2015 marcellus and utica shale databook - vol. 1

Marcellus and Utica Shale Databook 2015 Volume 1: 2015 Jan-Apr Drilling Permit Maps; Directory of Active Drillers, Well & Property Valuation

Detail Maps & Charts, Individual County Maps for Permits Issued Jan-Apr; Regulatory/Legal Update; Permits by Driller and More!

May 2015 Edition

©Marcellus and Utica Shale Databook 2015 – Volume 1

Table of Contents

Section I - Overview

Introduction & Methodology 6

Drilling Update Jan-Apr 2015 7-9

Marcellus/Utica Permits Plunge 7

Marcellus/Utica Permits Issued – Trends (chart) 7

Pennsylvania Regions (map) 7

NGLs & Pipelines Make the Difference 8

Henry Hub vs Marcellus Gas Spot Price (chart) 8

Rig Counts Plunge 9

US Rig Counts - Year to Year Comparison (chart) 9

Marcellus/Utica Rig Counts by State (chart) 9

Permit Counts – a Databook Innovation 10

Permits by Driller 2013-15: PA, OH, WV (chart) 10-13

Pennsylvania Geographical Regions (chart) 14

Permits by County 2013-15: PA, OH, WV (chart) 14-15

Regulatory/Legal Update: PA, OH, WV, NY, MD 16-20

Regulatory/Legal Update: SRBC, DRBC, EPA, FERC 21-22

Marcellus/Utica Latest Lease Offers (map) 23

Wet Gas/Dry Gas Boundary (map) 24

Guide to Using the County Maps (chart) 25

Section II - Pennsylvania Permits

PA Gas Well Permits – Entire State (map) 26

Allegheny County (map) 27

Armstrong County (map) 28

Beaver County (map) 29

Bradford County (map) 30

Section II - Pennsylvania Permits (continued)

Butler County (map) 31

Cameron County (map) 32

Centre County (map) 33

Clarion County (map) 34

Clearfield County (map) 35

Clinton County (map) 36

Crawford County (map) 37

Elk County (map) 38

Fayette County (map) 39

Forest County (map) 40

Greene County (map) 41

Huntingdon County (map) 42

Indiana County (map) 43

Jefferson County (map) 44

Lawrence County (map) 45

Lycoming County (map) 46

McKean County (map) 47

Mercer County (map) 48

Potter County (map) 49

Sullivan County (map) 50

Susquehanna County (map) 51

Tioga County (map) 52

Venango County (map) 53

Warren County (map) 54

Washington County (map) 55

Westmoreland County (map) 56

Wyoming County (map) 57


Table of Contents

Section III - Ohio Permits

OH Gas Well Permits – Entire State (map) 58

Belmont County (map) 59

Carroll County (map) 60

Columbiana County (map) 61

Guernsey County (map) 62

Harrison County (map) 63

Jefferson County (map) 64

Monroe County (map) 65

Noble County (map) 66

Tuscarawas County (map) 67

Washington County (map) 68

Section IV - West Virginia Permits

WV Gas Well Permits – Entire State (map) 69

Barbour County (map) 70

Brooke County (map) 71

Doddridge County (map) 72

Gilmer County (map) 73

Harrison County (map) 74

Lewis County (map) 75

Marion County (map) 76

Marshall County (map) 77

Monongalia County (map) 78

Ohio County (map) 79

Preston County (map) 80

Ritchie County (map) 81

Taylor County (map) 82

Tyler County (map) 83

Upshur County (map) 84

Wetzel County (map) 85


Table of Contents

Section V – How to Value Property & Mineral Rights in Shale Plays

Disclaimer: Select Analytics, LLC, dba “ShaleNavigator” and Marcellus Drilling News, are not liable for any direct or indirect damages suffered related to the use of this Databook product arising from any errors, omissions, inaccuracies, or any other inadequacies of the Databook or the Recipient’s use of the Databook. In no event will Select Analytics, LLC’s, dba “ShaleNavigator”’s or Marcellus Drilling News’ liability to the Recipient or anyone else exceed the fee paid for the Databook product. Use of information provided in this report is at your own risk. Editor’s Note: If you spot anything you believe is inaccurate or should be added, tell us! You may qualify for a free MDN or ShaleNavigator subscription.

