The URL can be used to link to this page

Browse Search

Home My WebLink About950686.tiffUSE BY SPECIAL REVIEW Non Commettial Landfann For Oil and Gas Waste SE/4 Section 13, T3N, R66W Prepared for: Weld County Department of Planning Session Prepared By: HS Resources, Inc. Denver, Colorado September 29, 1994 950086 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY HS Resources, Inc. (HSR) proposes to operate a Landfarm in the SE/4 of Section 13, Township 3 North, Range 66 West, approximately 5 miles east of Platteville, Colorado. The proposed Landfarm will be a noncommercial, centralized facility for the treatment and recycling of nonhazardous exploration and production (E&P) wastes generated at HSR well sites throughout Weld County. The proposed Landfarm will provide HSR with a cost-effective, environmentally -sound method of treating and recycling E&P wastes, will minimize the volume of wastes that would otherwise require disposal at a County landfill or at individual well sites, and will provide the opportunity for cooperation between HSR and the agricultural community through a series of pilot programs to be performed in coordination with the Weld County Extension Office. The land treatment technique proposed for this Landfarm utilizes naturally occurring bacteria that biodegrade hydrocarbons in E&P waste soil, sand, and drilling mud. Biodegradation is enhanced by thin -spreading and tilling the waste materials, adding moisture and nutrients as needed to promote the biological activity. The location proposed for HSR's Landfarm was selected to minimize potential effects of land treatment activities on productive agricultural land, the public, and the environment. Soils at the site are of marginal agricultural value, shallow ground water and other sensitive environmental receptors are not present, and the area is already utilized extensively for other oil and gas activities. The proposed HSR Landfarm plan conforms with many of the goals and policies outlined in Weld County's Comprehensive Plan: • No net loss of productive agricultural land is involved; • The 160 acre tract of land being considered is to be left in an open space condition and could easily be converted to agricultural or other open space use when landfarming activities are suspended; • Use of the parcel for landfarming will preserve the area from scattered urban -type development; • The Landfarm will be operated in a manner that minimizes effects to the County's natural resources, including water, soil, air, and wildlife; and, • The waste minimization and recycling techniques proposed will reduce the volume of waste that might otherwise strain the County's solid waste disposal capabilities. A completed Use by Special Review Questionnaire and Plat are included as Appendices to this proposal. 950696 TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Page 1.0 INTRODUCTION 2.0 BACKGROUND INFORMATION 2.1 LANDFARM OPERATOR 2.2 LANDFARM LOCATION 2.3 CURRENT LAND USE 1-1 2-1 2-1 2-1 2-1 2.4 LOCAL GEOLOGY AND HYDROGEOLOGY 2-2 2.4.1 Soil Types and Shallow Geology 2-2 2.4.2 Ground Water 2-3 2.4.3 Surface Water Features 2-4 3.0 LANDFARM OPERATIONAL PLAN 3-1 3.1 TYPES OF WASTE TO BE TREATED 3-1 3.1.1 Hydrocarbon -Stained Soil 3-1 3.1.2 Fresh Water -Based Bentonitic Drilling Mud 3-2 3.1.3 Hydrocarbon -Affected Frac Sand 3-3 3.2 WASTE CHARACTERIZATION 3-4 3.3 OUTLINE OF LANDFARMING METHOD 3-4 3.3.1 Land Treatment Plot 3-4 3.3.2 Tilling and Moisture Addition 3-5 3.3.3 Nutrient Addition 3-5 3.3.4 Land Treatment Performance Monitoring 3-6 3.3.5 Concrete -Lined Wash Pit 3-6 3.4 RECORD KEEPING 3-7 3.5 SITE SECURITY 3-7 3.6 SPILL RESPONSE PLAN 3-7 TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Page 4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PLAN 4.1 GROUND WATER MONITORING 4.2 SOIL TESTING 5.0 CLOSURE PLAN 6.0 RECYCLING OPTIONS 7.0 REFERENCES TABLES FIGURES APPENDIX A APPENDIX B - APPENDIX C APPENDIX D - APPENDIX E - 4-1 4-1 4-2 5-1 6-1 7-1 - WELD COUNTY USE BY SPECIAL REVIEW QUESTIONNAIRE REAL ESTATE CONTRACT - SITE PHOTOGRAPHS SOIL SURVEY USR PERMIT PLAT 950696 1.0 INTRODUCTION HS Resources, Inc. (HSR) has prepared this Use by Special Review Permit application to the Weld County Department of Planning Services for operation of a Landfarm for centralized, noncommercial land treatment and recycling of nonhazardous exploration and production (E&P) wastes. This permit application has been compiled in accordance with the Weld County Site Specific Development Plan, Use by Special Review Information Packet (Appendix A), the Weld County Comprehensive Plan dated March 24, 1992, the Weld County Zoning Ordinance, and the Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation Commission (COGCC) Rule 907 for Offsite Noncommercial Treatment of E&P Wastes. HSR is also submitting a permit application directly to COGCC for the proposed Landfarm, as required by COGCC Rule 907. The HSR Landfarm will utilize proven, natural, land treatment techniques to treat and recycle selected nonhazardous E&P wastes associated with drilling, production, and site reclamation activities being conducted by HSR throughout Weld County. The proposed Landfarm will: • Provide HSR with a cost-effective, environmentally -sound method for dealing with E&P waste materials; • Promote communication and understanding between the agricultural and oil and gas communities through a series of cooperative efforts planned with the Weld County Extension Office that will investigate beneficial uses of some E&P wastes; • Minimize through recycling the volume of waste that would otherwise need to be disposed of either at the individual well site or a commercial disposal facility in Weld County; and, • Preserve a 160 acre tract of open space from non-agricultural, scatter -type urban development. 1-1 950686 The remaining sections of this proposal present background information on the proposed Landfarm location, including a review of area geology, hydrogeology, and land use; a Landfarm Operating Plan, including the types and volumes of materials to be treated and recycled, waste profiling, an outline of the land treatment techniques to be employed, record keeping, site security, and spill response procedures; an Environmental Monitoring Plan for soil and ground water at the site; and a Closure Plan. Figures and Appendices to the proposal include site locations maps and diagrams, a completed Use by Special Review Questionnaire and supporting documents; an executed real estate contract for the property, site photographs, an excerpt from the USDA Soil Conservation Service (SCS) soil survey of the site; and a Use by Special Review Plat. 1-2 950686 2.0 BACKGROUND INFORMATION The location for the proposed Landfarm was selected with the intent of minimizing impacts to prime agricultural land, to minimize possible effects to soil, ground water, and surface water resources, as well as any nuisance effects to County residences, and to locate the land treatment site in an area already used extensively for oil and gas production activities. Presented below is a review of the proposed Landfarm location, adjacent land use, and the geologic and hydrogeologic conditions in the area. 2.1 LANDFARM OPERATOR The proposed Landfarm will be owned and operated by HS Resources, Inc. (HSR) as a noncommercial facility. HSR's Environmental Affairs Department will have the primary responsibility for operation, management, and monitoring at the Landfarm. HSR is a publicly held oil and gas exploration and production company that has been active in Weld County for over ten years. HSR is one of the largest oil and gas operators in the Wattenberg field and has a significant acreage position. HSR (formerly known as Elk Exploration) employs approximately 75 people in our Evans, Colorado office, as well as a similar number in our Denver office. 2.2 LANDFARM LOCATION The proposed Landfarm will be located on a 160 acre parcel being purchased by HSR in the SE/4 of Section 13, Township 3N Range 66W, approximately 5 miles east of Platteville, Colorado (Figure 1 and Appendix B). The parcel is bounded on the south by Weld County Road (WCR) 32, which is paved, and to the east by WCR 37, which is a light duty dirt road. 2.3 CURRENT LAND USE The 160 acre parcel being proposed for the Landfarm is undeveloped range and grazing land. According to the current property owner, the land has not been cultivated since at least 1979. Field observations, comments made by the current property owner and others familiar with the 2-1 950686 area, and a review of historical aerial photographs suggest that there has been only limited cultivation in the past 25 years (Appendix C). The HSR parcel and surrounding area are extensively developed for oil and gas production. Four oil and gas wells, three crude oil storage tank batteries, and several pipeline/gathering system manifolds are located within the 160 acre parcel. Several natural gas gathering systems and associated right-of-ways also cross the property. Adjoining land is used for grazing, limited agricultural development, oil and gas production, and light density residential development. The Landfarm parcel is bounded: to the north by undeveloped range and grazing land, with oil and gas wells and tank batteries; to the west by cultivated agriculture, range/grazing land, oil and gas development, and several houses; to the south by WCR 32, with range/grazing land, oil and gas development, and a single residence beyond; and to the east by range/grazing land, oil and gas wells and a tank battery, and a house. The nearest residential structures to the proposed HSR Landfarm are located approximately 500 feet (ft) west and 1,200 ft east of the section boundary (Figure 2). 2.4 LOCAL GEOLOGY AND HYDROGEOLOGY 2.4.1 Soil Types and Shallow Geoloey The proposed Landfarm is located in an area of flat rangeland and gently rolling hills with a surface elevation ranging from approximately 5,010 to 5,060 ft above sea level. The relatively highest points are found in the western half of the parcel, with the ground surface sloping gently to the east. The eastern half of the parcel, within which most of the proposed land treatment activities will be performed, is nearly flat lying. Soils underlying the site include well sorted fine- to medium -grained sand, loamy sand, and sandy loam. The dominant soil types present in the parcel are included in the Valent-Vona- Osgood soil mapping unit, comprised of deep, well drained, nearly level to moderately sloping 2-2 950686 sands and sandy loamy formed in eolian deposits (Crabb, 1980). According to the SCS, this soil type is used primarily for rangeland, with some small areas used for irrigated and non -irrigated cropland. The predominant sandy texture limits the soil's use for most agricultural development. The specific soil types mapped in the 160 acre HSR parcel include the Valent sand, Vona loamy sand, Vona sandy loam, and sparse Shingle-Renohill loam complex. The sandy soils exhibit rapid permeability, slow surface runoff, moderate available water capacity, and low erosive hazard (Appendix D). Underlying the sandy soils is approximately 20 ft of unconsolidated, Quaternary eolian sand deposits (Tweto, 1979). Soil borings drilled by HSR at the property encountered medium brown to yellowish brown, well sorted, fine- to medium -grained sand that contains sparse pebbles and rootlets. A two ft thick, soft to firm, dry, medium gray clay layer was encountered in the borings at a depth of approximately 15 to 17 ft. Sand encountered above and below this clay layer were slightly moist to dry. The unconsolidated deposits are underlain by hard to friable claystone and siltstone of the Cretaceous Laramie formation (Tweto, 1979). Depth to bedrock in the soil borings drilled at the site ranged from approximately 15 to 25 ft below the ground surface. The upper two to three ft of bedrock appeared to be weathered and friable but did not contain any detectable ground water. 