Delegation of Royalty Management Functions to States

Federal RegisterApr 24, 1997

Ask Donna

What actually matters in this document.

Text

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Minerals Management Service

30 CFR Parts 227, 228, and 229

RIN 1010-AC25

Delegation of Royalty Management Functions to States

AGENCY: Minerals Management Service, Interior.

ACTION: Proposed rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: The Minerals Management Service (MMS) proposes to add part 227

which authorizes the delegation of several Federal royalty management

functions to States.

Also, MMS proposes to amend its regulations at parts 228 and 229 to

remove references to cooperative agreements and delegations for Federal

lands under those parts. As a result, those parts would apply only to

Indian cooperative agreements and delegation agreements with States for

Indian lands within the State.

DATES: MMS will consider all comments received by May 27, 1997. We will

begin reviewing comments at that time and may not fully consider

comments we receive after May 27, 1997.

ADDRESSES: Comments should be sent to: David S. Guzy, Chief, Rules and

Procedures Staff, Royalty Management Program, Minerals Management

Service, PO Box 25165, MS 3101, Denver, Colorado 80225-0165, courier

delivery to Building 85, Denver Federal Center, Denver, Colorado 80225,

or e-Mail David__G[email protected].

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: David S. Guzy, Chief, Rules and

Procedures Staff, Royalty Management Program, Minerals Management

Service, telephone (303) 231-3432, Fax (303) 231-3194, e-Mail

David__G[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The principal authors of this proposed

rulemaking are Larry Cobb, Jim Detlefs, Clare Onstad, Robert Prael,

Todd McCutcheon, John Russo, Dave Steiber, Cecelia Williams, and Sam

Wilson, MMS; and Peter Schaumberg and Sarah Inderbitzin of the Office

of the Solicitor.

Because section 3(d) of the Federal Oil and Gas Royalty

Simplification and Fairness Act of 1996 requires the Secretary to

promulgate standards and regulations ``pertaining to authorities and

responsibilities to be delegated [to States] * * *'' within 12 months

of its enactment, i.e. by August 13, 1997, MMS is specifying a deadline

for comments that is less than the 60 days recommended in Executive

Order 12866. MMS has determined that it is not feasible to allow the

60-day comment period referred to in section 6(a)(1) of Executive Order

12866 because a comment period of that length would make it very

difficult to comply with the 12 month statutory deadline. MMS also

believes that a 30-day comment period is appropriate in this instance

because it previously provided both States and industry with the

opportunity to comment during the numerous outreach meetings discussed

above. Although MMS will consider late-filed comments to the greatest

extent practicable, RSFA's requirement that a final rule be issued

within 12 months of enactment will make it extremely difficult for MMS

to consider comments received after the 30-day period. Thus, MMS

believes that for these reasons, a 30-day comment period is

sufficiently long to allow the public a meaningful opportunity to

comment on the proposed rule in accordance with Executive Order 12866.

I. General

On August 13, 1996, Congress enacted the Federal Oil and Gas

Royalty Simplification and Fairness Act of 1996, Pub. L. 104-185, as

corrected by Pub. L. 104-200 (RSFA). The RSFA amends portions of the

Federal Oil and Gas Royalty 33 Management Act of 1982 (FOGRMA), 30

U.S.C. 1701 et seq. Prior to the RSFA enactment, section 205 of FOGRMA,

30 U.S.C. 1735, provided for the delegation of only audits,

inspections, and investigations to the States. The RSFA amendments to

section 205 now provide that the MMS may delegate other Federal royalty

management functions to requesting States.

The royalty management functions MMS may delegate under the RSFA

amendments are:

(1) Conducting audits and investigations;

(2) Receiving and processing production and royalty reports;

(3) Correcting erroneous report data;

(4) Performing automated verification; and

(5) Issuing demands, subpoenas (except for solid mineral and

geothermal leases), orders to perform restructured accounting, and

related tolling agreements and notices to lessees or their designees.

The RSFA amendments to section 205(d) also provide that within 12

months after the date of enactment, after consultation with the States,

the Secretary must issue standards and regulations pertaining to

delegable functions and other relevant responsibilities, including:

(1) Audits to be performed;

(2) Records and accounts to be maintained;

(3) Reporting procedures to be required by the States under this

section;

(4) Receipt and processing of production and royalty reports;

(5) Correction of erroneous report data;

(6) Performance of automated verification;

(7) Issuance of standards and guidelines in order to avoid

duplication of effort;

(8) Transmission of report data to the Secretary; and

(9) Issuance of demands, subpoenas, and orders to perform

restructured accounting, for royalty accounting purposes.

In response to the section 205 RSFA amendments, MMS formed the 205

Consultation Team, comprised of MMS, interested States, representatives

from State associations, and a representative of the Bureau of Land

Management (BLM) to discuss how to implement the delegation provisions

of the RSFA. In 1996, the 205 Consultation Team met on October 2,

October 10-11, and October 23-24. The result was the development of an

initial regulatory framework that MMS used to discuss the regulation at

three outreach meetings with States and to write the proposed

regulation. The 205 Consultation Team members agreed to the regulatory

framework in a teleconference held on December 2, 1996.

During the initial meetings with the 205 Consultation Team, State

representatives sought delegated functions in addition to those

provided in RSFA. These additional functions included collecting and

disbursing funds, processing and deciding appeals, and issuing civil

penalties. However, the Act does not allow MMS to delegate these

functions. Thus, MMS has reserved such functions because they are

necessary for uniform administration of the applicable statutes,

regulations, and policies and therefore are reserved, among other

[[Page 19968]]

reasons, to ``assure[] that a uniform and effective royalty management

system will prevail among the States.'' 30 U.S.C. 1735(d).

At the initial meeting with the 205 Consultation Team, State

representatives also asked MMS to delegate royalty management functions

for solid mineral leases, geothermal leases, and offshore leases

subject to section 8(g) of the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act, 43

U.S.C. 1337(g). In this rulemaking, the MMS Director proposes to

delegate royalty management functions to States for such leases under

Pub. L. 102-154. This 1991 law provides authority for MMS to delegate

its royalty management functions to States for these leases. However,

because MMS does not have statutory authority to issue subpoenas for

solid mineral or geothermal leases, it cannot delegate to the States

the authority to issue subpoenas for such leases.

After its meetings with the 205 Consultation Team, MMS held

outreach meetings for the States in 1996 on December 11 in New Orleans,

LA., on December 12 in Denver, CO., and on December 13 in Oakland, CA.

At those meetings, MMS representatives explained the delegation

regulatory framework, discussed the concepts of the proposed regulation

with the State attendees, answered questions, and received feedback.

MMS also held outreach meetings for industry in early 1997, in

Houston, TX on January 7, in Albuquerque, NM on January 8, in Denver,

CO on January 9, and in Casper, WY on January 10. MMS again explained

the delegation regulatory framework, discussed the concepts of the

proposed regulation with the industry attendees, responded to

questions, and received feedback.

In addition, MMS will hold several outreach meetings in the spring

of 1997 at various locations to discuss the MMS Standards for

Delegation (Standards) document which will contain the detailed

standards that States must follow when performing delegated functions.

II. Indian Lands

MMS proposes to amend 30 CFR parts 228 and 229 to remove references

to cooperative agreements and delegations for Federal lands under those

parts. As a result, those parts would apply only to Indian cooperative

agreements and delegation agreements for audits, inspections, and

investigations with States for Indian lands within the State.

Section 8 of the Act provides that as of the Act's effective date,

Sec. 202 of FOGRMA, 30 U.S.C. 1732, which authorizes cooperative

agreements with Indian tribes and States to carry out audits and

related investigation and enforcement activities, no longer applies to

Federal lands. Thus, the proposed new section would limit the rules in

30 CFR part 228 to cooperative agreements with Indian tribes and States

to perform audits, inspections, and investigations for Indian lands.

Under those rules, any cooperative agreement with a State requires the

consent of the responsible Indian tribe or allottee.

Section 9 provides that the amendments made in Sec. 205 of the Act,

30 U.S.C. 1735, do not apply to Indian lands. For those lands, the

original FOGRMA Sec. 205 provisions for delegating audits, inspections,

and investigations will continue to apply. Therefore, MMS proposes to

keep the existing part 229 delegation rules but limit their

applicability to Indian lands. Under those rules, any delegation to a

State to perform audit and related investigative activities for Indian

lands within the State requires the consent of the affected Indian

tribe or allottee, and that provision is unaffected.

In a final rule, MMS may make some changes to parts 228 and 229 to

conform the language to principles of ``plain English'' that MMS is

implementing for all rules. These changes would not be substantive

except to remove any unnecessary references to Federal lands.

As an alternative proposal, MMS would like comment on whether it

should remove part 229 completely and incorporate delegations to States

for audits, inspections, and investigations on Indian lands into new

part 227.

Under this approach, only the new procedural provisions for that

delegation process would apply for Indian lands to the same extent as

for Federal lands. However, the additional delegable activities for

Federal lands added in the Act, such as issuing demands and subpoenas

and performing error correction, would not apply for Indian lands. In

addition, MMS would continue to require the concurrence of the affected

Indian tribe or allottee before any delegation would occur.

To aid public participation in this rulemaking, MMS will post

comments received on this proposed rule on the Internet at http://

www.rmp.mms.gov.

III. Section-by-Section Analysis

Section 229.1 What is the purpose of this part?

This section would explain that the purpose of this rule is to

provide procedures to delegate Federal royalty management functions to

States under section 205 of the Federal Oil and Gas Royalty Management

Act of 1982 (the Act), 30 U.S.C. 1735, as amended by the Federal Oil

and Gas Royalty Simplification and Fairness Act of 1996, Pub. L. 104-

185, August 13, 1996, as corrected by Pub. L. 104-200. Further, it

would explain that this part also provides procedures to delegate

similar functions to States for solid mineral leases, geothermal

leases, and leases subject to section 8(g) of the Outer Continental

Shelf Lands Act, 43 U.S.C. 1337(g), under Pub. L. 102-154. This section

also would explain that this part does not apply to any inspection or

enforcement responsibilities of BLM for onshore leases or the MMS

Offshore Minerals Management office for leases on the Outer Continental

Shelf. The respective agencies will issue any regulations for those

activities separately.

Section 227.100 What States may request delegation?

This section would explain which States may request a delegation of

royalty management functions under this rule.

Paragraph (a) would provide that States may request a delegation of

royalty management functions under this rule if the State has oil and

gas leases subject to the Act on Federal lands within that State.

Paragraph (b) would provide that States may request a delegation of

royalty management functions under this rule if the State has oil and

gas leases offshore of that State subject to section 8(g) of the Outer

Continental Shelf Lands Act, 43 U.S.C. 1337(g).

Paragraph (c) would provide that States may request a delegation of

royalty management functions under this rule if the State has solid

mineral leases or geothermal leases on Federal lands within that State.

Section 227.101 What royalty management functions may MMS delegate

to a State?

This section would list the functions that, under the Act, MMS may

delegate to States eligible to receive delegations as provided under

section 227.100 of this rule.

Paragraph (a) would provide that States may request to conduct

audits and investigations. For purposes of this rulemaking, this

paragraph would pertain only to audits and investigations related to

royalty management functions. However, MMS is interested in knowing

whether States having oil and gas leases subject to section 8g of the

Outer Continental Lands Act, 43 U.S.C. 1337(g) would be interested in

[[Page 19969]]

performing inspection functions on those leases.

Paragraph (b) would provide that States may request to receive and

process either production reports or royalty reports, or both as a

delegable function. RSFA added these functions to section 205(a)(2) of

the Act, 30 U.S.C. 1735(a)(2), which refers to ``financial reports.''

However, ``financial reports'' are royalty reports or other reports

lessees or their designees file in association with the payment of

royalties. Therefore, MMS would use the term ``royalty reports'' in

this rulemaking to encompass all financial reports.

Paragraph (c) would provide that States may request to correct

erroneous report data as a delegable function for either production

reports or royalty reports, or both. This is a new function which RSFA

added to section 205. States to which MMS has delegated this function

must assure that reporters correct reporting errors. States must

perform this function to allow MMS to enter correct production or

royalty data into the applicable MMS production or royalty database.

