1014-aa49 Hpht Fr [89 Fr 71076]

71076

Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Rules and Regulations

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Bureau of Safety and Environmental
Enforcement
30 CFR Part 250
[Docket ID: BSEE–2021–0003; EEEE500000
245E1700D2 ET1SF0000.EAQ000]
RIN 1014–AA49

Oil and Gas and Sulfur Operations in
the Outer Continental Shelf—High
Pressure High Temperature Updates
Bureau of Safety and
Environmental Enforcement, Interior.
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:

The Department of the
Interior (DOI or Department), through
the Bureau of Safety and Environmental
Enforcement (BSEE), is adding
requirements for new or unusual
technology, including equipment used
in high pressure high temperature
(HPHT) environments; revising and
reorganizing the information submission
requirements for a project’s Conceptual
Plans and Deepwater Operations Plan
(DWOP); and requiring independent
third parties to review certain
information prior to submission to
BSEE. This final rule will improve
operational and environmental safety
and human health, while providing
consistency and clarity to industry
regarding the equipment and
operational requirements as well as the
submissions that are necessary so that
BSEE can review and consider for
approval proposed projects that would
use new or unusual technology.
DATES: This final rule is effective on
October 29, 2024. The incorporation by
reference of certain material listed in
this rule is approved by the Director of
the Federal Register as of October 29,
2024.
SUMMARY:

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

For

questions, contact Kirk Malstrom,
Regulations and Standards Branch,
(202) 258–1518, or by email: regs@
bsee.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES2

Executive Summary
This final rule will improve
operational safety and human health
and environmental protections, while
providing industry with clarity and
consistency regarding the equipment,
operational requirements, and
submissions that are necessary for BSEE
to review and approve operations using
new or unusual technology. BSEE
considers new or unusual technology to
include equipment or procedures that

VerDate Sep<11>2014

22:47 Aug 29, 2024

Jkt 262001

the offshore oil and gas industry has not
used previously or extensively under
the anticipated operating conditions or
has not used previously in a particular
BSEE Outer Continental Shelf (OCS)
Region, or that have operating
characteristics outside the performance
parameters established in 30 CFR part
250.
Currently, operations and equipment
used in HPHT environments are
relatively new on the United States
OCS. In general, an HPHT environment
is present when well conditions have
pressures greater than 15,000 pounds
per square inch absolute (psia) or have
a temperature greater than 350 degrees
Fahrenheit. Historically, most oilfield
equipment has not been designed to
withstand such high pressures and
temperatures. Working in an HPHT
environment therefore increases
operational complexity because HPHTassociated operations require the use of
equipment that exists at the limits of
current technology and lacks a long
operational history. Due to limited
industry experience in HPHT
environments, few industry standards
directly address HPHT equipment and
operations. Currently, BSEE carefully
reviews HPHT projects on a case-bycase basis. To date, BSEE has received
several applications for projects in
HPHT environments and anticipates
HPHT project interest to increase due to
equipment technological advancements
and industry capabilities to develop
resources in these environments.
For new or unusual technology
projects, including HPHT projects, BSEE
regulations currently:
—Require submission of information in
a sequence that is not conducive to
BSEE’s review and consideration for
approval of new or unusual
technology projects because these
projects typically require a more
immediate BSEE review and approval
than the regulations currently allow;
and
—Lack specific equipment requirements
because the technology is new and
there are few applicable industry
standards.
To address these issues, this final
rulemaking:
—Requires the submission of
information in a sequence that
provides both operators 1 and BSEE
1 BSEE administers the Departmental regulations
at 30 CFR part 250, which 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’’). For
convenience, this preamble will refer to these
regulated entities as ‘‘operators’’ unless otherwise
indicated.

PO 00000

Frm 00002

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4700

the ability to evaluate whether a new
or unusual technology project is
economically and operationally
feasible;
—Clarifies that equipment or
procedures used for operations in an
HPHT environment are considered
new or unusual technology.
—Adds specific equipment
requirements, particularly for barriers,
through new regulations and the
incorporation of applicable industry
standards; and
—Requires Independent Third Party
(I3P) review of operator submissions,
in certain cases, or provides BSEE
with the ability to require I3P review,
to ensure project viability and safety.
Currently, the DWOP process requires
information to be submitted in two
distinct phases: the Conceptual Plan
phase and the DWOP phase. This final
rule maintains the two phase DWOP
process and adds additional
requirements to each phase that will
enable BSEE to thoroughly review
proposed new or unusual technology
projects. The final rule defines three
types of Conceptual Plans: a Project
Conceptual Plan, a New or Unusual
Technology Conceptual Plan, and a New
or Unusual Technology Barrier
Equipment Conceptual Plan. A Project
Conceptual Plan will be required for any
project planned in water depths greater
than 1000 feet or that will include the
use of subsea tieback development
technology, regardless of water depth. A
New or Unusual Technology Conceptual
Plan will be required for any project or
system involving New or Unusual
Technology equipment or procedures. A
New or Unusual Technology Barrier
Equipment Conceptual Plan will be
required for any project or system
involving new or unusual technology
identified as a primary or secondary
barrier to isolate a hydrocarbon pressure
source from people and the
environment. An operator must submit
the applicable Conceptual Plan(s) based
on the specifics of the proposed project.
The information specific to HPHT
projects submitted in the applicable
Conceptual Plan(s) will be evaluated for
adequacy prior to approval. The final
rule’s establishment of three new types
of Conceptual Plans and the associated
new timing requirements established in
§ 250.226 (e.g., BSEE must approve your
Conceptual Plan(s) before the Bureau
will approve any associated permit) will
provide both operators and BSEE with
the ability to evaluate early in the
project planning process, before permit
approval, whether a new or unusual
technology project is economically and
operationally feasible. In the final rule,

E:\FR\FM\30AUR2.SGM

30AUR2

ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES2

Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
the DWOP phase, during which the
DWOP is reviewed, will take place after
the Conceptual Plan(s) have been
approved and the system design has
been substantially completed.
In addition, this final rule revises 30
CFR part 250, subpart B (‘‘Plans and
Information’’) and the DWOP process to
incorporate BSEE’s Barrier Concept into
the requirements, including for new or
unusual technology projects. The
Barrier Concept is a holistic approach to
the barrier system based on BSEE’s
determination that abnormal conditions
and/or failures are potential risks in a
well or pipeline system. When an
abnormal condition or failure occurs, it
must be detectable, and upon detection,
its source must be isolated behind
redundant barriers. BSEE considers a
barrier or barrier system to be any
engineered equipment, materials,
component, or assembly that is intended
to contain a hydrocarbon pressure
source(s) to prevent harm to people or
the environment. This final rule defines
the types of equipment that BSEE
considers to be sufficient barriers and
how barriers must be used. The final
rule also includes portions of the Barrier
Concept in the DWOP process under the
New or Unusual Technology Barrier
Equipment Conceptual Plan as a means
of ensuring that new or unusual
technology projects include sufficient
barriers, which will enhance protections
for people and the environment. This
rule incorporates into the regulations
the existing BSEE policy on the Barrier
Concept discussed in Notice to Lessees
(NTLs) 2009–G36, Using Alternate
Compliance in Safety Systems for
Subsea Production Operations; 2019–
G02, Guidance for Information
Submissions Regarding Proposed High
Pressure and/or High Temperature
(HPHT) Well Design, Completion, and
Intervention Operations; and 2019–G03,
Guidance for Information Submissions
Regarding Site Specific and Non-Site
Specific HPHT Equipment Design
Verification Analysis and Design
Validation Testing.
Furthermore, this final rule revises
the DWOP process to require I3P review
of equipment or procedures identified
in a New or Unusual Technology Barrier
Equipment Conceptual Plan. This final
rule also allows BSEE to require an
operator to use an I3P to review certain
equipment or procedures identified in a
New or Unusual Technology Conceptual
Plan. Independent third parties have
been used as a longstanding industry
practice to support verifications that
ensure project viability and safety. I3P
review provides an additional review in
circumstances where proposed
equipment or processes may be

VerDate Sep<11>2014

22:47 Aug 29, 2024

Jkt 262001

technically complex and require a high
degree of specialized engineering
knowledge, expertise, and experience to
evaluate.
Table of Contents
I. Background
A. BSEE Statutory and Regulatory
Authority and Responsibilities
B. Purpose and Summary of the
Rulemaking
C. Summary of Documents Incorporated by
Reference
II. Discussion of Public Comments on the
Proposed Rule
III. Section-by-Section Summary and
Responses to Comments on the Proposed
Rule
IV. Derivation Table
V. Procedural Matters

I. Background
A. BSEE Statutory and Regulatory
Authority and Responsibilities
The applicable authority for this
rulemaking is the Outer Continental
Shelf Lands Act (OCSLA), 43 U.S.C.
1331–1356a. OCSLA, enacted in 1953
and substantially revised it 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 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 ensure
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-andregulations.
BSEE’s regulatory program covers a
wide range of OCS facilities and
activities, including drilling,
completion, workover, production,
pipeline, and decommissioning
operations. This rule is applicable to
operations that involve deepwater
development projects, subsea tieback
development technology, or projects or
systems that use new or unusual
technology.
B. Purpose and Summary of the Rule
The purpose of this rule is to improve
the requirements and information
submission process for oil and gas
operations in deepwater and for
operations that propose the use of new

PO 00000

Frm 00003

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4700

71077

or unusual technology equipment or
procedures. The final rule achieves this
purpose by adding requirements for new
or unusual technology projects,
including HPHT projects, reorganizing
the deepwater project information
submission process, and requiring I3P
review of certain submissions.
Together, these regulations will better
ensure that operators consider and
submit sufficient information to BSEE at
an early enough stage in the process so
that operators and BSEE can adequately
address any issues concerning
equipment selection, design, and
fabrication.
C. Summary of Documents Incorporated
by Reference
The Office of the Federal Register has
regulations concerning incorporation by
reference. 1 CFR part 51. These
regulations require that, for a final rule,
agencies must discuss in the preamble
to the rule the way in which materials
that the agency incorporates by
reference are reasonably available to
interested persons and how interested
parties can obtain the materials.
Additionally, the preamble to the rule
must summarize the material. 1 CFR
51.5(b). The text immediately below
summarizes the documents
incorporated by reference in 30 CFR
250.198 and the changes to the
regulatory text. This section of the
preamble concludes with a discussion
regarding the availability of the
documents that are incorporated by
reference.
API Spec. 6A, Specification for
Wellhead and Christmas Tree
Equipment, Twentieth Edition, October
2010; Addendum 1, November 2011;
Errata 2, November 2011; Addendum 2,
November 2012; Addendum 3, March
2013; Errata 3, June 2013; Errata 4,
August 2013; Errata 5, November 2013;
Errata 6, March 2014; Errata 7,
December 2014; Errata 8, February
2016; Addendum 4, June 2016; Errata 9,
June 2016; Errata 10, August 2016.
This specification defines
requirements for the design of valves,
wellheads, and Christmas tree
equipment that is used during drilling
and production operations. This
specification includes requirements
related to dimensional and functional
interchangeability, design, materials,
testing, inspection, welding, marking,
handling, storing, shipment, purchasing,
repair, and remanufacture. This
document is currently incorporated by
reference elsewhere in 30 CFR part 250,
and BSEE is adding a reference to this
standard in existing §§ 250.518 and
250.619.

E:\FR\FM\30AUR2.SGM

30AUR2

ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES2

71078

Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Rules and Regulations

American National Standards
Institute (ANSI)/API Specification
(Spec.) 11D1, Packers and Bridge Plugs,
Third Edition, April 2015, Errata 1,
August 2019.
This specification provides minimum
requirements and guidelines for packers
and bridge plugs used downhole in oil
and gas operations. The performance of
this equipment is often critical to
maintaining well control during drilling
and production operations. This
specification provides requirements for
the design, design verification and
validation, materials, documentation
and data control, repair, shipment, and
storage of packers and bridge plugs.
This document is currently incorporated
by reference, and BSEE is updating this
standard from the second to the third
edition.
API Spec. 17D, Design and Operation
of Subsea Production Systems—Subsea
Wellhead and Tree Equipment, Second
Edition, Reaffirmed November 2018,
Addendum 1, September 2015; Errata,
September 2011; Errata 2, January 2012;
Errata 3, June 2013; Errata 4, July 2013;
Errata 5, October 2013; Errata 6, August
2015; Errata 7, October 2015.
This specification provides
requirements for subsea wellheads,
mudline wellheads, and drill-through
mudline wellheads, as well as vertical
and horizontal subsea trees. These
devices are located on the seafloor, and,
therefore, ensuring the safe and reliable
performance of this equipment is
extremely important. This specification
identifies the tooling necessary to
handle, test, and install the equipment.
It also specifies the parameters for
design, material, welding, quality
control (including factory acceptance
testing), marking, storing, and shipping
for both individual sub-assemblies (used
to build complete subsea tree
assemblies) and complete subsea tree
assemblies. This document is currently
incorporated by reference elsewhere in
30 CFR part 250, and BSEE is adding
references to this standard in existing
§§ 250.518 and 250.619.
NACE Standard MR0175–2003,
Standard Material Requirements, Metals
for Sulfide Stress Cracking and Stress
Corrosion Cracking Resistance in Sour
Oilfield Environments, Revised January
17. 2003.
This standard describes general
principles and provides requirements
and recommendations for the selection
and qualification of metallic materials
for equipment used in oil and gas
production, and in natural-gas
sweetening plants, in hydrogen sulfide
(H2S)-containing environments, where
the failure of such equipment can pose
a risk to the health and safety of the

VerDate Sep<11>2014

22:47 Aug 29, 2024

Jkt 262001

public and personnel or to the
environment. Application of this
standard can help avoid costly corrosion
damage to equipment. This standard
supplements, but does not replace, the
material requirements contained in
applicable design codes, standards, or
regulations. This standard also
addresses all mechanisms of cracking
that can be caused by H2S, including
sulfide stress cracking, stress corrosion
cracking, hydrogen-induced cracking
and stepwise cracking, stress-oriented
hydrogen-induced cracking, soft zone
cracking, and galvanically induced
hydrogen stress cracking. This standard
does not include and is not intended to
include design specifications. This
document is currently incorporated by
reference elsewhere in 30 CFR part 250,
and BSEE is adding references of this
standard in existing §§ 250.518 and
250.619.
The American Petroleum Institute
(API) provides free online public access
to view read-only copies of its key
industry standards, including a broad
range of technical standards. All API
standards that are safety-related and that
are incorporated into Federal
regulations are available to the public
for free viewing online in the
Incorporation by Reference Reading
Room on API’s website at: https://
publications.api.org. In addition to the
free availability of these standards for
viewing on API’s website, hardcopies
and printable versions are available for
purchase from API. The API website
address to purchase standards is:
https://www.api.org/products-andservices/standards/purchase.
NACE International (NACE) standards
can be accessed through the American
National Standards Institute (ANSI).
The ANSI Incorporated by Reference
(IBR) Portal provides access to many
standards that have been incorporated
by reference in the U.S. Code of Federal
Regulations (CFR). These standards
incorporated by the U.S. government in
rulemakings are offered at no cost in
‘‘read only’’ format and are presented
for online reading. However, there are
no print or download options. The
website can be accessed at: https://
ibr.ansi.org.
For the convenience of the viewing
public who may not wish to purchase or
view the incorporated documents
online, the documents may be inspected
at BSEE’s offices at: 1919 Smith Street,
Suite 14042, Houston, Texas 77002
(phone: 1–844–259–4779), or 45600
Woodland Road, Sterling, Virginia
20166 (email: regs@bsee.gov), by
appointment only. An appointment is
required to ensure personnel are
available to accommodate the request

PO 00000

Frm 00004

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4700

and to account for competing agency
obligations or concerns, including those
related to public health and natural
disasters. Additional information about
where these documents can be
inspected or purchased can be found at
§ 250.198, Documents incorporated by
reference, or by sending a request by
email to regs@bsee.gov.
II. Discussion of Public Comments on
the Proposed Rule
In response to the proposed rule,
BSEE received 9 sets of submitted
comments containing general
statements, specific comments on the
proposed provisions, and discussions of
provisions not included in the proposed
rule. Comments included submittals
from the following entities: 1
manufacturer, 5 companies, 1 industry
organization, 1 non-governmental
organization, and 1 classification
society. All relevant comments are
posted at the Federal eRulemaking
portal: https://www.regulations.gov. To
access the comments at that website,
enter BSEE–2021–0003 in the Search
box. BSEE reviewed all comments
submitted, and this section of the
preamble contains brief summaries of
the relevant comments, as well as
BSEE’s responses.
BSEE received multiple comments
expressing general support for the
proposed rule. Some of the commenters
who expressed general support for the
proposed rule also provided specific
detailed comments, which we have
addressed further in section III of this
preamble. While these commenters
voiced support broadly for certain
proposed changes, some of them also
disagreed with other specific proposals
and provided suggested revisions.
Multiple commenters also provided
statements or comments that were not
relevant to the proposed rule, and
therefore BSEE is not addressing them
in this final rule.
General Comments
Summary of comments related to
incremental submission of plans:
Multiple commenters suggested that
BSEE clarify the regulations to allow for
incremental submission of certain plans.
Response: BSEE disagrees with the
commenters’ suggestions to allow for
incremental submission of certain plans.
Incremental submission of plans would
complicate the BSEE approval process
and require additional BSEE time and
resources to verify compliance with all
requirements. This piecemeal approach
increases the potential for errors or gaps
within the plans, which may delay
project implementation. The DWOP
process is purposefully divided into

E:\FR\FM\30AUR2.SGM

30AUR2

Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Rules and Regulations

ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES2

multiple plans to allow BSEE approval
of certain operations as the project is
developed. For example, BSEE approval
of certain Conceptual Plans would allow
for the wells to be completed or the
installation of certain equipment, while
BSEE approval of the DWOP would
allow for well production. BSEE
requires all pertinent information
associated with the applicable plans
within the DWOP process to be
submitted as required in §§ 250.220
through 250.248. Furthermore, the final
rule provides clarity for the appropriate
timing and submission requirements for
all plans covered under the DWOP
process (e.g., see revisions to §§ 250.201,
250.220, 250.225, and 250.226). This
final rule also clarifies that not all
projects will require the submittal of
each of the three Conceptual Plans and
a DWOP. Specifically, certain New or
Unusual Technology Conceptual Plans
or New or Unusual Technology Barrier
Equipment Conceptual Plans may not be
required to have an associated Project
Conceptual Plan or DWOP.
Comments Related to the Independent
Third Party (I3P)
Summary of comments: Multiple
commenters expressed concerns that the
proposed rule would substantially
expand the role of I3Ps beyond the
scope of expected duties. The
commenters also requested clarification
regarding the role and expected
deliverables of I3Ps, including I3P
actions concerning verification,
validation, and certification and how
those fit in with the terms ‘‘fit for
purpose’’ and ‘‘fit for service.’’
Response: BSEE agrees with the
commenters that the I3P requirements
should be clarified and throughout this
rulemaking has revised the roles and
expected responsibilities for I3Ps. For
example, BSEE has provided
supplemental regulatory text that
clarifies the meaning of the terms ‘‘fit
for purpose’’ and ‘‘fit for service’’ and to
identify that an I3P makes a ‘‘fit for
purpose’’ determination and an operator
makes a ‘‘fit for service’’ determination.
These added definitions are consistent
with the guidance of BSEE NTL Nos.
2019–G02 and 2019–G03.
In response to the comments, BSEE
has also removed the term
‘‘certification’’ as it pertains to
determining what is ‘‘fit for purpose’’
and ‘‘fit for service’’ and is clarifying
that a statement from the appropriate
entity is sufficient instead of a
certification statement.2 BSEE has also
2 Notwithstanding this terminology change,
operators and I3Ps should be aware that willfully
and knowingly making materially false statements

VerDate Sep<11>2014

22:47 Aug 29, 2024

Jkt 262001

removed the term ‘‘certification’’ as it
pertains to I3Ps throughout Subpart B.
See Section III of this preamble for a
complete discussion regarding the
updated I3P expectations and
requirements.
Summary of comment: A commenter
acknowledged that I3Ps can be a
powerful tool, but stated that BSEE must
ensure that the criteria for third party
reviewers is sufficient.
Response: BSEE agrees with the
commenter that I3Ps can be a useful tool
for added review and verifications. In
this final rule, BSEE has clarified the
I3P qualifications and expectations to
help ensure appropriately qualified
entities are performing this important
work and that BSEE has clear oversight
of the process.
Summary of comments related to
continued use of NTLs: Multiple
commenters expressed concerns with
consistency between existing BSEE
guidance (NTL No. 2019–G02 and NTL
No. 2019–G03) and the proposed rule
and were unsure as to whether BSEE
intended to replace or supplement the
BSEE guidance.
Response: BSEE has made many
revisions throughout the final rule to
provide consistency with existing BSEE
guidance in the NTLs. For example,
BSEE has added the definitions of ‘‘fit
for purpose’’ and ‘‘fit for service’’ to the
final rule to provide that consistency
(see Section III of this preamble for
discussions on consistency and
clarification of the content of the
guidance documents). If the NTLs
conflict with this final rule, the final
rule is controlling, and BSEE will revise
the NTLs, as necessary.
Summary of comments related to
significance determination: A
commenter asserted that the rule was
incorrectly identified as a nonsignificant action. The commenter
asserted that the rule includes several
significant alterations to the DWOP
process currently used by both the oil
and natural gas industry and BSEE,
including a substantial expansion of the
circumstances that would trigger the
DWOP process, as well as an expansion
of the circumstances that would require
review by I3Ps. The commenter
requested that BSEE reevaluate the
significance analysis.
Response: The Office of Information
and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) in the
Office of Management and Budget
determined that this rule is not
significant for purposes of Executive
Order 12866, as amended. BSEE
disagrees with the commenter’s
to the government are actionable under 18 U.S.C.
1001.

PO 00000

Frm 00005

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4700

71079

assertion that the rule should be
considered significant. The DWOP
process that is clarified in this rule is
the same process that BSEE has been
using to review new and unusual
technologies and new and unusual
technologies barriers for more than 20
years. Under its current regulations,
BSEE has established conditions of
approval through the DWOP process
under the authority of § 250.141, ‘‘May
I ever use alternate procedures or
equipment?’’, to enable it to review and
approve applications using new
technologies. In response to the
commenters request to reevaluate the
significance criteria, BSEE has
conducted a final analysis of the
regulations, and OIRA confirmed that
this final rule is not a significant
regulatory action. A summary of that
analysis can be found in Section V of
this preamble.
Summary of comments related to
grandfathering ongoing approvals and
actions: Multiple commenters expressed
concerns that the proposed rule would
impact and significantly delay ongoing
approval for projects that have already
been proposed and subject to BSEE
review before the effective date of the
rule, or for equipment that has already
been reviewed by BSEE. The
commenters identified that some of the
projects have already undergone years
of review.
Response: BSEE agrees with the
commenters and revised § 250.201 by
adding new paragraph (d) to clarify that
all plans covered under the DWOP
process that are initially submitted after
the effective date of this rule must
comply with the requirements of this
subpart. DWOPs that were submitted to
BSEE for approval prior to the effective
date of this rule, including revised or
amended DWOPs, do not have to follow
the new DWOP process and may
continue to follow the process that was
in effect before the effective date of
these final regulations. BSEE considers
Conceptual Plans and DWOPs to be
submitted when BSEE receives the
initial submittal. BSEE will work on a
case-by-case basis to ensure there are no
significant delays for those ongoing
projects or reviews. BSEE may allow
review pursuant to the new regulations
if such a review is requested by the
operator.
Comments Related to the Use of New or
Unusual Technology
Summary of comments: A commenter
requested that BSEE not classify
equipment or procedures used in an
HPHT environment as new or unusual
technology, as the HPHT technology is
expanding and maturing.

E:\FR\FM\30AUR2.SGM

30AUR2

ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES2

71080

Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Rules and Regulations

Response: BSEE disagrees with the
commenter and does not consider HPHT
equipment to be fully mature. BSEE
considers HPHT equipment to be
potentially high risk because it requires
complex material selection, material
testing, design analysis, and validation
testing. BSEE understands and supports
many engineering standards that are
being updated to address HPHT design.
However, at this point BSEE intends for
operations in an HPHT environment to
be fully reviewed and approved to
ensure safety and environmental
protection. BSEE will continue to
evaluate HPHT projects, and at an
appropriate time may revise the
regulations to remove HPHT from being
considered new or unusual technology
once BSEE determines that it is fully
established.
Summary of comments: Multiple
commenters recommended that BSEE
provide means to communicate about
equipment or procedures that are or are
not considered new or unusual
technology and a means for equipment
or procedures initially deemed to be
new or unusual technology to later be
deemed as falling outside the definition
of ‘‘new or unusual technology.’’
Response: BSEE is not developing a
list of equipment or procedures
considered to be new or unusual
technology. It is impractical for BSEE to
list every potential piece of equipment
or procedure that may fall under the
definition of new or unusual technology
as there may be an infinite number of
variations of each type of equipment or
procedure. Furthermore, BSEE reviews
each piece of equipment and procedure
individually to ensure that the
equipment or procedure is appropriate
for the specific project proposed. This
rule sets the parameters of what is
considered new or unusual technology.
BSEE anticipates that over time,
consistently successful implementation
of certain new or unusual technologies
will lead to BSEE revising the criteria
for determining what is considered new
or unusual technology. After
appropriate experience and analysis of
data, in a future rulemaking BSEE may
decide to no longer treat certain
equipment or procedures used in an
HPHT environment as new or unusual
technology. For example, BSEE has
become familiar with the freestanding
hybrid riser (FSHR) systems and does
not consider that equipment new or
unusual technology. In 2019, BSEE
removed many of the FSHR prescriptive
requirements and associated
certifications from the DWOP (see 84 FR
21932).
Summary of comments: Multiple
commenters expressed concerns that

VerDate Sep<11>2014

22:47 Aug 29, 2024

Jkt 262001

only operators can propose the use of
new or unusual technology under the
DWOP process.
Response: The current regulatory
structure focuses on entities—such as
lessees, operators, and grant holders—
that submit permits to BSEE for review
and approval; this final rule, therefore,
focuses on regulation of those entities
that use the permitting processes.
Summary of comments: Multiple
commenters expressed concerns that the
full DWOP process should not be
required to facilitate review of new or
unusual technology and recommended
that BSEE provide clear expectations
and timing for all plans covered under
the DWOP process and actions or
operations that can be taken during the
process.
Response: In this final rule, BSEE has
clarified the DWOP process and the
timing associated with each Conceptual
Plan and the DWOP, as applicable.
BSEE has revised multiple sections to
reflect the appropriate timing (including
what actions or operations can be taken
during the DWOP process) and
submission requirements for all plans
covered under the DWOP process (e.g.,
see revisions to §§ 250.201, 250.220,
250.225, and 250.226). BSEE has also
clarified in other sections (see, e.g.,
§ 250.220) that certain New or Unusual
Technology Conceptual Plans or New or
Unusual Technology Barrier Equipment
Conceptual Plans (which may be used
for drilling and decommissioning) may
not be required to have an associated
Project Conceptual Plan or DWOP. This
clarification helps limit burdens on
industry, as not every proposed use of
new or unusual technology will require
the submission of all plans defined in
the DWOP process; only those plans
that are applicable will be required.
There is a difference between the DWOP
process and submitting a DWOP. The
DWOP process identifies the
overarching requirements for all
associated plans (i.e., the Project
Conceptual Plan, New or Unusual
Technology Conceptual Plan, New or
Unusual Technology Barrier Equipment
Conceptual Plan, and the DWOP). The
DWOP itself is just one plan included
within the DWOP process. BSEE expects
operators to follow the DWOP process
as appropriate, which may only require
the submittal of a certain Conceptual
Plan.
Summary of comments: A commenter
expressed concerns that the proposed
rule is overly prescriptive when
identifying new or unusual technology
and barriers. This commenter expressed
that the proposed rule may limit or stifle
innovation.

