questions and

voice concerns to OPS, State, industry

and community representatives. OPS is

seeking ways to expand the audience to

include local safety and environmental

protection officials as well as other

community representatives. The town

meeting broadcast was also available via

new Internet technology, which

provided the information via linkage to

personal computers. Videotapes of this

broadcast will be available to loan to

interested parties from their State

pipeline safety office, or from OPS

Headquarters. Individuals can request to

borrow a copy of the videotape via the

OPS Home page (http://ops.dot.gov), or

by contacting OPS by e-mail

(pipeline.safety@dot.gov). State

emergency managements agencies will

also have a copy.

5. Identifying other resources: The

communications workgroup mentioned

earlier will assist in identifying

information that meets the needs of

local communities and methods to

distribute information. Use of the

Internet, electronic ‘‘town meetings’’

and regional briefings to provide project

status reports are examples of methods

to communicate risk management

activities on a national basis. We will

identify other resources during the

course of the Demonstration Program.

Local Communications

Both OPS and participating operators

are responsible for local level

communications focused on

communities within a demonstration

project site area. In its proposal, an

operator is required to describe to OPS

its external communication methods as

defined in the Program Standard,

including the types of information to be

communicated and the audiences to

receive that information. Companies

will also describe the methods of

communication, individuals or

organizations responsible for providing

information, and methods of receiving

feedback from these audiences.

The operator will initiate

communications at the start of the

project to inform community

representatives about key issues,

progress and to solicit feedback.

Operators will build on existing public

education and outreach programs. The

operator will describe to OPS how it

plans to address public interests and

concerns, and how it will communicate

to community representatives with

varied interests such as local officials,

environmental organization

representatives, and fire, rescue, safety

and health organization representatives.

These representatives could include

members of organized groups that have

a continuing interest in pipeline safety

issues, or citizens with an interest in the

projects who come forward with

questions or suggestions.

OPS will work with operators to help

identify interested parties and to answer

questions from State officials and

community representatives. OPS will

also help operators gather relevant

information regarding local, site-specific

issues in locations of their

demonstration projects. OPS and

operators will provide information to

effectively address issues of concern.

Many channels of communication,

including local media sources in various

demonstration project areas, will be

pursued as a means of communication.

OPS seeks names of media contacts

interested in following demonstration

projects.

As stated earlier, OPS will provide a

prospectus on each of the demonstration

projects being considered to State

officials and community representatives

that may be interested in reviewing

project information, providing input, or

monitoring the progress of the project.

Each prospectus will contain basic

information about the company and its

proposed demonstration project,

describe the operator’s approach to

communication with States and

community representatives, and identify

individuals who can be contacted for

information, questions or comments.

These contacts will be OPS, company,

and State pipeline agency

representatives (if the State agrees to

participate). OPS will provide

additional information on project

objectives, risk management

alternatives, and performance measures

and progress throughout the

demonstration period.

III. Commonly Asked Questions

The following are two commonly

asked questions regarding the

Demonstration Program. OPS will

continue to address these and other

questions received from interested

parties using the communication

techniques described above.

A. What Are the Expected Benefits of

the Risk Management Demonstration

Program?

1. Risk Management Should Help OPS

Better Protect the Public and the

Environment

While the traditional approach to

safety is effective in determining if

prescribed safety requirements are

carried out, it does not require a

structured process to identify risks or to

validate the solutions being

implemented. Risk management is

intended to provide a more complete

understanding of risks and to provide

methods and models to produce the

most appropriate and cost effective

measures to reduce risk.

2. Risk Management Is Designed To

Yield Improved Information for Policy

and Decision-Making

Since risk management is predicated

on identifying and understanding

potential threats to a pipeline system,
43032 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 154 / Monday, August 11, 1997 / Notices

the risk management approach to safety

is likely to generate improved data to

enhance decision-making by both

operators and regulators. Both

government and industry should learn

more from available data about a wide

range of risks and system configurations

to help determine the most effective

methods to measure performance and

monitor risk activities.

3. Risk Management Will Allow

Pipeline Safety Programs To Be Tailored

to Local Conditions

Risk management will permit pipeline

operators and OPS to focus greater

attention on those pipeline systems, or

segments of those systems, where there

is an opportunity to reduce risk and

achieve superior safety, environmental

protection and service reliability. The

goal is to design risk management

programs that best address pipelinespecific conditions.

4. Risk Management Should Provide

Increased Operator Flexibility To

Achieve Superior Safety

Through risk management, operators

plan to use expert knowledge and

experience to tailor company safety

plans to unique system conditions,

providing them with the flexibility to

select the best methods to address risks.

5. The Risk Management Demonstration

Program Will Be Built Through

Partnerships

A partnership was formed among

OPS, the pipeline industry, and State

and community representatives to

examine risk management principles

and to evaluate if they should be tested

as an alternative approach to pipeline

regulation. This partnership is expected

to continue to improve information

exchange between all parties

participating in the Demonstration

Program.

