Replies to This Discussion

landownerPermalink Reply by DJG on December 12, 2009 at 8:01

Common has been referencing this well in many of their recent investor presentation, but not actually naming which one it was that IP'd at 21+. Further good news for SA County and East Texas prospects in general.

21K for Bossier Shale as well. Considering that many earlier reports from the LA side of the equation have been that the Bossier is relatively less productive than Haynesville completions it is particularly nice to see another Texas well coming in at over 20MMfcd.

Oil & Gas ProPermalink Reply by eastex on December 12, 2009 at 14:54

Haynesville completions are often filed as "Bossier" in Texas. I think it started with Penn Virginia in Carthage. What was the reservoir name in the nearby EOG wells? They said they were Haynesville in the IR
presentation.

Permalink Reply by jffree1 on December 12, 2009 at 15:22

Naconiche Creek (Haynesville) ?

Oil & Gas ProPermalink Reply by eastex on December 12, 2009 at 15:46

I was thinking of the Gammage, Hill, Pop Pop, Hassel wells in Nacogdoches. I do not know what
name was used in the RRC filing.

Permalink Reply by jffree1 on December 12, 2009 at 16:15

They were all reported on East Texas Drilling Report as Carthage, N. (Bossier Shale).

Permalink Reply by RBH on December 12, 2009 at 19:41

eastex
right -EOG showed one map in their IR presentation for "haynesville" and included all of their wells--gammage, hill, pop-pop and hassell acres

Oil & Gas ProPermalink Reply by Les Bamburg on December 13, 2009 at 4:54

Eastex, the vast majority of Haynesville/Bossier Shale completions in Texas are associated with the Carthage, North (Bossier Shale) Field. This was just the original name assigned to the gas accumulation by the TRRC. There are other field names such as Bossierville (Bossier Shale), Waskom (Haynesville), Beckville (Haynesville), etc utilized in other parts of the play.

Permalink Reply by RBH on December 12, 2009 at 8:30

additional info to add:
BOSSIERVILLE (BOSSIER SHALE)
12738-17236 and well head pressure 7818 #

Permalink Reply by jffree1 on December 12, 2009 at 9:23

You are sure right about the field. I wasn't paying attention while multi-tasking.

Oil & Gas ProPermalink Reply by Les Bamburg on December 13, 2009 at 14:08

RBH, where were you able to locate the flowing pressure information?

landownerPermalink Reply by intrepid on December 12, 2009 at 19:16

WOW. That's great!