{"operation":"document","citation":"PHMSA Guidance, Information Collection Gas Distribution Annual Report Form (2010)","title":"Information Collection Gas Distribution Annual Report Form (2010)","source_type":"guidance","agency":"Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration","status":"guidance","official":true,"published_on":null,"effective_on":null,"summary":"Information Collection Gas Distribution Annual Report Form (2010) Document 75fr36615pipelinesafetyinformationcollectiongasdistributionannualreportform.pdf (68.07 KB) As required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA), the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) published a notice in the Federal Register on December 4, 2009, under Docket No. PHMSA–2004–19854 of its intent to revise the age","machine_formats":{"json":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-guidance-information-collection-gas-distribution-annual-report-form-2010-e644ca77.json","markdown":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-guidance-information-collection-gas-distribution-annual-report-form-2010-e644ca77.md"},"app_url":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-guidance-information-collection-gas-distribution-annual-report-form-2010-e644ca77","source_url":"https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/pipeline/gas-distribution-integrity-management/information-collection-gas-distribution-annual-report-form-2010","body":"Information Collection Gas Distribution Annual Report Form (2010)\n\nDocument\n\n 75fr36615pipelinesafetyinformationcollectiongasdistributionannualreportform.pdf (68.07 KB)\n\n        As required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA), the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) published a notice in the Federal Register on December 4, 2009, under Docket No. PHMSA–2004–19854 of its intent to revise the agency's Gas Distribution System Annual Report Form (PHMSA F 7100.1–1).\n\n          Effective Date: Monday, June 28, 2010\n\n<<<PAGE 1>>>\n\njlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS\nFederal Register / Vol. 75, No. 123 / Monday, June 28, 2010 / Proposed Rules\n36615\nPART 482—CONDITIONS OF\nPARTICIPATION FOR HOSPITALS\n1. The authority citation for part 482\ncontinues to read as follows:\nAuthority: Secs. 1102 and 1871 of the\nSocial Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1302 and\n1395(hh)).\n2. Section 482.13 is amended by\nadding a new paragraph (h) to read as\nfollows:\n§ 482.13 Condition of participation:\nPatient’s rights.\n* * * * *\n(h) Standard: Patient visitation rights.\nA hospital must have written policies\nand procedures regarding the visitation\nrights of patients, including those\nsetting forth any clinically necessary or\nreasonable restriction or limitation that\nthe hospital may need to place on such\nrights and the reasons for the clinical\nrestriction or limitation. A hospital\nmust—\n(1) Inform each patient (or\nrepresentative, where appropriate) of his\nor her visitation rights, including any\nclinical restriction or limitation on such\nrights, when he or she is informed of his\nor her other rights under this section.\n(2) Inform each patient (or\nrepresentative, where appropriate) of\nthe right, subject to his or her consent,\nto receive the visitors whom he or she\ndesignates, including, but not limited to,\na spouse, a domestic partner (including\na same-sex domestic partner), another\nfamily member, or a friend, and his or\nher right to withdraw or deny such\nconsent at any time.\n(3) Not restrict, limit, or otherwise\ndeny visitation privileges on the basis of\nrace, color, national origin, religion, sex,\nsexual orientation, gender identity, or\ndisability.\n(4) Ensure that all visitors designated\nby the patient (or representative, where\nappropriate) enjoy visitation privileges\nthat are no more restrictive than those\nthat immediate family members would\nenjoy.\nPART 485—CONDITIONS OF\nPARTICIPATION: SPECIALIZED\nPROVIDERS\n3. The authority citation for Part 485\ncontinues to read as follows:\nAuthority: Secs. 1102 and 1871 of the\nSocial Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1302 and\n1395(hh)).\n4. Section 485.635 is amended by\nadding a new paragraph (f) to read as\nfollows:\n§ 485.635 Condition of participation:\nProvision of services.\n* * * * *\n(f) Standard: Patient visitation rights.\nA CAH must have written policies and\nprocedures regarding the visitation\nrights of patients, including those\nsetting forth any clinically necessary or\nreasonable restriction or limitation that\nthe CAH may need to place on such\nrights and the reasons for the clinical\nrestriction or limitation. A CAH must—\n(1) Inform each patient (or\nrepresentative, where appropriate) of his\nor her visitation rights, including any\nclinical restriction or limitation on such\nrights, when he or she is informed of his\nor her other rights under this section.