• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Oil and Gas Reporter >Compulsory Pooling and Unitization: Pooling Order Administrative Law: Scope of Judicial Review
【24h】

Compulsory Pooling and Unitization: Pooling Order Administrative Law: Scope of Judicial Review

机译：强制性统筹和单位化：统筹令行政法：司法审查的范围

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

Gadeco appeals a compulsory pooling order of the North Dakota Industrial Commission (NDIC). The district court reverses the assessment of a risk penalty against Gadeco. The operator, Slawson, and non-operator, Gadeco, own oil and gas leasehold interests in the pooled unit at issue. On July 8,2009, Slawson sends invitations to participate to all owners within the unit, including Gadeco. On July 15, 2009, another letter is sent from Slawson to all other owners amending the well location and spud date for the proposed well. On August 19, 2009, Gadeco signs and returns the invitation with a check for their share of expenses. Slawson returns the check and informs Gadeco that the election expired on August 10, 2009, thirty days after Gadeco received the original proposal on July 10, 2009. Slawson subsequently seeks a compulsory pooling order and the NDIC's pooling order grants a 200 percent risk penalty against Gadeco. The district court reverses the NDIC's decision, noting that Slawson amended three of the five pieces of information required by N.D.A.C. § 43-02-03-16.3(l)(a), and thus a new participation letter should have been mailed to each owner in order to begin the election period. Held: district court judgment reversed and remanded to the Industrial Commission. On appeal, Slawson argues that the changes to the AFE were insubstantial and immaterial, while Gadeco argues that the changes to the spud date and well location were substantial and material. The supreme court ultimately reverses the district court's decision and remands to the NDIC for them to prepare findings of fact that reveal the basis for their decision to enforce a risk penalty on the Gadeco's working interest share.
机译：Gadeco对北达科他州工业委员会（NDIC）的强制性合并命令提出上诉。地方法院推翻对Gadeco的风险惩罚的评估。运营商Slawson和非运营商Gadeco在有争议的合并单位中拥有油气租赁权益。 2009年7月8日，Slawson向所有单位（包括Gadeco）的所有人发出了参加邀请。 2009年7月15日，Slawson向所有其他所有者发送了另一封信，修改了拟建井的井位和开钻日期。 2009年8月19日，Gadeco在邀请函上签名并寄回支票，以支取他们应得的费用。 Slawson退还了支票，并通知Gadeco选举于2009年8月10日到期，也就是Gadeco在2009年7月10日收到原始提案后的30天。Slawson随后寻求强制性的合并命令，而NDIC的合并命令给予200％的风险罚款。加德科。地方法院撤销了NDIC的决定，并指出Slawson修改了N.D.A.C.要求的五项信息中的三项。 §43-02-03-16.3（l）（a），因此应该向每个所有者邮寄新的参会信，以开始选举期。举行：地方法院的判决被撤消并退回工业委员会。在上诉中，Slawson认为对AFE的更改没有实质性影响，而Gadeco则认为对开钻日期和井位的更改是实质性和重大的。最高法院最终推翻了地区法院的裁决，并退回给国家争议解决委员会，以供他们准备事实调查结果，以揭示其决定对加迪科工作利益份额实施风险惩罚的依据。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号