SPE-193987-MS

The Optimization for Cost-Effective Well Plug and Abandonment Techniques

Afriandi Eka Prasetya and Shanni Ardhana Herputra, SKK Migas

Copyright 2018, Society of Petroleum Engineers

This paper was prepared for presentation at the SPE Symposium: Decommissioning and Abandonment held in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, 3 - 4 December 2018.

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

Abstract
Well abandonment is an obligatory work in the Production Sharing Contract. In the midst of low oil
prices, this work cannot be postponed to do, especially for wells that have potential hazards. The longer it
postponed, the greater risk will be face. It needs to be done with the most efficient way.
Well abandonment of onshore-well in "R" Block of Central Sumatra Basin began in 2015. Reason for
abandonment is varied from no more reservoir potential, mechanical problem, bad well integrity, missing
part of wellhead, and vandalism. Since the initial start of the well abandonment work, the gold-plated effect
appeared. The well abandoned in a very safe method, but not worth the risk.
Discuss the procedures of selecting the well under potential circumstances to be plugged. An adjustment
made by optimize it to fit-to-purpose abandonment according to Indonesia national standard while
complying with the feasibility and safety operation.
As a result, there is a decrease in average AFE cost during 2015 to 2017 by 29% which equal to US$8.5
million and still has decrease potential until the very fit-to-purpose method obtained. The average realization
of AFE cost decrease from 48% to 34%.
This paper shows that there is always a chance for optimization even though abandonment work does
not have any gain of production and ignoring it also poses safety and cost risks. To date, this optimization
has saved US$2 million.

Introductions
A largest oil and gas company in Indonesia has successfully operated the "R" Block, a complex working
area in Central Sumatra Basin since 1924 currently managing of around 9,000 producing wells with an
average water cut of over 97% and over the last 10 years consistently delivering about 30%-40% of national
oil production to provide substantial benefits to Indonesia's economy. Along with increasing operational
challenges and complexites, requires the application of large capital investment of technologies to sustain
operational reliability of this mature assets, maintain base production and develop opportunities from
technically challenged projects.
One of the challenges is to maintain around 3,500 long term closed (LTC) wells to be routinely evaluated
and selected as candidates for re-activation or permanently abandoned. The selection was carried out
by considering the problem of well, whether at the surface facility or inside the wellbore or subsurface.
2 SPE-193987-MS

Problems on the surface, the wells are located close to residents and public facilities, some well equipment
such as wellheads are incomplete or missing, some are experiencing leaks that pollute the soil surface.
Subsurface problems include wells located in the flank area, areas that have been drained or depleted, or
very high water cut. For wellbore problems such as experiencing mechanical damage to the casing, integrity
of subsurface equipment or the presence of fish or equipment left in the hole to stop production.
In order to prevent the risk of environmental pollution, minimize the potential risks to the safety of local
communities, and reduce theft of assets that can interfere with field operations, some of the LTC wells are
proposed to be permanently closed. Since 2015 a project campaign of well plug and abandonment (P&A)
has been carried out massively. At least more than one hundred wells are closed in every one-year budget
period (Figure 1).

Figure 1—Plug and abandonment of wells during 2015-2017 executed in "R" Block of Central Sumatra
Basin have made improvements to technically challenged projects with cost-effective method.

The technical procedure of P&A follow Indonesia national standard document SNI 13-6910-2002,
subsection 6.10 Plug and Abandonment of Wells and the Company's well abandonment procedures are
applied as best practices. Improvements made from the selection stage of well candidates, planning and
procedures preparation, as well as budget reviews, to the implementation stage have succeeded in reducing
P & A risks and costs without having to ignore safety while ensuring the integrity of wells after being
abandoned.

P&A Candidate Selection Process

The planning process for the selection of candidates for P&A wells is proposed from the asset team to the
company management or Decision Review Board (DRB). Figure 2 shows the flow diagram of the selection
process for the candidate well for P&A. Subsurface review is carried out routinely and in detail on idle wells
or LTC, if the results suggest to reactivate, the wells will be handed over to the workover or wellservice
SPE-193987-MS 3

(WO/WS) team so that the wells return to production (put on production/POP) or service (put on injection/
POI). But if the well is known to have subsurface hazard such as mechanical damage in the hole or has a
potential wellbore integrity issue, the well is immediately proposed as a P&A candidate.

Figure 2—The flow diagram of the selection process for the candidate well for P&A.

