Recommended guidelines for well intergity


Published on

More HPHT related content is available in our download centre page:

More information about the HPHT Wells Summit 2010 can be found here:

Published in: Technology
1 Comment
  • More HPHT related content is available in our download centre page:

    More information about the HPHT Wells Summit 2010 can be found here:
    Are you sure you want to  Yes  No
    Your message goes here
No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Recommended guidelines for well intergity

  1. 1. Recommended guidelines for Well Integrity
  2. 2. OLF Recommended Guidelines for Well Integrity No.:117 Date effective: 01.10.08 Rev. no: 1 Rev. date: 10.12.08 Page: 2 ___________________________________________________________________________ TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter 1: Well Integrity Training 1. Introduction 2. Abbreviations 3. Background 4. Training Guidelines Appendix A: Well Integrity Fundamentals – Recommended Subjects Chapter 2: Well Integrity Handover documentation 1. Introduction 2. Background 3. Discussion a. Well construction data b. Well diagrams c. Handover certificate d. Operating input Chapter 3: Well Barrier Schematics for the operational phase 1. Introduction 2. Background 3. Guidelines of minimum data 4. Discussion on minimum data 4.1 The formation strength should be indicated for formation within the barrier envelopes. 4.2 Reservoir(s) should be shown on the drawing. 4.3 Each barrier element in both barrier envelopes should be presented in a table along with its initial integrity-verification test results. 4.4 Depths to be shown relatively correct according to each barrier element on the drawing. 4.5 All casing and cement, including the surface casing, should be on the drawing and labelled with its size. 4.6 There should be separate fields for the following well information: Installation, well name, well type, well status, rev. no and date, “Prepared by”, “Verified/Approved by”. 4.7 Include a Note field for important well integrity information. Attachment 1: Example of a well specific barrier schematic. NOTE: Revision 1 dated 10.12.08 is issued to add Chapter 3
  3. 3. OLF Recommended Guidelines for Well Integrity No.:117 Date effective: 01.10.08 Rev. no: 1 Rev. date: 10.12.08 Page: 3 ___________________________________________________________________________ Chapter 1 WELL INTEGRITY TRAINING 1 Introduction The Well Integrity Forum (WIF) was established in 2007 and one of the main issues that was initially brought up for review was well-integrity training. WIF members acknowledge a need for well-integrity training of key personnel working with well integrity offshore and onshore. This was also one of the key findings in an earlier PSA well-integrity survey. A survey of operators’ well-integrity-training practices, experiences, opinions and ideas was carried out and used as a basis for developing a well-integrity-training guideline. This chapter describes WIF members’ recommendations for well-integrity training and is intended to function as a guideline to the oil industry. 2 Abbreviations ASV is Annulus Safety Valve HSE is Health, Safety and Environment OIM is Offshore Installation Manager PSA is Petroleum Safety Authority SCSSV is Surface Controlled Subsurface Safety Valve WBS is Well Barrier Schematic WIF is Well Integrity Forum 3 Background A survey was completed by WIF members and this formed the basis for discussion and development of the guidance in section 4. The feedback focused on learning, present practice, opinions and ideas. The survey included the following questions: • Main objective for a well integrity course? • What should be covered in the well integrity training? • Should the course include any exercises? • Timing and schedule, how many days and if applicable, when?
  4. 4. OLF Recommended Guidelines for Well Integrity No.:117 Date effective: 01.10.08 Rev. no: 1 Rev. date: 10.12.08 Page: 4 ___________________________________________________________________________ • Who to participate and mixture of skills in one group? • Handouts and/or documentation? • Computer based vs. class room based – or other methods? • Training a part of competency management system? 4 Training Guidelines What to cover in a well integrity course and timing of training The recommended training is listed below in a preferred sequence and with estimated number of training days for each element. Note that this recommendation applies to all personnel with assigned responsibilities for well maintenance, operations, servicing, design and construction. 1. Well Integrity Fundamentals (see Appendix A) – Typically 1 to 2 days 2. Norsok D-010 terminology and principles – Typically 1 day 3. Company specific training (test procedures, well design and internal requirements) – Typically 1day Who should participate? Personnel directly responsible and or involved in Well Integrity should have the recommended training. Examples of who may be required to have this training are as follows: 1. Production operation personnel offshore (including OIM, production supervisors, control room operators, technicians and senior technicians); 2. Production operation personnel onshore (incl. Ops sup, production engineers, production technologies, HSE personnel); 3. Drilling/completion/intervention engineers (including drilling supervisor and drilling superintendent); 4. Rig contractors like drillers and tool pushers; and, 5. Service-company engineers and operators with delegated responsibilities in well integrity. Each company should evaluate on ‘as per needs’ basis who in their workforce is required to attend the recommended training. It is recommended that management responsible for Well Integrity should be trained.
  5. 5. OLF Recommended Guidelines for Well Integrity No.:117 Date effective: 01.10.08 Rev. no: 1 Rev. date: 10.12.08 Page: 5 ___________________________________________________________________________ Type of training – Class room based versus computer based Class room training is preferred for company specific training. Both class room based and computer based training is good for training in Norsok D-010 and well integrity fundamentals. Particularly for the computer based training method, it is recommended that the training include exercises, case solving and questions and be completed with a test. Additionally for class room training it is recommended to include group work exercises. Appendix A Well Integrity Fundamentals Training – recommended subjects. 1. Roles and Responsibilities for Well Integrity Who monitors / who do they report to / who fixes? Who ‘manages’ the Well Integrity System? 2. Basic Wellbore Physics Discuss formations / pressures / overbalance / underbalance / temperature increases when wells flow etc. Illustrations should be available to describe what is happening. 3. Basic Well Construction with Emphasis on Barriers Describe minimum barrier requirements. Provide a typical Well Schematic. Discuss tubing burst / collapse etc. Discuss SCSSVs / ASVs / Xmas trees / tubing. Schematics, incl. WBS and cutaways should be provided. 4. Basic Well Control Requirements Discuss and describe simple hydrostatics for well control. Discuss and describe Well Emergency Shutdown functionality. 5. Well Integrity Hazards Use case studies. Discuss hydrates / sand / corrosion - erosion / Well Intervention Ops etc. Well start up/shut down. 1. Annulus Monitoring and importance of reporting / trending. 2. Discuss operating and design limits (pressure, temperature, flowrates etc). Describe and provide typical Annulus Monitoring Spreadsheet. 3. Discuss annulus leak rate and other acceptance criteria. Discuss risk resulting from annulus leaks. 6. Annulus Bleed-Down Discuss what should be reported and the reasons for bleed-down during production. Discuss sources of tubing to annulus communications - eg; pipe / cement etc. 7. Wellhead Maintenance Activities Discuss importance of regular and adequate well maintenance.