\n(2) Inform each patient (or\nrepresentative, where appropriate) of\nthe right, subject to his or her consent,\nto receive the visitors whom he or she\ndesignates, including, but not limited to,\na spouse, a domestic partner (including\na same-sex domestic partner), another\nfamily member, or a friend, and his or\nher right to withdraw or deny such\nconsent at any time.\n(3) Not restrict, limit, or otherwise\ndeny visitation privileges on the basis of\nrace, color, national origin, religion, sex,\nsexual orientation, gender identity, or\ndisability.\n(4) Ensure that all visitors designated\nby the patient (or representative, where\nappropriate) enjoy visitation privileges\nthat are no more restrictive than those\nthat immediate family members would\nenjoy.\n(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance\nProgram No. 93.773, Medicare—Hospital\nInsurance; and Program No. 93.774,\nMedicare—Supplementary Medical\nInsurance Program). (Catalog of Federal\nDomestic Assistance Program No. 93.778,\nMedical Assistance Program).\nDated: June 18, 2010.\nMarilyn Tavenner,\nActing Administrator and Chief Operating\nOfficer, Centers for Medicare & Medicaid\nServices.\nApproved: June 21, 2010.\nKathleen Sebelius,\nSecretary.\n[FR Doc. 2010–15568 Filed 6–23–10; 11:15 am]\nBILLING CODE 4120–01–P\nACTION: Request for public comments\nand OMB approval of modifications to\nan existing information collection.\nDEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION\nPipeline and Hazardous Materials\nSafety Administration\n49 CFR Part 192\n[Docket No. PHMSA–RSPA–2004–19854]\nPipeline Safety: Information Collection\nGas Distribution Annual Report Form\nAGENCY: Pipeline and Hazardous\nMaterials Safety Administration\n(PHMSA), DOT.\nSUMMARY: As required by the Paperwork\nReduction Act of 1995 (PRA), the\nPipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety\nAdministration (PHMSA) published a\nnotice in the Federal Register on\nDecember 4, 2009, under Docket No.\nPHMSA–2004–19854 of its intent to\nrevise the agency’s Gas Distribution\nSystem Annual Report Form (PHMSA F\n7100.1–1). PHMSA F 7100.1–1 is\ncovered under the PHMSA information\ncollection titled: ‘‘Incident and Annual\nReports for Gas Pipeline Operators,’’\nwith an OMB Control Number of 2137–\n0522. PHMSA is publishing this notice\nto respond to comments and announce\nthat the revised information collection\nwill be submitted to OMB for approval.\nThis notice also informs operators of gas\ndistribution systems that PHMSA is\nplanning for the revised Annual Report\nForm, once approved, to be used for the\n2010 calendar year and submitted to\nPHMSA by March 15, 2011. The portion\nof the annual report relative to\nmechanical fitting (compression\ncouplings) failures will be delayed by\none year and will take effect starting\nwith the 2011 calendar year.\nDATES: Submit comments to OMB on or\nbefore July 28, 2010.\nADDRESSES: You may submit comments\nidentified by the docket number\n‘‘PHMSA–2004–19854’’ and OMB\nControl Number ‘‘2137–0522’’ by any of\nthe following methods:\n• Fax: 1–202–395–6566, ATTN: Desk\nOfficer for Department of Transportation\n(DOT)/PHMSA.\n• Mail: Office of Information and\nRegulatory Affairs (OIRA), OMB, 726\nJackson Place, NW., Washington, DC\n20503, ATTN: Desk Officer for DOT/\nPHMSA.\n• E-mail: OIRA, Office of\nManagement and Budget, at the\nfollowing address:\noira\n_submissions@omb.eop.gov (ATTN:\nDesk Officer for DOT/PHMSA).\nRequests for a copy of the information\ncollection should be directed to\nCameron Satterthwaite, 202–366–1319\nor by e-mail at\nCameron.Satterthwaite@dot.gov, or by\nmail at DOT, PHMSA, 1200 New Jersey\nAvenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590–\n0001.\nFOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:\nTechnical Information: Mike Israni,\n202–366–4571 or by e-mail at\nMike.Israni@dot.gov.\nInformation Collection: Cameron\nSatterthwaite, 202–366–1319 or by e-\nmail at Cameron.Satterthwaite@dot.gov.