USE OF ESTIMATES	9 Months Ended
Sep. 30, 2016
Accounting Policies [Abstract]
USE OF ESTIMATES	NOTE 3—USE OF ESTIMATES We use estimates and assumptions to prepare our financial statements in conformity with U.S. GAAP. Those estimates and assumptions affect the amounts we report in our Consolidated Financial Statements and accompanying Notes. Our actual results could differ from those estimates, and variances could materially affect our financial condition and results of operations in future periods. Changes in project estimates generally exclude change orders and changes in scope, but may include, without limitation, changes in cost recovery estimates, unexpected changes in weather conditions, changes in productivity, unidentified required vessel repairs, customer and vendor delays and other costs. We generally expect to experience a reasonable amount of unanticipated events, and some of those events can result in significant cost increases above cost amounts we previously estimated. As of September 30, 2016, we have provided for our estimated costs to complete on all of our ongoing contracts. However, it is possible that current estimates could change due to unforeseen events, which could result in adjustments to overall contract costs. Variations from estimated contract performance could result in material adjustments to operating results. For all contracts, if a current estimate of total contract cost indicates a loss, the projected loss is recognized in full when determined. The following is a discussion of our most significant changes in estimates that impacted operating income for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2016 and 2015. Three months ended September 30, 2016 Operating income for the three months ended September 30, 2016 was positively impacted by net favorable changes in estimates totaling approximately $34 million across all segments. Americas, Europe and Africa Segment (“AEA”)—This segment was positively impacted by net favorable changes in estimates, aggregating approximately $6 million, none of which individually were material. Middle East Segment (“MEA”)—This segment was positively impacted by net favorable changes in estimates aggregating approximately $12 million, including changes due to productivity improvements and associated cost savings related to a Saudi Aramco project. The remaining changes attributable to other miscellaneous projects were not individually material. Asia Segment (“ASA”)—This segment was positively impacted by net favorable changes in estimates aggregating approximately $16 million, which were primarily driven by cost savings associated with our vessel productivity improvements, as well as favorable changes in estimates at completion on several active projects. Those changes were partially offset by net unfavorable changes on an active project, which was not material. Nine months ended September 30, 2016 Operating income for the nine months ended September 30, 2016 was positively impacted by net favorable changes in estimates totaling approximately $101 million across all segments. AEA—This segment was positively impacted by net favorable changes in estimates aggregating approximately $29 million, primarily due to (1) successful execution and close-out improvements on two significant projects, PB Litoral and Exxon Julia Subsea Tieback; and (2) productivity improvements and associated cost savings related to our DB 50 and NO 102 vessels’ marine campaigns undertaken in the Gulf of Mexico. Included in the change was a reversal of a $7 million provision for liquidated damages, due to an agreed additional extension of the PB Litoral project completion date. Those changes were partially offset by net unfavorable changes on multiple projects, none of which were individually material. MEA—This segment was positively impacted by net favorable changes in estimates aggregating approximately $29 million, primarily due to productivity improvements and associated cost savings related to the DB 27 and the Intermac 406 vessels, both associated with Saudi Aramco projects, due to improved execution. Those favorable changes in estimates were partially offset by marine equipment downtime due to weather on a project in Qatar. ASA—This segment was positively impacted by net favorable changes in estimates aggregating approximately $43 million, primarily driven by cost savings associated with productivity improvements on our CSV 108 vessel activities and favorable agreement on outstanding change orders on active and completed projects during the 2016 period. Those changes were partially offset by net unfavorable changes on multiple projects, none of which were individually material. Three months ended September 30, 2015 Operating income for the three months ended September 30, 2015 was impacted by net unfavorable changes in cost estimates totaling approximately $8 million. AEA—This segment had net unfavorable changes in estimates aggregating approximately $11 million. Results for the third quarter of 2015 included $6 million due to changes in the marine campaign execution plan on the PB Litoral EPCI project in Mexico and charges associated with a legal settlement. The changes in the PB Litoral marine campaign execution plan were due to carryover of offshore scope and revised cost estimates for hookup campaign. These changes were partially offset by the extension of the project completion date on the PB Litoral project, which resulted in a $13 million provision reversal for liquidated damages. MEA—This segment was positively impacted by net favorable changes in estimates aggregating approximately $6 million. Projects in Saudi Arabia were positively impacted by: (1) a $6 million favorable change order for vessel downtime; (2) productivity improvements and associated cost savings on a cable-lay project in Saudi Arabia totaling approximately $3 million; and (3) $1 million in net positive changes in estimates on multiple projects, which were not individually material. These favorable changes were partially offset by a $4 million increase in pipelay cost estimates on a U.A.E. project, primarily due to changes in execution plan as a result of needing to substitute with a third-party vessel and hookup associated issues. ASA—This segment had net unfavorable changes in estimates aggregating approximately $3 million. The deterioration was primarily due to $8 million of cost overruns and weather downtime on an installation project in Brunei, partially offset by $5 million of net positive changes in estimates on multiple projects, which were not individually material. Nine months ended September 30, 2015 Operating income for the nine months ended September 30, 2015 was positively impacted by net favorable changes in estimates totaling approximately $21 million across all segments. AEA—This segment had net unfavorable changes in estimates aggregating approximately $1 million. For the nine months ended September 30, 2015, the AEA segment was positively impacted by: (1) $13 million provision reversal for liquidated damages due to the extension of the PB Litoral project completion date; (2) $4 million due to productivity improvements on the Agile charter; and (3) $3 million each attributable to the Papa Terra project due to reduced cost estimates and to the North Ocean 105 vessel (the “NO 105”) due to reduced demobilization cost resulting from revised project plans. Those changes were partially offset by $6 million due to changes in the marine campaign execution on the PB Litoral project discussed above and charges associated with a legal settlement. Other multiple projects experience net positive changes in estimates of $1 million, which were not individually material. MEA—This segment was positively impacted by net favorable changes in estimates aggregating approximately $16 million. The following four projects, in Saudi Arabia, were positively impacted: (1) $11 million of changes in estimates mostly due to productivity improvements and associated cost savings on the Intermac 406, which was working on a cable lay project; (2) $5 million of cost savings associated with revised cable lay scope; (3) $5 million as a result of an agreement with the customer on compensation for vessel downtime due to weather and standby delays; and (4) $4 million related to marine hook-up campaign savings. The KJO Hout project in the Neutral Zone was positively impacted by $7 million due to changes in revenue recovery and cost savings resulting from customer-approved design optimization. Those favorable changes were partially offset by: (1) $9 million increase in pipelay cost estimates on a U.A.E. project as a result of changes in our execution plan; (2) $5 million negative impact on another EPCI project in Saudi Arabia due to an increase in cost estimates on onshore scope; and (3) $2 million of unfavorable changes in estimates on multiple projects, none of which were individually material. ASA—This segment was positively impacted by net favorable changes in estimates aggregating approximately $6 million. Improvements were driven by $4 million of productivity gains and improvements in cost estimates realized on the Gorgon MRU fabrication project, as well as $10 million net improvements on multiple projects that were not individually material. Those improvements were partially offset by $8 million in cost overruns resulting from weather downtime on an installation project in Brunei.

