The URL can be used to link to this page

Browse Search

Home My WebLink About20193053.tiffEXHIBIT INVENTORY CONTROL SHEET CASE USR18-0100 - PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY OF COLORADO Exhibit Submitted By Description A. Planning Commission Resolution of Recommendation Summary of Hearing (Minutes dated 06/18/2019, B. Planning Commission 03/19/2019, 02/5/2019 and 12/18/2019) C. Planning Services PowerPoint Presentation D. Applicant and Staff Email string regarding continuance (dated 11/27/2018) Email string regarding continuance (dated 11/28/2018- E. Applicant and Staff 12/26/2018) F. Applicant and Staff Email string regarding continuance (dated 01/21/2019) G. Harold and Carol Long Letter of Opposition (dated 12/03/2018) First Amended Waiver Agreement (dated 11/05/2018), H. Applicant and Staff and copy of Agreement signed 11/5/2018 Applicant Requesting Continuance Email J. CDOT Email Re: Utility and Access Permits (dated 06/24/2019) K. Kutak Rock, LLP Appeal (received 06/16/2019) Support of Appeal Email and Letters (received L. Sara Irby 06/25/2019) M. Applicant Letter requesting withdraw (dated 07/17/2019) N. Kutak Rock, LLP Letter supporting withdraw (dated 07/23/2019) O. P. Q. R. S. T. U. V. W. 2019-3053 i 1 f f 3 a • a . 54 s • 1 4- J • 1. _ VIM • I I . . f r I • Us s.Ja �• s. allaa•amt I N a • • .• •, a S. •■•II NO ••...V•!; I a n • Lk% 4.40 P • . . lb • Co CO $ a tj 1 _ t' a • • •• ta.•. ,• • s a a sass SO S. Ca -1 I, • • le a ill y.. . • Co CR27 a a a • • NIP 14 a a CR 29 CR 31 CR 33 CR 35 CR 37 CR 39 CR 41 CR 43 CR 45 .AbJau3/ar L , 1 I a MAP 1 VICINITY MAP NORTHERN COLORADO AREA PLAN _yii�ais vIJIf QfQQf HftjffljflJ i 4 ]Y24••88 i i 1 i !4piR1]` 1 if a a i - public bearings concerning this property will be heard before the County Planning Commission and Board of County Commissioners_ Both hearings will be held at: WELD COUNTY ADMINISTRATION BUILDING 1150 "0.. Street a Greeley, CO 80631 Planning Commission Hearing will be held on ..,3uNE 1 B ! }�pl;car�t: '' MP lc Std 1 ce rem PIfrr doE GctLO w f 0 Cs Ftuest. A SITE SPECIFIC LJE\/ELOF`M8NT PLAN ") ANT SPECIPL REVIEW PEF1v11Y Fold A MAJOR F" II- TY OF A F LJSLIC L1TlLlTY (Or s (1) 2301 -CV TRANISrv91SSIO.N LAVE EXTarsi o1r\Jc5 APP1=OXIMJATELY 10.4 MILES. orJE (1) NEW SU BSTATION ANC) LIFPCRAIDES TO AN EXISTING SUBSTATION" ('\NAPA AULT SUSST,ATION) IN THE A ( !NCR ICULIT LiFzinN. ) F IC T. Case Niurntneyr_ J S 0 100 Acres: FOP. FURTHER INFORMATION PLEASE CON'TACT t1!!ONT THE WELD COur`1TY UERAFtTF\A8NT OF PLANNING SERVICES„ AT 970-353-6100. atXt_ r�i lanning�as��.e><� For Additional information visit +www w.veraccau Y� �.....rf.t.r�.f .Ic:/.,....+ hfltfl F1VN-.YV ffirc tistern, rM?.+F.<Y.'1[tlto 1f.•.. Nfn }1 +.IHa C.lc�dkTlahaperetrrri tata'hr! le -pa. at .0 nfyr afiMlenaen' Nv.✓�'V` •,..n te-a'WY`ito (I. f t, rhan.itl Mrrtf wxh�..�/ �I Lptpi ^ in••� antmi. ahrrn.srW int.• Pitt l •' •..w IN COef S -`• a- .�. es +s 0 . {}a 3 ear • . ors h www.GVlrirail corn NO MOTOR VEHICLES ALLOWED PLEASE CLEAN UP AFTER YOUR PET - - - ±`-!'say's=mowai'', ca'` 'r' ti ^ `... a' • • - • 1 .2 • 1 t II tr. ir :.s • ^ 4 l 'i • • ti i X41 killts 1 • 1 h • L^J f d Y•>' I in • 1 {t R 1 i AZT,. iA 1•• �+tom 41 V �-� VIEW TOWARD GRAHAM CREEK SUBDIVISION SITE FROM SOUTH VIEW TOWARD EATON COMMUNITY CENTER ADJACENT TO GRAHAM CREEK SITE S,....a-tom ea. • IP • a ")•.' el'f`in« .. ro ._ . .r•t '• i• t731 T'-`- .. .c-Cfyi, ..,r'•" -•t .4•-;3.., 6 u as «� . -mow✓ .. z4 . •Y �.�. r _ aMuer r • . tr "woe a -a-- !+'�ai.l. ]i Q`_1..Ji/• -. [i . • ..r.'14f yyM .�4 waskveketts. Y"" d A� -9 ft L 1s O .ra l .. _ _ .�.[J �.� .-•tai . • -414% -..iw �'.�_^ KI L P'•hr,-73: . s .��.. ....�. ..�:eras I. Zass • t 7 t. i y _ • 4 • • al. W. S. & ' r.. �r .)µ X11 r9 f r • jt. VIEW TO SOUTH FROM- GRAHAM CREEK SITE J• • • -E _ a . - a; Caa4 (- 1 t Ate 1 • • - t ?,rte �•.p.C-...t , a:. A. .t s, sec VI41• a Y ,� N.7":7‘.•["it • •.. .l el ' I a. s Is" .. — t _ • •.. - 11.h.r et. C F « ; ,a r•'�}iu1., es'�a. of c. 'Om ,: as.: a .r ,] . a s TiliMilliiiiMillirlieriiii7na a I AIL 1 • a.v �.- aal 1 i■ VIEW TOWARD EXISTING WAPA SUBSTATION MIME M■■ i IMir® ■uw ■ Ellin ■ III Tit II Erliellia NIP RI.PAS3/4%.Ma Inn a III i�1 girl �.� 11.lIIlli �� ,� I.. ,�! .0 i iii 1al1� f a i .. ❑ .�� rrrrrrrr� c a _- ,� _ 1 u p p i �� I`i�b� I;r 1°.,P4iiit a, 'F!' 1,1, I' i I "ilitilliiJ1P!!f! r I [ . lr a ;rr r t 4,13,11t'_ a _- 41. A Selena Baltierra Subject: Kristine Ranslem RE: Planning Commission and BOCC Hearings Reschedule - USR18-0100 From: Chris Gathman Sent: Tuesday, November 27, 2018 4:39 PM To: Kristine Ranslem <kranslem@weldgov.com> Cc: Frank Haug <fhaug@weldgov.com> Subject: FW: Planning Commission and BOCC Hearings Reschedule - USR18-0100 Kris, Attached is the continuance request for USR18-0100. The date says 2/29 — they are actually requesting the 2/27 B0CC hearing date. Regards, Chris Gathman Planner III Weld County Department of Planning Services ;5 N. 17th Avenue 970-400-3537 fax: 970-400-4098 Confidentiality Notice: This electronic transmission and any attached documents or other writings are intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged, confidential or otherwise protected from disclosure. If you have received this communication in error, please immediately notify sender by return e-mail and destroy the communication. Any disclosure, copying, distribution or the taking of any action concerning the contents of this communication or any attachments by anyone other than the named recipient is strictly prohibited. From: Claxton, Larry K <Larry.Claxton@XCELENERGY.00M> Sent: Tuesday, November 27, 2018 4:20 PM To: Chris Gathman <cgathman@weldgov.com> Cc: Jeremy Call <JCall@L0GANSIMPS0N.00M>; Urrutia, Jonathan <Jonathan.Urrutia@xcelenergy.com> Subject: Planning Commission and B0CC Hearings Reschedule - USR18-0100 caution: This email originated from outside of Weld County Government. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. 1 Chris, Public Service Company of Colorado (PSCo) respectfully requests that the Northern Colorado Area Plan (Case USR 18- )0) December 18, 2018 Planning Commission and January 23, 2018 Board of County Commissioner public hearings be rescheduled to February 5, 2019 and February 29, respectively. This request provides PSCo additional time to try and work with certain stakeholders on potential concerns with the project. Please let me know if you have any questions. Luny Claxton Xcel Energy I Responsible by Nature Siting and Land Rights, Principal Agent 1800 Larimer Street, Suite 400, Denver, CO 80202 P:303-571-7089 C:303-887-8402 F: 303-294-2088 E: I a rry, cl ax ton Pxce l en ergy. co►n 2 Selena Baltierra Dm: To: Cc: Subject: Attachments: should have it by wednesday Frank Haug Friday, December 28, 2018 10:56 AM Esther Gesick Isabella Juanicorena; Selena Baltierra; Kristine Ranslem RE: hearing continuance? (USR18-0100) RE: Public Service Co. - Application Approval Waiver Agreement - First Amendment From: Esther Gesick Sent: Thursday, December 27, 2018 4:35 PM To: Frank Haug <fhaug@weldgov.com> Cc: Isabella Juanicorena <ijuanicorena@weldgov.com>; Selena Baltierra <sbaltierra@weldgov.com>; Kristine Ranslem <kranslem@weldgov.com>; Esther Gesick <egesick@weldgov.com> Subject: RE: hearing continuance? (USR18-0100) Hi Frank, Kris sent the notice to the newspaper today to be published next Wednesday for the new hearing date of 2/13/19. Any word on the Waive Amendment yet? I'd like to get that on the Agenda prior to the current hearing date of 1/23, so we have something to point to for the continuance request. anks, Esther E. Gesick Clerk to the Board 1150 O Street'P.O. Box 758/Greeley, CO 80632 tel: (970) 400-4226 4itin Kfri Confidentiality Notice: This electronic transmission and any attached documents or other writings are intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged, confidential or otherwise protected from disclosure. If you have received this communication in error, please immediately notify sender by return e-mail and destroy the communication. Any disclosure, copying, distribution or the taking of any action concerning the contents of this communication or any attachments by anyone other than the named recipient is strictly prohibited. From: Frank Haug Sent: Wednesday, December 19, 2018 1:21 PM To: Esther Gesick <egesick@weldgov.com> Cc: Isabella Juanicorena <ijuanicorena@weldgov.com>; Selena Baltierra <sbaltierra@weldgov.com>; Kristine Ranslem <kranslem@weldgov.com> Subject: RE: hearing continuance? (USR18-0100) hink we should still call it up at the hearings, but I think we should also renotice it. I will check on the amendment to e waiver 1 From: Esther Gesick Sent: Wednesday, December 19, 2018 1:17 PM To: Frank Haug <fhaug@weldgov.com> : Isabella Juanicorena <ijuanicorena@weldgov.com>; Selena Baltierra <sbaltierra@weldgov.com>; Kristine Ranslem ckranslem@weldgov.com>; Esther Gesick <egesick@weldgov.com> Subject: RE: hearing continuance? (USR18-0100) This is for the USR18-0100. At this point CTB still needs the following in order to prepare the 1/23 continuance Resolution: 1) Waiver Amendment to establish the new hearing date February 27th Question: There was a reference to publication below; do we actually have to re -notice, or are we just continuing? Esther E. Gesick Clerk to the Board 1150 O Street/P.O. Box 758/Greeley, CO 80632 tel: (970) 400-4226 Confidentiality Notice: This electronic transmission and any attached documents or other writings are intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged, confidential or otherwise protected from disclosure. If you have received this communication in error, please immediately notify sender by return e-mail and destroy the communication. Any disclosure, copying, distribution or the taking of any action concerning the contents of this communication or any attachments by anyone other than the named recipient is strictly prohibited. From: Selena Baltierra Sent: Wednesday, December 19, 2018 12:57 PM To: Esther Gesick <egesick@weldgov.com>; Frank Haug <fhaug@weldgov.com>; Kristine Ranslem <kranslem@weldgov.com> Cc: Isabella Juanicorena <ijuanicorena@weldgov.com> Subject: RE: hearing continuance? I was just reading through this thread and realized I do not see what case this is for.. can anyone clarify? Thanks, S 8a1tternw Deputy Clerk to the Board Weld County 1150 O Street Greeley, CO 80631 tel: 970-400-4217 sbaltierra(a7weldgov. com sbaltierraco.weld.co.us 2 Confidentiality Notice: This electronic transmission and any attached documents or other writings are intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged, confidential or otherwise protected from disclosure. If you have received this communication in error. please immediately tify sender by return e-mail and destroy the communication. Any disclosure. copying, distribution or the <ing of any action concerning the contents of this communication or any attachments by anyone other than the named recipient is strictly prohibited. From: Esther Gesick Sent: Monday, December 10, 2018 10:54 AM To: Frank Haug <fhaug@weldgov.com>; Kristine Ranslem <kranslem@weldgov.com> Cc: Selena Baltierra <sbaltierra@weldgov.com>; Isabella Juanicorena <ijuanicorena@weldgov.com> Subject: RE: hearing continuance? Thanks Frank! We'll prepare documents accordingly. Esther E. Gesick Clerk to the Board 1150 O Street/P.O. Box 758'Greeley, CO 80632 tel: (970) 400-4226 Confidentiality Notice: This electronic transmission and any attached documents or other writings are intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged, confidential or otherwise protected from disclosure. If you have received this communication in error, please immediately notify sender by return e-mail and destroy the communication. Any disclosure, copying, distribution or the taking of any action concerning the contents of this communication or any attachments by anyone other than the named recipient is strictly prohibited. From: Frank Haug Sent: Monday, December 10, 2018 10:36 AM To: Esther Gesick <egesick@weldgov.com>; Kristine Ranslem <kranslem@weldgov.com> Subject: FW: hearing continuance? See attached, so I think we are good to notice it, thanks. From: McNeish, Gilbert F. <GMcNeish@spencerfane.com> Sent: Monday, December 10, 2018 10:27 AM To: Frank Haug <fhaug@weldgov.com> Subject: RE: hearing continuance? Caution: This email originated from outside of Weld County Government. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Frank, sorry for the delayed response...just saw your message from Friday...it got lost in the mix on my end. Spoke with Xcel this morning and asked them to confirm the dates, and I am told Feb. 5t1i for the PC and Feb. 27 for the BOCC still work and should be noticed. Thx for confirming. And, will send an amendment to the time waiver agreement per my messages last week. Gil "ilbert F. McNeish Attorney at Law Dencer Fane LLP 3 1700 Lincoln Street, Suite 2000 I Denver, CO 80203 O 303.839.3722 gmcneish@spencerfane.com I spencerfane.com om: Frank Haug <fhaug@weldgov.com> Sent: Monday, December 10, 2018 8:37 AM To: McNeish, Gilbert F. <GMcNeish@spencerfane.com> Subject: RE: hearing continuance? We are going to send out notice, so I want to be sure we are good on the dates, do you see any issues with the 5th and the 27`h From: Frank Haug Sent: Thursday, December 6, 2018 1:30 PM To: 'McNeish, Gilbert F.' <GMcNeish@spencerfane.com> Subject: RE: hearing continuance? I am going to go ahead and have our folks schedule this, if that is okay with you. From: McNeish, Gilbert F. <GMcNeish@spencerfane.com> Sent: Wednesday, December 5, 2018 3:22 PM To: Frank Haug <fhaug@weldgov.com> Subject: RE: hearing continuance? Caution: This email originated from outside of Weld County Government. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the ender and know the content is safe. Frank, I was told this morning that the dates are PC on Feb. 5 and BOCC on Feb. 27. There is no Feb. 29 next year. 1'll check again on my end so that we can compare notes. Also, based on a discussion with Xcel in-house counsel. Julie Stencel. I have been asked to prepare an amendment to the waiver agreement signed earlier by the county re the previous hearing dates. If acceptable to you. I will get that done and send a draft to you for review. Gilbert F. McNeish Attorney at Law Spencer Fane LLP 1700 Lincoln Street, Suite 2000 I Denver, CO 80203 O 303.839.3722 gmcneish@spencerfane.com I spencerfane.com From: Frank Haug <fhaug@weldgov.com> Sent: Wednesday, December 5, 2018 3:00 PM To: McNeish, Gilbert F. <GMcNeish@spencerfane.com> Subject: RE: hearing continuance? It sounds like we are talking about the BOCC hearing on February 29, and planning commission on 2-19. Does that work for you all? From: McNeish, Gilbert F. <GMcNeish@spencerfane.com> int: Wednesday, November 28, 2018 5:13 PM ii: Frank Haug <fhaug@weldgov.com> Subject: RE: hearing continuance? 4 Caution: This email originated from outside of Weld County Government. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the ender and know the content is safe. links Frank. I just learned about that late this afternoon. Will circle back with you to discuss modification of the waiver agreement. Gil Gilbert F. McNeish Attorney at Law Spencer Fane LLP 1700 Lincoln Street, Suite 2000 I Denver, CO 80203 O 303.839.3722 gmcneish@spencerfane.com I spencerfane.com From: Frank Haug <fhaug@weldgov.com> Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2018 4:51 PM To: McNeish, Gilbert F. <GMcNeish@spencerfane.com> Subject: hearing continuance? Our planning department got a request from your client to continue the hearings that we negotiated for December 18 and January 23, which I suppose would mean we would need to modify the agreement that we signed. I just wanted to make sure you were aware of that and see how you wanted to proceed. Thanks. ? 5 Selena Baltierra rom: 3ent: To: Cc: Subject: Chris Gathman Monday, January 21, 2019 3:39 PM Esther Gesick; Isabella Juanicorena; Selena Baltierra; Jessica Reid Frank Haug FW: Continuance Request for USR18-0100 FYI. Attached is the request to continue USR18-0100. Mr. Claxton indicated that he and another representative will be there at 10 AM Wednesday to address this continuance request before the Board of County Commissioners. Regards, Chris Gathman Planner III Weld County Department of Planning Services 1555 N. 17th Avenue tel: 970-400-3537 fax: 970-400-4098 Confidentiality Notice: This electronic transmission and any attached documents or other writings are intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged, confidential or otherwise protected from disclosure. If you have received this communication in error, please immediately notify sender by return e-mail and destroy the communication. Any disclosure, copying, distribution or the taking of any action concerning the contents of this communication or any attachments by anyone other than the named recipient is strictly prohibited. From: Claxton, Larry K <Larry.Claxton@XCELENERGY.COM> Sent: Monday, January 21, 2019 3:29 PM To: Chris Gathman <cgathman@weldgov.com> Cc: Urrutia, Jonathan <Jonathan.Urrutia@xcelenergy.com>; Jeremy Call <JCaII@LOGANSIMPSON.COM> Subject: RE: Hearing dates for Planning Commission and Board of County Commissioners hearing Caution: This email originated from outside of Weld County Government. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Chris, Public Service Company of Colorado respectfully requests a continuance of the February 5 and 27, 2019 Planning )mmission and Board of County Commissioners public hearings, respectively, for the Northern Colorado Area Plan oject. Per your e-mail below, the new dates are March 19, 2019 and May 22, 2019. Please let me know if you have any questions or if these dates are not correct. 1 Thank you, tarty Claxton cel Energy I Responsible by Nature :ling and Land Rights, Principal Agent 1800 Larimer Street, Suite 400, Denver, CO 80202 P:303-571-7089 C:303-887-8402 F: 303-294-2088 E: larry.claxton a)xcelenergy.corn From: Chris Gathman [mailto:cgathman@weldgov.com] Sent: Monday, January 21, 2019 1:30 PM To: Claxton, Larry K Subject: Hearing dates for Planning Commission and Board of County Commissioners hearing CAUTION EXTERNAL SENDER: Stop and consider before you click links or open attachments. Report suspicious email using the 'Report Phishing/Spam' button in Outlook. Dear Larry, I checked with Kris and Esther re: hearing dates. Here is what we are looking at for available dates: anning Commission — 3/19 Board of County Commissioners — 5/22 Let me know if you have any questions. Regards, Chris Gathman Planner III Weld County Department of Planning Services 1555 N. 17th Avenue tel: 970-400-3537 fax: 970-400-4098 confidentiality Notice: This electronic transmission and any attached documents or other writings are intended only for ie person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged, confidential or otherwise protected from disclosure. If you have received this communication in error, please immediately notify sender by return e-mail and destroy the communication. Any disclosure, copying, distribution or the taking of any action concerning the contents of this communication or any attachments by anyone other than the named recipient is strictly prohibited. 2 December 3, 2018 Weld County Department of Planning Services tv'Veid County Commissioners 1555 N. 17th Avenue Greeley. CO 80631 Re: Case #USR 18-0100 Planner Chris Gathman To: Weld County Department of Planning Services, and Weld County Commissioners We are writing this letter in opposition to the proposed project location of the Public Service transmission line in the Ault area. It is proposed to run along the west side of our property. We live at 40471 County Road 33, Ault, CO: one mile west of Ault. One of the main reasons we purchased our property was for future development as Ault grows. This property has an outstanding western view. and will be prime development ground. County Road 33, along our property, has already been annexed into Ault, with another annexation along Highway 14. There is currently a new development just west of Ault, already under construction. We feel the proposed location of this transmission line along our property will definitely decrease our property value. and will hinder future western development of Ault. We also have concerns about the effect of our present farming operation, and crop production. There is an irrigation well within 10 to 20 feet of our property line, which would make it unsafe to get our well worked on. Also, there is a pivot sprinkler at the same location with an electric instrument panel and pump on the pivot. There is concern of safety for anyone operating the pivot. Also, along the east side of the fence line, there are several underground lines carrying irrigation water to other parts of the farm, and across Highway 14 to the neighboring property. The neighboring property to the \nest also has an irrigation underground. lime .v thin the easement. We currently pasture beef cows and have feeder cattle. After harvest, our cattle pasture our entire property. usually calving along the west side of our property where the trees provide protection from the weather. These trees are necessary and not to be removed. This is the area where the proposed transmission line is to be located. We are concerned what effect this will have on our livestock. We purchased the neighboring property to protect our view and future uevelopment intentions. But now we have to contenu wiin unwanted transmission lines intruding on us, decreasing our property value. We strongly oppose the proposed location of these transmission lines. We respectfully ask that you please take these concerns under consideration, and request Public Service locate an alternate location; where it would not affect current farming operations. livestock operations. and future property development. These lines will be destructive to our property. Thank you for your consideration in this matter. Sincerely. Hawk] L. Long Carol A. Long gala?? 6/, 40471 County Rd_ 33 Ault, CO 80610 c1cP'i' FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT APPLICATION APPROVAL WAIVER AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE COUNTY OF WELD, COLORADO AND PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY OF COLORADO DATED NOVEMBER 5, 2018 THIS FIRST AMENDMENT ("First Amendment") TO THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT APPLICATION APPROVAL WAIVER AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE COUNTY OF WELD, COLORADO AND PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY OF COLORADO dated November 5, 2018 ("Agreement") is entered by and between the County of Weld, Colorado, a Colorado home rule county, located at 1150 O Street, Greeley, Colorado 80631 ("County") and Public Service Company of Colorado, located at 1800 Larimer Street, Suite 400, Denver, Colorado 80202 ("PSCo") (County and PSCo collectively the "Parties"). RECITALS WHEREAS, the County and PSCo entered into that certain Agreement for property within the County located as generally described on Exhibit A of the Agreement; and WHEREAS, both the County and PSCo desire to amend the Agreement by changing the dates of the public hearings and final action by the County as set forth in Section III. Terms of Agreement, B. Alternative Review Timeline, and C. Final Action; and WHEREAS, this First Amendment shall be binding as between the County and PSCo upon the last date of execution of this First Amendment. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing, and the mutual promises and covenants contained herein, the Parties hereto do mutually agree to this First Amendment to the Agreement as follows: 1. The Agreement is hereby amended as follows: a. The current Section III. Terms of Agreement, paragraphs B. Alternative Review Timeline, and C. Final Action, are deleted in their entirety, and a new Section III, Terms of Agreement, paragraphs B. Alternative Review Timeline, and C. Final Action, are inserted as follows: III. Terms of Agreement B. Alternative Review Timeline In accordance with the agreement to waive any applicable timeline, the Parties agree to the following alternative review timeline for application review, public hearings and final County action on the Application: DN 3402851.1 c2PY 1. Application submitted — August 13, 2018 2. Revised application deemed complete — September 24, 2018 3. Referral period complete — November 1, 2018 4. Planning Commission Hearing — March 19, 2019 5. Board of County Commissioner Hearing — May 22, 2019 (Final Action) C. Final Action The public hearings on PSCo's Application are currently scheduled to be heard by (1) the County Planning Commission on Tuesday, March 19, 2019, and, (2) the Board of County Commissioners on Wednesday, May 22, 2019, unless rescheduled as set forth herein. The scheduled hearing dates may only be rescheduled upon mutual agreement of the Parties, or if an unavoidable event occurs not attributable to the County requiring the public hearing(s) to be rescheduled in which case such public hearing will be scheduled for the next regular meeting of the Commission or the Board, as appropriate, or the Application will be deemed approved. The Parties agree that this Agreement and the alternative review timeline set forth herein are reasonable. 