[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 75 (Tuesday, April 20, 1999)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 19318-19326]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 99-9683]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Minerals Management Service

30 CFR Part 250

RIN 1010-AC41


Training of Lessee and Contractor Employees Engaged in Oil and 
Gas and Sulphur Operations in the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS)

AGENCY: Minerals Management Service (MMS), Interior.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: This proposed rule would amend our regulations governing 
training of lessee employees engaged in oil and gas and sulphur 
operations in the OCS. We are proposing to establish a performance-
based training system that would:
     Lead to safer and cleaner OCS operations;
     Allow the development of new and innovative training 
techniques;
     Impose fewer prescriptive requirements on the oil and gas 
industry; and
     Provide increased training flexibility.

DATES: We will consider all comments received by July 19, 1999. We will 
begin reviewing comments then and may not fully consider comments we 
receive after July 19, 1999.

ADDRESSES: If you wish to comment, you may mail or hand-carry comments 
(three copies) to the Department of the Interior; Minerals Management 
Service; Mail Stop 4024; 381 Elden Street; Herndon, Virginia 20170-
4817; Attention: Rules Processing Team.
    Our practice is to make comments, including names and home 
addresses of respondents, available for public review during regular 
business hours. Individual respondents may request that we withhold 
their home address from the rulemaking record, which we will honor to 
the extent allowable by law. There may be circumstances in which we 
would withhold from the rulemaking record a respondent's identity, as 
allowable by the law. If you wish us to withhold your name and/or 
address, you must state this prominently at the beginning of your 
comment. However, we will not consider anonymous comments. We will make 
all submissions from organizations or businesses, and from individuals 
identifying themselves as representatives or officials of organizations 
or businesses, available for public inspection in their entirety.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Wilbon Rhome, Industrial Specialist, 
or Joseph Levine, Chief, Operations Analysis Branch, at (703) 787-1600 
or FAX (703) 787-1093.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On February 5, 1997, we published a final 
rule in the Federal Register (62 FR 5320) concerning the training of 
lessee and contractor employees engaged in drilling, well completion, 
well workover, well servicing, or production safety system operations 
in the OCS. The final rule streamlined the regulations by 80 percent, 
provided the flexibility to use alternative training methods, and 
simplified the training options at 30 CFR Part 250, Subpart O--
Training.
    The February 5, 1997, final rule did not sufficiently address 
developing a performance-based training system. This proposed rule 
retains some elements of our existing training program related to 
identifying minimum required training elements and affords lessees the 
flexibility to design a performance-based training plan and to ensure 
that their contractors are in compliance with such a plan.
    On June 10, 1997, we conducted a public workshop in Houston, Texas, 
to get information pertinent to a revision of the February 5, 1997, 
Subpart O--Training regulation. The purpose of this workshop was to 
discuss the development of a performance-based training system for OCS 
oil and gas activities. In the April 4, 1997, Federal Register notice 
(62 FR 18070) announcing the workshop, we stated that the goal of the 
meeting was to develop a procedure which ensures that lessee and 
contractor employees are trained in well control or production safety 
system operations by creating a less prescriptive training program 
focusing on results and not on processes.
    To improve the regulations at 30 CFR Part 250, Subpart O--Training, 
the

[[Page 19319]]

workshop notice asked attendees to be prepared to present and discuss 
comments on the following four performance measures and indicators 
which could be used as part of a performance-based program:
     MMS Written Test: We may test lessee or contractor 
employees. We may give announced or unannounced written tests at a 
training site, office, or work location.
     MMS Simulator and Hands-On Testing: We may conduct 
production safety system equipment hands-on testing or well-control 
simulator testing of lessee or contractor employees. We may give 
announced or unannounced tests at a training site, office, or work 
location.
     Audits, Interviews or Cooperative Reviews: We may meet 
with lessee or contractor employees periodically to determine the 
effectiveness of their training program. These announced or unannounced 
meetings may include an evaluation of training documents, procedures, 
or interviews of key personnel.
     Incident of Noncompliance (INC), Civil Penalty, and Event 
Data: We may analyze the performance of a lessee by evaluation of INC, 
civil penalty, and event data. Event data includes information dealing 
with spills, fires, explosions, blowouts, fatalities, collisions, and 
injuries. As part of this evaluation, we may analyze the data in 
relation to the following:

--Number of facilities (platform/rig) operated by a company;
--Production volumes of an operator;
--Location of activity; or
--Frequency of events.

