Norse Energy's Shale Gas Applications: Proposed Unit Maps Uploaded

[Original post April 2, 2012, or so, but since updated as more applications and unit maps have come in.]

Here's a list of off-site links to the as-initially-drafted unit maps, in PDF form, for Norse Energy's shale gas drilling permit requests.  Since the SGEIS was put out in draft form more than a year ago, July 2011, there have so far trickled out 29 of these (counting two verticals).

1) Norse-Housing 1H, Town of Smyrna, Chenango County (Utica shale) — unit map.
2) Nowalk, R. 3H, Town of Smithville, Chenango County (Marcellus shale) — unit map.
3) Martin, C, 1H, Town of McDonough (top hole), Chenango County (Marcellus shale) — unit map.
4) Branagan, A. 1H, Town of Lebanon, Madison County (Utica shale) — unit map.
5) Sage, J. 1H, Town of Smithville, Chenango County (Marcellus shale) — unit map.
6) Mowatt, J. 1H, Town of Smithville, Chenango County (Marcellus shale) — unit map.
7) Fernandez II 1H, Town of Coventry, Chenango County (Marcellus shale) — unit map.
8) Emerson, D. 1H, Town of Sanford, Broome County (Marcellus shale) — unit map.
9) Fritzsch, C. 1H, Town of Sanford, Broome County (Marcellus shale) — unit map.
10) Hansen, B. 1H, Town of Afton, Chenango County (Marcellus shale) — unit map.
11) Finelli, J. 1, Town of Coventry, Chenango County (vertical to Utica shale) — unit map.
12) Simpson, R. 1H, Town of McDonough, Chenango County (Marcellus shale) — unit map.
13) Woodford, D. 1H, Town of Sanford, Broome County (Marcellus shale) — unit map.
14) WF, D. 1H, Town of Sanford, Broome County (Marcellus shale) — unit map.
15) Helm, R. 1H, Town of Sanford, Broome County (Marcellus shale) — unit map.
16) Lightning Rod Hollow 1H, Town of Smithville, Chenango County (Marcellus shale) — unit map.
17) Hardiman, M. 1H, Town of German, Chenango County (Utica shale) — unit map.
18) Lopresti, W. 1H, Town of German, Chenango County (Utica shale) — unit map.
19) Handley, G. 1H, Town of German, Chenango County (Utica shale) — unit map.
20) Wolford, C. 1H, Town of Smithville, Chenango County (Utica shale) — unit map.
21) Miller, E. 1H, Town of Georgetown, Madison County (Utica shale) — unit map.
22) Lyon, G. 1H, Town of Smithville, Chenango County (Utica shale) — unit map.
23) Smith, D. 1H, Town of Afton, Chenango County (Utica shale) — unit map.
24) Petkash, T., Town of Coventry, Chenango County (vertical to Utica shale) — unit map.
25) Rusweiler, B. 1H, Town of Bainbridge, Chenango County (Utica shale) — unit map.
26) Faber, P. 1H, Town of McDonough, Chenango County (Utica shale) — unit map.
27) Baciuska, V. 1H, Town of Afton, Chenango County (Utica shale) — unit map.
28) Crumb, E. 1H, Town of Smithville, Chenango County (Utica shale) — unit map.
29) Brown, K. 1H, Town of German, Chenango County (Utica shale) — unit map.

For the first round, I had also requested "ownership tabulations," which would specify the current oil and gas ownership within each these units, both those signed to the operator, and those unsigned — and therefore in line, at some point, for the formalized process of "compulsory integration," also known as "forced pooling."

But it turns out it's too early in the sequence of events for these records to be filed.  Here's the word on this from Tom E. Noll, Permits Section Chief within the DEC's Division of Mineral Resouces:

"Please note that an ownership tabulation is submitted to the Department as part of the compulsory integration process.  Compulsory integration is not scheduled and will not commence until the spacing unit is established at the time of permit issuance.  Prior to a scheduled integration hearing the well operator is required pursuant to ECL 23-0901 to provide the Department with an ownership tabulation which identifies those parcels wholly or partially within the spacing unit by tax parcel ID number, owner's name and in case of uncontrolled parcels, the owner's mailing address.  Until a spacing unit requiring integration has been scheduled for hearing the operator is not required to submit information on property ownership.  Consequently, we do not currently maintain the ownership tabulations responsive to your request."

Of course, all this could be pieced together at the County Real Property Tax Office, and the County Clerk's Office — should anyone be feeling particularly motivated.  And, naturally, the folks owning land inside each of these draft boxes will certainly know who they are.