PO 00000

Frm 00006

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4700

Response: BSEE disagrees with the
commenter’s concerns that the rule is
overly prescriptive. These regulations
outline the requirements and
expectations for using new or unusual
technology. These regulations will not
limit or stifle innovation because BSEE
uses the DWOP process to evaluate and
approve new or unusual technology, not
to limit the type of technology that may
be submitted. BSEE has worked
successfully with industry for many
years to implement new or unusual
technology, and BSEE will continue to
work with any operator on the proposed
use of any new or unusual technology,
even if that use is not explicitly
identified in the regulations. If an
operator has any questions about the
applicability of the regulations to any
new or unusual technology or how the
process will work for a specific
equipment or process, that operator may
contact the appropriate Regional
Supervisor for guidance and actions on
a case-by-case basis.
Summary of comments related to
overlap between the contents of
Conceptual Plans and the DWOP:
Multiple commenters expressed
concerns that there is significant overlap
among the Conceptual Plans and the
DWOP requirements for the submission
of information.
Response: BSEE agrees in part that the
Conceptual Plans and the DWOP may
require the submission of similar
information. However, the final rule
will not significantly change the
contents and requirements of the Project
Conceptual Plan and the DWOP. This
final rule clarifies the nature of the
required information submitted with
each Conceptual Plan and DWOP (see
revisions to §§ 250.227 through
250.242). BSEE recognizes that the New
and Unusual Technology Conceptual
Plan and New and Unusual Barrier
Equipment Technology Conceptual Plan
have potentially similar requirements
relative to the Project Conceptual Plan
and DWOP. However, the Conceptual
Plans require the general operational
concepts and basis of design while the
DWOP identifies the specific design,
fabrication, installation, and operational
requirements for the equipment.
Summary of comments: Multiple
commenters requested that BSEE
provide guidance for using alternate
procedures or equipment requests for
using industry standards not
incorporated by BSEE. A commenter
also recommended BSEE make the
process for granting alternate
procedures or equipment and departure
requests transparent to the public.
Response: Current BSEE regulations
already outline the requirements for

E:\FR\FM\30AUR2.SGM

30AUR2

ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES2

Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
alternate procedures or equipment and
departures in accordance with
§§ 250.141 and 250.142, respectively. In
reference to the transparency of the
alternate procedure or equipment and
departure requests, BSEE posts approval
information on the BSEE website at:
https://www.data.bsee.gov/Company/
Approvals/Default.aspx.
Summary of comments: A commenter
requested that BSEE increase
inspections, develop procedures to
effectively enforce safety violations, and
improve oversight measures to fulfill its
mandate.
Response: This rulemaking clarifies
the DWOP process to ensure BSEE
receives proper information to evaluate
and approve new or unusual
technology. BSEE has an established
inspection program independent of the
DWOP process to help ensure
compliance with the regulations and
enforce safety requirements. The
equipment approved by BSEE through
the DWOP process will be inspected
pursuant to the existing inspection
program. This rule does not alter the
existing inspection program for the
actual operations. That inspection
program is outside of the scope of this
rulemaking. However, BSEE is always
seeking to improve its regulatory
oversight and enforcement and
appreciates receiving relevant
recommendations.
Summary of comments: A commenter
expressed concern that the confidential
and intellectual information submitted
throughout the DWOP process should
be safeguarded and not released to the
public domain.
Response: BSEE agrees with the
commenter’s concerns about the release
of confidential business information and
will withhold such information from
public disclosure in accordance with
law (see, e.g., the Freedom of
Information Act, 5 U.S.C. 552).
Summary of comment: A commenter
requested that BSEE provide guidelines
for how long DWOP process review is
anticipated to take to better align
schedules leading to first production.
Response: BSEE cannot provide
timelines for DWOP process review. The
review time for the DWOP process is
handled on a case-by-case basis, as each
process is unique to a particular project.
The size of the project and complexity
of the project, equipment, and processes
all factor into the length of time
necessary for DWOP process review.
Summary of Comments Related to
Economic Data
A commenter stated that the Proposed
Rule is expected to increase the cycle
time by one to two years for new major

VerDate Sep<11>2014

22:47 Aug 29, 2024

Jkt 262001

capital projects due to the magnitude of
detailed information that is required to
be submitted with Conceptual Plans,
both for projects of a conventional
nature and for projects that involve the
use of ‘‘new or unusual technology’’ (as
defined in the Proposed Rule). The
commenter asserted that this increased
cycle time for a project will impact the
economics and delay the schedule of the
project.
The commenter also stated that the
scope of Supplemental DWOP is
expanded well beyond the current
requirements, and Table 2 of the Initial
Regulatory Impact Analysis does not
take this into account since it holds flat
the number of Supplement DWOPs
(312) to the Baseline for DWOP
Revisions for Equipment Change (312).
The commenter asserted that the change
in scope could well cause the number
of Supplement DWOPs to double over
the baseline. The commenter further
asserted that this would cause the 10year cost reported in Table 7 for both
industry and government to be under
reported.
Response: BSEE disagrees with the
assertion that the rule will lead to
substantial delays in capital projects.
Industry is already submitting much of
the project information for BSEE
approval, so the burden is not
anticipated to be significant. Based on
the Final Regulatory Impact Analysis
(RIA), the overall reporting burden on
industry is expected to be an additional
67 hours per report compared to the
baseline, which is not reasonably likely
to delay or increase the cycle time for
HPHT investment or deployment.
BSEE also disagrees with the
commenter’s assertion that the rule will
expand the scope and lead to large
increases in the number of
Supplemental DWOP Reports compared
to the baseline. BSEE has clarified that
certain Conceptual Plans must be
submitted for each piece of equipment
at an assembly level. This final rule also
clarifies the scope of § 250.247 and
identifies what conditions require
operators to submit Supplemental
DWOPs consistent with the existing
longstanding practice for submittal of a
Supplemental DWOP. The DWOP
process clarified in this rule is the same
process that BSEE has been using to
review new and unusual technologies
and new and unusual technologies
barriers for many years. Under existing
regulations, BSEE has established
conditions of approval for new
technologies for more than 20 years
through the DWOP process under the
authority of § 250.141, ‘‘May I ever use
alternate procedures or equipment?’’
BSEE expects that the increased clarity

PO 00000

Frm 00007

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4700

71081

regarding requirements and submission
expectations provided by this rule may
in fact decrease the number of
Supplemental DWOPs that will need to
be submitted. A supplement to a DWOP
is required for applicable development
projects when there are certain changes
or additions that have not been
approved by BSEE. The Supplemental
DWOP will only be as complex as the
equipment or systems not covered in the
approved DWOP. BSEE uses this
supplemental process to ensure that all
applicable equipment is properly
reviewed and approved before
installation, well completion, or
production.
III. Section-by-Section Summary and
Responses to Comments on the
Proposed Rule
BSEE is finalizing revisions to the
following regulations:
Subpart A—General
Definitions (§ 250.105)
Summary of Proposed Rule Revisions
BSEE proposed to add definitions for
‘‘BOP [blowout preventer] systems and
related equipment’’ and ‘‘HPHT
environment.’’
The proposed definition of ‘‘BOP
systems and related equipment’’
included all pressure controlling and
pressure containing well control
equipment that may or will be exposed
to the well’s maximum anticipated
surface pressure (MASP) during any
phase of operation (i.e., drilling,
completion, workover, intervention, or
abandonment). The proposed definition
also explained that well control
equipment includes equipment that is
installed for the purpose of pressure
control and containment when it
becomes necessary to physically enter a
well bore during drilling, completion,
workover, intervention, or abandonment
modes of operation. The proposed
definition of ‘‘BOP systems and related
equipment’’ is consistent with how
BSEE defined the term in NTL No.
2019–G03.
The proposed definition of HPHT
environment was moved from
§ 250.804(b) to this section and revised
to refer to well conditions: (1) that
require equipment assigned a pressure
rating greater than 15,000 psia or
temperature rating greater than 350
degrees Fahrenheit; (2) where the MASP
or shut in tubing pressure (SITP) is
greater than 15,000 psia at the seafloor
for a well with a subsea wellhead or at
the surface for a well with a surface
wellhead; or (3) with a flowing
temperature greater than 350 degrees
Fahrenheit measured at the seafloor for

E:\FR\FM\30AUR2.SGM

30AUR2

71082

Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Rules and Regulations

a well with a subsea wellhead or at the
surface for a well with a surface
wellhead. The proposed definition is
consistent with BSEE’s current
definition of HPHT environments in
existing § 250.804(b) and is identical to
the definition in NTL No. 2019–G03.
Summary of Final Rule Revisions
BSEE is finalizing the proposed
revisions to § 250.105 with minor
clarifications. BSEE is revising the
proposed definition of BOP systems and
related equipment to clarify that well
control equipment includes equipment
that is installed for the purpose of
pressure control and ‘‘pressure’’
containment. This revision clarifies the
original intent of the proposed
definition.
BSEE is also revising the proposed
definition of HPHT environment to
clarify that the criteria for evaluating
MASP, SITP, and flowing temperatures
are evaluated ‘‘at’’ the seafloor instead
of ‘‘on’’ the seafloor. The temperature
measuring device may be several feet
above the actual seafloor. The device is
generally located on the subsea tree and
can be as high as 25 feet above the
mudline.
Summary of comments: A commenter
expressed concerns that BSEE is not
including in the rule all of the
definitions contained in the existing
BSEE NTL Nos. 2019–G02 and 2019–
G03.
Response: BSEE does not agree that
adding all of the definitions from the
NTLs are necessary. BSEE has
determined that some of the definitions
in the NTL are more appropriate in the
context of the associated guidance
contained in the NTLs. However, as
described in Section III of this preamble
and in response to comments, BSEE has
revised the definitions of ‘‘BOP systems
and related equipment’’ and ‘‘HPHT
environment’’ in the proposed rule for
consistency with BSEE NTL Nos. 2019–
G02 and 2019–G03. The referenced
NTLs were created prior to significant
BSEE HPHT reviews occurring. Now
that BSEE has been reviewing HPHT
projects for several years, we have
identified what information is pertinent
for regulation. BSEE will revise the
existing NTLs, as necessary, to provide

additional guidance for HPHT
operations. The content of the existing
applicable NTLs may still be relevant,
but they may be revised to reflect the
content incorporated into these
regulations and updated processes.
Summary of comments: A commenter
expressed concerns that the definition
of BOP systems and related equipment
is too broad and may be interpreted to
include equipment beyond what is
traditionally considered a BOP system.
Response: BSEE disagrees with the
commenter. BSEE considers any piece
of temporary equipment used to contain
or control well bore fluids and pressure
during drilling, completions, workover,
intervention, or abandonment
operations to be part of the BOP systems
or related equipment. The concept of
BOP system and related equipment has
been utilized for many years in the
existing BSEE regulations (see previous
§ 250.732(c) and existing § 250.735). The
definition of BOP systems and related
equipment provides clarity consistent
with the use of the term as identified in
the regulations and is not intended to
significantly alter or expand the scope
of the definition. If there are any
questions about what equipment is
properly defined as part of a BOP
system or related equipment, please
contact the appropriate BSEE Regional
Supervisor.
Summary of comments: A commenter
stated that the definition of HPHT
environment needs further clarity
regarding the terms MASP and ‘‘flowing
temperature’’ to ensure it is applied
appropriately.
Response: BSEE disagrees with the
commenter that the definition needs to
be revised to further explain the
terminology of the definition. This
definition of HPHT environment is
consistent with the definition of an
HPHT environment in current
regulations (see § 250.804(b)) and with
BSEE’s longstanding approach for
considering HPHT environment criteria,
including the use of the NTLs that
further clarify applicable terms like
MASP (e.g., BSEE NTL No. 2019–G03).
This rule is not changing the meaning
of any terms used within that definition,
and their meanings will continue
consistent with the current regulations

and guidance. If there are any questions
about what is considered an HPHT
environment, please contact the
appropriate BSEE Regional Supervisor.
Service Fees (§ 250.125)
Summary of Proposed Rule Revisions
BSEE proposed to revise paragraph
(a)(2) of § 250.125 by adding new
service fees for BSEE review of
submittals associated with the DWOP
process. Specifically, BSEE proposed
adding service fees for processing a
Project Conceptual Plan, New or
Unusual Technology Conceptual Plan,
New or Unusual Technology Barrier
Conceptual Plan, revised DWOP,
Combined Conceptual Plan/DWOP, and
Supplemental DWOP. BSEE also
proposed revising the cost recovery fee
amount for DWOP approval to reflect
current BSEE review and processing
timeframes. These service and cost
recovery fees would cover BSEE’s costs
for administrative and technical review
of each identified submittal and
processing.
Summary of Final Rule Revisions
BSEE is finalizing the service fee
categories as proposed with one minor
textual revision in paragraph (a)(2) of
§ 250.125. BSEE revised the fourth
category to include the word
‘‘Equipment’’ to make it consistent with
the title of that Conceptual Plan. BSEE
is also revising all the proposed service
fee amounts listed in paragraph (a)(2) to
more accurately reflect the revised
processes and the estimated BSEE
review time for the listed services. For
example, BSEE now expects a separate
New or Unusual Technology Barrier
Equipment Conceptual Plan for each
separate piece of applicable equipment
and has reduced the service fee amount
accordingly. Each project may require a
different number of New or Unusual
Technology Barrier Equipment
Conceptual Plans based on the
equipment being used. Accordingly, the
new fee reflects the BSEE evaluation
time per plan and not per project, which
was the basis of the fee initially
analyzed in the proposed rule. The
service fee amounts are revised as
follows:
Proposed fee
amount

ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES2

Service—processing of the following:
(2) Deepwater Operations Plan (DWOP) Process:
(i) Project Conceptual Plan ..............................................................................................................................
(ii) New or Unusual Technology Conceptual Plan ...........................................................................................
(iii) New or Unusual Technology Barrier Equipment Conceptual Plan ............................................................
(iv) DWOP ........................................................................................................................................................
(v) Revised DWOP ...........................................................................................................................................
(vi) Combined Conceptual Plan/DWOP ...........................................................................................................

VerDate Sep<11>2014

22:47 Aug 29, 2024

Jkt 262001

PO 00000

Frm 00008

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4700

E:\FR\FM\30AUR2.SGM

30AUR2

$2,510
32,611
71,570
13,907
896
8,959

Final fee
amount

$2,697
7,964
15,104
10,647
963
13,856

71083

Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
Proposed fee
amount

Service—processing of the following:
(vii) Supplemental DWOP ................................................................................................................................

ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES2

Summary of comments: A commenter
recommended that BSEE add a fee
schedule for an Original Equipment
Manufacturer (OEM) to submit a generic
equipment plan.
Response: BSEE disagrees with the
commenter regarding requiring an OEM
to submit an equipment plan and to add
a service fee for such a filing. The
DWOP process requires submittal of the
appropriate plans and permits (see
§ 250.201) by those entities who are
covered under the definition of ‘‘you,’’
which includes a lessee or designated
operator. BSEE is not including the
OEM as an entity to submit plans
because an OEM is not the end user of
the equipment. BSEE will review plans
specific to each project and prefers not
to review generic equipment plans in
addition to the project-specific plans, as
doing so would duplicate the review
burden on BSEE.
Summary of comments: A commenter
expressed concerns that only one
service fee should apply to each
Conceptual Plan covering the whole
project regardless of the number of
pieces of equipment or components
covered by the plan.
Response: BSEE agrees in part with
the commenter as only one service fee
is required for each applicable
Conceptual Plan (see §§ 250.227(t),
250.228(a)(15), and 250.229(j)). BSEE,
however, does not agree that all
Conceptual Plans can cover multiple
pieces of equipment. For example, BSEE
now expects a separate New or Unusual
Technology Barrier Equipment
Conceptual Plan for each separate piece
of applicable equipment and has
reduced the service fee amount
accordingly (see §§ 250.226(b)(5) and
250.226(c)(5)). Because the nature of
plan submittals and the number of plans
may vary for each project, BSEE has
determined that a service fee for BSEE
review on a per-plan basis more
accurately reflects the resources
expended than a service fee on a perproject basis.
Documents Incorporated by Reference
(§ 250.198)
Summary of Proposed Rule Revisions
BSEE proposed to revise paragraph
(e)(82) of § 250.198, which currently
incorporates ANSI/API Spec. 6A,
Specification for Wellhead and
Christmas Tree Equipment, to add new
references to §§ 250.518 and 250.619,

VerDate Sep<11>2014

22:47 Aug 29, 2024

Jkt 262001

making this standard applicable to
completion and workover operations.
The proposed changes to this paragraph
are administrative and reflect the
substantive changes made to §§ 250.518
and 250.619 that incorporate by
reference this standard and are
addressed further in the section-bysection discussion for these two
sections.
BSEE also proposed to revise
paragraph (e)(86) of § 250.198 to update
the incorporation of ANSI/API Spec.
11D1 to the third edition of that
standard. BSEE reviewed the new
edition and the differences between the
second and third editions of ANSI/API
Spec. 11D1 and determined that the
third edition is appropriate to
incorporate into the regulations. The
ANSI/API Spec. 11D1 third edition now
includes an improved testing procedure
for design verification and validation of
packers and bridge plugs. The most
significant change from the second
edition to the third edition was the
addition of the enhanced validation of
the testing processes.
BSEE also proposed to revise
paragraph (e)(91) of § 250.198, which
currently incorporates ANSI/API Spec.
17D, Design and Operation of Subsea
Production Systems—Subsea Wellhead
and Tree Equipment, Second Edition, to
add new references to §§ 250.518 and
250.619, making this standard
applicable to completion and workover
operations. The proposed changes to
this paragraph are administrative and
reflect the substantive changes made to
§§ 250.518 and 250.619 that incorporate
by reference this standard and are
addressed further in the section-bysection discussion for these two
sections.
BSEE also proposed to revise
paragraph (i)(1) of § 250.198, which
currently incorporates NACE Standard
MR0175–2003, Standard Material
Requirements, Metals for Sulfide Stress
Cracking and Stress Corrosion Cracking
Resistance in Sour Oilfield
Environments, Revised January 17,
2003, to add new references to
§§ 250.518 and 250.619, making this
standard applicable to completion and
workover operations. The proposed
changes to this paragraph are
administrative and reflect the
substantive changes made to §§ 250.518
and 250.619 that incorporate by
reference this standard and are
addressed further in the section-by-

PO 00000

Frm 00009

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4700

Final fee
amount

8,959

9,626

section discussion for these two
sections.
Summary of Final Rule Revisions
BSEE did not receive any comments
on the incorporation by reference of the
proposed industry standards in this
section and is including the proposed
language in the final rule without
change.
Summary of comments: Multiple
commenters expressed general support
for BSEE updating out of date standards
and requested BSEE to consider many
additional standards to be incorporated
into the regulations.
Response: BSEE supports the actions
of ensuring referenced standards are not
out of date and reflect the recent
editions; however, BSEE cannot add
new standards to this rulemaking
without specifically identifying them for
public comment. BSEE may consider all
of the recommended standards for
incorporation in future BSEE
rulemaking actions.
Summary of comments: A commenter
expressed concerns that reliance on
industry standards undermines safety.
Response: BSEE follows the policies
of OMB circular A–119, which directs
agencies to use voluntary consensus
standards in lieu of government-unique
standards, except when they are
inconsistent with law or otherwise
impractical. BSEE recognizes the
positive contribution of standards
development and related activities.
When properly conducted, standards
development can increase productivity
and efficiency in government and
industry, expand opportunities for
international trade, conserve resources,
improve health and safety, and protect
the environment. BSEE has reviewed
the incorporated standards to ensure
that they provide the necessary level of
safety. BSEE also complies with the
requirements to utilize standards
according to the National Technology
Transfer and Advancement Act (Pub. L.
104–113 (March 7, 1996)).
Subpart B—Plans and Information
This final rule will restructure
Subpart B—Plans and Information,
under the following undesignated
headings to assist the reader in finding
the subject matter provisions they are
looking for in the regulations:
—GENERAL INFORMATION;
—BARRIER EQUIPMENT AND
SYSTEMS;

E:\FR\FM\30AUR2.SGM

30AUR2

71084

Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Rules and Regulations

—ACTIVITIES AND POST-APPROVAL
REQUIREMENTS FOR THE EP, DPP,
DWOP, AND DOCD;
—DEEPWATER OPERATIONS PLAN
(DWOP) PROCESS;
—CONCEPTUAL PLANS; and
—DWOP APPROVAL.
General Information
Definitions (§ 250.200)

ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES2

Summary of Proposed Rule Revisions
BSEE proposed to revise paragraph (a)
of § 250.200 by adding the acronym
HPHT. BSEE also proposed to revise
paragraph (b) of § 250.200 by adding,
revising, or removing the following
definitions, as noted:
—Add a definition for Barrier
categorization to identify barriers as
one of the following two categories:
Category 1 Barrier, which would
mean any equipment, component, or
assembly that functions as part of a
primary barrier during any operational
phase of its life cycle. The operational
phases of the barrier equipment,
component, or assembly are drilling,
completion, workover, intervention,
injection, production, or abandonment;
and
Category 2 Barrier, which would
mean any equipment, component, or
assembly that normally functions as part
of a secondary barrier system in all
operational phases of its life cycle,
except when a primary barrier fails. The
operational phases of the barrier
equipment, component, or assembly are
drilling, completion, workover,
intervention, injection, production, or
abandonment. BSEE may consider nonbarrier structural components of a
barrier system as Category 2 barriers if
failure of that structural component
could reasonably result in a primary
barrier failure.
—Add a definition for Primary Barrier
system, which would mean the
component or group of components
that are designated as the principle
means of isolating the source of
hydrocarbons and/or pressure from
people and the environment.
—Add the definition for Secondary
Barrier system, which would mean
the component or group of
components that are designated as the
secondary means of isolating the
source of hydrocarbons and/or
pressure from people and the
environment.
—Revise the definition for New or
unusual technology to include
equipment or procedures used for any
drilling, completion, workover,
intervention, injection, production,
pipeline, platform, decommissioning,

VerDate Sep<11>2014

22:47 Aug 29, 2024

Jkt 262001

or abandonment operation that meets
any of the following criteria:
(1) Has not been approved for use or
used extensively in a BSEE OCS Region;
(2) Has not been approved for use or
used extensively under the anticipated
operating conditions;
(3) Has operating characteristics that
are outside the performance parameters
established in 30 CFR part 250;
(4) Will operate in an HPHT
environment as defined in proposed
§ 250.105; or
(5) Is part of a primary or secondary
barrier system that uses materials,
design analysis techniques, validation
testing methods, or manufacturing
processes not addressed in existing
industry standards.
—Replace the definition for nonconventional production or
completion technology with subsea
tieback development technology. The
definition of subsea tieback
development technology would still
include the current examples of
floating production systems, tension
leg platforms, spars, Floating
Production Storage and Offloading
Vessel (FPSO) systems, guyed towers,
compliant towers, subsea manifolds,
and subsea production components,
and would add subsea wells, hybrid
wells, and other subsea completion
components to the list of examples.
—Remove the definitions of
modification, offshore vehicle,
resubmitted OCS plan, revised OCS
plan, and supplemental OCS plan.
Summary of Final Rule Revisions
BSEE received and considered
comments on this section and is
finalizing the proposed § 250.200 with
the following clarifying revisions:
—Adding the acronym for Independent
Third Party (I3P). This addition helps
provide clarity for this common term
used in the regulations.
—Revising the definition of Category 1
Barrier to remove ‘‘system’’ from the
term. BSEE is removing this term
because it is unnecessary to define
from a system level and is sufficient
to define on an individual level. BSEE
wants to ensure the flexibility to
review the appropriately identified
equipment even if only a single piece
of equipment.
—Revising the definition of Category 2
Barrier to clarify that it means any
equipment, component, or assembly
that normally functions as part of a
secondary barrier ‘‘during any’’
operational phase instead of ‘‘in all’’
operational phases. This revision
clarifies when a Category 2 Barrier
should be used. BSEE also is

PO 00000

Frm 00010

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4700

clarifying that BSEE may consider
non-barrier structural components of
a barrier system as a Category 2
Barrier if failure of this structural
component could reasonably result in
a ‘‘primary’’ barrier failure. This
revision clarifies the consideration of
a Category 2 Barrier to be consistent
with its definition and applicability
only when there is a Primary Barrier
failure instead of any barrier failure.
—Adding the definition of Fit for
Purpose to mean a determination
made by an I3P at the conclusion of
I3P review that the barrier equipment
design has been verified and validated
in conformance with recognized
engineering standards and any
additional project specification
requirements; that the material
selection, design verification analysis,
design validation testing, and quality
control are appropriate to justify the
technical specifications; and that the
technical specifications meet or
exceed a project’s site specific
functional requirements. The addition
of this definition provides clarity
about the expectations and actions of
an I3P and is consistent with the
associated revisions to §§ 250.226 and
250.230 through 250.233.
—Adding the definition of Fit for
Service to mean a determination made
by the operator that the material
selection, design verification analysis,
design validation testing, and quality
control of the barrier equipment is
appropriate to justify the technical
specifications and that the technical
specifications meet or exceed a
project’s site-specific functional
requirements. This addition provides
clarity about the expectations and
actions of an operator when providing
required determinations for a sitespecific project and is consistent with
the associated requirements of the
DWOP process.
—Revising the definitions of Primary
Barrier and Secondary Barrier by
removing the terms ‘‘system’’, ‘‘or
group of components’’, and ‘‘of
hydrocarbons and/or pressure’’,
resulting in the defined terms
meaning the equipment, material,
component, or assembly that is
designated as the primary or
secondary means of isolating the
hydrocarbon pressure source from
people and the environment. These
revisions provide clarity and
consistency with other applicable
definitions (e.g., Category 1 Barrier
and Category 2 Barrier) and with how
the terms are used in § 250.206. Also
based on comments, BSEE clarified
the applicability of the barriers
encompassing those that isolate a

E:\FR\FM\30AUR2.SGM

30AUR2

ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES2

Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
‘‘hydrocarbon pressure source.’’ This
clarification confirms the original
intent of the definitions, further
ensuring personnel safety and
environmental protection from the
potential release of hydrocarbons.
—Revising the definition of Subsea
Tieback Development Technology by
removing an unnecessary acronym
and adding production risers and
export risers to the list of applicable
technology. These identified risers
have always been an integral part of
subsea tieback development
technology and BSEE is adding them
for clarification.
Summary of comments: Multiple
commenters expressed concerns that the
definition of ‘‘New or unusual
technology’’ is too broad and would
unnecessarily expand the application of
the DWOP process. Commenters also
expressed concerns that the language
‘‘used extensively’’, which is used in the
definition for ‘‘New and unusual
technology’’, is vague and gives no
criteria as to when equipment will no
longer be considered new or unusual in
the context of HPHT equipment. Some
commenters recommended that the
definition of new or unusual technology
should not include equipment covered
by industry standards.
Response: BSEE disagrees in part with
the commenters’ concerns. BSEE
recognizes that the definition in this
rule expands the scope of what is
considered new or unusual technology;
however, this expansion helps cover the
critical projects, equipment, or
procedures identified by BSEE that must
follow the DWOP process. BSEE has
determined that this expanded scope is
necessary to ensure safe operations in
HPHT environments.
To clarify the scope, BSEE has also
revised other definitions in this final
rule to clarify the equipment, materials,
components, or assemblies that may be
used (e.g., Category 1 and 2 Barriers,
Primary and Secondary Barriers, and
Subsea Tieback Development
Technology). BSEE has also successfully
used the longstanding definition of
‘‘New or unusual technology’’ in the
current regulations in § 250.200, which
already uses the language ‘‘used
extensively’’ as part of the definition.
Accordingly, BSEE does not agree that
the term will be too vague for its
intended purposes.
In this rule BSEE is not using industry
standards as a criterion for determining
new or unusual technology. Multiple
standards could be used for one piece of
equipment, and BSEE has not
incorporated into the regulations every
potential industry standard. Also, BSEE

VerDate Sep<11>2014

22:47 Aug 29, 2024

Jkt 262001

may not have reviewed or evaluated the
standards not incorporated in the
regulations prior to Conceptual Plan or
DWOP submittal, and standards
generally do not address site specific
reviews of the equipment. New
technology applications are
individualized even when the same idea
is used in different locations. BSEE
needs to ensure the equipment or
procedures are appropriate for the
conditions in which they will be used.
Once industry and BSEE understand the
full risks and mitigations from the
specific application and use, then BSEE
may determine that the equipment no
longer needs to be categorized as new or
unusual technology.
Summary of comments: Multiple
commenters expressed concerns with
the expectations of the I3P and
operators for determining what is ‘‘fit
for purpose’’ and ‘‘fit for service,’’
respectively. The commenters
recommended that BSEE clarify the
differences between determining what is
‘‘fit for purpose’’ and what is ‘‘fit for
service,’’ consistent with BSEE
guidance.
Response: BSEE agrees with the
commenters, and the final rule now
includes definitions for both terms. The
addition of these definitions provides
clarity and certain expectations for the
I3P or operator conducting the relevant
determinations. The added definitions
are consistent with the guidance of
BSEE NTL Nos. 2019–G02 and 2019–
G03, with minor corresponding edits to
reflect their applicability specific to the
DWOP process.
Summary of comments: A commenter
expressed concerns that the proposed
rule extends the barrier envelope
beyond the scope of isolating pressure
systems from hydrocarbons.
Response: BSEE agrees with the
commenter. BSEE has revised the
definitions of primary and secondary
barriers to clarify applicability to
hydrocarbon pressure sources. These
revisions to the definitions clarify
BSEEs original intent and limit the
scope of the primary and secondary
barriers to only hydrocarbon pressure
sources.
What plans and information must I
submit before I conduct any activities on
my lease or unit? (§ 250.201)
Summary of Proposed Rule Revisions
BSEE proposed to revise existing
paragraph (a) of § 250.201 to reflect the
creation of the New or Unusual
Technology Conceptual Plan, the New
or Unusual Technology Barrier
Conceptual Plan, and the Project
Conceptual Plan. This section provides

PO 00000

Frm 00011

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4700

71085

general information about each plan and
identifies when BSEE approval is
necessary. BSEE proposed paragraph (a)
to clarify when each plan approval is
required for certain activities. An
operator is only required to submit the
applicable Conceptual Plan(s). Each of
these Conceptual Plans are standalone
plans and are not contingent upon
approval of each other.
BSEE also proposed to remove
existing paragraph (c), which includes
the limiting information provisions. The
limiting information provisions allow
the Regional Director to limit the
amount of information or analyses
required to be included with the
submitted plans or documents, covered
by Subpart B of 30 CFR part 250, under
certain conditions. The narrower scope
of the information described in the
proposed rule aligns with the Bureau’s
roles, authorities, and regulations
established in 2011 when BSEE
separated from the Bureau of Ocean
Energy Management (BOEM) (see 76 FR
64432).
Summary of Final Rule Revisions
BSEE received and considered
comments on this section and is
finalizing the proposed section with the
following revisions based on the
comments received:
—In paragraph (a), BSEE is adding ‘‘(or
relevant portions thereof)’’ after the
listed plans. This addition clarifies
that certain lease activities can be
conducted if the appropriate portions
of the Conceptual Plans are submitted
to BSEE and approved as identified in
§ 250.226;
—In the table under paragraph (a)(1),
BSEE is revising the information
under the heading ‘‘Additional
information’’ to designate the first
paragraph as (a)(1)(i) and clarifying
that the New or Unusual Technology
Conceptual Plan must be approved by
BSEE before it will approve any
associated application or permit
involving the use of new or unusual
technology. BSEE is also adding new
paragraphs (a)(1)(ii), (iii), and (iv) to
clarify that the New or Unusual
Technology Conceptual Plan may be
independent of a project Conceptual
Plan or DWOP, that BSEE will not
approve the Conceptual Plan until all
associated I3P Reports (if required)
are submitted and reviewed by BSEE,
and that the Conceptual Plan may not
contain equipment identified as a
primary or secondary barrier;
—In the table under paragraph (a)(2),
and throughout the rule, BSEE is
revising the name of the New or
Unusual Technology Barrier
Conceptual Plan to New or Unusual

E:\FR\FM\30AUR2.SGM

30AUR2

ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES2

71086

Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Rules and Regulations

Technology Barrier Equipment
Conceptual Plan. This revision is
made based on comments received to
clarify the scope of the plan and to be
consistent with the terminology and
use of equipment covered by the plan.
BSEE is also clarifying that the New
or Unusual Technology Barrier
Equipment Conceptual Plan
requirements apply to new or unusual
technology ‘‘that is identified’’ as
barrier equipment. The final rule also
revises paragraph (a)(2)(ii) to state that
this type of plan must be approved
‘‘by BSEE before it will approve any
associated application or permit
application (e.g., pipeline, platform,
APD, APM) involving the use of new
or unusual technology identified as
barrier equipment as applicable for
the permit scope.’’ The final rule also
adds new paragraph (a)(2)(iii), which
states that BSEE will not approve this
Conceptual Plan until all associated
I3P Reports are submitted and
reviewed by BSEE. These additions
clarify the BSEE Conceptual Plan
approval process and submittal
requirements associated with the
applicable Conceptual Plans. These
additions are based on comments
received and are consistent with the
relevant revisions to the associated
plans covered under § 250.226
(‘‘When and how must I submit each
applicable Conceptual Plan?’’);
—In the table under paragraph (a)(3),
BSEE is clarifying that the Project
Conceptual Plan may include certain
new or unusual technology. BSEE is
also revising the information under
the heading ‘‘Additional information’’
to designate the proposed paragraph
as (a)(3)(i), removing the incorrect
reference to the Application for
Permit to Drill (APD), and adding new
paragraph (a)(3)(ii) to clarify that
BSEE must approve any relevant new
or unusual technology associated with
completion operations before BSEE
approves the Project Conceptual Plan.
These additions clarify the BSEE
Project Conceptual Plan approval
process and submittal requirements
associated with the Project
Conceptual Plans. These revisions
ensure proper information has been
approved or is included with in the
applicable Conceptual Plan for BSEE
approval. These additions are based
on comments received and are
consistent with the relevant revisions
to the Conceptual Plans covered
under § 250.226 (‘‘When and how
must I submit each applicable
Conceptual Plan?’’). BSEE removed
the incorrect reference to the APD
because it is not applicable to the

VerDate Sep<11>2014

22:47 Aug 29, 2024

Jkt 262001

Project Conceptual Plan and activities
covered under that plan;
—In the table under paragraph (a)(4)(i),
BSEE removed the reference to the
new or unusual technology barrier
equipment because it is redundant
with the definition of new or unusual
technology; and
—BSEE added new paragraph (d) to
clarify that all DWOP process plans
initially submitted after the effective
date of this rule must comply with the
requirements of this subpart.
Summary of comments: A commenter
expressed concerns that the terms used
in the table are not consistent with the
definitions and requested that BSEE
provide clarification on when lease
activities can commence under each
applicable plan.
Response: BSEE agrees with the
commenter and has revised the table to
reflect the additional information
associated with the applicable plans.
BSEE has also revised § 250.226 to
further reflect the actions that may be
taken at each step of each applicable
plan (see the applicable discussions of
§ 250.226 in Section IV of this
preamble). The revisions to this section
and § 250.226 further clarify the original
intent of the proposed rule and the
ability to conduct certain lease activities
associated with the applicable plans.
Summary of comments: A commenter
requested that BSEE limit the request of
additional information at the
Conceptual Plan stage to the adequacy
of the requirements included in the plan
and the adequacy of the documentation
or verification of details.
Response: BSEE agrees in part with
the commenter and expects the request
for additional information under
paragraph (b) to be limited to that
applicable information needed to
evaluate the proposed plan or permit.
However, no revisions to this paragraph
are necessary as the context of the
current provisions are limited already to
the scope of the associated plan or
permit covered under paragraph (a).
How must I protect the rights of the
Federal government? (§ 250.202)
Summary of Proposed Rule Revisions
BSEE proposed to move the content of
existing § 250.204 to this section
without revision.
BSEE did not receive any comments
on this proposed section and is
including the proposed language in the
final rule without change.

