CSA Z625-16 Well design for petroleum and natural gas industry system

CSA Z625:16
(reaffirmed 2021)
Well design for petroleum and natural gas

industry systems
REVISED FEBRUARY 2024

Legal Notice for Standards
Canadian Standards Association (operating as “CSA Group”) develops standards through a consensus standards development process approved
by the Standards Council of Canada. This process brings together volunteers representing varied viewpoints and interests to achieve consensus
and develop a standard. Although CSA Group administers the process and establishes rules to promote fairness in achieving consensus, it does
not independently test, evaluate, or verify the content of standards.
Disclaimer and exclusion of liability

This document is provided without any representations, warranties, or conditions of any kind, express or implied, including, without limitation,
implied warranties or conditions concerning this document’s fitness for a particular purpose or use, its merchantability, or its non-infringement
of any third party’s intellectual property rights. CSA Group does not warrant the accuracy, completeness, or currency of any of the information
published in this document. CSA Group makes no representations or warranties regarding this document’s compliance with any applicable
statute, rule, or regulation.
IN NO EVENT SHALL CSA GROUP, ITS VOLUNTEERS, MEMBERS, SUBSIDIARIES, OR AFFILIATED COMPANIES, OR THEIR EMPLOYEES, DIRECTORS,
OR OFFICERS, BE LIABLE FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, OR INCIDENTAL DAMAGES, INJURY, LOSS, COSTS, OR EXPENSES, HOWSOEVER CAUSED,
INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO SPECIAL OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES, LOST REVENUE, BUSINESS INTERRUPTION, LOST OR DAMAGED
DATA, OR ANY OTHER COMMERCIAL OR ECONOMIC LOSS, WHETHER BASED IN CONTRACT, TORT (INCLUDING NEGLIGENCE), OR ANY OTHER
THEORY OF LIABILITY, ARISING OUT OF OR RESULTING FROM ACCESS TO OR POSSESSION OR USE OF THIS DOCUMENT, EVEN IF CSA GROUP
HAS BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES, INJURY, LOSS, COSTS, OR EXPENSES.
In publishing and making this document available, CSA Group is not undertaking to render professional or other services for or on behalf of any
person or entity or to perform any duty owed by any person or entity to another person or entity. The information in this document is directed
to those who have the appropriate degree of experience to use and apply its contents, and CSA Group accepts no responsibility whatsoever
arising in any way from any and all use of or reliance on the information contained in this document.
CSA Group is a private not-for-profit company that publishes voluntary standards and related documents. CSA Group has no power, nor does it
undertake, to enforce compliance with the contents of the standards or other documents it publishes.
Intellectual property rights and ownership

As between CSA Group and the users of this document (whether it be in printed or electronic form), CSA Group is the owner, or the authorized
licensee, of all works contained herein that are protected by copyright, all trade-marks (except as otherwise noted to the contrary), and all
inventions and trade secrets that may be contained in this document, whether or not such inventions and trade secrets are protected by
patents and applications for patents. Without limitation, the unauthorized use, modification, copying, or disclosure of this document may
violate laws that protect CSA Group’s and/or others’ intellectual property and may give rise to a right in CSA Group and/or others to seek legal
redress for such use, modification, copying, or disclosure. To the extent permitted by licence or by law, CSA Group reserves all intellectual
property rights in this document.
Patent rights
Attention is drawn to the possibility that some of the elements of this standard may be the subject of patent rights. CSA Group shall not be
held responsible for identifying any or all such patent rights. Users of this standard are expressly advised that determination of the validity of
any such patent rights is entirely their own responsibility.
Authorized use of this document

This document is being provided by CSA Group for informational and non-commercial use only. The user of this document is authorized to do
only the following:
If this document is in electronic form:
• load this document onto a computer for the sole purpose of reviewing it;
• search and browse this document; and
• print this document if it is in PDF format.
Limited copies of this document in print or paper form may be distributed only to persons who are authorized by CSA Group to have such
copies, and only if this Legal Notice appears on each such copy.
In addition, users may not and may not permit others to
• alter this document in any way or remove this Legal Notice from the attached standard;
• sell this document without authorization from CSA Group; or
• make an electronic copy of this document.
If you do not agree with any of the terms and conditions contained in this Legal Notice, you may not load or use this document or make any
copies of the contents hereof, and if you do make such copies, you are required to destroy them immediately. Use of this document
constitutes your acceptance of the terms and conditions of this Legal Notice.
Revision History
CSA Z625:16, Well design for petroleum and natural gas industry
systems
Update No. 1 — February 2024 Revision symbol (in

margin)
Technical Committee on Well Design — Update 1 ①
SDG Foreword
Preface
Clauses 1.1, 1.3, 2, 3, 4.2, 5.2, 5.3.2, 5.4.2.3, 5.6.3, 5.8.3, 5.9,
6.2.1.1, 6.2.1.2, 6.2.13, 6.5.2, 7.3, and 7.4
Standards Update Service
CSA Z625:16
November 2016
Title: Well design for petroleum and natural gas industry systems
To register for e-mail notification about any updates to this publication
• go to www.csagroup.org/store/
• click on CSA Update Service
The List ID that you will need to register for updates to this publication is 2424656.
If you require assistance, please e-mail techsupport@csagroup.org or call 416-747-2233.

Visit CSA Group’s policy on privacy at www.csagroup.org/legal to find out how we protect your personal
information.
CSA Z625:16
Well design for petroleum and
natural gas industry systems
®A trademark of the Canadian Standards Association, operating as “CSA Group”
Published in November 2016 by CSA Group

A not-for-profit private sector organization
178 Rexdale Boulevard, Toronto, Ontario, Canada M9W 1R3
To purchase standards and related publications, visit our Online Store at
www.csagroup.org/store/ or call toll-free 1-800-463-6727 or 416-747-4044.
ICS 75.020
ISBN 978-1-4883-0462-0
© 2016 Canadian Standards Association
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced in any form whatsoever
without the prior permission of the publisher.
CSA Z625:16 Well design for petroleum and natural gas industry systems
Contents
Technical Committee on Well Design 3
Technical Committee on Well Design — Update 1 5
Preface 8
SDG Foreword 9
1 Scope 10
2 Reference publications 11
3 Definitions 13
4 Design philosophy for well integrity 16

4.1 Purpose 16
4.2 Operating envelopes 17
4.3 Basis of design 18
4.4 Management of change 18
5 Casing design 18
5.1 General 18
5.2 Casing design objectives 18
5.3 Casing design process and methods 19
5.3.1 Design methods 19
5.3.2 Casing design basis, premises, and assumptions 19
5.3.3 Minimum design factors 20
5.3.4 Other working stress design methodology 20
5.4 Load cases for casing and connection design 21
5.4.1 Identification by operation 21
5.4.2 Event or operation by load type 21
5.5 Tri-axial analysis 22
5.6 Connections 22
5.6.1 Performance properties 22
5.6.2 Connection make-up 22
5.6.3 Welded connection 22
5.7 Casing wear and erosion 22
5.8 Other conditions 22
5.8.1 Temperature derating 23
5.8.2 Buckling 23
5.8.3 Fatigue 23
5.8.4 Torsional loading 23
5.9 Material selection for corrosive, sour (H2S), CO2, and hydrogen environments 23
5.9.1 Material selection 23
5.9.2 Sour (H2S) service wells 24
5.9.3 Hydrogen service wells 24
5.9.4 Carbon dioxide service wells 24
November 2016 © 2016 Canadian Standards Association 1

6 Cementing design 24
6.1 Cement design objectives 25
6.1.1 General 25
6.1.2 Primary cementing 25
6.2 Cement design considerations 25
6.2.1 General 25
6.2.2 Offset analysis 26
6.2.3 Changing conditions 26
6.2.4 Software simulations 26
6.2.5 Centralization 26
6.2.6 Minimization of fluid contamination 26
6.2.7 Design impact to execution 26
6.2.8 Wellbore cleaning and spacer design 27
6.2.9 Prevention of fluid influx 27
6.2.10 Interval cementing requirements 28
6.2.11 Consideration for abandonment 28
6.2.12 Completion design considerations 28
6.2.13 Cementing float equipment 28
6.3 Cement slurry design 28
6.3.1 Density 28
6.3.2 Thickening time 28
6.3.3 Compressive strength 29
6.3.4 Fluid loss 29
6.3.5 Free water 29
6.3.6 Rheology 29
6.3.7 Stability 29
6.3.8 Mechanical and thermal properties 29
6.3.9 Lost circulation 29
6.4 Cement lab testing 30
6.5 Verification of cement 30
6.5.1 Cement job evaluation 30
6.5.2 Liner lap 31
6.6 Special cements 31
6.6.1 Foam cement 31
6.6.2 Thermal cement 31
6.7 Cementing reporting requirements 32
7 Wellhead design 32
7.1 General 32
7.2 Wellhead design objectives 32
7.3 Wellhead design considerations 32
7.4 Installation practices 33
7.5 Re-use/re-conditioning 33
7.6 Records 33
Annex A (informative) — Example wellbore stick diagrams 34

Annex B (informative) — Casing designs methods 35
Annex C (informative) — Sample template for basis of design document 37
Annex D (informative) — Bibliography 42

Technical Committee on Well Design

K.C. Carr Southern Alberta Institute of Technology, Chair
Calgary, Alberta
Category: General Interest
M.A. Parker Imperial Oil Resources, Vice-Chair

