Outer Continental Shelf Activities

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes a major revision of its regulations

on Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) activities. A revision is needed to

address new developments in the offshore industry, to fully address

existing legislation, to effectively implement interagency agreements,

to respond to comments received from the advanced notice of proposed

rulemaking, and to address casualty investigation findings. The revised

regulation will effectively implement existing legislation and

interagency agreements. This rulemaking improves the level of safety in

the workplace for personnel engaged in OCS activities.

DATES: Comments and related material must reach the Docket Management

Facility on or before April 5, 2000. Comments sent to the Office of

Management and Budget (OMB) on collection of information must reach OMB

on or before February 7, 2000.

ADDRESSES: To make sure your comments and related material are not

entered more than once in the docket, please submit them by only one of

the following methods:

(1) By mail to the Docket Management Facility, (USCG-1998-3868),

U.S. Department of Transportation, room PL-401, 400 Seventh Street SW.,

Washington, DC 20590-0001.

(2) By hand delivery to room PL-401 on the Plaza level of the

Nassif Building, 400 Seventh Street SW., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m.

and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The

telephone number is 202-366-9329.

(3) By fax to the Docket Management Facility at 202-493-2251.

(4) Electronically through the Web Site for the Docket Management

System at http://dms.dot.gov.

You must also mail comments on collection of information to the

Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and

Budget, 725 17th Street NW., Washington, DC 20503, ATTN: Desk Officer,

U.S. Coast Guard.

The Docket Management Facility maintains the public docket for this

rulemaking. Comments and material received from the public, as well as

documents mentioned in this preamble as being available in the docket,

will become part of this docket and will be available for inspection or

copying at room PL-401 on the Plaza level of the Nassif Building, 400

Seventh Street SW., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday

through Friday, except Federal holidays. You may also find this docket

on the Internet at http://dms.dot.gov.

You may inspect the material proposed for incorporation by

reference at room 1208C, U.S. Coast Guard Headquarters, 2100 Second

Street SW., Washington, DC 20593-0001 between 8:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m.,

Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The telephone number is

202-267-1082. Copies of the material are available as indicated in the

``Incorporation by Reference'' section of this preamble.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For questions on this proposed rule,

call Mr. James M. Magill, Vessel and Facility Operating Standards

Division (G-MSO-2), telephone (202) 267-1082, or fax (202) 267-4570.

For questions on viewing or submitting material to the docket, call

Dorothy Walker, Chief, Dockets, Department of Transportation, telephone

202-366-9329.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Request for Comments

The Coast Guard encourages you to participate in this rulemaking by

submitting comments and related material. If you do so, please include

your name and address, identify the docket number for this rulemaking

(USCG 1998-3868), indicate the specific section of this document to

which each comment applies, and give the reason for each comment. You

may submit your comments and material by mail, hand delivery, fax, or

electronic means to the Docket Management Facility at the address under

ADDRESSES; but please submit your comments or material by only one

means. If you submit them by mail or hand delivery, submit them in an

unbound format, no larger than 8\1/2\ by 11 inches, suitable for

copying and electronic filing. If you submit them by mail and would

like to know they reached the Facility, please enclose a stamped, self-

addressed postcard or envelope. We will consider all comments and

material received during the comment period. We may change this

proposed rule in view of them.

Public Meeting

We do not now plan to hold a public meeting. But you may submit a

request for one to the Docket Management Facility at the address under

ADDRESSES explaining why one would be beneficial. If we determine that

one would aid this rulemaking, we will hold one at a time and place

announced by a later notice in the Federal Register.

What Is the History of This Rulemaking?

This rulemaking, USCG-1998-3868 (formerly CGD 84-098, CGD 95-016),

is the final phase of an ongoing effort by the Coast Guard to update

the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) in 33 CFR chapter I, subchapter

N, on Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) activities and to implement its

authority under the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act Amendments of

1978 (Pub. L. 95-372)(the Act). In the first phase, we published in the

Federal Register a final rule, entitled ``Outer Continental Shelf

Activities'' (CGD 78-160)(47 FR 9366, March 4, 1982). That rule

implemented the mandatory provisions of the Act, such as employment of

personnel in 33 CFR part 141, and reorganized subchapter N to provide a

framework for the inclusion of other regulations in the future.

The second phase of this effort began in 1985 with the publication

of an advance notice of proposed rulemaking (ANPRM) (CGD 84-098) (50 FR

9290, March 7, 1985). This ANPRM discussed inspection of fixed

facilities, emergency evacuation, workplace safety and health,

lifesaving, fire protection, training, and vessels used for OCS

activities. Because virtually all of the comments received to the ANPRM

focused on inspection of fixed facilities and emergency evacuation, we

handled these subjects in two separate rulemakings. On May 26, 1988, we

published a final rule entitled ``Self Inspection of Fixed OCS

Facilities'' (CGD 84-098a) (53 FR 18977) and, on May 18, 1989, we

published a final rule entitled ``Emergency Evacuation Plans for Manned

OCS Facilities'' (CGD 84-098b) (54 FR 21566).

The current and final phase of this effort began with the

publication of a ``Request for Comments'' (CGD 95-016) (60 FR 33185,

June 27, 1995) describing the broad scope of this rulemaking and asking

for public comments. The purpose of this request was to focus comments

on subjects other than self-inspection and emergency evacuation, which

were addressed in the second phase. The remaining subjects include

workplace safety and health, lifesaving,

[[Page 68417]]

fire protection, training, operations, and certification.

What Is the Purpose of This Rulemaking?

The Coast Guard is the lead Federal agency for workplace safety and

health, other than for matters generally related to drilling and

production that are regulated by the MMS, on facilities and vessels

engaged in the exploration for, or development or production of,

minerals on the OCS. The last major revision of our current OCS

regulations occurred in 1982. In 1982, the offshore industry was not as

high tech as today's operations. Offshore activities were in relatively

shallow water near land, where help was readily available during

emergency situations. The equipment regulations required only basic

equipment, primarily for lifesaving appliances and hand-held portable

fire extinguishers. Since 1982, the requirements in 33 CFR chapter I,

subchapter N, have not kept pace with the changing offshore technology

or the safety problems it creates as OCS activities extend to deeper

water (7,500 feet) and move farther offshore (127 miles). This proposed

rule is intended to revisit all of our current OCS regulations in

subchapter N to take advantage of past experiences and new improvements

to make the OCS a safer workplace.

In keeping with the Vice President's National Partnership for

Reinventing Government (using government/industry partnership to reduce

government regulations), the Coast Guard along with the Minerals

Management Service (MMS) is promoting voluntary use of Safety and

Environmental Management Programs (SEMP). This approach has been

promoted by the Coast Guard and the MMS since 1991. It would help those

owners who operate equipment under MMS, USCG, and International Safety

Management standards to have a consistent management program throughout

their operations, which will certainly promote safety. With SEMP, Outer

Continental Shelf operators can plan, design, manage, and conduct their

operations with emphasis on the human element in safety and pollution

prevention. Companies effectively using SEMP can expect it to result in

more efficient operations by avoiding or containing accident and

pollution costs. By promoting SEMP, it is our intent to put overall

performance ahead of rote equipment testing and reliance on

prescriptive regulations. See American Petroleum Institute (API) RP 75

entitled ``Recommended Practice for Development of a Safety and

Environmental Management Program for Outer Continental Shelf (OCS)

Operations and Facilities'' for further information. RP 75 is available

from API on the Internet at http://www.api.org for a fee.

What Comments Were Received to the 1985 Advance Notice of Proposed

Rulemaking?

We received 88 letters in response to the 1985 ANPRM. Of the 88

letters, 72 contained comments in response to questions published in

the ANPRM on emergency evacuation plans (EEP's) for manned facilities

and mobile offshore drilling units (MODU's). These comments were

discussed in the notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) on EEP's that was

published on December 24, 1987 (52 FR 48717).

Twenty-three letters contained comments concerning the self-

inspection of fixed facilities. These comments were discussed in the

NPRM on self-inspection of fixed facilities that was published on July

7, 1987 (52 FR 25392).

Eleven letters contained comments on the remaining questions in the

ANPRM. They are addressed below:

(1) Five comments stated that fire protection on fixed facilities

is adequately addressed in the MMS regulations and no additional Coast

Guard regulations are needed.

We disagree. The 1998 Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the

Coast Guard and MMS assigns to the Coast Guard the responsibility for

establishing fire protection requirements for all areas on fixed

facilities, including the wellbay and industrial equipment areas.

Current regulations do not address requirements for structural fire

protection in accommodation spaces on fixed facilities. This rulemaking

will add requirements in this area.

(2) One comment suggested that the Coast Guard require a fire and

gas detection system in or near accommodation spaces. They reasoned

that a fire and gas detection system is needed because of the potential

fire hazard resulting from flammable liquids or gases handled or

processed on fixed facilities.

We agree. Proposed Sec. 143.1050 would require that all

accommodation spaces on manned fixed facilities be outfitted with a

fire detection system. Under the 1998 MOU between MMS and the Coast

Guard, MMS is responsible for establishing gas detection requirements

on facilities. Gas detection system requirements for accommodation

areas are found in 30 CFR 250.123(b)(9).

(3) Five comments stated that fire hazards on a fixed facility are

not similar to those found on a tank vessel, as stated by the Coast

Guard in the ANPRM. Rather than apply tank-vessel regulations to fixed

facilities, the Coast Guard should develop fire protection regulations

specifically for those facilities.

We agree and propose new regulations that address the unique fire

hazards found on fixed facilities. As most fixed facilities do not

store oil or gas in large quantities, as do tankers, a direct adoption

of tank-vessel regulations is inappropriate. Fire hazards on fixed

facilities are similar, in many areas, to those on MODU's, the greatest

risk for loss of life on both being a blowout or a hydrocarbon fire.

However, the probability of saving personnel on a fixed facility is

greater than on a MODU, because the location of the facility is

permanent and known to the Coast Guard, whereas that of the MODU

changes. On the other hand, the risk of a blowout or hydrocarbon fire

is greater on a fixed facility than on a MODU. A fixed facility has a

connection to a hydrocarbon source year-round, 24 hours a day. A MODU

has a connection to a hydrocarbon source only 20 to 25 percent of the

time, as drilling results in a dry hole 75 to 80 percent of the time.

Therefore, this rulemaking proposes new regulations in part 143,

subparts K and L, for fixed facilities. They will allow the facility to

meet either the MODU fire protection regulations or the National Fire

Protection Association (NFPA) Life Safety Code, NFPA 101, with the

additional requirement of an independent fire wall.

(4) One comment stated that there are already industry safety

standards for most of the items addressed in the ANPRM. The comment

suggested that we adopt or reference industry standards wherever

possible, instead of issuing separate Coast Guard standards and

requiring the use of only Coast Guard-approved equipment.

We incorporate industry standards into our regulations (proposed

Sec. 140.30), where appropriate. However, some critical safety

equipment, such as lifesaving equipment, still needs to be approved by

the Coast Guard to ensure adequate safety in the event of an emergency.

(5) Five comments stated that hospital spaces on fixed facilities

are impractical and should not be required. They claimed that the

current requirements for first-aid equipment are sufficient to handle

personnel injuries offshore and that no new regulations are needed. Two

comments stated that individuals who are seriously injured can be

evacuated by helicopter to a shore-side hospital within a matter of

hours. The

[[Page 68418]]

comments stated that many facilities house 10 or fewer people and that

it is not feasible to require a hospital space on those facilities.

We agree that a hospital space is not needed for fixed facilities.

However, it is necessary to have a space to isolate individuals or to

provide basic first aid treatment while they await evacuation.

Therefore, proposed Sec. 143.1321 would require that a manned fixed

facility with quarters for 12 or more persons have a designated medical

treatment room.

(6) One comment suggested that first-aid supplies should be

suitable for, and sized to, the facility's population.

We agree. Proposed Sec. 143.855 would require that suitable first-

aid supplies are provided in quantities based on a facility's

population.

(7) Five comments questioned the need to require the lease holder

to submit an annual report to the Coast Guard on the size of the worker

population and total man hours lost as a result of casualties, as

suggested in the ANPRM. They contend that this information would be

difficult to obtain because subcontractors often work on fixed-rate

contracts and do not report man-hours lost to the leaseholder. The

comments recommended that subcontractors and others should report the

required information directly to the Coast Guard.

We can require collection data only from the lease holder and not

from subcontractors. We currently receive population data from the

self-inspection and emergency evacuation regulations now in place. We

propose no change in response to this comment and plan to reassess our

needs at a later time.

(8) Four comments suggested that the Coast Guard, MMS, and

Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) develop a single

casualty reporting form to be submitted to all of these agencies. The

comments stated that the three agencies' current casualty reporting

requirements are redundant and that the duplication of reporting should

be eliminated.

We agree. We have developed and propose a new consolidated form.

Information about the proposed form is located at the end of the

discussion of proposed changes.

What Comments Were Received to the 1995 Request for Comments?

The Coast Guard received a total of seven letters in response to

our 1995 request for comments (60 FR 33185, June 27, 1995). Two letters

submitted copies of the minutes for meetings of the National Offshore

Safety Advisory Committee (NOSAC) subcommittee. Comments contained in

the other five letters are summarized below:

Three comments expressed strong support for the Coast Guard's

efforts to review and revise regulations for activities on the OCS. One

comment supports operationally sound improvements to current OCS

regulations. However, one comment stated that current safety

regulations relative to a fixed structure on the OCS are suitable and

adequate. It was further suggested that any change to safety

regulations be justified by a cost/benefit analysis. The Coast Guard

contends that review and revision of regulations for activities on the

OCS is necessary. Here is but one example:

In the current 33 CFR parts 143 and 145, there are no requirements

for structural fire protection for a fixed facility accommodation

space. It is conceivable that an accommodation module made from plywood

and 2x4 wooden studs could provide adequate protection from the

weather. However, it would not provide adequate fire protection.

Through our industry partnerships, we discovered that many fixed

facility owners voluntarily use fire resistant materials in the

construction of fixed facility accommodation spaces. We incorporated

several structural and construction fire protection requirements in

this proposed rule.

One comment stated that the current regulations in 33 CFR parts

140-147 were inadequate in the following areas: design and equipment;

operations; workplace safety and health, including confined-space

entry; and accident reporting. We agree and propose many new workplace

safety and health regulations that are similar to recently developed

OSHA regulations. We also obtained valuable comments and

recommendations from the NOSAC subcommittee addressing issues related

to this rulemaking, and many suggestions were incorporated in the

drafting of this proposed rule.

Two comments suggest that the Coast Guard consult with OSHA to

update the 1979 MOU to clearly confirm that redundant jurisdiction and

regulatory enforcement on the OCS does not exist. One comment contends

that if the Coast Guard is unwilling to comprehensively address OCS

issues, then it would be appropriate for it to formally withdraw from

exercising regulatory jurisdiction over occupational safety and health

issues on the OCS, leaving such activities to OSHA. The MOU between the

Coast Guard and OSHA was last updated in 1989. We have a strong

interagency relationship and regularly communicate on issues of mutual

interest, thus the current MOU meets our needs at this time. The 1989

MOU clearly assigns regulatory responsibility and enforcement to the

jurisdiction of the Coast Guard for workplace safety and health issues

on the OCS.

One comment expressed concern about working conditions for U.S.

citizens employed on board foreign vessels engaged in OCS activity.

They stated that employees experience the labor standards of the third-

world countries in which the vessels are registered, even when working

within areas subject to U.S. jurisdiction. They requested the Coast

Guard provide these U.S. citizens the protection entitled under the

Act. The workplace safety and health regulations in part 142 apply to

personnel engaged in operation on the OCS, whether onboard a foreign

OCS unit or a U.S. OCS unit. The proposed revisions to part 142 will

add many new workplace safety and health items which should increase

the level of safety for U.S. citizens employed on foreign units engaged

in OCS activities.

One comment stated that the Coast Guard should adopt an underlying

principal that lifesaving equipment should be capable of keeping 100

percent of the personnel on a facility out of the water in case of

abandonment or evacuation. We agree. Current regulations for fixed

facilities require life floats for 100 percent of facility personnel.

This is not adequate to protect personnel in the event of a blowout nor

is it the best available and safest technology for this purpose. See

proposed Sec. 143.826 for the survival craft requirements for fixed

facilities. This would align fixed facility requirements with similar

regulations for MODU's and floating facilities.

