Pod All

FINAL EAXAM
PERENCANAAN, PENGELOLAAN, DAN PENGEMBANGAN

LAPANGAN MIGAS
PT DEVELOPMENT
GROUP 1
PLAN OF
BETA FIELD
Dibuat oleh:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
Panca Suci Widiantoro

Chrismon
Joko Sugiyarto
Apriyansah Toni
Erald Eiden
Agung Nurwanto
Nila Rahayu
Trihandoyo
Keumala Widyamurti
171.141.009
171.141.004
171.141.007
171.141.003
171.141.005
171.141.001
171.141.008
171.141.016
171.140.009
PROGRAM MAGISTER BIDANG ILMU TEKNIK

PERMINYAKAN
FAKULTAS TEKNOLOGI KEBUMIAN DAN
ENERGI
0
Table of Contents
CHAPTER I.............................................................................................................1
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY......................................................................................1
CHAPTER II............................................................................................................3
GEOLOGICAL FINDINGS AND REVIEWS........................................................3
2.1. Regional Geology......................................................................................3
2.1.1
Tectonic Setting..................................................................................3
2.1.2
Stratigrafi Regional............................................................................6
2.1.3
Depositional environment................................................................11
2.1.4
Petroleum System............................................................................14
2.2. Well Data Evaluation...............................................................................18
2.2.1
Identification Reservoir....................................................................18
2.2.2
Reservoir Correlation.......................................................................18
2.3. Evaluation of Geophysical Data..............................................................19
2.3.1
Well Ties...........................................................................................20
2.3.2
Time Interpretation...........................................................................23
2.3.3
Atribute Analysis..............................................................................25
2.3.4
Time Structure Interpretation...........................................................26
2.3.5
Depth Conversion............................................................................28
2.3.6
Beta Field Depth Structures.............................................................30
2.4. Reservoir Properties Distribution............................................................33
2.4.1
Net Sand Map...................................................................................34
2.4.2
Net Pay Map.....................................................................................34
2.4.3
Porosity Map....................................................................................35
2.4.4
Saturation Water Map......................................................................35
2.4.5
Permeability Map.............................................................................36
2.5. Well Drilling Result.................................................................................36
2.5.1
Beta-1...............................................................................................36
2.5.2
Beta-2...............................................................................................37
2.5.3
Beta-4...............................................................................................37
2.5.4
Beta-3...............................................................................................38
2.6. Core Description & Analysis...................................................................38
2.6.1
Side Wall Core.................................................................................38
2.6.2
Conventional Core...........................................................................39
CHAPTER III........................................................................................................42
RESERVOIR DESCRIPTION...............................................................................42
3.1 Introduction.............................................................................................42
3.2 Initial Condition......................................................................................42
3.3 Petrophysics.............................................................................................43
3.4.1 Data Availability...................................................................................44
3.4.2
Petrophysical Analysis of Beta Field...............................................45
3.4.3
Log vs. Core Porosity & Permeability.............................................45
3.4.4 Water Saturation....................................................................................46
3.4.5
Log Interpretation Plots...................................................................46
3.4 Reservoir Characterization......................................................................52
3.4.1
Reservoir Rock Type........................................................................52
3.4.2
Permeability Transform....................................................................53
ii
3.4.3
Irreducible Water Saturation (SWC) Transforms.............................53
3.4.4
Relative Permeability.......................................................................54
3.5 Reservoir Fluid Properties.......................................................................54
3.5.1
Liquid Hydrocarbons...........................................................................55
Total.........................................................................................................................56
3.5.2
PVT Analysis...................................................................................56
3.5.3
Formation Water Resistivity............................................................61
3.6 Production Test Data and Analysis..........................................................62
3.6.1
Well Deliverability...........................................................................62
3.6.2
Reservoir Testing.............................................................................64
3.6.3
Reservoir Pressure............................................................................68
3.6.4
Reservoir Temperature.....................................................................68
3.7 Drive Mechanism....................................................................................70
3.8 Fluid Contact (OWC)..............................................................................71
CHAPTER IV........................................................................................................74
RESERVES AND PRODUCTION FORECAST..................................................74
4.1.1
Original Oil Inplace (OOIP)................................................................74
4.2 Production Forecast.................................................................................79
4.3 Artificial Lift Consideration...................................................................81
CHAPTER V..........................................................................................................90
DRILLING & COMPLETION..............................................................................90
5.1 Drilling....................................................................................................90
5.2 Drilling Program......................................................................................90
5.3 Depth vs Day...........................................................................................91
5.4 Drilling Fluid...........................................................................................91
5.5 Drilling Cement.......................................................................................91
5.6 Casing Design..........................................................................................92
5.6.1
Casing 13-3/8.................................................................................92
5.6.2
Casing 9-5/8...................................................................................94
5.6.3 Casing 13-3/8......................................................................................95
5.7 Drilling and Work over Cost........................................................................96
5.8 Completion Strategy................................................................................96
5.8.1
Perforation Strategy.........................................................................96
5.8.2
Perforation Method........................................................................100
5.8.3
Tubing Selection............................................................................100
5.9 Completion Type...................................................................................102
CHAPTER VI......................................................................................................103
PRODUCTION FACILITIES..............................................................................103
6.1 Introduction...........................................................................................103
6.2 Production Profile..................................................................................103
6.3 Fluid Properties.....................................................................................104
6.4 Production Specification.......................................................................105
6.5 Facilities Design Description................................................................107
6.6 Health, Safety, and Environment...........................................................112
6.7 Commercial Calculation........................................................................115
CHAPTER VII.....................................................................................................121
FIELD DEVELOPMENT SCENARIOS.............................................................121
7.1 Development Plan and Strategy............................................................121
7.2 Production Optimization.......................................................................121
7.3 Future Development..............................................................................121
iii
7.4 Artifiacialift Consideration....................................................................122

CHAPTER VIII....................................................................................................124
HEALTH SAFETY AND ENVIRONMENT AND COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT................................................................................................124
8.1 Health, Safety, and Environment...........................................................124
8.1.1
Safety, Health and Environment Policy.........................................124
8.1.2
Space, Land and Soil......................................................................125
8.1.3
Sensitive Areas...............................................................................126
8.1.4
Environment Baseline Summary...................................................126
8.1.5
Environmental Studies...................................................................127
8.2 Community Development.....................................................................129
8.2.1
Policy Statement............................................................................129
CHAPTER IX......................................................................................................132
ABANDONMENT AND SITE RESTORATION...............................................132
9.1 Introduction...........................................................................................132
9.2 Abandonment / Restoration...................................................................132
9.3 Funding of Abandonment/Restoration..................................................133
CHAPTER X........................................................................................................136
PROJECT SCHEDULE AND ORGANIZATION..............................................136
10.1
Project Schedule................................................................................136
10.2 Organization............................................................................................136
10.3 Manpower...............................................................................................138
CHAPTER XI......................................................................................................139
LOCAL CONTENT.............................................................................................139
CHAPTER XII.....................................................................................................141
COMMERCIAL AND PROJECT ECONOMICS...............................................141
12.1
Introduction........................................................................................141
12.2
PSC Fiscal Regime............................................................................141
12.3
Project Investment and Operating Cost.............................................141
12.4
Capital Cost.......................................................................................141
12.4.1 Development Well Costs................................................................141
12.4.2 Facilities Costs...............................................................................142
12.4.3 Operating Costs..............................................................................142
12.5
Production Profile..............................................................................142
12.6 Oil Price..................................................................................................144
12.7
Sunk Cost...........................................................................................144
12.8
Economic EvaluationResult...............................................................145
2.9. Sensitivity Analysis...............................................................................146
CHAPTER XIII....................................................................................................148
CONCLUSIONS..................................................................................................148
iv
List of Tables
CHAPTER II
TABLE 2. 1 WELL TOP............................................................................................18
CHAPTER III
TABLE 3. 1 SUMMARY OF INITIAL CONDITION .......................................................43
TABLE 3. 2DATA AVAILABILITY IN BETA FIELD .....................................................44
TABLE 3. 3 SUMMARY OF PETROPHYSICAL ANALYSIS ...........................................45
TABLE 3. 4SUMMARY OF BETA -1 OIL COMPOSITION .............................................55
TABLE 3. 5SUMMARY OF BETA-3 OIL COMPOSITION ..............................................56
TABLE 3. 6SUMMARY OF DOWNHOLE PVT ANALYSIS ...........................................57
TABLE 3. 7SUMMARY OF SURFACE .........................................................................57
TABLE 3. 8BO.........................................................................................................59
TABLE 3. 9 O FOR ROCK TYPE 1........................................................................60
TABLE 3. 10 RS....................................................................................................61
TABLE 3. 11 BETA WATER SAMPLES......................................................................62
TABLE 3. 12 SUMMARY OF WELL PERFORMANCE DATA .....................................62
TABLE 3. 13. SUMMARY OF PRODUCTION TEST IN BETA-4...................................64
TABLE 3. 14. SUMMARY OF LONG TERM PRODUCTION TEST................................67
TABLE 3. 15. SUMMARY OF PRODUCTION TEST IN BETA-4...................................68
TABLE 3. 16 SUMMARY BETA RESERVOIR PRESSURE DATA...................................68
TABLE 3. 17 SUMMARY OF FREE WATER LEVEL ...................................................71
CHAPTER IV
TABLE 4. 1 OOIP....................................................................................................79
TABLE 4. 2 BETA-1 SKIN VALUE............................................................................84
TABLE 4. 3. BETA-1 Q MAXIMUM AFTER STIMULATION.........................................85
TABLE 4. 4 COMPARISON OF THE RESULT FOR 3 CASES .........................................89
CHAPTER V
TABLE 5. 1 TYPICAL DRILLING MUD .....................................................................91
TABLE 5. 2 TYPICAL CEMENTING SLURRY.............................................................92
TABLE 5. 3 LOAD ANALYSIS FOR 13-3/8 CASING .................................................92
TABLE 5. 4 LOAD ANALYSIS 9-5/8 CASING ..........................................................94
TABLE 5. 5 LOAD ANALYSIS 7 CASING ................................................................95
TABLE 5. 6 DRILLING AND COMPLETION COST/WELL ...........................................96
TABLE 5. 7. OPTIMUM PERFORATION LENGTH.......................................................98
CHAPTER VI
TABLE 6. 1 FLUID RATE (OIL AND WATER)..........................................................104
TABLE 6. 2 LIQUID PROPERTIES OF BETA FIELD ..................................................104
TABLE 6. 3 CRUDE OIL SPECIFICATION................................................................105
TABLE 6. 4 PRODUCED WATER QUALITY FOR DISPOSAL.....................................106
TABLE 6. 5 THE SUMMARY OF THE PROPOSED PIPELINE LENGTHS .......................111
v
TABLE 6. 6 EXPORT PIPELINE LENGTHS...............................................................112

TABLE 6. 7 FLOWLINE PROPERTIES......................................................................112
TABLE 6. 8 ENVIRONMENTAL EMISSION LIMITS ..................................................113
TABLE 6. 9 COMMERCIAL CALCULATION .............................................................115
CHAPTER VIII
TABLE 8. 1ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES.................................................................127
CHAPTER IX
TABLE 9. 1 COST ESTIMATE OF PSC ABANDONMENT ..........................................134
TABLE 9. 2 COST ACCRUAL SCHEDULE FOR ABANDONMENT..............................134
CHAPTER XI
TABLE 11. 1SERVICE DOMESTIC CONTENT AVERAGES 2014 - 2016...................139
TABLE 11. 2 MATERIAL DOMESTIC CONTENT AVERAGES 2014 - 2016...............139
TABLE 11. 3 FUTURE DOMESTIC CONTENT FOR SERVICES AND MATERIAL ........140
CHAPTER XII
TABLE 12. 1 ECONOMIC RESULTS........................................................................146
vi
List of Figures
CHAPTER II
FIGURE 2. 1 REGIONAL SOUTH SUMATRA BASIN TECTONIC SETTING .....................3
FIGURE 2. 3 TECTONIC SETTING OF BLOCK CENTAURY............................................4
FIGURE 2. 4 SCHEMATIC TEKTONOSTRATIGRAFI OF SOUTH SUMATRA BASIN.............6
FIGURE 2. 5 REGIONAL STRATIGRAPHY OF SOUTH SUMATRA BASIN.....................7
FIGURE 2. 6 CHRONOSTRATIGRAPHY SCHEME FOR THE SOUTH SUMATRA BASIN. 12
FIGURE 2. 7 CLASSIFICATION LITOFASIES ON BETA-4 WELLS...............................13
FIGURE 2. 8 CLASSIFICATION LITOFASIES ON BETA-4 WELLS................................14
FIGURE 2. 9 PETROLEUM SYSTEM BETA FIELD, SOUTH SUMATRA BASIN.............15
FIGURE 2. 10 PALEOGEOGRAFI FORMASI AIR BENAKAT........................................17
FIGURE 2. 11 PLAY CONCEPT OF SOUTH SUMATRA BASIN.....................................18
FIGURE 2. 12 BETA FIELD STRATIGRAPHIC CROSS SECTION THROUGH WELL LOGS
........................................................................................................................19
FIGURE 2. 13 BETA FIELD LOCATION MAP AND DATABASE.................................20
FIGURE 2. 14 WAVELET EXTRACTION BETA-2.......................................................21
FIGURE 2. 15 LINE 05PAL015 : BETA 2/4 SEISMIC WELL TIE...............................22
FIGURE 2. 16 LINE 05PAL064 : BETA-3 SEISMIC WELL TIE..................................23
FIGURE 2. 17 BETA WELL CORRELATION (WITH SYNTHETIC TRACK)....................24
FIGURE 2. 18 CROSS CORRELATION WELL LOG (GR) AND SEISMIC ATTRIBUTE
(DOMINANT....................................................................................................25
FIGURE 2. 19 DOMINANT FREQUENCY SEISMIC ATTRIBUTE MAP.........................26
FIGURE 2. 20 FAULT PATTERN AROUND THE BETA FIELD......................................27
FIGURE 2. 21 TOP INTRA ABF (R14) TIME STRUCTURE MAP...............................27
FIGURE 2. 22 TIME VS. DEPTH FOR THE BETA WELLS............................................28
FIGURE 2. 23 KED INTERPOLATION : Z-550 TIME VS DEPTH................................29
FIGURE 2. 24 Z-650 DEPTH DIFFERENCES BETWEEN EQUATION AND KED
METHODS........................................................................................................30
FIGURE 2. 25 Z-380 DEPTH STRUCTURE MAP WITH LATEST FWL........................31
FIGURE 2. 26 R-10 DEPTH STRUCTURE MAP WITH LATEST FWL..........................31
FIGURE 2. 27 Z-450 DEPTH STRUCTURE MAP WITH LATEST FWL........................32
FIGURE 2. 28 Z550 DEPTH STRUCTURE MAP WITH LATEST FWL.........................32
FIGURE 2. 29 Z650 DEPTH STRUCTURE MAP WITH LATEST FWL.........................33
FIGURE 2. 30 NET SAND MAP BETA FIELD............................................................34
FIGURE 2. 31 NET PAY MAP BETA FIELD..............................................................34
FIGURE 2. 32 POROSITY MAP BETA FIELD.............................................................35
FIGURE 2. 33 SATURATION WATER MAP BETA FIELD............................................35
FIGURE 2. 34 PERMABILITY MAP BETA FIELD.......................................................36
CHAPTER III
FIGURE 3. 1- RESERVOIR VIEW..............................................................................42
FIGURE 3. 2 PETROPHYSICAL ANALYSIS WORKFLOW ............................................44
FIGURE 3. 3 BETA-4 LOG VS. CORE POROSITY AND PERMEABILITY MATCHING ....46
FIGURE 3. 4 BETA-1 LOG INTERPRETATION OF Z380 SANDS (SCALE : 1/200)........47
FIGURE 3. 5 BETA-1 LOG INTERPRETATION OF Z450 SANDS (SCALE : 1/200)........47
FIGURE 3. 6. BETA-1 LOG INTERPRETATION OF Z650 SANDS (SCALE : 1/200).......48
FIGURE 3. 10. BETA-3 LOG INTERPRETATION OF Z380 SANDS (SCALE : 1/200).....50
vii

FIGURE 3. 16. PERMEABILITY TRANSFORM............................................................53
FIGURE 3. 17IRREDUCIBLE WATER SATURATION (SWC) TRANSFORM ...................54
FIGURE 3. 18 RELATIVE PERMEABILITY.................................................................54
FIGURE 3. 19 PLOT OF BO VS PRESSURE................................................................59
FIGURE 3. 20 PLOT OF O VS PRESSURE................................................................60
FIGURE 3. 21 PLOT OF RS VS PRESSURE................................................................61
FIGURE 3. 22. BETA-1 (Z380) IPR CURVES.............................................................63
FIGURE 3. 23. BETA-1 (Z450) IPR CURVES...........................................................63
FIGURE 3. 26. WELL SCHEMATICOFBETA-1...........................................................65
FIGURE 3. 27. FORMATION TEMPERATURE.............................................................69
FIGURE 3. 28. FREE WATER LEVEL Z-380.............................................................72
CHAPTER IV
FIGURE 4. 1 P1 AREA Z-380...................................................................................75
FIGURE 4. 2 P1 AREA Z-450...................................................................................75
FIGURE 4. 3 P1 AREA Z-550...................................................................................76
FIGURE 4. 4P1 AREA Z-650....................................................................................76
FIGURE 4. 5 2P AREA Z-380...................................................................................77
FIGURE 4. 6 2P AREA Z-450...................................................................................77
FIGURE 4. 7 2P AREA Z-550...................................................................................78
FIGURE 4. 8 2P AREA Z-550...................................................................................78
FIGURE 4. 9. INTEGRATED SUBSURFACE AND SURFACE MODEL..............................80
FIGURE 4. 10 ARTIFICIAL LIFT SELECTION ............................................................81
FIGURE 4. 11 BETA-1 (Z380) IPR CURVES WITH RESERVOIR PRESSURE
SENSITIVITY....................................................................................................82
FIGURE 4. 12. TYPICAL ESP DESIGN FOR BETA WELLS..........................................82
FIGURE 4. 13. TYPICAL ESP PERFORMANCE DESIGN FOR BETA WELLS.................83
FIGURE 4. 14. TYPICAL ESP PERFORMANCE DESIGN FOR BETA WELLS.................83
FIGURE 4. 15 PRODUCTIONS FORECAST CASE 1....................................................84
FIGURE 4. 16. BETA-1 (Z380) IPR CURVE WITH VARIABLE SKIN...........................85
FIGURE 4. 19. BETA-4 IPR CURVE WITH VARIABLE SKIN.......................................87
FIGURE 4. 21 PRODUCTION FORECAST RESULT FOR CASE 3...................................88
CHAPTER V
FIGURE 5. 1 DRILLING DEPTH VERSUS DAY..........................................................91
FIGURE 5. 2 VME ELLIPSE FOR 13-3/8 CASING WITH SF 1.25............................93
FIGURE 5. 3 VME ELLIPSE FOR 9-5/8 CASING WITH SF 1.25..............................94
FIGURE 5. 4 VME ELLIPSE FOR 7 LINER..............................................................95
viii
FIGURE 5. 5 COMPARISON BETWEEN 1-11/16 & 2-1/8 OWEN SDP PENETRATION

