DOCSLIB.ORG

Encana Annual Information Form

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Encana Corporation Annual Information Form February 17, 2011 Table of Contents Introduction...................................................................................................................................................................................2 Corporate Structure ......................................................................................................................................................................3 General Development of the Business .........................................................................................................................................4 Narrative Description of the Business...........................................................................................................................................7 Canadian Division ..........................................................................................................................................................8 USA Division ................................................................................................................................................................12 Market Optimization .....................................................................................................................................................15 Former Operations .......................................................................................................................................................15 Reserves and Other Oil and Gas Information...............................................................................................................17 Acquisitions, Divestitures and Capital Expenditures.....................................................................................................18 Competitive Conditions ................................................................................................................................................19 Environmental Protection .............................................................................................................................................19 Social and Environmental Policies ...............................................................................................................................19 Employees....................................................................................................................................................................21 Foreign Operations.......................................................................................................................................................21 Directors and Officers.................................................................................................................................................................22 Audit Committee Information ......................................................................................................................................................25 Description of Share Capital .......................................................................................................................................................27 Credit Ratings.............................................................................................................................................................................29 Market for Securities...................................................................................................................................................................30 Dividends....................................................................................................................................................................................30 Legal Proceedings......................................................................................................................................................................31 Risk Factors................................................................................................................................................................................31 Transfer Agents and Registrars..................................................................................................................................................35 Interest of Experts ......................................................................................................................................................................35 Additional Information.................................................................................................................................................................35 Note Regarding Forward-Looking Statements............................................................................................................................36 Note Regarding Reserves Data and Other Oil and Gas Information ..........................................................................................37 Appendix A - Canadian Protocol Disclosure of Reserves Data and Other Oil and Gas Information........................................A-1 Appendix B - Report on Reserves Data by Independent Qualified Reserves Evaluators (Canadian Protocol) .......................B-1 Appendix C - Report of Management and Directors on Reserves Data and Other Information (Canadian Protocol) ..............C-1 Appendix D - U.S. Protocol Disclosure of Reserves Data and Other Oil and Gas Information ................................................D-1 Appendix E - Audit Committee Mandate..................................................................................................................................E-1 Encana Corporation Annual Information Form (prepared in US$) 1 Introduction This is the annual information form of Encana Corporation ( Encana or the Company ) for the year ended December 31, 2010. In this annual information form, unless otherwise specified or the context otherwise requires, reference to Encana or to the Company includes reference to subsidiaries of and partnership interests held by Encana Corporation and its subsidiaries. In this annual information form, the term liquids is used to represent crude oil and natural gas liquids ( NGLs ). Liquids also include condensate volumes. Certain liquids volumes have been converted to millions of cubic feet equivalent ( MMcfe ) or thousands of cubic feet equivalent ( Mcfe ) on the basis of one barrel ( bbl ) to six thousand cubic feet ( Mcf ). Also, certain natural gas volumes have been converted to barrels of oil equivalent ( BOE ) on the same basis. MMcfe, Mcfe and BOE may be misleading, particularly if used in isolation. A conversion ratio of one bbl to six Mcf is based on an energy equivalency conversion method primarily applicable at the burner tip and does not represent value equivalency at the well head. Unless otherwise indicated, all financial information included in this annual information form is determined using Canadian Generally Accepted Accounting Principles ( Canadian GAAP ), which differs from Generally Accepted Accounting Principles in the United States ( U.S. GAAP ). The notes to Encana s annual audited consolidated financial statements contain a discussion of the principal differences between Encana s financial results calculated under Canadian GAAP and under U.S. GAAP. Readers are directed to the sections titled Note Regarding Forward-Looking Statements and Note Regarding Reserves Data and Other Oil and Gas Information . Unless otherwise specified, all dollar amounts are expressed in United States ( U.S. ) dollars and all references to dollars , $ or to US$ are to U.S. dollars and all references to C$ are to Canadian dollars. Encana Corporation Annual Information Form (prepared in US$) 2 Corporate Structure Name and Incorporation Encana Corporation is incorporated under the Canada Business Corporations Act ( CBCA ). Its executive and registered office is located at 1800, 855 - 2nd Street S.W., Calgary, Alberta, Canada T2P 2S5. On November 30, 2009, Encana completed a corporate reorganization (the Split Transaction ) to split into two independent publicly traded energy companies Encana Corporation, a natural gas company, and Cenovus Energy Inc. ( Cenovus ), an integrated oil company. In conjunction with the Split Transaction, Encana s articles were amended to make certain changes to its share capital. Further information on the Company s share capital is disclosed under Description of Share Capital . Intercorporate Relationships The following table presents the name, the percentage of voting securities owned and the jurisdiction of incorporation, continuance or formation of Encana s principal subsidiaries and partnerships as at December 31, 2010. Each of these subsidiaries and partnerships had total assets that exceeded 10 percent of the total consolidated assets of Encana or annual revenues that exceeded 10 percent of the total consolidated annual revenues of Encana as at December 31, 2010. Percentage Jurisdiction of Directly or Incorporation, Indirectly Continuance Subsidiaries & Partnerships Owned or Formation Encana USA Holdings 100 Delaware 3080763 Nova Scotia Company 100 Nova Scotia Alenco Inc. 100 Delaware Encana Oil & Gas (USA) Inc. 100 Delaware Encana Marketing (USA) Inc. 100 Delaware Encana USA Investment Holdings 100 Delaware The above table does not include all of the subsidiaries and partnerships of Encana. The assets and annual revenues of unnamed subsidiaries and partnerships in the aggregate did
Recommended publications
  • Modern Shale Gas Development in the United States: a Primer

