[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 177 (Wednesday, September 14, 2022)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 56354-56365]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2022-19462]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement

30 CFR Part 250

[Docket ID: BSEE-2022-0009; EEEE500000 223E1700D2 ET1SF0000.EAQ000]
RIN 1014-AA52


Oil and Gas and Sulfur Operations in the Outer Continental Shelf-
Blowout Preventer Systems and Well Control Revisions

AGENCY: Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement, Interior.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Department of the Interior (DOI or Department), through 
the Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement (BSEE), is proposing 
to revise certain regulatory provisions published in the 2019 final 
well control rule for drilling, workover, completion, and 
decommissioning operations. BSEE is proposing these revisions to 
clarify blowout preventer (BOP) system requirements and to modify 
certain specific BOP equipment capability requirements. This proposed 
rule would provide consistency and clarity to industry regarding the 
BOP equipment and associated operational requirements necessary for 
BSEE review and approval and would further ensure operations are 
conducted safely and in an environmentally responsible manner.

DATES: Send your comments on this proposed rule to BSEE on or before 
November 14, 2022. BSEE may not consider or include in the 
Administrative Record for the final rule comments that we receive after 
the close of the comment period (see DATES) or comments delivered to an 
address other than those listed below (see ADDRESSES).
    Information Collection Requirements: If you wish to comment on the 
information collection requirements in this proposed rule, please note 
that the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) is required to make a 
decision concerning the collection of information contained in this 
proposed rule between 30 and 60 days after publication of this proposed 
rule in the Federal Register. Therefore, comments should be submitted 
to OMB by October 14, 2022. The deadline for comments on the 
information collection burden does not affect the deadline for the 
public to comment to BSEE on the proposed regulations.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments on the rulemaking by any of the 
following methods. Please use the Regulation Identifier Number (RIN) 
1014-AA52 as an identifier in your message.
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. In 
the entry entitled, ``Enter Keyword or ID,'' enter BSEE-2022-0009 then 
click search. Follow the instructions to submit public comments and 
view supporting and related materials available for this rulemaking. 
BSEE may post all submitted comments.
     Mail or hand-carry comments to BSEE: Attention: 
Regulations and Standards Branch, 45600 Woodland Road, VAE-ORP, 
Sterling, VA 20166. Please reference RIN 1014-AA52, ``Oil and Gas and 
Sulfur Operations in the Outer Continental Shelf-Blowout Preventer 
Systems and Well Control Revisions,'' in your comments, and include 
your name and return address.
     Send comments on the information collection in this rule 
to: Interior Desk Officer 1014-0028, Office of Management and Budget; 
202-395-5806 (fax); email: [email protected]. Please send a 
copy to BSEE at [email protected].
    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. For BSEE to withhold from disclosure your 
personal identifying information, you must identify any information 
contained in your comment submittal that, if released, would constitute 
a clearly unwarranted invasion of your personal privacy. You must also 
briefly describe any possible harmful consequence(s) of the disclosure 
of information, such as embarrassment, injury, or other harm. While you 
may request that we withhold your personal identifying information from 
public review, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For questions, contact Kirk Malstrom, 
Regulations and Standards Branch, (202) 258-1518, or by email: 
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Executive Summary

    This rulemaking would revise certain regulatory provisions that 
were published in the 2019 final rule entitled ``Oil and Gas and Sulfur 
Operations in the Outer Continental Shelf-Blowout Preventer Systems and 
Well Control Revisions,'' 84 FR 21908 (May 15, 2019) (2019 WCR). On 
January 20, 2021, the President issued Executive Order (E.O.) 13990 
(Protecting Public Health and the Environment and Restoring Science to 
Tackle the Climate Crisis) and the accompanying ``President's Fact 
Sheet: List of Agency Actions for Review.'' Within the President's Fact 
Sheet, DOI was specifically instructed to review the 2019 WCR to 
evaluate potential revisions to promote and protect public health and 
the environment, among other identified policy goals. This review 
confirmed that the 2019 WCR contains many provisions that help ensure 
that federally regulated outer Continental Shelf (OCS) oil and gas 
operations are conducted safely and in an environmentally responsible 
manner. Therefore, this proposed rule would address only select 
provisions that would further promote the President's policies and 
environmental objectives. At this time, BSEE is proposing a narrowly 
focused rulemaking to address the identified regulatory requirements to 
help improve operations that use a BOP, certain BOP capabilities and 
functionalities, and BSEE oversight of such operations. The proposed 
rule would:
     Clarify BOP system requirements,

[[Page 56355]]

     Remove the option for operators to submit failure data to 
designated third parties,
     Require accreditation of independent third party 
qualifications,
     Establish dual shear ram requirements for surface BOPs on 
existing floating production facilities when an operator replaces an 
entire surface BOP stack,
     Require ROV open functions as originally required in the 
2016 WCR, and
     Require submittal of certain BOP test results if BSEE is 
unable to witness the testing.
    BSEE will continue to evaluate the effectiveness of the 2019 WCR 
and all BSEE regulations for necessary and appropriate rulemakings in 
the future.

Table of Contents

I. Background
    A. BSEE Statutory and Regulatory Authority and Responsibilities
    B. Purpose and Summary of the Rulemaking
II. Section-by-Section Discussion of Proposed Changes
III. Procedural Matters

I. Background

A. BSEE Statutory and Regulatory Authority and Responsibilities

    BSEE's authority for this rule flows from the Outer Continental 
Shelf Lands Act (OCSLA), 43 U.S.C. 1331-1356a. OCSLA, enacted in 1953 
and substantially revised in 1978, authorizes the Secretary of the 
Interior (Secretary) to lease the OCS for mineral development and to 
regulate oil and gas exploration, development, and production 
operations on the OCS. The Secretary has delegated authority to perform 
certain of these functions to BSEE.
    To carry out its responsibilities, BSEE regulates offshore oil and 
gas operations to: enhance the safety of exploration for and 
development of oil and gas on the OCS, ensure that those operations 
protect the environment, and implement advancements in technology. BSEE 
also conducts onsite inspections to assure compliance with regulations, 
lease terms, and approved plans and permits. Detailed information 
concerning BSEE's regulations and guidance to the offshore oil and gas 
industry may be found on BSEE's website at: https://www.bsee.gov/guidance-and-regulations.
    BSEE's regulatory program covers a wide range of OCS facilities and 
activities, including drilling, completion, workover, production, 
pipeline, and decommissioning operations. Drilling, completion, 
workover, and decommissioning operations are types of well operations 
that offshore operators \1\ perform throughout the OCS. This rulemaking 
is applicable to these listed operational activities that involve 
certain BOP operations, capabilities, or functionalities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ BSEE's regulations at 30 CFR part 250 generally apply to ``a 
lessee, the owner or holder of operating rights, a designated 
operator or agent of the lessee(s)'' (30 CFR 250.105 (definition of 
``you'')'' and ``the person actually performing the activity to 
which the requirement applies'' (30 CFR 250.146(c)). For 
convenience, this preamble will refer to these regulated entities as 
``operators'' unless otherwise indicated.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Purpose and Summary of the Rulemaking

