|
1
|
Question:
| Do I have to wait until the finish drilling information is updated by the licensee before I can submit any PAS files? |
| |
Answer:
| Yes. Data from any well test conducted cannot be submitted until the Finished Drill Date is available on the ERCB system, with the exception of drillstem tests (DSTs), which require only the spud date. |
| | | |
|
2
|
Question:
| If my service company is not on the ERCB listing of SERCOs, how do I obtain a code? |
| |
Answer:
| Contact the ERCB Well Test staff via e-mail at Welltest-Helpline@ercb.ca, providing the full name of your company, and a code will be assigned to you. |
| | | |
|
3
|
Question:
| What is the procedure if I submit a test and realize later that I have to correct the file? |
| |
Answer:
| Since the original PAS file needs to be deleted from the ERCB system before resubmission, you need to e-mail the Welltest-Helpline to request deletion. Once the original file has been deleted, you will receive a reply advising that you can resubmit the PAS file. |
| | | |
|
4
|
Question:
| If the original file was submitted with the Test Purpose Indicator = (O)ther, and I want to replace it with an amended file changed to (I)nitial, do I need to notify the ERCB Well Test Group? |
| |
Answer:
| Yes, you are required to advise the Well Test Group of your intentions and request that the original file submitted as (O)ther be removed from the ERCB database. |
| | | |
|
5
|
Question:
| As a DST tester, I may be responsible for submitting the PAS files to the ERCB on behalf of the Licensee. Do I have to wait until the finish drilling information is updated by the licensee? |
| |
Answer:
| No. Since the well drilling information may not be sent to the ERCB until up to three weeks after the rig is released, the DST will be accepted as long as the spud information has been reported. (Note that all other PAS files require the final drilling information, including the total depth of the well before a submission is accepted.) |
| | | |
|
6
|
Question:
| Can I submit just AOF data without any pressure information? |
| |
Answer:
| If tested before April 1, 2005, the pressure results summary and data table gauge areas can be blank. |
| | | |
|
7
|
Question:
| Why do I need a [SGPTAU] (single-point authorization code)? |
| |
Answer:
| This code is required in the TRG.PAS file when a single-point deliverability reports an AOF > 300 103 m3/d. The ERCB must provide a code to be included in the PAS file. |
| | | |
|
8
|
Question:
| How do I obtain a SGPTAU? |
| |
Answer:
| You must fill out the form provided at https://www3.eub.gov.ab.ca/eub/dds/anonymous/apps/wtc/ver_20060308.doc
This form is located on the ERCB DDS system under ERCB: Submissions: Well Test Data. At the right you will see text. Scroll down until you come to the Related Resources portion, and under System Resources you will see the link to the form.
|
| | | |
|
9
|
Question:
| If I have acquired all the flow rates and pressures needed for my initial deliverability test, how do I report the in-line information (no more than “Cleanup” flaring only), since I will not have equipment on site to generate a PRD file? |
| |
Answer:
| In the TRG.PAS file, there is a table called Data Table – Inline Rate and Pressure Summary where the recorded rates and pressures are to be reported. |
| | | |
|
10
|
Question:
| What sort of information should be included in a PRD image file? |
| |
Answer:
| Depending on the test conducted, it is recommended to supply the same information as set out in Directive 034: Gas Well Testing, Theory and Practice Appendix E, forms EG-29 A, B, and C and EG-34. |
| | | |
|
11
|
Question:
| How do I apply for exemptions? |
| |
Answer:
| Contact the ERCB Well Test Group by e-mail, attaching a formal letter with company letterhead, or send a hard copy letter explaining why exemption is being requested and all pertinent documentation to support the request. Exemption requests should be submitted in a proactive manner before the requirement is identified as outstanding. |
| | | |
|
12
|
Question:
| With respect to CBM control wells, if I have determined the flow rates and pressures for each tested zone by a spinner survey, how can the data be submitted via WTC? |
| |
Answer:
| At this time, there is no way to submit the spinner data electronically through WTC. Currently, a hard copy of the data is to be submitted for CBM control wells to the attention of the Control Well Coordinator, Resources Applications Group. Send noncontrol well spinner data to the attention of Curtis Evans, Geology and Reserves Group. |
| | | |
|
13
|
Question:
| What information should be provided in a PDF file? |
| |
Answer:
| When bottomhole pressure gauges are not used, the conversion of wellhead pressures to bottomhole condition should be clearly indicated and presented. Any wellbore schematics, graphs, analysis data, and conclusions not captured in the PAS file should be included. |
| | | |
|
14
|
Question:
| Does the ERCB have plans for establishing other DEs? |
| |
Answer:
| The ERCB is considering establishing other DEs, as well as possibly expanding the existing DEs. It is, however, monitoring the development and operations in the current DEs to ensure that compliance is being met before further implementation. |
| | | |
|
15
|
Question:
| How do I submit pre-1999 (electronic) data if I do not have a PAS file? |
| |
Answer:
| The ERCB Well Test Group accepts paper copies of well test data obtained before January 1, 1999.
