Adjustments to Cost Recovery Fees Relating to the Regulation of Oil, Gas, and Sulfur Activities on the Outer Continental Shelf, 81033-81049 [2016-27500]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 222 / Thursday, November 17, 2016 / Proposed Rules
Alternative Name/Name
Geneva Red 7—Geneva Red
Madeline Angevine—Madeleine
Angevine
Signed: September 29, 2016.
John J. Manfreda,
Administrator.
Approved: November 3, 2016.
Timothy E. Skud,
Deputy Assistant Secretary (Tax, Trade, and
Tariff Policy).
[FR Doc. 2016–27573 Filed 11–16–16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4810–31–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Bureau of Safety and Environmental
Enforcement
30 CFR Part 250
[Docket ID: BSEE–2016–0003; 17XE1700DX
EEEE500000 EX1SF0000.DAQ000]
RIN 1014–AA31
Adjustments to Cost Recovery Fees
Relating to the Regulation of Oil, Gas,
and Sulfur Activities on the Outer
Continental Shelf
Bureau of Safety and
Environmental Enforcement, Interior.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
The Bureau of Safety and
Environmental Enforcement (BSEE)
currently charges a fee for 31 different
services (hereafter ‘‘cost recovery fees’’)
it provides to non-Federal recipients.
The services were identified by BSEE’s
predecessor agency, the Minerals
Management Service (MMS). This
proposed rule would revise and clarify
the existing fees; add new fees for
certain services; revise and codify the
existing conditions for refunding fees;
and clarify the acceptable methods of
fee payment. This proposed rule would
enable BSEE to recover its full costs
associated with providing these services
to recipients of special benefits beyond
those accruing to the general public.
DATES: BSEE will consider all comments
received by January 17, 2017. BSEE may
not consider comments received after
this date. Submit comments to the
Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) on the information collection
burden in this proposed rule by
December 19, 2016.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
on the proposed rule by any of the
following methods. Please use the
Regulatory Identifier Number (RIN)
1014–AA31 as an identifier to your
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:46 Nov 16, 2016
Jkt 241001
message. See also Public Availability of
Comments under Procedural Matters.
• Submit comments electronically. Go
to https://www.regulations.gov and
search for ‘‘BSEE–2016–0003.’’ Follow
the instructions to submit public
comments and view supporting and
related materials available for this
rulemaking. BSEE will post all relevant
comments.
• Mail or hand-carry comments to the
Department of the Interior (DOI); Bureau
of Safety and Environmental
Enforcement; Attention: Regulations
and Standards Branch; 45600 Woodland
Road, Sterling, VA 20166. Please
reference Adjustment of Service Fees
Relating to the Regulation of Oil, Gas,
and Sulfur Activities on the Outer
Continental Shelf, AA31 in your
comments and include your name and
return address.
• Comments on the information
collection contained in this proposed
rule are separate from those on the
substance of the proposed rule. Send
comments on the information collection
burden in this rule to: OMB, Interior
Desk Officer, 202–395–5806 (fax); email
OIRA_submissions@omb.eop.gov. Please
also send a copy to BSEE at
regs@bsee.gov, fax number (703) 787–
1546, or by the address listed above.
• Public Availability of Comments—
Before including your address, phone
number, email address, or other
personal identifying information in your
comment, you should be aware that
your entire comment—including your
personal identifying information—may
be made publicly available at any time.
While you can ask us in your comment
to withhold your personal identifying
information from public review, we
cannot guarantee that we will be able to
do so.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Kimberly Monaco, Budget Analyst,
Office of Budget at (703) 787–1658,
Kimberly.Monaco@bsee.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. Background
A. BSEE Statutory and Regulatory
Authority
B. Summary of Existing Cost Recovery Fees
Regulations and Basis for Proposed
Amendments
C. Request for Comments on Potential
Future Fees
II. Procedural Matters
I. Background
A. BSEE Statutory and Regulatory
Authority
In accordance with the Independent
Offices Appropriation Act, 1952, 31
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
81033
U.S.C. 9701 and the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB)
Circular A–25,1 BSEE is required to
assess a charge against each identifiable
non-Federal recipient of special benefits
derived from BSEE services beyond
those received by the public at large.
The charge BSEE assesses is legally
sufficient if it recovers BSEE’s full cost
to provide the service.
OMB Circular A–25 requires a Federal
agency to conduct a biennial review of
its user charges to determine whether
adjustments are necessary and to review
other agency programs to determine
whether new fees should be established
for any services it provides. BSEE
reviewed its 31 services and preproduction site visits along with the
associated cost recovery fees to
determine whether the cost of providing
each of the services supports the
existing fee structure in the existing
regulations. BSEE’s methodology for
calculating its direct and indirect costs
to perform the 31 services and the preproduction site visits is found later in
this document. Results from the direct
and indirect cost calculations indicate
that 17 fees should be increased, eight
fees reduced, and six fees subdivided
into two tiers by complexity, with six of
the subdivided fees increasing above the
existing undivided fee, and six
decreasing. The results also indicate
that the existing pre-production site
visit fees for two of the facility
production safety system applications
should be decreased for visits to
facilities offshore and increased for
visits to facilities while in a shipyard.
Finally, the results suggest that new preproduction site visit fees should be
implemented for the four facility
production safety system applications
that did not previously include site visit
fees. The details of these proposed fees
are shown in the Service Fee Table later
in this document.
The fees are codified in BSEE’s
regulations at 30 CFR 250.125(a). This
proposed rule would: (1) Amend 31 of
the cost recovery fees in existing
§ 250.125; (2) establish two tiers of fees
within the Deepwater Operations Plans
(DWOPs), New Pipeline Applications,
Pipeline Modification Applications for
both Lease Term and Right-of-way
(ROW) Pipelines, ROW Pipeline Grant
Applications, and Unitization Revisions
fee categories; (3) add four new preproduction site visit cost recovery fees
to the existing two pre-production site
visit fees to support the review and
approval, if necessary, of production
1 Office of Management and Budget (OMB)
Circular A–25 Revised, User Charges, July 8, 1993,
and Transmittal Memorandum 1.
E:\FR\FM\17NOP1.SGM
17NOP1
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
81034
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 222 / Thursday, November 17, 2016 / Proposed Rules
safety system applications; (4) revise the
two existing pre-production site visit
cost recovery fees; (5) amend and codify
conditions for granting fee payment
refunds in the existing Notice to Lessees
and Operators (NTL) No. 2009–N09; 2
(6) amend § 250.126 to provide
clarification on the payment of cost
recovery fees and the acceptable
payment methods; and 7) include
descriptions of the two complexitybased levels of service fees in 30 CFR
250.292 (DWOPs), § 250.1000
(Applications to install or modify lease
term pipelines), § 250.1015
(Applications for pipeline ROW grants)),
and § 250.1303 (Requests for voluntary
unitization).
In addition to BSEE’s in-depth review
of the bureau’s existing cost recovery
fees, the need for adjustments is further
supported by the fact that, with the
exception of adjustments for inflation,
BSEE’s cost recovery fees have not been
adjusted since the 2005 and 2006
rulemakings establishing the fees (see 70
FR 49871 (August 25, 2005) and 71 FR
40904 (July 19, 2006)). Over the last ten
years, offshore operations have moved
into deeper, more complex, and more
hostile environments. This evolution of
offshore operations has resulted in
increasingly technical and more
complex requests submitted by
operators. Reviewing and approving
these requests requires extensive
communication and collaboration
between offshore operators, BSEE
engineers, and BSEE subject matter
experts (SMEs) who are knowledgeable
about the safety and environmental
aspects of the current technologies and
operational challenges, which require
additional time and more experienced,
senior-level individuals at higher pay
grades to review and approve. In
addition, the Consolidated
Appropriations Act of 2012 authorized
BSEE to ‘‘establish higher minimum
rates of basic pay for employees of the
Department of the Interior in the Gulf of
Mexico Region in the Geophysicist (GS–
1313), Geologist (GS–1350), and
Petroleum Engineer (GS–0881) job series
at grades 5 through 15 at rates no greater
than 25 percent above the minimum
rates of basic pay normally scheduled
. . .’’ Public Law 112–74, sec. 121(c)
(Dec. 23, 2011). In August 2015, the
Office of Personnel Management (OPM)
increased the special pay for the job
2 Minerals
Management Service, MMS Policy on
Refund Requests for Service Fees, NTL No. 2009–
N09, November 1, 2009.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:46 Nov 16, 2016
Jkt 241001
series identified in Public Law 112–74,
sec. 121(c) (Dec. 23, 2011) to 35 percent
above basic pay and also used its
authority to establish the same 35
percent special pay rate for the
Inspectors (GS–1801) job series. These
special pay rates have allowed the
Bureau to be competitive with the oil
and gas industry in attracting and
retaining qualified personnel, but have
increased the bureau’s personnel costs.
For these reasons, BSEE’s costs to
provide certain services have increased
over the levels set out in the existing
regulations including, but not limited
to, the costs to process applications for
permits to drill and applications for
permits to modify. For other services,
the proposed fees may be lower than the
existing fees due to an overall reduced
cost to provide those services (i.e.,
efficiencies).
The proposed adjustments are based
on an analysis of BSEE’s costs for
providing services from fiscal year (FY)
2013 to FY 2015. The proposed fee
adjustments are necessary to more
accurately align fees with the cost of
BSEE’s services provided to the nonFederal recipients. BSEE invites
comments on each of the proposed fee
adjustments described later in this
document.
B. Summary of Existing Cost Recovery
Fees Regulations and Basis for Proposed
Amendments
Existing §§ 250.125 and 250.126 set
out the amount of cost recovery fees for
each BSEE service and provide
instructions for making payments.
Section 250.125(a) lists the 31 cost
recovery fees currently imposed by
BSEE for specific services. Section
250.125(b) requires that payment of the
applicable fee(s) must accompany the
request for service and provides that all
fees are non-refundable. Section
250.125(c) requires the submission of a
written request and accompanying
payment within 72 hours of a BSEE
verbal approval. Section 250.126
requires that all cost recovery fees be
paid electronically through
www.pay.gov.
BSEE proposes to amend § 250.125 by
revising the fees for specific services
based on its in-depth review and
incorporating guidance from NTL No.
2009–N09 regarding conditions for
granting fee payment refunds. BSEE
proposes amendments to § 250.126 to
provide clarification on the payment of
cost recovery fees and the acceptable
payment methods. BSEE also proposes
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
to amend the following other sections of
30 CFR part 250 that are subject to the
proposed § 250.125 amendments in this
document: § 250.292 (DWOPs);
§ 250.1000 (Applications to install or
modify lease term pipelines); § 250.1015
(Applications for pipeline ROW grants);
and § 250.1303 (Requests for voluntary
unitization).
What Fees Would This Proposed Rule
Adjust?
BSEE is proposing adjustments to its
31 existing cost recovery fees to fully
account for the costs of providing the
services listed in the Service Fee Table
below. Additionally, BSEE is proposing
to amend § 250.125(a) to:
1. Subdivide into two categories and
add different fee levels for six types of
cost recovery fees (DWOPs, New
Pipeline Applications, Pipeline
Modification Applications for both
Lease Term and ROW Pipelines, ROW
Pipeline Grant Applications, and
Unitization Revisions) to accurately
reflect the varying levels of complexity
of the requested services and the
corresponding levels of costs to BSEE
from providing those services; 3 and
2. Add four new pre-production site
visit fees and revise the two existing
pre-productions site visit fees to support
the review and approval of production
safety system applications, if a site visit
is deemed necessary. These new and
revised site visit fees are proposed to be
included in §§ 250.125(a)(5)–(10).
The following table lists the type of
service to be performed by BSEE when
it receives a plan, application, permit, or
other request; the associated regulatory
citation for each type of request; the
existing and proposed fee; and the
proposed acceptable payment type for
each service. The proposed payment
types are credit card and electronic
check through the Automated Clearing
House (ACH-debit). Because the current
U.S. Treasury limit on credit card
payments is $24,999.99, an ACH-debit
must be used for payments of $25,000
or more.
In the Service Fee Table below, the
existing regulations are in regular font;
proposed text is in italic font; and new
fees are in bold font. The fifth column,
payment type, is provided to explain the
options for payment for a particular
service.
3 The complexity-based fees for these services are
specified in proposed §§ 250.125(a)(2), (15)–(17),
(19), and (28) and in the Service Fee Table in this
document.
E:\FR\FM\17NOP1.SGM
17NOP1
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 222 / Thursday, November 17, 2016 / Proposed Rules
81035
SERVICE FEE TABLE
Service—processing of the
following:
(1) Suspension of Operations/Suspension of Production (SOO/
SOP) Request.
(2) Deepwater Operations Plan ......
(a) Deepwater Operations Plan—
Simple.
(b) Deepwater Operations PlanComplex (New Technology).
(3) Application for Permit to Drill
(APD; Form BSEE–0123).
(4) Application for Permit to Modify
(APM; Form BSEE–0124).
Existing fee
Proposed fee
Payment type
§ 250.171(e) ....................
$2,123 ...........................................
$3,055 ...........................................
Credit Card or ACH-debit.
§ 250.292(q) ....................
.........................................
$3,599.
.......................................................
$14,290 .........................................
Credit Card or ACH-debit.
.........................................
.......................................................
$70,333 .........................................
ACH-debit Only.
§ 250.410(d);
§ 250.513(b);
§ 250.1617(a).
§ 250.465(b);
§ 250.513(b);
§ 250.613(b);
§ 250.1618(a);
§ 250.1704(g).
§ 250.842 .........................
$2,113 ...........................................
$10,420 .........................................
Credit Card or ACH-debit.
$125 ..............................................
$1,680 ...........................................
Credit Card or ACH-debit.
$3,976 ...........................................
$13,534 additional fee will be
charged if BSEE conducts a
pre-production inspection of a
facility offshore, and $14,567 for
an inspection of a facility while
in a shipyard.
A component is a piece of equipment or an ancillary system that
is protected by one or more of
the safety devices required by
API RP 14C (as incorporated by
reference in § 250.198).
Credit Card or ACH-debit.
Credit Card or ACH-debit.
(6) New Facility Production Safety
System Application for Facility
with 25–125 Components.
§ 250.842 .........................
(7) New Facility Production Safety
System Application for Facility
with Fewer than 25 Components.
§ 250.842 .........................
$5,426 ...........................................
$14,280 additional fee will be
charged if BSEE conducts a
pre-production inspection of a
facility offshore, and $7,426 for
an inspection of a facility while
in a shipyard.
A component is a piece of equipment or an ancillary system that
is protected by one or more of
the safety devices required by
American Petroleum Institute
(API) Recommended Practice
(RP) 14C (as incorporated by
reference in § 250.198).
$1,314 ...........................................
$8,967 additional fee will be
charged if BSEE conducts a
pre-production inspection of a
facility offshore, and $5,141 for
an inspection of a facility while
in a shipyard.
$652 ..............................................
(8) Production Safety System Application—Modification with More
than 125 Components Reviewed.
§ 250.842 .........................
$605 ..............................................
(9) Production Safety System Application—Modification with 25–125
Components Reviewed.
§ 250.842 .........................
$217 ..............................................
(10) Production Safety System Application—Modification
with
Fewer than 25 Components Reviewed.
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
(5) New Facility Production Safety
System Application for Facility
with More than 125 Components.
30 CFR citation
§ 250.842 .........................
$92 ................................................
(11) Platform Application—Installation—Under
the
Platform
Verification Program.
(12) Platform Application—Installation—Fixed Structure Under the
Platform Approval Program.
(13) Platform Application—Installation—Caisson/Well Protector.
(14) Platform Application—Modification/Repair.
(15) New Pipeline Application
(Lease Term).
§ 250.905(l) .....................
$22,734 .........................................
$548 ..............................................
$8,508 additional fee will be
charged if BSEE conducts a
pre-production inspection of a
facility offshore, and $9,818 for
an inspection of a facility while
in a shipyard.
$463 ..............................................
$4,338 additional fee will be
charged if BSEE conducts a
pre-production inspection of a
facility offshore, and $1,967 for
an inspection of a facility while
in a shipyard.
$1,278 ...........................................
$9,313 additional fee will be
charged if BSEE conducts a
pre-production inspection of a
facility offshore, and $8,100 for
an inspection of a facility while
in a shipyard.
$439 ..............................................
$6,765 additional fee will be
charged if BSEE conducts a
pre-production inspection of a
facility offshore, and $7,326 for
an inspection of a facility while
in a shipyard.
$386 ..............................................
$4,513 additional fee will be
charged if BSEE conducts a
pre-production inspection of a
facility offshore, and $2,141 for
an inspection of a facility while
in a shipyard.
$28,311 .........................................
§ 250.905(l) .....................
$3,256 ...........................................
$1,914 ...........................................
Credit Card or ACH-debit.
§ 250.905(l) .....................
$1,657 ...........................................
$1,914 ...........................................
Credit Card or ACH-debit.
§ 250.905(l) .....................
$3,884 ...........................................
$1,975 ...........................................
Credit Card or ACH-debit.
.........................................
$3,541.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:46 Nov 16, 2016
Jkt 241001
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\17NOP1.SGM
17NOP1
Credit Card or ACH-debit.
Credit Card or ACH-debit.
Credit Card or ACH-debit.
Credit Card or ACH-debit.
ACH-debit Only.
81036
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 222 / Thursday, November 17, 2016 / Proposed Rules
SERVICE FEE TABLE—Continued
Service—processing of the
following:
(a) New Pipeline Application (Lease
Term)—Shallow Water (less than
1000 ft.).
(b) New Pipeline Application (Lease
Term)—Deepwater (greater than
1000 ft.).
(16) Pipeline Application—Modification (Lease Term).
(a) Pipeline Application—Modification (Lease Term)—Minor.
(b) Pipeline Application—Modification (Lease Term)—Major.
(17) Pipeline Application—Modification (ROW).
(a) Pipeline Application—Modification (ROW)—Minor.
(b) Pipeline Application—Modification (ROW)—Major.
(18) Pipeline Repair Notification .....
(19) Pipeline ROW Grant Application.
(a) Pipeline ROW Grant Application—Shallow Water (less than
1000 ft.).
(b) Pipeline ROW Grant Application—Deepwater (greater than
1000 ft.).
(20) Pipeline Conversion of Lease
Term to ROW.
(21) Pipeline ROW Assignment ......
(22) 500 Feet From Lease/Unit
Line Production Request.
(23) Gas Cap Production Request
(24) Downhole Commingling Request.
(25) Complex Surface Commingling
and Measurement Application.
(26) Simple Surface Commingling
and Measurement Application.
(27) Voluntary Unitization Proposal
or Unit Expansion.
(28) Unitization Revision .................
(a) Unitization Revision—Exhibit A,
Exhibit B, and Successor Unit
Operator/Sub-operator.
(b) Unitization Revision—Exhibit C
(29) Application to Remove a Platform or Other Facility.
(30) Application to Decommission a
Pipeline (Lease Term).
(31) Application to Decommission a
Pipeline (ROW).
30 CFR citation
Existing fee
Proposed fee
Payment type
§ 250.1000(b) ..................
.......................................................
$1,584 ...........................................
Credit Card or ACH-debit.
.........................................
.......................................................
$3,663 ...........................................
Credit Card or ACH-debit.
.........................................
$2,056.
§ 250.1000(b) ..................
.......................................................
$651 ..............................................
Credit Card or ACH-debit.
.........................................
.......................................................
$1,696 ...........................................
Credit Card or ACH-debit.
.........................................
$4,169.
§ 250.1000(b) ..................
.......................................................
$455 ..............................................
Credit Card or ACH-debit.
.........................................
.......................................................
$1,800 ...........................................
Credit Card or ACH-debit.
§ 250.1008(e) ..................
.........................................
$388 ..............................................
$2,771.
$557 ..............................................
Credit Card or ACH-debit.
§ 250.1015(a) ..................
.......................................................
$1,662 ...........................................
Credit Card or ACH-debit.
.........................................
.......................................................
$3,796 ...........................................
Credit Card or ACH-debit.
§ 250.1015(a) ..................
$236 ..............................................
$494 ..............................................
Credit Card or ACH-debit.
§ 250.1018(b) ..................
§ 250.1156(a) ..................
$201 ..............................................
$3,892 ...........................................
$397 ..............................................
$5,440 ...........................................
Credit Card or ACH-debit.
Credit Card or ACH-debit.
§ 250.1157 .......................
§ 250.1158(a) ..................
$4,953 ...........................................
$5,779 ...........................................
$11,962 .........................................
$14,064 .........................................
Credit Card or ACH-debit.
Credit Card or ACH-debit.
§ 250.1202(a);
§ 250.1203(b);
§ 250.1204(a).
§ 250.1202(a);
§ 250.1203(b);
§ 250.1204(a).
§ 250.1303(d) ..................
$4,056 ...........................................
$8,205 ...........................................