  6. 6. OLF Recommended Guidelines for Well Integrity No.:117 Date effective: 01.10.08 Rev. no: 1 Rev. date: 10.12.08 Page: 6 ___________________________________________________________________________ SCSSSV Testing - discuss frequency / acceptance criteria / functionality / control line integrity /repeat tests Xmas Tree Valve Testing - discuss functionality / acceptance criteria Void Monitoring - discuss implications for hydrocarbons in voids / repair methods Monitoring equipment, accuracy and maintenance 8. Handover of Wells Need to ensure accurate and timely reporting. Discuss information required and who gets it. Provide an example Well Handover Documentation. 9. Documentation Discuss need for keeping good well integrity records. Discuss and describe need for non-conformance system for operating wells not in accordance with the 'Standard'. Provide an example.
  7. 7. OLF Recommended Guidelines for Well Integrity No.:117 Date effective: 01.10.08 Rev. no: 1 Rev. date: 10.12.08 Page: 7 ___________________________________________________________________________ Chapter 2 WELL HANDOVER DOCUMENTATION 1 Introduction The Well Integrity Forum (WIF) was established in 2007 and one of the main issues that was initially identified for its review was well handover documentation. NORSOK D-010 has one section (section 8.7.1) where the content of a well handover documentation package is outlined. Availability of, knowledge about and content of the well handover document were also main elements that were highlighted by the PSA in their well integrity survey as an area for improvement. This chapter describes WIF members’ recommendations for well handover documentation and is intended to function only as a guideline for the Norwegian oil and gas industry. 2 Background A survey completed by WIF members formed the basis for discussion and development of the guidance given in section 3. The body content of the handover documentation varied very little amongst the members, but the information was located and organized in different places. 3 Discussion The survey showed that the majority of information already included in the company specific well handover documents was common amongst the companies. All companies also had exceeded the NORSOK standard by including well barrier schematics. In the sections below the recommended guidelines for minimum content per focal area are listed. The format for how the documentation is structured has not been looked at, and is left to the discretion of each operator to organize the information.
  8. 8. OLF Recommended Guidelines for Well Integrity No.:117 Date effective: 01.10.08 Rev. no: 1 Rev. date: 10.12.08 Page: 8 ___________________________________________________________________________ a. Well Construction Data The handover should contain the following well construction information: • Wellhead data with schematic • Xmas tree data with schematic • Casing program (depths, sizes) • Casing and tubing data, including test pressures • Cement data • Fluid status, tubing and all annuli • Wellhead pressure tests • Tree pressure tests • Completion component tests • Perforating details • Equipment details such as identification or serial numbers b. Well Diagrams The handover documentation should include the following two well schematics: • Well barrier schematic with well barrier elements listed • Completion schematic C. Handover Certificate The handover documentation should also include a handover certificate. The certificate should include actual status at handover on the following: • Valve status • Pressure status • Fluid status d. Operating Input Operating limitations for the well should also be included in the well handover documentation package. As a minimum the following information should be included:
  9. 9. OLF Recommended Guidelines for Well Integrity No.:117 Date effective: 01.10.08 Rev. no: 1 Rev. date: 10.12.08 Page: 9 ___________________________________________________________________________ • Tubing and annulus operating limit • Test and acceptance criteria for all barrier elements (could be referenced to valid internal company documents) • Deviations that are identified and valid for the well
  10. 10. OLF Recommended Guidelines for Well Integrity No.:117 Date effective: 01.10.08 Rev. no: 1 Rev. date: 10.12.08 Page: 10 ___________________________________________________________________________ Chapter 3 WELL BARRIER SCHEMATICS FOR THE OPERATIONAL PHASE 1 Introduction One of the Petroleum Safety Authority's (PSA) findings from the spring-2006 well-integrity audit was the requirement for the creation of well barrier schematics (WBS) for the operational-phase of each individual well on the Norwegian Continental Shelf (NCS). Each operating-company worked to fulfill this requirement, independently of other operators. As a whole the industry used the WBS's presented and well-barrier elements (WBE) defined in the NORSOK D-010 standard as a basis in developing their own WBS format. At the industry- organized, well-integrity workshop held in March 2007, the need for common, minimum guidelines for the subject WBS's was identified to help standardize this tool within the industry. The same workshop resulted in calls for establishing a well-integrity forum (WIF) to promote open and frequent discussion of well-integrity related issues amongst the NCS operators. One of the WIF's tasks was to further investigate the use of WBS amongst the operating companies and propose a minimum level of detail which should be included in each well specific WBS. This document summarizes the WIF's guideline of minimum data to be presented on WBS's of all NCS wells in the operational phase. These guidelines may re-state and/or add to existing requirements specified in the governmental regulations and NORSOK D-010 standard. The attached example WBS has been included for the purpose of illustrating the recommended guidelines 2 Background The task to establish a common WBS has been discussed and refined in WIF. The agreed guidelines of minimum data are listed below.
