IATMI22-179

A Successful Story: Improving Success Ratio up to 80% of Well

Reactivation Job. Pamusian Field Case Study, Tarakan, North
Kalimantan, Indonesia
Isrianto Kurniawan, Yudha Kusuma Rizal, Muhammad Ramadhan, Muhammad Ariq Dewantara,
Husein Agil Almunawwar, Frans Hermano Rostow Silaen, Ardi Darmawan, Rian Apriandi,
Bayu Framana
* Email: muhammad_ramadhan@live.com

Abstract.
Pamusian Field is located in the northern part of North Kalimantan, Zona 10, Pertamina Hulu Indonesia
area, approximately 1 km Southeast from center of Tarakan City. Pamusian field is one of the top ten Fields
(Kalimantan Area under Pertamina EP operation Area) based on its OOIP, 553 MMSTB with more than
1200 wells drilled since 1905 (brown field). However, this role doesn’t mean Pamusian production stands
at a tremendous number of productions. Moreover, only 50 active wells contribute to Pamusian oil
production. More than 1000 wells are idle even though there are bunch of oil opportunities on the idle wells.
As an overall, Pamusian oil production remained constant for around 500 BOPD at 3 years back before
massive reactivation delivered in 2021.

At the end of 2020, aligned with the company’s goal to maximize existing Assets, the idea of production
optimization was commissioned by improving the success ratio of well reactivation job in Pamusian Field.
In the last 3 years, the success ratio of well reactivation jobs was not encouraging. The team focused on all
aspects of optimization and reactivation practices. Field Review and Reactivation Lookback are
aggressively conducted to figure out Pamusian Field problems. Lack of workover and well intervention
jobs, inadequate surveillance data, and a misperception of well reactivation methods are raised as the root
causes for underdeveloped fields. Another surprising fact is more than a hundred attic wells located up dip
in the main closure are not active (idle), which has lower surrounding well in a good oil production
performance (10-30 BOPD) BOPD with various of water cut 90%. Again, this is real opportunity! low
hanging fruit to become more oil by producing those wells.
An integrated and comprehensive assessment was successfully delivered. The most important outcome of
this assessment is reactivation method recommendation, it’s called Locomotive (Low Cost, Massive
Impact, & Innovative).
Three innovations were created and delivered to conduct well reactivation jobs in the Pamusian field, there
are Subsurface Data Hierarchy Development (to set subsurface confident level), Fill up Annulus Activity
(to check fluid sample), and Locomotive Risk Mapping Assessment (to set priority by comparing confident
& impact level) as a decision tool. These reactivation methods deliver a high confidence level of success.
Resulting a dramatic rise of success ratio up to 80% (previously 30% at 3 years back) and oil gain average
150 – 200 BOPD which remained stable for several months until early 2022.

Keyword(s): Reactivation, Production, Brown Fields, Locomotive, Subsurface, Optimization

©2022 IATMI. All rights reserved.

“Kebijakan, Strategi dan Teknologi Tepat Guna untuk Meningkatkan

Pengurasan Lapangan Minyak dan Gas di Indonesia“
Introduction
Pamusian Field is a brown oil field located at Tarakan Island, North Kalimantan, Indonesia (Fig. 1). This
field was discovered by Operator Nederlandsch-Indische Industrie Handel Maatschaapij) in 1905 then
started the first production until this day. Pamusian field is one of the backbone fied in Tarakan Field, Zona
10 Pertamina Hulu Indonesia since 32% of oil production comes from this field.

The main formation to become a productive reservoir of this field is Tarakan Formation. The Tarakan
Formation consists of interbedded clay, shale, sandstone, and lignite coal layers, which indicates the
depositional environment was fluvial until delta plain. Based on well log data, clastic sediment lithology is
dominated by sandstone and shaly sand, which generally acts as a para-sequence boundary of one with
another para-sequence. In general, GR Log shapes evaluation indicates 3 types of sand distribution, blocky
sand as dominant facies, bell-shape, and symmetrical. Based on well-to-well correlation evaluation,
Tarakan formation is relatively continuous and connected among wells, especially in shallow prospect zone
as the main contributor of production in the Pamusian Field (Fig 2.).

