Measurement

Guideline

Issue Date: October 28, 2024

For more information, contact:

C-NLOPB CNSOPB
240 Waterford Bridge Road, Suite 7100 201 Brownlow Avenue, Suite 27
The Tower Corporate Campus – West Campus Hall Dartmouth NS B3B 1W2
St. John’s NL A1E 1E2 Tel: (902) 422-5588
Tel: (709) 778-1400 Fax: (902) 422-1799
Fax: (709) 778-1473

ISBN #: 978-1-77865-016-1
Measurement Guideline

Summary of Changes
Date Revised Sections Description of Change
(if applicable)
October 28, 2024 General This Guideline has been placed in the new format and style;
references to regulations have been updated; duplication
has been removed with other guidelines and references to
standards have been reviewed and updated, as necessary.

Issue Date: October 28, 2024 Page 2 of 52

Measurement Guideline

Foreword

The Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Board and Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador
Offshore Petroleum Board (the Regulators) have issued this Guideline to assist operators in the
design, construction and operation of metering systems for which Regulator approval is required
pursuant to section 14 of the Framework Regulations.

Guidelines are developed to provide assistance to those with statutory responsibilities (including
operators, employers, employees, supervisors, providers of services, suppliers, etc.) under the
Accord Acts and regulations. Guidelines provide an understanding of how legislative
requirements can be met. In certain cases, the goals, objectives and requirements of the
legislation are such that no guidance is necessary. In other instances, guidelines will identify a
way in which regulatory compliance can be achieved.

The authority to issue Guidelines and Interpretation Notes with respect to legislation is specified
by sections 151.1 and 205.067 of the Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador Atlantic Accord
Implementation Act, S.C. 1987, c.3 (C-NLAAIA), sections 147 and 201.64 of the Canada-
Newfoundland and Labrador Atlantic Accord Implementation Newfoundland and Labrador Act,
RSNL 1990 c. C-2, subsection 156(1) and section 210.068 of the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore
Petroleum Resources Accord Implementation Act, S.C. 1988, c.28 (CNSOPRAIA) and section 148
and subsection 202BQ(1) of the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Resources Accord
Implementation (Nova Scotia) Act. The Accord Acts also state that Guidelines and Interpretation
Notes are not deemed to be statutory instruments.
For the purposes of this Guideline, these Acts are referred to collectively as the Accord Acts. Any
references to the C-NLAAIA, the CNSOPRAIA or to the regulations in this Guideline are to the
federal versions of the Accord Acts and the associated regulations.

Issue Date: October 28, 2024 Page 3 of 52

Measurement Guideline

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1.0 ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS 6

2.0 DEFINITIONS 6
3.0 PURPOSE AND SCOPE 7
4.0 REQUIREMENTS 7
4.1 Compliance Verification 8
4.1.1 Regulator 8
4.1.2 Certifying Authority 9
4.1.3 Third Party 9
4.2 Innovations 9
4.3 Flexibility for Marginal Cases 10
5.0 PURPOSE FOR WHICH MEASUREMENT IS REQUIRED 11
6.0 CATEGORIES OF MEASUREMENT SYSTEMS 11
6.1 Overview of Measurement Categories 12
6.2 Measurement Uncertainty 13
6.3 Fiscal Quality Measurement 15
6.4 Field or Platform Allocation 16
6.5 Well Allocation Measurement 17
6.6 Fuel Gas, Gas Injection and Utility Gas 17
6.7 Produced Water and Water Injection 17
6.8 Drill Cuttings and Waste Fluid Injection 17
7.0 STANDARDS 17
8.0 DOCUMENTATION REQUIREMENTS 18
8.1 Flow System 18
8.2 Flow Calculation Procedure 19
8.3 Flow Allocation Procedure 19
8.4 Other submission requirements 19
9.0 PLANT BALANCES 20
10.0 MEASUREMENT OF LIQUID PETROLEUM 20
10.1 Fiscal Quality Measurement of Petroleum Liquids 21
10.1.1 Mode of Measurement 21
10.1.2 Meters and Associated Piping Systems 21
10.1.3 Secondary Measurements 22
10.1.4 Prover Loops and Sphere Detectors 22
10.1.5 Recirculation Facilities 23
10.1.6 Pulse Transmission (PD and Turbine Meters) 24
10.1.7 Totalisers and Compensators 24
10.1.8 Other Instrumentation 25
10.1.9 Security 26
10.1.10 Calibration Facilities 26
10.2 Field or Platform Allocation 26
10.2.1 Continuous Measurement 27
10.2.2 Intermittent Measurement 28
10.3 Well Allocation and Reservoir Management – Test Separator 29
11.0 MEASUREMENT OF GAS 30
11.1 Fiscal Quality Measurement of Gas 31
11.1.1 Mode of Measurement 31
11.1.2 Design Criteria 32
11.1.3 Computers and Compensators 34
11.1.4 Calculation of Design Uncertainties 35

Issue Date: October 28, 2024 Page 4 of 52

Measurement Guideline

11.2 Field or Platform Allocation 36

11.2.1 Dry Gas Measurement 36
11.2.2 Wet Gas Measurement 37
11.3 Well Allocation and Reservoir Management – Test Separator 38
11.4 Utility, Gas Injection and Fuel Gas Measurement 39
11.5 Flare or Vent Gas Measurement 39
12.0 MULTIPHASE PETROLEUM 40
12.1 Fiscal Quality Measurements of Multiphase Petroleum 40
12.2 Field or Platform Allocation 40
12.3 Well Allocation 41
12.4 Standards 42
13.0 PRODUCED AND INJECTED WATER 42
14.0 DRILL CUTTINGS AND WASTE FLUID INJECTION AND MEASUREMENT 43
15.0 OPERATING PROCEDURES 43
15.1 Hydrocarbon Liquid Measurement Systems 43
15.1.1 Prover Calibration 43
15.1.2 Determination of Meter Characteristics 44
15.1.3 Meter Proving in Service 45
15.1.4 Meter Factors 45
15.2 Gaseous Measurement Systems 46
15.2.1 Pre-Commissioning 46
15.2.2 Start-up Precautions 46
15.2.3 Differential Pressure Measurement 47
15.2.4 Ancillary Instrumentation 47
15.2.5 Inspection of Orifice Plates and Meter Tubes 48
15.2.6 Other Meters 49
15.3 Multiphase Measurement Systems 49
15.4 General Procedures 50
15.4.1 Documentation at the Meter Station 50
15.4.2 Direct Reporting to the Regulator 51
16.0 BIBLIOGRAPHY 52

Issue Date: October 28, 2024 Page 5 of 52

Measurement Guideline

1.0 Acronyms and Abbreviations

API American Petroleum Institute

BS&W Basic Sediment and Water

CCO Chief Conservation Officer

C-NLAAIA1 Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador Atlantic Accord

Implementation Act

C-NLOPB Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador Offshore

Petroleum Board

CNSOPB Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Board

CNSOPRAIA2 Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Resources

Accord Implementation Act

FSA Flow System Application

GOR Gas Oil Ratio

ISO International Organisation for Standardisation

LGR Liquid Gas Ratio

LPG Liquid Petroleum Gas

NL Newfoundland and Labrador

NS Nova Scotia

2.0 Definitions

In this Guideline, the terms such as “authorization”, “chief conservation officer”,

“conservation officer”, “development plan”, “development well”, “operator” and
“waste”, referenced herein have the same meaning as in the Accord Acts.3
Refer also to defined terms in the Framework Regulations.

1 References to the C-NLAAIA in this Guideline are to the federal version of the Accord Act
2 References to the CNSOPRAIA in this Guideline are to the federal version of the Accord Act
3 C-NLAAIA 2, 135; CNSOPRAIA 2, 138

Issue Date: October 28, 2024 Page 6 of 52

Measurement Guideline

For the purposes of this Guideline, the following terms have been capitalized and
italicized when used throughout. The following definitions apply:

Accord Acts means the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Resources

Accord Implementation Act and Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore
Petroleum Resources Accord Implementation (Nova Scotia) Act,
Canada-Newfoundland Atlantic Accord Implementation Act and
the Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador Atlantic Accord
Implementation (Newfoundland and Labrador) Act

Framework means the Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador Offshore Area

Regulations Petroleum Operations Framework Regulations, SOR/2024-25 and
the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Area Petroleum Operations
Framework Regulations, SOR/2024-26

Good Oilfield means those practices, methods, standards and procedures

Practices generally accepted and followed by prudent, diligent, skilled and
experienced personnel in petroleum exploration, development
and production operations

Regulator means the Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador Offshore

Petroleum Board or the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum
Board, as the case may be

3.0 Purpose and Scope

The objective of this Guideline is to assist operators in the submission of a flow system,
flow calculation procedure and flow allocation procedure for approval for a production
project pursuant to section 14 of the Framework Regulations. Additional guidance is also
provided in section 14 of the Framework Guideline. For the purposes of this Guideline,
this application is referred to as the Flow System Application (FSA).

4.0 Requirements

Requirements for measurements and flow systems are provided in sections 74 – 78 of

the Framework Regulations. In accordance with these sections, all produced and injected
fluids (which means gas or liquid, or gas and liquid in combination) are to be measured and,
where appropriate, allocated in accordance with a flow system, flow calculation and
allocation procedures which have been approved by the Regulator. Since the
Governments of NL and NS are royalty owners, the respective Regulator will consult
government officials on the suitability of the transfer meter.

Additionally, the following should be taken into consideration in the development of an

FSA:

Issue Date: October 28, 2024 Page 7 of 52

Measurement Guideline

 Provisions of the Accord Acts4, prohibiting waste.

 Sections 79 – 85 of the Framework Regulations respecting Production Conservation.
 Sections 194, 196, 197, 198 and 202 of the Framework Regulations requiring
operating and production records and reports.

Where petroleum is delivered to shore via a pipeline which serves as a common

transportation route for a number of fields then the “method of measurement” will
include the measurement of petroleum at the terminal serving the relevant pipeline and
the allocation procedures used to determine each contributing field’s share of the
petroleum used at or exported from the terminal.

In order to assist an operator in determining the purpose and selecting a measurement

category, the operator should contact the Regulator at an early stage in the
consideration of the development (i.e., at the development plan stage). It is
recommended that the operator submit a metering philosophy document to the
Regulator either at this stage or once the system has been designed such that
clarification can be provided, where necessary, with respect to measurement
requirements.

4.1 Compliance Verification

The following compliance verification activities may be undertaken:

4.1.1 Regulator

Conservation officers may, at their discretion, review the metering

systems at any stage from construction through commissioning. During
operation, operators can expect the flow system and flow calculations
and allocation procedures to be routinely verified by conservation officers
to satisfy the Regulator.

As the royalty owners, the provincial governments of NL and NS have

various agreements and legislation concerning the calculation of their
royalty share. The accurate recording and reporting of petroleum
volumes is critical to this calculation. Therefore, the governments of NL
and NS reserve the right to participate fully in any verification activity,
including the witnessing and approvals of custody transfer meters. In
addition, the CCO will provide copies of all relevant documents and will
liaison with the provincial government concerning custody transfer
meters.

4 C-NLAAIA 154; CNSOPRAIA 159

Issue Date: October 28, 2024 Page 8 of 52

Measurement Guideline

4.1.2 Certifying Authority

The design and associated inspection, testing and maintenance of the

flow system is also included in the Certification Plan and Scope of Work
of the Certifying Authority. Refer to the requirements and associated
guidance under Part 5 of the Framework Regulations.

4.1.3 Third Party

The Regulator may also require a third party audit of the flow system
design or associated procedures at the following stages:

 prior to initiating construction activities;

 prior to initial use of the flow system or procedures; or
 within six months of initiation of petroleum production.

