SM
#Thank you, <UNK>, and thanks to you all for joining us this morning by phone and online.
Before we start, I'd like to advise you that we will be making forward-looking statements during this call about our plans, expectations and assumptions regarding our future performance.
These statements involve risks that may cause our actual results to differ materially from the results expressed or implied in our forward-looking statements.
For a discussion of these risks, you should refer to the cautionary information about forward-looking statements in our press release from yesterday, the presentation posted to our website for this call and the Risk Factors section of our Form 10-K that was just filed.
We will also discuss certain non-GAAP financial measures that we believe are useful in evaluating our performance.
Reconciliation of those measures to the most directly comparable GAAP measures and other information about these non-GAAP metrics are described in our press release for this call.
Other company officials on the call are Jay <UNK>, President and Chief Executive Officer; Wade Pursell, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer; Herb <UNK>, Executive Vice President, Operations; and <UNK> <UNK>, Vice President of Investor Relations.
I now turn the call over to Jay.
Thank you, <UNK>.
Well, thank you, everyone, for joining us.
I recognize that we released a lot of material last night and there's a lot there to digest.
So I very much appreciate you taking the time to call in today.
I do have one introductory comment before I open the floor for questions.
Over the past year or so I've spent a lot of time talking to people who've been disillusioned with investing in the oil and gas space because they believe industry management teams don't really care much about making high returns on capital.
My response to that concern is always that we agree with that.
And that SM Energy's singular focus on achieving top-tier returns as a measure of success in our business currently has us on a path of demonstrating a very high rate of change in the improvement of our business relative to our peers.
I listened to our recorded call notes again and I'm sure we must have said 50 times that we focus on achieving high returns as measured by growth and cash flow per debt adjusted share.
And that is how we have built our business plan, a plan that achieves about a 35% cash flow per debt adjusted share growth rate over the next several years.
To be clear, production is an output from that planning process, not an input.
We have never had a production growth rate metric in our long-term incentive plans here at SM.
And even though we've averaged over a 98.5% approval rate on our say-on-pay votes over the last 5 years, we are going to modify our long-term incentive plan metrics this year to explicitly include cash flow growth per debt adjusted share as a key performance measurement.
We'll be disclosing more about that in our upcoming proxy.
So with that, I'll open the floor for questions.
<UNK>, this is Herb.
I'll take that one.
So you're probably aware we've been getting quite a bit more efficient on our rig rate drilling, how fast we're drilling.
And for example, what we would drill with 11 rigs in 2016, we can do with 8.5 rigs this year.
And we also are going to large pads with co-development.
And by doing that, we wind up with a large number of DUCs at a certain time and then we complete them and we bring them all online pretty quickly.
So what you'll see is a large increase in the DUC count at the end of '18.
And shortly thereafter, in '19, we bring those all online.
So we'll be spending completion dollars in '18 for a bunch of wells that come on in '19.
I think ---+ does that answer the question for you.
Okay.
So it's still relatively early compared to the Viper experience.
But the IP was quite good on that Wolfcamp B.
It reaffirmed our views from that Eastland well that Apache had drilled just to southwest of there.
So it's on that same trend, which we see ---+ which is relatively low decline.
We'll see where it goes, but it's a strong well.
Well, we look at the opportunity to core up all the time.
We are exploring the idea of selling Halff East.
Don't know if we'll get a number that we like yet, and we'll let you know where that goes.
We're kind of in that exploration phase at this point.
Brad, yes, you're right.
We went with tighter stage spacing there.
I think it's probably around 84 ---+ 82 to 84 stages in that well compared to ---+ so effectively 125-foot stage spacing versus our standard 167.
We've been trying that in a number of places.
So we're trying to do direct offset comparisons in some cases to see is the incremental investment in the additional stages worth it.
So we're still in the testing stage on that.
And those Sundown wells, we applied it there.
We also had that in the Viper well.
No, I don't think we're really prepared to do that.
Obviously, we're in the core areas where we're building out that infrastructure and then there's other areas where we'll still be using third party.
But yes, I wouldn't put a number on that yet.
We're just in the building phase right now.
So first of all, let me address the capacity question first.
So we have not had any issues with capacity.
We've got vendors lined out and we've been using the same ones over and over again.