The shallow prospect zone includes the reservoirs as follows, 90 Mz, 110 Mz, 130 Mz, 165 Mz, 235 Mz,
290 Mz, 340 Mz, and 460 Mz, which all current active wells are producing from these reservoirs/zones
(Fig.3). The major challenge of the shallow prospect zone is typically a sand problem that leads to
generating skin problems. That’s why all of the wells in Pamusian field are completed with a downhole
sand screen on an open hole section (standalone screen). However, the driving mechanism of this shallow
prospect zone is strong water drive support. It’s really significantly become a strength of Field Pamusian
because the majority of wells have a good static fluid level which indicates good reservoir pressure. As
shown on the table-1, there are no gaps between the initial and current formation pressure. Both of them
have similar pressure such a 0.98 SG equivalent pressure.

Since the field’s start up in 1905, Pamusian Field has successfully drilled 1271 wells and distributed in 15
prospect reservoirs with various depths of 50 m to 1400 mMD in the Tarakan and Santul Formation (Fig.
4). Even though a thousand wells drilled in Pamusian, there are only 47 actives wells with production 447
bopd in the end of 2020 (average production 10 bopd per well) and Recovery Factor (RF) 37% which
indicates a bunch of opportunities should be unlocked to increase production and RF by reactivating
suspended wells.
Many years back, the reactivation job of suspended wells has been executed for many wells. Unfortunately,
the success ratio of these reactivation jobs is not promising yet, success ratio < 30% (table.2). This fact
becomes our background to perform massive reactivation to achieve a higher success rate. More wells
reactivated, more oil will be delivered. Looking at current condition of suspended well, the potency looks
promising because of more than a hundred attics wells located up dip in main closure not active (idle) has
lower surrounding well with a good oil production performance.

Scope
For more than 1 year, suspended for various reasons, this reactivation job can be defined as reactivating
inactive wells. This typical reactivation is executed without doing reservoir intervention such as water shut
off, reperforation, adding perforation, stimulation, fracturing, etc. The scope of this reactivation includes
cleaning the wellbore by the sand fill up, fish/junk, screen job, swabbing job, and a downhole pump as an
artificial lift (Fig.5).

“Kebijakan, Strategi dan Teknologi Tepat Guna untuk Meningkatkan

Pengurasan Lapangan Minyak dan Gas di Indonesia“
This reactivation campaign is expected to deliver a higher success rate with a minimum cut-off Discounted
Profitability Index (DPI) ≥ 1.2 which should be definitely profitable. The DPI is calculated by dividing the
present value of future cash flows by initial cost of reactivation job. A DPI of 1 indicates that
project/reactivation job will break event.
Project in scope:
- Screen job
- Fishing Job
Project out scope:
- Workover job
- Reservoir intervention

Methodology
In the event of production increasing effort through a massive reactivation campaign in Pamusian Field,
here are some steps in delivering good candidates:
1. Lookback Previous Reactivation Job
Conducting a lookback for previous reactivation jobs are very critical step before delivering good
candidates. As part of the continuous improvement process, taking a lesson learned of success or failed job
is important. There will be some specific parameter correlations identified during this process. The
evaluated parameters were correlated to the oil gain result of the previous reactivation job. This process is
evaluated to accelerate finding out correlated parameters which has boundary of limited subsurface data.
Those parameters include well location in depth structure, production history, well integrity & fish/junk
problem cumulative oil production, latest oil saturation based on saturation log result, injection response,
etc. Here are some lesson learned taken of previous reactivation job (Fig. 6):
• Lookback & lesson learned from PAM-1043
This is typical of reopening job which refers to cased hole saturation log result. In 2019, oil saturation 340
Mz was at 40%, which has been promising. This well is located at lower attic and is surrounded by 2 good
oil producing wells; PAM-0213/II with a production of 25 bopd, and PAM-0933 with a production of 15
BOPD. From this data, it was decided to reopen 340 MZ in PAM-1043, which generated an average
normalized oil gain of 15 BOPD.
• Lookback & lesson learned from previous job
Well in attic/up dip of structure statistically delivered higher oil gain
Water injection well had a good response either gross or net production
Most of failure jobs were caused by unsuccessful fishing job
There were some dynamic fluid level response from nearby injector

