New EOG Austin Permit -- Parshall Oil Field -- Replaces An Old PNC Permit -- June 25, 2024

Locator: 48039B.

See this post. 

The EOG Austin wells are tracked here, but they haven't been updated for years. 

There are 139 EOG Austin permits. Some of them are PNC. 

Now, note this well in today's daily activity report:

• 40874, loc/loc, EOG, Austin 481-1523H, Parshall, Mountrail.

The maps:

Random Observation Regarding Whiting's Southern Bakken Play, From A Reader -- September 13, 2021

A reader sent this note after a sidebar conversation regarding Whiting's southern Bakken play:

• These are some of the first drilled, not so-hot producers, hopefully someday re-frack, if that would take care of it?? However, as you say, I think they just turn the spigot down on these. I have seen times where they produce a good amount per month, and then back down a lot.

• PRONGHORN FEDERAL  41-15PH SWSE10140100   #24161
• PRONGHORN FEDERAL 11-15PH NENW15140100   #24158
• PRONGHORN FEDERAL 21-15PH NENW15140100   #24157

• These are the better ones, even though some are older, again, maybe a re-frack someday. Also, as you have mentioned to me in the past, if the price is right, maybe some more drilled over here someday in the future.
  

• SMITH FEDERAL 41-13PH SESE12140100   #28055
• PRONGHORN FEDERAL 11-13PH  NENW13140100   #27691
• PRONGHORN FEDERAL  21-13TFH  NENW13140100    #20504
• PRONGHORN FEDERAL  21-13-2PH  SESW12140100     #31779
• PRONGHORN FEDERAL  31-13PH   SESW12140100       #31780
• PRONGHORN FEDERAL  41-14PHU    SWSW12140100      #32301

• This one sits in Bell. Literally just over the fence line from Park to Bell, which is also from Billings County to Start County.

• HECKER  11-18PHU    LOT1 1814099    STK   #31882

The reader: notice all the different handles, PH, TFH, PHU.

My reply:

The "handle" designations:

• TFH: Three Forks, around 11,036 top in one well.PH: Pronghorn member of the Three Forks, about 10,917 top in one well.
• PHU: any "handle" with the "U" designation simply means a "unit" well, or a well with four-section (2560-acre) spacing. Unless otherwise designated, most Bakken drilling units are now two-section (1280-acre) spacing.
  

I'm not sure how much difference there is between the "TFH" and the "PH." It's possible this is some extent due to change in nomenclature over the years. Maybe a reader knows. It seems I've discussed this before -- a long, long time ago. 

Abbreviated post. I may add to this later. But I wanted to get it posted in "real time."

And yes, the Bakken operators manage their assets closely, opening and tightening the spigots on individual wells, as you have noticed.

Later, see comments regarding nomenclature, or naming the wells. Example:

• PRONGHORN FEDERAL  31-13PH   SESW12140100       #31780
• Pronghorn Federal: family name or alpha-portion of the name of the well; all wells have some type of such designation;
• 31: this must be the chronologic number; if not, Whiting does not provide a chronologic number which makes no sense; the first digits of the two-digit number may reference the subformation;
• 13: this is the first section in which the horizontal takes oil; section 13 in this case; the bottom hole is in section 24 but is not so designated in the name of the well; many oil companies designate both sections;
• PH: the "H" is horizontal," obviously and the "P" is Pronghorn. For other wells, "TF" is Three Forks. 
• I am not convinced there is a designation for both an upper Pronghorn and a lower Pronghorn, as suggested by the reader (see comments) but it's possible. "P" by itself would be the "upper" Pronghorn, and the "2P" would be the lower Pronghorn (or vice versa).
• The 2PU well: a Three Forks Pronghorn well according to the geologist's narrative; no mention of upper or lower Pron horn, but  it is interesting that unlike other reports where it is either Pronghorn or Three Forks, this is a "Three Forks Pronghorn" with no comma;
• the narrative breaks out the "Pronghorn," the top at 10,638' TVD/10,867' MD; whereas the Three Forks Pronhorn lateral top was "10,936 - 21,014' MD. 
• unfortunately we are not given the TVD in the narrative for the Three Forks Pronghorn lateral 
• however, we do get those "sample tops" numbers in a spreadsheet:
• upper Bakken: 10,619
• middle Bakken: 10,633
• lower Bakken: 10,635
• Three Forks Pronghorn: 10,638
• TF Pronghorn target: 10,650
• The "U" in the Hecker well: clearly means a section line well, a 4-section (2560-acre) spaced well. Both wells above with the "PHU" designation are 4-section (2560-acre) spaced wells. All the rest are 1280-acre wells. Going forward, my hunch is that larger spacing (6-section spacing or 8-section spacing, for example, will also carry the "U" designation.

This post has been tagged with the "Nomenclature" tag so the ost can easily be found again later, if more information becomes available. For me, only three things concern me right now:

• the formation, either Pronghorn or Three Forks and if they are considered different formations; and the thickness of each;
• the size of the drilling unit; and,
• the chronological number.

Holy Mackerel! I Have To Take A Break -- More On This Well Later -- November 30, 2020

Locator: 10010MARION.

Note: in a long note like this, there will be content and typographical errors. If this is important to you, go to the source.

Nomenclature for MRO wells in the Bakken:

• H: middle Bakken
• TFH: Three Forks, first bench
• TFH-2B: Three Forks, second bench

Record IPS are tracked at this link. 

The well, see update here:

• 37283, drl/A-->5,810, MRO, Marion USA 4-10TFH, Antelope-Sanish, t9/2-; cum 139K over 45 days; 217K 11/20; API: 3-053-09324; fracked 7/24/20 - 9/10/20; 7 million gallons of water; 70% water by mass; note completion strategies at sidebar at the right; cum 451K 5/21; cum 495K 8/21; cum 572K 3/22; cum 641K 11/23; recently off line for a short period of time; cum 677K 4/25;
  

Pool	Date	Days	BBLS Oil	Runs	BBLS Water	MCF Prod	MCF Sold	Vent/Flare
SANISH	9-2020	30	110439	110134	56589	137824	130303	1077
SANISH	8-2020	15	28319	27932	19975	30120	26611	1815

For newbies: in the early days of the Bakken, we were happy if a well produced 150,000 bbls of oil in two years. Now, we're routinely seeing 150,000 bbls in six months. And then we have wells like this one. The Antelope-Sanish, I believe, is the best field in the Bakken. 

See this post from last month. 

Other wells of interest. These wells have been previously posted.