Calgary, Alberta
Category: Producer Interest
G. Boyer Alberta Energy Regulator, Associate

Calgary, Alberta
G. DeBrujin Schlumberger,
Sugar Land, Texas, USA
Category: User Interest
G. Ericson Saskatchewan Ministry of Economy,

Lloydminster, Saskatchewan
Category: Government and/or Regulatory Authority
J. Faria Calgary, Alberta Associate
K. Farquharson Stream-Flo Industries Ltd.,

Edmonton, Alberta
T. Godsoe Ministry of Natural Resources, Associate

London, Ontario
I.A. Khallad ConocoPhillips Canada,

Calgary, Alberta
J. Koteles Shell Canada Energy, Associate

Calgary, Alberta
K. Kowal Saskatchewan Ministry of the Economy, Associate

Regina, Saskatchewan
M. Leeb Repsol Oil & Gas Canada Inc.,

Calgary, Alberta

R. MacDonald Alberta Energy Regulator,

Calgary, Alberta
J.S. Manocha Ministry of Natural Resources,

London, Ontario
C. Matthews C-FER Technologies,

Edmonton, Alberta
M.B. Muir Husky Oil Operations Limited,

Calgary, Alberta
W. O'Halloran Nova Scotia Dept of Energy, Associate

Halifax, Nova Scotia
K. Parsonage BC Oil and Gas Commission,

Fort St. John, British Columbia
L. Sorelli Université Laval,

Québec, Québec
W.G. Suek TAQA North,

Calgary, Alberta
P.C. Toy Tenaris Canada,

Calgary, Alberta
S. Tracy EVRAZ Inc. NA,

Calgary, Alberta
T. Watson T.L. Watson & Associates Inc.,

Calgary, Alberta
S. Chan CSA Group, Project Manager

Calgary, Alberta, Canada

①
Technical Committee on Well Design —
Update 1
N. Cameron Petronim Projects, Chair
D. Kinch SubTerra Engineering, Vice-Chair

L. Swanson Secure Energy Services, Vice-Chair

W. Butler Arup,
T. Cook Canlin Energy,

D. Dall'Acqua Noetic Engineering 2008 Inc.,

Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
E. Diggins Frontier Project Solutions,

C. J. Dyck Imperial,
G. Ericson Saskatchewan Ministry of Energy and Resources, Non-voting

Lloydminster, Saskatchewan, Canada
K. Farquharson Stream-Flo Industries Ltd.,


K. Hamilton C-FER Technologies,

A. Kabir Canada Energy Regulator,

I. A. Khallad ConocoPhillips Canada,

B. Kostiuk Big Guns Energy Services Inc., Non-voting

K. Kowal Saskatchewan Ministry of Energy and Resources,

Regina, Saskatchewan, Canada
D. Lee Big Guns Energy Services Inc,

M. Leeb Suncor Energy Inc.,

J. S. Manocha Ameta Projects Inc., Non-voting

London, Ontario, Canada
M. Muqeem Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources & Forestry,

Mississauga, Ontario, Canada
I. Peleshok Alberta Engergy Regulator,

E. Taylor ATCO,
Clagary, Alberta, Canada

J. van Besouw BC Energy Regulator,

Kelowna, British Columbia, Canada
B. Weinkauf CSA Group, Project Manager


①
Preface
This is the first edition of CSA Z625, Well design for petroleum and natural gas industry systems.
Operators need to work with other industries, as well as governmental agencies, in order to effectively
manage the design process of their energy infrastructure. Therefore, this Standard is meant to be read
in conjunction with other security legislation, safety legislation, best practices, policies, standards, and
applicable codes.
CSA Group acknowledges that the development of this Standard was made possible, in part, by the
support of the regulatory organization and industry participants.
CSA Group acknowledges that the development of Update No. 1 was made possible, in part, by the
financial support of Natural Resources Canada.
This Standard was prepared by the Technical Committee on Well Design, under the jurisdiction of the
Strategic Steering Committee on Petroleum and Natural Gas Industry Systems.
Notes:
1) Use of the singular does not exclude the plural (and vice versa) when the sense allows.
2) Although the intended primary application of this Standard is stated in its Scope, it is important to note that it
remains the responsibility of the users of the Standard to judge its suitability for their particular purpose.
3) This Standard was developed by consensus, which is defined by CSA Policy governing standardization — Code
of good practice for standardization as “substantial agreement. Consensus implies much more than a simple
majority, but not necessarily unanimity”. It is consistent with this definition that a member may be included in
the Technical Committee list and yet not be in full agreement with all clauses of this Standard.
4) To submit a request for interpretation of this Standard, please send the following information to
inquiries@csagroup.org and include “Request for interpretation” in the subject line:
a) define the problem, making reference to the specific clause, and, where appropriate, include an
illustrative sketch;
b) provide an explanation of circumstances surrounding the actual field condition; and
c) where possible, phrase the request in such a way that a specific “yes” or “no” answer will address the
issue.
Committee interpretations are processed in accordance with the CSA Directives and guidelines governing
standardization and are available on the Current Standards Activities page at
standardsactivities.csagroup.org.
5) This Standard is subject to review five years from the date of publication. Suggestions for its improvement will
be referred to the appropriate committee. To submit a proposal for change, please send the following
information to inquiries@csagroup.org and include “Proposal for change” in the subject line:
a) Standard designation (number);
b) relevant clause, table, and/or figure number;
c) wording of the proposed change; and
d) rationale for the change.

①
SDG Foreword
CSA Group develops and maintains Standards across a broad range of topics, most of which support the
United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (UN SDGs) towards shaping a sustainable and resilient
future.
Through a robust mapping process, connections between CSA Z625:16 and the following SDGs have
been identified:
SDG
Targets 6.6 11.5
CSA Z625:16 has notable linkages with the following SDGs:

• SDG 6: Clean Water and Sanitation
• SDG 11: Sustainable Cities and Communities
For further information on CSA Group’s SDG Mapping initiative, please visit:
https:www.csagroup.org/sdg/
Disclaimer: It is important to note that although some Standards explicitly support SDG targets, not all
Standards link to the SDGs. Standards users should always take care and be specific when claiming their
support of SDGs through the use of Standards. The SDG mapping outcomes made available by CSA
Group are intended to assist users in their evaluation of how the application of a Standard can support
their work towards SDG achievement.

CSA Z625:16
Well design for petroleum and natural gas
industry systems
1 Scope
① 1.1
This Standard covers the design of wells in the land-based sector of the energy industry. This Standard is
inclusive of wellhead to final drilled depth.
1.2
This Standard addresses
a) casing, including casing design for various types of wells, including but not limited to horizontal and
directional wells;
b) cementing, including cement design and centralization issues and practices; and
c) wellhead, including design, and assembly.
① 1.3
This Standard does not apply to
a) completion;
b) operations;
c) abandonment;
d) remedial cementing;
e) interventions;
f) suspensions;
g) competencies;
h) management system requirements;
i) drilling operations;
j) emerging technologies;
k) design tools; and
l) offshore and arctic applications.
1.4
This Standard is intended to establish essential requirements and minimum standards for the design of
wells in the oil and gas industry. This Standard is not a design handbook, and competent design practice
and judgment must be employed with its use.
It is not the intent of this Standard to prevent the development of new equipment or practices, nor to
prescribe how such innovations should be handled.
1.5
The requirements of this Standard do not apply retroactively to existing installations or installations
under construction at the time of publication, but they do apply to the extension, replacement,
maintenance, and upgrading of such installations.

1.6
In this Standard, “shall” is used to express a requirement, i.e., a provision that the user is obliged to
satisfy in order to comply with the standard; “should” is used to express a recommendation or that
which is advised but not required; and “may” is used to express an option or that which is permissible
within the limits of the Standard.
Notes accompanying clauses do not include requirements or alternative requirements; the purpose of a
note accompanying a clause is to separate from the text explanatory or informative material.
Notes to tables and figures are considered part of the table or figure and may be written as
requirements.
Annexes are designated normative (mandatory) or informative (non-mandatory) to define their

application.
① 2 Reference publications
This Standard refers to the following publications, and where such reference is made, it shall be to the
edition listed below, including all amendments published thereto.
AER (Alberta Energy Regulator)

Directive 010:2009
Minimum Casing Design Requirements
API (American Petroleum Institute)

5A3-2015 (RP)
Recommended Practice on Thread Compounds for Casing, Tubing, Line Pipe, and Drill Stem Elements
5C3-2008 (TR)
Technical Report on Equations and Calculations for Casing, Tubing, and Line Pipe Used as Casing or
Tubing; and Performance Properties Tables for Casing and Tubing
5CT-2011 (SPEC)
Specification for Casing and Tubing
5TP-2013 (TR)
Torque-Position Assembly Guidelines for API Casing and Tubing Connections
6A-2010 (SPEC)
Specification for Wellhead and Christmas Tree Equipment
10B-2-2015 (RP)
Recommended Practice for Testing Well Cements
10B-3-2015 (RP)
Recommended Practice on Testing of Deepwater Well Cement Formulations
10B-4-2015 (RP)
Recommended Practice on Preparation and Testing of Foamed Cement Slurries at Atmospheric Pressure

