Chevron operates the Texas 10 13/16 lease that covers all of Section 13 and the north half of 16 in Blk 40 T3S. They’ve recently pulled 6 new permits on the lease which is what drew my attention to it. There has been some activity on the lease dating back to 2017 but it is not as active as adjacent sections.
I have ownership in Section 13 Blk 40 T3S Cert 3296, T&P Railway Co Survey. I have never seen payments on this lease. Could it be that I don’t own what I think I own? The RRC has a survey name of TB Brashears but I don’t know if that’s an alternate name. Or could it be that Chevron missed the ownership. That is possible because the first wells were spudded in the middle of an estate being settled and it’s possible this got missed. I am gathering information to ask Chevron, if that’s what’s needed.
When you post about wells, include the full name (no abbreviation) and preferably an API number. In this case, the Texas Ten wells are drilled from Section 42, Block 40, T-2-S (not T-3-S), but the producing well bores are in Section 13 and Section 16, TB Brashears Survey, Block 40 (located to the south and has no Township designation). According to RRC, the most recent Texas Ten permits were issued in 2019. Sections 13 and 16 are not adjacent in Block 40, T3S or T2S. COG operates wells in Section 13, Block 40, T3S, under Braun and Parks Field. Are you in pay on these?
Apologies. I was focused on the land, not the wells. The new permits are for the GBG Hercules 37-16 (A-F) wells, API 329478(60-65). They are indeed drilled from Section 42 T2S but the permit shows them transiting to Section 13 T3S. I know I am missing something basic here because yes, COG does operate in Section 13 Blk 40 T3S, A-279 and I am in pay on those. I am confused as to why there appears to be another Section 13 Blk 40 T3S, A-861.
This is a section idenfication mistake by the surveyor on the plat. Abstract 861 in Midland County is Section 13, Block 40, TB Brashears Survey on the GLO viewer and Section 13, NO BLOCK #, TB Brashears Survey, on the RRC Gis Viewer. It is not T-3-S and not part of the T&P RR Co Survey. And it is not close to Sec 13, Blk 40, T3S. Section 16, A-860, is properly identified on the plat. How interesting and unusual that the error was not caught by RRC in review before approval.
Thank you. This has vexed me for 7 years. I have asked many this question but you’re the first to say it was an error in the survey. The original land was purchased in 1909 and there is a reasonable legal description for it in the deed (not metes and bounds) but this “duplicate” in the survey has always bothered me.
The error is not in the GLO or RRC records for these sections (sometimes called surveys). You can always double check by the Abstract number which is unique and never repeated within any one Texas county. The problem is that the original surveyor hired by the oil company to draw a well plat made a mistake on the plat and then it has been perpetuated by successive surveyors. Your Section 13, Blk 40, T-3-S is Abstract 279.