GP 10 80 11 June 2008

Document No.
GP 10-80
Applicability Group
Date 11 June 2008
GP 10-80
Well Testing
Group Practice
BP GROUP
ENGINEERING TECHNICAL PRACTICES
11 June 2008 GP 10-80
Well Testing
Foreword
This is the first issue of Engineering Technical Practice (ETP) BP GP 10-80 for Well Testing and
Clean Up Operations. This Group Practice (GP) has been developed to provide the basic framework
outlining how BP operations will manage Well Testing and Clean Up activities using temporary
surface process facilities and /or well completion installations.
DWOP Section 29 Well Testing
All well testing and clean up operations shall be designed to conform with GP 10-80 (Well Testing ETP)
29.1 The equipment programmed for the Well Testing or Clean Up operations shall be designed to be
able to safely control the maximum potential pressures that the reservoirs may be able to
generate.
29.2 Timely HAZOP/HAZID reviews shall be conducted covering the Well Testing/Clean Up
equipment and operations plans for all newly programmed activities. A process safety specialist
should be involved in this review. However a generalised review covering a programme of
similar operations on multiple wells is acceptable as long as an appropriate MOC programme
addresses potential variations.
29.3 A detailed programme for Well Testing or Clean up operations shall be prepared for each well.
29.4 All installed Temporary Process Equipment shall be checked to confirm compliance with the
relevant documented P&ID (Process and Instrumentation Diagram).
29.5 BOP’s and associated equipment shall be tested immediately prior to running the test string.
29.6 All connections within test strings or completion strings with packers shall be tested to the
maximum anticipated pressure, plus a safety margin, prior to flowing the well.
29.7 The test string shall be designed to allow effective well kill in the event of any potential failed
closed valve within the string. The test string shall include the facility to allow the string
contents to be circulated or bullheaded prior to pulling out of hole.
29.8 All surface well testing or completion equipment potentially exposed to high operating
pressures shall be pressure tested to the maximum anticipated pressure, plus an acceptable
safety margin, prior to flowing the well.
29.9 All other process equipment shall be tested to its rated working pressure or to an appropriate
test pressure that will not actuate installed relief valves.
29.10 Test lines, relief lines, process equipment and all relevant temporary fittings shall be securely
anchored. Particular attention shall be given to line fixing at each end and along their length.
29.11 Relief lines shall be designed to accommodate the maximum potential fault flow rate without
exceeding their own pressure rating.
29.12 Emergency Shut Down systems shall be function tested and confirmed operational prior to the
start of well flowing.
Downloaded Date: 6/17/2008 10:10:43 PM
The latest update of this document is located in the BP ETP and Projects Library
Page 2 of 29
11 June 2008 GP 10-80
Well Testing
29.13 The air supply to burners shall be independent of the rig air supply. Non return valves should be
fitted between the compressors and burner head.
29.14 Unlatch equipment deployed for floating rig operations shall be function tested prior to running
tools into the well.
29.15 Subsea test trees and test string deployed safety valves shall be capable of shearing all coiled
tubing and wireline to be run through the test string.
29.16 The capability of the BOP’s to shear the Sub Sea tree slick joint shall be determined and
suitable safeguards installed to prevent the test string being pulled to position non shear-able
assemblies across the shear rams.
29.17 During testing sufficient main power, well control and installation services shall be available
and on line to service unplanned or emergency conditions that may occur during the test.
29.18 Nitrogen used to pre-charge DST tools or samplers shall be certified oxygen free or analysed on
site to confirm quality before use.
29.19 All rig installed and temporary gas detection systems and safety equipment shall be certified fit
for use prior to the start of flow.
29.20 After completing well testing or clean up operations reasonable steps shall be taken to ensure
that the well conditions are safe to allow tripping out of the hole to commence.
Copyright  2008, BP Group. All rights reserved. The information contained in this
document is subject to the terms and conditions of the agreement or contract under which
the document was supplied to the recipient’s organisation. None of the information
contained in this document shall be disclosed outside the recipient’s own organisation
without the prior written permission of BP Group, unless the terms of such agreement or
contract expressly allow.

Page 3 of 29
11 June 2008 GP 10-80
Well Testing
Table of Contents
Page
Foreword ........................................................................................................................................ 2
Introduction ..................................................................................................................................... 5
1. Scope .................................................................................................................................... 6
2. Normative references............................................................................................................. 6
3. Terms and definitions............................................................................................................. 7
4. Symbols and abbreviations .................................................................................................... 7
5. Objectives of this document ................................................................................................... 9
6. Organisation and competencies............................................................................................. 9
6.1. Management accountability ........................................................................................ 9
6.2. Management delegation.............................................................................................. 9
6.3. Organisational structure ............................................................................................ 10
6.4. Senior Petroleum Engineer responsibilities ............................................................... 10
6.5. SPE and Testing support staffing requirements ........................................................ 10
6.6. Testing Contractor support requirements .................................................................. 11
6.7. Specialist services and other support requirements .................................................. 11
6.8. POB Management .................................................................................................... 11
6.9. Training Expectations ............................................................................................... 12
7. Well Test Planning and Design Concepts ............................................................................ 12
7.1. Introduction ............................................................................................................... 12
7.2. Test Basis of Design ................................................................................................. 13
7.3. Equipment Selection and Design Fundamentals ....................................................... 15
7.4. Programme Generation............................................................................................. 23
7.5. Equipment and Process Plant Commissioning.......................................................... 24
7.6. Start Up Limitations................................................................................................... 28
7.7. Performance Indicators ............................................................................................. 29
List of Tables
Table 1 – Pressure Test Duration and Acceptance Criteria........................................................... 28

Page 4 of 29
11 June 2008 GP 10-80
Well Testing
Introduction
Well Testing and Clean-up operations involve flowing significant quantities of flammable and
potentially explosive hydrocarbons. Safely conducting these operations, on installations primarily
designed for drilling, can be consistently achieved with correctly prepared, installed and
commissioned temporary process equipment.
This GP provides direction on the minimum standards required to design and manage these operations
whilst keeping within the spirit of the BP Group HSE Standard for “Process Safety/Integrity
Management”, as follows: “Mechanical and structural systems shall be operated, inspected, tested
and maintained, consistent with accepted standards to ensure that equipment is fit for service, so as to
avoid loss of containment and structural integrity”.
Good design and operating procedures are essential to deliver safe operations. All equipment installed
in any temporary process system needs to meet the correct design, maintenance, and inspection
standards and be certified as fit for use.
It should be noted that no specific reference is made in this document to any additional or special
procedures that relate to managing HPHT Well Testing or Clean-up operations. It is recognised that all
Testing and Clean Up operations introduce significant risk and the same demanding requirements that
are routinely placed on HPHT operations should be delivered consistently to all test operations.

Page 5 of 29
11 June 2008 GP 10-80
Well Testing
1. Scope
This GP provides critical guidance on the design, planning, commissioning and operation of
temporary Well Testing and Clean Up operations.
The GP will not cover the following subject matter and these will need to be addressed by referring to
the relevant safety and operational standards:
a. Equipment mobilisation and lifting management.

b. Handling and installation of completion equipment
c. Data acquisition requirements with the exception of relevant safety critical data systems.
2. Normative references
The following normative documents contain requirements that, through reference in this text,
constitute requirements of this technical practice. For dated references, subsequent amendments to, or
revisions of, any of these publications do not apply. However, parties to agreements based on this
technical practice are encouraged to investigate the possibility of applying the most recent editions of
the normative documents indicated below. For undated references, the latest edition of the normative
document referred to applies. Requirements in these documents not referenced are not requirements of
this technical practice
BP
GP 10-01 Casing & Tubing Design
BPA-D-003 Casing Design Manual
TS-D-007 Completion Design Manual
GP 04-30 Guidance on Practice for Design and Location of Occupied Permanent
Buildings Subject to Blast Fire and Gas Hazards on Onshore Facilities
GP 24-10 Guidance on Practice for Fire Protection Onshore
GP 24-20 Guidance on Practice for Offshore Fire & Explosion Hazard Management
GP 24-21 Guidance on Practice for Fire Hazard Analysis
GP 24-22 Guidance on Practice for Gas Explosion Hazard Analysis
GP 48-02 Guidance on Practice for Hazard and Operability Studies
GP 48-50 Guidance on Practice for Major Accident Risk Process
Industry Standards
API Spec 5CT Specification for casing and tubing
API RP 7G Recommended practice for drill stem design and operating limits
API Spec 6A Specification for valves and wellhead equipment
API Spec 14A Specification for sub surface safety valve equipment
API RP 14C Recommended practice for analysis design installation and testing of
basic surface safety systems on offshore production platforms
API RP 14E Recommended practice for design and installation of offshore production
platform piping systems

