Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 235 / Friday, December 8, 2023 / Notices 85725 

3See North America Subaru, Inc., Denial of 

Petition for Decision of Inconsequential 

Noncompliance; 87 FR 48764, August 10, 2022. 

4Nissan North America, Inc., Grant of Petition for 

Determination of Inconsequential Noncompliance; 

85 FR 39678 (July 1, 2020). 

5Subaru of America, Grant of Petition for 

Determination of Inconsequential Noncompliance; 

56 FR 59971, (November 26, 1991). 

6Toyota Motor North America, Inc., Grant of 

Petition for Decision of Inconsequential 

Noncompliance; 85 FR 39679 (July 1, 2020). 

7 FCA US, LLC, Denial of Petition for Decision of 

Inconsequential Noncompliance; 87 FR 57649 

(September 15, 2022). 

8Ford did not provide the Federal Register 

citation but it appears that this refers to North 

America Subaru, Inc., Denial of Petition for 

Decision of Inconsequential Noncompliance; 87 FR 

48764 (August 10, 2022). 

unable to differentiate the light output 

between different sources when the 

difference in illumination was less than 

25 percent. Ford contends that the 1994 

study indicated that the findings were 

appropriate for consideration of 

inconsequentiality petitions involving a 

noncompliance with the photometry 

requirements of FMVSS No. 108. 

Ford notes that it is not aware of any 

reports related to the subject 

noncompliance. Ford recognizes that a 

lack of reports is not dispositive but 

believes that it is illustrative of the field 

performance.3

Ford says that NHTSA has granted 

prior petitions concerning similar 

noncompliances. Ford believes that 

NHTSA’s rationale for those decisions 

support the granting of its current 

petition. 

Ford says that NHTSA granted a 

petition submitted by Nissan North 

America, Inc. (Nissan)4 that involved 

vehicles with side marker lamps in 

combination head lamps that did not 

meet the photometric intensity 

requirements as required by paragraph 

S7.4.13.1 of FMVSS No. 108. Ford 

explains that Nissan’s petition 

presented two main arguments: (1) 

NHTSA should consider the parking 

lamp photometry along with the side 

marker lamp because both lamps are 

always illuminated, and (2) the 

condition that caused the 

noncompliance could not be seen by the 

human eye. In this case, Ford says that 

NHTSA agreed with Nissan’s second 

argument but rejected the first. Ford 

says that NHTSA disagreed with 

Nissan’s first argument because Nissan’s 

parking lamp illumination was white 

and the side marker lamp was amber 

which would cause a passing motorist 

to have difficulty determining what part 

of the vehicle is approaching. Ford 

contends that this reasoning does not 

apply to the subject noncompliance 

because both Ford’s parking lamp and 

side marker lamp are amber. Thus, 

according to Ford, a passing motorist 

would not encounter the same difficulty 

in determining which part of the vehicle 

is approaching. 

Ford says it also reviewed petitions 

involving a noncompliance with the 

side reflex reflector and not the side 

marker lamp. While the petitions do not 

concern the side marker lamp, Ford 

believes that NHTSA’s rationale in those 

decisions can be informative. Ford 

explains that the side reflex reflectors 

reflect other light and do not illuminate. 

Ford says that NHTSA has consistently 

found that a 25 percent change in 

luminosity is imperceptible to the 

human eye. Specifically, Ford refers to 

NHTSA’s decision on a petition 

submitted by Subaru of America 

(Subaru) 5 that involved failures of 

luminous intensity on the side reflex 

reflector and a Hella petition. In that 

case, Ford explains that the 

noncompliant lamps were all less than 

20 percent of the minimum values. 

NHTSA granted Subaru’s petition and 

applied the reasoning that the human 

eye cannot detect a 25 percent change 

in luminosity. 

Ford also cites NHTSA’s decision on 

a petition from Toyota Motor North 

America (Toyota) 6 in which vehicles 

were equipped with rear reflex 

reflectors that did not meet the 

minimum requirements specified in 

FMVSS No. 108. Ford says Toyota 

believed that noncompliance was 

inconsequential because a change of 

luminous intensity of 18 percent is 

imperceptible to the human eye. 

NHTSA concurred, relying on its own 

assessment and past precedent stated in 

the 1991 Hella and Subaru grants of 

inconsequentiality. 

