,

SPE 20748
Implementation of a Reservoir Management Program
G.C, Thakur,

Chevron

U.S.A.

Inc.

3PE Member

Copyright

1SS0, Society c: etroleum

Th18 paper was

prepar~

:-.: :sentalion

Engineers

Inc.

at the 65th Annual :echnlcal Conference

and Exhlbllion of the society of Petroleum Engineers held in New Orleans, A, SapIembw

23-20,

1SS0,

This pepar wae eeleoled for presentation by an SPE Program Committee following ravlnw of information contained In art abstre~t submitted by Ihe author(s). Contenla of Iha paper,
aa praaented, have not been reviewed by the society of Petroleum Engineers and are cwbjacl to correction by the author(a). The matenll, aa presentd,
doas not rwessarily
reflect
any p+eltion of the Sooie!v of Petroleum Engineers, Ita oftlcers, or memb$rs. Papers preeented at SPE meetings are eubjact to publication review by Editorial Committees of the SocIely
of Petroleum Enginwra, Permission 10 copy Ie reatrkted to an abstract of not rnwe than S00 worde. Illustralkme may mot be cc$+sd. lle abstract ahoukf oomaln ccmaprcuous aokrroWadgmant
of where and by whom tha papar ie preeented, Write Publications Manager, SPE, P,O. Box 8336S8, Richardson, TX 7W6S4626.
Telex, 7S0969 SPEDAL.

ABSTRACT
Reservoir
management
can
be
defined
as
the
judicious
use of various means available
to maximize
benefits
or economic
recovery
from a reservoir.
Although
there are numerous reasons why reservoir
management
programs
sometimes do not succeed,
perhaps
the most i,flportant
reason is the lack of
team effort
in developing
and implementing
such
programs.
A step-by-step
procedure
to improve
success in this effort is outlined.
Two distinct
approaches
have been utilized:
one is
a comprehensive
approach
for large reservoirs
and
the other is a problem solving approach
for small
(and/or
less profitable)
reservoirs.
Although
the
approaches
are philosophically
qu!te different,
each
has produced
useful
results.
It is not necessary
for all reservoirs
to have the most comprehensive
management
program;
rather,
it should be dictated
based upon need, keeping. the cost-benefit
anal ysis
In mind.

INTRODUCTION

and Ill ustratlons

The
purpose
of
this
paper
is to provide
an
overview
of reservoir
management,
discuss
why
some reservoir
management programs fail, and offer
alternative
methods to manage resmvoirs
utilizing
two case studies.

WHY DO
mml-?