    The notice also encouraged the public to suggest other viable 
performance measures or indicators for us to consider for a 
performance-based training program. Workshop participants suggested no 
new measures or indicators.
    Approximately 150 people attended the workshop, representing a 
diverse cross section of the oil and gas industry. Most of the 
attendees were associated with major and independent oil and gas 
producing companies. There was no significant participation from 
contractors. Representatives from 12 of the 55 MMS-accredited training 
schools attended the workshop.
    We discussed industry views concerning a performance-based training 
program and gathered comments. Some commenters favored the development 
of a performance-based training system while others suggested that the 
current system be modified to provide added flexibility. Another group 
of commenters favored the development of a dual training system 
incorporating elements from both a performance-based program and MMS's 
current system. This proposal would allow individual companies to 
collect performance measures data, and to petition us for alternative 
compliance to Subpart O. The petition would include a company's 
individual performance measures versus industry averages and ranges, 
and information on a company's individual training program. If we 
approved a company's petition, then it would implement its own program 
instead of complying with existing Subpart O requirements. Companies 
that do not petition us to use alternative compliance methods, or have 
their petition denied, would continue implementing current Subpart O 
regulations.
    We believe that the proposed rule retains critical safety elements 
from the current system and provides added flexibility by allowing 
lessees to develop training programs in a performance-based 
environment. Under the proposal, lessees, not MMS, will be responsible 
for ensuring that personnel employed at their facilities are trained 
and competent. We intend to focus our resources on evaluating lessee 
performance, not on accrediting schools. Lessees wishing to continue 
using an existing school program or develop a new school program to 
train their employees may do so as long as the program meets the 
minimum requirements included in the proposed rule.
    Another issue raised by segments of the oil and gas industry in 
attendance at the workshop was the potential for certain companies to 
neglect training under a performance-based regime. As part of the 
proposed rule, lessees will be required to develop a training plan 
defining their program. Minimum information to be included in the plan 
is listed in this proposed rule. We will monitor company training 
programs to determine their effectiveness. Those lessees performing 
satisfactorily will receive less oversight by the agency, allowing us 
to concentrate on those companies achieving less than satisfactory 
results. Under such a system, companies will not be able to neglect 
training.
    Another issue highlighted at the workshop dealt with a 
recommendation for MMS to use caution when changing from the current 
prescriptive training system to a performance-based system. Workshop 
participants questioned why we were willing to abandon the current 
system, which has been successful, and implement a new program. We 
believe that this proposed training regulation provides companies the 
opportunity to develop their own individual program, tailored to the 
needs of their employees. This flexibility will contribute to the 
development of new and innovative training techniques. We encourage 
such diversity because we feel that its ultimate result is safer and 
cleaner OCS operations.
    Workshop participants also commented on the type of performance 
measures and indicators that we are considering. The participants felt 
that an unannounced written test could cause employees stress that 
would lead to poor performance on the exams. We do not feel that this 
is a valid concern. Although a testing situation may be stressful, the 
employee should be able to answer fundamental questions about 
production safety systems or well control operations. This same 
employee would be expected to respond positively in an actual situation 
where the risks to personnel health, safety, and environmental damage 
are great. We realize that the results of written tests are not always 
indicative of an individual's performance. For that reason, we propose 
to use a variety of performance measures to assess employees' skill and 
safety knowledge relative to their job.
    Certain commenters stated that hands-on simulator testing was an 
excellent and realistic means of gauging performance, while others felt 
that we do not have the necessary expertise or equipment to conduct 
simulator tests. We agree that hands-on testing, using either well-
control simulator technology, interactive computer systems, live well 
testing, or hands-on production safety system testing is an excellent 
means of evaluating an individual's performance. We also agree that we 
do not have the equipment or the expertise to conduct simulator 
testing. For that reason, the proposed rule includes a provision that 
either we or our authorized representative would administer or witness 
the testing if we find it necessary.
    Other commenters stressed the point that all hands-on testing 
should be conducted at onshore facilities and not in an offshore 
environment so it does not interfere with offshore operations. Whenever 
possible, we will try to accommodate this concern. However, under 
certain circumstances it may be appropriate to conduct hands-on testing 
in an offshore environment. Therefore, either onshore or offshore 
testing are viable options for MMS to use in evaluating the performance 
of OCS employees.

[[Page 19320]]

    Other commenters at the workshop stated that many offshore workers 
have difficulty reading regulations or company operating manuals. We 
believe this is a significant issue that should be addressed by 
individual lessees. We also feel that lessees are responsible for 
hiring well qualified and competent workers who should possess the 
ability to read appropriate and necessary information.
    A commenter asked how we would react to a company that does not 
train its employees but has a good safety record as measured by 
appropriate performance measures. The proposed rule requires a company 
to develop a training plan and provide its employees with the necessary 
skills to perform their job. We will periodically evaluate the 
performance of companies relative to their plan to see how well 
employees are being trained. Regardless a of company's safety record, 
if we determine that the company is not training its employees, we will 
initiate appropriate enforcement actions as discussed in the rule.
    Another commenter said that although there is an increase in OCS 
activity, there appears to be a shortage of trained and experienced 
workers. The commenter thought that this is not the right time to move 
towards a performance-based training system. We agree that we are 
seeing a significant upturn in OCS activity and an associated increase 
in the use of inexperienced personnel. However, the proposed changes 
are expected to improve company training programs by holding lessees 
accountable for the competency of their employees. We believe that a 
performance-based system that focuses on results and the ability of 
employees to demonstrate their job skills is preferable to the current 
school certification system.
    To implement this rule, we will periodically assess company 
performance to determine how well its employees are trained. This 
assessment will include implementation of one or more of the following 
techniques: training system audits, employee interviews, written 
testing, and equipment-based hands-on testing. We are seeking input on 
what situations and threshold levels we should use as part of our 
assessment of your training program to trigger the different 
enforcement actions included in this rule. Some specific issues to 
address in your comments should include the following:

--Is there a specific written test score (re: threshold level) we 
should use to signify the competency of an individual?
--If an individual or group of individuals receives a written test 
score below a level determined to signify competency, should we issue 
an INC, conduct a retest, or initiate some other type of enforcement 
action?
--What issues should we focus on when conducting employee interviews? 
How often should these interviews be conducted? What situation(s) 
should trigger MMS to conduct an interview?
--What type of enforcement action should we initiate if during an 
employee interview an employee exhibits only a minimal understanding of 
the employer's training program?
--Are there any situations where we should not allow an employee to 
continue working on the OCS?
--Under what circumstances should we initiate hands-on testing of 
employees?
    We intend to conduct at least one workshop on this proposed 
training rule during the comment period. We will notify you in a 
separate document.

Procedural Matters

Federalism (Executive Order (E.O.) 12612

    In accordance with E.O. 12612, the rule does not have significant 
Federalism implications. A Federalism assessment is not required.

Takings Implications Assessment (E.O. 12630)

    In accordance with E.O. 12630, the rule does not have significant 
Takings Implications. A Takings Implication Assessment is not required.

Regulatory Planning and Review (E.O. 12866)

    This document is a significant rule and is subject to review by the 
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under E.O. 12866.
    (1) This rule will not have an effect of $100 million or more on 
the economy. It will 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. The estimated yearly gross cost to the oil and gas 
industry to train its employees at MMS accredited schools is 
$5,955,000. We feel that the cost of complying with the proposed rule 
would be somewhat less than this amount. Under the proposed rule, the 
oil and gas industry would have flexibility to tailor its training 
program to the specific needs of each company, resulting in lower 
training costs. The rule does not add any new cost to the oil and gas 
industry and it will not reduce the level of safety to personnel or the 
environment.
    (2) This rule will not create a serious inconsistency or otherwise 
interfere with an action taken or planned by another agency.
    (3) This rule does not alter the budgetary effects or entitlements, 
grants, user fees, or loan programs or the rights or obligations of 
their recipients.
    (4) This rule does raise novel legal or policy issues. This is a 
performance-based rule.

Clarity of This Regulation

    E.O. 12866 requires each agency to write regulations that are easy 
to understand. We invite your comments on how to make this proposed 
rule easier to understand, including answers to questions such as the 
following:
    (1) Are the requirements in the rule clearly stated?
    (2) Does the rule contain technical language or jargon that 
interfere with its clarity?
    (3) Does the format of the rule (grouping and order of sections, 
use of headings, paragraphing, etc.) aid or reduce its clarity?
    (4) Would the rule be easier to understand if it were divided into 
more (but shorter) sections?
    (5) Is the description of the rule in the ``Supplementary 
Information'' section of this preamble helpful in understanding the 
rule? What else can we do to make the rule easier to understand?
    Send a copy of any comments on how we could make this rule easier 
to understand to: Office of Regulatory Affairs, Department of the 
Interior, Room 7229, 1849 C Street, NW, Washington, DC 20240. You may 
also e-mail the comments to this address: E[email protected].

Civil Justice Reform (E.O. 12988)

    In accordance with E.O. 12988, the Office of the Solicitor has 
determined that this rule does not unduly burden the judicial system 
and meets the requirements of sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of the Order.

National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)

    This rule does not constitute a major Federal action significantly 
affecting the quality of the human environment. A detailed statement 
under the NEPA of 1969 is not required.

Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) of 1995

    The proposed rule contains a collection of information which has

[[Page 19321]]