They know our program, they know what to expect so that it can work quite effectively for them ---+ very efficient for them.
That goes to our rigs and our completion crews and then some of the ancillary services like cementing and logging.
So we've baked in a certain amount of escalation.
Some of it is where we have no escalation, we've got firm contracts.
And then some, there's some linkage to prices where there's escalation based on certain price parameters.
And we know those will be coming in and we baked those in.
So bottom line is availability looks good for us.
And the escalation, we've baked in ---+ a lot of it is relatively firm for the first half of the year, and then we'll see where the second half goes.
<UNK>, will you repeat the first part of that.
Okay.
So the Griswold, there's a few wells over there in that area, and those are on the periphery and there's a number that we've drilled over there for our acreage holding.
The real pilot areas for where we're downspacing that's like the Iceman pad would be an example, where we've gone down to 500 ---+ sorry, 420-foot spacing there and stacked Wolfcamp A over ---+ Lower Spraberry over Wolfcamp A's.
So we do have a spacing model that we're using, so typically, 500, 660 feet in Wolfcamp A.
That's really the ---+ what we've determined is optimal based on all the work we've done in both Sweetie Peck and Rock [Ridge].
Is there something specific about the Griswold you wanted to know.
Yes.
And the Griswold ---+ let me just pull up the results there.
Actually, what I'll do is I'll have <UNK> get back to you on that one.
You gave us a 2018 rig cadence over the course of the year.
You're going to enter 2019 with 7 rigs in the Permian, 1 in the Eagle Ford.
How does that activity trend through '19.
Do you kind of keep that rig count flat there.
And I guess, how much CapEx ---+ or directionally, how does that look when you're assuming that you'll be free cash flow neutral by mid-2019.
Yes.
Our assumption for 2019 is we keep the activity relatively flattish, but you just have to watch the DUC count versus the rig count.
As we get more efficient, that can influence things considerably.
But we have not provided capital guidance on that one.
Directionally, it will be lower than '18.
Okay.
And so I guess, how many DUCs are you going to enter 2019 with.
And how many of those will you be working down.
I mean, are you going to complete more wells in 2019 than in 2018.
I think the DUC count we provided at end of December is around 110 to 115.
That's at Slide 34 that we give it by month.
You can see the build at the end of the year.
Okay.
And so are you going to work that down pretty significantly in 2019.
Yes.
This is where it gets real lumpy.
As we go to these 25 well type of co-developments, you see 25 wells come on in a very short period of time.
So then your DUC count drops within a month by 25 wells.
And then you build it up again and [cut down].
So that's just what we've determined is very much the optimal way of developing.
Okay, got it.
And just lastly for me, did you incorporate the in-basin sand cost savings into the 2018 CapEx budget.
Or is there maybe some downside if that comes in at some point in time.
Yes, there's some of it.
I guess, the way to look at it is ---+ I just checked, last month, we ran about 20% local sand in our completions.
And by the end of the year, we hope to get to around 80%.
So for the year, what the actual savings will be will depend on how quickly those local sand mines come on.
And we indicated that U.<UNK> Silica has told us first quarter and third quarter, and they're on track for that.
So that's really ---+ yes, there is an opportunity to get more local sand to reduce further, but we've got something that's very reasonable baked into that plan.
Okay, that's a tough one.
I usually think of it in terms of frac spreads per rig.
And that's usually the way ---+ and basically, you can see we run about 2:1.
So 2 rigs per frac spread.
And then how it actually moves through time is really pad dependent.
If we do 2 well pads, they come on pretty quickly.
If we do 6 well and we do a number of 6 wells together to co-develop, then it's a different story.
I think you just run an average line through what we've got there, and that would be a pretty good indicator.
Yes, there's 2 things on the Austin Chalk.
First, we know a lot of other operators in the Eagle Ford have gone and test the Austin Chalk and had some great results.
Second piece of information is that we had 1 Eagle Ford well that was initially in the Eagle Ford for a good portion of the lateral but then went up into the Austin Chalk.
And we find that the condensate yield and NGL yields are higher in the Austin Chalk.
So that's an attractive economic proposition.
Deliverability looked good, too.
So we'll be testing that.
