OTC-26867-MS

Decommissioning Process Optimization Methodology

G. L. Siems, MBA, PAR Specialists, LLC, Stone Energy Corporation

Copyright 2016, Offshore Technology Conference

This paper was prepared for presentation at the Offshore Technology Conference held in Houston, Texas, USA, 25 May 2016.
This paper was selected for presentation by an OTC program committee following review of information contained in an abstract submitted by the author(s). Contents
of the paper have not been reviewed by the Offshore Technology Conference and are subject to correction by the author(s). The material does not necessarily reflect
any position of the Offshore Technology Conference, its officers, or members. Electronic reproduction, distribution, or storage of any part of this paper without the
written consent of the Offshore Technology Conference is prohibited. Permission to reproduce in print is restricted to an abstract of not more than 300 words;
illustrations may not be copied. The abstract must contain conspicuous acknowledgment of OTC copyright.

Abstract
The over 4,500 idle wells and 783 idle structures in the U.S. federal waters of the Outer Continental Shelf
at the beginning of 2011 were increasing the risk of contamination to the environment as these assets aged,
while at the same time the cost to decommission these assets was on the rise. During the hurricane seasons
of 2005 and 2008 over 175 structures and 1,000 wells were damaged or toppled to the sea floor by wind
and storm surge that further exposed the risk, increased the cost of decommissioning and made
underwriting the repair or replacement of these assets no longer affordable to many operators.
Renewed pressure on operators to decommission idle infrastructure sooner rather than later was
brought forth by the issuance of new guidelines by regulators in the form of a Notice to Lessee. These new
guidelines now require operators to decommission idle wells and supporting structures as soon as possible,
but no later than 5 years after they become no longer useful for producing oil and gas in paying quantities.
With the cost of decommissioning and regulatory pressure increasing, many operators began seeking
new and better decommissioning methods that could get more work done, safely and at a lower cost.
Employing the newest technologies, a new, optimized decommissioning methodology was made possible.
The size and capabilities of a newly designed and constructed 335 class self-elevating, self-propelled,
marine vessel (liftboat) allowed a departure from the traditional method of performing decommissioning
work-steps sequentially, one-after-the-other, to a new method of performing the majority of work-steps
concurrently in just one spread mobilization.
The new concurrent model was utilized over a 30-month period and demonstrated that not only did the
new liftboat perform as proposed, use of the new model resulted in a 140% more wells and structures
being removed over the number expected to have been removed using traditional methods. The actual
spend to execute the total work scope was reduced by one-third (33%) and, most importantly, the excellent
safety performance achieved by the single, consistent team of specialty workers was recognized with the
presentation of the 2013 Safety-in-Seas Award by the National Ocean Industries Association (NOIA).

Introduction
A government study and subsequent Safety Alert (Minerals Management Service, 2007) issued following
the severe hurricanes of 2004 and 2005 that toppled 123 structures and 800 wells in the U.S. Gulf of
Mexicos Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) prompted MMS to recommend that operators should review
and evaluate their inventory of nonproducing wells and facilities to determine the future utility of these

OTC-26867-MS

structures and the level of threat posed to the environment and human safety should a facility experience
a catastrophic loss. Following another severe hurricane season in 2008 where another 200 wells and 54
structures were damaged or toppled, the U.S. Department of the Interiors Bureau of Ocean Energy
Management Regulation and Enforcement (BOEMRE) issued a Notice to Lessees (NTL) No. 2010-G05,
commonly referred to as the Idle-Iron NTL. This NTL (BOEMRE, 2010) for the first time provided
decommissioning guidance for wells and structures on active leases reaching far beyond the decommissioning requirements codified into law (U.S. Code of Federal Regulations, 2015) that only required
decommissioning within one-year of lease expiration or lease relinquishment.
The newly issued guidelines specified the maximum number of years that wells and structures were
allowed to remain idle before they had to be decommissioned and removed. Lease operators now had to
permanently decommission and remove wells and structures no longer useful for oil and gas production
as soon as possible, but no later than 5 years after cessation of production. This eliminated the prior
practice of some lease operators to kick the can down the road by deferring its decommissioning expense
until maintenance issues or lease expiration forced the work to be done, or until the sale of lease and
associated assets could be made to another operator.
At the time of NTL issuance in October 2010, there were a total of 3,577 structures (BSEE, 2015)
located in less than 500 water depth of the Gulf of Mexicos OCS. According to Kaiser (2011}, as of
January 2011, 1,281 (36%) of these structures were already idle and would require decommissioning and
removal per NTL requirements over the coming five-year period of 2011 through 2015. This number was
expected to grow larger during the period as it did not include structures that were actively producing
hydrocarbons in 2011, but would cease production and require decommissioning within 12-months of its
lease expiration or structures that were already idle, but had not yet been idle for 5-years. The abundance
of idle structures past due for removal in January 2011 combined with those that would require removal
in the coming years, forced lease operators to place more focus on its decommissioning program and
allocate corresponding capital monies to perform the work. This prompted many lease operators to seek
safer and more cost-effective methods of performing well abandonment and structure decommissioning.
Offshore oil and gas facility decommissioning activities are inherently hazardous as they often involve
workers performing various tasks in, on and around oil and gas wells, platforms and production facilities
that have no future utility for hydrocarbon production. Some of these facilities (Photo 1) may have been
idle for many years and could be in various stages of decomposition depending upon their age and level
of maintenance performed over their life time.