B. How Will the Demonstration Program

Work?

1. OPS Will Oversee the Risk

Management Demonstration Program

Process

OPS will carefully assess each

proposed demonstration project to

determine whether superior safety and

environmental protection can be

achieved. Before OPS issues an order

approving a demonstration project, a

Project Review Team (PRT), made up of

OPS representatives (assisted by

voluntary State support), will meet with

the candidate to clarify all relevant

aspects of the project. To accomplish

this, OPS will seek input from other

Federal agencies, affected states and

other safety and environmental officials

on their issues and concerns, including

their knowledge of candidate

companies’ safety and environmental

compliance records.

The selection process will involve a

comprehensive review of the

candidate’s pipeline system and

consultation with the candidate. There

are two important operator submissions.

The first submission is the Letter of

Intent. This initial letter is an

expression of an operator’s interest in

participating in the Demonstration

Program. It describes a specific

demonstration project the operator

would like OPS to consider for

inclusion in the Demonstration

Program. Following the receipt of the

Letter of Intent, OPS will contact the

company to set up a series of

consultation meetings. The second

submission is the Formal Application

and Work Plan, which the operator will

prepare after discussions with the PRT

have resulted in a mutually acceptable

demonstration project. This submission

formally documents the terms and

conditions of the project and is the basis

upon which OPS will approve or reject

the operator’s project.

Adjustments may be necessary to

specific areas of the project before it

starts. Such adjustments will take into

account community concerns. Other

adjustments or modifications may also

occur during the course of the project,

and may come from periodic reviews by

the PRT.

2. Basic Regulatory Roles and

Responsibilities Will Not Change Under

Risk Management

The Federal government’s

fundamental responsibilities and

authority will remain the same. OPS

will continue to set standards for, and

independently assess, pipeline safety

and integrity. Oversight will be

improved as government agencies focus

on better understanding how individual

pipelines are operated, how risk-based

decisions are made, what effective

alternatives exist for reducing risk, and

whether the intended results are being

achieved.

3. Clear and Ambitious Performance

Goals Will Be Set

OPS has worked with representatives

of State pipeline safety agencies and

industry to develop guidance on

performance measures that will be used

to evaluate the results of the

demonstration projects. Many of the

performance measures will be designed

to evaluate at the national program level

whether superior safety and

environmental protection are achieved

through this alternative approach to

government oversight.

In addition, performance measures

will be designed for government and

industry to monitor the achievement of

desired safety, environmental and

service reliability results at the

individual project level. OPS and

operators should be able to demonstrate

improved accountability to the

community as a result of these

measures.

4. The Demonstration Program

Welcomes Public Input

Improving public involvement has

been a Program goal from the beginning.

Government and industry sought public

input through the November 1995, the

May 1996, and the January 1997 risk

management public meetings. The

public’s views have also been sought

through the OPS Home Page on the

Internet (HTTP://ops.dot.gov),

presentations to groups representing

emergency responders and State and

community representatives, and through

newsletters and Federal Register

notices. The previously described

Communications Plan has been

designed to continue and enhance the

public’s involvement.

5. Opportunities to Address Public

Concerns

The demonstration project review,

consultation, approval, and

communication process is designed to

give appropriate opportunities to raise

concerns and to seek information about

particular demonstration projects.

Participating companies will facilitate

this process by coordinating with

Federal, State and local authorities to

provide methods of information sharing

to community representatives.

6. Safeguards Will Be Maintained

The OPS regulatory program that has

been in place for 25 years will continue

to be the means of oversight of all

pipelines not participating in the

Demonstration Program. Pipelines

participating in demonstration projects

will also continue to be safeguarded.

OPS and State pipeline agencies will

maintain regulatory oversight activities

on all existing pipelines involved inside

and outside the Demonstration Program.

7. The Focus Will Be on Those Who Can

Succeed

The previously described Program

Standard and Framework processes are

designed to provide many checks and

balances in the selection process. The

process is intended to identify

companies that will comply with the

Program Standard, achieve superior
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 154 / Monday, August 11, 1997 / Notices 43033

safety and environmental protection

through risk management, work in

partnership with OPS to evaluate the

merits of risk management, and show a

corporate commitment to use the risk

management process as a day-to-day

part of their business practices. The

selection criteria for the Demonstration

Program favors those proposals that are

the most comprehensive. The company

must also have a clear and established

record of compliance in the existing

program in order to be considered for

participation.

8. Enforceable Agreements and

Incentives To Perform

Just as the traditional regulatory

system provides a clear process to

monitor performance, so must the risk

management alternative. Once OPS

approves a Formal Application and

Work Plan, an order will be issued and

notice made to the public through the

Federal Register. The order will specify

the pipeline safety regulatory

requirements for the period of the

demonstration, and set forth the terms

and conditions for the operator’s

participation in the project.

OPS will have an audit plan to

monitor how well the operator is

meeting the performance goals. OPS’s

full statutory authority to inspect

pipeline facilities remains in effect.

