Pipeline Safety: Meetings of the Pipeline Safety Advisory Committees, 29555-29557 [05-10275]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 98 / Monday, May 23, 2005 / Notices
Privacy Act Statement in the April 11,
2000, issue of the Federal Register (65
FR 19477) or go to https://dms.dot.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Florence Hamn at (202) 366–3015 or by
e-mail to Florence.Hamn@dot.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Standards
in 49 CFR 192.383, ‘‘Excess flow valve
customer notification,’’ require that
before operators install or replace
certain gas service lines, they must
notify customers in writing that excess
flow valves are available for installation
if the customer agrees to pay for the
related expenses. Operators also must
keep records that include the notice
currently in use and evidence that
notices were sent as required during the
previous 3 years. The standards were
published in response to a statutory
mandate in 49 U.S.C. 60110(c).
This information collection supports
the DOT strategic goal of safety by
reducing the number of fatalities,
injuries, and amount of property
damage.
Comments are invited on: (a) The
need for the proposed collection of
information 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)
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 those who are to respond, including
the use of appropriate automated,
electronic, mechanical, or other
technological collection techniques.
As used in this notice, ‘‘information
collection’’ includes all work related to
preparing and disseminating
information related to this
recordkeeping requirement including
completing paperwork, gathering
information and conducting telephone
calls.
Type of Information Collection
Request: Renewal of Existing Collection.
Title of Information Collection:
Record keeping Requirements for Excess
Flow Valves—Customer Notification.
OMB Approval Number: 2137–0593.
Frequency: A notice is sent before a
new service line is installed or an
existing service line is replaced.
Use: This collection is used by gas
customers to decide whether to have
EFVs installed and by government
inspectors to review operator
compliance.
Estimated Number of Respondents:
1,540.
VerDate jul<14>2003
16:20 May 20, 2005
Jkt 205001
Estimated Annual Burden Hour:
18,000.
Issued in Washington DC, on May 17,
2005.
Theodore L. Willke,
Deputy Associate Administrator for Pipeline
Safety.
[FR Doc. 05–10203 Filed 5–20–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–60–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Pipeline and Hazardous Materials
Safety Administration
International Standards on the
Transport of Dangerous Goods; Public
Meetings
Pipeline and Hazardous
Materials Safety Administration
(PHMSA), Department of
Transportation.
ACTION: Notice of public meeting.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: This notice is to advise
interested persons that PHMSA will
conduct public meetings in preparation
for and to report the results of the 27th
session of the United Nation’s SubCommittee of Experts on the Transport
of Dangerous Goods (UNSCOE) to be
held July 4–8, 2005 in Geneva,
Switzerland.
DATES: June 22, 2005, 9:30 a.m.–12:30
p.m., Room 4438–4440, July 20, 2005,
9:30 a.m.–12:30 p.m., Room 6200–6204.
ADDRESSES: Both meetings will be held
at DOT Headquarters, Nassif Building,
400 Seventh Street SW., Washington,
DC 20590.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.
Bob Richard, Director, Office of
International Standards, or Mr. Duane
Pfund, Senior International
Transportation Specialist, Office of
Hazardous Materials, Safety,
Department of Transportation,
Washington, DC 20590; (202) 366–0656.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
primary purpose of the first meeting
will be to prepare for the 27th session
of the UNSCOE and to discuss draft U.S.
positions on UNSCOE proposals. The
primary purpose of the second meeting
will be to provide a briefing on the
outcome of the UNSCOE session and to
prepare for the 28th session of the
UNSCOE. The 27th session of the
UNSCOE is the first meeting in the
current biennium cycle. The UNSCOE
will consider proposals for the 15th
Revised Edition of the United Nations
Recommendations on the Transport of
Dangerous Goods Model Regulations.
Topics to be covered during the public
meetings include: (1) Harmonization of
PO 00000
Frm 00083
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
29555
the Recommendations on the Transport
of Dangerous Goods with other model
and national regulations, (2) Transport
of Dangerous Goods in limited and
excepted quantities, (3) Requirements
for Intermodal Bulk Containers (IBC), (4)
New entries for fuel cell systems
containing flammable gas, (5)
Requirements related to lithium ion
rechargeable batteries, (6)
Harmonization with the IAEA
Regulations for the safe transport of
radioactive materials, (7) Miscellaneous
proposals related to listing and
classification and the use of packagings
and tanks. The public is invited to
attend without prior notification. Due to
the heightened security measures
participants are encouraged to arrive
early to allow time for security checks
necessary to obtain access to the
building.