    Modern Shale Gas Development in the United States: a Primer

    U.S. Department of Energy • Office of Fossil Energy National Energy Technology Laboratory April 2009 DISCLAIMER This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States Government nor any agency thereof, nor any of their employees, makes any warranty, expressed or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe upon privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government or any agency thereof. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government or any agency thereof. Modern Shale Gas Development in the United States: A Primer Work Performed Under DE-FG26-04NT15455 Prepared for U.S. Department of Energy Office of Fossil Energy and National Energy Technology Laboratory Prepared by Ground Water Protection Council Oklahoma City, OK 73142 405-516-4972 www.gwpc.org and ALL Consulting Tulsa, OK 74119 918-382-7581 www.all-llc.com April 2009 MODERN SHALE GAS DEVELOPMENT IN THE UNITED STATES: A PRIMER ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This material is based upon work supported by the U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Fossil Energy, National Energy Technology Laboratory (NETL) under Award Number DE‐FG26‐ 04NT15455. Mr. Robert Vagnetti and Ms. Sandra McSurdy, NETL Project Managers, provided oversight and technical guidance.
  • Hydraulic Fracturing in the Barnett Shale

    Hydraulic Fracturing in the Barnett Shale

    Hydraulic Fracturing in the Barnett Shale Samantha Fuchs GIS in Water Resources Dr. David Maidment University of Texas at Austin Fall 2015 Table of Contents I. Introduction ......................................................................................................................3 II. Barnett Shale i. Geologic and Geographic Information ..............................................................6 ii. Shale Gas Production.........................................................................................7 III. Water Resources i. Major Texas Aquifers ......................................................................................11 ii. Groundwater Wells ..........................................................................................13 IV. Population and Land Cover .........................................................................................14 V. Conclusion ....................................................................................................................16 VI. References....................................................................................................................17 2 I. Introduction Hydraulic Fracturing, or fracking, is a process by which natural gas is extracted from shale rock. It is a well-stimulation technique where fluid is injected into deep rock formations to fracture it. The fracking fluid contains a mixture of chemical components with different purposes. Proppants like sand are used in the fluid to hold fractures in the rock open once the hydraulic
  • Assessing Undiscovered Resources of the Barnett-Paleozoic Total Petroleum System, Bend Arch–Fort Worth Basin Province, Texas* by Richard M

    Assessing Undiscovered Resources of the Barnett-Paleozoic Total Petroleum System, Bend Arch–Fort Worth Basin Province, Texas* by Richard M