2.4.2 Ground Water The HSR Landfarm parcel occurs in an area mapped by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) as containing localized ground water in colluvial, landslide, windblown, and poorly consolidated bedrock deposits (Hillier, 1979a). These isolated water table aquifers are generally not perennially saturated, are concentrated near surface water streams and creeks, and generally occur at depths ranging from 5 to 20 ft below the ground surface. Ground water was not encountered in borings drilled at the site that were completed as ground water monitoring wells. The borings/monitoring wells were drilled to auger refusal in bedrock at depths ranging from 2-3 950686 20 to 25 ft and the wells were left in place to monitor possible seasonal changes in ground water conditions. Although water wells completed in water table aquifers in this area are generally capable of producing sufficient water for domestic and some commercial uses (less than 50 gallons per minute), the quality of the water is relatively poor (Hillier, 1979b). Total dissolved solids (TDS) concentrations in these water table aquifers is greater than 500 milligrams per liter (mg/1) and commonly greater than 1,500 mg/l. The Fox Hills Sandstone constitutes the principle ground water aquifer in the area. The Fox Hills is present at a depth greater than 300 ft and contains relatively poor quality water, with an average TDS concentration in this area is greater than 1,000 mg/1 (Repplier, et al, 1981). Five permitted water wells are located within Section 13, one of which belongs to the current property owner and is located within the boundaries of the HSR Landfarm. The Colorado Division of Water Resources master well list only reports completion information and water levels for two of these five wells. Both are completed in the bedrock aquifer and have reported water levels of 91 and 240 ft (Table 1). Numerous permitted water wells are present to the east of the proposed Landfarm property that report water levels of approximately 20 to 50 ft below the ground surface. The presence of shallower ground water east of the Landfarm property is interpreted to be related to topographically lower ground elevations. The proposed HSR Landfarm is located on one of the highest points in the surrounding area and may be positioned above the elevation of the alluvial aquifer. 2.4.3 Surface Water Features The nearest surface water feature in the area is the West Speer Canal, which is located in the SW/4 of Section 13. An abandoned section of the East Speer Canal crosses the eastern portion of the SE/4 of Section 13. Field observations and comments by the property owner and others 2-4 950686 familiar with the area suggest that the abandoned channel has not been used for irrigation or transport purposes for at least the past 15 years. According to flood plain maps maintained by the Weld County Department of Planning Services and maps published by the USGS (McCain and Hotchkiss, 1975), the proposed Landfarm does not occur in a flood hazard area. 2-5 950686 3.0 LANDFARM OPERATIONAL PLAN The proposed HSR Landfarm will treat and recycle only nonhazardous, low toxicity drilling and production waste materials according to standards for centralized, noncommercial land treatment established by COGCC and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)/Interstate Oil and Gas Compact Commission (IOGCC). Outlined below is the operational and management plan for the proposed Landfarm. 3.1 TYPES OF WASTE TO BE TREATED The HSR Landfarm will only treat nonhazardous, low toxicity E&P waste materials derived from HSR-operated drilling and production sites in Weld County. The types of wastes to be treated and recycled are (Table 2): • Hydrocarbon -stained soil from spills, production pit closures, and other site reclamation activities; • Fresh water -based bentonitic drilling mud; and • Hydrocarbon -affected "frac" sand associated with completion of oil and gas wells. The proposed HSR Landfarm will not receive any materials that are listed and defined as hazardous wastes under Subtitle C of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). 3.1.1 Hydrocarbon -Stained Soil Hydrocarbon -stained soil commonly occurs at oil and gas production sites associated with unlined production pits used for produced water storage and evaporation, from spills and releases at well heads and tank batteries, and other sources. HSR typically treats hydrocarbon -stained soil in place when relatively minor quantities of hydrocarbons are involved, according to COGCC Rule 906. However, many surface owners prefer that spills and other operation -related soil staining be remediated as quickly as possible. This is especially true in the case of well sites that are being plugged and abandoned (P&A) and the surface owner wishes that the site be restored more rapidly than onsite land treatment would allow. Since onsite land treatment of oil -stained soil 3-1 950656 can take up to twelve months or more to complete, offsite disposal and treatment options are often more attractive to both HSR and the surface owner when time constraints are a major factor. Hydrocarbon -stained soil will constitute one of the three waste materials treated at the Landfarm. The volume of soil requiring treatment will vary according to operational parameters such as occurrence of spills, the number of wells scheduled for P&A, and the number of production pits to be closed. At present, HSR has identified approximately fifty unlined production pits and concrete tanks in the Wattenberg and Waite Lakes areas that it intents to close within the next year. The pits and tanks are part of a recent acquisition of oil and gas properties by HSR. Although these pits and tanks are in compliance with COGCC rules and regulations, HSR has decided to replace them with above ground steel tanks in order to bring the well sites up to the standard of other HSR operations in the area. The pit closure program will generate approximately 1,000 to 1,500 cubic yards of hydrocarbon - stained soil requiring treatment or disposal. HSR intends to treat and recycle the soil over a one year period and will use treated soil as backfill for excavated pits. Initial hydrocarbon concentrations in the untreated soil ranges from less than approximately 500 ppm to over 20,000 ppm. HSR will treat the soil until hydrocarbon concentrations are reduced to less than 1,000 ppm, in accordance with target hydrocarbon levels being proposed by COGCC. Soil to be used as backfill in areas with shallow ground water will be treated to the appropriate Remedial Action Category (RAC) levels adopted by the Colorado Department of Health (CDH). 3.1.2 Fresh Water -Based Bentonitic Drilling Mud Fresh water -based bentonitic drilling mud (WBBDM, drilling mud) is composed of fresh water, bentonite clay, and trace quantities of nontoxic chemical additives. Minor amounts of hydrocarbons may also be present in cases where the drilling mud comes into direct contact with a hydrocarbon -bearing formation during drilling of the well. 3-2 9S0686 Drilling mud is typically discharged to area farmland as a means of increasing the clay content and water holding capacity of sandy soil. This type of disposal is performed with the permission of the land owner under COGCC Rule 911. However, some land owners prefer that drilling mud be removed from the location. HSR intends to apply some drilling mud to the Landfarm to provide moisture for land treatment and composting projects. Application of drilling mud directly to rangeland soil within the Landfarm is also planned as part of a cooperative pilot study proposed with Jerry Alldredge of the Weld County Extension Office to investigate beneficial agricultural use and the effects of fresh water drilling mud on rangeland soil. HSR generates approximately 4,000 barrels (bbl, 1 bbl = 42 gallons) of drilling mud for each oil and gas well drilled in the Wattenberg area. One hundred twenty five new oil and gas wells are planned for the area in 1995, generating an estimated 500,000 bbls of drilling mud. The actual volume of drilling mud to be disposed of at the Landfarm is unknown. HSR intends to continue applying the drilling mud to cropland on location whenever possible. Application of drilling mud at the Landfarm will be conducted in a manner that prevents ponding, pooling, runoff, or saturated soil. This effort will be augmented by the sandy, permeable nature of area soils that typically limits runoff and allows for rapid infiltration of water. 3.1.3 Hydrocarbon -Affected Frac Sand "Frac" sand is sand that is pumped down a well during completion or "fracturing" of the oil and gas -bearing formation. The sand helps to enlarge fractures in the hydrocarbon -bearing formation and also keeps the fractures open. Variable quantities of this sand are then produced back out of the well bore. Produced frac sand contains silica sand, a nontoxic gel solution, and minor quantities of hydrocarbons that are produced from the well and mix with the sand. HSR intends to drill and recomplete a total of approximately 250 well sites in 1995. Each well is expected to produce approximately 10 cubic yards of frac sand that will require treatment or disposal. The total volume of frac sand that will be treated and recycled at the Landfarm in 1995 is approximately 2,500 cubic yards. 3-3 950686 ' 3.2 WASTE CHARACTERIZATION All E&P waste materials to be treated and recycled at the HSR Landfarm will be analyzed prior to transport to the facility to ensure that the materials are nonhazardous and conform with COGCC guidelines. The wastes will be analyzed for: • Benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and xylene (BTEX); • Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (TPH); • Oil and Grease; • RCRA Metals; and, • Total Dissolved Solids (TDS). All samples collected for waste characterization will be analyzed by a Colorado -certified laboratory using U.S. EPA -approved methods. COGCC requires that TPH concentrations in the thin -spread materials be kept below 50,000 parts per million (ppm). COGCC also requires that limits be maintained on metals concentrations, including: 100 mg/kg for arsenic; 2,000 mg/kg for barium; 20 mg/kg for cadmium; 100 mg/kg for chromium; 100 mg/kg for lead; 4 mg/kg for mercury; 20 mg/kg for selenium; and 100 mg/kg for silver. 3.3 OUTLINE OF LANDFARMING METHOD Soil, sand, and drilling mud will be treated at the Landfarm using land treatment techniques that have been proven to be environmentally -safe, cost efficient, and effective at reducing hydrocarbon concentrations by enhancing natural bacterial breakdown of the hydrocarbons. HSR proposes to employ natural, in situ bacteria to degrade the hydrocarbons by augmenting their growth through addition of oxygen, water, and nutrients. 3.3.1 Land Treatment Plot Each load of material to be land treated will be placed in a discrete plot separated from other soil, sand, etc... being treated at the site. The material will be placed on a relatively flat area 3-4 950686 and thin -spread to a depth not to exceed one ft. An earthen berm will be built around the thin - spread soil to prevent runon and runoff from impacting the land treatment plot. Access to each plot will be sufficient to allow for movement of a backhoe or tractor necessary for periodic tilling and moisture addition. Appropriate nutrients will also be added to the thin spread material in the form of commercial fertilizer. 3.3.2 Tilling and Moisture Addition The thin spread soil/sand will be tilled at least once each month and as often as weekly to promote aeration of the soil and enhanced biodegradation. Water will also be added to the soil/sand as needed to maintain the moisture content at approximately 10 to 15 percent. Soil moisture levels will be measured weekly using a hand-held soil moisture meter. Care will be taken during tilling and moisture addition to prevent unnecessary pulverization of the soil/sand, to limit dust emissions, and to prevent water saturation. To limit dust emissions, tilling will not be performed when wind speeds exceed 25 miles per hour. Excess watering will be avoided to prevent pooling, ponding, runoff, and infiltration. Also, excess moisture can retard growth of the bacteria being utilized to degrade the hydrocarbons. 3.3.3 Nutrient Addition HSR will perform a nutrient analysis of the various waste materials being treated at the Landfarm to determine if additional nutrients are needed to promote biodegradation. If results of this analysis suggest that additional nutrients are required to promote bacterial activity, the soil will be amended with a commercial fertilizer that contains potassium, nitrogen, phosphorous, and trace elements. These additional nutrients will be tilled into the soil when it is originally thin - spread at a rate of approximately one pound of fertilizer per cubic yard of soil/sand being treated. This nutrient addition will increase the rate of hydrocarbon biodegradation. 3-5 950686 3.3.4 Land Treatment Performance Monitoring Decreases in hydrocarbon levels will be monitored on a weekly basis in the field using a photoionization detector (PID). A composite sample will be collected from the thin -spread plot and placed into a sealable container. The sample will be allowed to reach ambient temperature and the headspace of the container will be probed with the PID, providing a semi -quantitative measure of volatile hydrocarbon concentrations in the soil. pH will also be monitored periodically and the pH level within the thin -spread material will be maintained between 6.5 and 9.0 to foster biodegradation and maintain a balanced pH in underlying soil. When field PID results suggest that hydrocarbon concentrations have decreased to a target level or approximately 500 to 1,000 ppm, a composite sample will be collected for laboratory analysis. The laboratory analytical results will be used to confirm that hydrocarbon concentrations in the thin -spread soil have been reduced to acceptable levels and the soil/sand will be removed from the Landfarm and recycled for use at another HSR facility (Section 6.0). 