Submissions: Published response
What organisation do you represent? - Organisation
Should the property removal obligation be amended to specifically require titleholders to either remove property or make other arrangements that are satisfactory to NOPSEMA? - Q1 - Y/N
Not Answered
Should timeframes for property removal be mandated? - Q2 - Y/N
Not Answered
Should a new standalone decommissioning obligation be included within the regime? - Q3 - Y/N
Not Answered
Should titleholders be required to inform government of their overarching plans for decommissioning? - Q4 - Y/N
Not Answered
Should titleholders be required to periodically update government about decommissioning-related information, including an inventory of infrastructure and its status, and a progress report on decommissioning items of infrastructure? - Q5 - Y/N
Not Answered
Should titleholders be required to submit ‘close-out’ reporting after decommissioning? - Q6 - Y/N
Not Answered
Should current titleholders be made expressly (in the OPGGS Act) liable for the costs of carrying out their decommissioning obligations? - Q7 - Y/N
Not Answered
Should alternative liability arrangements be included in a revised framework, providing government with the ability to pursue previous titleholders in the chain of ownership if the current titleholder is unwilling or unable to decommission? - Q8 - Y/N
Not Answered
Should titleholders be released from liability in appropriate circumstances? - Q8 - Y/N
Not Answered
Should titleholders ever be released from liability for infrastructure left in the marine environment? - Q10 - Y/N
Should government be able to conduct assessments of a titleholder’s capacity to fulfil its obligations at any time? - Q11 - Y/N
Should industry be required to hold and demonstrate sufficient financial security to meet its decommissioning costs? - Q12 - Y/N
Should a former titleholder operating under a remedial direction be subject to all the duties and responsibilities as if it were operating under their previous title? - Q13 - Y/N
Not Answered
Should a former titleholder be permitted to submit risk management plans? - Q14 - Y/N
Should a ‘person’ (or another entity other than a former titleholder) be permitted to submit risk management plans? - Q15 - Y/N
Should a new category of title be established to enable a former titleholder to have a current title under which to undertake relevant decommissioning and remediation activities with relevant regulatory approvals? - Q16 - Y/N
Should NOPSEMA and the Minister be permitted to issue remedial directions to all former titleholders?
- Q17 - Y/N
Is there additional research (and/or development) being undertaken relevant to decommissioning that government should be aware of? - Q18 - Y/N
Is there additional research (and/or development) being undertaken relevant to decommissioning that government should be aware of? - Q18 - research current
We wish to advise of research in platform decommissioning technology through a unique and novel technology for the decommissioning of offshore platforms.
The owner of the IP has worked in the oil & gas industry as an engineer and project manager for more than 35 years. This extensive experience has enabled him to develop a unique and innovative system for offshore platform decommissioning for which a UK Patent has been obtained.
Current platform decommissioning technology is based on reverse installation using heavy lift vessels that are weather dependent and highly expensive. There is now also a catamaran type lifting vessel which can lift the topsides and jacket in separate operations but again requires considerable offshore preparatory work and is also highly expensive.
Our system has researched the lifting and transportation of the complete platform in one operation and provides a low cost solution for removal and potential re-use.
The advantage of the system is that it provides a cost effective method of removal and transportation of the complete platform in-situ rather than the highly expensive reverse installation methods involving extensive offshore work.
The additional advantage of the system is that the removed platform can be transported in the vertical position thereby allowing relocation for re-use after transportation inshore for modification.
The key elements of the feasibility of the system are buoyancy, stability and structural integrity during removal and transportation. A study carried out by British Maritime Technology confirmed that the buoyancy and stability criteria of the system on a sample de-commissioning project were excellent. We believe the structural integrity requirements can also be satisfied.
We have obtained a UK Patent for the system and the design concept has been validated to comply with IMO (International Marine Organisation) buoyancy and stability criteria by BMT (British Maritime Technology).
The next stage of developing the system to a commercial and working level is to build a scale prototype to carry out dynamic performance testing enabling further design analysis and refinement of the system.
We estimate the costs of this work including model building, hydraulic tank testing, further structural and hydraulic design analysis including a report by a marine Insurer to be in the region of $500-600k.
We believe this system could reduce costs to tens of millions thereby substantially reducing the Government and taxpayers contribution and provide the additional potential advantage of re-use.
The development is ongoing. Further technical information is available upon the signing of a non disclosure agreement.
Is there additional research that should be undertaken on decommissioning, and in particular on environmental standards? - Q19 - Y/N
Not Answered
Should more be done to encourage industry collaboration to help ensure that options for the continued use of offshore petroleum infrastructure in Commonwealth waters are explored prior to its decommissioning? - Q20 - Y/N
Not Answered
Is there interest and merit in creating an Australian offshore petroleum decommissioning industry? - Q21 - Y/N
Yes: What opportunities are there? Should government be involved in establishing this industry and, if so, how?
Is there interest and merit in creating an Australian offshore petroleum decommissioning industry? - Q21 - Aus decomm industry
Yes, competition will drive down costs, mitigate risk to business and the environment, deliver best practice standards and foster innovation.
Are there other issues relating to decommissioning that are not covered in this discussion paper and you think it is appropriate for government to be involved in?
- Q22 - Y/N
Not Answered
Unique ID