Pipeline Safety: Technical Assistance Grants to Communities, 66098-66100 [E8-26506]
Download as PDF
sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES
66098
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 216 / Thursday, November 6, 2008 / Notices
133 can be found at https://
www.whitehouse.gov/omb/circulars/
a133/a133.html. Also include signed
copies of FRA’s Additional Assurances
and Certifications, available at https://
www.fra.dot.gov/downloads/admin/
assurancesandcertifications.pdf.
5. Define the scope of work, budget
and schedule for the proposed project.
Describe the proposed project’s physical
location, mile-post limits, and include
any drawings, plans, or schematics that
have been prepared relating to the
proposed project.
If funding requested under this
Program is only going to support a
portion of the overall rehabilitation and
repair of the applicant’s project,
describe the complete project and
specify which portion will involve
Federal funding. In addition, FRA
strongly encourages applicants to
estimate complete project costs and the
future financial viability of the Class II
and Class III railroad on whose property
the project is located.
6. The budget for the cost of the
project should, to the extent possible, be
separated into the following categories:
(1) Administrative; (2) Engineering fees;
(3) Demolition and removal; (4)
Construction labor, supervision, and
management; (5) Equipment; (6)
Materials, by type (e.g., ties, rail, ballast,
signals, and switches); (7)
Contingencies; and (8) Inspection fees.
Costs may be reimbursed as long as
expenditures were incurred after the
date of the natural disaster.
7. Describe the source and amount of
non-Federal funds, broken down by
cash, equipment, or supplies.
8. Describe proposed project
implementation and an overview of
project management arrangements.
9. For the railroad(s) operating on the
infrastructure proposed to be
rehabilitated or repaired, describe the
frequency of service, axle-load limits,
and estimated railroad gross ton miles
per mile for the first full year after
completion of the project.
10. Provide an overview of all work
done to date to rehabilitate and repair
damage caused by the natural disaster.
11. Describe the status or progress
toward completing any environmental
documentation or clearance for the
proposed project under the National
Environmental Policy Act, the National
Historic Preservation Act, section 4(f) of
the DOT Act, or other applicable federal
or state environmental impact
assessment laws. FRA’s Procedures for
Considering Environmental Impacts (64
Fed. Reg. 28545) (May 26, 1999)
(https://www.fra.dot.gov/us/content/166)
describe FRA’s process for the
assessment of environmental impacts
VerDate Aug<31>2005
19:11 Nov 05, 2008
Jkt 217001
and the preparation and processing of
appropriate documents. For projects
that may be categorically exempt from
detailed environmental review, as
discussed in FRA’s Procedures,
categorical exclusion worksheets are
available at: https://www.fra.dot.gov/us/
content/1606. Applicants are
encouraged to contact FRA as early as
possible in the environmental/historic
preservation review process to discuss
the environmental review.
Format: Excluding spreadsheets,
drawings, and tables, the narrative
statement for grant applications may not
exceed twenty-five pages in length.
With the exclusion of oversized
engineering drawings (which may be
submitted in hard copy to the FRA at
the address indicated above), all
application materials should be
submitted as attachments through
Grants.Gov. Spreadsheets consisting of
budget or financial information should
be submitted via Grants.Gov as
Microsoft Excel (or compatible)
documents.
Issued in Washington, DC, on November 3,
2008.
Mark E. Yachmetz,
Associate Administrator for Railroad
Development.
[FR Doc. E8–26478 Filed 11–5–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–06–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Pipeline and Hazardous Materials
Safety Administration
[Docket ID PHMSA–2008–0292]
Pipeline Safety: Technical Assistance
Grants to Communities
Pipeline and Hazardous
Materials Safety Administration
(PHMSA), DOT.
ACTION: Notice of Technical Assistance
Grant Criteria.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: PHMSA has established the
criteria and competitive procedures that
will be used in awarding grants under
the Technical Assistance Grants (TAG)
program authorized in 49 U.S.C. 60130
and section 2(e) of the Pipeline
Inspection, Protection, Enforcement,
and Safety Act of 2006. Subject to future
appropriations, the TAG program will
provide grants to local governments and
community groups for engineering and
other technical assistance related to
pipeline safety matters. This Notice also
details PHMSA’s plans for awarding the
three demonstration grants authorized
under the TAG program.
