We received the Pooling Order in Cause CD No. 2025-003650 and the 20 days to respond are nearly over. We have only a 0.000069 acres interest in Section 28, Township 7N, Range 7W and are wondering if we are supposed to respond since we are not even close to an acre interest. There are seven of us who have inherited this very small interest and Camino Natural Resources does not even have all our addresses. So any advice on responding to the Order would be appreciated.
Yes, you must respond if you want a highest royalty -otherwise they assign you the lowest. When you do, let them know that seven of you inherited and that you are selecting the highest royalty. Give all of the names and addresses and a copy of your probate document. You may need all of you to sign the letter- or all sign an identical letter. Has the probate been filed in the proper county where the minerals are located. If not, then you can straighten it out later, but for now get them informed or you get stuck with the lowest royalty. Send by certified mail return receipt and keep a copy. Do you need a template letter? I have attached one. Add your second page with names and addresses.
0_Pooling order response.docx (85.6 KB). Fill in the red parts with your information and then turn black.
2 Likes
I had two different tracts with Camino Natural Resources that were being force pooled in that area. I received so many different election forms for each tract and no reason why. No explanations. I called multiple times, emailed over and over and finally gave up. Finally, three months later I received checks for my pooling interests. The department for the pooling and whoever is doing their title chains has dropped the ball more times than I can count. The left hand has no clue what the right hand is doing. Something needs to be done. The mineral owners are getting fed up.
1 Like
Hello Martha,
I want to thank you so much for responding so quickly to my post. You are so helpful. We had our probate filed in the correct County; however, we have 2 cousins who have not had their mother’s probate filed completely and their interest is still in their mother’s name. Can they respond as heirs even though the interest hasn’t been transferred into their names? Their mother was in the same probate proceeding distribution that the 7 of us were in.
We aren’t sure if we can elect anything because of the clauses in the paragraphs that apply to the owners of very small interests:
“Further, any party electing to accept the consideration set forth in this paragraph must be able to deliver on the date elections are due 75.00% net revenue interest.”
And:
““It was the testimony that some Respondents have or may have leasehold interest containing an NRI less than 75% and that such overburdened interest is a negative asset to Applicant. Such overburdened leasehold interest shall only be entitled to participate under the provisions of paragraph 6.1 or to elect the provisions of this Paragraph 6.6.” (6.6 Cash Consideration of $1.00 per acre and deliver interest as burdened at the time forced pooling was filed.)
So paragraph 6.6 would mean less than $1.00 to be split between the 7 of us. You can see that it would not even be worth the money it would cost to respond. I think that is our conclusion. If you think it says something different, please let us know. We can’t even imagine they had to spend the money to tell us that we are offered a few cents to respond. This all seems unbelievable.
All the best,
Sharon
They probably can go ahead and respond with their names and list that they are in probate and give the case number if it is assigned.
The paragraphs you are quoting probably do not apply to you. They are usually for working interest owners. You are a mineral owner. What is the case number and I will look it up.
2 Likes
Hi Martha,
Thank you SO much. I do not understand the order at all! The case number is CD No. 2025-003650 Order No. 755269.
All the best,
Sharon
You need to look at options 6.2-6.5. The lower the royalty, the higher the bonus. The higher the royalty, the lower the bonus. Most of us would want the higher royalty because over the long run, the higher royalties far outweigh the one time bonus.
This pooling says it is for 28-7N-7W. Gloss Mountain 0707 21-28-33 1MXH. However they may have more than one horizontal well in the future. They have an additional well from the same surface pad called Salt Plains 0707 21-29-32 1WXH which will run parallel into 29 and 32. There are two possible horizons, the Woodford (W) and the Mississippian (M) in the well names. They are trying to hold all of those sections. There could be three to eight wells per section in the coming years, so think longer term. I see permits to the south with five wells per section, so not out of the realm of possibility.
If it were me, I would pick the 1/4th option (6.5) or the 1/5th option (6.4)-maybe. The bold items in the option are for folks that have an overriding interest or other burden that you probably do not have. It would be worth it to send the certified letter cost to get the 1/4th option in the hope that down the line you would share in the larger royalties over hundreds if not thousands of feet of perforations. Still not huge due to the small acreage position, but maybe a nice dinner out! If you don’t do anything, you will be assigned the 1/8th option for all of the wells in the future. I would rather have double the money at 1/4th with a productive well or wells.
2 Likes