Published on:

Royalty owners should be aware that they are entitled to severance tax refunds on gas wells drilled in certain “tight sand” formations, including the Barnett Shale. If a field is designated as a “tight sand,” Texas law provides for a reduction in severance tax from 7.5% to 2% for a period of ten years, or until the operator has recovered one-half of the well’s drilling and completion costs, whichever comes first. But the operator must apply for this exemption to the Texas State Comptroller’s office after the well has been completed. Until the exemption is granted for the well, the operator pays severance tax at the 7.5% rate, and once the exemption is granted the Comptroller refunds the excess tax paid to the operator. The operator should then pass on to the royalty owners their share of the refund, since the royalty owner bears his/her share of the severance tax. This refund could occur several months after production first commences.

According to Gene Powell’s Barnett Shale Newsletter, there are 1,452 Barnett Shale wells in the “pending file” at the Texas Railroad Commission. Wells in the pending file have not yet been assigned a lease code number. Until a lease number has been assignd by the Railroad Commission, the operator cannot file for a tight sand exemption to the Comptroller. Powell says that the 1,452 pending wells have been producing for an average of eight months, so the operators of those wells are entitled to severance tax refunds of millions of dollars, once the paperwork is done.

Royalty owners should inquire with their lessees as to the status of the lessee’s severance tax exemption. The additional royalty resulting from the exemption should be 5% of the gas royalties previously paid, from date of first production.

Published on:

Conveyances of minerals in Texas usually describe the interest conveyed or reserved as an interest in “oil, gas or other minerals.” Texas courts have struggled mightily to try to discern what the parties meant by the term “other minerals.” If the parties did not specifically name a particular mineral, such as coal or uranium, did they intend that substance to be included in their reference to “other minerals”?

Making the matter more complicated, the Texas Supreme Court has changed its mind on how to approach the problem. At one point, the Court adopted a “surface destruction test” to determine whether a substance was intended to be a “mineral.” Under this rule, the Court reasoned that the parties would not intend to sever ownership of a substance from the surface estate if the commercial way to mine the mineral was by strip mining, so a near-surface substance would not be considered a “mineral.” Then the Court decided that such a test was not workable, and it adopted (but only for reservations or conveyances of “other minerals” after the date of its opinion) a different test, the “ordinary and natural meaning” test. Under this test, a substance is a mineral if it is within the “ordinary and natural meaning” of the word “mineral.” In effect, each substance must be tested by litigation to determine if it is a “mineral” within the ordinary and natural meaning of that term. Once a court has decided that a particular substance is a mineral under this test, it is a mineral for all reservations and conveyances of “oil, gas and other minerals” to which the test applies..

Because of all of the confusion about the term, I have created a short-hand decision tree to use when looking at a conveyance or reservation, to help me remember how to apply these tests.  My decision tree is below.

 

Continue reading →

Published on:

Below is an interesting chart published by the U.S. Energy and Informaton Administration, showing how the U.S. used energy in the U.S. in 2007:

U.S. Primary Energy consumption by source and sector 2007.jpg

The sources of energy are on the left, the sectors of the economy that consume energy are on the right. The lines connecting supply sources and demand sectors show which sectors use which sources of energy. For example, petroleum represents 39.8% of the total supply of energy in the U.S. Seventy percent of that petroleum is used for transportation. Petroleum is the source of 96% of all sources of energy for the transportation sector. The transportation sector consumes 29% of all energy consumed in the U.S.

The chart reveals how natural gas is used in the U.S.: 34% in the industrial sector, 34% in the residential and commercial sector (as fuel to heat and cool homes and buildings), 30% to generate electricity. Most electricity is used by residential and commercial buildings, so in reality electricity is an intermediate demand sector. If it is eliminated as a demand sector, 61% of total demand would show as consumed by residential and commercial buildings. Natural gas would supply 14.8% of total energy used in residential and commercial buildings, either directly for heating and cooling or indirectly through its use to generate electricity. 

Published on:

The Texas Railroad Commission has denied Chesapeake Energy’s request for permission to produce its Ramey 1H well in Tarrant County, because the well was drilled in violation of RRC spacing rules. Chesapeake drilled the horizontal well with a 3,553-foot lateral, even though its permit was for a lateral of only 1,839 feet. The RRC ordered Chesapeake to plug back the well so as to comply with the permit. The problem was that the wellbore passed wihin 330 feet of an unleased tract, violating the Barnett Shale field rules that require all wells to be located at least 330 feet from the boundary of the lease or unit. Kevin Cunningham, regional counsel for Chesapeake’s southern division, said that the ruling “would have the negative effect of rendering a significant amount of gas” unrecoverable under Chesapeake’s leases. For the story in the Fort Worth Star-Telegram, click here. Situations like those faced by Chesapeake will drive the debate for forced-pooling legislation in Texas.

Published on:

Congress passed the 2010 federal budget without adopting the Obama Administration’s proposal to eliminate several tax provisions favorable to the oil and gas industry, including percentage depletion and expensing of intangible drilling costs. See my earlier post discussing these tax provisions.  Adam Haynes, EVP of Texas Independent Producers and Royalty Owners Association (TIPRO), was quoted in TIPRO’s April 17 newsletter as saying that that the industry had “dodged a bullet,” and that repeal of these tax provisions, which purportedly cost taxpayers $80 billion a year, “would very negatively impact the exploration for needed energy here and throughout the nation.”

