34500 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 121 /Wednesday, June 24, 1998 / Notices

information collection(s) should be sent

within 60 days from the date of this

publication, directly to the SSA Reports

Clearance Officer at the following

address: Social Security Administration,

DCFAM, Attn: Frederick W.

Brickenkamp, 6401 Security Blvd., 1–

A–21 Operations Bldg., Baltimore, MD

21235.

In addition to your comments on the

accuracy of the agency’s burden

estimate, we are soliciting comments on

the need for the information; its

practical utility; ways to enhance its

quality, utility and clarity; and on ways

to minimize burden on respondents,

including the use of automated

collection techniques or other forms of

information technology.

II. The information collection(s) listed

below have been submitted to OMB:

1. Certificate of Coverage Request—

0960–0554. The information collected is

used by the Social Security

Administration (SSA) to provide to an

individual working in a foreign country,

a certificate of coverage from the United

States Social Security system. This

certification exempts the individual

from paying taxes into a foreign Social

Security system. The respondents are

workers and employers whose work is

performed in a foreign country. The

hour burden may vary, because the

information may be collected in writing,

by telephone or electronically.

Telephone/mail Electronic

Number of Respondents .................................................................................................................. 33,500 ................................ 500.

Frequency of Response ................................................................................................................... 1 ......................................... 1.

Average Burden Per Response ....................................................................................................... 30 minutes .......................... 20 minutes.

Estimated Annual Burden ................................................................................................................ 16,750 hours ...................... 167 hours.

Written comments and

recommendations regarding the

information collection(s) should be

directed within 30 days to the OMB

Desk Officer and SSA Reports Clearance

Officer at the following addresses:

(OMB)

Office of Management and Budget,

OIRA, Attn: Laura Oliven, New

Executive Office Building, Room 10230,

725 17th St., NW, Washington, D.C.

20503.

(SSA)

Social Security Administration,

DCFAM, Attn: Frederick W.

Brickenkamp 1–A–21 Operations Bldg.,

6401 Security Blvd., Baltimore, MD

21235.

To receive a copy of any of the forms

or clearance packages, call the SSA

Reports Clearance Officer on (410) 965–

4145 or write to him at the address

listed above.

Dated: June 18, 1998.

Frederick W. Brickenkamp,

Reports Clearance Officer, Social Security

Administration.

[FR Doc. 98–16815 Filed 6–23–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4190–29–P

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Coast Guard

[USCG–1998–3350]

Public Workshops for Response Plan

Equipment Caps: Scheduled Increases

in Mechanical Recovery and Potential

Changes to Dispersant Planning

Requirements

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DOT.

ACTION: Notice of meetings.

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is holding

three public workshops to solicit

comments on potential changes to the

equipment requirements within the

response plan regulations (33 CFR 154

and 155) for mechanical recovery,

dispersants, and other oil spill removal

technologies. These workshops are

intended to serve as forums for the

discussion of issues relevant to

establishing new integrated equipment

requirements, which address all

necessary spill removal technologies.

The Coast Guard specifically wishes to

solicit comments on how to cost

effectively incorporate high-rate

removal technologies, such as the use of

dispersants, into the resource

requirements contained within the

vessel response plan regulations.

Federal, state, and local agencies,

industry, oil spill removal

organizations, environmental groups

and the public are encouraged to

participate and provide oral or written

comments. This notice announces the

dates, times, locations, and format for

the workshops.

DATES: The public workshops are

scheduled for the following times and

locations. The workshops will convene

at the times indicated below; however,

they may be concluded early if their

business is finished: (1) Friday, July 24,

1998, from 9:30 a.m. to 3 p.m., at the

Oakland Airport Hilton, One

Hegenberger Road, Oakland, California

94621. (2) Wednesday, August 19, 1998,

from 9:30 a.m. to 3 p.m. at the Houston

Marriott West Loop—by the Galleria,

1750 West Look South, Houston, Texas

77027. (3) Wednesday, September 16,

1998, from 9:30 a.m. to 3 p.m. at the

U.S. Department of Transportation,

Nassif Building, Room 2230, 400

Seventh Street S.W., Washington, DC

20590.

ADDRESSES: You may mail comments to

the Docket Management Facility

(USCG–98–3350), U.S. Department of

Transportation (DOT), room PL–401,

400 Seventh Street S.W., Washington,

DC 20590–0001, or deliver them to room

PL–401, located on the Plaza level of the

Nassif Building at the same address

between 10 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday

through Friday, except Federal holidays.

The telephone number is 202–366–

9329. The Docket Management Facility

maintains the public docket for this

notice. Comments, and documents as

indicated in this preamble will become

part of this docket and will be available

for inspection or copying at room PL–

401, located on the Plaza Level of the

Nassif Building at the above address

between 10 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday

through Friday, except for Federal

holidays. You may also access the

public docket on the internet at http://

dms.dot.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

For questions on this Federal Register

notice, or persons interested in

presenting information at the workshop,

please contact Lieutenant Commander

John Caplis, Plans and Preparedness

Division, Office of Response, telephone

202–267–6922, fax 202–267–4065, or at

e-mail address jcapliscomdt.uscg.mil. A

conceptual document has been

developed by the Coast Guard in order

to facilitate discussion during the

workshop. The document identifies key

issues and elements relating to

dispersant planning, and can be

obtained prior to the workshops through

the Vessel Response Plan Status-line or

the Vessel Response Plan Program

Internet site (http://www.uscg.mil/vrp).

Document requests can be placed on the

VRP Status-line (voice mail system) at

202–267–0434, or by accessing the VRP
Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 121 /Wednesday, June 24, 1998 / Notices 34501

Internet site, which will have the

document posted.