The Regulator may also require third party audits during production
operations. The third party audit will be either co-ordinated by the
Regulator or the operator. In either case, all costs are to be paid by the
operator. When the Regulator directs the operator to coordinate the third
party audit, prior to conducting the audit, the operator should provide the
audit scope and a potential list of auditors to the Regulator for approval.
A copy of all third party audit reports should be provided to the Regulator
and the operator.

4.2 Innovations

If an operator wishes to use new technology or to deploy existing technology in

a novel setting then the operator should refer to the requirements and
associated guidance for innovations under section 103 of the Framework
Regulations. As part of this process, it is requested that the operator provide full
justification to the Regulator and the Certifying Authority, as applicable. The
objectives, design, methodology and acceptance criteria of any technology
qualification program for the flow system should be agreed in advance with the
Regulator. The Regulator or the Certifying Authority, as applicable, should be
given the opportunity to witness tests at their discretion and/or may request to
be engaged during witness testing.

If it is proposed to use multiphase metering for fiscal intent it would be expected

to perform as well as or better than the traditional test separator method. This
technology is still at an early stage in its development and a concern is that the
rate of development can be very rapid. Various standards bodies, both national
and international, may be unable to produce standards or codes of practice on a
time scale that would permit early deployment.

Issue Date: October 28, 2024 Page 9 of 52

Measurement Guideline

4.3 Flexibility for Marginal Cases

If an alternative technology or process can produce comparable results to

existing measurement systems, such technologies may be considered for use in
marginal cases. Examples of marginal cases could include, but are not limited to;
marginally economic field developments, low flow rates, changes in rates over
field life and possible relaxations of requirements justified through a track record
of operating experience developed over time.

For example, in the case of a marginally economic field development, the

requirement for three-phase separation to meet the highest standards of
measurement only achievable on single phase fluids, has the potential to make
such a development uneconomic. Therefore, when reviewing an operator’s
measurement proposals for a so called ‘marginal’ field, on an exception basis the
Regulator may relax measurement requirements, as specified in this Guideline,
in the interests of encouraging the development of these oil and gas reserves.

For such relaxation to be granted in the case of an economic argument, the

Regulator will require economic justification from the operator. This should
include the following:

 Details of the relevant field economic parameters (e.g., predicted production

profiles and development costs).
 The measurement options considered (one of which will necessarily be a
fiscal quality solution).
 The approximate cost to the project that would have been incurred by the
installation of a fiscal quality measurement system and the economic
justification for the rejection of this solution.
 The cost of the system actually proposed and the resultant savings in
comparison with the fiscal quality solution.

In many cases the economics are so clear that there is little choice over which
class of measurement is appropriate for a particular field development.
However, other cases may present the operator with a difficult choice – whether
to jeopardise revenue by the installation of a cheaper, but more uncertain,
measurement system, or to reduce operational exposure to unfavourable
systematic bias by investing money in higher-quality measurement.

The Regulator will generally advise the latter approach in such cases.

For other types of exception, operators may be able to technically demonstrate

equivalence of results through an alternative approach or may be able to use
track records of operations to justify relaxations.

Issue Date: October 28, 2024 Page 10 of 52

Measurement Guideline

5.0 Purpose for Which Measurement is Required

The first task in determining the suitability of a proposed measurement system or

systems is to identify the purposes for which measurement is required. This includes:

 where measurements are to account for petroleum produced from the licensed area
such as:
o to safeguard revenues from royalty paying field; or
o to allocate production from shared facilities to different fields or fiscal regimes;
 where measurements are to enable reservoir management, such as:
o to track total reservoir volumes to determine recovery efficiency and to identify
targets;
o to improve the understanding of reservoir behaviour to enable effective reservoir
management strategies to be implemented; or
o to track volumes produced and injected for pressure maintenance and
conservation of the total resource;
 to establish clearly whether a reservoir is no longer economically viable prior to
initiating abandonment procedure; or
 for other purposes relevant to the licence, such as:
o establishing the viability of a reservoir as a production prospect as for example
with extended formation flow tests and pilot schemes;
o measuring flare gas, fuel gas and utilities use;
o monitoring the environment;
o accounting for drill cuttings and waste fluids injected into a formation; or
o measuring any other produced or injected fluids per the Framework Regulations.

6.0 Categories of Measurement Systems

This section is intended to provide an overview of measurement categories and

measurement requirements. It is not possible to capture all cases and more details are
provided in subsequent sections of this Guideline, but it should provide an overview of
expectations for most normal operations. Though some examples are provided to add
clarity, it should be noted that it has not been attempted to capture every possible case
with an example. Within each category of measurement there will be scope to vary the
detailed method of achieving the measurement objective.

At the early discussion stage, the operator and the Regulator will agree on the
categorisation of a measurement system and associated accuracy requirements. For new
field developments, the operator is encouraged to contact the Regulator early in the field
development stage to discuss the appropriate measurement category. The
measurement technique employed and its uncertainty, and the operating procedures
used should be appropriate for the fluid and service in question. Rather than fitting a
measurement category to a particular field, it is more appropriate to consider at the
design stage the economics of a particular field and the standard of measurement that
will be supported. This will indicate whether or not the project economics will support

Issue Date: October 28, 2024 Page 11 of 52

Measurement Guideline

separation and dedicated processing of fluids prior to their measurement and export.
The Regulator will request operators to apply the best standard of measurement
consistent with economic considerations.

Once the appropriate measurement category for a particular development has been
agreed, this should be regarded as no more than a ‘first step’. Whatever the class of
measurement system, the target uncertainty will only be met if adequate supporting
measures are taken.

For example, uncertainty of better than 0.25% is potentially achievable if the system is
installed, operated and maintained correctly.

The appropriate level of maintenance for a measurement system will of course depend
on the ‘class’ of measurement desired. Fiscal quality systems will generally require the
highest degree of attention.

6.1 Overview of Measurement Categories

For petroleum fluids, the Regulator considers three levels of metering accuracy
shown in Table 1 below:

Table 1 - Categories of Measurement

Hydrocarbon Hydrocarbon
Liquid Gas
Fiscal or custody transfer quality measurement 0.25 % 1%
Field or platform allocation 1% 3%
Well allocation 5% 5%

The three categories of measurement are defined as follows:

 Fiscal or Custody Transfer Quality Measurement is required at points of

custody transfer and at the export of the offshore system where the two
points are different. The offshore system may include more than one
connected production platform.
 Field or Platform Allocation denotes the accuracy required for the total flow
from a system to be allocated to a single field or platform in a multi-field or
platform development, where total flow is later measured further down the
production stream by an approved fiscal quality meter, as described above.
 Well Allocation is the level of accuracy required for allocation of total flow to
an individual well.

Following agreement with the Regulator, a flow system may not support fiscal
quality measurement, even if it is a custody transfer point. In this case, where

Issue Date: October 28, 2024 Page 12 of 52

Measurement Guideline

fiscal quality would be normally required but has been exempted, then the lower
quality measurement of field, platform or well allocation would be used for fiscal
purposes.

An example of field allocation is discussed below and this discussion can be

equally applied to well allocation, though accuracies will differ as shown in Table
1. Allocation accuracy is normally tracked on a day to day basis by proration
factor. For example, if a platform accuracy of 3% is required for gas, then the
proration factor of the measured fiscal volume to the sum of the measured
platform flow volumes would ideally be 1.0, but may vary between 0.97 and 1.03,
averaged on a volume per reporting period basis. Where proration factor is given
by:
𝐴𝑐𝑡𝑢𝑎𝑙 𝑉𝑜𝑙𝑢𝑚𝑒
𝑃𝑟𝑜𝑟𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝐹𝑎𝑐𝑡𝑜𝑟 =
𝐸𝑠𝑡𝑖𝑚𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑑 𝑉𝑜𝑙𝑢𝑚𝑒

Actual volume is the accurate volume, measured by a more accurate meter, to

be allocated and estimated volume is the sum of volumes from the less accurate
meters. For example, in a multi-field development with several platforms, the
field or platform proration factor would be calculated using the actual volume
measured at the system export fiscal meter and the estimated volume would be
the sum of the less accurately metered individual platform or field volumes. The
volumes are to be for one report period, whether daily, monthly or as otherwise
agreed.

For a platform with three wells, the well proration factor would be calculated
using the actual volume as measured at the platform export and the estimated
volume would be the sum of the three well metered or estimated volumes.

Though monitoring of the proration factor will be the means of tracking

measurement performance on a regular basis, the design basis of the
measurement system should also be able to demonstrate the required accuracies
can be achieved (e.g., 3% for field or platform total gas metering, 5% for
individual well metering).

6.2 Measurement Uncertainty

Table 2 – Overall Measurement Uncertainties

Overall Measurement Uncertainty

Fiscal Quality, Oil ±0.25 %
Fiscal Quality, Gas ±1 %
Platform or Field Allocated Oil ±1 %
Platform or Field Allocated Gas ±3 %
Platform Produced Water ±4 %

Issue Date: October 28, 2024 Page 13 of 52

Measurement Guideline

Well Oil ±5 %
Well Gas ±5 %
Well Water ±5 %
Flaring
(a) High Pressure Flare ±5 %
(b) Low Pressure Flare ±10 %
Fuel Gas ±3 %
Injection Water ±4 %
Gas Injection ±3 %
Waste Fluid Injection ±15 %
Utility Gas* ±3 %
*Utility gas is further defined in section 11.4 of this Guideline.

Note: Fiscal quality and platform, field and well allocation requirements are
described in section 6.1 of this Guideline. Platform, field or well measurement
may be required at fiscal quality, or may be used for fiscal purpose, if they are
from separate royalty regimes or are the sole production source prior to export
from the offshore. Again, if exceptions are required, early communication with
the Regulator is recommended.

Custody
Transfer
Gas
1%
To Terminal or Other Platform
with Custody Transfer
1%

Total
Water Injection Platform
4% Gas Gas Injection
3%
Waste Fluid Injection Gas Lift (Utility) 3%
15% Gas
Fuel Gas 3%

Well Allocation HP Flare

(oil, gas, water) 5%
5%
LP Flare Field, Platform or Group Separator
10% (Continuous Measurement)

Oil
1% Water
4%
Test
Separator

Total
Field, Platform or Group Separator Platform
(Intermittent Measurement) Oil Storage Custody
5% Group 1% Transfer
Separation
Oil
0.25%

Platform Produced To Terminal or Other Platform

Water with Custody Transfer
4% 1%

Figure 2 – Process Flow Diagram Showing Measurement Uncertainties

Issue Date: October 28, 2024 Page 14 of 52

Measurement Guideline

6.3 Fiscal Quality Measurement

The term fiscal in the context of measurement systems can have different
definitions in different areas of the world. This section describes the term fiscal
as it is applied throughout this Guideline. In its simplest definition, fiscal is the
highest quality, or most accurate, measurement in the system. Though strictly
speaking the term ‘fiscal metering’ implies a service, not a quality, it is used
throughout this Guideline to also represent a quality.

‘Fiscal’ literally means ‘concerned with government finance’. Fiscal metering may
therefore be defined as metering of fluids that will ultimately have an impact on
government finance. Government revenue can be affected through:
 Royalty
 Corporation Tax

The first of these is levied more or less directly on production, the other on
company profit – which is clearly related to production.

Within the jurisdiction of the Regulator, fiscal quality measurements are the
highest quality of measurements required at any points of custody transfer and
at the export point from offshore systems where the two measurement points
are different.

A fiscal meter is any system, or element of that system, that is used to determine
production rates that will ultimately generate revenue for an operator.

Depending on the particular allocation mechanism for a field, the term ‘fiscal’ can
therefore potentially be applied to measurement of:

 Separator flow rates

 Well test flow rates
 Gas flared
 Fuel and utility gas
 Gas injected
 Hydrocarbon content in produced water discharged

It should be noted that though these measurements are not required to be made
to fiscal quality accuracies as described in this Guideline, rather these
measurements may be used for fiscal purposes.