    After the Deepwater Horizon incident in 2010, BSEE adopted several 
recommendations from multiple investigation teams to improve the safety 
of offshore operations. Subsequently, BSEE published the 2016 Blowout 
Preventer Systems and Well Control Final Rule on April 29, 2016 (81 FR 
25888) (2016 WCR). The 2016 WCR consolidated the equipment and 
operational requirements for well control into one part of BSEE's 
regulations; enhanced BOP and well design requirements; modified well-
control requirements; and incorporated certain industry technical 
standards. Most of the 2016 WCR provisions became effective on July 28, 
2016.
    Although the 2016 WCR addressed a significant number of issues that 
were identified during the analyses of the Deepwater Horizon incident, 
BSEE recognized that BOP equipment and systems continue to improve and 
that well control processes also evolve. Therefore, after the 2016 WCR 
took effect, BSEE continued to engage with the offshore oil and gas 
industry, Standards Development Organizations (SDOs), and other 
stakeholders. During these engagements, BSEE identified issues, and 
stakeholders expressed a variety of concerns regarding the 
implementation of the 2016 WCR. BSEE completed a review of the 2016 WCR 
and, on May 15, 2019, published the 2019 WCR in the Federal Register 
(84 FR 21908). The 2019 WCR left most of the 2016 WCR unchanged.
    Following publication of the 2019 WCR, BSEE continued to engage 
with stakeholders to gather information to ensure an effective 
implementation of the governing regulatory requirements. The Department 
also identified areas for improvement to specific 2019 WCR provisions. 
Furthermore, on January 20, 2021, the President issued E.O. 13990 
(Protecting Public Health and the Environment and Restoring Science to 
Tackle the Climate Crisis) and the accompanying ``President's Fact 
Sheet: List of Agency Actions for Review.'' Within the President's Fact 
Sheet, DOI was specifically instructed to review the 2019 WCR to 
evaluate potential revisions to promote and protect public health and 
the environment, among other identified policy priorities. The 
Department is proposing a narrowly focused rulemaking to address the 
identified regulatory requirements to help improve operations that use 
a BOP, certain BOP capabilities and functionalities, and BSEE oversight 
of such operations.

II. Section-by-Section Discussion of Proposed Changes

    BSEE is proposing to revise the following regulations:

Subpart G--Well Operations and Equipment

What are the general requirements for BOP systems and system 
components? (Sec.  250.730)

Proposed Revisions to Paragraph (a)
    BSEE proposes to revise the paragraph (a) by modifying the current 
requirement that the ``BOP system must be capable of closing and 
sealing the wellbore in the event of flow due to a kick, including 
under anticipated flowing conditions for the specific well 
conditions,'' to a requirement that the ``BOP system must be capable of 
closing and sealing the wellbore at all times to the well's maximum 
kick tolerance design limits.'' Additional minor, non-substantive 
wording and grammatical changes are proposed for readability to 
accommodate this proposed revision.
     Summary of applicable 2016 WCR provisions:
    In the 2016 WCR, BSEE promulgated a revised final version of Sec.  
250.730(a) requiring the BOP system to be capable of closing and 
sealing the wellbore ``at all times'' under ``anticipated flowing 
conditions for the specific well conditions.''
     Summary of applicable 2019 WCR provisions:
    In the 2019 WCR, BSEE modified these requirements to codify BSEE 
guidance developed in July 2016 based on experience implementing the 
2016 WCR. In that posted guidance, BSEE clarified that the language of 
the 2016 WCR required that ``the BOP system . . . be designed to shut-
in a well that is flowing due to a kick.'' A kick is defined as an 
influx of formation fluids or gas unexpectedly entering the wellbore. 
Flow from a kick represents the most critical and challenging

[[Page 56356]]

circumstances a BOP must address. Accordingly, BSEE considers the 
capacity to close and seal under such conditions to correspond to the 
capacity to close and seal under any conditions. Further, other 
regulations contain requirements to ensure BOP functionality during 
non-kick conditions. For example, the operator must verify the ability 
of the BOP to function during a non-kick event through the regular 
function and pressure testing required by Sec.  250.737. The operator 
also is required to obtain independent third party certification that 
the BOP is designed, tested, and maintained to perform under the 
maximum environmental and operational conditions anticipated to occur 
at the well under Sec.  250.731. In modifying the regulatory language 
in 2019 to more clearly reflect BSEE's original 2016 intent, BSEE did 
not view the revisions as weakening or altering the existing 
requirement that the BOP system must function during all operations.
Explanation of Proposed Revisions to Paragraph (a)
    Based on BSEE's experience with the implementation of these 
regulations, BSEE is proposing revisions to the general introductory 
language to provide additional clarity. Since the 2019 WCR, BSEE 
continues to receive questions and requests for clarity on this current 
provision. Therefore, BSEE determined that further clarification is 
necessary to help reduce any misconceptions or ambiguity. The proposed 
revisions would restore language referencing the BOP system's capacity 
to close and seal the wellbore at all times, while clarifying the 
necessary context of that requirement within the well's maximum kick 
tolerance design. Kick tolerance is defined as the maximum volume of 
gas kick influx that can be safely taken into the well bore and 
circulated out of the well without breaking down the surrounding 
formation. It is used in well design to plan the position of the casing 
shoes and ensures that protecting the formation integrity is an 
integral part of the well barrier design.
    The volume of influx can be directly converted to a loss of 
hydrostatic pressure on the well prior to shut in. This loss of 
pressure in the wellbore is a mechanism for well flow. Simply stated, 
the larger the pressure change the greater the flow rate. The impact of 
the change in pressure is unique to each well condition, e.g., a well 
with prolific exposed formations will have a higher flow rate with the 
same pressure change than a well with a lower permeability. The 
methodology for calculating this flow rate follows similar logic to 
that used in calculating worst case discharge rates, as well as in well 
testing and production change estimations.
    A BOP functions as a mitigation device, designed to backstop other 
prevention mechanisms to keep a well from progressing to a full 
blowout; its purpose is not to halt a full blowout once it has 
commenced. Operators must ensure ram closure time and sealing integrity 
within the operational and mechanical design limits of the well and 
equipment. The anticipated flowrate is used to validate that the BOP 
will function under flowing conditions while maintaining well 
integrity, as clarified in the proposed text. The proposed 
clarifications to paragraph (a) further support and reflect the 
totality of the improved BOP equipment, procedures, and testing, while 
acknowledging the safe and appropriate purpose and function of the BOP, 
to clarify these requirements from the 2016 and 2019 WCRs.
Proposed Revisions to Paragraph (c)
    BSEE proposes to revise paragraph (c) by removing, throughout the 
paragraph, the option for submission of failure reporting to a 
designated third party. BSEE also would revise paragraph (c)(2) to 
ensure that the operator starts a failure investigation and analysis 
within 90 days of the failure instead of within 120 days.
     Summary of applicable 2016 WCR provisions:
    The 2016 WCR first established the process for failure analysis and 
reporting. It required that an investigation and a failure analysis be 
performed within 120 days of the failure to determine the cause of the 
failure. BSEE also required that certain failure reports be sent to 
BSEE headquarters to ensure that emerging trends occurring across 
various Districts and Regions are recognized early and that potentially 
serious issues can be addressed in a coordinated and uniform way 
nationwide.
    BSEE also noted in the 2016 WCR, however, that the U.S. Bureau of 
Transportation Statistics (BTS) had developed (with BSEE's assistance) 
a voluntary near-miss reporting system for OCS facilities and 
operations at www.SafeOCS.gov (SafeOCS). As a result of the publication 
of the 2016 WCR, BSEE started using the BTS system for collecting 
information similar to that collected through failure reporting.
     Summary of applicable 2019 WCR provisions:
    BSEE reevaluated the timeframes set forth in the 2016 WCR for 
performing the investigation and the failure analysis and determined 
that certain operations would not be able to meet the original 
deadlines. For example, investigations of certain failures cannot be 
commenced safely until active operations progress to the point where 
necessary actions--like retrieving a subsea BOP to the surface--can be 
performed safely. Further, BSEE determined that shifting immediately to 
investigation is not essential when the failure relates to a redundant 
component that does not affect required BOP functionality. BSEE also 
recognized that many investigations take a long time and require 
contracting with specialty engineering firms, who are often located 
overseas and whose workload may prohibit immediate analysis, as well as 
transporting components to those firms. Therefore, BSEE revised the 
timeframes to require that operators start their investigation and 
their failure analysis within 120 days of the failure and complete the 
investigation and the failure analysis within 120 days of starting the 
process.
    The 2019 WCR also added provisions allowing BSEE to designate a 
third party to collect failure data and reports on behalf of BSEE and 
to require that failure data and reports be sent to the designated 
third party. These changes in the 2019 WCR codified BSEE guidance on 
the 2016 WCR posted on the BSEE website at https://www.bsee.gov/guidance-and-regulations/regulations/well-control-rule. Based on the 
2019 WCR, BSEE currently is working through BTS, using SafeOCS, as the 
designated third party for receipt of failure reports and data. Reports 
submitted through SafeOCS are collected and analyzed by BTS and 
protected from release under the Confidential Information Protection 
and Statistical Efficiency Act (CIPSEA), which permits BTS to handle 
and store reported information confidentially.\2\ Information submitted 
under this statute also is protected from release to other government 
agencies, Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests, and certain 
records requests.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ OMB identifies BTS as one of 14 CIPSEA statistical agencies; 
BSEE is not a CIPSEA statistical agency. ``Implementation Guidance 
for [CIPSEA]'', 72 FR 33362 at 33368 (June 15, 2007).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Explanation of Proposed Revisions to Paragraph (c)
    BSEE has continued to evaluate and analyze the data collected by 
the BTS system and is actively looking for trends in the failure data. 
BSEE also conducts investigations into certain incidents to

