HomeMy WebLinkAbout20121361.tiff •
EXHIBIT
/OA
City of /�^ ,wx, Pfr
c
"•
Gleat �.�,�,� tilt Grim_ [ : T_
Y
May 2, 2012
Mr. Clay Drake
Director of Business Development
The Great Western Development Company
700 Automation Drive, Unit A
Windsor, CO 80550
Re: Windsor Renewal's Request for Interim Water Service for the Musket Corporation's
Transloading Station at the Former Kodak Site
Dear Clay:
Your request for interim water service to serve the parcel you are leasing to Musket Corporation
requires additional information as the City of Greeley considers conditionally providing water
service for the proposed transloading facility. Before staff can move forward,please provide an
•
updated utility plan that clearly addresses the following items:
1. Location of the existing master meter that serves your site and the remaining Kodak
property.
2. Location of the proposed' -inch tap and meter.
3. Highlight the proposed Musket Corporation's site boundaries as described in your lease
agreement.
Upon receipt of your revised utility plan, The City of Greeley will then consider entering into an
Outside City Water Service agreement with Windsor Renewal to provide water service on a
time-limited, interim basis. This agreement will identify the terms and conditions outlined in the
Greeley Water and Sewer Board and the City Council Resolutions concerning this topic to the
extent feasible. These terms and conditions will include, but are not limited to the following
items:
1. Service from the City of Greeley's transmission lines does not equate to a guarantee of
pressure or continuity of service; therefore, fire protection is not available per Greeley's
standards.
2. A plant investment fee of$18,000 for one 3/4-inch interim water tap will be required.
3. Customary tap-related fees include a'/4-inch meter and 0.75 acre feet of raw water. The
amount of raw water due is estimated at$8,025, subject to quarterly changes in the cash-
in-lieu of water rights rate.
4. The proposed' -inch water tap will have a base annual allotment of 244,000 gallons,
• subject to a surcharge if usage exceeds the base amount.
2012-1361
Water and Sewer Department . 1100 10th Street,Suite 300,Greeley,CO 80631 • (970)350-9811 Fax(970)350-9805
We promise to preserve and improve the quality of life for Greeley through timely, courteous and cost-effective service.
• Mr. Clay Drake
Page 2
May 2, 2012
5. Any fees paid by Windsor Renewal or Musket Corporation to the City of Greeley for the
interim water tap will not be refundable at the end of the agreement's term.
6. Windsor Renewal's interim water service agreement must comply with the provisions of
the Water and Board and the City Council's Joint Resolution No. 66, 1998.
7. Windsor Renewal understands that the interim water service agreement is specific to the
Musket Corporation's site only.
8. Future requests for water service will not be considered until Windsor Renewal provides
a master plan for the development of the former Kodak site, and such requests remain
subject to the terms and conditions outlined in the Greeley Water and Sewer Board
Resolution No. 10,2011, and City Council Resolution No. 72, 2011.
As we get further into this process, the Water and Sewer Board will need to consider the
provisions of the interim agreement and grant approval for staff to proceed further. Final
approval by City Council may also be necessary.
Please let me know if you have any additional concerns or questions.
• Sincerely,
Jon G. Monson
Director of Water and Sewer
Cc: Derek Glosson, Engineering Development Manager
Doris Biehl, Water and Sewer Services Coordinator
Frank Brooks, Water Operations Manager
Jim Witwer, Water and Sewer Board Counsel
•
Water and Sewer Department • 1100 10th Street,Suite 300,Greeley,CO 80631 • (970)350-9811 Fax(970)350-9805
We promise to preserve and improve the quality of life for Greeley through timely,courteous and cost-effective service.
ATTORNEYS&COUNSELORS AT LAW
• 633 SEVENTEENTH STREET,SUITE 3000
DENVER,COLORADO 80202
TELEPHONE:(303)297-2900
FAX:(303)298-0940
WWW.SHERMANHOWARD.COM
W.SHERMANHO W ARD.COM
Joan Blaik
Direct Dial Number: (303)299-8073
E-mail: JBlaik@ShermanHoward.com
May 2, 2012
Via E-Mail
Mr. Tom Parko, Planner
Weld County Department of Planning Services
1555 North 17th Avenue
Greeley CO 80631
Re: Case#USR 12-0005
Windsor Renewal I LLC
Windsor Transloading Facility
Dear Mr. Parko:
• We represent Carestream Health, Inc. ("Carestream"), which owns property adjacent to
the site of the proposed Windsor Transloading Facility (the "Facility"). For the reasons set forth
below, Carestream does not believe that Windsor Renewal I LLC ("WR"), which filed the
Application on February 3, 2012 as authorized agent for Musket Corporation ("Musket"), has
met its burden of proving that it has met the standards and conditions contained in Sections 23-
2-220(A) and 23-2-230(B), Weld County Code (the "Code"), as well as the standards and
conditions of Sections 23-2-240 and 23-2-250 of the Code. The Application does not clearly
identify how the Applicant intends to comply with the requirements of the Code for the Use by
Special Review process. Moreover, many of the statements made in the Application and the
Map of the Windsor Transloading Facility which is pan of the Application and based on which
Weld County is performing its analysis are unclear, inaccurate or incomplete.
The lack of complete information and inaccuracies in the Application make it very
difficult to evaluate the adequacy of the utilities and access roads on which the Facility will rely,
to address the shared use of those facilities by neighboring private parties, or to evaluate the
impact of the Facility on the operations of neighboring property owners. For example, as
described below, Eastman Kodak Company ("Kodak") and Carestream are parties to multiple
easement agreements and a services agreement designed to facilitate the provision of a complex
private integrated system of water, sewer, fire protection and other utilities (some of which the
Applicant intends to use) and which are not designed for use by an unknown number of
potential occupants of the "Industrial Park." Carestream, Kodak and parties developing
property within the property recently acquired by WR, including Musket, each need an
• opportunity to gain an adequate understanding of the impacts new uses will have on these
DOW
BUS_RE\4333499.I 'T�
r �
Sherman & Howard L.L.C.
Mr.Tom Parko, Planner
Weld County Department of Planning Services
May 2, 2012
Page 2
systems, ensure the systems have the capacity to handle the growing demand, and allocate
related responsibilities among the parties.
However, Carestream has not been approached either by Musket or WR to discuss the
plans for the Facility and, although it has been negotiating with Great Western Railway (an
affiliate of WR) with respect to the use of Carestream's rail tracks to the south of the proposed
Facility and specifically to service the Facility as well as other customers of Great Western
Railway, none of the information and plans contained in the Application was provided to it by
either WR or Great Western Railway. Carestream requests that Musket be required to add
additional detail to its Application in compliance with the requirements of Weld County Code
Sec. 23-2-260 and to permit the opportunity for adequate evaluation of the Application's
satisfaction of the requirements for its approval. Carestream also requests that, as contemplated
in Section 23-2-210(B(4) of the Code, Musket and WR be encouraged to communicate with
Carestream and Kodak regarding the systems of private utilities and roads which Musket and
WR propose to use.
• BACKGROUND
In 1968 Kodak announced that it had acquired property in unincorporated Weld County
and over a period of decades developed a manufacturing campus (the "Kodak Campus")
serviced by a private integrated system of utilities, roads and railroads designed specifically to
serve the manufacturing uses to which Kodak put the property. A map showing the Kodak
Campus, part of which was acquired by Carestream in 2007 and 2010, as well as the remaining
property owned by Kodak is attached as Exhibit A. In 2007 Kodak sold its medical imaging
business to Carestream and, with it, those facilities on the Kodak Campus used in connection
with that business on two parcels of land(the "North Parcel" and the "South Parcel") located to
the west of the property where the proposed Facility is to be located. In 2010 Carestream
acquired additional property from Kodak located to the south of the South Parcel and south of
the proposed location of the Facility. As part of the 2007 and 2010 transactions, Kodak and
Carestream entered into multiple easement agreements (the "Easement Agreements") and a
Services Agreement dated April 30, 2007 which was superseded and replaced in 2010 by a
Restated Services Agreement (the "Services Agreement"), pursuant to which they provide
services to each other in order to facilitate their respective manufacturing processes. The
Easement Agreements and the Services Agreement are designed to support the provision of
utilities and road and rail services to the Kodak Campus. In December 2012 WR acquired all of
the remaining property owned by Kodak with the exception of a parcel located between the
North Parcel and the South Parcel where Kodak continues its manufacturing process (the "WR
Property").
•
BUS_RE\4333499.1
•
Sherman & Howard L.T.C.
Mr.Tom Parko, Planner
Weld County Department of Planning Services
May 2, 2012
Page 3
The Services Agreement sets forth Kodak's and Carestream's rights and obligations in
providing various services to each other. Only Kodak and Carestream are parties to the Services
Agreement which does not contemplate providing services to any third parties. Neither the
utilities, roads and rail services in place on the Kodak Campus and made the subject of the
Services Agreement nor the Easement Agreements were designed or intended to serve the future
redevelopment of the Kodak Campus as part of a completely different "Industrial Park" with
different uses and demands. In order to facilitate the development of the WR property and the
Facility as part of a larger "Industrial Park" the utilities and transportation infrastructure needs
to be evaluated and WR and Carestream need to work out new agreements that provide for the
growth and expansion of industry in the area without compromising existing systems of limited
capacity.