PO 00000
Frm 00089
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Steven Fischer by e-mail at
steve.fischer@dot.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
Experience shows that informed
communities play a vital role in the
safety and reliability of pipeline
operations. Accurate information about
the location, operation, and regulation
of pipelines facilitates safe land use
planning, effective damage prevention
programs, and fast, safe, and capable
emergency response. To those ends,
PHMSA has actively developed and
strengthened programs to improve the
flow of pipeline safety information to
communities. Over the past several
years, PHMSA has established its
Stakeholder Communications website;
staffed a Community Assistance &
Technical Services Program within the
Office of Pipeline Safety; offered webcasting of Pipeline Safety Trust
meetings; funded invitational travel for
state and local officials to participate in
various planning and review
committees; invited public
representatives to our Pipeline Safety
Advisory Committees; made
transmission pipeline location
information available through the
National Pipeline Mapping System; and
strengthened standards for pipeline
operator public awareness programs.
Most recently, in January 2008, PHMSA
launched the Pipeline and Informed
Planning Alliance to facilitate riskinformed land use and community
planning.
The Technical Assistance Grants
(TAG) program, first authorized in the
Pipeline Safety Improvement Act of
2002 (Pub. L. 107–355, codified at 49
U.S.C. 60130), offers new opportunities
to strengthen the depth and quality of
public participation in pipeline safety
matters. Section 9 of the Act, titled:
‘‘Pipeline Safety Information Grants to
Communities’’ authorized the Secretary
of Transportation to make grants to local
communities and organizations for
technical assistance relating to pipeline
safety issues. The grants would allow
communities and groups of individuals
(not including for-profit entities) to
obtain funding for technical assistance
in the form of engineering or other
scientific analysis of pipeline safety
issues and help promote public
participation in official proceedings. For
purposes of grants eligibility,
communities are defined as cities,
towns, villages, counties, parishes,
townships, and similar governmental
subdivisions, or consortiums of such
subdivisions. A nongovernmental group
E:\FR\FM\06NON1.SGM
06NON1
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 216 / Thursday, November 6, 2008 / Notices
of individuals is eligible for a grant
under the TAG program if its members
are affected or potentially affected
individuals who are, or are willing to
become, incorporated as a non-profit
organization in the state where they are
located. By law, the amount of any grant
may not exceed $50,000 for a single
grant recipient and the funds authorized
for these grants may not be derived from
user fees collected under 49 U.S.C.
60301. Although the 2002 Act
authorized $1,000,000 for grant awards
under the TAG program, to date, no
funds have been appropriated for this
purpose.
sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES
II. Competitive Procedures for
Awarding Technical Assistance Grants
Beginning in 2005, PHMSA has used
the Federal government-wide, webbased system Grants.gov for posting and
processing all new grants programs.
Grants.gov was established as a
governmental resource under the EGrants Initiative, part of the President’s
2002 Fiscal Year Management Agenda
to improve government services to the
public. The system operates as a central
storehouse for the timely and accurate
exchange of information and processing
of applications for Federal grant
programs. Organizations and
individuals who may be interested in
applying for grants may register on the
Grants.gov Web site to receive e-mail
notification of grant postings.
Subject to appropriations, PHMSA
will post notice on Grants.gov of the
application deadline and selection
criteria for TAG program grants. The
selection criteria will be those
established in this Notice, as set forth
below.
PHMSA plans to use a committee of
stakeholder representatives to assist in
reviewing and evaluating applications
under the TAG selection criteria. We
have used similar multi-stakeholder
committees to assist in reviewing and
recommending awards for both
Research and Development and State
Damage Prevention Program grants. As
with these grants, PHMSA will publish
on our website the names of the
individuals and organizations
comprising the review committee and
will identify the applicants selected and
the amount of each grant award.
