No node selected. Each visit follows five steps: inspection, testing, maintenance, troubleshooting and reporting.
01 Fakhri · Well Integrity Project Coordinator
Wellhead integrity projects, coordinated end to end.
OSES wellhead and X-mas tree maintenance: contract, crews, HSE, integrity data, cost and client reviews — run as one system.
- 01Project & Contract Setup
- 02Field Operations Coordination
- 03Well Integrity Data Analysis
- 04HSE & Quality Governance
- 05Commercial Performance
- 06Client & Stakeholder Management
Simplified, non-certified wellhead/X-mas tree model for portfolio communication.
02 Starting with a controlled plan
Before the crew mobilized, the project needed a workable commercial, operational, and safety baseline.
What I inherited: a new contract, a crew mix that included first-time OSES personnel, and inspection reports that still lived in separate workbooks. The first job was to turn obligations into controls.
- Translated contract requirements into project controls.
- Prepared P&L and revenue / margin forecasts.
- Mapped manpower and equipment requirements.
- Prepared the HSE Plan, Bridging Document, mobilization plan and readiness tracking.
- 01
Contract Review
Scope, KPIs and reporting duties turned into a control list.
- 02
P&L Forecast
Revenue, cost and margin forecast before the first invoice.
- 03
HSE Plan
Hazards, controls and responsibilities for this scope.
- 04
Bridging Document
Contractor and client HSE systems aligned into one agreement.
- 05
Crew Matrix
Roles mapped to competencies and certificate validity.
- 06
Equipment Readiness
Calibration, lifting certificates, toolboxes and consumables.
- 07
Mobilization
Plan and readiness tracker closed before sailing.
03 Crew and equipment readiness
Readiness was verified before the team entered the field.
- One SIKA readiness
- 75% → 100%
- Personnel authorized and BSS-ready
- 16 / 16
- First-time OSES personnel prepared
- 10
- Personnel rejected by the client
- 0
04 Coordinating field execution
Two vessel-based crews. One coordinated visit programme.
Each crew sailed a planned loop of well visits. My job was to keep the programme, the people, the permits, the materials and the reports moving together.
- Average well visits per month
- 84
- Well visits supported in 2025
- ≈ 1,000
- Productive utilization
- 87–89%
- H2 2025 reporting coverage
- 448 wells · 2,494 valves
Select a route to see its work sequence, or a node to open its visit steps.
Mobilize from supply base → Pre-job briefing and PTW on board → Inspect → test → maintain at each node → Report findings the same day → Return and demobilize
Mobilize from supply base → Pre-job briefing and PTW on board → Carry corrective items from previous visits → Report findings the same day → Return and demobilize
Abstract route map. Node names and positions are fictional and do not represent real wells, platforms or vessels.
05 From field reports to WIMS
Field reports became a governed data pipeline the whole project could act on.
Every visit ends in a Final Inspection report. I developed WIMS so those reports are imported, checked by a person where judgment matters, and turned into dashboards, corrective queues, visit plans and SPR evidence.
- Final Inspection
- Automatic Import
- Human QC
- Validated Record
- Dashboard
- Corrective Queue
- Visit Planning
- SPR
- Valve-inspection records
- 7,713
- Troubleshooting records
- 1,418
- Searchable visit history and pressure mapping
- Red / amber / green integrity classification
- Next-visit recommendations
- Interactive 3D equipment visualization
WIMS supports coordination, traceability, prioritization and technical communication. It does not replace certified engineering assessment.
05.1 Final Inspection Inbox
Drop the report into the inspection inbox. WIMS begins tracking it automatically.
- 1
Reports are placed into the Final Inspection Inbox
A monitored folder is the single entry point. No one has to remember to upload a file.
- 2
WIMS detects incoming workbooks
The folder is watched for Excel files. Temporary lock files are ignored and a workbook is only read once it has finished copying.
- 3
Processing begins automatically
Each workbook is parsed and saved locally, one after another, with visible progress.
- 4
The report becomes part of the tracked workflow
From here it can be validated, counted, searched, reviewed and planned against — across hundreds of inspection reports.
05.2 Automation with human quality control
Automation where the data is reliable. Human review where judgment matters.
