The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutCO 123Conservation Order Cover Page XHVZE This page is required for administrative purposes in managing the scanning process. It marks the extent of scanning and identifies certain actions that have been taken. Please insure that it retains it's current location in this file. /--C~- _ Conservation Order Category Identifier Organizing RESCAN [] Color items: [] Grayscale items: [] Poor Quality Originals: [] Other: NOTES: DIGITAL DATA [] Diskettes, No. [] Other, No/Type OVERSIZED (Scanna~arge ~~Maps: [] Other items OVERSIZED (Not suitable for plotter/scanner, may work with 'log' scanner) [] Logs of various kinds [] Other BY: .,~ARIA Scanning Preparation BY; )MARIA Production Scanning Stage I PAGE COUNT FROM SCANNED DOCUMENT: ..~r.. _~ PAGE COUNT MATCHES NUMBER IN SCANNING PREPARATION: YES NO BY: Stage 2 IF NO IN STAGE 1, PAGE(S) DISCREPANCIES WERE FOUND: ~ YES NO BY: ~ARIA DATE: ~.~.,)-/(~ ~..~ (SCANNING IS COMPLETE AT THIS POINT UNLESS SPECIAL ATTENTION IS REQUIRED ON AN INDIVIDUAL PAGE BASIS DUE TO QUALITY, GRAYSCALE OR COLOR IMAGES) General Notes or Comments about this Document: 5/21/03 ConservOrdCvrPg.wpd STATE OF ALASKA ALASKA OIL AND GAS CONSERVATION COMMISSION $001 Porcupine Drive Anchorage, Alaska 99501-3192 Re: THE APPLICATION OF UNION OIL COMPANY OF CALIFORNIA for an order expanding the Swanson River Field, Hemlock Oil Pool, to include the G zone of the Tyonek formation and the lower portion of the Hemlock formation. ) Conservation Order No. 123A ) Swanson River Field ) Hemlock Oil Pool ) ) ) ) August 23, 1973 (original order) ) First Amendment: December 5, 1995 IT APPEARING THAT: The Commission issued Conservation Order No. 123 for the Swanson River Field, Hemlock Oil Pool, on August 23, 1973. Conservation Order No. 123 replaced Conservation Order//8 and Conservation Order No. 9. . Union Oil Company of California Inc. ("UNOCAL") became sole operator of the Swanson River Field on December 15, 1992. , By letters dated October 2, 1995, and October 19, 1995 UNOCAL requested expansion of the Swanson River Field, Hemlock Oil Pool to include the G zone of the Tyonek Formation and the lower portion of the Hemlock Formation. The correspondence demonstrated all affected parties had been notified prior to the subject request. FINDINGS: o The Tyonek G zone is a predominately sandstone interval within the Tyonek Formation that immediately overlies the Hemlock Formation and corresponds to the 10,085 foot to 10,230 foot measured depth interval in the Soldotna Creek Unit 41-4 well. Two discrete sandstones are present in the interval; the upper sandstone is designated the G1 sand and the lower the G2 sand. , Average net pay is estimated to be approximately 20 feet and 40 feet in the G1 and G2, respectively. The sands are restricted to the southern portion of the field. o Initial production from the Tyonek G zone was established in August 1974 in the Swanson River Unit well SRU 32-33. The production rate from this interval Conservation Order N6. 123A August 23, 1973, First Amendment December 5, 1995 Page 2 declined from 467 bopd to rates the operator believed were uneconomic in approximately two year. , Development operations within the Tyonek G zone were undertaken by UNOCAL in March 1995. Since that time four Swanson River Field wells have been completed in the interval. , The oil water contacts for the Tyonek G zone sandstones have not yet been precisely delineated; however, available evidence indicates they are likely to fall within a range comparable to that exhibited by the Upper Hemlock Formation sands. 6, The lithologic properties of the Tyonek G zone sandstones, including porosity and permeability, are very similar to those in the Hemlock Formation. o The fluid properties and reservoir pressure in the Tyonek G zone are nearly identical to those originally found in the underlying Upper Hemlock Formation. The Tyonek G-2 oil AP1 gravity was 37.7 degrees, GOR of 3 70 scl per stb, and initial pressure 5540 psi. Initial properties of oil in the Hemlock Pool were 37 degrees AP1 gravity, GOR 375 scf per stb, and 5580 psi initial pressure. , Preliminary estimates of original oil in place in the Tyonek G zone indicate approximately 15 million stock tank barrels. o The Lower Hemlock Formation is defined as the interval between the measured depths of 10,585 feet and 10,815 feet in the Soldotna Creek Unit well 41-4. This interval was originally excluded from the Swanson River Field, Hemlock Oil Pool. 10. Since December 1994, the Soldotna Creek Unit 4 lA-8 well has sustained production generally in excess of 100 bopd from the Lower Hemlock Formation. 11. The fluid properties and reservoir pressure in the Lower Hemlock Formation are dissimilar to those in the Upper Hemlock Formation. The Lower Hemlock production has an API gravity of 26 degrees and a GOR of 1100-1500 scf per stb with an original pressure of 5331 pounds per square inch. 12. Lithologic differences between the Upper and Lower Hemlock Formation are minor. 13. The potentially productive area for the Lower Hemlock interval is currently thought to be restricted to the crest of the Swanson River anticline in the Soldotna Creek Unit. 14. Preliminary estimates of original oil in place in the Lower Hemlock Formation indicate approximately 20 million stock tank barrels. Conservation Order N . 123A August 23, 1973, First Amendment December 5, 1995 Page 3 15. The volume of original oil in place estimated in the Tyonek G zone and the Lower Hemlock, requires reliance on existing wellbores and unit infrastructure to maximize reserves from these intervals. CONCLUSION: Pool rules must be sufficiently flexible to allow efficient exploitation of this faulted and lenticular reservoir under a gas and water injection pressure maintenance program. , Expansion of the Hemlock Oil Pool to include the Tyonek G-zone and the Lower Hemlock intervals will prevent waste, protect correlative rights and improve ultimate recovery from the Swanson River Field. . UNOCAL has satisfied the conditions necessary for administrative approval of its October, 1995 request to expand the Hemlock Oil Pool in the Swanson River Field. 4. Administrative approval is allowed by Rule 7 of Conservation Order No. 123. NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED THAT the pool rules for the Swanson River Field Hemlock Oil Pool are amended to include the G zone of the Tyonek Formation and the lower portion of the Hemlock Formation and the findings, conclusions and administrative record for Conservation Order No. 123 are adopted by reference and incorporated in this decision. The following rules apply to the Swanson River Field, Hemlock Oil Pool: Rule 1: Previous Orders Revoked Conservation Orders Nos. 8 and 9 are hereby revoked. Rule 2: Rules Area These rules apply to the combined area of the Swanson River and Soldotna Creek Units described as follows: T. 7N., Section Section Section Section Section Section Section R9W., S.M. T 8 3 :W ½ Section 4:All Section 5:E½, SW¼ Section 8:E½, E½W½, NW¼NW¼ Section 9:AIl Section 10:W½W½, NE¼ NW¼ Section 16:W½NE¼, NE¼NE¼, NW¼ Section N., R 9 W., S.M. 9:SE¼NE¼, E½SE¼, NW¼SE¼ 10:W½W½, SE¼NW¼, E½SW¼, W½SE¼, SE¼SE¼ 15 :All 16:E½ 21:NE¼, E½NW¼, E½SE¼, NW¼SE¼, NE¼SW¼ 22:All 27:NE¼, W½SE¼, W½ Conservation Order N~o. 123A August 23, 1973, First Amendment December 5, 1995 Page 4 Section 17:NE¼NE¼ Section 28:E½E½, SW¼NE¼, W½SE¼, E½SW¼ Section 32:E½SE¼, SW¼SE¼ Section 33:E½, E½W½, SW¼NW¼, W½SW¼ Section 34:W½NE¼, W½ Rule 3: Pool Definition The Hemlock Oil Pool includes all intervals which correlate with the interval 10,085 feet to 10,815 feet in the Standard Oil Company of California, Soldotna Creek Unit 41-4 well. Rule 4: Pressure Maintenance Projects The injection of gas and water for the purpose of pressure maintenance, secondary or tertiary recovery, and conducting pilot and injectivity tests is permitted in the Hemlock Oil Pool of the Swanson River field. Rule 5: Spacing Not more than two completed wells are allowed in any governmental quarter section. No well shall be completed less than 500 feet from the Swanson River Field-Working Interest Agreement Area exterior boundary line. Rule 6: Hemlock Oil Pool Reservoir Report. A surveillance report will be required within one year of regular production following the issuance of Hemlock Oil Pool roles amended to include the Tyonek G zone and Lower Hemlock Formation, and biannually thereafter by December 5. The report shall include but is not limited to the following: a, Progress of any enhanced recovery project and reservoir management summary including engineering and geotechnical parameters. b. Voidage balance by month of produced fluids and injected fluids. c. Analysis of reservoir pressure surveys within the pool. do Results and analysis of production logging surveys, tracer surveys and observation well surveys. e. Results of any special monitoring. f. Future development plans. Conservation Order No. 123A August 23, 1973, First Amendment December 5, 1995 Page 5 Rule 7: Administrative Approval Upon request of the Operator and a showing that all affected parties have been notified of such request, the Committee may authorize any operation reasonably designed to further the progress of' the project and maximize the recovery of oil from the Hemlock Oil Pool in the Swanson River Field. DONE at Anchorage, Alaska and dated August 23, 1973, amended December 5, 1995. Alaska Oil :servation Commission ~uckerman Babcock, Commissioner Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission J. Davi~mmissioner Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission AS 31.05.080 provides that within 20 days after receipt of written notice of the entry of an order, a person affected by it may file with the Commission an application for rehearing. A request for rehearing must be received by 4:30 PM on the 23rd day following the date of the order, or next working day ifa holiday or weekend, to be timely filed. The Commission shall grant or refuse the application in whole or in part within 10 days. The Commission can refuse an application by not acting on it within the 10-day period. An affected person has 30 days from the date the Commission refuses the application or mails (or otherwise distributes) an order upon rehearing, both being the final order of the Commission, to appeal the decision to Superior Court. Where a request for rehearing is denied by inaction of the Commission, the 30-day period for appeal to Superior Court runs from the date on which the request is deemed denied (i.e., 10th day after the application for rehear!nlg was filed). ALASKA OIL AND GAS CONSERVATION COM~IlSSION TONY KNOWLES, GOVERNOR 3001 PORCUPINE DRIVE ANCHORAGE, ALASKA 99501-3192 PHONE: (907) 279-1433 FAX: (907) 276-7542 ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVAL NO. 123A.1 Re~ The Application of UNOCAL for the Drilling of'the SCU 23A-9 Well in the Swanson River Field Mr. Shannon W. Martin Legal Analyst UNOCAL P.O. Box 196247 Anchorage, AK 99519-7600 Dear Mr. Martin: An application, dated May 18, 2000, requested approval to drill the SCU 23A-9 well, which would be the third completion in the NW ~A Section 9, T7N, R9W, SM. It is understood by the Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission (Commission) that the drilling and completion of the well should result in accelerated recovery of reserves from the Swanson River Field. The Commission hereby authorized drilling and completion of the SCU 23A-9 well pursuant to Rule 5 of Conservation Order No. 123A. DONE in Anchorage, Alaska this day June _~__, 2000. Cammy Oechsli Taylor Commissioner Daniel T. Seamount, Jr. Commissioner BY ORDER OF THE COMMISSION STATE OF ALASKA DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES DIVISION OF OIL AND GAS Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Committee 3001 Porcupine Drive Anchorage, Alaska .~9501 Re: THE APPLICATION OF STANDARD ) OIL COMPANY OF CALIFORNIA for an ) order revoking Conservation Orders) Nos. 8 and 9, applying for the ) establishment of pool rules for ) the referenced field and estab- ) l ishment of a gas and water i njec-) tion pressure maintenance program.) Conservation Order No. 123 Swanson River Oil Field Hem lock Oil Pool August 23, 1973 IT APPEARING THAT: I. The Standard Oil Company of California applied for the referenced order on June 26, 1973. 2. Notice of Public Hearing was published in the Anchorage Daily News on July 14, 1973 pursuant to title II, Alaska Administrative Code, Section 2009. 3. A public hearing was held in the City Council Chambers, Anchorage, Alaska on July 26, 1973 at which time the applicant and others were heard. FINDINGS: I. Conservation Order No. 8 permitted 80 acre well spacing and Conservation Order No. 9 established a gas injection pressure maintenance project in the referenced field. Neither order provided for administrative approval of' any exceptions. 2. Previous conservation orders permitted six wells to be drilled as exceptions. 3. The Swanson River and Soldotna Creek Units are subject to a working interest agreement, lnc'iude the entire area of the field, and correlative rights are protected. 4. The present 80 acre spacing density may result in an efficient well drainage pattern for most of the field but additional wells may be neces- sary in localized areas. Conservation Ora~'~ Page 2 August 23, 1973 5. The Hemlock Oil Pool lies in an anticlinal structure and consists of a maximum of I0 sands which shale out at some locations and merge at other I ocati ons. 6. Normal faults with displacements varying to over 300 feet cut the pro- ducing zone in approximately an east-west direction with the north blocks down thrown. The faults show increasing displacement in a westerly direction within the field I lmits. 7. A very successful gas injection project has been in operation since 1962 but the geometry of the present well pattern, barrier faults, and productive limits of the producing sands will not allow complete reservoir drainage in all ten sands. 8. Successful water injection feasibility tests have been conducted. CONCLUS ION .' Pool rules that are sufficiently flexible to al Iow efficient exploitation of this faulted and lentlcular reservoir under a gas and water injection pressure maintenance program are required. NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED THAT: Rule I: Previous Orders Revoked Conservation Orders Nos. 8 and 9 are hereby revoked. Rule 2: Area to Which_~hese Rules aopl_y_ These rules apply to the combined area of the Swanson River and So ldotna Creek Unlts described as follows: T. 7 N., R 9 W., S.M. Section 3: W½ Section 4: All Section 5: .E½, SW¼ E'W' NW¼NW¼ Section 8: E½, ~ ~, Section 9: All Section I0: W½W½, NE¼NW¼ Section 16: W½NE¼, NE¼NE¼, NW¼ Section 17: NE¼NE¼ Section 9: SE¼NE¼, E½SE¼, NW¼SE¼ Section I0: W½W½, SE¼NW¼, E½SW¼,. W½SE¼, SE:SEN' ' Section 15: All Section 16: E½ Section 21: NE¼, E½NW¼, E½SE¼, NW¼SE¼, NE¼SW¼ Section 22: All Section 27: NE¼, W½SE¼, W½ Section 28: E½E½, SW¼NE¼, W½SE¼, E½SW¼ Section 32: ~, 6, SW~CE¼ ~¼ Section 33: E½, E½W½, SW¼NW¼, W½SW¼ Section 34: W½NE¼, W½ Rule 3: Pool Definition The Hemlock Oil Pool includes all intervals which correlate with the interval 10230 feet to 10585 feet in the Standard Oil Company of Calif- ornia, Soldotna Creek Unit 41-4 well. Conservation Order Page 3 August ~23, 1973 Rule 4: Pressure Maintenance Projects The injection of gas and water for the purpose of pressure mainten- ance, secondary or tertiary recovery, and conductin~q pi lot and in- jectivity tests is permitted in the Hemlock Oil Pool of the Swanson River Field. Rule 5: .SpaRing Acrea~qe_ Not more than two completed wells are al lowed in any governmental quarter section. Ru I e 6: Spacing Footage No well shall be completed less than 500 feet from the Swanson River Field-Working Interest Agreement Area exterior boundary line. Rule 7: Administrative Ap~proval Upon request of the Operator and a showing that all affected parties have been notified of such request, the Committee may authorize the drilling or redrilling of any well at any location for any pur- pose, the conversion of any well at any location, the termination or suspension of gas injection or water injection operations at any well, or any operation reasonably designed to further the progress of the project and maximize the recovery of oil frown the Hemlock Oil Pool in the Swanson River Field. DONE at Anchorage, Alaska and dated August 23, 1973. Thomas R. Marshall, Jr., Acting Chairman Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Committee Concurri ng: Hoyle t~ Hamilton, Acting Member Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Committee O. K. Gilbreth, Jr., Memb~ ' Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Committee !,~ovember ~6, 198,2 Re: The application of Chevron U.S.A. Inc. for the drilling' of the $CU 42i{-5 well in the Swanson }liver Field. k~r. T. L. perry~a.n .Area Operations Superintendent Chevron U.S.A. Inc. P. O. Box 7-839 Anchorage, Alaska 99510 De ar ~,;~r. Pe rryman: An application, dated November 23, 1.982, requested approval to . drill the SCU 42E~.-5 well, which would be the third completion in the SE t Section 5, TTN, .Rg}~, SM. It t~ ~tated that the drilling and completion of the well should result in an additional ?00,000 barrels of recoverable reserves to. the Swanson }!iv~r Field. The Alaska Oil and Gan Conservation Coraraission hereby authorizes drilling and completion of the SC~J ~2t~i-5 well pursuant to }~Ule 7 of Conservation Order }'~o. 123. Yours verY truly, /~,./ ~:, , ;/, ,., ;;, , .,,{ .1:':i{ ,,¥/ [:,.:::,;. ." Harry ~¥. Kug'ler' Co~a;i s ~ i one r i~Y THE ORDER OF Tt{E C03;I~.ISS ION September 16~ 1980 _A.,..D..,..M.~..I..N.