Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 92 / Friday, May 10, 1996 / Notices 21521

For the Commission, by the Division of

Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated

authority, 17 CFR 200.30–(a)(12).

Margaret H. McFarland,

Deputy Secretary.

[FR Doc. 96–11747 Filed 5–9–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010–01–M

DEPARTMENT OF STATE

[Public Notice No. 2375]

Shipping Coordinating Committee,

Subcommittee on Safety of Life at Sea

Working Group on Fire Protection;

Notice of Meeting

The U.S. Safety of Life at Sea (SOLAS)

Working Group on Fire Protection will

conduct an open meeting on May 29,

1996, at 9:30 AM, in Room 4315, at U.S.

Coast guard Headquarters, 2100 Second

Street SW., Washington, DC 20593. The

purpose of the meeting will be to

prepare for discussions anticipated to

take place at the Forty-first Session of

the International Maritime

Organization’s Subcommittee on Fire

Protection, scheduled for September 30,

1996.

The meeting will focus on proposed

amendments to the 1974 SOLAS

Convention for the fire safety of

commercial vessels. Specific discussion

areas include: the new mandatory Fire

Test Procedures Code, proposed

restructuring of Chapter II–2, halon fire

extinguishing systems, emergency

escape breathing devices, fire-retardant

materials for fishing vessel lifeboats,

criteria for maximum fire loads, fire

safety measures for deep fat cooking

equipment, interpretations to SOLAS

74, role of the human element in

maritime casualties, safety of passenger

submersible craft, recognition of test

laboratories, fixed fire detection and

alarm systems for new and existing

cargo ships, and shipboard safety

emergency plans.

Interested members of the public are

encouraged to attend. For further

information regarding the meeting of the

SOLAS Working Group on Fire

Protection contact Mr. Jack Booth at

(202) 267–2997.

Dated: May 1, 1996.

Charles A. Mast,

Chairman, Shipping Coordinating Committee.

[FR Doc. 96–11804 Filed 5–9–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4710–07–M

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Reports, Forms and Recordkeeping

Requirements; Agency Information

Collection Activity Under OMB Review

AGENCY: Department of Transportation

(DOT), Federal Aviation

Administration.

ACTION: Notice.

SUMMARY: In compliance with the

Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C.

3501 et seq.), this notice announces that

the Information Collection Request (ICR)

abstracted below has been forwarded to

the Office of Management and Budget

(OMB) for review and comment. The

FAA requested and received an

emergency clearance through June 30,

1996 under OMB control number 2120–

0595. This request is for the three year

clearance. The ICR describes the nature

of the information collection and its

expected cost and burden.

DATES: Comments must be submitted by

June 7, 1996.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: FAA

Hotline number (202) 267–7029, or the

Internet Home Page: http://

www.faa.gov/asu/asu100/acq-reform/

acqlhome.htm.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Title: Federal Aviation

Administration Acquisition

Management System (FAAMS).

Abstract: This document contains

policy guidance that implements the FY

1996 Transportation Appropriation Bill,

that gave FAA an exemption from

acquisition laws and provided authority

to create a flexible, more cost effective

system. Guidance is focused on the

acquisition management system, the life

cycle acquisition process, the

procurement system and process, and

an acquisition work force learning

system Acquisitions are handled by

integrated product teams who provide

support through all stages of the

process.

Need: Pursuant to section 348 of

Public Law 104–50, the FAA hereby

develops and implements a new

acquisition management system that

addresses the unique needs of the

agency. This document establishes the

policies, guiding principles, and

internal procedures for FAA’s new

acquisition system.

Respondents: The respondents are

individuals and businesses who do or

wish to do business under contract with

the FAA. We estimate approximately

3,300 respondents.

Frequency: The frequency is on

occasion and monthly with an estimated

1 to 12 responses per respondent.

Burden: The estimated burden is

333,292 hours annually. Comments on

this collection should be submitted to

the Office of Information and Regulatory

Affairs, OMB, New Executive Office

Bldg., 725 17th St. NW., Washington,

DC 20503, Attention: Desk Officer for

FAA.

Issued in Washington, D.C. on May 7,

1996.

Phillip A. Leach,

Clearance Officer, United States Department

of Transportation.

[FR Doc. 96–11787 Filed 5–9–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P

Coast Guard

[CGD 96–019]

Waterfront Facilities; Marine

Transportation Related Pipeline

Testing

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DOT.

ACTION: Request for comments.

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is

conducting a study to evaluate several

alternative methods, in addition to those

presently approved, for testing marine

transfer pipelines on facilities capable of

transferring oil or hazardous material, in

bulk, to or from a vessel with a capacity

of 250 barrels or more. These methods

may provide suitable alternatives for

facility operators while maintaining an

equivalent level of safety.

DATES: Comments must be received on

or before July 9, 1996.

ADDRESSES: Comments may be mailed to

Commandant (G–MCO–3), Port and

Facilities Compliance Branch, 2100

Second Street, SW, Washington, DC

20593–0001.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Lieutenant (junior grade) David Deaver,

Port and Facilities Compliance Branch,

Commandant (G–MCO–3), room 1104,

(202) 267–0502, between 7 a.m. and 3

p.m., Monday through Friday, except

Federal holidays.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Coast

Guard is responsible for ensuring

compliance for marine transportation

related (MTR) facilities, including

requirements for transfer pipeline

systems. The scope of this study

concerns possible testing alternatives for

the transfer pipeline system from the

dock loading arm or manifold of the

Coast Guard inspected MTR facility up

to the first valve encountered after the

pipe enters the Spill Prevention Control

and Countermeasure (SPCC) area or the

first valve encountered after the pipe

enters the secondary containment
21522 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 92 / Friday, May 10, 1996 / Notices

around the bulk storage tank for

facilities not protected by SPCC plans.

