Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 116 / Monday, June 18, 2007 / Proposed Rules 33417 

PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS 

DIRECTIVES 

1. The authority citation for part 39 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701. 

§ 39.13 [Amended] 

2. The Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA) amends § 39.13 

by adding the following new 

airworthiness directive (AD): 

LEARJET: Docket No. FAA–2006–25174; 

Directorate Identifier 2005–NM–007–AD. 

Comments Due Date 

(a) The FAA must receive comments on 

this AD action by July 13, 2007. 

Affected ADs 

(b) None. 

Applicability 

(c) This AD applies to Learjet Model 45 

airplanes, certificated in any category; serial 

numbers (S/Ns) 45–002 through 45–302 

inclusive, and S/Ns 45–2001 through 45–

2049 inclusive. 

Unsafe Condition 

(d) This AD results from new and more 

restrictive life limits and inspection intervals 

for certain principal structural elements 

(PSEs). We are issuing this AD to ensure that 

fatigue cracking of various PSEs is detected 

and corrected; such fatigue cracking could 

adversely affect the structural integrity of 

these airplanes. 

Compliance 

(e) You are responsible for having the 

actions required by this AD performed within 

the compliance times specified, unless the 

actions have already been done. 

Note 1: This AD requires revisions to 

certain operator maintenance documents to 

include new inspections. Compliance with 

these inspections is required by 14 CFR 

91.403(c). For airplanes that have been 

previously modified, altered, or repaired in 

the areas addressed by these inspections, the 

operator may not be able to accomplish the 

inspections described in the revisions. In this 

situation, to comply with 14 CFR 91.403(c), 

the operator must request approval for an 

alternative method of compliance (AMOC) 

according to paragraph (g) of this AD. The 

request should include a description of 

changes to the required inspections that will 

ensure the continued damage tolerance of the 

affected structure. The FAA has provided 

guidance for this determination in Advisory 

Circular (AC) 25–1529–1. 

Revise the Airworthiness Limitations 

Section (ALS) 

(f) Within 30 days after the effective date 

of this AD, revise the ALS of the airplane 

maintenance manual (AMM) to include new 

life limits and inspection intervals according 

to a method approved by the Manager, 

Wichita Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), 

FAA. Incorporating the applicable chapters 

in paragraph (f)(1) or (f)(2) of this AD in the 

AMM is one approved method for doing the 

revision. Thereafter, except as provided in 

paragraph (g) of this AD, no alternative life 

limits or inspection intervals may be 

approved for the affected PSEs. 

(1) For Learjet Model 45 airplanes, S/Ns 

45–002 through 45–302 inclusive: Chapter 4 

of the Learjet 45 Maintenance Manual, 

Revision 38, dated April 24, 2006. 

(2) For Learjet Model 45 airplanes, S/Ns 

45–2001 through 45–2049 inclusive: Chapter 

4 of the Learjet 40 Maintenance Manual, 

Revision 6, dated April 24, 2006. 

Note 2: After an operator complies with the 

requirements of paragraph (f) of this AD, that 

paragraph does not require that operators 

subsequently record accomplishment of 

those requirements each time an action is 

accomplished according to that operator’s 

FAA-approved maintenance inspection 

program. 

AMOCs 

(g)(1) The Manager, Wichita ACO, has the 

authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if 

requested in accordance with the procedures 

found in 14 CFR 39.19. 

(2) To request a different method of 

compliance or a different compliance time 

for this AD, follow the procedures in 14 CFR 

39.19. Before using any approved AMOC on 

any airplane to which the AMOC applies, 

notify your appropriate principal inspector 

(PI) in the FAA Flight Standards District 

Office (FSDO), or lacking a PI, your local 

FSDO. 

Issued in Renton, Washington, on June 8, 

2007. 

Stephen P. Boyd, 

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane 

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. E7–11682 Filed 6–15–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Minerals Management Service 

30 CFR Part 251 

RIN 1010–AD41 

Geological and Geophysical (G&G) 

Explorations of the Outer Continental 

Shelf—Changing Proprietary Term of 

Certain Geophysical Information 

AGENCY: Minerals Management Service 

(MMS), Interior. 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The MMS proposes to extend 

the proprietary term of certain 

reprocessed geophysical information 

submitted to MMS under a permit. The 

proposed rule would give up to 5 years 

of additional protection to reprocessed 

vintage geophysical information that 

MMS retained and, under the current 

rule, is subject to release by MMS 25 

years after issuing the germane permit. 

The extension would provide incentives 

to permittees and third parties to 

reprocess, market, or in other ways use 

geophysical information that may not 

otherwise be reprocessed without the 

term extension. 

DATES: Submit comments by August 17, 

2007. The MMS may not fully consider 

comments received after this date. 