Photo 1Idle-Iron Structure

OTC-26867-MS

A new, optimized decommissioning methodology was made possible through the use of a newly
designed and constructed 335 class self-elevating, self-propelled, marine vessel (liftboat). The size and
working capabilities of this new vessel allowed a departure from the traditional method of performing
decommissioning work-steps sequentially, one-after-the-other, to a new method of performing the
majority of work-steps concurrently in just one spread mobilization.
Traditional methods for decommissioning offshore facilities at their end-of-life typically require
multiple (four to nine) mobilizations of different personnel and equipment spreads spanning several
months or years to execute all phases of the decommissioning process.

Traditional Decommissioning Methodology

The traditional decommissioning process is comprised of multiple phases of work executed in discrete,
sequential steps performed with as few as two and as many as nine mobilizations of different, specialized,
personnel and equipment spread groups. Decommissioning programs utilizing this process often require
many weeks or months to complete the decommissioning of a single structure due to the amount of
planning, permitting, scheduling, mobilizing and demobilizing of each contractor spread that is involved.
The size and type of structure, number of associated wells, quantity of hydrocarbon processing vessels and
associated piping onboard and the number of pipelines attached are factors that determine the type and
number of personnel and equipment spreads required to perform the decommissioning process.
Typical structure types found in less than 500 water depth of the OCS include small to large multi-pile
(3, 4, 6, 8 or more) jackets that support multiple deck configurations and multiple wells (Photo 1) down
to smaller unbraced and braced caissons (Photo 2) typically supporting one to three wells.

Photo 2Braced Caisson

The usual work phases for decommissioning offshore structures can include:

Planning, engineering, and scheduling

Regulatory Permitting
Performing HAZID and facility make-safe operations
Prepare existing or install temporary worker living quarters
Service, load-test and certify platform cranes or install a temporary, portable crane

OTC-26867-MS

Hydrocarbon free and clean production vessels and process piping

Flush, pig and remove tube-turns of all attached pipelines
Place regulatory required cement plugs in all wellbores
Cut and remove well conductors
Remove structure (platform deck(s) and jacket/caisson) and transport for onshore disposal or
jacket placement in an approved artificial reef site
Perform final site clearance verification
Traditionally, the above steps are performed sequentially as most require separate, specialized workers
or equipment to perform. The process of conducting the decommissioning steps in this manner consumes
operator resources to plan, permit, select contractors, mobilize to the field and then manage each work
scope execution. Depending upon the quantity and experience of an operators internal engineering and
project management resources along with contractor availability when needed, the entire decommissioning of a single structure could take several months to complete.
Once work procedures are produced and all regulatory permits are approved, the first phase of the
decommissioning process is to mobilize personnel to the worksite to identify hazards (HazID) that
could negatively impact workers or the environment. Following the HazID process, the next step is
to perform make-safe operations on the work platform to mitigate any identified hazards. On
structures with sufficient work space on the platform deck, the make-safe operations are often
performed with a small construction crew to prepare and make the structure safe for additional
workers. This process may include making repairs to boat landings, helidecks, stairs and deck grating,
installing or repairing hand rails and servicing the living quarters. On larger structures where living
quarters are not serviceable or do not exist, an additional mobilization may be required to place and
install temporary living facilities such as bunks, kitchen, waste disposal, electricity generation and
power distribution systems.
Once the structure is deemed safe for workers, the next step in the process is to inspect, maintain and
certify the platform crane for use in the decommissioning process. If the platform crane is not serviceable,
then another mobilization may be required to transport and install a temporary portable crane system
(Photo 3).