PO 00000

Frm 00012

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4700

Are there special requirements if my
well affects an adjacent property?
(§ 250.203)
Summary of Proposed Rule Revisions
BSEE proposed to move the content of
existing § 250.205 to this section
without revision.
BSEE did not receive any comments
on this proposed section and is
including the proposed language in the
final rule without change.
Requirements for High Pressure High
Temperature (HPHT) Barrier Equipment
(§ 250.204)
Summary of Proposed Rule Revisions
BSEE proposed this new section to
clarify what information an operator
would be required to submit to BSEE if
the operator plans to install HPHT
barrier equipment. This section crossreferences the applicable DWOP process
requirements associated with the New
or Unusual Technology Barrier
Equipment Conceptual Plan (e.g.
§§ 250.229 and 250.242). These
additions are necessary to help ensure
that the equipment is fit for service in
the specific HPHT environment. BSEE’s
review and approval of information
submitted during the DWOP process is
intended to occur in conjunction with
BSEE’s review and approval of
associated applications or permits (e.g.,
APD, Application for Permit to Modify
(APM), pipeline, and production safety
system).
Summary of Final Rule Revisions
Based on comments received, BSEE is
revising this section to reflect the
sequential order of submission of the
applicable plans and permits and clarify
that if an operator plans to install HPHT
barrier equipment, then it must submit
information with its applicable Project
Conceptual Plan, New or Unusual
Technology Barrier Equipment
Conceptual Plan, DWOP, and applicable
permit(s). BSEE also clarified the last
sentence of the section to include
§§ 250.229 and 250.242 as examples
‘‘(e.g.,)’’ of the applicable DWOP Process
requirements.
Summary of comments: A commenter
expressed concerns that this section is
inconsistent with other submittal
requirements. The commenter also
stated that certain uses of HPHT barrier
equipment do not require every step in
the DWOP Process.
Response: BSEE agrees in part with
the commenter and is ensuring that this
section lists all plans that would be
applicable to the use of HPHT barrier
equipment. BSEE disagrees with the
commenter that revisions are necessary

E:\FR\FM\30AUR2.SGM

30AUR2

Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
to demonstrate that only parts of the
DWOP process apply. The last sentence
of this section already states that the
operator must follow the applicable
DWOP process requirements. This does
not mean that every DWOP process step
must be followed as there are situations
where certain parts may not be required.
For example, certain New or Unusual
Technology Barrier Equipment
Conceptual Plans do not require
submittal of a DWOP. BSEE is revising
the last sentence of the paragraph to
include a general reference to
§§ 250.229 and 250.242 as examples of
possible DWOP process requirements.
BSEE proposed to reserve § 250.205
and this section is reserved in this
regulation.
Barrier Equipment and Systems
What equipment does BSEE consider to
be a barrier? (§ 250.206)

ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES2

Summary of Proposed Rule Revisions
BSEE proposed that this section
codify some of the barrier concepts from
BSEE NTL No. 2009–G36. Many parts of
existing BSEE regulations under 30 CFR
part 250, subparts D, E, F, G, H, J, and
Q, are dedicated to establishing barrier
requirements. This section would clarify
that BSEE considers a barrier or barrier
system to be any engineered equipment,
materials, component, or assembly that
is installed to contain a hydrocarbon
pressure source(s) to prevent harm to
people or the environment. BSEE
recognizes barriers that are either nonmechanical or mechanical in nature,
permanently or temporarily installed,
pressure controlling, and/or pressure
containing barriers. Pressure controlling
barriers must be able to be activated on
demand. The proposed rule also
clarified that barriers or barrier systems
are required to be able to function and/
or be pressure tested repeatedly to
defined acceptance criteria. If the barrier
or barrier system is classified as Safety
and Pollution Prevention Equipment (as
described under § 250.801(a)), then it
must also be compliant with the leak
test requirements established in Subpart
H of 30 CFR part 250. Any specific
engineered equipment, materials,
components, or assembly that exist
within a barrier system that are not
tested would not be considered a
barrier. This section would not alter or
impact any existing regulation; it only
documents a principle that is the basis
of many BSEE regulations.
Summary of Final Rule Revisions
BSEE received multiple comments on
this section and has revised the
language in the final rule with the

VerDate Sep<11>2014

22:47 Aug 29, 2024

Jkt 262001

following revisions based on those
comments.
—BSEE is making this section
consistent with the revisions to the
definitions under § 250.200 and
clarifying that barriers are installed to
contain hydrocarbon pressure sources
to prevent harm to people and the
environment. This revision clarifies
the purpose of barriers and provides
consistent terminology;
—Removing the parenthetical that nonmechanical or mechanical in nature
barriers are only recognized by BSEE
as barriers. BSEE removed this
parenthetical to avoid confusion and
be consistent with the definitions and
terms defined in Subpart B of 30 CFR
part 250 and in § 250.200;
—Adding an example of activating a
barrier on demand to include the
parenthetical ‘‘(i.e., closed by an
operator or automated safety
system).’’ This was added to provide
guidance and clarity to the intent of
activation of a barrier and does not
change the associated requirement;
—Revising the second to last sentence to
clarify that operators must function
test and pressure test any pressure
controlling barriers and adding that
the operator must also pressure test
any pressure containing barrier to
defined acceptance criteria that can be
repeated. BSEE clarified these
requirements to eliminate confusion
about the types of testing that is
applicable to only pressure
controlling as opposed to pressure
containing barriers. BSEE does not
specify the exact testing requirements
or testing timeframes in order to not
limit the use of new or unusual
technology, such as single use barrier
technology. However, the operator
must identify and demonstrate the
defined acceptance criteria to ensure
that the barrier or barrier system can
be used as designated; and
—Removing the last proposed sentence
because Safety and Pollution
Prevention Equipment is already
covered under 30 CFR part 250,
subpart H and is unnecessary in
Subpart B.
Summary of comments: A commenter
recommended clarifying that the
barriers discussed in this section apply
to hydrocarbon sources to prevent the
requirements being taken out of context
for including other non-barrier pressure
containing components.
Response: BSEE agrees with the
commenter and removed the words ‘‘or
other’’ to clarify that the barriers are
installed to contain hydrocarbon
pressure sources. BSEE has revised this
section to ensure consistency with the

PO 00000

Frm 00013

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4700

71087

definitions of applicable terms and
clarify that the barrier envelope covered
by these definitions is limited to
hydrocarbon pressure sources. These
revisions to this section and
corresponding edits to the definitions
section clarify BSEEs original intent and
limit the applicable scope of the barrier
or barrier system to only hydrocarbon
pressure sources.
Summary of comments: A commenter
requested BSEE to clarify the term
‘‘activated on demand.’’
Response: BSEE agrees with the
commenter and clarified the term
‘‘activated on demand’’ by providing a
parenthetical that includes ‘‘closed by
an operator or automated safety
system.’’ This clarification does not
change the meaning or intent of the
proposed requirements and only
provides two examples of what is meant
by the term activated on demand.
Summary of comments: Multiple
commenters expressed concerns with
the purpose of function testing and
pressure testing of barriers and
suggested that function testing and
pressure testing are only used for
determining failures.
Response: BSEE agrees in part with
the commenters that function testing
and pressure testing help determine
failures; however, BSEE also uses
pressure testing and function testing to
help ensure that the barrier or barrier
system is capable of being used as
designed for the specific conditions.
This section does not specify any
specific function testing or pressure
testing acceptance criteria. BSEE
clarified these requirements to eliminate
confusion about the types of testing that
is applicable to only pressure
controlling as opposed to pressure
containing barriers. BSEE does not want
to limit the use of new or unusual
technology, such as single use barrier
technology, by specifying the exact
testing requirements or testing
timeframes. However, the operator must
identify and demonstrate the defined
acceptance standard to ensure that the
barrier or barrier system can be used as
designated.
How must barrier systems be used?
(§ 250.207)
Summary of Proposed Rule Revisions
BSEE proposed to require operators to
install and maintain a primary and
secondary barrier system to prevent a
loss of containment during any
operational phase of a well, flowline,
pipeline, production, or riser system. It
is BSEE’s goal to prevent loss of
containment by minimizing single point
failures wherever possible. Given the

E:\FR\FM\30AUR2.SGM

30AUR2

71088

Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Rules and Regulations

probability that any barrier may fail
during its service life due to age,
corrosion, wear, damage, the
environment, or accidents, the best
mitigation is redundancy. This section
would not alter or impact any existing
regulation; it only documents a
principle that is the basis of many BSEE
regulations.

This addition to the BSEE regulations is
not intended to alter any applicable
judicial process or change the
longstanding requirements of the BOEM
regulations. Pursuant to the
commenter’s suggestion, BSEE has
revised the regulation to reflect that the
actions ‘‘may’’ result in the lack of
compensation.

Summary of Final Rule Revisions
BSEE did not receive any comments
on this proposed section and is
including the proposed language in the
final rule without change.

What must I do to conduct activities
under the approved EP, DPP, or DOCD?
(§ 250.209)

Activities and Post-Approval
Requirements for the EP (Exploration
Plan), DPP (Development and
Production Plan), DWOP, and DOCD
(Development Operations Coordination
Document)
How must I conduct activities under an
approved EP, DPP, or DOCD?
(§ 250.208)

ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES2

Summary of Proposed Rule Revisions
BSEE proposed that this section be
similar to the language in 30 CFR
550.280, How must I conduct activities
under the approved EP, DPP, or DOCD?
During the 2011 regulatory split
between BSEE and BOEM, the content
of this section was inadvertently
removed from 30 CFR part 250;
however, the content is still applicable
to BSEE and should be included in 30
CFR part 250, as well as in 30 CFR part
550.
Summary of Final Rule Revisions
BSEE received and considered a
comment regarding this proposed
provision and includes the proposed
language in the final rule with the minor
wording change to paragraph (a)(2) to
state that the actions ‘‘may’’ result in the
lack of compensation and to fix an
incorrect citation. BOEM removed 30
CFR 556.77 from the regulations; the
new applicable regulation is 30 CFR
556.1102.
Summary of comment: A commenter
expressed concerns that the proposed
language does not reflect that lease
cancellation and right-of-way forfeiture
occur through a judicial process and
that the last sentence in paragraph (a)(2)
is not compatible with 30 CFR
550.185(b) and 30 CFR 556.77 because
those provisions do not categorically
preclude compensation in all
circumstances.
Response: BSEE disagrees with the
commenter in part. The language in
paragraph (a)(2), like 30 CFR
550.280(a)(2), accurately reflects the
language in 43 U.S.C. 1334(c) or (d), 30
CFR 550.185, and 30 CFR 556.1102.

VerDate Sep<11>2014

22:47 Aug 29, 2024

Jkt 262001

Summary of Proposed Rule Revisions
The content of this proposed section
would be similar to the language in 30
CFR 550.281, What must I do to conduct
activities under the approved EP, DPP,
or DOCD?, paragraphs (a) and (b).
During the 2011 regulatory split
between BSEE and BOEM, the content
of this section was inadvertently
removed from this part; however, the
content is still applicable to BSEE and
should be included in 30 CFR part 250,
as well as in 30 CFR part 550.
Summary of Final Rule Revisions
BSEE did not receive any comments
on this proposed section and is
including the proposed language in the
final rule without change.
Do I have to conduct post-approval
monitoring? (§ 250.210)
Summary of Proposed Rule Revisions
BSEE proposed to move this section
from § 250.282. BSEE also proposed to
add revisions to clarify that the Regional
Supervisor may direct operators to
conduct monitoring programs in
association with their approved EP,
DPP, DWOP, or DOCD.
Summary of Final Rule Revisions
BSEE received and considered a
comment regarding this proposed
provision and includes the proposed
language in the final rule without
change.
Summary of comment: A commenter
stated that paragraph (b) is vague and
ambiguous and fails to put industry on
notice of the standards with which it
must comply. The commenter
recommended that BSEE revise this
paragraph to clarify the requirements for
preparing and submitting monitoring
plans.
Response: BSEE disagrees with the
commenter and has successfully used
the language regarding monitoring
programs as a longstanding requirement
(see previous § 250.282). For example,
BSEE has successfully directed the use
of monitoring programs to minimize the
risk of vessel strikes to protected species
and provided clarifying guidance for

PO 00000

Frm 00014

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4700

implementing those monitoring
programs (see BSEE NTL No. 2012–
G01).
What are my new or unusual technology
failure reporting requirements?
(§ 250.211)
Summary of Proposed Rule Revisions
BSEE proposed to clarify the new or
unusual technology failure reporting
requirements. Currently, BSEE does not
receive new or unusual technology
failure data associated with approved
DWOPs; however, BSEE has recently
requested new or unusual technology
failure data as a condition of DWOP
approval. The proposed section would
require an operator to notify BSEE
within 30 days of a failure and provide
a written report identifying the root
causes of the failure. This new section
is intended to provide BSEE with a
better understanding of operational
limitations of equipment associated
with an approved DWOP.
Existing failure and incident reporting
requirements in §§ 250.188, What
incidents must I report to BSEE and
when must I report them?; 250.730,
What are the general requirements for
BOP systems and system components?;
and 250.803, What SPPE failure
reporting procedures must I follow?,
may be used to help fulfill the new or
unusual technology failure reporting
requirements of this section. This
section is not a substitute for other
currently applicable failure or incident
reporting requirements.
Summary of Final Rule Revisions
Based on comments received, BSEE is
revising this section by clarifying the
definition of a failure to include any
condition that prevents the equipment
from meeting its functional
specification. The final rule also
removes the terms ‘‘recovered and
repaired or replaced’’ as elements the
proposed rule listed as triggering a
requirement to notify the Regional
Supervisor. BSEE is also revising the
term ‘‘written report’’ to ‘‘failure
analysis report’’ and clarifies that an
operator must provide the failure
analysis report as soon as it is available
following the notification and that the
failure analysis report must include any
results and potential root causes. These
revisions provide consistency with the
same terminology and expectations for
failure reporting used throughout BSEE
regulations (e.g., §§ 250.188, 250.730
and 250.803).
Summary of comments: A commenter
stated that the proposed rule is too
broad and would capture non-failures.
For example, the commenter stated that

E:\FR\FM\30AUR2.SGM

30AUR2

Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
simply needing to recover equipment
does not mean the equipment
experienced a failure and does not
provide a distinction between failure
notification and submission of a failure
report.
Response: BSEE agrees with the
commenter and has revised the
definition of failure in this section to
mean any condition that prevents the
equipment from meeting its functional
specification. BSEE also removed the
requirement for reporting if the new or
unusual technology has to be recovered
and repaired or replaced. This revision
is necessary for consistency with similar
terminology used throughout BSEE
regulations and within the failure
reporting requirements and submissions
to BSEE. BSEE also revised this section
to provide clarity that the failure
analysis report must be submitted as
soon as available following the
notification. BSEE requires submittal of
the failure notice first and then
submittal of the failure analysis, thereby
providing a clear order for submittal of
failure information to BSEE.
Summary of comments: A commenter
expressed concerns that a root cause
analysis may not always be possible.
Response: BSEE agrees with the
commenter and understands that there
are circumstances where a root cause
analysis may not be possible. Therefore,
BSEE has revised this section to clarify
that the report must include any results
and potential root causes for the failure.
BSEE values failure data and uses the
failure information, including root
causes, to identify failure trends and
potential issues.
BSEE proposed to reserve §§ 250.212–
250.219, and these sections are reserved
in this regulation.
Deepwater Operations Plan (DWOP)
Process

ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES2

What is the DWOP process? (§ 250.220)
Summary of Proposed Rule Revisions
BSEE proposed to move the content
from § 250.286 to this section and
include the following revisions and
additions:
Proposed paragraph (a) of § 250.220
would clarify that the DWOP process is
not only used for review of subsea
tieback development technology, but
also applies to deepwater development
projects and other projects or systems
that use new or unusual technology
during any phase of drilling,
completion, workover, intervention,
injection, production, pipeline,
platform, decommissioning, or
abandonment operations. These
additions clarify when the DWOP
process is necessary and correspond

VerDate Sep<11>2014

22:47 Aug 29, 2024

Jkt 262001

with the proposed additions of the new
or unusual technology requirements.
Proposed paragraph (b) would add
that the DWOP process does not replace
other BSEE applications or permits (e.g.,
APD, APM, pipeline, and platform).
Other minor revisions to this paragraph
reflect the corresponding additions to
the proposed new or unusual
technology requirements for the DWOP
process.
Proposed paragraph (c) would clarify
that the DWOP process consists of two
phases: the Conceptual Plans and the
DWOP. The current DWOP regulations
do not differentiate between the DWOP
process and the DWOP plan itself, as
they currently use the term DWOP to
refer to both. This proposed section
would clarify the terms and is intended
to reduce confusion about the different
phases of the DWOP process. The
proposed DWOP requirements are not
intended to require the submittal of a
DWOP for operations not currently
covered under the DWOP plan stage
(e.g., drilling and decommissioning), but
would require submittal of the
appropriate Conceptual Plan. Proposed
§§ 250.227 through 250.229 would
identify the contents of the Conceptual
Plans. Proposed §§ 250.236 through
250.242 would identify what the DWOP
must contain.
Summary of Final Rule Revisions
Based on comments received, BSEE is
finalizing this proposed section and
including a new paragraph (d) to clarify
that not all projects will require the
submittal of all three Conceptual Plans
and a DWOP. Specifically, this revision
clarifies that projects requiring New or
Unusual Technology Conceptual Plans
or New or Unusual Technology Barrier
Equipment Conceptual Plans may not be
required to have an associated Project
Conceptual Plan or DWOP.
Summary of comments: Multiple
commenters expressed concerns that the
proposed rule lacks clarity for how the
DWOP process is fully used for all
applicable types of operations and if
each step of the DWOP process is
required for every type of equipment or
operation.
Response: BSEE agrees with the
commenters and has revised this section
by adding new paragraph (d) and the
respective DWOP process sections to
add clarity that not all projects will
require the submittal of each Conceptual
Plan and DWOP. There are
circumstances when only a New or
Unusual Technology Conceptual Plan or
a New or Unusual Technology Barrier
Equipment Conceptional Plan is
required to be submitted to BSEE
without a Project Conceptual Plan or

PO 00000

Frm 00015

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4700

71089

DWOP. For applicability requirements,
see § 250.225 for each Conceptual Plan
and § 250.235 for the DWOP.
When must I use the DWOP process?
(§ 250.221)
Summary of Proposed Rule Revisions
BSEE proposed to move the content
from § 250.287 to this section and to
clarify that the DWOP process is
applicable to any project in water
depths greater than 1000 feet and to any
project that will include the use of
subsea tieback development technology,
regardless of water depth, or new or
unusual technology for any drilling,
completion, workover, intervention,
injection, production, pipeline,
platform, decommissioning, or
abandonment operations. These
revisions provide consistency and
reflect corresponding additions to the
proposed new or unusual technology
and DWOP process requirements.
BSEE has always required DWOPs
when a development is situated in water
depths of 1000 feet or greater or when
subsea tieback development technology
is used in any water depth. BSEE
proposes to promulgate regulations that
include our existing practices regarding
the expansion of new or unusual
technology. BSEE also proposed to add
requirements for the DWOP process
when any new or unusual technology is
used for drilling, completion, workover,
intervention, injection, production,
pipeline, platform, decommissioning, or
abandonment projects. This would
provide consistency for all new or
unusual technology reviews.
Summary of Final Rule Revisions
BSEE received comments on this
section as proposed and is finalizing it
with a minor revision to paragraph (b)
to remove the words ‘‘you must.’’ This
paragraph was intended to be a
suggestion for operators to contact BSEE
if they have any questions about the
classification of certain technology and
is not a requirement.
Summary of comments: Multiple
commenters requested that BSEE list or
create a database that indicates what
equipment, components, or procedures
are considered new or unusual
technology or new or unusual barrier
technology.
Response: BSEE disagrees with this
comment and is not developing a
database to list every new or unusual
technology. It is the operator’s
responsibility to ensure any new or
unusual technology is appropriately
identified and approved by BSEE before
operational use. Also, such a database
may be of limited use as each OEM may

E:\FR\FM\30AUR2.SGM

30AUR2

71090

Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Rules and Regulations

have unique equipment designs and
individual components do not
necessarily all work together for specific
projects.
Summary of comments: A commenter
expressed concerns that this section
would unnecessarily expand the
complete DWOP process to cover
operations not previously covered by
the process and would create redundant
filings and impose undue burdens.
Response: BSEE disagrees with the
commenter. BSEE has clarified in other
sections (see § 250.220(d)) that projects
requiring New or Unusual Technology
Conceptual Plans or New or Unusual
Technology Barrier Equipment
Conceptual Plans (which may be used
for drilling and decommissioning) may
not be required to have an associated
Project Conceptual Plan or DWOP. This
clarification will eliminate any undue
burden on industry by only requiring
submission of the applicable plans in
the DWOP process.
BSEE proposed to reserve §§ 250.222–
250.224, and these sections are reserved
in this regulation.
Conceptual Plans
What are the types of Conceptual Plans
that I must submit? (§ 250.225)

ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES2

Summary of Proposed Rule Revisions
BSEE proposed a new section that
would identify the three types of
proposed Conceptual Plans:
—A Project Conceptual Plan would be
required for any project that is
planned in water depths greater than
1000 feet or will include the use of
subsea tieback development
technology, regardless of water depth
(see proposed § 250.221 paragraphs
(a)(1) and (2));
—A New or Unusual Technology
Conceptual Plan would be required
for any project or system that involves
equipment or systems that are
considered new or unusual
technology (see proposed § 250.200
for the definition of new or unusual
technology); and
—A New or Unusual Technology Barrier
Conceptual Plan would be required
for any project or system involving
new or unusual technology that is
also identified as a primary or
secondary barrier (see proposed
§ 250.200 for the definition of primary
or secondary barriers).
This proposed section would add
clarity by describing the proposed types
of Conceptual Plans. The proposed
requirements for each Conceptual Plan
are discussed in the applicable
corresponding sections, §§ 250.227
through 250.229. An operator must

VerDate Sep<11>2014

22:47 Aug 29, 2024

Jkt 262001

submit the applicable Conceptual
Plan(s) based on specifics of the
proposed project. The operator may be
required to submit multiple Conceptual
Plans.
Summary of Final Rule Revisions
BSEE received comments on this
section and is finalizing the proposed
content with the following revisions
based on the comments:
—Paragraph (a) is revised by adding
clarification that a Project Conceptual
Plan is also required if the project will
use new or unusual technology for
completion, injection, production,
pipeline, or platform projects. This
addition clarifies the scope of the
Project Conceptual Plan and how
applicable new or unusual technology
fits within that plan. A Project
Conceptual Plan would not be needed
when new or unusual technology is
being used for drilling or
decommissioning operations.
—Paragraph (b) is revised by making the
first sentence consistent with the
definition of new or unusual
technology by changing the proposed
phrase ‘‘involves equipment or
systems’’ to ‘‘involves equipment or
procedures’’. BSEE is also adding the
clarification that the New or Unusual
Technology Conceptual Plan is
applicable for drilling, completion,
workover, intervention, injection,
production, pipeline, platform,
decommissioning, or abandonment
operations. This revision clarifies the
scope of operations covered under the
New or Unusual Technology
Conceptual Plan.
—Paragraph (c) is revised to also clarify
that the New or Unusual Technology
Barrier Equipment Conceptual Plan is
applicable for drilling, completion,
workover, intervention, injection,
production, pipeline, platform,
decommissioning, or abandonment
operations. This revision clarifies the
scope of operations covered under the
New or Unusual Technology Barrier
Equipment Conceptual Plan. BSEE
also added ‘‘Equipment’’ to the title of
the plan to clarify the distinctions
between this plan and the New or
Unusual Technology Conceptual Plan.
Summary of comments: Multiple
commenters expressed concerns that the
proposed activities of drilling and
decommissioning cannot be covered
under a Project Conceptual Plan and is
outside the scope of previous BSEE
guidance and practice. The commenters
also expressed concerns that, if a Project
Conceptual Plan is required for drilling
operations, that requirement could not
be met before drilling.

PO 00000

Frm 00016

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4700

Response: BSEE agrees with the
commenters and has revised this section
to clarify that a Project Conceptual Plan
is not required for certain operations
(e.g., drilling and decommissioning).
This clarification is consistent with
BSEE guidance and the original scope of
the Project Conceptual Plan. BSEE does
not share the commenters’ concerns
about timing requirements prior to
drilling the well because drilling
operations are not covered under the
Project Conceptual Plan. BSEE has also
further clarified in § 250.226 when each
applicable Conceptual Plan is required
and the timing of conducting certain
operations covered under each plan.
Summary of comments: A commenter
asked if a non-site-specific voluntary
equipment Conceptual Plan and the
well design Conceptual Plan will still be
part of the HPHT approval process (see
BSEE NTL No. 2019–G02 and 2019–
G03).
Response: Non-site-specific voluntary
equipment Conceptual Plans are not
required. Operators should plan to
submit site-specific equipment
qualification for their HPHT project
pursuant to §§ 250.228 and 250.229 as
applicable. The identified content of the
Well Design Conceptual Plans is still
part of the HPHT process pursuant to
the applicable regulations referenced in
BSEE NTL 2019–G02 (e.g., see
§§ 250.420, 250.462, 250.505, 250.514,
250.518, 250.605, 250.613, 250.614, and
250.732).
Summary of comments: A commenter
expressed concerns that the proposed
rule is unclear regarding overlap
between the proposed New or Unusual
Technology Conceptual Plan and the
New or Unusual Technology Barrier
Conceptual Plan. The commenter
requested that BSEE clarify that barrier
equipment would only require the New
or Unusual Technology Barrier
Conceptual Plan and not the New or
Unusual Technology Conceptual Plan.
Response: BSEE agrees in part with
the commenter and has revised the
name of the New or Unusual
Technology Barrier Conceptual Plan to
the New or Unusual Technology Barrier
Equipment Conceptual Plan. This
revision clarifies the scope of the New
or Unusual Technology Barrier
Equipment Conceptual Plan and uses
consistent terminology and descriptions
of equipment covered by the plan. If a
New or Unusual Technology Barrier
Equipment Conceptual Plan is required,
the operator would not have to also
submit a New or Unusual Technology
Conceptual Plan for the same equipment
(see revisions to § 250.201).

E:\FR\FM\30AUR2.SGM

30AUR2

Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
When and how must I submit each
applicable Conceptual Plan? (§ 250.226)

ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES2

Summary of Proposed Rule Revisions
BSEE proposed to move the content
from §§ 250.288 and 250.290 to
§ 250.226, with revisions to clarify that
an operator must submit its Conceptual
Plans to the Regional Supervisor after
the operator decides on the general
concept(s) for a project or system, and
before it begins final engineering design
of the equipment, well, well safety
control system, or subsea production
systems. These revisions would help
ensure that the operator considers the
information associated with the
proposed Conceptual Plans when
submitting an associated application or
permit application (e.g., APD, APM,
pipeline, platform). BSEE proposed to
add a table to organize and clarify
information associated with the three
types of proposed Conceptual Plans as
follows:
Proposed paragraph (a) of § 250.226
would include content from § 250.290
and would further clarify that BSEE
must approve a Project Conceptual Plan
before an operator may complete a
production or injection well or install a
tree.
Proposed paragraph (b) would add the
following requirements regarding a New
or Unusual Technology Conceptual
Plan:
—The operator may not install any new
or unusual technology until BSEE
approves the New or Unusual
Technology Conceptual Plan;
—BSEE must approve the New or
Unusual Technology Conceptual Plan
before BSEE will approve any
associated application or permit (e.g.,
pipeline, platform, APD, APM); and
—The Regional Supervisor may require
the operator to use an I3P to perform
certain functions and verifications in
accordance with § 250.231, as
applicable. This addition would allow
I3P services to assist BSEE’s review of
new or unusual technology that may
involve technically complex
engineering and require a high degree
of specialized engineering knowledge,
expertise, and experience to evaluate
thereby helping to ensure that BSEE
conducts appropriate reviews of new
or unusual technology plans.
Proposed paragraph (c) would add the
following requirements regarding a New
or Unusual Technology Barrier
Conceptual Plan:
—The operator must submit a New or
Unusual Technology Barrier
Conceptual Plan for any project or
system involving new or unusual

VerDate Sep<11>2014

22:47 Aug 29, 2024

Jkt 262001

technology that is also identified as a
primary or secondary barrier;
—BSEE must approve the New or
Unusual Technology Barrier
Conceptual Plan prior to new or
unusual technology barrier equipment
installation;
—BSEE must approve the new or
unusual technology barrier equipment
before BSEE will approve any
associated application or permit
application (e.g., pipeline, platform,
APD, APM); and
—An operator submitting a New or
Unusual Technology Barrier
Conceptual Plan must use an I3P to
perform certain functions and
verifications in accordance with
proposed § 250.231,
What are the I3P review requirements
for Conceptual Plan reviews?
Summary of Final Rule Revisions
Based on comments received, BSEE is
finalizing the proposed content with the
following revisions:
—Revising the introductory paragraph
by removing the term ‘‘begin final’’
engineering design and replacing it
with ‘‘finalize.’’ This revision clarifies
the intent of the submittal timing
requirement concerning Conceptual
Plans. BSEE wants to ensure that
engineering design is not complete
before BSEE approves the concept in
case any change is required.
—Paragraph (b)—Revising the order of
content under the table heading
‘‘Additional information’’ and adding
paragraphs (b)(1)(i), (ii), and (iii),
paragraph (b)(3), and (b)(4) to read as
follows: (1) Operations and approval
timing requirements are as follows:
(i) You may not install any new or
unusual technology until BSEE
approves your New or Unusual
Technology Conceptual Plan;
(ii) You may not complete any
production or injection well or install a
tree before BSEE has approved all New
or Unusual Technology Conceptual
Plans associated with all well
completion equipment and the Project
Conceptual Plan; and
(iii) BSEE must first approve your
New or Unusual Technology Conceptual
Plan associated with subsea production
systems before the DWOP may be
approved. You may install this new or
unusual technology following BSEE
permit approval (e.g., pipeline
application) and prior to DWOP
approval.
(2) The Regional Supervisor may
require the operator to use an I3P to
perform certain functions and
verifications in accordance with
§ 250.231, as applicable.

PO 00000

Frm 00017

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4700

71091

(3) BSEE will not approve a New or
Unusual Technology Conceptual Plan
until you submit and BSEE reviews all
I3P Reports (if any required).
(4) BSEE must approve your New or
Unusual Technology Conceptual Plan
before approval of any associated
application or permit (e.g., pipeline
application, platform application, APD,
APM).
(5) You must submit separate New or
Unusual Technology Conceptual Plans
for each piece of equipment at an
assembly level (e.g., BOP, tree, wellhead
system, or tubing head spool).
These revisions clarify certain
expectations and timing for applicable
submittals associated with the New or
Unusual Technology Conceptual Plan.
—Paragraph (c)—Revising paragraphs
(c)(2), (c)(3), and (c)(4) and adding
paragraphs (c)(2)(i), (ii), and (iii) and
paragraph (c)(5) to read as follows:
(c)(2) Operations and approval timing
requirements are as follows:
(i) BSEE must approve your New or
Unusual Technology Barrier Equipment
Conceptual Plan prior to you installing
new or unusual technology identified as
barrier equipment
(ii) You may not complete any
production or injection well or install
the tree before BSEE has approved all
the New or Unusual Technology Barrier
Equipment Conceptual Plans associated
with all well completion equipment and
the Project Conceptual Plan, and
(iii) BSEE must first approve your
New or Unusual Technology Barrier
Equipment Conceptual Plan associated
with subsea production systems before
the DWOP may be approved. You may
install this equipment with BSEE permit
approval (e.g., pipeline application) and
prior to DWOP approval.
(3) BSEE must first approve your New
or Unusual Technology Barrier
Equipment Conceptual Plan before
BSEE will approval any associated
application or permit application (e.g.,
pipeline application, platform
application, APD, APM).
(4) BSEE will not approve New or
Unusual Technology Barrier Equipment
Conceptual Plans until you submit and
BSEE reviews all required I3P Reports
pursuant to § 250.231.
(5) You must submit separate New or
Unusual Technology Barrier Equipment
Conceptual Plans for each piece of
equipment at an assembly level (e.g.
BOP, tree, wellhead system, tubing head
spool).
These revisions clarify certain
expectations and timing for applicable
submittals associated with the New or
Unusual Technology Barrier Equipment
Conceptual Plan.