Paragraph (d) would provide that States may request to perform

automated verification activities as a delegable function. RSFA also

added this function to section 205. States to which MMS has delegated

this function must perform verification processes to resolve various

identified exceptions. Examples of exceptions include volume and

royalty rate discrepancies. The verification process would require the

State to perform manual research. If the State's manual research

identified exceptions, the State would require reporters to submit

corrected reports or pay additional royalties.

Paragraph (e) would provide that States may request to issue

demands, subpoenas (except for solid mineral and geothermal leases),

and orders to perform restructured accounting, including related

notices to lessees or their designees. This delegation would not

include any further enforcement authority. Thus, if a lessee or its

designee appeals a demand or order to perform restructured accounting,

that appeal would go to MMS. Further, any judicial action to enforce a

demand, order to perform restructured accounting or subpoena would be

MMS's responsibility together with the U.S. Department of Justice.

Paragraph (e) also would provide that States may request to enter

into tolling agreements with lessees or their designees in order to

toll the running of the 7-year statute of limitations on demands under

the Act. This paragraph would exclude issuing subpoenas for solid

mineral and geothermal leases for the reasons discussed above.

Section 227.102 What royalty management functions will MMS not

delegate?

This section would explain the principal royalty management

functions that MMS will not delegate. These functions are specifically

reserved to MMS and are not delegable under this rule.

Paragraph (a) would provide that MMS must collect all monies

received from sales, bonuses, rentals, royalties, civil penalties,

assessments and interest. This paragraph also would provide that MMS

must collect any monies a lessee or its designee pays because of audits

or other actions of a delegated State.

Paragraph (b) would provide that MMS must compare all cash and

other payments it receives with payments shown on royalty reports or

other documents, such as bills, to reconcile payor accounts. For

example, if a lessee or its designee pays MMS $100 but reports a $110

payment on its royalty report or other document, MMS must reconcile the

discrepancy. This paragraph also would provide that MMS must disburse

all appropriate monies to States and other revenue recipients,

including refunds and interest owed to lessees and their designees.

Paragraph (c) would provide that MMS will receive, process and

decide all administrative appeals from demands or other orders issued

to lessees and their designees including demands or orders a delegated

State issues. Thus, even if a State performs the audit and issues the

demand or order, lessees or their designees must continue to send the

notice of appeal to MMS, and MMS will process and decide those appeals.

A centralized appeals process is necessary for uniform administration

of the applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. Therefore, this

authority would be reserved, among other reasons, to ``assure[] that a

uniform and effective royalty management system will prevail among the

States.'' 30 U.S.C. 1735(d).

Paragraph (d) would provide that MMS will take all enforcement

actions other than issuing demands, subpoenas and orders to perform

restructured accounting. This paragraph also would provide that MMS

will issue notices of noncompliance and civil penalties, collect debts,

write off delinquent debts, pursue litigation, enforce subpoenas, and

manage alternative dispute resolution. Furthermore, this paragraph

explains that MMS will conduct, coordinate and approve all settlements

or other compromises of an obligation that a lessee or its designee

owes. Therefore, if a State receives a settlement request from a lessee

or its designee, the State must refer that request to MMS. However, MMS

will include States in settlement discussions as it currently does. As

with appeals, centralizing the decision of whether to issue a civil

penalty is necessary for uniform administration of the applicable

statutes, regulations, and policies. Therefore, the authority would be

reserved, among other reasons, to ``assure[] that a uniform and

effective royalty management system will prevail among the States.'' 30

U.S.C. 1735(d).

Paragraph (e) would explain that MMS will decide all valuation

policies, including issuing valuation regulations, determinations, and

guidelines, and interpreting valuation regulations. For example, MMS

must respond to industry requests for valuation determinations in

specific situations. Such valuation determinations have the effect of

an order and are appealable. MMS also must decide requests for

exceptions to the limitations on allowances and the exceptions for non-

arm's-length transportation and processing allowances. However, in the

course of audits, States may apply any MMS valuation policy, make

findings consistent with such policies, and issue orders in accordance

with such policies. The purpose of this paragraph is to maintain

uniform and consistent enforcement of applicable statutes and

regulations.

Paragraph (f) is a catch-all provision that would allow MMS to

reserve additional authorities and responsibilities not included in

paragraphs (a) through (e) of this section.

Section 227.103 What must a State's delegation proposal contain?

This section would provide that if a State wants MMS to delegate

royalty management functions to it, the State must submit a delegation

proposal to the MMS Associate Director for Royalty Management. This

section also would explain that a State's delegation proposal must

contain specific minimum information to help MMS assess its potential

to receive and perform delegated functions. Such information would

include a description of what facilities, personnel, and equipment the

State will need to perform delegated functions. It also would include

what facilities, personnel, and equipment the State currently has and

what it will need to obtain, and its resources to obtain such elements.

To assist States in preparing

[[Page 19970]]

their delegation proposals, this section also would provide that MMS

will help States with any technical assistance and information they may

need.

MMS specifically requests comments on additional information that

you believe would be important to include in a State's delegation

proposal.

Paragraph (a) would require the State to provide the name and title

of the State government official authorized to submit the delegation

proposal and execute the delegation agreement.

Paragraph (b) would require the State to provide the name, address,

and telephone number of the State contact for the delegation proposal.

Paragraph (c) would require the State to provide a copy of the

legislation, State Attorney General opinion or other document

demonstrating the State's authority to accept a delegation from MMS,

and receive State or Federal appropriations to perform delegated

functions. This documentation is necessary because States must show

that State laws and regulations allow the State to perform the

delegated functions it seeks.

Paragraph (d) would require States to provide the date they propose

to begin performing delegated functions.

Paragraph (e) would require States to provide a detailed statement

of the delegable functions that they propose to perform. In addition,

for each delegable function a State proposes to assume, the State must

describe the resources available in that State to perform each

function, the procedures the State will use to perform each function,

and how the State will assure that all Federal laws, lease terms,

regulations and relevant performance standards will be met.

Paragraph (e) also would require States to provide evidence that

the State has or will have the resources to perform each delegable

function. Thus, States would have to submit a description of the

personnel they have available to perform delegated functions, the

facilities the State will use to perform delegated functions, and the

equipment, including hardware and software, the State has available for

any of the delegable functions for which it is requesting delegation.

If a State did not currently have the personnel, facilities or

equipment necessary to perform delegated functions, it would have to

provide information on when it expects to have such resources

available.

Paragraph (f) would require a State to estimate the costs to fund

the personnel, facilities and equipment necessary to perform each

delegable function that the State proposes to perform.

Paragraph (g) would require States to submit their plans to fund

the costs of the resources described under paragraph (f), including any

items the State will ask MMS to fund under the delegation agreement.

Thus, this paragraph would require a State to describe the resources

available in the State to perform each delegable function.

Paragraph (h) would require States to provide a statement

identifying any areas where State law may limit its ability to perform

delegated functions. In addition, a State would have to explain what

actions it proposes to remove any such limitation.

Paragraph (i) would require States to provide a statement that in

accordance with section 203 of the Act, 30 USC 1733, persons who have

access to information received under delegated functions are subject to

the same provisions of law regarding confidentiality and disclosure of

that information as Federal employees. Applicable laws include the

Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), the Trade Secrets Act, and relevant

Executive Orders. In addition, your statement must acknowledge that all

documents produced, received, and maintained as part of any delegation

functions are agency records for purposes of FOIA. All requests for

records or other information under the applicable laws would be subject

to MMS's review and approval.

Section 227.104 What will MMS do when it receives a State's delegation

proposal?

This section would explain that MMS will record the date it

receives a State's delegation proposal. This section also would explain

that MMS will notify the State in writing whether its delegation

proposal is complete within 15 business days of the recorded date. When

MMS notifies a State that its delegation proposal is not complete, MMS

will identify any missing items section 227.103 requires. Once a State

submits all required information, MMS will notify the State in writing

the date its delegation proposal is complete. The date the delegation

request is ``complete'' is important because under proposed section

227.107, MMS would decide whether to approve a delegation proposal

within 90 days after it is complete.

Section 227.105 What are the hearing procedures?

This section would explain the public hearing procedure that will

occur after MMS notifies a State that its delegation proposal is

complete. The hearing procedures would assure that the State has

demonstrated it has adequate resources to carry out the requested

delegation, that it will carry out the requested delegation upon

receipt of its delegation agreement, that it will effectively and

faithfully administer all applicable statutes and regulations, that it

will not impose any additional burdens on lessees or their designees,

and that it will cooperate with any MMS, General Accounting Office or

Office of the Inspector General reviews. The hearing also is to allow

other persons to present their views regarding the State's delegation

proposal.

Paragraph (a) explains that the MMS Director will appoint a hearing

official to conduct one or more public hearings for fact finding

regarding a State's ability to assume the delegated functions it

requested. Because the public hearing is purely a fact finding

procedure, this paragraph makes clear that the hearing official is not

responsible for deciding whether to approve a State's delegation

request. The remaining paragraphs of this proposed section are self-

explanatory.

Section 227.106 What statutory requirements must a State meet to

receive a delegation?

This section would make clear that the MMS Director will decide

whether to approve a State's delegation request and will ask the

Secretary of the Interior to concur in the decision. This section would

provide that the MMS Director's decision is solely within the MMS

Director's and the Secretary's discretion. This section also would

provide that the MMS Director's decision in which the Secretary concurs

in is the final decision for the Department of the Interior. Thus, the

decision is not subject to appeal to the Interior Board of Land Appeals

under 43 CFR part 4.

In addition, this section would provide that the MMS Director may

approve a State's request for delegation only if, based upon the

State's delegation proposal and the hearing record, the MMS Director

finds that the State meets the statutory requirements under section

205.

Under paragraph (a), the MMS Director would have to find that it is

likely that the State will provide adequate resources to achieve the

purposes of the Act. Thus, States must show a commitment of State

resources adequate to perform the requested delegable functions. This

would include evidence that the State has the proper appropriation from

the State legislature.

Under paragraph (b), the MMS Director would have to find that the

State has demonstrated that it will effectively and faithfully

administer the

[[Page 19971]]

rules and regulations of the Secretary under the Act in accordance with

the requirements of subsections (c) and (d) of section 205 of the Act.

The purpose of this proposed paragraph is for States to demonstrate

their ability to effectively administer a royalty management system

that will be uniform among the States. The purpose of this requirement

also is to allow a smooth, efficient transition of delegable functions

to States.

Under paragraph (c), the MMS Director would have to find that a

State's delegation will not create an unreasonable burden on any

lessee. The purpose of this section is to ensure that lessees are not

subject to duplicate requirements from MMS and one or more delegated

States. While lessees may have some increased reporting burdens because

of multiple reporting entities, MMS does not consider that an

unreasonable burden given the Act's intent.

Under paragraph (d), the MMS Director would have to find that the

State agrees to adopt standardized reporting procedures MMS prescribes

for royalty and production accounting purposes, unless the State and

all affected parties (including the Secretary and lessees and their

designees) otherwise agree. For example, a State would have to adopt

the MMS Report of Sales and Royalty Remittance (Form MMS-2014) and the

MMS Monthly Report of Operations (Form MMS-3160) reporting formats,

unless all affected parties and the Secretary agree to an alternate

procedure that fulfills MMS's reporting requirements.

Under paragraph (e), the MMS Director would have to find that the

State agrees to follow and adhere to regulations and guidelines MMS

issues under the mineral leasing laws regarding valuation of

production. Thus, a State requesting delegation must agree to follow

all Federal laws, regulations, and Secretarial and agency

determinations and orders relating to the calculation, reporting and

payment of mineral revenues. The purpose of this paragraph is to ensure

uniform application of the royalty management program among the

delegated States.

Under paragraph (f), the MMS Director would have to find that where

necessary for a State to carry out and enforce a delegated activity,

the State agrees to enact such laws and promulgate such regulations as

are consistent with relevant Federal laws and regulations. Thus, a

State applying for delegation would be required to provide evidence

that the State is authorized under State laws to perform delegable

functions. If a State is not so authorized, then it may be required to

enact laws authorizing performance of those functions before the MMS

Director will approve the State's delegation proposal.

Section 227.107 When will the MMS Director decide whether to approve a

State's delegation proposal?

