19414 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 62 / Friday, March 30, 2012 / Notices 

UP also requests FRA approval of all 

locomotive horn test data acquired by 

any of UP’s ASMS that meet the 

requirements of SAE ARP–4 721, and 

have been calibrated in accordance with 

this waiver. 

A copy of the petition, as well as any 

written communications concerning the 

petition, is available for review online at 

http://www.regulations.gov and in 

person at the U.S. Department of 

Transportation’s (DOT) Docket 

Operations Facility, 1200 New Jersey 

Avenue SE., W12–140, Washington, DC 

20590. The Docket Operations Facility 

is open from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m., Monday 

through Friday, except Federal 

Holidays. 

Interested parties are invited to 

participate in these proceedings by 

submitting written views, data, or 

comments. FRA does not anticipate 

scheduling a public hearing in 

connection with these proceedings since 

the facts do not appear to warrant a 

hearing. If any interested party desires 

an opportunity for oral comment, they 

should notify FRA, in writing, before 

the end of the comment period and 

specify the basis for their request. 

All communications concerning these 

proceedings should identify the 

appropriate docket number (e.g., Waiver 

Petition Docket Number FRA–2012– 

0023) and may be submitted by any of 

the following methods: 

• Web site: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the online 

instructions for submitting comments. 

• Fax: 202–493–2251. 

• Mail: Docket Operations Facility, 

U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200 

New Jersey Avenue SE., W12–140, 

Washington, DC 20590. 

• Hand Delivery: 1200 New Jersey 

Avenue SE., Room W12–140, 

Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. 

and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, 

except Federal Holidays. 

Communications received by May 14, 

2012 will be considered by FRA before 

final action is taken. Comments received 

after that date will be considered as far 

as practicable. 

Anyone is able to search the 

electronic form of any written 

communications and comments 

received into any of our dockets by the 

name of the individual submitting the 

comment (or signing the comment, if 

submitted on behalf of an association, 

business, labor union, etc.). You may 

review DOT’s complete Privacy Act 

Statement in the Federal Register 

published on April 11, 2000 (Volume 

65, Number 70; Pages 19477–78), or 

online at http://www.dot.gov/ 

privacy.html. 

Issued in Washington, DC, on March 26, 

2012. 

Ron Hynes, 

Acting Deputy Associate Administrator for 

Regulatory and Legislative Operations. 

[FR Doc. 2012–7614 Filed 3–29–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–06–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Pipeline and Hazardous Materials 

Safety Administration 

[Docket ID PHMSA–2012–0021] 

Pipeline Safety: Public Comment on 

Leak and Valve Studies Mandated by 

the Pipeline Safety, Regulatory 

Certainty, and Job Creation Act of 2011 

AGENCY: Pipeline and Hazardous 

Materials Safety Administration 

(PHMSA), DOT. 

ACTION: Notice of Public Comment. 

SUMMARY: The Department of 

Transportation (DOT), Pipeline and 

Hazardous Materials Safety 

Administration (PHMSA) is providing 

an important opportunity through this 

notice for all stakeholders to publically 

comment on the scope of recently 

commissioned studies involving leak 

detection systems and valves. This 

action and others described within this 

notice will support the comprehensive 

investigation of topics and issues 

Congress has charged to PHMSA. 

DATES: PHMSA must have all comments 

submitted by close of business April 30, 

2012. 

ADDRESSES: Comments should reference 

Docket No. PHMSA–2012–0021 and 

may be submitted in the following ways: 

• E–Gov Web Site: http:// 

www.Regulations.gov. This site allows 

the public to enter comments on any 

Federal Register notice issued by any 

agency. 

• Fax: 1–202–493–2251. 

• Mail: DOT Docket Management 

System: U.S. DOT, Docket Operations, 

M–30, West Building Ground Floor, 

Room W12–140, 1200 New Jersey 

Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590– 

0001. 

• Hand Delivery: U.S. DOT Docket 

Management System; West Building 

Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 1200 

New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, 

DC 20590–0001 between 9 a.m. and 5 

p.m., Monday through Friday, except 

Federal holidays. 

Instructions: You should identify the 

Docket No. PHMSA–2012–0021 at the 

beginning of your comments. If you 

submit your comments by mail, submit 

two copies. To receive confirmation that 

PHMSA received your comments, 

include a self-addressed stamped 

postcard. Internet users may submit 

comments at http:// 

www.regulations.gov. 

Note: Comments are posted without 

changes or edits to http:// 

www.regulations.gov, including any personal 

information provided. There is a privacy 

statement published on http:// 

www.regulations.gov. 

Any technically substantive 

comments received after the comment 

closing date will be considered to the 

extent practicable. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Contact Max Kieba at 202–493–0595 or 

Email: max.kieba@dot.gov for questions 

regarding the leak detection study. 

