Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 223 / Wednesday, November 19, 1997 / Rules and Regulations 61695

2. Section 191.1 is amended by

adding paragraph (b)(3) to read as

follows:

§ 191.1 Scope.

* * * * *

(b) * * *

(3) On the Outer Continental Shelf

upstream of the point at which

operating responsibility transfers from a

producing operator to a transporting

operator.

3. Section 191.3 is amended by

adding a definition in alphabetical order

to read as follows:

§ 191.3 Definitions.

* * * * *

Outer Continental Shelf means all

submerged lands lying seaward and

outside the area of lands beneath

navigable waters as defined in Section

2 of the Submerged Lands Act (43

U.S.C. 1301) and of which the subsoil

and seabed appertain to the United

States and are subject to its jurisdiction

and control.

* * * * *

PART 192—[AMENDED]

1. The authority citation for part 192

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 5103, 60102, 60104,

60108, 60109, 60110, 60113, and 60118; 49

CFR 1.53.

2. Section 192.1 is amended by

adding paragraph (b)(5) to read as

follows:

§ 192.1 Scope of part.

* * * * *

(b) * * *

(5) On the Outer Continental Shelf

upstream of the point at which

operating responsibility transfers from a

producing operator to a transporting

operator.

3. Section 192.3 is amended by

adding a definition in alphabetical order

to read as follows:

§ 192.3 Definitions.

* * * * *

Outer Continental Shelf means all

submerged lands lying seaward and

outside the area of lands beneath

navigable waters as defined in Section

2 of the Submerged Lands Act (43

U.S.C. 1301) and of which the subsoil

and seabed appertain to the United

States and are subject to its jurisdiction

and control.

* * * * *

4. Section 192.10 is added to read as

follows:

§ 192.10 Outer continental shelf pipelines.

Operators of transportation pipelines

on the Outer Continental Shelf (as

defined in the Outer Continental Shelf

Lands Act; 43 U.S.C. 1331) must

identify on all their respective pipelines

the specific points at which operating

responsibility transfers to a producing

operator. For those instances in which

the transfer points are not identifiable

by a durable marking, each operator will

have until September 15, 1998 to

identify the transfer points. If it is not

practicable to durably mark a transfer

point and the transfer point is located

above water, the operator must depict

the transfer point on a schematic located

near the transfer point. If a transfer

point is located subsea, then the

operator must identify the transfer point

on a schematic which must be

maintained at the nearest upstream

facility and provided to RSPA upon

request. For those cases in which

adjoining operators have not agreed on

a transfer point by September 15, 1998

the Regional Director and the MMS

Regional Supervisor will make a joint

determination of the transfer point.

PART 195—[AMENDED]

1. The authority citation for part 195

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 5103, 60102, 60104,

60108, 60109, 60118; and 49 CFR 1.53.

2. Section 195.1 is amended by

adding a new paragraph (b)(6) and

redesignating paragraphs (b)(6) through

(b)(8) as paragraphs (b)(7) through (b)(9)

to read as follows:

§ 195.1 Applicability.

* * * * *

(b) * * *

(6) Transportation of hazardous liquid

or carbon dioxide in Outer Continental

Shelf pipelines which are located

upstream of the point at which

operating responsibility transfers from a

producing operator to a transporting

operator.

* * * * *

3. Section 195.2 is amended by

adding a definition in alphabetical order

to read as follows:

§ 195.2 Definitions.

* * * * *

Outer Continental Shelf means all

submerged lands lying seaward and

outside the area of lands beneath

navigable waters as defined in Section

2 of the Submerged Lands Act (43

U.S.C. 1301) and of which the subsoil

and seabed appertain to the United

States and are subject to its jurisdiction

and control.

* * * * *

4. Section 195.9 is added to read as

follows:

§ 195.9 Outer continental shelf pipelines.

Operators of transportation pipelines

on the Outer Continental Shelf must

identify on all their respective pipelines

the specific points at which operating

responsibility transfers to a producing

operator. For those instances in which

the transfer points are not identifiable

by a durable marking, each operator will

have until September 15, 1998 to

identify the transfer points. If it is not

practicable to durably mark a transfer

point and the transfer point is located

above water, the operator must depict

the transfer point on a schematic

maintained near the transfer point. If a

transfer point is located subsea, the

operator must identify the transfer point

on a schematic which must be

maintained at the nearest upstream

facility and provided to RSPA upon

request. For those cases in which

adjoining operators have not agreed on

a transfer point by September 15, 1998

the Regional Director and the MMS

Regional Supervisor will make a joint

determination of the transfer point.

