2010 Unit Application features/trends I've noticed upon review, year to date.
This morning I woke up early and used it as an opportunity to review the Unit Applications that have been filed for 2010. Several things jumped out at me after completing my review:
1) Petrohawk has been very busy. A very large number of the Unit Applications for 2010 so far have been Petrohawk's.
2) As Les B has mentioned before, Devon filed for four Unit Applications in the Caddo Pine Island Field, well north if I-20. They created Haynesville/Smackover/Cotton Valley units. Is there much Smackover production in Caddo Pine Island???
3) Many of the Operators (Chesapeake, Petrohawk, XTO, Encana, Comstock, etc.) are beginning to file for alternate unit wells in a number of sections in the play. The volume surprised me as there are still so many undrilled sections, but it should lead to multiple Hauynesville wells in many sections.
4) Chesapeake filed an Alternate Unit Application for a Horizontal Cotton Valley well (Skip, I think it's the real thing) in T14N,R10W, Section 10. The Conly 10-14-10H-1. Don't recall CHK drilling many horizontal Cotton Valley wells lately, but it would be a nice trend to see develop.
1) Petrohawk has been very busy. A very large number of the Unit Applications for 2010 so far have been Petrohawk's.
2) As Les B has mentioned before, Devon filed for four Unit Applications in the Caddo Pine Island Field, well north if I-20. They created Haynesville/Smackover/Cotton Valley units. Is there much Smackover production in Caddo Pine Island???
3) Many of the Operators (Chesapeake, Petrohawk, XTO, Encana, Comstock, etc.) are beginning to file for alternate unit wells in a number of sections in the play. The volume surprised me as there are still so many undrilled sections, but it should lead to multiple Hauynesville wells in many sections.
4) Chesapeake filed an Alternate Unit Application for a Horizontal Cotton Valley well (Skip, I think it's the real thing) in T14N,R10W, Section 10. The Conly 10-14-10H-1. Don't recall CHK drilling many horizontal Cotton Valley wells lately, but it would be a nice trend to see develop.
Views: 174
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Skip Peel - Mineral Consultant on -
I like 16N - 11W.
-
Permalink Reply by Bobi Carr ("parker") on
-
Do you like 16N-11W because it has lower decline rates?
-
Permalink Reply by Les Bamburg on
-
Parker, I don't think there is any effective way to track individual well decline rates in T16N-R11W due to multiple producing wells in the units.
-
Permalink Reply by Skip Peel - Mineral Consultant on
-
It makes good wells.
-
Permalink Reply by Spring Branch,mineral owner on
-
Les, are you referring to well permitting of the alternate unit wells or well permitting of the initial Haynesville unit well??? It just didn't seem logical to me to file for alternate unit wells BEFORE the initial unit well (upon which thenalternate unit wells are based) is filed.
-
Permalink Reply by Les Bamburg on
-
SB, I was referring to the filing for permission to drill alternate wells when there is an existing unit well. The actual well permit application for alternate unit wells occurs after the Commission grants their approval.
-
Permalink Reply by Spring Branch,mineral owner on
-
So you are saying that in the example cited above, the Conly 10 in 14/10, which is a true Cotton Valley well with TVD of 10,450', can serve as the Unit well to the Cotton Valley Alternate Unit wells which are being applied for currently, except that the Alternate Unit wells are not really Cotton Valley wells (though that is what the the Alternate Unit well application says), but rather Alternate Unit Haynesville wells, without Chesapeake 1st having to drill a Unit well to the Haynesville Shale upon which to base the Alternate Unit Cotton Valley wells which are really Alternate Unit Haynesville wells??? And this is all made possible because of the redefinition on the Cotton Valley zone? If that is the case, something about it doesn't pass the sniff test.
-
Permalink Reply by Les Bamburg on
-
SB, I was referring to #3 above rather than #4. So my comments were concerning alternate Haynesville Shale wells in a Haynesville Unit with an existing Haynesville Shale well.
-
Permalink Reply by Spring Branch,mineral owner on
-
Les B, I understand.
-
Permalink Reply by JAMES SMITH on
-
Can someone answer a question for me to pass along? If a well is in your section but not your township and range will everyone in that section receive royalties or only the owners in the exact s/t/r/?
Thanking you in advance!
-
Permalink Reply by Skip Peel - Mineral Consultant on
-
JAMES. It is impossible for a well to be in "your" section but not "in your township". A drilling unit may include portions of sections in adjoining townships though the unit well has a surface location in only one. All mineral owners with tracts contained within the unit boundaries would receive royalty payments.
-
Permalink Reply by JAMES SMITH on
-
I was looking on Sonris and there are 3 wells in Sec 19 with different townships and ranges will all the mineral owners in Sec 19 receive royalties from each well? Thanks for your reply
- ‹ Previous
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
Support GoHaynesvilleShale.com
Top Content
Not a member? Get our email.
Groups
-
San Augustine, TX
386 members
-
Natchitoches Parish
399 members
-
Cass County, TX
119 members
-
Franklin County, Texas
8 members
-
Rusk County
97 members
-
Vernon Parish
59 members
-
Bienville Parish, LA
242 members
-
Sabine County, Texas
172 members
-
Sabine Parish, LA
455 members
-
Angelina County, TX
87 members
© 2024 Created by Keith Mauck (Site Publisher).
Powered by
