COG
#Well we have recently ---+ on the spacing side we have ongoing wells currently producing that have term production and certainly setting their own production curve that we will continue to utilize and evaluate the spacing that we think we can get down to.
We just had enough data ---+ enough well results to be able to determine that between 700 foot and 800 foot and we were comfortable that stage.
But we will continue to look at it ---+ down the road we will continue to look at the viability of the spacing that we think we can get down to without the creation of an acceleration profile to our mix.
So and with that being said, we have tried all different frac stage spacing scenarios and we have a fairly voluminous database in that regard and feel that 200 foot spacing is a good design.
We continue, though, to look at any of the ideas that are new to industry, whether it's something as simple as more profit per stage or different profit size.
All of the things that are discussed and looked at out there by the industry, we will continue to look at it.
And both <UNK> <UNK> and Phil Stalnaker, who runs our North and South region, they and their crew continue to read and look at and, in some cases, test all the different ideas that are out there in industry that we all hear about and we talk about and they visit with the third-party service sector on what might be applicable to enhance efficiencies in our program.
So I don't have anything specific that I will talk about today but we do look at all of it, I can assure you.
Thank you, <UNK>.
It's a number based on timing of when we decide to bring on any given pad location.
For example, if we bring on a pad location that has three wells on it versus ---+ and that ---+ we still have some opportunities to address where we go with our frac crew.
And that movement of where we move a frac crew can dictate how much in a snapshot period of time, our a finite period of time, we would curtail.
If we bring on a 3 well location that has 32 frac stages per well versus an 8 well location that has 40 stages per well the ---+ and the timing of that is three or four months, it affects the amount of volumes that we might have curtailed for 2016.
So it's a hard number to just say exactly what it is.
I'm not trying to dance around your question.
I'm just saying that it's hard to be specific but it's certainly [100,000 to 200,000] cubic foot per day.
Keep in mind just as a backdrop, <UNK>, the entire area that we have out there has both the upper and lower Marcellus under our acreage.
So as we reduce the spacing in those areas, we will have both upper and lower Marcellus in those additional wells that we are adding to the inventory.
Let me give it a stab, <UNK>.
We feel very comfortable about our balance sheet.
We feel very comfortable about being able to ramp up a level of activity to a level that we have already experienced in the past.
We feel very comfortable that our balance sheet will be able to handle that level of activity and the outspend being minimal through that process.
I'm sorry, the last part about your question ---+
Thank you, <UNK>.
I'll ---+ thanks, <UNK>, for the question.
And I will pass that to <UNK>.
<UNK>, you are correct.
We model the upper 3's the low 4's.
We're not ---+ unless there's a dramatic drop in the strip even further, the 4.75 does not come into play.
But we do have some ---+ as I mentioned earlier, we have some assets that we could potentially trade.
We do have a level of interest ---+ not committed to doing that but it is an option.
We could also slow down activity further if we really decided.
And one of the comments is our activity level at 3.25, which we reaffirmed, is contingent on continuing progress on the infrastructure project.
If those get delayed, that spend, which is part of our overall analysis, goes down also.
So we could conserve capital to manage through that process.
Our effort and the amendment process of the covenants was to give us enough flexibility through 2016 and we believe we accomplished that.
Thanks, <UNK>.
I will pass that on to <UNK> since he is the catalyst behind some of that.
Okay.
If I understood the first part of your question, you were asking about whether or not we felt that Williams could continue to fund the projects.
Okay.
So we have had that discussion with Williams.
And I don't know if you listen to the call yesterday or a press release they made a few weeks ago, but they are committed to their interstate projects.
They feel any cutback on funding would have to do with expansion of nonregulated interstate projects such as processing plants or even in the gathering infrastructure world where they operate in Ohio and southwest PA.
But they are committed to the funding on the interstate pipeline projects.
And I think they even mentioned that they are really not moving ahead with any projects that are in the design phase but are going to concentrate on the ones that are fully committed to and in the queue.
I think the lack of activity drilling and completion, <UNK>, is going to show up in any curtailed volumes, just like Cabot.
Any curtailed volumes that were back earlier in the year, and whatever volumes they were, you're going to have some natural runoff with the lack of activity of your base decline.
I think that is certainly going on.
I can't give you an exact figure of what's curtailed today.
But whatever is curtailed today, I think is significantly less volumes than that were curtailed back in the summer of 2015.
All I can really answer is directionally, I'm sure less volume curtailed.
Yes.
I think that is exactly the case.
Ducks are ---+ will be coming down some and with 4 rigs and 4 daylight frac crews running up there in an area that has 8 Bcf, you could do some real simple math and determine that it's not going to maintain production flat.
We get the question, what kind of maintenance capital is necessary to keep 1.5 Bcf or 2 Bcf flat.
And you look at that maintenance capital that is necessary and we had the absolute best rock in the northeast area of Pennsylvania.
So that other 8 Bcf, you might note, is not coming from the similar rock as Cabot.
It's good rock and I'm not throwing stones at it but it nevertheless ---+ statistically, it is not as good as Cabot's rock.
So 4 rigs and 4 frac crews is not going to keep 8 Bcf flat.
That's a hatchet.
(laughter) Thanks.
I think it's between $0.85 to $0.90.
It would go to the end of the first quarter, end of the second quarter of 2017.
Thank you, Carrie.
I appreciate the time today.
And I appreciate everybody's interest.
And I can assure you by the results that you've seen in our 2015 program that we are going to be able to navigate through this difficult environment.
And we expect that 2016 numbers will be equal to, if not better, than 2015.
Thanks again and we will see you at next quarter call.
Thank you.