Documents
Copies of documents for the UNSCOE
meeting and the meeting agenda may be
obtained by downloading them from the
United Nations Transport Division’s
Web site at: https://www.unece.org/trans/
main/dgdb/dgsubc/c32005.htm. This
site may also be accessed through
PHMSA’s Hazardous Materials Safety
Homepage at https://hazmat.dot.gov/
regs/intl/intstandards.htm. PHMSA’s
site provides additional information
regarding the UNSCOE and related
matters such as a summary of decisions
taken at previous sessions of the
UNSCOE.
Robert A. McGuire,
Associate Administrator for Hazardous
Materials Safety.
[FR Doc. 05–10192 Filed 5–20–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–60–M
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Pipeline and Hazardous Materials
Safety Administration
[Docket No. RSPA–98–4470]
Pipeline Safety: Meetings of the
Pipeline Safety Advisory Committees
Office of Pipeline Safety (OPS),
Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety
Administration (PHMSA), Department
of Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Notice of meetings.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: This notice announces public
meetings of Pipeline and Hazardous
Materials Safety Administration’s
(PHMSA) Technical Pipeline Safety
Standards Committee (TPSSC) and
Technical Hazardous Liquid Pipeline
Safety Standards Committee (THLPSSC)
to discuss various regulatory issues.
E:\FR\FM\23MYN1.SGM
23MYN1
29556
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 98 / Monday, May 23, 2005 / Notices
The technical pipeline safety
advisory committees will meet in joint
session on Wednesday, June 15 and
Thursday, June 16, 2005, from 8 a.m. to
4 p.m. each day.
ADDRESSES: The meetings will be held at
the Ritz-Carlton Hotel (Pentagon City),
1250 South Hayes Street, Arlington, VA
22202, www.@ritzcarlton.com. The
phone number for reservations at the
Ritz Carlton is 1–800–241–3333 or (703)
415–5000. Attendees staying at the hotel
must make reservations by Tuesday,
May 31.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For
additional information regarding these
meetings contact: Cheryl Whetsel, OPS,
(202) 366–4431; cheryl.whetsel@dot.gov.
Background: Reservations by
attendees must be received on or before
May 31, 2005. Priority is given to the
Technical Pipeline Safety Advisory
Committee members and State Pipeline
Safety Representatives for rooms
blocked under the Department of
Transportation-Advisory Committee
Meeting. Any additional information or
changes will be posted on the OPS web
page approximately 15 days before the
meeting date at https://ops.dot.gov.
The public may make short
statements on the topics under
discussion. Anyone wishing to make an
oral statement should notify Cheryl
Whetsel, (202) 366–4431, not later than
May 31, 2005, on the topic and the
length of the presentation. The
presiding officer at each meeting may
deny any request to present an oral
statement and may limit the time of any
presentation.
You may submit written comments by
mail or deliver them to the Dockets
Facility, U.S. Department of
Transportation, Room PL–401, 400
Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC
20590–0001. It is open from 9 a.m. to 5
p.m., Monday through Friday, except
Federal holidays. You also may submit
written comments to the docket
electronically by logging onto the
following Internet Web address: https://
dms.dot.gov. Click on AHelp &
Information’’ for instructions on how to
file a document electronically. All
written comments should reference
docket number RSPA–98–4470. Anyone
who would like confirmation of mailed
comments must include a self-addressed
stamped postcard.
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. You may review DOT’s
complete Privacy Act Statement in the
Federal Register published on April 11,
2000 (Volume 65, Number 70; Pages
DATES:
VerDate jul<14>2003
16:20 May 20, 2005
Jkt 205001
19477–78) or you may visit https://
dms.dot.gov.
