[QUOTE=company man 1;37934]Here is the coup de gras. Did this design follow the guidelines set in the preface of this manual. It most certainly did not. The cementing work was also not performed up to BP requirements as per API recommended practices. There are no excuses. When you specifically deviate away from your own bible, how can anyone expect you to follow anyone else’s recommendations, best practices, rules, regulations, or laws? In short how can youever be trusted not to do it again. In short, you can’t.
[FONT=Times New Roman][SIZE=3]
[LEFT]13.5 Casing and liner setting depths shall be selected to provide a sufficient safety
margin between formation fracture pressure and well control or casing cementing
operations. Limitations on allowable well control operations shall be detailed in
the design.
13.6 All casing and liner shall be designed to withstand reasonably foreseeable well
control burst loadings.
The starting point for well control burst loading shall be gas to surface from
casing shoe, or lower open hole fracture pressure. Casing designs using lesser well
control loadings shall be subject to review as in Well Category 3 above. Casing
designs shall include definition of the well control scenarios they accommodate
and their rationale based on subsurface information, local experience and
operational well control capabilities.[/LEFT]
13.7 All
[/SIZE][/FONT][/QUOTE]
The manual clearly shows how BP would like to operate. But for a few decisions, this well could have been shut in, even with the single completion string. Is anyone prepared to explore this possibility