Photo 3Portable Crane

OTC-26867-MS

The actual decommissioning process begins with rendering the structure free of hydrocarbons and any
other hazardous materials such as methanol, glycol and Naturally Occurring Radioactive Material
(NORM) from storage tanks, process piping and production vessels. A team of specialty workers is
mobilized to isolate the wells and pipelines from the process equipment, flush process piping, open vessel
access hatches (Photo 4), then drain and wash all process vessels while processing or collecting the
effluents for treatment onshore disposal.

Photo 4 Hydrocarbon Free Vessel

Another step involves the permanent abandonment of all pipelines attached to the structure. The type
of pipeline end connection, riser-to-riser or riser-to-subsea tie-in (SSTI), determines the type and number
of spread mobilizations required. Where riser-to-riser connections exist, a single crew with pumping
equipment is employed to flush seawater through the pipeline from one structure for recovery and capture
for disposal at another structure. Following the initial flushing, one or more foam pigs are pumped through
the line to remove any residual hydrocarbons then the pipeline is filled with corrosion inhibited seawater
prior to each end being isolated until removal of its associated riser and tube-turn.
The in-place pipeline abandonment is completed during yet another mobilization of an underwater diver
spread usually on an anchored or dynamically-positioned dive support vessel (Photo 5) to sever the pigged
pipeline, remove the tube turns at each end (Photo 6), bury the pipeline ends and cover them with sand
or cement filled bags to secure each end in place.

Photo 5Dive Support Vessel

OTC-26867-MS

Photo 6 Pipeline Tube-Turn Removal

To place cement plugs in the wells per government approved well plugging procedures, a rigless well
abandonment spread (Photo 7) and associated personnel is mobilized. The time required to complete this
step is a function of the number of wells to be plugged and difficulties encountered during the process.
Normally, an average of 3.5 to 5 days is required to properly plug each of multiple wells on a single
platform to as many as 8 to 10 days for single wells.

Photo 7Rigless Well Plugging Equipment

Once all of the wells supported by the structure to be decommissioned have the required cement plugs
in place, another spread of specialty equipment and personnel are mobilized to sever all of the well
conductors a minimum of 15 feet below the natural seafloor or mudline. The severing process is typically
performed utilizing explosive, mechanical or abrasive cutting methods. Once severed and the cut verified,
the conductors can be removed with hydraulic jacking systems or platform crane, or they can be left for
later removal along with the decks and jacket removal.
The final phases of the traditional decommissioning process include mobilizing a vessel with heavy-lift
capability (Photo 8) with lifting capacity to prepare the structure for removal, cut and remove the deck
sections, sever the jacket legs and piles 15 below mudline before removing the remainder of the jacket
for transport to a state and federal government approved artificial reef site, to shore for disposal or to
storage for future re-use.

OTC-26867-MS

Photo 8 Deck Removal via Derrick Barge

The last step of the decommissioning process is to mobilize a certified trawl vessel (Photo 9) to drag
nets across the site to verify it is clear of obstructions and prepare the final site clearance verification
report for submittal to regulators.

Photo 9 Site Clearance Trawl Vessel

The time and costs to perform the many steps of the decommissioning process utilizing traditional,
sequential methods were estimated (RigZone, 2016) to be as much as $4 to $10 million per structure. In
January 2011, one independent operator forecast the cost to decommission its then idle-iron inventory
consisting of 245 wells and 93 structures over the coming 5-year period prescribed by the idle-iron NTL
to be $409 million. This average decommissioning spend of almost $82 million per year would consume
12% to 15% of the firms annual capital budget. Additionally, the $409 million did not include any capital
expenditure for decommissioning those structures that had not been idle for the full 5-years and not yet
on the BSEE provided idle-iron list.

