Search for a command to run...
Abstract The abandonment of legacy offshore wells following historical blowouts and infrastructure collapse poses significant technical and regulatory challenges, particularly when conventional abandonment methods are no longer feasible. National decommissioning and restoration guidelines require permanent well plug and abandonment to manage long-term integrity risks; however, site-specific conditions may limit the feasibility of achieving the abandonment objectives. This paper describes the application of a structured, risk-based decision-making process to determine an appropriate end state for the collapsed platform wells. The approach combined the Alternative Project Future (APF) strategy workshop and Comparative Assessment (CA) to evaluate the end-state options under conditions of uncertainty. The Strategy table is a powerful tool in managing uncertainty, aligning stakeholder expectations, and supporting risk-based regulatory decisions. The approach provides a replicable framework for other offshore operators facing inaccessible or high-risk legacy assets where conventional abandonment may not be the optimal solution. The AFS workshop was conducted with participation from key National authorities, Technical Authorities, and the project matrix team to establish the top Execute-phase risks influencing end-state decisions, develop risk-based scenarios based on combinations of potential outcomes, and reflect on "How Bad Can It Get" (HBCIG). Walkaway points were defined to support alignment on conditions warranting reassessment. The result of the AFS workshop provided the foundation for a regulator-directed CA, which compared two feasible end-state options – Intercept drilling to Plug and Abandon or Leave wells as is, with both options requiring continued reservoir pressure monitoring - using an agreed criteria covering health and safety, environmental, societal, technical feasibility, and cost considerations. The CA was supported by technical work completed during project maturation, including geophysical surveys, reservoir modelling, well-concept selection, crater stability, and environmental studies. The assessment provided a transparent basis for documenting how different options relate to the identified risk scenarios and supported alignment on a recorded outcome.