[[Page 56357]]

verify/monitor BOP component root cause analysis. Upon further 
evaluation of the use of a designated third party to collect and 
analyze failure data and based in part on experience since the 
implementation of the 2019 WCR, this proposed rule would remove the 
option to send failure reports and data to a designated third party. 
BSEE has found value in using BTS for monitoring failure analysis and 
trend data. However, such a reporting arrangement limits BSEE's ability 
to efficiently and effectively address all of the issues associated 
with certain failures. For example, if BSEE does not become aware of 
certain failure reports and trend data until it receives an annual 
report from BTS, it limits BSEE's ability to address failures and 
trends in a timely and meaningful manner. Receiving failure reports 
directly would facilitate BSEE's timely review of the failure data to 
help more quickly identify trends and respond to systematic issues 
falling within BSEE's regulatory authority. Reviewing failure reports 
could also highlight companies that have a higher-than-average number 
of failures, which could be evidence of poor maintenance practices.
    The proposed revisions to paragraph (c)(2) also would help ensure 
the operator starts a failure investigation and analysis in a timely 
manner. Based in part on experience gathered through implementation of 
the 2019 WCR, BSEE reevaluated the timeframes set forth in the 2019 WCR 
for performing the investigation and the failure analysis. BSEE 
determined that most operators can initiate the failure investigation 
and analysis more quickly without unnecessarily interrupting operations 
and jeopardizing safety and environmental protection. Accordingly, BSEE 
proposes to require that operators start the investigation and the 
failure analysis within 90 days of the failure. This proposed revision 
also would help limit the potential for evidence to dissipate over 
time, e.g., through degradation of equipment or components, 
accessibility of certain records, and availability or memory of 
personnel.

What are the independent third party requirements for BOP systems and 
system components? (Sec.  250.732)

Proposed Revisions to Paragraph (b)
    BSEE proposes to revise paragraph (b) by adding that an independent 
third party must be accredited by a qualified standards development 
organization and that BSEE may review the independent third party 
accreditation and qualifications to ensure that it has sufficient 
capabilities to perform the required functions.
     Summary of applicable 2016 WCR provisions:
    BSEE introduced for the first time in the 2016 WCR the concept of 
using BSEE Approved Verification Organizations (BAVOs) to provide 
certain verifications, certifications, and inspections of BOP systems. 
BSEE explained that the objective of the use of BAVOs was to help 
ensure certain BOP equipment was monitored during its entire lifecycle 
by an independent third party to verify compliance with BSEE 
requirements, original equipment manufacturer recommendations, and 
recognized engineering practices. Previously, the independent third 
parties that performed such functions did not undergo a BSEE approval 
process. BSEE introduced such a process based on a perception that 
increased BSEE screening of the third parties would provide greater 
assurances surrounding the performance of these functions. BSEE stated 
that it would develop, and make available on its public website, a list 
of BAVOs--consisting of qualified third party organizations that BSEE 
determined were capable of performing the functions specified in the 
regulations--to help BSEE ensure that BOP systems are designed and 
maintained during their service life to minimize risk. BSEE never 
published a list of BAVOs, however. In the absence of that action, the 
2016 WCR required industry to continue using qualified independent 
third parties to perform the identified functions to ensure that there 
was no diminution of the safety and environmental protection under the 
existing regulations.
     Summary of applicable 2019 WCR provisions:
    In the 2019 WCR, BSEE removed all references to BAVOs and, where 
appropriate, replaced them with references to independent third 
parties. BSEE based these revisions on information from the Bureau's 
increased interactions with independent third parties following 
publication of the 2016 WCR and the successful use of such third 
parties in lieu of BAVOs in the absence of a published BAVO list. BSEE 
expected the majority of BAVOs would be drawn from the existing 
independent third parties, who would continue to conduct the same 
verifications, certifications, and inspections, yielding little actual 
change in the implementation of the program. BSEE also clarified the 
qualifications for independent third parties (i.e., the third parties 
must be a technical classification society, a licensed professional 
engineering firm, or a registered professional engineer capable of 
performing the required actions), which aligned with the standards BSEE 
had anticipated applying to the approval of BAVOs.
Explanation of Proposed Revisions to Paragraph (b)
    The proposed changes to paragraph (b) would provide an additional 
layer of assurance that independent third parties are capable of 
providing the required verifications and certifications and that BSEE 
may review the independent third party accreditation and qualifications 
to ensure that capability. These proposed revisions are derived in part 
from BSEE's increased interaction and experience with independent third 
party certification and verifications since the 2019 WCR, as well as 
BSEE's awareness of certain stakeholder concerns about independent 
third party qualifications. These revisions also would help increase 
accountability of independent third parties. It is BSEE's continued 
goal to ensure that independent third parties are properly qualified 
and have proven competencies to perform all required actions.

