Caspian Sea MODU refurbished to western standards

Dredger works for North Sea pipelays

The trailing hopper dredger Gerardus Mercator recently completed a trial trench excavation in the Westhinder Shipping Channel for Statoil's Norfra pipeline. The excavation was through more than 750 m of stiff clay containing boulders up to 1.2 m long, according to owner Jan De Nul N.V., Aalst, Belgium. The vessel is currently presweeping in front of EMC's laybarge Seamac 1 for the Bacton-Zeebrugge Interconnector pipeline. Later this month, it will return to the Westhinder Shipping Channel to complete the 4.5 km trench in front of ETPM's 1601 pipelay barge for the Norfra project.

A consortium of eleven companies acquired and refurbished the semisubmersible drilling unit Kaspmorneft for drilling in the Azerbaijani sector of the Caspian Sea.

This was the first such acquisition and refurbishment project in the region. The project cost $40 million and took 12 months.

Caspian Sea potential

Estimates place the undeveloped hydrocarbon reserves lying beneath the Caspian Sea at about 12 billion bbl with a further 25 billion bbl yet to be found. Iran and the Former Soviet Union (FSU) countries of Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, Turkmenistan, and Russia surround this land locked body of water (Fig. 1 [29140 bytes]).

Following dissolution of the Soviet Union, several international oil companies began negotiations to participate in developing the region's hydrocarbon reserves. One of the first agreements concluded was a production sharing agreement (PSA) between the Republic of Azerbaijan and an 11 company consortium ( Table 1 [14506 bytes]), the founding members of Azerbaijan International Operating Co. (AIOC).

The PSA required AIOC to drill a minimum of three appraisal wells on its contract area within 30 months from the agreement ratification date in December 1994.

The Caspian Sea depth varies from a few meters in the North to over 900 m in the South. Water depth in the AIOC area of interest varies between 80 and 300 m.

Marine vessel access to the Caspian Sea is possible from the Black Sea via the Volga-Don waterway or from the Baltic Sea via the Volga River.

The size of the vessel that can navigate these waterways is limited in length, beam, height, and draft. No existing mobile offshore drilling units (MODUs) can navigate either waterway without significant modification.

Existing fleet

When the first agreements with international companies were signed, no MODUs in the Caspian Sea met internationally recognized safety and operating efficiency standards.

The indigenous Caspian Sea MODU fleet consists of five semisubmersible and six jack up units. The oldest of the semisubmersibles was the Kaspmorneft, a Freide & Goldman-designed Pacesetter rig built in modules in Pori, Finland, and assembled in Astrakhan, Russia, by Rauma Repola in 1980.

The four subsequent semisubmersibles were Soviet designed and built Shelf-class rigs which were also assembled in Astrakhan.

The rigs are all owned and operated by State Oil Co. of the Azerbaijan Republic (Socar).

The rigs were in a very poor state of repair and required significant investment to bring them to internationally recognized safety and operating efficiency standards.

Options

AIOC considered and evaluated several options before selecting the Kaspmorneft to drill its commitment wells. These options were as follows:

• Upgrade the Kaspmorneft

• Upgrade a Shelf-class unit

• Import an existing MODU

• Build a new MODU at a Caspian Sea shipyard

• Build a new MODU in sections and assemble at a Caspian Sea shipyard

• Convert a Caspian Sea monohull vessel

• Build a self-erecting MODU.

Option evaluation

AIOC evaluated the various options using the results of several investigative projects, summarized in Table 2 [11170 bytes], that had been undertaken by AIOC's partners prior to the PSA ratification.

Data on the upgrading time and cost for the in situ MODUs were acquired during visits to the vessels by a number of operators, rig builders, equipment manufacturers, and drilling contractors. The criteria initially set for estimating time and cost were that the vessel should be upgraded to meet internationally acceptable safety and operating efficiency standards.

The Shelf-unit refurbishment included complete replacement of the power generation as well as the drilling and subsea equipment. This equipment was primarily of Soviet manufacture, and there were major uncertainties regarding the operating efficiency, reliability, and spare part availability.

The Kaspmorneft was equipped with western-manufactured equipment and, although it was mainly an early 1970s technology, there was a higher comfort level regarding the potential performance and availability of spare parts.

The time and cost estimates for importing existing MODUs were obtained from drilling contractors that had independently commissioned studies. Drilling contractors also provided new-build estimates.