2. Develop Subsurface Data Hierarchy

All the parameters that have been evaluated previously are not stand alone. There are connections between
one parameter with others. Therefore, integrated analysis towards these parameters is still required when
selecting reactivation candidates. To sum up, subsurface data hierarchy is developed to determine confident
level & uncertainty level from the limitation of owned data which includes lack of open hole (OH) log data
(less than 150 OH log of 1227 drilled wells), lack of cement bond log, inadequate pressure data, incomplete
well history & production history, etc.

“Kebijakan, Strategi dan Teknologi Tepat Guna untuk Meningkatkan

Pengurasan Lapangan Minyak dan Gas di Indonesia“
location, surrounding well performance, injection performance, and production performance/history of
suspended well. Saturation log data is actually limited as well due to this kind of data being acquired only
during workover jobs. In spite of that, this data is very important to quantify current oil saturation and
provide valuable information for nearby suspended wells. Moreover, this data becomes the most reliable
data (as long as it has valid interpretation) to start screening nearby suspended wells. On top of that, the
latest saturation log data can deliver further assessment for well to well correlation and fluid contact. Other
parameters or data can be described as follows:
- Well location
This is a well location on reservoir structures such as updip/attic, lower attic / medium, and downdip/flank.
As stated on previous evaluation, more oil gain will come from wells located at updip/attic structures.
- Surrounding well performance
This is very important data to show the current performance of certain well or reservoir. A lot of suspended
well located around big oil producer. Looking back the typical of reservoir connectivity is quite good,
surrounding well performance is the key to quick screening reactivation candidate. Quite simple conceptual
applied, if structurally lower surrounding wells perform a good production from a particular zone/reservoir,
thus the higher suspended well should be typically good performance. Vice versa.
- Injection response
Some injector wells were on stream in a couple of years back. These wells were intended to increase the
areal sweep of Pamusian Field which has a typically low drainage radius. After a couple years of having no
monitoring around suspended & active wells, surveillance job was aggressively performed in several
monitor wells such as static & dynamic fluid level, reservoir balancing to avoid lack of withdrawal. As a
result, many areas having more injection on the peripheral but not enough withdrawal. It leads to a major
reason to reactivate more suspend well to prove response of injection
- Production history
This kind of data includes production history, cumulative production, bubble maps, initial production, and
last production.

3. Well History and Integrity Analysis

Referring to the previous evaluation of reactivation jobs, more than 50% of execution had been postponed
since integrity issues. Moreover, the uncertainty of wellbore accessibility might cause jobs to fail because
of unsuccessful fishing jobs. That’s why deep down of well history analysis is a must. Extra effort should
be carried out such as revisiting aging documents since the early 1900s. This effort to reduce the uncertainty
of wellbore accessibility issues by doing mitigation with the wellwork team.

4. Field Survey
Field survey aims to direct site visit for the sake of fill up annulus check and access & location check.
- Fill up annulus check
This procedure is to fill up the well annulus with water to determine the original wellbore fluid whether
water or oil (Fig. 8). Injected water to the annulus will fulfill until overflow happened in the surface. If oil
as the original fluid in the wellbore, overflow will be oil as well since oil less dense than water.
Early step of this procedure is perform Sonolog test to determine fluid level and wellbore pressure. Fluid
level data is necessary to ensure the required volume of water is injected while wellbore pressure is
maintained to ensure all operational jobs are working safely and properly.

