AIX has within the last few months permitted 9 vertical wells in Township 23N Range 7W (East Haynesville Field) of Claiborne Parish, 8 of which were permitted or drilled to a depth sufficient to test the Brown Dense (see the "LSBD wells as of 2-3-2012" discussion in this group.)
Completion results have been reported at SONRIS Lite for 3 of these wells and perforation data reported for a 4th. Interestingly, each of these 4 wells seems to have been completed or perforated in a different formation or zone. The Hardin #1 was completed at 10430'-10520' in the Upper Smackover A zone; the Hardin #2 was completed at 10132'-10247' in the Haynesville sand; the Garrett L&T was completed at 11442'-11475' in the Lower Smackover; and the Camp et al. #1 has been perforated at 10876'-10940', which looks like the Upper Smackover C zone.
It must be nice for the operator to have so many zones from which to choose!
Tags:
Good example "bee". I would be very pleased to own these 2 wells
Good example "bee". I would be proud to own these 2 wells.
New AIX well permit in the E. Haynesville Field, S3 -23N - 7W. Jerry Smith Etal, vertical permitted to 12,000', non-unitized Haynesville.
The well is permitted as a "lease" well meaning that the operator holds the development rights (leases) to all the lands in the well's minimum spacing requirement (foot print). An operator may choose to apply for a compulsory unit first and then drill a unit well or drill the well and then form the drilling unit. A number of Haynesville Shale wells were permitted and spud as non-unitized and the unit applications were made after drilling had begun. By the time the well was finished the unit had been approved. This is a Haynesville well being drilled without a unit designation.
Jackie, when a well is unitized it is noted in the name. For example: L SMK RA SUA; HOLLIS 27-22-3H #1. The unit is Lower Smackover Reservoir A, Sand Unit A. If the well was not unitized it would be named simply, Hollis 27-22-3H #1.
This is probably a stupid question but with the number of wells in S-9 T 23 R-7W that sit very close to the southern boundary of section 4, and their close proximity to themselves, would this become a pooled unit?
That's up to the operator. These are the wells listed for Section 9. I have bolded the wells which are unit wells. All the others are "lease" wells.
4993 CRUMP 001 9715 9999 14 3140 1 29
42536 D C CRUMP 001 4457 6327 14 5300 5320 5328 1 30
43019 C C CRUMP 001 4457 6327 14 5277 5312 5316 1 30
44043 CRUMP-SALE-SCOTT 001 4457 9999 14 5411 1 29
212860 HA RC SUB;JOSEPH CRUMP 001 4457 2746 14 9856 10065 12620 1 30
244244 HA RC SUT;E CRUMP EST 001 4457 A234 14 9829 10303 11342 1 617320 2 10
244367 HA RC SUU;MCA RESOURCES 001 4457 A234 14 9990 10243 13097 1 617385 2 10
244598 FRANKLIN SALE 001 4457 A234 14 12500 1 01
244770 LELAND CRUMP EST 001 4457 A234 14 11000 1 01
244598 FRANKLIN SALE 001 4457 A234 14 12500 1 01
244367 HA RC SUU;MCA RESOURCES 001 4457 A234 14 9990 10243 13097 1 617385 2 10
244244 HA RC SUT;E CRUMP EST 001 4457 A234 14 9829 10303 11342 1 617320 2 10
How do I find the Division orders for these and see if they will impact my land just to the north of the, in section 4 twn 23 range 7w?
Jackie, you don't. Division Orders are not filed of public record. I think you may mean you are interested in the unit boundaries for the HA RC SUU and SUT. If that's the case, use this link:
http://ucmwww.dnr.state.la.us/ucmsearch/UCMRedir.aspx?url=http%3a%2...
68 members
478 members
194 members
11 members
405 members
18 members
250 members
457 members
11 members
388 members
Posted by Char on May 29, 2025 at 14:42 — 4 Comments
© 2026 Created by Keith Mauck (Site Publisher).
Powered by