TALLAHASEE - A Florida state appeals panel has ruled a state agency was wrong to deny a landowner in the Everglades the chance to drill a well to explore for oil.
On March 19, the Florida First District Court of Appeals reversed the decision of the Florida Department of Environmental Protection and approved the issuance of an oil well drilling permit in the Florida Everglades to Kanter Real Estate.
Kanter Real Estate had been denied a permit to drill an exploratory well on five acres of a 20,000 acre tract it owns in the Florida Everglades.
Kanter had been granted a permit that defined and approved the design of a stormwater management system at the site to protect offsite lands from any stormwater discharges. Kanter had previously committed to a number of pollution prevention measures, including spill prevention and cleaning plans, a hydrogen sulfide plan, a construction pollution prevention plan, proposals for wildlife management, and a safety manual, court documents said.
The appellate decision noted Kanter presented evidence that the project site lies in an area called “the pocket,” notable for a degraded natural habitat and lessened environmental values. Kanter also presented an environmental resource permit that was granted by the Environmental Protection Department, indicating Kanter had satisfied all necessary environmental precautions.
In addition, Kanter introduced evidence that the Department had allowed other oil wells in the Everglades, including one approximately 24 miles west of the project site which had operated since the 1970s.
The Department accepted an administrative law judge's determination that there was a reasonable likelihood of discovering oil in commercially profitable quantities. Kanter's expert testified that there was a 23% chance of discovering oil at the project site, noting in the oil exploration industry, a 23% chance of discovering oil constitutes a very good prospect.
However, the Department of Environmental Protection denied Kanter his drilling permit, overruling an administrative law judge and declaring Kanter's alleged delay in seeking a permit was relevant to the balancing test and weighed against issuance.
In the appellate opinion authored by First District Appellate Chief Judge Bradford Thomas, the appeals judges determined the Environmental Protection Department "improperly rejected the ALJ’s factual findings on the first statutory factor, recast the facts, and relied on information from outside the record. It was an abuse of discretion to reject, modify, or substitute the ALJ’s factual findings, and when the reasons for the change are legally insufficient, it is entirely appropriate to remand."
The appeals court reinstated the administrative law judge's ruling and granted Kanter's permit.