Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by The_Baron on October 13, 2011 at 7:34

Generally a unit is intended to have one well. However in practice additional wells are drilled. Additioanl wells in a unit require permission from the Commisioner through a field order.

 

All wells have to be individualy permited.

 

The mineral owners in a unit or pool, will recieve their pro-rata share.

 

Take some time to browse this site, this has all been covered at length before.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by emily amedee on October 13, 2011 at 16:45

Thanks for the info, I have looked at the site, I just don't understand the terminology...I'm working on that! A well is being drilled in my unit, it had to get one of theses permits "exceptional location" and is "redefined"  The well that is already up is in a different unit I think..su77, the new one is su78. Is this in the same pool? I appreciate your patience with my ignorance...I'm gonna learn this one day!

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Craig Wascom on October 14, 2011 at 4:09

Hi Emily

Redefined sounds like they want to change the size of the unit. These days the change is usually larger. I have not heard of "eceptional location" I will be checking back for an answer to that.

 

Craig 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Skip Peel - Mineral Consultant on October 14, 2011 at 4:26

Without a copy of the notice letter, we're just guessing.  The Baron has already explained the most likely definition of "exceptional location" in this case, above.  The redefinition is not related to the size of the unit unless this is an application to dissolve an existing unit.  It is most likely that the depth of the unit formation/zone is being redefined by a newer or closer reference well with an electric log on file with the state.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by emily amedee on October 14, 2011 at 13:02

the app is not to dissolve existing well so you are right about the elec log on file w state ...the permit was granted for the new well which is in my section. s9t19n,r1w. and is the exceptional location.  allowed depth for this is up to 10,ooo feet  This site was kind of a surprise, in that they did not expect to find what they did. The existing well is s12 t19n r1w. The unit/pool confuses me...my unit is 64o acres so are they both in the same unit/pool?   Thanks so much for taking the time to help me better understand this. 

 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Skip Peel - Mineral Consultant on October 14, 2011 at 13:36

emily, it would make it much easier to answer your questions if you would upload a copy of the pre-conference notice letter and plat.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by emily amedee on October 14, 2011 at 14:13

Skip i don't have a scanner but I found this info on the internet. If you type in: cottonvalley davis zone in unionvillefield in louisiana  and scroll down to the 6th entry...it will show the letter and the plat.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Skip Peel - Mineral Consultant on October 14, 2011 at 14:21

You can always link the document.  Please confirm that this is the correct application.

 

http://ucmwww.dnr.state.la.us/ucmsearch_070611/UCMRedir.aspx?url=ht...

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by emily amedee on October 14, 2011 at 14:22

yes that is it. Sorry not very computer savvy either.

Permalink Reply by emily amedee on October 14, 2011 at 13:13

Hi Craig, I went to the hearing here in baton rouge for this recently and should have asked more ?s.  I was told that this exceptional location/site was needed because the location was at the top of a peak or something??? They had not intended on finding what they did when they took all the readings ect.  This well will be less than 10,000 feet??? there is an existing well up and producing...s12 t19n r1w. The new one will be in s9 t19n r1w which is my section. How does this affect me?  I am in a pooled unit. Any help would be much appreciated!

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by The_Baron on October 14, 2011 at 5:50

Emily,

 

What is your s-t-r

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by emily amedee on October 14, 2011 at 12:31

s9 t19n 1w.

• ▶ Reply

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• Next ›
• Page