Some help please? Very different results for twin 10,176’ long laterals sharing same pad, both commenced production April 2019. Reeves County, section 30 block 2 H&GNRR.
38937579, well 5H. RRC labels it Gas Well, RRC production data shows only gas & condensate, no oil. Total depth 11,148’.
38937581, 6H. Production not yet published on RRC website. Per royalty stubs, this 6H “sister” well produced 238,684 bbl oil first six months, plus NGLs, gas etc. Total depth 10,782’.
Questions. Is 10,782’ Wolfcamp A, and 11,118’ Wolfcamp B? These twin sister wells appear separated by 366’ vertical feet … How is it possible that 5H, 366’ below 6H, does not disclose a single barrel of oil on the RRC website, while its sister well produces 238,664 bbl in six months? We receive royalties from 6H, not 5H. If 5H is producing only gas & condensate, wouldn’t it be unprofitable?
Go to https://mycpa.cpa.state.tx.us/cong and click on “Lease Drop-Natural Gas”.
Enter “844828” in the Drilling Permit Number box. Enter “1901” in the Beg Period box and enter “1911” in the End Period box. Select “Reeves” from the County drop down menu. Click “Search” to generate production.
Repeat the above steps, but initially choose “Lease Drop-Crude Oil” and enter “844831” in the Drilling Permit Number box.
Thanks. On Texas Comptroller CONG, I hit both wells, permits, lease numbers, names, but no production data whatsoever, sahys “no matching records found” when drop downs are searched. I guess operator or state is very tardy posting the data. On RRC GIS map, one well has never reported any production, the other just popped up (gas only) on RRC in last few days. Its only been seven months since production commenced. CONG labels both wells as “Gas Wells” even though the one that pays us royalties yields 85% oil, don’t know why they call it “gas well”.
When a well is classified as a gas well, the oil is called condensate. There used to be clear lines between oil and gas wells which were based on the gas/oil production ratios. The RRC has amended the field rules for the Phantom (Wolfcamp) field and allow the operator to classify wells as either oil or gas regardless of the gas/oil ratio.
Many oil companies are classifying these horizontal wells as gas wells because they will get reduced severance tax rate on the gas as high cost gas wells. If you look at the G-1 gas completion report for the Seivers 2-35 North 5H, you can find that the vertical depth is 11148 feet and toward the back pages, the top of the Wolfcamp formation was encountered at 10,500 vertical feet. RRC 08-The Seivers 2-35 South 6H is also classified as a gas well and was also completed in Wolfcamp formation. RRC 08-287434. Look at the G-5 forms for the initial 24 hour production test volumes.
Thx, very helpful TennisDaze, I understand now why oil wells are labelled Gas Well.
When a “Gas Well” reports oil as “condensate”, do they combine all NGLs and other liquids in this condensate number? Sort of like BOE reported in financials?
Clearly, operator or state are delinquent boarding data, production commenced 7 1/2 months ago, they just boarded one well on RRC in last few days, no production yet on Comptroller CONG website. Seems to take several days and stages to board RRC data … for months no drop-down for production data, then drop-down appears but is empty “no report”, eventually data fills the drop-down.
I recommend entering the county also. The same permit number and RRC lease number can be issued in different RRC districts and the CONG will pull the data for all wells. Using the county limits the information. Note that the operator is reporting all data under Gas Lease - RS = residue gas after processing being the dry gas sold at the tailgate of the plant - PR = products - CN = Condensate which is the oil - LU = lease use, the gas used by the operator at the well, generally to power a compressor.
The condensate reported volume is only oil for these wells. The classification as a gas well under the Phantom (Wolfcamp) field rules does not change the production facilities or procedures for these wells. The products are only removed from the gas during processing at the plant.
yes, thanks much. My previous response is delayed awaiting moderator review. Problem resolved, I think data was being boarded literally this morning, for the first time.
Thx both AJ11 & TennisDaze, extremely helpful. I think they’ve been boarding data literally this morning, unable to see data last night, now visible both RRC (one well) and CONG both wells. Thx for the abreviations TennisDaze, CONG doesn’t explain them.
Revised.
Reconciled my royalty stub to CONG. Obviously, Crude oil reported separately, not combined with other products on CONG. Natural Gas Inquiry shows RS is dry gas, reconciles exactly to royalty stub. CN (CONG) is what Cimarex calls “drip”, reconciles exactly.
Royalty stub describes Pprod 9,120 = $153,694, I think mostly NGLs, doesn’t reconcile exactly but seems to be the “PR” on CONG. Cong refers to “PR” 58.938 = $78,928. Close enough for government work I suppose.
Finally able to compare two sister wells, the 10,782’ well (Wolfcamp A?) grossed $12.8 million in first six months, the 11,148’ well (Wolfcamp B) grossed approx $9.5MM at first glance.
The definitions of the abbreviations you provided are terrific!
Could someone also explain the meaning of the other headings and abbreviations on the Natural Gas inquiry form?
For example, what does the “Off Lease” Yes/No column mean? It seems to be related to the Comm Code on our lease. Usually “No” for codes LU (lease use) and CN (Condensate), and “Yes” for RS residue and PR (Products).
I’m seeing large “Marketing Costs” listed for code RS – about half of the original value.
