Decommissioning Programme

Harding Submerged Turret Loading System

HAR-01031-DEC-PM-ADP-0001-TAQ
 HAR-01031-DEC-PM-ADP-0001-TAQ
HARDING STL SYSTEM DECOMMISSIONING PROGRAMME

Inst P/L
CONTENTS
1.0  EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 9  
1.1  Decommissioning Programme 9  
1.2  Requirement for Decommissioning Programme 9  
1.3  Introduction 9  
1.4  Overview of Installation Being Decommissioned 12  
1.5  Summary of Proposed Decommissioning Programme 13  
1.6  Field Location including Field Layout and Facilities 14  

1.7  Industrial Implications 16 
2.0  DESCRIPTION OF ITEMS TO BE DECOMMISSIONED 17  
2.1  Installation: Surface Facilities 17 
2.2  Installation: Subsea including Stabilisation Features 17  
2.3  Pipelines including Stabilisation Features 20 
2.4  Wells 20 
2.5  Drill Cuttings 20 
2.6  Inventory Estimates 20  
3.0  REMOVAL AND DISPOSAL METHODS 22  
3.1  Topsides 22  
3.2  Jackets 22  
3.3  Subsea Installations and Stabilisation Features 22  
3.4  Pipelines 31  
3.5  Pipeline Stabilisation Features 31  
3.6  Wells 31  
3.7  Drill Cuttings 31  
3.8  Waste Streams 31  

4.0  ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT 32  

4.1  Environmental Sensitivities Summary 32  

4.2  Potential Environmental Impacts and their Management 34 
5.0  INTERESTED PARTY CONSULTATIONS 38  
6.0  PROGRAMME MANAGEMENT 40  
6.1  Project Management and Verification 40  
6.2  Post-Decommissioning Debris Clearance and Verification 40  
6.3  Decommissioning Programme 40  
6.4  Costs 41  
6.5  Close Out 41  
6.6  Post-Decommissioning Monitoring and Evaluation 41  
7.0  SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS 42  
8.0  PARTNERS LETTER(S) OF SUPPORT 43  

Rev A1 – December 2015 Page 3 of 51

 HAR-01031-DEC-PM-ADP-0001-TAQ
HARDING STL SYSTEM DECOMMISSIONING PROGRAMME

GLOSSARY OF ABBREVIATIONS

BAP Biodiversity Action Plan

Britoil Britoil Limited

CA Comparative Assessment

CNS Central North Sea

DECC Department of Energy and Climate Change

DP Decommissioning Programme

DSV Dive Support Vessel

ED50 European Datum 1950

EIA Environmental Impact Assessment

EMS Environmental Management System

ER Environmental Report

ES Environment Statement

FLTC UK Fisheries Offshore Oil and Gas Legacy Trust Fund Limited

FPAL First Point Assessment Limited

GBT Gravity Base Tank

HSE Health and Safety Executive

JNCC Joint Nature Conservation Committee

km kilometre

LSA Low Specific Activity

m metre

Maersk Oil Maersk Oil North Sea UK Limited

MS Marine Scotland

N/A Not Applicable

NFFO National Federation of Fishermen’s Organisations

NIFPO Northern Irish Fish Producers Organisation

NORM Naturally Occurring Radioactive Material

OGUK Oil & Gas UK

OLS Offshore Loading System

OSPAR The Convention for the Protection of the Marine Environment of

the North-East Atlantic

Rev A1 – December 2015 Page 4 of 51

 HAR-01031-DEC-PM-ADP-0001-TAQ
HARDING STL SYSTEM DECOMMISSIONING PROGRAMME

PDi Project Development International Limited

PLEM Pipe-Line End Manifold

PMF Priority Marine Feature

PWA Pipeline Works Authorisation

ROV Remote Operated Vehicle

SFF Scottish Fishermen’s Federation

SIMOPs Simultaneous Operations

STL Submerged Turret Loading System

TAQA TAQA Bratani Limited

Te Tonne

UKCS United Kingdom Continental Shelf

Rev A1 – December 2015 Page 5 of 51

 HAR-01031-DEC-PM-ADP-0001-TAQ
HARDING STL SYSTEM DECOMMISSIONING PROGRAMME

FIGURES AND TABLES

FIGURE 1.1 EXISTING STL LOADING SYSTEM 

FIGURE 1.2 REPLACEMENT OLS SYSTEM SCHEMATIC 

FIGURE 1.3  FIELD LOCATION IN UKCS 

FIGURE 1.4  FIELD LAYOUT (EXISTING & PROPOSED) 

FIGURE 2.1 HARDING STL COMPONENTS TO BE DECOMMISSIONED 

FIGURE 2.2 HARDING STL SUCTION ANCHOR SCHEMATIC 

FIGURE 2.3 INVENTORY ESTIMATE 

FIGURE 3.1 REMOVAL BY REVERSE INSTALLATION FLOWCHART 

FIGURE 6.1 DECOMMISSIONING PROGRAMME 

TABLE 1.1: INSTALLATION BEING DECOMMISSIONED 

TABLE 1.2: INSTALLATION SECTION 29 NOTICE HOLDERS DETAILS 

TABLE 1.3: SUMMARY OF DECOMMISSIONING PROGRAMME 

TABLE 1.4: ADJACENT FACILITIES 

TABLE 2.1: SUBSEA INSTALLATIONS AND STABILISATION FEATURES 

TABLE 2.2: WELL INFORMATION 

TABLE 2.3: DRILL CUTTINGS PILE(S) INFORMATION 

TABLE 2.4: ESTIMATED INVENTORY: INSTALLATIONS STL AND MOORINGS 

TABLE 3.1: SUBSEA INSTALLATIONS AND STABILISATION FEATURES 

TABLE 3.2: SUCTION ANCHORS DECOMMISSIONING 

Rev A1 – December 2015 Page 6 of 51

 HAR-01031-DEC-PM-ADP-0001-TAQ
HARDING STL SYSTEM DECOMMISSIONING PROGRAMME

TABLE 3.3: WEIGHT FACTORS 

TABLE 3.4: WEIGHTED COMPARATIVE ASSESSMENT SUMMARY OPTIONS TABLE 

TABLE 3.5: CA OPTION SELECTION RESULTS 

TABLE 3.6: SELECTED OPTION 

TABLE 3.7: WASTE STREAM MANAGEMENT METHODS 

TABLE 3.8: INVENTORY DISPOSITION 

TABLE 4.1: ENVIRONMENTAL SENSITIVITIES 

TABLE 4.2: ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT MANAGEMENT 

TABLE 5.1: SUMMARY OF STAKEHOLDER COMMENTS 

TABLE 5.2: SUMMARY OF STAKEHOLDER COMMENTS 

TABLE 6.1: PROVISIONAL DECOMMISSIONING PROGRAMME(S) COSTS 

TABLE 7.1: SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS 

Rev A1 – December 2015 Page 7 of 51

 HAR-01031-DEC-PM-ADP-0001-TAQ
HARDING STL SYSTEM DECOMMISSIONING PROGRAMME

APPENDICES
Appendices Description Page
Appendix 1 Public Notice and Statutory Consultee Correspondence 43
Appendix 2 Technical Note on Suction Anchor Removal Failure Modes 44

Rev A1 – December 2015 Page 8 of 51

 HAR-01031-DEC-PM-ADP-0001-TAQ
HARDING STL SYSTEM DECOMMISSIONING PROGRAMME

1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1.1 Decommissioning Programme
This document contains one Decommissioning Programme (DP), for one installation. It outlines
the decommissioning intent for elements of the Harding field Submerged Turret Loading system
(STL) - which is to be replaced due to obsolescence.

1.2 Requirement for Decommissioning Programme

Installation:
In accordance with the Petroleum Act 1998, TAQA Bratani Limited (TAQA), as the operator of the
Harding field STL, and on behalf of the Section 29 holders (see Table 1.2), is applying to the
Department of Energy and Climate Change (DECC), to obtain approval for decommissioning the
installation detailed in Section 2.0 of this programme. Partner Letter of Support for this
programme is included in Section 8.0.

In conjunction with public, stakeholder and regulatory consultation, this Decommissioning

Programme is submitted in compliance with national and international regulations and DECC
guidelines. The schedule (Figure 6.1) is for a 2 month decommissioning project, due to
commence summer 2016.

1.3 Introduction
The Harding field is located in the UKCS Licence Block 9/23b in the Central North Sea,
approximately 320 km north-east of Aberdeen (Figure 1.3). Water depth at the field is 110m. The
field was discovered in January 1988 and first production was in April 1996. The field was
operated by BP until June 2013, when TAQA purchased BP’s field equity and took over the
operatorship.

The field has one central production, drilling and accommodation platform located between the
Central and South reservoir accumulations. The Harding platform is a large, heavy-duty jack-up
rig fixed to a concrete gravity base structure containing oil storage tanks. The oil is exported from
the storage tanks to shuttle tankers via the STL which is located approximately 2km to the east of
the platform.

The STL is supported by a submerged mooring and loading interface buoy, which is anchored to
the seabed via eight mooring lines and suction anchors. Due to obsolescence the STL will be
replaced by a new Offshore Loading System (OLS).

Rev A1 – December 2015 Page 9 of 51

 HAR-01031-DEC-PM-ADP-0001-TAQ
HARDING STL SYSTEM DECOMMISSIONING PROGRAMME

Figure 1.1 Existing STL Loading System

The following components of the original system are redundant and will be removed:

• Eight mooring lines and associated components

• Eight steel seabed suction anchors

• The shuttle tanker mooring and loading interface buoy and associated components

• The offloading riser *

It is intended that all redundant equipment will be removed for reuse or recycling. If it is not
possible following reasonable endeavours to perform reverse installation of the individual suction
anchors then it is intended, following liaison and agreement with DECC, to cover the suction
anchor with rock dump and leave in situ. It is considered that the ‘partial recovery’ of an anchor,
i.e. suction anchor not fully removed from seabed at failure of reverse installation, is, after
detailed engineering and utilisation of optimal removal procedure, rated as very unlikely / very low
risk.

Reference Section 3.3.8 and Appendix 2 for further details on suction anchor removal by reverse
installation and suction anchor failure modes.
*The Harding oil export pipeline PL1176, inclusive of riser, is being modified. This will be defined in a variation to PWA
23/W/95; as a result the riser is not included in this Decommissioning Programme.