This section would state that the MMS Director will decide whether

to approve a State's delegation proposal within 90 days after its

delegation proposal is complete. Under the Act, 30 U.S.C. 1735(c), MMS

has 90 days after a State submits its delegation proposal to decide

whether to approve the delegation proposal. However, the Act does not

explain what constitutes a delegation proposal sufficient to start the

90-day period running. Therefore, as part of the Secretary's rulemaking

authority under the Act, 30 U.S.C. 1751(a), MMS interprets the 90-day

period to run from the date a State's delegation proposal is complete.

This interpretation would avoid MMS unnecessarily rejecting a State's

proposal merely because some portion of it is incomplete. This section

would also provide that MMS may extend the 90-day period with a State's

written consent.

Section 227.108 How will MMS notify a State of its decision?

This section would provide that MMS will notify the State in

writing of its decision on the State's delegation proposal. In

addition, this section would explain that after MMS approves a State's

delegation proposal, MMS will hold discussions with the State to

develop a delegation agreement detailing the delegable functions which

the State will perform and the standards and requirements the State

must comply with to perform those functions.

Section 227.109 What if the MMS Director denies a State's delegation

proposal?

Under this proposed section, if the MMS Director denies a State's

proposal, MMS will state the reasons for denial. MMS also will inform

the State in writing of the conditions it must meet to receive

approval. In addition, this section would provide that a State may

submit a new delegation proposal at any time following a denial.

Section 227.110 How long are delegation agreements effective?

This section would explain how long delegation agreements issued

under this part remain in effect as well as procedures for renewal of

delegation agreements.

Paragraph (a) would provide that delegation agreements are

effective for 3 years.

Paragraph (b) would explain that after 3 years a State may ask MMS

to renew its delegation for an additional 3 years. This section also

would explain that States must submit their renewal request to the MMS

Associate Director for Royalty Management within 6 months prior to the

expiration of the 3-year delegation agreement. Paragraph (b)(1) would

provide that if a State does not want to change the terms of its

delegation agreement, it need only ask MMS to extend its existing

agreement for the 3-year renewal period. In such instances, MMS will

not schedule a hearing unless the State requests one. Paragraph (b)(2)

would explain that if a State wants to change the terms of its

delegation agreement for the renewal period, full review is required.

Therefore, in this situation, the State must submit a new delegation

proposal under this part.

Paragraph (c) would explain that the MMS Director would approve a

State's renewal request only if MMS determines that the State is

meeting the requirements of the applicable standards and regulations.

Further, it would explain that if the MMS Director denies a State's

renewal request, MMS will state the reasons for denial. In addition,

MMS would inform a State in writing of the conditions it must meet to

receive approval. This section also would provide that a State may

submit a new renewal request at any time following a denial, but not

after your current agreement expires.

Paragraph (d) would provide that after the 3-year renewal period

for a State's delegation agreement ends, the State must request a new

delegation agreement from MMS under this part. It also would explain

that MMS will not hold a hearing on the State's new delegation

agreement unless the State requests one or it wants to change the terms

of its delegation agreement. Further, it would explain that as part of

the MMS Director's decision whether to approve a State's request for a

new delegation, the MMS Director will consider whether the State is

meeting the requirements of the applicable standards and regulations

under its existing delegation agreement.

Existing Delegations

Section 227.111 Do existing delegation agreements remain in effect?

This section would explain a State's options if it is operating

under a delegation in effect on the date these regulations become

final.

[[Page 19972]]

Paragraph (a) would explain that a State not wanting to perform any

new royalty management functions in addition to those authorized under

its existing delegation agreement may continue under that agreement

until it expires. After the delegation agreement expires, a State would

have to receive a new delegation agreement meeting the requirements of

these regulations and the applicable standards.

Paragraph (b) would explain that a State wanting to perform royalty

management functions in addition to those authorized under its existing

agreement must submit a delegation proposal under this part. Thus, any

State wanting to perform the delegable functions under this part in

addition to those provided for under its existing delegation agreement

must submit a delegation proposal under this part for all delegable

functions it wishes to perform, including those under its existing

agreement.

Paragraph (c) would provide that MMS may extend any delegation

agreement in effect on the date these regulations become final for up

to 3 years beyond the date it is due to expire. The purpose of this

paragraph is to provide States whose existing delegation agreements are

due to expire shortly after these rules become final with enough time

to prepare a delegation proposal under this part and to receive

authority to accept a delegation from MMS and receive State or Federal

appropriations to perform delegated functions as required under section

227.103(c)(2) of this part.

Compensation

Section 227.112 What compensation will a State receive to perform

delegated functions?

This section would provide that a State would receive compensation

for its costs to perform each delegation function. This section also

would provide the conditions for a State to receive compensation.

Paragraph (a) would provide that compensation for costs would be

subject to agency fiscal appropriations. Thus, if Congress does not

pass a budget or continuing resolution, MMS will not have the funds

available to pay the States.

Paragraph (b) would provide that compensation could not exceed the

reasonable anticipated expenditures that MMS would incur to perform the

same function. Thus, a State's compensation would be limited to the

amount it would cost the MMS to perform the same function. For example,

if it costs MMS $1,000 to perform error correction on a State's leases,

then $1,000 is the maximum amount a State could receive to perform its

own error correction.

Paragraph (c) would provide that the cost for which a State

requests compensation must be directly related to its performance of a

delegated function and necessary for performance of that delegated

function. For example, MMS will not compensate a State for employees

who perform delegated royalty management functions to attend an

environmental conference because environmental studies are not a

delegated function. An additional example is that MMS will not

compensate a State for performing audits of State leases even though

the same audit may cover Federal leases.

Generally, MMS will compensate for items related to performing

royalty management delegations, such as, rent or lease of office space,

salary, employee benefits, supplies, equipment, and travel. For

example, MMS would compensate for reasonable purchase of office

personal computers, but would not compensate for purchase of a

mainframe computer.

Paragraph (d) would provide that States would be required to

provide vouchers detailing their expenditures quarterly or monthly

during the fiscal year as stated in their delegation agreement.

Paragraph (e) would provide that States would be required to

maintain adequate books and records to support their vouchers.

Paragraph (f) would provide that MMS would pay a State quarterly or

monthly during the fiscal year as stated in the State's delegation

agreement.

Paragraph (g) would provide that MMS could withhold compensation

for a State's failure to properly perform a delegated function whether

or not MMS takes any action under sections 227.801 or 227.802 of this

part.

States' Responsibilities To Perform Delegated Functions

Section 227.200 What are a State's general responsibilities if it

accepts a delegation?

This section would explain what general responsibilities a State

must perform for each delegated function. Specific requirements would

be explained in sections 227.300, 227.301, 227.400, 227.401, 227.500,

227.501, 227.600, and 227.601 of this part, the State's delegation

agreement, and the Standards.

Paragraph (a) would provide that States must operate in compliance

with all Federal laws, regulations, and Secretarial and agency

determinations and orders relating to the calculation, reporting, and

payment of mineral royalties and other revenues. Under this paragraph,

States also would be required to submit a written request for

interpretation of any applicable Federal requirement to the appropriate

MMS official. The purpose of this requirement is to maintain uniform

and consistent application of Federal requirements in order to minimize

the burden on lessees. MMS will respond to a State's request for

guidance in writing, and States must follow the interpretation or

guidance given.

Paragraph (b) would provide that States must comply with Generally

Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP). Paragraphs (b) (1)-(5) explain

what GAAP requirements would pertain to performing royalty management

functions.

Paragraph (c) would require States to assist MMS in meeting the

requirements of the Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA) as

well as assisting in developing and endeavoring to comply with the MMS

Strategic Plan and Performance Measurements.

Paragraph (d) would require a State to maintain all records it

obtains or creates under its delegated functions, such as royalty

reports, production reports, and other related information. States

would be required to maintain such records in a safe, secure manner,

including taking appropriate measures for protecting confidential and

proprietary information and assisting MMS in responding to Freedom of

Information Act requests when necessary. This paragraph also would

require States to maintain such records for at least 7 years.

Paragraph (e) would require States to provide reports to MMS about

any activities it performs under its delegated functions. MMS will

specify in a State's delegation agreement and the Standards what

reports a State must submit and how often it must submit them. The rule

would provide that at a minimum, a State must provide periodic

statistical reports to MMS summarizing the activities it carried out,

such as:

(1) Production and royalty reports processed;

(2) Erroneous reports corrected;

(3) Results of automated verification resolution efforts;

(4) Number of audits performed; and

(5) Enforcement documents issued.

Paragraph (f) would require States to assist MMS in maintaining

adequate reference, royalty, and production databases as provided in

the Standards. Thus, States would provide corrected reference data to

MMS such as: lease acreage, lease ownership, royalty rates,

[[Page 19973]]

unit and communitization agreement allocation factors, and payor

information. States will have access to the reference database for use

in various delegated functions. However, MMS will update reference data

and maintain the reference database.

Paragraph (g) would require States to develop annual work plans

that:

(1) Specify the work the State will perform for each delegated

function; and

(2) Identify the resources the State will commit to perform each

delegated function. This would include the personnel, facilities, and

equipment the State will commit to perform each delegated function.

Paragraph (h) would require States to help MMS respond to requests

for information from other Federal agencies, Congress, and the public.

Thus, MMS would be responsible for responding to such requests with the

State's assistance.

Paragraph (i) would require that States cooperate with MMS's

monitoring of their delegated functions. For example, States must make

financial records available to MMS to facilitate the fiscal examination

MMS performs as part of monitoring the State's delegated functions

under Sec. 227.800(b)(2).

Paragraph (j) would require States to comply with the Standards as

required under Sec. 227.201.

Section 227.201 What standards must a State comply with for performing

delegated functions?

This section would explain a State's requirements to comply with

standards for performing delegated functions. In addition to the

requirements for performing royalty management functions under this

part and a State's delegation agreement, MMS will set out additional

requirements in the Standards. MMS will provide each delegated State

with the Standards.

Paragraph (a) would provide that if MMS delegates royalty

management functions to a State, it must comply with the Standards. The

Standards would provide guidelines for States to carry out specific

delegable functions. For example, the Standards will explain the

appropriate standards of accuracy, timeliness, and efficiency for

States to carry out each delegated function.

Paragraph (b) would provide that a State's delegation agreement may

include standards in addition to those in the Standards which

specifically apply to the functions delegated to that State.

Paragraph (c) would provide that if a State fails to comply with

its delegation agreement, the Standards, or any of the specific

standards and requirements in the delegation agreement, that would be

grounds for termination of all or part of its delegation agreement, or

other actions as provided under Secs. 227.801 and 227.802.

Paragraph (d) would provide that MMS may revise the Standards and

will provide notice of those changes in the Federal Register. This

paragraph also would provide that States must comply with any changes

to the Standards.

MMS would suggest formation of an advisory committee comprised of

States receiving delegations and MMS representatives. The committee

would be responsible for providing advice and recommendations about the

standards and procedures required for the performance of delegable

functions. MMS would like comments on this suggestion.

Section 227.300 What audit functions may a State perform?

This section would explain generally that an audit consists of an

examination of records to verify that royalty reports and payments

accurately reflect actual production, sales, revenues and costs, and

compliance with Federal statutes, regulations, lease terms, and MMS

policy determinations. This section would then provide the minimum

functions a State must perform if it requests delegation of audit

functions. Thus, a State must perform all of the functions in this

section if it requests delegation of audit functions.

Paragraph (a) would require States to issue engagement letters

informing the lessee that the State has begun an audit. This would

ensure that lessees receive maximum advance notification of scheduled

audits and have adequate time to furnish requested information.

Paragraph (b) would require States to arrange for entrance

conferences to facilitate the lessees' understanding of the audit

process, enhance the effectiveness of the initial site visit, designate

audit coordinators, and clarify policies regarding confidentiality.

Paragraph (c) would require States to submit requests for records

to lessees requesting information necessary to perform the audit.

Paragraph (d) would require States to schedule site visits to

examine the information the State has requested. States would be

required to schedule site visits sufficiently in advance to allow

lessees ample time to arrange space for the auditors and to have the

requested information available.

Paragraph (e) would require States to examine royalty and

production reports to determine whether royalties and production

volumes were properly reported and paid.

Paragraph (f) would require States to examine lessee production and

sales records, including contracts, payments, invoices, and

transportation and processing costs to substantiate that production

volumes and royalties were correctly reported and paid.

Paragraph (g) would require States to hold closeout conferences to

inform lessees that site visits are complete and to summarize audit

findings to date.