    Assessing Undiscovered Resources of the Barnett-Paleozoic Total Petroleum System, Bend Arch–Fort Worth Basin Province, Texas* By Richard M. Pollastro1, Ronald J. Hill1, Daniel M. Jarvie2, and Mitchell E. Henry1 Search and Discovery Article #10034 (2003) *Online adaptation of presentation at AAPG Southwest Section Meeting, Fort Worth, TX, March, 2003 (www.southwestsection.org) 1U.S. Geological Survey, Denver, CO 2Humble Geochemical Services, Humble, TX ABSTRACT Organic-rich Barnett Shale (Mississippian-Pennsylvanian) is the primary source rock for oil and gas that is produced from Paleozoic reservoir rocks in the Bend Arch–Fort Worth Basin Province. Areal distribution and geochemical typing of hydrocarbons in this mature petroleum province indicates generation and expulsion from the Barnett at a depocenter coincident with a paleoaxis of the Fort Worth Basin. Barnett-sourced hydrocarbons migrated westward into reservoir rocks of the Bend Arch and Eastern shelf; however, some oil and gas was possibly sourced by a composite Woodford-Barnett total petroleum system of the Midland Basin from the west. Current U.S. Geological assessments of undiscovered oil and gas are performed using the total petroleum system (TPS) concept. The TPS is composed of mature source rock, known accumulations, and area(s) of undiscovered hydrocarbon potential. The TPS is subdivided into assessment units based on similar geologic characteristics, accumulation type (conventional or continuous), and hydrocarbon type (oil and (or) gas). Assessment of the Barnett-Paleozoic TPS focuses on the continuous (unconventional) Barnett accumulation where gas and some oil are produced from organic-rich siliceous shale in the northeast portion of the Fort Worth Basin. Assessment units are also identified for mature conventional plays in Paleozoic carbonate and clastic reservoir rocks, such as the Chappel Limestone pinnacle reefs and Bend Group conglomerate, respectively.
  • Hydrogeochemical Evaluation of the Uinta Formation and Green River Formation, Piceance Creek Basin, Northwestern Colorado, USA

    Hydrogeochemical Evaluation of the Uinta Formation and Green River Formation, Piceance Creek Basin, Northwestern Colorado, USA

    Portland State University PDXScholar Dissertations and Theses Dissertations and Theses Fall 11-1-2016 Hydrogeochemical Evaluation of the Uinta Formation and Green River Formation, Piceance Creek Basin, Northwestern Colorado, USA Megan E. Masterson Portland State University Follow this and additional works at: https://pdxscholar.library.pdx.edu/open_access_etds Part of the Geology Commons Let us know how access to this document benefits ou.y Recommended Citation Masterson, Megan E., "Hydrogeochemical Evaluation of the Uinta Formation and Green River Formation, Piceance Creek Basin, Northwestern Colorado, USA" (2016). Dissertations and Theses. Paper 3317. https://doi.org/10.15760/etd.3297 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access. It has been accepted for inclusion in Dissertations and Theses by an authorized administrator of PDXScholar. Please contact us if we can make this document more accessible: [email protected]. Hydrogeochemical Evaluation of the Uinta Formation and Green River Formation, Piceance Creek Basin, Northwestern Colorado, USA by Megan E. Masterson A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in Geology Thesis Committee: Robert B. Perkins, Chair Carl Palmer John Bershaw Maxwell Rudolph Portland State University 2016 ABSTRACT The Piceance Creek Basin in northwestern Colorado contains extensive oil shale deposits that produce natural gas and which could potentially yield ~1.5 trillion barrels of shale oil. However, much of the oil shale lies at depths too great for traditional mining practices and various innovative approaches for in situ conversion of kerogen to oil have been proposed. A firm understanding of the existing hydrogeochemistry is needed as resulting mineralogical changes or rock-fluid reactions may affect rock porosity and permeability.
  • A Comparative Study of the Mississippian Barnett Shale, Fort Worth Basin, and Devonian Marcellus Shale, Appalachian Basin

    A Comparative Study of the Mississippian Barnett Shale, Fort Worth Basin, and Devonian Marcellus Shale, Appalachian Basin