E:\FR\FM\30AUR2.SGM

30AUR2

71092

Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Rules and Regulations

Summary of comments: Multiple
commenters expressed concerns that it
is unrealistic to submit all the
applicable Conceptual Plan information
before beginning final engineering
design.
Response: BSEE agrees in part with
the commenters and has revised this
section to clarify the expectation that
applicable Conceptual Plans require
submittal of the plans before finalizing
the engineering designs. This revision
clarifies the intent of the submittal
timing requirement concerning
Conceptual Plans. BSEE wants to ensure
that engineering design is not complete
before BSEE approves the concept in
case any change is required. This
revision also provides latitude for the
operators to make the determination of
what constitutes a finalized engineering
design.
Summary of comments: Multiple
commenters expressed concerns that the
proposed rule establishes unrealistic
sequencing for Conceptual Plan
approvals and requested clarification to
ensure certain operations (e.g., drilling)
can commence as appropriate before
BSEE approval of certain plans (e.g.,
Project Conceptual Plan and DWOP).
Response: BSEE agrees in part with
the commenter and has clarified the
expectations in this section and timing
requirements associated with each
applicable Conceptual Plan. BSEE has
also revised multiple other sections to
also reflect the appropriate timing and
submission requirements for all plans
covered under the DWOP process (e.g.,
see revisions to §§ 250.201, 250.220, and
250.225).
What must the Project Conceptual Plan
contain? (§ 250.227)

ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES2

Summary of Proposed Rule Revisions
BSEE proposed to require a Project
Conceptual Plan to include the basis of
design that the operator would use to
develop the field. Proposed paragraphs
(a), (b), (c), and (i)(1) of § 250.227 would
reflect the content of existing § 250.289.
In addition, BSEE proposed that the
section would require the operator to
include certain information in the
Project Conceptual Plan, including, but
not limited to, information such as
facility descriptions, schedule of
development activities, certain
schematics, and well information.
Summary of Final Rule Revisions
Based on comments received, BSEE is
finalizing the content of proposed
§ 250.227 with the following revisions:
—Redesignating proposed paragraphs
(i)(5) as (j), (j) through (q) as (k)
through (r) respectively, and (r) as (t).

VerDate Sep<11>2014

22:47 Aug 29, 2024

Jkt 262001

—Adding new paragraph (s) to list
requests for any alternate procedures
or equipment or departure requests
associated with the applicable
Conceptual Plans needed for well
completion operations.
—Revising paragraphs (c), (d), (f), (i), (j),
and (q) as follows:
Paragraph (c)—clarifies that BSEE
expects the ‘‘estimated’’ distance from
each well.
Paragraph (d)—changes the
requirement from a confirmation that
the subsea production safety system will
comply with 30 CFR part 250, subpart
H to a statement that the subsea
production safety system will be
designed to comply with Subpart H.
Paragraph (f)—clarifies that for a
subsea tieback to an existing facility the
operator must submit: a description of
known structural modifications needed
to accommodate the tieback, including a
statement about whether these may be
minor or major modifications; the BSEEapproved service life of the existing
facility; and a description of how
modifications will be evaluated for
effects on the BSEE-approved service
life.
Paragraph (i)—clarifies (i)(1) to
include a ‘‘proposed’’ well location plat;
(i)(2) to include a ‘‘conceptual’’ subsea
field schematic containing
infrastructure as applicable and adds
additional examples, including
manifolds, subsea booster pumps, and
high integrity pressure protection
systems; and (i)(4) to include
‘‘proposed’’ wellbore and completion
schematics.
Paragraph (j)—clarifies that BSEE
expects only a description of the drilling
and completion systems.
Paragraph (q)—removes the term
‘‘activities’’ because some of the listed
items are not activities but are physical
objects. BSEE also added risers to the
list of examples applicable to new or
unusual technology.
BSEE understands that certain
information is not finalized at this stage
of a project, and these revisions clarify
the BSEE intent to reflect information
that is available or that can be available
for the Project Conceptual Plan.
Summary of comments: Multiple
commenters requested that BSEE clarify
the informational requirements for the
Project Conceptual Plan. The
commenters expressed concerns that
specific information may not be
precisely known at this stage and may
be more appropriate for the DWOP.
Response: BSEE agrees with the
commenters that certain types of
information may not be available at this
stage of a project and has revised this

PO 00000

Frm 00018

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4700

section to better reflect the submission
of information that is appropriate and
available at the Project Conceptual Plan
stage (e.g., the ‘‘estimated’’ distance
from each well, a description of only
‘‘known’’ modifications to a facility,
schematics including the ‘‘proposed’’
well locations, and a ‘‘description’’ of
the drilling system). These revisions
clarify the submission requirements and
help alleviate the commenters’ concerns
regarding information availability for
the Project Conceptual Plan.
Summary of comments: A commenter
expressed concerns that the term ‘‘Basis
of Design’’ means different things to
different operators and recommended
that BSEE remove the term.
Response: BSEE agrees that the term
‘‘Basis of Design’’ can mean different
things depending on the components in
question and their application. BSEE
does not agree that removing the term is
necessary because it is a common
conceptual term well understood in the
industry. BSEE is involved with
operators in the early stages of HPHT
projects, and uncertainties regarding
terminology can easily be addressed on
a case-by-case basis to ensure submittals
fulfill regulatory requirements.
What must the New or Unusual
Technology Conceptual Plan contain?
(§ 250.228)
Summary of Proposed Rule Revisions
BSEE proposed paragraph (a) of
§ 250.228 to require certain information
to be included in the New or Unusual
Technology Conceptual Plan including,
but not limited to, how the New or
Unusual Technology Conceptual Plan
fits within the overall site-specific
project, a description of the technology,
information on inspection and testing
capabilities, risk assessments and failure
mode analysis, operating procedures,
and schematics.
BSEE proposed paragraph (b) to allow
for the Regional Supervisor to require
the use of an I3P according to proposed
§ 250.230 if the system or equipment
requires a high degree of specialized or
technically complex engineering
knowledge, expertise, and experience to
evaluate, or is not addressed in existing
industry standards. This addition would
help BSEE ensure that the equipment or
process is appropriate for use in the
specific environmental and operating
conditions. In addition, the Regional
Supervisor would be able to require
operators to follow I3P requirements
under § 250.231, on a case-by-case basis.
Finally, this section proposed to instruct
operators to direct any questions about
I3P requirements for New or Unusual

E:\FR\FM\30AUR2.SGM

30AUR2

Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
Technology Conceptual Plans to the
Regional Supervisor.

ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES2

Summary of Final Rule Revisions
Based on comments received, BSEE is
finalizing the content of proposed
§ 250.228 with the following revisions:
—Paragraphs (a)(5) and (a)(5)(ii) add the
requirement to describe not only the
barrier, but also the ‘‘safety’’ system as
applicable. Paragraph (a)(11) clarifies
the detailed schematic is applicable to
identifying all components. Paragraph
(a)(13) clarifies that the list of
alternate procedures or equipment
requests and departure request
required are those applicable to the
new or unusual technology proposed
in a New or Unusual Technology
Conceptual Plan. And finally,
paragraph (a)(14) removes the
requirements for a ‘‘certification’’ and
requires instead a statement that the
technology is fit for service.
—Paragraphs (b) and (b)(1) fix incorrect
cross references since the final rule
updated the applicable section
numbers, and make some grammatical
improvements.
Summary of comments: A commenter
suggested that BSEE should move this
section and section § 250.229 outside of
the DWOP process and expressed
concerns that these sections expand the
circumstances in which thew DWOP
process is required.
Response: BSEE disagrees with the
commenter that this section should be
moved outside of the DWOP process.
However, in light of these concerns,
BSEE has clarified the applicability of
each Conceptual Plan to relevant
operations. BSEE has clarified in other
sections (e.g., see § 250.220) that
projects requiring certain New or
Unusual Technology Conceptual Plans
or New or Unusual Technology Barrier
Equipment Conceptual Plans (which
may be used for drilling and
decommissioning) may not be required
to have an associated Project Conceptual
Plan or DWOP. This clarification helps
limit the burden on industry as not
every project using new or unusual
technology requires every plan covered
under the DWOP process.
Summary of comments: Multiple
commenters expressed concerns that the
proposed rule inadvertently requires I3P
to certify ‘‘fit for service,’’ a standard
ostensibly outside the I3P’s expertise.
The commenters also expressed
concerns with the ‘‘certification’’
statement associated with both ‘‘fit for
purpose’’ and ‘‘fit for service’’
determinations and suggested that BSEE
remove the term ‘‘certification’’ from the
requirements.

VerDate Sep<11>2014

22:47 Aug 29, 2024

Jkt 262001

Response: BSEE agrees with the
commenters that there is confusion
surrounding the terminology of ‘‘fit for
purpose’’ and ‘‘fit for service’’ and how
the I3P provides appropriate
verifications and reviews. BSEE has
therefore added definitions of both ‘‘fit
for purpose’’ and ‘‘fit for service’’ to
clarify who is responsible for each
statement. In response to the comments,
BSEE has also removed the term
‘‘certification’’ as it pertains to fit for
purpose and fit for service and is
clarifying that a statement from the I3P
or operator respectively is sufficient.
Such a statement is within the scope of
the I3P’s expertise.
Summary of comments: A commenter
expressed concern with the discretion of
the Regional Supervisor to require an
I3P. The commenter stated that this
provision does not provide any
regulatory certainty when an I3P will be
required. The commenter also expressed
concerns that the Regional Supervisor
discretion for the use of an I3P may
cause setbacks or inefficiencies to the
Conceptual Plan process.
Response: The existing HPHT
regulation (e.g., § 250.232) and NTLs
provide guidelines for I3P report
requirements. BSEE has incorporated
most of the I3P guidance from the
existing NTLs into these regulations,
which provide clarity regarding when
an I3P is required. Under § 250.228(b),
BSEE may require I3P reports for this
type of Conceptual Plan when the
operator proposes to use a ‘‘system or
equipment [that] requires a high degree
of specialized or technically complex
engineering knowledge, expertise, and
experience to evaluate, or if existing
industry standards do not address the
system or equipment you propose to
use.’’ BSEE is retaining this discretion to
allow it to adjust to equipment
development and maturation over time.
BSEE encourages operators to reach out
to the Regional Supervisor early in the
project development process to get
additional clarity regarding when an I3P
will be necessary (§ 250.228(b)(2)). BSEE
will notify the operator at the earliest
possible stage to help ensure there are
no setbacks or delays with I3P
applicability in the Conceptual Plan
approval.
What must the New or Unusual
Technology Barrier Equipment
Conceptual Plan include? (§ 250.229)
Summary of Proposed Rule Revisions
BSEE proposed this section to require
the following information to be
included in the New or Unusual
Technology Barrier Conceptual Plan: a
description of how the New or Unusual

PO 00000

Frm 00019

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4700

71093

Technology Barrier Conceptual Plan fits
within the overall site specific project;
a diagram depicting the primary and
secondary barriers; a list of the
engineering standards that will be used
in the equipment’s material selection
and qualification, design verification
analysis, and design validation testing;
a list of the functional requirements (i.e.,
environmental, and physical loads
(magnitude and frequency)) for which
the barrier equipment is being designed;
a description of the barrier equipment’s
safety critical functions, (i.e., function(s)
performed by or inherent to the
equipment enabling it to achieve or
maintain a safe state); an I3P
nomination; an I3P verification plan;
and I3P reports as required in proposed
§ 250.232.
BSEE also proposed paragraph (l) to
clarify that, after BSEE receives all of
the required I3P reports, the operator
must submit a certification statement
that the barrier equipment is fit for
service in the applicable environment
(for the specific project location).
Summary of Final Rule Revisions
Based on comments received, BSEE is
finalizing the proposed content with the
following revisions.
—Throughout the rule—renaming the
New or Unusual Technology Barrier
Conceptual Plan as the New or
Unusual Technology Barrier
Equipment Conceptual Plan. This
revision clarifies that this Conceptual
Plan applies only to barrier
equipment.
—Paragraph (b)—requiring a detailed
schematic instead of a diagram.
—Paragraph (e)—clarifying that the list
of alternate procedures or equipment
requests and departure requests
required are those applicable to the
new or unusual technology barrier
equipment proposed in the New or
Unusual Technology Barrier
Equipment Conceptual Plan.
—Fixing incorrect cross references due
to renumbering certain sections in
this final rule.
—Removing the I3P reports under
proposed paragraph (j) and the fit for
service statement in proposed
paragraph (l), then moving that
information to its own new section
(see § 250.230). As a result of
removing the content, BSEE is also
redesignating proposed paragraph (k)
as (j).
Summary of comments: A commenter
requested clarification that HPHT
barrier equipment intended for 20K
completions (for example, HPHT
wellheads or production liners) can be
installed during the 15K drilling phase

E:\FR\FM\30AUR2.SGM

30AUR2

71094

Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Rules and Regulations

prior to approval of the New or Unusual
Technology Barrier Equipment
Conceptual Plan.
Response: An operator may install
HPHT barrier equipment prior to
approval of the New or Unusual
Technology Barrier Equipment
Conceptual Plan prior to the HPHT
phase of operations, if all wellheads and
casings are approved by BSEE in the
applicable application or permit (for
example see § 250.410 for APDs and
§§ 250.465 and 250.513 for APMs).
However, all 20K well construction
components are subject to equipment
qualification review and BSEE approval
prior to entering the HPHT phase of
operations (see § 250.229). If
components are installed but are denied
Conceptual Plan approval, the well will
not be allowed to enter the HPHT phase
of operation.
When are you required to submit an I3P
Report? (§ 250.230)
Summary of Final Rule Revisions
This is a new section for this final
rule that contains the information
previously covered under proposed
§ 250.229 paragraphs (j) and (l). This
section clarifies that submittal of the I3P
reports is required in § 250.229 and
when required by BSEE pursuant to
§ 250.228. BSEE added this section
because I3P reports can be applicable to
both a New or Unusual Technology
Barrier Equipment Conceptual Plan, as
well as a New or Unusual Technology
Conceptual Plan.
Summary of Comments
BSEE did not receive any comments
on the proposed content covered in this
new section. BSEE did receive other
I3P-related comments, and those
comments are discussed in the
appropriate sections (e.g., see §§ 250.228
and 250.231).

ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES2

What are the requirements for the
Independent Third Party (I3P)
nomination? (§ 250.231)
Summary of Proposed Rule Revisions
BSEE proposed this section to outline
the requirements for the operator’s
nomination of an I3P to be used in
conjunction with applicable Conceptual
Plans. Paragraph (a) would add the
nomination criteria for the I3P to review
the design verification and design
validation classification of the OEM,
including that the I3P must be a
technical classification society, a
licensed professional engineering firm,
or a registered professional engineer
capable of providing the required
certifications and verifications. This
paragraph would also clarify that the

VerDate Sep<11>2014

22:47 Aug 29, 2024

Jkt 262001

I3P nomination must be submitted to
BSEE for approval and must include the
following information:
—Previous experience in third-party
verification or experience in the
design, fabrication, or installation of
applicable offshore oil and gas
equipment;
—Technical capabilities of the
individual or the primary staff for the
specific project;
—Size and type of organization or
corporation;
—In-house availability of, or access to,
appropriate technology to review the
specific project (this should include
computer programs, hardware, and
testing materials and equipment as
applicable);
—Ability to perform the I3P functions
for the specific project considering
current commitments (e.g., project
timelines, schedules, and personnel
availability); and
—Previous experience with BSEE
requirements and procedures.
This proposed section would help
ensure that BSEE is informed of the I3P
competencies and show that the I3P is
qualified to perform the required
verifications and certifications of
Subpart B.
Paragraph (b) would require that
operators allow the I3P to access all
associated documentation and
equipment related to items in proposed
§ 250.229(i) to perform the complete
reviews in accordance with proposed
§ 250.231. This may include OEM
documents or access to the fabrication
and manufacturing locations. The
operator is responsible for ensuring that
the I3P has the appropriate information
to complete the required verifications
and certifications. This documentation
is necessary for the I3P to conduct its
review and verify, as appropriate, that
the equipment is designed and
manufactured to operate within its
specified operating limits.
Multiple I3Ps may be used to conduct
the applicable verifications. These
proposed revisions are not intended to
limit the number of I3Ps, as operators
may need multiple I3Ps to cover
multiple types of equipment covered
under all applicable Conceptual Plans.
Summary of Final Rule Revisions
Due to the addition of new § 250.230,
BSEE is renumbering this section as
§ 250.231. Based on comments received
and after review of comments, BSEE is
also revising this section as follows:
—Paragraph (a) is removing the term
‘‘when required by BSEE’’ because it
is redundant of the requirements for
I3P nominations under the applicable

PO 00000

Frm 00020

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4700

Conceptual Plans. BSEE is also
removing the reference to I3P
‘‘certifications’’ and clarifies that the
I3P provides verifications and
validations in line with the
expectations of the I3P. BSEE is
clarifying that the operator must
submit the I3P nomination(s) within
the applicable Conceptual Plan for
separate BSEE acceptance before
BSEE will approve the applicable
Conceptual Plan. This clarification
was added because I3P nominations
can be applicable to both the New or
Unusual Technology Barrier
Equipment Conceptual Plan as well as
the New or Unusual Technology
Conceptual Plan. Lastly, BSEE is also
clarifying the list of appropriate
technology in paragraph (a)(4) by
removing ‘‘testing materials’’ and that
the appropriate technology is not
limited to what is listed.
—Paragraph (b) is fixing certain cross
references and clarifying that you
must ensure the I3P has access to
relevant OEM documentation,
including relevant documentation and
data labeled as confidential and
proprietary. BSEE also wants to
ensure the I3P has access to the OEM
fabrication and manufacturing
locations only if necessary to review
the data. These revisions will help
ensure the I3P has access to data
necessary to provide the required
verifications and validations.
—Paragraph (c) is added to clarify that
an operator may propose to use an I3P
previously accepted by BSEE for the
same project, and not submit the
items required under paragraph (a), if
the BSEE-accepted I3P qualifications
are still valid and applicable. The
operator must also provide evidence
of the previous I3P nomination
acceptance. These additions help
streamline the use of I3Ps within a
project and reduce unnecessary
submittal of duplicative information.
Summary of comments: A commenter
expressed concerns with the term
‘‘when required by BSEE’’ and
requested it to be removed. The
commenter stated this change is
necessary because the I3P requirements
are sufficiently covered within the
applicable Conceptual Plan
requirements.
Response: BSEE agrees with the
commenter and has removed the term
‘‘when required by BSEE’’ from the
introductory paragraph to § 250.231. It
is not necessary to include this term, as
the I3P nomination requirement is
sufficiently covered under the
applicable Conceptual Plans.
Summary of comments: Multiple
commenters requested clarification on

E:\FR\FM\30AUR2.SGM

30AUR2

ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES2

Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
the BSEE expectations and actions for
the I3P nominations.
Response: BSEE agrees with the
commenters and has revised
§ 250.231(a) to clarify that operators
must submit the I3P nominations before
BSEE will approve the applicable
Conceptual Plan.
Summary of comments: Multiple
commenters expressed concerns with
allowing I3Ps unrestricted access to
OEM fabrication and manufacturing
locations.
Response: BSEE agrees in part with
the commenters’ concerns over I3P
access to OEM locations and has revised
this section to reflect that the I3P needs
access to review equipment and data,
particularly with respect to the elements
described in § 250.229(i) concerning the
I3P verification plan. BSEE wants to
ensure that the appropriate equipment
and data are available to the I3Ps to
conduct the required verifications and
validations of the project.
Summary of comments: A commenter
expressed concerns with the in-house
availability of testing materials. The
commenter was concerned that the I3P
can require re-verification and re-testing
as part of the validation at their own
facilities.
Response: BSEE agrees in part with
the commenter’s concerns and would
not expect an I3P to require reverification or re-testing at its own
facility. BSEE has removed the reference
to testing materials from the list of
availability of appropriate I3P
technology. BSEE is removing this
reference to help limit any
misconceptions regarding the I3P
reviews. It is BSEE’s expectation that
I3Ps will have the appropriate
technology to be able to conduct the
required verifications and validations of
the specific project.
Summary of comments: Multiple
commenters expressed concerns with
the term ‘‘certification’’ associated with
I3P capabilities and suggested BSEE to
remove the term ‘‘certification’’ from the
requirements.
Response: BSEE agrees with the
commenters that there is confusion
surrounding the terminology of
certification for I3Ps. BSEE has added
definitions of ‘‘fit for purpose’’ to clarify
I3P requirements and expectations. In
response to the comments, BSEE has
also removed the term ‘‘certification’’ as
it pertains to I3P qualifications.
Summary of comments: A commenter
expressed concerns that the I3P
nomination process is too onerous and
that BSEE should streamline the
requirements to be more consistent with
BSEE guidance.

VerDate Sep<11>2014

22:47 Aug 29, 2024

Jkt 262001

Response: BSEE agrees in part with
the commenter and is adding
§ 250.231(c) to clarify that the operators
may propose to use a previously
accepted I3P from the same project if
the qualifications are still valid. This
revision will help streamline the use of
existing I3Ps within a project and help
limit unnecessary duplicative
submissions of the nomination
information. This is consistent with
current practice (previous § 250.732(b))
and BSEE guidance.
Summary of comments: A commenter
expressed concerns that this section
implies that multiple I3Ps can be
nominated and that equipment,
assembly, or systems should be verified
and validated by the same I3P.
Response: BSEE disagrees with the
commenter’s concerns regarding use of
multiple I3Ps for different verifications
and validations. Only one I3P is
required for nomination per applicable
Conceptual Plan at a time for the
requirements under this section (see,
e.g., § 250.229(h)). This section defines
the qualifications for acceptable I3Ps.
However, the operator retains the ability
to propose different I3Ps for different
equipment or new technologies within
the same project. For example, a
classification society may be a better I3P
for a floating production facility, and a
professional engineering firm maybe a
better I3P for a riser design.
What are the I3P review requirements
for Conceptual Plan reviews? (§ 250.232)
Summary of Proposed Rule Revisions
BSEE proposed to identify the
requirements for the I3P review.
Paragraph (a) would require the I3P to
review the following information
regarding the applicable equipment or
system:
—Basis of design, technical
specification (if known at this point in
the design process), and functional
requirements (i.e., environmental and
physical loads (magnitude and
frequency));
—Risk assessment and failure mode
analysis;
—Material specification, selection,
qualification, and testing;
—Design verification analysis, including
a structural/strength analysis and
fatigue assessment and/or analysis;
—If fatigue is identified as a potential
failure mode in the required fatigue
assessment and/or analysis, the plan
to record and gather data (i.e., load
monitoring) in order to conduct a
future fatigue analysis;
—Design validation testing; and
—Fabrication, quality management
system, and inspection and test

PO 00000

Frm 00021

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4700

71095

plan(s) that identifies the quality
control/quality assurance process, and
inspection of the final products.
Paragraph (b) would require the I3P to
submit a report to BSEE documenting
the review of each item covered under
paragraph (a) of this section. This
paragraph would also require each
report to identify all OEM and operator
documents used during the I3P reviews.
Paragraph (c) would require the I3P to
submit a final report to BSEE that
summarizes each of the review
requirements covered under paragraph
(a) of this section. This paragraph would
also require the final report to include
the equipment and/or system’s technical
specifications, including a certification
statement that the equipment and/or
system is fit for purpose for the
technical specification by the I3P, and
verification that the equipment’s
technical specifications meet or exceed
the project’s functional requirements,
including a certification statement by
the I3P that the equipment and/or
system is fit for purpose for the
proposed project.
Paragraph (d) would clarify that, for
any subsequent I3P review of equipment
and/or system’s technical specification
that was previously approved in the
operator’s New or Unusual Technology
Barrier Conceptual Plan, the Regional
Supervisor may accept a final report in
accordance with § 250.231(c), including
the existing certification covered under
paragraph (c)(1) of this section, in lieu
of reports required in paragraph (b). The
I3P would be required to submit an
updated certification statement in
accordance with § 250.231(c)(2) for the
specific project.
This section would require I3P review
of all New or Unusual Technology
Category 1 or Category 2 barrier
equipment to help minimize the risk of
loss of containment on new barrier
equipment through reliance on the
principle of qualified redundant barrier
systems. The concept of using an I3P
review process has been used in the
regulations for various operations (e.g.,
§§ 250.420, 250.732, and 250.914
through 250.918). The I3P review
process within § 250.231 would be the
same process described in NTL 2019–
G03, ‘‘Guidance for Information
Submissions Regarding Site Specific
and Non-Site Specific HPHT Equipment
Design Verification Analysis and Design
Validation Testing.’’ The industry is
currently using this NTL for the design
verification and validation analysis for
HPHT barrier equipment that will be
used in the Gulf of Mexico. The
verification processes in this section
would be similar to the basic

E:\FR\FM\30AUR2.SGM

30AUR2

71096

Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Rules and Regulations

engineering design and manufacturing
methodologies found in many existing
engineering standards.

ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES2

Summary of Final Rule Revisions
Due to the addition of new § 250.230,
BSEE is renumbering this section as
§ 250.232. Based on comments received
and after review of comments, BSEE is
also revising this section as follows:
—The introductory paragraph clarifies
the applicability of I3P for the
applicable Conceptual Plan. This
revision is necessary to clarify that
different Conceptual Plans may have
I3P requirements (e.g., the New or
Unusual Technology Conceptual Plan
or the New or Unusual Technology
Barrier Equipment Conceptual Plan);
—Paragraph (a)(1) clarifies the technical
specifications are applicable to the
equipment and the functional
requirements are appliable to the
specific project and changed the ‘‘i.e.’’
to an ‘‘e.g.’’ because the parenthetical
provides examples;
—The contents under proposed
paragraphs (c)(1) and (c)(2) are now
located under paragraph (b), and the
term ‘‘certification’’ was removed to
clarify the I3P is required to provide
statements regarding ‘‘fit for purpose’’
determinations; and
—The contents under proposed
paragraph (d) are now redesignated as
paragraph (c) and modified to clarify
that for any new project, the operator
may use previous I3P reviews of
equipment or a system’s technical
specifications that was approved in a
previous Conceptual Plan. This
section would also clarify the intent
of the proposed rule by adding
paragraphs (d)(1), (d)(2), and (d)(3) to
require the operator to submit certain
information to the Regional
Supervisor to demonstrate the
previous I3P review is still valid (i.e.,
a statement that the previous
summaries of paragraph (a) and the
previous fit for purpose statement are
still valid, verification that the
equipment technical specifications
meet or exceed the project’s
functional requirements, and a
statement by the I3P that the
equipment or system is fit for purpose
for the proposed project).
Summary of comments: A commenter
suggested that BSEE should explicitly
state that equipment that has been
previously verified and validated
through appropriate industry standards
and reviewed by an I3P should be
exempted from further I3P review,
unless there are substantive design
changes, such as a major change to the
technical specification.

VerDate Sep<11>2014

22:47 Aug 29, 2024

Jkt 262001

Response: BSEE agrees in part with
the commenter and has revised
paragraph (d) to clarify the requirements
for an operator to use previously
approved I3P reviews for any new
project. BSEE also clarified the
information necessary to demonstrate
that the previous I3P reviews are still
valid for the project. These revisions
would help streamline the use of
previously approved I3Ps and limit
unnecessary and duplicative submittals
for I3P reviews and ensure that the
proper information is submitted to
demonstrate that previously approved
I3P reviews are still valid.
Summary of comments: Multiple
commenters expressed concerns with
the ‘‘certification’’ statement associated
with both fit for purpose and fit for
service and suggested BSEE remove the
term ‘‘certification’’ from the
requirements.
Response: BSEE agrees with the
commenters that there is confusion
surrounding the terminology of
certification for fit for purpose. In
response to the comments, BSEE has
removed the term ‘‘certification’’ as it
pertains to ‘‘fit for purpose’’
determinations and is clarifying that a
statement from the I3P is sufficient
instead of a certification. This revision
is consistent with the addition of the
definition of ‘‘fit for purpose’’ and
clarifies the role of the I3P for certain
reviews.
Summary of comments: A commenter
expressed concerns with the
requirements to provide a fatigue
assessment or analysis and that the
requirements are ambiguous and
unclear. The commentor believes that
such ambiguity could lead to
inefficiencies and additional work that
will further delay field and lease
development.
Response: BSEE views fatigue
assessment or analysis as an important
tool for HPHT qualification. Operators
should engage early with equipment
manufacturers to ensure the proper
analysis is being performed. Fatigue
assessment is not a new concept and is
well understood by the industry. BSEE
is not defining these terms because of
the broad range of potential equipment
or facilities covered under the project.
BSEE has successfully used similar
concepts for fatigue evaluation in
existing regulations (see § 250.908) and
does not expect the identified terms to
delay field or lease development based
on previous Conceptual Plan and DWOP
experience.

PO 00000

Frm 00022

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4700

General requirements for any I3P report.
(§ 250.233)
Summary of Proposed Rule Revisions
BSEE proposed to clarify expectations
for the I3P reports. The proposed rule
proposed to require that an I3P report
must be a standalone document that
clearly summarizes the verification
work performed and must contain a
sufficient level of detail (i.e.,
quantitative information) and clarity to
establish the basis of the I3P’s findings
and recommendation(s). Each report
would be required to identify the OEM
or operator documents reviewed, the
detailed I3P review, and convey the
results of the I3P’s review without
requiring BSEE to review any other
referenced document. This section
would establish basic expectations for
I3P reports and provide consistency and
uniformity for operator submittals and
BSEE reviews. These reports are an
important tool for BSEE to conduct
appropriate reviews and it is imperative
to ensure that these reports are
comprehensive and clear. These reports
also contain information necessary for
audit purposes.
Summary of Final Rule Revisions
Due to the addition of new § 250.230,
BSEE is renumbering this section as
§ 250.233 and fixing any applicable
cross references. Based on comments
received and after review of comments,
BSEE is also revising this section to
clarify that the I3P reports must clearly
summarize the required verification and
validation work of the I3P. BSEE is also
removing the proposed requirement that
the I3P reports need to include the I3P
recommendations. These revisions
clarify the role of the I3P and provide
consistency with the expectations of the
I3P actions throughout this rulemaking.
Summary of comments: Multiple
commenters expressed concerns that the
requirement to include I3P
recommendations in the reports are
beyond the scope of the I3P duties for
reviewing for conformance with the
specified requirements.
Response: BSEE agrees with the
commenters and has removed the term
‘‘recommendations’’ from the regulatory
requirements for I3P reports. BSEE
wants to be consistent with the
expectations and required actions for
I3Ps when conducting required
verifications and validations.
BSEE proposed to reserve § 250.234,
and this section is reserved in this
regulation.

E:\FR\FM\30AUR2.SGM

30AUR2

Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
DWOP Approval
When and how must I submit the
DWOP? (§ 250.235)
Summary of Proposed Rule Revisions
BSEE proposed to move the content
from § 250.291 and revise the section to
clarify that a DWOP must be submitted
to the Regional Supervisor after BSEE
has approved the operator’s project
Conceptual Plan and the operator has
substantially completed system design
and before the operator conducts postcompletion installation activities for a
deepwater development project or for
any project that will involve the use of
subsea tieback development technology
in any water depth, which may include
new or unusual technology or new or
unusual technology barrier equipment.
This section would also clarify that
operators cannot begin production from
the well until BSEE approves the
DWOP. The revisions to this section
would help ensure that there is enough
time for BSEE to review a DWOP,
including resolution of any potential
issues, prior to DWOP approval. The
operator should consider the DWOP
requirements when beginning to
procure or fabricate the safety and
operational systems (other than a tree,
because operators may install a tree after
Conceptual Plan approval), production
platforms, pipelines, or other parts of
the production system.

ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES2

Summary of Final Rule Revisions
BSEE is reorganizing this section to
provide clarification for the DWOP
requirements. Based on comments
received and after review of comments,
BSEE is revising this section as follows:
Under newly designated paragraph
(a), BSEE is clarifying that the operator
must submit the DWOP before
conducting installation activities postwell completion. BSEE is also adding
paragraph (a)(3) to clarify that an
operator must submit the DWOP for an
HPHT development project, any project
using Category 1 or 2 new or unusual
technology barrier equipment, or any
project that uses new or unusual
technology that may impact the safety
critical function of Category 1 or 2
barrier equipment regardless of water
depth. These revisions clarify what
projects are applicable to the DWOP
submission and are consistent with
BSEE experience and approvals of
DWOPs.
BSEE is also clarifying under newly
designated paragraph (b) that the
operator may install subsea systems and
associated pipelines once they have
applicable BSEE permit and Conceptual
Plan approval. This clarification helps

VerDate Sep<11>2014

22:47 Aug 29, 2024

Jkt 262001

establish the order of operations and
actions that can be taken before DWOP
approval.
Summary of comments: A commenter
expressed concerns that this section is
unclear about the use of the DWOP and
the New or Unusual Technology
Conceptual Plan or the New or Unusual
Barrier Equipment Conceptual Plan and
requested BSEE to clarify the DWOP
requirements.
Response: BSEE agrees in part with
the commenter and has revised this
section to clarify that the DWOP
submission is applicable to HPHT
development projects, as well as any
project that uses Category 1 or 2 new or
unusual technology barrier equipment,
or any project that uses new or unusual
technology that may impact the safety
critical function of Category 1 or 2
barrier equipment regardless of water
depth. This clarification helps identify
how the DWOP is applicable to certain
project that use HPHT equipment and
new or unusual technology barrier
equipment. This revision also provides
clarity and consistency with the
definitions of certain barrier equipment
and associated Conceptual Plan
requirements.
Summary of comments: Multiple
commenters expressed concerns with
lack of clarity regarding which actions
or operations can commence at various
stages of DWOP approval.
Response: BSEE agrees with the
commenters and has revised paragraph
(a) of this section to clarify that the
operator must submit the DWOP before
conducting installation activities after
well completion. BSEE is also revising
paragraph (b) of this section to clarify
that the operator may install subsea
systems and associated pipelines once
the operator has the approval of the
applicable BSEE permit(s) and
Conceptual Plan(s). However, the
operator may not begin production from
the well until BSEE approves the
DWOP. These revisions provide clarity
and consistency with current BSEE
practices and expectations of the DWOP
approval process.
What information must I submit with
the DWOP? (§ 250.236)
Summary of Proposed Rule Revisions
This proposed section is
organizational in nature and would
identify the types of information that
the operator must submit with the
DWOP by adding a table that lists the
applicable sections and the information
to be included. In this section, BSEE
would reorganize and breakout the
DWOP requirements by topic, as
reflected in paragraphs (a) through (f).

PO 00000

Frm 00023

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4700

71097

These revisions would improve clarity
for applicable information requirements.
Summary of Final Rule Revisions
BSEE did not receive any comments
on these provisions of the proposed rule
and includes the proposed language in
the final rule without change.
What general information must my
DWOP include? (§ 250.237)
Summary of Proposed Rule Revisions
BSEE proposed to identify the general
information that an operator would be
required to submit in the DWOP. The
content of paragraphs (a) and (b) of this
proposed section would be moved from
current § 250.292(o) and (q). This
section would add paragraph (c) to
require the submission of a list of any
associated industry standards not
incorporated in the regulations that the
operator will use for project design or
operation.
Summary of Final Rule Revisions
Based on comments received and after
review of comments, BSEE is revising
paragraph (a) by clarifying that the
DWOP must include a list of requests
for any alternate procedures or
equipment or departure requests in
accordance with §§ 250.141 and
250.142, respectively, and a list of any
identified alternate procedures or
equipment or departures that the
operator may request. BSEE is also
clarifying that if a Conceptual Plan was
previously approved for the project that
already included the alternate
procedures or equipment or departure
requests in accordance with §§ 250.141
and 250.142 for the specific equipment
identified in a Conceptual Plan, those
do not need to be listed in the DWOP
unless the same alternate procedure or
equipment request or departure request
is needed for a different piece of
equipment for post completion
activities. These revisions provide
clarification of the context and
expectations for including requests
covered under §§ 250.141 and 250.142
in the DWOP.
Summary of comments: Multiple
commenters expressed concerns with
submittal of duplicative information
regarding the applicable alternate
procedures or equipment and departure
requests already identified in approved
associated Conceptual Plans.
Response: BSEE agrees with the
commenters and has revised this section
to clarify the required submittal of
alternate procedures or equipment and
departure requests. BSEE has also
clarified that those requests approved in
the associated Conceptual Plans do not

E:\FR\FM\30AUR2.SGM

30AUR2

71098

Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Rules and Regulations

need to be submitted in the DWOP
unless the same alternate procedure or
equipment or departure requests are
needed for a different piece of
equipment for post-completion
activities. BSEE does not expect
operators to submit information of
which they are unaware. However, if an
operator is aware that it is reasonably
likely to submit such information or
departure request in the future, it is
beneficial to include it in the DWOP at
this stage to help streamline DWOP
approval.

What structural information must my
DWOP include? (§ 250.239)

What well or completions information
must my DWOP include? (§ 250.238)

Summary of Final Rule Revisions

Summary of Proposed Rule Revisions
BSEE proposed to move the content
from current § 250.292 and include a
revision to paragraph (c) to clarify that
this section requires information in the
operator’s DWOP about the design and
fabrication of each wellbore riser system
deployed from a floating production
facility or TLP. This revision would
clarify that these informational
requirements apply to wellbore risers as
components of the well and resolve
confusion regarding the general term
‘‘riser’’ and its applicability of multiple
types of risers (e.g., pipeline risers and
wellbore risers) used on the OCS.

ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES2

Summary of Final Rule Revisions
BSEE did receive a comment on these
provisions of the proposed rule but is
including the proposed language in the
final rule without change.
Summary of comments: A commenter
expressed concerns that the information
requested in paragraphs (a) and (b) are
duplicative and unclear.
Response: BSEE disagrees with the
commenter. These are longstanding
requirements and have been
successfully used in each applicable
DWOP. Paragraph (a) is typically a
summary narrative with a graphical
representation of the wellbore that
identifies casing and completion
components, among other
characteristics. Paragraph (b) provides
further detail on the systems used for
drilling and completion that result in
the final schematic configuration. These
requirements are not duplicative and
have been used in existing regulations
to allow for variations in well proposals
and information requests. The
information identified in these
paragraphs is essential to ensure
consistency with the activities to be
addressed in the associated well
permits.

VerDate Sep<11>2014

22:47 Aug 29, 2024

Jkt 262001

Summary of Proposed Rule Revisions
BSEE proposed to move the content
from current § 250.292 to this section
and would include a revision to
paragraph (b) to clarify that the design,
fabrication, installation, and monitoring
information would be required for the
tendon or mooring systems, including
the turret or buoy system, as applicable.
This revision would reflect current
equipment and operations common to
DWOP approvals.
BSEE did not receive any comments
on the content of the proposed
provisions; however, BSEE moved the
phrase ‘‘including any major
modifications,’’ to the end of the
introductory paragraph to clarify the
intent of the paragraph.
What Production Safety System
information must my DWOP include?
(§ 250.240)
Summary of Proposed Rule Revisions
BSEE proposed in this section to
identify the production safety system
information that an operator would be
required to submit in the DWOP, as
applicable, to align with the activities
the operator plans to address in the
associated production safety systems
application. The content of paragraphs
(a), (b), (c), (d), and (e)(3) of this
proposed section would be moved from
current § 250.292. The additions to this
proposed section would require
submission of the following
information:
—In paragraph (e)(1)—Methods,
frequency, and acceptance criteria for
testing the underwater safety valves
(USVs), surface controlled subsurface
safety valves (SCSSVs), and boarding
shutdown valves;
—In paragraph (e)(2)—The function and
testing of the host facility emergency
shutdown device (ESD) system and its
interface to the subsea system; and
—In paragraph (f)—Information on the
design, operation, maintenance,
personnel competency, and testing of
the subsea leak detection system to
protect the subsea field/infrastructure
(e.g., trees, manifolds, jumpers). BSEE
proposed that operators must include
procedures for how to operate the
system, ensure system functionality,
identify a leak, and take action when
a leak is identified.
Summary of Final Rule Revisions
Based on comments received and after
review of comments, BSEE is removing

PO 00000

Frm 00024

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4700

the statement ‘‘including a table
summarizing the curtailment of
production and offloading based on
operational considerations’’ from
paragraph (a) and moving it to
paragraph (b). This revision is necessary
because those operations are covered
under paragraph (b). BSEE is also
revising paragraph (e) to remove the
term ‘‘certification’’ to be consistent
with other required statements and the
use of certifications.
Summary of comments: A commenter
expressed concerns that the information
in paragraph (a) regarding the table
summarizing the curtailment of
production and offloading is unclear
and may not be applicable.
Response: BSEE agrees with the
commenter and is removing the
statement ‘‘including a table
summarizing the curtailment of
production and offloading based on
operational considerations’’ from
paragraph (a) and moving it to
paragraph (b). This information is more
applicable to the contents of paragraph
(b).
Summary of comments: Multiple
commenters expressed concerns with
the use of a certification statement for
compliance with Subpart H.
Response: BSEE agrees with the
commenters and has removed the term
‘‘certification’’ from paragraph (e). BSEE
will still require a statement that the
production safety systems will comply
with Subpart H. Subpart H contains the
requirements for production safety
systems and a certification is not
necessary at this stage. BSEE wants to
ensure that the safety system
requirements are considered at this
stage of the DWOP process.
Summary of comments: A commenter
requested that BSEE clarify if a
description of the leak detection system
or the actual procedures are required.
Response: BSEE disagrees with the
commenter that the language is unclear.
The regulations in § 250.240(f) require
the submittal of information concerning
both the leak detection system itself and
procedures for how to operate the
system, ensure system functionality,
identify a leak, and the actions to take
when a leak is identified.
What subsea systems and pipeline
information must my DWOP include?
(§ 250.241)
Summary of Proposed Rule Revisions
BSEE proposed to identify the subsea
systems and associated pipeline systems
information that must be included in a
DWOP. The content of paragraphs
(c)(2)(i), (ii), and (iii) of this proposed
section would be moved from current

E:\FR\FM\30AUR2.SGM

30AUR2

ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES2

Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
§ 250.292. Proposed paragraph (a)
would require the operator to identify
the information common to the subsea
system and the associated pipeline
system, which constitute all or part of
a single project development covered by
the DWOP and is consistent with
activities addressed in an associated
pipeline application, and would require
the submission of the following:
—A subsea field schematic depicting
the planned subsea development
equipment and infrastructure,
including wells/trees, non-pipe
subsea equipment, pipeline route(s),
pipeline riser systems, umbilical(s),
and platform footprint;
—A description of the subsea
development project detailing the
subsea and pipeline equipment design
criteria and analysis procedures
(including industry standards,
pressure and temperature ratings,
materials selection), testing methods,
and general operational procedures;
—A description of the fabrication and
assembly/testing location of subsea
trees, pipelines, and non-pipe subsea
equipment (manifold, pipeline end
manifold, pipeline end termination,
subsea umbilical termination
assembly, subsea pumps, suction
piles, etc.);
—A summary of the subsea tieback
development technologies’ Integrity
Management Program, including a
plan for inspection and monitoring to
support assessment of system
condition. This should include, but
not be limited to, the in-service
inspections or surveys of hull and
topsides structures, tendons,
moorings, and pipelines and/or
wellbore riser systems to assess and
analyze component condition after
each significant environmental event
(e.g., hurricane, earthquake, loop and
eddy currents, or mudslide) impacting
the system, or once every 10 years,
whichever occurs first; and
—A summary of safety and
environmental controls.
Proposed paragraph (b) would require
submission of the following information
about subsea systems that constitute all
or part of a single project development
covered by the DWOP, as applicable:
—System control type (i.e., direct
hydraulic or electro-hydraulic);
—Well tree(s), wellhead, and non-pipe
equipment general arrangement
drawings and schematics, with size
and valve type annotations to
illustrate the tree and other
equipment in operation;
—Estimated shut-in tubing pressure for
the proposed well(s), including the
calculations used to arrive at the

VerDate Sep<11>2014

22:47 Aug 29, 2024

Jkt 262001

estimate, specifying true vertical
depth, reservoir pressure, and the
fluid gradient used, or a brief
discussion of the pressure volume
temperature (PVT) data used for
estimation;
—Wellbore static bottomhole
temperature and the estimated
flowing temperature at the tree,
including a description of the method
used to calculate this estimate;
—A description of the umbilical(s) and
umbilical connection(s), including an
umbilical cross-section schematic;
—A description of the chemical or other
injection systems and/or enhanced
recovery systems the operator plans to
use;
—A description of the corrosion
monitoring and prevention/inhibition
processes;
—Details of any re-furbished and/or recertified equipment that would be
used; and
—A schedule of development activities,
including well completion, facility
installation, and anticipated date of
first oil.
Proposed paragraph (c) would require
an operator to include pipeline
information in its DWOP to align with
the activities to be addressed in the
associated pipeline application(s),
including:
—Design and fabrication information for
each pipeline riser system;
—For projects that will use a pipeline
free standing hybrid riser (FSHR) on
a permanent installation that uses a
buoyancy air can suspended from the
top of the riser, the operator would be
required to provide the following
information in its DWOP as part of the
discussion required by paragraph
(b)(1) and (2) of § 250.241: a detailed
description and drawings of the
FSHR, buoy, and the associated
connection system; detailed
information regarding the system used
to connect the FSHR to the buoyancy
air can, and associated redundancies;
and descriptions of the monitoring
system and monitoring plan for the
pipeline FSHR and the associated
connection system for fatigue, stress,
and any other abnormal condition
(e.g., corrosion) that may negatively
impact the riser system’s integrity;
and
—Pipeline and pipeline riser
installation methods.
Submission of this information is
consistent with what BSEE currently
requires in the DWOP (and has
historically required). The proposed
requirements would clarify general
language in the existing regulation by
adding specificity regarding scope.

PO 00000

Frm 00025

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4700

71099

Summary of Final Rule Revisions
Based on comments received and after
review of comments, BSEE is revising
paragraph (a)(4) to clarify that the
operator must also include in the
integrity management plan a description
of how it will determine when a
significant environmental event has
occurred and how it will respond to
such an event. This revision would help
identify and properly account for
integrity management through
significant environmental events. BSEE
is also revising paragraph (c)(1) to only
require ‘‘general’’ design and fabrication
information for pipelines. This revision
addresses a situation where some of the
specific design and fabrication
information may not be available at this
stage. For the purposes of the DWOP,
the general design and fabrication
information is sufficient.
Summary of comments: Multiple
commenters expressed concerns that
certain information requested in this
section is duplicative with information
covered under Conceptual Plans or the
associated permits or applications.
Response: BSEE disagrees with this
comment. This section covers the
DWOP submittal, which presents
information from a whole project
perspective. Conversely, Conceptual
Plans focus on an individual component
or assembly.
Summary of comments: A commenter
recommended that BSEE require that
operators’ integrity management plans
state their process for determining
significant environmental events.
Response: BSEE agrees with the
commenter and has revised paragraph
(a)(4) to require the operator to also
provide a description in the integrity
management plan of how it will
determine that significant
environmental events have occurred,
and how it will respond to such an
event. This revision clarifies the scope
of the integrity management plan. It is
BSEE’s intent to ensure that operators
discuss, plan for, and address the
impacts of the significant environmental
events.
Summary of comments: A commenter
asked for clarification as to the source
of the 10-year assessment.
Response: Based on BSEE experience
with assessing facilities or equipment
through their entire lifecycle, the
assessment cycle of 10 years in
paragraph (a)(4) of this section is an
incremental approach to platform
service life extension and monitoring.
Often, operators ask for infinite or
significant years of increased life.
BSEE’s approach has been to approve
fewer years—either 5 or 10—and revisit

E:\FR\FM\30AUR2.SGM

30AUR2

71100

Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Rules and Regulations

the calculations and inspection data
later to ensure there are no significant
changes. BSEE will remain consistent
with that approach and utilize the
identified assessment cycle. As BSEE
gains more experience with the
assessments, BSEE will evaluate the
efficiency of the assessment cycle and
may revise it as appropriate.
Summary of comments: A commenter
asked if the NTLs help define the
affected area for inspections and
assessments after a significant
environmental event.
Response: BSEE will continue to use
the guidance of an NTL to help identify
the affected area of the significant
environmental event (e.g., see NTL No.
2021–G02). This information is very
useful to focus the inspections and
assessments to those areas potentially
impacted by the significant
environmental events.
Summary of comments: A commenter
expressed concerns that it is not
practical to directly monitor stress and
fatigue in all components. The
commenter also stated that the
assessment for stress should be
determined based on observed
responses and analytical assessment.
Response: BSEE disagrees with the
commenter’s concerns and is not
revising this section based on this
comment. It is BSEE’s expectations that
the operator must identify how it will
monitor the FSHR and associated
connection system. BSEE does not want
to limit how an operator conducts the
appropriate monitoring to ensure riser
system integrity.
What new or unusual technology
information must my DWOP include?
(§ 250.242)

ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES2

Summary of Proposed Rule Revisions
BSEE proposed in this section to
identify the new or unusual technology
information that must be included in
the DWOP, including the information
referenced in the applicable Conceptual
Plan. Proposed paragraph (a) would
require the submission of a description
of any new or unusual technology being
used in a development project,
including a reference to previously
approved New or Unusual Technology
Conceptual Plans or New or Unusual
Technology Barrier Conceptual Plans.
Proposed paragraph (b) would require
submission of a description of any new
or unusual technology not covered
under the New or Unusual Technology
Conceptual Plan or New or Unusual
Technology Barrier Conceptual Plan. It
would also require an operator to
include the same applicable information
as required in §§ 250.228 or 250.229.

VerDate Sep<11>2014

22:47 Aug 29, 2024

Jkt 262001

Summary of Final Rule Revisions
BSEE did not receive any comments
on the substance of the provision of this
section and is finalizing the proposed
revisions with administrative changes to
reflect the revisions to the name of the
New or Unusual Technology Barrier
Equipment Conceptual Plan, as
discussed previously in this preamble.
Summary of comments: A commenter
asked what service fee would be
required if an operator needed to submit
the description of any new or unusual
technology not previously approved in
the applicable Conceptual Plan.
Response: BSEE will require the
service fees listed in § 250.125 for the
plans required under the DWOP Process
for the specific project proposed.
BSEE proposed to reserve §§ 250.243–
250.244, and these sections are reserved
in this regulation.
May I combine the Project Conceptual
Plan and the DWOP? (§ 250.245)
Summary of Proposed Rule Revisions
BSEE proposed to move to this
section the content from current
§ 250.294, which addresses when an
operator may submit a combined
Conceptual Plan and DWOP, and
proposed to include the following
revisions:
The introductory paragraph would be
revised to clarify that, if the operator’s
development project meets the criteria
in proposed paragraphs (a) and (b) of
this section, an operator may submit a
combined Conceptual Plan and DWOP
that complies with all applicable
requirements for both, on or before the
deadline for submitting the Conceptual
Plan, as described in proposed
§ 250.226. Existing paragraph (a), which
allows the operator to submit a
combined Conceptual Plan and DWOP
if the project is located in water depths
of less than 400 meters (1,312 feet),
would be removed.
Existing paragraph (a) would be
replaced with existing paragraph (b),
which allows a combined plan if the
project is similar to projects involving
subsea tieback development technology
for which the operator has obtained
approval previously. BSEE proposed to
add a new paragraph (b) to allow for the
submission of a combined Conceptual
Plan and DWOP if the project does not
involve either new or unusual
technology or a new platform. As
previously stated at the beginning of the
paragraph, the operator must meet the
criteria in paragraph (a) and (b) of
proposed § 250.245 in order to be able
to submit a combined Conceptual Plan
and DWOP.

PO 00000

Frm 00026

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4700

These revisions would provide clarity
for operators to streamline the process,
when appropriate, and would reflect
conforming edits for new or unusual
technology. These revisions would
reflect current BSEE acceptance of
combined submission of the Conceptual
Plan and DWOP in certain situations.
Summary of Final Rule Revisions
BSEE received a comment on these
provisions and is making a revision
based on that comment. BSEE is
changing the heading to read: ‘‘May I
combine the Project Conceptual Plan
and the DWOP?’’ and is revising the
introductory paragraph accordingly.
BSEE is clarifying that that the ‘‘Project’’
Conceptual Plan can be combined with
the DWOP.
Summary of comments: A commenter
suggested that BSEE add the term
‘‘project’’ to the reference to the
Conceptual Plans.
Response: BSEE is revising this
section to clarify that a Project
Conceptual Plan may be combined with
the DWOP if the project meets the
required criteria. This revision is
consistent with paragraph (b) that
prohibits the combination of a
Conceptual Plan and DWOP if the
project involves new or unusual
technology.
When must I revise my DWOP?
(§ 250.246)
Summary of Proposed Rule Revisions
BSEE proposed to move to this
section the content from current
§ 250.295 and to clarify when revision
to an approved Conceptual Plan or
DWOP is necessary. Revision is
necessary when there are changes in the
development project that alter the
proposed plan or procedures, but that
do not involve a physical alteration of
the equipment on the platform or the
seabed. As explained below, a
supplement is required when changes
involve a physical alteration of the
equipment on the platform or the
seabed. This section and the following
section are intended to reduce
confusion by helping operators
determine when a revision or a
supplement to the applicable
Conceptual Plan or DWOP is necessary.
Summary of Final Rule Revisions
Based on comments received and
review of the comments, BSEE is
revising this section to clarify when a
revision to a DWOP is necessary. BSEE
removed the reference to revising the
Conceptual Plan as it is not applicable
to this section and clarified that
revisions are necessary only to the

E:\FR\FM\30AUR2.SGM

30AUR2

Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
approved DWOP to reflect any material
change to the plan.
Summary of comments: A commenter
expressed concerns that requiring a
revision to the plan for ‘‘any changes’’
is too broad and burdensome.
Response: BSEE disagrees with the
commenter and wants to ensure the
information contained in the DWOP is
accurate and consistent with the
applicable approved permit or
application. BSEE has clarified the
difference between a revision and
supplement and has revised the service
fees to adequately reflect the
appropriate level of actions necessary to
complete the revision or supplement.
However, BSEE also clarified that any
material change to the plan would
require a revision. This clarification is
consistent with the language of the
previous regulations (see previous
§ 250.295).
Summary of comments: A commenter
expressed concerns that revisions to the
Conceptual Plans are not applicable to
this section and should be removed.
Response: BSEE agrees with the
commenter and is removing the
reference to Conceptual Plan revisions.
Revisions to the Conceptual Plans are
outside the scope of this section and it
is unnecessary to include them in this
section.
When must I supplement my DWOP?
(§ 250.247)

ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES2

Summary of Proposed Rule Revisions
BSEE proposed in this section to
identify when an operator must
supplement the approved DWOP to
reflect additions or changes in the
development project.
Proposed paragraph (a) would require
the operator to submit a supplement to
the DWOP to reflect any additions or
changes in the development project that
physically alter the platform, process
facilities, equipment, or systems
approved in the original Conceptual
Plan or DWOP. If a Supplemental
DWOP proposes the addition of any
wells (e.g., a new subsea field) not
approved in the original DWOP, the
operator may not complete or produce
from the new well(s) until BSEE
approves the Supplemental DWOP.
Proposed paragraph (b) would require
a supplement to the DWOP for additions
or changes that involve the addition of
any new or unusual technology to the
project that was not previously
approved under the New or Unusual
Technology Conceptual Plan, New or
Unusual Technology Barrier Conceptual
Plan, or DWOP. This proposed
paragraph would also clarify that the
operator may not install any new or

VerDate Sep<11>2014

22:47 Aug 29, 2024

Jkt 262001

unusual technology until BSEE
approves the Supplemental DWOP.
This section would be added to clarify
when operators must submit
supplemental DWOPs. This section and
the section above are intended to reduce
confusion by helping operators
determine when a revision or a
supplement to the DWOP is necessary.
Summary of Final Rule Revisions
Based on comments received and
review of the comments, BSEE is
revising paragraph (a) by removing the
references to ‘‘platform’’ and ‘‘process
facilities’’ from the list of items that, if
physically altered, would require a
supplement to the DWOP and then
clarifying that it applies to equipment or
systems upstream of the boarding
shutdown valve approved in the DWOP.
BSEE is also removing the reference of
supplementing the DWOP based on the
equipment and systems approved in the
original Conceptual Plan as it is not
applicable to this section.
BSEE is also revising paragraph (b) to
clarify that under the situation where
there is an addition of new or unusual
technology not previously covered
under an applicable Conceptual Plan or
DWOP, an operator may not install any
new or unusual technology until BSEE
approves the applicable Conceptual
Plan and supplemental DWOP. This
revision is necessary to ensure the new
or unusual technology follows the
appropriate process including the
applicable Conceptual Plan approval.
Summary of comments: Multiple
commenters expressed concerns that the
language describing a supplement to the
DWOP is too broad and needs
clarification concerning when a
supplement is required.
Response: BSEE agrees in part with
the commenters and is revising this
section to clarify when a supplement to
the DWOP is required by removing the
references to ‘‘platform’’ and ‘‘process
facility’’ and clarifying that a
supplement requirement applies only
when there is a physical change to the
equipment or systems upstream of the
boarding shutdown valve. This
clarification establishes when a
supplemental DWOP is necessary based
on the scope of the equipment listed.
For example, BSEE would not expect a
supplement of your DWOP for changing
decking on a platform.
What information must I include in my
Supplemental DWOP? (§ 250.248)
Summary of Proposed Rule Revisions
BSEE proposed to describe the
information that must be included in
the supplement to the DWOP referenced
in proposed § 250.247.

PO 00000

Frm 00027

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4700

71101

Proposed paragraph (a) would require
the same information for the wells or
equipment as required in the applicable
Conceptual Plan and DWOP
requirements in Subpart B. This
addition would ensure consistency
between the initial and supplemental
submissions.
Proposed paragraph (b) would
describe information for each applicable
Conceptual Plan or DWOP section that
is being impacted by the addition or
change.
Proposed paragraph (c) would require
documents demonstrating payment of
the new service fee for BSEE’s review
and processing of a supplemental
DWOP, as listed in the proposed
revisions to § 250.125.
Summary of Final Rule Revisions
BSEE did not receive any comments
on the content of this section and is
finalizing the provision as proposed.
Subpart D—Oil and Gas Drilling
Operations
Hydrogen sulfide (§ 250.490)
Summary of Proposed Rule Revisions
BSEE proposed to revise paragraph (p)
of this section, which addresses
metallurgical properties of equipment
used in an H2S environment. BSEE
proposed revising the paragraph to state
that if operating in a zone with H2S
present or when the concentration of
H2S in the produced fluid may exceed
0.05 pounds per square inch (psi) partial
pressure of H2S, the operator must use
equipment that is constructed of
materials with metallurgical properties
that resist or prevent sulfide stress
cracking (also known as hydrogen
embrittlement, stress corrosion cracking,
or H2S embrittlement), chloride-stress
cracking, hydrogen-induced cracking,
and other failure modes.
BSEE also proposed to revise this
section to be consistent with the
requirements of NACE Standard
MR0175–2003, ‘‘Standard Material
Requirements, Metals for Sulfide Stress
Cracking and Stress Corrosion Cracking
Resistance in Sour Oilfield
Environments, ’’Revised January 17,
2003, incorporated by reference at
existing §§ 250.490 and 250.901 and
NTL 2009–G31. Section 250.490
paragraph (p) currently requires that the
tubing and casing be designed for NACE
requirements, but incorrectly refers only
to ‘‘H2S present’’ as the concentration
necessary to trigger this requirement.
‘‘H2S present’’ is defined in existing
§ 250.490 paragraph (b) as ‘‘could
potentially result in atmospheric
concentration of 20 ppm or more of
H2S.’’ BSEE proposed language to clarify

E:\FR\FM\30AUR2.SGM

30AUR2

71102

Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Rules and Regulations

that in either ‘‘H2S present’’ conditions
or when H2S concentrations in the
produced fluid exceed 0.05 psi partial
pressure of H2S, the operator must use
equipment that is constructed of
materials with certain metallurgical
properties, in accordance with NACE
Standard MR0175–2003.
Summary of Final Rule Revisions
BSEE is including the proposed
language in the final rule without
change.
Summary of comments: A commenter
recommended that BSEE reference
NACE MR0175 in the introductory text
to paragraph (p).
Response: BSEE is not including the
reference to NACE MR0175 in the
introductory text to this paragraph in
the final rule because it is currently
referenced in existing paragraph (p)(2).
BSEE already requires BOP system
components, wellhead, pressure-control
equipment, and related equipment
exposed to H2S-bearing fluids to be in
conformance with NACE Standard
MR0175. BSEE also requires
conformance with NACE MR0175 in
other subparts of the BSEE regulations
as it pertains to other equipment (e.g.,
see §§ 250.518(a)(2) and 250.619(a)(2)
for tubing requirements).
Subpart E—Oil and Gas WellCompletion Operations
Tubing and wellhead equipment
(§ 250.518)
Summary of Proposed Rule Revisions

ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES2

BSEE proposed to revise paragraph (a)
of § 250.518 to include the following:
—The tubing string must be evaluated
for burst, collapse, and axial loads
with appropriate safety and design
factors for the pressure and
temperature environments of the
completion, production, shut-in, and
injection load cases;
—The tubing string materials must be
appropriate for the environment. The
operator must follow NACE Standard
MR0175–2003 (as incorporated by
reference in § 250.198) when H2S
concentration may equal or exceed
0.05 psi partial pressure; and
—The tubing string threaded connectors
must be appropriate for the loads
identified in proposed paragraph
(a)(1).
These revisions would reflect
essential well design elements
addressed in industry standards.
Current regulations discuss well design
specific to casing, but little is provided
for tubing design, which is equally
critical for well integrity. Regulations
currently establish H2S concentrations

VerDate Sep<11>2014

22:47 Aug 29, 2024

Jkt 262001

that constitute a specific threat to
personnel and establish concentrations
that trigger enactment of H2S protocols.
Additional requirements added to this
section would address H2S impacts to
equipment integrity, as these
components must function as barriers to
personnel and the environment. Section
250.490 paragraph (p) currently requires
that the tubing and casing be designed
for NACE requirements, but incorrectly
refers only to ‘‘H2S present’’ as the
concentration necessary to trigger this
requirement. ‘‘H2S present’’ is defined
in existing § 250.490 paragraph (b) as
‘‘could potentially result in atmospheric
concentration of 20 ppm or more of
H2S.’’ BSEE proposed to clarify that, in
either ‘‘H2S present’’ conditions or
when H2S concentrations in the
produced fluid exceed 0.05 psi partial
pressure of H2S, the operator must use
equipment that is constructed of
materials with certain metallurgical
properties, in accordance with NACE
Standard MR0175–2003.
BSEE also proposed to revise
paragraph (c) of this section to include
the design and testing of the wellhead,
tree, and related equipment in
accordance with ANSI/API Spec. 6A (as
incorporated by reference in § 250.198)
or ANSI/API Spec. 17D (as incorporated
by reference in § 250.198), as applicable.
The proposed rule would also add
paragraphs (c)(1), (2), and (3) to clarify
that:
—Newly completed dry trees (e.g.,
fixed, hybrid, or mudline suspension)
for production or injection wells must
be equipped with a minimum of one
master valve and one surface safety
valve (SSV), installed above the
master valve, in the vertical run of the
tree;
—Newly completed subsea production
or injection wells must be equipped
with a minimum of one USV installed
in the horizontal or vertical run of the
tree (e.g., vertical or horizontal subsea
trees); and
—Newly completed wells with a
mudline suspension conversion to a
subsea tree must have a minimum of
two casing strings tied back and
sealed below the tubing head. At a
minimum, the production casing and
the next outer casing must be tied
back to the wellhead to ensure
annular isolation.
BSEE proposed adding paragraph
(c)(3) because ANSI/API Spec. 17D does
not address mudline suspension
conversion to a subsea tree with more
than one casing tieback. The proposed
revisions would also codify similar
language from NTL 2006 G–20, which
would establish a requirement for a

PO 00000

Frm 00028

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4700

minimum of two casing strings tied back
and sealed below the tubing head for a
mudline suspension conversion to a
subsea tree.
BSEE proposed revising paragraph (d)
to clarify that both the subsurface safety
equipment and surface safety equipment
must comply with applicable
requirements of Subpart H.
Summary of Final Rule Revisions
BSEE received a comment on this
section, but is not making any revisions
based on that comment. BSEE is
finalizing the proposed content with a
clarification in paragraph (a)(1) that the
tubing string must be evaluated with
appropriate safety factors and material
design factors. This revision clarifies
this regulation with the correct usage of
terms for engineering analysis.
Summary of comments: A commenter
expressed concerns that certain content
in this section is redundant of the
requirements of Subpart D and should
be removed.
Response: BSEE disagrees with the
commenter and is not removing the
content. Finalizing the regulation based
on the proposed language helps ensure
consistency among the different
subparts and considerations for
operations when H2S is present.
Subpart F—Oil and Gas Well-Workover
Operations
Tubing and wellhead equipment
(§ 250.619)
Summary of Proposed Rule Revisions
BSEE proposed to revise paragraph (a)
of § 250.619 to include the following:
—The tubing string must be evaluated
for burst, collapse, and axial loads
with appropriate safety and design
factors for the pressure and
temperature environments of the
completion, production, shut-in, and
injection load cases;
—The tubing string materials must be
appropriate for the environment. The
operator must follow NACE Standard
MR0175–2003 (as incorporated by
reference in § 250.198) when H2S
concentration may equal or exceed
0.05 psi partial pressure; and
—The tubing string threaded connectors
must be appropriate for the loads
identified in proposed paragraph
(a)(1).
Additional requirements BSEE
proposed to add to this section address
H2S impacts to equipment integrity, as
these components must function as
barriers to personnel and the
environment. BSEE proposed to clarify
that in either ‘‘H2S present’’ conditions
or when H2S concentrations in the

E:\FR\FM\30AUR2.SGM

30AUR2

Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
produced fluid exceed 0.05 psi partial
pressure of H2S, the operator must use
equipment that is constructed of
materials with certain metallurgical
properties, in accordance with NACE
Standard MR0175–2003.
BSEE also proposed to revise
paragraph (c) to include the design and
testing of the wellhead, tree, and related
equipment in accordance with ANSI/
API Spec. 6A (as incorporated by
reference in § 250.198) or ANSI/API
Spec. 17D (as incorporated by reference
in § 250.198), as applicable. This section
would also add paragraphs (c)(1), (2),
and (3) to clarify that:
—Newly completed dry trees (e.g.,
fixed, hybrid, or mudline suspension)
for production or injection wells must
be equipped with a minimum of one
master valve and one SSV, installed
above the master valve, in the vertical
run of the tree;
—Newly completed subsea production
or injection wells must be equipped
with a minimum of one USV installed
in the horizontal or vertical run of the
tree (for vertical or horizontal subsea
trees); and
—Newly completed wells with a
mudline suspension conversion to a
subsea tree must have a minimum of
two casing strings tied back and
sealed below the tubing head. At a
minimum, the production casing and
the next outer casing must be tied
back to the wellhead, to ensure
annular isolation.
BSEE proposed to revise paragraph (d)
to clarify that surface safety equipment
must be installed, maintained, and
tested in accordance with applicable
sections of Subpart H, in addition to the
subsurface safety equipment.
Summary of Final Rule Revisions
BSEE did not receive any comments
on this section and is finalizing the
proposed content with the same
clarification identified in § 250.518 in
paragraph (a)(1) that the tubing string
must be evaluated with appropriate
safety factors and material design
factors. This revision clarifies this
regulation with the correct usage of
terms for engineering analysis and is
consistent with similar requirements in
§ 250.518.

ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES2

Subpart G—Well Operations and
Equipment
What information must I submit for BOP
systems and system components?
(§ 250.731)
Summary of Proposed Rule Revisions
BSEE proposed to revise existing
paragraph (c)(4) of § 250.731 to update
a cross-reference to the definition of

VerDate Sep<11>2014

22:47 Aug 29, 2024

Jkt 262001

HPHT in accordance with proposed
§ 250.105.
Summary of Final Rule Revisions
BSEE did not receive any comments
on this provision of the proposed rule
and is including the proposed language
in the final rule without change.
What are the independent third party
requirements for BOP systems and
system components? (§ 250.732)
Summary of Proposed Rule Revisions
BSEE proposed to revise existing
paragraph (c) of § 250.732 to reflect the
addition of the new or unusual
technology and new or unusual
technology barrier requirements in
Subpart B. BSEE proposed to delete the
independent third-party requirements
under existing paragraph (c) because
that information would be covered
under the new DWOP process
requirements. These proposed revisions
would connect the HPHT permitting
(e.g., APD) requirements and the DWOP
process requirements and would
improve BSEE’s review and decision
process. BSEE proposed these revisions
to help ensure that the specified
equipment is fit for service in the
environmental conditions reasonably
expected at the operation’s site.
BSEE also proposed to remove
duplicative requirements now covered
under the DWOP new or unusual
technology barrier requirements and
would provide greater detail
considering that the Conceptual Plan
review occurs before use of HPHT
equipment and would occur before
application review. BSEE proposed to
consolidate the language and refer to the
applicable new or unusual technology
barrier requirements and would specify
that BSEE would require Conceptual
Plan and appropriate permit approval
before equipment installation. This
addition would provide clarification to
operators unfamiliar with the applicable
DWOP requirements.
Summary of Final Rule Revisions
Based on comments received and
review of the comments, BSEE is
revising paragraphs (c)(4) and (c)(5) to
remove the term ‘‘certification’’ to be
consistent with other required
statements and the use of certifications.
BSEE is also revising paragraph (c) to
clarify that the operator may not deploy
the proposed BOP system and related
equipment that will or may be exposed
to an HPHT environment until BSEE
approves the appropriate Conceptual
Plan and permits (e.g., APD and APM).
This clarification helps ensure the
correct use of terminology and

PO 00000

Frm 00029

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4700

71103

description of equipment or systems.
For example, BSEE does not have a
definition of ‘‘HPHT BOP system,’’ so
that term was removed.
BSEE also fixed incorrect cross
references throughout this section based
on the updates to Subpart B.
Summary of comments: Multiple
commenters expressed concerns with
the use of the term ‘‘related equipment’’
as it relates to BOP systems and asserted
that this section is limited to BOP
equipment.
Response: BSEE disagrees with the
commenters, as ‘‘BOP systems and
related equipment’’ has been defined in
§ 250.105, and BSEE is not making
changes to this section based on this
comment. BSEE defines ‘‘BOP systems
and related equipment’’ to be all
pressure controlling and pressure
containing well control equipment that
may or will be exposed to the well’s
MASP during drilling, completion,
workover, intervention, or
abandonment. Well control equipment
includes equipment that is installed for
the purpose of pressure control and
pressure containment when it becomes
necessary to physically enter a well bore
during drilling, completion, workover,
intervention, or abandonment modes of
operation. This definition makes it clear
what is included in ‘‘BOP systems and
related equipment.’’
Summary of comments: A commenter
expressed concerns that it is unclear
how MASP is determined for all the
stated operations and requested BSEE
clarify how to determine MASP.
Response: BSEE disagrees with the
commenter and is not making changes
to this section based on this comment.
Information regarding how to determine
MASP is already identified in multiple
BSEE regulations (e.g., see § 250.730).
Summary of comments: Multiple
commenters expressed concerns with
the use of a certification statement for
compliance with Subpart H.
Response: BSEE agrees with the
commenters and has removed the term
‘‘certification’’ from paragraph (c). BSEE
will still require a statement in
accordance with §§ 250.230 and
250.232. BSEE wants to ensure
consistency with the use of I3P
statements.
Summary of comments: A commenter
requested clarification about when the
Conceptual Plans are required for HPHT
operations discussed in this section.
Response: BSEE has determined that
no clarification is needed in this
section. As stated in this section, the
operator cannot deploy the proposed
HPHT BOP system and related
equipment until BSEE approves the
New or Unusual Technology Barrier

E:\FR\FM\30AUR2.SGM

30AUR2

71104

Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Rules and Regulations

Equipment Conceptual Plan and
appropriate permit. Also, BSEE requires
certain actions listed in paragraph (c)
before beginning any operation in an
HPHT environment. If the operations
are not in an HPHT environment as
defined by BSEE, then paragraph (c) is
not applicable. This section is only
applicable to operations in an HPHT
environment and all non-HPHT new or
unusual technology will need to follow
the New or Unusual Technology Barrier
Equipment Conceptual Plan process in
Subpart B.

ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES2

Current regulations section

IV. Derivation Table

Subpart H—Oil and Gas Production
Safety Systems
Additional Requirements for Subsurface
Safety Valves (SSSVs) and Related
Equipment Installed in High Pressure
High Temperature (HPHT)
Environments (§ 250.804)
Summary of Proposed Rule Revisions
BSEE proposed to remove and reserve
this section. The existing requirements
from this section would be addressed
under proposed §§ 250.105 and 250.204.
Summary of Final Rule Revisions
BSEE did not receive any comments
on this proposed section and is
finalizing the proposed removal and
reservation of this section without
change.
Final rule
section

The following table is intended to
provide information about the
derivation of the requirements in
Subpart B. This table provides guidance
on the following:
—The destination of various existing
requirements.
—The organization and content of the
proposed revisions.
This table does not provide definitive
or exhaustive guidance and should be
used in conjunction with the section-bysection discussion and regulatory text of
this proposed rule.
The proposed rule would make
changes as outlined in the following
table:

Nature of change

Subpart A:
250.804 ..............................................

250.105

Moves the definition of HPHT to make it applicable to all operations, not just production.

Subpart B:
250.200 ..............................................

250.200

250.201 ..............................................

250.201

250.204 ..............................................
250.205 ..............................................
New ....................................................

250.202
250.203
250.204

New ....................................................
New ....................................................

250.206
250.207

550.280 ..............................................
550.281(a) and (b) .............................
250.282 ..............................................
New ....................................................
250.286 ..............................................

250.208
250.209
250.210
250.211
250.220

250.287 ..............................................
New ....................................................
250.288 and 250.290 ........................

250.221
250.225
250.226

250.289 ..............................................

250.227

New ....................................................
New ....................................................

250.228
250.229

New ....................................................
New ....................................................
New ....................................................
New ....................................................
250.291 ..............................................

250.230
250.231
250.232
250.233
250.235

New ....................................................

250.236

250.292 ..............................................

250.237

250.292 ..............................................

250.238

250.292 ..............................................

250.239

250.292 ..............................................

250.240

250.292 ..............................................

250.241

New ....................................................

250.242

Adds definitions for ‘‘barrier categorization,’’ ‘‘primary barriers,’’ ‘‘secondary barriers,’’ and ‘‘new or unusual technology’’.
Adds information about the three new Conceptual Plans and when submittal of
each plan is required.
Moved without revision.
Moved without revision.
Clarifies what information must be submitted to BSEE if an operator plans to install
HPHT barrier equipment.
Codifies some of the barrier concepts from existing BSEE guidance.
Requires the installation and maintenance of a primary and secondary barrier system to contain the source.
Includes similar content with minor formatting changes to reflect BSEE applicability.
Includes similar content with minor formatting changes to reflect BSEE applicability.
Includes similar content with minor formatting changes to reflect BSEE applicability.
Clarifies the new or unusual technology failure reporting requirements.
Clarifies the addition of new or unusual technology, and the operations that could
be covered under the DWOP Process.
Includes similar content and clarify when the DWOP Process is applicable.
Identifies the 3 new Conceptual Plans.
Includes similar content and clarify when to submit the applicable Conceptual
Plans.
Includes content from existing paragraphs (a), (b), (c), (i)(1), and specify the content of the Project Conceptual Plan.
Specifies the content of the New or Unusual Technology Conceptual Plan.
Specifies the content of the New or Unusual Technology Barrier Equipment Conceptual Plan.
Specifies the submittal timing for I3P Reports.
Specifies the I3P nomination requirements.
Specifies the I3P requirements for applicable Conceptual Plan review.
Clarifies the I3P Report expectations.
Includes similar content and clarify DWOP submittals to reflect new or unusual
technology additions.
Adds a table listing the applicable sections with corresponding information for the
DWOP content.
Includes content from existing paragraphs (a), (b) and clarify the general DWOP requirements.
Includes content from existing paragraphs (a), (b), (c) and clarify the completions
information DWOP requirements.
Includes content from existing paragraphs (a), (b), (c) and clarify the structural information DWOP requirements.
Includes content from existing paragraphs (a), (b), (c), (d), (e)(3) and clarify the
production safety system information DWOP requirements.
Includes content from existing paragraphs (c)(2)(i), (ii), (iii) and clarify the subsea
systems and pipeline information DWOP requirements.
Clarifies the new or unusual technology information DWOP requirements.

VerDate Sep<11>2014

22:47 Aug 29, 2024

Jkt 262001

PO 00000

Frm 00030

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4700

E:\FR\FM\30AUR2.SGM

30AUR2

Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
Final rule
section

Current regulations section
250.294 ..............................................

250.245

250.295 ..............................................
New ....................................................
New ....................................................

250.246
250.247
250.248

ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES2

V. Procedural Matters
Regulatory Planning and Review
(Executive Orders (E.O.) 12866, 14094,
and 13563).
E.O. 12866, Regulatory Planning and
Review, as amended by E.O. 14094,
provides that OMB’s Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs
(OIRA) will review all significant
regulatory actions. A significant
regulatory action is one that is likely to
result in a rule that:
• Has an annual effect on the
economy of $200 million or more
(adjusted every 3 years by the
Administrator of OIRA for changes in
gross domestic product); or adversely
affect in a material way the economy, a
sector of the economy, productivity,
competition, jobs, the environment,
public health or safety, or State, local,
territorial, or tribal governments or
communities;
• Creates a 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 legal or policy issues for
which centralized review would
meaningfully further the President’s
priorities or the principles set forth in
E.O. 12866, as specifically authorized in
a timely manner by the Administrator of
OIRA in each case.
OIRA has determined that this final
rule is not significant under E.O. 12866.
In support of that conclusion, BSEE
prepared a final Regulatory Impact
Analysis (RIA) to assess the anticipated
costs and potential benefits of the
rulemaking. The RIA estimates that the
increase in annualized costs, compared
with the baseline in the absence of the
proposed rule, is $6.6 million per year.
Over the period 2025–2034, those costs
are estimated to have a total present
value of $64.0 million undiscounted,
$57.5 million discounted at 2 percent,
and $59.3 million discounted at 2

VerDate Sep<11>2014

22:47 Aug 29, 2024

Jkt 262001

Nature of change
Includes similar content and clarify when an operator can combine the Project Conceptual Plan and the DWOP.
Includes similar content and clarify when a revised DWOP is necessary.
Clarifies when a supplemental DWOP is necessary.
Clarifies the content of a supplemental DWOP.

percent with a capital displacement
adjustment. The RIA for this rulemaking
can be found in the docket at https://
www.regulations.gov/ (Docket ID: BSEE–
2021–0003).
As required by the Independent
Offices Appropriation Act (IOAA), as
amended (31 U.S.C. 9701), the rule will
establish new fees for BSEE’s review
and processing of several types of
operator submissions and reports. This
rule will add service fees for processing
a Project Conceptual Plan, New or
Unusual Technology Conceptual Plan,
New or Unusual Technology Barrier
Equipment Conceptual Plan, revised
DWOP, Combined Conceptual Plan/
DWOP, and Revised or Supplemental
DWOP. This rule will also revise the
cost recovery fee amount for DWOP
review. The final rule will increase, and
not adversely affect, the government’s
receipt of user fees. BSEE’s economic
analysis projects that, altogether, the
fees anticipated to be collected under
the proposal over a 10-year period
(2025–2034) would exceed the baseline
fees collected by approximately $1.6
million (undiscounted).
The rulemaking will improve
operational and environmental safety
and human health for deepwater
development projects and other projects
or systems that use new or unusual
technology, not only by providing
clarity and regulatory certainty
regarding the information submission
process, but also by ensuring that
additional regulatory requirements and
that New or Unusual Technology Barrier
Equipment Conceptual Plans are
reviewed by I3Ps, as well as providing
BSEE discretion to require I3P review of
New or Unusual Technology Conceptual
Plans. BSEE has not monetized or
quantified the benefits of the new
submission process, the new
requirements for new or unusual
technology projects, including HPHT
projects, and I3P reviews. BSEE believes
that by updating references to industry
standards and giving greater clarity to
requirements for submissions for new or

PO 00000

71105

Frm 00031

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4700

unusual technology and HPHT projects
and plans, the final rule promotes the
objectives of E.O. 13563, including a
reasoned determination that its benefits
justify its costs (recognizing that some
benefits and costs are difficult to
monetize or quantify).
Executive Order 13563, Improving
Regulation and Regulatory Review,
reaffirms the principles of E.O. 12866
while calling for improvements in the
Nation’s regulatory system to promote
predictability, to reduce uncertainty,
and to use the best, most innovative,
and least burdensome tools for
achieving regulatory ends. E.O. 13563
directs agencies to consider regulatory
approaches that reduce burdens and
maintain flexibility and freedom of
choice for the public where these
approaches are relevant, feasible, and
consistent with regulatory objectives.
E.O. 13563 emphasizes further that
regulations must be based on the best
available science and that the
rulemaking process must allow for
public participation and an open
exchange of ideas. We have developed
this final rule in a manner consistent
with these requirements.
Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA),
5 U.S.C. 601–612, requires agencies to
analyze the economic impact of
regulations when there is likely to be a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities and
allows an agency to certify a rule, in lieu
of preparing an analysis, if the
regulation will not have such an
economic impact.
BSEE considers a rule to have 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. The relevant small-size
criteria for affected operators and firms
likely to help prepare reports are
presented in Table 1 below.

E:\FR\FM\30AUR2.SGM

30AUR2

71106

Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
TABLE 1—SMALL-ENTITY CRITERIA FOR AFFECTED FIRMS
Industry sector

211120
211130
213111
541330

Small-entity criteria

Crude petroleum extraction .............................................................................................
Natural gas extraction .....................................................................................................
Drilling oil and gas wells ..................................................................................................
Engineering services (for the I3P or other reports) .........................................................

Using these criteria, BSEE estimates
that the final rule will affect about 23
companies over the next 10 years (2025–
2034), of which approximately 12 (52
percent) of the potentially impacted
businesses are considered small; the rest
are considered large businesses. All of
the operating businesses meeting the
U.S. Small Business Administration
classification are potentially impacted;
therefore, BSEE expects that the rule
will affect a substantial number of small
entities.

As noted in the E.O. 12866
discussion, the final rule will result in
increased costs to firms from HPHT and
new or unusual technology reporting
requirements and increased service fees,
including mandatory I3P nominations
and reports. The increase in cost borne
by industry includes cost of
submissions, preparation, and cost
recovery fees. BSEE has evaluated
quantifiable costs and benefits and has
estimated that there are quantified costs
to industry from the final provisions.
BSEE has estimated the annualized

1,250
1,250
1,000
$16.5

employees.
employees.
employees.
million/year revenues.

industry costs by business size in Table
2. The percent of the total industry cost
impacts to small operators was
estimated based on their percentage of
overall revenues. These revenues were
estimated by applying Census Statistics
of U.S. Businesses revenue estimates by
employment ranges to each impacted
operator. Based on historical
information, BSEE estimates that small
companies will bear 8 percent of the
industry costs from this rule and large
companies will bear the remaining 92
percent.

TABLE 2—TOTAL 10-YEAR INDUSTRY COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH FINAL RULE (2025–2034)
[Undiscounted annualized $]
Company size

Percent of revenues

Industry rulemaking costs

Small Companies .............................................................................................................
Large Companies ............................................................................................................

8
92

$505,733
5,812,764

Total ..........................................................................................................................

100

6,318,497

Table 3 presents the average industry
cost and revenue per firm and the
numbers of firms classified as small or
large. This is presented in Table 3,
which illustrates that on a per-firm basis
the new reporting costs that will be
imposed on small firms by the new
requirements, at $42,123 per year, will
represent approximately 0.015 percent

of revenue. BSEE uses a threshold of 1
percent of annual revenues to determine
the significance of costs on entities;
therefore, the new reporting costs are
not deemed to be a significant impact.
BSEE therefore projects that the final
rule is not likely to have a significant
economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities. Although it is

not likely required because of this
projection, BSEE has conducted a
regulatory flexibility analysis (RFA),
which provides information on the
impact of the final rule on small
entities. It is contained in the RIA,
which can be found in the docket at
https://www.regulations.gov/ (Docket
ID: BSEE–2021–0003).

TABLE 3—AVERAGE ANNUAL INDUSTRY COST AND REVENUE PER FIRM
[Undiscounted annualized $]

Company size

Small Companies .....................................................................
Large Companies ....................................................................

ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES2

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
This final rule would not impose an
unfunded mandate on State, local, or
tribal governments or the private sector
of more than $195 million per year. The
final rule will 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

VerDate Sep<11>2014

22:47 Aug 29, 2024

Jkt 262001

Average
annualized
industry cost
per firm

Count

12
11

$42,123
528,456

Average annual
revenue per firm
$283,524,338
3,555,005,441

Cost as percent of
revenue
0.015
0.015

Act (2 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) is not
required.

protected property rights. A Takings
Implication Assessment is not required.

Takings Implication Assessment (E.O.
12630)

Federalism (E.O. 13132)

Under the criteria in E.O. 12630, this
final rule does not have significant
takings implications. The rule is not a
governmental action capable of
interference with constitutionally

PO 00000

Frm 00032

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4700

Under the criteria in E.O. 13132, this
final rule does not have federalism
implications. This final rule will not
substantially and directly affect the
relationship between the Federal and
State governments. To the extent that
State and local governments have a role

E:\FR\FM\30AUR2.SGM

30AUR2

Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
in OCS activities, this final rule will not
affect that role. A federalism assessment
is not required.
Civil Justice Reform (E.O. 12988)
This final 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.

ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES2

Consultation With Indian Tribes (E.O.
13175)
BSEE strives to strengthen its
government-to-government
relationships with Tribal Nations and
Alaska Natives through a commitment
to consultation with the Tribes and
recognition of their right to selfgovernance and Tribal sovereignty.
BSEE is also respectful of its
responsibilities for consultation with
Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act
(ANCSA) Corporations. In 2022, BSEE
notified Tribal Nations and ANCSA
Corporations of multiple BSEE
rulemakings in development, including
this final rule, and invited further
government-to-government
consultations on any subjects in the
regulatory agenda at a Tribe’s or ANCSA
Corporation’s request. BSEE received
written comments on the regulatory
agenda from the Mashpee Wampanoag
Tribe, Native Village of Kotzebue, and
Choctaw Nation of Oklahoma, and held
a subsequent informational meeting
with the Choctaw Nation of Oklahoma.
None of the Tribes submitted comments
or requested further consultations
pertaining to this final rule. Under the
criteria in E.O. 13175 and DOI’s Policies
on Consultation with Indian Tribes and
Consultation with Alaska Native Claims
Settlement Act Corporations (512 DM 4
and 512 DM 6, respectively), we have
evaluated this final rule and determined
that it has no substantial direct effects
on federally recognized Indian Tribes.
National Technology Transfer and
Advancement Act (NTTAA)
BSEE complies with the National
Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act (NTTAA) (15 U.S.C. 3701 et seq.)
requirement that an agency ‘‘use
standards developed or adopted by
voluntary consensus standards bodies
rather than government-unique
standards, except where inconsistent
with applicable law or otherwise
impractical.’’ (OMB Circular A–119 at p.

VerDate Sep<11>2014

22:47 Aug 29, 2024

Jkt 262001

13). BSEE also complies with the Office
of the Federal Register (OFR) regulations
governing incorporation by reference.
(See, 1 CFR part 51.) Those regulations
also specify the process for updating an
incorporated standard at 1 CFR 51.11(a),
and BSEE complies with those
requirements, including seeking
approval by OFR for a change to a
standard incorporated by reference in a
final rule.
Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) of 1995
This final rule contains existing and
new information collection (IC)
requirements for regulations at 30 CFR
part 250, subpart B, Plans and
Information, 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 request a new OMB
control number. Once the 1014–AA49
final rule is effective, we will
discontinue the hour burdens and nonhour cost burdens from current 1014–
0024 (22,458 hours, $32,391 non-hour
cost burden, expiration December 31,
2024), 30 CFR part 250, subpart B, Plans
and Information. BSEE will keep 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 final regulations will establish
new and/or revise current requirements
in Subpart B, Plans and Information, by
revising regulations regarding the
Deepwater Operations Plan (DWOP)
Process and information submittal and
approval process, which includes
Conceptual Plans and DWOPs; adding
requirements for HPHT barrier
equipment and systems and new or
unusual technology; and requiring, or
providing BSEE with the option to
require, independent third-party
reviews of Conceptual Plans and
DWOPs.
This final rule revises all the
proposed service fees listed in
§ 250.125(a)(2) to reflect the revised
processes more accurately, as identified
in the other applicable discussions in
Section III of this preamble and the
estimated BSEE review time for the
listed services.
The following provides a breakdown
of the paperwork hour burdens and nonhour cost burdens for this final rule.
While some sections are being moved
from existing Subpart B requirements, it
is noted that the burden in proposed
§ 250.210 (current § 250.282) is covered
under BOEM’s 1010–0151. Accordingly,
new burdens for BSEE are being added.

PO 00000

Frm 00033

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4700

71107

As discussed in the Section-bySection analysis above, and in the
supporting statement available at
RegInfo.gov, this rule will add/revise:
[New requirements, due to the final
rule, are shown in bold]
250.210—This section will be revised
and moved from existing § 250.282. It
will include minor revisions to clarify
that the Regional Supervisor may direct
operators to conduct monitoring
programs in association with their
approved EP, DPP, DWOP, or DOCD
(+12 burden hours).
250.211—This section is new and will
clarify the new or unusual technology
failure reporting requirements and will
require notification to BSEE within 30
days of the failure and provision of a
written report identifying the root
causes of the failure (+400 burden hours
and $47,216 in non-hour cost burdens).
250.221(b)—This section will be
revised and moved from existing
§ 250.287. It will clarify that the DWOP
process is applicable to any project that
will include the use of new or unusual
technology (+6 burden hours).
250.226—This section will be revised
and moved from existing §§ 250.288 and
250.290. It will add two new Conceptual
Plans: New or Unusual Technology
Conceptual Plan and New or Unusual
Technology Barrier Equipment
Conceptual Plan. There are also three
new Cost Recovery Fees (§ 250.125—
Service Fees) associated with each
Conceptual Plan (+39 burden hours and
$297,568 non-hour cost burdens).
250.227—This section will be revised
and moved from existing § 250.289. It
will list additional information to be
submitted with a Project Conceptual
Plan and will add new Independent
Third Party (I3P) costs for various
reviews, certifications, verifications, etc.
(+320 burden hours and $37,776 nonhour costs burden).
250.228—This section is new and will
list the various submissions required
with a New or Unusual Technology
Conceptual Plan and will add new I3P
costs for various reviews, certifications,
verifications, etc. (+3,600 burden hours
and $676,130 non-hour costs burden).
250.229—This section is new and lists
the various submissions required with a
New or Unusual Technology Barrier
Equipment Conceptual Plan and will
add new I3P costs for various reviews,
certifications, verifications, etc. (+9,360
burden hours and $2,955,719 non-hour
costs burden).
250.230—This section is new and will
require operators submit I3P Reports for
any equipment identified in the New or
Unusual Technology Barrier Equipment
Conceptual Plan and when required by

E:\FR\FM\30AUR2.SGM

30AUR2

71108

Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Rules and Regulations

Regional Supervisor (Fit for service
statement) (+25 burden hours).
250.231(a)—This section is new and
will outline the requirements for the
operator to nominate an I3P to be used
in conjunction with applicable
Conceptual Plans, including that the I3P
must be a technical classification
society, a licensed professional
engineering firm, or a registered
professional engineer capable of
providing the required certifications and
verifications (+9 burden hours).
250.231(b)—This section is new and
will add the required information that
the I3P is to review (+16,660 burden
hours).
250.231(c)—This section is new and
will require operators to provide
evidence of previous I3P nomination
acceptance to utilize a previously BSEE
accepted I3P from the same project
(+100 burden hours).
250.232(b); 250.233—These sections
are new and will require the I3P to
submit a report documenting the review
of each item and identify all OEM and
operator documents used during the
reviews (+60 burden hours).
250.232(c), (d); 250.233—These
sections are new and will require the
I3P to submit a final report that

summarizes each review requirement
under (a) of this section and will also
require the summary report to include
the equipment and/or system’s technical
specifications, including a statement
that the equipment and/or system is fit
for purpose for the technical
specification by the I3P, and verification
that the equipment’s technical
specifications meet or exceed the
project’s functional requirements
including a statement that the
equipment and/or system is fit for
purpose (+9 burden hours).
250.235; 250.236; 250.237; 250.238;
250.239; 250.240; 250.241; 250.242;
250.204; and 732(c)—These sections
will be revised and moved from existing
§§ 250.291 and 250.292. These will
identify when and how to submit a
DWOP; and what general information,
well or completions information,
structural information, production
safety system information, subsea
systems, and pipeline information to
submit with DWOPs (+1,070 burden
hours and $756,210 non-hour costs
burden).
250.245—This section will be revised
and moved from existing § 250.294. It
will be revised to clarify that operators
may submit a combined Project

Conceptual Plan/DWOP, with all
applicable requirements for both, on or
before the deadline for submitting the
Conceptual Plan (+428 burden hours
and $27,712 non-hour costs burden).
250.246—This section will be revised
and moved from existing § 250.295. It
will be revised to clarify when a
revision to a Conceptual Plan or DWOP
is necessary (+80 burden hours and
$1,926 non-hour costs burden).
250.247; 250.248—This section is new
and will identify when an operator must
supplement the DWOP to reflect
additions or changes in the
development project and will add the
required information that must be
included in the supplement to the
DWOP. It will also require a supplement
to the DWOP when a project change
involves the addition of any new or
unusual technology that was not
previously covered under the New or
Unusual Technology Conceptual Plan,
New or Unusual Technology Barrier
Equipment Conceptual Plan, or DWOP
(+3,990 burden hours and $756,210
non-hour costs burden).
This rule also edits and updates
citations to §§ 250.731(c) and
250.732(c). No burden changes are being
requested.

BURDEN BREAKDOWN
Citation 30 CFR part 250,
subpart B and NTLs

Reporting & recordkeeping requirement

Hour burden

I

Average number of
annual responses
annual

Burden hours

I

Non-hour cost burdens
General Information
200 thru 248 ...............................
201 thru 248 ...............................

General departure and alternative compliance requests not specifically covered elsewhere in subpart B regulations.
Submission of plans, documents/information with applicable permit (New or Unusual Technology (NUT) Conceptual Plans
(CPs), NUT Barrier Equipment CP, Project CP, and DWOP);
any additional information required by Reg. Sup.

Burden covered under 1014–0022.

0

Burden included with specific requirements below.

0

Post-Approval Requirements for the EP (Exploration Plan), DPP (Development and Production Plan), Deep Water Operations Plan (DWOP), and DOCD
(Development Operation Coordination Document) [for BSEE apps/permits which include drilling, workovers, production, pipelay, facility installation,
and decommissioning, etc.]
210 ..............................................

211 ..............................................

Retain monitoring data/information; make available to BSEE if requested.
Submit monitoring plan for approval ...............................................
Submit monitoring reports and data ...............................................
Notify Reg. Sup. w/in 30-days of NUT failure; provide failure analysis report including and results & findings of root cause analysis.

.5 ....................

2 retentions .................

1

.5 ....................
5 .....................
200 .................

2 plans ........................
2 reports .....................
2 reports .....................

1
10
400

$23,608 I3P × 2 reports = $47,216.
Deepwater Operations Plan (DWOP) Process

ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES2

221(b) ..........................................

226 ..............................................

Contact the Reg. Sup. for guidance if you are unsure if your
project contains subsea tieback development technology or
NUT.
Submit Project CP for approval including additional information
requested.

15 min ............

25 inquiries .................

6

2 .....................

8 plans ........................

16

$2,697 Fee × 8 plans = $21,576.
Submit NUT CP for approval including additional information requested.

VerDate Sep<11>2014

22:47 Aug 29, 2024

Jkt 262001

PO 00000

Frm 00034

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4700

1 .....................

E:\FR\FM\30AUR2.SGM

10 plans ......................

30AUR2

10

71109

Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
BURDEN BREAKDOWN—Continued
Citation 30 CFR part 250,
subpart B and NTLs

Reporting & recordkeeping requirement

Hour burden

Average number of
annual responses
annual

Burden hours

Non-hour cost burdens
$7,964 Fee × 10 plans = $79,640.
Submit NUT Barrier Equipment CP for approval including additional information requested.

1 .....................

13 plans ......................

13

$15,104 Fee × 13 plans = $196,352.
227; 226; 201; 204 .....................

Submit w/Project Conceptual Plan, an explanation of the general
design basis and philosophy, and all required information, including but not limited to: overviews, system control type, estimated distances, subsea production safety Statement, descriptions, structural modifications, installation information, modification statements, schedules, schematics, estimated pressures or
discussion of PVT, temperature ratings, etc., the pay.gov confirmation receipt and any additional information required.

