We are having trouble in getting Sanguine Gas to agree with our desire to delete post-production costs, so we are looking at their Forced Pooling terms for a similar project in Sections 27 & 22 just east of our royalty in Pittsburg County in Oklahoma. We were interested in the 3/16 their option 3,c. non-participating in the well cost section. The part difficult to understand includes net revenue interest of 87.5%, and other reductions. Our other question was if the Pooling Order excludes deductions for post-production cost. I could not find yes or no to that issue. I have attached the entire pooling document to ask for help deciding if the Pooling Order will be the way to go for us. Sanguine Gas has decided to go with Trinity Operating for this new area (Sections 21 & 28, Township 7, Range 13E. Since Trinity currently has a Court case against them for excessive royalty deductions, (see Sultan Oil v. Trinity Operating Case # CIV 10-175-CBG), relying on Trinity to fairly pay or releasing post production revenue looks risky for this new well development, See attached lease.Adjacent Pooling Order occ30382947.pdf (1.7 MB)
This topic was automatically closed after 90 days. New replies are no longer allowed.