~!, S T R A T I V E A P P R O V A L /"'NO,, 123.6 ,::~ Re: The applications of Chevron U.S.A., Inc. for the 'side- tracking and redrilling of five wells in the Swanson River Field. Mr. R. W. Magee Area Engineer Chevron U.S.A.., Inc. P. O. Box 7-839 Anchorage, Alaska 99510 Dear Mr. Magee: Applications for the sidetracking and redrilling of five (5) wells were received on September 15, 1980. In each of the applications, the plans called for the redrilled hole to be about 50 feet distant ~rom the existing well bore. The Alaska Oil and Gas conservation commission, recoginizing the efforts to maximize oil.recovery from the Swanson RiVer Field~ authorizes'the sidetracking, redrilling, completion and production in the following'five ('5) wells: Soldotna Creek Unit #2IA-4 Soldotna Creek Unit #12A-3 Soldotna Creek Unit #42A-5 $oldotna Creek Unit #44A-8 Soldotna Creek Unit ~41A-9 Very truly yours, }Iarry W. KUgleF CommissiOner BY THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSION Conservatt~ ALASKA OIL AND GAS CONSERVATION COMMITTEE November 2, 1976 Re: ApPlication of Standard Oil C~pany of California, Soldotna Creek Unit operator, to drill the SCU 33-33 v~'ll as part of the pressure maintenance project approved 'by Con~erv.ation Order No., 1.23.:. The location lies in the SE quarter of Section 33, T7N, RgW, S.M, Mr.. C. F. Kirk:void: f° '~v//'~'rnia/ Area Supervi.sor Standa'rd Oil Company of Calt :. ' P. O. Box 7-839 Anchorage, Alaska g9510' Dear )Ir. Kirkvol.d, :On November 2, 1976 the refetenced app.l:tcation was received which stated that the proposed ~ml 1 would '"'re:sul't i'n additional ul ti'mate recovery of oil from the H~lock .5. sand interval. The referelnced wll will be the third co~p. letion in a q:uarter section. The Ot'l and Gas Conservation Comnttt~ hereby authorized, the dril 1 lng and ClOnlpletion of the referenced well pursuant to Ru:le :7 of 'Conservation Order No. 123 Very truly yours, Thomas R. ~rshalt, Jr. Executive Secretary ALASKA OIL AXD GAS COflSERVAT!ON CO~II"EE November 6, 1975 :Re: Application of Standard Oil Company of California, Soldotna Creek Unit operator, to drill the SCU ll-3 well as part of the pressure maintenance project approved by Conservation Order No. 123. The location lies in the liW quarter of Section' 3, TT)I, Rgw, SM. Mr.. J'. L. Rowland Area Supervisor , Standard Oil Company of California P. O. 'Box 7-839 Anchor. age, Alaska 99510 :, Dear Mr. Rowland: On October 31, 1975 the referenced application was received which stated that the pr~.osed well would resul:t in .additional u. lttmate recovery :of oil from the. Hemlock 8 sand interval:. The referenced wel.l will be the third completion 'i'n .a quarter section. The Oil and Gas Conservation .Committee hereby authorized, the dr.t 11.lng and com- pletto~ of the referenced: we.Il pursuant 'to :Rule 7 .of Conservati.on (7rder 123. tru. ly yours,. Thomas. R. ~rshall, Jr. Executive Secretary ALASKA OIL AND GAS CONSERVATION COMMITTEE August 20, 1975 ,A D M I N I S TR A T I V E A P P R'O V A'L N O. 1'23.4 RE: Application .of Standard Oil Company of California, Soldotna Creek Unit operator, to dril 1 the SCU 13-3 well as part of the pressure maintenance project .approved by Conservation Order No. 123. The location l i.es in the. S. W. 1/4 of Section: 3, T7N, Rgw, S.M. Mr. ,l. L. Rowland .~. Area Supervisor Standard Oil Compa~ of California P.O. Box 7-839 A~chorage, Alaska 99510 Dear Mr. Rowl.and: On August 11, 197'5 the referenced application was received which stated that the proposed m)t would result in additional ultimate recovery of oil from the 14emlock 8 sand interval. The referenced well will be the. third com- pletion in a :quarter sectiom The Oil a.nd .'Gas Conservation Committee hereby authorized the drilling and completion of the referenced well pursuant to Rule 7 of Conservation Order 123. Very truly~..yours, Thomas R. Marsh.al l, O~r. Executi ye. Sec.re tary T~;~ ALASKA OIL AND GAS CONSERVATION COMMITTEE ,tune 16, 1975 Application of Standard Oil Company of California,. Sol'dotna .Creek: Unit Operator, to drill the SCU 33-S well as part of the pressure maintenance project approved by Consel~vation Order No. 123.. The location lies i.n .the S.. £. 1/4 of Section Mr. j'. L.. Rowland Area Supervisor , Standard Oil Company of' Cal t.fornta. ~x, 7-839 ,, Anchorage,, Alaska gg~l.O , Dear Mr. Rowland: On J'une. 13, 1975 the: referenc~...appl..tcatlon .was received which stated that the proposed, wel I would result in additi:onal ul. ttma'te recovery of oil 'from the ~:lock 1-$ sand intervals. The referenced Well will: be the third comp'letion tn a quarter section. The Oil and Gas Conservation.cOmmittee hereby authorized the drilling .and com- pleticm of the .referenced well. pu~uant. ~ Rule.7 of Conservatt.on Order 1:23' Very 't~'ly yours, Chairman OICG:be ALASKA 01L AND GAS CONSERVAT 1 ON COHM I TTEE November 27, t974 A D M I N t S T R A. T I V E A P P R 0 V.A L N O. t23.2 Appl icatl'on of Standard Oil Company o:f California Swanson River Unlt Operator, to drl I I the SCU 44.4 wel I as part of the pressure, maintenance project approved by Conservation Order No. 123. The. location I les In the S. E. l/4 of Section 4, TTN, RgW, S.M. Mr. J. L,. Rowland' Area Supervl sot Standard Ol I Company of Cai' i fornl':a Box 7-839: Anchorage, .A l:aska 995 l:O Dear Mr. Row t and:: On November 26, 1974 ?he referenced .appl tcatlon was received whlch stated that t~e proposed weli .would result In addt?lonal utt. lma.?e recovery of oil from the Hemlock 8 sand Interval. The referenced well w! Il be the thlrd completion In a quarter sectlon. The O! t a.nd Gas Conservation. Committee hereby aut'ho'rlzed the dr! I t lng an.d :co~.tetl on of the refere~ed ~et I pursuant Eu te. 7 of Cons.ervatlon Order' 1.23. Very truly .yours,. ,,~ Thomas 'R, Mar:shat Execut'l ye Secretary .Appl~~n of Sr~dlard, Oil Company of .Callfornia~ Svaneon Itiver Unic approved by Gommtt~ou Ord~ .lb, 123, Nt~, J,L, bi,ami S~nud~ .Oil ConVant of ~li,tonLf~ On. ,June 28, '197& tbB =eferauced application ,vas, r~etv~d .,hich stated tlalt the lo~'k ! -:5 ,sand .~Lnterv&l., The refeEenced 'vel1 'v~tLl be ~he third completLon ~ a quarter plet~L0~ ,of ~ referet~.ed veil pu~,su~at ~o. hie 7 of~' Cou~.fm. Order 123, Unocal Alaska Resources [ Unocal Corporation 909 West 9th Avenue, P.O. Box 196247 Anchorage, Alaska 99519-6247 Telephone (907) 276-7600 UNOCAL ) May 18, 2000 Commissioner Robert N. Christenson Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission 3001 Porcupine Drive Anchorage, AK 99501-3192 Soldotna Creek Unit #23A-9 ADMINISTRATIVE APPLICATION FOR VARIANCE: RULE 5, CONSERVATION ORDER 123-A Dear Chairman Christenson: Enclosed and submitted in triplicate is our application for Permit to Drill Soldotna Creek Unit A-28997 Well 23A-9 (form 10-401) pursuant to 20 AAC 25.005 and our check No. 2003591 in the amount of $100.00 as required under 20 AAC 25.005 (c) (1). Verification of Application by the undersigned stating that applicant is acquainted with the facts, pursuant to 20 AAC 25.055 (d)(3), is attached as part of this application. It is requested that the Commission approve an administrative variance to Rule 5, Conservation Order 123-A for the drilling of well SRU #23A-9, A-28997, as the addition 'of #23A-9 will cause more than two completed wells to be within the northwest governmental quarter-section of Section 9, T7N, R9W, SM. Soldotna Creek Unit Well 23A-9: The specific location, interval, and depth are as follows: Surface Location: 2520' FSL and 1970' FWL Sec. 9, T7N, R9W, SM Top of Productive interval: 2630' FSL and 1525' FWL Sec. 9, T7N, R9W, SM Total Depth and Location: 2495' FNL and 946' FWL Sec. 9, T7N, R9W, SM The lease is currently beyond its primary term and is being held by the Soldotna Creek Unit. RECEIVED 2000 AJask3 (,.~1 & ~, Co~s. Commission All applicable provisions of 20 AAC 25.050 (Deviation) have been met for each owner and all operators of governmental sections directly or diagonally offsetting the section where the gas wells are located. Unocal is the owner and operator of all directly or diagonally offsetting sections; therefore, notices by registered mail pursuant to 20 AAC 25.055 (d) are not necessary. If you require additional information, please contact Shannon Martin at 907-263-7882, or Tim Billingsley, Drilling Department at 907-263-7659. Sincerely, Enclosures ECEiVED 2 3 2000, Ala~a Oil & Gas Cons, Commission ~chora~e VERIFICATION OF APPLICATION FOR SPACING EXCEPTION COOK INLET, ALASKA Lease # 28997 Well: Soldotna Creek Unit #23A-9 I, SHANNON W. MARTIN, Legal Analyst, Union Oil Company of California, do hereby verify the following: I am acquainted with the application submitted for the drilling of the Soldotna Creek Unit #23A-9 Well. I have reviewed the application submitted for the exception to 20 AAC 25.055 (a)(4) (statewide spacing) and all facts therein are true. I have reviewed the plat attached to said application, and it correctly portrays pertinent and required data. DATED at Anchorage, Alaska this 15th day of 2000. Legal Analyst STATE OF ALASKA THIRD JUDICIAL DISTRICT ) ) ss ) SUBSCRIBED TO AND SWORN before me this 15th day of May 2000. NOTARY PUBLIC THE STATE OF ALASKA My Commission expires: Unocal Alaska Resources/~' Unocal Corporation 909 West 9th Avenue, P.O. Box 196247 Anchorage, Alaska 99519-6247 Telephone (907) 276-7600 UNOCAL ) May 15, 2000 Commissioner Robert N. Christenson Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission 3001 Porcupine Drive Anchorage, AK 99501-3192 Soldotna Creek Unit #23A-9 REQUEST FOR SPACING EXCEPTION A- 28997 Dear Chairman Christenson: Enclosed and submitted in triplicate is our application for Permit to Drill Soldotna Creek Unit A-28997 Well 23A-9 (form 10-401) pursuant to 20 AAC 25.005 and our check No. 2003591 in the amount of $100.00 as required under 20 AAC 25.005 (c) (1). Verification of Application by the undersigned stating that applicant is acquainted with the facts, pursuant to 20 AAC 25.055 (d)(3), is attached as part of this application. It is requested that the Commission approve, an exception to the statewide spacing regulation 20 AAC 25.055 (a)(4) for the drilling of well SRU #23A-9, A-28997. Soldotna Creek Unit Well 23A-9: The specific location, interval, and depth are as follows: Surface Location: Top of Productive interval: 2520' FSL and 1970' FWL Sec. 9, T7N, R9W, SM 2630' FSL and 1525' FWL Sec./4~, T7N, R9W, SM Total Depth and Location: 2495' FNL and 946' FWL Sec. 9, T7N, R9W, SM The lease is currently beyond its primary term and is being held by the Soldotna Creek Unit. All applicable provisions of 20 AAC 25.050 (Deviation) have been met for each owner and all operators of governmental sections directly or diagonally offsetting the section where the gas wells are located. Unocal is the owner and operator of all directly or diagonally offsetting sections; therefore, notices by registered mail pursuant to 20 AAC 25.055 (d) are not necessary. If you require additional information, please contact Shannon Martin at 907-263-7882, or Tim Billingsley, Drilling Department at 907-263-7659. Sincerely, Enclosures I A-28396 i UOC 32 I [------! I u-~.o. ! 12-3 UOC .-J,. A-28990 UOC A-28997 UOC A-28996 UOC . J 8 4lu-! =" " ~997 A-28997 · , .,. .uoc..,.~,. . · '! '% '- · 41S-Il J ! ,10 SCALE IN FEET I i ! !' i '- : SOLDOTNA + l uoc CREEK L___J UNI]' ',/]4'- 5'8 to dOC. L '17 Ill-Il"" I I It-il, I !. ! ! ! ! "' i i I !. ! I ,3 ! I I I I I I I-- I UNOCAL~. Soidotna Creek Unit PROPERTY · PLAT -I- STo-~U~R.~GE P&$ ~ (s~ T.$. 1-33 T.S. 1-27 } LOCK]~D . GATE / / / / I I / II I .I LAUNCH $0' 4& 60' 4.5 2~65000 PIT ./ ,"Smcs SHOP 4~A--8 WASTE DISPOSAL } 13-34 ,, / ? / / / / / / ,/ UNOCAL~ KENN PENINSULA SWANSON RIVER FIELD OIL SPILL 60' 44' Z4.60000 80' 43'J 24~0~ 60' 42"~ 360000 , ~',.~* ¢ ~" r Alaska 0CT Z5 ~995 /~a~ ¢i[ .& Gas Cons. Co. mmi~ion '~chorage Unocal Corporation Oil & Gas Operations 909 West 9th Avenue, RO. Box 196247 Anchorage, Alaska 99519-6247 Telephone (907) 276-7600 UNOr..AL October 19, 1995 Mr. Bob Crandall Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission 3001 Porcupine Drive Anchorage, Alaska 99501 Dear Mr. Crandall' Re: Swanson River Field, State of Alaska Clarification of Request For Hemlock. Pool Expansion , In support of Unocal's request in our letter of October 2, 1995 for the expansion of the Hemlock Oil Pool at Swanson River Field, I would like to clarify our justification for including the lower sands of the Hemlock Formation in this proposed expansion. The lower Hemlock Formation is defined as the interval between the depths of 10,585 feet and 10,815 feet (measured depth) in the Soldotna Creek Unit 41-4 well. This interval is comprised of five sands, referred to as the Hll through H15 benches, and interlayered mudstones. These sands extend beneath the entire Soldotna Creek and Swanson River Units, however they are believed to be productive only along the crest of the structure in the Soldotna Creek Unit. In December, 1994 production was established from the Hll bench in the SCU 41A-8 well at an initial rate of 171 BOPD. By July, 1995 production had dropped to 91 BOPD. The lowermost H10 bench was perforated on July 14, 1995 and total oil production increased to 149 BOPD. The most recent test on this well indicates that it is producing at a rate of 113 BOPD. Oil recovered from the Hll bench in SCU 41A-8 has an APl gravity of 26 degrees, which is lower than the 37 degree APl oil initially produced from the upper Hemlock. Initial gas-oil ratios from the Hll were 1100-1500 SCF/STB which is higher than the Mr. Bob Crandall AOGCC Page No. 2 original upper Hemlock solution GOR of 375 SCF/STB but much lower than the current average upper Hemlock GOR of 65,000 SCF/STB. Initial pressure in the Hll bench was 5331 psia which is similar to original upper Hemlock pressure of 5,580 psia. Lithologically, the lower Hemlock is very similar to the upper Hemlock. Both intervals appear to have been deposited by a braided stream system. The average porosity of the lower Hemlock is approximately 16%, slightly less than the 18% average porosity of the upper Hemlock. Core and mudlog data indicate that both the upper and lower benches are comprised of fine to medium grained sand and conglomerate. Because it is difficult to interpret logs from the lower Hemlock benches, the exact depth of the oil/water contact remains poorly defined; however, it is believed to be close to the oil/water contact depth of-10,570 feet (subsea) recognized in the H10 bench. This oil/water contact will limit the productive area of the lower Hemlock sands to the crest of the structure. Average net sand thickness of the total lower Hemlock interval is approximately 100 feet while the thickness of the producing Hll bench averages only 10 feet. As a result of the limited areal extent and thickness of the H11 bench, recoverable reserves in this one sand are expected to be approximately 700,000 STB. Possible oil in place in the entire lower Hemlock is estimated at 20 MMBO with 4 MMBO of recoverable reserves. Recoverable reserves would increase if gas were injected into the lower Hemlock for pressure maintenance; therefore, we also request that Area Injection Order No. 13 be modified to include the lower Hemlock interval as defined above. Thank you for your consideration of this request, and if you have any additional questions please give me a call at 263-7837. Sincerely, Erik P. Graven Advanced Development Geologist CC: M.T. Morell K.A. Tabler ,. Unocal Corporation '~i' Oil & Gas Operations ~ 909 West 9th Avenue, P.O. Box 196247 Anchorage, Alaska 99519-6247 UNOCAL October 2, 1995 Kevin A. Tabler Land Manager Alaska Business Unit OC T 0 ~'-~. !995 ~Jaska 0~ & {~as Co~s. CommJss~o~ Anchorage Mr. Bob Crandall Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Committee 3001 Porcupine Drive Anchorage, Alaska 99501 Swanson River Unit State of Alaska Request For Hemlock Pool Expansion Dear Mr. Crandall: Pursuant to prior discussions with the Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission and the Department of Interior, Bureau of Land Management (BLM), Union Oil Company of California, (Unocal) (Operator of the Swanson River Unit), requests Administrative Approval under Rule 7 of Conservation Order 123 to redefine the definition of Hemlock Oil Pool (Rule 3) to include the Tyonek G Zone formation. Inasmuch as the two horizons are an extension of the same accumulation and geologically part of the same pool, future development of the Tyonek G Zone formation will be consistent with the management and development of the Hemlock Oil Pool and therefore it's appropriate to expand the Pool Definition of Rule 3 to include the interval 10,085 feet to 10,815 feet. Correlations of the expanded intervals can be extrapolated into the Standard Oil Company of California, Soldotna Creek Unit 41-4 well but are more readily identifiable in wells 43-4 (10,168' - 10,920') and 41A-8 (10,116'- 10,880'). As a conservation matter, reserves accessed, commingled and produced through existing wellbores will maximize production in the Unit and are reserves that economically would not otherwise be obtained if drilled on a grass roots basis. Additionally, at some point, an enhanced oil recovery program in the Tyonek G Zone is envisioned if economically viable. An immiscible gas injection program for pressure maintenance similiar to that conducted in the Hemlock would be employed utilizing the same wellbores consistent with existing Pool Rules. Early and very rough preliminary estimates of original oil in place indicate Mr. Bob Crandall SWR-Hemlock Pool Expansion Page2 approximately 15 MMSTB exist in the Tyonek G Zone. This estimate will be revised as information from additional wells and production history is analyzed. Recovery factors are very uncertain at this point. Due to the potential enhanced oil recovery program, we further request that the Area Injection Order No. 13 for Swanson River Field be modified to include the