Two comments commend the Coast Guard for working with industry

groups, reviewing new developments, and creating an environment of

partnership in safety. One comment specifically supports the Coast

Guard's work with the NOSAC. The Coast Guard regularly receives

valuable feedback and recommendations from various safety advisory

committees. We also use other industry partnerships. For several years,

the Coast Guard has focused on ways to improve safety and reduce

incidents caused by human factors. Prevention Through People (PTP)

continues to be a high priority with the Coast Guard's Office of Marine

Safety and Environmental Protection. PTP is a people-focused approach

to reducing casualties and pollution. Although initiated by the Coast

Guard, PTP finds its strength in its close working relationship with

the maritime and offshore industries. The Coast Guard

[[Page 68419]]

currently has eight PTP partnerships, and the projects undertaken

within these partnership groups are mutually beneficial.

One comment encouraged the Coast Guard to include in this

regulatory effort any new requirements developed by OSHA for onshore

locations that may apply offshore. We continually review new OSHA

regulations to determine applicability to the OCS. Many workplace

safety and health regulations included in this proposed rule are

similar to recent regulations developed by OSHA for onshore locations.

One comment suggests that the Coast Guard address the danger of a

vessel colliding with a facility. A recent near-miss incident

emphasizes the importance of this subject. In this case, a tanker lost

power and nearly collided with a tension leg platform (TLP) production

facility. The Coast Guard requested that a NOSAC subcommittee address

this issue. On April 8, 1999, NOSAC reported its findings to the Coast

Guard. We will review this information and the recommendations. Any

necessary regulatory revisions would be part of a future rulemaking.

One comment expressed concern that design requirements for OCS

units are inadequate. It further stated that workers are being injured

and killed due to substandard facility design created by a lack of

written standards. Since we established regulations for OCS activities,

there are dramatic changes to both the nature of the work and the

technology used. This proposed rule would address the deficient areas

in current OCS regulations and improve the level of safety for workers

engaged in OCS activities.

One comment stated that current regulations do not contain

regulations to prevent injuries due to falls. We agree. The proposed

rule contains requirements for fall-arrest systems in Secs. 142.155

through 142.160.

Where Are Current OCS Regulations Located in the Proposed Rule?

When we use the term the ``current OCS regulation(s)'' in this

preamble, we refer to the current regulation in 33 CFR chapter I,

subchapter N. Discussion of material from this rulemaking is identified

as ``proposed.'' Much of the material in the proposed rule is new.

However, the following table can help you find out where material in

the current 33 CFR is located in this document. This table does not

show provisions that are new and did not come from current OCS

regulations.

BILLING CODE 4910-15-U

[[Page 68420]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP07DE99.000

[[Page 68421]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP07DE99.001

[[Page 68422]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP07DE99.002

[[Page 68423]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP07DE99.003

[[Page 68424]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP07DE99.004

What Are the Major Changes Being Proposed?

Many of the current OCS regulations remain unchanged in substance.

They include the regulations in part 141 for personnel, in part 143 for

self-inspection of manned fixed facilities and for EEP's, and in part

147 for safety zones.

The major changes are in the areas of operations, structural fire

protection, lifesaving and fire-protection equipment, workplace safety

and health, training, vessels engaged in OCS activities, and

accommodation spaces on manned fixed facilities. To the extent

practicable, we tried to align the regulations for one category of OCS

unit with those for other categories and to align the regulations for

foreign OCS units with those for U.S. OCS units.

We incorporated substantive changes in this proposed rule so OCS

requirements in subchapter N conform with other applicable requirements

in OCS regulations. We also aligned sections within subchapter N that

are similar for various OCS units. The affected sections are as

follows:

BILLING CODE 4910-15-U

[[Page 68425]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP07DE99.005

[[Page 68426]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP07DE99.006

[[Page 68427]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP07DE99.007

[[Page 68428]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP07DE99.008

BILLING CODE 4910-15-C

[[Page 68429]]

What Methods Did We Use To Make the Regulations More Readable?

One of the most noticeable changes in the proposed rule is in its

organization, arrangement, and style. We use many of the modern

drafting techniques intended to make regulations easier to locate and

understand. These techniques include the use of personal pronouns that

speak directly to the reader; section headings and text in a question/

answer format; common, everyday words, except for necessary technical

terms; the active voice to clarify who is responsible; short sentences;

and logical organization. These techniques are consistent with the

requirements of the Presidential Memorandum, ``Plain Language in

Government Writing'' (63 FR 31885, June 1, 1998).

The most comprehensive change to the format of the current OCS

regulations is the way the material is organized. In the proposed rule,

all of the requirements that apply to a particular category of what we

call an ``OCS unit'' (i.e., fixed facility, floating facility, MODU,

mobile inland drilling unit (MIDU), or vessel) are grouped together in

a single part of the CFR. For example, all the requirements

specifically for fixed facilities appear in proposed part 143. Proposed

part 143 also includes references to the general provisions applicable

to all OCS units in parts 140, 141, and 142. On the other hand, the

current OCS regulations group the material by subject, such as

operations, and all of the operations regulations for all categories of

OCS units appear in one CFR part. Therefore, the owner of a fixed

facility has to scan parts 140 through 146 to locate and group together

all of the regulations applicable to fixed facilities.

The proposed re-structuring of subchapter N is as follows:

Part 140, General (applies to all OCS units).

Part 141, Personnel (applies to all OCS units).

Part 142, Workplace Safety and Health (applies to all OCS

units).

Part 143, Fixed Facilities.

Part 144, Floating facilities.

Part 145, MODU's and MIDU's.

Part 146, Vessels (other than floating facilities, MODU's,

and MIDU's).

Part 147, Safety zones (applies to particular structures).

The subparts within each CFR part are also rearranged, with the

most frequently used subject placed first. The order of the subparts is

operations, lifesaving equipment, fire-fighting and fire-protection

equipment, and design and equipment.

We are interested in your comments on our efforts to improve the

readability of this subchapter. We recognize this material is highly

technical and addressed to a technically trained audience, but we still

hope to provide reader aids to make the material more readable and

accessible. When drafting your comments on the style of presentation,

please provide examples from the proposed rule with section references

and then detail how you would improve it. We are particularly

interested in your answers to the following:

Do you find the question/answer format helpful?

Do the tables present the information in an understandable

and useful manner?

Do you benefit from the reorganization, which presents all

fixed-facility requirements in one part, all floating-facility

requirements in another, and so forth?

Is the level of detail appropriate for the material being

presented and the intended audience?

Do you find the wording too technical or too simplified to be

easily understood?

What Are the Substantive Changes?

On November 15, 1999, we published a notice of proposed rulemaking

entitled, Frequency of Inspection, Alternate Hull Examination for

Certain Passenger Vessels, and Underwater Surveys for Passenger,

Nautical School, and Sailing School Vessels (64 FR 62017). This notice

proposes amending its vessel inspection regulations. It also introduces

a 5-year Certificate of Inspection cycle. The comment period is open

until December 30, 1999. However, we have not included changes in this

regulation to reflect the proposed frequency of inspection regulation.

The following discussion is arranged by CFR part and section

number, just as those parts and sections are numbered in the proposed

rule. It does not include all changes and none of the ones related

solely to format. To help identify what is derived from current OCS

regulations and what is new, see Table 1 in the preamble.

Part 140--Outer Continental Shelf Activities: General

The only substantive changes to this part are as follows:

(1) The references to the ``U.S. Geological Survey'' are replaced

with ``Minerals Management Service.''

(2) The definition section is significantly changed. In proposed

Sec. 140.25, the definitions for the following terms in subchapter N

are amended:

Development, fixed facility, floating facility, manned

facility, marine inspector, mobile offshore drilling unit or MODU, OCS

activity, Officer in Charge, Marine Inspection or OCMI, operator,

owner, personnel, production, and unmanned facility.

The following terms are new:

Accommodation module, accommodation module that is part of

a drilling/workover rig package, accommodation space, approval series,

approved, bloodborne pathogens, drilling/workover rig package,

facility, floating production system or FPS, floating production

storage and offloading system or FPSO, foreign, free-fall launching,

fuel cell, hazardous material, helicopter fuel containment area,

immersion suit, inflatable, lifejacket, lifesaving equipment, major

conversion, marine evacuation system, mobile inland drilling unit or

MIDU, naturally occurring radioactive material or NORM, novel

lifesaving appliance or arrangement, OCS unit, on-load/off-load release

mechanism, paint locker, personnel transfer net, platform hydrocarbon

source, primary means of escape, radiation, registered architect,

rescue boat, ring life buoy, secondary means of escape, service space,

sleeping space, spar buoy, survival capsule, survival craft, systems

fire protection, temporary accommodation module, tension leg platform

or TLP, and U.S.

The items of special interest are as follows:

``Unit'' is changed to ``OCS unit,'' meaning all things

covered by these regulations (i.e., fixed facilities, floating

facilities, MODU's, MIDU's, and vessels).

``OCS facility,'' which included MODU's as well as fixed

and floating facilities, is no longer used. Instead, each type of OCS

unit is addressed in the regulations by its defined category (i.e.,

``fixed facility,'' ``floating facility,'' ``MODU,'' ``MIDU,'' or

``vessel'').

``Systems fire protection'' is a new term being used in

subchapter N. It incorporates structural fire protection items as well

as other items from the Life Safety Code, NFPA 101, to make a complete

fire protection system.

``U.S.,'' as used in the terms ``U.S. floating facility,''

``U.S. MODU,'' and ``U.S. vessel,'' includes floating facilities,

MODU's, and vessels that are not registered, documented, or

certificated under the laws of any nation. In other words, these units,

when on the U.S. OCS, must meet the same requirements as their U.S.

certificated counterparts on the OCS.

[[Page 68430]]

(3) In proposed Secs. 140.200, 143.110, 145.106, and 146.110, the

dollar value for property damage is increased from $25,000 to $100,000.

Part 141--Outer Continental Shelf Activities: Personnel

The only substantive changes to this part are as follows:

(1) In proposed Sec. 141.15, the definition of the terms ``citizen

of the United States'' and ``citizen of a foreign nation'' are amended

to include percentage of vested interests.

(2) Proposed Sec. 141.23 is new and details the process for

submitting a request to the Commandant for a determination of the

percentage of ownership and right to control an OCS unit. This

determination is related to the employment of personnel on OCS units.

Part 142--Outer Continental Shelf Activities: Workplace Safety and

Health

This part contains extensive changes to update OCS requirements in

subchapter N with applicable requirements as referenced in the

Comparison Table, to address adequate training of personnel, and to

establish new workplace safety and health requirements necessary for

work on the OCS. The substantive changes to this part are as follows:

(1) In proposed Sec. 142.5, the following definitions are new:

Certified industrial hygienist, certified marine chemist,

confined space, dangerous atmosphere, hot work, and Offshore Competent

Person.

(2) This proposed rule would impose new requirements for owners or

operators to inform or provide training to personnel in several key

areas. These areas include--

Recognized hazards in the workplace (Sec. 142.20);

Emergency response and cleanup (Sec. 142.25);

The proper use of personal protective equipment

(Sec. 142.110);

Confined-space entry (subpart D); and

The use, handling, and storage of hazardous material on

the facility (subpart E).

(3) This proposed rule would establish the following new

requirements:

Procedures for access to medical monitoring (Sec. 142.30).

Personal fall arrest systems, including inspection of

components after a system arrests a fall and before it is returned to

service (Secs. 142.155 through 142.160).

Personnel nets (Sec. 142.165).

Personnel working in an area subject to radiation

(Secs. 142.175 through 142.179), airborne substances (Secs. 142.180

through 142.183), infectious material or blood-borne pathogens

(Sec. 142.185), and noise (Secs. 142.235 through 142.240).

Safe practices for electrical work (Sec. 142.215).

Safe use and maintenance of equipment (Sec. 142.255).

Design, construction, maintenance, and use of personnel

transfer nets (Secs. 142.265 through 142.280).

Specification of color codes for signs and tags marking

physical hazards and dangers (Sec. 142.285).

Entering and working in an unventilated confined space

which may contain a dangerous atmosphere (subpart D).

Hazardous material communication, use, handling, and

storage (subpart E).

(4) Proposed subpart D contains precautions for entering and

working in any unventilated confined space that may contain poisonous

gases, explosive gases, or an oxygen deficient atmosphere. Fatalities

continue to occur on facilities when people work in a confined space

that contains a dangerous atmosphere.

While gathering information to evaluate the nature and extent of

this problem, the Coast Guard met with a NOSAC working group at the

Coast Guard's Eighth District offices in New Orleans, Louisiana.

Representatives from the offshore facility owners and operators, the

NFPA, and the Marine Chemist Association participated. The

recommendation of the group was that regulations are necessary for work

in confined spaces. The recommendation was to extract applicable

requirements from OSHA's general industry standards for confined-space

entry in 29 CFR 1910.146, the Shipyard Confined-space Entry Standards

in 29 CFR part 1915, subpart B, and U.S. Cargo and Miscellaneous Vessel

regulations in 46 CFR part 91, subpart 91.50.

A primary point of discussion revolved around the use of a

Certified Marine Chemist and or the use of a Competent Person. The

offshore industry contends that an Offshore Competent Person should

have the responsibility to perform most of the tests and work for the

day-to-day entry into confined spaces aboard an OCS unit.

We agree, but determined that the qualifications of the Offshore

Competent Person must extend beyond those listed in OSHA's general

industry standards. In the proposed rule, the authority of the Offshore

Competent Person was limited to testing for oxygen, flammable gas,

benzene, total hydrocarbons, and hydrogen sulfide. This is due to both

the limited education and training of the Offshore Competent Person

when compared with the Certified Marine Chemist and to the absence of

an oversight body that assesses the competency of the Offshore

Competent Person.

We request comment on the following specific areas:

Suggestions on ways to create an oversight body for the

Offshore Competent Person.

Training and education criteria for an Offshore Competent

Person.

Information on atmospheric hazards that may be routinely

anticipated and thus should be included on the list of toxins for which

an Offshore Competent Person is authorized to test.

Information and suggestions on ways to enable and require

the Offshore Competent Person to identify unexpected hazards and

hazards which require the expertise of a Certified Marine Chemist. For

example, rapid consumption of certain anti-corrosion anodes is known to

produce hydrogen gas in the confined spaces to which the anodes are

attached. A typical combustible gas indicator will not indicate the

explosive atmosphere created by the hydrogen gas. Typically, the meter

will ``peg out'' then return to zero in such an atmosphere. The

Offshore Competent Person needs to recognize that this is abnormal

instrument behavior and request the services of the Certified Marine

Chemist. A second more common situation is the presence of toxic

hazards that are not anticipated and would not be identified in the

facility's written confined-space entry program. For example, a typical

hazard analysis of a diesel fuel oil tank may identify the atmospheric

hazards as oxygen and flammable gas. However, we have information that

even fuel oil tanks known to have contained only diesel fuel have

resulted in atmospheres containing benzene above the action level. More

commonly, ballast tanks on offshore supply vessels have been found to

contain benzene or cleaning-solvent vapors above the threshold limit

values. The presence of these vapors were not a result of the liquids

being carried in the tanks. Instead, they were present because cleaning

liquids used topside drained into the tanks or because topside tanks

overflowed and the liquids found their way into the ballast tanks.

Information on these and other insidious hazards and

suggestions on addressing them in this regulation.

(5) Proposed subpart E would prescribe requirements for hazardous

[[Page 68431]]

material on fixed and floating facilities. The proposed regulation

would ensure that all personnel on a fixed or floating facility are

aware of what materials on the facility are hazardous and what hazards

are associated with their use, handling, and storage.

On March 10, 1988, the Coast Guard published a final rule entitled

``Hazardous Materials Used as Ship's Stores On Board Vessels'' (53 FR

7745). In the preamble discussion, under the heading ``Related

Projects,'' the Coast Guard stated that it proposed to make the

hazardous ship's stores regulations applicable to fixed and floating

facilities. MODU's, offshore supply vessels (OSV's), and other vessels

are already included in the ship's stores regulations. We reviewed the

existing programs being used on fixed and floating facilities in the

U.S. OCS and reviewed the comments from the NOSAC working group. We

determined that ships' stores regulations were not applicable to fixed

and floating facilities. We contend that the hazards associated with a

floating facility are similar to those of a fixed facility.

The current industry trend incorporates guidance from OSHA's

requirements when establishing procedures for workers. We determined

that regulations for hazardous communication similar to 29 CFR

1910.1200 are appropriate for activities performed on fixed and

floating facilities.

Part 143--Outer Continental Shelf Activities: Fixed Facilities

This part contains extensive changes to update OCS requirements in

subchapter N with applicable requirements as referenced in Table 2 in

this preamble and to establish new requirements necessary for work on

the OCS. The substantive changes to this part are as follows:

(1) We propose the following new requirements:

Marine casualty reports, including a proposed change of

form (Sec. 143.115).