    DOE/NETL-2011/1478 A Comparative Study of the Mississippian Barnett Shale, Fort Worth Basin, and Devonian Marcellus Shale, Appalachian Basin U.S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY DISCLAIMER This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States Government nor any agency thereof, nor any of their employees, makes any warranty, expressed or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe upon privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government or any agency thereof. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government or any agency thereof. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The authors greatly thank Daniel J. Soeder (U.S. Department of Energy) who kindly reviewed the manuscript. His criticisms, suggestions, and support significantly improved the content, and we are deeply grateful. Cover. Top left: The Barnett Shale exposed on the Llano uplift near San Saba, Texas. Top right: The Marcellus Shale exposed in the Valley and Ridge Province near Keyser, West Virginia. Photographs by Kathy R. Bruner, U.S. Department of Energy (USDOE), National Energy Technology Laboratory (NETL). Bottom: Horizontal Marcellus Shale well in Greene County, Pennsylvania producing gas at 10 million cubic feet per day at about 3,000 pounds per square inch.
  • TXOGA Versus Denton

    TXOGA Versus Denton

    FILED: 11/5/2014 9:08:57 AM SHERRI ADELSTEIN Denton County District Clerk By: Amanda Gonzalez, Deputy CAUSE NO. __________14-08933-431 TEXAS OIL AND GAS ASSOCIATION, § IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF § Plaintiff, § vs. § § DENTON COUNTY, TEXAS CITY OF DENTON, § § Defendant. § § § _____ JUDICIAL DISTRICT § ORIGINAL PETITION The Texas Oil and Gas Association (“TXOGA”) files this declaratory action and request for injunctive relief against the City of Denton, on the ground that a recently-passed City of Denton ordinance, which bans hydraulic fracturing and is soon to take effect, is preempted by Texas state law and is therefore unconstitutional. I. INTRODUCTION This case concerns a significant question of Texas law: whether a City of Denton ordinance that bans hydraulic fracturing is preempted by the Constitution and laws of the State of Texas. The ordinance, approved by voters at the general election of November 4, 2014, exceeds the limited authority of home-rule cities and represents an impermissible intrusion on the exclusive powers granted by the Legislature to state agencies, the Texas Railroad Commission (the “Railroad Commission”) and the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (the “TCEQ”). TXOGA, therefore, seeks a declaration that the ordinance is invalid and unenforceable. To achieve its overriding policy objective of the safe, efficient, even-handed, and non-wasteful development of this State’s oil and gas resources, the Texas Legislature vested regulatory power over that development in the Railroad Commission and the TCEQ. Both agencies are staffed with experts in the field who apply uniform regulatory controls across Texas and thereby avoid the inconsistencies that necessarily result from short-term political interests, funding, and turnover in local government.
  • Mesaverde Group and Wasatch Formation - Piceance Basin, Colorado

    Mesaverde Group and Wasatch Formation - Piceance Basin, Colorado

    NONTRIBUTARY GROUNDWATER ASSESSMENT: MESAVERDE GROUP AND WASATCH FORMATION - PICEANCE BASIN, COLORADO Submitted to: OXY USA INC. AND OXY USA WTP LP Date: November 4, 2009 Norwest Corporation 950 South Cherry Street, Suite 800 Denver, CO 80246 Tel: (303) 782-0164 Fax: (303) 782-2560 Email [email protected] www.norwestcorp.com 004280 TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ..............................................................................................................1 1 INTRODUCTION.................................................................................................................1-1 2 CONCEPTUAL MODEL .....................................................................................................2-1 2.1 GEOLOGIC SETTING ....................................................................................................2-1 2.1.1 Mancos Shale ..............................................................................................2-1 2.1.2 Iles Formation ..............................................................................................2-2 2.1.3 Williams Fork Formation ..............................................................................2-2 2.1.4 Wasatch Formation......................................................................................2-3 2.2 HYDROLOGIC DATA .....................................................................................................2-3 3 HYDROLOGEOLOGIC PARAMETERS.............................................................................3-1
  • Strategic Center for Natural Gas and Oil R&D Program

