I' 

OIL TECHNOLOGY SERVICES, INC. 

5450 NORTHWEST CENTRAL DRIVE, SUITE 240 

HOUSTON, TEXAS 77092 
BR-301 

OJ§ OIL TECHNOLOGY SERVICES, INC. 

7701 WILSHIRE PLACE, SUITE 200 

HOUSTON, TEXAS 77040 

PART I 

ANALYSIS 

of 

TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS 

for 

DEEP WELL DRILLINGJ COMPLETIONJ AND TESTING · 

PARADOX VALLEY UNIT 

COLORADO RIVER BASIN SALINITY CONTROL PROJECT. 

PREPARED FOR 

· UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE 1NTER10R --- --- - -- - -- - ----

BUREAU OF RECLAMATION 

UPPER COLORADO ~EGIONAL OFFICE 

UNDER 

P. 0. NO. 3-PG-40-10000 

Erich F. KlementichJ P.E. Date 

TELEPHONE: 713-462-8298 TELEX: 795134 
01s 

TABLE OF CONTENTS 

ITEM 

I. INTRODUCTION 

II. ANALYSIS 

III .. CONCLUSION AND RECOM!1ENDATION 

Appendix A 

PAGE 

1 

2 

8 
oiS 

I. 

Page 1 

INTRODUCTION 

As set out in the purchase order and in the background data provided, 

the purpose of this analysis was to evaluate the follmd .. ng areas: 

1. Review the design of the well for completion and operation. 

2. Provide comments/recommendations relative t:o the adequacy of the 

specication to produce the successful completipq of the· well. 

3. Provide comments/recommendations relative to the method of payment 

to the contractor for the construction of the well. 

Comments relative to the overall design of the -well are addressed in 

Section III - Conclusion and Recommendations along ~~th a proposed 

payment method. A detailed analysis of the adequacy of the 

specifications including an analysis of design details, are provided in 

Section II. 
ols 

II. 

Page 2 

ANALYSIS 

An analysis relative to the adequacy of the specifications to produce 

the successfull completion of the well can best be achieved by providing 

detailed comments and recommendations on the same format·as the 

Specification. 

Section 1.1 GENERAL 

1.1.1 The Requirement 

The requirement must clearly state all objectives of the project 

in a format to answer the questions - What, Where and ~~en. 

These were only fragmentarily addressed in the current 

specification. 

The capacity of the well (900 GPM), design service life (? 

years), location of the work, anticipated start of construction 

date and required completion date (if applicable) must be given. 

1.1.2 Description of Work 

The description of work is incomplete. In a lump sum.contract 

each distinct phase must be listed along with the general 

requirements, namely: 

a. Detailed Engineering of the well 

b. Acquisition of long lead time materials 

c. Selection of the rig, service contractors, procurement of 

short lead time materials 

d. Preparatj_on of the location 

e. Drilling of the well listing the general requirements and any 

unusual features, such as cores, non damaging muds, etc. 

f. Completion 

g. Hydrofracturing tests 

.h. Injection tests 

i. Final surface facilities.hook up 

Note: Paragraph 1.1. 2. b is in error; 13-3/8" 0. D. T&C casing cannot be 

run inside 16" O.D. casing. For 13-3/8" O.D. casing, 18-5/8" 

O.D. or more commonly 20" O.D. casing is required. As a result, 
cis 

Page 3 

30" O.D. conductor is usually set in wells "rith a 9-5/8" x 13-

3/8" x 20" casing program. \,.lith 18-5/8" casing, a 26" O.D. 

conductor is adequate. 

Paragraph 1.1.2.d- If a well with a 900 GPM injection capacity 

is required, it is not logical to test it at only 200 GPM. A 

full volume injection test is strongly recommended. 

1.2.2 Reference Specifications and Standards 

"Standard Commercial Quality'~ materials are completely inadequate 

for a 15,000' deep disposal well. Detailed material 

specifications with an appropriate QA/QC program are mandatory 

for a successful completion. 

1.3.8 Water for Construction Purposes 

Details concerning potential sources of water for construction 

purposes should be provided to expedite the bidding and recude 

the effects of this variable in the bid. 

A separate paragraph must be used- to ··address the spe-cifics of thebrine for the injection test. Details on the location of the 

source, chemical analysis, concentrations of particulates, degree 

of filtration required, leakage, spill tolerance, etc. must be 

provided. 

