1276 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 6 / Monday, January 11, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

List of Subjects in 21 CFR Part 558 

Animal drugs, Animal feeds. 

■ Therefore, under the Federal Food, 

Drug, and Cosmetic Act and under the 

authority delegated to the Commissioner 

of Food and Drugs and redelegated to 

the Center for Veterinary Medicine, 21 

CFR part 558 is amended as follows: 

PART 558—NEW ANIMAL DRUGS FOR 

USE IN ANIMAL FEEDS 

■ 1. The authority citation for 21 CFR 

part 558 continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 21 U.S.C. 360b, 371. 

■ 2. In § 558.500, in paragraph (e)(2), in 

the heading of the first table column, 

remove ‘‘Ractopame’’ and in its place 

add ‘‘Ractopamine’’; and add paragraph 

(e)(2)(xi) to read as follows: 

§ 558.500 Ractopamine. 

* * * * * 

(e) * * * 

(2) Cattle— 

Ractopamine in grams/ton Combination in 

grams/ton Indications for use Limitations Sponsor 

* * * * * * * 

(xi) Not to exceed 800; to provide 

70 to 400 mg/head/day. 

Cattle fed in confinement for 

slaughter: As in paragraph 

(e)(2)(i) of this section. 

Top dress in a minimum of 1.0 lb 

of medicated feed. 

000986 

* * * * * * * 

* * * * * 

Dated: December 31, 2009. 

Bernadette Dunham, 

Director, Center for Veterinary Medicine. 

[FR Doc. 2010–208 Filed 1–8–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4160–01–S 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Minerals Management Service 

30 CFR Part 250 

[Docket ID MMS–2007–OMM–0066] 

RIN 1010–AD45 

Requirements for Subsurface Safety 

Valve Equipment 

AGENCY: Minerals Management Service 

(MMS), Interior. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The MMS is incorporating by 

reference the Eleventh Edition of the 

American Petroleum Institute’s 

Specification for Subsurface Safety 

Valve Equipment (API Spec 14A) into 

its regulations. The MMS is 

incorporating the Eleventh Edition of 

API Spec 14A because it updated the 

design validation and functional testing 

requirements, incorporated new design 

changes, and corrected ambiguous areas 

open to misinterpretation. These 

changes will ensure that lessees and 

operators use the best available and 

safest technologies while operating in 

the Outer Continental Shelf. The rule 

will also require that lessees and 

operators provide supporting design 

verification information for subsurface 

safety valves intended for use in high 

pressure high temperature 

environments. 

DATES: Effective Date: This final rule is 

effective on February 10, 2010. The 

incorporation by reference of the 

publication listed in the regulation is 

approved by the Director of the Federal 

Register as of February 10, 2010. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Wilbon Rhome, Office of Offshore 

Regulatory Programs, Regulations and 

Standards Branch at (703) 787–1587. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The MMS 

uses standards, specifications, and 

recommended practices developed by 

standard-setting organizations and the 

oil and gas industry as a means of 

establishing requirements for activities 

on the OCS. This practice, known as 

incorporation by reference, allows us to 

incorporate the provisions of technical 

standards into the regulations. The legal 

effect of incorporation by reference is 

that the material is treated as if the 

entire document were published in the 

Federal Register. This material, like any 

other properly issued regulation, then 

has the force and effect of law. We hold 

operators/lessees accountable for 

complying with the documents 

incorporated by reference in our 

regulations. We currently incorporate by 

reference 97 private sector consensus 

standards into the offshore operating 

regulations. The regulations at 1 CFR 

part 51 govern how we and other 

Federal agencies incorporate various 

documents by reference. Agencies may 

only incorporate a document by 

reference by publishing the document 

title and affirmation/reaffirmation date 

in the Federal Register. Agencies must 

also gain approval from the Director of 

the Federal Register for each 

publication incorporated by reference. 

Incorporation by reference of a 

document or publication is limited to 

the specific edition, supplement, or 

addendum cited in the regulations. 

This rule adds the following API 

document to those currently 

incorporated by reference in MMS 

regulations: 

ANSI/API Specification 14A, 

Specification for Subsurface Safety 

Valve Equipment, Eleventh Edition, 

October 2005, Effective Date: May 1, 

2006; also available as ISO 10432: 2004, 

Product No. GX14A11. 