Tyonek G Zone. Further to our request and in support of our application, I have enclosed copies of correspondence between BLM and Unocal evidencing BLM's encouragement and support for our proposed request. The following is provided as geologic and engineering support of this application: Geologic and Reservoir Justification The first documented test of Tyonek "G" zone oil production in the Swanson River Field occurred in August, 1974 from SRU 32-33. After running segregation packers, Chevron perforated and produced the Tyonek "G" zone through a sliding sleeve. Well test records show Tyonek "G" zone production as high as 467 BOPD, but by late 1976 production had declined to 42 BOPD. In 1977, SRU 32-33 was shut-in and did not produce again from the Tyonek "G" zone. In 1987, ARCO redrilled the well as SRU 32A-33 and completed it in the Hemlock only. In March 1995, Unocal perforated a stratigraphically equivalent unit, herein designated the "G2" sand, in SCU 34-4, resulting in approximately 300 BOPD production. Subsequently, the G2 sand has been perforated and produced in the following wells: SCU 12A-4, SCU 321-9, and SCU 323-4. Definition of intervals The Tyonek "G" zone is defined as the lithostratigraphic unit lying immediately above the Hemlock Formation and below the subsea depths of -10,050 feet in the SCU 34-4 well and -10,075 feet in the SCU 13-9 well. Two sandstone intervals are recognized within the "G" zone: the upper sandstone is designated as the "Gl" sand and the lower sandstone is designated as the "G2" sand. Pay thickness Net pay thickness in the "G2" sand varies from 15 feet in SCU 13-9 to 75 feet in SCU 23-4, with an average pay thickness across the Soldotna Creek Unit of approximately 40'. Mr. Bob Crandall SWR-Hcmlock Pool Expansion Pag¢3 The "Gl" interval has not yet been proven to be productive, however wireline logs and mudlogs indicate the presence of oil in this sand. Net sand thickness reaches a maximum of 32 feet in SCU 34-4 and thins to the northwest. Average pay thicknesses are estimated at 20'. Areal extent and oil-water contacts The "G2" sand extends across the entire Soldotna Creek Unit. North of the SRU 41-33 and SRU 21A-34 wells the "G2" sand thins, and it pinches out entirely south of the SRU 314-27 well. This stratigraphic boundary forms the northern limit of the reservoir. The down-dip extent of the "G2" oil-water contact has not yet been identified, however mudlog shows indicate that it is similar to, or shallower than, the oil-water contact in the upper Hemlock sands. It is important to note that the oil-water contacts, and thus the areal extents, vary for different sands within the existing Hemlock pool. It is doubtful therefore that the "G" zone sands will have oil-water contacts that are identical to any single Hemlock sand, yet these "G" zone oil-water contacts are expected to fall within the range exhibited by the various Hemlock sands. The "Gl" sand pinches out along northeast-southwest trending line that passes near the SCU 341-4, SCU 314-4, and SCU 41A-8 wells. This stratigraphic boundary forms the northwestern limit of the "Gl" reservoir. Like the "G2" sand, the oil-water contact and resulting areal extent for the "Gl" sand has not yet been identified, however it is expected to fall within the range exhibited by the Hemlock sands. Porosity and Permeability The average core permeability in the Tyonek "G" zone at Swanson River Field is 189 md. This is very similar to Hemlock permeabilities which generally range from 50-500 md. Log porosities in the "G" zone are also very similar to those in the Hemlock, averaging approximately 18%. Fluid Properties and Reservoir Pressure The fluid properties and the reservoir pressure in the Tyonek "G2" sand are almost identical to that originally found in the Hemlock in the Soldotna Creek Unit fault block. The APl gravity and initial solution GOR from the "G2" sand in SCU 34-4 was 37.7 degrees APl and 370 SCF/bbl respectively. This compares to initial values of 37 degrees APl and 375 SCF/bbl for the Hemlock in the Soldotna Creek Unit fault blOck. The initial bottom hole pressure measured in SCU 34-4 was 5540 psig which is almost identical to the initial pressure of 5580 psig for the Hemlock in the Soldotna Creek Unit fault block. Mr. Bob Crandall SWR-Hcmlock Pool Expansion Pag¢4 We trust that the foregoing supports our request for Administrative Approval and Area Injection modification for the requested action and that the Commission will approve same. Please contact the undersigned at (907) 263-7600 should you have additional questions. Enclosures Very truly yours, -~~ovin A. Tabler Gas Cor~s. Commissior~ Anchorage THU 1 5 : 0 1 ]~ . L . M . linch . Iqk . United'States Department of the Interior BURKAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT Alaska State O~ce ~ W. ?t~ A~n~e, #]3 Anchorage, Alaska 9951~-7599 14--080001-8652 (9 8,~) ASset Manager ~. O. Box 196247 Anchorage, Alaska 99510-0560 Dear l~r. Morel1: Your applicat$on for approval of the Becond Amendment to the Thirty-Pirst Plan of Development and Operations for the Swanson River Field, Kenai Borough, Alaska, has been reviewed and is approved, eubJect to the following requirements. In view of the need to use an a11oc~tion of well production based on well tests in lieu of direct prod~ction measurement, we require ~hat additional well tests be conducted at least annually for the first three years in order to verify the accuracy of the allocations and make production accountirtgcorrections as necessary. After ~he first few years, we can review the issue of well tests for allocatin9 to the G Zone. In this regard, we request that UNOCAL provide this office with reserve estimates and copies of their projected decline curves for these wells subsequent to the results of their proposed operations and testing. Oas if produced and sold from the Tyonek ~ zone is subject to federal royalty p~yment. The Accoun~in~ and di~position of Tyonek ~ Zone ~as will need to be identified separately from the "rental gas" produced from the Hemlock. we recognize the Eour proposed well operations on SOU 45A-4, SCU 41B=~, SCU 21-8, and SCU 332-4, as beln9 in compliance with the terms and conditio~s of the approval of ~he 31st Plan of Development for the Swanson River Field. Please ensure that all wells approved as te~porarily abandoned are reported, on the 3160, as TA'd as 1on9 as they remain in a non-produci~ status. We f~rther su~gest..that UNOCAL consider the merits to include Tyonek Production wzth Hemlock Production because it would provide for more efficient production under pool rules compared to statewide rules. The Authority aS provided in Paragraph 6 of.the Royalty Agreement dated March 5, 1964 for the Swanson River F~eld will accomplish this purpose, we also, suggest that UNOCAL review the compatibility of the four wells with Statewide well spacin~ rules Of the AOGCC. we believe expansion of the poolin~ aFea to includ! Tyonek ~ production would improve the ef~ioiency of production. '~ IqUG-- 1 T--95 THU 15 -" 0:2 :B . I-- . Iq . P. 03 All specA~i~ opera, ions ~o~ose~ in this Amendment First Plan must be approved in accordance with 43 CFR 3160, 3180 and all applicable Onshore Orders, and/or NOtices to Lessees, as well as written instructions of the Authorized officer. Please contact Joseph A. Dy~as at (90?) 271-4403; respectively, if you have any questions concernin~ this approval letter. Attachment - 2nd Amendment to SKF 3lsE POD AO~CC Kenai ~e~uffe Manager THU I $ : O2 :~. L. Iq. Rnch . ~qk . P. O4 .. Amendment No, 2 to Swanson RIver Field Thirty- Flr~ Plan of Development .nd Operations I, Drllllna ~nd Remedial Pro~lram Currently INs is a high GaR Rroducer from the HS-H10 sands, it Is proposed to set a plug in the tubing above the current Hemlock Int,ervais, cut the tubing above the uppermost packer currently installed in the well and then Install a re. entry guide on the remainlng tubing stub. ^ new packer and tubing will be set above the Tyonek G Zone. The Tyonek G2 sand will then be perforated with thru tubing perforating guns, This well Is a high QOR product in the Hemlock H1, H2 and H8 Intervals. It Is proposed that the current tubing and paoker be pulled fi*om above the gravel pack screen Installed aoross the H8 Interval In the well. The Ht and H2 Interval.s. ~11 then be cement squeezed to repair a suspected channel behind casing to the"ga,~ed out H5 Inte~a'l. in Itie* well. A new completlan will then be run ~llowing access to the Tyonek G1 and G2 sands. Thee H8 perforations will then be preduction tested. Depending on results of the produetlon test, the H8 may be returned to produotlon or a tublng plug set above the H8 perforations and the well completed In the Tyonek G2 sand. This well is a downdlp Hemloc~ producer which ceased producing In 1994 and is believed to be watered out In the Hemlook Interval. ;A wireline cleanout attempt end reperforaflon of the H2 Interval were unsuccessful in restabllshlng pYoduction. · It is proposed to abandon the ~-lemlock interval In this well by placing a cement plug with cOiled tubing and perforate and test the Ty6nek G2 send et this location. If unsu~ful in establishing production from the Tyonek G Zone. this well is e future sidetrack candidate. This well Is an active gas Injector in the Hemlock HI-HIO Intervals. It Is proposed that this well be converted to a Tyonek G Zone oil producer It is proposed that the current tubing in the well be pulled or cut and new completion isolating the Tyonek G Zone be run in the well. The Tyonek G1 and G2 sands can then be tested for production. '..Ll~evin Tablet-" ' ' Attomey-ln-Faot Submitted by Union Oil Company of Califomla (dba Unocal) Operator, July 31, 1~95 Approved this _!7.d.,~..._,day of Az/q/P5 ~1995 (~u~ea'u of Und '~an ,~geme~t l '~ Approved this ~, day of ~~ ..'1995 by: /enaU.8. Fish and~Idlife I National Wildlife Refuge THU Unocel Oo_rpor.n. tlon C~ & (~a$ q)ermK)ns ~9 W~t ~th Avenue, P.G Box 196247 Am:~'mmg~, Alask~ ~$19-$~47 UNOCAL P. 0~ 0ureuu ~,i ~-and Managerne,t lease Opei'aliotls August 11, 1995 Mr. Joe Dygas Bureau of Land Management Alaska State Offi~ 222 West 7th Avenue #13 Anchorage, AK. 99513-7599 Request to Include Tyonek Production with Hemlock Production Dear Joe, Paragraph 6 of the Royalty Owner's Agreement provides for the Block Values of 28.83% for Block I (SWanson River Unit Area) and 71.17% for Block 2 (Soldotna Creek Unit Area). The last sentence of Paragraph 6 reads as follows: "It Is hereby agreed that production of Unitized Substances from the Agreement Area shall be allocated as provided herein regardless of where such Substances are produced within the Agreement Area' Furthermore, Paragraph 6 provides that the Working Interest Owners, with the approval of the Director, shall determine the Weighted Acre Feet. UNOCAL requ'~t'that the Tyonek'~'G' Zone be combine~l with the Hemlock Production as it would provide for more efficient production under the pool rules compared to statewide rules. Significant 'G' Zone reserve potential has been demonstrated. Development of 'G" Zone reserves is only feasible if existing Hemlock wells and facilities can be used. ~RUG--[7--9$ THU ~5 =05 ~. L.H. Rnch . Rk - P. 06 Mr. Joe Dygas Request to include Tyonek Production with Hemlock Production Page Two It is intention of UNO(~AL as the sole Working Interest Owner of the Swanson River Field to maintain the present Block Values for Block I and Block II for the Tyonek "G' Zone. UNOCAL will attempt to obtain the State of Alaska's Office of the AOGCC consent to have the same uniform rules Implemented for pooling and spacing rules applicable to the Hemlock and *G' Zone for the combined area. Please cx~nflrm your acceptance to the foregoing procedure by signing in the proper sp .p_ce es orovidecl for ~ereinbelow. ~ ~,truly yours, KAT:rb¢ day of August, 1995 May 23, 1980 Mr. C. F. Kirkvold Area Operations superintendent Production Department Chevron U.S.A. Inc. P. O. Box 7-839 Anchorage, Alaska 99510 . Dear Mr. Kirkvold: The Alaska Oil and Gas conservation Commission has received your applicaton for exception to 20 AAC 25.240,'Gas-Oil Ratios, for oil wells in the Hemlock Po01 of the Swanson River Field. The application was dated ~ay 19, 1980. The letter will serve as notice that the Commission hereby waives the requirements of'20 AAC 25.240 of %he regulations for all oil wells in the Hemlock Pool of the Swanson River Field for so long as the a~proved additional recovery project. is in effect or for so long as the gas from the wells is being returned to the ~emlo.ck P0~l~.whicheVer is latest. Yours very truly, .ton, ~arri~ w;' ~ugl~r, .... cs~issipae-~,-,' -':,, ' ~aH/~IWK:/LCS :be, , , Chevron U.SA. Inc, P.O. Box 7-839, Anchorage, AK 99510 · Phone (907) 279-9666 C. F. Kirkvold Area Operations Superintendent Production Department APPLICATION FOR EXCEPTION ~~~. ~ 20 AAC 25.240 GAS-OIL RATIO State of Alaska Alaska Oil & Gas Conservation Commission / 3001 Porcupine Drive Anchorage, Alaska 99501 Attention: Mr. Hoyle H. Hamilton / " Chevron U,S,A.'I.nc., as .operator of the Swanson R:iv.e.r Oil Field, is applying to the State of Alaska, Alaska Oil & Gas Conservation Commi. ssion for an exception to Section 20 AAC 25,240 GAS OIL RATIOS. of the Alaska Oil & Gas Conservation CommiSsion Regulations dated April, 1980. The Swanson River Oil Field meets both of the criteria given in paragraph (b) of Section 20 AAC 25.240 GAS OIL RATIOS, as conditions under'Which the' limitation set forth in this Section of the Regulations may be waived by the Commission. First, all wells at Swanson River are producing from the Hemlock pool which is an approved "Gas Drive" additional' recovery pr.oject. Second, all of the'gas produced at Swanson River is being returned to the Hemlock pool. In addition, "Make-up" gas is being injected into the Hemlock pool to balance the voidage created by the removal of oil and water to maintain the reservoir pressure. .We request that the Alaska Oil & Gas Conservation Commission waive the limitation of Section 20 AAC 25.240. GAS-OIL RATIOS. requi~ing that an oil well may not be allowed to produce a gas-oil ratio in excess of 2,000 cubic feet of gas per barrel of oil, for the Swanson River Oil Field. RECEIVED 1 O0 Years Helping to Create t Page Two/ .... Alaska Oil & Gas Conservation Commission May 19, 1980 Page Two Please indicate your approval of the exception to Section 20 AAC 25.240. GAS-OIL RATIOS. for. the Swanson River Oil Field, by signing and returning one copy of this letter to this office. Very truly yours, C. F. Kirkvold :RWM:sj Enclosure APPROVED: STATE OF ALASKA This day of , 1980 By: Hoyle H. Hamilton, Chairman/Commissioner Alaska Oil & Gas Conservation Commission Chevron ,. Chevron U.S.A. Inc. P. O. Box 7-839 Anchorage, AK 99510 (907) 279-9666 ~: , s ars,a, , Alaska Oil and ~s Conservation Comittee Department of Natural Resources 3001 Porcupine Drive Anchorage, Alaska 99501 February 25, 1977 Administrative Approval Well SRU-31-15 Swanson River Field Dear Mr. Marshall: Chevron U.S.A. Inc., as operator of the Swanson River Field, proposes to drill SRU 31-15 (Section 15, T. 8 N., R. 9 W., SB&M). The well will be drilled from the existing SRU 34-10 surface pad. It will be completed in the Hemlock sands. The well will test the productive potential of the lower Hemlock sands. The justification for this proposal is an estimated 1,300,000 STB of new reserves. By provision of Conservation Order No. 123, we request your approval to drill well SRU 31-15. Very truly yours, C. F. Kirkvold Area Supervisor Producing Department ~<\ ~,,~, GM: nh ,.. ,,,:,,r,'~' cc: Mr. J. W. Hart, Atlantic Richfield Mr. E. F. Griffin, Union Oil Company of California Mr. A. Mechler, Jr., Marathon Oil Company Mr. R. A. Smith, U. S. Geological Survey Chevron Standard 0il Company of California, Western Operations, Inc. P.O. Box 7-839, Anchorage, AK 99510 · Phone (907) 279-9666 C. F. Kirkvold Area Supervisor Producing Department November 2, 1976 Administrative Approval Well SCU 33-33 Swanson River Field Mr. Thomas R. Marshall Alaska Oil & Gas Conservation Committee Department of Natural Resources 3001 Porcupine Drive Anchorage, Alaska 99501 Dear Mr. Marshall: Standard Oil Company of California, as operator of the Swanson River Field, proposes to complete a new development well, SCU 33-33 in the SE 1/4 of Section 35, T. 7 N., R. 9 W., SB&M. The well was drilled from a new surface pad to a bottomhole location approximately 1400' North and 1700' West of the Southeast Corner of Section 33. This well was originally drilled to investigate deeper horizons at this location. We now propose to complete SCU 33-33 in the Hemlock 1-5 sands. This will increase the number of completions in the 1/4 section from two to three, but it will be the only H5 sand producer. The justification for this proposal is an estimated 1.5 to 2 million STB of reserves. By provisions of conservation order 'No. 123, we request your approval to complete well SCU 33-33 as a Hemlock producer. Very truly yours, 2 ' ' ............. C. F. Kirkvold IJE:nh cc: Mr. J. W. Hart, Atlantic Richfield Company Mr. E. F. Griffin, Union Oil Company of California. Mr. A. Mechler, Jr., Marathon Oil Company Mr. R. A. Smith, Supervisor, U.S. Geological Survey D~VIS, tOI>~ ©? {,)~i~ A¥fI:'.;~ G Chevron Standard Oil Company of California, Western Operations, Inc. P.O. Box 7-839, Anchorage, AK 99510 · Phone (907) 279-9666 J. L. Rowland Area Supervisor Producing Department October 31, 1975 Administrative Approval Well SCU 11-3 Swanson River Field Mr. Thomas R. Marshall Alaska Oil & Gas Conservation Committee Department of Natural Resources 3001 Porcupine Drive Anchorage, Alaska 99501 Dear Mr. Marshall: Standard Oil Company of California, as operator of the Swanson River Field, proposes to drill a new development well, SCU 11-3 in the NW 1/4 of Section 