Bluestone Pipeline Green-Lighted; Local Press Still Asleep at Keyboards

[Original post Oct. 8; updated Oct. 9 with some additional details.]

Okay, I'm back from a several-months-long bout with especially complicated paid work.

First thing I noticed is this:  The glacial State of New York, through its Public Service Commission, has finally given the go-ahead on a PA-NY natural gas pipeline interconnect called Bluestone.

In Bureaucratese, this decision-making event is known as the issuance of a "Certificate of Environmental Compatibility and Public Need."  Bluestone now has it.  It's all on the web, if you know where to look for it (which is really not that hard).  It's been out there since Sept. 21.  I also put up a more directly linkable copy here. 

Also in the file, I see a letter written afterwards from the developer's lawyer showing an all-day pre-construction meeting is scheduled to take place in Windsor, NY, on Oct. 10.  (If you've ever been to Windsor, you know it doesn't get any more local than that.)  Also, if all the final construction wrinkles are successfully ironed out that day, the developer proposes to get moving on the ground in NY as early as Oct. 20 (the PA end has already started).  A report from one of the main PA drillers contracted to feed this new transmission capacity (see below) claims both the PA and NY phases of Bluestone will be completed by late November (though that does seem remarkably quick to me).

Maybe then there'd finally be some visuals for the news people.

Other developments directly or indirectly related to this:

• A week or so prior to Bluestone finalizing things with the NYS PSC, Southwestern Energy (SWN) officially foresaw the relieving of the takeaway pipeline bottleneck in its Susquehanna County, PA, leasehold area.  This has triggered a push to move from 40 to 90 producing Marcellus wells (most of them already drilled and completed) by the end of this year, and SWN is also boosting its rig count from 3 to 4 in that area.  All this is occurring despite continued, less-than-stellar economics in dry natgas areas, which is where this part of PA falls.  All these details are here.

• Days later, in Broome County's Town of Sanford, Bluestone put the last closing documents of record on a complicated, four-party, land, easement, and conservation easement purchase and swap, including an eminent-domain-forced deal with the anti-shale gas Delaware Highlands Conservancy.  Bluestone also formalized legal proceedings in order to take (for "just compensation") an easement from another reluctant landowner along the pipeline route.  The state's official blessing makes this action essentially a formality.  No, the details are not spelled out in a handy press release, but the nuts and bolts are of public record for any journalist worth his or her salt.  (Note to the file:  Contrary to popular, PA-inspired belief, eminent domain can be a factor for either larger pipeline projects overseen by the federal government, or smaller ones supervised by the State of NY, which is — in fact, in the end, as you can see — capable of not messing around when it comes to essential infrastructure.) 

• About the same time, the subscription-only Binghamton paper finally got around to reporting the remarkable tax impact of a parallel pipeline project nearby:  In one year, Broome County's Town of Windsor saw its overall tax base jump from $310.5 to $342.5 million, on the strength of just its 9.5-mile portion of the PA-NY pipeline interconnect known as Laser, plus a compressor station.  As a consequence, school district tax bills dropped 5.8 percent, and town tax bills can be expected to drop similarly.  (The county portion of folks' land tax bills would presumably be too diluted by the county-wide pool to show much of a response to such a localized bump.)  I have not seen any forecast for the similar pending impact of the Bluestone development on the Town of Sanford and whatever school districts will be affected by the pipeline route there, though certainly that could be pulled together.  You can get by the paywall on the gist of this Windsor story here.

Ordinarily, all this would be the sort of thing which a decent local paper would report, and which TV and radio stations would at least try to cover.  Sure seems like news to me.  But, by my search engine enhanced reckoning, local media have not yet taken notice of this latest development in the Bluestone project. 

Is this because we do things weird in New York, or just in Binghamton, NY?  The Bluestone pipeline job is now a $280 million construction project (according to the developer's latest explanations to its investors — see page 19 of a PDF'd PowerPoint here).  But our media reps don't seem to be able to see any worthwhile angles.  It's just unsubsidized private investment, leading to jobs, landowner income, significant spinoff activity, new tax base, and infrastructure development (including traffic, noise, and dirt) in especially depressed areas of Upstate NY and rural PA — even while the Empire State's indigenous shale gas opportunities continue to be thwarted by ceaseless debate, dragging on toward the 4-and-a-half year mark.

In this case, we see a rare burst of progress goes through, unstoppable, somehow making it non-news. 

