Preview pages for the Marcellus and Utica Shale Databook 2013, Volume 2. This second volume (of three) features 74 detailed maps and multiple charts showing where Marcellus & Utica Shale well permits have been issued throughout PA, OH and WV for May through August of 2013. Each detail map shows major natural gas pipelines, the location of compressor stations, and the locations for each permit issued appended with the driller's name. NEW in this edition: A comprehensive list of 111 midstream/infrastructure projects announced for the Marcellus/Utica region. Each project identifies the company building it, timeline, description of where it's being built, and approximate capital expenditure being made for the project. Many other special features make this an indispensable tool for those with an interest in drilling in the Marcellus/Utica. Visit this page for more details: http://marcellusdrilling.com/databook.

1. Marcellus and Utica Shale Databook 2013
Volume 2: 2013 May-Aug Drilling Permit Maps; Pipeline/Infrastructure Projects, Midstream Contacts
74 Detail Maps, including individual county maps for permits issued May-Aug; Regulatory/Legal Update; Permits by Driller and More!
September 2013 Edition

2. Table of Contents
Section I - Overview
Introduction & Methodology
Drilling Update May-Aug 2013
Henry Hub & TGP Zn 4 Marc. Spot Price (chart)
Baker Hughes Rig Count by Play (chart)
Baker Hughes Well Count by Play (chart)
Baker Hughes Rig Count by State (chart)
Databook Permit Count (chart)
Permits by Driller: PA, OH, WV (chart)
Permits by County: PA, OH, WV (chart)
Regulatory/Legal Update: PA, OH, WV, NY, MD
PA Marcellus/Utica Shale Boundaries (map)
OH Marcellus/Utica Shale Boundaries (map)
WV Marcellus/Utica Shale Boundaries (map)
NY Marcellus/Utica Shale Boundaries (map)
MD Marcellus/Utica Shale Boundaries (map)
Marcellus/Utica Lease Offers (map)
Guide to Using the County Maps (chart)
Section II - Pennsylvania Permits (continued)
6
7-10
11-14
15-16
17-19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
Section II - Pennsylvania Permits
PA Gas Well Permits – Entire State (map)
Allegheny County (map)
Armstrong County (map)
Beaver County (map)
Bradford County (map)
Butler County (map)
©Marcellus and Utica Shale Databook 2013 – Volume 2
27
28
29
30
31
32
Cambria County (map)
Cameron County (map)
Centre County (map)
Clarion County (map)
Clearfield County (map)
Clinton County (map)
Elk County (map)
Fayette County (map)
Forest County (map)
Greene County (map)
Indiana County (map)
Jefferson County (map)
Lawrence County (map)
Lycoming County (map)
McKean County (map)
Mercer County (map)
Potter County (map)
Somerset County (map)
Sullivan County (map)
Susquehanna County (map)
Tioga County (map)
Venango County (map)
Warren County (map)
Washington County (map)
Westmoreland County (map)
Wyoming County (map)
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
Sample Pages

3. Table of Contents
Section III - Ohio Permits
OH Gas Well Permits – Entire State (map)
Ashtabula County (map)
Belmont County (map)
Carroll County (map)
Columbiana County (map)
Guernsey County (map)
Harrison County (map)
Jefferson County (map)
Mahoning County (map)
Monroe County (map)
Noble County (map)
Portage County (map)
Preble County (map)
Trumbull County (map)
Tuscarawas County (map)
Washington County (map)
©Marcellus and Utica Shale Databook 2013 – Volume 2
Section IV - West Virginia Permits
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
WV Gas Well Permits – Entire State (map)
Barbour County (map)
Braxton County (map)
Brooke County (map)
Doddridge County (map)
Gilmer County (map)
Greenbrier County (map)
Harrison County (map)
Kanawha County (map)
Marion County (map)
Marshall County (map)
Monongalia County (map)
Ohio County (map)
Preston County (map)
Ritchie County (map)
Taylor County (map)
Tyler County (map)
Upshur County (map)
Webster County (map)
Wetzel County (map)
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
Sample Pages

4. Table of Contents
Section V – Marcellus & Utica Shale Midstream/Infrastructure Projects – 2013 & Beyond
Introduction
Alita USA
Antero Resources
Arrowhead Utica Pipelines
Blue Racer Midstream
Calumet Specialty Products
Cardinal Gas Services
Crestwood Midstream
Dominion
E2 Energy Services
Enterprise Products Partners
EQT Midstream Partners
Ergon, Inc.
Inergy Midstream
Iroquois Gas Transmission
Kinder Morgan
Marcellus GTL
95-96
97
97
97
97-98
98
98-99
100
100-102
102
102
102
103
103
103
103-104
104
MarkWest Liberty
MarkWest Utica
Millennium Pipeline
National Fuel Gas/Empire Pipeline
NiSource/Columbia Pipeline
Pennant Midstream
Pinto Energy
PVR Partners
Rockford Corp/Primoris Services
Shell Chemical
Spectra Energy Partners
Sunoco Logistics
Tennessee Gas Pipeline
UGI Energy Services
Utica East Ohio Buckeye
Williams Partners
104-106
106-107
108
108
108-109
109
110
110
111
111
111-113
113-114
114
115
115-116
116-120
Section VI – Directory of Marcellus & Utica Shale Midstream/Infrastructure Companies (Contact Details)
Alita – Kinder Morgan
Marcellus GTL – Shell Chemical
Spectra Energy – Williams
©Marcellus and Utica Shale Databook 2013 – Volume 2
121
122
123
Sample Pages

5. Section I - Overview
DRILLING UPDATE: MAY-AUG 2013
Natural Gas Commodity Price & Infrastructure
From the U.S. Energy Information Administration:
“Daily natural gas spot prices between Tennessee Gas Pipeline
(TGP) Zone 4 Marcellus and Henry Hub have diverged recently
largely due to rising Marcellus production, which has outpaced
the growth of available take-away pipeline capacity in northern
Pennsylvania. As a result, the spot price of natural gas at the
TGP Zone 4 Marcellus trading point has fallen—at times
considerably—below the spot price at Henry Hub in Louisiana,
and is currently the least expensive wholesale natural gas in
North America.
“To address this rapid growth in natural gas production,
several Northeast interstate pipeline projects were completed
in 2011, adding nearly 1.5 billion cubic feet per day (Bcf/d) of
capacity in Pennsylvania. Many additional pipeline projects
have been proposed or are in various stages of completion in
the Northeast to reduce transportation constraints caused by
growing Marcellus natural gas production.
“Dry natural gas production in Pennsylvania, a key part of the Marcellus supply basin, continues to grow and according to Bentek Energy is now
approaching 6 Bcf/d. Estimated June 2012 Marcellus dry natural gas production (5.7 Bcf/d) has nearly doubled since June 2011 (2.9 Bcf/d) and
represents about 9% of overall U.S. dry natural gas production. Further, Bentek Energy estimates that there are over 1,000 natural gas wells that have
been drilled in northern Pennsylvania but which are not yet producing natural gas because there is not enough interstate and gathering pipeline
infrastructure to accommodate the new production.”
At What Commodity Price is it Unprofitable to Drill?
Energy producers are less willing to drill when the commodity price is at a level where profits are small or non-existent. Gas storage and pipeline
company Spectra Energy estimates the breakeven price drillers need to receive just to stay in the black is $4.26 MMbtus for drilling in the central
Marcellus region, and $3.44 MMbtus in the less-expensive-to-drill area of northeastern PA. Energy consulting firm Enercom pegs the average
breakeven number for the entire Marcellus at $2.88 MMbtus. Only the drillers themselves know the real breakeven price—it’s different for each driller
(closely guarded information they generally don’t share). The price of natural gas varies—it’s different at each point along a pipeline where’s it bought
and sold. However, many use the Henry Hub of southern Louisiana as a benchmark by which to measure the entire industry. Recently Cabot Oil & Gas
CEO Dan Dinges said Cabot’s northeast PA operation breakeven price is an incredible $1.20 MMbtus. Such a low breakeven gives Cabot a distinct
competitive advantage. Cabot and other Marcellus drillers are innovating new ways to make drilling more profitable at very low commodity prices.
©Marcellus and Utica Shale Databook 2013 – Volume 2
Sample Pages

6. Section I - Overview
PERMITS BY DRILLER 2012-2013
Who’s Drilling & How Much?
In this brand new section of the Databook, we take a look at the number of permits issued by period—by “halfs” for 2012, or Jan-Jun and Jul-Dec,
and by “trimesters” for 2013, Jan-Apr and May-Aug—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 is considered a permit. We filter out multiple permits for the same well
and show only unique, distinct well locations. So a driller with a “42” for a given period means that driller received permits for 42 different, distinct
wells for some purpose. Use this information to spot trends and get a high-level overview of activity for a particular driller—where they drill, when
they drill, and how much they drill.
1H12
AB Resources
Alpha Shale
Alta Mesa
Anadarko Petroleum
Antero Resources
Atlas Resources
Belden Brick
BEUSA Energy
Bocor Holdings
BP
Brammer Engineering
BRC Operating
Burnett Oil
Cabot Oil & Gas
Cambell Oil & Gas
Carrizo
Chesapeake Energy
Chevron
Chief Oil & Gas
Citrus Energy
CNX Gas/CONSOL Energy
DAC Energy
Devon Energy
5
Pennsylvania
2H12
1T13
5
4
Ohio
2T13
1H12
2H12
1T13
2T13
1H12
West Virginia
2H12
1T13
1
5
2T13
3
1
2
47
20
60
7
2
4
6
12
7
5
12
1
19
3
93
298
204
213
15
42
5
5
2
11
2
2
299
2
9
67
3
4
119
3
4
69
58
105
1
1
1
1
2
1
66
24
184
65
21
3
33
48
1
6
227
59
19
4
50
©Marcellus and Utica Shale Databook 2013 – Volume 2
46
1
8
250
59
36
31
53
2
11
137
25
53
5
26
3
1
2
1
1
1
135
3
135
3
2
92
2
96
3
55
3
11
8
7
19
5
6
Sample Pages

7. Section I - Overview
REGULATORY/LEGAL UPDATE
West Virginia
Permitting and drilling in West Virginia is regulated by the West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection (WVDEP). Future Fund
Initiative: Each year the West Virginia legislature meets for 60 days. They concluded their session for 2013 in April with no new major oil and
gas legislation—but not for lack of trying. A number of oil and gas bills introduced did not pass. One of those bills included a new “Future Fund”
that would set aside 25% of the increase in severance tax revenue the state receives from an increase in drilling that would “benefit all
residents” of the state. In August, a group of 19 WV legislators took a trip to North Dakota (at a cost of $25,000) to review and discuss their
state’s Legacy Fund, a similar concept. The legislators hope that next time the measure it brought before the full legislature (in 2014) they will
have enough support to pass it. The trip to ND was an effort at building that support. Air Quality Study – No New Regs: The WV Natural
Gas Horizontal Well Control Act, passed and signed into law in Dec. 2011, directed the WVDEP to conduct three studies. The third and final
study was released this summer, titled “Air Quality Impacts Occurring from Horizontal Well Drilling and Related Activities.” According to the
WVDEP, based on the findings in the study, no new regulations are required to control air pollution around drilling sites. Those findings were
later disputed by the WVU professor who oversaw the raw report given to the WVDEP, however, there is no new effort among legislators (at
this time) to create stricter air emissions standards.
New York
Permitting and drilling in New York is regulated by the Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC). Fracking Still on Hold: Shale
gas drilling in New York has been on hold since 2008—now over 5 years. The DEC was supposed to release a final set of new drilling rules,
called the Supplemental Generic Environmental Impact Statement, or SGEIS, no later than Nov 29, 2012 (exactly one year from the last public
hearing on the new rules). The DEC instead chose to file for a 90-day extension, which expired at the end of February 2013, to allow time for a
mini-review of potential impacts shale drilling may have on public health. The State Health Commissioner, Nirav Shah, still has not supplied
his health review as of this edition of the Databook (September 2013), so the de facto moratorium remains in place. If Gov. Cuomo decides to
move forward with shale drilling now that the public comment period is expired and the deadline passed, it’s not clear whether or not the
approval process would need to restart from the beginning. DEC Commissioner Joe Martens seems to have indicated in public statements that
he would be willing to issue permits for some wells as a test, without having the SGEIS officially adopted. NY High Court to Hear Two Ban
Cases: Apart from the question of whether or not the governor and legislature will allow drilling, a major court battle has ensued over whether
or not local municipalities have the right to completely ban hydraulic fracturing. Two NY towns—Dryden and Middlefield—banned fracking and
were subsequently sued—in one case by a driller, in the other by a landowner. The towns won the initial lawsuits at a lower court and the cases
were appealed. On appeal, the towns won a second time with unanimous decisions (the court decision was handed down in April 2013). The
cases were appealed to the highest court in New York—the NY Court of Appeals. In August, the Court of Appeals agreed to hear the twin cases
which are being tried together. Accounting for paperwork, oral arguments and the inevitable slow pace such cases take, a final decision will
likely not be handed down before summer of 2014. The issue of local bans and moratoriums has already created nasty political infighting at the
town board level in many Upstate New York towns, a trend that will continue through at least the November 2013 election cycle—and likely
beyond.
©Marcellus and Utica Shale Databook 2013 – Volume 2
Sample Pages

8. Section I - Overview
New York Marcellus & Utica Shale Boundaries
©Marcellus and Utica Shale Databook 2013 – Volume 2
Sample Pages

9. Section I - Overview
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:
Center – 7 (6). The first number “7” in this case - shows the total
number of permits issued. The
second number - “(6)” in this case
- indicates how many wells the
permits were issued for. Usually a
single well requires several
permits during drilling, to allow
the driller to continue to the next
stage.
#2 – A purple 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 purple dots will be
“on top of each other” and
sometimes will not be labeled
with a driller’s name.
#3 – The boundary of each
county is indicated with a blue
outline.
#4 – Major gas pipelines are
indicated with red lines and the
name of the pipeline somewhere
along the line.
#5 – The location for pipeline
compressor stations is indicated
by a green triangle–the name is
next to it.
©Marcellus and Utica Shale Databook 2013 – Volume 2
Sample Pages

10. Section II – Pennsylvania Permits
Butler County
By Municipality:
Allegheny – 1 (1)
Butler – 11 (11)
Center – 7 (6)
Cherry – 5 (5)
Clay – 7 (7)
Clinton – 5 (5)
Concord – 2 (2)
Donegal – 1 (1)
Forward – 4 (4)
Jackson – 2 (2)
Middlesex – 2 (2)
Muddycreek – 2 (2)
Oakland – 1 (1)
Slippery Rock – 1 (1)
Summit – 8 (8)
Winfield – 5 (5)
Worth – 2 (2)
By Operator:
EM Energy – 3 (3)
Penn Energy Resources – 9 (9)
RE Gas/Rex Energy – 9 (9)
Snyder Bros – 1 (1)
SWEPI – 22 (21)
XTO Energy – 22 (22)
©Marcellus and Utica Shale Databook 2013 – Volume 2
Sample Pages

11. Section III – Ohio Permits
Belmont County
By Municipality:
Colerain – 2 (1)
Kirkwood – 7 (7)
Richland – 1 (1)
Somerset – 14 (14)
Union – 4 (4)
Warren – 3 (3)
By Operator:
Gulfport Energy – 24 (24)
Hess – 6 (5)
XTO Energy – 1 (1)
©Marcellus and Utica Shale Databook 2013 – Volume 2
Sample Pages

12. Section IV – West Virginia Permits
Marion County
Entire County: 82 (31)
By Operator:
Chesapeake Energy – 2 (2)
EQT – 1 (1)
Trans Energy – 48 (11)
Waco Oil & Gas – 1 (1)
XTO Energy – 30 (16)
©Marcellus and Utica Shale Databook 2013 – Volume 2
Sample Pages