What are the requirements for a surface BOP stack? (Sec.  250.733)

Proposed Revisions to Paragraph (b)(1)
    BSEE proposes to revise paragraph (b)(1) by adding that an operator 
also must follow the BOP requirements of Sec.  250.734(a)(1) when 
replacing an entire surface BOP stack on an existing floating 
production facility.
     Summary of applicable 2016 WCR provisions:
    The 2016 WCR added the requirement that surface BOPs installed on a 
floating production facility after 2019 must satisfy the dual shear ram 
requirements in Sec.  250.734(a)(1). BSEE expected industry to be 
moving toward eventual use of dual shear rams in surface BOPs on new 
floating production facilities already. However, BSEE explained several 
practical concerns related to applying the dual shear ram requirement 
to existing facilities. For example, the dual shear ram requirement, if 
applied to existing floating production facilities, or facilities under 
construction or in advanced stages of development, potentially could 
have negative personnel safety and structural impacts due to the added 
weight of the dual shear ram equipment and due to the height and 
structural limits of those facilities. Accordingly, BSEE clarified in 
the final rule that existing floating production facilities did not 
need to

[[Page 56358]]

retrofit or replace their BOPs to meet the dual shear ram requirement. 
In effect, this meant that--under the 2016 WCR--surface BOPs on 
existing floating production facilities, or facilities installed on the 
OCS before 2019, were not required to meet the dual shear ram 
requirement unless those BOPs were removed or replaced after 2019.
    BSEE further explained that these provisions reasonably balanced 
the practical concerns related to requiring dual shear rams on BOPs at 
existing floating facilities or those to be constructed in the near 
term, with the importance of improving the capabilities of surface BOPs 
on such facilities in the longer term. BSEE also explained that 
existing floating production facilities generally are less likely to 
have an event requiring a dual shear ram BOP (than, e.g., exploratory 
drilling rigs), given that the majority of such facilities are located 
in depleted fields, with lower pressures due to ongoing production from 
those fields. In addition, there are large amounts of offset well data 
for those existing facilities in depleted fields (due to the multiple 
wells previously drilled into the same geologic formations and 
reservoirs), which allows for better prediction of drilling parameters 
and concomitant reduced risk of well control losses. Similarly, because 
of the previous production of the reservoirs at such facilities, the 
reservoir parameters and characteristics are generally well 
established.
     Summary of applicable 2019 WCR provisions:
    The 2019 WCR revised Sec.  250.733(b)(1) to require that, after 
April 29, 2021, operators must follow the dual shear ram requirements 
in Sec.  250.734(a)(1) for new floating production facilities installed 
with a surface BOP. These revisions were based on comments seeking 
clarity. Following publication of the 2016 WCR, stakeholders expressed 
confusion about the requirements in this section that cross-reference 
the Sec.  250.734 requirements regarding dual shear rams for subsea 
BOPs, which did not take effect until 2021. BSEE made the compliance 
dates the same for Sec. Sec.  250.733(b)(1) and 250.734(a)(1) (i.e., 
April 29, 2021) to avoid confusion. It also modified this provision to 
apply only to new floating production facilities (installed after April 
2021) with a surface BOP. BSEE justified the exemption of existing 
facilities from these requirements, even if they are redeployed at 
another location or the BOP is removed or replaced, for various 
reasons, including, but not limited to, clearance and weight issues 
associated with facility and BOP design limitations.
Explanation of Proposed Revisions to Paragraph (b)(1)
    Since the implementation of the 2019 WCR, BSEE has reviewed all 
existing surface BOP stacks on floating production facilities and 
evaluated facility limitations for expanding BOP systems to include 
dual shear rams. Dual shear ram BOPs have one blind shear ram that is 
able to cut certain equipment in the well (e.g., drill pipe and 
wireline) and then seal the well, as well as a shear ram that is also 
used for cutting similar equipment in the well. BSEE is aware that 
certain existing floating production facilities cannot accommodate 
additional BOP components without significant facility modifications, 
which may present challenges due to facility design limitations. 
However, BSEE also recognizes that dual shear rams provide additional 
and redundant well control capabilities that ensure BOP function and 
effectiveness during a well control event. In short, dual shear rams 
increase safety. BSEE has determined that the few facilities with 
facility design limitations should meet the safety requirements of 
Sec.  250.734(a)(1) at an appropriate time. Therefore, BSEE is 
proposing to require existing floating production facilities to satisfy 
the dual shear ram requirements when the operator replaces an entire 
surface BOP stack. Irrespective of such requirements, replacement of an 
entire BOP stack would entail rig downtime and require such facilities 
to consider facility modifications to accommodate the new BOP stack, 
making it an appropriate time to accommodate the dual shear rams. In 
addition, making any necessary facility modifications for the dual 
shear rams during BOP stack replacement will enable efficient 
implementation of the BOP requirements of Sec.  250.734(a)(1) while 
operations are already paused. As noted in connection with the 2016 
WCR, BSEE believes such provisions reasonably balance the practical 
concerns related to modifications of surface BOPs at existing floating 
facilities with the importance of improving the capabilities of such 
BOPs in the longer term.

What are the requirements for a subsea BOP system? (Sec.  250.734)

Proposed Revisions to Paragraph (a)(4)
    BSEE proposes to revise paragraph (a)(4) by adding that the 
operator must have the Remotely Operated Vehicle (ROV) intervention 
capability to both open and close each shear ram, ram locks, and one 
pipe ram.
     Summary of applicable 2016 WCR provisions:
    The 2016 WCR included requirements that the ROV must be capable of 
opening and closing each shear ram, ram locks, and one pipe ram, in 
addition to disconnecting the lower marine riser package (LMRP) under 
maximum anticipated surface pressure (MASP) conditions. Rams are 
components on a blowout preventer designed to close and seal the 
wellbore. There are generally three types or rams: blind, pipe, or 
shear. A blind shear ram is able to cut certain equipment in the well 
(e.g., drill pipe and wireline) and then seal the well; a pipe ram can 
seal around pipe; and a shear ram is used for cutting certain equipment 
in the well (e.g., drill pipe, tubing, and wireline). A ram lock is 
used to hold a ram closed. This provision was meant to help ensure 
consistency with the critical function terms in American Petroleum 
Institute (API) Standard 53, which is incorporated by reference in 
relevant regulations.
     Summary of applicable 2019 WCR provisions:
    The 2019 WCR retained the requirements for ROVs to have full ram 
closure functions, but removed the requirement for the ROV to be 
capable of opening the rams. After publication of the 2016 WCR, the API 
Standard 53 committee clarified the definition of ROV ``operate'' 
critical functions to include ``close'' only and not to include 
``open.'' For the purposes of well control, BSEE primarily focuses on 
closure of critical components. BSEE took the position that BOP ram 
closure is more important during a well-control event than ram opening 
for the purposes of well control. Removal of the open function reduced 
the required number of equipment alterations to the subsea ROV panel 
and associated control systems and made the regulatory requirements 
more consistent with updated provisions of API Standard 53. BSEE 
acknowledged that removing the ROV open function may limit certain 
options for well intervention after the well has already been secured; 
however, it believed technological advancements in well intervention 
capabilities could eliminate this issue.
Explanation of Proposed Revisions to Paragraph (a)(4)
    Since implementation of the 2019 WCR, BSEE has gained an increased 
awareness of the importance of intervention capabilities and of 
alternative technologies. Immediate responses to losses of well control 
that

[[Page 56359]]

are designed to seal the well and prevent releases of formation fluids 
(e.g., dual shear rams) are critical, and the previous rulemakings 
emphasized those aspects of well control capabilities. However, BSEE 
has determined that more comprehensive and longer-term solutions to 
well control issues often require additional BOP functionality to 
support subsequent intervention operations, for which closed rams can 
present operational complications.
    For example, having an open function makes it easier for operators 
to conduct remedial operations following the loss of well control that 
may be necessary to maintain the security of the well, such as zonal 
isolation and equipment repair. Also, BSEE is not aware of 
technological advancements in well intervention capabilities that have 
eliminated the need for the ROV open function to facilitate these 
important well maintenance operations. Accordingly, this revision would 
require that the ROV open function be in place to allow for easier 
access to open a closed BOP component for well intervention purposes, 
including operations necessary to maintain the security of the well. 
BSEE also has reviewed existing subsea BOP capabilities and determined 
that most subsea BOPs currently incorporate the capability to open the 
shear rams from the ROV panel. BSEE therefore anticipates that only a 
minor number of equipment modifications would be necessary by 
reintroducing this requirement.