Rev A1 – December 2015 Page 10 of 51

 HAR-0
01031-DEC
C-PM-ADP-0
0001-TAQ
HARDING
G STL SYS
STEM DECO
OMMISSIONNING PROGRAMME

Figure 1.2 Replacem ent OLS Sy

ystem Schematic

Rev
R A1 – Dec
cember 2015
5 Page
e 11 of 51
 HAR-01031-DEC-PM-ADP-0001-TAQ
HARDING STL SYSTEM DECOMMISSIONING PROGRAMME

1.4 Overview of Installation Being Decommissioned

1.4.1 Installation

Table 1.1: Installation Being Decommissioned

Field name Quad/Block/Location
9/23b
Harding STL WGS84 59° 16.586’
01° 33.025'
Subsea Installation
Total Number Type
STL = Shuttle tanker mooring and loading interface
1
buoy, and mooring facility
Distance to median
Production type Distance from nearest
Water Depth (m) Line (km)
(Oil/Gas/Condensate) UK coastline (km)
(if less than 5km)
Oil 110 meters 168km N/A

Table 1.2: Installation Section 29 Notice Holders Details

Section 29 notice holder Registration Number Equity Interest (%)

TAQA Bratani Limited Reg. No. 05975475 70%
Maersk Oil North Sea UK
Reg. No. 03682299 30%
Limited
Britoil Limited Reg. No. SC077750 0%

Rev A1 – December 2015 Page 12 of 51

 HAR-01031-DEC-PM-ADP-0001-TAQ
HARDING STL SYSTEM DECOMMISSIONING PROGRAMME

1.5 Summary of Proposed Decommissioning Programme

Table 1.3: Summary of Decommissioning Programme

Proposed decommissioning
Selected option Reason for selection
solution
Topsides
N/A N/A N/A
Jacket(s) / Floating Facility (FPSO)
N/A N/A N/A
Subsea Installation
The STL:  Meets DECC guidelines on  Decommissioning of the STL
 Shuttle tanker mooring & removal of seabed structures facilities highlighted will be by
Loading interface Buoy to leave a clean seabed. means of reverse installation
 Eight mooring lines  Minimal seabed disturbance. process. This will be followed by
 Eight seabed suction  Reduced risk to personnel disposal via an onshore
anchors engaged in activity. accredited recycling/waste
 Riser*  Removal of risk to ‘other users management facility.
of the sea’ and consequent  The Shuttle tanker mooring and
Option Selected: risk in perpetuity to section 29 loading interface buoy is the
 Shuttle tanker mooring & holders. property of the shuttle tanker
Loading interface Buoy agent, and as such, shall be
returned to owner.   returned to the owner.
 Mooring lines, suction  Post activity ‘as-left’ survey and,
anchors and associated where required, an over-trawl
elements, removed by exercise will be conducted.
reverse installation method.
 Riser* as per PWA 23/W/95
variation.
*The Harding oil export pipeline PL1176
inclusive of riser, is being modified. This
will be defined in a variation to PWA
23/W/95; as a result the riser is not
included in this Decommissioning
Programme.
5. Wells
N/A N/A N/A
6. Drill Cuttings
N/A N/A N/A
7. Interdependencies
N/A N/A N/A

Rev A1 – December 2015 Page 13 of 51

 HAR-DEC-PM--ADP-0001-TAQ
Q
HARDING
H STL SYSTEM DECO
OMMISSIONING
G PROGRAMME E

1.6 Fielld Location including Field Layou

ut and Facillities

Figure 1.3
3 Field Loca
ation in UKCS

Revision A1 – December 2015 Page 14 of 51

 HAR-DEC-PM--ADP-0001-TAQ
Q
HARDING
H STL SYSTEM DECO
OMMISSIONING
G PROGRAMME E

Figu
ure 1.4 Field
d Layout (Existing & Proposed
d)

Revision A1 – December 2015 Page 15 of 51

 HAR-DEC-PM-ADP-0001-TAQ
HARDING STL SYSTEM DECOMMISSIONING PROGRAMME

Table 1.4: Adjacent Facilities

Distance/
Owner Name Type Information Status
Direction
Semi Mobile 2km - North West
Offshore
TAQA Production Unit, Harding
Harding WGS84 59.279183
/Maersk with an integral
Decimal 1.514617
Production Operational
Platform concrete base Platform
Oil
used for crude WGS84 59° 16.751'
storage DEC Min 01° 30.877'

From Harding Platform to the

STL, 2km long
WGS84 59.279183
Decimal 1.514617 Temporarily non-
TAQA 24“ crude oil
Harding platform operational during
PL1176 export pipeline WGS84 Dec 59° 16.751'
/Maersk from Harding
to shuttle tanker STL
Min 01° 30.877' discharge decommissioning
Oil Platform
activities
WGS84 59.276417
Decimal 1.550433

WGS84 Dec 59° 16.586'

Min 01° 33.025'
Impacts of decommissioning proposals
Decommissioning activities will be scheduled around offloading operation intervals. No impact is anticipated to
third parties.

1.7 Industrial Implications

In planning and preparing for the decommissioning of the Harding STL, TAQA, as the operator of
the Harding field, and on behalf of the Section 29 Notice Holders, has undertaken a
contract/procurement and communications strategy as follows:

 Engaged with representatives from DECC, statutory consultees and associations, inviting
those who expressed an interest in attending, to the main Stakeholder Engagement,
Decommissioning Options Comparative Assessment review, held on 15th December 2014.

 Specific engagement sessions relating to the decommissioning of the facilities covered under
this Decommissioning Programme, are summarised in Table 5.1: Summary of Stakeholder
Comments.

 Whilst First Point Assessment Ltd (FPAL) remains the primary source for establishing tender
lists for contracts/purchases, it is TAQA’s intention, given the nature and size of this scope, to
use the new loading system installation contractor to complete the Harding STL removal
activities.

 With regard to waste management, TAQA intend to use its existing competent approved waste
management contractors, who will be engaged to deal with any and all waste as a result of the
decommissioning activities.

Revision A1 – December 2015 Page 16 of 51

 HAR-DEC-PM-ADP-0001-TAQ
HARDING STL SYSTEM DECOMMISSIONING PROGRAMME

2.0 DESCRIPTION OF ITEMS TO BE DECOMMISSIONED

2.1 Installation: Surface Facilities
N/A

2.2 Installation: Subsea including Stabilisation Features

Table 2.1: Subsea Installations and Stabilisation Features

Subsea
installations
Size/Weight Comments /
including Number Location
(Te) Status
stabilisation
features
Anchor 1
8m long x 5m 59.282050
WGS84 Decimal 1.5m protruding
diameter, 40 1.547600
above seabed
tonnes 59˚ 16.923’
WGS 84
01˚ 32.856’
Anchor 2
8m long x 5m 59.281500
WGS84 Decimal 1.8m protruding
diameter, 40 1.556117
above seabed
tonnes 59˚ 16.890’
WGS 84
01˚ 33.367’
Anchor 3
8m long x 5m 59.277933
WGS84 Decimal 1.6m protruding
diameter, 40 1.561450
above seabed
tonnes 59˚ 16.676’
WGS 84
01˚ 33.687’
Anchor 4
10m long x 5m WGS84 Decimal
59.273517
1.560317 1.1m protruding
diameter, 48 above seabed
tonnes 59˚ 16.411’
WGS 84
01˚ 33.619’
Suction Anchors 8 Anchor 5
10m long x 5m WGS84 Decimal
59.270783
1.553333 1.0m protruding
diameter, 48 above seabed
tonnes 59˚ 16.247’
WGS 84
01˚ 33.200’
Anchor 6
10m long x 5m WGS84 Decimal
59.271333
1.544750 1.0m protruding
diameter, 48 above seabed
tonnes 59˚ 16.280’
WGS 84
01˚ 32.685’
Anchor 7
8m long x 5m WGS84 Decimal
59.274950
1.539350 2.0m protruding
diameter, 40 above seabed
tonnes 59˚ 16.497’
WGS 84
01˚ 32.361’
Anchor 8
8m long x 5m WGS84 Decimal
59.279383
1.540550 1.8m protruding
diameter, 40 above seabed
tonnes 59˚ 16.763’
WGS 84
1˚ 32.433’

Revision A1 – December 2015 Page 17 of 51

 HAR-DEC-PM-ADP-0001-TAQ
HARDING STL SYSTEM DECOMMISSIONING PROGRAMME

Table 2.1: Subsea Installations and Stabilisation Features (cont’d)

Subsea
installations
Size/Weight Comments /
including Number Location
(Te) Status
stabilisation
features
Shuttle tanker WGS84 Decimal
59.276417
mooring and 8.39m x 7.4 m x 1.550433
1
loading interface 99 Te 59° 16.586'
WGS 84
Buoy 01° 33.025'

Lay between anchor & shuttle Connected

Mooring Lines Each = 450 m x between suction
8 tanker mooring and loading anchor & Tri-
(chain element) 131 Te
interface buoy location plate*
Lay between anchor & shuttle Connected
Mooring Lines Each = 225 m x
8 tanker mooring and loading between Tri-
(wire element) 11.5 Te plate and buoy
interface buoy location
Lay between anchor & shuttle In between wire
Mooring Line Each = 1 m x 1.3
8 tanker mooring and loading & chain
Tri-plates Te elements
interface buoy location
Lay between anchor & shuttle At either ends of
Mooring Line
24 Each = 0.42 Te tanker mooring and loading the wire and
shackles interface buoy location chain elements
Lay between anchor & shuttle Fitted to either
Mooring line
16 Each = 0.77 Te tanker mooring and loading end of the wire
wire sockets interface buoy location elements

Messenger &
Pick up line with Attached to the
top of buoy and
marker buoys & 363m x 9 Te As per shuttle tanker mooring
1 weather vanes
navigation (approx.) and loading interface buoy as sea & tide
warning lights & dictate.
Lifting Bridle

Wellheads N/A N/A N/A N/A

Manifold N/A N/A N/A N/A

Protection
N/A N/A N/A N/A
Frame(s)
Concrete
N/A N/A N/A N/A
Mattresses
Grout bags N/A N/A N/A N/A

Formwork N/A N/A N/A N/A

Frond Mats N/A N/A N/A N/A

Rock Dump N/A N/A N/A N/A

* The mooring chain will be severed at the seabed as close to the suction anchor as possible. The length of chain remaining
attached to the suction anchor will be relatively short and will have a free end which would prevent the chain from becoming
a snagging hazard. During the offshore operations, if the chain is considered a hazard the chain will be jetted below the
surface of the seabed.

Revision A1 – December 2015 Page 18 of 51

 HAR-DEC
C-PM-ADP-0
0001-TAQ
HARDING
G STL SYS
STEM DECO NING PROGRAMME
OMMISSION

Figure
e 2.1 Hardin
ng STL Co mponents to be deco
ommission
ned

F
Figure 2.2 Harding
H ST
TL Suction Anchor
A Sc
chematic

Re
evision A1 – December 2015
2 Page
e 19 of 51
 HAR-DEC
C-PM-ADP-0
0001-TAQ
HARDING
G STL SYS
STEM DECO NING PROGRAMME
OMMISSION

2.3
2 Pip
pelines includin
ng Stabillisation Feature
es
The
e Harding cruude oil exporrt pipeline, P
PL1176, doess not form paart of the Ha rding STL In nstallation
and
d therefore, although
a reference is mad de, does not form part of this DP scoppe of activitie
es.

Thiss pipeline wiill be modifie

ed for re-use
e as part of the new OLS
S system, thee details of which
w will
be ddefined in a variation
v to PWA
P 23/W/995.

2.4
2 We
ells

Table 2.2: Well In

nformation
n
Platform We
ells Designatio
on Status
s Category of
o Well
N/A
S
Subsea Wellls
N/A

2.5
2 Drrill Cuttin
ngs

Tab
ble 2.3: Dril l Cuttings Pile(s) Info
ormation
Location of Pile
L P Centre Seabed
d Area E
Estimated volume of
(Latitude/Lo
ongitude) (m²²) cuttings (m³)

N/A
A

2.6
2 Inv
ventory Estimattes

Figure
F 2.3 I nventory Estimate
E

Re
evision A1 – December 2015
2 Page
e 20 of 51
 HAR-DEC-PM-ADP-0001-TAQ
HARDING STL SYSTEM DECOMMISSIONING PROGRAMME

Table 2.4: Estimated Inventory: Installations STL and Moorings

STL and Moorings Qty Weight Length Diameter Total Made from
Item Description kg/m m m kg Te
1 STL Buoy 1 99000 8 7.8 99000 Steel 99
2 Wire 8 51 225 111mm dia 91800 Steel 91.8
3 Chain K3 studless 8 291 450 120mm 1047600 Steel 1047.6
4 Tri Plates 8 1335 1 N/A 10680 Steel 10.68
5 Suction Anchor 1 5 41 tonnes est 8 5 205000 Steel 205
6 Suction Anchor 2 3 48 tonnes 10 5 144000 Steel 144
7 Misc shackles 24 415 1 n/a 9960 Steel 9.96
8 Wire Socket 16 765 1 n/a 12240 Steel 12.24
Plastic &
est 22 + 26mm -
9 Pick Up Line 1 363.6 8739 Synthetic 8.739
buoy 150mm
rope
Tonnes

Total Mass 1620280 Steel 1620.3

Plastic &
8739 Synthetic 8.7
rope
Total 1629.0

The inventory list in Table 2.4 has a total weight of 1629Te of which 1530Te is to be returned to
shore for recycling/disposal. The shuttle tanker interface buoy (99Te) is to be returned to its
owner TEEKAY Shipping Norway AS.