OBJECTIONS
We have the following objections to the Applicant's Questionnaire Response filed with
• the Application.
• The Applicant must show that adequate water will be available to the site. Item 5
of the Application states that water will be provided by the Greeley Water District. Page
1 of the Map shows the location of"proposed water service" which appears to connect
with "existing water per Kodak Sketch (labeled service water)" also shown on the Map.
The water supply to the Kodak Campus is the subject of a Water Agreement dated May
11, 1978 between Kodak and the City of Greeley, as amended by an Amendment to
Water Agreement dated October 3, 1995, and an Assignment and Amendment to Water
Agreement dated April 30, 2007 among Kodak, Carestream and the City of Greeley (the
"Greeley Water Agreement"). In 2007 Kodak assigned to Carestream a portion of
Kodak's right to receive treated water under the Greeley Water Agreement and Greeley
agreed to provide water to Kodak and Carestream in consideration of the provision of
raw water to Greeley by Kodak and Carestream. Pursuant to the Greeley Water
Agreement, Kodak is presently obligated to pay Greeley for treated water charges
relating to the Kodak and Carestream property and Carestream is required to pay Kodak
for treated water charges as provided in the Services Agreement. The Application does
not disclose what water the Applicant intends to use and we note that the Applicant has
no right to use the treated water provided to Carestream under the Greeley Water
Agreement.
• The Applicant must show that adequate sewer service will be available to the site.
Item 5 of the Application states that sanitary sewer service will be provided by "the
• Town of Windsor utilizing existing infrastructure owned by Kodak". Only parts of the
BUS_REt4333499.1
Sherman & Howard •
L.L.C.
Mr.Tom Parko, Planner
Weld County Department of Planning Services
May 2, 2012
Page 4
sanitary sewer system are owned by Kodak. The remainder is owned by Carestream and
Carestream's and Kodak's rights and obligations for the provision of the sanitary sewer
service are governed by the Services Agreement. Page 1 of the Map appears to depict a
proposed sanitary sewer line. Carestream does not know whether the Applicant intends
to connect a new sewer line to the existing sanitary sewer system and has not yet
determined whether connection of a new sewer line to the sanitary sewer system is
permitted under the Kodak/Carestream agreements or will overwhelm the existing
sanitary sewer system.
• The Applicant must show that adequate fire protection measures are available on
the site. Item 5 of the Application appears to state that Windsor Fire Protection District
will provide fire protection service, but it does not tell us how the Fire Protection District
will provide this service or where it will obtain water for fire protection. Fire protection
water service is provided by Kodak to Carestream in accordance with the terms of the
Services Agreement and the Applicant has no right to use the water owned by
• Carestream under the Greeley Water Agreement.
• Uses must comply with storm water management standards. Item 8 of the
Application states that the development of the site will use the existing storm water
facilities. Kodak and Carestream are parties to an Amended and Restated Easement
Agreement (Reciprocal Storm Sewer Easements) which permits each of them to use the
other's property for the flow of storm water over their property. The Storm Water
Easement Agreement requires each party to comply with all laws and regulations, all
applicable requirements of the Colorado Discharge Permit System-Stormwater Permit,
and the requirements of the Kodak Colorado Division Storm Water Management Plan.
The Application does not discuss the implications of these requirements. Moreover,
there is nothing in the Application to assure Carestream that the Applicant has
considered any of the issues related to storm water discharge over Carestream's
property,that the Applicant has an adequate spill prevention and containment plan or the
fact that the Poudre River may be contaminated if there is an oil spill at the Facility. The
Application says only that the development of the site will use the existing storm water
facilities and not impede the historical flow routes.
There are a number of statements made in the Application that are inaccurate or
misleading. For example:
(1) Page 1 of the Map submitted with the Application mistakenly represents that the
two cooling towers on the Carestream property are abandoned and that the building to the east
•
aus_AEw333499.I
•
Sherman & Howard L.L.C.
Mr.Tom Patio, Planner
Weld County Department of Planning Services
May 2, 2012
Page 5
of the towers is not in use. The towers and building are integral components of Carestream's
power plant operation which serves its manufacturing activities on the South Parcel.
(2) Applicant also states that adequate roadway and rail infrastructure has been
established to serve the existing and new uses within the "Industrial Park". Carestream and
Great Western Railway (an affiliate of WR) are presently negotiating a license for Great
Western Railway to use Carestream's railroad tracks to accommodate the proposed rail traffic
contemplated by the Application, but that license is not yet in place. We would also point out
that Applicant has not specified which roads the 7,800 gallon tanker trucks will use to deliver
the crude oil. Only certain roads within the former Kodak Campus are intended and designed to
support heavy loads. In 2007 Kodak granted Carestream easements on roads throughout the
former Kodak Campus. These easement agreements include obligations for maintenance and
repair of the roads which could be significantly increased by heavy tanker trucks using the
roads. Carestream is also concerned that tanker trucks making 14 round trips spread out
throughout the day(Application, paragraph 5) will adversely affect Carestream's ability to cross
• from the parcel immediately south of the Facility to its manufacturing plant.
In conclusion, the Application is lacking the necessary detail for the County to analyze
its compliance with the Code or for Carestream to determine what effect the Facility will have
on Carestream's operations on its property. The activity contemplated by Applicant at the new
Facility is not designed to fit within the complex system of easement and other agreements
between Kodak and Carestream which were intended to serve their manufacturing processes on
the former Kodak Campus.
V my yours,
Blaik
JB/vlh
cc: Julie Lewis, Carestream Health, Inc.
Mark Caton, Carestream Health, Inc.
Chris Schmachtenberger, Carestream Health, Inc.
Alex Yeros,Windsor Renewal I LLC
Bruce Bowden,Musket Corporation
•
BUS_RE\4333499.I
-- ..... __. ... .. .-.-_-- EXHIBITA
_ � . _
1 •
I I
'
t
i 4:
1
r - ; i -----'i......�.
PROPERTY
I /
. •
\•i i" \, i
I . 1 1 +I-/ :1- I 1
•� i I
\* ST(�py.
0 i , ,\� %(RimV
• ' I
4....\\
\ 1
i
•
0 i
I N
KCD O
`WINDSOR COLORADO •
PARCEL B
•
J-R ENGINEERING
April 24, 2012 •
Lauren Light
Weld County Department of Health and Environment
1555 North 17th Street
Greeley, CO 80631
Re: USR 12-0005 Sewage System Variance Request per Article IX of the Weld County
Code
Dear Ms. Light:
On behalf of Musket Corporation the applicant for the above mentioned Use By Special Review
Application 12-0005 we are requesting a variance to Weld County Code Section 30-2-40 G(3)
"Except as provided in the Chapter, no individual sewage disposal system permit shall be issued
to any person when the subject dwelling, place of business or institution is located within four
• hundred (400) fee of a sewer line of a municipality or special district which provides public
sewer service, except where such sewer service to the structure is not feasible in the
determination of the municipality or special district."
The Town of Windsor is the owner and operator of the centralized sanitary sewer located within
400 feet of the project location 2030 Howard Smith Avenue East. At this time of application
review the Town of Windsor has declined to provide sanitary sewer service to this property due
to the property being outside of their Town Limits. Therefore to serve this project JR
Engineering requests that an ISDS permit be issued. Other alternatives would be to design a
sanitary sewer holding tank which could be pumped out on a regular basis since the facility will
have between 3 and 5 employees during regular business hours that will generate minimal
holding volume. Other alternatives include no sanitary sewer services which will cause a denial
of our project.
The project lease site comprises of approximately 9 acres. Directly east of the planned
improvements (see attached site plan) as shown on the USR 12-0005 application adequate room
exists to construct an ISDS system. This portion of the site has a gentle slope to the south. Per
the geotechnical report dated February 3, 2012 by Earth Engineering Consultants the first 10 feet
of soil consists of sandy lean clay/clayey sand. It is anticipated that an acceptable percolation
rate can be achieved of around 30 minutes per inch. The water depth identified during drilling
was at 7.5 feet therefore adequate 4 feet of separation can occur between the leach field and
ground water. Currently this location is within the John Law Ditch Special Flood Hazard Area
also known as the 100 year flood plain. Therefore our system will be designed to meet Weld
• County ISDS flood plain regulations. The location of the proposed ISDS system allows for
EXHIBIT
7200 South Alton Way,Suite C100,Centennial,CO 80112
303-740-9393•Fax.303-721-9019•www jrengineenng.com
LISA, -__r•.y
• Page 2
adequate separation from physical features. An ISDS system will not cause any additional risk
to the public or harm to the environment.
The purpose for the ISDS request is solely due to the denial of access to the existing centralized
sanitary sewer system owned and operated by the Town of Windsor.
We appreciated you consideration to our request.
Sincerely,
Michael Brake, PE, PLS
Client Manager on behalf of JR Engineering
Attachments
• Cc: Bruce Bowden, Musket Corporation
•
a., —
r.
. •00hlea0�_3,5rI• JNIi�'JNI`.�N3 lit Si _ .._..... - —. •._ 1VNINN31
... -.._.--- 1A30(183 SOSONN5 •
• — —----.
ri_;, s�
__________II___ rte . `O• ."' —46�•
_ 11 ; Seal _� . 1(
1 le: t i, -YI .t ' .er f _.-
r ,
-..r-Iii),.�r
V) `
g.
OQ
.\.. .\\ i II ! 4. • .
0 '
•I
/I •• - •, .
.
i . ;. r.:j
•
• -•
•tb i_
y
-.r._.._._ ..........:.:..... ......�--.._._-- ., ,_....r - .is — ":."2-..:.-..:•".-......-.........•
............
.. -_.. ....,_ ... "--..,..'.' —r—in - y•
• -i WNW HUM OYYMON
1
•
0
• ig6i PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
1111H STREET, P.O. BOX 758
t , GREELEY, COLORADO 80632
WEBSITE: WWW.CO.WELD.CO.US
��/U� PHONE: (970) 304-6496
C O U NV"' FAX: (970) 304-6497
April 19, 2012
JR Engineering
Attention: Mike Brake
7200 S Alton Way
Suite C100
Centennial, CO 80112
Re: Flood Hazard Development Permit application (FHDP-766) — Crude Oil Transloading Facility
Dear Mr. Brake,
As a participant in FEMA's National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP), Weld County is required by
FEMA to ensure that any development (as defined by FEMA) occurring in a designated 100-year
floodplain or floodway is compliant with FEMA, Colorado Water Conservation Board, and Weld County
floodplain regulations. The intent of the floodplain regulations is to ensure that development occurs in a
manner that keeps proposed development safe from flood damage and does not adversely impact the
• health and safety of the public. The purpose of this FHDP Conditional Approval Letter is to provide the
applicant with a brief history of the floodplain issues involved with the proposed project and to make the
applicant aware of specific requirements which must be satisfied in order for Weld County and this
proposed project to remain in good standing with the NFIP requirements. Failure to abide by the
floodplain regulations and requirements may result in a violation case being brought before the Weld
County Board of County Commissioners and potential fines.
The Weld County Public Works Department has reviewed the requested Flood Hazard Development
Permit (FHDP) application for the construction of a crude oil transloading facility on the former Kodak
property. The current FHDP application can be conditionally approved at this time based on the
comments and requirements below.
COMMENTS
Applicant: Musket Corporation
Attention: Bruce Bowden
10601 N Pennsylvania Ave
Oklahoma City, OK 73120
Request: Flood Hazard Development Permit number 766 for the construction of a crude oil
transloading facility in the I-1 (Industrial) Zone
Legal Description: Generally located in part of the SW1/4, Section 26, T6N, R67W of the 6th P.M.,
Weld County, Colorado
Property Location: Generally located north of Kodak Drive and east of Howard Smith Avenue,
• Windsor, CO
EXHIBIT
Page 1M5
P MtLANNING-DEVELOPMENT REVIEVJ\FHDP-Flood Hazard Development PertnilVfi6 Muskeg Trensloatl FaciliryTHDF'-766 Musket Transload
2012.tloa
LtSQt2-0005
• FIRM Community 080266-605D dated September 27, 1991 and superceded by the FEMA
Panel Map No. approved Physical Map Revision for the John Law Ditch dated December 14,
2009
Parcel Number: 0807-26-2-00-018
Public Works Department
Project History
The applicant submitted a FHDP application for review on January 13, 2012 by the applicant's
engineer, Mike Brake—JR Engineering. The applicant's engineer was notified via email that additional
information was needed. Revised information regarding the hydraulic modeling was submitted by the
applicant's engineer on February 2, 2012. An email from the applicant's engineer was received on
February 23, 2012 indicating that the original submittal was being expanded from 2 bays to 4. The
expansion required additional fill to be placed and therefore new modeling was required to show the
impact of the fill. The revised mapping, modeling, and narrative was resubmitted by the applicant's
engineer on March 1, 2012. The mapping and modeling was reviewed for completeness and it was
determined that the mapping and HEC-RAS model files needed to be revised. The applicant's
engineer provided revised mapping and modeling on March 15, 2012.
The application was signed by Alex Yeros, applicant's agent. The application was submitted in support
of the construction of a crude oil transloading facility to be located at the Eastman Kodak Plant in
Windsor, CO (located in unincorporated Weld County). The narrative and work maps were stamped,
signed, and dated by Jason Tarry, P.E. Number 41795.
Proiect Description
The project location is located partially within the John Law Ditch Special Flood Hazard Area (SFHA),
•
also known as the 100-year floodplain. The project location is designated as Zone AE and Zone AO
(shallow flooding) on the Physical Map Revision Floodplain Maps. The revised floodplain maps update
the original John Law Ditch floodplain shown on Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) Panel 080266-
0605D. These floodplain designations indicate there are published base flood elevations (BFEs) on the
FEMA approved Physical Map Revision dated December 14, 2009. All FIRMs are prepared,
distributed, managed, and revised by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA).
The project location falls entirely within the area studied by Anderson Consulting Engineers (ACE) in
the 2009 John Law Ditch Physical Map Revision. The original ACE HEC-RAS model completed by
ACE was used as a starting point for modeling the impact of the proposed project. Because the ACE
model does not run in HEC-RAS version 4.1 due to a problem with the definition lateral wiers, the
portion of the ACE model that was pertinent to the proposed project was cut out and utilized as the
duplicate effective model (the applicant's engineer mistakenly identified the duplicate effective model as
the corrected effective model) . The duplicate effective model extends from station 5030 to 7185 of the
Kodak Lpath as modeled in the ACE model. The duplicate effective model shows that water surface
elevations match to within 0.04 feet of the ACE model.
The applicant's engineer then modified the duplicate effective model by adding three new cross
sections through the proposed project area. The model containing the additional cross section became
the corrected effective model (mistakenly referred to as the existing conditions model by the applicant's
engineer). The additional cross sections were placed at stations 5680, 5870, and 5950. The additional
cross sections include the pertinent obstructions and ineffective flow areas that are based on existing
structures at those locations.
The applicant's engineer then modified the corrected effective model to show the proposed grading
• which includes additional fill around the existing tank containment structure, a four lane access ramp
west of the existing tanks, and an elevated pad south of the existing tanks for an office trailer. The
Page 2 of 5
M:PLANNING-DEVELOPMENT REVIEIMFHDP-Flood Hazard Development Permit\766 Musket Transload FaulityTHDP-766 Musket Transload Faulity Conditional Approval 04-19-
2012 does
• modified corrected effective model became the proposed conditions model. The FHDP drawing for the
unloading bays shows the BFE to be 4750.7 feet NAVD-88, In order to be compliant with the
CWCB's critical facility rule, the transload facility has be a minimum of two feet above the BFE. The
proposed fill is projected to be at an elevation of 4753.4 feet NAVD-88. The addition of the proposed
fill to the floodplain creates a maximum rise of approximately 0.3 feet. On April 18, 2012,
representatives from Windsor Renewal 1, LLC provided a letter stating they will accept a rise of up to
0.3 feet on their adjacent property.
The FHDP drawing and the pre-construction elevation certificate shows the office trailer associated
with the transload facility is proposed to be at a BFE of 4750.3 feet NAVD-88. The lowest and
highest adjacent grade for the office trailer is proposed to be at an elevation of 4752.0 feet NAVD-88.
The floor of the office trailer is proposed to be at an elevation of 4754.2 feet NAVD-88. In order to
be compliant with the CWCB's critical facility rule, the transload facility has be a minimum of two feet
above the BFE.
The FHDP application includes the following documentation:
1. FHDP Application (Page 6)
2. Letter dated January 12, 2012 describing the impact of the proposed 2 bay transload facility.
Letter is stamped, dated, and signed by Jason Tarry, P.E. #41795.
3. Letter dated February 29, 2012 describing the impact of the revising the transload facility from
the original 2 bay facility to a 4 bay facility. Letter is stamped, dated, and signed by Jason
Tarry, P.E. #41795.
4. Copy of the FHDP Submittal Checklist
5. Special Warranty Deed for the property
6. Copy of pre-construction elevation certificate for the office trailer that has been stamped,
• signed, and dated by Michael S Brake, PLS#28262
7. FHDP Drawing for the office trailer that has been stamped, signed, and dated by Jason M Tarry,
P.E. #41795
8. FHDP Drawing for the unloading facility that has been stamped, signed, and dated by Jason M
Tarry, P.E. #41795
9. FHDP Drawing showing the overall site layout that has been stamped, signed, and dated by
Jason M Tarry, P.E. #41795
10. Copy of Broe Letter dated April 18, 2012 accepting the rise caused by the Musket Transload
facility
11. Copy of the electronic HEC-RAS and CAD files
Weld County added the following documentation to the file:
1. Copy of a floodplain and vicinity map showing the John Law Ditch floodplain in relation to the
2008 aerial photograph
2. Copy of the FIRMette showing the proposed location of the transload facility in relation to the
John Law Ditch Floodplain
3. Copies of correspondence from Building, Planning, and Health Departments
4. Copies of email correspondence
Please refer to the REQUIREMENTS section of this memorandum for further instructions.
Department of Planning Services
The property is zoned Industrial (I-1) and has historically been part of the Eastman Kodak Company
corporate campus. There is an existing Amended Site Plan Review permit for the entire campus area
not previously annexed into the Town of Windsor.
• At a minimum, the property will be required to establish a legal description for the area defined for the
transload facility. This action will require, at a minimum, a Recorded Exemption or alternatively be part
Page 3 of 5
M:\PLANNING-DEVELOPMENT REVIEW\FHDP-Flood Hazard Development PermiN66 Musket Transload Facility FHDP-765 Musket Transload Facility Conditional Approval 04-19-
2012 dccx
• of a planned unit development (PUD), with the latter land use application taking up to two years to
complete.
The defined area will require a deed to establish the legal description. Given that this newly defined
property is Zone Industrial, a new site plan review (SPR) application shall be submitted to permit the
proposed transload facility. With the approval and recording of the new plat for the SPR, the property
owner shall request a vacation of AmSPR-293 for the area defined by the RE plat and associated deed.
Please refer to the REQUIREMENTS section of this memorandum for further instructions.
Building Department
Please refer to the REQUIREMENTS section of this memorandum for further instructions.
Department of Environmental Health Services
Environmental Health Services has reviewed this proposal. Upon review of our records for the
identified parcel numbers, there is not an individual sewage disposal system (ISDS) associated with
this request. It appears that water and sewer will be provided from a system previously utilized by
Kodak.
As there is not an ISDS that is associated with this expansion, this department has no concern with this
proposal. If a septic system is installed in the future the system shall comply with the Weld County
ISDS flood plain regulations. No septic systems shall be installed within the floodway
Please refer to the REQUIREMENTS section of this memorandum for further instructions.
• REQUIREMENTS:
Public Works Department
1. In order to verify the foundation elevations, prior to the foundation inspection for the office, an
Elevation Certificate for the building under construction shall be provided to Public Works. The
Building under Construction Elevation Certificate shall have an original wet stamp and be signed
and dated by a registered Professional Land Surveyor licensed in the state of Colorado. Photos
of the office trailer shall be included with the elevation certificate.
2. In order to verify the As-Built elevations, prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for the
office, an As-Built Elevation Certificate shall be provided to Public Works. The As-Built Elevation
Certificate shall have an original wet stamp and be signed and dated by a registered Professional
Land Surveyor licensed in the state of Colorado. Photos of the office trailer shall be included with
the As-built elevation certificate.
3. An as-built survey covering the extent of fill and grading shall be provided to Public Works prior to
the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for the office trailer. The as-built survey shall have an
original wet stamp, and be signed and dated by a registered Professional Land Surveyor licensed in
the State of Colorado.
4. Any fill material placed in the floodplain must be placed in a method which will withstand the
erosional forces associated with the 100-year flood event.
5. Any future proposed development activities on this parcel that fall within the FEMA-defined 100-
year floodplain shall not cause a rise in the BFE on adjacent or upstream properties or structures.
6. Any future activities must be approved through an amended flood hazard development permit.
7. Any future structures or development activities must be in compliance with the Federal, State, and
Weld County floodplain regulations in effect at the time.
Department of Planning Services
• 1. All existing structures on the RE parcel must be appropriately permitted for the use of the building
or structure.
Page 4 of 5
M.\PLANNING-DEVELOPMENT REVIENAFHDP-Flood Hazard Development Permi0766 Musket Transload FaulitpFHDP-766 Musket Transload Facility Conditional Approval 04-19-
2012 docx
• 2. Stockpiling of any material in the floodway is not permitted due to the highly erosional nature of the
placement of the material.
3. Installation of utilities shall comply with applicable ordinances and codes.
4. Construction shall comply with all requirements and conditions of the Weld County Building Code.
5. All proposed or existing structures will or do meet the minimum setback and offset requirements for
the zone district in which the property is located.
6. Any future structures or uses on site must obtain the appropriate zoning and building permits.
7. Transient equipment including temporary structures shall be appropriately anchored.
Building Department
1. Fill used to elevate equipment within the floodplain shall be compacted to resist erosion
created by flood waters. Fill shall be certified by a Professional Engineer and compaction
reports are required to be submitted with As Built Elevation Certification.
2. A building permit will be required for any new construction, alteration, or addition to any buildings or
structures on the property. It is recommended that a code analysis be done on the project by a
design professional with experience in this area.
3. A building permit application must be completed and two complete sets of plans including
engineered foundation plans bearing the wet stamp of a Colorado registered architect or engineer
must be submitted for review. A geotechnical engineering report performed by a registered State of
Colorado engineer shall be required.
4. Buildings and structures shall conform to the requirements of the various codes adopted at
the time of permit application. Currently the following has been adopted by Weld County:
2006 International Building Code; 2006 International Mechanical Code; 2006 International
Plumbing Code: 2006 International Energy Code; 2006 International Fuel Gas Code; 2011
National Electrical Code; 2003 ANSI 117.1 Accessibility Code and Chapter 29 of the Weld
• County Code
5. Electrical systems, equipment and components, and heating, ventilating, air conditioning
and plumbing appliances, plumbing fixtures, duct systems, and other service equipment
shall be elevated or shall be waterproofed to prevent the entry of floodwaters into the
equipment a minimum of one foot above the regulatory flood datum (BFE + 1 ft).
Department of Environmental Health Services
1. The future installation or repair of any septic system within the 100-year flood plain shall comply
with the Weld County I.S.D.S. flood plain regulations.
2. In accordance with the Colorado I.S.D.S. Regulations, no septic systems shall be installed within
the floodway.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
The Weld County Public Works Department conditionally approves this FHDP application at this
time.
Sincerely,
Clay Kimmi, P.E., CFM
Weld County Public Works
Original: Bruce Bowden,Applicant
CC to File. FHOP466
• PC by Post: Mlhe Brake,JR Engineering
Lin Dodge,Panning
Kim Ogle,manning
Tom Pork:.Planning
Frank Piacentmo,Panning
Lauren Lignt Ernnienmenlal Ne¢/M
Page 5 of 5
M'.\PLANNING-DEVELOPMENT REVIEWFHDP-Flood Hazard Development Pennit\766 Musket Transload FaolityfHDP-766 Musket Transload Facility Conditional Approval 04-19-
2012.docx
Great Western Railway of Colorado, LLC
•
252 Clayton Street,41' Floor
Denver,Colorado 80206TtiONY 1'"_
Telephone:(303)398-4529 c o i.,o R a D o
Facsimile: (866)351-9508
www.omnitrax.com
April 18, 2012
Clay Kimmi P.E., CFM, Drainage & Floodplain Engineer
Weld County Colorado - Department of Planning Services
PO Box 758
Greeley, CO 80632
Email: ckimmi(Wco.weld.co.us
RE: Weld County Flood Hazard Development Permit for Musket Project Located in the
Great Western Industrial Park near Windsor, Weld County, Colorado.
Dear Mr. Kimmi:
The Great Western Railway of Colorado (GWRCO) is aware of Musket Corporation's plans
involving the location of a new Musket facility within the Great Western Industrial Park
(GWIP).
• The Musket project, which is located within the interior of the Loop Track area, is required
by Weld County Code to mitigate potential risk of flooding to its facility by locating out of
the floodplain. The Musket design mitigation plan displaces flood waters onto neighboring
property owned by Windsor Renewal I, a subsidiary of Broe Real Estate. As a
consequence of the Musket design, the floodwater on the adjacent Broe/GWRCO property
experiences a rise in the flood elevation of approximately 0.30 feet.
This is to advise that Broe/GWRCO will accept the aforementioned rise in flood elevation
on its property.
Sincerely,
/eSeril
Kendall (Ken) Koff
Vice President - Engineering Services
OmniTRAX, Inc. for Great Western Railway of Colorado, LLC
cc: Michael Brake, PE, PLS
Rich Montgomery
Clay Drake EXHIBIT
• Glenn Hay
' 12. •• •-
Windsor Trans Loading Station
•
Floodplain Assessment
Duplicate Effective Model HEC-RAS Results Summary*
Kodak Lpath Q Total Original Model Duplicate Effective Model Change in W.S.
River Station (cfs) W.S. Elevation W.S. Elevation Elevation (FT)
7185 1422.51 4760.10 4760.13 0.03
7045 1422.51 4751.70 4751.75 0.05
6050 1474.53 4751.21 4751.26 0.05
5760 1474.53 4750.13 4750.14 0.01
5480 1474.53 4748.31 4748.36 0.05
5320 1474.53 4745.43 4745.47 0.04
5030 1474.53 4744.68 4744.71 0.03
*Results taken from John Law Ditch LOMR,dated December 27,2007. Duplicate Effective model contains errors.
Corrected Effective Model HEC-RAS Results Summary"
Kodak Lpath Q Total Duplicate Effective Model Corrected Effective Model Change in W.S.
River Station (cfs) W.S. Elevation W.S. Elevation Elevation(FT)
7185 1422.51 4760.13 4760.12 -0.01
7045 1422.51 4751.75 4751.71 -0.04
6050 1474.53 4751.26 4751.22 -0.04
5760 1474.53 4750.14 4750.11 -0.03
5480 1474.53 4748.36 4748.33 -0.03
5320 1474.53 4745.47 4745.44 -0.03
5030 1474.53 4744.71 4744.68 -0.03
*Flow rates adjusted in Corrected Effective Model to match LOMR results. Duplicate Effective Model contains errors.
•
Existin Conditions Model HEC-RAS Results Summary
Kodak Lpath Q Total Corrected Effective Model Existing Conditions Change in W.S.
River Station (cfs) W.S. Elevation W.S. Elevation Elevation(FT)
7185 1422.51 4760.12 4760.12 0.00
7045 1422.51 4751.71 4751.79 0.08
6050 1474.53 4751.22 4751.40 0.18
5950 1474.53 - 4750.71 -
5870 1474.53 - 4750.53 -
5760 1474.53 4750.11 4750.37 0.26
5680 1474.53 - 4750.16 -
5480 1474.53 4748.33 4748.33 0.00
5320 1474.53 4745.44 4745.44 0.00
5030 1474.53 4744.68 4744.68 0.00
Proposed Conditions Model HEC-RAS Results Summary
Existing Conditions Proposed Conditions Change in W.S.
River Station IQ Total (CFS) W.S. Elevation W.S. Elevation Elevation(FT)
7185 1422.51 4760.12 4760.12 0.00
7045 1422.51 4751.79 4751.67 -0.12
6050 1474.53 4751.40 4751.18 -0.22
5950 1474.53 4750.71 4750.74 0.03
5870 1474.53 4750.53 4750.58 0.05
5760 1474.53 4750.37 4750.32 -0.05
5680 1474.53 4750.16 4749.83 -0.33
5480 1474.53 4748.33 4748.33 0.00
5320 1474.53 4745.44 4745.44 0.00
• 5030 1474.53 4744.68 4744.68 0.00
JR Engineering 2/21/2012
X:\3960000.all\3967700\ExcelW EC-RAS Summary Table-4-Lane.xls 2:25 PM
• 4-Lane Proposed Conditions Model HEC-RAS Results Summa
Existing Conditions 4-Lane Option Change in W.S.
River Station IQ Total(CFS) W.S. Elevation W.S. Elevation Elevation(FT)
7185 1422.51 4760.12 4760.12 0.00
7045 1422.51 4751.79 4751.69 -0.10
6050 1474.53 4751.40 4751.21 -0.19
5950 1474.53 4750.71 4750.99 0.28
5870 1474.53 4750.53 4750.74 0.21
5760 1474.53 4750.37 4750.39 0.02
5680 1474.53 4750.16 4749.84 -0.32
5480 1474.53 4748.33 4748.33 0.00
5320 1474.53 4745.44 4745.44 0.00
5030 1474.53 4744.68 4744.68 0.00
4-Lane Proposed Conditions NO KODAK BUILDING Model HEC-RAS Results Summary
Existing Conditions 4-Lane Option Change in W.S.
River Station IQ Total(CFS) W.S. Elevation W.S. Elevation Elevation(FT)
7185 1422.51 4760.12 4760.12 0.00
7045 1422.51 4751.79 4750.96 -0.83
6050 1474.53 4751.40 4750.41 -0.99
5950 1474.53 4750.71 4750.31 -0.40
5870 1474.53 4750.53 4750.15 -0.38
5760 1474.53 4750.37 4749.42 -0.95
5680 1474.53 4750.16 4748.47 -1.69
5480 1474.53 4748.33 4747.85 -0.48
5320 1474.53 4745.44 4745.26 -0.18
. 5030 1474.53 4744.68 4744.68 0.00
•
JR Engineering 2/21/2012
X:\3960000.all\3967700\Excel\HEC-RAS Summary Table-4-Lane.xls 2:25 PM
• AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DIVISION
PRELIMINARY ANALYSIS
PERMIT NUMBER: 12WE1016 DATE: April 11, 2012
APPLICANT: Musket Corp
REVIEW ENGINEER: Michael J. Harris, P.E. CONTROL ENGINEER: R. K. Hancock III
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Musket Corporation is proposing to construct and operate a transloading facility, located at 9952
Eastman Park Drive, Windsor, Weld County, CO. The company has applied to transload the following:
total crude oil and condensate not to exceed 245,280,000 gallons per year; and condensate not to
exceed 61,320,000 gallons per year. Estimated emissions are listed in the following table.
• SUMMARY OF EMISSIONS in Tons/Year
Pollutant Emissions
Nitrogen Oxides 11.3 tons per year
Carbon Monoxide 28.2 tons per year
Volatile Organic Compounds 55.2 tons per year
Volatile Organic Compounds (fugitive) 4.6 tons per year
SOURCE CLASSIFICATION
For permitting purposes, this source is considered a synthetic minor source for New Source Review
(NSR) applicability and Title V applicability, since permitted emissions will be less than 100 tons per year
for all criteria pollutants and less than 10 tons per year for any hazardous air pollutant (HAP) and 25 tons
per year of total HAP's. Emissions could exceed 100 tons per year of Volatile Organic Compounds
(VOCs), if Musket Corp did not accept federally enforceable limits on production throughput and install
and operate air pollution control equipment. The company has made an application for issuance of a
federally enforceable synthetic minor source permit limiting the potential to emit to below the major
source thresholds.
The Division has determined that the proposed source will comply with all applicable regulations and
standards of the Colorado Air Quality control commission and has made a preliminary determination of
approval of the application.
S
Page 1 of 1
D RAFT
STATE OF COLORADO
•
o,•co
COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENT
AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DIVISION
TELEPHONE: (303) 692-3150 `.
',.•1876*
CONSTRUCTION PERMIT
PERMIT NO: 12WE1016
INITIAL APPROVAL
DATE ISSUED:
ISSUED TO: Musket Corporation
THE SOURCE TO WHICH THIS PERMIT APPLIES IS DESCRIBED AND LOCATED AS FOLLOWS:
Condensate and crude oil transloading facility, known as the Windsor Loading Facility,owned
and operated by Musket Corp, located at 9952 Eastman Park Drive,Windsor,Weld County,
Colorado.
THE SPECIFIC EQUIPMENT OR ACTIVITY SUBJECT TO THIS PERMIT INCLUDES THE FOLLOWING:
• Facility AIRS Description /Activity
Equipment ID Point
Two (2) Condensate LACT tanks to receive condensate from tank
2 - Condensate 001 trucks and discharge to rail cars—vented to a flare for emission control.
LACT tanks Tank capacity is 16,075 gallons each. (Manufacturer, model and SN :
TBD)
Two (2) internal floating roof storage tanks to receive crude oil from
2 -Crude Oil 002 LACT tanks and discharge to rail cars. Tank capacity is 948,614 gallons
storage tanks each. (Manufactured by Chicago Bridge and Iron, model no. 73-627OU,
serial numbers ST No. 1 and ST No. 2)
Six (6) crude oil LACT tanks to receive crude from tank trucks and
6 -Crude discharge to storage tanks (AIRS 002) or to rail cars. -vented to a flare
003 for emission control. Tank capacity is 16,075 gallons each
LACT tanks P tY
(Manufacturer, model and SN : TBD)
One (1) drain tank to collect rail car contents and is vented to a flare for
Drain tank 004 emission control. Tank volume is 16,075 gallons. (Manufacturer, model
and SN : TBD)
Flare 005 John Zink flare, model LHT-3-24-30-X-1/10-1/10-X, rated at 13 MM
BTU/hr. Used to control emissions from transfers and tanks.
Crude Transfer Crude oil transfers to LACT tanks (AIRS 003)
(Tanker truck to 006
6 LACT tanks) Vented to a flare for emission control.
• EXHIBIT
I W
AIRS ID 123/9581/ WR12. tom,
Musket Corporation
Permit No. 12WE1016
Initial Approval Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment
• page 2 Air Pollution Control Division
Facility AIRS Description/Activity
Equipment ID Point
Condensate
Transfer Condensate transfers from tank trucks to LACT tanks (AIRS 001).
007
(Tanker truck to Vented to a flare for emission control.
2 LACT tanks)
Crude Tansfer Crude oil transfer from storage tanks (AIRS 002) to railcars.
(2 storage tanks 008 Vented to a flare for emission control.
to railcar)
Condensate
Transfer Condensate transfers from LACT tanks(AIRS 001)to railcars
009
(2 LACT tanks Vented to a flare for emission control. .
to railcar)
Crude Transfer
(6 LACT tanks 010 Crude oil transfers to storage tanks (AIRS 002) and/or railcars
to 2 storage Vented to a flare for emission control.
tanks)
Fugitive 011 Fugitive emissions from equipment leaks.
• emissions
THIS PERMIT IS GRANTED SUBJECT TO ALL RULES AND REGULATIONS OF THE COLORADO AIR
QUALITY CONTROL COMMISSION AND THE COLORADO AIR POLLUTION PREVENTION AND
CONTROL ACT C.R.S.(25-7-101 et seq),TO THOSE GENERAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS INCLUDED
IN THIS DOCUMENT AND THE FOLLOWING SPECIFIC TERMS AND CONDITIONS:
REQUIREMENTS TO SELF-CERTIFY FOR FINAL APPROVAL
1. YOU MUST notify the Air Pollution Control Division (the Division) no later than fifteen days
after commencement of the permitted operation or activity by submitting a Notice of
Startup form to the Division. The Notice of Startup form may be downloaded online at
www.cdphe.state.co.us/ap/downloadforms.html. Failure to notify the Division of startup of the
permitted source is a violation of Air Quality Control Commission (AQCC) Regulation No. 3, Part
B, Section III.G.1 and can result in the revocation of the permit.
2. Within one hundred and eighty days (180) after commencement of operation, compliance with the
conditions contained on this permit shall be demonstrated to the Division. It is the permittee's
responsibility to self certify compliance with the conditions. Failure to demonstrate compliance
within 180 days may result in revocation of the permit or enforcement action by the Division.
Information on how to certify compliance was mailed with the permit or can be obtained from the
Division. (Reference: Regulation No. 3, Part B, II.G.2)
3. This permit shall expire if the owner or operator of the source for which this permit was issued: (i)
does not commence construction/modification or operation of this source within 18 months after
either, the date of issuance of this construction permit or the date on which such construction or
• activity was scheduled to commence as set forth in the permit application associated with this
permit; (ii) discontinues construction for a period of eighteen months or more; (iii) does not
complete construction within a reasonable time of the estimated completion date. The Division
AIRS ID 123/9581
Musket Corporation
Permit No. 12WE1016
Initial Approval Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment
• page 3 Air Pollution Control Division
may grant extensions of the deadline per Regulation No. 3, Part B, III.F.4.b. (Reference:
Regulation No. 3, Part B, III.F.4.)
4. Within one hundred and eighty days (180) after commencement of operation, the operator shall
complete all initial compliance testing and sampling as required in this permit and submit the results
to the Division as part of the self-certification process. (Reference: Regulation No. 3, Part B, Section
III.E.)
5. The applicant shall develop an operating and maintenance (O&M) plan, along with a
recordkeeping format, that outlines how the applicant will maintain compliance on an ongoing
basis with the requirements of this permit. The O&M plan shall commence at startup.Within
one hundred and eighty days (180) after commencement of operation, the applicant shall submit
the O&M plan to the Division. Failure to submit an acceptable operating and maintenance plan
could result in denial of the final approval permit (Reference: Regulation No. 3, Part B, III.E.)
6. Within one hundred and eighty days (180) after commencement of operation, the permit number
and AIRS ID number shall be marked on the subject equipment for ease of identification.
(Reference: Regulation No. 3, Part B, III.E.) (State only enforceable)
7. The manufacturer, model number and serial number of the subject equipment shall be provided to
the Division within fifteen days (15)after commencement of operation. This information shall be
included on the Notice of Startup (NOS) submitted for the equipment. (Reference: Regulation No.
3, Part B, III.E.).
• EMISSION LIMITATIONS AND RECORDS
8. Emissions of air pollutants shall not exceed the following limitations (as calculated using the
emission factors included in the Notes to Permit Holder section of this permit). Monthly records of
the actual emission rates shall be maintained by the applicant and made available to the Division
for inspection upon request. (Reference: Regulation No. 3, Part B, Section II.A.4).
•
AIRS ID 123/9581
Musket Corporation
Permit No. 12WE1016
Initial Approval Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment
• page 4 Air Pollution Control Division
Monthly Limits: Based on 31 day month
Facility Equipment AIRS Tons per Month Emission Type
ID Point NO, VOC CO
(2) Condensate 001 0.17 — Point
LACT tanks
(2)Crude 002 0.16 Point
storage tanks
(6) Crude 003 ---- 0.11 ---- Point
LACT tanks
Drain tank 004 0.001 Point
Flare 005 0.96 --- 2.40 Point
Crude transfer
(Tanker truck to 6 006 ---- 1.11 ---- Point
LACT tanks)
Condensate transfer
(Tanker truck to 2 007 0.48 Point
•
LACT tanks)
Crude transfer
(2 storage tanks to 008 ---- 1.11 ---- Point
railcar)
Condensate transfer
(2 LACT tanks to 009 -- 0.48 ---- Point
railcar)
Crude transfer
(2 LACT tanks to 2 010 ---- 1.11 ---- Point
storage tanks)
Fugitive emissions 011 0.39 Fugitive
Point 0.96 4.65 3.02
TOTAL
Fugitive ---- 0.39 ----
The monthly limits included in this permit were derived from the annual limits based on a 31-day
month. The owner or operator shall calculate monthly emissions based on the calendar month.
•
AIRS ID 123/9581
Musket Corporation
Permit No. 12WE1016
Initial Approval Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment
• page 5 Air Pollution Control Division
Annual Limits:
Facility Equipment AIRS Tons per Year Emission Type
ID Point NO. VOC CO
(2) Condensate 001 2.0 Point
LACT tanks
(2) Crude 002 1.8 -- Point
storage tanks
(6) Crude 003 1.2 Point
LACT tanks
Drain tank 004 ---- 0.01 Point
Flare 005 11.3 ---- 28.2 Point
Crude transfer
(Tanker truck to 6 006 ---- 13.0 Point
LACT tanks)
Condensate transfer
(Tanker truck to 2 007 5.6 ---- Point
LACT tanks)
Crude transfer
(2 storage tanks to 008 13.0 Point
•
railcar)
Condensate transfer
(2 LACT tanks to 009 5.6 ---- Point
railcar)
Crude transfer
(2 LACT tanks to 2 010 --- 13.0 Point
storage tanks)
Fugitive emissions 011 ---- 4.6 Fugitive
Point 11.3 55.2 28.2
TOTAL
Fugitive ---- 4.6
See "Notes to Permit Holder#4"for information on emission factors and methods used to calculate
limits.
During the first twelve (12) months of operation, compliance with both the monthly and yearly
emission limitations shall be required. After the first twelve(12)months of operation,compliance with
only the yearly limitation shall be required.
Compliance with the annual limits shall be determined by recording the facility's annual criteria
pollutant emissions, (including all HAPs above the de-minimis reporting level) from each emission
unit, on a rolling (12) month total. By the end of each month a new twelve-month total shall be
calculated based on the previous twelve months' data. The permit holder shall calculate monthly
emissions and keep a compliance record on site, or at a local field office with site responsibility,
for Division review. This rolling twelve-month total shall apply to all emission units, requiring an
• APEN, at this facility.
AIRS ID 123/9581
•
Musket Corporation
Permit No. 12WE1016
Initial Approval Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment
• page 6 Air Pollution Control Division
9. The emission points in the table below shall be maintained and operated with the control
equipment as listed. The uncontrolled emissions shall be reduced by at least the control
efficiencies listed. Operating parameters of the control equipment shall be identified in the
operating and maintenance plan. The identified operating parameters will replace the control
efficiency requirement in the final approval permit. (Reference: Regulation No.3, Part B, Section
III.E.).
Facility Equipment ID AIRS Control Controlled (1)Control
Point Device Emissions Efficiency
(2) Condensate LACT tanks 001 Flare VOC 97%
(2) Crude Internal
storage tanks 002 floating roof VOC 0
(6) Crude 003 Flare VOC 97%
LACT tanks
Drain tank 004 Flare VOC 97%
Flare 005 None
Crude transfer(Tanker truck 006 Flare VOC 97%
to 6 LACT tanks)
Condensate transfer
(Tanker truck to 2 LACT tanks) 007 Flare VOC 97%
• Crude transfer 008 Flare VOC 97%
(2 storage tanks to railcar)
Condensate transfer 009 Flare VOC 97%
(2 LACT tanks to railcar)
Crude transfer
(2 LACT tanks to 2 storage 010 Flare VOC 97%
tanks)
Fugitive emissions 011 None ---- ----
(1) Control efficiency for flare based on 99% capture and 98% destruction of VOCs
PROCESS LIMITATIONS AND RECORDS
10. This source shall be limited to the following maximum consumption, processing and/or operational
rates as listed below. Monthly records of the actual process rate shall be maintained by the
applicant and made available to the Division for inspection upon request. (Reference: Regulation
3, Part B, II.A.4).
I
AIRS ID 123/9581
Musket Corporation
Permit No. 12WE1016
Initial Approval Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment
• page 7 Air Pollution Control Division
Process/Consumption Limits
Annual Limit Monthly limit(31 days)
Process Parameter (gallons) (gallons)
crude oil and condensate
Facility combined shall not exceed 245,280,000 20,832,000
wide AND
condensate shall not exceed 61,320,000 5,208,000
The monthly limits included in this permit were derived from the annual limits based on a 31-day
month. The owner or operator shall calculate monthly emissions based on the calendar month.
During the first twelve(12) months of operation, compliance with both the monthly and yearly process
limitations shall be required. After the first twelve(12)months of operation, compliance with only the
yearly limitation shall be required.
Compliance with the yearly process limits shall be determined on a rolling twelve (12) month total.
By the end of each month a new twelve-month total is calculated based on the previous twelve
months' data. The permit holder shall calculate monthly process rate and keep a compliance
record on site or at a local field office with site responsibility, for Division review. .
STATE AND FEDERAL REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS
11. Visible emissions shall not exceed twenty percent(20%) opacity during normal operation of the
• source. During periods of startup, process modification, or adjustment of control equipment
visible emissions shall not exceed 30% opacity for more than six minutes in any sixty consecutive
minutes. (Reference: Regulation No. 1, Section II.A.1. &4.
12. This source is subject to the odor requirements of Regulation No. 2. (State only enforceable)
13. The two large storage tanks(AIRS ID 002) are subject to requirements to Control Emissions of
Volatile Organic Compounds as contained in Regulation No. 7, Section VI.B.2 "Storage of
petroleum liquid in tanks greater than 151,412 liters (40,000 gallons)" including but not limited to:
§VI.B.2.a. Storage of petroleum liquid in fixed roof tanks
VI.B.2.a.(i)(A) The tank has been equipped with a pontoon-type, or double-deck type,
floating roof or an internal floating cover which rests on the surface of the liquid contents
and which is equipped with a closure seal or seals to close the space between the edge
of the floating roof(or cover) and tank walls;
OR
VI.B.2.a.(i)(B) The tank has been equipped with a vapor gathering system capable of
collecting the petroleum liquid vapors discharged, together with a vapor recovery or
disposal system capable of processing such vapors so as to prevent their emission into
the atmosphere.
VI.B.2.a.(i)(C) Control devices shall meet the applicable requirements, including
recordkeeping, of Subsections IX.A.3.a,b,c, and e, and IX. A.8.a and b.
AIRS ID 123/9581
Musket Corporation
Permit No. 12WE1016
Initial Approval Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment
• page 8 Air Pollution Control Division
VI.B.2.a.(i)(D) The applicable EPA reference methods 1 through 4, and 25, of 40 CFR
Part 60 shall be used to determine the efficiency of control devices.
Vl.B.2.a.(i)(E)The owner or operator shall maintain records for at least two years of the
type, average monthly storage temperature, and true vapor pressure of all petroleum
liquids stored in tanks not equipped with an internal floating roof or cover or other control
pursuant to Regulation 7.VI.B.2.a.(i)(A) or(B) or 7.II.D.
VI.B.2.a.(ii) No owner or operator of a fixed-roof tank equipped with an internal floating
roof or cover shall permit the use of such tank unless:
VI.B.2.a.(ii)(A)The tank is maintained such that there are no visible holes, tears, or other
openings in the seal or any seal fabric or materials; and
VI.B.2.a.(ii)(B)All openings, except stub drains, are equipped with covers, lids, or seals
such that:
VI.B.2.a.(ii)(B)(1)The cover, lid, or seal is in the closed position at all times except when
in actual use;
VI.B.2.a.(ii)(B)(2)Automatic bleeder vents are closed at all times except when the roof is
floated off or landed on the roof leg supports;
VI.B.2.a.(ii)(B)(3) and Rim vents, if provided, are set to open when the roof is being
floated off the roof leg supports or at the manufacturer's recommended setting.
• 14. This source is subject to requirements to Control Emissions of Volatile Organic Compounds as
contained in Regulation No. 7, Section VI. "Storage and Transfer of Petroleum Liquid" including
but not limited to:
§VI.C.4. Transport Vehicles
§VI.C.4.a Rail cars shall be loaded only at facilities which allow for the following:
§VI.C.4.a(i)A submerged fill pipe which reaches within 15.24 com (6 in) of the bottom of
the tank or tank cars equipped for bottom loading.
§VI.C.4.a(ii) Vapor collection and/or disposal equipment designated and operated to
recover vapors displaced during the loading of the rail car.
§VI.C.4.a(iii)A vapor-tight seal around the tank car hatch and the loading equipment.
15. The petroleum transport trucks transferring products at Musket's Windsor site are subject to the
requirements contained in Regulation No. 7, Section VI. "Storage and Transfer of Petroleum
Liquid" including but not limited to::
§VI.C.4.b(i) Dry-break loading and unloading nozzles are used and are compatible with
those required at Musket's Windsor facility.
§VI.C.4.b(ii)Vapor recovery hoses are connected at all times during unloading or loading
of petroleum distillate.
•
AIRS ID 123/9581
Musket Corporation
Permit No. 12WE1016
Initial Approval Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment
• page 9 Air Pollution Control Division
§VI.C.4.b(iii)Transport trailers and vehicle tanks are operated and maintained to prevent
detectable hydrocarbon vapor loss during loading-and delivery at the
Musket's Windsor Facility.
§VI.C.4.b(iv) Compartment dome lids are closed and locked during transfers of
petroleum liquid. Such lids may be opened for the purpose of certifying the
accuracy of a delivery only prior to and after such delivery.
§VI.C.4.b(v) Hoses, couplings, and valves are maintained to prevent dripping, leaking, or
other liquid or vapor loss during loading or unloading.
16. This source is located in an ozone non-attainment or attainment-maintenance area and subject to the
Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT) requirements of Regulation Number 3, Part B,
III.D.2.b. Compliance with conditions 9, 10, 13, 14 and 15 were determined to be RACT.
OPERATING & MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENTS
17. Upon startup of these points, the applicant shall follow the operating and maintenance (O&M) plan
and record keeping format approved by the Division, or for new sources, the operating and
maintenance (O&M) plan and record keeping format submitted to the Division for review and
approval, in order to demonstrate compliance on an ongoing basis with the requirements of this
permit. Revisions to your O&M plan are subject to Division approval prior to implementation.
(Reference: Regulation No. 3, Part B,Section III_G.7.)
• COMPLIANCE TESTING AND SAMPLING
Initial Testing Requirements
18. Within 180 days of startup, the owner or operator shall demonstrate compliance with Condition
11, using EPA Method 9 to measure opacity from the flare (AIRS point 005)
This measurement shall consist of a minimum twenty-four consecutive readings taken at fifteen
second intervals over a six minute period. (Reference: Regulation No. 1, Section II.A.1 &4).
19. A source initial compliance test shall be conducted on the John Zink Flare (AIRS ID 005)to
measure the emission rate(s)for the pollutants listed below in order to demonstrate compliance
with 98% destruction of VOCs The test protocol must be in accordance with the requirements of
the Air Pollution Control Division Compliance Test Manual and shall be submitted to the Division
for review and approval at least thirty (30) days prior to testing. No compliance test shall be
conducted without prior approval from the Division. Any compliance test conducted to show
compliance with a monthly or annual emission limitation shall have the results projected up to the
monthly or annual averaging time by multiplying the test results by the allowable number of
operating hours for that averaging time (Reference: Regulation No. 3, Part B., Section III.G.3)
Volatile Organic Compounds using EPA approved methods.
20. A source initial compliance test shall be conducted on the VOC vapor collection system to
• demonstrate compliance with the 99% capture efficiency and to demonstrate that there is no
detectable vapor loss from the collection system (ie the system is leak free). Detectable vapor
loss is defined as a VOC concentration exceeding 10,000 ppm. Measurement for fugitive VOC
AIRS ID 123/9581
•
Musket Corporation
Permit No. 12WE1016
Initial Approval Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment
• page 10 Air Pollution Control Division
emissions from the collection system shall be made by Photo Ionization Detector(PID) or another
method approved by the Division. The test protocol must be in accordance with the requirements
of the Air Pollution Control Division Compliance Test Manual and shall be submitted to the
Division for review and approval at least thirty (30) days prior to testing. No compliance test shall
be conducted without prior approval from the Division. Any compliance test conducted to show
compliance with a monthly or annual emission limitation shall have the results projected up to the
monthly or annual averaging time by multiplying the test results by the allowable number of
operating hours for that averaging time (Reference: Regulation No. 3, Part B., Section III.G.3)
ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS
21. Within one hundred and eighty days (180) after commencement of operation, the operator shall
complete a hard count of components at the source and establish the number of components that
are operated in "gas service" and 'light oil" service. The operator shall submit the results to the
Division as part of the self-certification process to ensure compliance with emissions limits.
22. The permit number and AIRS ID number shall be marked on the subject equipment for ease of
identification. (Reference: Regulation No. 3, Part B, III.E.) (State only enforceable).
23. A Revised Air Pollutant Emission Notice(APEN) shall be filed: (Reference: Regulation No. 3, Part
A, Section II.C.)
a. Annually whenever a significant increase in emissions occurs as follows:
•
For any criteria pollutant:
For sources emitting less than 100 tons per year, a change in actual emissions of five
tons per year or more, above the level reported on the last APEN submitted; or
For volatile organic compounds (VOC) and nitrogen oxide (NOx) sources in an ozone
non-attainment area emitting less than 100 tons of VOC or nitrogen oxide per year, a
change in actual emissions of one ton per year or more or five percent, whichever is
greater, above the level reported on the last APEN submitted; or
For sources emitting 100 tons per year or more of a criteria pollutant, a change in
actual emissions of five percent or 50 tons per year or more, whichever is less, above the
level reported on the last APEN submitted; or
For sources emitting any amount of lead, a change in actual emissions, above the level
reported on the last APEN submitted, of fifty(50) pounds of lead
For any non-criteria reportable pollutant:
If the emissions increase by 50% or five (5)tons per year, whichever is less, above the
level reported on the last APEN submitted to the Division.
b. Whenever there is a change in the owner or operator of any facility, process, or activity; or
c. Whenever new control equipment is installed, or whenever a different type of control
• equipment replaces an existing type of control equipment; or
d. Whenever a permit limitation must be modified; or
AIRS ID 123/9581
Musket Corporation
Permit No. 12WE1016
Initial Approval Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment
• page 11 Air Pollution Control Division
e. No later than 30 days before the existing APEN expires.
24. Operating Permit(OP) requirements shall apply to this source at any such time that the facility
wide potential to emit equals or exceeds the major source level. Once the facility wide potential to
emit equals or exceeds the major source level a Title V operating permit application shall be
submitted in accordance with the requirements in Regulation No. 3, Part C.
25. Non-attainment New Source Review requirements shall apply to this source at any such time that
this source becomes major solely by virtue of a relaxation in any permit condition. Any relaxation
that increases the potential to emit above the applicable NSR threshold will require a full NSR
review of the source as though construction had not yet commenced on the source. The source
shall not exceed the NSR threshold until a NSR permit is granted. (Regulation No. 3, Part D,
V.A.7).
GENERAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS:
26. This permit and any attachments must be retained and made available for inspection upon
request. The permit may be reissued to a new owner by the Division as provided in Regulation
No. 3, Part B, Section II.B upon a request for transfer of ownership and the submittal of a revised
APEN and the required fee.
27. If this permit specifically states that final approval has been granted, then the remainder of this
• condition is not applicable. Otherwise, the issuance of this construction permit does not provide
"final" authority for this activity or operation of this source. Final approval of the permit must be
secured from the Division in writing in accordance with the provisions of 25-7-114.5(12)(a) C.R.S.
and Regulation No. 3, Part B, Section III.G. Final approval cannot be granted until the operation
or activity commences and has been verified by the Division as conforming in all respects with the
conditions of the permit. Once self-certification of all points has been reviewed and approved by
the Division, it will provide written documentation of such final approval. Details for obtaining
final approval to operate are located in the Requirements to Self-Certify for Final Approval
section of this permit.
28. This permit is issued in reliance upon the accuracy and completeness of information supplied by
the applicant and is conditioned upon conduct of the activity, or construction, installation and
operation of the source, in accordance with this information and with representations made by the
applicant or applicant's agents. It is valid only for the equipment and operations or activity
specifically identified on the permit.
29. Unless specifically stated otherwise, the general and specific conditions contained in this permit
have been determined by the Division to be necessary to assure compliance with the provisions of
Section 25-7-114.5(7)(a), C.R.S.
30. Each and every condition of this permit is a material part hereof and is not severable. Any
challenge to or appeal of a condition hereof shall constitute a rejection of the entire permit and
upon such occurrence, this permit shall be deemed denied ab initio. This permit may be revoked
at any time prior to self-certification and final authorization by the Division on grounds set forth in
the Colorado Air Pollution Prevention and Control Act and regulations of the AQCC including
failure to meet any express term or condition of the permit. If the Division denies a permit,
conditions imposed upon a permit are contested by the applicant, or the Division revokes a permit,
•
the applicant or owner or operator of a source may request a hearing before the AQCC for review
of the Division's action.
AIRS ID 123/9581
Musket Corporation
Permit No. 12WE1016
Initial Approval Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment
• page 12 Air Pollution Control Division
31. Section 25-7-114.7(2)(a), C.R.S. requires that all sources required to file an Air Pollution Emission
Notice (APEN) must pay an annual fee to cover the costs of inspections and administration. If a
source or activity is to be discontinued, the owner must notify the Division in writing requesting a
cancellation of the permit. Upon notification, annual fee billing will terminate.
32. Violation of the terms of a permit or of the provisions of the Colorado Air Pollution Prevention and
Control Act or the regulations of the AQCC may result in administrative, civil or criminal
enforcement actions under Sections 25-7-115 (enforcement), -121 (injunctions), -122 (civil
penalties), -122.1 (criminal penalties), C.R.S.
Michael Harris, P.E. R K Hancock III, P.E.
Permit Engineer Construction Permit Unit Supervisor
Permit History
Issuance Date Description
Initial Approval This Issuance Issued to Musket Corporation
•
Notes to Permit Holder:
1) The production or raw material processing limits and emission limits contained in this permit are
based on the production/processing rates requested in the permit application. These limits may
be revised upon request of the permittee providing there is no exceedence of any specific
emission control regulation or any ambient air quality standard. A revised air pollution emission
notice (APEN) and application form must be submitted with a request for a permit revision.
2) This source is subject to the Common Provisions Regulation Part II, Subpart E, Affirmative
Defense Provision for Excess Emissions During Malfunctions. The permittee shall notify the
Division of any malfunction condition which causes a violation of any emission limit or limits stated
in this permit as soon as possible, but no later than noon of the next working day, followed by
written notice to the Division addressing all of the criteria set forth in Part II.E.1. of the Common
Provisions Regulation. See: http://www.cdphe.state.co.us/regulations/airregs/5CCR1001-2.pdf.
3) The following emissions of non-criteria reportable air pollutants are estimated based upon the
process limits as indicated in this permit. This information is listed to inform the operator of the
Division's analysis of the specific compounds emitted if the source(s) operate at the permitted
limitations.
Uncontrolled
Emission Are the Controlled
Rate emissions Emission
• Pollutant CAS# BIN (Ib/yr) reportable? Rate (Ib/yr)
Benzene 71432 A 90 Yes 90
AIRS ID 123/9581
Musket Corporation
Permit No. 12WE1016
Initial Approval Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment
• page 13 Air Pollution Control Division
Hexane 110543 C 1540 Yes 1540
4) The emission levels contained in this permit are based on the following emission factors:
• VOC Emissions for AIRS points 001 -004 (various tanks)were calculated using TANKS
4.09. These emissions are tank losses.
• VOC Emissions for AIRS points 006- 010 (various transfers from point to point) these
emissions are loading losses and were calculated using the loading loss equation (AP 42,
equation 5.2) with the following parameters:
Parameter Crude Oil Condensate
S- saturation factor 0.6 0.6
P—true vapor pressure 2.26 _ 4.68
M—molecular weight 146.2 90.1
T—temperature(degrees R) 522.4 522.4
LL- loading loss lb/1000 gal(uncontrolled) 4.73 6.03
LL- loading loss lb/1000 gal (with 97% control) 0.14 — 0.18
• • Flare (AIRS point 005) based on the manufacturer's control specifications
VOC—minimum of 97%control(99%capture and 98%destruction = 0.99*0.98=0.9702)
NOx -4 mg per liter (0.0334 Ib/1,000 gallons) of product loaded
CO— 10 mg per liter (0.0835 lb/1,000 gallons) of product loaded
• For the flare emissions the total volume processed is greater than the volume received
due to multiple handling steps involved. The condensate is handled 2 times: 1) from the
tank truck to the LACT tank and 2) from the LACT tank to rail cars. The crude has the
potential to be handled 3 times 1)from the tank truck to the LACT tank, 2) from the LACT
tank to the storage tanks, and 3)from the storage tanks to the rail car. Thus the total
volume processed would be(2 *61,320,000) + (3* 183,960,000) = 674,520,000 gallons.
This is the volume used to calculated NOx and CO emission limits.
• Fugitive emissions(AIRS point 011) are based on the following estimated component
counts and using "Protocol for Equipment Leak Emission" (EPA 453/R-95-017). The
following component counts are representative estimates only and are not enforceable
limits:
Component Gas Service Light Oil Service
Valves 38 38
Connectors 14 14
Flanges 38 38
Seals 0 7
Other 4 7
Open ended lines (capped) 24 24
• 5) The emission calculations for the two storage tanks (AIRS ID 002) are based on each tank being
configured with an internal floating roof. A permit modification will be required if Musket
Corporation decides to use a vapor collection and control system, instead of the internal floating
AIRS ID 123/9581
Musket Corporation
Permit No. 12WE1016
Initial Approval Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment
• page 14 Air Pollution Control Division
roof to control emissions.
6) In accordance with C.R.S. 25-7-114.1, the Air Pollutant Emission Notices (APENs) associated
with this permit are valid for a term of five years. As of the issuance of this permit, the five-year
term for these APENs expires per the table below. A revised APEN shall be submitted no later
than 30 days before the five-year term expires.
AIRS Points Expiration Date Renewal Date
001 -011 December 15, 2016 November 15, 2016
7) This facility is classified as follows:
Applicable Status
Requirement
Operating Permit Synthetic Minor Source VOC
NANSR Synthetic Minor Source VOC
8) The two large storage tanks (AIRS ID 002) are not subject to NSPS subpart Kb since the dates of
the tank construction (1973 and 1974) precede the effective date for subpart Kb, July 23, 1984.
• 9) Full text of the Title 40, Protection of Environment Electronic Code of Federal Regulations can be
found at the website fisted below:
http://ecfr.q poaccess.gov/
•
AIRS ID 123/9581
Hello