Page 6 of 29
11 June 2008 GP 10-80
Well Testing
API 17B Recommended practice for flexible pipes

API RP 44 Recommended practice for sampling petroleum reservoir fluids
API RP 520 Recommended practice for sizing selection and installation of pressure
relieving devices in refineries.
API RP 521 Recommended practice for pressure relieving and depressurising systems
ASME Section VIII Div 1 Rules for construction of pressure vessels
ANSI/ASME B31.3 Chemical plant and petroleum refinery piping
NACE MR-01-75 Sulphide stress cracking resistant metallic materials for oilfield
equipment
ISO 1368 Part 7
3. Terms and definitions
For the purposes of this GP, the following terms and definitions apply:
Shall
Shall defines a requirement that needs to be followed to be in compliance with the standard.
Should
Should defined as a preference that is expected to meet the spirit of the standard
May
Indicates a course of action that is permissible
Can
Can requirements are defined as “having the ability to” under the terms of the standard
Accountable
Person who has authority to approve or disapprove.
Responsible
Person who is responsible for carrying out the requirement
Technical Authority
Person(s) responsible for guiding safe and consistent application of regulatory, BP, and industry codes
and standards, and good engineering practices.
4. Symbols and abbreviations
For the purpose of this GP, the following symbols and abbreviations apply:
BOP Blow Out Preventor.
CGR Condensate Gas Ratio
DP Dynamic Positioning.
DST Drill Stem Test.
EPTG Exploration Production Technology Group

Page 7 of 29
11 June 2008 GP 10-80
Well Testing
ESD Emergency Shut Down.
ETP Engineering Technical Practice.
Ex d Flameproof Electrical Fitting Specification
gHSEr Getting health, safety and environment right.
GP Group Practice
HAZID Hazard Identification.
HAZOP Hazard and Operability study.
HP High Pressure
HPHT High Pressure High Temperature
HSSE Health, Safety, Security, and Environment.
ITT Invitation To Tender
IA Inspection Authority.
MOC Management of Change
MDT Modular Dynamics Tester – Logging tool provided by Schlumberger
NACE National Association of Corrosion Engineers
NDE Non-destructive Examination
NPT National Pipe Thread designed to American National Pipe Tapered Thread specification
OMS BP’s Operations Management System
POB Personnel on Board (reference to manning levels for offshore installations or camps)
P&ID Piping and Instrumentation Diagram.
PE Petroleum Engineer.
psi Pounds force per square inch Customary Oilfield Unit of Pressure
PBU Pressure Build Up
PSV Pressure activated Safety Valve
RCI Reservoir Characterisation Instrument – Logging tool, provided by Baker Atlas
RDT Reservoir Description Tool – Logging tool provided by Halliburton
SCBA Self Contained Breathing Apparatus
SG Specific Gravity – ratio of liquid or gas density, relative to water or air
SME Subject Matter Expert.

Page 8 of 29
11 June 2008 GP 10-80
Well Testing
SPE Senior Petroleum Engineer or Well Testing Engineer.
STX Steam Exchanger
SSTT Sub Sea Test Tree.
TA Technical Authority
WP Working Pressure – maximum safe operating pressure for equipment
5. Objectives of this document
The objectives of this document are to promote the safe and efficient well testing operations through
the application of consistently high standards in technical design, planning and operational procedures
6. Organisation and competencies
6.1. Management accountability

a. The management of Well Testing and Clean Up operations will normally be covered
within the wells management structure and accountability for delivery of safe operations
will reside at the Wells Director or Wells Manager level. Technical support from specialist
Well Testing or Petroleum Engineers will normally be embedded within the appropriate
Wells team and these will normally be assigned responsibility for ensuring that the planned
activities meet the requirements of this GP. In some locations the assignment of a local
Well Testing Technical Authority, or Subject Matter Expert, may be appropriate to provide
more focused technical support for the Wells Director.
b. Site Management (i.e. the Senior accountable BP leader at site) shall be accountable for
ensuring that:
1. Well test equipment is installed and commissioned in accordance with the standards
referenced in this document.
2. Operating boundaries are defined in the Well Test Programme and adhered to during
the test.
3. Equipment is installed in accordance with the relevant P&ID
4. Local regulations over and above those identified in this document are adhered to
5. Economic constraints shall not affect the above requirements – these being essential
for safe operations.
6. Well Control requirements to ensure safe operations are effectively prioritised and
managed during all testing and clean up related activities.
7. Local and BP HSSE regulations and expectations are met for all site based operations.
6.2. Management delegation

The management of each BU shall delegate the responsibility and authority for the correct
application of this GP to an appropriately qualified Senior Petroleum (SPE) or Well Testing
Engineer This delegation of responsibility and definition of appropriate authorities shall be
documented

Page 9 of 29
11 June 2008 GP 10-80
Well Testing
6.3. Organisational structure

a. Senior SPU/PU management shall ensure that the SPE is given terms of reference in
writing defining the activities for which he or she is responsible, and resources to deliver
these activities. The terms of reference shall ensure that the SPE is able to offer
independent advice direct to the Wells Team management without subsidiarity to other
engineering functions.
b. The SPE shall have direct access to Site Senior Wells management when:
1. It is not possible to reach an agreement acceptable to all functional groups.
2. The SPE considers it necessary to advise management of critical information
affecting the health and safety of personnel or equipment.
6.4. Senior Petroleum Engineer responsibilities

The responsibilities of the SPE should include design, planning, equipment certification,
commissioning and supervision of testing operations in accordance with the requirements of the
GP, in particular to:
a. Prioritise the Safety of all personnel at the operating site whilst being aware of, but not
driven by:
1. Environmental protection considerations.
2. Property protection.
3. Financial considerations.
b. Ensure the Well Testing Engineering design is consistent with the well casing design..
c. Ensure that the test string design and below rotary components allow safe operations to be
conducted during deployment, flow and data acquisition operations, well kill activities and
string recovery.
d. Ensure that the surface process equipment design has been effectively engineered to meet
the relevant process safety standards and to deliver a safe operating environment for all site
based staff.
e. Ensure that equipment is installed and tested to the exact well and surface equipment
designs as programmed and assured.
f. Confirm that the relevant commissioning and installation testing protocols have been
conducted and are properly recorded prior to active operations.
g. Deliver well operations as specified in the detailed well testing programme unless
appropriate management of change (MOC) documentation has been approved by the Wells
Team Manager in support of an alternative operation.
h. Review all equipment and operational failures to assess the root cause and develop
corrective actions. Where equipment failures occur during operations approved MOC
processes should be required to allow revised operations to continue.
i. Liaise with Segment Technical Authority on Well Testing to ensure all potential safety
related issues and learning opportunities are documented and disseminated within the BP
Well Testing Technical interest group. These can also be disseminated in GP updates.
6.5. SPE and Testing support staffing requirements

Well Testing and/or Clean-up operations using temporary process equipment is a specialist skill
set, where BP have limited in-house expertise. Whilst experienced BP staff members do exist
there is often a need to employ contract staff to cover Well Testing planning and operational
support. The following staffing requirements are recommended for a single string project.