Revision A1 – December 2015 Page 21 of 51

 HAR-DEC-PM-ADP-0001-TAQ
HARDING STL SYSTEM DECOMMISSIONING PROGRAMME

3.0 REMOVAL AND DISPOSAL METHODS

In line with the waste hierarchy, the re-use of an installation (or parts thereof) is first in the order
of preferred decommissioning options.

Equipment and vessel obsolescence is the driver for replacing the STL, and as such, assessment
determined that none of the STL Installation component parts were suitable for re-use or
redeployment at this time.

TAQA shall return the STL submerged buoy to the owner, TEEKAY Shipping Norway AS.

However; acknowledging that the crude oil export pipeline PL1176 and PLEM are not considered
part of the STL Installation, the assessment did confirm that both the export pipeline and PLEM
should remain in place as part of the replacement OLS system.

3.1 Topsides
N/A

3.2 Jackets
N/A

3.3 Subsea Installations and Stabilisation Features

All STL component parts owned by the field owners, shall be removed to shore for recycling or
disposal.

Table 3.1: Subsea Installations and Stabilisation Features

Subsea
installations
Disposal Route (if
including Number Option
applicable)
stabilisation
features
Suction Removal as part of the works undertaken to
8 Onshore for recycling.
Anchors install the replacement offloading system.
Shuttle tanker
mooring and
Removal as part of the works undertaken to Returned to equipment
loading 1
install the replacement offloading system. owner.
Interface
Buoy
Mooring
Removal as part of the works undertaken to
Lines (Chain 8
install the replacement offloading system.
Onshore for recycling.
Element)
Mooring
Removal as part of the works undertaken to
Lines (wire 8
install the replacement offloading system.
Onshore for recycling.
element)
Mooring Line Removal as part of the works undertaken to
8 Onshore for recycling.
(Tri-plates) install the replacement offloading system.

Removal as part of the works undertaken to

Mooring Line 24
install the replacement offloading system.
Onshore for recycling.
Shackles

Revision A1 – December 2015 Page 22 of 51

 HAR-DEC-PM-ADP-0001-TAQ
HARDING STL SYSTEM DECOMMISSIONING PROGRAMME

Table 3.1: Subsea Installations and Stabilisation Features

Subsea
installations
Disposal Route (if
including Number Option
applicable)
stabilisation
features
Removal as part of the works undertaken to
Wire Sockets 16
install the replacement offloading system.
Onshore for recycling.

Messenger +
Pick up line
with marker
Removal as part of the works undertaken to
buoys & 1
install the replacement offloading system.
Onshore for disposal.
navigation
warning
lights
Wellheads N/A N/A N/A

Manifolds N/A N/A N/A

Templates N/A N/A N/A

Production
N/A N/A N/A
Frames
Concrete
N/A N/A N/A
Mattresses

Grout bags N/A N/A N/A

Formwork N/A N/A N/A

Frond Mats N/A N/A N/A

Rock Dump N/A N/A N/A

3.3.1 Suction Anchors Comparative Assessment

The system includes amongst its elements, eight suction anchors which are utilised in the
provision of the mooring capability of the system. Due to their unique seabed application type,
the suction anchors have been the subject of a specific decommissioning options review.

This took the form of a formal removal options Comparative Assessment (CA) [2], in which various
technical options previously developed in dealing with these types of anchors, were considered.
The options were then ranked through a process as described in the following sections.

3.3.2 Comparative Assessment Method

A CA of the suction anchors decommissioning options was conducted by an independent
consultant, Project Development International (PDi), following their process and terms of
reference, derived from and underpinned by the requirements of OSPAR.

Initially eleven decommissioning methods were considered for decommissioning of suction

anchors. The eleven options are listed in Table 3.2 on page 25.

Based on a technical feasibility review the eleven options were reduced to seven. These seven
options were brought forward for Comparative Assessment.

Revision A1 – December 2015 Page 23 of 51

 HAR-DEC-PM-ADP-0001-TAQ
HARDING STL SYSTEM DECOMMISSIONING PROGRAMME

Comparative Assessment Session:

The CA session was held in TAQA offices on the 15th December 2014 and facilitated and chaired
by PDi and attended by a number of stakeholders in the project, including:

 TAQA

 Maersk Oil
 Joint Nature Conservation Committee (JNCC)
 Marine Scotland Science (MS)
 Environ (Independent environmental consultants)
 Scottish Fisheries Federation (SFF) – who, whilst not present on the day, had been
advised of and consulted on the options being put forward for comparative assessment
and provided feedback as to their position on each option.

In order to compare the options, each option was scored against a set of assessment criteria in
the following categories:

 Safety

 Environmental

 Technical

 Societal

 Reputational

 Ongoing Liability

 Economic.

Revision A1 – December 2015 Page 24 of 51

 HAR-DEC-PM-ADP-0001-TAQ
HARDING STL SYSTEM DECOMMISSIONING PROGRAMME

3.3.3 Suction Anchors Specific Decommissioning Options

An initial decommissioning scope development process generated a number of anchors specific
decommissioning options. The table below covers all the options tabled in the Suction Anchors
Decommissioning Options Selection Report[1] and identifies which options were disregarded and
which options were subject to the Comparative Assessment Review.

Table 3.2: Suction Anchors Decommissioning

Option 1 Leave in situ until end of field life, then fully recover. Taken forward for Comparative Assessment.
This option involves an initial offshore campaign to install protection over any suction anchors that lie outside the exclusion zone of the
new loading system. Protection would consist of either rock dump or GRP/steel covers to prevent trawl gear snagging on the anchor.
A second offshore campaign will be performed at the end of the Harding field life, to remove the protection covers and suction
anchors.
Option 2 Leave in place to degrade naturally. Taken forward for Comparative Assessment.

This option proposes leaving the suction anchors in place, with no remedial protection and allows them to degrade naturally over time.
Leave in place to degrade naturally but cover with rock
Option 3 Taken forward for Comparative Assessment.
to provide over-trawlability.
Similar to option 2. In this case the anchors will be left in situ to degrade naturally, however they will also be covered with rock to
provide overtrawlability. Estimate to cover all anchors 8,400 tonnes of rock, impacting area of 0.003 km², ref appendix 2
Option 4 Complete removal by reverse installation. Taken forward for Comparative Assessment.
This option involves applying a reverse installation method, during which water is pumped into the anchors to force them out of the
seabed. The anchors will then be recovered back to the vessel deck and transported for onshore disposal/recycling.
Option 5 Complete removal by direct pull. Taken forward for Comparative Assessment.
This option involves divers installing rigging onto the suction anchors pad-eyes and opening the top vent on the anchors. Following
this, a suitable heavy lift vessel will be mobilised to perform the direct pull of the anchors from the seabed. The anchors will be
recovered to shore for disposal/recycling.
Disregarded, insufficient sediment in water column
Option 6 Leave in situ and install Frond Mats
to encourage sediment deposits to build up.
The suction anchors are to be left in situ, and frond mattresses are to be installed over them to encourage natural coverage.
Disregarded due to the high noise, vibration and the
Option 7 Leave in situ and drive to depth anchor was not designed with this application in
mind.
Using subsea piling equipment, drive the suction anchors to an agreed depth below the seabed and allow to backfill naturally.

Disregarded due to the large volume of seabed

Option 8 Complete removal by external excavation material that would be required to be removed from
around the anchor.
Use of dredging/excavation equipment to remove sufficient seabed around the suction anchors for them to be easily removed.
3
Estimated 54,000m (108,000 tonnes) of material would be excavated, impacting an area of 0.018km².
Disregarded – due to technical difficulty. To be
successful, the lifting of the anchor would have to
Option 9 Complete removal by water injection
be completed whilst the soils in the full length of the
anchor were ‘fluidised’.
This option involves the fabrication of bespoke tool used to inject water around the circumference of the suction anchors, and allow it
to be completely removed.

Disregarded – due to the large volume of seabed

Complete removal by reverse installation preceded by
Option 10 material that would be required to be removed from
partial excavation
around the anchor.
This option is a combination of options 4 and 8 – firstly partially excavate around the suction anchors, followed by the reverse
installation process to completely remove the suction anchors.
Option 11 Partial removal by cut and burial. Taken forward for Comparative Assessment.
This option proposes to dredge around the circumference of the suction anchors and perform an initial cut of the internal stiffening
beam. A second cut around the circumference of the anchors will then be performed, and the top section removed. A final cut of the
remaining internal stiffening beam will then be carried out. The cut sections will be recovered to the vessel and transported onshore
for disposal/recycling.

Revision A1 – December 2015 Page 25 of 51

 HAR-DEC-PM-ADP-0001-TAQ
HARDING STL SYSTEM DECOMMISSIONING PROGRAMME

3.3.4 Weighted Assessment

Weightings were given to each category of the comparative assessment. The weight factors
were derived in consultation with TAQA in accordance with their corporate policies, and are
presented in Table 3.3 below. Safety was judged as being the most critical category and is
therefore applied the highest weighting.

Table 3.3: Weight Factors

Category Weight factor
Safety 1.5
Environmental 1.3
Technical 1.0
Societal 1.1
Reputation 1.1
Ongoing Liability 1.2
Economic 1.2

Revision A1 – December 2015 Page 26 of 51

 HAR-DEC-PM-ADP-0001-TAQ
HARDING STL SYSTEM DECOMMISSIONING PROGRAMME

3.3.5 Weighted Results

The following table lists the weighted options results.

