The URL can be used to link to this page

Browse Search

Home My WebLink About20021904.tiff -- RICHARD D. JUDD, P.C. ATTORNEYTMR E Y AT LAW nr rreS 370 SEVENTEENTH STREET,SUITE 3050 C.]l� MAY -1 9 [T/4' DENVER, COLORADO 80202 l FACSIMILE: 303/592-4244 lit' 0 . TELEPHONE: 303/592-4900 May 18, 1994 VIA FACSIMILE NO. 866-5691 AND REGULAR MAIL Timothy J. Monahan, Esq. Assistant Attorney General Natural Resources Section State of Colorado Department of Law State Services Building 1525 Sherman Street - 5th Floor Denver, Colorado 80203 Re: Weld County Waste Disposal, Inc. Dear Mr. Monahan: Thank you for your letter of April 14, 1994. Weld County Waste Disposal, Inc. ("WCWD") is pleased that the Colorado Department of Health ("Department") is willing to pursue a global settlement of the pending hazardous waste and solid waste enforcement action. Generally, we concur that a global settlement document that takes the form of a compliance order on consent and which addresses the alleged violations, possible penalties and actions necessary to come into compliance with both hazardous waste and solid waste requirements and a schedule for compliance is a satisfactory method of resolving the existing problems. WCWD accepts for disposal at its facility drilling fluids, produced waters and other waste associated with exploration, development or production of crude oil or natural gas ("Brine water"). Brine water is not a hazardous waste. 6 CCR 1007-3, Section 261.4(4)(5). Our agreement to pursue negotiations for a global settlement are not an admission of liability or agreement to be bound by any regulations not currently applicable to WC\VD. Any such agreement will be contained in the global settlement if and when executed by the various parties. This letter is written to you pursuant to and is governed by Rule 408 of the Colorado Rules of Evidence. EXHIBIT jAY 2002-1904 RICHARD D. JUDD, P.C. .-, Timothy J. Monahan, Esq. May 18, 1994 Page 2 As I understand your letter, the purpose of the sampling plan is to collect characterization data which can be used to determine if the contents of the ponds and the underlying soils at the WCWD facility fit the chemical definition of hazardous waste. Your letter does not discuss nor suggest how acceptance of a permitted non-hazardous waste stream changes its characterization from nonhazardous to hazardous waste during the acceptance and treatment process. Obviously that issue will have to be dealt with in a global settlement. Based upon the suggestions contained in your letter, I have discussed these suggestions with Mr. Shosky of Groundwater Technology, Inc. ("GTI"), and GTI suggests the following concerning collection of samples. Generally, WCWD's approach continues to be a step-by-step approach. WCWD believes it would be appropriate to sample the liquid portions of the pond at this time and once the ponds are empty, samples of sludge can be collected and analyzed. Alternatively, if the Department wishes to pursue water sampling, sludge sampling and underlying soil sampling, GTI recommends the following procedure. POND WATER SAMPLES GTI assumes that each pond over the years has become homogeneous in nature and that the contents of each pond are consistent throughout. Given that assumption, GTI recommends that one water sample per pond be collected and analyzed. GTI recommends that each pond water sample be collected from a pond while the person collecting the sample stands on the bank of the pond. GTI does not recommend that a pond water sample be collected from a boat while floating on a pond due to the safety hazards involved. GTI specifically suggests that pond water samples be analyzed for the following hazardous waste parameters: -pH (USEPA Method Number 9045), -TCPL Metals (USEPA Method Numbers 6010/7000 Series), -Flash Point (USEP Method Number 1010), -Reactivity (USEPA Method Number SW 846, Chapter 7), -Volatile Organics (USEPA Method Number 8240), and -Semi-Volatile organics (USEPA Method Number 8270). All non-disposable sampling equipment will be washed in an alkaline detergent solution and rinsed with distilled water. All samples will be preserved (as required by the analytical method) and standard chain-of-custody procedures followed. Quality Assurance/Quality Control ("QA/QC") samples will be collected as presented below: -Field Duplicate (one), -Field Blank (one), and -Trip Blank (one). RICHARD D. JUDD, P.C. Timothy J. Monahan, Esq. May 18, 1994 Page 3 Standard field and laboratory QA/QC protocols are available from GTI upon request. POND SLUDGE SAMPLES GTI assumes that each pond over the years has become homogenous in nature and that the contents of each pond are consistent throughout. Given that assumption, GTI recommends that one sludge sample per pond be collected and analyzed. GTI recommends that each pond sludge sample be collected from a pond while the person collecting the sample stands on the bank of the pond. GTI does not recommend that a pond sludge sample be collected from a boat while floating on a pond due to the safety hazards involved. GTI specifically suggests that pond sludge samples be analyzed for the following hazardous waste parameters: -pH (USEPA Method Number 9045), -TCPL Metals (USEPA Method Numbers 6010/7000 Series), -Flash Point (USEPA Method Number 1010), -Reactivity (USEPA Method Number SW 846, Chapter 7), -Volatile Organics (USEPA Method Number 8240), and -Non-volatile organics (USEPA Method Number 8270). All non-disposable sampling equipment will be washed in an alkaline detergent solution and rinsed with distilled water. All samples will be preserved (as required by the analytical method) and standard chain-of-custody procedures followed. QA/QC samples will be collected as suggested under the caption of this Pond Water Samples. Standard field and laboratory QA/QC protocols are available upon request. UNDERLYING SOIL SAMPLES GTI assumes that each pond over the years has become homogenous in nature and that the leakage from each pond (if any) is consistent below the clay liner. GTI recommends that underlying soil samples not be collected through the clay liner as this would compromise the integrity of the clay liner. Instead, GTI recommends that underlying soil samples be collected by drilling in areas adjacent to ponds to determine the underlying soil characteristics. If the Department believes that it is imperative that a sample of the underlying soil below each pond and its liner be collected by drilling through the liner and thereby compromising the integrity of the liner, then GTI recommends waiting until the ponds are empty and the clay liner is removed before sampling the underlying soil. GTI specifically suggests that one soil boring to groundwater be conducted adjacent to each pond and that the underlying soil sample be analyzed for the following hazardous waste parameters: . RICHARD D. JUDD, P.C. Timothy J. Monahan, Esq. May 18, 1994 Page 4 -pH (USEPA Method Number 9045), -TCPL Metals (USEPA Method Numbers 6010O000 Series), -Flash Point (USEPA Method Number 1010), -Reactivity (USEPA Method Number SW 846, Chapter 7), -Volatile Organics (USEPA Method Number 8240), and -Non-volatile organics (USEPA Method Number 8270). All non-disposable sampling equipment will be washed in an alkaline detergent solution and rinsed with distilled water. All samples will be preserved (as required by the analytical method) and standard chain-of-custody procedures followed. QA/QC samples will be collected as suggested under pond water samples. Standard field and laboratory QA/QC protocols are available upon request. • NOTIFICATION TO THE DEPARTMENT The Department will be notified in writing, addressed to Steve Laudeman, at least ten days prior to each sampling event in order to permit the Department to observe and comment on the field activities. The written notification will specify contact name, date, time and the sample collection location. The Department will also be given the opportunity for split samples, if desired. We look forward to your response in this matter. Yours very truly, 1LJl Richard D. Jud� RDJ/vab cc: Mr. Donald Shosky Mr. Howard Duckworth Mr. Fred Dowsett Mr. Glenn Mallory Mr. Scott Klarich Mr. Stephen Laudeman Lee Morrison, Esq. Mr. Keith Schuett '' Mr. Trevor Jiricek MEMORANDUM TO: Glenn Mallory J7NAR , ET99VY ? ni SLD/WEL/1D FROM: Steve Laudeman -DATE: March 4, 1994 SUBJE eld Coun Waste Disposal , 4 meeting A meeting was held at Colorado Department of Health offices on March 1, 1994 to address outstanding issues regarding the Weld County Waste Disposal (WCWD) liquid waste impoundment facility located near Fort Lupton in Weld County, Colorado. The meeting was requested by Richard Judd, attorney for Weld County Waste Disposal. The attendees were: Howard Duckworth, Weld County Waste Disposal Richard Judd, Attorney for WCWD Don Shosky, Groundwater Technology, Inc. Lee Morrison, Weld County Attorney Jeff Stoll, Weld County Department of Health Keith Schuett, Weld County Planning Department Tim Monahan, Colorado Attorney General's Office Pam Harley, Colorado Department of Health Glenn Mallory, Colorado Department of Health Steve Laudeman, Colorodo Department of Health The meeting ended in agreement that WCWD would agree to comply with all the requirements of Section 9 of the Regulations Pertaining to Solid Waste Disposal Sites and Facilities, while not pursuing the a Certificate of Designation for the facility. The position presented by WCWD was that the technical and logistical hurdles to compliance were manageable,while the political and administrative