HomeMy WebLinkAbout20092830.tiffTo: Chris Gathman
Weld County Panning
916 10th Street
Greeley, Colorado 80631
Regarding Case #: USR-1708
Dear Chris Gathman,
Weld County Planning Department
GREELEY OFFICE
JUL 3 01009
RECEIVED
I live about a quarter mile from a proposed Oilfield waste Disposal Facility that will be in
our AG Zoned area. My neighbor, Douglas Ratzlaff, notified me of this case and sent a
copy of a letter that he sent to Governor Ritter. I hope we do not have to go to that level
of government to get this zoning request denied.
I moved into the country to have an agricultural related property and neighbors with
similar interests. The oil waste disposal site is very close to our property and will cause
additional local heavy traffic, odors from the oil waste products and I believe it will cause
a decrease in my property value. I have invested a lot of money in my property over the
years and plan on another major upgrade to the house, but I do not want to throw money
away if the unattractive commercial neighbor is going to cause lower property value.
Please keep this an Ag area and deny this change to the zoning.
Regards,
Lonnie Ford
16299 WCR 49
LaSalle, CO 80645
EXHIBIT
I 6A
2009-2830
Londa Reynolds
5524 South 175th Road
Brighton, MO 65617
CASE #: USR-1708
August 8, 2009
Weld County Department of Planning
910 8th Street
Greeley, Colorado 80631
Weld County Planning Department
GREELEY OFFICE
AUG 13 7nnq
)10EIVED
To whom it may concern:
I have significant issues with Lone Star LLC's proposed project : USR for Class II
Oilfield Waste Disposal Facility in the Ag Zone District Location: South of an
adjacent to CR 34 and East of and adjacent to CR49.
My property lies within 500 feet of this proposal and, as such, makes me a
interested party. I will not agree to this proposed Waste Disposal Facility. The of
companies have been ruining the water supply in this area for quite some time. There
must be a limit put on much further they can pollute a very important aquifer that
serves the needs of a multi -state area. It's time to say no to their pollution. In addition,
such a facility will drastically reduce the value and sale of real estate in the
surrounding area. Consider this my official complaint and objection with this project. I
ask Weld County to deny their proposal and permits.
Please send me by return mail all information regarding this proposal and the
conditions that must be met for approval and denial. I am also requesting a complete
list of all meetings to include date and time.
In addition, I am requesting for the Weld County Planner associated with the
proposal to call my husband to discuss the situation, Derral Reynolds (417) 724-8589
Thank You for Understanding My Concerns,
Londa Reynolds
d
n
EXHIBIT
•
•
Weld County Planning Services
918 10th Street
Greeley, Colorado 80631
August 17, 2009
Re: Case # USR-1708, Deep Well Disposal site in Weld County
Dear: Weld Country Planning & Zoning
This letter expresses our concern regarding a Deep Well Disposal site that is planned
across the street from our home. As residents of Weld County for 25 years.
Our family lives on a 10 -acre parcel at 24249 Weld County Road 34 in LaSalle, Colorado.
Across the road from our home is a 40- acre parcel that the previous owner recently lost
due to property foreclosure. At the end of 2008, Mr. Jim Lee, an out -of state citizen from
Texas, purchased the 40 -acre parcel.
In approximately November of 2008, Mr. Lee contacted us and stated that he intended to
install a Deep Well Disposal site on the property. Not knowing what a Deep Well Disposal
site involved, we immediately researched the topic. Using the internet and local resources,
including already established Deep Well Disposal sites, we learned that there are already a
minimum of five conquest disposal sites in Weld County. One of these sites is less than
eight miles, gate -to -gate, from the site that is to be located across from our home. In
addition to our home, there are several homes on small acre parcels very near to the
planned disposal site, and at least eight additional homes in close proximity to this site. We
are extremely concerned about the negative impact this planned Deep Well Disposal site
will have on our property and our neighborhood. The planned well will be located at Weld
County Roads 49 & 34. Weld County Road 49 is already a very dangerous road. It is
frequently congested. The speed limit is 65mph on this two-lane road. Adding large trucks
and additional traffic to this situation will surely add to its danger.
In addition to the concern of increased traffic danger, the company that is planning to build
and operate the facility is Lone Star LLC. From what we have learned, this out-of-state
company has never -before owned nor operated a Deep Well Disposal site. To the best of
our knowledge, Mr. Jim Lee has acted in a consulting capacity for a conquest disposal site,
however he has neither owned nor operated a facility. There as there is no track record on
the company: are they a safe company and will they follow rules & regulations?
A third area of concern is the planned hours of operation for the site. The site plans to
operate 24 hours each day, 7 days each week. The majority of homeowners that live in our
area moved here to get away from the very issues that the proposed site will bring to the
area: lights that will illuminate the facility throughout the night; noise from truck engines,
jake-breaks and pumps; and heavy traffic comings and goings. Additional disruption will
take place while the initial well is drilled and during bi-annual inspections that will increase
lights and noise related to the facility.
Added to our concerns are the smell from the hydrocarbons and the significant and
dangerous issue of fugitive dust. Finally, there is a significant environmental and health
concern of water contamination to local aquifers. When all is added together, our
EXHIBIT
(cc
•
•
•
neighborhood will suffer noise pollution, environmental contamination, disruption of our
peaceful rural community, and significantly decreased property values.
We filed a Letter of Protest with the Colorado Oil & Gas Commission earlier this year. The
Commission contacted us on May 4, regarding the Letter and our concerns. Three days
later, Mr. Lee came to our home with wine and cookies, stating that he would like to come in
for a visit. We asked him in, and he shared that he had just come from the Commission. He
learned that we had filed a protest. He pressured us to take back our Letter of Protest,
suggesting that if we did so, we could become "good neighbors." He also stated that we
cost him an additional $30,000.00 dollars and a thirty day delay because of the Letter. He
shared that he was already having a difficult time with the rules and regulations in Weld
County and in Colorado. In fact, he stated several times that "... this place is worse than
California..." We countered that it is probably the case that the state and the county are just
trying to keep the state nice! We expressed concerns about the well and the value of our
property. Mr. Lee responded that we already have a feedlot in the area. Indeed there is a
feedlot out of view of our parcel, and indeed this lot already brings a great deal of traffic to
the area. We explained our concern that the proposed Deep Well Disposal site would
compound the traffic and property value issues, and many other issues as well.
We are extremely concerned that this site is not in the best interests of our community. In
fact, based on behaviors and activities Mr. Lee to date, on his apparent lack of knowledge
and experience about Deep Well Disposal development and operation, and on his
frustration regarding county and state law and regulation, we are extremely concerned that
this site, if developed, will pose a significant danger to our family, our community, and our
state.