Reservoir
Management
has
sl~nificant
received
interest
wlthln
the petroleum
Industry
In recent
years.
Although
reservoir
management ha? been in
practice
in various
forms since th~ 1930s , it has
Before
1970,
gone through
evolutionary
stages,
reservoir
engineering
and
reservoir
management
were considered
synonymous
by many.
However,
during the 1970s and 19S0s, considerable
changes in
this philosophy
were Instigated,
and the value of
synergism
between
n~~terinj~te
~~~g~ltho~~~
geophysics
was realized,
were
beneficial,
these
alterations
raservoi r
management
still dld ,mt fully value the merits of
other
disclpllnes,
e.g.
production
operations,
drllllng,
and non-petroleum
engineering
functions,

References

Recently
the management
of resewoirs
has been
explained
as
judicious
use
of
various
mean~
available
to maximize
benefits
fram a reservoir.
Wiggins
Startzman
and
describe
reservoir
and decisions
management as ~lthat set of operations
by
which
a reservoir
is identified,
measured,
produced,
developed,
monitored,
and evaluated
from
Its
aband%~%;~z .
hrough
epletion
Also,
they
explain and
it as final
the
of
state-of-the-art
technology
to
a
application
given
within
a
reservoir
system
management
In
summary,
the
function
of
environment.
reservoir
is
to
facts,
management
provide
information,
and
knowledge
necessary
to control
operations
and obtain the maximum possible economic
recovery
from d reservoir.

at end of paper,

SOME

RESERVOIR

MANAGEMENT

PRO-

reservoir
are
numerous
reasons
why
There
Some are listed
management
programs
have falle
below:
1
1
A)
It was not considered
as a part of a coupled
system consisting
of wells,
surface
facilities,
and
the
reservoir,
Not all of these
were
For example,
emphasized
In a balanced way,
one could do well In studying
the fluids and
their
interaction
with
rock,
i.e.
reservoir
engineering;
but,
by not considering
the well
surface
system
design,
the
andlor
the
recovery
of oil and/or
gas was not optimized.
Most people can cite examples of mistakes made
in our business
where we thoroughly
studied
various
aspects
of the reservoir
and made
decisions
resulting
in too many wells drilled,

*
IMPLDIENTATIONOF A RESERVOIRMANAGEMENTPROGRAM
application
of
improper
technology,
and/or
inadequate
available for future expansion.

well
completion
surfac~- facilities

Perhaps
the
most important
reason
why
a
is deveioped
reservoir
man(gement
program
and implemented
poorly is unintegrated
group
Som@times the operating
decisions are
effort.
the
made by peclple who do not recognize
dependence
of one system m the other.
Also,
net
have
the
required
may
the
people
background
knowledge
in critical
areas,
e.g.
reservoir engineering,
geology and geophysics,
and
drilling
engineering,
and
production
Although
it may not be
surface
facilities.
for
reservoir
necessary
the
absolutely
management
decision
maker
to have working
knowledge
in all areas,. he/she
must have an
intuitive
feel for them.
Thakur
recently
emphasized
the team approach
to reservoir
managel.)ent
involving
i~teraction
It is
between various
functions
(Figure
1) .
suggested
that the team members work as a
well-cnoroinated
basketball
team rather
than
Constant
interaction
between
a relay
team.
various
functions
is requ!red
in the
team
Note that the synergism
of the team
effort.
thai~
approach
Ran yieid a llwhol~ is greater
Thus,
hlteract!on
sum of its parts
effect.
various
engineering
functions,
between
production
operations,
geolo~~thand geophysics,
management,
interaction
and
their
economics,
proration,
Iegai, and enviror~mental
are
both
critical
to
a successful
groups
This statement
resewoi r management program.
is, basically
an extension
of the idea advocated
hetvfeen reservoir
by Talash
that I!Teamwork
engineers
and
is
essenti~l
management,
B)

production
to

loperations
waterflood

engineers
project

Reservoir
management
was not started
eariy
enough
and when
initiated,
the management
became
necessary
because
of a crisis
that
occurred
and/or
required
a major problem to
Early
in,.iation
of a coordinated
be fixed,
program
couid
have
reservoir
rrmagement
provided
a better
monitoring
and evaluation
FQP
tool , and cost less in the long run.
example,
a few eariy DSTS could have heiped
Also,
decide
if and
where
to set pipe.
performing
some tests
eariy
on could
have
indicated the size of the reservoir,
If it were
of limited
size,
driliing
of unnecessary