Spreadsheet cells are parsed into structured inspection fields. Each record then takes one of two paths.
- Well identity
- Platform
- Inspection date
- Valve position
- Valve type
- Maintenance outcome
- Pressure result
- Visual finding
- Anomaly
- Personnel / crew
Green path · validated automatically
Well identity matches the master well list and the fields are readable. The record enters WIMS with no review step.
Amber path · manual confirmation required
The well name is ambiguous or not in the master list, or fields are unreadable. That file is paused while the remaining files keep scanning.
Manual mapping is an intentional quality-control gate, not a system failure. As Project Coordinator I keep the final say over uncertain well identities and incomplete information — WIMS proposes a candidate, a person confirms it.
05.3 Operational dashboard
Hundreds of reports become one coordinated operational view.
Validated records are counted once, in one place, with the scoring rules written on the screen: Lock Open, Pneumatic and Production Choke valves stay in the reports but are excluded from every score and percentage.
- Visit statusActive and non-active visits
- Valve recordsTotal valve records in the population
- Scored recordsValves that count toward performance
- PassedMaintenance outcome acceptable
- Needs attentionOutcome requires follow-up
- No testTest not performed on the visit
- Manual / unreadableNeeds data correction before scoring
- Excluded categoriesLock Open · Pneumatic · Production Choke
Bar lengths are schematic, not measured values.
05.4 Need Attention workflow
The system does not only count problems. It shows exactly where they must be corrected.
Dashboard totals break down into individual corrective tasks. Each one carries its full address, so the person fixing it never has to search through workbooks.
WELL-D05 · Swab Valve
- Source workbook
SAMPLE FINAL INSPECTION PLATFORM-D #05.xlsx- Well
- WELL-D05 · Platform D
- Valve position
- 3 · Swab Valve
- Affected fields
- Maintenance Result · Easy to Operate after grease
- Reason for review
- Easy to Operate changed Yes → No after grease — check possible typo
- Detected
- Reviewed
- Corrected
- Validated
Detected — the imported values contradict each other, so the valve is flagged instead of being scored.
Fictional example. The reason text is one of the real WIMS check rules.
05.5 Crew performance and work-quality review
Validated inspection records support fair review and continuous work-quality improvement.
Because every valve outcome is tied to a validated report, crew results can be discussed with evidence rather than impressions.
- Personnel or crew
- Matched to the current roster; unmatched names are flagged for confirmation.
- Assigned role
- Inspector, tester, team leader.
- Visits
- Wells visited in the period.
- Scored work
- Valves that count, out of all valves handled.
- Passed work
- Maintenance outcomes accepted.
- Attention items
- Outcomes needing follow-up.
- Excluded results
- Categories outside the scoring policy.
- Unresolved items
- “Review work” opens the exact well, file and valve checks.
This is a review aid, not an automatic disciplinary ranking. It shows where work quality can improve and where the data itself needs checking first.
05.6 Searchable report dictionary
One searchable source for every inspection report.
Every Final Inspection file is registered with its well, platform, inspection date, scope, source and anomaly summary. In WIMS, authorised users can trace a record back to its workbook, view it and download the original.
8 example reports
| Final Inspection file | Well / platform | Inspection | Scope | Source | Anomalies | Original |
|---|
Original reports remain controlled within the internal WIMS environment. This register uses fictional demonstration records.
05.7 Visit history and planning
Historical inspection records become the basis for the next field priority.
WIMS groups every visit by well and calculates the next due date from the latest valid inspection. It supports planning and recommendations; the Project Coordinator remains responsible for final prioritisation and operational decisions.
- Last visit 2025-10-06 Final Inspection imported and validated.
- Current status 1 valve needs attention Swab valve outcome flagged on the last visit.
- Next due 2026-04-06 Calculated from the latest valid inspection date.
- Recommended coordination action Bring the follow-up forward and combine it with the next platform trip Coordinator decision — weighed against crew availability, platform access and other priorities.
Fictional well and dates.
05.8 Performance trend
Every imported inspection updates the wider well integrity performance picture.
After each import, WIMS recalculates the cumulative passed percentage from 1 January to the latest inspection. Early in the year a single report moves the line; as records accumulate, the line shows the real level of performance.
