HomeMy WebLinkAbout2.0 BOCC Staff Report 05.16.2005REQUEST
APPLICANT
REPRESENTATIVE
LOCATION
SITE
ACCESS
ZONING
SURROUNDING ZONING
BOCC 0st16t05
FJ
Special Use Permit for a 10-inch Gas pipeline
Garfield County Board of County Commissioners
Wagon Wheel Consulting for Williams production
RMT
County "Anvil Points" Landfill located north of I-70
and east of Rulison on CR 246
259 acres
County Road 246
Resource Lands (Gentle Slopes & Lower Valley
Floor)
RL and OS (BLM)
PROJECT INFORMATION AND STAFF COMMENTS
GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSAL
Garfield County (the County) is the owner of the subject property located north of I-70 and east
of Rulison on County Road-246 which is where the Garfield County Landfill is located which is
also referred to as the Anvil Points Landfill (the Property). The Property is located 7 miles west
of Rifle and 1 mile north of the Colorado River in an area known as Sharrard Park and is situated
at the base of the Roan Cliffs. Williams Production RMT (Williams) has requested the County
grant them permission to install and bury a 10-inch natural gas pipeline (Pipeline) across the
Froperty. Total length of the pipeline is 6,783 ffitar feet Glniles) and resulting site disturbance
will comprise approximately 16 acres.
The pipeline, traveling in a northeast to southwest direction, will be used to gather natural gas
from eiisting and future gas wells and deliver the gas to an existing 6-inch pipeline, then to an
existing Wiliiams .o*pr.iror station which will compress the gas to send it through transmission
lines to be processea anA sent to market. Williams proposes to install the Pipeline in three phases.
phase I inciudes clearing and ditching the route; Phase II includes welding and installation of the
pipe; and phase III includes reclamation and reseeding of the disturbed surface. Williams expects
io complete the project in three weeks using a work schedule of 7:00 AM to 5:00 PM, Monday
through Saturday.
I BACKGROUND
As you will recall, on April 18, 2005, Staff brought this matter to your attention in order that you
take action on three rp.-ifi. topics related to the requested Special Use Permit. These issues are
briefly outlined here again for your reference.
1) Rieht-Of-Way Request
Williams has requast"d G-fi"Id County grant a permit for a (50-foot temporary and 3o-foot
permanent) right-of-way across the County Landfill for the installation of a lO-inch natural
gas pipetine. tt " Planning Staff met with the Applicant and County Road and Bridge and
Landfill Staff to determine if the proposed route would impact any cuffent or future planned
activities at the Landfill. And as a result, the Road and Bridge and Landfill Staff have
determined that the route will not affect the existing or planned operations at the Landfill so
long as certain conditions are met.
BOCC Response: The Board indicated they were wilting to grant a permit which
would be diicussed in more detail as part of the Special Use Permit discussion.
2; Rezonins of the Landfill ProPerty
Presently, tni froperty is zoned Open Space which was the zoning on the parcel when it was
owned Uy tfre Bureau of Land Management (BLM). Once the transfer of the property to the
County occurred, the property remained zoned Open Space. Prior to the purchase of the
property by the County, the County obtained a Special Use Permit for a Landfill. However,
on.i tfr" ffansfer happened, the County should have more appropriately rezoned the property
to be consistent with the surrounding zoning of Resource Lands (RL) because Open Space
zoning is a designation reserved only for federally or state owned lands. In addition, a landfill
is also a Special Use in the RL zone district.
Additionally, a "pipeline" or "material handling of natural resources" is not included as a
permitted uie in lund, zoned Open Space. In order for a pipeline application to be considered,
ihe property will need to be rezoned to Resource Lands (Gentle Slopes and Lower Valley
Floor). In this way, the property will be more colrectly zoned to be consistent with the zoning
and uses ofthe properties in the surrounding area'
BOCC Response: The Board directed Staff to initiate a zone district amendment on
behalf of the Board of County Commissioners so that it would be discussed by the
Board at the same meeting as the Special Use Permit'
3) Referral of Special Use Permit
Should th" BoarTof-C*rrty Commissioners agree to permit a right-of-way for the l0-inch
pipeline across the County Landfill, Staff requests the Board determine if the Special Use
ire'rmit application be referred to the Planning Commission for their recommendation'
BOCC Response: The Board directed Staff not to refer the application to the Planning
Commission and to schedule Special Use Permit to be heard directly before the Board'
III. REFERRALS
Staff referred the application out to the following review agencies and /or County Departments:
a. Garfield county oil & Gas Auditor: Indicated he had no comments on the proposal. (See
Exhibit H)
County Vegetation Management Director: (See Exhibit I)
Bureau of Land Management: No comments received'
The Planning Staff met withR
"-urd mnafill Staff to determine if the proposed
1.
2.
aJ.
4.
5.
6.
b.
c.
d.
route would impact uny .r...n, or futu-re planned activities at the Landfill. And as a result,
the Road and Bridge and Landfill Staff have determined that the route will not affect the
existing or planned operations at the Landfill so long as certain conditions are met (see
Exhibit G) which include:
Complete the work around the guard shack and the sludge ponds as soon as possible'
Use the back (east) gate as much as possible so as not to interfere with customer
traffic;
Traffic control according to MUTCD standards and proper signage when working
next to the road;
97Vo compaction on or near the road, all other area'S need a minimum of 957a
compaction;
Wortng hours within the landfill are limited from 7 a.m. to 5 p.m.; and
a carneta county Utility permit will be issued upon the approval of the Bocc.
US Army Corps of Eneineers: lndicated that a permit is required prior to any discharge of
Or"Og"O o. fif -ut"riul in *aters of the US that includes ephemeral streams' (See Exhibit
F)
aJ
tV. STAFF COMMENTS
1. STIPULATIONS OF THE BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT CONVEYANCE
As mentioned above, Garfield County purchased the Property by way of a Land Patent (Patent)
from the Bureau of Land Management which sale is memorialized in a document recorded on
January 13, 1998, in Book l049,Page 941, having a reception number of 519059'
The patent contains a variety of conditions which were originally contained in.the Environmental
Assessment (EA) conducted by the BLM just prior to the sale to the County in order to analyze
the effect of the sale of the lands included in the landfill lease and the adjacent BLM administered
lands. This document has been attached for your convenience and review as Exhibit K'
The EA specifically examined impacts to the environment including visual resources, recreation
,".our""r,^ regionai and site geology, cultural resources, paleontological resources, mineral
resources, ,urfu." and ground *ut"i resources, soils, soiid and hazardous waste, threatened or
endangered species, wiidlife, live stock grazing and neighboring land. The BLM approved the
..propJsed Aiternative" outlined in the-EA. Ultimatelyt the BLM issued a "Finding of No
Significant Impact,, (FoNSD as result of the EA which concluded there would be no significant
irujpact from the UndnU operation so long as the landfill operated according to the provisions in
the Development and Management plan. Conditions attached to the FONSI of particular interest
include the following:
7) The County will agree to provide administrative access to the BLM, and its authorized
agents, across the Property, for the purpose of accessing the- archeological and
pileontological resource's on thb remaining federal lands lying north of the landfill area'
This requirement for access will be on o
-rorr-by-case
basis and may include vehicular
access. For eaci instance, the BLM will contact the County l,andfill Supervisor in
advance to make arrangements for access'
g) The County will commit to ensuring that access will be reserved to the BLM and its
authorized agents, across any of the subject lands that are subsequently sold to the
County. fnitr wilt be for ihe- sole purpose of accessing the archeological and
paleoitological resource-s on the remaining federal lands lying north of the landfill area'
The cultural and paleontological resources identified in the EA are located on lands north of the
property which were part oI tn. originally leased lands to the County but were not included as
lands in the final sale io the County b..u*. of the identified resources. As a result, the BLM, by
way of the two conditions listed above, reserved a right of access across the Property to get to the
areas with these resources. This application does not affect or impede the continued access to
those BLM lands in any way.
The patent also contains conditions that govern activity on the Property. Specifically, condition
no. 5 prohibits the transfer of ownership of any portion of the Property to a third party for uses
not consistent with the Plan. In this case the County would grant a permil rather than an easement
for the timited purpose of constructing, installing, maintaining and repairing a 10-inch steel
pipeline within in an area delineated as approximately 50 to 30 feet wide on the map attached
4
hereto. This granting of a permit is not considered to be a transfer of any interest in land and can
also be revoked at the sole discretion of the County'
Additionally, the issuance of a permit by Garfield county to williams for the sole purpose of the
construction, installation and maintenance of the pipeline does not grant any additional rights
otherwise regulated by the provisions specifically contained in the Land Patent from the Bureau
of Land Managemeni which is memorialized in a document recorded on January 13, 1998' in
Book lO49,Page941, having a reception number of 519059. As a result, should the Board grant
a permit to cros=s the Property, it would be consistent with condition no' 5 in the Patent'
2. GARFIELD COUNTY ZONING RESOLUTION
As required in the County's ZoningResolution, Special Uses Permit requests for pipelines shall
adequately address the following review criteria and standards from Sections 5'03, 5'03'07 and
S.:.OS of the ZoningResolution of 1978, as amended:
Section 5.03
(l) Utilities adequate to provide water and sanitation service based on accepted
engineering standards and approved by the Board of county commissioners shall
either be in'place or shall be ciistructed in conjunction with the proposed use;
Staff Response
The pipeline itself does not require any pennanent water or sanitation service for its operation'
Water will not be required to hydrostaiically test the line; however, water will be required to be
used in dust suppression during construction. Once the line has been constructed' tested' and
regrading / recontouring of the disturbed area has been completed, no further water service is
needed. The application states that portable toilets will be used on a temporary basis during the
90-day construction phase then be removed once the project is completed' Staff finds this
standard is met.
(2) street improvements adequate to accommodate traffic volume generated by -the
proposed use and to provi.tle safe, convenient access to the use shall either be in place
-o, ihotl be constructed in coniunction with the proposed usel
Staff Response
Access to the property will be provided by CR 246 as well as through a private road access gate
conrrolled by Williams. While traffic wiil increase due to the construction of the pipeline, the
County road system is presently adequate to handle the limited volume of traffic to the site' The
main road inro the Landfill (known as CR 246A) has been budgeted by the County for
improvement this summer which will include improving sections of that road with either chip and
seal or asphalt. Williams has committed to phasing the construction of the pipeline so that the use
of the particular portions of cR 246A will be over by the time the county begins the
improvements. ln tiris way, the added traffic with heavy machinery required to install the pipeline
will not affect / impact the newly improved road way. The Application includes the anticipated
traffic counts expected during the phasing of the pioject. This traffic is expected to diminish
following the completion of the line.
(3)Design of the proposed use is organized to minimize impact on and from adiacent uses
of land through installation of sireen fences or landscape materials on the periphery of
the lot and by location of intinsively itiltzed areas, access points, lighting and signs in
such a manner as to protect established neighborhood character;
Staff Response
The project area is located in a relatively remote, relafively uninhabited portion of the county
primarily characterized as open range covered in sage brush vegetation at the base of the Roan
Cliffs. There are at least eight natural gas well pudt on the property with existing pipelines
conveying that gas off the pioperty. A lige portion of this activity occurred while the Property
was in BLM ownership by Banett (no* oin"i by wilriams). There are no residential uses within
1.5 miles of the ,uUie"t rit" u, it is entirely surrounded by very large tracts of BLM lands to the
north.
In addition to the industrial nature of the natural gas activities and associated structures' the
property continues to be dominated by the industrial nature of the County's Landfill operations'
once the pipeline has been installed, williams commits to appropriate revegetation measures to
minimize the visual impact of the line installation which- have been reviewed and deemed
appropriate by the county vegetation Manager. There is no need for screening as the pipeline
will be buried. The only propoJed signage *i-n u" limited but installed along the route to indicate
the presence of the line under ground urid no lighting is proposed. Staff finds the project will not
result in a loss of neighborhood character'
Section 5.03.07 Industrial Oper?tion
Industrial operations, including [but not limited to] extraction' processing, fabrication' industrial
support faciiities, mineral *uri" disposal, stofage, sanitary landfill, salvage yard' access routes
and utility lines, shall be permitted, provided:
1) The applicant for a permit for industrial operations shall, prepare and submit to the
planning Direcitor ten (10) copies of an impaci statement on thZ pioposed use describing its
location, scope, design ona ,oitiiiciin schedule, includiig -a2 elflan?ti2n .o{ its
operational chiracteistics. O"r"(i) iriy- rt the impact statemint shall be filed with the
County commissioners by the plaiitis blirttor. Th, i*port statement shall address the
following:
a) Existing lawfut use of water through d.epletion or pollution of surface run-off, stream
flow or ground water;
b) Impacts ,i'iaiiiii land from the generation of vapor, dust, smoke, noise' glare or
vibration, or other emanations;
c) Impacts on wildlife and dimestic animals through th9 creation of hazardous
attractions, alt;eriion of existing native vegetation, blockade of migration routes' use
patterns or other disruPtions;
d)Affirmativelyshowthetmpactsoftruckandautomobiletralfictoandfromsuchuses' aia their impacts to areas in the County;
e) That sfficiiit aXmnrr, ,hoii-ripiroi'-t"ch use from abutting property which might
otherwisebedamagedbyoperationsoftheproposeduse(s);
6
2)
staff Findine
Th. ,* "f the pipeline itself will not generate any vapor' dust, smoke, noise' glare or
vibration. During construction and installaiion of the line, noise levels will increase as a result
of heavy equipment during daylight hours but will cease once construction is complete' The
project includes cutting, .il*irg, *d/or removal of existing vegetation for the 50-foot width
of ifr" permitted *.u.-Williams commits to revegetate the disturbed area so that vegetative
cover und fo.ug" will return to pre-construction levels'
The pipeiine, since it is buried, will not result in the creation of hazardous attractions,
blockade of migration routes or use patterns. Portions of the Pipeline will also be located in
an existing Williams pipeline corridoi. The Pipeline is located in an area that will not damage
abutting property u, tit" adjoining land has the same use and character. Further, the project is
located within an existing gathering field and pipelines, well pads, and aboveground
appurtenances are already located within and adjacent to the project area'
permits may be granted, for those uses with provisions that provide adequate mitigation for
the following:
a.) A plan for site rehabilitntion must be approved by the County Commissioners before a
' pirmit for conditional or special use will be issued;
b) The County Commissioiers ma! reqyut, trtu-rity bgfo-lr^ a ye-rmit for special or
conditional use-is iss;ied, if required.'The applicant siall furyish evidence of a-bank
commitment oy iiiiii,iinla, ,infiti check oi other security leemed acceptgble by the
County Commissioners in'the imount calculated by the C-ounty .,Commissioners to
secure tt, ,*eliiion of the site rehabilitation plan in workmanlike manner and in
accordancn nf* in, sf,ecifications and construition schedule established or approved
by the County Commissioiners. Such commitments, bonds or check shall be payable to
and held by the County Commissionersl
c) |;p;;i;;;tforth in tie impact-statemint and compliance with the standards contained' in Section 5.03.08 of this Resolution.
staff Findinq
The County Vegetation Manager reviewed the proposal and provided the following
comments on the revegetation plan and commitment to security:
1) Regarding noxious weeds, it is requested that Williams respond to any complaints by
landowners either private or public, regarding Garfield County listed noxious weeds
found on the pipeline in a timeiy *unn"r. Weed problems on pipelines tend to occur after
there is maintenance activity on a section of pipeline and the ground has been disturbed'
Williams shall monitor ths project area for noxious weeds at least twice per growing
season and treat as needed.
2) Regarding revegetation, the proposed Revegetation Plan is acceptable; however, it is the
recommendation of this Department that the Applicant post a revegetation security for the
parts of the pipeline that are on private p.op"tty or county land. Based on information
provided Uy Wittlams, 16.06 acres of surface area will be disturbed.
As such, based on a figure of $1000 per acre for reclamation, the 16.06 acres of
disturbance will total $16,000. The Vegetation Manager recommends the County request
a revegetation security in the amount o? $t6,000. This may be in the form of a letter of
credit, if deemed appropriate by the County Attorney's Office, or t]re funds by may
deposited with the -o"rty Treaiurer in a manner prescribed by the County Attorney's
Office. The security stratt Ue held by Garfield County until vegetation has been
successfully reestablished according to the Reclamation Standards in the Garfield County
Weed Management Plan.
3) Regarding sediment barriers, it is strongly recommended that any straw bales that are
used as sediment barriers need to be certified as weed-free.
