I noticed this in next month’s docket… https://www.dmr.nd.gov/oilgas/dockets/2025/docket121725.pdf
Phoenix Operating LLC wants to set up a standup spacing unit that includes some minerals we own in section 25,145-99. (Case 32408) As far as I know nobody in the family has been contacted about leasing anything there…The item mentions 5 horizontal wells, but nobody in the family has heard anything. I’m just curious what to expect.
I think there may be some leases recorded in sections 24 and/or 36… but not from our family… and we don’t hold minerals in those sections.
I did notice that this item is continued to January, but I expect it will come up then.
Thanks for any help.
1 Like
Are your legals right? Township 145, Range 99, Section 25? That looks like the Little Missouri National Grassland area or some other government owned/managed area. The green colors on the map (GIS map on NDO&G website) reflect government but there’s too many similar shades of green to be sure which it is. Do you own acres there? There’s literally been zero activity in that area. Just wondering if the Legals are wrong? I don’t know enough but definitely look for this again next month.
It occurred to me that the legal description might be wrong in the docket… but yes, we hold mineral rights in that section… we have had several leases that include that section, but no wells.
I was interested because the docket indicates establishment of a standup spacing unit that includes a section to the north, and one to the sourh of our section… we hold rights in a number of odd-numbered sections in 145/99.
I’d never seen that happen before.
The docket (on the link I gave before) reads “Application of Phoenix Operating LLC for an order extending nd amending the applicable orders for Charlie Bob-Bakken Pool to establish a standup 1920-acre spacing unit described as Sections 24, 25, and 36, T.145N., R.99W., McKenzie County,
ND, and authorize five horizontal wells to be drilled on such unit or granting such other relief as may be appropriate.”
Thanks for the advice to look again next month… I will be sure to do so.
We noticed there seems to be more leasing activity in the area, including one we got this year on another section in 145/99.
For what it’s worth… the case is still showing for the January Dockets list with the same legal description… so I’m guessing the legal is probably correct.
Would it be a good idea to contact Phoenix to see if they plan to lease? Or just wait to hear from them? As far as I know none of my relatives have been contacted yet.
I’m a tad bit confused. Your original post seems to be asking how to get the land leased, as you indicate it isn’t. “As far as I know nobody in the family has been contacted about leasing anything there” and then in your 2nd post you indicate that there have been leases. “yes, we hold mineral rights in that section… we have had several leases that include that section, but no wells”.
If the property is leased (and it most likely is), they will do their thing and then send out paperwork. They will essentially drill through 24 through 25 and through 36, Three sections of well production…or in reverse order. Whichever, it appears if your property is leased you will get payment under these wells and be paid for 5 wells. They will total all the production from these wells/sections and divide it by each owner in the appropriate share.
I hope this answers your questions as best as possible. ???
Yes… I should have said we have leases on a different section in 145/99…
To clarify… we have a recent lease on a different section (S9 s 1/2) in 145/99, but nobody has sent us (or anyone else in the family that I know of)… any sort of lease on Section 27.
I guess I’m wondering if it’s normal to have a drilling/spacing unit established without a lease.
So nobody in the family has heard anything from Phoenix (or anyone else) about section 27… but there’s this item to set up a spacing drilling unit that includes it… in the January docket. I did look on the recorder’s website (MCVV) and could see there were some leases on section 36 and 28… which are also in the proposed spacing unit.
I’m wondering if it’s unusual for someone to propose a drilling/spacing unit without having leases in hand. I can see they might just be separate processes with different possible timelines, but it seemed odd, as we’ve never had this happen before.
Okay. Section 27 IS NOT included in this proposal. Sections run as shown. The applicable ones are in the lower right hand corner. !
[Screenshot_20251228_214210_Google|522x499](upload://fIBKIi7vAL5rOr2F3mxeGYx4
iKN.jpeg)
Thank you! You’re being extremely patient with me fumbling around about this… and I appreciate it… and I’ve probably rushed around trying to type these entries… getting too old for this, I guess. I have trouble reading the section numbers on my map without reading glasses… and this is the only context in my life where I look at section numbers. And that serpentine pattern of numbering is confusing (to non-industry civilians). Also I did call out 25 in my first posting… I just got it wrong in the second one trying to correct the word “section” in the first.
So to further correct… We hold minerals in some of the odd-numbered sections, of 145/99, including both 25 and 27, 25 being the one I’m questioning about that is between 24 and 36… and in the proposed spacing unit. is for 24,25, and 36, the 3 sections along the western side that are the farthest South in 145/99. (I appreciate your screeen shot with the easily legible numbers). Our section is wedged between the two that appear to have some sort of leases on them.
Again my question is about timing… is it unusual to have that proposal before we were contacted to lease - which we have not been yet… or should we expect to hear from Phoenix - or some other entity - in the near future?
The last lease the family had prior to last year… was for all of our minerals in 145/99, which includes a number of sections.
Section 25 is not, to my knowledge, leased by anyone in the family, but is included in the proposed spacing unit.
Again, I’m sorry for typos and my misreading of the maps previously.
Maybe consider it a general question about the timing of spacing units vis-a-vis leases… which should come first?
Hopefully there isn’t some stupid typo in this one!
No it is NOT usual for them to do this before they have a lease. It also needs to be said that it is highly unusual to see acres that have not been leased yet.
You indicate that you have had other leases in that area… And if that last lease did not include section 25, then I would think that they would be contacting you to lease.
You could contact them and ask about this.
Good luck with it all and Happy New Year!
Thanks for the reply… I had sent a query through their website, maybe two weeks ago… but no answer so far… but it is the holidays. I sent another today.
This section was leased at least once or twice in the past - the last one was more than 10 years ago when Hess leased all of our minerals in that township… but never did any drilling. I think my parents may have had leases on it in like the 70s or 80s… but nothing was ever drilled. The only royalties they ever got were in the pre-Bakken days on the east side of the township.
I’ll probably open a subscription to the county recorder (MCVV) website again next year, as I’ve done occasionally in the past, and watch for leasing activity again.
Happy new year to you as well… and thanks for following and answering.
