The URL can be used to link to this page

Browse Search

Home My WebLink About940502.tiff February 15, 1994 r r� John Pickle Weld County Department of Health c 1517-16 Avenue Court . . Greeley, CO 80631 Dear John: This letter is in response to yours dated January 30, 1994 and received in my office on February 11, 1994 as well as our telephone conversation this morning. I am returning your revision unsigned. If we are to keep the agreement in effect, your proposed revision deals adequately with monitoring issues. I am concerned about the possibility of differing compliance standards, points of compliance, fine schedules, et al. These all could be points for future interpretation and conflict which I want to avoid. Cancelling the agreement is the option National Hog Farms most favors. This would be the cleanest, simplest way to insure that everyone understands how our agreement fits into the picture with the State of Colorado Department of Health regulations. An acceptable alternative would be -- as we discussed this morning -- to insert the following language into your revision: "Weld County Health acknowldeges and National Hog Farms agrees that the water quality standards and points of compliance established by the State of Colorado Department of Health are the same standards and points of compliance governing the agreement between Weld County Health and National Hog Farms from this point hence. Further, Weld County Health can take no enforcement action or levy any fine of a greater magnitude or of a more severe nature than the State of Colorado Department of Health under its Confined Animal Feeding Operation Control Regulation 4.8.0 (5 CCR 1002-19) ." National Hog Farms remains committed to operating responsibly now just as we were on February 21, 1991 when we signed the original agreement. National Hog Farms believes this would be the best way to resolve this dilemma and meld our earlier agreement with our new responsibilities if the Board decides it is best to keep the agreement in effect. Let me know what you think once you get a chance to study this. Best Reg rds, Grey. lsdorf Executive Vice- es' ent Swine Division National Farms, Inc. cc: Bill Haw Bill Webster Bill O'Hare Victor Sainz Frank Haywood n (� ni Encl: Weld County Letter dated 1/30/94 (Jp) n� I! State of Colorado Letter dated 1/24/94 [7L' .' /l C 940502 2 :kr 6 DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH I 1517 - 16 AVENUE COURT GREELEY, COLORADO 80631 ADMINISTRATION (303) 3530586 WI gO HEALTH PROTECTION (303) 3530635 • COMMUNITY HEALTH (303) 3530639 COLORADO January 30, 1994 Mr. Gregg Gilsdorf Executive Vice President Swine Division' National Farms, 'Inc. Livestock Exchange Building 1600 Genessee Kansas City, Missouri 64102 Dear Gregg: We have received correspondence from the Colorado Department of Health, (attached) , which indicates that they wish to modify the monitoring plan as outlined in the agreement between National Farms and Weld County. As I understand the revision, it would seem to decrease the overall monitoring responsibility of National, yet still meet the described monitoring goals of our agreement as outlined in paragraph IV. In view of this, the revision would be agreeable to the Department. Please accept this letter as notice that the Colorado Department of Health Monitoring Program as described in their letter of January 24, 1994, shall be considered to constitute the modified monitoring program required under the Agreement of February 21, 1990 between National Hog Farms Incorporated, the Weld County Board of County Commissioners and the Weld County Health Department IV. The State requested monitoring program shall be considered to be substituted for Appendix B to the February 21, 1990 Agreement or any subsequent amendments prior to that date. The substitution will be complete upon receipt of the state approved plan indicating location and number of monitoring wells. Further, the substitution of the state plan is not intended by the parties to affect the validity of any data gathered under the previous monitoring programs. • Please sign and return a copy of this letter to indicate yobr agreement with this revision. If you have any questions, please contact us. Very t ulyyoouurs, oh S. Pic 1 Gregg Gilsdorf Director Executive Vice President 62/82/1(194 12: 85 3D3-702-E729f] CUH WUCD W000 PAGE 02 STATE OF COLORADO • COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH Q:II�s•,, Dedicated to protecting and improving the health ands. environment of the people of Colorado 4300 Cherry Creek Dr.S. Laboratory Building Denver,Colorado 80222-1530 4210 E 11th Avenue ��_JJJtttyyyYYY Phone D03)692.2000 Denver,Colorado 60220-3716 (303)691.4700 y konw Governor , January 24, 1994 A.Nolen,IAD,MPH emotive teactur • Greg Gilsdorf National Hog Farms • 1600 Genessee Kansas City, Missouri 64102 RR; National Hog Fame, Inc. , Ground Water Monitoring