3.3.5 Concrete -Lined Wash Pit Frac sand will be delivered to the Landfarm in 500 bbl tanks that are carried on the back of a truck. HSR intends to construct a double lined concrete wash pit at the Landfarm that will allow the sand to be washed out of the tank, removing excess hydrocarbons for offsite disposal (Figure 3). The pit will measure approximately 20 ft long, 10 ft wide, and a maximum of 8 ft deep. The floor of the concrete -lined pit will slope down from one side, allowing the truck to back into the pit, where the sand will be washed out with a high pressure water hose. Water and hydrocarbons will be removed from the pit by a vacuum truck for offsite disposal using approved techniques. The sand will then be scooped out of the pit and thin -spread for treatment. HSR intends to over -excavate the hole required for the concrete pit and will line the outside of the hole with an impermeable clay liner that will contain any fluids that might leak from the pit. A sand and gravel bed will be placed over the clay liner to form a sump for collection of any 3-6 950656 1 released fluids. A PVC monitoring and recovery well will be placed in the sump between the concrete and clay liners. Fluid levels will be monitored in the sump on a weekly basis and any water or hydrocarbons detected will be promptly removed and the source of the leak identified and corrected. 3.4 RECORD KEEPING HSR will maintain records pertaining to the Landfarm operation. A duplicate set of records will be kept in HSR's Corporate Environmental Files in Denver and at our field office in Evans, Colorado. The records will be maintained for the duration of Landfarm operation and for at least three years following closure and site reclamation. The records will include: • A copy of all approved permits; • Dates, sources, volumes, waste characterization data, tillage dates, dates of moisture and nutrient addition, and all field and laboratory analytical results for all materials treated at the Landfarm, and the final disposition of the treated material; • Concrete wash tank inspection records; • Results of periodic soil and ground water monitoring; and, • Any incidents, spills, or emergency response related to the Landfarm. 3.5 SITE SECURITY HSR will construct a six ft high, chain link fence around the perimeter of the Landfarm to prevent unauthorized access. The perimeter fence will include at least two gates located along the property's east side, adjacent to present lease roads. A dirt road serving as a fire lane will be constructed inside the fence along the outside margin of the active Landfarm area. In addition to the perimeter fence, HSR will visually inspect the Landfarm at least once a week. 3.6 SPILL RESPONSE PLAN HSR maintains a formalized spill response and reporting plan for all of its production facilities, which will be expanded to include the Landfarm. The plan includes guidance on mitigating a 3-7 95"06&6 spill or release and notification of the appropriate regulatory authorities. In general, the most common material involved in a reportable spill would be crude oil or condensate, neither of which will be stored at the Landfarm. All spill reporting and remedial actions will be the responsibility of HSR's Environmental Affairs Manager. 3-8 950686 4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PLAN HSR plans to implement a formal environmental monitoring program at the Landfarm to provide ongoing documentation of soil and ground water conditions at the site. Outlined below are the major components of HSR's Environmental Monitoring Plan. 4.1 GROUND WATER MONITORING Although ground water was not identified in soil borings drilled by HSR at the proposed Landfarm site, we intend to install a number of ground water monitoring wells to document possible seasonal changes in ground water conditions. The wells will be located in upgradient and downgradient locations proximal to the active land treatment areas, as well as around the double -lined concrete wash pit described in Section 3.3.5. The monitoring wells will be installed in soil borings drilled into bedrock at a depth of approximately 20 to 25 ft below the ground surface. The wells will be constructed of one to two inch PVC according to standards for monitoring well construction established by the State Engineer. Each of the wells will be equipped with a locking cap to prevent unauthorized access. All well will be permitted with the State Engineer. Water table levels will be measured on a monthly basis. If ground water is encountered in the wells, quarterly sampling of ground water will be conducted for laboratory analysis of BTEX and TPH. HSR will prepare water table maps and quarterly analytical reports that will become part of the Landfarm records. If hydrocarbon compounds are detected in ground water beneath the site, land treatment activities will be suspended pending identification of the source of the hydrocarbons and initiation of appropriate corrective actions and notification of Weld County and CDH. 4-1 950686 ' 4.2 SOIL TESTING HSR will sample shallow soil beneath active land treatment areas on an annual basis. Soil samples will be collected from depths ranging from 5 to 20 ft below the ground surface for visual observation, field analysis of hydrocarbon concentrations using a PID, and laboratory analysis of BTEX and TPH. COGCC regulations require that hydrocarbon impacts to soil underlying the treatment area be limited to the upper 5 ft below the ground surface. As with the ground water sampling results, HSR will maintain a record of the soil sampling and analytical results and will take whatever corrective action is appropriate to mitigate adverse effects to soil at the site. 4-2 950686 5.0 CLOSURE PLAN HSR does not anticipate closing the Landfarm in the foreseeable future. Nevertheless, we have prepared a closure plan for the site that outlines the steps to be taken to return the land to its natural condition in the event land treatment activities are suspended. The general requirements of the Closure Plan include: • The Landfarm will be closed in the event that no E&P waste materials are treated or recycled at the site for more than a one year period, unless HSR has sought and received the approval of Weld County and COGCC; • A physical and chemical analysis of soil at the site, utilizing the analytical set outlined in Section 3.2, that documents soil conditions at closure; • Treated soil/sand remaining at the site will not contain hydrocarbons in excess of 1,000 ppm (measured by the oil and grease method) and the pH will be between 6.5 and 9.0; • The total metals concentrations in soil will not exceed the levels outlined in Section 3.2; • HSR will perform appropriate corrective action to remediate impacts to soil and ground water to acceptable levels; • The Plan will include a description of the site's operation history, including dates of operation, treatment methods employed and waste types treated or recycled, and the source and amounts of E&P waste materials accepted; 5-1 950686 7 • A site map showing the areas used for land treatment, dates of the treatment, types, sources, and amounts of waste land treated, and the final contours of the site after all treated materials are removed; • An evaluation of the site's potential to impact waters of the state; and, • All improvements or equipment onsite, including the concrete wash pit, will be removed. HSR will maintain the monitoring wells onsite for a period of one year after closure to document ongoing ground water conditions post closure. All fences and gates will be left in place during closure operations. 5-2 950686 6.0 RECYCLING OPTIONS One of the purposes of HSR's proposed Landfarm is to recycle waste materials whenever possible and to minimize the volume of waste that would otherwise require disposal. HSR intends to achieve this recycling by reusing treated soil and sand at other HSR well sites and facilities in Weld County and by working with Jerry Alldredge of the Weld County Extension Office to find other beneficial uses for these materials, including agricultural uses. Potential uses for treated soil and sand that have been identified by HSR so far include: • Road base for lease roads; • As construction materials for earthen berms around crude oil storage tanks; • As backfill material for excavated production pits, concrete sumps, etc...; • Fresh water -based bentonitic drilling mud can be applied under controlled conditions on sandy rangeland soils to improve water holding capacity and suitability for crops; • Soil, sand, and drilling mud could be added to locally -derived manure and crop debris to make an organic -rich compost that could have agriculture -related applications; and, • Other uses developed through a cooperative effort with the County. 6-1 950686 7.0 REFERENCES Crabb, J.A., 1980; Soil Survey of Weld County, Colorado, Southern Part: USDA Soil Conservation Service. Hillier, D.E. and Schneider, P.A., 1979a; Depth to the Water Table in the Boulder -Fort Collins - Greeley Area, Front Range Urban Corridor, Colorado: US Geological Survey Map I -855-I. Hillier, D.E. and Schneider, P.A., 1979b; Well Yields and Chemical Quality of Water from Water -Table Aquifers in the Boulder -Fort Collins -Greeley Area, Front Range Urban Corridor, Colorado: US Geological Survey Map I -855-J. McCain, J.F. and Hotchkiss, W.R., 1975; Map Showing Flood -Prone Areas, Boulder -Fort Collins -Greeley Area, Front Range Urban Corridor, Colorado: US Geological Survey Map I- 855 -E. Repplier, F.N., Healy, F.C., Collins, D.B., and Longmire, P.A., 1981; Atlas of Ground Water Quality in Colorado: Colorado Geological Survey Map Series No. 16. Smith, R.O, Schneider, P.A., and Petrie, L.R., 1964; Ground Water Resources of the South Platte River Basin in Western Adams and Southwestern Weld Counties, Colorado: US Geological Survey Water Supply Paper No. 1658. Tweto, O., 1979; Geologic Map of Colorado: US Geological Survey. 8-1 950686 TABLE 1 WATER WELLS WITHIN 0.5 MILE OF THE PROPOSED LANDFARM SE/4 Section 13, Township 3 North, Range 66 West Location NESW 13 3N 66W SENW 13 3N 66W SENW 13 3N 66W NESE 13 3N 66W SWSW 13 3N 66W NWNW 18 3N 66W NWNW 18 3N 66W NWNW 18 3N 66W NWNW 18 3N 66W NWNW 18 3N 66W NWNW 18 3N 66W SWNW 18 3N 66W SWNW 18 3N 66W SWNW 18 3N 66W NESW 18 3N 66W NESW 18 3N 66W NESW 18 3N 66W NWSW 18 3N 66W NWSW 18 3N 66W NWSW 18 3N 66W NWSW 18 3N 66W NWSW 18 3N 66W NWSW 18 3N 66W NWSW 18 3N 66W SESW 18 3N 66W SESW 18 3N 66W SESW 18 3N 66W SESW 18 3N 66W SESW 18 3N 66W SESW 18 3N 66W SWSW 18 3N 66W SWSW 18 3N 66W NENW 19 3N 66W NENW 19 3N 66W NENW 19 3N 66W NWNW 19 3N 66W Well Depth (ft) Water Level (ft) 389 440 58 41 44 42 62 60 60 40 56 63 57 58 55 60 55 45 30 40 60 60 53 70 40 58 59 91 240 23 16 17 18 30 26 20 18 17 17 17 16 20 16 17 21 22 21 25 17 26 13 16 19 32 12 57 17 950686 TABLE 1 (CONTINUED) WATER WELLS WITHIN 0.5 MILE OF THE PROPOSED LANDFARM SE/4 Section 13, Township 3 North, Range 66 West Location NWNW 19 3N 66W SENW 19 3N 66W SENW 19 3N 66W SENW 19 3N 66W SWNW 19 3N 66W Well Depth (ft) Water Level (ft) 36 12 60 17 250 Taken from Colorado Division of Water Resources Master Well List. ---- Data not reported. 930656 I TABLE 2 WASTE TYPES AND ANTICIPATED VOLUMES Proposed HSR Landfarm Waste_Type_____ Estimated Volume Hydrocarbon -stained 500 - 1,000 Soil Fresh water -based 5,000 - 10,000 Bentonitic Drilling Mud Frac Sand 25 - 50 Total Estimated Vol ume, 1995 1,000 - 1,500 Unknown 2,500 Estimated Volume is the total amount of waste material expected to be present at the Landfarm a given time. Total Estimated Volume is the cummulative amount of waste anticipated to be treated at the Landfarm in 1995. Volumes for Hydrocarbon -stained Soil and Frac Sand are reported in cubic yards. Volume for Drilling Mud is reported in bbls (1 bbl = 42 gallons). 