10B-5-2015 (RP)
Recommended Practice on Determination of Shrinkage and Expansion of Well Cement Formulations at
Atmospheric Pressure
10B-6-2015 (RP)
Recommended Practice on Determining the Static Gel Strength of Cement Formulations
10F-2015 (RP)
Recommended Practice for Performance Testing of Cementing Float Equipment
10TR1-2008 (TR)
Cement Sheath Evaluation
10TR4-2008 (TR)
Technical Report on Considerations Regarding Selection of Centralizers for Primary Cementing
Operations
14E-2013 (RP)
Recommended Practice for Design and Installation of Offshore Production Platform Piping Systems
17A/G-2002 (RP)
Design and Operation of Subsea Production Systems—General Requirements and Recommendations
65-2-2010 (RP)
Isolating Potential Flow Zones During Well Construction
Q1-2013 (SPEC)
Specification for Quality Management System Requirements for Manufacturing Organizations for the
Petroleum and Natural Gas Industry
ASME (The American Society of Mechanical Engineers)

Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, Section IX: 2015
Welding, Brazing and Fusing Qualifications
B31.12:2019
Hydrogen Piping and Pipelines
DACC (Drilling and Completions Committee)

IRP 01:2015
Critical Sour Drilling
IRP 03:2012
In Situ Heavy Oil Operations
IRP 25:2015 (Working Draft)

Primary and Remedial Cementing Guidelines

ISO (International Organization for Standardization)

ISO/TR 10400:2007
Petroleum and natural gas industries – Equations and calculations for the properties of casing, tubing,
drill pipe and line pipe used as casing or tubing
10423:2009
Petroleum and natural gas industries – Drilling and production equipment – Wellhead and christmas tree
equipment
13678: 2010
Petroleum and natural gas industries—Evaluation and testing of thread compounds for use with casing,
tubing, line pipe and drill stem elements
ISO 15156-1/NACE MR0175:2015

Petroleum and natural gas industries - Materials for use in H2S-containing Environments in oil and gas
production
2394: 2015
General Principles on Reliability of Structures
ISO/TS 29001:2010
Petroleum, petrochemical and natural gas industries – Sector-specific quality management systems –
Requirements for product and service supply organizations
① 3 Definitions
The following definitions shall apply in this Standard:
Barrier — element forming part of a pressure-containing envelope which is designed to prevent

unintentional flow of produced/injected fluids, particularly to the external environment.
[From API 17A/G.]
Blowout preventer — a large, specialized valve or similar mechanical device, usually installed
redundantly in stacks, and used to seal, control and monitor oil and gas wells.
Note: Blowout preventer stacks are typically installed at the top of the well. The terms blowout preventer, blowout
preventer stack and blowout preventer system are commonly used interchangeably and in a general manner to
describe an assembly of several stacked blowout preventers of varying type and function, as well as auxiliary
components.
Casing — a tubular string comprised of pipe that is lowered into an open wellbore and typically
cemented in place. Casing serves as the major structural component of a well and provides locations for
the installation of blowout preventers, wellhead equipment, production packers, production tubing and
various other equipment components that may be used in constructing a well. There are six basic types
of casing strings:
Note: Most casing joints are fabricated with male threads on each end, and short-length casing couplings with
female threads are used to join the individual joints of casing together. Joints of casing can also be fabricated with
male threads on one end and female threads on the other. Casing is usually manufactured from carbon steel that is

heat-treated to varying strengths, but can be also be fabricated with stainless steel, aluminum, titanium, fiberglass
and other materials.
Casing, conductor — the first string installed when constructing a well. These strings prevent caving
of loose near-surface formations, provide structural support for wellhead equipment and
subsequent casing strings and can also allow for diversion equipment to be installed.
Note: These strings typically extend to relatively shallow depths from the surface, and the pipe may be driven
into the ground, or alternatively, a hole may be drilled or augured into the ground allowing the pipe to be run
and cemented to the surface. A diverter or a blowout preventer stack can be installed onto this string for
protection against shallow gas.
Casing, intermediate — strings that are set before reaching final total depth of the well to isolate
unstable hole sections, lost-circulation zones, over/under pressurized zones, and production zones
and to provide sufficient shoe strength/formation integrity for drilling the next hole section.
Note: Some wells require multiple intermediate strings. The casing cement top isolates any hydrocarbon zones.
Some intermediate strings can also be production strings if a production liner is run beneath it or the well
interval below the intermediate casing is open hole completed.
Casing, liner — a casing string that does not extend back to the wellhead but is hung from the
previous casing string.
Note: They are used to extend an intermediate casing string through long trouble zones (e.g., to isolate lost
circulation zones or abnormally pressurized zones), or to extend a production casing string into the productive
zone. Casing liners are designed and installed in the wellbore with the intent to provide similar functionality in
each case.
Casing, production — string used to isolate production zones and to provide a conduit through
which the well is completed and operated.
Note: In wells utilizing tubing string-packer completions, the string serves as a fluid control barrier to contain
formation fluids and pressures in the event of a tubing leak or an inflow occurrence during a workover. When a
packer-less completion is utilized, the production casing is directly exposed to the pressure and fluids of the
producing formation. In some cases, these strings can also be exposed to injected fluids and pressures from
hydraulic fracturing, gas lift, or inhibitor fluid injection operations conducted in the casing.
Casing, surface — casing that is set to isolate and protect non-saline water-bearing formations near
the surface; to prevent caving of weak/unconsolidated formations encountered at shallow depths;
to prevent lost circulation; and to provide sufficient shoe strength/formation integrity to achieve
the mud weights required for drilling the next hole section with a sufficient kick-tolerance.
Note: The string may also be used to provide structural support for a blowout preventer, wellhead equipment
and/or subsequent casing strings. In deviated wells, the surface casing can cover the build section to prevent
key-seating of the formation during deeper drilling. This string is typically cemented over its full length.
Casing, tieback string — a casing string used to extend a previously installed production liner to
surface.
Note: In some cases, they are installed to provide isolation to an upper section of casing with either an
insufficient pressure rating or a lack of pressure integrity (e.g., where an upper section of casing has
experienced excessive wear during drilling operations). These strings can also be installed for temporary
service as a flow conduit between the wellhead and the production liner (e.g., used during initial completion as
a fracturing string that needs to be retrieved to run a pump in the well). These strings may or may not be
cemented in place depending on the intended use and functional requirements.
Cementing — the operation whereby a cement slurry is circulated into the annular space behind the
casing.

Centralizer — a casing accessory installed on the outside of a casing string to offset the casing string
from the borehole or larger casing wall.
Conditioning, drilling fluid — the process of modifying and circulating the drilling fluid to adjust its
properties within the wellbore.
Note: In preparation for cementing, the drilling fluid properties allow for good fluid mobility, low fluid loss, and
easy displacement of the drilling fluid from the wellbore.
Conditioning, wellbore — the process of circulating drilling fluid to minimize cuttings accumulation,
establish an effective filter cake, and manage wellbore stability.
Note: Wellbore conditioning may be performed throughout various stages of well construction including prior to
tripping drill pipe, testing, coring, logging and cementing.
Connection — a mechanical interface consisting of male and female ends used to join two separate
pipe sections; encompassing the threadform geometry, seal, and thread compound, if applicable.
Coupling — a section of heavy wall casing, threaded internally on both ends used to join two pieces of
threaded casing or tubing.
Critical static gel strength (CSGS) — the point where the gel strength of the cement slurry at which the
hydrostatic pressure in the cement column is equal to the pore pressure of the formation.
Critical static gel strength period — the elapsed time from when the cement reaches critical static gel
strength (CSGS) until the cement is impermeable to gas, typically considered 73kg/s2 (500lbf/100ft2).
Equivalent circulating density (ECD) — the calculated density equivalent of the hydrostatic head plus
frictional pressure drop in the wellbore annulus above the point being considered.
Note: The ECD is an important parameter in avoiding kicks and losses, particularly in wells that have a narrow
window between the fracture gradient and pore-pressure gradient.
Failure — when the designed function of a component or system can no longer be met.
Fatigue — changes in material properties resulting from the application of cyclic loads.
Deviated well — a well with an inclination other than zero degrees from vertical.
Note: Wells with deviation generally greater than 30° may be considered highly deviated.
Gel strength — is the shear stress of a fluid measured at low shear rate after the fluid is static for a
certain period of time.
Horizontal well — highly deviated wells with an inclination of greater than 85° with an extended
wellbore section within the reservoir.
Operating envelope — the collection of operating parameters such as pressure, temperature,

environmental and flow conditions that a well will be exposed to during each stage of its lifecycle,
incorporating suitable safety margins.
Operational controls — equipment and procedures to monitor and maintain well integrity.
Offset well — an existing oil or gas wellbore that is proximal to the well currently being designed.
Note: Various information acquired during the drilling and completion of such wells, including subsurface geology
details and formation pressures, can be used as a guide for planning and safely constructing the current well.