........................................................................................................................97
FIGURE 5. 6 TEMPERATURE STABILITY OF PERFORATING EXPLOSIVES (COURTESY
OF M. J. ECONOMIDES,L.T.WATTERS, AND S. DUNN-NORMAN)...................97
FIGURE 5. 7 SENSITIVITY FOR PERFORATION INTERVAL LENGTH IN Z380............98
FIGURE 5. 8 SENSITIVITY FOR PERFORATION INTERVAL LENGTH IN Z450............99
FIGURE 5. 9 SENSITIVITY FOR PERFORATION INTERVAL LENGTH IN Z550...........99
FIGURE 5. 10 SENSITIVITY FOR PERFORATION INTERVAL LENGTH IN Z650........100
FIGURE 5. 11 SENSITIVITY FOR TUBING SIZE .......................................................101
FIGURE 5. 12 TYPICAL WELL COMPLETION IN BETA ...........................................102
CHAPTER VI
FIGURE 6. 1 BETA FIELD PRODUCTION PROFILE ..................................................103
FIGURE 6. 2 BETA PROCESS FLOW DIAGRAM......................................................107
FIGURE 6. 3 BETA PRODUCTION FACILITIES EQUIPMENT LAYOUT ...................110
CHAPTER VII
FIGURE 7. 1. ARTIFICIAL LIFT SELECTION...........................................................122
FIGURE 7. 2. Z380 IPR CURVES WITH RESERVOIR PRESSURE SENSITIVITY........123
CHAPTER VIII
FIGURE 8. 1 BETA FIELD CENTAURY PSC............................................................126
CHAPTER X
FIGURE 10. 1 BETA FIELD COMMERCIALIZATION AND PROJECT SCHEDULE ........136
FIGURE 10. 2 GROUP 1 ORGANIZATION STRUCTURE............................................137
FIGURE 10. 3 FIELD ORGANIZATION STRUCTURE ................................................137
FIGURE 12. 1 PRODUCTION PROFILE CASE 1.......................................................143
FIGURE 12. 2PRODUCTION PROFILE CASE 2........................................................143
FIGURE 12. 3 PRODUCTION PROFILE CASE 3.......................................................144
FIGURE 12. 4CONTRACTOR CASH FLOW CASE 1..................................................145
FIGURE 12. 5 CONTRACTOR CASH FLOW CASE 2.................................................145
FIGURE 12. 6 CONTRACTOR CASH FLOW CASE 3................................................145
FIGURE 12. 7 DIAGRAM BETA POD-1 PROJECT...................................................147
ix
CHAPTER I
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Centaury block is operated by PT Group 1 (Group 1) under Production
Sharing Contract (PSC) signed on 16 th January 2010 for thirty (30) years
contract period. The block is located in South Sumatera province, it is 70 km
South East Palembang, the capital of the province. The Beta structure is Sout
Sumatera Basin.
During the initial 6-year exploration period, Contractor is carrying out exploration
activities based on the PSC. The contractor has completed the firm commitment
including two (2) exploration wells.Based on wells testing results and an
independent GGR study, commercial reserve was discovered in Beta field and it is
feasible for development.
The Contractor proposes to produce oil from Beta field with production
scenario :
Acidizing is selected as stimulation strategy to improve productivity of
Beta wells. Electric Submersible Pump (ESP) as an artificial lift will be installed
in each well. A permanent trunkline, oil loading facility, oil storage tanks, and
effluent water processing and disposing facility will be built. Oil from producing
wells is flowed to processing facility, pumped through trunk line to oil storage
tanks, and delivered to an existing oil export line Tempino-Plaju using booster
pump. Oil, water, and gas are separated at the processing facility. A simplified
process flow diagram are shown on chapter VI, figure 6.1.
The investment includes drilling of five (3) exploration wells, 2 appraisal
wells, 1 additional development drilling well, completion and acidizing five (5)
wells in the Beta field, flow lines, processing plant, trunk line, oil storage tanks,
effluent water treatment, and logistic support facility.
Economic evaluation of the proposed Beta field development project is
based on field life of ten(10) years and oil price of USD 50.00/Barrel because
Beta crude oil is good quality oil with 53 degree of API, 0% of Sulfur content, and
low pour point of 21 degree C.
The capital expenditure (capex) of Beta field will be USD 5.49 millions,
operating costs (opex) will be USD 68.62 millions. It will generate gross
revenue USD 172.3 million, government of Indonesia cash flow of US$ 52
million (30% from gross revenue) and Contractor cash flow of USD 47 million
(27% from gross revenue).
In summary, this project is feasible and will open development
opportunities for other fields in the Centaury Block.
CHAPTER II
GEOLOGICAL FINDINGS AND REVIEWS
2.1. Regional Geology

2.1.1
Tectonic Setting
Centaury block located in the South Sumatra Basin to the east of the
Barisan Mountains and extends to the offshore area and is considered as a

foreland basin or back-arc. In the north, South Sumatra Basin is bordered by
Tigapuluh mountains and Duabelas Mountains. In east, bordering the Sunda Shelf,
on the south by Tinggian Lampung and on the west by the Barisan Mountains. In
the west, bordering the basin area of Jambi and Bangka-Belitung. South Sumatra
basin extends from the northwest - southeast (Figures 2.1 and 2.2).
Figure 2. 1 Regional South Sumatra Basin Tectonic Setting
Blok Centaury
Figure 2. 2 Tectonic Setting of Block Centaury
Geology of South Sumatra Basin is a result of tectonic activity that is

closely related to subduction Indi-Australian Plate, moving from the north to the
northeast towards the Eurasian plate is relatively not moving. Subduction zone
covers on West Sumatra area and south of Java area. Many micro-plate between in
interaction zone, moving and produce convergence zone in various forms and
directions. Indi-Australian plate subduction can affect the state of rock,
morphology, tectonics and structure in South Sumatra. The collision of tectonic
plates on Sumatra island generating front lines, magmatic, and back arc.
South Sumatra basin formed the decrease (depression) surrounded by
altitude rock Pratersier. Barisan Mountain lifted in Early Cretaceous and
occurrence of block faulting. Moreover, Barisan mountain as block mountain, a
few old rocks was view at the surface in Tigapuluh
mountain, Duabelas
mountain, Lingga island and Bangka island as called as Paparan Sunda.

South Sumatra basin has three times orogenesis process, the first in Middle
Mesozoic, the second in Late Crateceous to Eearly Tertiary and the third in PlioPleistocene. Orogenesis Plio-Pleistocene geological structures generate conditions
as seen at this time. Tectonics and structural geology of South Sumatra Basin can
be divided into three groups, that is Fault Semangko Zone, folding zone are
4
trending northwest-southeast and fault zone related to folding and Pratersier fault
rejuvenated.
According to Salim et al.(1995), South Sumatra basin was formed during
Early Tertiary (Eocene-Oligocene) when graben developed as a reaction oblique
subduction system between Hindian Ocean plate under Asian plate. According to
De Coster, 1974(in Salim,1995) is estimated to have occured three orogenesis
which from structural framework of Sumatra Basin area is Middle Mesozoik
orogenesis, Tectonic Late Cretaceous-Early Tertiary and Plio-Pleistocene
Orogenesis.
The appearance of the dominant structure is a northwest trending structure
- southeast as a result PlioPleistocene Orogenesis. Thus the structural patterns
that occur can be divided into old patterns trending north - south and northwest southeast trending younger and patterns northwest - southeast parallel to Sumatra
Island.
History of South Sumatra Basin can be divided into three tectonic
megasekuen:
1. Syn-rift Megasequence (c.40 c. 29 Ma)
Continental crust in South Sumatra event affected a great extension to the
Eocene-Early Oligocene due to subduction along the Sumatra trench. This
extension resulted in the opening of some half-graben geometry and
orientation affected by the heterogeneity of the basement. Then, there was
an extension oriented West-East produce horst and graben trending South
Northern. South Sumatra has been rotated by 150 since the Miocene
according to Hall (1995), which produces orientation became trending
graben North-Northwest and South-Southeast
2. Post-rift Megasequence (c.29 c.5 Ma)
Deposition post-rift in Palembang Sub Basin reaches a thickness 13,000
feet, it is caused by high subsidence and relative sea level which also high
causing prolonged transgression.
3. Syn-orogenic/Inversion Megasequence (c. 5 Ma sekarang)
Event orogen widespread, Barisan orogenesa appear along in South
Sumatra. Transpressional fold oriented lengthwise crease in the
Northwest-Southeast direction is formed along the basin and cut of syn-rift
5
underneat Most of the structural traps in the central part of the basin
started on this megasekuen.
Figure 2. 3 Schematic Tektonostratigrafi of South Sumatra Basin
2.1.2
Stratigrafi Regional
South Sumatra basin stratigraphy is generally known as one megacycle
(large cycle) consisting of a transgression and followed by regression. Formation

formed during the phase of transgression grouped into Telisa Group (Talang Akar
Formation, Formation Balfour, and the formation Gumai). Palembang group were
deposited during the regression phase (Air Benakat Formation, Muara Enim
Formation, and Kasai Formation), whereas lemat and older lemat Formation was
deposited before the main phase of transgression. South Sumatra Basin
stratigraphy according to (De Coster, 1974) as follows:
Figure 2. 4 Regional Stratigraphy of South Sumatra Basin
1.
Pre-Tertiary Group
This formation is the bedrock (basement rock) from Sumatra Selatan
Basin. Composed of Mesozoic igneous rocks, metamorphic rocks of Paleozoic,

Mesozoic, and carbonate rocks that have been metamorphosis. Dating results in
some places show that some Late Cretaceous aged rocks until Early Eocene.
Paleozoic-Mesozoic metamorphic rocks and sedimentary rock undergo folding
and faulting has result intrusions of igneous rock during the Middle Mesozoic
episodeorogenesa (Mid-Mesozoic).
2.
Lahat Formation
The oldest rocks found in South Sumatra Basin is batu anyang which Late
Mesozoic age. Rocks in this formation that exist in tuff is composed of
sandstones, conglomerates, breccias, and clay. The rocks are likely part of a cycle
of sedimentation originating from the Continental, result volcanic activity, and the
process of erosion and tectonic activity accompanied in the Late - Early Tertiary
limestone in the South Sumatra Basin.
3. Lemat Formation
Lemat formation composed of coarse klastika form of sandstone,
mudstone, fragments of rock, breccia, "Granite Wash", there is a thin layer of coal,
and tuff. Everything is deposited on the continental environment. While members
of the Formation lemat Benakat formed in the central part of the basin and is
composed of brown flakes gray flakes coated with tuff, siltstone, sandstone, there
is a thin layer of coal and limestone (stringer), Glauconit, is deposited on the
environment fresh- Brackish. Lemat formation is normally limited by the field
unconformity (unconformity) at the top and bottom of the formation. Contact
between the Lemat Formation with Talangakar Formation is interpreted as
paraconformable. Formation lemat Paleocene-Oligocene age, and members
Benakat Late Eocene-Oligocene, which is determined from the spores and pollen,
as well as the K-Ar dating. The thickness of this formation varies, more than 2500
feet ( 760 m). In South Sumatra Basin and over 3500 feet (1070 m) at fault
depression zone in the central part of the basin (obtained from seismic data).
4. Talang Akar Formation
Talang Akar Formation located in South Sumatra Basin, this formation is
located above and below the formation lemat Telisa formation or member Basal
Limestone Telisa. Talang Akar Formation consists of sandstones derived from the
delta plain, shale, silt, quartz sandstones, with inserts carbonate mudstone, coal
and in some places conglomerates. Contact between Talang Akar Formation by
Lemat Formation not aligned at the center and at the periphery of the basin
paraconformable possibility, while contact between Talang Akar Formation with
Telisa and members Basal Limestone Telisa is conformable. Contact between
Talang Akar and Telisa difficult in the pick of the wells in the riverbed due to the
8
lithology of these two formations are generally the same. Talang Akar Formation
thickness varies from 1500-2000 feet (approximately 460-610 m). Age of Talang
Akar Formation is Upper Oligocene- Lower Miocene and possibilities include the
N3 (P22), N7 and N5 part based Foraminifera plangtonik existing zones in wells
drilled in this formation is associated with the delta plain and shelf areas.
5. Baturaja Formation
This member is known as the Baturaja Formation. Deposited on the
intermediate-shelfal of South Sumatra Basin, above and around the platform and
altitude. Contact at the bottom of the Talang Akar Formation or the Pre-Tertiary
rocks. The composition of the Baturaja Formation is composed of limestones and
reefal Bank or platform. The thickness of the lower part of this formation varies,
but the average 200-250 feet (about 60-75 m). Outcrops of Baturaja Formation in
Garba mountains had thickness about 1,700 feet (520 m). This formation is very
fossiliferous and from the analysis of this member Miocene age. Fauna at Baturaja
Formation age is N6-N7.
6. Telisa Formation (Gumai)
Gumai formation is widely distributed and occurs in the Tertiary, this
formation deposited during marine transgressive phase maximum, (maximum
marine transgressive) into two basins. The rocks in this formation consists of marl
which have characteristics fossiliferous, many containing foramplankton. Inserts
limestone found at the bottom. Gumai Formation different facies with Talang Akar
formation and partly above the Baturaja Formation. The thickness of this
formation varies depending on the position of the basin, but the thickness
variation for this Gumai Formation range of 6000-9000 feet (1800-2700 m). Age
determination of Gumai formation can be determined from dating by using
planktonic foraminifera. Mikropaleontologi examination of the rock samples from
some wells showed that planktonic foraminifera fossils that were found can be
classified into zones Globigerinoidessicanus, Globogerinotella insueta, and the
bottom zone SatiralisGloborotalia Orbulina peripheroranda, age inferred Early
Miocene-Middle Miocene. The depositional environment is neritic.
7. Lower Palembang Formation (Air Benakat)

Lower Palembang Formation was deposited during the initial phase of the
cycle of regression. The composition of this formation consists of sandstones
glaukonitan, claystone, siltstone and carbonate sandstones containing elements. At
the bottom of Lower Palembang Formation contact with Telisa Formation. The
thickness of this formation varies from 3300 - 5000 feet (around 1000-1500 m).
The fauna found in Lower Palembang Formation, among others Orbulina
Universad'Orbigny, Orbulina Suturalis Bronimann, Globigerinoides Subquadratus
Bronimann, Globigerina Venezuelana Hedberg, Globorotalia Peripronda Blow &
Banner, Globorotalia Venezuelana Hedberg, Globorotalia Peripronda Blow &
Banner, Globorotalia mayeri Cushman & Ellisor, which shows its age Miocene
Middle N12-N13. These formations deposited in shallow marine environments.
8. Middle Palembang Formation (Muara Enim)
Constituent rock formations that exist in this form of sandstone, mudstone,
and coal seams. The lower limit of the Middle Palembang Formation in the
southern part of the basin in the form of coal seams which usually used as a
marker. The number and thickness of the coal seams decreases from south to
utarapada this basin. The thickness of the formation ranges between 1500-2500
feet (between 450-750 m). De Coster (1974) interprets this formation Late
Miocene to Pliocene, based on the stratigraphic position. These formations
deposited in shallow marine environments to brackist (at the bottom), delta plain
and environmental non-marine.
9. Upper Palembang Formation (Kasai)
This formation is the youngest formation in the South Sumatra Basin.
This formation was deposited during the Plio-Pleistocene orogenesa and erosion
resulting from the Barisan Mountains and Thirty Mountains. The composition of
this formation consists of sandstones tuff, clay, and gravel and a thin layer of coal.
Age of this formation can not be ascertained, but it is suspected Plio-Pleistocene.
The depositional environment is Land.
10
2.1.3
Depositional environment
Depositional environment in South Sumatra basin consists of several
cycles, ie:
Cycle Depositional late Middle Miocene to Late Miocene MEF

(Muara Enim Formation).
Cycle deposition transgressive - regressive beginning of Formation
Air Benakat (ABF) that turned slowly into formation Muara Enim
(MEF), which consists of overlapping carbonate shale, siltstone,
sandstone, characterized by the abundance of lignite (one layer of
lignite can reach a thickness of 30 m), and tuffaceous inserts are often
found locally.
Youngest Deposition (Pliocene-Pleistocene) Kasai Formation

Kasai Formation deposited out of tune over Muara Enim
Formation (MEF), especially in the central part of the basin, is present
as volcanic clastic overlapping sediment with shale of bentonite and
inserts lignite.
Alluvial and Volcanic Quarter