950686 RFC W WCR 34 R65W JOEL D. & GAYLE M. GRAF /RR/GATED AGRICUI TURAL LAND OII well • Tan\ obau�L�s House Pond / House II a \MAUDE L. BROTEMARKLE • • Oil well ny IJ Oil well • ❑o Tank battery II House FALLOW AGRICUL TURAL LAND Oil well cP c Tank battery Oil well i ' Tank/ battery 1 13 WCR 32 \� 0 Tank battery 0 House FALLOW 1 AGRICULTURAL S RANGELAND Oil well 0 0 / DEPT. OF TRANSPORTATION (FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION fa Tank Ibattery RANGEL ANO . ' Tank battery 0. Tank battery Oilwell --• Tank battery h V H S RESOURCES, INC. Oil well •----, Pipeline • manifold 0 ' \ Oil well O • :manifold° Tank battery • 2 HANS L. & well • MAUDE E. JOHNSON FALLOW AGRICULTURAL 8 RANGELAND •\ Oil well \ \�1i manifold 0 wellw MAXINE I. --= TERRY FALLOW AG. I ■ Tank battery El Tank battery S Oilwell ABANDON •Oil well 1 Tank battery JERROLD J. WARDELL 1/2 ANNA E. WARDELL 1/2 Tank battery , /Oil well / / • \ Oil well • RANGELAND 18 \• 'cq v Oil ilk -N._ ro well 4`cto 111 9,1"OO4LC'I'A! O iI well a/ --• �� • KLE Tank battery • Oil well • ,• RANGELAND ♦` (,P • Oil well House • Tank battery a • Oil wells • • PLAT SCALE : 1" = 1,000' 500 1000 2000 1/8 GRAPHIC SCALE IN FEET 1/4 1/2 GRAPHIC SCALE IN MILES PARCEL PROPOSED FOR THE MO USE BY SPECIAL PERMIT REVIEW SE'/4-SECTION 13 T3N-R66W VICINITY MAP WELD COUNTY, COLORADO 3 N 1 FOR USE BY SPECIAL REVIEW PERMIT MAP 950686 CLAY LINER MONITORING WELL CONCRETE LINER 0 Z Q N U Q W = W M U Z N J QC J I U Q Z H d ce w U Z Zo 0 U CD z z z a -J 3a ww O w �Z O Z W J W Q I- v UI- o O d Q a Nw • 0 a >- u1 N Z D V 0 J W UO z o -Q T _K co NO W v UO v K U O w LJ • c2 w a Cr w xca N - O - 9506x.5 file No.: HSRES/001 USE BY SPECIAL REVIEW APPLICATION Department of Planning Services, 1400 N. 17th Avenue, Greeley, Colorado 80631 Phone - 353-6100 - Ext. 3540, Fax # (303) 351-0978 TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT: (please print or type, except for necessary signature) LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF SPECIAL REVIEW PERMIT AREA: Section 13 SF 1/4 T 1 N, R AA W TOTAL ACREAGE 16O OVERLAY ZONE PRESENT ZONE Floodzone C PROPOSED USE Land Treatment Facility N/A SURFACE FEE (PROPERTY OWNERS) OF AREA PROPOSED FOR THE USE BY SPECIAL REVIEW PERMIT: Name: Kenneth I. and Joyce L. Riddle Address: 532 North Louisa Home Telephone: (4O5) -l5-1476 Name: Address: Home Telephone: City/State/Zip: Shawnea (1K 74801 Business Telephone: City/State/Zip: Business Telephone: APPLICANT OR AUTHORIZED AGENT (if different than above): Name: Pat Flynn Environmental Affairc Manager HS Pesourrpc Tnr Address: 1999 Broadway. Spite 16On City/State/Zip: Deliver, CO 80202 Home Telephone: Business Telephone: (303) 296-3600 I hereby state that all statements and plans submitted with the application are true and correct to the best of my knowledge. f 21, Signatur=. Owner or Authorized Agent 950686 AFFIDAVIT OF INTEREST OWNERS SURFACE ESTATE Application No. Subject Property Section 13 SE/4 Township 3 North, Range 66 West THE UNDERSIGNED, states that to the best of his or her knowledge the attached list is a true and accurate list of the names, addresses, and the corresponding Parcel Identification Number assigned by the Weld County Assessor of the owners of property (the surface estate) within 500 feet of the property being considered. This list was compiled from the records of the Weld County Assessor, or an ownership update from a title or abstract company, or an attorney. The list compiled from the records of the Weld County Assessor was assembled within thirty days of the application's submission date. Signature ≤41 c 144 - 22, 199,1 Date NAME Wardell Wardell Wardell PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 500 FEET Piease print or type MAILING ADDRESS CITY/STATE/ZIP CODE Jerrold J, Wardell Anna Jerrold J. Wardell Anna Jerrold J.,Wardell Anna E, PO Box 27. Platteville CO SO651 F, PO Box 27, Platteville, CO 80651 121118000001 E. PO Box 27, Platteville Co BOh51 ASSESSOR'S PARCEL IDENTIFICATION it 121319000003 121318000002 Brotemarkle Mande Laura 17080 Weld County Brotemarkle Maude Laura, 17080 Weld County Brotemarkle Mande Rnar1 -;9 Platteville, CO 80651 121113000017 Road 37 Platteville, CO 80651 121124000013 Taura 17080 Weld County Road 32. Platteville, rn 2fl.SJ 19117/innnnJ2 Johnson Hans L & Maude E. RR 1 Box 71 B. Juaniata, NR 68955 121124000014 Terry Maxine T 1190 Madras HWY, Priemrilla, OR 97754 121124000015 Department of Transportation - Federal Aviation Arimin 1601 linden A.ren„e SW Renton, WA 98055 121113000027 Graf Joel D & Gayle M. 15508 Weld County Road 35, Platteville, CO 80651 121113000026 950686 AFFIDAVIT OF INTEREST OWNERS MINERALS ANDIUK SUBSURFACE ESTATE Application No. Subject Property Section 13 SE/4 Township i Mnrrh Pnngn '` TEE UNDERSIGNED, states that to the best of his or her knowledge the attached list is a true and accurate list of the names and addresses of all mineral owners and lessees of the minerals on or under the parcel of land as their names appear upon the records in the Weld County Glerk and Recorder's Office, an ownership update from a title or abstract company, or an attorney. &ature . - Li, /117 Date 950686 MINERAL OWNERS AND LESSEES OF MINERAL INTERESTS Please print or type NAME MAILING ADDRESS CITY/STATE/ZIP Union Pacific Resources Co., PO Box 166. Ft Tiptnn, ro 80671 950686 ' USE BY SPECIAL REVIEW QUESTIONNAIRE 1. How is this proposal consistent with the Weld County Comprehensive Plan? The proposed Landfarm does not adversely effect productive agricultural areas and their is no net loss of either prime agricultural land or open space. The 160 acres being proposed for landfarming operations could easily be converted to agricultural or other open space uses when landfarming activities are completed. Use of the parcel for landfarming would preserve the area from scatter -type urban development and will not require additional County -provided services. The proposed Landfarm would be operated in a manner that minimizes effects to the County's natural resources and the environment. The waste minimization and recycling techniques proposed will reduce the volume of waste that would otherwise require disposal either at County solid waste landfills or on individual well sites. 2. How does this proposal meet the intent of the zone district it is located in? Although the proposed Landfarm is not strictly an agricultural development, no productive agricultural areas or activities will be adversely effected. Many of the activities planned at the Landfarm could benefit agricultural interests, including pilot programs planned with the Weld County Extension Office to find beneficial uses for some recycled E&P waste materials, particularly fresh water -based drilling mud. No structures are planned for the parcel and the open space nature of the surrounding area will be maintained. 3. How is this use compatible with future development as stated in the Weld County Comprehensive Plan? If yes, how? As mentioned above, use of the parcel as a landfarm for nonhazardous oil and gas waste materials will preserve the open space nature of the area from urban development. No additional demands are expected on County services and environmental quality and natural resources will be preserved through effective operation, management, and monitoring at the facility. Finally, HSR believes that effective management of oil and gas waste materials at a centralized facility will promote cooperation and understanding between HSR and area land/surface owners and agricultural interests. 4. What type of uses surround this site? Is this request compatible with surrounding uses? Properties adjoining the proposed HSR Landfarm include undeveloped rangeland, agricultural land, low density residential, and oil and gas development areas. The 160 acre area comprising the Landfarm includes four producing oil and gas wells and two 950686 crude oil storage tank batteries, as well as numerous natural gas pipelines and associated facilities. The proposed Landfarm is bordered: to the east by Weld County Road 37 with rangeland, oil and gas development, and a single residence beyond; to the north by an unimproved dirt road (WCR 34), rangeland and oil and gas development; to the west by cultivated and fallow agricultural land overlain with oil and gas development and sparse housing; and to the south by WCR 32, with undeveloped rangeland, cultivated agricultural land, oil and gas development, and sparse housing. Yes. The proposed HSR Land Farm would preserve 160 acres of open space rangeland from further residential or commercial development. With the exception of a perimeter fence, no above ground structures will be erected. The purpose of the proposed landfarm is to land treat certain types of nonhazardous exploration and production wastes and recycle them for other oil and gas development uses. HSR is also proposing that potential beneficial uses for agricultural purposes be explored. Both are compatible with agricultural and oil and gas production operations in the area. 5. Is this property located within a Flood Hazard Zone, Geologic Hazard Zone, or Airport Overlay zone - and does it meet these special requirements? The proposed HSR Landfarm is not located within any of these zones. 6. What efforts have been made to conserve productive agricultural land? The majority of soils within the proposed HSR landfarm are composed of Valent sand, which apparently has limited potential for agricultural development due to its sandy texture, rapid permeability, and excessively drained conditions. The location was selected in part to avoid impacting productive agricultural land. 7. How will the public health, safety, and welfare be protected? The proposed HSR Landfarm is not believed to pose a significant risk to the public's health, safety, and welfare. To minimize the limited risks that the project could pose, HSR plans to place a perimeter fence around the parcel that will be locked, limiting access to HSR personnel and its subcontractors. The general nature of the landfarming activities are unobtrusive, consisting mainly of unloading and thin -spreading of soil, sand, and drilling mud onto the ground surface where it is tilled periodically by a tractor or backhoe. Efforts will be taken to minimize operation -related nuisances, such as dust and noise. Land farming operations will only be conducted during daylight business hours and the proposed location is adjacent to a paved road, which will reduce dust emissions from truck traffic to and from the facility. HSR will conduct environmental monitoring at the Landfarm to monitor conditions in the soil and ground water. The proposed monitoring program will include installation of ground water monitoring wells, which will be sampled for laboratory analysis on a quarterly basis. 950686 8. What will the site be used for? As detailed in the attached proposal, the proposed HSR Landfarm will be used to treat and recycle produced sand, water -based bentonitic drilling mud, and oil -stained soil associated with HSR's oil and gas drilling and production activities throughout Weld County. All of these materials are nonhazardous and they will be treated under guidelines established by the Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation Commission (COGCC) in Rule 907. Produced sand (frac sand) and hydrocarbon -stained soil contain variable amounts of crude oil and condensate. Drilling mud is generally composed of fresh water and bentonite clay, with minor concentrations of hydrocarbons. Hydrocarbon components in these materials are easily reduced using land treatment techniques (landfarming) that enhance natural degradation of hydrocarbons by naturally occurring bacteria. Called biotreatment or bioremediation, this techniques has been widely demonstrated to reduce hydrocarbon concentrations without the need of chemical additives and eliminating the necessity of landfill disposal. A major benefit of this treatment technique is that the soil and sand can be recycled for use at other HSR oil and gas operations in the area. Such uses include building and maintenance of earthen berms around crude oil storage tanks, construction of lease roads, and as fill material for backfilling excavated production pits, sumps, etc... Fresh water -based bentonitic drilling mud has been demonstrated to help stabilize sandy agricultural soils by adding clay and providing a corresponding increase in the soil's water holding capacity. HSR plans to work with Mr. Jerry Alldredge of the Weld County Extension Office to investigate the addition of drilling mud to range soils and will also explore other possible beneficial agricultural uses of drilling mud and other materials treated at the Landfarm. 9. How close will this site be to other residential structures? There are two residences within 1,500 feet of the proposed HSR Landfarm: one residence is located across WCR 32 approximately 500 ft to the south and the other is located across WCR 37, approximately 1,200 ft to the east. 10. How many people will be employed at this site and what hours will they work? The proposed HSR Landfarm will not be staffed on a regular basis. Rather, HSR employees and subcontractors will visit the site as needed to either deliver materials to be recycled or to perform regular land treatment and monitoring activities. One or two people would likely visit the Landfarm approximately once or twice weekly. All activities would take place during daylight hours on weekdays. 