  11. 11. OLF Recommended Guidelines for Well Integrity No.:117 Date effective: 01.10.08 Rev. no: 1 Rev. date: 10.12.08 Page: 11 ___________________________________________________________________________ 3 Guidelines of minimum data The following minimum data have been agreed upon and act as a guideline: 1. The formation strength should be indicated for formation within the barrier envelopes. 2. Reservoir(s) should be shown on the drawing. 3. Each barrier element in both barrier envelopes should be presented in a table along with its initial integrity-verification test results. 4. Depths should be shown relatively correct according to each barrier element on the drawing. 5. All casing and cement, including the surface casing, should be on the drawing and labelled with its size. 6. There should be separate fields for the following well information: Installation, well name, well type, well status, rev. no and date, “Prepared by”, “Verified/Approved by”. 7. Include a Note field for important well integrity information. 4 Discussion on minimum data 4.1 The formation strength should be indicated for formation within the barrier envelopes In all well designs, formation will be within the barrier envelopes and may therefore be exposed to reservoir and well pressures. It is important that it is understood which formations are inside the barrier envelopes and ensured that they are not exposed to pressures exceeding their strength. Exceeding the formation strength may result in leaks on the outside of casings and cement, outside the barrier envelopes. This is important for all well types; however, special attention should be given to injector wells. The strength of the formations which is within the barrier envelopes should therefore be indicated on the barrier drawing and should be considered when determining operational limits for the well. The formation strength can typically be based on physical measurements performed during drilling of the well, e.g. Formation Integrity Tests (FIT), Leak Off Tests (LOT) or Extended Leak Off Tests (XLOT). The indicated formation strength can also be based on tests done on core samples, results from downhole logs or correlations based on historical field data. The type of value used to indicate formation strength can differ in meaning and uncertainty (e.g. a FIT value has another meaning than a LOT value, a value derived from a downhole log has a higher uncertainty than a value based on tests on core samples), and it should therefore always be stated what the indicated formation strength is based on. The formation provides containment of reservoir fluids together with the well barrier elements which constitute the barrier envelopes, but the properties of formation is not tested, designed, monitored or known in the same manner as for a well barrier element, which have
  12. 12. OLF Recommended Guidelines for Well Integrity No.:117 Date effective: 01.10.08 Rev. no: 1 Rev. date: 10.12.08 Page: 12 ___________________________________________________________________________ defined acceptance criteria. There is currently no common understanding of what well barrier element acceptance criteria should be used for formation to ensure that formation in a meaningful and adequate way can be treated and defined as well barrier element in the same manner as e.g. casing or production packers. 4.2 Reservoir(s) should be shown on the drawing. The reservoir(s) should be shown on the drawing to be able to verify proper barriers. This will also ensure that any zone isolation requirements are fulfilled. 4.3 Each barrier element in both barrier envelopes should be presented in a table along with its initial integrity-verification test results By presenting each barrier element in the table, there will be no doubt regarding which elements are a part of the barrier envelope. In addition, this exercise will help the engineer to ensure the actual elements are qualified according to requirements and the ability to verify the integrity of each element. It is intended that the actual test results that verified the integrity is presented. For example pressure test and CBL are methods used. The actual results should be presented.- e.g. pressure test to 320 bar, FIT to 1,79 sg EMW, 100% bond at 3000 mMD. When the well is completed, it is important to keep data and status of the well barriers. By stating the actual integrity-verification method and test results for each element on the well barrier schematic, the status of the well is known and documented. This information is also important for the operational phase and later interventions and/or workovers. 4.4 Depths to be shown relatively correct according to each barrier element on the drawing It is important that the drawing show the barrier elements at the correct depths relative to each other, and do not show e.g. that the production packer is set in cemented casing if the actual layout is otherwise. Likewise it is important to show the relative positioning of the reservoir(s) and the positioning of the cap rock relative to the cement and production packer. The relative positioning of the barrier elements is important in relation to integrity, robustness, and the ability to detect any leakages after initial installation and testing. For the same reason, it is also advised to show all packers, PBR’s and similar equipment on the drawing. The drawing should be well specific and show/illustrate the actual layout of the well. 4.5 All casing and cement, including the surface casing, should be on the drawing and labelled with its size For the same reason as above (4.4), it is important to show all casing sizes and the cement behind. This will give important information of the robustness of the well, and not lead to any misinterpretation of the design. 4.6 There should be separate fields for the following well information: Installation, well name, well type, well status, rev. no and date, “Prepared by”, “Verified/Approved by”
  13. 13. OLF Recommended Guidelines for Well Integrity No.:117 Date effective: 01.10.08 Rev. no: 1 Rev. date: 10.12.08 Page: 13 ___________________________________________________________________________ It is important that the well specific barrier schematic contain information about the validity of the drawing. Therefore installation name and/or field name should be clearly stated, and the name of the well. To be able to understand the well barriers the "well type", if the well is an oil producer, water injector, gas injector etc, should also be stated. The status of the well, e.g. if the well is operational, shut in, temporary plugged for nippling etc should also be defined. This is important such that the validity phase of the well barrier schematic is clearly defined. Document and quality control is needed. Revision number, date, information about who has prepared, and who has verified or approved the schematic is therefore also needed. 4.7 Include a Note field for important well integrity information Special well conditions that have changed the barrier envelope over time and other important well integrity information should be highlighted. This ensures any weaknesses are made aware of, and also shows the actual situation. References to where the integrity dispensations are located (e.g. number) should be made, with a short explaining text. The WBS should be updated when well conditions such as e.g. detected tubing/casing leaks, have changed the barrier envelope. Other important well integrity information that has not changed the barrier but still should be highlighted in the note field could e.g be leaks outside the barrier envelope.
