Pursuant to OCSLA (43 U.S.C. 1340) and 30 CFR 250.203, an Exploration Plan (EP) and its supporting information must be submitted for approval to MMS before an operator may begin exploratory drilling on a lease. The EP describes all exploration activities planned by the operator for a specific lease(s), the timing of these activities, information concerning drilling vessels, the location of each well, and other relevant information. A revised plan is a revision to an approved plan that proposes changes such as surface location, type of drilling unit, or location of the onshore support base. A supplemental plan constitutes a revision to an approved plan that proposes the addition of an activity that requires a permit. An amended plan is any revision to a plan pending approval. Each of these types of plans need contain only information related to or affected by the proposed revision.

The revised rule provides for submission of supporting information for MMS and State CZM evaluation as outlined in 30 CFR 250.203(b)(1) through (21). The operator may limit the amount of information submitted to that listed in the LTL dated October 12, 1988, as amended by the LTL dated September 5, 1989. Environmental reports are not considered part of the plan. This was intended in part to eliminate unnecessary duplication. The MMS can require modification of a plan based on inadequate or inaccurate supporting information.

The supporting information provides an analysis of both offshore and onshore impacts that may occur as a result of implementation of the plan. In accordance with the CZMA, as amended, EP's requiring State review must contain a certification of consistency with approved CZM programs of States that could be affected by the exploration activities. States with approved programs may take up to 6 months for consistency reviews but must agree with or request an extension within 3 months after receipt of the EP. In the Gulf of Mexico, Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, and Florida have federally approved CZM programs. The guidelines and environmental information requirements for lessees and operators submitting an EP are discussed further in Section I.B.3.d.(1)(e).

The MMS prepares a Categorical Exclusion Review (CER), Environmental Assessment (EA), or Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) based on available information, which may include the geophysical report (for determining the potential for the presence of deepwater benthic communities), archaeological report (30 CFR 250.203(b)(15)), air emissions data, live-bottom survey/report (30 CFR 250.203(b)(12)), biological monitoring plan (30 CFR 250.203(b)(16)), and recommendations by the affected State(s), the Department of Defense (DOD), U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) (for selected plans under provisions of a DOI agreement), National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), and/or internal MMS offices. The MMS evaluates the proposed activity for potential impacts relative to geohazards and manmade hazards (including existing pipelines), archaeological resources, endangered species, sensitive biological features, water and air quality, oil-spill response, and other uses (e.g., military operations) of the OCS.

A CER is prepared for certain postlease activities in the WPA and CPA in accordance with 516 DM 2, Appendix 1, and 516 DM 6, Appendix 10. The criteria used to determine which actions are to be excluded from the NEPA process are as follows: (1) the action or group of actions would have no significant effect on the quality of the human environment, and (2) the action or group of actions would not involve unresolved conflicts concerning alternative uses of available resources.

If the CER determines that the proposed action is an exception to the categorical exclusions as listed in 516 DM 2, Appendix 2, then the preparation of an EA is required. An EA may also be prepared on any action at any time in order to assist in planning and decisionmaking (516 DM 3.2.B) or under extraordinary circumstances (516 DM 2.4). An EA is routinely prepared for selected environmentally sensitive areas (e.g., for activities proposed within the 4-Mile Zone of the Flower Garden Banks lease blocks) and for proposed activities considered environmentally sensitive (e.g., new or unusual technology, or pipeline rights-of-way to shore).

If the EA indicates that approval of the plan would constitute a major Federal action significantly affecting the human environment, that an existing EIS is not current, or that there is no EIS addressing the type of action under consideration, an EIS must be prepared. The EA would also identify appropriate mitigation for impacts of the proposal.

On the basis of the CER, EA, or EIS findings, and the plan completeness review, the EP would be approved or disapproved, or modification of the plan would be required of the operator.