NOTE 3—USE OF ESTIMATES

We use estimates and assumptions to prepare our financial statements in conformity with U.S. GAAP. Those estimates and assumptions affect the amounts we report in our Consolidated Financial Statements and accompanying Notes. Our actual results could differ from those estimates, and variances could materially affect our financial condition and results of operations in future periods. Changes in project estimates generally exclude change orders and changes in scope, but may include, without limitation, changes in cost recovery estimates, unexpected changes in weather conditions, changes in productivity, unidentified required vessel repairs, customer and vendor delays and other costs. We generally expect to experience a reasonable amount of unanticipated events, and some of those events can result in significant cost increases above cost amounts we previously estimated. As of September 30, 2016, we have provided for our estimated costs to complete on all of our ongoing contracts. However, it is possible that current estimates could change due to unforeseen events, which could result in adjustments to overall contract costs. Variations from estimated contract performance could result in material adjustments to operating results. For all contracts, if a current estimate of total contract cost indicates a loss, the projected loss is recognized in full when determined.

The following is a discussion of our most significant changes in estimates that impacted operating income for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2016 and 2015.

Three months ended September 30, 2016

Operating income for the three months ended September 30, 2016 was positively impacted by net favorable changes in estimates totaling approximately $34 million across all segments.

Americas, Europe and Africa Segment (“AEA”)—This segment was positively impacted by net favorable changes in estimates, aggregating approximately $6 million, none of which individually were material.

Middle East Segment (“MEA”)—This segment was positively impacted by net favorable changes in estimates aggregating approximately $12 million, including changes due to productivity improvements and associated cost savings related to a Saudi Aramco project. The remaining changes attributable to other miscellaneous projects were not individually material.

Asia Segment (“ASA”)—This segment was positively impacted by net favorable changes in estimates aggregating approximately $16 million, which were primarily driven by cost savings associated with our vessel productivity improvements, as well as favorable changes in estimates at completion on several active projects. Those changes were partially offset by net unfavorable changes on an active project, which was not material.

Nine months ended September 30, 2016

Operating income for the nine months ended September 30, 2016 was positively impacted by net favorable changes in estimates totaling approximately $101 million across all segments.

