Random Example Of Jump In Production In Two Older Slawson Wells -- June 14, 2018

Disclaimer: I do these rather quickly and I may be misreading something or have some data incorrect, but I believe the information is correct. The wells are a bit difficult to sort out on the NDIC map, but I believe they are correct. I post this disclaimer because generally wells this close together have the same "alpha" names -- these vary quite a bit: Jeriyote, Jericho, Coyote -- although it appears the "Jeriyote" is a combination of Jericho and Coyote.

Anyway, pressing on. Another case study for newbies to help understand the potential of the Bakken.

This post concerns four wells: #21595, #21596, #24919, and #24921. I happened to run across them while randomly updating wells that came off the confidential list in 1Q13 and noted that #21595 was a particularly good well. 

Wells #21595 and #21596 were older wells, short laterals, on the same pad, one horizontal went south, one horizontal went north.

A couple of years later, two long lateral wells were drilled parallel to these older (#21595 and #21596) wells. The new wells, #24919 and #24921, were long laterals drilled from the south, going north, and because they were long laterals, paralleled the entire length of the older, short laterals.

Hopefully that makes sense.

Here are the graphics:

Look at the cumulative production of the older wells; these turned out to be very nice wells:

• 21595, 1,351, Jericho 3-5H, Big Bend, t9/12; cum 318K 4/18;  
• 21596, 703, Coyote 2-32H, big Bend, t1/13; cum 301K 4/18;

Look at their production profiles back in 2014; they both showed a similar jump in production.

21595:

BAKKEN	12-2014	31	5019	5301	1454	4253	3630	468
BAKKEN	11-2014	30	5960	6558	1762	5183	4475	558
BAKKEN	10-2014	31	7752	7620	3706	6537	5897	485
BAKKEN	9-2014	30	8187	8161	3671	6310	6160	0
BAKKEN	8-2014	31	9197	8919	3662	7324	7169	0
BAKKEN	7-2014	31	11249	11162	6085	8739	8584	0
BAKKEN	6-2014	30	12820	12777	9019	11143	10993	0
BAKKEN	5-2014	30	13414	13005	10898	11514	11364	0
BAKKEN	4-2014	7	2882	2982	2008	1848	1813	0
BAKKEN	3-2014	17	1885	2342	415	2208	2123	0
BAKKEN	2-2014	28	3400	3739	773	7754	7614	0
BAKKEN	1-2014	31	3886	3286	912	10147	9992	0
BAKKEN	12-2013	31	4059	4902	1386	11052	10897	0

21596:

BAKKEN	12-2014	31	5819	6079	1454	5130	4309	666
BAKKEN	11-2014	30	6345	6493	1859	5117	4663	304
BAKKEN	10-2014	31	8676	8715	3706	7096	6722	219
BAKKEN	9-2014	29	8400	8779	4152	6557	6412	0
BAKKEN	8-2014	31	9756	9298	5411	7975	7820	0
BAKKEN	7-2014	31	12109	12125	6185	9383	9228	0
BAKKEN	6-2014	30	15783	15745	9019	14281	14131	0
BAKKEN	5-2014	30	16483	15999	11178	14338	14188	0
BAKKEN	4-2014	6	3226	3322	2008	1883	1853	0
BAKKEN	3-2014	13	1756	2516	333	2491	2426	0
BAKKEN	2-2014	28	3964	3843	773	4602	4462	0
BAKKEN	1-2014	31	4751	4397	912	4292	4137	0
BAKKEN	12-2013	31	4133	4877	1261	3410	3255	0

Jumps in production like that should suggest the wells were re-fracked. They may have been but FracFocus does not have any data to suggest they were re-fracked and there are no sundry forms to suggest they were re-fracked (I only checked on well). In addition, they were both originally fracked in late 2012 and it's not likely they would be re-fracked as soon as 2014.

So, when I saw that jump in production, I immediately went to look at the NDIC maps to see if any neighboring wells were fracked in mid-2014. Yup. These two wells were fracked in mid-2014:

• 24919, 660, Slawson, Jeriyote 7-5-32TFH, Big Bend, t7/14; cum 158K 4/18;
• 24921, 88, Slawson, Jeriyote 6-5-32TFH, Big Bend, t6/14; cum 242K 4/18;

There's one more interesting thing to note that those familiar with the Bakken might notice, but I won't talk about that for now.