KETENTUAN DAN PERSYARATAN

1. Menjelaskan secara lengkap dan ringkas tentang POD (Plan of

Development/ Rencana Pengembangan) dan regulasi yang berlaku Di
Indonesia sesuai dengan PTK POD SKK MIGAS suatu lapangan minyak- gas
bumi (dijawab saat presentasi, dalam format power- point).
2. Mempelajari data POD Lapangan Gas Juliet (terlampir) yang mencakup
aspek teknis dan keekonomian.
3. Peserta dituntut untuk membuat nama perusahaan sendiri yang mewakili
profil dari para peserta se kreatif mungkin. Nantinya nama perusahaan
akan dipakai di laporan dan slide presentasi.
4. Penilaian makalah (dokumen POD) mencakup kelengkapan data,
sistematika penulisan, prosedur pengerjaan, dan materi makalah
(dokumen POD). Materi makalah (dokumen POD) harus mencantumkan
kajian model geologi, kajian petrofisik, kajan reservoir, perkiraan
OGIP/OOIP, kajian produksi, kajian pemboran/ kerja ulang dan non-
subsurface, dan rekomendasi pengembangan lapangan.
5. Penilaian hasil pengerjaan POD mencakup kreatifitas dalam memberikan
alternatif strategi pengembangan lapangan, kemampuan tim dalam
menguasasi teori, materi dan penyampaian secara sistematis, jelas, tepat
waktu, dan kemampuan dalam menjawab pertanyaan (diskusi).
6. Penilaian dan keputusan juri bersifat mutlak dan tidak dapat diganggu
gugat.
Juliet Field
1. Geological Findings & Reviews

Juliet was discovered in 2001, the discovery well encountered a thick gas column
and thin oil rim reservoired in steep-flanked carbonate buildup structure of
Oligocene age. The top carbonate envelop (TCE) structure map of the Cepu Block
(Figure 1) shows the regional configuration of the Oligo-Miocene carbonate
platform and associated carbonate buildups, including the Juliet structure. The
buildups can exhibit several thousands of feet of relief from the regional
carbonate platform. Their growth history, structural form and rock properties are
similar.

Figure 1. Juliet Top Carbonate Envelope Depth Structure Map

The hydrocarbon column is predominantly gas with thin oil leg. Pressure, contact
data, and 3D seismic interpretation indicates that the Juliet Field is a common
reservoir in pressure communication. The hydrocarbon reservoir system has a
gas cap with an estimated GOC at 1995 m (6546 TVDSS). The carbonate
reservoir has an interpreted OWC at 2040 m (6692 TVDSS). The total gas column
approximately is 442 m (1450 ft).

The regional geology of the east java basin has been the subject of numerous
industry and academic studies over the last decade. The majority of the available
studies lack the level of integration necessary to resolve the complex tectonic
and sedimentology history of basin. Interpretation of the existing seismic
coverage, both 3D and 2D, has allowed correlation of recognizable seismic
patterns to depositional environments filling the data gap between the sparsely
distributed deeper wells. This qualitative classification was completed for several
time intervals of which The Rupelian, Chattian, Aquitanian, and Burdigalian
(Figure 2). This covers the period during which Cepu area carbonate buildups
grew before they were drowned and replaced by deeper water clastic deposition.
Four depositional environments for these time intervals were interpreted based
on distinguishable seismic patterns. Their characteristics are as follows :

1. Carbonate platform/ buildup : Internally Chaotic and Mounded geometries

with Onlap of External Units. These are main reservoir unit.
2. Middle self : High Amplitude, Parallel Continuous and Onlap
3. Slope : Thinned Section, Inclined Parallel Continuous
4. Basin : High Amplitude Parallel Continuous

This categorization was utilized to map out the three carbonate growth stages of
The Cepu area carbonate build-ups from Rupelian to Burdigalian and the early
deposition of clastics following buildup drowning.

Figure 2. Integrated Stratigraphy Chart, Cepu Area

2. Reservoir Descriptions

Fluid Contact

The Gas Oil Contact (GOC) and The Oil Water Contact (OWC) are interpreted
through formation pressure and log analysis, confirmed by DST result.