\nVerDate Mar<15>2010 16:02 Jun 25, 2010 Jkt 220001 PO 00000 Frm 00039 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\\FR\\FM\\28JNP1.SGM 28JNP1\n\n<<<PAGE 2>>>\n\njlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS\n36616 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 123 / Monday, June 28, 2010 / Proposed Rules\nSUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section\n1320.8(d), Title 5, Code of Federal\nRegulations requires PHMSA to provide\ninterested members of the public and\naffected agencies an opportunity to\ncomment on information collection and\nrecordkeeping requests. This notice\nidentifies a revised information\ncollection request that PHMSA will be\nsubmitting to OMB for approval. This\ninformation collection is contained in\nthe pipeline safety regulations at 49 CFR\nparts 190–199. PHMSA has revised\nburden estimates, where appropriate, to\nreflect the proposed adjustments to the\nGas Distribution System Annual Report\nForm (PHMSA F 7100.1–1). The\nfollowing information is provided for\nthe information collection: (1) Title of\nthe information collection; (2) OMB\ncontrol number; (3) type of request; (4)\nabstract of the information collection\nactivity; (5) description of affected\npublic; (6) estimate of total annual\nreporting and recordkeeping burden;\nand (7) frequency of collection. PHMSA\nwill request a three-year term of\napproval for the information collection\nactivity. PHMSA is posting the revised\nGas Distribution Annual Report Form\nand instructions to Docket No. PHMSA–\n2004–19854. Once approved, the\nrevised Annual Report Form will be\nused to collect information for the 2010\ncalendar year and submitted to PHMSA\nby March 15, 2011. The portion of the\nannual report relative to mechanical\nfitting (compression couplings) failures\nwill be delayed by one year and will\ntake effect starting with the 2011\ncalendar year.\nThis notice includes the following:\nI. Background\nII. Summary of Comments\nIII. Proposed Information Collection\nRevisions and Request for Comments\nI. Background\nOn December 4, 2009, (74 FR 34906),\nPHMSA published a final rule titled:\n‘‘Pipeline Safety: Integrity Management\nProgram for Gas Distribution Pipelines.’’\nThe Distribution Integrity Management\nProgram (DIMP) rulemaking established\nthe requirements for integrity\nmanagement programs for Gas\nDistribution systems. In the DIMP notice\nof proposed rulemaking, PHMSA\nproposed the reporting of all plastic\npipe failures. In the final rule, PHMSA\nmodified this proposal to limit the\nreporting of plastic pipe failures to those\noccurring on compression couplings but\nextended the collection to include\ncouplings used in metal pipe. PHMSA\ninitially provided an opportunity for\ncomments on this proposal for 30 days\nand subsequently published another\nFederal Register notice (December 31,\n2009; 74 FR 69286) to allow for a total\ncomment period of 60 days. PHMSA is\ndeveloping a final rule to address the\ncomments received on this proposal and\nrevise the pipeline safety regulations to\nclarify the extent of pipe fittings\ninvolved in the compression coupling\n(mechanical fitting) failure information\ncollection, revise key dates for the\ncollection and submission of\nmechanical fitting failure information,\nalign threat categories in § 192.1007\nwith the ‘‘cause of leak’’ categories on\nthe Annual Report Form and\nInstructions, and clarify the Excess Flow\nValve (EFV) metric to be reported by\noperators of gas systems.\nIn addition to the comment period for\nthe proposed regulatory requirements,\nPHMSA used the December 4, 2009,\nfinal rule to announce a 60-day\ncomment period seeking public\ncomments about the proposed\nmodification of the information\ncollection: OMB Control Number 2137–\n0522, with respect to the corresponding\nannual report form (Form PHMSA F\n7100.1–1 Annual Report for Gas\nDistribution Systems). Section 191.11\nrequires each operator of a gas\ndistribution pipeline system, except as\nprovided in § 191.11(b), to submit report\nForm PHMSA F 7100.1–1 Annual\nReports for Gas Distribution System.\nThe proposed revisions to PHMSA F\n7100.1–1 are needed for operators to\nsubmit information required by the\nDIMP final rule regarding compression\ncoupling (mechanical fitting) failures,\nfour program performance measures,\nand the number of EFVs in the system\nat the end of the year on single-family\nresidential services. The purpose of this\nnotice is to address comments received\nfrom the 60-day comment period and\nannounce the changes to the annual\nreport form that will be submitted to\nOMB for approval.\nII. Summary of Comments\nPHMSA received twenty-three letters\ncommenting on the proposed\ncompression coupling (now referred to\nas mechanical fittings) reporting\nrequirements on the Distribution\nAnnual Report Form. The comments\nwere from twelve pipeline operators,\ntwo trade associations representing\npipeline operators, NAPSR representing\nState pipeline safety regulators, one\nState pipeline regulatory agency, two\nmanufacturers, and one industry\nconsultant. Several commenters\nsubmitted multiple letters. In addition\nto comments about the specific\ninformation to be collected, commenters\nexpressed concern that the reporting\nrequirements will require operators to\nperform a ‘‘root cause’’ analysis of each\nfailure. Based on discussion at the\nTechnical Pipeline Safety Standards\nCommittee (TPSSC) meeting and\ncomments submitted to the docket,\nPHMSA has further modified the\nproposed Distribution Annual Report\nForm. A summary of comments about\nthe proposed changes to the information\ncollection, PHMSA’s responses, and the\ndate operators are to begin using the\nrevised form are provided below.