Paragraph (h) would require States to issue records releases and

audit closure letters to lessees upon completion of an audit, as

necessary.

Paragraph (i) would require States to provide assistance to MMS

regarding appealed demands or orders, including preparing field

reports, performing remanded actions, modifying orders, and providing

oral and written briefing and testimony as expert witnesses. Thus,

although MMS would decide all appeals, it would rely on States to

provide any information or assistance necessary for deciding appeals

and developing the administrative record.

Section 227.301 What are a State's responsibilities if it performs

audits?

This section would explain a State's general responsibilities if it

accepts delegation of the audit functions required under section

227.300. The Standards and a State's delegation agreement would contain

more specific responsibilities a State must perform if it accepts

delegation of audit functions.

Paragraph (a) would require States performing audits to comply with

the MMS Audit Procedures Manual and the Government Auditing Standards

the Comptroller General of the United States issues.

Paragraph (b) would require States to follow the MMS Annual Audit

Work Plan and 5-year Audit Strategy, which MMS will develop in

consultation with States having delegated audit authority.

Paragraph (c) would require States to agree to undertake special

audit initiatives MMS identifies which target specific valuation or

volume issues such as gas contract settlements and crude oil valuation.

Paragraph (d) would require States to prepare, construct, or

compile audit work papers under the appropriate procedures, manuals,

and guidelines.

Paragraph (e) would require States to prepare and submit any audit

reports required in MMS Audit Work Plans and the Standards.

Paragraph (f) would require States to comply with procedures for

appealed demands or orders, including using

[[Page 19974]]

appropriate format and content for field reports and meeting

timeframes.

Section 227.400 What functions may a State perform in processing

production reports or royalty reports?

This section would explain that production reporters or royalty

reporters provide production, sales, and royalty information on mineral

production from leases which must be collected, analyzed, and

corrected. States may receive and process production reports or royalty

reports, or both. This section would provide the minimum functions a

State must perform if it requests delegation of authority to process

production reports or royalty reports, or both.

Paragraph (a) would provide that if a State requests delegation of

either production report or royalty report processing functions, it

must perform certain minimum functions. Thus, a State must perform all

of the functions in paragraph (a) if it requests delegation of either

production or royalty report processing functions, or both. The minimum

functions States must perform are:

(i) Receiving, identifying, and date stamping production reports or

royalty reports;

(ii) Processing production or royalty data to allow entry into a

data base. MMS uses such data to disburse money to the proper entities

and to provide data to States and other affected Federal agencies;

(iii) Creating copies of reports by means such as electronic

imaging. This requirement creates an audit record and allows for use of

the copies in other functions such as automated verification and

audits;

(iv) Timely transmitting production report or royalty report data

to MMS and other affected Federal agencies as provided in the State's

delegation agreement and the Standards. For example, MMS transmits a

biweekly tape of production data to BLM and monthly production data to

the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA), States, and Indian tribes;

(v) Providing training and assistance to production reporters or

royalty reporters. For example, MMS holds periodic training meetings.

MMS also would expect delegated States to hold these meetings. States

processing reports also must provide telephone or written assistance to

reporters who have questions on how to report certain transactions;

(vi) Providing production data or royalty data to appropriate

Federal agencies upon request. For example, States would be required to

provide production data to BLM upon request; and

(vii) Providing assistance to MMS for appealed demands or orders,

including preparing field reports, performing remanded actions,

modifying orders, and providing oral and written briefing and testimony

as expert witnesses.

Paragraph (b) would explain that if a State requests delegation of

either production report or royalty report processing functions, or

both, it may perform certain additional functions authorized under the

Act. Unlike the functions required under paragraph (a) of this section,

performance of the functions in this paragraph would not be mandatory.

The optional functions would include:

(i) Granting exceptions from reporting and payment requirements for

marginal properties; and

(ii) Approving alternative royalty and payment requirements for

unit agreements and communitization agreements.

Section 227.401 What are a State's responsibilities if it processes

production reports or royalty reports?

This section would explain what general responsibilities a State

must perform if it accepts delegation of the processing functions

required under section 227.400 for production reports or royalty

reports or both. The Standards and a State's delegation agreement would

contain more specific responsibilities a State must perform if it

accepts delegation of report processing functions. States must perform

the following minimum report processing functions:

(a) Process reports accurately and timely as provided in the

Standards and the State's delegation agreement;

(b) Identify fatal errors for subsequent error correction that the

State or MMS performs;

(c) Accept multiple forms of electronic media from reporters, as

MMS specifies. For example, States must be able to accept electronic

data interchange, magnetic or cartridge tapes, diskettes reporters

prepare, e-mail, model diskettes, and template diskettes;

(d) Timely transmit required production or royalty data to MMS and

other affected Federal agencies. For example, MMS transmits a biweekly

tape of production data to BLM and a monthly tape to BIA and States. A

State delegated the function of performing processing of report

functions would be required to timely transmit the required data to the

appropriate agency;

(e) Access well, lease, agreement, and reporter reference data from

MMS and provide updated information to MMS. BLM uses this information

for field inspections. MMS uses it in performing other royalty

management functions such as automated verification and audits;

(f) For production reports, maintain adequate system software edits

to ensure compliance with the provisions of 30 CFR part 216, the PAAS

Onshore Oil and Gas Reporter Handbook, the PAAS Reporter Handbook-

Lease, Facility/Measurement Point, and Gas Plant Operators, the PAAS

Solid Minerals Reporter Handbook, any interagency memorandums of

understanding to which MMS is a party, and the Standards. For example,

when a reporter submits a production report, the lease number reported

must match the lease number in the database;

(g) For royalty reports, maintain adequate system software edits to

ensure compliance with the provisions of 30 CFR part 218, the Oil and

Gas Payor Handbook, Volume II, the Solid Minerals Payor Handbook,

``Dear Payor'' letters, and the Standards. For example, the lease must

be a valid lease in the system and the correct payor must pay on the

lease; and

(h) Comply with the procedures for appealed demands or orders,

including using appropriate format and content for field reports and

supplementals and meeting timeframes.

Section 227.500 What functions may a State perform to assure that

reporters correct erroneous report data?

This section would explain that production data and royalty data

are subjected to numerous edits for errors which ensure that what is

reported is correct, that disbursement is made to the proper recipient,

and that correct data are used for other functions such as automated

verification and audits. States may perform error correction functions

for production reports or royalty reports, or both. This section would

provide the minimum functions a State must perform if it requests

delegation of authority to correct erroneous report data for production

reports or royalty reports, or both. The minimum error correction

functions a State must perform are:

(a) Correcting all fatal errors and assigning appropriate

confirmation indicators. Confirmation indicators are used for tracking

purposes and for generating confirmation reports to operators;

(b) Verifying missing production reports to ensure that all reports

are received to assist BLM in field inspections and MMS in other

functions such as automated verification and audits;

[[Page 19975]]

(c) Contacting production reporters or royalty reporters about

missing reports and resolving exceptions. States would be required to

contact reporters by phone and request that they submit additional data

and amended reports. If phone contact does not resolve the issue, the

State would be required to send a letter or issue an order to the

reporter;

(d) Documenting all corrections made, including providing

production reporters or royalty reporters with confirmation reports of

any changes;

(e) Providing training and assistance to production reporters or

royalty reporters. For example, MMS routinely advises reporters on how

to prepare their production and royalty reports. In addition, MMS holds

reporter training sessions throughout the country several times a year.

MMS also would expect delegated States to advise reporters on preparing

their reports and to hold such training sessions.

(f) Issuing notices and bills as needed, including but not limited

to, imposing assessments on a person who chronically submits erroneous

reports; and

(g) Providing assistance to MMS for appealed demands or orders,

including preparing field reports, performing remanded actions,

modifying orders, and providing oral and written briefing and testimony

as expert witnesses.

Section 227.501 What are a State's responsibilities to assure that

reporters correct erroneous data?

This section would explain what general responsibilities a State

must perform if it accepts delegation of the error correction functions

required under section 227.500 for production reports or royalty

reports, or both. The Standards and a State's delegation agreement

would contain more specific responsibilities a State must perform if it

accepts delegation of error correction functions. States must perform

the following minimum error correction functions:

(a) Ensure compliance with the provisions of 30 CFR parts 216 and

218, any applicable handbook specified under 30 CFR 401 (f) and (g),

inter-agency memorandums of understanding to which MMS is a party, and

the Standards;

(b) Assure that reporters accurately and timely correct all fatal

errors as designated in the Standards. These errors include, for

example, invalid or incorrect reporter/payor codes, incorrect lease/

agreement numbers, and missing data fields. The Standards would list

fatal edits for both production reports and royalty reports;

(c) Submit accepted and corrected lines to MMS to allow processing

into the Auditing and Financial System (AFS) and the Production

Accounting and Auditing System (PAAS) in a timely manner as provided in

the Standards and 30 CFR 219; and

(d) Comply with the procedures for appealed demands or orders,

including using appropriate format and content for field reports and

meeting timeframes.

Section 227.600 What automated verification functions may a State

perform?

This section would explain that automated verification involves

systematic monitoring of production and royalty reports to identify and

resolve reporting or payment discrepancies. This section would provide

the minimum functions a State must perform if it requests delegation of

automated verification functions.

Paragraph (a) would provide that States may perform automated

comparison of sales volumes reported by royalty reporters to sales and

transfer volumes reported by production reporters. Paragraph (a) also

would provide that if a State requests delegation of automated

comparison of sales and production volumes, it must perform at least

the following functions:

(1) Performing an initial sales volume comparison between royalty

and production reports;

(2) Performing subsequent comparisons when reporters adjust royalty

or production reports;

(3) Checking unit prices for reasonable product valuation based on

reference price ranges MMS provides;

(4) Resolving volume variances using written correspondence,

telephone inquiries, or other media;

(5) Maintaining appropriate file documentation to support case

resolution; and

(6) Issuing orders to correct reports or payments.

Paragraph (b) would provide that a State requesting delegation of

authority to perform automated comparison of sales and production

volumes also may perform functions in addition to those it must perform

under paragraph (a) of this section. States may perform any one or more

of the following additional automated verification functions:

(1) Verifying compliance with lease financial terms, such as

payment of rent, minimum royalty, and advance royalty;

(2) Identifying and resolving improper adjustments. This involves

trying to adjust a previously reported line with a line that does not

match;

(3) Identifying late payments and insufficient estimates, including

calculating interest owed to MMS and verifying payor-calculated

interest owed to MMS;

(4) Calculating interest due to a lessee or its designee for an

adjustment or refund, including identifying overpayments and excessive

estimates, except for solid mineral and geothermal leases. MMS cannot

delegate authority to calculate interest due a lessee or its designee

for solid mineral and geothermal leases because MMS is not authorized

under the Act to pay interest to such lessees or their designees. MMS

cannot delegate authority it does not have.

(5) Verifying royalty rates;

(6) Verifying compliance with transportation and processing

allowance limitations; and

(7) Manually checking and confirming corrected reports or payments.

Paragraph (c) would require States to issue any notices and bills

associated with any of the functions under paragraphs (a) and (b) of

this section.

Paragraph (d) would require States to provide assistance to MMS for

appealed demands or orders, including preparing field reports, taking

remanded actions, modifying orders, and providing oral and written

briefing and testimony as expert witnesses.

Section 227.601 What are my responsibilities if I perform automated

verification?

This section would explain what general responsibilities a State

must perform if it accepts delegation of the automated verification of

production reports or royalty reports functions required under section

227.600 for production reports or royalty reports, or both. The

Standards and a State's delegation agreement would contain more

specific responsibilities a State must perform if it accepts delegation

of automated verification of production report or royalty report

functions. States must perform the following minimum automated

verification functions:

(a) Verify through research and analysis all identified exceptions,

and prepare the appropriate billings, assessment letters, warning

letters, notification letters, Lease Problem Reports, other internal

forms required, and correspondence required to perform any required

follow-up action for each function, as specified in the Standards or

the State's delegation agreement;

(b) Resolve and respond to all production reporter or royalty

reporter inquiries;

(c) Maintain all documentation and logging procedures as specified

in the Standards or the State's delegation agreement;

[[Page 19976]]

(d) Access well, lease, agreement, and production reporter or

royalty reporter reference data from MMS and provide update information

to MMS. Thus, States will have access to the reference database but MMS

will update reference data and maintain and update the reference

database; and

(e) Comply with procedures for appealed demands and orders,

including using appropriate format and content for field reports and

meeting timeframes.