Contact Patrick Landon at 202–695– 

0798 or Email: patrick.landon@dot.gov 

for questions regarding the valve study. 

Background: The recent passage of the 

Pipeline Safety, Regulatory Certainty, 

and Job Creation Act of 2011 has called 

for several commissioned studies and 

reports to Congress that PHMSA must 

address and complete. Further, PHMSA 

is also evaluating how to address several 

concerns raised by recent National 

Transportation Safety Board 

recommendations. 

PHMSA has commissioned two 

studies to gather facts and perform 

technical, operational, and economical 

analyses about the constraints and 

implications for expanding the uses of 

leak detection systems and automatic 

and remote controlled valves. PHMSA 

believes that the scope of these studies 

should have a wide stakeholder review 

and input and seeks public input 

through two venues. 

First is the public workshop on 

Improving Pipeline Leak Detection 

System Effectiveness and 

Understanding the Application of 

Automatic/Remote Control Valves on 

March 27–28, 2012. This workshop will 

examine how to encourage operators to 

expand usage of leak detection systems 

(LDS) and improve system effectiveness 

on the Nation’s pipeline infrastructure 

and how remote control and automatic 

control valves can be installed to lessen 

the volume of natural gas and hazardous 

liquid released during catastrophic 

pipeline events. These public meetings 

are designed to provide an open forum 

for exchanging information on the 

challenges associated with LDS and 

automatic/remote control valves. 

Second is the opportunity for all 

stakeholders to publically comment on 

the scope of these two studies. This 

notice was designed to do just that. The 

following sections identify what 

Congress has mandated in these studies 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 62 / Friday, March 30, 2012 / Notices 19415 

and the scope of work PHMSA has 

factored into each study. 

Leak Detection Study 

The Congress included the following 

language from the Act related to the leak 

detection study: 

‘‘SEC. 8. LEAK DETECTION. 

(a) LEAK DETECTION REPORT.— 

(1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 1 year 

after the date of enactment of this Act, the 

Secretary of Transportation shall submit to 

the Committee on Commerce, Science, and 

Transportation of the Senate and the 

Committee on Transportation and 

Infrastructure and the Committee on Energy 

and Commerce of the House of 

Representatives a report on leak detection 

systems utilized by operators of hazardous 

liquid pipeline facilities and transportationrelated flow lines. 

(2) CONTENTS.—The report shall 

include— 

(A) An analysis of the technical limitations 

of current leak detection systems, including 

the ability of the systems to detect ruptures 

and small leaks that are ongoing or 

intermittent, and what can be done to foster 

development of better technologies; and 

(B) An analysis of the practicability of 

establishing technically, operationally, and 

economically feasible standards for the 

capability of such systems to detect leaks, 

and the safety benefits and adverse 

consequences of requiring operators to use 

leak detection systems.’’ 

PHMSA has commissioned a leak 

detection study containing the following 

work scope: 

Task 1—Kickoff Meeting 

A kickoff meeting will be held via 

webinar or phone call to review the 

scope of the project. 

Task 2—Attendance at Public Workshop 

The contractor will attend PHMSA’s 

Improving Pipeline Leak Detection 

System Effectiveness Public Workshop 

on March 27, 2012. Any public input 

from that workshop will be considered 

for any potential modifications of the 

scope of work and when developing the 

final report. 

Task 3—Review and Assess Previous 

Pipeline Incidents 

PHMSA will provide access to its 

pipeline incident data. The contractor 

will examine past pipeline incidents 

and consider any non-PHMSA datasets 

that may provide useful insight and 

analysis to meet project objectives. This 

evaluation will help determine whether 

implementation of further leak detection 

capabilities would have mitigated 

effects to the public and surrounding 

environment. The contractor will use 

standard fire science practices to 

perform the risk analysis to property, 

public, and the environment. This 

evaluation will also help determine the 

level of protection needed for adequate 

mitigation. 

Task 4—Technological Feasibility 

The contractor will compare all 

methods to determine whether current 

systems (or multiple systems) are able to 

adequately protect the public and the 

environment from pipeline leaks or 

incidents. The contractor is to look at 

legacy equipment currently utilized by 

operators, their ability to retrofit, and all 

benefits and drawbacks of all methods. 

The contractor is to consider the 

method/systems ability to detect small/ 

intermittent leaks and identify and 

explain any technology gaps. 

Task 5—Operational Feasibility 

The contractor will analyze leak 

detection methods and systems that are 

currently being used throughout the 

industry. This task includes defining 

and categorizing leak detection methods 

and systems that range from visual 

inspection techniques, instrumented 

monitoring of internal pipeline 

conditions, and external 

instrumentation for detecting leaked 

hydrocarbons. This task includes a view 

of how many operators are adequately 

protecting their infrastructure with leak 

detection systems, and an analysis of 

operational aspects (i.e. procedures, 

protocols, best practices, workforce, 

etc.). The contractor will consider 

reliability, availability and 

maintainability of system aspects and 

analyze how further leak detection 

methods/system deployment would 

affect pipeline operations. 