\nThe comments were grouped into the\nfollowing topic summaries:\nComment Topic 1 PRA procedural\nrequirements in making proposed\nchanges to the Gas Distribution System\nAnnual Report form; information being\ncollected is not compatible with the\npurpose of the gas distribution system\nannual report.\nComment Topic 2 Delete, change\nand define data fields and align terms\nused in § 192.1009, and proposed Part F\nof the annual report and instructions.\nComment Topic 3 Proposals for\nother changes to the Gas Distribution\nSystem Annual Report Form and\ninstructions.\nA discussion of each comment topic\nand PHMSA’s response to each follows:\nComment Topic 1: PRA procedural\nrequirements in making proposed\nchanges to the Gas Distribution System\nAnnual Report form; information being\ncollected is not compatible with the\npurpose of the gas distribution system\nannual report.\nSeveral commenters maintained that\nPHMSA’s proposal to modify the Gas\nDistribution Annual Report information\ncollection did not meet the\nrequirements of 44 U.S.C 3501 et seq. of\nthe PRA of 1995. They indicated that\nPHMSA did not provide an adequate\ndescription of the need, a statement of\npurpose for the data collection, or an\nevaluation of the cost benefit of\ncollecting this data. They claimed the\nproposed changes to the information\ncollection were burdensome,\nsubstantive, and without benefit to\npublic safety in near term. Additionally,\none commenter stated that the intent of\nthe information collection presented in\nthe proposed rule differed from how the\ninformation collection was prescribed in\nthe final rule in § 192.1009.\nSouthwest Gas maintained that some\nof the changes were inconsistent with\nthe discussion held with TPSSC on\nDecember 12, 2008, and requested that\nthe issue be brought back to the TPSSC\nfor its review and approval.\nSome commenters believed that there\nshould be a separate information\ncollection for mechanical fitting failure\ndata. Commenters claimed that the\nmechanical fitting failure data was too\ndetailed for reporting via the Annual\nVerDate Mar<15>2010 16:02 Jun 25, 2010 Jkt 220001 PO 00000 Frm 00040 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\\FR\\FM\\28JNP1.SGM 28JNP1\n\n<<<PAGE 3>>>\n\njlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS\nFederal Register / Vol. 75, No. 123 / Monday, June 28, 2010 / Proposed Rules\n36617\nReport Form. A commenter stated that\nthe purpose of the Annual Report Form\nis to summarize data about an operator’s\nsystem for the prior year. One\ncommenter suggested the information be\ncollected using the Incident Report\nform. Another commenter suggested\nthat information could be collected in a\nmanner consistent with the Plastic Pipe\nData Collection.\nPHMSA Response: PHMSA is taking\nthe necessary measures to comply with\nthe PRA procedural requirements in\namending PHMSA F 7100.1–1. The 60-\nday notice published in the December 4,\n2009, DIMP final rule and this 30-day\nnotice are part of those steps to comply\nwith the PRA requirements. PHMSA\nwill not implement the amendments to\nPHMSA F 7100.1–1 until PHMSA has\nreceived approval from OMB.\nMechanical fitting failure has been the\ncause of a number of incidents on\ndistribution pipelines in recent years\nand the subject of two PHMSA\nadvisories. PHMSA needs additional\ninformation concerning mechanical\nfitting failures to determine if there are\nany trends or concerns regarding\nmechanical fitting failures in the\nindustry. To identify trends, there needs\nto be sufficient data to characterize the\ntype of fittings which are more\nsusceptible to failure. If too little\ninformation is collected about the\nattributes of the fitting, only broad\ngeneralizations could be developed.\nPHMSA seeks to identify the smallest\nsubset of mechanical fittings which pose\nthe highest risk. The information\ncollection will assist PHMSA in\nidentifying problems where additional\ntargeted requirements may be needed to\nprotect public safety and help prevent\nfuture incidents. While the majority of\nmechanical fittings currently being\ninstalled are plastic, problems have\nbeen identified with existing steel\nmechanical fittings. The quality of\noriginal pipeline installation, quality of\nthe original material, changes in the\nenvironment, and the appropriateness of\nthe original design application can\nmanifest itself in problems over time.