1.4.4 Hazardous Gas C0nditions 

Specifics regarding the location and amount (pressure, volume and 

concentration) of H2S gas must be provided. The problems fr~m 

H~. can be anywhere from acute to insignificant and can therefore 

increase the cost greatly or none at all. 
cis Page 4 

Section 2.1 DRILLING PROGRAM 

General Comments 

Turnkey well specifications are extremely difficult to generate and can 

often contain great pitfalls. For example, if a specific casing string 

design were specified and that string were to fail during the 

construction of the well ~ho shall be financially responsible for the 

repair or redrill operation? It would be·extremely difficult to prove, 

either way, that 1) the design was not defective or 2) that the casing 

was not improperly installed. Since such a question involves millions 

o'f dollars in a well of this type it could, and likely would, lead to 

lengthy litigation before the Board of Contract Appeals. As a result 

fixed specif~c designs must be avoided in turnkey contracts. However, 

on the other hand, lack of specifications could lead to premature 

failures shortly after the well is accepted. The solution ;to the 

problem lies in developing rigid performance specifications with 

verification of material acceptability through a"thorough user, Bureau 

of Reclamation in this case, Quality Assurance program. 

The drilling program, as contained in the specification, suffers from 

another problem - great specificity in some areas, ~ith completely 

inadequate details or specifications in others. For example, great 

details are provided in paragraph 2.1.6. Completion concerning the 

manipulation of the tubing string, but no specifics are provided on what 

constitutes an acceptable packer and seal element test. The pressure 

nor the acceptable leakage rate are specified. Similarily, neither are 

there. any specifications in paragraph 2 .1. 4 Drilling and Casing Details 

of what constitutes "a uniform, true hole". 

Some specific problem areas are: 

2. 1. 1 General 

"Cemented to surface" is not an adequate specification. 

Specifics relative to the strength of the cement, degree of fill 

up, bonding, etc., must be provided. 
ols 

2.1. 4 

Page 5 

Drilling and casing Details 

a. Paradox Salt Formation 

Specifications such as "uniform, true hole", and "best 

drilling practices" cannot be enforced because they are 

totally subjective. If a specification on the hole is truly 

required it must be specified in terms of the holes geometry 

- size, deviation, etc. 

The specific casing design must be left up to the contract, 

however, a minimum acceptable pipe program can be given. 

Specifically in this specifica'tion the 30" O.D. conduc'tor 

should be API 51 30" O.D., 1.00" wall grade B line pipe. The 

20'' surface casing must be at least 20" 106.5f K-55 BTC. The· 

intermediate casing string must be at least 13-3/8" 72# C-95 

BTC, with ovality limitations. 

The existing 9-5/8" production casing string design is 

completely inadequate. Furthermore, the grade designation is 

nonsensical. An analysis of the_ 9-5/8" casing at.the nominal 

service life condition and a preliminary alternate design are 

presented in Appendix A. · 

The use of a stage cementing technique on this well will lead 

to early failure of the 9-5/8" casing string. 

b. Disposal Formations 

Step 1. A maximally rigid, not minimum size, core barrel shall 

be used. 

Step 4. The correct hole size is 8-1/2" not 8-3/8". Special 

drift 9-?/8" casing, commonly available, is of course 

required. 

c. Short Term Injection Test 

The objectives, not specific procedures, should be clearly 

stated. 
Page 6 

cis 

2.1.6 Completion 

As with the short term injection test, the objectives to be 

accomplished in the completion, not specific procedures, shall be 

clearly stated. The procedures as written contain a hodgepodge of 

information that is inconsistent and often incorrect. Specifically 

the problem areas are: 

The 9-5/8'' production casing must be cemented to surface immediately· 

after it is run, not after the injection test, otherwise an early 

failure due to plastic salt flow will occur. 

The procedure relative to the "safety sub" is completely 

nonsensical, entirely too specific and presumptuous. No previous 

mention of a safety sub in the hole has been. made. Nor is there a 

description or a specification given for the polished bore assembly. 

The use of duplex materials in this well should be reevaluated. 

A 7" tubing string design using 29# and 38# N-80 LTC cas~ng is 

completely incorrect for this application; · - · ·- -------------

Consideration should be given to_!he use of plastic coated API Xline casing. This combination has proven successful in a-DOE 

geopressured/geotherrnal source well. 

The remaining completion procedures are entirely too detailed for 

specific equipment which may or may not be used in tl:e completion. 

Performance specifications for the tree must be given, not a 

specific manufactures designation. Furthermore, the use of a "wrap 

around bushing" for sealing the 7" x 9-5/8" annulus is not 

advisable. In critical wells, suspension and sealing of the tubing 

s~ring must be accomplished by one device, i.e.: a mandrel type 

hanger. 
cis 

2 .1. 7 

Page 7 

Two Week Injectivity Test 

a. General 

Specifications regarding the minimum/maximum injection rate, 

permissible suspended solids in the injection fluid, type and 

location of instrumentation, etc. must be provided . 