3, T7N, R9W, SB&M. The well will be drilled from the existing SCU 12-3 surface pad to a bottom-hole location approximately 1,000' South and 900' East of the Northwest corner of Section 3; it will be completed in the Hemlock 8 sand. This will increase the number of completions in the 1/4 section from two to three, but it will be only the second H8 sand producer. The justification for this proposal is an estimated 820,000 STB of reserves. By provisions of conservation order No. 123, we request your approval to drill well SCU 11-3 .................... Very truly yours, ~land IJE:da CC: Mr. J. P. Johnson - Arco Mr. E. F. Griffin - Union Mr. B. G. Howard - Marathon Mr. R. A. Smith - USGS Chevron Standard 0il Company of California, Western Operations, Inc. P.O. Box 7-839, Anchorage, AK 99510 · Phone (907) 279-9666 J. L. Rowland Area Supervisor Producing Department Alaska Oil & Gas Conservation Committee Department of Natural Resources 3001 Porcupine Drive Anchorage, Alaska 99501 Attention: Mr. Thomas R. Marshall Gentlemen: August 11, 1975 Administrative Approval Well SCU 13-3 Swanson River Field 2 ENG ~ 3 ENG 4 E. NQ I ~ $ ENG Standard Oil Company of California as operator of the Swanson River Field proposes to drill a new development well, SCU 13-3, in the SW 1/4 of Section 3, T7N, R9W, SB&M. The well will be drilled from the existing eCU 23-3 surface padto a bottom-hole location approximately 2000' North and 400' East of the SW corner of Section 3; it will be completed in the Hemlock 8 sand. This will increase the number of completions in the 1/4 section from two to three, but it will be the only H8 sand producer. The justification for this proposal is an estimated 603,000 STB of re- serves. By provisions of conservation order No. 123, we request your approval to drill well eCU 13-3. Very truly yours, BAD/da cc: Mr. J. P. Johnson, ARCO Mr. E. F. Griffin, UNION Mr. B. G. Howard, MARATHON Mr. R. A. Smith, USGS Chevron Standard Oil Company of California, Western Operations, Inc. P.O. Box 7-839, Anchorage, AK 99510 · Phone (907) 279-9666 J. L. Rowland Area Supervisor Producing Department June 11, 1975 Administrative Approval Well SCU 33-5 Swanson River Field Mr. Thomas R. Marshall, Jr. Alaska Oil & Gas Conservation Committee Department of Natural Resources 3001 Porcupine Drive Anchorage, Alaska 99501 2 ENG 3 EN~ "l ..... ' 4 5. h!3 5 ENG ~ ~L 3 GEO_L_..l___ ....... REV DRAFT ] '. CONFER: Dear Mr. Marshall: Standard Oil Company of California, as operator of the Swanson River Field, proposes to drill a new development well, SCU 33-5, in the SE 1/4 of Section 5, T7N, R9W, SB&M. The well is to be completed in the Hemlock 1-5 sand intervals. It will increase the number of completions in the quarter section from two to three, but it will be the only H1-5 producer. The justification for the proposal is an estimated 583,000 STB of reserves. By provisions of Conservation Order No. 123, we request your approval to drill SCU 33-5. Very truly yours, J. L. Rowland BAD:mjs CC: Mr. J. P. Johnson, ARCO Mr. E. F. Griffin, Union Mr. B. G. Howard, Marathon Mr. R. A. Smith, USGS OiL aND Chevron Standard Oil Company of California, Western Operations, Inc. P.O. Box 7-839, Anchorage, AK 99510 · Phone (907) 279-9666 November 21, 1974 3. L. Rowland Area Supervisor Producing Department Administrative Approval Well SCU 44-4 Swanson River Field Mr. Thomas R. Marshall, Jr. Alaska Oil & Gas Conservation Committee Department of Natural Resources 3001 Porcupine Drive -Anchorage, Alaska 99501 Dear Mr. Marshall: Standard Oil Company of California, as Operator of the Swanson River Oil Field, proposes to drill a new development well, SCU 44-4, in the SE 1/4 of Section 4, T7N, R9W, SB & M. The well is to be completed in the Hemlock 8 sand intervals, thus increasing the nuumber of completions in the quarter section from two to three for an equivalent reduction in spacing. The justification for the proposal is an estimated 423,000 STB of new reserves and 332,000 STB of accelerated reserves. By provisions of Conservation Order NO. 123, we request your approval to drill SCU 44-4. Very truly yours, BAD: da CC: Mr. J. P. Johnson, Atlantic Richfield Company Mr. E. F. Griffin, Union Oil Company Mr. B. G. Howard, Marathon Oil Company Mr. R. A. Smith, U.S.G.S. Chevron Standard Oil Company of California, Western Operations, Inc. P.O. Rox 7-839, Anchorage, AK 99510 · Phone (907) 279-9666 J. L. Rowland Area Supervisor Producing Department June 26, 1974 Administrative Approval Well SCU 44-8 Swanson River Field Mr. Thomas R. Marshall, Jr. Alaska Oil & Gas Conservation Committee Department of Natural Resources 3001 Porcupine Drive Anchorage, Alaska 99501 Dear Mr. Marshall: Standard Oil Company of California, as Operator of the Swanson River OilField, proposes to drill a new development well, SCU 44-8, in the SE 1/4 of Section 8, T7N, R9W, SB & M. The well is to be completed in the Hemlock 1-5 sand intervals, thus increasing the number of completions in the quarter section from two to three for an equivalent reduction in spacing. The justification for the proposal is an estimated 474,000 STB of new reserves and 204,000 STB of accelerated reserves. By provisions of Conservation Order No. 123, we request your approval to drill SCU 44-8. Very truly yours, J. L. Rowland BAD:mjs CC: Mr. J. P. Johnson, Atlantic Richfield Company Mr. E. F. Griffin, Union Oil Company Mr. B. G. Howard, Marathon Oil Company Mr. R. A. Smith, U.S.G.S. JUN STATE OF ALASKA DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES DIVISION OF OIL AND GAS Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Committee CONSERVATION ORDER NO. 123 Swanson River Field Hemlock Oil Pool HEARING July 26, 1973 H E A R I 1',I G Mr. Marshall: Good Morning gentlemen. For the record, it's 9:30 July 26, 1973. This is a public hearing on Conservation Order File bio. 123, it pertains to Swanson River Oil Field, operated by Standard Oil Company of Cai i fornia. The purpose of the hearing is to establish pool rules and approve and institute a pressure maintenance program utilizing both gas and water. Notice of this public hearing was published in the Anchorage Daily Hews on July 14, 1973. On my right is 0.. K. Gilbreth, Jr.~ a Committee member, on my left, Hoyle Ftamilton, an acting Committee member. My name is Tom Marshall, I'm acting Committee Chairman, in the absence of Committee Chairman, Homer Burrell. Before we hear testimony of the applicant ! would like to say that we need one more copy of your application for our public file. Fine, thank you. We would appreciate receiving an 8 ½ by I! or small manageable maps of your exhi- bits, if this can be arranged without destroying the readability of them. Mr. Young: 8 ½ is pretty tough, so we can go down to probably to about II by 7" or something like that, that's about as small as we can go. Mr. Marshall: That would be much more manageable. Mr. Young: To preserve the detai I. Mr. Marshall: and it will be acceptable. Is the applicant ready with his test I mony? · Mr. Young: Yes, I am. Mr. Young: For those of you unaquainted with me, I am Roger Young, of the Alaska Area Engineers for Standard Oil Company of California Western Operations Inc. I am an Petroleum Engineer with a Bachelor of Science degree from the University of Wyoming obtained in 1967. The exoerienced background durinq my approximate 6 ½ years of service with Standard Oil Company was four years in Alaska working as a Reservoir Production Development Engineer, Senior Engineer and finally Area Engineer. I have supervised and personally conducted every major reservoir study on the Swanson River Field during this period of time. These studies have included adequate definitions of production forecasting, development and remedial well planning. In addition to the foregoing I have the following experience pertinent to the ~l:ntent of this testimony. For the purpose of determination of participating equities, I have been Standard's representative on the Engineering Committees of the following: the Los Angeles Downtown Unit - Broad Way Dri i Isite, the Las Cienegas Unit, Jefferson Drillsite Las Cienegas Unl% St. James Drillsite, alt of which are producing fields in the east side of the Los Angeles basin. Additionally I have served on the Engineering Committee of the Nafoora Field of Libya, which is operated by American Oversea's Petroleum Limited, which is an affiliate of Standard Oil Company of California. My responsibilties on that Committee, included determination of participating equities in the devel- opment of an intergrated field wide secondary recovery operation in the unitized Nafoora Field. Finally in recent years I have consulted for American Oversea's Petroleum Limited on matters relating to reservoir performance of the Libyan Nafoora and Bahi-Amal Oil Fields. In my present position, in Alaska, I have supervisory responsibility for desi,qn construction production reservoir and development engineering in the Alaska area of Standard Oil Company. -2- Now if there are no auestions I will .~roceed with the testimony sup~ortina the a~lication for an order to both Conservation Orders ~8 and .#9, and pre- scribing field rules on the Swanson River Field. Mr~ Marshall: Mr. Young, we will accept your qualifications for expert, if I hear no objections from the Committee members and we will swear you at this time. If you will stand please and raise your right hand, sir. In the matter now at hearing do you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth so help you God? Mr. Young: I do. Mr. Marshall: Thank you, you may be seated. Proceed. Mr. Young: On June 26, 1973, Standard Oil Company of California Western Operations as operator of the Swanson River Field, submitted an application for a new Conservation Order which would revoke the existing Conservation Orders numbers #8 and #9 and establish new field rules for the Swanson River. Basically Conservation Order No. 8 sets spacing in the field at 80 acres per well. in Conservation Order No. 9, permitted pressure maintenance program, utilizin..q only natural gas. Since 1962, when these two orders were written, the nature of our operations and our engineering and geological knowledge of the field has devel- oped significantly. Both gas and water injection operations are successfully being conducted in the field, and under certain circumstances, it is necessary to drill wells on tess than 80 acre spacing to maximize the oil recovery. The two existing orders, in present form, provide little flexibility for operat- ing the Swanson River Field. At the present time, let me read the application we're submitting into the record thats here. -3- Pursuant to the Oil and Gas Regulations and applicable statutes of the State of Alaska, Standard Oil Company of California, W.O.I., as operator of the Swanson River Field, on behalf of itself, Atlantic Richfield Company, Union Oil Company of California, and the Marathon Oil Company requests the issuance of a Conservation Order covering the unitized area shown on Exhibit A. I have on the board, to accomplish the following: I. Revoke Conservation Order #8 providing for 80 acre well spacing in the Swanson River Fleld and Conservation Order #9 establishing a gas injection pressure maintenance project in the Swanson River Field. 2. Is to prescribe field rules for conducting operations in the Swanson River Field as roi lows: Mr, Marshall: Pardon me just one minute Mr. Young. I see Tom Berry has an extra copy of the application~ I wonder if we could have that for the other members of the Committee to review while your Mr~'' Young: I have an extra copy here too, if that would help. Mr. Marshall: Fine, g~od then we'll all three have one. Mr. Young: Okay I'm going to repeat No. 2 as prescribed field rules for conducting operations in the Swanson River Field as follows" Rule I: The__~Area to W,.h] ch These. R~u! e~_s._~p~_~]_lv_ These rules shalt apply to all wells completed in the Hemlock Zone in the Swanson River Field-as delineated by the Swanson River--Field Working Interest Agreement Area which is shown on Exhibit A. The Hemlock Zone includes all intervals which correlate to the interval 10230' to 10585' in Standard Oil Company of California, Well Soldota Creek Unit 4~-4. --4-- Rule 2: Pressure Maintenance PE~iects The injection of gas and water for the purpose of pressure maintenance, secondary or tertiary recovery, and conducting pilot tests and injectivity tests is per- mitted in the Hemlock Zone of the Swanson River Field. Rule 3: The drilling and completing of oil wells in the Hemlock Zone at any location regardless of well spacing is permitted in the Swanson River Field except that no well shall be completed less than 500' from the Swanson River Field-Working Interest Agreement line. Ru~e There is to be no limitation relative to the minimum distance between oi~ wells completed in the Hemlock Zone of the Swanson River Field except that no well shall be completed less than 500 feet from the Swanson River Field-Working Interest Agreement line. And finally Rule 5. A~dminisfrativ~_L Upon request of the Operator and showing that all affected parties have been notified of such request, the committee may authorize the drilling or redrilling of any well at any location for any purpose, the conversion of any well at any location, the termination or suspension of gas injection or water injection or suspension of gas injection or water injection operations at any well, the termi- nation or suspension of the project~ or any operation reasonably designed to further the progress of the field and to maximize the ultimate economic recovery of oil from the Swanson River Field. In the material accompanying the Application~ we discussed in detail the desirability, in certain circumstances~ of well spacing less than 80 acres and supplied the data required by Section 2226 of the Alaska Oil and Gas Conserva- tion Regulations supporting both gas and water injection operations within the field. Because of tis length, I shall not read the entire text of the support- lng material into the record at this hearing, bu~l~ request it be attached thereto. However, with your permission, I wi II summarize i-'."~e I~ore significant points. I have up on the board a current structure map of the Swanson River Field. Will these microphones pick me up standing up here? Mr. Marshall: If you speak loudly, we will probably be a lright. Mr' Young: This structure map is similar to Exhibit A, which accompanied 'the application, which is the first attachment to the application, except the scale has been changed as ~ inch equals 2 000 feet to ! inch equals 1,000 feet, so the map will be more readable at this presentation. This anticline which has been cut by a series of east-west trending normal faults, which we show up as the green faults on the structure. This faulting plays a major role in the oil accumulation at Swanson River since the faults or portions of the faults are barriers to fluid movement, in particular the fault to the north. The major fault separating the center fault b~ock from the SE fault block and certain - portions of the fault on the west line of the structure have been identified -6- as pressures barriers. The productive limits of the Hemlock sands are not only located at different subsea depths across some barrier faults, but are offset by them as indicated by offset in the oil water contacts on the map. The Hemlock zone at Swanson River has been divided into a maximum of I0 sands south of Fault E. Of the I0 sands, three major intervals, Sands I-5, which are designated on this Exhibit, Sand 8 and Sand I0 have the largest areal extent and are the host '~i'mportant. The original oil-water interfaces of these major sand bodies are different both areally and vertically. For example, the Sand 8 and Sand I0 intervals are wet in most of the wells located to the periphery of SCU fault block sand, Sand I0 has the smallest areal extent as belng productive on the wells immediately adjacent to the injection wells, and Sands I to 5, of course has the largest areal extent in being productive out to the limits. Swanson River I=ield has been operated as a full scale gas injection pressure maintenance project since 1966. The gas injectors are located on the crest of the structure, indicated by the red arrow, you see. Oil and gas, oil and cycled gas are produced from downstructure wells, the producing wells to reduce unnecessary cycling of gas, only the downstructure, most downstructure well in any given sand is one production, for instance the I to 5 interval up here is produced primarily only in the very peripherical wells. The 8 and I0 sands are produced up here on top of the structure' at the last point which they become p rod u ct i ye. Because of the geometry of the present spacing pattern relative to the posi- tions of producers and injectors, oil-water interfaces in individual sands and barrier faults, there are areas within the field which cannot be swept with -7- injection gas. Thus, if wells are not drilled on less than 80 acre spacing into these areas, ultimate oil recovery of the field will be reduced. For these reasons, three wel Is, SCU 42-5, SRU 2_4-33, and SCU 33-8, were .clranted a spacing variance by Conservation Order 109 and drilled on nominal 40 acre spac- ing patterns in the undrained areas of the reservoir. As we continue to operate and expand our knowledge about the field, and as economic conditions dictate, other wells on less than 80 acre spacing may be recluired to maximize economic oil recovery. As an example of how additional knowledge of the field may prove-up new reduced spacing locations, we have recently tested the 8 sand on well 23A-3 redrlll. We have just completed that well. Previously, we believed the 8 sand at this location was wet, but the entire sand has been pro- ven on test now, highly productive, l~lth this new information, we