problems with the CD application process were not. This position was accepted by the Solid Waste Section contingent on further review and approval of a compliance plan and schedule. Weld County indicated that further internal consultation would be necessary before an official position could be clarified. The proposed 'written cooperative agreement" (WCA), intended to address the aspects of the facility operation that do not meet the requirements of Section 9, will include WCWD's plans to address the following issues: EXHIBIT Pilr fie t uicw0 ROSSI & JUDD`'`�� A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION /t eat un Attorneys at taw N ELD CO. tle:P.LTI1 4250 REPUBLIC PLAZA European Office 310 SEVENTEENTH STREET Mown,loss.10,2 DENVER.COLORADO 80202 5000 K01N a FAC50.1DE)07/61}9176 FEDERAL KEnnUC OF GER ANT FAOWIIE 011.49-221.4892810 303/623.5600 011-49111 4891650 RICHARD D.JUDD December 22, 1993 Mr. Stephen Laudeman • Geological Engineer Solid Waste Section Hazardous Materials and Waste Management Division Colorado Department of Health 4300 Cherry Creek Drive South Denver, Colorado 80222-1530 Re: Weld County Waste Disposal, Inc. Sampling of Martin Property Disposal Incident Weld County; Colorado Dear Mr. Laudeman: In response to your letter of September 30, 1993 I enclose herewith a letter to you from Thomas J. Beckman,Chemist with Groundwater Technology,Inc. which contains the information sought in your September 30. 1993 letter. Yours very truly, Richard D. Judy RDJ/vab Enclosure cc: Mr. Tim Monahan Mr. Trevor Jiricek Mr. James Martin Mr. Howard Duckworth Mr. Donald Shosky 2 EXHIBIT • --Es© GROUNDWATER TECHNOLOGY ® Groundwater Technology,Inc. 6436 S.Racine Circle.Suite 200,Englewood.CO 80111-6426 USA December 17, 1993 Tel:13 031 799-12 4 1 Fax:13 031 799-42 7 4 Stephen Laudeman Solid Waste Section • HMWMD Colorado Department of Health 4300 Cherry Creek Drive South Denver, CO 80222-1530 RE: Representative Sampling Data for Area Impacted During the Martin Property Disposal • Incident. Dear Mr. Laudeman: Groundwater Technology, Inc. is writing this letter on behalf of Weld County Waste Disposal. This • letter Is in response to your request for representative sampling of the area impacted during the Martin property disposal incident. A representative of Northern Colorado Consulting Firm (NCCF) collected soil samples from three locations in the impacted area on October 11, 1993. The location of these soil samples and the area impacted by the disposal incident are illustrated on the attached map. The soil samples were analyzed by Technology Laboratory, Inc. for benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, total xylenes (BTEX) by EPA method 8020 and Total recoverable petroleum hydrocarbons (TRPH) by EPA method 418.1. The analytical data is presented In the table below and the analytical report is attached. Sol Analytical Chemistry Results Martin Property Disposal Incident (All sample results are reported in parts per million) Sample ID • Benzene Toluene Ethylbenzene Xylenes TRPH Detection Umit 0.002 0.002 0.002 0 002 5.0 101193-1 0.005 0.012 0.003 0 015 9.447 101193.2 0.004 0.009 0.007 0.013 10,618 101193.3 0.005 0.011 0.008 0.014 6,589 c:\wcwdtcanmwnk22 Offices throughout the U.S.Canada and(Aeneas Stephen Laudeman December 17. 1993 Colorado Department of Health Page 2 If you have any questions or concerns please contact me at 799-4241. Sincerely, . GROUNDWATER TECHNOLOGY, INC. Thomas J. Beckman Chemist CC: Howard Duckworth, WCWD Tim Monahan, AG Office Trevor Jiricek, WCHD James Martin C:lwcwd,cXunYkn.k22 _ GROUNDWATER __.._TECHNOLOGY i ( I- aim as o ac < 0 o "s ow) g 1 w LI 8a §! Z 4 O ii z '"$ 5 .s.• a� H 3 § I A a a` V 31a 5 00 _a"man"_ Z —: o m WS z is_ s x x C. Mg ?s W a z ci oa W a ; a. to a) ! w -,.. O ` E" Z� i a3 ®❑ Cp.,w p W 00 wQ V O •2 ED 30 i--; r� ci - o WCR 37 \ :1101193-1 's riLt \N-\N\\ \\\\\Z\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\‘-\\\\\ \\\N m 'i r WCR ELISABETH o\ m N O 1 il N j N U \ N rz O,.; \ Wa U W \ QN N up- \\ a V1 \ WO U \ Wtz z U <Q W 3 \ \ VI N I I- \ Ow N 3 2 \N O O N O-I \ Ws( \ W \ O Z IN \ . 00T-20-93 TNU 11 :05 COPYWORLD BUSINESS CENTR 3033510081 P. 05 • I C i TECHNOLOGY LABORATORY, INC. CENTRE FOR ADVAl4CRD 77CCIINOLOGY 2401 Research Boulevard,Suite 204 Fort Collins,Colorado 80526 (30.1) 490-1414 SOIL ANALYSIS REPORT NORTHERN COLORADO CONSULTING FIRM Sampled: 10/11/93 430 30th Avenue Court Received: 10/11/93 Greeley, Colorado 80631 Analyzed: 10/15/93 Sample ID: 101193.1 Project No: 101193 • Lab ID: 7342-1 Compound Anahml Concentration fma/Ki\ Method (Detection LimiU Downs 0.005 EPA-8020 (0.002 mg/Kg) Tobacco 0.012 EPA-8071] (0.002 mg/Kg) Ethylbeettno 0.003 EPA-8020 (0.002 mg/Kg) Total X74-flea 0.015 EPA-8020 (0.002 mg/Kg) TPH Recoverable 9,447 EPA-41111 (5 mg/Kg) SURROGATE RECOVERIES Compound an= Wert-Neu Limits F7uorobeazene 130 75425 Bromofluorobeuzeee 84 75.125 Comments Surrogate recovery for Fluorobeazsae reflects a high value due to co-elution of hydrocarbon compounds with laboratory quality control compounds. ed- TECHNOLOGY LABORATORY, INC OCT-28-93 THU 1I :05 COPYWORLD BUSINESS CENTR 3033310081 P. 06 TECHNOLOGY LABORATORY, INC. CENTRE FOR ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY 2401 Research Boulevard,Suits 204 Fort Collins,Colorado 80526 (303) 490.1414 SOIL ANALYSIS REPORT NORTHERN COLORADO CONSULTING FIRM Sampled: 10/11/93 430 30th Avenue Court Remind: 10/11/93 Creaky, Colorado 80631 Analyzed: 10/15/93 Sample 1D: 101193-2 Project No: 101193 Lab ID: 7342-2 fa000uad Analyzed 24011811111111 1541144 MethSsl (Detection Limit) Benzene 0.004 EPA-8020 (0.002 mg/Kg) Toluene 0.009 EPA-8020(0.002 mg/Kg) Ethylbeazene Q007 EM-8020(0.002 mg/Kg) Total Xylenea ton EPA-8020 (0.002 mg/Kg) TM Recoverable 10,618 EPA-418.1 (5 mg/Kg) SURROGATE RECOVERIES end % Recovery %Recovery Limits Pluorobenzcae 139 75-125 Bromoduorobenzene 81 75-125 Comments Surrogate recovery for Fluorobenzene reflects a high value due to co-elutioo of hydrocarbon compounds with laboratory quality control compounds. iteCi TECHNOLOGY LABORATORY, INC. • .+� • -LO-va . n•... • 4 • Ia 1.ur rwullLu nun a HtZ* l.cn . IC .uaa.l anoe♦ r • or f • • TECHNOLOGY LABORATORY, INC. CENTRE FOR ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY 2401 Research Boulevard,Suite 204 Pod Collins, Colorado 80526 (303) 490-1414 SOIL ANALYSIS REPORT NORTHERN COLORADO CONSULTING FIRM Sampled: 10/11/93 CO 30th Avenue Court Received: 10/11/93 Grecky, Colorado 80631 Analyzed: 10/13/93 Sample ID: 101193-3 Project No: 101193 Lab ID: 7342.3 Comgoaad Anahae4 getnd Method (Detection Limit) Benzene 0.005 EPA-8020 (0.002 mg/Kg) Toluene 0011 EPA-8021 (0.002 mg/Kg) F.thylbearene 0.008 EPA-8020 (0.1102 mg/Kg) Total Xyleaes 0.014 EPA-8020(0.002 mg/Kg) TPH Recoverable 6,589 EPA-/18.1 (3 mg/Kg) SURROGATE RECOVERIES Compoun4 % Recovery % Recovery limits Fluorobenzene 143 75-125 Bromofluorobcniene 90 75-125 Comments: Surrogate recovery for Pluorobeozeoe ref a is a high value due to co-elution of hydrocarbon compounds with laboratory quality control cnmpnunds. TECHNOLOGY LABORATORY, INC. UL1 -28-93 7MU 11001 CUYYWUKLL MUb1MtbO LCMIK auaao uuo+ raw., I l . ea ` 3 u 1I: Oi --- fi J-,-, Y g r., ha lr / t- a h �- 1 I - - -- I I z. 1 IA _ a b s 4 y. ./1 It d 0 _ .a M 5: ,� - c 1 S. .1 — -. y M o = € `1- o �' -- Q M C c iq t{ 1 t4 a t V M w V i a- J o 3 LL 1 f , a 1� i, j10 I 4 t 7 vil 4k7 - 1 .1 - -? A G 1a 31 J 'a _ It, r a arc a ,,�a OO 1 ' 31 IV, 3 ;0 t MS wsz 6 ,& & - I-- - AA I ROSSI & JUDD A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION Attorneys at Law 17-1§)77 � ., '1 i 6230 REPUBUC PLAZA European Office DED T 3k 370 SEVENfEIIJLH STREET MOein Stusa 1042 • DENVER,COLORADO 80202 3000 KOIN 40 . .-_ J ' FEDERAL P.EPUI UC OF GERMANY _..,f 1,,C; hchL i r 1 V FACSD.�E 303/623-9176 FACE 0119-221892810 303/623-5600 0146922148922 0 RICHARD D.JUDD December 9, 1993 Mr. Keith A. Schuett Current Planner Department of Planning Services Weld County Administrative Offices 1400 North Seventeenth Avenue Greeley, Colorado 80631 Mr. Trevor Jiricek Supervisor Environmental Protection Services Department of Health 1517 16 Avenue Court Greeley, Colorado 80631 ate' yWeld Coant}%Waste D sposal Vc Dear Messrs. Schuett and Jiricek: This office represents Weld County Waste Disposal, Inc. ("WCWD"). This letter is a response to the letter to WCWD from Mr. Jiricek dated November 3, 1993 (the "November 3rd Letter"), the letter from Mr. Keith Schuett to WCWD dated November 9, 1993 (the "November 9th Letter") and the letter to WCWD from Mr. Jiricek dated November 10, 1993 (the "November 10th Letter"). NOVEMBER 3RD LETTER The November 3rd Letter alleges that volatile organic compounds have been detected in monitoring wells on the WCWD facility. The November 3rd Letter further alleges "the presence of these compounds in the groundwater indicate a (sic) environmental impact from this facility" and further then alleges that "the detected concentrations of benzene exceed the groundwater = EXHIBIT —114(i.