Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 81 / Thursday, April 25, 1996 / Notices 18457

Among other things, the items of

particular interest are:

—The implementation of the Global

Maritime Distress and Safety System

(GMDSS).

—Maritime Search and Rescue matters.

Further information, including

meeting agendas with meeting room

numbers, minutes, and input papers,

can be obtained from the Coast Guard

Navigation Information Center computer

bulletin board, accessible by modem by

dialing: (703) 313–5910. This

information is also accessible through

Internet World Wide Web by entering:

‘‘http://www.navcen.uscg.mil/

marcomms/imo/imo.htm’’

Members of the public may attend

these meeting sup to the seating

capacity of the rooms. Interested

persons may seek information,

including meeting room numbers, by

writing: Mr. Ronald J. Grandmaison,

U.S. Coast Guard Headquarters,

Commandant (G–STM–2), Room 6509,

2100 Second Street, S.W., Washington,

DC 20593–0001, by calling: (202) 267–

1389, or by sending Internet electronic

mail to r.grandmaison/ge@mailgatehq.comdt.uscg.mil.

Dated: April 15, 1996.

Charles A. Mast,

Chairman, Shipping Coordinating Committee.

[FR Doc. 96–10158 Filed 4–24–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4710–07–M

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Coast Guard

[CGD 95–089]

Interim Report on Tank Vessel Design,

Construction, and Operation Under the

Oil Pollution Act of 1990

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DOT.

ACTION: Notice of availability of interim

report; request for public comments.

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard announces

the availability of an interim report

concerning the impact of the provisions

of the Oil Pollution Act of 1990 (OPA

90) relating to tank vessel design,

construction, and operation on the

safety of the marine environment and

the economic viability and operational

makeup of the maritime oil

transportation industry. The interim

report was prepared by a committee

under the National Research Council

and describes the committee’s work to

date and the availability of data. In

addition, the committee is seeking

comments and additional information

on certain issues to assist it in preparing

a final report, required by OPA 90, for

submission by the Coast Guard to

Congress.

DATES: Comments must be received no

later than May 30, 1996. In order to

provide adequate time to review the

interim report, it is recommended that

requests for copies of the report be made

on or before May 10, 1996.

ADDRESSES: Comments may be mailed to

the Marine Board, National Research

Council, 2101 Constitution Avenue, HA

250, Washington, DC 20418, ATTN: Mr.

Donald Perkins. A copy of the interim

report may be requested by writing

Commandant (G–MES), U.S. Coast

Guard Headquarters, 2100 Second Street

SW., Washington, DC 20593–0001, by

calling (202) 267–1044 between 8 a.m.

and 3 p.m., Monday through Friday,

except Federal holidays, or by facsimile

at (202) 267–4624. The report is

available on the World Wide Web at:

http://www.starsoftware.com/uscgnmc/

nmc/.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Mr. Jack Klingel, Standards Evaluation

and Development Division (G–MES),

(202) 267–1044, or Mr. Jaideep Sirkar,

Design and Engineering Standards

Division (G–MMS–2), (202) 267–6925,

U.S. Coast Guard Headquarters, 2100

Second Street SW., Washington, DC

20593–0001.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

Under the Oil Pollution Act of 1990

(OPA 90), the Secretary of

Transportation (Coast Guard) is required

(1) To assess the impact of the

provisions of OPA 90 relating to double

hulls for tank vessels on the safety of the

marine environment and the economic

viability and operational makeup of the

maritime oil transportation industry and

(2) to report the results of its assessment

to Congress, with recommendations for

legislative or other action (OPA 90, Sec.

4115(e)(2) (B) and (C); Note to 46 U.S.C.

3703a). To assist it in preparing the

report, the Coast Guard requested advice

in preparing this report from the

National Research Council.