may propose as many as three additional wells on the east flank of the structures to pro- cess oil that is unrecoverable, as most down-structured wel Is. Those three possible locations being indicated by the X on the map, The oil between the first offset wells to the injectors, which are essentially these wells here., in the proposed wells, cannot be swept unless the proposed wells are drilled, since ,, they are not product i'ng on the downstructure we l Is. Other types of situations could exist at Swanson River which would require a well to be drilled or redrilled to a location on less than 80 acre spacing. One good example is the next well we plan to spud in the field, which is SCU 24-5, drilled from 34-5 location, as the direction of the well. Several years ago we completed SCU 14-5 at this location in the 2-4 sands is productivity has steadily declined and its WOR increased. It is a critical downstructure location -8- in this area of the field but it is not producible because it is essentially watered out. We have decided to replace this well with a new location upstruc- ture and have evaluated the various alternatives to accomplish this. ~asicail¥ there are two. One is to abandon the SCU 14-5 well and redrill it, the other is to simply drill a new well, 24-5 and leave the 14-5 well as is. This is of little value. We believe that after evaluating that the new well is superior because of the relatively high cost and high mechanical fist of the redrill since the directional 14-5 is rather difficult and we may use 14-5 for other purposes in the future such as sand 8, sand ~0 injection, peripheral injection or as a pressure recording location in the field to monitor reservoir pressure. The new location that we have proposed for 24-5 is about 700 feet of upstruc- ture of the 14-5 well and that's about a 20 acre spacing. This spacing is not permitted under Conservation Order #8 or Section ~061 Subsection (b) of the Alaska Oil and C~as Conservation Regulations since well 14-5 is not anticipa±ed to be abandoned. However~ because Sand 5~ which is equalivant sand here and Sand 8 are not perforated at the 14-5 location and we anticipate that it will be at the ~_4-5 location a portion of the I~roductive section is on 80 acre spacing, the ~emainder is however is not. The ~ to 4 sands will be open here still, although probably not produced. The advantages of drilling a n~w well compared to redrilling the SCU 14-5 well are obvious, and slmilar situations could occur in the future with other wells. Rather than request a variance for each situation as it occurs, we're requesting this new ConserYation Order which will al Iow wells to be drilled or redriiled r~gard~l~ss~o~i'~w~.t~.l ~spacing but subject to the State and Federal Actmin- istrative Review and Authorization. -9- Before I go on with the remainder of my testimony, I would like to make a few general comments about well spacing in the Swanson River Field. The field has been unitized into the Swanson River ~ield working interest agreement area and all interest and equities, working interest and royalty owners are adequately protected. The entire field is bieng operated under a pressure maintenance program and any new well or redrill will become part of that pressure main- tenance program. Standard Oil Company of California, W.O. Io, is operator of the Swanson River Field, has no intention of initiating a field-wide infill drill- lng on less than 80 acres spacing because we are attempting to maximize economic oil recovery, and the nature of the gas injection program does not permit economic new well drllling except in spe¢~l~!individual circumstances similar to the ones previously described. We believe it is the intention of the Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Re- gulationa and Statutes and the hearing system to give this Committee the auth- ority to grant the Operator the flexibility to develop each indi¥idual field according to the best geologic and engineering evidence available. We have, in our opinion presented to you sound geologic and engineering evidence support- ing a well spacing less than 80 acres in the Swanson River Field. In addition, Rule 5 of the proposed Swanson River Rules entitled Administrative Approval, gives the Committee the prerogative to approve or reject any new well or re- drill location at the time we submit our ap~lication for such work. W~th your permission~ I will proceed to the testimony supporting both gas and water injection pressure maintenance operations within the Swanson Ri'ver Field. ~lO- Mr. Marshall: Pardon me, do any members perfer to ask any questions on this phase? Fine~ proceed, Mr. Young. Mr. Young: As you recall Conservation Order No. 9~ permitted only a ,qas injection operation. Since 1969 we have, on a pi lot basis, been conducting a small water flood in the most northerly fault block of the field, which we call the 34-10 fault block up in this area, north of the fault H, are designated Fault H. Also, on a pi lot basis, we are injecting water into a flank well in the SCU Fault Block, that'wel~ being SCU 4-12-10. Section 2226 of the Regulations requires us to file with you considerable detailed information about the Injection program of the wells. 'This information is included with the material accompanying our application. With you permiss- lon~ I will not read this material into the records, but I request it be attached thereto. The gas injection project at Swanson River Field was initiated ds a pi lot in 1962 and expanded to full scale in 1966. it is now well established and is perform~.ng better than original predictions, For your information, we have currently recovered' 30% of the estimated oil in place and we have published with the American Petroleum institute, a recovery number of approximately 49%~ ulti- mate recovery anticipated. Now~ Exhibit D, on the map, ! think its called Exhibit D, in the Application, is a performance curve for the gas injection project. I't is probably a little hard for you to see~. but we have indicated the ~reen curve to be the oil production rate of swanson River which is nom- inally over the years unt~ recently has produced from about 30,000 to 40~000 barrels per day. The dash in the green curve here is the anticipated primary recovery of the field in the absence of pressure maintenance, to demonstrate the very favorable response from our gas injection operations. Exhibit E up here~ is a performance curve for the 34-10 fault block, this northernly fault block. The estimated ~erformance under continued gas injection is indicated on this curce as the dashed green line, the sol id green line here is the water, is the oil production. As you can see that as a response to water injection, that we have since the 1969, proved the great recovery of this fault block in this particular circumstance of injecting water after that particular fault block had been pluged with gas. The reason for this, the water inject- Ion is successful in the northern areas of the Swanson River Field, it's because of the varing crude properties and the contrasting crude properties, betweem the south end of the field and the north end of the field. Generally speaking we find, the crude oil properties in the SCU Fault Block area are such that the oil is very succeptible to gas flooding. The crude oil properties in the north, makes it kind of an academic question whether you want to inject gas or water, they appear to both do about the same, they have about the same efficiency in that area. And we've demonstrated that in that particular area these conclusions can not be used in any other area of the field, that water fill gas injections would be very 'successful, to maintain, sustain the higher rate of production, anticipating an considerable increase in ultimate recovery of the fault. We are also injectIng water into the flank well in the SCU Fault Block in Sand I0 only, that 4-12-10 well. This operation is less than one year old and is designed primarily to supplement natural water encroachment, is taking place in an attempt to recover some of the I0 Sand oil downstructure of the existing producing wells. We are not contemplating any major water injection operations in the southerly portions of the field other than the type -12- just described. The Swanson River Field will continue to be operated primarily as a gas injection pressure maintenance project. Representing Standard Oil Company of California, I have respectfully sub- mitted the foregoing testimony for your consideration in ruling on our appli- cation. Further, due to rapid completion of the prior two wells, our drilling rig is now prepared to initiate drilling on well SCU 24-5. Your approval of 24-5 depends upon a favorable ruling on our application, therefore we request your early consideration of this. Thank you, any questions? Mr. Marshall: Thank you Roger, I'm sure there wlll be questions. Mr, Gl I breth? Mr. Gi Ibreth: Roger, the last portion of your testimony regarding the water injection project, you testified that ~he~:::~crude properties on the north were favorable to either gas or water injection, on the south generally the gas injection. ~/hat about the north-central part of the field? You marked center on your Exhibit there, are the characteristics such 'there that you might have a favorable water injection program. Mr. Young,~ Yes, that's true, you see the crude oil property range from approximately 35 to 36 degree APl in the south, down to about 32 to 33 degrees APl in the north of the center block and its grade A shown from one end to the other, so that there is an area In this center portl'on of that .center fault block.~, where we would not want to inject south of that area, because the crude properties then would break over and go off. -13- Mr. Gi Ibreth: But, I take then from your testimony that at some day you may at some future date you might decide to go a little stronger on the water injection in the northern part of the central area. Mr. Young~ We have preliminary plans to investigate injecting water in the north end of the center fault block, as a means to improve the recovery in that a rea. Mr. Gilbreth: I see. On the Exhibit that was presented with your appli- cation and I haven't looked at the one passed out here this morning. The inject- ion well, you can't tell which are the water and which are the gas injection wells so when you give us a final Exhibit here, would you be sure and mark those. Mr. Young: Yes, they should be indicated by these dates on that map. Mr. Gilbreth: Well, a cursory look this morning you couldn't tell. Mr. Young: Well, we'll submit to you, this one has the injection wells the gas and water injection wells clearly identified, I'll submit you a copy of this on a smaller scale. Mr. Gilbreth: AIright. Are you injecting water other than produced water through these Injection wells? Mr. Young: Not to my knowledge. Mr. Gilbreth: All produced water. Mr. Young: That's right. Mr. Gllbreth: In other words the disposal well thats doing good. Mr. Young: Well, that was the intent to utilize the produced Hemlock fluids · for re-injection. Easy, i'm not sure of the nature of your question, but we had obtained permission at one time to inject fresh water in the well 417~-I0, for a -14- short period of time, at which time we did complete a flow line into that well and injection line into that well, and are now injecting produced water. Mr. Gilbreth: Well, this was one of the reasons I had asked, of course the reports that are required once a project goes in, we make no distinction on water, we had no knowledge of which water was going in. In the second part of your Exhibit on the field, the Soldatna Creek portion, you mentioned that the upper sands were completed in the outer most we l Is, what about over In the central area, the part say from the east edge. Do you have wel Is where sand I, 3 or I0 are completed or I through 5? Mr. Young: Yes. Mr, Gilbreth: Or ten? Mr~ Young: Yes, they are completed, essentially all the wells are com- pleted and all the productive sands. As you may be aware, we do mechanically segregate between the zones and we exclude one 5 production in the up-structure we~ is. Mr. Gi Ibreth: Even though the sand may be present. Mr. Young: That's correct, we do not produce it, its a matter of efficiency. Mr. Gilbreth: Now, in your, ~n your proposal, for Rule 5, you say among other things, that the Committee may authorize, well let me read it. Upon request of the operator and a showlng that all affected parties have been notif- ied of such request, the Committee may authorize the drilling or redrilling of any well at any location for any purpose. Certainly its the Committee's In- tention that if an operator needs to drill an additional We~l'! for enhanced recov- ery, or improved recovery and its not going to effect correlative rights, I don't think there would be any hesitancy on their part to approve something like that. However, I wou~d call your attention to the statutes under which we operate, that says that the Committee shaJl approve any application, which -15- submitted by an operator, if not contrary to law or an order of the Committee and the regulation further states, the Committee can not issue an order without a hearing. So we have a technicality there, that with an open ended order, you have requested~ the Committee could never have any objection, any reason to object except for the waste statute. And i wondered if you had considered this in making your recommendation do you have nay comment on that? Mr. Young: ! would have to defer to Paul McAndrews for any legal considera- tion and Interpretations of your statutes. I certainly am in no position to interpret them for you. Mr. McAndrews: I have no comment. Mr. Young: Alright. Mr. Gllbreth: It would be your intent I gather from your testimony that you mainly would stick with an 80 acre draining area for the wells, but you do need the flexibil~ty to put additional wells in the area that now cannot be drained. Mr. Young: That's correct. Mr~ G~lbreth: In other words the 80 acre part of the field rule that now exists is really not bothering you, its the inability to drill the other wells w~thout having a public hearing everytime? Mr~ Young: That's correct. Mr. Gilbreth: Thank you. Mr. Young: And I think that we have in the past demonstrated to the Committee that these we~ls were required specific purpose wells. There will be additional wells in the future as ! have indicated that will have to go through the hearing route if some provisions are not made to circumvent that on every appI lcatlon. Mr. Gitbreth: Those are alt the questions I have right now. Mr. Marshall: Thank you. Mr. Hamilton, do you have any questions? Mr. Hamilton: I have a couple here. On Exhibit A, just a minor thing, but I noticed that you have the defined the Swanson River Unit boundary and below that you have Soldonta River Unit. Is that appropriate or should that be So ldatna Creek? Mr. Young: Soldatna Creek, I'll just straighten it up. Mr. Gilbreth: It's right on your Exhibit there, the border line to the right. Mr. Young: This one here Tom. Mr. Berry: ~ think I can straighten that up. Originally before the Swanson River Field working agreement area was Mr. Marshall: Pardon me, for the record, this is Mr. Berry speaking. Mr. Berry: Okay. Before the field was unitized in the Swanson River Field Working Interest Agreement area, it was comprised of Swanson River and So~datna Creek units and that boundary line on the maD t~ the original dividing line between those two units. It also served as the way we name our we l~s as you can see. Mr. Gilbreth: No, the question is So~datna River Unit not Soldatna Creek. ~Mro Young: Yes, ~ think that's right, it should be So~datna Creek. Mrs' Berry~ i'm sorry, I misunderstood the question Mr~ Hami~lton~· That ~ooked a I lttle strange to me on the Exhibi~t, I~ just Mr. Young: Yes, ~ think that was probably drafted~ a ty~icagraphicai error. Mr~ Hamilton: One other question, Mr. Young~ you mentioned the 24-5 weii you will be applying for Mr. Gllbreth: A ~ittle ~ouder Mr. Hamilton: And you have shown some pre-locations of the wells in the southern part of field that you are looking possible to drill. Do you have it in your long range plans have any idea what other wells would be needed say in the northern part? Mr. Young: Under the present conditions, with the knowledge we have there are no plans to my knowledge that have been developed In the four years that I have been here to indicate any further drllling will be required in the center of the Swanson River Oil Field. You see you have the center block, simply the I to 5 sands being productive, there isn't the opportunity to go after selective sands ~n a specific locations to improve areal sweep efficiences, since the fault block Is adequately drilled under the present circumstances. Mr. Hamilton: That's all I have. Mr. Marshall: Thank you Hoyle, Easy, do you have any additional questions? Mr. Gilbreth: Mr. Young, in the southern part of the field there where you have injected water, do you have any unfavorable response as a result of water injection? Any where in the southern part of the field? Mr. Young: We've only injected water in the 412-10 well and that was only for a short period of time. There is no response what so ever. There is no response, we've not seen good or bad yet. It's ~l~ntent is to supplement natural water which is taking place at the rate I believe now the whole field, I be- lieve about I0,000 barrels per day. We're adding several thousand more to it, to help deminish the, essentially the re-injection requirements to maintain reservoi r pressure. Mr. Gilbreth: But you haven't had any unfavorable reactions problems? Mr. Young: That's correct. Mr. Marshall: Mr. Young, in the excepted well, those that you received 40 acre exception for in the