Possession and storage of any firearm or firearm

ammunition (Sec. 143.130).

Storage and dispensing of anesthetics, drugs, and other

prescription medication (Sec. 143.135).

Assignment of muster stations (Sec. 143.215), emergency

duties (Sec. 143.220), survival craft assignment (Sec. 143.225), and

posting of documents (Sec. 143.235).

Emergency Evacuation Plan (EEP) (subpart D) regarding

personnel in temporary accommodation modules (Sec. 143.310), and marine

inspector review, approval, and deficiency issues during oversight

inspection to the facility (Sec. 143.320). These changes reflect

current Coast Guard and industry practices.

Fire drills and abandonment drills (Secs. 143.420 and

143.425).

Use of equipment during drills (Sec. 143.435).

Onboard training and instruction (Sec. 143.510).

Maintenance and repair of lifesaving, fire-fighting, and

other equipment (subpart G).

Tests and inspection of lifesaving, fire-fighting, and

other equipment (Secs. 143.700 through 143.730, and Sec. 143.750)

including emergency lighting and power systems (Sec. 143.760), survival

craft and rescue boat weight testing (Secs. 143.735 through 143.740),

and recordkeeping of tests or inspections of fire-fighting equipment

(Sec. 143.755).

Lifesaving equipment on manned fixed facilities (subpart

I) including survival craft and rescue boats (Secs. 143.825 and

143.826), survival craft for temporary personnel (Sec. 143.828),

approval requirements for lifeboats (Sec. 143.830), free-fall lifeboats

(Sec. 143.831), inflatable life rafts (Sec. 143.832), rigid life rafts

(Sec. 143.833), marine evacuation systems (143.834), life floats

(Sec. 143.835), launching and recovery equipment (Secs. 143.836 and

143.837), location and arrangement of survival craft (Sec. 143.840),

rescue boat approval and stowage (Sec. 143.841), embarkation,

launching, and recovery arrangements (Sec. 143.842), lifejackets

(Secs. 143.845 through 143.848), ring life buoys (Secs. 143.850 through

143.852), first aid kit (Sec. 143.855), immersion suits (Sec. 143.870),

marking of work vests (Sec. 143.877), inflatable lifejackets

(Sec. 143.881), and marking requirements for lifesaving equipment

(Sec. 143.885).

Fire-fighting and fire-protection equipment (subpart K)

including fire extinguisher approval (Sec. 143.1025), number of fire

extinguishers required (Sec. 143.1029), fireman's outfits

(Sec. 143.1035), fire axes (Sec. 143.1040), fire extinguishing systems

(Sec. 143.1045), automatic fire detection and alarm systems

(Sec. 143.1050), smoke detection in sleeping spaces (Sec. 143.1050),

fire main system (Sec. 143.1055), fire-fighting equipment on helicopter

decks (Sec. 143.1060), helicopter fueling facility fire-fighting

equipment (Sec. 143.1061), and water supply for helicopter deck fire

protection (Sec. 143.1062).

Systems fire protection (subpart L) including fire

protection in accommodation spaces and modules (Secs. 143.1115 and

143.1120), design and location of an accommodation space near a

hydrocarbon source (Sec. 143.1125), ventilation system shutdown

(Sec. 143.1130), and fire protection for escaping personnel

(Sec. 143.1135).

Design and equipment for fixed facilities (subpart M)

including general alarm systems on manned and unmanned facilities

(Sec. 143.1215), means of escape (Secs. 143.1220 through 143.1223),

personnel landings (Sec. 143.1225), stairways (Sec. 143.1231), and

general noise level design standards (Secs. 143.1235 and 143.1236).

Design and equipment for manned fixed facilities (subpart

N) including openings between accommodation spaces and other

restrictive areas (Sec. 143.1316), sleeping spaces (Sec. 143.1317),

temporary accommodation modules (Sec. 143.1318), toilet and shower

spaces (Sec. 143.1319), messroom seating (Sec. 143.1320), medical

treatment space (Sec. 143.1321), medical treatment room

(Sec. 143.1322), laundry room (Sec. 143.1323), heating in accommodation

spaces (Sec. 143.1325), potable water (Sec. 143.1330), wash water

(Sec. 143.1331), sanitary water (Sec. 143.1332), electrical lighting

(Sec. 143.1335), emergency lighting and power (Sec. 143.1336), and

stairways and ladders (Secs. 143.1340 and 143.1341).

Certification of fixed facilities (subpart O) including

design plan review (Sec. 143.1410).

(2) Proposed subpart I would prescribe requirements for lifesaving

equipment on manned fixed facilities. This new subpart would revise the

current OCS regulations in 33 CFR part 144, subparts 144.01 and 144.10.

Much of this information, written as far back as 1956, is outdated

because it requires mainly life floats, life preservers, ring life

buoys, and exposure suits. This proposed rule establishes requirements

for lifeboats and life rafts sufficient to rescue 100 percent of manned

fixed facility personnel. Life floats are acceptable for use in

addition to the required lifeboats, in certain conditions. We also

propose new requirements for launching equipment, rescue boats,

immersion suits, and work vests. When determining the rescue boat

requirements, we considered the facility location, the distance from a

safe haven (another facility or vessel capable of providing rescue),

and the temperature of the water. Rescue boats, lifeboats, and life

rafts are the primary sources of rescue. Life floats are used only as a

secondary means of rescue in warmer waters and are considered an

acceptable risk within 5.6 kilometers (3 nautical miles) of another

facility or vessel capable of rescue. On these waters, life floats are

acceptable since lifeboats would be deployed first and, once deployed,

would be available to assist in

[[Page 68432]]

the rescue of an individual using a life float.

(3) Proposed Sec. 143.810 would permit lifesaving equipment on a

fixed facility as of the date of the final rule to be continued in

service until replaced or until the facility undergoes major

alterations affecting the equipment.

(4) Proposed Sec. 143.815 would permit the use of existing

lifeboats on manned fixed facilities constructed after the effective

date of this rule, if they are modified to include self-righting

capability and onload/offload release mechanism within 2 years of the

effective date of the final rule. Owners who voluntarily installed

lifeboats on OCS units before the effective date of this rule may now

use the modified lifeboats as rescue boats, even though the lifeboats

may not meet the rescue boat requirements.

(5) Proposed Sec. 143.827 would allow for an existing manned fixed

facility a 2-year phase-in period to comply with the survival craft and

rescue boat requirements in subpart I.

(6) Proposed Sec. 143.842 would prescribe requirements for rescue

boat embarkation, launching, and recovery arrangements similar to 46

CFR 108.570. Paragraph (g) allows an onboard crane to launch the rescue

boat, as an alternative to having a separate rescue boat launching

system.

(7) Proposed Sec. 143.855 would prescribe requirements for the

first aid kit. This section is similar to the current requirement

located in 33 CFR 144.01-30. We added a requirement for the location of

the first aid kit, either in the medical treatment space, if there is

one, or in the custody of the person in charge. We added a requirement

that each first aid kit contain a copy of ``The Ship's Medicine Chest

and Medical Aid at Sea'' or ``The American Red Cross First Aid Manual

and Safety Handbook.''

(8) Proposed Sec. 143.870 would prescribe requirements for

immersion suits on manned fixed facilities. This is similar to the

requirement for immersion suits on MODU's. The requirement for

immersion suits was first introduced in February 6, 1984. That change

to the current OCS regulations applied only to MODU's operating on the

OCS. We did not address immersion suits on fixed facilities at that

time, because we intended to include this revision in the planned

revision of subchapter N.

(9) Proposed Sec. 143.877. This new section would require work

vests to be marked with retro-reflective material under International

Maritime Organization (IMO) Resolution A.658(16) and approved under

approval series 164.018.

(10) Proposed subpart J would prescribe requirements for lifesaving

equipment on unmanned fixed facilities. This subpart is similar to the

current requirement located in 33 CFR part 144, subpart 144.10. The

term ``unmanned platforms'' has been updated to ``unmanned fixed

facilities.'' This subpart has also been made applicable to floating

facilities through cross referencing.

(11) Proposed Sec. 143.915 would prescribe requirements for

lifejackets on unmanned facilities. This section is similar to the

current requirement located in 33 CFR 144.10-1(a)(1). We removed the

references to personal flotation devices and to make the proposed rule

consistent with SOLAS 74/83. We added an allowance that would require

lifejackets to be on the facility only when personnel are on board.

This would help eliminate the expense incurred by the growing practice

of lifejackets being stolen from unmanned facilities. We also added an

alternate provision permitting the use of helicopter lifejackets on

unmanned facilities by personnel while on a short helicopter visit.

(12) Proposed subpart K would revise and expand the limited current

OCS regulations on fixed facility fire-fighting and fire-protection

equipment located in 33 CFR part 145.

(13) Proposed Sec. 143.1000 allows all fixed facilities, 2 years

from the effective date of the final rule, to install fire-fighting and

fire-protection equipment.

(14) Proposed Sec. 143.1010 would clarify the long standing Coast

Guard position that only Coast Guard approved fire-fighting and fire-

protection equipment may be used on OCS units, whether or not that

equipment is in addition to the number of approved items required in

the regulations. This is similar to the requirements for MODU's located

in 46 CFR 108.103. We allow exemptions for equivalent items as stated

in paragraph (b), excess fire-fighting equipment under proposed

Sec. 143.1015, MMS fire-fighting items permitted under proposed

Secs. 143.1055(b) and (c) and 143.1062(a), and existing helicopter deck

fire-protection systems under proposed Sec. 143.1063.

(15) Proposed Sec. 143.1015 would allow for the use of fire-

fighting equipment for which the Coast Guard has no standard, if the

equipment does not endanger the facility or personnel and is maintained

in good working condition.

(16) Proposed Sec. 143.1020 would prescribe requirements for fire

extinguishers. This section is similar to the current requirement

located in 33 CFR 145.05(a) through (c), with the removal of soda and

water extinguishers and the addition of type B-IV extinguishers from

the table.

(17) Proposed Sec. 143.1045 would prescribe requirements for fire-

extinguishing systems for certain enclosed spaces on a manned fixed

facility, which is similar to current requirements for MODU's. However,

we considered some significant differences while proposing this

requirement. MODU's have to drill in harsh environmental areas such as

the North Sea. Their industrial areas often must be enclosed, requiring

fire-extinguishing systems for those areas. Many industrial spaces on

fixed facilities in the U.S. OCS are open to the atmosphere and would

not require a fire-extinguishing system.

(18) Proposed Sec. 143.1050 would prescribe requirements for

automatic fire detection and alarm systems in accommodation and service

spaces and smoke detectors in the sleeping quarters of a manned fixed

facility. Fire detection and alarm systems must meet American Petroleum

Institute (API) standards and NFPA 72 requirements. The requirement for

smoke detectors in sleeping quarters is new and in addition to current

MODU regulations. We intend to revise MODU regulations in a future

rulemaking, to include new requirements for smoke detectors in sleeping

spaces similar to IMO MODU CODE requirements.

(19) Proposed Sec. 143.1055 would require manned fixed facilities

to have a fire main system to protect the accommodation spaces.

Existing requirements in subchapter N have no provisions for fire mains

in the accommodation spaces. Existing OCS manned fixed facilities have

a fire main as part of the firewater system required by MMS for the

production-handling equipment areas. If the owner or operator elects to

meet this requirement by making an extension to the existing MMS fire

main, the new fire main system piping fittings and hardware may meet

the MMS requirements to maintain compatibility of the necessary

hardware. If the owner or operator elects to install a new independent

fire main to meet this requirement, the system design and hardware must

comply with the MODU regulations in 46 CFR 108.415 through 108.425.

(20) Proposed Sec. 143.1062 would prescribe requirements for the

water supply of helicopter deck fire-protection systems. Many operators

of fixed facilities have voluntarily installed helicopter deck fire

protection systems, even though they have not been

[[Page 68433]]

required by the Coast Guard regulations. The water supply for these

voluntarily installed systems is, in most cases, a continuation of the

MMS firewater system. Some facilities tap into a Coast Guard approved

independent accommodation fire main system. Either option will meet

this requirement as long as the design and hardware maintains

consistency with the fire main being used.

(21) Section 143.1063 would permit the continued use of non-

approved Coast Guard helicopter deck fire-protection equipment if

installed on the facility before 2 years after the effective date of

the final rule. This exemption is required to permit the continued use

of voluntarily installed systems. However, this equipment will still

have to meet the requirements in Secs. 143.1060 and 143.1061.

(22) Proposed subpart L would prescribe requirements for systems

fire protection for manned fixed facilities. The Coast Guard currently

has extensive regulations for structural fire protection on MODU's and

floating facilities; however, there are no requirements in existing 33

CFR part 145 for structural fire protection of manned fixed facilities

and fire protection of helicopter decks.

In accordance with the 1998 MOU between the Coast Guard and MMS,

the Coast Guard is responsible for regulating fire protection for fixed

facilities in the areas of accommodation spaces, service spaces,

control rooms, wellbay areas, and helicopter decks. This subpart would

address structural fire protection of accommodation spaces and the

fire-protection requirements for helicopter decks and helicopter

refueling systems.

For personnel safety, the proximity of an accommodation space to an

explosive source or hydrocarbon source is of critical importance in the

event of a blowout or explosion. Accident statistics show that 78

percent of all fires, explosions, and blowouts occurring on the OCS

have occurred on fixed facilities. A likely explanation of this

statistic is that the majority of fixed facilities are producing and

flowing oil and gas 24-hours-a-day, whereas most MODU's are performing

exploratory drilling, where they encounter dry holes 80 percent of the

time. Many fixed facilities house production facilities capable of

handling thousands of barrels of oil and millions of cubic feet of gas

daily, making the threat of fire on a fixed facility greater than or at

least equal to that of a MODU engaged in OCS activity.

Coast Guard and MMS accident and casualty data reveals that the

threat of fire remains a major hazard on fixed facilities. Between 1970

and 1979, there were 264 fires, explosions, and blowouts on fixed

facilities, resulting in 42 fatalities. Between 1980 and 1986, there

were 410 fires, explosions, and blowouts on fixed facilities, resulting

in 31 fatalities. Between 1987 and 1998, there were 563 fires,

explosions, and blowouts on fixed facilities, resulting in 10

fatalities.

Initially, the Coast Guard intended to write the requirements for

structural fire protection on a manned fixed facility, similar to Coast

Guard MODU regulations in 46 CFR part 108, subpart D, and the 1989 IMO

MODU Code. In the process of determining what requirements to

establish, the Coast Guard formed a NOSAC working group to address the

issue of structural fire protection. Many members were of the opinion

that the ``fixed'' nature of a manned fixed facility made it more like

a land-based structure than their marine-based counterparts (for

example, MODU's). Therefore, the working group recommended that the

requirements for structural fire protection be similar to the existing

land-based building code requirements. This would provide an equivalent

level of safety while allowing greater flexibility in construction and

design. We thoroughly examined one of the land-based building codes,

the Life Safety Code, NFPA 101. We determined that with a few

modifications, NFPA 101 requirements could increase the level of

safety.

We contend that, in addition to NFPA 101, an independent firewall

between the accommodation spaces and the wellbore or explosive source

is absolutely necessary. The requirement for a firewall is an

acknowledged international requirement brought about by the review of

the ``Piper Alpha'' accident in the North Sea. This requirement is

consistent with the IMO MODU Code, which includes a regulation

requiring the front bulkhead of accommodation spaces to be of A60

construction if it is within 30 meters of the wellhead. As an

alternative, this proposed rule allows the owner or operator to use an

A60 bulkhead on the periphery of the quarters building, as required by

the MODU regulations in 46 CFR part 108.

(23) Proposed Secs. 143.1100 and 143.1105 would prescribe

requirements for fixed facilities, major conversions, relocated

facilities, accommodation modules, temporary accommodation modules, and

accommodation modules that are part of a drilling/workover rig package.

The proposed regulations would apply only if the facility, conversion,

or module were contracted for or constructed after the effective date

of the final rule.

(24) Proposed Secs. 143.1115 and 143.1120 would prescribe

requirements for systems fire protection for accommodation spaces and

modules on manned fixed facilities, based on the Life Safety Code, NFPA

101, with an additional requirement for a fire wall. We also permit the

owner or operator to elect to meet this requirement by complying with

46 CFR part 108, subpart B.

(25) Proposed Sec. 143.1125 would prescribe requirements for the

design and location of accommodation spaces, accommodation modules,

temporary accommodation modules, and accommodation modules that are

part of a drilling/workover rig package with respect to explosive

sources. This would provide a safe refuge from fires, blowouts, and

explosions during the time needed to evacuate.