been submitted to OMB for review and approval under section 3507(d) of 
the PRA. As part of our continuing effort to reduce paperwork and 
respondent burdens, we invite the public and other Federal agencies to 
comment on any aspect of the reporting and recordkeeping burden. Submit 
your comments to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs; OMB; 
Attention: Desk Officer for the Department of the Interior (OMB control 
number 1010-NEW); 725 17th Street, NW, Washington, DC 20503. Send a 
copy of your comments to the Rules Processing Team, Attn: Comments; 
Mail Stop 4024; Minerals Management Service; 381 Elden Street; Herndon, 
Virginia 20170-4817. 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 (202) 208-7744.
    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 between 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 May 20, 1999. This does not affect the deadline for the 
public to comment to MMS on the proposed regulations.
    The title of the collection of information for this proposed rule 
is ``Proposed Rulemaking, 30 CFR 250, Subpart O--Training'' (OMB 
control number 1010-NEW). Respondents are approximately 130 Federal OCS 
oil and gas or sulphur lessees. The frequency of response is primarily 
``on occasion.'' Responses to this collection of information are 
mandatory. We will protect proprietary information in accordance with 
the Freedom of Information Act and 30 CFR 250.118, ``Data and 
information to be made available to the public.''
    The proposed rule contains the following information collection 
requirements and estimated burdens:
    1. Develop and maintain training plans (average 2.2 hours per 
plan). The burden will be greater during the first year when some 
companies will need to develop plans, but will decrease in subsequent 
years when companies will only have to maintain plans. The burden per 
plan is annualized over a three-year period.
    2. Maintain documentation of employee training activities (average 
5 minutes per training record).
    3. Employee responses to oral interviews conducted by MMS to 
evaluate the effectiveness of the company's training program (10 
minutes per interview).
    4. Revise and submit training plans to correct deficiencies 
identified by MMS (4 hours per revised plan).
    We estimate the total annual reporting and recordkeeping ``hour'' 
burden for the proposed rule to be 2,044 hours. This will reflect a 
decrease of 917 hours when it replaces the collection of information 
approved for the current requirements in 30 CFR 250, Subpart O (1010-
0078).
    We will summarize written responses to this notice and address them 
in the final rule preamble. All comments will become a matter of public 
record.
    1. We specifically solicit comments on the following questions:
    (a) Is the proposed collection of information necessary for MMS to 
properly perform its functions, and will it be useful?
    (b) Are the estimates of the burden hours of the proposed 
collection reasonable?
    (c) Do you have any suggestions that would enhance the quality, 
clarity, or usefulness of the information to be collected?
    (d) Is there a way to minimize the information collection burden on 
those who are to respond, including the use of appropriate automated 
electronic, mechanical, or other forms of information technology?
    2. In addition, the PRA requires agencies to estimate the total 
annual reporting and recordkeeping ``cost'' burden resulting from the 
collection of information. We have not identified any and solicit your 
comments on this item. For reporting and recordkeeping only, your 
response should split the cost estimate into two components: (a) total 
capital and startup cost component, and (b) annual operation, 
maintenance, and purchase of services component. Your estimates should 
consider the costs to generate, maintain, and disclose or provide the 
information. You should describe the methods you use to estimate major 
cost factors, including system and technology acquisition, expected 
useful life of capital equipment, discount rate(s), and the period over 
which you incur costs. Capital and startup costs include, among other 
items, computers and software you purchase to prepare for collecting 
information; monitoring, sampling, drilling, and testing equipment; and 
record storage facilities. Generally, your estimates should not include 
equipment or services purchased: before October 1, 1995; to comply with 
requirements not associated with the information collection; for 
reasons other than to provide information or keep records for the 
Government; or as part of customary and usual business or private 
practices.

Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The Department certifies that this document will 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.). Currently 
there are 55 MMS accredited training schools: we have approved 24 
schools to teach production safety courses, 26 schools to teach well 
control courses, and 5 schools to teach both well control and 
production courses. The training companies best fit under the SIC 8249 
and the criteria for small businesses is $5 million in revenue. Based 
on that criteria, 25 training companies will fall into the small 
business category.
    Although we would no longer be accrediting schools, lessee 
personnel and those hired by the lessee will have to be trained and 
competent in the duties associated with their particular job.
    The training schools that teach a broad range of vocational courses 
in addition to MMS accreditation courses will not be significantly 
affected. Also, schools that teach only MMS accreditation courses and 
provide quality training at a competitive price will continue to 
compete effectively for customers. Based on our experience, the failure 
rate of the schools in the offshore training industry should not change 
significantly under a performance-based program. Under the current 
regulations we maintain a database that tracks training schools 
approved by the agency. Based on information from this database less 
than 2 percent of the training schools approved by MMS go out of 
business each year; under the new rule we expect this to remain the 
same. MMS experience has shown that because of lower overhead and 
competitive pricing, small training schools are just as capable as the 
larger schools at adapting to change. Under this proposal schools will 
have the flexibility to tailor their training programs to accommodate 
the needs of the oil and gas industry. The training industry has been 
requesting this flexibility for years, and this performance-based 
training rule will make that possible.
    We believe these changes will make it easier for small schools to 
market their program at a competitive rate to small contractors who may 
have special needs working in the oil and gas industry. We

[[Page 19322]]

view this is as a positive impact for the training industry.
    Under the proposed rule we will monitor the lessees and hold them 
responsible for ensuring that their employees are trained in a timely 
manner. We believe this will encourage lessees to provide their 
employees training in a more consistent and timely manner, thus 
increasing student enrollment resulting in financial benefits to both 
large and small training schools.
    The oil and gas companies that operate on the OCS are predominately 
in SIC 1311, crude petroleum and natural gas. Under the SIC 1311, 
companies with less than 500 employees are considered small businesses 
and we estimate that 70 percent of the 130 OCS operating companies fall 
into the small business category. Although, these companies may be 
technically ``small,'' they have to be financially strong to operate in 
the marine environment.
    A positive effect for both small and large companies is that they 
will have increased options concerning where to get their training. 
This will change how a company does business. Small businesses 
operating on the OCS will continue to have the option of using a third-
party training organization to train their employees, the same as under 
the current system. These businesses will not be subject to any 
additional training costs or economic burdens as a result of the 
proposed rule.
    Under the proposed rule, the oil and gas industry would have the 
flexibility to tailor its training program to the specific needs of 
each company. Small businesses that operate on the OCS will be 
positively impacted by this proposal. They will be given the added 
flexibility to determine the type of training, methodology (classroom, 
computer, team, on-the-job), length of training, frequency and subject 
matter content for their training program. Since this rule will not 
have a significant effect on small training schools, or small lessees 
working on the OCS, the Department has certified that this rule will 
not have a significant effect on a substantial number of small 
entities.
    Your comments are important. The Small Business and Agriculture 
Regulatory Enforcement Ombudsman and 10 Regional Fairness Boards were 
established to receive comments from small business 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 any enforcement actions, call toll-
free at (888) 734-3247.

Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA)

    This rule is not a major rule under (5 U.S.C. 804(2)), SBREFA. This 
rule:
    (a) Does not have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million 
or more,
    (b) Will not cause a major increase in costs or prices for 
consumers, individual industries, Federal, State, or local government 
agencies, or geographic regions.
    (c) Does not have significant adverse effects on competition, 
employment, investment, productivity, innovation, or ability of U.S.-
based enterprises to compete with foreign-based enterprises.

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995

    DOI has determined and certifies according to the Unfunded Mandates 
Reform Act, 2 U.S.C. 1502 et seq., that this rule will not impose a 
cost of $100 million or more in any given year on State, local, and 
tribal governments, or the private sector.

List of Subjects in 30 CFR Part 250

    Reporting and record-keeping requirements, Sulphur development and 
production, Sulphur exploration, Surety bonds.

    Dated: December 23, 1998.
Sylvia V. Baca,
Acting Assistant Secretary, Land and Minerals Management.

    For the reasons stated in the preamble, Minerals Management Service 
(MMS) proposes to amend 30 CFR part 250 as follows:

PART 250--OIL AND GAS AND SULPHUR OPERATIONS IN THE OUTER 
CONTINENTAL SHELF

    1. The authority citation for part 250 continues to read as 
follows:

    Authority: 43 U.S.C. 1331 et seq.

    2. Subpart O is revised to read as follows:

Subpart O--Training

Sec.
250.1500  Definitions.
250.1501  What is the goal of my training program?
250.1502  What are my general responsibilities for training?
250.1503  What job skills and safety knowledge elements must my 
training cover for well control, production safety systems, and 
other types of training?
250.1504  What well control training must my employees receive?
250.1505  What training must my production safety system employees 
receive?
250.1506  What other types of training must my employees receive?
250.1507  May I use alternative training methods?
250.1508  Where may I get training for my employees?
250.1509  How often must I train my employees?
250.1510  How will MMS measure training results?
250.1511  What must I do when MMS administers written tests?
250.1512  What must I do when MMS administers hands-on, simulator, 
or other types of testing?
250.1513  What will MMS do if my employees are not properly trained?


Sec. 250.1500  Definitions.

    Terms used in this subpart have the following meaning:
    Employee means lessee or contractor employees.
    Floorhand means rotary helpers, derrick-men, or their equivalent.
    I or you means the lessee engaged in oil, gas, or sulphur 
operations in the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS).
    Lessee means a person who has entered into a lease with the United 
States to explore for, develop, and produce the leased minerals. The 
term lessee also includes an owner of operating rights for that lease 
and the MMS-approved assignee of that lease.
    Production safety system employee means employees who install, 
repair, test, maintain, or operate surface or subsurface safety 
devices, as well as the platform employee who oversees production 
operations.
    Supervisor means the driller, tool-pusher, operator's 
representative, or their equivalent.
    Training school means a party who has developed a course to teach 
well-control for drilling, well completion and well workover, well 
servicing, or production safety systems.
    Well completion/well workover means those operations following the 
drilling of a well that are intended to establish production or to 
restore production to a well. For the purpose of this subpart, well 
completion/well workover includes small tubing operations but does not 
include those operations defined as well servicing.
    Well servicing means snubbing and coil tubing operations.


Sec. 250.1501  What is the goal of my training program?

    The goal of your training program is safe and clean OCS operations. 
To accomplish this goal, you must ensure that your employees are 
experienced and competent in their respective work assignments.


Sec. 250.1502  What are my general responsibilities for training?

    (a) You must ensure that your employees are properly trained in the

[[Page 19323]]

job skills and safety knowledge elements for their positions. We regard 
the job skills and safety knowledge elements in this subpart as the 
minimum qualifications OCS workers must have to complete their assigned 
duties safely and in a manner which protects the environment. You may 
expand the knowledge elements as appropriate for particular operations. 
Because you are accountable for the performance of your employees, you 
must focus on training results, regardless of the method or process 
used to train them.
    (b) You must have a training plan which specifies the type, method, 
length, frequency, and content of the training. This plan must include 
at least the following information:
    (1) Training in operating procedures, welding, burning, hot tapping 
practices, safe work practices, emergency response and control 
measures.
    (2) Training and job qualification requirements for each employee's 
position.
    (3) Procedures for maintaining and enhancing job skill 
requirements, including the latest technological advancements.
    (4) Procedures for evaluating contractor personnel.
    (5) Procedures for verifying the skills of employees on a periodic 
basis.
    (6) Recordkeeping and documentation procedures.
    (7) Audit procedures for your training plan.
    (c) You must keep copies of your training plan and documentation 
for each employee for 5 years at the lessee's or contractor's field 
office, Headquarters office, or at another location conveniently 
available to the MMS Regional Supervisor, Field Operations.