Table 3.4: Weighted Comparative Assessment Summary Options Table

Option 1a Option 1b Option 3 Option 4 Option 5 Option 11
Assessment Installation Complete
Place rock
Criteria Weight temporary removal by Complete
over suction Complete Partial
factor fishing reverse removal by
anchors and removal by removal and
friendly installation reverse
leave to direct pull burial
protection at end of installation
degrade
cover field life
Safety
Risk to offshore
personnel - 6 6 3 6 6 6
Construction vessels
Risk to offshore
personnel - Subsea 6 3 1.5 3 3 9
1.5
(divers)
Risk to onshore
1.5 13.5 3 13.5 13.5 13.5
personnel
Residual risk to other
6 1.5 6 1.5 1.5 1.5
users of the sea
Environmental
Physical Presence 7.8 1.3 7.8 1.3 7.8 7.8
Seabed Disturbance 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8 20.8
Noise and Vibration 7.8 11.7 11.7 11.7 11.7 15.6
Atmospheric
1.3 5.2 5.2 5.2 5.2 5.2 5.2
Emissions
Marine Discharges 5.2 5.2 5.2 5.2 5.2 5.2
Solid Waste 5.2 5.2 5.2 5.2 5.2 5.2
Loss of Containment 1.3 5.2 1.3 5.2 5.2 5.2
Technical
Technical Challenge 6 12 2 9 16 9
Weather Sensitivity 1.0 6 8 4 8 8 8
Use of technology or
4 6 1 4 8 4
equipment
Societal
Fisheries Impacts 6.6 1.1 6.6 1.1 1.1 4.4
1.1
Amenities 3.3 6.6 3.3 6.6 6.6 6.6
Reputation
Risk to Company 1.1 6.6 2.2 6.6 2.2 2.2 4.4
Ongoing liability 1.2 14.4 1.2 14.4 1.2 1.2 7.2
Economic 1.2 10.8 10.8 14.4 10.8 19.2 14.4
Individual Average Score: 6.18 5.97 5.79 5.71 7.07 8.05
Category Average Score: 7.53 5.52 7.48 5.28 7.14 7.90

Revision A1 – December 2015 Page 27 of 51

 HAR-DEC-PM-ADP-0001-TAQ
HARDING STL SYSTEM DECOMMISSIONING PROGRAMME

3.3.6 Comparative Assessment Options Selection Results

Table 3.5: CA Option Selection Results

Removal CA outcome
Description Score
Option order
Installation of suitably engineered temporary over fishing
1a 6 7.53
friendly protection cover.
Complete removal by reverse installation (at end of Harding
1b 3 5.52
field life).
2 1 Leave in place to degrade naturally. *
3 5 Place rock over suction anchors and leave to degrade. 7.48
4 2 Complete removal by reverse installation. 5.28
5 4 Complete removal by direct pull. 7.14
11 7 Partial removal and burial. 7.90

Notes *Option 2 “Leave in place to degrade naturally” was initially scored but on advice from
stakeholder that this option was unacceptable and due to current DECC policy, the
option was not taken forward for the weighted assessment.

3.3.7 Comparative Assessment Selected Option

Table 3.6: Selected Option

Removal CA outcome
Description
Option order
4 2 Complete removal by reverse installation.

Option 2 was not considered viable due to concerns raised by stakeholder and current DECC
policy. As a result Option 4 is ranked the first in the CA review. However it is recognised that the
success of Option 4 cannot be guaranteed; see sub-section 3.3.8 and Appendix 2 below.

Option 5 was not considered viable due to the following reasons;

 The calculated loads required to direct pull the suction anchors out of the seabed were
between 450 tonnes and 1600 tonnes.

 The suction anchor lift points (padeyes) are only designed for 55 tonnes each and would
not be suitable for the loads required for direct pull

 There are currently no vessels that operate in the North Sea capable of providing the
required lift capacity

 Cranes are not designed to withstand the significant shock load that occurs when anchor
breaks free from the soil

Options 1a and 1b were considered to represent a single option but as there are two work
campaigns they were evaluated separately in the CA review. However, degradation of the
suction anchor in the period to end of field life is expected to prevent successful reverse
installation so this option is not considered to be viable.

Revision A1 – December 2015 Page 28 of 51

 HAR-DEC-PM-ADP-0001-TAQ
HARDING STL SYSTEM DECOMMISSIONING PROGRAMME

3.3.8 Suction Anchor Removal by Reverse Installation

A technical note is included in Appendix 2 providing more information on the reverse installation
technique, the potential failures of the technique and mitigations for those failures.

It is intended that pressurisation shall be attempted for each anchor, regardless of any failures
encountered.

The potential failures of reverse installation are (1) failure to achieve the required pressurisation,
or (2) that the suction anchor / seabed soil interaction presents a resistance to the technique that
requires an applied pressure, and / or flowrate, higher than predicted and which is not achievable.
Where there are failures, of reverse installation that can be remedied using reasonable
endeavours to carry out repairs, these shall be carried out in 2016 and pressurisation re-applied.
However, failures which are due to soil piping or which for any other reason requires further
engineering, potentially bespoke fabrication and / or novel solutions (complex failures), are not
viable for repair / rectification to be effected in 2016.

Carrying out repairs of complex failures would require bespoke engineering, e.g. injection of drill
mud or injection of leak sealant compounds. Such bespoke engineering would be unproven,
have no guarantee of success and would require increased diving work, which would increase the
safety and environmental impact, and would also be more costly.

If the design pressure (installation pressure +10%) is successfully applied and the suction anchor
does not move then the reverse installation method is not viable and requires utilisation of
another removal method which increases the safety and environmental impact, and would be
more costly.

Therefore, it is intended to remove all anchors in 2016 using the reverse installation method.
However, in the event of failure of the reverse installation method in 2016, where the failure is
due to or resulting from a complex failure (i.e. further work would be required to identify a method
to complete reverse installation after 2016), it is intended, following liaison and agreement with
DECC, to cover the anchor, by rockdump and leave in situ; see Appendix 2 for estimate of
rockdump quantity. It is considered that the ‘partial recovery’ of an anchor, i.e. suction anchor not
fully removed from seabed at failure of reverse installation, is, after detailed engineering and
utilisation of optimal removal procedure, rated as very unlikely / very low risk.

Figure 3.1 illustrates the decision flowchart intended for the suction anchor removal by reverse
installation.

Revision A1 – December 2015 Page 29 of 51

 HAR-DEC-PM-ADP-0001-TAQ
HARDING STL SYSTEM DECOMMISSIONING PROGRAMME

Survey anchor for damage/
deterioration

Damage evident Yes Repair viable

Repairs to small bore piping are
likely to be viable in 2016
Structural damage to anchor not
viable to repair as requires
No Yes engineering design and additional
vessel campaign in 2017, or later

Remove anchor, by 
Carry out Repair
reverse installation

Yes Yes
Design pressure ≡ installation
pressure +10%
No Failure to achieve pressure due to
Achieved design  soil piping requires novel solution,
pressure ?
No Damage evident
engineering design and additional
vessel campaign in 2017, or later

Yes
No

Removal / 
recovery  No Soil Piping If design pressure is achieved and
achieved anchor not removed then reverse
installation is not viable
No Should anchor move but removal not
Yes
be achieved then reassessment
needed as potential for small bore
If repair is not viable and/or no  piping repair or cut and recover may
movement occurs after  be viable
pressurisation the pile cannot be  Alternate removal methods increase
recovered by reverse installation. safety and environmental impact,
and are costly
Yes

All reasonable endeavours to 
Partial recovery, revert to  office for  recover suction pile have failed; 
further engineering review cover stuck pile with rockdump and 
complete overtrawl survey  

Removal successful:
Overtrawl Survey

Figure 3.1 Removal by Reverse Installation Flowchart

Revision A1 – December 2015 Page 30 of 51

 HAR-DEC-PM-ADP-0001-TAQ
HARDING STL SYSTEM DECOMMISSIONING PROGRAMME

3.4 Pipelines
No pipelines are being decommissioned as part of the STL decommissioning, however; the
Harding oil export pipeline, PL1176 will be modified as defined in a variation to PWA 23/W/95.

3.5 Pipeline Stabilisation Features

N/A

3.6 Wells
N/A

3.7 Drill Cuttings

N/A

3.8 Waste Streams

Table 3.7: Waste Stream Management Methods

Waste Stream Removal and Disposal method
Bulk Liquids N/A
The bulk will be removed at sea, as part of the decommissioning recovery process and
Marine
prior to return to shore. The remainder will be the subject of removal and disposal under
Growth appropriate guidelines.
NORM/LSA
N/A
Scale
Asbestos N/A
Other
hazardous N/A
wastes
Onshore
It is the intention to use a licensed, TAQA preferred, waste management contractor, with
dismantling a demonstrable proven track record in recycling and correct disposal capabilities.
sites

Table 3.8: Inventory Disposition

Planned left (in
Total Inventory Tonnage Planned Tonnage to shore
situ)
Subsea
1629 Te 1629 Te 0
‘other’

Revision A1 – December 2015 Page 31 of 51

 HAR-DEC-PM-ADP-0001-TAQ
HARDING STL SYSTEM DECOMMISSIONING PROGRAMME

4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

4.1 Environmental Sensitivities Summary
TAQA commissioned an Environmental Report[3] that presents the findings of the independent
environmental analysis, which has been completed to identify and evaluate the potential
environmental effects associated with the preferred decommissioning option for the STL in the
Harding field. The following tables summarises the key findings of this Environmental Report.

Table 4.1: Environmental Sensitivities

Environmental
Main Feature
Receptor
Habitats Directive Annex I Habitats: No Annex I habitats are recorded or have been
confirmed within 5km of the STL. Small areas of Lophelia pertusa have potentially
been recorded on the STL pipeline end manifold (PLEM) and risers during ROV
survey (2014) although the resolution of current footage is insufficient to make a
positive identification. The Braemar Pockmarks are the closest designation located
approximately 20km from the STL.
Habitats Directive Annex II Species: Harbour porpoise sightings are recorded
regularly in the study area.
Habitats Directive Annex IV: All cetacean species are listed, making it an offence to
kill, injure, capture or disturb these animals.
CITES: Small areas of Lophelia pertusa have potentially been recorded on the STL
Mooring Buoy structures (PLEM and risers) during ROV survey 2014.
OSPAR Convention Annex V Species: Species with recorded distributions in the
area of the STL are; Lesser black-backed gull, Little shearwater, Balearic shearwater,
Conservation
Black legged kittiwake, Iberian guillemot, Basking shark, Common skate, Spotted ray,
interests Porbeagle shark and Harbour porpoise.
OSPAR Convention Annex V Habitat: Small areas of Lophelia pertusa have
potentially been recorded on the STL Mooring Buoy structures (PLEM and risers)
during ROV survey (2014). Burrowing megafauna communities are also potentially
indicated to occur in the area (visible burrows in the ROV footage). Offshore deep
sea mud habitats are recorded approximately 7km from the STL.
Scottish Biodiversity Action Plans (BAPs): Species with recorded distributions in
the study area are; Manx shearwater, European storm petrel, Arctic skua, Herring cull
and Arctic tern.
Priority Marine Feature (PMFs): Species with recorded distributions in the area of
the STL Mooring Buoy are; Saith, Norway pout, Whiting, Mackerel, Basking shark,
Blue shark, Common skate, Porbeagle shark, Sandy ray, Spiny dogfish, Minke whale,
White beaked dolphin, Atlantic white sided dolphin, Harbour porpoise,
Harbour/common seal and the Grey seal.
Depth to seabed: Up to 115m in the area.
Seabed classification: Mud and sandy mud.
Seabed features: The ROV footage of the seabed immediately surrounding the
suction anchors does not provide any evidence of biogenic reef, pockmarks or
unusual formations. There is evidence of burrows which indicate burrowing
megafauna.
Seabed contamination: Sampling carried out around the Platform included one
Seabed sample approximately 500m away from the STL system (Gardline, 2013). This
sample demonstrated less than background concentrations for all contaminants other
than naphthalene and iron. Samples carried out in the wider area indicated little
evidence of pronounced cuttings piles. The survey report concluded that ‘based on
previously published information, ecological impacts of hydrocarbons from the
Platform in the concentrations found at all bar one of the stations are likely to fall
somewhere between negligible and intermediate.’
Benthos sampling at 500m from the STL indicated an ecologically diverse Benthos
including annelids, crustaceans, molluscs and echinoderms. ROV video footage of
Benthos the immediate area around the structures, and including the structures, indicated an
abundance of echinoderms, cnidarian, crustaceans and algae.