wells
could have been prevented.
Early definition
and evaluation
of the reservoir
system
is a prerequisite
to good reservoir
The collection
and anaiysis
of
management.
data play an important
role in the evacuation of
Most
often,
an
integrated
the
system.
approach
of data collection
is not followed,
especially
immediately
after the discovery
of a
Also,
in this endeavor,
not all
reservoir.
Sometimes
functions
are generatiy
involved.
the reservoir
management staff has difficulties
in justifying
the data collection
effort
to the
management because of not clearly showing the
need of the data,
along with its costs and
benefits.

c)

SPE 2rJ748

Calhoun
draws
an anai~y
between
reservoir
and health
management
,
According
to his
concept,
it is Rot sufficient
for the reservoir
management
teani to determine
the state of a
reservoirs
heal.;~ and then attempt to improve
it.
One reason for reservoir
management to be
ineffective
is
that
the
reservoir
ar,d
its
attached
systems (weils and surface facilities)
health
(condition)
is not maintained
from the
siart.

IMPROVING

SUCCESS

IN IMPLEMENTATION
..

Table 1 describes
a step-by-step
procedure
on how
to improve
success
in implementing
a reservoir
management program.
1.

The first step involves starting

with a plan of
action,
including
all functions.
It is common
for
many
reservoir
management
efforts
to
devise a plan,
but this plan usually does not
involve
all functional
groups.
Thus,
not all
groups
buy
into
these
programs,
and
the
cooperation
between various
functions
is beiow
the desired Ieve
;f a plan is to be developed
and implemented
ihe best way, it must have
commitment
from
all
disciplines,
inciuding
management.

2.

The
plan
must
be flexible,
Even
if the
reservoir
management
team members
prepare
pians by involving
ali functional
groups,
it
does
not
guarantee
success
if
it
is not
adaptable
to surrounding
circumstances
(e. g.,
economic, legal, and environmental).

3.

The plan must have managemeiv

support.
No
matter how good the plan is in (ethnical
terms,
it must have local and h!gher level management
blessings.
Without their support,
it would not
have a chance to get approved,
Thus,
it iS
necessary
that
we get management
involved
from day one.

4.

No
reservoii
management
plan
can
be
implemented
properly
without
the support
of
the field personnel,
Time and time again we
have
seen
reservoir
management
plans
fail
because
either
they
are
imposed
on field
personnel
without
thorough
explanations
or
they are ~,epared
without
their involvement.
Thus,
the
fieid
personnel
do not have
a
commitment to these plans.

5.

It is critical
to have periodic review meetings,
invoiving
all team members.
Most, if not all,
of these meetings should be held ht the field
offices.
The success of these meetings
will
depend upon the ability
of each team member
to teach his/her
functional
objectives.

ALTERN,+TIVE

WAYS TO MANAGE

A RESERVOi R

a comprehensive
plan
for
As
discussed
above,
reservoir
management,
including
a team approach,
is Lighly desirable,
However,
every reservoir
may

**e.

E 20748

G. C. lhakur

b~cau~e
of
n~t
warrant
such
a detailed
plan
cost-b~nefit
considerations.
Keepi.]g this in mind,
two approaches
utilizing
case studies are described
in this paper.
The
first
case study,
North
Ward Estes Field,
illustrates
of
a
the
application
comprehensive
approach,
whereas
the
second,
Columbus
Gray
to
Lease,
discusses
a IIproblem
solvii~gll approach
Weservoir
Both
approaches
have
management.
shown
positive
results,
and,
although
they
are
philosophically
quite
different,
each has its own
merits.
The comprehensive
approach philosophy
is described
in detail
in Ref.
2.
The fc iowing describes
the
latter,
i.e. the problem solving apl iroach:
o

for
evaluating
and
pian
An
isction
increasing
the net worth of reservoirs
is
prepared
by involving
a selected group of
personnel,
and is based upon the best
available data.

in
the
problem
solving
sessions,
an
informal
exchange
of ideas takes
place
associated
with
current
and
probiems
Next,
operating
practices
are defined.
aimed
at
recommendations
specific
are
reservoir
performance
enhancing
suggested,
and pros and cons for each
If the
recommendation
are evaluated.
required
reievant
data are not available,
then either they are assumed or collected
keeping
the cost-benefit
in the
field,
analysis in mind.

NORTH

WARD ESTES

FiELD

Introduction