Submit comments to the Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB) on the 

information collection burden in this 

proposed rule by July 18, 2007. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments 

on the rulemaking by any of the 

following methods. Please use the 

Regulation Identifier Number (RIN) 

1010–AD41 as an identifier in your 

message. See also Public Availability of 

Comments under Procedural Matters. 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions on the website for 

submitting comments. 

• E-mail MMS at 

rules.comments@mms.gov. Use RIN 

1010–AD41 in the subject line. 

• Fax: 703–787–1546. Identify with 

the RIN, 1010–AD41. 

• Mail or hand-carry comments to the 

Department of the Interior; Minerals 

Management Service; Attention: 

Regulations and Standards Branch 

(RSB); 381 Elden Street, MS–4024; 

Herndon, Virginia 20170–4817. Please 

reference ‘‘Changing Proprietary Term 

of Certain Geophysical Information, 

1010–AD41’’ in your comments and 

include your name and return address. 

• Send comments on the information 

collection in this rule to: Interior Desk 

Officer 1010–0048, Office of 

Management and Budget; 202–395–6566 

(fax); e-mail: oira_docket@omb.eop.gov. 

Please also send a copy to MMS. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

David Zinzer, Geophysicist, Offshore 

Minerals Management, Resource 

Evaluation Division, at (703) 787–1628 

or e-mail david.zinzer@mms.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Summary of Proposed Rulemaking 

The MMS proposes to extend, upon 

successful application to MMS, the 

proprietary term of geophysical 

information that a permittee or third 

party reprocessed 20 or more years after 

MMS issued the germane permit under 

which the originating data were 

collected. The proposed rule gives up to 

5 years of additional protection to 

reprocessed vintage geophysical 

information that MMS retained and, 

under the current rule, is subject to 

release by MMS 25 years after issuing 

the permit. The extension would 

provide incentives to permittees and 

third parties to reprocess, market, or in 


jlentini on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSALS
33418 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 116 / Monday, June 18, 2007 / Proposed Rules 

other ways use geophysical information 

that may not otherwise be reprocessed 

without the term extension. 

Industry Concerns With Previous Final 

Rulemaking 

Final rulemaking at part 251 (71 FR 

16033, March 30, 2006, effective date 

May 1, 2006) modified the start dates of 

proprietary terms for geophysical data 

and information and any derivatives of 

these data and information that MMS 

acquires for retention from permittees 

and third parties. The start dates 

changed from the date of submittal to 

the date of the permit under which the 

originating data were collected, 

retroactive to 1976. 

The International Association of 

Geophysical Contractors (IAGC), in an 

April 21, 2006, letter to Director R.M. 

‘‘Johnnie’’ Burton, mostly objected to 

changes that affect the proprietary term 

for reprocessed geophysical 

information. Before the May 1, 2006, 

rule changes, the derivative reprocessed 

information enjoyed its own new 25- 

year term, starting on the date of its 

submittal to MMS. After the May 1 

changes, reprocessed information 

enjoyed the same 25-year term as the 

original information, starting on the date 

the germane permit was issued. 

An example of IAGC’s concerns is if 

before the May 1, 2006, changes, 

geophysical information derived from 

data collected under a 1985 permit were 

reprocessed and submitted to MMS for 

retention in January 2006, its 

proprietary term would expire in 2031 

(2006 + 25). After the May 1, 2006, rule 

changes, the proprietary term of the 

reprocessed information submitted in 

January 2006, would expire in 2010 

(1985 + 25). If the same information 

were to be submitted in 2011 or later, 

it would be subject to immediate public 

release, since the applicable 25-year 

term would have already expired. 

The IAGC letter also stated that one 

permittee that is actively reprocessing 

vintage geophysical information derived 

from data collected in the Alaska Outer 

Continental Shelf (OCS) concluded that 

the May 1 changes to the rule will cost 

the permittee significant future revenue, 

as repeated global experience 

demonstrates that some clients will just 

wait for the new geophysical 

information to be handed to them for 

free in a short time (after release by 

MMS). Third parties who reprocess 

geophysical information acquired from 

permittees would also lose reprocessing 

investment opportunities for their 

geophysical information. 

MMS Response to Industry Concerns 

The MMS recognizes that industry 

invests significant capital in 

reprocessing geophysical information; 

however, the IAGC letter did not 

document or quantify costs to industry 

directly related to the May 1 changes to 

part 251. Furthermore, MMS rarely 

selects and retains minimally processed 

geophysical information, the type of 

reprocessed geophysical information 

that is of most interest and value to 

industry. 

Permittees commonly offer licenses 

for geophysical information with 

application of only routine editing of 

field tapes and common processing and 

reprocessing techniques. Geophysical 

information at this early stage of the 

processing sequence is the most suitable 

and flexible for subsequent 

reprocessing. Many third parties prefer 

to apply their own advanced processing 

techniques to geophysical information 

licensed from permittees. Permittees 

will also further reprocess the 

information, applying advanced 

algorithms and other techniques, for 

license or sale. 