At the top of the Kasai Formation was deposited alluvial and
Quaternary volcanic contact is not aligned with.
11
Figure 2. 5 Chronostratigraphy scheme for the South Sumatra Basin
Lithofacies based on the data available, it can be concluded as follows

depositional environment :
1.
Shoreface:
Association vertical and horizontal trace fossils indicate marine
environment ber low to medium energy. Heterolitic very fine sandstone,
interpreted as precipitates close to the beach. Sandstone presence was
interpreted as a result of the rework transgressive sand the top, where it
increases the quality of reservoir.
2. Offshore Transition:
Ichnofacies zoophycos indicates a calm sea environment (low-energy).
Laminated shale and shale bioturbated interpreted as precipitates transition
between shoreface and offshore..
3. Offshore:
Massive shale is interpreted as precipitates offshore. At least the storm
affected sediment and zoophycos ichnofacies an indication of a constant
sedimentation in the marine environment of low energy. Based on the
interpretation of depositional environment, cores, logs and flow data from the
ancient tidal FMI, the paleogeography can be reconstructed.
12
Figure 2. 6 Classification Litofasies on Beta-4 Wells
13
Figure 2. 7 Classification Litofasies on Beta-4 wells
Figure 2. 1 Facies Model in Beta Field
2.1.4
Petroleum System
South Sumatra basin is a productive basin as a producer of oil and
gas. This was evidenced by the many oil and gas seeps that are connected
by the anticline. The layout of this seepage is in the foothills and
mountains Gumai Barisan. So with the events of seepage, can be used as
an initial indication for exploration of the hydrocarbons under the surface
based on the petroleum system (Ariyanto, 2011) On the petroleum system
14
will be discussed on the source rock, reservoir rock, cap rock (seal), and
hydrocarbon trap (Figure 2.9).
Figure 2. 8 Petroleum System Beta Field, South Sumatra Basin
2.1.4.1
Source Rock
Hydrocarbons in the South Sumatra basin was obtained from Source rock
formations Lahat Lacustrine and terrestrial source rock coaly coal and shale in
Talang Akar formation. Lacustrine source rock deposited on halfgraben complex,
whereas terrestrial coal and shale coaly widely on halfgraben limit. In addition to
the
Batu
Raja
limestone
formations
and
shale
formation
Gumai allows also to be able to produce hirdrokarbon the local area (Bishop,
2000). Gradients temperature in the South Sumatra basin ranges from 49 C /
Km. This gradient is smaller than the Central Sumatra basin, so that the oil will
tend to be in deep water. Rock formations and formations Gumai King was in a
state ripe to early matured in thermal gas generation in some parts inside of the
basin,
therefore
it
is
possible
to
system (Bishop, 2000).
15
produce
gas
on
petroleum
2.1.4.2 Reservoir Rock

In South Sumatra basin, some formations can be an effective reservoir for
storing hydrocarbons, among others, is in the basement, formation Lahat, Talang
Akar formation, formation Batu Raja, and the formation Gumai. As for the subbasin of South Palembang's largest hydrocarbon production comes from Talang
Akar formation and formation Batu Raja. Basement potential as a reservoir
located in the area in which paleohigh uplifted and suffered fractures and
weathering. In the basement rocks consist of granite and quartzite which has an
effective porosity of 7%. For Talang Akar formation generally consists of
quarzone sandstone, siltstone, and shale deposition. So that the sandstone is very
good to be the reservoir. Porosity owned the formation of gutters roots ranged
from 15-30% and permeability of 5 Darcy. Talang Akar formation estimated to
contain 75% of oil production from all over the South Sumatra basin (Bishop,
2000). In the carbonate reservoir formations Batu Raja, on top of a porous zone
compared to the bottom relatively tight (tight). Porosity contained in Balfour
formations ranging between 10-30% and permeability of about 1 Darcy (Ariyanto,
2011).
2.1.4.3 Cap Rock
Overburden South Sumatra basin in general be quite thick shale layers that
are above the reservoir Talang Akar formation and Gumai itself (intraformational
seal rock). Seal on the limestone reservoir formations Batu Raja also be derived
from shale layer formation Gumai. At the reservoir sandstone formations Air
Benakat and Muara Enim, shale that is intraformational also be a good rock seal to
trap hydrocarbons (Ariyanto 2011).
2.1.4.4 Hydrocarbon Trap
The main hydrocarbon trap caused by the presence of anticline from the
northwest to southeast and becomes a trap that first explored. This anticline
formed as a result of compression that started during the early Miocene and
revolves around 2-3 million years ago (Bishop, 2000). Additionally trap
hydrocarbons in the South Sumatra basin also caused due to the structure. Traptype structure on the South Sumatra basin is generally controlled by the structures
16
of older and younger structure. This old structure trap in combination with a
reverse fault wrench fault system younger. Entrapment old structures also form
regional normal faults that trap hydrocarbons. While younger trap structure
formed simultaneously with the removal of the end of the Barisan Mountains
(Pliocene to Pleistocene) (Ariyanto, 2011).
Figure 2. 9 Paleogeografi Formasi Air Benakat
2.1.4.5 Migration
These hydrocarbon migration occurs both horizontally and vertically from
the source rock shale and coal in Lahat and Talang Akar formation. Horizontal
migration occurs along the slope of the slope, which carry hydrocarbons from the
source rock to the reservoir rock of Lahat and Talang Akar formation itself.
Vertical migration may occur through the cracks-cracks and faults down major
areas. The presence of hydrocarbons within the catchment Muara Enim Formation
and Air Benakat is evidence that indicates vertical migration through the fault area
until Pliestosen Pliocene epoch (Ariyanto, 2011).
17
Figure 2. 10 Play Concept of South Sumatra basin
2.2. Well Data Evaluation

2.2.1
Identification Reservoir
Layers into reservoir formations Benakat water generally consists of a
layer of sandstone interspersed with shale. The depths of the coating is based on
the well, which is :
Table 2. 1 Well Top

Layer
Z380
R10
Z450
Z550
Z650
2.2.2
Beta 1
368
391
444
526
635
Beta 2
391
415
453
550
664
Beta 3
366
410
446
541
669
Beta 4
364
387
441
523
631
Reservoir Correlation
Correlation carrier layer of hydrocarbons in wells on Beta structure can be
seen in Figure 2.10 below :
18
Figure 2. 11 Beta Field stratigraphic cross section through well logs
2.3. Evaluation of Geophysical Data

Several legacy vintages of 2D seismic cross the Beta Field. While these
provide a gross structural trend, quality is generally poor. There are also major
concerns related to the static solution for these lines. The 2005 vintage seismic
data acquired by Omega Carigali gives a regional Centaury PSC coverage with
good quality of seismic data, but it is only 9 lines (approx. 2-3 kms line spacing)
over Beta structure that gives limited interpretation. At late 2010 Omega Carigali.
was acquired another 140 kms of 2D Seismic lines which about 7 lines were infill
at Beta area. These are the grey and red lines shown in (Figure2.12) Older
vintages are shown in pink.
Geophysics well control was limited to the Beta-1 discovery well and the
three appraisal wells (Beta-2, 3 & 4). The West Berau well (1937) is situated to
19
the southwest on the same structure but no data is available for this well. A
comprehensive logging suite exists for each of the Beta wells. However,
significant washouts compromise the quality of acoustic logs and hence the
seismic-well tie. A zero-offset VSP was acquired in both Beta-1 and Beta-3 while
the other Beta wells have adequate checkshot coverage.
Figure 2. 12 Beta Field Location Map and Database
2.3.1
Well Ties
Well ties were established for the four Beta-wells using the electric log and
well seismic (check shot & VSP) data. Spectral analysis was done for Beta-1, 2
and 3 (Figure 2.13 ) and then simplified to a Ricker 40 Hz minimum phase (peak
onset corresponds to an increase in acoustic impedance - Reverse SEG) wavelet.
This Ricker wavelet was used in the generation of synthetic seismograms for the
Beta wells.
20
Figure 2. 13 Wavelet Extraction Beta-2
Due to areas of severe washout raw acoustic logs were unsuitable for
synthetic generation. Fortunately, corrected logs were generated as part of a
borehole stability study. These were used to generate zero-offset synthetics for
each well.
The Beta-1 exploration well was drilled near the crest of the structure.
While a VSP was run in this well, a poor tie is achieved. The synthetic
seismogram was derived using Ricker wavelet, with a limited "stretch and
squeeze", a reasonable good match with the seismic is achieved
Beta-2 was drilled downdip some 500m to the south of the structural crest,
and was found to be 5m deep to prognosis. A checkshot survey was acquired in
21
the well. A 22ms bulk shift is required to achieve a good tie. The bulk shift
suggests that there are issues with the static solution for the seismic in this area.
Beta-4 was drilled prior to Beta-3. The main objective was to core the oil
reservoirs encountered in Beta-1. The well came in 10 m updip to prognosis (~5m
higher than Beta-1 instead of 5m deeper). Using the 40 Hz Ricker wavelet,
the synthetic seismogram ties well with the seismic (05PAL015, Figure 2.14 ).
Figure 2. 14 Line 05PAL015 : Beta 2/4 Seismic Well Tie
Beta-3 was drilled to test the sealing capacity of a NNE-SSW fault that
divides the structure. It intersected the reservoir levels some 5m deep to prognosis
and only encountered oil at the Z-450 level. Notwithstanding the sporadic poor
hole condition, a good tie was achieved with VSP and seismic line 05PAL064
(Figure 2.15).
22
Figure 2. 15 Line 05PAL064 : Beta-3 Seismic Well Tie
A tuning thickness calculation has been done for the dataset; for the
dominant frequency of 40Hz and a velocity of 2200m/s gives a wavelength of
56m and a tuning thickness ( / 4 ) o f 14m. This mean that the seismic only can
differentiate beds with minimum thickness of 14m..
2.3.2
Time Interpretation
Based on a review of the acoustic response at the wells and the 2005
seismic data, three major seismic markers were chosen for field-wide mapping.
These correspond to the R14 (Top Intra ABF), Z-550 (tight sand) and R1 (Base
ABF). These three seismic markers represent the most reliable markers close to
the major reservoir units (Z-380, Z-450 and Z-650, Figure 2.16) and being
regionally extensive in both the wells and within the seismic control. Reservoir
levels were not picked directly as a consistent seismic character could not be
established within the existing well control.
23
Figure 2. 16 Beta Well Correlation (with synthetic track)

The shallowest marker picked over the field is the Top Air Benakat Formation. It
is mapped as an angular unconformity within the first 100 ms of the data. The pick is
compromised by low fold at this depth.
Generally the three seismic markers were laterally continuous peaks. The seismic
in crestal area is of slightly lower frequency than the flanks and in some parts of the
survey the surface seismic is degraded by near surface statics issues. The Z-550 tight sand
24
reflection is higher amplitude and is laterally more continuous than the other events and
formed the basis for the structural interpretation. R14 (top Intra ABF) and R1 (base ABF)
have continuous peak seismic reflectance, but are not as clear as the Z-550 tight sand.
These events are less consistent in their seismic response but a pick has been established
for all. Areas of lowest confidence include the area to the north of the Beta-1/4 wells (line
05PAL-015) and the crestal area of line 05PAL-013. Due to the steep dips and
commensurate poor migration of the 2D data, significant miss-ties are present in the
dataset. A pragmatic approach to these has been adopted: absolute values of dip lines are
always honored above the values on the strike data where a discrepancy occurs
2.3.3
Atribute Analysis
Although as mention above the calculated tuning thickness is 14m which
is some of the reservoir are below the tuning thickness, the seismic attribute still
can be generate to control the lateral distribution - Appendix 1 static modeling
(properties distribution).
The Gamma ray log was chosen due to the log can show the sand package
which is characterized by negative amplitude. Further is the seismic attributes i.e,
amplitude, frequency and phase were crossplotting with GR log and founded the
dominant frequency is the most appropriate attribute to guide the spread laterally..
Figure 2. 17 Cross Correlation Well Log (GR) and Seismic Attribute (Dominant
Frequency)
25
Figure 2. 18 Dominant Frequency Seismic Attribute Map
2.3.4
Time Structure Interpretation

The Beta structure is a NNW-SSE trending compressional anticline. The
anticline forms in the hanging wall of a large reverse fault to the SW. This fault
trend continues to the SE to the Kali Berau Field. The reverse fault is limited to
the west by a NE-SW fault. A number of NNE-SSW trending extensional faults
splay off the reverse fault in what appears to be a complex response to dextral
transgression and clockwise rotation, associated with the NW-SE thrust fault. The
extensional faults divide the anticline into a series of rotated blocks, each of which
sets up a small, fault dependent closure (Figure 2.19). The Beta Field occupies an
elevated graben within this trend and a west-hading fault separates the main part
of the field from Beta-3 (although pressure data suggests that communication
between the fault blocks occurs). There is significant uncertainty as to whether
some or all of the faults on the structure leak, but free water levels established
during the appraisal program confirm that the structural closure is substantially
larger than the closure based on the hydrocarbons encountered.
These extensional faults are debated to be seal or leak, from the
juxtoposition it is possible to be seal. Beta-3 compartment most likely to be a
26
leaking fault due to known from pressure data the FWL sits at similar depth. West
Berau compartment most likely to be a sealing fault die to WB-1 well is lies under
Beta FWL and still producing.
Figure 2. 19 Fault Pattern around the Beta Field
The time interpretation generated structure framework that consist of time

structure maps of three seismic markers and fault plane that used for further stage.
One example of time structure maps are seen below (Figure ).
Figure 2. 20 Top Intra ABF (R14) Time Structure Map
27
2.3.5
Depth Conversion
Two (2) methods were hired to convert the time to depth structure map.
First is the simplest method use a trend line (equation) from wells that penetrated.
The second method is trending line calculated use Krigging External Drift Model
(KED). Regarding all Beta wells were located at the crestal area, both techniques
gives similar depth conversion at the crestal area, the differences appears on the
uncontrolled area - flank area. The first method; use average velocity data from
the wells (Figure ) to generate the trend for the depth conversion away from the
wells.
Figure 2. 21 Time vs. Depth for the Beta wells
The second method is calculating the regression line using Krigging

External Drift (KED) methods.
28
Figure 2. 22 KED Interpolation : Z-550 Time vs Depth
The main differences of two depth structure output from both techniques
are located at flank area, which is no well control. At the crestal area where the oil
accumulation the depth resulted similar. Hence the final depth structure maps
were calculating the average depth from both methods
29
Figure 2. 23 Z-650 Depth Differences between Equation and KED methods
2.3.6
Beta Field Depth Structures

Understanding the layering of Beta structure and thin reservoir, to create
structure maps at reservoir level the depth converted seismic markers and fault
information (polygons) were imported into modelling package and a 3D structural
model was generated. By calibrating the seismic markers with the well data a set
of stratigraphic surfaces including all the main reservoir levels could be generated.
It is important to note that the resulting maps are only valid if the stratigraphy is
conformable. Final depth structure map, as shown Figure to Figure below
respectively.
Figure 2. 24 Z-380 Depth Structure Map with latest FWL
30
Figure 2. 25 R-10 Depth Structure Map with latest FWL
Figure 2. 26 Z-450 Depth Structure Map with latest FWL
31
Figure 2. 27 Z550 Depth Structure Map with latest FWL
Figure 2. 28 Z650 Depth Structure Map with latest FWL
32
2.4. Reservoir Properties Distribution

Geological input data to provide the reservoir characteristic needs some
properties analysis. Vertical and lateral reservoir property modeling is obtained
from petrophysics analysis and integrated with depth structure (Figure 2.29-2.33).
1.1.1.
2.4.1
Net Sand Map
Figure 2. 29 Net Sand Map Beta Field
33
2.4.2
Net Pay Map
Figure 2. 30 Net Pay Map Beta Field
2.4.3
Porosity Map
Figure 2. 31 Porosity Map Beta Field
34
2.4.4
Saturation Water Map
Figure 2. 32 Saturation Water Map Beta Field
2.4.5
Permeability Map
Figure 2. 33 Permability Map Beta Field
35
2.5. Well Drilling Result

2.5.1 Beta-1
Beta-1 was spudded on 4 March 2007 and reached a TD of 2300 m KB
(2286m TVDSS) on 24 March 2007 in PreTertiary Fractured Basement. The
well discovered hydrocarbons with CO2 rich dry gas in a thin 6 meter basal sand
overlying basement and shallow light oil of the Air Benakat Formation (ABF)
clastics. The ABF oil was identified as the primary reservoir in a forward sense.
The sedimentological interpretation of the ABF section and Gumai section of
Beta-1 represents two main progradational sequences with flooding event
(parasequence set boundary) at 650m. The sands are arranged as a series of
stacked parasequences within the progradational sequences.
Individual
parasequences range in thickness from 25 m to 75 m. Each sequence comprises

offshore muds prograding to low energy sandy shoreface from 1281m 650m and
650 468 m. The progradation corresponds to a facies change from highly
laminated offshore muds to the shaly and bioturbated sand facies. Sands are
interpreted as mixed lower and middle shoreface, while heterolithics associated
with laminated sand facies are interpreted as tidal sand flats.
Palaeocurrent analysis indicates that within the shoreface deposits of the
ABF in both the wells the azimuth of sand beds and cross-bedding of the
shoreface deposits gives an overall south easterly to southerly direction indicating
the palaeoshoreline to be NE-SW varying to ENE-WSW. ABF sands porosity
varies from 16 to 23 %. Water saturation is 60 to 75% for oil reservoir..
2.5.2
Beta-2
Beta-2 was drilled as a downflank appraisal well to establish the oil-water
contacts of the three oil bearing sands production tested in the Beta-1 well. Beta-2
intersected the ABF sandstone reservoirs approximately 23m downdip of the
original Beta-1 discovery well. The top of Z-380 and Z-450 were approximately
22m downdip from Beta-1 while the Z-650 was approximately 29m downdip
showing the southern flank is steeper than predicted. An excellent correlation
exists between the Beta-1 and the Beta-2 appraisal well and, as such, reservoir
continuity has been established. Sand porosities range from 15 to 23 %.
36
2.5.3
Beta-4
Beta-4 dibor dengan posisi NW 175 m dari sumur Beta-1. Tujuan utama
adalah untuk mendapatkan seluruh core (inti) dan FMI untuk kalibrasi dan
mengetahui zona potensial produksi. Sumur ini lebih dangkal 10 m dari prognosis
(~ 5m lebih tinggi dari Beta-1 bukan 5m lebih dalam). Sebuah program coring
dalam 3 selang reservoir utama dilakukan yaitupada kedalaman:
372,5-384,5MMDdengan recovery 58%
384,5-392MMD tidak ada recoveryhidrokarbon.
436,5-466MMDnol recovery
628,5-637,5MMD tidak ada recoveryhidrokarbon.
643,3-649MMDdengan recovery 97%
The main reason for this poor recovery is due to failed mechanical core
catcher. Also, the formation is too soft and washed out from the core chamber
while drilling. There are no other significant obastacles while drilling the Beta
wells. All wells were shallow, and no overpressure or significance temperature
gradient change was observed. The only problem occured while drilling the wells
is the presence of Gumbo as the intra shale facies of Air Benakat. That swelling
clay slower the drilling operation of Beta appraisal wells, hence it is suggest to
improve the mud system use for future drilling will help resolve the problem.
2.5.4
Beta-3
Beta-3 was drilled to test the sealing capacity of a NNE-SSW fault that
divides the structure. The result of the drilling show that the compartment between
Beta-3 area (Central) and Beta-1,2,4 (West) has a pressure connection for the
reservoirs. It is tested using the MDT and resulted that the water gradient line up
in the same trend between this 2 compartment.
The Beta-3 well intersected the sandstone reservoirs approximately 20m
downdip of the original Beta-1 discovery well. The top of Z-380 and Z-450 were
approximately 14-18m downdip from Beta-1 while the Z-650 was approximately
33m downdip. Of the three major reservoirs, only Z-450 resides above the FWL at
depth 445m TVDSS.
37
An excellent correlation exists between the Beta-1 discovery well and the
Beta-2, 4 and 3 appraisal wells as such that reservoir continuity has been
established. Sand porosities range from 17 to 23 %.
2.6. Core Description & Analysis
2.6.1
Side Wall Core