Issued in Washington D.C. on November

12, 1997.

Richard B. Felder,

Associate Administrator for Pipeline Safety.

[FR Doc. 97–30216 Filed 11–18–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–60–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Research and Special Programs

Administration

49 CFR Parts 192 and 195

[Docket No. PS–101A, Amdt. 192–82 , 195–

60]

RIN 2137–AC 57

Mandatory Participation in Qualified

One-Call Systems by Pipeline

Operators

AGENCY: Research and Special Programs

Administration (RSPA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: This final rule requires that

operators of onshore gas, hazardous

liquid, and carbon dioxide pipelines

participate in qualified one-call systems

as part of the required excavation

damage prevention programs. The rule

also limits the current exclusion of

certain small gas systems from

compliance with the damage prevention

program requirements. This final rule is

intended to reduce excavation damage,

the largest single cause of pipeline

failures.

EFFECTIVE DATE: This final rule takes

effect May 18, 1998.
61696 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 223 / Wednesday, November 19, 1997 / Rules and Regulations

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Christina Sames by telephone at (202)

366–4561 or through the Internet at

christina.sames@rspa.dot.gov, about this

document, or the Dockets Unit at (202)

366–5046, for copies of this document

or other material in the docket.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

One-Call Systems

A one-call system is a communication

system established individually or

jointly by utilities, government agencies,

or other operators of underground

facilities to provide a single telephone

number (other methods of

communication are also used) for

excavators and the public to call to

notify participating members of their

intent to excavate. The one-call systems

receive the excavation notices and

transmit them to operators of

underground pipeline facilities and

other underground facilities that

participate in the system.

Upon receipt of the excavation

notices, participating operators that

have underground facilities in the

vicinity of the excavation arrange for the

timely identification and temporary

marking of underground facilities. In

addition, underground operators may

inspect the site during the excavation

activities to ensure the safety of their

underground facilities.

National One-Call Campaign and the

Damage Prevention Quality Action

Team

There are now 75 one-call systems

operating in 49 states and the District of

Columbia. Not all of the operating onecall systems meet the qualifications for

a ‘‘one-call notification system,’’ as

defined in 49 CFR 198.39. Hawaii and

Puerto Rico are currently without a onecall system.

Forty-seven states and the District of

Columbia have damage prevention laws

that, to varying degrees, govern the

activities performed by excavators and

persons locating and temporarily

marking underground facilities.

However, most of the existing state

damage prevention programs do not

meet all of the requirements of § 198.37,

‘‘State one-call damage prevention

program.’’

To address the problem of incomplete

national one-call coverage and the

deficiencies in some existing one-call

systems, RSPA has launched a national

campaign to encourage states to adopt

improved one-call notification systems.

The national campaign targets states for

concentrated outreach to assist their

efforts to upgrade current one-call

systems. The campaign focuses on

mandatory operator participation,

mandatory excavator participation,

State-wide coverage, and civil penalty

enforcement. The national campaign

also works with selected states currently

without one-call legislation or those

which need to strengthen existing

legislation.

RSPA has also formed a Damage

Prevention Quality Action Team to

address third party damage to

underground facilities including

pipelines. The Team includes

representatives from RSPA, the natural

gas and hazardous liquid pipeline

industry, the telecommunications

industry, States, one-call centers, and

the insurance and contracting

industries. The Team is evaluating

existing damage prevention education

campaigns and will design and

implement a national public education

campaign to reduce third party damage.

Rulemaking Proposal (Docket No. PS–

101A)

On March 20, 1995, RSPA issued a

notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM)

titled ‘‘Mandatory Participation in

Qualified One-Call Systems by Pipeline

Operators’’ (60 FR 14714). The NPRM

proposed to remove the option in

§§ 192.614(a) and 195.442(a) that

permits a pipeline operator to receive

and record notification of planned

excavation activities rather than to

participate in a qualified one-call

system covering the area where the

operator’s pipeline is located.

