Question Regarding CLR SWD Well In Banks Oil Field And March, 2017, Heaing Docket Case -- March 20, 2017

Updates

March 21, 2017: another nice note from a reader, reminding me how surveyors "corrected" for errors and "irregularly-shaped" townships --

Regarding the sub-divisional lines for section 2 (per original GLO survey): the SW and SE quarters are regular - contain 160 acres with the north line of said quarters established one-half mile north of south line, thus the mid-section line.

Government lots 5-12 (middle and lower tiers) are also regular 40 acre tracts (1320' x 1320') so lots 1-4 (upper tier) get all the error when closing on the parallel, and in this case creating tracts less than 40 acres.

Later, 2:02 p.m. Central Time: a reader provided some insight regarding section 2-152-99 below which will help explain things. But it probably doesn't answer the question whether the SWD well CLR is proposing is converting an older Monroe well or drilling a new one. These are the comments the reader had regarding the graphic below:

1) I am not familiar with case, but Township 152 closes on a standard parallel and section 2 would have all the error for said township on the north, therefore creating a series of government lots. This can create a lot of confusion when crafting a legal description.
2) Section 2 is very long. Therefore twelve (12) government lots make up the north half and in reality there is no NW or NE quarter.

From another reader: you are looking at this as 160 acre. The well's operator is breaking this 160 acre piece into 40 acre squares., thus technically these wells are in the  NE corner (40 acre square) of the SE corner (160  acre.)

From those comments that would put #22891 in the NESW "area" of section 2.

Original Post

 

A reader picked up on this. I'm having trouble making sense of it; I must be misreading something. Maybe a reader can help sort this out (see comments above).

It concerns section 2-152-99. These are all "Monroe" wells.

To me the 8-well pad seems to be in the NESE quadrant but the scout ticket shows them to be in the SENE quadrant (which is very, very close).

The four well pad is in the NWSW quadrant (per the scout ticket and the graphic above).

#22891 is in the SENW quadrant.

The reader noted that case #25706, Thursday, March 23, 2017, NDIC hearing dockets that CLR requests: "application ... for an order ... authorizing saltwater disposal into the Dakota Group in the Monroe SWD well, NESW section 2-152-99, Banks Field ...

I don't see an existing Monroe well in NESW 2-152-99. The oldest and most likely well would be #22891 but not only is it not in the location noted in case #25706, it seems to be a pretty good well. So, I do not understand the case as written unless CLR is going to drill a "new Monroe" well. Generally, if I recall correctly, a case to convert an existing producing well to a SWD well would use the word "convert." So, most likely a new SWD well in this section?

• 22891, 947, CLR, Monroe 1-2H, Banks, t8/12; cum 305K 1/17;

Recent Monthly Production Data:

Pool	Date	Days	BBLS Oil	Runs	BBLS Water	MCF Prod	MCF Sold	Vent/Flare
BAKKEN	1-2017	31	2659	2583	968	4507	4035	0
BAKKEN	12-2016	31	2809	3005	1042	5894	4993	420
BAKKEN	11-2016	30	2783	2860	1002	4474	3994	15
BAKKEN	10-2016	31	3040	2932	1167	4997	4516	0
BAKKEN	9-2016	24	2006	1934	707	3099	2559	250
BAKKEN	8-2016	31	2601	3002	1072	4421	3969	0
BAKKEN	7-2016	31	2943	2656	1125	4858	4377	0
BAKKEN	6-2016	28	2408	2187	875	3612	3110	103
BAKKEN	5-2016	31	2720	3087	943	4140	3659	0
BAKKEN	4-2016	30	2589	2324	947	3977	3520	0
BAKKEN	3-2016	31	2654	2719	985	4108	3627	0