I don't get that. 

I have some prickly philosophical questions about this.  Are we getting to the point where modern-day news coverage is inherently biased by: 

1) Lack of training, professionalism, and skill among the current generation of practitioners?

2) Lack of resources, on account of the fading economic fortunes of free-market journalism?

3) Lack of social feedback rewards for actually doing the journalistic work of gathering facts independently, outside the more efficient formula of re-writing press releases from agenda-driven sources?

4) Lack of interest in stories that don't mesh very well with the preferred, more interesting, more comfortable "decision hangs in the balance" narratives of reporters and editors?

5) A news-gathering engine that too often fuels itself on press releases engaged in easily over-dramatized, over-simplified conflict, rather than the sometimes technical flow of actual events?

Pre-"Gasland" Flaming Faucets in NYS: Burning Spring Farm, Bristol, Ontario County

This clipping is from the Oswego (NY) Palladium-Times, April 11, 1988 — a pre-"Gasland" curiosity written by Carol Eisenberg of the AP (according to another version published the same day in The Citizen of Auburn, NY):

Going back even further in time, this next one was headlined "Why Go To Yellowstone? We Have Our Fiery Springs."  Looks like it made for some interesting Sunday reading in the Rochester paper, circa 1936.  I had to do some trimming to make it fit here, losing the headline, an over-contrasted photo of the farm, and some details regarding a legendary local Halloween prank which didn't have anything to do with Bristol's water.

To find these clippings, I relied entirely upon a web site called Old Fulton New York Postcards.  This appears to have been named for a prior obsession of the web master — before he landed upon his remarkable, primary mission:  Digitizing, and making keyword-searchable, entire microfilmed archives of old New York State newspapers.

And one more clipping — some pages from the Town of Bristol chapter in the History of Ontario County, NY.  Looks like media coverage of Bristol's "Burning Spring" goes back quite a ways.

[Spaceholder]

Minard Run in the Northern Finger Lakes: Utica Shale "Shows Potential"

Minard Run Oil Company Finger Lakes Development Plan

Much more detail on the Chesapeake Energy to Minard Run shallow gas wells transaction in the Northern Finger Lakes — popping within some documents filed May 31, 2012 with the NYS Public Service Commission.

For background, see my March 20 post, which I've left more or less unchanged — and which I believe is still the only original reportage on this deal anywhere.  Not even the hometown Auburn Citizen has yet taken notice.

First, an answer to a previously unanswered question:  Alongside some 400-plus producing wells, Minard Run purchased from CHK 56,130 net developed acres, and 104,779 net undeveloped acres. 

["Developed," also known as "held by production" (HBP), means the whole of the underlying leases are protected from expiration by continued production from under at least part of the acreage.  "Undeveloped" means the lease clocks are still ticking.  And "net" is the way the oil and gas industry accounts for gross acreage in which it technically holds only a partial interest (so, for instance, a half-interest in 100 actual acres is bought and sold as 50 net acres).]

Next, more significantly, Minard Run let NYS officials in on its three- to five-year development plan, by way of giving the PSC a heads-up on possible future pipeline expansion needs: 

• Due to currently low natgas prices, drill the Queenston only "as-needed" to cover supply contracts, at least within the first one to two years;

• Drill maybe 10 to 20 Queenston wells per year, assuming prices recover within the two- to three-year time frame;

[Contrast this with a straight mathematical approximation that the whole raw potential of the just the HBP areas would be 990 remaining well sites (if there's more gas under all those spots) — based on the state's current spacing rules calling for 40 acres of drainage per shallow well.]

• Exploratory drilling over the next 1.5 to two years within the undeveloped acreage — within either Queenston sandstone, or Trenton-Black River limestone, both of which have been previously attempted, the TBR's with limited success; and

• Should NYS get off its ass on shale gas (no, they didn't phrase it that way), Minard Run "feels that the Utica Shale in the region shows potential for exploration of natural gas via horizontal drilling," and "there is a high probability that [it] may engage into exploration of the Utica Shale."

[That's great news for hopeful northern Finger Lakes landowners who may have been lulled by skeptical observers (including me) into reluctantly accepting that shale gas in New York is inevitably going to be a mostly Southern Tier operation.  For drilling opponents, of course, these words from Minard Run will be seen as confirmation of their darkest frackophobic nightmares.]