Credit Card or ACH-debit.
$1,371 ...........................................
$3,514 ...........................................
Credit Card or ACH-debit.
$12,619 .........................................
$27,288 .........................................
ACH-debit Only.
.........................................
§ 250.1303(d) ..................
$896.
.......................................................
$1,683 ...........................................
Credit Card or ACH-debit.
.........................................
§ 250.1727 .......................
.......................................................
$4,684 ...........................................
$3,255 ...........................................
$2,846 ...........................................
Credit Card or ACH-debit.
Credit Card or ACH-debit.
§ 250.1751(a) or
§ 250.1752(a).
§ 250.1751(a) or
§ 250.1752(a)
$1,142 ...........................................
$857 ..............................................
Credit Card or ACH-debit.
$2,170 ...........................................
$980 ..............................................
Credit Card or ACH-debit.
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
How did BSEE determine the costs to be
recovered by the proposed fees?
Federal agency policy covering full
cost recovery through user charges is
outlined in OMB Circular A–25.
According to OMB Circular A–25, BSEE
should assess fees to recover the
bureau’s full costs of providing the
services to the offshore oil and gas
industry, rather than market price,
because BSEE is acting on behalf of the
United States to issue offshore oil and
gas permits, approve DWOPs, and
provide the other listed services.
Therefore, BSEE used the full cost
recovery approach, described in
paragraph 6.d.1 of OMB Circular A–25,
to assess the cost of each process.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:46 Nov 16, 2016
Jkt 241001
For each of the services provided by
BSEE, the process begins with the
submission of an application, plan,
permit, or other request by an operator.
BSEE typically provides the service
requested when an operator submits a
request and the associated user fee. The
output of each service is BSEE’s
issuance of the permit or application/
plan approval or denial.
In order to determine the current cost
of BSEE’s services, BSEE assessed and
itemized its services through data
collection and dialogue with BSEE
personnel in its Gulf of Mexico Regional
Office (GOMR) and other BSEE SMEs.
This process included the identification
of each task undertaken by BSEE to
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
review and approve each type of plan,
application, permit, or other request.
These tasks include: The initiating event
or BSEE’s receipt of a request for
service; the identification of personnel
to perform the review of the plan,
application, permit, or other request; the
review of the plan, application, permit,
or other request; and the issuance of the
permit or approval/denial of the
application/plan. This information and
the time spent performing each task
were used to calculate BSEE’s service
costs, consistent with the procedures in
OMB Circular A–25, as explained in the
following discussion.
E:\FR\FM\17NOP1.SGM
17NOP1
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 222 / Thursday, November 17, 2016 / Proposed Rules
How were the direct costs calculated?
The direct costs assessed as part of the
full cost recovery analysis are direct
labor costs, e.g., direct salary costs and
fringe benefits for BSEE staff performing
the requested services. Direct labor costs
were established using the average work
time provided by BSEE staff members
for each task. The average time was then
multiplied by the 2016 Office of
Personnel Management’s (OPM) General
Schedule (GS) pay grade hourly rate for
the employee responsible for
completing that task. The GS pay grade
was calculated at a step 5 level, which
was estimated to be the average step
within each pay grade. A range of GS
pay grades are involved in certain
actions (i.e., specific tasks might be
accomplished by either a GS–7, 9, or 11
employee). In this case, BSEE averaged
the hourly rate for a step 5 at all the
grade levels that could accomplish the
task to create an average hourly rate for
that specific task.
The following 2016 OPM GS rate
tables were used to identify the
appropriate hourly rate for the employee
responsible for completing each task:
(1) For any task completed by a
petroleum engineer, OPM’s 2016 special
rate tables 711 and 712 were utilized.
These tables provide petroleum
engineers in GOMR and the Pacific OCS
Region (POCSR) with a 35 percent
increase above OPM’s ‘‘Base’’ pay rate.
(2) For any task completed by a
geologist or geophysicist, OPM’s 2016
special rate table 711 was utilized. This
table provides geologists and
geophysicists in Jefferson, LA and
Camarillo, CA with a 35 percent
increase above OPM’s ‘‘Base’’ pay rate.
Jefferson, LA includes the GOMR New
Orleans District where the majority of
these positions are located.
(3) For all other tasks not covered by
(1) or (2) above, the GS ‘‘REST OF
UNITED STATES’’ 2016 rate table was
used.
Along with direct labor salary costs,
OMB Circular A–25 requires the
collection of direct labor costs classified
as fringe benefits, which usually
includes paid leave, medical insurance,
and retirement. Historically, BSEE has
calculated the fringe benefits as 28
percent of the direct salary costs and
refers to that percentage as the ‘‘fringe
benefit factor.’’ The fringe benefit factor
was applied to all labor categories and
grades for all cost recovery fee
calculations.
How were the indirect costs calculated?
In accordance with OMB Circular A–
25, indirect costs include personnel
fringe benefits, all physical overhead
costs, and management and supervisory
costs. In accordance with OMB Circular
A–25, BSEE assessed indirect costs for
all headquarters, Regional, and District
personnel and operations involved in
the provision of services that are the
subject of this proposed rule. These
indirect costs include salaries and fringe
81037
benefits of personnel providing
ancillary support functions, material
and supply costs, utilities, and other
costs that are allocated across all
services provided by BSEE. BSEE has an
extensive activity-based costing code
table and cost capture database (Cost
and Performance Management Tool
(CPMT)) that categorizes all BSEE costs
as either direct or indirect. Data from
CPMT, going back to FY 2007, were
analyzed to develop an appropriate
methodology for estimating the indirect
costs component of the cost recovery
fees.
Indirect costs were estimated using
the historical ratio of indirect to direct
costs observed at the headquarters,
Regional, or District levels. From FY
2007 through FY 2015, the ratio was
consistently between 51 and 56 percent.
An average ratio of 53.51 percent was
used. This percentage was applied to
each service’s direct cost to derive an
indirect cost estimate for each service.
The following table provides the
indirect to direct cost data and ratios for
BSEE and the Bureau of Ocean Energy
Management’s (BOEM) predecessor
agencies, MMS and the Bureau of Ocean
Energy Management, Regulation, and
Enforcement, from FY 2007–FY 2011
and for BSEE from FY 2013–FY 2015.4
FY 2012 data were not included due to
inaccurate tracking that occurred as
BSEE and BOEM were established at the
beginning of that fiscal year.
DIRECT AND INDIRECT COST DATA 1
Direct total
cost
($ millions)
Indirect total
cost
($ millions)
2007 .............................................................................................................................................
2008 .............................................................................................................................................
2009 .............................................................................................................................................
2010 .............................................................................................................................................
2011 .............................................................................................................................................
2013 .............................................................................................................................................
2014 .............................................................................................................................................
2015 .............................................................................................................................................
Average ................................................................................................................................
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
Fiscal year
205.62
203.42
219.36
222.91
244.25
113.27
138.21
159.97
........................
110.75
114.35
120.14
114.88
135.10
58.26
74.50
81.68
........................
Why are two fee levels proposed for
some service categories?
Two fee levels are proposed for
certain applications, plans, permits, and
other requests for BSEE services (e.g.,
simple DWOP vs. complex DWOP, or
shallow water pipeline application
(lease term) vs. deepwater pipeline
application (lease term)) based on the
varying levels of complexity, and
resulting costs, associated with
processing those requests. The six
categories of BSEE services for which
two tiers of complexity-based fees are
proposed are identified in the following
list, along with clarification for
operators on which fee is more
appropriate with regard to an
application, plan, permit, or other
request for these services:
17:46 Nov 16, 2016
Jkt 241001
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
53.86
56.22
54.77
51.54
55.31
51.43
53.91
51.06
53.51
1. DWOP: The complexity of
processing a DWOP varies and depends
on whether it includes new or unusual
technology, as well as the scope and
scale of the proposed development
project.
a. DWOP—Complex: An operator
would submit payment for this service
when a DWOP meets any of the
following criteria:
4 BSEE and BOEM were created on October 1,
2011 as part of the DOI reorganization and division
of responsibilities formerly exercised by MMS.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
Indirect/direct
cost ratio
(percent)
E:\FR\FM\17NOP1.SGM
17NOP1
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
81038
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 222 / Thursday, November 17, 2016 / Proposed Rules
• The plan contains new or unusual
technology, as defined in 30 CFR
250.200(b), and the new or unusual
technology:
—requires a high degree of specialized
knowledge;
—exceeds the limits of existing
engineering standards;
—conflicts with existing engineering
standards; or
—warrants an additional level of review
due to the risk associated with
implementation; or
• The plan includes installation of a
new floating production facility.
b. DWOP—Simple: An operator
would submit payment for this service
for all DWOPs that do not meet the
criteria for Deepwater Operation Plans—
Complex. This includes, but is not
limited to:
• A new or unusual technology as
defined in 30 CFR 250.200(b) that does
not require a high degree of specialized
knowledge.
• A new or unusual technology that
is a modification or repair to an existing
floating production facility or project.
• A subsea tieback to a new or
existing floating production facility.
• A material change, addition or
revision to an existing, previously
approved project.
• A subsea tieback/additional well(s)
for which only minor or no updates for
subsea production safety system are
necessary.
• Addition of a new subsea
development to a new or existing
floating production facility.
2. New Pipeline Application (Lease
Term): The complexity of processing an
application varies and is dependent on
the water depth of the pipeline.
a. New Pipeline Application (Lease
Term)—Shallow Water: An operator
would submit payment for this service
when the pipeline in a New Pipeline
Application (Lease Term) is located in
its entirety in water depths less than or
equal to 1,000 feet (ft.).
b. New Pipeline Application (Lease
Term)—Deepwater: An operator would
submit payment for this service when
any portion of the pipeline in a New
Pipeline Application (Lease Term) is
located in water depths greater than
1,000 ft.
3. Pipeline Application—Modification
(Lease Term): The complexity of
processing an application varies and is
dependent on the complexity of the
modification.
a. Pipeline Application—Modification
(Lease Term)—Major: An operator
would submit payment for this service
when a Pipeline Application—
Modification (Lease Term) contains a
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:46 Nov 16, 2016
Jkt 241001
route modification request. Actions
which constitute a ‘‘route modification’’
include, but are not limited to, changing
a pipeline route, installing a new
portion of pipeline, decommissioning a
portion of pipeline, and changing
service or flow direction of a pipeline.
b. Pipeline Application—Modification
(Lease Term)—Minor: An operator
would submit payment for this service
for all other Pipeline Applications—
Modification (Lease Term) requests (i.e.,
for all Pipeline Applications—
Modification (Lease Term) requests that
do not contain a route modification).
4. Pipeline Application—Modification
(ROW): The complexity of processing an
application varies and is dependent on
the complexity of the modification.
a. Pipeline Application—Modification
(ROW)—Major. An operator would
submit payment for this service when a
Pipeline Application—Modification
(ROW) contains a route modification
request. Actions that constitute a ‘‘route
modification’’ include, but are not
limited to, changing a pipeline route,
installing a new portion of pipeline,
decommissioning a portion of pipeline,
and changing service or flow direction
of a pipeline.
b. Pipeline Application—Modification
(ROW)—Minor: An operator would
submit payment for this service for all
other Pipeline Applications—
Modification (ROW) requests (i.e., for all
Pipeline Applications—Modification
(ROW) requests that do not contain a
route modification). An example is an
ROW Grant Modification request for
cessation of operations.
5. Pipeline ROW Grant Application:
The complexity of processing an
application varies and is dependent on
the water depth of the pipeline.
a. Pipeline ROW Grant Application—
Shallow Water: An operator would
submit payment for this service when
the pipeline in a Pipeline ROW Grant
Application is located in its entirety in
water depths less than or equal to 1,000
ft.
b. Pipeline ROW Grant Application—
Deepwater: An operator would submit
payment for this service when any
portion of the pipeline in a Pipeline
ROW Grant Application is located in
water depths greater than 1,000 ft.
6. Unitization Revision: BSEE
currently charges one fee for the review
of a Unitization Revision; however, the
complexity of processing the
application and resulting cost vary
based on the specific exhibits being
revised in the signed unit agreement.
Typical unitization applications contain
an Exhibit A, which is the lease plat
identifying the unit area; Exhibit B,
which is a listing of the component
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
leases and ownership of each; and
Exhibit C, which is a listing of the
participation and allocation by lease.
Payment for unitization revision
services are as follows:
a. Unitization Revision—Exhibit A,
Exhibit B, and Designation of Successor
Unit Operator/Sub-operator: The Unit
Operator would submit payment for this
service when a Unitization Revision is
submitted for approval that revises
Exhibit A and/or Exhibit B of the signed
unit agreement or designates a
Successor Unit Operator and/or
Successor Unit Sub-operator.
b. Unitization Revision—Exhibit C:
The Unit Operator would submit
payment for this service when a
Unitization Revision is submitted for
approval that revises Exhibit C of the
signed unit agreement.
Why are there proposed new and
adjusted fees for some services that
involve BSEE site visits?
In accordance with existing § 250.800,
production must not commence until
the production safety system has been
approved and a pre-production
inspection has been requested by the
lessee. If a BSEE application reviewer
decides that a pre-production inspection
is necessary as part of the production
safety system application review and
approval process, then a team of
engineers and inspectors visits the
facility offshore (e.g., a mobile offshore
drilling unit) or at a shipyard.
Existing §§ 250.125(a)(5) and (6)
establish fees for visiting a facility
offshore or in a shipyard for two of the
six production safety system
applications, when necessary, as part of
the BSEE review and approval process.
Visits to an offshore facility or a
shipyard can become necessary in order
to verify that safety devices are in the
proper locations or to identify if they are
missing when compared with the
associated application submitted for
approval. Any necessary corrections to
production safety systems can typically
be handled more easily while
construction work is ongoing in a
shipyard, rather than when the facility
is offshore.
BSEE’s costs for travel to offshore
facilities and shipyard locations and for
services, as part of the application
review process, can be recovered in
accordance with OMB Circular A–25.
Estimates for BSEE’s costs for these
services include costs for transportation,
lodging, and labor hours for each labor
category involved.
As illustrated in the Service Fee
Table, under §§ 250.125(a)(7)–(a)(10),
BSEE proposes four new fees for
production safety system visits to
E:\FR\FM\17NOP1.SGM
17NOP1
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 222 / Thursday, November 17, 2016 / Proposed Rules
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
offshore facilities or shipyards. BSEE
also proposes to amend the two existing
fees for production safety system
inspection visits to offshore facilities or
shipyards under §§ 250.125(a)(5) and
250.125(a)(6). The proposed new and
amended fees would affect:
1. New Facility Production Safety
System Application for Facility with
more than 125 components;
2. New Facility Production Safety
System Application for Facility with
25–125 components;
3. New Facility Production Safety
System Application for Facility with
fewer than 25 components;
4. Production Safety System
Application—Modification with more
than 125 components reviewed;
5. Production Safety System
Application—Modification with 25–125
components reviewed; and
6. Production Safety System
Application—Modification with fewer
than 25 components reviewed.
Why are the adjustments to BSEE’s cost
recovery fees necessary?
As previously mentioned, offshore
operations have changed dramatically
over the last ten years, which has led to
adjustments in the review and approval
process for a large portion of the
services BSEE provides to industry.
BSEE proposes the listed fee levels
based on the assessment of the bureau’s
full costs to provide the associated
services using the methodology
described above. However, this full-cost
methodology is not entirely comparable
to the methodologies used in the 2005
and 2006 rulemakings that initially
established the fees. The following
examples provide the general rationale
for some of the fee adjustments as
compared to the fees in existing
regulations.
1. BSEE’s assessment of its costs for
processing complex DWOPs indicates
that six employees, ranging in grades
from GS–5 through GS–14, will spend
between 310 and 1,094 hours reviewing,
analyzing, and processing these plans.
As previously discussed, the increased
complexity of offshore operations has
required additional senior-level
employees to spend added time
reviewing and approving these plans.
This is particularly true with regard to
the increased processing time of DWOPs
and the associated increased costs to
BSEE. In addition, the existing $3,599
fee for processing both complex and
simple DWOPs does not account for the
special pay that many BSEE employees
receive for reviewing and approving
these plans and the higher indirect cost
ratio. The fee assessed for DWOP review
has also not been adjusted since a 2006
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:46 Nov 16, 2016
Jkt 241001
rulemaking that established the existing
fee. The adjusted fee is the result of
calculations performed with input from
BSEE Regional Offices and takes into
account the increased complexity of
submitted DWOPs due to the use of new
or unusual technologies and the
increased scope or scale of proposed
plans. Based on its assessment, BSEE
proposes to subdivide the DWOP
processing fees and assess a $70,333 fee
for processing complex DWOPs in
250.125(a)(2)(ii).
2. Similarly, BSEE proposes
subdividing the fees for processing
unitization revisions based on its
assessment of the bureau’s direct and
indirect costs. Typically, seven BSEE
positions, ranging in grades from GS–5
through GS–15, spend between 6.6 and
29.7 hours processing unitization
revisions impacting exhibits A and B,
while six BSEE positions spend between
8.5 to 71.9 hours processing unitization
revisions impacting exhibit C. As is the
case with the existing DWOP fee, the
existing $896 fee for processing
unitization revisions does not account
for the special pay that many BSEE
employees receive for reviewing and
approving these documents and the
higher indirect cost ratio. Based on its
assessment, BSEE proposes a $1,683 fee
for processing a unitization revision
related to exhibits A and B and a $3,255
fee for processing a unitization revision
related to exhibit C in 250.125(a)(28)(i)
and (ii).
3. BSEE is also proposing to reduce
some existing fees based on its
assessment of the bureau’s full costs to
process applications and requests. For
example, BSEE’s assessment indicated
that five BSEE employees, ranging in
grades from GS–5 through GS–14, will
spend between 5.8 and 12.5 hours
processing an application for a minor
lease term pipeline modification,
resulting in $651 in full bureau costs.
Since the existing fee of $2,056 was
established, efficiencies have resulted in
lower costs to process applications and
requests (e.g., a technician now
performs certain steps in the process
previously performed by an engineer).
Based on this assessment, BSEE
proposes to subdivide and reduce the
existing fee for processing both major
and minor applications for lease term
pipeline modifications in
§ 250.125(a)(16)(i).
C. Request for Comments on Potential
Future Fees
Due to the large number of revised
applications received by BSEE and the
associated costs to BSEE to process
them, BSEE is currently evaluating the
need for additional fees for revised
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
81039
applications for permits to drill (R–
APD) and revised applications for
permits to modify (R–APM).
Accordingly, BSEE requests comments
on whether separate fee levels for R–
APD and R–APM should be proposed in
a future rulemaking. BSEE also requests
comments on the factors that should be
the basis for determining the separate
fee levels for R–APDs and R–APMs (e.g.,
complexity, water depth, etc.).
II. Procedural Matters
Regulatory Planning and Review
(Executive Orders (E.O.) 12866 and
13563)
E.O. 12866 provides that OMB, Office
of Information and Regulatory Affairs
(OIRA), will review all significant rules.
BSEE has determined that this proposed
rule is not a significant regulatory action
as defined by section 3(f) of E.O. 12866
because:
—It is not expected to have an annual
effect on the economy of $100 million
or more;
—It would not adversely affect in a
material way the economy,
productivity, competition, jobs, the
environment, public health or safety,
or State, local, or tribal governments
or communities;
—It would not create a serious
inconsistency or otherwise interfere
with an action taken or planned by
another agency;
—It would not alter the budgetary
impact of entitlements, grants, user
fees, or loan programs, or the rights or
obligations of their recipients; and
—It would not raise novel legal or
policy issues arising out of legal
mandates, the President’s priorities,
or the principles set forth in E.O.
12866.
Accordingly, BSEE has not prepared
an economic analysis, and OIRA has not
reviewed this proposed rule.
E.O. 13563 reaffirms the principles of
E.O. 12866 while calling for
improvements in the Nation’s regulatory
system to promote predictability, to
reduce uncertainty, and to use the best,
most innovative, and least burdensome
tools for achieving regulatory ends. E.O.
13563 directs agencies to consider
regulatory approaches that reduce
burdens and maintain flexibility and
freedom of choice for the public where
these approaches are relevant, feasible,
and consistent with regulatory
objectives. It also emphasizes that
regulations must be based on the best
available science and that the
rulemaking process must allow for
public participation and an open
exchange of ideas. BSEE is developing
this rule in a manner consistent with
these requirements.
E:\FR\FM\17NOP1.SGM
17NOP1
81040
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 222 / Thursday, November 17, 2016 / Proposed Rules
Regulatory Flexibility Act
The DOI certifies that this proposed
rule would not have a significant
economic effect on a substantial number
of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.
(RFA). The RFA, at 5 U.S.C. 603,
requires agencies to prepare an initial
regulatory flexibility analysis to
determine whether a regulation would
have a significant economic impact on
a substantial number of small entities.