The NPRM proposed to require that

pipeline operators only participate in

qualified one-call systems. A one-call

system would be considered qualified if

the state had adopted a one-call damage

prevention program in compliance with

§ 198.37. A one-call system would also

be considered qualified if it operates in

accordance with § 198.39, provides a

pipeline operator the same opportunity

to participate in one-call system

management that is offered to other

owners of underground facilities, and

assesses a participating pipeline

operator a fee that is proportionate to

the service provided by the one-call

system.

The NPRM also proposed to extend

the excavation damage prevention

program requirements to petroleum gas

systems subject to § 192.11 and to small

gas systems whose primary activity

includes the transportation of gas.

The NPRM proposed to limit the

current exemption for operators of gas

systems, including operators of master

meter systems, whose primary activity

does not include the transportation of

gas. RSPA is sensitive to the minimum

resources of these small operators and

proposed that small operators be

exempted from identifying excavators in

the vicinity of the pipeline. RSPA also

proposed that small operators be

exempted from notifying excavators of

the damage prevention program’s

existence and purpose and on how to

learn the location of underground

pipelines before excavation activities

begin. In addition, RSPA proposed that

these small operators be exempted from

the requirement for a written damage

prevention program. These operators

would still be required to provide a

means of receiving and recording

notification of planned excavation

activities, to provide for notification of

persons who give notice of an intent to

excavate of the type of temporary

marking to be used and how to identify

the markings, to provide for temporary

marking of buried pipelines in the area

of excavation activity before, as far as

practical, the activity begins, and to

provide for the inspection of pipelines

that the operator has reason to believe

could be damaged by excavation

activities.

Under the proposed regulation,

pipeline operators would continue to

receive and record the notification of

planned excavation activities using their

own personnel in areas where one-call

systems are not yet established, or

where a qualified one-call system is not

yet in place. However, operators would

be required to join a qualified one-call

system once it was established.

Comments to the NPRM

RSPA received sixteen comments in

response to the NPRM. These

commenters represented natural gas and

hazardous liquid pipeline operators,

industry trade associations, and

government agencies.

All sixteen commenters voiced

general support for the NPRM. Among

those in support, a state pipeline safety

agency commented that many states

have already instituted mandatory onecall membership for regulated intrastate

underground facility operators.

The majority of the commenters also

voiced a general opinion that all

underground facility operators and all

excavators should be required to

participate in a qualified one-call

system. Commenters recognized that

RSPA can only require regulated

pipeline operators to participate in

qualified one-call systems and

supported RSPA’s current initiative to

encourage all underground facility

operators and all excavators to

participate in a qualified one-call

system. One commenter also supported

RSPA’s reduction of state grants to

states that do not establish mandatory
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 223 / Wednesday, November 19, 1997 / Rules and Regulations 61697

participation for all underground

utilities and excavators.

One commenter recommended

clarification of the proposed language in

§ 192.614(e) to ensure that municipal

gas systems are included in the damage

prevention regulations. The commenter

stated that the proposed wording could

be interpreted to exclude municipal gas

systems from certain damage prevention

regulations. Municipal gas systems are

currently required to have a damage

prevention program, and RSPA has

clarified the language in this final rule

to prevent misinterpretation.

Another commenter suggested that

RSPA clarify that operators are not

precluded from receiving calls directly

from individuals on activities near a

pipeline. Certain pipelines are required

to be marked with line markers that

show the location of that pipeline.

These line markers list the operator and

a telephone number for individuals to

call to receive or transmit information

on the pipeline. RSPA agrees that a

pipeline operator should be allowed to

receive information directly from

individuals on activities near the

operator’s pipeline. This final rule does

not preclude that from occurring.

Other recommended changes to the

NPRM focused on the problem of

overlapping one-call service areas, and

the terms ‘‘disproportionate cost’’ and

‘‘coverage.’’ These recommended

changes are discussed below.

Comments on Overlapping One-Call

Service Areas

There are limited areas of the United

States, primarily in the northwest and in

the state of Texas, where more than one

one-call system covers the same service

area. In areas of overlapping one-call

coverage, excavators may need to call

several one-call systems to ensure that

all underground utilities are informed of

excavation activities. In addition,

underground utility operators may need

to join several one-call systems to

ensure that they are informed of all

excavation activities near the pipeline.