III. TAG Criteria
In keeping with Congressional intent,
PHMSA has developed TAG evaluation
criteria to be used to rate and select
competing proposals. Together, these
criteria are intended to identify projects
that target high-risk areas; offer welldefined plans; foster open
communication with a local community
VerDate Aug<31>2005
19:11 Nov 05, 2008
Jkt 217001
and/or affected pipeline operators; and
produce results that are measurable and
transferable to other communities and/
or technology development.
The evaluation criteria are as follows:
1. The extent to which the Applicant’s
project scope is focused on areas where
a pipeline failure could pose a
significant risk to people or to unusually
sensitive environmental areas;
2. The extent to which the proposed
project scope demonstrates an
understanding of the specific concern
the Applicant wishes to address, as well
as the range of risks affected pipelines
pose to the affected geographic area and
the risks the community poses to the
pipelines;
3. The extent to which the proposal
demonstrates the Applicant’s
experience with and commitment to
open communication with affected
operators and to partnerships with other
key members of the community;
4. The extent to which the Applicant’s
project is designed to improve
performance and safety over time in
areas such as engineering, damage
prevention, land use, public education,
emergency response, and community
awareness;
5. The extent to which the Applicant’s
project plan establishes clear goals,
objectives, milestones, and estimates of
project costs;
6. The extent to which the Applicant
has a plan for evaluating and
disseminating results; and
7. The extent to which the Applicant’s
project scope provides the potential for
learning or technology transfer to other
groups and communities.
IV. Demonstration Grants—Three Pilots
Section 5 of the PIPES Act requires
the first three Technical Assistance
Grants to be demonstration grants in
amounts not exceeding $25,000 each.
These demonstration grants will be
funded out of general funds and will
target a specific community information
project—the Pipelines and Informed
Planning Alliance (PIPA), as referenced
above. The PIPA project has brought
together a wide range of pipeline safety
and local planning interests for the
purpose of developing risk-informed
best practices for land use and
community planning. The PIPA project
groups have been working on the
development of draft best practices for
roughly ten months and are scheduled
to report their conclusions in early
2009. More information on PIPA can be
found on PHMSA’s Web site at https://
primis.phmsa.dot.gov/comm/
PIPA.htm?nocache=458.
The PIPA project offers an excellent
opportunity to pilot test the TAG
PO 00000
Frm 00090
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
66099
program in the context of an ongoing,
previously-authorized community
information project. PHMSA is working
closely with the PIPA Steering
Committee to identify communities
interested in participating in the
demonstration grants phase of the TAG
program. The Steering Committee has
endorsed the concept of asking the pilot
communities to test draft recommended
practices currently being developed by
the PIPES task teams. We believe this is
a valuable opportunity to advance both
the TAG program and the PIPA project.
However, although we anticipate
awarding the three $25,000 grants
designated for demonstration projects
under PIPES Act section 5, we expect
this amount to cover only a portion of
the draft PIPA recommended practices.
In keeping with the demonstration
project scope, PHMSA intends to
streamline the rating process. Because
we are limiting the demonstration grants
to a specific community information
project, we will not use the grants.gov
system for applications or the full range
of TAG evaluation criteria discussed
above in selecting the three
demonstration grant recipients. Instead,
PHMSA, in consultation with the PIPA
Steering Committee, will select the three
pilot communities based on the
Applicant’s interest in pilot testing draft
PIPA best practices. PHMSA and the
PIPA Steering Committee will identify
communities interested in focusing on
PIPA related topics that are reflective of
the scope and intent of the TAG criteria.
Each demonstration grant recipient
will be required to provide a report to
PHMSA demonstrating completion of
the work as outlined in the grant
agreement. Further, each recipient of a
grant under section 5 must ensure that:
1. The technical findings made
possible by the grants are made
available to the relevant operators; and
2. Open communication is maintained
between the grant recipients, local
operators, local communities and other
interested parties.