2. All other terms and conditions of the Agreement shall remain in full force and effect. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have executed this First Amendment as of the dates of signatures below. County of Weld, Colorado 1150 O Street Greeley, CO 80631 STATE OF COLORADO ) ) ss. COUNTY OF I ery i ' ) Public Service Company of Colorado 1800 Larimer Street, Suite 400 Denver, Colorado 80202 PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY OF COLORADO By: Title: Date: 2 Xcel Energy Services. Inc as Authorized Agent for Public Service Company of Colorado ci 2Z, ZOM DN 3402851.1 aoPy The foregoing instrument was signed before me this 22 day of Nfaiiii , 2011, by Cph,� L.0 , as cis. eiAi for Public Service Company of Colorado. WITNESS my hand and official seal. My commission expires CRYSTAL SANCHEZ Notary Public State of Colorado Notary ID # 19994014518 My Commission Expires 11-23-2020 3 COUNTY OF WELD, COLORADO By: Title: Date: DN 3402851.1 Selena Baltierra om: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Chris Gathman Friday, March 8, 2019 11:24 AM Kristine Ranslem Esther Gesick; Selena Baltierra; Bob Choate FW: Northern Colorado Area Plan From: Claxton, Larry K <Larry.Claxton@XCELENERGY.COM> Sent: Friday, March 08, 2019 11:09 AM To: Chris Gathman <cgathman@weldgov.com> Subject: Northern Colorado Area Plan Caution: This email originated from outside of Weld County Government. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Good morning Chris, As discussed in our meeting yesterday, Public Service Company of Colorado (PSCo) respectfully requests that the Northern Colorado Area Plan (Case USR 18-0100) March 19, 2019 Planning Commission and May 22, 2019 Board of County Commissioner public hearings be rescheduled to June 18, 2019 and July 17, 2019, respectively. This request ovides PSCo additional time to amend the current 1041 permit application to reflect the change in scope. Larry Claxton Xcel Energy I Responsible by Nature Siting and Land Rights, Principal Agent 1800 Lorimer Street, Suite 400, Denver, CO 80202 P:303-571-7089 C:303-887-8402 F: 303-294-2088 E: jarryclaxtoncoxcelenergy.com ti Weld County Council Article XIII County Council Pursuant to Section 16-7 Every elective county office shall become vacant, on the happening of any one of the following events, before the expiration of the term of office: (1) The death of the officer. (2) The resignation of the officer. (3) The removal of the officer. by recall or otherwise. (4) The officer ceasing to be a resident of Weld County, or in the case of an officer required to live in a district. ceasing to be a resident of the district from which elected. (5) The officer's refusal or neglect to take his oath of office, or renew his official bond. or to deposit such oath and bond within the time prescribed by law (6) The final decision of a competent tribunal. declaring void an officer's election or appointment (7) The final decision of a competent tribunal finding an officer guilty of a crime_ Pursuant to Section 3-15 Vacancies (1) A vacancy in the office of the County Commissioner shall be filled by appointment by County Council Pursuant to Section 13-8 (1) A vacancy in the Board of County Commissioners shall be filled by appointment by the Council. Said appointees shall be of the same political party as that of the previous officer, and the appointment shall be effective for the remainder of the term. Board of County Commissioners vacancy procedure 08/13/2018. 1 Upon notification of a vacancy to the County Council by the county attorney of the final determination of commissioner office vacancy, pursuant to Section 16-7 of the Weld County Hare Rut Charter. the procedures listed below shall be followed The county attorney shall attempt to notify the Weld County Council within 72 hours, following the final determination of commissioner office vacancy_ 2. Notification shall be made for applications for a qualified person to be appointed to the vacant commissioner position within (5) days following the final determination of a vacancy of a commissioner office. Method of notification shall be determined by the County Council. Notification shall be made requesting applicant resumes to be delivered to the Weld County Council office in a sealed envelope by a date specified /1 3. Within five (5) days following the closing date of application acceptance. two (2) appointed Weld County Council members shall open and review all applicant resumes. Five resumes shall be selected from the responding applicants. Applicants must be of the same political party as the former commissioner that has vacated the office. Determination of political affiliation shall be based on state requirements of registration deadline for participation in their respective party caucus. (a) Chosen candidates shall be given a background check by the Weld County Sheriff to confirm eligibility to hold public office. 4. The President of the Weld County Council shall call a special meeting to convene within three (3) business days following the selection of the qualified candidate resumes. 5. The Weld County Council shall receive and review each of the five resumes during the special meeting. A date for interviews of the chosen applicants shall be established at the special meeting Resumes of applicants not chosen will be returned to applicants at next meeting or destroyed per County personnel document standards 6. Invitations to each of the applicants shall be made by the Secretary of the Weld County Council, within 72 hours. for an open interview of each candidate at the next regular County Council meeting. 7. All Weld County Council members shall be in attendance for interviews. In the event of -emergency or excused absence from the meeting by a council member. the interviews shall be re- schedµled forthe next regular scheduled County Council meeting. 8 One applicant shall be selected for the vacancy on the Board of County Commissioners following completion of interviews. Selection of the candidate shall be made at the end of the meeting following open discussion of each candidate by the County Council. A roll call vote shall be made for each vote made during the Commissioner vacancy appointment process. 9. Official notification of selection shall be made by the President at the meeting. as well as by electronic communication to the successful applicant after adjournment of the meeting by the secretary. but not to exceed 24 hours in duration after meeting adjournment. 10. Applicant shall be sworn in at the earliest available opportunity following notification. t A RESOLUTION RE: APPROVE LOCAL GOVERNMENT WAIVER AGREEMENT FOR MAJOR FACILITY OF A PUBLIC UTILITY 1041 PERMIT APPLICATION AND AUTHORIZE DIRECTOR OF PLANNING SERVICES TO SIGN - PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY OF COLORADO WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Weld County, Colorado, pursuant to Colorado statute and the Weld County Home Rule Charter, is vested with the authority of administering the affairs of Weld County, Colorado, and WHEREAS, the Board has been presented with Local Government Waiver Agreement for Major Facility of a Public Utility 1041 Permit Application between the County of Weld, State of Colorado, by and through the Board of County Commissioners of Weld County, on behalf of the Department of Planning Services, and Public Service Company of Colorado, commencing upon full execution of signatures, with further terms and conditions being as stated in said agreement, and WHEREAS, after review, the Board deems it advisable to approve said agreement, a copy of which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of County Commissioners of Weld County, Colorado, that the Local Government Waiver Agreement for Major Facility of a Public Utility 1041 Permit Application between the County of Weld, State of Colorado, by and through the Board of County Commissioners of Weld County, on behalf of the Department of Planning Services, and Public Service Company of Colorado be and hereby is, approved. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the Board that the Director of the Department of Planning Services be, and hereby is. authorized to sign said agreement. The above and foregoing Resolution was, on motion duly made and seconded, adopted by the following vote on the 5th day of November, A.D., 2018. ATTEST: dadact, ,er ok. Weld County Clerk to the Board BY: Deputy APED A oun • ttorney Date of signature: 12/V18 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS WELD COUNTY, COLORADO Ste e Moreno. Chair arbara Kirkmeyer, i Mike Freeman Cc* PLCTP). CaCFH) sal(o'7/It 2018-3526 PL2623 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PASS -AROUND REVIEW PASS -AROUND TITLE: Extension of time for application for XCEL power line DEPARTMEN'I': Planning/County Attorney DATE: 10-15-18 PERSON REQUESTING: Frank Haug/Tom Parko Brief description of the problem/issue: There is a pending application for a power line that is coming before the board. C.R.S. 29-20-108(2) requires that the application be heard within 90 days, or the application is deemed automatically approved. The same statute allows the reviewing ajncy and the applicant to agree to additional time so that the application can proceed. Given the amount of land use applications we have over the next several months, XCEL has agreed to extend the 90 day timeframe into next January so as to give staff enough time to present the application to the board. What options exist for the Board? (include consequences, impacts, costs, etc. of options): Authorize "1'om Parko to sign the extension of time so that we can avoid the 90 day default time frame and bring the case before the board. Decline to authorize the extension and risk the application being automatically approved. Recommendation: Authorize Tom Parko to sign the extension. Sean P. Conway Julie A. Cozad Mike Freeman Barbara Kirkmeyer, Pro -Tern Steve Moreno, Chair 5 Approve Recommendation Schedule Work Session Other/Comments: 2018-3526 PL QC.Pa3 sther Gesick om: ent: To: Cc: Subject: Attachments: Frank Haug Tuesday, October 30, 2018 3:55 PM Esther Gesick; Karla Ford Bruce Barker; Don Warden; Tom Parko Jr. FW: NCAP - Weld County Waiver Agreement Weld County Waiver - Revised-cleaned.pdf Esther, the board just approved us moving forward with this. Can you please put it on the agenda, thanks. From: McNeish, Gilbert F. <GMcNeish@spencerfane.com> Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2018 3:31 PM To: Frank Haug <fhaug@weldgov.com> Subject: FW: NCAP - Weld County Waiver Agreement Caution: This email originated from outside of Weld County Government. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Frank, attached is an executed copy of the Waiver Agreement between the county and Public Service Company of Colorado/Xcel Energy pursuant to our recent conversations. Mr. John Lupo who is a Senior Manager has signed on behalf of the company. The hearing date for the BOCC has been changed to January 23, 2019 as we :ye discussed. Please attached Exhibit A from my earlier email to the agreement for a complete copy. And, urn a signed copy of the agreement to me after execution by the county . Thanks. Gil Gilbert F. McNeish Spencer Fane LLP 1700 Lincoln Street Suite 2000 Denver, Colorado 80203-4554 303-839-3800 (Main) 303-839-3722 (Direct) 303-839-3838 (Fax) gmcneish@spencerfane.com LOCAL GOVERNMENT APPLICATION APPROVAL WAIVER AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE COUNTY OF WELD, COLORADO AND PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY OF COLORADO MAJOR FACILITIES OF A PUBLIC UTILITY - SECTION 1041 PERMIT APPLICATION I. Introduction The County of Weld, Colorado ("County") and Public Sei vice Company of Colorado ("PSCo") (individually "Party", or collectively "Parties") hereby enter into the following Waiver Agreement ("Agreement") for the purpose of waiving the requirements of C R S § 29-20- 108(2) ("Statute") The County and PSCo mutually acknowledge that this Agreement is supported by appropriate and adequate consideration IL Background In a meeting held on January 18, 2018, PSCo notified County staff of its intention to construct, operate and maintain a new electrical transmission line ("Transmission Line"), a new substation ("New Substation"), improvements to an existing substation ("Existing Substation") (both New Substation and Existing Substation together, "Substations") and related facilities ("Related Facilities") within the County's jurisdiction pursuant to the Statute under § 29-20- 108(4)(a) During the January 18th meeting, PSCo initiated a statutorily -required consultation piocess with the