In addition to the time and cost criteria, several other factors supported the selection of the Kaspmorneft. Azerbaijan's shipyard facilities and infrastructure were unable to support a major construction project, and it was known that the rig owners were reluctant to allow the vessel to leave Azerbaijani waters.

Because this was AIOC's first major project, AIOC desired to keep the work scope and infrastructure requirements as simple as possible. A further influencing factor was that Socar desired to have one of the indigenous fleet refurbished for drilling the appraisal wells.

Contracting philosophy

Several potential contractual options were considered for the charter, refurbishment, and operation of the Kaspmorneft. There were, however, many variations on these principle themes, including the use of Azerbaijani organizations and joint ventures between Azerbaijani enterprises and foreign companies. The following indicates the range of alternatives.

• Socar to refurbish and operate

• AIOC to bare boat charter, shipyard contractor to refurbish, and a drilling contractor to operate

• AIOC to bare boat charter, drilling contractor to refurbish and operate.

Financing of the refurbishment work could have been lump sum, cost plus, or recovered in the day rate during drilling operations.

AIOC eventually adopted the philosophy where AIOC bare boat chartered the Kaspmorneft directly from Socar and selected a drilling contractor for the refurbishment work and rig operations.

The drilling contractor was to be reimbursed for all labor and material costs, and a conventional day rate fee was to be negotiated to cover the contractors' costs when the rig was operating. This strategy had several advantages including:

• Introducing international technology and operating practices to Azerbaijan

• AIOC retaining a high control level over its investment in the rig

• AIOC accessing the skills and experience of a drilling contractor in making value/investment judgments

• Minimizing the risk carried by the drilling contractor

• Simplifying the contractual organization.

A bare boat charter agreement for the Kaspmorneft was negotiated and agreed to in November 1994. The agreement included an option period whereby AIOC had to confirm the selection of the Kaspmorneft within 6 months of the PSA being ratified.

Drilling contractor selection

A prequalification of drilling contractors for the Kaspmorneft refurbishment had been performed by BP and Statoil prior to the formation of AIOC. The prequalification developed a short list of contractors qualified to undertake this type of project and assessed the following:

• Financial status

• Quality of personnel

• Relevant project engineering experience

• Relevant drilling operations experience

• FSU experience

• Pacesetter MODU experience

• Innovative project proposals

• Health, safety, and environmental proposals.

After reviewing the work, AIOC adopted a short list of four drilling contractors.

It was clear at an early stage that a simple cost analysis was inappropriate for evaluating the contractors because it was not possible at that time to fully define the refurbishment scope. There were also significant uncertainties in local labor, shipyard facilities, and logistics costs.

The short-listed contractors were requested to submit a detailed written response to an invitation to tender, which included details of a provisional survey of the rig. Sixteen major refurbishment line items were included in the inquiry. The contractors were to use these items to demonstrate their project management, cost control, and cost reduction initiatives.

Other specific items in the inquiry document allowed evaluation against the following key criteria:

• Estimated refurbishment cost

• Quality of the technical aspects of the proposed work

• Project cost control

• Project management

• Ability to operate the rig after refurbishment

• Health, safety, and environmental management

• Quality of personnel

• Local and cultural issues.

A panel of representatives from the AIOC partners evaluated the written submissions from the contractors. In addition to the written submissions, the contractors were invited to a full day meeting with the selection team where they made further presentations and were questioned on their written submissions.

The panel agreed upon a weighting for each of the eight selection criteria and awarded a score in each category based on both written and verbal submissions. The total score for each contractor was calculated by summing the products of the category score and weighting.

This approach provided a fair and balanced evaluation method and it gave the panel the opportunity to properly assess the contractor's capabilities in terms of resource and approach.

In February 1995, Santa Fe International Corp. was selected as the preferred drilling contractor. An interim agreement allowed Santa Fe to inspect in detail the Kaspmorneft and to prepare the scope of work, time, and cost estimates. This work had to be completed prior to finalizing the contract for refurbishment and operation of the rig.

Inspection survey

A team of AIOC and Santa Fe personnel, caterers, an American Bureau of Shipping (ABS) surveyor, and divers were mobilized to the Kaspmorneft in March.

The rig was stacked at an inshore location close to Baku. The inspection team lived on the vessel for 4 weeks. The Socar crew onboard the vessel also participated in the inspection.

A work program had been prepared, and this governed the daily activity schedule. The work included test runs on all operable drilling and marine systems and opening up as much equipment as possible. Provisional estimates of the scope for the repairing or replacing work, material requirements, and man-hour estimates were made for each system inspected.