The Regulator will require fiscal quality measurement, which by industry

consensus is ±0.25% uncertainty for hydrocarbon liquid (i.e., oil, LPG,
condensate) and ±1.0% for gas for all fields which contain a production facility
which processes oil and gas prior to leaving the facility or at a point of custody

Issue Date: October 28, 2024 Page 15 of 52

Measurement Guideline

transfer. (The ‘facility’ may be a group of connected platforms). These are overall
uncertainties and are derived from an appropriate statistical combination of the
component uncertainties in the measurement system. The equipment used to
achieve this level of performance will vary according to the particular
circumstances of each development and any new technology should result in
equal or lower uncertainties as discussed in section 4.2 of this Guideline.

6.4 Field or Platform Allocation

This category of measurement is usually taken to mean measurement by which

a quantity of product which has been metered to a higher standard is attributed
to different sources. Continuous measurement to an uncertainty not greater than
±1.0% would be required for liquid hydrocarbons and not greater than ±3.0% for
hydrocarbon gases, provided that the overall larger uncertainties do not mask
significant systematic errors which would introduce bias in the production
accounting. Proration factors are expected to stay within the following ranges:

Fluid Proration Factor Range

Hydrocarbon Liquid 0.99 to 1.01
Hydrocarbon Gas 0.97 to 1.03

The operator is expected to investigate the cause of proration factors outside

these ranges. Proration factors will be monitored on a monthly basis following
the submission of the monthly production reports pursuant to section 198 of the
Framework Regulations. Following a request from the Regulator, operators will
be required to report the cause and corrective measures being taken following
repeated deviations outside the accepted ranges. Proration factors may be
monitored more frequently than monthly at project start-ups or following
periods of repeated deviations. Further details on reporting requirements are
discussed in section 15.4.2 of this Guideline.

Platform water (produced, injected and water injected into the process stream)
should be metered to an accuracy of ± 4 %.

In the case where field economics do not support continuous measurement,

‘allocation by flow sampling’ will be considered on an exception basis. (This use
of the term flow sampling should not be confused with the industry practice of
“allocation by well test.” Flow sampling means the allocation of flow to different
fields using a test separator, whereas allocation by well test means allocating
total flow from a field to different wells using a test separator). To permit the use
of a test separator for field allocation it may be necessary to enhance the test
separator metering capability both in terms of the instrumentation used and in
the operating procedures. Target uncertainties for allocation by flow sampling
should be of the order of ± 5%.

Issue Date: October 28, 2024 Page 16 of 52

Measurement Guideline

6.5 Well Allocation Measurement

Accuracy of well flows are required to ± 5%. Where fluids produced from a pool
are not directly measured at a well, the volumes produced should be estimated
based on a flow calculation and allocation procedure which will permit a
reasonable accurate determination of the fluids produced from each well in the
pool. Monthly proration factors are expected to stay within the range of 0.95 to
1.05 for oil, water and gas. The operator is expected to investigate the cause of
proration factors outside this range. As for field or platform allocation metering,
following a request from the Regulator, operators will be required to report the
cause and corrective measures being taken following repeated deviations outside
the accepted ranges.

6.6 Fuel Gas, Gas Injection and Utility Gas

For fuel gas, gas injection and utilities the measurement is usually categorised as
normal process quality measurement. The measurement uncertainty expected
for this class of measurement is ± 3.0%.

6.7 Produced Water and Water Injection

The measurement uncertainty expected for produced water and water injection
is ± 4.0%.

6.8 Drill Cuttings and Waste Fluid Injection

All fluids injected into a well should be measured. A relaxed measurement

standard may be used for this purpose. The measurement uncertainty expected
for this class of measurement is ± 15%.

7.0 Standards

Standards commonly used in the oil and gas industry for petroleum measurement are
available from API, the BSI Group, the Energy Institute and ISO. The standards deal by
their very nature with established methods and technology and offer no guidance as to
best practice in the deployment of new and emerging technologies in the field of fluid
flow measurement and allied topics. Operators should use the latest standards to guide
and inform their discussions with the Regulator in arriving at a consensus view as to what
constitutes Good Oilfield Practices in the specific context of the proposed development.

Issue Date: October 28, 2024 Page 17 of 52

Measurement Guideline

Facilities and operations are expected to meet the latest revision of the standards
available at the time of approval and operators should assess subsequent changes to
standards for impact to their operations. Guidance on standards that have been adopted
or incorporated by reference in the regulations is provided in section 2 of the Framework
Regulations. If an operator proposes to deploy a new technology in the proposed
method of measurement for which no recognised standards exist then it will be
necessary for the operator to identify any additional measures stemming from the risk
assessments that have been undertaken. Refer to section 4.2 of this Guideline for
additional guidance on introduction of new technologies.

8.0 Documentation Requirements

As per section 14 of the Framework Regulations, the operator of a field or terminal must
apply to the Regulator for approval of the FSA, which includes the following:

 Flow System and Flow Calculation Procedure

 Flow Allocation Procedure

These procedures must be submitted and approved before an application for an

authorization is approved which includes production from a field. Early communication is
advised to avoid the operator proceeding with a system design that is unacceptable to the
Regulator. The level of these discussions will only be available to the level of design
complete at the time, but at the very least, the metering philosophy or concept level
discussions would be expected.

8.1 Flow System

An application for approval of the flow system should include the following:

 schematics showing the location of all meters used in the measurement and
allocation procedure and all streams which will be estimated rather than
directly measured;
 specifications of the type, configuration and dimension of any meters and
meter runs, meter proving equipment, sampling devices used to obtain fluid
samples for determination of sediment and water content, devices to correct
measured quantities of petroleum for temperature and pressure effects and
devices for measuring temperature or pressure to be used in the flow
calculation procedure;
 a description of each type of meter including:
o flow rate range, operating temperature and pressure;
o any measuring, sampling, monitoring or compensation device to be used in
conjunction with the meter;
o details of the operating conditions to which each meter will be subject
including the range of flow rates, intermittent or continuous, the
temperature and the maximum pressure drop across the meter; and

Issue Date: October 28, 2024 Page 18 of 52

Measurement Guideline

o details of the meter accuracy and a description of the proposed operating

procedure including calibrations and checking of equipment for
maintenance of accuracy; and
 a description of the test separators and the basis for selecting the capacity and
quantity of test separators.

8.2 Flow Calculation Procedure

An application for approval of the flow calculation procedure should include:

 a description of the equipment, computer software and mathematical

formulae to be used to convert raw meter output to a measured quantity of
oil, gas or water;
 a description of the equipment, computer software and mathematical
formulae and correlations of pressure, volume and temperature to be used to
convert quantity of oil, gas or water at measured conditions to an equivalent
volume at standard conditions for reporting purposes, or to estimate quantities
of oil, gas and water in streams not directly measured;
 the frequency at which calculations will be made and an assessment of
accuracy of the calculation algorithm including the effects of unintentional
rounding errors for each metering location; and
 specimen calculations indicating how reported quantities of oil, gas and water
are obtained giving correction factors proposed for converting meter and
instrument readings to standard conditions.

8.3 Flow Allocation Procedure

An application for approval of the flow allocation procedure should include:

 proposed flow sampling or well testing procedures, duration and frequencies;

 a description of the equipment, computer software and mathematical
formulae used in the allocation procedure;
 the accuracy capability of the allocation procedure including an analysis of the
system measurement accuracy using the procedures established in the API
Manual of Petroleum Measurement Standards;
 a description of the pools to which production will be allocated; and
 details of the procedure for allocating production to a typical well including a
sample calculation with an explanation of each used and a schematic flow
diagram showing the points at which the measurements were made.

8.4 Other submission requirements

In addition, the operator is requested to provide the following:

 A description of the organizational structure in place for the management of

Issue Date: October 28, 2024 Page 19 of 52

Measurement Guideline

the measurement system including responsibilities and the training and

competency of personnel.
 The security provisions for changing any of the flow calculations and allocation
procedures should be noted.
 A description of the procedures that will be used to estimate flow rates for
those short periods of time when any meter may be out of service.
 A list of critical meters essential to the flow system which require operator
notification to the Regulator when there is a failure.
 Sparing philosophies and list of spares to ensure the continued availability of
meters and key instruments.

The list of spares should also be updated to reflect past operating experience.
Refer to the requirements and additional guidance on asset integrity and
maintenance programs under sections 153 and 159 of the Framework Regulations.

With respect to records and reporting requirements, refer to the requirements

and associated guidance in the following sections of the Framework Regulations:

 For daily production records, refer to section 194.

 For daily reports, refer to section 197.
 For monthly production reports, refer to section 198.

9.0 Plant Balances

The operator is expected to maintain a plant balance for all fluids produced, injected,
transferred, disposed of or used for fuel, gas lift or other utilities. In addition, for gas
fields, the operator is requested to submit an overall plant balance on a monthly basis.
The plant balance incorporates all offshore wells, platforms and custody transfer points.

10.0 Measurement of Liquid Petroleum

This Part of the Guideline is intended for use with liquid petroleum (e.g., crude, LPG, gas
condensate) that is sufficiently above its vapour pressure and where there is no
significant risk of gas breakout at the meter. Where this condition is not met, operators
are strongly advised to exercise caution in applying the principles and advice provided
here.

While this section of the Guideline focuses largely on mechanical type meters for
measurement of crude, LPG and gas condensate, it is not meant to be restrictive of any
other meter types that may achieve the required measurement accuracy. Prior to using
newer technologies (for fiscal purpose) the operator should demonstrate to the
Regulator that it is suitable for the intended application. Therefore, early dialogue is
encouraged. Regulator approval of these technologies for fiscal applications is required
prior to designing the flow system.

Issue Date: October 28, 2024 Page 20 of 52

Measurement Guideline

10.1 Fiscal Quality Measurement of Petroleum Liquids

10.1.1 Mode of Measurement

Hydrocarbon measurements should be reported in volumetric units and be

measured in cubic metres. The overall level of uncertainty required for fiscal
quality measurements of liquid petroleum is ± 0.25%. Fiscal quality measurement
is required at points of custody transfer and at the export point of offshore
production facilities in circumstances where the two are not a common
measurement point.

The volumes should be referred to standard reference conditions of 15°C

temperature and 101.325 kPa pressure. The metering system should compute
referred volumes by means of individual meter temperature compensation and
totalisers. Pressure compensation will always be required whether continuously
or by a fixed factor determined at each proving as appropriate. Alternative
systems giving equivalent results can be considered.

10.1.2 Meters and Associated Piping Systems

The meter should generate the electrical signal directly from the movement of
the meter internals without any intermediate gearing or mechanical parts.
Electronic interpolation systems may be accepted. Although the meters
traditionally used for this service are either turbine or positive displacement
meters, new types are available which if properly installed and operated can
deliver similar levels of performance. Other considerations are as follows:

 Number of Meter Runs - A sufficient number of parallel meter streams should

be provided to ensure that, at the nominal maximum design production rate,
at least one stand-by meter is available, to maintain a high level of availability.
 Isolation Valves - Adequate valve arrangements should be provided such that
individual meters may be safely removed from service without shutting down
the entire metering system.
 General Design and Installation Criteria - Metering stations should have a
common inlet header and, if necessary, a common outlet header to ensure
uniform measuring conditions at all metering streams, temperature and
pressure transducers and density meters. However if product of differing
physical properties is produced by separate production trains and is not fully
commingled before metering then it may be necessary to have separate
measurement of the differing fluids.