950686 1 11. How many people will use this site? A maximum of approximately ten HSR personnel and subcontractors will likely use the facility, with generally less than three people present at a given time. 12. What type and how many animals, if any, will be on this site? None. 13. What type and how many, if any, operating and processing equipment will be utilized on site? Dump truck Water truck, backhoe/tractor equipped with tiller. 14. What type and how many structures will be erected (built) on this site? The site will consist essentially of the ungraded, natural topographic surface onto which soil, sand, and drilling mud will be applied. The only surface structures present will be ground water monitoring wells and a small concrete basin that will be used to clean sand out of frac tanks brought to the site. The ground water monitoring wells will consist of one or two inch poly vinyl chloride (PVC) well screen and casing that will extend approximately three ft above the ground surface. The concrete basin will measure approximately ten ft wide by twenty ft long, sloping to a depth of approximately eight ft. Berms will be constructed around active land treatment plots. With these exception of a perimeter fence and gate, there will be no above ground structures at the Landfarm. 15. What kind (type, size, weight) of vehicles will access this site and how often? Water trucks, dump trucks, backhoe/tractor tiller, front end loader. 16. Will this site use a septic tank or public sewer facilities? No. 17. Are you proposing storage or stockpile of wastes on this site? If so, what is the size and type proposed? Hydrocarbon -stained soil, frac sand, and drilling mud will be applied to ground surface at the site at rates that will allow for efficient biotreatment and in a manner that will 950686 prevent ponding, pooling, or runoff of liquids. The estimated volumes of these materials that are expected to be present at the Landfarm at a given time are: • Hydrocarbon -stained soil - less than 500 to 1,000 cubic yards • Frac sand - approximately 25 to 50 cubic yards Drilling mud - 5,000 to 10,000 bbls HSR does not anticipate that much material will be stockpiled on the site but instead intends to thin -spread the materials and begin land treatment as soon as they arrive at the Landfarm. The Landfarm will be organized so that soil, sand, and mud will be land treated in different areas. Also, individual "lifts" or batches of soil, sand, and drilling mud will be segregated in order to accurately track reduction in hydrocarbon concentrations and monitor the land treatment process. As soon as hydrocarbon concentrations in each lift have been reduced to required levels, the recycled material will be removed from the Landfarm for use on other HSR production facilities in the County. 18. How often will debris, junk, or waste be disposed of? By what means? The purpose of the proposed HSR Landfarm is to treat and recycle certain nonhazardous exploration and production wastes in an effort to minimize wastes that require disposal. HSR does not anticipate generating significant amounts of debris, junk, or waste at the site and will promptly dispose of any at an approved landfill. 19. How long will it take to construct this site and when will construction begin? Erection of the perimeter fence, construction of the concrete -lined wash basin, and installation of the ground water monitoring wells (storm water retention basin) will take approximately two weeks to complete. Work will commence upon HSR's receipt of Weld County's approval of our Use by Special Review Permit. 20. Explain the proposed landscaping plans and erosion control measures associated with this site. HSR does not intend to utilize more than approximately 40 acres of the 160 acre parcel for Land Farming operations at a given time. The remaining 120 acres will be left in its natural condition and native vegetation will be encouraged. The Land Farm will preserve the natural topography of the parcel, the majority of which is underlain by Vona sand and Vona loamy sand. According to the U.S. Soil Conservation Service (SCS), surface runoff in these soils is slow and the erosive hazard is low. 21. Explain any proposed reclamation procedures when termination of the Special Review use begins. 950686 The surface soil and topography will remain essentially undisturbed by land treatment activities at the site. All treated soil and sand will be removed from the location after treatment. The area will be reseeded as necessary to return the site to its natural condition when all land treatment activities are completed. 22. Explain the need for the proposed use (activity) in Weld County. Weld County, area surface owners, the agricultural community, and the oil and gas industry can benefit from innovative methods of treating, disposing, or recycling of waste materials generated by oil and gas drilling and production such as those contained in HSR's Landfarm proposal. Oil and gas activity is likely to continue in the County for years to come and industry needs to address the concerns of land owners and the agricultural community. The Landfarm will: • Allows HSR an effective, environmentally sound, cost-effective, relatively low liability means to treat and recycle wastes generated when drilling, producing, abandoning, and reclaiming well sites, especially in cases where surface owners do not wish to have soil, sand, and drilling mud treated or disposed of onsite; • Provides HSR the opportunity to work with the Weld County Extension Office under controlled, secured conditions to show beneficial uses for some waste materials, including drilling mud; • Allows HSR to develop new methods of treating and recycling hydrocarbon - affected soil and frac sand that utilize natural techniques; • By emphasizing the recycling nature of the proposed Landfarm techniques, HSR can minimize the amount of drilling and production wastes that would require disposal in County landfills; • The proposed location of the HSR Landfarm minimizes potential impacts to soil and ground water resources due to the depth to ground water, lack of surface water features or environmentally -sensitive areas, the preponderance of soils that are of marginal agricultural value, and the use of extensive soil and ground water monitoring technique; and, • The proposed HSR Landfarm will promote understanding between oil and gas and agricultural interests in the County through cooperative efforts with the County Extension Office, Colorado State University, and HSR. 23. Who will provide fire protection for this site? 950686 The proposed HSR Landfarm is located within the Platteville Fire Protection District. Due to the lack of above ground structures or development at the site, HSR does not anticipate that the Landfarm will have any additional impact on fire protection services. 24. What or who will provide water to this site? The only water necessary for operation of the Landfarm will be that which is to be periodically added to the thin -spread soil to promote biodegradation of the hydrocarbons. This water will be brought to the site by water trucks approximately once every two weeks when land treatment activities are being performed. 25. How will storm water drainage be handled on the site? The site will be left in its natural condition and drainage will likely follow natural patterns. Areas containing thin -spread materials that are actively being land treated will be surrounded by berms to prevent contact between waste materials and surface runon and runoff. Also, the sandy texture of soil underlying the site is expected to limit the amount of surface runoff at the site due to rapid infiltration and relatively gentle ground slopes. 950686 CAPTIONS FOR SITE PHOTOGRAPHS Photo No. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Caption View looking north across proposed Landfarm property towards tank battery, which is located near the center of the parcel. View looking to the south towards Weld County Road 32, taken from the southwestern corner of the property. View looking north across the center of the property, with an oil/gas well and tank battery in the background. View looking to the east from the crest of the hill located in the western half of the property. Tank battery is in the background. Four oil/gas wells are operated on the property. This view is looking west from the southeast corner of the parcel, with the well surrounded by nearly flat -lying rangeland. One of several crude oil storage tanks located on the parcel. This battery is located near the center of the property on the crest of a broad hill which slopes gently to the east. View looking north along a section of the abandoned East Speer Canal, which crosses the eastern margin of the property. The canal is filled with weeds and does not appear to have been used for some time. View looking to the north along the West Speer Canal, which is the only surface drainage feature proximal to the property. The canal is located west of the Landfarm parcel and is 1/3 mile away from the area being proposed for land treatment activities. 950686 4 950686 z00'39Wd 9962268606 LS:9I $66 82 833 Welborn Sullivan Meek & Tooley, P.C. Lee Morrison, Esq. Assistant County Attorney Office of Weld County Attorney P.O. Box 1948 Greeley, CO 80632 February 28, 1995 Via Facsimile & U.S. Mail Re: HS Resources, Inc. Site Specific Development Plan and a Special Review Permit for a Land Treatment Facility in the A (Agricultural) Zone District Township 3 North. Range 66 West Section 13: SE/4 Weld County, Colorado Case No. USR-1067 Dear Lee: Attorneys at Law ]975 Sherman Street Suite 1900 Ilene Colorado 80201 Telephaae 303-0Bo.2500 Fwsimile 903432.2366 John F Welborn Stephen J. Sullivan Jahn F Mack Keith A Tooley *Sender R Jones Molly Sommerville I4ran Oetrende-Rrig Marla E. Valdes Brian S.Tboley Scott L. Sells Tamara Aimee OCCAunetd Robert F Welborn Spcsial Counsel John S. Cowan 'Admitted in New York and Texas Only This firm represents HS Resources, inc. ("I -IS") with respect to the application for a special review permit ("Application") that HS filed with Weld County ("County") to have a land farm installed on the property that is referenced above ("Property"). As you are probably aware, the Property is near the SW/4SW/4 of Section 18, Township 3 North, Range 65 West, the surface of which is owned by Messrs. Roy Wardell and J.J. Wardell. By now you should have received a telefax of the signed agreement between the Wardells and HS. This document is in the form of the February 21 agreement that HS submitted to the Board with an additional provision for quarterly monitoring of the Wardell well in the event BTEX is found above specified limits in an HS monitoring well. We have advised HS, based upon our discussion with you, that no further hearing is necessary and that HS may proceed with the project. We want to state for the record that we do not feel that the agreement is necessary legally; however, HS has pursued it in an effort to resolve the concerns of a local landowner without putting the Board of County Commissioners of Weld County ("Board") through another hearing. If the Board had required that 1•A;\MORRISON.REV pebmary 21, IONS (a:3$pm) Z0 'd 950686 , piled on reggae paper 99£ZZESE0E 'ON Xiid UWSM £5:LI 3f11, 96-8Z-U3d 600'39ed 9963'388600 85:91 56, 82 839 Welborn Sullivan Meek & Tooley, P.C. Lee Morrison, Esq. February 28, 1995 Page 2 an agreement be reached either as a condition to the permit or as a development standard, it would have given the Wardells the power to veto the Application and would have held HS hostage to the unreasonable demands of the adjacent landowners. We believe that either result would be legally impermissible and that the County could not justify such a result based on the testimony in the record. History of the Application: HS applied for and received a permit for a land farm from the Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation Commission ("COGCC") pursuant to the statutory and regulatory authority of the agency. Without admitting that the County had jurisdiction, HS filed an application with the County for a special use permit. The permit application was reviewed and processed by the Weld County Department of Planning Services ("Planning Department") and, as part of the application process, HS, in cooperation with the County Health Department, established and agreed to operation standards to protect the public health and safety. Planning Department staff recommended approval of the Application (with conditions) to the Planning Commission and, based on the testimony at the hearing and the staff recommendation, the Planning Commission unanimously recommended approval of the Application (with conditions) to the Board. In making its recommendation, the Planning Commission determined that the Application would meet the design standards in Section 24.5 of the Code and the operation standards in Section 24.6 as well as the more general criteria outlined in Section 24.3.1. The Application came before the Board for a hearing on February 22, 1995. The testimony at the hearing demonstrated that IIS had reached an agreement with the Wardells which provided that periodic samples would be taken from the Wardell water well throughout the life of the land farm, among other things. The Agreement was documented in a written agreement and submitted to the Wardells and signed by IIS. The Wardells raised additional concerns at the hearing. The Board decided to continue the hearing for a week and directed HS to work out an agreement with the Wardells. The Code at Section 24.4.2 requires that the Board approve a special use permit if the application complies with the same standards that the Planning Commission considered when it made its recommendation. Position of HS: A. Colorado case law is clear that the Board cannot deny a special use permit based solely on the failure to obtain the consent or agreement of an adjacent landowner and that it cannot make such consent or agreement either a condition to obtain the permit or a development standard in the permit. 