Page 10 of 29
11 June 2008 GP 10-80
Well Testing
a. Full time SPE cover within the Wells team should start a minimum of six months before
well spud is planned. Earlier part-time cover may be adequate for the initial test planning,
tender preparation and contractor selection activities. Additional early cover should be
sought during the rig selection process and ITT
b. SPE candidates shall be experienced, qualified, assessed as being competent for the work
that they do and endorsed by the Segment Technical Authority.
c. SPE office based cover may be provided on either a continuous or full time rotational
basis.
d. Ideally the office-based SPE(s) will assume the site-based SPE role
e. Site based SPE support will require a minimum of one SPE and an additional PE to
provide full time 12-hour shift cover.
f. Experienced office-based cover during the test phase is recommended, however remote
support may be possible where communications systems allow e.g. expert cover is
available at alternative BP office
6.6. Testing Contractor support requirements

The Testing contractor plays a critical role in the delivery of a safe and efficient well test and
securing correct staffing for planning and operational activities is paramount for operational
success.
a. A full time testing contractor project coordinator should support the project starting around
three to six months before well spud depending on project complexity
b. During typical well test operations the following minimum contractor staffing levels
should be implemented to provide adequate 24 hour cover.
1. Testing Coordinator / Project Manager 1 of
2. Chief Operator 2 of
3. Testing Operators 4 of
4. Data Acquisition Specialists 2 of
5. DST Specialists (where appropriate ) 2 of
6. Sub Sea Specialists (where appropriate) 2 of small bore, 3 of large bore
7. Sampling Specialists (where appropriate ) 1 of
8. Steam and Air (2 of – assuming that dual service support is available )
9. Rig Cooling Support Engineers (where appropriate) 2 of
10. Sand Filter Operators (where appropriate ) 2 of
11. Specialist safety personnel – e.g. H2S & Gas Detection 2 of ( where appropriate)
12. Slickline crew (where appropriate) 2 of
6.7. Specialist services and other support requirements

Third party services for specialist areas are often required during well testing operations and this
frequently places a strain on POB or camp requirements.
6.8. POB Management

It is essential that adequate site-based accommodation and mess facilities are prioritised for
Well Test and primary support service crews. Early planning should consider the following

Page 11 of 29
11 June 2008 GP 10-80
Well Testing
a. Discussion with rig/camp management to ensure a suitable balance between rig and BP
third-party crews.
b. Manning levels when testing sour wells with high levels of H2S.sometimes require a three-
shift pattern due to the fatigue and stress when working with SCBA equipment and or
cascade air systems in exceptionally demanding ambient conditions e.g. 40°C and 100%
humidity.
c. Crew fatigue, related to extended site to camp travel,.
d. No crews should be accommodated on adjacent supply vessels against their will.
6.9. Training Expectations

Sustaining organisational learning requires access to site-based operations for trainee staff, both
for the operator and for our support service companies. Well testing operations provide arguably
the best opportunity for relevant operational learning for Petroleum or Reservoir Engineers and
these relatively rare activities should support training visits
All site-based operational activities should review training opportunities and take steps to ensure
training activities can be provided for a minimum of one BP Engineer on every other well test
operation and where possible should support contractor trainees provided such support does not
come at the expense of experienced staff.
7. Well Test Planning and Design Concepts
7.1. Introduction
Well Testing and Clean-up operations should manage the disposal of hydrocarbons and other
produced well fluids in a safe and environmentally sustainable manner. These activities
introduce abnormal risks compared with standard drilling activities and need to be addressed
appropriately. Correctly engineering the planning and design for these services is a critical
element in the delivery of safe operations.
In general plant and equipment found in oil & gas refineries is deigned to handle
steady state processes with known tightly controlled parameters that, once brought
on line, maintain fairly constant pressures, temperatures and flow regimes. The
processes allow for a high degree of automation. Minor changes in expected
conditions are regulated and reported automatically, major changes can initiate
central alarms and system shut downs as appropriate.
Conversely well testing process plant is designed to handle various fluids and solids
in a short time frame whose pressure, temperature and flow are nearly always of a
transient nature. It is neither possible nor desirable to design for the same level
automation as found in refineries. Continuous monitoring and intervention is
desirable and requires highly trained and experienced operators to maintain
control.
Well testing process equipment is designed to afford the flexibility to safely handle a
wide range of operating conditions. Should conditions develop, through equipment
or operation failure, that exceed predetermined safe operating levels then the system
is designed to shut down safely through, automatic valve operation, preventing
further influx from the well and contain hydrocarbon inventory in the system. In the
event of an automatic shutdown system failure or inadequate response time primary
protection for system over pressure is provided by dedicated relief valve and venting
systems for relevant system sections.

Page 12 of 29
11 June 2008 GP 10-80
Well Testing
7.2. Test Basis of Design

The basis of design shall capture information regarding the well conditions and fluids and
summarise the proposed well test design to operate under those conditions. When preparing a
basis for design, consider the following:
1. Pressure : -. Equipment shall withstand the maximum pressure differential that may
arise
The maximum possible formation pressure that may communicate with the surface
process system should be assessed during the testing design phase.
Testing equipment pressure limitations are finite and the risks associated with
potential over pressure of equipment could prove fatal. The management of surface
pressure elements, assuming connection to the expected reservoir with a worst case
gas gradient and a 20% bullhead margin, is a typical design feature for exploration
and appraisal well testing operations.
The assumption that the well will only be influenced by the tested reservoir interval
is not always correct as there is sometimes the potential for breakthrough from
higher pressure reservoirs which may deliver surface pressures in excess of testing
equipment or BOP pressure ratings.
Contingency and risk mitigation plans, to address the possibility of high pressure
breakthrough, shall be adopted at the planning stage. These plans may indicate a
staged approach to testing where testing may be aborted unless critical operational
checks – e.g inflow tests - indicate adequate well integrity.
Anticipated maximum surface pressures shall be calculated using the following as a
guide:
a) For Exploration Gas prospects in new areas a dry gas gradient equivalent to
100% Methane shall be calculated for the relevant reservoir pressure and
temperature and this gradient shall be used to calculate the maximum anticipated
surface pressure. Initial rough estimates can be calculated using 0.1 psi/ft (TVD)
b) For Exploration Gas projects in established areas reliable offset gas gradient
measurements may be used. This should however be confirmed with Wireline
Formation Tester data on the well to be tested,
c) For Exploration Oil prospects the hydrostatic pressure in the well should be
estimated using a combination of 80% reservoir oil density and a 20% gas cap
calculated assuming a gas gravity of 0.75 SG relative to Air
d) The requirement for reasonable bull head margins to overcome DST tooling
shall be engineered. Particular attention should be given to bullhead differential
pressures required to overcome pump through systems on lubricator and similar
ball valves in the string.
e) The potential for manually controlled pumps to over-pressure the process system
shall be effectively addressed by the process HAZOP study and where
appropriate effective control and relief systems shall be installed.
f) Potential over pressure induced by high temperatures or other possible external
influences shall be assessed during the HAZOP for the surface equipment and in
the test string design for downhole equipment. .
g) Excessive underbalance with the potential to induce a collapse in pipe, vessels,
casing or tubing shall be assessed in the design.
h) Packer selection considerations
2. Temperature :–.Well Testing Designs should adequately address thermal ranges

Page 13 of 29
11 June 2008 GP 10-80
Well Testing
The desgn of the test should be such as to withstand the maximum range in
temperatures expected during the well test.
a) Modelling of temperature profiles within the well and BOP areas should be
conducted during the design phase. This may require specialist software not used
during drilling operations.
b) Suitable real time temperature monitoring systems should be run to monitor
BOP ram temperatures, to ensure that the BOP’s can be operated within their
specified operating envelope
c) Where Annular Pressure Build up is anticipated and cement placement is used to
provide potential leak off paths consideration should be given to install
temperature and pressure monitoring gauges in the relevant annular spaces.
d) Minimum extremes of temperature should be considered. Controls shall be
implemented when these values approach the lowest rated safe working
temperature for the equipment. A factor of safety similar to that applied for
pressure should be applied along with the controls.
3. Well Fluids: Reservoir Fluid Uncertainty
The fluid nature has a significant impact on the design of the well test. Specifically the
production of gas contrasts with that of oil in its behaviour and in the hazards
associated with handling in the process equipment. As much data as is available
should be included in the Basis of Design to describe the expected fluid. So that its
behaviour can be predicted and planned for.
Reservoir fluid should be assessed, where possible, using all appropriate tools,
however, well testing completion and process system designs should always meet sour
service NACE MR 01-75 specifications. Where detailed field knowledge can
confidently confirm that no H2S will be produced standard service equipment can
safely be used during the operations.
a) In exploration wells wireline formation tester tools – e.g MDT, RCI, RDT or
others should be run to collect samples prior to any well testing operations.
These samples should be carefully field analysed to provide detailed knowledge
of the fluid that will need to be managed. E.g fluid type, oil, estimated GOR and
density, potential for wax, gas, basic composition, estimated CGR, potential
contaminants, H2S, CO2, etc.
Improved operational safety will be achieved when a better understanding of
potential fluid type is available. An example of this is commissioning tests on gas
wells that have an exceptionally high concentration of CO2 and possible H2S. Gas
indications from logs and pressure data alone may not always highlight the
potential fluid risk.
4. Well Fluids : Mud and Completion Fluids
Mud and completions fluids are critical components that need effective management
to ensure they are suitable for the Well testing or Clean Up Operations. The well test
design should address mud or completion fluid types with the relevant experienced
mud engineers and drilling personnel to secure a suitable design and preparation
programme can be delivered ahead of the testing operation.
a) Mud and completion fluid design criteria shall address the justification for using
over balanced or under-balanced test designs.
b) Mud compatibility studies with DST and other tool elastomers, e.g. packers and
seal assemblies should be conducted to ensure suitability for the planned
operation