Section 227.700 What enforcement documents may a State issue in

support of its delegated function?

This section would explain what enforcement actions a State may

take as part of its delegated functions.

Paragraph (a) would provide that States may issue demands,

subpoenas (except for solid minerals and geothermal leases), and orders

to perform restructured accounting, including related notices to

lessees and their designees. Unlike Federal oil and gas leases, under

the Act MMS does not have statutory authority to issue subpoenas for

solid mineral and geothermal leases. Thus, MMS cannot delegate this

authority to States.

Paragraph (a) also would provide that States may enter into tolling

agreements under section 15(d)(1) of the Act, 30 U.S.C. 1725(d)(1).

Paragraph (b) would provide that, when a State issues any

enforcement document, it must comply with the requirements of section

115 of the Act, 30 U.S.C. 1725.

Paragraph (c) would explain the requirements a State must comply

with when it issues a demand or enters into a tolling agreement under

section 15(d)(1) of the Act, 30 U.S.C. 1725(d)(1). When a State issues

a demand or enters into a tolling agreement, the highest State official

having ultimate authority over the collection of royalties or the State

official to whom that authority has been delegated must sign the demand

or tolling agreement.

Paragraph (d) would explain what requirements a State must meet

when issuing subpoenas or orders to perform restructured accounting.

When a State issues a subpoena or order to perform a restructured

accounting, it must:

(1) Coordinate with MMS to assure identification of issues that may

concern more than one State before it issues subpoenas and orders to

perform restructured accounting. The purpose of this paragraph is to

ensure that issues of national importance are pursued in a uniform and

coordinated manner; and

(2) Assure that the highest State official having ultimate

authority over the collection of royalties signs any subpoenas and

orders to perform restructured accounting, as required under section

115 of the Act, 30 U.S.C. 1725. Unlike demands and tolling agreements,

such officials may not delegate signature authority for subpoenas and

orders to perform restructured accounting to any other person.

Performance Review

Section 227.800 How will MMS monitor a State's performance of

delegated functions?

This section would provide procedures that MMS would use to monitor

a State's performance of its delegated functions.

Paragraph (a) would provide that a monitoring team comprised of MMS

officials would monitor a State's performance of the delegated

functions under its delegation agreement. The team would be comprised

of MMS experts from each of the delegated function areas. Please

provide comment to MMS if you have suggestions on how MMS should form

this team.

Paragraph (b) would provide that the Standards will specify the

frequency of monitoring for each delegated function.

Paragraph (c) would specify how the monitoring team would monitor a

State's performance of each delegated function. The monitoring team

would:

(1) Perform reviews to verify that the State is complying with the

Standards and 30 U.S.C. Sec. 1735;

(2) Conduct fiscal examinations to verify that the State's costs

are eligible for reimbursement;

(3) Periodically review the State's statistical reports required

under Sec. 227.200(e) to verify the State's accuracy, timeliness, and

efficiency;

(4) Check for timely transmittal of production report or royalty

report information to MMS and other affected agencies, as applicable,

to allow for proper disbursement of funds and processing of

information;

(5) Schedule on site visits and Office of The Inspector General,

General Accounting Office, and MMS audits of the State's performance of

its delegated functions; and

(6) Maintain reports of its monitoring activities.

Section 227.801 What if a State does not adequately perform a

delegated function?

This section would explain the steps MMS may take if a State's

performance of a delegated function does not comply with its delegation

agreement, or the Standards, or if MMS finds that the State can no

longer meet the statutory requirements under Sec. 227.106.

Paragraph (a) would provide that MMS would notify a State in

writing of its noncompliance or inability to comply with its delegation

agreement, or the Standards, or the statutory requirements under

Sec. 227.106. The notice would prescribe corrective actions a State

must take, and how long it would have to comply. A State could ask MMS

for an extension of time to comply with the notice and would be

required to explain why it needs more time to comply.

Paragraph (b) would provide that if a State did not take the

prescribed corrective actions within the time that MMS allows in a

notice issued under paragraph (a) of this section, then MMS may:

(1) Initiate proceedings under Sec. 227.802 to terminate all or a

part of the State's delegation agreement;

(2) Withhold compensation provided to the State under Sec. 227.112;

and

(3) Perform the delegated function, prior to terminating or without

terminating the State's delegation agreement, including, but not

limited to, issuing a demand or order to a Federal lessee, or its

designee, or any other person when:

(i) The State's failure to issue the demand or order would result

in an underpayment of an obligation due MMS; and

(ii) Such underpayment would go uncollected without MMS

intervention.

Section 227.802 How may MMS terminate a State's delegation agreement?

This section would explain the procedures MMS would use to

terminate either a State's entire delegation agreement or a part of a

State's delegation agreement.

Paragraph (a) would provide that MMS will notify a State in writing

that it is initiating procedures to terminate the State's delegation

agreement.

Paragraph (b) would state that MMS will provide a State with notice

and opportunity for a hearing under Sec. 227.803.

Paragraph (c) would provide that after the hearing, MMS may:

(1) Terminate a State's delegation agreement; or

(2) Allow the State 30 days to correct any remaining deficiencies.

If the State did not correct the deficiency within 30 days, MMS would

terminate all or a part of the State's delegation agreement.

[[Page 19977]]

Section 227.803 What are the hearing procedures for terminating a

State's delegation agreement?

This section would explain the hearing procedures MMS would

establish to assist it in determining whether to terminate all or a

part of a State's delegation agreement.

Paragraph (a) would provide that the MMS Director would appoint a

hearing official to conduct one or more public hearings for fact

finding and to determine any actions a State must take to correct the

noncompliance identified in Sec. 227.801(c). The hearing official would

act solely as a fact finder and would not decide whether to terminate a

State's delegation agreement.

Paragraphs (b) through (g) of this proposed section are self-

explanatory.

Paragraph (h) would provide that information presented at each

public hearing will help MMS to determine whether:

(1) The State has complied with the terms and conditions of its

delegation agreement; or

(2) The State has the capability to comply with the requirements

under Sec. 227.106.

Section 227.804 How else may a State's delegation agreement terminate?

This section would explain that a State may terminate its

delegation at any time by giving MMS a 90-day written notice of intent

to terminate. MMS would require 90 days notice to allow it to prepare

to reassume the functions it had delegated to the State. In addition,

industry would require the 90 days to readjust its systems to reflect

any change.

Section 227.805 How may a State obtain a new delegation agreement

after termination?

This section would explain that a State may apply again for

delegation by beginning with the proposal process under this part after

its delegation agreement terminates.

The MMS's Royalty Management Program will post the comments

received on the Internet homepage at www.rmp.mms.gov.

IV. Procedural Matters

The Regulatory Flexibility Act

The Department certifies that this rule will not have significant

economic effect on a substantial number of small entities as that term

is defined under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.).

Some small entities might have activities in more than one State. While

these companies could be required to report to several States instead

of only the Federal Government under the proposed rule, they would not

have to file different reports. Instead, they would file the same

reports that they do now, but to a greater number of regulatory

authorities. The proposed rule will provide procedures and standards

for States interested in developing and maintaining an efficient and

effective Federal royalty management system for those functions

delegable to States under the Federal Oil and Gas Royalty

Simplification and Fairness Act of 1996, Pub. L. 104-185, August 13,

1996, as corrected by Pub. L. 104-200.

Executive Order 12630

The Department certifies that the rule does not represent a

governmental action capable of interference with constitutionally

protected rights. Thus, a Takings Implication Assessment need not be

prepared under Executive Order 12630, ``Governmental Actions and

Interference with Constitutionally Protected Property Rights.''

Executive Order 12866

This proposed rule is significant under the Executive Order 12866.

The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has reviewed the rule.

Although this rule will result in an increased reporting burden, there

will be several offsetting benefits which include: incentives to States

and increased State participation in Federal activities; agency

compliance with the statute.

Executive Order 12988

The Department has certified to OMB that this rule meets the

applicable reform standards provided in section 3(a) and (b)(2) of

Executive Order 12988.

Paperwork Reduction Act

This proposed rule contains a collection of information which has

been submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review

and approval under section 3507(d) of the Paperwork Reduction Act of

1995. As part of our continuing effort to reduce paperwork and

respondent burden, MMS invites the public and other Federal agencies to

comment on any aspect of the reporting burden. Submit your comments to

the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, OMB, Attention Desk

Officer for the Department of the Interior, Washington, DC 20503. Send

copies of your comments to Minerals Management Service, Royalty

Management Program, Rules and Procedures Staff, P.O. Box 25165, MS

3101, Denver, Colorado 80225-0165; courier address is Building 85,

Denver Federal Center, Denver, Colorado 80225; e:Mail address is

David____G[email protected].

OMB has up to 60 days to approve or disapprove this collection of

information but may respond after 30 days. Therefore, public comments

should be submitted to OMB within 30 days in order to assure their

maximum consideration. However, MMS will consider all comments received

during the comment period for this notice of proposed rulemaking.

The information collection is titled Delegation of Authority to

States (OMB Control Number 1010-0088). Recently enacted legislation

expands the scope of royalty management functions that the Secretary

may delegate to States. See the Federal Oil and Gas Royalty

Simplification and Fairness Act of 1996, Pub. L. 104-185, as corrected

by Pub. L. 104-200 (RSFA). The functions that MMS may delegate under

RSFA are:

(1) Conducting audits and investigations;

(2) Receiving and processing production and royalty reports;

(3) Correcting erroneous report data;

(4) Performing automated verification; and

(5) Issuing demands, subpoenas (except for solid mineral and

geothermal leases), orders to perform restructured accounting, and

related tolling agreements and notices to lessees or their designees.

With the increase in the number of delegable functions, the

paperwork burden upon those States assuming additional delegable

functions and upon industry which will now be interacting with several

States as well as with MMS will increase.

For example, a State requesting a delegation of any of these

functions must prepare and submit information to MMS including an

application to perform the delegable functions, evidence and testimony

for the hearing process, expense vouchers for cost reimbursement, and

annual workplans for MMS review. A delegated State must also maintain

records in accordance with applicable Federal recordkeeping

requirements. This information is necessary for tracking purposes, for

an audit trail, and to document that the State can perform the

delegated royalty management functions effectively and efficiently. MMS

will use this information to evaluate applications for delegation and

to monitor and review a State's performance of its delegated functions.

Currently 38 States receiving royalties from MMS could request a

delegation. MMS assumes that four of the larger producing States may

request a delegation of expanded functions

[[Page 19978]]

beyond those they already perform. Approved delegations will last for 3

years but can be extended for another 3 years. States may submit

vouchers for cost reimbursement monthly or quarterly. States must

submit delegable function workplans annually. MMS will specify the

frequency of monitoring and reviewing a State's performance in the

delegation agreement.

In the current Delegation of Authority to States information

collection, MMS estimated the annual burden hours to the States to be

800 hours. This was based on 10 States conducting delegated audits

spending 40 hours preparing workplans and 40 hours preparing vouchers:

[40 hours (workplans) + 40 hours (vouchers)] x 10 States = 800 annual

burden hours. In retrospect, our estimate of 80 annual burden hours per

State was low. Additional responsibilities that a State must assume

under the new legislation when they elect to perform a delegable

function include application and hearing preparation--40 annual burden

hours, voucher preparation--120 annual burden hours, annual workplan

preparation--40 annual burden hours, and recordkeeping--200 annual

burden hours. Experience gained over the last several years indicates

that each State that is conducting delegated audits is spending

approximately 400 annual burden hours, not 80, and that MMS's original

estimate of 800 annual burden hours for 10 States should be revised to

4,000 annual burden hours: [40 annual burden hours + 120 + 40 + 200]

x 10 States = 4,000 annual burden hours.

MMS estimates 8,000 burden hours for the four States to perform all

five delegable functions: 400 annual burden hours per function x 4

States x 5 functions = 8,000 annual burden hours. If six other States

continued conducting delegated audits, MMS estimates that burden at

2,400 burden hours: 400 annual burden hours x 6 States = 2,400 annual

burden hours. With the additional delegated functions, the total annual

burden hour estimate for this information collection will increase to

10,400. Using a cost of $25 an hour, the annual cost burden estimate is

$260,000. The Federal Government will reimburse some of these costs out

of current appropriations. However, States could incur additional start

up costs, such as purchasing equipment necessary to perform a delegated

function, that may not be reimbursable.