County The consultation piocess was conducted in order to identify the specific locations and transmission line routes under consideration for the sites of the Tiansmission Line, Substations and Related Facilities, and to attempt to resolve land use issues that may arise from the contemplated permit application PSCo also submitted an application for a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity ("CPCN") to the Colorado Public Utilities Commission ("CPUC") on March 9, 2017 for the Transmission Line, Substations and Related Facilities The application for a CPCN was approved by the CPUC on March 1, 2018 As a result of the consultation process and a thorough analysts of all potential transmission line corridors and substation sites, as well as ongoing outreach to area residents, PSCo selected the preferred alternative sites ("PSCo Sites") located as generally described on Exhibit A A Section 1041 Permit Application ("Application") for major facilities of a public utility for the PSCo Sites was initially filed with the County on August 13, 2018 1 DN 3240340 Subsequently, PSCo was notified by County staff that, among various technical seasons, the Application was incomplete Following the County's determination that the Application was incomplete, PSCo sought further clarification of the submittal requirements Based on dialogue between the Parties, an understanding was reached with respect to the level of additional application information requited In response, PSCo submitted such additional information to the County on September 11, 2018 foi all remaining incomplete application matters identified by the County This additional information completed the Application submittal requirements which resulted in a determination by County staff on September 24, 2018 that the Application was complete Pursuant to the Statute, local government land use regulations must require final local government action on any application of a public utility that relates to the location, construction, or improvement of major electrical facilities within ninety (90) days ("Statutory 90 Day Deadline") after submission of a final application If the County does not take final action within such time pursuant to the Statute, the application shall be deemed approved Since the Statute provides that a local government and a public utility may come to an agreement on an alternative timeline which supeisedes the Statutory 90 Day Deadline, the County and PSCo have chosen to enter into this Agreement In light of the above -described communications between the Parties and related uncertainty regarding the completeness and finality of the Application, but also in recognition that (1) the Application is now complete, and, (2) the County needs adequate time to review and evaluate public utility facilities of this nature, the Parties now agiee to an alternative timeline as described below which supeisedes the Statutory 90 Day Deadline foi final action by the County III. Terms of Agreement The County and PSCo hereby stipulate and agree to the following A. Wavier of the Statutory 90 -Day Deadline of C.R S 29-20-108(2) The Parties agree that to the extent applicable, the provisions of the Statute which require the County to complete its review and take final action on the Application within ninety (90) days after the submission of a final application shall be waived and that the timeline set forth heiern below between the Parties shall govern B. Alternative Review Timeline In accordance with the agreement to waive any applicable timeline, the Parties agiee to the following alternative review timeline foi application review, public hearings and final County action on the Application 2 DN 3240340 1 Application submitted — August 13, 2018 2 Revised application deemed complete - September 24, 2018 3 Referral period complete - November 1, 2018 4 Planning Commission Hearing - December 18, 2018 5 Board of County Commissioner Hearing — January 23, 2019 (Final Action) C. Final Action The public hearings on PSCo's Application are currently scheduled to be heard by (1) the County Planning Commission on Tuesday, December 18, 2018, and, (2) the Boai d of County Commissioners on Wednesday, January 23, 2019, unless rescheduled as set forth herein The scheduled hearing dates may only be rescheduled upon mutual agreement of the Parties, or if an unavoidable event occurs not attiibutable to the County requiring the public heating(s) to be rescheduled in which case such public hearing will be scheduled for the next regular meeting of the Commission or the Board, as appropriate, or the Application will be deemed approved The Parties agree that this Agreement and the alternative review timeline set forth herein at e reasonable THE REST OF THIS PAGE LEFT INTENTIONALLY BLANK (SIGNATURES FOLLOW ON NEXT PAGE) 3 Z DN 3240340 PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY OF COLORADO STATE OF COLORADO COUNTY OF Aline ) ss. B D. Lupo r & Land Rghts cal Energy Services. Inc ae Authorized Agent for Public Service Company of Colorado Subscribed and sworn to before me this rl ym day of Waste , 2018, by IAA b.beo , as in gen jnentatt, on behalf of Public Service Company of Colorado. SINAI 114to ( I&glts Witness my hand and official seal. My Commission Expires: 1`3-aoa.o Notary Public DEREK HOLSCHER Notary Public State of Colorado Notary ID • 20114082658 My Commission Expires 01-03-2020 COUNTY OF WELD, COLORADO By: Title: 4 �► rc c L( j cx. n i NOV 05 2078 atoll -35026 DPI 3240340 MAP 1 VICINITY MAP NORTHERN COLORADO AREA PLAN tailmeni u le a...ar ir-• wilt aoaaa...a -> s- tir • - 0000 ataronw.an MONS no. tsv nfv —. ,ev PalPalt So a.ar Cant alas far M is Owe One tat aMeraaam a airbataYr•a. • - 1W :010 sail 00 •0000 r--a.MI sod Staa All InDOISa Dab-�. f0r. • ae ar.r lla aaa-EMI • Psis, Cietes M x • a afA'Ra101 A'• ism alt saes 07M •7s Os • 0101Car • :sa lbos One Ma AMOS an to Walsh L.•* OM aaa m. oas Ind la MI raw, • r.• • •r r1. .Y1• poor . r \ r }r •a•Irmo 7 'feel Energy • EXHIBIT EXHIBIT 6 J Esther Gesick bject: FW: USR18-0100/PSCo/Weld County/SH 14 LAS'R-\: - O k0 From: Hice-Idler - CDOT, Gloria <gloria.hice-idler@state.co.us> Sent: Monday, June 24, 2019 9:09 AM To: Chris Gathman <cgathman@weldgov.com> Cc: Bilobran, Timothy <timothy.bilobran@state.co.us>; Allyson Mattson - CDOT <allyson.mattson@state.co.us> Subject: USR18-0100/PSCo/Weld County/SH 14 Caution: This email originated from outside of Weld County Government. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. The applicant will need to obtain the appropriate CDOT utility and access permits for construction of the utility line for accessing and crossing SH 14. Gloria Hice-Idler Rocksol Consulting (970) 381-8629 10601 W. 10th Street, Greeley, CO 80634 gloria.hice-idler@state.co.us I www.codot.Qov I www.cotrip.org iik 1 KUTAKROCK June 11, 2019 Via U.S. Mail and Email: egesick(a,weldgov.com Weld County Commissioners Attn: Esther Gesick, Clerk to the Board 1150 O Street P.O. Box 758 Greeley, CO 80631 Kutak Rock LLP 1801 California Street, Suite 3000, Denver, CO 80202-2652 office 303.297.2400 KENNETH K. SKOGG 303.297.2400 Kenneth.skogg@kutakrock.com RECEIVED JUN 1 6 2019 Weld County Attorney's 0; Re: Appeal of Weld County Planning Department Decision Case No. USR18-0100 - Public Service Company of Colorado — Section 1041 Special Review Permit Application Dear Ms. Gesick: This firm represents Fagerberg Produce, Inc., Lynn Fagerberg, Ryan Fagerberg, Keirnes Land Company, Brad Keirnes, Spencer Keirnes, Arlen Anderson, Vic Leffler & Sons, Inc., Leffler Brothers, LLC, Russell Leffler, Ted and Sheri Carlson, and Lynn Otteson (collectively referred to herein as "Landowners"). Pursuant to Weld County Code §§ 21-1-70 and 2-4-10, this letter serves as the Landowners' appeal of the Weld County Department of Planning Service's (the "Planning Department") decision to accept and proceed with Public Service Company of Colorado's ("PSCo") Amended Section 1041 Application ("Amended Application") filed under the Planning Department's Case No. USR18-0100, concerning PSCo's Northern Colorado Area Plan Project ("Project"). BACKGROUND FACTS PSCo filed an initial Section 1041 Permit application in August of 2018 ("Initial Application") based on approval of PSCO's approved Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity ("CPCN") by the Colorado Public Utilities Commission ("PUC") to allow Xcel Energy to construct the Project.' That Project is defined in all of PSCo's filings with the PUC and the Initial Application as building approximately 20 miles of new 115/230 -kilovolt transmission line between the Western Area Power Authority ("WAPA") Ault Substation and a location northeast of Greeley where the new 115/230-KV transmission lines would connect to Xcel Energy's existing 115-KV line near the Cloverly Substation, with the construction of two new substations and ' Landowners question, but have not as of this writing fully analyzed, the validity of the Amended Application in light of the CPCN issued by the PUC. At the very least, it should be noted that the Project as so approved by the PUC is the entire Project and not merely a portion as PSCo seeks approval for in its Amended Application. 4812-1474-6009.1 KUTAKROCK Weld County Commissioners June 11, 2019 Page 2 improvement of two existing substation facilities. In the face of objections from referral agencies, cities and towns, the Planning Department has allowed PSCo to amend its Initial Application to eliminate more than 50% of the transmission corridor of the Project (the "Amended Application"). The Amended Application, which addresses only the Project's northernmost transmission route to and including the proposed non -terminal Graham Creek Substation location, seeks to omit from consideration by the Weld County Planning Commission ("Planning Commission") and the Weld County Board of County Commissioners ("Board of Commissioners") any of the extremely controversial, and yet crucial and necessary to the Project, southern transmission segment from the Graham Creek Substation to the Cloverly Substation. Weld County Code § 21-2-200(B) provides that a section 1041 application "shall not be accepted or processed until it is complete." By the enclosed letter dated April 26, 2019 with an accompanying Affidavit by Thomas Ghidossi of Exponential Engineering Company addressed to the Planning Department, the Landowners raised a procedural objection to PSCo's Amended Application, objecting to the application as being substantially incomplete. The Landowners argued that the Amended Application should not be accepted or further processed by the Planning Department, but rather that PSCo should be required to submit a new Section 1041 Permit Application that meets all of the requirements of the Weld County Code and Comprehensive Plan and presents the entirety of the Project. By email dated May 24, 2019, Chris Gathman, Planner III with the Planning Department, responded stating that the Landowners' "comments will be entered into the record," but after consulting with the County Attorney's Office, the Planning Department will continue to process PSCo's Amended Application. PSCo's late "amendment" to the Initial Application is a transparent attempt to conceal from the Planning Commission and Board of Commissioners all of the adverse impacts presented by the entire Project. By presenting only a portion of the Project for consideration, the Amended Application is incomplete and wholly deficient under Weld County's requirements. Considering the interdependent siting relationship between the transmission routes and substation locations as established within the power transmission industry (see Affidavit), and the fact that the Project is not functional without the critical southern transmission line, it is inconceivable how the Planning Department, Planning Commission or Board of Commissioners can reasonably evaluate whether only a non-functional subcomponent of the Project (as presented in the Amended Application) meets the County's 1041 criteria. We submit that it is in the best interests of Weld County and its residents, including in particular, the Town of Eaton and the aforementioned Landowners, for the Planning Commission and the Board of Commissioners to evaluate the entire Project as a whole in a single application (as presented in the Initial Application) so all of the actual and potential impacts of the proposed Project can be considered and the Planning Commission and Board of Commissioners can make a fully informed, rather than only partially informed, decision. PSCo claims that it requested continuances of public hearings relating to the Project and reduced the scope