CHESAPEAKE APPLIES TO TAKE OVER HA UNITS FROM XTO
CHK has applied to the Commissioner to replace XTO as operator of the following HA units in the Converse Field: HA RA SU77 - Section 21 - 9N -13W, HA RA SU83 - Section 15 - 9N -13W and HA RA SU84 - Section 22 - 9N - 13W,
http://ucmwww.dnr.state.la.us/ucmsearch_070611/UCMRedir.aspx?url=ht...
Views: 890
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by J B Nabors on -
IMO, that is unfortunate.
Chesapeake is my "least favored" operator. They have been to court many many times for actions unfavorable to mineral owners. Examples: for failing to honor a "No Cost" clause in a lease, and for selling production to a subsidiary at below market prices. We have a well that is partly owned by Plains--and Chesapeake consistently pays significantly less per MCF than Plains for the same time period. -
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
-
Franklin County, Texas
9 members
-
Cass County, TX
120 members
-
Rusk County
97 members
-
Livingston Parish, LA
34 members
-
San Augustine, TX
386 members
-
Miller County, Arkansas
27 members
-
Sabine Parish, LA
455 members
-
South Caddo Parish Group
440 members
-
Natchitoches Parish
400 members
-
Bienville Parish, LA
244 members
© 2024 Created by Keith Mauck (Site Publisher).
Powered by