If the deep well disposal site is passed these are a few things we would like to see happen.
In Mr. Jim Lee words he wants to be a good neighbor however he has not attempted to
mow are spray his 40 acre parcel for noxious weeds and has not attempted to pick up any
of the debris that is scattered over the property which are not visible now because the
weeds are so tall. This concerns us what will happen when the disposal site is up and
running! Will the site be kept in this manner will we end up with a dump as well as a
disposal site.
The road congestion, I believe that Weld County will perform a traffic test for this concern.
Hours of operation, we would like to see a limit put on the hours possibly from 6:00 A.M.
thru 9:00 P.M. the front of our home faces the disposal site. There are bright lights that
shine if the trucks come and go 24/7 there will be no rest.
As stated above the front of our home faces the disposal site this is something we will have
to look at everyday not just if you happen to go out the back door its right there in plain
view. I would like to see a large dirt burro built around it with natural prairie grass planted
Mr. Lee said he would plant trees to hide but I doubt they would be kept watered, and if they
were how long would it take for them to grow big enough? However if he wanted to buy
larger trees for my property line I would see that they where water!
Mr. Lee also stated he was not going to put up any building to hide or conceal the site or to
keep the noise down, however I have heard of a bird cage device that can be placed over
the site when they are injecting the brine into the earth.
•
•
•
Another concern is a strange one however from the people that live around the other deep
well sites say no cell phone service for some reason everyone said that when it's in
operation there is no cell service and since my husband and I run both of our businesses
out of our home this is a very important concern if we can't get our call then we won't be
able to get new customers.
Weld County Planning and Zoning Commission, we greatly appreciate you reading this
letter. We can be reached at 970-302-6465 or at Iratzlaff(c�aol.com. Our contact information
is below.
Sincerely,
Doug & Linda Ratzlaff
24249 Weld County Road 34
LaSalle, CO 80645
Chris Gathman
From:
"rent:
To:
Subject:
Dear Chris Gathman:
hollraut@netzero.net
Tuesday, September 15, 2009 5:21 AM
Chris Gathman
propsed deep well diposal
I have just heard from a neighbor about the proposed deep well disposal planned site to be
built on County Rd's 49 and 34. I live off of County rd 341/2 and I can hardly believe
someone is actually thinking of doing this! WCR 49 is a very dangerous road with all the semi
trucks that come through here at 65 miles an hour.
One semi almost hit my sons school bus just the other day it's trailer jack knifed because
it wasn't paying attention when the bus stopped on WCR 49 to drop off a child. The bus driver
now has all the kids in the back to move forward just before he gets to that stop everyday to
be a little more safe. Just yesterday I saw a semi truck rolled in the ditch again on WCR 49.
It was a foggy morning. Way to many trucks on this road.
With this new site there would be a lot more new trucks coming and going to add even more
danger, that's a dissaster waiting to happen! My oldest son is a fairly new driver and it
already worries me and in a couple months my other son will be driving. As a parent one
always has concerns with children and driving but, none as worrisome as these. Enough is
enough I wish they would lower the speed limit to 50 on WCR 49, it was 55 once I don't know
who chose to raise it to 65, well that's a whole nother issue. My point here is, it just
can't be safe at this location. Besides the smell! And what about our drinking water and the
oise 24 seven! The bright lights at night it's usually so calm and relaxing most evening one
of the reasons for living out here to get away from city commotion.
Please stop this from happening. Please email me and let me know what I can do to stop them.
Holly Rautmann
Best Weight Loss Program - Click Here!
<http://console.mxlogic.com/redir/?1od79EVu7cIe6SmkTXzD4Po0epekk5JzcJIRTUOU6yDNHMdM4x8aFFIFUX
rlAaz4h60u2MMgeoDA2505N4ohs30n1p6hwrcwso2M3Gy84z096zUwahuCwi39oJg23h0bGxEM4xH3t-
LtNNMsYgenDztPpeFVYtrC2wgav6L0QSUCVsSyC-Pt5As-UrjvdHhGJi03h0x H6y0NVVVEwgAJmCDCV-
7PNo pgdECQirbarZN0a9Ile6tA3s>
•
EXHIBIT
I 67J2
•
•
•
Weld County Planning Services
918 10th st.
Greeley, Co 80631
Attn: Chris Gathman
September 21, 2009
Weld County Planning Department
GREELEY OFFICE
SEP 2 4 ?nns
RECEIVED
Dear Chris Gathman:
I emailed you about some of my concerns and after talking to neighbors I assure you none
are very happy about the proposed deep well disposal site plans for county rd's 49 and 34.
Case NO. USR- 1708
I'm sending this letter to let you know several neighbors are very against this location site
and what it means to our neighborhood.
I mentioned the dangers before I hope to be at the hearing but, in case I can't be there I
wanted to state our concerns in this letter in advance so you might have sometime to look
over it before October 6`h hearing..
After talking to the neighbors we seem to have a lot of similar concerns, the first is, the
safety of everyone traveling to and from on County Rd 49. It is a highly traveled road by
everyone around here including all the Semi trucks which makes for a very dangerous
road and with the deep well disposal site vehicles coming and going all day long makes for
even more dangerous situations.
Second, the noise and bright lights, we live in a very peaceful neighborhood. No one ever
wants to disrupt the relaxed atmosphere we moved out here for. What hours do they plan
to operate? The noise of the pumps and truck engines with the lights lit up all over how
can anyone enjoy the country life? This commotion is meant for the city not out here
where there's still peace and quite.
Third, What about the safety of our water? Or the Environment? I understand the
company planning this project has no experience in this type of a business. How can we be
sure they won't make mistakes and cause some serious problems. What about the smell?
This is not a very pleasant smell, yeah live stock smells aren't so pleasant sometimes but,
that's expected when your in the country and those do pass this would stick around. This
company, Lone Star LLC could make mistakes that jeopardize our health that's something
that can never be taken back how will the public be protected?. Were talking real serious
problems. How can we be assured mistakes won't be made especially when (Lone Star LLC
) is in experienced and naive, mistakes will happen.
Remember who pays for their mistakes!
Please don't allow this to happen.
Thanks,
Holly & Cory Rautmann
16300WCR 471/2
La Salle, Co 80645
Ph 970-284-5787
Chris Gathman
From:
,Sent:
Miro:
Subject:
LNICESHOT@aol.com
Monday, September 28, 2009 6:03 PM
Chris Gathman
Fwd: Deep Well Disposal Site
From: LNICESHOT
To: cgathman@co.weld.us
Sent: 9/28/2009 12:06:24 P.M. Mountain Daylight Time
Subj: Deep Well Disposal Site
Mr. Gathman- this letter is in response to the proposed DWD site at Rd34 & 49. I must
strongly voice my extreme disapproval of this project. As there are 8 other DWD's in close
proximity to this location, the installation of this abomination is due only to the greed of
Mr. Jim Lee, and Weld County's obvious disdain for the safety and welfare of it's residents.
