Friday, July 20, 2012

CLR Has Permits for 14 Wells in Township South of Williston -- Daily Activity Report -- July 20, 2012

Daily activity report, July 20, 2012 --

New permits: 20
Operators: CLR (14), Samson Resources (4), Whiting, OXY USA,
Fields: Baker (Williams), Murphy Creek (Dunn), Ambrose (Divide), Sanish (Mountrail)

All fourteen of the CLR permits are in Baker oil field, listed as Williams County; Baker is south of the river except for a small piece in the northwest, so either I am misreading the map, or misreading something, but I thought south of the river here was McKenzie County, not Williams County; Baker is just north of Indian Hill; US Highway 85 South runs through it, south of the bridge. [Note first comment: I will be listing these as "McKenzie County" wells in my data base.]

More on this later, if I remember.

Four wells came off the confidential list:
  • 20563, drl, KOG/BTA, P Peterson 155-99-2-15-22-15H, Epping, s1/12;
  • 21504, 126, Legacy Oil, Legacy Et Al Berge 5-31H, a Spearfish well, North Souris, t4/12; cum 4K 5/12
  • 21754, drl, ERF, Grouper 149-94-36D-25H (original name with "TF" designation); Squaw Creek, s1/12;
  • 22246, 458, Slawson, Dagger 2-10H, Cabernet, t3/12; cum 12K 5/12;
Producing wells that were completed:


  1. Continental Resources has 14 new permits today in section 6-T153N-R101W. Atlanta 1 through 14. Amazing. The oil companies are really starting to milk their sweet spots.

    1. That is incredible. I haven't seen the daily activity report yet; I will see it after 5:00 p.m. CDT, I assume.

      Thank you for the head's up. If I am not reading the map incorrectly, that is right in the heart of the best Bakken, but incredibly, there is not yet much drilling activity there yet.

      There is one long lateral one mile to the west:
      19034, BEXP, Lippert 1-12 1-H with an IP of 2000 bbls on 11/10 and has produced 117K bbls to date. The well has paid for itself, most likely, and continues to produce 5,000 bbls/ month and sells some natural gas (some is still flared which is very interesting because there have been months when "none" is flared.

    2. Yes, it is McKenzie County. I have an interest in that section and section 7. I am too excited and looking forward to a great ride.

    3. Thank you. In my database, I listed them as McKenzie wells because regardless of how/why NDIC labels them "Williams County" wells, the surface activity will take place in McKenzie County.

    4. After looking at the GIS map server it looks like the well heads are all north of the river and west of 85. The lion share of the laterals will be in McKenzie but the well heads are in Williams. Impressive line of a two 4 and one 6 well pads...


    5. Wow, you (DC) are so correct. The "locations" on the GIS Map Server show the wells to be drilled in that tiny corner of Baker field inside Williams County. Now, I have a dilemma. I had planned to count these at McKenzie wells, but the surface work will be done in Williams County.

      Thank you for taking time to write.