. :.. 
ols 

III. 

-Page 8 

CONCLUSION Ah~ RECO.~NDATION . The technical specifications contained i~ Deep Well Drill~ng, Completion 

and Testing, Paradox Valley Unit, Colorado River Basin Saiinity Control 

Project, are insufficient and will not guarantee a successful well or 

injection test. Moreover, the proposed drilling/completipn plan will 

likely result in a premature well failure due to plastic salt movement 

and subsequent casing deformation, i.e.: "casing collapse". 

It is possible, but extremely difficult and very costly, to drill nearly 

15,000' of massive, laterally loaded, salt beds, equip the well for 

permanent injection and expect a useful life of twenty plus (20+) years. 

At minimum, the salt section must be divided into two, preferably three, 

essentially equal intervals. This would necessitate a three or four 

string casing program, plus the conductor and the injection tubing. For 

example, - 42" conductor, 30" surface casing at 500'; 20" first 

protective casing at 5,000'; 14" second protective casing at 10,000'; 9-

5/8" production casing at 14,.800'; 7" injection tubing string. Such a 

casing program is necessary to prevent excessive hole enlargement, 

thereby assure complete circumferential cement fill up, to preve~t 

asymmetric lateral salt loading, and thus prevent "casing collapse". 

It \o:Ould be more logical to drill a well "off structure" where only 

approximately 500' (plus or minus) of salt would be encounter~d. An 

adequate seal would still be achieved and the well cost would be far 

less. Furthermore, in case of a salt co~lapse, a cost effective 

recompletion could be accomplished. 

Generally a least cost well can be obtained by an operator on a daywork 

contract basis. This however, presumes the presence of three critical 

items. First, an expert engineering staff to design the well, i.e.: a 

competent staff group, second, an expert operating group to construct 

_the ·well, i.e.: a competent line gr·oup and third, experienced/competent 

management familiar with high technology drilling and completion 

engineering and operations. Many oil companies do not even have such a 
bTs Page 9 

structure. Consequently often cost overruns or even juhked holes 

result. 

It is doubtful that the Bureau of Reclamation has within-it's 

organization the required deep drilling expertise. Nor would it be cost 

effective to staff up for one well. 

As a result, in this particular situation? it would be best to issue 

several, (at least two), separate contracts. The first would be for the 

planning of the well, preparation of the specifications (bid package), 

evaluation of the bids and· technical surveillance during the 

construction phase. The second would be for the actual construction of 

the well, performing the injection test and fina1 completion 

To assure a competent well a detailed hierarchical user (Bureau of 

Reclamation) quality assurance plan would have to be developed and 

implemented. In a hierarchical quality assuanc~ program the performance 

required in the Project is assured by verifying that all aspects of each 

individual component to each assembly system, etc., from design to 

manufacture, to installation, meet the required specifications. 

For optimum results, a payment .schedule based on achieved milestones, 

of benefit to the user and contractor (for examp1e successful.pressure 

tests on each casing string recorded cores, injection test, etc.). needs 

to be implemented. 

Drilling a deep disposal well is difficult. It is even more difficult 

to attempt such a venture on a fixed cost basis. Only with adequate 

planning and a hierarchical performance specification and quality 

program can success be assured. 
cis 

Th'll)EX 

APPENDIX A - CASING ANALYSIS SUMMARY 

1.0 DESIGNS ANALYZED 

2.0 SERVICE CO~~ITIONS 

3.0 RESULTS 

DESCRIPTION OF CASING ANALYSIS 

TABULAR OUTPUT i 

9-5/8" CASING ANALYSIS TABULAR OUTPUT 

A SERVICE LIFE MODEL FOR CASING STRING 

(SPE 12361) 

·;: 

! 