In reapportion for the demonstration
projects, PHMSA and the PIPA Steering
Committee have identified several
potential projects and topics we may ask
communities to investigate, including:
Performing an annual review with
pipeline operators having facilities
within the community; mapping
pipelines, abandoned pipelines and
Consultation Zones in a geographic
information system (GIS); drafting a
model ordinance and reviewing one or
more of the proposed PIPA best
practices for legal issues associated with
incorporating the best practices into
law; developing educational material for
local governments to distribute to
E:\FR\FM\06NON1.SGM
06NON1
66100
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 216 / Thursday, November 6, 2008 / Notices
developers, landowners and operators
about Consultation Zones; or performing
Consultation Zone discussions for
several developments now being
planned that are in close proximity to a
transmission pipeline.
Issued in Washington, DC, on October 29,
2008.
Jeffrey D. Wiese,
Associate Administrator for Pipeline Safety.
[FR Doc. E8–26506 Filed 11–5–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–60–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Surface Transportation Board
[STB Docket No. AB–33 (Sub-No. 271X);
STB Docket No. AB–585 (Sub-No. 3X)]
sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES
Union Pacific Railroad Company—
Abandonment Exemption—in Bowie
County, TX; Dallas, Garland &
Northeastern Railroad Company—
Discontinuance of Service
Exemption—in Bowie County, TX
Union Pacific Railroad Company (UP)
and Dallas, Garland & Northeastern
Railroad Company (DGNO)
(collectively, applicants) have jointly
filed a verified notice of exemption
under 49 CFR part 1152 subpart F—
Exempt Abandonments and
Discontinuances of Service for UP to
abandon, and for DGNO to discontinue
service over, a 0.3-mile line of railroad
known as the Bonham Industrial Lead,
extending between milepost 21.5 and
milepost 21.8 near New Boston, in
Bowie County, TX. The line traverses
United States Postal Service Zip Code
75570.
Applicants have certified that: (1) No
local traffic has moved over the line for
at least 2 years; (2) any overhead traffic
on the line can be rerouted over other
lines; (3) no formal complaint filed by
a user of rail service on the line (or by
a state or local government entity acting
on behalf of such user) regarding
cessation of service over the line either
is pending with the Surface
Transportation Board or with any U.S.
District Court or has been decided in
favor of complainant within the 2-year
period; and (4) the requirements at 49
CFR 1105.7 (environmental report), 49
CFR 1105.8 (historic report), 49 CFR
1105.11 (transmittal letter), 49 CFR
1105.12 (newspaper publication), and
49 CFR 1152.50(d)(1) (notice to
governmental agencies) have been met.
As a condition to these exemptions,
any employee adversely affected by the
abandonment or discontinuance shall be
protected under Oregon Short Line R.
Co.—Abandonment—Goshen, 360 I.C.C.
91 (1979). To address whether this
VerDate Aug<31>2005
19:11 Nov 05, 2008
Jkt 217001
condition adequately protects affected
employees, a petition for partial
revocation under 49 U.S.C. 10502(d)
must be filed.
Provided no formal expression of
intent to file an offer of financial
assistance (OFA) has been received,
these exemptions will be effective on
December 6, 2008, unless stayed
pending reconsideration. Petitions to
stay that do not involve environmental
issues,1 formal expressions of intent to
file an OFA under 49 CFR
1152.27(c)(2),2 and trail use/rail banking
requests under 49 CFR 1152.29 must be
filed by November 17, 2008. Petitions to
reopen or requests for public use
conditions under 49 CFR 1152.28 must
be filed by November 26, 2008, with:
Surface Transportation Board, 395 E
Street, SW., Washington, DC 20423–
0001.
A copy of any petition filed with the
Board should be sent to applicants’
representatives: (1) Gabriel S. Meyer,
Assistant General Attorney, Union
Pacific Railroad Company, 1400 Douglas
Street, Mail Stop 1580, Omaha, NE
68179; and (2) Louis E. Gitomer, Esq.,
Law Offices of Louis E. Gitomer, 600
Baltimore Avenue, Suite 301, Towson,
MD 21204.
If the verified notice contains false or
misleading information, the exemptions
are void ab initio.