Optimized Decommissioning Methodology

The cost to decommission any structure is directly related to the cost of services and, more importantly,
the time required to complete each step of the process. Some of the process steps, particularly those related
to well plugging, are not always within the control of the operator. However, there are areas where the
entire decommissioning process can be streamlined to reduce the amount of time and the associated
tangible and intangible costs. Tangible costs are those that are precisely measureable such as the daily cost

OTC-26867-MS

for a marine vessel or a rigless well PA equipment and personnel spread. The intangible costs that can be
quite large are those costs that are not normally applied to a projects Authorization for Expenditure (AFE)
such as corporate overhead, department management, engineering, and project management. Normally
these costs are applied to the General and Administrative portion of the financial statement and are not
always captured in a projects direct total cost.
The optimized decommissioning model seeks to eliminate as much of the intangible management time
and associated costs as well as reduce the tangible direct costs associated with performing multiple
mobilizations of different equipment and personnel spreads over potentially long periods of time. By
combining as many services as possible into a single mobilization to the worksite then reducing project
work time by performing as many of the decommissioning work steps concurrently (simultaneously),
more work can be accomplished in less time resulting in less money being spent. It was projected (Siems,
2012) that by eliminating multiple spread mobilizations and performing concurrent operations over a
continuous campaign of decommissioning work, the work scope could be completed in one-half the time
for one-third less total [tangible and intangible] costs.
In one case, for example, a large 4-pile jacket with three decks (Photo 10), containing production
equipment and four wells was decommissioned utilizing the traditional, sequential step method. The entire
project, excluding the site clearance, required six different spreads, mobilized at six different times to
perform the required 42 days of actual work. Because of the time required to plan, schedule and mobilize
the various spreads of personnel and equipment, the entire project spanned a period of 10 months incurring
a total tangible cost of $3.6 million.

Photo 10 4-Pile Jacket; 3 Decks

A similarly sized structure (Photo 11) with the same work scope, but only with two wells to plug and
remove, completed the same number of work steps in just one 22-day period. The cost normalized for the
two well difference brought the tangible decommissioning cost utilizing the optimized concurrent method
to $2.4 million. In this case, the cost to perform normalized work scopes utilizing traditional vs. the new
optimized method resulted in a 34% reduction in cost, five fewer mobilizations and a 9-month reduction
in total time. It should be noted that none of the actual costs shown in these examples include the site
clearance, the intangible general and administrative costs for office based engineering and project
management, nor do they include the opportunity costs associated with dedicating the various internal
company resources to a single project for a 10-month period that could have been working on other
projects.

OTC-26867-MS

Photo 114-Pile Jacket; 3 Decks

New Technology
Implementation of the optimized decommissioning model requires the ability to stage and conduct
multiple decommissioning services such as well abandonment, conductor cutting, pipeline flushing,
diving, and structure disassembly crews at the work location to perform all process steps at the same or
nearly the same time. New technology was needed with adequate deck space for equipment that could
provide marine transport, a stable work deck, lodge 50 to 80 service workers and provide heavy-lift
capability.
A newly constructed, self-elevating liftboat with 335 leg length (Photo 12) was utilized to revolutionize the process of decommissioning offshore facilities that exist in 280 water depths or less, which
is the maximum operating water depth of the vessel. This unique self-propelled, dynamically-positioned
liftboat with its 500-ton lift capacity crane, 15,400 sqft. of available deck space and accommodations for
up to 152 marine crew and service workers allows all equipment and personnel needed to complete the
decommissioning process to mobilize to a single work location all at one time.

Photo 12335 Class Liftboat

Since this heavy-lift vessel doesnt require tugboats to move it around or anchors to secure it in place
it can arrive at one location, pre-load and jack up in approximately six to eight hours, perform the work

10

OTC-26867-MS

scope, jack down and move to the next work site. This mobility allows work to be performed at multiple
locations in a comparatively short period of time.
Historically, heavy-lifting for structure removals was performed using derrick barges, but a liftboat
with heavy-lift capability basically eliminates the need for derrick barges for a high percentage of
idle-structures being removed. It also eliminates a lot of the weather concerns in having to demobilize and
secure a floating vessel should sea conditions worsen during operations (Sweet, 2013).