The North Ward Estes ( NWE) field,
located in Ward
Texas
(Figure
2),
was
and
Winkler
Counties,
It is an lb mile x 4 miie
discovered
in 1929.
Cumulative
oil
production
from
anticlinoriumo
primary
and secondary
recovery
has been in excess
or about 25% OOi P, from
of 320 million
barrels,
The
field
has
been
more
than
3,000
wells.
Geologically,
the fieid
waterflooded
since
1955.
resides on the western
edge of the Central
Basin
The
field
is
part
of
an
Upper
Piatform.
which
extends
trend
productive
Cuadalupian
uninterrupted
for 30 miles on the e:@
of the
platform (Figure
3).
The average
reservoir
depth is 2,600 feet; porosity
19%
and
19
md,
permeability
and
The t&~~$o;r
temperature
is 83F,
respectively.
The flood patterns
are generally
20-acre,
five spots
and line drives.
Field

i nformatlon

set above
sands.

the

After
1950,
hydraulically
half
of the
cased-hole.
on the field

productive

formation

in

the

gas

the welis were completed

cased-hoie,
fractured
and acid stimulated.
About
current
producers
and injectors
are
Table 2 provides additional
information
histwy,
structure,
and s?ratigrapliy,

The
producing
formations
are Yates
and Quzen
sands,
but most of the production
has been from
the Yates sands (Figure
3).
They consist of very
fine-grained
sandstones
to siltstones,
separated
by
dense dolomite beds.
These sands,
as shown in
A, BC, D, E, F, stray sands, Jl,
Figure 4, are:
and J3.
2
Most of the BC was in the original
gas cap and
consists of silt:,tones to finegrained
sandstone
with
clay.
The D and E sands are similar to BC,
The
stray
is composed
of thin
bedded,
Ienticular,
siitstones
and fine-g rained
sandstones,
with hiqh
~> ~ds are compo~ed of
clays.
The
J,
and J
coarser
sands
wi~avrluc:ghw
clay
content;
therefore,
they
porosities
and
Generally,
the
J3 is not
well
permeabilities.
developed and is wet in most areas.
The Queen formation,
which lies below the Yates
is composed
of intervals
of fine-grained
sands,
sandstones
to siltstones,
composed
of numerous
thin,
ienticular
sands with poor lateral continuity.
Thus,
the
Queen
sand
has
been
difficult
to
waterflood.
Reservoir

Management

Team

A team including
all functional
groups,
a. shown in
Figure
1, was formed to investigate
ali .>ertinent
options for optimizing
recovery
from the field.
The
results
of the team effort
are described
below.
1. Geoiocalcal Characterization
A correlation
scheme was developed
for the field
based upon Iateraily
continuous
key dolomites that
bracket
the
productive
sands
and
segment
the
A computer
reservoir
into discrete
mappable units.
database was built by our geologists to facilitate
the
processing
and integration
of large volumes of data
to aid in the geological characterization
study.
The
database components were:
A.

Wireline
included

log data
from
3,300
welis,
about 15 million curve feet,

B,

Core

from 538 wells, which totaled about

analyses
Ilthology
feet
of
and

data

30,000

which

description,

c.

Marker
data
markers.

D.

Fluid contact
oil-water.

gas-oil

anu

E,

consisting
of historical
Production
data,
wellbore data, Includlng diagrams.

and

for

more

than

60,000

correlation

and Geology

The
fleid
was
Initially
developed
on
20-acre
however,
the most productive
Later,
spacing.
parts of the field were drilled on 10-acre spacing.
Until
the 1950s,
the wells were mostly completed
Perforated
open-hole
and shot with nitroglycerine.
liners were then hung from the casing,
which was

data,

I.e.

original

Core analyses
were depth
corrected.
normalized
using
a 60-foot
interval

cf

Logs were
laterally

IMPLEMENTATIONGF A RESERVOIRMAWGFWNT

The
Cat
plant
compresses,
desulfurizes,
and
dehydrates
all C02-rich
gas produced
from the
project.
The
plant
is designed
to process
65
MMCF/D of produced gas.
In addition to reinfection
gas, the plant will also produce
four (4) tons per
day
of
marketable
sulfur
from
moderate
concentrations
of H2S (2%) in the hydrocarbon
gas.
Team Effort
1. Why a Team Effort?
The
North
Ward Estes
Field
is one of Chevron
U .S. A,S largest
fields,
and it has significant
EOR
potential.
C02
f!ooding
was the only economic
option available
to recover significant
reserves
from
For about 1,3oO producing
wells.
toe
this field.
average
production
rate is only 7 130PD at 95 %
water cut.
Out of the 1,300 wells, about 700 make
5 BOPD or less,
Also, 300 wells are now capable of
producing
only at or below the present