Preface: Valuing Property, OGM Rights, Royalties 86

Leveling the Playing Field for Sellers 87

Appraisal Problem Overview 88

Methods of Appraisal 89

Appraisal Considerations for OGM Properties 90-91

Appraising a Unitized Parcel w/Royalties 92

Tools for Property Valuations 92

Tools for Property Valuations (chart) 93

Sales Comparison Approach & Conclusion 94

Mineral Rights Value & Oil Prices 95

Section VI – Pipelines 101 – Regulations & Maps

Types of Pipelines & Who Regulates Them 96

Agencies with Regulatory Oversight (chart) 97

Major Gas Pipelines – Eastern Marcellus (map) 98

Major Gas Pipelines – Western Marcellus (map) 99

Major Gas Pipelines – Utica (map) 100

Section VII – Directory of Active Drillers in the Marcellus/Utica

ABARTA Energy – Carrizo Oil & Gas 101

Chesapeake Energy – EM Energy 102

Energy Corp of America – Gastar Exploration 103

Great Plains Operating – Mountain V Oil & Gas 104

Moutaineer Keystone – Rice Energy 105

Ross & Wharton Gas – Triad Hunter 106

Triana Energy – XTO Energy 107


DRILLING UPDATE: JAN-APR 2015


Marcellus/Utica Permits Plunge in 1T15 Let’s begin with what happened in the first four months of 2015 with respect to the number of permits issued to Marcellus and Utica Shale drillers. As you can see by the chart on this page, the number of permits issued for unique, individual wells in each state decreased. The chart shows the number of permits issued by “trimester” or four month periods starting with January 2013. The number of wells where a driller filed for a permit to begin drilling, or where the driller filed for a permit to continue work on an existing well in Pennsylvania decreased to 785 “active” wells during the first four months of this year. That’s the lowest number of wells being worked on since we began tracking by trimesters in 2013. Looking at the graph and the numbers, you can see that both Ohio and West Virginia were “treading water” and holding about even from the middle to the last part of 2014. But in 2015 that changed—in a pretty big way. The number of active wells in both states decreased to almost the same level as two years ago, in 1T13. But the story, at least in the Pennsylvania Marcellus, is nuanced. If you look at our Permits by County chart on page 14, you’ll notice we’ve included a chart showing which Marcellus counties belong to which Pennsylvania regions. Most of the drilling that happens in PA happens in either the “dry gas” northeast region, or the “wet gas” southwest region. That’s not to say drilling doesn’t happen elsewhere—it does. Only the southeast counties have not experienced any horizontal shale drilling—every other region has. But counties in the northeast and southwest see the bulk of Marcellus (and Utica) drilling. All of the northeast counties except Bradford saw decreases in the number of permits in 1T14. While the major counties of the southwest also saw a decrease, it wasn’t nearly has much as those in the northeast. Why?


PERMITS BY DRILLER 2013-2015

Who’s Drilling & How Much?


In this section it we take a look at the number of permits issued by “trimesters” or Jan-Apr (1T), May-Aug (2T) and Sep-Dec (3T)—for each driller active in either the Marcellus and/or Utica Shale. The numbers reflect a permit received by that driller for a distinct, unique well (not pad, but individual well). That is, if the driller applied for and received a permit for any purpose—to begin drilling, to continue drilling, to frack, to re-drill, etc.—that number is included. This chart shows intent—an indication of potential activity. We filter out multiple permits for the same well and show only unique, distinct well locations. So a driller with a “46” for a given period means that driller received at least one permit for 46 different, distinct wells. Use this information to spot trends and get a high-level overview of activity for a particular driller—where, when, and how much they are drilling now—or soon will be.

