96-17013. Leasing of Sulphur or Oil and Gas in the Outer Continental Shelf  

  • [Federal Register Volume 61, Number 129 (Wednesday, July 3, 1996)]
    [Rules and Regulations]
    [Pages 34730-34732]
    From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
    [FR Doc No: 96-17013]
    
    
    =======================================================================
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
    
    Minerals Management Service
    
    30 CFR Part 256
    
    RIN 1010-AC18
    
    
    Leasing of Sulphur or Oil and Gas in the Outer Continental Shelf
    
    AGENCY: Minerals Management Service (MMS), Interior.
    
    ACTION: Final rule.
    
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    SUMMARY: This rule amends the regulations of MMS to allow the 
    authorized officer to extend the 90-day time period within which we 
    must accept or reject the high bids received on Outer Continental Shelf 
    (OCS) tracts offered for sale. Unforeseen circumstances including a 
    flood, a furlough, and an extremely high bid response may create a need 
    for more time to evaluate bids. The rule gives the authorized officer 
    authority to extend the time period for 15 working days or longer, 
    beyond 90 days after the date on which the bids are opened, when 
    circumstances warrant.
    
    EFFECTIVE DATE: This rule is effective July 18, 1996.
    
    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
    Dr. Marshall Rose, Chief, Economic Evaluation Branch, telephone (703) 
    787-1536.
    
    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The time to accept or reject bids is 
    established under the regulations at 30 CFR 256.47. The authorized 
    officer must accept or reject the high bids within 90 days after the 
    bid opening, except for tracts or blocks identified by the Secretary of 
    the Interior as subject to:
        (1) Another nations's claims of jurisdiction and control which 
    conflict with the claims of the United States, or
        (2) Defense-related activities that may be incompatible with 
    mineral exploration/development activities. Any bid not accepted within 
    that period is deemed rejected.
        In the Central Gulf of Mexico Sale 157, held April 24, 1996, we 
    received 1,381 bids on 924 tracts, 632 of which passed to Phase 2 for 
    detailed reviews. This unprecedented response by industry in Sale 157 
    resulted from the enactment of the Outer Continental Shelf Deep Water 
    Royalty Relief Act (Pub. L. 104-58, DWRRA) and other factors, such as 
    higher natural gas and oil prices. Consequently, MMS is unable to 
    conduct and complete the entire bid review process within the 90 days, 
    i.e., by July 22, 1996. If we do not modify the timing restriction 
    before the 90 days expire for Sale 157, dozens of high bids received on 
    tracts offered in that sale may be rejected because of our inability to 
    complete the statutorily mandated review for fair market value. 
    Therefore, in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(3)(B), this rule is 
    effective July 18, 1996. It is in the public interest to ensure that 
    adequate time is available to give all high bids a full and appropriate 
    review and to ensure the receipt of fair market value.
        The 90-day period was established in 1982 because of the change 
    from nomination to areawide sales and from presale to postsale 
    evaluations. Since then, MMS has held mainly areawide sales. The DWRRA 
    amended the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act and defined a new bidding 
    system which provides for royalty suspensions. The deep water incentive 
    law did not amend the requirement that we receive fair market value for 
    tracts leased. Any lease sale held before November 28, 2000, must use 
    the new bidding system for all tracts located in water depths of 200 
    meters or more in the Gulf of Mexico west of 87 degrees, 30 minutes 
    west longitude. The large number of bids received in response to the 
    new statutory requirements resulted in an increased workload which we 
    expect will exceed our ability to complete the bid review process 
    within 90 days as required by 30 CFR 256.47(e)(2).
        This rule allows the authorized officer authority to extend the 
    time period for 15 working days or longer when circumstances warrant. 
    Recent examples include floods and furloughs; however, other 
    circumstances such as an excessive unanticipated workload may arise 
    which could warrant the need for a longer time for bid evaluation.
        This rule addresses a housekeeping issue and will enable us to 
    adjust the bid acceptance/rejection time period to meet changing 
    conditions. It recognizes that 90 days may not be enough time to 
    complete the review process, which would result in the rejection of the 
    high bids which we fail to evaluate within 90 days. This would result 
    in fewer leases being issued because of failure to complete the bid 
    review process within time and resource constraints. The Government may 
    receive less bonus and rental monies.
        Today, without authority to extend the bid review period, the 1982 
    90-day rule is arbitrarily too rigid and may not allow sufficient time 
    given the current complexities inherent in evaluating certain tracts. 
    It is in the public interest to ensure that adequate time is available 
    to give all high bids a full and appropriate review, to ensure the 
    receipt of fair market value, and ultimately to increase natural gas 
    and oil supplies.
        This rulemaking finalizes the rule, with one substantive 
    modification, as originally proposed and published in the Federal 
    Register (61 FR 24466, May 15, 1996). Seven respondents--a trade 
    organization and six companies--submitted comments on the proposed rule 
    during the public comment period. The MMS reviewed and analyzed the 
    comments. The following is a discussion of the comments received and 
    our response.
    