Development and Production Plans

Pursuant to OCSLA (43 U.S.C. 1351) and 30 CFR 250.204, a development and production plan and its supporting information must be submitted for approval to MMS before an operator may begin development or production activities. Development and production plans as defined by 30 CFR 250.204(d)(1) are not required for leases in the CPA and WPA. Instead, to ensure conformance with the OCSLA, other laws, applicable regulations, and lease provisions and to enable MMS to carry out its functions and responsibilities, the operator must prepare and submit to MMS a Development Operations Coordination Document (DOCD) and, as required, supporting environmental information, archaeological report, biological report (monitoring and/or live-bottom survey), or other environmental data determined necessary before any development and production activity is conducted on a lease in the Western Gulf. A DOCD shall be considered a development and production plan for the purpose of any references in any law, regulation, lease provision, agreement, or other document referring to the preparation or submission of a plan. The plan describes a schedule of development activities, platforms, or other facilities including environmental monitoring features and other relevant information. Refer to Section I.B.3.d.(1)(a) for a discussion of plan revisions. The revised rule provides for submission of supporting information for MMS and State CZM evaluation as outlined in 30 CFR 250.204(b) through (u). As with EP's, MMS can require modification of a plan based on inadequate or inaccurate supporting information.

After receiving a DOCD, MMS prepares either a CER, EA, and/or EIS as discussed in Section I.B.3.d.(1)(a) above. As part of the review process, the DOCD and supporting environmental information, as required, are sent to the affected State(s) having an approved CZM plan for consistency certification review and determination. The OCSLA (43 U.S.C. 1345(a)) provides for coordination and consultation with the affected State and local governments concerning a development plan. The guidelines and environmental information requirements for lessees and operators submitting a DOCD are addressed in NTL 86-09 and are discussed further in Section I.B.3.d.(1)(e). On the basis of the CER, EA, or EIS findings and the plan completeness review, the plan would be approved or disapproved, or modification of the plan would be required of the operator.

After plan approval, the operator submits for approval specific applications to MMS, such as those for pipelines and platforms, to conduct activities described in the plan.

Oil Spill Contingency Plans

Pursuant to 30 CFR 250.203, 30 CFR 250.204, and 30 CFR 254, a lessee is required to submit an Oil Spill Contingency Plan (OSCP) to MMS for approval when or prior to submitting an EP or DOCD. In order to facilitate this requirement in the Gulf of Mexico OCS Region, an operator may submit a regional plan covering all of their Gulf OCS operations. The approved regional OSCP is then referenced when EP's or DOCD's are submitted. Additionally, certain site-specific, oil-spill-response information is required to accompany a plan when a regional OSCP is referenced. An operator may elect to include or the MMS may require inclusion of a site-specific OSCP in an EP or DOCD when the approved regional OSCP does not provide adequate oil-spill protection. All regional and site-specific OSCP's are required to be reviewed and updated annually, and all modifications of an OSCP are submitted to MMS for approval. Guidelines outlined in the February 1, 1989, and September 5, 1989, LTL's were developed to aid Gulf OCS operators in the preparation of OSCP's. An LTL dated November 4, 1991, advises that lessees may use the trajectory analysis found in the most recent final EIS for the identification of spill impact zones for oil-spill information accompanying plans. Effective December 1, 1992, an OSCP is required for all right-of-way pipelines (NTL 92-04 dated July 1, 1992). The OSCP assures that a full response capability exists and is available for commitment in the event of an oil spill. Such a commitment includes specification of appropriate equipment and materials, their availability and deployment time, and provisions for varying degrees of response effort, depending on the severity of the spill. See Appendix D for additional information on oil-spill planning. The MMS developed an interim final rule at 30 CFR 254, effective February 18, 1993, establishing requirements for spill-response plans for offshore facilities including associated pipelines. This rule implements the requirement under the Oil Pollution Act of 1990 (OPA) that makes MMS responsible for reviewing and approving spill response plans submitted for both Federal and State offshore areas. The MMS interim rule expires February 18, 1995, allowing time for the completion of the final rule.

The MMS currently requires a comprehensive oil spill contingency plan for lessees operating on the OCS. The interim rule requires owners or operators currently in compliance with MMS regulations at 30 CFR 254 to submit new documentation for facilities located on the OCS.