1T13 2T13 3T13 1T14 2T14 3T14 1T15 1T13 2T13 3T13 1T14 2T14 3T14 1T15 1T13 2T13 3T13 1T14 2T14 3T14 1T15

AB Resources 5 3

Abarta Oil & Gas 8 1

Alpha Shale 4 1 9 8 1

Alta Mesa 2 2

American Energy 1 8 8 33 63 59 20

Anadarko Petroleum 20 60 41 3 5 36 3 3

Antero Resources 12 19 18 30 52 59 35 204 213 216 241 329 309 146

Apex Energy 4 2 4

Arrington Oil & Gas 1

Atlas Resources 2 12 1 1 12 1 1 3 4

BEUSA Energy 1

BP 3 2 4

Brammer Engineering 1 1 3

BRC Operating 11 2 4

Burnett Oil 1

Cabot Oil & Gas 46 53 63 63 47 45 27

Cameron Energy 1

Cambell Oil & Gas 1 2 1 3 2

Carrizo 8 11 20 1 2 4 15 15

Chesapeake Energy 250 137 77 329 211 131 131 92 96 63 82 72 50 48 67 119 87 96 95 50 31

Chevron 59 25 39 39 10 17 25 2 3 3 3 3 24 31 11 45 37

Chief Oil & Gas 36 53 74 35 68 15 13 4 4 2

Citrus Energy 5 2 2

CNX Gas/CONSOL Energy 31 26 27 53 60 53 37 8 7 4 22 9 18 58 105 75 64 96 78 61

Pennsylvania Ohio West Virginia


REGULATORY/LEGAL UPDATE

Pennsylvania Permitting and drilling in Pennsylvania is regulated by the Department of Environmental Protection (DEP). Gov. Tom Wolf’s Proposed Severance Tax Pennsylvania elected a new governor who took office in January. Tom Wolf ran on—and made a centerpiece in his campaign—a new severance tax for the state’s unconventional shale producers. The tax, as he advertises it, is 5% plus 4.7 cents per thousand cubic feet (Mcf). The tax assumes an average sale price of $2.97 per Mcf. As you can see from the graph on page 8, in some locations like northeastern PA where more than half of all natural gas is produced in the state, the price producers get is less than half that of the assumed $2.97/Mcf. Given the low price of natural gas in the state and a tax pegged to a much higher price, plus the added 4.7 cents per Mcf, when you run the calculations many economists peg the real rate at closer to 15%, not 5%--at least in the first few years. If a severance tax is instituted, the existing impact fee currently collected (raising over $200 million per year) would automatically be phased out. Over the past month or so Wolf and his lieutenants have ratcheted up the pressure on the PA legislature. Wolf is a Democrat and the legislature is Republican controlled. The state’s annual budget is due to be adopted by June 30. Drilling is reported to be down 30% in the state already this year. A new tax could accelerate that trend. Will Wolf get his severance tax? And if he does, will it threaten the Marcellus industry in PA? Stay tuned as this important issue plays out this year. DEP Oil & Gas Technical Advisory Board Controversy In an unprecedented move, Acting Secretary of the DEP, John Quigley, fired the entire DEP Oil & Gas Technical Advisory Board (TAB) and appointed his own slate of candidates, including non-voting members from anti-drilling environmental organizations. Quigley argues it’s no big deal since TAB board members don’t make legally binding decisions but instead offer advice and recommendations to the DEP. The oil and gas industry counter argues that since the TAB is charged with reviewing and offering changes to the 1984 Oil & Gas Act (updates are required under Act 13), their opinion and votes hold great sway and influence over PA’s drilling laws. Quigley’s action set a contentious tone right out of the gate and his relations with the industry have been strained since. Although the industry has asked that the original members of TAB be reinstated, Quigley refuses to do so. New changes offered by the new TAB members will mean yet another delay in adopting revisions to the 1984 law. Changes were ready to be implemented to the 1984 law at the end of 2014—but Tom Corbett, previous governor, lost his re-election bid and in the mire and confusion of a changeover at the DEP with the abrupt departure of Chris Abruzzo (former Secretary of the DEP), changes to the 1984 law were never implemented. It gave the Wolf administration an opportunity to put their own stamp on the industry. Pipelines & Noise – New Regulations from the DEP on the Way? In a sign that the PA DEP is becoming more aggressive with its regulatory powers, in late spring Gov. Wolf announced two new initiatives at the DEP. One initiative is the creation of a “Task Force on Pipeline Infrastructure Development.” The task force will help craft new regulations and guidelines for laying local gathering pipelines. The Task Force will be comprised of volunteers from government, communities where pipelines are laid, the drilling industry and anti-drilling environmental organizations. The second initiative is a new set of noise ordinances (from the state, not local municipalities). The new regulations don’t contain specific guidelines for all sites, but instead will require drillers to file site-specific plans for each and every site, along with taking sound measurements before and during drilling operations—to ensure the neighbors are not being unduly exposed to loud noises. The Marcellus Shale Coalition believes the new noise standard is “so vague and arbitrary that it fails as a regulatory standard.” Watch for both of these issues to be a flashpoint in the ongoing tussle with the new Wolf administration.