Lastly, Minard Run reports it's taking over three compressor stations and 195 miles of gas pipeline — although some of that mileage may date from a time period before the PSC was legally assigned to get involved.  (Little-appreciated fact here:  Sandstone natgas production was initiated in the previously unknown, previously unnamed Fayette-Waterloo and West Auburn fields as far back as the Sixties.) 

Those pipelines subject to PSC's 1984-to-2005 oversight include previously approved (and probably mostly built) projects which total about 48 miles of two- to four-inch gathering lines, and another 9.95 miles of eight-inch trunkline.  The spider web lays within four towns in Cayuga County (Scipio, Fleming, Springport, and Aurelius); four towns in Seneca (Varick, Fayette, Seneca Falls, and Tyre); and one town in Wayne (Galen).

PA Active Rig Count: Now Firmly South of 100; OH, Meanwhile, Breaking Records

One of the terrific, completely under-appreciated benefits of capitalism is that it carries within itself the seeds for quickly putting itself wholly or partly out of business, if necessary — temporarily or permanently.

By contrast, a public institution such as my own City of Syracuse was just last week reported to be steadfastly maintaining job titles such as Typist I, II, and III.

As always, change is both good and bad, and there are both winners and losers.  In a supply glut, such as continental North America has on its hands right now with regard to natural gas, consumers win without much notice, celebration, or gratitude. 

But, in the private sector, such a glut inevitably leads to jobs being lost or moved with a single phone call or email.  You don't hear a lot of bitching about it, because business is business, and — in this case — not something that hinges on a lot of interminable, political hullaballoo.  It's just the way it is.

As shown by my chart, the Eastern U.S. counts of actively drilling rigs are quietly, but graphically, telling this story:  Pennsylvania was down to 92 such operations on a monthly average in May 2012 (down, that is, from a record monthly high of 115 rigs, reached in July 2011).  If you prefer the weekly numbers, PA's drilling decline can be painted even more dramatically — down to 85 rigs for the week ending June 1.  (My chart is based on monthly averages, so those even lower numbers will likely show up later.)

Cross the river into Ohio, however, and you see the Buckeye State averaged 17 rigs in May (and, not yet charted, 21 for the week ending June 1).  [Here's a note to OH journalists:  There's a story hiding in plain sight there.  Either number, May or June, is a modern record for your state — going back at least as far as the year 2000, the year when Baker Hughes' online historical data drifts off into the ether.  If you're especially enterprising, I'm sure you could dig back even further:  Baker Hughes has been consistently maintaining these counts since 1944.]

What's it all about?  It's about the Shale Gas Technological Revolution, triggered by hydraulic fracturing, or fracking.  But it's also about the wetter, oilier, and more lucrative resources frackable within the older Utica Shale in OH, compared to the drier, less valuable, pure methane offered up by most of the younger Marcellus Shale in PA.  In other words, it's an old resource extraction story, casting together nature, technology, and economics, with at least a bit part for politics.

I see that West Virginia, meanwhile, is still cruising around without a clear sense of direction, with 23 rigs on average in May, and 23 for the week ending June 1.  Hard to say whether that means anything.  Wonder if anyone will notice when OH surpasses WV, rig-wise, which looks like it could happen this summer.

And New York?  It's gotten so bad in NY, Baker Hughes has officially dropped the Former Empire State — and a number of other high-consuming, low-producing jurisdictions — from its weekly spreadsheet.  I'm pretty sure that means another zero, so far as rigs at work in NY are concerned.  The last time NY had a rig working in-state big enough for Baker Hughes to find it was back in December 2010 — which is a heckuva long time ago if you are an out-of-work Upstater wanting to break into this business, or if you are a hopeful Upstate landowner, sitting atop this otherwise untouchable resource.

Since most rigs are working on a single well during any given week, the ebb and flow of employment impact can be roughly correlated to the rig counts using the figure of approximately 420 jobs per well — based on the assumptions used in a July 2011 study by an arm of Penn State Extension.  While most Easterners can envision only pickup-driving roughnecks from out of state, jobs tied to fossil fuels extraction are actually spread across more than 150 different occupations — each hard at work in their respective fields, before, during, and after drilling.  Everything from truck driver to wildlife scientist.