Section 5.03.08 Industrial Performance Standards
All industrial operations in the CountylEitl "o-pty with applicable County, State' and Federal
regulations regulating water, air and noise pollution and shall not be conducted in a manner
co"nstituting a public nuisance or hazard. Operations shall be conducted in such a manner as to
minimize heat, dust, smoke, vibration, glari and odor and all other undesirable environmental
effects beyond the boundaries of the property in which such uses are located, in accord with the
following standards:
D Volume of sound generated shall comply with the standards set forth in the Colorado
Revised itotutrt ai the time any new application is made'
2) Vibration g:enerated: every use tiott t, so operat-ed t?!t the. ground vibration
inherently"and recurrently generated is not perceptible, without instruments, at any
point of iny boundary ltni oi the propefi on which the use is located;
3) Emission, oj iioke ina paittculite maier: every use shall be operated so as to comply
with all Fedeiat, State aid County air quality laws, regulations and standards;
4) Emission of heit, glare, radiatioi andiume-s.: every use s.hall be so-operated that it does
not emit heat, giaii, ,idiotion or fumbs which substantially interfer-e with the existing
use of adjoi;i;g property or whicit constitutes a public nuisance or hazard. Flaring o{
gorri, at craft"ioritng signals, reflective paiittng of storag-e tynks, or o.ther such
"operations ititl, *oyi, iequiiedby taw as safety or air pollution control measures
shall be exemptedfrom this provision;
staff Finding
Tl* prp"l"* itself will not result in the production of vapor, heat, glare, radiation or
vibraiion. During construction, the will be in increase in noise levels due to operation of
heavy equipmeni during daylight hours which will cease after construction is complete'
Williams commits that all volume of sound generated from this project will comply with the
standards set forth in the Colorado Revised Statutes at all times. Dust will be generated
during the construction portion of the project but can be minimized by an appropriate
Fugitive Dust Control Pian. Lastly, Staff suggests that no burning or open fires will be
allowed during construction of the project. Staff suggests these performance measures be
requires as conditions of approval should the Board applove the project'
5) Storage area, salvage yard, sanitary landfill and mineral waste disposal areas:
a) Storage of Jlammable or explosive s,olids o-r gays-shall-be in accordance with
accep"ted itindards and laws and shall comply iitn the national, state and local fire
b)
c)
d)
codes and written recomfiT.endationslcornments from the appropriate local protection
district regarding compliance with the appropriate c-odes;-
At the discretion oiiit County Commissioiers, all outdoor storage facilities ryay b9
iiqiirra tu be tiriotri iy 1rnrr, landscaping or wall adequate to conceal such
facilities from adiacent pr9p9!ry;
_"No mateh.als or-wastei snatt 6i deposited upon a property in such form or manner
that they may be iii*iia off tie proprity by any reasonably foreseeable natural
causes orforcesl
itirog, oi ttroiy Equipment will only be allowed subiect to (A) and (C) above and the
following standards:
i. The minimum lot size is five (5) acres-and-is not a platted subdivision'
ii. The equipmt"titirisi iiea'i{ not ftaciA any cloier than 300 ft. from any existing
residehtihldwelling. ,1,- -^-.^^--:--- -t,^^^] -:-hl /e\t.i- All eouiomrnt tiiiFos, will be enclosed in an area with screening at least-eight (8)h 7;;;f;'fr;;;i;;;;A;it;;i'a-ioi iiei at the same etevation oi tower. sueefing
';:;';;;i;:l;'i;;;;;;"ffii;"[piii, iighi it""ring fencins or a combination of anv
of ihese methods.
v' tii;#r:[,fr!,r::{';!yi;;,ff3\Po;fr':#:f,:,!'br:,;d"q,r:{T!{;r':':#"Y,!l"iiiiii"i ifia{"i ,r-i"aoZi Quathg the--hoirs bf,s a.ry. to 6 p.m', Mon.-Fri.
v. i;;;;"s-;ff;rff;;it"'s;iirnlitii\iiu t, con"ducted on prtvati propertv and mav
iot be Eonducted on aiy fiublic right-of-way-' . - r 2----;;; i;;;;t'nil itoZUtett wiih natural resources shall not exceed ten
(10) acres in size.
f) iiy lighting iy ttoroge area s_hall be pointed downward and inward to the property
ceiteiand iniaeA tu prevent direct reflection on adjacent property.
staff Findins
Tl* p-p"*l does not include the permanent storage of any materials or equipment on any
part of the area permitted for the location of the pipeline. The project is not located within
^3OO f""t of any residential dwelling and is not located within any platted subdivisions'
Screening does not need to be installed because these areas are temporary use areas and not
long-term equipment storage yards. Equipment shall be maintained during daylight hours and
wili not ,"qri.i lighting. itre applicaiion contains a Fire Prevention and Suppression Plan
which Staff suggests bL kept on-site during the project as it contains appropriate contact
numbers in the event a fire occurs.
6) Water pollution: in a case in which ,potential -hazyds exist, it sltqll b9 necessary to-/
install'safeguards designed to compiy -*it!, !!1e- Resula-tions of -the Environmental
protectioir Agrncy brfit operation bY tne facilities -may begty. All-percolation tests or
ground watei res-ourie tests as *oy in required.by local or State Health Offirers must
be met before operation of the facilities may begin'
Staff Findine
Williu-, proposes to route the Pipeline such that it crosses two ephemeral streams known as
West Sharrard Creek and East Sharrard Creek. The Plan of Development in the application
contains a Stream Crossing and Wetland Protection Plan which outlines how stream crossings
are conducted including *l"urr."s for sediment and erosion control which is also dealt with in
the Soil Conservation,
-Sedimentation and Erosion Plan. While these plans appear to use "best
management practices" intended to protect the water quality in these drainages by better
controlling Storm water runoff from the project area, these Streams are considered to be
ephemeral streams able to carry waters of the US and are subsequently regulated by the US
Army Corps of Engineers (the Corps). No permits approving the crossings from the Corps
were submitted with the application. Staff suggests obtaining these permits be conditions of
approval.
The Plan of Development contained in the application also contains a Hazardous Material
Management, Spill Prevention, and Countermeasure Plan which is intended to reduce the
risks associated with the use, storage, transportation, production, and disposal of hazardous
materials. In addition, this plan outlines the required spill prevention and response (cleanup)
procedures for the project. Staff suggests that this plan be kept on site during the project.
In the case of this Pipeline, the disturbance of ground will be approximately 16 acres which
requires Williams to submit a Stormwater management Plan to the Department of Public
Health and Environment. This plan is intended to outline what measures will be taken in the
field to control the discharge of stormwater in runoff events to control the quality and
quantity of water discharged into the watershed. Staff suggests the Board require Williams to
provide the County with a copy of this Plan.
V. SUGGESTED FINDINGS
1. That proper public notice was provided as required for the hearing before the Board of
County Commissioners.
That the hearing before the Board of County Commissioners was extensive and complete,
that all pertinent facts, matters and issues were submitted and that all interested parties
were heard at that meeting.
That for the above stated and other reasons, the proposed Special Use Permit is in the best
interest of the health, safety, morals, convenience, order, prosperity and welfare of the
citizens of Garfield County.
That the application is in conforrnance with Section 5.03, 5.03.07, and 5.03.08 of the
Garfield County ZoningResolution of 1978, as amended.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends the Board of County Commissioners approve the proposed Special Use Permit
for a "Pipeline" and grant Williams a permit to cross the Property with the following conditions:
1.That all representations made by Williams in the application and as testimony in the public
hearing before the Board of County Commissioners shall be considered conditions of
approval, unless specifically altered by the Board of County Commissioners.
Williams shall ensure that copies of the following plans are kept at the work site during the
entire construction of the pipeline:
a. Fugitive Dust Control Plan;
2.
aJ.
4.
VI.
2.
10
4.
5.
b. Stormwater Management Plan; and
c. Fire Prevention and Suppression Plan
d. Spilt Prevention, Containment and Countermeasure Plan
3. Williams shall comply with the following conditions asserted by the County Road and Bridge
Department:
Prior to the start of the project, Williams Production RMT and any necessary
subcontractor shall hold a *"Lting with the County Landfill Manager in order to
ensure the construction phasing plan and these following conditions will be met;
Complete the work *ornd ttre guara shack and the sludge ponds as soon as possible;
Use ihe back (east) gate as much as possible so as not to interfere with customer
traffic;
Traffic control according to MUTCD standards and proper signage when working
next to the road;
977a compaction on or near the road, all other area's need a minimum of 95Vo
compaction;
Spacing of the above ground natural gas pipeline markers shall be spaced at a distance
required by the Landfill Manager;
working horrc within the landfill are limited from 7 a.m. to 5 p.*.;
A Garfield County Utility permit will be issued upon the approval of the BOCC; and
Dust control will Ue requiieA as needed at the discretion of the road foreman on the
roads impacted by the equipment used in the construction of the pipeline' Damage to
the surface of the roads snal require replacement or reconstruction for that portion of
the damaged road;
Because weed problems on pipelines and their revegetated corridors tend to occur after there
is maintenance activity on a ,"ction of pipeline andthe ground has been disturbed' Williams
shall respond to any Lomplaints by landl*re.t either private or public, regarding noxious
weeds in a timelY manner.
During revegetation, williams shall submit the tags from the bags containing the approved
and certified seed mix for verification that the seed mix used in the field on the corridor is
acceptable. These tags shall be submitted to the County Vegetation Manager for verification
prior to the reseeding of the disturbed area't\
( O. b.io. ro rhe issuance of the Special Use Permit, Williams shall post a revegetation security in
t/
\__r/tt e amounr of g16,000.00 foithe portion of land disturbed by the pipeline. This may be in the
/ r form of a letter of credit, if deemed appropriate by the County Attorney's Office, or the funds
$\ t ., , . *"it" deposited with the County tiearur"r. The security shall be held by Garfield County
;fl Du ,*ir ,.g"ation has been successiully reestablished according to the Reclamation Standards
I in the Garfield County Weed Management Plan'
1. Regarding stormwater, erosion and sediment control measures, the Williams shall only use
straw bales as sediment barriers so long as they are certified as weed-free bales'
1.
2.
aJ.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
11
t2
g. prior to the issuance of a Special Use Permit, Willianm shall submit the following approved
permits to the County Building and Planning Department:
a. US Army Coms of Ensineers: Nationwide Permit (or other appropriate permit
b.
c.: Construction Dewatering
g. Williams shall comply with the following Industnal Performance Standards in Section
5.03.08 of the CarneiO County Zoning Resolution of 1978, as amended including:
a. Volume of sound generated shall comply with the standards set forth in the Colorado
Revised Statutes;
b. Vibration generated: every use shall be so operated that the ground vibration
inherently ind recurrently generated is not perceptible, without instruments, at any
point of any boundary line of the property on rvhich the use is located;
c. Emissions of smoke and particulate matter: every use shall be operated so as to
comply with all Federal, State and County air quality laws, regulations and standards;
and
d. Emission of heat, glare, radiation and fumes: every use shall be so operated that it
does not emit heat, glare, radiation or fumes which substantially interfere with the
existing use of adjoining property or which constitutes a public nuisance or hazard'
Flaring of gases, uir"rafi*u*ing signals, reflective painting of storage tanks, or other
such operations which may be-re{uired by law as safety or air pollution control
measures shall be exempted from this provision,
N9
10. That the issuance of a permit by Garfield counry'i-f,wittiums for the sole purpose of the
installation and maintenance of the pipeline does,rlgrant any additional rights otherwise
regulated by the provisions specifically contained in the Land Patent from the Bureau of Land
Management which is memorialized in a document recorded on January 13, 1998, in Book
1049, Page 941, having a reception number of 519059'
required by the Corps of Engineers)
Road and bridee Department: Approved Utility Permit
Col,orado Department of Public Health and Ilnvi
Permit & General Construction Stormwater Plim
I
REPLYTO
ATTENTION OF
RegulatorY Branch (200575223)
Mr. Fred
Garfield
108 8th
Glenwood
DEPARTMENT OFTHE ARMY
U.S. ARMY ENGINEER DISTRICT, SACRAMENTO
CORPS OF ENGINEERS
1325 J STREET
SACRAMENTO, CALIFORNIA 9581 4-2922
MaY 6, 2005
SincerelY,
RECB'.VED
EXHIBIT
Basin
MAY 0 I 2005
Jarman i.' 'rtFlELD CCTJIIITY
;;il; Building and planning uDbpdGu,TFee'}B'rlri(i
Street, Suite 20L-ipii"g=, Colorado 81-6ol-
Dear Mr. Jarman:
IamrespondingtoyourwrittenrequestforCornmeriLorlt.i:e
wilriams proailItii"=nni,' +6--i;;h-;;..,t'f q"= line project across
the Garfield Countv landfiir-ut""'- -'!:.pigjt:t '1:-located at an
unnamed tribut.ary within^sections L7 and''-20-, Township 6 south'
Range 94 west, t'ititud:,1';-it ' 9 '30" ' l'ongitude l-07' 54t 53 '6tt '
carlield Count'Y, Cororado '
In accordance with Section nO1-:l-:h" C1ean Water Act' a
Department,oftheArmypermit,isrequiredpriorto.commencinganydischarge (rncluding -mecha;;"a-ran.i "iu}i"gi-"f dredged or f il1
material in waLers of the united stat.es (us) I waters of t'he us
include the territ'orial =";;;"p"'"""iaf intermittent' and
ephemeral streams; lakes' porlai' impoundments; and wetlands'
piease be advised, r have "ni"ii*r";i1t-i';t"iiried a waLer of the
uS near rhe access ro rhe i;;ilril-r"a'county Road 246A' For
more informa[r;;-arout the-permit program, please visit our
,""n=it" referenced below'
Pleaserefertoidentificationnumber2o05T5223in
corresporra"rrll-to""u"'it'g-thi= pr9ju"!'. If you have any
ouesLions, please contact i"-rt'-lfr" address below, email
riark.A.Gilfillan@usa.". rr*yl*ii "i t"13nhone 970-24?-L19e'
extension rul-*v""-*ry al-sL use our website: www'spk'usace'
,r^Y . mi7 / regulatorY' html'
IN*L
Mark Gilfill5n
eioi"gist, Colorado/Gunnison
negulatorY Office
400 i,ood Avenue, Room l-42
a;:"e;;";;r;;;' ctlorado Br-so1'-2563
From: Mike Vander Pol
Sent: TuesdaY, MaY 03, 2005 10:39 AM
To: Fred Jarman
Cc: Kraig Kuberry
Subject: Williams Production RMT
Fred;
This is for the special Use Permit for a 10" gas gathering line across the county landfill'
Kraig asked that I e-mailyou his concerns'
1. Comptete thL wort< around the guard shack and the sludg,e pon.q.s as soon as possible'
2. Use the U""i grt" "i much as "possible so as not to interfere with customer traffic'
3. Traffic
"ontrof"r""*oing
to MUfCD standards and proper signage when.working next to the road'
4. gz% compa"ii"" "i "iieir tne roaO, att otne, area;s nbed a min-lmum of 95% compaction'
5.WorkinghourswithinthelandfillarelimitedfromTa.m.to5p.m..6. A Garfied Cor"ty Utif'ty p"rmit will be issued upon the approval of the BOCC'
Any questions, you can contact Kraig.
Mike
Fred Jarman
s19l200s
Exxtstr
.6
0ood
Fred Jarman
From: Doug Dennison
Sent: ThursdaY, MaY 05, 2005 9:09 AM
To: Fred Jarman
Subject: Williams Production SUP Application
Fred,
I have reviewed the following special Use Permit application and have not comments:
williams production RMT, 10" NaturalGas Gathering Pipeline Across county Landfill
Doug Dennison
Garfield CountY
Oil& Gas Liaison
mailto:dden nison@garfield-cou nty com
(970) 625-5691
cell(970) 309-5441
fax (970) 62s-0908
51512005
EXHIBIT
MEMORANDUM
To: Fred Jarman
From:Steve AnthonY
Comments on the Williams Production RMT SUP (Landfill)Re:
A.
Thanks for the opportunity to comment on this permit'
My comments are as follows:
1. Noxious Weeds
2. Revegetation
A.Itisrequestedthattheapplicantrespondtoanycomplaintsbylandownerseitherprivate
or public, ,"g*iirg c*field County listed no;ious weeds found on the pipeline in a
timely manner.--ii""Jp.oblems on pipelinestend to occur after there is maintenance
activity on a section ;f iipeline und ti'," g.ound has been disturbed' The applicant shall
monitor the project *"u ro. noxious *""d, u, least twice per growing season and treat as
needed.
Revegetation Security-It is the recommendation of this department that the applicant post
u r"rJg"Ltion securiiy for the parts of the pipeline that is on private property or county
land.Basedoninformationprovidedbytheapplicant,l6.06acresofsurfaceareawill
be disturbed.
Basedonafigureof$l000peracreforrec]amation,the!6.06acresofdisturbancewill
total $16,000. My recomrnendation is that the County request a revegetation
security in the amount of $16,000. This may be in the form of a letter of credit, if
deemed appropriate uv tt" L""r,y Attorney,s office, or the funds by may deposited with
tn" C"rr,V fr"uru.". ir.u *urn"t pt""ribed Uy the County Attorney's Office'
ThesecurityshallbeheldbyGarfieldCountyuntilvegetationhllgelsuccessfully
reestablished u""o.Olrgioihe Reclamation Standards in the Garfield County Weed
Management Plan.
The Revegetation Plan is acceptable'
Sediment Barriers
Any straw bales that are used as sediment barriers need to be certifred as weed'free'
B.
EXHIBIT
BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT
GLENWOOD SPRINGS RESOURCE AREA
GRAND JUNCTION DISTRICT, COLORADO
West Garfield County Landfill Sale
Environmental Assessment
EA Number: GO-078-6-31
Serial Number: COC 35148
November, 1996
L_i
il.
1il.
tv.
CONTENTS
Page
lntroduction............... ............. 1
Background
Purpose and Need
Oonformance With Land Use P1an.......... .......................2
Relationship to Statutes, Regulations, or Other Plans
Alternatives Analyzed .............2
A. Proposed Action
B. No Action.. ...... 3
C. Sale of Less Than the Proposed Acreage
Alternatives Not Analyzed Further...... ......................4
A. Relocation of the Landfill/Sale of Other Lands
B. Sale of Additional Acreage
Affected Environment............... ................5
A. Proposed Action
B. No Action Alternative .......15
C. Sale of Less than the Proposed Acreage ...........17
Vl. Mitigation Measures.. ............18
Vll. Residual/Cumulative 1mpacts..................:... .............19
Vlll. Consultation and Coordination............... ...-.............21
lX. References ...........23
Appendices
Appendix A. Maps of Proposed Action/Project Area
Appendix B. Mineral Report
Appendix C, CERCLA 120(h) Records Search
V. Environmental Consequences.11
l. lntroduction
Backqround
ln response to an application by Garfield County, Colorado, a Recreation and Public Purposes
(R&PP) lease was issued to the County on October 5, 1982, covering 275.79 acres, for the
Anvil Points landfill. The lease was issued for five years and was renewed in 1987 for an
additional five years.
