[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 199 (Friday, October 15, 2010)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 63609-63654]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-25665]
[[Page 63609]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Part III
Department of the Interior
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Regulation and Enforcement
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
30 CFR Part 250
Oil and Gas and Sulphur Operations in the Outer Continental Shelf--
Safety and Environmental Management Systems; Final Rule
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 199 / Friday, October 15, 2010 /
Rules and Regulations
[[Page 63610]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Regulation and Enforcement
30 CFR Part 250
[Docket ID BOEM-2010-0046]
RIN 1010-AD15
Oil and Gas and Sulphur Operations in the Outer Continental
Shelf--Safety and Environmental Management Systems
AGENCY: Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Regulation and Enforcement
(BOEMRE), Interior.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This final rule establishes a new subpart under the Bureau of
Ocean Energy Management, Regulation and Enforcement (BOEMRE)
regulations to require operators to develop and implement Safety and
Environmental Management Systems (SEMS) for oil and gas and sulphur
operations in the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS). This rulemaking will
incorporate in its entirety and make mandatory the American Petroleum
Institute's Recommended Practice 75, Development of a Safety and
Environmental Management Program for Offshore Operations and
Facilities, with respect to operations and activities under the
jurisdiction of BOEMRE. This final rule will apply to all OCS oil and
gas and sulphur operations and the facilities under BOEMRE jurisdiction
including drilling, production, construction, well workover, well
completion, well servicing, and DOI pipeline activities. The importance
of this final rule is highlighted by the Deepwater Horizon event on
April 20, 2010. Although the cause of the event is presently under
investigation, it further illustrates the importance of ensuring safe
operations on the OCS. BOEMRE believes that requiring operators to
implement SEMS will reduce the risk and number of accidents, injuries,
and spills during OCS activities.
DATES: Effective Date: This rule becomes effective on November 15,
2010. The incorporation by reference of the publication listed in the
regulation is approved by the Director of the Federal Register as of
November 15, 2010.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: David Nedorostek, (703) 787-1029.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On May 22, 2006, the former Minerals
Management Service published an Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
(71 FR 29277), and then on June 17, 2009, BOEMRE (formerly MMS)
published a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking in the Federal Register
entitled ``Safety and Environmental Management Systems for Outer
Continental Shelf Oil and Gas Operations'' (74 FR 28639). The comment
period for that proposed rule closed on September 15, 2009. In response
to several requests, BOEMRE issued a National Notice to Lessees and
Operators (NTL No. 2009-N05) on August 12, 2009, announcing a public
meeting on September 2, 2009, in New Orleans, Louisiana, to discuss the
proposed rule.
Summary of the Final Rule
BOEMRE is incorporating by reference, and making mandatory, the
American Petroleum Institute's Recommended Practice for Development of
a Safety and Environmental Management Program for Offshore Operations
and Facilities (API RP 75), Third Edition, May 2004, reaffirmed May
2008. This recommended practice, including its appendices, constitutes
a complete Safety and Environmental Management System (SEMS) program.
On May 22, 2006, BOEMRE published an Advance Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking (ANPR) in the Federal Register (71 FR 29277) related to
requiring a SEMS program. This was followed on June 17, 2009, by a
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPR).
The ANPR discussed several options for implementing a SEMS program.
One of these options was a comprehensive safety and environmental
management approach by addressing all elements of API RP 75. API RP 75
consists of 13 sections, one of which is a ``General'' section. This
relates to the 12 elements identified in the ANPR and states the
overall principles for the SEMS program and establishes management's
general responsibilities for its success. This General element is
critical to the successful implementation of the SEMS program in API RP
75, and BOEMRE is including it by incorporating by reference the
entirety of API RP 75.
The NPR proposed regulatory text premised on the four critical
elements of API RP 75 (hazards analysis, management of change,
operating procedures, and mechanical integrity). BOEMRE noted all
elements of API RP 75 in the proposed rule, stating that a SEMS program
should be modeled after the requirements of API RP 75, but did not
propose to incorporate all elements of API RP 75. However, several
comments suggested that BOEMRE should incorporate by reference and
require implementation of all elements of API RP 75. BOEMRE has
determined that for the SEMS program to be most effective, the entirety
of API RP 75 needs to included in the program and has required as much
in the final rule. BOEMRE also believes that adoption of API RP 75 in
its entirety is consistent with the direction of the National
Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1996, which directs
agencies, wherever possible, to adopt private standards.
This final rule will therefore require the operator (a lessee, the
owner or holder of operating rights, or the designated operator) to
integrate a comprehensive SEMS program into the management of their OCS
operations, thereby providing for the prevention of waste and
conservation of natural resources of the Outer Continental Shelf. In
addition, BOEMRE is highlighting certain requirements from API RP 75
and further describing those requirements in the regulatory text to
clarify compliance requirements. It is the intent of this rule to hold
the operator accountable for the overall safety of the offshore
facility, including ensuring that all contractors and subcontractors
have safety policies and procedures in place that support the
implementation of the operator's SEMS program and align with the
principles of managing safety set forth in API RP 75. Nothing in this
final rule shall affect the Coast Guard's authority and jurisdiction
over vessels and offshore facilities. This final rule will require all
elements of API RP 75 as follows:
(1) General, with additional clarification in Sec. 250.1909,
(2) Safety and Environmental Information, with additional
clarification in Sec. 250.1910,
(3) Hazards Analysis, with additional clarification in Sec.
250.1911,
(4) Management of Change, with additional clarification in Sec.
250.1912,
(5) Operating Procedures, with additional clarification in Sec.
250.1913,
(6) Safe Work Practices, with additional clarification in Sec.
250.1914,
(7) Training, with additional clarification in Sec. 250.1915,
(8) Assurance of Quality and Mechanical Integrity of Critical
Equipment, (Mechanical Integrity), with additional clarification in
Sec. 250.1916,
(9) Pre-startup Review, with additional clarification in Sec.
250.1917,
(10) Emergency Response and Control, with additional clarification
in Sec. 250.1918,
(11) Investigation of Incidents, with additional clarification in
Sec. 250.1919,
(12) Audit of Safety and Environmental Management Program Elements,
(Auditing), with additional clarification in Sec. Sec. 250.1920, 1924,
and 1925, and
[[Page 63611]]
(13) Records and Documentation, (Recordkeeping and Documentation),
with additional BOEMRE requirements in Sec. 250.1928.
BOEMRE also carried over other provisions that were contained in
the proposed rule. Therefore, in implementing a comprehensive SEMS
program that incorporates all of API RP 75, the operator needs to
include the following in its SEMS program:
(1) Recordkeeping and documentation regarding specification of the
amount of time records are to be kept;
(2) Clarification of the differences between hazards analysis
(facility level) and job safety analysis (task level);
(3) Procedures to verify that contractors are conducting their
activities in accordance with the operator's SEMS program and an
evaluation to ensure that contractors have the skills and knowledge to
perform their assigned duties;
(4) An independent third-party or your designated and qualified
personnel must conduct all SEMS audits;
(5) Audit documentation must be submitted to BOEMRE;
(6) Other documentation to be made available to BOEMRE upon
request;
(7) OCS performance measures data (Form MMS-131).
The following table provides a summary of the individual provisions
and their associated cost for implementation and annual maintenance of
a SEMS program. No costs are identified for implementation of a SEMS
program by high activity operators because all high activity operators
currently have a SEMS program. Implementation costs for moderate and
low activity operators that have a partial SEMS program are lower than
those operators without a SEMS program.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Implementation Implementation
(moderate) (low) Maintenance Maintenance Maintenance
Elements -------------------------------------------- (high) (moderate) (low)
Partial Full Partial Full
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
General..................................................... $18,000 $18,000 $5,000 $5,000 $50,000 $3,000 $2,000
Safety and Environmental Information........................ 0 22,000 0 8,000 75,000 12,000 3,000
Hazards Analysis............................................ 0 98,000 0 23,000 300,000 34,000 14,000
Management of Change........................................ 0 29,000 0 18,000 150,000 21,000 7,000
Operating Procedures........................................ 0 20,000 0 10,000 100,000 17,000 4,000
Safe Work Practices......................................... 0 28,000 0 12,000 125,000 17,000 5,000
Training.................................................... 0 30,000 0 14,000 200,000 25,000 9,000
Mechanical Integrity........................................ 0 38,000 0 19,000 225,000 27,000 11,000
Pre-startup Review.......................................... 25,000 25,000 8,000 8,000 125,000 16,000 5,000
Emergency Response and Control.............................. 28,000 28,000 14,000 14,000 175,000 24,000 7,000
Investigation of Incidents.................................. 20,000 20,000 10,000 10,000 95,000 17,000 3,000
Audits...................................................... 3,000 3,000 2,000 2,000 15,000 6,000 6,000
Records and Documentation................................... 6,000 6,000 4,000 4,000 30,000 6,000 4,000
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total................................................... 100,000 365,000 43,000 147,000 1,665,000 225,000 80,000
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total One-time Implementation: $655,000.
Total Annual Maintenance: $1,970,000.
BOEMRE may enforce non-compliance with any of the requirements of
30 CFR part 250 subpart S, in a variety of ways. BOEMRE may issue
incidents of non-compliance (INCs) following an inspection where BOEMRE
determines that a facility is conducting operations that do not comply
with the requirements of subpart S, or after a BOEMRE directed
independent third-party SEMS audit. If BOEMRE identifies non-compliance
with subpart S as a result of a regularly scheduled SEMS audit and all
deficiencies discovered during the course of the audit are sent to
BOEMRE with a schedule for their correction, then BOEMRE will consider
this in deciding whether to issue an INC. However, if the operator does
not meet its schedule of corrections, BOEMRE will be more likely to
issue an INC.
If non-compliance resulting from an inspection or BOEMRE-directed
audit poses actual harm or threat to the human and marine environment,
BOEMRE will proceed with a civil penalty review of that violation(s)
subject to 30 CFR part 250, subpart N--Outer Continental Shelf Civil
Penalties. Should non-compliance with subpart S display serious and
pervasive safety management concerns, BOEMRE may restrict or revoke the
operator's privilege to operate on the OCS as a designated operator or
lessee operator through probationary or disqualification actions as
detailed in Sec. 250.135.
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking Comments
In response to the proposed rule, BOEMRE received 61 sets of
comments, of which 57 were from individual entities (companies,
industry organizations, or private citizens). Some of the 61 comments
were duplicates, not related to the proposed rule, or the same company
submitting multiple comments. All of the comments received are posted
on the BOEMRE Web site at: http://www.BOEMRE.gov/federalregister/PublicComments/AD15SafetyEnvMgmtSysforOCSOilGasOperations.htm.
Multiple comments stated that they do not support the proposed rule
as written because it will eliminate the flexibility needed for any
safety management system to work effectively, including flexibility
inherent in the API RP 75 approach.
Five comments received recommended that BOEMRE should move forward
to implement its plan to require a SEMS for oil and gas and sulphur
operations on the OCS and that the proposed rule should require that
offshore operators implement all elements of API RP 75. Other comments
suggested various combinations of the API RP 75 elements.
The majority of the comments received stated that SEMS should
remain voluntary and the proposed rule, as written, would increase
documentation and recordkeeping requirements and would not address
human factors (i.e., errors, behavior, etc.). Several comments
recommended that BOEMRE incorporate the JSA into current 30 CFR part
250 regulations to address human factors as an alternative to
incorporating the four elements.
Numerous comments received from drilling, production, and service
contractors stated that BOEMRE already
[[Page 63612]]
has regulations in place to address employee training and competency
assessments in 30 CFR part 250, subpart O--Well Control and Production
Safety Training, and recommended that BOEMRE strike the section
relating to contractors from the rule because it is redundant with the
existing subpart O regulations.
A few comments received from industry trade organizations (API,
International Association of Drilling Contractors (IADC), Offshore
Operators Committee (OOC)) stated that the proposed rule as written
will require lessees and operators to modify existing SEMS programs and
that rewriting these programs would not prevent accidents or increase
safety.
In response to the comments we address the general comments and
those that pertain to several sections of the rule first. Following
that, we have a section-by-section discussion of the specific comments
received and our response to those comments, including any changes made
to the final rule.
General Comments
Contractor Selection Criteria
Comment: Nearly every comment addressed contractor selection
criteria. They stated that BOEMRE already has regulations in place (30
CFR part 250, subpart O--Well Control and Production Safety Training)
that address training and competency assessment for contractors. In
addition, they stated that BOEMRE was requiring contractors to have a
SEMS program.
Response: We incorporated by reference API RP 75, Section 7, which
addresses training. Subpart O addresses training and competency for
contractors. The operator may use the training requirements in subpart
O to meet part of the requirements of Section 7. As part of their SEMS
program, operators must establish and implement training programs so
that all personnel are trained to work safely and are aware of
environmental considerations offshore, in accordance with their duties.
The SEMS program must address contractor training to ensure and verify
that contractors have their own written safe work practices and
contractors may adopt appropriate sections of the operator's SEMS
program. The operator must have a SEMS program and is responsible for
obtaining and evaluating information regarding the contract employer's
safety performance and safety programs to ensure that skilled,
knowledgeable, and properly trained personnel are working on the OCS.
In order to comply with this rule, an operator must ensure that its
contractors are conducting their operations in accordance with the
operator's SEMS program. The operator must work with the contractor
regarding appropriate contractor safety and environmental policies and
practices before a contractor begins work at the operator's facilities.
Jurisdictional Authority
Comment: Most comments expressed concern that BOEMRE had
overstepped its jurisdictional authority by imposing management safety
system requirements in the proposed rule on mobile offshore drilling
units (MODUs). Comments questioned BOEMRE's authority to require an
operator to have a SEMS on a MODU.
Response: BOEMRE has jurisdictional authority to adopt and
implement this rule. The final rule will require operators to have a
SEMS for a MODU when it is under BOEMRE's jurisdiction such as during
drilling, well workover, well completion, and servicing operations.
The U.S. Offshore Industry Safety Record
Comment: Most comments expressed the view that the safety and
environmental protection record of the offshore industry is excellent,
and that imposing these new requirements is not justified.
Response: BOEMRE disagrees that the final SEMS regulation is not
justified in light of the available incident data and the trends
identified through analyzing this data as discussed in the ANPR and
preamble of the proposed SEMS rule. This analysis covers 10 years (from
2000 to 2009) of OCS oil and gas operations, including Incidents of
Noncompliance (INCs), accident panel investigation reports, incident
analysis, and OCS spill analysis. It shows that the majority of INCs
and accidents during that period were related to human factors and not
to equipment failure. Thus, additional regulations are needed to
address how operators can reduce the risk of incidents during OCS
activities.
The ANPR and the proposed rule describe numerous incidents that
indicate the need for a comprehensive SEMS program. The recent
Deepwater Horizon incident is a significant reminder of the risk of
offshore operations and the need to regularly evaluate measures that
help ensure safe operations. A SEMS program will augment existing
safety requirements.
Root Cause
Comment: Most comments stated that BOEMRE's assertion that ``root
cause analysis'' points to the need for requiring the four proposed
SEMS elements, is not supported by the BOEMRE's incident analysis.
Response: BOEMRE believes that the SEMS regulation is justified
given the available incident data trends and associated analysis
discussed in the ANPR and preamble of the proposed and final SEMS rule.
As mentioned previously, the analysis covered over 10 years and
demonstrates that requiring operators to implement a SEMS program is
likely to improve OCS safety. BOEMRE incident analysis supports
adopting all 13 elements. Voluntary data submitted by industry should
not be construed as BOEMRE data as it is incomplete and unverified.
BOEMRE data is the only source of industry-wide data available.
Job Safety Analysis/Job Hazards Analysis
Comment: Most comments claimed that the job safety analysis/job
hazards analysis is the only significant portion of the proposed rule
that could affect the behavioral issues related to an incident.
Response: BOEMRE agrees that a JSA/JHA does address behavioral
change with the goal of minimizing accidents, but disagrees that it is
the only portion of the rule that bears on behavior. In the final rule,
BOEMRE is incorporating all elements of API RP 75, much of which
addresses behavioral issues and additional regulatory requirements to
clarify expectations for compliance.
Mandated SEMS Program
Comment: Most comments strongly disagree that a mandated SEMS
program as proposed is needed. The comments stated that a mandated
program will not reduce OCS incidents any more than a voluntary SEMS
program. As such, they recommend BOEMRE keep SEMS voluntary.
Response: BOEMRE disagrees. In 1998, operators accounting for 98
percent of OCS production reported that they were covered under a SEMS.
By 2006, this number decreased to approximately 60 percent (see API RP
75 implementation survey at: http://www.BOEMRE.gov/semp/Reports/survey98.htm). A voluntary SEMS program has not been adopted by all
operators. The only way to ensure the adoption of a SEMS program by all
operators is to require that all operators implement such a program.
Comment: The other option proposed by some comments was to mandate
a program for those operators who have a historical record of poor
performance.
Response: BOEMRE does not agree that this is the most effective
approach.
[[Page 63613]]
The purpose of requiring a SEMS program is to reduce the risk and
number of incidents during OCS activities, which is not solely based or
determined by an operator's past record of poor performance.
Withdraw Proposed Rule
Comment: Many comments stated that BOEMRE should withdraw the
proposed rule immediately and reevaluate the cost/benefits of mandating
a program that, as recently as 2003, was determined by the agency to be
performing well as a voluntary program.
Response: BOEMRE disagrees. The only way to ensure SEMS programs
are used across the entire OCS is to require a program for all
operators. As of 2009, only 54 percent of OCS operators had a SEMS
program, and not all of the 54 percent include the entirety of APR RP
75 in their SEMS program.
Underestimated Cost
Comment: Most comments expressed that BOEMRE significantly
underestimated the cost of developing, revising, and implementing the
SEMS program. Comments also stated that BOEMRE dramatically
underestimated the major new documentation and reporting burden that
the rule will impose on offshore operators.
Response: BOEMRE re-evaluated the cost burden on industry by
interviewing parties experienced in the development of SEMS programs,
vendors that submit information for operators, and operators with
designated personnel who work on SEMS issues. Based on this
information, we have increased the non-hour cost and hour burdens.
Should OCS companies have documented data that shows a higher cost to
industry, they may submit comments at any time on the paperwork burden
as stated in Sec. 250.199(d).
New Reporting, Documentation, and Recordkeeping Requirements
Comment: Several comments claim that this proposed rule attempts to
prescribe new reporting, documentation, and recordkeeping requirements
far above current levels in API RP 75, that will adversely impact OCS
operators' businesses, both operationally and financially, while
bringing little benefit towards improving safety of offshore
operations.
Response: BOEMRE changed the reporting and recordkeeping
requirements from the proposed rule to the final rule. We are now
incorporating all elements of API RP 75, with requirements in Sec.
250.1928 to enhance documentation and recordkeeping. The reporting and
recordkeeping requirements in this final rule are primarily submissions
of documents that are directed by the adoption of API RP 75 and used to
comply with this recommended practice. The reporting to BOEMRE is
necessary to ensure the bureau has the appropriate documentation to
monitor compliance with this rule.
Comment: The operator can only supply the information on the Form
MMS-131 by collecting and consolidating information from their
contractors, suppliers, and vendors and, in turn, any subcontractors or
other workers involved in OCS operations. This is not a current
practice and it will require a significant amount of time to establish
and maintain a reporting system. Further complications will arise since
a significant portion of work may be contracted out as ``lump sum''
turnkey projects where individual worker hours are not provided to the
operator.
Response: Such information is critical to the effective
implementation of a SEMS program. While operators may not currently
require contractors, suppliers, and vendors to submit this information,
it is not unreasonable to expect them to provide it to the operator.
Regarding ``lump sum'' turnkey projects, individual worker hours could
be estimated as a normal practice. For example, a contractor may have
workers who stay offshore for 2 weeks at a time and work 12 hour
shifts. Therefore, a crew of 20 people, could be estimated to work a
total of 240 hours per day for 14 continuous days (240 hours x 14 days
= 3, 360 hours).
Comment: While most contractors on the OCS probably collect
information regarding employee work hours and injuries/illnesses for
their own use, they typically do so either on a quarterly or annual
basis, not the per-contract basis which would be necessitated by the
proposed action.
Response: Operators will need to work with their contractors to
establish the best approach to provide the information required by this
rule.
Comment: Collection and reporting of information that only becomes
available post-contract is problematic. For example: Will the operator
be expected to report days of continuing restricted work activity for a
contractor's employee injured while working for the operator after the
termination of the contract?
Response: Once the contract has been terminated, the contractor's
employee is no longer working for the operating company in question.
Form MMS-131 only requests that an operating company provide
information for contractors under their employment during the calendar
year. Operating companies will only be required to provide information
tallied for the portion of the year the contractor is under the
operating company's employment, not for the entire year.
Comment: There is no consistent industry practice of collecting
information regarding work hours and injuries/illnesses from sub-
contractors and other (possibly occasional) workers. The proposed
action would require the establishment of such an information
collection and reporting system. The collection of such information
regarding occasional workers (e.g., equipment repair specialists),
particularly those providing services on a per-job (rather than hourly)
basis will be particularly challenging.
Response: In Sec. 250.1914(e)(2), BOEMRE requires the operator to
keep an injury/illness log, retain it for 2 years, and include this
information on Form MMS-131. The operating company is responsible for
collecting and submitting this data and will need to work with their
contractors to establish a process for doing so.
Comment: BOEMRE has not, with this proposed version of Form MMS-
131, provided the necessary instructions and definitions for the user
to understand the information collection and comply with the reporting
requirement. The instructions and definitions should be made available,
with the proposed form, for public comment. The information collection
should not be authorized until clear and unambiguous instructions are
provided.
Response: There is no need to make proposed Form MMS-131 available
for public comment since it was previously made available for comment
in the proposed rule. However, in light of your comment concerning the
instructions, the BOEMRE is providing explicit instructions to guide
respondents on completing the form. See Appendix 1 of the final rule.
Comment: Cost and time estimates are more in line with the printing
of manuals and instructions and not actual or historical costs we have
as operators experienced for the development, implementation, and long
term support of a new program.
Response: BOEMRE re-evaluated the cost burden on industry by
interviewing parties experienced in the development of SEMS programs,
vendors that submit information for operators, and operators with
designated personnel who work on SEMS issues. Based on this
information, we have increased the non-hour cost and hour burdens. If
OCS companies
[[Page 63614]]
have documented data that shows a higher cost to industry, they may
submit comments at any time on the paperwork burden as stated in Sec.
250.199(d).
Comment: The proposed rule does not take into consideration the
impact that the requirements and administrative burden will force on
small independent contractors and service suppliers who perform a large
portion of the field work typically carried out on OCS facilities.
Response: The operators must submit Form MMS-131 to BOEMRE, not
small independent contractors and service suppliers. BOEMRE foresees
that the primary impact for these groups is that they are now expected
to provide information on the man-hours. That task may be as simple as
taking note of the time specific employees report in and out of a
specific work site and tracking that data. Operators will need to work
with their contractors to establish the best approach to provide the
information required by this rule.
Comment: We ask that BOEMRE appropriately acknowledge the entire
burden being imposed by this rulemaking on the industry and account for
it within its information collection budget.
Response: This is discussed in more detail in the Procedural
Matters of this rulemaking under the Regulatory Flexibility Act and
Paperwork Reduction Act section. If OCS companies have documented data
that shows a higher paperwork burden than what BOEMRE estimates, they
may submit comments at any time on the paperwork burden as stated in
Sec. 250.199(d).
Unnecessary Burden on BOEMRE
Comment: Most comments claim that implementing this proposed rule
will create an additional burden to regional BOEMRE staff that will
require additional inspector/auditor training and increased workloads.
Response: While this is additional work, we consider this
regulation critical to improve safety on the OCS. BOEMRE will adjust
inspector training and workload as necessary to ensure effective
implementation of the rule.
Where BOEMRE Believes the Industry Is Falling Short of Expectations
Comment: Several comments would like to know specifically where
BOEMRE believes the industry is falling short of BOEMRE's expectations
regarding safety and why the BOEMRE has not shared this information in
the rulemaking.
Response: The proposed rule was developed based upon 33 accident
panel investigations, 1,443 incident analyses, and 3,132 INCs issued by
the agency. Additional information about these items is publicly
available at: http://www.BOEMRE.gov/incidents/index.htm and http://www.gomr.BOEMRE.gov/homepg/offshore/safety/acc_repo/accindex.html.
For the SEMS program to be most effective, the entirety of API RP
75 needs to be part of the program, which the final rule requires.
Remove Prescriptive Language
Comment: A few comments pointed out that if BOEMRE intends to
require that each SEMS conform to API RP 75, then the highly
prescriptive language should be removed and the final rule should
simply reference the appropriate sections in API RP 75. They recommend
that BOEMRE incorporate by reference API RP 75 into the regulations and
require compliance with the existing recommended practice. In addition,
the comments state that the proposed rule, as written, not only
represents an abrupt change from past direction of the BOEMRE, but it
also penalizes those operators that took the initiative and developed
programs patterned after the API RP 75 model. For operators that
implement API RP 75 and continue to evolve their systems to keep
abreast of changing operations, having the BOEMRE implement a 4 element
SEMS will require them to go back and modify or change those systems to
comply with new BOEMRE prescriptive requirements. These changes to
programs that are working effectively will add minimal if any added
value.
Response: The final rule incorporates, and thus prescribes, all of
API RP 75, as well as requirements as detailed in 30 CFR 250 subpart S
for recordkeeping and documentation, JSAs for activities identified in
the SEMS programs, contractor selection criteria, and audit
requirements.
Implementation
Comment: A commenter pointed out that the rule calls for the
program to be implemented within 1 year after the final rule becomes
effective. For operators that do not already have a written SEMS
program that covers all of the elements, it will be impossible to
develop the SEMS program, conduct all of the hazards analyses
(facility), complete job hazards analysis for every job, write complete
operating procedures, establish a mechanical integrity program, and
establish an audit program for everyone on their facilities. Even for
those operators that have a SEMS in place, it is likely to take more
than 1 year to compare their existing program to the prescriptive
requirements in this rulemaking and make all of the required
modifications. Therefore, if a mandatory program is adopted, the
commenter recommends that a phased-in approach to implementation be
adopted.