“Kebijakan, Strategi dan Teknologi Tepat Guna untuk Meningkatkan

Pengurasan Lapangan Minyak dan Gas di Indonesia“
The fill up annulus is able to be conducted in the Pamusian field due to strong aquifer support (water driver).
After more than a year of having no production, static fluid level will be continuously built up, even up to
0 mMD (to the surface) and it turn into high static formation pressure in suspended wells. Once fill up
annulus is conducted, fluid will be circulated out to the surface, not loss to the formation.
The main purpose of this procedure is to determine the original fluid in the wellbore. Overflow fluid to the
surface will be accumulated to the tank/chamber. Amount barrels of recover oil can be convert to fluid
column using annulus volume capacity conversion. This procedure is able to replace Static Bottom Hole
(SBHP) record using slickline which was not available on site at the time.

- Access & Location Joint Survey

This activity involves a multi-discipline team to visit and check the current condition of well access and
location. The joint assessment is part of a mandatory survey considering the Pamusian operation area
located around housing, swamps, rivers, production facilities, public roads, etc. The output of this survey
is to ascertain a safe rig operation and production facility scenario. If some findings are identified, they
need a mitigation plan to close the findings for the sake of smooth and safe project execution.

5. Risk Mapping
As part of delivering high-quality candidates, this step is very critical. This is a step on how to generate low
risk & high impact candidates. In line with Pertamina Upstream Production Way (PUPW), 3 main step of
reactivation candidacy process should be completed such as determining potency, economic assessment,
and prioritization. The prioritization is translated into this risk mapping and named it with Locomotive Risk
Mapping (LRM) (Fig. 9). Locomotive means Low Cost, Massive Impact, & Innovative because LRM
generates low-risk high-impact candidates with innovative methods.

LRM consists of 2 main assessments such as Confident Level and Impact Level. Confident Level includes
subsurface assessment, well history/integrity assessment, fill-up annulus result, and surface assessment.
These parameters all set by certain scoring criteria to guide us in fulfill this LRM (table 3). While impact
level quantifies economic assessment which consists of an estimated cost and an oil gain function.
Wells that have high confident level and impact level should be plotted at the upper right which means low
risk and high impact candidates.
All wells on that quadrant will be prioritized using a multiplier number of Confident Level and Impact
Level. This number is called LRM Value.
Confident Level
• High confident level (low risk) : score 2.7-3.0
• Medium confident level (medium risk) : 2.4 ≤ score < 2.7
• Low confident level (high risk) : score < 2.4
Impact Level (Discounted Profitability Index/DPI)
• High : DPI ≥ 3.5
• Medium : 2.5 ≤ DPI < 3.5
• Low : DPI ≤ 2.5

6. Project Execution & Monitoring

As a result of Locomotive Risk Mapping, high-quality candidates have been generated. These candidates
then be transformed into a Reactivation Proposal which consists of the purpose of a job, job procedure,

“Kebijakan, Strategi dan Teknologi Tepat Guna untuk Meningkatkan

Pengurasan Lapangan Minyak dan Gas di Indonesia“
work & material plan, and mitigation plan. Next is the reactivation job. During this job, its’ really possible
to fail since integrity issues are not captured in well history, low influx, low oil cut, complex fish/junk,
massive sand problem, etc. On the other hand, for a successful job, a well is put into production with close
monitoring by taking more surveillance (well test, sampling, sonolog, etc.) to capture optimization
opportunities.

To sum up, Locomotive method is an integrated, comprehensive, and quick method to reactivate suspended
wells in Pamusian Field (Fig.10). By implementing this method, high quality of candidates will be delivered
with some benefits such as simple screening and simple job, no need to rent equipment for SBHP record,
generating hundreds well candidates, simple decision tool (Locomotive Risk Mapping).

Results & Discussion

During 2021, reactivation job in Pamusian field had been implemented in 21 wells, of which 17 wells are
categorized as a successful job that reach 81% of success ratio (DPI ≥ 1.2) (table 5). It is a big achievement
compared to the previous year which only reach 30% of success ratio. This reactivation is also the biggest
contributor to the increase of Tarakan Field production for about 2100 BOPD.