Accordingly, the Marine Board of the

National Research Council established

the ‘‘Committee on Oil Pollution Act of

1990 (section 4115) Implementation

Review’’ (the Committee). The

Committee will assess the impact of the

double hull and related provisions of

OPA 90 on (1) The safety of the marine

environment, (2) the economic viability

of the maritime oil transportation

industry, (3) the operational makeup of

the maritime oil transportation industry,

and (4) the influence of international

conventions on tank vessel design and

operational activities. In this regard, the

Committee has undertaken a methodical

data gathering process, which includes

input from written surveys, industry

representatives and databases, and

various Federal agencies involved in the

promulgation of regulations. This notice

of availability of the interim report and

request for comments is one element

within this data gathering process.

While the Committee has compiled

significant amounts of data and

information and analysis, an

independent solicitation of public

comment over and above the public

comment processes for the related Coast

Guard regulatory projects may add

significant value to the deliberations of

the Committee.

With some exceptions, section 4115 of

OPA 90 requires that oil tank vessels

operating on waters subject to the

jurisdiction of the United States have

double hulls. It also provides for a 25-

year phase-in period under certain

circumstances.

Related Rulemakings

The Coast Guard has had several

rulemaking projects concerning the

design, construction, and operation of

tank vessels under section 4115 of OPA

90. Comments submitted to the Coast

Guard under these rulemakings have

been made available to the Committee

and need not be re-submitted in

response to this request for comments.

Questions

The Coast Guard requests comments

on the interim report and further

information on the issues addressed in

the report. The Committee has prepared,

and is seeking answers to, the following

questions:

1. Has the quality of the tanker fleet

serving U.S. ports changed as a result of

the passage of OPA 90? Can you

attribute these changes to section 4115

of OPA 90?

2. What is the anticipated impact

resulting from MARPOL 73/78, Annex I,

Regulations 13F and 13G, on ship safety

and the reduction of pollution into the

marine environment?

3. What has been the impact of

increased port state control activities

designed to improve ship safety and

reduce pollution into the marine

environment?

4. What is the anticipated impact of

enhanced survey requirements of

MARPOL 73/78, Annex I, Regulation

13G, on ship safety and the reduction of

pollution into the marine environment?

5. What information can you provide

that indicates double hull vessels have

affected marine safety and reduced

pollution into the marine environment?
18458 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 81 / Thursday, April 25, 1996 / Notices

6. Have changes in vetting and other

management practices been instituted

since the passage of OPA 90? Have these

changes been made as a direct result of

section 4115 of OPA 90? What impact

have these changes had on ship safety

and the reduction of pollution into the

marine environment?

7. What is your experience with the

operational safety of double hull tank

vessels in regard to stability during

loading and discharge, safe access to

ballast spaces, ventilation of ballast

spaces, salvage, and other safety issues?

8. What is your inspection and

maintenance experience in regard to

corrosion protection and structural

performance of double hull tank

vessels?

9. Have you had any structural

problems on double hull tank vessels?

10. What design changes would you

suggest in double hull tank vessels?

11. Based on your experience, what

are the advantages and disadvantages of

double hull tank vessels as compared to

single hull tank vessels?

12. Has OPA 90, section 4115, forced

the retirement of single hull tank vessels

earlier than desired or expected? If so,

how much earlier and for what specific

reason?

13. How do maintenance and

operating costs differ between double

hull and single hull tankers? Are higher

costs anticipated for maintaining

internal tank coatings? Manning and

training requirements? Insurance?

Drydocking and other maintenance and

repair costs?

14. To what extent will pre-MARPOL

tankers be modified to meet MARPOL’s

requirements for protectively located/

segregated ballast tanks in order to gain

additional life in the Regulation 13G

retirement schedule?

15. Will MARPOL tankers in the

international trade operate for the full

30 year limit or retire early? If they

retire early, how much earlier?

16. Has the phase-out schedule for

single hull tankers in OPA 90 affected

the ability of shipping companies to

finance replacement vessels? If so, how?

17. Has a two-tiered market developed

in which double hull tank vessels

receive higher freight rates than single

hull tank vessels? If so, what is the

difference? If not, will such a two-tiered

market develop in the future?

18. To what extent will existing tank

vessels without double hulls be

reconstructed to comply with the

double hull requirements of OPA 90

section 4115? At what cost? (Jones Act

and international trades.)