1•A:\MORRISON.RRV Febnary 213. 1995 (4:35pm) £0 'd 950686 99£ZZE9E0£ 'OH Aid L$1SM E9:LI 3f1L 56 -8Z -BEd 700'39I3d 99632C860C GG:9t SG, 82 833 Welborn Sullivan Meck & Tooley, P.C. Lee Morrison, Esq. February 28, 1995 Page 3 B. Colorado case law is also clear that the Board is required to issue a special use permit when the applicant fulfills all of the criteria in the applicable zoning code and that it has no discretion to deny a permit in such a case. C. The COGCC has issued a permit to HS to operate a land farm on the Property pursuant to COGCC Rule 907. Because the COGCC has comprehensively regulated the area and the matter is technical, the County is preempted from further regulation. Summary of Case Law: 1. A local government cannot deny a zoning application based solely on a requirement that the applicant obtain the consent or agreement of the_landowners who are adjacent to the development. Courts strike awn such reauiremcnts either on the theory that they are an_imnroper delectation of authority by the local government or that they are an improper exercise by the local government of its police power. The Colorado Supreme Court held that a condition that a city council imposed on the development of property which required the developer to negotiate with adjoining property owners to arrive at a plan to minimize noise and visual impacts from the development was invalid in the case Cherry Hills Resort Development Comnanv v. Cherry Hills' and found that the city council unlawfully delegated its authority to the adjacent property owners.2 Local land use controls and local decisions to enforce land use regulations are constitutionally valid as the exercise by the local government of its police power only when they have a rational relationship to the public health, safety and welfare and when the means that the local government chooses to protect the public welfare is reasonable.' ( 790 P.2d 827 (Colo. 1990). 2 See also,, Eubank v. City of Richmond, 33 S. Ct. 76, 226 U.S. 137, (1912); Brunacini v. Loomis, 177 NYS 2d 954 (1958). l a§tal, for example. Williken v, Cooke, 130 P. 828, 54 Colo. 320 (1913); Wilkerson v. Board of County Commissioners of Pitkin County 872 P. 2d 1269 (Colo. App. 1993)• Trl-State Generation. etc. v. Board of County Commissioners, 600 P.2d 229 (Colo. 1979). l-A:,M0RRIS0N.RCV February 28. 199$ (4ilSpm) 60 'd 950686 99EZZ£8£0E 'ON Xdd 1 WSM VS:LI 3111 96 -8Z -A33 S00'3Slid 998328880E 00:4T £6, 83 83d Welborn Sullivan Meek & Tooley, P.C. Lee Morrison, Esq. February 28, 1995 Page 4 The Colorado Supreme Court in Willison v, Cooke, infra, held that a regulation had no relationship at all to the public health, safety or welfare that required an applicant for a building permit to obtain the signatures of the majority of the owners of the property on the same block in order to get city approval to construct a building. The Court found that the building that the petitioner proposed was no more or less objectionable depending upon whether or not the adjacent property owners consented to its construction.' The Montana Supreme Court in the case Western Energy Company v. Genie Land Company° reviewed a state statute that required an applicant for a mining permit to obtain the waiver or consent of the surface owner where the minerals that were the subject of the application had been severed. The Court found that the requirement to obtain surface owner consent was an unreasonable burden on the landowner and unconstitutional as a denial of due process and that it had no substantial relationship to the public health, safety and welfare in that it served a private interest rather than a public interest. 2. The standards that a local government applies to grant or deny a permit must be articulated in jts regulations and those standards and any conditions that the local government imposes on a permit application must be related to the public health. safety and welfare. Courts hold that a local government cannot apply or read into a regulation a standard where there is none and reason that without clear standards a local government would have the power to discriminate between applicants.° For example, the Court in the case Bauer v. City of Wheat Ridge struck down the decision by a city council to deny a special use permit to build an apartment building where the Court found that the applicant had complied with all standards in the applicable regulations and that the sole reason that the city denied the permit was because of the type of building that the applicant proposed. The Court 4 ' 21s,, Eubank v. City of Richmond, worst (ordinance that allowed 2/Ss of the owners of property un a street to determine the building line for all buildings on the street found to be as unreasonable exercise of the police power); Drew v. Town -Mac. Inc., 304 NYS 2d 1003 (1969) (license requirement to obtain the written consents of occupants within 1000' of property found to be invalid because it did not have a substantial relationship to the public health, safety and welfare). 5 737 P.2d 478 (Mont. 1987). ° kg, for example, General Outdoor Advertising Co. v. Goodman, 262 P.2d 261 (Colo. 1953). 513 P.2d 203 (Colo. 1973) 1-AAM0RRIS0N.REV Penmory la, 1995 (4:43pm) SO 'd 99£ZZ£8£0£ 'ON Add 950686 J,'+1WSM 55: L 13f1l 56 -8Z -03d 90:LI $6. 83 B3d 900'39tid 99£32£8£0£ Welborn Sullivan Meek & Tooley, P.C. Lee Morrison, Esq. February 28, 1995 Page 5 stated that the City could only apply factors to a special use application that it generally applied to all applications and that the. City would need to amend its ordinance in order to apply different criteria. In cases in which a zoning ordinance allows the local government to impose conditions on the approval of a special use permit, Colorado courts have found that the local government has the power only to fashion conditions that protect the public health and safety for the proposed use? The Weld County Zoning Code in Sections 24.3.1, 24.5 and 24.6 set forth the standards that an applicant for a special use permit is required to meet to obtain a permit. The regulations themselves include no requirement that an applicant obtain consents from adjacent surface owners to a proposed development, and the County cannot require that the applicant obtain such consents as a condition to the issuance of a permit because the condition would have no relationship to the public health, safety or welfare. 3. A local jurisdiction is required to issue a special use hermit where, as here. the applicant has met all of the standards in the zoning ordinance. Courts will find the decisions of local governments to deny permits arbitrary and capricious where the evidence is that an applicant has complied with all standards in a zoning ordinance and there is no evidence to support the decision to deny the permit. The Colorado Supreme Court in the case Western Paving Construction Co. v. Board of County Commissioners of Boulder County, infra held that a decision of the Boulder County Board of County Commissioners to deny a special use permit for a sand and gravel operation was arbitrary and capricious and found it persuasive that the planning staff had advised the County Planning Commission and Board that the applicant had met all County requirements and was entitled to the proposed use and that the applicant and the planning staff had agreed to numerous conditions to include in the permit which the Board did not find to be inadequate. The Court stated that the purpose of a zoning regulation that allowed the Board to impose conditions on a permit was not to provide a basis to deny an application, but to allow the Board to tailor a use to conditions in a district so as to protect public health, safety and welfare. tdso Bevnolds v. City Council of Longmont, 680 P.2d 1350 (Colo. App. 1984). 9 , for agm2ie, Westemiavine Construction Co. vaytard of County Commission of Boulder County. 506 P.2d 1230 (Colo. 1973). 1•A:IMORRISON.RRV February ut. 1995 (f:15F.n) 90'd 99EZZEBEOE 'ON Xdd 950686 ,1'riNSM sS:LI ant $6-eZ-93d 10:LI 96, 82 '333 L00'39Ud 996226820E Welborn Sullivan Meck & Tooley, P.C. Lee Morrison, Esq. February 28, 1995 Page 6 Likewise, the Colorado Court of Appeals held the decision of a city council to deny approval of a preliminary plat for a subdivision in Reynolds v. City of Longmont, infra, invalid in a case where the planning director for the city and consultants all reported to the city council that technical requirements had been met and that drainage and traffic impacts had been adequately addressed. The Court found that there was no competent evidence in the record to support the decision by the city council to deny the permit and held that the city council denied the applicant due process of law when it substituted pure discretion for the discretion with fixed standards that were included in the ordinance. Concerns of a general nature which had been expressed by adjacent landowners concerning the impact of the development on traffic and drainage were not found by the Court to be sufficient to support the city's decision.10 Here the County Planning and Health Departments and the Planning Commission all recommended the approval of the Application with conditions to protect the public health and safety. In making its recommendation, the Planning Commission determined that the proposed use was compatible with existing surrounding land uses and that the conditions provided adequate protection for the heath, safety and welfare of the inhabitants of the neighborhood and the County. No evidence was presented at the hearing on February 22, 1995 before the Board that the Application did not protect the public health, safety and welfare. 4. The County is preempted by state law from regulating anvthing_but the land use issues related to the Application. The two Colorado Supreme Court cases Lundvall Bros. v. Voss" and Bowen/Edwards Association v. Board of County Comm'rs.12 held that the Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation Act ("Act") did not preempt all local regulation of oil and gas development and that local jurisdictions may enact local land use regulations applicable to oil and gas operations within their boundaries; however, the local jurisdiction was preempted from adopting regulations that were in conflict with state law and 10 Note also, that the Colorado Court of Appeals held in the case Bentley v. Vasco. Inc„ 741 P.2d 1266 (Colo. App. 1987) that a plaintiff in its capacity as an adjacent property owner has no vested right in the maintenance of a specific zoning classification for his property. 11 Lundvall Bros. v, Voss, 812 P.2d 693 (16 Colo. App. 19%), aff'd. Voss v. l.nndvall Bros., inc., 830 P.2d 1061 (Colo. 1992). 12 Boweradwards Assoc.. Inc. v, Board of County Comm's., 812 P.2d 656 (Colo. App. 1990), aff'd. in pan and rev'd in part, 830 P.2d 1045 (Colo. 1992). 1•Ac1MORRISON.REV Febn,ary 28. 