Applicants have filed a joint
combined environmental and historic
report, which addresses the effects, if
any, of the abandonment and
discontinuance on the environment and
historic resources. SEA will issue an
environmental assessment (EA) by
November 10, 2008. Interested persons
may obtain a copy of the EA by writing
to SEA (Room 1100, Surface
Transportation Board, Washington, DC
20423–0001) or by calling SEA, at (202)
245–0305. [Assistance for the hearing
impaired is available through the
Federal Information Relay Service
(FIRS) at 1–800–877–8339.] Comments
on environmental and historic
1 The Board will grant a stay if an informed
decision on environmental issues (whether raised
by a party or by the Board’s Section of
Environmental Analysis (SEA) in its independent
investigation) cannot be made before the
exemptions’ effective date. See Exemption of Outof-Service Rail Lines, 5 I.C.C.2d 377 (1989). Any
request for a stay should be filed as soon as possible
so that the Board may take appropriate action before
the exemptions’ effective date.
2 Each OFA must be accompanied by the filing
fee, which is currently set at $1,500. The filing fee
for an OFA increased from $1,300 to $1,500,
effective July 18, 2008. See Regulations Governing
Fees for Services Performed in Connection with
Licensing and Related Services—2008 Update, STB
Ex Parte No. 542 (Sub-No. 15) (STB served June 18,
2008), which amends 49 CFR Part 1002 of the Code
of Federal Regulations.
PO 00000
Frm 00091
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
preservation matters must be filed
within 15 days after the EA becomes
available to the public.
Environmental, historic preservation,
public use, or trail use/rail banking
conditions will be imposed, where
appropriate, in a subsequent decision.
Pursuant to the provisions of 49 CFR
1152.29(e)(2), UP shall file a notice of
consummation with the Board to signify
that it has exercised the authority
granted and fully abandoned the line. If
consummation has not been effected by
UP’s filing of a notice of consummation
by November 6, 2009, and there are no
legal or regulatory barriers to
consummation, the authority to
abandon will automatically expire.
Board decisions and notices are
available on our Web site at https://
www.stb.dot.gov.
Decided: November 3, 2008.
By the Board, David M. Konschnik,
Director, Office of Proceedings.
Jeff Herzig,
Clearance Clerk.
[FR Doc. E8–26467 Filed 11–5–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4915–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
Agency Information Collection
Activities: Submission for OMB
Review; Comment Request
Office of the Comptroller of the
Currency (OCC), Treasury.
ACTION: Notice and request for comment.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: The OCC, as part of its
continuing effort to reduce paperwork
and respondent burden, invites the
general public and other Federal
agencies to take this opportunity to
comment on a continuing information
collection, as required by the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995. Currently, the
OCC is soliciting comment concerning
its extension of an information
collection titled ‘‘Debt Cancellation
Contracts and Debt Suspension
Agreements—12 CFR 37.’’ The OCC is
also giving notice that it has submitted
the collection to OMB for review.
DATES: You should submit written
comments by: December 8, 2008.
ADDRESSES: Communications Division,
Office of the Comptroller of the
Currency, Public Information Room,
Mail Stop 1–5, Attention: 1557–0224,
250 E Street, SW., Washington, DC
20219. In addition, comments may be
sent by fax to (202) 874–4448, or by
electronic mail to
regs.comments@occ.treas.gov. You may
personally inspect and photocopy
comments at the OCC’s Public
E:\FR\FM\06NON1.SGM
06NON1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 216 (Thursday, November 6, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Pages 66098-66100]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-26506]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration
[Docket ID PHMSA-2008-0292]
Pipeline Safety: Technical Assistance Grants to Communities
AGENCY: Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA),
DOT.