The sidewall cores have been taken at Beta-1, Beta-2, Beta-3 and Beta-4.
In Beta-1, total of 30 sidewall cores (SWCs) were attempted in the 8 hole over
the interval from 1305.5 m 2135 m. Of the 30 SWCs shot, 27 were recovered
with three lost bullets.
The samples were taken for reservoir information,
biostratigraphic control and source rock determination. The age of rocks ranged
from Late Oligocene Talangakar to Early Miocene Gumai Formations.
Most
of the samples were composed of shale and siltstone, with a few described as
sandstone. Based on routine core analysis, porosities ranged from less than 5% in
shales to about 23% in sandstone. Most of the SWCs had no show indications.
There were poor shows over the interval 1305.5m 1528.5 m and one sample at
1958.5 m.
In Beta-2, the MSCT tool was run only in the 8 hole. There were 21
cores attempted. Unfortunately, some of the corepoints selected occurred in
washed out areas. Of the 21 cores that were drilled, only 6 were recovered. Most
of these being partial recoveries with only 1 fully recovered core. It is believed
that the formation had become too soft and physically uncoreable in the invaded
zone. Consequently no further cores in the 8 hole section were attempted. For
the next operation it is recommended that a different technique of sidewall coring
be considered to improve recovery in the ABF. The percussion SWC might be
more suitable in this thinly laminated shaly-sand.
In Beta-3, the MSCT tool run was very disappointing, in which once again
the recovery from the tool was very poor as had been the case on every well on
the Beta campaign thus far. This was despite efforts to change the mud system to a
more saline fluid to help reduce water invasion into the formation. Nevertheless
the cores still drilled too quickly indicating soft formation which meant the
formation had been affected by the fluid invasion despite higher salinities. In total
only two partial cores were recovered from the run which those samples are not
the formation rocks.
38
In Beta-4, the MSCT tool was run only in the 8-1/2 hole. The MSCT
program called for two runs whereby the first run would attempt to core the firm
formations with the second run attempting what were believed to be softer
formation in the Z450 sands. Unfortunately the recovery on surface was very poor
with only one fully recovered core and 9 partial fragmented cores obtained. The
second MSCT run was cancelled.
2.6.2
Conventional Core
The core description was conducted by PT Corelab Indonesia and the
result was incorporated with the other analysis to support the overall interpretation
of facies, sedimentology and depositional environment.
637.0 649.3 meters
Description: This interval is composed of very fine- to fine-grained
sandstone that is mainly bioturbated and burrowed.
include
Identified burrows
Ophiomorpha, and possibly Rosselia, Teichichnus, and Zoophycus.
Planar beds and ripples are locally preserved. Contacts between depositional units
are scoured. The sandstone is tightly cemented with calcite between 644.7 and
645.33 meters. Bioclasts are mainly pelecypods.
Average porosity is 24.59% (range = 8.03 29.83%) and average air
Klinkenberg permeability (Kinf) is 12.2 md (range = 0.003 104 md; median =
5.65 md). Average grain density is 2.66 g/cc (range 2.63 2.69 g/cc).
628.5 637.0 meters

Description: Core recovery was very poor in this interval. Recovered
material is clay- rich, unlithified, and contains no visible sedimentary structures or
burrows. It does not resemble any other portion of the described cores.
376.52 378.98 meters
Description: This interval is composed mainly of thinly interlaminated
shale and very fine- to fine-grained sandstone.
Medium-grained sandstone
between 377.2 and 377.35 meters is less common.
Gradational to scoured
contacts separate depositional units. Interlaminated sandstone and shale are

rippled, with clay drapes, to heavily bioturbated.
39
Bioclasts include pelecypods and benthic foraminifera.
The medium-
grained sandstone bed is oil-stained, bioturbated to cross bedded, with scattered

bioclasts and shale rip-up clasts.
Klinkenberg permeability (Kinf) is 395 md (range = 6.33 4956 md; median =
45.2 md). Average grain density is 2.64 g/cc (range 2.59 2.69 g/cc).
375.65 376.52 meters
Description: This thin interval is composed medium-grained sandstone
that is oil stained. Unoriented shale rip-up clasts indicate that the sandstone
has been bioturbated. Skeletal fragments include pelecypods. The sandstone is
weakly to moderately lithified, calcareous, and has a scoured basal contact with
underlying sediments.
Klinkenberg permeability (Kinf) is 561 md (range = 0.548 1351 md; median =
634 md). Average grain density is 2.68 g/cc (range 2.65 2.70 g/cc).
372.5 375.65 meters

Description: This interval is comprised of argillaceous sandstone that is
bioturbated to rippled, with millimeter-thick sandy laminae and clay drapes.
These sediments are relatively uniform in this interval.
Klinkenberg permeability (Kinf) is 0.143 md (range = 0.005 0.572 md; median
= 0.140 md). Average grain density is 2.62 g/cc (range 2.61 2.64 g/cc).
40
CHAPTER III
RESERVOIR DESCRIPTION
3.1 Introduction
In 2015, Trisakti One Group has drilled two (2) exploration wells and three (3)
appraisal wells. From these wells, a considerable amount of sub-surface data has been
collected, chapter 2 describes how some of this information are used in the local and
regional geological interpretation.
In this Chapter of the POD, the reservoir properties of the Lower Talang Akar
(LTAF) and Air Benakat (ABF)
sand are discussed, in particular porosity and
permeability. The nature of the reservoir fluids is also presented.

LTAF is typically characterized by amalgamated, varied degree of bioturbation
Sandstone, which is deposited in transgressive sequence tide dominated delta or estuarine
environment in Early to Middle Miocene.
The available reservoir data is used to estimate the oil initially in place (OIIP) and
the oil reserves for Beta fields.
3.2 Initial Condition
Beta reservoir stretches along 4 km with direction of Northwest and Southeast
and width of 1.5 km. Top of Beta reservoir is penetrated on 364.31m SS. The reservoir
consists of 5 zones which called Z380, R10, Z450, Z550 and Z650. Among of 5 zones
only Z380, Z450 and Z650 which had been tested through MDT and production test.
Following figure shows Beta reservoir viewed from above and also showing reservoir
slices.
Figure 3. 1- Reservoir View
analysis which taken during reservoir testing. At initial reservoir condition, only
one phase fluid (oil) which occurs in reservoir. This oil has low viscosity and its bubble
point pressure which close to initial reservoir pressure. Table 3-1 is summarizing initial
condition for Z380, Z450 and Z650.
Table 3. 1 Summary of initial condition
3.3 Petrophysics
Petrophysical analysis was conducted based on the open hole log results of the
Beta field appropriated to data availability in each wells.
Petrophysical analysis workflow in Beta field is seen in Figure 3.1. Open hole log
data that used in analysis are Gamma Ray, spontaneus potential, resistivity, neutron, and
density. Then, all of the data are proccessed to establishs saturation water (sw)
43
Figure 3. 2 Petrophysical Analysis Workflow
3.4.1 Data Availability

Data availability for petrophysical analysis is shown in Table 3.3. LAS data is
available for all wells, except Neutron log in Beta-02 well. Sedimentological and facies
analysis, and side wall core conducted in all of Beta well, only Beta-4 performed
conventional core. The mudlog data is gathered in each well, and Production test data is
only from Beta-01 and Beta-04 wells.
Table 3. 2Data Availability in Beta Field
Well
Beta
1
Beta
2
Beta
3
Beta
4
Wire
CA D
LI
T
Servi
ce
SP
G
R
LL
S
LL
D
MS
FL
SCHL
SCHL
SCHL
SCHL
44
NP
HI
DRH RHOB/RH
O
OZ
3.4.2
Petrophysical Analysis of Beta Field

The saturation water generated based on modified Simandoux method
with a,m, and n factor obtained from the core analysis.
Based on mentioned above, the petrophysic analysis is obtained result for each
wells in Beta field for Sihapas formation as table below
Table 3. 3 Summary of Petrophysical Analysis
Well
Beta01
Beta02
Beta03
Beta04
Zone
Top
Z380
(ft.MD)
368
Gross
Sand
(ft)
16.4
R10
391
22.96
Z450
444
32.8
Z550
526
26.24
Z380
391
R10
Net to
Gross
Porosi
ty
Vsha
le
56%
0.17
44%
0.15
55%
0.17
52%
0.16
14.3
25.58
4
20.8
47%
0.17
415
22.1
21.5 4
45%
0.15
Z450
453
32.8
52. 2
43%
0.16
Z550
550
24,2
26.14
51%
0.16
Z380
366
16.4
22.13
49%
0.17
R10
410
21
22.34
44%
0.15
Z450
446
32.8
51.34
46%
0.15
Z550
541
22.4
26.14
51%
0.16
Z380
364
16.4
19.32
50%
0.17
R10
387
23.1
23.4
48%
0.15
Z450
441
32.8
50.34
49%
0.17
Z550
523
24.2
25.64
50%
0.19
0.24
4
0.12
1
0.32
1
0.06
9
0.24
4
0.12
1
0.32
1
0.06
9
0.24
4
0.12
1
0.32
1
0.06
9
0.24
4
0.12
1
0.32
1
0.06
9
45
Net
Sand
(ft)
18.36
8
28.86
4
54.12
Sw
0.6
0.6
0.69
0.7
0.6
0.6
0.69
0.7
0.6
0.6
0.69
0.7
0.6
0.6
0.69
0.7
3.4.3
Log vs. Core Porosity & Permeability

A good match was achieved with log data and core data at NOBP. Clay volume
stimation using the gamma ray together with appropriate GR minimum and GR
maximum inputs was used to tune log derived porosity to core porosity in Beta-4. In the
other wells GRmin and GRmax were normalised to ensure good quality porosity
estimation over zones with no core. An attempt was made to relate MDT mobility with
core permeability for application to the un-cored formations.
Figure 3. 3 Beta-4 Log vs. Core porosity and Permeability matching
3.4.4 Water Saturation

A number of plugs from the Beta-4 Core were subjected to formation factor and
resistivity index analysis. Water saturation is derived from Indonesian equation (m = 2, n
= 1.8 for Z380 and Z450, n = 2.14 for Z650). These assumptions has been cross-checked
with SCAL results (Appendix-2).
3.4.5
Log Interpretation Plots

Log interpretation plots for each well complete with core data (for Beta-4),
formation tops and fluid contacts are displayed below.
46
Figure 3. 4 Beta-1 Log Interpretation of Z380 sands (scale : 1/200)
Figure 3. 5 Beta-1 Log Interpretation of Z450 sands (scale : 1/200)
47
Figure 3. 6. Beta-1 Log Interpretation of Z650 sands (scale : 1/200)
48
49
50
51
3.4 Reservoir Characterization

Reservoir characterizations were made in an attempt to understanding the behaviour
of Beta Reservoir with available reservoir data.
3.4.1
Reservoir Rock Type

Three Major type of reservoir rock were acknowledged based on the range of
permeability value. They were:
1. Rocktype 0: Shale
52
2. Rocktype 1: Sand <= 395 mD

3. Rocktype 2: Sand > 395 mD
3.4.2
Permeability Transform
Permeability transform is formulated from core porosity and permeability (after
correction for NOB and Klinkenberg effects) and Vsh (from log analysis). A flow zone
index is formulated and used to predict permeability values as shown below.
Note: FZI = Por^2.5*(1-Vsh)^3/(1-Por)^1.5
Figure 3. 16. Permeability Transform
3.4.3
Irreducible Water Saturation (SWC) Transforms

The Swc transform was calculated from routine and special core analysis data of
Beta-03. This transform will be used for the J-function and relative permeability analysis.
53
Figure 3. 17Irreducible Water Saturation (Swc) Transform
3.4.4
Relative Permeability
Since there was no SCAL data in Beta well the relative permeability data was
derive from Corey Function with Swc : 0.2, krw : 0.7, kro : 0.7, and exponent : 4. Figure
3.3 show relative permeability curve for Air Benakat Formation In Beta Field.
Figure 3. 18 Relative permeability
3.5
Reservoir Fluid Properties

Beta Lower Sihapas formation is a two phase fluid reservoir consists of oil and
water.
54
3.5.1
Liquid Hydrocarbons
Compositional analysis was carried out on pressurised samples taken during MDT
in two of wells. The analysis of the samples was generally carried out in Jakarta, at the
laboratories of LEMIGAS and core lab. The results of Beta-1, and Beta-3 laboratory
analyses are given in Table 3.4 and Table 3.5 in Beta-1 and Beta-3 the hydrocarbon
component in the oil are dominated by C7+.
Crude assay analysis from oil sample in Table 3.4
Table 3. 4Summary of Beta -1 oil composition
COMPONENT
Methane
Ethane
Propane
i-butane
n-butane
i-pentane
n-pentane
Hexanes
Heptanes
Octanes
Nonanes
Decanes
Undecanes
Dodecanes
Tridecanes
Tetradecanes
Pentadecanes
Hexadecanes
Heptadecanes
Octadecanes
Nonadecanes
Eicosanes
Heneicosanes
Docosanes
Tricosanes
Tetracosanes
Pentacosanes
Hexacosanes
Heptacosanes
Octacosanes
Nonacosanes
Triancontanes
CH4
C2H6
C3H8
C4H10
C4H10
C5H12
C5H12
C6H14
C7H16
C8H18
C9H20
C10H22
C11H24
C12H26
C13H28
C14H30
C15H32
C16H34
C17H36
C18H38
C19H40
C20H42
C21H44
C22H46
C23H48
C24H50
C25H52
C26H54
C27H56
C28H58
C29H60
C30H62
55
Mol%
0.0000
0.1576
0.2686
0.1630
0.3319
0.3565
0.2814
0.8639
2.7088
4.8411
7.3249
9.3005
8.9897
7.0710
10.5590
6.8014
7.6299
3.9532
4.7091
9.4375
3.0462
2.0195
1.7881
1.6474
1.4960
1.1942
0.9202
0.6746
0.5289
0.3575
0.2922
0.0824
Wt%
0.0000
0.0241
0.0602
0.0481
0.0980
0.1306
0.1031
0.3782
1.3786
2.8087
4.7716
6.7209
7.1368
6.1175
9.8871
6.8532
8.2318
4.5465
5.7514
12.1990
4.1546
2.8981
2.6935
2.5990
2.4666
2.0541
1.6484
1.2565
1.0227
0.7168
0.6068
0.1770
Heneitriacontanes
Dotriacontanes
Tritriacontanes
Tetratriacontanes
Pentatriacontanes
Hexatriacontanes
Heptatriacontanes
Octatriacontanes
Nonatriacontanes
Tetracontanes +
C31H64
C32H66
C33H68
C34H70
C35H72
C36H74
C37H76
C38H78
C39H80
C40H82 +
Total
0.1118
0.0421
0.0499
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
100.0000
0.2475
0.0963
0.1167
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
0.0000
100.0000
Table 3. 5Summary of Beta-3 oil composition