economic
limit.
Thus,
if C02 flooding was not implemented
right away, economics would have dictated
plugging
and abandoning
of uneconomic wells.

Test

A CC
injectivity
test was conducted
to investigate
any ,i,jectivity
reductions
during
C02
and water
An injector
in good mechanical
Injection
cycles.
condition
and
with
no hydraulic
fracturing
was
Geological
cross-sections
through
this
selected.
The injectivity
well showed weil-developed
sands,
test
provided
valuable
information,
as described
below:
No reduction
In injection
rates
during or after C02 injection,

was

(B)

The C02 Injection

rate was about
than the water Injection rate.

(C)

NO significant
change in injection
profile
observed during or after COa Injection,

Implementation

Management
approval
of this project was obtained in
December 1987,
In January
1988, i) task force was
formed,
and the C02
kIl:CdOf7
was
initiated
in
March 1989.
Currently,
about 60 ,$fMCF/D of COZ
and hydrocarbon
gas is being injected.
To date,
project response has been encouraging.

One of the outcomes of the characterization

study
has been
identi flcation
of well
workovers.
In
addition,
several
waterflood
projects
were designed
and implemented.
A waterflood
project that did not
prove as successful
as others was later analyzed
in
If the project
terms of the characterization
study.
had been considered
after
the study,
it probably
would not have been implemented
and considerable
savings could have been attained,

(A)

and

The ant icipated

increase
in oi I recovery
from the
six-section,
Stage 1 area (containing
165 producing
wells and 192 injection
wells)
as a result of COi
flooding is 16.5 million bbl of oil.
Stages 2 and 3,
tentatively
scheduled
for 1993 and 1995, will depend
upon
the success
of the first
stage and on oil
price.

Reference
10 describes
the details
of the study.
About 11 man years and $1.6 million were spent to
Figure
6 summarizes
ach~we
the above resu Its,
steps.
computer-aided
characte, ization
study
Normalized
log
and
cme
data,
markers,
fluid
contacts,
and production
data were quality
checked
The output Included
and corrected
for any errors.
maps (structure,
Isopach and porosity-thickness),
permeability
plots,
water
saturation
porosity
vs.
and
volumetric
data,
plots,
production
and
including
wellbore
diagrams.
An
cross-sections,
example of a sand trend cross-section
is shown in
It is based upon basic geologic data and
Figure 7.
supported
by production
data.

Injectivity

SPE 2074f

The C02 flood design

was based upon a history
match
the waterflood
performance
of
the
of
six-section
pr~ject
area,
the sel~tion
& typical
patterns
~flcluding
a
detailed
reservoir
characterization,
a prediction
for continuation
of tl,s
waterflood,
predictions
for C02 flooding . and the
scale up of t~f
pattern
predictions
to the entire
project
area,
Predicti Ins
were
made
for
continuation
of the waterflood
tmi for C02 flooding.
Additional
reservoir
simulation
was conducted
tc
determine
the optimum C02 slug size.

As seen in this
figure,
the correlation
between
pxmosity and permeability
is poor,
However,
when
the correlation
based upon Ilthofacies
was mad~o
increased
correlation
coefficients
were obtained.
Structure
and porosity-feet
maps were merged with
fluid contact and water saturation
data to calculate
volumetric.
Facies
relationships
and actual
to
apparent
p~y
ratios
were
applied
to determine
effective
hydrocarbon
pore
volume,
Computar
generated
net isopach maps of the sands display a
The sands pinch out into an
north-south
strike,
updip
and
a carbonate
facies
evaporite
facies
downdip.

2. C02

PRoCRAM

3. COZ Proj >ct Design

continuous
anhydritic
dolomite.
Core porosity
data
were cross-plotted
versus
bulk density
log value~
to develop
transforms
for derivation
of porosity.
Corrections
for hole rugoslty,
overburden
pressure,
and Iithologic
complicat~ns
were applied
to refine
the porosity
transform.
Jht? final transforms
are
shown in Figure 5.

Keeping
the above points m mind and considering
the average
age of wells In the field of about 35
years,
a window
of opportunity
became quite
obvious.
If the wells were
abandoned,
It was
unlikely
that
the
project
would
have
been
undertaken
because
economics
would
not
have
justified
re-drills,
Thus,
it became urgent to start
an EOR project,
i.e.
either
move quickly
or risk
losing the chance,
To design
and implement an