The MMS has reviewed this 

document and determined that 

incorporating it into regulations ensures 

that industry uses the best available and 

safest technologies for downhole safety 

valves. 

This final rule updates the 

requirements for subsurface safety 

valves operating in high pressure, high 

temperature (HPHT) environments in 30 

CFR part 250 Subpart A—General and 

Subpart H—Oil and Gas Production 

Safety Systems. Subpart A is amended 

to incorporate by reference ANSI/API 

Specification 14A, Specification for 

Subsurface Safety Valve (SSSV) 

Equipment. The MMS is also adding a 

new section (30 CFR 250.807) to 

Subpart H that identifies additional 

safety valve information requirements 

for HPHT environments. 

The Eleventh Edition of API Spec. 

14A contains significant technological 

and design changes that will increase 

the safety of downhole operations in the 

Outer Continental Shelf (OCS). The 

updated API Spec. 14A is an 

improvement over the current API Spec. 

14A, Tenth Edition, incorporated in the 

regulations because it does the 

following: 

• Strengthens the guidelines for 

preparation of a functional specification 

by the user/purchaser to submit to the 

manufacturer/supplier when ordering 

equipment addressed by this standard. 

Functional characteristics in the 

specification must include, but are not 

limited to, well parameters, operational 

parameters, environmental 


cprice-sewell on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 6 / Monday, January 11, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 1277 

compatibility, and compatibility with 

related well equipment. 

• Adds new design verification and 

validation guidelines. 

• Clarifies procedures in areas such 

as design methodology and verification. 

• Introduces state-of-the-art 

technological advances to improve 

downhole performance. 

Comments on the proposed rule: On 

June 12, 2008, MMS published a rule 

proposing to incorporate the Eleventh 

Edition of API Spec 14A and to add a 

new section to the regulations 

identifying additional safety valve 

information requirements for HPHT 

conditions (73 FR 33333). The public 

comment period ended on August 11, 

2008. The MMS received only two 

comments on the proposed rule; one 

comment was received from Baker Oil 

Tools and the other comment was 

received from the Offshore Operators 

Committee (OOC). You may view these 

comments on MMS’s Web site at: http://

www.mms.gov/federalregister/

PublicComments/

AD45ReqSubsurfaceSafety

ValveEquip.htm. 

Discussion of Comments 

Comment: Baker Oil Tools (Baker) 

supports MMS’s proposal to incorporate 

API Spec 14A into the regulations. The 

comment stated that Baker supports the 

proposal to revise 30 CFR § 250.806 to 

accept the Eleventh Edition of API 

Spec14A (and its specified functional 

test provisions) for safety valves in use 

in OCS waters. Baker also supports the 

proposal to require that Operators 

provide new information when 

submitting an Application for Permit to 

Drill (APD), an Application for Permit to 

Modify (APM), or a Deepwater 

Operations Plan (DWOP) that 

demonstrates the SSSV and related 

equipment are fit-for-service for 

performing in HPHT environments. 

Baker believes that the current design 

verification and validation activities 

specified in the Eleventh Edition of API 

Spec14A, which has been in effect since 

May 1, 2006, have and will continue to 

reasonably ensure that products are fitfor-service in all pressure and 

temperature environments. 

Response: The MMS fully agrees with 

the comment by Baker supporting the 

incorporation of API Spec 14A and the 

requirement for new information that 

demonstrates the SSSV is fit-for-service. 

Comment: The Offshore Operators 

Committee (OOC) wanted MMS to 

delete or clarify HPHT condition No. 1 

in § 250.807, Additional requirements 

for subsurface safety valves installed in 

HPHT. The OOC stated that condition 

No. 1, which describes the ‘‘HPHT 

environment,’’ is confusing as it is 

currently worded. The commenter asked 

what does condition No. 1 cover that 

environment condition No. 2 does not 

already cover? The OOC further stated 

that basing the rule on ‘‘HPHT 

environment’’ (defined as the pressures 

and temperatures at the wellhead 

whether a surface wellhead or subsea 

wellhead) is not necessarily appropriate 

for the ‘‘related’’ equipment, including 

the SSSV. The OOC suggested that it 

will be more appropriate to define 

‘‘HPHT environment’’ by the anticipated 

worst case service conditions at each 

piece of related equipment. When the 

significant physical distance between 

the related equipment and the wellhead 

is combined with the anticipated fluid 

gradients and temperature gradients, it 

can result in conditions that push 

related equipment into greater than 

15,000 pounds per square inch gauge 

(psig), or greater than 350 degrees 

Fahrenheit—conditions in wells that 

may not be considered an HPHT 

environment by the current wording. 