However, as a matter of practice, 

MMS does not acquire minimally 

reprocessed geophysical information, as 

MMS does not have the capability to 

further process the information using 

advanced techniques. Moreover, MMS 

does not release geophysical 

information it does not acquire for 

retention, including valuable minimally 

processed geophysical information. 

Most geophysical information 

submitted to and retained by MMS was 

reprocessed to or near the final stages of 

the processing sequence. This 

geophysical information is useful for 

viewing and merging with other types of 

information. However, it is basically not 

suitable for further processing and 

consequently of little interest or value to 

industry for that purpose when it is 

released to the public following 

expiration of its proprietary term. 

Furthermore, most reprocessing by 

permittees or third parties occurs in the 

first few years of the 25-year proprietary 

term, not near the end of the term, when 

there is less time to sell, license, or 

otherwise make use of the reprocessed 

information. 

Also cited in the IAGC letter is lost 

opportunity for MMS and the public 

interest to have vintage information 

made available in a format that can be 

meaningful using modern processing 

technologies. Industry submitted similar 

comments on changes put forth in the 

related notice of proposed rulemaking, 

published July 17, 2002 (67 FR 46942), 

which preceded the March 31, 2006, 

final rulemaking. 

In some cases the confidentiality 

period is in effect shortened by more 

than 10 years. In such cases, more than 

40 percent of the time over which one 

would expect to recover the initial 

investment and earn a return will be 

lost. For example, if geophysical 

information from a 1985 permit were 

submitted to MMS in 2002, the 

information would be released in 2027 

(2002 + 25), a total term of protection of 

42 years (1985–2027) under the 

previous rule. It would be released in 

2010 under the current rule, a loss of 17 

years (2027–2010), or 40 percent (17/42) 

of the 42-year term under the previous 

rule. Resetting the start date of the 25- 

year proprietary term to the date the 

permit is issued reduces the economic 

life of new geophysical information, and 

in effect reduces the return on 

investment in future non-exclusive 

seismic programs, stifling healthy 

competition and investment in new 

technologies and innovation. Valueadded derivative products created when 

legacy (vintage) geophysical information 

is reprocessed, applying new technology 

and computer power, are becoming 

increasingly vital to the exploration and 

production process in the Gulf of 

Mexico. 

The MMS notes that before the May 

1, 2006, changes, reprocessed 

geophysical information could have in 

effect up to a 50-year proprietary term 

if it were submitted at the end of the 

initial 25-year term (25-year original 

term + 25-year new term). This would 

be virtually the same as the 50-year term 

for geophysical data and in sharp 

contrast to the proprietary terms for 

geophysical data and information 

submitted under a MMS lease (10 years 

or when the lease expires, whichever is 

sooner), or for geophysical information 

collected on the continental shelves of 

the United Kingdom, Australia, or 

Norway (2 to 10 years). The 25-year 

term, starting on the date of the permit, 

in the 2006 final rule was considered by 

MMS a reasonable amount of time for a 

permittee or third party to receive a fair 

return on investment in acquiring, 

processing, or reprocessing geophysical 

information. 

Proposed Rulemaking Details 

To address industry concerns 

regarding release of geophysical 

information reprocessed near the end of 

its 25-year term, MMS proposes in this 

rule to extend, upon successful 

application to MMS, the proprietary 

term for geophysical information for 

which reprocessing was completed in 

the last 5 years of its initial 25-year 


jlentini on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 116 / Monday, June 18, 2007 / Proposed Rules 33419 

proprietary term, or thereafter. The term 

of geophysical information that was 

processed or reprocessed up to the 20th 

anniversary of the date of the germane 

permit is not affected by this proposed 

rulemaking. 

Permittees and third parties may 

apply to MMS for an extension of the 

proprietary term, starting on the date of 

completion of reprocessing the 

geophysical information. The 

application must include: 

• Name and address of the permittee 

or third party; 

• Product name; 

• Identification of the geophysical 

information-area; 

• Identification of originating permit 

number and date; 

• Description of reprocessing 

performed; 

• Identification of the date of 

completion of reprocessing the 

geophysical information; 

• Certification that the product meets 

the definition of processed geophysical 

information and that all other 

information in the application is 

accurate; and 

• Signature and date. 

If MMS disapproves the application 

for an extension, the Regional Director 

will state the reasons for the denial and 

will advise the applicant of changes 

needed to obtain approval. There will be 

a 1-year grace period, starting on the 

date that the final rule becomes 

effective, to allow permittees and third 

parties sufficient time to meet the above 

requirements and file separate 

applications for each extension. During 

this time, MMS will not release 

geophysical information which was 

reprocessed 20 or more years after MMS 

issued the germane permit. 

After the 1-year grace period, MMS 

will resume releasing eligible 

reprocessed information. Also, in order 

to obtain an extension, permittees and 

third parties must apply for the 

extension within 30 days after the date 

of completion of the reprocessing. If an 

application is not filed, not filed on 

time, or if the application is not 

approved by MMS, the original 25-year 

proprietary term applies to the release 

date of the reprocessed geophysical 

information. 

