SPE/IADC-178187-MS

A Novel Strategy To Provide Extended Life For Offshore Wells By

Restoring The Integrity Of Surface Casing Using Innovative Planning And
Remediation Techniques
Arsalan Ansari, David Ringrose, Ziad Libdi, John Moffatt, Ahmed Mazrouei, and Naeem Khan, Zakum
Development Company

Copyright 2016, SPE/IADC Middle East Drilling Technology Conference and Exhibition

This paper was prepared for presentation at the SPE/IADC Middle East Drilling Technology Conference and Exhibition held in Abu Dhabi, UAE, 26 –28 January 2016.

This paper was selected for presentation by an SPE/IADC program committee following review of information contained in an abstract submitted by the author(s).
Contents of the paper have not been reviewed by the Society of Petroleum Engineers or the International Association of Drilling Contractors and are subject to
correction by the author(s). The material does not necessarily reflect any position of the Society of Petroleum Engineers or the International Association of Drilling
Contractors, its officers, or members. Electronic reproduction, distribution, or storage of any part of this paper without the written consent of the Society of Petroleum
Engineers or the International Association of Drilling Contractors is prohibited. Permission to reproduce in print is restricted to an abstract of not more than 300 words;
illustrations may not be copied. The abstract must contain conspicuous acknowledgment of SPE/IADC copyright.

Abstract
The petroleum industry has made significant investments and extensive research to rectify well integrity
issues, one particular failure mode relates to the structural degradation of the surface and conductor casing
strings by the effects of corrosion. Historically, and by convention, the inability to provide integral barriers
in the 95⁄8⬙ ⫻ 133⁄8⬙ casing annulus is resulting in wells being abandoned. Section milling to restore
annulus integrity and the use of external casing patches to replace failed casings are two of the innovative
approaches that we utilized in offshore wells to recover annulus integrity and as such preventing reservoir
fluid migration to surface. These approaches have proved successful as they provided real economic and
environmental advantages. We have proven that wells can be put back on stream with greatly reduced
CAPEX and OPEX exposure, negating the need to drill new replacement wells; we achieved tangible
commercial benefits and at the same time reduce our environmental risk exposure.
Our remediation engineering design focuses on the application of a novel strategy for an offshore well
that had failed Annulus-B (95⁄8⬙ ⫻ 133⁄8⬙ casing annulus). The failure was detected during planned annulus
monitoring. The annulus pressure test failed and testing fluid was observed exiting from the conductor.
The remediation action involved section milling and the placement of cement to regain annulus integrity.
The operation commenced with standard workover practices for the completion recovery, followed by the
running of cement, noise, temperature and corrosion logs in an effort to evaluate the cement quality behind
95⁄8⬙ casing above the reservoir and gain corrosion mapping of the 133⁄8⬙ casing.
The noise/temperature logs indicated a leak point at 4500 feet and the annulus space was hydro-tested
which resulted in returns being observed at surface, confirming a direct leak path from the 95⁄8⬙ ⫻ 133⁄8⬙
casing annulus to the 133⁄8⬙ ⫻ 30⬙ casing annulus. The cement bond logs indicated poor cement behind
95⁄8⬙ casing above the reservoir. However, the results from metal thickness detection logs indicated
insignificant corrosion (˜15%) for 133⁄8⬙ casing, eliminating the need to recover and replace this casing
string. The decision was taken to place two cement barriers behind the 95⁄8⬙ casing, above and below leak
point, and an additional barrier would be installed with the use of a 7⬙ tie-back casing string. The planned
strategy was successfully implemented and the integrity of the producer well was restored with two
2 SPE/IADC-178187-MS

