October 31, 1975 - Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library and Museum

incorporated in computerized auditing procedures to identify incorrect
units of information and operators were telephoned to obtain consistent
data.
Misinterpretation of instructions or definitions which were not
flagged by the screen could distort estimates. In the case of natural
gas estimates be1n9 reported in thousands instead of millions of cubic
feet, the estimate would tend to be overstated.
Field Identification and Delineation
To compare operator responses to a known base, FEA obtained 1973
crude oil and gas production by fields from all States in which this
information was available. However, in many instances, validation
and delineation of fields to compare State production, operator production,
field study production, decline curve production, and the 100
oil fields and 50 gas fields for which the API and AGA published
reserve estimates required data tabulations by hand. This resulted
from inexact labeling of data entries into the benchmark system,
inexact labeling of field names provided by operators, and grouping of
previously individually designated and named fields into areas, trends,
and other fields.
Throuqh the use of auxiliary information purchased for 15 principal
oil and gas producing States including operator production by field and
State allowable schedules, the FEA was able to identify satisfactorily
and delineate virtually all fields for which API, AGA, and FEA field
studies reserve data were available.
The expansion of reserves for those responses that did not provide
the data at a field level by using the ratio of reserve to production
would have provided a more precise estimate than the State level expansion
and the application of theoretical decline curves to calculate
reserves. However, the delineation problems mentioned would have
greatly increased the time and manpower requirements.
Manpower Constraints
There were insufficient technically qualified personnel available
within FEA to complete the study in the allotted time. A total of 25
professionals from three offices of the USBM, one office of
Energy Research Development Administration and two FEA Offices assisted
in the processing, analyzing and obtaining of additional information
from operators. The work of these professionals contributed significantly
to improvements in data quality. A sufficient number of
personnel were made available to process, edit, encode, keypunch, and
verify data submissions; develop computerized systems; and process the
data. At peak periods in April and May between 65 and 70 persons worked
on the operator survey portion of this project.
54