Response: BOEMRE believes that 1 year is a sufficient amount of
time for operators to develop their SEMS program, even if they do not
already have a program in place. The final rule incorporates by
reference, and thus prescribes, the entirety of API RP 75 together with
related requirements for recordkeeping and documentation, JSAs for
activities identified in the SEMS programs, and contractor selection
criteria. BOEMRE believes that 1 year is a sufficient amount of time
for operators to put these related requirements of the program in
place.
Three Alternatives for Consideration
Comment: A comment suggested that in lieu of pursuing the
rulemaking in its current form, the BOEMRE should consider the
following three alternatives:
1. Suspend the rulemaking and continue with the voluntary program
currently in place.
2. Suspend the rulemaking and return to the Advance Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking.
3. Abandon the concept of a new prescriptive section in the
regulation and simply include the following language in Sec. 250.107:
(e) You must have a safety and environmental management program in
accordance with the American Petroleum Institute's Recommended Practice
for Development of a Safety and Environmental Management Program for
Offshore Operations and Facilities (API RP 75), incorporated by
reference as specified in Sec. 250.198.
(1) At a minimum, your safety and environmental management program
must include:
(i) Hazards Analysis. You must perform a hazards analysis for all
OCS facilities to identify, evaluate, and, where unacceptable, reduce
the likelihood and minimize the consequences of uncontrolled releases
and other safety or environmental incidents. This includes having a job
safety analysis process. Human factors should be considered in this
analysis,
(ii) Management of Change. You must establish procedures to
identify and control hazards associated with change and maintain the
accuracy of safety information,
(iii) Operating Procedures. You must have written facility
operating procedures designed to enhance
[[Page 63615]]
efficient, safe, and environmentally sound operations,
(iv) Mechanical Integrity. You must ensure that procedures are in
place and implemented so that critical equipment for any facility
subject to this recommended practice is designed, fabricated,
installed, tested, inspected, monitored, and maintained in a manner
consistent with appropriate service requirements, manufacturer's
recommendations, BOEMRE requirements, or industry standards, and
(v) Documentation. You must establish a documentation system to
ensure that records and documents are maintained in a manner sufficient
to implement your safety and environmental management program. Records
or documentation may be in either paper or electronic form. You must
make this documentation available for BOEMRE inspection upon request. *
* *
Response: BOEMRE disagrees with all three of the proposed
alternatives. Not all operators on the OCS voluntarily submit Form MMS-
131. A comprehensive SEMS program is important. The final rule
incorporates, and thus prescribes, API RP 75, and requirements for
recordkeeping and documentation necessary to implement API RP 75, JSAs
for activities identified in the SEMS programs, contractor selection
criteria and the option of utilizing either an independent third party
or your designated and qualified personnel to conduct audits on your
behalf.
Potential Adverse Impacts to Drilling Contractors
Comment: A commenter expressed concerned that any prescriptive
imposition of mandatory SEMS elements upon operators has the potential
to adversely impact drilling contractors' SEMS, if a careful balance
between the operators' perceived need to impose those SEMS elements
against the contractors' need to manage their own SEMS is not achieved.
Clearly the goal should be that a drilling contractor should move
between operators with little, if any, modification to the contractor's
SEMS.
Response: The final rule does not require that a contractor have a
SEMS program. The final rule requires operators to ensure that
contractors have their own written safe work practices and provides
that they may adopt appropriate sections of the operator's SEMS
program. The operator must have a SEMS program and is responsible for
obtaining and evaluating information regarding the contractor's safety
performance and programs. An operator and contractor should agree on
appropriate contractor's safety and environmental policies and
practices before the contractor begins work at the operator's
facilities.
BOEMRE Meetings With Industry
Comment: Several comments state that BOEMRE should have held
meetings with industry so that industry comments and views could have
been placed on the record. An informal ``workshop'' without public
recording of industry views is insufficient to reflect the depth of
concern held by exploration and production companies operating on the
OCS and the numerous other companies that support their activities.
Even though BOEMRE held a public meeting in September 2009, it did not
have official recording of comments.
Response: BOEMRE disagrees. BOEMRE has publicized its views that a
SEMS rule is needed since 1993 at a variety of industry conferences and
meetings. At these meetings, BOEMRE explained that the agency supported
implementation of a comprehensive SEMS program. These meetings
presented the industry with numerous opportunities for dialog with
BOEMRE regarding this type of program. In 1994, API RP 75 was developed
with input from industry. In addition, the BOEMRE published its views
in an ANPR in 2006, which discussed BOEMRE's consideration of a
comprehensive API RP 75-based program, and an NPR in 2009. At the
September 2009 meeting, attendees were encouraged to submit written
comments.
Rule Lacks Specifics
Comment: Several comments stated that the proposed rule lacks
specificity in some areas, as well as in the discussion on hazard/
safety analyses. It is the commenters' concern that without specifics,
there will be inconsistency with regard to interpretation, which will
be difficult on the industry, as well as BOEMRE, to implement and
enforce.
Response: The final rule incorporates, at an appropriate level of
detail, requirements necessary for recordkeeping and documentation to
implement API RP 75, JSAs for activities identified in the SEMS
programs, contractor selection criteria and the option of utilizing
either an independent third party or your designated and qualified
personnel to conduct audits on your behalf.
Agency Jurisdiction
Comment: Several comments stated that it is not clear that BOEMRE
is expanding its reach into other agencies' jurisdiction, and do not
understand how this will help safety. BOEMRE's proposal to handle
enforcement issues on MODUs, where the USCG has jurisdiction and has
done a very good job over the years with their limited resources, is a
duplication of efforts and a power grab by BOEMRE. Requiring mandatory
reporting to BOEMRE when Occupational Safety and Health Administration
(OSHA) is the appropriate agency is another area of duplication and
another power grab by BOEMRE. The comments stated that they may be
misreading the information, but it also appeared that BOEMRE is
attempting to take over jurisdiction of Department of Transportation
(DOT) regulated pipelines. If this is the case, here is another attempt
at duplication or a power grab by BOEMRE.
Response: BOEMRE disagrees. A SEMS will and should apply to MODUs
when they are under BOEMRE's jurisdiction (i.e., drilling, well
workover, well completion, servicing operations). The final rule
clarifies that the SEMS program must address DOI regulated pipelines
only. BOEMRE, DOT, and USCG establish the requirements for workplace
safety on the OCS with requirements that pertain to personal protection
equipment, tripping and slipping hazards, deck openings, means of
escape, fire extinguishers, and other workplace safety items. The OSHA
requirements do not apply to OCS operations.
Support for the Proposed Rule
Comment: Some comments supported BOEMRE in requiring OCS oil and
gas operators to implement SEMS rules, which are intended to reduce
human error and organizational failures. The analysis summarized in the
proposed rule indicates that the elements are associated with
contributing causes of most incidents, hence the rationale for focusing
on them. Comments requested that this regulation require, rather than
simply encourage, that offshore operators implement all elements of the
API RP 75, as identified in the rulemaking notice.
Response: Upon review of all the comments and the requirements of
API RP 75, BOEMRE agrees that a SEMS program should be comprehensive to
reduce human error and organizational failures. Therefore, BOEMRE
incorporated all elements of API RP 75 with requirements necessary to
implement API RP 75 and regulatory language to clarify expectations for
compliance.
[[Page 63616]]
Comment Period
Comment: The comment period to such a significant, formal rule, was
not long enough and it is recommended that further discussions with
industry be carried out prior to any final rulemaking.
Response: BOEMRE disagrees. BOEMRE published an ANPR in 2006
notifying industry that we were considering requiring a comprehensive
SEMS program and seeking comment. The proposed rule was published on
June 17, 2009, with a 90-day comment period. BOEMRE also held a
workshop on September 2, 2009 at which attendees were encouraged to
submit written comments on the proposed rule. This comment period is
consistent with comment periods for other rules of this magnitude.
Thus, sufficient response time was afforded for interested parties to
submit comments.
General Comments
Comment: A SEMS approach is more applicable to production
facilities; MODU, liftboat, and coiled tubing operations are inherently
more hazardous than production facility operations, and lead to more
well control incidents.
Response: BOEMRE believes that SEMS has merit for all OCS
operations including, but not limited to, production, drilling, well
completion, well workover, well servicing, and coiled tubing. For SEMS
to be properly implemented, it needs to address all OCS operations.
Liftboats are under the jurisdiction of the USCG and are not covered by
this regulation.
Comment: Support a more focused SEMS program for production
facility management (excluding MODU operations), preferably one that is
voluntary. Such a program, with elements of hazards analysis and
management of change, probably could be helpful especially for smaller
operators.
Response: BOEMRE disagrees. A SEMS should apply to MODUs and all
other facilities under BOEMRE's jurisdiction. The final rule will
require operators to have a SEMS for operations and activities onboard
a MODU when it is under BOEMRE's jurisdiction such as drilling, well
workover, well completion, and servicing operations.
Comment: Does the definition of facility in this section apply to
all the sections in subpart S?
Response: BOEMRE is incorporating by reference API RP 75, including
the definitions from Appendix D of API RP 75, except as revised in the
final rule.
Comment: How does BOEMRE perceive the difference between a Job
Hazards Analysis (JHA) and a Job Safety Analysis (JSA)?
Response: A JSA is one form of hazards analysis. Hazards analysis
is performed to identify and evaluate hazards for the purpose of their
elimination or control. A JSA is a process used to review site-specific
detailed job steps and uncover hazards associated with the specific job
undertaken. To alleviate any confusion, BOEMRE replaced the term JHA
with JSA in the final rule.
Comment: Is the JHA for each general operation or for the immediate
task at hand?
Response: BOEMRE removed the term JHA from the final rule. In the
final rulemaking, JSAs are required for the immediate tasks at hand and
are not required for general operations.
Comment: What is BOEMRE's expectation for what triggers an internal
audit and updating a facility hazards analysis?
Response: The final rule requires operators to have their SEMS
program audited by either an independent third party or your designated
and qualified personnel, according to the requirements of this subpart
and API RP 75, Section 12. The first audit must be within 2 years of
the initial implementation of the SEMS program and at least once every
3 years thereafter. However, BOEMRE may issue additional guidance on
this after the final rule is implemented. BOEMRE may direct specific
operators to conduct additional independent third-party audits or
BOEMRE may conduct an audit, if we identify safety or non-compliance
concerns based on the results of inspections and evaluations, or as a
result of an event.
The operator must update the appropriate elements of their SEMS
program, if there are deficiencies identified in the audit. For
updating a hazards analysis for a facility, we incorporated by
reference the requirements of API RP 75, Section 4.4, which requires
that if a management of change is conducted due to changes in
personnel, facility and operating conditions, then the operator must
conduct a hazard analysis on those changes. For simple and nearly
identical facilities, such as well jackets and single well caissons,
the operator may use the same single hazards analysis after verifying
that any site-specific deviations have been identified and addressed
(see Sec. 250.1911).
Comment: Recommend in proposed section Sec. 250.1907 ``What
criteria for Mechanical Integrity must my SEMS program meet?'' that
``manufacturer's recommended limits'' should be changed to
manufacturers and/or engineering design limits.
Response: We disagree; we believe that the manufactures recommended
limits are the most appropriate guidance to use.
Comment: What are BOEMRE's definitions of temporary operations,
personnel change, and facility?
Response: See the scope of ``facilities'' addressed in Sec.
250.1911 and Appendix D of API RP 75, incorporated by reference, which
includes a definition of ``facility.'' As to personnel change, we are
now incorporating by reference API RP 75, Section 4, which defines
``personnel change'' in Section 4.3. The term ``temporary operations''
was removed from the final rule. It is the operator's responsibility to
ensure all contractors subscribe to basic safety workplace principles
that meet the spirit and intent of the operator's SEMS program.
Comment: Does BOEMRE support API RP 75 guidance on MOC as being
sufficient to direct operators in developing an effective MOC process?
Response: The guidance provided in API RP 75, Section 4, which we
incorporated by reference in the final rule, along with the requirement
in Sec. 250.1912 of the final rule provides sufficient guidelines and
procedures on when and how to develop a MOC process.
Comment: How does BOEMRE perceive the difference between
documenting the inspection and tests that have been performed, and
verification that inspections and tests are being performed?
Response: BOEMRE will evaluate all of the documentation provided to
verify that the inspections and tests were performed and that the
operator continues to perform the inspections and tests, as described
in their SEMS. BOEMRE is vigilant about operator documentation and may
use a variety of tools to determine the validity of operator records
and that the operator is conducting all prescribed and appropriate
tests, as identified in their SEMS.
Comment: Are there contractor groups that BOEMRE believes are not
being addressed by existing subpart O requirements--identify. We
believe this is redundant with the existing subpart O program.
Response: BOEMRE does not regulate contractors; we regulate
operators. Subpart O applies to well control and production safety,
whereas this SEMS final rule applies to operators who are performing or
who have contractors performing maintenance or repair, turnaround,
major renovation, or
[[Page 63617]]
specialty work on or adjacent to a covered process. The training
requirements of subpart O may be used to partially meet the SEMS
requirements.
Comment: Can you provide detailed instructions and examples for
filling out Form MMS-131?
Response: The form and instructions are in Appendix 1 which is
incorporated by reference into the rule and is also set forth in the
preamble of the final rule.
Comment: BOEMRE fails to recognize that our voluntary safety and
environmental programs are effective.
Response: The voluntary programs may be effective for those who
follow the guidance completely. However, more needs to be done to
promote safety of the environment and the personnel working on the OCS
by ensuring that everyone complies with API RP 75 and the requirements
of this final rule.
Comment: BOEMRE fails to understand that our safety record is good
and is only getting better.
Response: The record of incidents that cause injuries, fatalities,
fires, collisions, loss of well control, or explosions demonstrates the
need for regular evaluation and improvement of safety standards.
Comment: BOEMRE fails to understand that the prescriptive SEMS
program will not address many of the incidents/accidents that the
regulation is based on.
Response: BOEMRE does not agree that the voluntary program has been
as effective as it could be. Industry wide adoption of SEMS is crucial
to enhancing safety in the OCS.
Comment: BOEMRE wrote prescriptive requirements for all or part of
8 of the 12 SEMS elements in lieu of just following API RP 75.
Response: BOEMRE is incorporating all elements of API RP 75 in the
final rule, with clarification of the proposed rule's requirements for
JSA, recordkeeping and documentation requirements, contractor selection
criteria, and the option of utilizing either an independent third party
or your designated and qualified personnel to conduct audits on your
behalf.
Comment: The proposed rule changes the wording and expands on API
RP 75, Section 5, dealing with environmental and occupation safety and
health considerations. These requirements overlap with hazardous
materials regulations, OPA 90, RCRA, NPDES, etc. How does BOEMRE think
the addition of these requirements will impact safety performance more
than the existing regulations of other agencies?
Response: SEMS is a safety management system that will enhance the
effectiveness of other laws and regulations.
Comment: BOEMRE should use an alternative compliance approach,
i.e., those operator/lessees that have established Safety and
Environmental Management Program (SEMP) (identified by BOEMRE as 56
percent or 73 of the 130 operators) and are within the BOEMRE standard
of compliance as recognized in the annual Safe Award program that would
be exempt from the proposed rule.
Response: We believe that there are varying degrees of commitment
and compliance with the voluntary SEMP program and that a mandatory
program is the best way to ensure that operators implement a
comprehensive approach to safety. Operators that have a comprehensive
SEMS program in place addressing all of API RP 75 are already
addressing many of the requirements in this final rule.
Comment: Some operators have existing processes that address
changes. Consideration should be given to these existing processes and
not develop a prescribed MOC process for changes that are already
covered.
Response: BOEMRE changed the final rule by incorporating by
reference API RP 75, Section 4, to address MOCs. You may use your
existing MOC process if it meets the requirements of API RP 75 and
Sec. 250.1912.
Comment: We believe that the one size fits all approach to this
rule does not take into account the diversity of operations that exists
in the OCS.
Response: SEMS is not a one size fits all program. In fact, SEMS
encourages operators to consider unique circumstances and conditions.
BOEMRE changed the final rule by incorporating all elements of API RP
75 and requirements for recordkeeping and documentation necessary to
implement API RP 75, JSAs for activities identified in the SEMS
programs, contractor selection criteria, and the option of utilizing
either an independent third party or your designated and qualified
personnel to conduct audits on your behalf to allow for the diversity
of operations that exists on the OCS and within the company/operation.
Comment: Please clarify if the parts of the proposed elements can
be accomplished through other management systems; in other words, a
comprehensive SEMS program can cover each of the proposed items without
these necessarily being part of a single system.
Response: In the final rule, we are requiring all operators to
follow the elements of API RP 75 and requirements for recordkeeping and
documentation, JSAs for activities identified in the SEMS programs,
contractor selection criteria, and the option of utilizing either an
independent third party or your designated and qualified personnel to
conduct audits on your behalf. As recognized in API RP 75, Section
1.3.1.1, some systems may have been developed using other guidelines.
If a system was developed using other guidelines, when that system is
assessed, the operator should focus on assuring that all the program
elements from API RP 75 and this final rule are addressed.
Comment: What data will be made available to the public? What
measures will be in place to protect sensitive company data from being
made public?
Response: BOEMRE requires a copy of Form MMS-131 from an operator.
The information on the Form MMS-131 is not protected from disclosure
and is subject to the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), should a
member of the public request this information. BOEMRE may request a
copy of the operator's SEMS and audits. BOEMRE will protect proprietary
information under the Freedom of Information Act (5 U.S.C. 522) and its
implementing regulations (43 CFR part 2); and 30 CFR 250.197.
Comment: We further believe that the record retention requirements
for the JSA and related index are unduly burdensome and contrary to
BOEMRE's stated intent that the programs not become a paperwork
exercise. The proposed rule also creates concern regarding
``ownership'' of the JSA/index once a MODU is no longer under contract
for the operator under whose contract they were developed.
Response: The retention in the final rule for the JSAs is now 30
days on-site and up to 2 years at a location of the operator's
discretion. The JSA/index has been removed.
Comment: A commenter believes that BOEMRE should have a separate
section in the rulemaking that pertains only to hazards analysis for
MODUs.
Response: BOEMRE disagrees; the final rulemaking does not need a
separate section for hazards analysis for MODUs. We incorporated by
reference API RP 75, Section 3, for hazards analysis requirements, with
requirements necessary to implement API RP 75 in Sec. 250.1901 and
Sec. 250.1911.
Comment: How do we overcome human error?
Response: The intent of this rule is to reduce human error by
focusing on a comprehensive SEMS program and JSAs. One result of an
effectively
[[Page 63618]]
implemented SEMS will be to reduce human error.
Comment: If BOEMRE intends to require that each SEMS conform to API
RP 75, then the highly prescriptive language should be removed and the
final rule should simply reference the appropriate sections in API RP
75. Any exception or additions could be listed, similar to the approach
taken in Sec. 250.804.
Response: BOEMRE is incorporating by reference API RP 75 and
requirements for recordkeeping and documentation necessary to implement
API RP 75, JSAs for activities identified in the SEMS programs,
contractor selection criteria and the option of utilizing either an
independent third party or your designated and qualified personnel to
conduct audits on your behalf.
Comment: The rulemaking is confusing with respect to the 4 types of
contractor requirements, e.g., MODUs; contractors brought onto
platforms for painting/cleaning, etc.; contract operating companies;
individuals working side by side with employees under head company
rules. The word ``employee'' needs to be clarified--just the operator's
actual employees or whom?
Response: We are replacing ``employees'' with ``personnel'' and
defining ``personnel'' in Sec. 250.1903 in the final rule. The term
``Personnel'' means direct employee(s) of the operator and contracted
workers who are involved with or affected by specific jobs or tasks.
All personnel involved with or affected by a SEMS specific task must be
trained by skilled and knowledgeable personnel to perform their
assigned duties.
Comment: A comment expressed the concern that we are accepting
duplicated work that is already required by DOT, OSHA, and USCG--
killing trees with all the paperwork submissions.
Response: A number of federal agencies, including DOT, USCG, and
BOEMRE have various responsibilities and authorities under a variety of
statutes related to OCS matters. BOEMRE is not asking for duplication
of paperwork that is already submitted to another government agency.
Most of the information may be submitted electronically.
Section-by-Section Discussion
The industry trade organizations (Offshore Operators Committee,
American Petroleum Institute, International Association of Drilling
Contractors) and OCS operators submitted extensive lists of specific
comments for most sections of the proposed rule. We responded to those
comments in the ``General Comments'' section. The following table
addresses more specific comments not already addressed.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment received on BOEMRE response to
Proposed rule citation proposed rule comment
------------------------------------------------------------------------
250.1903(b)................... Note that, at Sec. As recognized in
250.1903(b), API RP 75, Section
BOEMRE holds up 1.3.1.1, some
ISO 14001 as an systems may have
example of other been developed
standards or using other
guidelines that guidelines. If an
meet or exceed API operator has
RP 75, seemingly already developed
encouraging such a system using
an approach as other guidelines,
ours. However, a when the system is
certified, active assessed, the
ISO 14001 program focus should be on
will not comply assuring that the
with the proposed necessary program
regulation. elements from API
RP 75 and the
requirements
necessary to
implement API RP
75 in this final
rule are
addressed.
250.1905...................... Do DOI pipelines It is up to the
require separate operator to decide
hazards analyses, to combine or do a
or is it separate hazard
acceptable to analysis for the
combine with the DOI pipelines and
facility with associated
which it is facility. However,
associated? the analysis must
comply with the
API RP 75 and the
requirements
necessary to
implement API RP
75 in this final
rule.
250.1905...................... The regulated The terms JSA and
community has JHA are different;
varying degrees of therefore, in this
understanding of final rulemaking
the terms JHA and we will require
JSA. The JSAs are only JSAs. We have
typically viewed defined JSA in the
as a tool to general comments
perform the OSHA section of the
required JHA. Does preamble.
BOEMRE consider
these terms the
same? If not,
please explain the
difference from
your
understanding. The
regulated
community commonly
understands JHA to
be a broad
analysis of the
hazards for an
overall operating
procedure. A JSA
is a review of a
specific task at
hand where the
steps and hazards
associated with a
specific task are
reviewed. To
effect behavior
change, we believe
that a JSA is the
more effective
methodology than a
JHA. However, it
is not clear in
the rulemaking
which methodology
BOEMRE is
mandating. We note
that BOEMRE Safety
Alerts 276 and 282
have good
descriptions of
the difference
between JHA and
JSA.
Recommendation:
Please state the
correlation to the
appropriate
section within API
RP 75 such as
``You must develop
and implement a
hazards analysis
(facility level)
as described in
Section 3 of API
RP 75.'' For
clarity, we
recommend that job
hazards analysis
be changed to job
safety analysis in
all places in the
regulation.
250.1905...................... MODU, coiled BOEMRE agrees with
tubing, and this comment
liftboat pertaining to the
operations are current Subpart O
contracted. regulation, in
Subpart O already part. The operator
requires operators is the responsible
to verify well- party for all well
control control activities
certification of and operations,
contractor whether or not
employees. Few using contract
operators possess personnel. If
specialized contractors are
knowledge that used, the operator
would trump the is responsible for
certification of verifying that its
contractor contractors have
employees. the skills and
knowledge to
perform these
operations in a
safe manner.
[[Page 63619]]
250.1905...................... If a company BOEMRE disagrees.
contracts a MODU, The operator must
the contractor have a SEMS
would have to program. BOEMRE's
provide and intent is to have
support its own a hazards analysis
hazards analyses as detailed in API
(and SEMS program) RP 75, Section 3
vs. the operator and the
for which it is requirements in
working. The MODUs Sec. 205.1911 of
should not be this final rule,
included in the of any MODU under
list of facilities BOEMRE's
covered by this jurisdiction. The
rule. The MODU MODUs are
operator should considered
have a mechanical facilities when
integrity and JSA they are used for
program to cover exploration,
operations on the development,
rig. production, and
transportation
activities for oil
and gas and
sulphur from areas
leased in the OCS.
250.1905...................... We do not We are
understand the incorporating by
reference to reference API RP
internal audit and 75, Section 3,
know of no which includes
facility specific periodic analysis,
audits that are to update the
required. We noted hazards analysis
that proposed Sec. for compliance.
250.1910 refers You must update
to a SEMS audit, your hazards
but that is on the analysis as
overall program. appropriate with
Periodic analyses typical review
should be periods. The final
conducted as rule requires the
described in first audit within
Section 3.4 of API 2 years of
RP 75. Does this implementation of
mean hazards the SEMS program
analyses must be and every 3 years
updated (or thereafter,
revalidated) every however, BOEMRE
3 years in may require
conjunction with additional
the SEMS Audit? independent third
API RP 75 allows party audits or
hazards analysis BOEMRE may conduct
updates to be made our own audits
at 5-10 year based on poor
intervals based on operator
risk. performance or
accidents.
Recommendation:
Change the last
sentence to: The
hazards analyses
(facility level)
must be reviewed
periodically and
updated as
appropriate when
changes are
warranted to
verify that it is
consistent with
the current
operations on the
facility,
consistent with
the requirements
in Section 3.4 of
API RP 75.
250.1905...................... We see no purpose The operator is
in maintaining the responsible for
hazards analysis deciding where to
on the facility. keep the hazards
In many cases, the analysis for the
facility may be an life of the
unmanned facility facility. BOEMRE
with no storage is removing the
capability. Does requirement to
BOEMRE really maintain a hazards
expect a MODU to analysis on a
store a hazards facility. The JHAs
analysis onboard were removed from
the MODU from each the final rule and
and every operator replaced with
who has performed JSAs. The JSAs
such an analysis? must be retained
As in API RP 75, for 30 days on the
the hazard report facility for
(facility level) BOEMRE inspection
should be kept on and must be made
file for the life available to
of the facility. BOEMRE upon
It is most request for 2
appropriate that years. You must
this file be kept maintain a copy of
in the operator's all SEMS program
office where documents at an
design and other onshore location
facility related for 6 years.
information is
kept since this
data will need to
be referred to in
conjunction with
the hazards
analysis. For job
hazards analysis
(commonly referred
to as Job Safety
Analysis-JSA),
this should be
kept where it is
readily accessible
to the personnel
actually reviewing
the analysis prior
to performing the
job it covers.