• 29208, 2,533, MRO, Lun USA 11-14H, Reunion Bay, t6/15; cum 287K 12/20; cum 299K 5/21; cum 305K 8/21; cum 319K 3/22; cum 322K 5/22; cum 339K 4/25;
  
• 29209, 2,776, MRO, Ernesting USA 11-14TFH-2B, Reunion Bay, t6/15; cum 397K 12/20; cum 407K 5/21; cum 408K 6/21; came off line 7/21; remains off line 8/21; cum 428K 3/22; cum 434K 5/22; cum 495K 4/25;
  
• 29210, 2,900/AB/A, MRO, Tony Lun USA 12-14TFH, Reunion Bay, t6/15; cum 365K 7/18; cum 376K 5/21; cum 383K 8/21; cum 403K 3/22; cum 406K 5/22; cum 480K 4/25;
  
• 29211, 2,929, MRO, Doll USA 120-14H, Reunion Bay, t6/15; cum 538K 12/20; see full report here; cum 556K 5/21; cum 562K 8/21; cum 580K 3/22; cum 585K 5/22; cum 666K 4/25;
  

• 37286, drl/A-->AL/A-->5,560, MRO, Strand USA 44-10TFH-2B, t820; cum 142K in 2.5 months; cum 162K 12/20; cum 295K 5/21; cum 313K 7/21; cum 373K 3/22; cum 384K 5/22; cum 461K 4/25;
  
• 37284, drl/A-->AL/A-->6,469, MRO, Mandan USA 34-10H, Antelope oil field, t8/20; cum 155K in 3 months; cum 201K 12/20; cum 300K 5/21; cum 317K 7/21; cum 365K 3/22; cum 370K 5/22; cum 433K 4/25;
  
• ******37283, drl/A-->AL/A-->5,810, MRO, Marion USA 44-10TFH, t9/20; cum 217K in 2.5 months;  cum 267K 12/20; cum 451K 5/21; cum 495K 8/21; cum 572K 3/22; cum 584K 5/22; cum 677K 4/25;
  
• 37282, drl/A-->5,249, MRO, Dragswolf USA 34-10TFH, t8/20; cum 248K in 3.5 months; cum 300K 12/20; cum 396K 5/21; cum 417K 7/21; 472K 3/22; cum 481K 5/22; cum 562K 4/25;
  

• 34100, 4,857, MRO, Nora Jones USA 12-14TFH-2B, t10/18; cum 428K 11/20; cum 433K 12/20; cum 451K 5/21; cum 458K 7/21; cum 480K 3/22; cum 484K 5/22; cum 557K 4/25;
  
• 34101, 4,966, MRO, Briek USA 13-14H, t11/18; cum 471K 11/20;  cum 475K 12/20; cum 491K 5/21; cum 501K 7/21; 539K 3/22; cum 547K 5/22; cum 631K 4/25;
  
• 34102, 4,488, MRO, Julia Jones USA 13-14TFH, t11/18; cum 355K 11/20; cum 361K 12/20; cum 381K 5/21; 417K 3/22; cum 424K 5/22; cum 487K 4/25;
  
• 34103, 7,471, MRO, Dye USA 14-14TFH-2B, t10/18; cum 504K 12/20; full production here; cum 527K 5/21; cum 545K 8/21; cum 568K 3/22; cum 570K 5/22; cum 656K 4/25;
  
• 34104, 5,747, MRO, Hammerberg USA 14-14H, t10/18; cum 446K 12/20; cum 480K 5/21; cum 496K 8/21; 523K 3/22; cum 527K 5/22; cum 595K 4/25;
  

• 19514, IA/527, MRO, Jones USA 14-14H, Antelope-Sanish, t4/11; cum 691K 12/20; a huge steady Eddy; huge jump in production 1/19; summary here with full production; cum 706K 5/21; cum 711K 8/21; cum 724K 3/22; cum 728K 5/22;
  

• 33980, 6,113, MRO, Michelle USA 14-14TFH, t10/18; cum 271K 12/20; cum 278K 5/21; cum 283K 7/21; cum 294K 3/22; off line for a short period; cum 297K 5/22; cum 333K 4/25;
  
• 33981, 5,386, MRO, Phyllis USA 11-23H, t11/18; cum 287K 12/20; cum 299K 5/21; cum 303K 7/21; cum 312K 1/22; off line 2/22; remains off line 5/22; cum 352K 4/25;
  
• 33982, 6,325, MRO, Clara USA 11-23TFH-2B, t10/18; cum 443K 12/20; cum 455K 5/21; cum 456K 6/21; off line 6/21; remains off line 8/21; 461K 3/22; off line for a while; back on line; cum 467K 5/22; cum 577K 4/25;
  
• 21172, 5,067, MRO, TAT USA12-23H, Reunion Bay, t11/18; cum 359K 12/20; cum 372K 5/21; cum 383K 8/21; cum 394K 3/22; cum 397K 5/22; was off line 2/22; back on line 5/22; cum 467K 4/25;
  

BAKKEN	1-2019	31	49596	49596	48097	62779	48198	11266
BAKKEN	12-2018	23	43060	43199	39573	63625	43196	17648
BAKKEN	11-2018	22	48708	48144	45141	66202	7883	58241

• 19321, 1,274, MRO, Danks USA 11-3H, Antelope-Sanish, t8/11; cum 649K 12/20; no jump in production; but a huge steady Eddy; jump in production, 9/20; cum 658K 5/21; cum 663K 8/21; cum 670K 3/22; cum 672K 5/22; cum 689K 4/25;
  

• 36914, drl/A-->AL/A-->6,932, MRO, Keyes USA 21-3H, Antelope-Sanish, first production, 5/20; t5/20; cum 269K 12/20; 51,150 bbls over 11 days extrapolates to 139,500 bbls over 30 days; cum 341K 5/21; cum 365K 8/21; cum 395K 3/22; cum 404K 5/22; cum 467K 4/25;
  

Pool	Date	Days	BBLS Oil	Runs	BBLS Water	MCF Prod	MCF Sold	Vent/Flare
SANISH	9-2020	30	66059	65882	33891	89076	61063	23110
SANISH	8-2020	24	29964	29752	69840	38235	30770	5234
SANISH	7-2020	12	31655	31526	8004	39391	20276	17006
SANISH	6-2020	0	0	452	0	0	0	0
SANISH	5-2020	11	51150	50698	17269	73704	0	70766
SANISH	4-2020	3	0	0	1055	519	0	518

• 36915, drl/A-->AL/A-->6,572, MRO, Ardella USA 21-3TFH-2B, Antelope-Sanish, first production, 5/20;, t5/20; cum 313K 12/20; cum 395K 5/21; cum 397K 6/21; off line 7/21; back on line 8/21; with great production; cum 464K 3/22; cum 473K 5/22; cum 580K 4/25;
  