13. Section V – Midstream/Infrastructure Projects
Marcellus & Utica Shale Midstream/Infrastructure Projects – 2013 & Beyond
Marcellus/Utica Shale Midstream & Infrastructure Projects – Planned & Under Construction
We are excited to bring you what we consider the most comprehensive and authoritative list of midstream and infrastructure projects planned
for the Marcellus and Utica Shale region in existence—a staggering 111 major multi-million dollar projects. What follows is largely
research from the Marcellus Drilling News (MDN) website which daily chronicles the happenings in northeastern U.S. shale drilling. In
addition to MDN, we have added other publicly available sources, including statements made by the companies themselves and from
independent news accounts. Please be advised that the information that follows is only as good as the source documents. While we’ve made
every effort to verify the information using multiple sources, we could not do so in every case. We cannot guarantee 100% accuracy. Projects
change! Some announced projects never materialize, and sometimes the scope of an announced project changes—please bear that in mind as
you use this list.
For projects with an announced capital expenditure (capex) amount we indicate the amount in the CapEx column. For those projects where we
could not find any mention of planned expenditure, we made our own best guess. If you see an amount followed by (est.) that means
“estimated” and it is our own estimate based on what competing similar projects have announced as their capex and based on our own
experience in closely tracking the industry. We expect some of those estimates will not be accurate—but we thought giving you a general idea
(our opinion) would be more useful than leaving it blank.
Who This List is For
We’ve tabulated this list first and foremost for companies in the shale supply chain. It is a handy guide of projects you may want to
consider becoming a supplier for. That is, this is your “opportunities” list. Be aware that any project that shows an in-service date of this year is
likely already well underway and almost completed. However, there may still be opportunities for some supply chain companies beyond the
initial construction. Following the list of projects is a Directory of Midstream/Infrastructure Companies contact list, which will make it easier
for you to begin the process of figuring out who you need to speak with about becoming a supplier.
Midstream and infrastructure companies will find this list indispensable. It is a handy reference to what your competitors are planning.
We think you may surprised at the scope and number of major projects on the way in the northeast.
For drillers (“producers” in industry parlance), this list will help answer the vitally important questions of what capabilities will be arriving
with new infrastructure buildout. Use the list as a checkpoint against your company’s planned project files.
Government officials will also be interested in knowing where and when projects will be heating up—especially those in your geography or
region. With a typical investment of $250-$350 million per project, and some in the billions, when an infrastructure project becomes active, it
infuses an area with a huge amount of money (and jobs) that ripple throughout that area’s economy. Many projects also bring challenges—
increased truck traffic, packed hotel rooms, etc. This list will help you predict what’s coming down the road for your area—and when.
©Marcellus and Utica Shale Databook 2013 – Volume 2
Sample Pages

14. Section V – Midstream/Infrastructure Projects
Marcellus & Utica Shale Midstream/Infrastructure Projects – 2013 & Beyond
Law firms are a big buyer of the Databook, and for good reason. The information in the Databook and particularly in this list will help law
firms know when to expect an uptick in demand for their services—and which companies to talk to about those services. Each of these
midstream/infrastructure projects contain mountains of legal work—from securing real estate for processing plants and pipeline easements—to
labor law, compliance and a host of other legal issues. No law firm with an energy practice should be without the Databook and this list!
Updates
If you have updated information or corrections for this list, please send them to jim@marcellusdrilling.com. In the subject line use "Update:
Infrastructure List". If we receive a meaningful number of updates we will issue an addendum to ensure you have the latest and greatest and
most accurate information.
Industry Abbreviations Used:
bbl/d = barrels per day
bcf/d = billion cubic feet of gas per day
dth/d = dekatherms per day
jv = joint venture
mmcf/d = million cubic feet of gas per day
NGL = natural gas liquids
State Abbreviations Used:
CT = Connecticut
IN = Indiana
KY = Kentucky
LA = Louisiana
MD = Maryland
MI = Michigan
MO = Missouri
NY = New York
OH = Ohio
PA = Pennsylvania
RI = Rhode Island
TX = Texas
WV = West Virginia
©Marcellus and Utica Shale Databook 2013 – Volume 2
Sample Pages

