Global regulations and practices for well integrity management: a review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The integrity of oil and gas wells ensures safe operations and preserves air and water quality. Thus, it is important to identify and repair well integrity issues that cause unwanted gas movement within a well system. Sustained casing pressure (SCP) and surface casing vent flow (SCVF) are key well integrity indicators. This study presents the first review of SCP/SCVF government regulations and industry guidelines across major oil- and gas-producing countries, including the USA, Canada, Australia, Norway, Russia, and China. Regulations vary widely: the USA, Canada, and Russia have specific regulatory requirements, while Australia and Norway leave more responsibility to operators. China relies on guidelines from state-owned companies. Major oil- and gas-producing provinces in Canada require pressure to be released to the atmosphere as SCVF. The U.S. industry guideline API RP 90 underpins offshore SCP regulations in multiple countries, but no global standard exists. Routine annulus pressure or flow monitoring is required in 38% of U.S. states, 15% of Canadian provinces and territories, as well as in Norway and Russia, whereas China and Australia do not have such requirements. Diagnostic testing for SCP or SCVF is required in 12% of U.S. states, 38% of Canadian provinces and territories, and Russia. However, testing is not mandated in China, Australia, and Norway. This study proposes a minimum standard workflow that can be included and adjusted in jurisdictions without SCP/SCVF regulations. The proposed workflow includes routine monitoring, diagnostic testing when anomalies occur, and remediation, providing a structured approach to well integrity management.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.009 | 0.018 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.010 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".