Pool	Date	Days	BBLS Oil	Runs	BBLS Water	MCF Prod	MCF Sold	Vent/Flare
SANISH	9-2020	30	64307	63939	36392	93602	65384	23321
SANISH	8-2020	23	11942	12089	34110	17982	13396	3676
SANISH	7-2020	24	69534	69285	30076	96246	48212	43334
SANISH	6-2020	2	3802	4272	1524	4426	0	4217
SANISH	5-2020	16	56980	56476	35899	75316	0	72037
SANISH	4-2020	2	0	0	280	150	0	150

• 36912, drl/A-->AL/A-->4,821-->IA, MRO, Prairie Chicken USA 11-3TFH, first production, 5/20; Antelope-Sanish, t4/20; cum 357K 12/20; cum 416K 5/21; cum 425K 6/21; off line 7/21; back on line 8/21; cum 469K 1/22; off line 2/22; back on line 5/22; cum 471K 5/22; cum 559K 4/25;
  

Pool	Date	Days	BBLS Oil	Runs	BBLS Water	MCF Prod	MCF Sold	Vent/Flare
SANISH	9-2020	30	40465	40591	21601	101144	69763	27704
SANISH	8-2020	31	38936	38798	33932	71319	56468	11640
SANISH	7-2020	31	74842	75082	41105	117042	63517	48256
SANISH	6-2020	29	61553	61540	40099	87133	41154	41816
SANISH	5-2020	22	60188	59842	54206	82971	0	79494
SANISH	4-2020	4	9064	8878	11256	12130	0	11601

**************************
The Graphics

Random Update Of Statoil Russel Well In Painted Woods -- April 20, 2018

The well:

• 19930, two frack/IP (see below), Statoil, Russell 10-3 1H, Painted Woods, cum 286K 2/18;
• first frack: 5/22/11 -- 2,670, 36 stages; 4 million lbs; large/small ceramic
• second frack: 8/11/17 -- 82, 1.9 million lbs, all mesh

For newbies: this is an important data point/random well update. The Bakken is now in the manufacturing phase. Bakken wells:

• will be drilled
• some will go immediately into production
• some will be fracked/completed later (DUCs) -- within two years
• once completed, Bakken wells will:
• have pumps installed
• undergo work-overs (think roto-rooter)
• undergo mini-re-fracks
• be re-fracked: standard re-fracks; high-intensity re-fracks
• taken off-line while neighboring wells are fracked/re-fracked
• come back off -line once work on neighboring wells is completed
• be remotely "managed" for production
• will produce for 35 years (source: NDIC) 
• with "current" EURs of --
• less than 500,000 bbls: poor wells
• 500,001 - 750,000 bbls: "okay" wells for those with low expectations
• 750,001 - 1,000,000 bbls: expectations for Bakken wells on the fringe
• 1,000,001 -- 1,500,000: expectations for Bakken wells inside the fringe
• > 1.5 million bbls: currently not much said about EURs greater than 1.5 million bbls ...

#19930 is a good example of a fairly mediocre well simply undergoing a very small re-frack -- few stages (it was a long lateral) and very little proppant and it was all mesh, relatively inexpensive to re-accomplish. By the way, this well is the only one in this drilling unit and is located on the fringe.

Whiting's "U" Designation In Today's Daily Activity Report -- February 17, 2015

Disclaimer: this was done very quickly; there may be errors. I will come back later and make corrections if necessary. 

On today's daily activity report, there were two Whiting wells with the designation "PHU."

A reader asked about that designation.

I will see if I can find some examples to confirm my hunch but for the moment the spacing units on the GIS map should suffice. [Update: there is an example, near the end of this post.]

The two permits:

• 30735, loc, Whiting, Privratsky 41-28PHU, Bell,
• 20736, loc, Whiting, Privratsky 44-21PHU, Bell,

Here's the approximate location for these two wells (they are not yet shown on the GIS map, so this is my guess); they are both "Bell" wells, so it means they both run north:

This area is spaced for 1280-acre drilling units:

But the area has also been spaced for 2560-acre drilling units:

Whenever I see a "U" in the name of a Bakken well (such as "ULW" used by another operator for 2560-acre spaced wells), I assume the "U" means a well in a 2560-acre (overlapping) unit.

*********************************

Confirmation

Here's an example of a Whiting well with the "PHU" designation and confirming that it's a 2560-acre spaced well:

• 30342, loc, Whiting, Obrigewitch 41-29PHU, Bell, the well file is available and shows that this permit is for a 2560-acre spaced well; sections 28/29/32/33 - 140-99;

**************************

"ULW" Designation

The "ULW" designation is used by BR for 2560-acre spaced wells.

Random Note On New "400-Series" EOG Wells In The Parshall -- August 17, 2014

Updates

August 23, 2014: another "400-series" well:

• 29190, SI/NC --> TATD --> 622, EOG, Parshall 406-34H, Parshall. The well file is still accessible -- proposed "objective horizon": Bakken; spacing unit: 640 acres, TVD, 9,320 feet; TD, 14,968 feet. EOG estimates the top of the middle Bakken (which is listed as the target) at 9,303 feet; the lower Bakken shale at 9,341 feet; and the Three Forks at 9,374 feet; spud October 14, 2014; FTD, October 21, 2014; 5,263 feet in the middle Bakken target; in zone, 100%); 21 stages; 5.1 million lbs; t11/16; cum 47K 5/17; 

Original Note

[Note, unrelated to this post: St Demetrius oil field has been updated.]

At the bottom of the blog, there is a large section of "tags." One of the tags is "nomenclature." I haven't caught all the posts that have to do with "nomenclature" or the naming of wells in the Bakken, but I have several, at least enough to get started for those interested.

Some operators name their wells so that we know which formations are being targeted. When the Bakken boom began, all "H" wells were horizontal wells (that's what the "H" stood for and most of the wells were targeting the middle Bakken); if you saw an "H" in a name for a permit after 2007 in North Dakota, you could be pretty comfortable knowing it was in the "Bakken Pool."

When operators started targeting the Three Forks, many of them preceded the "H" with "TF" --> TFH or a Three Forks Horizontal. (Subsequently, Whiting uses "PH" for Pronghorn formation in the southwest part of the state, similar to Sanish in Mountrail County.)

Generally speaking, any well permitted/drilled before the end of 2012 with a TFH designation and/or any well drilled prior to the end of 2012 in which the geology report/file report says Three Forks, one can assume the target was the "upper" Three Forks.

Some time after 2011 or 2012 (I've long forgotten when this all evolved), we started hearing CLR and Whiting discuss lower benches of the Three Forks. The shorthand is now TF1 for the upper Three Forks; TF2 for the second bench, TF3, for the third bench, and TF4, for the fourth bench (I think I'm correct on that -- but I could be wrong).

Be that as it may, some operators stay with the single letter "H" for horizontal and do not use letters to suggest which formation will be targeted.