15. Section V – Midstream/Infrastructure Projects
Marcellus & Utica Shale Midstream/Infrastructure Projects – 2013 & Beyond
Company(s)
Project Name
CapEx
Alita USA
Alita Steel Pipe Plant
$102 million
Antero Resources
Antero Water Pipeline
$525 million
Description/Location
In-Service
Dubai-based company building its first U.S.
manufacturing plant--a 324,000-square-foot factory
and a 16,000-square foot lab, storage and office
building--planned for a brownfield site in south
2014
Buffalo, NY near the city’s Lake Erie waterfront. The
factory will produce up to 150,000 tons of oil country
tubular goods annually.
An 80-mile pipeline from the Ohio River near the
Pleasants/Tyler County, WV line running southeast
through Pleasants, Tyler and into Ritchie counties to
2014
supply water to Antero's operations in WV. The water
line is estimated to draw 3,360 gallons of river water a
minute, or about 4.8 million gallons a day.
In 2012 Arrowhead Utica Pipelines (Hilcorp
subsidiary) leased 22 acres from the Columbiana
County (OH) Port Authority and announced a deal
with Marathon Petroleum Corporation (MPC) to
develop a transloading facility for Utica Shale NGLs
coming from eastern OH and western PA. The project
will result in up to 24,000 bbl/d of truck unloading
capacity and a terminal capable of loading up to
Dec 2013
50,000 bbl/d onto barges on the Ohio River at
Wellsville, OH. The project includes modifications to
MPC’s existing Wellsville river terminal to
accommodate the additional volume for loading onto
barges, and a new truck rack to be built on property
leased by Harvest Pipeline (also a subsidiary of
Hilcorp) next to the MPC facility.
Arrowhead Utica Pipelines
Arrowhead NGL
(Hilcorp), Marathon
Transloading Facility
Petroleum Corporation
$20-$40 million
Blue Racer Midstream
(jv: Dominion, Caiman
Energy II, Williams)
Berne Cryogenic
Processing Plant
Phase 1 will be capable of handling 200 mmcf/d at
the Berne (Monroe County), OH plant. An additional
$250 million (est.)
400 mmcf/d is planned for future construction--for a
total of 600 mmcf/d.
Ph 1: 3Q14
Ph 2: TBD
Eastern Ohio Gathering &
Trunk Pipelines
Currently under construction: an NGL pipeline from
Berne, OH to Lewis, OH; condensate pipeline;
$250 million (est.) Western Connector pipeline in Tuscarawas and
Harrison counties, OH; wet gas gathering pipelines
throughout eastern OH.
2013-2014
Blue Racer Midstream
(jv: Dominion, Caiman
Energy II, Williams)
©Marcellus and Utica Shale Databook 2013 – Volume 2
Source(s)
http://dlvr.it/43681P
http://dlvr.it/43688f
http://dlvr.it/4368CN
http://dlvr.it/45Jcxn
http://dlvr.it/43CTZS
http://dlvr.it/43CTvq
http://dlvr.it/43CTvq
Sample Pages

16. Marcellus and Utica Shale Databook 2013
Volume 1: 2013 Drilling Permits (Jan-Apr); 2011-2013 Trends by State & County, Drilling Contacts
Publish Date: May 2013
Volume 2: 2013 Drilling Permits (May-Aug), List of Pipeline/Infrastructure Projects, Permits by Driller 2012-2013
Publish Date: Sep 2013
Volume 3: 2013 Drilling Permits (Sep-Dec), Production Update, Compressor Stations, Supply Chain Tutorial
Publish Date: January 2014
Purchase Options
Buy each volume individually for $149,
or buy all three for $447 $298
Buy the 2012 3-volume series for $149
Site licenses/volume discounts also available,
contact us for details
To purchase, contact:
Marcellus Drilling News
Web: marcellusdrilling.com/databook
Email: databook@marcellusdrilling.com
Phone: (607) 218-2005
©Marcellus and Utica Shale Databook 2013 – Volume 2
Sample Pages