Page 14 of 29
11 June 2008 GP 10-80
Well Testing
c) Mud aging studies should be conducted at reservoir temperatures to confirm

potential rheological performance during long term static conditions encountered
during the testing operations
d) Test design and planning shall include fluid conditioning and barrier assessment
throughout every phase of the well test.
e) Underbalance testing shall only be approved with adequate operational
justification and thorough risk assessment supported by detailed procedures
demonstrating that adequate controls will be applied during operations. Test tool
selection should reflect the well control needs for an underbalance test.
7.3. Equipment Selection and Design Fundamentals

Testing equipment should be selected to work within the pressure and temperature limits
consistent with the design criteria in section 7.2 above.
7.3.1. Rig Environment and Support Requirements

Rig interfaces with the well test services constitute a significant part of planning and
engineering. In some instances significant long lead engineering is necessary to prepare a rig for
a well test, for example to install kingposts and flare booms. Rig visits and engineering rig
interfaces should commence as early in planning as possible.
Excellent integration between the Rig Contractor and all supporting Service contractors is
essential for the safe delivery of these demanding operations. This integration is best supported
by open dialogue and clear indications of the expected work load and operational requirements.
This will allow all relevant parties to assess who is best to support what service and how they
can all work together to deliver the safe operations that the Client is planning.
a. Where practicable the supply of rig facilities in support of well test services should be
negotiated at the rig contract stage.
b. Rig selection should include a review of the rigs suitability to support well test services. If
possible a well test suitability audit should be performed by a competent SPE. Significant
engineering should be included in shipyard workscopes
c. Contractual requirements for typical Well Testing support operations should be addressed
in early rig procurement activities to enable contract terms to be drawn up that minimises
BP’s additional exposure to potential Well Testing related rig upgrades.
These include, for example, the rig ability to provide cooling water, available deck
space for the required well testing equipment, and availability of flow lines from the
test area to the burner areas. It is important that the rig selection process considers
the rig requirements to support planned well testing activities
d. Early rig assessments of Well Testing support capability should be conducted. These are
best covered as part of a detailed Rig Audit following contract award so potential
additional support activities can be prioritised along with other recommendations for the
unit.
e. A detailed list of specific audit requirements needed to support the potential rig testing
activities should be developed with the rig audit team and Wells Team. Support for the
generation of this list may be obtained from BP’s EPTG and or Testing Contractors if no
SPE has been recruited

Page 15 of 29
11 June 2008 GP 10-80
Well Testing
f. The primary testing contractor Project Manager or technical representative and the BP SPE
should be requested to conduct a rig visit as soon as possible to assess the exact
requirements and integration activities that are required to deliver a safe Well Testing or
Clean Up operation. Where previous testing activity has been conducted on the rig and
facilities are familiar to the primary testing contractor this visit may be delayed to coincide
with further assessment visits by specialist support groups should these prove necessary.
g. Additional process risk assessments should be conducted as indicated in 7.3.7 below
7.3.2. Downhole Completion Equipment
For Exploration and Appraisal wells, where no permanent completions will be installed,
temporary downhole DST tools will generally be run and installed for the duration of the testing
operation and then recovered from the well following completion of well kill operations.
The design of the test string shall be based around a knowledge of the fluids and the well
conditions of pressure and temperature :
a. Test tools with premium connections shall be utilised in general. Non premium
connections shall only be utilised for low pressure conditions.
b. All DST tools and systems should be designed to allow for commissioning pressure tests
of all tool connections to the maximum anticipated differential pressure likely during
testing operations.
c. DST tools and systems should be designed to withstand the maximum anticipated failure
conditions during testing operations.
System overpressure during fault conditions may damage downhole tools and make
them inoperative. It is important to review all potential failure conditions, especially
when operating close to the margins of the equipment. For example a potential
tubing leak close to the BOP’s could create maximum annular over-pressures that
exceed the annular design pressure of the tools and could lead to internal damage
which would create significant difficulties for both killing the well and subsequent
recovery of the DST string .
d. DST tools shall be designed to provide a single-shot back up circulating path to allow a
bypass kill or pressure equalisation fluid pathway to the formation in case the direct route
is obstructed by a failed closed tester or other in-line valve.
e. A single shot back up revering valve should be installed above all other DST tool
components to provide the best chance of achieving circulation.
f. DST system designs should incorporate a single-shot pump-through flapper safety valve
positioned below the lowest circulating device to restrict any further hydrocarbon influx
following breach, or controlled activation.
7.3.3. Major String Design

The completion tubing design for the Well Testing Operations shall meet the BP tubing design
safety factors set out in the BP Completion Design Manual. For typical DST operations a gas
tight premium connection should be used for the major tubing string.
Independent tubing design review analysis should be conducted by an experienced tubing
design specialist for all new DST designs.
An independent tubing design review analysis shall be conducted by an experienced tubing
design specialist for all HPHT DST designs.

Page 16 of 29
11 June 2008 GP 10-80
Well Testing
7.3.4. Sub-Sea Well Requirements

Where Well Testing or Clean-up Operations are conducted from a floating vessel additional sub
sea safety systems shall be run to provide a means to isolate the well at the sea bed and effect a
safe disconnection should weather conditions or the failure of the rig-positioning control system
warrant it. The following design criteria should be addressed when planning the landing string
and Sub-Sea Test Tree (SSTT) system.
a. The SSTT shall incorporate an unlatch system that will allow a timely disconnect, seal and
isolate a live well and retain pressurized hydrocarbon fluids contained in the landing string.
b. The SSTT unlatch system shall be physically tested at surface after installation into the test
string.
c. The SSTT system shall incorporate a fail-safe closed dual valve system that will allow well
kill operations to be conducted with the valves in the fail-safe closed position.
d. The SSTT shall be capable of shearing and subsequently sealing any planned wireline or
coiled tubing that may be run in the well.
e. The SSTT shall be equipped with a remote shut in control station positioned in a low risk
nominally safe area.
f. The SSTT system shall incorporate a retainer valve that will contain the landing string
hydrocarbon inventory should disconnection be required or a shear event occur.
g. The SSTT shall have a chemical injection facility located at the SSTT to enable methanol
injection below the primary sealing ball – normally between the upper and lower valve the
chemical injection line and shall be protected from hydrocarbon or fluid ingress by means
of a double check valve.
h. The SSTT shall be positioned within the BOP stack to ensure the shear ram can be
operated following land out in the well head. Ensuring this design feature will often require
a slick-joint or pump-out sub design that will restrict upward movement of the landing
string so preventing the shear rams being exposed to non -shearable sections of the SSTT.
It shall also require a suitable shear joint design that delivers the required tubing stress
performance whilst still being capable of being sheared by the rams.
i. The landing string design should provide a weak link that will preferentially shear in the
case of compensator or draw-works failure. This is most likely to be the shear-sub spaced
out opposite the shear rams. An alternative weak link in the landing string hang off system
would be a more preferable contingency solution should a suitable design become
available.
j. The potential for compensator or draw works failure should be addressed by the rig
operator and mitigations, such as preventative maintenance programmes and optimum
operating positions, should be documented in the testing programme.
k. Flowhead stick up on floating vessels should consider tide, heave and requirement to
manipulate the test string, for example, to unsting from a packer
l. Temporary Surface Test Tree or Flowheads deployed as part of the landing string shall be
connected to the surface equipment via appropriate standpipes installed in the derrick using
Coflexip or Coflon flexible production test hoses. Hub connections with metal to metal
seals should be used on both the standpipe and temporary surface test tree kill and flowline
connections. Graylock metal piping may be an alternative on onshore or jack-up facilities.
m. Coflexip or Coflon flexible hoses shall be suitable for the service required and properly
inspected and maintained to meet the manufacturers’ recommendations. The specifications
for production-rated hose for test flow durations in excess of 36 hours shall be confirmed
prior to installation. Standpipe design and positioning shall address the need to keep the
line bend radius within allowable tolerances.