  14. 14. OLF Recommended Guidelines for Well Integrity No.:117 Date effective: 01.10.08 Rev. no: 1 Rev. date: 10.12.08 Page: 14 ___________________________________________________________________________ Attachment 1: Example of a well specific barrier schematic. Note that data have to be filled out where xx is stated for a real well. Logo WELL BARRIER SCHEMATIC Well information Installation: xxxxx Well no.: xx/xx-xx Well type: e.g.Oil producer Well status: e.g. Operational Revision no. / Date: x xx.xx.xxxx Prepared: xxxxx Verified/Approved: xxxxx Well barrier elements Verification of barrier elements PRIMARY 7 “ liner cement xx bar with xx sg fluid Method: prognosed / measured TOC: xx mMD Method: volume control / logs e.g. CBL xx bonding at xx mMD 7” liner xx bar with xx sg fluid 7” liner hanger packer xx bar with xx sg fluid 9 5/8” casing between liner hanger packer and production packer xx bar with xx sg fluid Production packer xx bar with xx sg fluid Production tubing xx bar with xx sg fluid SCSSV Inflow test to xx bar SECONDARY 9 5/8” casing cement FIT to xx sg EMW. Method: prognosed / measured TOC: xx mMD above prod.packer / csg.shoe. Method: volume control / logs e.g. CBL xx bonding at xx mMD 9 5/8” casing xx bar with xx sg fluid 9 5/8” casing hanger with seal assembly xx bar with xx sg fluid Wellhead / annulus access valve xx bar with xx sg fluid Tubing hanger with seals xx bar with xx sg fluid X-mas tree valves xx bar with xx sg fluid Reference / Disp. no. well integrity issues Comments / Notes: N/A X-mas tree PWV PUMV PLMV KV PSV 18 5/8" csg 13 3/8" csg SCSSV 9 5/8" csg 7" liner FG = xx s.g. FIT = xx s.g. FG = xx s.g.
  15. 15. CONFERENCEPROGRAMME2010 Reduce risk and deliver optimal operational success in your HPHT projects. Hear directly from leading experts on key strategies to: n Manage risk,plan for emergency response and assess the critical safety factors for HPHT operations - with insight from the HSE,Cameron McKenna and Marsh n Ensure wellbore stability while drilling - Chevron Upstream Europe share insight from the Erskine field n Customise QA/QC procedures for your HPHT project - with experience from the International Research Institute of StavangerAS n Drive advances in completions for HPHT deep tight gas wells - Lukoil SaudiArabia Energy Ltd bring case study experience of both appraisal and exploration wells n Optimise HPHT well design:From concept to well construction - hear from Ed Mcfadden,Independent Consultant Engineer HPHTWells - From perception to reality Main conference:24th 25th November 2010 Pre-conference workshops:23rd November 2010 Venue:Ardoe House Hotel,Aberdeen Sponsors Exhibitors: 20% Discountfor Operators– Quote HPHTSLIDEO10% Discountfor Consultants Equipment Providers – Quote HPHTSLIDEV
  16. 16. A welcome note from the HPHT Programme Steering Committee… Dear industry colleagues, HPHT operations are integral to the growth of the oil and gas industry.Getting the most out of your HPHT operations requires continuous learning and refinement of techniques and technologies to push the envelope as we continue to explore new areas, face new challenges and capture opportunities. The Programme Steering Committee came together inAberdeen for extensive discussions to draw up the key topics for the 2010 HPHTWells Summit.We formulated an agenda with a number of new topics to cover this year including: n Suspension and abandonment of HPHT wells n Risk management,emergency response planning and safety of HPHT operations n HPHT well design:From concept to well construction n Effectively managing uncertainty in pore pressure,fracture gradient and the“transition zone” n Delimiting the operational limits on drilling,logging testing tools Other major themes that have been highlighted for discussions at this year’s meeting include: n Well architecture and delivering a safe HPHT well n Well integrity challenges n Emerging technologies and technology gaps for HPHT n Operational considerations for HPHT well evaluations The conference format is unique and mixes presentations,panel discussions,roundtables and workshops to ensure that you are able to learn first-hand from the practical experience shared amongst both expert speakers and the wider delegate audience. We look forward to seeing you there. Andrew McHardy,Independent Consultant Grant Affleck,Weatherford Jean-Paul Stuyck,GDF Suez HPHT Wells 2010 Programme Steering Committee Telephone: +44 (0)20 7368 9300 Fax: +44 (0)20 7368 9301 Email: Visit: Programme highlights for this year include: Industry breakfast with the HSE Thursday 25th November 2010,7.45am Join the HPHT community for a breakfast meeting on the morning of the second day of the conference.During breakfast, you’ll hear directly from Grant Moody,HM Principal Inspector of Health Safety,HSE who will deliver a brief presentation on‘Challenging wells in the UKCS – a regulator’s perspective’. Case study experience of HPHT deep tight gas wells Lukoil Saudi Arabia Energy Ltd share insight into the process of optimisation for stimulation and production operations in a case study presentation of their drilling and completions experience in both exploration and appraisal wells in SaudiArabia. Safety risk management panel discussion This year,there is an exclusive interactive panel bringing together legal,risk,insurance,HSE and operator’s perspectives of key safety considerations for HPHT operations. Topics include: n Key considerations for environmental protection and pollution n Balancing risk and exposure n Response team planning:Emergency response and oil spill response considerations The 2010 speakers panellists include: EdMcfadden,IndependentConsultantEngineer GrantMoody,HMPrincipalInspectorofHealthSafety,HSE RaidBu-Khamseem,KECCompany JoergZaske,SeniorGeophysicist,ChevronUpstreamEurope DerekCharlton,HP/HTDrillingManager,MaerskOil AndrewMcHardy,IndependentConsultantWellExaminer,Total GrantAffleck,BusinessDevelopmentManager,Weatherford StuartCole,Manager,TechnicalSalesandServices,VallourecGroup TonyFurniss,RegionalSalesManager,EnventureInternationalLLC CraigHendrie,ManagingDirector,PlexusOceanSystems SteveKirby,DrillingEngineer,SasokLtd JohnMunningstomes,SeniorRiskEngineer–Upstream,Marsh JanBurgess,Partner,CameronMcKenna RJBoocock,ConsultantPetroleumEngineer OddvarSkjæveland,VPUllriggDrillingandWellCentre,IRIS