Recommendation: The BOEMRE disagrees
requirement for with the
documentation recommendation.
should be changed Please see
to the following: previous response.
You must document
and maintain
current analyses
for each operation
covered by this
section for the
life of the
operation. Hazards
analysis (facility
level) should be
retained in the
operator's records
where the facility
design information
is located. The
JHA (operations/
task level) should
be kept in a
location where it
is readily
accessible to
personnel for
review prior to
conducting the
operation or task
the analysis
covers.
250.1905...................... We suggest deleting This specific
``property reference to
damage'' from the ``property
potential damage'' is not in
consequences the final rule.
included in the BOEMRE is
purpose of the incorporating by
facility level reference API RP
hazards analysis 75, which speaks
in Sec. to this issue.
250.1905. The
philosophy adopted
with respect to
property damage,
also referred to
as ``asset
protection''
should be at the
operator's
discretion,
provided that the
property damage
does not
subsequently lead
to worker
injuries,
fatalities, or
coastal or marine
environmental
impacts.
250.1905...................... We recommend the The final rule
language in Sec. requires the
250.1905 be operator to ensure
modified to state the development
``You must ensure and implementation
a hazards analysis of a hazards
(facility level) analysis in
and a JHA accordance with
(operations/task API RP 75 and to
level) is perform a JSA at
developed and the task level in
implemented for accordance with
all your Sec. 250.1911.
facilities'' These must be
rather than ``You included in the
must develop.'' SEMS program. In
The reason for order to comply
this with this rule, an
recommendation is operator and its
that since MODUs contractors need
are included as to agree on
facilities in this appropriate
subpart, it will contractor safety
then be clear that and environmental
operators are only policies and
responsible to practices before a
ensure the third- contractor begins
party contractors work at the
have performed a operator's
hazards analysis facilities.
prior to
conducting
operations on the
operator's lease.
[[Page 63620]]
250.1905...................... Production The operator must
contractor can develop and
have a Lockout/ implement a
Tagout (LOTO) hazards analysis
Standard that for all of their
outlines the operations in
general guidelines accordance with
on how to perform the Section 3,
proper LOTO; but Hazards Analysis
to generate a and Sec.
Hazard Assessment 250.1911. In order
of a facility, the to comply with
contractor would this rule, an
need to have operator and its
access to the contractors need
drawings and/or to agree on
facility to appropriate
address site contractor safety
specific equipment and environmental
and issues. In policies and
some cases, practices before a
contractors merely contractor begins
provide a work at the
resource. This operator's
resource is facilities.
supervised by the
client onsite.
250.1905...................... We urge BOEMRE to BOEMRE disagrees.
revise Sec. When a drilling
250.1905 to make vessel is under
clear that BOEMRE's
drilling vessels jurisdiction, it
or utility vessels is the operator's
are not required responsibility to
to be managed have a SEMS
under our SEMS. program. In order
to comply with
this rule, an
operator and its
contractors need
to agree on
appropriate
contractor safety
and environmental
policies and
practices before a
contractor begins
work at the
operator's
facilities.
250.1905(a)................... Language in Sec. Proposed Sec.
250.1905(a) should 250.1905 is
be revised to reflected in the
state: ``You must final rule at Sec.
ensure an initial 250.1911. The
hazards analysis requirement to
(facility level) perform a hazards
is or has been analysis for each
performed on each facility within 1
facility on or year of the
before (THE DATE 1 effective date of
YEAR AFTER THE the final rule was
EFFECTIVE DATE OF retained. A
THE FINAL RULE)''. previous hazards
analysis may be
used as long as it
meets the
requirements of
API RP 75 and Sec.
250.1911 in the
final rule.
250.1905(a)................... If an operator has BOEMRE disagrees.
not previously The final rule
conducted a requires the
hazards analysis operator to have
on all of his its SEMS program
platforms, it may in place within 1
be impossible to year of the
complete a hazards effective date of
analysis of all of the rule. The
his platforms hazards analysis
within 1 year of requirement must
the effective date be in accordance
of the final rule. with the
A provision should provisions of API
be included for RP 75, Section 3
providing a and the
prioritized list requirements in
of facilities to this final rule
the Regional under Sec.
Supervisor along 250.1911, and
with the date that included in the
each hazards SEMS program.
analysis will be
completed. This
could be either in
the rulemaking or
a companion NTL.
250.1905(a)................... According to Sec. There is nothing in
250.1905(a), we the rule that
must do a separate prevents an
Hazards Analysis operator from
for every platform using the same
that we operate. hazards analysis
Under our IMS, we for similar
get to the same platforms.
place by doing a However, if one or
comprehensive more facilities
hazards analysis are similar but
(actually a more have distinct
rigorous ``risk differences that
assessment'') of require discrete
all of our policies and
operations, with procedures for
evaluation and safe operations
ranking of risks meeting the SEMS
and planned elements, then you
mitigations. must develop a
separate SEMS for
each of those
facilities.
250.1905(a)................... Element 1, BOEMRE agrees. The
``Hazards Analysis API RP 14C is a
at the facility good guideline for
level'' is already conducting a
being achieved by hazards analysis
following API RP for a production
14C as a guideline facility and it is
for Analysis, referenced in API
Design, RP 75. However,
Installation, and the hazards
Testing of Surface analyses must
Safety Systems. follow API RP 75,
The JSA/JHA along Section 3, with
with the ``Stop clarification in
Work Authority'' Sec. 250.1911.
is already being
utilized Gulf-
wide. Furthermore,
egress is
identified in the
platform
submission
process; chemicals
and flammables
kept on the
facility are
identified as part
of the MSDS
requirements; and
mitigation of
possible safety
and health effects
on employees are
also already being
performed.
250.1905(a)(1)(ii)............ We do not BOEMRE is
understand the incorporating by
requirement that reference API RP
special attention 75. The operator
should be given to must follow the
any incident in guidelines under
which you were API RP 75, Section
issued an INC, 3, as clarified in
civil or criminal Sec. 250.1911.
penalty; nor do we If BOEMRE
understand what evaluates a SEMS
``special program, the
attention'' should operator must
cover; nor do we submit to BOEMRE a
understand what revised SEMS
length of time we program that
should consider. addresses any
Further, we have identified
no idea how the deficiencies.
enforcement action
of a regulatory
agency relates to
hazards analysis.
We agree that
previous incidents
related to the
operation, to the
extent known by
the operator,
should be
evaluated
regardless of
whether or not
they resulted in
an enforcement
action. It should
be noted that in
many cases, a
facility may have
had multiple
previous operators
and a complete
history of
previous incidents
may not have been
provided to the
current operator.
Recommendation: This provision was
Strike the amended, striking
sentence ``Special ``special
* * * penalty''. attention'' while
requiring the
hazard analysis to
address previous
incidents.
[[Page 63621]]
250.1905(a)(1)(iv)............ It is not clear The requirements
what BOEMRE's for a hazards
expectations are analysis are in
for a hazard API RP 75, Section
review to cover 3 with
coastal and marine clarification in
environmental Sec. 250.1911.
impact. These
potential impacts
are already
covered in the
environmental
analysis conducted
by BOEMRE for
lease sales and
exploration and
development plans.
The operator
addresses these
impacts in their
EP, DOCD, and
OSRPs. This
requirement is
duplicative of
analysis already
conducted in
accordance with
the BOEMRE
regulations in 30
CFR Part 250,
subpart B, and 30
CFR Part 254.
Recommendation: The rule was
Strike coastal and changed to say
marine ``human and marine
environmental environment.''
impacts from the
accident scenarios
list.
250.1905(a)(2)................ Based on The hazards
experience, a analysis team must
hazards analysis meet the
team is composed requirements
of (at least) included in API RP
individual(s) with 75, Section 3 and
experience in the requirements
operations being necessary to
evaluated, and implement API RP
individual(s) who 75 in the final
are experienced in rule under Sec.
the hazards 250.1911.
analysis
methodology. The
rule states that
these individuals
need to have
experience with
both. That may be
an impractical
requirement.
Recommendation: BOEMRE agrees and
Change the second has made the
sentence to: ``at change to the
least one person final rule.
needs to be
experienced''.
250.1905(b)................... There should be BOEMRE agrees that
some an operator can
prioritization in prioritize its JSA
jobs/tasks to be to maximize safety
evaluated. as long as it
Everything an meets the
operator does is provisions of the
primarily a job/ final rule. BOEMRE
task. Routine jobs/ removed JHA from
tasks may be the final rule. In
covered under the final
operating rulemaking, JSAs
procedures and the are done for the
hazards analysis immediate tasks at
may be included in hand (not used for
those procedures; administrative or
therefore, a JSA domestic
may not be services). If the
necessary. Jobs/ particular
tasks that are not activity is
routinely done and conducted on a
not covered by recurring basis,
operating and the parameters
procedures should do not change, the
have a JSA. Jobs/ person in charge
tasks should be of the activity
selected for may decide that a
analysis in JSA for each
priority order. We individual
suggest the activity is not
following required.
prioritization:
1. Jobs with highest rate of
accidents or greatest
potential for injuries
2. New jobs or non-routine
jobs
3. Changes in process and
procedures
Recommendation: The requirement for
Remove section an index was
(b)(2). removed.
250.1905(b)................... The rulemaking also We removed the
seems to envision requirement to
that a ``book'' of maintain a book/
JHAs/JSAs is index, but we
maintained at the require operators
job site. While to keep a copy of
this may be true the JSA for 30
for jobs/tasks days onsite and
that are routinely for 2 years at a
performed, in many location of the
cases a JSA is operator
completed for a discretion and
non-routine task make them
(e.g., an unusual available to
lifting BOEMRE upon
operation). The request.
best JSAs are The requirements
prepared by the for JSAs are in
workers on the final rule,
location and are Sec. 250.1911.
handwritten. They Recordkeeping and
should be kept in Documentation
a manner that the requirements are
workers can easily in Sec.
access them. The 250.1928.
real value in the
JSA is the
``process'' of the
workers involved
in the specific
task actually
discussing the
hazards, agreeing
on the individual
roles and
responsibilities
and completing the
JSA document.
While it is
important that
JSAs for both
routine and non-
routine tasks be
available for
review by the
workers until the
job is completed,
they may not be in
a nice, neat,
properly indexed
book. We have no
idea how the
prescriptive
documentation
details in (b)(2)
relate to keeping
workers safe. They
should be allowed
to use whatever
documentation
technique works
for them.
[[Page 63622]]
250.1905(b)................... The only element in The final rule
the proposed distinguishes
regulation that between a broad
attempts to facility-based
address worker hazards analysis
behavior is the conducted in
task-specific accordance with
``hazards API RP 75, Section
analysis.'' 3 and a task level
However, there is JSA, Sec.
a lot of confusion 250.1911, as
throughout the required in the
regulated final rule.
community about
the terms ``JHA''
and ``JSA.'' We
typically use the
term ``JHA'' to
mean a broad
analysis of the
hazards associated
with a job or
process. Such
analysis is
typically done by
a diverse team and
may be done in an
office setting or
at the job site.
Many times, this
analysis is
included with a
facility-level
hazards analysis
or operating
procedures and in
many cases covers
routine tasks. We
typically use the
term ``JSA'' to be
the analysis done
by onsite workers
immediately prior
to performing a
task, many times a
non-routine task.
Some workers start
with a ``go-by''
and mark it up for
the specific task
at hand and others
start with a blank
piece of paper or
form. We believe
that the
application of JSA
has the best
opportunity to
impact worker
behavior since it
is the workers
themselves that
are identifying
the hazards and
developing plans,
procedures,
safeguards, etc.,
to avoid an
incident.
250.1905(b)................... Specific examples The operator is
of practices required to follow
within our IMS API RP 75 as
would be incorporated by
unacceptable under reference and
the proposed SEMS perform JSA's for
regulations: We those activities
presently conduct identified in it's
JSAs for work with SEMS program, as
at least some addressed in Sec.
level of risk, but 250.1911. There
not for every work are routine tasks
project and performed in the
activity. offshore
environment that
may meet the
requirements of
SEMS under the
Safe Work
Practices and
Operating
Procedures
elements. However,
for such
activities that
deviate from their
norm due to a
change in
environment,
personnel, or
equipment-related
factors, or other
activities that
are non-routine
procedures, a JSA
must be conducted
that identifies
and accounts for
routine variations
or the uniqueness
of the activity.
250.1905(b)................... A commenter is BOEMRE replaced the
concerned by the term JHA with JSA
proposed in the final rule.
requirement for a In the final
task-level JHA. rulemaking, JSAs
While we are done for the
understand that immediate tasks at
this may be more hand (not used for
correctly administrative or
described as a domestic
JSA, we believe services).
that there needs
to be a better
understanding of
both what
constitutes a JSA,
and for what tasks
a JSA should be
developed. Does
BOEMRE expect a
JSA for operation
of a copy machine?
250.1905(b)................... Section 250.1905(b) There is nothing in
states that a JHA the rule that
must be performed prevents an
for ``each'' work operator from
project and using the same JSA
activity. BOEMRE for a particular
must clarify this activity that is
paragraph. There conducted on a
are many projects recurring basis as
and activities long as the
that are parameters of the
considered activity do not
``routine.'' Our change.
company
wholeheartedly
agrees that a
thorough analysis
should always be
performed on all
``non-routine''
projects and
activities. Our
only concern is
that a requirement
for a JHA on all
projects and
activities would
be overwhelming.
The way the rule
is written an
operator would be
required to
perform a JHA for
a simple activity
such as obtaining
tubing pressures
or adjusting a
level in a vessel.
250.1905(b)(2)................ We further believe The operator may
that the record use programs
retention already in
requirements for existence to
the JSA and comply with
related index are provisions of this
unduly burdensome final rule, as
and contrary to long as your SEMS
BOEMRE's stated program addresses
intent that the all the elements
programs not in API RP 75 and
become a paperwork the requirements
exercise. The in the final rule.
proposal also
creates concern
regarding
``ownership'' of
the JSAs/index
once a MODU is no
longer under
contract for the
operator under
whose contract
they were
developed
Recommended: Strike
this section..
250.1906(a)................... We assume that the The operator may
13 requirements use programs
for procedures can already in
be covered existence to
collectively by comply with
other management provisions of this
systems, final rule. BOEMRE
especially with is incorporating
regards to by reference API
chemicals and RP 75, Section 5
materials. The with requirements
scope of these necessary to
requirements (7, 9- implement API RP
13) goes beyond 75 in Sec.
API RP 75, as well 250.1913 to
as OSHA PSM and address operating
EPA RMP. procedures.
[[Page 63623]]
250.1906(a)................... Coupled with the BOEMRE requires
requirement in operating
Sec. 250.1905 to procedures for a
develop a SEMS for MODU under
MODUs, Sec. BOEMRE's
250.1906(a)(1) and jurisdiction. The
(a)(5) would now operator's
require the operating
operator to procedures need to
develop procedures include provisions
for some drilling for evaluating
facilities that we operating
neither own nor procedures in
operate. This their contractor
would plans. Under Sec.
significantly add 250.1914 of the
to the final rule
documentation operators must
burden on the ensure that
operators. We do contractors have
not believe this their own written
would benefit the safe work
operator, the practices.
owner of the Contractors may
facility, or the adopt appropriate
personnel on the sections of the
rig. Operators operator's SEMS
hire contractors program. Operator
that have safety and contractor
programs in place must document
and are in their agreement on
compliance with appropriate
applicable laws, contractor safety
but do not dictate and environmental
to them how to policies and
achieve that. The practices before
MODUs already have the contractor
operations manuals begins work at the
developed in operator's
conformance with facilities.
flag State
requirements and/
or IMO MODU Code
and fall under the
jurisdiction of
the USCG. The
proposed rule
duplicates these
requirements. Most
operators do not
have the resources
or the expertise
to develop
operational
procedures for
drilling
operations and
depend on the
contracted company
who are the
experts to develop
their own
procedures and
safety systems.
Recommendation:
Change to
``implement
written production
facility operating
procedures''.
250.1906(a)................... It is easier to The operator is
have site specific responsible for
procedures that developing and
the operator can implementing all
provide training operating
to the contractor procedures.
(preferably before Procedures should
the contractor be site-specific
employees begin for the task at
work), and verify hand e.g.,
competency so that drilling,
once the cementing, coiled
contractor's tubing. How
employees reach operators decide
the facility, to implement such
there exists a operating
clear procedures is up
understanding of to them, as long
what is to be as they are in
done, and how to compliance with
do it. API RP 75, Section
5, and the
requirements in
Sec. 250.1913 of
the final rule.
250.1906(a)................... Our company agrees BOEMRE understands
that operating that standardizing
procedures are a procedures with
valuable tool in respect to safe
regards to operations makes
paragraphs (1) good sense where
through (13). Our appropriate. An
only concern is operator may do so
that a written regarding like
procedure for facilities but it
paragraphs (1) is the operator's
through (13) must responsibility to
be site specific. identify any
For example, a differences
written procedure existing among
for paragraph (1) similar facilities
(initial startup) and identify those
could only be differences within
followed for the their SEMS
facility that it program. BOEMRE
was written for. may require the
operator to submit
a complete SEMS
for a particular
facility should it
deem the impact of
the differences
outweighs the
similarities of
the facilities.
250.1906(a)(1)................ Initial startup, BOEMRE disagrees
startup following and retained this
a turnaround, or paragraph in the
startup after an final rule. We
emergency shutdown incorporated by
are redundant and reference API RP
encompass the same 75, Section 5 to
elements. We address these
suggest they be terms.
combined.
250.1906(a)(3)................ What does BOEMRE This paragraph was
envision as deleted from the
``temporary final rule.
operations?'' Section 5 of API
Please define or RP 75 does not
explain. define ``temporary
operations.''
250.1906(a)(4)................ Does the BOEMRE BOEMRE agrees that
mean Emergency it should be
Shutdown addressed as
Operations in (4)? ``emergency
If not, then shutdown
please define operations''.
``emergency
operations''.
250.1906(a)(7)................ Bypassing and BOEMRE disagrees
flagging should be that ``bypassing
included in the and flagging out
individual of service''
operating should be a
procedure; it is separate operating
not a separate procedure in and
operating of itself.
procedure in and
of itself.
250.1906(a)(7)................ We recommend the BOEMRE agrees that
wording in Sec. it should be
250.1906(a)(7) be addressed as
changed from ``bypassing and
``bypassing and flagging out of
flagging'' to service.''
``bypassing and
flagging out of
service''.
250.1906(a)(8)................ ``Safety and BOEMRE disagrees
environmental with this comment
consequences of and the operator
deviating from must comply with
your equipment the provisions of
operating limits operating
and steps required procedures listed
to correct or in Sec.
avoid this 250.1913(a)(8) and
deviation;'' is API RP 75, Section
already covered by 5.
API RP 14C and is
included in the
individual
operating
procedures and is
not a separate
operating
procedure in and
of itself.
Recommendation: BOEMRE disagrees
Strike (a)(8). with this comment
and the operator
must comply with
the provisions of
operating
procedures listed
in Sec.
250.1913(a)(8) and
API RP 75, Section
5.
250.1906(a)(8-12)............. The intent of API BOEMRE is
RP 75 is to take incorporating by
environmental reference API RP
factors into 75. However,
consideration operators still
during startup, must comply with
normal operations, other Federal laws
temporary and regulations.
operations * * *
not developing
procedures
specific to these
issues. Specific
environmental
issues are covered
under and or
overlap with
Hazardous Material
Regulations,
CERCLA, RCRA, H2S
regulations, and
NPDES. These
sections should be
removed.
[[Page 63624]]
250.1906(a)(13)............... ``Coastal and The overriding goal
marine of SEMS is to
environmental protect the human
impacts identified and marine
through your environment.
hazards analysis''
is taken into
account in the
operating
procedures
themselves, they
are not a separate
operating
procedure.
Environmental
impact
identification is
also covered in
NPDES, air permit,
and oil spill
regulations and
response plans.
This section
should be removed.
250.1906(b)................... Reword Sec. BOEMRE disagrees
250.1906(b) to and is keeping
read, ``Employees this and is
will have access incorporating by
to the appropriate reference API RP
procedures for 75, Section 5.
their specific job/
role in the
operations.'' This
is subtle, but
procedures for
specific roles
should be
available to those
specific
employees, rather
than all employees
having access to
all procedures.
250.1906(b)................... We assume that See API RP 75,
procedures Section 13 and
maintained Sec. 250.1928.
electronically are
considered
accessible.
250.1906(b)................... Please state what The API RP 75 does
you mean as not address this
``accessible.'' issue and the
The facility where operator should
the work is define, in their
conducted may be SEMS, where
manned or operating
unmanned. We procedures are to
suggest that the be kept. However,
operating you must be able
procedures be kept to provide your
at the nearest SEMS to BOEMRE
manned facility. upon request in a
timely fashion.
250.1906(d)................... What specifically The intent of the
is meant by, SEMS rule is to
``develop and ensure safe work
implement safe and practices for all
environmentally operations on an
sound work OCS facility.
practices for
identified hazards
during
operations?'' Is
this meant to be
Safe Work
Practices (e.g.,
Hot Work, Confined
Space, SIMOPS,
etc.), or some
other processes?
This seems to be
the intent of this
whole element, if
not all of the
SEMS rule.
250.1907...................... Is the intent of The final rule
the mechanical incorporates by
integrity element reference API RP
to cover critical 75, Section 8 that
equipment as addresses critical
referred to in API equipment and
RP 75? The way it includes
is worded this requirements
element may cover necessary to
more: ``Your implement API RP
mechanical 75 in Sec.
integrity program 250.1916. It is
must encompass all the operator's
equipment and responsibility to
systems used to meet the intent of
prevent or SEMS as well as
mitigate its requirements.
uncontrolled The overriding
releases of goal of SEMS is to
hydrocarbons, protect the human
toxic substances, and marine
or other materials environment. The
that may cause inventory of
environmental or harmful substances
safety on offshore
consequences.'' facilities is well
What are the types known but will
or severity of also evolve over
such consequences? time so it is
incumbent upon the
operator to keep
all harmful
substances
controlled and
contained.
250.1907...................... Does BOEMRE expect BOEMRE requires
each operator to operating
implement a procedures for a
mechanical MODU under
integrity program BOEMRE's
for each MODU that jurisdiction. The
we contract to operator's
work on our lease operating
that we neither procedures need to
own nor operate? include provisions
The MODU operator for evaluating
should have a operating
mechanical procedures in
integrity program their contractor
for his equipment. plans. Under Sec.
The operator 250.1914 of the
should verify that final rule
the MODU operator operators must
has such a program. ensure that
Recommendation: You contractors have
must develop and their own written
implement written safe work
procedures that practices.
provide Contractors may
instructions to adopt appropriate
ensure the sections of the
mechanical operator's SEMS
integrity and safe program. Operator
operation of and contractor
equipment through must document
inspection, their agreement on
testing, and appropriate
quality assurance contractor safety
for equipment on and environmental
your facility used policies and
to prevent or practices before
mitigate the contractor
uncontrolled begins work at the
releases of operator's
hydrocarbons, facilities.
toxic substances,
or other materials
that may cause
environmental or
safety
consequences. For
MODUs operating on
your lease, you
must verify that
the MODU operator
has a mechanical
integrity program
that meets the
requirement in
this subpart.
These procedures
must address the
following:.
250.1907...................... Include the BOEMRE disagrees
requirements in and in the final
Sec. 250.1907(i) rule will keep
in Sec. both sets of
250.1907(a). requirements
separate.
250.1907...................... A contractor can BOEMRE agrees. The
have a mechanical operator must have
integrity program a mechanical
for contractor integrity program
owned equipment in accordance with
(tools, vehicles, the requirements
etc.), but to of API RP 75,
address the Section 8 and Sec.
operator's 250.1916.
equipment, again,
it is more
practical for the
operator to
develop this
program, then
train the
contractor in
implementation.
250.1907...................... This entire element BOEMRE disagrees.
is already being Subpart O
addressed. addresses training
Paragraph (a) is related to well
already addressed control and
by API RP 14C. production safety.
Paragraph (b) We incorporated by
(training) is reference API RP
already being 75, Section 8 and
addressed as part Sec. 250.1916 to
of the subpart O address mechanical
requirement. integrity.
Paragraphs (c)
through (i) is
being addressed
through the
requirements of
API RP 14C along
with the monthly,
quarterly, semi-
annual, and annual
testing of the
surface and sub-
surface safety
system.
[[Page 63625]]
250.1907(a)................... We suggest We disagree; we
replacing believe that the
``manufacturers manufacturer's
design and design and
material material
specifications'' specifications are
with ``applicable the most
design and appropriate
material guidance to use.
specifications.''
The design,
procurement,
fabrication, etc.,
of equipment are
not necessarily
just based on
manufacturers'
specifications but
could be based on
API, company, or
other applicable
design and
material
specifications.
250.1907(b)................... Please note that BOEMRE is
there are incorporating by
typically no reference API RP
manufacturers 75, Section 8 and
recommended Sec. 250.1916 to
inspection address mechanical
intervals for integrity. The
fixed equipment operator's
(pressure vessels, maintenance
piping, pipelines). program must be
Maintenance structured to
intervals should enhance safety and
be allowed to be protect the
extended based on environment and
component history, must sustain
operating ongoing mechanical
experience, and integrity. Testing
risk-based and inspection
decision making. procedures must
follow commonly
accepted standards
and codes, such as
API 510 and the
manufacture's
recommendations.