Next, Ford says that NHTSA’s 

rationale in denying a petition 

submitted by FCA US LLC (FCA) 7

supports its belief that the subject 

noncompliance should be deemed 

inconsequential. Ford explains that 

FCA’s petition concerned side reflex 

reflectors that did not meet the 

minimum photometry requirements at 

the observation angle of 0.2 degrees. In 

that petition, FCA’s reflex reflectors 

were 68.6 percent below the required 

value. Ford says that the subject side 

marker lamps ‘‘maintained much closer 

margins to the standard.’’ 

Finally, Ford refers to a Subaru 

petition that NHTSA denied in 2022 

that involved side reflex reflectors that 

did not comply with FMVSS No. 108 

photometry requirements.8 In that case, 

Ford says NHTSA stated that its 

thinking on the deviation threshold of 

25 percent evolved, and that it no longer 

believes that threshold applies to side 

reflex reflectors because the photometry 

criteria for side reflex reflectors are 

measured in mcd/lux, whereas other 

lamps are measured in candela. Ford 

contends that this new thinking should 

not apply to the subject noncompliance 

because side marker lamps produce 

their own illumination and are therefore 

measured in candela. 

Ford concludes by stating its belief 

that the subject noncompliance is 

inconsequential as it relates to motor 

vehicle safety and its petition to be 

exempted from providing notification of 

the noncompliance, as required by 49 

U.S.C. 30118, and a remedy for the 

noncompliance, as required by 49 

U.S.C. 30120, should be granted. 

NHTSA notes that the statutory 

provisions (49 U.S.C. 30118(d) and 

30120(h)) that permit manufacturers to 

file petitions for a determination of 

inconsequentiality allow NHTSA to 

exempt manufacturers only from the 

duties found in sections 30118 and 

30120, respectively, to notify owners, 

purchasers, and dealers of a defect or 

noncompliance and to remedy the 

defect or noncompliance. Therefore, any 

decision on this petition only applies to 

the subject vehicles that Ford no longer 

controlled at the time it determined that 

the noncompliance existed. However, 

any decision on this petition does not 

relieve vehicles distributors and dealers 

of the prohibitions on the sale, offer for 

sale, or introduction or delivery for 

introduction into interstate commerce of 

the noncompliant vehicles under their 

control after Ford notified them that the 

subject noncompliance existed. 

(Authority: 49 U.S.C. 30118, 30120: 

delegations of authority at 49 CFR 1.95 and 

501.8) 

Otto G. Matheke, III, 

Director, Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance. 

[FR Doc. 2023–26960 Filed 12–7–23; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–59–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

National Highway Traffic Safety 

Administration 

[Docket No. NHTSA–2023–0065] 

Agency Information Collection 

Activities; Notice and Request for 

Comment; Crash Injury Research and 

Engineering Network Data Collection 

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic 

Safety Administration (NHTSA), 

Department of Transportation (DOT). 

ACTION: Notice and request for 

comments on a request for approval of 

a new information collection. 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
85726 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 235 / Friday, December 8, 2023 / Notices 

1Additional details about the CISS, SCI, and 

Special Study data collections are available in the 

supporting statements for the ICR with OMB 

Control Number 2127–0706. 

SUMMARY: The National Highway Traffic 

Safety Administration (NHTSA) invites 

public comments about our intention to 

request approval from the Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB) for a 

new information collection. Before a 

Federal agency can collect certain 

information from the public, it must 

receive approval from OMB. Under 

procedures established by the 

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, 

before seeking OMB approval, Federal 

agencies must solicit public comment 

on proposed collections of information, 

including extensions and reinstatement 

of previously approved collections. This 

document describes NHTSA’s Crash 

Injury Research and Engineering 

Network (CIREN) investigation-based 

crash data study for which it is seeking 

OMB approval. 

DATES: Comments must be submitted on 

or before February 6, 2024. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments 

identified by the Docket No. NHTSA– 

2023–0065 through any of the following 

methods: 

• Electronic submissions: Go to the 

Federal eRulemaking Portal at http://

www.regulations.gov . Follow the online 

instructions for submitting comments. 

• Fax: (202) 493–2251. 

• Mail or Hand Delivery: Docket 

Management, U.S. Department of 

Transportation, 1200 New Jersey 

Avenue SE, West Building, Room W12– 

140, Washington, DC 20590, between 9 

a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through 

Friday, except on Federal holidays. To 

be sure someone is there to help you, 

please call (202) 366–9322 before 

coming. 