If the idle well or LTC is not known to have subsurface hazard but is not planned for reactivation, then
an examination of the surface conditions of the well is carried out. Wells that are located near residents or
public facilities or have lost some of their surface equipment, are having surface hazard and also a priority
to be proposed as P&A candidates. The wells that do not have both of these hazards but not planned for
reactivation in the near future will return the status to be idle or LTC well.
The criteria are based on the subsurface integrity (SSI) vulnerability as shown in Figure 3. SSI is the
prevention of unwanted fluid flow outside the HC reservoir. SSI includes everything from upstream side of
the chokes. It is about understanding the vulnerability and prevention of incidents through complete design,
practicable operability, and proper monitoring and verification. This is the concept of transition from "I
think" (I guess) subsurface plugs are available and functioning properly, to "I know they are" (I know for
sure).

Figure 3—Conceptual description of subsurface integrity (SSI) vulnerability and its risks.
4 SPE-193987-MS

By studying the well condition to understand various combinations of the following factors in
determining the degree of fragility of a well:
– Proximity to community and subsurface water sources (risk of contamination)
– Damage to the casing at shallow depths
– Shallow gas zone above from the cement well column
– Proximity to the injection well
– Excessive pressure, reservoir pressure, risk of possible flow
– Old well (risk of corrosion)
– The length of the shut-in well (a subsurface condition that is at risk)
– Mechanical condition of surface plugs (wellhead)
The well which is likely to have several criteria (vulnerability factors) as well as showing a high degree
of vulnerability whill be focus of discussion with DRB. After fulfilling the criteria for abandoning the
wells based on risks associated with, the company is continuing the process to the stage of approval of the
government of Indonesia. The standard for the design of plugs used complies with the provisions in SNI
13-6910-2002.

P&A Project Campaign

In order to comply with SNI standards for P&A wells (2002), there are 6 types of plugs that must be set:
(1) Isolation of zones in open hole; (2) Isolation of open hole; (3) Plugging or isolating perforated intervals;
(4) Plugging of casing stubs; (5) Plugging of annular space; and (6) Surface plug. Verification of plugs is
carried out by testing a load of at least 15,000 lbs on the cement plug or mechanical plug and a minimum
pressure test on a cement plug of 1000 psi with a result of no more than 10% pressure drop during a 15
minutes’ period.
Company procedures also require isolation of gas zones to prevent the migration of gas to the surface
through wellbore, and also isolation of aquifer zone to prevent contamination to fresh water sources. There
is a general interpretation that the completion string and all obstacles in the wellbore must be removed prior
to the plugs placement. Applying these standard and procedures without criticism would leads to high costs.
As one of the petroleum operation, according to PSC, the P&A projects are part of the government project.
The government requires a high quality budget estimation and objective project management process for
they project (Prasetya & Herputra, 2016). After obtaining budget approval and permission to implement
P&A project campaigns from the government, the company prepared two types of equipment: workover
rigs and coiled tubing units or CTU.
Workover rigs are used for wells that need to do lifting work with large loads, while CTUs are used for
wells that do not require lifting or the load can be lifted by heavy equipment. Table 1 shows the actual
number of P & A well activities carried out in 2015-2017.

Table 1—P&A Wells Project Campaign of the "R" Block in 2015-2017

Year Number of Wells Average of Average of Budget Average of Actual

Days Actual per well (US$) Cost per well (US$)

2015 26 7.18 157,000 76,000

2016 149 6.63 142,000 67,000

2017 151 4..76 120,000 52,000

SPE-193987-MS 5

Improvements and Best Practices

Reviewing the numbers in Table 1 there is a decrease in the average operating day and cost of the P&A
well operation. This decrease resulted from several improvements that had been made. Among these
improvements is optimizing the mobilization of rigs or CTUs by clustering. Previously the mobilization of
rigs or CTUs was carried out based on the readiness of the location of the well where the distance between
the wells was probably far apart so that it needed a longer moving time. By clustering, adjacent wells are
grouped and worked alternately until completed before moving to another cluster (Figure 4). The utilization
of CTU is also maximized to P&A for slim hole and clear wells without fish. The waiting time on cement
in the CTU application is reduced so that the operating day is shorter.

Figure 4—Optimization has been made to cut the moving duration and lower the costs of P&A works. The dots
are the wells, the green and purple paths represent the moving path between wells. The improvement made
was to reduce the alternating frequency of equipment, by making it in a cluster and flowing in one direction.