Component
Mole Percent
Hydrogen Sulfide
H2S
0.0000
0.0000
Carbon Dioxide
CO2
0.9089
0.2477
Nitrogen
N2
0.5610
0.0973
Methane
C1
2.3663
0.2350
Ethane
C2
0.1236
0.0230
Propane
C3
1.1713
0.3198
Iso-Butane
i-C4
0.5938
0.2137
n-Butane
n-C4
1.2775
0.4597
Iso-Pentane
i-C5
6.5002
2.9037
n-Pentane
n-C5
4.4882
2.0049
Hexane
C6
12.9061
6.8860
Heptanes plus
C7
69.1031
86.6092
100.0000
100.0000
Total
3.5.2
Weight Percent
PVT Analysis
Reservoir fluid samples from MDT and production testing were sent to laboratory
for fluid analysis. In total there were 8 sets of fluid samples from wells Beta-1 and Beta4. Some of the samples were surface recombination sets (i.e.fluid samples taken from the
production separator during production testing) and the others were downhole samples
56
(i.e fluid samples obtained by pump-out downhole using the MDT tool in wells Beta-1
and Beta-4).
The fluid samples obtained from Beta-1 (surface recombination and downhole) in
2007 were sent to LEMIGAS laboratory for analysis. Samples obtained from Beta-4 in
2009 (downhole samples) were sent to CoreLab for analysis. In general, all reservoir
fluid samples indicate that the Beta structure contains a low viscosity, light oil with
bubble point pressure close to initial reservoir pressure. The following tables summarize
and compare the results of the various fluid analyses.
Table 3. 6Summary of Downhole PVT Analysis
Table 3. 7Summary of surface
57
During long term production test, the separator gas rates were too low for
accurate gas measurement meaning that the calculated gas oil ratios (GOR) used for
recombination were not considered reliable. For this reason it was decided that results
from surface recombination samples were not suitable for PVT modeling. In order to
select which downhole fluid samples used for PVT modeling, the lowest drawdown
pressure during sample acquisition is the key. Sample acquisition must be carried out
when the reservoir fluid is in one phase. By comparing drawdown pressure between well
Beta-1 and well Beta-4, it is apparent that during sample acquisition in Beta-1, the
reservoir fluids were in two phase. Meanwhile in well Beta-4, when fluid samples were
acquired, reservoir fluid was in one phase. Based on this consideration fluid samples
from well Beta-4 are selected for PVT modeling in Beta structure.
Since only 2 fluid samples are available from well Beta-4, fluid properties for
modeling in other zones such as Z450 and Z550 are derived based on interpolation.
Molecular weight and specific gravity of Heptane plus from Z380 and Z650 were plotted
over depth to get molecular weight, specific gravity and its characteristic for Z450 and
Z550. Then by using same correlation which applied in Z380 and Z650, fluid properties
in Z450 and Z550 can be derived.
a. Bubble Point Pressure
Based on the PVT analysis from Beta-03, the bubble point pressure are 506
psig.
b. Formation Volume Factor (Bo)
Based from differential vaporization analysis, the value of Formation volume
factor as measured is shown in Table 3.10
Table 3. 8Bo
58
Figure 3. 19 Plot of Bo vs Pressure
c. Oil Viscosity
Oil viscosity based on Beta-03 PVT analysis is as follow:
Table 3. 9 o for Rock Type 1

59
Figure 3. 20 Plot of o vs Pressure
d. Solution Gas (Rs)

Value of RS was also taken from Beta-03 PVT analysis as follow:
Table 3. 10 Rs
60
Figure 3. 21 Plot of Rs vs Pressure
3.5.3
Formation Water Resistivity

To have better define the likely water salinities, apparent formation water
salinities have been calculated. These calculations are made by first calculating the
apparent formation water resistivity using the Archie equation (i.e. Rwa = Rt*( m),
then using the borehole temperature at each point to convert the resistivity to the salinity
61
of the water that would have that resistivity at that temperature. The Water samples were
acquired from Beta-3 and the comparison as follow.
Table 3. 11 Beta Water Samples
The different sources of water salinity are reasonably consistent and current log
evaluation is based on an average salinity of 22 Kppm (NaCl equivalent) meaning
average resistivity of 0.33 ohmm at 60F.
3.6 Production Test Data and Analysis

3.6.1
Well Deliverability
IPR generated using vogel method. The IPR plot for Beta-1 and Beta-4 are
shown in figure 3.21 and Figure 3.22.
Based on above analysis, the well test analysis result are summarised as table 3.18 below.
Table 3. 12 Summary of Well performance data
Permeability shows that these wells have good formation quality.
62
Figure 3. 22. Beta-1 (Z380) IPR Curves

63
The long term production test result in Z650 is considered as not representatives
since the formation suffer very high damage. In order to have representative data in
Z650, a production test was carried out in well Beta-4 during 3rd quarter 2010. Objective
of the test was to get good quality of data in Z650 which can be used as guidance in
developing Z650. The following table summarizes test result in well Beta-4.
Table 3. 13. Summary of Production Test in Beta-4
Production Test
Based on theproduction test of Beta-4, the IPR curve can be generated and the average
Qmax can be achievedat rate of 108 Bbls/day.
To be matched with
Beta-4 (Z650)
Production Test
82.8 BOPD, 0% WC
3.6.2
Reservoir Testing
Well Beta-1 (exploration well) was drilled to a total depth of 2300 meter and
penetrated two zones of interest. The first zone of interest is the Lower Talang Akar
Formation (TAF) which containing dry gas with high CO2 (36%). The second zone of
64
interest is the Air Benakat Formation (ABF) which is contains oil. The Air Benakat
Formation (ABF) comprises 3 main oil bearing zone referred to as Z-380, Z-450 and Z650. Production tests were conducted on the formations (TAF and ABF) to evaluate
reservoir properties and productivity. An openhole DST was conducted on the lower
Talang Akar Formation and a long term production test was conducted on the Air
Benakat Formation.
The following schematic of well Beta-1 shows location of the tested zones.
Figure 3. 26. Well SchematicofBeta-1
3.6.3.1 Lower Talang Akar Formation (LTAF)

A barefoot DST was conducted to test a 6 meter gross interval (2147 to 2153 m
KB) of Lower Talang Akar formation lying on top basement, together with the
underlying basement below 2147 meters. A multi-rate test was conducted to establish the
inflow performance relationship (IPR) and measure reservoir parameters. The maximum
flow rate achieved was 13.3 MMscf/d through a 1choke at a flowing tubing head
pressure (FTHP) of 1110 psig via 2-7/8tubing. From these results the absolute openhole
flow potential (AOF) of the test interval is estimated to be 37 MMscf/d.
65
The produced gas has zero condensate and is sour, with around 36% CO2 and
some H2S (33 ppm). Some water was also produced at an average rate 137 b/d. About
half of this can be explained as water of hydration (i.e. a vapor phase component of the
gas at reservoir conditions), which means that another 70 b/d was free water. This
conclusion is supported by a production logging survey over the test interval, which
detected a small volume of water flowing from the basement below 2153 meters KB. The
following is a summary of the test results:
Flowing wellhead pressure : 1110 psig
Maximum gas rate : 13.3 MMscfd
Gas gravity : 0.94
CO2 content : 36.0%
Water rate : 137 bwpd
Reservoir pressure and temperature : 3850 psia and 340o F at 2150 mKB
Estimated Absolute Open Flow : 37.0 MMscfd
Although the test is showing a significant gas rate, the Talang Akar Formation is
not become primary means in monetizing Centaury PSC block. The reason behind this
decision is because there is a significant amount of CO2 which is causing high
investment in the processing facilities. Since development of Talang Akar Formation
requires high investment, it will be better that TAF development project conducted after
the Centaury block is commercialized through development of Air Benakat Formation.
3.6.3.2 Air Benakat Formation (ABF)
Extensive testing using the Modular Dynamic Tester (MDT) tool was carried out
to determine formation pressures and identify hydrocarbon fluid type in the ABF
reservoirs. The data acquired for Beta-1 included cased-hole, dual packer testing as well
as open-hole testing. Meanwhile the data acquired for Beta-2, 3 and 4 was for open-hole
testing but many of the tests were carried out using dual-packer. The summarize table of
MDT results from each of the wells were showed in Appendix 4. A long term production
test was conducted in well Beta-1 during period of 21 September through 5 November
2008 to measure reservoir continuity and deliverability. Each oil zone in Air Benakat
Formation was tested separately starting from the lower-most Z-650 and moving upwards
to the Z-380. Table 3-8 shows long term production test result summary.
66
Table 3. 14. Summary of Long Term Production Test
The recorded pressure response and production rate over time during long term
production test for each zone and its pressure transient analysis are presented in
Appendix 5.
The above table is showing that each of the Beta-1 test intervals had high
formation damage as indicated by the calculated skin values. The high formation damage
was suspected to have been caused during well drilling and in the case of the Z650 zone,
also by killing operations during well completion.
After clean-up zones Z-380 and Z-650 produced clean dry oil with no sign of
sustained water production. However, zone Z-450 produced a sustained level of
formation water with an average water cut of around 8%. Samples of the water were
collected for laboratory analysis and later proved to be formation water. No production
logging was carried out during the testing program so the exact source of the water is not
known. However, the Z-450 perforated test interval was 29 meters and subsequent
analysis and interpretation of all available formation pressure data has shown that part of
the perforated test interval was below what is now believed to be the FWL of the Z-450
reservoir.
The long term production test result in Z650 is considered as not representatives
since the formation suffer very high damage. In order to have representative data in
Z650, a production test was carried out in well Beta-4 during 3rd quarter 2010. Objective
of the test was to get good quality of data in Z650 which can be used as guidance in
developing Z650. The following table summarizes test result in well Beta- 4.
Table 3. 15. Summary of Production Test in Beta-4
67
Detail of production test including its pressure transient analysis in well Beta-4 is
presented in Appendix 6.
3.6.3
Reservoir Pressure
Pressure test was conducted using MDT tool, the summary of pressures data are
as table 3.19 below:

Table 3. 16 Summary Beta Reservoir Pressure data
3.6.4
Reservoir Temperature
Temperature profile of Beta Fields were derived from the MDTs, wireline data
and LTPT which LTPT is the most reliable data. Summary of temperature profile is
described in the Figure below.
Figure 3. 27. Formation Temperature
68
The Indonesian water saturation equation was used in order to solve for different
fluid saturations. The formation water salinity was zoned for the petrophysical analysis.
Based on the SP (Spontaneous Potential) reading in well Beta-2, it was found that the
formation water salinity should be very fresh on the top logging section about 4,000ppm
NaCl, over the middle section a bit more saline about 7,000ppm NaCl and on the bottom
logging interval it was based on the water sample (22,000ppm NaCl).
The Indonesian water saturation factors were given constant values. Based on
SCAL information from well Beta-4 it was calculated to use, the "a"=1, "n"=2.12 and the
"m" value to be zoned, on top section to be "m"=2.0, middle section "m"=1.83 and the
bottom section "m"=2.14.
Effective porosity is computed from the density response after clay and
hydrocarbon corrections are applied. The gamma ray was used to estimate Vclay and the
neutron to estimate hydrocarbon density. Effective porosity was calculated using the
formula:
PHIE = (RHOB (Vclay * (RHOBclay - RHOMA)) - RHOMA) /

(RHOF -RHOMA)
Total porosity was calculated using the same formula with the exception that dry
clay density was substituted for wet clay density (RHOBclay). The dry clay density of
2.70g/cc was used. Shallow and deep resistivity curves were transformed to Rt and the
micro resistivity curve to Rxo.
The logic followed was to create a core constrained log interpretation model at
Beta-4, and then apply this model to the remaining wells where core does not exist while
at the same time assuming the reservoirs in all wells have similar matrix and clay
properties to the cored interval.
Permeability is calculated from NMR log. Permeability from NMR methods is a
function of both porosity and pore size, which is a great improvement over traditional
permeability estimation methods based only on transform between porosity and
permeability. It should be noted that both producible porosity and permeability are
expected to increase with the pore throat diameter. The pore throat diameter ratio to pore
size is almost constant for most sandstone. However, it is necessary to have core
permeability for coefficients calibration for building a robust local permeability model, to
minimize the uncertainty on pore throat diameter to pore size ratio.
69
The NMR and brine permeability measurements on core samples have resulted in
several empirical correlations. The following permeability models are included in the
Geoframe MR Scanner processing software :
Schlumberger-Doll Permeability transform : KSDR = 4 * (T 2LM )2 * (TCMR)4
Timur-Coates Permeability transform : KTIM = 104 * (FFV / BFV )2 * (TCMR)4
The NMR Timur-Coates permeability was computed in all the Beta wells, and
compared with core permeability data available in the well Beta-4. The core permeability
data and the MR Scanner high resolution pass permeability are showing a good match
with the default parameters.
3.7 Drive Mechanism

Driving mechanism which occurred in Beta reservoir is predicted based on
information from long term production test in well Beta-1 and production test in well
Beta-4. The tests are indicating that no sustain water were produced while testing zone
Z380 and zone Z650. However, zone Z450 produced a sustained level of formation water
with an average water cut of 8%. No production logging was carried out during the
testing program so the exact source of the water is unknown. However, the Z-450
perforated test interval was 29 meters and subsequent analysis and interpretation of all
available formation pressure data has shown that part of the perforated test interval was
below what is believed to be the FWL of the Z-450 reservoir.
Based on the observation on long term production test in well Beta-1 and
production test in well Beta-4, it is believed that Beta reservoir is a depletion reservoir
with little support of edge water for Z380 and Z650 and bottom water for Z450.
3.8 Fluid Contact (OWC)

Hydrocarbon contact in Beta Field is determined based on intersection between
oil gradient with water gradient lines. In common practice, formation pressure data are
plotted versus depth and the fluid gradients (for gas, oil and water) are calculated from
plotted data. However since the Beta structure has thin reservoirs with short, independent
oil columns, it is not possible to accurately determine formation oil gradients directly
from the pressure plots.
70
To overcome this problem, oil gradients for Beta structure are derived from PVT
analysis on downhole reservoir fluid samples from Beta-4. Meanwhile, the water gradient
line is derived from Beta-2 MDT data, since Beta-2 penetrated the water leg. Meanwhile
the FWL for Z550 and R10 are determined based on lowest MDT point in well Beta-3
and result of petrophysic analysis respectively. The interpreted FWls for each of the main
oil reservoirs in the Beta structure are shown in the following Figure 3-17 to Figure 3-19
and summarized in Table 3-12.
Table 3. 17 Summary of Free Water Level
Figure 3. 28. Free Water Level Z-380
71
72
CHAPTER IV
RESERVES AND PRODUCTION FORECAST
Reservoir modelling and Simulation study is generated based geological study
and reservoir properties. The objective of this study is to create appropriate reservoir
model using Tank Model (M-BAL and GAP Software) which represent subsurface Beta
field to predict future performance.
4.1.1
Original Oil Inplace (OOIP)

OOIP estimates were made by integrating data from cores, wireline logs, 3-D
seismic interpretation, and stratigraphic models. Petrophysical cutoffs to be used for pay
zone criteria are Porosity 16%, V-shale 24% , So_original 24% and no permeability
cut off.
The original oil in place can be calculated using equation below:
OOIP = A * h * * (1 - Sw) / FVF
where A is the area, h is the average thickness of pay sand, is the porosity in the
pay sand, Sw is the water saturation in the pay sand, and FVF is the Formation Volume
Factor.
Since there is no well radius investigation data, radius investigation P1 Area and
P2 area were define based on PTK POD that is 250 m for P1, and 2P area is 2.5 times of
P1 radius. The area P1 and 2P each zone in Beta structure based on PTK POD are shown
in figure 4.1-4.9 below
73
Figure 4. 1 P1 Area Z-380
74
Figure 4. 4P1 Area Z-650
75
Figure 4. 5 2P Area Z-380
76
77
Original oil in place was calculated based on petro physical in chapter II and area
as PTK POD can be shown in table below:
Table 4. 1 OOIP
The OOIP was then used as an input for reservoir simulation of Beta Field.
4.2 Production Forecast

The objective of the reservoir simulation phase was to generate oil production
forecasts for a range of development scenarios.
Since there is no static model generated in this GGR study, tank modelling will be
used to generate production forecast. Figure 4.9 shows the schematic tank model which
integrate with wells and surface facility of Beta Field. Several input for tank model are
following below:
Reservoir Pressure and Temperature (taken from Chapter II Reservoir

Description)
PVT data (taken from Chapter II Reservoir Description)
Rock Properties (taken from Chapter II Reservoir Description)
Well performance parameter and production test (taken from Chapter II

Reservoir Description)
OOIP
78
Figure 4. 9. Integrated subsurface and surface model

There are three scenario generate for development Beta oil field. One of them will
be selected as to Beta Field development strategy.
The key parameters of the prediction runs were:
Run started in January 2017 in all cases;
Run limited to production constraints

Each case generated using constraints as follows:
Water Cut Maximum = 98%
Oil rate maximum = 1000 STB/D
Minimum Oil rate, 40 STB/D per well
ESP maximum frequency = 60 A
Separator working pressure 60 Psi
79
4.3 Artificial Lift Consideration

Based on the artificial lift selection table below, the suitable artificial lift for this crude oil
characteristic is Electrical Submersible Pump (ESP).
.
Figure 4. 10 Artificial Lift Selection

The need of artificial lift depends on the increasing of water cut, decreasing of
reservoir pressure and GOR. Figure 7.2 shows the simulation with constant GOR and
watercut, variable reservoir pressure (563 psi, 500 psi and 450 psi). Based on the
simulation result in Figure 7.2 using Pipesim, the minimum reservoir pressure before the
well cannot flow naturally is 500 psi. This is when we need to install artificial lift.
80
Figure 4. 11 Beta-1 (Z380) IPR Curves with Reservoir Pressure Sensitivity
Figure 4. 12. Typical ESP design for Beta wells
81
Figure 4. 13. Typical ESP performance design for Beta wells
Figure 4. 14. Typical ESP performance design for Beta wells

a.
Case 1
In this case the field will produce oil from five wells without wells stimulation
and forecasted until economic limitation which is 40 BOPD per well. The result of
production forecast case 1 is shown in Figure 4.19
82
Figure 4. 15 Productions Forecast Case 1
b. Case 2
In this case the field will produce oil from five wells with stimulation for skin
removal.
Stimulation Plan
Beta-1
The skin value from WellTest Analysis from Beta-1 are below.
Table 4. 2 Beta-1 Skin Value
N
o.
1
2
3
Zone
Skin
Z380
Z450
Z550
25.4
12.1
33.9
The positive skin factor indicated that there is damaged zone existed near the
wellbore. Other factor that could contribute to the damaged formation is the drilling
materials such as mud filtrate, cement slurry or clay particles that may have entered the
formation during drilling and completion. Skin could be reduced with stimulation
treatment. The stimulation treatment that commonly used in nearby fields, is acidizing.
83
After acidizing, the lowest possible skin value that could be achieved is 0 which resulted
in Q maximum as below.
Table 4. 3. Beta-1 Q maximum after stimulation
N
o.
1
2
3
Zone
Z380
Z450
Z550
Qmax
(BFPD)
960
242
360
Skin 0
Skin 25.4
Based on Long
Term Test
Figure 4. 16. Beta-1 (Z380) IPR Curve with variable skin
Skin 0
Skin 12.1
Based on Long
Term Test
84
Skin 0
Skin 33.9
Based on Long
Term Test
Skin 0
Beta-4
The skin value from Well Test Analysis from Beta-4 is 10.3. The positive skin
factor indicated that there is damaged zone existed near the wellbore. Other factor that
could contribute to the damaged formation is the drilling materials such as mud filtrate,
cement slurry or clay particles that may have entered the formation during drilling and
completion. Skin could be reduced with stimulation treatment. The stimulation treatment
that commonly used in nearby fields, is acidizing. After acidizing, the lowest possible
skin value that could be achieved is 0 which resulted in Q maximum of 243 STB. The
result is shown in Figure 3.5.
Skin 10.3
Based on
Production Test
Figure 4. 19. Beta-4 IPR Curve with variable skin

