Content-Type: text/html Cause #: 93-111g.v7.html

CADDNAR


[CITE: DNR v. Meteor Development and Ringel Farms 7 CADDNAR 63 (1994)]

[VOLUME 7, PAGE 63]

Cause #: 93-111G
Name: DNR V. Meteor Developments and Ringel Farms
Administrative Law Judge: Lucas
Attorneys: Davidsen; Raikos; DeVoe
Date: March 18, 1994

ORDER

Liens are foreclosed under IC 13-8-15-2 against Meteor Development of Indiana Inc. and in favor of the state of Indiana on the casing and all equipment located on or removed from the well sites on each of the permits issued to Meteor Developments, and on the leasehold of the lands upon which these wells are located, to secure the cost of plugging and abandoning. Meteor Developments of Indiana, Inc. is ordered to cease removing equipment from the well sites except in accordance with a written agreement entered with the Department of Natural Resources or as otherwise subsequently ordered by a circuit or superior court having jurisdiction. The state of Indiana shall, acting through the Attorney General, do all things appropriate to enforcing and implementing this order and to securing all appropriate relief under IC 13-8.

FINDINGS OF FACT

1. These proceedings were initiated by the department of natural resources (the "Department") with the filing of complaints against Meteor Developments of Indiana, Inc. ("Meteor Developments") which alleged violations of IC 13-8 and 310 IAC 7 (collectively referred to as the "Indiana oil and gas production law") .

2. The complaints initiated actions governed by IC 4 -2 1. 5 (the "administrative orders and procedures act" or "AOPA") . In addition, the natural resources commission (the "Commission") has adopted a rule as codified at 310 IAC 0.6-1 to assist in the administration of the AOPA.

3. First of America Bank-Indiana ("First of America") is the successor to the holder of Certificate of Deposit 32020, assigned to the Department by Meteor Developments as required by IC 13-8, in order to assure performance of drilling and reclamation standards at each of the wells in controversy. For this reason, First of America was also made a party to these proceedings.

4. Ringel Farms, Inc. ("Ringel Farms") sought to intervene because the company owns the realty on which some of the wells in controversy are located. Ringel Farms was found to have a direct proprietary interest in the outcome of the proceedings, and intervention was ordered on October 15, 1993 under IC 4-21.5-3-21 and 310 IAC 0.6-1-10.

5. The Department, Meteor Developments, First of America, and Ringel Farms (collectively the "parties") entered an "Agreed Order" instead of litigating the disputes at issue in these proceedings. The "Agreed Order" was ultimately approved by the secretary of the Commission, and on January 20, 1994, entered as a "Final Order of the Natural Resources Commission".

6. On March 7, 1994, the Department filed its "Motion to Foreclose Lion" against Meteor Developments. The motion alleged that Meteor failed to abide by the terms of the "Agreed order" in a number of particulars. Among these were allegations that Meteor Developments failed to produce a compliance plan in a timely fashion, that Meteor Developments failed to pay a penalty as specified for each well, and that Meteor Developments failed to immediately plug and abandon each well.

7. Pursuant to a notice dated March 8, the Administrative Law Judge scheduled the "Motion to Foreclose Lien" for a hearing to be hold on March 17, 1994. Copies of the notice were sent to the parties or to their attorneys of record.

8. The Department and Ringel Farms appeared by counsel for the hearing as scheduled on March 17, 1994. The other parties did not appear. Testimony was received from James AmRhein and Johnny D. White, employees of the Division of Oil and Gas of the Department, with respect to the "Motion to Foreclose Lien".

9. Testimony was unrefuted that Meteor Developments has committed and continues to commit a multitude of violations of the Indiana oil and gas production law at the wells in dispute. Meteor Developments has plugged two of the wells but has failed to properly abandon these wells and has failed either to plug or abandon the other wells. Meteor Developments has failed to maintain the wells in an active status or to properly place them on temporary abandonment status. Several of the wells pose fire hazards, the potential exists for harm to fish and wildlife, and there is a serious possibility of pollution to ground water.

[VOLUME 7, PAGE 64]

10. Testimony was also unrefuted that Meteor Developments has breached, and is in continuing violation of, the terms of the "Agreed order". Meteor Developments has failed to produce a compliance plan in a timely fashion. Meteor Developments has failed to take corrective action on the wells either as set forth in a compliance plan, or in the absence of a compliance plan, by the due date of February 18, 1994 anticipated in the "Agreed Order". No work consistent with plugging, abandonments, and reclamation of the wells has been performed by Meteor Developments since entry of the "Agreed order".

11. As provided in IC 13-8-15-2(c), the "state has a liEn on the casing and all equipment located on or removed from the well site, and on the leasehold of the land upon which the well is located, to secure the cost of plugging and abandoning."

12 The State of Indiana has a lien on the casing and all equipment located on or removed from the well sites of each of the permits issued to Meteor Developments, and on the leasehold of the lands upon where these wells are located, to secure the cost of plugging and abandoning.

13. Testimony was unrefuted that Meteor Developments has removed pump jacks and other equipment located at the wells since entry of the "Agreed order". Johnny White estimated that approximately 60% of the equipment has been removed.

14. The liens should be ordered foreclosed upon the casing and all equipment located on or removed from the well sites of each of the permits issued to Meteor Developments, and on the leasehold of the lands upon which these wells are located, to secure the cost of plugging and abandoning. In addition, Meteor Developments should be ordered to cease removing equipment from the well sites except in accordance with a written agreement entered with the Department or as otherwise subsequently ordered by a circuit or superior court having jurisdiction.