|
|
16
|
Question:
| If the DST was mechanically successful (not a misrun), does an extrapolated pressure have to be attained? |
| |
Answer:
| No. Only DSTs being considered as the initial pressure (Pi) for the specific formation need to have at least one gauge (most representative) extrapolated (P*). |
| | | |
|
17
|
Question:
| During the running of a static gradient survey, are there any requirements as to where the stop depths should be taken? |
| |
Answer:
| No. Although the depths and durations chosen are up to the well test coordinator, it is recommended that a stop be made as close to MPP as possible. The duration at MPP should comply with Section 5.1.3 of Directive 040. |
| | | |
|
18
|
Question:
| If gauges are run past the zone of investigation (i.e., gas) and make contact with liquid, do I need to report the liquid gradient ([GRLIQ]) in my PAS file? |
| |
Answer:
| Yes, if it is an oil, water, or crude bitumen well ([WSFL] <> 02 [gas]). No, if well is a gas well and the liquid contact is completely below the tested interval. |
| | | |
|
19
|
Question:
| Why do the published PAS rules for computing pressure stabilization (2.5 kPa/hr) contradict Directive 040 (Third Edition) Section 5.1 (2.0 kPa/hr)? |
| |
Answer:
| The ERCB allows some leniency, but only for system programming/calculation editing, where wells may show steady pressure but be just outside the Directive 040 threshold. |
| | | |
|
20
|
Question:
| Are flowing gradients required to be submitted to the ERCB? |
| |
Answer:
| Yes. Although they are not used by the ERCB in any regular daily activities, in accordance with Oil and Gas Regulations, Section 11.120(1)(b), all data gathered for the purpose of obtaining information must be submitted.
Further, prior to July 2004 (when PAS version 4.00 was instituted), flowing gradients were rarely captured, but upon suggestion from industry, provisions were made to the GRD.PAS file to accept them
|
| | | |
|
21
|
Question:
| What is the difference between a stabilized AOF and an extended AOF? |
| |
Answer:
| An extended AOF is calculated from an extended flow rate where the well may not have attained real flowing pressure stabilization. An extended pressure drawdown response has yet to touch the no-flow boundaries at the end of the drilling spacing unit. A stabilized AOF is where the only pressure support or lack of support is from the drilling spacing unit’s drainage area. |
| | | |
|
22
|
Question:
| When more than one gauge is run in the hole, do I have to indicate which are the top or bottom recorders? |
| |
Answer:
| No. Unlike previous PAS file formats, where your “source” gauge had to be reported as #1, the new format (v. 4.00+) only requires that the serial number for your choice gauge (GSER) be reported in ~Pressure Results - Summary [GSERU] (gauge serial number used in summary). Therefore, any data checking will be done against that gauge. (Note: subsequent gauges still must follow any required formatting standards.) |
| | | |
|
23
|
Question:
| Are clean-up or swab data required to be submitted? |
| |
Answer:
| Only if these data are in combination with the drawdown or flowing data of a deliverability test. |
| | | |
|
24
|
Question:
| In the Recombined Gas Properties section, how is the value for [RECOFLO] (recombined flow rate) supposed to be derived? Is this a measured value reported in the field or is it a derived value? In either case, some laboratories do not obtain, calculate, or store this value. |
| |
Answer:
| The calculation for this is in Directive 034, but is summarized as follows: In order to calculate the gas equivalent of the liquid, the liquid flow rate in moles per day must first be calculated. This is equal to the flow rate (m3/d) multiplied by the density of the liquid (kg/m3) divided by the molar mass of the liquid (g/mol) multiplied by 1000. This results in the liquid flow rate in mol/d and is multiplied by 23.645 x 10-6 to determine the gas equivalent of the liquid in 103 m3/d. |
| | | |
|
25
|
Question:
| During the running of a Static Gradient survey, are there any requirements as to where the stop depths should be taken? |
| |
Answer:
| No. Although the depths and durations chosen are up to the well test planner, it is recommended that a stop be made as close to MPP as possible. Also, the duration at MPP should comply with Section 5.1.3 of Directive 040. |
| | | |
|
26
|
Question:
| If my test failed and provided no useful data, does the data have to be submitted to the ERCB? |
| |
Answer:
| Section 4.9 of Directive 040 provides submission requirements. In the case of information that might be misleading, it would not be required unless it was a DST. All DSTs must be submitted, including misruns. |
| | | |
|
27
|
Question:
| Is the ERCB considering any consequences for not submitting data that is gathered only for the operator benefit? |
| |
Answer:
| Compliance with respect to the matter above will be reviewed sometime in the future.
In addition, further review is planned to address potential escalations directly to 1st Notice of Low Risk Noncompliance for repeat offenders, as well as situations where well test data that do not exist in the public domain are being used by an operator as source information in an application and/or at a hearing.
|