Show chart data as a table
06 Interactive wellhead integrity model
A report records the finding. The model shows where it sits and what happens next.
Select a component to turn the model toward it, read a sanitized finding, and follow it to its report and next visit.
| Component | Latest result | Severity |
|---|
Select a record or a marker to see the component, its latest result and the recommended follow-up.
- Verified / operable
- Requires attention
- Critical finding
- Not tested / insufficient data
Operable-valve performance · same measurement method across SPR periods
H1 202553%
H1 202668%
Drag to rotate · Use + / − to zoom
Simplified, non-certified wellhead/X-mas tree model for portfolio communication. Findings are fictional demonstration data. It supports coordination and does not replace engineering review.
07 Continuous project evaluation
Every activity became an input for the next operational decision.
- 1
Operational events and plan-versus-actual
Visits completed and deferred, the reasons, and crew utilization against plan.
- 2
HSE compliance, observations and corrective actions
Findings from each trip, who closes them, and whether they repeat.
- 3
Commercial implications
Cost impact, materials required for the next scope, and legitimate upselling opportunities where the client needs additional work.
One finding, followed to closure (fictional example)
Event recorded — the crew reports a wing-valve packing leak that persists after greasing at Node A3; WIMS flags it as critical.
08 HSE governance
Safety was designed into the project before execution and monitored throughout delivery.
- Plan
- HSE Plan
- Bridging Document
- Assess
- JSA and Risk Assessment
- PTW / One SIKA
- Execute
- Pre-job briefing
- Fit-to-Work
- Post-job briefing
- Learn
- Training
- Safety observations
- Corrective-action closure
- Recordable incidents, H1 2026
- 0
- Project safe man-hours
- 9,624
- Safe workdays
- 380
- Safety observations
- 781
- Internal training sessions
- 21
Shared milestone The project team contributed to the broader PHE OSES five-million-safe-man-hour milestone — an achievement shared by every operator and contractor team on site, not an individual one.
09 Commercial and contract control
Commercial control ran alongside field execution, not after it.
Contract values stay confidential. Each financial layer is shown separately, with percentages only where a percentage was tracked.
-
Contract revenue
Baseline for every other layer. Value not disclosed.
-
Invoice / proforma / outstanding
Paid-contract realization tracked from 72% to 87%.
-
Project cost
Tracked monthly against the P&L forecast.
-
Margin
Maintained above 10% through the coordination period.
-
Upselling opportunity
≈ IDR 2 billion in supported / generated contract upselling opportunities. Not recognized revenue.
TKDN (local content)
81.09% achieved against an 80.45% commitment
Bar lengths are proportional only where a percentage is stated (invoice realization, margin floor, TKDN). Revenue, cost and opportunity bars are schematic.
10 SPR and client satisfaction
I translated field activity into a performance story the client could evaluate.
Presentation and evidence
- Visits and utilization against plan
- Integrity status and operable-valve trend
- HSE indicators and observations
- Commercial and invoice status
- Root causes and corrective actions
Stakeholder discussion and improvement commitments
- Questions answered from WIMS records
- Integrity follow-ups agreed per component
- HSE actions carried into the next period
- Invoice and scope items clarified
- Improvement commitments with owner and date
The review connected operational delivery, HSE, quality, commercial performance, root causes, and forward actions.
Client SPR outcomes remained satisfactory, with no formal performance-related corrective-action MoM issued during my coordination period.
11 The connected role
One control system: ready, safe, traceable, accountable.
Where this experience fits
Project Engineer
Scope, schedule, cost and HSE controls set up from contract review.
Chapter 02Project Coordinator
Two crews, permits, materials and reports kept moving together.
Chapter 04Well Integrity
Valve status, pressure mapping and findings traced to reports and next visits.
Chapter 06Field Engineer
Inspection, testing, maintenance and troubleshooting sequence understood from the field.
Chapter 04Drilling / Operations
Readiness, PTW and offshore logistics coordinated before every trip.
Chapter 03Technical-Commercial
P&L, invoice realization, TKDN and upselling opportunities tracked with evidence.
Chapter 09