We signed a lease with Dutton I want to say about 9-10 months ago. Nothing was done. The last couple of days we have gotten mail from Continental and their lawyers they have a court date to go before the OCC seeking the Ok on a horizontal well to end in sections 32 and 33. 33 is where our rights are.
So how will this work if Dutton has not filed for drilling there which I’m not sure they had. They just filed the lease paperwork this month.
I don’t like things to just happen I like to know a little about things before they hit me in the face.
There can be many working interest partners in a well, but only one operator, Continental is an experienced company, so logical that they would be the operator since they are much larger and have rigs under contract. Just sit back and wait for the outcome. Do you know the links for the OCC and OTC so you can watch the filed paperwork?
The case files can be found here:
Read the Manual first, then go to the Red box and set up a log in for yourself if you want direct emails about your sections. If you already know the case numbers, then use the blue box.
I cant thank you enough in telling me where i can find those.
One of my step dads was a landman and I would go to the court houses with him. I loved the looking up and figuring out who owned what.
This adds a whole nother dimension to that.
Once again thanks so much for your help.
I received the same mailings from Continental. I own an ORRI in leasehold in 21-9n-9w. Continental is proposing to establish 3 lay down 1280 acre units (20-21, 28-29, & 32-33) and then drill a 12,900’ lateral across the three units in the Woodford formation at approximately 16,400’ vertical depth. I’m retired and no longer subscribe to DI so am unable to easily research to see if this is common to this area or not. It appears that one well could HBP 3,840 acres. Is this unusual or common?
Due to the 1280 spacings, theyd have to drill 3 separate wells to HBP 3,840 acres, unless of course people signed OGL’s for multiple sections with no provisions. 20-21 is unit 1, 28-29 unit 2, 32-33 unit 3. But no poolings have been field yet, just location exception, spacing and multi unit horizontal.
The relief sought is for a “Multiunit Horizontal Well”. They propose to allocate well costs and production revenues; 40% to unit 1, 42% to unit 2 and 18% to unit 3. Sounds to me that it would HBP 3 units.
There is another set like this in Caddo in 9N-9W sections 20/21, 29/28, 32/33. Case 2024-002131. There may be others. Continental has already done this in Carter County where they have at least seven horizontals lined up across three sets of 1280 acres. If it works, it can be a lot of wells and everyone wins some in the sections that have the most wells. Some sections will make out better than others, looks like the middle two get most of the footage of perforations.
I didnt scroll down far enough to see the allocation values. Didnt see the legals included, so not sure if it holds all 640 per section or the E/2, SW/4 etc per section. Id be one pissed off mineral owner wishing I would have sold months before if my minerals were tied up in that.