250.1907(b)................... Equipment may be The operator must
maintained by have mechanical
employees, integrity in
contractors, or a accordance with
mix. Some API RP 75, Section
specialized 8 and Sec.
equipment is 250.1916, in their
actually SEMS program. Your
maintained by the contractors must
manufacturer's conduct operations
representatives in accordance with
who periodically your SEMS program.
travel to offshore
facilities to
perform required
maintenance.
Therefore, our
employees do not
need to be trained
to do the actual
maintenance work
for all equipment
in the mechanical
integrity program.
Recommended:
Replace (b) with
the following: The
training of
maintenance
workers in the
application of the
procedures,
relevant hazards,
and safe work
practices.
250.1907(c)................... We recommend We disagree, we
deleting the believe that the
language ``meet manufacture's
the manufacturer's recommendations
recommendations'' are appropriate to
in Sec. use.
250.1907(c). Many
of our inspection
and testing
requirements,
while meeting
regulations, are
risk-based in
approach.
250.1907(c)................... Specific examples The operator is
of practices required to meet
within our IMS or exceed the
would be inspection
unacceptable under frequencies in 30
the proposed SEMS CFR part 250.
regulations: We
presently feel
free to inspect or
test some
equipment more
frequently than
necessary to gain
some extra level
of comfort, but we
do not expect to
be locked into a
greater frequency.
250.1907(d)................... Is electronic To address
documentation of recordkeeping and
the person documentation, we
performing the incorporated by
inspection or test reference API RP
acceptable? 75, Section 13,
Electronic work and additional
order systems are reporting and
often used to documentation
schedule and requirements in
document Sec. 250.1928.
inspections and Electronic records
tests. are acceptable to
BOEMRE for most
records.
250.1907(d)................... We recommend BOEMRE kept this
adding, paragraph in the
``Electronic final rule. The
documentation of final rule will
the same also address
information will mechanical
suffice to meet integrity
this requirement'' documentation as
to Sec. described in API
250.1907(d). The RP 75, Section 8.
requirement for Electronic records
``signature'' on are acceptable to
inspection or test BOEMRE for most
documentation records, including
should be modified electronic
to encompass signatures.
operators' use of
electronic work
management
systems. Work
orders, assigned
to and completed
by individuals
within the
software should be
acceptable.
250.1907(d)................... The last sentence BOEMRE agrees with
in Sec. this comment and
250.1907(d) should made the text
be modified to change in new Sec.
place an ``or'' 250.1916(d).
between inspection
and test,
therefore changing
the language to
read ``and the
results of the
inspection or
test''.
250.1907(e)................... Correction of Deficiencies are
deficiencies addressed in API
before further use RP 75, Section 8
will prevent use and Sec.
of risk-based 250.1916(e). Under
decision making, the final rule,
and the subsequent the procedures for
shut-in of Mechanical
operations may Integrity must
present additional address the
hazards. Would correction of
this apply in the deficiencies
case of waiting on associated with
parts and while equipment and
mitigation systems that are
measures are put outside the
in place? Does it manufacturer's
cover deficiencies recommended limits
that may not before further
affect operations use.
integrity? Run to
failure should be
a viable option
for some
components.
Suggest this
requirement be
based on risk.
This is not a
requirement in API
RP 75.
[[Page 63626]]
250.1907(e)................... Specific examples Under Sec.
of practices 250.1916(e) of the
within our IMS final rule the
that would be operator must
unacceptable under document the
the proposed SEMS procedures to
regulations: We correct critical
presently decide equipment
whether to take a deficiencies or
piece of equipment operations. The
out of service operator may
based upon our continue to use an
judgment of actual IMS, if it meets
risk (likelihood the requirements
and consequence of of API RP 75 and
failure). the final rule and
the operator
addresses any
deficiencies. We
cannot accept only
``judgment'' as a
means of the
operator
determining risk.
The operator must
account for what
factors were
considered in
taking equipment
out of service.
This does not have
to be an
exhaustive
analysis but it
does need to
reflect that all
relevant SEMS
elements were
considered.
Documenting the
``likelihood and
consequence of
failure'' comports
with the intent of
SEMS.
250.1907(f)-(i)............... How is this BOEMRE disagrees
requirement with this comment
different from and is
(a), nor how it is incorporating by
to be implemented. reference API RP
Recommendation: 75 and
Strike (f).. requirements
How is this necessary to
requirement implement API RP
different from 75 in the final
(a), nor how it is rule. The operator
to be implemented. must follow the
Recommendation: requirements of
Strike (g). Since API RP 75, Section
BOEMRE has 8 and the
outlined requirements in
prescriptive Sec. 250.1916
requirements for for mechanical
the inspection and integrity.
testing and the Paragraph (a) of
documentation of Sec. 250.1916
those inspections provides an
and tests, we do overview of the
not understand requirements,
what the while the
requirement in (h) subsequent
is and how it is paragraphs provide
different from (c) more details.
and (d) above or
how to implement
it..
Recommendation:
Strike (h)..
We suggest this be
included under
(a).
Recommendation:
Strike (i) and
include under (a)..
250.1908...................... There is no mention The operator must
if the MOC is for follow the
either permanent requirements of
and temporary API RP 75, Section
changes or just 4 and Sec.
permanent changes. 250.1912 of the
Please clarify. final rule for
MOC, which
requires
procedures for any
changes related to
equipment,
operating
procedures,
personnel changes,
materials, and
operating
conditions, except
for replacement in
kind. This applies
to permanent and
temporary changes.
250.1908...................... A production The operator is
contractor can responsible for
have a MOC developing and
process, but in implementing a MOC
order for the in accordance with
process to work, API RP 75, Section
the operator 4 and Sec.
(client) must be 250.1912 of the
part of the final rule. The
process. The operator is
scenario of the responsible for
lessee/operator coordinating with
having a MOC the contractor
process that the regarding MOC. The
contractor can be operator must
a part of is a ensure that their
better model. contractor
embraces safety
principles that
support their SEMS
program. The MOC
is a cooperative
activity that
makes all parties
responsible for
its success.
250.1908(a)(2)................ A process for BOEMRE is
changing operating incorporating by
procedures has reference API RP
already been 75, Section 4 for
established in MOCs and Section 5
Sec. for Operating
250.1906(c). The Procedures and
MOC process should requirements under
simply identify Sec. Sec.
that operating 250.1912 and
procedures either 250.1913 of the
need to be changed final rule. Under
(or don't) as a Sec. Sec.
result of changes 250.1912 and
to the facility. 250.1913, the
The actual change operator must
to the operating address MOC for
procedures should operating
not have to go procedures.
through the MOC
process.
250.1908(a)(3)................ Section 250.1908 BOEMRE disagrees
proposes issuing with this comment
MOCs for personnel and it is the
changes, but does operator's
not define which responsibility to
personnel that address personal
encompasses. It changes. BOEMRE is
would be quite incorporating by
onerous if a MOC reference API RP
was required for 75, Section 4 and
every single requirements under
individual that Sec. 250.1912,
was changed out on to address MOCs
a facility. To for changes in
provide clarity as personnel. API RP
to those personnel 75, Section 4
changes that would includes the
require a MOC, we suggested
propose adding the language. The
following language definition of
to Sec. contractors in
250.1908(3): Sec. 250.1914(a)
``Personnel with does not include
specific knowledge those providing
or experience who domestic services.
supervise or
operate, or
support operations
of a facility
which would lead
to a loss of
knowledge or
experience''.
250.1908(a)(4)................ What does BOEMRE BOEMRE is
envision as a incorporating by
change in material reference API RP
that requires a 75, Section 4 and
MOC that is not requirements under
already covered Sec. 250.1912 to
under equipment? address MOCs. The
operator must
adopt these
requirements in
the SEMS.
Materials that are
not covered under
equipment could
include process
chemicals and
maintenance
materials; these
are mentioned in
API RP 75.
250.1908(a)(5)................ We assume that BOEMRE is
changes in incorporating by
operating reference API RP
conditions include 75, Section 4 and
such things as requirements under
changes to the Sec. 250.1912 to
operating envelope address MOCs. API
(pressure, RP 4.2e addresses
temperature, flow changes in
rates, material operating
chemistry, etc.) conditions. The
as described in operator must
the facility adopt these
design basis or a requirements in
change in the the SEMS.
chemistry of the
product that was
not considered in
the equipment
specification. If
our assumption is
not correct,
please clarify.
[[Page 63627]]
250.1908(c)................... What does BOEMRE BOEMRE is
envision by the incorporating by
following reference API RP
requirement: ``You 75, Section 4, and
must review all requirements under
changes prior to Sec. 250.1912 to
their address MOCs.
implementation?'' Section
250.1912(c)
requires the
operator to review
all changes prior
to their
implementation and
API RP 75 section
4.3 addresses this
review related to
changes in
personnel. This
review is required
to ensure the
safety of
personnel.
250.1908(c)................... Specific examples BOEMRE is
of practices incorporating by
within our IMS reference API RP
that would be 75, Section 4 and
unacceptable under requirements under
the proposed SEMS Sec. 250.1912 to
regulations: We address MOCs. The
presently allow operator may
immediate approval continue to use an
of work considered IMS, if it meets
to be for the requirements
emergency of API RP 75 and
situations without the final
prior MOC review regulation.
and approval, Emergency
subsequently situations are
working through addressed in the
MOC as a follow-up. final rule under
Sec. 250.1918
and requires the
operator to have
emergency response
and control plans
in place and ready
for immediate
implementation.
250.1908(f)................... We assume that the If the management
documentation for of change results
this step will be in change in the
under Sec. operating
250.1906(c). procedure, this
change must be
documented as
provide in Sec.
250.1912(f) in the
final rule.
250.1909...................... The final rule must While BOEMRE does
distinguish not directly
between regulate the
``contractor operator/contactor
employees'' and relationship, it
``contracted is the
employees''. responsibility of
both the operator
and contractor to
conduct activities
so that they
comport with the
operator's SEMS.
250.1909...................... 1. How does this 1. Subpart O
part relate to specifically
subpart O? applies to
personnel involved
in well control
and production
safety system
operations, while
subpart S applies
to all aspects of
OCS operations
under BOEMRE
jurisdiction.
2. This section 2. BOEMRE
could conflict disagrees. Subpart
with subpart O and O complements a
become detrimental SEMS program. The
to operators. operator may use
the training
requirements of
subpart O to meet
the SEMS
requirements in
API RP 75 Section
7 as incorporated
by reference and
the requirements
in Sec.
250.1915.
250.1909...................... BOEMRE already has BOEMRE disagrees.
regulations in The SEMS rule
place to address applies to
training and contractors
competency performing
assessments for maintenance or
both operator repair,
employees and turnaround, major
contractors. 30 renovation, or
CFR Part 250, specialty work on
subpart O, Well or adjacent to a
Control and covered process.
Production Safety This section was
Training, clearly renumbered as Sec.
states that 250.1914 in the
operators must final rule. The
ensure that both operator is
employees and responsible for
contract personnel obtaining and
understand and can evaluating
properly perform information
their duties; Sec. regarding the
250.1503(b)(3) contract
requires operators employer's safety
to have procedures performance and
``for verifying programs and
that all employees informs contract
and contractor employers of the
personnel engaged known potential
in well control or fire, explosion,
production safety or toxic release
operations can hazards related to
perform their the contractor's
assigned duties.'' work and the
In fact, BOEMRE process. The
periodically operator may use
assesses the the training
Subpart O program requirements of
by auditing and subpart O to meet
testing as the SEMS
described in Sec. requirements in
250.1507(d), API RP 75, Section
which states 7, as incorporated
``BOEMRE or its by reference and
authorized Sec. 250.1915.
representative may
conduct testing at
either onshore or
offshore
locations. Tests
will be designed
to evaluate the
competency of your
employees or
contract personnel
in performing
their assigned
well control and
production safety
duties. You are
responsible for
the costs
associated with
this testing,
excluding salary
and travel costs
for BOEMRE
personnel''.
We find that the BOEMRE disagrees.
proposed language Subpart O
in Sec. 250.1909 complements a SEMS
is redundant with program. All
existing personnel with the
regulations under operator's SEMS
30 CFR Part 250, program need to be
subpart O, and trained to
therefore, should competently
be eliminated from perform their
the proposed rule. assigned duties.
If you do not The operator may
agree, then please use the training
clarify the requirements of
relationship subpart O to meet
between this the SEMS
proposed rule and requirements in
the requirements API RP 75, Section
in subpart O and 7, as incorporated
identify what by reference and
contractor groups Sec. 250.1915 in
have otherwise not the final rule.
been addressed by
the existing
subpart O
requirements. If
BOEMRE has
concerns regarding
contractor
selection or
competency, then
the appropriate
regulation to
address such
concerns is within
the subpart O
program.
Recommendation:
Strike Sec.
250.1909 in its
entirety..
[[Page 63628]]
250.1909...................... The current BOEMRE Subpart O
regulations under specifically
subpart O at Sec. applies to
250.1500 require personnel involved
operators to in well control
ensure and and production
document that safety system
their company and operations The
contract employees SEMS rule applies
are competent to to contractors
perform their performing
assigned jobs. maintenance or
Therefore, the repair,
section on turnaround, major
contractor renovation, or
selection and specialty work on,
competency in the or adjacent to, a
proposed rule is covered process.
redundant and not This section was
needed. If BOEMRE renumbered as Sec.
felt it necessary, 250.1914 in the
subpart O could be final rule. The
expanded to operator is
include any worker responsible for
groups not already obtaining and
covered in the evaluating
current rule. In information
the event BOEMRE regarding the
proceeds with an contract
entirely new employer's safety
rulemaking, we performance and
recommend a programs and
performance-based informing contract
rule be written employers of the
(like subpart O) known potential
to allow operators fire, explosion,
to utilize their or toxic release
existing safety hazards related to
and environmental the contractor's
management work and the
programs instead process. The
of a detailed, operator may use
prescriptive the training
program as requirements of
proposed in this subpart O to
rulemaking. substantially meet
Companies could the SEMS
then certify to requirements in
BOEMRE that their API RP 75, Section
programs include 7, as incorporated
the required by reference and
elements and use the requirements
their necessary to
documentation and implement API RP
audit systems that 75 in Sec.
are already in 250.1915. The
place and working. contactor must
ensure that all
personnel not
mentioned in
subpart O are also
competent in
conducting their
job and subscribe
to safe work
practices as
identified in the
operator's SEMS
program.
250.1909...................... While the proposed BOEMRE disagrees;
rule states the SEMS must include
required SEMS everyone working
program must on a facility;
include each of criteria for
the 4 elements contractor
described, we selection are an
believe the Sec. important part of
250.1909 ``What that. Contractor
criteria must be criteria are
documented in my addressed in
SEMS program for Section 6.4 and
contractor Appendix A of API
selection?'' is RP 75 as
actually a 5th incorporated by
element that has reference. We
been added without included this in
the justification the final rule
and rationale used with requirements
to validate necessary to
inclusion of the implement API RP
other 4 elements. 75 in Sec.
250.1914.
250.1909...................... If contractors are The operator is
to be responsible for
``accountable'' having a SEMS
for SEMS program in place.
activities, their The operator is
scale, complexity responsible for
and scope of work coordinating with
should also be the contractor
taken into regarding their
account. Example: SEMS program. The
Contractor operator must
services vary from ensure that their
``Labor'' (i.e., contractor
production embraces safety
operators), principles that
``Equipment'' support their SEMS
(i.e., Generators, program.
machinery rentals)
or both ``Labor
and Equipment''
(i.e., drilling
rig, welding
machine, and
welder), etc. A
contractor
supplying
``Labor'' services
should not be
required to have a
SEMS program, but
the competency to
work within the
clients program
(i.e., perform
JSAs, initiate MOC
process, utilize
Operating
Procedures in
performance of
duties, perform
level one visual
Mechanical
Integrity
inspections in
accordance with a
lessee's SEMS
program). A
contractor only
supplying
``Equipment''
should have a
Mechanical
Integrity Plan and
Operating
Procedures that
accompany the
equipment and
limited hazards
analysis
pertaining to his
equipment. A
contractor
supplying ``Labor
and Equipment''
should have a SEMS
program that
covers his
equipment and the
operation thereof.
250.1909...................... There is no Contractors perform
indication in the a majority of the
data used for the work on the OCS
proposed rule that and the selection
``Contractor of skilled,
Selection'' knowledgeable, and
contributed to the trained contractor
incidents analyzed personnel by the
by the BOEMRE. operator is an
important part of
ensuring that the
SEMS program
works.
250.1909...................... The proposed rule The operator is
would require the responsible for
lessee/operator to having a SEMS
develop a SEMS. program in place.
However, Sec. The operator is
250.1909 states responsible for
that the lessee coordinating with
must document that the contractor
their contractors regarding their
have policies and SEMS program. The
practices that are operator must
consistent with ensure that their
the lessee's plan. contractor
Furthermore, it embraces safety
states that a copy principles that
of the support their SEMS
contractor's SEMS program.
program must be Under Sec.
kept by the 250.1914 in the
operator and the final rule the
contractor at each operators must
facility where obtain and
contract evaluate
operations are information
being performed. regarding the
Our company has 50 contractor's
to 60 customers. safety and
To strive for environmental
consistency with performance when
50 to 60 selecting a
individual contractor.
programs is Operators must
unrealistic and ensure that
places an contractors have
unnecessary burden their own written
on all contract safe work
operators. Our practices.
company either Contractors may
manages or adopt appropriate
operates over 600 sections of the
platforms in the operator's SEMS
GOM. The paperwork program. Operator
burden of and contractor
supplying and must document
maintaining a SEMS their agreement on
program for each appropriate
facility (again, contractor safety
consistent with and environmental
that individual policies and
customer) could practices before
only be done at a the contractor
tremendous cost of begins work at the
not only man hours operator's
but monetary facilities.
investment that
may not be
recoverable.
[[Page 63629]]
250.1909...................... There is absolutely Subpart O applies
no need for to personnel
further expansion involved in well
of contractor control and
selection and production safety
contractor system operations.
documentation in Section 250.1914
any SEMS program. of the final rule
Subpart O already applies to
addresses contractors
contractor performing
evaluations and maintenance or
contractor repair,
selection. This turnaround, major
portion of the renovation, or
proposed rule is specialty work on,
redundant and or adjacent to, a
attempts to expand covered process,
once again on the as well as
definition of Appendix A of API
``Production RP 75. The
Operations''. operator is
responsible for
verifying that
contractor
personnel can
perform their
assigned duties
and informs
contract employers
of all hazards
related to the
contractor's work
and the process.
The operator may
use the training
requirements of
Subpart O to meet
the SEMS
requirements in
API RP 75 Section
7 as incorporated
by reference and
Sec. 250.1915 of
the final rule.
250.1909...................... BOEMRE cannot BOEMRE disagrees.
expect the The operator is
operator or lessee accountable for
to evaluate, test, contractor
and document the personnel
competency of activities and
these hired equipment. BOEMRE
professionals as does not expect
they are by name the operator to
certified to test their
perform their contractors.
tasks and possess BOEMRE does expect
unique knowledge. the operator to
Additionally, evaluate their
contractor contractor's
selection does not ability to perform
affect human the job that they
factors. are hired to do
and to document
that they have
done so.
Under Sec.
250.1914 in the
final rule the
operators must
obtain and
evaluate
information
regarding the
contractor's
safety and
environmental
performance when
selecting a
contractor.
Operators must
ensure that
contractors have
their own written
safe work
practices.
Contractors may
adopt appropriate
sections of the
operator's SEMS
program. Operator
and contractor
must document
their agreement on
appropriate
contractor safety
and environmental
policies and
practices before
the contractor
begins work at the
operator's
facilities.
250.1909...................... We are concerned BOEMRE disagrees.
with the ambiguous Subpart O applies
language related to personnel
to contractors and involved in well
contracted control and
personnel. BOEMRE production safety
fails to clearly system operations.
distinguish Section 250.1914
between contracted of the final rule
individuals acting applies to
in the same contractors
capacity as an performing
employee, and maintenance or
companies repair,
contracted to turnaround, major
perform renovation, or
specialized specialty work on,
services for a or adjacent to, a
lessee, leading to covered process
perhaps unintended and Appendix A of
applications. For API RP 75. The
example, Sec. operator is
250.1909(a) of the responsible for
proposed rule obtaining and
states, ``A evaluating
contractor is information
anyone performing regarding the
work for the contract
lessee.'' This employer's safety
could be construed performance and
as including safety programs
emergency response and informs
operations even contract employers
though these are of the known
not integral to potential fire,
oil and gas explosion, or
exploration and toxic release
production hazards related to
operations. We the contractor's
support the OOC work and the
comment that the process. The
section relating operator may use
to contractors be the training
stricken from the requirements of
rule, as redundant subpart O to meet
with existing the SEMS
subpart O requirements in
regulations. In API RP 75, Section
the alternative, 7 as incorporated
we request that by reference. The
the currently API RP 75 defines
overbroad language contractor as
be clarified to ``The individual,
define partnership, firm,
contractors, and or corporation
contracted retained by the
personnel, and to owner or operator
confirm that the to perform work or
rule does not provide supplies
apply to emergency or equipment. The
response term contractor
contractors even must also include
though they are subcontractors''.
contracted to
perform work for a
lessee in the OCS.
250.1909...................... The data used in Contractors perform
the proposed rule the majority of
makes no mention the work on the
of problems OCS and as such,
regarding selecting skilled,
contractor knowledgeable, and
competency, trained contractor
training, MOC, personnel by the
mechanical operator will help
integrity, etc. achieve safe OCS
operations.
Under Sec.
250.1914 in the
final rule the
operators must
obtain and
evaluate
information
regarding the
contractor's
safety and
environmental
performance when
selecting a
contractor.
Operators must
ensure that
contractors have
their own written
safe work
practices.
Contractors may
adopt appropriate
sections of the
operator's SEMS
program. Operator
and contractor
must document
their agreement on
appropriate
contractor safety
and environmental
policies and
practices before
the contractor
begins work at the
operator's
facilities.
250.1909(b)................... 1. Are electronic 1. Electronic
copies of copies of
contractor's contractor's
competencies and competencies and
SEMS programs SEMS programs are
acceptable? acceptable. See
API RP 75, Section
13 and Sec.
250.1928.
[[Page 63630]]
2. Do we need to 2. In Sec.
keep competencies 250.1914 of the
for each final rule, the
individual SEMS must include
contractor? procedures and
verification that
the operator's
contractor and
employees
understand and can
perform their
assigned duties,
as well as
Appendix A of API
RP 75, which
addresses
contractor
selection
criteria. The
operator is
responsible for
ensuring and
validating the
competency of
their contractors;
the method for
doing so must be
detailed in their
SEMS program. The
operator may
request specific
performance
information from
contractors.
250.1910...................... We recommend that BOEMRE incorporated
the prescriptive by reference API
language be RP 75, Section 12
replaced with the and requirements
following: ``You necessary to
must audit your implement API RP
SEMS program in 75 in the final
accordance with rule under Sec.
API RP 75, Section 250.1920 to
12, Audit of address audits and
Safety and documentation. The
Environmental final rule gives
Management Program the option of
Elements''. utilizing either
an independent
third party or
your designated
and qualified
personnel to
conduct audits on
your behalf.
250.1910(a)................... We believe timing BOEMRE incorporated
for audits should by reference API
be based on RP 75. Audit
performance and frequency is
risk rather than a addressed in Sec.
prescribed 250.1920 of the
schedule as final rule. The
described in Sec. operators must
250.1910(a). have their SEMS
programs audited
by either an
independent third
party or your
designated and
qualified
personnel to
conduct audits on
your behalf
according to the
requirements of
this subpart and
API RP 75, Section
12 within 2 years
of the initial
implementation of
the SEMS program
and at least once
every 3 years
thereafter.
250.1910(b)................... As part of our SEMS Audit frequency is
program, we audit addressed in Sec.
all facilities 250.1920 of the
(offshore and on) final rule. The
on a 3-5 year operators must
basis and roll up have their SEMS
results of audits programs audited
from each year to by either an
evaluate our independent third
program as a party or your
whole. We assume designated and
this is acceptable qualified
in accordance with personnel to
this section. conduct audits on
your behalf
according to the
requirements of
this subpart and
API RP 75, Section
12 within 2 years
of the initial
implementation of
the SEMS program
and at least once
every 3 years
thereafter.
Which part of this In Sec.
audit process 250.1920(b), the
would the BOEMRE operator must
want to be invited notify the BOEMRE
to participate/ 30 days in advance
observe? to allow BOEMRE to
participate in/
observe the
operators SEMS
audit. BOEMRE may
participate or
observe the audit
of any of the
elements in the
final rule.
250.1910(b)................... We recommend BOEMRE disagrees;
deleting language we maintained this
at Sec. requirement in the
250.1910(b) final rule, so
requiring that BOEMRE may
notification to observe SEMS
BOEMRE prior to audits under Sec.
conducting an 250.1924(c).
audit.
250.1910(b)................... How does BOEMRE If BOEMRE decides
envision to participate in
participating in a SEMS audit, our
an audit as just activities may
as an observer? include one or
These seem to be more of the
contradictory following:
terms. If BOEMRE
is merely going to Observation.
observe and not do Requesting
or say anything, documentation.
then perhaps Revising
better wording SEMS program.
would be Other
``Representatives duties as needed.
from BOEMRE may BOEMRE may
observe your SEMS participate as
audit.'' Further, observers to
if BOEMRE is going verify compliance.
to simply observe, BOEMRE may issue
what is the warnings, PINCs,
purpose of or INCs, under
observing the Sec. 250.1927.
audit?
250.1910(b)................... The wording in this BOEMRE disagrees.
section also seems In the final rule
to indicate that BOEMRE may
the SEMS audit participate in the
will be conducted audit in the field
in a meeting and office
style; otherwise, locations as
how will BOEMRE needed. How BOEMRE
observe the audit? participates in
the audit will be
based on how the
operator conducts
its audit.