  17. 17. Interactive Workshops Tuesday 23rd November 2010 08.45 – 12.00 Interactive Workshop A: Examine critical completions considerations and well integrity issues for HPHT environments This in-depth workshop will give you the opportunity to assess first-hand some of the most effective completions and well integrity challenges,and discover the techniques and strategies required to overcome them. During the interactive discussions,you will have the opportunity to: n Explore in detail the use of various HPHT completion techniques n Understand what the emerging technologies are in this space n Examine the critical aspects of HPHT well integrity n Address issues surrounding HPHT well integrity with application to life of well prediction n Gain insight into cementing practices and cement fatigue in HPHT wells n Measure corrosive formation fluids effects on: -Tubular integrity - Pressure barrier sealing performance -Well head seals - Downhole mechanical seals in packers n Key considerations for cement sealing and structural integrity Workshop leader to be announced 12.30 – 15.30 Interactive Workshop B: Understand the need for discipline integration with HPHT wells During this“hands-on”workshop,teams will work through an exercise to carry out a plan for well construction within a set scenario.Through this exercise,you will: n Definethechallengesandbeingawareof“rippleon”effectsofdecisionsmade n Determinetheplayersandtheirroles–possibleshiftinpresentorganisationrequired n Engage in discussions as to why early buy-in from senior management is critical In order to maximise group participation,you will be split into teams.In your teams,you will work out a plan based around your scenario and then you will then report back to the whole workshop.Key considerations will include: n Bringing the ultimate goal of production back to the initial planning stage n Setting up a paper exercise of a well construction based on known reservoir conditions and having back-up plans to address possible surprises n Establishing guidelines for drilling team In this session,you will understand why thinking about the well objectives is critical to the well design.You will take into account the fact that if you only look at the drilling of the well (pressure integrity of the casing) rather than size,type and depth of the specific string,you may plan yourself into a corner with no room to adjust should higher pressures be encountered further up-hole.This could mean that you need to run another intermediate string and that could not be available or be wrongly sized to enable test tools to get to the depth required.You need to avoid having a drilled hole that nothing can fit in for evaluation purposes. Jointlyafinalplanismadecompletewithcontingenciesandobjectivesallagreed. Led by R.J. Boocock,Consultant Petroleum Engineer All of R.J.Boocock’s experience has been“hands-on”within the oil and gas industry,specialising in field development,reservoir engineering,production operations,optimisation and surveillance,drilling, completions,work-overs and contract negotiations.He has been heavily involved in training programs and produced manuals such as“AdvancedWellTesting”,“Drilling and Geological Operations”and “ExplorationWell Programmes”.He recently completed an assignment for GSPC doing well testing work in HPHT wells. Baker Hughes delivers innovative,reliable products and services designed to help customers manage operating expenses,maximize reserve recovery and boost overall return on investment.Baker Hughes has been a technology leader in the oil and gas industry for over 100 years and continues to partner with operators to find solutions for progressively more complex technical challenges.A leading global oilfield service company with operations in over 90 countries and nearly 50,000 employees globally,Baker Hughes provides advanced products and services to help customers drill,evaluate, complete and produce oil and gas wells.Baker Hughes’ reservoir technology experts offer independent consulting services,geomechanics modeling, petroleum engineering and reservoir simulation services to achieve superior results that lower costs,reduce risk,improve productivity and increase ultimate recovery.At Baker Hughes collaboration is at the heart of our business.Our 23 local geomarket teams work side by side with customers to engineer reliable,application-specific products and services – whether the application is deep water,unconventional hydrocarbons or production and water management - and deliver technologies that improve operating efficiency and create more value from the reservoir. READ Well Services is a downhole technology specialist providing a variety of new downhole well construction,repair and well intervention services to the oil and gas industry.RWS’s expertise lies in its ground breaking Hydraulically ExpandableTubular System (HETS),Cased Hole Logging services (data acquisition and analysis) and Development and Engineering. Houston-based Enventure Global Technology,L.L.C.,the world’s leading provider of SET® solid expandable technology solutions for the energy industry,has a global presence with operations in NorthAmerica,the Middle East,SouthAmerica,Europe and the Far East.Enventure’s SET® technology minimizes the tapering event in oil and gas wells by radially enlarging proprietary tubulars through a cold-drawing process.SET® systems are used in openhole and cased-hole environments to mitigate trouble zones,add casing points,remediate damaged casing and cover perforations. Weatherford International Ltd (WFT: NYSE) is the fourth-largest diversified upstream oilfield service company in the world.Our global network includes more than 34,000 people,730 service bases,87 manufacturing facilities,and 13Technology Centers in more than100 countries.Our products and services span the lifecycle of a well,including drilling,evaluation,completion,production and intervention.The Company’s range of production enabling technologies include evaluation services,directional drilling services,controlled pressure drilling® (CPD®) systems,cased hole completion systems,expandable technologies,intelligent completion technologies,production optimisation systems and all major forms of artificial lift systems. WeatherfordInternationalLtd,Tel:+44(0)1224380180 Fax:+44(0) Roundtable Sponsor:Vallourec Mannesmann Oil Gas UK (VMOG UK) manufactures casing and tubing to the highest industry standards,for the world’s most progressive oil companies. Over the last year,VMOG UK has been facilitating the upsurge in HP-HT activity in the North Sea through a project-based approach to the most extreme exploration projects ever seen,with extensive qualification testing and dedicated manufacturing quality