Texas Smackover Lithium Play
As the Smackover (SMK) Lithium (Li) play picks up steam we need to acknowledge that from regulatory and legal standpoints, there will be significant differences between the play in South Arkansas and in East Texas. Very soon we expect to know more about royalty provisions and regulatory guidelines. From past experience with dissimilarities between Texas and Louisiana mineral laws and regulatory statutes governing the Haynesville Shale, we hope to limit confusion and make it easier to access the information that will be pertinent to land and mineral owners.
In order to help members and quests to the website and to avoid confusion, we will start two new discussions, one for Texas and one for Arkansas. There is an abundance of information in the original SMK Lithium discussion threads and members may want to click on them and then save them to their computer bookmarks/favorites to be able to access them in the future as they will eventually rotate off the main page. After 24 hours, comments in those discussions will be closed but the replies will remain available in the website archive. Archived discussions are available by using the search box in the upper right corner of all website pages.
GoHaynesvilleShale.com was one of the first resources for mineral owners to learn basics, share information and generally provide a place where mineral owners could become more informed managers of their mineral assets in the age of the Internet. The website is pleased to continue to provide those services to those who will benefit from the SMK Lithium Play. Please keep in mind two things. You are a key part of the on the ground intelligence network by letting your friends and neighbors know about GoHaynesvilleShale.com and encouraging them to participate in site discussions. And since GoHaynesvilleShale.com is free for all to use, please consider a donation to help keep the website online.
Views: 11747
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Skip Peel - Mineral Consultant on
-
Thanks, Joe
-
Permalink Reply by Joe B. Lovelace on -
I have been neglectful in posting the comments made to the Texas Railroad Commission (TRRC) Rule to implement SB 1186 by Senator Bryan Hughes from the 2023 Texas Legislative Session.
The proposed rule, posted October 15, 2024, clarified that the TRRC's jurisdiction over brine mining includes the authority to regulate brine production wells and brine injection wells (“spent brine return injection wells”) used for lithium mining, which requires re-injecting naturally occurring brines into the formation from which they were produced after the extraction of minerals.
The posted comments to the Rule have been posted at this link under TRRC Proposed Rules (cut and paste in your web browser) or click here
https://www.rrc.texas.gov/general-counsel/rules/proposed-rules/comm...
All the comments are enlightening including those by and Oil & Gas Law Firm - Coghlan Crowson - that includes this sentence that would indicate further legislation will be filed in the Texas Legislative Session that begins in January 2025.
Due to our law firm’s extensive exposure to the brine mining rush, leasing, DLE development, and the activity being in our back yard, we contacted and are working with Senator Bryan Hughes’ of State Senate District 1 on potential legislation to address continued questions in the law concerning brine minerals and ownership that impacts his constituents and our clients in Northeast Texas.
-
Permalink Reply by Joe B. Lovelace on
-
Filed in the Texas Legislature yesterday (February 28, 2025) by Senator Bryan Hughes is SB 1763 (attached) with the following language:DEFINITION. In this chapter, "brine minerals" means the interstitial particles and solutes suspended, dissolved, or otherwise contained in brine, including bromine, magnesium, potassium, lithium, boron, chlorine, iodine, calcium, strontium, sodium, sulfur, barium, sodium chloride, and other minerals, chemical elements, compounds, or products produced with or extracted from brine.Sec. 124.002. OWNERSHIP OF BRINE MINERALS. Except as otherwise expressly provided by a conveyance, contract, deed, reservation, exception, limitation, lease, assignment, or other binding obligation, the owner of the mineral estate of the land owns the brine minerals below the surface of the land as real property and is responsible for protecting the correlative rights of other owners.Recall that Senator Hughes in the 2023 Texas Legislative Session authored SB 1186 authorizing the Texas Railroad Commission to pass rules to regulate extraction of fluid from brine aquifers in Texas. The Commission adopted new rules to implement the provisions of Senate Bill 1186.The progress of SB 1763 can be tracked at Texas Legislature Online https://capitol.texas.gov/Home.aspx
- Attachments:
-
Permalink Reply by Joe B. Lovelace
-
From Press Release issued by Standard Lithium March 26, 2025
https://www.standardlithium.com/investors/news-events/press-release...