PAGE 

A-1 

' A-1 

A-1 

A-2 

A-4 

A-6 

A-24 
o1s 

APPENDIX A 

CASING ANALYSIS SUMMARY 
ois A-1 

APPENDIX A - CASING ANALYSIS SUMM..l\RY 

1.0 Designs Analyzed 

1.1 9-5/811 Design Specified by the Bureau of Reclamation 

Feet of Casing Description 

1,275 9-5/8" 53.50(1 P-110 LTC 

1,900 9-5/8" 47 .0# P-110 Ll'C 

5,400 9-5/8" 47.0/1 C-95 LTC 

6,145 9-5/8" 53. 50{! C-95 LTC 

80 9-5/8" 53 . 50 II c- 7 5 LTC 

1.2 9-5/8" Design Proposed by OTS 

Feet of Casing Description 

7,000 9-5/8" 4 7. otJ C-95 LTC 

1,000 9-5/8" 53. 5011 C-95 LTC 

3,500 9-5/8" 53.5011 P-110 LTC 

3,300 9-5/8" 59.200 P-110 LTC 

2.0 Service Conditions 

Interval 

O' - 1,275' 

1,275'- 3,175' 

3,175' - 8,575' 

8,575' - 14,720' 

14,720'- 14,800' 

. Interval 

O' - 7,000 1 

7,000' 8,000 1 

8,000' - 11,500 1 

11,.500' - 14,800 J 

Designs 1.1 and 1. 2 '"ere analyzed for the following antic:ipated serv:ice 

conditions: 

2.1 Cement Condition (base case) - 2,800' of 16.2 PPG cement on bo~tom. 

14.0 PPG cement above 12,000' to the surface; 10.0 PPG mud .:internal 

from the.surface to 14,800 1 (total depth); 60° Fat the surface, 

240° F at total depth. 
Cis A-2 

2.2 Collapse Case - 19.2 PPG lithostatic salt gradient exte~nal; 

internally evacuated to 1,100', 8.3 PPG freSh water packer fluid 

below 1,100' to total depth; presumed min~ internal Bottom Bo~e 

Pressure, 5,936 psi equivalent to the potentiometric surface of the 

Colorado River; differential collapse pressure at 14,800' equa~s 

8,864 psi; 60° Fat the surface, 120° Fat 14,~00'. 

3.0 Results of the Analysis 

Service Condition 

Cement Condition 

(Base Case) 

Collapse Case 

Service Condition 

Cement Condition 

(Base Case) 

Collapse Case 

*C - Collapse 

TABLE I 

MINIMUM DESIGN FACTORS 

DESIGN 1.1 

Minimum Design Factors 

API Pressure 

1.87 C* at 14,800' 

0.72 C_at 14,800 1 

API Joint 

3.69 at O' 

3.69 at O' 

TABLE II 

MINIMUM DESIGN FACTORS 

DESIGN 1.2 

Minimum Design Factors 

API Pressure API Joint 

2.82 C at 14,800' 

1.08 Cat 14,800' 

2. 59 at 0' 

2. 59 at 0' 

VME 

2.67.at 14,800' 

0. 90 at J4, 800' 

3.10 at O' 

1. 4 2 at 14, 800' 
o1s 

DESCRIPTION 

OF 

CASING ANALYSIS TABULAR OUTPUT 
cis A-4 

DESCRIPTION OF CASING ANALYSIS TABULAR OUTPUT 

The first page, at the extreme left lists the node number and depth. To the 

right spaced between the nodes is a complete description of the casing - weight 

per foot, outside diameter, nominal internal diameter, nominal wall thickness. 

nominal area of the pipe body, the minimum yield and ultimate strengths, a 

description of the connector and its axial tension efficiency, followed by the 

collapse and minimum internal yield pressure of the pipe body and the joint 

strength. 

The second page of the output describes the cement condition, listing nodes 

and node depths, a differential pressure, axial force above and below the 

node, temperature.(degrees F), fluid densities, axially adjusted collapse 

ratings above and below the node joint strength above and below the node, 

burst or collapse load capacity design factors, and joint strength design 

factor. A notation will be made whether floats are open or holding and 

another message appears if there is to be any axial adjustment in the ensuing 

load cases. 

For each load case (one or more) three (3) pages of output are provided. The 

first page lists the same columnar output as for the cement condition. 

Messages consist of the depth to the ·top of the cement and one (1) of three 

(3) buckling messages - buckling cannot occur, buckling forces are present 

but are less than the critical buckling load and buckling will occur with a 

description of buckling parameters. 

The second and third page of each load case lists stresses and von Mises 

design factors based upon nominal pipe and minimum pipe body properties. In 

columnar form the p'rlntout consists of the node number, node depths, internal 
cis A-5 

and external pressure at each node, internal and external hoop stress above 

and below each node, axial stress above and below each node and maximum 

(either internal or external) and average (one half of the internal plus 

external) von Mises stress above and below each node. Corresponding design 

factors, the specified minimum yield strength divided by the von ~ses 

equivalent stress, are presented at the right of the printout. 

The above information provides a complete description of the force and 

stress state of the casing essential to a proper evaluation of the particular casing design. 
ols··· 

9-5/8" CASING ANALYSIS·TABULAR OUTPUT