Preflush — used to prepare both the pipe and formation for the cementing operations by keeping
drilling fluid separate from the cement and removing the drilling fluids. The fluid is not typically
densified with insoluble-solid weighting down agents and is designed to go into turbulent flow at low
flow rates.
Non-saline water — groundwater that contains less than a prescribed amount of total dissolved solids
(TDS). Typically suitable for human or agricultural consumption.
Note: As typically defined by provincial regulations.
Spacer — a fluid designed to clean the wellbore and separate drilling fluids from cement slurries by
altering the viscosity and density. They can be designed for use with either water-based or oil-based
drilling fluids.
Sour — fluid that contains hydrogen sulphide (H2S).
Sour service — exposure to oilfield fluids containing hydrogen sulphide (H2S) in concentrations
sufficient to cause hydrogen-related degradation of oilfield materials.
Note: H2S concentrations can vary over the lifecycle of the well.
Tubing — the smallest, inner-most tubular string in a well which serves as the conduit through which oil
and gas are brought from the producing formations to the surface or, in the case of an injection well,
the pipe used to convey the injected fluids to selected underground formations.
Note: A number of tubing joints are assembled with other completion components to make up the production or
injection string. The tubing string material, grade and connections provide sufficient capacity and corrosion
resistance to meet the load, flow, and chemical environment conditions, along with designed service life.
Wellbore — a bored hole in the earth at any stage from drilling to post-abandonment.
Wellhead — the permanent equipment installed between the upper-most portion of the surface casing
and the bottom connection of the first flow control valve.
Note: When tubing is landed in the well, this includes the tubing head and the tubing head adapter top connection.
The wellhead serves as the termination point of the various casing and tubing strings that extend to surface. These
systems control pressure and provide access to the main bore of the casing or tubing strings as well as to the
annuli between these strings.
Well integrity — the immediate state of a well ensuring the containment and prevention of an
uncontrolled release of fluids (i.e., liquids or gases) to subterranean formations or the surface.
Well integrity envelope — the limiting design loads and conditions established to ensure well integrity
by providing adequate safety factors in relation to the operating envelope.
Zone of interest — a geological interval penetrated by a well that will generally be evaluated for
economic production then completed using various means to enhance production or injection.
4 Design philosophy for well integrity

4.1 Purpose
The design philosophy provides the foundational basis for a well design. The design philosophy lays out
a plan to ensure a well is suitably constructed for the intended use and that well integrity is maintained
throughout its lifecycle. The design philosophy should apply a risk management approach, which

considers the probability of failure and consequence, taking into account uncertainties in the loading
and environmental conditions.
Two key outputs of a design philosophy are a barrier philosophy, and an operational controls
philosophy.
The design philosophy shall

a) encompass the operational lifecycle of the well, including drilling, completion, operations,
maintenance and abandonment in terms of defining the well design considerations;
b) identify appropriate well integrity objectives for the containment and the prevention of the escape
of fluids (i.e. liquids or gases) to subterranean formations or the surface;
c) establish the barrier controls plan to maintain well integrity;
d) establish the operational controls plan, both physical and procedural, to maintain both barrier and
well integrity;
e) confirm that the barrier and operational controls are feasible; and
f) verify that the operator has or will have the capability to reliably conduct these operations.
① 4.2 Operating envelopes

The operator shall develop operating envelopes that consider loads and conditions throughout the life
of the well. Several different operating envelopes might need to be considered. These envelopes are
inputs to the well design.
Operating envelopes shall be defined to establish a well integrity envelope.
When establishing an operating envelope, the following are conditions, events, and operational controls
that should be considered in the well design:
a) formation characteristics
i) pore pressure;
ii) fracture gradients;
iii) porosity and permeability;
iv) formation fluids (such as hydrocarbons, water, H2S, CO2, and hydrogen);
v) presence of ground water; and
vi) geo-mechanical loads;
b) operational phases
i) drilling;
ii) completion;
iii) production/injection;
iv) interventions;
v) recompletion; and
vi) abandonment;
c) well component performance and reliability
i) corrosion risk;
1) external fluids; and
2) internal fluids;
ii) mechanical wear;
iii) flow erosion; and
iv) temperature and pressure cycling (e.g., hydraulic fracturing, steam injection, stimulation);
d) surface location considerations
i) surface water;
ii) flood plains;

iii) adjacent wells; and

iv) proximity to populated areas; and
v) geo-technical stability; and
e) operational controls and maintenance
i) implementation of well monitoring, surveillance, and control systems that will ensure
operation within the specified limits; and
ii) actions to be taken as an operating limit is approached.
4.3 Basis of design

The well design inputs, barrier requirements, and operational controls shall be captured in a basis of
design (BOD) document.
The BOD shall include the assumptions and decisions that are used to establish the well design to meet
the operating and integrity requirements. The BOD should be assembled early on in the design process
and may outline the considerations and processes used for making decisions.
This information shall be recorded and retained for the life of the well.
Note: A template for a sample BOD can be found in Annex C.
4.4 Management of change

A management of change (MOC) process shall be utilized to document and manage risk associated with
a change to the well integrity envelope and/or operating envelope. Events that might require an MOC
include, but are not limited to
a) a load or environmental departure from that previously considered in the BOD;
b) a change to operations or functions planned for the well; and
c) the extension of the well life expectancy.
This information shall be recorded and retained for the life of the well.
5 Casing design
Note: Clause 5 outlines the minimum requirements for casing design associated with wellbore construction and is
not intended as a comprehensive design guide.
5.1 General
The intent of the casing design and material selection is to ensure well integrity through the lifecycle of
the well.
The design of each casing string shall consider loads relevant to its primary planned conditions and
potential operational loads (e.g., pressure test, tubing leak, hydraulic fracturing, etc.).
① 5.2 Casing design objectives

A casing design shall provide the following functionalities for the lifecycle of the well:
a) a conduit that allows a well to be drilled and completed for production/injection;
b) protection of non-saline water formations;
c) isolation of reservoir fluids and pressures within the wellbore;
d) the ability to withstand downhole environmental conditions (H2S, CO2, hydrogen, temperature,
etc.);
e) accommodation for workover, stimulation and other loads; and

f) a means for effective abandonment.

Note: Figure A.1 provides examples of wellbore stick diagrams.
5.3 Casing design process and methods
5.3.1 Design methods

A design method shall be selected that is appropriate to the well.
The primary method used to design casing is working stress design (WSD), a deterministic method of
casing and tubing string design. Loads and nominal strengths are estimated and the design process
compares the established loads to the relevant casing strength values. A safety factor is calculated as
the ratio of the corresponding strength to load values and, this ratio is compared to a minimum design
factor for the particular load case.
Other design methodologies that may be used to design casing include limit state, reliability-based, and
strain-based designs.
For thermal applications, refer to DACC IRP03 for an appropriate design method.
Notes:
1) See Annex B for further information on design methods.
2) Clause 5.3.2 and 5.3.3 outline further considerations and particulars of the WSD approach.
① 5.3.2 Casing design basis, premises, and assumptions

Casing strings shall be designed to withstand the relevant loads for the intended purpose throughout
the lifecycle of the well. Loads induced during well control operations shall be calculated (e.g., well kill
operations). Degradation effects associated with mechanical damage (e.g., erosion and casing wear) and
down-hole environmental conditions (e.g., H2S, CO2, hydrogen, chlorides) shall also be considered.
The casing design process shall consider the following factors:

a) mechanical
i) installation loads (e.g., axial, torsional, and pressure differentials);
ii) planned well trajectory;
iii) temperature-related effects (e.g., casing strength de-rating and thermal cycling strain);
iv) completion design requirements (e.g., packer loads);
v) casing wear;
vi) metallurgical considerations (e.g., sour service, corrosion-resistant alloys);
vii) casing connection requirements (e.g., tensile strength, sealability, fatigue resistance); and
viii) impacts of well pressure cycling;
b) sub-surface
i) maximum allowable setting depth with respect to kick tolerance;
ii) estimated reservoir pressure, formation integrity, and temperature gradient;
iii) isolation of weak formations, potential loss zones, sloughing and caving formations and
protection of reservoirs; and
iv) reservoir fluids (potential for H2S, CO2, hydrogen);
c) operational
i) drilling fluids and cementing program;
ii) ECD and surge/swab effects due to narrow annular clearances;
iii) loads induced by well servicing and operations;
iv) stimulation requirements (e.g., hydraulic fracturing); and
v) well abandonment requirements; and

d) replacement — ability to facilitate a casing replacement or patch to repair casing issues.
Offset well information shall be taken into consideration. Re-assessment of the casing design shall be
conducted if the purpose of the well changes in the future.
5.3.3 Minimum design factors

Load calculations shall be performed for all relevant load cases and the result compared with the
corresponding casing strength rating (i.e., to establish the safety factor). The safety factor shall be
greater than the minimum acceptance criteria (i.e., design factor).
Design factor = Minimum acceptable safety factor
For working stress design, the minimum design factors for sour and non-sour service applications from
Table 5.1 shall be used, along with the load cases outlined in AER Directive 010, except as allowed by
Clause 5.3.4.
Table 5.1
Minimum design factors
(See Clauses 5.3.3, 5.3.4 and 5.4.1.)
Alternative Method
Surface Sweet/Sour Sour Sour
Casing (H2S<0.3kPa) (0.3<H2S<10 kPa) (H2S>10 kPa) IRP 1 Comments
Collapse 1.00 1.00 1.00
Burst 1.10 1.20 1.25 1.25 IRP 1: pp H2S>3,500 kPa
Tensile 1.75 1.75 1.75 API Connections
1.60 1.60 1.60 Premium connections
Int./Production Casing
Collapse 1.00 1.00 1.00
Burst 1.10 1.20 1.25 1.25
Tensile 1.75 1.75 1.75 API Connections
1.60 1.60 1.60 Premium connections
Table adapted from AER Directive 010. Table 5.1 is abridged, for the complete methodology refer to
AER Directive 010.
5.3.4 Other working stress design methodology

If a more rigorous design methodology (eg, triaxial design) than the Alternative Method (according to
AER Directive 010) is used and the resulting safety factors are less than the minimum specified in
Table 5.1 then the associated risk shall be understood, quantified, documented and considered
acceptable.