System Adequacy, Weld County. Dear Greg: This letter is to let you know that after a careful review of the groundwater quality data collected to this date, by National Hog Farms and Weld County Health Department, we have concluded that the information submitted is not reliable and it appears to be of very little use. We have reached this conclusion based on the following analysis: Design, Location, Construction, and Sampling of the existing ground water monitoring system. DESIGN. We have not been able to find any engineering study that shows a deep and detailed hydrogeological characterization of the site. The report prepared by International Technology Corporation, April 1989, provides about two pages of information regarding the geology and hydrogeology of the site. Furthermore, the study does not even make a small attempt to formulate a design for an adequate ground water monitoring system The Water Quality Control Division, Ground Water Unit has confirmed the existence and location of two distinct aquifers at the site. However, in your agreement with the Weld County Health Department there is no technical document or engineering report that outlines the basis of how these two aquifers should be monitored. In addition, these two aquifers have very different geological and hydrological properties, therefore, any monitoring system should have been designed to better monitor flow patterns and ground water quality changes that might have occurred dui to the land application of liquid and solid waste at the site. Again, we have not found any study that attempted to determine these differences. Bi\L\W:T.-HOOP.J91 1 ©2/(]2/1994 12: 05 303-782-0398 CDH WOOD W000 PAGE 03 Finally, the American Society for Testing and Materials, Standard Practice for _Design and Installation of Ground Water Monitoring Wells in Aquifers, D 5092-90; recommends "the development of a conceptual hydrogeologic model for the intended monitoring zone (a) prior to the design and installation of a monitoring well. • This conceptual hydrogeologic model should be an integral part of the overall geomorphological concepts, geologic structure, and hydrology of the site. As stated before no such technical considerations were performed. Therefore, the ground water monitoring system is flawed because it was not properly engineered. LOCATION: Also, we have not been able to determine what was the scientific or engineering basis for the location of the monitoring wells. A conceptual model would have been given National Hoge, Inc. a scientific basis for the location of all the ground water monitoring wells . At this point, it is our professional opinion that a detailed study of the geological and ground water hydrology characteristics of the site needs to be performed. This study will provide a scientific basis to properly locate a ground water monitoring system that eventually will yield reliable and accurate water quality information. We would like to point out, that the statewide adoption (12/27/93) of the amended ass Clifications and Wa r Qua it a nda srd o Ground Water 3 .12. 0 (5 CCR 1002-8) , now include the eolian shallow sand hills unconfined aquifer. Therefore, the point of compliance defined in our letter of November 2, 1993, has changed to the intersection of any ground water in the unconfined sand hills shallow aquifer and/or the South Platte alluvial aquifer. The Division maintains its position that three seta of monitoring wells, properly designed, located, constructed and sampled, is needed to monitor your disposal operations. The three set of monitoring wells were described in our letter of 11/2/93 . CONSTRUCTION In reviewing the construction logs of all your monitoring wells we noted that in not a single one of them were minimum state of the art engineering practices used to build them. We would like to point out some of the deficiencies the existing wells have. All wells are four inches (nominal interior). diameter. ASTM recommends that in most cases a two inch well is more than adequate to monitor ground water. A large diameter well is difficult to purge and it could retain large amounts of Bi\L\NAT-NOOV..794 2 02/02/1994 12: 05 303-702-0390 CDH WUCll W1 CC PAGE 04 stagnant ground water. There is no evidence that a sieve analysis was performed, in any of the wells, to determine the size of the filter pack. In actuality we do not know if an adequate filter pack was ever installed in these wells. There is no information, in the construction logs, as of what kind of engineering criteria was used to determine the size and length of the well screen. A proper size screen is critical, especially when low flows have to be monitored and sampled. Almost all the wells are 50 feet deep, and some of them have screens that are 40 feet in length. It appears that some of the wells with such long screens may have punctured -the shallow sand aquifer and reached the alluvium