Lact 5 Project Summary

August 2017 – February 2018

Grant Caldwell
 Projects Overview

• H-10 & H-14 Booster Swap

• Utilize H-14 booster into a lower utility and non-EWC area
• Hot Water Break Down
• Provide another tool to treat producers by pumping 90-120bbls
of 180* water at 8-10 bpm
• SD3 Injectivity Analysis
• Calculate MH N vs MH S injectivity
• GGO Conversion
• Swap and selectively perf producer & injector
• Previous Frac Round Analysis
• Use previous frac data to provide a look back into candidates
• 36WC2SE12 Rig Clean Out

2
H-10 & H-14 Booster Swap
 Project Overview: Swap boosters between H-10 & H-14

H-10 Inj Header

H-14 Inj Header

4
H-10 Wells To Benefit From Swap: D-3 & E-3
 Example of Struggling Injector in H-10 Header (22WC2SW18)

Utility

• 22WC2SW18 Injector still has room to boost 345 psi before reaching
CO2 set point injection pressure.
• Injector surrounded by good producers that could benefit directly
6
from increasing injection in area.
 Entire H-10 Header Injection and Production

• Goal to increase injection pressure an estimated 300 psi

• Incremental oil increase estimated to be 39 bpd
7
H-14 Wells To Affected From Swap: B-5 & D-5

• Estimated 6 wells affected

• Only have north 4 injectors on CO2, due to EWC
 Entire H-14 Header Injection and Production

• Goal to utilize the H-14 booster pump, which is feeding mostly

EWC wells
• Incremental oil loss estimated to be 5 bpd
9
 H-14 Header

Production Injection Rate Utility Inj Pressure Δ P due to Rate Decrease Incremental Oil
Well Comments
in Pattern (bbl/d) (mcf/d) (mcf/bbl) (psi) Swap (psi) (mcf/d) (bbls/day)
08WC2SE19 35.0 3,568 101.9 1,459 -29 -70.9 -0.7
10WC2SE19 13.0 3,148 242.2 1,535 -105 -215.3 -0.9
32WC2NE19 27.0 2,356 87.3 1,568 -138 -207.4 -2.4
34AWC2NE19 13.0 1,876 144.3 1,610 -180 -209.7 -1.5
20WC2SE19 25 0 0 1309 267 EWC
22WC2SE19 25 0 0 1323 437 EWC
24WC2SE19 2 0 0 1327 544 EWC
32WC2SE19 13 0 0 1333 312 EWC
34WC2SE19 27 0 0 1330 476 EWC
36AWC2SE19 - - - - - Well SI Made inactive 12/14/16

• Average Utility = 124.4 MCF/BBL

• Estimated Injection Pressure after Swap = 1430psi
• No intention to increase CO2 in EWC
• Incremental Oil Loss Estimated to be 5 bpd

10
 H-14 Booster Curve

Will increase
efficiency by
swap ~8%

Est Boost

11
 H-10 Header
Production Injection Rate Utility Inj Pressure Δ P to reach Additional Incremental Oil
Well Comments
in Pattern (bbl/d) (mcf/d) (mcf/bbl) (psi) SP (psi) Rate (mcf/d) (bbls/day)

05WC2NE19 25 1,073 42.9 1,291 259 215.3 5.0

08WC2SE18 10 0 0.0 1,228 322 0.0 - Can't wag to CO2 bc System Pressure Low
08WC2SW18 32 0 0.0 1,221 329 0.0 - Can't wag to CO2 bc System Pressure Low
10WC2SW18 25 1,485 59.4 1,281 269 311.8 5.2
12WC2NW19 24 2,816 117.3 1,295 255 554.5 4.7
12WC2SW18 15 726 48.4 1,304 246 137.0 2.8
20WC2NE19 20 0 0.0 1,231 319 0.0 - Can't wag to CO2 bc System Pressure Low
20WC2SE18 15 309 20.6 1,303 247 58.6 2.8
22WC2SW18 44 1,708 38.8 1,270 280 376.6 9.7
24WC2NW19 14 2,547 181.9 1,244 306 626.5 3.4
24WC2SW18 25 1,259 50.4 1,302 248 239.8 4.8
36WC2SW18 31 0 0.0 1,150 400 0.0 - Can't wag to CO2 bc System Pressure Low