Page 17 of 29
11 June 2008 GP 10-80
Well Testing
n. The kill wing outlet should have a non-return valve installed between the flowhead and the
kill Coflexip or Coflon line. This should prevent hydrocarbon ingress at the cement unit.
o. If the production standpipe is teed to the pits or other rig system, then the isolations of this
branch section shall require special controls and approval from senior management.
Well kill operations are best managed using reverse circulation techniques. The
introduction of the non return valve on the kill side outlet of the flowhead makes
these operations more difficult. To minimise man riding operations provision of a
secondary flow path back to the rig mud system via the flowline standpipe can
create a less risky rig up. This flexibility does create the potential interconnection of
the high pressure flowline and the rig mud system so stringent permit to work and
lock out systems shall be in place to address these risks.
p. Where the landing string may be utilised as a lubricator for wireline operations two
separate, independently controlled, lubricator valves shall be employed providing double
barrier isolation for staff involved in deploying the wireline toolstring. Lubricator valves
should be fail-as-is designs that provide pump through capability if they fail closed.
q. Lubricator valves should be positioned away from the telescopic riser slip joints. .
7.3.5. Rig Specific Requirements for Dynamic Positioning Vessels

Well Testing and Clean-up Operations, conducted from a DP Vessel, introduce additional risks
associated with station keeping and potential for powered drive off. Testing on these vessels
was initially considered a high risk operation, however, experience has demonstrated that these
operations can be executed safely.
Well specific operating guidelines covering unlatch and shear procedures shall be drafted and
reviewed by all relevant parties during the well planning stages, particularly at HAZOP.
Discussions should incorporate metocean and station keeping experience, integrated with the
drilling and well test contractor’s specialist knowledge of the BOP and SSTT systems, to arrive
at a suitable operations plan.
The SSTT interface with the BOP, the unlatch procedure and the monitoring of the subsea
system during the test shall be subject to an independent risk assessment.
Regular rig site DP operations drills, to alert and train crews on their specific tasks should a
shear or unlatch be required, shall be conducted for all relevant crews prior to testing operations.
Additional risk assessment shall be required for operations that entail wireline or coil tubing.
7.3.6. Surface Safety Valve Requirements – Jack Ups Platforms and Land Rigs
A fail safe closed remotely activated safety valve providing pump through capability positioned
within the BOP stack should be part of the DST string design for Well Testing operations being
conducted from Jack Up’s , Land Rigs or Platforms.
7.3.7. Surface Process Equipment – Temporary Installations

For BP operated well test and clean up operations the following table provides a guide to the
equipment specification required for different conditions of pressure
Maximum Anticipated WHP Nominal Equipment WP Limit
All wells where pressure < 8,000 psi 10,000 psi WP
All wells where pressure > 8,000 psi and < 12,000 psi 15,000 psi WP

Page 18 of 29
11 June 2008 GP 10-80
Well Testing
Standardisation on equipment used in service to 10,000 psi and 15,000 psi nominal
rated equipment has been chosen to minimise the risks associated with older
possibly less well maintained nominally rated 5,000 osi WP equipment. There may
still be cases where the use of suitably prepared and maintained 5,000 psi WP rated
equipment could deliver a safe and acceptable operational system, however these
should only be endorsed by exception and a clear documented risk assessment
undertaken before use of this equipment.
The primary risk associated with the use of 5,000 psi rated equipment comes from
poorer maintenance of older equipment normally used in low margin operations.
Additionally reduced familiarity with the equipment can enhance the potential
operational operating risks. The lower rated pressure also reduces the system safety
margins.
In general the use of older 5,000 psi rated equipment shall not be authorised except under
exceptional circumstances.
The effect of temperature shall also be evaluated for every design. Certain conditions,
particularly on gas well tests may take the surface process equipment close to its lower
operating temperature limit. The high pressure flexible hose is often a weak point in terms of its
ability to operate at extremes of temperature. Reference to the specifications for every
component should be made individually to verify its suitability to the conditions.
The reduced operating pressures for 10,000 and 15,000 psi equipment increase the potential
safety margin during operations. As a by-product it also means a more detailed risk assessment
to justify any dispensation to operate at pressures approaching the maximum design working
pressures. Where detailed reservoir and well pressure knowledge can be documented
dispensation to allow operation at pressures closer to the maximum working pressures may be
sought. However a HAZOP should be conducted with acceptable failure and mitigation
contingencies put in place to manage operations safely.
There is a broad spectrum of surface process equipment used during temporary well
testing and clean up operations. These systems have a number of interconnected
modules with different pressure operating ranges that need to be effectively
managed and protected through appropriate system design. Typically temporary
installations of surface process equipment, which are most frequently processing
transient fluid state,s can not fully utilise automatic control and shutdown systems
normally found in permanent installations and have to rely on competent operators
and processes to ensure safe operation (This is similar to commissioning and
process start up on most process plants). The intention of this ETP is to define the
critical areas and adopt processes to ensure the highest levels of safety during Well
Testing and Clean Up operations.
In addition to compliance with standards, the following points should also be considered when
planning the surface equipment design.:
a. Positioning of surface process equipment on a rig or wellsite location shall take into
account risks associated with proximity to permanently manned accommodation,
hazardous areas, and the risks associated with gas or hydrocarbon releases.
b. Gas dispersal, explosion and fire assessment reviews shall be addressed during the
planning stages for testing operations. Additional detailed studies for particular set ups
may be required if such an assessment is not in place or if the existing assessment is
inadequate for the conditions.
c. A pressure relief system designed to protect over pressure of any process equipment shall
be installed if fault or adverse operating conditions could result in system overpressure.
Page 19 of 29
11 June 2008 GP 10-80
Well Testing
Where over pressure risk are likely to be derived from upstream higher pressure rated
equipment pressure relief systems should be installed at the specification break.
The possibility of blockages in lower pressure lines may prevent a pressure relief
system from operating if it is positioned downstream of the fault.
d. Back pressure and PSV throughput caculations shall be performed to confirm the
suitability of the relieving device setup.
e. Pressure relief lines shall be adequately secured to suitable structural elements of the rig
for offshore operations. Relief lines installed on land locations should be secured to
suitable heavyweight stand alone structures that provide sufficient inertia to prevent pipe
movement. Particular care and focus should be taken to secure relief lines at their outlet
location .
Relief outlets are subject to high forces and bends close to the outlet can create
significant reaction. Where pipe work is not properly secured high forces can
accelerate pipework sufficiently to generate shock forces that could shear fixings.
Adequate positioning of fixing and restraint clamps are required to prevent the relief
line being propelled back to the vessel it is relieving causing fatal injuries to
operating staff
f. Adequate escape routes and unimpeded operational access to enable safe and efficient
operation of the plant shall be in place during all testing activities. This may require laying
walkways and use of scaffolding over pipework.
g. Temporary process equipment design layout shall provide for adequate artificial lighting to
ensure a minimum lighting intensity of 100 lux is achieved around all process vessels and
process line connections. Care should be taken not to place Ex d rated light fittings too
close to areas of potential hydrocarbon release such as sampling points nor directly above
the separator Daniel box to mitigate against a projectile breaking the light housing and
creating an ignition source in the test area.
h. Contingency spill plans shall be in place. These plans shall take into account the total
potential inventory of liquid hydrocarbons possible on deck.
i. Fire protection systems should be assessed for the process equipment area and suitable
provision made to manage any fire hazards that exist in the well testing process equipment
areas. The need for specialist foam supplies and monitors should be addressed to cover the
potential fire hazards that have been highlighted.
Methanol and other chemical additives that may be required for well testing
operations could create their own separate fire hazards. Adequate resources and
foam types may be required to fight these as well as the potential well fluids that are
to be flowed through the process system
j. Heat radiation protection systems should be designed and installed to cope with burning
the highest planned flow rates during the test. Generally high calorific black oils will create
the biggest radiation risk and reservoir information needs to be included into deciding heat
shield requirements.
k. Interconnection between well test temporary process equipment flow paths and well test
auxiliary support equipment should be avoided using appropriate protection devices:
1. Air compressor lines to the burners shall be fitted with separate check valves to
prevent hydrocarbons returning to the air receiver or compressors.
2. Chemical injection pumps shall be fitted with check valves at the pump outlet and at
the inlet connection to the process system flowline.
3. Steam supply lines from the steam generator shall be equipped with an in-line check
valve upstream of the steam exchanger inlet connection.