    Strategic Center for Natural Gas and Oil R&D Program

    Driving Innovation ♦ Delivering Results The National Energy Technology Laboratory & The Strategic Center for Natural Gas and Oil R&D Program Tribal leader forum: U.S. Department of Energy Albert Yost oil and gas technical assistance capabilities SMTA Strategic Center for Natural Gas & Oil Denver, Colorado August 18, 2015 National Energy Technology Laboratory Outline • Review of Case History Technology Successes • Review of Current Oil and Natural Gas Program • Getting More of the Abundant Shale Gas Resource • Understanding What is Going On Underground • Reducing Overall Environmental Impacts National Energy Technology Laboratory 2 Four Case Histories • Electromagnetic Telemetry • Wired Pipe • Fracture Mapping • Horizontal Air Drilling National Energy Technology Laboratory 3 Development of Electromagnetic Telemetry Problem • In early 1980s, need for non-wireline, non-mud based communication system in air-filled, horizontal or high-angle wellbores grows. • Problems with drillpipe-conveyed and hybrid-wireline alternatives sparked interest in developing a “drill-string/earth,” electromagnetic telemetry (EMT) system for communicating data while drilling. • Attempts to develop a viable EM-MWD tool by U.S.-based companies were unsuccessful. DOE Solution • Partner with Geoscience Electronics Corp. (GEC) to develop a prototype based on smaller diameter systems designed for non-oilfield applications • Test the prototype in air-drilled, horizontal wellbores. • Catalyze development of a U.S.-based, commercial EM-MWD capability to successfully compete with foreign service companies. National Energy Technology Laboratory 4 EMT System Schematic Source: Sperry-Sun, March 1997, Interim Report, DOE FETC Contract: DE-AC21-95MC31103 National Energy Technology Laboratory 5 EMT Path to Commercialization • 1986 – Initial test of GEC prototype tool at a DOE/NETL Devonian Shale horizontal drilling demonstration well in Wayne county, WV (10 hours on- bottom operating time).
  • Draft Plan to Study the Potential Impacts of Hydraulic Fracturing on Drinking Water Resources, EPA/600/001/February 2011

    Draft Plan to Study the Potential Impacts of Hydraulic Fracturing on Drinking Water Resources, EPA/600/001/February 2011

    EPA/600/D-11/001/February 2011/www.epa.gov/research Draft Plan to Study the Potential Impacts of Hydraulic Fracturing on Drinking Water Resources United States Environmental Protection Agency Office of Research and Development EPA/600/D-11/001 February 2011 &EPA United States Environmental Protection Ag""" Draft Plan to Study the Potential Impacts of Hydraulic Fracturing on Drinking Water Resources Office of Research and Development U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Washington, D.C. February 7, 2011 DRAFT Hydraulic Fracturing Study Plan February 7, 2011 -- Science Advisory Board Review -- This document is distributed solely for peer review under applicable information quality guidelines. It has not been formally disseminated by EPA. It does not represent and should not be construed to represent any Agency determination or policy. Mention of trade names or commercial products does not constitute endorsement or recommendation for use. DRAFT Hydraulic Fracturing Study Plan February 7, 2011 -- Science Advisory Board Review -- TABLE OF CONTENTS List of Figures ................................................................................................................................................ v List of Tables ................................................................................................................................................. v List of Acronyms and Abbreviations ............................................................................................................ vi Executive Summary ....................................................................................................................................
  • Perryman Denton Fracking Ban Impact

    Perryman Denton Fracking Ban Impact

    June 2014 The Adverse Impact of Banning Hydraulic Fracturing in the City of Denton on Business Activity and Tax Receipts in the City and State THE PERRYMAN GROUP 510 N. Valley Mills Dr., Suite 300 Waco, TX 76710 ph. 254.751.9595, fax 254.751.7855 [email protected] www.perrymangroup.com The Adverse Impact of Banning Hydraulic Fracturing in the City of Denton on Business Activity and Tax Receipts in the City and State Contents Introduction and Overview .............................................................................. 1 The Barnett Shale ............................................................................................... 3 Study Parameters and Methods Used ............................................................. 4 Summary of Methods Used .......................................................................................... 4 Input Assumptions and Losses Measured ................................................................... 5 Projected Economic and Fiscal Harms Stemming from a Ban on Hydraulic Fracturing in the City of Denton .................................................... 8 Economic Harms Over 10 Years .................................................................................. 8 Lost Tax Revenue Over 10 Years .............................................................................. 11 Conclusion ......................................................................................................... 12 APPENDICES .....................................................................................................
  • Oil Shale Development in the United States: Prospects and Policy Issues