Instructions: All submissions must 

include the agency name and docket 

number for this notice. Note that all 

comments received will be posted 

without change to http://

www.regulations.gov, including any 

personal information provided. Please 

see the Privacy Act heading below. 

Privacy Act: Anyone is able to search 

the electronic form of all 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 (65 FR 

19477–78) or you may visit https://

www.transportation.gov/privacy. 

Docket: For access to the docket to 

read background documents or 

comments received, go to http://

www.regulations.gov or the street 

address listed above. Follow the online 

instructions for accessing the dockets 

via internet. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For 

additional information or access to 

background documents, contact Rodney 

Rudd, Office of Vehicle Safety Research, 

Human Injury Research Division (NSR– 

220), West Building, W46–324, 1200 

New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 

20590. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under the 

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 

U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), before an agency 

submits a proposed collection of 

information to OMB for approval, it 

must first publish a document in the 

Federal Register providing a 60-day 

comment period and otherwise consult 

with members of the public and affected 

agencies concerning each proposed 

collection of information. The OMB has 

promulgated regulations describing 

what must be included in such a 

document. Under OMB’s regulation (at 

5 CFR 1320.8(d)), an agency must ask 

for public comment on the following: (a) 

whether the proposed collection of 

information is necessary for the proper 

performance of the functions of the 

agency, including whether the 

information will have practical utility; 

(b) the accuracy of the agency’s estimate 

of the burden of the proposed collection 

of information, including the validity of 

the methodology and assumptions used; 

(c) how to enhance the quality, utility, 

and clarity of the information to be 

collected; and (d) how to minimize the 

burden of the collection of information 

on those who are to respond, including 

the use of appropriate automated, 

electronic, mechanical, or other 

technological collection techniques or 

other forms of information technology, 

e.g. permitting electronic submission of 

responses. In compliance with these 

requirements, NHTSA asks for public 

comments on the following proposed 

collection of information for which the 

agency is seeking approval from OMB. 

Title: Crash Injury Research and 

Engineering Network (CIREN) Data 

Collection. 

OMB Control Number: New. 

Form Number(s): TBD. 

Type of Request: Request for approval 

of a new information collection. 

Type of Review Requested: Regular. 

Requested Expiration Date of 

Approval: Three years from date of 

approval. 

Summary of the Collection of 

Information: 

The National Highway Traffic Safety 

Administration (NHTSA) is seeking 

approval from OMB of this information 

collection request (ICR) for a new, 

independent information collection for 

an investigation-based crash data 

acquisition system which was 

previously included under OMB Control 

Number 2127–0706. NHTSA proposes 

to collect information from the public as 

part of a study to improve NHTSA’s 

understanding of injury causation in 

motor vehicle crashes. NHTSA is 

authorized, under 49 U.S.C. 30182 and 

23 U.S.C. 403 to collect data on motor 

vehicle traffic crashes to aid in the 

identification of issues and the 

development, implementation, and 

evaluation of motor vehicle and 

highway safety countermeasures. For 

decades, NHTSA has been investigating 

crashes and collecting crash data 

through its investigation-based data 

collection systems. The Crash Injury 

Research and Engineering Network 

(CIREN) is a multidisciplinary, injuryfocused crash data collection program 

using trauma centers under contract to 

NHTSA’s Office of Vehicle Safety 

Research. NHTSA also investigates 

crashes through the Crash Investigation 

Sampling System (CISS), Special Crash 

Investigation (SCI), and specific issuebased Special Study data collection 

studies. Although each of these systems 

satisfy different purposes and collect 

data in different manners, they all 

utilize similar core data elements, 

procedures, information technology, 

and protocols for data collection.1

NHTSA is seeking approval for a new, 

independent information collection 

request for the CIREN program separate 

from NHTSA’s other investigation-based 

crash data collection systems. The 

method of case subject identification 

and selection is unique for CIREN. 