After the underwater survey of the hull, it was agreed with ABS that an underwater inspection in lieu of dry-docking would be performed.

Upon completing the inspection work, the team returned to its temporary base in Dallas to finalize the time and cost estimates and to draw up the contract for the subsequent work.

Project scope

The project scope, in simple terms, was to refurbish the Kaspmorneft to a level that would enable it to drill a minimum of three wells efficiently and to operate under internationally recognized safety standards.

The bare boat charter agreement stipulated that the vessel must be reclassed by ABS.

The operating criteria established included that the rig would operate at a maximum 300 m working water depth and a 5,000 m drilling depth. The Charter agreement requires a further upgrade to a 475 m water depth and 7,600 m drilling depth before the rig is returned to Socar.

The overall scope of work can be summarized as follows:

• Replace
  
  BOP stack
  

  Mud-processing equipment
  

  Cementing equipment
  

  Safety equipment, including lifeboats
  

  Drillstring and handling tools
  

  Environmental systems

  
  

• Refurbish and upgrade
  
  Accommodations
  

  Mooring system

  
  

• Structural modifications
  
  Reconfigure and extend mud tank system
  

  Construct additional warehousing and stores
  

  Install new mud/gas separator and 10-in. vent line
  

  Extend accommodations to support 100 men
  

  Remove diving and well-testing equipment

  
  

• Repair
  
  All remaining drilling and marine equipment
  
  

• Clean and paint
  
  Entire vessel.

Planned work

The planned work scope of the Kaspmorneft refurbishment was comprised of three basic groups:

1. Defined tasks which resulted from the survey, referred to as WBS tasks.

2. Regulatory certification and compliance requirements, as called for in the PSA and bare boat charter.

3. General management, administration, and project support requirements necessary to accomplish the actual work and meet the project functions.

The defined work included about 300 tasks that were all quantitative in nature. Each task identified the condition of each individual piece of equipment to be repaired, serviced, or replaced.

Materials necessary for each activity or task were identified, purchased, and shipped to the job site. Labor to affect the repair, replacement, modification, or addition was also identified for each task.

Included in this group were activities such as overhauling engines, repairing structural damage, installing new air compressors, refurbishing and expanding quarters, replacing BOPs, and outfitting the rig with all needed tubulars and drilling tools.

Additionally, support and finishing services, such as scaffolding, painting, nondestructive testing (NDT), and load testing, were identified and tasked. These tasks, when completed, would bring the unit back into acceptable condition to meet the minimum drilling efficiency and safety requirements.

Besides the generally straightforward repairs needed, the vessel was to be brought back into an ABS Class. It originally had been constructed in accordance with ABS and, therefore, classed by ABS when construction was finished.

At the same time, the unit was to be upgraded as needed to comply with IMO 1979 MODU Code requirements. Fulfillment of these work scope items was to be by issue of a new ABS "Certificate of Class" and an ABS issued "Statement of Fact" for compliance with IMO.

The work scope required to achieve regulatory compliance was initially developed during the survey by the attending ABS surveyor. The details were limited at that time, due to requirements for NDT, underwater survey, etc., and therefore, singular tasks were budgeted for each of the two key objectives.

The management of the refurbishment contained the majority of the qualitative aspects of the project. While the work itself was known, the method and mechanics by which that work would actually be done constituted an equally large portion of the project.

This portion of the scope included such items as developing a shipyard labor force, purchasing all materials for both direct and indirect WBS task use, preparing a complete as-built drawing and manual file, supervising all work, shipping materials, reporting status and costs, coordinating procedures, and generating and maintaining a safe workplace with close attention to environmental concerns.

While these would not normally be considered part of the actual work scope, they were for this project because few facilities, resources, or materials existed.

Actual work

After starting the actual refurbishment on Oct. 1, 1995, the entire project focused on the control of the work scope. From previous experience, it was recognized that refurbishment projects of this type can easily be subjected to rapid and uncontrolled scope expansion as the work progresses. This would not be allowed for reasons of not only cost but, more importantly, schedule maintenance.

As a result, the planned work scope was for all intents and purposes, the actual work scope.

For the majority of the WBS tasks, the planned work was accomplished as specified. Some activities did experience growth due to further defects discovered as equipment was disassembled for repair.