plans.The expertise gained through supplying casing and tubing forTotal’s Elgin-Franklin and Glenelg projects,and Shell’s Shearwater,Onyx andAragorn projects (to name but a few) ensured thatVM has the extensive experience so vital to delivering success in HP-HT wells. In 2007,VMOG UK has supplied all of the casing and tubing for the highest pressure well ever drilled in the UKCS North Sea,from the 13 5/8”production casing through to the 3 1/2”sour service work-string for the well test. Vallourec Mannesmann Oil Gas UK Office,Tel:+44 (0) 1224 279350 Fax:+44 (0) 1224 279341 Email: Web: / Plexus Holdings plc. is anAIM listed engineering and service business in the oil and gas industry based inAberdeen.Plexus has developed and patented a unique method of engineering for oil and gas field wellheads and connectors,called POS-GRIP®Technology which involves deforming one tubular member against another to effect gripping and sealing.POS-GRIPWellheads are the leading technology for HPHT exploration drilling and production due to their through-BOP and true metal to metal“HG”Seal capability. Plexus Ocean Systems Ltd,Plexus House,Burnside Drive,Dyce,Aberdeen,AB21 0HW,UK.Tel:+44 (0)1224 774222 Sponsors Exhibitors:
  18. 18. Conference Day One Wednesday 24th November 2010 08.30 Coffee and morning registration 09.00 Chairman’s opening remarks outlining the HPHT market overview n Assess what has changed in the global offshore environment in the past 12 months and understand the impact on HPHT operations in the future n Global insights into HPHT projects n New technologies and pushing the envelope with HPHT operations 09.30 Examine advances in completions for HPHT deep tight gas wells through insight into the process of optimisation for stimulation and production operations n ExploreLuksar’s testing andcompletionchallengesinthefirstexplorationstage n Assess how Luksar are advancing in completion and testing forA-1 F-2 exploration wells n Lessons learnt and the way forward forT-4 appraisal well Raid Bu-Khamseen,KEC Company 10.15 Icebreaker networking and problem solving session In this interactive session,delegates will be assigned a team to work with in order to solve a set scenario.In these teams,you will take the time to talk through the proposed scenario and evaluate the challenges,risks and opportunities you would be likely to come across.Each team’s spokesperson reports their findings back to the wider delegation. 10.45 Coffee and networking break FOCUS ON HPHT SAFETY 11.15 Emergency response planning and critical safety factors for HPHT operations A panel of health and safety and risk experts will kick off by delivering short 10 minute overviews where they briefly share their perspective on what 2010 going forwards means for managing HPHT operational safety and risk management. 11.15 The regulator’s perspective n Understand key safety considerations for HPHT operations and ensure that your safety strategies are robust for 2010 going forwards n Examine requirements for the operators’ compliance with safety regulations for HPHT operations n Understand the importance of promoting a safety culture Grant Moody,HM Principal Inspector of Health Safety, Health and Safety Executive (HSE) 11.25 The legal perspective n What are the legal requirements for HPHT drilling safety and risk? n Examine key considerations for environmental protection and pollution n Mitigating risks and compliance Jan Burgess,Partner,CMS Cameron McKenna 11.35 The risk and insurance perspective n Ensure that you are effectively prepared when it comes to emergency response and oil spill response n Understand key considerations for balancing risk and exposure n Explore what is required of the operator from the insurer’s perspective John Munningstomes,Senior Risk Engineer – Upstream,Marsh 11.45 Interactive panel debate and QA session You’ve heard the different perspectives from the HSE and risk professionals. Now it is your opportunity to raise your questions and put forward any challenges and concerns directly to the panel of experts. Interactive panellists: Andrew McHardy,Well Examiner,Total Independent Consultant Jan Burgess,Partner,Cameron McKenna John Munningstomes,Senior Risk Engineer – Upstream,Marsh Grant Moody,HM Principal Inspector of Health Safety, Health and Safety Executive (HSE) 12.15 Seated lunch and networking break 13.15 Carry out effective planning for the suspension and abandonment of HPHT wells n Examine the legislative and guideline background n Understand the technical challenges involved and the required technologies n Assess your tubing and cementing requirements n Explorethemajorenvironmentalconsiderations surroundingthiscomplexarea Steve Kirby,Drilling Engineer,Sasok Ltd 14.00 Gain insight into the geophysical challenges at the depleted HPHT Erskine Field,North Sea Gain insight into the Erskine Field,a depleted HPHT gas condensate accumulation located on the western margin of the East Central Graben, Central North Sea,UKCS.This presentation will give you insight into: n The challenges with wellbore stability while drilling,integrity due to significant liner deformations and sanding issues n The geophysical and geomechanical studies conducted over the last couple of years,their applicability to HPHT reservoirs and the challenges to implement modern geophysical tools at a mature field n The identification of high risk areas for wellbore integrity of existing wells and for the optimisation of potential infill well locations,changes in mud window during drilling and completion integrity Joerg Zaske,Senior Geophysicist,Chevron Upstream Europe 14.45 Coffee and networking break 15.15 BLUE SKY THINKING - TECHNOLOGY REQUIREMENTS ROUNDTABLE SESSION This interactive session will see the delegate audience split into two groups. This is your opportunity to voice your opinion on technology gaps and industry requirements for your forthcoming HPHT projects. GROUP A: Expandable technology requirements n Gain insight into“Hot off the press”new technology n What does the industry require for expandable technology developments? n Explore effective strategies for the application of expandables in HPHT environments Led by:Tony Furniss,Regional Sales Manager, Enventure International LLC GROUP B: Casing and tubing requirements n Casing and tubing requirements for HPHT depleted zones n Selecting the appropriate materials and connections n Casing with drilling applications – gain insight into developments Ledby:StuartCole,Manager,TechnicalSalesandServices,VallourecGroup 16.30 Chairman’s close and end of day one 17.00 Networking drinks reception Join your peers in a relaxed and informal setting for this excellent networking opportunity.This is a fantastic way to establish contacts early on at the conference and to strengthen relationships with existing contacts. Telephone: +44 (0)20 7368 9300 Fax: +44 (0)20 7368 9301 Email: Visit:
  19. 19. Conference Day Two Thursday 25th November 2010 07.45 HPHT industry breakfast with the HSE Join your peers from the HPHT community for an industry breakfast meeting.You can take this opportunity to catch up with your contacts informally whilst enjoying a full English breakfast and bacon rolls. During breakfast,you’ll hear directly from Grant Moody,HM Principal Inspector of Health Safety, HSE who will deliver a brief presentation on‘Challenging wells in the UKCS – a regulator’s perspective’. 08.30 Coffee and registration 09.00 Chairman’s welcome 09.15 Exploring HPHT well design: From concept to well construction n Explore effective strategies to ensure that you have clear well objectives n Understandhowallowingforuncertaintyinporepressure,fracturegradientand the“transitionzone”predictionsiskeytothesuccessofyourwellconstruction n Understand why casing shoe points and casing strategy is as important as detailed casing design n Examine the“lack of accurate data”paradox Ed Mcfadden,Independent Consultant Engineer 10.00 HPHT logging: Going the extra mile n New techniques extend the valid operating envelope n Data from case studies in Gulf of Mexico and North Sea n Increases in operating efficiency GrantAffleck,Business Development Manager,Weatherford 10.45 Coffee and networking break 11.15 Interactive panel discussion: Identifying technology gaps for HPHT completions n Understanding fluid selection for your completions projects n Seals and tubular integrity – key technology gaps n Explore pore pressure projects n Key considerations for polymers and metallurgy n BOP considerations Interactive panellists: Derek Charlton,HP/HT Drilling Manager,Maersk Oil Andrew McHardy,Well Examiner,Total/ Independent Consultant Ed Mcfadden,Independent Consultant Engineer 12.00 Gain insight into requirements for friction grip technology and solid metal seals for HPHT surface and subsea wellheads n Explore current industry standards for wellheads n Establish what makes a product fit for purpose for HPHT drilling and explore testing and qualification procedures n Gain insight into key case studies on HPHT wellhead experience Craig Hendrie,Managing Director,Plexus Ocean Systems 12.45 Lunch and networking break 13.45 Testingandqualificationofequipmentforextremeapplications n Customising QA/QC procedures for your HPHT project n ExplorehowtechnologyandmaterialscanbetterwithstandhostileHPHTconditions n Specification and design of equipment:Managing risk in the design process n Ensuringyourequipmentis fit-for-purpose:Fromrawmaterialstomanufacture Oddvar Skjæveland,VP Ullrigg Drilling andWell Centre, International Research Institute of Stavanger AS 14.30 Addressing the many challenges of HPHT well evaluations HPHT wells offer an opportunity to shift the paradigm while adjusting the mindset to cope with the current technological limitations.Success is often measured through the pre-determined KPIs which can fail to encompass the need for a fully integrated approach.In this session,you will explore how: n Understanding past failures in reservoir management can provide the key to future success stories n Well planning needs to be all encompassing and deal with all aspects from location,trajectory,well construction,drilling and completion fluid systems to available evaluation tools n HPHT environments not only affect the drill bit selection and downhole steerable assemblies,but also the reservoir properties and test tools as well. Test programmes need to apply a suite of achievable objectives and a clear understanding of the effects of time and temperature on downhole logging and test tools n Good planning with sufficient lead time can make all the difference R J Boocock,Consultant Petroleum Engineer 15.15 Coffee and networking break 15.45 Group competition of the well construction process During this group session,the delegation will be split into teams to build an ideal well in a given scenario. You will: A) Consider what is currently available to you B) Identify any current technology gaps 1) Planning tools - integrated planning,hydraulics,real time to actual comparisons 2) Rig capacity - size,onboard mud coolers fluid capacity,MPD spread, (And total number of“capable”rigs) 3) Drilling tools - downhole equipment premium threaded components,etc 4) Fluids - weight,rheology,variable behaviour with heating / cooling cycles, control with mpd 5) Cement - design,testing,“foams” 6) Casing - steels etc 7) Completions - tools transferring conventional technology to ht domain 8) Well test - special tools,differing test patterns 9) Logging - real time vs.recorded vs.wireline,new developments This group exercise is created to determine the difference between the actual edge of the current envelope,and the theoretical limit of upcoming potential wells. 16.30 Chairman’s close and end of conference Supported by: Event partnership opportunities Make the most of this unique opportunity to further your business development and marketing in the HPHT marketplace.Through tailored networking,sponsors can achieve the face-to-face contact that overcrowded trade shows cannot deliver.Sponsorship options are extensive and packages can be tailor-made to suit your company’s individual needs. Most packages include targeted marketing to over 10,000 HPHT professionals and tailored networking opportunities.For further information on exclusive profiling at the 2010 HPHTWells Summit please call us on +44 (0) 20 7368 9300 or e-mail