Page 20 of 29
11 June 2008 GP 10-80
Well Testing
4. Steam condensate returns from the steam exchanger shall be connected to an

automatic shut off device preventing hydrocarbons from returning to the supplying
boiler.
5. Pneumatic control air supplies for the process equipment should be fitted with both
check valves and suitable systems to prevent accidental isolation from the air supply.
l. Critical reviews should be undertaken of rig ventilation, the standard of electrical
installation and zoning regulations. Potential ignition sources should be identified during
the early rig visit stages to assess placement of well testing equipment and services. Gas
detection systems installed on the rig, or well site, should be calibrated and checked prior
to any testing operations being started. Reviews assessing the need for additional
temporary placement of sensors may be conducted should particular concern arise from
gas dispersal studies.
Provisions of additional gas detection sensors is most appropriately targeted at
potential failure of process lines passing adjacent to air intake ventilation systems.
Installing sensors around the main process area, where manned controlled bleed off
of gas during testing, and sample collection activities are common is not
recommended.
m. Normally manned temporary control rooms or labs shall be positioned in a lower risk
nominally safe area for the duration of all testing related activities or de-manned where this
is appropriate. Only essential personnel and suitably supervised staff in training should be
allowed in the areas of higher risk.
n. Managing efficient disposal and burning of hydrocarbon liquids and gas is an essential
requirement for both safe operations and the environmental reputation of BP. The SPE
should ensure the provision of a fully backed up robust ignition system to ensure effective
ignition of both oil and gas flares for all relevant Well Testing and clean up activities.
7.3.8. Safety Systems

In addition to the primary safety relief systems, that are installed as part of the process system,
ESD automatic and manual safety shutdown systems shall be installed to provide additional
protection for the process system and installation. These systems should be designed to limit the
potential severity of the possible fault condition and isolate the appropriate hydrocarbon
inventories thus minimising any escalation of potential incidents
Fast acting electrically controlled with auditable sensor monitoring and activation systems
should be deployed with all well testing and clean up process systems. The shutdown system
shall be capable of monitoring for high and low pressure fault conditions in the process system
and also be able to monitor manual shutdown signals from any of the remote manual shutdown
buttons spaced around the well test area. Fusible link protection or fire detection shut down
capability should also be incorporated in the safety shutdown system design.
On detecting any fault conditions the system should be able to simultaneously close the
flowhead or Christmas Tree production wing valve and any additional stand alone safety
shutdown valve installed in the system.
Where actuated Christmas tree valves are not available ESD shutdown should be configured to
close in at the safety valve.
Flexibility to incorporate additional stand alone shut in at the sub-sea SSTT level, with both
manual over-ride and automatic control, shall be provided on all floating vessel operations.
It is possible that different shut down sequences could be more appropriate for the different
phases of the well test, such as for wireline work where no downhole shut in would be activated.
Optimum shutdown valve configuration should be evaluated by considering each potential
option individually during the HAZOP and Risk Assessment for the entire test.
Page 21 of 29
11 June 2008 GP 10-80
Well Testing
When a modification is to be incorporated during the testing sequence to the ESD system, this
modification is to be addressed in the detailed work procedure, and is to be implemented very
carefully with plenty of communication between the different parties involved with the well test.
All automated wellhead, temporary flowhead or stand alone shutdown valves deployed on a
temporary process plant shall have suitable access to a manual over-ride system. The
deployment of automatic valves can create conditions where actuator failure prevents well kill
or de-pressuring operations to take place.
Historically, simple pneumatic ESD systems have been used for temporary process
systems deployed for well testing and clean up operations. These systems have the
advantage of being simple known systems that industry staff is familiar with.
The pneumatic systems have two important disadvantages that could limit their
ability to provide adequate safety protection to the process safety system. They are
slower to activate, particularly if many pilot and shut down sensors are connected to
the pneumatic pilot circuit, and may allow short duration pressure fault conditions
to pass without shutdown activation. ( e.g rapid over pressure of a separator leading
to a relief valve lifting may occur too quickly to enable pneumatic control pressure
to exhaust so ESD is not initiated) .
They also often have no simple audit trail facility and false activations can be
difficult to track and correct. They are equally more difficult to integrate into other
more advanced rig and or other auxiliary process systems which can limit safe
operating protocols.
Whilst introduction of electrical based ESD systems are likely to introduce more
additional false shutdowns during operations, greater familiarity will minimise these
and overall enhanced process plant safety will result.
7.3.9. Small Bore fittings and test and instrumentation line management
Where possible the use of NPT style fittings and connections on high pressure lines should be
avoided. The use of Autoclave fittings is recommended.
Should NPT fittings be used adequate inspection of all NPT threadlets with go, no-go gauges
shall be carried out during pre-operational checks.
Certification records for small bore valving and small bore fittings are not always possible to
find and type certification and confirmation equipment has been sourced from reputable
suppliers should be assessed
The use of NPT threaded fittings for instrumentation and sampling port management
can create significant hazards if they are not managed correctly. NPT fittings use in
high pressure service lines (e.g > 1,500 psi) can lead to failure if thread related
corrosion is present, or the small bore fittings utilised are not properly
manufactured and certified.
7.3.10. System Design Review, HAZID and HAZOP expectations

Following initial rig visits, design reviews, and a well testing or clean-up objectives assessment,
a draft operations plan and process system design shall be mapped out and reviewed to address
specific potential hazards with the proposed system
Each new well testing or clean up operation to be conducted on a vessel or well site shall be
separately assessed using HAZID techniques with a suitable skilled multi disciplinary team that
are familiar with the rig site and potential equipment requirements. This meeting shall address
all the operating hazards, from initial equipment deployment through to final equipment demob.

Page 22 of 29
11 June 2008 GP 10-80
Well Testing
Following programme refinement, a detailed process HAZOP shall be conducted to carefully

work through the operational plans as to how the well and process plant will be operated. Full
documentation of this review shall be recorded and all HAZOP findings and recommendations
should be addressed in a pre-operations HAZOP status report.
Where similar activities are being conducted on the same, or equivalent well site, the need for a
full HAZOP can be omitted as long as a documented review of the previous HAZOP findings is
undertaken to review the process system as a result of changes to the work site that may
introduce additional hazards.
It is recognised that a set of typical standard process equipment layouts that are
universally used within BP would reduce the time required to cover process system
HAZOP activities, however, variability between service provider and service
provider staff will continue to create uncertainty and risk so careful gap analysis
shall be conducted on every process system to make sure that P&ID is effectively
identical to the HAZOP study.
7.3.11. Fire and Explosion Studies

Inspection and test procedures for new equipment during manufacture shall ensure compliance
with statutory regulations, industry codes and standards, and BP practices. These requirements
are covered in the relevant ETPs for the particular equipment category and further guidance is
available in GP 24-10, GP 24-21, GP 24-22, GP 48-50 and other cross referenced documents
listed within these documents. Additional information on Group Standards for occupied portable
buildings can be found in GP 04-30.
7.4. Programme Generation

Delivery of safe efficient testing or clean up operations is most likely to be achieved by
following a detailed carefully documented plan. Generation of a Detailed Well Testing
Programme shall be the fundamental requirement for all operations
The Detailed Testing Programme shall address the following areas.
a. Well Testing and/or Clean-up Objectives
b. Well Status, schematic, installed equipment and pressure integrity data.
c. Reservoir and expected fluid data listing and uncertainties including operational
contingency requirements for hydrate, wax, foaming, erosion, emulsion and scale
mitigation.
d. Detailed well completion volume, tubing capacity, and mechanical limitations (yield etc.).
e. Finalised equipment layout plan and detailed P&ID.
f. Detailed equipment and cross-over listing.
g. Roles and responsibilities.
h. Detailed operations plan, including equipment preparation, installation procedures and
commissioning activities.
i. Defined flow and PBU testing plans with contingent options as required.
j. Defined data acquisition and sampling requirements.
k. Detailed well kill and string recovery programme.
l. Outlined planned contingency options.
m. Documented checklists for safety meeting, commissioning and pre-flow reviews.