These problems are alleviated if the

state has a central telephone number for

excavators to call for excavation

activities, or if the one-call systems in

the areas of overlapping coverage

communicate with one another.

Three commenters and an industry

trade association stated that operators

should not be required to join more than

a single qualified one-call system for a

given area. One commenter stated that

if an excavator is required to make more

than one call, there is no true one-call

system. Two commenters thought the

NPRM might prolong the problem by

providing captive participation and

funding for redundant systems. In

addition, the commenters thought that

captive participation and funding might

create an incentive for the establishment

of multiple qualified one-call systems in

a given area, thus reducing the one-call

system effectiveness.

RSPA does not agree that multiple

one-calls will be created for the same

coverage area, or that the current

problem of overlapping coverage will be

prolonged, if an operator is required to

join all qualified one-call centers that

cover the operator’s pipeline system.

RSPA bases this on the fact that the

number of states mandating one-call

membership has been increasing while

the problem of overlapping coverage has

been decreasing. If the problem of

overlapping one-call coverage were to

increase with mandatory participation,

as the commenters suggested, it should

have already occurred in the states

mandating one-call participation. This

has not happened.

RSPA does not see the need for an

operator to join more than one qualified

one-call system in overlapping coverage

areas, if there is a central telephone

number for excavators to call for

excavation activities, or if the one-call

systems in those areas communicate

with one another. A central telephone

number can forward an intent to

excavate to multiple one-call systems.

This allows an operator to join a single

one-call system and still receive all

notices of intent to excavate that may

affect the operator’s pipeline. One-call

systems that communicate notices of

intent to excavate to other one-call

systems also allow an operator to join a

single one-call system and still receive

all notices of intent to excavate that may

affect the pipeline. Both situations end

the need for an operator to join several

one-call systems in areas of overlapping

coverage.

States that have overlapping one-call

coverage are actively working to

alleviate the problem. As an example,

Texas has recently passed legislation

that will create a central number for

excavators to call. In addition, several of

the states in the northwest that have

small areas of overlapping coverage are

currently referring excavators to a

central number. Both alleviate the need

for an operator to join more than a

single one-call system covering its

pipeline.

Disproportionate Cost and Coverage

The NPRM proposed that pipeline

operators join a one-call system that

‘‘assesses a participating pipeline

operator a fee that is not

disproportionate to the costs of the onecall system’s coverage of the operator’s

pipeline.’’ Two commenters

recommended modifying the proposed

section to read ‘‘Assesses a participating

pipeline operator a fee that is

proportionate to the operator’s

utilization of the one-call service.’’

RSPA has modified the proposed

regulation in response to these

recommendations.

Additional Concerns on State

Jurisdiction

A state pipeline safety agency raised

concern about a state’s ability to impose

one-call requirements on interstate

pipeline operators. This rule should

allay any concern about an interstate

operator’s required compliance with

one-call damage prevention notification

and marking requirements. Although a

state cannot impose pipeline safety

standards on an interstate operator,

RSPA urges interstate operators to

comply with any other requirements a

one-call system imposes as a condition

of membership.

Presentation to Advisory Committees

On November 8 and 9, 1995, RSPA

presented the NPRM and the comments

received on the NPRM to its two

pipeline advisory committees, the

Technical Pipeline Safety Standards

Committee (TPSSC) and the Technical

Hazardous Liquid Pipeline Safety

Standards Committee (THLPSSC).

On November 8, 1995, the THLPSSC

discussed and unanimously supported

mandating pipeline operator

participation in qualified one-call

systems with one minor modification to

the wording used in the NPRM. The

THLPSSC recommended that RSPA

modify § 195.442(b)(2)(iii) to remove the

double negative. The suggested wording

reads ‘‘Assesses a participating pipeline

operator a fee that is proportionate to

the costs of the one-call system’s

coverage of the operator’s pipeline.’’

The THLPSSC also discussed the

problem of overlapping one-call

coverage and the possible actions that

could be taken in these areas. The

THLPSSC discussed requiring a

pipeline operator to only join one

qualified one-call system in areas of

overlapping one-call coverage, on the

condition that the operator’s entire

system in the overlapping area be

covered by the single one-call system.

