Replies to This Discussion

landownerPermalink Reply by FXEF on January 29, 2010 at 9:48

Tommy,
Well S/N 238491 will extract gas from section 22. Well S/N 240477 will extract gas from section 27. Both well heads will be in section 22, but royalty for well S/N 240477 will only go to section 27 owners, and royalty for well S/N 238491 will only go to section 22 owners.

Oil & Gas ProPermalink Reply by Skip Peel - Mineral Consultant on January 29, 2010 at 10:29

FXEF. Aren't you going to tell Tommy how to find this for himself on SONRIS? LOL! Something about PBH.

landownerPermalink Reply by FXEF on January 29, 2010 at 14:16

Skip, that's your expertise. I can read SONRIS but my explanation to proposed bottom hole would leave him totally in the dark. Waiting on the LOC/SONRIS class.

Oil & Gas ProPermalink Reply by Les Bamburg on January 29, 2010 at 19:26

Tommy, two indications when looking at the Sonris information for Ser #240477.

The first is the well name "JPIL BEAIRD 27 H". The "27" indicates the well will be producing from Section 27.

The second is found under the well detail "200' FSL & 2640' FWL OF SEC 22. PBHL: 250' FSL & 2640' FWL OF SEC 27". The PBHL stands for proposed bottomhole location and indicates the bottom hole will be 250' from the south line and 2640' from the west line of Section 27.

landownerPermalink Reply by Tommy Munds on January 30, 2010 at 6:00

Thanks for the replies. Your answer of section 27 being where the removal is from was just as I thought. Why would the state not have the well in the 27 section? There is plenty of vacant land. The first reason that comes to my mind, since I own property in the east half of section 27, is , the state is claiming the mineral rrights to the east half and maybe they want to back door the gas removal and maybe some of the property owners will not be aware of hat is going on. We are trying to resolve the issue, but the state and the governors office have taken the position of no response to requests for a meeting. Looks like court is our only hope. Thanks again for the replies. Tommy Munds

Oil & Gas ProPermalink Reply by Skip Peel - Mineral Consultant on January 30, 2010 at 6:21

Tommy. There are numerous instances of HA horizontal wells with surface locations in one section, drilling into an adjacent section(s). And it has nothing to do with a scenario such as you describe above. It has to do with drilling the longest lateral possible within a drilling unit. Since a vertical well bore is incapable of making a 90 degree turn, it takes several hundred linear feet to radius from vertical to horizontal. If a well is drilled from a surface location within the same section as the well bore perforations that produce the gas, the operator looses those several hundred feet of horizontal well bore. And the gas that could have been produced. The royalty owners miss the revenue from that gas and the State of Louisiana misses its revenue. IMO, that is the reason why you are not hearing from the state and/or the governor's office. In such matters it is a good idea to engage the services of an experienced professional whether it be a landman or O&G attorney.