51624 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 191 / Thursday, October 2, 1997 / Proposed Rules

approval of the Office of Management

and Budget under 44 U.S.C. 3501, et

seq.

List of Subjects in 48 CFR Parts 203 and

252

Government procurement.

Michele P. Peterson,

Executive Editor, Defense Acquisition

Regulations Council.

Therefore, 48 CFR Parts 203 and 252

are proposed to be amended as follows:

1. The authority citation for 48 CFR

Parts 203 and 252 continues to read as

follows:

Authority: 41 U.S.C. 421 and 48 CFR

Chapter 1.

PART 203—IMPROPER BUSINESS

PRACTICES AND PERSONAL

CONFLICTS OF INTEREST

2. Section 203.570 is revised to read

as follows:

203.570 Prohibition on persons convicted

of fraud or other DoD contract-related

felonies.

3. Section 203.570–2 is revised to read

as follows:

203.570–2 Policy.

(a) Contractors or subcontractors shall

not knowingly allow a person,

convicted after September 29, 1988, of

fraud or any other felony arising out of

a contract with DoD, to serve—

(1) In a management or supervisory

capacity on any DoD contract or firsttier subcontract;

(2) On its board of directors;

(3) As a consultant, agent, or

representative; or

(4) In any capacity with the authority

to influence, advise, or control the

decisions of any DoD contractor or

subcontractor with regard to any DoD

contract or first-tier subcontract.

(b) The period covered by the

prohibition in paragraph (a) of this

subsection is not less than 5 years from

the date of conviction unless waived in

the interest of national security by the

agency head or designee. Prohibition

periods greater than 5 years may be

imposed upon a written determination

by the agency head or designee. A copy

of each such determination shall be

provided to the Bureau of Justice

Assistance, U.S. Department of Justice,

633 Indiana Avenue, NW., Room 470,

Washington, DC 20531.

4. Section 203.570–5 is revised to read

as follows:

203.570–5 Contract clause.

Use the clause at 252.203–7001,

Special Prohibition on Persons

Convicted of Fraud or Other DoD

Contract-Related Felonies, in all

solicitations and contracts exceeding the

simplified acquisition threshold, except

solicitations and contracts for

commercial items.

PART 252—SOLICITATION

PROVISIONS AND CONTRACT

CLAUSES

5. Section 252.203–7001 is amended

by revising the section heading, the

clause title and date, paragraphs (b) and

(c), the introductory text of paragraph

(d), and paragraph (h) to read as follows:

252.203–7001 Special Prohibition On

Persons Convicted of Fraud or Other DoD

Contract-Related Felonies.

* * * * *

Special Prohibition on Persons

Convicted of Fraud or Other DOD

Contract-Related Felonies (XXX 19XX)

* * * * *

(b) Any individual who is convicted

after September 29, 1988, of fraud or

any other felony arising out of a contract

with DoD is prohibited from serving—

(1) In a management or supervisory

capacity on any DoD contract or firsttier subcontract;

(2) On the board of directors of any

DoD contractor or first-tier

subcontractor;

(3) As a consultant, agent, or

representative to any DoD contractor or

first-tier subcontractor; or

(4) In any other capacity with the

authority to influence, advise, or control

the decisions of any DoD contractor or

subcontractor with regard to any DoD

contract or first-tier subcontract.

(c) Unless waived, the prohibition in

paragraph (b) of this clause applies for

not less than 5 years from the date of

conviction.

(d) 10 U.S.C. 2408 provides that a

defense contractor or first-tier

subcontractor shall be subject to a

criminal penalty of not more than

$500,000 if convicted of knowingly—

* * * * *

(h) Pursuant to 10 U.S.C. 2408(c),

defense contractors and subcontractors

may obtain information as to whether a

particular person has been convicted of

fraud or any other felony arising out of

a contract with DoD by contacting The

Office of Justice Programs, The Denial of

Federal Benefits Office, U.S. Department

of Justice, telephone (202) 616–3507.

(End of clause)

[FR Doc. 97–26115 Filed 10–1–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 5000–04–M

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Research and Special Programs

Administration

49 CFR Part 192

[Docket No. RSPA–97–2879; Notice 1]

Remotely Controlled Valves on Natural

Gas Pipeline Facilities

AGENCY: Research and Special Programs

Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Notice of public meeting.

