# Pooling question
**URL:** https://www.mineralrightsforum.com/t/pooling-question/11864
**Category:** Woods County, OK
**Created:** [January 18, 2014, 5:23am UTC](https://www.mineralrightsforum.com/t/pooling-question/11864 "2014-01-18T05:23:04Z")
**Posts on this page:** 5
**Page:** 1
### Author:  [@ray\_turner](https://www.mineralrightsforum.com/u/ray_turner)
#### Post date: [January 18, 2014, 5:23am UTC](https://www.mineralrightsforum.com/t/pooling-question/11864/1 "2014-01-18T05:23:04Z")
I have some mineral rights in Woods County, Section 18, Township 28N, Range 18W.
Can someone tell me what is happening with the pooling of this area? In the documents I have it seems they applied for pooling then applied for relief in spacing. The final document is an order dismissing cause.
So now I don’t know where I stand.
Thanks
---
### Author:  [@Ron\_McKenzie](https://www.mineralrightsforum.com/u/Ron_McKenzie)
#### Post date: [January 18, 2014, 1:35pm UTC](https://www.mineralrightsforum.com/t/pooling-question/11864/2 "2014-01-18T13:35:54Z")
Sandridge filed a pooling then dismissed it. The Chesapeake filed for a spacing, location exception and pooling, and the pooling order was also dismissed.
> **[0302C1B4.pdf](https://imaging.occ.ok.gov/AP/CaseFiles/0302C1B4.pdf)**
>
> 216.94 KB
> **[03037794.pdf](https://imaging.occ.ok.gov/AP/Orders/03037794.pdf)**
>
> 47.68 KB
Here is how it should go.
> **[0301241E.pdf](https://imaging.occ.ok.gov/AP/Orders/0301241E.pdf)**
>
> 213.78 KB
> **[03031DB3.pdf](https://imaging.occ.ok.gov/AP/Orders/03031DB3.pdf)**
>
> 182.67 KB
> **[03013814.pdf](https://imaging.occ.ok.gov/AP/Orders/03013814.pdf)**
>
> 546.84 KB
Here are some completion reports for wells around you.
> **[1DD041F3.pdf](https://imaging.occ.ok.gov/OG/Well%20Records/1DD041F3.pdf)**
>
> 149.07 KB
> **[1DD07089.pdf](https://imaging.occ.ok.gov/OG/Well%20Records/1DD07089.pdf)**
>
> 10.76 KB
> **[1DD041F4.pdf](https://imaging.occ.ok.gov/OG/Well%20Records/1DD041F4.pdf)**
>
> 151.38 KB
> **[1DD041FB.pdf](https://imaging.occ.ok.gov/OG/Well%20Records/1DD041FB.pdf)**
>
> 149.82 KB
---
### Author:  [@ray\_turner](https://www.mineralrightsforum.com/u/ray_turner)
#### Post date: [January 18, 2014, 4:22pm UTC](https://www.mineralrightsforum.com/t/pooling-question/11864/3 "2014-01-18T16:22:29Z")
So it looks like I am back at ground zero. Any idea on why they chose not to pursue drilling? Is it because the area is a low producer? Or that there were better areas to invest in?
Thanks for the provided information.
---
### Author:  [@Ron\_McKenzie](https://www.mineralrightsforum.com/u/Ron_McKenzie)
#### Post date: [January 18, 2014, 5:31pm UTC](https://www.mineralrightsforum.com/t/pooling-question/11864/4 "2014-01-18T17:31:03Z")
Chesapeake had a lot to think about the last year or more, so who knows.
---
### Author:  [@system](https://www.mineralrightsforum.com/u/system)
#### Post date: [August 15, 2018, 1:00am UTC](https://www.mineralrightsforum.com/t/pooling-question/11864/5 "2018-08-15T01:00:25Z")