My concerns are these: 1. Increased truck traffic, with it's attendant increase in dust,
noise, pollution, and the inevitable traffic accidents on an already dangerous, mostly
unmonitored high speed 2 lane road. 2. Noise and light pollution. Most of the residents live
here (and pay taxes) because of the quiet, peaceful surroundings. Would you like to live next
this site? I doubt it. 3. The possibility of contamination of domestic wells. We depend on
',these wells for our families and livestock. How does Weld County propose to reimburse us if
wells are contaminated? I submit that the long term effects of this project are not worth any
amount of money, none of which will trickle down to the people who have to put up with the
degradation of their lifestyle. Do the right thing, Mr Gathman, and do not allow this project
to proceed!
Sincerely, Larry Smith and Deborah Ray, 16049 WCR 47.5, LaSalle CO 80645
•
1
DATE: September 28, 2009
TO: Weld County Board of County Commissioners
Weld County Planning and Building Services
RE: USR-1708
I am writing to express concern about the proposed deep well disposal site at County Roads 34 and 49. I
am a Weld County resident living on County Road 49 near County Road 34 and do not wish to have the
quality of the rural character in this part of Weld County compromised. My concerns are the following:
• Traffic volume on County Road 49 is already heavy and additional trucks turning from County
Road 49 onto County Road 34 will add congestion and traffic noise. A semitruck slowing from
65 -plus miles per hour to a stop for a left-hand turn will produce a significant amount of noise
which is likely in excess of the 86 to 90 dB permitted by Weld County Code Ordinance 2008-4.
• Light pollution from such a facility will disturb the rural lifestyle of residents in the area.
• The visual landscape and natural vegetation of this rural area will be significantly disrupted.
Please consider rejecting this proposal to conserve the agricultural nature of this area of Weld County. If
the proposal must be approved, please consider the following modifications to reduce the impact of the
disposal site:
• Reduce hours of operation and truck delivery to daytime hours only.
• Require dimming of lighting during nighttime hours.
• Move placement of holding tanks to a less visually prominent location on the property.
• Enforce prohibition ofjake brakes for trucks delivering waste.
• Require landscaping of the area to include trees and shrubbery.
I would like to remind you of the following excerpt from Weld County Code Ordinance 2008-13, Chapter
22, Article 2, Section 22-2-10:
F. Land use policies should support a high quality rural character which respects the
agricultural heritage and traditional agricultural land uses of Weld County, as
agricultural lands are converted to other uses (excluding urban development). Rural
character in Weld County includes those uses which provide rural lifestyles, rural -
based economies, and opportunities to both live and work in rural areas. The natural
landscape and vegetation predominate over the built environment. Agricultural land
uses and development provide the visual landscapes traditionally found in rural areas
and communities.
I do not believe that a deep well disposal site at this location meets the requirements outlined in Section
22-2-10. Thank you for considering my concerns and those of my neighbors.
Sincerely,
Kathryn Bright Banks
16201 County Road 49
La Salle, CO 80645
EXHIBIT
September 29, 2009
To: Chris Gathman
Weld Co. Planning Services
Ref: USR-1708
Lonestar Saltwater Disposal Facility concerns
From: Ray Nelson
15950 CR 47.5
La Salle, Co. 80645
Weld County Planning Department
GREELEY OFFICE
srp 79 7nnq
RECEIVED
Chris Gathman,
Having reviewed all of the information I can find pertaining to USR-1708, I have developed some
concerns with respect to this application.
1. Placement of the holding tanks:
The proposed placement of the thirteen tanks is on the highest point of the entire property.
This placement produces a silhouetting of the 25' to 36' high tanks. Are tanks this tall
really considered low profile tanks' as stated in the application? Are the tanks partially
buried to qualify as 'low profile' tanks?
2. Site lighting:
As stated in the application, "Lighting for the facility will be shielded ...." Again, if the
tanks are located on the highest point of the property I am perplexed as to how a site with
36' tall tanks can be adequately light without the lights being visible from a very far
distance. Secondly, what constitutes a `shielded light'?
3. Hours of operation:
The stated off-loading hours of operation are 7am to 7pm. The application makes note of
`isolated instances' where off-loading may occur outside of these hours. For the sake to
local residents, I would like to propose the site be limited to off-loading only during the
7am to 7pm time frame and when off-loading has ended the lights be turned off to the
maximum extent possible.
4. Proposed number of loads:
I have seen two numbers, 60 per day and 180 round trips per day. At the 180 per day rate,
that is a truck entering the property every four minutes for a twelve hour period. I have
serious concerns for the intense traffic loading, and resulting safety issues on the
surrounding roads.
As the proposal places the facility on the highest point of the property, silhouetting the tanks and
building, I propose that Lonestar not plant trees at their location, but rather supply well started
trees to the residences that will have line -of -sight to this facility. History in Weld County has
proven that trees planted to `hide' unsightly feedlots/operations do not work. These trees are not
watered and maintained adequately enough to provide any sort of screen for decades, if ever. Let
the residents who have a vested interest in screening this facility from their view grow the trees.
Thank you for your time and consideration of my requests.
EXHIBIT
I ti -4
September 29, 2009
•
•
•
To Chris Gathman.
This is a letter to protest Lonestar LLCs plans to put a Deep Well Disposal site at Weld County
Roads 49 and 34.
Mr Jim Lee is from Texas and has no vested interest in Colorado, except to make money at the
expense of our state. He has no plans to live on the property and so any damage to the
environment or our property values will be of absolutely no concem to him.
The property he picked is on one of the busiest country roads in Weld County.
In the 10 years I have lived on road 49 I've seen the speed limit and the amount of traffic rise
geometrically.
Along with that, we have had very little support from the local police or state patrol.
I use the road once or twice a day and if I see a patrol car once a wk I'm lucky.
The site will impact the entire area with noise, excess traffic day and night, light pollution at night,
in spite of what Mr Lee states, that coupled with potential accidents, involving large tanker trucks,
carrying toxic waste.
Mr Lee's plans to hide the site with berms and trees, will fall by the wayside just like the trees
Horton Feed Lot promised when the county commison let them expand their facility.
If Mr lee wants to be the good neighbor, he claims to be, his plan should provide the land owners,
impacted by his operation, with the necessary trees.
The landowners at least will have a real interest in caring for them to help soften any
environmental and physical problems the site will cause.