What are the BOP system testing requirements? (Sec.  250.737)

Proposed Revisions to Paragraphs (d)(2)(ii) and (d)(3)(iii)
    BSEE proposes to revise paragraphs (d)(2)(ii) and (d)(3)(iii) by 
adding the requirement that, if BSEE is unable to witness the testing, 
the operator must provide the initial test results to the appropriate 
District Manager within 72 hours after completion of the tests.
     Summary of applicable 2016 WCR provisions:
    The 2016 WCR required the operator to contact the District Manager 
at least 72 hours prior to beginning the initial test for a surface 
BOP, or the stump test for a subsea BOP, to allow BSEE 
representative(s) the option to witness the testing. If BSEE 
representative(s) were unable to witness the testing, the operator was 
required to provide the test results to the appropriate District 
Manager within 72 hours after completion of the tests.
     Summary of applicable 2019 WCR provisions:
    The 2019 WCR removed the requirement for operators to submit the 
relevant test results to BSEE when BSEE cannot witness the testing. 
BSEE stated that the revisions would significantly reduce the number of 
submittals to BSEE and minimize the associated burden for BSEE to 
review those submittals, without reducing safety. If BSEE cannot 
witness the testing, BSEE still has access to the BOP testing 
documentation upon request pursuant to Sec.  250.746, What are the 
recordkeeping requirements for casing, liner, and BOP tests, and 
inspections of BOP systems and marine riser? BSEE also reviews the test 
results during routine inspections of facilities and retained the 
option to witness the testing.
Explanation of Proposed Revisions to Paragraphs (d)(2)(ii) and 
(d)(3)(iii)
    Based upon BSEE experience with implementing he 2019 WCR, BSEE has 
determined that consistent access to this data is necessary for BSEE to 
ensure BOP safety. Since implementation, BSEE has found it necessary to 
request this data from operators to verify that the necessary tests 
were conducted and passed. While the 2019 WCR cited the burden to BSEE 
from reviewing this data, BSEE has been reviewing the data even without 
the submission requirement, and its reintroduction will reduce the 
burden on BSEE from having to request the data. BSEE's experience has 
led it to determine that any additional burden is necessary to ensure 
compliance with BOP testing requirements. The burdens on operators from 
submission of the data are minimal. These revisions also would help 
BSEE ensure it has continued access to certain BOP testing data 
necessary to conduct its routine review. In the past, BSEE has utilized 
the BOP information for further review and investigations and has taken 
enforcement action as a result of the data review. BSEE retains the 
requirements for operators to produce certain records upon request and 
to provide advanced notice at least 72 hours before the testing to 
allow BSEE the option of sending representatives to witness the 
testing.

III. Procedural Matters

Regulatory Planning and Review (Executive Orders (E.O.) 12866 and 
13563)

    E.O. 12866 provides that the Office of Information and Regulatory 
Affairs (OIRA) in the OMB will review all significant rules. To 
determine if this proposed rulemaking is a significant rule, BSEE had 
an outside contractor prepare an economic analysis to assess the 
anticipated costs and potential benefits of the proposed rulemaking. 
The following discussion summarizes the economic analysis; a complete 
copy of the economic analysis can be viewed at www.Regulations.gov (use 
the keyword/ID ``BSEE-2022-0009'').
    Changes to Federal regulations must undergo several types of 
economic analyses. First, E.O.s 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to 
assess the costs and benefits of regulatory alternatives and, if 
regulation is necessary, to select a regulatory approach that maximizes 
net benefits (including potential economic, environmental, public 
health, and safety effects; distributive impacts; and equity). Under 
E.O. 12866, an agency must determine whether a regulatory action is 
significant and, therefore, subject to the requirements of the E.O. and 
review by OMB. Section 3(f) of E.O. 12866 defines a ``significant 
regulatory action'' as any regulatory action that is likely to result 
in a rule that:

--Has an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more, or 
adversely affects in a material way the economy, a sector of the 
economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public 
health or safety, or state, local, or tribal governments or communities 
(also referred to as ``economically significant'');
--Creates serious inconsistency or otherwise interferes with an action 
taken or planned by another agency;
--Materially alters the budgetary impacts of entitlement grants, user 
fees, loan programs, or the rights and obligations of recipients 
thereof; or
--Raises novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal mandates, 
the President's priorities, or the principles set forth in E.O. 12866.

    BSEE has determined that this proposed rule is not significant 
within the definition of E.O. 12866 because the estimated annual costs 
or benefits would not exceed $100 million in any year of the 10-year 
analysis period and the rule will not meet any of the other 
significance triggers. Accordingly, OMB has not reviewed this proposed 
regulation.
1. Need for Regulatory Action
    BSEE has identified a need to amend the existing well control 
regulations to ensure that oil and gas operations on the OCS are 
conducted in a safe and environmentally responsible manner. In 
particular, BSEE considers the proposed rule necessary to reduce the 
likelihood of an oil or gas blowout, which can lead to the loss of 
life, serious injuries, and

[[Page 56360]]