1st case, ideal case candidate (Fig. 11)

An example of an ideal success case can be found on PAM-0893. This oil well was produced in the 340
Mz layer with an open hole and standalone sandscreen completion, with the last production of 5 bopd in
1974. From the analysis of subsurface data, the well is located in the top structure, relatively up dip
compared to the surrounding active wells which have typical production of 10-40 bopd. From the 2019
cased hole saturation log data on PAM-1043 which is more down dip than PAM-0893, the oil saturation is
obtained at 40%, and it is proven that the perforation in the PAM-1043 well in the zone shows an oil
production of 10-20 bopd. The PAM-0893 well also has injection support which is more down dip. From
the well history data, this well also has no record of fish/junk and integrity problems. From the survey
results at the site, there were no major problems so that the wells could be rig work. The downhole pressure
measurement was obtained using a sonolog tool with a fluid level of 0 m and intermittent flowing well
under static conditions. After the reactivation job, the peak production was 60 bopd, and it was stable at 30-
40 bopd.

2nd case, the uncertainty of wellbore accessibility, unrecovered fish (Fig.12)

This case can be found in PAM-0224/II and PAM-0235. These wells were completed from 340 Mz layer
with standalone screen on open hole section. These wells are located up dip in the main closure of 340 MZ.
Unfortunately, PAM-0235 has unclear tubular fish in the wellbore. While PAM-0224/II has fish of 4-3/4”
basket and 2-3/8” drill pipe. All mitigation had been discussed and clear with wellwork team. However,
both fish couldn’t be recovered after several attempts of fishing job. Moreover, PAM-0224/II had a shallow
tag starting at 40 mMD. It was significantly different information between the well history and actual well
profile. Its common findings during reactivation job in Pamusian due to lack of well history information.
Maximizing efforts for washing down, milling, or fishing job were the key to the success of the wells
although maximum accessibility was only until the top of the fish. The final tag of fish for PAM-0235 is
about 30 meters from the top of production interval, while PAM-0224/II is about 30 meters from the top of
the production interval. Those wells were decided to perform swab job to determine the well influx. With
Qmax less than 70 bfpd and oil cut 1-2%, these wells keep to put on production due to located up dip, oil

“Kebijakan, Strategi dan Teknologi Tepat Guna untuk Meningkatkan

Pengurasan Lapangan Minyak dan Gas di Indonesia“
show result during fill up annulus check, and as the monitor of injection response in 340 Mz. These wells
should be produced to increase withdrawal due to nearby injector consistently injected until 1600 bfpd.
Surprisingly, resulting a dramatic rise of tremendous production comes from these wells. In the early period
of production, PAM-0235/II was naturally flowing to the surface for 3 days up to 300 bopd before a
recordable test stable at 30-40 bopd. While PAM-0224/II production was relatively stable at 10 bopd but
an interesting phenomenon happened here. There was a significantly improvement Inflow Performance
Relationship (IPR)/Qmax from 80 bfpd to become 1400 bfpd with stable net production 16 bopd.

3rd case, injection response (Fig. 13)

This is one of the unique cases in PAM-0173/I. This well is located up dip in the main closure of 340 Mz.
In the 1st quarter of 2014, this well was reactivated with a 100% water cut.. After right, this well was
suspended before last reactivation job in 2021. After almost 7 years of having no production, some
interesting points came up to become the reasons for reactivating this well. There were 2 injectors on stream
in late 2014 and 2019, PAM-0378i and PAM-1001i. PAM-0378 was converted to a peripheral injector since
2014 with average injection 3400 bwipd. While PAM-1001i located up dip but lower than PAM-0173/I had
been starting the injection in November 2019 with stable rate 3800 bwipd. After Almost 7 years of having
support injection from the peripheral, and 2 years from the nearby injector, filling up annulus was conducted
as part of reactivation job screening. To sum up, fluid level was found until surface, 0 m and continues oil
show result during fill up annulus. It’s indicating nearby water injection response to this well by improving
areal swept. As the result, after reactivation job, the peak production of this well up to 50 bopd and is
currently stable at 20 bopd.