of its Initial Application under the auspices of (i) needing time to expand its siting study area to examine additional possible transmission routes from the new Graham Creek Substation to the Cloverly Substation, and (ii) being committed to working with landowners and 4812-1474-6009.1 KUTAKROCK Weld County Commissioners June 11, 2019 Page 3 community members to find a viable solution. Instead, having apparently recognized the flaws in its initial siting study, PSCo filed its Amended Application that effectively relies on the same flawed siting study, amended solely to eliminate the southern transmission routing. The Amended Application portends a new siting study for the southern transmission corridor. Such a position raises far more questions than it answers. Does PSCo and its consultant intend to change the criteria upon which it selected its "preferred alignment"? If not, why would the analysis result in a different result? Is it because they misapplied their criteria? If so, does that not call into question the application of such criteria in siting the portion of the Project that is included in the Amended Application? If such criteria is in fact going to be modified, why shouldn't such modifications also be applied to the portion of the Project included in the Amended Application? The mere assertion that re -assessment of the siting of the southern transmission line route calls into question the legitimacy and thoroughness of its original Siting Study and Revised Siting Study and what PSCo would do differently, resulting in new or different conclusions than those already reached in its previous studies. Stated as assertions rather than questions, if PSCo does not apply new criteria to its proposed new and expanded siting study analysis, one can reasonably expect that PSCo will reach the same conclusions concerning its preferred transmission route between the new Graham Creek Substation and the Cloverly Substation. On the other hand, if PSCo considers new criteria in its expanded siting study, it calls into doubt the legitimacy of the conclusions drawn for the Amended Application that were based on the prior studies that relied on the no longer adequate criteria. Whether by design or otherwise (and Landowners submit it is by design), the unmistakable effect of piecemeal applications for the Project is that review and approval of one subcomponent of the Project, namely, its proposed location for the non -terminal Graham Creek Substation, allows PSCo to postpone (and thus eliminate) consideration of controversial aspects of its Project while avoiding scrutiny and fair and full objective evaluation of the interdependent locational considerations of and between substations and transmission routes. Moreover, if the Amended Application is approved, PSCo will be poised to rely on the approval of the location of the Graham Creek Substation to support the location of transmission lines west and south of Eaton through some of the most prime agricultural land in Weld County and in the path of current and future growth and development to the west between Eaton and the City of Fort Collins and south between Eaton and the City of Greeley. Once that substation siting is approved, all other alternative substation locations and transmission corridors will be eliminated for further consideration going south to the Cloverly Substation. Effectively, PSCo will have eliminated from the Planning Commission's and the Board of Commissioners' consideration any of these other alternatives because the location of the Graham Creek Substation renders them less appropriate or desirable, if not location -wise and economically infeasible. CONCLUSION Accordingly, the Landowners respectfully submit that the Planning Department staff's decision to accept and proceed with processing PSCo's Amended Application constitutes an error in discretion by the Planning Department and is not in the best interest of Weld County or its 4812-1474-6009.1 KUTAKROCK Weld County Commissioners June 11, 2019 Page 4 residents. As such, the Landowners respectfully request that the Board of Commissioners overturn the Planning Department's decision to accept and proceed with PSCo's Amended Application and direct the Planning Department to require PSCo to present the entirety of its Project — at full build -out — in a single, complete Section 1041 application so all can see the true impacts of the entire Project for the sake of making fully informed decisions and to avoid making decisions based on partial information and a land use application rendered incomplete through substantial amendment. Sincerely, KUTAK ROCK LLP Ke eth K. Skogg Enclosure cc: Weld County Department of Planning Services Bruce Barker, Weld County Attorney Bob Choate, Assistant Weld County Attorney Landowners 4812-1474-6009.1 KUTAKROCK Kutak Rock LLP 1801 California Street, Suite 3000, Denver, CO 80202-2652 office 303.297.2400 April 26, 2019 Via Email: cgathman(u,weldgov.com Weld County Planning Department Attn: Chris Gathman 1555 N. 17th Avenue Greeley, CO 80613 KENNETH K. SKOGG 303.297.2400 Kenneth.skogg©kutakrock.com Re: Public Service Company of Colorado Special Review Permit Application Case No. USR18-0100 Dear Mr. Gathman: This letter is written on behalf Fagerberg Produce, Inc., Lynn Fagerberg, Ryan Fagerberg, Keirnes Land Company, Brad Keirnes, Spencer Keirnes, Arlen Anderson, Vic Leffler & Sons, Inc., Leffler Brothers, LLC, Russell Leffler, Ted and Sheri Carlson, and Lynn Otteson (collectively referred to herein as "Landowners") in opposition to Public Service Company of Colorado's ("PSCo") Amended Section 1041 Application ("Amended Application"), concerning PSCo's Northern Colorado Area Plan Project ("Project") filed under Case No. USR18-0100. The Landowners own, or otherwise have interests in, prime agricultural farmland, residential and commercial development properties, and/or farming and other business operations located in Weld County in close proximity to the Town of Eaton that are subject to being adversely impacted by PSCo's Project. To assist them in reviewing PSCo's Project, PSCo's original Section 1041 Application ("Original Application") filed with the Weld County Department of Planning Services in August 2018; and (ii) PSCo's Amended Application, the Landowners, through counsel, have engaged the services of Exponential Engineering Company ("EEC"). An affidavit from Thomas A. Ghidossi, P.E. ("Ghidossi Affidavit"), addressing the Project and deficiencies and issues associated with PSCo's Amended Application is enclosed herewith and incorporated herein by reference. In attempting to advance its own interests, PSCo's Amended Application fails to address the Project and all of its impacts in their entirety. The Project, as approved by the Colorado Public Utilities Commission ("CPUC") contemplates a complete transmission project that is not limited to the construction of the Graham Creek Substation and a 230 kV transmission line from the existing Ault Substation to the new proposed Graham Creek Substation as described in the Amended Application. Rather, as described in PSCo's Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity ("CPCN") Application for the Project filed with, and approved by, the CPUC, the 4823-1411-1893.1 t KUTAKROCK April 26, 2019 Page 2 Project includes, among other things, "1) approximately 25 miles of new 115/230 kV -capable transmission facilities originating at the Western Area Power Administration ("WAPA") Ault Substation northwest of Greeley, Colorado and terminating northeast of Greeley at Public Service's modified Cloverly Substation, and 2) two new and one modified substations (respectively, Husky, Graham Creek, and Cloverly) which will enable the Company to retire and decommission three existing substations (Public Service Ault, Eaton, and Pleasant Valley)." The Weld County Code mandates that a 1041 "application shall not be accepted or processed unless it is complete." Weld County Code § 21-2-200(B). Through its Amended Application, PSCo seeks to omit from consideration a crucial component necessary to provide for a complete Project as approved by the CPUC - namely the transmission line section between the proposed Graham Creek Substation and the existing Cloverly Substation. The removal of the transmission line section from PSCo's Section 1041 Permit Application renders the Amended Application substantially incomplete on its face and is not in keeping with Project that was described in PSCo's CPCN Application and approved by the CPUC. (See Ghidossi Affidavit, ¶¶ 5, 7-9, 14 and 15.) PSCo's justifications for removing the Graham Creek to Cloverly transmission line section from its Amended Application are suspect at best. PSCo contends that its Amended Application allows PSCo time to expand the Graham Creek to Cloverly line siting study area to examine additional possible routes and to provide extra time to address concerns that have been expressed about PSCo's preferred Graham Creek to Cloverly transmission route. The impacts of the transmission line routes are, however, significant for this transmission -driven project and need to be considered as part of any substation location determination or Project evaluation. Once the preferred locations for the substations are defined, the transmission corridors will become significantly constrained. (See Ghidossi Affidavit, ¶¶ 9-13 and 15.) The Landowners suggest that by attempting to amend its application and limit it to portions of the Project north of proposed Graham Creek Substation site, PSCo is engaging in a "slight of hand" that is intended to preclude the Planning Commission from addressing ALL of the impacts of the Project. The impacts of the substations and all future transmissions lines associated with the Project will be long-term, lasting for decades to come. The overall Project has far reaching consequences that are not properly addressed in the Amended Application, and which cannot be fully and properly evaluated through a piece -meal approach that PSCo is now seeking to embark upon through its Amended Application. In short, PSCo's Amended Application is substantially incomplete and should not be accepted or further processed by the Department of Planning Services. Instead, the Department of Planning Services and the Planning Commission should require PSCo to start over and submit a new Section 1041 Permit Application that meets all of the requirements of Weld County Code and Comprehensive Plan and presents the entirety of the Project — at full build out — so all can see the true impacts of the Project and avoid making decisions based on partial information. Without considering the entire Project and all of its impacts in a single application, it is inconceivable how the Project can be receive proper evaluation to ensure that it is in the best interests of the citizens of Weld County. 4823-1411-1893.1 4 KUTAKROCK April 26, 2019 Page 3 Should the Amended Application be accepted and allowed to proceed, the Landowners have further substantial objections to the Amended Application and proposed siting of the Graham Creek Substation that will be submitted under cover of a separate letter. Sincerely, Ke eth . Skogg Enclosure cc: Bruce Barker, Esq. Landowners 4823-1411-1893.1 BEFORE THE DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING SERVICES OF WELD COUNTY, COLORADO RE: Public Service Company of Colorado's Special Review Amended Section 1041 Permit Application ) ) ) Case No. USR18-0100 AFFIDAVIT OF THOMAS A. GHIDOSSI, P.E. STATE OF COLORADO COUNTY OF LARIMER I, Thomas A. Ghidossi, P.E., having first been sworn upon my oath, state as follows: 1. My name is Thomas A. Ghidossi. I am a professional engineer duly licensed in the State of Colorado. I am the President and Principal Engineer with Exponential Engineering Company ("EEC"). EEC's principal place of business is located at 2950 East Harmony Road, Suite 265, Fort Collins, Colorado 80528. 2. EEC is a full -service engineering consulting firm that provides services to rural electric associations, public and investor -owned utilities, municipalities, and a variety of other organizations and individuals in the Rocky Mountain Region and throughout the country. Services that EEC provides include, but are not limited to, (i) designing and delivering new electric substations as well as substation upgrades, station plans and arrangements, and analysis. and assistance with commissioning of substations; (ii) planning, designing, managing and delivering electric transmission and distribution lines and corridors; and (iii) developing feasibility, system impact and facility studies, including stability, coordination and complete utility system analysis studies. 