Procedural Matters 

Public Availability of Comments 

Before including your address, phone 

number, email address, or other 

personal identifying information in your 

comment, you should be aware that 

your entire comment—including your 

personal identifying information—may 

be made publicly available at any time. 

While you can ask us in your comment 

to withhold your personal identifying 

information from public review, we 

cannot guarantee that we will be able to 

do so. 

Regulatory Planning and Review 

(Executive Order (E.O.) 12866) 

This proposed rule is not a significant 

rule as determined by the OMB and is 

not subject to review under E.O. 12866. 

(1) The proposed rule would not have 

an annual effect of $100 million or more 

on the economy. It would not adversely 

affect in a material way the economy, 

productivity, competition, jobs, the 

environment, public health or safety, or 

State, local, or tribal governments or 

communities. 

The MMS estimates that over the first 

5 years after the rule becomes effective, 

revenue generated by licensing or 

selling geophysical information 

reprocessed 20 or more years after MMS 

issued the germane permit and for 

which MMS extended the proprietary 

term, would be in a range from $3 

million to $25 million over the period. 

More revenue would be generated in the 

first year during which there is a 1-year 

grace period to apply for extensions of 

proprietary terms of all eligible 

reprocessed information. In subsequent 

years, applications must be filed within 

30 days of completion of processing. 

The range of estimated values 

depends on the number of lease sales in 

areas where eligible vintage geophysical 

information exists, mostly in the Alaska 

OCS, the amount and quality of 

reprocessed geophysical information, 

and economic factors. MMS assumes 15 

extensions would be approved over the 

5-year period after the final rule is 

effective. 

(2) The proposed rule would not 

create a serious inconsistency or 

otherwise interfere with an action taken 

or planned by another agency. 

(3) The proposed rule would not alter 

the budgetary effects of entitlements, 

grants, user fees or loan programs, or the 

rights or obligations of their recipients. 

(4) The proposed rule would not raise 

novel legal or policy issues. 

Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) 

The Department certifies that this 

proposed rule would not have a 

significant economic effect on a 

substantial number of small entities 

under the RFA (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). 

This proposed rule would extend the 

proprietary term for vintage reprocessed 

geophysical information. The only 

entities affected by this proposed rule 

change are about 10 geophysical 

companies, if still in existence, whose 

reprocessed geophysical information 

being held by MMS may be released 

later than under current regulations. 

The Small Business Administration 

classifies geophysical surveying and 

mapping service companies under the 

North American Industry Classification 

System Code 541360. The criteria for 

determining a small entity for this 

classification code is annual receipts of 

less than $4.5 million. All of the 10 

geophysical companies potentially 

affected by this proposed rule have 

annual receipts greater than $4.5 

million; therefore, this proposed rule 

will not have a significant economic 

effect on a substantial number of small 

entities. 

Your comments are important. The 

Small Business and Agriculture 

Regulatory Enforcement Ombudsman 

and 10 Regional Fairness Boards were 

established to receive comments from 

small businesses about Federal agency 

enforcement actions. The Ombudsman 

will annually evaluate the enforcement 

activities and rate each agency’s 

responsiveness to small business. If you 

wish to comment on the actions of 

MMS, call 1–888–734–3247. You may 

comment to the Small Business 

Administration without fear of 

retaliation. Disciplinary action for 

retaliation by an MMS employee may 

include suspension or termination from 

employment with the DOI. 

Small Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act (SBREFA) 

This proposed rule is not a major rule 

under the SBREFA (5 U.S.C. 804(2)). 

This proposed rule: 

a. Would not have an annual effect on 

the economy of $100 million or more. 

b. Would not cause a major increase 

in costs or prices for consumers, 

individual industries, Federal, State, or 

local government agencies, or 

geographic regions. 

c. Would not have significant adverse 

effects on competition, employment, 

investment, productivity, innovation, or 

the ability of U.S.-based enterprises to 

compete with foreign-based enterprises. 

Leasing on the U.S. Outer Continental 

Shelf (OCS) is limited to residents of the 

U.S. or companies incorporated in the 

U.S. The proposed rule would not 

change that requirement. 

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

(UMRA) 

This proposed rule would not impose 

an unfunded mandate on State, local, or 

tribal governments or the private sector 

of more than $100 million per year. The 

proposed rule would not have a 

significant or unique effect on State, 

local or tribal governments or the 

private sector. A statement containing 


jlentini on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSALS
33420 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 116 / Monday, June 18, 2007 / Proposed Rules 

the information required by the UMRA 

(2 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) is not required. 

This is because the proposal would not 

affect State, local, or tribal governments, 

and the effect on the private sector is 

small. 