The MMS expects that the annual burden for industry will increase

by a total of 200,000 burden hours for approximately 4,500 payors and

reporters providing royalty and production reports to MMS. If four

States perform delegable functions and each State affects approximately

1,000 payors and reporters, MMS estimates that each payor or reporter

would spend 50 burden hours annually coordinating their interactions

and communications among the several States and with MMS. For example,

if a payor sends reports to the State but sends payments to MMS, the

payor must coordinate not only with MMS, as is currently done, but also

with the State. This will result in an annual burden on industry of

200,000 hours: 1,000 reporters or payors x 4 States x 50 annual

burden hours = 200,000 annual burden hours. Using a cost of $25 an

hour, the annual cost burden estimate is $5,000,000.

Based on our current experience with administering the delegated

audit function 10 States conduct, MMS's annual burden estimate is 900

hours per State for admninistering the delegated audit function and an

additional 300 hours per State for issuing related demand letters.

Since MMS will no longer issue demand letters, the 300 burden hour

estimate will decrease to an estiamte of 50 annual burden hours for

monitoring purposes. MMS's total burden for the six States continuing

to perform delegated audits plus assuming the responsibility of issuing

demand letters would be 5,700 annual burden hours: [900 hours x 1

function (delegated audits) x 6 States] + [50 hours x 1 function

(issue demand letters) x 6 States] = 5,700 annual burden hours. The

annual burden hours to the Federal Government for four States assuming

all five functions would be 14,600 hours: [900 annual burden hours per

function x 4 functions (all except issue demands) x 4 States] + [50

annual burden hours x 1 function (demand letter monitoring) x 4

States)] = 14,600 annual burden hours. MMS estimates the annual burden

hours to the Federal Government for this information collection at

20,300. Using a cost of $25 an hour, the annual cost burden estimate is

$507,500.

In compliance with the requirement of Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, MMS is providing notice and otherwise

consulting with members of the public and affected agencies concerning

collection of information in order to solicit comment to: (a) evaluate

whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the

proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether

the information is useful; (b) evaluate the accuracy of the agency's

estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information; (c)

enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be

collected; and (d) minimize the burden of the collection of information

on those who are to respond, including using automated collection

techniques or other forms of information technology.

The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 provides that an agency may not

conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a

collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB

control number.

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995

The Department has determined and certifies according to the

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act, 2 U.S.C. 1502 et seq., that this rule

will not impose a cost of $100 million or more in any given year on

local, tribal, State governments or the private sector.

National Environmental Policy Act of 1969

We have determined that this rulemaking is not a major Federal

action significantly affecting the quality of the human environment,

and a detailed statement under section 102(2)(C) of the National

Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4332(2)(C)) is not

required.

List of Subjects in 30 CFR Parts 227, 228 and 229

Coal, Continental shelf, Geothermal energy, Government contracts,

Mineral royalties, Natural gas, Petroleum, Public lands--mineral

resources, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

Dated: March 28, 1997.

Bob Armstrong,

Assistant Secretary for Land and Minerals Management.

For the reasons set out in the preamble, 30 CFR part 227 is

proposed to be added and parts 228 and 229 are proposed to be amended

to read as follows:

1. Part 227 is added to read as follows:

PART 227--DELEGATION TO STATES

Delegation of MMS Royalty Functions

Sec.

227.1 What is the purpose of this part?

227.100 What States may request delegation?

227.101 What royalty management functions may MMS delegate to a

State?

227.102 What royalty management functions will MMS not delegate?

Delegation Proposals

227.103 What must a State's delegation proposal contain?

227.104 What will MMS do when it receives a State's delegation

proposal?

227.105 What are the hearing procedures?

227.106 What statutory requirements must a State meet to receive a

delegation?

[[Page 19979]]

227.107 When will the MMS Director decide whether to approve a

State's delegation proposal?

227.108 How will MMS notify a State of its decision?

227.109 What if the MMS Director denies a State's delegation

proposal?

227.110 How long are delegation agreements effective?

Existing Delegations

227.111 Do existing delegation agreements remain in effect?

Compensation

227.112 What compensation will a State receive to perform delegated

functions?

States' Responsibilities to Perform Delegated Functions

227.200 What are a State's general responsibilities if it accepts a

delegation?

227.201 What standards must a State comply with for performing

delegated functions?

227.300 What audit functions may a State perform?

227.301 What are a State's responsibilities if it performs audits?

227.400 What functions may a State perform in processing production

reports and royalty reports?

227.401 What are a State's responsibilities if it processes

production reports or royalty reports?

227.500 What functions may a State perform to ensure that reporters

correct erroneous report data?

227.501 What are a State's responsibilities to ensure that

reporters correct erroneous data?

227.600 What automated verification functions may a State perform?

227.601 What are a State's responsibilities if it performs

automated verification?

227.700 What enforcement documents may a State issue in support of

its delegated function?

Performance Review

227.800 How will MMS monitor a State's performance of delegated

functions?

227.801 What if a State does not adequately perform a delegated

function?

227.802 How will MMS terminate a State's delegation agreement?

227.803 What are the hearing procedures for termination of a

State's delegation agreement?

227.804 How else may a State's delegation agreement terminate?

227.805 How may a State obtain a new delegation agreement after

termination?

Authority: 30 U.S.C. 1735; 30 U.S.C. 196.

Delegation of MMS Royalty Functions

Sec. 227.1 What is the purpose of this part?

This part provides procedures to delegate Federal royalty

management functions to States under Section 205 of the Federal Oil and

Gas Royalty Management Act of 1982 (the Act), 30 U.S.C. 1735, as

amended by the Federal Oil and Gas Royalty Simplification and Fairness

Act of 1996 Pub. L. 104-185, August 13, 1996, as corrected by Pub. L.

104-200. This part also provides procedures to delegate similar

functions to States under Pub. L. 102-154 for solid mineral leases,

geothermal leases, and leases subject to section 8(g) of the Outer

Continental Shelf Lands Act, 43 U.S.C. 1337(g). This part does not

apply to any inspection or enforcement responsibilities of BLM for

onshore leases or the MMS Offshore Minerals Management program for

leases on the Outer Continental Shelf.

Sec. 227.100 What States may request delegation?

You may request a delegation of royalty management functions under

this part if:

(a) You have oil and gas leases subject to the Act on Federal lands

within your State;

(b) You have oil and gas leases offshore of your State subject to

section 8(g) of the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act, 43 U.S.C.

1337(g);

(c) You have solid mineral leases or geothermal leases on Federal

lands within your State.

Sec. 227.101 What royalty management functions may MMS delegate to a

State?

MMS may delegate the following royalty management functions under

this part:

(a) Conducting audits and investigations;

(b) Receiving and processing production or royalty reports;

(c) Correcting erroneous report data;

(d) Performing automated verification; and

(e) Issuing demands, subpoenas (except for solid mineral and

geothermal leases), and orders to perform restructured accounting,

including related notices to lessees or their designees, and entering

into tolling agreements under section 115(d)(1) of the Act, 30 U.S.C.

1725(d)(1).

Sec. 227.102 What royalty management functions will MMS not delegate?

This section lists the principal royalty management functions that

MMS will not delegate to a State. MMS will not delegate to a State the

following functions:

(a) MMS must collect all moneys received from sales, bonuses,

rentals, royalties, civil penalties, assessments and interest. MMS also

must collect any moneys a lessee or its designee pays because of audits

or other actions of a delegated State;

(b) MMS must compare all cash and other payments it receives with

payments shown on royalty reports or other documents, such as bills, to

reconcile payor accounts. MMS also must disburse all appropriate moneys

to States and other revenue recipients, including refunds and interest

owed to lessees and their designees;

(c) The Department of the Interior will receive, process, and

decide all administrative appeals from demands or other orders issued

to lessees, their designees, or any other person, including demands or

orders a delegated State issues;

(d) Only MMS may take enforcement actions other than issuing

demands, subpoenas and orders to perform restructured accounting. MMS

will issue notices of non-compliance and civil penalties, collect

debts, write-off delinquent debts, pursue litigation, enforce

subpoenas, and manage alternative dispute resolution. MMS will conduct,

coordinate, and approve any settlement or other compromise of an

obligation that a lessee or its designee owes;

(e) MMS will decide all valuation policies, including issuing

valuation regulations, determinations, and guidelines, and interpreting

valuation regulations; and

(f) MMS may reserve additional authorities and responsibilities not

included in paragraphs (a) through (e) of this section.

Delegation Programs

Sec. 227.103 What must a State's delegation proposal contain?

If you want MMS to delegate royalty management functions to you,

then you must submit a delegation proposal to the MMS Associate

Director for Royalty Management. MMS will provide you with technical

assistance and information to help you prepare your delegation

proposal. Your proposal must contain the following minimum information:

(a) The name and title of the State official authorized to submit

the delegation proposal and execute the delegation agreement;

(b) The name, address, and telephone number of the State contact

for the proposal;

(c) A copy of the legislation, State Attorney General opinion, or

other document that:

(1) States which State entity is responsible for performing

delegated functions; and

(2) Demonstrates the State's authority to:

(i) Accept a delegation from MMS; and

(ii) Receive State or Federal appropriations to perform delegated

functions;

(d) The date you propose to begin performing delegated functions;

[[Page 19980]]

(e) A detailed statement of the delegable functions that you

propose to perform. For each function, describe the resources available

in your State to perform each function, the procedures you will use to

perform each function, and how you will ensure that you will meet all

Federal laws, lease terms, regulations, and relevant performance

standards. As evidence that you have or will have the resources to

perform each delegable function, you must provide the following

information:

(1) A description of the personnel you have available to perform

delegated functions, including:

(i) How many persons you will assign full-time and part-time to

each delegated function;

(ii) The technical qualifications of the key personnel you will

assign to each function, including academic field and degree,

professional credentials, and quality and amount of experience with

similar functions; and

(iii) Whether these persons are currently State employees. If not,

how you propose to hire these persons or obtain their services, and

when you expect to have those persons available to perform delegated

functions.

(2) A description of the facilities you will use to perform

delegated functions, including:

(i) Whether you currently have the facilities in which you will

physically locate the personnel and equipment you will need to perform

the functions you propose to assume. If not, how you propose to acquire

these facilities, and when you expect to have the facilities available;

(ii) How convenient the location is for travel to and communication

with lessees and Federal regulatory officials;

(iii) How much office space is available; and

(iv) How you currently are using those facilities.

(3) Describe the equipment you will use to perform delegated

functions, including:

(i) Hardware and software you will use to perform each delegated

function, including equipment for:

(A) Document processing, including compatibility with MMS automated

systems, electronic commerce capabilities, and data storage

capabilities;

(B) Accessing reference data;

(C) Contacting production or royalty reporters;

(D) Issuing demands;

(E) Maintaining accounting records;

(F) Performing automated verification;

(G) Maintaining security of confidential and proprietary

information; and

(H) Providing data to other Federal agencies.

(ii) Whether you currently have the equipment you will need to

perform the functions you propose to assume. If not, how you propose to

acquire the equipment and when you expect to have such equipment

available.

(f) Your estimates of the costs to fund the following resources

necessary to perform the delegation:

(1) Personnel, including hiring, employee salaries and benefits,

travel, and training;

(2) Facilities, including acquisition, upgrades, operation, and

maintenance;

(3) Equipment, including acquisition, operation, and maintenance;

(g) Your plans to fund the resources under paragraph (f) of this

section, including any items you will ask MMS to fund under the

delegation agreement;

(h) A statement identifying any areas where State law may limit

your ability to perform delegated functions. Explain what actions you

propose to remove any such limitation;

(i) A statement that, in accordance with section 203 of the Act (30

U.S.C. 1733), persons who have access to information received under

delegated functions are subject to the same provisions of law regarding

confidentiality and disclosure of that information as Federal

employees. Applicable laws include the Freedom of Information Act, the

Trade Secrets Act, and relevant Executive Orders (FOIA). In addition,

your statement must acknowledge that all documents produced, received,

and maintained as part of any delegation functions are agency records

for purposes of FOIA; and

Sec. 227.104 What will MMS do when it receives a State's delegation

proposal?