The county commisson needs to be concerned with Weld County residents who are directly
affected by this proposal.
Sincerely,
121,0-4
_ \_.04!),1445--
Frank Cassano
15315 Wcr 49
La Salle, Co
80645
Weld County Planning Department
GREELEY OFFICE
SFP 29 7nng
RECEIVED
EXHIBIT
(aZ
SEP-29-2009 10:55A FR0M:JERRY & PAM HILL 9702846099
70:9703046498 P.1
Weld County Planning and Zoning Services
918 10'h Street
Greeley, Co. 80631
ATTN: Chris Gathman
Case No. USR-1708/ Deep Well Disposal Site
Dear Sir:
It has been brought to our attention that the county is in the process of approving a deep
well disposal site at the location of county roads 49 and 34. We are strongly against
this proposal. I am not too sure why the county is not required to inform those who will
be affected by this disposal site since the county requires the land owners to disclose
certain changes to the land we own.
The county just finished not long ago a very large oil collecting plant at county road 49
and 32. This required the roads at this intersection to be widened for trucks coming on
and getting off of county road 49. County road 49 already has a lot more traffic with
more homes being built out in the area and now more trucks coming and going at the oil
collecting site. Now the county wants to add yet another large site for disposing of oil
production just another county road away.
It is also our understanding that the county currently has five other conquest disposal sites
one of which is less than eight miles from where the new proposal site is being
considered. This will definitely have a negative impact on our community not to mention
the noise level, the pollution to the air from the fugitive dust, the smell, the extra traffic,
lights, inspections, environmental contamination, and just the invasion of our very quiet
and peaceful life style that we have so very much protected.
Surely there are other areas much more suitable for this disposal site than the one the
county is proposing. Home owners should and must be heard since we are the ones being
directly impacted by this site. We are concerned about the person who wants to develop
this site, who appears to have lack of knowledge of laws and regulations of deep well
disposal sites and the possible damage he could cause our community. He has never
owned or operated a disposal site and that alone is enough to be concerned.
The home owners that will be affected by this disposal site will have to endure a lot more
traffic in the area not to mention it will greatly affect their property values. There is also
a very large feed lot on county road 49 and 34 which increases traffic flow in the area
already, now the county wants to add a disposal site down the road. It seems as though
there is already enough activity in the area, and we are proposing the county find another
suitable area for the deep well disposal site. The home owners along county road 49 do
not want any more production coming into the area, enough is enough.
EXHIBIT
co
I
SEP-29-2009 10:55A FR0M:JERRY 8 PAM HILL 9702846099
TO:9703046498 P.2
•
•
•
Property owners should have some rights when it comes to changes that directly impact
there safety, property values, there peace and quiet, and the mere invasion of loud and
noisy equipment operations twenty four hours a day. Not to mention the unappealing
view of large containers to deal with permanently. Please hear our plea, and find another
suitable area for this disposal site.
Thank you for your time,
Sincerely,
Jerry and Pamela Hill
24421 county road 36
LaSalle, Co. 80645
Chris Gathman
From:
eent:
o:
Subject:
Swampcactus3@aol.com
Thursday, October 01, 2009 8:42 PM
Chris Gathman
Case No. USR-1708
Dear Chris,
My name is Charlene Fridge . My husband Roger and I live on CR 49 in the area of the proposed
site of the deep well disposal on county roads 49 & 34.
We are writing in protest to the deep well disposal site there. We have lived on 49 for 19
years and moved there to get out of the city, the air, light, and noise pollution. Lo and
behold it appears man wants to bring the pollution and bring our quality of life down.
We have enjoyed being in the environment of peace and quiet, till the airport was built and
now the traffic is horrendous and noise pollution, not to mention the oil rigs and cattle
truck etc. that add to the interruption on the peace we used to enjoy here in the very
beginning of our move.
Putting the tanks on the proposed site, already disturbed by the feed lot there, it
destroys the beauty of the horizon in the early morning when the sun rises. Any time I look
out my window and see the man made interruption, it kinda depresses me. I believe God's
intention for us is to have His beautiful creation of rolling hills and big sky and clouds,
and the stars at night, the animals grazing, and gives a certain amount of peace to us. When
all the tanks are there it is an eye sore. It interrupts our quality of life, and it's not
aright that these companies should rob us of that.
Would you please set them as low as possible that they are less visible to us, keep the
lights low as possible, keep the operation during the normal work hours as everyone else, 7
A.M. to 4 P.M. , and please keep the traffic down to minimum.
We would prefer you to set them somewhere else where there are no residences surrounding
it. And if you choose not too, maybe you could give us Evergreen trees to plant between us
and the tanks so we never have to look out and see them.. At least Evergreens are full and
stay thick all year round. The trees would also cut the noise and the light from the
facility.
We would appreciate your consideration of "not" putting these tanks in the area of 49 and
34.
Pease confirm receiving of this e-mail.
Thank You.
Sincerely,
Charlene and Roger Fridge
15417 CR 49
La Salle, Co. 80645
•
EXHIBIT
laK
1
Mr. Chris Gathman
Weld County Planning Services
918 Tenth Street
Greeley, CO 80631
Dear Mr. Gathman:
Weld County PlWRR1
GREELEY 0
P.lennjjng Department
T0PT0FFICE
(Inri n 7?R to October 1, 2009
OCT n 19t1
RECEIlith %VED
This letter expresses our opposition to a Deep Well Disposal site that is planned in our area. The planned
well is to be located at Weld County Roads 49 and 34. Our family lives on a 15 -acre parcel at 15027
Weld County Road 49 in LaSalle, Colorado. As residents of Weld County for 15 years, we are writing let
you know that we are against this project.
There are already a minimum of five disposal sites in Weld County, and one of these sites is less than
eight miles from the site that is to be located in our area. We are extremely concerned about the negative
impact this planned Deep Well Disposal site will have on our property and our neighborhood. Weld
County Road 49 is already a very dangerous road. The speed limit is 65 mph on this two-lane road, and it
is frequently congested. Adding large trucks and additional traffic to this situation will add to the danger.
In addition to our concern of the increased traffic danger, the company, Lone Star LCC, that is planning
this project has never owned or operated a Deep Well Disposal site. Mr. Jim Lee, the owner of the
property, has neither owned nor operated such a facility. Consequently, there is no track record for the
company or Mr. Lee, and we are concerned about his ability to follow all of the rules and regulations in
order to make this a safe operation.
The site plans to operate 24 hours a day, seven days a week. This can only mean lights that will
illuminate the facility throughout the night; noise from truck engines, jake-brakes and pumps; and heavy
traffic in the area. There will be order from the hydrocarbons, and significant and dangerous fugitive
dust. Most important are the environmental and health concerns of water contamination of local aquifers.