Wells/environments that will not fall 

into the categorization of HPHT, as the 

rule is currently drafted, could actually 

need related equipment that is greater 

than 15,000 psig, or 350 degrees 

Fahrenheit rated working pressure. As 

written, the rule could be interpreted 

such that, in these applications, it will 

not be necessary for operators to supply 

supporting design verification for this 

related equipment (greater than 15,000 

psig, or 350 degrees Fahrenheit rated 

working pressure equipment), unless 

the pressures or temperatures at the 

wellhead are deemed to be an HPHT 

environment. If it is intended that 

operators planning to use related 

equipment greater than 15,000 psig, or 

350 degrees Fahrenheit working 

pressure provide design verification, 

then this should be clearly conveyed. 

Response: The MMS revised the 

language in § 250.807 based on OOC’s 

comment to add clarity and specificity 

to condition No. 1 that describes the 

‘‘HPHT environment.’’ 

Final Rule Requirements 

The new § 250.807 provisions will 

require the lessee or operator to provide 

additional information when SSSVs and 

related equipment are intended to be 

installed in an HPHT environment. The 

lessee or operator will be required to 

include such information in an APD, 

APM, or DWOP and must demonstrate 

that the SSSV and related equipment are 

fit-for-service for performing in HPHT 

environments. For the purpose of this 

rulemaking, HPHT exists in any of the 

following conditions: 

1. The completion of the well requires 

completion equipment or well control 

equipment with a pressure rating greater 

than 15,000 psig or a temperature rating 

greater than 350 degrees Fahrenheit; 

2. The maximum anticipated surface 

pressure or shut-in tubing pressure is 

greater than 15,000 psig on the seafloor 

for a well with a subsea wellhead or at 

the surface for a well with a surface 

wellhead; or 

3. The flowing temperature is equal to 

or greater than 350 degrees Fahrenheit 

on the seafloor for a well with a subsea 

wellhead or the surface for a well with 

a surface wellhead. 

Related equipment refers to 

wellheads, tubing heads, tubulars, 

packers, threaded connections, seals, 

seal assemblies, production trees, 

equipment associated with coiled 

tubing, snubbing, operations, chokes, 

well control equipment, and any other 

equipment that will be exposed to rated 

working pressures greater than 15,000 

psig or temperatures greater than 350 

degrees Fahrenheit. 

Procedural Matters 

Regulatory Planning and Review 

(Executive Order (E.O.) 12866) 

This final rule is not a significant rule 

and is not subject to review by the 

Office of Management and Budget 

(OMB) under E.O. 12866. 

(1) The final rule will not have an 

annual effect of $100 million or more on 

the economy. It will 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 primary purpose of 

this final rule is to establish minimum 

acceptable requirements for SSSVs. The 

requirements apply to SSSVs, as well as 

all components that establish tolerance 

and/or clearances that may affect 

performance or interchangeability of 

SSSVs. This rule also will set minimum 

requirements for SSSVs and related 

equipment to conform to international 

standards. Finally, this rule will 

establish minimum fitness-for-service 

criteria for HPHT equipment operating 

over 15,000 psig or 350 degrees 

Fahrenheit and will require lessees and 

operators to provide information that 

demonstrates to the MMS that their 

SSSVs are properly designed to operate 

in HPHT environments. 

The oil and gas industry took the lead 

in revising API Spec 14A, Eleventh 

Edition. The industry and API have 

encouraged the promulgation of the 

final rule incorporating API Spec 14A. 

The API Spec 14A standard is now 

accepted as an industry standard both 


cprice-sewell on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES
1278 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 6 / Monday, January 11, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

domestically and internationally; 

consequently, the impact of this final 

rule on the oil and gas industry is 

expected to be negligible. 

The impact of the new requirements 

of § 250.807 will also be negligible. A 

review of drilling activity indicates that, 

if the current trend continues, there may 

not be any HPHT wells that exceed 

15,000 psig at the wellhead drilled and 

completed in the next 3 years. However, 

there is activity in the Mobile Bay 

region and in the western Gulf of 

Mexico where the working environment 

for SSSVs and related equipment may 

reach over 350 degrees Fahrenheit, 

flowing tubing temperature. The MMS 

estimates that a maximum of 20 APDs 

or APMs that could be subject to the 

final rule may be submitted by lessees 

or operators over the next 3 years. These 

submittals will be required to provide 

additional information on SSSVs and 

related equipment for wells to be drilled 

and completed that may be classified as 

HPHT completions. 