(26) Proposed Sec. 143.1217 would prescribe requirements for the

hardware of the general alarm system on a fixed facility. The current

OCS regulations were deficient in this area. It has long been the Coast

Guard's standard practice to require a bell for the primary sounding

device for MODU'S and other U.S. vessels. This is in keeping with

international maritime standards. However it has been standard practice

on U.S. fixed facilities to use primary alarm sounding devices that are

not bells. Floating and fixed facility operations are similar in being

mostly production operations and different from that of MODU's and

other U.S. vessels. Because personnel engaged in OCS activity often

work on both fixed and floating facilities, consistency between the

general alarm systems is important. This rulemaking allows the use of

devices other than bells for the primary and supplementary sounding

device so the signals on a fixed facility will be similar to the signal

on a floating facility. It further permits the use of system hardware

that is either Underwriters Laboratories (UL) listed, Factory Mutual

(F.M.) listed, or U.S. Coast Guard approved.

(27) Proposed Secs. 143.1235 and 143.1236 would prescribe general

noise level design standards for all new manned fixed facilities. These

sections are intended to be used in conjunction with proposed

Secs. 142.235 and 142.240 to result in a general noise standard for all

new manned fixed facilities. The table of maximum noise levels for

accommodation spaces in Sec. 143.1235 is taken from the IMO Resolution

A.468(XII).

(28) Proposed subpart N would prescribe requirements for

accommodation spaces, accommodation lighting and power, heating in

[[Page 68434]]

accommodation spaces, service water systems, emergency lighting and

power, and stairways and ladders on manned fixed facilities contracted

for or constructed after these rules are finalized. Requirements are

proposed to establish minimum safety and design standards for those

areas on fixed facilities within the responsibility of the Coast Guard

under the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act and the 1998 MOU between

the Coast Guard and the MMS. Because many of the potential safety

hazards on fixed facilities are similar to those on MODU's,

requirements proposed in this subpart are similar to those applied to

MODU's under subchapter IA of 46 CFR chapter I. The proposed

modifications were needed to address differences specific to the nature

of operations on a fixed facility. This rulemaking is more general in

nature than that for MODU's, because fixed facilities do not have to

comply with international marine regulations as do MODU's.

(29) Proposed Sec. 143.1317 would prescribe general requirements

for sleeping spaces on manned fixed facilities and modules. Many of the

paragraphs are similar to the regulations for accommodation spaces on a

MODU in 46 CFR 108.201 and 108.203. Coast Guard vessel and MODU

regulations permit only four persons per sleeping space. The Coast

Guard determined that six persons per sleeping space is acceptable on

fixed facilities for the following reasons:

(a) Fixed facilities do not experience wave motion as do vessels

and MODU's. More space is required in a room where there is vessel

motion than in a room which does not have motion.

(b) Fixed facilities do not embark on international ocean voyages

and therefore do not have to contend with foreign marine manning

regulations.

(30) Proposed Sec. 143.1318 would prescribe general requirements

for temporary accommodation modules used on fixed facilities. The Coast

Guard determined that eight persons in these sleeping spaces is

acceptable because the sleeping space would only be used on a temporary

basis on the rare occasions that personnel are working on the facility.

(31) Proposed Sec. 143.1321 would require a medical treatment space

on each manned fixed facility with accommodation spaces for 12 or more

persons. Also see the comments on this subject in paragraph (5) of the

discussion of comments to the ANPRM in this preamble.

(32) Proposed Sec. 143.1322 would allow a medical treatment room to

be used as a sleeping space or office.

(33) Proposed Sec. 143.1323 would prescribe requirements for

laundry rooms. It would require a washer and dryer for every 25 persons

on the facility or a laundry service could be used instead.

(34) Proposed Sec. 143.1332 would prescribe requirements for

sanitary water systems. It is general in nature, the main objective

being to ensure that sanitary water is properly located and labeled to

avoid being used for drinking and to avoid its coming into contact with

food or medical utensils.

(35) Proposed Sec. 143.1335 would prescribe electrical lighting

requirements for accommodation spaces, illuminated exit signs, and

lifeboat and life raft embarkation area floodlights. The requirements

are intended to ensure that adequate lighting is provided for

accommodation spaces and for emergency purposes. Paragraph (a) would

require that the design and installation of the lighting system comply

with API RP 14F, section 9.

(36) Proposed Sec. 143.1336 would prescribe emergency lighting and

power design and installation requirements for emergency lighting and

power sources. The system design must meet API RP 14F. The purpose of

this requirement is to ensure that a dependable independent emergency

power source is available to provide a minimum level of light and power

during an emergency. The emergency source of power may consist of

either batteries, a generator, or a combination of both.

(37) Proposed Sec. 143.1341 would prescribe requirements for

vertical ladders. It is similar to the vertical ladder requirements for

MODU's in 46 CFR 108.160. Paragraph (c) on embarkation ladders is an

additional requirement to that for MODU's. This is added to eliminate

the potential safety hazard of an escaping person becoming trapped by

waves in the ladder cage during storm conditions. This rulemaking would

add a side opening to the cage and the elimination of the cage for the

bottom 9.15 meters (30 feet).

(38) Proposed Sec. 143.1410 would require a U.S. registered

professional engineer or registered architect to review facility design

plans and specifications of the items prescribed by this subchapter and

certify that these items comply with the Coast Guard's design

regulations. This section was proposed in order to allow owners and

operators to use in-house, as well as third-party, engineers to review

and certify calculations and drawings. This change is necessary to

reduce both the time required for plan review by the Coast Guard and

the cost of plan review for the owner.

Part 144--Outer Continental Shelf Activities: Floating Facilities

Fixed and floating facilities have many regulations in common, so

some subparts and sections in part 144 refer to requirements in part

143. Existing regulations for floating facilities were very limited.

Many new and novel types of floating facilities, such as TLP's and Spar

Buoys, have appeared since subchapter N was last revised. This new part

addresses these new types of floating facilities, as well.

(1) This proposed rule would establish new requirements for all

floating facilities in the following areas:

Notice of arrival or relocation (Sec. 144.110).

Operating manuals (Sec. 144.210).

Lifesaving equipment for manned U.S. floating facilities

(subpart D), including immersion suits (Sec. 144.310).

Lifesaving equipment for unmanned U.S. floating facilities

(subpart E).

Fire fighting and fire protection for floating facilities

(subpart F), including temporary accommodation modules on a manned

floating facility (Sec. 144.510) and fire-fighting and fire-protection

equipment for U.S. unmanned floating facilities (Sec. 144.515).

Equipment requirements for U.S. floating facilities

(subpart G), including the general alarm system (Secs. 144.605 and

144.610).

Design and equipment requirements for manned and unmanned

U.S. floating facilities (subpart H), including conversions,

relocations (Sec. 144.700), TLP's (Sec. 144.710), and FPSO's

(Sec. 144.715).

Plan and approval requirements for manned and unmanned

U.S. floating facilities (subpart I), including initial submission

(Sec. 144.815), plan submission (Sec. 144.820), in-service inspection

(Sec. 144.830), and new or novel hull designs (Secs. 144.835 and

144.840).

Inspection and certification requirements for U.S.

floating facilities (subpart J), including Certificates of Inspection

(COI) (Sec. 144.910), drydocking (Sec. 144.915), and the revocation of

a COI (Sec. 144.920).

Foreign floating facility requirements (subpart K),

including operational requirements (Sec. 144.1005), EEP's

(Sec. 144.1010), operating manuals (Sec. 144.1015), design equipment

and inspection requirements (Sec. 144.1020), FPSO's (Sec. 144.1025),

Letter of Compliance (LOC) (Sec. 144.1030), mid-

[[Page 68435]]

period inspection (Sec. 144.1035), and the revocation of a LOC

(Sec. 144.1040).

(2) Proposed Sec. 144.105 would prescribe requirements for manned

and unmanned floating facilities. The owner or operator of a floating

facility would have to comply with the same operational requirements as

the owner or operator of a fixed facility. There is one exception; the

notice of arrival or relocation requirement is specific to manned and

unmanned floating facilities.

(3) Proposed Sec. 144.305 would prescribe the requirements for

lifesaving equipment. Currently, the owner or operator of a floating

facility must comply with all of 46 CFR part 108. This proposed rule

would exempt the portions of 46 CFR part 108 that are not applicable to

floating facilities.

(4) Proposed Sec. 144.310 would prescribe the requirements for

immersion suits. This requirement applies to any floating facility

located north of 32 degrees north latitude. It may effect floating

facilities located along the Pacific and Atlantic coasts of the

continental United States. It will not effect any floating facility

located in the Gulf of Mexico. This requirement will improve the level

of safety of personnel in the event they are forced to spend time in

the water.

(5) Proposed subpart E would prescribe the requirements for

lifesaving equipment for unmanned U.S. floating facilities. The

requirements are the same as those for unmanned fixed facilities in

proposed part 143, subpart J.

(6) Proposed Sec. 144.510 would permit temporary accommodation

modules used on a manned floating facility that meet the same

requirements as modules for manned fixed facilities. Present regulation

requires any temporary accommodation module used on a floating facility

to meet the requirements for MODU's in 46 CFR part 108.

(7) Proposed Secs. 144.605 and 144.610 would prescribe equipment

requirements for a U.S. floating facility. These sections would make

equipment requirements for a floating facility similar to those for a

fixed facility, except that the general alarm system for a floating

facility must meet the electrical engineering requirements in 46 CFR

chapter I, subchapter J. Floating facilities would use Coast Guard-

approved hardware, rather than UL or F.M. listed hardware. However,

TLP's would meet the fixed facility requirements.

(8) Proposed subpart H would prescribe the design and equipment

requirements for manned and unmanned U.S. floating facilities. This

subpart would revise and expand the current requirement in 33 CFR

143.120(b), which states in general terms that floating facilities must

comply with 46 CFR part 108. We incorporate in subpart H additional

requirements from the ``MVI Policy Letter No. 13-92,'' which details

the design and equipment requirements for FPSO's. We also incorporate

the requirements of API RP 2FPS for floating production systems and API

RP 2T for TLP's.

(9) Proposed Sec. 144.810 would require that if construction of a

U.S. floating facility began before the plans were approved, then any

discrepancies between the final construction and the approved plans

must be rectified.

(10) Proposed Sec. 144.830 would require in-service inspection

plans to be submitted at the same time as the design basis. This early

stage submittal will facilitate minimum cost and effort for any

structural design changes that are necessary for proper inspection.

(11) Proposed Sec. 144.1025 would require a foreign FPSO operating

on the U.S. OCS to comply with OPA 90 regulations, which will align

with U.S. FPSO requirements.

Part 145--Outer Continental Shelf Activities: Mobile Offshore Drilling

Units and Mobile Inland Drilling Units

We combined the requirements for U.S. and foreign MODU's located in

33 CFR part 143, subpart C, part 144, subparts 144.20 and 144.30, and

part 146, subpart C, with new regulations for MIDU's. We have left much

of the current MODU regulations unchanged, but we have added some new

requirements, expanded the current OCS regulations in areas where they

were very general, and made some modifications. The substantive changes

to this part are as follows:

(1) This proposed rule would establish new requirements in the

following areas:

Excess emergency equipment for MODU's (Sec. 145.125).

Operational testing of emergency equipment for MODU's

(Sec. 145.130).

Two-year LOC for foreign MODU's (Sec. 145.425).

Revocation of a foreign MODU's Letter of Compliance (LOC)

(Sec. 145.430), mid-period inspection of foreign MODU's (Sec. 145.435),

and fees for an LOC examination of foreign MODU's (Sec. 145.440).

Operational, training, and drill requirements for U.S.

MIDU's (Sec. 145.510), arrival and relocation notification

(Sec. 145.515), EEP (Sec. 145.520), lifesaving equipment

(Sec. 145.525), fire fighting and fire protection (Sec. 145.530),

design, equipment, and inspection requirements (Sec. 145.535), LOC

(Sec. 145.540), revoking of an LOC (Sec. 145.545), and re-inspection

requirements (Sec. 145.550).

(2) Proposed Sec. 145.210 would prescribe immersion suit

requirements for U.S. MODU's. On October 1, 1998, we published a final

rule on lifesaving equipment (63 FR 52802) that established new

requirements for immersion and exposure suits on U.S. MODU's in 46 CFR

part 108. Before these regulations were established, immersion-suit

requirements for MODU's were located in 33 CFR 144.20-5. When the MODU

regulations in 46 CFR part 108 were revised to include immersion-suit

requirements, the requirements located in 33 CFR 144.20-5 (a) through

(e) became obsolete. Therefore, proposed Sec. 145.210 cross-references

the MODU immersion-suit requirements in 46 CFR part 108.

As for exposure suits, our regulations in 46 CFR part 160, subpart

160.071, have been removed. Immersion suit regulations under 46 CFR

part 160, subpart 160.171, have replaced those for exposure suits,

because of the similarity between the two suits and because SOLAS uses

the term ``immersion suit.'' Paragraph (a) is similar to the first

sentence of the current requirement located in 33 CFR 144.20-5, but

would revise the geographical areas where immersion suits are required.

This section cross-references the requirements for immersion suits

for manned fixed facilities (Sec. 143.870), unmanned fixed facilities

(Sec. 143.925), manned floating facilities (144.310), unmanned floating

facilities (Sec. 144.420), U.S. vessels (Sec. 146.200), and foreign

vessels (Sec. 146.210). MODU's and other OCS units engaged in OCS

activity would be required to have immersion suits when operating in

waters North of 32 degrees North latitude in both the Atlantic and

Pacific Oceans. Current regulations in 33 CFR 144.20-5 and 144.30-5

require suits when operating North of 32 degrees in the Atlantic and

North of 35 degrees in the Pacific. A study conducted by the Coast

Guard determined that temperatures in the Pacific Ocean near the West

Coast of the United States at 32 degrees North latitude were colder

than they were in the Atlantic Ocean at the same latitude. There was no

reason, therefore, to allow 35 degrees North latitude for the Pacific

Ocean. This proposed rule would change the geographical areas to 32

degrees North for both oceans.

(3) Proposed Sec. 145.215 would establish immersion suit

requirements for foreign MODU's. The intent is to have identical

requirements, or at least

[[Page 68436]]

equivalent requirements, on all MODU's (U.S. or foreign). There are two

ways that a foreign MODU may satisfy the requirements. They may use--

(a) U.S. approved suits; or

(b) Their own nation's immersion suits, anti-exposure suits, or

other similar suits approved by the MODU's flag-state, provided the

suits are accepted by the Coast Guard as equivalent to U.S. approved

suits.

(4) Proposed 145.425(c) would amend the current requirement located

in 33 CFR 143.210(b) to allow a 2-year term for the LOC. This would

align that term with the 2-year term for a COI.

(5) Proposed subpart F would establish regulations for MIDU's

operating on the OCS. This proposed rule implements an established

policy that has been operating successfully for several years. When

operating on the OCS, a MIDU would have to comply with portions of the

requirements for a manned fixed facility, the requirements for arrival

and relocation notification for a floating facility, and the

requirements for EEP plans for a MODU. Also, they would be required to

obtain an LOC and undergo annual inspections to certify compliance with

these limited regulations.

(6) Proposed Sec. 145.525 would require MIDU's operating on the OCS

to comply with lifesaving equipment requirements for manned fixed

facilities. The section does not specifically address immersion suits;

however, immersion suits are part of the lifesaving equipment for a

manned fixed facility. When a MIDU operates on the OCS North of 32

degrees North latitude, it must comply with the immersion suit

requirements for a manned fixed facility.

(7) Proposed Sec. 145.535 would require that MIDU's operating on

the OCS have an LOC. An LOC would be issued to a MIDU for operations

inside the defined area. An LOC would be issued based on an inspection

to establish that the MIDU meets the lifesaving, fire fighting, and

operational requirements for a manned fixed facility and proposed part

145, subpart F. A foreign MIDU is not permitted to operate on the OCS.

Part 146--Outer Continental Shelf Activities: Vessels

We combined the current requirements in 33 CFR part 143, subpart D

(Vessels), with those in part 143, subpart E (Standby Vessels), to form

this one part for all vessels operating on the OCS, other than MODU's,

MIDU's, and floating facilities. Some sections were added to make this

an all-inclusive set of regulations for OCS vessels. The substantive

changes to this part are as follows:

(1) Proposed Secs. 146.115 and 146.120 would revise the current

requirement in 33 CFR 146.303, which requires an owner or operator of a

foreign vessel to comply with the casualty notice for fixed and

floating facilities. We propose a revision that would require foreign

vessels to meet the general U.S. vessel requirements for notice of

casualty located in 46 CFR 4.05.