5.4 Load cases for casing and connection design
5.4.1 Identification by operation

The following operation types should be considered when developing the load cases:
a) drilling;
b) installation loads;
c) completion loads;
d) stimulation (pressure and temperature effects);
e) production/injection; and
f) other anticipated loads (e.g., geomechanical).
For the operational types the operator shall ensure that the safety factors meet the minimum design
factors listed in Table 5.1.
5.4.2 Event or operation by load type
5.4.2.1 Burst (internal yield)

The following are examples of events that lead to burst loading conditions:
a) displacement to gas;
b) gas kick;
c) surface tubing leak;
d) pressure test;
e) green cement pressure test;
f) stimulation surface tubing leak;
g) injection down casing; and
h) annular pressure build up due to thermal fluid expansion in trapped annulus.
Note: The typical design factor for a burst analysis is 1.1.
5.4.2.2 Collapse
The following are examples of events that lead to collapse loading conditions:
a) lost returns with mud drop;
b) evacuation (full or partial);
c) cementing;
d) evacuation to atmospheric pressure in case of blocked perforations;
e) packer fluid drop to balance reservoir pressure (initial or depleted reservoir pressure where
applicable);
f) collapse pressure caused by salt or shale squeeze; and
g) annular pressure build up due to thermal fluid expansion in trapped annulus.
Note: The typical design factor for a collapse analysis is 1.0.
① 5.4.2.3 Axial
The following are examples of events that lead to axial loading conditions:
a) shock loads while running in hole;
b) overpull;
c) green cement pressure test;
d) evacuation (full or partial); and
e) heating or cooling of a cemented (full or partial) string.
Note: The typical design factor for an axial load analysis (tension and compression) is 1.3.

5.5 Tri-axial analysis

A tri-axial stress analysis should be performed to confirm combined load conditions that might be
experienced by a casing string (i.e., under relevant combinations of tension, compression, burst,
collapse, thermal and bending loads) produce maximum stress conditions that remain within the elastic
region of the tubular materials.
Note: The typical design factor for a tri-axial analysis is 1.25.
5.6 Connections
5.6.1 Performance properties

Performance properties such as mechanical ratings and sealability for connections shall be included in
the casing design.
Notes:
1) Certain connections have lower mechanical and pressure ratings than the pipe body (e.g., API 8-round,
integral connections, etc.).
2) There are many connection designs available including those specified in API 5C3 as well as semi-premium
and premium proprietary connections that may offer improved performance compared to API connections.
5.6.2 Connection make-up

API connections shall be made up in accordance with API TR 5TP. The thread compound shall conform
to API 5A3 or ISO 13678.
Premium and semi premium connections shall be made up in accordance with the manufacturer’s
specification. Manufacturer’s recommended thread compounds shall be used, unless testing is
performed to qualify other thread compounds.
① 5.6.3 Welded connection

Welded connections may be used, subject to approval by the authority having jurisdiction, and shall
comply with ASME B31.12.
Note: A detailed engineering assessment should be included to evaluate risks associated with flammable
substances.
5.7 Casing wear and erosion

Wear due to drilling operations reduces casing wall thickness, which could affect the burst and collapse
capacity of the casing. Anticipated wall thickness reduction shall be included in the well design.
Casing wall thickness reduction due to erosion shall be accounted for, but not limited to, stimulation
operations. Empirical guidelines for erosional velocities of sand-laden fluids in pipeline systems can be
found in API 14E.
Note: If the existing well is being evaluated to ensure operations during the lifecycle of the well remain within the
design envelope, the recommended practice is to assess remaining wall thickness with logs and to adjust tubular
mechanical capacity accordingly.
5.8 Other conditions

Note: In addition to the loading conditions described in Clauses 5.4.2, temperature de-rating, fatigue, and torsional
loading shall be considered.

5.8.1 Temperature derating

The yield strength of the tubular material shall be derated as appropriate where the temperatures are
expected to be above 120 °C.
Note: There may be variability in elevated temperature test results depending on circumferential location, loading
method, loading rate, specimen geometry, etc.
5.8.2 Buckling
Buckling conditions and associated loading effects shall be assessed in situations where a portion of the
casing string is not supported by cement.
Note: A casing string is a flexible, elastic structural member that can buckle under compressive loads introduced
through shoe constraint, friction, pressure and/or temperature loading conditions within a wellbore. The buckled
shape of a casing string in a given well depends on the magnitude and distribution of the compressive force along
the string as well as the well geometry and the size/spacing of the centralizers. After well construction is
completed, temperature changes and resulting thermal expansion induced in the casing by production and/or
workover operations might also cause buckling over un-cemented intervals of the string.
① 5.8.3 Fatigue
The effect of cyclic loading conditions during the lifecycle of the well on tubular fatigue behaviour shall
be considered in casing design and connection selection.
Notes:
1) Casing designs may be qualified with an engineering assessment, which can be developed in cooperation with
the pipe/connection manufacturer, for design validation under the expected service conditions.
2) Examples of common cyclic loading conditions include
a) rotation and reciprocation during installation and cementing operations in wells with high build rate
and/or dogleg severity;
b) pressure cycles due to storage activities, induced by stimulation activities, such as hydraulic fracturing;
and
c) temperature cycles induced by stimulation activities, changes in fluid temperatures, or other causes.
3) Service fluids and operating conditions can increase potential for corrosion, erosion, and/or environmental
cracking, magnifying fatigue impacts.
4) The impact of cyclic loading on casing fatigue is cumulative. Cyclic loading that happened at an earlier stage
in the life of the well will impact the fatigue life of the casing and reduce its resistance in subsequent loading
cycles. An example is casing that has been rotated through a build section during installation and then
pressure cycled during hydraulic stimulation.
5.8.4 Torsional loading

Torsional loads expected during the installation and cementing operations shall be considered in the
selection of connections and the establishment of the design envelope as it relates to the maximum
allowable torque.
① 5.9 Material selection for corrosive, sour (H2S), CO2, and hydrogen environments
5.9.1 Material selection

Material selection shall include corrosion considerations. Wellbore tubular materials shall be designed
to withstand the fluid/chemical environments expected, including both naturally occurring and
introduced fluids, during the life cycle of the well. The well design shall be based on the anticipated
fluid/chemical, pressure, and temperature combination that will produce the most severe effect.
Notes:
1) The fluid/chemical environments include, but are not limited to, hydrocarbons, drilling fluids, brines, packer
fluids, completion fluids, stimulation acids, CO2, H2S, hydrogen, and/or cements.

2) Exposure to H2S, hydrogen, and CO2 are significant causes of material degradation.
5.9.2 Sour (H2S) service wells

All tubulars to be exposed to sour service shall be compatible and comply with
ISO 15156/NACE-MR0175 when the H2S partial pressure (pp H2S) is higher than or equal to 0.3 kPa.
Consideration shall also be given to operating conditions.
Where the primary barrier is a cemented casing, welded connections or premium couplings that have
been designed or approved for sour service shall be used.
Where the primary barrier is tubing, premium couplings that have been designed or approved for sour
service shall be used.
Operators shall use DACC IRP 01 to determine if additional requirements are applicable depending on
the level of H2S, pressure, flow rate, and the location of the well.
5.9.3 Hydrogen service wells

All tubulars to be exposed to hydrogen shall be compatible and comply with ISO 15156/NACE MR0175.
Consideration shall also be given to the following:

a) partial pressure of hydrogen; and
b) operating conditions.
been designed or approved for hydrogen service shall be used.
Where the primary barrier is tubing, premium couplings that have been designed or approved for
hydrogen service shall be used.
5.9.4 Carbon dioxide service wells

Consideration shall be given to the following:
a) partial pressure of CO2; and
b) operating conditions.
been designed or approved for CO2 service shall be used.
Where the primary barrier is tubing, premium couplings that have been designed or approved for CO2
service shall be used.
6 Cementing design
Note: Clause 6 provides minimum requirements for primary cementing design and execution associated with
wellbore construction.

6.1 Cement design objectives
6.1.1 General
The three main objectives for primary cementing operations for oil and gas wells are to provide
a) hydraulic isolation between various water, gas, and oil bearing formations within the wellbore. The
cement design shall ensure ground water isolation and sufficient wellbore integrity for subsequent
operations;
b) adequate support for the casing (i.e., buckling prevention); and
c) external casing corrosion protection.
Cementing objectives should be clearly specified in well design documents.
6.1.2 Primary cementing

Primary cementing should be designed to minimize integrity issues throughout the life of the well by
including the following considerations:
a) pressure cycling (hydraulic fracturing, production, and injection);
b) the corrosive environment; and
c) thermal cycling.
6.2 Cement design considerations
6.2.1 General
① 6.2.1.1
The following shall be considered when planning and designing a cement job:
a) hole quality;
b) drilling fluid and wellbore conditioning;
c) casing hardware;
d) close-tolerance and flow restriction considerations;
e) zonal coverage requirements;
f) pore pressure/fracture gradient;
g) temperature gradient;
h) lithology (e.g., reactive shales, sands, high permeability sands, permafrost);
i) cement job execution;
j) post cementing operations; and
k) fluids the cement will be in contact with during the life cycle of the well.
Note: See API STD 65-2 and DACC IRP 25 for further details.
① 6.2.1.2
The following shall be considered for all jobs, but are more critical for highly deviated and horizontal
wells:
a) accurate bottom hole circulating and static temperatures;
b) adequate hole cleaning;
c) mud removal;
d) adequate centralization;
e) spacer contact time and/or annular length;
f) cement slurry design; and

g) hydrostatic and hydraulic pressure effects [e.g., when using external casing packers (ECP) and liner
top packers].
6.2.2 Offset analysis