All in all, there were so many cases and lessons learned taken during reactivation job campaign in 2021.
Here are some positive takeaways of this reactivation campaign (Fig. 14):
1. Increase the success ratio from 30% to become 81%
2. Deliver normalized oil gain about 200 BOPD
3. Contribute to peak production of Tarakan Field up to 2100 BOPD (previously 1800 bopd)
4. Improve cycle time of operational rig job from 9.5 days/job to become 6.05 days/job

Not only contributing to the production and operation, but also other positive impacts achieved from
reactivation job such as asset protection from land encroachment issue and additional active wells for
workover/well intervention candidates.

Recommendations
The reactivation campaign has succeeded in being a pioneer in bringing up greater opportunities in
Pamusian Field. The success of reactivation jobs is able to prove most of the wells and the productive zone
has great potential prospects. Wells reactivation with high influx/productivity index become candidates for
further production optimization programs such a like gross-up production. In the end, reactivation job will
be able to maximize oil recovery in the Pamusian Field with the existing surface facility capacity. The next
plan to further improve the production is by improving surveillance data such as cased hole saturation log,
SBHP record, and injection support.

Acknowledgments

“Kebijakan, Strategi dan Teknologi Tepat Guna untuk Meningkatkan

Pengurasan Lapangan Minyak dan Gas di Indonesia“
The author would like to express thanks to Pertamina Hulu Indonesia, Zona 10, Tarakan Field and EPT
Asset 5 Pertamina EP, and Area 2 SSD Zona 10 Pertamina Hulu Indonesia for their support and input in
executing Reactivation campaign and publishing this paper. Also sincerely thank all personnel and
frontliner on site who performed the successful work, documenting the process and its result.

References
Batohie, G., Maharaj, G. 2016, Mature Field Rejuvenation by Reactivation of idle Wells in Petrorin’s Land
Acreage. Presented at the SPETT 2016 Section Energy Resources Conference, Port of Spain, 13-15 June
2016. SPE-180792-MS
Pertamina Upstream Production Way (PUPW)
Lock, G.A., and Hoyer, W.A., 1975. Carbon/Oxygen (C/O) Log: Use and Interpretation, Journal of
Petroleum Technology
Ahmed, T., 2005. Advance Reservoir Engineering, Gulf Publishing Company, Houston, Texas, USA
Ahmed, T., 2006. Reservoir Engineering Handbook, Gulf Publishing Company, Houston, Texas, USA
Allen, T.O., and Robert, A. P., 1993. Production Operation: wll Completion, Work Over and Stimulation,
2nd Edition, Volume II, Oil and Gas Consultant International, Inc., Tulsa, Oklahoma
Kristanto, Dedy., Rukmana, Dadang., Amperianto, Agus., Paradhita., Windyanesha. 2022, Evaluation and
Reactivation Stratgy of Shut-In Wells Due to High Water Cut to Improve Oil Production in Bayu Field:
Case Study of Bayu-N3 Well. International Journal of Oil, Gas and Coal Engineering.

Figures
Figure 1: Pamusian Field Location part of Tarakan Field, Zona 10, Pertamina Hulu Indonesia
Figure 2: Well to well correlation of Pamusian Field
Figure 3: Shallow Prospect Zone
Figure 4: Total wells vs Depth
Figure 5: Typical completion and reactivation job in Pamusian Field
Figure 6: Lesson learned of previous reactivation job
Figure 7: Subsurface Data Hierarchy
Figure 8: Illustration of Fill up Annulus
Figure 9: Locomotive Risk Mapping (LRM)
Figure 10: Flow process of Locomotive Risk Mapping
Figure 11: 1st Case Data
Figure 12: 2nd Case Data
Figure 13: 3rd Case Data
Figure 14: 4th Case Data
Figure 15: Positive impact of reactivation job

Tables
Table 1: Initial and current formation pressure
Table 2: 3 Years of reactivation performance lookback
Table 3: Locomotive Risk Mapping Scoring Criteria
Table 4: Summary of Well Reactivation Job