(2) Proposed Sec. 146.205 would establish lifesaving equipment

requirements for all foreign vessels engaged in OCS activities, other

than foreign MODU's and floating facilities. Our intent is to require

the owner or operator of a foreign vessel to meet the same lifesaving

requirements or ones equivalent to those for a U.S. vessel. For foreign

vessels, we propose the option of using any one of the three

alternatives for satisfying the lifesaving equipment requirements. The

owner or operator of a foreign vessel may meet either the U.S.

lifesaving regulations, their own nation's regulations, if they have

been reviewed and approved by the Commandant, or the lifesaving

requirements in SOLAS.

(3) Proposed Sec. 146.305 would establish fire-fighting and fire-

protection regulations for foreign vessels while engaged in OCS

activities. The current OCS regulations have no requirements in this

area, and this has created the possibility that foreign vessels may be

operating on the OCS with a lower standard of fire protection than that

of a similar type of U.S. vessel. The intent is to require foreign

vessels, while engaged in OCS activities, to have a standard of fire

protection the same as or equivalent to that for a U.S. vessel. The

proposed regulation is organized similar to the requirements for

lifesaving equipment for foreign vessels in proposed Sec. 146.205 by

providing the option of one of three alternatives to comply with this

requirement.

(4) Proposed Sec. 146.405 would require the owner or operator of a

foreign vessel, while engaged in OCS activities, to comply with the

design, equipment, and inspection requirements applicable to U.S.

vessels under proposed Sec. 146.400 or the standards of the vessel's

nation if accepted and approved by the Coast Guard. The intent is to

ensure that all vessels engaged in OCS activities have a minimum level

of safety at least equal to that of a U.S. vessel of similar type.

(5) Proposed Sec. 146.420 would require foreign vessels, while

engaged in OCS activities, to obtain an LOC similar to that required

for foreign MODU's in current 33 CFR 143.210 and in proposed

Sec. 145.425.

(6) Proposed subpart F would revise and enlarge the current OCS

regulations for standby vessels in 33 CFR part 143, subpart E. The

intent is to produce a complete set of regulations for standby vessels.

The standby vessel regulations were added as part of the EEP

regulations published on May 18, 1989 (54 FR 21566). Standby vessels

would also be subject to applicable vessel regulations of part 146.

Proposed Form CG-RMAID

The Coast Guard, MMS, and OSHA worked together to develop the

proposed form entitled ``Casualty Report of Accident, Injury,

Occupational Illness, or Death on a Facility, Excluding Mobile Offshore

Drilling Units.'' We intend to streamline the reporting process by

using one form to report to each agency. The form number, CG-RMAID, is

temporary and will be replaced by the proper Coast Guard form number in

the final rule. We encourage comments on the use and clarity of this

form.

BILLING CODE 4910-15-U

[[Page 68437]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP07DE99.009

[[Page 68438]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP07DE99.010

[[Page 68439]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP07DE99.011

BILLING CODE 4910-15-C

[[Page 68440]]

Incorporation by Reference

Material proposed for incorporation by reference appears in

proposed Sec. 140.30. You may inspect this material at U.S. Coast Guard

Headquarters where indicated under ADDRESSES. Copies of the material

are available from the sources listed in proposed Sec. 140.30.

Before publishing a binding rule, we will submit this material to

the Director of the Federal Register for approval of the incorporation

by reference.

Regulatory Evaluation

(a) Introduction

This proposed rule is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under

section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866 and does not require an

assessment of potential costs and benefits under section 6(a)(3) of

that Order. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has not reviewed

it under that Order. It is not ``significant'' under the regulatory

policies and procedures of the Department of Transportation (DOT) (44

FR 11040, February 26, 1979).

A draft Regulatory Evaluation under paragraph 10e of the regulatory

policies and procedures of DOT will be available in the docket as

indicated under ADDRESSES on January 6, 2000. The Regulatory Evaluation

is included in the document entitled ``Economic Supporting Data.'' A

summary of the Evaluation follows:

(b) Summary

Subchapter N regulations apply to all activities occurring on the

OCS. The types of unit that engage in OCS activities are diverse and

include fixed facilities, floating facilities, mobile offshore drilling

units, mobile inland drilling units, and vessels (i.e., offshore supply

vessels, industrial vessels, pipe lay barges, and derrick barges). The

proposed rule is a comprehensive effort to provide a complete

rulemaking package to meet the needs of today's OCS, with sufficient

flexibility to handle tomorrow's emerging technology. The primary

changes for OCS units are in workplace safety and health, lifesaving,

fire-fighting, and fire-protection equipment, and structural fire

protection.

The benefit-to-cost ratio for this proposed rule is 0.86-to-1. The

cost of the rule in present value dollars over the 10-year period of

analysis (2000-2009) is $82.8 million, which includes $81.9 million in

costs to industry and $0.9 million in costs to the government. The

present value benefits in the form of avoided deaths, injuries, and

accidents are $71 million.

The component parts of the proposed rule have the following

benefit-to-cost ratios:

Part 142, 10.5-to-1;

Part 143, .28-to-1; and

Parts 144 through 146, which account for approximately 2

percent of the costs, have benefits expressed qualitatively.

The Coast Guard included several measures to accommodate small

entities and others affected by this proposed rule with phase-in

periods, exemptions, and options to meeting some proposed requirements.

(c) Costs Evaluation

(1) Costs to the Offshore Industry

When you review the proposed rule, you will note that the substance

of many current OCS regulations remains unchanged. The following is a

list of parts identifying where you will find proposed changes that

impact the industry.

Part 140 No changes that impact the industry costs.

Part 141 No changes that impact the industry costs.

Part 142 Contains 17 changes which impact costs. General

categories are training, personal fall arrest systems, and confined-

space entry.

Part 143 Contains 28 changes which impact costs. General

categories are lifesaving equipment, fire-fighting and fire-protection

equipment, and structural fire protection.

Part 144 Contains 5 changes which impact costs.

Part 145 Contains 3 changes which impact costs.

Part 146 Contains 2 changes which impact costs.

Part 147 No changes that impact the industry costs.

Costs incurred by the industry under this proposed rule are

comprised of first-year one-time costs, 2-year phase-in costs, and

recurring costs to all OCS units and new build manned fixed facilities

involving workplace safety and health, lifesaving, fire-fighting, and

fire-protection equipment. The accumulated present value costs of this

rule to industry are $81.9 million. Total first-year costs to industry

are $33.7 million. Two-year phase-in costs to industry are $21.6

million and recurring annual costs are $5.2 million.

Together Part 142 (Workplace Safety and Health) and Part 143 (Fixed

Facilities) comprise $80 million (present value) or 98 percent of the

total industry cost. Parts 144-146 (floating facilities, MODU's and

MIDU's, and foreign vessels) comprise the remaining $1.9 million

(present value) or 2 percent of the total industry cost.

(2) Government Costs

The estimated annual costs to the Federal government are $124,288.

The costs would include Coast Guard personnel time and resources to

review and approve the following:

In-service inspection plans for tension leg platforms

(TLP) and spar buoys (SPARS).

Design basis documents for floating facilities.

Inspections for letter of compliance issuance for MIDU's

and foreign vessels.

(d) Benefits Evaluation

According to the MMS FY95 report to Congress, a noticeable increase

of accidents and injuries have occurred to personnel engaged in OCS

activities due to the rapid increase of oil exploration and production

over the last 20 years. The proposed rule would provide benefits

through implementing workplace safety and health, lifesaving and fire-

fighting equipment, and structural fire protection requirements. Also,

the proposed rule would require the owner or operator of a foreign

vessel or foreign floating facility engaged in OCS activities to comply

with requirements similar to those imposed on U.S. OCS units.

Most accidents on the OCS occur during drilling or production.

Trends show that the two main causes of incidents are equipment failure

and human error. The proposed rule would provide benefits by reducing

the number of accidents or decreasing the severity of injury to

personnel. We did not include the valuation of property damage from

blowouts, fires, and explosions as a potential benefit due to

insufficient data to support accurate assumptions. Some of the proposed

measures that will reduce the likelihood of deaths and injuries include

improved workplace safety and health requirements, structural fire

protection, and additional lifesaving, fire-fighting, and fire-

protection equipment. The following is a discussion presenting the

quantifiable benefits, the qualitative benefits, and the total benefits

summary.

To determine potential benefits, we examined both the Coast Guard

and Mineral Management databases for accidents involving personnel on

OCS units and identified the trends. This data is summarized in Table 3

in this preamble.

[[Page 68441]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP07DE99.012

From this data, we extracted cases meeting the following criteria--

(1) Fatalities that had occurred ``on or around'' an OCS unit;

(2) Critical or severe injury that occurred ``on or around'' an OCS

unit; and

(3) Injuries ``on or around'' an OCS unit that involved fire,

water, or human-error related incidents.

A query of the Coast Guard's Marine Safety Information System

(MSIS) yielded 94 incidents between 1992-1998 that met the criteria. A

MMS query yielded 61 fatality cases that met the criteria. The

following adjustments have been made:

(1) We used MMS fatality cases as our primary data source for

fatalities. We cross-referenced all of the Coast Guard's Marine Safety

Management System (MSMS) fatality cases with the MMS cases to avoid

double-counting.

(2) We used MSIS as our data source for injuries. MSIS data had

more information and allowed us to make a better criteria match.

From the combined data sources, we identified a total of 47

accidents likely to benefit from the proposed requirements.

We then assigned one of the following effectiveness measures to

each incident:

(1) 85 percent for incidents with a high possibility of prevention;

(2) 50 percent for incidents with a medium possibility of

prevention; or

(3) 25 percent for incidents with a low possibility of prevention.

The effectiveness measures assigned to individual incidents were

based on-- (a) the actual details of the incident, (b) the positive

effects of measures or regulations currently in place to avert

occurrences, i.e., SEMP, and, (c) the professional estimates used to

determine the degree of applicability.

The benefits estimate for each incident is determined by

multiplying the effectiveness measure and the dollar value for

society's willingness to pay (WTP) to avert a fatality. The benefits of

the proposed rule would be measured based on an estimated dollar value

for society's WTP to avert a fatality. According to the Department of

Transportation, the value is $2.7 million per fatality averted. The

Department of Transportation's memorandum, dated January 8, 1993,

``Treatment of Value of Life and Injuries in Preparing Economic

Evaluations'' provides percentages of society's WTP for severe and

critical injuries. Injuries averted are derived as a fraction of the

value of an averted fatality. Because of the subjectiveness in

determining whether an injury is severe or critical (e.g., multiple

injuries to neck, head, or spinal), the mean of these two injury levels

is calculated as $1,282,500 and is applied as the value of an averted

injury.

(1) Quantifiable Benefits

Quantifiable benefits accruing from this proposed rule include

reductions in deaths and injuries due to improved workplace safety and

health requirements, and additional lifesaving, fire-fighting, and

fire-protection equipment. These potential benefits are determined

based on the analysis of accident cases from the MSIS and MMS

databases. The proposed requirements that would have potentially

reduced the likelihood of accidents that occurred on the OCS and

provided a quantifiable benefit are discussed here.

(i) Workplace Safety and Health (Part 142). Based on the review of

accident narratives over the period of analysis, 24 deaths and 5

injuries might have been prevented or diminished in severity by the

proposed workplace safety and health requirements. Proposed

requirements that would impact incidents similar to our criteria base

are: increase training, improve work practices, upgrade fall arrest

systems, and require guardrails, fencing, or other means necessary to

avert a fall.

The following table summarizes the effectiveness measures applied

to accidents that occurred during the period of analysis. Annual

benefits from avoided deaths and injuries for this component are $7.1

million.

[[Page 68442]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP07DE99.013

(ii) Fixed Facilities (Part 143). Below are the estimated benefits

for lifesaving equipment, and fire-fighting and fire-protection

equipment. These two sections are reviewed separately because they

represent a significant share of the proposed requirements. We found

zero (0) quantifiable benefit for the remaining proposed requirements

under the fixed facilities component, i.e., medical treatment room and

emergency lighting and power source. However, they are discussed later

as qualitative benefits.

Lifesaving equipment for fixed facilities. Based on the review of

accident narratives, 9 deaths and 5 injuries might have been prevented

or diminished in severity by the proposed lifesaving equipment

requirements. The following table summarizes the effectiveness measures

applied to accidents that occurred during the period of analysis.

Annual benefits from avoided deaths and injuries for this component are

$2.3 million.

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP07DE99.014

Currently, 67 percent of industry voluntarily complies with

survival craft and rescue boat requirements. Survival crafts and rescue

boats are needed to provide a means for personnel to abandon a facility

during a blowout, explosion, or fire. Blowouts, which are an

uncontrollable flow of hydrocarbon from a wellhead, have occurred more

[[Page 68443]]

frequently in recent years--as shown in Table 6. On average, the number

of fires in 1997 and 1998 totaled 109. Although most of these incidents

were considered minor, the occurrences posed a risk to human safety.

Data reports provided by Survival Systems International include

emergency offshore incidents requiring evacuation of crewmembers, using

their survival craft. On 5 different incidents during the period from

1994 to 1997, more than 156 persons were evacuated by rescue boats. The

incidents were primarily a result of fire and explosion. Exposure to

risk and danger increases with the likelihood of emergency abandonment

of facilities. The availability of rescue boats is critical to a safe

and expeditious evacuation.

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP07DE99.015

Fire-fighting and fire-protection equipment for fixed facilities.

Based on the review of accident narratives over the period of analysis,

1 death and 3 injuries might have been prevented or diminished in

severity by the proposed fire-fighting and fire-protection equipment

requirements. The following table summarizes the effectiveness measures

applied to accidents that occurred during the period of analysis.

Annual benefits from avoided deaths and injuries for this component are

$660,053.

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP07DE99.016

The most significant fire in the last decade was the 1988 Piper

Alpha incident in the North Sea. We did not quantify benefits from the

Piper Alpha for this rulemaking; however, we mention it to show the

presence of risk. The night of July 6, 1988, a series of events

resulted in a catastrophic fire. These events include human error,

operational failure, design deficiencies, and system failures. Of the

226 people onboard, 165 died. We reviewed reports on this incident and

incorporated several requirements in the proposed rule to provide

increased safety and reduce the risk of this type of incident happening

on the U.S. OCS in the future. These proposed items include, but are

not limited to, personnel training, fire and emergency drills, means of

escape, fire-protection systems, fire-fighting equipment, a fire main,

structural fire protection, emergency lighting and power, and design

certification.

We reviewed other MMS narratives describing fire-related incidents

that did not result in injuries or fatalities, but might have been

prevented or diminished in severity by the proposed

[[Page 68444]]

fire-fighting and fire-protection equipment requirements. The proposed

on-site fire main system might have been effective in the following

scenarios--

On November 12, 1995, the night production operator

noticed a pipeline pump engulfed in flames, which were spreading into

the wellbay. The temperature safety element located above the pump

burned out and activated the emergency shut-down system. The general

alarm was sounded to alert all personnel. The fire-fighting deluge

system was activated by the emergency shut down. After about 5 minutes

the fire was extinguished using the fire pump water and a No. 30

extinguisher.

On September 20, 1996, a steel hull shrimp trawler

collided with a satellite well resulting in an explosion and fire. All

personnel abandoned the vessel and were rescued. Safety devices

operated properly and closed the well stream flow. Gas or liquid gas

was shut in at the production facility. The fire was extinguished with

the fire water system aboard the rescue vessel. The collision and

subsequent explosion resulted in severe damage to the satellite well.

Total benefits for fixed facilities. The total estimated benefits

for part 143 are $3 million annually. This estimate represents the

quantifiable benefits from lifesaving, fire-fighting, and fire-

protection equipment.

(2) Qualitative Benefits

Many proposed requirements were difficult to quantify but, if

implemented, should provide benefits to industry through a safer work

environment, decreased risk of death, injury, or property damage. Here

are some examples.

Training. When personnel are trained 1) to recognize

hazards in the workplace, the risk of incident due to lack of

preparedness decreases; 2) to properly use and wear appropriate

personal protective equipment, the risk of injury decreases; and 3) to

know the methods and procedures to avoid exposure, the risk of

contamination from blood-borne pathogens or other infection material

decreases.

Protective equipment, guards, warning signs, and hazardous

communication program. Conducting a noise level survey or otherwise

identifying hazards, posting appropriate warning signs, and providing

appropriate personal protective equipment will promote a safer work

environment.