RSPA has studied the possible

consequences of this action and believes

there is a safety issue. If an operator

joins a single one-call system in an

overlapping coverage area, an excavator

could call the one-call system the

operator has not joined. The excavator

may not understand that another call

has to be made to obtain the location of
61698 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 223 / Wednesday, November 19, 1997 / Rules and Regulations

additional underground facilities

covered by the other one-call system.

The excavator may believe it is safe to

dig in the area when, in fact, there is a

pipeline or other underground utility in

the area. This could lead to a hazardous

liquid release, explosion, or possible

death. Therefore, RSPA will not pursue

this action.

On November 9, 1995, the TPSSC

voted six to five in favor of the proposed

regulation and several modifications.

Those opposed were concerned with the

recommendation to modify § 198.39,

made by other committee members, and

not with the overall intent of the NPRM.

This recommendation is discussed

below in further detail.

The TPSSC recommended that

pipeline operators only participate in

one qualified one-call system in areas of

overlapping one-call coverage. In

conjunction with that recommendation,

the TPSSC proposed that RSPA modify,

through a new NPRM, § 198.39,

‘‘Qualifications for operation of one-call

notification system.’’ The proposed

modification would require a one-call

system to communicate with all other

one-call systems in areas of overlapping

coverage before that one-call system

could be considered qualified.

The TPSSC recommended that the

modification to § 198.39 be done in

conjunction with the requirement that

pipeline operators need only join one

qualified one-call system in areas of

overlapping jurisdiction. The TPSSC

recognized that RSPA could not modify

part 198 in this final rule and some

members were concerned that

implementing the actions at different

times would cause undue problems.

Their six to five vote reflects these

concerns.

The TPSSC also followed the

THLPSSC’s recommended modification

of § 195.442(b)(2)(iii) by unanimously

concurring that § 192.614(b)(2)(iii) be

modified to remove the double negative.

The recommended wording would read

‘‘Assesses a participating pipeline

operator a fee that is proportionate to

the costs of the one-call system’s

coverage of the operator’s pipeline.’’

Amendments

RSPA has adopted the TPSSC’s and

THLPSSC’s recommended wording of

§§ 192.614(b)(2)(iii) and

195.442(b)(2)(iii) and has removed the

double negative. RSPA has also clarified

§ 192.614(e) to ensure that municipal

gas systems are included in the damage

prevention regulations.

RSPA has not adopted the

recommendation to require pipeline

operators to participate in only one

qualified one-call system in areas of

overlapping one-call coverage. RSPA

has not adopted this recommendation

due to the possible safety issues.

However, RSPA does not see the need

for a pipeline operator to join more than

a single one-call system if there is a

central telephone number for excavators

to call, or if the one-call systems in the

overlapping coverage area communicate

with each other. RSPA is taking into

consideration the TPSSC’s

recommendation to modify § 198.37 to

require one-call systems to

communicate with one another in areas

of overlapping one-call coverage before

they are considered a qualified one-call

system. A new NPRM will be issued if

RSPA pursues the recommendation.

Rulemaking Analyses

Executive Order 12866 and DOT

Regulatory Policies and Procedures

This final rule is not considered a

significant regulatory action under

section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866

and, therefore, was not subject to review

by the Office of Management and

Budget. The final rule is also not

considered significant under the

Regulatory Policies and Procedures of

the Department of Transportation (44 FR

11034).

The final rule requires that operators

of interstate and intrastate pipelines

participate in qualified one-call systems.

It requires less stringent standards for

participation of small entities, including

master meter operators, whose primary

activity does not include the

transportation of gas.

Presently, approximately 75 one-call

systems operate in 49 states and the

District of Columbia. These one-call

systems perform many of the duties

required under parts 192 and 195 for an

excavation damage prevention program.

Many pipeline operators already

participate in these one-call systems on

a voluntary or state-mandated basis.

Forty-seven states and the District of

Columbia have damage prevention laws

that, to varying degrees, govern the

activities performed by excavators and

persons locating and temporarily

marking underground facilities. Twentyeight states and the District of Columbia

mandate one-call participation by most

commercial underground facility

owners and operators. Therefore, many

of the operators that this final rule

covers already have some form of an

excavation damage prevention program

and should incur little or no additional

cost as a result of this final rule.

Based on available data and

discussions with the American Gas

Association, the American Public Works

Association, and One-Call Systems

International, the cost for a pipeline

operator to participate in a qualified

one-call system should be

approximately the same or slightly less

than if the operator performed the

excavation damage prevention duties

independently. Therefore, operators that

are required to meet the current damage

prevention program requirements, but

who have not joined a qualified one-call

system, should incur little or no

additional cost.