Takings Implication Assessment 

(Executive Order 12630) 

This proposed rule is not a 

governmental action capable of 

interference with constitutionally 

protected property rights. Thus, MMS 

did not need to prepare a Takings 

Implication Assessment according to 

E.O. 12630, Governmental Actions and 

Interference with Constitutionally 

Protected Property Rights. 

Federalism (Executive Order 13132) 

With respect to E.O. 13132, this 

proposed rule would not have 

federalism implications. This proposed 

rule would not substantially and 

directly affect the relationship between 

the Federal and State governments. To 

the extent that State and local 

governments have a role in OCS 

activities, this proposed rule would not 

affect that role. 

Civil Justice Reform (Executive Order 

12988) 

With respect to E.O. 12988, The Office 

of the Solicitor has determined that the 

proposed rule does not unduly burden 

the judicial system and does meet the 

requirements of sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) 

of the Order. 

Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) 

This proposed rule contains a 

collection of information that is being 

submitted to OMB for review and 

approval under § 3507(d) of the PRA. As 

part of our continuing effort to reduce 

paperwork and respondent burdens, 

MMS invites the public and other 

Federal agencies to comment on any 

aspect of the reporting and 

recordkeeping burden. If you wish to 

comment on the information collection 

aspects of revised 30 CFR 251, you may 

send your comments directly to OMB 

(see the ADDRESSES section of this 

notice). Please identify your comments 

with 1010–0048. Send a copy of your 

comments to the Regulations and 

Standards Branch, Attn: Comments; 381 

Elden Street, MS–4024; Herndon, 

Virginia 20170–4817. You may obtain a 

copy of our submission to OMB to 

revise and extend the OMB approval for 

1010–0048 by contacting the Bureau’s 

Information Collection Clearance Officer 

at (202) 208–7744. 

The PRA provides that an agency may 

not conduct or sponsor, and a person is 

not required to respond to, a collection 

of information unless it displays a 

currently valid OMB control number. 

OMB is required to make a decision 

concerning the collection of information 

contained in these proposed regulations 

between 30 to 60 days after publication 

of this document in the Federal 

Register. Therefore, a comment to OMB 

is best assured of having its full effect 

if OMB received it by July 18, 2007. 

This does not affect the deadline for the 

public to comment to MMS on the 

proposed regulations. 

The title of the collection of 

information for the rule is ‘‘30 CFR 251, 

Geological and Geophysical (G&G) 

Explorations of the Outer Continental 

Shelf.’’

Respondents for this rulemaking 

include approximately 10 Federal OCS 

permittees. Responses to this collection 

are mandatory and required for a 

benefit. The frequency of reporting is on 

occasion. The proposed new 

requirement allows permittees and third 

parties to apply for an extension of the 

25-year proprietary term within 30 days 

after the date of completion of the 

reprocessing. MMS will protect 

proprietary information according to the 

Freedom of Information Act (5 U.S.C. 

552) and its implementing regulations 

(43 CFR part 2), the Federal Oil and Gas 

Royalty Management Act of 1982 (30 

U.S.C. 1733), and under regulations at 

30 CFR parts 250, 251, and 252. The 

information collection (IC) does not 

include questions of a sensitive nature. 

The collection of information required 

by the current subpart 30 CFR 251 

regulations is approved under OMB 

Control Number 1010–0048 (expiration 

7/31/09). The proposed rule imposes a 

new requirement to the information 

collection for 3 burden hours. Once the 

rulemaking becomes effective, the new 

burden hours will be incorporated into 

the existing information collection. 

Refer to the chart for the current and 

proposed burden. 

Current 30 CFR 251 

proposed 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirement Hour burden 

Average number 

of annual 

responses 

Annual burden 

hours 

Fee 

Form 

251.4(a), (b); 251.5(a), (b), 

(d); 251.6; 251.7.

Apply for permits (form MMS–327) to conduct G&G exploration, including deep stratigraphic tests/revisions 

when necessary.

6 110 Applications .... 660 

110 applications × $1,900 fee = $209,000 

Subtotal 110 responses 660 

$209,000 

General 

251.4(b); 251.5(c), (d); 251.6 File notices to conduct scientific research activities, including notice to MMS prior to beginning and after 

concluding activities.

6 4 Notices ................ 24 

251.6(b) 251.7(b)(5) ............. Notify MMS if specific actions should occur; report archaeological resources. (No instances reported since 

1982.).

1 1 Notice ................. 1 

251.7(c) ................................ Enter into agreement for group participation in test drilling, including publishing summary statement; provide 

MMS copy of notice/list of participants. (No agreements submitted since 1989.).

1 1 Agreement .......... 1 

251.9(c) ................................ Notify MMS to relinquish a permit .................................... 1⁄2 8 Notices ................ 4 


jlentini on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 116 / Monday, June 18, 2007 / Proposed Rules 33421 

Current 30 CFR 251 

proposed 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirement Hour burden 

Average number 

of annual 

responses 

Annual burden 

hours 

251.10(c) .............................. File appeals ....................................................................... Not subject to the PRA. 0 

251.1–251.14 ....................... General departure and alternative compliance requests 

not specifically covered elsewhere in part 251 regulations.