Summaries will be prepared at the

conclusion of each workshop by the

Coast Guard which will be made

available to interested parties upon their

request. Summaries may be obtained by

calling VRP Status-line at 202–267–0434

or may be accessed through the Vessel

Response Plan Program Internet site

(http://www.uscg.mil/vrp).

For questions on this docket, contact

Carol Kelly, Coast Guard Dockets Team

Leader, or Paulette Twine, Chief,

Documentary Services Division, U.S.

Department of Transportation, 202–366–

9329.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Oil

Pollution Act of 1990 (OPA 90)

contained provisions that were intended

to increase the preparedness of tank

vessel owners or operators to respond to

a spill, as well as increase the oil spill

response capability in the United States.

To achieve these goals, minimum onwater oil-removal capability

requirements (often referred to as

‘‘caps’’) were set out in 33 CFR

154.1045(m) and 33 CFR 155.1050(o).

These equipment caps were established

in 1993 based on available equipment

and technology levels.

These caps were scheduled to

increase by 25% in 1998 as a planning

target for increasing response

capabilities within the United States. 33

CFR 154.1045(n) and 33 CFR

155.1050(p) requires the Coast Guard to

review the proposed increases to

determine if they are practicable prior to

implementing any new requirements.

The Coast Guard is charged with

evaluating other spill removal

technologies as part of that review. The

Coast Guard intends to review the

proposed increases with a holistic

approach to oil spill removal, evaluating

our national response capability in light

of all available technologies.

The Coast Guard published a

‘‘Request for Comment’’ with regard to

the cap review in the Federal Register

on January 27, 1998. The Coast Guard

received 21 written comments which

were entered into the public docket, as

well as numerous verbal comments from

interested stakeholders at various public

forums.

Raising the equipment requirements

for mechanical recovery systems

appears to be a controversial item, with

numerous comments received both for

and against such as increase. Many

comments suggested that the increase

was not necessary because the

equipment already exists. Other

comments agreed that the equipment

already exists, but argued that it was

obtained in anticipation of the

scheduled increase, and that a failure to

implement the new requirements will

result in equipment being sold off or put

out of service.

In order to ascertain whether existing

equipment stocks are able to meet the

scheduled 25% increase, the Coast

Guard National Strike Force

Coordination Center (NSFCC) reviewed

the availability of mechanical recovery

systems throughout the United States.

The NSFCC looked at the private sector

resources available to respond to a spill

in each Captain of the Port (COTP) zone

using the data compiled in the Regional

Response Inventory (RRI). The NSFCC

review indicates that mechanical

recovery systems are available in

quantities sufficient to meet the

proposed increase. The Coast Guard will

present a summary of this report at the

public workshops. While the NSFCC

report establishes that mechanical

recovery equipment is available to meet

the scheduled increases, the Coast

Guard must still determine whether

implementing such as increase is

practicable, which must include an

examination of the expected benefits in

comparison to the associated costs.

Most of the comments received

strongly supported developing new

requirements for other removal

technologies as part of any cap increase.

Many comments suggested that highrate removal technologies are a more

cost-effective or capacity-enhancing

method of increasing overall response

preparedness than mechanical recovery.

Other comments suggested that the use

of these technologies offers positive net

environmental benefits for many

response situations, and are a necessary

tool for today’s response infrastructure.

The use of dispersants was the most

widely supported means for increasing

the existing requirements, and was

generally preferred to increases in

mechanical recovery [in the comments

that were received].

The Coast Guard is reviewing

dispersants and other oil spill removal

technologies with regard to their

potential for inclusion in a proposed

cap increase. The Coast Guard is

evaluating a range of alternatives,

including mandatory requirements

/and/ or credits for dispersants, in situ

burning, and oil spill tracking resources.

The Coast Guard will present these

alternatives for discussion and comment

during these workshops. The Coast

Guard solicits public comment

regarding appropriate performance

dimensions for these technologies,

including: areas of applicability,

response times, ensured levels of

capability, application equipment,

application rates, monitoring,

anticipated costs and other applicable

planning requirements. Interested

persons are encouraged to submit any

pertinent written views, data, or

arguments, either prior to or during the

workshops, to the Coast Guard.

Agenda for the Workshops

Equipment Cap and Dispersant

Planning Public Workshop

The agenda includes the following

short information presentations, each

followed by an open discussion period:

(1) Introduction and presentation on

concept of Integrated Equipment Cap

Review.

(2) Presentation of National Strike

Force Coordination Center Report on

OSRO Resource Information.

(3) Presentation of summary of

comments received in response to

Request for Comment, Review of Cap

Increases, 63 FR 3861, January 27, 1998.

(4) Presentation and discussion of

potential changes to regulations as part

of integrated cap increase:

(a) Increases to Mechanical Recovery

(b) Required Dispersant Capabilities

Note: The Coast Guard will present a

concept position to facilitate discussion

during the workshop. The document

identifies key elements and issues for

dispersant planning. The concepts contained

within are mainly for discussion purposes

and are likely to change as a result of public

involvement and further regulatory analysis

to be performed at a later date. Participants

may obtain a copy of this document prior to

the workshop [see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION].

Information on Services for Individuals

with Disabilities

For information on facilities or

services for individuals with disabilities

or to request special assistance at the

meetings, contact LCDR John Caplis at

the address or phone number listed

under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT as soon as possible.

Dated: June 17, 1998.

Robert North,

Rear Admiral, Assistant Commandant for

Marine Safety and Environmental Protection.

[FR Doc. 98–16780 Filed 6–23–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–15–M

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

Submission for OMB Review;

Comment Request

May 8, 1998.

The Department of Treasury has

submitted the following public

information collection requirement(s) to

OMB for review and clearance under the

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995,