EXAMINERS' REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION STATEMENT OF THE CASE

Similar documents
EXAMINERS' REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION STATEMENT OF THE CASE

EXAMINERS' REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION STATEMENT OF THE CASE

EXAMINERS' REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION STATEMENT OF THE CASE

Horace S. Wallace, Jr. and EXAMINERS' REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION STATEMENT OF THE CASE

Representing EXAMINERS' REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION STATEMENT OF THE CASE

August 1, 2012 PROPOSAL FOR DECISION PROCEDURAL HISTORY

March 5, 2012 PROPOSAL FOR DECISION PROCEDURAL HISTORY

RAILROAD COMMISSION OF TEXAS OIL AND GAS DIVISION

****************************************************** * KEY ISSUES: Confiscation * * Legal Subdivision * * Date of Attachment of Vol. Sub.

RAILROAD COMMISSION OF TEXAS OFFICE OF GENERAL COUNSEL HEARINGS SECTION

APPLICATION OF ENRON OIL & GAS COMPANY FOR A RULE 37 EXCEPTION TO DRILL WELL NO. 12, JONES 97 LEASE, SAWYER (CANYON) FIELD, SUTTON COUNTY, TEXAS

Jamie Nielson, Attorney Sandel Energy, Inc. Joe Sandel Don Rhodes, Consultant. Neva Laverne Cook Beene Etha Cook Curtis Lawrence Jarvis Self

RAILROAD COMMISSION OF TEXAS OFFICE OF GENERAL COUNSEL

RAILROAD COMMISSION OF TEXAS OFFICE OF GENERAL COUNSEL HEARINGS SECTION

Representing EXAMINERS REPORT AND PROPOSAL FOR DECISION STATEMENT OF THE CASE

RAILROAD COMMISSION OF TEXAS HEARINGS DIVISION

RAILROAD COMMISSION OF TEXAS HEARINGS DIVISION

RAILROAD COMMISSION OF TEXAS OFFICE OF GENERAL COUNSEL

FINAL ORDER NUNC PRO TUNC

OIL AND GAS LEASE for UMBERACRE

RAILROAD COMMISSION OF TEXAS HEARINGS DIVISION ORDER NUNC PRO TUNC AMENDING FIELD RULES HOEFS T-K (WOLFCAMP) FIELD REEVES COUNTY, TEXAS

RAILROAD COMMISSION OF TEXAS OFFICE OF GENERAL COUNSEL

RAILROAD COMMISSION OF TEXAS HEARINGS DIVISION

RAILROAD COMMISSION OF TEXAS HEARINGS DIVISION

RAILROAD COMMISSION OF TEXAS HEARINGS DIVISION

October 8, APPEARANCES: For Complainant Woolsey Well Service, L.P. and J & C Operating Co. Dick Marshall Rick Woolsey PROPOSAL FOR DECISION

TOWN OF WINDSOR RESOLUTION NO

RAILROAD COMMISSION OF TEXAS OFFICE OF GENERAL COUNSEL HEARINGS SECTION

RAILROAD COMMISSION OF TEXAS OFFICE OF GENERAL COUNSEL HEARINGS SECTION ORDER NUNC PRO TUNC

RAILROAD COMMISSION OF TEXAS

ARKANSAS OIL AND GAS COMMISSION 301 NATURAL RESOURCES DRIVE SUITE 102 LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS ORDER NO August 06, 2010

Statutory Pooling in Colorado: Overview and Practical Tips. DODOA July 18, 2016

FILED FOR RECORD PETITION OF BEAN RESOURCES, INC. TO AMEND THE SPECIAL FIELD RULES FOR.,n.., _r

RAILROAD COMMISSION OF TEXAS HEARINGS DIVISION

OIL AND GAS DOCKET NO

Conservation Law and Regulation

Mineral Interest Pooling Act

Oil and Gas Agreements. J. David Chase Wyoming State Office Reservoir Management Group (RMG) February 7, 2013

ARKANSAS OIL AND GAS COMMISSION 301 NATURAL RESOURCES DRIVE SUITE 102 LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS ORDER NO February 03, 2012

ARKANSAS OIL AND GAS COMMISSION 301 NATURAL RESOURCES DRIVE SUITE 102 LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS ORDER NO May 05, 2008

What the Frack? Judicial, Legislative and Administrative Responses to a New Drilling Paradigm.