When MMS receives your delegation proposal, it will record the

receipt date. MMS will notify you in writing within 15 business days

whether your proposal is complete. If it is not complete, MMS will

identify any missing items that Sec. 227.103 of this part requires.

Once you submit all required information, MMS will notify you of the

date your application is complete.

Sec. 227.105 What are the hearing procedures?

After MMS notifies you that your delegation proposal is complete,

MMS will schedule a hearing on your proposal as follows:

(a) The MMS Director will appoint a hearing official to conduct one

or more public hearings for fact-finding regarding your ability to

assume the delegated functions requested. The hearing official will not

decide whether to approve your delegation request;

(b) The hearing official will contact you about scheduling a

hearing date and location;

(c) The hearing official will publish notice of the hearing in the

Federal Register and other appropriate media within your State;

(d) At the hearing, you will have an opportunity to present

testimony and written information in support of your proposal;

(e) Other persons may attend the hearing and may present testimony

and written information for the record;

(f) MMS will record the hearing;

(g) MMS will maintain a record of all documents related to the

proposal process;

(h) After the hearing, MMS may require you to submit additional

information in support of your delegation proposal.

Sec. 227.106 What statutory requirements must a State meet to receive

a delegation?

The MMS Director will decide whether to approve your delegation

request and will ask the Secretary of the Interior to concur in the

decision. That decision is solely within the MMS Director's and the

Secretary's discretion. The MMS Director's decision in which the

Secretary concurs in is the final decision for the Department. The MMS

Director may approve a State's request for delegation only if, based

upon the State's delegation proposal and the hearing record, the MMS

Director finds that:

(a) It is likely that the State will provide adequate resources to

achieve the purposes of the Act;

(b) The State has demonstrated that it will effectively and

faithfully administer MMS rules under the Act in accordance with the

requirements of subsections (c) and (d) of section 205 of the Act;

(c) The delegation will not create an unreasonable burden on any

lessee;

(d) The State agrees to adopt standardized reporting procedures

prescribed by MMS for royalty and production accounting purposes,

unless the State and all affected parties (including MMS and lessees

and their designees) agree otherwise;

(e) The State agrees to follow and adhere to regulations and

guidelines issued by MMS under the mineral leasing laws regarding

valuation of production; and

(f) Where necessary for a State to carry out and enforce a

delegated activity, the State agrees to enact laws and rules consistent

with relevant Federal laws and regulations.

[[Page 19981]]

Sec. 227.107 When will the MMS Director decide whether to approve a

State's delegation proposal?

The MMS Director will decide whether to approve your delegation

proposal within 90 days after your delegation proposal is complete. MMS

may extend the 90-day period with your written consent.

Sec. 227.108 How will MMS notify a State of its decision?

MMS will notify you in writing of its decision on your delegation

proposal. If MMS approves your delegation proposal, then MMS will hold

discussions with you to develop a delegation agreement detailing the

functions that you will perform and the standards and requirements you

must comply with to perform those functions.

Sec. 227.109 What if the MMS Director denies a State's delegation

proposal?

If the MMS Director denies your delegation proposal, MMS will state

the reasons for denial. MMS also will inform you in writing of the

conditions you must meet to receive approval. You may submit a new

delegation proposal at any time following a denial.

Sec. 227.110 How long are delegation agreements effective?

(a) Delegation agreements are effective for 3 years.

(b) After 3 years, you may ask MMS to renew the delegation for an

additional 3 years. No later than 6 months prior to the expiration of

your 3-year delegation agreement, you must submit your renewal request

to the MMS Associate Director for Royalty Management as follows:

(1) If you do not want to change the terms of your delegation

agreement for the renewal period, you need only ask to extend your

existing agreement for the 3-year renewal period. MMS will not schedule

a hearing unless you request one;

(2) If you want to change the terms of your delegation agreement

for the renewal period, you must submit a new delegation proposal under

this part.

(c) The MMS Director may approve your renewal request only if MMS

determines that you are meeting the requirements of the applicable

standards and regulations. If the MMS Director denies your renewal

request, MMS will state the reasons for denial. MMS also will inform

you in writing of the conditions you must meet to receive approval. You

may submit a new renewal request at any time following a denial, but

not after your current agreement expires.

(d) After the 3-year renewal period for your delegation agreement

ends, you must request a new delegation agreement from MMS under this

part. No hearing will be held unless you request one or you want to

change the terms of your delegation agreement. As part of the decision

whether to approve your request for a new delegation, the MMS Director

will consider whether you are meeting the requirements of the

applicable standards and regulations under your existing delegation

agreement.

Existing Delegations

Sec. 227.111 Do existing delegation agreements remain in effect?

This section explains your options if you have a delegation

agreement in effect on [the effective date of the final rule].

(a) If you do not want to perform any royalty management functions

in addition to those authorized under your existing agreement, you may

continue your existing agreement until its expiration date. After the

agreement expires, you must receive a new delegation agreement meeting

the requirements of this part and the applicable standards.

(b) If you want to perform royalty management functions in addition

to those authorized under your existing agreement, you must request a

new delegation agreement under this part.

(c) MMS may extend any delegation agreement in effect on [the

effective date of the final rule] for up to 3 years beyond the date it

is due to expire.

Compensation

Sec. 227.112 What compensation will a State receive to perform

delegated functions?

You will receive compensation for your costs to perform each

delegated function subject to the following conditions:

(a) Compensation for costs is subject to Congressional

appropriations;

(b) Compensation may not exceed the reasonably anticipated

expenditures that MMS would incur to perform the same function;

(c) The cost for which you request compensation must be directly

related to your performance of a delegated function and necessary for

your performance of that delegated function;

(d) You must provide vouchers detailing your expenditures quarterly

or monthly during the fiscal year as stated in your delegation

agreement;

(e) You must maintain adequate books and records to support your

vouchers;

(f) MMS will pay you quarterly or monthly during the fiscal year as

stated in your delegation agreement; and

(g) MMS may withhold compensation to you for your failure to

properly perform any delegated function under section 227.801 of this

part.

States' Responsibilities To Perform Delegated Functions

Sec. 227.200 What are a States' general responsibilities if it accepts

a delegation?

For each delegated function you perform, you must:

(a) Operate in compliance with all Federal laws, regulations, and

Secretarial and MMS determinations and orders relating to calculating,

reporting, and paying mineral royalties and other revenues. If you need

guidance on or interpretation of any applicable Federal requirement,

you must submit a written request for guidance or interpretation to the

appropriate MMS official. MMS will respond to your request in writing,

and you must follow the interpretation or guidance given;

(b) Comply with Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP).

You must:

(1) Provide complete disclosure of financial results of activities;

(2) Maintain correct and accurate records of all mineral-related

transactions and accounts;

(3) Maintain effective controls and accountability;

(4) Maintain a system of accounts that includes a comprehensive

audit trail so that all entries may be traced to one or more source

documents; and

(5) Maintain adequate royalty and production information for

royalty management purposes.

(c) Assist MMS in meeting the requirements of the Government

Performance and Results Act (GPRA) as well as assisting in developing

and endeavoring to comply with the MMS Strategic Plan and Performance

Measurements;

(d) Maintain all records you obtain or create under your delegated

function, such as royalty reports, production reports, and other

related information. You must maintain records in a safe, secure

manner, including taking appropriate measures for protecting

confidential and proprietary information and assisting MMS in

responding to Freedom of Information Act requests when necessary. You

must maintain records for at least 7 years;

(e) Provide reports to MMS about your activities under your

delegated functions. MMS will specify in your delegation agreement and

the MMS Standards for Delegation (Standards) what reports you must

submit and how often you must submit them. At a minimum, you must

provide periodic statistical reports to MMS summarizing the activities

you carried out, such as:

[[Page 19982]]

(1) Production and royalty reports processed;

(2) Erroneous reports corrected;

(3) Results of automated verification findings;

(4) Number of audits performed; and

(5) Enforcement documents issued.

(f) Assist MMS in maintaining adequate reference, royalty, and

production databases as provided in the Standards;

(g) Develop annual work plans that:

(1) Specify the work you will perform for each delegated function;

and

(2) Identify the resources you will commit to perform each

delegated function;

(h) Help MMS respond to requests for information from other Federal

agencies, Congress, and the public;

(i) Cooperate with MMS' monitoring of your delegated functions; and

(j) Comply with the Standards as required under Sec. 227.201 of

this part.

Sec. 227.201 What standards must a State comply with for performing

delegated functions?

(a) If MMS delegates royalty management functions to you, you must

comply with the Standards. The Standards explain how you must carry out

the activities under each of the delegable functions. The Standards

will explain, for example, the appropriate standards of accuracy,

timeliness, and efficiency for you to carry out each delegated

function.

(b) Your delegation agreement may include additional standards

specifically applicable to the functions delegated to you.

(c) Failure to comply with your delegation agreement, the

Standards, or any of the specific standards and requirements in the

delegation agreement, is grounds for termination of all or part of your

delegation agreement, or other actions as provided under Secs. 227.801

and 227.802.

(d) MMS may revise the Standards and will provide notice of those

changes in the Federal Register. You must comply with any changes to

the Standards.

Sec. 227.300 What audit functions may a State perform?

An audit consists of an examination of records to verify that

royalty reports and payments accurately reflect actual production,

sales, revenues and costs, and compliance with Federal statutes,

regulations, lease terms, and MMS policy determinations. If you request

delegation of audit functions, you must perform at least the following

functions:

(a) Issuing engagement letters;

(b) Arranging for entrance conferences;

(c) Submitting requests for records;

(d) Scheduling site visits;

(e) Examining royalty and production reports;

(f) Examining lessee production and sales records, including

contracts, payments, invoices, and transportation and processing costs

to substantiate production and royalty reporting;

(g) Holding closeout conferences;

(h) Issuing records releases and audit closure letters, as

necessary; and

(i) Providing assistance to MMS for appealed demands or orders,

including preparing field reports, performing remanded actions,

modifying orders, and providing oral and written briefing and testimony

as expert witnesses.

Sec. 227.301 What are a State's responsibilities if it performs

audits?

If you perform audits you must:

(a) Comply with the MMS Audit Procedures Manual and the Government

Auditing Standards issued by the Comptroller General of the United

States;

(b) Follow the MMS Annual Audit Work Plan and 5-year Audit

Strategy, which MMS will develop in consultation with States having

delegated audit authority;

(c) Agree to undertake special audit initiatives MMS identifies

targeting specific royalty issues, such as valuation or volume

determinations;

(d) Prepare, construct, or compile audit work papers under the

appropriate procedures, manuals, and guidelines;

(e) Prepare and submit audit reports, MMS Audit Work Plans, the

Standards require; and

(f) Comply with procedures for appealed demands or orders,

including using appropriate format and content for field reports and

meeting time frames.

Sec. 227.400 What functions may a State perform in processing

production reports or royalty reports?

Production reporters or royalty reporters provide production,

sales, and royalty information on mineral production from leases that

must be collected, analyzed, and corrected.

(a) If you request delegation of either production report or

royalty report processing functions, you must perform at least the

following functions:

(1) Receiving, identifying, and date stamping production reports or

royalty reports;

(2) Processing production or royalty data to allow entry into a

data base;

(3) Creating copies of reports by means such as electronic imaging;

(4) Timely transmitting production report or royalty report data to

MMS and other affected Federal agencies as provided in your delegation

agreement and the Standards;

(5) Providing training and assistance to production reporters or

royalty reporters;

(6) Providing production data or royalty data to appropriate

Federal agencies upon request; and

(7) Providing assistance to MMS for appealed demands or orders,

including preparing field reports, performing remanded actions,

modifying orders, and providing oral and written briefing and testimony

as expert witnesses.

(b) If you request delegation of either production report or

royalty report processing functions, or both, you may perform the

following functions:

(1) Granting exceptions from reporting and payment requirements for

marginal properties; and

(2) Approving alternative royalty and payment requirements for unit

agreements and communitization agreements.

Sec. 227.401 What are a State's responsibilities if it processes

production reports or royalty reports?