Those lessees/operators with MMS-approved OSCP's for facilities on the OCS may now expand these plans under the interim rule to include facilities in State waters within the same geographic area. Owners and operators of facilities in State waters with plans approved by the State are required to submit to MMS a copy of the plan and information pertaining to the approval.

The Environmental Protection and Response Plan outlines the availability of spill containment and cleanup equipment and trained personnel. It must assure that full response capability can be deployed during an oil-spill emergency. The plan includes specification for appropriate equipment and materials, their availability, and the time needed for deployment. The plan must also include provisions for varying degrees of response effort, depending on the severity of a spill. The OPA requires that spill-response plans identify and ensure the availability of private personnel and equipment necessary to respond to a worst case discharge. For purposes of the MMS interim rule, MMS is considering a continuous spill for a facility to be a worst case discharge. This is consistent with the MMS requirements for OSCP's at 30 CFR 254.

Hydrogen Sulfide Contingency Plans

Pursuant to 30 CFR 250.203, 30 CFR 250.204, and 30 CFR 250.417, the operator of a lease requests that MMS make a determination regarding the presence of hydrogen sulfide (H2S) gas. The MMS classifies an area of proposed operations as (1) a zone known to contain H2S, (2) a zone where the presence of H2S is unknown, or (3) a zone where the absence of H2S has been confirmed. An H2S Contingency Plan must be submitted for approval prior to conducting operations on a lease when the H2S classification meets the criteria of (1) or (2) and must include contingencies for simultaneous drilling, well-completion, well-workover, and production operations. Pursuant to the LTL dated September 5, 1989, each EP or DOCD must contain a request for a determination for one of the three classifications and a discussion of the basis for the recommendation. The lessee must take all necessary and practicable precautions to protect personnel from the toxic effects of H2S and to mitigate the adverse effects of H2S to property and the environment.

Environmental Information

Pursuant to 30 CFR 250.203 and 250.204, specific environmental information, as discussed in Sections I, II, and IV of NTL 86-09 and as prepared in accordance with guidelines in Sections II.A., II.B., or III. of the enclosure to NTL 86-09, is required for leases in the Gulf of Mexico for CZM purposes. It should be noted that the term "environmental report" as used in NTL 86-09 is synonymous with the term "environmental information" required by the LTL dated October 12, 1988. Under the CZMA, each State that has an approved CZM plan has the option to require information that is different than that specifically outlined in 30 CFR 250.203 and CFR 250.204 for inclusion in the plan. Refer to Section I.B.3.d.(1)(h) for a discussion of the Gulf Region's procedures for CZM consistency for plans. A State CZM agency is required to ensure timely public notice of their receipt of each OCS plan that has been submitted to them for their CZM consistency determination [15 CFR 930.78(b) and 15 CFR 930.84(a)]. The States of Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, and Florida have approved CZM programs. With the exception of Florida, operators submit abbreviated environmental information for CZM purposes. Requirements for both the abbreviated format required for the States of Alabama, Louisiana, and Mississippi and the long-form format required for activity determined to affect the State of Florida are given in the LTL dated October 12, 1988 (NTL 86-09 incorporated therein by reference). The operating regulations recognize the possible significance of proposed modifications to approved plans and provide for CZM agency review of modifications.

Additional environmental information may also be required for plans/activities in the Western Gulf of Mexico for the following: (1) areas of high seismic risk or seismicity and relatively untested deepwater and remote areas; (2) areas proposed or established as a marine sanctuary and/or near the boundary of a proposed or established wildlife refuge or areas of high ecological sensitivity (e.g., East and West Flower Garden Banks); (3) areas of potentially hazardous natural bottom conditions; or (4) the use of new or unusual technology, when the additional information is required to evaluate impacts. Environmental information requirements will be determined on a case-by-case basis for plans meeting any of the four categories, with the exception of plans submitted that propose activities within the restrictive zones of the Flower Garden Banks. The Guidelines enclosure of NTL 86-09 outlines the information requirements for activities proposed within the 4-mile zone of the Flower Garden Banks. The LTL dated January 31, 1989, is used by lessees and operators for blocks requiring photo-documentation surveys of live-bottom areas. Specific information is required for structure-removal applications as outlined in LTL's dated August 19 and December 9, 1986. Archaeological resource protection requirements are outlined in NTL 91-02 dated December 20, 1991, and in an additional letter dated November 30, 1990. The MMS authority to require lessees or operators to conduct archaeological resource surveys and submit reports prior to exploration, development and production or pipeline installation is now outlined by regulation (59 FR 53091-53094) and no longer by lease stipulation. This rulemaking also standardizes the definition and use of the term "archaeological resources" within MMS's regulatory program. The submission of specific supporting information to aid in evaluating the environmental impacts of plans/activities may be required by MMS under 30 CFR 250.33(b)(21) and 30 CFR 250.34(b)(15) in areas of the Central and Western Gulf where either no environmental information is required or an abbreviated format is required for CZM purposes.