competent 100’ cement barriers behind 95⁄8⬙ casing, above and below the leak depth, and a 7⬙ tie-back
casing string was also cemented all the way to surface.
As a result of this remediation, the production rate for the well was restored and provided an additional
200 BOPD as compared to expected production rate. Adopting the above methodology resulted in
approximately 50 days rig time giving significant cost savings and negated the requirement to perma-
nently abandon this well and to drill a replacement well.
Introduction
Industry analysts predict that the crude oil production coming from existing producing fields will decline
by 67% by 2030, in parallel the predicted world energy consumption is forecasted to increase by 74%; the
same analysts predict that there will be a 25% increase in the abandonment of existing producing wells
during this timeframe [Oil & Gas Journal, SPE 2013, U.S. Energy information EIA, 2015]. In addition to
the supply and demand impact of the above, the petroleum industry is faced with other enormous
challenges resulting from the declining oil prices [U.S. Energy information IEA, 2015], add to this a
number of performance challenges such as high abandonment and new wells construction costs, low
sweep efficiency, formation damage, deeper waters, harsh environments, unconventional wells, ageing
assets, time-manpower-skills-cost and regulatory pressures and the rising costs associated to recovery
from well integrity issues for the existing wells and the delivery of the expected recovery factor of the
reservoir [Taber et al., 1996]. Irrespective of the many innovative well remediation techniques that have
emerged through time, the industry statistics above coupled with the traditional day to day technical and
operational challenges faced when managing oil field production, will mandate that well integrity
engineering will remain a challenge for the industry for years to come.
The petroleum industry has made significant investments to find solution to remediate well integrity
issues, caused by corrosion of the surface casing [Pandey et al., 2014]. There has been extensive research
to investigate and resolve the root cause of these issues [Ceray et al., 2014]. A mature Well Integrity
Management System (WIMS) is essential to assure the sustained integrity of a well. An immature WIMS
will typically result in a higher risk of a major incident occurring, an increased frequency and severity of
minor integrity issues as well as reduced long term production [Fanoiki, 2002].
Based on actual experience gained through the management of several wells, the key challenges faced
and methodologies adopted to restore the integrity of surface casing using different approaches is
presented within this paper.
Well Integrity in offshore wells
Brief overview of offshore wells
On average, offshore wells are drilled with a 36⬙ hole lined with 30⬙ conductor pipe cemented on the back
side. The depth of water table determines the casing setting depth so that drilling fluids cannot
contaminate underground fresh water sources by mud filtration [Hills, 1951]. The next section tradition-
ally is a 17 hole drilled to a depth to address high formation pressures, isolate salt and unstable zones,
which is then lined with 133⁄8⬙ surface casing, and cemented insitu. Finally, production casings are set (9
5⁄8⬙ casing and 7⬙ liner) in a sealing reservoir section. The last string will be a completion string which will

vary depending on the production or injection requirements. By convention, Annulus-A is the space or
annuli between completion tubing and production casing (95⁄8⬙ casing or 7⬙ liner), Annulus-B is the space
or annuli between production casing (95⁄8⬙ casing or 7⬙ liner) and 13 3⁄8⬙ surface casing. Finally, Annulus-C
is the space or annuli between 133⁄8⬙ surface casing and 30⬙ conductor pipe.
A number of surveys aiming to assess well integrity status around the world have been carried out in
recent years [Ceray et al., 2014]. The survey results reveal that globally a high percentage of existing wells
have well integrity problems. The following regions record that the percentage of their total wells with
well integrity problems is: -Gulf of Mexico (45%), UK North Sea (34%) and the Norwegian North Sea
SPE/IADC-178187-MS 3