85
The result of production forecast case 2 is shown in Figure 4.11
c. Case 3
This case is similar with case 2 but there is additional one infill well to optimize
recovery from Z-450 reservoir.
The infill well (Beta-05) location can be seen in figure 4.12 below (blue circle)
86
Figure 4. 21 Production forecast result for case 3
87
The development scenario which gave the best economic outcome then became
the basis for the proposed POD development. Table 4.4 below shows the comparison of
the result for 3 cases above:
Table 4. 4 Comparison of the result for 3 cases
88
CHAPTER V
DRILLING & COMPLETION
5.1
Drilling
Beta field development will have 5 workover development wells and 1 infill drilling, which is
expected to deliver its first production at end of Q1, 2017. Those 5 workover well were drilled at Beta
field and West Berau field. To maintain oil production another infill well will be drilled in Beta field.
The development well will be drilled vertically to reach the intended reservoirs to produce the
interest target formation/zones. Similar with the appraisal wells, all development wells will be drilled
using KCL-Polymer as drilling fluid. The KCL-Polymer will used from 12-1/4 and 8-1/2 hole
section to final TD. The KCL-Polymer has been field proven during appraisal drilling to mitigate the
risk of reactive shale formation and to ensure hole stability while maintaining thin mud cakes.
Therefore the reservoir skin damage and the risk for pipe stuck can be minimized.
Well trajectories have been designed to minimize drilling hazard, optimizing drilling
performance and easy well production process. The well surface location will be located at the best
selected surface area to minimize shallow hazard risk. Loss circulation hazard is not anticipated in the
area based on previous 3 exploratory wells
5.2
Drilling Program
1. Move to drill site location
2. Drill and Log 17-1/2 directional hole to 30m MD
3. Run and cement 13-3/8 casing
4. Install unitized 13-5/8 x 9-5/8 wellhead
5. Drill and Log 12-1/4 hole with to 300 m MD
6. Run and cement 9-5/8 casing
7. Drill and Log 8-1/2 hole with to 700 m MD
8. Run and cement 7 liner
9. Run 2-7/8
10. R/D and Move
89
5.3
Depth vs Day
Figure 5. 1 Drilling Depth Versus Day
5.4
Drilling Fluid
Similar to the appraisal wells, all development wells will be drilled using KCL-POLYMER as
drilling fluid. The KCL-POLYMER will used from 12-1/4 and 8-1/2 hole section to final TD. The
KCL-POLYMER has been field proven during appraisal drilling to mitigate the risk of reactive shale
formation and to ensure hole stability while maintaining thin mud cakes. Therefore the reservoir skin
damage and the risk for pipe stuck can be minimized.
Table 5. 1 Typical Drilling Mud

Hole Size
17-1/2
12-1/4
8-1/2
5.5
Type
Salt Water
Non-destructive
Non-destructive
MW
8.7 9.0
9.0 10.5
10.5 11.5
Viscosity
14 - 16
11 - 13
8 - 10
YP
24-40
24-32
16-30
Drilling Cement
To avoid formation damage and formation fracture due to hydrostatic pressure of cement
column, a comprehensive study will be conducted during FEED
90
Table 5. 2 Typical Cementing Slurry

Size (in.)
13-3/8
9-5/8
7
Spacer
10.5ppg
10.5ppg
10.5 -12.0 ppg
Lead
12 ppg
12 ppg
14.5 ppg
Tail
15.8 ppg
15.8 ppg
14.5 ppg
To avoid formation damage and formation fracture due to hydrostatic pressure of cement column, a
comprehensive study will be conducted during FEED.
5.6
Casing Design
5.6.1
Casing 13-3/8
Table 5. 3 Load Analysis for 13-3/8 Casing
91
Figure 5. 2 VME Ellipse for 13-3/8 Casing with SF 1.25
92
5.6.2
Casing 9-5/8
Table 5. 4 Load Analysis 9-5/8 Casing
Figure 5. 3 VME Ellipse for 9-5/8 Casing with SF 1.25
93
5.6.3 Casing 13-3/8

Table 5. 5 Load Analysis 7 Casing
Figure 5. 4 VME Ellipse for 7 Liner
94
5.7 Drilling and Work over Cost

Table 4.1 below shown typical duration and cost estimate for Beta development
drilling and workover. The well that has total depth of around 2000 ft reaching IAB reservoir
series.
Table 5. 6 Drilling and Completion Cost/well
Well Cost, USD

Activi
ty
5.8
Duration/
well
Days
WO
10
WS
Drillin
g
5
24
Tangib
le
Intangi
ble
Total
150,00
0
50,000
200,000
220,00
0
100
100,000
1,270,00 1,490,00
0
0
Completion Strategy
5.8.1 Perforation Strategy

The parameters on perforating selection below are used to select perforating gun
system:
1. Gun Size, Shot density and phasing
2. Explosive/charge type
3. Perforation length
5.8.1.1 Gun Size
The Through Tubing Perforating has been selected. Based on availability, two gun
size could be opted, which is 1-11/16 OD (0.22 entrance hole and 20.33 penetration) 6
SPF, 60o phasing or 2-1/8 OD (0.26 entrance hole and 29.29 penetration), 6 SPF, 60 o
phasing that will go through Tubing 2-7/8 (with ID 2.441) and sufficient to by-pass
estimate 6 damaged zone thickness due to drilling operation as shown in Figure 1.
95
assumed
damage
radius: 6
in
Figure 5. 5 Comparison between 1-11/16 & 2-1/8 Owen SDP penetration
5.8.1.2 Explosive Type

Bottom hole temperature of Z650 is around 165oF and perforation working hours at
bottom hole is about 2-3 hours, explosive type will be RDX (refers to figure 2).
Figure 5. 6 Temperature Stability of Perforating Explosives (courtesy of M. J.

Economides,L.T.Watters, and S. Dunn-Norman)
96
5.8.1.3 Perforation Length

In vertical well completion, perforation length and shot density is aimed to get
optimum design and reach the target rate. Based on the simulation, the optimum perforation
interval length to achieve the target rate are below.
Table 5. 7. Optimum Perforation Length
N
o.
1
2
3
4
Zone
Z380
Z450
Z550
Z650
Target
Rate (BFPD)
500
185
100
325
Optimum
Perforation Length (ft)
10
16
10
10
Target
Rate 500
BOPD
Figure 5. 7 Sensitivity for Perforation Interval Length in Z380
97
Target
Rate 185
BOPD
Target
Rate 100
BOPD
98
Target
Rate 325
BOPD
5.8.2
Perforation Method
To get higher productivity completion and produce the well as soon as after
perforation, it is highly recommended to apply underbalanced perforating. Based on equation

from King, Anderson and Bingham study, the minimum underbalance pressure necessary to
provide clean perforation is approximately 518 psi with permeability refer to Z380
permeability. However, if it is found operational difficulties to achieve that underbalance
pressure, further decision must be taken between production and completion engineering
department.
5.8.3
Tubing Selection
Below is sensitivity tubing size vs flow rate. Optimum tubing size is 2-7/8 OD (6.5
ppf) to allow through tubing perforation with 2-1/8 gun size.
99
2-3/8 Tubing
2-7/8 Tubing
3-1/2 Tubing
Figure 5. 11 Sensitivity for Tubing Size
100
5.9 Completion Type

The proposed Beta will be completed as single string completion; typical completion can be
seen in Figure 5.5.
For Natural Flow
Using Artificial Lift
Figure 5. 12 Typical Well Completion in Beta
101
CHAPTER VI
PRODUCTION FACILITIES
6.1 Introduction
PT. Group 1 is planned to develop the Beta field located on South Sumatera. The first
appraisal well Beta-01 field has been drilled in March 2014. Currently there are 5 well drilled
and 1 future well are waiting for POD approval to produce.
6.2 Production Profile

Beta field production is produced with 5 (four) active wells, there are Beta 1, beta 2, beta
3, beta 4 and WB 1. There are also Beta 5 as the future well which will be produced on 2020.
The fluids produced from Beta wells transferred from well area which is 1 km from production
facilities with 3 flowline. The fluids then gathered on manifold located on production facility
with maximum fluid production of 1000 Stb/day and gas with maximum rate of 1.6 MMscfd.
Figure 6. 1 Beta field Production Profile
102
As there is a small quantities of gas produced, it will be utilized for local power
generation system. Hence, there are only Oil and water will be the concern.
Beta field production is design based on the following production life for equipment sizing.
Table 6. 1 Fluid rate (Oil and Water)
Operating Cases
Date
Sales Crude
Flowrate, (Stb/d)
Water
Flowrate (Stb/d)
Design
Early Life
End of Life
Jan-17
Jan-26
1200
1000
510
10
0.2
0.1
Note:
1. Three operating cases have been identified based on production profile, as follows;
Design :Used for sizing the equipment (Flowrate 20% of maximum production:
2MMscfd Gas, 1200 BOPD)
Early Life (September 2017):The highest production flow rate for gas
(1.64MMscfd) and oil (1000 BOPD)
6.3 Fluid Properties

The fluid properties of beta fluid are taken from laboratory evaluation of crude oil.
Summary of liquid properties as shown below:
Table 6. 2 Liquid Properties of Beta Field
Parameter
Z 380
Analyst
Type of Fluid
Fluid Density, deg API
Initial Reservoir Pressure, Psig
Bubble Point Pressure, Psig
Solution GOR, scf/stb
Oil Viscosity, Cp
Oil
52.4
485
485
302
0.59
103
Beta
Z 450
LEMIGAS
Oil
52.3
660
660
412
0.54
Z 650
Oil
53.2
945
945
498
0.56
As can be seen from Table 6.1., the API of crude oil is shown the light oil. Based on this
data, the heating treatment for producing Beta fluid is not required.
Taken from: Lemigas crude oil analysis, date: October, 4th 2015.
6.4 Production Specification

Sales Crude Oil
The produced cude from Beta field will be sales by tie-in to the existing Tiamo
Pajuflowline. These Sales Crude Oil Specifications were used for the plant processing design of
Beta field production facilities.
Table 6. 3 Crude Oil Specification
Crude Oil Specification
Reid Vapor Pressure (RVP)
Basic
Sediment
&
Water
12 psia
0.5% v/v
( BS&W)
50 ppb (50
Mercury
g/L)
Produce Water Disposal

The produced water disposal quality from new onshore facility shall be referred to the
Regulation of Minister Environmental No.19/2010, Annex 1, Point C as describe below:
The Ministry of Environment Decree no 19/2010 regarding Liquid Waste Quality
Standards for Oil and Gas Activities as well as Geothermal, Annex 1, Point C shall be used as
liquid effluent design limits. The effluent design limits are summarized as follows:
Table 6. 4 Produced Water Quality for Disposal

104
No
Type of waste
water
Produced
Water
Drainage
water
Parameters
Maximum Limit
COD
200 mg/L
Oil and fat

Dissolve Sulfide
(as H2S)
Ammonia (as
NH3-N)
Total Phenol
Temperature
pH
TDS
Oil and fat
Total Organic
carbon
25 mg/L
0.5 mg/L
5 mg/L
2 mg/L
40OC
6-9
4000 mg/L
15 mg/L
110 mg/L
105
Method of Measurement
SNI-06-6989:2-2004 or
SNI-06-6989:15-2004 or
APHA 5220
SNI-06-6989.10-2004
SNI 06-2470-1991 or APHA
4500-S2SNI-06-6989.30-2005 or
APHA 4500-NH3
SNI-06-6989.21-2005
SNI-06-6989.23-2005
SNI-06-6989.11-2004
SNI-06-6989.27-2005
SNI-06-6989.10-2004
SNI-06-6989.28-2005 or
APHA 5310
106
6.5 Facilities Design Description
Figure 6. 2 Beta Process Flow Diagram
Water Dispossed
Process Facility
The main processing of Beta production Facilities consists of:
a) Wellhead Area
a.
Oil Wellheads
b.
Provision for Temporary Pig launcher per wellhead for Oil Flowline
b) Processing Production Plant

a.
Oil Processing Facilities

i.
Provision for Temporary Pig Receiver for Oil Flowline
ii.
Oil Flowlines and Headers
iii.
Oil Separation and Stabilization System
iv.
Oil Storage and Pumping System
v.
Produced Water Treatment System
vi.
Oil Testing System
c) Crude Oil Storage Station

a.
Crude Oil Storage System
b.
Crude Oil Pumping System
c.
Crude Oil Metering System
Utility System
Other than the main process, the Beta production facilities must also be supported by the utility
systems that make up the overall facility. This includes the following systems:
a) Beta field production Utilities
Power Generation System
Instrument Air and Utility Air System
Fuel Gas System
Diesel Fuel System
Flare System
Closed and Open Drain System
Chemical Injection System
Firewater and Ring main System
107
Service and Potable Water System

b) Permanent Camp
Power Generation System
Firefighting System
Service and Potable Water System
108
109
Figure 6. 3 Beta Production Facilities Equipment Layout
Main Gate
Loading Bay
Office Building
Process Area
Manifold and Production

Separator
Utility Area
Storage Tank Area
Flare Area
Process Description
The fluids processing on the Beta field production facilities is design onshore with
4(four) well producers. The fluids (3 phase) are produced from remote area which located on 1
km from Beta field production facilities. The fluid from each well then gathered on Production
manifold / header and entering the gas boothV-2001 separator to separate Oil and gas rapidly.
Since the Gas is expected to be utilized for local user / power generation, the compression
system is required. The gas will be compressed first to increase the pressure from 19psia to
30psia, the discharge compressor Z-6001 will goes to Scrubber for liquid separation before its
utilized for Power generation. However, due to capacity of fuel gas generation system, the
exceed gas is routed to be flared on the save area.
The liquid outlet gas booth V-2001 is flowingby gravity force and entering the wash tank
T-1001 for another separation stage. The process separation is resulting 3 phase fluid. Gas will
goes out from the wash tank from the top section and tied to the fuel gas system. The small
amount of produced water will be at the bottom of the wash tank and pumped with P-1002 and
flows to water tank T-1302. In order to meet the environment criteria of disposal liquid, the water
treatment using chemical (water clarifier) is required to reduce the Oil content on water.
The oil produced is pumped with charge pump P-1001 to be store on the shipping tank T1301 with maximum capacity of 3300 bbl/d. The oil then pumped using booster pump P-1003
A/B/C to the sales point with 14 pipeline and tied-in to Plaju pipeline.
Flowline
The summary of the proposed pipeline lengths could be seen from the tables below
Table 6. 5 The summary of the proposed pipeline lengths
Proposed 3 Oil Flowlines to Production Facility
Well No.
Approximate Lengths (m)
B-01
1000
B-02
1000
B-03
1000
B-04
1000
110
Table 6. 6 Export Pipeline Lengths

Export Pipeline
Beta Crude Oil Storage Station
Plaju Tie-in Point 8
Approximate Lengths
3 500 m
Table 6. 7 Flowline Properties

Data
Parameter
Flowline
Oil
200
79-110
1360
50-71
Unit
Design Temperature
Operating temperature
Design Pressure
Operating pressure
Content Density (Min. and
Max.)
Corrosion Allowance
F
F
psi
psi
o
kg/m3
15.4/333.2
mm
Export Line
70-77
1360
675-755
-/50.7
6.6 Health, Safety, and Environment

As the commitment to Produce and operate beta field properly with ZERO Accident the
following Safety facilities is provided.
Noise Control
The noise level defined by the 1999 Ministerial Decree KEP 51 (85 dB limit measured at
1m from the source) shall be used as the basis of design for all noise control measures.
Environmental Emission Limits

Precautions shall be taken against using or discharging hazardous or toxic materials to the
ground or the atmosphere in quantities likely to harm the environment, as per the
guidelines specified in the sections below.
Table 6. 8 Environmental Emission Limits
111
Source
Gathering Station
Gas Vents
Parameters
Concentration
(mg/Nm3)
H2S
100 (*)
Hydrocarbon
5000 (**)
(*)
Ground Level Concentration shall not exceed 5 ppm.
(**)
Ground Level Concentration as per Ambient Air Quality Standard per
Government Regulation PP 41/1999.
Fire and Gas Detection System

Fire & Gas Monitoring System (FGS) shall be fitted to the facility to monitor gas release.
The FGS is activate audible and visual alarm to warn personnel at any location on the
facility.
Fire Protection and Safety System

Fire protection measures normally fall under control and mitigation measures to prevent
further escalation. Fire protection measures are mainly combination of following
systems:
o Isolation and Depressurisation
o Active Fire Protection (AFP)
o Passive Fire Protection
Vent
A Cold Vent is located on the East side of the plant, adjacent to crude Storage Area
Personnel Safety Equipment
This used to protect personnel for not to be directly impaired by the hazard during
working.
Escape Route and Markings
112
A muster area is located within the facility to provide the maximum protection for
personnel in the event of an emergency situation. The muster area is provided with
suitable markings on both the ground and adjacent signs to demarcate the safety zone
Emergency Exit from Building

Emergency exit is provided for evacuation from inside the control room. The emergency
exit shall be clearly identified for personnel to follow in an emergency situation.
113
114
6.7 Commercial Calculation
Cost estimation consists of Beta facilities, other indirect cost for utilization of fluid from Beta well, and operation expense for
rented Beta facilities. Production separator, test separator, fuel scrubber, portacamp, will be rental basis. Rental cost estimation use
yearly basis included Pre-commissioning and Commissionng. The following table is shown the details of the cost estimationduring
EPCI Phase.
Table 6. 9 Commercial Calculation
ITEMS / JOBS
QT
Y
UNIT
RATE
TOTAL
PRICE
USD / UNIT
(USD)
PROCUREMENT OF MAJOR EQUIPMENT & BULK MATERIALS