“Kebijakan, Strategi dan Teknologi Tepat Guna untuk Meningkatkan

Pengurasan Lapangan Minyak dan Gas di Indonesia“
Figure 1

Figure 2

“Kebijakan, Strategi dan Teknologi Tepat Guna untuk Meningkatkan

Pengurasan Lapangan Minyak dan Gas di Indonesia“
Figure 3

Figure 4

Figure 5

“Kebijakan, Strategi dan Teknologi Tepat Guna untuk Meningkatkan

Pengurasan Lapangan Minyak dan Gas di Indonesia“
Figure 6

Figure 7

Figure 8

“Kebijakan, Strategi dan Teknologi Tepat Guna untuk Meningkatkan

Pengurasan Lapangan Minyak dan Gas di Indonesia“
Figure 9

Figure 10

“Kebijakan, Strategi dan Teknologi Tepat Guna untuk Meningkatkan

Pengurasan Lapangan Minyak dan Gas di Indonesia“
Figure 11

Figure 12

Figure 13

“Kebijakan, Strategi dan Teknologi Tepat Guna untuk Meningkatkan

Pengurasan Lapangan Minyak dan Gas di Indonesia“
 Figure 14

Table 1
Current Reservoir
Current Reservoir Current and Initial Initial Reservoir
Datum Water Cut Pressure Estimation
Field Name Pay Zone Condition Pressure Comparisson Pressure
(Latest RDT Jan 2019)

m, TVDSS Drop Down List Drop Down List Drop Down List psi psi
Oversaturated
Pamusian 110 Mz 112 WC > 75% Pressure Drop <20% 156 153
(P > Pb)
Oversaturated
Pamusian 130 Mz 132 WC > 75% Pressure Drop <20% 184 174.94
(P > Pb)
Oversaturated
Pamusian 165 Mz 170 WC > 75% Pressure Drop <20% 237 236
(P > Pb)
Oversaturated
Pamusian 235 Mz 240 WC > 75% Pressure Drop <20% 335 334
(P > Pb)
Oversaturated
Pamusian 290 Mz 288 WC > 75% Pressure Drop <20% 401 400
(P > Pb)
Oversaturated
Pamusian 340 Mz 340 WC > 75% Pressure Drop <20% 474 473
(P > Pb)
Oversaturated
Pamusian 460 Mz 472 WC > 75% Pressure Drop <20% 658 657
(P > Pb)

Table 2
Year Wells Job Days Cum Oil (bbls) Rig Cost (USD) Revenue (USD) Profit (USD) Success Ratio
2020 10 81 10767 116,219 322,999 206,781 30%
2019 5 35 0 65,141 - - 65,141 0%
2018 5 8 0 22,953 - - 22,953 0%

“Kebijakan, Strategi dan Teknologi Tepat Guna untuk Meningkatkan

Pengurasan Lapangan Minyak dan Gas di Indonesia“
 Table 3
I. Subsurface Assessment Assesment Value
Indicator Expert Judgement 3 2 1
RST Log & Nearby Wells Fluid Contact & well to well correlation, oil Good Medium Poor/not available
saturation analysis
Well Location/ Depth Structure Top to Flank Assessment Updip/Attic Upper flank Flank
Surrounding Well Performance production and water cut of reference well, well Good Medium Poor/not available
to well correlation (if any log or correlation
depth based correlation approach), bubble map,
surrounding well location
Injection Performance FIFO (withdrawl) check,monitor well, well Connected available but not not available
location, and injection interval connected/response

Production History Production profile, influx/productivity index, Good Medium Poor/not available
initial production, last production, water cut,
cummulative oil production
Scoring Guideline - Subsurface Assessment (with expert judgement) :
Score 3 in LRM if total assessment value : 11-15
Score 2 in LRM if total assessment value : 9-11
Score 1 in LRM if total assessment value : 5-8

II.A Well History - Fish/Junk Problem

1 Type and depth of fish are not clearly identified and or major fish problem. Historically fishing job effort had been tried but not succeed
2 Type and depth of fish are identified and or minor fish problem
3 No fish in the wellbore