Sec. 250.1503  What job skills and safety knowledge elements must my 
training cover for well control, production safety systems, and other 
types of training?

    (a) Employees must receive enough training to ensure competency in 
their assigned duties.
    (b) Employees must receive training in basic safety and 
environmental issues and procedures.
    (c) Employees must receive training in the use of each safety 
device that they will encounter in their normal duties.
    (d) Employees must receive additional training as required by 
Secs. 250.1504 through 250.1506.


Sec. 250.1504  What well control training must my employees receive?

    Employees must receive training in well control knowledge and 
skills as indicated in the following table:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                             Drilling                WC/WO \3\
         Safety knowledge and skill elements         ------------------------------------------------   WS \4\
                                                       Super \1\   Floor \2\     Super       Floor
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(a) Hands-on training in:
    (1) Choke manifold operation....................
    (2) Stand pipe operation........................
    (3) Mud room valves operation...................
(b) Care, handling & characteristics of drilling and
 well completion/well workover fluids...............
(c) Care, handling & characteristics of well
 completion/well workover fluids & packer fluids....
(d) Major causes of uncontrolled fluids from a well
 including:
    (1) Failure to keep the hole full...............
    (2) Swabbing effect.............................
    (3) Loss of circulation.........................
    (4) Insufficient drilling fluid density.........
    (5) Abnormally pressured formations.............
    (6) Effect of too rapidly lowering the pipe in
     the hole.......................................
(e) Importance of & instructions on measuring the
 volume of fluid to fill the hole during trips......
(f) The importance of filling the hole as it relates
 to shallow gas conditions..........................
(g) Filling the tubing & casing with fluid to
 control bottomhole pressure........................
(h) Warning signals that indicate a kick &
 conditions that can lead to a kick.................
(i) Controlling shallow gas kicks and using
 diverters..........................................
(j) At least one bottomhole pressure well control
 method including conditions unique to a surface or
 subsea BOP stack...................................
(k) Installing, operating, maintaining & testing BOP
 & diverter systems.................................
(l) Installing, operating, maintaining & testing BOP
 systems............................................
(m) Government regulations on:
    (1) Emergency shutdown systems..................
    (2) Production safety systems...................
    (3) Drilling procedures.........................
    (4) Wellbore plugging & abandonment.............
    (5) Pollution prevention & waste management.....
    (6) Well completion & well workover requirements
     (Subparts E & F of 30 CFR part 250)............
(n) Procedures & sequential steps used on the
 following pieces of equipment when shutting in a
 well:
    (1) BOP system..................................
    (2) Surface/subsurface safety system............
    (3) Choke manifold..............................
(o) Well control exercises with a simulator,
 interactive computer system or live well suitable
 for modeling well completion/well workover
 operations.........................................
(p) Well control exercises with a simulator,
 interactive computer system or live well suitable
 for modeling drilling operations...................
(q) Instructions & simulator or live well experience
 on organizing & directing a well killing operation.

[[Page 19324]]

 
(r) At least two simulator practice problems
 rotating trainees using teams of three or less
 members............................................
(s) Care, operation, purpose, and installation of
 well control equipment.............................
(t) Limitations of the equipment that may wear or be
 subjected to pressure..............................
(u) Instructions in well control equipment,
 including:
    (1) Surface equipment...........................
    (2) Well completion/well workover, BOP & tree
     equipment......................................
    (3) Downhole tools & tubulars...................
    (4) Tubing hanger, back pressure valve (threaded/
     profile), landing nipples, lock mandrels for
     corresponding nipples & operational procedures
     for each, gas lift equipment & running &
     pulling tools operation........................
    (5) Packers.....................................
(v) Instructions in special tools & systems, such
 as:
    (1) Automatic shutdown systems (control points,
     activator pilots, monitor pilots, control
     manifolds & subsurface systems)................
    (2) Flow string systems (tubing, mandrels &
     nipples, flow couplings, blast joints, &
     sliding sleeves)...............................
    (3) Pumpdown equipment (purpose, applications,
     requirements, surface circulating systems,
     entry loops and tree connection/flange)........
(w) Instructions for detecting entry into abnormally
 pressured formations & warning signals.............
(x) Instructions on well completion/ well control
 problems...........................................
(y) Well control problems during well completion/
 well workover operations including:
    (1) Killing a flow..............................
    (2) Simultaneous drilling & well completion &
     well workover operations on the same platform..
    (3) Killing a producing well....................
    (4) Removing the tree...........................
(z) Calculations on the following:
    (1) Fluid density increases that controls fluid
     flow into the wellbore.........................
    (2) Fluid density to pressure conversion & the
     danger of formation breakdown under the
     pressure caused by a fluid column, especially
     when setting casing in shallow formations......
    (3) Fluid density to pressure conversion & the
     danger of formation breakdown under the
     pressure caused by a fluid column..............
    (4) Equivalent pressures at the casing seat
     depth..........................................
    (5) Drop in pump pressure as fluid density
     increases & the relationship between pump
     pressure, pump rate, & fluid density...........
    (6) Pressure limitations on casings.............
    (7) Hydrostatic pressure & pressure gradients...
(aa) Unusual well control situations, including the
 following:
    (1) Drill pipe is off bottom or out of the hole.
     Work string is off bottom or out of the hole...
    (2) Lost circulation occurs.....................
    (3) Drill pipe is plugged. Work string is
     plugged........................................
    (4) Excessive casing pressure...................
    (5) There is a hole in drill pipe. Hole in the
     work string. Hole in the casing string.........
    (6) Multiple well completion....................
(bb) Special well control problems while drilling
 with a subsea stack including:
    (1) Choke line friction pressure determinations.
    (2) Use of marine risers........................
    (3) Riser collapse..............................
    (4) Removing trapped gas from the BOP stack
     after controlling a well kick..................
    (5) ``U'' tube effect as gas hits the choke line
(cc) Mechanics of various well controlled
 situations, including:
    (1) Gas bubble migration & expansion............
    (2) Bleeding volume from a shut-in well during
     gas migration..................................
    (3) Excessive annular surface pressure..........
    (4) Differences between a gas kick, a salt water
     and/or oil kick................................
    (5) Special well control techniques (such as,
     but not limited to, barite plugs & cement
     plugs).........................................
    (6) Procedures & problems involved when
     experiencing lost circulation..................
    (7) Procedures & problems involved when
     experiencing a kick while working over or
     completing a well including conducting small
     tubing operations in a hydrogen sulfide (H2S)
     environment....................................
    (8) Procedures & problems involved when
     experiencing a kick while drilling in a H2S
     environment....................................
    (9) Procedures & problems involved when
     experiencing a kick while servicing a well
     including snubbing, coil-tubing, and stripping
     & snubbing operations with work string.........