-- Mr. Keith A. Schuett Mr. Trevor Jiricek December 9, 1993 Page 2 organic chemical standard as defined in 'the Basic Standards For Groundwater' 3.11.0 (5 CCR 1002-8)." The November 3rd Letter then requests WCWD develop a characterization and remediation plan detailing the extent of migration of the contamination and measures being considered to alleviate the impact. RESPONSE TO NOVEMBER 3RD LE11ER WCWD acknowledges that the report for WCWD prepared by Groundwater Technology, Inc. dated October 21, 1993 (the "Groundwater Technology Report") indicates the presence of benzene in two monitoring wells. WCWD denies that the presence of these compounds in the groundwater indicate an environmental impact from this facility and also denies that the detected concentrations of benzene exceed the basic standards for groundwater. The November 3rd Letter requests that "the facility develop a characterization and remediation plan detailing the extent of migration of the contamination and measures being considered to alleviate the impact". The Weld County Department of Health has exceeded its jurisdiction and authority in requesting WCWD to develop a characterization and remediation plan. An examination of the Special Use Permit (SUP-454:8O:44) (the "Special Use Permit") contains no authority granting to the Weld County Department of Health the right to require WCWD to develop such a characterization and/or a remediation plan. Further, I am unaware of any state statute or Weld County Ordinance applicable to this facility that gives the Weld County Department of Health the authority to issue such an order. Notwithstanding the foregoing, as an offer of compromise and settlement, and not as an admission of liability, reference is made to the Groundwater Technology Report for information concerning the extent of migration of the waters on the WCWD property and the measures being considered to alleviate the detected concentrations of benzene. NOVEMBER 9TH LET'T'ER The November 9th Letter makes reference to the November 5th memo from Trevor Jiricek and also references certified letters numbered P 533 510 950 and P 860 415 499 without making reference to the authors or dates of those letters. The letter referred to as certified letter numbered P 533 510 950 is unknown to us. WCWD did receive a certified letter dated September 29, 1992 from the Colorado Department of Health under number P 553 510 945. Further, WCWD did receive a letter from the Colorado Department of Health dated September 23, 1993 under number P 860 415 499. We assume this is the letter to which reference is made. Mr. Keith A. Schuett Mr. Trevor Jiricek December 9, 1993 Page 3 The November 9th Letter also references a letter from an unnamed person dated March 10, 1993 to Mr. John Pickle. The two certified letters and the letter to Mr. John Pickle were not enclosed, and accordingly, no response is made. The November 9th Letter also alleged that the correspondence set forth above revealed violations of Development Standards No. 1, 4, 11, 14 and 15 of the Special Use Permit, but, other than attaching a copy of the memorandum dated November 5, 1993 from Trevor Jiricek to Keith Schuett, the November 9th Letter did not detail the alleged violations of Development Standards No. 1, 4, 11, 14 and 15. RESPONSE TO NOVEMBER 9TH LETTER The November 9th Letter states that the use by special review area must be brought into compliance with the conditions of approval and development standards within thirty days of the date of that Letter. WCWD is in compliance with the Special Use Permit. To the extent the November 9th Letter incorporates by reference the memorandum of Mr. Jiricek to Mr. Schuett dated November 5, 1993, please see the response to the November 10th Letter contained elsewhere in this letter. NOVEMBER 10Th LETTER The November 10th Letter indicates that Mr. Jiricek inspected the WCWD facility on September 29, 1993 and November 5, 1993 to inspect and assess the facility's compliance with the Solid Waste and Disposal Site and Facilities Act(C.R.S. § 30-20-101, et seq.) (the "Act") and the development standards set forth in the Special Use Permit. Notations of seven specific observations were made: 1. The facility has impacted groundwater at this location. This has been cited by the Colorado Department of Health letter of August 26, 1993. 2. The facility has accepted hazardous waste. This has been cited by the Colorado Department of Health certified letter # P 860 415 499. 3. Pond C was observed to be partially covered with an oil scum. 4. Freeboard readings do not appear to be accurate. The gauges provided on the facility ponds must be verified to ensure accuracy. 5. Contaminated soil has been observed across the site. Mr. Keith A. Schuett Mr. Trevor Jiricek December 9, 1993 Page 4 6. Contaminated soil from the Martin property was observed stockpiled on the site. 7. The facility has removed contaminated soil near the disposal pad. The November 10th Letter alleges that these are violations of the Special Use Permit as well as certain sections of the Regulations Pertaining to Solid Waste Disposal Sites and Facilities (the "Regulations"). RESPONSE TO NOVEMBER 10TH LETTER The Regulations are promulgated pursuant to the "Solid Waste Disposal Sites and Facilities Act" Tide 30, Article 20, Part 1, Colorado Revised Statutes as amended, and are dated June 30, 1993, effective October 9, 1993. Section 9.1 of the Regulations states as follows: 9.1 REGULATED FACILITIES These Regulations apply to waste impoundments that store, treat or dispose of liquid, semi-solid or solid waste, except as provided in 9.1.4 for facilities in operation prior to adoption of these Regulations. 9.1.4 Those sites and facilities in operation prior to adoption of these Regulations may be required to come into compliance with these Regulations upon a determination by the Department that such sites and facilities are causing impairment of existing or future use of the surface water or groundwater. The Regulations, in Section 1.2, define "Department" as the Colorado Department of Health. WCWD has operated its facility in Weld County since a date prior to the adoption of the Regulations. There has been no determination by the Department, after a hearing held pursuant to C.R.S. § 24-4-105, that the facilities are causing impairment of existing or future use of surface water or groundwater. Accordingly, WCWD takes the position that it is not subject to the Regulations. WCWD responds to the seven numbered allegations contained in the November 10th Letter as follows: Mr. Keith A. Schuett Mr. Trevor Jiricek December 9, 1993 Page 5 1. The facility has impacted groundwater at this location. This has been cited by the Colorado Department of Health, letter of August 26, 1993. RESPONSE: WCWD denies that it impacted the groundwater. It acknowledges that it has received a letter dated August 26, 1993 from the Colorado Department of Health. Also see the Groundwater Technology Report. 2. The facility has accepted hazardous waste. This has been cited by the Colorado Department of Health certified letter # P 860 415 499. RESPONSE: WCWD denies that it has accepted hazardous waste not within its permitted waste stream. Drilling fluids, produced waters, and other wastes associated with the exploration, development or production of crude oil, natural gas or geothermal energy are solid wastes which , are not hazardous waste. 6 CCR 1007-3, Section 261.4(d)(5). See Exhibits 1, 2 and 3 attached hereto concerning the request (Exhibit 1) and the approval (Exhibits 2 and 3) by the Weld County Department of Planning Services and the Weld County Department of Health of the waste stream accepted by WCWD. The letter entitled Notice of Violation and Request for Information from Colorado Department Health dated September 23, 1993 (certified mail # P 860 415 499) to WCWD contained four specific observations: 1. Mesa Oil Company. See request of WCWD to dispose of waste stream (Exhibit 4), the wastewater analysis submitted by Mesa Oil (Exhibit 5) and the approval of the Weld County Health Department (Exhibit 6). 2. Approved Oil Service, Inc. On June 6, 1991 WCWD requested an approval to accept,for disposal, 438,000 gallons of wastewater(Exhibit 7). Included with the request was the analysis report from Approved Oil Service, Inc. (Exhibit 8). The waste stream was approved for disposal by Weld County Department of Health on June 10, 1991 (Exhibit 9). • 3. Lowry Air Force Base Tanks J and K. On December 2, 1991 WCWD requested approval to accept 1,500 gallons of wastewater from Tanks J and K of Lowry Air Force Base (Exhibit 10). Included with the request were analyses of the waste stream proposed for acceptance (Exhibits I1 and 12). Weld County Department of Health approved the acceptance of the waste stream by letter of December 4, 1991 (Exhibit 13). r-- Mr. Keith A. Schuett Mr. Trevor Jiricek December 9, 1993 Page 6 4. Approved Oil Services, Inc. By letter of March 2, 1992,WCWD requested approval to accept for disposal 50,000 gallons of gasoline, diesel fuel, contaminated water from Approved Oil Services in Commerce City, Colorado (Exhibit 14). The analysis of the waste stream was submitted with the request (Exhibit 15). Weld County Department of Health, by letter dated March 4, 1992, approved acceptance of the waste stream for disposal (Exhibit 16). 3. Pond C was observed to be partially covered with an oil scum. RESPONSE: WCWD acknowledges your observation that, on the occasion of the two examinations of the facility, Pond C was partially covered with scum. Development Standard 4 of the Special Use Permit does not specifically deal with scum and reliance on Section 9.7.5 of the Regulations is misplaced in that this facility is not subject to the Regulations. Even if the facility was subject to the Regulations, the amount of scum on Pond C is reasonable and is contained with a floating buoy. Periodically, the scum from Pond C is removed as a part of the ordinary and normal operations of the facility. Notwithstanding the foregoing, as an offer of compromise and settlement, and not as an • admission of liability, WCWD would be willing to biologically treat the scum material on site \, if an on site treatment area is administratively approved by Weld County. 