It would be a potential big inventory add for us if we could add another layer of Austin Chalk across our full acreage position.
Too early to say.
This is <UNK>.
No, I think our plan would be to exit that acreage over time.
Most of that acreage that's remaining is small dribs and drabs of things in mineral interest, small interest in other wells.
It's not a big, cohesive thing that we can really develop.
So I think it would probably ---+ most of it would probably get sold in auction processes or in small processes.
And it will take quite a bit of time.
None of it is operated to any significant extent, so it wouldn't impact our ability to exit operationally.
Well, as was mentioned earlier in the call, we're exploring the sale of Halff East, which is a nonoperated property we have in the Permian.
We'll look over time.
We're not shy about selling things.
And I think we're getting to the point where a lot of what we own has great inventory in it, and that makes all those decisions more difficult.
But certainly, we're going to continue looking at our portfolio every year and deciding whether it fits.
Our objective is to own top-tier assets.
And if we can find ways to get better assets, we're always going to look for opportunities to trade up or do whatever we need to do.
I guess, how much additional facility in water infrastructure CapEx should we expect in 2019.
And I guess, is that something you plan to keep in-house.
Or could that be potentially monetized at some point.
<UNK>, yes, this is Herb.
So for 2019, well, first let's get our backbone going in 2018.
2019, we'll have most of the backbone in there, and it will just be a matter of whether we extend it from there.
So no, we haven't really looked beyond that.
And there's always the opportunity to sell a water system if it makes sense.
Okay.
So it's not necessarily something that you've built it with the intention of selling, it's just something that maybe opportunistically you would evaluate.
Yes.
<UNK>, it's <UNK>.
We've done this before.
We've built water systems in the Bakken and it's sold and then kind of had a leaseback arrangement.
And I think that makes sense to us.
At this point in the development, having control of these assets has a lot to do with maintaining schedule.
We have great relationships with the landowners and everything we need to build these out.
It just makes sense to us.
When you run the economics, it's just really a compelling story to go ahead and build these ourselves.
And we can make the decision here in a year or 2 about, okay, do we need to continue to own those or can we make a turn here by passing that on to someone else.
So we'll make that decision.
We can go either way.
It's certainly an opportunity.
I think it's going to create a lot of economic value for us.
And that's why we're willing to spend the capital over the next 12 months.
Okay, got it.
And I guess, in terms of the spacing, the wellbore spacing, how do you guys plan to go and develop Howard County in 2018.
Is it going to be all 660-foot spacing or are you going to do some 500-foot spacing on a portion of the acreage.
And I guess, also if you can just kind of talk about that in regards to your inventory at year-end '17.
Does that include anything on ---+ tighter than 660-foot spacing.
Yes.
<UNK>, I will say we've got the ---+ Slide 33 shows kind of some of the assumptions.
But I'll just go over a little bit more color on that.
So yes, typically in the Wolfcamp A, we're going to be between 513 and 660-foot spacing.
There's ---+ some of the Wolfcamp B further to the east will be going to wider spacing because it makes sense there.
And then in Sweetie Peck, we'll still be doing some 420s.
And typically, the Lower Spraberry in Sweetie Peck will be 420 to 513-foot spacing.
And that's just because of how thick Lower Spraberry is over there.
Lower Spraberry will vary between 660 and 1,320 feet in the RockStar area.
Okay, got it.
And just lastly for me, you guys are obviously seeing a lot of efficiency gains out there.
What should we assume now for how many wells a rig can now drill in a year.
Okay.
Here, I'll do it kind of the reverse.
You can figure out the math here.
We have a record well of ---+ I believe we did 1 10,000 foot lateral spud rig release in 12.5 days.
That's the record.
But the average would be a little bit longer than that.
So call it about ---+ yes, last 12 pads averaged 18.5 days from spud of the first well in the pad to rig release on the last well.
So ---+ and that's with 10,000-foot wells.
So you can figure that's about 20 wells per rig.
Oh, yes, and you see the ---+ if we can get 18.5 down to 12.5, that's a lot of efficiency gains.
Well, again, I just want to thank everybody for taking the time today.
We know it's a very busy day for you.
And we're happy ---+ <UNK> is always happy to answer questions, and we'll be happy to follow up on those.
So thank you very much, and have a great week.