(18%) [Almukhaitah et al., 2013, Fanoiki, 2002]. Other studies indicate that 20% of all production wells
and 33% of injection wells suffer from integrity problems. Technological advancement for well construc-
tion techniques often increase the complexity of wells and it is considered that the major well integrity
challenges will present themselves downhole.
Issues related to surface casing
We embarked on a field wide scanning program to measure the conductor thicknesses as it is postulated
that the conductor wall thickness has a direct correlation to the structural capacity of the well, in addition
to the structural surveying we hydro-tested the annulus spaces to access the pressure integrity of each
annuli. From this exercise, we were able to identify the following conditions and we classified the risk
associated to each condition with a risk ranking index. The well integrity status was restored by assessing
and fixing the issues based on evaluating the criteria presented in the methodology section:
● Wells with structurally unsound conductors
Modelling work with the conductor thickness measurement helped to determine that conductors
with less than a certain minimum critical mean thickness are structurally at risk and we classified
them as Structural Risk Rank 1 (SRR-1). This minimum thickness indicates that conductor is in
a high risk condition and as such there was a potential risk of well collapse. These well were shut
in and isolated. Remediation planning would mandate, amongst other precautions, that drilling
BOP’s could not be nippled-up without additional mean of support to protect against risk of 13 3⁄8⬙
casing collapse as a result of the added weight burden of the BOP’s.
● Corroded surface casing
In some cases, the 133⁄8⬙ surface casing was found to be severely corroded, where measurement
was possible using the same modeling techniques with the wall thickness measurements to assess
the structural capacity and develop a theoretical minimum acceptable wall thickness for these
surface casings. If the casings were found to be below this minimum wall thickness, we treated the
wells with the same ranking and precautions as the conductors.
● High Annulus-B pressure wells
Some of the wells were found to have sustained High Annulus-B (9 5⁄8⬙ ⫻ 13 3⁄8⬙) pressures. An
annular monitoring and management program was initiated and further investigative work was
scheduled to determine the source of the ingress and remediation planning commenced. It was
investigated that oil dripping occurred from the reservoir behind the 95⁄8⬙ casing through the 30⬙
conductor pipe window as the oil or water effluent were contained in a sum tank.
● Failed Annulus-B wells
From the hydro-testing program, a number of wells failed to hold a low pressure test due to failed
133⁄8⬙ surface casing, which is probably due to communication between the surface casing and 30⬙
conductor pipe and are categorized under one of the following:
X Shallow Leak
Returns were observed at surface. These wells were classified as Shallow Annulus-B leaks and
further investigative work was scheduled to determine the location of the leak and remediation
planning commenced.
X Deep Leak
No returns were visible at surface. These wells were classified as Deep Annulus-B leaks and
further investigative work was scheduled to determine the location of the leak and remediation
planning commenced

Objective of this study

The study presented here finds the solutions to address the well integrity failures that presented themselves
during the field wide investigation. This paper also proposes a strategy for fixing the well integrity for
4 SPE/IADC-178187-MS

different offshore wells with different problems. During the course of the study, we developed a simple
yet effective Decision Tree concept that helped us decide on the remediation steps for a number of
well-condition scenarios based on the following criteria:
● Condition and remaining mean wall thickness of 30⬙ conductor pipe
● Cement quality behind 9 5⁄8⬙ production casing
● Top of cement behind 9 5⁄8⬙ production casing
● Corrosion (Remaining metal thickness percentage) for the 13 3⁄8⬙ surface casing
● Leak depth in the 13 3⁄8⬙ surface casing
The studies helped determine, acknowledge and confirm the importance of executing thorough
investigative work ahead of rig mobilization to accurately assess the well integrity condition. The ability
to assess the concentric casing strings, second and third barriers, is of paramount importance. The use of
thru-tubing deployed logs in combination with thorough annuli and conductor assessments provided the
added dimensions that helped ensure that the appropriate remediation steps are taken, saving production
deferment time, reducing workover costs and eliminating unnecessary environment risk exposure.
Restoring wells is a much more viable proposition rather than abandoning existing wells and drilling new
wells to replace lost production or injection.