south-westerly part of the field, has your well performance there in any way indicated that these wells were in effect draining oil that wouldn't be drained on 80 acre spacing. Mr. Young: I think there is sol id indications, of course, let me qualify that a little bit. Well #33, has just been on production a very short time. We really don't have enough information. There is sol id indication in the Well SCU 42-5 was drained approximately twice we had anticipated it was going to drain, and it was a rather pleasant surprise. Well 24-33, the other one that you mentioned, the objective sands were not productive in the location. We anticipated from all our information that the 8 and I0 sands would be productive ~n that well. ~/hen we drilled the well we found out that a natural water encroachment in that particular part of the field had essentially swept out of the oli and we made a salvage completion of the ! to 5 sand interval. It was a matter that in that particular area of the field, the water encroach- ment was more active than anticipated. Mr. Marshall: Thank you. , Mr Young: Can ~ add another comment though, we have had other locations that have just, the placement of the ~ocation could have gone 40 or 80 acre spacing, depending on how close we placed the well on to the up structure producer ~¢~,d I would indicate to you to my knowledge there is not a well that has been drilled in the last three years, with the exception 412-10 which was found the productive column unproductive~ that has not demonstrated that there were areas of the field that were not being adequately processed by natural gas injection. Mr. Marshall: Thank you. Mr. Giibreth? Mr. Gi tbreth: One more question, Roger, just for the record, are you not selectively withdrawing production from your wells to minimize the draw down of energy for each well with high gas/oil ratio unnecessarily. Mr. Young: That's correct. We have a compressor plant that is capable of handling approximately 250 mi I! ion cubic feet per day. Now to maximize the oil recovery, the oil rate under that condition we produce the wells with the lowest gas/oil ratios. Those wells range from solution gas/oil ratio up to in the range of I0 to 15 thousand cubic feet per barrel. We then do work to support this concept on individual well, in attempt to shut-off mechani- cal ly down-hole those intervals that have had gas break through to further reduce the gas/oil ratio of the producing wells to al Iow more oil production and a higher efficiency for the over-all operation. Mr. Gi)breth: Do you visualize within the foreseeable future that It might be necessary to drll(additiona) wells down-dip to aid in 'this pdocess. Mr. Young: Downstructure relative - downsfructure re)ative to what we!l~ Mr. Gllbreth: )n any of the sands to drill additional wel)s on the Iow slde of the sturcture in order to ~ake advantage of producing a Iow fuel G.O.R. we Mt. Young: We have, Easy, we have pretty much exhausted all the extreme periphera~ wel~ locations. I think as you are aware we have drilled quite a number of them In the past three years and to my knowledge there are none left ~n the extreme periphery where I to 5 sand is productIve. Now, we have just pointed out that there are ~nstances where there is sand other than I to 5 and particularly the 8 sand maybe productive d°wnstructure of the pro- ducers have on production at the current time. ~t ~s another special sit- uatlon that wou~d require addit!onal drilling. Mr. Gilbreth: Actually, what I was leading up to was wondering about the possibility or the need in the future maybe to drill some 40 acre wells out on the eastern edge. Do you have anticipate that these would be feasible or necessary? Mr. Young: Wel I, other then the ones that I have mentioned, ! don't see that there are any are feasible, the sweep efficiency out to those peripheral line of wells due to distances, mobility ratios and other considerations, the areal sweep efficiency is quite good out to the peripheral wells. Mr. Gilbreth: I see~ Mr. Young: And there isn't any need to inflll between those wells. There real ly isn't any Improvement that you can make on the areal sweep effic- Iencies to sufficiently justlfy the cost of the well. Mr. Gilbreth: Okay, that answers my question. Thank you. Mr. Marshall: Roger, I note in your Application, that the area to which these rules apply will be the Swanson River Field Working Interest Agreement area, shown on Exhibit A. Would you care to comment on the appro- priatness of that outline for these pool rules? Mr. McAndrews: I think basically the¥~represent the participating area for these pools that have been established in engineering and geo- logical determinations and were submitted to U.S.G.S and found engineering wise sufficient to find the Swanson River oil producing horizons. Mr. Young: I would additional comment that all productive acreage that we, through the interpretation of the data that we have, all productive acres of the Hemlock zone, Swanson River Field ls contained wi'thin the working industry. -21- Mr. Marshall: I appreciate your c~mment. I believe that this is the first time we've had such a designation requested per se and appreciate your comment. Any further questions? Hoyle? I'd like to state that anyone in our audience is free to ask any questions about any of the exhibits and if there are any statements tha~t anyone would like to make at this time, why we would entertain them. Mr. Smith: Tom, I have a statement. I am Rodney A. Smlth, the Area Oil/Gas Supervisor for Alaska for U.S.G~S. and I see no objection to an order on the Swanson River Field as requested by the Applicant, so long as the order al lows the basic flexibility consistent with operations under the Swanson River Unit Agreement. That's all I have to say. Mr. Marshall: Thank you very much, Rodney. ! might point out that the Swanson River Field is entirely within the l~enai National Moose Range and entirely on Federal Oll and Gas Lease. Is that correct Rodney? Mr. Smith: Correct~ Mr. Marshall: Correct. Thank you. if there are no further comments, we w~li adjourn. Pardon me, Mr. Gilbreth? Mr. Young, we understand you have a rig practically on location at 24-5, is that correct? Mr. Young: That's correct, sir. Mr, Marshall: And your spud date is? Mr. Young: Forthwith Mr. Marshall: Forthwith. Your testimony today has been certainly suffi- cient to answer questions we have concerning the well permit application for 24-5 and we can at this time give you a verbal permission to p~roceed ~l~r that permit. As far as the entire body of the request that you have made goes, this will be forthcoming. You might appreciate this ls a rather envolved pool ru~es hearing, they a~l are and within 30 days we wl~i have the pool rules orders excuted, but as of now you have permission to proceed with SCU 24-5, from a well permit stand point. Mr. Young: That does not - can I ask you to qualify your statement? We can proceed with the drilling, can we bring the well on production at the term..lnat~on irrespective of your at the termination of the completion of the well irrespective of the Committee's findings? Mr. Marshall: Yes, you may. Fine then, if there are no further ques- tions or statements, we'll adjourn the meeting now. Thank you. -23- TELETYPE RECEIVED TO: THOMAS R. MARSHALL, JR. FROM: CHARLES F. HERBERT 11:50 AM 7-25-73 PURSUANT TO AS 31.05.030 AND IIAAC, SECTION 2002, HOYLE H. HAMILTON IS HEREBY APPOINTED TO THE OIL AND GAS CONSERVATION COMMITTEE AND AN ALTERNATE MEMBER FOR THE HEARING TO BE HELD IN THE CONSUL CHAMBERS, LOUSSAC LIBRARY, JULY 26, 1973 AT 9:30 AM. STATE OF ALASKA, ) THIRD JUDICIAL DISTRICT, ) ss. being first duly s deposes and says that...~--e.- ..... is the ...... Lega.],...Cl-ez'..~f the Anchorage News, a daily news- paper. That said newspaper has been approved as a legal news- paper by the Third Judicial Court, Anchorage, Alaska, and it is now and has been published in the English language continually as a daily newspaper in Anchorage, Alaska, and it is now and during all of said time was printed in an office maintained at the aforesaid place of publication of said news- paper. That the annexed is a true copy of a ...~..?..~.~..];.....~...o..t;...:J:....o...e.. 7060 as it was published in regular issues (and not in supplemental form) of said newspaper for. a ol'3e period of .................. insertions, commencing on the ....1..~....day of ...... ~.~..3-.7.. ......... ,19 ""?3 and ending on the ....... 1.).F ...... day of of ..... ~7.. ............... , both dates inclusive, and that such newspaper was regularly distributed to its subscribers dur- ing all of sa,id period. That the full amount of the fee charged for the foregoing publication is the sum of $ 12.~Owhich amount has been paid in full at the rate of 25¢ per line; Mini- mum charge $7.50. Subscribed an~'worn to me this .~.~_~ay of...~.~ ....... , 19....?.3 Notary Public in and for the State of Alaska, Third Division, Anchorage, Alaska M/Y.~OMMISSION EXPIRES ........ ........ ...... ~IOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING STATE OF ALASKA ~,E,PARTM,ENT O,F NATURAL RESOURCE,~ DIVISION OF OIL AN'O GAS Alaska 0ii and 'Gas Conserva~ti0n ,Commi~te,e Coi~,~ati:0,n File ,No. 1'2'3 ~e: Sw,a~,~on. R, iv. er 0,il 'S~a~n,d,a~d ,0'i,I Co,mpa~¥ oi C,a,lif0rnla, 0Jp,e,att,0r,' . , .f~t ,is '~e~eb.9'."" ~'!~en .~.at i 4..-','...'~'.; ,'~'... ". ct '.,"~,-~ ' ~- June ' :~.,"... .~'-,"', ....... ;5, .t/.: ~.. · ' ', ' ' " ' ' s ~ '~'~ "i9is~raTive ~" '" ~1~: ~r~upln~ J Pu,bl,iS,h~ ' 3~lY' 14, 1973 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING STATE OF ALASKA DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES DIVISION OF OIL AND GAS Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Committee Conservation File bio. 123 Re: Swanson River Oil Field Standard Oil Company of California, Operator Notice is hereby given that an application was received from Standard Oil Company of California on June 26, 1973 applying for an order revoking Conservation Orders Nos. 8 and 9, applying for the establishment of pool rules for the referenced field pursuant to Alaska Administrative Code, Section 2004, and establishment of a gas and water injection pressure maintenance program pursuant to Alaska Administrative Code, Section 2226. Conservation Order No. 8 set spacing in the Swanson River Field at 80 acres per well, and No. 9 al lowed a pressure maintenance project in the Hemlock zone utilizing only natural gas. A hearing on this matter will be held in the City Council Chambers at the Z. J. Loussac Library, 5th Avenue and F Street, Anchorage, Alaska at 9:30 A.M. on July 26, 1973, at which time the operator and affected and interested parties will be heard. Thomas R. Marshall, Jr. Executive Secretary Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Committee 3001 Porcupine Drive Anchorage, Alaska 99501 Publish July 14, 1973 June 26, 1973 APPLICATION FOR AN ORDER REVOKING CONSERVATION ORDERS ~8 AND 99 AND PRESCRIBING FIELD RULES FOR THE SWANSON RIVER FIELD-- KENAI PENINSULA, ALASKA 'Mr. Homer Burrell, Chairman Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Committee Department of Natural Resources 3001 Porcupine Drive Anchorage, Alaska Dear Sir: Pursuant to the Oil and Gas Regulations and applicable statutes of the State of Alaska, Standard Oil CompaI~ of California, W.O.I., as operator of the Swanson River Field, on behalf of itself, Atlantic Richfield Company, Union Oil Company of California, and Marathon Oil Company requests the issuance of a Conservation Order covering the unitized area shown on Exhibit A to accomplish the following: 1. Revoke Conservation Order #8 providing for 80 acre well spacing in the Swanson River Field and Conservation Order ~9 establishing a gas injection pressure maintenance project in the Swanson River Field. 2. Prescribe field rules for conducting operations in the Swanson River Field as follows: Rule 1: Area to Which These Rules Apply These rules shall apply to all wells completed in the Hemlock Zone in the Swanson River Field-as delineated by the Swanson River Field-Working Interest Agreement Area shown on Exhibit A. The Hemlock Zone includes all intervals which correlate with the interval 10230' to 10585' in Standard Oil Company of California, Soldotna Creek Unit 41-4. Rule 2: Pressure Maintenance Projects The injection of gas and water for the purpose of pressure maintenance, secondary or tertiary recovery, and conducting pilot and injectivity tests is permitted in the Hemlock Zone of the Swanson River Field. Rule 3: Spacing Acreage The drilling and completing of oil wells in the Hemlock Zone at any location regardless of well spacing is permitted in the Swanson River Field except that no well shall be completed less than 500' from the Swanson River Field-Working Interest Agreement line. Rule 4: S_~pacing Footage There is to be no limitation relative to the minimum distance between oil wells completed in the Hemlock Zone of the Swanson River Field except that no well shall be completed less than 500 feet from the Swanson River Field-Working Intere~t Agreement line. Rule 5: Administrative A~proval Upon request of the Operator and a showing that all affected parties have been notified of such request, the Committee may authorize the drilling or redrilling of any well at any location for any purpose, the conversion of any well at any location, the termination or suspension of gas injection or water injection operations at any well, the termination or suspension of the project, or any operation reasonably designed to further the progress of the project and maximize the ultimate economic recovery of oil from the Swanson River Field. Very truly yours, J. W. WALKER DISCUSSION IN SUPPORT OF THIS APPLICATION Gas injection and water injection pressure maintenance operations are success- fully being conducted in the Swanson River Field. The nature of the geology and reservoir at Swanson River has been discussed in the supporting information and hearing testimony for Conservation Order #8, dated May 18, 1962, Conservation Order #9, dated May 18, 1962, and Conservation Order #109, dated Noven~er 30, 1971. Conservation Order #8 established 80 acre well spacing; Conservation Order #9 established a gas injection pressure maintenance project; and Conservation Order ~109 granted a variance to Conservation Order #8 and to Section 2061 (b) of the State of Alaska Oil and Gas Regulations and Statutes so four wells could be drilled on less than 80 acre spacing. Conservation Orders #8 and #9, in their present form, provide little flexibility for operating the Swanson River Field. This application is submitted to obtain a more flexible and general "Order" which will facilitate future operations and aid in maximizing ultimate economic oil recovery from the Swanson River Field. DISCUSSION SUPPORTING ~.~.~ELL SPACING LESS THAN 80 ACRES GEOLOGY Oil entrapment at the Swanson River Field is in an anticlinal structure -oriented roughly in a north-south direction. Structural closure varies from a maximum of 600' in the southern portion of the field to 250' in the central and northern portion. Please see Exhibit A. .~. With the anticlinal flexure, tensional faulting occurred. The majority of the faults located to date are normal faults, oriented roughly in an east-west direction with the north block down thro~m. They have been identified in a south to north direction as Faults B, C, D, E, F, G, and H on Exhibit A. The above faults have been located and followed through the stratigraphic section on detailed cross-sections using all available electric logs and dipmeter data. Displacements on faults vary from less than 100' to over 300'. Fault plane dips vary from 40© to near vertical. The faults show increasing displacement in a westerly direction within the field limits. The oil productive portion of the Hemlock reservoir consists of a maximum of ten sands south of Fault E. Sand deposition was not uniform across the entire field and sands shale out at some locations and merge at others. The ten sands · are identified on the type logs on Exhibit A. Of these ten sands, sands 1-5, 8, and 10 are of largest areal extent and of prime importance. These three major intervals are separated by continuous impermeable barriers that prevent pressure communication. The original productive limit lines for the separate sands were determined from detailed electric log, reservoir and seismic analysis, and from formation testing. Sands 1-5, 8, and 10 have different original oil-water interfaces. Faulting plays a major role in the accumulation of oil at the Swanson River Field, and faults or portions of them are barriers to fluid movement. The productive limits of the Hemlock sands are not only located at different subsea depths across some barrier faults, but are offset by them. Along the western flank of the structure, for example, faults C, D, and E are barriers in the ten productive H~nlock sands. The geometry of the present well pattern, barrier faults, and productive limits of the naturally separated producing sands will not allow for complete reservoir drainage in the gas injection project in all ten sands. For these reasons, wells SCU 42-5, SRU 24-33, and SCU 33-8 were recently granted a spacing variance by Conservation Order #109, drilled on nominal 40 acre spacing, and completed in previously undrained areas of the reservoir. ENGINEERING During 1966 full. scale gas injection con~nenced at the Swanson River Field. The objective of the gas injection project is to sweep t:he Hemlock oil sands with gas while maintaining the reservoir pressure at a level w]~ich will maximize ultimate economic recovery. The project is performing better than original predictions and can be considered a marked success. By drilling the three wells, SCU 42-5, SRU 24-33, and SCU 33-8, or other wells on less than 