1993 (4;49'm) LO'd 99EZ£9EOE '©N Mid 950686 ,L9WSM 99:L1 311L 96-8Z-H3.d 20:L1 56, BZ 93d 000'39Hd 99CE COCO6 Welborn Sullivan Meek & Tooley, P.C. Lee Morrison, Esq. February 28, 1995 Page 7 regulations or that frustrated the state goal of efficient and fair development of production. The Court was not precise in either case in articulating the extent to which local land use regulations could apply to oil and gas activities. It is clear from the cases, however, that there can be no local regulation of the technical aspects of oil and gas operations since the Court in Bowen/Edwards expressly approved such a reading of an earlier case, Oborne v, Board of County Commissioners.`3 The Court in Oborne struck down technical requirements that Douglas County sought to impose on oil and gas operators including regulations with respect to the protection of water supplies and the disposal of liquid wastes; assurances regarding surface spills; independent monitoring and technical advise requirements; and the protection of underground water supplies. Examples of technical matters referred to by the Bowen/Edwards court, included ". . . waste prevention, safety precautions and environmental restoration. "'4 The Court in the Ohorne case further found that the County could not impose conditions to grant a permit for oil and gas operations with respect to matters as to which the Act had granted specific jurisdiction to the COGCC. For this reason, the Court struck down certain permit conditions imposed by the County and found that the COGCC had specific statutory authority to prevent pollution of water supplies, among other things. The Court held that the Board had no authority to either impose conditions on the issuance of a permit or to deny a permit based on such conditions.15 Here the County has authority to regulate only the narrow land use aspects of the land farm that HS proposes. The only purpose for which the Board could require the consent of the nearby landowners to the Application is not a land use issue. Instead, it is to assure the land owners that their water well is protected from land farm operations. COGCC Rule 907, pursuant to which HS has received a state permit to operate the land farm, contains extensive submission requirements that include a chemical analysis of E&P waste streams, a topographic, geologic and hydrologic description of the land treatment site and a site operation plan. Subparagraph g. of Rule 907 also gives the Director of the COGCC the authority to include terms in the permit to protect the waters of the state, public health or the environment which, with respect to the HS application, he did not choose to do. 13 764 P.2d 397 (Colo. App. 1981). See Bowen/Edwards Assoc. v. Board of County Comm'rs., :wprn, at 1060 fn 7. 14 15 at 1058. at 401. 1-A;IM0RRLS0N,RSV 9ebnary 29. 1995 (4:35pin) 90'd 99£ZZEBEOE 'ON kid 950696 1WSM LS:Li i 311L 96-93-833 20:Li $6i 83 833 600'39tld 996336960E Welborn Sullivan Meek & Tooley, P.C. Lee Morrison, Esq. February 28, 1995 Page 8 The Board may be preempted by state law from requiring that HS get any permit at all from the County for its proposed land farm because the State has extensive regulations that cover the matter. At a minimum, the Board is preempted from imposing conditions in a special use permit that relate to the protection of state waters either because the matter is a technical one over which the COGCC has exclusive jurisdiction or because the COGCC has specific authority to regulate the matter and has comprehensively done so. We note that all of the evidence that was presented to the Board by HS and the County Planning and Health Departments showed that the Application met the criteria for approval set forth in the Code and sufficiently protected the public health, safety and welfare. There was no evidence that anything more should be required for HS to obtain County approval. Nevertheless, HS has been willing to go beyond the legal requirements of state law and the Code and enter into the described agreement with the Wardells. We ask that this letter be included as part of the record in this case and that the Board consider our comments in making any further determination on the disposition of the Application. Very truly yours, WELBORN SULLIVAN MECIL & TOOLEY, P.C. John F. Welborn Molly Sommerville I•A:UIORRISON, REV pd+n,.ry 28. 1995 (4.35pm) 60 'd 99£ZZ£9£0£ '011 Rd 950686 ,L'dWSM 85:1.1 Hill 96-9Z-a3d HS RESOURCES, INC. 1999 BROADWAY, SUITE 3600 DENVER, COLORADO 80202 (303) 296-3600 TELEFAX (303) 296-3601 December 12, 1994 19941 Mr. Trevor Jiricek Weld County Health Department 1517 16th Avenue Court Greeley, Colorado 80631 Re: Clarification of Use by Special Review Permit - 1067 submitted by HS Resources, Inc. Dear Trevor: In response to your questions and comments made at our meeting on November 17, 1994, HS Resources, Inc. (HSR) has prepared this letter to clarify several issues related to our Use by Special Review (USR) permit application. HSR submitted the USR to the Weld County Department of Planning Services on September 29, 1994 for operation of a centralized, non- commercial land treatment facility for recycling of nonhazardous oil and gas wastes. The proposed land treatment facility is located on a 160 acre parcel of land owned by HSR in the SE/4 of Section 13, Township 3 North, Range 66 West. HSR has received a permit to operate the land treatment facility from the Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation Commission (COGCC) under Rule 907. A copy of HSR's 907 permit application was provided to you at our November 17th meeting and a copy of a letter from COGCC approving the facility is attached. Overview of the Land Treatment/Recycling Plan The HSR land treatment facility is designed to treat and recycle nonhazardous oil and gas waste derived from HSR drilling and production operations throughout Weld County. Several aspects of the plan that we have discussed previously are: Oil -stained soil and frac sand will be treated using bioremediation and composting techniques that promote bacterial breakdown of hydrocarbons using naturally - occurring bacteria. With the exception of commercial fertilizer, no chemical additives will be employed at the site; Oil -stained soil and frac sand treated at the site will be recycled for use at other HSR production facilities as back fill material and to build roads and berms. No treated soil or frac sand will be left at the site; No liquid wastes will be treated at the facility. Fresh water -based bentonitic drilling mud will be applied periodically but this material is essentially a mixture 950686 Mr. Trevor Jiricek December 12, 1994 Page No. 2 of fresh water and bentonite and is not considered a waste. Application of drilling mud to the sandy rangeland soil will increase the soil's water holding capacity. HSR intends to work with the Weld County Extension Office to perform pilot studies to identify the most effective method of applying drilling mud to soil and to illustrate beneficial use of the drilling mud for agricultural purposes; HSR plans to utilize the southern half of our 160 acre parcel for land treatment of soil and frac sand. Each lift or batch of soil or frac sand to be treated will be segregated into a separate plot where remediation can be monitored and the final disposition of treated soil tracked and documented. The northern half of the parcel will receive periodic applications of drilling mud. HSR will segregate drilling mud application areas from the land treatment area (Figure 1); The land treatment process will include both thin -spreading of soil and mounding of soil into windrows or compost piles. There will be minimal disturbance of underlying soil and HSR does not intent to incorporate treated material into underlying native soil; and, HSR will apply fresh water to the thin spread soil and compost piles periodically to promote biodegradation of the hydrocarbons. The fresh water will be brought to the site by water truck and will be applied in a manner that maintains the soil moisture level at approximately 10 to 15 percent. Moisture will also be applied to reduce dust and prevent dust -related nuisance conditions. Ground Water In regards to clarification on ground water conditions and HSR's soil and ground water monitoring plans, several key aspects are outlined below. An Environmental Monitoring Plan for the land treatment facility is attached. HSR has drilled five soil borings at the site, all of which were completed as ground water monitoring wells. The borings were drilled to auger refusal in claystone bedrock at a depth of approximately 30 feet (ft) below the ground surface. Soils encountered in the borings included sand extending from the ground surface to a depth of approximately 15 ft. Clay and weathered claystone was encountered beneath the sand layer extending from a depth of approximately 15 ft to 30 ft. The sand was dry and the clays slightly moist to moist. The monitoring wells were dry upon completion and remained dry ten days later. Ground water was detected in four of the five monitoring wells approximately three weeks after installation and the ground water surface has equilibrated at a depth of approximately 20 ft below the ground surface. The piezometric surface 950686 Mr. Trevor Jiricek December 12, 1994 Page No. 3 is located within the clay layer and slopes slightly to the east with a gradient of 0.04 ft per ft. Assuming a hydraulic conductivity in the clay of 0.03 ft per day, given the measured gradient of 0.04 ft per ft, and assuming an effective porosity of 25 percent, the rate of ground water flow beneath the land treatment area is approximately 0.61 ft per year (USGS Water Supply Paper 2220); HSR intends to measure ground water levels in its onsite monitoring wells on a monthly basis. Ground water samples will be collected quarterly for laboratory analysis of benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, xylene (BTEX) and total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH); Soil samples will be collected within the active land treatment area from depths ranging from 5 to 20 ft below the ground surface. These soils will also be analyzed for BTEX and TPH; HSR will prepare a quarterly ground water monitoring report which will be submitted to COGCC and the Weld County Health Department and will also become part of the permanent land treatment facility record. The quarterly monitoring report will include a table of measured ground water elevations, hydrographs, a water table map, and results of the laboratory analysis of ground water. Soil analytical results will be included in the monitoring reports as appropriate; Quarterly sampling will continue for eight consecutive quarters and, if conditions warrant, will be conducted biannually thereafter; Five ground water monitoring wells are currently installed at the site. HSR intends to install an additional three wells along the property's eastern, downgradient margin in order to provide additional monitoring points and to address the concerns raised by an adjoining land owner. The five wells already installed have been located in an approximately 40 acre area in which land treatment activities are planned to occur. Of the current wells installed, one is located upgradient of the planned treatment area, two wells are located within the treatment area, and two wells are located downgradient of the treatment area; and, If conditions warrant use of the southwestern corner of the land treatment facility, monitoring wells will be installed in this area as well. 950686 Mr. Trevor Jiricek December 12, 1994 Page No. 4 Closure Plan In reference to your questions about a closure plan, HSR has committed in both its USR and COGCC Rule 907 permit to provide COGCC and the Weld County Health Department with a Closure Plan prior to facility closure. Note that HSR does not anticipate closing the land treatment facility in the foreseeable future. Presented below are the general provisions of the Closure Plan, which is also outlined in Section 5.0 of the USR application. At a minimum, the Closure Plan will address the following provisions: The land treatment facility will be closed in the event that no waste materials are treated/recycled at the site for more than a one year period, unless HSR has sought and received the approval of Weld County and COGCC; A physical and chemical analysis will be performed on soil at the site, to include analysis of BTEX, TPH, oil and grease, RCRA Metals, and total dissolved solids (TDS). Representative soil samples will be collected and analyzed from depths ranging from five to twenty ft below the ground surface; No soil will remain at the site that contains TPH concentrations in excess of 1,000 parts per million (ppm) or that exhibits a pH outside the range of 6.0 to 9.0. The 1,000 ppm TPH action level for crude oil -affected soil is employed in other producing states, including California and Texas. HSR does not believe that Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment (CDPHE) Remedial Action Category (RAC) standards are applicable to crude oil in soils since the RAC levels were established for refined products, such as gasoline and diesel. Refined hydrocarbons are relatively more toxic than unrefined materials and they contain significantly higher concentrations of BTEX compounds. In contrast, crude oil contains relatively minor, if any, BTEX concentrations and have significantly lower toxicity; The total metals concentrations in soil left in place will not exceed the limits prescribed by the COGCC 907 permit and outlined in Section 3.2 of the USR application; HSR will perform appropriate corrective actions to remediate any impacts to soil or ground water; The Plan will include a description of the facility's operating history, dates of operation, treatment methods employed, waste types treated/recycled, and the source, volume, and final disposition of the materials recycled; 950686 Mr. Trevor Jiricek December 12, 1994 Page No. 5 A site map will be included showing the areas that were used for land treatment, dates of treatment, types, sources, and amounts of material recycled, and the final contours of the site after the treated materials have been removed; An evaluation will be made that addresses the site's potential to impact waters of the state; All improvements or equipment, including the concrete -lined wash pit, will be removed; and, HSR will maintain and monitor the onsite monitor wells and the perimeter fence for a period of one year following closure. 