APPLICATION FOR INJECTION WELL

TWENTY-FIVE PROVISIONS OF AN OIL AND GAS LEASE IN FIFTY MINUTES

BEFORE THE OIL AND GAS CONSERVATION COMMISSION OF THE STATE OF COLORADO APPLICATION

NYS DEC s Regulation of Oil and Gas Drilling in New York

Houston Workshop. February Discussion concerning permitting issues and staying in compliance

RULE 37 CASE NO District 06

Energy and Environment Symposium

GLOSSARY - OIL AND GAS INDUSTRY

October 25, Eric R. King

ARKANSAS OIL AND GAS COMMISSION 301 NATURAL RESOURCES DRIVE SUITE 102 LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS ORDER NO December 18, 2009

Eric R. King. University of Oklahoma "Oil and Gas Practice" Fall UPDATED Glossary of Oil and Gas Terms

Petroleum Resources Management GOVERNANCE & REGULATORY ISSUES Lessons from Louisiana

Oil & Gas Leases Other Issues and Concerns

ARKANSAS OIL AND GAS COMMISSION 301 NATURAL RESOURCES DRIVE SUITE 102 LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS ORDER NO December 18, 2009

ARKANSAS OIL AND GAS COMMISSION 301 NATURAL RESOURCES DRIVE SUITE 102 LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS ORDER NO June 04, 2012

ARKANSAS OIL AND GAS COMMISSION 2215 WEST HILLSBORO P.O. BOX 1472 EL DORADO, ARKANSAS ORDER NO February 04, 2008

ARKANSAS OIL AND GAS COMMISSION 301 NATURAL RESOURCES DRIVE SUITE 102 LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS ORDER NO February 06, 2009

ARKANSAS OIL AND GAS COMMISSION 301 NATURAL RESOURCES DRIVE SUITE 102 LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS ORDER NO February 06, 2009

ARKANSAS OIL AND GAS COMMISSION 301 NATURAL RESOURCES DRIVE SUITE 102 LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS ORDER NO November 06, 2009

Oil and Gas Acquisitions

The Engineering Aspects of the Implied Covenant to Protect Against Drainage

ARKANSAS OIL AND GAS COMMISSION 301 NATURAL RESOURCES DRIVE SUITE 102 LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS ORDER NO August 06, 2009

Land and Regulatory Issues Related to Horizontal Wells

The Parties own Royalty Interests and Working Interests, or either of them, in the Production Allocation Substances;

C-O-R-R-E-C-T-E-D ARKANSAS OIL AND GAS COMMISSION 301 NATURAL RESOURCES DRIVE SUITE 102 LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72205

Unit Operation of Oil and Gas Fields Part I

North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality

Negotiations. October 25, Eric R. King

BEFORE THE OIL & GAS CONSERVATION COMMISSION OF THE STATE OF COLORADO ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) APPLICATION

The End of the Tour. Gerald Walrath Kirby, Mathews & Walrath, PLLC

The Parties own Royalty Interests and Working Interests, or either of them, in the Production Allocation Substances;

Oil & Gas Law. Class 6: RoC: Regulatory Responses (3 of 4) Unitization

BEFORE THE OIL & GAS CONSERVATION COMMISSION OF THE STATE OF COLORADO ) ) ) ) ) ) ) APPLICATION

LEASE CLAUSES FOR THE MODIFIED LYNCH FORM. Description of Leased Substances Coalbed Methane. Description of Premises Limited Depth.

Land Ownership, Leases, Units & Pools. Krissell Crandall, BP

ARKANSAS OIL AND GAS COMMISSION 301 NATURAL RESOURCES DRIVE SUITE 102 LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS ORDER NO July 02, 2009

Horizontal Oil Well Requirements

BEFORE THE OIL &GAS CONSERVATION COMMISSION OF THE STATE OF COLORADO

Environmental Management Chapter

PIPELINE RIGHT-OF-WAY EASEMENT

BEFORE THE OIL & GAS CONSERVATION COMMISSION OF THE STATE OF COLORADO ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) APPLICATION

Mineral Rights Integration Information Sheet Updated February 4, 2015

Negotiating Financial and Surface Components of the Oil and Gas Lease

Review of the Typical California Oil & Gas Lease with a focus on Essential, Defensive and Administrative Clauses and Keeping Your Lease Alive

TEXAS VOLUNTARY POOLING

OIL AND GAS LEASE NO.

yjryly AGENDA REPORT Meeting Date: November 20, 2018 Item Number: To: From:

A. Applicant - Any person applying for a mineral lease covering State lands under the jurisdiction of the MMEIA

CAUSE NO. V. KARNES COUNTY, TEXAS. Defendants. JUDICIAL DISTRICT PLAINTIFFS ORIGINAL PETITION COME NOW JOHN JOSEPH FOSTER, INDIVIDUALLY; AND KELLY

Oil and Gas Overview. Harry W. Sullivan, Jr. Adjunct Professor Texas A&M University, School of Law. Ft. Worth, Texas, U.S.A.