4. Freeboard readings do not appear to be accurate. The gauges provided on the facility must be verified to ensure accuracy. RESPONSE: WCWD acknowledges that Mr. Jiricek does not believe that the freeboard readings appear to be accurate. The freeboard readings are accurate. See report of Alpha Engineering Co. attached as Exhibit 17. 5. Contaminated soil has been observed across the site. RESPONSE: WCWD acknowledges your observation. WCWD denies that contaminated soil is located on the site. Pursuant to C.R.S. § 30-20-102(3), WCWD may dispose of its own solid waste on its own property. Any solid waste disposed of on the WCWD property was generated on the WCWD property. Notwithstanding the foregoing, as an offer of compromise and settlement, and not as an admission of liability, WCWD would be willing to biologically treat the impacted soil on site at an area to be agreed upon by WCWD and Weld County using standard land application rates. Mr. Keith A. Schuett Mr. Trevor Jiricek December 9, 1993 Page 7 If this proposal is acceptable to Weld County, WCWD will prepare and submit to Weld County an operations plan for such treatment. 6. Contaminated soil from the Martin property was observed stockpiled on the site. RESPONSE: WCWD acknowledges your observation that certain soil is stockpiled on 09.1 the WCWD property. WCWD denies that soil stockpiled on the property is contaminated. Any ) soil stockpiled on the property was generated on the property. See C.R.S. § 30-20-103(2). Again, notwithstanding the foregoing, as an offer of compromise and settlement, and not as an admission of liability, WCWD would be willing to biologically treat the soil on site as suggested in the response to comment 5 above. 7. The facility has removed contaminated soil near the disposal pad.RESPONSE: Pursuant to C.R.S. § 30-20-102(3), WCWD may dispose of its own solid) waste on its own property. Any solid waste disposed of on the WCWD property was generated on the WCWD property. GENERAL RESPONSE TO ALL LETTERS WCWD believes that its facility is in subs ' compliance with the Special Use Permit. Further, no determination has been made by the Colorado Department of Health that the facility is causing impairment of existing or future use of surface water or groundwater. Nevertheless, WCWD has proposed to the Colorado Department of Health a schedule for testing liner integrity of Ponds C and D which will entail reopening Pond A after first lining Pond A with 40 millimeter high density polyethylene ("HDPE"). Enhanced evaporation in Pond D would then be undertaken followed by a liner test of Pond D. Pond D would then be relined with a 40 millimeter HDPE liner. The existing aeration system in use on Pond D will be reactivated to stimulate degradation of petroleum hydrocarbons. Similarly, upon the relining of Pond D, enhanced evaporation in Pond C would be undertaken, a liner test of Pond C would be undertaken and, ultimately, Pond C would be relined with a 40 millimeter HDPE liner. WCWD will also install an aeration system in Pond C. The details of WCWD's proposal is contained in the Groundwater Technology Report. WCWD desires to cooperate with all regulatory authorities having jurisdiction over it. Despite the fact that the WCWD facility is not subject to the Regulations, WCWD has made a comprehensive proposal to the Colorado Department of Health by submitting the Groundwater Technology Report. WCWD believes that the recommendations contained in the Groundwater Mr. Keith A. Schuett Mr. Trevor Jiricek December 9, 1993 Page 8 Technology Report, if implemented, will address the issues raised by both the Colorado Department of Health and Weld County concerning groundwater in the vicinity of the facility. WCWD is concerned that if it is required to do the bidding of two masters (Colorado Department of Health and Weld County), inconsistent requirements may be imposed that will either increase costs to the extent that practical realization of the results of the proposal would be impossible to obtain, or that requirements imposed by one governmental authority would prohibit compliance with the requirements of the other governmental authority. Accordingly, WCWD requests that Weld County continue to monitor the operations of the WCWD facility pending a response to the Groundwater Technology Report by the Colorado Department of Health. Upon receipt of that response, WCWD proposes a joint meeting attended by representatives of WCWD, Weld County and the Colorado Department of Health to finalize and agree upon site improvements for the WCWD facility and a schedule for implementing those site improvements. Very truly yours, J 9R Richard D. Jutted/ RDJ/vab cc: Mr. Donald Shosky Mr. Howard Duckworth Lee D. Morrison, Esq. 11/03/94 15:56 1,3037595355 CDR HAZ HAT ®0o2 STATE OF COLORADO COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH .14' Vetted to pmtecdng and the health and environment of the people of Cdorado 4300 Cory Crook Dr.iG:, Denver,Colorado 60222.1530 421O laboratory71 Phone 13031 692-2000 Denver,Colorado 602204716 1303)691-4700 Ray Rater Gone MEMORANDUM Nelda A.Wolin,MD,MM bake Diarmr TO: Howard Duckworth, Weld County Waste Disposal Glenn Mallory, CDH HMWMD STR/SW Roger Doak, CDH HMWMD STR/SW Lillian Gonzalez, CDH HMWMD HWC Trevor Jiricek, Weld County Health Department File: SW/WEL/WLD/#2P FROM: :Steve Laudeman DATE: August 30, 1993 SUBJECT: Weld County Waste Disposal Compliance Meeting 8/27/93 A meeting was held at Colorado Department of Health offices on August 27, 1993 to • address concerns of the Solid Waste Section of the Hazardous Materials and Waste Management Division (the Division) regarding ground water impact from liquid waste disposal at Weld County Waste Disposal (WCWD). The concerns of the Division were originally expressed to WCWD in a March 8, 1993 letter, to which WCWD's consultant, Ground Water Technology, Inc. (GWT) responded in an April 29, 1993 letter. After a review of GWT's response, Division sent another letter on July 6, 1993, informing WCWD that the April 23 response was inadequate. The August 27 meeting was requested by GWT to address Division concerns, determine Division requirements, and propose a schedule for meeting Division requirements. The following people were in attendance: Howard Duckworth, Weld County Waste Disposal Don Shosky, Ground Water Technology, Inc. Jane Godby, Northern Colorado Consulting Firm Trevor Jiricek, Weld County Health Department Glenn Mallory, CDH HMWMD STR/SW Roger Doak, CDH HMWMD STR/SW Steve Laudeman, CDH HMWMD STR/SW EXHIBIT I 11/03/94 15:56 $'3037585355 GDH HAZ MT 1gIuu3 WCWD Meeting Minutes August 30, 1993 Page 2 The following items were discussed: 1. Steve Laudeman gave Mr. Duckworth and Mr. Shosky the Division's August 26, 1993 letter that included a determination that WCWD had impacted area ground water based on a statistical analysis of ground water data. Steve specified that, due to the recent date of this letter, it would not be necessary for GWT to address it's implications at this meeting. Pursuant to Subsection 6.1.4 of the Regulations, if ground water is impacted, a facility may need to comply with all or part of Section 6 of the Regulations. 2. Don Shosky addressed the Division's concerns as expressed in the March 8, 1993 letter item by item as follows: #1. Information on ground water monitoring well completions, geologic and hydrologic characteristics of the site, and other information requested would be forthcoming, pending Chen- Northern locating the necessary files. Chen-Northern apparently performed the well installations prior to Mr. Duckworth's purchase of the facility. #2. GWT proposed to upgrade the existing site map by adding contours and other pertinent information. #3. The renumbering of the ground water monitoring wells occurred in May of 1989. Prior to this, according to Ms. Godby, the wells were referred to only in terms of their general location, i.e. 'well in the northwest corner". GWT will attempt to correlate monitoring data prior to May, 1989 with data based on the current monitoring well numbering scheme. #4. Wells 15 and 17 do not exist and never have. Monitoring results for these wells indicated that they were sampled on August 13, 1990. Ms. Godby, who performed the sampling, confirmed that the well numbers were recorded in error. Well numbers indicated as 15 and 17 were actually 10 and 13, respectively, according to Ms. Godby. #5. Data for the wells cited (2, 3, 4, 6, 7, 10, and 11) is not available as these wells have apparently not been sampled. 11/03/94 15:57 $3037595355 CDH BAZ MAT ®004 WCWD Meeting Minutes August 30, 1993 Page 3 WCWD has been sampling six wells, as specified in their Special Use Permit These wells are 1, 4, 8, 9, 12, and 11 #6. Information on well construction details is being requested from Chen-Northern. #7. Information on the Speer Canal was been provided by OWT in the April 29. 