Ariz. Admin. Code § R18-9-B613 - Mechanical Integrity
A. An injection
well has mechanical integrity if:
1. There is
no significant leak in the casing, tubing or packer; and
2. There is no significant fluid movement
into an USDW through vertical channels adjacent to the injection well
bore.
B. One of the
following methods must be used to evaluate the absence of significant leaks
under subsection (A)(1) of this Section:
1.
Following an initial pressure test, monitoring of the tubing-casing annulus
pressure with sufficient frequency to be representative, as determined by the
Director, while maintaining an annulus pressure different from atmospheric
pressure measured at the surface;
2. Pressure test with liquid or gas;
or
3. Records of monitoring showing
the absence of significant changes in the relationship between injection
pressure and injection flow rate for the following Class II enhanced recovery
wells:
a. Existing wells completed without a
packer provided that a pressure test has been performed and the data is
available and provided further that one pressure test shall be performed at a
time when the well is shut down and if the running of such a test will not
cause further loss of significant amounts of oil or gas; or
b. Existing wells constructed without a long
string casing, but with surface casing which terminates at the base of fresh
water provided that local geological and hydrological features allow such
construction and provided further that the annular space shall be visually
inspected. For these wells, the Director shall prescribe a monitoring program
which will verify the absence of significant fluid movement from the injection
zone into an USDW.
C. One of the following methods must be used
to determine the absence of significant fluid movement under subsection (A)(2)
of this Section:
1. The results of a
temperature or noise log;
2. For
Class II only, cementing records demonstrating the presence of adequate cement
to prevent such migration;
3. For
Class III wells where the nature of the casing precludes the use of the logging
techniques prescribed at subsection (C)(1) of this Section, cementing records
demonstrating the presence of adequate cement to prevent such migration;
or
4. For Class III wells where the
Director elects to rely on cementing records to demonstrate the absence of
significant fluid movement, the monitoring program prescribed by
R18-9-G647(B)
shall be designed to verify the absence of significant fluid
movement.
D. The
Director may allow the use of a test to demonstrate mechanical integrity other
than those listed in subsections (B) and (C)(2) of this Section with the
written approval of the Administrator.
E. In conducting and evaluating the tests
enumerated in this Section or others to be allowed by the Director, the owner
or operator and the Director shall apply methods and standards generally
accepted in the industry. When the owner or operator reports the results of
mechanical integrity tests to the Director, they shall include a description of
the test or tests and the method or methods used. In making the evaluation, the
Director shall review monitoring and other test data submitted since the
previous evaluation.
F. The
Director may require additional or alternative tests if the results presented
by the owner or operator under subsection (E) of this Section are not
satisfactory to the Director to demonstrate that there is no movement of fluid
into or between USDWs resulting from the injection activity.
Notes
State regulations are updated quarterly; we currently have two versions available. Below is a comparison between our most recent version and the prior quarterly release. More comparison features will be added as we have more versions to compare.
No prior version found.