harm to the environment. As was evidenced by the Deepwater Horizon 
incident (which began with a blowout at the Macondo well on April 20, 
2010), blowouts can result in catastrophic consequences.
    After the Deepwater Horizon incident in 2010, BSEE adopted several 
recommendations from multiple investigation teams to improve the safety 
of offshore operations. Subsequently, BSEE published the 2016 WCR on 
April 29, 2016 (81 FR 25888; RIN 2014-AA11). The 2016 WCR consolidated 
the equipment and operational requirements for well control into one 
part of BSEE's regulations; enhanced BOP and well design requirements, 
modified well-control requirements; and incorporated certain industry 
technical standards. Most of the 2016 WCR provisions became effective 
on July 28, 2016.
    Although the 2016 WCR addressed a significant number of issues that 
were identified during the analyses of the Deepwater Horizon incident, 
BSEE recognized that BOP equipment and systems continue to improve 
technologically and well control processes evolve. Therefore, after the 
2016 WCR became effective, BSEE continued to engage with the offshore 
oil and gas industry, SDOs, and other stakeholders. During the course 
of these engagements, BSEE identified issues and stakeholders expressed 
a variety of concerns regarding implementation of the 2016 WCR. On May 
15, 2019, BSEE addressed these issues and concerns by publishing the 
final 2019 WCR in the Federal Register (84 FR 21908; RIN 2014-AA39), 
which finalized the current regulatory requirements for BOP systems and 
operations. The 2019 WCR also incorporated by reference API Standard 53 
(including the 2016 addendum) and the Second Edition of API RP 17H into 
the applicable sections of the regulatory text included in this 
proposed rule.
    Since the publication of the 2019 WCR, BSEE has continued engaging 
with stakeholders to gather information to ensure effective 
implementation of the regulations. The Department subsequently 
identified areas for improvements to specific 2019 WCR provisions. 
Furthermore, on January 20, 2021, the President issued E.O. 13990 
(Protecting Public Health and the Environment and Restoring Science to 
Tackle the Climate Crisis) and the E.O.'s accompanying ``President's 
Fact Sheet: List of Agency Actions for Review.'' Within the President's 
Fact Sheet, DOI was specifically instructed to review the 2019 WCR to 
evaluate potential revisions to promote and protect public health, 
safety, and the environment, among other identified policy goals.
    BSEE is proposing a narrowly focused rulemaking to address the 
identified regulatory requirements to help improve operations that use 
a BOP, certain BOP capabilities and functionalities, and BSEE oversight 
of such operations. The proposed rule would:
    (A) Clarify BOP system requirements,
    (B) Remove the option for operators to submit failure data to 
designated third parties,
    (C) Require accreditation of independent third party 
qualifications,
    (D) Establish dual shear ram requirements for surface BOPs on 
existing floating production facilities when an operator replaces an 
entire surface BOP stack,
    (E) Require ROV open functions as originally required in the 2016 
WCR, and
    (F) Require submittal of certain BOP test results if BSEE is unable 
to witness the testing.
2. Alternatives
    BSEE has considered two regulatory alternatives:
    (A) Promulgate the requirements contained within the proposed rule.
    (B) Take no regulatory action and continue to rely on existing well 
control regulations in combination with permit conditions, deepwater 
operations plans (DWOPs), operator prudence, and industry standards.
    Alternative 1--the proposed rule--would incorporate recommendations 
provided by government, industry, academia, and other stakeholders. In 
addition to addressing concerns and aligning with industry standards, 
this proposed rule would prudently improve efficiency and consistency 
of the regulations.
3. Economic Analysis
    BSEE's economic analysis evaluated the expected impacts of the 
proposed rule compared with the baseline. The baseline refers to 
current industry practice in accordance with existing regulations, 
industry permits, DWOPs, and industry standards with which operators 
already comply. Impacts that exist as part of the baseline were not 
considered costs or benefits of the proposed rule. Thus, the cost 
analysis evaluates only activities, expenditures, and capital 
investments representing a change from the baseline that would result 
if the provisions of the proposed rule were finalized. BSEE quantified 
and monetized the costs, using 2022 data, of all the provisions in the 
proposed rule determined to result in a change compared to the 
baseline. These estimated compliance costs are discussed more 
specifically in the associated full initial regulatory impact analysis, 
which can be viewed at www.regulations.gov (use the keyword/ID ``BSEE-
2022-0009'').
    BSEE qualitatively assessed the benefits of the proposed rule. The 
rulemaking would allow BSEE to address stakeholder concerns related to 
the BOP and well control provisions in 30 CFR part 250 and would 
provide clarification about regulations in this section. The proposed 
amendments would have a positive net impact on worker safety and the 
environment. The benefits include clarification, more timely review of 
data to facilitate faster response to systemic risks, increased 
accountability of verification entities to ensure that risks are 
accurately assessed and verified, improved protection from a blowout, 
improved ability to manage a blowout, and the assurance that BSEE 
receives and is able to review BOP testing data to help identify risks.
    The analysis assumes an effective date of January 1, 2023, and 
covers 10 years (2023 through 2032) to ensure it encompasses the 
significant costs and benefits likely to result from this proposed 
rule. A 10-year period was used for this analysis because of the 
uncertainty associated with predicting industry's activities and the 
advancement of technical capabilities beyond 10 years. It is very 
difficult to predict, plan, or project costs associated with 
technological innovation due to unknown technological or business 
constraints that could drive a product into mainstream adoption or into 
obsolescence. The regulated community itself has difficulty conducting 
business modeling beyond a 10-year time frame. Over time, the costs 
associated with a particular new technology may drop because of various 
supply and demand factors, causing the technology to be more broadly 
adopted. In other cases, an existing technology may be replaced by a 
lower-cost alternative as business needs may drive technological 
innovation.
    Extrapolating costs and benefits beyond this 10-year time frame 
would produce more ambiguous results and therefore be disadvantageous 
in determining actual costs and benefits likely to result from this 
proposed rule. BSEE concluded that this 10-year analysis period 
provides the best overall ability to forecast reliable costs and 
benefits likely to result from this proposed rule. When summarizing the 
costs and benefits, we present the estimated annual effects, as well as 
the 10-year discounted totals using discount

[[Page 56361]]

rates of 3 and 7 percent, per OMB Circular A-4, ``Regulatory 
Analysis.''
    Table 1 presents the total costs per year of the proposed rule. As 
can be seen in the table, the estimated costs over the ten-year period 
are $2.4 million undiscounted, $2.3 million discounted at 3%, and $2.2 
million discounted at 7%.

          Table 1--Total Costs Associated With Proposed Amendments to BOP and Well Control Regulations
                                                     [2022$]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                   Discounted at   Discounted at
                              Year                                 Undiscounted         3%              7%
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2023............................................................      $1,801,301      $1,801,301      $1,801,301
2024............................................................           1,357           1,317           1,268
2025............................................................           1,357           1,279           1,185
2026............................................................           1,357           1,242           1,108
2027............................................................         557,653         495,467         425,431
2028............................................................           1,357           1,171             967
2029............................................................           1,357           1,136             904
2030............................................................           1,357           1,103             845
2031............................................................           1,357           1,071             790
2032............................................................           1,357           1,040             738
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
    Total.......................................................       2,369,809       2,306,128       2,234,537
        Annualized..............................................         236,981         270,349         318,148
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: Annualized costs are calculated by the annuity method.

    BSEE welcomes comments on this analysis, including potential 
sources of data or information on the costs and benefits of this 
proposed rule.

Regulatory Flexibility Act and the Congressional Review Act

    DOI certifies that this proposed rule is unlikely to have a 
significant economic effect on a substantial number of small entities 
as defined 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 a regulatory 
flexibility analysis to determine whether a regulation would have a 
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. 
Further, under the Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., an 
agency is required to produce compliance guidance for small entities if 
the rule would have a significant economic impact. For the reasons 
explained in this section, BSEE believes that this proposed rule likely 
would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of 
small entities. Although a regulatory flexibility analysis is not 
required by the RFA, BSEE provides this Initial Regulatory Flexibility 
Analysis to demonstrate the relatively minor impact of this proposed 
rule on small entities.
1. Description of the Reasons That Action by the Agency Is Being 
Considered
    Since publication of the 2019 WCR, BSEE has continued to confer 
with stakeholders to ensure effective implementation of the 
regulations. BSEE also identified potential improvements to specific 
aspects of these provisions. Furthermore, on January 20, 2021, the 
President issued E.O. 13990 (Protecting Public Health and the 
Environment and Restoring Science to Tackle the Climate Crisis) and the 
E.O.'s accompanying ``President's Fact Sheet: List of Agency Actions 
for Review.'' Within the President's Fact Sheet, DOI was specifically 
instructed to review the 2019 WCR to evaluate potential revisions to 
promote and protect public health, safety, and the environment, among 
other identified policy goals.
2. Description and Estimated Number of Small Entities Regulated
    Small entities, as defined by the RFA, consist of small businesses, 
small organizations, and small governmental jurisdictions. We have not 
identified any small organizations or small government jurisdictions 
that the rule would impact, so this analysis focuses on impacts to 
small businesses (hereafter referred to as ``small entities''). A small 
entity is one that is independently owned and operated and that is not 
dominant in its field of operation. The definition of small business 
varies from industry to industry to properly reflect industry size 
differences.
    One of the changes in the proposed rule would have an impact on a 
substantial number of small entities. The proposed rule would affect 
all well drilling operators and Federal oil and gas lease holders on 
the OCS, primarily those working in the Gulf of Mexico. BSEE's analysis 
also shows that this would include 48 companies that drilled at least 
one offshore well during the period 2015 to 2021. Of these drilling 
operators, approximately 20 would be active in each given year. 
Entities that would operate under the proposed rule are classified 
primarily under North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) 
codes 211120 (Crude Petroleum Extraction), 211130 (Natural Gas 
Extraction), and 213111 (Drilling Oil and Gas Wells). For NAICS 
classifications 211120 and 211130, the Small Business Administration 
defines a small business as one with fewer than 1,251 employees; the 
rest 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 small entities in a given industry. 
BSEE estimates that approximately 83 percent of offshore operators 
drilling on the OCS are small and that the small entities impacted each 
year would comprise 34 percent of that universe.
3. Description and Estimate of Compliance Requirements
    BSEE has estimated the incremental costs for small operators and 
lease holders in the offshore oil and natural gas production industry. 
Costs already incurred as a result of current industry practice in 
accordance with existing regulations, industry permits, DWOPs, and API 
industry standards with which operators already comply were not 
considered as costs of this rule because they are part of the baseline.