Offshore Competent Person and confined-space entry

program. Having a trained Offshore Competent Person to recognize

confined spaces and the dangers they may contain, to test the space, to

identify restrictions for working in the space, and to ensure that

personnel conduct confined-space entry in accordance with the written

program in Sec. 142.375, the risk of property damage, injury, or death

resulting from an incident within a confined space will decrease.

Training and drills. When drills are conducted regularly

and personnel are trained in lifesaving procedures, survival when

overboard, use of lifesaving equipment, and duties assigned under the

station bill, the risk of injury, death, or property damage is

diminished in the event of emergencies. When emergency situations

occur, the training will minimize confusion and human error as people

follow the procedures they have learned and practiced.

Maintenance, equipment inspection, and weight testing.

Maintenance and equipment inspection ensures proper function in the

event of emergency. Weight testing will ensure survival craft falls are

operational and ready for emergency use. When equipment is operating

properly and used by trained personnel following established

procedures, the risk of injury, death, and property damage is

diminished.

Lifesaving equipment and immersion suits. Maintained and

operational lifesaving equipment will increase the probability of

rescue. Immersion suits will increase the probability of survival in

the event personnel spend time in cold water.

Fire-fighting, fire-protection, fire-extinguishing

equipment, fire main systems, fire-extinguishing systems, structural

fire protection, and emergency lighting and power systems. Fireman's

outfits, fire axes, fire main systems and fire-extinguishing systems

will greatly increase the probability that fire is contained,

controlled, and extinguished in a timely manner. Detection and alarm

systems will provide fast, effective notification to personnel so they

can act immediately as trained, either fighting the fire or evacuating

the facility. Structural fire protection will increase safety and slow

the spread of fire. Emergency lighting and power systems may provide

power in the event a fire damages the main power generator, keeping

lights, alarms, and communication systems operational. These things

would decrease the risk of injury or death and decrease property

damage.

In-service inspection plan for floating facilities.

Currently a floating facility must undergo drydocking every 2 years.

The option to use an in-service inspection plan would allow the

facility to remain on station during its field depletion lifetime.

Current technology results in the location of larger oil fields,

requiring longer on station time for depletion. It is costly to

shutdown operations, undergo drydocking, and return to station to

resume operations. In-service inspection will ensure an adequate level

of safety while allowing the facility to continue production.

(e) Total Benefit-Cost Estimate

Total benefit estimate for this proposed rule over the 10-year

period of analysis is $71 million. This estimate reflects the outcome

of the effectiveness measures and WTP values of the 47 accident cases

found likely to benefit from the proposed requirements.

The following table illustrates the total quantifiable costs and

benefits resulting from the implementation of this proposed rule. The

ratios are derived using present value benefits and costs for the 10-

year period of 1999 through 2009.

[[Page 68445]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP07DE99.017

Accumulated present value benefits attributable to the proposed

rule are estimated to total $70,978,307 for the 10-year period.

Accumulated present value costs to industry attributable to the

proposed rule are estimated to total $81,937,888 for the 10-year

period.

Small Entities

Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we

considered whether this proposed rule would have a significant economic

impact on a substantial number of small entities. The term ``small

entities'' comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations

that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their

fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than

50,000.

This proposed rule considered impacts for small business owners and

operators of OCS units, such as fixed and floating facilities and

foreign vessels engaged in OCS activity that are held by small

companies. Based on the Small Business Administration's classification,

a small entity in the oil and gas extraction industry is a company with

500 employees or less. A MMS report (dated Feb. 27, 1998) that

addresses small entities regulated under its offshore program,

identifies approximately 130 owners or operators of OCS units. Of

these, we estimate 13 (10 percent) are small entities.

While an entity connected to this industry is classified as small

based on its number of employees, an enormous monetary effort is

essential to develop even the smallest of fixed facilities. The

following table shows an estimate of the project cost of developing an

oil field.

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP07DE99.018

The maximum cost an owner or operator of a facility or vessel might

incur to comply with the proposed regulation is shown in Table 10 as

implementation or one-time costs, recurring costs, and total costs

extending the 10-year period of analysis. This maximum cost would only

apply if a facility were not currently in compliance with any of the

proposed requirements. In 1991, the MMS introduced the Safety and

Environmental Management Program (SEMP) as a voluntary approach to

improving safety and environmental protection on OCS facilities. In

1996, MMS conducted a comprehensive survey of the offshore industry, to

determine the effectiveness of SEMP. Ninety-six percent of all OCS

operators responded, which represented over 99 percent of total OCS oil

and gas production at that time. The results of the survey indicated

that OCS operators have SEMP plans or were well on their way to

implementing SEMP plans. Based on this information, for the purpose of

this analysis, we assumed that 95 percent of the owners or operators

currently meet the proposed workplace safety and health requirements

proposed in Part 142. Total cost to any of these facilities over

[[Page 68446]]

a 10-year period is determined to be less than 1 percent of development

cost of a fixed facility.

There are currently 513 OSV's owned by approximately 170 individual

companies. Of these 170 companies, we estimate approximately 90

percent, or 153, are small entities. For those OSV's not in compliance

with any of the proposed measures, the total 10-year cost in present

value dollars is expected to be $3,317 dollars as shown in Table 10.

Current (1999) day rates for these vessels depend on the size of the

vessel, but are in the $2,500 to $6,000 range. Therefore, the cost of

this rule over the next 10 years for an OSV not in compliance is

approximately the cost of 1 day of operation.

There are currently 190 MODU's and MIDU's operating on the OCS

owned by approximately 15 individual companies. Of these companies, no

more than 2 are small entities. For those OCS units not in compliance

with any of the proposed measures, the total 10-year cost in present

value dollars is $43,792 for a MODU and $76,580 for a MIDU (as shown in

Table 10). The day rates for MODU's vary from $30,000 to $180,000.

Therefore, the cost of this rule over the next 10 years for a MODU is

approximately the cost of one day of operation. The day rates for

MIDU's range from $10,000 to $15,000. Therefore, the cost of this rule

over the next 10 years for a MIDU ranges from approximately 5 to 8 days

of operation.

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP07DE99.019

To help offset burdens on small businesses caused by this proposed

rulemaking, the Coast Guard has included several measures to

accommodate small business needs and provide flexibility to small

entities affected by this rulemaking.

The Coast Guard would allow a floating facility to use an

in-service inspection plan in place of the 2-year drydocking

requirement. This would allow a floating facility to remain on station

during its field depletion lifetime. This is a cost-saving measure

considering the effort involved in moving an operational floating

facility.

All lifesaving equipment on an existing fixed facility may

be continued in use and need not meet the proposed requirements if it

has been accepted by the OCMI for use on the facility. However, if the

lifesaving equipment is replaced or the facility undergoes major

repairs, alterations, and modifications, the new lifesaving equipment

must meet the new requirements. This flexibility would allow businesses

to not have to purchase new lifesaving equipment upon the effective

date of this rule.

Existing lifeboats on any fixed facility would not need to

meet the proposed lifeboat requirement provided it is modified to

include self-righting capability and an onload/offload release

mechanism within 2 years of the effective date of the final rule. If

the existing lifeboats already meet the aforementioned requirement,

then the need for a rescue boat or lifeboat meeting the rescue boat

requirements is not required. Survival craft and its davit and winch

also have exemption, which would lessen the regulatory burden. The

expense of modifying a lifeboat would be less burdensome than

purchasing a new lifeboat. If a new lifeboat is purchased, the cost may

be phased-in over a 2-year period.

For fire-fighting and fire-protection equipment, manned

fixed facilities would have a 2-year phased-in period to meet the

proposed requirements.

Accommodation modules, temporary accommodation modules and

temporary accommodation modules that are part of a platform/workover

package on existing fixed facilities would be exempt from structural

fire protection requirements.

Existing helicopter landing deck fire protection systems

on manned fixed facilities would have a 2-year exemption period, after

the effective date of the final rule, to be used without having Coast

Guard equipment approval.

The fire main system required under this proposed

rulemaking for manned fixed facilities include an option whereby it may

be part of the required MMS firewater system. This flexibility would

lessen the burden involved with this requirement.

Fire drills and emergency evacuation or emergency drills

may be conducted in sequence as long as all functions required for each

drill are performed. This would provide small businesses an opportunity

to minimize the disruption to production operations thereby decreasing

potential costs.

The Coast Guard has given consideration to small entities and

others affected by this proposed rule. Due to the flexibility provided

by the alternatives, the Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b)

that if

[[Page 68447]]

implemented, the proposed rule would not have a significant economic

impact on a substantial number of small entities.

If you think that your business, organization, or governmental

jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity and that this rule would have

a significant economic impact on it, please submit a comment to the

Docket Management Facility at the address under ADDRESSES. In your

comment, explain why you think it qualifies and how and to what degree

this rule would economically affect it. Recommendations on workable

alternatives that would help minimize the economic impact are also

solicited.

Assistance for Small Entities

Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement

Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small

entities in understanding this proposed rule so that they can better

evaluate its effects on them and participate in the rulemaking. If the

rule would affect your small business, organization, or governmental

jurisdiction and you have questions concerning its provisions or

options for compliance, please consult Mr. James M. Magill, Vessel and

Facility Operating Standards Division (G-MSO-2), telephone (202) 267-

1082, or fax (202) 267-4570.

Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal

employees who enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with, Federal

regulations to the Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory

Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small Business Regulatory

Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these actions annually and

rates each agency's responsiveness to small business. If you wish to

comment on actions by employees of the Coast Guard, call 1-888-REG-FAIR

(1-888-734-3247).

Collection of Information

This proposed rule would call for a collection of information under

the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520). As defined

in 5 CFR 1320.3(c), ``collection of information'' comprises reporting,

recordkeeping, monitoring, posting, labeling, and other, similar

actions. The title and description of the information collections, a

description of those who must collect the information, and an estimate

of the total annual burden follow. The estimate covers the time for

reviewing instructions, searching existing sources of data, gathering

and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the

collection. The Coast Guard is currently requesting a revision of

current collections of information, under OMB control numbers 2115-0569

and 2115-0580.

Title: Outer Continental Shelf Activities.

Summary of the Collection of Information: This proposed rule

requires the owner or operator of a facility or a foreign vessel

engaged in OCS activity to meet standard design requirements as well as

report or record information that is necessary for the safe operation

of a facility or a foreign vessel. This includes:

(1) Confined-space entry permit;

(2) Confined-space entry certificate of training;

(3) Offshore competent person certificate;

(4) In-service inspection plans;

(5) Floating facility plan approval;

(6) Design basis report;

(7) Design certification;

(8) Fire drill report;

(9) Report of lifesaving equipment record;

(10) Weight testing written attestment;

(11) Record of fire-fighting equipment;

(12) Emergency evacuation plans for MIDU's;

(13) Letter of compliance for MIDU's; and

(14) Letter of compliance for foreign vessels.

These recordkeeping and reporting requirements are consistent with good

commercial practices and the maintenance of vital equipment.

Need for Information: The primary use of this information is to

determine if a facility or foreign vessel is in compliance with

requirements. Additionally, the information is necessary to implement

the Best Available and Safest Technology concept of Section 21 of the

Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act.

Proposed Use of Information: This information can be used to

determine in cases where a casualty resulted, whether failure to meet

these regulations contributed to the casualty.

Estimate of Total Annual Burden: The estimated reporting burden to

industry is 3,095 hours.

As required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C.

3507(d)), we have submitted a copy of this proposed rule to the Office

of Management and Budget (OMB) for its review of the collection of

information.

We ask for public comment on the proposed collection of information

to help us determine how useful the information is; whether it can help

us perform our functions better; whether it is readily available

elsewhere; how accurate our estimate of the burden of collection is;

how valid our methods for determining burden are; how we can improve

the quality, usefulness, and clarity of the information; and how we can

minimize the burden of collection.

If you submit comments on the collection of information, submit

them both to OMB and to the Docket Management Facility where indicated

under ADDRESSES, by the date under DATES.

You need not respond to a collection of information unless it

displays a currently valid control number from OMB. Before the

requirements for this collection of information become effective, we

will publish notice in the Federal Register of OMB's decision to

approve, modify, or disapprove the collection.

Federalism

We have analyzed this proposed rule under E.O. 13132 and have

determined that this rule does not have implications for federalism

under that Order.

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538)

governs the issuance of Federal regulations that require unfunded

mandates. An unfunded mandate is a regulation that requires a State,

local, or tribal government or the private sector to incur direct costs

without the Federal Government's having first provided the funds to pay

those costs. This proposed rule would not impose an unfunded mandate.

Taking of Private Property

This proposed rule would not effect a taking of private property or

otherwise have taking implications under E.O. 12630, Governmental

Actions and Interference with Constitutionally Protected Property

Rights.

Civil Justice Reform

This proposed rule meets applicable standards in sections 3(a) and

3(b)(2) of E.O. 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to minimize litigation,

eliminate ambiguity, and reduce burden.

Protection of Children

We have analyzed this proposed rule under E.O. 13045, Protection of

Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks. This rule is

not an economically significant rule and does not concern an

environmental risk to health or risk to safety that may

disproportionately affect children.

[[Page 68448]]

Environment

We considered the environmental impact of this proposed rule and

concluded that, under figure 2-1, paragraph (34) (c), (d) and (e), of

Commandant Instruction M16475.lC, this proposed rule is categorically

excluded from further environmental documentation. The environmental

impact associated with requiring additional equipment, training, and

improved facilities will be insignificant. A ``Categorical Exclusion

Determination'' is available in the docket where indicated under

ADDRESSES.

List of Subjects

33 CFR Part 140

Continental shelf, Incorporation by reference, Investigations,

Marine safety, Occupational safety and health, Penalties, Reporting and

recordkeeping requirements.

33 CFR Part 141

Citizenship and naturalization, Continental shelf, Employment,

Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

33 CFR Part 142

Continental shelf, Marine safety, Occupational safety and health,

Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

33 CFR Part 143

Continental shelf, Fire prevention, Fixed facilities, Lifesaving

equipment, Marine safety, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

33 CFR Part 144

Continental shelf, Fire prevention, Floating facilities, Lifesaving

equipment, Marine safety, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

33 CFR Part 145

Continental shelf, Fire prevention, Lifesaving equipment, Marine

safety, Mobile offshore drilling units, Reporting and recordkeeping

requirements.

33 CFR Part 146

Continental shelf, Fire prevention, Lifesaving equipment, Marine

safety, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Vessels.

33 CFR Part 147

Continental shelf, Marine safety, Navigation.

For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard proposes

to revise 33 CFR chapter I, subchapter N, as follows:

SUBCHAPTER N--OUTER CONTINENTAL SHELF ACTIVITIES

PART 140--OUTER CONTINENTAL SHELF ACTIVITIES: GENERAL

Subpart A--General

Sec.

140.1 What is the purpose of this subchapter?

140.5 What and who does this subchapter apply to?

140.10 What does this subchapter not do?

140.15 Who administers and enforces this subchapter?

140.20 What OCS units also have to meet Minerals Management Service

regulations?

140.25 How are terms used in this subchapter defined?

140.30 How can I get a copy of a publication referenced in this

subchapter?

140.35 What is the Coast Guard publication for equipment type

approval and where can I obtain it?

140.40 How may I appeal an action or decision of the OCMI or

District Commander?

140.45 What is the procedure for judicial review?

140.50 What are the penalties for noncompliance with these

regulations?

140.55 How are penalty cases processed?

140.60 To rectify emergencies, can the person in charge use actions

not in the regulations?

Subpart B--Inspections

140.100 Are all OCS units subject to Coast Guard inspection?

140.105 What review, drills, and inspection procedures should I

prepare for?

140.110 For a foreign OCS unit, what certificates will the Coast

Guard recognize?

140.115 For a fixed facility, who conducts the initial inspection?

140.120 For a fixed facility, what are the requirements for annual

self-inspection?

140.125 For a fixed facility, what form must I use for the annual

self-inspection results, and when must I send it to the Coast Guard?

140.130 What must I do with defective lifesaving and fire-fighting

equipment?

140.135 What is the procedure to correct a deficiency or hazard

discovered during a Coast Guard inspection?

140.140 For a fixed facility, what procedures must I follow to

correct a deficiency or hazard discovered during annual self-

inspection?

140.145 What action will the Coast Guard take if I do not correct a

deficiency or hazard?

Subpart C--Investigations

140.200 What OCS activity incidents will the Coast Guard

investigate?

140.205 What investigation procedures will the Coast Guard follow?

140.210 To what extent does the Minerals Management Service

participate in Coast Guard investigations?

140.215 Are investigation reports made available to the public?

140.220 What subpoena powers does the Coast Guard investigating

officer have?

Authority: 43 U.S.C. 1333(d)(1), 1348(c), 1356; 49 CFR 1.46.