In processing production reports or royalty reports you must:

(a) Process reports accurately and timely as provided in the

Standards and your delegation agreement;

(b) Identify fatal errors for subsequent error correction that the

State or MMS performs;

(c) Accept multiple forms of electronic media from reporters, as

MMS specifies;

(d) Timely transmit required production or royalty data to MMS and

other affected Federal agencies;

(e) Access well, lease, agreement, and reporter reference data from

MMS and provide updated information to MMS;

(f) For production reports, maintain adequate system software edits

to ensure compliance with the provisions of 30 CFR part 216, the PAAS

Onshore Oil and Gas Reporter Handbook, the PAAS Reporter Handbook-

Lease, Facility/Measurement Point, and Gas Plant Operators, the PAAS

Solid Minerals Reporter Handbook, any inter-agency memorandums of

understanding to which MMS is a party, and the Standards;

(g) For royalty reports, maintain adequate system software edits to

ensure compliance with the provisions of 30 CFR part 218, the Oil and

Gas Payor Handbook, Volume II, the Solid Minerals Payor Handbook,

``Dear Payor'' letters, and the Standards; and

(h) Comply with the procedures for appealed demands or orders,

including using appropriate format and content for field reports and

supplementals and meeting time frames.

[[Page 19983]]

Sec. 227.500 What functions may a State perform to ensure that

reporters correct erroneous report data?

Production and royalty data must be edited to ensure that what is

reported is correct, that disbursement is made to the proper recipient,

and that correct data are used for other functions, such as automated

verification and audits. If you request delegation of error correction

functions for production reports or royalty reports, or both, you must

perform at least the following functions:

(a) Correcting all fatal errors and assigning appropriate

confirmation indicators;

(b) Verifying missing production reports;

(c) Contacting production reporters or royalty reporters about

missing reports and resolving exceptions;

(d) Documenting all corrections made, including providing

production reporters or royalty reporters with confirmation reports of

any changes;

(e) Providing training and assistance to production reporters or

royalty reporters;

(f) Issuing notices, orders to report, and bills as needed,

including, but not limited to, imposing assessments on a person who

chronically submits erroneous reports; and

(g) Providing assistance to MMS for appealed demands or orders,

including preparing field reports, performing remanded actions,

modifying orders, and providing oral and written briefing and testimony

as expert witnesses.

Sec. 227.501 What are a State's responsibilities to ensure that

reporters correct erroneous data?

To ensure the correction of erroneous data, you must:

(a) Ensure compliance with the provisions of 30 CFR Parts 216 and

218, any applicable handbook specified under 30 CFR 401 (f) and (g),

inter-agency memorandums of understanding to which MMS is a party, and

the Standards;

(b) Ensure that reporters accurately and timely correct all fatal

errors as designated in the Standards. These errors include, for

example, invalid or incorrect reporter/payor codes, incorrect lease/

agreement numbers, and missing data fields. The Standards will list

fatal edits for both production reports and royalty reports;

(c) Submit accepted and corrected lines to MMS to allow processing

into the Auditing and Financial System (AFS) and the Production

Accounting and Auditing System (PAAS) in a timely manner as provided in

the Standards and 30 CFR part 219; and

(d) Comply with the procedures for appealed demands or orders,

including using appropriate format and content for field reports and

meeting time frames.

Sec. 227.600 What automated verification functions may a State

perform?

Automated verification involves systematic monitoring of production

and royalty reports to identify and resolve reporting or payment

discrepancies. States may perform the following functions:

(a) Automated comparison of sales volumes reported by royalty

reporters to sales and transfer volumes reported by production

reporters. If you request delegation of automated comparison of sales

and production volumes, you must perform at least the following

functions:

(1) Performing an initial sales volume comparison between royalty

and production reports;

(2) Performing subsequent comparisons when reporters adjust royalty

or production reports;

(3) Checking unit prices for reasonable product valuation based on

reference price ranges MMS provides;

(4) Resolving volume variances using written correspondence,

telephone inquiries, or other media;

(5) Maintaining appropriate file documentation to support case

resolution; and

(6) Issuing orders to correct reports or payments;

(b) Any one or more of the following additional automated

verification functions:

(1) Verifying compliance with lease financial terms, such as

payment of rent, minimum royalty, and advance royalty;

(2) Identifying and resolving improper adjustments;

(3) Identifying late payments and insufficient estimates, including

calculating interest owed to MMS and verifying payor-calculated

interest owed to MMS;

(4) Calculating interest due to a lessee or its designee for an

adjustment or refund, including identifying overpayments and excessive

estimates (except for solid mineral and geothermal leases);

(5) Verifying royalty rates;

(6) Verifying compliance with transportation and processing

allowance limitations; and

(7) Manually checking and confirming corrected reports or payments;

(c) Issuing notices and bills associated with any of the functions

under paragraphs (a) and (b) of this section; and

(d) Providing assistance to MMS for appealed demands or orders,

including preparing field reports, taking remanded actions, modifying

orders, and providing oral and written briefing and testimony as expert

witnesses.

Sec. 227.601 What are a State's responsibilities if it performs

automated verification?

To perform automated verification of production reports or royalty

reports, you must:

(a) Verify through research and analysis all identified exceptions

and prepare the appropriate billings, assessment letters, warning

letters, notification letters, Lease Problem Reports, other internal

forms required, and correspondence required to perform any required

follow-up action for each function, as specified in the Standards or

your delegation agreement;

(b) Resolve and respond to all production reporter or royalty

reporter inquiries;

(c) Maintain all documentation and logging procedures as specified

in the Standards or your delegation agreement;

(d) Access well, lease, agreement, and production reporter or

royalty reporter reference data from MMS and provide update information

to MMS; and

(e) Comply with procedures for appealed demands and orders,

including using appropriate format and content for field reports and

meeting time frames.

Sec. 227.700 What enforcement documents may a State issue in support

of its delegated function?

This section explains what enforcement actions you may take as part

of your delegated functions.

(a) You may issue demands, subpoenas (except for solid minerals and

geothermal leases), and orders to perform restructured accounting,

including related notices to lessees and their designees. You also may

enter into tolling agreements under section 15(d)(1) of the Act, 30

U.S.C. 1725(d)(1).

(b) When you issue any enforcement document you must comply with

the requirements of section 115 of the Act, 30 U.S.C. 1725.

(c) When you issue a demand or enter into a tolling agreement under

section 15(d)(1) of the Act, 30 U.S.C. 1725(d)(1), the highest State

official having ultimate authority over the collection of royalties or

the State official to whom that authority has been delegated must sign

the demand or tolling agreement.

(d) When you issue a subpoena or order to perform a restructured

accounting you must:

(1) Coordinate with MMS to ensure identification of issues that may

concern more than one State before you issue subpoenas and orders to

perform restructured accounting; and

[[Page 19984]]

(2) Ensure that the highest State official having ultimate

authority over the collection of royalties signs any subpoenas and

orders to perform restructured accounting, as required under section

115 of the Act, 30 U.S.C. 1725. This official may not delegate

signature authority to any other person.

Performance Review

Sec. 227.800 How will MMS monitor a State's performance of delegated

functions?

This section explains MMS's procedures for monitoring your

performance of any of your delegated functions.

(a) A monitoring team of MMS officials will review and monitor your

performance of the delegated functions under the delegation agreement.

(b) The Standards will specify the frequency of monitoring for each

delegated function.

(c) The monitoring team will:

(1) Perform reviews to verify that you are complying with the

Standards and 30 U.S.C. 1735;

(2) Conduct fiscal examinations to verify that your costs are

eligible for reimbursement;

(3) Periodically review your statistical reports required under

Sec. 227.200(e) to verify your accuracy, timeliness, and efficiency;

(4) Check for timely transmittal of production report or royalty

report information to MMS and other affected agencies, as applicable,

to allow for proper disbursement of funds and processing of

information;

(5) Schedule onsite visits and Office of the Inspector General,

General Accounting Office, and MMS audits of your performance of your

delegated functions; and

(6) Maintain reports of its monitoring activities.

Sec. 227.801 What if a State does not adequately perform a delegated

function?

If your performance of the delegated function does not comply with

your delegation agreement, or the Standards, or if MMS finds that you

can no longer meet the statutory requirements under Sec. 227.106 of

this part, then MMS may:

(a) Notify you in writing of your noncompliance or inability to

comply. The notice will prescribe corrective actions you must take, and

how long you have to comply. You may ask MMS for an extension of time

to comply with the notice. In your request you must explain why you

need more time; and

(b) If you do not take the prescribed corrective actions within the

time that MMS allows in a notice issued under paragraph (a) of this

section, then MMS may:

(1) Initiate proceedings under Sec. 227.802 of this part to

terminate all or a part of your delegation agreement;

(2) Withhold compensation provided to you under Sec. 227.112 of

this part; and

(3) Perform the delegated function, before terminating or without

terminating your delegation agreement, including, but not limited to,

issuing a demand or order to a Federal lessee, or its designee, or any

other person when:

(i) Your failure to issue the demand or order would result in an

underpayment of an obligation due MMS; and

(ii) The underpayment would go uncollected without MMS

intervention.

Sec. 227.802 How will MMS terminate a State's delegation agreement?

This section explains the procedures MMS will use to terminate all

or a part of your delegation agreement:

(a) MMS will notify you in writing that it is initiating procedures

to terminate your delegation agreement;

(b) MMS will provide you notice and opportunity for a hearing under

Sec. 227.803 of this part;

(c) After the hearing, MMS may:

(1) Terminate your delegation agreement; or

(2) Allow you 30 days to correct any remaining deficiencies. If you

do not correct the deficiency within 30 days, MMS will terminate all or

a part of your delegation agreement.

Sec. 227.803 What are the hearing procedures for terminating a State's

delegation agreement?

(a) The MMS Director will appoint a hearing official to conduct one

or more public hearings for fact finding and to determine any actions

you must take to correct the noncompliance. The hearing official will

not decide whether to terminate your delegation agreement;

(b) The hearing official will contact you about scheduling a

hearing date and location;

(c) The hearing official will publish notice of the hearing in the

Federal Register and other appropriate media within your State;

(d) At the hearing, you will have an opportunity to present

testimony and written information on your ability to perform your

delegated functions as required under this part, your delegation

agreement, and the Standards;

(e) Other persons may attend the hearing and may present testimony

and written information for the record;

(f) MMS will record the hearing;

(g) After the hearing, MMS may require you to submit additional

information; and

(h) Information presented at each public hearing will help MMS to

determine whether:

(1) You have complied with the terms and conditions of your

delegation agreement; or

(2) You have the capability to comply with the requirements under

Sec. 227.106 of this part.

Sec. 227.804 How else may a State's delegation agreement terminate?

You may terminate your delegation at any time by giving MMS a 90-

day written notice of intent to terminate.

Sec. 227.805 How may a State obtain a new delegation agreement after

termination?

After your delegation agreement is terminated, you may apply again

for delegation by beginning with the proposal process under this part.

PART 228--COOPERATIVE ACTIVITIES WITH STATES AND INDIAN TRIBES

2. The authority citation for Part 228 is revised to read as

follows:

Authority: Section 202, Pub. L. 97-451, 96 Stat. 2457 (30 U.S.C.

1732).

3. Part 228 is amended by revising the title to read as follows:

PART 228--COOPERATIVE ACTIVITIES WITH INDIAN TRIBES

4. A new section 228.3 is added to read as follows:

Sec. 228.3 Limitation on applicability.

MMS will not enter into a cooperative agreement with a State under

this part to carry out audit and related investigation and enforcement

activities for leases on Federal lands within the State. This part

applies only to cooperative agreements with Indian tribes and States to

perform audits, inspections, and investigations for Indian lands. See

part 227 of this title for delegation of authority to States for

Federal lands.

PART 229--DELEGATION TO STATES

5. The authority citation for Part 229 is revised to read as

follows:

Authority: 30 U.S.C. 1735.

6. Part 229 is amended by revising the title to read as follows:

PART 229--DELEGATION TO STATES FOR INDIAN LANDS

7. A new section 229.3 is added to read as follows:

[[Page 19985]]

Subpart A--General Provisions

Sec. 229.3 Limitation on applicability.

MMS will not enter into a delegation agreement with a State under

this part to carry out audit and related investigation activities for

leases on Federal lands within the State. This part applies only to

delegation agreements with States to perform audits, inspections, and

investigations for Indian lands. See part 227 of this title for

delegations of authority to States for Federal lands.

[FR Doc. 97-10387 Filed 4-23-97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4310-MR-P

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.