Revision A1 – December 2015 Page 32 of 51

 HAR-DEC-PM-ADP-0001-TAQ
HARDING STL SYSTEM DECOMMISSIONING PROGRAMME

Table 4.1: Environmental Sensitivities

Environmental
Main Feature
Receptor
Blooms of phytoplankton occur every spring, followed by a smaller peak in the
Autumn. The last publicly available dataset from 2001 demonstrated population peaks
Plankton of various Ceratium species in February, June to August and October to November in
the area of the STL (SAHFOS Win CPR). Zooplankton populations peak
approximately two months following the increase in phytoplankton populations.
The STL is located within known spawning grounds of haddock (Feb to May), Saithe
(Jan to April), Norway pout (Jan to April), Whiting (Jan to June) and Nephrops (all
year round). Mackerel use the area as a nursery ground. Blue whiting use the area as
juvenile fish. Important commercial adult fish species include Herring, Haddock,
Fish Saithe, Whiting, Mackerel, Cod, Norway pout, Sprat and Sandeel,
Six species of sharks are also regularly recorded in the area (each with various
conservation designations). The Basking shark is recorded in the area in high
numbers between April and October coinciding with the peak plankton blooms.
Landings in the ICES rectangle 47F1 are dominated by demersal fisheries, although
in some years, pelagic fisheries comprise a large component. Total landings in this
Fisheries area are lower than in other adjacent ICES rectangles. Demersal fisheries target Cod,
Haddock and Whiting. Various fishing methods are used, with towed gear such as
trawls and Scottish seine netting predominating.
The most commonly sighted marine mammals in the area around the STL Mooring
Buoy are Minke whale (Balaenoptera acutorostrata) (May to Sept), White beaked
dolphin (Lagenorhynchus albirostris) (June to November), Harbour porpoise
(Phocoena phocoena) (April to September) and Atlantic white side dolphin
Marine Mammals (Lagenorhynchus acutus) (June to Sept). The Harbour porpoise is the most
frequently sighted species. Other cetaceans are also recorded on a less regular basis.
Harbour seals (Phoca vitulina) and Grey seals (Halichoerus grypus) are also recorded
in the vicinity of the STL. Research carried out recently using tracking methods
indicates minimal usage of this area and the immediate vicinity.
18 species of seabird are recorded regularly in the area around the STL. Vulnerability
of individual species varies dependent upon the life cycle, bio-geographical
population, conservation status, potential for recovery and contact time with the water.
Birds Overall, seabird vulnerability to oil pollution in the vicinity of Buoy is classified as ‘High’
in January, February, July and November and between ‘moderate and only a few
birds’ in all other months.
An onshore decommissioning facility will be used for the final disposal of suction
Onshore
anchors during decommissioning that complies with all relevant permitting and
Communities legislative requirements.
Shipping: No commercial ferry routes are located in proximity to the area. Fishing
vessels will occur regularly in the vicinity.
Wrecks and historic artefacts: No records exist of archaeological remains in the
vicinity of the STL Mooring Buoy.
Other Users of Ministry of Defence: There are no offshore areas in the vicinity of the STL used by
the sea the Ministry of Defence (MOD).
Communication infrastructure: The STL is located approximately 11.61 miles to the
North East of active telecom cables.
Tourism: No tourism activities are recorded to be carried out in the vicinity of the STL
site.
Local atmospheric conditions are influenced by emissions from nearby gas and oil
Atmosphere facilities and vessel usage. Predominant wind direction and strength varies seasonally
and will affect movement of any atmospheric emissions.

Revision A1 – December 2015 Page 33 of 51

 HAR-DEC-PM-ADP-0001-TAQ
HARDING STL SYSTEM DECOMMISSIONING PROGRAMME

4.2 Potential Environmental Impacts and their Management

Environmental Impact Assessment Summary:
The Environmental Report (ER) identifies potential environmental effects by identifying
interactions between the proposed decommissioning activities associated with the STL and the
local environment while considering responses from stakeholders. The ER also details mitigation
measures designed to avoid and reduce the identified potential environmental impacts and
describes how these will be managed in accordance with TAQA established Environmental
Management System (EMS).

The evaluation of the potential effect of the preferred option for decommissioning of the STL
utilized a standard structured methodology based on established best practice guidance and the
professional judgment of environmental specialists. The application of the methodology also
draws, where appropriate, on previous experience and lessons learned from other
decommissioning projects. Following this evaluation, which was completed through a workshop
and subsequent environmental risk assessment, the ER concludes that the recommended
options to decommission the redundant STL can be completed without causing significant impact
to the environment.

Those activities that had a potential for a significant impact are summarised in Table 4.2, along
with the proposed environmental management strategy. There will be no planned use of
underwater explosives during these activities. We acknowledge that there will be a requirement
for an environmental protection plan to be produced and submitted to JNCC should this plan
change.

Revision A1 – December 2015 Page 34 of 51

 HAR-DEC-PM-ADP-0001-TAQ
HARDING STL SYSTEM DECOMMISSIONING PROGRAMME

Impact Assessment Overview:

Table 4.2: Environmental Impact Management

Activity Main impacts Management

Topsides Removal N/A N/A

Jacket(s)/Floating Facility removal N/A N/A

Flushing will be completed from platform to tanker through

Subsea Installation(s): Removal of Whilst a number of activity/receptor interactions were
the existing closed system and disconnection and removal
Shuttle tanker mooring & Loading considered in relation to this specific activity, none were
will only take place once infrastructure has been cleaned of
interface Buoy considered likely to give rise to significant environmental
hydrocarbons and other potential contaminants. Buoy and
effect.
risers will be recovered to deck and removed.
Offshore vessels will avoid concentrations of marine
mammals.
All work programmes will be planned to optimise vessel
time in the field.
Subsea Installation(s): Removal of Similar noise levels are anticipated to those currently
Mooring Lines Underwater noise: Disturbance to marine mammals experienced in the area from commercial shipping and oil
industry supply vessels.
Minke whale, White beaked dolphin and Atlantic white-
sided dolphin are known to be present in the area in the
summer months at a low frequency (0.01 - 0.09/km)
therefore there is unlikely to be significant disturbance.
Seabed Disturbance: Direct disturbance to localised area
All efforts will be made to reduce seabed disturbance to an
of seabed during suction anchors removal by reverse
absolute minimum. Where there are areas affected, they
installation. Some localised sediment entrainment and
will be left in a condition fit for other users of the area;
Subsea Installation(s): Removal of smothering of benthic organisms through subsequent
Disturbed seabed sediments will rapidly settle out or be
Suction Anchors sediment settlement within close proximity to suction
dispersed by localised bottom currents.
anchors.
Offshore vessels will avoid concentrations of marine
Underwater noise: Disturbance to marine mammals mammals.
Removal by reverse installation for each of the suction

Revision A1 – December 2015 Page 35 of 51

 HAR-DEC-PM-ADP-0001-TAQ
HARDING STL SYSTEM DECOMMISSIONING PROGRAMME

Table 4.2: Environmental Impact Management

Activity Main impacts Management

anchors will be short duration operations and all work

programmes will be planned to optimise vessel time in the
field.
Similar noise levels are anticipated to those currently
experienced in the area from commercial shipping and oil
industry supply vessels.
Minke whale, White beaked dolphin and Atlantic white-
sided dolphin are known to be present in the area in the
summer months at a low frequency (0.01 - 0.09/km)
therefore there is unlikely to be significant disturbance.
UK Hydrographical Office and Kingfisher will be informed of
all activities and of any structures left in place.
Although not anticipated that any structures will be left in
place, in the event that this is required they will be left in
such a way that they present no greater risk to other users
than at present.
TAQA will via established lines of communication, e.g.
Effects on Commercial Fisheries: Damage or loss of
kingfisher, Fish-safe, SFF bi annual updates, UK
fishing gear/Dropped objectives.
hydrographic office, seek to inform other sea users,
including fishermen, of vessel operations during
decommissioning activities.
A post-decommissioning as-left survey will be conducted at
the end of decommissioning, and any debris discovered
and found to be a part of the removal operation, or off the
elements previously removed, shall be recovered.
No possible incidents of Lophelia pertusa coral have been
Designations: Small areas of possible Lophelia pertusa
recorded on the suction anchors. The PLEM is to be left in
growth have been observed in ROV footage on STL
situ and reused in the replacement system. Small incidents
structures (PLEM and risers) Due to the resolution and
of marine growth which may be Lophelia were identified in
orientation of the footage it has not been possible to make
ROV footage of the risers. If confirmed it is considered
a confirmed identification of this feature.
unlikely that these incidents would comprise a coherent

Revision A1 – December 2015 Page 36 of 51

 HAR-DEC-PM-ADP-0001-TAQ
HARDING STL SYSTEM DECOMMISSIONING PROGRAMME

Table 4.2: Environmental Impact Management

Activity Main impacts Management

biogenic reef habitat with sustainable ecosystem

functionality; It is anticipated that this would be removed
along with any other marine growth, prior to removal.
A risk of both water column and sediment contamination
does exist from oil spills from vessel activity during
decommissioning. Standard operating procedures
according to TAQA’s relevant oil pollution emergency plan
(OPEP) will be in place at all times to control this and
mitigate any consequences from such spills.
As no hydrocarbons or chemicals have been associated
with the long term operation of the suction anchors it has
been assumed no potential for large scale spills of historic
hydrocarbon contaminants from suction anchor removal,
and Continual monitoring of fuel status will be completed
with regular visual inspections of sea surface throughout
the works.
As no hydrocarbons or chemicals have been associated
with the long term operation of the suction anchors and no
Accidental events: oil/diesel spill discharges:
use of chemicals is anticipated, no resultant discharges to
seawater are expected.
Vessels will be audited as part of selection and pre-
mobilisation and only efficient service vessels will be
Energy Use and Emissions:
utilised. Work programmes will be planned to optimise
vessel time in the field.
Decommissioning Pipelines N/A N/A

Decommissioning Stabilisation
Features N/A N/A

Decommissioning Drill Cuttings N/A N/A

Revision A1 – December 2015 Page 37 of 51

 HAR-DEC-PM-ADP-0001-TAQ
HARDING STL DECOMMISSIONING PROGRAMME

5.0 INTERESTED PARTY CONSULTATIONS

Consultations Summary:

Table 5.1: Summary of Stakeholder Comments

Stakeholder Comment Response
INFORMAL CONSULTATIONS
Initial engagement by email November 2014, followed by After initial engagement in December, Marine Scotland
face to face meeting at Marine Scotland’s offices in attended and contributed to the formal CA held later that
Marine
December 2014 to brief on the decommissioning scope same month, and any further comment, if required, would
Scotland
covered. Marine Scotland were invited to the be made to the Decommissioning Programme during the
Comparative Assessment held in December 2014. consultation process.
Initial engagement by email November 2014, followed by After initial engagement in December, JNCC attended
Joint Nature
face to face meeting in December 2014 at JNCC’s and contributed to the formal CA session held later that
Conservation
offices, to brief on the decommissioning scope covered. same month. Any further comment if required would be
Committee
JNCC were invited to the Comparative Assessment held made to the Decommissioning Programme during the
(JNCC)
in December 2014. consultation process.
Initial engagement by previously arranged telephone
The HSE declined the invitation to the CA on the basis
conference, December 2014, where a briefing was given
that the scope presents no areas of specific concern. Any
of the decommissioning scope. This was followed by an
HSE further comment, if required, would be made to the
email summary of the discussion and outcome. The HSE
Decommissioning Programme during the consultation
were invited to the Comparative Assessment held in
process.
December 2014.
STATUTORY CONSULTATIONS
National NFFO have developed a joint position on
Initial engagement made with a phone call and followed
Federation of st decommissioning with the SFF and would like to be
up by e-mail on the 21 of May 2015.
Fishermen’s copied on any consultation for good order.
Organisations Letter received in response to revision R6 confirming ‘no
(NFFO) Revision R6 issued to NFFO.
adverse comments’; see Appendix 1.3.
Initial engagement with a face to face meeting at the SFF SFF were unable to attend meeting in December 2014
offices in Aberdeen to brief on the decommissioning due to commitment clashes. Their view of the options
scope. The SFF’s position on the decommissioning covered in the face-to-face was provided in their
options discussed was made clear, with a preferred set of absence, and any further comment, if required, would be
options indicated in this meeting. The SFF were invited to made to the Decommissioning Programme during the
Scottish the Comparative Assessment held in December 2014. consultation process.
Fishermen’s
No objections raised to TAQA’s proposals for the
Federation
Meeting held 2 September to present the proposals Decommissioning Programme. TAQA provided, post-
contained in the draft Decommissioning Programme. meeting, further information on the proposed new 500m
safety zone and scour at mooring leg touch-down.
Letter received in response to revision R6 confirming ‘no
Revision R6 issued to SFF.
adverse comments’; see Appendix 1.2.
NIFPO advised verbally that due to the location of the
Northern Irish facilities and because we are in communication with the
st
Fish Initial engagement made with a phone call on the 21 of SFF that was sufficient.
Producers May 2015 and followed up e-mail providing additional NIFPO followed up with an e-mail dated the 29/5/2015
Organisation information. advising that they had no comment to make as Harding is
(NIFPO) outwith the area that NIFPO operate; refer to Appendix
1.4.