Issue Date: October 28, 2024 Page 21 of 52

Measurement Guideline

10.1.3 Secondary Measurements

Temperature and Pressure Measurement

Temperature and pressure measurement points should be representative of

conditions at the meter inlet and situated as close to the meter as possible
without infringing the requirements of the API Manual of Petroleum
Measurement Standards. In practice, this means approximately 5 diameters
downstream of the meter location. Temperature measurements that affect the
accuracy of the metering system should have an overall loop accuracy of at least
0.5°C, and the corresponding readout should have a resolution of at least 0.2°C.
This is equivalent to an uncertainty of approximately 0.05% in CTL (temperature
corrected liquid volume). Thermo-wells should be provided adjacent to the
temperature transmitters to allow temperature checks by means of certified
thermometers. Pressure measurements that affect the accuracy of the metering
system should have an overall loop accuracy of at least 50 kPa and the
corresponding readout should have a resolution of at least 10 kPa.

Density Meters

Dual density meters should normally be used and include a density discrepancy
alarm system. Where single density meter systems are used, high and low set
point alarms should be used. Suitable sampling facilities should be provided in
close proximity to the density meter(s) in all cases. Provision should be made for
solvent flushing on systems where wax deposition may be a problem. Density
meters should be installed as close to the volume flow meters as possible and be
provided with thermo-wells and pressure indicators so that it may be
demonstrated that there is no significant difference from the volume flow
meters’ inlet conditions. If this is not the case, temperature and pressure
compensation should be applied. If the density meters are in a recirculation loop
then the inlet probe should be a correctly designed sample take-off probe and
positioned to extract a flow of representative composition.

10.1.4 Prover Loops and Sphere Detectors

Preferably, prover loops should be of the bidirectional type to eliminate possible

directional bias. They should have a suitable lining. The flanged joints within the
calibrated volume should have metal to metal contact and there should be
continuity within the bore.

Connections should be provided on the prover loop to facilitate recalibration with

suitable calibration equipment which may be a dedicated water draw tank or a
portable calibration prover loop and transfer meter, or a small volume type
prover.

Issue Date: October 28, 2024 Page 22 of 52

Measurement Guideline

Provers should be constructed according to the following criteria:

 Number of meter pulses generated over swept volume should be at least
20,000 pulses (This is equivalent to 10,000 pulses between detectors on
bidirectional provers, or the equivalent accuracy greater than 1 pulse in
10,000 be achieved).
 Resolution of detector/displacer system to be compatible with the above.
 Displacer velocity not to exceed 3m/s to avoid slippage past the displacer but
may be faster with piston type provers if seal integrity can be demonstrated.

Because the resolution of the detector/displacer system can only be gauged by

the actual performance of the prover, the Regulator expects the manufacturer to
demonstrate an acceptable repeatability during calibration of the prover, such
that on 5 consecutive round trips the range of volumes does not exceed 0.01%
of the mean volume. Alternatively, a statistically equivalent repeatability
criterion for small volume provers or meter pulse gating systems may be used.

For offshore use, or in remote locations, prover loops should be fitted with dual
sphere detectors and switches at each end of the swept volume. At least two
volumes should be calibrated so that failure of a detector or switch does not
invalidate the prover calibration. The detector should be designed such that the
contacting head of the detector protrudes far enough into the prover pipe to
ensure switching takes place at all flow rates met with during calibration and
normal operation. Detectors and switches should be adequately waterproofed
against a corrosive marine environment. Refer also to the requirements and
associated guidance for electrical, control and monitoring systems in sections
122, 123, 124, 125 and 169 of the Framework Regulations.

In the case of mechanical switches, each sphere detector should have a dedicated
micro-switch. The actuation of each detector unit should be set during
manufacture so that should it be necessary to replace a detector unit during
service there will be a minimal change in prover calibrated volume.

NOTE: Other designs of prover may be considered subject to their being in

accordance with Good Oilfield Practices. In the event of the failure of any critical
element of the prover, the CCO should be contacted so that an appropriate
strategy for the re-verification of the meters may be agreed.

10.1.5 Recirculation Facilities

Where recirculation systems are fitted around the metering system, full logging
of recirculation and any other non-export flows through the meters should be
maintained. Any such system should be properly operated and maintained.

Recirculation facilities intended for the use of pump testing, etc., should be fitted
upstream of the metering system.

Issue Date: October 28, 2024 Page 23 of 52

Measurement Guideline

10.1.6 Pulse Transmission (PD and Turbine Meters)

The metering signals should be generated by a dual meter head pickup system in
accordance with either Level A or Level B of HM 23 Fidelity and security of
measurement data transmission systems. Section 1: Electric and/or electronic
pulsed data cabled transmission for fluid metering systems. This is to indicate if
signals are "good" or to warn of incipient failure of meter or pulse transmission.

A pulse comparator should be installed which signals an alarm when a pre-set

number of error pulses occurs on either of the transmission lines in accordance
with the above code. The pre-set alarm level should be adjustable, and when an
alarm occurs it should be recorded on a non-resettable comparator register.
Where the pulse error alarm is determined by an error rate, the error threshold
should be less than 1 count in 106. Pulse discrepancies that occur during the low
flow rates experienced during meter starting and stopping should be inhibited.
This is to avoid the initiation of alarms for routine process situations thereby
tending to induce a casual attitude to alarms in general.

The pulse transmission to the prover counter should be from one or both of the
secured lines to the pulse comparator, and precautions should be taken to avoid
any signal interference in the spur from the comparator line. This is to ensure
that meter factors are determined with quality pulses (i.e., as good as those
pulses used to totalise production).

10.1.7 Totalisers and Compensators

Storage of Constants

All computer and compensating functions, other than data input conversions,
should be made by digital methods. All calculation constants should be securely
stored within the computer and should also be easily available for inspection at
the appropriate resolution.

Each meter run should have an instrument computing uncorrected volumes at

line conditions in which meter factors should be capable of being set to a
resolution of at least 0.03% of value. In volumetric measuring systems, a liquid
pressure correction may be included in the computation as this correction is
usually small and of constant magnitude. Where a metering skid operates over a
wide range of pressures as a routine then continuous correction for pressure
effects may be appropriate.

Issue Date: October 28, 2024 Page 24 of 52

Measurement Guideline

Totalisers

Totalisers on individual meter run instruments and station summators should

have sufficient digits to prevent rollover more frequently than once every two
months. The resolution of the totalisers should be such as to comply with this
rollover criterion. Totalisers should provide resolution sufficient to permit
totalisation checks to be completed within a reasonably short time frame.

Totalisers and summators should be non-resettable and should be provided with

battery driven back-up or permanent memories where they are of the non-
mechanical type.

Flow computer manufacturers should consider the provision of a separate

maintenance totalisation register for use during totalisation checks.

The procedures to be used for correcting flow during any period of

mismeasurement should be made available.

For the volumetric mode of measurement, automatic temperature

compensation should be applied. Temperature compensation should be carried
out on each individual meter stream. The liquid thermal expansion coefficient
should be fully adjustable over the range likely to be encountered in practice and
have a resolution of at least 1%.

Corrections to meter throughput for water and sediment content should be

applied retrospectively based on the analysis of the flow-proportional sample.
However, it is recognised that the new generation of water-in-oil meters is
approaching levels of performance associated with traditional methods and is
likely to become acceptable within the currency of this document. Any
application to use new methods will be reviewed on a case by case basis
according to the policy for adopting new technology.

10.1.8 Other Instrumentation

To provide a history of meter operation and flowing conditions and a record of

meter malfunctions, each meter-run should be provided with a continuous chart
recording of flow rate and metering temperature. Alternatively, electronic data
recording will be accepted provided that the recording frequency is adequate and
the system logs all metering alarms. Recording intervals no greater than 4 hours
will normally be considered adequate.

In mass measurement systems, the density signals from the density meters
should also be recorded continuously by a chart recorder or electronic data
recorder at the same interval as noted above. Digital read-outs should have a
resolution of at least 4 significant figures.

Issue Date: October 28, 2024 Page 25 of 52

Measurement Guideline

Sampling System

Crude oil metering systems should be provided with automatic flow proportional
sampling systems for the determination of average water content, average
density and for analysis purposes. It is important to ensure that properly designed
sample probes are used and positioned in such a way as to ensure representative
sampling. Sample extraction rates should be “isokinetic” according to ISO 3171.
These samples are required to account for dry oil quantities and allocated
quantity determination. They may also be used for valuation purposes. In special
circumstances when flows are specifically held constant (e.g., well testing) spot
or time based sampling may be acceptable. The use of on-line water-in-oil
monitors will be dealt with in accordance with the new technology procedures.

In crude oil systems where slugs of water may occur, in line water detection
probes should be fitted to detect abnormal levels of water content. Continuous
recordings of percentage water content and a high-level alarm system should be
provided. Data from this source should not normally be used in determining dry
oil quantities. This may only be used as a back-up in case of failure of agreed
sampling and analysis procedures.

10.1.9 Security

In order to show if accidental or malicious interference with these critical

components has occurred, all meter factor settings and reset buttons, where
allowed, should be secured with a seal, lock or password to prevent unauthorized
adjustment. Prover loop sphere detectors and associated micro-switches should
also be secured by locks or seals.

Valves on re-circulation lines, provided for the purposes of off-line meter testing
via re-circulation loops, should be provided with approved type locks.

10.1.10 Calibration Facilities

Adequate test facilities should be provided with metering systems to facilitate

the checking and calibration of all computing and totalising systems. Test
equipment must be calibrated in accordance with good measurement practices
in accordance with paragraph 77(1)(b) of the Framework Regulations.

10.2 Field or Platform Allocation

Field or Platform Allocation denotes the accuracy required for the total flow
from a system to be allocated to a single field or platform in a multi-field or
platform development, where total flow is later measured further down the
production stream by an approved fiscal quality meter, as described in section
6.1 of this Guideline.

Issue Date: October 28, 2024 Page 26 of 52

Measurement Guideline

A flow system that is a point of custody transfer may not support fiscal quality
measurement. In this case, where fiscal quality would be normally required but
has been exempted, then the lower quality measurement of field, platform or
well allocation would be used for ‘fiscal purposes’.

Two measurement scenarios (continuous and intermittent) are recognised in this

situation, with continuous measurement being the most desirable. Early dialogue
with the Regulator is encouraged such that the category of measurement can be
agreed upon.

10.2.1 Continuous Measurement

Continuous measurement to an uncertainty not greater than ±1.0% should be

applied for liquid hydrocarbons. Proration factors should stay within the range
0.99 to 1.01.

Dedicated separation and process trains with measurement capabilities to a high

standard should be installed to meet these accuracies. The best levels of
allocation metering can sometimes approach “fiscal” standards. In order to
approach fiscal standards of allocation metering it would be necessary to have
separate processing of the product streams.

Allocation metering systems approaching fiscal standards will in most cases use
traditional equipment in the design of the metering system. The main difference
from full fiscal metering standards is likely to be the removal of in-situ proving
requirements. The meters would be installed on the outlet of the last separator
stage and each train would be nominally identical. Fiscally metered production
at the export or sales meter would then be prorated based on the allocation
meter quantities.

This method has the advantage of reducing the effect of any systematic errors
which may be present in the allocation metering system but are masked by the
larger overall random uncertainties of the allocation meters.

In circumstances where it is not practicable to fully process the product streams

then the next best option will be to place the allocation meters in the outlet
pipework of the first stage separator. This option runs the risk of free gas being
present in the product streams unless precautions are taken to ensure that the
meters are installed in such a position where gas breakout is not likely to occur.

If the choice of allocation meter is not of the traditional variety but is for example
a Coriolis or ultrasonic meter, particular care should be taken in matching the
expected range of process conditions to the operational envelope of the selected
meter type. These newer meters can be particularly sensitive to installation

Issue Date: October 28, 2024 Page 27 of 52

Measurement Guideline

effects or process conditions particularly if there is a risk of free gas being present
in the product stream.