During that time, as a result of an increased awareness and concern for environmental
problems resulting from hazardous materials contamination and the resulting liability, the
Bureau of Land Management (BLM) began to place increasing restrictions on sanitary landfill
leases on public lands. This culminated with a total ban on the issuance of leases for new
landfills in the late 1980's. Benewals of existing leases were limited to one-year terms, with
the stated objective being the termination of these leases and closure of the sites. Sales of
the sites under the R&PP Act were determined not to be an option due to the reversionary
clause requirement which effectively meant that title to the landfill would automatically revert to
the BLM in the event it was determined hazardous materials had been disposed of at the site.
Sales of land for new sites were banned for the same reason. Sales of existing landfills under
the provisions of the Federal Land Policy and Management Act were effectively ruled out
because of the concern.for the Bureau's liability should a site later be found to be
contaminated with hazardous materials and the lack of guidetines to deal with this concern.
ln 1988, the Recreation and Public Purposes Amendment Act was passed, amending the
R&PP Act by removing the requirement for the reversionary clause in patents for lands to be
used for waste disposal or storage purposes. The Bureau was prohibited from implementing
the amended act until the approval of accompanying regulations. These regulations were
approved in July of 1992, permitting the efforts towards the proposed sale of the Anvil Points
landfill to Garfield County.
Purpose and Need
This environmental assessment (EA) describes the environmental effects of the proposed sale
of the Anvil Points landfill and additional, adjacent BLM administered lands to Garfield County.
The effects of the landfill operation were first analyzed under the provisions of the National
Environmental Policy Act in July, 1982 in response to an application from Garfield County.
The EA concluded there would be no significant impact from the landfill operation.
The purpose of this EA is to analyze the effects of the sale of the lands covered by the
existing landfill lease and the additional adjacent BLM administered lands. This EA
supplements the original EA, which addressed the suitability of the existing leased lands for
use as a sanitary landfill. This EA incorporates additional resource information gained since
the original EA was written, specifically, additional information regarding paleoniological and
cultural resources, hydrologicaland geologicaldata, wildlife information, and data rigarding
uses of the adjacent lands that could impact the subject tract (oil and gas development and
the Anvil Points Oil Shale Facility.) The discussions in this EA cover both the existing lease
-
lands and the additional lands.
conforma@
Disposal of the subiect lands is consistent with the Glenwood springs Resource Area,
Resource Management plan (RMp), 1988. The subject lands lie within disposal lract#22-
These lands wefu designated as suitable for disposal. since that time, additional resource
information has'been g-aineo which indicirtes some of these lands have important
arcneotogical and palJontological resources. For that reason, certain of these lands will be
excludejfrom consideration in tne proposed sale, as will be discussed later in this EA.
The proposed action is consistent with the Recreation and Public Purposes Amendment Act of
198d, *ni"n permits the sale of waste disposal sites'
The proposed action is consistent, and in fact prompted by the BLM policy mandating the sale
or closure of allwaste disposalsites on public lands in order to minimize liability imposed by
the comprehensive Environmental Response, compensation, and Liability Act of 1980' which
mandates that liabiliv for hazardous materiais contamination and cleanup extends to the
i"nJ"*r"t, regardless of whether the landowner caused the contamination'
The proposed action would be carried out in accordance with the regulations at 43 cFR 2740,
which detail the steps necessary to ensure that the BLM sell only sites which have been found
to not pose a significant risk to human health and the environment'
ll. Alternatives AnalYzed
A. ProPosed Action
The proposed action is to sell to Garfield county, under the terms of the Recreation and
Public Purposes Act (as amended), the following lands:
Sixth PrinciPal Meridian
TownshiP 6 South, Range 94 West
Sec. 17: lots 18,20,22, and 24
Sec. 20; lots 1, 5, 8, and 11
Sec. 21; lots 1 and 2
Containing 259.60 acres, more or less
The subject lands include 155.92 acres presently encymbered by R&PP lease coc 35148,
currenfly being used for landfill purposes. The suitability of these lands for landfill purposes
has been preiiously analyzed. An additional 103.68 acres (expansion lands) have been
requested to allow ior additional landfilling capability'
The united states would reserve the oil and gas, together with the right to prospect for, mine
and remove the same.
The patent would be issued subject to all valid existing rights, including existing rights of way
and oil and gas leases.
The patent would contain a provision requiring that for those lands patented that currently lie
within lease COC-35148, no portion of the lands covered by such patent would under any
circumstances revert to the United States. For those lands not currently covered by the R&Pp
Iease, the patent would contain provisions such that if Garfield County sold the land to another
party, Garfield County would pay the United States the fair market value of the land at the
time of the sale. Under no circumstances would title to these lands revert to the United States
if they had been used for solid waste disposal or if there was a release of hazardous
materials. The patent would be issued subject to all valid existing rights.
Through ated May, 1995, Garfield County has
specified the proposed uses oGxpansion lands to include addltional disposalceils, and
relocation of an existing materials recycling area. (See Development and Management Plan,
West Garfield County Landfill, May, 1995.)use for the existi
will remain with
e exception that the existing materials recycling area would be used for solid waste celiE
with another materials re.cycling area being relocated in the northwest corner of the subject
tract on lands that are no't as well suited for landfill cells.
As a part of the proposed disposal action, the oil shale withdrawal would be revoked as to the
lands proposed for disposal.
B. No Action
Under this alternative, the proposed sale would not take place. ln the short term, BLM would
presumably continue to renew the R&PP lease to Garfield County for one-year periods and
the land would continue to be used for landfill purposes in accordance with the current plan of
operations. ln the long term, it is probable that at some point, BLM would refuse to renew the
landfill lease. lt is BLM's policy to divest itself of the liability associated with landfill operations
by refusing to lease lands for new landfills and selling or closing existing landfills. The
granting of one-year extensions has been an interim measure while waiting for approval of the
regulations implementing the R&PP Amendment Act. With the approval of these regulations,
one-year lease renewals are permitted as long as progress towards a sale of existing leases
is continuing.
C. Sale of Less Than the Proposed Acreaqe
This proposal would involve the sale of that acreage described in the proposed action less all
or part of the following parcel: lots 1 and 2, Section 21 (80 acres). This proposal is
considered as a means to satisfy the concerns of the owners of the property direcfly north of
the 80 acre parcel in Section 21. These concerns will be addressed later in this EA.
lll. Alternatives Not Analyzed Further
A. Flelocation of the LandfilUsale
,no",.elltheexistinglandfillortheexpansionacreage.
Garfield County would have the option of locating other suitable lands for solid waste disposal.
This might or might not include BLM lands. The existing landfillwould be closed and the land
would be reclairned.
Garfield County woutd be required to satisfy the closure and post-closure provisions described
in the regulations at 40 CFR 258. For the following reasons, this alternative will not be
analyzed further.
The present location for the West Garfield County landfill was selected in 1981 and 1982 from
numerous potential sites. The present site was selected for the favorable combination of
suitable geologic and hydrogeologic conditions and hauling distances from the major sources
of solid waste.
The state and federal regulations regarding landfill citing, permitting, operation, and closure
are extensive and complex. The time period required to plan, design, permit, and open a
landfill can exceed three years and the investment required can easily exceed several
hundred thousand dollars. Federal and State regulations require post-closure monitoring of
groundwater and methahe gas for a period of thirty years after closure for landfills receiving
waste after October 9, 1993'
Additionally, the location and operation of an alternative landfillwould also require the same
long term, post closure monitoring. For these reasons, Garfield County officials prefer to
continue use of the existing landfill and expansion of the existing landfill to adjacent lands if
possible. This would permit the placement of one set of groundwater and methane monitoring
systems instead of two sets of monitoring systems. For these reasons, Garfield County has
not expressed an interest in purchasing alternate lands for landfill purposes.
ln the event the proposed sale of the existing site and the adjacent expansion acreage is not
consummated, darfield County may pursue an alternative site. lf the alternative included
public lands, BLM would entertain a sale at that time. However, for the reasons above,
barfield County has not attempted to identify other lands for potential landfill sites. For these
reasons, this alternative will not be analyzed further in this environmental assessment.
B. Sale of AdditionalAcreaoe
This proposal would include the sale of the isolated parcel of public land (the parcel would be
isolaied by the proposed action)comprising approximately 25 acres and located on the
southwesi side of the project area. An easement for public access across this parcel would
be reserved to the United States. ln addition, the paleontological and cultural resources would
be reserued by the United States and the county would be restricted from disturbing these
resources. The purpose of this alternative would be to preserve public access to the
remaining public lands to the north and preserve the paleontological and cultural resources
while still selling the subject land to Garfield County.
This alternative will not be analyzed further for the following reasons. Public access to the
remaining public lands to the north can be preserved by reserving an easement for public
access at the two critical points at the southwest and northwest parts of this 25 acre parcel
(see Vl., Mitigation Measures.) Reservation of the paleontological and cultural resources
would require that these resources be surveyed (legal survey) so that the location(s) could be
legally described. lt would also require the permanent marking of the sites. Finally, it would
reiuiie that a restrictive covenant be placed on the sites prohibiting any disturbance of the
sites. The paleontological site has not been surveyed sufficiently to legally describe it and it
is a generai area rathJr than a specific site. considerable additional survey would be required
to s[ecifically delineate the cultural and paleontological resources. The reservation of these
resources is at best a compromise. lt places strict limits on the patentee's use of portions of
the land and leaves the United States with a perpetual responsibility to monitor the patentee's
compliance with the terms of the reservation. lt does not afford the degree of protection lor
these resources that retention of the lands in federal ownership would afford. Finally, the
County has not identified a need for the subject lands in their plan of development and the
Recreation and public purposes Act limits the sale of lands to those for which a clear use and
need can be demonstrated. For this reason, unless the public access needs cannot be met
otherwise, there is no compelling reason to consider this alternative. Public access needs are
addressed further in this EA. The paleontological and cultural resources would be reserved
by the United States.
lV. Affected Environmbnt
The following resources and elements of the environment are not present at the site or would
not be affected and will not be discussed further: areas of critical environmental concern
(ACEC,s), prime or unique farmlands, wetlands or riparian zones, wild and scenic rivers,
wilderness, native American religious concerns, floodplains, and air quality'
General Settinq The site is located approximately 7 miles west of Rifle and 1 mile north of
the Colorado Filver in an area known as Sharrard Park. lt is situated at the base of and on
the alluvial plain of the Roan Cliffs. Topography is characterized by a gently south sloping
plain. The iioan Cliffs rise steeply immediately to the north of the site. West Sharrard Creek
passes through the western third of the site, running in a southeasterly direction. East
bharrard Creek and another un-named drainage (both running in a southerly direction) pass
through the east and middle portions of the site, respectively. All of these are ephemeral
drainiges. Elevations on the site range from 5400 feet to 5480 feet above see level. The
"nnr"ipr"cipitation
averages 10.9 inches, the majority of which falls between July and
September. Temperaturei range from betwe en -25 to '100 degrees fahrenheit. The prevailing
winds are from the west.
Visual Resources The surrounding landscape includes man-made features related to oil
a"d g"s d"*l"prent, oilshale development, and the landfill operation itself. The subject tract
ties witnin a Class ll Visual Resource Management area in which the objectivqs are to retain
the existing character of the landscape. The level of change to the characteristic landscape
should be low and management activities may be seen but should not attract attention of the
casual observer. The site is in an open area, visible from lnterstate 70 in the foreground and
middleground with little natural screening.
Recreation Resources The proposed sale traci is a part of a larger block of public land
cols'sting of 640 acres. Legal access to these lands is provided by county road.
Approximiately 4,00O acres of Naval Oil Shale Reserve (NOSH) lands directly north of the
public lands are accessible via the public lands. Access is limited, due to the rugged
topography and limited road access to the area.
Recreation opgOrtunities available in these lands are typical of dispersed areas and include
big game and small game hunting, fossil hunting, hiking and horseback riding. Recreational
usL of the BLM and NOSR lands is low, primarily due to the limited public access. The
ruggedness of the area and low visitor use volume contribute to a recreational setting which
proviO"s a high quality experience for those who seek to get away from other visitors-
The County road to the landfill provides the only practical legal public access to the BLM and
NOSR lanjs to the north and northeast. (The Roan Cliffs prevent physical access from the
lands to the north, on top of the NOSR.) Presently, visitors can park off the landfill road on
BLM land, or drive a vehicle to an existing gas well pad located west of the current landfill to
access these BLM and NOSR lands. Physical access (but not legal public access) to these
lands is also available across private land from several private roadways. Travel beyond
these access points is presently by nonmotorized means due to the absence of roads-
Reqional GeolooV lnformation on regional and site geology is taken from the Land Transfer
Aufit, West OarfielO Copntv LanOtitt (TerraMatrix, lnc., 1995). The property is located in the
s"uth"a"t p"rti"" of the Piceance structural basin. During basin subsidence, thousands of
feet of sediments occurred. The initial deposits became the Wasatch Formation. Deltaic and
lacustrine deposits became the upper Wasatch and the Green River Formation oil shale
deposits. Uplift of the region formed the Roan Plateau. Subsequent erosion caused the Roan
Cliffs. The Roan Cliffs are composed of the Green River formation with exposures of the
Wasatch Formation along the base of the cliffs. Bedrock dips in both the Green River and
Wasatch Formations are gentle to the northwest at between 3 and 5 degrees. There is no
evidence of active faults within 20 miles of the site. Historicalseismic activity indicates a low
probability for a strong motion eadhquake to occur in the area.
Site Geoloqv The site is located at the base of the Roan Cliffs on the north edge of the
CotoraOo River alluvialvalley. The Tertiary Wasatch forms the bedrock throughout the area.
The interbedded Wasatch is composed of varied siltstone, mudstone, sandstone and shale'
Channel sandstones may be medium to coarse grained and locaily conglomeratic and laterally
discontinuous. The Wasatch Formation is between 4,000 and 4,500 feet thick below the site.
A veneer of Quaternary Alluvium lies above the bedrock over much of the site. This
interbedded material is complex and laterally discontinuous. Core drilling has shown that in
general, near surface soils consist of sands and gravels wiih a silt and clay matrix. Thickness
of tne alluvium is quite variable, with bedrock having been encountered at depths as shallow
as 13 feet, with other boreholes having been drilled to 100 feet without encountering bedrock.
Typical drilling practices for the numerous gas wells in the area involve setting 300 feet
(minimum) of surface casing due to the unconsolidated nature of the alluvium and Wasatch.
Cultural Hesources A number of energy development projects within Sharrard Park have
generated some basic data for cultural resource distribution. Several important historic
properties are known for the lands within the proposed action as well as those lands
immediately adjacent. One of the cultural properties is listed on the National Register of
Historic Places and portions of the historic property extend through the lands of ine proposed
action. (GSRA CRIR #1095-1)
Paleontolooical Resources The hills immediately north of and adjacent to the site have and
continue to yield scientifically important vertebrate fossil resources, having first been studied
bytheChicagoFieldMuseumof Natural History(FieldMuseum) inthe1930's. Several other
known localities are in section 17 and in adjacent sections. The areas have been worked and
collections made in the past by the University of Colorado Museum, the Field Museum, and
the Museum of Western Colorado. The sites have yielded both fragmentary and semi-
articulated to articulated vertebrate fossil material.
Mineral Resources The mineral report (Appendix B) indicates the tract contains
commercially valuable oil and gas resources and parts of the tract are encumbered by oil and
gas leases COC-27867 and COC-27868, issued to Barrett Resources (Barrett) in 1979. The
leases are held by production with several producing wells located in and around the tandfill
lease. Oil and gas production activities were most recently analyzed in EA No. CO-078-5-31
(approved June 21, 1995). This EA analyzed the effects of 4O-acre well spacing and the
potential for an approval of Zl-acre well spacing in the future, with additional well bores (over
and above that of the 4O-acre spacing) being located on existing well pads. Barrett is in the
process of attempting directional drilling from an existing well pad to test the practicality of the
use of existing well pads for future wells within the proposed sale area. lt is possible that
directional drilling may not be economically feasible which would result in the need for
additionalwell pads within the proposed landfillsale area. The EA details the extensive
consultation between Garfield County, Barrett,, and the BLM in order to best accommodate
the needs of Garfield County and Barrett..
The tract has also been classified as prospectively valuable for coal, however the coal
resources in this area are to deep to be of economic importance in the foreseeable future (the
occurrence is at a depth of 6400 feet or greater.) The tract is not valuable for geothermal
resources or any other leasable minerals.
The tract is located within the boundaries of an oil shale withdrawal (Executive Order S32l
and Public Land Order 4522.) This withdrawal also lies immediately adjacent to the Naval Oil
Shale Reserve. However, as noted in the mineral report, the extensive oil shale reserves of
the Piceance Creek Basin are in the Tertiary Green River formation. This formation is absent
within the tract as the older Wasatch formation outcrops at the surface. Additionally, the
Geological Survey has classifled the subject lands as nonvaluable for oil shale. Any disposal
action would include a revocation of the oil shale withdrawal for the effected lands.