[[Page 19325]]

 
(dd) Reasons for well completion/well workover,
 including:
    (1) Reworking a reservoir to control production.
    (2) Water coning................................
    (3) Completing a new reservoir..................
    (4) Completing multiple reservoirs..............
    (5) Stimulating a reservoir to increase
     production.....................................
    (6) Repairing mechanical failure................
(ee) Methods of preparing a well for entry:
    (1) Using back pressure valves..................
    (2) Using surface & subsurface safety systems...
    (3) Removing the tree & tubing hanger...........
    (4) Installing & testing BOP & wellhead prior to
     removing back pressure valves & tubing plugs...
(ff) Instructions in small tubing units:
    (1) Applications (stimulation operations,
     cleaning out tubing obstructions, plugback, and
     squeeze cementing).............................
    (2) Equipment description (derrick & drawworks,
     small tubing, pumps, weighted fluid facilities,
     and weighted fluids)...........................
    (3) BOP equipment (rams, wellhead connection, &
     check valve)...................................
(gg) Methods for killing a producing well,
 including:
    (1) Bullheading.................................
    (2) Lubricating & bleeding......................
    (3) Coil tubing.................................
    (4) Equipment description (coil tubing, reel,
     injection head, control assembly & injector
     hoist).........................................
    (5) BOP equipment (tree connection or flange,
     rams, injector assembly & circulating system)..
    (6) Snubbing....................................
    (7) Types (rig assist & stand alone)............
    (8) Applications (running & pulling production
     or kill strings, resetting weight on packers,
     fishing for lost wireline tools or parted kill
     strings, circulating cement or fluid
     initiating, flow and cleaning out sand in
     tubing.).......................................
    (9) Equipment (operating mechanism, power
     supply, control assembly & basket, slip
     assembly, mast & counterbalance winch & access
     window)........................................
    (10) BOP equipment (tree connection or flange,
     rams, spool, traveling slips, manifolds,
     auxiliary--full opening safety valve inside
     BOP, maintenance & testing)....................
(hh) The purpose & use of BOP closing units,
 including the following:
    (1) Charging procedures include precharge &
     operating pressure.............................
    (2) Fluid volumes (usable & required)...........
    (3) Fluid pumps.................................
    (4) Maintenance that includes charging fluid &
     inspection procedures..........................
(ii) Instructions on stripping & snubbing operations
 & using the BOP system for working pipe in or out
 of a wellbore under pressure.......................
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Footnotes:
\1\ Super = Supervisor.
\2\ Floor = Floorhand.
\3\ WC/WO = Well Completion and Well Workover.
\4\ WS = Well Servicing.

Sec. 250.1505  What training must my production safety system employees 
receive?

    You must ensure that your employees receive all of the training 
specified in this section.
    (a) You must ensure that your employees understand Government 
regulations related to:
    (1) Pollution prevention and waste management; and
    (2) Requirements for well completion and well workover operations.
    (b) You must give your employees instruction in the following 
(contained in, but not limited to, API RP 14C):
    (1) Failures or malfunctions in systems that cause abnormal 
conditions and the detection of abnormal conditions;
    (2) Primary and secondary protection devices and procedures;
    (3) Safety devices that control undesirable events;
    (4) Safety analysis concepts;
    (5) Safety analysis of each basic production process component; and
    (6) Protection concepts.
    (c) You must give your employees hands-on training on covering, 
installing, operating, repairing, or maintaining the following 
equipment:
    (1) High-low pressure sensors;
    (2) High-low level sensors;
    (3) Combustible gas detectors;
    (4) Pressure relief devices;
    (5) Flowline check valves;
    (6) Surface safety valves;
    (7) Shutdown valves;
    (8) Fire (flame, heat, or smoke) detectors;
    (9) Auxiliary devices (3-way block and bleed valves, time relays, 
3-way snap acting valves, etc.);
    (10) Surface-controlled subsurface safety valves and surface-
control equipment; and
    (11) Subsurface-controlled subsurface safety valves.
    (d) You must give your employees instructions on inspecting, 
testing and maintaining surface and subsurface devices and surface 
control systems for subsurface safety valves.
    (e) You must give your employees instructions in at least one 
safety device

