1. Produced Water Reinjection Performance Joint Industry Project TerraTek, Inc. Triangle Engineering Taurus Reservoir Solutions (DE&S) E-first Technologies Advantek International

2. Task 3 – Soft sands Review of progress since the December meeting in Houston

3. Task 3 – Soft sands 3.1 Acquisition of Information 3.2 Empirical Correlations and Data Evaluation 3.3 Physical Mechanisms/Phenomena 3.4 Evaluation of Currently Existing Models 3.5 Best Practices: Well Evaluation, Design, Completion and Operating Options Water Quality Specifications/Implications/Guidelines

4. New Work completed n Additional Data for soft formations received after Dec 2000 meeting: –Brage wells 03 and 07 –Heidrun pilot data n Further improvements to the “Skin and k” spreadsheet analysis tool based on Dec 2000 meeting (isolating completion skin) n Re-analysis of all data sets with the modified tool and assessment of differences

5. New Work completed (continued) n Wellstress - poro and thermoelastic stress evaluation tool included in the PWRI Toolbox n Corrections and revisions to the reports issued for Dec meeting –Injectivity of completions –1-D radial damage model n User guides written for: –Wellstress tool (in the Toolbox) –“Skin and k” spreadsheet (not in the toolbox)

6. 1. Additional Data for soft formations received after Dec 2000 meeting –Brage wells 03 and 07 –Heidrun pilot data Only cursory look at Brage at this point Brage long term data looks interesting There is also SRT data. Test data is noisy due to problems with chokes, but has alternating PW and SW – should be analyzed

7. Brage A-3 PW injection

8. Brage A-7 SRT

9. 2. Further improvements to the “Skin and k” spreadsheet n Based on the discussion of the KMG G field dataset, completion skin S c was separated out and it is now an input n KMG data re-analysis: –Assuming S c =100-250 makes skin from damage smaller but still significant –Comparison with BP field D is still unfavourable n All other data sets were re-analyzed using measured or assumed S c – no substantial changes in conclusions

10. KMG G field well 4A, assumed S c =250

11. KMG G field – injectivity comparison with BP field D

12. Wellstress - poro and thermoelastic stress tool for the PWRI Toolbox n Spreadsheet tool – improved packaging n Integrated in the PWRI Toolbox n Problems with computational module – portability issue n Recommend to rewrite the Fortran.dll in VB n User Guide written

13. Work in progress/planned for completion of Task 3 n No new data analysis. Include the Brage and Heidrun pilot data in project extension ? n Report on the completed Soft Formations (SF) data analyses: –Include the general methodology –Detailed discussion of each data set –Findings from the comparative analysis –Concise summary

14. Work in progress/planned for completion of Task 3 (continued) n Investigate if PEA 23 type correlation for fracture injection mode is feasible n Write User Guide for the radial damage tool n Summarize Task 3 results: –Major learnings, concepts, developments –Gaps in understanding –Future work needed n Write Best Practices for soft formations

15. Proposed Extensions of Task 3 n Completion Skin tool for inclusion in the Toolbox –Full set of correlations for C+P completions –Correlations for screens, liners and excluders n Analysis of late data sets –Brage –Heidrun pilot n Rewrite Wellstress library (portability) n Improvements to Damage model