1993 letter. #8. GWT specified that performing leak tests on the liners of the ponds would require locating an alternative holding area for the liquids in each pond during testing. The Division noted the logistical concerns related to this testing,and agreed that GWT and WCWD should propose a schedule for emptying the ponds and performing the needed testing. It was agreed that the ' testing should be performed as soon as possible. #9. It was agreed that, as an alternative to obtaining data from the Water Resources Division on every permitted ground water well within a one mile radius of the facility, Ms. Godby would perform a determination of the number of wells within a one- half mile radius of the site and select only those wells with a total depth of 50 feet or less. #10. It was agreed that the alleged or possible impairment of the Trostel well located east of the facility was not an issue at this time. The Division's immediate concerns regarding this well were that it indicated that the extent of contamination may extend several hundred feet downgradient of the facility. It was agreed that, if necessary based on the September, 1993 sampling event, further sampling may be performed downgradient This further sampling may or may not include the shallow Trostel well. #11. GWT has analyzed water in Ponds C and D for a wide range of contaminants. Their report on the results of this analysis is attached. GWT and WCWD agreed to alter the parameter list for ground water sampling based on Division requirements. Steve Laudeman agreed to send a letter within one week that specified the Divisions requirements in this area. 11/03/94 15:57 $3037595355 CDH HAZ NAT 2005 • WCWD Meeting Minutes - August 30, 1993 Page 4 3. GWT and WCWD and the Division agreed on an approach to address the Division's concerns on this facility. The plan consists of: 1. Sampling of ground water for the parameter list specified by the Division, to be provided in letter form by September 3, 1993. 2. The development and implementation of improyed operational plans at the facility. All changes in operation must be approved by the Division and Weld County Health prior to implementation. 3. Provision of sampling results on the soil removed from the Martin property, 4. Confirmatory sampling on the excavated area at the Martin property, 5. Information on the proposed use and/or disposal of soils from the Martin property and soils excavated from Pond A, 6. Clarifications from GWT on information requested by the Division in the March 8 letter, specifically items 1, 2, 3, 6, 8, 9, and 11, 7. The inclusion of well 5 in all future ground water sampling at the site. 4. It was agreed that WCWD would provide design and operations information on the aeration system currently in use in Pond C. 5. It was agreed that a final report containing all requested information would be prepared and submitted to the Division by September 30, 1993. r1 • .. RESOLUTION • RE: APPROVAL OF AN p .IUD LNT WELD n ° TO SPECIAL USE PERMIT' COUNTi DISPOS INC. , C/O DARREL McK n195 FOR 304 , FT. LUPTON, COLORADO 80621 NIGII'I', P . O. BOX WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Weld County , Colorado, pursuant to Colorado statute and the Weld County Home Rule Charter, is vested with the authority of administering the affairs of Weld County, Colorado, and WHEREAS, on April 22, 1981 at 2 : 00 o 'clock p.m. , the Board of County Commissioners of Weld County, Colorado held a hearing to consider the request of Weld County Disposal , Inc. , c/o Dar- rel Mcxnight, P. O. Box 304, Ft. Lupton, Colorado, for an amend- ment to Special Use Permit No. 396 concerning the following described property: Part of the Northwest west Quarter of Section 12 , Townshipr of tp 1 Nor- Range 66 West of the 6th P.M. , Wel 1 North, Colorado. Weld County, WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners reviewed the testimony of the applicant and reviewd the recommendations of the Weld County Planning Commission, and having been fully informed, is satisfied that the request for an amendment to Special Use Permit No. 396 should be approved with the fol- lowing changes to the Development Standards : "1.e• Four bentonite sealed lagoons as shown hereon. The lagoons may include an aeration system as part of the operation. The dimensions of the lagoons shall be as follows : Pond A - 83, 000 square feet 1 . 9 acres Pond B - 82 , 000 square feet 1 . 9 acres /` Pond C — 312 , 600 s Pond D - 233, 900 square feet 8 . 2 acres qua re feet 5. 4 acres " "8 • The settling pit as shown hereon shall be screened with a one-inch wire mesh to pre- vent wildlife gaining access to the pit. All lagoons shall have flagging devices placed no mere than 20 feet apart to dis- courage birds from landing on the water surface . These flagging devices shall be installed by the owner/operator within 3 months of approval of this Special Ilse Per- mit by the Board of County Commissioners and shall be maintained in good re aryl ;,,;.. t^ro- io t the life repair F of the operation . " P r C. �, vrJ O� {' . \ E lT 3i, ',.y v ,e l `-- ...../ 4 "9. To prevent seepage to the groundwater, all pits , lagoons, and other excavations con- . taining water at any time shall be lined with bentonite or other impervious material as per State and County Health Department guidelines within six (6) months of appro- val of the Special Use Permit by the Hoard of County Commissioners . Construction of the lagoons and embankments shall be in accordance with the design as shown hereon or other design specifications from a regis- tered professional engineer. Those speci- fications shall be subject to review and approval by the Weld County Health Depart- ment and Colorado Department of Health . The freeboard allowance for all dikes designed to retain water or other fluids shall be as specified by the Weld County Health De- partment and/or Colorado Department of Health. " NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of County Com- missioners of Weld County, Colorado that Special Use Permit No. 396 be , and hereby is , amended as set forth in the recommenda- 3. tion of the Weld County Planning Commission and is subject to (1) the Development Standards , as amended, as contained in the Special Use Permit, and (2) no building or electrical permits shall be issued on the Special Use Permit area until the Develop- . ment Standards for the Special Use Permit and amendments to the plat have been placed on the Special Use Permit plat and said plat has been delivered to the Office of the Department of Planning Services. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the Board of County Commissioners that the findings of fact and the reasons for approval as con- tained in the Weld County Planning Commission recommendations dated March 3 , 1981 be , and hereby are , adopted by the Board of County Commissioners. The above and foregoing Resolution was , on motion duly made and seconded, adopted by the following vote on the 22nd day of April, A. D. , 1981. ATTEST ` -- " , i!i.lc¢?:,71-/ BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS f i ttil. (2,a , i WELD COUNTY, COLORADO Weld County Clerk and Recorder ABSENT DATE SIGNED (Aye) and`Clerk to the Boar Chuck Carlson , Chairman � y:, p i,t--, C c i:L.�J !y (Aye) //' .Deputy County Clerk Norman Carlson; Pro-Tem Al' tOV A TO FORM: • f J%��: ��_. _ (Ave) C. W. Kirby / County tt rney (ABSENT) J n T. Martin DATE PRESENTED: PPRTL 27 , 1981 ne K. St inmark • • WELD COUNTY DISPOSAL, INC. SUP-454:80:44 Development standards 1 . The water and oil fluids recycling and disposal site granted by this Special Use Permit on the hereon described parcel is limited to the facilities shown • hereon. Said facilities shall be: a. 600 square foot (minimum) structure built in accordance with the re- quirements of the Uniform Building Code and utilized as an office and a residence by an employee for the control , operation and security of the facility; b. Eight 300 barrel tanks; c. One circulating pump and motor: d. One 8 foot and 20 foot heat and filtering vessel . of d e. Four bentonite sealed lagoons as shown hereon. The lagoons may C include an aeration system as part of the operation. ly f. Settling pit screened with one-inch wire mesh. g. Concrete sump divided by cement petitions into three (3) separate holding tanks. Additionally, all uses permitted by right in Sec- tion 3.3 of the Weld County Zoning Resolution are allowed within the Special Use Permit area. 2. Access to the Special Use Permit area is limited to one access point shown hereon. The access shall have the approval of the Weld County Engineering Department. The access shall be cOnstructed in accordance with the recommenda- tions and/or requirements of the Weld County Engineering Department. All private interior roads shall be graveled. 3. The Special Use Permit area shall be maintained in such a manner so as to prevent soil erosion, fugitive dust, and the growth of noxious weeds. 4. All phases of the operation shall comply with all County and State Health Standards and Regulations pertaining to air quality, water quality, noise emission, and sanitary disposal systems. Representatives or members of the Weld County Health Department, Weld County Department of Planning Services Staff and/or Colorado Department of Health shall be granted access onto the site at any reasonable time in order to insure the operations carried out on the site comply with all applicable Weld County and State Health Regulations. 5. Upon cessation of operations at the site all structures shall be removed to 30 inches below grade and all ponds or pits shall be filled and graded so as to conform with the surrounding terrain. The Special Use Permit area shall be reclaimed to a farmable state within six (6) months of the operations. The property shall be seeded in wheat or alfalfa or other appropriate ground cover approved by the Soil Conservation Service. VT:rg 2-12-81 • 1 Weld County Disposal , Inc. SUP-454:80:44 Development. Standards Page 2 6. Storage of oil field drilling and associated equipment shall not be permitted within the Special Use Permit area. 7. Parking on County Roads 12 and 35 will be prohibited. Parking will only be allowed within the property described hereon. 