[[Page 56362]]

    Only 1 of the proposed provisions would have cost impacts on small 
entities.
    For proposed Sec.  250.737(d)(2)(ii) and (d)(3)(iii), it is 
estimated that the annual cost per company would be $78.30, which is 
not a significant impact.
4. Identification of All Relevant Federal Rules That May Duplicate, 
Overlap, or Conflict With the Proposed Rule
    The proposed rule would not conflict with any relevant Federal 
rules or duplicate or overlap with any Federal rules in any way that 
would unnecessarily add cumulative regulatory burdens on small entities 
without any gain in regulatory benefits. However, BSEE requests 
comments identifying any Federal rules that may duplicate, overlap, or 
conflict with the proposed rule.
5. Description of Significant Alternatives to the Proposed Rule
    BSEE has considered two regulatory alternatives:
    (1) Promulgate the requirements contained within the proposed rule.
    (2) Take no regulatory action and continue to rely on existing well 
control regulations in combination with permit conditions, DWOPs, 
operator prudence, and industry standards.
    Alternative 1--the proposed rule--would incorporate recommendations 
provided by government, industry, academia, and other stakeholders. In 
addition to addressing concerns and aligning with industry standards, 
this proposed rule would prudently improve efficiency and consistency 
of the regulations.
    The potential costs to small entities are believed to be small; 
however, the risk of safety or environmental accidents for small 
companies would not necessarily be lower than it would be for larger 
companies. Offshore operations are highly technical and can be 
hazardous. Adverse consequences in the event of incidents are similar 
regardless of the operator's size. The proposed rule would reduce risk 
for entities of all sizes. Nonetheless, BSEE is requesting comment on 
the costs of these proposed policies to small entities, with the goal 
of ensuring thorough consideration and discussion at the final rule 
stage. BSEE specifically requests comments on the burden estimates 
discussed above as well as information on regulatory alternatives that 
would reduce the burden on small entities (e.g., different compliance 
requirements for small entities, alternative testing requirements and 
periods, and exemption from regulatory requirements).

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. A statement containing the information required by Unfunded 
Mandates Reform Act (2 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) is not required.

Takings Implication Assessment (E.O. 12630)

    Under the criteria in E.O. 12630, this proposed rule would not have 
significant takings implications. The rule is not a governmental action 
capable of interference with constitutionally protected property 
rights. A Takings Implication Assessment is not required.

Federalism (E.O. 13132)

    Under the criteria in E.O. 13132, this proposed rule would 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 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 Tribes (E.O. 13175)

    BSEE is committed to regular and meaningful consultation and 
collaboration with Tribes on policy decisions that have Tribal 
implications. Under the criteria in E.O. 13175 and DOI's Policy on 
Consultation with Indian Tribes (Secretarial Order 3317, Amendment 2, 
dated December 31, 2013), we have evaluated this proposed rule and 
determined that it has no substantial direct effects on federally 
recognized Indian Tribes.

Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) of 1995

    This proposed rule contains existing and new information collection 
(IC) requirements for regulations at 30 CFR part 250, subpart G, and 
submission to the OMB for review under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 
1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) is required. Therefore, BSEE will submit 
an IC request to OMB for review and approval and will request a new OMB 
control number. Once the 1014-AA52 final rule is effective, we will 
transfer the new hour burden and non-hour costs burden from 1014-NEW to 
1014-0028 (160,842 hours, $867,500 non-hour cost burden, expiration 
January 31, 2023) 30 CFR part 250, subpart G, Well Operations and 
Equipment, then discontinue the new number associated with this 
rulemaking. We may not conduct or sponsor, and you are not required to 
respond to, a collection of information, unless it displays a currently 
valid OMB control number.
    The proposed regulations would establish new and/or revise current 
requirements in Subpart G, Well Operations and Equipment, by revising 
regulatory provisions published in the 2019 WCR for drilling, workover, 
completion, and decommissioning operations. BSEE is providing clarity 
to BOP system requirements and revising a few specific BOP equipment 
capabilities.
    The following provides a breakdown of the paperwork hour burdens 
and non-hour cost burdens for this proposed rule.
    As discussed in the Section-by-Section analysis above, and in the 
supporting statement available at RegInfo.gov, this rule proposes to 
add/revise:
    Sec.  250.730--This section would eliminate text allowing BSEE to 
designate a third party to receive notices and reports. No burden 
changes are being proposed.
    Sec.  250.732(b)--This section would add to the current paragraph 
that BSEE may review independent third party accreditations and 
qualifications. This would add +10 hours.
    Sec.  250.737(d)(2) and (3)--This section would add the requirement 
that if BSEE is unable to witness the testing, the operator must 
provide the initial test results to the appropriate District Manager 
within 72 hours after completion of the tests. The 2019 WCR provisions 
removed the requirement that operators submit testing results within 72 
hours when a BSEE representative cannot witness the testing. BSEE 
inadvertently never removed the IC burden associated with this 
requirement; therefore, no burden changes are being proposed.

[[Page 56363]]

    Title of Collection: 30 CFR part 250, subpart G, Well Operations 
and Equipment.
    OMB Control Number: 1014-NEW.
    Form Number: None.
    Type of Review: New.
    Respondents/Affected Public: Potential respondents comprise Federal 
OCS oil, gas, and sulfur lessees/operators and holders of pipeline 
rights-of-way.
    Total Estimated Number of Annual Respondents: Currently there are 
approximately 550 Federal OCS oil, gas, and sulfur lessees and holders 
of pipeline rights-of-way. Not all the potential respondents will 
submit information in any given year, and some may submit multiple 
times.
    Total Estimated Number of NEW Annual Responses: 5.
    Estimated Completion Time per Response for NEW requirement: 2 
hours.
    Total Estimated Number of NEW Annual Burden Hours: 10.
    Respondent's Obligation: Responses are mandatory.
    Frequency of Collection: Generally, on occasion and as required in 
the regulations.
    Total Estimated Annual Nonhour Burden Cost: none.
    In addition, the PRA requires agencies to estimate the total annual 
reporting and recordkeeping non-hour cost burden resulting from the 
collection of information, and we solicit your comments on this item. 
For reporting and recordkeeping only, your response should split the 
cost estimate into two components: (1) total capital and startup cost 
component and (2) annual operation, maintenance, and purchase of 
service component. Your estimates should consider the cost 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. Generally, 
your estimates should not include equipment or services purchased: (1) 
before October 1, 1995; (2) to comply with requirements not associated 
with the information collection; (3) for reasons other than to provide 
information or keep records for the Government; or (4) as part of 
customary and usual business or private practices.
    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 this information collection, including:
    (1) Whether the collection of information is necessary, including 
whether the information will have practical utility;
    (2) The accuracy of our estimate of the burden for this collection 
of information;
    (3) Ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the 
information to be collected; and
    (4) Ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on 
respondents.
    Send your comments and suggestions on this information collection 
by the date indicated in the DATES section to the Desk Officer for the 
Department of the Interior at OMB-OIRA at (202) 395-5806 (fax) or via 
the RegInfo.gov portal (online). You may view the information 
collection request(s) at http://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain. 
Please provide a copy of your comments to the BSEE Information 
Collection Clearance Officer (see the ADDRESSES section). You may 
contact Kye Mason, BSEE Information Collection Clearance Officer at 
(703) 787-1607 with any questions. Please reference Proposed Rule 1014-
AA52, Oil and Gas and Sulfur Operations in the Outer Continental Shelf-
Blowout Preventer Systems and Well Control Revisions--30 CFR part 250, 
subpart G, Well Operations and Equipment (OMB Control No. 1014-NEW), in 
your comments.

