Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Skip Peel - Mineral Consultant on March 7, 2011 at 11:03

Today Anadarko permitted the Gasrs 16 (242887) in Vernon Parish.  Surface location S16 - 2S - 11W with Bottom Hole in Section 21.  TVD - 14,882' and MD - 21,912'.  This is an Austin Chalk horizontal.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by The_Baron on March 10, 2011 at 6:18

sounds expensive

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Skip Peel - Mineral Consultant on March 10, 2011 at 6:34

Absolutely.  However Anadarko has saved up plenty of drilling cash by avoiding the HA/BO Play.  LOL!

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by The_Baron on March 10, 2011 at 9:13

I suppose, but they could be on the hook for 6 billion on the BP blowout.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by silver240 on March 9, 2011 at 17:46

HI there .. can someone direct me on what would happen if our land is force pooled and we don't sign a lease.  

 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Skip Peel - Mineral Consultant on March 10, 2011 at 2:02

Join this group and read the discussions.

 

http://www.gohaynesvilleshale.com/group/unleasedmineralinterests

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Madman on March 11, 2011 at 12:57

I recently leased a small amount of acreage listed with Anadarko.  The property is in St. Landry parish, in the North Bayou Jack Field of the Austin Chalk zone. 

 

Recently received a letter from an attorney advising that Anadarko plans to apply to the Commissioner of Conservation for the calling of a public hearing to consider certain matters, including: the establishment of rules to create a single drilling and production unit; force pooling of separately owned tracts; etc. 

 

I am new to this and just curious as to what it all means.  The letter from the attorney included a plat which listed all of the property owners within the area, as well as a specified area where the production unit would be established.  My property is included in this proposed tract. 

I would assume these are good signs for someone leased within the proposed area.  Does this indicate that drilling activity is imminent? 

Again, just a beginner here, so looking for information.  Would appreciate any help.  Thanks much.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Joe Aldridge on March 11, 2011 at 13:37

YES, YES, YES!!!!!!!!!!!!!! That is GREAT news. I was wondering when they were going to make a move. This is fantastic news. Anadarko has had great success in the Austin Chalk play. They seem to know what they are doing with a formation that can be difficult to drill and produce.

They should have a location marked on the plat that they sent you indicating where the well site will be. So yes they have immediate plans to drill.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Madman on March 11, 2011 at 13:50

Thanks for the encouraging word Mr. Aldridge.  As far as I can determine, there are no locations marked for drilling - it is just a map indicating the various sections and property owners, and as mentioned, my property lies within the boundaries of the proposed tract. 

I did receive a follow-up letter today from the attorney mentioned above, advising that a conference would indeed be held to discuss the proposed application by Anadarko.  Is this just a formality?  If I understood the original letter correctly, the conference would only be held in the event that an interested owner or represented party receiving the notice requested it.  Does this mean that there is opposition to the drilling on the site? Or again, is this just a formality?

 

I really appreciate your response.  Thanks again.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Joe Aldridge on March 11, 2011 at 14:08

Its more than a formality. Someone did ask for the pre-application meeting. Where is it going to be held? It is open to all interested parties and I'm one even though I don't have property in the unit. By all means you should GO!!! They will make a formal presentation and describe what they are doing. The meeting will be open for questions from the interested parties that attend. It just means that someone wants more info about what they are doing. On the other hand someone could put in another plan for a unit. That is seldom done though  in an area that is just opening.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Joe Aldridge on March 11, 2011 at 14:57

Its usually someone wanting more information. I would not read any more into it than that at this time. The Conservation Commission is going to go along with the operator unless they are asking for something that is not kosher. One of the pre-app. hearing that I went to was a hearing that Exxon was asking for units that were 20% larger than any other units in the field. I put in an objection at the pre-app. hearing and before the Commission and the Commission agreed with me and redrew the units in house. I don't anticipate a problem like that in this case. However, it would be interesting to know what size unit are they asking for and is it square?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Joe Aldridge on March 11, 2011 at 15:17

Not good. Pryme is developing the area adjacent to Anadarko with 640 acre units. At least that's my understanding. I think there could be a problem with units that large. When the Tusc. was being developed Chevron ask for and got 1280 acre units. Later I was told by someone that the Commissioner wished they had never OK'ed units larger than 640 acres. It will be interesting to see what the interested parties say and what the Commission does.

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• …
• 6
• 7
• 8
• 9
• 10
• …
• 15
• Next ›
• Page