Further, under the Small Business
Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of
1996, at section 212 of Public Law 104–
121 (March 29, 1996), an agency is
required to produce compliance
guidance for small entities if the rule
would have a significant economic
impact.
The Initial Regulatory Flexibility
Analysis prepared by BSEE assessed the
impact of this proposed rule on small
entities, as defined by the applicable
Small Business Administration (SBA)
size standards. BSEE has determined
that this proposed rule potentially
affects operators and holders of Federal
oil and gas leases, as well as right-ofway holders, on the OCS. This includes
an estimated 99 businesses with active
operations. Businesses that operate
under this rule fall under the SBA’s
North American Industry Classification
System (NAICS) codes 211111 (Crude
Petroleum and Natural Gas Extraction)
and 213111 (Drilling Oil and Gas Wells).
For these NAICS classifications, a small
business is defined as one with fewer
than 1,251 employees (for NAICS
211111) and fewer than 1,001 (for
NAICS 213111). Based on these criteria,
54 of the potentially impacted
businesses are considered small and 45
are considered large businesses. BSEE
considers that a rule has an impact on
a ‘‘substantial number of small entities’’
when the total number of small entities
impacted by the rule is equal to or
exceeds 10 percent of the relevant
universe of impacted entities.
Approximately 55% of the businesses
that would be affected by this rule are
considered small; therefore, BSEE has
determined that this rule would impact
a substantial number of small
businesses under the RFA.
BSEE’s analysis estimates the
incremental costs for small operators,
lease holders, and right-of-way holders
in the offshore oil and natural gas
industry. Costs already incurred as a
result of existing fees were not
considered as costs of this proposed rule
because they are part of the baseline.
Among the 54 small businesses
involved in offshore operations, the
average annual corporate sales volume,
from the latest available data, for the
year 2014, is $186 million, which is
approximately $192 million in 2016
dollars.
The following ‘‘Change in Cost per
Small Entity’’ table provides an analysis
and derivation of the estimated average
cost, per small firm, that would be
incurred per year as a result of the
proposed rule. The first column of the
table displays the list of services
provided, as they appeared earlier in the
Service Fee Table. The second column
displays an estimate of the total counts
of these services expected over the three
fiscal year period 2016–2018. The third
and fourth columns show the existing
fee, and the proposed fee, respectively,
for each service provided. The fifth
column then displays, for each service,
the expected change in total costs over
the three-year period, on the basis of the
data in the previous columns (the
change in fees and the counts of
services). The sixth column reflects the
estimated proportion of the change in
cost per small firm based on BSEE’s data
regarding counts of services across firms
from FY 2013 to FY 2015. Finally, the
seventh column reflects the estimated
change in cost per small firm per fiscal
year, by taking the annualized product
of columns five and six. The estimated
additional costs of the proposed rule
from service fee changes totals
approximately $8,875 per small firm per
year, or an estimated 0.0046 percent of
an average small business’s sales.
CHANGE IN COST PER SMALL ENTITY BY PROPOSED RULE PROVISION 1
[Negatives in parentheses]
Estimated
(Est.) total
counts for all
operators in
FY 2016–
FY 2018
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
Service provided
1 Suspension of Operations/Suspension of Production (SOO/SOP) Request .....................................................
2a Deepwater Operations Plan—Simple
2b Deepwater Operations Plan—Complex .......................................................
3 Application for Permit to Drill (APD;
Form BSEE–0123) ...............................
4 Application for Permit to Modify
(APM; Form BSEE–0124) ....................
5 New Facility Production Safety System Application for facility with more
than 125 components ...........................
Pre-Production inspection Facility
Offshore ................................................
Pre-Production inspection Facility in
a Shipyard ............................................
6 New Facility Production Safety System Application for facility with 25–125
components ..........................................
Pre-Production inspection Facility
Offshore ................................................
Pre-Production inspection Facility in
a Shipyard ............................................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:46 Nov 16, 2016
Jkt 241001
Existing fee
per incidence
Proposed fee
per
incidence
Change in
total cost for
all firms in
FY 2016–
FY 2018
Est.
proportion
of cost
per small firm
Est. change in
cost per small
firm, per FY
468
19
$3,055
14,290
$436,176
203,129
0.0085
0.0074
$1,235
502
11
3,599
70,333
734,074
0.0074
1,813
244
2,113
10,420
2,026,908
0.0082
5,544
540
125
1,680
839,700
0.0094
2,622
3
5,426
3,976
(4,350)
0.0085
(12)
3
14,280
13,534
(2,238)
0.0085
(6)
3
7,426
14,567
21,423
0.0085
61
12
1,314
548
(9,192)
0.0085
(26)
3
8,967
8,508
(1,377)
0.0085
(4)
3
PO 00000
$2,123
3,599
5,141
9,818
14,031
0.0085
40
Frm 00026
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\17NOP1.SGM
17NOP1
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 222 / Thursday, November 17, 2016 / Proposed Rules
81041
CHANGE IN COST PER SMALL ENTITY BY PROPOSED RULE PROVISION 1—Continued
[Negatives in parentheses]
Estimated
(Est.) total
counts for all
operators in
FY 2016–
FY 2018
Service provided
Proposed fee
per
incidence
Change in
total cost for
all firms in
FY 2016–
FY 2018
Est.
proportion
of cost
per small firm
Est. change in
cost per small
firm, per FY
7
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
New Facility Production Safety System Application for facility with fewer
than 25 components .............................
Pre-Production inspection Facility
Offshore ................................................
Pre-Production inspection Facility in
a Shipyard ............................................
8 Production Safety System Application—Modification with more than 125
components reviewed ..........................
Pre-Production inspection Facility
Offshore ................................................
Pre-Production inspection Facility in
a Shipyard ............................................
9 Production Safety System Application—Modification with 25–125 components reviewed .....................................
Pre-Production inspection Facility
Offshore ................................................
Pre-Production inspection Facility in
a Shipyard ............................................
10 Production Safety System Application—Modification with fewer than 25
components reviewed ..........................
Pre-Production inspection Facility
Offshore ................................................
Pre-Production inspection Facility in
a Shipyard ............................................
11 Platform Application—Installation—
Under the Platform Verification Program .....................................................
12 Platform Application—Installation—
Fixed Structure Under the Platform Approval Program .....................................
13 Platform Application—Installation—
Caisson/Well Protector .........................
14 Platform Application—Modification/
Repair ...................................................
15a New Pipeline Application (Lease
Term)—Shallow water (less than 1000
ft.) .........................................................
15b New Pipeline Application (Lease
Term)—Deepwater (greater than 1000
ft.) .........................................................
16a Pipeline Application—Modification
(Lease Term)—Minor ...........................
16b Pipeline Application—Modification
(Lease Term)—Major ...........................
17a Pipeline Application—Modification
(ROW)—Minor ......................................
17b Pipeline Application—Modification
(ROW)—Major ......................................
18 Pipeline Repair Notification ..............
19a Pipeline ROW Grant Application—
Shallow water (less than 1000 ft.) .......
19b Pipeline ROW Grant Application—
Deepwater (greater than 1000 ft.) ........
20 Pipeline Conversion of Lease Term
to ROW .................................................
21 Pipeline ROW Assignment ...............
22 500 Feet From Lease/Unit Line Production Request ...................................
23 Gas Cap Production Request ..........
24 Downhole Commingling Request .....
25 Complex Surface Commingling and
Measurement Application .....................
Existing fee
per incidence
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:46 Nov 16, 2016
Jkt 241001
29
463
(5,481)
0.0085
(15)
3
........................
4,338
13,014
0.0085
37
3
........................
1,967
5,901
0.0085
17
404
605
1,278
271,892
0.0085
768
3
........................
9,313
27,939
0.0085
79
3
........................
8,100
24,300
0.0085
69
1,424
217
439
316,128
0.0085
893
3
........................
6,765
20,295
0.0085
57
3
........................
7,326
21,978
0.0085
62
880
92
386
258,720
0.0085
731
3
........................
4,513
13,539
0.0085
38
3
........................
2,141
6,423
0.0085
18
5
22,734
28,311
27,885
0.0111
103
27
3,256
1,914
(36,234)
0.0106
(128)
41
1,657
1,914
10,537
0.0126
44
108
3,884
1,975
(206,172)
0.0075
(514)
12
3,541
1,584
(23,484)
0.0038
(30)
369
3,541
3,663
45,018
0.0038
58
361
2,056
651
(507,205)
0.0040
(673)
11
2,056
1,696
(3,960)
0.0040
(5)
631
4,169
455
(2,343,534)
0.0083
(6,462)
21
397
4,169
388
1,800
557
(49,749)
67,093
0.0083
0.0081
(137)
181
121
2,771
1,662
(134,189)
0.0092
(409)
77
2,771
3,796
78,925
0.0092
241
35
800
236
201
494
397
9,030
156,800
0.0116
0.0092
35
478
69
87
138
3,892
4,953
5,779
5,440
11,962
14,064
106,812
609,783
1,143,330
0.0093
0.0035
0.0048
330
709
1,828
164
PO 00000
652
4,056
8,205
680,436
0.0082
1,863
Frm 00027
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\17NOP1.SGM
17NOP1
81042
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 222 / Thursday, November 17, 2016 / Proposed Rules
CHANGE IN COST PER SMALL ENTITY BY PROPOSED RULE PROVISION 1—Continued
[Negatives in parentheses]
Estimated
(Est.) total
counts for all
operators in
FY 2016–
FY 2018
Service provided
26 Simple Surface Commingling and
Measurement Application .....................
27 Voluntary Unitization Proposal or
Unit Expansion .....................................
28a Unitization Revision—Exhibit A,
Exhibit B, and Successor Unit Operator/Suboperator ...................................
28b Unitization Revision—Exhibit C ......
29 Application to Remove a Platform or
Other Facility ........................................
30 Application to Decommission a
Pipeline (Lease Term) ..........................
31 Application to Decommission a
Pipeline (ROW) ....................................
Total 2 ................................................
As a Percent of the Average
Sales Revenue of Small
Firms ($192 million) ...............
Existing fee
per incidence
Proposed fee
per
incidence
Change in
total cost for
all firms in
FY 2016–
FY 2018
Est.
proportion
of cost
per small firm
Est. change in
cost per small
firm, per FY
251
1,371
3,514
537,893
0.0082
1,473
50
12,619
27,288
733,450
0.0021
522
154
21
896
896
1,683
3,255
121,198
49,539
0.0076
0.0076
309
126
687
4,684
2,846
(1,262,706)
0.0089
(3,729)
707
1,142
857
(201,495)
0.0050
(333)
503
2,170
980
(598,570)
0.0077
(1,526)
........................
........................
........................
........................
........................
8,874
........................
........................
........................
........................
........................
0.0046
1 Estimated
2 Numbers
dollar amounts are in 2016 dollars.
may not add up due to rounding.
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
BSEE has concluded the additional
costs of the proposed rule would impose
an insignificant, negligible burden on
small entities.
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act
The proposed rule is not a major rule
under the Small Business Regulatory
Enforcement Fairness Act, 5 U.S.C.
804(2). This proposed rule:
(a) Would not have an annual effect
on the economy of $100 million or
more;
(b) Would not cause a major increase
in costs or prices for consumers,
individual industries, Federal, State, or
local government agencies, or
geographic regions; and
(c) Would not have significant adverse
effects on competition, employment,
investment, productivity, innovation, or
the ability of U.S.-based enterprises to
compete with foreign-based enterprises.
The requirements would apply to all
entities operating on the Outer
Continental Shelf (OCS) regardless of
company designation as a small
business. For more information on costs
affecting small businesses, see the
Regulatory Flexibility Act portion of this
document.
Your comments are important. The
Small Business and Agriculture
Regulatory Enforcement Ombudsman
and 10 Regional Fairness Boards were
established to receive comments from
small businesses about federal agency
enforcement actions. The Ombudsman
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:46 Nov 16, 2016
Jkt 241001
will annually evaluate the enforcement
activities and rate each agency’s
responsiveness to small business. If you
wish to comment on the actions of
BSEE, call 1–888–734–3247. You may
comment to the SBA without fear of
retaliation. Allegations of
discrimination/retaliation filed with the
SBA will be investigated for appropriate
action.
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
This proposed rule would not impose
an unfunded mandate on State, local, or
tribal governments or the private sector
of more than $100 million per year. The
proposed rule would not have a
significant or unique effect on State,
local, or tribal governments or the
private sector. Therefore, a statement
containing the information required by
the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act, 2
U.S.C. 1501 et seq., is not required.
Takings Implication Assessment (E.O.
12630)
Under the criteria in E.O. 12630, this
proposed rule does not have significant
takings implications. The proposed rule
is not a governmental action capable of
interference with constitutionally
protected property rights. Therefore, a
Takings Implication Assessment is not
required.
Federalism (E.O. 13132)
Under the criteria in E.O. 13132, this
proposed rule does not have federalism
implications. This proposed rule would
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
not substantially and directly affect the
relationship between the Federal and
State governments. To the extent that
State and local governments have a role
in OCS activities, this proposed rule
would not affect that role. A federalism
assessment is not required.
Civil Justice Reform (E.O. 12988)
This proposed rule complies with the
requirements of E.O. 12988.
Specifically, this proposed rule:
(1) Meets the criteria of section 3(a)
requiring that all regulations be
reviewed to eliminate errors and
ambiguity and be written to minimize
litigation; and
(2) Meets the criteria of section 3(b)(2)
requiring that all regulations be written
in clear language and contain clear legal
standards.
Consultation With Indian Tribal
Governments (E.O. 13175)
Under the criteria in E.O. 13175 and
the Department’s tribal consultation
policy, we have evaluated this proposed
rule and have determined that it has no
substantial direct effects on federally
recognized Indian tribes, or on the
relationship or distribution of power
and responsibilities between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes, and that
consultation under the Department’s
tribal consultation policy is not
required.
E:\FR\FM\17NOP1.SGM
17NOP1
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 222 / Thursday, November 17, 2016 / Proposed Rules
Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) of 1995
This proposed rule contains a
collection of information that will be
submitted to OMB for review and
approval under the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501
et seq.). As part of our continuing effort
to reduce paperwork and respondent
burdens, BSEE invites the public and
other Federal agencies to comment on
any aspect of the non-hour cost burden.
If you wish to comment on the
information collection (IC) aspects of
this proposed rule, you may send your
comments directly to OMB and send a
copy of your comments to the
Regulations and Standards Branch (see
the ADDRESSES section of this proposed
rule). Please reference Adjustments to
Cost Recovery Fees Relating to the
Regulation of Oil, Gas, and Sulfur
Activities on the Outer Continental
Shelf, 1014—NEW, in your comments.
BSEE specifically requests comments
concerning: The need for the
information, its practical utility, the
accuracy of the agency’s burden
estimate, and ways to minimize the
burden. You may obtain a copy of the
supporting statement for the new
collection of information by contacting
the Bureau’s Information Collection
Clearance Officer at (703) 787–1607. To
see a copy of the entire IC request (ICR)
submitted to OMB, go to https://
www.reginfo.gov (select Information
Collection Review, Currently Under
Review).
The PRA provides that an agency may
not conduct or sponsor, and a person is
not required to respond to, a collection
of information unless it displays a
currently valid OMB control number.
OMB is required to make a decision
concerning the collection of information
contained in these proposed regulations
30 to 60 days after publication of this
document in the Federal Register.
Therefore, a comment to OMB is best
assured of having its full effect if OMB
receives it by December 19, 2016.
The title of the collection of
information for this rule is 30 CFR part
250, Adjustments to Cost Recovery Fees.
The proposed regulations pertain to
BSEE updating its 31 cost recovery fees,
including additional fees for site visits
if deemed necessary. These proposed
changes are designed to recover the full
cost BSEE incurs for providing these
services.
Potential respondents comprise
Federal OCS oil, gas, and sulfur
operators and lessees, as well as
pipeline ROW holders. Responses to
this collection of information are
required to obtain or retain a benefit and
are mandatory. The frequency of
response varies depending upon the
requirement. The IC does not include
questions of a sensitive nature. BSEE
will protect proprietary information
according to the Freedom of Information
Act (5 U.S.C. 552) and DOI’s
implementing regulations (43 CFR part
2), 30 CFR 250.197, Data and
information to be made available to the
public or for limited inspection, and 30
CFR part 252, OCS Oil and Gas
Information Program.
OMB approved the IC burden of the
existing 30 CFR part 250 regulations
81043
under Control Numbers 1014–0022,
Subpart A (84,391 hour burden,
$1,371,458 non-hour cost burden;
expiration 8/31/17); 1014–0024, Subpart
B ($39,589 non-hour cost burden;
expiration 11/30/2018); 1014–0025
Applications for Permit to Drill
($862,104 non-hour cost burden,
expiration 4/30/2017); 1014–0026,
Applications for Permit to Modify
($361,625 non-hour cost burden,
expiration 5/31/2017); 1014–0003,
Subpart H ($323,481 non-hour cost
burden; expiration 12/31/2017); 1014–
0011, Subpart I, ($392,874 non-hour
cost burden, expiration 5/31/2017);
1014–0016, Subpart J ($1,508,968 nonhour cost burden, expiration 8/31/2018);
1014–0019, Subpart K ($1,361,176 nonhour cost burden, expiration 1/31/2019);
1014–0002, Subpart L ($322,479 nonhour cost burden, expiration 10/31/16);
1014–0015, Subpart M ($138,188 nonhour cost burden, expiration 12/31/
2017); and 1014–0010, Subpart Q
($1,686,396 non-hour cost burden,
expiration 10/31/2016), respectively.
If this proposed rule is finalized and
codified, the various non-hour cost
burdens and one new hour burden will
be removed from this collection of
information and consolidated with their
primary information collection burden
under their respective OMB Control
Numbers.
Hour burdens are included in the
regulatory requirements of various
OMB-approved ICRs, of which only one
is changing and discussed in this ICR.
HOUR BURDEN TABLE
Citation
30 CFR 250
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements
Hour burden
Average
number of annual
responses
Annual burden hours
Subpart A
125; 126; 292; 1000;
1015; 1303.
Cost recovery fees, applications, confirmation receipts, etc., verbal approvals pertaining to fees.
Cost Recovery Fees and related items are covered individually throughout Part 250
0.
125(c) .........................
Request refund, including a reason for the
refund, within 150 days of the initial payment.
.........................................................................
3 min. .........................
200 requests ..............
10.
....................................
200 responses ...........
10 hours.
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
Total ....................
BSEE currently receives
approximately $7,000,000 in cost
recovery fees (non-hour cost burdens)
annually. This proposed rulemaking
would increase that total by
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:46 Nov 16, 2016
Jkt 241001
approximately $9,000,000 for a total of
$16,000,000 in cost recovery fees. The
following table provides a breakdown of
the non-hour cost burdens for this
proposed rulemaking.
PO 00000
Frm 00029
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
[Existing non-hour cost burden/cost
recovery fees are in regular font;
proposed non-hour cost burden/cost
recovery fees and text are in italic font;
new fees are in bold font]
E:\FR\FM\17NOP1.SGM
17NOP1
81044
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 222 / Thursday, November 17, 2016 / Proposed Rules
NON–HOUR COST BURDEN TABLE
Citation 30 CFR part 250
Service/cost recovery fee
Non-hour cost burdens
Subpart A
171(e) ...................................
Suspension of Operations and/or Suspension of Production (SOO/SOP) Request.
$2,123 × 646 requests = $1,371,458.
$3,055 × 646 requests = $1,973,530.
Subpart B
292(q) ...................................
Deepwater Operations Plan [simple and complex] ........
$3,599 × 11 plans = $39,589.
$14,290 × 7 simple DWOPs = $100,030.
$70,333 × 4 complex DWOPs = $281,332.
Applications for Permit to Drill
410(d); 513(b); 1617(a) ........
Application for Permit to Drill [initial permit] ....................
$2,113 × 408 applications = $862,104.
$10,420 × 408 applications = $4,251,360.
Application for Permit to Modify
465(b); 513(b); 613(b);
1618(a); 1704(g).
Application for Permit to Modify [initial permit] ...............
$125 × 2,893 applications = $361,625.
$1,680 × 2,893 applications = $4,860,240.
Subpart H
842 .......................................
New Facility Production Safety System Application for
facility with more than 125 components.
Pre-production Inspection—offshore ...............................
Pre-production Inspection—shipyard ..............................
842 .......................................
New Facility Production Safety System Application for
facility with 25–125 components.
Pre-production Inspection—offshore ...............................
Pre-production Inspection—shipyard ..............................
842 .......................................
842 .......................................
842 .......................................
842 .......................................
New Facility Production Safety System Application for
facility with fewer than 25 components.
Pre-production Inspection—offshore .........................
Pre-production Inspection—shipyard .........................
Production Safety System Application—Modification
with more than 125 components reviewed.
Pre-production Inspection—offshore .........................