Surface Water/Ground Water Parts of the following information is taken from the Land
Transfer Audit. West Garfield Countv Landfill (TerraMatrix, lnc., 1995). fhe Colorado river is
the predominant naturalsurface water system in the area. West Sharrard Creej<, East
Sharrard Creek, and numerous smaller drainages bisect the site. All are ephemeral
drainages. Flash flooding due to heavy rainstorms is feasible. Runoff from the Roan Clitfs,
directly north of the site, can be heavy, emphasizing the importance of proper run-on control
structures. Surface flow along the upper segments of West Sharrard Creek varies as the
-7
water percolates into the permeable alluvium, only to encounter bedrock and flow laterally,
occasionally intersecting ine surface again as a seep or spring. At the lower reaches of the
drainage, 1ooy" of the fL* r"y infiltraie the alluvium due to the greater depth of that alluvium
and reduced slopes. This scenario can be extended to the other drainages bisecting the site.
Surface water quality is generally poor, characterized by high total dissolved solids and some
metals from leachinj miierals and salts from the Green River and Wasatch Formations'
Known regional.bedrock aquifers include sandstones in the Mesa Verde Formation, Dakota
sandstone and the Entrada sandstone. The shallowest regionalbedrock aquifer (Mesa
Verde) is greater than 4,000 feet subsurface. sandstone intervals in the shallower wasatch
can also be water uearing. Depth to these groundwater bearing sandstones can vary greatly
due to the discontinuous-nature of these sandstones but typically range from 300 to 600 feet
subsurface. Groundwater flow direction in the Wasatch is anticipated to be to the northwest.
The Wasatch Formation provides limited water production and poor water quality. lt contains
high total dissolved solids, high sodium and chloride concentrations, and trace metal
co-ncentrations (selenium, mo-lybdenum, barium, cadmium, lead) exceeding EPA maximum
contaminant levels tor orinxing water. The wasatch reportedly does provide livestock and
domestic water in some areaJ. The nearest domestic wells are located 3 to 4 miles to the
southwest near the town of Rulison. Numerous wells (presumably livestock water) are located
within 1.5 to 2.5 miles of the site. Depths were not reported for these wells but presumably,
they draw from local, shallow alluvial aquifers'
The shallowest occurrence of groundwater for the subject properties is likely perched waters
within the Sharrard park alluvium. A perched groundwater system likely exists beneath
portions of the subject property. The.underlying wasatch bedrock acts as an aquitard for
vertical percolation
"na'
pro*oies lateral flow to the south towards the colorado Fliver. The
depth, lateral extent ani continuity of the groundwater is unknown, but is expected to be
somewhat limited. Each individual drainage system may have independent groundwater
systems associated with each one. The perched grouldwater system may provide some
recharge to any permeable intervals in the WasatCh. Due to the discontinuous nature of the
sandstones, development of a regional groundwater aquifer is unlikely. Groundwater quality
for the shallow perc'hed system iJreportLoly poor due to high total dissolved solids and would
not be potable. Natural sulfate, manganese and arsenic concentrations in baseline water
quality measurements (for wells within the Anvil Points Facility perched groundwater system,
to the north of the site) are above the Secondary Drinking Water Standards'
solid wastes/Hazardous wastes The landfill lease and proposed expansion lands were
surveyed for hazardoGiit6riab on April 4, 1996. The survey revealed no indication that
hazardous materials were Present or had been stored on the site. A search of the records by
BLM personnel was conducted in accordance with section 120(h) of the Comprehensive
Environmental Response, compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (cERCLA) and revealed no
indication that the site has been used for the disposal or storage of hazardous materials
(Appendix C)
Approximately 1.5 miles to the northwest of the northwest boundary of the site is the former
Bureau of Mines oil shate Experiment station (Anvil Points Facility (APF)). This facility
conducted experimental oil shale processing and production operations between 1947 and
1982. The facility accumulated approximately 360,000 tons of retorted shale and raw shale
along the banks of West Sharrard Creek. The operations also included the use, storage, and
disposal of chemicals including acids, solvents, basic solutions, metals, and petroleum
products.
APF is listed on EPA's CERCLIS and has been the subject of 2 Preliminary Assessments
(PA's). Flecommendations of No Further RemedialAction Planned were made in both PA's,
most recently in June 1994. The distance to the Colorado River and remote location combine
to produce the conclusion that the facility poses little threat to human health or the
environment.
Environmental impacts of APF were primarily to West Sharrard Creek surface and
groundwater quality. Studies have indicated that surface and groundwater contamination in
the vicinity of Wast Sh arrard Creek has occurred in the past. A release of oily substance in
1979 reportedly reached the Colorado River, thereby flowing across the western edge of the
proposed sale tract. The shale pile showed evidence of self-retorting. This appears to have
stopped by'1993. An oily seep was noted below the pile in 1992 but has since then stopped.
Groundwater contamination including dissolved metals, TDS, and volatile and semivolatile
organics have been observed in monitoring wells located down-gradient of the shale pile and
industrialwaste disposal ponds. Recent sampling results indicate decreases in organic
contaminants to below regulatory levels. Groundwater monitoring is on-going on the APF
property. There has been no identifiable contamination of the Colorado River from the APF
but the high dilution factor would be expected to make detection of contaminants unlikely.
The on-going oil and gas exploration and production activities is a source of potential
contamination of the site. Contamination could come from 1) leaching of drilling and
production fluids into the subsurf ace,2) migration of fluids and gasses from the well bore, and
3) unauthorized dumping of material in the landfill by oil and gas production personnel. As
outlined in EA No. CO-078-5-31 these issues have been resolved in a manner which
minimizes or removes these concerns. There are several producing wells on the site and
additionaldrilling activity on the site is expected to occur. This activity involves the use of
unlined drilling (mud circulation) pits and production pits. Within the last year, the operator
has converted the one unlined production pit on the site to a concrete vault, in response to
concerns regarding potential infiltration of liquids from these pits. For all new wells to be
located on the tract, the production facilities will be located off-site. Raw gas will be piped off
site for processing (separation of produced water and condensate from the oil and gas.)
Possible contaminants from oil and gas drilling and production operations may include volatile
and semi-volatile organics, solvents, acids, and brine fluids (high TDS). lmproper
management of these materials, in combination with the relatively permeable surface soils
could result in the percolation of fluids into the subsurface.
Soils Soiltype across the site is fairly uniform, consisting of a Nihill channery loam. (A
channery soil is one that is by volume more than 15 percent thin flat fragments'of sandstone,
shale, slate, limestone, or schist as much as 6 inches along the longest axis.) This soil is
formed in alluvium derived from Green River shale and sandstone. The surface layer is a
channery loam, about 11 inches deep. Beneath that is a 7 inch layer of very channery loam,
overlying an extremely channery sandy loam/extremely channery loam to a depth of 60
inches. permeabilig is moderately rapid. Surface runoff is slow and the erosion hazard is
severe.
Threatened and Endanoered Soecies The area was surveyed for threatened and
@n November of 1995. The Debeque milkvetch (Astraqalus
debeqJaeusj was found in one area in the northwest portion of the expansions lands adjacent
t" W""t Sh*rard Creek. Wetherill's milkvetch (Astraqalus wetherillii) occurs on the north and
northeast side of a clay pocket in the SE4SW4 of Section 17. This area was subsequently
Jroppeo from consid"iaiion for saie. The threatened bald eagle might be expected to hunt
over'the area in winter but would not be affected. No other threatened or endangered animals
are thought to occur in the immediate area.
wildlifelwildlife Habitat The area is a relatively flat, sage/greasewood habitat type with
saltbush and a predominantly cheatgr,ass understory. There is limited water and tree cover.
The adjacent hills support pinyon and juniper cover.
Wildlife found in the area is representative of that typically found in the surrounding
semidesert shrub vegetative type. Common mammals include cottontail and jackrabbits, deer
mice, woodrats, pocliet gophers, coyotes, and skunks. Common birds include mourning dove,
horned lark, and commo-n iavens. Various raptors frequent the area, including golden and
bald eagles.
The area provides critical habitat for mule deer during severe winters (typically about 2 of
every 10 winters.) On those winters snow height covers the adjacent winter ranges to a depth
rendlring it unavailable to the deer. lt typically provides lower value to other wildlife species
than adjicent areas, due to lack of cover, lack of vegetation diversity, the amount of
development and loss of migration cbrridors because of the lnterstate-7O game proof fence
excluding immigration from game management unit 42.
Reclamation efforts on the existing closed landfill cells has been less than idea as is the case
at the surrounding gas well sites'
Livestock Grazinq The subject area lies with grazing allotment #18902, leased to J. Gentry.
Th" totrl perrnit f"r the allotment is 700 AUM's. The proposed sale would reduce the permit
by .15 AUi/,s or 2.1%. The landfill lease is not currently fenced and livestock commonlY graze
within the lease boundary.
Neiqhborinq Land The site is surrounded on the north by federal government lands (BLM
,"d l.l"ral Oil Snate Reserve), and on the west, south and east by private property. A
residence is located approximat ely 1/z mile north of the 8o-acre parcel (section 21 ). The
residence lies at an elevation of approximately 140 feet higher than that of the northern edge
of the proposed 80-acre expansion parcel and 160 feet higher in elevation than the main
landfill operation in sections 17 and 20. The existing landfill operation is visible from an area
approximately 150 yards south of the residence. The owners of this residence have
complained jeriodiially to BLM, Garfield County Commissioners, and landfill personnel about
blowing trasir, birds, smells noise, dust, and impact on property value and they objected to
the lea-sing of the 80 acres of public land (south of their residence) for landfill purposes in
1g82. These gO acres were withdrawn from the lease application at that time.
t0
V. Environmental Consequences:
A. Proposed Action
Visual Resources Continued development of the landfill after the sale would be noticeable
and may attract attention. This would add to the continuing impacts from the expanding oil
and gas development in the immediate area. Eventual closure and reclamation of the landfill
would partially mitigate these impacts. Closed landfill cells would more or less perrnanently
remain somewhat above the original grade (a design feature used to promote drainage of
water off of closed cells.)
Recreational Resources The proposed action would reduce the public land acreage in the
area and effectively eliminate public access to the remaining public land directly north and
west of the landfill (approximately 380 acres.)
Cultural Resources The proposed action has been configured so as to avoid some of the
affected cultural resources. Parts of the subject tract contain remnants of the Havemeyer-
Wilcox Canal System, specifically, the High Line Canal. This site has been mitigated by the
following: 1) a single feature along this linear site was avoided through realignment of the
project boundary, thereby retaining the feature on BLM land, and 2) 8 features which were
identified along the canal as it crosses the 80 acres in section 21 have been thoroughly
documented and recorded archaeologically through photodocumentation and GPS (Global
Positioning System) survey. The combination of avoidance, archival photography, and survey
has been determined to be sufficient mitigation. The proposed action would eventually
obliterate that portion of the canal located on the subject lands.
Additionally, eight other cultural properties would be obliterated by the proposed action.
These include 4 isolated prehistoric properties, 2 prehistoric camps, and three historic
properties. These sites have been mitigated through recordation.
Paleontoloqical Resources The proposed action has been developed so as to avoid direct
impact to the fossil resources through avoidance. Garfield County had initially identified a
narrow npocket" of clay soil in a narrow draw immediately adjacent to the project area in
section 17. This area was identified as an area the County wished to include in the purchase
and would be used as a source of clay soil for cell liner material. lt included an additional
draw directly to the north, and the steep ridge dividing the two. This area was finally dropped
from consideration for sale due to these concerns. However, the County continues to be
interested in the area as a clay source and BLM has indicated we will consider permitting the
removal of soil if proper mitigation measures can be developed. These measures might allow
for some loss of fossils. Therefore, sale of the landfill might indirectly lead to the loss of some
fossil resources.
Mineral Resources The oil and gas resources would be reserved by the United States.
The area is currently leased for oil and gas development and leases are held hy production
(Barrett Resources (Barrett)). Considerable discussions have been held in the past between
Barrett, BLM, and Garfield County in order to ensure that gas development and landfilling
activities can co-exist (see EA No. CO-078-5-31, Barrett Resources Proposed Gas Wells
Within & Adjacent to the GARCO Landfill, 1995.). Barrett has adjusted their operations
11
considerably to ensure that oil and gas operations will not affect the landfill operations or
contaminate the surface or subsurface. This inciudes conversion of unlined production pits to
lined vaults, relocation of drilling locations, and stricter control of access by oilfield personnel
to reduce the chance of unauthorized dumping in the landfill. Garfield County will have to
locate future disposal cells so as to allow for gas production activities. Barrett has committed
to attempting directional drilling using existing well pads to minimize future disturbance within
the sale area. lt these efforts prove impractical, it may be necessary to locate additional well
pads within the"sale area which would reduce the amount of land available for landfilling and
increase the coordination problems between Garfield County and Barrett and the BLM as the
oil and gas estate owner.
There are no other mineral resource values identified on the subject site. The site is currently
withdrawn for oil shale development. However, the mineral report establishes that there are
no oil shale values on the site. The site is located on the periphery of the withdrawal, outside
of the oil shale area. The withdrawal would be modified, revoking it for the subject lands.
This partial revocation would not interfere with oil shale development on the adjacent Naval Oil
Shale Reserve, should that ever occur.
Groundwater/Surface Water The landfillcurrently operates in compliance with the State and
Federal regulations. The property satisfies the locationalstandards stipulated by the State
regulations.
Garfield County is curreritly in the process of obtaining approval of an amended operations
plan in order to comply with the amended EPA and State regulations governing solid waste
disposal. lt is anticipated that additionalgroundwater monitoring wells will be required in order
to meet the stricter groundwater monitoring requirements. Additionally, stricter standards for
disposal cell liners are expected.
The landfill should generate little or no leachate due to the low precipitation experienced by
the area. A properly designed and constructed liner would be expected to stop any leachate
that might be produced. ln the unlikely event that leachate penetrated the liner, contamination
of the nearest "regional" aquifer (300 to 600 subsurface) is unlikely. The shallow perched
system appears to be laterally discontinuous, as evidenced by the existing well data. The
unlikely accidental contamination of parts of this aquifer would not be expected to have
significant impacts since its utilization as an aquifer is unlikely.
With proper run-on and run-off control, surface water would not be lmpacted by the landfill and
related waste management operations on the site. Proper reclamation of the active landfill
and future cells should adequately control surface water. ln the absence of future BLM
regulation of the landfill, the existing EPA and State regulations should adequately answer
ground and surface water concerns.
Solid Wastes/Hazardous Wastes The proposed sale of the existing landfill and proposed
expansion area should have a positive impact on solid waste management for the area by
providing for long-term solid waste disposal for Garfield County.
The land transfer audit concludes that there is a reasonable basis to believe the illegal
dumping of potentially hazardous waste at the landfill has not occurred. The landfill has had
12
controlled access with an attendant at the gate since its opening in 1982. The landfill may
have received exempt household hazardous waste. The shallowest occurrence of a regional,
bedrock aquifer is estimated to be 300 to 600 feet. Leachate generation and migration is
unlikely due to the dry climate and disposal cell design. The audit does note the possibility
that contamination of perched groundwater may have occurred from the septage
impoundments and oil and gas operations. However, there is no indlcation of this having
occurred. Existing monitoring wells do not indicate this occurrence. The clay liners in the
septage impoundments have been constructed to accepted standards. Additionally, the
anticipated stricter cell liner requirements, expanded groundwater monitoring program, and
stricter oil and gas operations (lined production pits and stricter access control - now in place)
should ensure that contamination will not occur. ln the unlikely event perched groundwater
was impacted, the impacts would be limited as the perched groundwater system is believed to
be laterally discontinuous (i.e. not a regional aquifer) and the chance that contamination
would move beyond the landfill boundary would be remote.
Soils The proposed action would result in the eventual removal of vegetation on the
majority of the site. A small portion will serve as buffer areas and would not be disturbed.
The buffer would be located at the toe slopes of the hills and along drainages and roads.
Without proper erosion control design and reclamation, the potential for long term erosion and
soil loss would be significant. However, state and federal regulations governing landfill
design, operation, closure, and long term monitoring should effectively minimize the erosion
potential for the subject tract. The regulations are aimed at minimizing water movement onto
closed landfills in order to minimize percolation of water through the landfill cap. This reduces
or eliminates leachate production. Water movement across and off closed landfills is also
minimized in order to preserve the integrity of the landfill cap.
To this end, proper landfill design incorporates run-on and run-off control and reclamation.
Additionally, the total area of disturbiance at any one time is kept to a minimum. These factors
combine to effectively minimize negative impacts to soils. Garfield County is experimenting
with the use of mulch (wood chips) and periodic watering in the initial stages of seeding to
encourage revegetation of disturbed areas. The County is also looking into the possibility of
applying sewage treatment plant sludges on reseeded areas to attempt to encourage
revegetation of disturbed areas.
Anticipated impacts to soils on the existing landfill lease from the proposed action should be
minimal. The active cell area (one open cell hnd one recently closed cell with no
revegetation) covers approximately 10 acres. Previously closed cells cover an additional 10
acres. The septage impoundments, recycling area and entrance station represent a long-term
disturbance and total an additional 20 acres. lt would be anticipated that no more than 10
acres would be in active cells at any given time. The landfill operation will result in
approximately 40 acres of disturbance at any one time.
Threatened and Endanqered Species The buffer zone between West Sharrard Creek and
the proposed materials recovery area, and conversations with the County Road and Bridge
Department Director indicate the population of Debeque milkvetch (Astraoalus debequaeus)
would not be affected. Bald eagles would be expected to continue to fly over the area in
winter and significant adverse effects would not be expected..