Offset wells should be reviewed to understand area issues such that the cement job can be designed to
be fit-for-purpose.
6.2.3 Changing conditions

Cement design shall be adjusted to accommodate changing or unexpected hole conditions.
6.2.4 Software simulations

The use of software simulations should be considered for cement slurry design and placement. As per
DACC IRP 25, simulations are typically used in the following situations:
a) high temperature wells;
b) large job volumes;
c) long pump times;
d) weak formations;
e) narrow annular clearances;
f) new drilling areas;
g) areas prone to gas migration and surface casing vent flows;
h) problem drilling areas (e.g., lost circulation, high deviation or over/under pressured); and
i) new technology trials (e.g., monobores).
6.2.5 Centralization
Casing centralization shall be designed to achieve hydraulic isolation across all critical zones, including
porosity intervals, cap rock, and liner overlaps. As a minimum the following factors shall be considered
to achieve effective centralization
a) centralizer spacing;
b) centralizer type;
c) hole size, geometry and rugosity;
d) fluid density; and
e) casing size and weight.
At the wellhead, the casing should be designed to be centralized. The final centralizer placement and
standoff should consider final directional surveys and other drilling information.
Notes:
1) Casing centralization is critical in order to achieve proper mud removal and cement placement.
2) Computer simulations for centralization modelling can be run to ensure standoff objectives are achieved.
3) Refer to API 10TR4 and DACC IRP 25 for more information on centralizer selection.
6.2.6 Minimization of fluid contamination

Provisions to minimize fluid contamination within the casing or liner (i.e., wiper plug use) shall be
considered when planning the cement job.
6.2.7 Design impact to execution

The cement design and its potential impact on the cement job execution shall be considered in the
upfront planning. At a minimum, such plans should include
a) pump rates and circulating pressure;

b) mud displacement;
c) possibility of reciprocation and/or rotation of the casing;
d) thickening times;
e) wait on cement times; and
f) cement top-up requirement.
6.2.8 Wellbore cleaning and spacer design

The wellbore shall be circulated and conditioned to minimize cuttings prior to running casing. After
casing is landed the drilling fluid should be circulated and conditioned to the rheology planned in the
cement design. This should include thinning to reduce gel strength and yield point. Conditioning should
be done immediately prior to cementing.
Consideration shall be given to a method of removing or minimizing drilling fluid and filter cake in order
to promote improved cement to formation bond. A typical approach to achieving this is by using a
preflush and spacer design coupled with appropriate pump rates, and pipe movements. A number of
additional methods and equipment may be considered as part of the cement program.
The spacer should be designed to achieve

a) separation of the cement slurry from the drilling fluid to prevent contamination and fully displace
the drilling fluid;
b) water wetting (if non-aqueous drilling fluid is used) or conditioning of the casing and borehole wall
to improve the cement bond and prevent creation of micro-annuli;
c) compatibility with wellbore fluids; and
d) turbulent flow at planned rates, or if turbulence cannot be achieved provide a density or friction
pressure hierarchy between the mud and cement in laminar flow.
Note: Drilling fluids will tend to gain gel strength when allowed to sit stationary in the wellbore. These pockets of
gelled fluid, which commonly exist following drilling, make displacement difficult and need to be broken up prior to
cementing.
6.2.9 Prevention of fluid influx

The cement shall be designed to mitigate or prevent the risk of shallow water flow, gas migration, and
surface casing vent flows.
Well control shall be maintained during all cementing activities. ECD simulations should be run prior to
cementing to ensure well control is maintained during cement placement.
Fluid invasion post cementing should be prevented. When there is risk of fluid influx, the critical static
gel strength period should be minimized to the extent possible.
Notes:
1) Evaluating gel strength development is one method of assessing the risk of fluid influx. Refer to API 65-2
section 5.7.8 for additional information on static gel strength.
2) A method to prevent fluid invasion post cementing involves maintaining pressure on the cement while the
cement is in transition phase.
Cement slurries with a solids volume fraction of > 0.4 should be placed across formations where fluid
influx is a concern.
Note: Lower solid volume fraction slurries (such as extended cement slurries) have a higher porosity and a reduced
ability to prevent flow through the cement matrix.

An expanding agent may be incorporated into the cement slurry to address the cement bulk shrinkage
and avoid the creation of a microannulus.
Note: Cement is considered a hydraulic barrier once 350kPa of compressive strength has been reached.
6.2.10 Interval cementing requirements

Conductor casing that is planned to be used with a diverter should be cemented by forward circulation.
Surface casing shall be cemented full length for all wells.
If groundwater is not covered by surface casing, the next string shall be fully cemented to surface. If
cement to surface is not achieved, the top of the cement shall be confirmed and the authority having
jurisdiction shall be engaged.
All other casing strings should be cemented to surface or into the previous casing string, when
reasonably practical, to mitigate external casing corrosion.
If the potential for cross flow between formations exists, cement shall be designed and placed to
mitigate the potential for cross flow. When using stage tools, the entire open hole section below the
stage tool should be cemented. If cement returns are not confirmed upon opening the stage tool, and
hydrocarbon bearing or porous zones are present below the stage tool, cement placement shall be
confirmed by logging.
6.2.11 Consideration for abandonment

When designing the primary cement job, consideration shall be given to future abandonment
requirements.
6.2.12 Completion design considerations

When the primary cement job is designed and planned, completion design and operations shall be
considered.
① 6.2.13 Cementing float equipment

Float equipment should be selected for the requirements of the cement job and material selection to
meet the requirements of the well design. Float equipment performance requirements are outlined in
API 10F. The cementing program should include contingency for leaking or failed float equipment.
6.3 Cement slurry design
6.3.1 Density
Slurry density shall be designed to ensure that an overbalance to formation pressure is maintained
during cement placement while not exceeding the fracture gradient.
6.3.2 Thickening time

Thickening time should be minimized while maintaining sufficient time for job execution. The following
shall be taken into account when estimating/calculating thickening time:
a) mixing method;
b) job placement time;
c) temperature;
d) planned non-circulating periods; and
e) appropriate safety factor.

6.3.3 Compressive strength

The casing shoe shall not be drilled out until the cement has reached sufficient compressive strength
(3500 kPa) to allow safe drilling operations or following the elapsed time specified by the authority
having jurisdiction. Regardless of drill out time, the cement shall have a compressive strength of at least
3500 kPa after 48 h at formation temperature.
Note: Cement requires compressive strength to support the casing, provide hydraulic isolation along the annulus
and withstand operational stresses. Hydraulic isolation is achieved after reaching 350 kPa. The minimum required
compressive strength can be governed by jurisdictional regulations. A casing should not be incrementally loaded
(tension and/or under pressure) during the initial cement setting process.
6.3.4 Fluid loss

Fluid loss should be minimized when slurry is placed across a permeable formation.
Note: Insufficient fluid loss control allows the aqueous phase of the slurry to escape into the formation. This can
lead to an increase in slurry rheology, increase in density, higher friction pressures, reduction in thickening time,
formation damage, inability to maintain hydrostatic head after placement, annular bridging or, in worst case,
plugging the annulus. Refer to DACC IRP 25 for further guidance.
6.3.5 Free water

For thermal wells, the free water shall be zero, as measured at an angle of 45° in a laboratory.
Note: In highly deviated wells or the deviated sections of horizontal wells the free water can coalesce to form a
continuous channel within the cement on the upper side of the hole. This forms a path that can allow annular flow.
In thermal wells, pockets of free water in a cased annulus could lead to casing collapse during the heating
operations.
6.3.6 Rheology
The following aspects should be considered in rheology design:
a) slurry mixability and pumpability;
b) drilling fluid removal and slurry placement;
c) slurry capability to transport large particles (e.g., lost circulation materials);
d) annular pressure during slurry placement (ECD); and
e) wellbore temperature profile.
6.3.7 Stability
Thermal and chemical stability shall both be considered in the cement design.
Note: The term stability refers to the ability of the set cement to withstand the environmental conditions
throughout the life of the well.
6.3.8 Mechanical and thermal properties

The mechanical and thermal properties of the cement should be designed to withstand the stresses
associated with pressure and temperature fluctuations throughout the life of a well (e.g., thermal
operations, and hydraulic fracturing).
6.3.9 Lost circulation

When there is risk of loss of circulation during cementing, all reasonable efforts should be made to cure
lost circulation before cementing operations at the same ECD as will occur during the cementing
operation. The following contingency measures should be considered at the design phase in the event
that loss of circulation cannot be cured prior to cementing operations:
a) addition of lost circulation materials (LCM);

b) use of specialized blends such as: thixotropic, lightweight or foam cement;

c) ECD management (reduced rates, viscosity, etc); and
d) staged cement jobs.
6.4 Cement lab testing
6.4.1
In conducting lab testing, actual downhole temperatures should be used if available. Temperature
changes throughout the wellbore shall be considered. Lab testing should be conducted using
representative field cement and additive samples as well as the planned mix water.
The following properties should be evaluated by lab testing:

a) density;
b) thickening time;
c) compressive strength;
d) fluid loss;
e) rheology;
f) free water;
g) compatibility;
h) critical static gel strength period; and
i) other properties as deemed appropriate to the application (e.g., thermal stability, shrinkage).
Note: Lab testing procedures are designed to replicate downhole conditions, primarily temperature.
6.4.2
All cement testing procedures shall, at minimum, adhere to the latest version of the following
standards:
a) API 10B-2;
b) API 10B-3;
c) API 10B-4;
d) API 10B-5; and
e) API 10B-6.
Deviations from the testing procedures described in the above standards are permitted, if the planned
testing process is more rigorous (i.e., exceeds the standard) or presents a more realistic approach to the
planned operations.
Material quality should be verified through vendor quality control processes.