http://www.depweb.state.pa.us/

http://www.depweb.state.pa.us/


GUIDE TO USING THE COUNTY MAPS


#1 – The municipality or

operator name is followed by two sets of numbers, with the second number in parentheses. Example: Cogan House – 3 (3). The first number - “3” in this case - shows the total number of permits issued. The second number - “(3)” in this case - indicates how many wells the permits were issued for. Usually a single well requires several permits during drilling. In this example there were 3 permits issued, 1 each for 3 different wells.

#2 – A red dot indicates where a

well pad is located. Each well pad can have from one to ten wells on it. Typically a pad will contain 2-4 wells. Because of the size of the maps (vastly reduced to show an entire county), sometimes the red dots will be “on top of each other” and sometimes will not be labeled with a driller’s name. Most of the time the driller’s name will appear next to the red dot.

#3 – The boundary of each

county is indicated with a blue outline.

#4 – Major gas pipelines are

indicated with red lines. The name of the pipeline is located somewhere along the line.

#5 – The location for pipeline

compressor stations is indicated by a green triangle–the name is next to it.


Lycoming County

Section II – Pennsylvania Permits

By Municipality: Anthony – 2 (2) Cascade – 1 (1) Cogan House – 3 (3) Cummings – 1 (1) Eldred – 1 (1) Gamble – 3 (3) Hepburn – 5 (5) Jackson – 4 (4) Mifflin – 2 (2) Penn – 1 (1) Plunketts Creek – 1 (1) By Operator: Anadarko Petroleum – 2 (2) Atlas – 1 (1) Chief Oil & Gas – 1 (1) EXCO Resources – 2 (2) Inflection Energy – 6 (6) Range Resources – 11 (11) Southwestern Energy – 1 (1)


Columbiana County

Section III – Ohio Permits

By Municipality: Fairfield– 14 (13) Franklin – 2 (2) By Operator: Chesapeake Energy – 2 (2) Hilcorp Energy – 14 (13)


Barbour County

Section IV – West Virginia Permits

Entire County: 58 (21) By Operator: CNX Gas – 57 (20) Mountaineer Keystone – 1 (1)


Section V – Marcellus/Utica Well & Property Valuation

HOW TO VALUE PROPERTY & MINERAL RIGHTS IN SHALE PLAYS Databook Preface: Valuing Property and Mineral Rights in the Marcellus/Utica Shale Plays