HYDRAULIC FRACTURING — THE MAKING OF A MEDIA BOGEYMAN
Moves by industry into northeastern U.S. fields, from 2008 onward, have had the unforeseen political consequence of much more widely publicizing (and making controversial) the previously obscure revolution triggered by hydraulic fracturing — which is now much more commonly (and disparagingly) referenced as "fracking," or "hydrofracking."  Contrary to virtually all shorthand descriptions appearing in northeastern media, hydraulic fracturing is not so much a drilling technique, as it is a "completion" technique — most profitably deployed within deep horizontal wellbores drilled beforehand for that purpose.  It is an American technological feat which combines the 1940s-invented fracking, accomplished vertically, with the 1980s-perfected horizontal drilling.  It was pioneered by independent operators (with some federal R&D help, as President Obama once argumentatively noted) in the Barnett Shale of Texas.

Though widely and misleadingly described by overdramatic northeastern media as working by "blasting," "shattering," or "breaking up" the shale — or by pumping a "chemically laced cocktail" "into the ground" in order to "flush out" the fossil fuels — fracking in actual fact works by simply countering natural rock pressure, temporarily, in discrete, one-at-a-time sections of previously drilled sedimentary bedrock.  That high pressure is applied for the purpose of slipping sand (or ceramic beads) into the shalebed's numerous tiny fractures — some old, and some newly created.  After the hydraulic pressure is intentionally eased up, and some of the spent frack water recovered, the "proppants" are left behind, stuck in the cracks, keeping routes through the shale open for the fossil fuels to escape to the wellbore, usually under normal rock pressure.

[Some further miscomprehensions peculiar to the East Coast:  Fracking has become inextricably linked in the public's mind with natural gas production, but — in actual reality, looking at the full picture in North America or worldwide — the technique is just as important for producing unconventional oil and lighter liquid hydrocarbons as natgas.  (See, for instance, this piece of Reality Correction from the very worthwhile blog of former PA DEP Chief John Hanger.)  Furthermore, though you sure don't hear about this much, fracking is also a key part of the arsenal for several much-less-besmirched enterprises, such as geothermal development, drilling more productive water wells, and still-under-development green dreams to work against global warming by sequestering carbon deep underground.]

OPPORTUNITY KNOCKS — NEW YORK BARS DOOR IN RED TAPE
My chart above runs the rig data back to October 2004, the month when Range Resources quietly became the first driller in the Appalachian basin to stimulate a horizontal Marcellus well in this way.  Word of Range's surprisingly successful gas-finding results on this and follow-up wells did not get out widely until January 2008, when geologists Terry Engelder of Penn State and Gary Lash of SUNY Fredonia saw through the arcana of industry reports to investors in order to conclude, and publicly release, a significant upward re-estimation of the natural gas content of the Marcellus formation.

Over the time frame of this technological upheaval, the Baker Hughes rig counts are useful in offering a historical comparison of industry's boom or bust response to the varying economic times, geologic fortunes, and regulatory receptions posed by each of these four states.  As you can readily see, drilling in PA was running even or higher nearly every successive month from January 2009 to July 2011, before finally topping out under the downward economic pressure created by the breakthrough's own continent-wide success.  Both OH or WV have stayed open to such developments — being guided by state administrations and political climates favoring the enterprise — but the payoff is only now clearly starting to show in OH.  In NY, by contrast, industry's interest in developing Upstate landowners' previously unknown shale gas resource has been greeted with a chronically delayed regulatory holdup, meshing obstructively with a gathering political firestorm.

In fact, New York on Feb. 15, 2012 — without any media notice whatsoever — reached the Four-Year Mark for its infamous shale gas moratorium.  That is the historical fact if you consider the moratorium's starting point to be Feb. 15, 2008, as I do.  That's the date industry first (unsuccessfully) asked for a drilling permit for a full-scale Marcellus well in the state.  Five months later, on July 23, 2008, New York officials followed their informal bureaucratic hesitation with a more formalized administrative freeze, pending study of the environmental impacts of high-volume completions, and the crafting of tougher operational rules, a process which is still ongoing.

Over all this time, drilling opponents and sympathetic media representatives have largely succeeded in subtly re-framing New York's ban as being a question of whether or not the state will ever allow shale gas development.  Drilling proponents, on the other hand, have insisted upon continuing to view the moratorium as it was originally described — as a temporary measure — preferring to believe that developing the Empire State's indigenous shale gas has always been a matter of when, and how, but not if.  Officialdom has cagily gone back and forth, using either characterization, depending on the person, the timing, or the situation. 

The latest word on the street is that the Cuomo Administration is quietly waiting for the panicky State Legislature to close up shop for the year in June 2012, before finally getting around to gamely defending a substantially limited, "pilot" drilling plan — on grounds of what the science really shows, and what the state's economy really could benefit from.