CIREN collects a purposive sample of 

injured traffic crash victims from a 

small number of sites to extensively 

examine and document injury causation 

in motor vehicle crashes. The CIREN 

program enrolls case subjects (crash 

victims) who have been admitted to 

eight contracted level-one trauma 

centers for treatment of injuries 

sustained in crashes and consent to 

participate in the study. The collection 

facilitates detailed review and analysis 

of medical and engineering data by 

multidisciplinary teams to evaluate 

injury causation. The focus of the 

CIREN program has historically been on 

seriously-injured occupants of recent 

model-year motor vehicles, though the 

program intends to expand to include 

pedestrians, pedalcyclists, and 

micromobility (non-motorist) users who 

have been injured in crashes. 

Study personnel at each of the eight 

contracted CIREN sites review trauma 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 235 / Friday, December 8, 2023 / Notices 85727 

registry data to identify potential case 

subjects based on the study’s inclusion 

criteria. Study teams obtain informed 

consent from eligible patients according 

to institutional policies and consent 

documents. No data is collected from 

eligible patients who do not provide 

consent to participate in the study. 

Participation in CIREN does not affect 

the case subject’s medical treatment. 

Observations from the CIREN program 

inform NHTSA research priorities and 

the data support improvements in motor 

vehicle safety. CIREN provides nonprivate data to the public through an 

online case viewer, database files, and 

reports. 

After an eligible patient provides 

consent, study personnel retrieve the 

case subject’s medical information and 

commence the crash investigation. 

Study personnel retrieve the medical 

information directly from the hospital’s 

electronic medical record (EMR) system 

including case subject anthropometry, 

past medical history, radiological 

imaging and reports, operative 

procedure reports, and injury diagnoses. 

They also request emergency medical 

services (EMS) response reports from 

first responders. Study personnel also 

conduct an interview with the case 

subject (or a surrogate in cases where 

the case subject is unable to 

communicate) to develop an 

understanding about the crash 

circumstances. A trained crash 

investigator locates, visits, measures, 

and photographs the crash scene and 

the case subject’s vehicle (or the striking 

vehicle for non-motorist case subjects). 

They also obtain the police crash report. 

These data are used to characterize the 

performance of vehicle safety systems 

and biomechanical responses of injured 

individuals in motor vehicle crashes. 

Description of the Need for the 

Information and Proposed Use of the 

Information: NHTSA investigates realworld crashes and collects detailed 

crash and medical data in the CIREN 

program to identify human and vehicle 

factors related to injury causation in 

support of NHTSA research. 

Biomechanical engineers and medical 

doctors collaboratively review case 

evidence to establish injury causation 

scenarios. These detailed factors and 

scenarios inform research priorities. 

They may also guide the development 

and evaluation of effective safety 

countermeasures such as testing tools 

and criteria. The data collected also act 

as a sentinel, providing NHTSA with 

advanced notice of emerging crash 

injury problems, and are used to 

generate research hypotheses. These 

efforts give motor vehicle researchers an 

opportunity to specify areas in which 

improvements may be possible, design 

countermeasure programs, and evaluate 

the effects of existing and proposed 

safety measures. The resulting 

deidentified database provides NHTSA 

and the public with access to crash data 

which contains extensive medical 

detail, including medical imaging, 

which is a unique resource among 

available crash data systems. There is no 

other source for the biomechanicsfocused data which is critical to support 

crash injury mitigation and prevention 

research. 

Affected Public: People involved in 

select motor vehicle crashes admitted to 

contracted trauma centers for treatment; 

law enforcement jurisdictions that 

provide access to and a copy of crash 

reports from the investigated crashes; 

EMS providers responding to 

investigated crashes, and tow or salvage 

facilities that provide access for 

inspections of involved vehicles. 

Estimated Number of Respondents: 

1,136. 

Study personnel screen trauma 

records for potentially eligible case 

subjects, and then approach potential 

case subjects to gain consent. It is 

estimated that 362 potential case 

subjects are approached for consent 

each year. Of those, an average of 258 

provide consent and participate in the 

interview process. For each of the 258 

consented case subjects, study 

personnel contact the police, EMS 

agencies, and a tow facility for report 

documentation and to coordinate the 

vehicle inspection. The combination of 

patients (362) and associated contacts (3 

× 258) yields 1,136 total respondents 

each year, on average. 

Frequency: On occasion. 

Estimated Total Annual Burden 

Hours: 499 hours. 