Application and Results

The quantity of non-producing, inactive wells and structures in the shallow waters (500 water depths)
of the Gulf of Mexicos OCS became increasingly evident to many operators when the devastating
hurricanes of 2004, 2005 and 2008 not only toppled many of their structures, but the cost to insure these
structures for wind storm damage increased more than ten-fold. The subsequent issuance of the idle-iron
Notice to Lessees by the BOEMRE was the final straw that forced many lease operators to look differently
at their respective inventories of non-producing assets.
It has been demonstrated in practice that the cost to decommission a toppled structure is over ten times
greater than the cost to decommission one that is still standing. This along with insurance becoming no
longer affordable to most operators, new methods of dealing with idle assets had to be evaluated. Selling
the leases on which the idle inventory was located to transfer their decommissioning liabilities to another
operator or simply deferring well abandonments and structure decommissioning until final lease expiration forced its decommissioning under law were no longer viable options.
One operator recognized after having 14 structures and their associated 63 wells toppled in the
hurricane seasons of 2005 and 2008 that the companys financial success, in part, meant dealing with their
idle-iron issues sooner rather than later. At year-end 2008 the company had an inventory of 285
non-producing, idle, wells with 60% of them on aging, multi-well structures with a high susceptibility of
being toppled by future storm events.
After two-years of well plugging and abandonment operations designed to mitigate as much of the
potential risk from hurricane toppling, the company saw the cost to perform decommissioning related
work was consuming higher than acceptable percentages of its annual capital budgets. In January 2011,
the company projected (Figure 1) that it would have to spend, using the then known traditional
(sequential) decommissioning method, a gross amount of $409 million to address its current idle and
projected to become idle 245 wells and 93 structures over the coming 4-years.

Figure 1Traditional Decommissioning Cost Projection

OTC-26867-MS

11

The new method of decommissioning assets concurrently was introduced to company management in
March of 2011. It was quickly realized that the concept of utilizing a multiple service operations being
conducted simultaneously could allow more work to be done in less time, reduce overall decommissioning
costs and allow the work to be conducted well within budgetary limits. The new concept would allow the
predicted volume of work to be completed within the time constraints of both the law and the idle-iron
notice to lessees with only a relatively small decommissioning team to execute the campaign.
In March 2012, construction of the new 335 liftboat was completed and mobilization of the
multi-contractor spreads began. The initial full-time services included the vessels marine crew, construction crews with former decommissioning experience gained on derrick barges, air/mixed gas diving and
abrasive multi-well conductor cutting services. All services, including company supervision, were staffed
for 24-hour per day operations keeping the base number of workers on board between 55 and 60. Other
services such as rigless well plugging/cementing, coiled tubing, pipeline flushing/filtration services,
dredging and external cutting services were brought onboard only when needed. During peak operations
the typical worker staff grew to as many as 80 persons onboard.
The decommissioning campaign was laid out to begin work on the eastern side of the operators leases
in South Pass, West Delta and South Timbalier fields then work continuously across the Gulf of Mexico
ending in the companys West Cameron field. Working 691 days over a 30-month period, the campaign
spanned the breath of the US GOM conventional shelf performing work at 120 different locations as
shown in Figure 2. A somewhat zig-zag route from east to west was necessary due to delays in obtaining
timely approval of some regulatory permits requiring adjustments to worksite locations.

Figure 2Decommissioning Campaign Locations

The bar graph of Figure 3 shows the number of structures removed in each of the years 2012 and 2013.
The ten most active operators are shown individually and the remaining 23 operators consolidated with
66 and 50 removals, respectively. In each of the first two years of operation the single spread of equipment
performing work concurrently removed a total of 80 structures compared to 110 removed by the most
active operator that utilized multiple, traditional spreads. Over the two-year period, the one vessel
employing the concurrent model removed 17% (80 of 482) of all structures removed from the OCS
without need to return to any shore base. The single vessel and associated services concluded its 30-month
decommissioning campaign with the removal of 92 structures from water depths ranging from 17 to 220,
the permanent abandonment of 176 wells and the in-place abandonment of 59 pipeline segments.

12

OTC-26867-MS

Figure 3OCS Structures Removed 2012 2013

Over the 691 operating days there were 1,250 air or mixed gas dives, 600 internal abrasive cuts of
multi-string well conductors, jacket piles and caissons with 40 external cuts made with diamond wire
saws. The workers safely completed the decommissioning program working 580,000 man-hours with zero
lost time incidents and two OSHA recordable incidents that occurred after completing 643 days of work
and 570,000 man-hours incident free. The two recordable incidents arose from two divers that were
administered antibiotics to cure an infection caused by two separate Lion Fish stings.
A post-work analysis of the decommissioning campaign shows that both the quantity of work and the
cost performance goals predicted in January 2011 were attained. The first series of (blue) bars in Figure
4 show the predicted gross annual cost utilizing the traditional, sequential step decommissioning process
with the corresponding volume of work. The actual gross annual cost to complete the volume of work
shown employing the new concurrent method is shown by the second series of (green) bars.