EOR project and to Improve the performance
of the
existing
waterflood,
a study
team,
as shown in
Figure 1, was formed,

observed

20% higher

was

2. What Did the Team Achieve?

In addition to the above-mentioned

results,
the C02
injectivity
test implantec! a valuable
IIseedll of team
effort
that led to fruitful
results during the design
and Implementation
of the COZ project,

During
the dee:gn
phase , as many as 25 to 30
members
of
various
f~nct: n]al
groups
worked

We

.
E 20748

C.yether
on a comprehensive
design of a six-section
Coa
project,
reviewed
hundreds
of
workover
candidates,
and
evaluated
waterflood
severai
modification
projects.
COZ injection
was started
in the six-section
area
within 15 months of project initiation.
In addition,
many workovers
and waterflood
modification
projects
were
implemented
during
time
period.
this
Moreover,
within
a
year-and-a-haif,
the
gas
processing
piant was buiit and started.
The teams
goai for every
aspect
of the project,
from weii
workovers,
reservoir
studies,
CCl
injc<tion,
and
gathering
system
construction
to start
up was
accomplished
in a short
tlrne without
sacrificing
quaiity,
In summary,
the teamwork across the function
iines
has resuited
in successful design and implementation
of many successful projects in the North Ward Estes
Fieid.
COLUMBUS

G. C. Thakur

GRAY

LEASE

Introduction .

The Coiumbus
Gray Lease in the Fuhrman
Mascho
fieid
is iocated
six miies southwest
of Andrews,
The fieid was discovered
in 1930
Texas (Figure
8).
and the first
weil was compieted
on the iease in
It was developed
on 40-acre
spacing,
and
1937,
waterflood
began
in 1965 on an 80-acre,
5-spot
The fiood reached its peak in 1967 at 720
pattern.
BOPD and deciined
at a rate of 15%, thereafter.
injection
was suspended
in 1975 in aii but five
In 1979,
an infiii
program
was
ieaseiine
wells.
and
injection
waz
started
on
20-acre
spacing,
The
infiii
restarted
to support
the new weils.
program was compieted in mid-1980s resuiting
in an
injection
pattern
of 80-acre,
inverted
nine-spot.
The peak response occurred
in 1984 at 1,000 BOPD
and then the production
deciined
at 20% per year
The current
fiood pattern
is shown in
(Figure
9).
Figure 10.
Seoiogy
The fieid is iocated on the eastern
margin of the
Centrai
Basin Piatform,
13 miles east of its edge.
The
San Andres
formation,
Guadaiupian
in age
was deposited
in an open marine
(Middie
Permian),
Other San Andres
shailow water sheif environment.
fields on the Northern
Centrai
Basin Piatform
that
are similar to Fuhrman
Mascho inciude
the Means,
Shafter Lake, Seminoie, and Emma fieids.
The San Andres
formation
has a gross productive
it can be
thickness
of 3001 in the iease area.
divided
into
two
intervais
based
on
p. rosity
development
and vorticai
continuity
(Figure
11).
The
Upper
San Andres
(USA)
has an average
thickness
of 225 feet and is comprised
of iight
coiored
dolomites
that
are fineiy
crystalline
and
vuggy
or sucrosic.
Aiso, it is anhydritic
probabiy
and contains
scattered
interbeds
of gray or green
permeability
are
both
Porosity
and
shaies,
discontinuous.
verticality
and
horizontality
Thickness
and reservoir
quality
change over short
distances.
The trapping
mechanism in this zone is
both structurally
and stratigraphicaiiy
controlled.

The
Iaterai
variability
of
makes weii to weii correlations

porcsity
difficuit,

development

The average
depth to the top of the USA is 4,259
The average porosity,
permeahiiity,
nt~t pay,
feet.
and water saturation
are 9.3%, 2.6 md, 80 ft. and
35%, respectively.
Aithough
no discrete
o,l-wat~r
contact (OWC) is present within this interval,
some
water is produced.
The
Lower San Andres
( LSA)
is about
60 feet
thick,
and
comprises
the
lowest
part
of
the
producing
interval.
This
zone is verticality
and
iateraliy
continuous
relative
to the USA in the lease
area,
and is generaiiy
capped by a dense doiomite.
Core
data
indicate
that
the LSA iacks
porosity
occlusion
by anhydrites
as compared
to the USA,
The main difference
between these zones is that the
moldic and vuggy porosity is preserved
in the LSA,
while it is generaliy
piugged
by anhydrite
in the
USA .
The ~.SA has an average porosity,
permeability,
net
pay, and water saturation
of 11 ,8%, 29 md, 25 ft.
The oi i-water contact defines
and 30% respective y.
the productive
limits of this zone.

Discussion
Studies
performed
on
the
iease
indicate
that
majority