BAKER HUGHES RIG COUNTS — OLDEST AND MOST CONSERVATIVE
Baker Hughes has long kept a tally of active drilling rigs for both informational and promotional purposes.  The counts trace their history to 1944, when they were initiated by predecessor Hughes Tool Company (whose founder Howard Hughes, Sr. invented the two-cone rotary drill bit).  The Hughes company realized that its sales force generally knew (or could find out) the location by state or province of every single operating rotary rig in the United States or Canada — even those which weren't (yet) using Hughes tools.

The counts have been consistently maintained ever since, and they have become a barometer for the energy sector, and a future pointer for the economy generally.

Baker Hughes' rig counts are considered more conservative than those broadcast by other outlets, because they only count active, rotary rigs — highly complex operations which are in the midst of placing substantial economic demands on the service, support, and labor sectors.

Rigs are only counted as active if they are being employed anywhere along the line between "spudding in" (or starting a well) and "target depth."  Not counted are rigs that are in the process of being taken down, moved, or rigged up again, or rigs that are being used to support non-drilling chores, such as workovers, completions, or testing.  Most relatively small, cable-tool and truck-mounted setups are also excluded from the census.

New Driller to NY, Carrizo, Proposes Vertical Marcellus Test in Tioga County

View Carrizo Vertical Marcellus Drill Permit Application in a larger map

This popped as of May 29:  Carrizo (Marcellus) WV LLC — a Houston, TX-addressed driller never before active in New York State — on May 17 asked the DEC for a permit to get cracking on a nearly one-mile-deep Marcellus Shale vertical test well in the Town of Owego, Tioga County, NY.

The location is about 3.4 miles by direct line northeast of the Village of Owego's main downtown crossroads, adjoining a hayfield uphill from the dead end portion of a sparsely populated McHenry Road.

Assuming less than 80,000 gallons of water would be needed to sample full-scale production potential through hydraulic fracture stimulation (sounds-reasonable spin), a/k/a fracking (perjorative spin), the enterprise could go forward regardless of the outcome of the state's repeatedly extended shale gas moratorium — which has, for four long years now, killed off any full-scale efforts through state-of-the-art horizontal drilling.

Vertical tests in both Marcellus and Utica shale have already occurred a number of times previously statewide — sometimes openly, sometimes by initially disguising the purpose by listing a slightly deeper conventional formation, and sometimes by re-purposing an already drilled well that proved dry at the intended horizon.  How many of them were actually fracked at permissible low volumes is unknown.

Statewide since 2008 — the year when Upstate's Shale Gas Genie was let out of the bottle, at least so far as the public was concerned — I count spuds of 10 verticals listing Marcellus as the "objective formation," and 6 Utica's.

One such operator — Gastem USA, parented in Canada — went about its business with a lot of fanfare and publicity, even going so far as to invite skeptical representatives of the Sierra Club and Pro Publica to witness a frack job at an Otsego County drillsite.

None of prior vertical projects, however, was in Tioga County, NY, a locality that adjoins two of the most actively drilled Marcellus shale counties in PA, Bradford and Susquehanna.

And relatively few of them have occurred in the last couple years, a time period when the anti-fracking campaign has worked itself into a corner, demanding a blanket opposition to any local development tied to fossil fuels (except, of course, for End Consumer delivery of such fuels, some proportion of which would have to have been fracked from out of state).

Could get interesting.
Wetterling 1 Spacing Unit Map

Here are the specs on Carrizo's drilling permit application:

API Well Number:  31107265020000
Well Name:  Wetterling 1
Company Name:  Carrizo (Marcellus) WV LLC
Well Type:  Not Listed
Well Status:  App to Drill/Plug/Convert
Objective Formation:  Marcellus
County:  Tioga
Town:  Owego
Status Date: 
Permit Application Date:  5/17/2012
Well Orientation:  Vertical
Surface Longitude:  [-]76.201622
Surface Latitude:  42.122425
True Vertical Depth:  5000
Bottom Hole Total Measured Depth:  5000
Drilled Depth:  5000
Proposed Well Type:  Gas Wildcat
Spacing:  Conforms to statewide spacing under Title 5
Spacing Acres:  43.52
Integration:  No integration order required
Last Modified Date:  5/29/2012

PA-NY Constitution Pipeline: Links to Much More Detailed Maps

Here we go, people:

— The developer Williams' preferred PA-NY natgas pipeline route, overlayed on topographical maps, southwesternmost section.

— The same in the northeasternmost section.

— Half of the alternative routes delineated.

— And the other half.