ACTION: Notice of Technical Assistance Grant Criteria.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: PHMSA has established the criteria and competitive procedures
that will be used in awarding grants under the Technical Assistance
Grants (TAG) program authorized in 49 U.S.C. 60130 and section 2(e) of
the Pipeline Inspection, Protection, Enforcement, and Safety Act of
2006. Subject to future appropriations, the TAG program will provide
grants to local governments and community groups for engineering and
other technical assistance related to pipeline safety matters. This
Notice also details PHMSA's plans for awarding the three demonstration
grants authorized under the TAG program.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Steven Fischer by e-mail at
steve.fischer@dot.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
Experience shows that informed communities play a vital role in the
safety and reliability of pipeline operations. Accurate information
about the location, operation, and regulation of pipelines facilitates
safe land use planning, effective damage prevention programs, and fast,
safe, and capable emergency response. To those ends, PHMSA has actively
developed and strengthened programs to improve the flow of pipeline
safety information to communities. Over the past several years, PHMSA
has established its Stakeholder Communications website; staffed a
Community Assistance & Technical Services Program within the Office of
Pipeline Safety; offered web-casting of Pipeline Safety Trust meetings;
funded invitational travel for state and local officials to participate
in various planning and review committees; invited public
representatives to our Pipeline Safety Advisory Committees; made
transmission pipeline location information available through the
National Pipeline Mapping System; and strengthened standards for
pipeline operator public awareness programs. Most recently, in January
2008, PHMSA launched the Pipeline and Informed Planning Alliance to
facilitate risk-informed land use and community planning.
The Technical Assistance Grants (TAG) program, first authorized in
the Pipeline Safety Improvement Act of 2002 (Pub. L. 107-355, codified
at 49 U.S.C. 60130), offers new opportunities to strengthen the depth
and quality of public participation in pipeline safety matters. Section
9 of the Act, titled: ``Pipeline Safety Information Grants to
Communities'' authorized the Secretary of Transportation to make grants
to local communities and organizations for technical assistance
relating to pipeline safety issues. The grants would allow communities
and groups of individuals (not including for-profit entities) to obtain
funding for technical assistance in the form of engineering or other
scientific analysis of pipeline safety issues and help promote public
participation in official proceedings. For purposes of grants
eligibility, communities are defined as cities, towns, villages,
counties, parishes, townships, and similar governmental subdivisions,
or consortiums of such subdivisions. A nongovernmental group
[[Page 66099]]
of individuals is eligible for a grant under the TAG program if its
members are affected or potentially affected individuals who are, or
are willing to become, incorporated as a non-profit organization in the
state where they are located. By law, the amount of any grant may not
exceed $50,000 for a single grant recipient and the funds authorized
for these grants may not be derived from user fees collected under 49
U.S.C. 60301. Although the 2002 Act authorized $1,000,000 for grant
awards under the TAG program, to date, no funds have been appropriated
for this purpose.
II. Competitive Procedures for Awarding Technical Assistance Grants
Beginning in 2005, PHMSA has used the Federal government-wide, web-
based system Grants.gov for posting and processing all new grants
programs. Grants.gov was established as a governmental resource under
the E-Grants Initiative, part of the President's 2002 Fiscal Year
Management Agenda to improve government services to the public. The
system operates as a central storehouse for the timely and accurate
exchange of information and processing of applications for Federal
grant programs. Organizations and individuals who may be interested in
applying for grants may register on the Grants.gov Web site to receive
e-mail notification of grant postings.
Subject to appropriations, PHMSA will post notice on Grants.gov of
the application deadline and selection criteria for TAG program grants.
The selection criteria will be those established in this Notice, as set
forth below.
PHMSA plans to use a committee of stakeholder representatives to
assist in reviewing and evaluating applications under the TAG selection
criteria. We have used similar multi-stakeholder committees to assist
in reviewing and recommending awards for both Research and Development
and State Damage Prevention Program grants. As with these grants, PHMSA
will publish on our website the names of the individuals and
organizations comprising the review committee and will identify the
applicants selected and the amount of each grant award.
III. TAG Criteria
In keeping with Congressional intent, PHMSA has developed TAG
evaluation criteria to be used to rate and select competing proposals.
Together, these criteria are intended to identify projects that target
high-risk areas; offer well-defined plans; foster open communication
with a local community and/or affected pipeline operators; and produce
results that are measurable and transferable to other communities and/
or technology development.