Subpart A--General

Sec. 140.1 What is the purpose of this subchapter?

The purpose of this subchapter is to--

(a) Promote safety of life and property and protect the marine

environment on the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS); and

(b) Implement the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (43 U.S.C. 1331

et seq.), as amended.

Sec. 140.5 What and who does this subchapter apply to?

(a) This subchapter applies to OCS units (i.e., fixed facilities;

floating facilities; mobile offshore drilling units (MODU's); mobile

inland drilling units (MIDU's); and vessels, including, but not limited

to, pipelay barges, derrick barges, offshore supply vessels, and

oceanographic research vessels) that are on the OCS for the purposes of

engaging in OCS activities, as the term ``OCS activity'' is defined in

Sec. 140.25.

(b) Unless otherwise specified, the owner or operator of an OCS

unit must ensure that the requirements of this subchapter are complied

with on that unit.

Sec. 140.10 What does this subchapter not do?

This subchapter does not do the following:

(a) Regulate drilling or production equipment on any OCS unit.

Drilling and production equipment are regulated by the Minerals

Management Service under 30 CFR part 250.

(b) Establish design requirements for fixed facilities, except--

(1) For requirements relating to navigation or workplace safety or

health; and

(2) For requirements relating to accommodation spaces,

accommodation modules, temporary accommodation modules, accommodation

modules that are part of a drilling/workover rig package, lifesaving

equipment, structural fire protection, and fire-protection equipment.

Sec. 140.15 Who administers and enforces this subchapter?

The Officer in Charge, Marine Inspection, (OCMI) is responsible for

enforcing this subchapter within that OCMI's marine safety zone. The

OCMI may delegate this authority as necessary.

[[Page 68449]]

Sec. 140.20 What OCS units also have to meet Minerals Management

Service regulations?

(a) Each facility, MODU, and MIDU, when in contact with the seabed

of the OCS, must meet the requirements of this subchapter, the

regulations and orders of the Minerals Management Service (MMS),

including those under 30 CFR part 250, and other MMS regulations and

orders that are applicable to facilities, MODU's, and MIDU's for

exploration or exploitation of subsea resources.

(b) If you find a conflict between the requirements of the Coast

Guard and MMS, you should notify the OCMI.

Sec. 140.25 How are terms used in this subchapter defined?

(a) Quotation marks around terms in this section mean that those

terms are defined in this section.

(b) As used in this subchapter--

Accommodation module means a module with one or more

``accommodation space'' that is individually contracted for and may be

used on one or more ``facility''. The term does not include ``temporary

accommodation module'' and ``accommodation module that is part of a

drilling/workover rig package.''

Accommodation module that is part of a drilling/workover rig

package means a module with one or more ``accommodation space'' that is

individually contracted for, that may be used on one or more ``fixed

facility'' or ``floating facility'' and that is used as part of a

``drilling/workover rig package.'' The term does not include

``accommodation module'' and ``temporary accommodation module.''

Accommodation space means living quarters, including sleeping,

mess, medical treatment, recreational, toilet, washing, shower, and

office spaces, and corridors serving living quarters.

Act means the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act of 1953 (43 U.S.C.

1331 et seq.), as amended.

Approval series means the first six digits of a number assigned by

the Coast Guard to approved equipment. Where approval is based on a

subpart of 46 CFR chapter I, subchapter Q, the approval series

corresponds to the number of the subpart. A listing of approved

equipment, including all of the approval series, is published

periodically by the Coast Guard in Equipment Lists (COMDTINST M16714.3

series), available from Commandant (G-MSE), 2100 Second Street SW.,

U.S. Coast Guard, Washington, DC 20593-0001.

Approved means approved by the ``Commandant.'' See Sec. 140.35.

Attending vessel means a ``vessel'' that is moored close to and

readily accessible from an ``OCS unit'' for the purpose of providing

power, fuel, or other services to the operation being conducted on the

unit.

Bloodborne pathogens means pathogenic microorganisms that are

present in human blood and can cause disease in humans. These pathogens

include, but are not limited to, hepatitis B virus (HBV) and human

immunodeficiency virus (HIV).

Commandant means Commandant of the Coast Guard or that individual's

authorized representative.

Development means those activities that take place following

discovery of ``minerals'' in paying quantities, including, but not

limited to, geophysical activity, drilling, and ``facility''

construction, and that are for the purpose of ultimately producing the

``minerals'' discovered.

District Commander means an officer who commands a Coast Guard

District described in part 3 of this chapter or that individual's

authorized representative.

Drilling/workover rig package means a modular group of moveable

components, including tanks, accommodation modules, and equipment for

hoisting, rotating, pumping, and power generation, that is designed for

engaging in drilling and workover operations supporting ``exploration''

or exploitation of ``mineral'' resources from a ``facility'' ``MODU,''

or ``MIDU.''

Exploration means the process of searching for ``minerals,''

including, but not limited to--

(1) Geophysical surveys where magnetic, gravity, seismic, or other

systems are used to detect or imply the presence of the ``minerals;''

and

(2) Any drilling, whether on or off of known geological structures,

including the drilling of a well in which a discovery of oil or natural

gas in paying quantities is made and the drilling of any additional

delineation well after the discovery which is needed to delineate any

reservoir and to enable the lessee to determine whether to proceed with

development and production.

Facility means--

(1) An installation or other device that is fixed or floating, is

permanently or temporarily attached to the subsoil or seabed of the

``Outer Continental Shelf,'' and is erected for the purpose of

``exploration,'' ``development,'' or ``production'' of resources from

the subsoil or seabed, or

(2) An installation or other device (other than a ``vessel'') that

is erected for the purpose of transporting those resources. The term

includes ``fixed facilities'' and ``floating facilities.'' The term

does not include ``mobile offshore drilling units,'' ``mobile inland

drilling units,'' ``vessels,'' pipelines, or deepwater ports (as the

term ``deepwater port'' is defined in 33 U.S.C. 1502).

Fixed facility means a bottom founded ``facility'' permanently

attached to the seabed or subsoil of the ``OCS.'' The term includes,

but is not limited to, artificial islands, platforms, guyed towers, and

articulated gravity platforms.

Floating facility means a buoyant ``facility'' that is securely and

substantially moored so that it cannot be moved without a special

effort. The term includes, but is not limited to--

(1) ``Tension leg platforms,'' ``floating production systems,''

``floating production storage and off loading systems,'' and ``spar

buoys'' that are site-specific and not intended for periodic relocation

and

(2) Permanently moored semisubmersibles or shipshape hulls. The

term does not include ``mobile offshore drilling units,'' ``mobile

inland drilling units,'' and ``vessels.''

Floating production system or FPS means a ``floating facility''

that produces hydrocarbons from the well and processes them on board

but does not store them within its hull or directly offload them to

another vessel.

Floating production storage and offloading system or FPSO means a

``floating facility'' that produces hydrocarbons from the well,

processes them on board, stores the processed products within its hull,

and has the capability to offload them directly to another vessel.

Foreign, as used in the terms foreign floating facility, foreign

MODU, and foreign vessel, means a ``floating facility,'' ``MODU'', or

``vessel'' that is registered, documented, or certificated under the

laws of a nation other than the United States.

Free-fall launching means the method of launching a survival craft

whereby the craft, with its full complement of persons and equipment on

board, is released and allowed to fall into the sea without any

restraining apparatus.

Fuel cell means an electrochemical device that uses a continuous

flow of fuel and oxidant to convert a chemical into electrical energy

via an isothermal process.

Hazardous material means a substance or material that, under normal

conditions of use or in an emergency, poses a physical hazard or a

health risk to persons in the workplace.

Helicopter fuel containment area means the area around a helicopter

fuel

[[Page 68450]]

storage tank, fuel transfer pump, and fuel hose reel that is designed

to contain fuel in the event of a leak or spill.

Immersion suit means an insulated, buoyant suit approved under 46

CFR part 160, subpart 160.171, worn to prevent shock upon entering cold

water and to lessen the chances of incurring hypothermia.

Inflatable means having non-rigid chambers that are capable of

being inflated with a gas but that are normally uninflated until ready

for use.

Investigating officer means an individual assigned by the

``Commandant,'' a ``District Commander,'' or an ``Officer in Charge,

Marine Inspection,'' to conduct an investigation of an accident,

casualty, or other incident.

Lifejacket means a flotation device approved under Sec. 143.845 as

a life preserver or lifejacket.

Lifesaving equipment means a device, such as a ``survival craft,''

``lifejacket,'' ``ring life buoy,'' ``rescue boat,'' ``immersion

suit,'' or first aid kit, designed to protect persons or enhance their

chance of survival and includes the component parts of the device and

its accessories, such as launching equipment and oars.

Major conversion, of a ``fixed facility'' or a ``floating

facility,'' means a conversion of the ``facility'' that, as determined

by the ``Commandant,''--

(1) Substantially changes the dimensions of the ``facility;''

(2) If a ``fixed facility,'' substantially changes the water depth

capability of the ``facility;''

(3) If a ``floating facility,'' substantially changes the carrying

capacity of the ``facility;''

(4) Changes the type of ``facility;''

(5) Substantially prolongs the life of the ``facility;'' or

(6) Otherwise so changes the ``facility'' that it is essentially a

new ``facility.''

Manned facility means a ``facility'' on which at least one person

occupies an ``accommodation space'' for more than 30 accumulative days

in any successive 12-month period.

Marine evacuation system means an appliance designed to rapidly

transfer a large number of people from an embarkation station by means

of a passage to a floating platform for subsequent transfer to a

``survival craft.''

Marine inspector means an individual designated as such by an

``Officer in Charge, Marine Inspection,'' to perform inspections of OCS

units to determine whether or not the requirements of Coast Guard

regulations or laws administered by the Coast Guard are met.

Minerals includes oil, gas, sulfur, geopressured-geothermal and

associated resources, and all other ``minerals'' that are authorized by

an Act of Congress to be produced from public lands, as the term

``public lands'' is defined in section 103 of the Federal Lands Policy

and Management Act of 1976 (43 U.S.C. 1702(e)).

Mobile inland drilling unit or MIDU means a ``vessel,'' other than

a ``mobile offshore drilling unit'' or a public vessel of the United

States, that is capable of engaging in drilling operations for

``exploration'' or exploitation of subsea resources and is designed and

intended for use in U.S. State waters, rivers, inland lakes, bays, or

sounds.

Mobile offshore drilling unit or MODU means a ``vessel,'' other

than a ``mobile inland drilling unit'' or public vessel of the United

States, that is capable of engaging in drilling operations for

``exploration'' or exploitation of subsea resources.

Naturally occurring radioactive material or NORM means a nuclide

that is radioactive in its natural physical state (i.e., not man-made)

and that may occur during an ``OCS activity'' not expressly designed to

produce radiation.

Novel lifesaving appliance or arrangement means one that has new

features not fully covered by this subchapter but providing an equal or

higher standard of safety.

OCS activity means any activity that occurs on the ``Outer

Continental Shelf'' and is associated with the ``exploration'' for, or

``development'' or ``production'' of, ``minerals.''

OCS unit means a ``fixed facility,'' ``floating facility,''

``MODU,'' ``MIDU,'' or ``vessel'' engaged in ``OCS activities.''

Officer in Charge, Marine Inspection, or OCMI means an individual

who commands a Marine Inspection Zone described in part 3 of this

chapter and who is immediately responsible for the performance of

duties with respect to inspections, enforcement, and administration of

regulations governing ``OCS units.''

On-load/off-load release mechanism means a release mechanism that

is designed to release a lifeboat when the load is off the hook, but

not release the lifeboat when the hook is under load unless the safety

mechanism is purposely overridden.

Operator means--

(1) For a ``vessel,'' a charterer by demise or other person who is

responsible for the operation, manning, and supplying of the

``vessel;'' or

(2) For a ``facility,'' ``MODU,'' or ``MIDU,'' the operator as

defined in 30 CFR 250.2(gg).

Outer Continental Shelf or OCS means all submerged lands lying

seaward and outside of the area of lands beneath navigable waters (as

the term ``lands beneath navigable waters'' is defined in section 2(a)

of the Submerged Lands Act (43 U.S.C. 1301(a)) and of which the subsoil

and seabed appertain to the United States and are subject to its

jurisdiction and control.

Owner means a person holding title to or, in the absence of title,

other evidence of ownership of an ``OCS unit.'' However, the term does

not include a person who holds evidence of ownership primarily to

protect a security interest in, and who does not participate in the

management or operation of, the ``OCS unit.''

Paint locker means an enclosed space that is used primarily for the

storage of paint and paint accessories but may be used for the storage

of other flammable or combustible liquids, gases, or solids.

Person means an individual, association, partnership, consortium,

joint venture, government entity, or private, public, or municipal firm

or corporation.

Person in charge means the master or other individual designated as

such by the ``owner'' or ``operator'' under Secs. 143.100 or 146.100 of

this chapter or 46 CFR 109.107.

Personnel means individuals who are employed by lease holders,

permit holders, ``operators,'' ``owners,'' contractors, or

subcontractors and who are on an ``OCS unit'' by reason of their

employment.

Personnel transfer net means a net or device used for the transfer

of ``personnel'' between ``OCS units.''

Platform hydrocarbon source means a wellhead or process equipment

and pipeline risers that contain produced hydrocarbons.

Primary means of escape means a fixed stairway, or fixed ladder, of

steel or equivalent construction, used in evacuating a ``facility.''

Production means those activities that take place after the

successful completion by the removal of ``minerals,'' including, but

not limited to, the removal, field operations, transfer of ``minerals''

to shore by pipeline, operation monitoring, and well workover

activities.

Radiation includes alpha particles, beta particles, gamma rays, X-

rays, neutrons, high-speed electrons, high-speed protons, and other

atomic particles. The term does not include sound or radio waves or

visible, infrared, or ultra-violet light.

Rebuilt means having had substantial alteration or reconstruction

of the hull or principal structural component.

[[Page 68451]]

Registered architect means an individual who meets the statutory

registration requirements through established Board Rules and

Regulations of the State in which the individual has sought

registration.

Rescue boat means a boat intended for use in rescuing persons from

the water and to marshal ``survival craft.''

Ring life buoy means a ring-shaped flotation device intended to be

thrown from an ``OCS unit'' to rescue personnel from the water.

Secondary means of escape means a ``marine evacuation system,'' a

portable flexible ladder, a knotted man rope, or a similar device

determined by the ``Officer in Charge, Marine Inspection,'' to provide

a means for evacuating a ``facility'' that is equivalent to or better

than these devices.

Service space means a space used for a galley, pantry containing

cooking appliances, storeroom, or workshop other than those in

industrial areas and trunks to those spaces.

Sleeping space means a space provided with bunks for sleeping.

Spar buoy means a ``floating facility'' that is held in place by a

permanent mooring system, has a center of gravity below its center of

buoyancy, and has a deep and narrow underwater shape designed to reduce

vessel motions and excursions.

Standby vessel means a ``vessel'' meeting the requirements of part

146, subpart F, of this chapter and specifically designated in an

Emergency Evacuation Plan under part 143, subpart D, Sec. 144.205(b),

or Sec. 145.115 of this chapter to rapidly evacuate ``personnel'' in an

emergency.

Survival capsule means a lifeboat whose waterplane shape is a

circle or an ellipse.

Survival craft means a craft capable of sustaining the lives of

persons in distress after abandoning an OCS unit. The term includes

lifeboats, life rafts, life floats, and ``survival capsules'' but does

not include rescue boats, unless the ``rescue boats'' are also approved

as lifeboats.

Systems fire protection means structural fire protection items and

other items from the Life Safety Code, National Fire Protection

Association (NFPA) 101.

Temporary accommodation module means a module with one or more

``accommodation spaces'' that is individually contracted for, that may

be used on one or more ``facilities'' and that is intended for use on a

``facility'' for short periods of time, not to exceed 12 months. The

term does not include ``accommodation modules'' and ``accommodation

modules that are part of drilling/workover rig packages.''

Tension leg platform or TLP means a ``floating facility'' that is

held in place by tendons that facilitate a large buoyancy force to be

used to provide reduced vessel motions and excursions.

Unmanned facility means a ``facility'' that is not a ``manned

facility'' even though an ``attending vessel'' may continuously service

it.

U.S., as used in the terms U.S. floating facility, U.S. MODU, or

U.S. vessel, means a ``floating facility,'' ``MODU,'' or ``vessel''

that is registered, documented, or certificated under the laws of the

United States or that is not registered, documented, or certificated

under the laws of any nation.

Vessel means every description of watercraft or other artificial

contrivance used, or capable of being used, as a means of

transportation on water.