For example, this Hess well will target the Lodgepole:

• 26738, TA-->A-->103, Hess, Ti-Wao-157-95-14H-1, Tioga, this is a Lodgepole well, t7/14; cum 27K 5/17;  

Another example: EOG.

EOG wells are fairly standard in the Bakken:

township/location/family name -- one, two, or three digit number -- dash -- two or four digit number -- H

So, a typical EOG well name looks like this:

West Clark 1-2413H

Pretty simple.

The "1" is simply a chronological number which I will return to later.

The "2413" number is the area under which the horizontal will run; in this case the well is sited in section 24 and will end in section 13.

Another well:

Parshall 13-26H

The "13" is the chronological number; the well is a short lateral, running under section 26.

Now back to that chronological number, "1" in the first example, and "13" in the second example. I discussed this a long, long time ago, and I could be wrong, but generally, it appears, for EOG, a chronological number in that location (coming right after the township/location/name) suggests which formation the original permit application provided:

• 1 - 99: middle Bakken (up to 99 middle Bakken wells in one spacing unit)
• 101 - 199: upper Three Forks (up to 99 upper Three Forks wells in one spacing unit)

This generally holds true for EOG, but exceptions can be found, where a "1-99" well ended up being a Three Forks well, and a "101-199" well ends up being a middle Bakken well. One generally needs to go back to the original permit and things generally line up correctly; it appears that on occasion the target changes between the time of the permit and the completed well.

The reason for all this is that in the last week or so, EOG has introduced a new three-digit number, what I call the "400-series":

• 29127, TATD--> 1,584, EOG, Parshall 401-3534H, Parshall, sections 35/34 - T152N-R90W, 1280-acre spacing, TVD of 9,300; TD of 15,717; 340 FSL; 1410 FEL; "Bakken," azimuth, 319.6; a "grass-roots horizontal"; middle Bakken; spud date, December 3, 2014; FTD date, December 12 2014; middle Bakken target - 100%; t11/16; cum 49K 5/17;
• 29126, TATD --> 955, EOG, Parshall 402-3534H, Parshall, sections 35/34 - T152N-R90W, 1280-acre spacing, TVD of 9,300; TD of 16,119; 340 FSL; 1460 FEL; "Bakken," azimuth, 320.5; t11/16; cum 72K 5/17;
• 29105, TATD--> 953, EOG, Parshall 405-3534H, Parshall, sections 35/34 - T152N-R90W, 1280-acre spacing, TVD of 9,335; TD of 15,189; 650 FSL; 2050 FWL; "Bakken," azimuth, 320.1; t11/16; cum 56K 5/17;
• 29104, TATD--> 1,221, EOG, Parshall 404-3534H, Parshall, sections 35/34 - T152N-R90W, 1280-acre spacing, TVD of 9,335; TD of 15,773; 650 FSL; 2000 FWL; "Bakken," azimuth, 320.0; 22 stages; 5.8 million lbs;  t11/16; cum 50K 5/17;
• 29103, TATD--> 780, EOG, Parshall 403-3534H, Parshall, sections 35/34 - T152N-R90W, 1280-acre spacing, TVD of 9,335; TD of 16,569; 650 FSL; 1950 FWL; "Bakken," azimuth, 320.0;  t11/16; cum 51K 5/17;

I don't believe #29126 and #29127 are yet plotted on the NDIC GIS map (August 17, 2014). 

So a couple of things.

First, the new three-digit number designating the formation, a new series, the "400-series." Looking at two other EOG wells in the immediate region provides no clue: the two nearby short-lateral wells targeting the middle Bakken have similar TVDs and TDs. The thickness of the various formations in the Bakken Pool (MB, TF1, TF2, TF3, and TF4) are very thin so even 50 feet makes a difference, but I certainly can't sort this out based on this information.

All five of these wells have almost identical azimuths of 320 degrees, making them all parallel with each other. The hypotenuse of a one-mile square section is 7,467 feet; the longest horizontal is about 6,800 feet (TD - TVD), which suggests that these horizontals will all parallel each other, start in section 35, and end in section 35, but they will be spaced at 1280-acre spacing (sections 35 and 34).

This is way beyond my comfort zone; and, I may be misreading something, but that's how I see it right now: a new "400-series"; depths that aren't helpful to figure out which formation might be targeted; and all appear to be short laterals in "long-lateral" spacing (if that makes sense.).

So, I will throw that out there, and see if anyone has any thoughts. Perhaps it's obvious to everyone else, and it's just me missing the obvious.

There is another "408" well out there:

• 27850, dry - a monitoring well, EOG, Parshall 408-15M, Duperow; it is located in 15-152-90, 3.5 miles almost due north (NNW) of the five locations in section 35-152-90, but the application says this "408" well is simply a monitoring well that will monitor two middle Bakken wells located in section 15 (#27291, #27292) and will not produce any oil.

Certainly the "400-series" wells in section 35 are going to be producing wells. It's hard to believe that "400-series" wells are Duperow wells. First, the forms for those wells say "Bakken"; second, it would seem unusual to place five Duperow wells all at one time in one section? And I think the Duperow, being deeper than the Three Forks, might mean a deeper TVD, even though that's much more difficult to sort out.

There are good Duperow wells, for example this one, about three-quarters of a million bbls since 2008:

• 7141, 521, Wesco, Hamre 1-14, Cherry Creek, Duperow;  s8/79; t2/80; cum 824K 5/17;

So, there you have it. That's all I know. Something tells me it's going to be a simple explanation and I wrote this long post for nothing.

Lodgepole? Lodgepole is part of the Bakken pool. Oasis has drilled Lodgepole wells using standard Oasis nomenclature.

Back To Some Cocktail Chatter -- EOG Nomenclature

Update

Later, 9:13 pm central time: I was told that the "M" stands for monitoring.  The operator is likely monitoring wells that are scheduled to be fracked.
 

Original Post

When I first started the blog, I had a lot of fun with nomenclature regarding the names of wells; most were easy to figure out. EOG took a bit of time.

Now, for those interested, here's a new one:

• 27850, loc, EOG, Parshall 408-15M, Duperow pool, Parshall, Mountrail County; the specific location of this well: SENE 15-152N-90W, 2410' FNL and 1275' FEL

This is the general location for the well with this permit number. If I remember, when the GIS map is updated, I will replace this with the "official" map:

Random Look At Possible Siting Of New KOG Koala Wells Based On Today's Permits

This is what really makes blogging about the Bakken fun.

This takes me back to the early days when I tried to anticipate where wells would be sited and what formation they would be targeting. It was much simpler then: just the middle Bakken and the (upper) Three Forks. Now we have three additional Three Forks benches.

A reader alerted me to this one. When readers write in about the Bakken correcting something I have written, the readers are almost always correct. In fact, I think I have been wrong 100% of the time, and readers have been correct 100% when they have pointed out what might be an error on my part.