Section 250.807 will require lessees 

and operators to provide supporting 

design verification information. This is 

the kind of information that a prudent 

operator should have available for 

operating in HPHT environments. 

Companies will be required to gather 

and present well data that should be 

readily available if requested by MMS 

for review. We estimate that the hourly 

burden to produce this data will be 

approximately 40 hours for each well at 

an hourly rate of $100 per hour, totaling 

$4,000 per well (40 hours × $100 per 

hour × 1 well = $4,000). 

The estimated cost to industry over 

the next 3 years, based on the high 

estimate of 20 APDs or APMs per year, 

will be approximately $80,000 ($4,000 

per well × 20 wells = $80,000). This 

additional cost associated with 

implementing these new requirements 

will be negligible in relation to the 

overall cost of offshore oil and gas 

production. Additional costs could be 

incurred if a lessee engages an 

independent consultant to prepare the 

fitness-for-service report for the 

application to install SSSVs and related 

equipment in an HPHT environment 

with readily available information. 

However, these costs are very small 

when compared to the cost of drilling a 

well in an HPHT environment, which 

can cost over $150 million. 

(2) The final rule will not create a 

serious inconsistency or otherwise 

interfere with action taken or planned 

by another agency. 

(3) This final rule will not alter the 

budgetary effects of entitlements, grants, 

user fees, or loan programs or the rights 

or obligations of their recipients. 

(4) This final rule will not raise novel 

legal or policy issues. The final rule 

simply seeks to improve MMS safety 

regulations by updating them with 

improved oil and gas industry standards 

and requires lessees and operators to 

demonstrate that SSSVs and related 

equipment are fit-for-service in HPHT 

environments. 

Regulatory Flexibility Act 

The Department of the Interior 

certifies that this final rule will not have 

a significant economic effect on a 

substantial number of small entities 

under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 

U.S.C. 601 et seq.). 

The new API Spec 14A will affect 

lessees and operators of oil and gas 

leases in the OCS. This includes 

approximately 130 active Federal oil 

and gas lessees. Lessees that conduct 

business under this rule are coded 

under the Small Business 

Administration’s (SBA) North American 

Industry Classification System (NAICS) 

codes 211111, Crude Petroleum and 

Natural Gas Extraction, and 213111, 

Drilling Oil and Gas Wells. For these 

NAICS code classifications, a small 

company is defined as one with fewer 

than 500 employees. Based on this 

criterion, an estimated 70 percent of 

these companies are considered small. 

Therefore, this final rule will affect a 

substantial number of small entities. 

This final rule will not, however, have 

a significant economic effect on a 

substantial number of small companies 

because the revised API Spec 14A will 

not impose significant costs or burdens 

on any lessees or operators. 

With respect to the new § 250.807, the 

MMS has determined that it is unlikely 

that a substantial number of small 

companies are currently involved with 

HPHT wells in the OCS due to the 

expense and the advanced technical 

expertise needed for drilling, 

completing, and producing HPHT wells. 

Because very few, if any, small 

companies will be involved in the 

activities that will require compliance 

with these additional requirements for 

HPHT wells, the costs of the additional 

requirements will not have a significant 

economic effect on a substantial number 

of small companies. Furthermore, as 

mentioned previously, the costs of 

complying with these final requirements 

are very small when compared to the 

cost of drilling an HPHT well, which 

can cost over $150 million. 

Your comments are important. The 

Small Business and Agriculture 

Regulatory Enforcement Ombudsman 

and 10 Regional Fairness Boards were 

established to receive comments from 

small business 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 enforcement 

actions of the MMS, call toll-free 1–888– 

734–3247. You may submit comments 

to the Small Business Administration 

without concern for retaliation. 

Allegations of discrimination/retaliation 

filed with the Small Business 

Administration will be investigated for 

appropriate action. 

Small Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act 

The final rule is not a major rule 

under 5 U.S.C. 804(2) of the Small 

Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act. This final rule: 

a. Will not have an annual effect on 

the economy of $100 million or more. 

The final rule will not impose any 

significant costs to lessees or operators. 