Page 23 of 29
11 June 2008 GP 10-80
Well Testing
The Detailed Well Testing Programme shall be reviewed and endorsed by the Wells Technical
Engineer and the Well Testing Technical Authority or the Segment Technical Authority where a
local Well Testing TA position does not exist.
Where a programme of similar well testing or clean up activities is being managed a primary
review of the first detailed programme would cover this requirement for all subsequent
operations and additional review support could be requested where significant changed to
programme scope was required
7.5. Equipment and Process Plant Commissioning

The fundamental recipe for successful well testing and clean up operations is to ensure that all
equipment is properly maintained, pressure and function tested and is installed in keeping with
the detailed Final P&ID that has been approved. Additionally it is also essential that all local
regulations that apply for these operations are specifically adhered to especially in relation to
HSSE regulations.
Temporary Well Testing equipment, whilst similar to permanently installed process
plant, has two fundamental benefits over typical permanent installations
The equipment utilisation and in service duty is generally only a small fraction of
that seen by permanent plant, and erosion, corrosion and equipment fatigue are less
likely to reduce equipment integrity
Temporary utilisation of process plant for typical short duration well testing
activities enables regular equipment inspection, maintenance and pressure testing
which, after audit of the equipment maintenance and certification records,
increases the confidence in the installed equipment.
Confirming equipment integrity shall be achieved by reviewing all certification records and
subsequently witnessing pressure and function tests. The use of BP QA/IM teams to
independently review equipment certification records should be implemented prior to equipment
deployment
Following plant installation detailed cross-checking against the P&ID shall be carried out prior
to any full system checks and signed off by the BP Well Testing Engineer and the Senior
Contractor Supervisor.
Pressure and function testing of appropriate modules and valve assemblies shall be carried out
as per the detailed programme and all site based pre operational pressure test records shall be
fully documented and appended to the final well testing report.
7.5.1. Pressure Testing
Pressure testing of process equipment modules, valves, lines and vessels is an essential part of
the well testing equipment verification process. These activities introduce significant potential
risks as equipment failure during pressure test can result in personnel injury.
a. Initial integrity confirmation pressure testing of equipment shall only be conducted using
non-volatile low compressibility fluids. Ideally this should be fresh or sea water, however,
water glycol mixtures may prove more appropriate in some circumstances.
b. Pressure testing operations should, wherever possible, record and monitor pressure volume
relationships pumped and returned during testing operations. Expected pressure-volume

Page 24 of 29
11 June 2008 GP 10-80
Well Testing
relationships should be estimated prior to pressure testing so possible failure conditions

can be detected early and any issues addressed.
c. Pressure testing operations should always consider potential valve or system leakages and
how lower rated downstream systems may be affected; where possible downstream
systems should be vented to prevent the possibility of potential equipment failure.
d. Pressure testing operations shall only be carried out with the relevant Permit to Work
approvals and all un-necessary personnel should be cleared from the area. It is particularly
important for the relevant contractors to minimise the risk to their personnel by developing
procedures that limit the potential damage in the event of equipment failure and which also
minimise personnel exposure.
e. Secondary pressure qualification testing of process systems with inert gas e.g. Nitrogen or
a Helium Nitrogen mixture shall only be conducted following a detailed risk assessment
and a documented technical decision memorandum defining the benefits of these
commissioning tests. Where endorsed, procedures shall be developed to minimise risk to
personnel and these documents should define what leakage is acceptable, with limits, and
be endorsed by the site technical authority. In such cases pressure testing with inert gasses
may be conducted at pressures not exceeding 80% of the initial hydrotest pressure recorded
for the system.
Secondary pressure qualification testing of process systems with inert gas e.g. a
Nitrogen or Helium/ Nitrogen mixture can only be justified where long- term plant
operations with minimal manning cover is anticipated and where equipment
integrity to a very low leak rate is deemed essential for the safe operation of the
plant.
7.5.2. Pressure Testing Requirements and Priorities

Pressure tests provide assurance that equipment and systems are correctly configured and are
able to retain the system pressures that they may be exposed to. All testing equipment on a
testing operation should pass a witnessed pressure test to a pressure that exceeds the maximum
anticipated pressure that the equipment is likely to experience during the testing operations.
Initial pressure tests should be conducted on a stand-alone, modular or sub-system basis
following rig site preparations and prior to installation in the well. These tests shall be
conducted to confirm system integrity and, where appropriate, provide additional assurance on
tool operability.
Individual tool, module or sub-system tests generally require less fluid to pressure test and can
be visually inspected for leakage when it is safe and appropriate to do so. These tests can be
conducted off critical path and should provide the necessary assurance and confidence on
equipment integrity. It is important that these tests are critically assessed to minimise the chance
of deploying failure-prone tools at surface or in the well. Individual tests provide the best
chance to detect potential leaks so the greatest care should be placed on assurance checks at this
stage.
Following deployment in the well additional system-wide integrity checks should be
programmed to confirm that the installed system is fit for purpose.
7.5.2.1. Pressure testing DST, Sub Sea Test Tools,, Safety Valves and HP flow Equipment
Pre-deployment pressure testing of high pressure equipment modules and valves
generally test small volumes, which make pressure monitoring particularly sensitive
to fluid leakage. This sensitivity, and the additional ability to observe system leaks
outwith the process system, will provide the greatest assurance of system integrity,
so these operations should be carefully witnessed and assessed.

Page 25 of 29
11 June 2008 GP 10-80
Well Testing
At low volumes care is needed to be aware of the potential for very significant
temperature related pressure increases that may mask potential leaks. Visual
inspection of an equipment item for leaks should always take place – but only once a
pressure appears stable. Inspection of equipment for a leak while pressure is
dropping should not be attempted in case the leak path suddenly worsens ahead of
catastrophic failure.
a. All Pressure tests should be clearly documented and recorded, preferably on a high
resolution electronic system.
b. Pressure tests should be conducted in a staged manner. Always perform a low pressure test
for 5 minutes prior to increasing the test to full test pressure.
c. High pressure tests should be held at full test pressure for a minimum of 15 minutes to
confirm an acceptable integrity test.
7.5.2.2. Pressure Testing Surface Process Equipment

Pressure testing higher volume surface process equipment can make potential
leakage difficult to detect. Whilst system volumes are much greater than the small
modules associated with the high pressure equipment the lower test pressure still
helps to keep pressure variation reasonably sensitive to system leakage ( pressure
fall off on system integrity tests are related to the system volume and the pressure
test applied. Larger applied pressures or system volumes require more volume to
pressure up the system so a small leak will result in a slower pressure fall off.
a. All pressure tests shall be clearly documented and recorded, preferably on a high
b. Pressure tests should be conducted in a staged manner, performing a low-pressure test for 5
minutes prior to increasing the test to full test pressure.
c. High pressure tests should be held at full test pressure for a minimum of 15 minutes to
confirm an acceptable integrity test.
7.5.2.3. Pressure Testing Installed DST string and Completion