10.2.2 Intermittent Measurement

Intermittent measurement to an uncertainty not greater than ±5.0% should be

applied for liquid hydrocarbons. Proration factors should stay within the range
0.95 to 1.05.

This scenario arises in situations which do not support the provision of dedicated
separation and process trains, and the facility for continuous measurement.
Under this scenario, allocation using intermittent or “flow sampling” techniques
may be permissible. In most cases this will involve the use of a three-phase test
separator. These tests are usually conducted at least twice per month. Ultimately,
the frequency of the tests will be dictated by operating performance. In this
regard, the Regulator may change the required testing frequency depending on
whether or not proration factor tolerances are being met.

In the case of a new development where it is proposed at the outset to use a

single production installation to co-produce more than one field then maximum
advantage should be taken to make use of the opportunities afforded by a new-
build situation to configure the process equipment to maximise the accuracy that
the use of a test separator can provide.

Positioning the test separator within reach of the export meter prover may be
possible. If that is the case then the small additional investment in a few metres
of pipe and some valves offers the possibility of in-situ proving of the test
separator meter(s). This, taken in conjunction with the selection of high quality
instrumentation and flow computers, will result in the contribution to the overall
uncertainty in the measurements used for allocation of the commingled out-turn
by the meters being as small as practicable. The main contribution to the
uncertainty will then arise from causes basically outside the operator’s control.
These uncertainties stem principally from the variability of the process conditions
in relation to flow rates, densities, water cut, incomplete separation, free gas in
liquid streams, liquid carry over in gas streams, oil remaining in the water, etc.

In situations where the test separator measurement is used for fiscal purposes,
one of the new generation of water in oil meters should be installed in the oil leg
of the separator to reduce the error in dry oil accounting when the oil stream has
significant water content.

If wells of significantly different physical properties and process conditions are to

be allocated using flow sampling techniques then additional precautions will be
necessary to ensure that each well is treated equitably in the allocation process.
The pressure and temperature in the main production separators may be

Issue Date: October 28, 2024 Page 28 of 52

Measurement Guideline

significantly different from those obtained in the test separator during different
well tests. This will result in a different test GOR from a production GOR. To
compensate for this a process simulation should be run for each well on both the
test separator and the main production separator. This will enable a correction or
“shrinkage” factor to be determined. The use of such a factor should result in the
sum of well head production being in closer agreement with the sum of the
installation out-turn. Such adjustments have the merit of tending to reduce any
systematic differences between wells of significantly different properties when
using flow sampling for allocation purposes. This is particularly important if some
of the wells are sub-sea completions tied back through long sub-sea flow lines.

In the circumstances where a new satellite field is to be co-produced using

existing process equipment on a parent platform the scope for the operation of
the test separator to the levels of accuracy achievable in the new-build
circumstances described above is severely limited.

If an operator proposes to use an existing test separator to allocate production

between different fields then it will be necessary to provide the Regulator with
full engineering details of the test separator and its instrumentation in order that
an evaluation can be made of its likely performance as an allocation flow sampler.
In general it is unlikely that pipework modifications would be called for but where
there is scope to enhance the metrology by upgrading instruments and flow
computers this would normally be required.

Although the provision of permanent in-situ proving facilities for the test
separator meters is unlikely to be feasible, consideration should be given to the
proving of the meters in-situ using a portable small volume prover. It is recognised
that there may be space and access restrictions that would make this approach
impractical.

The allocation of the commingled production should be based on the principal of

prorating the sums of the wellhead production (corrected if necessary for
differences between test and production process conditions) from each
contributing field. This procedure has the effect of minimising the impact that any
undetected systematic errors might have on the equitability of the allocation.

In very exceptional circumstances, where the migration of uncertainties caused

by relative flow rates and differing uncertainties of metering methods does not
introduce unacceptable bias in the allocation of production, the use of difference
methods may be permitted.

10.3 Well Allocation and Reservoir Management – Test Separator

Since the test separator may be called on to test wells exhibiting very wide
differences in product quality, process conditions and flow rates it is unrealistic

Issue Date: October 28, 2024 Page 29 of 52

Measurement Guideline

to expect universally high standards of metering. The conditions ranging from

steady flowing dry oil to slugging flow of high water content oil with significant
amounts of produced solids as well as temperature variations from sea bed
conditions to 100°C imposes severe limitations on the results achievable. In view
of this a wide range of uncertainties is associated with this type of measurement.
Typical target uncertainty is ±5%. It is acknowledged that some installations with
very favourable operating conditions may improve significantly on these figures.

While a conventional test separator may be equipped with a turbine meter or

meters in the oil leg, orifice plate in the gas leg and magnetic flow meter in the
water leg, there is scope for significant variations in test separator meter
configurations. Operators might wish to consider whether coriolis, vortex
shedding, ultrasonic or other meter types offer advantages in the provision of
test separator meters.

The majority of wells are tested by diverting the well to be tested from the main
production separator to the test separator for direct exclusive testing of the well.
There may be circumstances where testing by difference may be a viable or even
preferred option. Where circumstances permit there may be advantages
particularly with subsea satellites for testing by difference. For developments
where it is not necessary to provide for round trip pigging the elimination of a
subsea test line may benefit the field economics.

Special precautions may be necessary when testing satellite wells connected to a

parent platform by long subsea lines that when switching from production to test
that the same flowing tubing head pressure exists under both test and production
configurations. Failure to test the well under normal operating conditions will
introduce additional errors to the test data.

11.0 Measurement of Gas

This Part of the Guideline is intended for use exclusively with single-phase gas. Where
liquids or other contaminants are thought to be present, operators are strongly advised
to exercise caution in applying the principles and advice provided here.

While this Part focuses largely on orifice meters for measurement of gas, it is not meant
to be restrictive of any other meter types that may achieve the required measurement
accuracy. Ultrasonic meters have made significant progress in this regard. However, prior
to using these newer technologies the operator should demonstrate to the Regulator
that it is suitable for the intended application. Therefore, early dialogue is encouraged.
Regulator approval of these technologies is required prior to designing the flow system.

Issue Date: October 28, 2024 Page 30 of 52

Measurement Guideline

11.1 Fiscal Quality Measurement of Gas

11.1.1 Mode of Measurement

Petroleum or gas measurements for requirements pursuant to the regulations

should be reported in volumetric units and be measured in cubic metres. The
overall level of uncertainty required for fiscal quality measurements of gaseous
petroleum is ±1.0%. Fiscal quality measurement is required at points of custody
transfer and at the export point of offshore production facilities in circumstances
where the two are not a common measurement point.

All measurements should be reported in volumetric units and should be made on

single phase gas streams. The volume reported should be referred to the
standard reference conditions of 15°C temperature and 101.325 kPa absolute
pressure (dry to the level specified in contractual specification).

Sampling

Suitable sampling facilities should be provided for the purpose of obtaining

representative samples. This requirement may be influenced by the type of
instrumentation incorporated in the measuring system. Additional guidance is
provided in the Data Acquisition Guideline.

Gas Density

The continuous measurement of gas density is preferred but the density of the
gas being metered may be computed from pressure and temperature
measurements together with gas composition using a suitable equation of state
and agreed computational techniques.

It is important that the gas entering the density meter is representative of the
gas in the line, in respect of composition, temperature, and pressure. This
becomes critically important if, as is generally the case, the pressure and
temperature are not measured directly at the density meter.

Operators may therefore consider the use of density meters fitted with
temperature elements, although the re-verification of these temperature
elements may itself be problematic. No standard facility presently exists to
measure temperature directly at the density meter.

Therefore, unless the temperature is measured directly at the density meter,

equipment should be designed so that:
 The effect of ambient conditions (normally a cooling one) on the temperature
of the gas sample is minimised. This may mean keeping the density meter
inlet line in close thermal contact with the meter tube; ideally it should be

Issue Date: October 28, 2024 Page 31 of 52

Measurement Guideline

placed under any insulation. In extreme cases it may be necessary to heat-

trace the line; in this case care should be taken not to over-heat the sample.
 There is no pressure drop between the density meter and the point in the
system where pressure is normally measured. Therefore all isolation valves
between the density meter and the pressure measurement point should be
of the full-bore type.

Density meter installations should be designed so that, as well as meeting the

above criteria, they also offer the facility for easy and efficient removal of
densitometers and, preferably, the facility to readily view their serial numbers for
auditing purposes.

11.1.2 Design Criteria

Where orifice meter systems are used, the design and operation should comply
with ISO 5167-1 but with the additional specifications given below. The following
criteria should be used, however, other alternatives can be considered as long as
the operator can demonstrate that the 1% target uncertainty is still achievable.
Criteria is as follows:

a) Maximum beta ratio 0.6.

b) Maximum reynolds number 3.3 x 107.
c) Maximum differential pressure of 50 kPa is preferred. Higher differential
pressures may be used where it is demonstrated that the conditions of e), f)
and g) are met.
d) The metering assembly should be designed and constructed such that the
minimum uncertainties specified in ISO 5167-1 are achieved.
e) The total deformation including static and elastic deformation of the orifice
plate at maximum differential pressure should be less than 1%.
f) The uncertainty in flow caused by total deformation of the orifice plate should
be less than 0.1%.
g) The location of the differential pressure tappings with respect to the orifice
plate should remain within the tolerances given in ISO 5167-1 over the
operating ranges of differential pressures transmitters. Where plate carriers
utilise resilient seals care should be taken to ensure that the load on the plate
caused by the maximum differential pressure does not move the plate out of
pressure tapping tolerance.
h) Special considerations may be applicable where pulsations are unavoidable
but normally the uncertainty due to any such effects should be kept below
0.1%.

For existing metering systems, where orifice meters are employed, proposals to
implement new or modified requirements contained within the current revision
of ISO 5167-1, either partially or in full, should be discussed with the Regulator
prior to implementation.

Issue Date: October 28, 2024 Page 32 of 52

Measurement Guideline

Where metering systems other than orifice plate metering are to be used, the
systems together with their flow compensating devices, should be of the types
agreed by the Regulator and should be calibrated over as much of the operating
pressure, temperature and flow range as is reasonably practicable. Proposals for
any extrapolation of such calibrations and correlations of the operating
conditions should be presented.

Meter Runs

Sufficient meter runs should be provided to ensure that, at the maximum design
field production rate or utility rate, at least one stand-by meter is available. Due
consideration should be given to the provision of adequate valves so that
individual meters may be removed from service without shutting down the entire
metering system.

Secondary Instrumentation

Secondary instrumentation, line pressure and temperature, differential pressure,

flowing density, density at base or reference conditions where appropriate and
the flow computers should be specified and their positions in the system should
be located such that representative measurement is ensured. In many
applications the compositional analysis of the gas is required and it is necessary
to provide for gas sampling or on-line analysis.

Consideration should be given during the design of a measurement system for

the provision of back-up instrumentation to cover the failure of normal
instrumentation, and also for the provision of suitable facilities for the on-site
calibration of secondary metering equipment.

Avoidance of Liquid Carry-Over

Metering stations should be designed to be free from any carry over into the
metering section, and from any condensation or separation that would have a
significant effect on measurement uncertainties.

Overall Design Accuracy & Measurement Uncertainty

An indication of the overall design accuracy and measurement uncertainty of the

metering system together with the sources of error should be given in
accordance with ISO 5167-1. The assessment of uncertainties in gas
measurement should be calculated in accordance with ISO 5167-1.

Issue Date: October 28, 2024 Page 33 of 52

Measurement Guideline

11.1.3 Computers and Compensators

Dedicated Flow Computers

A flow computer should be dedicated to each meter run. Alternatively if multiple

meter runs are computed by one machine a hot operating standby should be
provided to allow maintenance or replacement to be carried out without
interruption of flow.