Note: API specification 10A, as an example, contains specifications for oil well cement.
6.5 Verification of cement
6.5.1 Cement job evaluation

If the primary cement job is not executed as per plan and there is a concern the objective of the
cementing job was not met, the authority having jurisdiction should be engaged to determine follow up
actions.
Note: Regardless of execution results, local regulations might require further diagnostics based on the type of well.
Refer to DACC IRP 25 section 25.9 for cement verification methods, tools and options, including pros and cons.
API 10TR1 provides additional detailed information on cement sheath evaluation.

The planned cement evaluation method and ability to properly evaluate the cement placement and
quality shall take into consideration the cement slurry design (e.g., foam or light weight cements).
① 6.5.2 Liner lap

A pressure test shall be performed where the liner lap is above the zone of interest. There are two
types of tests that may be performed on the liner lap:
a) A positive test: involves pressuring up the wellbore before drilling out the shoe to check for leaks
at the liner lap; and
b) A negative test: hydrostatic pressure in the well is decreased until the pressure above the liner is
below the pore pressure gradient in the zone of interest. The fluid level and pressures are
monitored to ensure the well is stable and there is no flow.
Unless an engineering assessment is completed, a liner lap shall be a minimum of 30 m.
6.6 Special cements
6.6.1 Foam cement

The following factors should be considered when designing a foam cement job:
a) compressive strength;
b) foam quality and stability;
c) well control; and
d) density changes during placement due to gas compressibility.
The foamed cement slurry shall meet the minimum compressive strength requirement as outlined in
Clause 6.3.3.
Due to the added complexity of placing foam cement, engineering software should be utilized when
planning and designing such cement jobs (see API 65-2 section 5.6.5.9). Foam cement slurries should be
tested in accordance with API 10B-4.
Note: Although its design and execution can be more complex than standard jobs, the use of foamed cement can
be advantageous in certain applications.
6.6.2 Thermal cement

Cement blends shall be designed to withstand the operating conditions over the record, including
temperature. Thermal cement shall be used when the bottom hole temperature exceeds 110 °C.
Thermal cement shall be used in all areas with current or future planned thermal activities. Particular
attention shall be given to pressure and temperature cycling, as this can cause cement failure and/or
debonding of the cement from the casing or formation. To address these concerns, the following shall
be considered when selecting thermal cements (as per DACC IRP 03):
a) mechanical properties (e.g., Young’s modulus, Poisson’s ratio, tensile strength, and compressive
strength);
b) thermal properties (e.g., thermal expansion coefficient, thermal conductivity, and specific heat
capacity);
c) the interaction of the casing, cement, and formation during the life cycle of the well; and
d) additives that can cause changes to thermo-mechanical cement properties.
Note: Cement exhibits strength retrogression at temperatures above 110 °C. The addition of silica flour can prevent
strength retrogression. Thermal cement blends are designed to not exhibit a significant strength reduction when
exposed to temperatures above 110 °C.

6.7 Cementing reporting requirements

The operator shall collect and maintain documentation to assess the cement job quality, trouble-shoot
future issues, and manage future jobs.
The following records shall be the minimum retained for lifetime of the well:
a) slurry design and properties;
b) spacers and preflush design and properties;
c) execution details
i) volumes pumped;
ii) volumes returned;
iii) pressures;
iv) pump rates;
v) pipe movements; and
vi) operational issues; and
d) cement evaluation details, as necessary.
For a complete list of cement job reporting requirements, refer to DACC IRP 25.
7 Wellhead design
Note: Clause 7 outlines the minimum requirements for wellhead design.
7.1 General
The wellhead design shall ensure well control and well integrity, to provide protection of the public and
the environment.
7.2 Wellhead design objectives

Wellhead equipment shall provide
a) access and means for securing the blowout preventers and drilling equipment;
b) a securely sealed surface termination for well casing strings;
c) access to annular spaces;
d) a means to suspend and seal production tubing;
e) a platform for installing surface flow control equipment; and
f) access for well servicing and other interventions including hydraulic fracturing.
① 7.3 Wellhead design considerations

Wellhead equipment shall be designed and constructed in accordance with ISO 10423 or API 6A, and
sourced from an equipment manufacturer that shall follow a recognized quality management program
such as ISO/TS 29001 or API Q1.
Wellhead materials shall comply with ISO 10423 or API 6A. Materials for equipment for sour service
wells shall comply with ISO 15156/NACE MR0175. Sour service materials shall be used for all
installations where the partial pressure of hydrogen sulphide is 0.3 kPa or greater.
When equipment used is not within the scope of ISO 10423 or API 6A, the well operator shall ensure
that the design is performed using accepted engineering principles and practices. Such wellhead
equipment shall be traceable, and records and documentation shall be produced and maintained in
accordance with ISO 10423 or API 6A.

Wellhead equipment shall be sized to allow full-bore access to the tubulars on which it is attached,
except in circumstances when full-bore access is not feasible. In such circumstances, the consequences
of restricted access shall be considered.
Wellhead equipment shall be designed to consider the effect of operating conditions which include but
are not limited to
a) operating temperatures and pressures;
b) loads from suspended tubulars;
c) loads from attached piping and equipment;
d) the attachment of temporary equipment;
e) the effects of nearby wells;
f) fluids to be encountered throughout the life of the well; and
g) corrosion and erosion.
For wellhead equipment on hydrogen wells, product verification level, material classification,
temperature classification, and specific service requirements suitability shall be confirmed via an
engineering assessment. Wellhead and Christmas tree valves that will be exposed to hydrogen shall be
manufactured and tested according to API 6A product specification level (PSL) 3G or API 6D quality
specification level (QSL) 3G.
① 7.4 Installation practices

Wellhead equipment shall be installed, maintained, and tested in accordance with documented
procedures that consider the manufacturer’s recommendations; and the design service conditions.
Field welding of pressure containing welds shall comply with a welding procedure specification (WPS)
developed in accordance with ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section IX. The WPS shall have a
procedure qualification record (PQR) showing qualification in accordance with ASME Boiler and Pressure
Vessel Code Section IX. The welder shall
a) perform the weld in accordance with the WPS;
b) have access to the WPS and PQR; and
c) be qualified as a pressure welder in the applicable jurisdiction.
Additionally, welds exposed to hydrogen shall comply with ASME B31.12.
7.5 Re-use/re-conditioning
The operator shall verify fit-for-purpose when utilizing reconditioned or refurbished equipment.
7.6 Records
The operator shall ensure that a set of records are created and maintained, which shall include but are
not limited to
a) a description of each wellhead component installed including
i) component name;
ii) size and working pressure;
iii) Product Specification Levels (PSL), material class and temperature rating (as defined
by API 6A); and
iv) connection description and pressure rating;
b) a schematic drawing including all modifications throughout the lifecycle of the well;
c) installation procedures;
d) welding procedure specification and welder’s qualification for field welding; and
e) pressure test results.

Annex A (informative)
Example wellbore stick diagrams
Note: This Annex is not a mandatory part of this Standard.
Figure A.1
Example wellbore stick diagrams
(See Clause 5.2.)
Conductor Conductor
casing casing
Surface Surface
casing casing
Intermediate
casing
Production
casing
Production
casing

Annex B (informative)
Casing designs methods
B.1 Working stress design (WSD)

WSD is the classical method of casing and tubing design used commonly for oil and gas well design.
Loads and strength are estimated and the design process compares the load to the strength. A safety
factor is calculated as the ratio of the strength to the load and compared to a minimum design factor
(see Clause 5.3.3).
The primary role of a safety factor is to account for uncertainties in the design variables and
parameters, primarily the loading conditions and the strength or resistance of the tubular.
The allowable utilization range of a tubular is defined as the common performance envelope area
bounded by
a) the von Mises Ellipse;
b) ISO/TR 10400:2007 or API 5C3 formulas for burst, collapse and axial stresses; and
c) pipe end connection capacities.
Note: See figure B.1.
Figure B.1
Performance envelope area
(See Clause B.1)
Note: Adapted from API 5C3.
B.2 Limit states design (LSD)

The LSD approach serves to define the ultimate strength or serviceability limit strength for allowable
mechanical limit in tubulars. It may use a stress or strain-based criteria (elastic limit is not always
relevant), as load bearing limit is the objective in this case. Applied loads are deterministic, and this
method may be used for either deterministic or probabilistic design. API 5C3 and ISO 10400 include
limit states strength equations and present them as an alternative to conventional WSD.
B.3 Reliability-based design (RBD)

RBD approaches are probabilistic in nature and explicitly identify all the design variables and parameters
that determine the loading and strength of the tubular string. Moreover, they use a limit-states
approach to the design of tubulars, rather than elasticity-based initial yield criteria to predict structural
failure. Such probabilistic design methodologies allow either the computation of the probability of

failure of a given casing or the design of a casing that meets a target probability of failure. Two different
reliability-based approaches that can be considered are: the more fundamental quantitative risk
assessment (QRA) approach and the more easily applied load and resistance factor design (LRFD)
methodology. The general principles of reliability-based design are given in ISO 2394.
In reliability-based approaches, the uncertainty and variability in each of the design variables and
parameters is explicitly considered. In addition, a limit-states approach is used rather than elasticity-
based criteria. Thus, the “failure criterion” of WSD is replaced by a limit state that represents the true
limit of the tubular for a given load condition. Such probabilistic design approaches allow the estimation
of a probability of failure of the tubular, thus giving better risk-consistent designs.
B.4 Strain-based design

Strain-based design is a particular form of LSD which may be used for applications where the most
critical load conditions are introduced by strains or displacements of controlled magnitude. In this
approach, casing performance limits and service margins are defined by alternative criteria, such as the
tubular or connection strain limits or structural stability, which must be characterised as functions of the
post-elastic stress-strain response of the material. This approach is applicable to the design of thermal
wells where the compressive and tensile loads introduced by constrained thermal expansion and
contraction of the casing under thermal cycle conditions may exceed the yield strength of the casing
material. Refer to DACC IRP 03 for further guidance in the application of this methodology to the design
of thermal wells.