Rev A1 – December 2015 Page 38 of 51

 HAR-DEC-PM-ADP-0001-TAQ
HARDING STL DECOMMISSIONING PROGRAMME

Table 5.2: Summary of Stakeholder Comments

STATUTORY CONSULTATIONS (continued)
Stakeholder Comment Response
A public consultation exercise has been undertaken, from
18 September to 19 October 2015, with advertisements
taken out in Edinburgh Gazette, Times and Aberdeen
Pres and Journal; refer to Appendix 1.1.
Copies of the Decommissioning Programme were made
Public No concerns or objections were raised.
freely available from TAQA office (located in Westhill,
Aberdeenshire, Scotland) during the consultation period.
Revision R6 of the Decommissioning Programme was
also placed on the DECC website: DECC
Decommissioning Programme website.
Email received in response to Revision R6 stating there
Global Marine
Revision R6 issued to Global Marine Systems. were no specific comments to the programme of works;
Systems
refer to Appendix 1.5.

Rev A1 – December 2015 Page 39 of 51

 HAR-DEC-PM-ADP-0001-TAQ
HARDING STL DECOMMISSIONING PROGRAMME

6.0 PROGRAMME MANAGEMENT

6.1 Project Management and Verification
A TAQA Project Management team will be appointed to manage the sub-contractors for the
removal of the STL. TAQA standard procedures for operational control and hazard identification
and management will be used. TAQA will monitor and track the process of consents, permits and
consultations required as part of this process. Any changes in detail to the offshore removal
programme will be discussed with DECC.

6.2 Post-Decommissioning Debris Clearance and Verification

A post-decommissioning activity debris survey will be conducted. Any debris discovered and
found to be a part of the STL or its removal operation shall be recovered for onshore disposal, in
line with existing disposal methods.

Independent verification of the seabed at the site of the recovered anchors and mooring system
will be obtained by over-trawling the seabed. This will be supported by a Certificate of Clearance
which will be submitted to DECC.

The post decommissioning survey results will be notified to the UK Fisheries Offshore Oil and
Gas Legacy Trust Fund Ltd (FLTC) for inclusion in their Fish Safe system, and for notification and
marking on Admiralty Charts and notices to Mariners. The UK Hydrographical Office and
Kingfisher will be informed.

6.3 Decommissioning Programme

ID Task Name 2015 2016 2017
Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4

Harding STL Decommissioning Programme Submission 
1
and Approval
2 Decommissioning Options Engineering
3 Decommissioning Engineering Support to Offshore
4 Initial Decommissioning offshore survey and preworks
5 Mooring Line Recovery
6 Remove STL and return to owners
7 Remove Suction Anchors
8 As Left base line survey and over trawl test
9 Onshore re‐cycling of decommissioned equipment

Figure 6.1 Decommissioning Programme

Revision A1 – December 2015 Page 40 of 51

 HAR-DEC-PM-ADP-0001-TAQ
HARDING STL DECOMMISSIONING PROGRAMME

6.4 Costs
An overall cost estimate (covering the items shown in Table 6.1 below) has been provided to
DECC in confidence.

Table 6.1: Provisional Decommissioning Programme(s) costs

Estimated Cost
Item
(£m)
Subsea Installation(s) and stabilisation Feature(s) Provided to DECC
Continuing Liability Provided to DECC
TOTAL Provided to DECC

6.5 Close Out

On completion of the decommissioning scope in its entirety, a close out report will be submitted to
DECC within 4 months.

Within the report will be independent verification of debris removal and verification of seabed
clearance.

Any variances from the approved Decommissioning Programme will be explained in the close out
report.

6.6 Post-Decommissioning Monitoring and Evaluation

It is anticipated that due to the removal process employed in decommissioning the mooring
elements of the STL, there will be no requirement to complete further surveys, following
completion of the ‘as left’ survey.

Notwithstanding, if the removal of suction anchors is unsuccessful, and there are some left in situ
covered with rockdump, then the requirement for post-decommissioning surveys shall be
reviewed in consultation with DECC and their statutory consultees.

Revision A1 – December 2015 Page 41 of 51

 HAR-DEC-PM-ADP-0001-TAQ
HARDING STL DECOMMISSIONING PROGRAMME

7.0 SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS

Table 7.1: Supporting Documents

Document Number Title
Suction Anchors Decommissioning
1.   HAR-01031-DEC-SS-REP-0001-PDI
Options Selection Report
Suction Anchors Comparative
2.   HAR-01031-DEC-SS-REP-0003-PDI
Assessment Report.
TAQA Harding STL Decommissioning
3.   HAR-01031-DEC-EN-REP-0001-ENV
Environmental Assessment Report

Revision A1 – December 2015 Page 42 of 51

 HAR-DEC-PM-ADP-0001-TAQ
HARDING STL DECOMMISSIONING PROGRAMME

8.0 PARTNERS LETTER(S) OF SUPPORT

A Partner Letter of Support from the other current equity holder (Maersk Oil North Sea UK
Limited) is presented below.

Revision A1 – December 2015 Page 43 of 51

 HAR-DEC-PM-ADP-0001-TAQ
HARDING STL DECOMMISSIONING PROGRAMME

APPENDIX 1

Public Notice and Statutory Consultee Correspondence

Revision A1 – December 2015 Page 44 of 51

 HAR-DEC-PM-ADP-0001-TAQ
HARDING STL DECOMMISSIONING PROGRAMME

APPENDIX 1.1 Public Notices

Public Notice Edinburgh Gazette 21 Public Notice The Press and Journal 18
September 2016 September 2015

Revision A1 – December 2015 Page 45 of 51

 HAR-DEC-PM-ADP-0001-TAQ
HARDING STL DECOMMISSIONING PROGRAMME

Public Notice The Times 18 September

2016

Revision A1 – December 2015 Page 46 of 51

 HAR-DEC-P
H PM-ADP-00001-TAQ
H
HARDING STL MMISSIONIING PROGRAMME
S DECOM

APP
PENDIX 1.2
2 SFF Co
orresponde
ence

Rev
vision A1 – D
December 2015 Page 47
4 of 51
 HAR-DEC-P
H PM-ADP-00001-TAQ
H
HARDING STL MMISSIONIING PROGRAMME
S DECOM

APPE
ENDIX 1.3 NFFO Co
orrespondence

Rev
vision A1 – D
December 2015 Page 48
4 of 51
 HAR-DEC-PM-ADP-0001-TAQ
HARDING STL DECOMMISSIONING PROGRAMME

APPENDIX 1.4 NIFPO Correspondence

See the following page for the email reply received from NIFPO.

Revision A1 – December 2015 Page 49 of 51

  
Ronnie Toal The following components of the original system are redundant and will be removed: 
•             Eight mooring lines and associated components 
•             Eight steel seabed suction anchors (TBC) 
From: Ian Kelly <[email protected]>
•             The shuttle tanker mooring and loading interface buoy and associated components 
Sent: 29 May 2015 14:54
•             The offloading riser * 
To: Craig Stenhouse  
Cc: Anthony Yates; Ronnie Toal The replacement system will be an Offshore Loading System, shown below 
Subject: RE: Statutory Consultation Harding Loading System Decommissioning  

Thank You for your consultation we have no comment to make as it is out with the area that our members usual 
operate. 
 
Regards 
Ian Kelly  
 
From: Craig Stenhouse [mailto:[email protected]]  
Sent: 21 May 2015 15:25 
To: [email protected] 
Cc: Anthony Yates; Ronnie Toal 
Subject: Statutory Consultation Harding Loading System Decommissioning  
 
Dear Sir/Madam 
 
NIFPO are listed as a statutory Consultee from DECC for decommissioning activities.   
  Replacement System 
In accordance with the Petroleum Act 1998, TAQA Bratani Limited (TAQA), as the operator of the Harding field STL, and on   
behalf of the Section 29 holders (see Table 1.2), is applying to the Department of Energy and Climate Change (DECC), to obtain  Please confirm the receipt of this e‐mail and should you require any additional information please do not hesitate  to give me a 
approval for decommissioning the Harding offloading system.  call or e‐mail. 
  Please also advise, as discussed  if you are happy, that we are in dialogue with the Scottish Fishing Federation. 
The Harding field is located in the UKCS Licence Block 9/23b in the Central North Sea, approximately 320 km north‐east of   
Aberdeen (Figure 1.3). Water depth at the field is 110m. The field was discovered in January 1988 and first production was in  Many Thanks 
April 1996. The field was operated by BP until June 2013, when TAQA purchased BP’s share and took over the operatorship. 
 
The field has one central production, drilling and accommodation platform located between the Central and South reservoir  Craig Stenhouse
accumulations. The Harding platform is a large, heavy‐duty jack‐up rig fixed to a concrete gravity base structure containing oil  Construction Manager
storage tanks.  The oil is exported from the storage tanks to shuttle tankers via the STL which is located approximately 2km to  TAQA Bratani Limited
the east of the platform.   D +44 (0)1224 286128
The STL is supported by a submerged mooring and loading interface buoy, which is anchored to the seabed via eight mooring  M +44 (0)7787148867
Prospect Road, Westhill, Aberdeenshire
lines and suction anchors. Due to obsolescence the STL will be replaced by a new Offshore Loading System (OLS). 
AB32 6FE United Kingdom
 

www.taqaglobal.com
 

The information contained in this communication is confidential, may be

attorney-client privileged, and is intended only for the use of the addressee.
It is the property of Abu Dhabi National Energy Company PJSC (TAQA) or one
of its affiliates. Unauthorized use, disclosure or copying of this
communication or any part thereof is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If
you have received this communication in error, please notify me immediately by
return email and destroy this communication and all copies thereof, including
attachments.

 
                Existing System 

1 2
 HAR-DEC-PM-ADP-0001-TAQ
HARDING STL DECOMMISSIONING PROGRAMME

APPENDIX 1.5 Global Marine Systems Correspondence

See the following page for the email reply received from Global Marine Systems.