\nFor this reason, in the DIMP final rule,\nPHMSA invited public comment on the\nextension of this requirement to include\nreporting of mechanical fittings failures\non metal pipe. This information\ncollection may assist operators in\nidentifying specific mechanical fittings,\nincluding installation or design\npractices, which pose the greatest threat\nto the integrity of their pipeline system.\nPHMSA provided the requirements\nfor reporting the information collected\nin Parts D, E, and F on the Annual\nReport Form in the DIMP proposed rule\nand final rule. Additionally, PHMSA\ndiscussed the proposed changes with\nthe TPSSC as detailed in the transcript\nto the meeting which may be reviewed\nin under Docket Number PHMSA–\n2009–0203 at www.Regulations.gov. In\ndiscussing the revised form with\nTPSSC, PHMSA conveyed that the\npurpose of the information to be\ncollected is to determine the root cause\nof the fitting failures. PHMSA\nmentioned that even if the plastic pipe\nfailures were removed from reporting,\ncompression coupling (mechanical\nfitting) failure reporting would still be\nretained. The National Transportation\nSafety Board (NTSB) had informed\nPHMSA that a safety recommendation\npertaining to the data collection of\nmechanical fitting failure information\nwas imminent and recommended that\nPHMSA revise the DIMP final rule to\naddress more explicitly the risks from\ncompression coupling failures. Based on\nthe discussion at the TPSSC meeting,\nPHMSA decided to reduce the\nfrequency of the reporting from within\n90 days of failure to annually.\nOperators conveyed that they need six\nto twelve months to modify their\nInformation Technology systems,\ninternally generated forms, and data\ncollection procedures to accommodate\nDIMP-related information collection\nrequirements. In direct response to that\nconcern, PHMSA has revised the\nAnnual Report form and instructions to\nspecify the delayed collection of\nmechanical fitting failure information in\nPart F. PHMSA is planning for operators\nto begin the collection of mechanical\nfitting failure information on January 1,\n2011, for the 2011 Calendar Year with\nfinal submission by March 15, 2012.\nPHMSA supports the involvement of all\nstakeholders during the review process\nfor future amendments to the Annual\nReport form based on the data collected.\nPHMSA is revising the level of effort to\ncomplete this information collection as\ndetailed in section III: Proposed\nInformation Collection Revisions and\nRequest for Comments.\nPHMSA uses the information\noperators report on the Annual Report\nas one method to evaluate operator\nperformance and identify national\ntrends. PHMSA strives to enhance safety\nin a risk-based, systematic approach to\ndeveloping and refining pipeline safety\nprograms. The collection of mechanical\nfitting failure information supports\nthese objectives. While the information\ncould be collected through a separate\ninformation collection, the Annual\nReport Form is an established channel\nand not incongruous with its purpose.\nInformation operators submit about\ntheir transmission integrity management\nprograms was recently integrated into\nthe Transmission Annual Report Form.\nIt was logical to have distribution\nintegrity management information be\nreported on the Distribution Annual\nReport Form. PHMSA is pursuing\nelectronic reporting for the Annual\nReport Form which will reduce the\nreporting burden on operators. The\nelectronic submission of data will\nincrease the accuracy and quality of\ndata collected which, in turn, will\nimprove PHMSA’s data integration\nefforts. Information about electronic\nfiling can be found in the Updates to\nPipeline and Liquefied Natural Gas\nReporting Requirements notice of\nproposed rulemaking published on July\n2, 2009 (74 FR 31675).\nComment Topic 2: Delete, change and\ndefine data fields. Align terms used in\n§ 192.1009, the Annual Report Form and\nInstructions, and the Incident Report\nForm and Instructions\nCommenters noted that some of the\ninformation requested in the form\nregarding mechanical fitting failures\nmay not be available and if it is\navailable, would require a significant\neffort to locate. The information cited on\nthe proposed form included ‘‘lot\nnumber’’\n,\n‘‘coupling manufacturer’’, and\n‘‘decade of manufacture’’. Commenters\nclaimed that external coatings may\nobscure the manufacturer’s markings.\nOperators were concerned about\npotential consequences of leaving fields\nempty on the Annual Report if they\ncould not locate the information. They\nrequested that these fields be deleted\nand if they were not deleted, that\nPHMSA provide operators relief when\nthe information is not readily available\nor apparent.