    Oil Shale Development in the United States: Prospects and Policy Issues

    INFRASTRUCTURE, SAFETY, AND ENVIRONMENT THE ARTS This PDF document was made available from www.rand.org as CHILD POLICY a public service of the RAND Corporation. CIVIL JUSTICE EDUCATION Jump down to document ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENT 6 HEALTH AND HEALTH CARE INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS The RAND Corporation is a nonprofit research NATIONAL SECURITY organization providing objective analysis and POPULATION AND AGING PUBLIC SAFETY effective solutions that address the challenges facing SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY the public and private sectors around the world. SUBSTANCE ABUSE TERRORISM AND HOMELAND SECURITY TRANSPORTATION AND Support RAND INFRASTRUCTURE Purchase this document WORKFORCE AND WORKPLACE Browse Books & Publications Make a charitable contribution For More Information Visit RAND at www.rand.org Explore RAND Infrastructure, Safety, and Environment View document details Limited Electronic Distribution Rights This document and trademark(s) contained herein are protected by law as indicated in a notice appearing later in this work. This electronic representation of RAND intellectual property is provided for non-commercial use only. Permission is required from RAND to reproduce, or reuse in another form, any of our research documents. This product is part of the RAND Corporation monograph series. RAND monographs present major research findings that address the challenges facing the public and private sectors. All RAND monographs undergo rigorous peer review to ensure high standards for research quality and objectivity. Oil Shale Development in the United States Prospects and Policy Issues James T. Bartis, Tom LaTourrette, Lloyd Dixon, D.J. Peterson, Gary Cecchine Prepared for the National Energy Technology Laboratory of the U.S. Department of Energy The research described in this report was conducted within RAND Infrastructure, Safety, and Environment (ISE), a division of the RAND Corporation, for the National Energy Technology Laboratory of the U.S.
  • UINTA-PICEANCE BASIN PROVINCE (020) by Charles W

    UINTA-PICEANCE BASIN PROVINCE (020) by Charles W

    UINTA-PICEANCE BASIN PROVINCE (020) By Charles W. Spencer INTRODUCTION This province trends west-east, extending from the thrust belt in north-central Utah, on the west, to the southern Park Range and Sawatch Uplift in northwestern Colorado on the east. The northern boundary is defined roughly by the Uinta Mountain Uplift, and the southern boundary is located along a line north of the axis of the Uncompahgre Uplift. The province covers an area of about 40,000 sq mi and encompasses the Uinta, Piceance, and Eagle Basins. Sedimentary rocks in the basin range in age from Cambrian to Tertiary. Spencer and Wilson (1988) provided a summary of the stratigraphy and petroleum geology of the province. The Uinta and Piceance Basins were formed mainly in Tertiary time. The Eagle Basin is a structural feature east of the Piceance Basin and coincides in part with the Pennsylvanian-age Eagle Evaporite Basin, although the present-day Eagle Basin is much smaller than the paleodepositional basin. Numerous oil and gas fields have been discovered in the Uinta and Piceance basins; however, there have been no fields discovered in the Eagle structural basin. The lack of exploration success in the Eagle Basin is attributed to very thermal maturity levels in source rocks (Johnson and Nuccio, 1993) and the generally poor quality of reservoirs, and although gas might be present, the expected volume is small. The Uinta Basin of Utah is about 120 mi long and is bounded on the west by the thrust belt and on the east by the Douglas Creek Arch. It is nearly 100 mi wide and bounded on the north side by the Uinta Mountains Uplift.