Methodology
Diagnosis conducted on wells
Initial investigative diagnostics is conducted on offshore wells whenever a well integrity issue is
experienced, the execution is performed ahead of any rig mobilization; as a minimum the following
checks are performed:
● Conductor UT scanning is performed to assess the remaining conductor mean thicknesses
X In the event that the remaining mean wall thicknesses is measure and found to be below the
recommended critical wall thickness, the conductor will need to have a repair scheduled before
other well remediation work can be considered.
X If the remaining conductor mean wall thickness is above the recommended critical value, the
conductor pipe does not require further repair and the remediation diagnostic program can be
continued as planned in the workover.
● Annulus-B (9 5⁄8⬙ ⫻ 13 3⁄8⬙) pressure tests are conducted to confirm the hydraulic integrity
X Inhibited brine is used to test the annular space and close monitoring is required to monitor and
record the volumes of pumped inhibited brine. The maximum pressure test to be attempted
must be below the calculated MAASP for the annuli as in practice the pressure tests were
limited to 200 psi during our field wide testing program. The applied pressure must be
increased in stages gradually and it is critical to accurately record all pressure responses. In the
event that the applied pressure drops then leak-off rates are to be accurately recorded.
y If the pressure test failed and returns are observed at the surface then this will be classified
as Shallow Failed Annulus-B
y If the pressure test failed but no returns are observed at the surface then this will be classified
as Deep Failed Annulus-B
X If high sustained pressure is observed on the Annulus-B with oil & gas as bled-off effluents,
then a measured and controlled bleed off program will be executed. These are the wells that
are having returns from Annulus-C (30⬙ ⫻ 13 3⁄8⬙) or Annulus-B (9 5⁄8⬙ ⫻ 13 3⁄8⬙) window.
Moreover, it is important that accurate data is recorded and the rate of pressure drop and any
subsequent pressure rise must be accurately recorded. The nature of the effluent drained must
SPE/IADC-178187-MS 5

be reported and samples taken. If hydrocarbons are present samples must be taken for further
analysis. We classify these wells as High B Annulus Pressure wells
Fig.2 presents a pressure plot of one of the High Annulus-B Pressure wells; this well had approximately
950 psi sustained pressure on the Annulus-B over a period of several months.

Figure 1—(a) The 2008 IEA oil production forecast to 2030 [Oil & Gas Journal, SPE 2013] (b) Brent front month futures price [U.S. Energy
information IEA, 2015]

Figure 2—Example of High sustained Annulus-B pressure well for the past few months

● Cased Hole Logging operations

X Noise & Temperature logs are conducted to:
y Detect the leak path behind the 95⁄8⬙ casing
y Detect the hole or leak point in 133⁄8⬙ casing as Fig 3 presents a sample of a noise and
temperature log
6 SPE/IADC-178187-MS

Figure 3—Example of Noise and temperature log along with suspected leak point detection in 13 3⁄8ⴖ casing

X Corrosion (Metal thickness detection) logs are conducted as seen in Fig.4 to:
y Determine if the 133⁄8⬙ and 95⁄8⬙ casings are structurally sound (Metal thickness loss ⬍ 50%)
to predict if casing is holding pressure.

Figure 4 —Example of Remaining Metal thickness (corrosion) detection log in 13 3⁄8ⴖ casing

X Cement Bond logs are conducted as seen in Fig.5 to:

y Identify if there is good well-bonded cement in competent consolidated rock formations
isolating the reservoir from surface
SPE/IADC-178187-MS 7