So, when a reader suggests I am seeing something incorrectly, well... talk about cognitive dissance. I assume the reader has to be right, but yet, I remain confused.

This is the situation.

KOG has six new permits in today's daily activity report. The pertinent information:

a) 27405, KOG, Koala 4-4-6-4H, Lot 4 4-151N-99W, 935' FNL and1116' FWL, development, Poe

b) 27406, KOG, Koala 4-4-6-4H3, Lot 4 4-151N-99W, 905' FNL and 1116' FWL, development, Poe

c) 27407, KOG, Koala 4-4-31-13H, Lot 4 4-151N-99W, 875' FNL and 1116' FWL, development, Poe

d) 27408, KOG, Koala 4-4-29-1H, Lot 4 4-151N-99W, 650' FNL and 810' FWL, development, Poe

e) 27409, KOG, Koala 4-4-28-4H, Lot 4 4-151N-99W, 650' FNL and 870' FWL, development, Poe

f) 274010, KOG, Koala 4-4-28-3H3, Lot 4 4-151N-99W, 650' FNL and 900' FWL, development, Poe

This information is taken directly from the daily activity report. Note: Poe field.

So, to get started.

For newbies: those are six permits, which for identification, I have labeled "a," "b," "c,"  "d," "e," and, "f."

For newbies: FNL - "from the north line of the section (in feet)"
For newbies: FWL - "from the west line of the section (in feet)"

Therefore, the siting:

• six wells either on one 6-well pad or two 3-well pads at right angles to each other
• three wells ("a," "b," and "c") sited (surface locations) in a a line north/south 1,116 feet from the west line
• three wells ("d," "e," and "f") sited (surface locations) in a line west/east 650 feet from the north line
• the wells will be sited in Lot 4 of section 4-151-99
• I don't know where Lot 4 is, but based on the "FNL" and the FWL" they will be in the northwest corner of the section 4

Which oil field?

• Section 4-151-99 is clearly in the North Tobacco Garden oil field (see NDIC GIS maps below)
• however, the permits are for development wells in Poe field
• permit nomenclature always designates the oil field from which the oil will be taken, not the field in which the wells are sited. In this case, the wells are clearly sited in North Tobacco Garden, but the permits (according to the NDIC daily activity report clearly designate these are to be development wells draining the Poe field.

Development wells

Development wells mean that there is already a producing well in the same general area (same field?) and these wells will continue to "develop" the field/location (as opposed to "wildcat" wells, for example).

Existing wells and spacing units

• section 4-151-99 is spaced for 640 acres (one section) and has one well is already there (an XTO well)
• the surrounding sections in question (which we will get to later), are spaced for 1280 acres and overlapping 2560 acres
• the surrounding sections in question (which we will get to later), already have KOG Koala wells

Nomenclature

• they are all Koala wells
• their names consist of four "parts" after the Koala
• the fourth part (4H, 4H3) has to do with the formation being targeted (middle Bakken or one of three Three Forks benches)
• the first part (the number "4") in all six permits is the same number (as noted, the number "4"): that means they are on the same pad, "Koala pad #4." (That's my first opinion. Up to this point, everything has been factual, not opinion.)
• the second two numbers are the sections where the well begins (SHL = surface hole location) and where the horizontal ends (BHL = bottom hole location)

So, for example, let's look at the "d" permit:

d) 27408, KOG, Koala 4-4-29-1H -- explanation:

• permit number 27408
• a KOG-operated well
• a Koala well
• on Koala pad #4
• surface hole location in section 4
• bottom hole location in section 29
• formation target and operator's chronologic number: 1H -- the first middle Bakken in this group

So, let's see another example. Let's look at the "b" permit:

b) 27406, KOG, Koala 4-4-6-4H3 -- explanation:

• permit number 27406
• a KOG-operated well
• a Koala well
• on Koala pad #4
• surface hole location in section 4
• bottom hole location in section 6
• formation target and operator's chronologic number: 4H3 -- one of the Three Forks benches

I've placed "1H" and "4H3" in red because I haven't sorted out what formation is designated using KOG's shorthand. I "know" that "H" by itself is the middle Bakken, and anything else is one of the Three Forks benches. I've never understood the "chronologic number" in this type of nomenclature.

That's how I see it.

More could be written explaining other details. I am mostly curious where I am wrong in my thinking on this.

Below are two graphics taken from the NIDC GIS map server. One shows 1280-acre spacing and one shows 2560-acre spacing. Everything seems to fit 1280-acre spacing except for one well, but the 2560-acre spacing is certainly possible.

The locations of the surface holes in the graphic are not perfect but are in the general direction. I did not label the origin of the arrows with "a," "b," "c", etc., because it would have gotten too cluttered. But "a" and "b" run to the west and "e" and "f" run to the north.

Before going to the graphics, one last comment. This is all idle chatter. It matters not the least to me exactly where these are sited or what they target. I own no mineral rights. But I get great enjoyment out of trying to break the nomenclature codes of the operators (and I did that for EOG's middle Bakken/Three Forks wells early on). (I also like Sudoku puzzles.) With so much going on in the Bakken, I don't have time for that much any more and in the big scheme of things es macht nichts. 

Disclaimer: It is very likely I have made a typographical error in the long post above. If alerted to typographical errors, I will correct them. It is also very possible I have misinterpreted the nomenclature and the graphics below are completely wrong. I would love to hear (definitively) where I have erred.

But again, this is all idle chatter on a frigid January evening for some. And again, a huge shoutout to all the roughnecks and geologists on site in the Bakken.

In the graphics below, section 4 (in white) is 640-acre spacing only. The well in section 4 is an XTO well. The existing wells where the red arrows are located are all (I believe) KOG Koala wells.

For newbies: it's hard to tell, but the red straight lines (the vertical and horizontal lines; not the arrows) are the borders of the oil fields in the graphics: the Poe, the Banks, and North Tobacco Garden. The arrows represent the horizontals (the tips of the arrows are the bottom hole locations/end of the horizontals); and all arrows reside within the Poe oil field, which agrees with the permits, except where they are sited (inside North Tobacco Garden. It is not at all unusual for wells to be sited in one field but draining an adjoining field. Folks with mineral rights in section 4 (white) would not share in the royalties of these six wells even though they are sited in that section. (Again, if my understanding is correct; and I could be way wrong; don't make any financial or investment decisions or sign any paperwork based on what you read here.)

1280-acre spacing (most likely):

2560-acre spacing (less likely):

Seven (7) New Permits -- The Williston Basin, North Dakota, USA -- Clarks Creek

Graphics

March 1, 2020:

January 29, 2020: see this note for an update of this area. 