Task 6—Economical Feasibility 

The contractor will perform a cost 

benefit analysis for deploying leak 

detection systems on new and existing 

pipeline systems. The cost benefit will 

determine the lifetime operational cost 

of the system and take into account the 

benefit that may be seen by the public 

and surrounding environment over the 

anticipated life cycle of the individual 

leak detection systems. The analysis 

will focus on the entire pipeline 

infrastructure with a separate analysis to 

include pipelines in high consequence 

areas (HCAs) only. Damage to 

surrounding environment/public must 

utilize standard fire science practices. 

Task 7—Analyze Leak Detection 

Standards 

The contractor is to analyze the 

practicability of establishing 

technically, operationally, and 

economically feasible leak detection 

standards to provide adequate 

protection to the Nation against pipeline 

leaks, if such standards don’t already 

exist. The analysis should be specific to 

the type of pipeline (gas distribution, 

gas transmission, hazardous liquid 

pipeline facilities, transportation-related 

flow lines, etc.) and consider pipeline 

locations (i.e., Class Locations, HCAs, 

non-HCAs, etc.). 

The deliverable from this study will 

embody the supporting information 

reported to Congress starting in 

December 2012, and will be publically 

available from PHMSA’s Web site at 

http://www.phmsa.dot.gov/pipeline/ 

library. 

Automatic and Remote-Controlled 

Shut-Off Valves 

Congress included the following 

language from the Act related to the 

valve study: 

‘‘SEC. 4. AUTOMATIC AND REMOTECONTROLLED SHUT-OFF VALVES. 

Section 60102 is amended— 

(1) By striking subsection (j)(3); and 

(2) By adding at the end the following: 

(n) Automatic and Remote-Controlled 

Shut-OFF Valves for New Transmission 

Pipelines.— 

(1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 2 years 

after the date of enactment of this subsection, 

and after considering the factors specified in 

subsection (b)(2), the Secretary, if 

appropriate, shall require by regulation the 

use of automatic or remote-controlled shutoff valves, or equivalent technology, where 

economically, technically, and operationally 

feasible on transmission pipeline facilities 

constructed or entirely replaced after the date 

on which the Secretary issues the final rule 

containing such requirement. 

(2) HIGH-CONSEQUENCE AREA 

STUDY.— 

(A) STUDY.—The Comptroller General of 

the United States shall conduct a study on 

the ability of transmission pipeline facility 

operators to respond to a hazardous liquid or 

gas release from a pipeline segment located 

in a high-consequence area. 

(B) CONSIDERATIONS.—In conducting 

the study, the Comptroller General shall 

consider the swiftness of leak detection and 

pipeline shutdown capabilities, the location 

of the nearest response personnel, and the 

costs, risks, and benefits of installing 

automatic and remote-controlled shut-off 

valves. 

(C) REPORT.—Not later than 1 year after 

the date of enactment of this subsection, the 

Comptroller General shall submit to the 

Committee on Transportation and 

Infrastructure and the Committee on Energy 

and Commerce of the House of 

Representatives and the Committee on 

Commerce, Science, and Transportation of 

the Senate a report on the results of the 

study.’’ 

PHMSA has commissioned a study on 

the requirements of automatic and 

remote-controlled shut-off valves that 

cover natural gas and hazardous liquid 

lines containing the following work 

scope: 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

19416 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 62 / Friday, March 30, 2012 / Notices 

Task 1: Kickoff Meeting 

A kickoff meeting will be held via 

webinar or phone call to review the 

scope of the project. 

Task 2: Attend Public Workshop 

The contractor will attend PHMSA’s 

Understanding the Application of 

Automatic Control and Remote Control 

Valves public workshop on March 28, 

2012. The contractor will review and 

provide feedback on any result from the 

workshop. The feedback should be 

incorporated into the tasked studies. 

This can potentially lead to a 

modification of scope and costs if 

warranted 

Task 3: Required Study on Automatic 

and Remote-Controlled Shut-off Valves 

on HCAs and Class 3 and Class 4 Areas 

on Natural Gas Pipelines 

The contractor will conduct a study 

on the ability of transmission pipeline 

facility operators to respond to a 

hazardous liquid or gas release from a 

pipeline segment located in a HCA. This 

study will evaluate Class 3 and Class 4 

areas of natural gas transmission 

pipelines. 

The contractor must analyze the 

technical and operational ability of the 

swiftness of the existing leak detection 

system and the operator’s capability to 

shut down the affected pipeline, and 

consider upstream and downstream 

controls, automation, supervisory 

control and data acquisition systems, 

and valve spacing. Also to be discussed 

are human factors of response, 

specifically, what is the minimum 

response time and the nearest required 

human to initiate isolation of the 

pipeline? 