Valuing Property, OGM Rights & Royalties One of the most challenging issues faced by landowners, appraisers, realtors, and investors is valuing property and associated mineral rights in the midst of the shale energy revolution we are witnessing. With information held “close to the vest” by competing energy companies regarding well test results, geologic data, and restrictions on lease specifics, those who have a vested interest in property value are seeking information to answer questions like: • What’s the going rate for an oil and gas minerals (OGM) lease in my area? • What are the mineral rights worth on my property? • I've started receiving royalty checks. What are my future royalty payments worth today? Further complicating the issue is the multiple layers of shale that—in our opinion—will be accessed in the near future, often from the same well pads that exist today. The advent of 8-10 wells on a single pad site and longer, deeper, horizontal lengths that we are starting to now see, also give great pause to future value of property and mineral rights. For these reasons there is a substantial paradigm shift occurring in the way we think about mineral rights valuation. In an area as large as the Marcellus and Utica, tens of thousands of affected landowners are asking the same questions for small lots under an acre all the way to landowner coalitions with hundreds of thousands of acres. In this special Databook section, we’ll get an inside look at how a mineral rights appraisal is conducted, why it’s so important, and tools available to not only the appraiser, but to anyone willing to put the pieces of the puzzle together to adequately estimate property and mineral rights in today’s fast-paced development environment. Our thanks to Mike Coles, owner of Coles & Associates Appraisal. Mike has generously shared his insights with the Databook audience. Mike has provided an update to last year’s primer on how professionals value property and mineral rights in shale plays like the Marcellus and Utica. As Mike tells us in the opening update, valuing mineral rights continues to “mature.” Often buyers of mineral rights have an edge. How do sellers of mineral rights (and property) level the playing field? Mike offers a solution. Following Mike’s update, we’ve included a copy of his primer from the 2014 Databook series. It’s just so too darned good not to repeat! Use Mike’s expert information to guide your own property valuation process. We also have another Databook first: Eric Winegar, Managing Partner of the US Mineral Exchange, gives us his insights into recent valuation trends in the Marcellus/Utica, along with his insight into how and why and the price of oil (yes, oil) influences natural gas lease activity and property values in the northeast. Jim Willis, Editor Marcellus and Utica Shale Databook May 2015


Section V – Marcellus/Utica Well & Property Valuation

HOW TO VALUE PROPERTY & MINERAL RIGHTS IN SHALE PLAYS

Mike Coles: Valuing Property and Mineral Rights in the Marcellus/Utica Shale Plays

Methods of Appraisal With the goal of estimating value of a particular property, appraisals are conducted for a variety of reasons such as tax planning, real estate conveyances (transfers or sales, for example), or to simply establish value for another reason. Banks also require appraisals as part of loan and mortgage reviews. With shale-area properties in different stages of maturity—some producing, some leased but not producing, some held by production, and others non-leased or with leases expired—the proper appraisal methodology must be used for each type. An appraiser has three standard methods of valuation: • Cost Approach: Replacement cost new less depreciation plus the land value.

• Income Approach: The Income Approach in its simplest form is stated as the formula V=I÷R; where V=value; I=Income; and R=the Rate. As

with the other approaches, the property’s Value is what we’re estimating. Income is received from rent, lease payments, etc. The Rate represents the rate of return an investor should reasonably expect to receive based on the risk of the investment. The higher the investor’s expected rate of return, the lower the property’s value, and vice versa.

• Sales Comparison Approach: Recently sold similar transactions are identified along with the appropriate unit of economic measure. The sold price per unit (e.g. the standard for land is per-acre) is then adjusted based on positive and negative attributes comparing the subject to the comparable sale properties. The end result is an adjusted sale price per unit that indicates the value per unit of the subject. The value per unit is multiplied by the number of units to indicate the subject’s value.