The main purpose of this rule is to 

update an industry standard that will 

ensure lessees use the best available and 

safest technologies for downhole safety 

valves. The costs associated with the 

final rule will involve the cost of the 

new document (API Spec 14A), and any 

cost associated with gathering and 

presenting the well data required by the 

new § 250.807 to MMS. As mentioned 

previously, the costs of complying with 

these requirements are very small when 

compared to the cost of drilling an 

HPHT well, which can cost over $150 

million. 

b. Will not cause a major increase in 

costs or prices for consumers, 

individual industries, Federal, State, or 

local government agencies, or 

geographic regions. 

c. Will 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. 

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 

1995 

This final rule will not impose an 

unfunded mandate on State, local, or 

tribal governments or the private sector 

of more than $100 million per year. The 

final rule will not have a significant or 

unique effect on State, local, or tribal 

governments or the private sector. A 

statement containing the information 

required by the Unfunded Mandates 

Reform Act (2 U.S.C. 1501 et seq.) is not 

required. 

Takings Implication Assessment (E.O. 

12630) 

Under the criteria in E.O. 12630, this 

final rule does not have significant 

takings implications. The final rule is 


cprice-sewell on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 6 / Monday, January 11, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 1279 

not a governmental action capable of 

interference with constitutionally 

protected property rights. A Takings 

Implication Assessment is not required. 

Federalism (E.O. 13132) 

Under the criteria in E.O. 13132, this 

final rule does not have federalism 

implications. This final rule will 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 final rule will not 

affect that role. A Federalism 

Assessment is not required. 

Civil Justice Reform (E.O. 12988) 

This rule complies with the 

requirements of E.O. 12988. 

Specifically, this rule: 

(a) Meets the criteria of section 3(a) 

requiring that all regulations be 

reviewed to eliminate errors and 

ambiguity and be written to minimize 

litigation; and 

(b) Meets the criteria of section 3(b)(2) 

requiring that all regulations be written 

in clear language and contain clear legal 

standards. 

Consultation With Indian Tribes (E.O. 

13175) 

Under the criteria in E.O. 13175, we 

have evaluated this final rule and 

determined that it has no substantial 

effects on federally recognized Indian 

tribes. There are no Indian or tribal 

lands in the OCS. 

Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) 

The final revisions to 30 CFR 250, 

subpart H regulations (§ 250.807) will 

specify that lessees and operators must 

submit a detailed description in their 

APD, APM, or DWOP when SSSVs and 

related equipment are intended to 

perform in HPHT environments. The 

information that will be required by the 

final rule should be readily available 

since a prudent operator will already 

possess this information for daily 

operations. Lessees and operators must 

then provide this existing information 

as part of their APD, APM, or DWOP 

submissions. The MMS has determined 

that the number of hours of paperwork 

burdens currently approved for 

preparation of APDs (3,135 annual 

burden hours) and APMs (9,900 annual 

burden hours) pursuant to the 

requirements set forth in 30 CFR 250, 

subpart D (OMB Control Number 1010– 

0141) and for DWOPs (51,000 annual 

burden hours) in 30 CFR 250, subpart B 

(OMB Control Number 1010–0151), are 

more than enough to accommodate this 

minor addition to existing submissions. 

Therefore, due to the fact that the 

burden hours are effectively included 

under currently approved OMB 

information collections, the final rule 

does not require a submission to OMB 

for review and approval under section 

3507(d) of the PRA (44 USC 3501 et 

seq.). 

The PRA provides that an agency may 

not conduct or sponsor a collection of 

information unless it displays a 

currently valid OMB control number. 

Until OMB approves a collection of 

information and assigns a control 

number, you are not required to 

respond. The OMB approved the 

referenced information collection 

requirements for 30 CFR 250, subparts 

B, D, and H under OMB Control 

Numbers 1010–0151 (321,817 hours; 

expiration 7/31/08), 1010–0141 (163,954 

hours; expiration 8/31/08) and 1010– 

0059 (17,598 hours; expiration 2/28/09). 

National Environmental Policy Act of 

1969 

This rule does not constitute a major 

Federal action significantly affecting the 

quality of the human environment. The 

MMS has analyzed this final rule under 

the criteria of the National 

Environmental Policy Act and 

implementing regulations. This final 

rule meets the criteria set forth in 516 

Departmental Manual 15.4(C)(1) for an 

MMS ‘‘Categorical Exclusion’’ in that its 

impacts are limited to administrative, 

economic, or technological effects. 