Storage of Constants

All computer and compensating functions, other than data input conversions,
should be made by digital methods. All calculation constants should be securely
stored in the computer and should be easily available for inspection. Equipment
should be designed so that constants can be adjusted, but only by authorised
personnel. After initial agreement of stored constants, as included in the FSA,
subsequent changes in the computer should be made only with agreement of the
Regulator. Where it is necessary to use manual inputs of data into the computer,
(e.g., base density), the use of this data should be automatically logged.

Flow computers and databases should be designed so that measurement

accuracy is not compromised by inadequate resolution on the display of critical
constants.

Totalisers

Totalisers on individual and station summators should have sufficient digits to

prevent rollover more frequently than every two months. Totalisers should
normally have a resolution of 1000 standard cubic metres, or decimal
submultiples thereof. Totalisers and summators should be non-resettable and
where they are of the non-mechanical type should be provided with battery
driven back-up or permanent memories.

Where external totalisers or summators are not installed, the resolution of the
flow computer totalisers should be such as to comply not only with this rollover
criterion, but also allow totalisation tests to be performed to the required
tolerance. These totalisers should also be non-resettable. If the resolution of the
totalisers cannot meet both the rollover and totalisation test requirements,
consideration should be given to the provision of a totalisation test function
within the flow or database computer.

Flow computer manufacturers should consider the provision of a separate

‘maintenance’ totalisation register for use during totalisation checks.

Issue Date: October 28, 2024 Page 34 of 52

Measurement Guideline

Compensation for influencing parameters, such as pressure and temperature,

should be carried out in the flow computer by digital methods using approved
algorithms.

If it is proposed to use new technology such as time of flight ultrasonic meters

then details of the proposed equipment, layout and verification procedures
should be discussed with the Regulator at the earliest opportunity.

Consistency Within Systems

In a gas gathering system the operator responsible for the gathering should
ensure that the basic metering data, flow formulae and computational
techniques are compatible throughout all the fields connected to the gathering
system.

Calorific Value Determination

The average heating value (energy per unit volume, flow weighted average) of
custody transfer gas, if applicable, should be reported to the Regulator monthly.
Provision for the determination of the calorific value of custody transfer gas
should be made.

Requirements for Notification of Regulator

With respect to subsection 77(a) of the Framework Regulations, the Regulator

will require notice of the factory inspection and calibration of primary and
secondary equipment, including flow computers, in order that conservation
officers may witness these tests at their discretion.

Adequate verification or, where appropriate, calibration equipment should be

provided to enable the performance of meters, computers, totalisers, etc., to be
assessed. Reference or transfer standards should be certified by a laboratory with
recognised traceability to national standards.

Requirements for transfer meter calibration are provided in section 77 of the

Framework Regulations.

11.1.4 Calculation of Design Uncertainties

When using orifice place meters according to ISO 5167-1, over normal production
flowrates the overall uncertainty should be better than ±1.0%.

In the case of differential pressure transmitters, it is important to use realistic

field values as the choice of uncertainty value has an impact on the operational
turndown of the system and also on the setting of the changeover point(s) for

Issue Date: October 28, 2024 Page 35 of 52

Measurement Guideline

metering systems incorporating both high and low range transmitters.

11.2 Field or Platform Allocation

Field or Platform Allocation denotes the accuracy required for the total flow
from a system to be allocated to a single field or platform in a multi-field or
platform development, where total flow is later measured further down the
production stream by an approved fiscal quality meter, as described in Section
6.1 of this Guideline.

A flow system that is a point of custody transfer may not support fiscal quality
measurement. In this case, where fiscal quality would be normally required but
has been exempted, then the lower quality measurement of field, platform or
well allocation would be used for ‘fiscal purposes’.

Continuous measurement to an uncertainty not greater than ±3.0% should be

applied for gas production. Proration factors are expected to stay within the
range 0.97 to 1.03.

11.2.1 Dry Gas Measurement

For the purposes of this section the term “dry gas” is taken to mean gas which is
at a temperature sufficiently above the dew point that condensation does not
occur in the meter tubes upstream of the principal flow measuring element or
within the downstream section of pipe between the principal element and the
sample take-off point.

In circumstances where the fiscal status of production from different fields using
common process or transportation infrastructure does not call for full fiscal
quality metering it is normal to refer to the class of measurement system as
“allocation” metering. Care should be taken to differentiate between the process
of allocation where fiscal quality measurement may be required and the class of
measurement frequently referred to as “allocation metering” where relaxed
standards of measurement may be appropriate.

Uncertainties for dry gas allocation metering systems will be ±3.0%. In order to
achieve this level of uncertainty the basic design of the metering station will be
similar to a fiscal quality metering station. The relaxed level of uncertainty is
achieved through simplified procedures for the operation and periodic
verification of the metering system.

If a multi-path ultrasonic meter is the preferred instrument in a particular

application it may be possible depending on the circumstances to dispense with
a redundant meter run. The multi-path nature of such instruments may be
deemed to provide the required level of redundancy. In order for such a

Issue Date: October 28, 2024 Page 36 of 52

Measurement Guideline

configuration to be accepted it would be necessary to demonstrate that the loss

of accuracy suffered by the failure of one chord does not take the system outside
the agreed uncertainty and that a spare set of transducers is available to enable
full operational capability to be reinstated within a reasonable time.

If it is proposed to operate a single stream metering system the ability to change

transmitters under pressure should be fully assessed. If for safety or operational
reasons it is not possible to replace transmitters under pressure then suitable
isolation valves upstream and downstream of the meter should be provided and
the impact of such a configuration on the ability of the installation to meet daily
nominations when it is necessary to work on the meter be recognised.

If the proposed allocation metering system is to be installed on an unattended

installation then in order to ensure the required level of availability and to avoid
unscheduled visits to the installation it may be necessary to include an
appropriate level of redundancy in the instrumentation associated with the
meter(s).

11.2.2 Wet Gas Measurement

For the purpose of this section, “wet gas” is interpreted to mean gas that is in
equilibrium with either water or gas condensate or both in the flowing gas stream.
It is not intended to address the measurement of gas with a sufficient liquid
content to be deemed two phase flow. The precise value of the LGR defining wet
gas or two phase boundary cannot be stated as it will depend on process variables
such as gas velocity, water/condensate ratio, line temperature and pressure. As a
guide LGRs greater than about 0.2% for stratified flow and 0.5% for annular mist
flow are likely to require two phase flow measurement techniques.

The types of meter presently considered suitable for wet gas metering are: orifice
plates with drain holes, venturis, v-cone meters and ultrasonic meters.

Special precautions over and above those required for dry gas will be necessary
in the design and operation of any meter to be used in wet gas.

Venturi meters should be designed and installed broadly in accordance with ISO
5167-1.

If an operator chooses to meter wet gas using a venturi, the arrangement of

bottom pressure tappings quoted in ISO 5167-1 should not be used as this could
result in liquid finding its way into the impulse lines of the pressure and
differential pressure transmitters. Single pressure tapping on the top of the meter
would normally suffice.

Issue Date: October 28, 2024 Page 37 of 52

Measurement Guideline

When any differential pressure device is used to measure wet gas, corrections
should be applied to the discharge coefficient to take account of the liquid
content. The methods of Murdock5 and Chisholm6 as modified by Jamieson and
Dickenson7 may be used to correct for the effect of liquid content.

As present work to correlate the difference between calculated pressure recovery

and measured pressure recovery as a function of liquid content holds the promise
of a direct on line measurement of liquid content, all new developments should
provide a pressure tapping at the recovered pressure position in the downstream
section of the metering tube. This small pre investment offers the prospect in the
near future of measuring the LGR continuously on line at a negligible cost.

Operators of existing wet gas metering systems should consider whether the
potential benefits of such a system warrant the retrofitting of a suitable pressure
tapping.

If wet gas allocation meters are to be installed on unattended installations

redundant instrumentation should be utilised to minimise the need for
unscheduled visits to the installation while providing a high level of availability.

11.3 Well Allocation and Reservoir Management – Test Separator

Since the test separator may be called on to test wells exhibiting very wide
differences in product quality, process conditions and flow rates it is unrealistic
to expect universally high standards of metering. The conditions ranging from
steady flowing dry oil to slugging flow of high water content oil with significant
amounts of produced solids as well as temperature variations from sea bed
conditions to 100°C imposes severe limitations on the results achievable. In view
of this a wide range of uncertainties is associated with this type of measurement.
Typical target uncertainty is ±5%. It is acknowledged that some installations with
very favourable operating conditions may improve significantly on these figures.

If the test separator measurement constitutes part of the total platform

measurement then it will require measurement uncertainties in line with those
required for field or platform allocation that is uncertainty not greater than ±3.0%
should be applied for gas.

Traditional instrumentation may still be the favoured option for gas field test
separator operations. However, if wet gas allocation metering is also to be used
on the installation, then the use of the test separator to determine LGRs takes on
an additional importance as well as the reservoir management function.

5 J W Murdock, Two-Phase Flow Measurements with Orifices. Journal of Basic Engineering 1962.
6 D Chisholm, Two Phase Flow Through Sharp Edged Orifices. Research Note. Journal of Mechanical Engineering Science 1977.
7 A W Jamieson and P F Dickenson, High Accuracy Wet Gas Metering. North Sea Flow Measurement Workshop 1993.

Issue Date: October 28, 2024 Page 38 of 52

Measurement Guideline

11.4 Utility, Gas Injection and Fuel Gas Measurement

Where gas is used for utility purposes such as gas lift, oxygen stripping and power
generation or for gas injection or acid gas disposal, process quality measurement
will generally be considered adequate. The level of measurement uncertainty
considered appropriate for this class of measurement system is ±3%. It will
normally be considered sufficient for a single measurement point to be used to
account for all utility consumption (but not including gas injection). However, for
operational reasons, the operator may wish to have separate metering for each
consumption unit on the installation. This will be acceptable to the Regulator.
Details of the selected measurement system should be included in the
documentation sent to the Regulator for review.

If the gas used on an installation does not originate from the field being produced
by the parent platform other procedures may be required.

In circumstances where a satellite field is produced using the process equipment

of a parent installation, then a method of accounting for the amount of gas used
in producing a satellite should be provided. In some cases this may involve the
provision of dedicated measurement equipment. It may also be possible to
account for individual field usage based on the relative proportions of service
required. This may take into account such factors as throughput, pumping or gas
compression requirements, water treatment or injection requirements and any
other service which involves the use of gas in its provision.

If an installation is gas deficient and it is necessary to import gas from a pipeline

system for power generation and utilities use then it will normally be necessary
to have a “fiscal quality” metering system to account for gas imported as the
pipeline will be transporting “fiscally” metered gas.

Gas transported between two installations via a dedicated pipeline for use on the
importing platform for utilities purposes may, depending on the fiscal status of
the exporting installation, make use of less-than-fiscal quality measurement.

11.5 Flare or Vent Gas Measurement

Flare gas is to be measured or calculated. Vent gas should be measured or

otherwise accounted for. In recent years significant advances have been made in
the technologies of flare gas measurement. Operators are encouraged wherever
practical to measure the quantities of gas vented from an installation. The
uncertainties likely to be achievable in flare gas metering systems will be of the
order of ±5% for high pressure flare systems and ±10 % for low pressure flare
systems.

Issue Date: October 28, 2024 Page 39 of 52

Measurement Guideline

Refer to the requirements and associated guidance for gas flaring and venting
under sections 82 and 83 of the Framework Regulations.

12.0 Multiphase Petroleum

The ability to meter to a satisfactory degree of uncertainty oil, gas and water in
multiphase mixtures without recourse to expensive separation is perhaps the greatest
challenge facing the oil and gas measurement industry.