2 1 Request .............. 2 

Permit Form (Form MMS–

327).

Retain G&G data/information for 10 years and make 

available to MMS upon request.

1 100 Recordkeepers 100 

Subtotal 115 responses 132 

Submissions 

251.7 .................................... Submit information on test drilling activities under a permit, including Form MMS–123.Burden included under 1010–0141. 0 

251.7(d) ................................ Submit bond(s) on deep stratigraphic test ....................... Burden included under 30 CFR part 

256 (1010–0006). 

0 

251.8(b), (c) ......................... Submit modifications to, and status/final reports on, activities conducted under a permit.2 55 Respondents × 

4 Reports = 220.

440 

251.11; 251.12 ..................... Notify MMS and submit G&G data information collected 

under a permit and/or processed by permittees or 3rd 

parties, including reports, logs or charts, results analyses, descriptions, etc.

4 50 Submissions ..... 200 

251.14(a) .............................. Submit comments on MMS intent to disclose data/info. 

to the public.

1 1 Comment ............ 1 

251.14(c)(2) ......................... Submit comments on MMS intent to disclose data/info. 

to an independent contractor/agent.

1 1 Comment ............ 1 

251.14(c)(4) ......................... Contractor/agent submits written commitment not to sell, 

trade, license, or disclose data/info. without MMS consent.

1 1 Commitment ....... 1 

Subtotal 273 responses 643 

Requests 

251.8(a) ................................ Request reimbursement for certain costs associated with 

MMS inspections. (No requests in many years. OCS 

Lands Act requires Government reimbursement.).

1 1 Request .............. 1 

251.13 .................................. Request reimbursement for certain costs associated with 

reproducing data/information.

2 50 Submissions ..... 100 

Permit Form (MMS-327); 

251.14(b)(3).

Request extension of time period for permitted activities. 1 50 Extensions ........ 50 

Subtotal 101 responses 151 

Extension 

251.14(b)(1), (2), (5) ............ Permittees and 3rd parties apply for extension for geophysical information within 30 days after reprocessing 

completion date.

1 3 Extensions .......... 3 

Subtotal 3 responses 3 

Total Hour and Fee 

Burden.

........................................................................................... 599 1,586 

602 1,589 

$209,000 Fee 

The MMS specifically solicits 

comments on the following questions: 

(1) Is the collection of information 

necessary for MMS to properly perform 

its functions, and will it be useful? 

(2) Are the estimates of the burden 

hours of the collection reasonable? 

(3) Do you have any suggestions that 

would enhance the quality, clarity, or 

usefulness of the information to be 

collected? 

(4) Is there a way to minimize the 

information collection burden on those 

who are to respond, including the use 

of appropriate automated electronic, 

mechanical, or other forms of 

information technology? 

In addition, the PRA requires agencies 

to estimate the total annual reporting 

and recordkeeping ‘‘non-hour cost’’

burden resulting from the collection of 

information. Other than the cost 

recovery fee listed in current regulations 

at § 251.5, we have not identified any 

other costs, and we solicit your 

comments. For reporting and 

recordkeeping only, your response 

should split the cost estimate into two 

components: (1) Total capital and 


jlentini on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSALS
33422 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 116 / Monday, June 18, 2007 / Proposed Rules 

startup cost component, and (2) annual 

operation, maintenance, and purchase 

of services components. Your estimates 

should consider the costs to generate, 

maintain, disclose or provide the 

information. You should describe the 

methods you use to estimate major cost 

factors including system and technology 

acquisition, expected useful life of 

capital equipment, discount rate(s), and 

the period over which you incur costs. 

Capital and start-up costs include, 

among other items, computers and 

software you purchase to prepare for 

collecting information; monitoring, 

sampling, drilling, and testing 

equipment; and record storage facilities. 

Generally, our estimates should not 

include equipment or services 

purchased: Before October 1, 1995; to 

comply with requirements not 

associated with the information 

collection; for reasons other than to 

provide information or keep records for 

the Government; or as part of customary 

and usual business or private practices. 

National Environmental Policy Act 

(NEPA) of 1969 

This rule does not constitute a major 

Federal action significantly affecting the 

quality of the human environment. 

MMS has analyzed this proposed rule 

under the criteria of the NEPA and 516 

Departmental Manual 6, Appendix 

10.4C(1). MMS completed a Categorical 

Exclusion Review for this action and 

concluded that ‘‘the rulemaking does 

not represent an exception to the 

established criteria for categorical 

exclusion; therefore, preparation of an 

environmental analysis or 

environmental impact statement will 

not be required.’’

Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use 

(Executive Order 13211) 

Executive Order 13211 requires the 

agency to prepare a Statement of Energy 

Effects when it takes a regulatory action 

that is identified as a significant energy 

action. This proposed rule is not a 

significant energy action, and therefore 

would not require a Statement of Energy 

Effects because it: 

a. Is not a significant regulatory action 

under E.O. 12866, 

b. Is not likely to have a significant 

adverse effect on the supply, 

distribution, or use of energy, and 

c. Has not been designated by the 

Administrator of the Office of 

Information and Regulatory Affairs, 

OMB, as a significant energy action. 

Consultation With Indian Tribes 

(Executive Order 13175) 

Under the criteria in E.O. 13175, we 

have evaluated this proposed rule and 

determined that it has no potential 

effects on federally recognized Indian 

tribes. There are no Indian or tribal 

lands in the OCS. 

Clarity of This Regulation 

Executive Order 12866 requires each 

agency to write regulations that are easy 

to understand. MMS invites your 

comments on how to make this 

proposed rule easier to understand, 

including answers to questions such as 

the following: 

(1) Are the requirements in the rule 

clearly stated? 

(2) Does the rule contain technical 

language or jargon that interferes with 

its clarity? 

(3) Does the format of the rule 

(grouping and order of sections, use of 

headings, paragraphing, etc.) aid or 

reduce its clarity? 

(4) Is the description of the proposed 

rule in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION

section of this preamble helpful in 

understanding the rule? What else can 

MMS do to make the rule easier to 

understand? 

Send a copy of any comments that 

concern how MMS could make this rule 

easier to understand to: Office of 

Regulatory Affairs, Department of the 

Interior, Room 7229, 1849 C Street, 

NW., Washington, DC 20240. You may 

also e-mail the comments to this 

address: Exsec@ios.doi.gov. 

List of Subjects in 30 CFR Part 251 

Continental shelf, Freedom of 

information, Oil and gas exploration, 

Public lands—mineral resources, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Research. 

Dated: June 1, 2007. 

C. Stephen Allred, 

Assistant Secretary—Land and Minerals 

Management. 

For the reasons stated in the 

preamble, MMS proposes to amend 30 

CFR part 251 as follows: 

PART 251—GEOLOGICAL AND 

GEOPHYSICAL (G&G) EXPLORATIONS 

OF THE OUTER CONTINENTAL SHELF 

1. The authority citation for part 251 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 43 U.S.C. 1331 et seq., 31 U.S.C. 

9701. 

2. Amend § 251.14 as set forth below: 

A. Revise the introductory text in 

paragraph (b); 

B. Revise the table in paragraph (b)(1); 

C. Redesignate paragraphs (b)(2) and 

(b)(3) as (b)(6) and (b)(7), respectively; 

and 

D. Add new paragraphs (b)(2), (b)(3), 

(b)(4), and (b)(5) to read as follows: 

§ 251.14 Protecting and disclosing data 

and information submitted to MMS under a 

permit. 

* * * * * 

(b) Timetable for release of G&G data 

and information related to oil, gas, and 

sulphur that MMS acquires. Except for 

high-resolution data and information 

released under 30 CFR 250.197(b)(2), 

MMS will release or disclose acquired 

data and information in accordance 

with paragraphs (b)(1) through (b)(7) of 

this section. 

(1) * * * 

If you or a third party submit and MMS retains . . . The Regional Director will release them to the public . . . 

(i) Geological data and information .......................................................... 10 years after MMS issued the permit. 

(ii) Geophysical data ................................................................................. 50 years after MMS issued the permit. 

(iii) Geophysical information reprocessed less than 20 years after MMS 

issued the germane permit.

25 years after MMS issued the permit. 

(iv) Geophysical information reprocessed 20 or more years after MMS 

issued the germane permit.

25 years after MMS issued the permit; or, if you or a third party applied 

for an extension of the proprietary term, 5 years after MMS approved 

the application. 

(2) Permittees and third parties may 

apply to MMS for an extension of the 

25-year proprietary term for geophysical 

information reprocessed 20 or more 

years after MMS issued the germane 

permit. You must submit the 

application to MMS within 30 days after 

completion of the reprocessing, except 

during the initial 1-year grace period as 

provided in paragraph (b)(3) of this 

section. Filing locations are listed in 

§ 251.5(d). Your application must 

include: 

(i) Name and address of the permittee 

or third party; 

(ii) Product name; 


jlentini on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 116 / Monday, June 18, 2007 / Proposed Rules 33423 

(iii) Identification of the geophysical 

information-area; 

(iv) Identification of originating 

permit number and date; 

(v) Description of reprocessing 

performed; 

(vi) Identification of the date of 

completion of reprocessing the 

geophysical information; 

(vii) Certification that the product 

meets the definition of processed 

geophysical information and that all 

other information in the application is 

accurate; and 

(viii) Signature and date. 

(3) There will be a 1-year grace 

period, starting [EFFECTIVE DATE OF 

THE FINAL RULE], to allow permittees 

and third parties sufficient time to meet 

the above requirements and to apply for 

all eligible extensions. During this time, 

MMS will not release geophysical 

information which was reprocessed 20 

or more years after the date that MMS 

issued the germane permit. 