Operators in areas with no qualified

one-call systems would continue to

receive and record notifications of

planned excavation activities with their

own personnel and would incur no

additional cost. However, operators

would be required to join a qualified

one-call system once one was

established.

49 U.S.C. 60102(b)(3) requires RSPA’s

technical advisory committees to serve

as peer review panels for the cost/

benefit analysis that accompanies each

rulemaking. The THLPSSC and the

TPSSC have reviewed the cost/benefit

information contained in this final rule

and three-fourths of the members have

voted to forego a formal analysis and

report on the merits of the data, the

methods used in the cost/benefit

analysis, and any recommended options

relating to the cost/benefit analysis.

Based on the above, this rule is not

considered to be significant under

Executive Order 12866. A complete text

of the regulatory evaluation is available

for review in this docket.

Executive Order 12612

The final rule has been analyzed in

accordance with the principles and

criteria in Executive Order 12612

(‘‘Federalism’’), and does not have

sufficient federalism impacts to warrant

the preparation of a federalism

assessment.

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of

1995

This rule does not impose unfunded

mandates under the Unfunded

Mandates Reform Act of 1995. It does

not result in costs or $100 million or

more to either State, local, or tribal

governments, in the aggregate, or to the

private sector, and is the least

burdensome alternative that achieves

the objective to the rule.

Regulatory Flexibility Act

This final rule extends the excavation

damage prevention program

requirements to petroleum gas systems

subject to § 192.11 and to small gas

systems whose primary activity

includes the transportation of gas. It also

limits the current exemption for
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 223 / Wednesday, November 19, 1997 / Rules and Regulations 61699

operators of gas systems whose primary

activity does not include the

transportation of gas. However, the final

rule is sensitive to the minimum

resources of these small operators.

Operators whose primary activity

does not include the transportation of

gas, such as master meter operators, are

exempted from the requirement that the

damage prevention program be written.

This is one of the most costly parts of

this regulation. These operators are

exempted from the requirements to

identify persons who normally engage

in excavation activities in the area in

which the pipeline is located, and to

provide actual notification to those

identified persons on the damage

prevention program’s existence and

purpose and on how to learn the

location of underground pipelines

before excavation activities begin.

Because little excavation activity occurs

in areas where master meter operators

operate, the cost of joining a one-call

system for these small operators should

be minimal.

Based on these facts, I certify that this

final rule will not, if promulgated, have

a significant economic impact on a

substantial number of small entities.

This certification is subject to

modification as a result of a review of

comments received in response to this

final rule.

Paperwork Reduction Act

This final rule will require no

additional increase in the current

information collection burden

requirements for gas pipeline operators

and hazardous liquid and carbon

dioxide operators. Twenty-eight states

and the District of Columbia mandate

one-call participation by most

commercial underground facility

owners and operators. In addition, many

operators already voluntarily participate

in qualified one-call systems. Therefore,

many of the operators that this final rule

covers already participate in qualified

one-call systems and should incur no

additional paperwork burden as a result

of this final rule.

Based on available data and

discussions with One-Call Systems

International, the paperwork burden for

a pipeline operator to participate in a

qualified one-call system should be less

than if the operator performed the

excavation damage prevention duties

independently. Therefore, operators that

are required to meet the current damage

prevention program requirements, but

who have not joined a qualified one-call

system, should incur little or no

additional paperwork burden.

Operators in areas with no qualified

one-call systems would continue to

receive and record notifications of

planned excavation activities with their

own personnel and would incur no

additional paperwork burden as a result

of this final rule.

List of Subjects

49 CFR Part 192

Pipeline safety, Reporting and

recordkeeping requirements.

49 CFR Part 195

Anhydrous ammonia, Carbon dioxide,

Petroleum, Pipeline safety, Reporting

and recordkeeping requirements.

In consideration of the foregoing,

RSPA amends 49 CFR parts 192 and 195

as follows:

PART 192—[AMENDED]

1. The authority citation for part 192

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 5102, 60102, 60104,

60108, 60109, 60110, 60113, 60118; 49 CFR

1.53.