Information on Services for Individuals
With Disabilities
For information on facilities or
services for individuals with disabilities
or to request special assistance at the
meeting, please contact Cheryl Whetsel
at (202) 366–4431 by May 31, 2005.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
TPSSC and THLPSSC are statutorily
mandated advisory committees that
advise the PHMSA, OPS on proposed
safety standards for gas and hazardous
liquid pipelines. These advisory
committees are established under
section 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory
Committee Act (Pub. L. 92–463, 5 U.S.C.
App. 1). The committees consist of 15
members—five each representing
government, industry, and the public.
The TPSSC and THLPSSC are tasked
with determining reasonableness, costeffectiveness, and practicability of
regulatory initiatives.
The purpose of the meeting is to
discuss future challenges facing the
pipeline industry and options for
direction on key projects. The
discussion will focus on three areas:
• Managing Risk and Integrity.
• Sharing Responsibility and
Building Alliances for Safety.
• Improving Our Stewardship of the
Environment, Security.
The OPS will provide an overview on
the topics that we will be exploring in
each of the subtopics. Under each
subtopic, several questions are provided
to promote discussion. The agenda
follows:
Wednesday, June 15 (8 a.m. to 4 p.m.)
Managing Risk and Integrity
The OPS’s primary responsibility is to
use a risk based, performance driven
approach to protect the 2.3 million
miles of natural gas, petroleum, and
other pipelines that crisscross our
Nation.
These pipelines transport two thirds
of the energy supply used by American
consumers each year. We carry out this
responsibility by identifying safety
problems, determining whether
standards need to change and how
much, enforcing the safety standards,
and evaluating whether we are meeting
our safety goals.
1. Inspection Technology and Quality
Assurance
• How do we ensure that technology
is applied to get credible results?
• Are the national consensus
standards sufficient for tool selection
and qualification of pig log interpreters?
PO 00000
Frm 00084
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
• Is there a need for additional
industry standards?
• Will these consensus standards
solve problems in the future in other
subject areas?
2. Pilot Operator Relief Valve Advisory
Notice
• Is the process outlined in the
advisory an appropriate approach to
address the inspection of relief valves?
3. Human Factors
• What have we learned from the
experience of other modes about human
factors?
• How do human factors affect the
performance of pipeline operators?
• What evidence do we have that
human factors may contribute to
incidents?
• Is the advice from other modes
generally applicable?
4. Distribution Integrity Management
Program (DIMP)
• Does the current plan draw data
from all key areas?
• What are your views on including
the decision to install and maintain
excess flow valves in DIMP?
• Should OPS give special
consideration to the small operators in
DIMP implementation, master meter
operators and liquefied petroleum gas
(LPG) operators?
5. Liquid Gathering Lines
• Is the ‘‘integrity’’ approach of
protecting pipelines that could affect
unusually sensitive areas (USA’s)
appropriate?
• What safety functions are
appropriate or needed?
Thursday, June 16 (8 a.m. to 4 p.m.)
Sharing Responsibility and Building
Alliances for Safety
The OPS seeks out partnerships with
all of our stakeholders. Each provides
unique experiences and information to
augment our efforts to keep the people
and the environment safe. One example
of a successful partnership, between the
OPS and the National Association of
Fire Marshals, is the production of a
video, Pipeline Emergencies, that will
provide emergency personnel, state and
local officials and others an overview of
the pipeline system. There are many
safety roles to play and some have yet
to be identified.
1. Common Ground Alliance (CGA)—
Virginia Experience
• Do you believe enforcement will be
necessary for damage prevention?
E:\FR\FM\23MYN1.SGM
23MYN1
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 98 / Monday, May 23, 2005 / Notices
• How do we improve effectiveness of
the one-call system and what is the role
of technology?
• How can we apply the Virginia
experience in other areas (i.e.,
distribution integrity management)?
2. High Consequence Area (CCA) Pilots
• Is there a way of using partnerships
to expand damage prevention,
emergency preparedness and response?
• Are there key partners missing? If
so, how do we enlist them, such as in
the areas of emergency preparedness,
encroachment, etc.?
• Should this best practice model be
introduced to all States?
3. Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG)
• Is PHMSA/OPS doing all it should
to educate communities about LNG?
Show Video Clip—Liquefied Natural
Gas
Pipeline Information Planning Alliance
(PIPPA)
• How do we approach home builders
and insurers?