8. The settling pit as shown hereon shall be screened with a one-inch wire mesh to prevent wildlife gaining access to the pit. All lagoons shall have flagging devices placed no more than 20 feet apart to dis- courage birds from landing on the water surface. These flagging devices shall be installed within 3 months of approval of this Special Use Permit by the Board of County Commissioners and shall be maintained in good repair throughout the life of the operation. 9. All pits, lagoons, and other excavations containing water at any time shall be lined with bentonite or other impervious material as per State and County Health Department guidelines to prevent seepage to the gruund- water within six (6) months of approval of this Special Use Permit by the Board of County Commissioners. Construction of the lagoons and embank- ments shall be in accordance with the design as shown on the Special Use Permit plat and the recommendations as contained in the Chen and Associates, Subsoil Investigation Report, Job No. 19,030, dated August 29, 1979, and additional letters on file with the Department of Planning Services office and State Health Department Offices. The freeboard allowance for all dikes designed to retain water or other fluids shall be as specified by the Weld County Health Department and/or Colorado Department of Health. 10. There shall be a minimum of six (6) groundwater wells to monitor possible leakage from the evaporation'ponds and other pits on the pro- perty. The Weld County Health Department and State Health Department shall have access to these wells at all times to determine possible contamination of the groundwater. The wells shall be installed as per Weld County Health Department guidelines for depth to groundwater table. 11. The operator shall provide measuring devices in all lagoons which will not damage the bentonite lining. Said devices shall be easily ac- cessible and easily visible to the Colorado Department of Health and Weld County Health Department. 12. The Weld County Health Department shall be given notice within a 24 hour period of use of the emergency lagoon by the operator of the site. Such use must be a true emergency and not for normal storage of water or normal operations of the site. This provision does not exclude the oper- ator from keeping 12 to 18 inches of water in the emergency lagoon to pre- vent the bentonite lining from drying out. VT:rg 2-12-81 • Weld County Disposal , Inc. SUP-454:80:44 Development Standards Page 3 13. An access road shall be constructed and maintained around the per- imeter of each lagoon such that there is adequate access for a vacuum truck to skim oil from all areas of the lagoons. 14. The Special Use Permit shall be limited to the plans shown hereon and governed by the Development Standards stated above and all app- licable Weld County Regulations. Any material deviations from the plans and/or Development Standards as shown or stated above shall require the approval of an amendment to the Special Use Permit by the Planning Commission and the Board of County Commissioners before such changes from the plans and/or Development Standards shall be permitted . Any other changes from the plans and/or Development Standards shall be filed in the office of the Department of Planning Services. 15. The property owner and/or operatior of this operation shall be responsible for complying with all of the above stated Development Standards. Noncompliance with any of the above stated Development Standards may be reason for revocation of the Special Use Permit by the Board of County Commissioners. VT:ard • 2-12-81 • RICHARD D. JUDD, P.C. ATTORNEY AT LAW 1660 ta,00tx SWEET.ACE ISM venn t ca ccADO 10164' lltCSh018 303/831-1181 =PHONE:3010031-11W May 5, 1995 Lee D. Mattison. Esq. Office of the County Attorney Weld County Colorado 915 tali Street P.O. Box 1948 Clheeley, Colorado 80632 Re: Weld County Waste Disposal, hr. Dar Let At die meeting held at the offices of Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment ("CDPHE") mended by various officials from CDPHE as well as by you and offcials of Weld County Health Department ('WCfID"), and aneaded by Don Shosky of Groundwater Technology,Inc., by me and for a portion of the meeting,by Howard Duckworth, President of Weld County Waste Disposal. Inc. ("WCWD") by telephone, the following discussion was had concerning a global settlement of all regulatory and other issues existing among CDPHE,WCHD and WCWD. The discussion was and this letter is pursuant to Colorado Rules of Evidence 408. The ream of the agreement proposed by CDPHE was as follows: 1. Source Control. (a) All existing surface impoundments must be reconstructed and brought into compliance with Section 9 of the Solid Waste Regulations. 1) Pond C within two (2)years and ii) Pond B within three (3)years. (b) All contaminated soils at the site, including those below the existing surface impoundments, must be rsmcdiatcd to a level such that the contamination does not cause or contribute to an accedence of an established state water quality standard. EXHIBIT RICHARD D.JUDD, P.C. Lee D. Marlon, Esq. May 5, 1995 Page 2 2. Site Cluracterizaairm. (a) Soils as the site most be chawctatized airing the seconstrvctiou of the surface impoundments. (b) Groundwater at the sire mum be characterized immediately to establish the levels of contamination ply existing at,and leaving the she. 3. Soil and Groundwater Rcmedjggcn. (a) Any contaminated soils at the site may be teanediated during recoostruction of the existing =face impoundments. (b) Any ccotaainased groundwater must be teatediaaed prior to leaving the site. (c) A groundwater control measure sufficient to establish state water quality - . standards, must be in operation within six mouths,and operated until son control is established. (a) A performance bond sufficient to corer the clos=e costs of the surface its, mute be maintained until all aspects of the she characterization and r me completed 3. pbalBond Approval and Review Pee. (a) All plans for site cbanct rizatioa,remediadon and reconstruction and the performance bond shall be subject to review by and approval of the Division. (b) The Division shall be reimbursed all review costs. 6 §urfaoe Impoundment Liquid. Whalen;tt eM Liner Materials and Contaminated Soils and Cuoaadwata. W Surface iirt oondurni Squids. sediments and liner Materials and contaminated soils and groundwater* may be managed as a solid waste. RICHARD D. JUDD, P.C. Lee D. Morrison, Esq. May 5. 1995 Page 3 7. Compliance Chde ecr3 Penalty. (a) The above tams will be made part of a compliance order on consent. (b) No civil penalties will be assessed as a part of the compliance order on consent,however violations of the compliance order on Consent will be Subject to civil penalties WCWD has agreed, is principle. to enter into a compliance order on consent generally encompassing the terms set forth above. but subject to the following tams and conditions A. I have mentioned to you WCWD's concern about S timing requirements concerning Pond C and D and the rccoasbuction schedule. Generally,in order to accomplish the tecoasauction and ranodiaaon as set forth in the setdauent proposal.WCWD must continue to operate and generate monies for the retconstruction. B. Restudy. E have discussed with you the possibility of constructing an injection well on-site into which die liquids from Pond C and Pond D would be injected. and which injection well would henceforth be used as the disposal method for the permitted waste main brought onto the site. WCWD's tentative proposal will be to construct a lined Pad A to be used as a settling pond, then pump liquids from the settling pond into the injection well. If this is approved, Ponds C and D would be closed as surface impoundment C. WCWD recognizes and agrees that construction of an injection well as set forth above would be an amendment to the Special Use Permit heretofore granted to WCWD, and would be subject to the normal haring procedures required by the ordinances of Weld County. D Generally,the asseawntef the site and the necessary nemediadon will be subject Ica asp-by-step process. To iaifaw that step-by=tes, a site assessment plan has been pret,ed by WCWD and submitted, on April 17. 