Review/Update of the Emerging Midale-Upper Rival Play in Burke County and the Greater Potential of the Ratcliffe Interval (Madison) Timothy O

Home , Madison Group

Review/Update of the Emerging Midale-Upper Rival Play in Burke County and the Greater Potential of the Ratcliffe Interval (Madison) Timothy O. Nesheim North Dakota Geological Survey

WDEA 2019 – Minot, ND North Dakota Geological Survey Midale-upper River Play Review/Update

Minot

North Dakota Geological Survey Midale-upper River Play Review/Update

North Dakota Geological Survey Anhydrite (hydrocarbon seal)

Anhydrite (hydrocarbon seal)

North Dakota Geological Survey Laminated dolostone (reservoir)

Bioturbation dolostone (reservoir)

Peloidal lime packstone (reservoir)

North Dakota Geological Survey Limestone ?? (non-reservoir)

Fossil* lime wackestone (non-reservoir)

Fossil lime wackestone (non-reservoir)

North Dakota Geological Survey Anhydrite (hydrocarbon seal)

Laminated dolostone (reservoir)

Limestone ?? (non-reservoir)

Bioturbation dolostone (reservoir)

Fossil* lime wackestone (non-reservoir)

Bioturbation dolostone (reservoir)

Fossil lime wackestone (non-reservoir)

Peloidal lime packstone (reservoir)

Anhydrite (hydrocarbon seal) North Dakota Geological Survey Midale-upper River Play Review/Update

1950’s - 1980’s

North Dakota Geological Survey Midale-upper River Play Review/Update

1990’s - 2000’s

North Dakota Geological Survey Midale-upper River Play Review/Update

2010’s-present

Operator Reported values • $2.9 to $3.8 million/well (drilling and completion) • 240-500 MMBO/Well (EUR values) North Dakota Geological Survey Midale-upper River Play Review/Update

2010’s-present

Open-hole horizontal wells (upper Rival) that have been re-stimulated using multi-stage hydraulic fracturing

North Dakota Geological Survey Midale-upper River Play Review/Update Elevated (Producible) Oil Saturations Maps • Core-plug fluid saturations • Legacy vertical well production • Drill stem test * fluid recoveries • Wireline log calculations • Structural analysis

North Dakota Geological Survey Madison Group Future Outlook

A’

North Dakota Geological Survey Department of Mineral Resources Madison Group Future Outlook A A’

North Dakota Geological Survey Department of Mineral Resources Madison Group Future Outlook

North Dakota Geological Survey Department of Mineral Resources Additional Madison Group Potential

Pool: MADISON Cum Oil: 146,662 BBLS Cum MCF Gas: 96,375 MCF Cum Water: 902,505 BBLS

*Completion included a 6-stage hydraulic fracture stimulation on the vertical perforations (~160 ft.)

North Dakota Geological Survey Department of Mineral Resources Examination of hydrocarbon charge within the Three Forks Formation sub-intervals and USGS Bakken- Three Forks Assessments Timothy O. Nesheim North Dakota Geological Survey

WDEA 2019 – Minot, ND North Dakota Geological Survey Bakken-Three Forks Production Summary – North Dakota

Bakken-Three Forks Production in North Dakota • 14,300+ horizontal wells drilled and completed • >3 billion barrels of cumulative oil production • ~1.42 MMBO/day (million barrels of oil per day) • >2.8 BCF/day (billion cubic feet of gas per day)

• 2008 USGS Assessment = 3.6 BBO* • 2013 USGS Assessment = 7.3 BBO* • ~2020 USGS Assessment = ?????

*Undiscovered, technically recoverable resource Evolution of the Bakken-Three Forks Unconventional Play Evolution of the Bakken-Three Forks Unconventional Play

Bakken-Three Forks Exploration-Development summary: • 1998-2008: E&D primarily targeted the Middle Bakken • st 2008-2013: upper Three Forks (1 bench) became a Source bed (UBS) regular drilling target Middle Bakken • 2013-present: middle Three Forks (2nd) has become a regular drilling target (230+ well) while the lower Three Source bed (LBS) Forks (3rd & 4th bench) has experienced dozens of upper Three Forks D&C’d wells but with mixed results. 1st bench

Bakken-Three Forks Production in North Dakota ? middle Three Forks • 2008 USGS Assessment (Bakken) = 3.6 BBO* 2nd bench • 2013 USGS Assessment (Bakken + upper Three Forks) = 7.3 BBO* lower Three Forks ? rd • ~2020 USGS Assessment (Bakken + total Three Forks) = ????? 3 bench

*Undiscovered, technically recoverable resource lower Three Forks 4th bench Three Forks cores with compiled fluid saturation data

core sample with oil saturations for the upper, middle, and/or lower Three Forks

60+ cores data sets compiled Three Forks Core-Plug Fluid Saturations

Pronghorn Three Forks Oil Saturations by subunit upper Three Forks

middle Three Forks

lower Three Forks middle Three Forks wells lower Three Forks wells

• >230 middle Three Forks wells (2B) • >45 MMBO combined, cumulative oil • ~48 lower Three Forks wells (3B-4B) production for middle and lower TF USGS Bakken-Three Forks Assessments

2008 USGS -> 3.6 billion barrels of undiscovered, technically recoverable resource (oil)

1,217 wells utilized in assessment (North Dakota and Montana)

Undiscovered, technically recoverable resource Discovered, technically recoverable resource = future production from undrilled and/or = past and future production from existing uncompleted wells within the assessed oil play. wells that have been drilled and completed within the assessed oil play. USGS Bakken-Three Forks Assessments

Discovered Resource • ~4,400 Bakken-Three Forks wells utilized in assessment • 5,000 middle Bakkens D&C’d • 1,600 upper Three Forks wells D&C’d • Discovered Resource => ~6,600 total Bakken-Three Forks Evolution of the Bakken-Three Forks Unconventional Play

~2013 - present

Middle Bakken

upper Three Forks 1st bench

middle Three Forks 2nd bench

lower Three Forks 3rd bench

lower Three Forks 4th bench USGS Bakken-Three Forks Assessments

Bakken Formation Three Forks Formation

Bakken-Three Forks Production in North Dakota • 2008: ~1,500 horizontal wells (Montana + North Dakota) • 2013: ~6,600 horizontal wells (Montana + North Dakota) • 2019: 14,300+ horizontal wells drilled and completed (North Dakota only) • 2019: >3 billion barrels of cumulative oil production (North Dakota only) Conclusions: • Midale-upper Rival Play (Madison) of northern Burke County appears poised for dozens to hundreds of future horizontal wells. • Alexander-Flat Lake subinterval section (Madison) may be a future, viable target for unconventional-style well development within southern Williams-western McKenzie Counties. • The Middle (2nd bench) and Lower Three Forks (3rd and 4th benches) both contain notable oil saturations over large appears, have yielded dozens to hundreds of productive horizontal wells, and have yet to be formally assessed by the USGS. • Another USGS assessment of the Bakken-Three Forks is pending. • USGS assessment numbers report only the future production from undrilled wells.