  20. 20. Main conference: 24th 25th November 2010 Pre-conference workshops: 23rd November 2010 Venue:Ardoe House Hotel,Aberdeen 5 easy ways to register Web: Phone: +44 (0) 20 7368 9300 Fax: +44 (0) 20 7368 9301 Email: Post: IQPC Ltd. Anchor House, 15-19 Britten Street, London SW3 3QL PAYMENT MUST BE RECEIVED PRIOR TO THE CONFERENCE To speed registration, please provide the priority code located on the mailing label or in the box below. My registration code is HPHTSLIDE0 HPHTSLIDEV Please contact our database manager on +44(0) 207 368 9300 or at quoting the registration code above to inform us of any changes or to remove your details. ConferenceCode:11887.004 FREE ONLINE RESOURCE Our website has changed! You will now find a variety of resources such as articles, news, podcasts and presentations available online. Many of these features are exclusive to IQPC so visit today and learn something new for free. VENUE INFORMATION Venue: Ardoe House Hotel and Spa,South Deeside Road Blairs,AB125YP, Aberdeen,United Kingdom Phone: :+44 (0) 1224 860600 Fax:+44 (0) 1224 860644 ACCOMMODATION Accommodation is not included in the registration fee. To book accommodation Tel: +44 (0)1224 860600. Always quote IQPC when booking. It is advisable to book before 23 October 2010. Prices from £120.00 inclusive vat and breakfast. For alternative hotels, please search TERMS CONDITIONS Please read the information listed below as each booking is subject to IQPC Ltd standard terms and conditions. Payment terms: Upon completion and return of the registration form, full payment is required no later than 5 business days from the date of invoice. Payment of invoices by means other than by credit card, or purchase order (UK Plc and UK government bodies only) will be subject to a £49 (plus VAT) per delegate processing fee. Payment must be received prior to the conference date. We reserve the right to refuse admission to the conference if payment has not been received. IQPC Cancellation, Postponement and Substitution Policy: You may substitute delegates at any time by providing reasonable advance notice to IQPC. For any cancellations received in writing not less than eight (8) days prior to the conference, you will receive a 90% credit to be used at another IQPC conference which must occur within one year from the date of issuance of such credit. An administration fee of 10% of the contract fee will be retained by IQPC for all permitted cancellations. No credit will be issued for any cancellations occurring within seven (7) days (inclusive) of the conference. In the event that IQPC cancels an event for any reason, you will receive a credit for 100% of the contract fee paid. You may use this credit for another IQPC event to be mutually agreed with IQPC, which must occur within one year from the date of cancellation. In the event that IQPC postpones an event for any reason and the delegate is unable or unwilling to attend in on the rescheduled date, you will receive a credit for 100% of the contract fee paid. You may use this credit for another IQPC event to be mutually agreed with IQPC, which must occur within one year from the date of postponement. Except as specified above, no credits will be issued for cancellations. There are no refunds given under any circumstances. IQPC is not responsible for any loss or damage as a result of a substitution, alteration or cancellation/postponement of an event. IQPC shall assume no liability whatsoever in the event this conference is cancelled, rescheduled or postponed due to a fortuitous event, Act of God, unforeseen occurrence or any other event that renders performance of this conference impracticable, illegal or impossible. For purposes of this clause, a fortuitous event shall include, but not be limited to: war, fire, labour strike, extreme weather or other emergency. Please note that while speakers and topics were confirmed at the time of publishing, circumstances beyond the control of the organizers may necessitate substitutions, alterations or cancellations of the speakers and/or topics. As such, IQPC reserves the right to alter or modify the advertised speakers and/or topics if necessary without any liability to you whatsoever. Any substitutions or alterations will be updated on our web page as soon as possible. Discounts: All ‘Early Bird’ Discounts require payment at time of registration and before the cut-off date in order to receive any discount. Any discounts offered whether by IQPC (including team discounts) must also require payment at the time of registration. All discount offers cannot be combined with any other offer. Data protection: Personal data is gathered in accordance with the Data Protection Act 1998.Your details may be passed to other companies who wish to communicate with you offers related to your business activities. If you do not wish to receive these offers, please tick the box below. c Please do not pass my information to any third party ©IQPC Ltd. 2010 UK VAT registration no. GB 799 2259 67 DELEGATE: Mr c Mrs c Miss c Ms c Dr c Other c First Name Family Name Position Email Organisation Address Tel Fax Dietary Requirements Approving Manager Signature I agree to IQPC’s cancellation and payment terms Delegate Information Registration Form Payment Methods Total price for your organisation (Add total of all individuals attending): Card Type: VISA c M/C c AMEX c Card Number: c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c Exp. Date: c c c c Sec: c c c c Name On Card: Signature: Billing Address (if different from above): City/County/Postcode Cheque enclosed for: £ (Made payable to IQPC Ltd.) By Direct Transfer: (Please quote 11887.004 with remittance advice). IQPC Bank details: Account No: 51304143 IBAN Code: GB59 MIDL 4038 1851 3041 43, Sort Code: 40 38 18, Swift Code: MIDLGB2112V, Account name: International Quality Productivity Centre Ltd., Bank: HSBC Bank Plc, 67 George Street, Richmond, Surrey TW9 1HG, United Kingdom DIGITAL CONFERENCE ON CD ROM A digital version of the conference proceedings, including all presentations, is available to buy. c I cannot attend the event, please send me the CD Rom priced at £599 plus VAT Recent digital conferences available - £599 plus VAT each c Asset Integrity Management, November, 2009 c HPHT Wells, November, 2009 c Please send me conference materials indicated above. c I have filled out credit card details opposite. For further information Please call: 0207 368 9300 or email: To search IQPC’s archived conference documentation Delegate Rates * To qualify for this discount, bookings must be received with payment by the discount deadline. Only one discount/offer is applicable per person. Registration fee includes conference documentation, lunch and refreshments. ** Please indicate choice of pre-conference workshops A c B c † I cannot make the networking Breakfast. Please remove £50 from the conference fee. c All above prices are subject to UK VAT at 17.5%.VAT Reg# GB 799 2259 67 Package Operators Consultants Equipment Providers Standard Price Gold Conference † + 2 Workshops Quote HPHTSLIDEO to receive 20% Discount Quote HPHTSLIDEV to receive 10% Discount c £2547 + VAT Silver Conference † + 1 Workshop** c £2048 + VAT Bronze Conference only † c £1549 + VAT Workshop only** c £499 + VAT