24 Hour Storm Event In regards to relevant planning for a 24 hour storm event, the U.S. Soil Conservation Service reports that the land treatment facility is located in a region that is predicted to receive approximately 3.8 inches of precipitation during a 100 year, 24 hour storm event. Since the land treatment facility is located near the crest of a low hill that defines this portion of the local drainage basin, berms designed to accommodate this storm would need to be at least five to six inches high. HSR plans to build one ft high earthen berms around the land treatment area to prevent runon and runoff from impacting the soil and frac sand being recycled. Note that the land treatment facility does not occur within a floodplain. Emergency Contacts The primary points of contact responsible for the land treatment facility are: Patrick E. Flynn Environmental Affairs Manager HS Resources, Inc. 1999 Broadway, Suite 3600 Denver, Colorado 80202 (303) 296-3600 Eddie Swan Greater DJ District Manager HS Resources, Inc. 3939 Carson Avenue Evans, Colorado 80620 (303) 330-0881 950686 Mr. Trevor Jiricek December 12, 1994 Page No. 6 I hope that the information presented here will assist your review of our USR permit application. Additional information is also available in HSR's USR-1067 and COGCC 907 permit applications, both of which have been provided to you. Please call with any additional questions or comments you may have. Sincerely, HS (SOURCES, INC. Patrick E. Flynn Environmental Affairs Manager :pef cc: Gloria Dunn, Weld County Department of Planning Services 950686 i r OPEN RANGE — FRESH WATER DRILLING MUD APPLICATION AREA POSSIBLE FUTURE LAND TREATMENT AREA r MW -2 • WCR 32 PLANNED LAND TREATMENT AREA co� 4/caoEYE MW -5 • A A MW -1 • A EXPLANATION EXISTING GROUNDWATER MONITORING WELL PROPOSED ADDITIONAL GROUNDWATER MONITORING WELL 0 200 400 SCALE IN FEET File No.: HSRES/N—I — DRAFTED BY: DDG — DATE:12/8/94 FIGURE 1 SITE PLAN HSR LAND TREATMENT FACILITY SE/4 SEC. 13, T3N-R66W Prepared For: USR - 1067 WELD COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING SERVICES Prepared By: HS RESOURCES, INC. Denver, Colorado 950686 O cS O O p p p O p O p (I)CZ MW -5 Le) h h h a a • 4989.18 MW -2 • 5005.12 P L- HSR MILBY 16-3 411* MW -3 • 4997.00 DIRECTION OF MW -4I • OM' GROUNDWATER FLOW I I MW -1 • -----T---l-- .1.989..1.311 WCR 32 EXPLANATION MW -1 • 5005.12 5000.00 GROUNDWATER MONITORING WELL WATER TABLE ELEVATION (ft.) WATER TABLE CONTOUR (ft.) OUTLINE OF LAND TREATMENT AREA File No.: HSRES/H-2 — DRAFTED BY: DOG — DATE:12/8/94 0 100 200 1 SCALE IN FEET FIGURE 2 GROUNDWATER CONTOUR MAP HSR LAND TREATMENT FACILITY SE/4 SEC. 13, T3N-R66W Prepared For: USR - 1067 WELD COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING SERVICES Prepared By: HS RESOURCES, INC. Denver, Colorado 550686 STATE OF COLORADO OIL & GAS CONSERVATION COMMISSION Department of Natural Resources 1580 Logan Street, Suite 380 Denver, Colorado 80203 Phone: (303) 894-2100 FAX: (303) 894-2109 November 10, 1994 Patrick Flynn Environmentalk Affairs Manager HS Resources, Inc. 1999 Broadway, Suite 3600 Denver, Colorado 80202 1171 DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES Roy Romer Governor Ken Salazar Executive Director Richard T. Griebling Director Brian I. Macke Deputy Director Patricia C. Beaver Technical Secretary PIT RE: OR OFF -SITE HSRESOURCES, INC., MILBY UNIT, SE PSSEEAPPLICATION SECTION13, -T3N- R66W, WELD COUNTY, COLORADO. Dear Mr. Flynn: The application is approved for the above site. HS Resources has complied with the requirements under Rules 907 and 905 of the Oil and Gas Conservation Commission. A bond in the amount of $50,000 shall be posted with the OGCC prior to construction on the site. The applicant is reminded that under Rule 907 f. a copy of the permit application shall be submitted to the local government. In addition other agencies may claim jurisdiction on off -site treatment of E&P waste and may need to be notified. Sincerely, Loren E. Avis Environmental Protection Specialist e506s j HS RESOURCES, INC. 1999 BROADWAY, SUITE 3600 DENVER, COLORADO 80202 (303) 296-3600 TELEFAX (303) 296-3601 January 17, 1995 Ms. Gloria Dunn Current Planner Weld County Department of Planning Services 1400 N. 17th Avenue Greeley, Colorado 80631 Re: USR-1067, Questions Regarding Vehicle Usage Dear Ms. Dunn: In response to your request, the following is the antcipated vehicle usage associated with HS Resources, Inc's. land treatment facility proposed under USR-1067: 1) 10 -Ton Tandum Hauler (dump truck) Weight empty: 4 tons Weight loaded: 7 tons Frequency: Once a week 2) Backhoe/Front-end loader Weight: 4.5 tons Frequency: Once a week 3) Tractor with Roto-tiller Weight: 4 tons Frequency: Once a month Please call if you need any additional information. HS Resources, Inc. would appreciate meeting with the County Board of Commissioners to complete this project as soon as possible. Once the meeting date is set, please let me know the time and date so that I can plan to attend. Patrick E. Flynn Environmental Affairs Manager cc: Env. File ii EXHIBIT j\ „IA" 9 ' 1995 f 9S0686 HS RESOURCES, INC. 1999 BROADWAY, SUITE 3600 DENVER, COLORADO 80202 (303) 296-3600 TELEFAX (303) 296-3601 December 29, 1994 Ms. Gloria Dunn Current Planner Weld County Department of Planning Services 1400 N. 17th Avenue Greeley, Colorado 80631 Re: USR 1067 Dear Ms. Dunn: DEC 3 0 1994 l� ,r - In response to your questions regarding HS Resources, Inc. (HSR) application for a Use by Special Review permit to operate a land treatment recycling facility east of Platteville, Colorado, please consider the following: 1) HSR has addressed the concerns expressed by Weld County Health via a letter to Trevor Jiricek dated December 12, 1994 and subsequent conversations between HSR and Mr. Jiricek. A copy of this letter has been provided to you; and, 2) HSR intends to use minimal quantities of water at the location. All water utilized will be transported to the facility by a commercial water truck. No water supply wells will be drilled or utilized at the site. Also, HSR requests that the Department of Planning Services consider its USR application in two parts: 1) the land treatment activities to be performed at the site involving the thin -spreading and composting of hydrocarbon -affected soil, frac sand, and applications of fresh water -based bentonitic drilling mud, and; 2) the permitting of the concrete wash pit. HSR's asks that these two activities be considered separately is in order to provide the Weld County Health Department with detailed engineering designs for the wash pit. HSR plans to submit these plans to the Health Department later in January 1995 and does not wish to incur any additional delays in permitting the land treatment facility. All of the information necessary to move forward with the land treatment provisions of our proposal has already been provided and discussed. Finally, I received from you in the mail today a packet that included an agenda for the January 5, 1995 Planning Commission Meeting. Attached were several documents related to 950686 Ms. Gloria Dunn December 29, 1994 Page No. 2 USR 1071 submitted by USWest/New Vector Group, but nothing related to HSR's application. Please verify that nothing has been omitted from HSR's packet, as it appears that we may have received USWest's materials instead. Thank you for your consideration. Please call with any questions or comments you may have. Sincerely, HS RESOURCES, INC. Patrick E. Flynn Environmental Affairs Manager cc: Env. File 950686 HS RESOURCES, INC. 1999 BROADWAY, SUITE 3600 DENVER, COLORADO 80202 (303) 296-3600 TELEFAX (303) 296-3601 October 10, 1994 Ms. Gloria Dunn Current Planner Department of Planning Services Weld County Administrative Offices 1400 N. 17th Avenue Greeley, CO 80631 VIA FACSIMILE: (303) 351-0978 Dear Ms. Dunn: I am writing in response to our telephone conversation earlier today in which you related Weld County Health Department's contention that would require HS Resources, Inc. (HSR) to obtain a Certificate of Designation (CD) from the Colorado Department of Health (CDH) in order to operate a land treatment and recycling facility for nonhazardous materials derived from HSR's oil and gas operations in the County. As I have mentioned to you on several occasions, HS Resources, Inc. is confident that its proposed activities are regulated by the Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation Commission's Rule 907, which regulates offsite, noncommercial land treatment of nonhazardous oil and gas wastes. CDH statutes and regulations are inapplicable in this case. However, if CDH were the agency with jurisdiction pursuant to its authority under the Solid Waste Disposal Sites and Facilities Act (Act), HSR believes that its proposed activities are exempt from regulations requiring a CD. I would like to direct your attention to the provisions of the Act, which in pertinent part provide as follows: (3) [A]ny person [defined under C.R.S. Section 30-20-102 to include entities such as HSR] other than a governmental unit may dispose of his own solid wastes on his own property, as long as such solid waste disposal site and facility complies with the rules and regulations of the department [CDH] and does not constitute public nuisance. For the purposes of this part 1, such solid wastes disposal site and facility shall be an approved site for which obtaining a certificate of designation under the provisions of section 30-20-102 shall be unnecessary. 950686 (5) Any site and facility operated for the purpose of processing, reclaiming, or recycling recyclable materials shall not be considered a solid waste disposal site and facility. (6) [T]he final use for beneficial purposes, including fertilizer, soil conditioner, fuel, and livestock feed, of sludge which has been processed and certified and designated as meeting all applicable regulations of the department and the department of agriculture shall not require a certificate of designation for such final use. (Colorado Revised Statutes, Section 30-20-102) Based on these portions of the Act, HSR believes its proposed activities are exempt from the requirements of a CD due to the fact that: 1) HSR owns the land on which the proposed landfarm site is to be located and the materials to be treated; 2) The landfarm plan proposed is based on recycling of materials for subsequent use at other HSR operations in the County and therefore is not considered a "Solid Waste Disposal Site and Facility" under the Act; and, 3) HSR can demonstrate a beneficial agricultural use of fresh water -based bentonitic drilling mud that qualifies it for exemption under the Act. The proposed location of the landfarm, the operational plan, and its emphasis on constructive recycling techniques, and provisions for ongoing environmental monitoring at the site are all designed to prevent environmental degradation of County resources and to address area surface owner concerns. HS Resources, Inc. appreciates your prompt attention to this matter and welcome any additional questions or comments you may have. Sincerely, HS RESOURCES, INC. Patrick E. Flynn Environmental Affairs Manager :pef 950686 Hello