SUMMARY: The Research and Special

Programs Administration (RSPA) invites

representatives of industry, state and

local government, and the public to an

open meeting on the use of remotely

controlled valves (RCVs) on natural gas

pipeline facilities. Congress mandated

the use of RCVs on interstate natural gas

pipeline facilities if it is determined as

a result of a survey and assessment that

the use of RCVs is technically and

economically feasible and would reduce

risks associated with a rupture of a

natural gas pipeline facility. The

purpose of this meeting is to gather

information and discuss issues relevant

to the survey and assessment.

DATES: The public meeting will be held

on October 30, 1997, beginning at 9:00

a.m. Persons who want to participate in

the public meeting should call (202)

366–4046 or e-mail their name,

affiliation, and phone number to

jenny.donohue@rspa.dot.gov before

close of business October 17, 1997. The

public meeting is open to all interested

parties, but RSPA may limit

participation because of space

considerations and the need to obtain a

wide range of views.

ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held in

Houston, Texas at the Adam’s Mark

Hotel, 2900 Briarpark Drive at

Westheimer. The hotel’s telephone

number is (713) 978–7400.

WRITTEN COMMENTS: Anyone may submit

written comments. Persons who are

unable to attend the public meeting may

submit written comments on or before

the deadline of November 28, 1997.

Interested persons should submit as part

of their written comments all material

that is relevant to a statement of fact or

argument. Late filed comments will be

considered so far as practicable.

Send written comments to the Docket

Facility, U.S. Department of

Transportation, Plaza 401, 400 Seventh

Street SW, Washington, DC 20590–0001.

Comments should identify the docket

number (RSPA–97–2879). Commenters

should submit an original and one copy.

Commenters wishing to receive
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 191 / Thursday, October 2, 1997 / Proposed Rules 51625

1A ‘‘Class 3 location’’ is defined in 49 CFR 192.5

as any class location unit (an area that extends 220

yards on either side of the centerline of any

continuous 1-mile length of pipeline) that has 46 or

more buildings intended for human occupancy, or

any area where the pipeline lies within 100 yards

of either a building of small well-defined area that

is occupied by 20 or more persons on at least 5 days

a week for 10 weeks in any 12-month period.

A ‘‘Class 4 location’’ is defined in 49 CFR 192.5

as any class location unit where buildings with four

or more stories above ground are prevalent.

2Southwest Research Institute, ‘‘Final Report,

Remote and Automatic Main Line Valve

Technology Assessment,’’ July 1995, Sponsored by

the Gas Research Institute (GRI–95/0101).

confirmation of receipt of their

comments must include a stamped, selfaddressed postcard with their

comments. The docket clerk will date

stamp the postcard and return it to the

commenter. Comments will be available

for inspection at the Docket Facility,

located on the Plaza level of the Nassif

Building in Room 401. The Docket

Facility is open from 10:00 a.m. to 5:00

p.m., Monday through Friday, except on

Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Lloyd W. Ulrich, telephone: (202) 366–

4556, FAX: (202) 366–4566, e-mail:

lloyd.ulrich@rspa.dot.gov regarding the

subject matter of this notice or the

Dockets Unit, (202) 366–5046, for copies

of this notice or other material in the

docket.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The

Accountable Pipeline Safety and

Partnership Act of 1996 (codified at 49

U.S.C. 60102 (j)) required that, ‘‘Not

later than June 1, 1998, the Secretary [of

Transportation] shall survey and assess

the effectiveness of remotely controlled

valves to shut off the flow of natural gas

in the event of a rupture of an interstate

natural gas pipeline facility and shall

make a determination about whether the

use of remotely controlled valves is

technically feasible and economically

feasibility and would reduce risks

associated with a rupture of an

interstate natural gas pipeline facility.’’

‘‘Not later than one year after the

survey and assessment are complete, if

the Secretary has determined that the

use of remotely controlled valves is

technically and economically feasible

and would reduce risks associated with

a rupture of an interstate natural gas

pipeline facility, the Secretary shall

prescribe standards under which an

operator of an interstate natural gas

pipeline facility must use a remotely

controlled valve. These standards shall

include, but not be limited to,

requirements for high-density

population areas.’’