\nComments were submitted regarding\neach mechanical fitting failure data field\non the proposed Annual Report form.\nThese comments are summarized in the\ntable below.\nPHMSA Response: Locating data\nrequires a reasonable effort on the part\nof operators. Nonetheless, PHMSA\nrecognizes that operators may not be\nable to locate some of the data\nrequested. While operators may not\nalways be able to identify some of the\ndata, the data they can identify will\nassist in determining the extent of a\nmechanical fitting failure issue. More\ngranular data such as ‘‘lot number’’ and\n‘‘manufacturer’’ may assist in narrowing\nan issue to a smaller group of fittings.\nThe Annual Report form and\ninstructions provide for the operator to\nrecord ‘‘UNAVAILABLE’’ if the operator\ncannot locate the ‘‘lot number’’\n,\n‘‘manufacturer’’, or the ‘‘part or model\nNumber’’ data. Accordingly, PHMSA\nretains the reporting requirements\nVerDate Mar<15>2010 16:02 Jun 25, 2010 Jkt 220001 PO 00000 Frm 00041 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\\FR\\FM\\28JNP1.SGM 28JNP1\n\n<<<PAGE 4>>>\n\nAnnual report Public comments\nPHMSA Response............... Model No. ............................. PHMSA Response............... Lot Number .......................... PHMSA Response............... Decade of Manufacture ........ PHMSA Response............... PHMSA Response............... Coupling Manufacturer .........• The Incident Report form cautions that the industry jargon concerning compression fittings can be misleading.\nManufacturers have utilized each other’s components and sell ‘‘private labeled’’ fittings under their own name.\nManufacturer’s names change.\nThe instructions from the Incident Report Form are repeated in the Annual Report Form instructions for this field.\nThe instructions address the commenters’ concerns about identifying the manufacturer who produced the fit-\nting.\n• The model number is usually not available. Consider deleting the field.\nField retained. Operators are to record ‘‘UNAVAILABLE’’ when they cannot locate the information with reasonable\neffort.\n• The lot number is usually not available. Consider deleting the field.\nField retained. Operators are to record ‘‘UNAVAILABLE’’ when they cannot locate the information with reasonable\neffort.\n• Operators generally know when a fitting was installed but not necessarily when the fitting was manufactured.\nThe fitting may have been in stock for years prior to installation. The information is not readily available.\n• Change to ‘‘Decade of Installation’’\n.\n• The decade a fitting is manufactured may not be accurate because the information would have to be inferred\nfrom pipe installation records\nThe field ‘‘Decade of Manufacture’’ was split into two fields for the operator to provide the best information the op-\nerator has available; ‘‘Year Installed’’ and ‘‘Year Manufactured’’. The year of installation is generally shown on\nthe as-built drawing and/or on a map. If neither the year installed nor the year manufactured is known but the\ndecade manufactured is known, the field ‘‘Decade Manufactured’’ is to be used.\nLocation in System ...............• Use radio buttons similar to those in the Incident Report.\n• ‘‘Meter set’’ and ‘‘Riser joint’’ are confusing. A failure on a flexible field assembled riser could be reported as\nlocated either at the meter set or in a riser joint.\nThe field ‘‘Location in the System’’ was split into two fields, ‘‘Location of System’’ and ‘‘Type of Mechanical Fit-\nting’’, to better identify and reduce confusion as to where the failed fitting was located. The ‘‘Location in the\nSystem’’ will identify if the fitting is above or below ground, inside or outside, and if it connects a main-to-main,\na main-to-service, or a service-to-main. The type of mechanical fittings include: service/main tee, tapping tee,\ntransition fitting, coupling, riser, adapter, valve, sleeve, or other fitting. Radio buttons are provided.\nNominal Pipe Size ................• Change the instructions for ‘‘Nominal pipe size’’ and ‘‘Material Type’’ to ‘‘Enter the piping material to which the\nleaking/pulled-out compression fitting was connected.’’ and ‘‘Enter the nominal piping size’’\n.\nPHMSA Response............... Radio buttons for most common nominal pipe sizes were added to the form along with a selection of the dimen-\nsion type of IPS, CTS, or NPS.\nMaterial Type (Body) ............• Segregate the data sets for plastic fittings from metal fittings to avoid confusion in the data.\n• Add type of materials being joined by the compression couplings.\nPHMSA Response............... The ‘‘Material Type (Body)’’ field was split into three fields to identify the fitting material and the material of the\ntwo pipes connected to the fitting.\nNature of Failure .................. • Consider deleting the field.