Further, the MMS has analyzed this 

final rule to determine if it involves any 

of the extraordinary circumstances that 

would require an environmental 

assessment or an environmental impact 

statement as set forth in 43 CFR § 46.215 

and concluded that it does not. 

Data Quality Act 

In developing this rule, we did not 

conduct or use a study, experiment, or 

survey requiring peer review under the 

Data Quality Act (Pub. L. 106–554, app. 

C § 515, 114 Stat. 2763, 2763A–153– 

154). 

Effects on the Energy Supply (E.O. 

13211) 

This rule is not a significant energy 

action under the definition in E.O. 

13211. A Statement of Energy Effects is 

not required. 

List of Subjects in 30 CFR Part 250 

Continental shelf, Environmental 

protection, Incorporation by reference, 

Public lands—mineral resources, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements. 

Dated: December 24, 2009. 

Ned Farquhar, 

Acting Assistant Secretary—Land and 

Minerals Management. 

■ For the reasons stated in the preamble, 

the Minerals Management Service 

(MMS) amends 30 CFR part 250 as 

follows: 

PART 250—OIL AND GAS AND 

SULPHUR OPERATIONS IN THE 

OUTER CONTINENTAL SHELF 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 250 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 31 U.S.C. 9701, 43 U.S.C. 1334. 

■ 2. In § 250.198(e), revise the entry for 

API Spec 14A to read as follows: 

§ 250.198 Documents incorporated by 

reference. 

* * * * * 

(e) * * * 

Title of documents Incorporated by 

reference at 

* * * * * * * 

ANSI/API Specification 14A, Specification for Subsurface Safety Valve Equipment, Eleventh Edition, October 2005, Effective Date: May 1, 2006; also available as ISO 10432: 2004, Product No. GX14A11 ............................................................. § 250.806(a)(3). 

* * * * * * * 


cprice-sewell on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES
1280 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 6 / Monday, January 11, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

1Request of the United States Postal Service to 

Add Express Mail Contract 6 to Competitive 

Product List and Notice of Filing (Under Seal) of 

Contract and Supporting Data, October 28, 2009 

(Request). On October 29, 2009, the Postal Service 

filed errata to its Request. See Notice of the United 

States Postal Service of Filing Errata to Request and 

Notice, October 29, 2009. Accordingly, the filing of 

the entire set of documents related to this Request 

was not completed until October 29, 2009. 

2Attachment A to the Request, reflecting 

Governors’ Decision No. 09–14, October 26, 2009. 

3Attachment B to the Request. 

4Attachment C to the Request. 

5Attachment D to the Request. 

6Attachment E to the Request. 

7Attachment F to the Request. 

■ 3. In § 250.806, remove the last 

sentence in paragraph (a)(3), and add 

two sentences in its place to read as 

follows: 

§ 250.806 Safety and pollution prevention 

equipment quality assurance requirements. 

(a) * * * 

(3) * * * All SSSVs must meet the 

technical specifications of API 

Specification 14A (incorporated by 

reference as specified in § 250.198). 

However, SSSVs and related equipment 

planned to be used in high pressure 

high temperature environments must 

meet the additional requirements set 

forth in § 250.807. 

* * * * * 

■ 4. Redesignate § 250.807 as § 250.808. 

■ 5. Add new § 250.807 to read as 

follows: 

§ 250.807 Additional requirements for 

subsurface safety valves and related 

equipment installed in high pressure high 

temperature (HPHT) environments. 

(a) If you plan to install SSSVs and 

related equipment in an HPHT 

environment, you must submit detailed 

information with your Application for 

Permit to Drill (APD), Application for 

Permit to Modify (APM), or Deepwater 

Operations Plan (DWOP) that 

demonstrates the SSSVs and related 

equipment are capable of performing in 

the applicable HPHT environment. Your 

detailed information must include the 

following: 

(1) A discussion of the SSSVs’ and 

related equipment’s design verification 

analysis; 

(2) A discussion of the SSSVs’ and 

related equipment’s design validation 

and functional testing process and 

procedures used; and 

(3) An explanation of why the 

analysis, process, and procedures 

ensure that the SSSVs and related 

equipment are fit-for-service in the 

applicable HPHT environment. 