Pre-production Inspection—shipyard .........................
Production Safety System Application—Modification
with 25–125 components reviewed.
Pre-production Inspection—offshore .........................
Pre-production Inspection—shipyard .........................
Production Safety System Application—Modification
with fewer than 25 components reviewed.
Pre-production Inspection—offshore .........................
Pre-production Inspection—shipyard .........................
$5,426 × 1 application = $5,426.
$3,976 × 1 application = $3,976.
$14,280 × 1 offshore = $14,280.
$13,534 × 1 offshore = $13,534.
$7,426 × 1 shipyard = $7,426.
$14,567 × 1 shipyard = $14,567.
$1,314 × 4 applications = $5,256.
$548 × 4 applications = $2,192.
$8,967 × 1 offshore visit = $8,967.
$8,508 × 1 offshore visit = $8,508.
$5,141 × 1 shipyard = $5,141.
$9,818 × 1 shipyard = $9,818.
$652 × 10 applications = $6,520.
$463 × 10 applications = $4,630.
$4,338 μ 1 offshore visit = $4,338.
$1,967 μ 1 shipyard = $1,967.
$605 × 174 applications = $105,270.
$1,278 × 174 applications = $222,372.
$9,313 μ 1 shipyard visit = $9,313.
$8,100 μ 1 shipyard visit = $8,100.
$217 × 615 applications = $133,455.
$439 × 615 applications = $269,985.
$6,765 μ 1 offshore = $6,765.
$7,326 μ 1 shipyard = $7,326.
$92 × 345 applications = $31,740.
$386 × 345 applications = $133,170.
$4,513 μ 1 offshore = $4,513.
$2,141 μ 1 shipyard = $2,141.
Subpart I
905(l) ....................................
905(l) ....................................
905(l) ....................................
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
905(1) ...................................
Platform Application—Installation—Under the Platform
Verification Program.
Platform
Application—Installation—Fixed
Structure
Under the Platform Approval Program.
Platform Application—Installation—Caisson/Well Protector.
Platform Application—Modification/Repair ......................
$22,734 × 3= $68,202.
$28,311 × 3 = $84,933.
$3,256 × 12 = $39,072.
$1,914 × 12 = $22,968.
$1,657 × 20 = $33,140.
$1,914 × 20 = $38,280.
$3,884 × 65 applications = $252,460.
$1,975 × 65 applications = $128,375.
Subpart J
1000(b) .................................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:46 Nov 16, 2016
Submit application and all required information and notices to install new lease term pipeline (L/T P/L)..
Submit application and all required information and notices to modify a L/T P/L—Shallow Water (less than
1,000 ft.).
Submit application and all required information and notices to modify a L/T P/L—Deepwater (greater than
1,000 ft.).
Jkt 241001
PO 00000
Frm 00030
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
$3,541 × 61 L/T P/L applications = $216,001.
$1,584 × 2 applications = $3,168.
$3,663 × 59 applications = $216,117.
E:\FR\FM\17NOP1.SGM
17NOP1
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 222 / Thursday, November 17, 2016 / Proposed Rules
81045
NON–HOUR COST BURDEN TABLE—Continued
Citation 30 CFR part 250
Service/cost recovery fee
1000(b) .................................
1015(a) .................................
Submit application and all required information and notices to modify a L/T P/L.
Submit application and all required information and notices to modify a L/T P/L—Minor.
Submit application and all required information and notices to modify a L/T P/L—Major.
Pipeline Application Modification (ROW) ........................
Pipeline Application Modification (ROW)—Minor ...........
Pipeline Application Modification (ROW)—Major ...........
Pipeline Repair Notification .............................................
Pipeline Repair Notification .............................................
Pipeline ROW Grant Application .....................................
Pipeline ROW Grant Application—Shallow Water (less
than 1,000 ft.).
Pipeline ROW Grant Application—Deepwater (greater
than 1,000 ft.).
Pipeline Conversion of Lease Term to ROW .................
1018(b) .................................
Pipeline ROW Assignment ..............................................
1000(b) .................................
1008(e) .................................
1015(a) .................................
Non-hour cost burdens
$2,056 × 102 L/T P/L applications = $209,712.
$651 × 99 minor modifications = $64,449.
$1,696 × 3 major modifications = $5,088.
$4,169 × 190 applications = $792,110.
$455 × 184 minor applications = $83,720.
$1,800 × 6 major applications = $10,800.
$388 × 156 = $60,528.
$557 × 156 notifications = $86,892.
$2,771 × 62 applications = $171,802.
$1,662 × 38 ROWs in shallow water = $63,156.
$3,796 × 24 ROWs in Deepwater = $91,104.
$236
$494
$201
$397
×
×
×
×
15 applications = $3,540.
15 applications = $7,410.
275 P/L ROW requests = $55,275.
275 P/L ROW requests = $109,175.
Subpart K
1156(a) .................................
500 Feet From Lease/Unit Line Production Request .....
1157 .....................................
Gas Cap Production Request .........................................
1158(a) .................................
Downhole Commingling Request ....................................
$3,892 × 20 requests = $77,840.
$5,440 × 20 requests = $108,800.
$4,953 × 22 requests = $108,966.
$11,962 × 22 requests = $263,164.
$5,779 × 30 requests = $173,370.
$14,064 × 30 requests = $421,920.
Subpart L
1202(a); 1203(b); 1204(a) ....
Complex Surface Commingling and Measurement Application.
1202(a); 1203(b); 1204(a) ....
Simple Surface Commingling and Measurement Application.
$4,056 × 67 applications = $271,752.
$8,205 × 67 applications = $549,735.
$1,371 × 37 applications = $50,727.
$3,514 × 37 applications = $130,018.
Subpart M
1303(d) .................................
Voluntary Unitization Proposal or Unit Expansion ..........
Unitization Revision .........................................................
Unitization Revision—Exhibit A, Exhibit B, and Successor Unit Operator/Sub-operator.
Unitization Revision—Exhibit C ......................................
$12,619 × 8 requests = $100,952.
$27,288 × 8 requests =$218,304.
$896 × 41 revisions = $36,736.
$1,683 × 36 Exhibit A/B = $60,588.
$3,255 × 5 Exhibit C = $16,275.
Subpart Q
Application to Remove a Platform or Other Facility .......
1751(a); 1752(a) ..................
Application to Decommission a Pipeline (Lease Term) ..
1751(a); 1752(a) ..................
Application to Decommission a Pipeline (ROW) ............
NEW NON-HOUR COST
BURDEN.
REVISED NON-HOUR
COST BURDEN.
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
1727 .....................................
..........................................................................................
$4,684 × 240 applications = $1,124,160.
$2,846 × 240 applications = $683,040.
$1,142 × 213 applications = $243,246.
$857 × 213 applications = $182,541.
$2,170 × 147 applications = $318,990.
$980 × 147 applications = $144,060.
$44,463.
..........................................................................................
$15,943,324.
..........................................................................................
$15,987,787.
TOTAL NEW and Revised Non-Hour Cost
Burdens.
Although the total new and revised
Non-Hour Cost Burdens are estimated to
be $16 million based on 3-year averages
of the number of plans, applications,
and permits, due to recent declines in
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:46 Nov 16, 2016
Jkt 241001
the number of these submissions, BSEE
anticipates that collections will more
closely approximate $11 million in FY
2018.
PO 00000
Frm 00031
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
For further information on this nonhour burden estimation process, refer to
5 CFR 1320.3(b)(1) and (2), or contact
the BSEE Information Collection
Clearance Officer at (703) 787–1607.
E:\FR\FM\17NOP1.SGM
17NOP1
81046
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 222 / Thursday, November 17, 2016 / Proposed Rules
National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA) of 1969
This proposed rule meets the criteria
set forth in 516 Departmental Manual
(DM) 15.4C(1) for a categorical
exclusion because it involves
modification of existing regulations, the
impacts of which would be limited to
administrative or economic effects with
minimal environmental impacts. BSEE
also analyzed this proposed rule to
determine if extraordinary
circumstances, set forth in 43 CFR
46.215, exist that would require BSEE to
prepare an environmental assessment or
an environmental impact statement for
actions otherwise eligible for a
categorical exclusion. BSEE concluded
that this proposed rule does not trigger
any of the criteria for extraordinary
circumstances and, therefore, has not
prepared an environmental assessment
or an environmental impact statement.
Data Quality Act
In developing this proposed rule, we
did not conduct or use a study,
experiment, or survey requiring peer
review under the Data Quality Act (Pub.
L. 106–554 § 515).
Effects on the Nation’s Energy Supply
(E.O. 13211)
This proposed rule is not a significant
energy action under the definition in
E.O. 13211 because:
—It is not a significant regulatory action
under E.O. 12866;
—It is not likely to have a significant
adverse effect on the supply,
distribution, or use of energy; and
—It has not been designated as a
significant energy action by the
Administrator of OIRA.
Clarity of This Regulation
We are required by E.O. 12866, E.O.
12988, E.O. 13563, and by the
Presidential Memorandum of June 1,
1998, to write all rules in plain
language. This means that each rule we
publish must:
—Be logically organized;
—Use the active voice to address
readers directly;
—Use clear language rather than jargon;
—Be divided into short sections and
sentences; and
—Use lists and tables wherever
possible.
If you feel that we have not met these
requirements, send us comments by one
of the methods listed in the ADDRESSES
section. To better help us revise the
rule, your comments should be as
specific as possible. For example, you
should tell us the numbers of the
sections or paragraphs that you find
unclear, which sections or sentences are
too long, the sections where you feel
lists or tables would be useful, etc.
List of Subjects in 30 CFR Part 250
Administrative practice and
procedure, Continental Shelf,
Environmental impact statements,
Environmental protection, Government
contracts, Investigations, Oil and gas
exploration, Penalties, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur.
Dated: October 31, 2016.
Amanda C. Leiter,
Acting Assistant Secretary, Land and
Minerals Management.
For the reasons stated in the
preamble, the Bureau of Safety and
Environmental Enforcement (BSEE)
proposes to amend 30 CFR part 250 as
follows:
PART 250—OIL AND GAS AND
SULFUR OPERATIONS IN THE OUTER
CONTINENTAL SHELF
1. Authority citation for part 250
continues to read as follow:
■
Authority: 30 U.S.C. 1751; 31 U.S.C. 9701,
33 U.S.C. 1321(j)(1)(C), 43 U.S.C. 1334.
2. Revise § 250.125 by:
■ a. Revising the table in paragraph (a)
to read as follows;
■ b. Redesignating paragraph (c) as
paragraph (d);
■ c. Removing paragraph (b) and adding
new paragraphs (b) and (c) to read as
follows:
■
§ 250.125
Service fees.
(a) * * *
SERVICE FEE TABLE
Service—processing of the following:
Fee amount
30 CFR citation
$3,055 .........................................................................................
§ 250.171(e).
$14,290 .......................................................................................
$70,333.
§ 250.292(q).
$10,420 .......................................................................................
§ 250.410(d); § 250.513(b);
§ 250.1617(a).
§ 250.465(b); § 250.513(b);
§ 250.613(b); § 250.1618(a);
§ 250.1704(g).
(5) New Facility Production Safety System Application for Facility with More than 125 Components.
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
(1) Suspension of Operations/Suspension of Production (SOO/SOP) Request.
(2) Deepwater Operations Plan:
(i) Deepwater Operations Plan—Simple ........
(ii) Deepwater Operations Plan—Complex
(New Technology).
(3) Application for Permit to Drill (APD; Form
BSEE–0123).
(4) Application for Permit to Modify (APM; Form
BSEE–0124).
$3,976 $13,534 additional fee will be charged if BSEE conducts a pre-production inspection of a facility offshore, and
$14,567 for an inspection of a facility while in a shipyard.
A component is a piece of equipment or an ancillary system
that is protected by one or more of the safety devices required by API RP 14C (as incorporated by reference in
§ 250.198).
$548 $8,508 additional fee will be charged if BSEE conducts a
pre-production inspection of a facility offshore, and $9,818
for an inspection of a facility while in a shipyard.
$463 $4,338 additional fee will be charged if BSEE conducts a
pre-production inspection of a facility offshore, and $1,967
for an inspection of a facility while in a shipyard.
(6) New Facility Production Safety System Application for Facility with 25–125 Components.
(7) New Facility Production Safety System Application for Facility with Fewer than 25 Components.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:38 Nov 16, 2016
Jkt 241001
$1,680 .........................................................................................
PO 00000
Frm 00032
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\17NOP1.SGM
17NOP1
§ 250.842.
§ 250.842.
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 222 / Thursday, November 17, 2016 / Proposed Rules
81047
SERVICE FEE TABLE—Continued
Service—processing of the following:
Fee amount
(8) Production Safety System Application—Modification with More than 125 Components Reviewed.
(9) Production Safety System Application—Modification with 25–125 Components Reviewed.
(10) Production Safety System Application—
Modification with Fewer than 25 Components
Reviewed.
(11) Platform Application—Installation—Under
the Platform Verification Program.
(12) Platform Application—Installation—Fixed
Structure Under the Platform Approval Program.
(13) Platform Application—Installation—Caisson/
Well Protector.
(14) Platform Application—Modification/Repair ....
(15) New Pipeline Application (Lease Term):
(i) New Pipeline Application (Lease Term)—
Shallow Water (less than 1,000 ft.).
(ii) New Pipeline Application (Lease Term)—
Deepwater (greater than 1,000 ft.).
(16) Pipeline Application—Modification (Lease
Term):
(i) Pipeline Application—Modification (Lease
Term)—Minor.
(ii) Pipeline Application—Modification (Lease
Term)—Major.
(17) Pipeline Application—Modification Right-ofWay (ROW):
(i)
Pipeline
Application—Modification
(ROW)—Minor.
(ii)
Pipeline
Application—Modification
(ROW)—Major.
(18) Pipeline Repair Notification ...........................
(19) Pipeline ROW Grant Application:
(i) Pipeline ROW Grant Application—Shallow
Water (less than 1,000 ft.).
(ii) Pipeline ROW Grant Application—Deepwater (greater than 1,000 ft.).
(20) Pipeline Conversion of Lease Term to ROW
(21) Pipeline ROW Assignment ............................
(22) 500 Feet From Lease/Unit Line Production
Request.
(23) Gas Cap Production Request .......................
(24) Downhole Commingling Request ..................
(25) Complex Surface Commingling and Measurement Application.
30 CFR citation
$1,278 $9,313 additional fee will be charged if BSEE conducts
a pre-production inspection of a facility offshore, and $8,100
for an inspection of a facility while in a shipyard.
$439 $6,765 additional fee will be charged if BSEE conducts a
pre-production inspection of a facility offshore, and $7,326
for an inspection of a facility while in a shipyard.
$386 $4,513 additional fee will be charged if BSEE conducts a
pre-production inspection of a facility offshore, and $2,141
for an inspection of a facility while in a shipyard.
$28,311 .......................................................................................
§ 250.842.
§ 250.905(l).
$1,914 .........................................................................................
§ 250.905(l).
$1,914 .........................................................................................
§ 250.905(l).
$1,975 .........................................................................................
§ 250.905(l).
$1,584 .........................................................................................
§ 250.1000(b).
§ 250.842.
§ 250.842.
$3,663
$651 ............................................................................................
§ 250.1000(b).
$1,696
$455 ............................................................................................
§ 250.1000(b).
$1,800
$557 ............................................................................................
§ 250.1008(e).
$1,662 .........................................................................................
§ 250.1015(a).
$3,796
$494 ............................................................................................
$397 ............................................................................................
$5,440 .........................................................................................
§ 250.1015(a).
§ 250.1018(b).
§ 250.1156(a).
$11,962 .......................................................................................
$14,064 .......................................................................................
$8,205 .........................................................................................
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
(26) Simple Surface Commingling and Measurement Application.
$3,514 .........................................................................................
(27) Voluntary Unitization Proposal or Unit Expansion.
(28) Unitization Revision:
(i) Unitization Revision—Exhibit A, Exhibit B,
and Successor Unit Operator/Sub-operator.
(ii) Unitization Revision—Exhibit C ................
(29) Application to Remove a Platform or Other
Facility.
(30) Application to Decommission a Pipeline
(Lease Term).
(31) Application to Decommission a Pipeline
(ROW).
$27,288 .......................................................................................
§ 250.1157.
§ 250.1158(a).
§ 250.1202(a);
§ 250.1203(b);
§ 250.1204(a).
§ 250.1202(a);
§ 250.1203(b);
§ 250.1204(a).
§ 250.1303(d).
$1,683 .........................................................................................
§ 250.1303(d).
$3,225.
$2,846 .........................................................................................
§ 250.1727.
(b) Fees specified in paragraph (a)
must be paid electronically using one of
the methods required by § 250.126.
Proof of payment of the fees listed in
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:38 Nov 16, 2016
Jkt 241001
$857 ............................................................................................
$980 ............................................................................................
paragraph (a) must accompany the
submission of the application or other
request for service. Once a fee is paid,
it is nonrefundable, except as provided
PO 00000
Frm 00033
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
§ 250.1751(a) or
§ 250.1752(a).
§ 250.1751(a) or
§ 250.1752(a).
in paragraph (c). If your application is
returned to you as incomplete, you are
not required to submit a new fee with
the amended application.
E:\FR\FM\17NOP1.SGM
17NOP1
81048
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 222 / Thursday, November 17, 2016 / Proposed Rules
(c) BSEE will issue a refund in certain
situations.
(1) You are eligible for a refund if you
submit:
(i) More than one payment with a
single request;
(ii) An incorrect fee or fee amount; or
(iii) A payment without submitting
any application or other request and the
matter does not proceed further.
(2) If you meet the criteria for a
refund, you must submit a completed
Refund Request form, which can be
found at https://www.bsee.gov/AboutBSEE/Fees-for-Services/. On the Refund
Request form, in the ‘‘*Memo (reason
requesting refund)’’ section, you must
list the reason for the refund. You must
use the information from your original
proof of payment to prepare your refund
request.
(3) You must submit all refund
requests to BSEE within 150 days of the
initial service fee payment. If you do not
submit your request within the 150-day
timeframe, BSEE will not issue a refund.
(4) If you have any questions
pertaining to refund eligibility or to the
preparation of the refund request,
contact the appropriate Regional Office.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 3. Revise § 250.126 to read as follows:
§ 250.126
Electronic payment instructions.
(a) You must file all payments under
any provision of this part electronically,
as provided in paragraphs (a)(1) or (a)(2)
of this section.
(1) If you submit an application
through the eWell Web site at https://
ewell.bsee.gov/ewell/, you must use the
interactive payment feature in that
system, which directs you through
pay.gov to make a payment. A copy of
your pay.gov payment confirmation or
pay.gov receipt serves as proof of your
payment.
(2) For applications not submitted
through eWell, you may make a
payment through the Fees for Services
page on the BSEE Web site at https://
www.bsee.gov/About-BSEE/Fees-for-
Application type
Services/ or directly through the pay.gov
Web site. A copy of your pay.gov
payment confirmation or pay.gov
receipt serves as proof of your payment
and must accompany the submission of
the application or other request for
service.
(b) Payments at or below the current
U.S. Treasury credit card limit may be
made using a credit card or through the
automated clearing house (ACH-debit).
Payments above the current U.S.
Treasury credit card limit must be made
through ACH-debit.
(c) BSEE does not accept wire transfer
electronic payments.
■ 4. In § 250.292, revise paragraph (q) to
read as follows:
§ 250.292
What must the DWOP contain?
*
*
*
*
*
(q) Payment of the service fee listed in
§ 250.125. The service fee is divided
into two levels based on the complexity
of the plan, as shown in the following
table.
Description
(1) Complex plans ...............................................
Plans containing:
i. ‘‘new or unusual technology’’ as defined by § 250.200 and such technology:
A. requires a high degree of specialized knowledge;
B. exceeds the limits of existing engineering standards;
C. conflicts with existing engineering standards; or
D. warrants an additional level of review due to the risk associated with implementation.
ii. installation of a new floating production facility.
All other plans.
(2) Simple plans ..................................................
5. Revise § 250.1000 by:
a. Redesignating paragraphs (c)
through (e) as paragraphs (e) through (g);
and
■
■
b. Adding new paragraphs (c) and (d)
to read as follows:
■
§ 250.1000
General requirements
*
*
*
*
*
(c) The service fee for a New Pipeline
Application (Lease Term) is divided
into two levels based on water depth, as
shown in the following table:
Application type
Description
(1) Shallow water applications ............................
Applications for new lease term pipelines that will be located in their entirety within water
depths of 1,000 feet or less.
Applications for new lease term pipelines, any portion of which will be located in water depths
greater than 1,000 feet.
(2) Deepwater applications .................................
(d) The service fee for a Pipeline
Application—Modification (Lease Term)
and a Pipeline Application—
Modification (Right-of-way) are divided
Application type
Description
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
(1) Major Applications .........................................