Figure 4 Traditional Decommissioning Projected Cost vs. Actual Concurrent Model Cost

The campaigns planned 245 well abandonments and 93 structure removals were both exceeded using
the new method with 115 more well abandonments (47%) and 16 (17%) more structures removed. The
single liftboat based spread utilizing the concurrent decommissioning process removed of 92 of the 109
structures (85%) and 176 of the 360 wells (49%) that were permanently abandoned by the company over

OTC-26867-MS

13

the four-year period. The predicted cost savings were also realized as the entire work scope was completed
for $278 million, which was $131 million (32%) less than the projected capital spend of $409 million. All
of the cost savings is attributed to the performance of the concurrent model as the all other decommissioning work was performed by spreads using traditional methods.
The final and perhaps most significant achievement of implementing the concurrent, optimized
decommissioning process was the demonstrated improvement in worker safety. Over 580,000 man-hours
were worked by the 60 to 80-person marine crew and service workers with no lost time incidents and only
two OSHA recordable incidents. The excellent safety performance is attributed largely to positive worker
attitude and the consistent, multiple service crews onboard learning how to work together as a team.
Additionally, the definition of Simultaneous Operations (SIMOPS) had to be modified. Traditionally,
SIMOPS referred to a major service operation such as drilling, workover or major maintenance operations
being performed on a facility where hydrocarbons were being simultaneously produced. In this new
application, SIMOPS had to be expanded to include the conducting of separate and distinct operations,
such as diving, at the same time other operations were in progress. This change in work process brought
about by the new concurrent-step decommissioning model, required the involvement of all personnel from
the vessel captain and crane operators to the riggers on the work deck and the divers in the water to plan
the daily work scope, perform the HazID analysis and conduct the job safety analysis together as a team.
The learning curve was long, taking about 3-months for everyone to learn the work processes of the others,
but not steep. Everyone onboard was very experienced at performing their respective specialty work, what
took time was learning the work being performed by others and how one service companys work scope
might impact others and how working together could improve both project efficiency and the safety of all
workers.
The first 21 months and 570,000 man-hours of the 23- month operating period, were worked with zero
OSHA recordable incidents and zero lost time. It was only after two diver stings by Lion fish requiring
antibiotic treatment for infection did the operation experience any recordable incidents. The entire
campaign ended with a Total Recordable Incident Rate of 0.68, well below the initial TRIR target of 1.50.
The newly implemented decommissioning model combined with the excellent safety performance was
recognized by the National Ocean Industries Association (NOIA) by its presentation of the 2013
Safety-in-Seas Award (Figure 5) to the company at its annual meeting in Washington D.C.

Figure 5NOIA Safety-In-Seas Award

Conclusions
There are a significant number of offshore facilities in the shallow waters of the Outer Continental Shelf
and Gulf of Mexico state governed waters. These facilities will require decommissioning and removal as
their associated hydrocarbons (Oil and Gas) are produced and the wells and supporting infrastructure

14

OTC-26867-MS

become idle with no future utility. In the aftermath of the catastrophic hurricanes of 2004, 2005 and 2008,
regulators were influenced to implement legislation to require the timelier removal of offshore facilities
that no longer had utility to its owner. With lease operator budgets already strained by unstable commodity
prices, developing methods to mitigate the environmental concerns of an aging idle-infrastructure,
reducing the cost to remove these deteriorating assets while improving worker safety was paramount. By
optimizing the decommissioning processes through use of the newest technologies served to meet all
objectives: Doing more decommissioning work safer, in less time and at a lower cost.
The application of new technologies the core being a liftboat vessel designed for decommissioning
allowed operational efficiency improvements and reduced weather sensitivity not previously available to
lease operators in the U.S. Gulf of Mexico region. The change in decommissioning methodology from
sequential to concurrent steps allows operators to more efficiently and more cost effectively meet their
decommissioning obligations that are set forth in the governing regulations. It was demonstrated over a
30-month campaign that these process changes allowed 40% or more of the required decommissioning
work to be accomplished with one-third less money spent with a gross savings of $131 million to the
operating company.