Sec. 140.30 How can I get a copy of a publication referenced in this

subchapter?

(a) Certain material is incorporated by reference into this

subchapter with the approval of the Director of the Federal Register

under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. To enforce any edition other

than that specified in paragraph (b) of this section, the Coast Guard

must publish notice of change in the Federal Register; and the material

must be available to the public. All approved material is available for

inspection at the Office of the Federal Register, 800 North Capitol

Street NW., suite 700, Washington, DC, and at the U.S. Coast Guard,

Office of Operating and Environmental Standards, 2100 Second Street

SW., Washington, DC 20593-0001, and is available from the sources

mentioned in paragraph (b).

(b) The material approved for incorporation by reference in this

subchapter, and the sections affected, are as follows:

American Industrial Hygienists Association (AIHA)

2700 Prosperity Avenue, Suite 250, Fairfax, VA 22031 or at http://

www.aiha.org/pubs.html.

AIHA publication ``Respiratory Protection--A Manual and Guideline''

163-PC-91 (1991)--142.152

American National Standards Institute (ANSI)

11 West 42nd Street, New York, NY 10036 or on the Internet at

http://www.ansi.org.

ANSI A10.11-1989 (R1998), Safety Nets Used During Construction,

Repair, and Demolition Operations--142.165

ANSI A14.3-1992, Ladders--Fixed--Safety Requirements--143.1341

ANSI S1.13-1995, Measurement of Sound Pressure Levels in Air--

142.235

ANSI 12.36-1990 (R1997), Survey Methods for the Determination of

Sound Power Levels of Noise Sources--142.235

ANSI S12.6-1997, Methods for Measuring the Real-Ear Attenuation of

Hearing Protectors--142.135

ANSI Z359.1-1992, Safety Requirements for Personal Fall Arrest

Systems, Subsystems, and Components--142.156; 142.157

ANSI Z41-1991, Personal Protection-Protective Footwear--142.130

ANSI Z87.1-1989, Practice for Occupational and Educational Eye and

Face Protection--142.115

ANSI Z88.2-1992, Respiratory Protection--142.150; 142.151; 142.152

ANSI Z89.1-1997, Industrial Head Protection--142.125; 143.1035

American Petroleum Institute (API)

Order Desk, 1220 L Street, NW., Washington, DC, 20005-4070 or on

the Internet at http://www.api.org.

API RP 2FPS, Planning, Designing and Constructing Floating

Production Systems--144.705; 144.710

API RP 2T, Planning, Designing, and Constructing Tension Leg

Platforms, Second Edition, August 1997 (ANSI/API RP 2T-1997)--144.710

API RP 14C, Analysis, Design, Installation and Testing of Basic

Surface Safety Systems for Offshore Production Platforms, Sixth

Edition, March 1998--143.1050

API RP 14F, Design and Installation of Electrical Systems for

Offshore Production Platforms, Third Edition, September 1991 (ANSI/API

RP14F-1993)--143.1335; 143.1336

API RP 14G, Fire Prevention and Control on Open Type Offshore

Production Platforms, Third Edition, December 1993--143.1050; 143.1055

API RP 54, Occupational Safety and Health for Oil and Gas Well

Drilling and Servicing Operations, and Servicing Operations, Second

Edition, May 1, 1992--142.265

API RP 500, Recommended Practice for Classification of Locations

for Electrical Installations at Petroleum Facilities Classified as

Class I, Division 1 and Division 2, Second Edition, November 1997

(ANSI/API RP 500-1998)--143.1336

API RP T-1, Orientation Programs for Personnel Going Offshore for

the First Time, Fourth Edition, October 1995--143.515

API RP T-4, Training of Offshore

[[Page 68452]]

Personnel in Nonoperating Emergencies, Second Edition, November 1995--

143.515

API RP T-7, Training of Personnel in Rescue of Persons in Water,

Second Edition, October 1995. 143.515

American Society for Testing Materials (ASTM)

100 Barr Harbor Drive, West Conshohocken, PA 19428-2959.

ASTM E 1529, Standard Test Methods for Determining the Effects of

Large Hydrocarbon Pool Fires on Structural Members and Assemblies--

143.1115

International Maritime Organization (IMO)

IMO Sales, New York Nautical Instrument and Service Corp., 140 W.

Broadway, New York, NY 10013.

IMO Resolution A.414(XI), Code for Construction and Equipment of

Mobile Offshore Drilling Units, 1979--144.1020; 145.105; 145.205;

145.305; 145.410

IMO Resolution A.468(XII), Code on Noise Levels On Board Ships,

1981--142.235

IMO Resolution A.520(13), Code of Practice for the Evaluation,

Testing and Acceptance of Prototype Novel Lifesaving Appliances and

Arrangements, 1983--143.45; 144.50

IMO Resolution A.649(16), Code for the Construction and Equipment

of Mobile Offshore Drilling Units, 1989--144.1005; 144.1020; 145.105;

145.205; 45.305; 145.410

IMO Resolution A.658(16), Use and Fitting of Retro-Reflective

Materials on Lifesaving Appliances, dated 20 November 1989--143.845;

143.850; 143.877

National Fire Protection Association (NFPA)

Secretary, Standards Council, National Fire Protection Association,

1 Batterymarch Park, Quincy, MA 02269-9101.

National Electrical Code (NEC), 1996 Edition--143.1336

NFPA 72, National Fire Alarm Code, 1996 Edition--

143.1050

NFPA 101, Life Safety Code, 1997 Edition--140.25;

143.1115

NFPA 306, Standard for the Control of Gas Hazards on Vessels, 1997

Edition--142.331; 142.335; 142.351; 142.352; 142.371

National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH)

Department of Health and Human Services, 200 Independence Avenue,

SW., Washington, DC 20201.

NIOSH publication No. 87-116, ``Guide to Industrial Respiratory

Protection'' (1987)--142.152

Public Health Service, Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS)

Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office,

Washington, DC 20402.

DHHS Publication No. (PHS) 84-2024, ``The Ship's Medicine Chest and

Medical Aid at Sea,'' revised 1984--143.135

Sec. 140.35 What is the Coast Guard publication for equipment type

approval and where can I obtain it?

(a) Where equipment in this subchapter is required to be of an

approved type, the equipment requires the specific approval of the

Commandant. Approvals are published in COMDTINST M16714.3 (Series),

Equipment List, available from Commandant (G-MSE), 2100 Second Street

SW., U.S. Coast Guard, Washington, DC 20593-0001.

(b) Specifications for certain items required to be of an approved

type are contained in 46 CFR parts 160 through 164.

Sec. 140.40 How may I appeal an action or decision of the OCMI or

District Commander?

(a) Any person directly affected by an action or decision of the

OCMI under the Act or the regulations in this subchapter may request

reconsideration of that action or decision. If still dissatisfied, that

person may appeal the action or decision of the OCMI within 30 days to

the District Commander of the District in which the action was taken or

the decision made. The District Commander issues a decision after

reviewing the appeal submitted under this paragraph.

(b) Any person not satisfied with the decision of a District

Commander may appeal that decision within 30 days to the Commandant,

who issues a ruling after reviewing the appeal submitted under this

paragraph. Rulings of the Commandant constitute final agency action.

(c) An appeal to the District Commander or Commandant--

(1) Must be made in writing, except in an emergency when an oral

appeal may be accepted;

(2) Must be submitted to the District Commander of the District in

which the action was taken or the decision made;

(3) Must describe the decision or action being appealed;

(4) Must state the reason(s) why the action or decision should be

set aside or modified; and

(5) May contain any supporting document(s) and evidence that the

appellant wishes to have considered.

(d) Pending determination of any appeal, the action or decision

appealed remains in effect, unless suspended by the District Commander

to whom the appeal was made or by the Commandant.

Sec. 140.45 What is the procedure for judicial review?

(a) Nothing in this subchapter may be construed to prevent any

interested party from seeking judicial review as authorized by law.

(b) Judicial review of the regulations in this subchapter, or any

final ruling or order of the Commandant or that person's delegate under

the Act or the regulations in this subchapter, is governed by the

judicial review provisions of section 23 of the Act (43 U.S.C. 1349).

Sec. 140.50 What are the penalties for noncompliance?

(a) Any person who fails to comply with one of the following, after

notice of the failure and after expiration of any reasonable period

allowed for corrective action, is liable for a civil penalty of not

more than $10,000 for each day the failure continues:

(1) Any provision of the Act.

(2) Any regulation in this subchapter.

(3) Any order issued under the Act or this subchapter by the

Commandant, a District Commander, or an OCMI.

(b) Any person who knowingly and willfully commits one of the

following will, upon conviction, be subject to a fine of not more than

$100,000, imprisonment for not more than 10 years, or both:

(1) Violates any provision of the Act.

(2) Violates any regulation in this subchapter designed to protect

health, safety, or the environment.

(3) Violates any order of the Commandant, District Commander, or

OCMI issued under the Act or this subchapter that is designed to

protect health, safety, or the environment.

(4) Makes any false statement, representation, or certification in

any application, record, report, or other document filed or required to

be maintained under the Act or this subchapter.

(5) Falsifies, tampers with, or renders inaccurate any monitoring

device or method of record required to be maintained under this Act or

this subchapter.

(6) Reveals any data or information required to be kept

confidential by the Act.

(c) Each of the following is a separate violation under paragraph

(b) of this section:

[[Page 68453]]

(1) Each day that a violation under paragraph (b)(1), (b)(2), or

(b)(3) continues.

(2) Each day that any monitoring device or data recorder remains

inoperative or inaccurate because of any activity described in

paragraph (b)(5).

(d) Whenever a corporation or other entity is subject to

prosecution under paragraph (b), any officer or agent of the

corporation or entity who knowingly and willfully authorized, ordered,

or carried out the prescribed activity is subject to the same fines,

imprisonment, or both, as provided for under paragraph (b).

(e) The penalties in this section are concurrent and cumulative.

The exercise of one penalty does not preclude the exercise of the

others. Furthermore, the penalties in this section are in addition to

other penalties, if any, under other laws or regulations.

Sec. 140.55 How are penalty cases processed?

Apparent violations of this subchapter are processed under part 1,

subpart 1.07, of this chapter on civil and criminal penalty

proceedings, except as follows:

(a) The District Commander refers a civil penalty case to the

Secretary of the Interior, or that person's delegate, who, under the

Act, assesses, collects, and compromises civil penalties.

(b) If a possible violation investigated by the Coast Guard carries

both a civil and a criminal penalty, the District Commander determines

whether to refer the case to the U.S. Attorney for criminal prosecution

or to the Secretary of the Interior, or that person's delegate, for

civil penalty proceedings.

(c) When the U.S. Attorney declines to institute criminal

proceedings, the District Commander decides whether to refer the case

to the Secretary of the Interior, or that person's delegate, for civil

penalty proceedings or to close the case.

Sec. 140.60 To rectify emergencies, can the person in charge use

actions not in the regulations?

In the event of an emergency, the person in charge may take any

action necessary to resolve the emergency, even though the action may

not comply with the regulations in this subchapter.

Subpart B--Inspections

Sec. 140.100 Are all OCS units subject to Coast Guard inspection?

(a) Yes. Each OCS unit is subject to inspection by the Coast Guard.

(b) Under the direction of the OCMI, marine inspectors may inspect

OCS units to determine whether the requirements of this subchapter are

met. A marine inspector may inspect, with or without advance notice, at

any time deemed necessary by the OCMI.

Sec. 140.105 What review, drills, and inspection procedures should I

prepare for?

A marine inspector may review records and may require and observe

the conduct of an emergency drill and other test or procedure to

demonstrate that the OCS unit and its equipment are in compliance with

applicable Coast Guard regulations. The marine inspector consults with

the person in charge of the unit before requiring a drill or other test

or procedure to minimize disruption of the unit activities and risk to

life or property.

Sec. 140.110 For a foreign OCS unit, what certificates will the Coast

Guard recognize?

For the inspection of foreign OCS units, the Coast Guard recognizes

valid international certificates accepted by the United States,

including Safety of Life at Sea (SOLAS), Loadline, and IMO MODU Code

certificates for matters covered by the certificates, unless there is

clear indication that the condition of the OCS unit or its equipment

does not correspond substantially with the particulars of the

certificate. These deficiencies must be corrected to the satisfaction

of the marine inspector.

Sec. 140.115 For a fixed facility, who conducts the initial

inspection?

Coast Guard marine inspectors conduct an initial inspection of each

fixed facility to determine whether the facility is in compliance with

the requirements of this subchapter.

Sec. 140.120 For a fixed facility, what are the requirements for

annual self-inspection?

(a) The owner or operator of each fixed facility must ensure that

the facility is inspected, at intervals of 12 months, to determine

whether the facility is in compliance with the requirements of this

subchapter. The inspection may be conducted within 2 months before to 2

months after the date the inspection is due. However, the inspection is

credited as of 12 months after the previous due date.

(b) Except for initial inspections under Sec. 140.115, unannounced

inspections by Coast Guard marine inspectors do not meet the

requirements for an inspection under paragraph (a) of this section.

Sec. 140.125 For a fixed facility, what form must I use for the annual

self-inspection results, and when must I send it to the Coast Guard?

Except for initial inspections under Sec. 140.115, you must record

the results of the inspection on Form CG-5432 ``Fixed OCS Facility

Inspection Report.'' You may obtain a Form CG-5432 from the OCMI. The

owner or operator must submit the completed Form CG-5432 to the OCMI

within 30 days after completion of the inspection.

Sec. 140.130 What must I do with defective lifesaving and fire-

fighting equipment?

You must, in the presence of the Coast Guard inspector, mutilate or

make unusable any lifesaving and fire-fighting equipment that, in the

opinion of the inspector, is defective or damaged beyond repair. If you

discover defective lifesaving and fire-fighting equipment when an

inspector is not present, mutilate it in the presence of the person

making the determination that it is defective or beyond repair, remove

it from the OCS unit, replace it with non-defective equipment, and

notify the OCMI on Form CG-5432.

Sec. 140.135 What is the procedure to correct a deficiency or hazard

discovered during a Coast Guard inspection?

The Coast Guard marine inspector reports any deficiency or hazard

discovered during an inspection to the OCS unit's owner or operator.

The owner or operator must correct each deficiency or hazard as soon as

practicable and within the time specified by the Coast Guard marine

inspector for each item.

Sec. 140.140 For a fixed facility, what procedures must I follow to

correct a deficiency or hazard discovered during annual self-

inspection?

(a) You must correct or eliminate each deficiency or hazard

discovered during an inspection of a fixed facility under Sec. 140.120.

If practicable, correct or eliminate all possible items before you

submit Form CG-5432 to the OCMI. Be sure that any items not corrected

or eliminated are clearly marked ``outstanding'' on the form.

(b) The owner or operator must contact the OCMI to request a time

period for the repair of any lifesaving and fire-fighting equipment

marked ``outstanding'' on Form CG-5432. Include in the comment section

of Form CG-5432, a description of the deficiency and the time period

for repair or correction specified by the OCMI.

(c) Upon receipt of a Form CG-5432 with a deficiency or hazard

outstanding, the OCMI sends a letter to the owner or operator

identifying each deficiency or hazard and specifying the time period to

correct or eliminate them.

[[Page 68454]]

Sec. 140.145 What action will the Coast Guard take if I do not correct

a deficiency or hazard?

The OCMI initiates appropriate enforcement measures if a deficiency

or hazard remains outstanding after the time specified for its

correction.

Subpart C--Investigations

Sec. 140.200 What OCS activity incidents will the Coast Guard

investigate?

Under the direction of the OCMI, investigating officers investigate

the following incidents resulting from OCS activities:

(a) Death.

(b) Injury resulting in substantial impairment of any body part or

bodily function.

(c) Fire causing death, serious injury, or property damage

exceeding $100,000.

(d) Oil spillage creating a sludge, sheen, or emulsion on or

beneath the water.

(e) Other injuries, casualties, accidents, complaints of unsafe

working conditions, fires, pollution, and incidents occurring as a

result of OCS activities as the OCMI deems necessary to promote the

safety of life or property or to protect the marine environment.

Sec. 140.205 What investigation procedures will the Coast Guard

follow?

As far as practicable, investigations conducted under this

subchapter must follow the procedures of 46 CFR part 4.

Sec. 140.210 To what extent does the Minerals Management Service

participate in Coast Guard investigations?

Representatives of the Minerals Management Service may participate

in investigations under this subchapter. This participation may

include, but is not limited to--

(a) Participating in a joint on-scene investigatio

This text is long and has been trimmed here. Open the source document for the complete record.