The CIREN program consists of four 

(4) information collections. The first 

information collection covers the 

consent process for individuals 

involved in crashes who are deemed 

potentially eligible for the study at 

contracted trauma centers. Based on 

historical data, approximately 362 

potential case subjects are approached 

for study consent each year. The 

consent process generally requires thirty 

(30) minutes of the respondent’s time 

during their acute hospital admission, 

which includes explanation of the study 

risks and benefits and review of consent 

language. This burden would apply for 

every patient approached for consent, 

regardless of their decision to 

participate in the study. The estimated 

total annual burden hours for seeking 

study consent from eligible case subjects 

is 181 hours (362 respondents × 0.5 

hours). 

The second information collection is 

from individuals who agree to 

participate in the study. After providing 

consent, CIREN contractor personnel 

conduct an interview that requires 

approximately one hour of the 

respondent’s time during their acute 

hospital admission. The CIREN program 

has historically conducted interviews of 

approximately 258 case subjects per 

year. Therefore, the estimated total 

annual burden for case subject 

interviews is 258 hours (258 

respondents × 1.0 hour). 

The third information collection for 

CIREN is obtaining first responder 

reports to complete the cases. The 

reports are obtained from police and 

EMS agencies, and reports are only 

requested for crash subjects who have 

consented to participate in the study. 

NHTSA estimates each query to police 

agencies takes three (3) minutes (0.05 

hours) and each query to EMS agencies 

takes six (6) minutes (0.1 hours). 

Therefore, the total estimated annual 

burden for crash and EMS reports is 39 

hours (258 requests × (0.05 hours + 0.1 

hours)). 

The fourth information collection for 

CIREN is associated with towing and 

salvage facility requests for access to 

case vehicles. Typically, a towing or 

salvage facility operator will provide the 

crash investigator permission to enter 

the facility to inspect the case-involved 

vehicle as well as provide guidance 

regarding the location of the vehicle. 

This process is estimated to take 

approximately five (5) minutes (0.08 

hours) of staff time. CIREN averages 258 

visits to towing and salvage facilities 

each year since most CIREN cases 

involve inspection of one case vehicle. 

The total annual burden for towing and 

salvage facilities is 21 hours (258 

requests × 0.083 hours). 

Information collection Number of 

respondents 

Number of 

responses 

(per respondent) 

Burden per 

response 

Burden per 

respondent 

Total burden 

(hours) 

Potential case subject consent ................................................................ 362 362 (1) 30 minutes ......... 30 minutes ......... 181 

Case subject interview ............................................................................ 258 258 (1) 1.0 hours ........... 1.0 hours ........... 258 

Police report requests ............................................................................. 258 258 (1) 3 minutes ........... 3 minutes ........... 13 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES

I I 
85728 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 235 / Friday, December 8, 2023 / Notices 

Information collection Number of 

respondents 

Number of 

responses 

(per respondent) 

Burden per 

response 

Burden per 

respondent 

Total burden 

(hours) 

EMS report requests ............................................................................... 258 258 (1) 6 minutes ........... 6 minutes ........... 26 

Access to towing/salvage facility ............................................................. 258 258 (1) 5 minutes ........... 5 minutes ........... 21 

Total .................................................................................................. ........................ .............................. ........................... ........................... 499 

Accordingly, NHTSA estimates that 

the total burden associated with the 

CIREN program is 499 hours (181 + 258 

+ 39 + 21). 

Estimated Total Annual Burden Cost: 

$0. 

There are no capital, start-up, or 

annual operation and maintenance costs 

involved in this collection of 

information. The respondents would not 

incur any reporting costs from the 

information collection beyond the 

opportunity or labor costs associated 

with the burden hours. The respondents 

also would not incur any recordkeeping 

burden or recordkeeping costs from the 

information collection. Therefore, 

NHTSA estimates that there will be no 

annual burden cost to respondents. 

Public Comments Invited: You are 

asked to comment on any aspects of this 

information collection, including (a) 

whether the proposed collection of 

information is necessary for the proper 

performance of the functions of the 

Department, including whether the 

information will have practical utility; 

(b) the accuracy of the Department’s 

estimate of the burden of the proposed 

information collection; (c) ways to 

enhance the quality, utility and clarity 

of the information to be collected; and 

(d) ways to minimize the burden of the 

collection of information on 

respondents, including the use of 

automated collection techniques or 

other forms of information technology. 

Authority: The Paperwork Reduction 

Act of 1995; 44 U.S.C. chapter 35, as 

amended; 49 CFR 1.49; and DOT Order 

1351.29A. 