RSPA is aware of the consequences

when a natural gas pipeline that has

experienced a rupture is not isolated

quickly by closing valves on either side

of the ruptured section. A high pressure

gas transmission pipeline failure

occurred in Edison, New Jersey on

March 23, 1994. The failure of the 36-

inch pipeline resulted in the escaping

gas igniting and creating a fireball 500

feet high. There was one death and

approximately 50 injuries. Radiant heat

from the fireball ignited the roofs of

buildings located more than 100 yards

from the failure, destroyed 128

apartments and resulted in the

evacuation of 1,500 people. The

casualties were limited because the few

minutes between the time of the failure

and the explosion allowed residents to

vacate the area. The gas company using

a manually operated valve took 21⁄2

hours to isolate the ruptured section of

pipeline, which contributed to the

severity of the damages.

The experience in New Jersey resulted

in the adoption of a set of new rules by

the New Jersey Board of Public Utilities

(BPU) covering the installation,

operation, and maintenance of intrastate

natural gas pipelines in the state of New

Jersey. These rules became effective

March 17, 1997.

One of the new BPU rules requires

each operator to submit a Sectionalizing

Valve Assessment and Emergency

Closing Plan for sectionalizing valves in

class 3 and class 4 locations 1. All valves

in class 3 and class 4 locations are to be

evaluated and prioritized as to the need

for installation or retrofitting of a RCV

or automatically controlled valve (ACV).

Each plan is to include training of

appropriate personnel on emergency

plans and procedures. An emergency

closing drill that simulates shutting

down a selected section of the pipeline

is required once each year. Reports of

the closing drills are to be submitted to

the BPU. RSPA is unaware of similar

requirements in other states.

RSPA is also aware of a

comprehensive report sponsored by the

Gas Research Institute (GRI) on ACVs

and RCVs 2. The report addresses the

evolution of ACVs in the natural gas

industry. The report specifically

addresses the risk of false closures, line

section blowdown duration, and typical

valve spacings. The report stresses the

unreliability of ACVs because the

pipeline failure detection systems used

to trigger the closure of ACVs often

mistake normal operating transient

conditions as a pipeline failure. The

report concludes that the installation of

ACVs or RCVs will not prevent gas

ignition because ignition usually occurs

within ten minutes of a rupture, long

before a line section could be blown

down, even if it was isolated

immediately after the rupture. However,

early closure can reduce the duration of

burn down and radiant heating of the

area.

Consistent with the President’s

Regulatory Reinvention Initiative (E.O.

12866), RSPA wants to explore this

congressional requirement with the

maximum stakeholder involvement.

Toward this end, RSPA is seeking early

participation in the survey and

assessment process by holding this

public meeting at which participants,

including RSPA staff, may exchange

views on relevant issues concerning

remotely controlled valves (RCVs). This

public meeting is in partial satisfaction

of the ‘‘survey and assess’’ portion of the

Congressional requirement. RSPA hopes

the public meeting will enable

government and industry to reach a

better understanding of the problems

and potential solutions before proposed

rules are considered.

RSPA will use the data accumulated

as a result of this public meeting along

with any state experience disclosed

during the public meeting, and the GRI

report on ACVs and RCVs to determine

the technical and economic feasibility of

using RCVs on natural gas pipeline

facilities.

Participants at the public meeting are

encouraged to focus their remarks on

the following issues, but may address

other issues as time permits and in

supplementary written comments:

A. What is the potential value of early

detection and isolation of a section of

pipeline after a failure in terms of

enhanced safety and reduced property

damage?

B. What are the technical and

economic advantages of installing

RCVs?

C. What are the technical and

economic disadvantages of installing

RCVs?

D. What states in addition to New

Jersey have adopted regulations

concerning RCVs on intrastate natural

gas pipeline facilities?

E. If RCVs were required in only high

risk areas, what would constitute high

risk areas and what would be criteria for

prioritizing from highest to lowest risk?

F. Document cases where RCVs have

malfunctioned causing them to close

unexpectedly or to not close when

commanded by the dispatcher.

G. Document cases where RCVs

operated after an accident to reduce the

consequences of the accident.

H. Provide documentation to support

or refute the impression that when the

escaping gas from a failed gas pipeline

ignites, it normally occurs shortly after

the accident, usually less than 10

minutes after the accident.
51626 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 191 / Thursday, October 2, 1997 / Proposed Rules

Issued in Washington, D.C., on October 24,

1997.

Richard B. Felder,

Associate Administrator for Pipeline Safety.

[FR Doc. 97–26123 Filed 10–1–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–60–P