3. I have personally reviewed materials concerning Public Service Company of Colorado's ("PSCo") Northern Colorado Area Plan Transmission Project ("Project"), including (i) materials related to PSCo's regulatory filings with the Colorado Public Utilities Commission ("CPUC") concerning PSCo's Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity ("CPCN") Application for the Project; (ii) PSCo's Section 1041 Permit Application ("1041 Application") for the Project filed with the Weld County Department of Planning Services in August 2018; and (ii) PSCo's Amended Section 1041 Permit Application ("Amended 1041 Application") filed with the Weld County Department of Planning Services in March 2019. This Affidavit concerns deficiencies and issues associated with PSCo's Amended 1041 Application. 4814-0585-7173.1 4. In its Amended 1041 Application, PSCo notes that "the Project is part of the long- term transmission plan for northern Colorado"' and that the CPCN for the Project was granted by the CPUC on March 1, 2018. The purpose of the Project, which is "...driven by electrical transmission and the need to improve the safety and reliability of the transmission system... "2 has not changed from what was approved by the CPUC. 5. As described in PSCo's CPNC Application and as approved by the CPUC, the Project includes, among other things, "1) approximately 25 miles of new 115/230 kV -capable transmission facilities originating at the Western Area Power Administration ("WAPA") Ault Substation northwest of Greeley, Colorado and terminating northeast of Greeley at Public Service's modified Cloverly Substation, and 2) two new and one modified substations (respectively, Husky, Graham Creek, and Cloverly) which will enable the Company to retire and decommission three existing substations (Public Service Ault, Eaton, and Pleasant Valley)."3 6. In its Amended 1041 Application, PSCo also states that the "...Project also will allow for a future interconnected grid system to other planned transmission and generation facilities in the area by creating a higher voltage "backbone" transmission system."4 7. PSCo has not requested that the CPUC modify the CPCN and does not contend that there is no longer a need for the transmission connection between the Ault Substation and the Greeley area. 8. Although the Project, as described in CPCN Application and as approved by the CPUC, contemplates a complete transmission project, PSCo has submitted to the Weld County Department of Planning Services an Amended 1041 Application for the Project, removing the transmission line section between the proposed Graham Creek Substation and the existing Cloverly Substation from the application. 9. The Amended 1041 Application does not, however, provide for a complete electrical transmission project as approved by the CPUC. The transmission line between the Graham Creek and Cloverly Substations is a critical link required to make the connection between the Ault Substation and the Greeley area. PSCo states that "[tjhe 230kV-capable transmission line connecting the new Graham Creek Substation to an interconnection point near the existing Cloverly Substation has been removed... and will be submitted separately following a good faith effort by PSCo to expand the siting area and continue to identify other routes and evaluate them against the current preferred alternative."5 The final transmission line route will, however, be dictated by the location of Graham Creek and Cloverly Substations. 10. PSCo selected its preferred substation sites and then determined transmission corridors between those substations. Substation sites determine the terminals of the transmission lines and therefore the starting and ending point of any preferred corridor. Importantly, 1 Revised 1041 Permit and USR Questionnaire_190402, Notice of Application Amendment, page 1 2 Revised Appendix B_Siting Study_190329, page 2-14, paragraph 2 3 PSCo's Verified Application for Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity, page 1 a Revised 1041 Permit and USR Questionnaire_190402, page vii, paragraph 4 5 New Appendix I_Xcel Comment Response Letter Sumary_190329, page 1 2 4814-0585-7173.1 transmission lines create significantly greater impact to land use and landowners than substation sites. The overall Project siting analysis should take both substation sites and their associated potential transmission line corridors into account in total to fairly assess the complete impact of the Project on the County. 11. Approving the Amended 1041 Application will have the effect of neglecting to consider the impacts of the Graham Creek Substation to Cloverly Substation transmission route on the entire Project, even though that final transmission link is known to be required. 12. Since, according to PSCo, the original 1041 Application and study was "a thorough siting study analysis" 6, one must ask what different conclusion would be drawn by a subsequent siting study analysis for the transmission line between the Graham Creek and Cloverly Substations if the substation sites are already approved. 13. Based on PSCo's prior analysis and statements in its original 1041 Application, the resulting siting analysis could be biased toward PSCo's "preferred" alignment. Further, approval of the Amended 1041 Application will most likely constrain the transmission corridors to the west side of the Town of Eaton, regardless of PSCo's purported good faith efforts to expand the siting area and identify and evaluate alternative routes against the current preferred transmission route. 14. The incomplete Project described in the Amended 1041 Application does not improve upon the service reliability to the Eaton community or other loads to be served from Graham Creek Substation compared to the existing transmission system. In fact, building just the Husky to Graham Creek transmission line segment would result in the Graham Creek Substation being served by only a single transmission line as "...only one circuit would initially operate at 115kV." 7 Therefore, the Graham Creek Substation, and its distribution feeders and loads would be out of service for any single contingency failure of the transmission line. This outage could have significant consequences to the customers in the area since "[t]he existing PSCo Ault and Eaton Substations will be decommissioned after the new transmission line and substations are constructed and operational."8 The transmission line segment between the Graham Creek and Cloverly Substations is necessary to provide PSCo's typical level of redundancy and reliability to the Graham Creek Substation. 15. The overall Project, as approved by the CPUC, is not limited to the construction of the Graham Creek Substation and a 230 kV transmission line from the existing Ault Substation to the new proposed Graham Creek Substation as described in the Amended 1041 Application, but rather includes other components that influence the Project's overall impacts on surrounding land uses and the citizens of Weld County. Consequently, the Amended 1041 Application is incomplete as it fails to address the Project and its impacts in their entirety, in keeping with the CPCN granted by the CPUC. 16. PSCo is not changing the Project or reducing the Project's scope through the Amended 1041 Application, but rather is avoiding the inclusion of issues raised by the Town of 8 Revised 1041 Permit and USR Questionnaire_190402, page vii, paragraph 5 7 Revised 1041 Permit and USR Questionnaire_190402, page 2 8 Revised 1041 Permit and USR Questionnaire_190402, page vii, paragraph 2 3 4814-0585-7173.1 Eaton and other concerned parties in the overall impacts of the Project. This approach will not adequately consider alternative substation locations east of the Town of Eaton and corresponding transmission routes between the Husky and Cloverly Substations that are wholly on the east side of Ault and Eaton. Dated: April VD , 2019 a(7cMclio Thomas A. Ghidossi, P.E. The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this Zip day of April, 2019, by Thomas A. Ghidossi. TINA S KNOX Notary Public State of Colorado Notary ID # 20194002442 My Commission Expires 01-17-2023 4814-0585-7173.1 My Commission Expires: % ' / 7 • .023 4 Esther Gesick im: To: Cc: Subject: Sara Irby <sarairby@fbgpc.com> Tuesday, June 25, 2019 3:59 PM Bruce Barker; Esther Gesick Bob Choate; 'dixieinco@gmail.com'; keith@amenfarmingfeeding.com; Chris Gathman; Whitney Phillips RE: USR 18-0100- Letter in Support of Appeal of Planning Department Decision Caution: This email originated from outside of Weld County Government. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Mr. Barker: I'm fine with not including the May 21, 2019 letter, as I agree it addresses issues for the July 24th hearing. The primary purpose of the letter dated today was to indicate that Mr. Amen and Ms. Meisner support the relief requested in the Appeal submitted by Mr. Skogg on behalf of his clients, and, that, Mr. Amen and Ms. Meisner are aggrieved to the point that this Project will impact their properties, but the full impact is unknown because the Amended Application was incomplete in that, among other things, it did not evaluate and analyze the entire Project. Thank you. Sara °---a J.L. Irby her, Brown, Bartlett & Gunn, P.C. 1319 E. Prospect Rd. Fort Collins, CO 80525 (970)407-9000 ext. 216 (970)449-4716 (direct) sarairby@fbgpc.com ateri brim The information contained in or attached to this E-MAIL message is intended only for the CONFIDENTIAL use of the individual(s) named above. If you are not the named recipient or an agent responsible for delivering it to the named recipient, you are hereby notified that you have received this e-mail message and any attachments in error and that review, dissemination, distribution or copying of this e-mail message and any attachments is prohibited. Erroneous of this communication does not constitute waiver of any applicable privilege. If you have received this e-mail message and any attachments in error, please notify the sender immediately by telephone or e-mail and then delete the e- mail message and any attachments from your computer and/or network. Thank you. 1 From: Bruce Barker [mailto:bbarker@weldgov.com] Sent: Tuesday, June 25, 2019 3:46 PM To: Esther Gesick; Sara Irby Cc: Bob Choate; 'dixieinco@gmail.com'; keith@amenfarmingfeeding.com; Chris Gathman; Whitney Phillips Subject: RE: USR 18-0100- Letter in Support of Appeal of Planning Department Decision Because these letters deal with the facts and criteria which will be considered by the Board at the hearing on USR 18- 0100, which will take place on July 24`h, my advice to the Board will be to consider them in that hearing rather than in the appeal hearing tomorrow. The question for tomorrow is whether or not Mr. Amen is "aggrieved" by the decision of the Planning Director in allowing the case to progress forward to hearings before the Planning Commission and the Board of County Commissioners. The letters go well beyond an explanation why Mr. Amen is "aggrieved" by such decision. Rather, they go to the heart of USR 18-0100 which is outside the scope of the appeal hearing. Sec. 21-1-70. - Duties of Board of County Commissioners. Unless otherwise specifically provided for, it shall be the duty of the Board of County Commissioners to perform all of the functions set forth in this Article, and those specified in Articles II and III of this Chapter 21. The Board of County Commissioners shall also be generally empowered to hear appeals from any person aggrieved by any decision of the Planning Director made in the course of administering these Section 1041 Regulations. Any such appeal shall follow the appeals procedure set forth in Section 2-4-10 of this Code. Bruce T. Barker, Esq. Weld County Attorney P.O. Box 758 1150 "O" Street Greeley, CO 80632 (970) 356-4000, Ext. 4390 Fax: (970) 352-0242 Confidentiality Notice: This electronic transmission and any attached documents or other writings are intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is attorney privileged and confidential, or otherwise protected from disclosure. If you have received this communication in error, please immediately notify sender by return e-mail and destroy the communication. Any disclosure, copying, distribution or the taking of any action concerning the contents of this communication or any attachments by anyone other than the named recipient is strictly prohibited. From: Esther Gesick Sent: Tuesday, June 25, 2019 2:09 PM To: Sara Irby <sarairby@fbgpc.com> Cc: Bruce Barker <bbarker@weldgov.com>; Bob Choate <bchoate@weldgov.com>; 