- The first ETX project area of approximately 67,000 acres has been identified. This project area is centered on Franklin County, and the Company has previously drilled three exploratory boreholes in and adjacent to this project area and reported the highest known lithium in brine grades in North America (maximum lithium grade of 806 mg/L reported). Some of the existing wells will be resampled during Q2 and Q3 of this year, and it is expected that a maiden Inferred Resource Report for this highly prospective lithium resource will be published in Q3 of this year;
-
Permalink Reply by Rock Man
-
Interesting news - pushing the lithium trend to the west.
- Good news for mineral owners in Titus, Morris and Hopkins Counties.
The high lithium content is great to see - now the question is the areal extent of the "good" Smackover lithium area is.
Attached PDF map shows Franklin County with only Smackover wells turned on (ENVERUS map).
- Note the bulk of the historical Smackover drilling is in the southern part of the county.
Hard to pin down where Standard Lithium is talking about as to the location of the high lithium tests. The only deep permit over the past several years in this area is the yellow icon (SW Operating Lundell Creek). This well was permitted and drilled in mid 2023 - I have attached the completion form and wellbore diagram indicating that the Smackover section was perforated and tested.
The fact that this well shows zero O&G presence but has still been "completed" and not plugged points to this being a possible lithium test well drilled by SW Operating (a contract operator our of Tyler) for a third-party group (Standard Lithium?)
- Attachments:
-
Permalink Reply by Skip Peel - Mineral Consultant
-
Thanks, Rock Man. Good detail. It would be nice to know the companies leasing for brine in south Franklin County. And the terms since leasing is ongoing without settled regulations and case law in Texas and no approved royalty in Arkansas.
-
Permalink Reply by Rock Man
-
Zero leases filed in Franklin Co as per ENVERUS site.
One would think that all subsurface leases for O&G or anything else would need to be filed.
And how can leasing be done if there is a still a question as to the clear-cut ownership of produced water and associated minerals in Texas?
-
Permalink Reply by Rock Man
-
Re: Frankling Co leasing
With respect to this topic, see the attached PDF that shows active Smackover producing wells in Franklin County. All in the southern part of the county (ties to post @ Geoframe leasing in this area). Another map from ENVERUS.
- One would think that many if not all of these Smackover wells produce some formation water with their O&G production - so lots of options to test these waters for lithium or any other mineral content (if you have an agreement with the producer or with any SWD trucking company that is taking water off of location for disposal).
Lots of wells active here - and this activity keeps that acreage HBP by O&G production and precludes any leasing in those specific areas.
Side note - location of this Smackover production and possible lithium rich area points to trend prospectivity in far SE Hopkins County as well as along the Titus / Camp County line.
- Attachments:
-
Permalink Reply by Skip Peel - Mineral Consultant
-
I think the owners being pursued for brine leases are those that own the surface (ground water) and the mineral rights (produced or formation water). That way lessees can be sure to have a valid lease for lithium.
-
Permalink Reply by Rock Man
-
That would make sense - I just hope that those being approached are getting some good legal advice before signing leases
-
Permalink Reply by Skip Peel - Mineral Consultant
-
I hope they are negotiating environmental protections with damages.
Support GoHaynesvilleShale.com
Top Content
Blog Posts
The Lithium Connection to Shale Drilling
Shale drilling and lithium extraction are seemingly distinct activities, but there is a growing connection between the two as the world moves towards cleaner energy solutions. While shale drilling primarily targets…
ContinuePosted by Keith Mauck (Site Publisher) on November 20, 2024 at 12:40
Not a member? Get our email.
Groups
-
Rapides Parish
102 members
-
Fayetteville Shale
150 members
-
Natchitoches Parish
400 members
-
North Caddo Parish
358 members
-
Harrison County
166 members
-
Franklin County, Texas
9 members
-
Cass County, TX
120 members
-
Rusk County
97 members
-
Livingston Parish, LA
34 members
-
San Augustine, TX
386 members
© 2025 Created by Keith Mauck (Site Publisher).
Powered by