• Average Utility = 63.8 MCF/BBL

• Estimated Injection Pressure after Swap = 1540psi
• Capped Inj Pressure SP to 1550 psi due to line constraints
• May potentially be able to put the 4 wells to CO2
• Incremental Oil Increase Estimated to be 39 bpd

12
 H-10 Booster Curve

No drastic change in
pump efficiency

Est Boost

13
 Project Economics Inputs

• Project Cost Estimated: $50,000

• Actual Project Cost: ~$25,000
• $/BBL: $47.90
• $/MCF: $0.11
• Potentially lower due to moving the gas to a lower utility area
• NRI: 63.601%
• WI: 75.529%
• Sensitives Run on BPD Incremental across H-10 header
• 20, 25, 30, 35, 45, 55, & 65bpd
• Estimated Production Incremental
• OIL = 34 bpd
• CO2 = 3017.1 mcfd

14
 Project Economics

Project Cost $ 50,000.00

H-14 Production Loss -5 H-14 CO2 Loss -703.3 *Inputs
H-10 Production Increase 39 H-10 CO2 Gain 3720.4
Oil Incremental 34 CO2 Incremental 3017.1

Payout (months) 2
Internal Rate of Return 47%
NPV 10 (12 mnth) $ 221,489.50
DPIR 4.43

Oil Incremental(BPD) CO2 (MCFPD) $/BBL $/MCF NRI Revenue ($/month) WI Comp Expense ($/month)
34 3017.1 $ 47.90 $ 0.11 63.601% $ 31,488.50 75.529% $ 7,620.26

H-10 BPD Incremental Payout (mnths) IRR NPV10 DPIR

15 7 7% $ 21,337.80 0.43
25 4 19% $ 74,009.30 1.48
25 3 30% $126,680.80 2.53
35 2 49% $232,023.80 4.64
45 1 68% $337,366.80 6.75
55 1 87% $442,709.80 8.85
65 0 105% $548,052.80 10.96

15
Hot Water Break Down
 Hot Water Break Down

• Goal:
• Provide another tool for treating producers
• Average Cost: ~ $1,500/well
• Method
• Pump 90 – 120 bbls of 180 *F water
• Achieve rate of 8 – 10 bpd
• Do not exceed 1850 – 2000 psi
• Potential Mechanisms
• Hot water retains heat at higher rates and melts paraffin
• High rate creates small micro-fractures in near wellbore
• High rate breaking off scale in perfs

17
 Frac Candidates: Pre - HWBD

Hot Water Breakdowns

Salt Creek up to Pre BD Avgs (last 3 verified tests)
WELL LACT OH/CH DATE Oil Water Gas GOR_i WHP WHT
13RDWC1SW06 LACT 10 CH 11/8/2017 9.34 22.5 635 67.99 500 56 PRD
25DWC1SW06 LACT 10 CH 11/7/2017 22.76 36.3 433.7 19.06 428 55 PRD
27WC1SE01 LACT 10 CH 11/8/2017 16.45 223.3 444.7 27.03 400 61 PRD
18WC2NW05 LACT 10 Slimhole 11/5/2017 9.54 116 1008.3 105.69 665.5 50 PRD
10WC2NE01 LACT 13 CH 10/22/2017 21.26 693 511 24.04 125 89 PRD
24DWC2NE22 LACT 4 CH 11/6/2017 16.16 215.6 964 59.65 640 50 PRD
30WC2SE12 LACT 4 CH w/ sidetrack 11/1/2017 5.65 323.3 2590.3 458.46 647.7 52 PRD
16WC2NW19 LACT 5 CH 11/2/2017 15.6 279 1318.3 84.51 620 51 PRD
02RDWC1NW07S SABLACT CH 10/31/2017 2.44 134.7 0 0.00 398.3 64 PRD
27RDWC2NE10s SABLACT CH 10/31/2017 4.98 115 311.3 62.51 402.7 68 PRD
18WC2NW19 LACT 5 OH 10/9/2017 16.3 51.3 3650.7 223.97 643.7 52 PRD
17WC2NE24 LACT 5 OH 10/16/2017 6.34 73 1669 263.25 646 52 PRD
32wc2ne13 LACT 5 CH 10/22/2017 8 115 1927 240.88 633 51 PRD
22wc2ne13 LACT 5 CH 10/22/2017 2.67 373.6 2294.3 859.29 466.3 65 PRD
36wc2ne15 LACT 4 OH 11/10/2017 19.6 133 1202 61.33 640.3 50 PRD
29wc2se14 LACT 4 CH 11/5/2017 61.3 529.7 1601.7 26.13 477 70 PRD
16dwc2ne22 LACT 4 CH 11/5/2017 62.86 144.7 635 10.10 343.7 56 PRD

18
 Frac Candidates: Post - HWBD

Post BD Tests
WELL LACT DATE Oil Water Gas GOR_f WHP WHT
13RDWC1SW06 LACT 10 11/24/2017 7.39 55 659 89.17 417 59 PRD
25DWC1SW06 LACT 10 11/15/2017 34.66 125 597 17.22 402 58 PRD
27WC1SE01 LACT 10 11/15/2017 82.31 614 1248 15.16 420 79 PRD
18WC2NW05 LACT 10 11/16/2017 12.61 108 991 78.59 658 52 PRD
10WC2NE01 LACT 13 11/27/2017 31.98 667 347 10.85 178 89 PRD
24DWC2NE22 LACT 4 11/23/2017 23.02 201 1011 43.92 604 53 PRD
30WC2SE12 LACT 4 11/27/2017 12.07 382 2425 200.91 652 54 PRD
16WC2NW19 LACT 5 11/14/2017 13.19 265 2020 153.15 475 53 PRD
02RDWC1NW07S SABLACT 11/12/2017 4.16 169 0 0.00 410 67 PRD
27RDWC2NE10s SABLACT 11/10/2017 5.15 128 329 63.88 390 69 PRD
18WC2NW19 LACT 5 11/26/2017 14.21 354 4098 288.39 680 53 PRD
17WC2NE24 LACT 5 11/27/2017 21.81 311 2288 104.91 632 51 PRD
32WC2NE13 LACT 5 11/21/2017 22 306 2297 104.41 504 58 PRD
22WC2NE13 LACT 5 11/26/2017 4 340 2415 603.75 476 57 PRD
36WC2NE15 LACT 4 11/25/2017 27 138 1346 49.85 657 51 PRD
29WC2SE14 LACT 4 11/27/2017 26 501 2315 89.04 515 68 PRD
16DWC2NE22 LACT 4 11/25/2017 232.57 362 809 3.48 365 55 PRD

19
 HWBD - Production Percentage Change

Production Percentage Change: (Final - Initial)/Initial

WELL ∆ Oil (BBL) ∆ Oil (% Change) ∆ Gas ∆ GOR ∆ WHT
13RDWC1SW06 -1.95 -20.88% 3.78% 31.16% 5.36%
25DWC1SW06 11.9 52.28% 37.65% -9.61% 5.45%
27WC1SE01 65.86 400.36% 180.64% -43.91% 29.51%
18WC2NW05 3.07 32.18% -1.72% -25.64% 4.00%
10WC2NE01 10.72 50.42% -32.09% -54.86% 0.00%
24DWC2NE22 6.86 42.45% 4.88% -26.38% 6.00%
30WC2SE12 6.42 113.63% -6.38% -56.18% 3.85%
16WC2NW19 -2.41 -15.45% 53.23% 81.22% 3.92%
02RDWC1NW07S 1.72 70.49% 4.69%
27RDWC2NE10s 0.17 3.41% 5.69% 2.20% 1.47%
18WC2NW19 -2.09 -12.82% 12.25% 28.76% 1.92%
17WC2NE24 15.47 244.01% 37.09% -60.15% -1.92%
32WC2NE13 14 175.00% 19.20% -56.65% 13.73%
22WC2NE13 1.33 49.81% 5.26% -29.74% -12.31%
36WC2NE15 7.4 37.76% 11.98% -18.71% 2.00%
29WC2SE14 -35.3 -57.59% 44.53% 240.77% -2.86%
16DWC2NE22 169.71 269.98% 27.40% -65.57% -1.79%
TOTAL 272.88 1435% 403% -63% 63%
AVERAGE 16.05 84% 25% -4% 4%

20
SD3 Injectivity Analysis
 SD3 InjectivityAnalysis

• Goal:
• Create visual of injection issues in the North of SD3
• Data Accumulated:
• Water Injected
• Tubing Pressure
• Average Reservoir Pressure
• Perforation Interval
• Formula:
• (Water Injected) / (Tbg Press + (Mid Perf Depth*0.433 – Avg Res
Press))

22
 11SD3NW02 Injection Well - Example Plot

11SD3NW02 INJ INDEX Acid: 500 gals w/ NE282 (30 gal)

12.00 2000.00

1800.00

10.00 1600.00

1400.00
8.00
1200.00
Injectivity (BPD/PSI)

Flow Rate (BPD)

1000.00
6.00
800.00

600.00
4.00
400.00

2.00 200.00

0.00

0.00 -200.00
3/6/2017 4/25/2017 6/14/2017 8/3/2017 9/22/2017 11/11/2017
Date

11SD3NW02 INJ IND AVG INJ IND 11SD3NW02_M2 Water

23
 Results

INJ INDEX COMARISON

MH N Avg Inj Ind MH S Avg Inj Ind

5.00

4.50

4.00

3.50
INJECTIVITY (BPD/PSI)

3.00

2.50

2.00

1.50

1.00

0.50

0.00
3/26/2017 5/15/2017 7/4/2017 8/23/2017 10/12/2017
DATE

24
GGO Conversion
 GGO Conversions Overview

• Define Gas Gravity Override & Underride

• Diagram of Conversion
• Selection Process for Patterns
• NE Conversion Project
• Project Economics
• Future Potential

26
 Gas Gravity Override & Underride

Override Occurs:
• Injected fluid is less dense than the
displaced fluid.
• Gravity segregation occurs and the
displacing fluid overrides the displaced
fluid. (Fig 4.16a - CO2 flood)

Underride Occurs:
• Injected fluid is more dense than the
displaced fluid.
• Gravity segregation occurs and the
Green, Whillhite. Enhanced Oil Recovery. 1998
displacing fluid underrides the
displaced fluid. (Fig 4.16b – H2O flood)

27
 Conversion Theory - Currently
• Injected CO2 is potentially overriding trapped hydrocarbons.

• Immiscible water flood hypothetically occurring at lower region of reservoir due to gravity
segregation.

CURRENT WELL SET UP

INJECTOR PRODUCER

WAG
CO2 SG~ 0.4
CO2 RISES TO TOP DUE TO LOWER SPECIFIC GRAVITY

CO2 H2O UNSWEPT REGION

OIL SG~ 0.8

POTENTIAL MOBILIZED OIL

H2O SINKS TO BOTTOM DUE TO HIGHER SPECIFIC GRAVITY
H2O SG~ 1.0

28
 Conversion Theory - Converted
• Injected CO2 will sweep overridden hydrocarbons

• A miscible CO2 flood will have an opportunity to sweep the lower region of the reservoir

INJ/PROD CONVERSION
PRODUCER INJECTOR

WAG
CO2 SG~ 0.4

SQUEEZE OFF
CO2 RISES TO TOP DUE TO LOWER SPECIFIC GRAVITY

CO2 H2O SWEPT REGION

OIL SG~ 0.8

REPERF
MOBILIZE TRAPPED OIL
H2O SINKS TO BOTTOM DUE TO HIGHER SPECIFIC GRAVITY
H2O SG~ 1.0

29
 Selection Process

• Quality Formation
• Highest GOR Wells/Patterns
• Largest Amount of Remaining Oil
• Limited Surrounding Injection Support
• Lowest Expense to Convert

30
 NE Conversion Project

31
 NE Selection – SoPhiH
• Reasonable Rock Formation
• SoPhiH: 6.5-7.5

NE Conversion SoPhiH

32
 NE Selection - 14WC2NE13
UTILITY PROD
• Producer to Injector
Row Labels
• High GOR 14WC2NE13
Sum of Last Tag Date 6/2/2015
• Avg GOR = 595 MSCF/BBL Sum of % Covered 0.00%
Sum of Last Acid Date
Sum of Last Coil Date
Sum of Last Frac Date 1/16/2014

Green = Oil Production

Red = Gas Production

33
 NE Selection – NE Remaining Oil
• Large Remaining Oil
• Row of Producers
• Little to No Downdip Injection Support
211.8 MBo

82.9 MBo

179.4 MBo

R.O. = OOIP * (RFa – RF)

34
 NE Selection - 10WC2NE13
UTILITY INJ

• Injector to Producer Row Labels

• Minimal Injection Support 10WC2NE13

Sum of Last Tag Date 8/23/2016

• Low cost to convert Sum of % Covered

Sum of Last Acid Date
27.55%
7/10/2017
Sum of Last Coil Date 8/23/2016
Sum of Last Frac Date

Still responsive
to acid

Blue = Water Injection

Red = Gas Injection

35
 NE Conversion Project Summary
14WC2NE13
• Run injection line from injection header
to wellhead.
• Squeeze off perforations and
reperforate lower zone
• Internally coated 2-7/8” fiber-lined
tubing and nickel plated retrievable
Baker Hornet packer (@ 2,370’) are
already installed for this well’s previous
service.
10WC2NE13
• Run production line from production
header to wellhead.
• Install internally coated 2-7/8” fiber-
lined tubing and nickel plated
retrievable Baker Hornet packer (@
2,317’).

36
 NE Conversion Project Costs

NE Conversions Costs

Flowline Cost
Injection FL 550ft $ 25.00 $/ft $ 13,750.00
Production FL 550ft $ 25.00 $/ft $ 13,750.00
Tie In 2 $ 1,100.00 $ 2,200.00
TOTAL $ 29,700.00

Wellwork Cost
Tag/Pressure Tests 2wells $ 250.00 $/test $ 500.00
10WC2NE13 Tubing 2370ft $ 10.00 $/ft $ 23,700.00
10WC2NE13 Packer 1unit $ 10,000.00 $ 10,000.00
10 & 14WC2NE13 Rig 6days $ 5,000.00 $/day $ 30,000.00
14WC2NE13 Mud 1unit $ 25,000.00 $ 25,000.00
14WC2NE13 Cement 1unit $ 10,000.00 $ 10,000.00
14WC2NE13 Perforate 1unit $ 10,000.00 $ 10,000.00
14WC2NE13 Sitework 1unit $ 10,000.00 $ 10,000.00
TOTAL $ 119,200.00

TOTAL $ 148,900.00

37
 Conversion Economics: Input, Sensitivity & Output

• Economics Inputs • Outputs (12 Month Forecast)

• $47.90/BBL • Payout in Months
• 63.601% NRI • Internal Rate of Return (IRR)
• 75.529% WI • Net Present Value 10% Discount
• $0.10/MSCF Rate per Year (NPV10)
• Brief Sensitivity Modeling • Discounted Profit to Investment
• BPD Additional per Pattern: Ratio (DPIR)
• 10, 15, 20, 25, 30, 50

• MCFD Expense per Pattern:

• 500, 1500

PROJECT WI COSTS
NE CONVERSION COST 75.529% $ 112,462.68
NW CONVERSION COST 75.529% $ 111,110.71
TOTAL PROJECT COST $ 296,010.00

38
 Conversion Economics Sensitivity: (500 vs 1500 MCFD)

• Case #1: 500 MCFD

Per Each Conversion (NE or NW)
OIL (BPD) Revenue ($/month) Comp Expense ($/month) Payout (months) IRR (12 mnth) NPV10 (12 mnth) DPIR (12 mnth)
10 $ 9,261.32 $ 1,148.04 28 -2.0% $ (18,826.11) -0.17 Currently
15 $ 13,891.98 $ 1,148.04 17 5.3% $ 33,845.39 0.30
20 $ 18,522.65 $ 1,148.04 12 11.3% $ 86,516.89 0.78
25 $ 23,153.31 $ 1,148.04 10 16.7% $ 139,188.39 1.25
30 $ 27,783.97 $ 1,148.04 8 21.7% $ 191,859.89 1.73 Potential
50 $ 46,306.62 $ 1,148.04 4 39.9% $ 402,545.88 3.62

• Case #2: 1500 MCFD

Per Each Conversion (NE or NW)
OIL (BPD) Revenue ($/month) Comp Expense ($/month) Payout (months) IRR (12 mnth) NPV10 (12 mnth) DPIR (12 mnth)
10 $ 9,261.32 $ 3,444.12 38 -6.5% $ (44,942.91) -0.40 Currently
15 $ 13,891.98 $ 3,444.12 21 1.9% $ 7,728.59 0.07
20 $ 18,522.65 $ 3,444.12 14 8.4% $ 60,400.09 0.54
25 $ 23,153.31 $ 3,444.12 11 14.1% $ 113,071.59 1.02
30 $ 27,783.97 $ 3,444.12 9 19.3% $ 165,743.09 1.49 Potential
50 $ 46,306.62 $ 3,444.12 5 37.7% $ 376,429.08 3.39

39
 Potential & Future Projects

• Current patterns are uneconomical due to High GOR & Compression

Costs
• Successful Project
• Potential to mobilize trapped oil
• Potential to regain lost production from Extended Water Curtain
• Applicable to other patterns
• Revitalize Phase 1 & 2
Well Name OOIP (MBO) RF RF abandon Remaining Oil PHASE GOR
08WC2NE13 1576 0.0875 0.1509 99.887968 PH1 607.92
04WC2SE12 957 0.106 0.1509 42.956728 PH2 271
32WC2NE13 1737 0.07452 0.1509 132.6399804 PH1 249
16WC2SE12 946 0.124 0.1509 25.436909 PH2 174.77
34WC2SE12 1063 0.1127 0.1509 40.603544 PH1 141.69

R.O. = OOIP * (RFa – RF)

40
2015 – 2017 Previous Frac Rounds Analysis
 Project Summary

• Data:
• Oil Delta
• CO2 Delta
• Water Delta
• Volumetric Flow Rate Delta
• Before/After
• Time Step Back
• GOR Delta
• Before/After
• Time Step Back
• Goal:
• To increase the efficiency of successful frac candidates

42
 OH vs CH - Results

ANALYZE Last Frac Date **Ma ke s ure to refres h pi vot a s cha nge a na l ys i s
DAYS BACK TO ANALYZE 45
DAYS FORWARD TO ANALYZE 45
Row Labels Count of Well Name Average of Oil Delta Average of Volumetric Delta Average of GOR Delta Average of DPIR
15 19.21 320.56 -374.24 4.90
CH 102 11.77 434.73 -28.46 2.37
OH 11 10.52 422.96 35.43 1.93
P&A 1 -0.72 28.27 6.85 -1.29
Slimhole 1 49.93 331.99 -30.43 15.14
(blank)
Grand Total 130 12.72 416.40 -62.38 2.69

43
 VFR TS Results: Comparing a decreasing VFR versus an always low VFR.
*Time Step Delta = (Avg VFR Before Frac) - (Avg VFR 2 Time Steps Back)

ANALYZE Last Frac Date **Ma ke s ure to refres h pi vot a s cha nge a na l ys i s

DAYS BACK TO ANALYZE 45

DAYS FORWARD TO ANALYZE 45
Row Labels Count of Well Name Average of Oil Delta Average of Volumetric Delta Average of GOR Delta Average of DPIR
VFR Delta TS Back: -1000 to -250 5 10.20 307.94 -12.65 1.96
VFR Delta TS Back: -250 to -50 21 11.97 427.61 -18.82 2.51
VFR Delta TS Back: -50 to 0 24 9.83 353.12 -85.40 1.74
VFR Delta TS Back: 0 to +50 28 18.03 350.58 -58.17 4.59
VFR Delta TS Back: +50 to +250 26 13.96 464.48 -152.09 2.95
VFR Delta TS Back: +250 to +1000 14 3.67 429.93 36.43 -0.35
12 23.67 973.57 10.92 6.00
(blank)
Grand Total 130 12.72 416.40 -62.38 2.69

44
 VFR: Comparing different ranges of VFR’s prior to Frac.

ANALYZE Last Frac Date **Ma ke s ure to refres h pi vot a s cha nge a na l ys i s

DAYS BACK TO ANALYZE 45

DAYS FORWARD TO ANALYZE 45
Row Labels Count of Well Name Average of Oil Delta Average of Volumetric Delta Average of GOR Delta Average of DPIR
VFR Avg Before Frac: 0 to +250 22 16.51 335.39 -82.63 4.16
VFR Avg Before Frac: +250 to +500 29 12.68 391.18 6.64 2.72
VFR Avg Before Frac: +500 to +750 25 14.27 547.15 -60.13 2.98
VFR Avg Before Frac: +750 to +1000 20 11.04 388.43 -27.02 2.15
VFR Avg Before Frac: +1000 to +1500 14 10.06 462.15 -12.83 1.75
VFR Avg Before Frac: +1500 to +2250 12 8.55 346.68 -315.21 1.37
--- 8
(blank)
Grand Total 130 12.72 416.40 -62.38 2.69

45
 GOR: Comparing an increasing GOR versus a low/high steady GOR.
*Time Step Delta = (Avg GOR Before Frac) - (Avg GOR 2 Time Steps Back)
ANALYZE Last Frac Date **Ma ke s ure to refres h pi vot a s cha nge a na l ys i s
DAYS BACK TO ANALYZE 45
DAYS FORWARD TO ANALYZE 45
Row Labels Count of Well Name Average of Oil Delta Average of Volumetric Delta Average of GOR Delta Average of DPIR
GOR Delta TS Back: -3000 to -250 3 7.60 189.20 -506.32 1.23
GOR Delta TS Back: -250 to -50 8 25.64 413.69 -47.49 7.06
GOR Delta TS Back: -50 to 0 38 12.46 361.70 11.64 2.70
GOR Delta TS Back: 0 to +50 48 9.67 354.60 21.39 1.75
GOR Delta TS Back: +50 to +150 10 13.35 529.67 -79.60 2.69
GOR Delta TS Back: +150 to +250 5 19.02 687.99 -100.36 4.36
GOR Delta TS Back: +250 to +500 3 8.90 711.79 -84.64 0.73
GOR Delta TS Back: +500 to +2000 3 12.22 463.85 -1866.57 2.28
12 23.67 973.57 10.92 6.00
(blank)
Grand Total 130 12.72 416.40 -62.38 2.69

