C.F.R. » Title 30 » CHAPTER II—BUREAU OF SAFETY AND ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR › SUBCHAPTER B—OFFSHORE › PART 250—OIL AND GAS AND SULPHUR OPERATIONS IN THE OUTER CONTINENTAL SHELF › Subpart Q—Decommissioning Activities

30 C.F.R. § 250.1701

Who must meet the decommissioning obligations in this subpart?

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) Lessees, owners of operating rights, and their predecessors are jointly and severally liable for meeting decommissioning obligations for facilities on leases, including the obligations related to lease-term pipelines, as the obligations accrue and until each obligation is met.

(b) All holders of a right-of-way grant and their predecessors are jointly and severally liable for meeting decommissioning obligations for facilities on their right-of-way, including right-of-way pipelines, as the obligations accrue and until each obligation is met.

(c) All right-of-use and easement grant holders and prior lessees or owners of operating rights of the parcel on whose leases there existed facilities or obstructions that remain on the right-of-use and easement grant are jointly and severally liable for meeting decommissioning obligations, including obligations for any well, pipeline, platform or other facility, or an obstruction, on their right-of-use and easement, as the obligations accrue and until each obligation is met.

(d) In this subpart, the terms “you” or “I” refer to lessees and owners of operating rights as to facilities installed under the authority of a lease; to pipeline right-of-way grant holders as to facilities installed under the authority of a pipeline right-of-way grant; and to right-of-use and easement grant holders as to facilities constructed, modified, or maintained under the authority of the right-of-use and easement grant. Predecessors to any of these interest holders are also included within the scope of these terms as appropriate in the context of the particular regulation.

[88 FR 23580, Apr. 18, 2023]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 12 cases (3 in the last 5 years), 2004–2025 · leading case: Apache Corp. v. W & T Offshore, Inc., 626 F.3d 789 (5th Cir. 2010).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Apache Corp. v. W & T Offshore, Inc., 626 F.3d 789 (5th Cir. 2010). “30 C.F.R. § 250.1701 (a) (“Lessees and owners of operating rights are jointly and severally responsible for meeting decommissioning obligations for facilities on leases, including the obligations related to lease-term pipelines, as the obligations accrue and until *798 each…”
Noble Energy, Inc. v. Kenneth Salazar, 671 F.3d 1241 (D.C. Cir. 2012). · cites it 2× “30 C.F.R. § 250.1701 . The lease’s text is short, only four pages, Joint Appendix (“J.”
Taylor Energy Co. LLC v. United States, 975 F.3d 1303 (Fed. Cir. 2020). “30 C.F.R. § 250.1701 (a). Accordingly, La.”
In Re Tri-Union Dev. Corp., 314 B.R. 611 (Bankr. S.D. Tex. 2004). “30 C.F.R. 250.1701, 30 C.F.R. 256.62, 30 C.”
Mariner Energy, Inc. v. Devon Energy Prod. Co., 690 F. Supp. 2d 558 (S.D. Tex. 2010). “30 C.F.R. §§ 250.1701 , 250.1702. The lights to the El 333 lease were transferred over time by various assignments.”
Noble Energy, Inc. v. Salazar, 770 F. Supp. 2d 322 (D.D.C. 2011). “” 30 C.F.R. § 250.1701 (c). The OCSLA regulations further define a “lessee” as "a person who has entered into a lease with the United States to explore for, develop, and produce the leased minerals.”
Total E&P USA, Inc. v. Marubeni Oil & Gas (USA), I (5th Cir. 2020). · cites it 2× “” 30 C.F.R. §§ 250.1701 (c), 250.1702. Total asserts that the regulations do not control here because they “govern the parties’ joint and several liabilities vis-à-vis the Government, not amongst themselves.”
Ankor Energy, LLC v. Merit Mgmt. Partners I, L.P. (E.D. La. 2024). “29 See 30 C.F.R. § 250.1701 . Defendants complain that plaintiffs do not cite specific contract provisions in support of their claims.”
PXP Producing Co. LLC v. MitEnergy Upstream LLC (Del. Ch. 2025). “Petitioner argues a receiver is needed to investigate the Company’s cancellation and provision for decommissioning obligations.”
Ankor Energy, LLC et al. v. Merit Mgmt. Partners I, L.P. et al. (E.D. La. 2025). “at 206 (citing 30 C.F.R. §§ 250.1701 (c), 250.1702). The Fifth Circuit thus found that the obligations arose not when the government ordered decommissioning but when the wells were drilled.”
Noble Energy, Inc. v. Salazar (D.D.C. 2011). “” 30 C.F.R. § 250.1701 (c). The OCSLA regulations further define a “lessee” as “a person who has entered into a lease with the United States to explore for, develop, and produce the leased minerals.”
Noble Energy, Inc. v. Jewell, 110 F. Supp. 3d 5 (D.D.C. 2015). “In short, the BSEE concluded that the regulatory obligations are independent of the contractual obligations because they apply to parties that are not bound by those contractual obligations.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.