The Cost Approach is primarily applicable for new construction and estimating depreciation. The Cost Approach is not applicable for land valuation or OGM valuation. From the two remaining approaches, the appraiser chooses to one or both depending on the circumstance. The applicability of the Income Approach is less relevant in the leasing stage and the only approach to value a ‘royalty estate’. The Sales Comparison Approach is the most commonly used method before any royalty payments are received. The best example of this are auctions of OGM (with and without the land or “Surface Estate”). The data developed to inform potential buyers are a major portion of the items an appraiser needs in order to estimate OGM value. Properly done, the auction also serves to inform the seller. Those attending the auction typically bid on the property as a single purchase price. The market quickly determines the price paid per acre for comparison purposes. Considerable work must be put into the development of data for this approach. The subject and each comparable sale needs to be properly identified along with the attributes (positive and negative) that affect value.


Section VI – Pipeline Infrastructure

PIPELINES 101 - REGULATIONS A Guide to Who Regulates What with Respect to Natural Gas Pipelines

Lack of pipeline infrastructure is still, four years since our first Databook edition, a common complaint among drilling companies. Landowners continue to see significant activity in pipeline right of way (ROW) surveys and contracts, for both transmission and gathering lines, particularly if they are in or near active drilling units. Pipeline ROWs introduce another lease payment opportunity for landowners as companies pursue capacity through a proposed pipeline tie-in. Gathering vs. Transmission Pipelines Small diameter gathering pipelines connect individual wells and groups of wells to the larger-diameter transmission pipeline network. Compressors function to move piped gas through the network. Gathering pipelines are typically under 18 inches in diameter. Transmission lines carry natural gas over long distances, often over state lines. They carry already-processed gas to and from compressor stations and to distribution and storage facilities. Transmission lines can be up to 42 inches in diameter. This Databook shows only transmission pipelines and not gathering pipelines which are constantly under construction. The value in seeing transmission pipelines is that at some point, gathering lines will have to connect to a transmission line in order to get the gas to market. So seeing where those opportunities lie is key to seeing where drillers may want to drill next. It makes sense to drill where you can get your product to market! Who Regulates Pipelines? The construction and ongoing operation of transmission pipelines that cross state lines (“interstate” pipelines) are regulated by FERC—the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. The pipelines detailed on the following pages are interstate pipelines regulated by FERC. The construction and ongoing operation of gathering pipelines is regulated either by state public utility commissions (the agency varies depending on the state), and in some cases, gathering lines are regulated at the local municipal level via zoning ordinances (see our handy chart on the next page). Other Infrastructure Components Compressor station locations continue to increase along proposed pipeline networks. Gas processing and treatment plants have saw a huge uptick in construction in 2013-2014. That pace has slowed as planned plants are now online. There are still some expansions happening at existing plants where new “trains” are added. Natural gas storage facilities are also part of the equation with new facilities planned and existing facilities expanded to accommodate the increased production in the region. Ethane cracker plants, which act as a catalyst for petrochemical plants to be constructed, are still very much alive in the northeast. While the Shell cracker plant for Beaver County, PA is still not 100% confirmed, it’s looking more likely it will get built every day. There have been numerous positive developments in just the past few months. Another such facility planned for Wood County, WV by the Brazilian company Odebrecht has been put on hold. A third cracker plant was announced for Belmont County, OH in April. The plant, if built, will be built by PTT Global Chemical, Thailand’s largest integrated petrochemical and refining company, and financed by Marubeni Corporation, a Japan-based company. Any cracker plant built will have the power to attract upward of $20 billion of economic activity.


Section VI – Pipeline Infrastructure

MAJOR GAS PIPELINES Eastern Marcellus


Section VII – Directory of Active Drillers

DIRECTORY OF ACTIVE DRILLERS

Contact Details for the 84 Active Drillers in the Marcellus/Utica Shale

DRILLER NAME ADDRESS CITY ST ZIP PHONE WEB

ABARTA Energy 200 Alpha Dr Pittsburgh PA 15238 (412) 963-6443 http://www.abartaenergy.com

Alpha Shale Resources (Rice Energy) 400 Woodcliff Dr Canonsburg PA 15317 (724) 746-6720 http://www.riceenergy.com

American Energy Partners 301 NW 63rd, Ste 600 Oklahoma City OK 73116 (405) 418-8000 http://www.americanenergypartners.com