We have already experienced problems with our well water as a consequence of the increased oil well
drilling in the area. When all of this is added together, our neighborhood will suffer noise pollution,
environmental contamination, disruption of our rural community, and significantly decreased property
values.
Based on Mr. Lee's apparent lack of knowledge and experience about Deep Well Disposal development
and operation, and his frustration regarding county and state regulations, we are extremely concerned that
this site, if developed, will pose a significant danger to our family, our community, and our county.
Our family moved to this area to get away from the very issues that this proposed site will bring. We are
opposed to the installation and operation of this Deep Well Disposal site, and we hope that you will take
into account all of our concerns when the hearing for Case No. USR-1708 comes before Weld County
Planning and Zoning on October 6, 2009.
Sincerely,
?v u2 n,,a.ff..t
R. Bradley Lindenmayer
15027 Weld County Road 49
LaSalle, CO 80645
EXHIBIT
Mr. Chris Gathman
Weld County Planning Services
918 Tenth Street
Greeley, CO 80631
Dear Mr. Gathman:
Weld County Planning Department
r REELEV OFFICE
Weld County Planning De
GREELEY 0FFICFoc1 it?rori
October 1, 2009
OCT�1
:016 /E�
RECEI
This letter expresses our opposition to a Deep Well Disposal site that is planned in our area. The planned
well is to be located at Weld County Roads 49 and 34. Our family lives on a 15 -acre parcel at 15027
Weld County Road 49 in LaSalle, Colorado. As residents of Weld County for 15 years, we are writing let
you know that we are against this project.
There are already a minimum of five disposal sites in Weld County, and one of these sites is less than
eight miles from the site that is to be located in our area. We are extremely concerned about the negative
impact this planned Deep Well Disposal site will have on our property and our neighborhood. Weld
County Road 49 is already a very dangerous road. The speed limit is 65 mph on this two-lane road, and it
is frequently congested. Adding large trucks and additional traffic to this situation will add to the danger.
In addition to our concern of the increased traffic danger, the company, Lone Star LCC, that is planning
this project has never owned or operated a Deep Well Disposal site. Mr. Jim Lee, the owner of the
property, has neither owned nor operated such a facility. Consequently, there is no track record for the
company or Mr. Lee, and we are concerned about his ability to follow all of the rules and regulations in
order to make this a safe operation.
The site plans to operate 24 hours a day, seven days a week. This can only mean lights that will
illuminate the facility throughout the night; noise from truck engines, jake-brakes and pumps; and heavy
traffic in the area. There will be order from the hydrocarbons, and significant and dangerous fugitive
dust. Most important are the environmental and health concerns of water contamination of local aquifers.
We have already experienced problems with our well water as a consequence of the increased oil well
drilling in the area. When all of this is added together, our neighborhood will suffer noise pollution,
environmental contamination, disruption of our rural community, and significantly decreased property
values.
Based on Mr. Lee's apparent lack of knowledge and experience about Deep Well Disposal development
and operation, and his frustration regarding county and state regulations, we are extremely concerned that
this site, if developed, will pose a significant danger to our family, our community, and our county.
Our family moved to this area to get away from the very issues that this proposed site will bring. We are
opposed to the installation and operation of this Deep Well Disposal site, and we hope that you will take
into account all of our concerns when the hearing for Case No. USR-1708 comes before Weld County
Planning and Zoning on October 6, 2009.
Sincerely,
Skipper Lindenmayer
15027 Weld County Road 49
LaSalle, CO 80645
EXHIBIT
1 CM
•
•
Mr. Chris Gathman
Weld County Planning Services
918 Tenth Street
Greeley, CO 80631
Dear Mr. Gathman:
Weld County Planning Department
GREELEY OFFICE
OCT 0 2701►Q
RECEIVED
October 1, 2009
This letter expresses our opposition to a Deep Well Disposal site that is planned in our area. The planned
well is to be located at Weld County Roads 49 and 34. Our family lives on a 15 -acre parcel at 15027
Weld County Road 49 in LaSalle, Colorado. As residents of Weld County for 15 years, we are writing let
you know that we are against this project.
There are already a minimum of five disposal sites in Weld County, and one of these sites is less than
eight miles from the site that is to be located in our area. We are extremely concerned about the negative
impact this planned Deep Well Disposal site will have on our property and our neighborhood. Weld
County Road 49 is already a very dangerous road. The speed limit is 65 mph on this two-lane road, and it
is frequently congested. Adding large trucks and additional traffic to this situation will add to the danger.
In addition to our concern of the increased traffic danger, the company, Lone Star LCC, that is planning
this project has never owned or operated a Deep Well Disposal site. Mr. Jim Lee, the owner of the
property, has neither owned nor operated such a facility. Consequently, there is no track record for the
company or Mr. Lee, and we are concerned about his ability to follow all of the rules and regulations in
order to make this a safe operation.
The site plans to operate 24 hours a day, seven days a week. This can only mean lights that will
illuminate the facility throughout the night; noise from truck engines, jake-brakes and pumps; and heavy
traffic in the area. There will be order from the hydrocarbons, and significant and dangerous fugitive
dust. Most important are the environmental and health concerns of water contamination of local aquifers.
We have already experienced problems with our well water as a consequence of the increased oil well
drilling in the area. When all of this is added together, our neighborhood will suffer noise pollution,
environmental contamination, disruption of our rural community, and significantly decreased property
values.
Based on Mr. Lee's apparent lack of knowledge and experience about Deep Well Disposal development
and operation, and his frustration regarding county and state regulations, we are extremely concerned that
this site, if developed, will pose a significant danger to our family, our community, and our county.
Our family moved to this area to get away from the very issues that this proposed site will bring. We are
opposed to the installation and operation of this Deep Well Disposal site, and we hope that you will take
into account all of our concerns when the hearing for Case No. USR-1708 comes before Weld County
Planning and Zoning on October 6, 2009.
Sincerely,
William Lindenmayer
15027 Weld County Road 49
LaSalle, CO 80645
EXHIBIT
I (M
Weld County Planning Department
GREELEY OFFICE DepartmentId rounty play OFFICE
OCT O 17fIf1QGREELE October 1, 2009
Mr. Chris Gathman
Weld County Planning Services
918 Tenth Street
Greeley, CO 80631
Dear Mr. Gathman:
RECEIVE:It RECEIVED
RE
This letter expresses our opposition to a Deep Well Disposal site that is planned in our area. The planned
well is to be located at Weld County Roads 49 and 34. Our family lives on a 15 -acre parcel at 15027
Weld County Road 49 in LaSalle, Colorado. As residents of Weld County for 15 years, we are writing let
you know that we are against this project.
There are already a minimum of five disposal sites in Weld County, and one of these sites is less than
eight miles from the site that is to be located in our area. We are extremely concerned about the negative
impact this planned Deep Well Disposal site will have on our property and our neighborhood. Weld
County Road 49 is already a very dangerous road. The speed limit is 65 mph on this two-lane road, and it
is frequently congested. Adding large trucks and additional traffic to this situation will add to the danger.
In addition to our concern of the increased traffic danger, the company, Lone Star LCC, that is planning
this project has never owned or operated a Deep Well Disposal site. Mr. Jim Lee, the owner of the
property, has neither owned nor operated such a facility. Consequently, there is no track record for the
company or Mr. Lee, and we are concerned about his ability to follow all of the rules and regulations in
order to make this a safe operation.
The site plans to operate 24 hours a day, seven days a week. This can only mean lights that will
illuminate the facility throughout the night; noise from truck engines, jake-brakes and pumps; and heavy
traffic in the area. There will be order from the hydrocarbons, and significant and dangerous fugitive
dust. Most important are the environmental and health concerns of water contamination of local aquifers.
We have already experienced problems with our well water as a consequence of the increased oil well
drilling in the area. When all of this is added together, our neighborhood will suffer noise pollution,
environmental contamination, disruption of our rural community, and significantly decreased property
values.
Based on Mr. Lee's apparent lack of knowledge and experience about Deep Well Disposal development
and operation, and his frustration regarding county and state regulations, we are extremely concerned that
this site, if developed, will pose a significant danger to our family, our community, and our county.
Our family moved to this area to get away from the very issues that this proposed site will bring. We are
opposed to the installation and operation of this Deep Well Disposal site, and we hope that you will take
into account all of our concerns when the hearing for Case No. USR-1708 comes before Weld County
Planning and Zoning on October 6, 2009.
Sincerely,
Cpl. W. Brian Lindenmayer
15027 Weld County Road 49
LaSalle, CO 80645
EXHIBIT
'(Co
•
•
Kerr/i Gee
Ken -McGee Gathering LLC
1099 18'h Street, Suite 1800, Denver, Colorado 80202
October 1, 2009
Weld County Department of Planning
ATTN: Chris Gathman, Planner
Greeley Office
918 106 Street
Greeley, CO 80631
(Sent Via Email and U. S. Mail)
Re: Application for Injection Well Operations for the Oil & Gas Industry
Case Number: USR 1708
Township 3 North, Range 64 West, 6th P.M.
Section 18: N/2 N/2 NW/4
Weld County, Colorado
Dear Mr. Gathman:
Weld County Planning Department
GREELEY OFFICE
OCT n 2 9nnq
RECEIVED
The purpose of this letter is to inform you that Kerr-McGee Gathering LLC's oil and gas rights may be
adversely affected by the Injection Well Operations as is proposed under Lone Star LLC's USR Application,
Case Number: 1708.
Kerr-McGee owns easements and rights -of -way on the Property stated in the caption above within which it
has buried high pressure natural gas pipelines and a network of natural gas gathering lines. Care must be taken
to insure that uses of the surface estate approved by Weld County above or near these pipelines and gathering
lines are consistent with both public safety and Kerr-McGee's legal rights of use.
Please contact Pete Dokken at 720-929-6556 if you have any questions or comments about this matter. I
am attaching a copy of our General Guidelines and Construction Activities On or Near Kerr-McGee Gathering
LLC Pipelines and Related Facilities.
Very truly yours,
eigt
ICERR-MCGEE GATHERING LLC
Daniel L. Collins
Landman Consultant
General Guidelines for Design and Construction Activities On or Near
Kerr- McGee Gathering LLC Pipelines and Related Facilities
This list of design, construction and contractor requirements, including but not limited to the following, is for the design and
installation of foreign utilities or improvements on Kerr McGee Gathering LLC (KMGG) right-of-way (ROW). These are not
intended to, nor do they waive or modify any rights KMGG may have under existing easements or ROW agreements. For
information regarding KMGG's rights and requirements as they pertain to the existing easements, please reference existing
easements and amendments documents. This list of requirements is applicable for KMGG facilities on easements and in road
rights of ways only. Encroachments on fee property should be referred to the Land & ROW Department. Any reference to
KMGG in the below requirements is meant to include and apply to any Kerr McGee entity.
•
•
Design
• KMGG shall be provided sufficient prior notice of planned activities involving excavation, blasting, or any type of
construction on KMGG's ROW or near its facilities. This is to determine and resolve any location, grade or encroachment
problems and allow for the protection of KMGG's facilities and the general public. This prior notification is to be made
before the actual work is to take place.
The encroaching entity shall provide KMGG with a set of drawings for review and a set of final construction drawings
showing all aspects of the proposed facilities in the vicinity of KMGG's ROW. The encroaching entity shall also provide a
set of "as -built drawings" and submit to KMGG, showing the facilities in the vicinity of KMGG's ROW upon completion of
the work.
• Only facilities shown on drawings reviewed by KMGG will be approved for installation on KMGG's ROW. All drawing
revisions that affect facilities proposed to be placed on KMGG's ROW must be approved by KMGG in writing.
• KMGG shall approve the design of all permanent road crossings.
• Any repair to surface facilities following future pipeline maintenance or repair work by KMGG on its "prior rights" ROW will
be at the expense of the developer or landowner. In addition, any repair to surface facilities following future pipeline
maintenance or repair work by KMGG on replacement ROW granted to relocate KMGG facilities will also be done at the
expense of the developer or landowner unless expressly addressed in surface use agreements and approved in writing by
KMGG.
• The depth of cover over the KMGG pipelines shall not be increased or reduced nor surface modified for drainage without
KMGG's written approval.
• Construction of any permanent structure within KMGG pipeline easement is not permitted without written approval by
KMGG.
• Planting of shrubs and trees is not permitted on KMGG pipeline easement without written approval by KMGG.
• Irrigation equipment i.e. backflow prevent devices, meters, valves, valve boxes, etc. shall not be located on KMGG
easement without written approval by KMGG.
• Foreign utility installations, lE, distribution gas, oil and gas gathering, water, electric, telephone, cable and sewer lines, etc.,
may cross perpendicular to KMGG's pipeline within the ROW, provided that a minimum of eighteen inches (18") of vertical
clearance is maintained between KMGG pipeline(s) and the foreign utility. Any installation by a foreign utility with less than
18" of vertical separation is not allowed without written approval by KMGG. In no case will vertical separation be less than
12". Constant line elevations must be maintained across KMGG's entire ROW width; gravity drain lines are the only
exception and must be approved in writing. Foreign line crossings below the KMGG pipeline must be evaluated by KMGG
to ensure that a significant length of the KMGG line is not exposed and unsupported during construction. Foreign line
crossings above the KMGG pipeline with less than 18" of clearance must be evaluated by KMGG to ensure that additional
support is not necessary to prevent settling on top of the KMGG natural gas pipeline. A KMGG representative must be on
site during any crossing activities to verify clearance depths and to assure the integrity and support of the KMGG facility.
All installations of foreign crossings done by boring and or jacking require the KMGG facility to be exposed to verify
clearances.
Page 1 of 4 Revision 9/2009
�11
General Guidelines for Design and Construction Activities On or Near
Kerr- McGee Gathering LLC Pipelines and Related Facilities
•
•
Foreign utilities shall not run parallel to KMGG pipelines within the KMGG easement without written permission by KMGG.
A minimum of 10 feet of horizontal separation must be maintained in parallel installations whether the foreign utility is
placed within the KMGG easement or adjacent to the KMGG easement. Any deviation from the 10' horizontal requirement
must be approved in writing by KMGG and an "as built survey" provided to KMGG after installation. In the instance that
high voltage electric lines, greater than 20kV, are installed parallel to a KMGG pipeline a minimum horizontal distance of
15' must be maintained.
• The foreign utility should be advised that KMGG maintains cathodic protection on its pipelines and facilities. The foreign
utility must coordinate their cathodic protection system with KMGG's. At the request of KMGG, foreign utilities shall install
(or allow to be installed) cathodic protection test leads at all crossings for the purposes of monitoring cathodic protection
interference. The KMGG CP technician and the foreign utility CP technician shall perform post construction CP
interference testing. Interference issues shall be resolved by mutual agreement between foreign utility and KMGG. All
costs associated with the correction of cathodic protection interference issues on KMGG pipelines as a result of the foreign
utility crossing shall be borne by the foreign utility for a period of one year from date the foreign utility is put in service.
• The developer shall understand that KMGG, whether specifically required per federal law or by company standard, will
mark the routing of its underground facilities with aboveground pipeline markers and test leads and maintain those markers
and test leads. Markers will be installed at every point the pipeline route changes direction and adequate markers will be
installed on straight sections of pipeline to insure, in the sole opinion of KMGG, the safety of the public, contractor, KMGG
personnel and KMGG facilities.
On all foreign utility crossings and / or encroachments, metallic foreign lines shall be coated with a suitable pipe coating for
a distance of at least 10 feet on either side of the crossing.
AC Electrical lines must be installed in conduit and properly insulated.
• On all foreign pipelines, DOT approved pipeline markers shall be installed so as to indicate the route of the foreign pipeline
across the KMGG ROW.
• No power poles, light standards, etc. shall be installed in the KMGG easement without written approval by KMGG.
• KMGG installs above ground appurtenances at various locations that are used in the operation of its facilities. Kerr McGee
will install protective enclosures at the above ground appurtenances to protect them from outside damage. The design and
placement of these above ground appurtenances and protective enclosures is done at KMGG's sole discretion, and may
exceed any regulatory requirements.
Construction
• If KMGG will be relocating KMGG facilities for any entity, grading in the new KMGG ROW shall be +/- 6 inches before
KMGG will mobilize to complete the relocation. Final cover after the completion of the project will not be manipulated by the
requesting entity to be less than 48" nor more than 72". All cover that exceeds 72" or less than 48" will be approved in
writing by KMGG. This does not preclude KMGG from installing the pipeline at a minimum cover of 36" as provided for in
CFR 49 Part 192. Cover during all construction activities will NEVER be less than 36" unless approved in writing and a
KMGG representative is on site during the time cover is reduced.
• The entity requesting relocation shall survey top of pipe after installation but before backfill to determine proper final
elevation of KMGG facilities. The entity requesting relocation is solely responsible for the final depth of cover over the
relocated KMGG facility. Any deviation from cover requirements as outlined above will be corrected at the sole expense of
the entity requesting relocation.
• Contractors shall be advised of KMGG's requirements and be contractually obligated to comply.
• The continued integrity of KMGG's pipelines and the safety of all individuals in the area of proposed work near KMGG's
facilities are of the utmost importance. Therefore, contractor must meet with KMGG representatives prior to construction to
provide and receive notification listings for appropriate area operations and emergency personnel. KMGG's on -site
representative will require discontinuation of any work that, in his or her opinion, endangers the operations or
safety of personnel, pipelines or facilities.
Page 2 of 4 Revision 9/2009
•
General Guidelines for Design and Construction Activities On or Near
Kerr- McGee Gathering LLC Pipelines and Related Facilities
• The Contractor must expose all KMGG pipelines prior to crossing to determine the exact alignment and depth of
the lines. A KMGG representative must be present.
The use of probing rods for pipeline locating shall be performed by KMGG representatives only, to prevent unnecessary
damage to the pipeline coating. A KMGG representative shall do all line locating.
Notification shall be given to KMGG at least 72 hours before start of construction. A schedule of activities for the duration
of the project must be made available at that time to facilitate the scheduling of KMGG's work site representative. Any
Contractor schedule changes shall be provided to KMGG immediately.
• Heavy equipment will not be allowed to operate directly over KMGG pipelines or in KMGG ROW unless written approval is
obtained from KMGG. Heavy equipment shall only be allowed to cross KMGG pipelines at locations designated by KMGG.
Haul roads will be constructed at all crossings. The haul roads will be constructed using lightweight equipment. The
existing depth of cover over the pipeline must be verified. Cover will be added such that a total of 8' of fill exists over the
pipeline and extends a minimum of 10' on each side of the pipeline. Depth of cover will then taper as required for
equipment access. Steel plates may be used for load dissipation only if approved in writing by KMGG.
Contractor shall comply with all precautionary measures required by KMGG, at its sole discretion to protect its pipelines.
When inclement weather exists, provisions must be made to compensate for soil displacement due to subsidence of tires.
• Excavating or grading which might result in erosion or which could render the KMGG ROW inaccessible shall not be
permitted unless the contractor agrees to restore the area to its original condition and provide protection to KMGG's facility.
At no time will cover be reduced to less than 36" without written approval by KMGG and a KMGG representative on site.
•
•
A KMGG representative shall be on -site to monitor any construction activities within twenty-five (25) feet of a KMGG
pipeline or aboveground appurtenance. The contractor shall not work within this distance without a KMGG representative
being on site. Contractor shall use extreme caution and take any appropriate measures to protect KMGG facilities.