While the three work scope groups were controlled and attended to carefully throughout the project, the planned commissioning/recommissioning was found to have been underestimated in both effort and duration. Fortunately, resources were available for the increased requirements, and the delivery schedule was not substantially impacted.

On completing the refurbishment, all WBS tasks had been finished, the rig was recommissioned and outfitted, and an ABS Certificate of Class and IMO Statement of Compliance was issued.

Schedule

Major projects such as the Kaspmorneft refurbishment are driven and controlled by a variety of parameters. The main ones being cost, schedule, and objective. This project was not different at the onset, but ultimately the schedule controlled the project.

When AIOC signed the PSA, definite time periods were delineated. AIOC had agreed to a 30-month period, beginning in December 1994, in which to drill and test three wells. Included within this period was the Kaspmorneft refurbishment. Thus, the 30-month period included:

• Establish an infrastructure and construct the support facilities which would be required to meet all objectives.

• Survey the Kaspmorneft and develop the requisite work scope to refurbish the rig.

• Refurbish and outfit the Kaspmorneft to meet the commitments and drilling objectives.

• Drill and test three wells.

During the inspection survey phase, the work scope was identified and labor estimates generated. Through an interactive process following the finalizing of the scope, a master and detailed work schedules were developed.

Initially, the plan reflected a 14-month schedule. By manpower and resource evaluation and leveling, that period was reduced to 12 months, from receipt of rig to completion, ready to drill. That final schedule, 111/2 months plus a 2-week contingency, became the schedule for the Kaspmorneft refurbishment.

Originally, AIOC anticipated the rig would be delivered in July; however, following schedule development, several delays occurred.

The main delays involved completing the facilities required to support the refurbishment project. Because of these delays, the schedule start date was shifted to Oct. 1, 1995, with a new completion date of Sept. 30, 1996 ( Fig. 2 [37716 bytes]).

Plan execution

Concurrent with the survey and work scope development, a complete refurbishment plan was developed. That plan covered not only the actual WBS required work, but the management, supervision, and engineering required along with the methodology by which the refurbishment would be accomplished.

The central theme of the planning was the recognition that the refurbishment would be accomplished entirely by the drilling contractor. There was no shipyard and very little other suitable support infrastructure available. Thus, it was necessary to:

• Obtain and train a complete labor force

• Provide all refurbishment supervision, management, and technical skills

• Procure all materials, equipment, and supplies necessary to fully outfit a refurbishment yard

• Develop a safety and environmental culture within the project

• Establish and maintain a quality assurance and control philosophy.

Implementation

Several preparatory activities were initiated prior to the final agreement between AIOC and Santa Fe, the completion of refurbishment site facilities, and the arrival of the rig. These included:

• Mobilization of the drilling contractors area management to Baku to establish an office and financial activities

• Preparation of materials requisitions ready for issue for purchase.

Requisitioning and purchasing activities fully commenced after the signing and authorization of the contract. Approved vendors lists were generated and formal bidding procedures finalized for items having a value over $10,000. These required AIOC's individual approval.

Part of the project team was mobilized to Baku in late June to work on infrastructure while procurement and planning continued in Dallas. The hiring of a local labor force commenced at that same time.

When adequate camp housing became available in late July, project staff mobilization continued with all project personnel in Azerbaijan by late August 1995.

On Oct. 1, 1995, the Kaspmorneft was delivered to the refurbishment dock. Work immediately commenced on the rig.

Initial activities were concentrated on the safety of the rig and the personnel. At the same time, off-loading and cleaning of the rig proceeded, ultimately taking about 21/2 months to complete. In total, over 2,500 tons of scrap and waste materials and fluids were removed from the rig during that period.

During the first months, national crews were expanded while managed subcontracts for major work were being concluded. In January 1996, subcontractor mobilization began.

The project worked with the plan and schedule through completion. The initial plan was maintained, although adjustments were necessary on almost a daily basis due to logistics, material requirements, discoveries, and labor skills.

The supervisory and management team as well as local labor requirements were structured as per the plan. Daily work and WBS tasks were strictly adhered to, and the scheduled sequence for the work was followed. By so doing, costs and schedule were controlled while safety and refurbishment quality were held to international standards.

Work force

The work force for the project consisted of two groups: expatriate management and supervision, and national technical and general labor.

The expatriate staff was initially selected from permanent employees having experience with semisubmersible drilling rigs and/or major marine drilling rig refurbishment. This group was later augmented by short-term contract employees who had specific trade and technical skills necessary to accomplish specific scope or work tasks.