Revision A1 – December 2015 Page 50 of 51

 Ronnie 
Ronnie Toal  

From: Wrottesley, John (GMSL) <[email protected]> Ronnie Toal, Project Manager

Sent: 06 November 2015 12:14 D +44 1224 737530, M +44 7703 004176, [email protected]
To: Ronnie Toal
TAQA Bratani Limited Prospect Road, Westhill, Aberdeenshire AB32 6FE United Kingdom
Subject: RE: Decommissioning Programme Harding STL System issued for consultation

Hi Ronnie, 
  www.taqaglobal.com
Apologies for the delay in responding.  
  TAQA is the brand name of Abu Dhabi National Energy Company PJSC
TAQA Bratani Limited, registered in England and Wales with registration number 05975475 and having its registered office at Cannon Place, 78
I don't have any specific comments on the programme of works itself as no cables should be directly affected in the  Cannon Street, London EC4N 6AF.
immediate vicinity, and if any interaction were unexpectedly to be necessary in the course of engineering the   
project, then it would be necessary to liaise with the specific cable owners who should be identified as early as 
possible. Contact details and general cable information for any systems affected can be found using KIS‐ORCA cable 
awareness charts/interactive map http://www.kis‐orca.eu/map#.VPmDJHZFDIU. Global Marine Systems would  The information contained in this communication is confidential, may be
recommend that when notice to mariners are arranged for the offshore works, then the Kingfisher fortnightly  attorney-client privileged, and is intended only for the use of the addressee.
It is the property of Abu Dhabi National Energy Company PJSC (TAQA) or one
bulletin should be updated (Contact: Kingfisher Information Service ([email protected])  to include details of  of its affiliates. Unauthorized use, disclosure or copying of this
the works to inform sea users as well as notifying the relevant authorities and UKHO.  communication or any part thereof is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If
  you have received this communication in error, please notify me immediately by
Please let me know if you require any further information.  return email and destroy this communication and all copies thereof, including
  attachments.
Best regards, 
*******************************************************************************************************************
 
John  Please Think. Do you really need to print this e-mail?
From: Wrottesley, John (GMSL) [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: 09 October 2015 12:18 Global Marine is an ISO certified company with a firm commitment to environmental issues. The information transmitted in this email (and contained in any
attachments) is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any review, retransmission,
To: Ronnie Toal dissemination or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you
Subject: RE: Decommissioning Programme Harding STL System issued for consultation receive this email in error, please contact the sender and delete the material from any computer
 
Dear Ronnie,  Registered Number: 1708481 England
 
Registered Office: New Saxon House, 1 Winsford Way, Boreham Interchange, Chelmsford, Essex CM2 5PD
My colleague passed on your message this morning. Apologies for the delay in responding – I can confirm receipt of 
the documentation that you sent by email and in the post.  *******************************************************************************************************************
 
I will review and provide my response asap. 
 
Kind regards, 
 
The information contained in this communication is confidential, may be
John 
attorney-client privileged, and is intended only for the use of the addressee.
  It is the property of Abu Dhabi National Energy Company PJSC (TAQA) or one
From: Ronnie Toal [mailto:[email protected]] of its affiliates. Unauthorized use, disclosure or copying of this
Sent: 18 September 2015 07:50 communication or any part thereof is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If
To: Wrottesley, John (GMSL) you have received this communication in error, please notify me immediately by
Subject: Decommissioning Programme Harding STL System issued for consultation return email and destroy this communication and all copies thereof, including
attachments.
 
The attached document, Decommissioning Programme Harding STL System, has been issued for consultation today 
18 September.  We have sent a copy to Global Marine by post, with the attached letter, and this will arrive in the 
afternoon, and also attached is an electronic version of the Decommissioning Programme. 
 
I would appreciate if you would reply confirming receipt, or otherwise, of the Decommissioning Programme. 
 
Regards 
 
1 2
 HAR-DEC-PM-ADP-0001-TAQ
HARDING STL DECOMMISSIONING PROGRAMME

APPENDIX 2

Technical Note on Suction Anchor Removal Failure Modes

Revision A1 – December 2015 Page 51 of 51

 HAR-01031-DEC-PM-TNN-0001-TAQ
Technical Note on Suction Anchor Removal Failure Modes

CONTENTS

Para Page

1.0  EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 3 

2.0  INTRODUCTION 4 
3.0  OBJECTIVE 6 
4.0  SUCTION ANCHOR DETAILS 7 
5.0  REVERSE INSTALLATION RECOVERY METHOD 8 
6.0  SUCTION ANCHOR FAILURE MODES AND CONTINGENCIES 10 
7.0  ROCKDUMP REQUIREMENTS 17 
8.0  ABBREVIATIONS 19 
9.0  REFERENCES 19 

Revision A2 – November 2015 Page 2 of 19

 HAR-01031-DEC-PM-TNN-0001-TAQ
Technical Note on Suction Anchor Removal Failure Modes

1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

During development of the Decommissioning Programme for the Harding SLS it was
identified through comparative assessment that the preferred decommissioning
option for the suction anchors is removal by following a reversal of the installation
procedure. TAQA have reviewed the installation records and expect to perform a
successful recovery of all suction anchors by reverse installation.
However, TAQA have identified a number of potential failure modes and associated
contingency measures, and have reviewed the practicality of implementing these
contingencies.

 Contingency measures to deal with small bore piping / instrumentation leaks

are straightforward and will be part of the onshore engineering preparation
for the removal operation.

 Contingency measures to deal with a structural integrity or soil failure would

not be considered reasonable (and have a low likelihood of success) and will
therefore not form part of the onshore planning process.
In the event that after reasonable endeavours to remove/move the anchor, these
attempts have been unsuccessful, the anchor will be covered in rockdump such that
it does not pose a hazard to other users of the sea, and left in situ.
In the event that failure occurs part way through recovery (i.e. the anchor protrudes
significantly further out of the seabed than initially found) the situation will be
assessed prior to any further intervention to determine the appropriate course of
action.

Revision A2 – November 2015 Page 3 of 19

 HAR-01031-DEC-PM-TNN-0001-TAQ
Technical Note on Suction Anchor Removal Failure Modes

2.0 INTRODUCTION
The Harding field is located in the UKCS Licence Block 9/23b in the Central North
Sea, approximately 320 km north-east of Aberdeen. Water depth at the field is
110m. The field was discovered in January 1988 and first production was in April
1996. The field was operated by BP until June 2013, when TAQA purchased BP’s
field equity and took over the operatorship.
The field has one central production, drilling and accommodation platform located
between the Central and South reservoir accumulations. The Harding platform is a
large, heavy-duty jack-up rig fixed to a concrete gravity base structure containing oil
storage tanks. The oil is exported from the storage tanks to shuttle tankers via the
Submerged Loading System (SLS) which is located approximately 2km to the east
of the platform.
The SLS includes a submerged turret mooring and loading interface buoy (STL),
which is anchored to the seabed via eight mooring lines and suction anchors. Due to
obsolescence the SLS will be replaced by a new Offshore Loading System (OLS).

Figure 2.1 Existing Submerged Loading System

Revision A2 – November 2015 Page 4 of 19

 HAR-01031-DEC-PM-TNN-0001-TAQ
Technical Note on Suction Anchor Removal Failure Modes

The following components of the original system are redundant and will be removed:
• Eight mooring lines and associated components
• Eight steel seabed suction anchors
• The shuttle tanker mooring and loading interface buoy and associated
components
• The offloading riser

*The Harding oil export pipeline PL1176, inclusive of riser, is being modified. This will be defined in a variation to
PWA 23/W/95; as a result the riser is not included in this Decommissioning Programme.

Revision A2 – November 2015 Page 5 of 19

 HAR-01031-DEC-PM-TNN-0001-TAQ
Technical Note on Suction Anchor Removal Failure Modes

3.0 OBJECTIVE
During development of the Decommissioning Programme for the Harding SLS it was
identified through comparative assessment that the preferred decommissioning
option for the suction anchors is removal by following a reversal of the installation
procedure. TAQA have reviewed the installation records and expect to perform a
successful recovery of all suction anchors by reverse installation.
The objective of this technical note is to identify the possible failure modes that
could occur to prevent the successful removal, by reverse installation, of the Harding
SLS mooring suction anchors. In addition, contingencies have been identified to
address each failure. In the event that after reasonable endeavours to remove the
anchor, these attempts are unsuccessful, the anchor will be covered in rockdump
such that it does not pose a hazard to other users of the sea, and left in situ. The
volume of rock dump has been calculated and is included in section 7.0.
The technical note addresses failure to initiate movement or limited movement of the
anchor. In the event failure occurs part way through recovery with the anchor further
out of the seabed than initially found then further engineering would be required to
determine the appropriate course of action. It is considered that the ‘partial
recovery’ of an anchor, i.e. suction anchor not fully removed from seabed at failure
of reverse installation, is, after detailed engineering and utilisation of optimal
removal procedure, rated as very unlikely / very low risk.

Revision A2 – November 2015 Page 6 of 19

 HAR-01031-DEC C-PM-TNN-0001-TAQ Q
Techni cal Note on
n Suction Anchor
A Re moval Failure Modes
s

4.0 SUCTION ANC

CHOR D
DETAILS
S
There are
e 8 suction anchors ra
anging from
m 8m to 10m
m long andd 5m diameeter. The
10m long anchors weigh approxximately 50
0 tonnes an
nd the 8m loong anchorrs weigh
approxima
ately 40 tonnes.

Figure
F 4.1 S
Suction Anchor Details

Revision A
A2 – Novem
mber 2015 Pa
age 7 of 19
 HAR-01031-DEC C-PM-TNN-0001-TAQ Q
Techni cal Note on
n Suction Anchor
A Re moval Failure Modes
s

5.0 REVER
RSE INS
STALLA
ATION RECOVE
R RY MET
THOD

To extractt a suction anchor from m the seabe ed the simpplest methood is to pum
mp water
into the anchor to crreate a diffe erential pre
essure betwween the insside and ouutside of
the ancho or. The differential presssure acts over
o the diameter of thee anchor efffectively
acting as a hydraulic cylinder. If the pressure differential can be m
maintained the
t force
applied too the anchor will pussh the anch hor out of the seabeed. At som me point
sufficient crane
c tension will overrcome the remaining
r soil
s friction aand the ancchor can
be recove ered to the surface.
s
The proce
ess to extract a suctiion anchor is essentia ally the insstallation prrocedure
performed
d in reverse as outlined
d below and
d in Figures 5.1 and 5.22.

 Install recovery rigging

r to su
uction ancho
or

 oy WROV with
Deplo w pump a nd dock into
o ROV hot stab panel

 el crane applies consta

Vesse ant tension (5-20 tonnes in excesss of self weight)
w to
ancho
or

 WROV to pump water

w anchor and maintain prressure
into a

Fiigure 5.1 Suction Anc

chor – Reverse Installation Step
p1

The ancho
or should sttart moving at a similarr pressure achieved
a duuring installa
ation i.e.
between 2 and 8 bar..

Revision A
A2 – Novem
mber 2015 Pa
age 8 of 19
 HAR-01031-DEC C-PM-TNN-0001-TAQ Q
Techni cal Note on
n Suction Anchor
A Re moval Failure Modes
s

 Once anchor sta arts to movve WROV to maintain pressuree and vesse
el crane
contin
nues to apply constant tension

 Contin
nue with thiis operation nchor is clear of the seeabed
n until the an

 Disco
onnect WRO
OV

 Recovver anchor to surface

Fiigure 5.2 Suction Anc

chor – Reverse Installation Step
p2

Revision A
A2 – Novem
mber 2015 Pa
age 9 of 19
 HAR-01031-DEC C-PM-TNN-0001-TAQ Q
Techni cal Note on
n Suction Anchor
A Re moval Failure Modes
s

6.0 SUCTION ANC

CHOR F
FAILURE
E MODE
ES AND
CONTIINGENC
CIES
The prima ary failure mode
m for a ssuction anc
chor is failurre to achievve internal pressure
p
in the ancchor which can
c occur d due to two reasons;
r so
oil failure or mechanica al failure.
Note thatt both failu ure modess can occu ur simultan neously durring installation or
recovery.