(2) Minor Applications .........................................
*
*
*
*
*
6. In § 250.1015, revise paragraph (a)
to read as follows:
■
§ 250.1015 Applications for pipeline rightof-way grants
(a) You must submit to the Regional
Supervisor an original and three copies
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:46 Nov 16, 2016
into two levels based on complexity, as
shown in the following table:
Jkt 241001
Applications containing a route modification.
All other applications.
of an application for a new or modified
pipeline ROW grant. The application
must address those items required by
§§ 250.1007(a) or (b) of this subpart, as
applicable. It must also state the
primary purpose for which you will use
the ROW grant. If the ROW has been
PO 00000
Frm 00034
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
used before the application is made, the
application must state the date such use
began, by whom, and the date the
applicant obtained control of the ROW.
When you file your application, you
must pay the rental required under
§ 250.1012 of this subpart, as well as the
E:\FR\FM\17NOP1.SGM
17NOP1
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 222 / Thursday, November 17, 2016 / Proposed Rules
service fees listed in § 250.125 of this
part for a pipeline ROW grant to install
a new pipeline, or to convert an existing
lease term pipeline into an ROW
pipeline. An application to modify an
approved ROW grant must be
accompanied by the additional rental
required under § 250.1012, if applicable.
You must file a separate application for
each ROW. The service fee for a
81049
pipeline ROW grant application is
divided into two levels based on water
depth, as shown in the following table:
Application type
Description
(1) Shallow water applications ............................
Applications for a pipeline ROW grant for pipelines that will be located in their entirety within
water depths of 1,000 feet or less.
Applications for a pipeline ROW grant for pipelines, any portion of which will be located in
water depths greater than 1,000 feet.
(2) Deepwater applications .................................
*
*
*
*
*
7. In § 250.1303, revise paragraph (d)
to read as follows:
■
§ 250.1303 How do I apply for voluntary
unitization?
*
*
*
*
*
(d) You must pay the service fee listed
in § 250.125 of this part with your
request for a voluntary unitization
proposal or the expansion of a
previously approved voluntary unit to
include additional acreage.
Additionally, you must pay the service
fee listed in § 250.125 with your request
for unitization revision. The service fee
for a request for unitization revision is
divided into two levels, as shown in the
following table:
Application type
Description
(1) Exhibits A and B ............................................
Applications for revisions to Exhibit A and/or Exhibit B or designation of Successor Unit Operators and/or Successor Unit Sub-operators.
Applications for revisions to Exhibit C.
(2) Exhibit C ........................................................
[FR Doc. 2016–27500 Filed 11–16–16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310–VH–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[EPA–HQ–OPP–2015–0653; FRL–9954–65]
Chlorpyrifos; Tolerance Revocations;
Notice of Data Availability and Request
for Comment
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
EPA is announcing and
inviting comment on additional
information obtained and developed by
EPA in conjunction with the proposed
tolerance revocation for chlorpyrifos.
This information includes the revised
human health risk assessment and the
drinking water assessment. It also
includes EPA’s issue paper and
supporting analyses presented to the
Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and
Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) Scientific
Advisory Panel’s (SAP) meeting in April
2016 that addressed chlorpyrifos
biomonitoring data and adverse
neurodevelopmental outcomes, public
comments received during the meeting,
the FIFRA SAP’s meeting minutes and
the FIFRA SAP report. EPA is
specifically soliciting comments on the
validity and propriety of the use of all
the new information, data, and analyses.
EPA is accepting comment on the
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:46 Nov 16, 2016
Jkt 241001
information and analysis, as well as
reopening comment on any other aspect
of the proposal or the underlying
support documents that were previously
available for comment. The EPA
continues to seek comment on possible
mitigation strategies, namely, use
deletions, which might allow the EPA to
retain a small subset of existing
chlorpyrifos food uses. Commenters
need not resubmit comments previously
submitted. EPA will consider those
comments, as well as comments in
response to this notice, in taking a final
action.
DATES: Submit comments on or before
January 17, 2017.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by docket identification (ID)
number EPA–HQ–OPP–2015–0653, by
one of the following methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments.
Do not submit electronically any
information you consider to be
Confidential Business Information (CBI)
or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute.
• Mail: OPP Docket, Environmental
Protection Agency Docket Center (EPA/
DC), (28221T), 1200 Pennsylvania Ave.
NW., Washington, DC 20460–0001.
• Hand Delivery: To make special
arrangements for hand delivery or
delivery of boxed information, please
follow the instructions at https://
www.epa.gov/dockets/contacts.html.
Additional instructions on
commenting or visiting the docket,
PO 00000
Frm 00035
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
along with more information about
dockets generally, is available at https://
www.epa.gov/dockets.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Dana Friedman, Pesticide Re-Evaluation
Division (7508P), Office of Pesticide
Programs, Environmental Protection
Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW.,
Washington, DC 20460–0001; telephone
number: (703) 347–8827; email address:
friedman.dana@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. How should I submit Confidential
Business Information (CBI) to the
Agency?
Do not submit this information to EPA
electronically. Clearly mark the part or
all of the information that you claim to
be CBI. For CBI information in a disk or
CD–ROM that you mail to EPA, mark
the outside of the disk or CD–ROM as
CBI and then identify electronically
within the disk or CD–ROM the specific
information that is claimed as CBI. In
addition to one complete version of the
comment that includes information
claimed as CBI, a copy of the comment
that does not contain the information
claimed as CBI must be submitted for
inclusion in the public docket.
Information so marked will not be
disclosed except in accordance with
procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2.
II. Purpose of This Document
EPA is reopening the comment period
on the proposed rule: Entitled
‘‘Chlorpyrifos; Tolerance Revocations’’
(80 FR 69080, November 6, 2015) (FRL–
E:\FR\FM\17NOP1.SGM
17NOP1
]]>Agencies
- DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
- Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement
[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 222 (Thursday, November 17, 2016)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 81033-81049]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-27500]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement
30 CFR Part 250
[Docket ID: BSEE-2016-0003; 17XE1700DX EEEE500000 EX1SF0000.DAQ000]
RIN 1014-AA31
Adjustments to Cost Recovery Fees Relating to the Regulation of
Oil, Gas, and Sulfur Activities on the Outer Continental Shelf
AGENCY: Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement, Interior.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement (BSEE)
currently charges a fee for 31 different services (hereafter ``cost
recovery fees'') it provides to non-Federal recipients. The services
were identified by BSEE's predecessor agency, the Minerals Management
Service (MMS). This proposed rule would revise and clarify the existing
fees; add new fees for certain services; revise and codify the existing
conditions for refunding fees; and clarify the acceptable methods of
fee payment. This proposed rule would enable BSEE to recover its full
costs associated with providing these services to recipients of special
benefits beyond those accruing to the general public.
DATES: BSEE will consider all comments received by January 17, 2017.
BSEE may not consider comments received after this date. Submit
comments to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) on the
information collection burden in this proposed rule by December 19,
2016.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments on the proposed rule by any of the
following methods. Please use the Regulatory Identifier Number (RIN)
1014-AA31 as an identifier to your message. See also Public
Availability of Comments under Procedural Matters.
Submit comments electronically. Go to https://www.regulations.gov and search for ``BSEE-2016-0003.'' Follow the
instructions to submit public comments and view supporting and related
materials available for this rulemaking. BSEE will post all relevant
comments.
Mail or hand-carry comments to the Department of the
Interior (DOI); Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement;
Attention: Regulations and Standards Branch; 45600 Woodland Road,
Sterling, VA 20166. Please reference Adjustment of Service Fees
Relating to the Regulation of Oil, Gas, and Sulfur Activities on the
Outer Continental Shelf, AA31 in your comments and include your name
and return address.
Comments on the information collection contained in this
proposed rule are separate from those on the substance of the proposed
rule. Send comments on the information collection burden in this rule
to: OMB, Interior Desk Officer, 202-395-5806 (fax); email
OIRA_submissions@omb.eop.gov. Please also send a copy to BSEE at
regs@bsee.gov, fax number (703) 787-1546, or by the address listed
above.
Public Availability of Comments--Before including your
address, phone number, email address, or other personal identifying
information in your comment, you should be aware that your entire
comment--including your personal identifying information--may be made
publicly available at any time. While you can ask us in your comment to
withhold your personal identifying information from public review, we
cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kimberly Monaco, Budget Analyst,
Office of Budget at (703) 787-1658, Kimberly.Monaco@bsee.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. Background
A. BSEE Statutory and Regulatory Authority
B. Summary of Existing Cost Recovery Fees Regulations and Basis
for Proposed Amendments
C. Request for Comments on Potential Future Fees
II. Procedural Matters
I. Background
A. BSEE Statutory and Regulatory Authority
In accordance with the Independent Offices Appropriation Act, 1952,
31 U.S.C. 9701 and the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Circular
A-25,\1\ BSEE is required to assess a charge against each identifiable
non-Federal recipient of special benefits derived from BSEE services
beyond those received by the public at large. The charge BSEE assesses
is legally sufficient if it recovers BSEE's full cost to provide the
service.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Circular A-25 Revised,
User Charges, July 8, 1993, and Transmittal Memorandum 1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
OMB Circular A-25 requires a Federal agency to conduct a biennial
review of its user charges to determine whether adjustments are
necessary and to review other agency programs to determine whether new
fees should be established for any services it provides. BSEE reviewed
its 31 services and pre-production site visits along with the
associated cost recovery fees to determine whether the cost of
providing each of the services supports the existing fee structure in
the existing regulations. BSEE's methodology for calculating its direct
and indirect costs to perform the 31 services and the pre-production
site visits is found later in this document. Results from the direct
and indirect cost calculations indicate that 17 fees should be
increased, eight fees reduced, and six fees subdivided into two tiers
by complexity, with six of the subdivided fees increasing above the
existing undivided fee, and six decreasing. The results also indicate
that the existing pre-production site visit fees for two of the
facility production safety system applications should be decreased for
visits to facilities offshore and increased for visits to facilities
while in a shipyard. Finally, the results suggest that new pre-
production site visit fees should be implemented for the four facility
production safety system applications that did not previously include
site visit fees. The details of these proposed fees are shown in the
Service Fee Table later in this document.
The fees are codified in BSEE's regulations at 30 CFR 250.125(a).
This proposed rule would: (1) Amend 31 of the cost recovery fees in
existing Sec. 250.125; (2) establish two tiers of fees within the
Deepwater Operations Plans (DWOPs), New Pipeline Applications, Pipeline
Modification Applications for both Lease Term and Right-of-way (ROW)
Pipelines, ROW Pipeline Grant Applications, and Unitization Revisions
fee categories; (3) add four new pre-production site visit cost
recovery fees to the existing two pre-production site visit fees to
support the review and approval, if necessary, of production
[[Page 81034]]
safety system applications; (4) revise the two existing pre-production
site visit cost recovery fees; (5) amend and codify conditions for
granting fee payment refunds in the existing Notice to Lessees and
Operators (NTL) No. 2009-N09; \2\ (6) amend Sec. 250.126 to provide
clarification on the payment of cost recovery fees and the acceptable
payment methods; and 7) include descriptions of the two complexity-
based levels of service fees in 30 CFR 250.292 (DWOPs), Sec. 250.1000
(Applications to install or modify lease term pipelines), Sec.
250.1015 (Applications for pipeline ROW grants)), and Sec. 250.1303
(Requests for voluntary unitization).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Minerals Management Service, MMS Policy on Refund Requests
for Service Fees, NTL No. 2009-N09, November 1, 2009.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In addition to BSEE's in-depth review of the bureau's existing cost
recovery fees, the need for adjustments is further supported by the
fact that, with the exception of adjustments for inflation, BSEE's cost
recovery fees have not been adjusted since the 2005 and 2006
rulemakings establishing the fees (see 70 FR 49871 (August 25, 2005)
and 71 FR 40904 (July 19, 2006)). Over the last ten years, offshore
operations have moved into deeper, more complex, and more hostile
environments. This evolution of offshore operations has resulted in
increasingly technical and more complex requests submitted by
operators. Reviewing and approving these requests requires extensive
communication and collaboration between offshore operators, BSEE
engineers, and BSEE subject matter experts (SMEs) who are knowledgeable
about the safety and environmental aspects of the current technologies
and operational challenges, which require additional time and more
experienced, senior-level individuals at higher pay grades to review
and approve. In addition, the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2012
authorized BSEE to ``establish higher minimum rates of basic pay for
employees of the Department of the Interior in the Gulf of Mexico
Region in the Geophysicist (GS-1313), Geologist (GS-1350), and
Petroleum Engineer (GS-0881) job series at grades 5 through 15 at rates
no greater than 25 percent above the minimum rates of basic pay
normally scheduled . . .'' Public Law 112-74, sec. 121(c) (Dec. 23,
2011). In August 2015, the Office of Personnel Management (OPM)
increased the special pay for the job series identified in Public Law
112-74, sec. 121(c) (Dec. 23, 2011) to 35 percent above basic pay and
also used its authority to establish the same 35 percent special pay
rate for the Inspectors (GS-1801) job series. These special pay rates
have allowed the Bureau to be competitive with the oil and gas industry
in attracting and retaining qualified personnel, but have increased the
bureau's personnel costs. For these reasons, BSEE's costs to provide
certain services have increased over the levels set out in the existing
regulations including, but not limited to, the costs to process
applications for permits to drill and applications for permits to
modify. For other services, the proposed fees may be lower than the
existing fees due to an overall reduced cost to provide those services
(i.e., efficiencies).
The proposed adjustments are based on an analysis of BSEE's costs
for providing services from fiscal year (FY) 2013 to FY 2015. The
proposed fee adjustments are necessary to more accurately align fees
with the cost of BSEE's services provided to the non-Federal
recipients. BSEE invites comments on each of the proposed fee
adjustments described later in this document.
B. Summary of Existing Cost Recovery Fees Regulations and Basis for
Proposed Amendments
Existing Sec. Sec. 250.125 and 250.126 set out the amount of cost
recovery fees for each BSEE service and provide instructions for making
payments. Section 250.125(a) lists the 31 cost recovery fees currently
imposed by BSEE for specific services. Section 250.125(b) requires that
payment of the applicable fee(s) must accompany the request for service
and provides that all fees are non-refundable. Section 250.125(c)
requires the submission of a written request and accompanying payment
within 72 hours of a BSEE verbal approval. Section 250.126 requires
that all cost recovery fees be paid electronically through www.pay.gov.
BSEE proposes to amend Sec. 250.125 by revising the fees for
specific services based on its in-depth review and incorporating
guidance from NTL No. 2009-N09 regarding conditions for granting fee
payment refunds. BSEE proposes amendments to Sec. 250.126 to provide
clarification on the payment of cost recovery fees and the acceptable
payment methods. BSEE also proposes to amend the following other
sections of 30 CFR part 250 that are subject to the proposed Sec.
250.125 amendments in this document: Sec. 250.292 (DWOPs); Sec.
250.1000 (Applications to install or modify lease term pipelines);
Sec. 250.1015 (Applications for pipeline ROW grants); and Sec.
250.1303 (Requests for voluntary unitization).
What Fees Would This Proposed Rule Adjust?
BSEE is proposing adjustments to its 31 existing cost recovery fees
to fully account for the costs of providing the services listed in the
Service Fee Table below. Additionally, BSEE is proposing to amend Sec.
250.125(a) to:
1. Subdivide into two categories and add different fee levels for
six types of cost recovery fees (DWOPs, New Pipeline Applications,
Pipeline Modification Applications for both Lease Term and ROW
Pipelines, ROW Pipeline Grant Applications, and Unitization Revisions)
to accurately reflect the varying levels of complexity of the requested
services and the corresponding levels of costs to BSEE from providing
those services; \3\ and
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ The complexity-based fees for these services are specified
in proposed Sec. Sec. 250.125(a)(2), (15)-(17), (19), and (28) and
in the Service Fee Table in this document.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Add four new pre-production site visit fees and revise the two
existing pre-productions site visit fees to support the review and
approval of production safety system applications, if a site visit is
deemed necessary. These new and revised site visit fees are proposed to
be included in Sec. Sec. 250.125(a)(5)-(10).
The following table lists the type of service to be performed by BSEE
when it receives a plan, application, permit, or other request; the
associated regulatory citation for each type of request; the existing
and proposed fee; and the proposed acceptable payment type for each
service. The proposed payment types are credit card and electronic
check through the Automated Clearing House (ACH-debit). Because the
current U.S. Treasury limit on credit card payments is $24,999.99, an
ACH-debit must be used for payments of $25,000 or more.
In the Service Fee Table below, the existing regulations are in
regular font; proposed text is in italic font; and new fees are in bold
font. The fifth column, payment type, is provided to explain the
options for payment for a particular service.
[[Page 81035]]
Service Fee Table
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Service--processing of the
following: 30 CFR citation Existing fee Proposed fee Payment type
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) Suspension of Operations/ Sec. $2,123............... $3,055............... Credit Card or
Suspension of Production (SOO/ 250.171(e). ACH-debit.
SOP) Request.
(2) Deepwater Operations Plan. Sec. $3,599...............
250.292(q).
(a) Deepwater Operations Plan-- ................ ..................... $14,290.............. Credit Card or
Simple. ACH-debit.
(b) Deepwater Operations Plan- ................ ..................... $70,333.............. ACH-debit Only.
Complex (New Technology).
(3) Application for Permit to Sec. $2,113............... $10,420.............. Credit Card or
Drill (APD; Form BSEE-0123). 250.410(d); ACH-debit.
Sec.
250.513(b);
Sec.
250.1617(a).
(4) Application for Permit to Sec. $125................. $1,680............... Credit Card or
Modify (APM; Form BSEE-0124). 250.465(b); ACH-debit.
Sec.
250.513(b);
Sec.
250.613(b);
Sec.
250.1618(a);
Sec.
250.1704(g).
(5) New Facility Production Sec. 250.842.. $5,426............... $3,976............... Credit Card or
Safety System Application for $14,280 additional $13,534 additional ACH-debit.
Facility with More than 125 fee will be charged fee will be charged
Components. if BSEE conducts a if BSEE conducts a
pre-production pre-production
inspection of a inspection of a
facility offshore, facility offshore,
and $7,426 for an and $14,567 for an
inspection of a inspection of a
facility while in a facility while in a
shipyard. shipyard.
A component is a A component is a
piece of equipment piece of equipment
or an ancillary or an ancillary
system that is system that is
protected by one or protected by one or
more of the safety more of the safety
devices required by devices required by
American Petroleum API RP 14C (as
Institute (API) incorporated by
Recommended Practice reference in Sec.
(RP) 14C (as 250.198).
incorporated by
reference in Sec.
250.198).
(6) New Facility Production Sec. 250.842.. $1,314............... $548................. Credit Card or
Safety System Application for $8,967 additional fee $8,508 additional fee ACH-debit.
Facility with 25-125 will be charged if will be charged if
Components. BSEE conducts a pre- BSEE conducts a pre-
production production
inspection of a inspection of a
facility offshore, facility offshore,
and $5,141 for an and $9,818 for an
inspection of a inspection of a
facility while in a facility while in a
shipyard. shipyard.
(7) New Facility Production Sec. 250.842.. $652................. $463................. Credit Card or
Safety System Application for $4,338 additional fee ACH-debit.
Facility with Fewer than 25 will be charged if
Components. BSEE conducts a pre-
production
inspection of a
facility offshore,
and $1,967 for an
inspection of a
facility while in a
shipyard.
(8) Production Safety System Sec. 250.842.. $605................. $1,278............... Credit Card or
Application--Modification $9,313 additional fee ACH-debit.
with More than 125 Components will be charged if
Reviewed. BSEE conducts a pre-
production
inspection of a
facility offshore,
and $8,100 for an
inspection of a
facility while in a
shipyard.
(9) Production Safety System Sec. 250.842.. $217................. $439................. Credit Card or
Application--Modification $6,765 additional fee ACH-debit.
with 25-125 Components will be charged if
Reviewed. BSEE conducts a pre-
production
inspection of a
facility offshore,
and $7,326 for an
inspection of a
facility while in a
shipyard.
(10) Production Safety System Sec. 250.842.. $92.................. $386................. Credit Card or
Application--Modification $4,513 additional fee ACH-debit.
with Fewer than 25 Components will be charged if
Reviewed. BSEE conducts a pre-
production
inspection of a
facility offshore,
and $2,141 for an
inspection of a
facility while in a
shipyard.
(11) Platform Application-- Sec. $22,734.............. $28,311.............. ACH-debit Only.
Installation--Under the 250.905(l).
Platform Verification Program.
(12) Platform Application-- Sec. $3,256............... $1,914............... Credit Card or
Installation--Fixed Structure 250.905(l). ACH-debit.
Under the Platform Approval
Program.
(13) Platform Application-- Sec. $1,657............... $1,914............... Credit Card or
Installation--Caisson/Well 250.905(l). ACH-debit.
