My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
PERMFILE54123
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Permit File
>
600000
>
PERMFILE54123
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 10:57:20 PM
Creation date
11/20/2007 4:02:08 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
M1999002
IBM Index Class Name
Permit File
Doc Date
6/18/1999
Doc Name
OBJECTORS EXHIBITS
Media Type
D
Archive
No
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
24
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
After lengthy negotiat~, the Division and AlliedSignal agr~in ]993 to a definition of the <br />work that would constitute a "reasonable effort" to clean out and plug each well as deeply as possible. <br />The agreement was crafted based on the practical experience of technical and field staff in the Division <br />with an intimate working knowledge of field conditions and previous plugging efforts in Tully Valley. <br />Once this agreement was secured and guidelines developed, AlliedSignal committed to plugging the <br />remaining wells. <br />Under terms of the agreement, the objective at each well was to clean the wellbore out to the salt <br />cavern, remove all uncemented casing and tubing, set a mechanical bridge plug just above the salt <br />cavern, and fill the wellbore ~~th cement. Guidelines for implementing the agreement recognized that <br />subsidence-related field conditions, combined with the age of many of the wells, could preclude <br />attainment of this goal. A "reasonable effort" to plug each well to the deepest attainable depth was <br />defined as 32 hours of "progress-yielding" dotvrthole time. Thirty-two hours was neither a maximum <br />nor minimum required effort, but an evaluation point for assessing downhole progress and determining <br />whether 2dditional work would result in any measurable advancement toward the stated goal. "Progress- <br />yielding" work for the 32-hour calculation included: <br />1) working down the hole, <br />2) cutting and pulling casing, <br />3) milling obstacles, -• <br />4) cutting/fishing tubing, <br />5) tripping associated with progress-yielding work, and <br />6) running into or out of the hole with: ` <br /> - logging tools to estimate dowmhole conditions, <br />- impression blocks, or <br /> -mills to condition or dress pipe or hole. - <br />Activities not considered "progress-yielding" downhole time included: <br />1) rigging up/rigging down, <br />2) fishing to recover lost tools, <br />3) logging, <br />4) perforating, <br />5) cementing, <br />6) plugging, <br />7) activities after reaching the deepest attainable depth, <br />8) conditioning trip to prepare for cementing, _ <br />9) making up tools and equipment on the surface, <br />10) running a cement basket or bridge plug, and <br />11) tripping associated with excluded work. <br />The 32-hour time frame s+~as based on prior Tully Valley plugging experience, which showed that four <br />days was generally adequate to clean a wellbore out to the 1,000- to 1,400-foot deep salt cavern when <br />site-specific do«nhole conditions were such that this could be reasonably accomplished. <br />13 <br />X20 <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.