The evaluation criteria are as follows:
1. The extent to which the Applicant's project scope is focused on
areas where a pipeline failure could pose a significant risk to people
or to unusually sensitive environmental areas;
2. The extent to which the proposed project scope demonstrates an
understanding of the specific concern the Applicant wishes to address,
as well as the range of risks affected pipelines pose to the affected
geographic area and the risks the community poses to the pipelines;
3. The extent to which the proposal demonstrates the Applicant's
experience with and commitment to open communication with affected
operators and to partnerships with other key members of the community;
4. The extent to which the Applicant's project is designed to
improve performance and safety over time in areas such as engineering,
damage prevention, land use, public education, emergency response, and
community awareness;
5. The extent to which the Applicant's project plan establishes
clear goals, objectives, milestones, and estimates of project costs;
6. The extent to which the Applicant has a plan for evaluating and
disseminating results; and
7. The extent to which the Applicant's project scope provides the
potential for learning or technology transfer to other groups and
communities.
IV. Demonstration Grants--Three Pilots
Section 5 of the PIPES Act requires the first three Technical
Assistance Grants to be demonstration grants in amounts not exceeding
$25,000 each. These demonstration grants will be funded out of general
funds and will target a specific community information project--the
Pipelines and Informed Planning Alliance (PIPA), as referenced above.
The PIPA project has brought together a wide range of pipeline safety
and local planning interests for the purpose of developing risk-
informed best practices for land use and community planning. The PIPA
project groups have been working on the development of draft best
practices for roughly ten months and are scheduled to report their
conclusions in early 2009. More information on PIPA can be found on
PHMSA's Web site at https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/comm/
PIPA.htm?nocache=458.
The PIPA project offers an excellent opportunity to pilot test the
TAG program in the context of an ongoing, previously-authorized
community information project. PHMSA is working closely with the PIPA
Steering Committee to identify communities interested in participating
in the demonstration grants phase of the TAG program. The Steering
Committee has endorsed the concept of asking the pilot communities to
test draft recommended practices currently being developed by the PIPES
task teams. We believe this is a valuable opportunity to advance both
the TAG program and the PIPA project. However, although we anticipate
awarding the three $25,000 grants designated for demonstration projects
under PIPES Act section 5, we expect this amount to cover only a
portion of the draft PIPA recommended practices.
In keeping with the demonstration project scope, PHMSA intends to
streamline the rating process. Because we are limiting the
demonstration grants to a specific community information project, we
will not use the grants.gov system for applications or the full range
of TAG evaluation criteria discussed above in selecting the three
demonstration grant recipients. Instead, PHMSA, in consultation with
the PIPA Steering Committee, will select the three pilot communities
based on the Applicant's interest in pilot testing draft PIPA best
practices. PHMSA and the PIPA Steering Committee will identify
communities interested in focusing on PIPA related topics that are
reflective of the scope and intent of the TAG criteria.
Each demonstration grant recipient will be required to provide a
report to PHMSA demonstrating completion of the work as outlined in the
grant agreement. Further, each recipient of a grant under section 5
must ensure that:
1. The technical findings made possible by the grants are made
available to the relevant operators; and
2. Open communication is maintained between the grant recipients,
local operators, local communities and other interested parties.
In reapportion for the demonstration projects, PHMSA and the PIPA
Steering Committee have identified several potential projects and
topics we may ask communities to investigate, including: Performing an
annual review with pipeline operators having facilities within the
community; mapping pipelines, abandoned pipelines and Consultation
Zones in a geographic information system (GIS); drafting a model
ordinance and reviewing one or more of the proposed PIPA best practices
for legal issues associated with incorporating the best practices into
law; developing educational material for local governments to
distribute to
[[Page 66100]]
developers, landowners and operators about Consultation Zones; or
performing Consultation Zone discussions for several developments now
being planned that are in close proximity to a transmission pipeline.
Issued in Washington, DC, on October 29, 2008.
Jeffrey D. Wiese,
Associate Administrator for Pipeline Safety.
[FR Doc. E8-26506 Filed 11-5-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-60-P