AEA—This segment was positively impacted by net favorable changes in estimates aggregating approximately $29 million, primarily due to (1) successful execution and close-out improvements on two significant projects, PB Litoral and Exxon Julia Subsea Tieback; and (2) productivity improvements and associated cost savings related to our DB 50 and NO 102 vessels’ marine campaigns undertaken in the Gulf of Mexico. Included in the change was a reversal of a $7 million provision for liquidated damages, due to an agreed additional extension of the PB Litoral project completion date. Those changes were partially offset by net unfavorable changes on multiple projects, none of which were individually material.

MEA—This segment was positively impacted by net favorable changes in estimates aggregating approximately $29 million, primarily due to productivity improvements and associated cost savings related to the DB 27 and the Intermac 406 vessels, both associated with Saudi Aramco projects, due to improved execution. Those favorable changes in estimates were partially offset by marine equipment downtime due to weather on a project in Qatar.

ASA—This segment was positively impacted by net favorable changes in estimates aggregating approximately $43 million, primarily driven by cost savings associated with productivity improvements on our CSV 108 vessel activities and favorable agreement on outstanding change orders on active and completed projects during the 2016 period. Those changes were partially offset by net unfavorable changes on multiple projects, none of which were individually material.

Three months ended September 30, 2015

Operating income for the three months ended September 30, 2015 was impacted by net unfavorable changes in cost estimates totaling approximately $8 million.

AEA—This segment had net unfavorable changes in estimates aggregating approximately $11 million. Results for the third quarter of 2015 included $6 million due to changes in the marine campaign execution plan on the PB Litoral EPCI project in Mexico and charges associated with a legal settlement. The changes in the PB Litoral marine campaign execution plan were due to carryover of offshore scope and revised cost estimates for hookup campaign. These changes were partially offset by the extension of the project completion date on the PB Litoral project, which resulted in a $13 million provision reversal for liquidated damages.

MEA—This segment was positively impacted by net favorable changes in estimates aggregating approximately $6 million. Projects in Saudi Arabia were positively impacted by: (1) a $6 million favorable change order for vessel downtime; (2) productivity improvements and associated cost savings on a cable-lay project in Saudi Arabia totaling approximately $3 million; and (3) $1 million in net positive changes in estimates on multiple projects, which were not individually material. These favorable changes were partially offset by a $4 million increase in pipelay cost estimates on a U.A.E. project, primarily due to changes in execution plan as a result of needing to substitute with a third-party vessel and hookup associated issues.

ASA—This segment had net unfavorable changes in estimates aggregating approximately $3 million. The deterioration was primarily due to $8 million of cost overruns and weather downtime on an installation project in Brunei, partially offset by $5 million of net positive changes in estimates on multiple projects, which were not individually material.

Nine months ended September 30, 2015

Operating income for the nine months ended September 30, 2015 was positively impacted by net favorable changes in estimates totaling approximately $21 million across all segments.

AEA—This segment had net unfavorable changes in estimates aggregating approximately $1 million. For the nine months ended September 30, 2015, the AEA segment was positively impacted by: (1) $13 million provision reversal for liquidated damages due to the extension of the PB Litoral project completion date; (2) $4 million due to productivity improvements on the Agile charter; and (3) $3 million each attributable to the Papa Terra project due to reduced cost estimates and to the North Ocean 105 vessel (the “NO 105”) due to reduced demobilization cost resulting from revised project plans. Those changes were partially offset by $6 million due to changes in the marine campaign execution on the PB Litoral project discussed above and charges associated with a legal settlement. Other multiple projects experience net positive changes in estimates of $1 million, which were not individually material.

MEA—This segment was positively impacted by net favorable changes in estimates aggregating approximately $16 million. The following four projects, in Saudi Arabia, were positively impacted: (1) $11 million of changes in estimates mostly due to productivity improvements and associated cost savings on the Intermac 406, which was working on a cable lay project; (2) $5 million of cost savings associated with revised cable lay scope; (3) $5 million as a result of an agreement with the customer on compensation for vessel downtime due to weather and standby delays; and (4) $4 million related to marine hook-up campaign savings. The KJO Hout project in the Neutral Zone was positively impacted by $7 million due to changes in revenue recovery and cost savings resulting from customer-approved design optimization. Those favorable changes were partially offset by: (1) $9 million increase in pipelay cost estimates on a U.A.E. project as a result of changes in our execution plan; (2) $5 million negative impact on another EPCI project in Saudi Arabia due to an increase in cost estimates on onshore scope; and (3) $2 million of unfavorable changes in estimates on multiple projects, none of which were individually material.

ASA—This segment was positively impacted by net favorable changes in estimates aggregating approximately $6 million. Improvements were driven by $4 million of productivity gains and improvements in cost estimates realized on the Gorgon MRU fabrication project, as well as $10 million net improvements on multiple projects that were not individually material. Those improvements were partially offset by $8 million in cost overruns resulting from weather downtime on an installation project in Brunei.