Figure 5—Example of Cement Bond log in 9 5⁄8ⴖ casing

Different remediation considerations and techniques

● Conductor pipe repair
Current offshore wells with structurally weakened conductors that have no further utility needs are
permanently abandoned. For wells that are permanently abandoned, the conductor and all surface
casing will ultimately be cut and recovered just above the sea bed and slot recovery wells will be
drilled requiring 150 days operation. Alternatively, there are a number of following potential
options to repair a structurally weakened conductor if repairs are considered feasible and there is
a business needs to repair the well. Attempts to effect repairs for the failed 133⁄8⬙ surface casing
can only be considered, if repairs to regain the structural integrity of the conductor can be
achieved.
X Conductor reinforcing is currently the primary option to effect conductor repairs, requiring
7-10 days operational time. This involves welding sleeves to the existing conductor as the
sleeves are welded to the conductor from below the sea level and will extend to the top of the
conductor. To facilitate this, the use of a cofferdam is required. The cofferdam provides a
means to evacuate the sea water and it provides a habitat for welders to prepare and weld the
sleeve to ⬙dry⬙ conductor. The sleeve reinforces the conductor and regains its structural
capacity. The sequence of events for this reinforcing cofferdam repair is as follows:-
y Conductor UT scanning to determine mean wall thickness and identify weakest sections
y Conductor is cleaned and all marine growth removed below water line
y Cofferdams is installed, sea water is evacuated and ⬙dry⬙ conductor access is given below
mean sea level
y 3 segment sleeves are welded in place from below the mean seal level to the top of the
conductor
y Sleeves and conducted painted for long term corrosion protection
y Cofferdam removed.
X Conductor reinforcement using sleeves is another technique where the subtle difference is that
the reinforcement can be carried out without the use of a cofferdam. Instead of welding the
sleeve to the conductor below the mean seal level, the sleeve is segmented and bolted in place
around the conductor as seen in Fig.6, which presents an illustration of the sleeve [Ceray et al.,
2014].
8 SPE/IADC-178187-MS

Figure 6 —Remediation of Conductor pipe by welding engineered sleeves

X Advanced grouting technologies is a third technique for conductor repairs, which provides
external support to the conductor. This technique also does not require the use of a cofferdam.
The fundamental difference is that there is no welding required. In essence an outer shroud is
constructed and grout is injected ⬙bottoms up⬙ which bonds to the conductors and proves to be
additional structural strength.
● Fixing failed Annulus-B wells
There were a number of different of failure modes discovered during the field evaluation
remediation techniques depending on the original well conditions. In order to simplify the decision
process, a decision tree approach was adopted as described in Fig.7 in order to diagnose and restore
the well integrity of the given well by selecting the approach based on the analysis as follows
SPE/IADC-178187-MS 9

Figure 7—Overall Decision tree for fixing Annulus-B problematic wells

The well condition will dictate the remediation forward plan and the high level scenarios as
follows:
X Good quality cement behind the 95⁄8⬙ casing and 133⁄8⬙ in casing in good condition
X Poor quality cement behind 95⁄8⬙ and 133⁄8⬙ in casing in good condition
X Poor quality cement behind 95⁄8⬙ and 133⁄8⬙ in bad condition
X Good quality cement behind 95⁄8⬙ and 133⁄8⬙ in bad condition
Fig 7 presents the top level decision tree for the well condition scenarios
In all failure scenarios, the wells under repair would be killed and the completions removed. The
aforementioned logs would be run to assess the cement tops and cement quality behind 9 5⁄8⬙ production
casing, qualify the weight loss of the concentric casing strings and where relevant perform leak detection.
Consequently, one of the following decisions are taken as per the decision tree:
X External Casing Patch
For illustration and referring to the decision tree as presented in Fig 8, consider that the well
condition has a shallow leak in the 133⁄8⬙ casing (less than 1000 feet from surface), the corrosion
mapping indicates severe corrosion damage (weight loss greater that 50%) of the 133⁄8⬙ casing and
there is poor cement quality or no cement behind the 95⁄8⬙ casing for the first 1000 feet from surface;
we would chose the option to recover and replace the 133⁄8⬙ casing string. To access the 133⁄8⬙
casing, we would first need to ensure there is poor cement (Free pipe) behind 9 5⁄8⬙ casing in the
first 1000 feet in order to recover the 95⁄8⬙ casing. We would then cut and recover the damaged 133⁄8⬙
casing and run new 133⁄8⬙ casing and tieback to the existing 133⁄8⬙ casing using external casing
patch. Finally, we will run new 95⁄8⬙ casing tying back to the origin 95⁄8⬙ casing also using an
external casing patch.
10 SPE/IADC-178187-MS

Figure 8 —Decision tree for External casing patch & internal patch for fixing Ann-B problematic wells

Fig.9 presents a section of standard external casing patch and the remediation steps that would be
followed are:

Figure 9 —External casing patch schematic

SPE/IADC-178187-MS 11

y RIH 95⁄8⬙ casing Cutte to 2 joints below the leak point of the 133⁄8⬙ casing
y Cut 95⁄8⬙ casing 5 feet below nearest casing collar.
y RIH 95⁄8⬙ casing spear and recover 95⁄8⬙ casing
y RIH 133⁄8⬙ casing cutter to below leak point (Based on DMAG log)
y Cut 133⁄8⬙ casing 5 feet below casing Collar.
y RIH 133⁄8⬙ casing Spear and recover 133⁄8⬙ casing
y Dress 13%⬙ casing (16⬙ 133⁄8⬙ washover required if cement is existing)
y RIH 133⁄8⬙ External Casing Patch to cut point
y Lower, engage and set External Casing Patch.
y Flush & clean 30⬙ conductor pipe Landing Rig Spool profile.
y Cut & dress 133⁄8⬙ casing to 10 feet stick-up.
y N/U Drilling Riser & Bell Nipple.
y Run Cleanout assembly and clean out to top of 95⁄8⬙ casing cut point.
y Run 133⁄8⬙ ⫻ 95⁄8⬙ wash -over assembly.
y Run Dressing assembly and dress 95⁄8⬙ casing.
y RIH 95⁄8⬙ External Casing Patch to cut point.
y Lower, engage and set External Casing Patch.
y Flush & clean 30⬙ CP Landing Rig Spool profile.
y Cut & dress 95⁄8⬙ casing to 20 feet stick-up.
y Install Lower part of Uni-Head Wellhead.
Using the similar convention consulting the Top Level decision tree, the optimum remediation options
will be identified for one of the following Annulus-B failures:
X 133⁄8ⴖ Internal Casing Patch and 95⁄8ⴖ external casing patch
For wells with a shallow leak in the 133⁄8⬙ casing that is localized i.e. the leak path does not extend
greater than 30 feet, we would use an Internal Casing Patch to repair the leak in the 133⁄8⬙ casing but
as in the above case the 95⁄8⬙ casing would have to be removed to gain access, hence, external casing
patch will be performed for 95⁄8⬙ casing.
X Perforating 95⁄8ⴖ casing in 2 intervals in a competent consolidated rock formation
For wells with Deep Failed Annulus-B and where logs reveals poor cement quality with the absence
of a hydraulic seal above the reservoir behind the 95⁄8⬙ casing. However, the 13 3⁄8⬙ surface casing is
in good condition and structurally sound. Annuli integrity can be recovered by using cement squeeze
techniques. Making two perforations in 95⁄8⬙ casing and squeezing cement in the lower perforation and
forcing cement out through the upper peroration with cement retainer in between the perforations can
result in regaining a competent cement barrier. An additional barrier will be provided by running an
additional casing string to surface. The methodology for squeeze cementing technique as seen in Fig.10
is presented as follows:
12 SPE/IADC-178187-MS

Figure 10 —Perforating 2 sets of perforation in 9 5⁄8 casing patch as a remediation technique

y TCP guns are fired to make 2 sets of perforations

y Cement retainer is set between the two perforations
y Cement is pumped into annulus but not always uniformly distributed due to eccentricity
X Section milling for 9 5⁄8ⴖ casing in two competent consolidated rock formations
For wells with Deep Failed B annulus, the optimum solution would be to regain annuli integrity deep
and above the leak point using standard section milling techniques in competent formations to gain
access and apply conventional cement practices to provide a competent hydraulic seal. An additional
barrier would be required and is achieved by installing an additional 7⬙ casing string to surface. The
methodology for conventional section milling technique as seen in Fig.11 is presented as follows:
SPE/IADC-178187-MS 13

Figure 11—Section milling in 2 competent formations as a remediation technique

y Section Milling is performed in competent formation

y Under-reaming is done to remove the cement behind 95⁄8⬙ casing lying on low-side
y Cemented the Section mill interval
y Smallest deviation from the axis may cause failure to re-enter the casing

Results & Discussion

The aforementioned methodology was applied on an offshore oil producer well which was producing
3000 BOPD.