\n• Change to ‘‘Cause of Release’’ or ‘‘Cause of Leak’’\n.\n• Change to ‘‘Apparent Root Cause’’\n.\n• Determining the ‘‘nature of failure’’ goes beyond reporting to performing a ‘‘root cause’’ analysis. Operators\nwould need to develop new practices and procedures to determine root cause.\n• PHMSA should develop procedures for how to perform a root cause analysis.\n• Select the ‘‘nature of failure’’ from the following choices: ‘‘leak through seal’’\n,\n‘‘leak through body’’ or ‘‘pull-out’’\n.\n• Select the ‘‘nature of failure’’ from the existing eight causes from Part C of the Annual Report Form.\n• Compressive forces during installation may be fixed by design or they may be influenced by human factors. Ex-\nternal forces or environmental changes may also affect them.\n• Performance of compression couplings are dependent upon design, fabrication, installation, application, and\nexternal factors.\n• Need to further delineate between types of couplings. Request industry stakeholder group create standard for\nperforming a root cause analysis and for reporting of data.\n• Gather factual data regarding the largest problems: installation and application practices. Operators should re-\nport data, not the failure cause. Reporting of cause requires expert forensic analysis. Remove ‘‘manufacturing\ndefect’’ as operators cannot determine.\n• Analysis is best performed at the operator level.\nField retained. Operators are to record ‘‘UNAVAILABLE’’ when they cannot locate the information with reasonable\neffort. Operators are required to investigate failures per section 192.617. The investigation of a hazardous leak\non a mechanical fitting would follow the operator’s established procedure for determining the cause of the fail-\nure. The field ‘‘Nature of Failure’’ was changed to ‘‘Apparent cause of leak’’ and provided the same choices as\non the Annual Report Form in Part C- Total Leaks and Hazardous leaks eliminated/repaired During Year. Addi-\ntionally, the field was split into two additional fields for operators to select the type of defect (construction, ma-\nterial, design, previous damage, thermal expansion/contraction) and the location of the leak (leak through seal,\nleak through body, pull-out).\n• Term ‘‘Number of Similar Failures’’ was not mentioned in 192.1009.\n• Determining the number of similar failures requires judgment.\n• Consider deleting the field. Nature of the information requested, such as lot number/part number makes it im-\npractical to have similar failures.\n• Confusing and inappropriate—Consider deleting the field.\nPHMSA Response............... jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS\n36618 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 123 / Monday, June 28, 2010 / Proposed Rules\nincluded in the DIMP final rule for each\nmechanical fitting failure data field.\nWe have changed the title for Part F\non the Annual Report Form from\n‘‘compression coupling’’ to ‘‘mechanical\nfitting’’\n.\nThe comments and related PHMSA\nresponse pertaining to the data fields are\nsummarized in the following table:\nNumber of Similar Failures .. VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:02 Jun 25, 2010 Jkt 220001 PO 00000 Frm 00042 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\\FR\\FM\\28JNP1.SGM 28JNP1\n\n<<<PAGE 5>>>\n\njlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS\nFederal Register / Vol. 75, No. 123 / Monday, June 28, 2010 / Proposed Rules\n36619\nAnnual report Public comments\nPHMSA Response............... This field was intended to reduce the number of failures an operator would report if they were similar in nature.\nDue to the confusion, PHMSA eliminates this field.\nComment Topic 3 Proposals for\nOther Changes to the Gas Distribution\nSystem Annual Report Form and\nInstructions.\nSome of the other comments proposed\nchanges to other parts of the Annual\nReport Form. A commenter requested\nthat one of the columns titled: ‘‘Other’’\nin Part B.1 be amended to ‘‘Other\nPlastic’’ to be consistent with Part B.2\nand B.3. Another commenter\nmaintained that based on The Integrity\nManagement for Gas Distribution Report\nof Phase 1 Investigations (December\n2005), the ‘‘PERCENT OF\nUNACCOUNTED FOR GAS’’ in Part H is\nnot a valid national level performance\nmeasure and should be removed from\nthe Annual Report Form.\nNAPSR suggested that PHMSA\nmodify the form instructions to align\nwith the changes recently made to the\nincident report form and instructions.\nNAPSR also proposed a revision of the\ndefinition of ‘‘excavation damage’’ to\ninclude ‘‘damaged tracer wire’’ and the\nuse of the term ‘‘enclosure’’ as opposed\nto the ‘‘housing’’ for the line device.