  
October 22, 2019:

Updates

March 8, 2020: huge, huge wells being reported by EOG.

August 9, 2015: Mike Filloon's incredible article on EOG's Hawkeye wells in Clarks Creek oil field. Highly recommend you read.

June 19, 2013: two more spectacular EOG Hawkeye wells. 

March 29, 2013: April, 2013, dockets -- EOG will put 22 wells on one 2560-acre spacing unit: sections 6, 7, 18, and 19 - 151-94.

December 15, 2012: update on EOG's Clarks Creek wells.

November 4, 2012: EOG's plans for 6 wells on a 320-acre spacing unit in this area, in Antelope field;


August 8, 2012: to the five wells mentioned below (20329 - 20334, inclusive) add two more wells in that same section. There are now seven wells being drilled in this one section. Add these two:

• 22962, 1,093, EOG, West Clark 5-2425H, Clarks Creek, t12/12; cum 289K 8/16;
• 22963, 1,908, EOG, West Clark 1-2-2413H, Clarks Creek, t10/12; cum 164K 8/16; off-line much of 2016

August 8, 2012:

• 20888, 3,415, EOG, Clarks Creek 14-1819H, Clarks Creek, t4/12; cum 246K 8/16; 21 stages; 4.1 million lbs; all sand; 4-section spacing (2560-acre); 

Original Post 

Daily activity report, February 27, 2011 --

Operators: EOG (4), MRO, BR, Samson Resources

Fields: Ambrose, Clarks Creek, Camel Butte, Deep water Creek Bay

The four EOG wells will be on one pad, or two neighboring pads.

It looks like it's time for a stand-alone post on Clarks Creek. This is a 12-section field (2x6) lying on the western boundary of the reservation. EOG already has a similar configuration in this field, except three wells each pad, both pads very near each other:

• 20329, 1,203, EOG, West Clark 4-2425H, Clarks Creek, Bakken, running south; middle Bakken, t5/13; cum 290K 8/16;
• 20330, 142, EOG, West Clark 3-2413H, Clarks Creek, Bakken, running south; middle Bakken; t6/13; cum 251K 8/16;
• 20331, 1,251, EOG, West Clark 101-2425H, Clarks Creek, Bakken, running north; Three Forks Samson "E" marker, 30 feet into the Three Forks; gas up to 6,329 units; t4/13; cum 241K 8/16;
• 20332, 647, EOG, West Clark 100-2413H, Clarks Creek, Bakken, running north; middle Bakken; (permit app said Three Forks; geology report said it targeted the middle Bakken but the conclusion said it was in the Three Forks);  25 stages; 2.8 million lbs; s January 12, 2012; reached total depth on February 1, 2012 (23 days); max gas 1,438 units; t9/12; cum 210K 8/16;
• 20333, 449, EOG, West Clark 2-2425H, Clarks Creek, t9/12; cum 227K 8/16; running south; Three Forks, 30 feet into the Three Forks; the permit app said Bakken, but the geology report was very clear that they were targeting and in the Three Forks;
• 20334, 1,324, EOG, West Clark 1-2413H, Clarks Creek, t10/12; cum 199K 8/16;; running north; Three Forks, 30 feet into the Three Forks; the permit app said Bakken but the geology report clearly states Three Forks

And, of course, this renews the discussion on the nomenclature of EOG wells ("100" vs "101") -- which I won't get into, but was huge discussion thread elsewhere two to three years ago. (I think I got the "north" and "south" on the wells correct.)

[Update, March 29, 2013: the nomenclature is very simple. The wells are numbered chronologically or sequentially. Wells 100 and above are Three Forks wells; wells numbered 1 - 99 are middle Bakken wells]

Speaking of nomenclature, here are the new wells:

• 22484, 2,946, EOG, Hawkeye 102-2501H, Clarks Creek, Bakken, Three Forks; producing, first short month at 17,147 bbls, January, 2013; t1/13; cum 532K 8/16;
• 22485, 1,926, EOG, Hawkeye 01-2501H, Clarks Creek, Bakken, middle Bakken; producing, first short month at 17,721 bbls, January, 2013; t1/13; cum 590K 8/16;
• 22486, 2,421, EOG, Hawkeye 100-2501H, Clarks Creek, Bakken, Three Forks, t9/12; cum 709K 8/16;
• 22487, 67, EOG, Hawkeye 02-2501H, Clarks Creek, Bakken, middle Bakken, t12/13; cum 634K 8/16;

And now for a teaser: wow, there are some good old Madison wells in the immediate area. I will get back to them later.

No IPs reported on today's daily activity report.



Permits

2019
36416, 2,859, EOG, Clarks Creek 105-0719H, t9/19; cum 233K 1/29;
36415, 3,519, EOG, Clarks Creek 18-0719H, t9/19; cum 282K 1/29;
36414, loc, EOG, ....17-0718H,
36413, 2,058, EOG, Clarks Creek 106-0719H, t9/19; cum 291K 1/29;
36412, conf, EOG, Clarks Creek 47-0706H, t--; cum 100K in less than four months;
36411, conf, EOG, Clarks Creek 46-0706H, t--; cum almost 200K in less than four months;
36410, conf, EOG, Clarks Creek 45-0705H, t--; cum 100K in less than four months;
36409, loc, EOG, ....44-0718H,

2018 (yes, only one Clarks Creek permit in 2018)

34448, 1,380, EOG, Clarks Creek 108-0706H, Clarks Creek, t6/18; cum 202K 1/20;

2017
34395, conf, White Butte Oil Operations, LLC, 
34394, PNC, White Butte Oil Operations, LLC,
34393, conf, White Butte Oil Operations, LLC,
34392, drl, White Butte Oil Operations, LLC, 
34391, PNC, White Butte Oil Operations, LLC,
34390, PNC, White Butte Oil Operations, LLC,
34389, PNC, White Butte Oil Operations, LLC,
34388, PNC, White Butte Oil Operations, LLC,
34387, PNC, White Butte Oil Operations, LLC,
34386, PNC, White Butte Oil Operations, LLC,
34379, conf, White Butte Oil Operations, LLC,
34378, conf, White Butte Oil Operations, LLC,
34377, conf, White Butte Oil Operations, LLC,
34376, conf, White Butte Oil Operations, LLC,
34375, conf, White Butte Oil Operations, LLC,
34374, conf, White Butte Oil Operations, LLC,
34373, conf, White Butte Oil Operations, LLC,
34372, conf, White Butte Oil Operations, LLC,