This Part is intended to provide operators with guidance on the relevant considerations
regarding the potential application, selection, operation and re-verification of
multiphase meters.

Any operator contemplating the use of multiphase metering should make contact with
the Regulator at the earliest possible stage.

The acceptability of a multiphase meter for a particular development will depend in large
measure on the match between the instrument’s operating characteristics and the
anticipated ‘in-service’ process conditions. It may in some circumstances be necessary
to implement a technology qualification program to assess the suitability of a meter for
a particular set of process conditions. Refer to the guidance provided in section 4.2 of
this Guideline.

12.1 Fiscal Quality Measurements of Multiphase Petroleum

Multiphase metering is not the preferred option for fiscal measurement

applications. This is mainly due to difficulties in achieving the desired levels of
uncertainty and the high costs of in-situ meter reverification for marginally
economic fields.

12.2 Field or Platform Allocation

The first task when considering the use of a multiphase meter for allocation
purposes is to decide the levels of uncertainty which are appropriate for each
phase. This will depend on the value of the phase and the production rate. Clearly
a highly accurate measurement on a phase comprising only a few per cent of the
production is unlikely to be either cost effective or necessary. The accuracy with
which the hydrocarbon flows can be determined will take precedence over the
accuracy of water flows. However, water fraction measurement may have a high
significance depending on the absolute value of the water cut in any particular
multiphase flow.

At present the “universal” multiphase meter covering all flow regimes and all
possible phase proportions from 0% to 100% of oil, water and gas does not exist.
Consideration should be given at the outset to the possible need to use different

Issue Date: October 28, 2024 Page 40 of 52

Measurement Guideline

types of multiphase meters at the start of production than those that may be
required at different stages in the life of the field. A detailed evaluation of the
predicted production profiles in terms of the changes to GOR and water cut
expected over the life of the field will give some indication of the possible
changes in multiphase meters which should be planned.

As these instruments at present have large uncertainties there is a risk that

significant systematic errors could be masked by the overall random
uncertainties. When considering the use of these meters, good repeatability is an
important consideration particularly where the opportunity exists for in-situ
calibration. By considering other measurement points throughout the production
and transportation system procedures can be devised to establish if any bias
exists and steps taken to eliminate it as part of the initial verification. If such
opportunities do not exist within the basic design of the production facilities then
modifications should be considered to enable verification tests to be performed.

It is not practicable to suggest what verification provisions should be made in this

document, as any such provision will of necessity be tailored to the particular
type of instrument and the process environment in which it is installed.

12.3 Well Allocation

There are a number of options for the use of multiphase meters for well testing.
Potential benefits include the elimination of test separators or reduced well test
time and frequency of well tests. Subsea satellite developments with long subsea
test flowlines may also benefit from this technology. These benefits will only be
available if the individual fields’ process characteristics are amenable to such
treatment. Depending on pipework configuration and deployment strategy of
multiphase meters another potential benefit is continuous well monitoring or
failing that, frequent well monitoring at daily intervals.

Topside use of multiphase meters may be either on their own or in conjunction

with a test separator. A multiphase meter in each well flowline may provide a
satisfactory level of well management information without the need for a test
separator although such an arrangement makes the extraction of well samples
more difficult. In some instances a test separator may be required for multiphase
meter calibration and well sampling.

If it is proposed to dispense with a test separator and rely entirely on multiphase

metering for well testing then care should be taken to ensure that the full range
of process conditions presented by wells is within the performance envelope of
the selected meter. If flow rates from the range of wells to be managed by the
system is very wide then it may be necessary to install more than one meter to
provide cover for the full range of flows and process conditions likely to be
encountered. As one meter or type of meter may not cover the range of

Issue Date: October 28, 2024 Page 41 of 52

Measurement Guideline

conditions which may arise throughout the life of the installation consideration
should be given at the outset to the possible need to change either the size or
type of instrument needed.

In the case of sub-sea satellite clusters the choice of individual well meters or a
single meter on a test manifold should be considered. If the properties of the
process fluid are such that round trip pigging is not required the saving of a
subsea test line can be significant compared to the costs of sub-sea multiphase
meters.

12.4 Standards

Refer to API Manual of Petroleum Measurement Standards Chapter 20.3

Measurement of Multiphase Flow.

Reporting Meter Performance

It is essential when considering a manufacturer’s performance and accuracy

statements to understand the implications of accuracy’s quoted in different
ways. There are three common ways in which multiphase meter accuracies are
presented:
a) % phase volume flow rate
b) % total multiphase flow rate
c) % gas and liquid flow rate plus absolute uncertainty of water cut in liquid
phase

Method a) is favoured by metrologists and clearly represents performance as

stated. This method may not be the most practical for extreme cases of phase
fractionation. Methods b) and c) while quoting relatively small numbers of the
order of 5% to 10% for gas/liquid phase uncertainties and 2% or 3% for
percentage water cut may nevertheless exhibit very large individual phase errors
of 100% or more depending on the absolute value of the percentage water. A
useful guide to multiphase metering is to be found in the Handbook of Multiphase
Metering produced by the Norwegian Society for Oil and Gas Measurement.

13.0 Produced and Injected Water

Where water is produced in association with oil or gas or injected into a reservoir for
pressure maintenance or disposal purposes process quality measurement will generally
be considered adequate. The level of measurement uncertainty considered appropriate
for this class of measurement system is of the order of ±4%. Details of the selected
measurement system should be included in the documentation sent to the Regulator for
review.

Issue Date: October 28, 2024 Page 42 of 52

Measurement Guideline

In terms of allocation of water production to individual wells an accuracy of ±5% is

considered reasonable.

14.0 Drill Cuttings and Waste Fluid Injection and Measurement

All waste fluids injected into a well should be measured. Examples of waste fluid include
drill cuttings and mud. Details of the selected measurement system should be included
in the documentation sent to the Regulator for review.

In terms of allocation of drill cuttings and waste fluid injection to individual wells an
accuracy of ±15% is considered reasonable.

15.0 Operating Procedures

15.1 Hydrocarbon Liquid Measurement Systems

These procedures cover the metering of hydrocarbon liquid volume with

particular emphasis on crude oil measurement and are based on the operational
characteristics to be expected of a typical metering station equipped with turbine
meters. Where other types of meter have been approved, a variant of these
procedures may be appropriate. The performance of individual metering stations
will depend on the particular characteristics of both the metering system and
flow system and the type of hydrocarbon being metered: therefore deviations
from these procedures may be necessary in special cases, for example
measurements on very viscous crude oils, or low lubricity fluids such as gas
condensate.

Operators are required to submit their proposals for the operation and
calibration of their metering systems to the Regulator prior to the
commencement of commissioning and operation.

15.1.1 Prover Calibration

Prover loops should be calibrated at the manufacturer's works by methods

described in API or ISO standards as part of their systems checks and following
installation on site. Two copies of the calibration certificates for each of these
and all subsequent calibrations should be sent to the Regulator. Certificates
should be submitted to either the C-NLOPB at [email protected] or to the
CNSOPB at [email protected]. Such certificates should show the reference
numbers of the sphere detectors used in the calibration and the traceability to
national standards of the calibration equipment. Meters and associated
equipment should also be calibrated as described in Part 14 of the Oil and Gas
Conservation Regulations of Alberta.

While a metering station is in service, prover loops should be calibrated at a

frequency of not less than once a year. Where this is not possible for operational

Issue Date: October 28, 2024 Page 43 of 52

Measurement Guideline

or weather reasons, a two-month period of grace will be allowed. Operation

beyond this period requires dispensation from the Regulator.

For small/marginal fields, or fields that are in decline and producing at a rate that
is only a fraction of the rate originally approved in the development plan (i.e.,
reduced custody transfer/offload frequency), the Regulator may consider
extending the prover calibration interval beyond 12 months provided the
following conditions are met:

 The five most recent prover calibrations demonstrate that each calibrated
volume has remained within a range of ±0.02% of its mean over these five
calibrations.
 The five most recent prover calibrations demonstrate that the shift in each
calibrated volume, from the first to the fifth calibrations, is within ±0.02%.

Operators wishing to pursue the possibility of extending their prover calibration

beyond 12 months, and whose systems meet the above criteria, should contact
the Regulator to discuss the matter more fully.

Inspection of all critical valves and instrumentation along with the sphere,
checking of sphere size, sphericity, etc., should take place prior to calibration.
After calibration, the sphere detectors and switches should be sealed.

Any maintenance work on the prover that could affect the swept volume (e.g.,
changes of sphere detectors and switches) should not be undertaken without
prior notice to the Regulator which will advise if a recalibration is required.

Pursuant to section 78 of the Framework Regulations, the Regulator must be

given at least 30 days’ notice of all prover loop calibrations so that arrangements
for witnessing can be made.

15.1.2 Determination of Meter Characteristics

For new or modified meters which are to be operated over a wide flow range
covering flow rates below 50% of maximum, characteristic curves of meter factor
versus flow rate should be determined for each meter. These curves should cover
a range of approximately 20% to 100% of maximum flow rate, subject to any
system restriction on flow rate. From these curves the permissible flow rate
variations at a given meter factor setting will be determined.

Meters that are to be operated normally only at above 50% maximum flow rate,
except during starting and stopping, will not be subject to the above requirement
provided it can be shown that a meter factor variation of not greater than 0.1%
occurs over the working flow rate range.

Issue Date: October 28, 2024 Page 44 of 52

Measurement Guideline

15.1.3 Meter Proving in Service

The requirements governing the intervals between turbine meter proving are:
 For a newly commissioned metering station in a continuous production
system (as distinct from tanker loading), meters should be proved three times
a week at approximately equal intervals between proving. Provided the
meter factor scatter is acceptable to the Regulator, this frequency may be
reduced to twice a week at the end of the first month and once a week at the
end of the second month.
 For tanker loading systems, the frequency of proving will depend on the
duration of the loading and the individual production system characteristics.
Generally, proving should be done once during tanker loading operations,
when flow has stabilized.

Meters should also be proved:

a) When the flow rate through the meter changes by a significant amount. This
change in flow will depend on the gradient of the meter's flow characteristics
in any particular installation and would normally be such that a change in
meter factor greater than 0.1% does not arise from the change in flow rate.
If the change in flow rate is a scheduled long term change then the meter(s)
should be reproved at the first opportunity. If the flow rate change is
unscheduled then the meters should be reproved if the estimated duration
of the changed flow is six hours or more.
b) When any significant change in a process variable such as temperature,
pressure or density of the liquid hydrocarbon occurs for extended periods as
for flow in a) above that is likely to cause a change in meter factor of 0.1% or
more. Practical values of these limits are of the order of 5°C temperature,
1000 kPa pressure and 2% density.
c) If scale or wax deposition occurs then a higher frequency of proving may be
necessary until the deposition problem can be overcome.

Where meter types other than turbine meters are in use, the type and frequency
of meter factor proving by the operator will be determined on an individual basis
by the Regulator after consultation with the operator. Account will be taken of
the meter type, process fluid and operational load cycle. Where meters
employing novel technology are to be used, extra evaluation periods and tests
will usually be required before acceptance of a long term operational schedule
can be determined.

15.1.4 Meter Factors

Meter factors should be based on the average of at least five proof runs. All
consecutive five proof runs should lie within ±0.05% of the mean value. Full

Issue Date: October 28, 2024 Page 45 of 52

Measurement Guideline

details of the proof runs, together with flow rates, pressures and temperatures
should be entered in the record of meter proving.

In particularly difficult situations where process stability sufficient for proving

purposes cannot be achieved, then a special proving regime may be agreed after
consultation with the Regulator. The purpose of a non-standard proving regime
is to arrive at a good average meter factor that represents the meter’s
performance under unstable operating conditions. In seeking to determine a
meter factor under unstable process conditions it is acknowledged that a
significant proportion of the variability in meter factors is not due to the meter’s
intrinsic repeatability but to the variations in process conditions during the meter
proving.