Air Emissions Information

The OCSLA (43 U.S.C. 1334(a)(8)) requires the Secretary of the Interior to promulgate and administer regulations that comply with the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) pursuant to the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.) and to the extent that authorized activities significantly affect the air quality of any State. Under provisions of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (USEPA) Administrator, in consultation with the Secretary of the Interior and the Commandant of the Coast Guard, will establish the requirements to control air pollution in OCS areas of the Pacific, Atlantic, Arctic, and eastward of 87o30'W. longitude in the Gulf of Mexico. For OCS sources located within 25 mi of the States' seaward boundaries, the requirements are the same as the requirements that would be applicable if the source were located in the corresponding onshore area. For sources located beyond the 25 mi of the States' boundaries, the sources are subject to Federal requirements for Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) promulgated pursuant to Part C of Title 1 of the Act. The new regulations also establish procedures to allow the USEPA's Administrator to exempt any OCS source from a control technology requirement if it is technically infeasible or poses unreasonable threat to health or safety. For sources located in areas under MMS jurisdiction regulations are promulgated by 30 CFR 250.44, 250.45, and 250.46 and are applicable to postsale activities. The regulated pollutants include carbon monoxide, suspended particulates, sulphur dioxide, nitrogen oxides, total hydrocarbons, and volatile organic compounds. In areas where hydrogen sulfide may be present, operations are regulated by 30 CFR 250.67, as discussed in Section I.B.3.d.(1)(d). Emissions data concerning new or modified onshore facilities (directly associated with offshore activities) are required to enable each affected State to make a determination of the effects on its air quality. Exploration plans and DOCD's address activities that are determined by the Secretary as activities regulated under 30 CFR 250.44, 250.45, and 250.46. All new or supplemental EP's and DOCD's must include air emissions information sufficient to make an air quality determination. The Letter to Lessees dated October 12, 1988, outlines air emissions data that must be submitted by operators to MMS. The Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 also require that MMS conduct and complete a study to assess the potential onshore air quality impacts from the development of OCS petroleum resources in the Gulf of Mexico. The study is scheduled for completion in late 1995. Based on the results of this study the Secretary must consult with the USEPA Administrator and determine if any further actions are necessary.

Archaeological Resources Regulation

The Archaeological Resource Stipulation has been converted to operational regulations under 30 CFR 250.194 and 30 CFR 250.1010(c). The new regulations grant specific authority to each MMS Regional Director to require archaeological resource surveys and reports where deemed necessary. The technical requirements of the archaeological resource surveys that may be required are detailed in the Gulf of Mexico OCS Region NTL 2005-G07.  

The regulation at 30 CFR 250.194 reads as follows:

1. If it is likely that an archaeological resource exists in the lease area, the Regional Director will notify you in writing. You must include an archaeological report in the EP or DOCD. IF the archaeological report suggests that an archaeological resource may be present, you must either:

1. Locate the site of any operation so as not to adversely affect the area where the archaeological resource may be; or
2. Establish to the satisfaction of the Regional Director that an archaeological resource does not exist or will not be adversely affected by operations. This requires further archaeological investigation, conducted by an archaeologist and a geophysicist, using survey equipment and techniques the Regional Director considers appropriate.

2. If the Regional Director determines that an archaeological resource is likely to be present in the lease area and may be adversely affected by operations, the Regional Director will notify you immediately. You must not take any action that may adversely affect the archaeological resource until the Regional Director has told you how to protect the resource.