2016
33050, 1,703, EOG, Clarks Creek 75-0719HX, Clarks Creek, t6/17; cu 459K 1/20; off line 9/19; back online 1/20;
32800, 2,615, EOG, Clarks Creek 155-0706H, Clarks Creek, t6/18; cum 321K 1/20;
32799, 1,873, EOG, Clarks Creek 24-0706H, Clarks Creek; t6/18; cum 340K 1/20;
32798, 1,744, EOG, Clarks Creek 107-0706H, Clarks Creek; t7/18; cum 274K 1/20;
32797, 2,172, EOG, Clarks Creek 72-0706H, Clarks Creek; t7/18; cum 275K 1/20;
32796, 2,518, EOG, Clarks Creek 73-0719H, Clarks Creek, t6/17; cum 336K 1/20;
32795, 2,204, EOG, Clarks Creek 110-0719H, Clarks Creek, t6/17; cum 342K 1/20;
32794, 2,382, EOG, Clarks Creek 74-0719H, Clarks Creek, t6/17; cum 366K 1/20;
32793, PNC, EOG, Clarks Creek 75-0719H,
32647, PNC, EOG, Riverview 19-3130H,
32646, PNC, EOG, Riverview 18 ...
32645, PNC, EOG, Riverview 17 ...
32644, PNC, EOG, Riverview 16 ...
32643, PNC, EOG, Riverview 15 ...
32642, PNC, EOG, Riverview 14 ...
32641, PNC, EOG, Riverview 13 ...
32640, PNC, EOG, Riverview 125 ...
32639, PNC, EOG, Riverview 124 ...
32638, PNC, EOG, Riverview 123 ...
32637, PNC, EOG, Riverview 122 ...
32636, PNC, EOG, Riverview 121 ...
32491, PNC, EOG, Riverview 133 ...
32490, conf, EOG, Hawkeye 132-2536H,
32489, conf, EOG, Hawkeye 131-2536H,
32488, conf, EOG, Hawkeye 123-2536H,


2015  (complete)
32222, conf, EOG, Hawkeye 145-2536H,
32199,
32198,
32197, conf, EOG, Hawkeye 106-2536H,
32186,
32285, conf, EOG, Hawkeye 137-2536H,
32184
32183,
32182,
32181,
32180
32179,
32178, PNC, EOG, Hawkeye 119-2536H,
32162,
32161,
32160, conf, EOG, Hawkeye 105-2536H,,
32147, conf, EOG, Hawkeye 148-2536H,
32146,
32145,
32144,
32143,
32142, PNC, EOG, Hawkeye 141-2536H,
31815, PNC, EOG, Riverview 101-3031H,
31814,
31813,
31812,
31811,
31810, PNC, EOG, Riverview 128 ...
31809, 2,581, EOG, Riverview 21-3031H, Clarks Creek, t8/19; cum 187K 1/20;
31808, 1,981, EOG, Riverview 22-3031H, Clarks Creek, t8/19; cum 182K 1/20;
31807, 2,222, EOG, Riverview 23-3031H, Clarks Creek, t8/19; cum 167K 1/20;
31806, 1,316, EOG, Riverview 24-3031H, Clarks Creek, t8/19; cum 174K 1/20;
31805, 2,073, EOG, Riverview 25-3031H, Clarks Creek, t8/19; cum 229K 1/20;
31804, 2,596, EOG, Riverview 26-3031H, Clarks Creek, t8/19; cum 276K 1/20;
31403, conf, EOG, West Clark 117-0136H, producing, a nice well,
31388, conf, EOG, West Clark 115-0136PNC,
31387,
31386,
31385,
31384,
31383,
31382
31381,
31380,
31379,
31378,
31377,
31376,
31375, PNC, EOG, West Clark 132-0136H,
31374, PNC, EOG, West Clark 122-0136H,
31257, loc, EOG, West Clark 129-0136H,
31256, loc, EOG, West Clark 128-0136H,
31255, loc, EOG, West Clark 134-0136H,
31254, loc, EOG, West Clark 127-0136H,
31253, loc, EOG, West Clark 126-0136H,
31252, PNC, EOG, West Clark 116-0136H,
31251, PNC, EOG, West Clark 107-0136H,
31250, PNC, EOG, West Clark 106-0136H,
31249, TA/127 (no typo), EOG, West Clark 105-0136H/West Clark 201-01SWD,
31248, 1,272, EOG, West Clark 104-0136H, Clarks Creek, t5/16; cum 199K 1/20;
31247, 1,613 EOG, West Clark 103-0136H, Clarks Creek, t5/16; cum 189K 11/18;
31246, PNC, EOG, West Clark 8-0136H,
31194, 2,390, Slawson, Jore Federal 1-12H, Clarks Creek, t2/19; cum 132K 1/20;
31193, 1,455, Slawson, Jore Federal 13-12TF2H, Clarks Creek, t2/19; cum 41K 1/20;
31192, 1,017, Slawson, Jore Federal 12-12TFH, Clarks Creek, t2/19; cum72K 1/20;
31191, conf, Slawson, Jore Federal 15-12TF3H,
31190, conf, Slawson, Jore Federal 13-12TF2H,

2014 (complete)
29964, 713, SHD Oil & Gas, Magnum 36-13-TF2, Clarks Creek, t12/15; cum 65K 11/18; offline much of 2016;
29963, 1,231, SHD Oil & Gas, Magnum 36-12-MB2, Clarks Creek, t12/15; cum 116K 11/18;
29962, 142, SHD Oil & Gas, Magnum 36-11-TF2, Clarks Creek, t12/15; cum 38K 8/16; offline much of 2016;
29755, 1,096, SHD Oil & Gas, Avalanche 36-14-MB2, Clarks Creek, t12/15; cum 49K 8/16; offline much of 2016;
29754, 1,111, SHD Oil & Gas, Avalanche 36-15-TF1, Clarks Creek, t12/15; cum 45K 8/16; offline much of 2016;
29753, 1,082, SHvD Oil & Gas, Avalanche 36-16-MB2, Clarks Creek, t12/15; cum 312K 8/16; offline much of 2016;
29752, 233, SHD Oil & Gas, Avalanche 36-17-TF2, Clarks Creek, t12/15; cum 8K 8/16; offline much of 2016;
29679, loc, EOG, West Clark 06-01M, (the "M" indicates a monitoring well)
28747, 2,592, Slawson, Jore Federal 2-12H, one section, 21 stages, 4.8 million lbs; t9/4; cum 253K 1/20;

2013 (complete)

27041, 1,905, SHD Oil & Gas, Bullet 12-36H, Clarks Creek, t6/14; cum 205K 11/18;
27040, 2,082, SHD Oil & Gas, Thud 12-36H, Clarks Creek, t6/14; cum 184K 11/18;
27039, 1,759, SHD Oil & Gas, Hammer 12-36H, Clarks Creek, t10/15; cum 121K 11/18;
27038, 1,980, SHD Oil & Gas, Canon 12-36H, Clarks Creek, t10/15; cum 110K 11/18;
26811, 1,888, SHD Oil & Gas, Luke 13-36H, Clarks Creek, 11/14; cum 115K 11/18;
26810, 1,274, SHD Oil & Gas, Marc 13-36H, Clarks Creek, t11/14; cum 131K 11/18;
26809, 1,753, SHD Oil & Gas, Mattie 13-36H, Clarks Creek, t11/14; cum 226K 11/18;
26808, 1,636, SHD Oil & Gas, Bucky 13-36H, Clarks Creek, t11/14; cum 176K 11/18;

