Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Cara Leggett on September 5, 2010 at 7:04

Krystal,
I can't answer your questions, but you might be interested to know that we are in Section 26, T8N, R12W, and we have received notices for unitization from Petrohawk's law firm. Since our letter talks about creating 4 additional drilling and production units, it might be likely that we are both included as a part of the same Reservoir A, Zwolle Field application. We have not been approached about a mineral lease, yet.

Permalink Reply by Skip Peel - Mineral Consultant on September 5, 2010 at 7:12

Cara, please list the section-township-ranges for the 4 units that Petrohawk mentions in their notice letter.

Permalink Reply by ken hatcher on September 5, 2010 at 7:40

I understand that beside the Hawks 4, Forest is filing for 2 IN THE Zwolle field. All to transpire on 28 of SEPT.

Permalink Reply by Skip Peel - Mineral Consultant on September 5, 2010 at 7:45

ken, the HK units on Sept. 28 are 14, 15, 19,21 -8N - 13W, The four that Krystal mentions are in 9N - 13W. They haven't been scheduled for a hearing date as they have not progressed through the pre-application notice period.

Permalink Reply by Cara Leggett on September 5, 2010 at 11:02

Skip, I can't find our section # on the most recent letters. However, when we received letters in the fall of 2009, Section 26 and T8N were named. The plat showsR12W and 14, 15, 19, and 21. 13 is listed as 'pending'. 9-12 and 17& 18 are listed a Bayou San MiGuel. The most recent correspondence says a hearing is set for Sept. 28, as per Ken Hatchers' info. I have attached the plat documents.

Attachments:

• 2010-09-05-1638-03.jpg, 585 KB
• 2010-09-05-1638-57.jpg, 561 KB

Permalink Reply by Skip Peel - Mineral Consultant on September 5, 2010 at 7:08

Both Chesapeake and Petrohawk have made application with the Commissioner to form a Haynesville Unit in Section 25. On Sept. 14 at the public hearing one will receive the unit order. The terms of your lease are binding regardless of which company receives that order or which drills the wells. The unit order will authorize the unit operator to force pool all mineral interests in the section so your proportional share of future unit production will be the same. Your acres divided by total acres in the unit X your royalty percentage will give you your fractional ownership in that production.

Permalink Reply by Les Bamburg on September 5, 2010 at 7:14

Krystal, it should be noted that both Petrohawk and Chesapeake have applied for Haynesville Units for this section. The hearings are scheduled for September 14th so the operator should be chosen at that time.

The operator designation for the unit will not change your royalty entitlement under the Chesapeake lease agreement. Chesapeake will be entitled to sale a portion of any natural gas produced form this unit no matter who drills and operates the wells. Chesapeake's entilement share will be based on the portion of acreage in the section they control. Chesapeake is required to make the royalty payments to you but could contract for Petrohawk to make the royalty payments on their behalf if Petrohawk is the operator.

S25-T9N-R13W, HA RA SU70 Unit, Chesapeake/Petrohawk, Converse Field, Sabine Parish

Permalink Reply by Henry on September 5, 2010 at 7:16

It is not clear to me who has unitized this section. On the posting of hearings for units, both Chesapeake and Petrohawk have applied for this section. See 10-946 for Petrohawk's proposal and 10-945 for Chesapeake's. In any event, if you are leased to Chesapeake, and Petrohawk is named the unit operator, you should consider yourself lucky. At least you'll get a fair price for your gas. If Chesapeake assigns your lease to Petrohawk, then Petrohawk will have to honor it and abide by all terms. I would be thrilled, if I were you, to get Petrohawk as my operator over Chesapeake any day.

http://dnr.louisiana.gov/CONS/CONSEREN/hearings/2010/09SEP/10-945ap...
http://dnr.louisiana.gov/CONS/CONSEREN/hearings/2010/09SEP/10-946ap...

Permalink Reply by Les Bamburg on September 5, 2010 at 7:31

Henry, even if Petrohawk is operator Chesapeake may still elect to market their share of any gas production.

Permalink Reply by ken hatcher on September 5, 2010 at 7:50

So Les, if Cheasapeake was the Driller in a section that Comstock had almost identical acreage could Comstock market it's share?

Permalink Reply by Les Bamburg on September 5, 2010 at 10:36

Ken, most unit operating agreements are structured so each working interest owner has the right and generally the obligation to market their share of any gas production. Operators will typically offer to market any non-operator's share and enter into a separate gas marketing agreement to cover this service. If the operator markets the non-operators' gas they may also be willing to handle royalty payments on behalf of the non-operator.

Permalink Reply by waltcop on September 5, 2010 at 8:30

Les, even if Petrohawk is operator CHK may still elect to market their share of gas produced BUT the mineral owner has no say, right? Since CHK, and perhaps others as well, is getting the reputation of not giving the mineral owners their fair share, it looks like the government needs to help in controling the industry similar to the way they did the banking industry by the "Truth in Lending" laws. Minerial owners need the right to sell their minerials to someone else if the leasee is found to be unfair in their selling of the leasors minerials.....IMHO.

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• 3
• Next ›
• Page