80 acre spacing into undrained areas of the reservoir, reserves are produced that can be classified as new and accelerated. New reserves, which increase ultimate recovery, result from increasing the areal sweep efficiency of the gas injection project between the injection well(s) and the new well. Accelerated reserves result from the establishment of a drainage point now, compared to recovery from other wells at a blowdown in 10-20 years. Oil recovery from an area by gas sweep is significantly higher than later in field life during a blowdown with natural aquifer encroachment. Most wells in the Swanson River Field produce satisfactorily. However, several flank wells such as SCU 32-5 and SCU 14-5 have historically performed very poorly. This poor performance is attributed to low reservoir permeability and the proximity of the oil-water contact which has, in some cases, reduced the effective productive section. Water encroachment has further limited the effectiveness of these wells because originally oil-saturated sands have been watered out. Conse- ~quently, the wells are either shut in or produce at very low rates and could conceivably water out in the near future. If ineffective producers in critical downstructure positions exist, it is not possible to sweep upstructure oil with gas and ultimate oil recovery will be reduced. Various methods to remedy these situations can be considered, and, depending on individual circumstances, one alternative will probably be superior to the others. Two examples can best illustrate this point. SCU 32-5 is in a critical downstructure position for Hemlock 1-5 sand sweep between Faults C and D. At this location, the Hemlock 1 sand is shaled out and the Hemlock 5 sand is wet. The well has never produced much more than 500 BOPD and currently produces only 150 BOPD at 50 percent water cut. After evaluating several stimulation and remedial alternatives for restoring the well to effective production, it was decided to abandon the present completion and redril! to an upstructure location. This is necessary to position the well in a higher permeability portion of the reservoir at a structural location at which some of the wet productive section would be regained. In this case, a relatively short and low cost redrill is possible because SCU 32-5 is not a directional hole. Since the original completion in SCU 32-5 will be abandoned and the redrill will be located on the original 80 acre pattern, there is no spacing problem. SCU 14-5 is also in a critical downstructure position for Hemlock 1-5 sand sweep. Similar to SCU 32-5, the Hemlock 1 sand is shaled out, the Hemlock 5 is wet, and the Hemlock 3-4 sands appear transitional on the electric log. Initially in 1969, SCU 14-5 produced relatively clean oil at low water cut. Since that time, cut has increased and production rates have declined. The well is currently shut-in. Again it was decided to replace the well at an upstructure location. In this case, however, a short, low cost redrill is not possible because of the nature of the SCU 14-5 directional. A redrill could only be made from the shoe of the surface casing. The potential cost savings of a redrill of this type compared with drilling a new well is small and mechanical risk is 'high. In addition to the possible problems in recovering casing from near the surface casing shoe, current practice in the field is to set + 3500 feet of surface casing to protect against lost circulation in shallcw sands. Furthermore, if a new well is drilled and SCU 14-5 is not abandoned, SCU 14-5 could be used in the future as a Hemlock 8 and 10 sand water injector. The bottom hole locations of SCU 14-5 and ~e new well will be 700 feet apart which is about 20 acre spacing. Because the Hemlock 5 sand will be productive in the new well and is wet in SCU 14-5, a portion of the productive section will be on nominal 80 acre spacing with surrounding wells. The advantages of drilling a new well compared to redrilling SCU 14-5 are obvious, but this cannot be done without some modification to the existing Conservation Order. Similar types of situations could occur in the future with other wells. Rather than dealing with each situat~n as it occurs, a new Order allowing the drilling or redrilling of wells regardless of well spacing or minimum footage re~ir~nents is requested. In this way, operations can be modified to more readily solve individual problems as they occur and are recognized. b SUMMARY OF GEOLOGIC AND ENGINEERING EVIDENCE IN SUPPORT OF REDUCED WELL SPACING 1. Faulting plays a major role in oiI accumulation at the Swanson River Field, and faults or portions of some faults are barriers to fluid movement. 2. The geometry and configuration of the present spacing program with the respect to the location of barrier faults and productive limits does not allow for adeqUate reservoir drainage in all areas in all sands. 3. Under the existing gas injection project, a poor areal sweep efficiency exists in some areas in certain Hemlock sand bodies due to a shortage of well positioned producing wells. 4. Individual producing well situations exist which require drilling or redrilling of wells on less than 80 acre spacing so that currently undrained areas can be produced. 5. A more general Conservation Order which will allow wells to be drilled regardless of spacing requirements is required. This will facilitate future operations and aid in providing the maximum ultimate economic oil recovery from the Swanson River Field. DISCUSSION OF INFORMATION REQUIRED UNDER SECTION 2226 OF ALASKA OIL AND GAS REGULATIONS SUPPORTING GAS AND WATER INJECTION PRESSU?~ MAINTENANCE PROJECTS WITHIN THE SWANSON RIVER FIELD 1. Ail of the lands withi~ the Swanson River Field have been unitized and all correlative rights and equities of the affected working interest owners and royalty owners are adequately protected. Property and lease lines within the field are subject to the philosophy of unitization and may be disregarded for the purposes of pressure maintenance and drilling. Exhibit A, attached hereto, shows the following: The units and lands affected by this Application; the location of all completed, abandoned, and drilling wells on the affected and surrounding lands; and the location and status of all gas and water injection wells. Standard Oil Company of California, W.O.I., is the only operator affected by this Application. Copies of this Application have been sent by registered mail or delivered to Atlantic Richfield Company, Union Oil Company of California, Marathon Oil Company, and the United States Geological Survey. The date of mailing or delivery and the addresses to which this Application was sent are indicated on a separate sheet. 2. Ail wells in the Swanson River Field-Workin~ Interest Agreement Area are completed in the Hemlock Zone with the exception of the following abandoned shallow gas, water disposal, and mud disposal wells: Well Number Status SRU 212-10 SRU 211-15 SRU 41-15 SRU 43-i5 SRU 34-16 SRU 32-22 SRU 222-21 SRU 41-28 SRU 212-27 SRU 32-27 SRU 41-33 SRU 221-33 SCU 243-4 SCU 243-8 SCU 43-5 SCU .12-16 Shut in shallow gas Shut in shallow gas Abandoned Hemlock-redrilled as SRU 41A-15 Abandoned Hemlock-redrilled as SRU 43-15 R/D Abandoned Hemlock-redrilled as SRU 14-15 Abandoned Hemlock-redrilled as SRU 23-22 Abandoned shallow gas Abandoned Hemlock Shut in shallow gas Abandoned Hemlock-redrilled as SRU 23-27 Water disposal Water disposal Mud disposal Shut in shallow gas Abandoned Hemlock-redrilled as SCU 43A-5 Abandoned Hemlock These wells were not drilled deep enough to penetrate the Hemlock Zone or were abandoned adequately through the Hemlock Zone so migration of injection fluids will not occur. 3. Applicant desires t© conduct the pressure maintenance projects in the Hemlock Zone which is located at an approximate depth of 10,000 to 12,000 ft., is of Tertiary Age, and is composed of conglomerates and fine to coarse grained sandstones with interbedded coal and carbonaceous siltstone. 4. The logs of all Swanson River Field wells have previously been filed with the State of Alaska--Division of Oil and Gas. Applicant therefore requests waiver of requirement (a) (4) of Section 2226. 5. The mechanical conditions of the gas and water injection wells are shown on Exhibits Bt-B13. Estimated "top of cement" for each well is indicated on Exhibit'B-14, "Description of Injection Wells' Casing-Estimated Top of Cement." Casing has been set and cemented in these wells in such a manner that no damage will be caused to oil, gas, or water resources by the gas and water injection. 6. Currently, gas is being injected into the Hemlock Zone south of Fault H on Exhibit A through 10 creatal gas injection wells. Injection rate is a%reraging 240,000 MCF/D of which approximately 190,000 MCF/D is cycled produced gas and 50,000 MCF/D is gas from the Kenai Gas Field or casing head gas from Cook Inlet. In addition, water is being injected into the Hemlock Zone through two water injection wells, one located crestally in the 34-10 Fault Block, and the other on the east flank of the Soldotna Creek Unit Fault Block. Currently about 5000 B/D of Hemlock Zone produced water is being reinjected. 7. Tabulations of oil and water production rates and recent gas-oil ratios for each'producing well in the-Swanson River Field-are on Exhibits C1 and C2. Additionally, Exhibit D is a Swanson River Field historical production .cur~.e which indicates the additional recovery obtained by the gas injection -project over estimated~primary production. The gas injection project is performing better than original-predictions and is very successful. Exhibit E is a historical production curve for the 34-10 Fault Block pilot water flood which began in 1969. Water injection in the 34-10 Fault Block has resulted in additional oil recovery over continued gas injection which is indicated on the curve. Water injection at SCU 412-10 was initiated to -supplement natural water encroachment in the Hemlock 10 sand and to iaccelerate the-production of oil downstructure of the'producing wells in that sand. 8.. There'are no plans for additional development of the gas injection or water injection operations in the Swanson River Field. Since the gas injection-project was expanded to full scale in 1966, several methods have.been user to-improve'project.performance. Additional work along . ~these lines will be done as appropriate. a. Additions to the Compressor plant increase oil rate and ultimate ~ meserves of the field by allowing more gas and oil production and hy e×tending the economic limit. b. .New development wells have been drilled into areas not being processed in the gas injection project because of the geometry of'producers and ' injectors relative to faulting and oil-water contacts. Remedial work to install packers in the producing wells has permitted the exclusion of intervals of high GOR production and will result in .'greater recovery from the field because more oil can be produced at lower GOR. WELL NO. SRU 432-15 SRU 334-15 STATUS Water Injector Gas Injector SRU 412-22 S.I. SRU 331-27 SRU 314-27 SCU 343-33 SCU 341-4 SCU 323-4 SCU 332-4 SCU 314-4 EXHIBIT B-14 DESCRIPTION OF INJECTION WELLS' CASING TOP OF CEMENT BEHIND CASING SCU 341-8 CASING TOP OF CEMENT ~ SCU 312-9 7" cmt. 11959' CP 8467' SQ 11386' 9575' 6495' SCU 412-10 7" cmt. 11190' CP 7978 ' 10340 ' 4503 ' 7" cmt. 10999' CP 6027' SQ 10750' above 8400' (top of log) 6210' Gas Injector 7" cmt. 11620' 9137' Gas Injector 5%" liner cmt. 11434' (top at 8794') -5%" csq. cmt. 8794' 9214 ' 2838' Gas Injector 6 5/8" cmt. 10995' 7306' Gas Injector 7" cmt. 10992' CP 6944 ' SQ 10226' SQ 10600' SQ 10965' 7000'+ below 5400' (bottom of log) Gas Injector 7 5/8" cmt. 10375' CP 6983' 5% liner cmt. 10770' (top at 9693') 8875' 4000' 10005' Gas Injector 5% cmt. 11119' CP 7516' -SQ 10883' 7785' 3970' Gas Injector Gas Injector 7" cmt. 11040' CP 7509' 7" cmt. 10813' CP 7015' 9200' 5960' 8960' 1570' Gas Injector 7" cmt. 10785' CP 8504' 8600' 5950' Water InjEctor 7" cmt, 11246' CP at 7503' SQ 11031 ' 5" liner cmt. 11553' (top at 11154') 9443' 5593' 11154' SOURCE Calculation Temperature Log CBL CBL CBL CBL CBL CBL CBL CBL Calculation Temperature Log Calculation Calculation CBL CBL CBL Calculation Temperature Log CBL CBL Calculation Calculation CBL CBL CBL ~ ~' 3 JTS. + PUP JT. 2~" EUE TUBING 120.21' ~o ~ 145.08' OTIS "S" NIPPIE, Position //2 1.59' ~. ;1'~- DV O' 964'' 53 JTS. 2~" EUE 8rd TUBTNG 1659.56' ~ !~ 1,806.23' __ ~ -CAMCO 1.2.I MANDI~L 12 .'92 ' -- 2958 ' ~4~1° 6150' 7926 9781' ,o DV ~ 8467' 11,192.08' -- ~01 JTS. 2~" EUE 8rd TUB]ZiG CAMCO 1,~,I I.~'~NDPJ~L , *_~ I JT. 2~"-EUE 8rd TUBING ~ 11,236.57' )--C~,;CO ~.~ J.:M,~REL ' 11,281.19~ ~ - I JT. 2~" EUE 8rd TUB~G ~ BROWN "CC" S~TY JT. PUP JT. 2~' E~ 8rd TUB~';G 11,2~.27'.- ~ ~0~"I 2~'' x 7" ~-16-1 PAC~R - 11,338.97' ~ 2 JTS. 2~,'' E~ 8rd TUBING ~ OT~ ~'S" NIPP~¢ Position //1 611,386 ,~,~e¢ 1 ~.~ 2~" EUg 8rd TUB~G ~ 11,392.06' ' ~.4~' C~,DO ~~ -- 11,~6.5~' C~CO "D" ~,,,~44' ' P~ ~' 2~e" E~' 8~ TUBE'~G · 11 ,~2. 00' ,ks' ~R MODEL "D" PAC}~R, L~~ SUB & . - s~ ~sz~.m~ ~/s~'oP su~. ~- 1,1,462.02~ · ' PRODUOTION TU~ w/ ROLL, rD E~ lo 1~"' 11,o34' ;lOPEb "K" B.P. --11~930~ TOP ot PLUG 11,9S2' TD 9372.93' 12.98' 31.51' '13.00 ' 31.62 ' 1.03 ' 8.05' 5.97' 62.73 ' 1.58' 31.51 ' 12.82 ' 31.72' .93~ ?.94' 11.79~ 4.77' S R U 432-'15 CASING & TUBING DETAIL SECTION 15 T. 8 N~R.9 W, 1(, 4890t 8490t K.B. 1~;.2_' 15~ Gl_ 1.37' 15.00~ 15.42' 29°24' DV 1~59' ~k~D.V. 7978 ' TBG. )I/~CER oZ£, · 3 PUP JTS. TOP TO ~TM. (8.09, 4.08 & 1.65) 13.82' 352 ~s. ~. Eus T~. ~/~¢ cz2~.. ~o, 586,4.0, .... 10,615.64'-- X-OVER'2[" x .,~-" EU~ , . 10,6~8.53 ~ C~DO 2~" 1~1 ~L I ~. 2? E~ TBG 10,692~65' wso m~o' [ , . , ' 1, ~. 2~" E~ TBG. ' ' 10,730.94'~ = ,~' 10,795.76 ~ ', ' C~O 2~ ~ ~D~L ~ ., g ~o~'. . ,~ 8,e' ' I ..'' "1 ~. 2~" E~ TBG. / · . . 10,oZ0.49 ~ , ~o,s~.oo,~ cz,~co 2~. "~ uz~m, x~ ~R ~F" ~'OP SUB ~d ~AL AS~~ 850 ' ~92' ' , ' ' ' 1 JT. 2~" E~ T~. 10,879.77' ~ . 11,090' ' TOP OF PLUG 11,190.~0' T.D. 1.25'. 31 i64' 13.10' 31.02' 6.69' 31.60' 1.62' 63.20' 13.20 ' ', 31.71 ' 1.51' 6.37t 31.40' ! S R U 5:54--1,5 CASING & TUBING DETAIL SECTION 15 T. SN.,R.9 W. III' I 4808' ~718' 8539' CASING 10,6 !!.48-10 KB 299t GL 279' ~DV ~ 1021t' 1817.88' -- 2489' DV @ 6027~ · ,, ~- TUB~];G HAi~GER -- 4 JTS. 2~" EUE + 24.00 t.. PUP _ OTIS "S" NIPPLE, Position #2 52 JTS. 2%" EUE 8rd TUBING -'- CAMCO 1.~,.! 1,L~',rDRF:,L 280 JTS. 2~e'' EUE 8rd TUBING · -- 10,$32.~7'.--/~_. C,M4CO ~! MANDt~L . ' / ,2-'. BRO~,~ ."CC" SA9%TY ,.7~. ' ~ PUP ~. 2~" E~ 8rd TUBING ~ 10,688,~' -~. ~0~ 2~a'' x 7" HS-I~I PAC2~R ~o,?~?.?~,~--I~ ..' ~ ~. ~,, ~ ~ Tu~ ' ' ~ ~ "S" .N~P~, Position t/1 . . ~10,150'- 10,751' SQD. . w~o ,o,,~,, ~.' ~ ~ ~s. %" s~ Sr~ TUBING. : 10,774' } I JT.' 2~" E~' 8~ TUBL~G . - '. - i~~ ..... ~o,s~a.ss, ~ c~.:co ,,p,, N~P~ ' !i ~ ,o.,~o. / .. . . . . . '~ ii 10,894' , . , .... 11,000' TD .33' 127.41 ' 1.63' 16/+4.53 ' 12.97' 8801.72' 13.00' 31.68' 1.09' 10.08' 6o01' 31.73' 1.63' 58.85' 13.06' 31.66' .89' .63' 4.21~ 56.4s' .EXHig]T ICASING 8~ TUBING DET,AIL SECTION 22 I 8 N.,R9~,.¢'. IL . 217;] · 8192 ,,, 10695 15' GL 15./~3'- 22°'20 ~ - -- Tubing Hanger .40 ~ 3 PUP Jts. Top to Btm. 0.62 ' ,2.155 4.03' 6.~' · , . Tbg w/A~C COLLARS / 10,7.32.52' fT-- C./d.:CO l~i MANDREL ti . 1 Jt. 2'~" 'EUE 8rd.Tbg. 10,776.23 -- 10,782.91 ' ' ~' OTIS "S". NIPPLE, Position //3 ,. 10804' .- '~ "" ~' ]u,~l o.zo'- 10836 10878 10,845.11 '-- 10,846.00'--~- · . ~o,8S2oO5 ' >--CAMCO MM M~NDrdSL " 2 PUP Jts 2~" EUE 8rd Tbg. C,~MCO' ,D" NIPPLE ~ "D" STOP'SU~ ~d SEAL ASSE~ I Jr, 2~" E~ 8rd Tbg..' , . , B.P. 10975 B.R I1000 .~11058 · i ~ .-_~~!11185 .. ~ ~~[~ .. TOP1111'620', 720°r I~Z~ ~ 11 ,/+~l - ' ~.D. 12~046~ 10,677.53' ~1.69' 13.00 ' 30.71 ' 6.68' 1.60' 12o24' 10.11' 6,00; .89~ 6.49' 29.56' E×HIDIT · . SCU 55 l.-27 CASING 8~ TUBING DETAIL SECTION 27 T, 8N.~R. gW. I BI~ER "D" 11,2-49' ........ :: i 19.25' -- -~ 363.87' -- 979 ' 2883 ' DV e 8118' , . 5~" SPLICE >~-'10,619' _ 11,092o13' :,11,,103.68'-- ....: 11,138.44' --~_. .... 11~155.71' -- , --11,172.94' -- "~*~'' 11,178.49'~ 2~" x 2%" CROSSOVER 11 ~£S. 2%" + PUP JT. OTIS "S" NIPPIZ, Position ~3 346 JTS. 2~" EUE 8rd TBG; :10,682. Cfa,DO I'$! MAhSBEL ..... . 1' JT. 2~'' EUE 8rd TUB~qG BR~fN "CC" SAFETY JT. PUP. JT& 2*e" EUE 8rd TUBING ~0~M~ 2~" x 5.~-" HS-16-1 PACt'~R I ~T. 2~" EUE 8rd TUBING OTI~ "S" NIPPLE Positioh ~/2 PUP JT. 2%" EUE 8rd TUBING HR~','N EY~P~J:SION JT. ' FdP JT. '2~" EUE 8rd TUBLNG C~.~'CO MM ~LLNDREL '~ PUP JT, 2%,~i' EU~ 8rd TUB'n':G ~'- BRC~,,' "C" S~'ZTY JT. ' 'PUP JT. 2~" EU~ 8rd TUB~":G ~ ~EI.(7~ 2[" x 57 HS-16-1 PAC~Z.R . 343.19' 1 ./+7' 11{148'; . ' ~- - ~ 11.,211.92' --,_ ~ I JT. 2%" EUE 8rd TUBL~G OTIS "S" NIPPLE, Position #1 i "--/11.,'-25.-6' -"' ' 2 PUP .YRS. 2%" EUE 8rd TUBING 2 ~ · - C~.ICO "D" NIP?lE I ~11'249'00' L'~ ~"'z:~' ' _Il _ ~R STOP SUB~2. MODEL "D" PAC~}t & SEAL, ~ '11 ~2~.09~ ......... LD~ P~IO1)U~ION TUB~'~G ~.ll 290' 'S,O , 1~..92' II,E: ~L TUBDIG CO'JPL~;GS ~ ~'1~ Bf~)FOi~ 1.10DL~D a'~ COUPLIEGS. ' 31.75' 1.44' 10.11 ' 3.92' 30.84' 1.49' 6.00' 3.76' 6.02' 13.07 ' 4o16' 1 °43 ' 4.16' 3.~6' 29.47' 1.50'. 12.14' 13.12' 3.95' °92 ' 3.91' 7.o~,' 27.36' SBU":314 I'27 I CASING TUBING DETAIL Ii . SECTION 27',.T. 8 N.R. gW. J .OO' $07' ,.124 NOTE: All tubing Coupling are Atlas Bradford ~bdified ABC Couplings. ' GR~ , TUB]]~G th~tlfiF_~ 2 PUP JTS. & 4 JTS. 2~" TUBTNG 148.41' OTIS "S" NIPPLE, Position #2 1496' 10,510.52' - 10,553.81 ' - · 10,560.98'- 326 JTS. 2%" TUBING 131.61 ' 1,60' 10,360.51 ' 13.12' 30.17' 1.07' 6.10' 5-95' 31.41' PUP JT. 2¥ TUB]/~G -- BROWN 2¥' x 6%'% HS-16-1 PACKER ' 1 JT. 2~" TUBING - - 10 598.37'-~ · . :/ ~ OTZS "S" NIPPLE Position #1 · '. , 1.59' .. wso ,o,6,e' ! ,-! "' 3 JTS~ 2~" TUBING ' ' 94.56' , = ~ ---- 10,739.07'--~ ' ' "" ' . ' ' ~ CAMCO "D" IIIJTI2; ' - ' ' .95' ~ ~o~. ~ ~ ,o,,,,. -- / ' : ~, ,rt. ~,, ~:u~ - ~.o7, "D" PKi~_. ' ti ~- -. 