Improving Our Stewardship in
Environmental and Energy Projects
The OPS is the Federal pipeline safety
expert and recognizes how important it
is to share its expertise with other
government and State agencies
responsible for supporting our
government’s national energy policies.
OPS also provides information and
assists other government and State
agencies responsible for protecting our
Nation’s pipeline system.
1. Permit Streamlining
• How do we introduce our concepts
to State and local agencies?
• What is the most efficient way to
develop best practices?
• How could we effectively use and
improve on developing best practices
during implementation of the second
pilot program?
2. Alaska
• Are OPS’s current pipeline safety
regulations aligned and applicable for
the new technologies and materials
being proposed for the Alaska North
Slope gas transmission pipeline?
• What changes need to be made to
ensure the optimum delivery rate from
Alaska, through Canada, and into the
lower 48 States?
3. Security
• How can OPS ensure continuing
pipeline security in the current
environment?
• What is OPS doing for pipeline
security?
VerDate jul<14>2003
16:20 May 20, 2005
Jkt 205001
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 60102, 60115.
Issued in Washington, DC on May 18,
2005.
Theodore L. Willke,
Deputy Associate Administrator, Office of
Pipeline Safety.
[FR Doc. 05–10275 Filed 5–19–05; 10:32 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–60–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Pipeline and Hazardous Materials
Safety Administration
Pipeline Safety: Planning for
Coordination of Emergency Response
to Pipeline Emergencies
Office of Pipeline Safety (OPS),
Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety
Administration, DOT.
ACTION: Notice; issuance of advisory
bulletin.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: This document alerts pipeline
operators about the need to preplan for
emergency response with utilities
whose proximity to the pipeline may
impact the response. Coordination with
electric and other utilities may be
critical in responding to a pipeline
emergency. Preplanning would facilitate
actions that may be needed for safety,
such as removing sources of ignition or
reducing the amount of combustible
material.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Robert J. Hall by phone at (202) 3668860, by fax at (202) 366-4566, or by email, robert.hall@dot.gov. General
information about the Pipeline and
Hazardous Materials Safety
Administration’s Office of Pipeline
Safety programs may be obtained by
accessing the home page at https://
ops.dot.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
Existing regulations for both gas and
hazardous liquid pipelines require
operators to have emergency procedures
to address pipeline emergencies. The
key element of these requirements,
which are located at 49 CFR 192.615
and 195.402(e), is to plan response
before the emergency occurs. Because
pipelines are often located in public
space rather than in controlled access
areas, planning emergency response
must include more than internal plans.
The regulations explicitly require that
operators include procedures for
planning with fire, police and other
public officials to ensure a coordinated
response. It is also important to plan a
coordinated response with owners of
other utilities in the vicinity of the
PO 00000
Frm 00085
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
29557
pipeline. The operations of these
utilities may provide sources of ignition
for the product released from a pipeline,
may increase the burning time of fires
that have already started, or may delay
responders who are attempting to make
the situation safe rapidly.
In the evening of April 7, 2003, a
breakout tank exploded and
subsequently ignited in Glenpool,
Oklahoma. The fire continued to burn
and increased in the early morning of
April 8 when electric lines affected by
the previous day’s explosion and fire
fell into a dike. The diesel fuel being
contained in the dike ignited, expanding
the fire. This resulted in a temporary
suspension of firefighting and damaged
additional facilities. While there were
no injuries or fatalities, the fire burned
for over 20 hours; the cost of the
accident exceeded two million dollars;
residents were evacuated; and schools
were closed. The National
Transportation Safety Board (NTSB)
conducted an investigation of the
accident. In its report, the NTSB found
that lack of a coordinated emergency
response contributed to the severity of
the accident. The NTSB noted that the
existing pipeline safety regulations on
emergency procedures do not explicitly
require that operators have procedures
for preplanning with electric and other
utilities.
A previous accident also points to the
need for better coordination of
emergency response. On March 1, 1998,
a pipeline failure occurred when a raven
landed on a power line. This resulted in
a fault current that impacted a gas
pipeline in Anchorage, Alaska. The
situation very quickly developed into an
explosion at the public electric
company’s plant. Although preplanning
was required by regulation, the pipeline
operator did not coordinate emergency
response well with the fire department
resulting in delays in shutting off the
flow of gas. This resulted in additional
fire damage. Inadequate coordination
with the electric company also
contributed to this delay.