Acknowledgments
The author recognizes the management of Stone Energy Corporation for their quick grasp of the optimized
decommissioning model concepts, approving the budgets and allowing the organizational changes
necessary for the concept to be assimilated, applied and proven.
Recognition is extended to Lee Orgeron of Montco Offshore, Inc. for having the foresight to conceive,
design, and construct a class of liftboat capable of supporting the process changes required for implementing a new decommissioning methodology, and to Carroll Price of Montco Oilfield Contractors for
providing the conceptual framework for the optimized decommissioning model.

Nomenclature
BOEMRE
BSEE
CFR
GAAP
GOM
MMS
NOIA
NORM
NTL
OCS
OSHA
SIMOPS
S-I-S

Bureau of Ocean Management Resource and Enforcement

Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement
Code of Federal Regulations
Generally Accepted Accounting Principles
U.S. Gulf of Mexico
Minerals Management Services
National Ocean Industries Association
Naturally Occurring Radioactive Material
Notice to Lessees
Outer Continental Shelf
Occupational Safety and Health Administration
Simultaneous Operations
Safety in Seas

References
1. Bureau of Ocean Energy Management Regulation and Enforcement. 2010. Decommissioning Guidance for Wells and
Platforms. NTL No. 2010-G05. 15 September 2010.
2. Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement. 2015. Platform Structures Online Query, http://www.data.bsee.gov/homepg/data_center/platform/platform/master.asp (accessed 8 December 2015).
3. Cost-Effective Decommissioning Improving on Traditional Methods, Siems, G., DecomWorld 4th Annual Decommissioning & Abandonment Summit, Gulf of Mexico, March 2012.

OTC-26867-MS

15

4. Kaiser, M.J. and, S. Narra. 2011. Decommissioning activity projected to hold steady following BOEMRE ruling.
Offshore, 11 April 2011. http://www.offshore-mag.com/articles/print/volume-71/issue-4/engineering_-construction/
decommissioning-activity-projected-to-hold-steady-following-boemre-ruling.html (accessed 14 December 2015).
5. RigZone Training. 2016. How Does Decommissioning Work? http://www.rigzone.com/training/insight_pf.asp?i_id354 (accessed 16 January 2016).
6. Sweet, R. 2013. New heavy-lift vessel brings one-stop decommissioning into reach for Stone. DecomWorld Projects
and Technologies, 21 January 2013. http://analysis.decomworld.com/projects-and-technologies/new-heavy-lift-vessel-brings-one-stop-decommissioning-reach-stone (accessed 25 January 2016).
7. United States Code of Federal Regulations. 2015. Decommissioning Activities. 30 CFR 250.1700 through 1754.
http://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/
retrieveECFR?gp&SID019448bc6daa81bb55d11891134ff79e&mctrue&nsp30.2.250.q&rSUBPART&tyHTML
(accessed 14 December 2015).
8. U.S. Dept. of the Interior Minerals Management Service Gulf of Mexico Region OCS. 2007. Plug and Abandonment
of Non-Producing Wells and Facilities, Safety Alert No. 253. 1 August 2007.
BIOGRAPHY

Gary L. Siem is a Petroleum Asset Retirement consultant specializing in managing, planning and
executing the removal of oil & gas wells, platforms and pipelines at their end-of-life. While Decommissioning Manager at Stone Energy Corporation, he executed the permanent plugging and removal of over
500 wells, 120 platforms and permanently abandoned over 150 pipelines. Utilizing the latest technologies,
Mr. Siems optimized and implemented the concurrent decommissioning methodology to safely complete
well and structure removals in one-half the time for one-third less cost over traditional sequential methods,
receiving the 2013 NOIA Safety- in-Seas award for the innovative process and associated safety
performance. Mr. Siems is experienced in well servicing operations, well plugging and abandonment,
sales, marketing and financial management with over 38 years of experience gained through his work at
Schlumberger, Superior Energy, TETRA Technologies and Stone Energy. He is a member of the Gerson
Lehrman Groups Council of Energy Advisors and was granted U.S. Patents for surface and subsea
cutting equipment. He holds a BS in Electrical Engineering degree from the University of Florida and an
MBA from the University of Louisiana at Lafayette.