Pressure testing the complete DST string and completion components provides assurance on
entire string integrity and can also reconfirm that no significant problems have occurred to the
DST downhole tools previously been tested before DST running.
System volumes and test pressures can often be very high and this effectively reduces the
sensitivity in the pressure response to leakage so small leaks may go undetected if sufficient
time is not taken to define a potential leak response.
Whilst entire string integrity pressure checks are critical, additional longer duration valve
sealing tests should not be required following the initial individual surface based tool tests. In
situ string tests should be used to check for major valve failure rather than detailed valve
integrity checks as these would take significantly longer to match any assurance to the same
standards as previous surface checks.
a. All Pressure tests shall be clearly documented and recorded, preferably on a high
b. Pressure tests should be conducted in a staged manner, perform a low-pressure test for 5
minutes prior to increasing the test to full test pressure.
c. Full system string integrity checks should be conducted for an extended period to ensure
adequate time is available to allow potential leaks to be detected. The extended test
duration for the primary string integrity test is dependant on system volume and maximum
test pressure targeted as highlighted in the following guidelines table.
Page 26 of 29
11 June 2008 GP 10-80
Well Testing
Pressure test acceptance criteria

Short term pressure testing for integrity verification can be subject to significant
uncertainty where incorrect procedures are applied and trend monitoring periods
are too short. Typical in-situ pressure tests are influenced by additional dynamic
system affects which create further uncertainty; such as temperature stabilisation
effects due to pressuring up the system. Different test fluids e.g. high density drilling
muds and brines are notoriously difficult to get stabilised and the introduction of
compressible fluids (e.g. air) in the test systems also creates extra short term
pressure variations that can mask a leak trend.
Pressure tests shall only be deemed acceptable where pressures are either stable or showing an
appropriate decreasing pressure fall off trend.

Page 27 of 29
11 June 2008 GP 10-80
Well Testing
Table 1 – Pressure Test Duration and Acceptance Criteria
System or Eqpt to be Remarks Target Test Aim and Pressure Acceptance

tested Duration tolerance
DST and SSTT Very small volume Target ~decreasing No visible leaks,
modules systems (0.01 – 0.1 pressure fall off trend Pressure fall off below
bbls) towards 2psi/min or 5psi/min for 15 mins
Critical Service High better. 15 min
observation of No significant system
pressure tests (5,000 – temperature variations-
15,000 psi) improving pressure
stabilisation especially increases
HP Process Eqpt – Generally small volume Target ~decreasing No visible leaks,

Flowhead, Choke (0.1 – 2 bbls) pressure fall off trend Pressure fall off below
Manifold valves Sand towards 2psi/min or 5psi/min for 15 mins
Filters, STX etc better. 15 min
observation of No significant system
Stand Alone tests temperature variations-
improving pressure
stabilisation especially increases
Surface Process Plant Moderate system Target to ensure no No visible leaks,

volumes –(up to 30 significant external Pressure fall off below
bbls) leaks and confirm 10 psi/min for 15 mins
Moderate pressure primary integrity Target
stability approaching 5 No significant system
tests – (500 -1200 psi) temperature variations-
psi/min for 15 mins per
test Corresponding to especially increases
~1 bbl/d possible loss
rate
In Situ completion Large volume systems ( Primary system No visible leaks ( e.g.
integrity test 50 400 bbls) High integrity check. Large annular returns)
pressure tests ( 5,000 – volume makes it difficult 30 mins/100 bbls
15,000) to resolve small leaks system volume with fall
Target decreasing fall off below 5 psi/min or
off trend of 2 psi/min or 15 mins with pressure
better. fall off below 2 psi/min
In Situ Equipment Moderate to large Post deployment No obvious pressure
Operational Checks – volumes. High Pressure operational checks – volume discrepancies
E.g Flowhead valves, Tests indications of potentially or potential leaks.
SSTT, Lubricator major operating 5 min tests to at better
valves, DST Tools problems or leaks than 50 psi/min fall off
Target short tests to and decreasing
confirm operations.
Pressure fall off better
than 50 psi/min
7.6. Start Up Limitations
A detailed pre start up operations check list shall be developed and completed prior to initiating
flow on any well test or clean up operation
The following critical processes shall be checked and completed as part of the pre-start check
list. Additional area and process specific checks should be developed to complete preparations
1. A full rig abandonment and fire drill shall be conducted to include all personnel on
board prior to the well being flowed. All new arrivals to the rig will also be given a
full induction physically walking evacuation routes follow the standard rig induction
Page 28 of 29
11 June 2008 GP 10-80
Well Testing
process. Full crew briefing on safety requirements during the testing operations shall
be delivered at this stage or prior to start up activities.
2. A physical check of all initial process system and relevant rig system valve positions
shall be conducted by the BP Rep, OIM , BP SPE Rig Toolpusher and Testing
Service Company Rep
3. Physical checks of all automatic shut down activation controls shall be observed and
operations confirmed
4. Emergency response plans for medical evacuation and oil spill response should be
refreshed
5. Rig specific unlatch procedures for DP vessels shall be drilled where appropriate.
6. Fire and Gas protection systems and specialist personnel shall be in place and in full
working order.
7. Regulatory notifications to Coast Guards, Shore bases, adjacent vessels and platforms
shall be notified.
8. BOP tests shall be up to date
9. Well kill provisions shall be prepared to ensure suitable flexibility for well kill
activities.
10. Rig power, utilities, and BOP control systems shall be configured to provide
continuous supplies with minimum risk of failure during complete testing operations
11. First hydrocarbons should only be flowed to surface during daylight hours
7.7. Performance Indicators

Leading and Lagging Performance indicators and simple KPI’s will be developed to allow for
rapid uptake of safety improvements and quickly aid improvements to operational efficiencies
during testing. These will be amended to updates of this ETP document.

Page 29 of 29

GP 10 80 11 June 2008

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

GP 10 80 11 June 2008

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Document No.

DWOP Section 29 Well Testing

Downloaded Date: 6/17/2008 10:10:43 PM

Table 1 – Pressure Test Duration and Acceptance Criteria........................................................... 28

Downloaded Date: 6/17/2008 10:10:43 PM

Downloaded Date: 6/17/2008 10:10:43 PM

a. Equipment mobilisation and lifting management.

Downloaded Date: 6/17/2008 10:10:43 PM

API 17B Recommended practice for flexible pipes

3. Terms and definitions

4. Symbols and abbreviations

BOP Blow Out Preventor.

CGR Condensate Gas Ratio

DST Drill Stem Test.

EPTG Exploration Production Technology Group

Downloaded Date: 6/17/2008 10:10:43 PM

ESD Emergency Shut Down.

ETP Engineering Technical Practice.

Ex d Flameproof Electrical Fitting Specification

gHSEr Getting health, safety and environment right.

HAZID Hazard Identification.

HAZOP Hazard and Operability study.

HPHT High Pressure High Temperature

HSSE Health, Safety, Security, and Environment.

ITT Invitation To Tender

MOC Management of Change

MDT Modular Dynamics Tester – Logging tool provided by Schlumberger

NACE National Association of Corrosion Engineers

NDE Non-destructive Examination

OMS BP’s Operations Management System

P&ID Piping and Instrumentation Diagram.

PBU Pressure Build Up

PSV Pressure activated Safety Valve

RCI Reservoir Characterisation Instrument – Logging tool, provided by Baker Atlas

RDT Reservoir Description Tool – Logging tool provided by Halliburton

SCBA Self Contained Breathing Apparatus

SG Specific Gravity – ratio of liquid or gas density, relative to water or air

SME Subject Matter Expert.

SPE Senior Petroleum Engineer or Well Testing Engineer.

STX Steam Exchanger

SSTT Sub Sea Test Tree.

WP Working Pressure – maximum safe operating pressure for equipment

5. Objectives of this document

6. Organisation and competencies

6.1. Management accountability

6.2. Management delegation

Downloaded Date: 6/17/2008 10:10:43 PM

6.3. Organisational structure

6.4. Senior Petroleum Engineer responsibilities

6.5. SPE and Testing support staffing requirements

Downloaded Date: 6/17/2008 10:10:43 PM

6.6. Testing Contractor support requirements

6.7. Specialist services and other support requirements

6.8. POB Management

Downloaded Date: 6/17/2008 10:10:43 PM

6.9. Training Expectations

7. Well Test Planning and Design Concepts

Downloaded Date: 6/17/2008 10:10:43 PM

7.2. Test Basis of Design

Downloaded Date: 6/17/2008 10:10:43 PM

Downloaded Date: 6/17/2008 10:10:43 PM

c) Mud aging studies should be conducted at reservoir temperatures to confirm

7.3. Equipment Selection and Design Fundamentals