National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA)

    BSEE is analyzing the provisions of the proposed rule in compliance 
with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 
4321 et seq.) to determine whether they could have a significant impact 
on the quality of the human environment. Environmental Assessments were 
prepared for both the 2016 WCR and the 2019 WCR. Those prior NEPA 
analyses informed the drafting process for this proposed rule, and the 
proposed rule primarily proposes to restore provisions whose potential 
environmental impacts were analyzed in connection with those prior 
rulemakings (or which are purely administrative in nature with no 
potential for environmental impacts). Accordingly, at this time, we 
anticipate that the Environmental Assessments associated with the 2016 
WCR and 2019 WCR will substantially inform the NEPA process and 
compliance for this rulemaking. We invite comments on this subject.

Data Quality Act

    In developing this rule, we did not conduct or use a study, 
experiment, or survey requiring peer review under the Data Quality Act 
(Pub. L. 106-554, app. C, sec. 515, 114 Stat. 2763, 2763A-153-154).

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. The rule is not a significant regulatory 
action under E.O. 12866, and it is not likely to have a significant 
adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use of energy. A 
Statement of Energy Effects is not required.

Clarity of This Regulation

    We are required by E.O. 12866, E.O. 12988, and by the Presidential 
Memorandum of June 1, 1998, to write all rules in plain language. This 
means that each rule we publish must:
    (1) Be logically organized;
    (2) Use the active voice to address readers directly;
    (3) Use clear language rather than jargon;
    (4) Be divided into short sections and sentences; and
    (5) 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, or the sections where you feel lists or tables would be 
useful.

List of Subjects in 30 CFR Part 250

    Administrative practice and procedure, Continental shelf, 
Environmental impact statements, Environmental protection, Government 
contracts, Incorporation by reference, Investigations, Oil and gas 
exploration, Outer Continental Shelf--mineral resources, Outer 
Continental Shelf--rights-of-way, Penalties, Pipelines, Reporting and 
recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur.

Laura Daniel-Davis
Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary, Land and Minerals Management.

    For the reasons stated in the preamble, the Department of the 
Interior proposes to amend 30 CFR part 250 as follows:

[[Page 56364]]

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

0
1. The authority citation for part 250 continues to read as follows:

    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. Amend Sec.  250.730 by revising paragraphs (a) and (c) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  250.730   What are the general requirements for BOP systems and 
system components?

    (a) You must ensure that the BOP system and system components are 
designed, installed, maintained, inspected, tested, and used properly 
to ensure well control. The working-pressure rating of each BOP 
component (excluding annular(s)) must exceed MASP as defined for the 
operation. For a subsea BOP, the MASP must be determined at the 
mudline. The BOP system includes the BOP stack, control system, and any 
other associated system(s) and equipment. The BOP system and individual 
components must be able to perform their expected functions and be 
compatible with each other. Your BOP system must be capable of closing 
and sealing the wellbore at all times to the well's maximum kick 
tolerance design limits. The BOP system must be capable of closing and 
sealing without losing ram closure time and sealing integrity due to 
the corrosiveness, volume, and abrasiveness of any fluids in the 
wellbore that the BOP system may encounter. Your BOP system must meet 
the following requirements:
* * * * *
    (c) You must follow the failure reporting procedures contained in 
API Standard 53, (incorporated by reference in Sec.  250.198), and:
    (1) You must provide a written notice of equipment failure to both 
the Chief, Office of Offshore Regulatory Programs (OORP), and the 
manufacturer of such equipment within 30 days after the discovery and 
identification of the failure. A failure is any condition that prevents 
the equipment from meeting the functional specification.
    (2) You must start an investigation and a failure analysis within 
90 days of the failure to determine the cause of the failure and 
complete the investigation and the failure analysis within 120 days 
after initiation. You also must document the results and any corrective 
action. You must submit the analysis report to both the Chief, OORP and 
the manufacturer. If you cannot complete the investigation and analysis 
within the specified time, you must submit an extension request 
detailing when and how you will complete the investigation and analysis 
to BSEE for approval. You must submit the extension request to the 
Chief, OORP.
    (3) If the equipment manufacturer notifies you that it has changed 
the design of the equipment that failed or if you have changed 
operating or repair procedures as a result of a failure, then you must, 
within 30 days of such changes, report the design change or modified 
procedures in writing to the Chief, OORP.
    (4) Submit notices and reports to the Chief, Office of Offshore 
Regulatory Programs; Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement; 
45600 Woodland Road, Sterling, Virginia 20166.
* * * * *
0
3. Amend Sec.  250.732 by revising paragraph (b) to read as follows:


Sec.  250.732   What are the independent third party requirements for 
BOP systems and system components?

* * * * *
    (b) The independent third party must be accredited by a qualified 
standards development organization and must be a technical 
classification society, a licensed professional engineering firm, or a 
registered professional engineer capable of providing the required 
certifications and verifications. BSEE may review the independent third 
party accreditation and qualifications to ensure that the independent 
third party has sufficient capabilities to perform the required 
functions.
* * * * *
0
4. Amend Sec.  250.733 by revising paragraph (b)(1) to read as follows:


Sec.  250.733   What are the requirements for a surface BOP stack?

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (1) On new floating production facilities installed after April 29, 
2021, that include a surface BOP, or when you replace an entire surface 
BOP stack on an existing floating production facility, follow the BOP 
requirements in Sec.  250.734(a)(1).
* * * * *
0
5. Amend Sec.  250.734 by revising paragraph (a)(4) to read as follows:


Sec.  250.734   What are the requirements for a subsea BOP system?

    (a) * * *

------------------------------------------------------------------------
 When operating with a subsea BOP
         system, you must:                 Additional requirements
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(4) * * *.........................  You must have the ROV intervention
                                     capability to open and close each
                                     shear ram, ram locks, one pipe ram,
                                     and disconnect the LMRP under MASP
                                     conditions as defined for the
                                     operation. You must be capable of
                                     performing these functions in the
                                     response times outlined in API
                                     Standard 53 (as incorporated by
                                     reference in Sec.   250.198). The
                                     ROV panels on the BOP and LMRP must
                                     be compliant with API RP 17H (as
                                     incorporated by reference in Sec.
                                     250.198).
 
                              * * * * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * *
0
6. Amend Sec.  250.737 by revising paragraphs (d)(2)(ii) and (3)(iii), 
to read as follows:


Sec.  250.737   What are the BOP system testing requirements?

* * * * *
    (d) * * *

------------------------------------------------------------------------
             You must                      Additional requirements
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(2) * * *.........................  * * *
                                    (ii) Contact the District Manager at
                                     least 72 hours prior to beginning
                                     the initial test to allow BSEE
                                     representative(s) to witness the
                                     testing. If BSEE representative(s)
                                     are unable to witness the testing,
                                     you must provide the initial test
                                     results to the appropriate District
                                     Manager within 72 hours after
                                     completion of the tests.

[[Page 56365]]

 
 
                              * * * * * * *
(3) * * *.........................  * * *
                                    (iii) Contact the District Manager
                                     at least 72 hours prior to
                                     beginning the stump test to allow
                                     BSEE representative(s) to witness
                                     the testing. If BSEE
                                     representative(s) are unable to
                                     witness the testing, you must
                                     provide the test results to the
                                     appropriate District Manager within
                                     72 hours after completion of the
                                     tests.
 
                              * * * * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2022-19462 Filed 9-13-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-VH-P