    Narrative Responses to Comments
    
        Comment: Although MMS now pays interest on the one-fifth bonus held 
    during the evaluation period, industry must set aside the four-fifths 
    of the bonus and first year rental to pay for the lease when and if 
    awarded. Delays in rejecting a lease may cause a company to miss 
    participating in a significant opportunity elsewhere. Delays in 
    awarding leases can cause delays in planning further seismic 
    evaluation, hazard surveys, rig commitment, and budgeting of wells. On 
    the other hand, industry does not want the retention of the 90-day 
    period to result in the rejection of the high bids because MMS does not 
    have sufficient time to evaluate them.
        Response: We realize that any extension beyond the 90 days could 
    result in some missed opportunities and impact exploration and 
    development activities, but MMS must fulfill its duty to obtain fair 
    market value for offshore leased tracts. Because we accept tracts 
    sequentially during the bid review period, on only a small portion of 
    tracts will MMS require more than 90 days to
    
    [[Page 34731]]
    
    complete the evaluation. We plan to extend the bid review period only 
    when circumstances beyond our control arise, such as weather 
    conditions, furloughs, or an unusually large number of unanticipated 
    tracts receiving bids causing disruptions in our workload. We would 
    rather ensure that adequate time is available to give all high bids a 
    full and appropriate review, than have to reject high bids for 
    insufficient time to evaluate, which could be the case without this 
    rule. To accommodate the concern to keep the review time extension as 
    short as possible, MMS has reduced the minimum extension time from 30 
    days as proposed to 15 working days in the final rule.
        Comment: The ``authorized officer'' should not be allowed authority 
    to extend the time period for more than 30 days. This extension of time 
    should only apply to the evaluation of Sale 157 bids and should not be 
    for additional time caused by a change in the bid adequacy procedures, 
    for example, elimination of the 3-bid rule.
        Response: Our recent experience with floods and furloughs, which 
    resulted in extensions of the bid review period for 14 and 9 days each, 
    would indicate that it is unlikely that the authorized officer will 
    extend the time period for more than 15 working days. As a result, we 
    have modified the proposed 30 days to 15 working days. However, in 
    those rare circumstances that may arise which could warrant a longer 
    time for bid evaluation, this rule gives the authorized officer the 
    flexibility to respond appropriately and in the public interest. With 
    respect to Sale 157, more than three times the normal number of tracts 
    went to Phase 2 for further evaluation, only a small percentage of 
    which was attributable to the elimination of the 3-bid rule. The 
    excessive workload burden is a result primarily of industry competition 
    and bidding in Sale 157 and not a change in the bid adequacy 
    procedures.
        Comment: The fact that a tract is covered by the DWRRA should not 
    be a factor in evaluating the high bid on that tract.
        Response: The MMS must fulfill its duty to obtain fair market value 
    for offshore leased tracts. The fact that a tract may benefit from the 
    DWRRA will normally cause the bidders to adjust their bids accordingly. 
    Therefore, any bid review procedure should take this effect into 
    consideration as well.
        Comment: The regulation and the notice granting the extension 
    should make clear the event or circumstances which require the 
    extension.
        Response: Based on past experience, the rule does not list all 
    possible reasons, or combination of reasons, that could trigger an 
    extension. Examples of circumstances that might apply are: Inclement 
    weather that results in closing the office; damage to the building 
    (e.g., explosion, fire, or water); lack of electrical power; etc. Any 
    announcement of an extension beyond the 90-day period will include the 
    reasons warranting the extension.
        Comment: An extension to accept or reject the high bids is 
    acceptable provided the additional time is warranted, and the sale 
    schedule in the Central and Western Gulf of Mexico is not seriously 
    affected. The alternative of rejecting high bids not evaluated because 
    of insufficient time does not serve the best interest of the companies 
    or the Government.
        Response: We, like the companies, do not want to extend the bid 
    review period any more than absolutely necessary because MMS wants to 
    continue to meet our sales schedule. We also realize that companies 
    might delay exploration and development decisions because considerable 
    amounts of financial resources, which could be better employed 
    elsewhere, are tied up during this period. Any extensions should be for 
    the minimum time warranted and affect a small number of tracts.
        Comment: The 90-day period would be sufficient if MMS limited its 
    evaluation efforts in Phase 2 to those tracts where there is current 
    activity or new production offsetting a tract receiving bids.
        Response: Because we are required to receive fair value for all 
    tracts leased, the existing bid adequacy procedures do not limit Phase 
    2 evaluation efforts only to those tracts where there is current 
    activity or new production offsetting a tract receiving bids. The rule 
    recognizes that more than 90 days may be needed to complete the 
    process. We will continue to review our procedures and, based on 
    knowledge gained from experience in lease sales, may identify 
    modifications which might reduce the length of the bid review period.
        Author: This document was prepared by Mary Vavrina, Offshore 
    Resource Evaluation Division, MMS.
    