\nCommenters also requested a ‘‘save’’\nfeature for electronic reporting so that\nthe report can be printed out and\ncirculated for review prior to electronic\nsubmittal. Additionally, they noted the\nimportance of the use of pick lists when\npossible instead of free form data\ncollection.\nPHMSA Response: PHMSA\nappreciates the input commenters\nprovided to improve the Annual Report\nForm. PHMSA made an editorial\ncorrection to the column titles for\n‘‘Other’’ in Part B.1 and B.2 on the\nproposed Annual Report form. A ‘‘save’’\nfeature will be available for electronic\ndata submission for the revised annual\nreport. The paper submission includes\npick lists as will future electronic\nsubmission. Under this information\ncollection notice, PHMSA limits\nchanges to and addresses comments\nabout the Annual Report form and\ninstructions to those proposed in the\nDIMP final rule.\nIII. Proposed Information Collection\nRevisions and Request for Comments\nThe revised burden hours associated\nwith this information collection is:\nTitle of Information Collection:\nIncident and Annual Reports for Gas\nPipeline Operators.\nOMB Control Number: 2137–0522.\nType of Request: Revision of currently\napproved information collection to one\nform within the information collection,\nPHMSA F 7100.1–1 Annual Reports for\nGas Distribution System.\nAbstract: Currently Information\nCollection 2137–0522 titled: ‘‘Incident\nand Annual Reports for Gas Pipeline\nOperators’’ has an approved burden\nhour estimate of 37,845 hours. This\ninformation collection consists of\nincident and annual reporting for gas\npipeline operators. Based on review of\nproposed changes to the Gas\nDistribution Annual Report form data,\nPHMSA estimates the respondent\ncommunity of 1,262 Distribution\nOperators to report a total of 18,000\nmechanical fitting failures. PHMSA\nestimates that the form changes relative\nto this notice will result in one hour\nincrease per mechanical fitting failure.\nThese actions would result in an\nincrease from 37,845 hours to an\nestimated 55,845 hours (37,845 hours +\n18,000 hours).\nThe result of this revision is specified\nin the following:\nAffected Public: Gas Pipeline\nOperators.\nEstimated Number of Respondents:\n2,212.\nEstimated Total Annual Burden\nHours: 55,845 hours (18,000 hour\nincrease).\nFrequency of collection: Annually\nwith the option for the operator to\nsubmit mechanical fitting failure\ninformation electronically at greater\nfrequency if the operator chooses.\nIssued in Washington, DC on June 18,\n2010.\nJeffrey D. Wiese,\nAssociate Administrator for Pipeline Safety.\n[FR Doc. 2010–15633 Filed 6–25–10; 8:45 am]\nBILLING CODE 4910–60–P\nDEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE\nNational Oceanic and Atmospheric\nAdministration\n50 CFR Part 300\n[Docket No. 100507218–0219–01]\nRIN 0648–AY91\nInternational Fisheries; South Pacific\nTuna Fisheries; Procedures to Request\nLicenses and a System to Allocate\nLicenses\nAGENCY: National Marine Fisheries\nService (NMFS), National Oceanic and\nAtmospheric Administration (NOAA),\nCommerce.\nACTION: Proposed rule; request for\ncomments.\nSUMMARY: Pursuant to its authority\nunder the South Pacific Tuna Act of\n1988 (SPTA), NMFS proposes\nregulations to modify the procedures\nthat U.S. purse seine vessels use to\nrequest fishing licenses to fish in areas\nmanaged under the SPTA. This rule\nwould also establish a system for\nallocating licenses in the event more\napplications are received than there are\nlicenses available. Such an allocation\nsystem is needed because the number of\napplications is approaching the number\nof available licenses, and may exceed\nthat number. The proposed license\nallocation system would include\nobjective criteria to be used by NMFS in\nprioritizing among license applicants.\nThe license application procedures\nwould be modified in accordance with\nthe allocation system, and would be\ndesigned to provide license holders and\nprospective license applicants with a\nclear and certain regulatory process. The\nregulations for vessels licensed under\nthe SPTA would also be modified to\nrequire that the vessel monitoring\nsystem units (VMS units), also known as\nmobile transmitting units, installed and\ncarried on the vessels are a type that is\nNMFS-approved.\nDATES: Comments must be received in\nwriting by August 12, 2010.\nADDRESSES: You may submit comments\non this proposed rule, identified by\n0648–AY91, and the regulatory impact\nreview (RIR) prepared for the proposed\nrule, by any of the following methods\n• Electronic submissions: Submit all\nelectronic public comments via the\nVerDate Mar<15>2010 16:02 Jun 25, 2010 Jkt 220001 PO 00000 Frm 00043 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\\FR\\FM\\28JNP1.SGM 28JNP1","truncated":false,"body_characters":35306}