13
wildlifelwildlife Habitat The site and surrounding area serves as critical mule deer winter
rrng"Jmp*t w"utO Oe expected to be two-fold. One impact is the removal of vegetation as
celli are opened. The other impact is the regular travel across the area which would serve to
discourage day-time deer use of the areas receiving traffic. The first impacts will be
minimizei by lieeping the active landfill area to a minimum and revegetation of closed cells.
To date, rev-egetation efforts have been less than ideal. Waiting for natural revegetation will
make the closld cells unavailable to deer in the short and intermediate term. Refer to Section
V, Mitigation Measures for a discussion of possible mitigation for wildlife habitat loss.
The proposed action would result in a larger area available to the county for eventual
tanaiitting use. Relatively flat land within the current lease boundary comprises approximately
170 acre!. The proposed sale would increase that amount to approximately 225 acres. lt
reclamation efforts were successful, much of the acreage would be available for wildlife at any
given time. However, as noted previously, reclamation efforts at the landfil has been less than
ideal. This adds to the habitat loss resulting from similar unsatisfactory reclamation on drill
pads and pipelines associated with gas development in the immediate area (estimated to totai
90-plus acres, including roads.)
Small mammals and birds would be displaced in these areas. Repopulation would be
expected after reclamation of these areas was accomplished-
Livestock Grazinq Sale of the proposed acreage would result in an eventual reduction of '15
AUMbfi th" grazng allotment which is currently set at 700 AUM's. This would amount to a
reduction o12.1"n. lne grazing allottee has expressed dissatisfaction with this action and is
not inclined to sign a waiver of the two-year notification requirement, meaning the
administrative aclion of reducing the grazing preference cannot take place until two years from
the date of his receipt of the Federal Register notice (5 May 1 996). He has indicated he
thinks he will not be adequately compensated for the loss of AUM's and has stated he
believes the County should be required to perform some brush control work on his allotment
to make up for the ioss of AUM's and the County should be required to fence the landfill.
Federal giazing regulations do not require that grazing allottees be compensated for loss of
AUM,s as a reJult of land disposals. Livestock grazing also impacts the reclamation efforts
within the landfill since the landfill is not fenced.
Neiohborinq Land Expansion of the landfill to the east (section 21) would directly impact the
.r".r"d'l"g fr"te land. A residence is located approximalely 1/z mile to the north of the B0'
""r" "*prnlion
parcel in section 21. The main access road to this residence passes through
the gO-acre parcel. Alternate access to the residence is available and would avoid passing
through the gg-acre parcel. However, this access route is considerably longer. Concerns
expre-ssed by the landowner regarding noise, dust, birds, smell, and blowing trash are valid.
The landowner has also raised concerns regarding the undermining of a range fence due to
adjacent landfill chainlink construction and invasion of weeds from disturbed areas at the
tanOtitt (thistles, in particular.) Garfield County has agreed to try to minimize the impacts
related to smell, dust, and blowing trash as much as possible, though realistically, these
issues will be present to some degree for as long as the landfill operates. Problems with the
fence and weed invasion can probably more easily be attended to.
Visibility of the landfill operations on the 8o-acre parcel from the residence and immediate
14
surroundings would be partially obscured due to the abundance of vegetation (trees, shrubs)
in the vicinity of the house and due to a small rise approximately 800 feet south of the
residence which partially obscures at least the west half of the 80-acre parcel. As one moves
farther south of the residence and the rise, and farther to the east on the private land, the 8O-
acre parcel would become more visible and any landfilling operations here would likewise
become more visible. During the active life of a given landfill cell, large piles of dirt
(excavated from the pit) are present. These piles are 20-30 feet above surrounding grade on
the existing landfill operation. The rise south of the residence would probably obscure this
activity on at least the west half of the 8O-acre parcel, but only from the residence. Dust
generated from landfilling would be visible from all surrounding areas. Blowing trash would be
expected to continue to be a problem, particularly if regular efforts are not made to pick up
scattered trash. The final grade of closed cells would be above that of the original grade, in
order to maximize use of the land and to provide for positive drainage of the closed cell (to
minimize potential for percolation of water and leachate production.) Although some settling
would occur in the long term, this abnormally high grade would probably be noticeable in
perpetuity.
The plan of development includes a buffer zone on both sides of the access road (through the
80-acre parcel). However, this is the primary access road to the private residence and
persons. using the access road would come in direct contact with landfill operations. Waste
haulers would have to cross this access road to reach landfill cells on the east half of the 80-
acre parcel.
The originallease application in 1982 included this parcel but was dropped from the
application due to the objections of the owners of the residence. The location of the landfill
probably had a negative impact on the value of the residence and surrounding private
property. The expansion of the landfill to the 8O-parcel would very likely result in an additional
reduction in value of the property. The precise degree to which the proposed sale would
effect the property's value would be impossible to predict.
The owner of the private property directly south of the landfill has indicated he has no
objection to the proposed sale of lands for the landfill.
B. No Action Alternative
Under this alternative, it is assumed landfilling activity on the BLM R&PP lease would continue
for at least a few years more. Ultimately, it is likely BLM would discontinue the one-year lease
renewals, resulting in the closure of the landfill and relocation elsewhere. The following
discussions are based on this assumption. The design and permitting time and capitaf
expenditure for an alternate site would be expected to be similar to that of the existing landfill.
Visual Resources There would continue to be a short-term impact to visual resources until
the landfill ceased operations. As equipment and structures were removed and the land was
reclaimed, visual impacts due to the.landfill would decrease. Gas developmenhin the area
would be expected to continue, resulting in further degradation of the visual resources from
this activity.
!(
Recreational Flesources Public access to the-public lands would remain much the same as
is currently the case.
cultural Flesources Under this alternative there would be no further impacts to the Highline
C*,"1 * th" "th"adentified
cultural resources from landfilling activities.
paleontoloqical Resources There would be no direct impacts. Assuming the landfill was
closed before ttre ctay soitsource was needed, and assuming the replacement landfill was
relocated far enough'away that the clay source was no longer a practicalsource, there would
be no potential forlndirect impacts to fossil resources either.
Mineral Resources There would be no impact to mineral resources other than oil and gas
A;*l"pr""t Th" mineral report has estabiished that oil and gas are the only valuable
mineral resources in the "r"". Erp"nsion and long-term operation of the landfill will require
,or" ""r"tul coordination between the landfill opeiator and the oil and gas lessee and might
increase production costs. Eventual closure of the landfill would lessen the restrictions on oil
and gas develoPment.
Groundwater/surface water lmpacts would be the same as for the proposed action.
Closure of the lanoffiuto result in earlier reclamation of those lands currently being actively
used for landfill purposes. Long-term monitoring of groundwater would continue to be required
by EpA and the Colorad.o Department of Health and the Environment.
Solid Wastes/Hazardous Wastes Failure to sell the existing landfill and expansion area
would have a negaiive iffit on solid waste management for Garfield county. Premature
closure of the tanotitt wouid force relocation of the landfill and would not permit the County to
fully utilize the investment already expended'
Planning, design, and permitting of a new landfill site would be expected to require at least 2-3
years "io " minimum of several hundred thousand dollars. Garfield county would be required
io continue long-term groundwater and methane gas monitoring for the closed landfill, in
addition to estiblishing similar monitoring for the new landfill-
Soils Reclamation of the existing disturbed areas would take place immediately upon
Eii-.rr" of the landfill, resulting in quicker stabilization of the soils.
Relocation of the landfill would result in extensive soil disturbance of the new site. Experience
shows that inevitably, reestablishing vegetation and stabilizing soils on disturbed sites is less
satisfactory tnan noi disturbing the iite in the first place. Therefore, relocation of the landfill
could potentially produce greater negative impacts to the soils.
Threatened and Endanoered Soecies Threatened and endangered species would not be
impacted.
WildlifeilVildlife Habitat Closure and reclamation of the existing site would permit
@nimalsdisplacedbytheactivelandfilloperation.Closureofthelandfill
would result in less vegetation removal from the site thereby preserving more critical deer
winter range. Some oitni. would still be eventually be impacted due to the ongoing gas
development and less than ideal reclamation efforts at these sites.
Livestock Grazinq The grazing lessee would not suffer a loss in the grazing preference
associated with the allotment. Upon closure and re-vegetation of the landfill area, these lands
would provide some livestock forage.
Neiqhborinq Land Closure of the landfill would mean the neighboring private land would not
be further impacted. Windblown trash and dust would cease to be a problem.
C. Sale of less than the proposed acreage
This alternative would involve excluding the B0 acre parcel in section 21 in orderto satisfythe
objections of the landowners to the north of that parcel.
Visual Resources Visual impacts from landfilling would be reduced.
Recreation Resources lmpacts to public access would be much the same as for the
proposed action. The public lands to the north of the landfill area would be cut off from public
access.
Cultural Resources The 80 acre parcel contains the remnants of the Highline canal of the
Havemeyer-Wilcox canal system. Exclusion of this parcel would spare this segment of the
canal from eventual obliteration.
Paleontoloqical Resources There are no paleontological resources identified on the 80
acre parcel and therefore no effect from this alternative. Smaller acreage devoted to
landfilling might reduce the demand for the clay soil source discussed earlier and might lessen
the chance that fossil resources in this area will be sacrificed for the clay extraction, or may
lessen the extent to which the clay removal may occur.
Mineral Resources There would be fewer conflicts with the existing oil and gas
development on this parcel if the parcel was not dedicated for landfill development.
Surface Water/Groundwater Exclusion of this parcel would eliminate some of the native
vegetation loss from the landfilling activity. With proper run-on/run-off control, soil erosion
should not increase from landfilling activity and this alternative should have no impacts on
surface water. With proper cell liner design, and due to low precipitation, and therefore no
leachate production, there should be no impacts to groundwater.
Solid Waste/Hazardous Waste Exclusion of this parcel would result in less land available
for landfilling and would shorten the potential life span of the landfill. Garfield County would
have to seek other lands for landfilling at some point in the future. This might include
adjacent private lands, in which case the County would presumably have to pay fair market
value. This would be a greater cost than the $10.00 per acre allowed by the Recreation and
Public Purposes Act.
Soils The 80-acre parcel would not be disturbed by landfilling activity. As noted in the
discussion of surface water impacts, there would probably be no significant impacts, either
17
positive or negative, to soils from this alternative'
Threatened and Endanqered Soecie-q_ There would be no impacts to threatened and
enA"ngered species from this alternative'
wirdriferuirdrife Habitat This arternative wourd eriminate, or reduce the rate of removal of
the native vegelation-(Some continued removal of native vegetation can be expected from
the continued oil "nJ
g". development abtivities.) This would mean a reduced' or slower loss
of critical deer winter habitat.
Grazing This alternative would result in a smaller reduction in AUM's' relative to the
projected 15 AUM loss from the proposed action. The projected reduction from this action
would be approximately 1 o AUM',s, amounting lo 1 .4"/o of the 700 AUM permit'
Neiqhborino Land Exclusion of this parcel would reduce the impacts to the owners of the
residence rocated 1/zmire north of this parcer and wourd minimize the objections voiced thus-
far. problems with urowing trash and dust would continue to require active efforts on the part
of Garfield County in ordel to minimize negative impacts from these problems'
Vl. Mitigation Measures
A. Proposed Action
To partially mitigate the effects of the landfill operation on the neighboring private landowners'
it is proposed that the county time the use of ihe subject rands so that the B0 acres in section
21 areused last. erir,ough iiwould still result in the eventual use of the subject land' it would
as teast ensure tnaiine iresent landowners would not be directly confronted with the landfill
operation immediatelY adjacent'
To mitigate the loss of the remnant of the highline cala], the canal would be surveyed'
archivally photographeJ, and mapped. A report would be submitted to the State Historic
Preservation Officer for approval of the mitigation'
Public Access To preserve public access to the remaining public lands. to the north of the
landfill, BLM should reserve an easement for public access at the two critical points on the 25
acre remnant parcer (northwest corner (southwest part of rot 20. section '17) and southwest
corner (southwest part of lot '10, section 20'))
wildlife Habitat Mitiqation There are several options to mitigate the loss of wildlife habitat'
The concern is the iit..tr of the loss of critical deer winter range. lt is estimated the longterm
disturbance of land from access roads, septage impoundments, the entry station/office, the
active cell and cells undergoing revegetation etforts results in a disturbance of approximately
40 acres of rand at any givln ti-me. T:he foilowing options courd be used to at least partially
mitigate the impacts of the landfill operation'
1) Livestock grazing could be eliminated from the site by fencing' This would improve the
pttential for rJclamition of disturbed areas and would provide more forage for deer on the
undisturbed areas of the tract due to the elimination of livestock grazing'
to
2) Revegetation objectives should emphasize the establishment of perennial grasses, forbs,and shrubs which are palatable to mule deer during winter and spring months. At least threegrass, 2torb, and one shrub species should be incllded in the seed irix. The shrub speciesshould be one that does not have a root system deep enough to penetrate the landfill 'cap (2-3feet). Penetration of the cap by plant roots provides a conduit for water to reach the refuse,creating the potential for leachate production. Additionally, the requirement for active weedcontrol efforts would benefit wildlife and livestock grazing on adjacent lands by slowing thespread of noxious weeds to adjacent properties.
3) Off-site mitigation (a ratio of 1:1 to replace the acreage disturbed atthe landfill atanygiven time (approximately 40 acres)) would help offset the habitat loss resulting from the tagtime in establishing vegetation on closed cells and the loss from and other longer termdisturbed areas (materials recycling area, septage impoundment pits, etc.) This would consistof mechanical treatment of pinyon{uniper or s"gLbrrsh (roller chopping, jiscing, or dozing)and reseeding. Temporary fencing (electric or barbed wire) would'be aJviseo in order toexclude livestock until the area is successfully revegetated. Additional offsite mitigation 1:1ratio) for closed cells where satisfactory reclamatio,i *"" not accomplished within three yearswould provide further mitigation for habitat loss. Offsite mitigation should be within the samegeneralarea as the landfill.
The offsite mitigation should be a cooperative effort between Garfield County, the BLM, andColorado Division of Wildlife (cDoW) with Garfield county providing the mechanical treatmentof vegetation and reseeding and BLM/CDow providing the seed.
4) A requirement for raptor-proofing of powerlines constructed on the property would eliminateelectrocution hazards for raptors.
The Proposed Action and proposed patent reservations and conditions adequately mitigatesany other potentiar negative impacts of the proposed action.
B. No Action - None
C. Sale of Less Than the proposed Acreage
Exclusion of the 8O-acre.parcel would mitigate the neighboring landowners objections. ltwould also partially reduce cultural resource and wildliie habitat impacts. Additionally, thosemitigative measures listed for the Proposed Action (with one exception) would be applicablefor this alternative. The proposal to sequence the use of the g0 acres last would not beapplicable..
Vll. ResiduaUCumulative lmpacts
A. Proposed Action r
The. gol! of the proposed sale is to remove the United States from any future involvement inthe landfill' However, there is no guarantee that the United States would not be involved if afuture hazardous materials contamination problem developed. lt is possible that in spite of the
-
19
Vlll. Consultation and Coordination
A. Persons and Agencies Consulted'
King Loyd, Garfield County Road and. Bridge De.partment
Jennifer Fligg, Flegi*uiiofi"itor, Rocky'Miuntain Region' US Department of the lnterior
Bud Curtis, nppr"i*i, a;;;;i Land Management' Grand Junction District
Oonn" Stoner,'Colorado Department of Health
'21
23
lX. References:
Development and Management Plan, west Garfield county Landfill, TerraMatrix lnc., 1gg5
Land rransfer Audit, west Garfield county Landfiil, TerraMatrix rnc., 1g95
ffi:":m'i:'"'#ffj:::l$jor rhe west Garfierd countv Landfirr, Garfierd county, cororado,
3:ffii,:l1ff,i.Titffnt or Asricurture, soil conservation service, soir survey or Garrierd
8;flt;:il l^:;Ii# 3:,*:::: rff li ffi"' G a rrie rd c o u n rv La n d riil, G arrie rd co u n tv,
BUREAU OF LAND MANAqEMENT
GRAND IUT'ICIOU DISTRICT OFFICE
=i,ffi?3,I$:3ro.1?,,
ProjectName:WestGarfieldCountyLandfillRecreation&PublicPurposesActSale
Findino of No Siqnificant lmPact:
r have reviewed this environmentar assessment incruding the expranation and. resolution of
any potentiarry sisnit';ani "nri,onr".,"iirr";i..
I il;;i"Li'ln"o that the Proposed Action'
with recommended mitigation *""rrr"l,-witt not have any significant impacts on the human
environment ano tnaiai "nvironm."nt"iirp""t-statemeni
ir ioir"qrired. t have determined
that the proposed A"il; is in conforr"n"" with the approved RMP and other plans for the
area.