Published on:

The Energy Information Administration has revised its forecast for 2009 U.S. industrial natural gas demand, to decline by 7.4% this year. It predicts total natural gas consumption to fall 1.8% in 2009. U.S. natural gas production is expected to decline 0.3% in 2009, and to slip 1% in 2010. EIA predicts natural gas Henry Hub prices to average $4.24/mcf in 2009 and $5.83/mcf in 2010, compared with $9.13/mcf in 2008.

Chesapeake Energy has elected to further curtail its gas production, by a total of 400 mmcf in 2009, representing approximately 13% of Chesapeake’s production capacity.

One petroleum geologist and industry consultant, Arthur Berman, believes that the Haynesville Shale in Lousiana, touted as the hottest onshore gas play in North America, is overrated. His analysis of early discoveries shows that the wells decline rapidly, cost about $7.5 million per well to drill and complete, and would require a price of $8/mcf to break even.  http://petroleumtruthreport.blogspot.com 

Published on:

Range Resources announced on April 16 that it had completed a horizontal well in the Barnett Shale in southern Tarrant County that produced an average of 9.6 mmcf per day for the first 30 days of its production. This would be the largest Barnett Shale well completed to date. Range currently has three rigs drilling in the Barnett Shale.

Published on:

Seismic surveys have become the primary tool of exploration companies in the continental United States, both onshore and offshore.  3-D seismic surveys have lowered finding costs and allloowed exploration for reserves not locatable by other means, revolutionizing the industry.  Below is a non-scientific explanation of how seismic surveys work.

A seismic survey is conducted by creating a shock wave – a seismic wave – on the surface of the ground along a predetermined line, using an energy source. The seismic wave travels into the earth, is reflected by subsurface formations, and returns to the surface where it is recorded by receivers called geophones – similar to microphones. The seismic waves are created either by smalle xplosive charges set off in shallow holes (“shot holes“) or by large vehicles equipped with heave plates (“Veibroseis” trucks) that vibrate on the ground. By analyzing the time it takes for the seismic waves to reflect off of subsurface formations and return to the surface, a geophysicist can map subsurface formations and anomalies and predict where oil or gas may be trapped in sufficient quantities for exploration activities.

seismic truck

Until relatively recently, seismic surveys were conducted along a single line on the ground, and their analysis created a two-dimensional picture akin to a slice through the earth beneath that line, showing the subsurface geology along that line. This is referred to as two-dimensional or 2D seismic data.

A 2D Seismic Line Image:

2D seismic

 

In the last 20-30 years, with the development of computers, geophysicists have been able to take seismic testing to a new level by conducting three-dimensional, or 3D, seismic tests. In 1980, about 100 3D surveys had been performed. By the mid 1990’s, 200 to 300 3-D surveys were being performed each year. In the 1980’s it took the most sophisticated Cray computers to analyze the data. Today, the analysis is performed on super-desk-top computers. Currently, almost all oil and gas exploratory wells are preceded by 3-D seismic surveys. The basic method of testing is the same as for 2D, but instead of a single line of energy source points and receiver points, the source points and receiver points are laid out in a grid across the property. The resulting recorded reflections received at each receiver point come from all directions, and sophisticated computer programs can analyze this data to create a three-dimensional image of the subsurface.

A 3D Seismic Image:

3D seismic

3D surveys can be conducted in almost any environment – in the ocean, in swamps, and in urban areas. A 3D seismic survey may cover many square miles of land and may cost $40,000 to $100,000 per square mile or more. The data obtained from such a survey is therefore very valuable, and if protected from disclosure constitutes a trade secret.  Seismic datea is licensed, bought and sold by seismic survey companies, brokers and exploration companies.

Continue reading →

Published on:

President Obama, in an attempt to recoup some of the money being spent to revive the economy, proposes to repeal several tax provisions near and dear to the oil and gas industry:

  • Enhanced oil recovery credit
  • Marginal well tax credit
  • Expensing of intangible drilling costs
  • Deduction for tertiary injectants
  • Passive loss exception for working interest owners in oil and gas properties
  • Manufacturing tax deduction for oil and gas companies
  • Percentage depletion deduction for oil and gas
  • Not surprisingly, the oil and gas industry is mounting a huge lobbying campaign to prevent loss of these tax benefits. 

The only one of these tax benefits that directly affects royalty owners is the percentage depletion deduction.  Currently, 15% of royalty income is deductible as “percentage depletion.”  The deduction is intended to recognize that the sale of oil and gas is in part the sale of a depleting asset, so that a portion of the royalty should be treated like a return of capital rather than as income.

Published on:

H.R. 1835, the New Alternative Transportation to Give Americans Solutions Act of 2009 (NAT GAS Act) was introduced in the U.S. House of Representatives by Dan Boren (D-OK), John Larson (D-CT) and John Sullivan (R-OK).  Its purpose is to promote the use of natural gas in vehicles, with an emphasis on large trucks and fleet vehicles.  It wiould provide incentives for installation of natural gas fueling stations.  It is the first legislation to promote Boon Pickens’ plan to use domestic natural gas to reduce dependence on foreign oil.

Contact Information