(b) For this section, HPHT 

environment means when one or more 

of the following well conditions exist: 

(1) The completion of the well 

requires completion equipment or well 

control equipment assigned a pressure 

rating greater than 15,000 psig or a 

temperature rating greater than 350 

degrees Fahrenheit; 

(2) The maximum anticipated surface 

pressure or shut-in tubing pressure is 

greater than 15,000 psig on the seafloor 

for a well with a subsea wellhead or at 

the surface for a well with a surface 

wellhead; or 

(3) The flowing temperature is equal 

to or greater than 350 degrees 

Fahrenheit on the seafloor for a well 

with a subsea wellhead or at the surface 

for a well with a surface wellhead. 

(c) For this section, related equipment 

includes wellheads, tubing heads, 

tubulars, packers, threaded connections, 

seals, seal assemblies, production trees, 

chokes, well control equipment, and 

any other equipment that will be 

exposed to the HPHT environment. 

[FR Doc. 2010–124 Filed 1–8–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4310–MR–P 

POSTAL REGULATORY COMMISSION 

39 CFR Part 3020 

[Docket Nos. MC2010–6 and CP2010–6; 

Order No. 360] 

New Postal Product 

AGENCY: Postal Regulatory Commission. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Commission is adding 

Express Mail Contract 6 to the 

Competitive Product List. This action is 

consistent with changes in a recent law 

governing postal operations. 

Republication of the lists of market 

dominant and competitive products is 

also consistent with new requirements 

in the law. 

DATES: Effective January 11, 2010 and is 

applicable beginning December 15, 

2009. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Stephen L. Sharfman, General Counsel, 

202–789–6820 or 

stephen.sharfman@prc.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Regulatory 

History, 74 FR 57537 (November 6, 

2009). 

I. Introduction 

II. Background 

III. Comments 

IV. Commission Analysis 

V. Ordering Paragraphs 

I. Introduction 

The Postal Service seeks to add a new 

product identified as Express Mail 

Contract 6 to the Competitive Product 

List. For the reasons discussed below, 

the Commission approves the Request. 

II. Background 

At the end of October 2009, the Postal 

Service filed a formal request and 

associated supporting information 

pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 3642 and 39 CFR 

3020.30 et seq. to add Express Mail 

Contract 6 to the Competitive Product 

List.1 The Postal Service asserts that the 

Express Mail Contract 6 product is a 

competitive product ‘‘not of general 

applicability’’ within the meaning of 39 

U.S.C. 3632(b)(3). This Request has been 

assigned Docket No. MC2010–6. 

The Postal Service 

contemporaneously filed a contract 

related to the proposed new product 

pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 3632(b)(3) and 39 

CFR 3015.5. The contract has been 

assigned Docket No. CP2010–6. 

In support of its Request, the Postal 

Service filed the following materials: (1) 

A redacted version of the Governors’ 

Decision authorizing certain types of 

Express Mail contracts;2 (2) a redacted 

version of the contract;3 (3) a requested 

change in the Mail Classification 

Schedule product list;4 (4) a Statement 

of Supporting Justification as required 

by 39 CFR 3020.32;5 (5) a certification 

of compliance with 39 U.S.C. 3633(a);6

and (6) an application for non-public 

treatment of the materials filed under 

seal.7 The redacted version of the 

contract provides that the contract is 

terminable on 30 days’ notice by either 

party, but could continue for 3 years 

from the effective date subject to annual 

price adjustments. Request, Attachment 

B. 

In the Statement of Supporting 

Justification, Mary Prince Anderson, 

Acting Manager, Sales and 

Communications, Expedited Shipping, 

asserts that the service to be provided 

under the contract will cover its 

attributable costs, make a positive 

contribution to coverage of institutional 

costs, and will increase contribution 

toward the requisite 5.5 percent of the 

Postal Service’s total institutional costs. 

Request, Attachment D, at 1. W. Ashley 

Lyons, Manager, Regulatory Reporting 

and Cost Analysis, Finance Department, 

certifies that the contract complies with 

39 U.S.C. 3633(a). Id., Attachment E. 

The Postal Service filed much of the 

supporting materials, including the 

supporting data and the unredacted 

contract, under seal. The Postal Service 

maintains that the contract and related 

financial information, including the 

customer’s name and the accompanying 

analyses that provide prices, certain 

terms and conditions, and financial 


cprice-sewell on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with RULES