South Platte aquifer. These deficiencies lead us to believe that some of the wells, which are close"to the interface between the eolian sand hills shallow aquifer and the alluvium aquifer of the South Platte, are acting as sink holes. It is our opinion that there is a cross connection between these two aquifers, therefore, the possibility of migration of ground water during low and high flows cannot be discounted. SAMPLING Your agreement with the Weld County Health Department does not have a sampling protocol. There is no quality control mechanism, we can use, that will allow us to assess the reliability and accuracy of the data collected to this point. In addition, it is our understanding that the sampling was done using bailors, exclusively. This method, is the least recommended one for ground water sampling. Based on all of these considerations we are recommending the following course of action: 1. Plugging and sealing all monitoring wells in existence at the site. This procedure should be carried out following state of the engineering practices. Only then, we will be sure that there is no ground water migration, therefore, cross connection between the aquifers mentioned above. 2 . That, an engineering study be conducted to determine the geological and hydrological characteristics of this site. And, a new set of ground water monitoring wells be located and built. The Division still maintains that 12' wells should be built to monitor both aquifers, as defined in our letter of November 2, of last year. Di\L\KAT-N00W.J9l 3 U2/02/194 12: 05 DU3-/02-0390 CDH W(ilCD W(7CC FAQ L'5 1 _. �_ 3 . The Division recommends that the construction of any new monitoring wells should be built according to the American Society for Testing and Materials (D 5092-90) standards. 4. A sampling protocol be developed by you or your consultant and approved by the Division. This protocol shall follow the latest' EPA procedures and/or ASTM standards for ground water sampling. We would like to have a response to our proposal within the next two weeks.,ii the Division would like to resolve thin issue and move forward as, rckly as possible. • If you ha v any questions, please call me at (303) 692-3564 Sincerely,' FOR DIRECTOR, WATER QUALITY CONTROL DIVISION • S�E. • Field Support Section co: Hill O'Hara, National Hog Parma, Weld County Patricia Hellion, Permits and Enforcement Derald. Lang, Field Support Services George' Moravec, Groundwater Unit, CDH John Pickle, Director, Weld County Health Department Jeff atoll, environmental Director, W.C.H.D. Environmental Protection Agency, Region VIII Wayne Forman. Equus Farms MS-3 Pile 11, • 9,\L\NAT-NoOP,J94 4 rte`\ NATIONAL FARMS, INC. 816-221-4501 • • • February 11 ,, 1994 Victor S'airi , ", , Colorado Dep'a'z.tmen t of Health 4300 Cherry. Creak Drive South Denver, Colorado 8022'2-- 1530 Dear Victor: This letter is in response to yours dated January 24 , 1994 and received here January 31 , 1994 as well as our February 3 , 1994 telephone conversation. National Hog, Farms is committed to working with the State of Colorado along. the lines and in the same spirit of cooperation characterizing our encounters to date. You can be assured that we will proceed 'as outlined in your letter. Considering our history in Weld County and in particular what has occurred in connection with Weld C .unty Health, you can understand our desire to proceed prudently, hl tidy the engineering carefully, and implement a program we can all have confidence in. The steps being taken at present include a search for an engineering firm to conduct the hydrogeological ica l study you have requested. ' We also are Cleve lap inga sampling program and protocol for the monitoring wells once they are located and constructed. The request. to plug wells and abandon the present program is not possible at: this time. Our agreement with Weld County Health is still in effect and legally binds us to sampling the existing wells . To dal to, Weld County Health has not shown a willingness to cancel saidragreement. • It is Na t eina l Hog Farms ' desire to accomplish the objectives outlined in. your January 24 , 1994 letter as quickly as is prudent. We have already begun the process by initiating the engineering studies . New wells will be constructed and sampled as soon as we are able to ascertain where they ought to be placed . Once the obstacle placed in our path by the Weld County Health agreement is 1600 GENESSEE KANSAS CITY, MISSOURI 64102 itilrilji1. NATIONAL FARMS, INC. sir 816-221-4501 III I'm February 11, 1994 Page 2 removed, we will be able to begin fulfilling your remaining requests . Best r Bards , ty/ij ----Al ( ; :12,1- 1 Greg Gilsdorf rr) % GG/ns cc : Bill Haw Bill O'Hare Lucy Creighton Connie' Harbert Frank Haywood John Pickle enc : NatiorralHHog Farms letter to Weld County dated 2/11/94 �' !!'l��, 1600 GENESSEE KANSAS CITY, MISSOURI 64102 Hello