The size of this group was partially controlled by a PSA commitment to utilize, to the maximum extent possible, local labor. Specifically, the expatriate man-hour content (or head count) was not to exceed 25% of the total.

While percentages varied throughout the project, the overall final content of man-hours worked on the refurbishment was slightly over 18% expatriate, and 22% expatriate when other non-Azeri skilled labor hours are considered.

The recruitment and staffing of the national work groups was somewhat more complex. The initial staffing was by hiring from a pool of existing Socar drilling crews. This initial staffing was concentrated on selecting personnel who would be acceptable first for the refurbishment and upon its completion to become part of the drilling crews.

Excess personnel were hired into this group to address specific refurbishment needs such as warehousemen, drivers, and general labor.

Once this initial group of about 100 was completed, contract national crews were hired. These numbered another 80 Azerbaijani personnel.

Local office staff were then hired along with interpreters, helpers, safety officers, and store men. With those on board, a total permanent national staff of over 300 was reached with a daily national on site project group of nearly 200.

To this direct staff, and operating under the same criteria, the managed subcontractors acquired national labor for the quarters refurbishment, painting, and scaffolding.

At peak, the local labor reached about 70 employees. Thus, all combined, a total project work force of over 370 national staff was reached with a peak of about 250 on the work site every day.

Training

Crews were selected from a pool of Socar employees. Investigation revealed that the Azerbaijani industry had a complex training regime established on two levels: a general worker-based program for personnel to the driller level and an academic (university) course of 3 years for personnel of drilling foreman positions and above.

However, it was decided to assume that basic training was required in all areas of safety and work skills. The training program was designed accordingly with the crew's first exposure to the system. This was a 1-day safety induction before commencing work.

Basic training in work skills and safety continued throughout the project. English language training was conducted for all national personnel on a daily basis and for 3 days during the crew's time off. Russian language training was also available for the expatriate personnel.

Specialist training in the areas of well control, drilling principles and procedures, marine operations, and subsea engineering were conducted overseas with cross-posting to operations in the U.S., Equatorial Guinea, Egypt, Kuwait, and the U.K.

After some early apprehension, the courses proved both popular and successful. The majority of national employees showed a sound knowledge base and were keen to learn new procedures and skills, especially where those skill improvements incorporated new tools and equipment.

Safety

A specific safety management system was developed for the refurbishment project, recognizing the uniqueness of the situation. This system was developed using exploration and production forum guidelines and an evaluation of local conditions and procedures.

As part of the system, a safety procedures manual was developed to detail the requirements and expectations of the project work force, both expatriate and Azeri.

To encourage participation in the safety programs, adjustments were made to the crew's work rotation and salary structure. Strict disciplinary procedures were introduced and a comprehensive training program initiated.

Two additional expatriate safety supervisors were added after assessment of local conditions and requirements. The additional personnel allowed for a full-time site safety and environmental supervisor, assisted by a national safety officer and a health, safety, and training supervisor to coordinate both the safety and training programs.

Constant vigilance and reinforcement of procedures proved effective, with the majority of incidents during the project being minor infringements in the area of personal protective equipment. There were a total of 54 incidents during the project, 22 of which required minor first aid to crew members. Only two lost-time accidents occurred during the total 566,000 direct man-hours worked on the project.

Environmental concerns

The rig refurbishment included an overall upgrade to ensure it would be nonpolluting during drilling operations. All activities undertaken during the upgrade would provide the highest level of concern and protection for the environment.

All aspects of the project were controlled as to the type of potential pollution. To protect the Caspian Sea, the rig was surrounded by a pollution containment boom. Any discharged oils or fuels, which were very limited, were continuously skimmed and placed in drums. All materials removed from the rig were separated into categories that ranged from suitable for land fill to hazardous fluids such as oils and paints.

The hazardous wastes were identified, logged, tagged, and sent to a controlled storage/disposal site.

The success of this portion is measured by the fact that no spills occurred on land. Minor spills were cleaned up within the confines of the pollution control boom, and the work sites were cleared of all rubbish daily. Disposal was handled per the approved procedures, and all ongoing audits by various environmental groups did not produce a single concern or notice.

Quality management

A quality standards and management system was implemented at the start of the project. These standards drew from existing Santa Fe systems and were supplemented by a project-initiated quality plan. That plan covered not only tangible issues such as could be controlled by NDT and visual inspection but further encompassed pride in personal appearance and hygiene, cleanliness of workplace, and training in technical skills by the expatriate supervisors.