19. Coast Guard lightering regulations

permit the use of certain single hull

vessels in specified lightering zones

within U.S. territorial waters until 2015,

five years beyond the mandated double

hull conversion schedule of OPA 90,

section 4115. What is the potential

impact of the lightering regulations on

the use of single hull vessels in U.S.

waters?

Dated: April 18, 1996.

Joseph J. Angelo,

Director for Standards, Marine Safety and

Environmental Protection.

[FR Doc. 96–10256 Filed 4–24–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–14–M

Federal Aviation Administration

Notice of Availability, Final

Environmental Impact Statement;

Master Plan Update, SyracuseHancock International Airport,

Syracuse, New York

AGENCY: Federal Aviation

Administration.

The City of Syracuse, Department of

Aviation, owner and operator of

Syracuse-Hancock International Airport,

has prepared a Master Plan update for

the airport. As part of the Plan, it was

determined that a runway parallel to

Runway 10–28 would be needed to

accommodate the anticipated aviation

demand and to allow for necessary

temporary closures to existing Runway

10–28. The proposed project is the

acquisition of approximately 220 acres

of land located primarily northeast of

the airport to provide a site for the

construction of Runway 10L–28R

parallel to, 3,600 ft. north of, and 1,400

ft. east of existing Runway 10–28.

A Final Environmental Impact

Statement (FEIS) has been prepared by

the FAA and the City of Syracuse which

assesses the impact of alternative airport

improvements. In the first phase of

development, a runway 7,500 ft. long

and 150 ft. wide would be constructed.

In the second phase of development, the

runway would be extended to an

ultimate length of 9,000 ft. The 3,600 ft.

lateral separation between the parallel

runways would provide the capability

to accommodate dual simultaneous ILS

approaches to these runways.

Copies of the FEIS are available for

review at the following locations:

Federal Aviation Administration,

Airports Division, Regional Office,

Fitzgerald Federal Building, JFK Int’l

Airport, Jamaica, NY 11430. FAA

Contact person is Mr. Frank Squeglia,

Environmental Specialist (718) 553–

3325.

City of Syracuse, Department of

Aviation, Syracuse-Hancock

International Airport, Main Terminal

Building, 2nd Floor Syracuse, New

York 13212. City Contact person is

Mr. Charles Everett, Jr., Commissioner

(315) 454–3263.

Town of Clay, Zoning Dept., 4483 Route

31, Clay, New York 13041.

Town of Cicero, Zoning Dept., 8326 S.

Main St., Cicero, New York 13039.

Town of Dewitt, Zoning Dept., 5400

Butternut Dr., Dewitt, New York

13214.

Town of Salina, Zoning Dept., 201

School Rd., Liverpool, New York

13088.

Syracuse University, Byrd Library, 222

Waverly Ave., Syracuse, New York

13210.

Onondaga Co. Public Library, 447 S.

Salina St., Galleries Mall, Syracuse,

New York 13202.

Comments on the FEIS must be

received within 30 days from the

publication date of this Notice and

addressed to both the FAA and City of

Syracuse at the above addresses. All

substantive comments will be

considered in the FAA Record of

Decision (ROD) which will conclude the

environmental process for this Federal

action.

Issued in Jamaica, New York on April 12,

1996.

Anthony P. Spera,

Acting Manager, Airports Division, Federal

Aviation Administration, Eastern Region.

[FR Doc. 96–9961 Filed 4–24–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–M

Office of the Secretary of

Transportation

[Docket No. OST–96–1288]

Comprehensive Truck Size and Weight

Study: Analytical Framework and

Outreach Plan

AGENCY: Department of Transportation,

Office of the Secretary (OST).

ACTION: Notice; request for comments.

SUMMARY: This notice provides an

update on the options analysis

framework approved by the DOT Policy

Oversight Group for the DOT

Comprehensive TS&W Study and

requests comments on this framework.

Plans are outlined for informational

focus sessions to explain how the study

is being conducted and to obtain direct

comment from constituent groups.

DATES: To be timely for consideration

for either the analytical framework or

outreach plans for the study, comments

should be received on or before May 28,

1996. However, this docket will remain

open until the study is completed.

FHWA Docket No. 95–5 also will