250.1910(b) and (c)........... Will the BOEMRE BOEMRE may write
write INCs on the INCs based on the
issues self- severity of the
discovered on issues discovered
audits (either as during an audit
a participant or (either as a
following review participant or
of the audit following the
report)? review of the
audit report). If
the BOEMRE
discovers an issue
when reviewing the
audit report, we
will consider
whether the extent
to which the
operator has
addressed the
issue when
deciding if we
should write an
INC. BOEMRE will
consider all
relevant factors
when considering
issuing an INC,
including the fact
that the operator
self-discovered
the deficiency.
BOEMRE encourages
operators to
identify
deficiencies
during their
audits and looks
favorably on
audits detailing
such, before
deciding if a self-
discovered
deficiency
warrants receiving
an INC. BOEMRE
recognizes the
intent of the
operator's audit
is to find
deficiencies and
make the necessary
corrections to
enhance safety and
BOEMRE does not
intend for audits
to be used as a
punitive exercise.
[[Page 63631]]
250.1910(c)................... When does BOEMRE The audit is
consider the audit complete when any
to be completed? deficiencies in a
We consider the SEMS program are
audit to be corrected and
completed when the documented. If
final audit report there are no
is issued. deficiencies, the
audit is complete
when the final
audit report is
issued and
submitted to
BOEMRE.
250.1910(c)................... Given the language In Sec. 250.1920
in Sec. of the final rule,
250.1910(d), it the operator must
appears that require the
BOEMRE does not Independent Third
envision receiving Party to submit an
the actual SEMS audit report of
audit report. the findings and
Recommendation: You conclusions of the
must submit a audit to BOEMRE
report to the within 30 days of
BOEMRE within 30 the audit
days after the completion date.
issuance of the The report must
final SEMS report outline the
by your designated results of the
and qualified audit, including
personnel or your deficiencies
independent third- identified.
party. The report
need not be the
full SEMS report
but must outline *
* *.
250.1910(c)................... We agree with the The audit reports
BOEMRE proposal to are critical
periodically documents that
review the results BOEMRE needs to
of SEMS audits ensure that your
based on operator audit protocols
performance are true to the
through intent of this
unannounced or subpart and that
announced any deficiencies
inspections. have been
However, we are addressed
not supportive of appropriately and
the language at in a timely
Sec. 250.1910(c) manner. In Sec.
that requires 250.1920 of the
producing a final rule, the
separate report operator must
solely for BOEMRE require the
purposes within 30 Independent Third
days of the Party or your
completion of an designated and
audit. This is an qualified
administrative personnel to
burden and does submit an audit
not meet the report of the
intent of the findings and
proposed conclusions of the
regulation that audit to BOEMRE
the rule not be a within 30 days of
paperwork the audit
exercise. We completion date.
suggest adding The report must
language to Sec. outline the
250.1910(c) that results of the
BOEMRE could audit, including
review audit deficiencies
reports during identified.
inspections or
upon request that
would provide
BOEMRE unimpeded
access to any
audit findings at
their discretion.
250.1910(d)................... What does BOEMRE There is not a
envision as the significant
difference between difference between
verifying the two sections
corrective actions in regards to
from an audit in verifying
Sec. 250.1910(d) corrective
and Sec. actions.
250.1913?
250.1910(e)................... What is the purpose BOEMRE is
of retaining incorporating by
copies of the reference API RP
audit for 5 years, 75, Section 12 and
when the program Sec. 250.1920 of
has to be audited the final rule
every 3 years? will require
Recommendation: You independent Third
must retain copies Party or your
of either the designated and
independent third- qualified
party's SEMS personnel to
records or self conduct audits on
audit for a your behalf. The
minimum period of final rule has
3 years or until additional
the completion of recordkeeping
the next audit. requirements that
are not in API RP
75. In Sec.
250.1920 of the
final rule, the
operator must
require the
Independent Third
Party or your
designated and
qualified
personnel to
submit an audit
report of the
findings and
conclusions of the
audit to BOEMRE
within 30 days of
the audit
completion date
and to keep copies
of the audits for
6 years. Requiring
the operators to
keep the audits
for 6 years
ensures that they
have copies of
audits for at
least 2 audit
cycles for
reference.
250.1911...................... We recommend that BOEMRE incorporated
the prescriptive by reference API
language be RP 75, Section 13,
replaced with the and additional
following: ``Your recordkeeping and
SEMS program documentation
procedures and requirements in
documents must be Sec. 250.1928.
maintained in
accordance with
API RP 75, Section
13, Records and
Documentation''.
250.1911...................... Which records need The response to
to be kept to these questions
comply with this are addressed in
part? Which API RP 75, which
records need to be BOEMRE
signed and dated? incorporated by
Only those records reference, and
specifically additional
referred to in recordkeeping and
this proposed documentation
rule? API RP 75 requirements in
provides guidance Sec. 250.1928.
and examples for
this section.
250.1911...................... The proposed BOEMRE incorporated
regulation has by reference API
exhaustive RP 75, Section 13,
prescriptive and additional
documentation and recordkeeping and
recordkeeping documentation
requirements requirements in
imbedded Sec. 250.1928.
throughout the
rule. Existing
programs will have
to be rewritten by
all operators to
incorporate these
prescriptive
requirements. We
do not believe
that this level of
prescriptive
documentation and
recordkeeping will
increase safety.
The API RP 75 has
a records and
documentation
section. If BOEMRE
is going to
require
documentation and
recordkeeping,
then again, we
strongly recommend
that Section 13 of
API RP 75 be
adopted in the
final rulemaking.
250.1912(c)................... When will BOEMRE The operator must
evaluate the use an independent
independent third- third-party or
party? Before or your designated
after they are and qualified
used for a SEMS personnel
audit? What is the performing
evaluation independent third
criterion? party functions.
If BOEMRE finds BOEMRE will not
deficiencies in approve, but will
the third-party evaluate, the
and they have independent third-
already performed party or your
a SEMS audit, does designated and
that put the audit qualified
results in personnel;
jeopardy or however, if there
require a new are deficiencies
audit be in the audit, we
performed?. will take
appropriate
action. The
independent third-
party or your
designated and
qualified
personnel must
meet the
requirements of
Sec. 250.1926.
[[Page 63632]]
250.1913(a)................... ``Adequate'' and In the final rule,
``effective'' are BOEMRE removed the
very subjective term ``adequate''
terms. What and adopted most
criteria will of the recommended
BOEMRE utilize to language. This is
determine if a now in Sec.
program is 250.1924.
adequate and/or
effective? Many
operators
currently have
well-developed
programs, but may
still have
injuries and
incidents. Would
these programs be
deemed adequate
and effective?
Recommendation: (a)
BOEMRE or its
authorized
representative may
evaluate or visit
your facility to
determine whether
your SEMS program
is in place and
being followed.
These evaluations
or visits may be
random or based
upon the OCS lease
operator's or
contractor's
performance.
250.1913(a)................... BOEMRE is in a much The final rule will
better position, require operators
than a third-party to use an
company to approve independent third-
the lessee's SEMS party or
Programs for the designated and
following reasons: qualified
1. BOEMRE is a personnel
government agency performing
and therefore does independent third
not have a party functions to
conflict of audit a SEMS
interest. Whereas program. BOEMRE
a third-party will not approve
company is a for- SEMS programs
profit entity and because the intent
would be subject is to have a
to the pressures program that
of financial evolves and
interest. adapts, as needed.
Additionally, This allows
third- party operators to
companies could be tailor the program
approving programs to their
that they have individual needs
produced. and corporate
cultures on an
ongoing basis.
2. BOEMRE has ready Under Sec.
access to all 250.1925 of the
offshore leases. final rule, BOEMRE
may conduct an
audit if BOEMRE
identifies safety
or non-compliance
concerns based on
the results of our
inspections and
evaluations, or as
a result of an
event.
250.1913(b)................... What are the BOEMRE will use
qualifications of appropriate BOEMRE
the BOEMRE personnel with the
representatives proper credentials
conducting these and training to
evaluations? Are ensure
they familiar with consistency.
management systems
and auditing
protocols?
250.1914...................... We have serious BOEMRE continually
concerns about the works to address
consistency of inconsistency. We
enforcement have demonstrated
actions. How will improvements in
BOEMRE ensure the this area for the
consistency of last 10 years.
evaluation? BOEMRE has
established
internal processes
to help ensure
consistency in
enforcement.
250.1915...................... 1. Please provide 1. See Appendix I
detailed in preamble of the
instructions and final rule.
examples for
filling out MMS-
131.
2. Who within 2. The form may be
BOEMRE is the form sent to the Safety
to be sent to and and Enforcement
by what method * * Branch by fax to
* paper, (703) 787-1575, by
electronic, etc.? e-mail to
[email protected],
or by mail to 381
Elden St., MS-
4023, Herndon, VA
20170.
3. By calendar 3. For this
year, we assume application, the
that you mean Jan BOEMRE considers a
1 to Dec 31. If calendar year to
not, please cover the time
clarify. from January 1st
to December 31st.
4. Please state how 4. BOEMRE uses the
BOEMRE will data collected in
utilize the data. Form MMS-131 to
calculate 20
annual, OCS-wide,
performance
indices. The
indices provide
information about
performance and
safety trends;
they also allow
OCS operators to
compare their
performance with
industry averages.
5. Please include 5. The information
provisions for on Form MMS-131 is
holding the not protected from
individual company disclosure and is
data confidential. subject to FOIA
should a member of
the public request
this information.
6. We also point 6. BOEMRE
out the authority disagrees. The
to require OSHA does not have
employers to authority for OCS
collect and report oil and gas and
work-hours and sulphur
injury/incident activities.
data of this type
actually rests
with the USCG
based on the MOU
between USCG and
OSHA dated 19
December 1979.
Furthermore, the
collection and
reporting of
injuries and
illnesses on the
OCS falls under
the currently
pending USCG
rulemaking (RIN
1625-AA18) issued
on 27 June 1995,
and entitled Outer
Continental Shelf
Activities.
Coordination by
BOEMRE with the
USCG is
recommended to
consolidate and
coordinate their
efforts and avoid
any duplication of
requirements and
unnecessary
burdens.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The following lists the citation for the proposed rulemaking and
what the current citation is in the final rulemaking.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Proposed rulemaking citation Final rulemaking citation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec. 250.1900 Must I have a SEMS Sec. 250.1900 Must I have a SEMS
program? program?
Sec. 250.1901 What is the goal of Sec. 250.1901 What is the goal of
my SEMS program? my SEMS program?
Sec. 250.1902 When must I comply Sec. 250.1900(a). Must I have a
with the regulations in this SEMS program?
subpart?
[[Page 63633]]
Sec. 250.1903 May I use an Removed.
industry standard to develop my
SEMS program?
Sec. 250.1904 What are my general Sec. 250.1909 What is
responsibilities for SEMS? management's general
responsibilities for the SEMS
program?
Sec. 250.1905 What criteria for Sec. 250.1911
Hazards Analyses must my SEMS
program meet?
Sec. 250.1906 What criteria for Sec. 250.1913
Operating Procedures must my SEMS
program meet?
Sec. 250.1907 What criteria for Sec. 250.1916
Mechanical Integrity must my SEMS
program meet?
Sec. 250.1908 What criteria for Sec. 250.1912
Management of Change must my SEMS
program meet?
Sec. 250.1909 What criteria must Sec. 250.1914 What criteria must
be documented in my SEMS program be documented in my SEMS program
for contractor selection? for safe work practices and
contractor selection?
Sec. 250.1910 What are my Sec. 250.1920
responsibilities when conducting a
SEMS audit?
Sec. 250.1911 What are my Sec. 250.1928
documentation and recordkeeping
requirements?
Sec. 250.1912 What qualifications Sec. 250.1926
must an independent third-party or
my designated and qualified
personnel meet?
Sec. 250.1913 How will BOEMRE Sec. 250.1924
determine if my SEMS program is
effective?
Sec. 250.1914 What happens if Sec. 250.1927
BOEMRE finds shortcomings in my
SEMS program?
Sec. 250.1915 What are my Sec. 250.1929
responsibilities for submitting
OCS performance measure data?
[NEW SECTION] Sec. 250.1903
Definitions.
[NEW SECTION] Sec. 250.1904
Documents incorporated by
reference.
[NEW SECTION] Sec. 250.1910 What
safety and environmental
information is required?
[NEW SECTION] Sec. 250.1914 What
criteria must be documented in my
SEMS program for safe work
practices and contractor
selection?
[NEW SECTION] Sec. 250.1915 What
criteria for training must be in
my SEMS program?
[NEW SECTION] Sec. 250.1917 What
criteria for pre-start up review
must be in my SEMS program?
[NEW SECTION] Sec. 250.1918 What
criteria for emergency response
and control must be in my SEMS?
[NEW SECTION] Sec. 250.1919 What
criteria for investigation of
incidents must be in my SEMS
program?
[NEW SECTION] Sec. 250.1925 May
BOEMRE direct me to conduct
additional audits?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appendix 1
Instructions on How To Fill Out Form MMS-131--Performance Measures Data
1. On the line titled, ``Company Name(s),'' enter the name(s) of
the operating company(ies) that are the owners of the data that need
to be entered on the remainder of this form.
2. Directly across from your entry on ``Company Names,'' please
enter the name of the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Regulation
and Enforcement (BOEMRE) Region where your operating company(ies)
have worked and generated the data to be entered on the remainder of
this form.
3. On the line titled, ``Operator Code(s),*'' please enter all
the known operator codes for the company name or names that you have
entered above.
4. Directly across from your entry on ``Operator Codes,'' please
enter the Calendar Year the data to be entered on the remainder of
the form was generated.
5. On the line titled, ``Contact Name,'' please enter the name
of your chosen contact person. This person should be knowledgeable
about the data your company has submitted on this form as they will
be the first person the BOEMRE contacts should the bureau have any
questions about the data you have provided.
6. Directly across from your entry on ``Contact Name,'' please
input an active, valid e-mail address for your ``Contact Name.''
7. Enter an active and valid telephone number on the line
titled, ``Telephone.'' This telephone number should belong to your
``Contact Name.''
8. Enter an active and valid fax number on the line titled,
``Fax.'' This fax number should be accessible to your ``Contact
Name.''
9. Enter the date this form was submitted to the BOEMRE on the
line titled, ``Date Submitted.''
10. On line A, in the column labeled, ``Production Operations,''
enter the total number of company employee recordable injuries and
illnesses accrued in each of the four quarters of the calendar year.
Only the total number of recordable injuries and illnesses suffered
by operating company employees while they were in engaged in
production operations may be entered here.
11. On line A, in the column labeled, ``Drilling** Operations,''
enter the total number of company employee recordable injuries and
illnesses accrued in each of the four quarters of the calendar year.
Only the total number of recordable injuries and illnesses suffered
by operating company employees while they were engaged in drilling
operations may be entered here.
12. On line A, in the column labeled, ``Construction
Operations,'' enter the total number of company employee recordable
injuries and illnesses accrued in each of the four quarters of the
calendar year. Only the total number of recordable injuries and
illnesses suffered by operating company employees while they were
engaged in construction operations may be entered here.
13. On line B, in the column labeled, ``Production Operations,''
enter the total number of contract employee recordable injuries and
illnesses accrued in each of the four quarters of the calendar year.
Only the total number of recordable injuries and illnesses suffered
by contract employees while they were engaged in production
operations may be entered here.
14. On line B, in the column labeled, ``Drilling** Operations,''
enter the total number of contract employee recordable injuries and
illnesses accrued in each of the four quarters of the calendar year.
Only the total number of recordable injuries and
[[Page 63634]]
illnesses suffered by contract employees while they were engaged in
drilling operations may be entered here.
15. On line B, in the column labeled, ``Construction
Operations,'' enter the total number of contract employee recordable
injuries and illnesses accrued in each of the four quarters of the
calendar year. Only the total number of recordable injuries and
illnesses suffered by contract employees while they were engaged in
construction operations may be entered here.
16. On line C, in the column labeled, ``Production Operations,''
enter the total number of company employee DART recordable injuries
and illnesses accrued in each of the four quarters of the calendar
year. Only the total number of DART recordable injuries and
illnesses suffered by operating company employees while they were
engaged in production operations may be entered here.
17. On line C, in the column labeled, ``Drilling** Operations,''
enter the total number of company employee DART recordable injuries
and illnesses accrued in each of the four quarters of the calendar
year. Only the total number of DART recordable injuries and
illnesses suffered by operating company employees while they were
engaged in drilling operations may be entered here.
18. On line C, in the column labeled, ``Construction
Operations,'' enter the total number of company employee DART
recordable injuries and illnesses accrued in each of the four
quarters of the calendar year. Only the total number of DART
recordable injuries and illnesses suffered by operating company
employees while they were engaged in construction operations may be
entered here.
19. On line D, in the column labeled, ``Production Operations,''
enter the total number of contract employee DART recordable injuries
and illnesses accrued in each of the four quarters of the calendar
year. Only the total number of DART recordable injuries and
illnesses suffered by contract employees while they were engaged in
production operations may be entered here.
20. On line D, in the column labeled, ``Drilling** Operations,''
enter the total number of contract employee DART recordable injuries
and illnesses accrued in each of the four quarters of the calendar
year. Only the total number of DART recordable injuries and
illnesses suffered by contract employees while they were engaged in
drilling operations may be entered here.
21. On line D, in the column labeled, ``Construction
Operations,'' enter the total number of contract employee DART
recordable injuries and illnesses accrued in each of the four
quarters of the calendar year. Only the total number of DART
recordable injuries and illnesses suffered by contract employees
while they were engaged in construction operations may be entered
here.
22. On line E, in the column labeled, ``Production Operations,''
enter the total number of hours that operating company employees
worked on production operations during each of the four quarters of
the calendar year.
23. On line E, in the column labeled, ``Drilling** Operations,''
enter the total number of hours operating company employees worked
on drilling operations during each of the four quarters of the
calendar year.
24. On line E, in the column labeled, ``Construction
Operations,'' enter the total number of hours that operating company
employees worked on construction operations during each of the four
quarters of the calendar year.
25. On line F, in the column labeled, ``Production Operations,''
enter the total number of hours that contract employees worked on
production operations during each of the four quarters of the
calendar year.
26. On line F, in the column labeled, ``Drilling** Operations,''
enter the total number of hours contract employees worked on
drilling operations during each of the four quarters of the calendar
year.
27. On line F, in the column labeled, ``Construction
Operations,'' enter the total number of hours that contract
employees worked on construction operations during each of the four
quarters of the calendar year.
28. On line G, enter the total number of EPA NPDES non-
compliances experienced by the operating company during the calendar
year.
29. On line H, for oil spills of less than 1 bbl:
a. Count every occurrence of such a spill individually and tally
that sum.
b. On line 1, enter the total number of oil spills less than 1
bbl that you have tallied.
c. For each individual spill, estimate the volume of oil lost.
d. Sum the estimates for each spill and enter the final amount
of oil lost (in bbls) on line 2.
BILLING CODE 4310-MR-P
[[Page 63635]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR15OC10.000
[[Page 63636]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR15OC10.001
BILLING CODE 4310-MR-C
After reviewing and discussing the comments, BOEMRE decided to
require each offshore operator to develop, implement, maintain, and
operate under a SEMS program composed of all elements addressed in API
RP 75, Development of a Safety and Environmental Management Program for
Offshore Operations and Facilities, Third Edition, May 2004, Reaffirmed
May 2008.
In addition to the SEMS elements, we clarified hazards analysis and
expanded recordkeeping and documentation requirements. We are also
requiring operators to conduct a JSA for OCS activities identified in
their SEMS program. In Sec. 250.1911, we allow the operator to perform
a single hazards analysis for simple and multiple similar facilities.
The hazards analysis may apply to all such facilities after verifying
that site-specific deviations are addressed in each of the elements of
your SEMS program. The hazards analysis section in API RP 75 addresses
the job task at the facility level.
[[Page 63637]]
Therefore, BOEMRE is requiring JSAs as part of the SEMS program under
Sec. 250.1911. A JSA is used to review site-specific detailed job
steps and uncover hazards associated with the specific job undertaken.
The JSA defines the requirements for identifying, assessing, and
controlling personal risks associated with work activities. Operators
must complete a JSA prior to performing any activity identified in
their SEMS program. The supervisor of the person in charge of the task
must approve the JSA prior to the work commencing. The JSA is performed
to identify and evaluate hazards of a job/task for the purpose of
hazards control or elimination that is currently not addressed in API
RP 75, Section 3, Hazards Analysis element.
The decision to require a SEMS program plus the JSA requirements is
based on BOEMRE accident panel investigation reports, incident
investigation findings, analyses of INC data, performance reviews with
operators, and the fact that existing BOEMRE regulations do not address
the SEMS elements as a separate and comprehensive approach. Since
existing regulations (30 CFR part 250) do not address these elements as
a separate and comprehensive approach, it is appropriate to require
these SEMS elements. BOEMRE's evaluation of safety information included
the following:
Accident Panel Investigation Reports
BOEMRE prepares accident panel investigation reports for major
accidents. An analysis of 42 accident panel reports from 2000 through
2009 revealed that many fatalities and injuries occurred while
performing routine tasks such as drilling, construction, coiled tubing
operations, and crane and other lifting events. In addition, most of
these accident panel reports' recommendations related to one of the
following four SEMS elements: Hazards Analysis, Management of Change,
Operating Procedures, and Mechanical Integrity.
The accident panel reports can be viewed at the following Web site:
http://www.gomr.BOEMRE.gov/homepg/offshore/safety/acc_repo/accindex.html.
Contributing Causes
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hazards Management Operating Mechanical Injury Fatality
BOEMRE report analysis of change procedures integrity
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
BOEMRE 2009-042............. X X X X 1 1
BOEMRE 2009-028............. X ............ X X ............ 1
BOEMRE 2009-018............. X ............ X X ............ 1
BOEMRE 2009-008............. X ............ ............ ............ ............ 1
BOEMRE 2008-056............. ............ ............ ............ X ............ ............
BOEMRE 2008-054............. ............ ............ ............ X ............ ............
BOEMRE 2008-053............. ............ X ............ ............ ............ ............
BOEMRE 2008-038............. ............ X X ............ ............ ............
BOEMRE 2008-016............. X X X ............ ............ 1
BOEMRE 2007-058............. X X X ............ ............ 1
BOEMRE 2007-045............. X X X ............ ............ 1
BOEMRE 2007-037............. X ............ X ............ ............ 1
BOEMRE 2006-070............. X ............ X X ............ 1
BOEMRE 2006-058............. X ............ X ............ ............ ............
BOEMRE 2006-047............. X ............ X ............ ............ ............
BOEMRE 2006-039............. ............ ............ X ............ ............ ............
BOEMRE 2006-021............. ............ ............ X ............ ............ ............
BOEMRE 2006-002............. X ............ X ............ ............ 1
BOEMRE 2005-027............. ............ X X X ............ ............
BOEMRE 2005-007............. ............ ............ X X ............ ............
BOEMRE 2004-078............. X X X ............ ............ 1
BOEMRE 2004-075............. X ............ X X ............ ............
BOEMRE 2004-048............. ............ ............ X X ............ ............
BOEMRE 2004-046............. X X X ............ 3 ............
BOEMRE 2004-010............. X ............ ............ ............ ............ ............
BOEMRE 2004-004............. X ............ ............ ............ ............ 1
BOEMRE 2003-068............. ............ ............ X ............ ............ ............
BOEMRE 2003-046............. ............ ............ X ............ ............ ............
BOEMRE 2003-023............. ............ X ............ ............ ............ ............
BOEMRE 2002-080............. ............ X ............ ............ ............ ............
BOEMRE 2002-076............. X X ............ X ............ 1
BOEMRE 2002-075............. X ............ ............ ............ ............ 1
BOEMRE 2002-062............. ............ X ............ ............ 2 1
BOEMRE 2002-059............. X ............ ............ X 1 1
BOEMRE 2002-040............. ............ ............ ............ X ............ ............
BOEMRE 2001-084............. ............ X ............ X ............ ............
BOEMRE 2001-045............. ............ X ............ X ............ 1
BOEMRE 2001-042............. X X ............ X ............ 1
BOEMRE 2001-010............. X X ............ ............ 1 ............
BOEMRE 2001-009............. ............ X X ............ ............ ............
BOEMRE 2001-005............. X X ............ ............ ............ ............
BOEMRE 2000-089............. X ............ ............ X ............ 1
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total................... 24 19 23 17 8 19
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 63638]]
The table shows that the accidents covered by 20 of the 42 panel
reports resulted in a combined 27 fatalities and injuries. The analysis
done on the accidents identified six contributing causes that are
related to the four elements:
1. A lack of communication between the operator and contractor(s);
2. A JSA was not conducted prior to beginning work, or there was a
lack of written procedures;
3. An onsite supervisor failed to enforce existing procedures or
practices;
4. A lack of written safe work procedural guidelines;
5. Integrity of the facilities and equipment were not maintained
according to recommended practices; and
6. Workplace hazards were not identified or corrected.
Some of these accidents could have been minimized or prevented if
the operator had implemented a comprehensive SEMS.
Incident Analysis
BOEMRE also studied 1,930 incidents that occurred in OCS waters
from 2001 through 2009 to determine if those events were associated
with any of the following 4 SEMS elements: Hazards Analysis, Management
of Change, Operating Procedures, and Mechanical Integrity. Although
these four elements have been identified by BOEMRE as contributing
causes to these events, BOEMRE recognizes the value of the remaining
API RP 75 elements as a critical part of a comprehensive safety
management program helping to ensure that all elements are addressed
completely. The events we reviewed included 44 fatalities, 440
injuries, 19 losses of well control, 23 collisions, 597 fires, 436
pollution events, and 371 crane and other lifting events (e.g., hoists,
winches, etc.).
The majority of incidents occurring in the OCS were related to
operational and maintenance procedures or human error. These incidents
are not addressed by BOEMRE's hardware-oriented compliance inspections.