of the remainil(g oil is in the USA because
the
LSA
is
10
times
more
permeabie,
times
permeability.
As a resuit,
very
iittie water
has
A study
been
injected
in
the
upper
zone.
conducted
in June 1989 made recommen.flations
to
recovery
from
the
upper
zone
and
increase
er~imated
that an additional
500,000
BO could be
obtained.
The June 1989 study was the resuit of a problem
soiving
session
invoiving
two
(production
and
reservoir)
engineers
and a geologist
over a period
of two weeks,
The resuits of the study were aiso
discussed
in a haif-day
session
with
the
fieid
The
foreman
and
surface
facilities
engineer.
foilowing describe the resuits of the study:
1.

(ooiP) ,
The
original
oil-in-piace
determined
by volumetric
anaiysis in 1984,
The values
was reviewed
and modified,
of OOIP for the upper
and lower zonas
are estimated
at 29.4
and 15.5 MMBO,
The lease has a current
respectively,
cumulative
oii production
of 7,2 MMBO, or
16% OOi P.

2,

The lease has a current

producing
rate of
350 BOPD with an average water injection
This is an
of 8,000
BWPD (Figure
9),
Improvement
in production
of 50 BOPD
over
the June 1989 rate,
or about 100
!30PD more than the rate based upor, he
expected
deciine,
is attributed
The
improvement
workovers
performed
on the
recommended by the study.
For
Weli 1928, which was producing
before,
is averaging
65 BOPD
installation
of a larger
pump.

to the
lease
as
exampie,
17 BOPD
after
the
Another

.
. ...

.
example
is
is
BOPD,
workover
perforations,
3.

Well
now

2126,

+-.&l,,Arh*

L,,

Au.

once

Although,
by recompleting
in the LSA,
some response has already been obs~ rved,
it is believed
that additional
production
increase
will
be seen
in the southern
portion of Section 21.
The wells in this
area were only completed in the USA and,
as ~lescribed
above,
this interval
has a
rr,uch lower
porosity
and
permeability.

5.

The producing
water-cut
is too high for
the relatively
low volume of water injected
(about 10% and 60% HCPV in the USA and
This high water-cut
LSA, respectively).
indicates:
(i)
channeling
from
the
injectors
to producers
through
fractures
and/or
high permeability
zones, and (ii)
poor volumetric
sweep in the LSA.

Reservoir

tlnmu,,~

rnvvmx

arti zu{~{

program
is
developed
and
poorly
is
unintegrated
group
procedure
to improve
success in
program
has
been
such
as

3.

Both the comprehel~sive

approach
and problem
solving approach to reservoir
management have
resulted
in positive
results,
and although they
are philosophically
quite
different,
each has
shown its merits.

4.

The
North
Ward
Estes
field
illustrates
an
application
of
comprehensive
reservoir
management,
whereas the Columbus Gray lease
depicts
a
problem
solving
approach
to
reservoir
management.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The
author
expresses
his
appreciation
to the
management of Chevron
U.S.A.
Inc. for permission
to publish this paper.
The content of the paper is
primarily
derived
from
in-house
Reservoir
Management
forums and workshops
coordinated
by
the
author.
The
work
performed
by
the
participants
of these
forums
{from
geology
and
geophysics,
all engineering
functions,
drilling,
and
production
operations)
is highly appreciated,

involving
Several
recommendations
pumping down the high fluid level wells,
increasing
injecton
pressure
due to the
increased
frac pressure,
running
profiles
before and after the increase in pressure,
match
and
injection
to
diverting
production
profile.

REFERENCES

Several
recommendations
of
the
above
These
have already
been incorporated.
cGst about $750,000,
and will result in an
increase
of
estimated
total
ploduction
250,000 130.

that
identifying
This
discussion
Illustrates
problems
reservoir
methodically
solving
increased
the performance
of the Columbus
lease.

uw,

management
implemented
A
effort.
implementing
employed.

17 BOPD

Since the parting

pressure
in Section 19
incr?ased,
the injection pressure
and rate
were also raised.

7.

&m

producing
5
after
out ,
(cleaning
adding
and acidizing) .
averaging

4.

6.

*,,,

and
has
Gray

1.

llReservoir
ManagemelTt in the
Stiles,
L. H,:
Means
San
Andres
Unit,
SPE
Paper
No.
20751,
presented
at
the
Arlnual
Technical
Conference,
Sept.
23-26,
1990, New Orleans,
LA

2.

Thakur,
G. C.:
Reservoir
Management:
A
Synergistic
Approach,
SPE Paper No. 20138,
presented
at the Permian Basin Oil and Gas
Conference,
March 8-9,
1990, Midland,