    Executive Order (E.O.) 12866
    
        This rule does not meet the criteria for a significant rule 
    requiring review by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under 
    E.O. 12866.
    
    Regulatory Flexibility Act
    
        The Department of the Interior (DOI) has determined that this rule 
    will not have a significant economic effect on a substantial number of 
    small entities. Any direct effects of this rulemaking will primarily 
    affect the lessees and operators--entities that are not, by definition, 
    small due to the technical complexities and financial resources 
    necessary to conduct OCS activities. Small entities are more likely to 
    operate onshore or in State waters--areas not covered by this rule. The 
    indirect effect of this rulemaking on small entities that provide 
    support for offshore activities has also been determined to be small. 
    When small entities work on the OCS, they are more likely to be 
    contractors rather than lessees. While these contractors must follow 
    the rules governing OCS operations, we are not changing the rules that 
    govern actual operations on a lease. We are only modifying the rules 
    governing the actual acceptance or rejection of a high bid for a lease.
    
    Paperwork Reduction Act
    
        The rule has been examined under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 
    1995 and has been found to contain no new reporting and information 
    collection requirements.
    
    Takings Implication Assessment
    
        The DOI certifies that this rule does not represent a governmental 
    action capable of interference with constitutionally protected property 
    rights. A Takings Implication Assessment prepared under E.O. 12630, 
    Government Action and Interference with Constitutionally Protected 
    Property Rights, is not required.
    
    E.O. 12988
    
        The DOI has certified to OMB that the rule meets the applicable 
    reform standards provided in Section 3(b)(2) of E.O. 12988.
    
    National Environmental Policy Act
    
        The DOI has determined that this rule does not constitute a major 
    Federal action significantly affecting the quality of the human 
    environment; therefore, an environmental impact statement is not 
    required.
    
    Unfunded Mandate Reform Act of 1995
    
        The DOI has determined and certifies according to the Unfunded 
    Mandates Reform Act, 2 U.S.C. 1502 et seq., that this rule will not 
    impose a cost of $100 million or more in any given year on local, 
    tribal, or State governments or the private sector.
    
    List of Subjects in 30 CFR Part 256
    
        Administrative practices and procedures, Continental shelf, 
    Government contracts, Incorporation by reference, Oil and gas 
    exploration,
    
    [[Page 34732]]
    
    Public lands--mineral resources, Reporting and recordkeeping 
    requirements, Surety bonds.
    
        Dated: June 27, 1996.
    Sylvia V. Baca,
    Assistant Secretary, Land and Minerals Management.
    
        For the reasons set forth in the preamble, we amend 30 CFR part 256 
    as follows:
    
    PART 256--LEASING OF SULPHUR OR OIL AND GAS IN THE OUTER 
    CONTINENTAL SHELF
    
        1. The Authority citation for part 256 continues to read as 
    follows:
    
        Authority: 43 U.S.C. 1331 et seq.
    
        2. Section 256.47(e)(2) is revised to read as follows:
    
    
    Sec. 256.47  Award of leases.
    
    * * * * *
        (e) * * *
        (2) The authorized officer must accept or reject the bid within 90 
    days. The authorized officer may extend the time period for acceptance 
    or rejection of a bid for 15 working days or longer, if circumstances 
    warrant. Any bid not accepted within the prescribed time period, 
    including any extension thereof, is deemed rejected.
    * * * * *
    [FR Doc. 96-17013 Filed 7-2-96; 8:45 am]
    BILLING CODE 4310-MR-M
    
    
    

Document Information

Effective Date:
7/18/1996
Published:
07/03/1996
Department:
Minerals Management Service
Entry Type:
Rule
Action:
Final rule.
Document Number:
96-17013
Dates:
This rule is effective July 18, 1996.
Pages:
34730-34732 (3 pages)
RINs:
1010-AC18: Extension of the Bid Acceptance/Rejection Period in the Final Notice of Sale
RIN Links:
https://www.federalregister.gov/regulations/1010-AC18/extension-of-the-bid-acceptance-rejection-period-in-the-final-notice-of-sale
PDF File:
96-17013.pdf
CFR: (1)
30 CFR 256.47