2. Section 192.614 is amended by

revising paragraph (a), by removing

paragraph (c)(4), by redesignating

paragraphs (b) and (c) as (c) and (d), by

revising the introductory text of newly

redesignated (c)(2), and by adding

paragraphs (b) and (e) as follows:

§ 192.614 Damage prevention program.

(a) Except as provided in paragraphs

(d) and (e) of this section, each operator

of a buried pipeline must carry out, in

accordance with this section, a written

program to prevent damage to that

pipeline from excavation activities. For

the purpose of this section, the term

‘‘excavation activities’’ includes

excavation, blasting, boring, tunneling,

backfilling, the removal of aboveground

structures by either explosive or

mechanical means, and other

earthmoving operations.

(b) An operator may comply with any

of the requirements of paragraph (c) of

this section through participation in a

public service program, such as a onecall system, but such participation does

not relieve the operator of responsibility

for compliance with this section.

However, an operator must perform the

duties of paragraph (c)(3) of this section

through participation in a one-call

system, if that one-call system is a

qualified one-call system. In areas that

are covered by more than one qualified

one-call system, an operator need only

join one of the qualified one-call

systems if there is a central telephone

number for excavators to call for

excavation activities, or if the one-call

systems in those areas communicate

with one another. An operator’s

pipeline system must be covered by a

qualified one-call system where there is

one in place. For the purpose of this

section, a one-call system is considered

a ‘‘qualified one-call system’’ if it meets

the requirements of section (b)(1) or

(b)(2) of this section.

(1) The state has adopted a one-call

damage prevention program under

§ 198.37 of this chapter; or

(2) The one-call system:

(i) Is operated in accordance with

§ 198.39 of this chapter;

(ii) Provides a pipeline operator an

opportunity similar to a voluntary

participant to have a part in

management responsibilities; and

(iii) Assesses a participating pipeline

operator a fee that is proportionate to

the costs of the one-call system’s

coverage of the operator’s pipeline.

(c) * * *

(2) Provides for notification of the

public in the vicinity of the pipeline

and actual notification of the persons

identified in paragraph (c)(1) of this

section of the following as often as

needed to make them aware of the

damage prevention program:

* * * * *

(e) Pipelines operated by persons

other than municipalities (including

operators of master meters) whose

primary activity does not include the

transportation of gas need not comply

with the following:

(1) The requirement of paragraph (a)

of this section that the damage

prevention program be written; and

(2) The requirements of paragraphs

(c)(1) and (c)(2) of this section.

PART 195—[AMENDED]

3. The authority citation for part 195

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 60102, 60104, 60108,

60109; 49 CFR 1.53.

4. Section 195.442 is amended by

revising paragraph (a), by redesignating

paragraphs (b) and (c) as (c) and (d), by

revising the introductory text of newly

redesignated (c)(2), and adding

paragraph (b) to read as follows:

§ 195.442 Damage prevention program.

(a) Except as provided in paragraph

(d) of this section, each operator of a

buried pipeline must carry out, in

accordance with this section, a written

program to prevent damage to that

pipeline from excavation activities. For

the purpose of this section, the term

‘‘excavation activities’’ includes

excavation, blasting, boring, tunneling,

backfilling, the removal of aboveground

structures by either explosive or

mechanical means, and other

earthmoving operations.
61700 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 223 / Wednesday, November 19, 1997 / Rules and Regulations

(b) An operator may comply with any

of the requirements of paragraph (c) of

this section through participation in a

public service program, such as a onecall system, but such participation does

not relieve the operator of responsibility

for compliance with this section.

However, an operator must perform the

duties of paragraph (c)(3) of this section

through participation in a one-call

system, if that one-call system is a

qualified one-call system. In areas that

are covered by more than one qualified

one-call system, an operator need only

join one of the qualified one-call

systems if there is a central telephone

number for excavators to call for

excavation activities, or if the one-call

systems in those areas communicate

with one another. An operator’s

pipeline system must be covered by a

qualified one-call system where there is

one in place. For the purposes of this

section, a one-call system is considered

a ‘‘qualified one-call system’’ if it meets

the requirements of section (b)(1) or

(b)(2) or this section.