These accidents point to the need for
operators to plan with utilities on how
to coordinate actions needed in
responding to a pipeline emergency.
This preplanning will result in better
coordination when an emergency
occurs.
II. Advisory Bulletin ADB–05–03
To: Owners and Operators of Natural
Gas and Hazardous Liquid Pipeline
Facilities in the Vicinity of Electric and
other Utilities.
Subject: Preplanning with owners of
electric and other utilities for
E:\FR\FM\23MYN1.SGM
23MYN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 98 (Monday, May 23, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Pages 29555-29557]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-10275]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration
[Docket No. RSPA-98-4470]
Pipeline Safety: Meetings of the Pipeline Safety Advisory
Committees
AGENCY: Office of Pipeline Safety (OPS), Pipeline and Hazardous
Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA), Department of Transportation
(DOT).
ACTION: Notice of meetings.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This notice announces public meetings of Pipeline and
Hazardous Materials Safety Administration's (PHMSA) Technical Pipeline
Safety Standards Committee (TPSSC) and Technical Hazardous Liquid
Pipeline Safety Standards Committee (THLPSSC) to discuss various
regulatory issues.
[[Page 29556]]
DATES: The technical pipeline safety advisory committees will meet in
joint session on Wednesday, June 15 and Thursday, June 16, 2005, from 8
a.m. to 4 p.m. each day.
ADDRESSES: The meetings will be held at the Ritz-Carlton Hotel
(Pentagon City), 1250 South Hayes Street, Arlington, VA 22202,
www.@ritzcarlton.com. The phone number for reservations at the Ritz
Carlton is 1-800-241-3333 or (703) 415-5000. Attendees staying at the
hotel must make reservations by Tuesday, May 31.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For additional information regarding
these meetings contact: Cheryl Whetsel, OPS, (202) 366-4431;
cheryl.whetsel@dot.gov.
Background: Reservations by attendees must be received on or before
May 31, 2005. Priority is given to the Technical Pipeline Safety
Advisory Committee members and State Pipeline Safety Representatives
for rooms blocked under the Department of Transportation-Advisory
Committee Meeting. Any additional information or changes will be posted
on the OPS web page approximately 15 days before the meeting date at
https://ops.dot.gov.
The public may make short statements on the topics under
discussion. Anyone wishing to make an oral statement should notify
Cheryl Whetsel, (202) 366-4431, not later than May 31, 2005, on the
topic and the length of the presentation. The presiding officer at each
meeting may deny any request to present an oral statement and may limit
the time of any presentation.
You may submit written comments by mail or deliver them to the
Dockets Facility, U.S. Department of Transportation, Room PL-401, 400
Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC 20590-0001. It is open from 9 a.m.
to 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. You also may
submit written comments to the docket electronically by logging onto
the following Internet Web address: https://dms.dot.gov. Click on AHelp
& Information'' for instructions on how to file a document
electronically. All written comments should reference docket number
RSPA-98-4470. Anyone who would like confirmation of mailed comments
must include a self-addressed stamped postcard.
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. 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 you may visit https://dms.dot.gov.
Information on Services for Individuals With Disabilities
For information on facilities or services for individuals with
disabilities or to request special assistance at the meeting, please
contact Cheryl Whetsel at (202) 366-4431 by May 31, 2005.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The TPSSC and THLPSSC are statutorily
mandated advisory committees that advise the PHMSA, OPS on proposed
safety standards for gas and hazardous liquid pipelines. These advisory
committees are established under section 10(a)(2) of the Federal
Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463, 5 U.S.C. App. 1). The
committees consist of 15 members--five each representing government,
industry, and the public. The TPSSC and THLPSSC are tasked with
determining reasonableness, cost-effectiveness, and practicability of
regulatory initiatives.
The purpose of the meeting is to discuss future challenges facing
the pipeline industry and options for direction on key projects. The
discussion will focus on three areas:
Managing Risk and Integrity.
Sharing Responsibility and Building Alliances for Safety.
Improving Our Stewardship of the Environment, Security.