OIL WELL FACILITY - PROCESS
Pig Launcher (Portable)

Well Head Control Panel
1
6
18,000.0
0
18,000.0
0
26,400.0
0
158,400.
00
176,400.00
BETA FIELD BLOK STATION - PROCESS
Pig Receiver
17,704.8
0
17,704.8
0
Pressure Vessel
Gas Booth
Oil Test Separator
Wash Tank
75,000.4
3
75,000.4
3
65,387.2
3
65,387.2
3
79,430.0
79,430.0
115
ITEMS / JOBS
RATE
1
Pump
Crude Oil Pump

Crude Oil Transfer Pump
Produced Water Pump
UNIT
QT
3
2
2
TOTAL
PRICE
1
USD / UNIT
12,294.5
0
36,883.5
0
17,273.0
0
34,546.0
0
18,262.0
0
36,524.0
0
Atmospheric API 650 Tank
Crude Oil Storage Tank A
Crude Oil Storage Tank B
Crude Oil Storage Tank C
60,000.0
0
60,000.0
0
60,000.0
0
60,000.0
0
60,000.0
0
60,000.0
0
Metering
Metering System
25,000.0
0
25,000.0
0
550,475.97
BETA FIELD BLOK STATION - UTILITY
Fuel Gas System
Fuel Gas Scrubber
45,000.0
0
45,000.0
0
Diesel St. and Transfer System
Diesel Filters
12,000.0
0
12,000.0
0
116
ITEMS / JOBS
Diesel Storage Tank
Diesel Transfer Pump
UNIT
QT
Y
1
1
TOTAL
RATE 5,071.62
USD / 11,644.0
UNIT
PRICE 5,071.62
11,644.0
Instrument and Utility Air System

Air Compressor Package & Dryer Packages
Instrument Air Receiver
1
1
45,123.0
0
45,123.0
0
35,360.0
0
35,360.0
0
Flare System
LP Flare Ignition Panel Package
43,070.0
0
43,070.0
0
Drain System
Drain Vessel
Drain Pump
1
1
36,620.0
0
36,620.0
0
27,915.1
0
27,915.1
0
Fire Water System
Diesel Fire Water Pump Package
Fire Water Pond
Jockey Pump
Power System
Gas Engine Generator Packages
Diesel Engine Generator Package
45,271.6
6
45,271.6
6
51,910.3
2
51,910.3
2
5,082.65
5,082.65
140,000.
420,000.
00
00
100,500.
100,500.
117
ITEMS / JOBS
RATE
00
Chemical Injection system
DeOiler
UNIT
QT
TOTAL
PRICE
00
USD / UNIT
10,000.0
0
10,000.0
0
Service & Potable Water System
Raw Water Pump
Sand Filtration
Potable Water Storage Tank
Service/ Potable Water Transfer Pump
Activated Cabon
Foam Generation System
Foam Generation Skid
13,865.0
0
27,730.0
0
6,840.00
40,000.0
0
6,840.00
40,000.0
0
14,097.0
0
28,194.0
0
7,688.00
7,688.00
35,895.0
35,895.0
CO2 Snuffing Package
CO2 Snuffing Package
25,651.0
0
25,651.0
0
1,066,566.38
PERMANENT CAMP AREA
Portable Water Pump
Portable Water Tank
Portable Water Treatment
17,759.0
0
17,759.0
0
7,371.60
35,000.0
0
7,371.60
35,000.0
0
118
ITEMS / JOBS
60,130.60
RATE
PROCUREMENTS OF MAJOR EQUIPMENTS
LO
PROCURE BULK MATERIALS
Civil Works & Structural
UNIT
QT
TOTAL
PRICE
USD / UNIT
T
1
700,000.
78
700,000.
78
Pipings include Manual Valves & SP
Pipe
Fitting
Flange + Blind
1
1
1
Gasket
Manual Valve
Special Item
82,000.0
0
82,000.0
0
45,431.6
5
45,431.6
5
77,863.7
9
77,863.7
9
14,459.9
4
14,459.9
4
98,490.6
9
98,490.6
9
68,517.7
7
68,517.7
7
Electrical
Switchgear & Motor Control Center
Power Transformer
UPS & Battery Charger
214,211.
11
214,211.
11
65,250.0
0
65,250.0
0
150,000.
150,000.
119
ITEMS / JOBS
UNIT
QT
RATE
00
Lighting & Small Power Distribution Board
Local Control Station
TOTAL
PRICE
00
USD / 14,432.0
UNIT
0
19,864.0
14,432.0
0
19,864.0
Bulk material
Power, Lightning & Control Cables
Lightning System
Cable Trays / Ladders
Cable Glands
Electrical & Lightning Protection
34,874.4
6
34,874.4
6
35,086.8
0
35,086.8
0
33,325.6
2
33,325.6
2
18,306.3
4
18,306.3
4
22,735.2
2
22,735.2
2
Instrumentation
Equipment
Cables
Trays and Ladders
1,775,615.73
PIPELINE
1
1
1
23,000.0
0
23,000.0
0
32,605.2
0
32,605.2
0
25,160.3
6
25,160.3
6
120
ITEMS / JOBS
WELL HEAD AREA
Oil Flow Line 4" NPS - 7.112 WT API 5L Gr. B (Km)
Y
m
QT
K
UNIT
RATE
TOTAL
PRICE
USD / UNIT
100,000.
60
(USD)
300,001.
80
Export Pipeline
Export Pipe Line 8" NPS - 12.7 WT API 5L Gr. B (Km)

350,002.10
0.5
100,000.
60
50,000.3
0
PRE-COMMISIONING AND COMMISIONING
Pre Commissioning
Commissioning
80000
TOTAL COST
3,999,060.18
35000
45000
CHAPTER VII
FIELD DEVELOPMENT SCENARIOS
7.1 Development Plan and Strategy

The GGR study has obtained an oil inplace value 15.32 MMSTB and 3.445
MMSTB of risked reserves as detailed in Section 4. The proposed field development
includes installing well flowlines, gathering stations, and production facilities will be
constructed based on production profile of subsurface study.
In this production scheme, the oil production will be delivered to existing export
oil pipe line Tempino-Plaju at estimated volume of 1000 BOPD. To support this
scenario well flowlines, gathering stations, and Production, will be constructed.
7.2 Production Optimization
Based on GGR review there is one additional development well and well
stimulation in all existing wells needed to drain reserves. Oil will be produce from 4
existing wells and 1 additional wells: Beta 1/2/3/4, WB-01 and Beta 5 Infill well. In early
production there are two well produce with artificial lift with rate of 1000 BOPD
7.3 Future Development
The GGR review concludes that reservoir drive mechanism is solution gas, hence
give the result in a pessimistic recovery factor number. Further GGR study is
recommended to re-evaluate the reservoir performance for one year production
performances. Production history matching for one year is enough to validate the
reservoir model. The update reservoir model will contingent to decide whether infill
wells required to optimize recovery of the reservoir and possibility to conduct pressure
maintenance project and or water flood.
Beta 1 and Beta 3 wells encountered R-10 reservoir, based on MDT and pressure
indicate that there is an oil accumulation in R-10 interval. Oil accumulation in R-10
interval could be upside potential in Beta structure, based on volumetric calculation has
STOOIP about 1.707 MMBO.
121
Based on MDT result R10 reservoir has initial reservoir pressure is 600 psi and
mobility of 20.45 mD/cp categorized as good reservoir. MDT sampling recovered 450 cc
oil, the oil properties of R10 oil tested in laboratory are : API gravity 52, SG 0.833 and
Pour point 72 0F. Need to conducted well testing to prove and to understanding the
reservoir performance the R-10 sand. If the result is good it is possible to produce Z
380/450/550/650 and R-10 simultaneously in the future year.
7.4 Artifiacialift Consideration
Based on the artificial lift selection table below, the suitable artificial lift for this
crude oil characteristic is Electrical Submersible Pump (ESP)
Figure 7. 1. Artificial Lift Selection

The need of artificial lift depends on the increasing of water cut, decreasing of
reservoir pressure and GOR. Figure 7.2 shows the simulation with constant GOR and
water cut, variable reservoir pressure (563 psi, 500 psi and 450 psi). Based on the
simulation result in Figure 7.2 using Pipesim, the minimum reservoir pressure before the
well cannot flow naturally is 500 psi. This is when we need to install artificial lift.
122
Figure 7. 2. Z380 IPR Curves with Reservoir Pressure Sensitivity
123
CHAPTER VIII
HEALTH SAFETY AND ENVIRONMENT AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
8.1 Health, Safety, and Environment

PT. Groupsatu has a vision to become a leading and respected oil and gas
companies in oil and gas industry, and it requires to develop operational excellence
meeting international standard. The operational excellence is reflected in managing
occupational safety and health aspects and in protecting the environment.
Exploration and exploitation of oil and gas is a high risk business, exposing the
workers and the surrounding environment in an inherently high risk operation. This is the
fundamental reason for safety, occupational health and protection of the environment as
of paramount aspect in its day-to-day operations.
Consistent to the protection of environment then Groupsatu ensured that the
potential impact to environment has been sufficiently identified and an environment
management plan has been developed to address and manage the identified potential
impacts. A compulsory environmental study has been developed for this is the UKL-UPL
Pengembangan Lapangan Migas Beta Field. which have been approved by Directorate
General Oil and Gas. Summary of UKL-UPL document described in sub-chapter 8.1.5.2
Other compulsory environmental studies that have been developed for similar
purposes are: UKL-UPL Kegiatan Survei Seismik 2D dan 3D (document summary
described in sub-chapter 8.1.5.1),
The objectives, targets and programs have to be achieved in a safe and
environmentally responsible manner, towards the employees and the surrounding
environment as well. Groupsatu commitment to safe guard this core value is articulated
in the Statement of Policy on Safety, Health and Environment. This would have been the
guiding principle for everyone working in Groupsatu in conducting their day-to-day
business.
8.1.1
Safety, Health and Environment Policy

Groupsatu is committed to achieving and maintaining safety, health and
environment excellence. In conducting the companys activities, protection of its

employees, the community and the environment are of equal importance to its
124
exploration, drilling and producing goals. Groupsatu commitment to excellence is

reflected in the Safety, Health, and Environment (SHE) management system.
Leadership and commitment are the most important factors in the implementation
of SHE management system. Leaders are not only responsible in achieving the goals but
also to ensure that the goals are achieved in a safe and environmentally responsible
manner.
Line Management is responsible for SHE excellence and ensuring the active
participation of all employees to achieve this. Everyone who works for Groupsatu is
responsible for working safely and in environmentally responsible manner.
In order to achieve the commitment on SHE, Groupsatu are to: (1) Identify,
evaluate and control safety, health and environment risks relating to our operations so as
to prevent accidents, occupational illness and damage to the environment. (2) Comply
with all applicable laws and regulations and apply responsible standards if these do not
exist. (3) Maintain a healthy and safe working place for its employees and contractors.
(4) Continuously maintain environmentally safe operations by reducing emissions and
waste, saving energy and other natural resources. (5) Promote cost-effective solutions to
safety, health and environmental issues. (6) Respond quickly to all emergencies arising
from our operations liaising with all stakeholders. (7) Recognize those who make a
valuable contribution towards achieving SHE excellence. (8) Continuously improve
Groupsatu SHE performance through effective systems.
8.1.2
Space, Land and Soil

The existing wells and future processing facility are not within the boundary of
conservation area. These locations are of enough distance to the strategic area for future
urban development.
125
Figure 8. 1 Beta Field Centaury PSC
8.1.3
Sensitive Areas
The sensitive areas identified within the Centaury PSC are including all
community centers such as villages and towns that are sensitive or easily responds to any
introduced activities. The sensitive areas are also including sites of historical heritage that
are scattered in the village.
The wetland for rice production in this regency is also identified as sensitive area
due to the relatively small areas for rice production within the regency. Any small
disturbance to these rice producing fields would significantly affect the rice production of
this regency.
8.1.4
Environment Baseline Summary

The Centaury PSC is located on the eastern margin of the South Sumatera Basin
in a region comprising of multiple NNE-SSW trending horst and graben features, which
were initiated in Palaeogene times.
126
In the Centaury area, the Merang and Ketaling Highs form the main horst blocks
with the Merang and Ketaling Deeps forming the intervening grabens, These horsts were
sources of sediment into the basins until they were eventually submerged and carbonates
developed on the old highs. The area was then subjected to Mid-Miocene transpressional
and then further subsidence.
This transpressional phase is also associated with a regional tilt towards the
southwest and the uplift of the Sembilang High to the northeast, followed by a
considerable amount of erosion in the past few million years.
The landscape within Centaury PSC is affected by two dominant factors: (1)
Lithology, (2) Geological structures,
The vegetation type within the boundary of Centaury PSC is in the formation of
tropical rain forest. The existing vegetations are in the farming of palm tree, rubber tree
and acacia for agro-industrial purpose. The formation of vegetation has already altered
structurally and compositionally either by natural course or by human activities.
8.1.5
Environmental Studies
Consistent with the commitment in environmental protection, Groupsatu have
already proceeded with some of the compulsory activities regulated in Indonesia. Every
operation has been preceded with compulsory environmental studies that would
underline the environmental management responsibilities of the company.
These environmental documents have already been studied and approved for
Groupsatu :
Table 8. 1Environmental Studies
N
o
Activity
1.
UKL
UPL
Kegiatan
Survei Seismik 2D
dan 3D
UKL
UPL
Kegiatan
Pengembangan
Lapangan
Migas
Terbatas
blok
Centaury
Environmental
Baseline Assessment
(EBA)
Type of
Env.
Document
UKL UPL
7 Januari 2014
Authority
for
Approval
Ditjen Migas
UKL UPL
7 Januari 2014
Ditjen Migas
Environme
nt Baseline
Study
127
Date of
Approval
5 April 2014
SKKMIGAS
The following are the summary and scope of the above mentioned environmental
studies.
8.1.5.1 UKL-UPL Kegiatan Survei Seismik 2D dan 3D.

This study covers the 2D and 3D seismic survey in Centaury PSC. The 3D
seismic survey was done. Seismic Survey(s) are considered as an activity with low
impact to the environment. The compulsory environmental study for this type activity is
UKL and UPL study (environmental management and monitoring efforts).
This study was done in order to collect environmental information prior to the
commencement of activity, to identify possible impact of activity to the environment and
to direct environmental management program and environmental monitoring program
during the commencement of Seismic Survey. The objective was:
To comply with applicable laws and regulations in environmental protection and

management, and to ensure that Groupsatu activity was done without harm to people
and the environment
To describe the planned 3D and 2D seismic survey in detail, and to forecast the impact
of this activity to the surrounding environment.
For early identification of possible impact and to minimize these impacts.
8.1.5.2 UKL-UPL Kegiatan Pengembangan Lapangan Migas Beta Field

This study covers the planned for limited developments of oil and gas field in
Centaury PSC, with the following planned activities were covered:
1. Exploration Drilling of onshore operations for Beta-1, Beta-2, Beta-3, Beta-4,
WB-1, and Infill Beta-5
2. Operations production
3. Construction of production lines that connects each wells with the Early
Production Station (EPS).
4. Transportation of crude oil.
This study was done in order to collect environmental information prior to the
commencement of activity, to identify possible impact of activity to the environment and
128
to direct environmental management program and environmental monitoring program

during the construction of facilities and production operations. The objective was:
To provide environmental guidelines during drilling operations and construction

of facilities, and ensure the possible impacts are sufficiently identified and
anticipated.
To provide reference for environmental management and monitoring program

during the commencement of drilling programs, construction and production
operations.
8.1.5.3 The Benefits of UKL-UPL Documentations

a. Groupsatu is well equipped with a reference that has systematically record
environmental condition, the planned activity, the identified possible impact resulting
from the planned activity and a specific guideline for environmental management and
monitoring programs.
b. By following the guidance from the UKL-UPL documents, Groupsatu would have an
early warning system that could identify changes to the environment condition that
would possibly caused by the company activity or some other external factors.
Groupsatu could initiate further studies in order to identify such problem when
occurred
8.2 Community Development
8.2.1
Policy Statement
For the mining companies, oil and gas companies as well as for local
stakeholders, Community Development as part of Corporate Social Responsibility has

now become a strategic issue. From the definition that is currently developing: "CSR is
the commitment and effort of companies that operate legally and ethically, to minimize
the risk of the presence of the company, to promote Social Development, Economy and
Environment and Sustainable Development to improve the quality of life for
stakeholders lives."
Groupsatu is committed to implementing Community Development (CD) as
social activities to support operation for the local stakeholders. The companys CD
programs aim to improve the welfare of local communities around companys operational
129
area; it is also regarded as a social investment as well as a means to minimize the

company's business risks.
Social investment built in form of trust among the stakeholders of company will
eventually reduce business risk against the company. Decline in security disturbance and
conflicts between companies and society will definitely increase the competitiveness of
Groupsatu as national oil and gas company.
CD programs will establish both the economic capital and the social capital.
Combination of social economic capitals becomes the basis for improving the
sustainability agenda during the existence of the program or even the CD program has
ended. Social capital is a trust established between groups, trust between local
community and company and other stakeholders as well as the presence of cooperation,
networking and quality of communication. Supported by the CD Program, the
improvement of social capital to the community will be the main agenda.
The
Companys CD program will be formulated through a participatory method involving

both the Company and key stakeholders in the area of operation. As such, CD program
goals constitute an inseparable part of objectives and goals of the local community.
The CD activities that will be conducted during the operation of the company for
local stakeholders around the operations area, are:
a. Education
This program aims to improve the quality of human resources of local people in
the operating area through improving quality of education. The education program will
increase the quality of education through improving facilities required for education and
providing the scholarship for students to pursue higher education.
Groupsatu will coordinate with local government how to bring the better facilities
required for education to community and providing the scholarship for the best students.
b. Environment
This program will provide the tree seedlings to the community to support the
greening campaign around the operation area.
130
Groupsatu may distribute the seedlings like mango, jackfruit, or other plantation
which are suitable with the local soil condition and will be determined in accordance
with prior discussions with local stakeholders .
c. Infrastructure
This program aims to improve infrastructure and public services to increase the
quality of life through providing good infrastructure for community. This program will be
collaborated with the local government.
An urgent and important program recently by local community is the providing of
better infrastructure and public services. Group satu will coordinate with local
government how to bring the better infrastructure and public services to community.
d. Public Health
This program aims to improve the quality of infant health to improve the quality
of human resources in the future through the provision of nutritious food. This program
with the main focus on effectiveness of Posyandu will be conducted in collaboration with
district health centers.
For that purpose, a good cooperation will be formed between Groupsatu and the
local government to success this program.
e. Economy
This program aims to increase income through improving the capacity of small
businesses and improving community skills through capacity building the local
cooperative institutions.
This economic development program will attempt to optimize the potential of
local resources to encourage the growth of new businesses and increased transactions
from existing local businesses. The company will provide technical assistance for the
development of economic activities
131
CHAPTER IX
ABANDONMENT AND SITE RESTORATION
9.1 Introduction
The Centaury PSC was signed in January 30, 2010. Under the terms of Section V
of the Amended PSC, the operator has an obligation to:
...remove all equipment and installations from the area in a manner acceptable to
SKKMIGAS and GOI, and perform all necessary site restoration activities in accordance
with the applicable laws and regulation of the Republic of Indonesia to prevent hazards
to human life and property of other or environment
Section 5.2.5 (d) All expenditure incurred by contractor in the abandoned of
all such wells and restoration of their drill site shall be treated as Operating Cost in
accordance with the Accounting Procedures
Referring to Decree RI No. 22, Year 2001, for Oil and Gas and based on the
Government Regulation No. 4, Year 2002, for Executive Agency for Upstream Oil and
Gas Business Activities (SKKMIGAS) and Government Regulation No. 35 Year 2004 for
Upstream Oil and Gas Business Activities, if SKKMIGAS takes over any area or field
prior to its abandonment, the contractor shall be released from its obligation but any
funds accrued for the purposes of abandonment will be transferred to SKKMIGAS.
9.2 Abandonment / Restoration