Soil piping
g occurs whhen the fluiid leaks through the gaps betweeen the soil particles
and createes leak path
hs to the en
nvironment.

Mechanica
al failure woould be the result of a material de
efect, damaage by third party or
damage during
d installation, corro
osion or a combination
c n of these faactors.

The leak path resultts in press ure loss, i..e. failure to apply or increase pressure
p
within the anchor, and the loss, if large enoough, will ex
xceed the prressure sup pplied by
the pump p. This will result in a situation n where th here is insuufficient diffferential
pressure available
a to
o overcome the soil fric ction and it will not bee possible to
o extract
the suction anchor byy reverse in
nstallation.

Figure 6.1 s pressure loss due to soil piping and Figgure 6.2 illustrates
1 illustrates
pressure loss due to mechanica l failure.

Figure 6.1 Soil Piping

g Failure of Reverse Installation
I n

Revision A
A2 – Novem
mber 2015 Pag
ge 10 of 19
 HAR-01031-DEC C-PM-TNN-0001-TAQ Q
Techni cal Note on
n Suction Anchor
A Re moval Failure Modes
s

Figure 6.2 Mechanica

al Failure of
o Reverse Installation
n
The followwing tables identify faiilure modess that could
d be appliccable to the
e suction
anchors inn the Harding Field. T TAQA have e identified the failure mode, thee item of
equipment that the failure is a attributed to
o and a su ubsequent contingenc cy repair
option. Inn relation to the rep pair optionn TAQA ha ave quantiified the technical
t
complexityy, schedule ost and likelihood of success. Thesse have been rated
e impact, co
HIGH, ME EDIUM or LOW;
L see ttable 6.1 onn page 11. Where poossible, TAQ QA have
included a photograph from a recent surrvey (May 2015) to illlustrate wh here the
ailure could occur and the equipm
relevant fa ment involved.

It should be
b noted tha at making a repair for one
o failure will
w not neceessarily pre
event
another faailure occurrring.

Revision A
A2 – Novem
mber 2015 Pag
ge 11 of 19
 HAR-01031-DEC C-PM-TNN-0001-TAQ Q
Techni cal Note on
n Suction Anchor
A Re moval Failure Modes
s

Ta
able 6.1 Ran
nking of Co
ontingencies
Techn
nical Comp
plexity Schedule Impact Cost
New equ uipment or Siignificant effo
ort to achieve
e Additionnal vessel
extensivve modificatioon to in 2016, thereffore work mobilisaation and ves
ssel
existing equipment. shhall be execuuted in 2017. days inccluding spec
cialised
High Offshoree access difficult equipmeent and pers sonnel.
requiring
g further
modificaations.
Specialissed equipme ent Coould be achieved in 2016 6, Additionnal vessel
available
e for similar altthough delay
y to 2017 is mobilisaation not required,
application but would d prreferable. but mayybe preferable, and
Medium
m require modification
m to suit additionnal vessel da
ays.
this requ
uirement. Special ised equipment and
Offshoree access difficult. personnnel equipmen nt
requiredd.
Little pre
eparatory W
Would be achievable with No addiitional vesseel
engineerring and off the
t onnly a few wee
eks mobilisaation required.
Low shelf equuipment. prreparation.
Offshore e access goo
od.

Tab
ble 6.2 Sucttion Ancho
or Failure Modes
M and Contingen
ncies
Failure
e to Achiev
ve and/or Maintain
M Prressure
Pressurre loss caus
sed Instrument line leaking
g Pressure g
gauge dama
aged
by
Equip
pment Detaiil Thee instrument line between n the Prressure gaugge mounted on ROV
ancho or and pressu ure gauge is s small panel used dduring installation.
boree tubing. The gauge is loc cated
on the ROV pane el. The gauge e was
used during installlation to sho ow the
differentia l pressure.
Contingency The small bore pip pe can be claamped Disconnecct the gauge and
or criimped to redduce the leak k rate. cla
amp/plug or crimp the sm
mall bore
pipe.
Technic cal complex
xity Lo
ow Low
Scheedule Impactt Lo
ow Low
Cost Lo
ow Low
Likeliho
ood of succe
ess Hi gh High

In
nstrumentation Piping Pres
ssure Gauge
e

Revision A
A2 – Novem
mber 2015 Pag
ge 12 of 19
 HAR-01031-DEC C-PM-TNN-0001-TAQ Q
Techni cal Note on
n Suction Anchor
A Re moval Failure Modes
s

Tab
ble 6.3 Sucttion Ancho
or Failure Modes
M and Contingen
ncies
Failure
e to Achiev
ve and/or Maintain
M Prressure
Pressurre loss caus
sed Pressu
urisation pip
pe leaking
by
Equipment Detail 2” piipe (approx.)) between su uction anchorr and WROV V hot stab rec
ceptacle
us ed for pressu urisation of the suction a nchor.
Co
ontingency If failure is accessible clamp
c the pippe.
If access is not suuitable it may y be possiblee to cut the p ipe work and
d re-route
th
he injection water.
w
Technic cal complex
xity Medium/high
Scheedule Impact Medium
Cost Medium
Likeliho
ood of succe
ess High

Pressurisation Pipin
ng

Revision A
A2 – Novem
mber 2015 Pag
ge 13 of 19
 HAR-01031-DEC C-PM-TNN-0001-TAQ Q
Techni cal Note on
n Suction Anchor
A Re moval Failure Modes
s

Tab
ble 6.4 Sucttion Ancho
or Failure Modes
M and Contingen
ncies
Failure
e to Achiev
ve and/or Maintain
M Prressure
Pressurre loss caus
sed Vent hatc
ch leaking Vent hatch m
mechanical damage
d
by
Equip
pment Detaiil Vent hatch Veent hatch
he open posittion
The hatch in th The hatch inn the open po osition
ws the waterr to flow out of
allow o the alllows the watter to flow ou ut of the
ancchor during innitial self-we
eight anchor
a durinng initial self-weight
peneetration. For suction operration pe
enetration. FFor suction op peration
the ha
atch is close
ed and seals via an the
e hatch is cloosed and sea als via an
“O” ring. “OO” ring.
Co
ontingency Replace “O O” ring seal. Damage to be aassessed an nd further
engineeringg to be perforrmed.

Technic cal complex

xity Loow High
Scheedule Impact Med
dium M
Medium
Cost Loow M
Medium
Likeliho
ood of succe
ess Hiigh M
Medium

Vent Hatc
ch

Revision A
A2 – Novem
mber 2015 Pag
ge 14 of 19
 HAR-01031-DEC-PM-TNN-0001-TAQ
Technical Note on Suction Anchor Removal Failure Modes

Table 6.5 Suction Anchor Failure Modes and Contingencies

Failure to Achieve and/or Maintain Pressure
Pressure loss caused Failure of anchor structural Soil piping
by Integrity
Equipment Detail Damage and / or corrosion to Failure of soils and leak to the
suction anchor during installation or environment.
service.
Contingency Damage to be assessed and further In the event soil piping occurs, leak
engineering to be performed. rate to be assessed and further
engineering required including
investigation of injection of drill mud
type of fluid, or platelets or other
bespoke solution.

Technical complexity High High

Schedule Impact High High
Cost High High
Likelihood of success Low Low

Revision A2 – November 2015 Page 15 of 19

 HAR-01031-DEC C-PM-TNN-0001-TAQ Q
Techni cal Note on
n Suction Anchor
A Re moval Failure Modes
s

Tab
ble 6.6 Sucttion Ancho
or Failure Modes
M and Contingen
ncies
Lift
ft Point Failure
Mecha
anical failurre Corro
osion
ca
aused by
Equip
pment Detaiil The
ere are threee pad eyes designed for lifting the sucction anchor during
installation
n.
Co
ontingency Ex
xtent of corro
osion to be measured
m an
nd further dettailed engine
eering
analysiis would be required
r to determine suiitable plan.
Technic cal complex
xity High
Scheedule Impact High
Cost High
Likeliho
ood of succe
ess Low

Lift Poin
nt

Revision A
A2 – Novem
mber 2015 Pag
ge 16 of 19
 HAR-01031-DEC C-PM-TNN-0001-TAQ Q
Techni cal Note on
n Suction Anchor
A Re moval Failure Modes
s

7.0 ROCKD
DUMP REQUIR
R REMENT
TS
In the eve ent that rea
asonable enndeavours to t recover the
t suction anchor by reverse
installation
n have been n unsuccesssful, the an
nchor will be
e covered w
with rock dump such
that it doees not pose a hazard tto other useers of the seea. An overrtrawl surve
ey of the
rock berm ms will be pe
erformed on
n completion n of the rock
kdump.

The total volume

v of rock
r require
ed will depe
end on the number
n of aanchors tha
at cannot
be successsfully extracted.
An estima
ate of rock dump
d for ea
ach anchor has been calculated,
c bbased on data from
the most recent
r offsh
hore survey , carried ou
ut in May 20
015, and mi nimum coverage of
1m.

Revision A
A2 – Novem
mber 2015 Pag
ge 17 of 19
 HAR-01031-DEC C-PM-TNN-0001-TAQ Q
Techni cal Note on
n Suction Anchor
A Re moval Failure Modes
s

Table 7.1  EEstimate of Ro
ock Dump Covverage
Pile
e Protruding  Rock Dum
mp 
Rock Dump Mass* Plan area of ro
ockdump
Pile N
No abo
ove seabed Volumee
m m³ to
onne m² km²
1 1.5 450 10
034 380 0.00038
2 1.8 573 13
319 445 0.00044
3 1.6 489 1124 401 0.00040
4 1.1 314 7
721 302 0.00030
5 1.0 284 6
654 284 0.00028
6 1.0 284 6
654 284 0.00028
7 2.0 667 15
534 491 0.00049
8 1.8 573 13
319 445 0.00044
Total 3634 83
358 3031 0.00303
Assumptions
* Flat‐topped cone shappe, including 15% contingeency
Rock densitty 2 te/m
m³
Rock coverage 1m abbove highestt point
Slope 3 to 1
1

In the eve ent failure occurs parrt way through recove ery (i.e. thee anchor protrudes
significanttly further out of the se
eabed than initially found) the situuation will re
equire to
be assesssed prior to any furtherr interventio
on to determ mine the apppropriate course
c of
action.
e suction an
Note in the event the nchors were
e dredged out,
o the masss of materrial to be
excavatedd would be circa 110 ,000 tonnes and the area impaccted approximately
0.01915km m².

Revision A
A2 – Novem
mber 2015 Pag
ge 18 of 19
 HAR-01031-DEC-PM-TNN-0001-TAQ
Technical Note on Suction Anchor Removal Failure Modes

8.0 ABBREVIATIONS

Dia Diameter
km Kilometer
m Meter
m³ cubic meter
OLS Offshore Loading System
ROV Remotely Operated Vehicle
SLS Submerged Loading System
STL Submerged Turret Loading
Te Tonne
WROV Workclass Remotely Operated Vehicle

9.0 REFERENCES
Decommissioning Programme HAR-01031-DEC-PM-ADP-0001
Suction Anchor Decommissioning
HAR-01031-DEC-SS-REP-0003
Comparative Assessment Report
Suction Anchor Extraction Review HAR-01031-DEC-SS-REP-0005

Revision A2 – November 2015 Page 19 of 19