Cem Hatipoglu, 

Associate Administrator, Office of Vehicle 

Safety Research. 

[FR Doc. 2023–27006 Filed 12–7–23; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–59–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Pipeline and Hazardous Materials 

Safety Administration 

[Docket No. PHMSA–2023–0116] 

Pipeline Safety: Random Drug Testing 

Rate; Multi-Factor Authentication; and 

Operator and Contractor Management 

Information System Reporting 

AGENCY: Pipeline and Hazardous 

Materials Safety Administration 

(PHMSA), DOT. 

ACTION: Notice of Calendar Year 2024 

Minimum Annual Percentage Rate for 

Random Drug Testing; Multi-Factor 

Authentication (MFA) for Drug and 

Alcohol (D&A) Management Information 

System (DAMIS) Reports, Pipeline 

Operator DAMIS Reporting, and 

Contractor DAMIS Reporting. 

SUMMARY: PHMSA has determined that 

the minimum random drug testing rate 

for covered employees will remain at 25 

percent during calendar year 2024. For 

calendar year 2023 reporting, DOT is 

introducing MFA login procedures for 

submitting D&A testing data into the 

DAMIS database. This notice also 

explains how pipeline operators and 

contractors will obtain MFA login 

information. 

DATES: Applicable January 1, 2024, 

through December 31, 2024. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Wayne Lemoi, Drug & Alcohol Program 

Manager, Office of Pipeline Safety, by 

phone at 909–937–7232 or by email at 

wayne.lemoi@dot.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Notice of Calendar Year 2024 Minimum 

Annual Percentage Rate for Random 

Drug Testing 

Operators of gas, hazardous liquid, 

and carbon dioxide pipeline facilities; 

liquefied natural gas (LNG) plants; and 

underground natural gas storage 

facilities must randomly select and test 

a percentage of all covered employees 

for prohibited drug use in accordance 

with 49 Code of Federal Regulations 

part 199. Pursuant to 49 CFR 

199.105(c)(1), the minimum annual 

random drug testing rate for all covered 

employees is 50 percent. However, the 

Administrator can adjust this random 

drug testing rate based on the reported 

positive rate in the industry’s random 

drug tests, which is submitted in 

operators’ annual MIS reports as 

required by § 199.119(a). In accordance 

with § 199.105(c)(3), if the reported 

positive drug test rate is below 1.0 

percent for two consecutive calendar 

years, the Administrator can lower the 

random drug testing rate to 25 percent 

of all covered employees. 

Pursuant to § 199.105(c)(3), the 

Administrator is maintaining the 

PHMSA minimum annual random drug 

testing rate for all covered employees at 

25 percent in calendar year 2024 

because the random drug test positive 

rate for the pipeline industry was 

reported at less than 1.0 percent in the 

consecutive calendar years of 2021 and 

2022. 

Multi-Factor Authentication for DAMIS 

Reports 

In calendar year 2024, DOT will begin 

using Multi-Factor Authentication 

(MFA) to limit and control access to 

DOT’s DAMIS database. MFA is not 

unique to PHMSA or to DAMIS. It is a 

Federal Government initiative being 

implemented to protect the integrity and 

security of Federal Government 

databases from cybersecurity attacks 

and other risks. MFA login procedures 

for ‘‘primary pipeline’’ operators and 

contractors are explained in the 

applicable sections below. 

Pipeline Operator DAMIS Reporting 

To collect more accurate pipeline 

industry DOT D&A test data and to 

avoid duplicate reporting of D&A test 

data, PHMSA is limiting the DAMIS 

reporting to ‘‘primary operators’’ and 

contractors only. The term ‘‘primary 

operator’’ is not used in the D&A testing 

regulations in part 199; however, the 

term ‘‘primary operator’’ as used herein 

has the same meaning as the term 

‘‘primary entity’’ as used in § 191.22 and 

§ 195.64. Moreover, a ‘‘primary 

operator’’ can be a large or small 

operator as explained below. 

Pipeline operators either have a D&A 

program that includes only one pipeline 

operator (i.e., one OPID) or an 

‘‘umbrella’’ type shared D&A program 

that includes multiple pipeline 

operators (i.e., more than one OPID). For 

DAMIS reporting purposes the operator 

of the single operator D&A program is 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES