2012-04-27_REVISION - C1981012 (2)

Home Browse Search

Hernandez, Alysha From: Stark, Jim Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2012 7:35 AM To: DRMS - Coal -Admin Subject: FW: New Elk - facility location issues Attachments: MineLocationComparisons.xls; XTO Well Locations & Pipelines.pdf; XTO Compressor Stations & Pipelines.pdf Please scan in New Elk C- 1981 -012 PR -04. Thanks. - - - -- Original Message---- - From: George Staus(@xtoenergy.com [ mailto:George Staus(@xtoenergy.com Sent: Friday, April 27, 2012 09:24 To: jill(@agapito.com ronthompson(@newelkcoal.com tross(@agapito.com Stark, Tim Cc: Tom Delong(@xtoenergy.com Robin Tracy(@xtoenergy.com Rebecca Bodenhamer(@xtoenergy.com Reed Meek(@xtoenergy.com Subject: New Elk - facility location issues All, We've been attempting to examine locations of XTO wells and NECC's mining plans. There are some discrepancies between well & pipeline locations, missing wells, and compressor stations (which NECC probably doesn't have yet). I have listed the missing wells and the largest discrepancies in well locations below. I have also included the well location file comparisons and pdf's of pipeline /wells superimposed on the NECC image data as well as the compressor stations superimposed on the NECC pdf file. As for the differences in well locations, some of the inconsistency might have to do with using pictures rather than electronic data, however, this will not explain all the differences. There is no consistent offset and the average offset is 45' with 8 wells greater than 60'. The NECC files themselves appear to have some inconsistency with average and maximum offset differences of 14' and 23' respectively. I've just learned today that we did recieve an electronic DFX file from NECC /Agapito. This should greatly help the reconciliation process. Right now we're investigating if the import will result in significant error as the export projection is different from ours( State Plane Zone 0503 (Colorado South) NAD83 vs North American Datum 1927 (NAD27)). We'd like to send NECC our pipeline, well, and compressor location data electronically. Please tell us what file type and projection we should use for those files. Many thanks for your help. Please contact me with any questions you might have. Follow -ups XTO has no deviation surveys in wells within the proposed mine expansion area, so no definitive bottom hole locations are available to help define pillar sizes around wellbores XTO wells not on NECC record file GE 30 -08, AC 30 -02, GE 30 -02, AC 01 -04 NECC well that XTO has no record of AC 02 -01 Largest Discrepancy Wells GE 29 -04 84' GE 19 -15 82' AC 31 -10 78 NE 24 -16 73' 1