Decision: lt is my decision to sellto Garfield County, under the terms of the Recreation and
Public Purposes o"ii"" ""'ended)'
the following lands:
Sixth PrinciPal Meridian
TownshiP 6 South' Range 94 West
Sec' 17: lots 18' 20' 22' and 24
Sec' 20; lots 1' 5' 8' and 11
Sec' 21; lots 1 and 2
Containing 259'60 acres' more or
Priortoissuanceofapatent,to.pjt.r.satethoseconcern.s.analyzedintheEnvironmental
Assessment, Garfietd County *illb-" ;ili;;; t; commit in wtiting' through an addendum to
the West Garfield County Landill D.;".il;ft;ift ffi"gttnuit Plan' to the following:
1)GarfieldCountywillagreelo.adjustthesequen^cingofthelandfillcelldevelopmentso
that the 8o-acre p;;;i lsecti6n 21' lots 1 and 2) will be used last'
2)GarfieldCountywillcomm.rttoaprogramof.regularfugitivetrashcontrolonthe
adjacent private ;;;av and noxious -1""i *rtror oi tne taiot,r property' Garfield county
wi, arso commit io consurtation with "#.pri"i" autnoritil. io a"t"trine what can be done to
;;;;;; the problem of nuisance animal pests'
3)GarfieldCounty*il|::l*^li:]anappropriatebufferzonebetweenlandfillactivitiesand
private properly Louni"'y tences in orderto protect these fences' \
4)GarfieldCountywillensu.re.thataccessacross.theSO-acreparcel(lots1and2,T'6S.,
R. 94w.) witr coffi"io u" "r"il"bi;-;lilo*n*t."
olh; lii'"t" residence and surrounding
property tor"t"O'Oirlrtiy n"rt1 ot tnJeJ-;"t. n^t.91,. Th;""ttt road willbe of at least the
same physical quality as that "urrrn,ri""i"i[[r"'
tnis requirement wilt apply unless alternate
access to the subject private lands is agreed upon between Garfield county and the owner(s)of the subject private lands.
li1 tT, Bureau of Land Management 1eLV) to proriO" ln_ri
s)Garfield county wiil agree to participate in a cooperative effort iinvolving the County
p *''$ r,d "'ilffi , ffi ::: : il il]: l :; T l :",: i,'"':1 i :,';: ffi::',l"J J::: H" ::i,?.?:1replace the acreage disturbed at
*""f::lll, L:lI :li^1 l13 f ^9
wiu equar lo lcres rn",it,g I;.r ;iil*ffiI ;,i',::ffi ;
::i,'Hi:f:l'ffr:,'.:::::r:h ["'tl-l-11"i",i1,e";; ;;;;;";il;;il;;,:n'ffi::,,
*::1,:Py:.9 !y q1sleoine; Jhe.Ieed mixtu,. *irr L" .* il;, il,, ;;rio:Tllli"l,ii,l
i il # ; fln il J0",," Iil:"J :, "aanar^l ^,^^ -^ rL ^ r,
*,f:f,:ii".lh,:1?1!ilt, remp.o,.?ry rencinj;ru;;;;;;;;r:;;il;" ffi:liil;:il?"
3:'y,::",H'::"':"'::llji::r:::g:':l:l :r:;"1 ii L-"n,i":;ffi il", ;;;;,I;.ff[,';1iiir.rit il" .l"o]
6),?T[':::::y,:1,::T':::^::1": :.l",,?fon errorts within the randriil boundary and,.i,"'i, ;;#;,fi":;il,Iirn^l^*^rl^- ^u- L-reclamation efforts.
7) Garfield
"9:nr,
will agree to provide administrative access to the Bureau of LandManagement, and its.authoriied agents, across the subject lands, for the purpose ofaccessing the archeologicaland pileontologicalr""our"L" on the remaining federal landslying north of the landfill area. This requirerient for access will be on " ""rE-by-case basis,and may include vehicular access. For each instance, the Bureau of LanJM"n"g"runt willcontact the Garfield county landfillsupervisor in advance to make
"""ng"rn"nts for access.
8) Garfieid County will commit to ensuring that access will be reserved to the Bureau ofLand Management, and it's authorized lgents", "";r;;;;, of the subject rands that aresubsequently sold by Garfield county. This will be for the purpose of accessing thearcheological and paleontological reiources on the remaining federaL lands north of the landfillarea.
9) Garfield county will commit to establishing a procedure whereby they will coordinatewith the oil and gas lessee regarding surface usJso that both Garfield county and the oil andgas lessee can use the surfacL esta-te in a mutuattty ueneiicial manner. rn" lil and gaslessee will continue to be bound by the conditions ireviously agreed to and set forth in theEnvironmental Assessment and Rlcord of Decision (co-oza-s-31), dated June 21, 1995.
The patent woutd be issued subject to the terms, conditions, and reservations listed in theappendix.
Rationale: The future of Bureau of Land Management (BLM) landfill leases is questionableat best' current BLM policy is aimed at getting dtu out !f active landfill permitting andmanagement' current lease renewals aie limiteo to one-year terms on a case-by-case basisand have been approved as an interim measure untilfinai R&pp regulations were approved.with approval of these regulations comes the implication that indefinite one-year leaseextensions are not likely. This creates an atmosphere of uncertainty that makes it moredifficult for local governments to justify the large capital ouilays necessary for landfill designand operation, not to mention the exienditure-s whah will be necessary to meet the latest EpA
regulations reqUiring long-term (30 year), post closure monitoring and financial assurance'
This Decision allows the Bureau of Land Management to proceed with the Recreation and
pubric purposes Act sare of the west Garfierd dounty Landfiil and designated adjacent lands
toGarfieldCoun$foruseasalandfillinaccordancewithexistingdevelopmentand
operations plans. The proposed action would secure a long-term site for Garfield county for
waste disposal and management purposes, enabling the County to continue to make the
capital expenditur"s n"c"i"ary to ensure compliancL with applicable state and federal
regulations. The p6;;;; "riion
would also enable the Bureau of Land Management to
accomplish Bureau policy and requirements to cease the leasing of public lands for solid
waste disposal prrpo""", while still enabling Garfield County to provide for the needs of its
residents in an environmentally sound manner'
The proposed action is consistent with the Recreation and Public Purposes Amendment Act of
198d, *ni"n permits the sale of waste disposal sites'
The proposed action is consistent, and in fact prompted by the BLM policy mandating the sale
or crosure of ail waste disposar sites on pubric'rands in order to minimize liability imposed by
.
the comprehensive Environmental Response, compensation, and Liability Act of 1980' which
mandates that ultimate liability for hazardous materials contamination and cleanup rests with
the landown"r, ,"g"idless of whether the landowner caused the contamination'
The environmental assessment process identified several conflicts that would result from the
proposed sale. following is a discu-ssion of these issues, along with any mitigating measures
io lessen the impacts of these conflicts'
Neighboring Land: The inclusion of the 80 acre parcel in section 21 has been controversial
from the time of the original development of the landfill. The original lease application
incruded this rand. However, Garfierd county withdrew their request"for the g0 acre parcel as
a resurt of objections from the owners of the private property rocated immediatery north of the
g0 acre parcel. Garfield county's purchase application has once again included the 80 acre
parcel. The private ;t"day o*n"t. have again objected to the inclusion of this parcel' citing
several impacts. These inciude: impacts ori property value; windblown trash' and animal
p."ir; a"rage to boundary fences; noxious weed invasion; and last but not least' the
negative esthetic impact of having an active randfiil ooperation rocated direcily adjacent to
their property. The mitigating measures listed above should lessn the negative impacts of the
proposed action.
At the current rate deveropment using the B0 acre parcer rast wourd forestail deveropment of
the 80 acre parcel until the year 2050. This projection could change with the change in
population of earfield b.rrtV A regular progralr of fug'rtaive trash control and noxious weed
controlshould minimize these impacts. ionJultation with appropriate authorities regarding
control of animal p"=t" m"y ptouide some avenues for improvement of this problem'
Additionally, Garfield county will be required to ensure th.at access will be provided across the
E0acreparceltotheadjacentprivatepropertytothenorth.
wirdrife Habitat: The randfiil area provides criticar winter mure deer habitat (typicaily 2 0ut of
every 10 years). Continued long-term use of the area for landfilling would result in thecontinued removal of the vegetation that provides this habitat. short-term rectamation of thedisturbed areas has proven difricult. This decision will require that Garfield county participatein a cooperative effort with the Bureau of Land Management to enhance mule deer habitatquality at, and in the immediate vicinity of the landfill.
f9c^9ss: The proposed action would block public access to the federal lands (BLM and Navaloil shale Resbrve) immediately north of the subject tract. BLM will reserue an easement forpublic access, including an area that can be developed as a public parking area in the future,as necessary, in order to preserve public reacreation opportunities io the ilderal lands northof the subject tract.
The proposed action would also prevent the BLM and it's authorized agents from accessingthe paleontological and archeological resources located north of the su6jecttract. To remedythis.,.BLM will require that Garfield County commit to providing administrative access to BLMand its authorized agents, including vehicular access if necessary, across the landfill property.This will be granted on a case by case basis, after a timely request from BLM to the GarfieldCounty landfill supervisor
Recommended by:
Area Manager Date
Approved by:
District Manager Date
APPENDIX
DECISION RECORD
co-078-6-31
Patent Provisions
ThepatenttotheselandswillreservetotheUnitedStates:
1)Aright-of-waythereonforditch.esandcanalsconstructedbyauthorityoftheUnited
Siates und6r the Aci of August 30, 1890' 43 U'S'C' 945'
2)Theoilandgasdeposltsinthelandssopatented,andtherightoftheUnitedStates,
or persons autnorizld-Uy tne United States, to prospect for, mine, and remove such deposits
from the same unoer appticaule laws and regulations as the secretary of the lnterior may
prescribe.
3)Aneasementandrightofwayover,across,anduponastripofland'60feetwide'the
west boundary of which is described as follows:
Beginning at a point which lies 79.7 tt. N. 0024',w. of the centerwest 1/16th section
corner of Section Z;i:i.-O S., n. 94 W., Sixth Principal Meridian, Colorado, and proceeding
N 0024,W., '1 15 ft., together with a svip of land, 15 feet wide, the west boundary of which is
described as follows:
Beginning at the West 1/16th section corner between Section 17 and Section 20, T' 6
S., R. 94W., Sixth Principal Meridian, Colorado, and proceeding N' 2001'E',576'84ft"
together with a tract of land, the description of which is follows:
BeginningattheWestl/l6thsectioncornerbetweenSectionlTandSection20,T.6
S., R. 94W., Sixth Principal Meridian, Colorado, and proceeding S' 51000'E', 18'75 ft'' thence
N.2oO1 ,E.,12.15 ft.,'il;;; S. AAo+Z'W., 15.00 feet, to the point of beginning, for the full use
as a trail "no
a"c""" roao uy the united states and its assigns, licensees, and permittees'
incruding the right of accesgand use for and by the peopre of the United States generally to
lands oined, aldministered, or controlled by the Unites States.
Provided, that if the Authorized officer determines that the reservation, or any segment
thereof, is no longer needed for the purposes reserved, the easement shall terminate' The
termination shail be evidenced by a staiement in recordabre form furnished by the appropriate
Authorized Officer to the patentees or their successors or assigns in interest'
Thepatentwillbesubjecttothefollowingtermsandconditions:i
1. Provisions of the Recreation and Public Purposes Act and to all applicable regulations
of the Secretary of the lnterior'
z. The patentee shall comply with all Federal and State laws applicable to the disposal,
-5
placement, or release of hazardous substances (substance as defined in 40 CFR Part 302.)
3. Those rights for telephone line purposes granted by right-of-way COC-35197.
4. Those rights for oil and gas production purposes granted by leases COC-27867 and
coc-27868.
5. Title sh'all revert to the United States upon a finding, after notice and opportunity for a
hearing, that the patentee has not substantially developed the lands in accordance with the
approved plan of development on or before the date five years after the date of conveyance.
No portion of the land shall under any circumstances revert to the United States if any such
portion has been used for solid waste disposal or for any other purposes which may result in
the disposal, placement, or release of any hazardous substance.
6. lf at any time, the patentee transfers to another party ownership of any portion of the
land not used for the purpose(s) specified in the application and approved plan of
development, the patentee shall pay the Bureau of Land Management the fair market value,
as determined by the authorized otticer, of the transferred portion as of the date of transfer,
including the value of any improvements thereon.
7.The lands described in this patent have been used and/
utilization as a solid waste disposal site. As of the date of patent, the lands have been used
as follows:
a) trench fill
b) depth of landfill: up to thidry feet
c) liner: compacted soil and clay
d) cover: three feet of compacted soil
e) Types and location of waste:
(1) Municipal solid waste and construction debris: Section 17, lots 18 and 24(2) Storage of tires, metal goods, including appliances (for recycling purposes) and
disposal of construction debris (wood): Section 20, lots 1 and 5(3) Liquid waste disposal (septage): Section 20, lot 5
f) During the remaining life of the site, the landfill operation will expand to use additional
areas suitable for landfill purposes and recyclable materials storage.
g) Location of permanent records: Garfield County permanent records regarding this site
(including detailed land-use plans and landfill specifications) will be locateJ at the Garfield
County landfill during the life of the landfill, and thereafter at the Garfield County Clerk and
Recorders Office, 109 8th St., Glenwood Springs, Colorado. Bureau of Land Management
lecords regarding this site willbe filed with the Bureau of Land Management, Colorido State
Otfice, Lakewood, Colorado.
h) Solid waste commonly includes small quantities of commercial hazardous waste and
household hazardous waste as determined in the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of
1976, asamended (42 U.S.C.6901), and defined in 40 CFR 261.4 and 261.5. Although th"r"
is no indication these materials pose any significant risk to human health or the environment,
future land uses should be limited to those which do not penetrate the liner or final cover of
the landfill unless excavation is conducted subject to applicable State and Federal
requirements.
g. Garfield County, its successors or assigns, shatl defend, indemnify, and save harmless
the United states and'its officers, agents, representatives, and employees (hereinafter referred
to in this clause as the United State!), from all claims, loss, damage, actions, causes of
action, expense, and liability (hereinafter reterred to in this clause as claims) resulting from,
brought for, or on account of, any personal injury, threat of personal injury, or property
damige received or sustained by any person or persons (including the patentee's employees)
or proierty growing out of, occuiring, or attributable directly or indirectly, to th9 disposal of
soiio wastl 6n, or' ihe release of haiardous substances from: Sixth Principal Meridian,
Colorado, T. 6 S., R. 94 W., Sec. 17: lots 9, 14, 15 and 16; Sec' 20; lots 1 , 2, 3 and 4; Sec'
21; lots 1 and 2, regardless of whether such claims shall be attributable to: (1) the concurrent,
contributory, or parlial fault, failure, or negligence of the United States, or (2) the sole fault,
failure, or negligence of the United Statei. ln the event of payment, loss, or expense under
this agreem"-ntl tn" patentee shall be subrogated to Jlg extent of the amount of such payment
to all iights, powers, privileges, and remedies of the United States against any person
regarding such payment, loss, or expense.
9. The patentee or his (its) successor in interest shall comply with and shall not violate
any of the terms or provisions of Title Vl of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (78 Stat. 241), and
requirements of the regulations, as modified or amended, of the. Secretary of the lnterior
issued pursuant theretl (€ cFR 17) tor the period that the lands conveyed herein are used
for the purpose for which the grant was made pursuant to the act cited above, or for another
purpose involving the provision of similar services or benefits.
10. lf the patentee or his (its) successor in interest does not comply with the terms of
provisions of Title Vl of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and the requirements imposed by the
bepartment of lnterior issued pursuant to that title, during the period during which the property
described herein is used for the purpose for which the grant was made pursuant to the act
cited above, or for another purpose'involving the provision of similar services or benefits, the
Secretary of the lnterior or i,i. delegate may declare the terms of this grant terminated in
whole or in part.
1 1. The patentee, by acceptance of this patent, agrees for himself (itself) or his (its)
successors in interest that a declaration of termination in whole or in part of this grant shall, at
the option of the Secretary or his delegate, operate to revest in the United States fulltitle to
the lands involved in the declaration
12. The united states shall have the right to seek judicial enforcement of the requirements
of Tiile Vl of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and the terms and conditions of tne rygut1lions, as
modified or amended, oi the Secretary of the lnterior issued pursuant to said Title Vl, in the
event of their violation by the patentee.
13. The patentee or his (its) successor in interest will, upon request of the Secretary of the
lnterior or his delegate, posi and maintain on the property conveyed by this document signs
-7
and posters bearing a legend concerning the applicability of Title Vl of the Civil Rights Act of
1964 to the area or facility conveyed.
14. The reservations, conditions, and limitations contained in paragraphs (1) through (5)
shallconstitute a covenant running with the land, binding on the patentee and his (its)
successors in interest for the period for which the land described herein is used for the
purpose for which this grant was made, or for another purpose involving the provision of
similar service$ or benefits
15. The assurances and covenant required by sections (1 O)-(14) above shall not apply to
ultimate beneficiaries under the program for which this grant is made. "Ultimate beneficiaries"
are identified in 43 CFR 17.12(h).
Appendix C
Memorandum
To: File COC 35148
From: District Manager
Subject: CEFICLA 120(h) Records Search
ln accordance with section 120(h) of the Comprehensive Environmental Response,
Compensation and Liability Act of 1980 a search of the BLM files has been conducted for the
purpose of determining if there is any indication that hazardous materials have been stored for
a period of year or more, released, or disposed of on the following lands:
Sixth Principal Meridian
Township 6 South, Range 94 West
Sec. 17: lots '18,20,22, and 24
Sec. 20; lots 1, 5, 8, and 11
Sec. 21; lots 1 and 2
Containing 259.60 acres, more or less
The subject lands include 155.92 acres presently leased to Garfield County, Colorado, under
the terms of the Recreation and Public Purposes Act for sanitary landfill purposes, and an
additional 103.68 acres of unleased, adjacent public land.
The Bureau of Land Management proposes to sell the subject lands to Garfield County for
landfill purposes..
ln order to determine if the BLM records revealed any indication that hazardous materials
were either stored for a period of one year or more, released, or disposed on the subject
lands, the following Bureau of Land Management records were examined.