At the end of the project, marked improvements were being registered, and project quality in all areas reached or surpassed minimum requirements. By comparison, those areas in which highly skilled technicians worked in concert with the local labor force saw the greatest improvements.

Soft areas, records maintenance, information collection, and learning-all part of the complete quality system-benefited from the available project systems. Overall, early recognition of the need and implementation of a quality management system rewarded the project, in both personnel and equipment.

Subcontractors

Bid packages were developed for the defined work scopes for scaffolding, cleaning, and painting and refurbishing existing and new quarters.

These were bid on a lump-sum basis by several specialist contractors. Following short listing, bid clarification meetings and re-bids, fixed-price contracts were awarded.

Rig Blast was awarded the cleaning, blasting, painting, and scaffolding (CBP&S) contract and Consafe the quarters work. Both of these contracts, the underwater inspection (Fraser Diving) and general inspection services (CAN), were awarded as managed subcontracts with AIOC.

Following awards, both principle subcontractors established independent project teams, each having an expatriate project manager and technical skills supervision and training staff. The managers and their supervisors were incorporated with the site project team.

Local workers were hired by each contractor, under the same criteria and parameters as those discussed above, and trained in each of their respective trade skills. All materials and equipment required by the contractors to accomplish their respective work scopes were acquired by the contractors and shipped to Azerbaijan.

Work site

The site selected for the refurbishment was the SPS jacket fabrication yard about 25 km south of Baku. This area had been selected as AIOC's first operations base.

Construction of an accommodation camp and warehousing facility was already planned and would be made available to the Kaspmorneft project. Other services at the facility were limited, and it was necessary to do significant civil engineering work before the rig was delivered to the site. This work included:

• Constructing a concrete work site at the dock, complete with security fence, water supply, and electricity

• Constructing a site office complex for the project team, including security fence, offices, a 90-man canteen, training building, separate change building, and a self-contained sewage disposal plant

• Preparing a secure fabrication shop near the office and work site, complete with overhead cranes, independent power supply, fenced lay down area, and change rooms for day workers

• Constructing covered warehouses and secure lay down areas complete with offices for materials personnel

• Outfitting the work site with materials and equipment required to actually perform work such as welding machines, cutting equipment, and hand tools.

• Medical treatment facilities and personnel

• Satellite international communications systems

• Security personnel and facilities

• Personnel and materials transportation, both on the job site and within the community

• Laundry facilities and operations to maintain project work clothing

• Computer systems and reprographics.

Logistics

About 5,600 tons of materials and equipment were shipped to Azerbaijan for the project. This was significantly more than originally estimated.

Several different routes were used to ship direct from suppliers in Western Europe, the U.S., and Australia and also from the project procurement center in Houston. Routes included:

• Ocean freight to Poti, Georgia, then road or rail to Baku

• Ocean freight to Mersin, Turkey, then road to Baku

• Ocean freight to Trabzon, Turkey, then road to Baku

• Ocean freight to Dubai, U.A.E., then road to Baku

• By road from Western Europe

• By road from Sweden to the Russian rail head in Finland, then by rail to Baku

• By rail from France

• Air freight from U.S., U.K., and U.A.E.

Work completion

The Kaspmorneft acquisition and refurbishment was successful. ABS issued the class certification and IMO compliance documentation. The contractual strategy adopted was fully vindicated. Table 3 [15103 bytes] summarizes the final costs.

The rig was renamed "Dada Gorgud" by the President of the Republic of Azerbaijan on Aug. 24, 1996. It sailed from the SPS yard to the first appraisal well location on Sept. 10.

The well was successfully drilled in 63 days.

The Authors

Paul Prince is engineering supervisor-shared services drilling for BP Exploration (Alaska) Inc., Anchorage, Alas. During the Kaspmerneft project, he was with the Azerbaijan International Operating Co. in Baku.

Prince has held a variety of drilling engineering and rig site supervisory positions with BP's worldwide operations. He has a BS in mechanical engineering from Heriot Watt University.

Dennis E. Yenzer is a director, project management, with Varco Drilling Systems, Orange, Calif. Prior to his retirement in January 1997, he was director of engineering and capitol projects for Sante Fe International Corp. in Dallas. During the Kaspmerneft project, Yenzer was the resident on-site project manager. He has a BS in mechanical engineering from California State Polytechnic University.

Copyright 1997 Oil & Gas Journal. All Rights Reserved.