2012 (not including ones listed before March 29, 2013, below)

• 22943, PNC, EOG, Riverview 103-3130H, Clarks Creek,
• 22200, 528, EOG, Riverview 4-3031H, Clarks Creek, t7/12; cum 457K 11/18;
• 22199, 1,088, EOG, Riverview 100-3031H, Clarks Creek, 2 sections, Three Forks, 39 stages, 5.8 million lbs, t6/12; cum 478K 11/18;

Prior to 2012
20513, 2,365, EOG, Riverview 3-3130H, Clarks Creek, t3/13; cum 716K 11/18;

***********************************

Clarksville...Clarks Creek...close enough:

Last Train to Clarksville, The Monkees

Three Forks vs Sanish Discusson: Very Esoteric

Since I suspect a lot of folks don't read all the comments, I'm going to post a comment here as it was sent into me.

It has to do with a posting regarding the evolving definition of the Three Forks / Sanish formation.

I've talked about the Three Forks / Sanish nomenclature several different places on the blog, and I won't link them again. One can find them by checking out the "Geology" tab at the top or the  sidebar at the right.

Here's the comment sent into me regarding the Sanish nomenclature, a posting which I very much appreciated:

This was my original post:

"During the "Bakken boom," there seems to be confusion with "Three Forks Sanish." Early on, that was how it was referred to: the "Three Forks Sanish." Over time, the "Sanish" was dropped, and it was simply "Three Forks." But on file reports, especially Whiting file reports, one sees "Sanish" standing alone. According to the "Petroleum Geology of North Dakota's Williston Basin (linked above also), "Sanish" was another name for the Bakken formation (Table 1, 1977). Further down in the article, it states that the Three Forks overlies the Birdbear formation; and, in turn, the Three Forks overlies the Bakken. (So, there is still a bit of confusion between the geologists and the NDIC administrative nomenclature.) According to the report at the link, the "Sanish" is an "informal unit," Sanish sandstone which overlies the Sanish itself. "

Here was what a reader sent into me (and again, I appreciate it):

If there was confusion it has been cleared up. The Sanish or Sanish Sand to some geologists is a member of the Three Forks formation and I think there are something like 7 or 8 members now (increased because of the increase in well data and core). The Sanish represents a lateral change in the depositional environment which I think was sea to beach or near shore, but I don't remember off hand. Last year there was a thesis from Colorado school of mines published on the Three Forks, but it has been awhile since I read it.

I think the NDIC fixed the wording of the post regarding the bakken and three forks with respect to each-other now reads:

"The Bakken Formation conformably overlies the Three Forks Formation in the basin center, and unconformably...

I will eventually write a geology section for thebakkenformation, but I haven't had time to work on the site at all lately.

This was how I responded to that comment:

1. With 7 or 8 members, the "Sanish" potentially becomes more confusing.

2. It appears that there is still differences in how producers classify things; how NDIC administratively classifies things; and how to update past logs (which I don't think will happen).

3. Whiting consistently calls it the Sanish (at least that's what I see), and CLR consistently refers to it as the Three Forks. The company geologists may disagree with me but that's my perception and among laymen, I probably follow this discussion as much as anyone. In my mind, I have a good feeling for what's going on (even if I'm wrong, I have my own "picture").

4. The problem I have is how to explain this in a 30-second soundbite to newbies before their eyes glaze over.

5. My own site has evolved over the past two years, and it might be smart of me to delete some of the old posts which might confuse things.

6. Please write to correct me when I make glaring errors on the geology. We all learn that way. I accept that kind of criticism very well. Other criticism, maybe not so well. Smile.

By the way, for those interested, there is a nice collection of articles/internet sources on the Bakken at this link: Discovery GeoServices Corporation.

Petro-Hunt Nomenclature

One of the parlor games for those of us with too much time on our hands is try to decode the names of the wells.

The folks on the Bakken Shale Discussion Group tried explaining EOG's "100" vs "101" nomenclature, suggesting that the 100/101 series was the way EOG was designating wells that were targeting the Bakken formation or the Three Forks formation. That discussion never seemed to fully explain EOG's numbering system; if it did, I missed it.

Now, for those with too much time on your hands, look at the names of the Petro-Hunt wells inside the Fort Berthold Indian Reservation:

Fort Berthold 147-94-1A-12-1H
Fort Berthold 147-94-2A-11-1H
Fort Berthold 147-94-3A-10-1H
Fort Berthold 148-94-9D-04-1H
Fort Berthold 148-94-17D-08-1H
Fort Berthold 148-94-19B-18-1H
Fort Berthold 148-94-22A-27-1H
Fort Berthold 148-94-25A-36-1H
Fort Berthold 148-94-35D-26-1H
Fort Berthold 152-93-17C-08-1H 
Fort Berthold 152-93-18B-19-1H
Fort Berthold 152-94-14C-11-1H
Fort Berthold 152-94-22D-15-1H

The first two numbers are easy: that is the township (T152N-93W, T148N-94W, for example).

The next two numbers are also easy. For example, take 17C-08.  This means the well is sited in section 17 and the lateral will be a long lateral, drilling through section 17 into section 8.  Again, take the second well above, 1A-12, means that the lateral will start in section 1 and drill into section 12. (Note, occasionally, the well could be sited just inside an adjoining section but will target the sections noted in the name of the well.)

Finally, the last alphanumeric, general "1H." The NDIC requires that wells in each section be chronologically numbered, and thus the "1": the first well in this section. The "H" obviously stands for "horizontal" well.

But we've left out one letter in the name of the well. The letter that I do not understand is the letter that follows the third number, the number that designates the section in which the horizontal lateral begins. In the first well noted above (Fort Berthold 152-93-17C-08-1H), the letter I am referring to is the "C." The letters used are A, B, C, and D. I have no idea to what the letters refer. It does not appear to refer to the quadrant in which the well is sited.

I suppose they could be referring to the formation the laterals are targeting but that would be four formations, and right now there are three formations that being targeted: the Middle Bakken, the Upper TFS, and the Lower TFS. So, what would be the fourth formation? The Birdbear? The Lodgepole?

The Petro-Hunt nomenclature is consistent through North Dakota: township designation, section-section, alphanumeric numbering. And the enigmatic letter following the first section.