Yes. The archive is clear on this point. The DDS non-routine abandonment guidance states that non-routine abandonment operations require ERCB approval before the work is started, and the related correspondence reinforces that approval was required before abandonment work could begin. The folder also shows why timing and sequencing mattered. Before a non-routine abandonment request could be made, related well information such as completion or perforation data may have needed to be submitted through DDS. The correspondence also indicates that other notifications or regulatory processes could be triggered by the field activity itself, especially where a well had been re-entered or where non-routine plugging was being considered. The deeper lesson is that non-routine abandonment was not just a submit-a-form exercise. It was part of a sequence: understand the well status, confirm the data in the reporting system, determine whether the proposed work is routine or non-routine, make any required submissions, and obtain approval before starting the work.