The contractor must perform a cost 

benefit analysis for installing automatic 

and remote controlled shut-off valves in 

HCAs and for gas transmission Class 3 

and Class 4 areas. The cost benefit must 

determine the lifetime operational cost 

of the system and take into account the 

benefit that may be seen by the public 

and surrounding environment. Analysis 

should include the economic impact of 

damage to surrounding environment/ 

public and utilize standard fire science 

practices to derive the result. 

The contractor will perform a risk 

analysis of installing automatic and 

remote controlled shut-off valves as 

compared to local manual operation of 

isolation valves on transmission 

pipelines. The contractor will use 

standard fire science practices to 

perform the risk analysis that will 

analyze the risk to property, the public, 

and the environment. 

The contractor is to analyze and 

discuss the benefits to the public and 

the environment of a requirement to 

install automatic and remote controlled 

shut-off valves within HCAs and Class 

3 and Class 4 areas. 

Task 4: Required Study on Automatic 

and Remote Controlled Shut-Off Valves 

on Newly Constructed or Entirely 

Replaced Facilities 

The contractor is to study the use of 

automatic or remote controlled shut-off 

valves in newly- constructed and 

entirely replaced facilities constructed 

after January 2012. This study should 

address the economical, technical and 

operational feasibility of this 

requirement. The following points 

should be incorporated into the study. 

Economic Feasibility 

The contractor will perform a cost 

benefit analysis for installing automatic 

and remote controlled shut-off valves on 

new and entirely replaced pipeline 

systems. This cost benefit will 

determine the lifetime operational cost 

of the system and take into account the 

benefit that may be seen by the public 

and surrounding environment over the 

anticipated life cycle of automatic and 

remote controlled shut-off valves 

installed. Analysis should include the 

economic impact of damage to the 

surrounding environment/public and 

utilize standard fire science practices to 

derive the result. 

Technical Feasibility 

The contractor is to compare all types 

of automatic and remote controlled 

shut-off valves and determine whether 

available technologies can adequately 

protect the public and environment 

from pipeline leaks and incidents 

through rapid closure, and discuss 

benefits and drawbacks of all methods. 

Giving special consideration to the 

method/systems ability to detect and 

react to small/intermittent leaks, the 

contractor is to identify and explain any 

technology gaps and analyze any 

technological shortfalls specific to 

automatic shut-off valves’ reliability. 

Modeling of rapid closure of valves will 

utilize standard fire science practices to 

establish benchmarks for technical 

feasibility. The contractor is also to 

determine if there are alternative 

technologies to automatic and remote 

controlled shut-off valves and 

investigate and explain these 

technologies. 

Operational Feasibility 

The contractor will review and 

summarize DOT’s current regulations 

addressing the installation of automatic 

and remote controlled shut-off valves. 

This review will be for hazardous liquid 

and natural gas pipelines and determine 

how operators are currently complying 

with them. The contractor will analyze 

operational aspects (i.e. procedures, 

protocols, best practices, workforce, 

etc.) and discuss reliability, availability 

and maintainability of these systems. 

The contractor will analyze how 

automatic and remote controlled shutoff valve installation would affect 

pipeline operations. Also, the contractor 

will consider how emergency first 

responders should be addressed in the 

operational feasibility study. 

Task 5—Review and Assess Previous 

Pipeline Incidents 

PHMSA will provide access to 

pipeline incident data. The contractor 

will examine past pipeline incidents to 

determine whether installation of either 

automatic or remote controlled shut-off 

valves would have mitigated effects to 

the public and surrounding 

environment. The contractor will use 

standard fire science practices to 

perform the risk analysis to property, 

the public, and the environment. 

The deliverable from this study will 

embody the supporting information 

reported to Congress starting in 

December 2012, and will be publically 

available on PHMSA’s Web site at 

http://www.phmsa.dot.gov/pipeline/ 

library. 

Any individual or organization can 

submit comments on any of these 

commissioned studies. However, there 

are time constraints to reporting to 

Congress. In order to meet the time 

constraints, PHMSA must have all 

comments submitted by close of 

business April 30, 2012. 

Some key questions for your 

consideration are: 

Is PHMSA’s commissioned work 

scope adequate for supporting a 

comprehensive report to Congress? 

If not, what additional or revised 

work scope actions should PHMSA 

consider? 

Is there a related technical report 

publically available that these studies 

should review? 

Dated: Issued in Washington, DC, on 

March 26, 2012. 

Linda Daugherty, 

Deputy Associate Administrator for Policy 

and Programs. 

[FR Doc. 2012–7729 Filed 3–29–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–60–P 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES