HomeMy WebLinkAbout20100373 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
MINUTES
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
WELD COUNTY, COLORADO
FEBRUARY 17, 2010
The Board of County Commissioners of Weld County, Colorado, met in regular session in full
conformity with the laws of the State of Colorado at the regular place of meeting in the Weld County
Centennial Center, Greeley, Colorado, February 17, 2010, at the hour of 9:00 a.m.
ROLL CALL: The meeting was called to order by the Chair and on roll call the following members
were present, constituting a quorum of the members thereof:
Commissioner Douglas Rademacher, Chair
Commissioner Barbara Kirkmeyer, Pro-Tem
Commissioner Sean P. Conway
Commissioner William F. Garcia
Commissioner David E. Long - EXCUSED
Also present:
County Attorney, Bruce T. Barker
Acting Clerk to the Board, Esther E. Gesick
Director of Finance and Administration, Monica Mika
MINUTES: Commissioner Conway moved to approve the minutes of the Board of County
Commissioners meeting of February 10, 2010, as printed. Commissioner Kirkmeyer seconded the
motion, and it carried unanimously.
READ ORDINANCE BY TAPE: Commissioner Conway moved to read Code Ordinance #2010-2 by
tape. Commissioner Garcia seconded the motion, which carried unanimously.
CERTIFICATION OF HEARINGS: Commissioner Garcia moved to approve the Certification of
Hearings conducted on February 9, 2010, as follows: 1) Violation Hearings. Commissioner Conway
seconded the motion, which carried unanimously.
AMENDMENTS TO AGENDA: There were no amendments to the agenda.
PUBLIC INPUT: Bill Downey, Independent Petroleum Association of the Mountain States, stated they
are working to circulate a petition to be submitted to Ken Salazar, Secretary of the Interior, next week.
He also referenced three position papers, marked Exhibit A, which discuss several issues Secretary
Salazar is attempting to implement at the federal level, including a proposed royalty fee, which will
reduce the competitiveness of western states and impact how natural gas is produced in Weld County
and potentially reduce the corresponding severance taxes. Mr. Downey stated Secretary Salazar is
also proposing changes to on-shore natural gas regulations which will create excessive public comment
periods in an attempt to delay the permitting process, which is already adequately regulated at the
State level. In response to Commissioner Kirkmeyer, Mr. Downey stated the proposed regulations
appear to create additional hurdles to the permitting process on federal lands. He further stated the
Minutes, February 17, 2010 2010-0373
Page 1 BC0016
(3-%7O /c ��
current studies do not reflect any significant environmental or wildlife benefits, and he believes the
current public comment periods are more than adequate. Responding to Commissioner Kirkmeyer,
Mr. Barker stated the proposed federal regulations are intended to preempt all local land use powers.
He stated this issue was discussed two years ago when the Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation
Commission (COGCC) regulations were being reviewed, and it was apparent, at that time, that this
issue was going to be a problem. He stated the COGCC has taken a neutral position on the issue;
however, it did express its intent to take priority over federal permitting. Commissioner Conway
thanked Mr. Downey for bringing this matter to the attention of the Weld County Commissioners, and
stated he did sign the petition today. Commissioner Conway commented the issue is not about
updating regulations but, rather, it is all part of a larger agenda that is being pursued at the federal level
to try to stop domestic oil and gas production. He stated, unfortunately, Mr. Salazar was very effective
as a United States Senator in terms of blocking oil shale development in Colorado, and now he is using
his powers as the Secretary of the Interior to make it more difficult to proceed with domestic production.
Commissioner Conway further stated the proposed regulations could have a profound impact in terms
of revenue that local governments receive, at a time when the nation should be doing everything to
decrease dependency on foreign oil. He stated 40 percent of Weld County's budget revenue comes
from oil and gas severance taxes, and the taxpayers currently enjoy low taxation as a result.
Mr. Downey stated the proposed changes will also impair competition in the western states, because
eastern states currently impose fewer restrictions on oil and gas producers. Commissioner Garcia
stated he concurs with the previous statements, he commented this is a very timely issue as evidenced
by the recent article in the Greeley Tribune. Chair Rademacher agreed and stated the Greeley Tribune
did an excellent job of covering the story of the recent exploration of the oil field in the Pawnee National
Grassland, and he anticipates there will be a lot of discussion regarding this issue.
CONSENT AGENDA: Commissioner Conway moved to approve the Consent Agenda as printed.
Commissioner Kirkmeyer seconded the motion, and it carried unanimously.
PRESENTATIONS:
RECOGNITION OF SERVICES, NOXIOUS WEED MANAGEMENT ADVISORY BOARD - GUY
GRIGSBY AND FREDERICK HEPNER: Chair Rademacher read the certificates recognizing Guy
Grigsby and Frederick Hepner for their service on the Noxious Weed Management Advisory Board.
RECOGNITION OF SERVICES, AREA AGENCY ON AGING - DON BEIERBACH, THOMAS
GORDON, NANCY MEEK, AND JACQUELINE CRICK: Chair Rademacher read the certificates
recognizing Don Beierbach, Thomas Gordon, Nancy Meek, and Jacqueline Crick for their service on
the Area Agency on Aging. Commissioner Conway commented it is unfortunate that the recognized
individuals were unable to attend today's meeting; however, they have been outstanding public
servants to Weld County and he wants the record to reflect the Board's appreciation and he wishes
them the best of luck in their future endeavors. Chair Rademacher concurred.
COMMISSIONER COORDINATOR REPORTS: Commissioner Conway stated he and Commissioners
Rademacher and Kirkmeyer, and Monica Mika, Director of Finance and Administration, attended an
informative meeting with Susan Kirkpatrick, Department of Local Affairs, although he feels they left the
meeting with more questions than answers. He thanked Ms. Kirkpatrick for meeting with Weld County
representatives and for providing some direction for successful future grant applications in the future.
Commissioner Conway expressed his surprise at the mention of criteria related to jobs, which was not a
part of the original statute, application criteria, etcetera. He noted that if a portion of the criteria was
related to jobs, he remains perplexed because Weld County has one of the highest unemployment
rates in the State of Colorado, behind Mesa County, which should have improved the chances for a
successful bid.
Minutes, February 17, 2010 2010-0373
Page 2 BC0016
Commissioner Conway also reported that at the last Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO)
meeting, the Board approved expanding the U.S. Highway 34 Express route to U.S. Highway 85, which
will begin in April, 2010. He stated the expansion will institute bus service between the Town of Eaton
and the City of Brighton as part of the U.S. Highway 85 Express.
Commissioner Kirkmeyer stated yesterday's meeting with Ms. Kirkpatrick was productive in the fact that
it confirmed for her that the application process is political. She stated, following discussions with the
Executive Director of Local Affairs and the Director of the Division of Local Government, it was
apparent that through their own guidelines and criteria, they have altered the intent of the both the
statute and the program. She further stated after that meeting she met with Representative Massey
regarding a Bill which would establish an interim task force to review the agricultural tax classification,
which is very important to Weld County as the largest agricultural County in the state. She noted that
although Representative Massey may pull the bill, he intends to proceed with establishing a task force
with fewer legislative representatives and include more County and agricultural representation,
including someone from Weld County, specifically. Commissioner Kirkmeyer also reported the
TIF (Tax Increment Financing) Bill has passed the House and is on its way to the Senate.
BIDS:
PRESENT BID #B1000048, BULK PORTLAND CEMENT - DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS:
Ms. Mika stated four vendors submitted bid proposals, and this bid will be considered for approval on
March 3, 2010. She noted part of the consideration made by the Department of Public Works will be
the location of the plant. Commissioner Garcia requested the specifications of the various types of
product be provided as part of the bid recommendation for consideration by the Board, in addition to an
estimate of the grand totals. In response to Chair Rademacher, Ms. Mika stated although there were
no local vendors on this particular bid, the following items do include submittals by local vendors.
PRESENT BID #B1000056, CONCRETE, WASHED ROCK, AND SQUEEGEE "ON CALL" -
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS: Ms. Mika stated eight vendors submitted bid proposals, and this
bid will be considered for approval on March 3, 2010. She noted this item does include local vendors
and staff will ensure total estimates are provided.
PRESENT BID #B1000052, HOT BITUMINOUS MATERIAUASPHALT SUPPLY - DEPARTMENT OF
PUBLIC WORKS: Ms. Mika stated this bid will be considered for approval on March 3, 2010.
APPROVE BID #B1000047, 2010 BRIDGE REHABILITATIONS - DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC
WORKS: Ms. Mika stated this bid was originally presented on February 1, 2010, and the Department
of Public Works recommends approval of the low bid from Weld County Construction, Inc., which is
competitive with the Engineer's estimate. Commissioner Garcia moved to approve the low bid, as
recommended by staff. Commissioner Conway seconded the motion, which carried unanimously.
NEW BUSINESS:
CONSIDER EXPENDITURE AUTHORIZATION FOR WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMS
AND AUTHORIZE CHAIR TO SIGN: Judy Griego, Director, Department of Human Services, stated
this authorization was reviewed at the Board's work session on February 3, 2010. She stated Wagner
Peyser and Work Force Investment Act funds will be used for the Summer Job Hunt Program, in the
amount of $30,000.00 and $4,500.00, respectively. Ms. Griego explained the Program provides
assistance to youth seeking summer employment, and the period of performance is from January 15,
2010, through August 31, 2010. In response to Commissioner Kirkmeyer, Ms. Griego confirmed this
authorization approves the funds; however, there may still be discussion on which organizations Weld
County will be working with. Commissioner Kirkmeyer moved to approve said expenditure
Minutes, February 17, 2010 2010-0373
Page 3 BC0016
authorization and authorize the Chair to sign. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Conway,
and it carried unanimously.
CONSIDER MODIFICATION TO AGREEMENT FOR SUSTAINABLE MANUFACTURING SECTOR
PLANNING GRANT AND AUTHORIZE CHAIR TO SIGN - UPSTATE COLORADO ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT: Ms. Griego stated this agreement modification was presented to the Board at the
work session on January 6, 2010. She stated the purpose of the modification is to continue utilization
of the Upstate Colorado Economic Development (UCEC) to complete the scope of services in the
original planning grant. She stated Sector Grant funds, up to a maximum of $26,000.00, will be
reimbursed to the UCEC for costs associated with the services, with a term beginning November 16,
2009, and ending June 30, 2010. In response to Commissioner Conway, Ms. Griego stated the end of
the term should be the conclusion of the planning grant, as well as the deadline for the report.
Commissioner Conway moved to approve said agreement modification and authorize the Chair to sign.
Seconded by Commissioner Garcia, the motion carried unanimously.
CONSIDER AMENDMENTS TO CHILD PROTECTION AGREEMENTS FOR SERVICES WITH
VARIOUS PROVIDERS AND AUTHORIZE CHAIR TO SIGN: Ms. Griego stated these amendments
were reviewed with the Board at the February 3, 2010, work session. She reviewed each of the
vendors, the services provided, and the proposed increases, as detailed on her memorandum, dated
February 11, 2010, and stated all of the amendments have terms retroactively effective June 1, 2009,
and ending May 31, 2010. Commissioner Conway moved to approve said amendments and authorize
the Chair to sign. Commissioner Kirkmeyer seconded the motion, which carried unanimously.
CONSIDER CONTRACT AMENDMENT #6 FOR EARLY AND PERIODIC SCREENING, DIAGNOSIS,
AND TREATMENT (EPSDT) PROGRAM AND AUTHORIZE CHAIR TO SIGN: Linda Henry,
Department of Public Health and Environment, stated this amendment is a continuation of the contract
through which the Department provides EPSDT services. She stated the term will commence March 1,
2010, and end June 30, 2010, with funding not to exceed $46,148.50. Commissioner Conway moved
to approve said amendment and authorize the Chair to sign. Commissioner Kirkmeyer seconded the
motion, which carried unanimously.
CONSIDER AGREEMENT FOR PROVISION OF INTERNSHIP EXPERIENCES AND AUTHORIZE
CHAIR TO SIGN - UNIVERSITY OF NORTHERN COLORADO: Gaye Morrison, Department of Public
Health and Environment, stated this agreement will result in the extension of the existing program to
provide internship experience for UNC students. She stated the term of the agreement begins
January 1, 2010, and ends December 31, 2015, and the Department will provide clinical practicum
experiences for Community Health, Dietetics, and Nursing students, provide a site supervisor, and work
with the student supervisor. She stated the students are not compensated for their services, and UNC
provides Professional Liability and Workers' Compensation insurance. Commissioner Conway stated
this has been a very successful program in the past. Ms. Morrison agreed and stated most of the
Department divisions have been pleased with the work of the interns and, on occasion, they are offered
permanent positions. In response to Commissioner Garcia, Ms. Morrison stated the internship
evaluation consists of a checklist provided by UNC in the internship packet which takes
approximately 15 minutes to complete. She further stated the student supervisor does conduct one site
visit at the Health Department, and overall, the program requires very little supervision. Commissioner
Kirkmeyer moved to approve said agreement and authorize the Chair to sign. Commissioner Garcia
seconded the motion, which carried unanimously.
CONSIDER TEMPORARY CLOSURE OF CR 35 BETWEEN CRS 38 AND 40: Janet Carter,
Department of Public Works, requested the temporary closure of County Road 35, between County
Roads 38 and 40, beginning February 22, 2010, and ending April 16, 2010, for the replacement of an
Minutes, February 17, 2010 2010-0373
Page 4 BC0016
existing bridge. She stated the average daily traffic count on County Road 35, taken in 2008, was
approximately 129 vehicles; magnesium chloride will be used for dust control along the detour route;
and standard signs and barricades will be used for traffic control. In response to Chair Rademacher,
Ms. Carter confirmed the bridge is over a drainage way. Commissioner Garcia moved to approve said
temporary closure. Commissioner Kirkmeyer seconded the motion, which carried unanimously.
CONSIDER INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT FOR A JOINT SCHOOL RESOURCE OFFICER
PROGRAM AND AUTHORIZE CHAIR TO SIGN - WELD COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT RE-3J:
Mr. Barker stated this agreement was reviewed by Deputy Alan Caldwell and the rate is consistent with
the direction provided by the Board. In response to Chair Rademacher, Mr. Barker confirmed this
agreement will provide for the continuation of existing services. Commissioner Kirkmeyer moved to
approve said agreement and authorize the Chair to sign. The motion was seconded by Commissioner
Conway. Commissioner Kirkmeyer commented this agreement is consistent with the terms previously
discussed and, although the term of the agreement may be extended for up to two years, any extension
will require separate action of the Board. There being no further discussion, the motion carried
unanimously.
CONSIDER MODIFICATION TO 2010 COOPERATIVE LAW ENFORCEMENT OPERATING AND
FINANCIAL PLAN AND AUTHORIZE CHAIR TO SIGN: Deputy Alan Caldwell was not in attendance to
present this matter. In response to Commissioner Conway, Mr. Barker stated following a quick review,
it does not appear the terms of the modification are time sensitive. Commissioner Conway moved to
continue the matter, for one week, to Wednesday, February 24, 2010, with the understanding that a
work session be held to review the matter prior to the next meeting. Commissioner Kirkmeyer
seconded the motion, which carried unanimously.
CONSIDER STATEMENT OF GRANT AWARD FOR JUVENILE ACCOUNTABILITY BLOCK GRANT
FOR FEMALE OFFENDER PROGRAM AND AUTHORIZE CHAIR TO SIGN: Ken Poncelow, Sheriff's
Office, stated this Statement of Grant Award is in the amount of $32,181.00, with a match of $3,578.00
to be made by North Range Behavioral Health (NRBH). He stated with these funds, NRBH will provide
collaboration of crisis assessment and triage services for juveniles involved with the justice system. He
stated the funds will also be used for the Juvenile Female Offender Program, which is run by the
Probation Office of the 19th Judicial District. In response to Chair Rademacher, Ms. Mika stated these
funds were included in the 2010 Budget, and Mr. Poncelow confirmed there will be no cost to Weld
County, since the funds are awarded by the State and the match funds are provided by NRBH.
Commissioner Kirkmeyer moved to approve said award and authorize the Chair to sign. Commissioner
Conway seconded the motion, which carried unanimously.
CONSIDER SMALL TRACT OIL AND GAS LEASE AND AUTHORIZE CHAIR TO SIGN - PETRO-
CANADA RESOURCES (USA) INC.: Mr. Barker stated Petro-Canada Resources (USA) Inc., has
submitted a Small Tract Lease for a one (1) acre parcel and paid the required $200.00 bonus. In
response to Chair Rademacher, Mr. Barker stated all of the Petro-Canada agreements will be assigned
to Noble Energy as part of the acquisition process. Commissioner Garcia moved to approve said lease
and authorize the Chair to sign. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Kirkmeyer, and it carried
unanimously.
CONSIDER APPLICATION FOR COLORADO EMTS PROVIDER GRANT AND AUTHORIZE CHAIR
TO SIGN: Lonnie Knudsen, Paramedic Service, stated the purpose of this grant application is to take
advantage of priority safety equipment authorized by the Colorado EMTS Division. He stated this
application is for driver monitoring equipment, and Weld County will be responsible for matching 25
percent of the grant award. In response to Chair Rademacher, Mr. Knudsen confirmed this will be for
new equipment. Responding to Commissioner Garcia, Ms. Mika confirmed the match amount has
Minutes, February 17, 2010 2010-0373
Page 5 BC0016
been budgeted as part of the new ambulances line item. Commissioner Kirkmeyer agreed and stated
this application is for grant funds which will help supplement the Budget. Commissioner Kirkmeyer
moved to approve said application and authorize the Chair to sign. The motion, which was seconded
by Commissioner Conway, carried unanimously.
FIRST READING OF CODE ORDINANCE #2010-2, IN THE MATTER OF REPEALING AND
REENACTING, WITH AMENDMENTS, CHAPTER 15 VEGETATION, OF THE WELD COUNTY
CODE: Mr. Barker stated this Ordinance proposes to add a new Article III regrding Prescribed Burns,
which includes language that creates limitations and prohibits prescribed burns in northern Weld
County, specifically surrounding the Pawnee National Grassland, for areas exceeding three acres. He
stated the specific area boundaries are north of County Road 86, west of County Road 157, and east of
U.S. Highway 85. He further stated the proposed action is in response to a Public Notice, dated
February 5, 2010, sent by Forest Ranger, Lori Bell, warning of the dry conditions which have occurred
due to past weather conditions. Mr. Barker referenced Section 30-15-201, C.R.S., which allows the
Board of Commissioners to pass an ordinance which bans fires and burning, and Section 15-3-60 of
the proposed language provides criminal penalties based on the number of occurrences. In response
to Commissioner Garcia, Mr. Barker confirmed governmental entities are not exempt, and exemptions
are part of the definition of the prescribed burns.
John Cooke, Weld County Sheriff, stated he has reviewed and supports the proposed Ordinance, as it
is an effort to protect agricultural practices, while establishing wise land use during dry vegetation
conditions. He further stated this effort will also help ensure properties and lives are protected from
unwarranted burning. In response to Commissioner Kirkmeyer, Mr. Barker stated the fines are similar
to those charged for littering. Sheriff Cooke stated $25.00 is minimal, and although he does not want to
gouge offenders, he would support a higher amount if supported by the Board, which may act as more
of a deterrent. Commissioner Conway stated a prescribed burn conducted by a public agency
previously escalated out of control, resulting in property damage and the use of public resources to
regain control. Sheriff Cooke agreed and stated, although the Board of Commissioners advised against
that particular burn, the warning was disregarded and surrounding property was damaged as a result of
the burn.
No public testimony was offered concerning this matter. Commissioner Garcia thanked the County
Attorney and the Weld County Sheriff for their hard work on this subject. He stated the Public Notice
cited the wet spring conditions of 2009 have resulted in tall dry grasses, and two uncontrolled burns
have already taken place. Commissioner Conway thanked staff for working on this issue. He stated
the proposed language appears to be establish a healthy balance to ensure the continuance of
agricultural practices, while recognizing the very dry conditions and striving to provide for public safety.
Commissioner Garcia stated the Board of Commissioners did speak with various agricultural
representatives in the area who confirmed that burning is not a typical agricultural practice in the
designated area, thus he does not expect an adverse impact. Commissioner Garcia moved to approve
Code Ordinance #2010-2 on First Reading. Commissioner Conway seconded the motion, which
carried unanimously.
PLANNING:
CONSIDER APPEAL OF DECISION OF THE PLANNING DIRECTOR REQUIRING A BUILDING
PERMIT FEE AND THE ASSESSMENT OF A ROAD IMPACT FEE — MICHAEL MILLER: Trevor
Jiricek, Director, Department of Planning Services, stated Michael Miller has submitted an appeal of the
assessed Building Permit and Road Impact fees. He stated Planning Services staff has compiled an
extensive chronology of the contacts made throughout this case, and he recommends the Board uphold
the fees, as they were established pursuant to the Weld County Code. In response to Chair
Rademacher, Mr. Jiricek confirmed the building permit fee is $437.68, and the Road Impact fee
Minutes, February 17, 2010 2010-0373
Page 6 BC0016
is $1,987.00, and he noted the building permit fee was significantly reduced following recent Code
revisions which allowed the amount to be pro-rated to recover final inspection costs.
Michael Miller, County resident, stated he pulled the original building permit in December, 2002, for the
construction of his home; however, a short time later he was involved in a serious auto accident which
resulted in numerous surgeries, thus delaying the project beyond the expiration date of the building
permit. Mr. Miller explained he applied for an extension of the building permit in 2008, and following a
subsequent surgery, he is now physically able to complete the project; however, he is no longer
insurable and is responsible for a majority of the medical bills. He stated the house is approximately
75 percent complete; however, due to timing issues, he is now being required to pay new fees, and he
feels it is unfair to assess fees based on Code criteria that were created after the original building
permit fee was pulled. He estimated the remainder of the project will cost approximately $45,000.00,
and the addition of more fees will create a financial hardship, therefore, he requested waiver of the road
impact fee and an additional extension of the building permit. He stated if his request is granted, he
intends to complete the house within the next year; however, if the request is rejected, he is uncertain
when the project will be finalized. He stated it is ironic that he served as a member of the Weld County
Planning Commission when the road impact fees were considered, and at that time he argued that the
road impact fee should not apply to farmers and individuals building a home on their farm. He also
argued against requiring a full building permit fee for the renewal of an expired permit. Mr. Miller stated
he is willing to pay for the actual cost of the remaining inspections.
In response to Chair Rademacher, Mr. Jiricek stated the septic permit fee was previously discussed
with Mr. Miller; however, it was not intended to be a part of this hearing, unless that is the desire of the
Board. He noted the septic permit fee is $750, which expires after one year. Responding to
Commissioner Kirkmeyer, Mr. Miller stated he agrees that the reduction of the building permit fee is
acceptable; therefore, his primary issue of appeal is regarding the waiver of the road impact fee.
Mr. Jiricek explained a road impact fee was not required when the building permit was originally pulled;
however, since it expired and a new permit is required, the Code explicitly states the fee is now
applicable. In response to Chair Rademacher and Commissioner Conway, Mr. Jiricek stated Mr. Miller
has been granted one extension of the building permit, he previously paid the septic fee, and staff is
now requesting another septic fee since the original permit expired. Mr. Miller commented his impact to
the road will actually be reduced once he resides on the property.
In response to Commissioner Kirkmeyer, Mr. Barker stated if the Board rejects the decision of the
Planning Director, the matter is simply referred back to staff for further negotiation, as the Board does
not have the jurisdiction to establish the fee within an appeal hearing. Mr. Jiricek requested direction
from the board if his prior decision is rejected. Commissioner Garcia stated he appreciates Mr. Miller's
situation; however, he is also concerned with the idea of applying the requirements of the Weld County
Code differently for one individual. Chair Rademacher agreed and clarified, based on today's
testimony, it appears Mr. Miller is no longer arguing the building permit fee, since it was significantly
reduced. He further stated he wants to be consistent with assessed Road Impact fees, but he agrees
that if the Director's decision is rejected, the Board needs to provide staff with some guidance.
Commissioner Conway stated it appears Mr. Miller is facing financial hardship caused by an
unfortunate auto accident, and he is in favor of sending this back to staff with the understanding that a
road impact fee was not required when the project started. Mr. Barker stated the Board's decision will
not set a precedent, since this is an appeal proceeding, pursuant to Chapter 2 of the Weld County
Code. In response to Commissioner Kirkmeyer, Mr. Barker stated staff is bound to assess the fees
based on the current Code, since the original permit expired and the new permit is subject to current
Code regulations.
Minutes, February 17, 2010 2010-0373
Page 7 BC0016
Mr. Jiricek stated the Board will soon be reviewing the Road Impact fees based on findings provided by
an independent consultant, and he proposed an indefinite continuance until after the Board completes
that review. Mr. Barker expressed concern with an indefinite continuance, since this issue deals more
with procedure, which will not be addressed by the consultant.
Commissioner Kirkmeyer moved to uphold the decision for the assessed building permit fee, in the
amount of$437.68, and reject the decision concerning the Road Impact fee for further determination by
staff. Commissioner Conway seconded the motion, which carried unanimously, and suggested staff
also review the septic permit fee, so that in the event Mr. Miller chooses to appeal that fee, the Board
may consider all of the issues at one hearing in the future.
OLD HEALTH BUSINESS:
AUTHORIZATION FOR THE WELD COUNTY ATTORNEY TO PROCEED WITH LEGAL ACTION
FOR VIOLATION OF THE COLORADO RETAIL FOOD ESTABLISHMENT RULES AND
REGULATIONS - ALBERTO'S: Dan Joseph, Department of Public Health and Environment,
presented the Board with a draft Stipulation Agreement, marked Exhibit A. He stated the facility
voluntarily closed on Wednesday, February 10, 2010, the Department staff provided a Weld Star
Training for the Spanish-speaking staff at the facility, and he personally provided an informal review of
issues with the front wait staff. Mr. Joseph recommended reopening the facility, contingent upon
approval of the Stipulation Agreement. He stated the facility has been cleaned and reorganized to
facilitate a fresh start, and the plan is to reassign some of the staff to go and work in other facilities and
bring in members of the consulting team to work at the Alberto's facility, thus resulting in a thorough
review of the procedures. He stated the facility owner and consulting team have reviewed the
proposed Stipulation Agreement; Alberto's has paid the $750.00 civil penalty; and staff intends to
conduct two to three inspections during the next several weeks and then conduct one monthly
unannounced inspection for the next six months. Mr. Joseph referenced Exhibit A and stated the
facility operator is in agreement with the proposed change shown in item A, item B is being addressed
because they are scheduled to have staff attend the "Serve Safe" training within the next three weeks,
and they have paid the civil penalty required under item C. He stated item D addresses the
requirement for maintaining cooling logs in 30-minute intervals, and item E requires that there be more
than one person in charge to ensure continuous coverage. He further stated the facility has satisfied
items F and G with the submittal of documents regarding short-term and long-term compliance goals,
which has been reviewed and approved by staff, and item H was satisfied with the inspection that was
conducted last Tuesday. Based on those comments, Mr. Joseph stated the Department of Public
Health and Environment recommends allowing the facility to reopen on Thursday, February 18, 2010.
In response to Chair Rademacher, Mr. Joseph confirmed the draft Stipulation Agreement was provided
to the facility for review.
Rachel Wells stated the consultant team and facility staff have invested more than 600 man hours since
the last hearing, and they are continuing to provide cross-training among the staff at her facility in an
effort to assist the Alberto's staff. She stated her head chef will work at Alberto's from 11:00 a.m., until
closing time, in addition to four-hour shifts covered by various members of the consulting team. She
stated despite the recent violations, Alberto's does have a long-standing reputation in the community
and she believes this is a good solution which allows the facility to operate and identify any remaining
issues of concern and address them immediately. In response to Commissioner Conway, Ms. Wells
stated item E of the proposed Agreement is intended to address the primary issue of facility
management, and they intend to have three to four staff members complete the "Serve Safe for
Managers" training. Mr. Joseph stated an additional provision could be included requiring the submittal
of the management structure within ten days detailing the assigned duties. Commissioner Conway
stated it is very important to address the management issue to ensure this facility remains in
compliance. Ms. Wells agreed and stated the owners/managers will also be completing the
Minutes, February 17, 2010 2010-0373
Page 8 BC0016
management training in an effort to provide them with the confidence to make appropriate changes,
when necessary.
No public testimony was offered concerning this matter.
Commissioner Garcia thanked Ms. Wells and Ms. Morales for their efforts since the last hearing. He
stated when this process started it could have gone many different ways and he commended
Ms. Morales for her wisdom in taking the appropriate steps to make a difference and allow her facility to
continue to provide quality service. He also commended Ms. Wells for her voluntary services in this
matter. Commissioner Kirkmeyer concurred and also commended the Health staff for the excellent
service to the public and for bringing important issues to the table to get matters resolved.
Commissioner Conway agreed with the previous comments and noted this is a good example of
government working for the public. He thanked Ms. Wells for her voluntary work and time away from
her own establishment, and stated he is looking forward to having a burrito at Alberto's very soon.
Ms. Morales also thanked the County staff, Ms. Wells' staff, and the consultant team for all of the
assistance. Chair Rademacher agreed with all previous comments, and stated although the Board
supports small business, they must also work to protect the public health.
Commissioner Garcia moved to approve the Stipulation Agreement, as proposed, and permit the lifting
of the voluntary suspension effective tomorrow, February 18, 2010. The motion was seconded by
Commissioner Conway, and it carried unanimously. (Clerk's Note: Following the meeting, a fully
executed version of the Stipulation Agreement, and copies of the proposed Plan of Action were also
added to the file as Exhibit B.)
RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES: The resolutions were presented and signed as listed on the
Consent Agenda. Code Ordinance#2010-2 was approved on First Reading.
Let the minutes reflect that the above and foregoing actions were attested to and respectfully submitted
by the Acting Clerk to the Board.
There being no further business, this meeting was adjourned at 10:36 a.m.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
WELD COUNTY, COLORADO
ATTEST: • \,) cY". Y—v
Weld County Clerk to the B. E Douglab Radema her: Chair
Illy S�
i 18 61 CS• <3 ' 7flarbara Kirkmey r, Pro-Tem
BY:
Deputy Clerk to the BoT: k �
..u� Sean ay
illiam F. Garcia
EXCUSED
David E. Long
Minutes, February 17, 2010 2010-0373
Page 9 BC0016
The Honorable Ken Salazar
Secretary of the Interior
1849 C Street, N.W.
Washington,D.C. 20240
Dear Secretary Salazar:
We, county commissioners and mayors from across the West, are very concerned about the effects
your recently announced policies will have on jobs and rural economies in our region. The oil and
gas industry is important to our counties, and your policies will put at risk many of the 300,000 jobs
in the region dependent on the industry. Since our localities are in areas with large amounts of
federal land, policies that make it more difficult for companies to develop oil and gas in an
environmentally responsible manner will harm our economies, and decrease local and state
government revenue. We are very concerned that your policies are putting western states at a
disadvantage compared to other regions of the country without significant federal lands, and energy
jobs and economic activity will migrate to those areas.
Our economies benefit from the productive use of federal lands. By making oil and gas leasing and
project approval more difficult, your policies threaten to delay the economic recovery of our
counties in the longer term. Because the development of oil and gas on federal lands already takes
considerable time, policies that further slow leasing and permuting will discourage companies from
operating in our counties, and we will not experience the rebound in jobs and economic growth that
we otherwise would as the American economy recovers.
Our counties are proud to help supply clean natural gas that enhances American energy security and
provides a meaningful solution to reducing greenhouse gas emissions. We respectfully ask you to
consider the negative impact your policies will have on our rural economies, the jobs of our
constituents, and the local government revenue that funds vital services such as schools, roads, and
law enforcement
Sincerely,
at) Gl C>tg14 o"Air tk94 OW v\11. 6 YY.1^'1t 'a3' ronir
it,,X , 2,_43,^,-� weld (e,„,-/-y G,—. , s s 2 o e7 er
EXHIBIT
I A
?ublic biSb±
e J �� 5/E 44n/ Co n//f-✓47
o7' /ic. kk .((J.. C-E ,,C.. ((h4 (try Gr17277ftirt Jt'/r c.C c—
Position Paper %war
Western Regional Competitiveness I�j��'�J��1
jv�February 2010
This is an exciting time in our nation's history as the U.S. is leading a global renaissance in natural
gas development, employing new technologies and millions of American workers to make an
enormous domestic supply of clean energy available for many generations to come. The
conventional wisdom about the limits of natural gas supply no longer holds true. U.S. natural gas
supply is robust enough to shoulder a larger percentage of our nation's long-term electricity
generation needs while also helping our nation wean itself from foreign oil imports by increased
use in the transportation sector. American natural gas provides concrete solutions to our most
pressing economic, environmental and energy security challenges.
• This American abundance of natural gas is spread throughout various regions of the country.
Highly productive shale gas plays such as the Marcellus in Appalachia, the Haynesville in
Louisiana, and the Barnet in Texas are attracting a great deal of attention. However, the
Intermountain West region has the second largest reserves,just behind the Gulf of Mexico.
Regional Resource Assessment Summary
Traditional Coalbed Gas Total Pot. Regions
Resources Resources Resources Proportion
PGC Area (Mean.Tcf) (M.L..Tcf) (Tot) of Total L48
Gulf Coast 455.2 3.4 458.5 28.1%
Rocky Mountain 374.4 51.9 426.3 26.1%
Atlantic 353.5 17.3 370.8 22.7%
Mid-Continent 274.9 7.5 282.4 17.3%
Pacific 51.3 2.6 53.8 3.3%
North Central 24.0 16.6 40.6 2.5%
Total Lower 48* 1,484.9 99.2 1,632.5
Alaska 193.8 57.0 250.8
Total U.S. (means)* 1,673.4 163.0 1,836.4
Data source:Potential Gas Committee(20091 'Separately aggregated total,not arithmetically additive.
• The diffusion of reserves across the country means that companies have choices when
deciding where to develop natural gas. State and federal policies that make it difficult and
costly to operate in one state or region will cause capital investment and jobs to relocate to
other regions.
• Distance to large population centers where the majority of natural gas consumers live has
been somewhat overcome in recent years with improvements in pipeline capacity.
Intermountain West producers still face a price differential compared to other regions,and
IPAMS Position Paper—Western Regional Competitiveness
February 2010
Page 2 of 2
are particularly vulnerable to policies that increase the cost of production. Rockies wells tend
to be fairly expensive compared to expected ultimate recovery.'
• Policy proposals and new regulations are threatening to decrease the competitiveness of the
Intermountain West.
o Policy changes to the federal onshore oil and gas program proposed by Interior
Secretary Ken Salazar will disproportionately affect the West,where the federal
government is by far the largest landowner and 54% of the natural gas production is
federal. The changes put Intermountain West states at a distinct disadvantage
compared to other regions of the country where natural gas is developed primarily on
private lands with less onerous permitting and regulation.
o Onerous state regulations in Colorado and New Mexico have severely increased the
cost to develop a well. Since the full implementation of these regulations coincided
with the downturn in the economy, the full impact of these regulations will not be
apparent until the economy recovers and we see if Colorado and New Mexico
continue to lag behind other states.
• The case study of Alberta is illustrative of the dangers of increasing the costs to develop
energy in one region. In 2008, the Province of Alberta increased the maximum royalty rate
for natural gas production from 35% to 50%. Operators now pay$165 in royalties before
they show$100 in profit.2
o Alberta experienced a 42% drop in rig count and an 8% reduction in gas production
between 2008 and 2009
o The new framework severely weakened Alberta's competitiveness with British
Colombia and Saskatchewan
o Alberta is now experiencing its first budget deficit in 15 years and recent reports show
a net loss of oil and gas royalties totaling$2 billion since 2008.
The average Rockies unconventional well costs around$1.8 million to drill and produces about 1.7 Bcf over the life
of the well. Source:Bentek Energy.
2 Energy Navigator Study,Boyd Russell,
http://www.energynavigatoccom/index.phormact=News cntnt0l detail 0&cntnl0l articleid=49&cntnt0I origid=15
&cntnt0l detailtemplatennews&cntnt0l returnid=24
Position Paper
Interior's Proposed Changes to the Federal Onshore „sr
Natural Gas and Oil Program MS n��� n/(�1
January 2010 lr
At a time when the Obama administration should be embracing policies to increase employment, stimulate
the economy, and increase production of American clean energy,Interior continues to make decisions that
increase uncertainty and put at risk jobs and economic development tied to the production of natural gas
and oil in the West. Rockies producers have achieved balanced energy development by providing 27% of
America's natural gas while occupying only 0.07%of public lands.
It is impossible to stand by silently while these job-killing proposals further hinder our efforts toward energy
independence and have devastating effects on families and small businesses across the nation.
Moreover, the revenue you are impeding from oil and gas leasing is the largest contributor to the national treasury
after income tax. To stifle the growth of this industry in the midst of record-setting national deficit and unemployment
levels is not only outrageous but irresponsible.
Congressman Dan Boren p-OK)
January 7, 2010
• Interior Secretary Ken Salazar's proposed changes to the federal onshore oil and gas program,
announced in early January, create additional layers of red tape and ignore the Energy Policy Act of
2005,which passed Congress with bipartisan support,including then Senators Barack Obama and Ken
Salazar.
• The changes constitute a bureaucratic command-and-control system in which government bureaucrats
rather than scientists and engineers with expertise in natural gas and oil development dictate where
energy development should occur. The market-based system has worked well for decades, allowing
government land managers to specify what lands are appropriate for leasing and leaving it to the
geologists and engineers to do the exploration and nominate projects based on geologic and market
conditions,with ultimate approval by Interior.
• Wyoming's Democratic Governor Dave Freudenthal says it best;
Unfortunately, the proposed changes potentially hand significant control over oil and gas exploration,
development and production to the whims of those that profess a 'nowhere, not ever'philosophy to surface
disturbance of any kind.
With specific regard to the proposed changes, it seems as though the Department contemplates adding up to
three additional layers of analysis into the existing leasing process. To my point, these reviews will be made
irrespective of(actually completely devoid of in most instances)substantive seismic, exploration, or other
subsurface data. Functionally, it seems that we are putting on two additional belts and two additional
pairs of suspenders without even knowing if we are going to wear pants.
The proposed changes are in addition to the existing leasing program, which already contemplates a land use
plan, consultation with the states and their agencies ofjurisdiction regarding leasing decisions,project specific
NEPA, an application for permit to drill and compliance with state wildlife, air, water and land quality
protections. I question the need for so many reviews, especially when leasing is such a small part of the
development equation.
IPAMS Position Paper—Interior's Proposed Changes to the Onshore Natural Gas &Oil Program
January 2010
Page 2 of 3
• Secretary Salazar claims the changes will increase certainty and reduce legal challenges. Again,
Governor Freudenthal:
One of the points of justification for the polig is the potential to reduce the number of challenges and protests
and, ultimately, the amount of litigation emanating from these objections. With rational players, this
expectation and rationale makes sense. In reality, though, the new technical and procedural reviews merely
offer more opportunities for challenge. Even the most perfect review will be challenged by someone or some
group— to assume otherwise is simply naive given the realities of the citizen suit provisions...and the ever
present 'not in my backyard'interests.
• Every step of the federal development process has opportunity for citizen input, but that hasn't
stopped 100% of lease sales,Resource Management Plans (RMP), and most natural gas and oil
development projects from being challenged legally. Recent examples are the Utah RMPs,with over
seven years of community and public input; and the Roan Plateau RMP which had unprecedented
cooperation with the Colorado Division of Wildlife,Department of Natural Resources,counties and
the public, and resulted in the most protective phased-development plan in history. In both cases,
extensive legal challenges resulted.
Details on the Proposed Changes
Several Additional Layers of Analysis
• Despite the announcement, specific policies have not been formalized, and an "Energy Reform Team"
led by Assistant Secretary Wilma Lewis will review additional aspects of the onshore program. IPAMS
stands ready to mobilize the expertise of 260,000 employees in the Intermountain West as input to the
review process,including petroleum engineers,geologists,landmen, environmental consultants, and
other professionals with actual expertise in natural gas and oil development.
• Since Interior has released very little information on the changes,it is difficult to analyze the full
impact of the policy changes. From the scant information released, these changes will add years to the
already lengthy process of developing energy on public lands.
• Because of the myriad delays already inherent in federal leasing,it often takes several years and several
lease sales until companies can put together sufficient leaseholds to begin exploration and
development work. Interior's reforms will add a minimum of three years to the process from
nomination to lease sale for any given parcel,creating further delays and more uncertainty for
companies trying to develop American energy.
• The changes will mean a lower percentage of leased acreage will be in a producing status. Industry is
often criticized for only developing on 27% of leased acreage,but that statistic doesn't account for
acreage where background permitting and environmental work is ongoing.
• Under the current onshore system,environmental analysis is conducted at the resource management
planning,leasing, and project stages. The public already has the opportunity to comment and
participate at each stage. In addition, companies must conduct cultural and wildlife surveys,and
comply with thousands of federal, state and county environmental regulations.
IPAMS Position Paper—Interior's Proposed Changes to the Onshore Natural Gas &Oil Program
January 2010
Page 3 of 3
• Despite all these environmental protections, Interior is proposing several additional layers of analysis—
Master Leasing and Development Plans (MLDP),additional"interdisciplinary team"review at the
leasing stage,another environmental review document,and an additional mitigation measures
document.
• The duplicative analysis would attempt to identify the impacts of development before any exploratory
work is done. The site-specific analysis required in the MLDP is speculative, since it's impossible to
know the impact of development before exploratory work reveals if there are quantities of natural gas
or oil available,how many wells would be necessary,and whether market,infrastructure,technical and
other factors indicate development is worthwhile.
Extraordinary Circumstances Review Added to Statutory Categorical Exclusions Processing
• Under the Energy Policy Act of 2005,Congress directed BLM to use categorical exclusions (CX)
under Section 390 to encourage energy development when one of five criteria are met. CXs eliminate
redundant environmental analysis and enable companies to minimize surface impacts. DOI's
announced policy to severely limit the use of categorical exclusions by requiring"extraordinary
circumstances" review is illegal.
• DOI cannot pick and choose which laws to follow. Congress,including then Senators Barack Obama
and Ken Salazar,mandated the use of CXs where the environmental impact is minimal or where
environmental analysis has already been completed;it did not provide Interior with discretion in their
use. The law clearly mandates the use of CXs when the criteria are met.
Unissued Leases
• Secretary Salazar's policy announcement did not address the$100 million worth of unissued leases that
Interior continues to hold in a non-productive capacity.
• It appears that Interior may be attempting to apply new policies to leases, some of which date back to
2003, that were legitimately won in prior sales conducted according to policies compliant with the
Mineral Leasing Act. Retroactive application of policies is clearly contrary to well-established law, and
seriously calls into question the good faith of the government.
• No other bidding system, from eBay to a livestock or art auction, allows a seller to withdraw goods
from a sale after someone has fairly won the bidding process. Interior's actions shatter the integrity of
the leasing system,and have dampened future interest in federal leases.
Public Lands Statistics
• Intermountain West producers provide 27% of American natural gas while occupying only 0.07%
of federal lands.
• Compared to the first year of the Clinton Administration, the Obama Administration has issued 1,934
fewer leases and 1,146,949 fewer acres in the Intermountain West, 32% and 46%reductions
respectively.
• The Obama Administration leased fewer onshore acres in 2009 than any other year on record.
• The US Treasury took in a more than ten times the leasing revenue in 2008 than in 2009,$10 billion
compared to $931 million.
Position Paper IPAMS
Interior's Proposed Fee and Royalty Rate Increases
February 2010
At a time when the Obama administration should be embracing policies to increase employment, stimulate the
economy,and increase production of American dean energy,the Department of the Interior(DOI) continues
to propose policies that increase uncertainty and put at risk jobs and economic development tied to the
production of natural gas and oil in the West. In addition, the President's FY 2011 budget includes new fees
on the natural gas and oil industry,along with royalty rate increases. Coupled with $36.5 billion in additional
taxes on industry, these new fees will disproportionately impact the small businesses that produce 82% of
America's natural gas and 68% of the oil. The increased costs will remove capital from the development and
production of American energy and result in further job loses.
• Industry already more than pays for the administration of the federal onshore natural gas and oil
program by returning$46 for every dollar spent. When income and other taxes are factored in,
companies return$123 for every dollar spent administering the program. Few other government
programs garner such a high direct return. Industry already more than pays for the leasing,
permitting,inspections, environmental enforcement,and all other aspects of the onshore program.
• Despite the fact that the natural gas and oil industry is the second largest source of revenue for the US
Treasury after the federal income tax, the Obama Administration is proposing further punitive tax
increases, and an increased royalty rate.
• Operating on federal lands is already much more time-consuming and costly compared to operating on
private lands. The sum total of all the negative proposals from DOI and the increases in fees and taxes
will be a decrease in production on federal lands, a reduction of jobs that result from the productive use
of public lands,and a decrease in the production of energy owned by all Americans.
• 27% of America's natural gas is produced in the Intermountain West,more than half of which comes
from federal lands. The APD fee and other policies that discourage natural gas and oil development on
federal lands block production of American energy owned by all citizens, and threaten American jobs,
government revenue, and economic development.
• Short-sighted efforts to increase costs could actually result in less revenue from the onshore program as
operators are further discouraged from developing American energy on public lands. The case study
of Alberta is illustrative. In 2008, the province increased the maximum royalty rate for natural gas
production from 35% to 50%.
o Operators now pay$165 in royalties before they show$100 in profit.'
o Alberta experienced a 42% drop in rig count and an 8%reduction in gas production
between 2008 and 2009
o Alberta is now experiencing its first budget deficit in 15 years and recent reports show a net
loss of oil and gas royalties totaling$2 billion since 2008.
I Energy Navigator Study,Boyd Russell,
http://wuw.enerunnavigat orcorn/indev.php%mact=News,cntnr01 derait0&cntntOlarticleid-49&cntnt(lonpid=15&utr
nil)I derailtemplate=news&cnrnrOl rerun-n(3=24
TPAMS Position Paper—Interior Fee and Royalty Rate Increases
February 2010 Page 2 of 3
Inspection Fees
• The President's budget directs the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) to collect inspection fees:
o $150 for each lease with no wells but with surface use, disturbance or reclamation
o $300 for each lease with one to ten active or inactive wells
o $750 for each lease with eleven to fifty active or inactive wells
o $1,500 for each lease with more than fifty active or inactive wells
• The administration of this fee would be extremely cumbersome for BLM. The DOI Inspector General
(IG) found that BLM already has data and systems difficulties,which would hinder the efficiency of
these fees.2
• Operators already more than pay for inspections by paying royalties,rents,and bonuses for leases.
Non-Producing Acreage Fee
• The President's budget includes a proposal to assess a$4 fee on non-producing federal acreage on
federal lands.
• Such a fee would de-incentivize industry,and does not take into account all the preparatory work done
on a lease before it goes into production, such as geophysical exploration,environmental analyses,
permitting,wildlife and cultural resource surveying, and numerous other activities necessary before a
well is drilled. All the regulations and analysis that the government requires on federal leases often take
more than five years to complete. In addition, the government routinely holds up projects for
bureaucratic reasons,and legal challenges from environmental groups further delay projects.
• It is inequitable to charge companies a non-producing fee when,in many cases, the government is the
entity holding up diligent development of federal leases. The fee will significantly increase the cost of
developing on federal lands,making less capital available for producing American energy and creating
jobs. The situation has become even worse with the additional delays imposed on companies by
Interior under Secretary Salazar.
• The DOI IG report,which resulted from a Government Accountability Office October 2008 study
recommending that DOI conduct further analysis, already addressed why punitive fees on non-
producing acreage will do nothing to enhance production.
D. The report cautioned that mandating production on federal leases or increasing lease fees
would not enhance production,but could de-incentivize industry.
➢ The DOI IG found that because of severe data integrity problems, they cannot say with any
certainty how many leases are producing. The oft-repeated statistic that 60% of leases are not
producing is not backed by any credible data.
➢ Inconsistencies between MMS and BLM mean that leases identified by BLM as producing may
be reported as non-producing by MMS,and vice versa.
2 Oil and Gas Production on Federal Leases:No Simple Answer,U.S.Department of the Interior,Office of
Inspector General,Royalty Initiatives Group,February 27,2009.
IPAMS Position Paper—Interior Fee and Royalty Rate Increases
February 2010 Page 3 of 3
Royalty Rate Increase
• The President's budget calls for rule making to increase the onshore royalty rate for natural gas and oil.
Currently set at 12.5%, the rate provides an excellent return to taxpayers.
• Administration officials often compare the federal rate to states such as Texas which have a higher
royalty rate in some instances. The comparison does not take into account the fact that these states
have a regulatory and permitting environment that otherwise encourages production. For example,
permitting is done within an average of nineteen days in Texas,versus several months, and in some
cases over a year for federal permits. Environmental analyses that take several years and cost hundreds
of thousands if not millions of dollars on federal lands are not required by these states. Increasing the
royalty rate for federal lands,which are already extremely expensive to develop because of the
regulatory burden,would become prohibitively expensive with a higher royalty rate.
• Comparison of the onshore rate to offshore royalty rates is also misleading. The reserves found on
onshore federal lands are significantly different from the conventional reserves found offshore, such as
in the Gulf of Mexico. Unconventional reserves found on public lands in the Intermountain West are
less productive and more expensive to develop,and the onshore 12.5%royalty rate reflects that
difference. Producers assume 100%of the risk and expense for developing these unconventional
resources with no guarantee of any return on investment whatsoever,while providing a huge rate of
return to the taxpayer.
Application for Permit to Drill (APD) Fees
• The APD fee was first enacted just two years ago during a closed-door attempt to plug holes in the last
administration's budget. Until then,it was understood that industry already more than paid for permits.
• Congress increased the APD fee for FY2010 from$4,000 to $6,500 in order to offset a lower funding
appropriation for the BLM Natural Gas and Oil Management Program. This 62% tax increase was
arbitrary,given that companies already more than pay for the administrative processing of APDs,as
well as more than 46 times the cost of the entire onshore program.
• BLM collects the APD fee regardless of whether or not the permit is issued. The money goes into the
general treasury,and is not applied to more efficient processing or to on-the-ground environmental
protection at the field office where it is collected.
• BLM collecting an APD fee is akin to the IRS charging individual taxpayers a large fee for filing their
income tax returns.
• The fee is especially egregious given BLM's slow APD processing times. While obtaining an approved
APD on a federal lease has always been a long, time-consuming and expensive process,recent
additional bureaucratic delays have resulted in particularly slow permitting times. Many permits take
over a year to process, despite a specific 30 day deadline mandated by Congress in the Energy Policy
Act of 2005. The long delays in obtaining permits, combined with the fee, further increase the expense
of developing American energy on public lands.
Hello