ImprovingLocation Accuracy

Update on migrating to NAD 83

and to a newer survey grid version

101100110101

Yogi Schulz

2

Yogi SchulzBiography

President of Corvelle Management Consultants Information technology related management

consulting Project management and systems development Computing Canada & Calgary Herald columnist PPDM Association board member Industry presenter:

• Project World - 4 years

• CIPS Informatics - 7 years

• PMI Information Systems SIG - 2 years

• Convergence - 4 years

• PPDM Association - several years

Management Consultants

3

PresentationOutline Quick introduction to:

• surveying, datums andco-ordinate reference systems

• DLS survey grid

Background to the problem/opportunity Strategies for improving location accuracy Benefits & Risks Conclusions & Recommendations Questions & Discussion

Bernie needs constant reassurance

4

A Quick Overviewof Survey Datum History

NAD 27

NAD 83

WGS 84

Canadian Federal GovernmentCompleted NAD 83 implementation in 1996

Best fit forNorth America

Best fit forthe whole world

Implemented as

5

NAD 27 to NAD 83 Differences

6

NAD 27 to NAD 83 Difference Impact

Lat/Long shift72.49 meters

UTM Easting/Northing shift227.98 meters

Calgary Tower moveson a map if location data

is not migrated

7

Calgary

Edmonton

Why is this important?

99% of GPS surveys are based on ASCM

ASCM = ATS 4.1

10 - 40 m

ATS 4.1 DLS Survey Grid Differences

7

ATS 2.2 vs. 4.1

8

DLS Grid Version Difference ImpactDLS Grid ATS 4.1 vs ATS 2.2 Difference > 40 m

Grid

Culture

Land

Seismic

Pipelines

Wells

Location risk increasesas exploration targets become smaller

+200 m

-75 m

30 m

Impact of Geospatial Data Discrepancies

1 Bin Grid20-30 m

10

Project Drivers

Minimize risk of producing maps with multiple datums & survey grid versions unknowingly

Respond to new data submission and distribution requirements of regulatory agencies

Implement CAPP recommendation to: Recognize that all new survey data is being

acquired and delivered using NAD 83 Opportunity to improve the G&G data

management environment

Growing momentum for oil & gas industryto move forward

11

Migrating to a new datum& to a new survey grid version

Current combination: NAD 27 ATS 2.2 or ATS 2.6 STS 1.0 or STS 2.5 MAN 1.0 PRB 1.0

New combination: NAD 83 ATS 4.1 STS 2.5 MAN 1.0 PRB 1.0

PPDM modules &some software packages

support move to new combination

12

Strategies for Migrating to NAD 83 and a new DLS survey grid version Do nothing Use either current or new combination

on a product-by-product basis Use either current or new combination

on a project-by-project basis Continue to use current combination

throughout the company One-time data migration of current to new

combination throughout the company

Lowest risk approach requires useof a single combination company-wide

13

One-time data migration Scope Choices Upgrade DLS version Corporate PPDM databases SEG P1 database(s) All active project datastores Project datastores with

anticipated longevity Inactive projects Legacy data:

• Reels of seismic SEG Y data

• Printed & Mylar maps

IncreasingCost

ComplexityScheduleBenefit

14

Project Benefits Risk Reduction Ongoing confirmation of the actual datum &

survey grid version creates risk of error The errors can lead to:

• Misplaced wells that miss their reservoir targets

• Missed exploration opportunities through misinterpretation

15

Project Benefits Effort Reduction The project benefits include reduced:

• Confusion about datums

• Confusion about survey grid versions

• Data management effort

• Data conversion effort

Value of the benefitsrelative to cost

of data migration projectis subject to challenge

Green grid is NAD 27Gray grid is NAD 83

16

ProjectRisks Data quality inadequacies will

complexify the data migration Expectation that data migration

will fix bumps in the G & G workflow Under-estimating impact of data migration on:

• Computing environment: Applications, Data

• End-user training

Data not available in new combination from data vendors

Applications from software vendors not ready to support new combination

17

Conclusions

Migration projects respond to trendof widening use of new combinationin the oil & gas industry

Migration projects position companies for survey requirements of unconventional production projects

Every company will have to address the data migration sooner or later

Data migration projectspay for themselves with one dry hole

18

Recommendations

Build datum & survey grid awarenessthrough education

Use PPDM to manage the data migrationto the new combination

Participate in the NAD 83 best practices workgroup

Collaboration will:- Improve quality of deliverables- Reduce costs through sharing

19

Questions &Discussion

Can you helpexplorationists?

Pleasefill out

evaluationform

20

1800, 250 - 6th Ave. S.W.Calgary, Alberta Canada T2P 3H7

Telephone: (403) 249-5255E-mail: YogiSchulz@corvelle.com

Web: www.corvelle.com

Information technology related management consulting

Project management and systems development

Computing Canada & Calgary Herald columnist

PPDM Association board member

Improving Location Accuracy

Management Consultants

21

NAD 27 to NAD 83 Differences

60 – 90 meters

0 – 25 meters

22

Likely Software Listrequired by all energy companies PPDM datastore migration * Project datastore migration for:

• GeoFrame

• Petrel

• OFM

Sequential file data migration SEG P1 * & SEG Y data migration GIS SDE layer migration

* May be handled by data management vendor