Well History and Issue

The oil producer well was drilled in 1981 and recompleted as a single horizontal producer (Fig.12)
through a 34⬙ single completion. In April 2014, the Annulus-B was pressure-tested and it failed to hold
a 200 psi test with returns of testing fluid observed at surface through 30⬙ conductor pipe, indicating a
shallow leak through the 133⁄8⬙ surface casing. The 30⬙ conductor was in good condition with remaining
wall thickness of 16.9 mm. Therefore, a workover was initiated with the objective to restore well integrity
related to failure of pressure testing in Annulus-B and restore the production rate of 3000 BOPD.
14 SPE/IADC-178187-MS

Figure 12—Single Horizontal Oil Producer well schematic

Diagnosis performed
The Annulus-B pressure test failed to hold an applied pressure of 200 psi as the test pressure dropped to
36 psig in 30 mins with return of testing fluid observed through 30⬙ conductor pipe, indicating leak in
surface casing at shallow depth.
Noise & Temperature logs were run which actually indicated a suspected leak point at approximately
4500 feet as seen in Fig. 13. The corrosion (Metal thickness detection) logs indicated that the 133⁄8⬙ casing
was structurally sound (Metal thickness loss ⬍ 50%) and cement Bond logs indicated poor cement in
consolidated rock formations, not isolating the reservoir from surface.
SPE/IADC-178187-MS 15

Figure 13—Noise and temperature logs showing suspected leak point

The decision was taken to perform Section milling in 95⁄8⬙ casing above the reservoir in two of the
consolidated rock formations and to install an additional casing string to give an additional barrier.

Operational Summary
The operations were performed in the following sequence after rig moved to location:
● Rig Move & skid
● Killing the well
● N/D X-mass tree, N/U BOP’s
● Recovered completion and cleanout run
● Cased Hole Logging operation to record Corrosion (Metal Thickness detection) logs, Noise-
temperature logs and cement bond logs
● Secure the well in 7⬙ and 9 5⁄8⬙ casing
● Performed section milling along with underreaming and placing cement across the 2 competent
formations (100 feet each)
● Performed 7⬙ tie-back operation to surface
● Run completion and restored the well back on production
● Prepare for Rig move

Achievements & Milestone including lessons learned while Section Milling

The remediation selection and the planned strategy was successfully implemented and the integrity of the
producer well was restored with the placement of two strong competent 100’ cement barriers behind 95⁄8⬙
casing above and below leak depth. In addition, a 7⬙ tie-back string was installed and cemented all the way
to surface. The production rate for the well was restored and actually provided an additional 200 BOPD
as compared to expected production rate. However, we encountered several limitations and issues with
section milling as follows:
● Could not pass bottom of section mill with bit
16 SPE/IADC-178187-MS

X Solution: Use Taper Mill to pass bottom of section mill depth and drill out 50’ cement at
bottom of Section mill and then drill out cement with bit
● Could not pass bottom of section mill with 7⬙ liner
X Solution: Using half-mule shoe design and rotate several turns to pass bottom cut.

Economics
By direct comparison and taking into consideration all the costs, that would be associated to have had to
plug and abandon this well and the costs associated to drill a new well from the same slot would be in
the order of $13.5 million and would take approximately 140 days to achieve. Therefore, this strategy
allows us to save approximately 55-60 days of rig time and $5.7 million dollars of capital expenditure by
avoiding additional costs on abandoning and drilling new wells.