II.B Well History - Wellbore Integrity Problem

0 Casing pared, crater to the surface by history
1 Casing collapse, casing leak
2 Small OD configuration, no well profile
3 No issue

III. Fill up Annulus

1 Results of fill up annulus is water
2 Results is low oil cut or oil film. And or fill up annulus check can't be executed
3 Clear and good oil cut

IV. Access & Pad Location (Joint Survey)

0 Under housing, under production facilty, located in river, uphills, and forest
1 Hard effort (around housing, plantation, river, etc.) but there is some space for rig layout setting. Need extra mitigation and extra coordination to
stakeholder/third party
2 Accessible, around housing or surface facility. Minor mitigation or civil work required
3 Good access & locatpion, no issue

Table 5
DPI
Productive Job Duration, days Days Prod (days) Cum (bbl) Cost (USD) Days Prod Cum (bbl) Cum (bbl) Cost (USD)
NO Well Success Success Note
Zone Jan-Dec 2021 Jan-Dec 2021 Jan- Dec 2021 Jan-Mar 2022 Jan-Mar 2022 to 365 days to 365 days
Moving Job ≥1.2
1 PAM-0132/I 460 MZ 2 5 365 264 10,938 90 0.0 264 10937.6 0.9 failed Suddenly massive sand problem
2 PAM-0157/II 235 MZ 1 3 67 163 6,250 90 566.4 1863 6250.0 4.1 success
3 PAM-0129/II 460 MZ 1 2 341 6678 4,688 90 789.9 7468 4687.5 19.4 success
4 PAM-0173/I 340 MZ 2 4 327 5974 9,375 90 786.3 6760 9375.1 9.1 success
5 PAM-1047 110 MZ 1 6 316 11769 10,938 90 2450.8 14220 10937.6 15.9 success
6 PAM-0189/II 340 MZ 2 6 304 3925 12,500 90 1242.4 5167 12500.1 5.5 success
7 PAM-0235/II 340 MZ 1 9 278 3489 15,625 90 0.0 3489 15625.1 3.2 success
8 PAM-0972 90 MZ 1 5 271 2489 9,375 90 328.7 2824 9375.1 4.1 success
9 PAM-1044 380 MZ 1 13 238 0 21,875 90 0.0 0 21875.1 0.6 failed Fish couldn’t be recovered
10 PAM-0251 340 MZ 1 4 228 414 7,813 90 0.0 414 7812.6 1.2 success
11 PAM-0224/II 340 MZ 1 11 157 1363 18,750 90 493.9 2238 18750.1 2.0 success
12 PAM-0165/II 110 MZ 1 2 157 1544 4,688 90 1512.4 5486 4687.5 14.4 success
13 PAM-0996 460 MZ 1 2 96 704 4,688 90 959.7 4114 4687.5 11.0 success
14 PAM-0132/II 340 MZ 2 5 105 0 10,938 90 0.0 0 10937.6 0.6 failed Fish couldn’t be recovered
15 PAM-0160/I 235 MZ 2 3 67 692 7,813 90 982.2 3300 7812.6 5.6 success
16 PAM-0727 165 MZ 1 2 67 170 4,688 90 634.3 1494 4687.5 4.4 success
17 PAM-1041 460 MZ 2 3 59 308 7,813 90 107.0 415 7812.6 1.2 success
18 PAM-0766 165 MZ 2 2 54 1160 6,250 90 1142.7 4071 6250.0 8.3 success
19 PAM-0893 340 MZ 2 4 43 1941 9,375 90 3353.0 5294 9375.1 7.3 success
20 PAM-0896 110 MZ 1 2 41 0 4,688 90 0.0 0 4687.5 0.6 failed Water cut 100%
21 PAM-0385 110 MZ 2 4 29 264 9,375 90 368.1 2347 3125.0 3.5 success
Assumption
Oil price 67.9 USD/bbl
Operating cost 31.85 USD/bbl
Rig cost 1562.51 USD/day

“Kebijakan, Strategi dan Teknologi Tepat Guna untuk Meningkatkan

Pengurasan Lapangan Minyak dan Gas di Indonesia“