1995. to awn&. To date. WCWD has not received a response to the site isaus®mt plan. but after a tesponse is received. WCWD will negotiate with CDPHE and WCHD to determine MC ncrassy3tidttional characterizations and remediatien which will be necessary. E. The hum concerning past due amounts of taxes and fees, when considered with requirement of the performance bond, were discussed in general team with the indication that the general proposal trade by WCWD to utilize a part of the performance bard costs in the remediation would be considered by WCHD and CDPHE. Certainly. if the final plan is to Construct Pond A, then use an wlecuon wets, mu would make even ammo sane. Howcva, no RICHARD D.JUDD, P.C. Lee D.Memnon.Esq. May 5, 1995 Page 4 specific **moment was reached, and all parties agroed this would simply be discussed and considered in the fame. F. Pursuant to the regtmcmewts of CDPFIR,WCWD deposited $5000.00 with the CDPHE as WCWD's annual solid waste fee for 1995, a a result of that deposit, which was a a mdidm precedent for rem oval and managementt of the solid waste,of the sediments locoed is WCWD's receiving pit.those wastes have now been removed. Based upon the ongoing smtmnmt negotiations set forth above. I request that WOID request.on behalf of itself wad WCWD.that the County C m amssiomers continue the Probable Cause hearing now scheduled for May 17, 1995. I believe that the time sad effort tray to pr pore far and conduct this hearing at behalf of both WCWD and WCIID is unnecessary and is eountraproductive so a global satkanwt of all issues resulting is a compliance ardor at 000.021. I would appreciate bearing from you as soon as possible if the matter is to be continued. as I a nicips.e than the hearing on May 17, 1995 will last all day, and a significant amount of prepentiio0 is going to be necessary for that bearing. Yours way truly. LP- Richard D. Judd RDJ/vab cc: Mr. Howard Duckworth Mr. Don Shosky Tim Moaskan,EM. Weld County Waste Disposal Approximately August 30, 1988 Weld County Disposal was sold to Weld County Waste Disposal. Weld County Waste was granted Chapter 7 and was guaranteed the right to sell property to Weld County Waste Disposal for the first lien on the property. Other liens were not acknowledged nor encumbrances and claims of right. This is the third time this property has changed owners since before 1980, but the first time the name has changed. WCWD is a new company which should have applied for a new permit to operate since operations have drastically changed since the issuance of the first permit. There have been two certain, and a third possible hazardous waste violations against thispermit. One hazardous waste violation should have closed this operation or at least had serious fines levied against it. They are not in compliance with 1 , 4, 11 , 14, & 15. This is how those Standards affect us and our neighbors: I also say they are in violation of Standard 3 because of the sand, dirt, and dust that blows on our property. Also we burn many oil soaked weeds, or chemical soaked weeds. Standard 4: Our well was poisoned prior to 1985 and WCWD drilled a new well after an injunction by Federal Court Judge Kane. Trees, Grass, goats, and horses died. No fine or stoppage of WCWD happened because of this. The overspray from the aeration of the pits sprays all over our vehichles, tractors, buildings, and ground. Everything has a white coating on it. The pump is to have a muffler on it. It may, but it does not muffle. In the summer it is so noisy that we have to keep doors and windows closed just to communicate and sleep. And it is still to noisy to sleep. Not to mention the smells that emit from the pits. It is so bad that even with the doors & windows closed it still seeps through the walls. We go outside and actually thow up and get bad stomach aches and strange shaking feelings. and burning in nose and throat. It gets so bad that we cannot work or play outside about 35% of each and every day. Early mornings, late afternoons, whenever the wind blows our way. The smells run from naptha to chlorine to chemical odors, even garbage dump smells The last time was Monday night that we had bad odors. . WCWD was required to put up a 6 ' fence separating our properties but this never has been done. Trees were to be planted. The plant has hours posted. These are not acknowledged as Sunday is one of the busiest days, and also the hours after midnight. Trucks come in from out of state, trucks with no names, no license plates. Trucks dump and dribble their loads on roads frequently. This operation has been the site of three explosions and fires, and men have been burned. We have rescued much wildlife from these ponds over the years. Every year we find at least 6 or more Blue Herons, which are becoming endangered; many ducks, different birds, and sand hill cranes. These birds are either dead or near death. We have • 4. EXHIBIT ---o- -l-riad +o cleaq the oil but that is near impossible. The game warden often gets them from us. When these birds are oil soaked they cannot breath or fly. A number of years ago we came across a pit or small lake that was filled with dead birds, south of the present tanks and lakes. A neighbor's dog also died a couple of days after being in the pond. There is no way that we or our neighbors can live with these obscene smells, noise, poisoning of our water and remain sane and happy. We live in the country to enjoy the good life, not to fear for our life--will we sicken and die or just live very unhealthily? Two years ago our daughter was diagnosed with an extremely rare brain tumor that was impossible to be where it was. It almost cost her her life, and still may reoccur. The doctors have no answers. We worry that it could have comee from the air, smells, or the tainted water. We do not want to repeat this experience. It is true that some of these problems may have originated before WCWD, but the issue is that The County Commissioners has reissued this permit too many times. I can' t count the times that we have been in this room because of violations and they always get another chance. If they are dealing in Hazardous Waste their 'permit should be revoked. According to the MSDS sheets oil is hazardous. They are dumping oil , many different and untried chemicals that no one knows what will happen when they are mixed, and no one seems to care. �7 i ry_ 3/4,d4 pC/ STATE Or COLORADO COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH Dedicated to protecting and improving the health and 045-ti? environment of the people of Colorado 4300 Cherry Creek Dr.S. Laboratory BuildingDenver,Colorado 80222-1530 4210 E.11th Avenue Phone(303)692-2000 Denver,Colorado 80220-3716 (303)691-4700 Roy Rorner oven+or August 26, 1993 Patricia ti ,MD,MPH Exenni a Director Mr. Howard Duckworth Weld County Waste Disposal 12018 Warfield San Antonio, Texas 78216 - RE: WELD COUNTY WASTE DISPOSAL WELD COUNTY, COLORADO Dear Mr. Duckworth: The Hazardous Materials and Waste Management Division of the Colorado Department of Health (the Division) has completed a review of ground water monitoring data for the above referenced facility. This data includes monitoring of the shallow ground water at the site from August 13, 1990 to September 14, 1992. Pursuant to Subsection 6.1.4 of the Regulations Pertaining to Solid Waste Disposal Sites and Facilities (the Regulations) the data was reviewed to make a determination if the ground water in the vicinity has been impacted by disposal operations at Weld County Waste Disposal (WCWD). A statistical analyses of selected wells and parameters was carried out using the GRITS/STAT Version 4.14 Ground Water Information Tracking Information System software, which has been developed by the EPA for storing and analyzing ground water monitoring data. The data was analyzed using the Cochran Approximation of the Behrens- Fisher Student's T-test, as described in the GRITS/STAT manual and as specified in Subsection 2.2.3 (c) of the Regulations. The Division has determined, based on its review, that WCWD has impacted the shallow ground water in the vicinity of this facility, and therefore must come into compliance with the Regulations. Representatives of the Division are available to discuss the implications of compliance with WCWD, if necessary. If you have any questions regarding this matter, please contact me at (303) 692:3462. Sincerely, 9- 1 Step n Laudeman SEP 1 1993 Geological Engineer �� Solid Waste Section Weld County Planning Hazardous Materials and Waste Management Division = EXHIBIT • JR1419947fl/ MEMORANDUM •131innina TO: Glenn Mallory File: SW/WLD/WEL/1D FROM: Steve Laudeman DATE: March 4, 1994 SUBJECT: Weld County Waste Disposal March 1, 1994 meeting A meeting was held at Colorado Department of Health offices on March 1, 1994 to address outstanding issues regarding the Weld County Waste Disposal (WCWD) liquid waste impoundment facility located near Fort Lupton in Weld County, Colorado. The meeting was requested by Richard Judd, attorney for Weld County Waste Disposal. The attendees were: Howard Duckworth, Weld County Waste Disposal Richard Judd, Attorney for WCWD Don Shosky, Groundwater Technology, Inc. Lee Morrison, Weld County Attorney Jeff Stoll, Weld County Department of Health Keith Schuett, Weld County Planning Department Tim Monahan, Colorado Attorney General's Office Pam Harley, Colorado Department of Health Glenn Mallory, Colorado Department of Health Steve Laudeman, Colorodo Department of Health The meeting ended in agreement that WCWD would agree to comply with all the requirements of Section 9 of the Regulations Pertaining to Splid Waste Disposal Sites and Facilities, while not pursuing the a Certificate of Designatiori for the facility. The position presented by WCWD was that the technical and logistical hurdles to compliance were manageable,while the political and administrative problems with the CD application process were not. This position was accepted by the Solid Waste Section contingent on further review and approval of a compliance plan and schedule. Weld County indicated that further internal consultation would be necessary before an official position could be clarified. • The proposed "written cooperative agreement" (WCA), intended to address the aspects of the facility operation that do not meet the requirements of Section 9, will include WCWD's plans to address the following issues: 940823 WCWD March 1, 1994 Meeting Minutes March 5, 1994 Page 2 1. Controlling the source of ground water comtamination by lining the impoundments with an HDPE geomembrane liner. 2. Continuing monitoring of the ground water quality upgradient and downgradient of the facility. 