A Reader Submitted This Mystery -- March 14, 2019

Note: in a long note like this there will be typographical and factual errors. If this information is important to you go to the source; in this case, MRO and NDIC.  This is being posted to help me understand the Bakken better and to provide feedback to a reader in the easiest way possible. It also provides another example that I try to maintain reader's anonymity (unless directed otherwise); and, that I try to share information to all readers. 

Note: if anyone wants to chime in on this one, feel free. I'm learning as I go along.

Note: I really, really learned a lot on this one. Really appreciated the reader sent this one along. I never would have caught it until the wells came off the confidential list.

The graphics:

From the reader:

Marathon well, #34758, Tercek 14-24H, shows up as confidential well plugged or producing, a mere sixteen or so days after being spud. Then, a new permit shows up, #36167 a week or so earlier.

The reader wonders if #34758, reported as plugged/producing sixteen days after being spud, might have encountered problems, in light of fact that it's unusual for a fifth permit to show up "after the fact."

Could be.

The wells:

• 34755, 33-025-03463, conf, MRO, Higgins 31-26TFH, Killdeer,,
• 34756, 33-025-03464, conf, MRO, Snider 41-26TFH, Killdeer,
• 18993, 33-025-01095, 884, MRO, Rosa Benz 44-23H, Chimney Buttes, t4/11; cum 211K 1/19; off line since late 10/18;
• 34757, 33-025-03465, conf, MRO, Ruth 44-23TFH, Chimney Butte,
• 34758, 33-025-03466, conf, MRO, Tercek 14-24H, Chimney Butte,
• 36167, 33-025-03727, loc, MRO, Meredith 14-24H, Chimney Butte, permit request from MRO dated March 8, 2019; requested a waiver to NDAC regulation to wait three business days prior to begin drilling this well; the request was approved; four-section drilling unit; bottom hole: 172 FNL; 200 FWL-13-146-85;

Unable to access even basic information when wells are on conf status, but the fact that both #34758 and #36167 have identical numeric descriptions (14-24H) certainly suggests the reader may be correct. Also, the company did not waste any time going forward on this. 

FracFocus has not posted any frac data for any of these wells. 

Lending credibility to the reader's suggestion that the Meredith well (#36167) is a "replacement well for the Tercek well (#34758), two other observations:

In the permit application:

1. Anti-collision plans: the other horizontals are mentioned (Higgins, Snider, Rosa Benz, and Ruth). But Tercek is not mentioned/shown in the anti-collision plan.

2. On one of the project details all wells are mentioned but:

a) whereas the horizontals are shown for Meredith, Ruth, and Rosa Benz, the horizontal for Tercek is not shown (see first graphic below)
b) whereas the names of the horizontals from the Rosa Benz are shown with their legal names, the Tercek horizontal is in parentheses (see second graphic below)

My hunch: the reader is correct. Time will tell.