Additionally, of the incidents involving injuries, fires, and pollution
on production facilities, only 25 were due to failure of a safety
device. The majority of the 1,930 incidents had at least 1 of the
following 4 elements as a contributing cause for the event occurring:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Number of
SEMS element incidents
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hazards Analysis........................................... 412
Management of Change....................................... 203
Operating Procedures....................................... 609
Mechanical Integrity....................................... 726
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Incidents of Noncompliance (INCs)
BOEMRE inspectors issue three General INCs (G-INCs) that
potentially relate to elements within a SEMS. The following summarizes
these INCs:
G-110 (Operations conducted in a safe and workmanlike
manner),
G-111 (Equipment maintained in a safe condition), and
G-112 (Safety of personnel and all necessary precautions
taken to correct and remove any hazards).
BOEMRE issued 4,284 G-INCs during 2003-2009 for drilling and
production activities. Of these G-INCs issued, 4,116 (approximately 96
percent) were related to 1 or more of the following 4 SEMS elements:
Hazards Analysis,
Management of Change,
Operating Procedures, and
Mechanical Integrity.
The following table summarizes the G-INCs written for drilling and
production activities:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
SEMS Drilling Production
G-INCs Issued from 2003-2009 elements percentage percentage
-------------------------------------------------------------- ------------
Hazards Analysis.................... 23 20
Management of Change................ 9 9
Operating Procedures................ 25 18
Mechanical Integrity................ 39 49
Unrelated........................... 4 4
------------------------------------------------------------------------
BOEMRE evaluation of accident panel investigations and reports,
incident analysis, and INCs indicates that in most cases, accidents can
be traced to human error and/or organizational failures. For example,
not following maintenance procedures as outlined in the SEMS program,
could lead to the failure of critical equipment, which could lead to an
accident. For that reason, it is important for operators to ensure that
safe and environmentally sound operating practices are followed.
Operations are safer when management systematically encourages
individuals to be safety conscious, provides adequate resources,
fosters safe worksite practices, promotes good housekeeping habits, and
assures that workers are properly trained.
This final rule will require operators to have their SEMS program
audited by an independent third-party or designated and qualified
personnel. All auditors must meet the qualifications as discussed in
this final rule and the audit must be conducted according to the
schedule in API RP 75, Section 12, and deficiencies addressed by the
designated auditor. A knowledgeable and experienced independent third-
party or designated and qualified personnel will audit an operator's
SEMS program to determine the extent the operator is complying with
their SEMS program. These audits will be conducted in an office
environment and in the field, and could cover both a broad range of
activities or be focused on a particular area (i.e. records, gas
compressors, blowout preventers, or documentation), as appropriate. If
the auditor determines that a SEMS program does not meet the
requirements in this subpart and API RP 75, the operator must submit a
report to BOEMRE within 30 days of the audit completion date. The
report must outline the results of the audit including deficiencies
identified, a timetable or schedule for implementing corrections to
deficiencies, and the person responsible for correcting each identified
deficiency including their job title. BOEMRE will verify that
corrective actions have been undertaken and that these actions
effectively address the audit findings.
BOEMRE may, at its discretion, evaluate independent third parties
or designated and qualified personnel, meet with operators to
periodically review the results of SEMS program audits, and conduct
announced or unannounced evaluations to assess SEMS program compliance
and effectiveness. The operators will be responsible for all costs
associated with any independent third-party audit of their SEMS
program. BOEMRE would be more likely to participate as an observer in
the case where the third-party auditor is the same as the contractor
who developed the SEMS program.
[[Page 63639]]
This final rule requires operators to verify that their contractors
can perform their assigned duties. The operator is responsible for
ensuring that all contractors and subcontractors have safety policies
and procedures in place that support the implementation of the SEMS
program and align with the principles of managing safety set forth in
API RP 75. The operator must inform contractors of any known hazards on
the facility that are related to the contractor's work. This applies to
contractors performing maintenance or repair, turnaround, major
renovation, or specialty work on or adjacent to a covered process
In this final rule, BOEMRE will require the operator to document
and keep the last two SEMS audits conducted (onshore or offshore) and
make them available to BOEMRE upon request. In addition, the operator
must keep documentation and records for 2 years (onshore or offshore)
including the following:
1. JSAs (must be kept onsite for 30 days, electronic access onsite
to the JSA would be sufficient to comply with this requirement).
2. Management of change provisions.
3. Injury/illness log.
4. Evaluations completed on contractors.
These records and documentation must be available to BOEMRE upon
request.
In this final rule, BOEMRE will require operators to submit Form
MMS-131 on an annual basis, broken down quarterly, reporting the
previous calendar year's data, by March 31st. For example, on March 31,
2011, Form MMS-131 must be submitted with data from calendar year 2010.
On March 31, 2012, the data submitted will be from calendar year 2011.
Form MMS-131 includes the number of hours worked by company and
contract employees (people on the facility) during production,
drilling, pipeline, and construction activities (including adding or
removing equipment and/or facility modifications). Submitting this
information will allow the BOEMRE to publish incident rate information
that is more useful and representative of the industry's safety record.
The collected hours worked data will support BOEMRE's Government
Performance and Results Act (GPRA), the Program Assessment Rating Tool
(PART), and the OCS Performance Measures Program.
BOEMRE does not want the SEMS program to be a paperwork exercise
conducted solely to meet regulatory requirements. BOEMRE understands
that the development and implementation of this type of program may
place an additional burden on some OCS operators, in the short term. A
SEMS program that includes all API RP 75 elements will benefit
operators by integrating safety across all aspects of the operating
environment.
Procedural Matters
Regulatory Planning and Review (Executive Order (E.O.) 12866)
This final rule is a significant rule, as determined by the Office
of Management and Budget (OMB), under Section 3(f)(4) of EO 12866 due
to its novel legal and policy issues, and is therefore subject to OMB
review.
Regulatory Flexibility Act
While the final rule will affect a substantial number of small
entities, it will not have a significant economic effect on a
substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory Flexibility
Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.).
Small operators that operate under this rule fall under the Small
Business Administration's (SBA) North American Industry Classification
System (NAICS) codes 211111, Crude Petroleum and Natural Gas
Extraction, and 213111, Drilling Oil and Gas Wells. For these NAICS
code classifications, a small company is one with fewer than 500
employees. Based on these criteria, an estimated 70 percent (91
operators) of the operators on the OCS are considered small. Therefore,
this final rule will affect a substantial number of small entities.
This rule will not have a significant economic effect on small
operators. Costs related to complying with this regulation are
relatively small compared to the costs associated with operating
offshore on an annual basis.
Assumptions
BOEMRE made the following assumptions concerning the costs
associated with the requirements in the final rulemaking:
Because of the wide variation in company size, we grouped
operators into three classes (High, Moderate, and Low Activity).
We used the results of 13 years of voluntary SEMS
Performance Measures reporting by OCS operators and determined that a
minimum 70 of the 130 operators are using SEMS. We believe that this
number is higher based on previous Annual Performance Review Meetings
conducted by the BOEMRE where voluntary SEMS was discussed.
We used actual costs from safety management system vendors
for our estimated costs for industry.
We assumed no new capital costs will be incurred for the
estimated 70 operators who are currently using SEMS to comply with this
final rule, as their systems are already developed and funds they
expend to manage and implement this program should not change
significantly. However, we calculated additional costs for compliance
with JSAs, documentation, maintenance, and recordkeeping requirements.
The estimated cost for the 60 remaining operators to
implement, develop, and manage the SEMS program is based on the
operator having an Internet-based system, which is the most common
approach used by operators.
The cost for auditing a SEMS program is part of the entire
program, per API RP 75, as audits are an integrated part of maintenance
of all elements combined, and the time involved cannot be easily
separated out.
Many smaller operators can use a template from a safety
management system vendor that will meet their needs for compliance with
the final regulation. In most cases, the operators will not need to
spend additional money to customize a template for their use.
High, Moderate, and Low Activity Definitions
Oil and gas operators in the OCS vary substantially in size and the
degree to which they are engaged in extracting oil from the OCS. The
scale of operations for the 130 OCS oil and gas operators ranges from
as little as 1 complex to nearly 500 facilities; and from as little as
15,000 barrels of oil equivalent (BOE) annual production to more than
300 Million (MM) BOE annual production. Because of this variation in
activity, BOEMRE divides operators into high, moderate, and low
activity for measuring performance. We used these size categories to
estimate costs associated with developing, managing, and fulfilling
reporting requirements for the final SEMS rule. BOEMRE uses the
following criteria for categorizing operators:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
High activity Moderate activity Low activity
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Annual Production................. >= 10 MMBOE.......... 1 MMBOE < 10 MMBOE.. < 1 MMBOE.
[[Page 63640]]
In-service components............. >= 1,000 components.. 100 < 1,000 < 100 components.
components.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Development of SEMS Program
After reviewing the voluntary SEMS submissions received from 1996
to 2009 (OCS Performance Measures Data, Form MMS-131), an average of 70
of 130 operators, or 54 percent, reported having a SEMS-type program
in-place. The other 60 operators, or 46 percent, may not have a SEMS
program in-place or may have a SEMS program, but are not participating
in the voluntary SEMS program.
The following table shows a breakdown by operator activity category
(high, moderate, low):
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Number of Number of Number of Total number of Percent of
Activity category operators operators with operators with operators by operators with
without SEMS SEMS partial SEMS activity SEMS
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
High Activity Operators....................................... 0 13 0 13 100
Moderate Activity Operators................................... 12 29 10 41 71
Low Activity Operators........................................ 48 28 12 76 37
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total..................................................... 60 70 22 130 54
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As shown in the table, 54 percent of all OCS operators have a
comprehensive and/or partial SEMS program in place. A partial SEMS
includes the following elements; Hazard Analysis, Management of Change,
Mechanical Integrity, Operating Procedures, Training, Safe Work
Practices. At a September 2009 SEMS workshop held in New Orleans,
Louisiana, BOEMRE was informed that moderate and low activity operators
are implementing a partial SEMS consisting of six elements previously
discussed. They will need to address the other seven elements in order
to be in compliance with the final rule. All high activity operators,
over 70 percent of the moderate activity operators, and almost 40
percent of the low activity operators are using a SEMS program.
Based on information received from consultants and vendors, the
cost for an operator to buy a generic SEMS template is approximately
$2,500. If an operator decided to modify the generic SEMS template to
make it specific to its use, the cost will be an additional $10,000. As
mentioned in the assumptions, it will not be necessary for many
operators to spend the additional $10,000 to customize a SEMS program.
If the 60 operators without a SEMS program decide to buy a SEMS
template, the cost will be $150,000 ($2,500 x 60). If all 60 operators
needed to modify the generic plan templates for their specific OCS
operations, which is unlikely, it will cost an additional $600,000
($10,000 x 60). The total cost for all 60 operators to buy a template
and then modify the template to their philosophy is estimated to be
$750,000 ($150,000 + $600,000).
SEMS Implementation
This section provides the estimated cost for industry to implement
a SEMS. The following table shows a breakdown of the average number of
facilities and components for the 3 operator activity levels:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Average
number of Average
Activity category Components number of
per Complex Complexes
------------------------------------------------------------------------
High.................................... 21 139
Moderate................................ 15 29
Low..................................... 16 6
------------------------------------------------------------------------
We describe the costs for the 60 operators in the moderate and low
activity categories that will have to implement a SEMS Program, and all
of the costs for the high, moderate, and low activity categories to
maintain their SEMS.
High Activity Operators
BOEMRE determined, based on Annual Performance Reviews and
voluntary submissions of Form MMS-131, that all high activity operators
already have a SEMS program in place.
Maintenance Costs for a High Activity Operator
The estimated average cost for each high activity operator to
maintain their SEMS program is approximately $1,670,000 a year. The
estimated cost for all 13 high activity operators to maintain their
SEMS program is $21,710,000 per year.
General.................................................... $ 50,000
Safety and Environmental................................... 75,000
Hazards analysis........................................... 300,000
Management of Change....................................... 150,000
Operating Procedures....................................... 100,000
Safe Work Practices........................................ 125,000
Training................................................... 200,000
Mechanical Integrity....................................... 225,000
Pre-Startup................................................ 125,000
Emergency Response and Control............................. 175,000
Investigation of Incidents................................. 95,000
Audits*.................................................... 20,000
Records and Documentation.................................. 30,000
------------
Total...................................................... $1,670,000
* audits are conducted every 3 years at an estimated cost of $60,000 per
audit ($60,000/3 = $20,000 per year).
Moderate Activity Operators
BOEMRE calculated the cost for a moderate activity operator to
implement and manage a SEMS program based on the 13 SEMS elements, as
follows:
Implementation Costs for a Moderate Activity Operator
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Element Basis Estimated cost
------------------------------------------------------------------------
General..................... The General section $18,000 per year
includes (includes the year
implementation, to implement SEMS).
planning and This also includes
management review data collection,
and approval of the analysis, report
SEMS Program. development, and
cost of meetings.
[[Page 63641]]
Safety and Environmental This section $22,000 per year
Information. outlines the (includes the year
minimum safety and to implement SEMS).
environmental This also includes
information needed data collection,
for any facility, evaluation, and
such as design data documentation
on facility process update of the
(e.g., flow design data on the
diagrams) and facility process
mechanical and mechanical
components (e.g., components.
piping and
instrument
diagrams). The
information is used
to perform a
hazards analysis.
Hazards Analysis............ Operators will need $102,000 per year
a facility risk (includes the year
assessment for each to implement SEMS).
facility. After the This also includes
initial facility annual updates.
risk assessments
are prepared, the
cost will be less
because a hazards
analysis is
required only for
changes in the
process or the
equipment on a
facility. The JSA
at the task level
includes data
collection,
analysis, and
report development.
This cost is
included in the
hazards analysis.
Management of Change (MOC).. The cost is based on $30,000 per year
one change request (includes the year
per month, but it to implement SEMS).
is also dependent This also includes
on the complexity MOC data
of the change-- collection,
something minor evaluation, and
will not cost as documentation
much as something update.
more complex. The
MOC cost is
determined by the
physical state of
the facilities, the
status of
technology, and the
turnover of
personnel.
Operating Procedures........ An operator will $20,000 per year
need to evaluate (includes the year
the operating to implement SEMS).
procedures of its This also includes
facility each year. data collection,
The operating evaluation,
procedure cost is documentation
determined by the update, and
maintenance of such recordkeeping.
procedures. For
most operators, no
formal evaluation
is necessary since
changes will be
identified through
the JSA process and
managed through the
MOC process.
Safe Work Practices......... An operator will $28,000 per year
need to evaluate (includes the year
its safe work to implement SEMS).
practices each year This also includes
to minimize safety data collection,
and environmental evaluation,
risks associated inspection report
with operations. development, and
Safe work practices inspection plan
should address all update.
personnel.
Training.................... An operator will $30,000 per year
need to develop (includes the year
provisions for to implement SEMS).
ensuring that its This also includes
employees and their job description
supervisors are review, training
taught how to program
conduct operations development, and
safely, to tracking of
recognize unsafe training and
methods of maintenance of
operations, and to training records.
identify potential The cost of
environmental and training is not
safety hazards. included in this
assessment, only
the cost of
managing the
program. Well
control and
production safety
training is
implemented
following the
enforcement of
subpart O.
Mechanical Integrity........ Based on the $40,000 per year
assumption that (includes the year
mechanical to implement SEMS).
integrity is This includes the
achieved through quality assurance
preventive inspection plan,
maintenance. The evaluation of
preventive schedule
maintenance program appropriateness,
is defined prior to communication of
the commissioning maintenance
of the facility. We program, salaries,
did not include the maintenance and
cost of maintenance inspection reports,
in this assessment, and recordkeeping.
only the cost of
managing the
program.
Pre-startup Review.......... An operator will $25,000 per year
need to include (includes the year
provisions to to implement SEMS).
verify that the This includes the
facility will pre-startup risk
function according register per
to design, that facility, pre-
personnel have been startup review
properly trained, checklists per
and that safe work facility, records
practices are in of pre-startup
place. reviews conducted,
and evaluation of
pre-startup
procedures.
Emergency Response and An operator will $30,000 per year
Control. need to include (includes the year
provisions to to implement SEMS).
require that all This includes
emergency response initial
and control plans identification of
be in place and risks and possible
ready for immediate emergencies,
implementation. development of
Specific types of response
plans include, but requirements and
are not limited to, comparison to
emergency existing plans,
evacuation and oil ensuring that
spill contingency drills are
plans. performed as
planned, and
manually tracking
and evaluating risk
changes. Costs of
emergency response
and drills are not
included in the
assessment, only
the cost of
managing the
procedures.
Investigation of Incidents.. An operator will $20,000 per year
need to include (includes the year
procedures for to implement SEMS).
investigating all This includes
incidents with incident and near
serious or miss registers,
potentially serious collecting data,
safety and analyzing,
environmental developing, and
consequences. presentation of
reports. Only the
cost of
preventative
measures such as
near miss tracking
is included in the
evaluation.
Audits...................... The operators are $12,000 every 3
required to have an years or $4,000 per
independent third- year.
party or designated
and qualified
personnel audit of
their SEMS program
to determine if the
program elements
were properly
implemented and
maintained.
[[Page 63642]]
Records and Documentation... The operators are $6,000 per year,
required to have based on the
documentation that requirements of
describes the 13 Sec. 250.1928 and
elements of their API RP 75, Section
SEMS program and 13.
the interaction
between the
elements.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The estimated cost for one moderate activity operator to implement
SEMS is $375,000. The estimated cost for the 12 moderate activity
operators to implement SEMS is $4,500,000 ($375,000 x 12 operators).
The itemized cost is:
Implementation Costs for a Moderate Activity Operator
General.................................................... $18,000
Safety and Environmental................................... 22,000
Hazards analysis........................................... 102,000
Management of Change....................................... 30,000
Operating Procedures....................................... 20,000
Safe Work Practices........................................ 28,000
Training................................................... 30,000
Mechanical Integrity....................................... 40,000
Pre-Startup................................................ 25,000
Emergency Response and Control............................. 30,000
Investigation of Incidents................................. 20,000
Audits..................................................... 4,000
Records and Documentation.................................. 6,000
------------
Total.................................................. 375,000
Implementation Costs for a Moderate Activity Operator (Partial SEMS)
The estimated cost for one moderate activity operator with a
partial SEMS to implement a comprehensive SEMS is $124,000. The
estimated cost for the 10 moderate activity operators to implement SEMS
is $1,240,000 ($124,000 x 10 operators). The itemized cost is:
General.................................................... $18,000
Safety and Environmental................................... 22,000
Hazards analysis........................................... 0
Management of Change....................................... 0
Operating Procedures....................................... 0
Safe Work Practices........................................ 0
Training................................................... 0
Mechanical Integrity....................................... 0
Pre-Startup................................................ 25,000
Emergency Response and Control............................. 30,000
Investigation of Incidents................................. 20,000
Audits..................................................... 3,000
Records and Documentation.................................. 6,000
------------
Total.................................................. 124,000
Maintenance Costs for a Moderate Activity Operator
The estimated average cost for each moderate activity operator to
maintain their SEMS program is approximately $223,000 a year. The
estimated cost for the 41 moderate activity operators to maintain their
SEMS program is $9,143,000 ($223,000 x 41).
General.................................................... $3,000
Safety and Environmental................................... 12,000
Hazards analysis........................................... 34,000
Management of Change....................................... 21,000
Operating Procedures....................................... 17,000
Safe Work Practices........................................ 17,000
Training................................................... 25,000
Mechanical Integrity....................................... 27,000
Pre-Startup................................................ 16,000
Emergency Response and Control............................. 24,000
Investigation of Incidents................................. 17,000
Audits *................................................... 4,000
Records and Documentation.................................. 6,000
------------
Total.................................................. 223,000
* Audits are conducted every 3 years at an estimated cost of $12,000 per
audit ($12,000/3 years = $4,000 per year).
Low Activity Operators
BOEMRE calculated the cost for a low activity operator to implement
and manage a SEMS program based on the 13 SEMS elements, as follows:
Implementation Costs for a Low Activity Operator
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Element Basis Estimated cost
------------------------------------------------------------------------
General..................... The General section $5,000 per year
entails (includes the year
implementation, to implement SEMS).
planning and This also includes
management review data collection,
and approval of the analysis, report
SEMS. development, and
cost of meetings.
Safety and Environmental This section $8,000 per year
Information. outlines the (includes the year
minimum safety and to implement SEMS).
environmental This also includes
information needed data collection,
for any facility, evaluation, and
such as design data documentation
on facility process update of the
(e.g., flow design data on the
diagrams) and facility process
mechanical and mechanical
components (e.g., components.
piping and
instrument
diagrams). The
information is used
to perform a
hazards analysis.
Hazards Analysis............ Operators will need $25,000 per year
to do a facility (includes the year
risk assessment for to implement SEMS).
each facility when This also includes
the rule is annual updates.
implemented. After
the initial
facility risk
assessments are
prepared, the cost
will be less
because a hazards
analysis is
required only for
changes in the
process or the
equipment on a
facility. The job
safety analysis at
the task level
includes data
collection,
analysis, and
report development.
This cost is
included in the
hazards analysis.
Management of Change (MOC).. Based on one change $20,000 per year
request per month (includes the year
but the cost is to implement SEMS).
dependent on the This also includes
complexity of the MOC data
change. The MOC collection,
cost is determined evaluation, and
by the physical documentation
state of the update.
facilities, the
status of
technology, and the
turnover of
personnel.
[[Page 63643]]
Operating Procedures........ An operator will $10,000 per year
need to evaluate (includes the year
the operating to implement SEMS).
procedures of their This also includes
facility each year. data collection,
The operating evaluation,
procedure cost is documentation
determined by the update, and
maintenance of such recordkeeping.
procedures. For
most operators, no
formal evaluation
is necessary since
changes will be
identified through
the JSA process and
managed through the
MOC process.
Safe Work Practices......... An operator will $12,000 per year
need to evaluate (includes the year
the safe work to implement SEMS).
practices each year This also includes
to minimize safety data collection,
and environmental evaluation, and an
risks associated inspection report
with operations. development and
Safe work practices inspection plan
should address all update.
personnel.
Training.................... An operator will $14,000 per year
need to develop (includes the year
provisions for to implement SEMS).
ensuring that their This also includes
employees and their job description
supervisors be review, training
taught how to program
conduct operations development, and
safely, to tracking of
recognize unsafe training and
methods of maintenance of
operations, and to training records.
identify potential The cost of
environmental and training is not
safety hazards. included in this
assessment, only
the cost of
managing the
program. Training
is well implemented
following the
enforcement of
subpart O.
Mechanical Integrity........ This is based on the $20,000 per year
assumption that (includes the year
mechanical to implement SEMS).
integrity is This includes the
achieved through quality assurance
preventive inspection plan,
maintenance. The evaluation of
preventive schedule
maintenance program appropriateness,
is defined prior to communication of
the commissioning maintenance
of the facility. We program, salaries,
did not include the maintenance and
cost of maintenance inspection reports,
in this assessment, and recordkeeping.
only the cost of
managing the
program.
Pre-startup Review.......... An operator will $8,000 per year
need to include (includes the year
provisions to to implement SEMS).
verify that the This includes the
facility will pre-startup risk
function according register per
to design, that facility, pre-
personnel have been startup review
properly trained checklists per
and that safe work facility, records
practices are in of pre-startup
place. reviews conducted
and evaluation of
pre-startup
procedures.
Emergency Response and An operator will $15,000 per year
Control. need to include (includes the year
provisions to to implement SEMS).
require that all This includes
emergency response initial
and control plans identification of
be in place and risks and possible
ready for immediate emergencies,
implementation. development of
Specific types of response
plan include, but requirements and
are not limited to, comparison to
emergency existing plans,
evacuation and oil ensuring that
spill contingency drills are
plans. performed as
planned, and
tracking and
evaluating risk
changes. Costs of
emergency response
and drills are not
included in the
assessment, only
the cost of
managing the
procedures
Investigation of Incidents.. An operator will $10,000 per year
need to include (includes the year
procedures for to implement SEMS).
investigating all This includes
incidents with incident and near
serious or miss registers,
potentially serious collecting data,
safety and analyzing, and
environmental developing and
consequences. presentation of
reports. Only the
cost of
preventative
measures such as
near miss tracking
is included in the
evaluation.
Audits...................... The operators are $9,000 every 3 years
required to have an or $3,000 per year.
independent third-
party audit or
their designated
and qualified
personnel of their
SEMS program to
determine if the
program elements
were properly
implemented and
maintained.
Records and Documentation... The operators are $4,000 per year,
required to have based on the
documentation that requirements of
describes the 13 Sec. 250.1928 and
elements of their API RP 75, Section
SEMS program and 13.
the interaction
between the
elements.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The estimated cost for a low activity operator to implement SEMS is
$154,000. The cost for the 48 low activity operators to implement SEMS
is $7,392,000 ($154,000 x 48 operators). The itemized cost to implement
SEMS for a low activity operator is:
Implementation Costs for a Low Activity Operator
General.................................................... $5,000
Safety and Environmental................................... 8,000
Hazards analysis........................................... 25,000
Management of Change....................................... 20,000
Operating Procedures....................................... 10,000
Safe Work Practices........................................ 12,000
Training................................................... 14,000
Mechanical Integrity....................................... 20,000
Pre-Startup................................................ 8,000
Emergency Response and Control............................. 15,000
Investigation of Incidents................................. 10,000
Audits..................................................... 3,000
Records and Documentation.................................. 4,000
------------
Total.................................................. 154,000
[[Page 63644]]
Implementation Costs for a Low Activity Operator (Partial SEMS)
The estimated cost for one low activity operator with a partial
SEMS to implement a comprehensive SEMS is $636,000. The estimated cost
for the 12 low activity operators to implement SEMS is $636,000
($53,000 x 12 operators). The itemized cost is:
General.................................................... $5,000
Safety and Environmental................................... 8,000
Hazards analysis........................................... 0
Management of Change....................................... 0
Operating Procedures....................................... 0
Safe Work Practices........................................ 0
Training................................................... 0
Mechanical Integrity....................................... 0
Pre-Startup................................................ 8,000
Emergency Response and Control............................. 15,000
Investigation of Incidents................................. 10,000
Audits..................................................... 3,000
Records and Documentation.................................. 4,000
------------
Total.................................................. 53,000
Maintenance Cost for a Low Activity Operator
The estimated cost for each low activity operator to maintain their
SEMS program is approximately $77,000 a year. The cost for the 76 low
activity operators to maintain SEMS is $5,852,000.