Texas

3,

Craig,
~,
F,
et al:
Through
?ontinuing
Cooperation(,
J,
Pet,
pp. 755-760

Management

The
reservoir
management
approach
followed
was
very
simple
in
this
case
because
the
lease
production
rate was only about 300 130PD at the
Based
upon
reservoir
of
the
study,
time
heterogeneity
and past performance,
the expected
increase
In production
was not considered
high.
~hus, a declslon \Vas made to design and implement
a cost-effective
reservoir
management
program that
Depending
upon
the
the
lease could
support.
success
of the implemented program,
additional
work
may be recommended,

lOptimized
Recovery
Interdisciplinary
(July
1977)
Tech.

4.

Harris,
D. G, and Hewitt,
C, H,:
ISynergism
in
Reservoir
Management
-The
Geologlc
Perspective,
J, Pet, Tech,
(Juiy 1977),
pp.
761-770

5.

Calhoun,
J.
Engineering,

6,

llAn overview
of Waterflood
Talash,
A, W,:
Surveillance
and Monltoringtl,
J. Pet,
Tech.
(December
1988) , pp. 1539-151+3

7,

Weber,
K.
J.:
influence
of
Sedimentary
Structures
on
Fluid
Reservoir
Modelslt,
J,
Pet.
Tech,
1982) , pp. 665-672

8,

;{avlena,
D,:
Iinterpretation,
Use of the
Basic
Geololglcal
Datail, J. Canadian
Pet. Tech.,

C,:
J.

11A Definition
of Petroleum
Pet. Tech,
(July 1963)

CONCLUSIONS
1,

Reservoir
management
has been described
the judicious
use of various means available
maximize benefits from a reservoir,

as
to

2,

some
why
reasons
There
are
numerous
Perhaps
reservoir
management programs
fail.
the most Important
reason
why a reservoir

w!

Common
Fiow
In
(March

Averaging
and
- Engineering
Part 1, V, 5,

.
.
2? 7Jl1711R
---,
,.,

nlv,

No.

4
( october
December
153-16~;
Part
2,
V.
7,
No.
September
1968) , pp. 128-144
9.

Harris,
D.
G.:
The
Role
Reservoir
Simulation
Studiesll,
(May 1975), pp. 625-632

of
J,

1966),
3
(July

fl%.,amu.
L..

A,,

PP.

Geology
in
Pet.
Tech.

I!North
Ward Est~s
to be published
in

10.

Stanlev,
R.
G. et al:
Geological Characterization!,
1990 AAPG 13u!letin

11.

llDe~ignOf a Major c02

Winzinger,
R. , et al:
Flood - North Ward Estes Field, Ward County,
Texas,
SPE Paper No. 19654,
presented
at
the SPE Annual Technical
Conference,
October
8-11, 1989, San Antonio,
Texas

12.

M.
L. and Startzman,
R. A.
An
Wiggins,
S PE
to
Reswwair
Management,
Approach
presented
at the
Annual
Paper
No.
20747,
Technical
Conference,
Sept.
23-26,
1990, New
LA
Orleans,

341

sp~ 2074Q

TABLE 1
HOW TO IMPROVE SUCCESS IN IMPLEMENTING A
RESERVOIR MANAGEMENT PFiOQRAM

START WITH A PLAN OF ACTION,

INVOLVING ALL FUNCTIONS

FLEXIBLE PLAN

MAN:,QEMENT SUPPORT

COMMITMENT OF FIELD PERSONNEL

o PER1ODIC REVIEW MEETINQS, INVOLVING ALL

TEAM MEMBERS (INTERDISCIPLINARY
COOPERATION IN TEACHING EACH OTHERS
FUNCTIONAL OBJECTIVES)

TABLE8
North Wud Eaba Fkld

tusIQBx

19E9-NORTHWRD FIELD DISCOVERED

~W. OBRIEN #4 8E~10N W

i@W-BOTEO FIELD DIBOOVERED
EsW.E8TE0 #l BEOTION BB
t044+lELDB
COMBINED
G lB8&MTER FLOOD DEMN
WE*
FOLYMER PROJUOT8 BEQAN
$#00
WELL~ DRILLED
MTIVE
WELL6-1#01 PRODUCERa 0@2 INJEOTOR8
(0/1/07) W ME
BPAOIN9

LOW RELIEF ANTIFORM

OENTRAL DAWN PLATFORMHOMOOLINE
PRIMARY PRODUCTIONUVX7E0
wEnME
DEPTH4B90
SECONDARY PRODUCTION-OUEEN

mmm
DEPT+BW
. m+mmu
am mwwuw)

LITH--VERY
FINS ORAIN EAHD AND 81LTBTONEB DOUMWE#ANtlYDRITE INTRRBEDDSD
#ERMR
POROBITY+SS

d!
* MRAW pmnmmkv-ti
SNVIRONMENT=TIML
FLAT
342

WE 20748

)(-)
=,,,

PfWuctlon

&

~;.,,,nt

QaR &nd

Chanllcd
Enfjlneerlng
)
/

,(
m@oUohuld
Drllllng

SOWI09w

I
Pfofmctlon

Opwatlona

~~o

Fig, 1 -

Ramwoir

F!enagemanc Approflch

Y
.

+!

b%

a43

S.L.

./

_-----

.
-4.000

-a,ofw-

12.000

w-

Fig.

North Ward Estes Geologic Horizons

-.,.
.,
-,.
..........
..
..
.
.
.
I
v -i$$ul)
,.,,.
,...-

..

TOP/SEVEN

,. ,.

..

.=

RIVERS

30
Fiu,

TOTAL YATES
POFKISIT7 PERM
TRAN8FORM

Typa

Log

20

10%$ 0

for NertllHardBmtc@
Fisld

J2 fiANO
POROSITY PLRM
TRANSFORM

J NRTEFFECTIVE

PA71SOPACN

I.mOW
*
J281LW PAY SANII$TONK
LITMOFACII!8
C* TRANWORM
w

I;,,
!:
.
,.,
,1
r%m--

!: 1
: ;!!

10

:
,A:;.,:_o I

,--!q;

,,.
,,

;j#A,

,,,.

0
0

Ip..++q

M&l,,

$46

SPE 20;48

Fig,

North hard tlncac Computtr-A;dtd

Chore ctart8etlon
Study

Cat
-

4 MILES

Fig,

uml

Uwndo

for

S48

Nurth

Ward Xue-u

FIQld

..

-. ..-.

-----

, -.
r-

. .,. -.-p-

..=

..4

<-

$g

-.1.s

.../

(*.,,

,,; ,,.

.,

~.t.$

,.
.4

I ...:

,AMES

Uhf

FIo, 10- Current Pattern, Columbu$Gray

W.T,

Chevron
ForA A

No. 9

Fig. 11 - Type Log, Columbuo Gray

348

\..4