Protector.
(14) Platform Application-- Sec. $3,884............... $1,975............... Credit Card or
Modification/Repair. 250.905(l). ACH-debit.
(15) New Pipeline Application ................ $3,541...............
(Lease Term).
[[Page 81036]]
(a) New Pipeline Application Sec. ..................... $1,584............... Credit Card or
(Lease Term)--Shallow Water 250.1000(b). ACH-debit.
(less than 1000 ft.).
(b) New Pipeline Application ................ ..................... $3,663............... Credit Card or
(Lease Term)--Deepwater ACH-debit.
(greater than 1000 ft.).
(16) Pipeline Application-- ................ $2,056...............
Modification (Lease Term).
(a) Pipeline Application-- Sec. ..................... $651................. Credit Card or
Modification (Lease Term)-- 250.1000(b). ACH-debit.
Minor.
(b) Pipeline Application-- ................ ..................... $1,696............... Credit Card or
Modification (Lease Term)-- ACH-debit.
Major.
(17) Pipeline Application-- ................ $4,169...............
Modification (ROW).
(a) Pipeline Application-- Sec. ..................... $455................. Credit Card or
Modification (ROW)--Minor. 250.1000(b). ACH-debit.
(b) Pipeline Application-- ................ ..................... $1,800............... Credit Card or
Modification (ROW)--Major. ACH-debit.
(18) Pipeline Repair Sec. $388................. $557................. Credit Card or
Notification. 250.1008(e). ACH-debit.
(19) Pipeline ROW Grant ................ $2,771...............
Application.
(a) Pipeline ROW Grant Sec. ..................... $1,662............... Credit Card or
Application--Shallow Water 250.1015(a). ACH-debit.
(less than 1000 ft.).
(b) Pipeline ROW Grant ................ ..................... $3,796............... Credit Card or
Application--Deepwater ACH-debit.
(greater than 1000 ft.).
(20) Pipeline Conversion of Sec. $236................. $494................. Credit Card or
Lease Term to ROW. 250.1015(a). ACH-debit.
(21) Pipeline ROW Assignment.. Sec. $201................. $397................. Credit Card or
250.1018(b). ACH-debit.
(22) 500 Feet From Lease/Unit Sec. $3,892............... $5,440............... Credit Card or
Line Production Request. 250.1156(a). ACH-debit.
(23) Gas Cap Production Sec. 250.1157. $4,953............... $11,962.............. Credit Card or
Request. ACH-debit.
(24) Downhole Commingling Sec. $5,779............... $14,064.............. Credit Card or
Request. 250.1158(a). ACH-debit.
(25) Complex Surface Sec. $4,056............... $8,205............... Credit Card or
Commingling and Measurement 250.1202(a); ACH-debit.
Application. Sec.
250.1203(b);
Sec.
250.1204(a).
(26) Simple Surface Sec. $1,371............... $3,514............... Credit Card or
Commingling and Measurement 250.1202(a); ACH-debit.
Application. Sec.
250.1203(b);
Sec.
250.1204(a).
(27) Voluntary Unitization Sec. $12,619.............. $27,288.............. ACH-debit Only.
Proposal or Unit Expansion. 250.1303(d).
(28) Unitization Revision..... ................ $896.................
(a) Unitization Revision-- Sec. ..................... $1,683............... Credit Card or
Exhibit A, Exhibit B, and 250.1303(d). ACH-debit.
Successor Unit Operator/Sub-
operator.
(b) Unitization Revision-- ................ ..................... $3,255............... Credit Card or
Exhibit C. ACH-debit.
(29) Application to Remove a Sec. 250.1727. $4,684............... $2,846............... Credit Card or
Platform or Other Facility. ACH-debit.
(30) Application to Sec. $1,142............... $857................. Credit Card or
Decommission a Pipeline 250.1751(a) or ACH-debit.
(Lease Term). Sec.
250.1752(a).
(31) Application to Sec. $2,170............... $980................. Credit Card or
Decommission a Pipeline (ROW). 250.1751(a) or ACH-debit.
Sec.
250.1752(a)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
How did BSEE determine the costs to be recovered by the proposed fees?
Federal agency policy covering full cost recovery through user
charges is outlined in OMB Circular A-25. According to OMB Circular A-
25, BSEE should assess fees to recover the bureau's full costs of
providing the services to the offshore oil and gas industry, rather
than market price, because BSEE is acting on behalf of the United
States to issue offshore oil and gas permits, approve DWOPs, and
provide the other listed services. Therefore, BSEE used the full cost
recovery approach, described in paragraph 6.d.1 of OMB Circular A-25,
to assess the cost of each process.
For each of the services provided by BSEE, the process begins with
the submission of an application, plan, permit, or other request by an
operator. BSEE typically provides the service requested when an
operator submits a request and the associated user fee. The output of
each service is BSEE's issuance of the permit or application/plan
approval or denial.
In order to determine the current cost of BSEE's services, BSEE
assessed and itemized its services through data collection and dialogue
with BSEE personnel in its Gulf of Mexico Regional Office (GOMR) and
other BSEE SMEs. This process included the identification of each task
undertaken by BSEE to review and approve each type of plan,
application, permit, or other request. These tasks include: The
initiating event or BSEE's receipt of a request for service; the
identification of personnel to perform the review of the plan,
application, permit, or other request; the review of the plan,
application, permit, or other request; and the issuance of the permit
or approval/denial of the application/plan. This information and the
time spent performing each task were used to calculate BSEE's service
costs, consistent with the procedures in OMB Circular A-25, as
explained in the following discussion.
[[Page 81037]]
How were the direct costs calculated?
The direct costs assessed as part of the full cost recovery
analysis are direct labor costs, e.g., direct salary costs and fringe
benefits for BSEE staff performing the requested services. Direct labor
costs were established using the average work time provided by BSEE
staff members for each task. The average time was then multiplied by
the 2016 Office of Personnel Management's (OPM) General Schedule (GS)
pay grade hourly rate for the employee responsible for completing that
task. The GS pay grade was calculated at a step 5 level, which was
estimated to be the average step within each pay grade. A range of GS
pay grades are involved in certain actions (i.e., specific tasks might
be accomplished by either a GS-7, 9, or 11 employee). In this case,
BSEE averaged the hourly rate for a step 5 at all the grade levels that
could accomplish the task to create an average hourly rate for that
specific task.
The following 2016 OPM GS rate tables were used to identify the
appropriate hourly rate for the employee responsible for completing
each task:
(1) For any task completed by a petroleum engineer, OPM's 2016
special rate tables 711 and 712 were utilized. These tables provide
petroleum engineers in GOMR and the Pacific OCS Region (POCSR) with a
35 percent increase above OPM's ``Base'' pay rate.
(2) For any task completed by a geologist or geophysicist, OPM's
2016 special rate table 711 was utilized. This table provides
geologists and geophysicists in Jefferson, LA and Camarillo, CA with a
35 percent increase above OPM's ``Base'' pay rate. Jefferson, LA
includes the GOMR New Orleans District where the majority of these
positions are located.
(3) For all other tasks not covered by (1) or (2) above, the GS
``REST OF UNITED STATES'' 2016 rate table was used.
Along with direct labor salary costs, OMB Circular A-25 requires
the collection of direct labor costs classified as fringe benefits,
which usually includes paid leave, medical insurance, and retirement.
Historically, BSEE has calculated the fringe benefits as 28 percent of
the direct salary costs and refers to that percentage as the ``fringe
benefit factor.'' The fringe benefit factor was applied to all labor
categories and grades for all cost recovery fee calculations.
How were the indirect costs calculated?
In accordance with OMB Circular A-25, indirect costs include
personnel fringe benefits, all physical overhead costs, and management
and supervisory costs. In accordance with OMB Circular A-25, BSEE
assessed indirect costs for all headquarters, Regional, and District
personnel and operations involved in the provision of services that are
the subject of this proposed rule. These indirect costs include
salaries and fringe benefits of personnel providing ancillary support
functions, material and supply costs, utilities, and other costs that
are allocated across all services provided by BSEE. BSEE has an
extensive activity-based costing code table and cost capture database
(Cost and Performance Management Tool (CPMT)) that categorizes all BSEE
costs as either direct or indirect. Data from CPMT, going back to FY
2007, were analyzed to develop an appropriate methodology for
estimating the indirect costs component of the cost recovery fees.
Indirect costs were estimated using the historical ratio of
indirect to direct costs observed at the headquarters, Regional, or
District levels. From FY 2007 through FY 2015, the ratio was
consistently between 51 and 56 percent. An average ratio of 53.51
percent was used. This percentage was applied to each service's direct
cost to derive an indirect cost estimate for each service. The
following table provides the indirect to direct cost data and ratios
for BSEE and the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management's (BOEM) predecessor
agencies, MMS and the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Regulation,
and Enforcement, from FY 2007-FY 2011 and for BSEE from FY 2013-FY
2015.\4\ FY 2012 data were not included due to inaccurate tracking that
occurred as BSEE and BOEM were established at the beginning of that
fiscal year.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ BSEE and BOEM were created on October 1, 2011 as part of the
DOI reorganization and division of responsibilities formerly
exercised by MMS.
Direct and Indirect Cost Data \1\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Indirect/
Direct total Indirect total direct cost
Fiscal year cost ($ cost ($ ratio
millions) millions) (percent)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2007............................................................ 205.62 110.75 53.86
2008............................................................ 203.42 114.35 56.22
2009............................................................ 219.36 120.14 54.77
2010............................................................ 222.91 114.88 51.54
2011............................................................ 244.25 135.10 55.31
2013............................................................ 113.27 58.26 51.43
2014............................................................ 138.21 74.50 53.91
2015............................................................ 159.97 81.68 51.06
Average..................................................... .............. .............. 53.51
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Why are two fee levels proposed for some service categories?
Two fee levels are proposed for certain applications, plans,
permits, and other requests for BSEE services (e.g., simple DWOP vs.
complex DWOP, or shallow water pipeline application (lease term) vs.
deepwater pipeline application (lease term)) based on the varying
levels of complexity, and resulting costs, associated with processing
those requests. The six categories of BSEE services for which two tiers
of complexity-based fees are proposed are identified in the following
list, along with clarification for operators on which fee is more
appropriate with regard to an application, plan, permit, or other
request for these services:
1. DWOP: The complexity of processing a DWOP varies and depends on
whether it includes new or unusual technology, as well as the scope and
scale of the proposed development project.
a. DWOP--Complex: An operator would submit payment for this service
when a DWOP meets any of the following criteria:
[[Page 81038]]
The plan contains new or unusual technology, as defined in
30 CFR 250.200(b), and the new or unusual technology:
--requires a high degree of specialized knowledge;
--exceeds the limits of existing engineering standards;
--conflicts with existing engineering standards; or
--warrants an additional level of review due to the risk associated
with implementation; or
The plan includes installation of a new floating
production facility.
b. DWOP--Simple: An operator would submit payment for this service
for all DWOPs that do not meet the criteria for Deepwater Operation
Plans--Complex. This includes, but is not limited to:
A new or unusual technology as defined in 30 CFR
250.200(b) that does not require a high degree of specialized
knowledge.
A new or unusual technology that is a modification or
repair to an existing floating production facility or project.
A subsea tieback to a new or existing floating production
facility.
A material change, addition or revision to an existing,
previously approved project.
A subsea tieback/additional well(s) for which only minor
or no updates for subsea production safety system are necessary.
Addition of a new subsea development to a new or existing
floating production facility.
2. New Pipeline Application (Lease Term): The complexity of
processing an application varies and is dependent on the water depth of
the pipeline.
a. New Pipeline Application (Lease Term)--Shallow Water: An
operator would submit payment for this service when the pipeline in a
New Pipeline Application (Lease Term) is located in its entirety in
water depths less than or equal to 1,000 feet (ft.).
b. New Pipeline Application (Lease Term)--Deepwater: An operator
would submit payment for this service when any portion of the pipeline
in a New Pipeline Application (Lease Term) is located in water depths
greater than 1,000 ft.
3. Pipeline Application--Modification (Lease Term): The complexity
of processing an application varies and is dependent on the complexity
of the modification.
a. Pipeline Application--Modification (Lease Term)--Major: An
operator would submit payment for this service when a Pipeline
Application--Modification (Lease Term) contains a route modification
request. Actions which constitute a ``route modification'' include, but
are not limited to, changing a pipeline route, installing a new portion
of pipeline, decommissioning a portion of pipeline, and changing
service or flow direction of a pipeline.
b. Pipeline Application--Modification (Lease Term)--Minor: An
operator would submit payment for this service for all other Pipeline
Applications--Modification (Lease Term) requests (i.e., for all
Pipeline Applications--Modification (Lease Term) requests that do not
contain a route modification).
4. Pipeline Application--Modification (ROW): The complexity of
processing an application varies and is dependent on the complexity of
the modification.
a. Pipeline Application--Modification (ROW)--Major. An operator
would submit payment for this service when a Pipeline Application--
Modification (ROW) contains a route modification request. Actions that
constitute a ``route modification'' include, but are not limited to,
changing a pipeline route, installing a new portion of pipeline,
decommissioning a portion of pipeline, and changing service or flow
direction of a pipeline.
b. Pipeline Application--Modification (ROW)--Minor: An operator
would submit payment for this service for all other Pipeline
Applications--Modification (ROW) requests (i.e., for all Pipeline
Applications--Modification (ROW) requests that do not contain a route
modification). An example is an ROW Grant Modification request for
cessation of operations.
5. Pipeline ROW Grant Application: The complexity of processing an
application varies and is dependent on the water depth of the pipeline.
a. Pipeline ROW Grant Application--Shallow Water: An operator would
submit payment for this service when the pipeline in a Pipeline ROW
Grant Application is located in its entirety in water depths less than
or equal to 1,000 ft.
b. Pipeline ROW Grant Application--Deepwater: An operator would
submit payment for this service when any portion of the pipeline in a
Pipeline ROW Grant Application is located in water depths greater than
1,000 ft.
6. Unitization Revision: BSEE currently charges one fee for the
review of a Unitization Revision; however, the complexity of processing
the application and resulting cost vary based on the specific exhibits
being revised in the signed unit agreement. Typical unitization
applications contain an Exhibit A, which is the lease plat identifying
the unit area; Exhibit B, which is a listing of the component leases
and ownership of each; and Exhibit C, which is a listing of the
participation and allocation by lease. Payment for unitization revision
services are as follows:
a. Unitization Revision--Exhibit A, Exhibit B, and Designation of
Successor Unit Operator/Sub-operator: The Unit Operator would submit
payment for this service when a Unitization Revision is submitted for
approval that revises Exhibit A and/or Exhibit B of the signed unit
agreement or designates a Successor Unit Operator and/or Successor Unit
Sub-operator.
b. Unitization Revision--Exhibit C: The Unit Operator would submit
payment for this service when a Unitization Revision is submitted for
approval that revises Exhibit C of the signed unit agreement.
Why are there proposed new and adjusted fees for some services that
involve BSEE site visits?
In accordance with existing Sec. 250.800, production must not
commence until the production safety system has been approved and a
pre-production inspection has been requested by the lessee. If a BSEE
application reviewer decides that a pre-production inspection is
necessary as part of the production safety system application review
and approval process, then a team of engineers and inspectors visits
the facility offshore (e.g., a mobile offshore drilling unit) or at a
shipyard.
Existing Sec. Sec. 250.125(a)(5) and (6) establish fees for
visiting a facility offshore or in a shipyard for two of the six
production safety system applications, when necessary, as part of the
BSEE review and approval process. Visits to an offshore facility or a
shipyard can become necessary in order to verify that safety devices
are in the proper locations or to identify if they are missing when
compared with the associated application submitted for approval. Any
necessary corrections to production safety systems can typically be
handled more easily while construction work is ongoing in a shipyard,
rather than when the facility is offshore.
BSEE's costs for travel to offshore facilities and shipyard
locations and for services, as part of the application review process,
can be recovered in accordance with OMB Circular A-25. Estimates for
BSEE's costs for these services include costs for transportation,
lodging, and labor hours for each labor category involved.
As illustrated in the Service Fee Table, under Sec. Sec.
250.125(a)(7)-(a)(10), BSEE proposes four new fees for production
safety system visits to
[[Page 81039]]
offshore facilities or shipyards. BSEE also proposes to amend the two
existing fees for production safety system inspection visits to
offshore facilities or shipyards under Sec. Sec. 250.125(a)(5) and
250.125(a)(6). The proposed new and amended fees would affect:
1. New Facility Production Safety System Application for Facility
with more than 125 components;
2. New Facility Production Safety System Application for Facility
with 25-125 components;
3. New Facility Production Safety System Application for Facility
with fewer than 25 components;
4. Production Safety System Application--Modification with more
than 125 components reviewed;
5. Production Safety System Application--Modification with 25-125
components reviewed; and
6. Production Safety System Application--Modification with fewer
than 25 components reviewed.
Why are the adjustments to BSEE's cost recovery fees necessary?
As previously mentioned, offshore operations have changed
dramatically over the last ten years, which has led to adjustments in
the review and approval process for a large portion of the services
BSEE provides to industry. BSEE proposes the listed fee levels based on
the assessment of the bureau's full costs to provide the associated
services using the methodology described above. However, this full-cost
methodology is not entirely comparable to the methodologies used in the
2005 and 2006 rulemakings that initially established the fees. The
following examples provide the general rationale for some of the fee
adjustments as compared to the fees in existing regulations.
1. BSEE's assessment of its costs for processing complex DWOPs
indicates that six employees, ranging in grades from GS-5 through GS-
14, will spend between 310 and 1,094 hours reviewing, analyzing, and
processing these plans. As previously discussed, the increased
complexity of offshore operations has required additional senior-level
employees to spend added time reviewing and approving these plans. This
is particularly true with regard to the increased processing time of
DWOPs and the associated increased costs to BSEE. In addition, the
existing $3,599 fee for processing both complex and simple DWOPs does
not account for the special pay that many BSEE employees receive for
reviewing and approving these plans and the higher indirect cost ratio.
The fee assessed for DWOP review has also not been adjusted since a
2006 rulemaking that established the existing fee. The adjusted fee is
the result of calculations performed with input from BSEE Regional
Offices and takes into account the increased complexity of submitted
DWOPs due to the use of new or unusual technologies and the increased
scope or scale of proposed plans. Based on its assessment, BSEE
proposes to subdivide the DWOP processing fees and assess a $70,333 fee
for processing complex DWOPs in 250.125(a)(2)(ii).
2. Similarly, BSEE proposes subdividing the fees for processing
unitization revisions based on its assessment of the bureau's direct
and indirect costs. Typically, seven BSEE positions, ranging in grades
from GS-5 through GS-15, spend between 6.6 and 29.7 hours processing
unitization revisions impacting exhibits A and B, while six BSEE
positions spend between 8.5 to 71.9 hours processing unitization
revisions impacting exhibit C. As is the case with the existing DWOP
fee, the existing $896 fee for processing unitization revisions does
not account for the special pay that many BSEE employees receive for
reviewing and approving these documents and the higher indirect cost
ratio. Based on its assessment, BSEE proposes a $1,683 fee for
processing a unitization revision related to exhibits A and B and a
$3,255 fee for processing a unitization revision related to exhibit C
in 250.125(a)(28)(i) and (ii).
3. BSEE is also proposing to reduce some existing fees based on its
assessment of the bureau's full costs to process applications and
requests. For example, BSEE's assessment indicated that five BSEE
employees, ranging in grades from GS-5 through GS-14, will spend
between 5.8 and 12.5 hours processing an application for a minor lease
term pipeline modification, resulting in $651 in full bureau costs.
Since the existing fee of $2,056 was established, efficiencies have
resulted in lower costs to process applications and requests (e.g., a
technician now performs certain steps in the process previously
performed by an engineer). Based on this assessment, BSEE proposes to
subdivide and reduce the existing fee for processing both major and
minor applications for lease term pipeline modifications in Sec.
250.125(a)(16)(i).
C. Request for Comments on Potential Future Fees
Due to the large number of revised applications received by BSEE
and the associated costs to BSEE to process them, BSEE is currently
evaluating the need for additional fees for revised applications for
permits to drill (R-APD) and revised applications for permits to modify
(R-APM). Accordingly, BSEE requests comments on whether separate fee
levels for R-APD and R-APM should be proposed in a future rulemaking.
BSEE also requests comments on the factors that should be the basis for
determining the separate fee levels for R-APDs and R-APMs (e.g.,
complexity, water depth, etc.).