1) Historical lndex
2) Master Title Plats, including Oil and Gas Plats
3) Mining Claim index
4) R&PP LandfillCasefile Number COC-35148
A search of these records revealed the following authorizations encumbering all or various
parts of the subject lands: . i
GS-20 Desert Land Entry (DLE), 2/A1892, canceled 2/10/1898
Secretarial Order, Withdrawal, Grand Valley Reclamation Project, Agl19O8, revoked 2/1en910
GS-04223 Hornestead Entry (HE), 411811910, Relinquished 9/2911910\
GS-04336 DLE, 5/9/1910, canceled 2/611915
on the tract will have the production facilities located off lease.
parts of the tract are currently withdrawn for oil shale development. The withdrawal will be
revoked as it pertains to this iract. The mineral report prepared for the proposed sale
indicates there are no oilshale resources at this elevation. The tract is on the periphery of
the withdrawn area.
Experimental oilshale mining and processing has occtrrred on the adjacent Naval Oil Shale
Reserve, and the former U.S. Bureau of Mines, Anvil Points Facility (APF) was located within
the Naval oil Shale Reserve boundary, approximalely 1/2 mile northwest of the subject tract.
The landfill transfer audit, prepared by TerraMatrix, lnc. (May, 1995) revealed that the APF
has been listed on EpA,s bf RCU|S. The facility was the subject of two Prellmlnary
Assessments (pA), with recommendations by the EPA of No Further Remedial Action Planned
(NFRAP) having been made in both PA's, most recently in June of 1994'
Surface and groundwater contaminant investigations have been conducted at APF, specifically
concentrated on West Sharrard Creek, which flows across a part of the subject tract.
Groundwater contamination including dissolved metals, total dissolved solids, volatile and
semi-volatile organics have been observed in monitoring wells located down-gradient of the
facility (but upgiadient of the tract), indicating that these materials may have flowed across
tne subject tia-ct. fne most recent monitoring results indicate organic constituents below
regulatory limits. Elevated inorganic constituents (manganese and sulfate) in surface and
gr6undwater exceed Secondar! Drinking Water Standards but are likely the result of naturally
Ilevated levels of these elements. The only documented release of material from APF that
is known to have crossed the landfill sale tract occurred in 1979. This was a realease of oil
produced from a fire in the spent shale pile. We recommend that the patent, if issued, contain
notification of this release. ividence of self-retorting within portions of the shale pile was
present in two gas vents at the top of the pile. This retorting had stopped by 1993. An oily
seep (evidently tne product of the self-retorting) was noted below the pile in 1992 but has
since ceased to flow. Although this material may have crossed the subject tract, there is no
analysis or other documentation that this did indeed occur. As noted in the landfill transfer
audii, the pA,s indicate the ApF poses little threat to human health or the environment due to
the distance to the Colorado River, the discontinuous nature of the shallow aquifer, and the
rural location.
CONCLUSIONS:
A review of the records reveals no indication that anything other than exempt household
hazardous waste was deposited at the site from either the landfill lease operations or the
natural gas production activitY.
There is sufficient information to indicate that contamination of the surface and/or shallow
groundwater system of West Sharrard Creek may have occurred due to activities at the
iearby Anvil points Facility. There have been documented releases of hazardbus materials
from tiris facility into West Sharrard Creek, which crosses the subject sale tract on the west
side. The contamination problems have been remediated to the Environmental Protection
Agency,s satisfaction and no further remedial actions are planned for the facility.
is enrrrled tt
The county of Garfleld, stare of cororado,
ff ; $ j;:j .* i:if ,*_ ti:: :l,:;t,il fh ff:;"i;j ",I ; :3';;; lf u ir,.oi"" ".
Slxth prln,. ,;:,,rX1 i?";1r..", cororado,
III: lJ: i::: i,, ",o1,,,.and 24;sec. zi , r"." r.
,u,ij !; ,na r r .
NoI,{ KNotI rE
contalning 259'57 acres.
,'*"'#,a,r+r*t,tLffiffi
EXCEPTING AND RESERVING TO THE UNTTED STATES:1. A rjghr_of_wa}, Ehereon f,
il; T :l :il t, iff *i;::,';; S.'"' "J"1-. :,:n." T-"1 " c o n a E ruc Eed by r he
z. Arl or1 ,rr'::t,'no
rtte AcE of Augusr 30, 1890
persons
"'.1-o-9::
dePosl ts
remove ",,J;.;j,;",if:"*;*r,i*Td;lo.j.ol:::tiid: and Eo 1r, orreguraElons to be_;;.;;;1";$ ;f:^:T:i.:#:fii,rli:,r,,,0
.
3' An easeoeot anrr r{a,.-
-"c oecE€tary of trt" r.rc"troa.
#ff;J:"1:"1T,;::,:;:.;::l iliil"li"li";nixfl il";":":i;:: :l
"".."'ifjJl'i't, at, a pornr wr
slxrh n.rn.]1lo*t """,i"n'J'"n
lles 79'7 fe
H- + : :
t:',".'3:*-y"':]il;I 8ll:::"t "'"""i;::;r#lJrJ'
l, lr*.T,boundari ;i-;;[; Ilt:"rijl ::j:#rii";"". w,de, ,h";.",
@nireU $roreg ot?rnericn
lo bDorn 6crt pj231nlc,tall r0m?, Orrctdnn.
Page I of 6
Form lg60-9
(January tggg)Colorado 3514g
o
@be
Go all
WHEREAS
Patcnr \umber 05-gu-.{tOJ,<r
.t'4:v
,;
DfitB-ii
o _____
,[t[l|lq.HprColorado 3514g
Patent Number Ofi-"9h*.{t0.i_t,r
ix ifi li,lj ,** #]
t,' i', ti ; :
.-, r [i r i: t. r, :ir: : : i
i' n 1 7
,hlch rs ""'i"ril*::n". wrth a
HHff$.+*,.*fi* :
Pfovrde.r :L-.
'--s.\r' vL eontrolled by th'
"""11:1:
that 1r th
o,,,jlf".;:I":;;:;J:iiiii;::":;:,:er decermlnes,ha,,he
shal
.h".1-!e evrden;;;,.l"-""""n,""-'Ji"'ir'" " longer noerled ro. tt.
,, r;:l::;;i;,.J"^":.ff";":r.,r.r.L"Jj"i:".:,:Ii:!i: r,ljl"rli.,r,,"ri,,,
Ehe paEenr;;';'" iurnlshed by
SUBJECT To,
' -'rerrLEq or 1ts asslgns
l. Those
*i ;i, ** +*illll;llt mq:, ir, iI ;, "R. 94
Z. Those
n."ou.Ilfhts for olr a:
,.ijj :t
s,, f ,i
H,,,i;, r I ;. * #".ffi # :, #T, ll, * f ;; :
.
" . .
ylii;"i + i "" ffi
o:n.",ff I :;";: ::,
*$ il*iili, *,#ti:,ii *,,:lU **
"iffi
, :t -+s k,operaElons. ,,arenEee for daurase"_.""ur..i,;,;r;:;T.;r1l:Tr;rriiorl.,,
This patent {s subJect to rhe fol
r . ,"or, ", ^---^
':. t"." tor lowlng Ee rms and
amended,
.r-"^r,on-. or_ t he
^."." r. r'o; ;::,
" "ro t r i ons :
r n t".i o i .
a ncr to ; r i :r;;;J;;r'"":";;rt" l;j"r,l "" |,Iff ";:" I:J;,y, "or t h"
Page 2 of 6.
l[fl!,!q!#ry,guffi ffi #,ll#11,,!ll[r#
Colorado 35f4S
Patenr Number Us-$U-(f()Ut-r
Z. The p
jT*T :
:*ff :lit r T. # t{ i: {j i*:: u; T: ;. ., ;;"
*nfi+nt*grqr*.* ;
.l;".::'Jij;'"r*:l::, rhar rhe rrrre ",-,,"'r
s€x' or nationar
****r**nt,,n{,litd#i*ri,}ffi
f{;t$Fr*$d,l,#Iff$}}}jffi
;i*ii*'{ fJr:*:T. .rff ,"' #"; : :';
"
:; : n .. n e r p a * v
iiji',*,#+ili{ff ,','"'.'#r{$*#iri*','ii:.u"
l;r"-tiifi:'j,:"::.:l-a." successor" ". *- :
'"" varue or anv
*;*fit*'u*'g6fgffi*m
**l;*ii**lt*tl*11ffi
wtl"tt,e. srci
Page 3 of 6
ll!i,t!,!U|#|$tHururufl#rril
claims shal1 be aro;
fi, ;li"'* i:hffi ,
j: i: xiiri.: I i xr.i I i;";. r : : : :: : " n,paEenree shall u" LT,tl., r"""]'oiesllgence of che IIni te<t a*."J" ]'pa,;f:;i.{ji:i}#iTi"*i*i*+,'$;Ti;#"ii.;";i"i,[;""expense g.rJing
"."n.rli_,lJ;.",
,L".1: ..The above_dr
*l{xllHIf,1*ittili',} :#U"l,"tE"i:;.F:"Alrhough rheT":Jil'Jffi
unlese excavarequlrements uuttquct€d subJect ao ,poi
Garfleld Coun
i::r,,.,, -iil:I,;lli X|;l;:l :11.records roraurlng the 11:
ana_ nrco,;";;j?i,i:: Trylt=a :;ii#::."::i::,ii :["*;::ll:"",
,"t l".nd t'r*.,"s.1,"nr records,;J 3jI""., ;i;;;;;; ;;.,.[":";:i:::.coun.y"6i".rrand Manasemenr, coro.lio'r:;l thls srre wrri-i"";;iJf";rl;t::r:. ,i."'u^"
rhe lands ,."".,..r
r::r-.:. state orrr"",_r,ili.j;,r::;j.;::: .il nu..,u_o-i-
tor ut'11"".rof'lld ,n thls Patthe rana-J-n,JJ"ii",;:j:'""ff,T*l;;:,1":?.xl"ool,11"lni.5,l!,:?
;:::;l:.
:] trench ftlLbl depth of Ie;i j*ji;".ff::!:ii-".fi lto.li;;,,"".e) ryp."."J"i::":i:: :f ;;33"";."i ""rr
( 1) t{urr"iii*'lrl"ij:""i;.: and. consrrucrron debrls :( 2) :::#"r"r#ffif*;
: t ::ff . :::: r :r.::,rrr.(,..a,,Sec(3) Llq
t) During the re-r r-r-^ , . -
' - -rsq6s/' ; uectlon 20, 1or -5.
;ri:#;f:";:;"#i:i;llf i1::"":,iIoii.;;".i:,;??if,il.;l:::.:lI
llli",,o,"
Colorado 3514g
Pa tent Number _q$:$q:( l( f, jt.r
Page 4 of 6
o
Colorado 35148 l[i'['f[r/{,i/,'/{{/#{?|;[$;,l,;1g1;,grulrr,
?he lands
*l=:ffi 1i1{#t,[{1{t:";ffi T;,,*=,i,,;i},"a) No. 9_17,,nr ,rh- ,.
--Y v. cne rands descrl u.J'i, 'Jrril"*_fl11"rrr"g
$rm,rffi
Oll and netu,
r=1f,[{,"#tl${?i,giftiiT,,,,.j",,". -
The grane of r."""i,,.i";;,'l:,li:i:1":":ffriijr*H:.::
rurcher subJect co r1. The patentec n_ r__
rrulfatlons: - "uu3ecE co the followlng
r$,:*ffis,H+rt#*f+tffi
3;^ tn. unlted srares "n,,, ;^:_"":"'on
or slmllar
"""-Ji"J"""T i.tlJr';.:.' "';*r*tfll}filt*:'+i:*'l,.,, jtiri,
:' ?he paEenEee
,'triT:Ti,:i".]:{*rffi;qgry;,,,.";,'5*{ffi ,,,"ii#ir:,
Patenc Nurnber g5- gU-.{ l( l,l3tr.--_.-______
Page 5 of .6
Message
Fred Jarman
Page 1 of 1
From: Carolyn Dahlgren
Sent: Monday, May.l6,2005 12:51 pM
To: Fred Jarman
Subject: landfill
The BocC's grant of permissj-on to use the designated. area for thelimited pipeline purio=""-.rr*ed will not include any warranties asto the BocC's title Lo the Anvil points Landfi1l. rhe permittee isresponsible for gaining any additionai permit or right to use theland that may be reqrii"J- by the BLM or any other federal agency.
s/16/2005
'S,IJSSS'.f'#**Yo'
n;.,idffi*sr***o*"*I"l**ffi F5'31*":il:;
}l:i.1B.H$flH}ffifj'HEffiEt
tsR:iii\i1*il:}ii#ts;G666niGnot
vwq9
z.iiil.""oto
oi-U9
+*, pi-sNA _
App,,cat-ioi
1 nerebY
authonz?.q ,uPg)f*"ntt*CSfgI'* \3;iffi"*o*u'
Woub includ
u"l9$ffi-onentefl--"""ry
mirel4*94
$i,,1"i *?.** l:!q1 provide*,r;r*i"r-W?i",rojtf,if,
],&.*[anii*#{[:ji#ffi
.Yh ffi.":l:;W##". ""[3$POZ1532'P?.jgffi ;;kry applica{ron
and to
ffiffi "i:l::":,*, ,air.yffir'-d".,'e
,"**.:o,,r*1,$'beharas _ r;#Lr4,tos s* st";
Slllu,ooa sn,tffi -*###-'ortorthis
:ffiE Tll.l.l,^.ocn-e377 inthepro@ssinsotthis
k#xt,ffi \H:1,"?:ws1,suRo)em"6ntor$au'" 4".^"*':=.-c".n-"ijEJunty ,"-,)*r
./ "rr"
anv ra',e, hJtlii,tT"Jiiji,r,ffil
,.rrffi
1d#;;;'y
Co\ora9o
o"tn4
o
Li
REPLYTO
ATTENTION OF
DEPARTMENT OFTHE ARMY
U,S. ARMY ENGlNEER DISTRICI SACRAMENTO
CORPS OF ENGINEERS
1325 J STREET
SACRAMENTO, CALIFORNIA 9581 4-2922- - -May 6, ,-&ilCEIVE
RegulatorY Branch (200515227)MAY 0 I 2005
GARrjii:'r-u CCUNTY
BUILDING & PLANNING
Mr. Fred Jarman
Garfietd count.y Building and Planning Department
1-08 Bth Street, Suite 201,
Glenwood SPrings, Colorado 81601
Dear Mr. Jarman:
f am responding to your written request for comment on the
EnCana-Middle Fork Water Storage Facilify at the -North Parachute
Ranch. The project site is loEated near the confluence of East
and West Forks of Parachute Creek within Section 30, Township 5
South, Range gS West, Latitude 39" 34t 45.6", Longitude 108" 6t
16.3", Garfield CountY, Colorado'
fn accordance with section 404 of the clean water AcL, a
Depart.ment of t.he Army permit is required prior Lo -commencing any
dilcharge (includitg *.Lfr"nized land clearing) of dredged or fitl
material in waters of the United States. Waters of the United
SLates include the territorial seas; perennj-al, intermittent, and
ephemeral streams; 1akes, ponds, impoundments; and wetlands- For
mlre information about the permit program, please visit our
websi-te referenced below'
please refer to ident.ification number 20057522'7 in
correspondence concerning this projec!. If you have any
questilns, please conLact me at the address below, email
tiark.A. Gilf illan@usace. army.mil or telephone 970-243-1-199 ,
extension l-5. You may also use our website I www.spk.usace.
army .mi7 / regulatory. html .
Sincerely,
M.rA
Mark cilfill
Biologist, c6lorado/Gunnison Basin
Regulatory Office
400 Rood Avenue, Room 142
Grand Junction, Colorado 81501--2563
Name: Wi
x
Y
x.x
x
Mt. Sopris Soil Conservation District
Bookcliff Soil Conservation District
Town of DeBeque
City of Rifle
Town of Basalt
Town of Carbondale
City of Glenwood Springs
Town of New Castle
Town of Silt
Town of Parachute
Eagle County Planning Department
Rio Blanco County Planrring Department
Pitkin County Planning Department
Mesa County Planning Department
Burning Mtn. Fire District
Town of Silt Fire Department
Rifle Fire Protection District
Grand Valley Fire Protection District
Carbondale Fire Protection District
Glenwood Springs & Rural Fire
RE-l School District
RE-2 School District
School District 16
Carbondale Sanitation District
Battlement Mesa Water & Sanitation
Spring Valley Sanitation District
West Glenwood Sanitation District
Mid-Valley Metropolitan Sarritation District
Roaring Fork Water and Sarutation District
Holy Cross Electric (Roaring Fork, S. of Co. River west)
Public Service Company (N of Co. River west)
KN Energy (S. of Co. fuver, Roaring Fork )
Western Slope Gas Company
US West Communications (G.S. & C'dale area)
US West Communications (N.C., Silt, Rifle)
US West Communications (Rifle, B.M., Parachute)
AT&T Cable Service
Colorado State Forest Service
Colorado Department of Transportation
Colorado Division of Wildlife (GWS Office)
Colorado Division of Wildlife (GJ office)
Colorado Dept. of Public Health & Environment
Colorado Division of Water Resotuces
Colorado Geological Survey
Colorado Water Conservancy Board
Colorado Mined Land Reclamation Board.
Bureau of Land Management -z'
Department of Energy - Western Area Power Admin.