40 ...................

8 plans ........................

228; 226; 201; 204 .....................

Submit w/NUT CP, all required information, including but not limited to descriptions, discussions, demonstrations, inspection
and testing capabilities, risk assessment, operating procedures,
history of the technology, design verifications/testing, schematics, justifications, certifications, list alternative compliance
procedures/departures, and any additional information required.
Use of an I3P if required, Contact Reg. Sup., for questions related to I3P verifications, the pay.gov confirmation receipt and
any additional information required.

360 .................

10 plans ......................

320

$4,722 I3P costs × 8 plans = $37,776.
3,600

$67,613 I3P costs × 10 plans = $676,130.
229; 226; 201; 204 .....................

Submit w/NUT Barrier Equipment CP, all required information, including but not limited to: detailed schematics, lists of barriers,
engineering standards, functional requirements, descriptions,
I3P nominations and verification plans, I3P Reports, certification statements, the pay.gov confirmation receipt and any
additional information required.

720 .................

13 plans ......................

9,360

$227,363 I3P costs × 13 plans =
$2,955,719.
230; 732(c) .................................

231(a) ..........................................

231(b) .........................................

231(c) ..........................................
232(b); 233 .................................

232(c), (d); 233; 732(c) ..............

235; 236; 237; 238; 239; 240;
241, 242, 204; 732(c).

Submit I3P Reports required for any equipment identified in NUT
Barrier Equipment CP and when required by Regional Supervisor. (Fit for service statement).
Submit I3P nomination capable to certify and verify documentation, I3P must be technical class. Society, licensed PE firm, or
registered PE. Make all documentation and equipment available to I3P.
I3P must review information of the applicable equipment and/or
system; including but not limited to basis of design, technical
specs., & function requirements, etc., all required info.
Provide evidence of previous I3P nomination acceptance to utilize a previously BSEE accepted I3P from the same project.
Submit report documenting the review of each item covered
under 250.232(a). Report must identify all OEM and Operator
documents reviewed.
Submit a final report summarizing the review requirements, including equipment and/or system’s technical specifications, certification statements and verifications w/sufficient level of detail
(e.g., quantitative information). (Fit for purpose statement).
Submit DWOP for approval; include all required information, and
the pay.gov confirmation receipt.

.5 ....................

50 reports ...................

25

30 min ............

17 nominations ...........

9

980 .................

17 submissions ...........

16,660

5 .....................

20 nominations ...........

100

30 min ............

119 reports .................

60

30 min ............

17 reports ...................

9

214 .................

5 plans ........................

1,070

$10,647 Cost Recovery Fee × 5 plans =
$53,235.
$25,024 I3P costs × 5 plans = $125,120.
ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES2

245 ..............................................

Submit a combined Project CP/DWOP for approval on or before
deadline for submitting CP.

214 .................

2 plans ........................

428

$13,856 Cost Recovery Fee × 2 plans =
$27,712.
246 ..............................................

Submit a revised DWOP .................................................................

40 ...................

2 plan revisions ..........

80

$963 Cost Recovery Fee × 2 plan revs. =
$1,926.

VerDate Sep<11>2014

22:47 Aug 29, 2024

Jkt 262001

PO 00000

Frm 00035

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4700

E:\FR\FM\30AUR2.SGM

30AUR2

71110

Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
BURDEN BREAKDOWN—Continued

Citation 30 CFR part 250,
subpart B and NTLs

Reporting & recordkeeping requirement

Hour burden

Average number of
annual responses
annual

Burden hours

Non-hour cost burdens
247 ..............................................
248

Submit supplements to DWOP reflecting additions or changes; include same information for wells or equipment as required per
CP and DWOP, descriptions for each CP or DWOP section
being impacted, and the pay.gov confirmation receipt.

133 .................

30 supp .......................

3,990

$9,626 Cost Recovery Fee × 30 supp. =
$288,780.
$15,581 I3P costs × 30 submissions =
$467,430.
Total for Subpart B ..............

..........................................................................................................

........................

374 responses ............

36,168 Burden
hours.

ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES2

$4,978,612 Non-hour Cost Burdens.

Title of Collection: 30 CFR part 250,
subpart B, Plans and Information.
OMB Control Number: 1014–0032.
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 rightsof-way.
Total Estimated Number of Annual
Respondents: Currently there are
approximately 555 Federal OCS oil, gas,
and sulfur lessees and holders of
pipeline rights-of-way. Not all the
potential respondents will submit
information at any given time, and some
may submit multiple times.
Total Estimated Number of Annual
Responses: 374.
Estimated Completion Time per
Response: Varies from 15 minutes to
980 hours depending on activity.
Total Estimated Number of Annual
Burden Hours: 36,168.
Respondent’s Obligation: Responses
are mandatory.
Frequency of Collection: Generally, on
occasion and as required in the
regulations.
Total Estimated Annual Non-hour
Burden Cost: $4,978,612.
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

VerDate Sep<11>2014

22:47 Aug 29, 2024

Jkt 262001

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 kye.mason@bsee.gov with any

PO 00000

Frm 00036

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4700

questions. Please reference Final Rule
1014–AA49, Oil and Gas and Sulfur
Operations in the Outer Continental
Shelf—30 CFR part 250, subpart B,
Plans and Information (OMB Control
No. 1014–0032), in your comments.
National Environmental Policy Act of
1969 (NEPA)
BSEE determined that this action is
covered under a Categorical Exclusion
as defined by NEPA at 43 CFR 46.205.
Pursuant to 43 CFR 46.210(i) and 516
Departmental Manual 15.4(C)(1), BSEE
determined that the final action is
categorically excluded from detailed
review under NEPA (42 U.S.C. 4321 et
seq.). BSEE has determined that the
final rule meets the criteria set forth at
43 CFR 46.210(i) for a Departmental
Categorical Exclusion in that this final
rule is ‘‘of an administrative, financial,
legal, technical, or procedural
nature. . . .’’ Further, BSEE has
determined that the final rule does not
involve any of the extraordinary
circumstances listed in 43 CFR 46.215
that would require further analysis
under NEPA. The final rule is an
administrative change and does not
authorize any activities on the OCS. It
involves the review of Conceptual Plans
and specialized requirements associated
with deepwater needs (e.g., special
moorings, fittings, production
equipment, HPHT items, etc.); however,
actual approval of Conceptual Plans and
DWOPs is for administrative purposes
and does not directly lead to OCS
activity that can result in environmental
impacts. The Conceptual Plans and
DWOPs only lead to an action once they
are included and addressed in an
Exploration Plan (EP), Development
Operations Coordination Document
(DOCD), or Development and
Production Plan (DPP) and subsequent
permit applications. EPs, DOCDs, DPPs,

E:\FR\FM\30AUR2.SGM

30AUR2

71111

Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
as well as the subsequent well and
facility permit applications, are
reviewed under site-specific NEPA
analyses. Only EPs, DOCDs, and DPPs
include the detailed information to fully
assess future environmental impacts. If
an operator chooses to modify their
Conceptual Plans, DWOPs, or proposed
technology or submit a new one for an
activity that has already been reviewed
and approved under the respective EP,
DOCD, or DPP, then the operator must
submit a revised EP, DOCD, or DPP in
accordance with 30 CFR 550.283, which
may trigger additional NEPA analysis.
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 final rule is not a significant
energy action under the definition in
E.O. 13211 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.
Severability

List of Subjects in 30 CFR Part 250

2. Amend § 250.105 by adding
definitions for ‘‘BOP systems and
related equipment’’ and ‘‘HPHT
environment’’ in alphabetical order to
read as follows:

BOP systems and related equipment
includes all pressure controlling and
pressure containing well control
equipment that may or will be exposed
to the well’s MASP during drilling,
completion, workover, intervention, or
abandonment. Well control equipment
includes equipment that is installed for
the purpose of pressure control and
pressure containment when it becomes
necessary to physically enter a well bore
during drilling, completion, workover,
intervention, or abandonment modes of
operation.
*
*
*
*
*
HPHT environment means when one
or more of the following well conditions
exist:
(1) The drilling, completion,
workover, intervention, injection,
production, or abandonment of the well
requires pressure controlling or pressure
containing equipment, including well
control equipment, assigned a pressure
rating greater than 15,000 psia or a
temperature rating greater than 350
degrees Fahrenheit;
(2) The MASP or SITP is greater than
15,000 psia at the seafloor for a well
with a subsea wellhead or at the surface
for a well with a surface wellhead; or
(3) The flowing temperature is greater
than 350 degrees Fahrenheit at the
seafloor for a well with a subsea
wellhead or at the surface for a well
with a surface wellhead.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 3. Amend § 250.125 by revising
paragraph (a)(2) to read as follows:

§ 250.105

§ 250.125

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.
This action by the Deputy Assistant
Secretary is taken herein pursuant to an
existing delegation of authority.
Steven H. Feldgus,
Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary, Land
and Minerals Management.

For the reasons stated in the
preamble, the Bureau of Safety and
Environmental Enforcement (BSEE)
amends 30 CFR part 250 as follows:
PART 250—OIL AND GAS AND
SULFUR OPERATIONS IN THE OUTER
CONTINENTAL SHELF
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.

Subpart A—General
■

If a court holds any section or
paragraph of this rule or their
applicability to any person or
circumstance invalid, the remainder of
this rule and their applicability to other
persons or circumstances will not be
affected.

*

*

Definitions.

*

*

Service fees.

(a) * * *

*

Service—processing of the following:

Fee amount

*
*
*
*
*
(2) Deepwater Operations Plan (DWOP) Process:
(i) Project Conceptual Plan ...............................................................................................................................
(ii) New or Unusual Technology Conceptual Plan ...........................................................................................
(iii) New or Unusual Technology Barrier Equipment Conceptual Plan ............................................................
(iv) DWOP .........................................................................................................................................................
(v) Revised DWOP ...........................................................................................................................................
(vi) Combined Project Conceptual Plan/DWOP ...............................................................................................
(vii) Supplemental DWOP .................................................................................................................................
*

*

*

ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES2

*

*
*
*
*
4. Amend § 250.198 by revising the
introductory text and paragraphs (e)(82),
(86), (91), and (i)(1) to read as follows:

■

§ 250.198 Documents incorporated by
reference.

Certain material is incorporated by
reference into this part with the

VerDate Sep<11>2014

22:47 Aug 29, 2024

Jkt 262001

*

*

approval of the Director of the Federal
Register in accordance with 5 U.S.C.
552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. All approved
material is available for inspection at
BSEE and at the National Archives and
Records Administration (NARA).
Contact BSEE at: the Houston BSEE
office at 1919 Smith Street Suite 14042,
Houston, Texas 77002; 1–844–259–

PO 00000

Frm 00037

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4700

*

30 CFR
citation (§)
*

$2,697
7,964
15,104
10,647
963
13,856
9,626
*

250.226
250.226
250.226
250.235
250.246
250.245
250.247
*

4779. For information on the availability
of this material at NARA, visit
www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/
ibr-locations or email: fr.inspection@
nara.gov. The material may be obtained
from the following sources:
*
*
*
*
*
(e) * * *

E:\FR\FM\30AUR2.SGM

30AUR2

71112

Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Rules and Regulations

(82) ANSI/API Spec. 6A, Specification
for Wellhead and Christmas Tree
Equipment, Twentieth Edition, October
2010; Addendum 1, November 2011;
Errata 2, November 2011; Addendum 2,
November 2012; Addendum 3, March
2013; Errata 3, June 2013; Errata 4,
August 2013; Errata 5, November 2013;
Errata 6, March 2014; Errata 7,
December 2014; Errata 8, February 2016;
Addendum 4, June 2016; Errata 9, June
2016; Errata 10, August 2016;
incorporated by reference at
§§ 250.518(c), 250.619(c), 250.730,
250.802(a), 250.803(a), 250.833,
250.873(b), 250.874(g); 250.1002(b).
*
*
*
*
*
(86) ANSI/API Spec. 11D1, Packers
and Bridge Plugs, Third Edition, April
2015; including Errata 1, August 2019;
incorporated by reference at
§§ 250.518(e), 250.619(e); 250.1703.
*
*
*
*
*
(91) ANSI/API Spec. 17D, Design and
Operation of Subsea Production
Systems—Subsea Wellhead and Tree
Equipment, Second Edition, Reaffirmed
November 2018; Addendum 1,
September 2015; Errata, September
2011; Errata 2, January 2012; Errata 3,
June 2013; Errata 4, July 2013; Errata 5,
October 2013; Errata 6, August 2015;
Errata 7, October 2015; incorporated by
reference at §§ 250.518(c); 250.619(c);
250.730.
*
*
*
*
*
(i) * * *
(1) NACE Standard MR0175–2003,
Standard Material Requirements, Metals
for Sulfide Stress Cracking and Stress
Corrosion Cracking Resistance in Sour
Oilfield Environments, Revised January
17, 2003; incorporated by reference at
§§ 250.490; 250.518(a); 250.619(a);
250.901.
*
*
*
*
*
■

5. Revise subpart B to read as follows:

ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES2

Subpart B—Plans and Information
General Information
Sec.
250.200 Definitions.
250.201 What plans and information must I
submit before I conduct any activities on
my lease or unit?
250.202 How must I protect the rights of the
Federal government?
250.203 Are there special requirements if
my well affects an adjacent property?
250.204 Requirements for high pressure
high temperature (HPHT) barrier
equipment.
250.205 [Reserved]
Barrier Equipment and Systems
250.206 What equipment does BSEE
consider to be a barrier?
250.207 How must barrier systems be used?

VerDate Sep<11>2014

22:47 Aug 29, 2024

Jkt 262001

Activities and Post-Approval Requirements
for the EP, DPP, DWOP, and DOCD
250.208 How must I conduct activities
under an approved EP, DPP, or DOCD?
250.209 What must I do to conduct
activities under the approved EP, DPP, or
DOCD?
250.210 Do I have to conduct post-approval
monitoring?
250.211 What are my new or unusual
technology failure reporting
requirements?
250.212–250.219 [Reserved]
Deepwater Operations Plan (DWOP) Process
250.220 What is the DWOP process?
250.221 When must I use the DWOP
process?
250.222–250.224 [Reserved]
Conceptual Plans
250.225 What are the types of Conceptual
Plans that I must submit?
250.226 When and how must I submit each
applicable Conceptual Plan?
250.227 What must the Project Conceptual
Plan contain?
250.228 What must the New or Unusual
Technology Conceptual Plan contain?
250.229 What must the New or Unusual
Technology Barrier Equipment
Conceptual Plan include?
250.230 When are you required to submit
an I3P Report?
250.231 What are your requirements for the
Independent Third Party (I3P)
nomination?
250.232 What are the I3P review
requirements for Conceptual Plan
reviews?
250.233 General requirements for any I3P
Report.
250.234 [Reserved]
DWOP Approval
250.235 When and how must I submit the
DWOP?
250.236 What information must I submit
with the DWOP?
250.237 What general information must my
DWOP include?
250.238 What well or completions
information must my DWOP include?
250.239 What structural information must
my DWOP include?
250.240 What production safety system
information must my DWOP include?
250.241 What subsea systems and pipeline
information must my DWOP include?
250.242 What New or Unusual Technology
information must my DWOP include?
250.243–250.244 [Reserved]
250.245 May I combine the Project
Conceptual Plan and the DWOP?
250.246 When must I revise my DWOP?
250.247 When must I supplement my
DWOP?
250.248 What information must I include in
my Supplemental DWOP?

Subpart B—Plans and Information
General Information
§ 250.200

Definitions.

Acronyms and terms used in this
subpart have the following meanings:

PO 00000

Frm 00038

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4700

(a) Acronyms used frequently in this
subpart are listed alphabetically below:
(1) BOEM means Bureau of Ocean
Energy Management of the U.S.
Department of the Interior.
(2) BSEE means Bureau of Safety and
Environmental Enforcement of the U.S.
Department of the Interior.
(3) CID means Conservation
Information Document.
(4) CZMA means Coastal Zone
Management Act.
(5) DOCD means Development
Operations Coordination Document.
(6) DPP means Development and
Production Plan.
(7) DWOP means Deepwater
Operations Plan.
(8) EIA means Environmental Impact
Analysis.
(9) EP means Exploration Plan.
(10) ESA means Endangered Species
Act.
(11) HPHT means High Pressure High
Temperature
(12) I3P means Independent Third
Party
(13) MMPA means Marine Mammal
Protection Act.
(14) NPDES means National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System.
(15) NTL means Notice to Lessees and
Operators.
(16) OCS means Outer Continental
Shelf.
(b) Terms used in this subpart are
listed alphabetically below:
Amendment means a change you
make to an EP, DPP, or DOCD that is
pending before BOEM for a decision
(see 30 CFR 550.232(d) and 30 CFR
550.267(d)).
Barrier categorization includes
identifying barriers as one of the
following two types of categories:
Category 1 Barrier means any
equipment, component, or assembly
that functions as part of a primary
barrier during any operational phase of
its life cycle. The operational phases of
the barrier equipment, component, or
assembly are drilling, completion,
workover, intervention, injection,
production, or abandonment.
Category 2 Barrier means any
equipment, component, or assembly
that normally functions as part of a
secondary barrier during any
operational phase of its life cycle,
except when a primary barrier fails. The
operational phases of the barrier
equipment, component, or assembly are
drilling, completion, workover,
intervention, injection, production, or
abandonment. BSEE may consider nonbarrier structural components of a
barrier system as a Category 2 Barrier if
failure of this structural component
could reasonably result in a Primary
Barrier failure.

E:\FR\FM\30AUR2.SGM

30AUR2

Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
Fit for Purpose means a determination
made by an I3P at the conclusion of I3P
review that the barrier equipment
design has been verified and validated
in conformance with recognized
engineering standards and any
additional project specification
requirements; that the material
selection, design verification analysis,
design validation testing, and quality
control are appropriate to justify the
technical specifications; and that the
technical specifications meet or exceed
a project’s site specific functional
requirements.
Fit for Service means a determination
made by the operator that the material
selection, design verification analysis,
design validation testing, and quality
control of the barrier equipment is
appropriate to justify the technical
specifications and that the technical
specifications meet or exceed a project’s
site-specific functional requirements.
New or unusual technology means
equipment or procedures used for any
drilling, completion, workover,
intervention, injection, production,
You must have BSEE
approval of a(n) . . .

Before you . . .

(1) New or Unusual Technology Conceptual Plan.

install the new or unusual technology ............................

(2) New or Unusual Technology Barrier Equipment
Conceptual Plan.

install the new or unusual technology that is identified
as barrier equipment.

(3) Project Conceptual Plan

conduct post-drilling installation or well completion activities for a deepwater development project, or for
any project that will involve the use of a subsea
tieback development technology in any water depth,
which may include new or unusual technology.
(i) conduct post-completion installation activities for a
deepwater development project, or for any project
that will involve the use of a subsea tieback development technology in any water depth, which may include new or unusual technology; and (ii) initiate production activities.

(4) Deepwater Operations
Plan (DWOP).

ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES2

pipeline, platform, decommissioning, or
abandonment operations that meet any
of the following criteria:
(1) Has not been approved for use or
used extensively in a BSEE OCS Region;
(2) Has not been approved for use or
used extensively under the anticipated
operating conditions;
(3) Has operating characteristics that
are outside the performance parameters
established in this part;
(4) Will operate in an HPHT
environment as defined in § 250.105; or
(5) Is part of a primary or secondary
barrier system that uses materials,
design analysis techniques, validation
testing methods, or manufacturing
processes not addressed in existing
industry standards.
Primary Barrier means the equipment,
material, component, or assembly that is
designated as the principal means of
isolating the hydrocarbon pressure
source from people and the
environment.
Secondary Barrier means the
equipment, material, component, or
assembly that is designated as the

(b) Submitting additional information.
On a case-by-case basis, the Regional
Supervisor may require you to submit
additional information if the Regional
Supervisor determines that it is

VerDate Sep<11>2014

22:47 Aug 29, 2024

Jkt 262001

71113

secondary means of isolating the
hydrocarbon pressure source from
people and the environment.
Subsea tieback development
technology means, but is not limited to,
floating production systems, tension leg
platforms, spars, Floating Production
Storage and Offloading (FPSO) systems,
guyed towers, compliant towers, subsea
manifolds, subsea wells, hybrid wells,
production risers, export risers, and
other subsea completion or production
components that rely on a remote site or
host facility for utility and well control
services.
§ 250.201 What plans and information
must I submit before I conduct any
activities on my lease or unit?

(a) Plans and permits. Before you
conduct the activities on your lease or
unit listed in the following table, you
must submit, and BSEE must approve,
the listed plans (or relevant portions
thereof), and any applicable permits.
Your plans and applicable permits may
cover one or more leases or units.
Additional information

(i) Must be approved by BSEE before it will approve
any associated application or permit (e.g., pipeline,
platform, APD, APM) involving the use of new or unusual technology.
(ii) May be independent of a project Conceptual Plan or
DWOP.
(iii) BSEE will not approve this Conceptual Plan until all
associated I3P Reports (if required) are submitted
and are reviewed by BSEE.
(iv) May not contain equipment identified as a primary
or secondary barrier.
(i) Is required for any project or system involving new
or unusual technology that is also identified as a primary or secondary barrier.
(ii) Must be approved by BSEE before it will approve
any associated application or permit (e.g., pipeline,
platform, APD, APM) involving the use of new or unusual technology identified as barrier equipment as
applicable for the permit scope.
(iii) BSEE will not approve this Conceptual Plan until all
associated I3P Reports are submitted and reviewed
by BSEE.
(i) Must be approved before well completion permit approval (e.g., APM).
(ii) Any relevant new or unusual technology associated
with completion operations must be approved by
BSEE before project Conceptual Plan approval.
Must include reference to all applicable, previously approved Conceptual Plans for the associated development project.

necessary to evaluate your proposed
plan or permit.
(c) Referencing. In preparing your
proposed plan or permit, you may
reference information and data

PO 00000

Frm 00039

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4700

discussed in other plans or permits you
previously submitted or that are
otherwise readily available to BSEE.
(d) All plans listed under paragraph
(a) of this section that are initially

E:\FR\FM\30AUR2.SGM

30AUR2

71114

Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Rules and Regulations

submitted after October 29, 2024 must
comply with the requirements of this
subpart.
§ 250.202 How must I protect the rights of
the Federal government?

(a) To protect the rights of the Federal
government, you must either:
(1) Drill and produce the wells that
the Regional Supervisor determines are
necessary to protect the Federal
government from loss due to production
on other leases or units or from adjacent
lands under the jurisdiction of other
entities (e.g., State and foreign
governments); or
(2) Pay a sum that the Regional
Supervisor determines as adequate to
compensate the Federal government for
your failure to drill and produce any
well.
(b) Payment under paragraph (a)(2) of
this section may constitute production
in paying quantities for the purpose of
extending the lease term.
(c) You must complete and produce
any penetrated hydrocarbon-bearing
zone that the Regional Supervisor
determines is necessary to conform to
sound conservation practices.
§ 250.203 Are there special requirements if
my well affects an adjacent property?

For wells that could intersect or drain
an adjacent property, the Regional
Supervisor may require special
measures to protect the rights of the
Federal government and objecting
lessees or operators of adjacent leases or
units.
§ 250.204 Requirements for high pressure
high temperature (HPHT) barrier equipment.

If you plan to install HPHT barrier
equipment, you must submit
information with your applicable
Project Conceptual Plan, New or
Unusual Technology Barrier Equipment
Conceptual Plan, DWOP, and applicable
permit(s) that demonstrates the
equipment is fit for service in the
applicable HPHT environment. You
must follow the applicable DWOP
Process requirements (e.g., §§ 250.229
and 250.242).
§ 250.205

[Reserved]

Barrier Equipment and Systems

ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES2

§ 250.206 What equipment does BSEE
consider to be a barrier?

A barrier or barrier system is any
engineered equipment, material,
component, or assembly that is installed
to contain a hydrocarbon pressure
source(s) to prevent harm to people or
the environment. BSEE only recognizes
barriers that are either permanently or
temporarily installed, pressure
controlling, and/or pressure containing.

VerDate Sep<11>2014

22:47 Aug 29, 2024

Jkt 262001

You must be able to activate pressure
controlling barriers on demand (i.e.,
closed by an operator or automated
safety system). You must function test
and pressure test any pressure
controlling barriers or barrier systems to
defined acceptance criteria that can be
repeated. You must pressure test any
pressure containing barrier or barrier
system to defined acceptance criteria
that can be repeated.
§ 250.207
used?

How must barrier systems be

You must install and maintain a
primary and a secondary barrier system
(redundant barriers) to prevent a loss of
containment during any operational
phase of a well, flowline, pipeline,
production, or riser system.
Activities and Post-Approval
Requirements for the EP, DPP, DWOP,
and DOCD
§ 250.208 How must I conduct activities
under an approved EP, DPP, or DOCD?

(a) Compliance. You must conduct all
of your lease and unit activities
according to your approved EP, DPP, or
DOCD and any approval conditions. If
you fail to comply with your approved
EP, DPP, or DOCD:
(1) You may be subject to BSEE
enforcement action, including civil
penalties; and
(2) The lease(s) involved in your EP,
DPP, or DOCD may be forfeited or
cancelled under 43 U.S.C. 1334(c) or (d).
If this happens, you may not be entitled
to compensation under 30 CFR
550.185(b) and 30 CFR 556.1102.
(b) Emergencies. Nothing in this
subpart or in your approved EP, DPP, or
DOCD relieves you of or limits your
responsibility to take appropriate
measures to meet emergency situations.
In an emergency situation, the Regional
Environmental Officer may approve or
require departures from your approved
EP, DPP, or DOCD.
§ 250.209 What must I do to conduct
activities under the approved EP, DPP, or
DOCD?

(a) Approvals and permits. Before you
conduct activities under your approved
EP, DPP, or DOCD you must obtain the
following approvals and or permits, as
applicable, from the District Manager or
BSEE Regional Supervisor:
(1) Approval of Applications for
Permits to Drill (APDs) (see § 250.410);
(2) Approval of production safety
systems (see § 250.800);
(3) Approval of new platforms and
other structures (or major modifications
to platforms and other structures) (see
§ 250.905);

PO 00000

Frm 00040

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4700

(4) Approval of applications to install
lease term pipelines (see § 250.1007);
and
(5) Other permits, as required by
applicable law.
(b) Conformance. The activities
proposed in these applications and
permits must conform to the activities
described in detail in your approved EP,
DPP, or DOCD.
§ 250.210 Do I have to conduct postapproval monitoring?

The Regional Supervisor may direct
you to conduct monitoring programs,
including monitoring in accordance
with the ESA and the MMPA, in
association with your approved EP,
DPP, DWOP, or DOCD. You must retain
copies of all monitoring data obtained or
derived from your monitoring programs
and make them available to BSEE upon
request. The Regional Supervisor may
require you to:
(a) Submit monitoring plans for
approval before you begin work; and
(b) Prepare and submit reports that
summarize and analyze data and
information obtained or derived from
your monitoring programs. The Regional
Supervisor will specify requirements for
preparing and submitting these reports.
§ 250.211 What are my new or unusual
technology failure reporting requirements?

If you have an approved new or
unusual technology and it experiences a
failure (i.e., any condition that prevents
the equipment from meeting its
functional specification) during or postinstallation, you must notify the
applicable Regional Supervisor within
30 days of the failure. You must also
provide a failure analysis report as soon
as it is available following notification.
The failure analysis report must include
any results of and potential root cause(s)
of the failure. You must also follow all
applicable failure or incident reporting
requirements associated with the failure
(e.g., §§ 250.188, 250.730, and 250.803).
§ § 250.212–250.219

[Reserved]

Deepwater Operations Plan (DWOP)
Process
§ 250.220

What is the DWOP process?

(a) The DWOP process consists of
providing sufficient information from a
total system approach for BSEE to
review:
(1) A deepwater development project,
(2) A subsea tieback development
technology, or
(3) Any other project or system that
uses new or unusual technology during
any phase of the following operations:
drilling, completion, workover,
intervention, injection, production,

E:\FR\FM\30AUR2.SGM

30AUR2

Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
pipeline, platform, decommissioning, or
abandonment.
(b) The DWOP process does not
replace but complements other
submittals required by the regulations,
such as BOEM EPs, DPPs, and DOCDs,
or BSEE applications and/or permits
(e.g., APD, Application for Permit to
Modify (APM), pipeline application,
and platform application). BSEE will
use the information in your DWOP
process to determine whether the
project will be developed in an
acceptable manner, particularly with
respect to operational safety and
environmental protection involved with
a deepwater development project,
subsea tieback development technology,
or new or unusual technology.
(c) The DWOP process consists of two
phases:
(1) The Conceptual Plans. The
Conceptual Plans outline certain
equipment and process specifications,
operational concepts, and basis of
design that you plan to use for project
development, and for applicable
equipment design, installation, and
operation. Sections 250.227 through
250.229 prescribe what each of the
Conceptual Plans must contain. Each
Conceptual Plan may be submitted
separately or combined as applicable;
and
(2) The DWOP. The DWOP identifies
specific design, fabrication, installation
and operational requirements for
equipment, systems, and activities as
applicable in §§ 250.236 through
250.242.
(d) You must submit to BSEE the
applicable plan(s) covered under the

§ 250.221 When must I use the DWOP
process?

(a) You must use the DWOP process
for any project that meets any of the
following criteria:
(1) Is planned in water depths greater
than 1000 ft;
(2) Will use subsea tieback
development technology, regardless of
water depth; or
(3) Will use any new or unusual
technology for any drilling, completion,
workover, intervention, injection,
production, pipeline, platform,
decommissioning, or abandonment
project.
(b) If you are unsure if your project
will use subsea tieback development
technology or new or unusual
technology, contact the Regional
Supervisor for guidance.
§ § 250.222–250.224

Conceptual Plans
§ 250.225 What are the types of
Conceptual Plans that I must submit?

There are three types of Conceptual
Plans:
(a) A Project Conceptual Plan is
required for any project that is planned
in water depths greater than 1000 feet,

(a) Project Conceptual Plan ....................

250.227

(b) New or Unusual Technology Conceptual Plan.

250.228

VerDate Sep<11>2014

22:47 Aug 29, 2024

[Reserved]

Where to find the
description
(§)

Conceptual plan type

ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES2

DWOP process as appropriate (see
§ 250.225 for Conceptual Plan
requirements and § 250.235 for DWOP
requirements). Certain projects requiring
New or Unusual Technology Conceptual
Plans or New or Unusual Technology
Barrier Equipment Conceptual Plans
may not be required to have an
associated Project Conceptual Plan or
DWOP.

Jkt 262001

PO 00000

Frm 00041

71115

will use subsea tieback development
technology, or will use new or unusual
technology for completion, injection,
production, pipeline, or platform
operations;
(b) A New or Unusual Technology
Conceptual Plan is required for any
project or system that involves
equipment or procedures that are
considered new or unusual technology
(see § 250.200 for the definition of new
or unusual technology) for drilling,
completion, workover, intervention,
injection, production, pipeline,
platform, decommissioning, or
abandonment operations; and
(c) A New or Unusual Technology
Barrier Equipment Conceptual Plan is
required for any project or system
involving new or unusual technology
that is also identified as a primary or
secondary barrier (see § 250.200 for the
definition of primary and secondary
barriers) for drilling, completion,
workover, intervention, injection,
production, pipeline, platform,
decommissioning, or abandonment
operations.
§ 250.226 When and how must I submit
each applicable Conceptual Plan?

You must submit each applicable
Conceptual Plan to the Regional
Supervisor after you have decided on
the general concept(s) for a project or
system, and before you finalize
engineering design of the equipment,
well, well safety control system, or
subsea production systems. You must
submit, for BSEE approval, each
Conceptual Plan according to the
following table:

Additional information
You may not complete any production or injection well or install the tree before
BSEE has approved the Project Conceptual Plan.
(1) Operations and approval timing requirements are as follows:
(i) You may not install any new or unusual technology until BSEE approves your
New or Unusual Technology Conceptual Plan,
(ii) You may not complete any production or injection well or install a tree before
BSEE has approved all New or Unusual Technology Conceptual Plans associated with all well completion equipment and the Project Conceptual Plan, and
(iii) BSEE must first approve your New or Unusual Technology Conceptual Plan
associated with subsea production systems before the DWOP may be approved. You may install this new or unusual technology following BSEE permit
approval (e.g., pipeline application) and prior to DWOP approval.
(2) The Regional Supervisor may require the operator to use an I3P to perform
certain functions and verifications in accordance with § 250.231, as applicable.
(3) BSEE will not approve a New or Unusual Technology Conceptual Plan until
you submit and BSEE reviews all I3P Reports (if any required).
(4) BSEE must approve your New or Unusual Technology Conceptual Plan before it will approve any associated application or permit application (e.g., pipeline application, platform application, APD, APM).
(5) You must submit separate New or Unusual Technology Conceptual Plans for
each piece of equipment at an assembly level (e.g., BOP, tree, wellhead system, or tubing head spool).