• Ripping is only allowed when the position of the pipe is known and not within ten (10) feet of KMGG facility. KMGG
personnel must be present.
• Temporary support of any exposed KMGG pipeline by Contractor may be necessary if required by KMGG's on -site
representative. Backfill below the exposed lines and 12" above the lines shall be replaced with sand or other selected
material as approved by KMGG's on -site representative and thoroughly compacted in 12" lifts to 95% of standard proctor
dry density minimum or as approved by KMGG's on -site representative. This is to adequately protect against stresses that
may be caused by the settling of the pipeline.
• No blasting shall be allowed within 1000 feet of KMGG's facilities unless blasting notification is given to KMGG Including
complete Blasting Plan Data. A pre -blast meeting shall be conducted by the organization responsible for blasting.
KMGG shall be indemnified and held harmless from any loss, cost of liability for personal injuries received, death caused or
property damage suffered or sustained by any person resulting from any blasting operations undertaken within 500 feet of
its facilities. The organization responsible for blasting shall be liable for any and all damages caused to KMGG's facilities
as a result of their activities whether or not KMGG representatives are present. KMGG shall have a signed and executed
Blasting Indemnification Agreement before authorized permission to blast can be given.
No blasting shall be allowed within 200 feet of KMGG's facilities unless blasting notification is given to KMGG a minimum of
one week before blasting. The organization responsible for blasting must complete Blasting Plan Data. KMGG shall
review and analyze the blasting methods. A written blasting plan shall be provided by the organization responsible for
blasting and agreed to in writing by KMGG. A written emergency plan shall be provided by the organization responsible for
blasting.
• KMGG shall have a signed and executed Blasting Indemnification Agreement before authorized permission to blast can be
given. A pre -blast meeting shall be conducted by the organization responsible for blasting.
Any contact with any KMGG facility, pipeline, valve set, etc. shall be reported immediately to KMGG. If repairs to the pipe
are necessary, they will be made and inspected before the section is re -coated and the line is back -filled.
Page 3 of 4 Revision 9/2009
/01111111/
General Guidelines for Design and Construction Activities On or Near
Kerr- McGee Gathering LLC Pipelines and Related Facilities
• KMGG personnel shall install all test leads on KMGG facilities.
Local Kerr-McGee Gathering LLC Representation:
Manager of Construction & Facilities Engineering: Kevin R. Osif, P.E.
Facilities Engineer: Joseph E. Sanchez, P.E.
Operations Engineer: Erik Smith
Pipeline Foreman: James Phillips
Pipeline Foreman: Rick Noffsinger
Emergency Contacts:
On call supervisor
Kerr McGee 24 hour emergency number
One Call Emergency
•
•
Phone: 303 655 - 4307
Phone: 303 655 - 4319
Phone: 303 655 -4359
Phone: 303 655 - 4343
Phone: 303-655 - 4326
Phone: 303-559 - 4001
Phone: 303-659 - 5922
Phone: 811
Page 4 of 4 Revision 9/2009
Chris Gathman
rom: Dokken, Peder [Peder.Dokken@anadarko.com]
ent: Tuesday, October 06, 2009 8:36 AM
o: Dan D. Hull; Collins, Dan
Cc: Chris Gathman; Jim Lee
Subject: RE: Kerr-McGee Gathering LLC's Comments regarding Lone Star LLC's USR Application,
Case Number 1708
Attachments: image001.jpg
Chris, Dan Hull and I spoke last Thursday. I advised Dan that the plat for this USR show 4
to 5 pipelines on the east side of this property that appear to run in approximately the same
direction. One of these pipelines is a Kerr-McGee Gathering LLC (KMGG) pipeline. I told Dan
he needed to call for locates and identify the ownership of these pipelines on the plat. I
also told Dan that the KMGG pipeline runs through this property and the plat needs to show
this pipeline across the entire length of the pipeline across the property.
Thanks, Pete.
Peder C. Dokken
Senior Staff Landman
Kerr-McGee Gathering, LLC
an Anadarko Petroleum Corp. company
1099 18th Street
Suite 1800
Denver, CO 80202
Telephone: 720-929-6556
Amirell: 303-263-5612
IlPrax: Peder.Dokken(nanadarko.com
From: Dan D. Hull [mailto:Dan.Hull@LRA-INC.com]
Sent: Thursday, October 01, 2009 3:22 PM
To: Collins, Dan
Cc: Chris Gathman; Jim Lee; Dokken, Peder
Subject: RE: Kerr-McGee Gathering LLC's Comments regarding Lone Star LLC's USR Application,
Case Number 1708
Dan,
Thanks for the information. Please note that I have a call in to Pete Dokken to help address
Kerr McGee's concerns.
Thanks,
*an
EXHIBIT
i
Chris Gathman
From:
tent:
o:
Cc:
Subject:
Attachments:
Thanks Dan! Pete.
Dokken, Peder [Peder.Dokken@anadarko.com]
Tuesday, October 06, 2009 10:21 AM
Dan D. Hull; Collins, Dan
Chris Gathman; Jim Lee
RE: Kerr-McGee Gathering LLC's Comments regarding Lone Star LLC's USR Application,
Case Number 1708
image001.jpg
From: Dan D. Hull [mailto:Dan.Hull@LRA-INC.com]
Sent: Tuesday, October 06, 2009 9:04 AM
To: Dokken, Peder; Collins, Dan
Cc: Chris Gathman; Jim Lee
Subject: RE: Kerr-McGee Gathering LLC's Comments regarding Lone Star LLC's USR Application,
Case Number 1708
Pete,
I completed a site visit Friday of last week. While completing my site visit, I did confirm
�he original locates were still in place. I will update the plans to show the entire Kerr
McGee pipeline and label as such. I will send you a copy once that has been completed for
your review.
Thanks,
Dan
From: Dokken, Peder[mailto:Peder.Dokken@anadarko.com]
Sent: Tuesday, October 06, 2009 8:36 AM
To: Dan D. Hull; Collins, Dan
Cc: Chris Gathman; Jim Lee
Subject: RE: Kerr-McGee Gathering LLC's Comments regarding Lone Star LLC's USR Application,
Case Number 1708
Chris, Dan Hull and I spoke last Thursday. I advised Dan that the plat for this USR show 4
to 5 pipelines on the east side of this property that appear to run in approximately the same
direction. One of these pipelines is a Kerr-McGee Gathering LLC (KMGG) pipeline. I told Dan
ige needed to call for locates and identify the ownership of these pipelines on the plat. I
lso told Dan that the KMGG pipeline runs through this property and the plat needs to show
this pipeline across the entire length of the pipeline across the property.
EXHIBIT
1 D5
Hello