BEFORE THE OIL AND GAS CONSERVATION COMMISSION OF THE STATE OF COLORADO APPLICATION. Interests Affected

WHAT TO DO WITH THE LEFTOVERS? OWNERSHIP ISSUES ASSOCIATED WITH ABANDONED PLATFORMS, WELLS, AND UNITS. The Legal Issues

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Important aspects of an oil & gas lease Clif Little OSU Extension Agriculture and Natural Resources Guernsey and Noble Counties Feb.

The Helium and Associated Gases Regulations, 1964

The Federal Exploratory Unit Agreement: Its Advantages and Disadvantages Insofar as the Fee Mineral Owner is Concerned

Title: Date: Location: Program: Sponsor: Duration:

URS? Y Urs, MINE. THE RULE OF CAPTURE AND SUBTERRANEAN FLUIDS by Judon Fambrough

RAILROAD COMMISSION OF TEXAS OIL & GAS DIVISION

Transcription:

OIL & GAS DOCKET NO. 06-0246733 THE APPLICATION OF KALOS CORPORATION TO CONSIDER UNITIZATION AND SECONDARY RECOVERY AUTHORITY FOR THE MOONROCK (RODESSA) FIELD UNIT, MOONROCK (RODESSA) FIELD, GREGG AND RUSK COUNTIES, TEXAS HEARD BY: Donna K. Chandler, Technical Examiner Marshall F. Enquist, Hearings Examiner DATE OF HEARING: May 5, 2006 APPEARANCES: David Gross Larry Wright Ted Cooper REPRESENTING: Kalos Corporation EXAMINERS' REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION STATEMENT OF THE CASE Kalos Corporation requests Commission authority for unitization of the Moonrock (Rodessa) Field Unit and approval of secondary recovery operations on the Unit. This application was unprotested and the examiners recommend approval. DISCUSSION OF THE EVIDENCE The Moonrock (Rodessa) Field was discovered in 1984. Cumulative production from the eleven wells which have produced from the leases in the proposed unit is 503,000 BO and 1.877 BCF of gas. The proposed Moonrock (Rodessa) Field Unit consists of 22 tracts which contain 950 acres. There are currently 9 producing wells within the proposed unit area which produce a total of approximately 300 BOPM. Kalos is the only operator in the field.

OIL AND GAS DOCKET NO. 06-0246733 PAGE 2 The unitized formation is the subsurface portion of the Unit Area commonly known as the Moonrock (Rodessa) Field which is described as that stratigraphic interval or its correlative equivalent between the log depths of 7,573 feet and 7,584 feet in the Kalos Corporation - Harrell Estate No. 1 well located 608 feet from the west line and 1,826 feet from the north line of the William H. Johnson Survey, A-118, Gregg County, Texas. The proposed unit includes the entire Moonrock (Rodessa) Field. The field limits are well defined. Dry holes define the pinching out of the Rodessa to the north, east and south. To the west, the reservoir limit is defined by an oil-water contact at 7,180 feet subsea. Remaining primary recovery from the leases within the unit boundaries is marginal, with primary recovery of 503,000 BO being approximately 15% of the original oil in place of 3.386 million BO. Estimated secondary recovery from the unit is estimated to be 411,000 BO, resulting in 27% recovery from both primary and secondary. It is expected that this secondary recovery project will have a life of 15 years. Average porosity of the reservoir is 13% and average water saturation is 25%. Net pay ranges from 6 fee to 10 feet, with an average of 7.4 feet. Permeability averages 13 md. Original reservoir pressure was 3,500 psia and current pressure is 1,500 psia. Kalos plans to ultimately have three injection wells on the Unit, two of which will be new drills. The third injection well will be a conversion of an existing producing well. The source water for the waterflood will be salt water produced from the Rodessa from a well downdip of the oil-water contact.. The total cost to implement and operate the secondary recovery project is $1.43 million. The cost does not exceed the value of additional reserves to be recovered, estimated to be $19 million. The participation formula for the Unit is based on 75% net acre-feet and 25% useable wellbores. At the time of the hearing, 100% of the working interest ownership and 78.77% of the royalty interest ownership had signed the unit agreement. On tracts which do not have 100% sign-up, Kalos Corporation will maintain separate tank batteries in order to account for production from those tracts. There are no state lands in the Unit. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. Notice of this hearing was sent to all operators and royalty interest owners within the proposed unit and to offset operators and mineral owners of offsetting unleased tracts. Notice was published in the Kilgore News Herald, a newspaper of general circulation in Gregg and Rusk Counties, for four consecutive weeks beginning April 2, 2006. 2. The proposed unit consists of 22 tracts which contain 950 acres.