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4700

E:\FR\FM\30AUR2.SGM

30AUR2

71116

Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
Where to find the
description
(§)

Conceptual plan type
(c) A New or Unusual Technology Barrier Equipment Conceptual Plan.

250.229

ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES2

§ 250.227 What must the Project
Conceptual Plan contain?

In the Project Conceptual Plan, you
must explain the basis of design that
you will use to develop the field. You
must include the following information:
(a) An overview of the development
concept(s);
(b) The system control type (i.e.,
direct hydraulic or electro-hydraulic);
(c) The estimated distance from each
of the wells to the host platform, and
umbilical length(s);
(d) A statement that the subsea
production safety system will be
designed to comply with Subpart H of
this part;
(e) For a new facility, a description of
the type of facility you plan to install
(e.g. spar, tension leg platform (TLP),
FPSO, etc.);
(f) For a subsea tie back to an existing
facility:
(1) A description of known structural
modifications that you will need to
make to accommodate the tieback,
including a statement about whether
these accommodations constitute minor
or major modifications,
(2) The BSEE-approved service life of
the existing facility, and
(3) A description of how you will
evaluate whether the modifications may
affect the BSEE-approved service life.
(g) A statement regarding whether the
host facility will be manned or
unmanned;
(h) A schedule of development
activities, including well completion,
facility installation, and date of first oil;

VerDate Sep<11>2014

22:47 Aug 29, 2024

Jkt 262001

Additional information
(1) You must submit a New or Unusual Technology Barrier Equipment Conceptual Plan for any project or system involving new or unusual technology that is
also identified as a primary or secondary barrier.
(2) Operations and approval timing requirements are as follows:
(i) BSEE must first approve your New or Unusual Technology Barrier Equipment
Conceptual Plan prior to you installing new or unusual technology identified as
barrier equipment,
(ii) You may not complete any production or injection well or install the tree before BSEE has approved all the New or Unusual Technology Barrier Equipment Conceptual Plans associated with all well completion equipment and the
Project Conceptual Plan, and
(iii) BSEE must first approve your New or Unusual Technology Barrier Equipment Conceptual Plan associated with subsea production systems before the
DWOP may be approved. You may install this equipment after BSEE permit
approval (e.g., pipeline application) and prior to DWOP approval.
(3) BSEE must first approve your New or Unusual Technology Barrier Equipment Conceptual Plan before it will approve any associated application or permit application (e.g., pipeline application, platform application, APD, APM).
(4) All new or unusual technology identified as barrier equipment requires the
use of an Independent Third Party (I3P) to perform certain functions and
verifications in accordance with § 250.231. BSEE will not approve New or Unusual Technology Barrier Equipment Conceptual Plans until you submit and
BSEE reviews all required I3P Reports pursuant to § 250.231.
(5) You must submit separate New or Unusual Technology Barrier Equipment
Conceptual Plans for each piece of equipment at an assembly level (e.g.,
BOP, tree, wellhead system, tubing head spool).

(i) Schematics, including:
(1) A proposed well location plat,
(2) A conceptual subsea field
schematic depicting the planned
development infrastructure that
contains (as applicable) the wells,
pipelines, manifolds, subsea booster
pumps, high integrity pressure
protection system, riser systems,
umbilical(s), and facility footprint,
(3) The surface or subsea tree, and
(4) A proposed wellbore and
completion schematic for a typical well
(including Surface Controlled
Subsurface Safety Valve (SCSSV)
location and chemical injection points;
and depiction or description of gas
zones, if any, behind the production
casing or production liner and how
those gas zones will be isolated).
(j) A description of the drilling and
completion systems;
(k) The estimated shut-in tubing
pressure for the proposed well(s),
including the calculation used to arrive
at the estimate, specifying true vertical
depth (TVD), reservoir pressure, and the
fluid gradient used, or a brief discussion
of the pressure volume temperature
(PVT) data used for estimation;
(l) The wellbore static bottomhole
temperature and the estimated flowing
temperature at the tree;
(m) The pressure and temperature
rating of the tree and wellhead;
(n) Whether there will be corrosive
production (e.g., hydrogen sulfide (H2S),
Carbon dioxide (CO2), Mercury (Hg) or

PO 00000

Frm 00042

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4700

injection fluids (e.g., acid)), including
concentrations;
(o) Whether any of the proposed
equipment will be re-furbished and recertified;
(p) Whether enhanced recovery is
planned for the early life of the project;
(q) Whether any new or unusual
technology will be used to develop your
project involving the following: drilling,
completion, injection, production,
risers, pipelines, or platforms;
(r) Whether the well(s) will include
smart completion technology;
(s) A list of requests for any alternate
procedures or equipment in accordance
with § 250.141 and request for
departures in accordance with § 250.142
associated with your applicable
Conceptual Plans; and
(t) Documentation demonstrating
payment of the service fee listed in
§ 250.125.
§ 250.228 What must the New or Unusual
Technology Conceptual Plan contain?

(a) You must include the following
information, as applicable, in your New
or Unusual Technology Conceptual
Plan:
(1) How the New or Unusual
Technology Conceptual Plan fits within
your overall site specific project, if
applicable, including an overview of the
project development concepts.
(2) A description of the technology
and specific conditions under which it
will be used;
(3) A description of shut-in
capabilities and procedures;

E:\FR\FM\30AUR2.SGM

30AUR2

ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES2

Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
(4) A description of redundancies of
critical components or systems that will
be used;
(5) A discussion of how the new or
unusual technology could impact the
barrier or safety system, if any,
including:
(i) The detection method for new or
unusual technology failure;
(ii) A description of how barriers or
safety systems function to a fail-safe
state when impacted by tew or unusual
technology failure;
(6) Information on inspection and
testing capabilities;
(7) A risk assessment and failure
mode analysis;
(8) Operating procedures;
(9) A history of development and
application of the technology;
(10) The basis of design, including
design verification and validation
testing;
(11) Detailed schematics identifying
all components;
(12) A justification for new or unusual
technology use, and any additional
information required for a complete
review;
(13) A list of requests for alternate
procedures or equipment in accordance
with § 250.141 and request for
departures in accordance with § 250.142
needed for the new or unusual
technology proposed in your New or
Unusual Technology Conceptual Plan;
(14) A statement that the technology
is fit for service in the applicable
environment (for the specific project at
location); and
(15) Documentation demonstrating
payment of the service fee listed in
§ 250.125.
(b) The Regional Supervisor may
require the use of an I3P according to
§ 250.231 if the system or equipment
you propose to use requires a high
degree of specialized or technically
complex engineering knowledge,
expertise, and experience to evaluate, or
if existing industry standards do not
address the system or equipment you
propose to use.
(1) The Regional Supervisor may also
require you to follow the I3P
requirements according to § 250.232, as
applicable, on a case-by-case basis.
(2) If you have any questions about
I3P requirements for the New or
Unusual Technology Conceptual Plan,
contact the applicable Regional
Supervisor.
§ 250.229 What must the New or Unusual
Technology Barrier Equipment Conceptual
Plan include?

Your New or Unusual Technology
Barrier Equipment Conceptual Plan
must include the following information:

VerDate Sep<11>2014

22:47 Aug 29, 2024

Jkt 262001

(a) A description how the New or
Unusual Technology Barrier Equipment
Conceptual Plan fits within your overall
site-specific project, if applicable. You
must include an overview of the project
development concepts and a proposed
schedule for submittal of associated
Conceptual Plans;
(b) Detailed schematics depicting the
primary and secondary barriers that
include all components, assemblies, or
sub-assemblies, each labeled and
categorized as a Category 1 barrier or
Category 2 barrier;
(c) A list of the primary and
secondary barriers that includes all
components, assemblies, or subassemblies specifying each assigned
barrier as either a Category 1 barrier or
Category 2 barrier;
(d) A list of the engineering standards
that will be used in the equipment’s
material selection and qualification,
design verification analysis, and design
validation testing;
(e) A list of requested alternate
procedures or equipment in accordance
with § 250.141 and requested departures
in accordance with § 250.142 needed for
the new or unusual technology barrier
equipment proposed in your New or
Unusual Technology Barrier Equipment
Conceptual Plan;
(f) A list of the functional
requirements (e.g., environmental and
physical loads (magnitude and
frequency)) for which the barrier
equipment is being designed;
(g) A description of the equipment’s
safety critical functions, (e.g.,
function(s) performed by or inherent to
the equipment enabling it to achieve or
maintain a safe state);
(h) An I3P nomination, in accordance
with § 250.231(a);
(i) An I3P verification plan that
includes the following:
(1) A discussion of the equipment’s
material selection and qualification;
(2) A discussion of the equipment’s
design verification analyses;
(3) A discussion of the equipment’s
design validation testing;
(4) An explanation of why the
analyses, processes, and procedures
ensure that the equipment is fit for
service in the applicable environment;
and
(5) Details regarding how the I3P will
address the additional items listed in
§ 250.232.
(j) Documentation demonstrating
payment of the service fee listed in
§ 250.125.
§ 250.230 When are you required to submit
an I3P Report?

You must submit to BSEE any I3P
reports required in § 250.232 for any

PO 00000

Frm 00043

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4700

71117

equipment identified in your New or
Unusual Technology Barrier Equipment
Conceptual Plan and when required by
the Regional Supervisor. BSEE will not
approve your associated Conceptual
Plan until BSEE reviews the required
I3P Reports.
§ 250.231 What are your requirements for
the Independent Third Party (I3P)
nomination?

In accordance with each applicable
Conceptual Plan, you must:
(a) Nominate I3P(s) to review the
design verification and design
validation documentation of the
Original Equipment Manufacturer
(OEM). Your I3P must be a technical
classification society, a licensed
professional engineering firm, or a
registered professional engineer capable
of providing the required verifications
and validations. You must submit your
I3P nomination(s) within the applicable
Conceptual Plan for separate BSEE
acceptance before BSEE will approve
the applicable Conceptual Plan. Your
I3P nomination must include the
following descriptions:
(1) Previous experience in third-party
verification and validation or
experience in the design, fabrication,
and installation of applicable offshore
oil and gas equipment;
(2) Technical capabilities of the
individual or the primary staff for the
specific project;
(3) Size and type of organization or
corporation;
(4) In-house availability of, or access
to, appropriate technology to review the
specific project. This should include,
but not limited to, computer programs,
hardware, and equipment as applicable;
(5) Ability to perform the I3P
functions for the specific project
considering current commitments (e.g.,
project timelines, schedules, and
personnel availability); and
(6) Previous experience with BSEE
requirements and procedures.
(b) You must ensure that the I3P has
access to all associated documentation
and equipment related to items listed on
the I3P verification plan defined at
§ 250.229(i) and necessary for
performance of complete reviews in
accordance with § 250.232, including
relevant OEM documentation (including
documentation and data labeled as
confidential and proprietary) and access
to the OEM fabrication and
manufacturing locations if such access
is necessary to review the data.
(c) If your project involves submittal
of multiple Conceptual Plans, you may
propose to use the services of an I3P
previously accepted by BSEE for the
same project, and not submit the items

E:\FR\FM\30AUR2.SGM

30AUR2

71118

Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Rules and Regulations

required under paragraph (a), if the
BSEE-accepted I3P’s qualifications are
still valid and applicable to provide the
required verifications and validations.
You must submit documentation
regarding the previous I3P nomination
acceptance.
§ 250.232 What are the I3P review
requirements for Conceptual Plan reviews?

In accordance with each applicable
Conceptual Plan, the I3P must:
(a) Review the following information
regarding the applicable equipment
and/or system:
(1) Basis of Design, technical
specification of the equipment (if
known at this point in the design
process) and functional requirements of
the specific project (e.g., environmental
and physical loads (magnitude and
frequency));
(2) Risk assessment and failure mode
analysis;
(3) Material specification, selection,
qualification, and testing;
(4) Design verification analysis,
including:
(i) Structural/strength analysis, and
(ii) Fatigue assessment and/or
analysis.
(5) If fatigue is identified as a
potential failure mode, as identified in
the fatigue assessment and/or analysis
in paragraph (a)(4) of this section, the
plan to record and gather data (load
monitoring) in order to conduct a future
fatigue analysis;
(6) Design validation testing; and
(7) A fabrication, quality management
system, and inspection and test plan
that identifies the quality control/
quality assurance process, and
inspection of the final products.
(b) Submit a report to BSEE
documenting the review of each item

covered under paragraph (a) of this
section. Each report must clearly
identify all OEM and operator
documents used during the I3P review.
The report must also include:
(1) The equipment and/or system’s
technical specifications, including a
statement that the equipment and/or
system is fit for purpose for the
technical specification by the I3P; and
(2) Verification that the equipment’s
technical specifications meet or exceed
the project’s functional requirements,
including a statement that the
equipment and/or system is fit for
purpose for the proposed project by the
I3P.
(c) For any new project, you may use
previous I3P reviews of equipment and/
or systems technical specification that
was approved in a previous Conceptual
Plan. The Regional Supervisor may
accept a final report in accordance with
paragraph (c) of this section that
includes the following:
(1) A statement that the previous
report submitted pursuant to of
paragraph (b) of this section remains
valid;
(2) Verification that the equipment’s
technical specifications meet or exceed
the proposed project’s functional
requirements; and
(3) A statement by the I3P that the
equipment and/or system is fit for
purpose for the proposed project.
§ 250.233 General requirements for any
I3P Report.

An I3P Report as required in
§ 250.232 must be a standalone
document that clearly summarizes the
required verification and validation
work performed and must contain a
sufficient level of detail (e.g.,

quantitative information) and clarity to
establish the basis of the I3P’s findings.
Each report must identify the OEM or
operator documents reviewed, describe
the detailed I3P review, and convey the
results of the I3P’s review without
requiring BSEE to review of any other
referenced documents.
§ 250.234

[Reserved]

DWOP Approval
§ 250.235
DWOP?

When and how must I submit the

(a) You must submit the DWOP to the
Regional Supervisor after BSEE has
approved your Project Conceptual Plan
and you have substantially completed
system design, and before you conduct
installation activities post-well
completion for:
(1) A deepwater development project;
(2) A project that will use subsea
tieback development technology in any
water depth; or
(3) An HPHT development project,
any project that uses Category 1 or 2
new or unusual technology barrier
equipment, or any project that uses new
or unusual technology that may impact
the safety critical function of Category 1
or 2 barrier equipment regardless of the
water depth.
(b) You may install subsea systems
and associated pipelines after you have
received applicable BSEE permit(s) and
Conceptual Plan approvals. However,
you may not begin production from the
well until BSEE approves your DWOP.
§ 250.236 What information must I submit
with the DWOP?

Your DWOP must contain the
following information, as applicable:
Where to find the
description
(§)

Information that you must include with your DWOP
(a) General information ............................................................................................................................................................
(b) Well or completion information ..........................................................................................................................................
(c) Structural information .........................................................................................................................................................
(d) Production safety system information ................................................................................................................................
(e) Subsea system and pipeline information ...........................................................................................................................
(f) New or unusual technology information .............................................................................................................................

ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES2

§ 250.237 What general information must
my DWOP include?

You must include the following
general information in your DWOP, as
applicable:
(a) A list of requests for any alternate
procedures or equipment in accordance
with § 250.141 and requests for
departures in accordance with § 250.142
applicable to the DWOP, and a list of
any identified alternate procedures or

VerDate Sep<11>2014

22:47 Aug 29, 2024

Jkt 262001

equipment or departures for which you
may request approval in any future
applicable permit or application. You
do not need to list alternative
procedures or equipment or departure
requests that were previously submitted
and approved for the same project’s
Conceptual Plans unless the same
alternate procedures or equipment or
departure requests are needed for a

PO 00000

Frm 00044

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4700

250.237
250.238
250.239
250.240
250.241
250.242

different piece of equipment for postcompletion activities.
(b) Documentation demonstrating
payment of the service fee listed in
§ 250.125; and
(c) A list of any associated industry
standards not incorporated in the
regulations that you are using for your
project design or operation.

E:\FR\FM\30AUR2.SGM

30AUR2

Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
§ 250.238 What well or completions
information must my DWOP include?

You must include the following
information in your DWOP, as
applicable, to be consistent with the
activities to be addressed in the
associated well permit(s):
(a) A description and schematic of the
typical wellbore, casing, and
completion;
(b) Information concerning the
drilling and completion systems; and
(c) Design and fabrication information
for each wellbore riser system (e.g.,
drilling, completion, workover,
intervention, injection, or production)
deployed from a floating production
facility or TLP.
§ 250.239 What structural information
must my DWOP include?

You must include the following
information in your DWOP, as
applicable, to align with the activities to
be addressed in the associated platform
application, including any major
modifications:
(a) Structural design, fabrication, and
installation information;
(b) Design, fabrication, installation,
and monitoring information on the
tendon, or mooring systems, including
the turret or buoy system, if applicable;
and
(c) Information on any active station
keeping system(s) involving thrusters or
other means of propulsion.

ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES2

§ 250.240 What production safety system
information must my DWOP include?

You must include the following
information in your DWOP, as
applicable, to be consistent with the
activities you plan to address in the
associated production safety system
application:
(a) A general description of the
operating procedures;
(b) Information about the design,
fabrication, and operation of an offtake
system for transferring produced
hydrocarbons to a transport vessel,
including a table summarizing the
curtailment of production and
offloading based on operational
considerations;
(c) A description of the process
facility installation and commissioning
procedure;
(d) A safety analysis flow diagram of
the production system from the SCSSV
downstream to the first item of
separation equipment;
(e) A statement that the surface and/
or subsea safety system and emergency
support systems will comply with
Subpart H of this part. This statement
must include:
(1) The methods, frequency, and
acceptance criteria for testing the

VerDate Sep<11>2014

22:47 Aug 29, 2024

Jkt 262001

underwater safety valves (USVs),
SCSSVs, and boarding shutdown valves;
(2) A description of the function and
testing of the host facility Emergency
Shutdown Device (ESD) system and its
interface to the subsea system; and
(3) If applicable, a description of the
surface and/or subsea safety system and
emergency support systems not covered
in Subpart H of this part. If you propose
to use systems not covered in Subpart
H of this part, you must request an
approval of alternate procedures or
equipment according to § 250.141, and
you must also include a table that
depicts what valves will close, at what
times, and for what events or reasons;
and
(f) Information regarding the design,
operation, maintenance, personnel
competency, and testing of your subsea
leak detection system to protect your
subsea field/infrastructure (e.g., trees,
manifolds, jumpers). You must include
a description of the procedures
regarding how you will operate the
system, ensure system functionality,
identify a leak, and the actions you will
take if a leak is identified.
§ 250.241 What subsea systems and
pipeline information must my DWOP
include?

(a) You must include the following
information common to the subsea
system and the associated pipeline
systems, which constitute all or part of
a single project development covered by
the DWOP and/or is consistent with
activities addressed in your associated
pipeline application, as applicable:
(1) The subsea field schematic
depicting the planned subsea
development equipment and
infrastructure, including wells/trees,
non-pipe subsea equipment, pipeline
route(s), pipeline riser systems,
umbilical(s), and platform footprint;
(2) A description of the subsea
development project detailing the
subsea and pipeline equipment design
criteria and analysis procedures
(including industry standards, pressure
and temperature ratings, materials
selection), testing methods, and general
operational procedures;
(3) A description of the fabrication
and assembly/testing location of subsea
trees, pipelines, and non-pipe subsea
equipment (manifold, Pipeline End
Manifold (PLEM), Pipeline End
Termination (PLET), Subsea Umbilical
Termination Assembly (SUTA), subsea
pumps, suction piles, etc.);
(4) A summary of the Integrity
Management Program for subsea tieback
development technologies, including a
plan for inspection and monitoring to
support assessment of the condition of

PO 00000

Frm 00045

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4700

71119

the systems a minimum of once every
10 years. This should include, but is not
limited to, the in-service inspections or
surveys of hull and topsides structures,
tendons, mooring, and pipeline and/or
wellbore riser systems to assess
component condition by inspection and
analysis after each significant
environmental event (e.g., hurricane,
earthquake, loop and eddy currents, or
mudslide) impacting the system, or once
every 10 years, whichever occurs first.
You must also include in your Integrity
Management Plan a description of how
you will determine significant
environmental events; and
(5) A summary of safety and
environmental controls.
(b) You must include the following
information about subsea systems that
constitute all or part of a single project
development covered by the DWOP:
(1) The system control type (e.g.,
direct hydraulic or electro-hydraulic);
(2) Well tree(s), wellhead, and nonpipe equipment general arrangement
drawings and schematics, with size and
valve type annotations to illustrate the
tree and other equipment in operation;
(3) The estimated shut-in tubing
pressure for the proposed well(s),
including the calculation used to arrive
at the estimate, specifying TVD,
reservoir pressure, and the fluid
gradient used, or a brief discussion of
the PVT data used for estimation;
(4) The wellbore static bottomhole
temperature and the estimated flowing
temperature at the tree, including a
description of the method used to
calculate this estimate;
(5) A description of the umbilical(s)
and umbilical connection(s), including
an umbilical cross-section schematic;
(6) A description of the chemical or
other injection systems and/or enhanced
recovery systems you plan to use;
(7) A description of the corrosion
monitoring and prevention/inhibition
processes;
(8) Details of any re-furbished and/or
re-certified equipment you plan to use;
and
(9) A schedule of development
activities, including well completion,
facility installation, and anticipated date
of first oil.
(c) You must include the following
pipeline information in your DWOP, as
applicable, to be consistent with your
associated pipeline application(s):
(1) General design and fabrication
information for each pipeline riser
system;
(2) If you propose to use a pipeline
free standing hybrid riser (FSHR) on a
permanent installation that uses a
buoyancy air can suspended from the
top of the riser, you must provide the

E:\FR\FM\30AUR2.SGM

30AUR2

71120

Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Rules and Regulations

following information in your DWOP as
part of the discussions required by
paragraphs (b)(1) and (2) of this section:
(i) A detailed description and
drawings of the FSHR, buoy, and the
associated connection system;
(ii) Detailed information regarding the
system used to connect the FSHR to the
buoyancy air can, and associated
redundancies; and
(iii) Descriptions of your monitoring
system and monitoring plan for the
pipeline FSHR and the associated
connection system for fatigue, stress,
and any other abnormal condition (e.g.,
corrosion), that may negatively impact
the riser system’s integrity.
(3) Pipeline and pipeline riser
installation methods.
§ 250.242 What New or Unusual
Technology information must my DWOP
include?

You must include the following new
or unusual technology information in
your DWOP, as applicable:
(a) A description of any new or
unusual technology being used in your
development project, including a
reference to previously approved New
or Unusual Technology Conceptual
Plans or New or Unusual Technology
Barrier Equipment Conceptual Plans.
(b) A description of any new or
unusual technology not covered under
the New or Unusual Technology
Conceptual Plan or New or Unusual
Technology Barrier Equipment
Conceptual Plan. You must include the
same applicable information as required
in §§ 250.228 or 250.229.
§ § 250.243 and 250.244

[Reserved]

ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES2

If your development project meets the
following criteria, you may submit a
combined Project Conceptual Plan/
DWOP that complies with all applicable
requirements for both, on or before the
deadline for submitting the Project
Conceptual Plan, as described in
§ 250.226:
(a) The project is similar to projects
involving subsea tieback development
technology for which you have obtained
approval previously, and
(b) The project does not involve either
new or unusual technology or a new
platform.
When must I revise my DWOP?

You must revise your approved
DWOP to reflect any material change to
the plan that does not involve a physical
alteration of the equipment on the
platform or the seabed.

VerDate Sep<11>2014

22:47 Aug 29, 2024

Jkt 262001

When must I supplement my

You must supplement your DWOP to
reflect additions or changes in your
development project that:
(a) Physically alter the equipment or
systems upstream of your boarding shut
down valve, approved in your DWOP. If
a Supplemental DWOP includes the
addition of a well or wells (e.g., a new
subsea field) not approved in your
original DWOP, you may not complete
or produce from the new well(s) until
BSEE approves the Supplemental
DWOP; or
(b) Involves the addition of any new
or unusual technology to your project
that was not previously covered under
the New or Unusual Technology
Conceptual Plan, New or Unusual
Technology Barrier Equipment
Conceptual Plan, or DWOP. You may
not install any new or unusual
technology until BSEE approves the
applicable Conceptual Plan and
Supplemental DWOP.
§ 250.248 What information must I include
in my Supplemental DWOP?

You must include the following
information, as applicable, in your
Supplemental DWOP:
(a) The same information for your
wells or equipment as required in the
applicable Conceptual Plan and DWOP
requirements in this subpart;
(b) A description of each applicable
Conceptual Plan or DWOP section that
is being impacted by the addition or
change; and
(c) Documentation demonstrating
payment of the service fee listed in
§ 250.125.
Subpart D—Oil and Gas Drilling
Operations

§ 250.245 May I combine the Project
Conceptual Plan and the DWOP?

§ 250.246

§ 250.247
DWOP?

6. Amend § 250.490 by revising
paragraph (p) introductory text to read
as follows:

■

§ 250.490

Hydrogen sulfide.

*

*
*
*
*
(p) Metallurgical properties of
equipment. When operating in a zone
with H2S present or when the
concentration of H2S in the produced
fluid may exceed 0.05 psi partial
pressure of H2S, you must use
equipment that is constructed of
materials with metallurgical properties
that resist or prevent sulfide stress
cracking (also known as hydrogen
embrittlement, stress corrosion cracking,
or H2S embrittlement), chloride-stress
cracking, hydrogen-induced cracking,
and other failure modes. You must do
all of the following:
*
*
*
*
*

PO 00000

Frm 00046

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4700

Subpart E—Oil and Gas WellCompletion Operations
7. Amend § 250.518 by revising
paragraphs (a), (c), and (d) to read as
follows:

■

§ 250.518

Tubing and wellhead equipment.

(a) No tubing string may be placed in
service or continue to be used unless
such tubing string has the necessary
strength and pressure integrity and is
otherwise suitable for its intended use.
(1) The tubing string must be
evaluated for burst, collapse, and axial
loads with appropriate safety factors
and material design factors for the
pressure and temperature environments
of the completion, production, shut-in,
and injection load cases.
(2) The tubing string materials must
be appropriate for the environment. You
must follow NACE Standard MR0175–
2003 (incorporated by reference in
§ 250.198) when H2S concentration may
equal or exceed 0.05 psi partial
pressure.
(3) The tubing string threaded
connectors must be appropriate for the
loads identified in paragraph (a)(1) of
this section.
*
*
*
*
*
(c) You must design and test the
wellhead, tree, and related equipment in
accordance with ANSI/API Spec. 6A
(incorporated by reference in § 250.198)
or ANSI/API Spec. 17D (incorporated by
reference in § 250.198), as applicable.
The wellhead, tree, and related
equipment must have a pressure rating
greater than the maximum anticipated
surface pressure and must be designed,
installed, operated, maintained, and
tested to achieve and maintain pressure
containment and pressure control.
(1) Newly completed dry trees (e.g.,
fixed, hybrid, or mudline suspension)
for production or injection wells must
be equipped with a minimum of one
master valve and one surface safety
valve (SSV), installed above the master
valve, in the vertical run of the tree.
(2) Newly completed subsea
production or injection wells must be
equipped with a minimum of one USV
installed in the horizontal or vertical
run of the tree (e.g., vertical or
horizontal subsea trees).
(3) Newly completed wells with a
mudline suspension conversion to a
subsea tree must have a minimum of
two casing strings tied back and sealed
below the tubing head. At a minimum,
the production casing and the next outer
casing must be tied back to the
wellhead, to ensure annular isolation.
(d) You must install, maintain, and
test surface and subsurface safety
equipment in accordance with the

E:\FR\FM\30AUR2.SGM

30AUR2

71121

Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 169 / Friday, August 30, 2024 / Rules and Regulations
applicable requirements in subpart H of
this part.
*
*
*
*
*
Subpart F—Oil and Gas Well-Workover
Operations
8. Amend § 250.619 by revising
paragraphs (a), (c), and (d) to read as
follows:

■

§ 250.619

Tubing and wellhead equipment.

*

*
*
*
*
(a) No tubing string may be placed in
service or continue to be used unless
such tubing string has the necessary
strength and pressure integrity and is
otherwise suitable for its intended use.
(1) The tubing string must be
evaluated for burst, collapse, and axial
loads with appropriate safety factors
and material design factors for the
pressure and temperature environments
of the completion, production, shut-in,
and injection load cases.
(2) The tubing string materials must
be appropriate for the environment. You
must follow NACE Standard MR0175–
2003 (incorporated by reference in

(2) Subsea production or injection
wells must be equipped with a
minimum of one USV installed in the
horizontal or vertical run of the tree (for
vertical or horizontal subsea trees).
(3) Wells with a mudline suspension
conversion to a subsea tree must have a
minimum of two casing strings tied back
and sealed below the tubing head. At
minimum, the production casing and
the next outer casing must be tied back
to the wellhead, to ensure annular
isolation.
(d) You must install, maintain, and
test surface and subsurface safety
equipment in accordance with the
applicable requirements in subpart H of
this part.
*
*
*
*
*
Subpart G—Well Operations and
Equipment
9. Amend § 250.731 by revising
paragraph (c)(4) to read as follows:

■

§ 250.731 What information must I submit
for BOP systems and system components?

*

*

*

*

*

You must submit:

Including:

*
*
(c) * * * ...........................................

*
*
*
*
*
(4) If using a subsea BOP, a BOP in an HPHT environment as defined in § 250.105, or a surface BOP on
a floating facility, the BOP has not been compromised or damaged from previous service.

*

*

*

10. Amend § 250.732 by revising
paragraph (c) to read as follows:

■

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

*

*
*
*
*
(c) Before you begin any operations in
an HPHT environment, as defined by
§ 250.105, with the proposed
equipment, you must include the
following in your applicable permit:
(1) The I3P certification required in
§ 250.731(c);

ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with RULES2

§ 250.198) when H2S concentration may
equal or exceed 0.05 psi partial
pressure.
(3) The tubing string threaded
connectors must be appropriate for the
loading identified in paragraph (a)(1) of
this section.
*
*
*
*
*
(c) You must design and test the
wellhead, tree, and related equipment in
accordance with ANSI/API Spec. 6A
(incorporated by reference in § 250.198)
or ANSI/API Spec. 17D (incorporated by
reference in § 250.198), as applicable.
The wellhead, tree, and related
equipment must have a pressure rating
greater than the shut-in tubing pressure
and must be designed, installed,
operated, maintained, and tested so as
to achieve and maintain pressure
containment and pressure control.
(1) Dry trees (e.g., fixed, hybrid, or
mudline suspension) for production or
injection wells must be equipped with
a minimum of one master valve and one
surface safety valve (SSV), installed
above the master valve, in the vertical
run of the tree.

VerDate Sep<11>2014

00:17 Aug 30, 2024

Jkt 262001

*

*

(2) A description of any new or
unusual technology being used;
(3) A reference to the previously
approved associated New or Unusual
Technology Barrier Equipment
Conceptual Plan;
(4) The final report and statements in
accordance with § 250.232(c); and
(5) The fit for service statement
required in § 250.230.
You may not deploy your proposed
BOP systems and related equipment that
will or may be exposed to an HPHT
environment until BSEE approves the

PO 00000

Frm 00047

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 9990

*

*

New or Unusual Technology Barrier
Equipment Conceptual Plan and
appropriate permits (e.g., APD and
APM).
*
*
*
*
*
Subpart H—Oil and Gas Production
Safety Systems
§ 250.804
■

[Removed and Reserved]

11. Remove and reserve § 250.804.

[FR Doc. 2024–18598 Filed 8–29–24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310–VH–P

E:\FR\FM\30AUR2.SGM

30AUR2