Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by The_Baron on September 28, 2009 at 7:43

at a little over 12,000' vertical depth, is this really a HA?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Skip Peel - Mineral Consultant on September 28, 2009 at 8:03

We are on the same wave length Baron. There is a slightly earlier CV Horizontal by Questar in the Woodardville Field with a permitted TVD of 12, 199" and a MD of 17,054 (240079). I don't have the time to check right now but I would expect the TVD for a horizontal CV to be ~11,300. I posted this well to see if the members were aware of additional CV horizontals in any field by any operator. There are other Questar wells in Woodardville that appear to be CV H wells but do not have the CV in the name so I missed them. Example Cupples H #2 (240063) TVD 11,339, MD 15,627. That profile seems more like a CV horizontal.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Bacon on September 28, 2009 at 8:10

The Barlow 13H in Thorn Lake field is a STR CV horizontal and has a TVD of 9781'. They're starting the completion today.

http://sonlite.dnr.state.la.us/sundown/cart_prod/cart_con_wellinfo2...

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Skip Peel - Mineral Consultant on September 28, 2009 at 8:16

Thanks, Bacon. I'm wondering if the well you reference is an Upper CV vertical? And the Woodarville wells Lower CV. I'll have to work on this later as I have an appointment. You or Baron might wish to send Les or Jay a heads up on this one. We may need some help.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Skip Peel - Mineral Consultant on September 28, 2009 at 11:42

The original field order for the CV RB in the Woodardville Field was Docket Number 05-1003 and referenced an electric log of a Will Drill well that defines the depth as 9,635' to 10,200'. Not even close to the TVD's in the above Questar wells.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Bacon on September 28, 2009 at 12:04

I think that the Barlow well had a similar issue when it was first permitted. They ended up changing the numbers at some point.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Skip Peel - Mineral Consultant on September 28, 2009 at 12:13

Bacon. The original TVD and MD were revised to shallower depths? I'm curious. Seems a strange "mistake" for an experienced operator like Questar. Particularly if it is a mistake made on more than one well. The depth discrepancies involved in these wells seems extreme.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Skip Peel - Mineral Consultant on September 28, 2009 at 14:03

A review of completed and producing CV wells in 15N - 10W reveals a range of 9571' to 10,106' for the CV RA and 8,087 to 10,325' for the CV RB with two recent and noticeable exceptions: Questar's 237707 - 8432' to 12,238' (5/08) and Empresa's 238588 - 10,220' to 12,720' (8/08). I'd like some feedback on the possibility of depths below 12,000' being CV.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Bobi Carr ("parker") on September 28, 2009 at 14:13

Skip,

How long ago was this area unitized?

I spotted a similar situation on the Moon well in Elm Grove and was told that it was classified as CV before the order was issued by the DOC.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Skip Peel - Mineral Consultant on September 28, 2009 at 14:17

The original delineation of the CV RB in the Woodardville Field was on Sept. 13, 2005, Docket Number 05-1103.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Bobi Carr ("parker") on September 28, 2009 at 14:22

Does it include the depth stated for the well in question?

Permalink Reply by jason on October 9, 2009 at 23:14

Dont know if this helps or not but the 238588 CV RB SUQ;WEYERHAEUSER 26 that was drilled by empresa is in our section. When we first got our permit paperwork, our family was under the impression that it was a haynesville well. But for some reason it seems like it changed midstream to a horiz cv. After they drilled we just thought that we misunderstood the initial paperwork.

• ▶ Reply

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• 3
• 4
• Next ›
• Page