For a NPRI interest holder who wishes to be paid by formalizing the pooling terms, which method is most advantageous - ratification of the underlying mineral lease or execution of a separate pooling agreement? If a pooling agreement has been submitted for approval, should the NPRI owner compare pooling terms of both the underlying mineral lease and the pooling agreement; then requesting a ratification if that approach is in the best interest of the NPRI owner?
Appears that signing the pooling agreement changes changes pooling terms for the NPRI owner, so that the agreement language replaces the mineral lease pooling language. Either way, NPRI owner must approve the language since pooling is a cross conveyance.
This topic was automatically closed after 90 days. New replies are no longer allowed.