Should any unsafe conditions arise,

OPS will work with participating

companies to see that such conditions

are quickly remedied.

OPS invites comments on ways we

can make the communications program

more meaningful.

Issued in Washington, DC, on August 5,

1997.

Richard B. Felder,

Associate Administrator for Pipeline Safety.

[FR Doc. 97–21117 Filed 8–8–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–60–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Surface Transportation Board

[STB Docket No. AB–477 (Sub–No. 2X)]

Owensville Terminal Company, Inc—

Abandonment Exemption—in Gibson

and Posey Counties, IN

On July 22, 1997, Owensville

Terminal Company, Inc. (OTC) filed

with the Surface Transportation Board

(Board) a petition under 49 U.S.C. 10502

for exemption from the provisions of 49

U.S.C. 10903 to abandon a line of

railroad known as the CynthianaOwensville line, extending from

railroad milepost 277.0 north of

Cynthiana to railroad milepost 271.0

north of Owensville, a distance of 6.0

miles, in Gibson and Posey Counties,

IN. The line traverses U.S. Postal

Service Zip Code 47665 and includes

the station of Owensville at railroad

milepost 271.5.

The line does not contain federally

granted rights-of-way. Any

documentation in the railroad’s

possession will be made available

promptly to those requesting it. The

interest of railroad employees will be

protected by Oregon Short Line R. Co.—

Abandonment—Goshen, 360 I.C.C. 91

(1979).

By issuance of this notice, the Board

is instituting an exemption proceeding

pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 10502(b). A final

decision will be issued by November 7,

1997.

Any offer of financial assistance

under 49 CFR 1152.27(b)(2) will be due

no later than 10 days after service of a

decision granting the petition for

exemption. Each offer of financial

assistance must be accompanied by the

filing fee, which currently is set at $900.

See 49 CFR 1002.2(f)(25).

All interested persons should be

aware that, following abandonment of

rail service and salvage of the line, the

line may be suitable for other public

use, including interim trail use. Any

request for a public use condition under

49 CFR 1152.28 or for trail use/rail

banking under 49 CFR 1152.29 will be

due no later than September 2, 1997.

Each trail use request must be

accompanied by a $150 filing fee. See 49

CFR 1002.2(f)(27).

All filings in response to this notice

must refer to STB Docket No. AB–477

(Sub-No. 2X) and must be sent to: (1)

Surface Transportation Board, Office of

the Secretary, Case Control Unit, 1925 K

Street, N.W., Washington, DC 20423–

0001, and (2) Thomas F. McFarland, Jr.,

McFarland & Herman, 20 North Wacker

Drive, Suite 1330, Chicago, IL 60606–

2902.

Persons seeking further information

concerning abandonment procedures

may contact the Board’s Office of Public

Services at (202) 565–1592 or refer to

the full abandonment or discontinuance

regulations at 49 CFR part 1152.

Questions concerning environmental

issues may be directed to the Board’s

Section of Environmental Analysis

(SEA) at (202) 565–1545. [TDD for the

hearing impaired is available at (202)

565–1695.]

An environmental assessment (EA) (or

environmental impact statement (EIS), if

necessary) prepared by SEA will be

served upon all parties of record and

upon any agencies or other persons who

commented during its preparation.

Other interested persons may contact

SEA to obtain a copy of the EA (or EIS).

EAs in these abandonment proceedings

normally will be available within 60

days of the filing of the petition. The

deadline for submission of comments on

the EA will generally be within 30 days

of its service.

Decided: August 1, 1997.

By the Board, David M. Konschnik,

Director, Office of Proceedings.

Vernon A. Williams,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 97–21127 Filed 8–8–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4915–00–P

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and

Firearms

Proposed Collection; Comment

Request

ACTION: Notice and request for

comments.

SUMMARY: The Department of the

Treasury, 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 proposed

and/or continuing information

collections, as required by the

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995,

Public Law 104–13 (44 U.S.C.

3506(c)(2)(A)). Currently, the Bureau of

Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms within

the Department of the Treasury is

soliciting comments concerning the

Firearms Transaction Record, Part II

Non-Over-The-Counter.

DATES: Written comments should be

received on or before October 10, 1997

to be assured of consideration.

ADDRESSES: Direct all written comments

to Linda Barnes, Bureau of Alcohol,

Tobacco and Firearms, 650

Massachusetts Avenue, NW.,

Washington, DC 20226, (202) 927–8930.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Requests for additional information or

copies of the form(s) and instructions

should be directed to Nicholas Colucci,

Firearms and Explosives Operations

Branch, 650 Massachusetts Avenue,

NW., Washington, DC 20226, (202) 927–

8310.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Title: Firearms Transaction Record,

Part II Non-Over-The Counter.

OMB Number: 1512–0130.

Form Number: ATF F 4473 (5300.9)

Part II.

Abstract: ATF F 4473 (5300.9) Part II

is used to determine the eligibility

under the Gun Control Act (GCA) of a