[[Page 19326]]

that illustrates the primary operation principle in each class for 
safety devices:
    (1) Basic operational principles;
    (2) Limits affecting application;
    (3) Problems causing equipment malfunction and how to correct these 
problems;
    (4) A test for proper actuation point and operations;
    (5) Adjustments or calibrations;
    (6) Recording inspection results and malfunctions; and
    (7) Special techniques for installing safety devices.
    (f) You must give your employees instructions on the following 
basic principles and on the logic of the emergency support system:
    (1) Combustible and toxic gas detection system;
    (2) Liquid containment system;
    (3) Fire loop system;
    (4) Other fire detection systems;
    (5) Emergency shutdown system; and
    (6) Subsurface safety valves.


Sec. 250.1506  What other types of training must my employees receive?

    Your employees must receive other training as shown in the 
following table.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Training elements                   Where can you find information on these training elements?
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Operational Hazards.................  MMS approved plans or permits.
Hydrogen Sulfide....................  30 CFR 250.417(g)(1) through (5) Subpart D.
Crane Operation.....................  30 CFR 250.101 (API RP 2D).
Environmental.......................  Lease stipulations and NTLs.
Pollution...........................  30 CFR 254.29(b) and 254.41(c).
Cultural............................  Lease stipulations and NTLs.
Electrical..........................  30 CFR 250.403(d).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sec. 250.1507  May I use alternative training methods?

    You may use alternative training methods. These methods may include 
team, self-paced, hands-on, on-the-job, or computer-based learning.


Sec. 250.1508  Where may I get training for my employees?

    You may get training from any source that meets your employee's job 
qualification requirements. These may include your own training 
programs, private vendors, universities, or government institutions.


Sec. 250.1509  How often must I train my employees?

    You determine the frequency of the training you provide your 
skilled employees. You must train them as often and as much as 
necessary to maintain their job and knowledge qualifications, and to 
keep them current in the latest technological advances and regulatory 
changes.


Sec. 250.1510  How will MMS measure training results?

    (a) MMS may periodically assess your training program to see how 
well your employees are trained.
    (b) To assess your program, MMS may use one of the following 
evaluation methods:
    (1) Training system audit.
    A training system audit may be conducted by MMS personnel and/or 
its authorized representative at your office. You will be asked to 
explain your overall training program. This review may include an 
evaluation of your training plans and/or records.
    (2) Employee interviews.
    MMS may conduct interviews at either onshore or offshore locations 
to determine what type of training your employees have had, when and 
where this training was conducted, and an employee's evaluation of the 
training in relation to his/her specific job.
    (3) Written test.
    MMS personnel and/or its authorized representative may conduct 
testing at either onshore or offshore locations for the purpose of 
evaluating an individual's knowledge of the training elements specified 
in this subpart. Your performance will be evaluated on how your 
employees perform relative to past written tests or compared to the 
written test scores of other companies.
    (4) Hands-on production safety, simulator, or live well testing.
    MMS personnel and/or its authorized representative may conduct 
tests at either onshore or offshore locations. Tests will be designed 
to evaluate the performance of employees in the job skills and safety 
knowledge elements identified in this subpart. You are responsible for 
the costs associated with this testing.


Sec. 250.1511  What must I do when MMS administers written tests?

    If MMS tests your employees at either your worksite or an onshore 
location, you must:
    (a) Allow MMS and/or its authorized representative to administer 
written tests to your employees.
    (b) Identify your employees by current position, years of 
experience in present position, years of total oil field experience, 
and employer's name (e.g., operator, contractor, or sub-contractor 
company name).


Sec. 250.1512  What must I do when MMS requires hands-on, simulator, or 
other types of testing?

    If MMS conducts or requires you to conduct hands-on, simulator, or 
other types of testing, you must:
    (a) Allow MMS and/or its authorized representative to administer or 
witness the testing.
    (b) Identify your employees by current position, years of 
experience in present position, years of total oil field experience, 
and employer's name (e.g., operator, contractor, or sub-contractor 
company name).
    (c) Pay for all costs associated with the testing.


Sec. 250.1513  What will MMS do if my employees are not properly 
trained?

    If MMS determines that you are not training your employees to 
perform their jobs effectively, we may initiate one or more of the 
following enforcement actions:
    (a) Issue an Incident of Noncompliance;
    (b) Require you to revise and submit to MMS your training plan to 
address identified deficiencies;
    (c) Assess civil/criminal penalties; or
    (d) Initiate disqualification procedures.

[FR Doc. 99-9683 Filed 4-19-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-MR-P