Figure 3. MDT

Porosity Model

Density porosity was chosen over density/ neutron crossplot and sonic porosity
methods. The porosity results from the density porosity method shows
reasonable agreement with core porosity (Figure 4).
Figure 4. Comparison of Calculated Porosity From Density Log and Core
Porosity

Permeability

The porosity-permeability relationship in Juliet Field core is similar to the matrix

trend in X Field (near Juliet Field; analogues). As the result, the porosity to
permeability transform from X Field was used for the permeability estimate in the
models (Figure 5).
 Figure 5. Similar Core Porosity and Core Permeability Trend Observed
as in X Field (Blue)

From a regional perspective, many carbonate fields in the area contain fractures,
which result in drilling problems such lost circulation. In general, the fractures are
mostly associated with the low porosity zones below TCE. For drilling, one
encountered significant experiences that approximately 8200 bbls of mud in total
were lost in the carbonate at two major events:

1. Total loss at TCE

2. Total loss in the oil column, ~30 m (100 ft) above OWC

Fractures are observed in FMI images are linked to mud loss (Figure 6). Most of
the fractures are perpendicular to the buildup slope, indicating gravity driven
slope failure origin. In addition to the natural fractures, around fifty near vertical
non-planar fractures were interpreted as drilling-induced tensile fractures.
 .

Figure 6. Composite Log and Fractures/ Bed Picks Form The FMI Logs

Reservoir Temperature and Pressure

Pressure were obtained with a sample formation tester and pressures were also
measured during well test build-ups. Based on pressure vs depth relationships,
the reservoir pressure at Juliet Field GOC of 1995 m (6546 ft) is predicted to be
2948 psia. The reservoir temperature has been calculated from the temperatures
measured during logging and the carbonate productions tests. For Juliet Field, the
reservoir temperature is estimated to be 268 F at 2016.2 mTVDss.
Fluid Properties and Characterization

Table 1. Composition
 Table 2. Reservoir Black Oil Properties

Table 3. Well Testing From Exploration Wells

Table 4. Purposed Development Wells

According to exploration wells. It can be modeled by using well test data,
permeability, and thickness correlation trough Juliet Field. As shown by (Table 4).
This simplification leads by engineering judgment can be used to obtain
purposed development wells deliverability.

In-Place

The Juliet Field reservoir contains an oil rim with a large gas cap. Table 5
summarizes the base case, best estimated, in-place volumes for this reservoir.

Table 5. Estimated In-Place Volumes

The volumes in Table 5 represent Hydrocarbon Gas which is 65% of the total
raw Gas accounting for the non-hydrocarbon components. Both DST and MDT
pressure information are available for Juliet Field, which suggest a common OWC
and GOC within the entire Juliet Field. The vertical limits for calculating the in-
place volumes associated with these wells are OWC and GOC.

Insight about this Juliet Field performance can be figured by looking at first
exploration well. Juliet 1 has been put to production from March- October 2013.
Since June 2013, the production was observed to be gradually declining, as can
be seen from (Figure 7).

Figure 7. Juliet-1 Production Profile

3. Drilling & Completion

Special drilling and completion considerations include the following :

1. Shalow gas on surface casing string interval

2. Effective primary cement jobs on shallow formation casing string to
provide surface isolation
3. Wellbore stability for reactive shale formations and higher angel wells
4. Lost circulation
5. Effective primary cement jobs on liners through the carbonate interval
6. Planning H2S and CO2
7. Corrotion (Downhole material selection and corrosion inhibitor)
8. Completion methods (including downhole pressure gauge), perforations,
and stimulations
9. Use appropriate rig
10.Lack of water supply during dry season
11.Management of drilling waste and cuttings

4. Production Facilities

The gas processing facility will consist primarily of the following units and
facilities :

1. Inlet separation unit

2. Dew point control unit
3. Refrigeration unit
4. Dehydration unit
5. Condensate stabilization unit
6. AGRU
7. Acid gas enrichment unit
8. Sulfur recovery unit
9. Tail gas unit
10. Sales gas compression
11. Thermal oxidizer unit
12. Flare, vent system, and an integrated control and safety
system
13. Inlet booster gas compressor (subject to performance)