Conclusion & Future work

It can be seen that, due to the creation of an innovative planning strategy, to assist decision making and
applying engineered technical remediation solutions for our Annulus-B challenges, we are able to deliver
tangible commercial and operational benefits and extend the working life of our well assets with minimum
environmental concerns and has the following merits:
● External casing patch and 13 3⁄8⬙ Internal patch fixes the integrity of well with new casing and no
returns coming through conductor pipe
● Isolates the flow of hydrocarbons from the reservoir to surface
● Saving on immense cost and time for running external casing patch or abandoning and drilling a
new slot recovery well
However, section milling, perforating in two intervals and external casing patch also have some
challenges:
● Incase external casing patch pressure test fails; 7-inch tie-back operation or slot recovery of well
should be conducted leading to immense rig operational costs.
● Incase of section milling,
X Eccentric casings might cause cutting two casings might lead to significant losses.
X The smallest deviation from the axis may cause failure to re-enter the casing
● Incase of perforating in two intervals,
X If circulation not there, cement cannot be squeezed behind casing
X Incase of eccentric casing or high angle, perforating guns can perforate across double casings
and can cause unwanted results in form of uneven distribution of cement.
X Incase if guns not fired, time lost in getting new guns

Current research phase and operations are targeted towards evaluating other techniques with adjusted
parameters to restore downhole barrier challenges along with saving and optimizing costs by having
efficient operations.

Acknowledgment
The authors acknowledge the support of the Zakum Development Company (ZADCO) management and
service companies for providing the required equipment, personal and support needed to conduct this
research.
SPE/IADC-178187-MS 17

Nomenclature
Ann-A Annulus-A (annulus between completion tubing and 9 5⁄8⬙ production casing or 7⬙ liner)
Ann-B Annulus-B (annulus between 9 5⁄8⬙ production casing or 7⬙ liner and 13 3⁄8⬙ surface casing)
Ann-C Annulus-C (annulus between 13 3⁄8⬙ surface casing and 30⬙ conductor pipe)
BOPD Barrels of Oil per day
BPM Barrels per minute
Bbls Barrels
CAPEX Capital Expenditure
N/D Nipple down
N/U Nipple up
OPEX Operational Expenditure
SRR Structurally risk rank
WIMS Well Integrity Management System
ZADCO Zakum Development Company

References
Almukhaitah, A, A. and Haldar, S., (2013), Effective Well Integrity Management in a Mature Sour Oil Field, Society of
Petroleum Engineers, IPTC 16767, Published in the International Petroleum Technology Conference, 26-28 March,
Beijing, China.
Ansari, A, A., Libdi, Z., Khan, N., Aslanyan, A., Aslanyan, I., Volkov, M., Arbuzov, A., Achkeev, A., Shnaib, F. and
Makhiyanov, R., (2015), Triple-barrier thickness scanning using through-tubing pulse-magnetic logging tool, Society
of Petroleum Engineers, SPE 176655, Published in the SPE Russian Petroleum Technology Conference held in
Moscow, Russia, 26-28 October 2015.
Ceray, A., Borzel, K. and Spowage, A, C., (2014), Well Integrity - Moving From Firefighting to Strategic Planning,
Society of Petroleum Engineers, SPE 171472, Published in the SPE Asia Pacific Oil & Gas Conference and
Exhibition, 14-16 October 2014, Adelaide, Australia.
Fanoiki, J, B., (2002), Sustaining Surface Casing Integrity in A Saline Environment, Society of Petroleum Engineers, SPE
77244, Published in the IADC/SPE Asia Pacific Drilling Technology, 8-11 September 2002, Jakarta, Indonesia.
Hills, J. O., (1951), A Review of Casing-String Design Principles and Practice, Drilling and Production Practice, 1951.
Oil and Gas Journal EOR Surveys, EOR surveys 1970-2030, US-Oil-Production-1965-through-2013-
Fracking.png?00cfb7, Available [Online]: www.energytrendsinsider.com909_⫻_660Search_by_image
Pandey, S, K., Rana, S, A. and Fakhro, A, J., (2014), Well Structure Integrity Threat Due To Near Surface Corrosion of
Outer Casing at Offshore Wells, Society of Petroleum Engineers, IPTC 17557, Published in the International
Petroleum Technology Conference, 19-22 January 2014, Doha, Qatar
U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA), Brent month future prices, 2015, Available [Online]: www.eia.
gov845_⫻_50503Search_by_image