top of page
From the Archive:

Does non-routine abandonment work require approval before field work begins?

If a well has pressure after abandonment work, is it considered abandoned?

When can zonal abandonment be treated as routine instead of non-routine?

Is closure planning only about abandoning individual wells?

Regulatory Intelligence 

Can operators request a variance from standard abandonment requirements?

Category:

Well Abandonment

Research Basis

Archive Period

2017-2022

Records Reviewed
6
Primary Topics
Directive 020; Well Abandonment; Non-Routine Abandonment; Variance Requests; Zonal Abandonment; Closure Programs
Current Reference
AER Directive 020

Common Question

Can operators request a variance from standard abandonment requirements?

Archive Findings

Yes. The archive supports the conclusion that abandonment requirements are not always applied as a single mechanical recipe. Historical records include both a non-routine abandonment request process and a dedicated well abandonment variance request form, indicating that operators may seek approval for an alternative abandonment approach where the standard process does not fit the well-specific situation. The most useful lesson from the folder is the type of information the regulator expected to see. The variance request material does not treat a variance as a simple administrative exception. It asks for the proposed non-routine abandonment program, potential risks, cementing details, casing details, formation tops, perforation intervals, whether the well has SCVF/GM or casing integrity issues, whether nearby offset activity exists in the same zone, and whether supporting logs, porous-zone interpretations, hydrogeologist reports, wellbore schematics, and abandonment plans are required. That tells a stronger story than simply saying variances are allowed. The archive indicates that a variance is fundamentally a technical submission. The operator must explain the proposed alternative, identify the risks, and provide enough well-specific evidence to demonstrate that the alternative can still meet the intent of the abandonment requirements.

ChatGPT Image Jul 11, 2026, 04_05_45 PM (2).png
Need help with an application?

Our team can help you navigate regulatory requirements, prepare strong applications and avoid costly delays

587.880.2249

Engineering Insight

The practical engineering lesson is that a variance request should be built around the wellbore problem, not around the desire to avoid a standard requirement. A strong request explains why the prescribed abandonment method is not suitable for the specific well and then shows how the proposed alternative will still protect groundwater, isolate formations, manage casing integrity risks, and maintain long-term well integrity. Examples supported by the folder include situations involving non-routine abandonment programs, zonal abandonment questions, casing or plug integrity concerns, well-specific construction details, and requests requiring additional supporting technical information. These are exactly the kinds of details that make the difference between a weak variance request and an engineering-based variance request.

Current Guidance

Current abandonment requirements and variance expectations should be reviewed against the current version of AER Directive 020 and the current AER variance submission process. Historical records provide useful context, but the current directive and current AER submission requirements always govern.

Related Regulatory Insights

Historical newsletter insights that reference the same directive, manual, rule or regulatory requirement.

Apr 30, 2025

Benoit+ WellFile and Key 2025 Directive Updates

This issue introduces Benoit+ WellFile and summarizes regulatory updates involving Directive 040, Directive 060, Directive 039, Directive 020, pilot-technology guidance, shallow-rights reversion, Saskatchewan orphan matters, and BC EIMS items.

Apr 30, 2022

AER Fees, Orphan Fund Levy and Cryptocurrency Mining Information Requests

This issue covers AER administration fees, orphan fund levy updates, phishing-awareness information, mineral-development sessions, cryptocurrency mining information requests, Directive 020, and Saskatchewan orphan levy and PNG017 updates.

Jul 31, 2024

Directive 040, Directive 020 Feedback and BCER Incident Updates

This newsletter combines Directive 040 reminders, Directive 020 feedback, well-licensing service information, and BCER incident and Treaty 8 items.

Feb 28, 2021

Directive 020 Commingled Abandonment and Gas Injection Applications

This issue discusses Directive 020 commingled well abandonment and short-term gas-injection application processes.

Jul 31, 2023

Industry-Wide Closure Spend Requirements and Directive 020 Feedback

This newsletter summarizes industry-wide closure spend requirements for 2024, Directive 020 feedback, ACCI, Directive 071, Saskatchewan liability items, and the BCER mandate.

May 31, 2023

Benoit+ Compliance Tools and Directive 020 Feedback

This newsletter highlights Benoit+ and compliance-tool development while also referencing CSA standard access, Directive 020 feedback, mineral-resource information, and Saskatchewan and BC updates.

bottom of page