The OPS will provide an overview on the topics that we will be
exploring in each of the subtopics. Under each subtopic, several
questions are provided to promote discussion. The agenda follows:
Wednesday, June 15 (8 a.m. to 4 p.m.)
Managing Risk and Integrity
The OPS's primary responsibility is to use a risk based,
performance driven approach to protect the 2.3 million miles of natural
gas, petroleum, and other pipelines that crisscross our Nation.
These pipelines transport two thirds of the energy supply used by
American consumers each year. We carry out this responsibility by
identifying safety problems, determining whether standards need to
change and how much, enforcing the safety standards, and evaluating
whether we are meeting our safety goals.
1. Inspection Technology and Quality Assurance
How do we ensure that technology is applied to get
credible results?
Are the national consensus standards sufficient for tool
selection and qualification of pig log interpreters?
Is there a need for additional industry standards?
Will these consensus standards solve problems in the
future in other subject areas?
2. Pilot Operator Relief Valve Advisory Notice
Is the process outlined in the advisory an appropriate
approach to address the inspection of relief valves?
3. Human Factors
What have we learned from the experience of other modes
about human factors?
How do human factors affect the performance of pipeline
operators?
What evidence do we have that human factors may contribute
to incidents?
Is the advice from other modes generally applicable?
4. Distribution Integrity Management Program (DIMP)
Does the current plan draw data from all key areas?
What are your views on including the decision to install
and maintain excess flow valves in DIMP?
Should OPS give special consideration to the small
operators in DIMP implementation, master meter operators and liquefied
petroleum gas (LPG) operators?
5. Liquid Gathering Lines
Is the ``integrity'' approach of protecting pipelines that
could affect unusually sensitive areas (USA's) appropriate?
What safety functions are appropriate or needed?
Thursday, June 16 (8 a.m. to 4 p.m.)
Sharing Responsibility and Building Alliances for Safety
The OPS seeks out partnerships with all of our stakeholders. Each
provides unique experiences and information to augment our efforts to
keep the people and the environment safe. One example of a successful
partnership, between the OPS and the National Association of Fire
Marshals, is the production of a video, Pipeline Emergencies, that will
provide emergency personnel, state and local officials and others an
overview of the pipeline system. There are many safety roles to play
and some have yet to be identified.
1. Common Ground Alliance (CGA)--Virginia Experience
Do you believe enforcement will be necessary for damage
prevention?
[[Page 29557]]
How do we improve effectiveness of the one-call system and
what is the role of technology?
How can we apply the Virginia experience in other areas
(i.e., distribution integrity management)?
2. High Consequence Area (CCA) Pilots
Is there a way of using partnerships to expand damage
prevention, emergency preparedness and response?
Are there key partners missing? If so, how do we enlist
them, such as in the areas of emergency preparedness, encroachment,
etc.?
Should this best practice model be introduced to all
States?
3. Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG)
Is PHMSA/OPS doing all it should to educate communities
about LNG?
Show Video Clip--Liquefied Natural Gas
Pipeline Information Planning Alliance (PIPPA)
How do we approach home builders and insurers?
Improving Our Stewardship in Environmental and Energy Projects
The OPS is the Federal pipeline safety expert and recognizes how
important it is to share its expertise with other government and State
agencies responsible for supporting our government's national energy
policies. OPS also provides information and assists other government
and State agencies responsible for protecting our Nation's pipeline
system.
1. Permit Streamlining
How do we introduce our concepts to State and local
agencies?
What is the most efficient way to develop best practices?
How could we effectively use and improve on developing
best practices during implementation of the second pilot program?
2. Alaska
Are OPS's current pipeline safety regulations aligned and
applicable for the new technologies and materials being proposed for
the Alaska North Slope gas transmission pipeline?
What changes need to be made to ensure the optimum
delivery rate from Alaska, through Canada, and into the lower 48
States?
3. Security
How can OPS ensure continuing pipeline security in the
current environment?
What is OPS doing for pipeline security?
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 60102, 60115.
Issued in Washington, DC on May 18, 2005.
Theodore L. Willke,
Deputy Associate Administrator, Office of Pipeline Safety.
[FR Doc. 05-10275 Filed 5-19-05; 10:32 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-60-P