OIL AND GAS DOCKET NO. 06-0246733 PAGE 3 3. The unitized formation is the subsurface portion of the Unit Area commonly known as the Moonrock (Rodessa) Field which is described as that stratigraphic interval or its correlative equivalent between the log depths of 7,573 feet and 7,584 feet in the Kalos Corporation - Harrell Estate No. 1 well located 608 feet from the west line and 1,826 feet from the north line of the William H. Johnson Survey, A-118, Gregg County, Texas. 4. At the time of the hearing, 100% of the working interest ownership and 78.77% of the royalty interest ownership had signed the unit agreement. 5. Cumulative recovery from the leases proposed for unitization is approximately 503,000 BO. Secondary recovery operations will result in the recovery of an estimated 411,000 BO which would otherwise go unrecovered. 6. Estimated cost to implement and operate the secondary recovery project is $1.43 million. The cost does not exceed the value of additional reserves to be recovered. 7. The participation formula for the Unit is based on 75% net acre-feet and 25% useable wellbores. 8. The secondary recovery project will not be successful unless the area is unitized. 9. The injected water will be salt water from the Rodessa. 10. The agreement was voluntarily executed by all parties affixing their signatures thereto and no person has been compelled or required to enter into the agreement. The unit agreement binds only those persons who have executed it, their heirs, successors, assigns and legal representatives. The rights of all owners of interests in the field will be protected under the operation of the unit, regardless of whether an owner signed the unit agreement. 11. The owners of interest in the oil and gas under each tract of land within the area reasonably defined by development have been given an opportunity to enter into the unit on the same yardstick basis as owners of interest in the oil and gas under the other tracts in the unit. 12. The proposed injection program will move hydrocarbons across lease lines, and unitization is necessary in order to protect the correlative rights of the various interest owners.

OIL AND GAS DOCKET NO. 06-0246733 PAGE 4 13. The unitization agreement is necessary to accomplish the purposes of establishing a unit to effect secondary recovery operations for water injection and to operate cooperative facilities necessary thereto. Other available or existing methods or facilities for secondary recovery operations are inadequate for the purpose of secondary recovery. 14. The unit agreement does not provide, either directly or indirectly, for the cooperative refining or marketing of crude petroleum, distillate, condensate, or gas, or any by-product thereof. 15. The unit agreement is subject to all valid orders, rules and regulations of the Railroad Commission. 16. The unit agreement contains no provision regarding field rules, nor does it limit the amount of production of oil or gas from the unitized area. The unit agreement does not release the operator from his obligation to reasonably develop lands or leases as a whole. 17. The unit agreement is a voluntary agreement entered into for the purpose of conducting secondary recovery operations. 18. The unit agreement does not provide for the location of wells. 19. There are no state lands in the unit. 20. The unit agreement is in the interest of public welfare as being reasonably necessary to prevent waste and to promote conservation. 21. The reservoir described in the unit agreement is identified as a single reservoir for Commission purposes and is a suitable reservoir for a water injection secondary recovery operation. 22. The unit agreement contains only the acreage reasonably necessary to accomplish the proposed secondary recovery project. 23. On tracts where 100% sign-up is not attained, applicant will maintain separate tank batteries to account for production from that tract. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. Proper notice was given to all persons legally entitled to notice. 2. All things have occurred or have been accomplished that are necessary to give the Commission jurisdiction in this matter.

OIL AND GAS DOCKET NO. 06-0246733 PAGE 5 3. Applicant's proposed secondary recovery project satisfies all of the requirements set out in TEX. NAT. RES. CODE ANN. 101.001 et seq. 4. Approval of the proposed unit agreement and secondary recovery operations is in the public interest and is necessary to prevent waste and to promote the conservation of oil or gas or both. EXAMINERS' RECOMMENDATION Based on the above findings of fact and conclusions of law, the examiners recommend approval of the proposed Moonrock (Rodessa) Field Unit and secondary recovery operations project as set out in the attached order. Respectfully submitted, Donna K. Chandler Technical Examiner Marshall F. Enquist Hearings Examiner