Checking with the cement bond logging (CBL) is usually applied after cementing behind the casing
to ensure strong bonding between the casing with cement and cement with rocks, so that there is no
microanulus gap that provides a way for the reservoir fluid to migrate. Improvement which is also carried out
is to verify the primary cementing data: when there is already a barrier cement behind the casing (with return
cement to surface or with CBL during the well construction), then it doesn't require CBL running on P&A
operations. Modification of cement squeeze technique to seal the casing leak also be one of improvement
methods.
After placing the plug and cementing, the top of cement (TOC) position is checked to conform to the
standard. Sometimes a drill on cement (DOC) is needed to meet standard requirements. To reevaluate the
intent and purpose of the obstruction, it is advisable not need to do DOC which its TOC is above the program
target. As well as the TOC which exceeds the lower limit of the stage cement on above which makes the
number of stages less, it does not require DOC.
In wells contained fish or other subsurface equipment such as a permanent packer, lower completion,
hanged liner that have difficulties to be removed, it is advisable further fishing effort is not needed so that the
fish are left and immediately cement on top of the fish. Placement of annular plugs performed by punching
holes and squeeze can be replaced by top job practices, especially in short wells, besides that the presence
of silt deposits on annulus can be considered as an additional barrier, especially if no bubbles are detected
in the silt.
6 SPE-193987-MS

The wells which its pressure is already depleted especially on oil well, when it is P&A, it is suggested to
use the most inexpensive alternative method of standard requirements.

Costs Analysis
As a result of the optimization of operations being carried out on the P&A work of wells in Block "R", in
year 2016 there was a deviation of 43% between the total budgeted cost and the total cost spent, as shown
in Figure 5. Authorization for expenditures or AFE is a project budget document that contains the amount
of costs and must be approved by the government.

Figure 5—43% deviation of actual versus plan cost in 2016 as a result of optimization of operation carried out on P&A works.

Figure 6 shows that the contribution of the deviation was derived from 85% of all the wells done in 2016
the actual cost was below the budget. Only 15% of work population its cost was over than budget, usage
cost that much caused by many things including subsurface issues that require additional work or weather
constraints so that the operation is slow.
SPE-193987-MS 7

Figure 6—As a result of optimization carried out on 2016 P&A works, the actual cost of 85% of wells are under the budget.

Optimization also affects the duration of work. Figure 7 shows the difference between a working day
plan and the actual working day. The number of well P&A jobs that are longer than the workday plan is
slightly more than the shorter ones.

Figure 7—The optimization carried out on 2016 P&A works affects the duration of work.

From Table 1 above, there is also a cost and actual improvement in costs. The budget is set higher and
meets standard criteria and procedures. While the actual costs are based on implementation in the field after
optimizing without violating the intent and purpose of those already defined by standards and procedures.
8 SPE-193987-MS

Aggregating data taken in period 2015-2017 there is a decrease in average AFE cost by 29% which equal
to US$8.5 million. The average realization of AFE cost decrease from 48% to 34%. To date, the optimization
has saved US$2 million.

Challenges
During the rainy season and also the smoke season makes it difficult to move equipment and field work.
Coordination with the operating team is carried out at the center, requiring assistance in repairing the access
road to the well. Coordination with the facility team was also conducted to prepare the location early
before entering the rainy season and the smoke season. Social disturbances that arise in several areas and
work locations require attention and an early assessment to find out the conditions and coordinate with the
interested team long before the work begins.
Well data collection needs to be done carefully in order to be able to know the surface and subsurface
conditions well in advance. An assessment of the resources for P & A work must also be conducted, such
as the availability of labor, work equipments, service and material contracts (such as rigs, cementing, CTU,
CBL, tools, fluids, fishing tools), as well as other supporting services. The process of submitting approval
and permission for P&A works from the government also needs to be taken into account in order to meet
the required conditions and meet the schedule.

Conclusions
The planning process becomes very important in selecting candidates for P & A wells and is subject to
discussion for management decisions and to ensure the reliability of the subsurface plugs to be set. P&A with
workover rig techniques and with rigless techniques using CTU has proven to be reliable and recommended
for wells that have few problems or can be overcome easily.
Adhering to standard and company procedures for P&A is an obligation to protect industry trust and
accountability, but applying these without criticism would leads to high costs. Optimization can be made
by improving work procedures to be more practical while ensuring the safety and well integrity. The wells
which its pressure is already depleted especially on oil well, is suggested to use the most inexpensive
alternative method of standard requirements for P&A.
The optimization carried out in the P & A project campaign throughout 2015-2017 to obtain the fit-to-
purpose method has shown a significant reduction in costs both on a budget and actual basis. This savings
can be a key reference for AFE of P&A approval that is more acceptable.
This works concludes that there is always a chance for optimization even though P&A does not have any
gain of production and ignoring it also poses safety and cost risks.

Acknowledgement
The authors would like to acknowledge the management of SKK Migas for the permission to publish this
paper and also recognize PT. Chevron Pacific Indonesia and other parties for their valuable supports of
this work.

References
Badan Standardisasi Nasional. (2002). SNI 13-6910-2002 Drilling operation for safe conduct of onshore and offshore in
Indonesia - Implementation. Jakarta, Indonesia: Author.
Prasetya, A. E., & Herputra, S. A. (2016, October 25). Well Abandonment Project and Recommendation for Applying
Activity Based Cost/Earn Value Management. Society of Petroleum Engineers. doi:10.2118/182441-MS