46
 GOR: Comparing different ranges of GOR’s prior to Frac.

ANALYZE Last Frac Date **Ma ke s ure to refres h pi vot a s cha nge a na l ys i s
DAYS BACK TO ANALYZE 45
DAYS FORWARD TO ANALYZE 45
Row Labels Count of Well Name Average of Oil Delta Average of Volumetric Delta Average of GOR Delta Average of DPIR
GOR Avg Before Frac: +0 to +25 20 15.41 367.39 8.66 3.74
GOR Avg Before Frac: +25 to +50 23 15.29 305.09 16.10 3.73
GOR Avg Before Frac: +50 to +75 20 10.57 436.87 32.50 2.06
GOR Avg Before Frac: +75 to +100 17 8.50 356.47 33.19 1.32
GOR Avg Before Frac: +100 to +150 7 4.90 323.97 -4.34 0.13
GOR Avg Before Frac: +150 to +175 9 15.69 623.40 -32.00 3.26
GOR Avg Before Frac: +175 to +250 9 18.58 586.07 -57.51 4.26
GOR Avg Before Frac: +250 to +500 10 10.17 481.12 -84.48 1.65
GOR Avg Before Frac: +500 to +4000 6 12.64 444.88 -1270.92 2.47
--- 9 16.18 1004.73 4.30
(blank)
Grand Total 130 12.72 416.40 -62.38 2.69

47
 Summary

OH vs CH
• Minimal difference in oil delta
• CH typically decreased GOR

VFR
• VFR Delta TS Back: +0 to +250
• VFR Range Before Frac: +0 to +750

GOR
• GOR Delta TS Back: -250 to -50
• GOR Range Before Frac: +175 to +250 (1st) & +0 to +50 (2nd)

48
36WC2SE12 Rig Clean Out
 36WC2SE12: RIG CLEAN OUT PROCEDURE

1. MIRUSU. SET PLUG IN PKR. NUBOP. J-OFF LAY DOWN TBG.

2. P/U WORKSTRING. SPACE OUT. PULL PLUG. KILL TBG. RUN 1.66’
TBG. STRIP UP.
3. TAG UP. KILL TBG. LAY DOWN 1.66’ TBG. SET PLUG IN PKR. LAY
DOWN WORKSTRING.
4. RUN FIBERLINE TBG. SPACE OUT TBG STRING. ROLL PKR FLUID.
PULL PLUG.
5. RDMOSU.

50
 36WC2SE12: COST BREAKDOWN & ECONOMICS

Item Costs
Rig $ 25,000.00
Trucking $ 8,000.00
Water Hauling $ 3,000.00
Tubing $ 21,000.00
BOP Rental $ 2,000.00
Contract Labor $ 5,000.00
Surface Rental $ 5,000.00
Road & Locations $ 2,000.00
Mud & Chemicals $ 4,000.00
Slickline $ 5,000.00
Misc $ 5,000.00
TOTAL: $ 85,000.00

Project Cost $ 85,000.00

34SE12 Production Loss 14 34SE12 CO2 Loss 261
32NE13 Production Loss 30 32NE13 CO2 Loss 1392
Oil Incremental 44 CO2 Incremental 1653

Payout (months) 2
Internal Rate of Return 42%
NPV 10 (12 mnth) $ 331,021.02
DPIR 3.89

51
 36WC2SE12: WELL HISTORY

• Saw a decrease in injection, added to acid list (unable to pump in w/

3000psi)
• Added to CTCO list (couldn't get into 2 7/8” liner)
• All Injection 0’d
• Only Downdip Injection Support: 34WC2SE12 and 32WC2NE13
• 34WC2SE12: Production decline estimate (~14bpd)
• 32WC2NE13: Production decline estimate (~30bpd)

52