Anadarko Petroleum 1201 Lake Robbins Dr The Woodlands TX 77380 (832) 636-1000 http://www.anadarko.com

33 W Third St Williamsport PA 17701 (570) 323-4157

Antero Resources 1625 17th St, Ste 300 Denver CO 80202 (303) 357-7310 http://www.anteroresources.com

121 N Main St, Ste 310 Greensburg PA 15601 (724) 837-1338

109-A Doctors Dr Bridgeport WV 26330 (304) 848-0270

Apex Energy 6041 Wallace Rd Ext, Ste 100 Wexford PA 15090 (724) 719-2611 http://www.apexenergyllc.com

Arrington Oil & Gas 500 W Wall St, #300 Midland TX 79701 (432) 682-6685 https://goo.gl/pzDEfO

Atlas Energy 1000 Commerce Dr, Ste 410 Pittsburgh PA 15275 (800) 251-0171 http://www.atlasresourcepartners.com

BP 501 Westlake Park Blvd Houston TX 77079 (281) 366-2000 http://www.bp.com

28301 Ferry Rd Warrenville IL 60555 (800) 333-3991

Brammer Engineering 400 Texas St, Ste 600 Shreveport LA 71101 (318) 429-2345 http://www.brammer.com

Burnett Oil Co 801 Cherry St, Unit 9, Ste 1500 Fort Worth TX 76102 (817) 332-5108 http://www.burnettoil.com

375 Southpointe Blvd Canonsburg PA 15317 (724) 503-1370

Cabot Oil & Gas 840 Gessner Rd, Ste 1400 Houston TX 77024 (281) 589-4600 http://www.cabotog.com

5 Penn Center W, Ste 401 Pittsburgh PA 15276 (412) 249-3850

8279 PA-29 Montrose PA 18801 (570) 278-3518

Campbell Oil & Gas (Penn Natural Resources) 6760 Portwest Dr Houston TX 77024 (713) 751-0419 http://www.pennatural.com

Carrizo Oil & Gas 500 Dallas St, Ste 2300 Houston TX 77002 (713) 328-1000 http://www.crzo.net

651 Wheeling Ave, Ste 5 Cambridge OH 43725 (740) 432-5463

2 E Market St Clearfield PA 16830 (814) 765-2233

12231 SR 706 Montrose PA 18801 (570) 278-7450

http://www.abartaenergy.com/

http://www.riceenergy.com/

http://www.americanenergypartners.com/

http://www.anadarko.com/

http://www.anteroresources.com/

http://www.apexenergyllc.com/

https://goo.gl/pzDEfO

http://www.bp.com/

http://www.brammer.com/

http://www.burnettoil.com/

http://www.cabotog.com/

http://www.pennatural.com/

http://www.crzo.net/


Marcellus and Utica Shale Databook 2015

Volume 1: 2015 Drilling Permits (Jan-Apr); Drilling Contacts, Regional Pipelines, Property Valuations

Publish Date: May 2015

Volume 2: 2015 Drilling Permits (May-Aug), List of Pipeline/Infrastructure Projects, Frac Sand/Railroads

Publish Date: Sep 2015

Volume 3: 2015 Drilling Permits (Sep-Dec), Waste Facility List, Calculating Well Decline Rates

Publish Date: January 2016

Purchase Options:

Buy each 2015 volume individually for $175, or buy all three for $525 $350

Buy the 2014 series

(3 volumes) for $175

Site licenses/volume discounts also available,

contact us for details

To purchase, contact:

Marcellus Drilling News Web: marcellusdrilling.com/databook

Email: [email protected] Phone: (607) 238-2500

http://marcellusdrilling.com/databook

http://marcellusdrilling.com/databook

mailto:[email protected]

2015 marcellus and utica shale databook - vol. 1

News & Politics

harrison county map

jefferson county map

washington county map

ohio county map

cameron county map

upshur county map

beaver county map

armstrong county map