3. If you discover any archaeological resource while conducting operations in the lease area, you must immediately halt operations within the area of the discovery and report the discovery to the Regional Director. If investigations determine that the resource is significant, the Regional Director will tell you how to protect it.

For pipeline right-of-way holders the regulation at 30 CFR 250.1010(c) reads as follows:

If the right-of-way holder discovers any archaeological resource while conducting operations within the right-of-way, the right-of-way holder shall immediately halt operations within the area of the discovery and report the discovery to the Regional Director.  If investigations determine that the resource is significant, the Regional Director will inform the lessee how to protect it.

Structure Removal

Lessees/operators must submit for approval an application to the MMS for a structure removal and provide information including the following: complete identification of the structure; size of the structure (number and size of legs and pilings); removal technique to be employed (if explosives are to be used, the amount and type of explosive per charge); and the number and size of well conductors to be removed and the removal technique (LTL's dated August 19 and December 9, 1986). Structure-removal requests are reviewed on a case-by-case basis. At present, all structure removals require an environmental assessment by the MMS and if explosives are used, require an Endangered Species Section 7 Consultation with the NMFS. The NMFS issued a "standard" Biological Opinion on July 25, 1988, which covers removal operations that meet specified criteria pertaining to the size of explosive charge used, detonation depth, and number of blasts per structure grouping. The MMS, the NMFS, and lessees are cooperating in an observer/monitoring program to determine the presence of marine mammals and/or sea turtles in the vicinity of the structure removals. Additional information on structure removals is found in Section IV.A.2.a.(4).

The use of explosives to cut offshore oil/gas structure legs/pilings for removal could cause injury or death to protected marine mammals and endangered sea turtles. Although the NMFS has the sole responsibility to enforce protection of the majority of marine mammals in the Gulf, MMS and NMFS have conferred extensively in the development of platform removal precautions and have employed data resulting from equations found in Connor (1991). Regarding "uncertainties concerning the possible effects of structure removals . . .," the NMFS has instituted a comprehensive program to protect sea turtles and cetaceans. The NMFS sends observers to every structure removal where explosives are used. The cumulative informationgathered by observing these removals address the uncertainties about direct mortalities or injuries to marine mammals resulting from these removals (none have been documented since these observations begun in 1986). Since the NMFS protective observer program began in 1986, only one sea turtle is known to have been harmed with certainty. Others have been removed from platforms slated for removal, prior to detonation. If cetaceans are observed in the vicinity of a removal site (they are much more visible and obvious to observers), detonations are postponed until the animals have vacated the area. The NMFS is totally responsible for training observers to their own required level of expertise and believes it would be redundant for MMS personnel to engage in the observer program (Gitschlag, personal communication, 1994). While MMS observers have been on site during removals, none have been employed directly as formal observers, recorders of data, nor in an advisory or decision-making capacity.

Site Clearance

Per MMS operating regulations [30 CFR 250.5(a), 250.112(i), 250.114, 250.143(a), (b), and (c)] and lease agreements (Section 22), all lessees must remove objects and obstructions upon termination of a lease. In 1989, shrimpers complained that sites of previous OCS wells and structures were not properly cleared and obstructions were left that damaged their trawls. In a "partnering" effort, the MMS formed a site clearance committee, composed of representatives of the oil and gas industry, the International Association of Drilling Contractors, local shrimpers, the State of Louisiana, Jefferson Parish, and the MMS, to address inadequacies in site clearance procedures and verification techniques as reported by the shrimping industry. In February 1990, the MMS issued NTL 90-01 to clarify site clearance and site verification requirements for all leases. This NTL required the lessee to submit a procedural plan for site clearance verification. Further, the NTL set forth specific actions required of the lessees to ensure all objects related to their activities were removed following termination of their lease. The NTL addressed single wells, platforms, well caissons, and well protectors, citing specific radii for clearing obstructions. The NTL also established site clearance verification procedures that included trawling the cleared site over 100 percent of the established clearance radii by a licensed shrimper. Lessees were required to file reports on the results of their site clearance activities. Data collected from these site clearance reports resulted in issuance of NTL 90-03 in August 1990. NTL 90-03 superseded NTL 90-01 and further refined the site clearance and site verification procedures and requirements.