10'741'09'-"k/--' BAKER THtLKkD X--OVER, STOP SUB SEAL. ~,SSEMBLY 5.18' . ~ ~ _ _~ ' % rO~ ~0~,. TO 1~ OPE'n';G ~ ~ ~ 10,807,18~ .... ' ..... ~ ~,,o ,o.,,,. ' - '' -' '" ' .,,, . . .. ' ~~-~ ~o,sss,~o~o~p~o ' '" ' · ' ,' " " ,)[ ,."..' ;, ~ ' * ~ ...~o,~, ~.~. · E X H I D I T S C U 54.5-55 CASING & TUBING DETAIL SECTION 55 I8N.,R.gW.- 6488' 9:545' BAKER"F" Pf.C K £R ' ,,,1 ~Ov 200~' 3,000' TUBLNG IIAN ~M{ 33o ~'$. 3~. Eu~ 8fa · ' , 10,100.67'--/_ 2~" x 3~" X-OVF, R . ' 1 JT. 2~" EUE 8rd TUB~IG ~ 10,130.84' CAMC 0 t.$! ~']DPd~ L ., · 10,172'.~' ' 1 ~. 2~" E~ 8~ TU~ B~R l~'?" x 2~" PAC}~R I ~.' 2~', E~ 8rd TUBING ~ ~ 10,210.43' ~'~ "S" NIPPI~, Position ~3 ,o,~' s~D. .' 1 ~. ~" E~ 8~ TUBD~G O 230' _- z ~ 10,243~32' C~CO ~,~ ~L . ' 1, ~. 2~" E~ 8rd TUB~G '~ iO~lO~ ~10~2~ ~ 1 ~, 2~" ~ 8~ ~'~ ~10'356°97' O~.~O0 ~ ~~L 1 JT. 2~" EUE 8rd TUBLNG !o,~, ~'~ 10,400.58 ' - 10,409' '-""- BROWN HS 16-1 7"x 2-~" PACKER .' .1 ~T. 2~. EUE 8rd TUBE,IG : - '- 10,437.21'-- · ~ OTIS "S" NIPPLE, Position #1 -L · 1~,4Z.8.41' PUP JT. 2]" Et~ 8rd TUBING : C~iCO i~! NA~I~L Z Lo,q? e' 10,492.10' -- ~10,4~3.00 --~ 10,$08' -" - - - 10,533.64' - ~-- BAkeR STOP SUB ~-BJd~I'iR SEAL ASSEI'[BLY · 1 JT. 2~" EUE 8rd TUBR;G -- CAMCO "D" EIPPIF~ 1 JT. 2{" EUE 8rd TUBING CASING 29# N-80 ;~02' Z6" N,80 302'- 2:5~' N.80 123~- '4526 · 29;; N.80 4526 - 6,t88 ..PERF'D PUP JT. 2~" EUE 8rd TBO. EXHIBIT TOP of PLUG TD .35' 10,086.87' 1.20'. 28.97' 13.06' 28.78' 6.62 ' 31.13' 1.60' 31.29' 12.81' 31.29' 6.03' ~.40' 1.60' 31.52 ' 13.16' 30.45' · 5.98' 30'65' 1.60' 9.60' 12.74' 31.0~' '80' 8.90' 31.74' .92 ' 31.74' 4.22' SC U ;541- .4-, CASIN6 8~ TUBINCDETAIL SECTION 4. T, 7 N.,R. 9W. 33.7 29.7 33.7 · 15.30' 1413' 655 V O 6983 ' 9590.31 ' ~ · 10,257.07 ' --~ ~ : I0,302.00',. I!- - 10,339.79' !'~"~ '10,375 ' 10,394 ~,o.4o,' 10,404.90 ' .10,4Z6' i ' i10,434' ,;i:,,,,' ~o.44o.44, . ' 10,53g' i,o~U- 10,611.35 ' -- 10,6~3' i ,?.,,8' 10,656.39'-- - 10,659.00 -- = 10,679.14' - · 10,740.00' - t0.775.00' TD TUBLNG HAl;OCR to KB. 314+ PUP JTS. 3'~z" w/ ABC COLLAP~S, EUE (2-',,,, x 2'~,,) x.-ov~, (2[,, x 3~-") x-o~ 21 J"i'S. 2? EUE 8rd .TUBING 1 JT. 2~" EUE 8rd TUBL~!G ~- BAKER F.I. PACI~ER HS 1 JT. 2~" EUE 8rd TUBING OTIS '%" NIPPLE '2 JTS. 2~" EUE 8rd TUBING BRO~ EXPANISON JT. 1 JT. 2%" EUE 8rd TUBING CAMCO ;.~.~ ;.~ANDREL 2 JTS. 2-~" EUE 8rd TUBING ~'--' HRO~,~'I "CC" SAFETY JT. . 2[" PUP JT. EUE TUBING '-- :~0',,~ m-16-1 .(5'.? x 2~," ) 2 JTS. + PUP 2~" EUE 8rd TUBING TOP of PLUG 15.00' 9590.31 ' .83' 665.93 ' 13.15' 31.78' 6.17' 31.62 ' 1.50' 63.61 ' 3.76' 31.78' 13.20' 63.44' .95' 8.00' 3.92' 81.40 ' 13.23 ' 31.81' 2.61 ' ~.25' 14.E9' CASING N-80 17~O'. N-80 150' - 7)621' N-80 362 I'- 5652' N.80 5652'- 6550' EXHiBiTB-8 -'-- ..... II - '' llll I I III -7 ----mc- ------? ...... 'SC U :523-4, CASING & TUBING DETAIL SECTION 4 T. 7N., R.9 Vt. 15.00' 18.5=)' ~ 19.2J.' 19.44' 32.9.5 ' .120 6HOUND LEVEL to TubLug Hanger Tubing }ta~er 00U~LE PIN SUB, 3~z" CS HYDRIL 3 PUP Jts. Top to Etm. 7.58,~.72,&2.21 338 Jts. 3~z" CS HYDRIL 3.59' .65' .20 ~ 13.51 ' · DV O 7516'' ' 10'345'06'-/¢--X-OVER 2/8" ELI~ to ~" 6;S ~RIL · .. % Jt. 2~" E~ 8rd Tbg. '. . 10,376.23' ' c~co " . ~ ~t. 2~, ~ 8~ t~¢. ~ 10,419.46'-~ "' I Jr. 2~, E~ 8~ Tbg. ~ 10,455.04'- . 4~o' ~ ' I Jt. 2~" E~ 8rd Tbg. 10,486.64' - 4~ ~-CAMCO I,DI I,~4D~L 509' ~S~S' 1°,5~'a5~-~ ~0~I t~ -16-1 PtC~R 2~" x ~" 2~# 54z' PUP J~. 2~" E~ 8~ Tbg. ,~ ~n ~, ' : ' 2 Jts. 2~" E~ 8rd Tbg. ~o' . I . . ~ ~t. 2~, ~ 8~ ~b~. :css' . 'J ' PUP ~. 2~" E~ 8rd tbg. / O ~ ' · jZ~".. ~ ~o,~.~8,~ c~,~co .~, ~z~ ._. . ,r,'¢-o ~8~' . --- - ~ (45 cut ~tm. 10,S33.15') ' (~) ~cl~c~ X~gZRS ~th ends 10312.11 ' .83' 30.34' 13.04' 30.19' 5.76' 29.~2-' 1.52t 30.08' 13.11' 30 · 50 ' 3.92' 3.?8' SCU 552-4 CASING 8~ TUBING DETAIL SECTION ~ T.. 7 N.,R. 9 W. 62.05 ' 13.0'1 ' 2.9.90' 3.92' ~4o'~4' 1 .;~7 ' 60.10' 13.00' 29°98 ' .89' 0.53' ?.53 ' 57~62' i'i 20" 9 30' ~' DV . 1500' ["~ 13~" CEM ~ 3005 ' ~ DV ~ 7509' ~ 10,081.09' -- : 10,11.3.73 ~ -- CASING ~3~ N-80 26* N-80 23~ N-80 26" N-80 29~ N- 80 26~ P-I I0 LANDING MANDREL 330 JTS. 3~" EUE TUBING ~- 2'%"x 33~-'' X-OVER 1 JT. 2~o'' EUE TUBI/~G ~- C~Lv~co 1'~! 1-~DHEL 1 JT. 2~,'' EUE TUBTNG - 10,158.51' -2-- BAKER FH 7" x 2;,'' PACKER 1 JT. 2%" EUE TUBING ~$O 10~196' · '-10,19~.01'--~_ OTIS "S" N~P~,.Position //3 ~0~1' · . ~,o.~,r' ' 4 JTS. 2~" E~ TUB~G ~10,302' 10,~06' ~,o.~,~* 10,323.03'- C~MCO ~4 ~D~L 10,~' ~ , · 7" 2%. : 10,381.87' ~ OT~ "S" NIPP~ Position ~2 : - 10,393.49' : : C~CO ~4 ~~L 10,~8.00,- ~ BRO%EI ~1~1 7" x 2~d' PAC~ ~ - { . 1 +P~ ~. 2~," E~ TUB~G I JT. 2~" ELE TUB~IG i ~ -- - 10,519.77' - C~£0 ~ ~J~DREL F 1 JT. 2%" E~ TUB~G B~ MOD. "D" P}~. ~ r,._ ~ ~ 10,565.00' ~ B~R STOP SUB ~~ B~R SEAL ~EI.~ ~ 10,565 ~r ,o.~,,' . ~ ~ ~. 2%. E~ TUB~ .. ~ : 10'~1'59~ C "DO "D" NIPP~ ~ ~,o.~s~' 10,638.29' ~ ~}~'D P~ ~. 2%" ~ ~,o.~o' ,-:~ ~ I0 6';' ~-J I~ ' ,'~o ! ' ~ %VSO 10,689' ' - .'---- 10,dSO' TOP Ok' PLUG .. .':;. 11,520 ' TD 503' ' 303' - 1296' 1296' - 4793' 4793' - 6205' 620 5'- 7895' 7895 - 9554 .35' 10,063.74' .' 1.13' 31.51 ' 13.01 ' 31,77' 6.68' 31.82 ' 1.61 ' 124.41 ' 13.06' 29.72 ' 6.04' 10.OZ' 1.56' 10.06 ' 12o94' 31.57' 5-99' 42.54' 1.60' 31.64' ' 12.95' 31.65' . ' 31.72' .92 ' 31.65' 4.13' SCU 114. - 4' CASING 8, TUBING DETAIL SECTION 4 T. ?N.iR. gW. KB. ~-TUBING HANGER 3 PUP JTS. 3~z" EUE 8rd Top to BTM. 1.70, 8.00, 9.70. ]9.40 287 JTS. 3I/Z# EUE 8rd ~ - I / W/ABC COLLARS 8825.32 ~DV ~ 7015 . . . -- 8,860.0~X_OVER ~z' EUE 8rd x CS MYDRIL .91 2 - ~ ti ~!' ' ' ' 40 JTS. 3~ CS HYDRIL 1238.33 -- lO ' 099 ' 26 ~-X-OVER 3~Z CS HYDRIL x2~ EUE 8rd Pin .65 [ 1 Jt 2%" Eb'S 8rd Tbs. · 31.51 -- 10,131.42.>_ UI'IS "S" NIPPLE, PosS.%ion ~'/3 1.59 [. I J~ 2~" EUE Srd Tbf. 31.49. -- 10 '164 ' 50 /~--OTIS "XA" SLEEVE . 3.161 _ 10,199.161 ... 1 J~ 2~" EUE 8rd Tbs. '~-BAKER FH, 2~"z 7" Zg~ i Jt 2~" EUE 8rd Tbs. -- 10 , 237 00 ' _/~z~'6' ' ~--CAMCO MM M~NDREL z~---' 10,281.2 -_ _~ -- 10,318.81 ~'-- 10,375.51 ,,:~¢,10,381.50I == -- 10,414.55 -- -- -- --BROWN HS-16-1, 2~~= ?, 29# I Jt 2~" EUE 8rd Tbg. ~--CAMCO MM MANDREI- I Ot ?,'~' EUE 8rd Tbg. 2 PUl) JTS. , 6.11 & 6.13 ~-BROWN HS-16-1, 2~/8:X ?, 29# ~; 0TIS "S" .NIPPLE, Position #2 1, Jt 2%" Eh% 8rd Tbg. .. "--CAMCO MM MANDREL · . 2. JTS. TBG. 31.50 & o PUP JT. ~' 10 499 -- , . STOP SUB . · · . STOP SUS & S~ALS for --10 504 35 ,o~'/a' ' CAM'CO 2 ~ '.. D NIPPLE ' . · ' 2 JtS 2 "EUE E~d 31.69'& --10735 · W/nTiS. CUT ON 45' 0 10,567' 31.50' 6.62 · 31.22 12.97 3~.31 6.03 31.50. 12.97 31.49 12.24 5.99 1.59 31.46 13.02 63.01 8.00 O.Z27 0.~9: 62.19' T.D. 10,814' .- EUE, Br, S CU 541-8 CASING 8, TUBING DETAIL SECTION 8 T, TN.,R.9 W. GL 17.20' 36.35'- DV H 1488' 2998' DV C 9504' Top of Cellar to XB ~op of Cellcr to Tubing Hanger 2ubing ~ PoP Jts. ~. O.Oo (8j50,6.~0,2.10~1.50) (TOP to BOfTOM) 15.O0' 2.20' .55' 18.60, 295 Jts 4" O,D. 9199.22' . 9235.57'-. X-OVER, 3~"EUE 8rd X 4" O.D./I.D. 2.5't 1.10' 27 Jts 3~z" EUE 8rd Tbg. 816.65' 10~053.32' X-OVER 2~" x 3~" 0.50' · .. ' 1 Jt 2~" EUE 8rd Tbg. 30.92' .10,084.74'-~ OTIS "S" NIPPLE, Pgsition /~4 1.59' / ~ 1 Jt 2rs" EUE 8rd Tbg. 30.18' 10,116.51'~ ~ 2~" XO S~ ' ' 3.O2' 10,1~9.97"--~' · . I Jt. ~" E~ 8~ Tbg. 30.~' B~R FH PACER, ~" x 7" 29/% 6.63' ~2 J~'s 2~" E~ 8rd Tbg. 59.95' 10,216~55' ~ ~ C~CO ~2,~ ~D~L 13005' ' I Jt 2~" E~ 8rd Tbg. 29.~1~ 10,259J51'~ BR0'~ ~-16-1 PACER, 2~" x 7" 2~ 6.00' .' 1. Jt 2~" E~ 8rd Tbg. ' 29.~7' 10,334.47'~ ~ ~-16-1 PACER, 2~" x 7~ 29/~ 5.97' 1~,371..86~~ . 1~ Jt 2~" E~ 8rd Tbg. 31.~2' ~ "S" NIPPY, Pomition /~3 1.~' .. C~.DO l. ff~ ~;DP~L 13~20' i ;8;-O,~8-5-~~ .... ~'/Jt 2~'E~ 8rd Tbg. · 30.98' STOP SUB a~w PZC~ - ' O.~2 ~ 10,~9.00'-- ~ STOP SUB ~d SEA~ for B~]R~F"~. 5.38~ 3 Jts 2~" E~ 8~ Tbg. ~/Btm 45~ 91.40' 10,546.~'- ' ~op of Pi~ 10,700' T,D. 10,785' SCU 12-9 CASING ~ TUBING DETAIL SECTION 9 T.?N.R.9W. 12 o70 ' ~ ~3./,?,,Z~ .TV, .65' 14.12 1.60' GROUND ]ZNEL TO K.B. i' TUBING CR~S-ow~n 3~" x 2~. OTIS "S" NIPPLE, Position #2 4- PuP JOINTS 2-~" EUE 8rd TUBING 47 Jts. 2{" EL~ 8rd TUBING 1518.07'-- ~_ "~A" C;J.Ico YJJ~DREL - 26 Jtso 2{" EUE 8~ T~G 2346.50 ' "~*~A" C~,:C0 D~D~L ~ DV ~ 7503' ~ ' 275 Jts. 2~" E~ 8r~ T~G --~O,~1.32'--~~ "XA" -- 10,~4.~' ~ B~ F.tI. PAC~ 2{" x ~ IlO~l 1040~ 1048 ~ ~o5o/ I0~~ ~0~ 7JREPERE. I J 163 ., 11201 1126t REPERF. ~ Jts. 2{" E~ 8rd TUB~G 112~ ' --11,140.10' ~ - ~IS "XA" S~ ,,,,,h"°-- 11,150.00' ~_ CR~VER. 2%" x_ 2%" ' 2 ~P Jt~. 2%" E~ 8~ T~G 2 Jts~ 2~" E~ 8rd T~G 11,228.20 ' ,~.~'~zV ~V ~ ~B~ "CC" S~TY JOlT 11 ~ "XA" S~E~ ' --11,420.68' I ~- OT]B "X~" ST.~'.VE .- -. _- : ~ 11~515o24~ - I Jr. 2~" EUE 8rd TUBING 2 Jts. 2~" EUE 8rd TUBEG BAkeR St~AR S~VE 1 1 ,.~0 ' TC.P CF PLUG --11,555t ''-T.D~ 28.18' 1474.17' 13.19' 815.24' 13.00' 8611.82' 3.18t 6.60' 3.18' '-, ,6.66, 1.05' 18.15' 59.00 ' 1.39' 2.88, 5.44' 24.34' 119.81 ' ,. , 2.86' "' 5.44' 30 032 ' · , 2.85' 29.31 ' o90~ 60,92' .55' E X Hi D IT S.C,U 4t 2- I 0 CASING & TUBING DETAIL SECTION I0 T. 7N.,R. gW. Well No. INITIAL pRODucTION Oil Water Gas EXHIB il PRODUCTION STATISTICS SWANSON RI%~R UNIT CURRENT PRODUCTION May 1973 Oil Water Gas GOR Completion Date CUMULATIVE PRODUCTION May 1973 Oil Water Gas 34-10 212-10 12-15 14-15 21-15 23-15 432-15 334-15 41-15 43-15 211-15 412-22 14-22 21-22 23-22 12-27 314-27 21-27 23-27 331-27 212-27 34-28 43-28 14-33 23-33 24-33 32-33 41-33 221-33 12-34 21-34 _ B/D B/D 492 3 -- -- 327 3 66 0 371 8 369 4 392 9 465 5 433 2 55 1 _ -- 515 5 320 43 364 4 304 3 461 9 502 5 495 5 488 30 848 28 304 221 350 1 540 9 337 3 221 1 2,328 5 583 5 382 4 -- -- 423 5 625 1 MCF/D 71 190 41 8 52 51 53 61 100 16 2,415 71 32 34 34 58 90 81 73 129 45 61 99 65 55 3,838 99 75 1,357 76 82 B/D B/D MCF/D CFB Shut In Shut In 163 303 44 Shut In 92 108 39 238 158 '209 Water Injection Gas Injection 273 1,093 195 Shut In Shut In water Injection 347 500 1,945 Shut In 624 208 7}706 Shut In Gas Injection 800 164 5,949 442 859 2,162 Gas Injection Shut In 413 1,651 2,743 483 822 5,344 101 42 267 212 29 '147 272 427 881 723 5,599 12,357 7,438 4,887 6,645 11,064 2,647 693 8-24-57 5-28-60 10-5-60 7-25-59 6-7-61 4-5-61 · 11-15-59 8-4-61 12-9-62 11-1-61 4-12-62 8-11-62 2-2-63 1-3-62 3-9-60 11-30-59 6-14-60 5-5-61 2-5-61 12-26-58 10-6-61 5-16-63 7-22-61 6-11-62 6-10-61 1,689 2- ..... 6~.f21-----~,624 ...... 12'23~72 Shut In 8-15-60 Shut In 3-12-61 Water Disposal 5-6-62 426 791 1,568 3,684 10-21-60 1,100 73 9,741 8,858 3-25-63 B B MCF 232,550 1,596~696 14,269 1,001,518 1,750,307 819,748 577,501 1,262,031 142,023 .- 731,389 718,110 697,277 777,576 1,108,844 1,407,846 3,446,674 1,835,430 177,007 1,825 1,044,621 2,581,557 1,635,096 1,298,989 1,933,297 2,926,886 -- 3,838,262 3,964,694 126,352 367,572 1,314 320,969 583,542 125,665 1,141,735 762,188 90,566 -- 214,689 673,258 645,117 419,638 636,549 82,414 989,623 1,836,803 132,919 1,326 1,802,830 1,119,513 541,201 150,799 423 237,449 307,300 -- 824,501 87,154 97,429 78,337 3,077 1,478,582 1,521,616 132,221 675,587 1,361,580 121,087 2,672,776 140,472 2,721,657 1,775,355 723,48~ 488,665 254,000 3,948,556 4,089,457 35,266 5,015,574 2,926,457 8,346,833 794,966 2,576,707 852,212 3,934,187 5,468,629 1,554,565 7,650,758 14,384,618 EX-HIBIT 6 PRODUCTION STATISTICS SOLDOTNA CREEK UNIT We 11 No. 12-3 14-3 21-3 23-3 12-4 314-4 21-4 323-4 332-4 34-4 341-4 43-4 243-4 14-5 32-5 34-5 41-5 42-5 43-5 21-8 32-8 33-8 --34-8 341-8 43-8 243-8 312-9 14-9 21-9 23-9 32-9 34-9 41-9 43-9 412-10 11-16 21-16 31-16 34-33 343-33 13-34 14-34 24-34 INITIAL PRODUCT_ION CURRENT PRODUCTION May, 1973 CUMULATI%qE PRODUCTION May, 1973 Oil Water Gas Oil Water B/D B/D MCF/D 600 6 110 482 5 107 640 7 122 441 96 75 524 10 102 563 6. ~123 599 6 101 783 8 169 783 8 152 639 7 130 438 4 120 692 7 141 - - 1,282 741 56 417 211 4 42 418 4 75 460 5 90 1,760 218 293 481 5 116 580 1 86 396 4 90 B/D B/D 875 261 936 401 923 138 382 679 472 5 Gas Injection Shut In Gas Injection Gas Injection 1,321.~ 13 Gas Injection Shut In Mud Disposal. Shut In 135 125 1,359 8 1,365 341 1,127 139 1,720 _ 3 996 387 1,166. 2 Gas _ ~-~ GOR MCF/D .... CFB Completion Date 11,910 13,607 3-23-61 11~024 11,779 8-2-61 2,236 2,423 1-4-62 1,608 4,213 11-12-63 9,264 19,639 4-8-61 8-13-60 11-5-61 6-1-61 6-5-60 18,342 13,890 11-27-60 3-21-60 5-14-61 8-17-61 11-3-69 118 872 3-11-62 24,906 18,322 10-9-61 3,914 2,868 9-20-61 2,611 2,316 5-8-72 3,327 1,934 5-28-61 10,221 10,266 2-5-63 5,270 4,519 2-22-61 Oil Water B B .'.[CF 2,982,337 326,795 12,702,587 2,183,900 516,541 12,093,435 2~695,685 677,589 7,598,380 1,828,406 1,513,304 6,077,203 5~568,289 78,475 19,644,431 1,997,694 20,185 693,595 2,013,287 29,283 3,246,629 3,377,212 35,732 1,930,870 2,918,782 28,865 1,317,430 5,611,505 200,498 17,415,528 679,758 6,950 161,754 4,353,049 177,234 9,~01,273 7~!,601 346,415 103,460 369,848 581,353 324,493 442,051 3,161,194 41,263 8,593,886 2,065,881 710,700 1,588,077 556,292 45,788 374,638 2,583,855 34,189 1,666,127 4,320,572 652,483 12,343,163 4,589,613 51,596 7,895,473 . . , _[~q ......... 1,711 ...... 139,300 ?07,762 5,779 -. 108,002 30,897 4,551,950 1,4.~1,296 2,320 2 156 317 .... 3 ...... 59 627 7 182 582 6 155 - - 1,381 633 7 130 465 5 91 753 8 169 635 7 164 5O2 5 105 583 6 95 577 6 144 570 8 91 - 1,000 - 1,748 2 407 291 2 57 1,370 24 203 527 6 101 460 5 95 1,695 3 13,051 504 5 93 2,823 8 675 2,320 2 -156 ~ 67 5-20-73 '25,519 544 2~6 ...... 113 ~ -208-i_28_6~ ' 1~380,702 Gas Injection 7-14-61 562,269 690 1 21,637 4-24-61 1,772,480 . Shut In 2-24-62 Gas Injection 10-9-60 511,833 5~230 782 2 9,730 12,435 12-26-60 4,724,310 49,993 1,261 92 13,395 10,624 7-19-61 4,060,084 138,884 435 10 14,893 34,237 7-16-61 2,193,865 39,267 433 12 635 1,466 1-16-61 425,556 91,347 648 10 7,176 11,075 11-8-61 3,161,801 - 125,124 7,572 4,587,228 729,742 1,323 567 10,021 6-11-61 445 322 4,262 9,572 4-4-63 2,206,228 1,148,861 Water Injeotion 5,006 1-17-70 12,795 - 709,268 3,194 391 16 2,738 7-9-71 14,454 2,337,14Q 46,662 189 2 4,706 7-8-63 587 12 6,121 8,012 8-31-69 __. 1,016,434 164,094 925 . 89 7~'43- 8,591 11-12-60 --- 4,90i~947 ' ~37,447 Gas Injection 3-8-61 .1,4~Q;267 , 56,191 1,321 1 969 734 12-24-71 57'5,724 5,548 Shut In 12-23-60 3,902,225 1,207,794 111,518 10,114,040 15,010,783 4,161,424 8,360,975 5,535,276 15,288,667 3,973,395 2,809,220 3,233,469 3,658,851 11,921,199 365,585 4,899,202 8,204,219 8,410,140 - _. ~ ' -: '.-' . '; ~ f ...... ~ ¢' ' ~ "~1[ :.- j ~ooo WATER - . - ~ -:::: , -:.~j::-t:_~_.~ ~ ~ - ~ : :[I.':-' :::-'-I-~ .- - ~: : - - ~-- ~" :'~ : -; '-':,---:-~':' i .... ~ . .: INJECTION - ' B/D ~ooo~ ..... - :."~'--,'--:-: .... J-'-:-F~- : -c-~" ~ ' - ........ ~ J'' ~ ~' ' ' J '~ ~ .... ~ ' '. :. · ~ :- - .:~ ; ] --J I [ ' ~ '[ ..... --. : : ......... : . - ; - ' -'~'- . . - ; ' - ' - I" : ..... J ' - - . , . .- [ · , . . : - --, . -- : : ]; --~ ~ . - ~.- _; _ .i:. . z - . -.- ~ ,-: : [ : ; : -' . -~_ :_r_ :[:-_ .~ .... :~:-:_: ~. . ~.--~-:-..:. .t .-.: . _; -- ~ . : : . -. . ~ .~ ~ : ...... ~ t ......... ~ ~ ~- Z:- ' .' _ ~ ' : . ~ - OIL ' : ' ~TH WATER iNJ~ff~ON:-: ;' :~ ~.:' ':-' .:[- '] :. :' '] ' ' PRODUCTION ' : = . ~ . ~ - ,~ ............. ; .................... : ...... 10GO: , ,. · ... , . _. J_ . . 600. 500~ ' J ' ~ -' ':_:: r: ........ . -~ ~- i": --: :- -~ : '-' ' - ' ' ' :-: - : , _' . - : _-.-- ::-_~.-_: ly_- : _ :_. _': : _'_-: ._-~ -.~..;.i :, · 400. : :'---:'.- ~ · '-: ~ WI:TH CONT-I~uED G~A~ INgECT[ON:' ~ ~ ~ : - ................ ................. . O0 0 I00 ~0 WO.R $4-10 FAULT BLOCK[ WATER INJECTION [ PERFORMANCE HISTORY SWANSON RIVER FIEL9 I I, EXHI BiT E GAS RATE INJECTION OIL 500,00OF,. 400,0 00 '.*~-~-.**-.i* 3oo,ooot"-;-4-' (J~CF/D) PRODUCTION B/D 30~000 20,00 ~,ooo .......... T' ....... I 8,000. oooi T 4,000[ .................................. ~_ ........ 500,000 400,000 300,000 200,000 . ~iOO,O00 go,o00 !80,000 70,000 60,000 ,50,000 40,000 3C,COC !~' , 20,000 , I0,000 9,000 8,000 000 ........ + ............................. ~ .................. + ......... i ............. l sooo ................. ~,ooo! ................ I : .......... ~ I ................... 2,ooo : I ........... ~ ......................................... : ............................. ~ .......................................................... ~ .......... -t," GAS PRODUCTION (MCF/D) ,' I T ....... cool ........ '~ .................. i~._ ~ ._' .... : . ....... ~ ', .............. ': l ~ ' ~ .................................. . . ' ' :: ........ : ' ........ ' /~V/- ......... : .................................. i. ' ................... '. ; , ............................... ', , + I .......... , ~oo ' :l i I Ii,_,.:.. i :' -tit-r :. ............ . ................. · : ................ .... = .... ........... o ---L f600 o ............... ...... s nn;- .......... :--:-iL .......... ~ .......... .LA ........ -4: ............ -:. ........................... ~ ..........................................................................i_ .............. : ........... : ............ i ........... 4- ........... ~soo ----- L - ' ' ' :: "' ": ; '-~/-'--~'`~"7- ' : ''' :. :' , . ' 400 i ...... ._ ........... : ...... i3oo --~--12oo , . _ ' .... :. ....... '__:;. · .... '___ T'.L .'. ...... L_..;+ ...... ' ·, ~9 ~,, 7o ;... 7~ "~ ~ / ~ ~ 7~ I ~, 7~ ~ ~ 7s | 1'~ 7~ [~ 77 ~ t t ' _ ............ '... - ......... L .............__L t ?. ...... ! ............ L_' ........ i ~ ' ' , ~' _ ..... _.,--.2 ........._L ........ i ................................ I ['10° J SWANSON RIVER FIELD HEMLOCK ZONE GAS INJECTION PROdECT PERFORMANCE HISTORY EXHIBIT D ,.,'/,4 -/J7 APPLICATION FOR NEW CONSERVATION ORDER SWANSON RIVER FIELD NOTIFICATION OF PARTNERS AND USGS PARTY RECEIVING APPLICATION ADDRESS DATE OF DELIVERY OR MAILING METHOD OF TRANSMITTAL United States.Geological Survey 218 "E" Street Anchorage, Alaska June 28, 1973 Delivered Atlantic Richfield Company 711 W.' 8th Avenue Anchorage, Alaska June 28, 1973 Delivered Union Oil Co. of California 909 W. 9th Avenue Anchorage, Alaska June 28, 1973 Delivered Marathon Oil Company 3111 "C" Street .June 28, 1973 Anchorage, Alaska Delivered