II. Procedural Matters
Regulatory Planning and Review (Executive Orders (E.O.) 12866 and
13563)
E.O. 12866 provides that OMB, Office of Information and Regulatory
Affairs (OIRA), will review all significant rules. BSEE has determined
that this proposed rule is not a significant regulatory action as
defined by section 3(f) of E.O. 12866 because:
--It is not expected to have an annual effect on the economy of $100
million or more;
--It would not adversely affect in a material way the economy,
productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public health or
safety, or State, local, or tribal governments or communities;
--It would not create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere
with an action taken or planned by another agency;
--It would not alter the budgetary impact of entitlements, grants, user
fees, or loan programs, or the rights or obligations of their
recipients; and
--It would not raise novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal
mandates, the President's priorities, or the principles set forth in
E.O. 12866.
Accordingly, BSEE has not prepared an economic analysis, and OIRA
has not reviewed this proposed rule.
E.O. 13563 reaffirms the principles of E.O. 12866 while calling for
improvements in the Nation's regulatory system to promote
predictability, to reduce uncertainty, and to use the best, most
innovative, and least burdensome tools for achieving regulatory ends.
E.O. 13563 directs agencies to consider regulatory approaches that
reduce burdens and maintain flexibility and freedom of choice for the
public where these approaches are relevant, feasible, and consistent
with regulatory objectives. It also emphasizes that regulations must be
based on the best available science and that the rulemaking process
must allow for public participation and an open exchange of ideas. BSEE
is developing this rule in a manner consistent with these requirements.
[[Page 81040]]
Regulatory Flexibility Act
The DOI certifies that this proposed rule would not have a
significant economic effect on a substantial number of small entities
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq. (RFA). The
RFA, at 5 U.S.C. 603, requires agencies to prepare an initial
regulatory flexibility analysis to determine whether a regulation would
have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities. Further, under the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996, at section 212 of Public Law 104-121 (March 29,
1996), an agency is required to produce compliance guidance for small
entities if the rule would have a significant economic impact.
The Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis prepared by BSEE
assessed the impact of this proposed rule on small entities, as defined
by the applicable Small Business Administration (SBA) size standards.
BSEE has determined that this proposed rule potentially affects
operators and holders of Federal oil and gas leases, as well as right-
of-way holders, on the OCS. This includes an estimated 99 businesses
with active operations. Businesses that operate under this rule fall
under the SBA's North American Industry Classification System (NAICS)
codes 211111 (Crude Petroleum and Natural Gas Extraction) and 213111
(Drilling Oil and Gas Wells). For these NAICS classifications, a small
business is defined as one with fewer than 1,251 employees (for NAICS
211111) and fewer than 1,001 (for NAICS 213111). Based on these
criteria, 54 of the potentially impacted businesses are considered
small and 45 are considered large businesses. BSEE considers that a
rule has an impact on a ``substantial number of small entities'' when
the total number of small entities impacted by the rule is equal to or
exceeds 10 percent of the relevant universe of impacted entities.
Approximately 55% of the businesses that would be affected by this rule
are considered small; therefore, BSEE has determined that this rule
would impact a substantial number of small businesses under the RFA.
BSEE's analysis estimates the incremental costs for small
operators, lease holders, and right-of-way holders in the offshore oil
and natural gas industry. Costs already incurred as a result of
existing fees were not considered as costs of this proposed rule
because they are part of the baseline. Among the 54 small businesses
involved in offshore operations, the average annual corporate sales
volume, from the latest available data, for the year 2014, is $186
million, which is approximately $192 million in 2016 dollars.
The following ``Change in Cost per Small Entity'' table provides an
analysis and derivation of the estimated average cost, per small firm,
that would be incurred per year as a result of the proposed rule. The
first column of the table displays the list of services provided, as
they appeared earlier in the Service Fee Table. The second column
displays an estimate of the total counts of these services expected
over the three fiscal year period 2016-2018. The third and fourth
columns show the existing fee, and the proposed fee, respectively, for
each service provided. The fifth column then displays, for each
service, the expected change in total costs over the three-year period,
on the basis of the data in the previous columns (the change in fees
and the counts of services). The sixth column reflects the estimated
proportion of the change in cost per small firm based on BSEE's data
regarding counts of services across firms from FY 2013 to FY 2015.
Finally, the seventh column reflects the estimated change in cost per
small firm per fiscal year, by taking the annualized product of columns
five and six. The estimated additional costs of the proposed rule from
service fee changes totals approximately $8,875 per small firm per
year, or an estimated 0.0046 percent of an average small business's
sales.
Change in Cost per Small Entity by Proposed Rule Provision \1\
[Negatives in parentheses]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Estimated
(Est.) total Change in Est.
counts for all Existing fee Proposed fee total cost for proportion of Est. change in
Service provided operators in per incidence per incidence all firms in cost per small cost per small
FY 2016- FY FY 2016- FY firm firm, per FY
2018 2018
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1 Suspension of Operations/Suspension of Production (SOO/ 468 $2,123 $3,055 $436,176 0.0085 $1,235
SOP) Request...........................................
2a Deepwater Operations Plan--Simple.................... 19 3,599 14,290 203,129 0.0074 502
2b Deepwater Operations Plan--Complex................... 11 3,599 70,333 734,074 0.0074 1,813
3 Application for Permit to Drill (APD; Form BSEE-0123). 244 2,113 10,420 2,026,908 0.0082 5,544
4 Application for Permit to Modify (APM; Form BSEE-0124) 540 125 1,680 839,700 0.0094 2,622
5 New Facility Production Safety System Application for 3 5,426 3,976 (4,350) 0.0085 (12)
facility with more than 125 components.................
Pre-Production inspection Facility Offshore............ 3 14,280 13,534 (2,238) 0.0085 (6)
Pre-Production inspection Facility in a Shipyard....... 3 7,426 14,567 21,423 0.0085 61
6 New Facility Production Safety System Application for 12 1,314 548 (9,192) 0.0085 (26)
facility with 25-125 components........................
Pre-Production inspection Facility Offshore............ 3 8,967 8,508 (1,377) 0.0085 (4)
Pre-Production inspection Facility in a Shipyard....... 3 5,141 9,818 14,031 0.0085 40
[[Page 81041]]
7 New Facility Production Safety System Application for 29 652 463 (5,481) 0.0085 (15)
facility with fewer than 25 components.................
Pre-Production inspection Facility Offshore............ 3 .............. 4,338 13,014 0.0085 37
Pre-Production inspection Facility in a Shipyard....... 3 .............. 1,967 5,901 0.0085 17
8 Production Safety System Application--Modification 404 605 1,278 271,892 0.0085 768
with more than 125 components reviewed.................
Pre-Production inspection Facility Offshore............ 3 .............. 9,313 27,939 0.0085 79
Pre-Production inspection Facility in a Shipyard....... 3 .............. 8,100 24,300 0.0085 69
9 Production Safety System Application--Modification 1,424 217 439 316,128 0.0085 893
with 25-125 components reviewed........................
Pre-Production inspection Facility Offshore............ 3 .............. 6,765 20,295 0.0085 57
Pre-Production inspection Facility in a Shipyard....... 3 .............. 7,326 21,978 0.0085 62
10 Production Safety System Application--Modification 880 92 386 258,720 0.0085 731
with fewer than 25 components reviewed.................
Pre-Production inspection Facility Offshore............ 3 .............. 4,513 13,539 0.0085 38
Pre-Production inspection Facility in a Shipyard....... 3 .............. 2,141 6,423 0.0085 18
11 Platform Application--Installation--Under the 5 22,734 28,311 27,885 0.0111 103
Platform Verification Program..........................
12 Platform Application--Installation--Fixed Structure 27 3,256 1,914 (36,234) 0.0106 (128)
Under the Platform Approval Program....................
13 Platform Application--Installation--Caisson/Well 41 1,657 1,914 10,537 0.0126 44
Protector..............................................
14 Platform Application--Modification/Repair............ 108 3,884 1,975 (206,172) 0.0075 (514)
15a New Pipeline Application (Lease Term)--Shallow water 12 3,541 1,584 (23,484) 0.0038 (30)
(less than 1000 ft.)...................................
15b New Pipeline Application (Lease Term)--Deepwater 369 3,541 3,663 45,018 0.0038 58
(greater than 1000 ft.)................................
16a Pipeline Application--Modification (Lease Term)-- 361 2,056 651 (507,205) 0.0040 (673)
Minor..................................................
16b Pipeline Application--Modification (Lease Term)-- 11 2,056 1,696 (3,960) 0.0040 (5)
Major..................................................
17a Pipeline Application--Modification (ROW)--Minor..... 631 4,169 455 (2,343,534) 0.0083 (6,462)
17b Pipeline Application--Modification (ROW)--Major..... 21 4,169 1,800 (49,749) 0.0083 (137)
18 Pipeline Repair Notification......................... 397 388 557 67,093 0.0081 181
19a Pipeline ROW Grant Application--Shallow water (less 121 2,771 1,662 (134,189) 0.0092 (409)
than 1000 ft.).........................................
19b Pipeline ROW Grant Application--Deepwater (greater 77 2,771 3,796 78,925 0.0092 241
than 1000 ft.).........................................
20 Pipeline Conversion of Lease Term to ROW............. 35 236 494 9,030 0.0116 35
21 Pipeline ROW Assignment.............................. 800 201 397 156,800 0.0092 478
22 500 Feet From Lease/Unit Line Production Request..... 69 3,892 5,440 106,812 0.0093 330
23 Gas Cap Production Request........................... 87 4,953 11,962 609,783 0.0035 709
24 Downhole Commingling Request......................... 138 5,779 14,064 1,143,330 0.0048 1,828
25 Complex Surface Commingling and Measurement 164 4,056 8,205 680,436 0.0082 1,863
Application............................................
[[Page 81042]]
26 Simple Surface Commingling and Measurement 251 1,371 3,514 537,893 0.0082 1,473
Application............................................
27 Voluntary Unitization Proposal or Unit Expansion..... 50 12,619 27,288 733,450 0.0021 522
28a Unitization Revision--Exhibit A, Exhibit B, and 154 896 1,683 121,198 0.0076 309
Successor Unit Operator/Suboperator....................
28b Unitization Revision--Exhibit C..................... 21 896 3,255 49,539 0.0076 126
29 Application to Remove a Platform or Other Facility... 687 4,684 2,846 (1,262,706) 0.0089 (3,729)
30 Application to Decommission a Pipeline (Lease Term).. 707 1,142 857 (201,495) 0.0050 (333)
31 Application to Decommission a Pipeline (ROW)......... 503 2,170 980 (598,570) 0.0077 (1,526)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total \2\........................................... .............. .............. .............. .............. .............. 8,874
As a Percent of the Average Sales Revenue of .............. .............. .............. .............. .............. 0.0046
Small Firms ($192 million).....................
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Estimated dollar amounts are in 2016 dollars.
\2\ Numbers may not add up due to rounding.
BSEE has concluded the additional costs of the proposed rule would
impose an insignificant, negligible burden on small entities.
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act
The proposed rule is not a major rule under the Small Business
Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act, 5 U.S.C. 804(2). This proposed
rule:
(a) Would not have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million
or more;
(b) Would not cause a major increase in costs or prices for
consumers, individual industries, Federal, State, or local government
agencies, or geographic regions; and
(c) Would not have significant adverse effects on competition,
employment, investment, productivity, innovation, or the ability of
U.S.-based enterprises to compete with foreign-based enterprises.
The requirements would apply to all entities operating on the Outer
Continental Shelf (OCS) regardless of company designation as a small
business. For more information on costs affecting small businesses, see
the Regulatory Flexibility Act portion of this document.
Your comments are important. The Small Business and Agriculture
Regulatory Enforcement Ombudsman and 10 Regional Fairness Boards were
established to receive comments from small businesses about federal
agency enforcement actions. The Ombudsman will annually evaluate the
enforcement activities and rate each agency's responsiveness to small
business. If you wish to comment on the actions of BSEE, call 1-888-
734-3247. You may comment to the SBA without fear of retaliation.
Allegations of discrimination/retaliation filed with the SBA will be
investigated for appropriate action.
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
This proposed rule would not impose an unfunded mandate on State,
local, or tribal governments or the private sector of more than $100
million per year. The proposed rule would not have a significant or
unique effect on State, local, or tribal governments or the private
sector. Therefore, a statement containing the information required by
the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act, 2 U.S.C. 1501 et seq., is not
required.
Takings Implication Assessment (E.O. 12630)
Under the criteria in E.O. 12630, this proposed rule does not have
significant takings implications. The proposed rule is not a
governmental action capable of interference with constitutionally
protected property rights. Therefore, a Takings Implication Assessment
is not required.
Federalism (E.O. 13132)
Under the criteria in E.O. 13132, this proposed rule does not have
federalism implications. This proposed rule would not substantially and
directly affect the relationship between the Federal and State
governments. To the extent that State and local governments have a role
in OCS activities, this proposed rule would not affect that role. A
federalism assessment is not required.
Civil Justice Reform (E.O. 12988)
This proposed rule complies with the requirements of E.O. 12988.
Specifically, this proposed rule:
(1) Meets the criteria of section 3(a) requiring that all
regulations be reviewed to eliminate errors and ambiguity and be
written to minimize litigation; and
(2) Meets the criteria of section 3(b)(2) requiring that all
regulations be written in clear language and contain clear legal
standards.
Consultation With Indian Tribal Governments (E.O. 13175)
Under the criteria in E.O. 13175 and the Department's tribal
consultation policy, we have evaluated this proposed rule and have
determined that it has no substantial direct effects on federally
recognized Indian tribes, or on the relationship or distribution of
power and responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian
tribes, and that consultation under the Department's tribal
consultation policy is not required.
[[Page 81043]]
Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) of 1995
This proposed rule contains a collection of information that will
be submitted to OMB for review and approval under the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). As part of our
continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent burdens, BSEE
invites the public and other Federal agencies to comment on any aspect
of the non-hour cost burden. If you wish to comment on the information
collection (IC) aspects of this proposed rule, you may send your
comments directly to OMB and send a copy of your comments to the
Regulations and Standards Branch (see the ADDRESSES section of this
proposed rule). Please reference Adjustments to Cost Recovery Fees
Relating to the Regulation of Oil, Gas, and Sulfur Activities on the
Outer Continental Shelf, 1014--NEW, in your comments. BSEE specifically
requests comments concerning: The need for the information, its
practical utility, the accuracy of the agency's burden estimate, and
ways to minimize the burden. You may obtain a copy of the supporting
statement for the new collection of information by contacting the
Bureau's Information Collection Clearance Officer at (703) 787-1607. To
see a copy of the entire IC request (ICR) submitted to OMB, go to
https://www.reginfo.gov (select Information Collection Review, Currently
Under Review).
The PRA provides that an agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a
person is not required to respond to, a collection of information
unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. OMB is
required to make a decision concerning the collection of information
contained in these proposed regulations 30 to 60 days after publication
of this document in the Federal Register. Therefore, a comment to OMB
is best assured of having its full effect if OMB receives it by
December 19, 2016.
The title of the collection of information for this rule is 30 CFR
part 250, Adjustments to Cost Recovery Fees. The proposed regulations
pertain to BSEE updating its 31 cost recovery fees, including
additional fees for site visits if deemed necessary. These proposed
changes are designed to recover the full cost BSEE incurs for providing
these services.
Potential respondents comprise Federal OCS oil, gas, and sulfur
operators and lessees, as well as pipeline ROW holders. Responses to
this collection of information are required to obtain or retain a
benefit and are mandatory. The frequency of response varies depending
upon the requirement. The IC does not include questions of a sensitive
nature. BSEE will protect proprietary information according to the
Freedom of Information Act (5 U.S.C. 552) and DOI's implementing
regulations (43 CFR part 2), 30 CFR 250.197, Data and information to be
made available to the public or for limited inspection, and 30 CFR part
252, OCS Oil and Gas Information Program.
OMB approved the IC burden of the existing 30 CFR part 250
regulations under Control Numbers 1014-0022, Subpart A (84,391 hour
burden, $1,371,458 non-hour cost burden; expiration 8/31/17); 1014-
0024, Subpart B ($39,589 non-hour cost burden; expiration 11/30/2018);
1014-0025 Applications for Permit to Drill ($862,104 non-hour cost
burden, expiration 4/30/2017); 1014-0026, Applications for Permit to
Modify ($361,625 non-hour cost burden, expiration 5/31/2017); 1014-
0003, Subpart H ($323,481 non-hour cost burden; expiration 12/31/2017);
1014-0011, Subpart I, ($392,874 non-hour cost burden, expiration 5/31/
2017); 1014-0016, Subpart J ($1,508,968 non-hour cost burden,
expiration 8/31/2018); 1014-0019, Subpart K ($1,361,176 non-hour cost
burden, expiration 1/31/2019); 1014-0002, Subpart L ($322,479 non-hour
cost burden, expiration 10/31/16); 1014-0015, Subpart M ($138,188 non-
hour cost burden, expiration 12/31/2017); and 1014-0010, Subpart Q
($1,686,396 non-hour cost burden, expiration 10/31/2016), respectively.
If this proposed rule is finalized and codified, the various non-
hour cost burdens and one new hour burden will be removed from this
collection of information and consolidated with their primary
information collection burden under their respective OMB Control
Numbers.
Hour burdens are included in the regulatory requirements of various
OMB-approved ICRs, of which only one is changing and discussed in this
ICR.
Hour Burden Table
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reporting and
Citation 30 CFR 250 recordkeeping Hour burden Average number of Annual burden
requirements annual responses hours
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subpart A
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
125; 126; 292; 1000; 1015; 1303 Cost recovery fees, Cost Recovery Fees and related items 0.
applications, are covered individually throughout
confirmation Part 250
receipts, etc.,
verbal approvals
pertaining to fees.
--------------------------------------
125(c)......................... Request refund, 3 min............ 200 requests..... 10.
including a reason
for the refund,
within 150 days of
the initial payment.
Total...................... ...................... ................. 200 responses.... 10 hours.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
BSEE currently receives approximately $7,000,000 in cost recovery
fees (non-hour cost burdens) annually. This proposed rulemaking would
increase that total by approximately $9,000,000 for a total of
$16,000,000 in cost recovery fees. The following table provides a
breakdown of the non-hour cost burdens for this proposed rulemaking.
[Existing non-hour cost burden/cost recovery fees are in regular
font; proposed non-hour cost burden/cost recovery fees and text are in
italic font; new fees are in bold font]
[[Page 81044]]
Non-Hour Cost Burden Table
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Service/cost Non-hour cost
Citation 30 CFR part 250 recovery fee burdens
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subpart A
------------------------------------------------------------------------
171(e)...................... Suspension of $2,123 x 646
Operations and/or requests =
Suspension of $1,371,458.
Production (SOO/ $3,055 x 646
SOP) Request. requests =
$1,973,530.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subpart B
------------------------------------------------------------------------
292(q)...................... Deepwater Operations $3,599 x 11 plans =
Plan [simple and $39,589.
complex]. $14,290 x 7 simple
DWOPs = $100,030.
$70,333 x 4 complex
DWOPs = $281,332.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Applications for Permit to Drill
------------------------------------------------------------------------
410(d); 513(b); 1617(a)..... Application for $2,113 x 408
Permit to Drill applications =
[initial permit]. $862,104.
$10,420 x 408
applications =
$4,251,360.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Application for Permit to Modify
------------------------------------------------------------------------
465(b); 513(b); 613(b); Application for $125 x 2,893
1618(a); 1704(g). Permit to Modify applications =
[initial permit]. $361,625.
$1,680 x 2,893
applications =
$4,860,240.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subpart H
------------------------------------------------------------------------
842......................... New Facility $5,426 x 1
Production Safety application =
System Application $5,426.
for facility with $3,976 x 1
more than 125 application =
components. $3,976.
Pre-production $14,280 x 1 offshore
Inspection--offshor = $14,280.
e. $13,534 x 1 offshore
= $13,534.
Pre-production $7,426 x 1 shipyard
Inspection--shipyar = $7,426.
d. $14,567 x 1 shipyard
= $14,567.
842......................... New Facility $1,314 x 4
Production Safety applications =
System Application $5,256.
for facility with $548 x 4
25-125 components. applications =
$2,192.
Pre-production $8,967 x 1 offshore
Inspection--offshor visit = $8,967.
e. $8,508 x 1 offshore
visit = $8,508.
Pre-production $5,141 x 1 shipyard
Inspection--shipyar = $5,141.
d. $9,818 x 1 shipyard
= $9,818.
842......................... New Facility $652 x 10
Production Safety applications =
System Application $6,520.
for facility with $463 x 10
fewer than 25 applications =
components. $4,630.
Pre-production $4,338 x 1 offshore
Inspection--offshor visit = $4,338.
e.
Pre-production $1,967 x 1 shipyard
Inspection--shipyar = $1,967.
d.
842......................... Production Safety $605 x 174
System Application-- applications =
Modification with $105,270.
more than 125 $1,278 x 174
components reviewed. applications =
$222,372.
Pre-production $9,313 x 1 shipyard
Inspection--offshor visit = $9,313.
e.