General.................................................... $2,000
Safety and Environmental................................... 3,000
Hazards analysis........................................... 14,000
Management of Change....................................... 7,000
Operating Procedures....................................... 4,000
Safe Work Practices........................................ 5,000
Training................................................... 9,000
Mechanical Integrity....................................... 11,000
Pre-Startup................................................ 5,000
Emergency Response and Control............................. 7,000
Investigation of Incidents................................. 3,000
Audits *................................................... 3,000
Records and Documentation.................................. 4,000
------------
Total.................................................. 77,000
* Audits are conducted every 3 years at an estimated cost of $9,000 per
audit ($9,000/3 years = $3,000 per year).
.Burden Cost to Submit to BOEMRE
The following are the estimated costs for complying with the
submissions to BOEMRE and associated recordkeeping. The burden hours
that these costs are based on are addressed in the Paperwork Reduction
Act section.
All JSAs conducted will require a supervisor and/or third-
party approval, which will cost $4,233,050 each year.
Operators must demonstrate and explain, if required, the
policies and procedures included in your SEMS, which will cost $4,272
each year.
Make available to BOEMRE evaluations documentation and
supporting information, which will cost $23,140 each year.
On an annual basis, operators must submit Form MMS-131
(Performance Measures Data) to BOEMRE and maintain a contractor
employee injury/illness log in the operation area, which will cost
approximately $115,700.
Operators must notify the BOEMRE when an operator plans to
conduct an audit of its SEMS program in order for BOEMRE to have the
opportunity to participate or observe, must submit plans, submit audit
reports documenting all findings/conclusions/deficiencies, which will
cost approximately $19,135 each year.
Recordkeeping and documentation requirements will cost
$57,850 each year.
The total cost for required paperwork being submitted to BOEMRE
will be approximately $4,443,147.
Summary of Annual Costs To Implement and Maintain SEMS
The total cost to implement and maintain SEMS is approximately
$92,910,811. A summary of all the costs are shown in the following
table:
SEMS Implementation Costs
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cost *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
IMPLEMENTATION of your SEMS:
Buy/develop and implement SEMS Plan for operators $750,000
without a SEMS (60 operators)......................
Implementation cost................................. ..............
High activity operator cost (already implemented)... 0
Moderate activity operator cost ($375,000 x 12)..... 4,500,000
Moderate activity operator cost ($124,000 x 10 1,243,000
operators) (Partial SEMS)..........................
Low activity operator cost ($154,000 x 48).......... 7,392,000
Low activity operator cost ($53,000 x 12) (Partial 636,000
SEMS)..............................................
---------------
TOTAL FIRST YEAR COST........................... 14,521,000
MAINTENANCE of your SEMS:
Maintain SEMS (Annual Cost after Implementation).... ..............
High activity operator cost ($1,670,000 x 13)....... 21,710,000
Moderate activity operator cost ($223,000 x 41)..... 9,143,000
Low activity operator cost ($77,000 x 76)........... 5,852,000
** Conduct required independent third-party audits.. 291,000
Paperwork Burden required by BOEMRE (annual cost)... 41,393,811
---------------
TOTAL ANNUAL COSTS AFTER IMPLEMENTATION......... 78,389,811
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Rounded to the nearest $1,000.
** Required independent audits--approximately 20 percent per operator
per category: 3 required audits for high operator ($20,000 per audit x
3 audits = $60,000); 8 required audits for moderate operator ($12,000
per audit x 8 audits = $96,000); and 15 required audits for low
operator ($9,000 per audit per 15 audits = $135,000) = 26 required
audits per year at a total yearly combined cost of $291,000.
Benefits of SEMS
The ultimate goal of SEMS is to promote safety and environmental
protection during OCS activities. The protection of human life and the
environment are the top priorities and objectives of this rule. While
it is difficult to provide absolute quantification of the benefits of
the lives saved and risks avoided due to this regulation, the BOEMRE
believes that implementation of a comprehensive SEMS program will avoid
accidents that could result in injuries, fatalities, and serious
environmental damage based upon BOEMRE's incident analysis. In
addition, an increase in a system's level of safety leads to reduced
material losses and enhanced productivity.
Some additional benefits include:
Avoiding incident investigation costs and operational
disruptions.
[[Page 63645]]
Improved communication and risk mitigation will prevent many accidents
from occurring.
Reduction of the direct and indirect costs of accidents.
Repair costs, damage claims, increased insurance premiums, and civil
penalties are a few of the potential economic consequences of an
accidental mishap.
Establishing a marketable safety record. A record of
consistently safe operations can attract new business and investment.
Improved employee morale and productivity. Promoting
communication between management and the rest of the organization
prevents disenfranchisement and lifts morale.
Again, while it is difficult to quantify with any degree of
certainty the human safety and environmental benefits of a
comprehensive SEMS program, the financial burden estimated for
developing and managing a SEMS program is minor compared to the costs
associated with major accidents. For example, in 1987, prior to
industry having developed a safety management template for offshore
operations, the Mississippi Canyon 311, A (Bourbon), platform in the
Gulf of Mexico was tilted to one side by an extensive underground
blowout. The cost associated with this incident alone was $274,000,000.
In 1989, a fire associated with a pipeline repair killed 7 people and
destroyed a major production facility. A SEMS plan would have
implemented several procedures and evaluations that may have prevented
these accidents. A SEMS plan is not a guarantee of avoiding all
accidents, but BOEMRE believes that requiring a comprehensive SEMS
program, that includes all 13 elements, will reduce the likelihood of
the types of accidents and incidents discussed in the preamble and will
raise the safety awareness of all personnel in the office and field.
The requirement for SEMS will not have a significant economic
effect on a substantial number of small entities. Based on voluntary
participation in the SEMS program and annual performance reviews, the
BOEMRE estimates that over 40 percent of the small entities currently
operating on the OCS have implemented some form of a SEMS program.
These small entities (28 low activity and 29 moderate activity
operators) implemented SEMS because it improved the efficiency and
safety of their OCS operations. The cost for each of the remaining
small entities to implement (approximately $154,000) and maintain
(approximately $77,000) SEMS is very small compared to the average
annual revenues these entities will generate ($28,000,000) from the
production of oil and gas. BOEMRE estimated the annual revenue by
multiplying the average production for a small entity (700,000 BOE)
times a conservative price for a barrel of oil ($40). These costs
should be less for operators that have already addressed this type of
information. Therefore, this rulemaking will not have a significant
economic effect on a substantial number of small entities.
Your comments are important. The Small Business and Agriculture
Regulatory Enforcement Ombudsman and 10 Regional Fairness Boards were
established to receive comments from small businesses about Federal
agency enforcement actions. The Ombudsman will annually evaluate the
enforcement activities and rate each agency's responsiveness to small
businesses. If you wish to comment on the actions of BOEMRE, call 1-
888-734-3247. You may comment to the Small Business Administration
without fear of retaliation. Allegations of discrimination/retaliation
filed with the Small Business Administration will be investigated for
appropriate action.
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act Subtitle E--
Congressional Review
This final rule is not a major rule under the Small Business
Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act (5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., also known
as the Congressional Review Act). This final rule:
a. Will not have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or
more.
b. Will not cause a major increase in costs or prices for
consumers, individual industries, Federal, State, or local government
agencies, or geographic regions.
c. Will not have significant adverse effects on competition,
employment, investment, productivity, innovation, or the ability of
U.S.-based enterprises to compete with foreign-based enterprises. The
requirements will apply to all entities operating on the OCS.
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
This final rule will not impose an unfunded mandate on State,
local, or tribal governments or the private sector of more than $100
million per year, adjusted for inflation. This 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 the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (2 U.S.C. 1501 et seq.) is not
required.
Takings Implication Assessment (E.O. 12630)
Under the criteria in E.O. 12630, this final rule does not have
significant takings implications. The final rule is not a governmental
action capable of interference with constitutionally protected property
rights. A Takings Implication Assessment is not required.
Federalism (E.O. 13132)
Under the criteria in E.O. 13132, this 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
in OCS activities, this final rule will not affect that role. A
Federalism Assessment is not required.
Civil Justice Reform (E.O. 12988)
This rule complies with the requirements of E.O. 12988.
Specifically, this rule:
(a) 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
(b) Meets the criteria of section 3(b)(2) requiring that all
regulations be written in clear language and contain clear legal
standards.
Consultation With Indian Tribes (E.O. 13175)
Under the criteria in E.O. 13175, we have evaluated this final rule
and determined that it has no substantial effects on federally
recognized Indian tribes.
Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)
This rule contains a collection of information that was submitted
to the OMB for review and approval under the Paperwork Reduction Act of
1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). The title of the information collection
(IC) for this rule is 30 CFR Part 250, Subpart S, Safety and
Environmental Management Systems for Outer Continental Shelf Oil and
Gas and Sulphur Operations. The OMB approved the collection under
Control Number 1010-0186, expiration date 10/31/2013, 465,099 hours,
$12,933,000 non-hour cost burdens. Respondents primarily are an
estimated 130 Federal OCS oil, gas, and sulphur lessees and/or
operators or other independent third parties. The frequency of response
varies, but is primarily annual. Responses to this IC are mandatory.
This rulemaking adds a new subpart to the 30 CFR Part 250 regulations.
BOEMRE will use the information to: Evaluate the effect of
[[Page 63646]]
industry's continued improvement of safety and environmental management
of the OCS; develop an industry average that helps to describe how well
the offshore oil and gas industry is performing; and judge the
reasonableness of company requests for any specific regulatory relief.
BOEMRE will protect proprietary information according to the
Freedom of Information Act (5 U.S.C. 522) and its implementing
regulations (43 CFR Part 2), and 30 CFR 250.197, Data and information
to be made available to the public or for limited inspection.
Section 250.198 lists all of the 30 CFR Part 250 incorporated
documents. The section is revised to include the new 30 CFR Part 250,
Subpart S, incorporated document added under this regulation.
As stated in the preamble, we received 61 comments, of which 99
percent made some mention of the IC burden. Generally, these commenters
said that the IC requirements were too burdensome and that the rule was
too prescriptive and should follow API RP 75. BOEMRE is incorporating
by reference API RP 75 to replace virtually all of the requirements in
the proposed rule. The incorporation of this document allows the
operators to address the diversity of operations while developing their
SEMS program. Also, all the commenters remarked that the burden hour
estimates were too low; therefore, we increased the burdens to reflect
this concern. In response to the comments, BOEMRE has included a new IC
requirement in the final rule, adjusted hour burdens, and non-hour cost
burdens as follows:
a. In Sec. Sec. 250.1900-250.1929 under Operator Activity in the
proposed rule, the burden hours were increased.
1. High Activity operator burden is increased from the proposed
rule due to incorporating API RP 75 in its entirety, which will
increase the hour burden (+217,204 hours).
2. Moderate Activity operator burden is increased from the proposed
rule due to incorporating API RP 75 in its entirety, which will
increase the hour burden and non-hour costs (+64,042 hours;
$2,580,000).
3. Low Activity operator burden is increased from the proposed rule
due to incorporating API RP 75 in its entirety, which will increase the
hour burden and non-hour costs (+44,384 hours; $5,472,000).
b. In Sec. 250.1911(b), the designated person in charge of the
activity must have approval to conduct a JSA. This requirement will
help determine that all physical requirements, environmental
conditions, personal protective equipment, and safety factors relating
to a specific job or task have been identified properly (+47,450
hours).
c. In Sec. 250.1914(d), a contractor employee injury/illness log
must be kept in the operation area. This requirement is needed to
assist in filling out Form MMS-131; therefore, we consider this burden
as part of the form burden. (Current OMB approved burden per form is 8
hours; this rulemaking increases the burden per form by an additional 2
hours per form (+260 hours).
d. In Sec. 250.1924(b), BOEMRE has added necessary requirements
pertaining to verification of the accuracy of industry's SEMS
documentation (+260 burden hours)).
e. In Sec. 250.1925(a) there is a new non-hour cost burden that
will require an operator to pay for all costs associated with an BOEMRE
directed audit. This cost is based on a potential of 26 BOEMRE directed
audits a year (+$291,000).
f. For clarity purposes, we placed the majority of all the
recordkeeping and documentation requirements in one regulatory
requirement, Sec. 250.1928. This will help respondents determine their
requirements at a glance (+650 hours).
The following table provides a breakdown of the burdens.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Non-hour cost burdens
Reporting and recordkeeping ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Citation 30 CFR 250 subpart S requirement Average number of annual Annual burden
Hour burden responses hours
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1900-1929............................. High Activity Operator: Have a 18,708........................ 13 operators................. 243,204
SEMS program, and maintain
all documentation and records
pertaining to your SEMS
program, according to API RP
75 in its entirety. Make your
SEMS available to BOEMRE upon
request. As part of your
SEMS, you must also develop
and implement written JSAs
for each OCS activity
identified or discussed in
your SEMS. NOTE: Based on
previous information, High
Activity Operators already
have a SEMS in place.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1900-1929............................. Moderate Activity Operator: 2,528......................... 41 operators................. 103,648
Have a SEMS program, and
maintain all documentation
and records pertaining to
your SEMS program, according
to API RP 75 in its entirety.
Make your SEMS available to
BOEMRE upon request. As part
of your SEMS, you must also
develop and implement written
JSAs for each OCS activity
identified or discussed in
your SEMS.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Moderate Activity Operator $375,000 per moderate activity
Implementation. (One time implementation x 12 operators
cost to implement SEMS). = $4,500,000
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 63647]]
1900-1929............................. Low Activity Operator: Have a 899........................... 76 operators................. 68,324
SEMS program, and maintain
all documentation and records
pertaining to your SEMS
program, according to API RP
75 in its entirety. Make your
SEMS available to BOEMRE upon
request. As part of your
SEMS, you must also develop
and implement written JSAs
for each OCS activity
identified or discussed in
your SEMS.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Low Activity Operator $154,000 per low activity
Implementation. (One time implementation x 48 operators
cost to implement SEMS). = $7,392,000.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1900.................................. Develop and implement a SEMS $2,500 per implementation x 60
program (One time operators = $150,000.
implementation cost of SEMS
template).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1900.................................. In-house modification (one $10,000 per implementation x
time implementation cost) of 60 operators = $600,000.
the generic SEMS program to
meet needs of specific
company.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1911(b)............................... Supervisor approval to conduct 10 mins....................... 130 operators x 365 days x 6 47,450
a JSA. = 284,700 *.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1900(b); 1914(d); 1928(d), (e); 1929.. Submit Form MMS-131. Maintain 10............................ 130 operators................ 1,300
a contractor employee injury/
illness log in the operation
area, retain for 2 years, and
make available to BOEMRE upon
request (this requirement is
included in the form burden).
Inform contractors of hazards.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1920.................................. Notify BOEMRE with audit 1............................. 130 operators/once every 3 43 (rounded)
schedule 30 days prior to years = 43.
conducting your audit.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1920(c); 1925(a), (c)................. Submit to BOEMRE after 3............................. 44 operators................. 132
completed audit, report of
findings and conclusions,
including deficiencies and
required supporting
information/documentation.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1920(d)............................... Submit a copy of your plan 4............................. 10 submissions............... 40
that will address
deficiencies identified in
audit, including a correction
schedule with appropriate
supporting information.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1924(b);.............................. Make available to BOEMRE upon 2............................. 130 operators................ 260
request, evaluation
documentation and supporting
information relating to your
SEMS.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1924(c)............................... Explain and demonstrate your 8............................. 6 explanations............... 48
SEMS during site visit if
required; provide evidence
supporting your SEMS
implementation.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1925(a)............................... Pay for all costs associated 26 BOEMRE directed audits--for
with BOEMRE directed audit a total of = $291,000.
approximately 20 percent per
operator per category: 3
required audits for high
operator ($20,000 per audit x
3 audits = $60,000); 8
required audits for moderate
operator ($12,000 per audit x
8 audits = $96,000; and 15
required audits for low
operator ($9,000 per audit
per 15 audits = $135,000) =
26 required audits per year
at a total yearly combined
cost of $291,000.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 63648]]
1928.................................. (1) Document and keep all SEMS 5............................. 130 operators................ 650
audits for 6 years (at least
2 full audit cycles) at an
onshore location, and make
available to BOEMRE upon
request. (2) JSAs must have
documented results in writing
and kept onsite for 30 days;
retain records for 2 years
and make available upon
request to BOEMRE. (3) All
MOC records (API RP Sec 4)
must be documented, dated,
and retained for 2 years and
make available to BOEMRE upon
request.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTAL BURDEN...................... .............................. .............................. 285,469...................... 465,099
-------------------------------------------------
$12,933,000 Non-Hour Cost Burdens
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* We calculated operators conducting six JSAs a day (3 JSAs for each 12 hour shift). Some contractors may perform none for a particular day, whereas
others may conduct more than six per day. This estimate is an average.
An agency 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 public may comment, at any time, on the
accuracy of the IC burden in this rule and may submit any comments to
the Department of the Interior; Bureau of Ocean Energy Management,
Regulation and Enforcement; Attention: Regulations and Standards
Branch; Mail Stop 4024; 381 Elden Street; Herndon, Virginia 20170-4817.
National Environmental Policy Act of 1969
This rule does not constitute a major Federal action significantly
affecting the quality of the human environment. BOEMRE has analyzed
this final rule under the criteria of the National Environmental Policy
Act and 516 Departmental Manual 15. This final rule meets the criteria
set forth in 43 CFR 46.210 for a Departmental ``Categorical Exclusion''
in that this rule is ``* * * of an administrative, financial, legal,
technical, or procedural nature * * *'' This rule also meets the
criteria set forth in 516 Departmental Manual 15.4(C)(1) for a BOEMRE
``Categorical Exclusion'' in that its impacts are limited to
administrative, economic or technological effects. Further, the BOEMRE
has analyzed this rule to determine if it meets any of the
extraordinary circumstances that will require an environmental
assessment or an environmental impact statement as set forth in 43 CFR
46.215.
Each section and subsection has also been reviewed to ensure that
no potentially relevant extraordinary circumstances apply to the
proposed action that would warrant the preparation of an environmental
assessment or environmental impact statement. All extraordinary
circumstances were considered in accordance with 43 CFR 46.215, but
only the following ones are potentially applicable:
a. Have significant impacts on public health or safety.
e. Establish a precedent for future action or represent a decision
in principle about future actions with potentially significant
environmental effects.
f. Have a direct relationship to other actions with individually
insignificant but cumulatively significant environmental effects.
The first extraordinary circumstance does not apply since rule
promulgation will not contribute to any significant and adverse impacts
on public health and safety. The SEMS program is likely to improve OCS
safety, given the available incident data trends and associated 10
years of analysis. The second extraordinary circumstance does not apply
since the promulgation of the rule or the eventual implementation of
SEMS by operators does not set precedent for future actions or
decisions by BOEMRE. The last extraordinary circumstance does not apply
since there is no direct relationship between this rulemaking and other
actions that could together contribute to cumulatively significant
effects.
Most subsections of the rule address strictly administrative,
technical, and/or procedural matters. Specific examples include
definitions of terminology, scope and timing of documentation,
recordkeeping, and transfer of information, and general descriptions of
what is to be included in written procedures. The rule does not create
the potential for environmental effects as a result of new
technologies, technology configurations, or technological procedures as
such measures are not part of the rule. For aspects of the rule dealing
with mechanical integrity and inspections, the requirements are
procedural and technical as the rule covers the content of the written
procedures. While the rule identifies the requirement, it allows the
operator to choose the means to accomplish the end as long as it is
consistent with the SEMS requirements.
Other subsections require activities in addition to administrative
tasks, advance planning and procedural documentation, such as training
and emergency response drills and corrective procedural actions that
address human errors identified in investigations. These requirements
are also considered procedural in nature since the subsections describe
general and ordered steps that operators must undertake to have and
maintain a compliant SEMS program. Subsections that require training or
drilling of personnel are procedural in that they target the cognitive
skills and knowledge of personnel (e.g., 250.1915(b)) and/or clarify
the purpose and/or scope of training (e.g., 250.1918(c)). For example,
in 30 CFR 250.1918, BOEMRE requires training and drills for personnel
to exercise elements in the Emergency Action Plan that focus on
response, control, and evacuation procedures and reporting. The
principal purpose of this is to ensure retention of and refine the
skills, knowledge, and abilities of personnel.
BOEMRE concluded that this rule does not meet any of the criteria
for extraordinary circumstances as set forth in 43 CFR 46.215.
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.
[[Page 63649]]
C Sec. 515, 114 Stat. 2763, 2763A-153-154).
Effects on the Energy Supply (E.O. 13211)
This rule is not a significant energy action under the definition
in E.O. 13211. A Statement of Energy Effects is not required.
List of Subjects in 30 CFR Part 250
Administrative practice and procedure, Continental shelf,
Environmental protection, Incorporation by reference, Public Lands--
mineral resources, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: October 1, 2010.
Wilma A. Lewis,
Assistant Secretary--Land and Minerals Management.
0
For the reasons stated in the preamble, Bureau of Ocean Energy
Management, Regulation and Enforcement (BOEMRE) is amending 30 CFR part
250 as follows:
PART 250--OIL AND GAS AND SULPHUR OPERATIONS IN THE OUTER
CONTINENTAL SHELF
0
1. The authority citation for 30 CFR part 250 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 31 U.S.C. 9701, 43 U.S.C. 1334.
0
2. Amend Sec. 250.198 by adding new paragraph (h)(80) to read as
follows:
Sec. 250.198 Documents Incorporated by Reference.
* * * * *
(h) * * *
(80) API RP 75, Recommended Practice for Development of a Safety
and Environmental Management Program for Offshore Operations and
Facilities, Third Edition, May 2004, Reaffirmed May 2008, Product No.
G07503; incorporated by reference at Sec. 250.1900, Sec. 250.1900(c),
Sec. 250.1902(c), Sec. 250.1903, Sec. 250.1909, Sec. 250.1920(a)
and (b).
* * * * *
0
3. Revise Sec. 250.199(e)(17) to read as follows:
Sec. 250.199 Paperwork Reduction Act statements--information
collection.
* * * * *
(e) * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
30 CFR subpart, title and/or BOEMRE Reasons for collecting
form (OMB Control No.) information and how used
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
(17) Subpart S, Safety and The SEMS program will describe
Environmental Management Systems (1010- management commitment to
0186), including Form MMS-131, safety and the environment, as
Performance Measures Data. well as policies and
procedures to assure safety
and environmental protection
while conducting OCS
operations (including those
operations conducted by
contractor and subcontractor
personnel). The information
collected is the form to
gather the raw Performance
Measures Data relating to risk
and number of accidents,
injuries, and oil spills
during OCS activities.
* * * * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
0
4. Add new subpart S to read as follows:
Subpart S--Safety and Environmental Management Systems (SEMS)
Sec.
250.1900 Must I have a SEMS program?
250.1901 What is the goal of my SEMS program?
250.1902 What must I include in my SEMS program?
250.1903 Definitions.
250.1904 Documents incorporated by reference
250.1905 through 250.1908 [Reserved]
250.1909 What is management's general responsibilities for the SEMS
program?
250.1910 What safety and environmental information is required?
250.1911 What criteria for hazards analyses must my SEMS program
meet?
250.1912 What criteria for management of change must my SEMS program
meet?
250.1913 What criteria for operating procedures must my SEMS program
meet?
250.1914 What criteria must be documented in my SEMS program for
safe work practices and contractor selection?
250.1915 What criteria for training must be in my SEMS program?
250.1916 What criteria for mechanical integrity must my SEMS program
meet?
250.1917 What criteria for pre-startup review must be in my SEMS
program?
250.1918 What criteria for emergency response and control must be in
my SEMS program?
250.1919 What criteria for investigation of incidents must be in my
SEMS program?
250.1920 What are the auditing requirements for my SEMS program?
250.1921 through 250.1923 [RESERVED]
250.1924 How will BOEMRE determine if my SEMS program is effective?
250.1925 May BOEMRE direct me to conduct additional audits?
250.1926 What qualifications must an independent third party or my
designated and qualified personnel meet?
250.1927 What happens if BOEMRE finds shortcomings in my SEMS
program?
250.1928 What are my recordkeeping and documentation requirements?
250.1929 What are my responsibilities for submitting OCS performance
measure data?
Sec. 250.1900 Must I have a SEMS program?
You must develop, implement, and maintain a safety and
environmental management system (SEMS) program. Your SEMS program must
address the elements described in Sec. 250.1902, American Petroleum
Institute's Recommended Practice for Development of a Safety and
Environmental Management Program for Offshore Operations and Facilities
(API RP 75) (incorporated by reference as specified in Sec. 250.198),
and other requirements as identified in this subpart.
(a) You must comply with the provisions of this subpart and have
your SEMS program in effect on or before November 15, 2011, except for
the submission of Form MMS-131 as required in Sec. 250.1929.
(b) You must submit Form MMS-131 on an annual basis beginning March
31, 2011.
(c) If there are any conflicts between the requirements of this
subpart and API RP 75 (incorporated by reference as specified in Sec.
250.198), you must follow the requirements of this subpart.
(d) Nothing in this subpart affects safety or other matters under
the jurisdiction of the Coast Guard.
Sec. 250.1901 What is the goal of my SEMS program?
The goal of your SEMS program is to promote safety and
environmental protection by ensuring all personnel aboard a facility
are complying with the policies and procedures identified in your SEMS.
[[Page 63650]]
(a) To accomplish this goal, you must ensure that your SEMS program
identifies, addresses, and manages safety, environmental hazards, and
impacts during the design, construction, start-up, operation,
inspection, and maintenance of all new and existing facilities,
including mobile offshore drilling units (MODU) while under BOEMRE
jurisdiction and Department of Interior (DOI) regulated pipelines.
(b) All personnel involved with your SEMS program must be trained
to have the skills and knowledge to perform their assigned duties.