(1) The state has adopted a one-call

damage prevention program under

§ 198.37 of this chapter; or

(2) The one-call system:

(i) Is operated in accordance with

§ 198.39 of this chapter;

(ii) Provides a pipeline operator an

opportunity similar to a voluntary

participant to have a part in

management responsibilities; and

(iii) Assesses a participating pipeline

operator a fee that is proportionate to

the costs of the one-call system’s

coverage of the operator’s pipeline.

(c) * * *

(2) Provides for notification of the

public in the vicinity of the pipeline

and actual notification of persons

identified in paragraph (c)(1) of this

section of the following as often as

needed to make them aware of the

damage prevention program:

* * * * *

Issued in Washington, D.C. on November

13, 1997.

Kelley S. Coyner,

Acting Administrator.

[FR Doc. 97–30290 Filed 11–18–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–60–P

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric

Administration

50 CFR Part 622

[Docket No. 970730185–7206–02; I.D.

111297D]

Fisheries of the Caribbean, Gulf of

Mexico, and South Atlantic; Reef Fish

Fishery of the Gulf of Mexico; Closure

of the Recreational Red Snapper

Component

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),

Commerce.

ACTION: Closure.

SUMMARY: NMFS closes the recreational

fishery for red snapper in the exclusive

economic zone (EEZ) of the Gulf of

Mexico. NMFS has determined that the

annual recreational quota for red

snapper will have been reached by

November 26, 1997. This closure is

necessary to protect the red snapper

resource.

DATES: Closure is effective 12:01 a.m.,

local time, November 27, 1997, through

December 31, 1997.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Robert Sadler, 813–570–5305.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The reef

fish fishery of the Gulf of Mexico is

managed under the Fishery

Management Plan for the Reef Fish

Resources of the Gulf of Mexico (FMP).

The FMP was prepared by the Gulf of

Mexico Fishery Management Council

and is implemented under the authority

of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery

Conservation and Management Act by

regulations at 50 CFR part 622. Those

regulations set the recreational quota for

red snapper in the Gulf of Mexico at

4.47 million lb (2.03 million kg) for the

current fishing year, January 1 through

December 31, 1997.

Under 50 CFR 622.43(a), NMFS is

required to close the recreational fishery

for red snapper when its quota is

reached, or is projected to be reached,

by publishing a notification to that

effect in the Federal Register. Based on

current statistics, NMFS has determined

that the recreational quota for red

snapper will have been reached by

November 26, 1997. Accordingly, the

recreational fishery in the EEZ in the

Gulf of Mexico for red snapper is closed

effective 12:01 a.m., local time,

November 27, 1997, through December

31, 1997.

During the closure, the bag and

possession limits for red snapper in or

from the EEZ in the Gulf of Mexico are

zero. In addition, in the Gulf of Mexico

on board a vessel for which a

commercial vessel permit for Gulf reef

fish has been issued, the bag and

possession limits for red snapper are

zero, without regard to where the red

snapper were harvested.

Classification

This action is taken under 50 CFR

622.43(a) and is exempt from review

under E.O. 12866.

Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.

Dated: November 13, 1997.

Richard W. Surdi,

Acting Director, Office of Sustainable

Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.

[FR Doc. 97–30294 Filed 11–14–97; 10:41

am]

BILLING CODE 3510–22–F

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric

Administration

50 CFR Part 660

[Docket No. 961227373–6373–01; I.D.

111297A]

Fisheries off West Coast States and in

the Western Pacific; Pacific Coast

Groundfish Fishery; Trip Limit

Changes

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),

Commerce.

ACTION: Fishing restrictions; request for

comments.

SUMMARY: NMFS announces further

routine management measures adjusting

the Pacific Coast groundfish limited

entry fisheries for the Sebastes complex

and its components, canary and

yellowtail rockfish, and the Dover sole,

thornyhead, trawl-caught sablefish

(DTS) complex and all its components.

These actions are authorized by

regulations implementing the Pacific

Coast Groundfish Fishery Management

Plan (FMP), which governs the

groundfish fishery off Washington,

Oregon, and California. These changes

are intended to keep landings close to

the 1997 harvest guidelines and

allocations for these species.

DATES: Effective from 0001 hours (local

time) November 16, 1997, including

trawl vessels operating in the B platoon.

These changes remain in effect, unless

modified, superseded or rescinded,

until the effective date of the 1998

annual specifications and management

measures for the Pacific Coast

groundfish fishery, which will be