Present regulations require that

transfer pipelines be hydrostatically

tested at 1.5 times the maximum

allowable working pressure (MAWP) on

an annual basis. In August of 1994, the

Coast Guard also established guidelines

for conducting pneumatic pressure

testing as an alternative method. In

addition, the Coast Guard has become

aware of other, non-destructive testing

methods, including acoustic and

ultrasonic methods through several

alternative requests submitted by

industry and discussions with the Office

of Pipeline Safety.

The Coast Guard is evaluating these

other testing options to assess their

suitability as alternative pipeline testing

methods for facility operators while

maintaining an equivalent level of

safety. To accomplish this, Coast Guard

is seeking comments on the following

issues pertaining to the use of

alternative methods for ensuring

pipeline safety: (1) Whether using

methods other than pressure testing

would provide the same or greater level

of confidence for ensuring that a

pipeline meets safety standards; (2)

Whether companies would apply to use

other programs, to include using

methods such as ultrasonic and acoustic

testing, as alternatives to pressure

testing; and, (3) Whether use of

alternative testing methods would be

physically practical and less costly than

current requirements. In addition to

these, the Coast Guard encourages the

submission of comments regarding any

other aspects of its pipeline inspection

policy.

Dated: May 6, 1996.

J.C. Card,

Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Chief,

Marine Safety And Environmental Protection.

[FR Doc. 96–11775 Filed 5–9–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–14–M

Federal Aviation Administration

[Docket No. 28567]

A Call for the Development of

Prototype(s) for a Global Analysis and

Information Network (GAIN)

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Notice; request for comments.

SUMMARY: David Hinson, Administrator

of the Federal Aviation Administration

(FAA), stresses that Zero Accidents is

the only acceptable safety goal for the

aviation industry and the FAA. This

notice offers some ideas for the elements

needed to establish an early warning

capability for existing and emerging

safety concerns that would move the

aviation industry towards Zero

Accidents, and challenges the aviation

industry to participate in developing

that capability. Because of an emerging

combination of improved cooperation

between airline management, labor, and

various governments, advancements in

information technologies, and the

political environment in several

countries, the international aviation

industry has an unprecedented

opportunity, by sharing and analyzing

aviation safety information, to reach

Zero Accidents.

This notice (a) solicits comments on

the Global Analysis and Information

Network (GAIN) concept and

implementation strategy for collecting

and analyzing aviation safety data, and

(b) invites participation in the

development of proof-of-concept

prototypes. All interested parties,

whether or not in the aviation

community, are invited to comment on

the ideas presented, offer alternative

solutions, indicate interest in helping to

develop a GAIN prototype or the overall

system itself, and comment about how

government aviation safety agencies can

best help the industry reach Zero

Accidents.

DATES: Comments in response to this

call for action must be received by June

14, 1996.

ADDRESSES: It is requested that all

comments be submitted via the Internet

by sending an e-mail message with your

comments (plain text preferred, no

graphics please) to: concept lpaper@

asyweb01.nasdac.faa.gov.

Please include your name and

organization. Comments must also be

mailed in hard-copy (two copies) via

regular mail to: Federal Aviation

Administration, 800 Independence

Ave., SW., Office of Chief Counsel,

Attention: Rules Docket (AGC–200),

Docket No. 28567, Washington, DC

20591.

All comments must be marked:

‘‘Docket No. 28567.’’ Commenters

wishing the FAA to acknowledge

receipt of their comments must include

a pre-addressed, stamped postcard on

which the following statement is made:

‘‘Comments to Docket No. 28567.’’ The

postcard will be date stamped and

mailed to the commenter.

Comments submitted about this

Notice may be examined at the FAA at

the above address in room 915G on

weekdays, except on Federal holidays,

between 8:30 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. In

addition, commenters will be able to

review all other comments by Internet.

Your submission should not contain any

proprietary or other information that

you do not want to be made available

to the public.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.

Chuck Fluet, Manager, Safety Analysis

Division, Office of Aviation Safety,

ASY–200, Federal Aviation

Administration, 400 7th Street, SW.,

Washington, DC 20590, telephone 202–

267–GAIN (202–267–4246).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The

aviation industry has made remarkable

progress in reducing aviation accident

rates. With today’s volume of flights, the

industry would have suffered more than

10,000 fatalities last year worldwide if

the accident rate had not improved so

dramatically since 1960. Because of this

major decline in the accident rate, the

industry now suffers an average of less

than 800 fatalities worldwide per year.

However, the rate has remained

stubbornly consistent for about the last

10 years; and at today’s accident rate,

forecast growth in air transportation

demand will lead to more than 4,500

fatalities worldwide per year by 2025—

clearly an unacceptable result.

Sound methods for certifying the

safety of new aviation products and

procedures, as well as surveillance

activities that help to ensure safe

operation and maintenance of these

products and procedures, have

contributed significantly to the current

safety levels of the aviation industry.

Within the framework of these

regulatory methods, technological

advances in engine performance and

reliability, airframes and materials, air

traffic control, cockpit automation, and

simulator training have contributed to

the safety of the aviation system.

Compliance inspections, accident and

incident investigations, special studies,

and program evaluations are the

fundamental methods of continuing

surveillance in the operating

environment, and safety has improved

significantly over the years in part

because of the lessons learned by using

these methods to understand the

mistakes and oversights of the past.

Yet all too often, the industry has not

been able to use data about accidents,

incidents and other system anomalies to

become aware of existing or emerging

safety problems in time to take

preventive measures. Just as traditional

product design and manufacturing

methods eventually gave way to new,

improved principles and methods, a

new safety information paradigm, with

much greater sensitivity to anomalies in

daily aviation system operations, could

help the industry reach Zero Accidents.

Just as aviation product improvements