Sec. 250.1902 What must I include in my SEMS program?
You must have a properly documented SEMS program in place and make
it available to BOEMRE upon request as required by Sec. 250.1924(b).
(a) Your SEMS program must meet the minimum criteria outlined in
this subpart, including the following SEMS program elements:
(1) General (see Sec. 250.1909)
(2) Safety and Environmental Information (see Sec. 250.1910)
(3) Hazards Analysis (see Sec. 250.1911)
(4) Management of Change (see Sec. 250.1912)
(5) Operating Procedures (see Sec. 250.1913)
(6) Safe Work Practices (see Sec. 250.1914)
(7) Training (see Sec. 250.1915)
(8) Mechanical Integrity (Assurance of Quality and Mechanical
Integrity of Critical Equipment) (see Sec. 250.1916)
(9) Pre-startup Review (see Sec. 250.1917)
(10) Emergency Response and Control (see Sec. 250.1918)
(11) Investigation of Incidents (see Sec. 250.1919)
(12) Auditing (Audit of Safety and Environmental Management Program
Elements) (see Sec. Sec. 250.1920)
(13) Recordkeeping (Records and Documentation) and additional
BOEMRE requirements (see Sec. 250.1928).
(b) You must also include a job safety analysis (JSA) for OCS
activities identified or discussed in your SEMS program (see Sec.
250.1911(b)).
(c) Your SEMS program must meet or exceed the standards of safety
and environmental protection of API RP 75 (incorporated by reference as
specified in Sec. 250.198).
Sec. 250.1903 Definitions.
Definitions listed in this section apply to this subpart and
supersede definitions in API RP 75, Appendices D and E (incorporated by
reference as specified in Sec. 250.198).
Designated and qualified personnel means employees (not
contractors) that are knowledgeable of your program, and have actual
work experience and training in implementing and auditing a SEMS or a
similar program in an offshore oil and gas environment.
Personnel means direct employee(s) of the operator and contracted
workers who are involved with or affected by specific jobs or tasks.
Sec. 250.1904 Documents Incorporated by Reference.
The effect of incorporation by reference of a document into the
regulations in this part is that the incorporated document is a
requirement. When a section in this part incorporates all of a
document, you are responsible for complying with the provisions of that
entire document, except to the extent that section provides otherwise.
If any incorporated document uses the word ``should'', it means must
for purposes of these regulations.
Sec. Sec. 250.1905 through 250.1908 [Reserved]
Sec. 250.1909 What are management's general responsibilities for the
SEMS Program?
You, through your management, must require that the program
elements discussed in API RP 75 (incorporated by reference as specified
in Sec. 250.198) and in this subpart are properly documented and are
available at field and office locations, as appropriate for each
program element. You, through your management, are responsible for the
development, support, continued improvement, and overall success of
your SEMS program. Specifically you, through your management, must:
(a) Establish goals and performance measures, demand accountability
for implementation, and provide necessary resources for carrying out an
effective SEMS program.
(b) Appoint management representatives who are responsible for
establishing, implementing and maintaining an effective SEMS program.
(c) Designate specific management representatives who are
responsible for reporting to management on the performance of the SEMS
program.
(d) At intervals specified in the SEMS program and at least
annually, review the SEMS program to determine if it continues to be
suitable, adequate and effective (by addressing the possible need for
changes to policy, objectives, and other elements of the program in
light of program audit results, changing circumstances and the
commitment to continual improvement) and document the observations,
conclusions and recommendations of that review.
(e) Develop and endorse a written description of your safety and
environmental policies and organizational structure that define
responsibilities, authorities, and lines of communication required to
implement the SEMS program.
(f) Utilize personnel with expertise in identifying safety hazards,
environmental impacts, optimizing operations, developing safe work
practices, developing training programs and investigating incidents.
(g) Ensure that facilities are designed, constructed, maintained,
monitored, and operated in a manner compatible with applicable industry
codes, consensus standards, and generally accepted practice as well as
in compliance with all applicable governmental regulations.
(h) Ensure that management of safety hazards and environmental
impacts is an integral part of the design, construction, maintenance,
operation, and monitoring of each facility.
(i) Ensure that suitably trained and qualified personnel are
employed to carry out all aspects of the SEMS program.
(j) Ensure that the SEMS program is maintained and kept up to date
by means of periodic audits to ensure effective performance.
Sec. 250.1910 What safety and environmental information is required?
(a) You must require that SEMS program safety and environmental
information be developed and maintained for any facility that is
subject to the SEMS program.
(b) SEMS program safety and environmental information must include:
(1) Information that provides the basis for implementing all SEMS
program elements, including the requirements of hazard analysis (Sec.
250.1911);
(2) process design information including, as appropriate, a
simplified process flow diagram and acceptable upper and lower limits,
where applicable, for items such as temperature, pressure, flow and
composition; and
(3) mechanical design information including, as appropriate, piping
and instrument diagrams; electrical area classifications; equipment
arrangement drawings; design basis of the relief system; description of
alarm, shutdown, and interlock systems; description of well control
systems; and design basis for passive and active fire protection
features and systems and emergency evacuation procedures.
[[Page 63651]]
Sec. 250.1911 What criteria for hazards analyses must my SEMS program
meet?
You must ensure the development and implementation of a hazards
analysis (facility level) and a job safety analysis (operations/task
level) for all of your facilities. For this subpart, facilities include
all types of offshore structures permanently or temporarily attached to
the seabed (i.e., mobile offshore drilling units; floating production
systems; floating production, storage and offloading facilities;
tension-leg platforms; and spars) used for exploration, development,
production, and transportation activities for oil, gas, or sulphur from
areas leased in the OCS. Facilities also include DOI regulated
pipelines. You must document and maintain current analyses for each
operation covered by this section for the life of the operation at the
facility. The analyses must be updated when an internal audit is
conducted to ensure that it is consistent with the current operations
on your facility. Hazards analysis requirements for simple and nearly
identical facilities, such as well jackets and single well caissons,
may be fulfilled by performing a single hazards analysis which you can
apply to all such facilities after you verify that any site specific
deviations are addressed in each of the elements of your SEMS program.
(a) Hazards Analysis (facility level). For a hazards analysis
(facility level), you must perform an initial hazards analysis on each
facility on or before November 15, 2011. The hazards analysis must be
appropriate to the complexity of the operation and must identify,
evaluate, and manage the hazards involved in the operation.
(1) The hazards analysis must address the following:
(i) Hazards of the operation;
(ii) Previous incidents related to the operation you are
evaluating, including any incident in which you were issued an Incident
of Noncompliance or a civil or criminal penalty;
(iii) Control technology applicable to the operation your hazards
analysis is evaluating; and
(iv) A qualitative evaluation of the possible safety and health
effects on employees, and potential impacts to the human and marine
environments, which may result if the control technology fails.
(2) The hazards analysis must be performed by a person(s) with
experience in the operations being evaluated. These individuals also
need to be experienced in the hazards analysis methodologies being
employed.
(3) You should assure that the recommendations in the hazards
analysis are resolved and that the resolution is documented.
(b) Job Safety Analysis (JSA). You must develop and implement a JSA
for OCS activities identified or discussed in your SEMS program.
(1) You must keep a copy of the most recent JSA (operations/task
level) at the job site and it must be readily accessible to employees.
(2) Your JSA must identify, analyze, and record:
(i) The steps involved in performing a specific job;
(ii) the existing or potential safety and health hazards associated
with each step; and
(iii) the recommended action(s)/procedure(s) that will eliminate or
reduce these hazards and the risk of a workplace injury or illness.
(3) The supervisor of the person in charge of the task must approve
the JSA prior to the commencement of the work.
Sec. 250.1912 What criteria for management of change must my SEMS
program meet?
(a) You must develop and implement written management of change
procedures for modifications associated with the following:
(1) Equipment,
(2) Operating procedures,
(3) Personnel changes (including contractors),
(4) Materials, and
(5) Operating conditions.
(b) Management of change procedures do not apply to situations
involving replacement in kind (such as, replacement of one component by
another component with the same performance capabilities).
(c) You must review all changes prior to their implementation.
(d) The following items must be included in your management of
change procedures:
(1) The technical basis for the change;
(2) Impact of the change on safety, health, and the coastal and
marine environments;
(3) Necessary time period to implement the change; and
(4) Management approval procedures for the change.
(e) Employees, including contractors whose job tasks will be
affected by a change in the operation, must be informed of, and trained
in, the change prior to startup of the process or affected part of the
operation; and
(f) If a management of change results in a change in the operating
procedures of your SEMS program, such changes must be documented and
dated.
Sec. 250.1913 What criteria for operating procedures must my SEMS
program meet?
(a) You must develop and implement written operating procedures
that provide instructions for conducting safe and environmentally sound
activities involved in each operation addressed in your SEMS program.
These procedures must include the job title and reporting relationship
of the person or persons responsible for each of the facility's
operating areas and address the following:
(1) Initial startup;
(2) Normal operations;
(3) All emergency operations (including but not limited to medical
evacuations, weather-related evacuations and emergency shutdown
operations);
(4) Normal shutdown;
(5) Startup following a turnaround, or after an emergency shutdown;
(6) Bypassing and flagging out-of-service equipment;
(7) Safety and environmental consequences of deviating from your
equipment operating limits and steps required to correct or avoid this
deviation;
(8) Properties of, and hazards presented by, the chemicals used in
the operations;
(9) Precautions you will take to prevent the exposure of chemicals
used in your operations to personnel and the environment. The
precautions must include control technology, personal protective
equipment, and measures to be taken if physical contact or airborne
exposure occurs;
(10) Raw materials used in your operations and the quality control
procedures you used in purchasing these raw materials;
(11) Control of hazardous chemical inventory; and
(12) Impacts to the human and marine environment identified through
your hazards analysis.
(b) Operating procedures must be accessible to all employees
involved in the operations.
(c) Operating procedures must be reviewed at the conclusion of
specified periods and as often as necessary to assure they reflect
current and actual operating practices, including any changes made to
your operations.
(d) You must develop and implement safe and environmentally sound
work practices for identified hazards during operations and the degree
of hazard presented.
(e) Review of and changes to the procedures must be documented and
communicated to responsible personnel.
Sec. 250.1914 What criteria must be documented in my SEMS program for
safe work practices and contractor selection?
Your SEMS program must establish and implement safe work practices
[[Page 63652]]
designed to minimize the risks associated with operating, maintenance,
and modification activities and the handling of materials and
substances that could affect safety or the environment. Your SEMS
program must also document contractor selection criteria. When
selecting a contractor, you must obtain and evaluate information
regarding the contractor's safety and environmental performance.
Operators must ensure that contractors have their own written safe work
practices. Contractors may adopt appropriate sections of the operator's
SEMS program. Operator and contractor must document their agreement on
appropriate contractor safety and environmental policies and practices
before the contractor begins work at the operator's facilities.
(a) A contractor is anyone performing work for the lessee. However,
these requirements do not apply to contractors providing domestic
services to the lessee or other contractors. Domestic services include
janitorial work, food and beverage service, laundry service,
housekeeping, and similar activities.
(b) You must document that your contracted employees are
knowledgeable and experienced in the work practices necessary to
perform their job in a safe and environmentally sound manner.
Documentation of each contracted employee's expertise to perform his/
her job and a copy of the contractor's safety policies and procedures
must be made available to the operator and BOEMRE upon request.
(c) Your SEMS program must include procedures and verification for
selecting a contractor as follows:
(1) Your SEMS program must have procedures that verify that
contractors are conducting their activities in accordance with your
SEMS program.
(2) You are responsible for making certain that contractors have
the skills and knowledge to perform their assigned duties and are
conducting these activities in accordance with the requirements in your
SEMS program.
(3) You must make the results of your verification for selecting
contractors available to BOEMRE upon request.
(d) Your SEMS program must include procedures and verification that
contractor personnel understand and can perform their assigned duties
for activities such as, but not limited to:
(1) Installation, maintenance, or repair of equipment;
(2) construction, startup, and operation of your facilities;
(3) turnaround operations;
(4) major renovation; or
(5) specialty work.
(e) You must:
(1) Perform periodic evaluations of the performance of contract
employees that verifies they are fulfilling their obligations, and
(2) maintain a contractor employee injury and illness log for 2
years related to the contractor's work in the operation area, and
include this information on Form MMS-131.
(f) You must inform your contractors of any known hazards at the
facility they are working on including, but not limited to fires,
explosions, slips, trips, falls, other injuries, and hazards associated
with lifting operations.
(g) You must develop and implement safe work practices to control
the presence, entrance, and exit of contract employees in operation
areas.
Sec. 250.1915 What criteria for training must be in my SEMS program?
Your SEMS program must establish and implement a training program
so that all personnel are trained to work safely and are aware of
environmental considerations offshore, in accordance with their duties
and responsibilities. Training must address the operating procedures
(Sec. 250.1913), the safe work practices (Sec. 250.1914), and the
emergency response and control measures (Sec. 250.1918). You must
document the qualifications of your instructors. Your SEMS program must
address:
(a) Initial training for the basic well-being of personnel and
protection of the environment, and ensure that persons assigned to
operate and maintain the facility possess the required knowledge and
skills to carry out their duties and responsibilities, including
startup and shutdown.
(b) Periodic training to maintain understanding of, and adherence
to, the current operating procedures, using periodic drills, to verify
adequate retention of the required knowledge and skills.
(c) Communication requirements to ensure that whenever a change is
made to operating procedures (Sec. 250.1913), the safe work practices
(Sec. 250.1914), or the emergency response and control measures (Sec.
250.1918), personnel will be trained in or otherwise informed of the
change before they are expected to operate the facility.
(d) How you will verify that the contractors are trained in the
work practices necessary to perform their jobs in a safe and
environmentally sound manner, including training on operating
procedures (Sec. 250.1913), the safe work practices (Sec. 250.1914),
or the emergency response and control measures (Sec. 250.1918).
Sec. 250.1916 What criteria for mechanical integrity must my SEMS
program meet?
You must develop and implement written procedures that provide
instructions to ensure the mechanical integrity and safe operation of
equipment through inspection, testing, and quality assurance. The
purpose of mechanical integrity is to ensure that equipment is fit for
service. Your mechanical integrity program must encompass all equipment
and systems used to prevent or mitigate uncontrolled releases of
hydrocarbons, toxic substances, or other materials that may cause
environmental or safety consequences. These procedures must address the
following:
(a) The design, procurement, fabrication, installation,
calibration, and maintenance of your equipment and systems in
accordance with the manufacturer's design and material specifications.
(b) The training of each employee involved in maintaining your
equipment and systems so that your employees can implement your
mechanical integrity program.
(c) The frequency of inspections and tests of your equipment and
systems. The frequency of inspections and tests must be in accordance
with BOEMRE regulations and meet the manufacturer's recommendations.
Inspections and tests can be performed more frequently if determined to
be necessary by prior operating experience.
(d) The documentation of each inspection and test that has been
performed on your equipment and systems. This documentation must
identify the date of the inspection or test; include the name and
position, and the signature of the person who performed the inspection
or test; include the serial number or other identifier of the equipment
on which the inspection or test was performed; include a description of
the inspection or test performed; and the results of the inspection
test.
(e) The correction of deficiencies associated with equipment and
systems that are outside the manufacturer's recommended limits. Such
corrections must be made before further use of the equipment and
system.
(f) The installation of new equipment and constructing systems. The
procedures must address the application for which they will be used.
(g) The modification of existing equipment and systems. The
procedures must ensure that they are modified for the application for
which they will be used.
(h) The verification that inspections and tests are being
performed. The
[[Page 63653]]
procedures must be appropriate to ensure that equipment and systems are
installed consistent with design specifications and the manufacturer's
instructions.
(i) The assurance that maintenance materials, spare parts, and
equipment are suitable for the applications for which they will be
used.
Sec. 250.1917 What criteria for pre-startup review must be in my SEMS
program?
Your SEMS program must require that the commissioning process
include a pre-startup safety and environmental review for new and
significantly modified facilities that are subject to this subpart to
confirm that the following criteria are met:
(a) Construction and equipment are in accordance with applicable
specifications.
(b) Safety, environmental, operating, maintenance, and emergency
procedures are in place and are adequate.
(c) Safety and environmental information is current.
(d) Hazards analysis recommendations have been implemented as
appropriate.
(e) Training of operating personnel has been completed.
(f) Programs to address management of change and other elements of
this subpart are in place.
(g) Safe work practices are in place.
Sec. 250.1918 What criteria for emergency response and control must
be in my SEMS program?
Your SEMS program must require that emergency response and control
plans are in place and are ready for immediate implementation. These
plans must be validated by drills carried out in accordance with a
schedule defined by the SEMS training program (Sec. 250.1915). The
SEMS emergency response and control plans must include:
(a) Emergency Action Plan that assigns authority and responsibility
to the appropriate qualified person(s) at a facility for initiating
effective emergency response and control, addressing emergency
reporting and response requirements, and complying with all applicable
governmental regulations;
(b) Emergency Control Center(s) designated for each facility with
access to the Emergency Action Plans, oil spill contingency plan, and
other safety and environmental information (Sec. 250.1910); and
(c) Training and Drills incorporating emergency response and
evacuation procedures conducted periodically for all personnel
(including contractor's personnel), as required by the SEMS training
program (Sec. 250.1915). Drills must be based on realistic scenarios
conducted periodically to exercise elements contained in the facility
or area emergency action plan. An analysis and critique of each drill
must be conducted to identify and correct weaknesses.
Sec. 250.1919 What criteria for investigation of incidents must be in
my SEMS program?
To learn from incidents and help prevent similar incidents, your
SEMS program must establish procedures for investigation of all
incidents with serious safety or environmental consequences and require
investigation of incidents that are determined by facility management
or BOEMRE to have possessed the potential for serious safety or
environmental consequences. Incident investigations must be initiated
as promptly as possible, with due regard for the necessity of securing
the incident scene and protecting people and the environment. Incident
investigations must be conducted by personnel knowledgeable in the
process involved, investigation techniques, and other specialties that
are relevant or necessary.
(a) The investigation of an incident must address the following:
(1) The nature of the incident;
(2) The factors (human or other) that contributed to the initiation
of the incident and its escalation/control; and
(3) Recommended changes identified as a result of the
investigation.
(b) A corrective action program must be established based on the
findings of the investigation in order to analyze incidents for common
root causes. The corrective action program must:
(1) Retain the findings of investigations for use in the next
hazard analysis update or audit;
(2) Determine and document the response to each finding to ensure
that corrective actions are completed; and
(3) Implement a system whereby conclusions of investigations are
distributed to similar facilities and appropriate personnel within
their organization.
Sec. 250.1920 What are the auditing requirements for my SEMS program?
(a) You must have your SEMS program audited by either an
independent third-party or your designated and qualified personnel
according to the requirements of this subpart and API RP 75, Section 12
(incorporated by reference as specified in Sec. 250.198) within 2
years of the initial implementation of the SEMS program and at least
once every 3 years thereafter. The audit must be a comprehensive audit
of all thirteen elements of your SEMS program to evaluate compliance
with the requirements of this subpart and API RP 75 to identify areas
in which safety and environmental performance needs to be improved.
(b) Your audit plan and procedures must meet or exceed all of the
recommendations included in API RP 75 section 12 (incorporated by
reference as specified in Sec. 250.198) and include information on how
you addressed those recommendations. You must specifically address the
following items:
(1) Section 12.1 General.
(2) Section 12.2 Scope.
(3) Section 12.3 Audit Coverage.
(4) Section 12.4 Audit Plan. You must submit your written Audit
Plan to BOEMRE at least 30 days before the audit. BOEMRE reserves the
right to modify the list of facilities that you propose to audit.
(5) Section 12.5 Audit Frequency, except your audit interval must
not exceed 3 years after the 2 year time period for the first audit.
(6) Section 12.6 Audit Team. The audit that you submit to BOEMRE
must be conducted by either an independent third party or your
designated and qualified personnel. The independent third party or your
designated and qualified personnel must meet the requirements in Sec.
250.1926.
(c) You must require your auditor (independent third party or your
designated and qualified personnel) to submit an audit report of the
findings and conclusions of the audit to BOEMRE within 30 days of the
audit completion date. The report must outline the results of the
audit, including deficiencies identified.
(d) You must provide the BOEMRE a copy of your plan for addressing
the deficiencies identified in your audit within 30 days of completion
of the audit. Your plan must address the following:
(1) A proposed schedule to correct the deficiencies identified in
the audit. BOEMRE will notify you within 14 days of receipt of your
plan if your proposed schedule is not acceptable.
(2) The person responsible for correcting each identified
deficiency, including their job title.
(e) BOEMRE may verify that you undertook the corrective actions and
that these actions effectively address the audit findings.
Sec. Sec. 250.1921 through 250.1923 [Reserved]
Sec. 250.1924 How will BOEMRE determine if my SEMS program is
effective?
(a) BOEMRE or its authorized representative may evaluate or visit
[[Page 63654]]
your facility to determine whether your SEMS program is in place,
addresses all required elements, and is effective in protecting the
safety and health of workers, the environment, and preventing
incidents. BOEMRE or its authorized representative may evaluate your
SEMS program, including documentation of contractors, independent third
parties, your designated and qualified personnel, and audit reports, to
assess your SEMS program. These evaluations or visits may be random or
based upon the OCS lease operator's or contractor's performance.
(b) For the evaluations, you must make the following available to
BOEMRE upon request:
(1) Your SEMS program;
(2) The qualifications of your independent third-party or your
designated and qualified personnel;
(3) The SEMS audits conducted of your program;
(4) Documents or information relevant to whether you have addressed
and corrected the deficiencies of your audit; and
(5) Other relevant documents or information.
(c) During the site visit BOEMRE may verify that:
(1) Personnel are following your SEMS program,
(2) You can explain and demonstrate the procedures and policies
included in your SEMS program; and
(3) You can produce evidence to support the implementation of your
SEMS program.
(d) Representatives from BOEMRE may observe or participate in your
SEMS audit. You must notify the BOEMRE at least 30-days prior to
conducting your audit as required in Sec. 250.1920, so that BOEMRE may
make arrangements to observe or participate in the audit.
Sec. 250.1925 May BOEMRE direct me to conduct additional audits?
(a) If BOEMRE identifies safety or non-compliance concerns based on
the results of our inspections and evaluations, or as a result of an
event, BOEMRE may direct you to have an independent third-party audit
of your SEMS program, in addition to the regular audit required by
Sec. 250.1920, or BOEMRE may conduct an audit.
(1) If BOEMRE direct you to have an independent third-party audit,
(i) You are responsible for all of the costs associated with the
audit, and
(ii) The independent third-party audit must meet the requirements
of Sec. 250.1920 of this part and you must ensure that the independent
third party submits the findings and conclusions of a BOEMRE-directed
audit according to the requirements in Sec. 250.1920 to BOEMRE within
30 days after the audit is completed.
(2) If BOEMRE conducts the audit, BOEMRE will provide a report of
the findings and conclusions within 30 days of the audit.
(b) Findings from these audits may result in enforcement actions as
identified in Sec. 250.1927.
(c) You must provide the BOEMRE a copy of your plan for addressing
the deficiencies identified in the BOEMRE-directed audit within 30 days
of completion of the audit as required in Sec. 250.1920.
Sec. 250.1926 What qualifications must an independent third party or
my designated and qualified personnel meet?
(a) You must either choose an independent third-party or your
designated and qualified personnel to audit your SEMS program. You must
take into account the following qualifications when selecting the
third-party or your designated and qualified personnel:
(1) Previous education and experience with SEMS, or similar
management related programs.
(2) Technical capabilities of the individual or organization for
the specific project.
(3) Ability to perform the independent third-party functions for
the specific project considering current commitments.
(4) Previous experience with BOEMRE regulatory requirements and
procedures.
(5) Previous education and experience to comprehend and evaluate
how the company's offshore activities, raw materials, production
methods and equipment, products, byproducts, and business management
systems may impact health and safety performance in the workplace.
(b) You must have procedures to avoid conflicts of interest related
to the development of your SEMS program and the independent third party
auditor and your designated and qualified personnel.
(c) BOEMRE may evaluate the qualifications of the independent third
parties or your designated and qualified personnel. This may include an
audit of documents and procedures or interviews. BOEMRE may disallow
audits by a specific independent third-party or your designated and
qualified personnel if they do not meet the criteria of this section.
Sec. 250.1927 What happens if BOEMRE finds shortcomings in my SEMS
program?
If BOEMRE determines that your SEMS program is not in compliance
with this subpart we may initiate one or more of the following
enforcement actions:
(a) Issue an Incident(s) of Noncompliance;
(b) Assess civil penalties; or
(c) Initiate probationary or disqualification procedures from
serving as an OCS operator.
Sec. 250.1928 What are my recordkeeping and documentation
requirements?
(a) Your SEMS program procedures must ensure that records and
documents are maintained for a period of 6 years, except as provided
below. You must document and keep all SEMS audits for 6 years and make
them available to BOEMRE upon request. You must maintain a copy of all
SEMS program documents at an onshore location.
(b) For JSAs, the person in charge of the activity must document
the results of the JSA in writing and must ensure that records are kept
onsite for 30 days. You must retain these records for 2 years and make
them available to BOEMRE upon request.
(c) You must document and date all management of change provisions
as specified in Sec. 250.1912. You must retain these records for 2
years and make them available to BOEMRE upon request.
(d) You must keep your injury/illness log for 2 years and make them
available to BOEMRE upon request.
(e) You must keep all evaluations completed on contractor's safety
policies and procedures for 2 years and make them available to BOEMRE
upon request.
(f) You must keep all records in an orderly manner, readily
identifiable, retrievable and legible, and include the date of any and
all revisions.
Sec. 250.1929 What are my responsibilities for submitting OCS
performance measure data?
You must submit Form MMS-131 on an annual basis by March 31st. The
form must be broken down quarterly, reporting the previous calendar
year's data.
[FR Doc. 2010-25665 Filed 10-7-10; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 4310-MR-P