Pre-production $8,100 x 1 shipyard
Inspection--shipyar visit = $8,100.
d.
842......................... Production Safety $217 x 615
System Application-- applications =
Modification with $133,455.
25-125 components $439 x 615
reviewed. applications =
$269,985.
Pre-production $6,765 x 1 offshore
Inspection--offshor = $6,765.
e.
Pre-production $7,326 x 1 shipyard
Inspection--shipyar = $7,326.
d.
842......................... Production Safety $92 x 345
System Application-- applications =
Modification with $31,740.
fewer than 25 $386 x 345
components reviewed. applications =
$133,170.
Pre-production $4,513 x 1 offshore
Inspection--offshor = $4,513.
e.
Pre-production $2,141 x 1 shipyard
Inspection--shipyar = $2,141.
d.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subpart I
------------------------------------------------------------------------
905(l)...................... Platform $22,734 x 3=
Application--Instal $68,202.
lation--Under the $28,311 x 3 =
Platform $84,933.
Verification
Program.
905(l)...................... Platform $3,256 x 12 =
Application--Instal $39,072.
lation--Fixed $1,914 x 12 =
Structure Under the $22,968.
Platform Approval
Program.
905(l)...................... Platform $1,657 x 20 =
Application--Instal $33,140.
lation--Caisson/ $1,914 x 20 =
Well Protector. $38,280.
905(1)...................... Platform $3,884 x 65
Application--Modifi applications =
cation/Repair. $252,460.
$1,975 x 65
applications =
$128,375.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subpart J
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1000(b)..................... Submit application $3,541 x 61 L/T P/L
and all required applications =
information and $216,001.
notices to install
new lease term
pipeline (L/T P/L)..
Submit application $1,584 x 2
and all required applications =
information and $3,168.
notices to modify a
L/T P/L--Shallow
Water (less than
1,000 ft.).
Submit application $3,663 x 59
and all required applications =
information and $216,117.
notices to modify a
L/T P/L--Deepwater
(greater than 1,000
ft.).
[[Page 81045]]
1000(b)..................... Submit application $2,056 x 102 L/T P/L
and all required applications =
information and $209,712.
notices to modify a
L/T P/L.
Submit application $651 x 99 minor
and all required modifications =
information and $64,449.
notices to modify a
L/T P/L--Minor.
Submit application $1,696 x 3 major
and all required modifications =
information and $5,088.
notices to modify a
L/T P/L--Major.
1000(b)..................... Pipeline Application $4,169 x 190
Modification (ROW). applications =
$792,110.
Pipeline Application $455 x 184 minor
Modification (ROW)-- applications =
Minor. $83,720.
Pipeline Application $1,800 x 6 major
Modification (ROW)-- applications =
Major. $10,800.
1008(e)..................... Pipeline Repair $388 x 156 =
Notification. $60,528.
Pipeline Repair $557 x 156
Notification. notifications =
$86,892.
1015(a)..................... Pipeline ROW Grant $2,771 x 62
Application. applications =
$171,802.
Pipeline ROW Grant $1,662 x 38 ROWs in
Application--Shallo shallow water =
w Water (less than $63,156.
1,000 ft.).
Pipeline ROW Grant $3,796 x 24 ROWs in
Application--Deepwa Deepwater =
ter (greater than $91,104.
1,000 ft.).
1015(a)..................... Pipeline Conversion $236 x 15
of Lease Term to applications =
ROW. $3,540.
$494 x 15
applications =
$7,410.
1018(b)..................... Pipeline ROW $201 x 275 P/L ROW
Assignment. requests = $55,275.
$397 x 275 P/L ROW
requests =
$109,175.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subpart K
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1156(a)..................... 500 Feet From Lease/ $3,892 x 20 requests
Unit Line = $77,840.
Production Request.
$5,440 x 20 requests
= $108,800.
1157........................ Gas Cap Production $4,953 x 22 requests
Request. = $108,966.
$11,962 x 22
requests =
$263,164.
1158(a)..................... Downhole Commingling $5,779 x 30 requests
Request. = $173,370.
$14,064 x 30
requests =
$421,920.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subpart L
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1202(a); 1203(b); 1204(a)... Complex Surface $4,056 x 67
Commingling and applications =
Measurement $271,752.
Application.
$8,205 x 67
applications =
$549,735.
1202(a); 1203(b); 1204(a)... Simple Surface $1,371 x 37
Commingling and applications =
Measurement $50,727.
Application.
$3,514 x 37
applications =
$130,018.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subpart M
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1303(d)..................... Voluntary $12,619 x 8 requests
Unitization = $100,952.
Proposal or Unit
Expansion.
$27,288 x 8 requests
=$218,304.
Unitization Revision $896 x 41 revisions
= $36,736.
Unitization $1,683 x 36 Exhibit
Revision--Exhibit A/B = $60,588.
A, Exhibit B, and
Successor Unit
Operator/Sub-
operator.
Unitization $3,255 x 5 Exhibit C
Revision--Exhibit C. = $16,275.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subpart Q
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1727........................ Application to $4,684 x 240
Remove a Platform applications =
or Other Facility. $1,124,160.
$2,846 x 240
applications =
$683,040.
1751(a); 1752(a)............ Application to $1,142 x 213
Decommission a applications =
Pipeline (Lease $243,246.
Term).
$857 x 213
applications =
$182,541.
1751(a); 1752(a)............ Application to $2,170 x 147
Decommission a applications =
Pipeline (ROW). $318,990.
$980 x 147
applications =
$144,060.
NEW NON-HOUR COST BURDEN.... .................... $44,463.
REVISED NON-HOUR COST BURDEN .................... $15,943,324.
-------------------------------------------
TOTAL NEW and Revised .................... $15,987,787.
Non-Hour Cost Burdens.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Although the total new and revised Non-Hour Cost Burdens are
estimated to be $16 million based on 3-year averages of the number of
plans, applications, and permits, due to recent declines in the number
of these submissions, BSEE anticipates that collections will more
closely approximate $11 million in FY 2018.
For further information on this non-hour burden estimation process,
refer to 5 CFR 1320.3(b)(1) and (2), or contact the BSEE Information
Collection Clearance Officer at (703) 787-1607.
[[Page 81046]]
National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969
This proposed rule meets the criteria set forth in 516 Departmental
Manual (DM) 15.4C(1) for a categorical exclusion because it involves
modification of existing regulations, the impacts of which would be
limited to administrative or economic effects with minimal
environmental impacts. BSEE also analyzed this proposed rule to
determine if extraordinary circumstances, set forth in 43 CFR 46.215,
exist that would require BSEE to prepare an environmental assessment or
an environmental impact statement for actions otherwise eligible for a
categorical exclusion. BSEE concluded that this proposed rule does not
trigger any of the criteria for extraordinary circumstances and,
therefore, has not prepared an environmental assessment or an
environmental impact statement.
Data Quality Act
In developing this proposed rule, we did not conduct or use a
study, experiment, or survey requiring peer review under the Data
Quality Act (Pub. L. 106-554 Sec. 515).
Effects on the Nation's Energy Supply (E.O. 13211)
This proposed rule is not a significant energy action under the
definition in E.O. 13211 because:
--It is not a significant regulatory action under E.O. 12866;
--It is not likely to have a significant adverse effect on the supply,
distribution, or use of energy; and
--It has not been designated as a significant energy action by the
Administrator of OIRA.
Clarity of This Regulation
We are required by E.O. 12866, E.O. 12988, E.O. 13563, and by the
Presidential Memorandum of June 1, 1998, to write all rules in plain
language. This means that each rule we publish must:
--Be logically organized;
--Use the active voice to address readers directly;
--Use clear language rather than jargon;
--Be divided into short sections and sentences; and
--Use lists and tables wherever possible.
If you feel that we have not met these requirements, send us
comments by one of the methods listed in the ADDRESSES section. To
better help us revise the rule, your comments should be as specific as
possible. For example, you should tell us the numbers of the sections
or paragraphs that you find unclear, which sections or sentences are
too long, the sections where you feel lists or tables would be useful,
etc.
List of Subjects in 30 CFR Part 250
Administrative practice and procedure, Continental Shelf,
Environmental impact statements, Environmental protection, Government
contracts, Investigations, Oil and gas exploration, Penalties,
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur.
Dated: October 31, 2016.
Amanda C. Leiter,
Acting Assistant Secretary, Land and Minerals Management.
For the reasons stated in the preamble, the Bureau of Safety and
Environmental Enforcement (BSEE) proposes to amend 30 CFR part 250 as
follows:
PART 250--OIL AND GAS AND SULFUR OPERATIONS IN THE OUTER
CONTINENTAL SHELF
0
1. Authority citation for part 250 continues to read as follow:
Authority: 30 U.S.C. 1751; 31 U.S.C. 9701, 33 U.S.C.
1321(j)(1)(C), 43 U.S.C. 1334.
0
2. Revise Sec. 250.125 by:
0
a. Revising the table in paragraph (a) to read as follows;
0
b. Redesignating paragraph (c) as paragraph (d);
0
c. Removing paragraph (b) and adding new paragraphs (b) and (c) to read
as follows:
Sec. 250.125 Service fees.
(a) * * *
Service Fee Table
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Service--processing of the
following: Fee amount 30 CFR citation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) Suspension of Operations/ $3,055........................... Sec. 250.171(e).
Suspension of Production (SOO/SOP)
Request.
(2) Deepwater Operations Plan:
(i) Deepwater Operations Plan-- $14,290.......................... Sec. 250.292(q).
Simple.
(ii) Deepwater Operations Plan-- $70,333..........................
Complex (New Technology).
(3) Application for Permit to Drill $10,420.......................... Sec. 250.410(d); Sec. 250.513(b);
(APD; Form BSEE-0123). Sec. 250.1617(a).
(4) Application for Permit to $1,680........................... Sec. 250.465(b); Sec. 250.513(b);
Modify (APM; Form BSEE-0124). Sec. 250.613(b); Sec. 250.1618(a);
Sec. 250.1704(g).
(5) New Facility Production Safety $3,976 $13,534 additional fee
System Application for Facility will be charged if BSEE conducts
with More than 125 Components. a pre-production inspection of a
facility offshore, and $14,567
for an inspection of a facility
while in a shipyard.
A component is a piece of
equipment or an ancillary system
that is protected by one or more
of the safety devices required
by API RP 14C (as incorporated
by reference in Sec. 250.198).
(6) New Facility Production Safety $548 $8,508 additional fee will Sec. 250.842.
System Application for Facility be charged if BSEE conducts a
with 25-125 Components. pre-production inspection of a
facility offshore, and $9,818
for an inspection of a facility
while in a shipyard.
(7) New Facility Production Safety $463 $4,338 additional fee will Sec. 250.842.
System Application for Facility be charged if BSEE conducts a
with Fewer than 25 Components. pre-production inspection of a
facility offshore, and $1,967
for an inspection of a facility
while in a shipyard.
[[Page 81047]]
(8) Production Safety System $1,278 $9,313 additional fee will Sec. 250.842.
Application--Modification with be charged if BSEE conducts a
More than 125 Components Reviewed. pre-production inspection of a
facility offshore, and $8,100
for an inspection of a facility
while in a shipyard.
(9) Production Safety System $439 $6,765 additional fee will Sec. 250.842.
Application--Modification with 25- be charged if BSEE conducts a
125 Components Reviewed. pre-production inspection of a
facility offshore, and $7,326
for an inspection of a facility
while in a shipyard.
(10) Production Safety System $386 $4,513 additional fee will Sec. 250.842.
Application--Modification with be charged if BSEE conducts a
Fewer than 25 Components Reviewed. pre-production inspection of a
facility offshore, and $2,141
for an inspection of a facility
while in a shipyard.
(11) Platform Application-- $28,311.......................... Sec. 250.905(l).
Installation--Under the Platform
Verification Program.
(12) Platform Application-- $1,914........................... Sec. 250.905(l).
Installation--Fixed Structure
Under the Platform Approval
Program.
(13) Platform Application-- $1,914........................... Sec. 250.905(l).
Installation--Caisson/Well
Protector.
(14) Platform Application-- $1,975........................... Sec. 250.905(l).
Modification/Repair.
(15) New Pipeline Application
(Lease Term):
(i) New Pipeline Application $1,584........................... Sec. 250.1000(b).
(Lease Term)--Shallow Water
(less than 1,000 ft.).
(ii) New Pipeline Application $3,663
(Lease Term)--Deepwater
(greater than 1,000 ft.).
(16) Pipeline Application--
Modification (Lease Term):
(i) Pipeline Application-- $651............................. Sec. 250.1000(b).
Modification (Lease Term)--
Minor.
(ii) Pipeline Application-- $1,696
Modification (Lease Term)--
Major.
(17) Pipeline Application--
Modification Right-of-Way (ROW):
(i) Pipeline Application-- $455............................. Sec. 250.1000(b).
Modification (ROW)--Minor.
(ii) Pipeline Application-- $1,800
Modification (ROW)--Major.
(18) Pipeline Repair Notification.. $557............................. Sec. 250.1008(e).
(19) Pipeline ROW Grant
Application:
(i) Pipeline ROW Grant $1,662........................... Sec. 250.1015(a).
Application--Shallow Water
(less than 1,000 ft.).
(ii) Pipeline ROW Grant $3,796
Application--Deepwater
(greater than 1,000 ft.).
(20) Pipeline Conversion of Lease $494............................. Sec. 250.1015(a).
Term to ROW.
(21) Pipeline ROW Assignment....... $397............................. Sec. 250.1018(b).
(22) 500 Feet From Lease/Unit Line $5,440........................... Sec. 250.1156(a).
Production Request.
(23) Gas Cap Production Request.... $11,962.......................... Sec. 250.1157.
(24) Downhole Commingling Request.. $14,064.......................... Sec. 250.1158(a).
(25) Complex Surface Commingling $8,205........................... Sec. 250.1202(a); Sec. 250.1203(b);
and Measurement Application. Sec. 250.1204(a).
(26) Simple Surface Commingling and $3,514........................... Sec. 250.1202(a); Sec. 250.1203(b);
Measurement Application. Sec. 250.1204(a).
(27) Voluntary Unitization Proposal $27,288.......................... Sec. 250.1303(d).
or Unit Expansion.
(28) Unitization Revision:
(i) Unitization Revision-- $1,683........................... Sec. 250.1303(d).
Exhibit A, Exhibit B, and
Successor Unit Operator/Sub-
operator.
(ii) Unitization Revision-- $3,225...........................
Exhibit C.
(29) Application to Remove a $2,846........................... Sec. 250.1727.
Platform or Other Facility.
(30) Application to Decommission a $857............................. Sec. 250.1751(a) or Sec.
Pipeline (Lease Term). 250.1752(a).
(31) Application to Decommission a $980............................. Sec. 250.1751(a) or Sec.
Pipeline (ROW). 250.1752(a).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(b) Fees specified in paragraph (a) must be paid electronically
using one of the methods required by Sec. 250.126. Proof of payment of
the fees listed in paragraph (a) must accompany the submission of the
application or other request for service. Once a fee is paid, it is
nonrefundable, except as provided in paragraph (c). If your application
is returned to you as incomplete, you are not required to submit a new
fee with the amended application.
[[Page 81048]]
(c) BSEE will issue a refund in certain situations.
(1) You are eligible for a refund if you submit:
(i) More than one payment with a single request;
(ii) An incorrect fee or fee amount; or
(iii) A payment without submitting any application or other request
and the matter does not proceed further.
(2) If you meet the criteria for a refund, you must submit a
completed Refund Request form, which can be found at https://www.bsee.gov/About-BSEE/Fees-for-Services/. On the Refund Request form,
in the ``*Memo (reason requesting refund)'' section, you must list the
reason for the refund. You must use the information from your original
proof of payment to prepare your refund request.
(3) You must submit all refund requests to BSEE within 150 days of
the initial service fee payment. If you do not submit your request
within the 150-day timeframe, BSEE will not issue a refund.
(4) If you have any questions pertaining to refund eligibility or
to the preparation of the refund request, contact the appropriate
Regional Office.
* * * * *
0
3. Revise Sec. 250.126 to read as follows:
Sec. 250.126 Electronic payment instructions.
(a) You must file all payments under any provision of this part
electronically, as provided in paragraphs (a)(1) or (a)(2) of this
section.
(1) If you submit an application through the eWell Web site at
https://ewell.bsee.gov/ewell/, you must use the interactive payment
feature in that system, which directs you through pay.gov to make a
payment. A copy of your pay.gov payment confirmation or pay.gov receipt
serves as proof of your payment.
(2) For applications not submitted through eWell, you may make a
payment through the Fees for Services page on the BSEE Web site at
https://www.bsee.gov/About-BSEE/Fees-for-Services/ or directly through
the pay.gov Web site. A copy of your pay.gov payment confirmation or
pay.gov receipt serves as proof of your payment and must accompany the
submission of the application or other request for service.
(b) Payments at or below the current U.S. Treasury credit card
limit may be made using a credit card or through the automated clearing
house (ACH-debit). Payments above the current U.S. Treasury credit card
limit must be made through ACH-debit.
(c) BSEE does not accept wire transfer electronic payments.
0
4. In Sec. 250.292, revise paragraph (q) to read as follows:
Sec. 250.292 What must the DWOP contain?
* * * * *
(q) Payment of the service fee listed in Sec. 250.125. The service
fee is divided into two levels based on the complexity of the plan, as
shown in the following table.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Application type Description
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) Complex plans................. Plans containing:
i. ``new or unusual technology'' as
defined by Sec. 250.200 and such
technology:
A. requires a high degree of
specialized knowledge;
B. exceeds the limits of existing
engineering standards;
C. conflicts with existing
engineering standards; or
D. warrants an additional level
of review due to the risk
associated with implementation.
ii. installation of a new floating
production facility.
(2) Simple plans.................. All other plans.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
0
5. Revise Sec. 250.1000 by:
0
a. Redesignating paragraphs (c) through (e) as paragraphs (e) through
(g); and
0
b. Adding new paragraphs (c) and (d) to read as follows:
Sec. 250.1000 General requirements
* * * * *
(c) The service fee for a New Pipeline Application (Lease Term) is
divided into two levels based on water depth, as shown in the following
table:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Application type Description
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) Shallow water applications.... Applications for new lease term
pipelines that will be located in
their entirety within water depths
of 1,000 feet or less.
(2) Deepwater applications........ Applications for new lease term
pipelines, any portion of which
will be located in water depths
greater than 1,000 feet.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(d) The service fee for a Pipeline Application--Modification (Lease
Term) and a Pipeline Application--Modification (Right-of-way) are
divided into two levels based on complexity, as shown in the following
table:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Application type Description
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) Major Applications............ Applications containing a route
modification.
(2) Minor Applications............ All other applications.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
0
6. In Sec. 250.1015, revise paragraph (a) to read as follows:
Sec. 250.1015 Applications for pipeline right-of-way grants
(a) You must submit to the Regional Supervisor an original and
three copies of an application for a new or modified pipeline ROW
grant. The application must address those items required by Sec. Sec.
250.1007(a) or (b) of this subpart, as applicable. It must also state
the primary purpose for which you will use the ROW grant. If the ROW
has been used before the application is made, the application must
state the date such use began, by whom, and the date the applicant
obtained control of the ROW. When you file your application, you must
pay the rental required under Sec. 250.1012 of this subpart, as well
as the
[[Page 81049]]
service fees listed in Sec. 250.125 of this part for a pipeline ROW
grant to install a new pipeline, or to convert an existing lease term
pipeline into an ROW pipeline. An application to modify an approved ROW
grant must be accompanied by the additional rental required under Sec.
250.1012, if applicable. You must file a separate application for each
ROW. The service fee for a pipeline ROW grant application is divided
into two levels based on water depth, as shown in the following table:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Application type Description
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) Shallow water applications.... Applications for a pipeline ROW
grant for pipelines that will be
located in their entirety within
water depths of 1,000 feet or less.
(2) Deepwater applications........ Applications for a pipeline ROW
grant for pipelines, any portion of
which will be located in water
depths greater than 1,000 feet.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
0
7. In Sec. 250.1303, revise paragraph (d) to read as follows:
Sec. 250.1303 How do I apply for voluntary unitization?
* * * * *
(d) You must pay the service fee listed in Sec. 250.125 of this
part with your request for a voluntary unitization proposal or the
expansion of a previously approved voluntary unit to include additional
acreage. Additionally, you must pay the service fee listed in Sec.
250.125 with your request for unitization revision. The service fee for
a request for unitization revision is divided into two levels, as shown
in the following table:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Application type Description
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) Exhibits A and B.............. Applications for revisions to
Exhibit A and/or Exhibit B or
designation of Successor Unit
Operators and/or Successor Unit Sub-
operators.
(2) Exhibit C..................... Applications for revisions to
Exhibit C.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[FR Doc. 2016-27500 Filed 11-16-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-VH-P