Based on approximately two years of data gained from the two NTL's, the site clearance committee recommended additional modifications to the NTL. Issued in May 1992, the current NTL (NTL 92-02) incorporates the committee's recommendations and will serve as the model to formulate changes to MMS regulations.

Coastal Zone Management Consistency Review and Appeals for Plans

Gulf of Mexico OCS Region's Procedures for CZM Consistency

Pursuant to the CZMA, 16 U.S.C. 1451 et. seq. (Section 307), a State with an approved CZM plan reviews certain OCS activities to determine whether they will be conducted in a manner consistent with their approved plan. This review authority is applicable to activities described in detail in any plan for the exploration (EP) or development (DOCD) of any area that has been leased under the OCSLA and that affects any land or water use or natural resource within the State's coastal zone (16 U.S.C. 1456(c)(3)(B)). The MMS may not issue a permit for activities described in a plan unless the State concurs or is conclusively presumed to have concurred that the plan is consistent with its CZM plan (43 U.S.C. 1340(c) and 1351(d); 16 U.S.C. 1456(c)(3)).

In accordance with the requirements of 15 CFR 930.76(b), the MMS Gulf of Mexico OCS Region sends copies of an EP and DOCD--including the consistency certification and other necessary information--to the designated State CZM agency by receipted mail. (See Section I.B.3.d.(1)(e) for a discussion of environmental information requirements for leases in the Gulf of Mexico submitted for CZM purposes.) If no State-agency objection is submitted by the end of the consistency review period, MMS shall presume consistency concurrence by the State (15 CFR 930.79 (a) and (b)). Similar procedures are followed for amended plans.

If a written consistency concurrence is received from the State, the Region may then approve any permit for activities described in the plan in accordance with 15 CFR 930.63(c). The Gulf Region does not impose or enforce additional State conditions when issuing permits. The MMS can require modification of a plan if the operator has agreed to certain requirements requested by the State.

If the Gulf Region receives a written consistency objection from the State containing all the items required in 15 CFR 930.79(c) before the expiration of the review period, the Region will not approve any permit for an activity described in the plan unless (1) the operator amends the plan to accommodate the objection in accordance with 15 CFR 930.83 and concurrence is subsequently received or conclusively presumed; (2) upon appeal, the Secretary of Commerce, in accordance with 15 CFR 930.120, finds that the plan is consistent with the objectives or purposes of the CZMA or is necessary in the interest of national security; or (3) the original objection is declared invalid by the courts.

Coastal Zone Consistency Appeals

A State determination that a proposed activity is not consistent with its approved program must be made within 6 months, and the State must notify the applicant. States often object on the grounds of insufficient information or that the proposal is inconsistent with a mandatory State program requirement. The State objection must describe (1) how the proposed activity will be inconsistent with specific elements of the management program and (2) alternative measures, if they exist, which, if adopted by the applicant, would permit the proposed activity to be conducted in a manner consistent with the management program. Further, the State must inform the applicant of the right of appeal to the Secretary of Commerce (15 CFR 930.64). The applicant has 30 days from receipt of the objection to file a notice of appeal with the Secretary. The applicant may appeal on two independent grounds. First, the applicant may state that the activity furthers the purposes or objectives of the CZMA or, second, that the activity is necessary in the interest of national security. The notice of appeal must be accompanied by a statement in support of the applicant's position, along with supporting data and information. Copies of the notice and supporting material must be sent to relevant Federal and State agencies. An Ex-PartŠ process applies to appeals to the Department of Commerce. The merits of an appeal cannot be discussed unless all parties are present (NOAA, Office of Ocean and Coastal Resources Management (OCRM) exempted). The Secretary may order a public hearing on his own volition or at the request of an interested party. If the Secretary holds a hearing, the NOAA General Counsel or his designee presides as hearing officer. A Federal Register notice is prepared to inform the public of the hearing. The regulations covering the appeals process are found at 15 CFR 930, Subpart H.