In my first reply, I said if they were not the drillsite, they get nothing and referred him to a 3 part series that I wrote on pooling in texas.
How much more of a teaching experience would you suggest that I make? All anybody had to do was read the blog and figure out how to use a hyperlink.
As to mineral co-tenancy law, I am more familiar than most. Both with the rights of the co-tenant and the accounting to the co-tenant, which has squat to do with the pooling transaction.
You have a 10% interest in a 50 acre tract. The other 90% choose to lease and their leases are pooled voluntarily under the terms of their leases and are non-drillsite tracts . The unleased 10% is not in the unit and gets nothing because they are not pooled - because they can't be without a pooling transaction.
Now, before overly sensitive, childish and paranoid people (and you surely know who you are) have their little hissie fit, I am not talking down to anybody or being rude or sarcastic.
I attempt to make my contributions relevant and accurate. As to filing "incomplete permit applications" the permits are for the most part totally within the regulations of the RRC for a drilling permit. If not, they are kicked back. Of course, it sounds like you are confusing a P-1 with a P-12. Can a P-12 be amended? Sure, all the time - when straggling lessors sign up. Does it affect title? Nope.
But who really cares?????? The ones who refuse to lease a non-drillsite minor interest is left out. The ones who lease a non-drillsite minor interest to a block buster is left out, unless the blockbuster flips the lease. Here is when they are not left out (as explained in my blog) - when it is primary production and you force your way in through a MIPA action or when you are in a fieldwide unit.
Then you have that nasty little rule of capture thing in Texas and the assumption that there is such a thing as equitable pooling in Texas, which there is not. So, if you can't get pooled, drill your own well.
Now, since you brought it up. Was anything I said inaccurate, in either my postings or my blogs on pooling in Texas? What is so terrifying? I will not shade the truth to make people feel real comfortable about their options. The truth of the matter is that most companies do want all mineral interest owners leased. If they cut someone out, they have made an enemy. They really don't want to do that....well there is at least one publicly traded company who seems to WANT to tick everybody in the whole country off.
"Think of this as a teachable moment Buddie and not a time to scare people with the whole "If they are the non drillsite tract, they get nothing" thing Landmen tend to say."
Maybe landmen say that because it is accurate. Non-pooled, non-drillsite tracts are not entitled to a share of production if the well is at a legal location.
Here is a link to Richard Merrill's pretty decent treatise on pooling in Texas.