3. Development of a plan for on-site treatment of petroleum contaminated soils produced as a result of minor spills occurring at the facility during normal operation. These were the three main points to be addressed in the WCA, as presented by Don Shosky. It was agreed that a written response to the concerns addressed in CDH's 12/6/93 letter would be needed prior to continuing with development of the WCA. Also, it was agreed that CDH and Weld County would consult internally regarding the feasability of the WCA and meet again on or about March 15, 1994 to discuss this matter. Regarding the disposal incident on property near the facility owned by Mr. James Martin, it was agreed that a contamination evaluation and sampling plan would be developed and submitted by Gil This plan would include enough sampling to determine the extent and degree of contamination at the Martin property. 9401523 (Riohahle CL.tLc Nry — -/1 kg-et 00 4345 Elizabeth St. Brighton, CO 80601 ,_5 May 4, 1995 rri• Weld County Commissioners EXHIBIT 915 10th S . I (°� Greeley, CO. �} . 806 1 Dear County Commissioner: We are concerned residents of Weld County and we live within 2 miles of the Weld County Waste Disposal that is located at WCR 12 & 35 east of Ft. Lupton. We understand that Weld Co. Waste Disposal is being reviewed for their license renewal and that they have several serious violations against them. We are extremely concerned about how our health and the environment is being affected by this business. This odor that is put off from Weld Co. Waste Disposal is at many times horrendous. Often times it can be smelled for as far away as 4 miles. The odor causes my family to be nauseated and have headaches. We have to keep the windows closed in the summertime because the odor comes in the house and lingers. (The odor seems to be heavier than air.) Several times we have been awakened at night by the odor, even with the windows shut. We have called the E.P.A. numerous times to complain about this odor. They have to send someone from Greeley to investigate it and many times the odor had subsided by the time they travel here. Many times the odor comes on the weekends when the county offices are closed. I have also called the pager number that was left on a recording and have gotton no response or even a phone call on the next business day. This gets costly nctonly for my phone bill, but for the county as well. It is inconveinient and frustrating. The dirt roads that run through this subdivision was contaminated by the dumping of oil that was purchased illegally from Weld Co. Waste Disposal by the developer, John Martin. This oil still remains on 90% of the roads. A small section was cleaned up by him when the E.P.A. stepped in. Why has the rest been left to remain ? Also we have seen oil spilled along the intersection of Highway 52 aad WCR 35 where the trucks come and go. We know that Weld Co. Waste Disposal has wells that have shown to have hazardous waste in them and also that they have been violated for impacting ground water with contaminants. We are concerned that our well water may also become contaminated. We have sited wildlife such as eagles, hawks, ducks and geese living in this area. The eagles have nests in a tree that lies just southeast of Weld Co. Waste Disposal's property line. This is not a healthy environment for them as well. I hope you will NOT renew Weld Co. Waste Disposal's license again. This business continues to operate and thrive even though they repeatedly violate and fail to meet what the E.P.A. requires all at the expense of others. When will you say enough is enough ? Sincerely, mac; CA, PL; /1L nrn' , ' Wade and Karen Frank 5-9-95 17576 Argie ST. Brighton . CO 80601 Dear Mr. Hall. We are writing to express our deep concern over the toxic waste dump located at WCR 435 and WCR #12. On May 17th. you will be given the opportunity to close this place down. We want to see you do just that. We know that you are familiar with this hazardous waste dump because there was another meeting on this same subject, so we won't go into the various violations that have already been discussed. However, if you have any doubts at all, you should spend a day there. You'd be amazed at the number of trucks that dump daily, the smell. the fog- like cloud that hovers over the surface of the ponds most days, the pipe that leaves the pond and dumps into Spear Canal. Hopefully nothing has been dumped into that irrigation water when no one was monitoring them! The owner(s) of the waste dump, have already been cited for selling and distributing waste illegally when they weren't monitored. The permit was originally issued years ago when Weld County was not undergoing such a tremendous gas toil boom and the number of loads dumped daily was nothing like it is today. Probably you know that John Martin is about to be get the go ahead to develop almost 300 acres which borders this hazardous dump. That is at least 60 more households being exposed to these toxic wastes. Another large tract of land, destined to become a multi-family neighborhood, was sold earlier this year about 1 mile west of WC R435 435 and 52. With the dump being in such close proximity to Speer Canal and the neighborhood's population rapidly increasing, forsaking all other violations, this should be reason enough for its rapid closure. The closure and clean up of this hazardous waste dump is not only good for us and the existing and future surrounding neighborhoods. but also anyone. cattle included, whose land borders Speer Canal. This place is a threat and shouldn't be in people's backyards but rather in a remote area away from kids, parents. animals and irrigation canals. Please do us proud and protect Weld County from this poison! We'd like to thank you in advance for your time and hopefully understanding . We'll be seeing you on May 17th. Sin ereh'. `� e Wade and F rck f .f rt EXHIBIT ge ,&cc --9)• e 9 PL ftL • aummois f t- ' — ' n PETITION �' ' H. m v ' We, the undersigned, are residents of Weld County and wish to express our cdnelrini W regarding Weld County Waste Disposal located at WCR 12 & 35; Becausec-ife$4,County rx. emrym Waste Disposal repeatedly continues to operate in violation of E.P;A,: ,regulations, without concern for the environment of their surrounding property owners and because , , of the hazard we feel this imposes upon our health, water, property, and wildlife, we hereby deem Weld County Waste Disposal a nuisance and request that their license for operation NOT be renewed. Name Address Drivers Lic. # -7)°ik .c)/rA1.52„ / 7620/ we fiO ? lc /3 3Cm9 z/ia «t.v c a a s-3 /g c7 7z ,214« 12(1;-.L._._//, --z-/Z. // is: -75 A oc16'/ ( 1._ G'dc, -:37 - (3 1 � 7_526 e6� (.; intbf,cci ..., Ad4 / 776_5 U/z-&- ) O 01534/ -780 %bLc ë 7 76r.;., /../Cot JO �l(-� l ` MA a Ail 2-O /AC/ M 1) 957 /89 OkernaL 10 fil i/✓ 1c lib/ 9E/ t4 j , ii, 1- 6 r\9) 30— r-_,: plC/ Zt /`277S / _ Pc_o ,LC.t . 'x,2 .3 3 <a in CL I.6±, , -, „,, ,,,,,,,,, f,... l30 , a 7f l" rfre l(( /J . . l7eYVf-6,--i.,._,,_., `1`c- e)42 &I/ r cli,k,-A, MaffuLtice IL i?b 3 6 AT 1f .S4- . R '1(D°.8x 1 do// £vcc,' CA 5 PL; HL PETITION We, the undersigned, are residents of Weld County and wish to express our concerns regarding Weld County Waste Disposal located at WCR 12 & 35; Because Weld County Waste Disposal repeatedly continues to operate in violation of E.P.A. regulations, without concern for the environment of their surrounding property owners and because of the hazard we feel this imposes upon our health, water, property, and wildlife, we hereby deem Weld County Waste Disposal a nuisance and request that their license for operation NOT be renewed. Name Address Drivers Lic. # 3/4a(--(_ 1-1 X� � LI3I15 uiebpL-n R 58a3L3 - Oak) San tilt 1 lin ¢^v `/7/G, /y Jr. �— (61 a k 0 CO R “„„), 0iz� (( ti L t 4S (Z I 02H7 >Ina, (4 4h /77/13 ,/b2 / Yar7 99- / 77 /1 / / az-"bX/46CL/de--7 /7yG 5 (Air, //-5 /sly 6 flat' 44-x.44c,/, 77t3 i ra Lee (a 7s Oss I LU�.eEI ted. p . ,�j�,� D Lois �"l� z•4-11: 1 ✓� 4L3 n 30 c a /7657:1 (1,6 et? tees( ( i)04,044-/)-t, we 6k' ficf7 wit bu hc/6 6 L0 ,0R fib' 9y sie g32/y- 7 76 4-1 eg 94/ -02BS -6371 qicee.r P. / 7&U rainy 9� lP_ -<a(a7 PETITION We, the undersigned, are residents of Weld County and wish to express our concerns regarding Weld County Waste Disposal located at WCR 12 & 35; Because Weld County Waste Disposal repeatedly continues to operate in violation of E.P.A. regulations, without concern for the environment of their surrounding property owners and because of the hazard we feel this imposes upon our health, water, property, and wildlife, we hereby deem Weld County Waste Disposal a nuisance and request that their license for operation NOT be renewed. Name Address II )1 Drivers Lic. # C FM D bitY1 %-'lleftn i 7 7 KKK. Rd-/Ca 7T. to nl r Luc 6 ` c)O v\72 rim^ l (h`f`1 C iIr i4 L t < � �i_.LIPI1 OUGIcrikei 115i-I!} CLcca Let. Br;r).lbf LA17ITO "Iail/0,-41w lecco Gla70. lee 1x 44-on `'4--I -F\7o PETITION We, the undersigned, are residents of Weld County and wish to express our concerns regarding Weld County Waste Disposal located at WCR 12 & 35; Because Weld County Waste Disposal repeatedly continues to operate in violation of E.P.A. regulations, without concern for the environment of their surrounding property owners and because of the hazard we feel this imposes upon our health, water, property, and wildlife, we hereby deem Weld County Waste Disposal a nuisance and request that their license for operation NOT be renewed. Nam Address Drivers Lic. # i,tS5 /7.5-83 C/lrca lee_ Sfi-e..1` 9!,4 -in -azure Hello