# Texas Mineral Interest Pooling Act (MIPA)
**URL:** https://www.mineralrightsforum.com/t/texas-mineral-interest-pooling-act-mipa/23406
**Category:** Regulation
**Created:** [May 12, 2011, 1:01pm UTC](https://www.mineralrightsforum.com/t/texas-mineral-interest-pooling-act-mipa/23406 "2011-05-12T13:01:21Z")
**Posts on this page:** 11
**Page:** 1
### Author:  [@Adam2](https://www.mineralrightsforum.com/u/Adam2)
#### Post date: [May 12, 2011, 1:01pm UTC](https://www.mineralrightsforum.com/t/texas-mineral-interest-pooling-act-mipa/23406/1 "2011-05-12T13:01:21Z")
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?
---
### Author:  [@Buddy\_Cotten](https://www.mineralrightsforum.com/u/Buddy_Cotten)
#### Post date: [May 12, 2011, 5:37pm UTC](https://www.mineralrightsforum.com/t/texas-mineral-interest-pooling-act-mipa/23406/2 "2011-05-12T17:37:29Z")
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.”
---
### Author:  [@Adam2](https://www.mineralrightsforum.com/u/Adam2)
#### Post date: [May 12, 2011, 6:00pm UTC](https://www.mineralrightsforum.com/t/texas-mineral-interest-pooling-act-mipa/23406/3 "2011-05-12T18:00:15Z")
Thanks for the insight.
Adam
---
### Author:  [@Rocky\_Arrell](https://www.mineralrightsforum.com/u/Rocky_Arrell)
#### Post date: [May 12, 2011, 7:03pm UTC](https://www.mineralrightsforum.com/t/texas-mineral-interest-pooling-act-mipa/23406/4 "2011-05-12T19:03:10Z")
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 through the 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.
[2979-TabHJohnCampMIPA.pdf](https://www.mineralrightsforum.com/uploads/db5755/original/2X/0/05f5190cc9112e061bf15a94ebdad76d746ba261.pdf) (911 KB)
---
### Author:  [@Buddy\_Cotten](https://www.mineralrightsforum.com/u/Buddy_Cotten)
#### Post date: [May 12, 2011, 7:40pm UTC](https://www.mineralrightsforum.com/t/texas-mineral-interest-pooling-act-mipa/23406/5 "2011-05-12T19:40:04Z")
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’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 through the 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.
---
### Author:  [@Adam2](https://www.mineralrightsforum.com/u/Adam2)
#### Post date: [May 12, 2011, 7:41pm UTC](https://www.mineralrightsforum.com/t/texas-mineral-interest-pooling-act-mipa/23406/6 "2011-05-12T19:41:55Z")
Thank you both for your input. The tract is outside of the units. It is an island between 3 units.
---
### Author:  [@Jack\_Ross](https://www.mineralrightsforum.com/u/Jack_Ross)
#### Post date: [August 3, 2011, 9:30pm UTC](https://www.mineralrightsforum.com/t/texas-mineral-interest-pooling-act-mipa/23406/7 "2011-08-03T21:30:57Z")
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.
---
### Author:  [@Buddy\_Cotten](https://www.mineralrightsforum.com/u/Buddy_Cotten)
#### Post date: [August 5, 2011, 1:54am UTC](https://www.mineralrightsforum.com/t/texas-mineral-interest-pooling-act-mipa/23406/8 "2011-08-05T01:54:38Z")
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:
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.
---
### Author:  [@David\_Haywood](https://www.mineralrightsforum.com/u/David_Haywood)
#### Post date: [September 5, 2012, 2:00pm UTC](https://www.mineralrightsforum.com/t/texas-mineral-interest-pooling-act-mipa/23406/9 "2012-09-05T14:00:08Z")
Sharon:
What was decided by the RRC at the Jan. 30th meeting, as to small mineral owners being forced pooled, and having to pay for drilling cost?
Thanks
---
### Author:  [@Buddy\_Cotten](https://www.mineralrightsforum.com/u/Buddy_Cotten)
#### Post date: [September 10, 2012, 10:44pm UTC](https://www.mineralrightsforum.com/t/texas-mineral-interest-pooling-act-mipa/23406/10 "2012-09-10T22:44:42Z")
Dear Mr. Haywood,
Sharon did not post that letter. It was multiple cross-posted by “Seth” and you should check with him to find out if he followed his post to the natural conclusion.
---
### Author:  [@system](https://www.mineralrightsforum.com/u/system)
#### Post date: [August 15, 2018, 4:23am UTC](https://www.mineralrightsforum.com/t/texas-mineral-interest-pooling-act-mipa/23406/11 "2018-08-15T04:23:34Z")