(4) After [DATE 1 YEAR AFTER 

EFFECTIVE DATE OF THE FINAL 

RULE], MMS will resume releasing 

eligible reprocessed information. If an 

application for extension is not filed, 

not filed on time, or not approved by 

MMS, the original 25-year proprietary 

term applies to the release date of the 

reprocessed geophysical information. 

(5) You may apply for multiple 

extensions related to the same permit; 

however, the maximum proprietary 

term for geophysical information is 50 

years after MMS issued the permit. 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 07–2960 Filed 6–15–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4310–MR–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 

SECURITY 

Coast Guard 

33 CFR Part 117 

[CGD07–07–107] 

RIN 1625–AA09 

Drawbridge Operation Regulations; 

Gulf Intracoastal Waterway Mile 131.8, 

Belleair Beach, FL 

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking. 

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to 

temporarily change the drawbridge 

regulation of the Belleair Beach Bridge, 

Gulf Intracoastal Waterway mile 131.8, 

Belleair Beach, Pinellas County, Florida. 

This proposed rule will require this 

drawbridge to open on signal, except 

that from 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. this bridge 

will open on the hour and half-hour. 

This action is necessary for workers 

safety and will assist in expediting the 

construction of the new bridge. 

DATES: Comments and related material 

must reach the Coast Guard on or before 

August 2, 2007. 

ADDRESSES: You may mail comments 

and related material to Commander 

(dpb), Seventh Coast Guard District, 909 

SE 1st Avenue, Room 432, Miami, 

Florida 33131–3050. Commander (dpb) 

maintains the public docket for this 

rulemaking. Comments and material 

received from the public, as well as 

documents indicated in this preamble as 

being available in the docket, will 

become part of this docket and will be 

available for inspection or copying at 

Commander (dpb), Seventh Coast Guard 

District, 909 SE 1st Avenue, Room 432, 

Miami, Florida 33131–3050 between 8 

a.m. and 4:30 p.m., Monday through 

Friday, except Federal holidays. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. 

Michael Lieberum, Seventh Coast Guard 

District, Bridge Branch, telephone 

number 305–415–6744. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Request for Comments 

We encourage 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 [CGD07–07–107], 

indicate the specific section of this 

document to which each comment 

applies, and give the reason for each 

comment. Please submit all comments 

and related material in an unbound 

format, no larger than 81/2 by 11 inches, 

suitable for copying. If you would like 

to know they reached us, 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 a meeting by writing to the Bridge 

Branch, Seventh Coast Guard District 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. 

Background and Purpose 

The existing regulation of the draw 

bridge requires that the Belleair 

Causeway bridge, mile 131.8 at 

Clearwater, shall open on signal; except 

that, from 12 noon to 6 p.m., on 

Saturdays, Sundays, and holidays, the 

draw need open only on the hour, 

quarter hour, half hour, and threequarter hour. 

Due to the construction of a new high 

level fixed Bridge, at Belleair Beach, 

Intracoastal Waterway mile 131.8, 

ECDriver, representing the owner of the 

bridge, has requested that the Coast 

Guard change the current operation of 

the Belleair Beach Drawbridge. The 

drawbridge will be required to open 

twice an hour from 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. In 

addition, the waterway may be 

restricted or closed for short periods to 

allow for construction of the new 

bridge. Exact times and dates of any 

waterway restrictions and closures and 

drawbridge restrictions will be 

published in the Local Notice to 

Mariners and Broadcast Notice to 

Mariners. In cases of emergency, the 

drawbridge will be opened as soon as 

possible. This regulation is necessary for 

workers safety and will assist in 

expediting construction of the new 

bridge. 

Discussion of Proposed Rule 

The draw of the Belleair Beach 

Drawbridge shall open on signal, except 

that from 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. the bridge 

shall open on the hour and half-hour. 

Waterway closures shall be authorized 

by the Captain of the Port, St Petersburg, 

as needed and will be published in the 

Local Notice to Mariners and Broadcast 

Notice to Mariners. The draw shall open 

as soon as possible for the passage of 

tugs with tows, public vessels of the 

United States and vessels in a situation 

where a delay would endanger life or 

property. 

Regulatory Evaluation 

This proposed rule is not a 

‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under 

section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866, 

Regulatory Planning and Review, 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 has not 

reviewed it under that Order. It is not 

‘‘significant’’ under the regulatory 

policies and procedures of the 

Department of Homeland Security. 

We expect the economic impact of 

this proposed rule to be so minimal that 

a full Regulatory Evaluation is 

unnecessary, because the rule will allow 

for scheduled bridge openings of this 

drawbridge and all waterway 

restrictions or closure times will be 

published with adequate time for 

mariners to plan accordingly. 


jlentini on PROD1PC65 with PROPOSALS