'dixieinco@gmail.com' <dixieinco@gmail.com>; keith@amenfarmingfeeding.com; Chris Gathman <cgathman@weldgov.com>; Whitney Phillips <WhitneyPhillips@fbgpc.com> Subject: RE: USR 18-0100- Letter in Support of Appeal of Planning Department Decision Hello Sara, 2 The attachments have been received and will be included in the file as Exhibits for the Commissioners to review. Thank you, ther E. Gesick Clerk to the Board 1150 O Street/P.O. Box 758/Greeley, CO 80632 tel: (970) 400-4226 Confidentiality Notice: This electronic transmission and any attached documents or other writings are intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged, confidential or otherwise protected from disclosure. If you have received this communication in error, please immediately notify sender by return e-mail and destroy the communication. Any disclosure, copying, distribution or the taking of any action concerning the contents of this communication or any attachments by anyone other than the named recipient is strictly prohibited. From: Sara Irby <sarairby@fbgpc.com> Sent: Tuesday, June 25, 2019 2:02 PM To: Esther Gesick <egesick@weldgov.com> Cc: Bruce Barker <bbarker@weldgov.com>; Bob Choate <bchoate@weldgov.com>; 'dixieinco@gmail.com' <dixieinco@gmail.com>; keith@amenfarmingfeeding.com; Chris Gathman <cgathman@weldgov.com>; Whitney Phillips <WhitneyPhillips@fbgpc.com> Subject: USR 18-0100- Letter in Support of Appeal of Planning Department Decision Caution: This email originated from outside of Weld County Government Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the nder and know the content is safe. Ms. Gesick: Attached please find a letter on behalf of my clients, Mr. Keith Amen and Ms. Dixie Meisner, in support of the Appeal filed by attorney Kenneth Skogg on behalf of his clients regarding the Planning Department's decision to accept and process Public Service Company's Amended 1041 Application in Case No. USR18-0100. This appeal is set for a hearing tomorrow, but Mr. Amen and Ms. Meisner will not be in attendance. For ease of access, I am also attaching a copy of Mr. Amen's comments letter dated May 21, 2019, which is already a part of the record in this matter. Thank you. Should you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. Regards, Sara Sara J.L. Irby Fischer, Brown, Bartlett & Gunn, P.C. 1319 E. Prospect Rd. Fort Collins, CO 80525 (970)407-9000 ext. 216 f°' 0)449-4716 (direct) lirbyfbgpc.com 3 FISCHER„ BROWN, 'DAR -11F Y ( GUNN, PC MARGARET A. (Meg) BROWN DANIEL K. BROWN BRENT A. BARTLETT LISA A. LARSEN SARA J.L. IRBY DONALD E. FRICK TODD W. ROGERS Weld County Commissioners Attn: Esther Gesick, Clerk of the Board 1150 O Street P.O. Box 758 Greeley, CO 80631 111, sIglisaits ATTORNEYS AT LAW 1 319 East Prospect Road Fort Collins, CO 80525 June 25, 2019 WARD H. FISCHER (1929-1996) WILLIAM H. BROWN (Of Counsel) WILLIAM C. GUNN (Of Counsel) WILLIAM R. FISCHER (Of Counsel) SENT VIA EMAIL Phone: 970.407.9000 Fax: 970.407.1055 Website: www.fbbglaw.com RE: Support of Appeal of Weld County Planning Department Decision in Case No. URS 18-0100 - PSCo Section 1041 Special Review Permit Application Dear Ms. Gesick: Please be advised that our firm, Fischer, Brown, Bartlett & Gunn, P.C., represents Mr. Keith Amen, a third -generation fanner who owns agricultural land located in the NW % of Section 3, Township 7 North, Range 66 West of the 6th P.M. ("Amen Property"), and Ms. Dixie Meisner, who owns land located directly south of the Amen Property in the SW '/ of Section 3, Township 7 North, Range 66 West of the 6th P.M. This letter is to notify the Weld County Board of Commissioners that both Mr. Amen and Ms. Meisner support the Appeal of the Planning Department's Decision to accept and proceed with the Public Service Company's Amended Application in USR 18-0100, which said Appeal was submitted on June 11, 2019 by Mr. Kenneth Skogg on behalf of his clients, Fagerberg Produce, Inc., Lynn Fagerberg, Ryan Fagerberg, Keirnes Land Company, Brad Keirnes, Spencer Keirnes, Arlen Anderson, Vic Leffler & Sons, Inc., Leffler Brothers, LLC, Russell Leffler, Ted and Sheri Carlson, and Lynn Otteson (the "Landowners"). Mr. Amen's and Ms. Meisner's complete comments letter dated May 21, 2019 is part of the record and is attached hereto for the Board's reference. Both Mr. Amen and Ms. Meisner agree with the Landowners that the Amended Application fails to address all of the impacts of PSCo's entire Northern Colorado Area Plan Project (the "Project"), and, therefore, the Amended Application is incomplete and should not have been accepted or processed. See Weld County Code § 21-2-200(B)("An application shall not be accepted or processed unless it is complete."). In fact, Mr. Amen and Ms. Meisner see the omission of the section of the transmission line from the Graham Creek Substation to the Cloverly Substation in the Amended Application as an attempt by PSCo to undermine and skirt Weld County's authority over land use by obscuring the much larger impact on Weld County's citizens of PSCo's ultimate preferred route for the entire 21 -mile transmission line. Accordingly, Mr. Amen and Ms. Meisner join in the Landowners' request that PSCo be required to submit a new 1041 application that considers and fully analyzes all of the impacts of the entire Project on the County and its citizens, including the section from the Graham Creek Substation and Cloverly Substation. Without such evaluation and analysis, the Amended Application is incomplete, and, pursuant to the Weld County Code, should not have been accepted or processed. Thank you for the opportunity to inform the Board of Mr. Amen's and Ms. Meisner's support of the Landowners' Appeal. Sincerely, Sara J.L. Irby cc: Keith Amen Dixie Meisner Bruce Barker, Weld County Attorney Bob Choate, Assistant Weld County Attorney Weld County Planning Department FISCHER, BROWN, BARTLETT & GUNN, PC MARGARET A. (Meg) BROWN DANIEL K. BROWN BRENT A. BARTLETT LISA A. LARSEN SARA J.L. IRBY DONALD E. FRICK TODD W. ROGERS Weld County Planning Department Attn: Chris Gathman 1555 N. 17th Avenue Greeley, CO 80631 RE: ATTORNEYS AT LAW 1319 East Prospect Road Fort Collins. CO 80525 May 21, 2019 WARD H. FISCHER (1929-1996) WILLIAM H. BROWN (Of Counsel) WILLIAM C. GUNN (Of Counsel) WILLIAM R. FISCHER (Of Counsel) Phone: 970.407.9000 Fax: 970.407.1055 Website: www.fbbglaw.com SENT VIA EMAIL AND/OR REGULAR MAIL Comments on behalf of Keith Amen, agricultural landowner Application of Public Service of Colorado Company Case No. USR 18-0100 Dear Mr. Gathman, Please be advised that our firm, Fischer, Brown, Bartlett & Gunn, P.C., represents Mr. Keith Amen, a third -generation fanner who owns agricultural land located in the NW '/ of Section 3, Township 7 North, Range 66 West of the 6`h P.M. ("Amen Property"), and who also farms land owned by Dixie Meisner, located directly south of the Amen Property in the SW 'A of Section 3, Township 7 North, Range 66 West of the 6`h P.M. This letter is in response to Public Service Company of Colorado's ("PSCo") Section 1041 Application filed under USR 18-0100 ("Application"), as amended in April under the same record number ("Amended Application"). The Application was originally for construction of an approximately 21 -mile 230-KV transmission line in Weld County. The Amended Application proposes to reduce the scope of the project by only installing the portion of the transmission line between the WAPA Ault Substation and the Graham Creek Substation. On the surface, PSCo is now asking the Board of County Commissioners to approve a shorter transmission line, which if taken at face value, impacts less land. However, it is inevitable, and, abundantly clear, that PSCo will use any approval to bolster its position to extend the transmission line to its originally proposed 21 miles in the near future. Accordingly, Mr. Amen sees the Amended Application as an attempt by PSCo to undermine and skirt Weld County's authority over land use by obscuring the much larger impact of PSCo's ultimate preferred route from the Graham Substation to Cloverly Substation. As proposed, a portion of the transmission line from the WAPA Ault substation to the Husky substation will cut through the southern half of the Amen Property and the northern half of Ms. Meisner's property, and, in turn, will severely debilitate Mr. Amen's farming and irrigation operations. Accordingly, Mr. Amen objects to PSCo's proposed Preferred Transmission Line Route for the reasons set forth below. Ms. Meisner shares Mr. Amen's concerns and joins in the filing of this letter, as set forth in the attached affidavit. Although Mr. Amen was hopeful that delays to the hearing schedules would mean that PSCo is taking a closer look at impacts to agricultural land and operations, the Amended Application is no different in that regard than the original, and Mr. Amen's and Ms. Meisner's land will be impacted in the same ways as they originally feared. Thus, those delays have done nothing more than drag out the uncertainty of the future of Mr. Amen's farming operation while he continues to incur costs and fees to protect their land. A. PSCo's Failure to Sufficiently Consider Impacts to Agriculture Approval of PSCO's project as proposed would directly contradict key requirements in the Weld County Code and Weld County's dedication to its Right to Farm policy. In its growth and land -use plan, the County not only recognizes the importance of its agricultural heritage, but also agriculture's critical role in the County's economy. See Chapter 22 of the Weld County Code, the Comprehensive Plan. Specifically, the Right to Farm policy highlights that "[t]he intent of the agricultural goals in the Comprehensive Plan is to support all forms of the agricultural industry and, at the same time, to protect the rights of the private property owners to convert their agricultural lands to other appropriate land uses." Because of the County's reliance upon and commitment to its agricultural community, Chapter 21 of the Weld County Code mandates that PSCo's Application be approved only if certain criteria are met, including in part that the project: (3) is compatible with and represents the best interests of the people of the County and represents a fair and reasonable utilization of resources in the impact area ...; (5) [t]he nature and location or expansion of the facility complies with all applicable provisions of the master plan of this County ... ; and (18) [t]he benefits of the proposed developments outweigh the losses of any natural resources or reduction of productivity of agricultural lands as a result of the proposed development... . 21-3-340(A)(3)(5) and (18)(Emphasis added). Even in its Amended Application, PSCo still fails to provide any in-depth analysis of the impacts to agricultural land, and, instead, includes "Table 2 - Compliance with Weld County Comprehensive Plan Goals and Policies," that makes generalized, unsubstantiated conclusions. See Amended Permit Application at 35-36. Rather than concentrate information on how the transmission line is compatible with the agricultural community and the continuation of those operations, PSCo's discussion focuses heavily on the notion that the project will "provide improved electrical capacity and reliability for development" Id. (Emphasis added). Instead of coordinating with landowners prior to submitting the Application, PSCo simply repeats that it "will work with affected landowners to reduce effects in agricultural uses," — a promise PSCo has failed to keep in Mr. Amen's case. In fact, Mr. Amen has reached out to PSCo's representatives on more than one occasion to voice his substantial concerns, and, to date, PSCo has failed to directly contact Mr. Amen concerning the proposed installation of the Transmission Line, towers, and other structures on the Amen Property. PSCo's perfunctory treatment of impacts to agricultural land, along with its failure to meaningfully consult Mr. Amen and other landowners, not only shows the lack of consideration PSCo has given to the agricultural community, but also goes against the County Code's requirements that the project be "compatible with and representative of the best interests of the people of the County" and that "[tNhe benefits of the proposed developments outweigh the losses of any natural resources or reduction of productivity of agricultural lands as a result of the proposed development." 21-3-340(A)(3)(5) and (18). Had PSCo reasonably coordinated with landowners/farmers prior to submitting its Application, it would have been apparent that the Preferred Route creates more burdens than on the agricultural community than its siting studies indicate. Therefore, the County should not approve PSCo's Application, and, instead, should require PSCo to resubmit its Application once it can show with substantial evidence that it meets all of the County's Code and Comprehensive Plan requirements. B. Impact on Mr. Amen's Irrigation Practices and Crops Besides PSCo falling short on meeting the requirements outlined in the County Code and Comprehensive Plan, the impacts to Mr. Amen's property, and some of the most productive farmland in Weld County, is far more harmful than PSCo has portrayed. PSCo's Application states that it has worked to "assure that only a minor, localized effect would occur" and that "[w]here possible, the transmission line was sited along the edge of cultivated areas ... in order to minimize effects on cultivation, particularly in areas irrigated with center pivot." Amended Application at 21. They go on to mistakenly conclude that "Agricultural activities can continue within the transmission line ROW and only a small amount of land would be taken out of production as a result of Project construction and operation." Id. Based on these statements alone, PSCo appears to be completely ignorant of — or indifferent to — how the transmission lines, towers and other infrastructure would actually impact irrigation operations and productivity. Further, in its Siting Study (Revised Appendix B to the Amended Application), PSCo again demonstrates its ignorance on how the Project would impact agriculture. For instance, Table 4-3, labeled "WAPA Ault Substation to Husky Substation Route Evaluation Results," arbitrarily states that the PSCo's Preferred Route would potentially impact zero "pivot irrigation systems," although Mr. Amen's pivot irrigation system exists on that route and would certainly be impacted. Revised Siting Study at 4-15. And, in its Amended Permit Application, PSCo depicts in Figure 5 "[t]ypical examples of how PSCo will work to avoid conflicts" with irrigation pivot circles. Id. at 22-23. However, those images depict the exact opposite by showing transmission lines cutting into irrigation circles in ways that, in Mr. Amen's case, would undoubtedly disable his guided pivot irrigation system — a fact clearly not taken into account by PSCo. Moreover, in Table 3-1 to the Revised Siting Study, PSCo lists incorrect information on the types of crops grown in the area - based solely on 2016 USDA data - further showcasing its obvious lack of effort to gain an understanding of the agricultural community. Id. at 3-24. In Mr. Amen's case, regardless of whether transmission structures are placed along the edge of his cultivated area or not, as long as they are placed on his property, they will disable his pivot irrigation system and other irrigation structures. Such infrastructure includes without limitation 1) underground overflow pipelines and underground drainage pipelines, which exist within the path of the proposed transmission line, and 2) a center pivot system that is run by an underground guidance system that runs the entire perimeter of his property. Without expensive and extensive modifications, this irrigation system would be completely incapacitated, or, worse, permanently unusable, if the Preferred Transmission Line Route is approved. Moreover, the drainage lines located in the southern portion of the Amen Property drain excess water from his land, and, in turn, enable Mr. Amen to have greater production from these acres. With regard to Ms. Meisner's property, the Preferred Route would impact underground irrigation supply pipelines and the ability to maintain the pivot supply pond located thereon. Simply put, Mr. Amen risks losing the use of his entire irrigation system, and, in turn, his ability to grow and produce any crops on the Amen Property, if the County accepts the Preferred Transmission Line Route — a reality that would be apparent to PSCo had it conducted a more thorough inquiry into the impacts on agricultural operations. Additionally, the presence of high -voltage overhead lines will have impacts far beyond those that PSCo has presented in its Application. Specifically, high -voltage power lines and substations may cause interference with GPS signals that are essential to the operation of precision agriculture technology, including GPS-based guidance systems for all types of equipment. In Mr. Amen's case, he stands to lose the functionality of not only his own AutoTrac-guided equipment, but also that of equipment used by contractors on his crops after he plants them. PSCo has given no consideration whatsoever to the impact that the high -voltage power lines will have on those GPS-guided systems, nor have they taken into consideration the obvious impact they will have on airplane and helicopter spraying operations and the effectiveness of the same. Lastly, despite PSCo's assertion that the project will promote development, Mr. Amen's ability and right under the Code to "convert [his] agricultural lands to other appropriate land uses," will be significantly lessened if the Preferred Transmission Line Route is approved. An approval by the County to accept PSCo's Preferred Transmission Route is an approval by the County to threaten Mr. Amen's and other farmers' livelihood, not to mention their significant contribution to the County's economy. Accordingly, the County should deny PSCo's Application. C. Alternatives. Notwithstanding the foregoing, Mr. Amen recognizes that, as Weld County grows, there will be a greater need for utility services. But such needs can be addressed in congruence with current agricultural practices, as long as Weld County officials stand behind the County Code and Right to Farm policy by holding project proponents to a high standard for collaborative and creative solutions. For instance, the County should require PSCo to provide more support for not utilizing existing utility easements to avoid creating yet another footprint across primary agricultural property in Weld County. Additionally, PSCo should provide additional reasoning and factual support on why it refuses to install the transmission line and towers within the road right-of-way, where impacts to private property could be avoided. Regardless of which route is selected, PSCo is required to work closely with landowners to determine a route that would work for the agricultural community as a whole, which it has not done. Mr. Amen and Ms. Meisner ask that the County not reward PSCo for simply picking the simplest route and hoping to buy off landowners. D. Conclusion. PSCo's Preferred Transmission Route bisects and threatens some of the most productive irrigated farmland in Weld County, including Mr. Amen's property. Therefore, for the reasons set forth herein, Mr. Amen respectfully requests that the Planning Commission recognize PSCo's blatant disregard for Weld County's agricultural community by recommending that the Board of County Commissioners deny PSCo's Application. In addition to the comments provided in this letter, Mr. Amen also supports the April 26, 2019, letter provided by attorney Ken Skogg on behalf of several agricultural landowners. In particular, Mr. Amen, as indicated above, shares their concerns that PSCo's Amended Application is merely an attempt to break one large project into two parts - an attempt that goes directly against the Weld County Code. STATE OF COLORADO ) �. )ss. COUNTY OF J Q P-- 0 ) AFFIDAVIT Affiant, being first sworn upon oath, and being over the age of 18 years, hereby states and affirms the following: 1. I reside at 10270 West 74th Place, in Arvada, Colorado 80005. 2. I own agricultural property in Weld County, Colorado, located in the SW '/o of Section 3, Township 7 North, Range 66 West of the 6th P.M. (the "Meisner Property"). 3. My property is located directly south of property owned and farmed by Mr. Keith Amen, located in the NW 1 of Section 3, Township 7 North, Range 66 West of the 6th P.M. 4. Mr. Amen has farmed the Meisner Property for approximately 15 years, and he understands the impact the installation of infrastructure, utilities or other facilities would have on his farming operations, not to mention the damage it could cause to my property. 5. I have read Mr. Amen's letter addressed to Mr. Chris Gathman at the Weld County Planning Commission, titled "Comments on behalf of Keith Amen, agricultural landowner, Application of Public Service of Colorado Company, Case No. USR 18-0100," (the "Amen Letter"), attached hereto as Attachment A. 6. I understand the statements and assertions in the Amen Letter and hereby affirm and fully join Mr. Amen in the concerns set forth in his letter. FURTHER THE AFFIANT SAYETH NAUGHT. STATE OF COLORADO ) COUNTY OF 5ef-s0n ) The foregoing Affidavit was subscribed and sworn to before me this day of 3a rl LAAr M 2019, by Dixie Joyce Meisner. Witness my hand and official seal. My Commission Expires: 0 3/04 / 1 1 Notary Public ANGELA R WALLING NOTARY PUBUC STATE OF COLORADO NOTARY ID 20174009861 MY COMMISSION EXPIRES 03/06/2021 Xcel Energy July 17, 2019 Weld County Board of County Commissioners Weld County Administration Building 1150O Street Greeley, CO 80631 Siting and Land Rights 1800 Larimer, Suite 400 Denver, CO 80202 Re: Case No. USR18-0100 Northern Colorado Area Plan — WAPA Ault Substation to Graham Creek Substation — Section 1041 Special Review Application Dear Commission: Public Service Company of Colorado (PSCo) respectfully requests the Weld County Board of County Commissioners (BOCC) allow PSCo to withdraw the Amended Application for Case USR 18-0100 — Northern Colorado Area Plan — WAPA Ault Substation to Graham Creek Substation — Section 1041 Special Review Application. PSCo is making this request to allow for additional public and stakeholder outreach on the overall project and to review additional transmission line route and substation site alternatives. PSCo will be in attendance at the July 24, 2019 BOCC public hearing to answer any questions on this request. Thank you and please let me know if you have any questions. I can be reached at (303) 571-7089 or larry.claxton@xcelenergy.com. Sincerely, Larry K. Claxton, Jr. Principal Agent, Siting and Land Rights Public Service Company of Colorado KUTAK ROCK Kutak Rock LLP 1801 California Street, Suite 3000, Denver, CO 80202-2652 office 303.297.2400 DANA B. BAGGS 303.297.2400 dana.baggs@kutakrock.com July 23, 2019 Via U.S. Mail and Email: egesick(aweldgov.com Board of Weld County Commissioners c/o Esther Gesick, Clerk to the Board 1 150 O Street Greeley, CO 80631 Re: Docket # 2019-04, Public Service Company of Colorado Special Review Permit Application (USR18-0100) Dear Commissioners: Kutak Rock LLP represents Fagerberg Produce, Inc., Lynn Fagerberg, Ryan Fagerberg, Keirnes Land Company, Brad Keirnes, Spencer Keirnes, Arlen Anderson, Vic Leffler & Sons, Inc., Leffler Brothers, LLC, Russell Leffler, Ted and Sheri Carlson, and Lynn Otteson (collectively referred to herein as "Landowners"). This letter is being submitted on the Landowners' behalf for your consideration in conjunction with the public hearing that is scheduled for tomorrow July 24, 2019 on Public Service Company of Colorado's ("PSCo") Amended Section 1041 Application ("Amended Application"), concerning PSCo's Northern Colorado Area Plan Project ("Project") filed under Weld County Planning Department Case No. USR 18-0100. The Landowners own, or otherwise have interests in, prime agricultural farmland, residential and commercial development properties, and/or farming and other business operations located in Weld County in close proximity to the Town of Eaton that are subject to being adversely impacted by PSCo's Project. The Landowner's previously submitted procedural and substantive objections to the Weld County Department of Planning Services ("Planning Department") concerning PSCo's Amended Application. In short the Landowners have objected to PSCo's Amended Application as being substantially incomplete and wholly deficient in that it fails to address the entire Project and all of its impacts in a single application. It is the Landowners' understanding that PSCo has submitted a written request to you to allow PSCo to withdrawal its Amended Application. The Landowners fully support PSCo's request to withdraw its Amended Application. Additionally, the Landowners and are willing to assist PSCo in conducting a new and proper siting study aimed at identifying an alternate combined transmission route and substation locations for the Project and the submission of a new, complete and proper application for the entire Project that the Landowners can and will support in the in the future. Sincerely, KUTAK ROCK LLP �azo a ter Dana B. Baggs cc: Landowners 4822-8705-9101.1 Hello