On metering installations where the meter factor is set manually, the change in
factor should be done in such a way as to prevent loss in the measured flow. Also,
the new factor setting should be checked by a second person who should sign to
this effect in the record of meter proving.

15.2 Gaseous Measurement Systems

These procedures cover the metering of petroleum in the gaseous phase. They
will also be appropriate for gas at high pressure when it is sometimes referred to
as a “dense phase fluid”. These procedures primarily address orifice plate
metering station. Many of the provisions will be applicable to metering stations
employing other measurement technologies with variations as appropriate.

Operators are required to submit their proposals for the operation and periodic
verification of their metering systems to the Regulator prior to the
commencement of commissioning and operation. These will include proposed
calibration intervals for the ancillary instrumentation.

15.2.1 Pre-Commissioning

The operator should prepare a schedule of pre-commissioning tests that are

designed to demonstrate the operability of salient aspects of the metrology as
detailed within ISO 5167-1. In particular, there should be an examination of the
interior of the meter tubes and of the orifice plates to ensure that they conform
to the relevant provisions of the standard.

15.2.2 Start-up Precautions

If there is a risk that debris including dust, mill scale or other foreign matter may
be present in the process upstream of the meters then consideration should be
given to the use of “start-up” plates to avoid damage to the primary elements for
long term metering service. Instruments that may be susceptible to damage or

Issue Date: October 28, 2024 Page 46 of 52

Measurement Guideline

malfunction if exposed to foreign matter should be isolated from the process for
the first 24 to 48 hours after start-up. Instruments most likely to be affected are
densitometers and gas chromatographs. During this period the flow computers
should preferably use a default gas composition to calculate the gas density at
operating conditions or use a keypad value of gas density representative of the
operating conditions. The computer should be returned to “live input” density as
soon as the clean-up is complete.

15.2.3 Differential Pressure Measurement

Differential pressure transmitters should be calibrated at high static pressure

representative of the normal operating pressure for the instrument. When this is
not possible, high static calibrations should be performed at a suitable calibration
facility and subsequently ”footprinted” at atmospheric pressure for use in
periodic verifications offshore. As facilities are not available locally for this
technique, the overall uncertainty in metering accuracies should take into
account effects related to calibration at different static pressures.

15.2.4 Ancillary Instrumentation

Detailed procedures for the verification of ancillary instrumentation such as

pressure, temperature, gas chromatography, density and relative density where
appropriate should be prepared for review by the Regulator.

Sampling systems for product characterisation may use conventional methods or

where appropriate on-line gas chromatographs.

Calibrations should be carried out using test equipment that is dedicated to the
metering systems and is traceable to national standards.

The recalibration frequency for each component in the system should be

included in the procedures document. It is expected that initially the calibration
frequency for most components will be monthly. As a history of the stability of
the instrumentation is built up it may be appropriate to increase the intervals
between recalibrations. As this would constitute a change in the “method of
measurement” prior consent should be sought by the operator before any
relaxation of calibration procedures can be granted. In order to support such an
application it will be necessary to show that the instruments remain within
tolerance on a number of successive recalibrations and are returned to service in
the “as found” condition.

The Regulator may consider a recalibration schedule based on “health checking”

procedures in circumstances where signal data analysis systems are in place to
monitor the condition of the instrumentation and indicate when an instrument
is moving out of its specification. Notification to the Regulator should be provided

Issue Date: October 28, 2024 Page 47 of 52

Measurement Guideline

if an operator wishes to adopt such procedures. This should include an analysis

of the impact such procedures would have on the overall uncertainty of the
metering system.

When calculating the overall uncertainty of metering installations, operators

should use realistic “field” values for the uncertainties of the ancillary
instrumentation rather than the manufacturers’ claimed values. The
uncertainties claimed by manufacturers for their equipment is usually the best
the equipment is able to deliver under ideal laboratory conditions.

In the case of differential pressure transmitters it is important to use realistic field

values as the choice of uncertainty value has an impact on the setting of the
changeover point for systems with high and low range transmitters.

The tolerances used when recalibrating ancillary instrumentation should be set

at a level which, while not being so tight as to make their achievement under field
conditions extremely difficult, should not be so lax as to risk compromising the
overall target uncertainty for the class of measurement in question.

When density is calculated from a compositional analysis and process conditions

of pressure and temperature using an approved equation of state, the accuracy
of the ancillary instrumentation has an additional significance. Typical
sensitivities of calculated density to process variables are:

Variable Change % Change in Density

Pressure 1% 1.0
Temperature 1°C 0.7
Molecular Wt 1% 1.6

15.2.5 Inspection of Orifice Plates and Meter Tubes

The interval between successive orifice plate inspections should initially be one
month.

Once it has been established that plate contamination is not likely, this interval
may be extended after consultation with the Regulator. A typical inspection
sequence, assuming that the condition of the plates is satisfactory on each
occasion, might be:

 Six plate inspections at one-month intervals

 Two plate inspections at three-month intervals
 Two plate inspections at six-month intervals
 Annual plate inspection

On plate contamination being encountered, the inspection frequency should

Issue Date: October 28, 2024 Page 48 of 52

Measurement Guideline

automatically revert to the previous stage in the above sequence. Plates should,
however, be inspected following an operational upset that could cause damage
to the plates.

When carrying out an examination of an orifice plate in the field it is not

necessary to conduct a full gauging examination to ISO 5167-1 tolerances. The
main points to look for in a field inspection of an orifice plate include plate
flatness, cleanliness, freedom from damage to the plate surfaces and particularly
damage or rounding of the sharp edge.

It may, from time to time, be necessary to examine the condition of the meter
tubes in pressure differential metering systems (orifice plate or venturi) to ensure
that corrosion, erosion or contamination has not occurred to an extent likely to
affect the accuracy of the meter. These examinations may be considered
necessary if periodic plate examinations show persistent contamination.
Particular attention should be paid to the section extending two pipe-diameters
upstream of the orifice plate and to the condition of the penetration of the
pressure tappings through the meter tube wall. If flow conditioners are used
these should also be examined.

15.2.6 Other Meters

Where meters other than orifice meters are used such as turbine meters or multi-
path ultrasonic meters singly or in combination and appropriate operating and
verification procedures should be discussed at the design stage with the
Regulator.

15.3 Multiphase Measurement Systems

Operators should discuss the details of their proposed operating procedures at

an early stage with the Regulator. All opportunities for periodic verification
should be investigated. This is likely to involve plans to make use of scheduled
shutdowns of contributing production streams to establish continued
satisfactory operation of the meter. Plans should also be in place to make
opportunistic use of unscheduled shutdowns to provide supporting evidence of
meter performance.

As the technology is developing rapidly, operators should keep a watching brief

on developments that may refine their instrumentation capability through
increasingly sophisticated signal-processing techniques. As our understanding of
multiphase metering advances. there is significant scope to use advanced signal
processing techniques to get more and better information from the existing
multiphase metering hardware.

Issue Date: October 28, 2024 Page 49 of 52

Measurement Guideline

15.4 General Procedures

Metering stations should be operated and maintained in accordance with the

manufacturers' recommendations. Particular attention should be paid to flow
stabilisation prior to meter proving and checking of block and bleed valves for
leaks.

The temperature-compensated totals associated with the individual meters are

to be used as the basis of the approved measurements at each metering station.

15.4.1 Documentation at the Meter Station

The operator should maintain a log book (either manual or Regulator approved
electronic form) for the prover detailing all calibrations, sphere detector serial
numbers and any maintenance work done on the prover loop and its associated
equipment.

A manual or Regulator approved electronic log should be kept for each meter
showing details of:
 type and identifying particulars including location and product measured;
 totaliser reading(s) on commencement of metering;
 all mechanical or electrical repairs or adjustments made to the meter or its
read-out equipment;
 metering errors due to equipment malfunction, incorrect operation etc.,
including date, time and totaliser readings both at the time or recognition of
an error condition and when remedial action is completed;
 alarms, together with reasons;
 any breakdown of meter or withdrawal from normal service, including time
and totaliser readings;
 replacement of security seals when broken; and
 record all re-circulation activities.

The operator should also keep a record of meter proving for each meter giving
the full details of each proof run. This record may be kept in either hard copy or
Regulator approved electronic form and should include a running plot, or similar
control chart, so that any undue change or fluctuation in meter factors may be
easily detected.

A manual log or automatic recording should also be kept, at intervals of not more
than 4 hours, of the following parameters:
 all meter totaliser readings;
 meter flow rates (also relevant meter factors), pressure and temperature,
and (if measured continuously) density; and
 any change in meter pulse comparator register readings.

Issue Date: October 28, 2024 Page 50 of 52

Measurement Guideline

One of these sets of readings should be recorded at 24:00 hours, or at the agreed
time for taking daily closing figures if different.

Other parameters such as liquid density and percentage BS&W content should
be recorded at agreed intervals, if not already included in the automatic log.

Records of parameters such as meter flow rate, liquid temperature and density
should be kept at the metering station for at least four months.

All above records should be available at all reasonable times for inspection by a
conservation officer.

15.4.2 Direct Reporting to the Regulator

Pursuant to subsection 77(2) and sections 162 and 170 of the Framework
Regulations, operators must notify the Regulator prior to any major maintenance
or re-calibration work on the metering and proving system. The Regulator should
also be notified when any abnormal situation or error occurs which could require
significant adjustments to the totalised meter throughputs.

If a flow meter is required to be removed or replaced, a notification should be

sent to the Regulator detailing the serial numbers of the meters concerned and
the reasons for the action taken.

When corrections to meter totalised figures are required due to known metering
errors, a report should be submitted to the Regulator detailing the times of the
occurrence, totaliser readings at start and finish, required corrections to these
readings, and reasons for the errors occurring.

In the event of a flow meter failure, the Regulator should be notified in

accordance with the process outlined in the Incident Reporting and Investigation
Procedure. The written notification should include details of remedial actions
being taken, including the procedure used to estimate volumes while the meter
is out of service. The Regulator or conservation officer should be notified when
the situation has been rectified and the flow meter has been repaired/replaced
and is functioning properly.

Issue Date: October 28, 2024 Page 51 of 52

Measurement Guideline

16.0 Bibliography

1. A W Jamieson and P F Dickenson, High Accuracy Wet Gas Metering. North Sea Flow Measurement
Workshop 1993
2. API Manual of Petroleum Measurement Standards (multiple volumes with varying dates of issue)
3. C-NLOPB/CNSOPB, Data Acquisition Guideline
4. C-NLOPB/CNSOPB Incident Reporting and Investigation Guideline
5. D Chisholm, Two Phase Flow Through Sharp Edged Orifices. Research Note. Journal of Mechanical
Engineering Science 1977
6. Energy Institute, HM 23 Fidelity and security of measurement data transmission systems. Section 1:
Electric and/or electronic pulsed data cabled transmission for fluid metering systems
7. Handbook of Multiphase Metering, Norwegian Society for Oil and Gas Measurement, March 2005
8. ISO 3171 Petroleum liquids - Automatic pipeline sampling, 1988
9. ISO 5167-1 Measurement of fluid flow by means of pressure differential devices inserted in circular
cross-section conduits running full – Part 1: General principles and requirements, 2003
10. J W Murdock, Two-Phase Flow Measurements with Orifices. Journal of Basic Engineering 1962.
11. United Kingdom’s Department of Energy and Climate Change, Oil and Gas Office Guidance Notes for
Standards for Petroleum Measurement Under the Petroleum (Production) Regulations, December
2003, Issue 7.

Issue Date: October 28, 2024 Page 52 of 52