In the event that abandonment and restoration of any of the operational sites be
required within the period of the PSC contract, Group 1 would then undertake the
following measures:
a. Wells All wells drilled by Group satu and no longer capable of production,
or required for other purposes (e.g. injection, disposal or reservoir monitoring)
would be plugged and abandoned in a manner agreed between Group 1
/SKKMIGAS/Migas.
b. Well sites On abandoned well sites, all over-ground facilities including
fences, pipework etc. would be removed. The Sites that have a central
132
graveled area and access road, discussions would be held between Group 1
SKKMIGAS (as the land owner) and the Kepala Desa as to the final site
status and appropriate level of restoration.
c. Pipelines At the time of installation, all pipelines are above ground
completed with the pipe support. Over the operating field life, the pipeline
and pipe support would be removed.
d. Loading Facility The loading facility would be removed and disposed off in
a manner agreed between Group 1 & SKKMIGAS (as the land/equipment
owner). The site restoration manner would be agreed between Group 1,
SKKMIGAS and the Kepala Desa.
e. Process Facility The process facility would be removed and disposed off in
a manner agreed between Group 1 & SKKMIGAS (as the land/equipment
owner). The site restoration manner would be agreed between Group 1,
SKKMIGAS and Kepala Desa.
f. Offloading Facility The offloading facility would be removed and disposed
off in a manner agreed between Group 1 & SKKMIGAS (as the equipment
owner). As the Sites are owned by the offloading facility owners, all site
restoration would be conducted by them.
9.3 Funding of Abandonment/Restoration

The costs of the restoration and abandonment as discussed above are estimated to
be US$ 820,500. Detail breakdown cost as shown in Table 9.1.
133
Table 9. 1 Cost Estimate of PSC Abandonment
Group 1 preferred method of funding the abandonment and restoration costs is by accrual
during the period of production and hence income.
There are no existing guidelines on the timing of this accrual, Group 1 has
proposed to SKKMIGAS an accrual period based upon the assumption that first crude oil
is delivered in January 1, 2017.
The minimum duration of the Beta Field production is from 2017 until 2027. On
this basis, Group 1 proposes to accrue abandonment costs from 2017 until 2027 as shown
in Table 9.2. This accrual cost schedule is included in the economics model.
Table 9. 2 Cost Accrual Schedule for Abandonment.
The method of abandonment of wells and removal of production facilities at the

end of their working life or the end of the PSC, whichever comes first, will be the subject
134
of discussion between Group 1, SKKMIGAS, and local government officials as

appropriate.
Firm details or plans cannot be given at this stage because Group 1 believes that
the final plans should be the subject of consultation between the interested parties e.g.
SKKMIGAS, MIGAS and the local community. Clearly this cannot happen until much
closer to the date that the work is required to be conducted.
Group 1 has developed budget costs for the abandonment/restoration and
proposes to fund these costs by accruals over the period 2017 to 2027.
135
CHAPTER X
PROJECT SCHEDULE AND ORGANIZATION
10.1
Project Schedule
The project schedule of Beta field is as shown in Figure 10.1. The key
uncertainties in this schedule are Government of Indonesia approvals of the POD and the
WP&B/AFEs.
Figure 10. 1 Beta Field Commercialization and Project Schedule
10.2 Organization
Organization structure of PT. Group 1 is supported by Functions (Fungsi
Pendukung) to smoothen the operational processes.
The concept of shared Functions was approved by SKKMIGAS to promote
efficiency and productivity of operations for the whole assets. To ensure cost allocation
implementation of Functions, we are using activity-based costing system and it has also
been approved by SKKMIGAS.
Below is the model of organization of Group 1. The General Manager is reporting
directly to Operations Executive Vice President. The General Manager is having
coordination line with shared Functions. The Functions are fully centralized under solid
line of President.
136
PT. Group satu Organization
Figure 10. 2 Group 1 Organization Structure
GM
Group
satu
Figure 10. 3 Field Organization Structure
137
10.3 Manpower
As field activity gradually increasing in 2017 ahead with oil production expected
to reach around 1,000 BOPD, Group 1 will require bigger logistics as well as
maintenance on site. Based on production forecast and increasing activities, manpower
planning will take an important role to support the activities.
For hiring strategy and as part of community development and relations, the
Company will utilize local people especially manpower resource from surrounding area
for assisting maintenance, production operations, field SHE and warehousing. For
Supervisor level and above, the Company will prefer to hire people from Jambi as nearby
city area.
138
CHAPTER XI
LOCAL CONTENT
PT. Group 1 is the operator of Beta Field which in carrying out any procurement
of Materials and Services, PT group 1 will maximize the use of Domestic Content
Products, Services, and Human Resources.
Procurement of Materials and Services had been conducted by PT group 1 to
support operational requirements in implementing various projects such as 3D & 2D
Seismic Data Acquisition, Drilling, and Work Over activities. Those activities were
carried out to fulfill PSC Exploratory commitment and group 1 is preparing itself to
become a highly potential Production PSC without neglecting the obligation to prioritize
Domestic Content of Materials and Services.
Commitment in prioritizing Domestic Content is reflected by the high level of
percentage from both Materials and Services procurement total expenditure, which is
using procurement data from early 2014 up to September 2016. The following table
(Services and Materials) are indicating that Domestic Content average which PT group 1
has utilized is significantly high and therefore creating an added value to local industries
development.
Table 11. 1Service Domestic Content Averages 2014 - 2016
2014
2015
2016
Contract Value
$ 5,000,000
$ 9,000,000
$ 6,000,000
TKDN Value
$ 5,000,000
$ 7,200,000.
$ 4,200,000
TKDN Commitment (%)
100%
80%
70%
Table 11. 2 Material Domestic Content Averages 2014 - 2016

2014
2015
2016
Contract Value
$ 3,000,000
$ 9,000,000
$ 3,700,000
TKDN Value
$ 3,000,000
$ 5,400,000
$ 2,775,000
TKDN Commitment (%)
100%
60%
75%
139
Implementation of procurement in Materials and Services will be conducted in

accordance with Pedoman Tata Kerja BPMIGAS no. 007 Revisi-II/PTK/I/2011 and
Industrial Ministry regulation no. 102/M-IND/10/2009.
Future procurement plan from PT group 1
starting 2020, there will be
procurement activities drilling activities which therefore has a potential in decreasing

Domestic Content percentage average. This is because there will be some raw materials
which can not be fully manufactured by local industry specifically in supporting both
activities (construction of production facilities). Considering that circumstances, PT
group 1 is still committed to maximize the utilization of Domestic Content for materials
and services by planning to achieve minimum overall percentage of 70% for materials
and 90% for services.
Table 11. 3 Future Domestic Content for Services and Material
2017
Contract Value
Services
Material
$ 1,000,000
$ 4,900,000
TKDN Commitment (%)
70% (Target TKDN)
140
CHAPTER XII
COMMERCIAL AND PROJECT ECONOMICS
12.1
Introduction
This Chapter contains the results of the economic evaluation of the Beta oil field.
This evaluation assumes that first oil from this field is delivered in January 2017. Three
scenarios built to compare and find the best economically project for development Beta
Field.
12.2
PSC Fiscal Regime

The basis of any economic evaluation is the fiscal terms contained in the PSC
itself. The Beta PSC was originally awarded in January 2010 hence the fiscal terms
reflect the contracts of that generation.
The fiscal terms of oil production are:
First Tranche Petroleum (Oil)
10% non-shareable
Contractor share before tax
44%
Government share before tax
Depreciation
DMO Obligation / Compensation
56%
5 years 25%
25% / 25% (DMO holiday start from
first oil until 60 months as stated on section V)
12.3
Project Investment and Operating Cost

The model for this POD is a stand alone basis.
12.4
Capital Cost
12.4.1 Development Well Costs

Chapter 4 discussed the need for 5 wells (Beta-01, Beta-02, Beta-03, Beta-04, and
Beta-05), to discovery Beta Field. Total cost consist of total sunk cost, total facility cost,
and total opex. The drilling cost each wells was US$ 1.49 million as seen on the Table
12.1.
141
12.4.2 Facilities Costs

Chapter 6 discussed the need for a permanent trunk line, oil loading facility, oil
storage tanks, and effluent water processing, disposing facility camp and office, costing a
total of US$ 4 million. The detail schedule of the capital expenditure and costing can be
seen in chapter 6 sub commercial calculation.
12.4.3
Operating Costs
The total amount of operational costs divide to three cases as project scenarios,
seen in table 12.1. It includes operating personnel cost, facility rental, inspection and
maintenance costs, logistic and consumable costs, well work costs, and abandonment
provision.
12.5
Production Profile
The production profile in Figure 12.1 is discussed in Chapter 4. The reserves are
equal to 90% of P1+ 50% of P2 as the result of GGR study. Production forecast each case
shown in figure 12.1, 12.2, 12.3 below. The economic forecasting built for 10 years (up
to 2027)
Case 1, the field will produce oil from five wells without wells stimulation. The
production start to decline from 2018. In case 1 cumulative production can reach 2,089
MMBbl. Figure 12.1 show oil production for case 1.
142
Figure 12. 1 Production Profile Case 1
Case 2, the field will produce oil from five wells with stimulation for skin
removal. The production keep constraint up to 2019 for 1,000 bopd and start decline in
2020. The cumulative production can reach 3,148 MMBbl. Figure 12.2 show oil
production for case 2.
Figure 12. 2Production Profile Case 2

143
Case 3 is similar with case 2 but there is additional one infill well to optimize
recovery from Z-450 reservoir and will be drill in 2020. The production keep constraint
up to 2020 to production maintenance for 1,000 bopd and start decline in 2021. The
cumulative production can reach 3,445 MMBbl. Figure 12.3 show oil production for case
3.
Figure 12. 3 Production Profile Case 3

12.6 Oil Price
Based on current word condition, we assume an oil price of US$50/bbl flat (refer
to WTI Crude Oil June 2016). To anticipate uncertainty oil price we built economic
sensitivity oil price start form US$ 30/bbl to US$ 80/bbl flat until 2027.
12.7
Sunk Cost
The total sunk cost is US$ 35.73 million, in this project sunk cost is all of the cost
that already expensed before 2017 which are consist of 3D&2D Seismic cost, G&G
study, Re-entry Beta-01 well and Beta-02, Exploratory drilling Beta-03, Beta-04 and
Beta-05 well, and SG&A.
144
12.8
Economic EvaluationResult
Contractor cash flow for three scenarios shown in figure below.
Case 1 there was no equity to be split and DMO due to unrecovered cost through
10 years. Each 3 years opex cost increase due to WO/WS forecasting. Three scenarios
given positive NPV for contractor and the best NPV for scenario 3 if we will add infill
well in 2020.
Figure 12. 4Contractor Cash flow case 1
Figure 12. 5 Contractor Cash flow case 2
Figu
re 12. 6 Contractor Cash flow case 3

The results of the economic calculation are shown in Table 12.1 below.
145
Table 12. 1 Economic Results
The result shows that this project would give an attractive NPV for both the
Government and for PT Group 1.
2.9. Sensitivity Analysis

Figure 12.7 shows the influences of oil price to Contr. NPV. The current
condition, oil price is fluctuated, hence we perform sensitivity analysis NPV versus aoil
price.
146
Figure 12. 7 Diagram Beta POD-1 Project
147
CHAPTER XIII
CONCLUSIONS
1. Beta field development project is feasible.
2. Case 3 (Stimulation+ drilling additional one well) is the best scenario selected
in this development scenario
3. GGR study concluded that OOIP 2P Risk (90% P1+50% P2) is 15.32
MMSTB, Recoverable Reserve is 3.445 MMSTB, and Recovery Factor is
22.5%
4. Oil from Beta field will be transport to existing oil export line Tempino-Plaju.
5. Total capex will be USD 5.49 million and total opex will be USD 68.62
million over field life of 10 years and pre-development cost (sunk cost) was
35.730 million. Cummulative oil production will be 3.445 MMBO.
6. The project generated total gross revenue of USD 172.3 million, government
of Indonesia cash flow of US$ 52 million (30% from gross revenue) and
Contractor cash flow of USD 47 million (27% from gross revenue). Oil price
assumption of USD 50.00/Barrel is applied for the economic calculation.
7. Beta structure has a chance potential to drill additional infill / step-out well
and develop upside potential from F-10 zone.
148

Pod All

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Pod All

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

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

Pod All

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

FINAL EAXAM

PERENCANAAN, PENGELOLAAN, DAN PENGEMBANGAN

Panca Suci Widiantoro

PROGRAM MAGISTER BIDANG ILMU TEKNIK

7.4 Artifiacialift Consideration....................................................................122

TABLE 6. 6 EXPORT PIPELINE LENGTHS...............................................................112

FIGURE 3. 11. BETA-3 LOG INTERPRETATION OF Z450 SANDS (SCALE : 1/200).....50

FIGURE 5. 5 COMPARISON BETWEEN 1-11/16 & 2-1/8 OWEN SDP PENETRATION

2.1. Regional Geology

Barisan Mountains and extends to the offshore area and is considered as a

Figure 2. 1 Regional South Sumatra Basin Tectonic Setting

Figure 2. 2 Tectonic Setting of Block Centaury

Geology of South Sumatra Basin is a result of tectonic activity that is

mountain, Lingga island and Bangka island as called as Paparan Sunda.

Figure 2. 3 Schematic Tektonostratigrafi of South Sumatra Basin

(large cycle) consisting of a transgression and followed by regression. Formation

Figure 2. 4 Regional Stratigraphy of South Sumatra Basin

Basin. Composed of Mesozoic igneous rocks, metamorphic rocks of Paleozoic,

7. Lower Palembang Formation (Air Benakat)

Cycle Depositional late Middle Miocene to Late Miocene MEF

Youngest Deposition (Pliocene-Pleistocene) Kasai Formation

Alluvial and Volcanic Quarter

Figure 2. 5 Chronostratigraphy scheme for the South Sumatra Basin

Lithofacies based on the data available, it can be concluded as follows

Figure 2. 6 Classification Litofasies on Beta-4 Wells

Figure 2. 7 Classification Litofasies on Beta-4 wells

Figure 2. 1 Facies Model in Beta Field

Figure 2. 8 Petroleum System Beta Field, South Sumatra Basin

system (Bishop, 2000).

2.1.4.2 Reservoir Rock

Figure 2. 9 Paleogeografi Formasi Air Benakat

Figure 2. 10 Play Concept of South Sumatra basin

2.2. Well Data Evaluation

Table 2. 1 Well Top

seen in Figure 2.10 below :

Figure 2. 11 Beta Field stratigraphic cross section through well logs

2.3. Evaluation of Geophysical Data

Figure 2. 12 Beta Field Location Map and Database

Figure 2. 13 Wavelet Extraction Beta-2

Figure 2. 14 Line 05PAL015 : Beta 2/4 Seismic Well Tie

Figure 2. 15 Line 05PAL064 : Beta-3 Seismic Well Tie

Figure 2. 16 Beta Well Correlation (with synthetic track)

Figure 2. 18 Dominant Frequency Seismic Attribute Map

Time Structure Interpretation

Figure 2. 19 Fault Pattern around the Beta Field

The time interpretation generated structure framework that consist of time

Figure 2. 20 Top Intra ABF (R14) Time Structure Map

Figure 2. 21 Time vs. Depth for the Beta wells

The second method is calculating the regression line using Krigging

Figure 2. 22 KED Interpolation : Z-550 Time vs Depth

Figure 2. 23 Z-650 Depth Differences between Equation and KED methods

Beta Field Depth Structures

Figure 2. 24 Z-380 Depth Structure Map with latest FWL

Figure 2. 25 R-10 Depth Structure Map with latest FWL

Figure 2. 26 Z-450 Depth Structure Map with latest FWL

Figure 2. 27 Z550 Depth Structure Map with latest FWL

Figure 2. 28 Z650 Depth Structure Map with latest FWL

2.4. Reservoir Properties Distribution