America’s conversation place for mineral & royalty owners
Texas Mineral Interest Pooling Act (MIPA)
If Company A has leased a single 10 acre tract that is surrounded by Company B & C Units, can Company A force itself into one of the Company B or C units?
Keywords: Texas MIPA, Texas Mineral Interest Pooling Act
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Buddy Cotten on
-
Dear Adam,
Technically, they would have to prove that they were being drained.
The MIPA statute is very flawed. For example, if you are successful, you only get a share of production from the date of the order. The MIPA statute has been around since the 60's and only about 110 cases have actually forced their way into the unit.
A very expensive proposition, by the way.
Typically, the response is "This is a rule of capture state. If you feel as if you are being drained, protect yourself."
Buddy Cotten
-
Permalink Reply by Rocky Arrell on -
Buddy's remark is candid and matter-of-fact, re: don't bet on it!
Your information needs improvement: is the 10 acre tract in the interior of designated units or is it outside and adjoining, if outside then nothing can be done, if inside and the bottom-hole location of the well is in compliance with Statewide Rule 37 (re: 467' from lease line) then again not much of a case to argue, your recourse is the rule of capture ... then you'll be objected and contested on your application to drill for insufficient acreage in compliance with Statewide Field Rules, re: 40 acres. The MIPA is difficult to impose and rarely used. These cases are heard by a Trial Examiner before the Texas RRC and I don't think there is recourse throught judicial system for appeal. Also, see if my file is attached, re: MIPA
See AAPL's Landman Nov/Dec'10 issue, re: Forced Pooling in Texas: The Mineral Interest Pooling Act for a concise review.
- Attachments:
-
-
Tab H - John Camp - MIPA.pdf, 911 KB
-
-
-
Rocky is correct as usual. For those that do not know Mr. A., he is one of the better landmen you will run across. Landowner landman.
Buddy Cotten
Rocky Arrell said:
Buddy's remark is candid and matter-of-fact, re: don't bet on it!
Your information needs improvement: is the 10 acre tract in the interior of designated units or is it outside and adjoining, if outside then nothing can be done, if inside and the bottom-hole location of the well is in compliance with Statewide Rule 37 (re: 467' from lease line) then again not much of a case to argue, your recourse is the rule of capture ... then you'll be objected and contested on your application to drill for insufficient acreage in compliance with Statewide Field Rules, re: 40 acres. The MIPA is difficult to impose and rarely used. These cases are heard by a Trial Examiner before the Texas RRC and I don't think there is recourse throught judicial system for appeal. Also, see if my file is attached, re: MIPA
See AAPL's Landman Nov/Dec'10 issue, re: Forced Pooling in Texas: The Mineral Interest Pooling Act for a concise review.
-
Permalink Reply by Adam on
-
Thank you both for your input. The tract is outside of the units. Its is an island between 3 units.
-
Permalink Reply by Jack Ross on
-
Is there, or has there ever been, an exception to the 40 acre rule in regard to pooling an oil well? I know that pooling for gas, the pool can be almost as big as whoever in charge wants it to be.
-
-
Dear Mr. Ross,
There is no real "rule" concerning the pooling to which you refer. Voluntary Pooling is set by the pooling transaction, which, for the most part, is in the lease form's pooling provision. We do not have compulsory or forced pooling in Texas, thank God. Texas does not have equitable pooling, which surprises the unsuspecting or uninformed.
You might want to read the following for a more complete, though elementary overview:
http://www.mineralrightsforum.com/profiles/blogs/the-basics-of-pool...
Best,
Buddy Cotten
BBA-UT-PLM
Jack Ross said:Is there, or has there ever been, an exception to the 40 acre rule in regard to pooling an oil well? I know that pooling for gas, the pool can be almost as big as whoever in charge wants it to be.
-
Permalink Reply by Seth on
-
All,
Last week we sent an alert, urging you to send a letter to the Railroad Commission telling them not to railroad Texans’ property rights via new rules for the Mineral Interest Pooling Act (MIPA) – the law that authorizes forced pooling.
If you haven’t done so, it’s not too late to send a letter.
But even better than sending a letter, come say your piece in person.
WHAT: Railroad Commission hearing to consider whether to proceed with new forced pooling rules under MIPA
WHEN: January 30th at 9:00 am
WHERE: William B. Travis State Office Building, Room 1-111 1701 N. Congress Ave., Austin, TX
WHY: The reason the TRC is considering the rules now? Among other things, they want to legitimize railroading (hah!) small landowners -- who want no part of production/leasing -- into not just drilling, but PAYING for the drilling they don't want. If the well isn't profitable, new rules could wind up losing landowners money.
Thank you!
Sharon Wilson, Gulf Regional Organizer
P.S. If you haven’t yet sent a letter to the Commission, click here to do so.
© 2012 Created by Kenny DuBose.