Annex C (informative)
Sample template for basis of design document
CONTENTS
1 INTRODUCTION
1.1 DRILLING OBJECTIVES
1.2 OFFSET WELLS
1.3 OPTIONS, VARIATIONS AND CONTINGENT DESIGNS CONSIDERED
2 TARGET DEFINITION
2.1 TARGET LOCATION, DEPTH AND SECTIONS
2.2 TARGET TOLERANCE
2.3 TOTAL DEPTH (TD) CRITERIA
3 DIRECTIONAL PROFILE
3.1 DIRECTIONAL PROFILE KEY POINTS
3.2 WELL SPACING AND ANTI-COLLISION CRITERIA
FIGURE 1: DIRECTIONAL PLAN
4 GEOLOGY
4.1 RESERVOIR MAP
4.2 GEOLOGICAL SEQUENCE
4.3 POTENTIAL DRILLING HAZARDS AND MITIGATION
5 RESERVOIR DESCRIPTION
5.1 RESERVOIR FLUID CHARACTERISTICS
5.2 RESERVOIR PRESSURE
5.3 RESERVOIR TEMPERATURE
6 DATA GATHERING
6.1 MEASUERMENT WHILE DRILLING (MWD)/LOGGING WHILE DRILLING(LWD)
6.2 CUTTINGS
6.3 WIRELINE LOGGING
6.4 CORING
7 DRILLING DESIGN, EQUIPMENT AND OPERATIONAL CONSIDERATIONS
7.1 WELL CONDITIONS/CHARACTERISTICS AFFECTING DRILLING CONSTRUCTION
7.2 FLUIDS TO BE USED
7.3 GENERIC CASING DESIGN
7.4 CEMENT DESIGN
7.5 PRESSURE TESTING REQUIREMENTS
7.6 PAD OR WELL KICK TOLERANCE/LEAK-OFF TESTING REQUIREMENTS
7.7 WELLHEAD DESIGN
FIGURE 2: GENERIC WELL SCHEMATIC
FIGURE 3: WELLHEAD SCHEMATIC
FIGURE 4: WELLHEAD SCHEMATIC – FLANGED WELLHEAD ASSEMBLY

Introduction
Drilling objectives
Offset wells
Options, variations and contingent designs considered
# Date Status Description
Target definition
Target location, depth and sections
Target tolerance
TD Criteria
Directional profile
Directional profile key points
Well spacing and anti-collision criteria
Directional plan
Geology
Reservoir map
Geological sequence
Potential drilling hazards and mitigation
Reservoir description
Reservoir fluid characteristics
Reservoir pressure
Reservoir temperature
Data gathering
MWD / LWD
Item Firm/Contingent Description

Cuttings
Wireline logging
Coring
Drilling design, equipment and operational considerations
Well conditions/characteristics affecting drilling construction
Fluids to be used
Activity/Hole section Fluid density

Fluid type
mm SG
Surface hole mud selection
Intermediate mud
Pilot hole and reservoir section mud
Generic casing design
Size New / Setting Depth m

Item Setting depth criteria
mm Existing MDbrt / TVDbrt
Casing specifications
OD Weight ID Burst Collapse Yield

Grade Connections
mm kg/m Mm kPa kPa MPa
Cement design
Surface hole cement spacer:
Surface hole cement slurry:
Surface hole lost circulation material:

Surface hole cement excess:
Surface casing cement head and plugs:
Surface hole cementing pump rates:
Surface hole cement displacement fluid:
Surface hole cement returns:
Intermediate cement spacer:
Intermediate cement slurry:
Intermediate hole loss circulation material:
Intermediate hole cement excess:
Intermediate hole cement head and plugs:
Intermediate hole cement pump rates:
Intermediate hole cement displacement fluid:
Production liner cement spacer:
Production liner cement slurry:
Abandonment plug
Kick off plug
Production liner lost circulation material:
Production liner cement excess:
Production liner centralization
Production liner cement head and plugs:
Production liner cement pump rates:
Displacement fluid:
Pressure testing requirements
Casing bowl
Blowout preventer/manifold/circulating system/surface casing
Surface casing
Intermediate casing
Liner

Pad or well kick tolerance/leak-off testing requirements
Expected
Casing / LOT / Kick Influx Formation Mud Kick
formation
hole size FIT depth gradient pressure weight tolerance Kick type
strength
mm SGe m KPa/m SGe SG m3
SGe
Wellhead design
Item Description
Wellhead manufacturer
Wellhead type
Pressure rating KPa
Generic well schematic
Wellhead schematic
Wellhead schematic – flanged wellhead assembly

Annex D (informative)
Bibliography
API (American Petroleum Institute)

5C1-2010 (RP)
Recommended Practice for Care and Use of Casing and Tubing
DACC (Drilling and Completions Committee)

IRP 05:2011
Minimum Wellhead Requirements
IRP 06:2004
Critical Sour Underbalanced Drilling
Government of Saskatchewan
O-2 Reg 6: 2012
Oil and Gas Conservation Regulations
ISO (International Organization for Standardization)

13679:2002
Petroleum and natural gas industries – Procedures for testing casing and tubing connections

ISBN 978-1-4883-0462-0

CSA Z625-16 Well design for petroleum and natural gas industry system

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

CSA Z625-16 Well design for petroleum and natural gas industry system

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

CSA Z625-16 Well design for petroleum and natural gas industry system

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

CSA Z625:16

Well design for petroleum and natural gas

REVISED FEBRUARY 2024

Disclaimer and exclusion of liability

Intellectual property rights and ownership

Authorized use of this document

Update No. 1 — February 2024 Revision symbol (in

If you require assistance, please e-mail techsupport@csagroup.org or call 416-747-2233.

®A trademark of the Canadian Standards Association, operating as “CSA Group”

Published in November 2016 by CSA Group

Technical Committee on Well Design — Update 1 5

4 Design philosophy for well integrity 16

November 2016 © 2016 Canadian Standards Association 1

Annex A (informative) — Example wellbore stick diagrams 34

November 2016 © 2016 Canadian Standards Association 2

Technical Committee on Well Design

M.A. Parker Imperial Oil Resources, Vice-Chair

G. Boyer Alberta Energy Regulator, Associate

G. Ericson Saskatchewan Ministry of Economy,

J. Faria Calgary, Alberta Associate

K. Farquharson Stream-Flo Industries Ltd.,

T. Godsoe Ministry of Natural Resources, Associate

I.A. Khallad ConocoPhillips Canada,

J. Koteles Shell Canada Energy, Associate

K. Kowal Saskatchewan Ministry of the Economy, Associate

M. Leeb Repsol Oil & Gas Canada Inc.,

November 2016 © 2016 Canadian Standards Association 3

R. MacDonald Alberta Energy Regulator,

J.S. Manocha Ministry of Natural Resources,

C. Matthews C-FER Technologies,

M.B. Muir Husky Oil Operations Limited,

W. O'Halloran Nova Scotia Dept of Energy, Associate

K. Parsonage BC Oil and Gas Commission,

L. Sorelli Université Laval,

W.G. Suek TAQA North,

P.C. Toy Tenaris Canada,

S. Tracy EVRAZ Inc. NA,

T. Watson T.L. Watson & Associates Inc.,

S. Chan CSA Group, Project Manager

November 2016 © 2016 Canadian Standards Association 4

D. Kinch SubTerra Engineering, Vice-Chair

L. Swanson Secure Energy Services, Vice-Chair

T. Cook Canlin Energy,

D. Dall'Acqua Noetic Engineering 2008 Inc.,

E. Diggins Frontier Project Solutions,

G. Ericson Saskatchewan Ministry of Energy and Resources, Non-voting

K. Farquharson Stream-Flo Industries Ltd.,

November 2016 © 2016 Canadian Standards Association 5

K. Hamilton C-FER Technologies,

A. Kabir Canada Energy Regulator,

I. A. Khallad ConocoPhillips Canada,

B. Kostiuk Big Guns Energy Services Inc., Non-voting

K. Kowal Saskatchewan Ministry of Energy and Resources,

D. Lee Big Guns Energy Services Inc,

M. Leeb Suncor Energy Inc.,

J. S. Manocha Ameta Projects Inc., Non-voting

M. Muqeem Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources & Forestry,

I. Peleshok Alberta Engergy Regulator,

November 2016 © 2016 Canadian Standards Association 6