Earlier I started a discussion about the Nov. 21 NDIC hearing that states HRC plans to combine 1280 spacing units into 2560. I also sent emails to both the NDIC and ND Oil & Gas Division stating my concern for the proposed spacing; the response from them was they will note my concern and encouraged me to attend the Nov. 21 hearing (I plan to).
Somehow HRC got word of my concern (probably a forwarded email from above) and they called me a noon today to explain what they are looking at in the 2560 acre spacing units; here is their explanation:
"Because current drilling spacing's have offset limits, they are not allowed to drill within 500' of a neighboring spacing unit/section line. This means there is about 1000' of the formation that will not have production. In order to drill and access this part of the formation they need to include the neighboring 1280 spacing in order to get production from this area. They plan to drill several more wells in this new spacing, but only the wells drilled within 500' of the section line (north/south line) will be part of the 2560 spacing. All other wells drilled that are west or east and outside the 500' section line offset will remain part of the original 1280 spacing unit."
I told HRC that when G3 was the operator, the June 27, 2013 Hearing Docket stated they plan to drill 7 wells in each spacing unit. HRC said they are still planning the same amount of wells in each 1280 spacing unit, with 1 or 2 of those wells in the 2560 spacing.
I have edited this discussion to include diagrams I received from HRC to show how they plan to utilize the 2560 spacing. Those wells within the "red circle" are those that will be part of the 2560 spacing
More food for thought on this subject. To pick up the set backs why did they need a 2560? Does the acreage add up to 2560? Also if the setbacks are in a different spacing, should the 1280 spacing be changed to reflect that?
My understanding of this is, the 2560 is for two adjacent 1280 leases that HRC owns. The acreage should be 2560 or close. There are, in some cases, where there are lots in those 1280 spcaings that when added to the remaining section acreage, may be smaller. They use the 2560 spacing as a standard so it is easier for people to understand (i.e. instead of a 2468.35 spacing).
In my case, the new 2560 spacing will be adjacent to a Zenergy lease to the west, so HRC has to follow the 500' set back on this side of their new 2560 spacing
The new spacing only affects the adjacent section line of the current 1280 spacing in the new 2560 spacing. Even if they own multiple adjacent 1280 spacing, they are only creating one 2560 spacing for those 4 sections.
For example, if you look at Case No. 21293, HRC a several adjacent 1280 spacing be converted to 2560 spacings. In that case, since they own all of the leases in the current 1280 spacings, each 1280 spacing will have to share in the new 2560 spacing on each side if the current 1280 spacing.
Ed, there is still hope to pick up that oil in the setback on the Zenenergy side, the two operators can form a cooperative venture and drill right down the section line. Mineral owners will be unhappy with the resulting 4 half sections overlapping drill spacing though. But hey, the NDIC set it up that extended long lateral wells pay at least a 1280 to aid operators in holding unproductive acreage and they can't change horses in mid stream. There is enough to drill right now that the matter will not come up for some time, I think. I believe it's called a band-aid unit in Oklahoma.
Ed Thanx for the info, am I reading this right some of the 1280 units there are going to drill up to 7 wells. If so is any one else doing this. Sorry I am not a better oil man. Your info always helps.
Tom, actually HRC plans to drill 14 wells/1280 spacing with 3 wells in the 2560 spacing along the section line the divides the two spacing's (see the files I attached to my original post). These files are HRC's plans for drilling the 2560 spacing; they sent them to me when I challenged their 2560 spacing request. I just updated these to pdf instead of the tiff files, so people can download the files.
To answer your second question, this a.m. I saw Continental is on the Feb. 26 NDIC hearing docket, purposing 14 wells per 1280 spacing in the Winner field just to the north of where HRC is drilling (I also have mineral interest in this field). Both companies are planning several wells in the Bakken and Three Forks.
This is what is called "infilling", and is going strong in Mountrail county. If you look at the NDIC GIS map in Mountrail county, you can see how many wells are being drilled there.