Bureau of Reclamation - Western Colorado Area Office
firl ,
US Corps of Engineers. "Northwest Options of Long Term Care , /
Hlr,i:""ffi;T:::tL",1dl t"il:Lr$ru) - v: E uL'4 r
Garfield County Vegetation (Steve Antho rry) \/ s \)
Garfield County Housing Authority
Garfield County Engineer (Jeff Nelson)
Garfield County Oiiand Gas Auditor (Doug Denni sorrl ,.r/
Garfield County Sheriff Department
-..1
t
nnrtnru,L FORM
Garfield County Building and Planning Department
108 8th Street, Suite 201, Glenwood Springs, CO 81601
(970) 945-82l2lFax: (97 O) 384-347 O
o
Date Sent: April 18,2005
Return Requested: May 10, 2005
File Name(s)Project Name(s)Type of Application(s)
Williams Production RMT Same Special Use Permit
Staff Planner: Fred Jarman (fredj arman @ garfi eld-county'com)Phone: (910) 945-8212
Applicant: Williams Production RMT.Phone: (910) 285-9311
Contact Person: Wagon Wheel Consulting / Cody Smith.Phone: (910) 625-8433
Location: located in Sections ll &20, T 65, R 94W.
Summary of Request: Request is to install a 10" natural gas gathering pipeline across the county landfill that will be
utilizedtogathernaturalgasfromfuturewe1l1ocationslocatednorthofthecou
The Garfield County Planning Department has received a land use request as referenced above. Your comments
are an important part of the evaluation process. In order to review all appropriate agency comments and
incorporatethemintotheStaffReport,werequestyourresponseby@
GARFIELDCOUNTY
Road & Bridee
Counfy Attorney
COLORADO STATE
Wafer Re RIM
Geolosical Survey (Fee)
Health Department
Forest Service (Fee)
Wildlife Division
SERVICE DISTRICT
I q \If,/pct
Public Service
Holy Cross Electric
G.S./Carbondale Fire District
Silt/New Castle/Rifle Fire District
Soil Conservation District
Planning Commission
BOCC
e^h^^l I);.rri^t
I
The.public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 10 hours per response, although the majority ofapp-licqtions qhould.require 5 hours or less. This includes the time for reviewing initructions. S'earchir"ig exisiing Oati sources,gathenng and maintaining the.data needed, and completing- !!d revigwing the-colbAion of informatioi. SenO dommentC regdrdingthis burden estimate or any other aspec{ of this colleition o:f information, i-ndudlng suggestions for reducino this burden, to
Pe$qrf.te.nt of Defense, Washington Headquarters Service Directorate of lnformition"bperations ano nep"orti, r z sJdftersonp^ryjg fig.!ya.y.. Suite 120l-Art'f,^g!gt UA 222024302; and to the Office of Management and Budget, faperwoiX neOuction project
(071.G'0003), Washington, DP ?05-09: Respondents should be aware that notwith:standing any otnier proriision of law, no person
shall be sgbject tg:lylgl{.forAiling to comply with a collection of information if it dods not Oispldy a cunenfly vaiiObfille controtnumber. Please DO NOT EETUFN your form to either of those addresses. Completed applicationb niust be suUfrritteO to tfreDistrict Engineer having jurisdiction over the location of the proposed activity.
PRIVACY ACT STATEMENT
Authorities: Rivers and tl"tbgry {"t, .9ect!ql 10r 3-9-qSC z$03i Clean WaterAct, Section 404, 33 USC 1344; Marine protection,
Research, and Sanctuaries Act, Section 103, 33 USC 141 3. Principal Purpose: lnformation frovided on tnid form witt Ue uieO inevaluating the application for a permit. Routine _Uses: This information may be shared with the Departmeni of Justice inO otnerfederal, state, and local govemment agencies. Submission of requested iriformation is voluntary, however, it intormationls notprovided, the permit application cannot be processed nor can a dermit be issued.
One set.of original drawings or bond reproducible copies which ihow the location and character of the proposed activity must be
APPLICATION FOR DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY PERMF-
(s3 cFR 325)
OMB APPROVAL NO. O71O-OOO3
Expires December 31, 2OA4
4. DATE APPLICATION
(an agent is not
attached to this. application (see.sample.drayngs and instrudions). an{ pe submitted to the District Engineer traving lurisOiciion ovei the locationof the proposed activity. An application that is not completed in fuil will be returned.
I . APPLrcArroN Nf,bstw,n
5. APPLICANTS NAME
Brad Moss,
Williams Production RMT
6. APPLICANT'SADDRESS
P.O. Box 370 co 816s5
required)
W. Smith, Field Technician
9. AGEA/T'S ADDRESS
111 E.3td Sf. Su[e 213 Rifle Colorado 81650
lO.AGENTS PHONE NUMBERS WITH AREA CODE
a. cell 303/902-1532
b. Business 9701625-U33
a. Residence
b. Business (970) 285-9377
AUTHORIZA'
I hereby authorize Cody W. Smith to act in my behatf as my agent in the processing of this apptication and to
furnish upon request, supplemental information in support of this permit application
3--/4 - zs-
NAUE, LOCANON ANO DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT OR ACNV|TY
12. PROJECT NAME OR TITLE
10" Suction
13. NAME OF WAtsWest Sharad
15. LOCATION OF
Garfield Colorado
STATE
is
16. OTHER LOCATION DESCRIPTIOI.IS,Ir KNo
Proiect is located in Sections 20 & '17, Township 65, Range g4W, 6t'p.M.
, lF KNOWN (if app//cable)14. PROJECT S
N/A
four (4) miles East of Rifle, CO at the Anvil points Landfill
T ADDRESS (if applicable)
ENG FORM 4345, Jul97 OF SEP 94IS (Proponent CEOW-@
18. Nature of Activity (Desciption of ', include all features)
Installation of new ten (10) inch natural gas pipeline. Pipe is to be .250" W.T. fusion bond epoxy coated-
Pipeline will be installed to allow for a minimum of sixty (60) inches of cover above pipe. No import fill
material is anticipated for back fill material. No Federal Lands will be affected by this property. After
construction has been completed all contours will reinstalled to near original state, and re-seeded with seed
mixture that will be stipulated by Garfield County Reclamation and weed control monitor. Rip Rap will be
installed if required.
tle reason or see instructions)
Pipeline will be utilized to gather natural gas from William's future well sites located North of the
Garfield County Landfill property and to deliver the gas to an existing tie-in point on one of William's
existing pipelines.
USE BLOcKS 20-22lF oREDGED AND/oR FILL MATERIAL IS To se oIScxARGED
ZU. Reason(s) lor D6cnarge
To install DiDeline across
nrrluurrl vr Lqur I yPc II
Native material consisting of Rock, Silt, Clay, Sand. All Material will be placed back after construction
@ No Import fill material is anticipat"d fol t4t projecf _
N/A
23. ls Any Portion of the Work Already Complete? Yes_No X lF YES, DESCRIBE THE COMPLETED WORK
24. Addresses of Adjoining froperty.Qrylers, Lessees, etc., Whose Property Adjoins the Water body (if more than can be entered
here, please attach a supplemental list).
Garfield County (Anvil Points Landfill)
108 86 Street, Suite 201
Glenwood co 81601
information in this airplication is oomplete dnd accurate. I furtrer certify that I possess ttre dJtnority to
described herein or is acting as the duly authorized agent of the appli<iant.
-.zJ-a{
APPLICANT DATE OF AGENT
The application must.be.sisngq by the.person who desires to underta(e the proposed activity (applicant) or it may be signed by aduly authorized agent if the statement in block 11 has been filled out and sigheci.
19 I S.9. Section 1001 pr.ovides that Whoever, in any manner within the jurisdiction of any department or agency of the UnitedplllS:t Xlgyingly,and willtully falsifies, conceals, oi'covers. up any tric( scheme, or.disfuistis a material f;ct d mates iny tatse,lictitious or lraudulent statements or representations or makes or uses any false writing or document knowing same to mirtainany fa.lse, fictitious or fraudulent statements or entry, shall be fined not mdre then $1O,bOO or imprisoned noimore then five years
or both.
ListofotherCertificationsorApprovals/DenialsReceivedfromotnei
r ApplicationAGENCY TYPE APPROVAL* IDENTIFICATION NUMBER DATE APPLIED DATE APPROVED DATE DENIED
Garfield County Special Use ztOZtOS pending
Hearing Date ls set for May 16, 2005
Would include but is not restrided to zoning, building and flood plain permits
a
SCALE: t lNctls50'FEET PLAN VIEW
BOTTOM OF DRAINAGE
(EL. 54E7.e)
y'*
/
PROPOSED
P|PEL|NE q
q PRoPostD ptpE/ E-DRA|NIEE
LAT: 39'30'55.3770"
LONG: 10754'35.E625''
LATITUDE AND LONGITUDE BASED ON
NAD 27. COLORADO CENTRAL ZONE
48'' APPROXIMATE DEPTH
OT PROPOSED PIPELINE
EuuL
I
"H
' GRlpsrc scALE H FEETI II{CH = 50'FEEI X_SECTION VlTW
CONgTFIUCTION 9URVEYS, INC.
@@12 9IJNRISE BLVD.
3tLT, CO AbAZ
11A-A1b-9153
ffi uJil liarnE Produatian RI*17
l@" Natural Gae PipclincgEA 2@, \.b$., R.g4uJ"
DRAINAC|E CROSSING #I
BEPLYTO
ATTENTION OF
DEPARTMENT OFTHE ARMY
U.S. ARMY ENGINEER DISTRICT, SACRAMENTO
CORPS OF ENGINEERS
1325 J STREET
SACRAMENTO, CALIFORNIA 9581 4-2922
May 6, 2&ECEXVE
Regulatory Branch (200S75227)MAY 0 I 2005
GARrii:.r-t, COUNTY
BUlLDll'ic & PLANNING
Mr. Fred JarmanGarfield County Building and Planning Department
108 8Lh Street, Suite 20L
Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601
Dear Mr. ,Jarman:
I am responding to your written request for commenL on the
EnCana-Middle Fork Water Storage Facility at the North Parachute
Ranch. The project site is locat.ed near the conffuence of East
and West Forks of Parachute Creek within Section 30, Township 5
South, Range 95 West, Latitude 39o 34' 45.6tt, Longitude 108" 5'
:-6.3" , Garfield County, Colorado.
In accordance with Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, a
Department of the Army permit is required prior to commencing any
discharge (including mechanized land clearing) of dredged or fill
material in waLers of the United States. Waters of the United
States include t.he territoria] seas; perennial, intermitt.ent, and
ephemeral streams; lakes, ponds, impoundments; and wetlands. For
more information about the permit program, please visit our
website referenced below.
P1ease refer to identification number 200575227 in
correspondence concerning this project. If you have any
quesLions, please cont,act me at the address beIow, email
Mark.A. Gilfil-lan@usace. army.mil or telephone 970-243-1-l-99,extension 15. You may also use our websitei www.spk.usace.
army .mi7 / regulatory. html .
Sincerely,
T/1.^A
Mark GilfitlBiologist, Colorado/Gunnison Basi-n
Regulatory Office
400 Rood Avenue, Room 142
Grand Junction, Colorado 8l-501-2563
1)
2)
Please Note: Proner noticing is vour responsibilitv'
13,2005
THAND DELIVERED]
Jimmy and CodY Smith
Wagon Wheel Consulting
111 E. Third Street, Suite 213
Rifle, CO 81650
Jimmy and CodY,
Under cover of this letter, I have attached the public notice forms for the Encana water
storage pond project as well as the Wittiams Production RMT l0-inch pipeline project
across the County Landfill property. Please attach the legal descriptions to those notices
for publication and mailing purposes. atto, I have pto'id"d the posting signs for said
projects as well as the sign-for tt. ,"rorirg of mt.f'*afiil property' Please post all three
according to the language set forth beiow. All three land use projects have been
scheduled to be discussed by the Board orco*ty commissioners at it "i. t'tuy 16th,2005
meeting.
Notice by publication, including the name of the applicant, description of the
subject lot, a description of the proposed use and nature of the hearing' and the
date, time and place'for the hearing tt utt be given once-in a newspaper of general
circulation in that portion of the county in wf,ich the subject property islo.cated at
least thirty (30) but not more than sixty (60) days prior to the date of such hearing'
*J prooioipublication shall be presented at hearing by the applicant'
Notice by mail, containing information as described under paragraph (1) above,
shall be mailed to all ownJrs of record as shown in the County Assessor's Offrce
of lots within two hundred feet (200') of the subject fo1 and to all owners of
mineral interest in the subject property at least thift, (30) but not more than sixty
(60) days prior to r""n rr.*irg ti-" by certifred t.t r* receipt mail, and receipts
rhuif U" prlsented at the hearing by the applicant'
3) The site shall be posted such that the notice is clearly and conspicuously visible
from a public .ight-of-*uy, with notice signs provided by the Planning
Department. rn. i"rting must take place at least thirty (30) but not more than
sixty (60) auy,
-p.io,
to"the hearing date and is the sole responsibility of the
applicant to postihe notice, u.rd "rrrrire
that if remains posted until and during the
108 8th Street, Suite 201, Glenwood Springs' Colorado 81601
(s70) s4s-s212 (g70) 2Ss-7972 Fax" (970) 384-3470
Garfietd qgllQ
BUILDING & PLANNING DEPARTMENT
date of the hearing.
Please provide 13 copies of both applications to this office no later than Monday,
April 18th, 2005 so that they may be properly referred to review agencies. Please let
me know if there are any questions.
Very truly yours,
Assistant Planning Director
970.94s.8212
Fred A. Jarman, AI
REPLYTO
ATTENNON OF
RegulatorY Branch (20057552L)
DEPARTMENT OFTHE ARMY
U.S. ARMY ENGINEER DISTRICI SACRAMENTO
CORPS OF ENGINEERS
1325 J STREET
SACRAMENTO, CAL!FORNIA 9581 4-2922
September 9, 2005
OcT t I 2005
Mr. Cody W. Smith
Field Technician
Wagon Wheel Consulting
111 East Third St.reet, Suite 2]-3
RifIe, Colorado 81650
Dear Mr. Smith:
we are responding to your request on behal-f of williams
prod"uction RMT, tor a bepartment of the Army permit for t'he West
sharard Pipeline Project. This project involves act'ivities'
including aislhiig." or dredged o_t rirr materia1 in waters of the
United States to construct a lipeline crossing at the Anvil Points
Landfi1l. The-pioject is rdcatea within section 20, Township 7
South, Range 95 Wesl, 95 WesL, Garfield County' Colorado'
Based upon the information provided, Lhe proposed project
pipeline crossings are authorized by Nationwide General permit
number 1,2 - The work must comply witfr the terms and conditions
listed on Lhe Lnclosed nationwid" g"t"ral permit information sheets
and the foll-owing special conditions:
1. If the project impact.s wetland andfot riparian plant
species, you snait revegetite and maintain, dL a 1:1 ratio,
rlgionalty appropriate rrrii.ru shrubs and.f or Lrees, and ensure that
native herbac'Lou-s ground cover is estabtished along the affected
drainage reach. fo., should. consult with the NaLural Resources
Conservation Service Lo ensure utilization of native plant species
that are ad.apted to survival at the impact sites.
2. You shal-I submit photographs of the crossing site . upon
completion of project corrst.t,.r.tion to document site condit'ions'
you must submit p6=t-project photographs and sign.and reLurn the
enclosed co*pli-ance c.riiti.it. to Cfre colorado/Gunnison Basin
Regulatory Oftice within 30 days after project completion'
This verif ication is valid until March 1-8, 2OO7 , ot until- t.he
nat.ionwide general permit. is modified or expires, whichever occurs
f irst. The Nationwide General permits (MIPs) are scheduled to be
modified, reissued or revoked prior to March 18, 2007. It is
incumbent upon you to remain inf-ormed of changes t.o the Nationwide
General- Permit Program.
Pl-ease ref er to ident if ication
correspondence concerning this project.
We will issue a public notice when the NWPs are reissued. If
you commence or are under conLract to commence this activity before
Lfr" date that the rel-evant NwP is modified or revoked, You will
have twelve (12) months to complete the activity under the present
terms and conditions of the NWP.
please contact me at the address below,
number 20057552L in
If you have any questions,
email- ken. j acobson@usace .
army.mil-, or telephone (970) 243-1-1-99,extension l-1
Since
Ken Jacobson
Chief , Colorado/Gunnison Basin
Regulatory Office
400 Rood Avenue, Room 142
Grand'Junction, Colorado 8150L-2563
Enclosures
Copies furnished without enclosures:
Mr. Mark Bean, Garfield county, 108 8th street, suite 20L,
Glenwood Springs, Colorado
COMPI,]ANCE CERTIFICATION
Permit. Fi-Ie Number: 20057552L
Permit. Tlrpe: Nationwide General permit number 12
Name of Permittee: Williams Production RMT
CounLy Where Work was Performed: Garfield
Date of Issuance: SePtember 6, 2005
upon completion of the activity authorized by this pe-rmit and any
*itig"ti-on requirea by the pe-rmit, sign this certif ication and
retuin it to the following address:
Col-orado/Gunnison Basin Regulatory Office
u.s. Army corps of Engineeis, sacramento District
Wayne N. Aspinall Federal- Building
4OO Rood Avenue, Room 142
Grand Junction, Colorado 8L501 -2563
please note that your permitted" activity is subject to.a compliance
inspection by U.S. Army Corps of Engin.?:= repres-entatives. If you
f aii to "o*1ity with tire teims and conditions of the permit, your
authorization may be suspended, modified or revoked- If you have
,"V questions concerninj this certification, please contact Ken
,Jacobson at the Corps & Engineers office in Grand Junction at
telephone number (970) 243-1L99, extension 11'
*r(*******
I hereby certify Ehat the work authorized by the above-referenced
permit, includLng all required _mitigation, was compJ-eted in
accordance with all terms and conditions of the permit
verification.
Signature of Permittee or Agent.Date
PUBLIC NOTICE FOR FINAL STATEWIDE REGIONAL
CONDITIONS FOR THE NATIONWIDE PERMIT PROGRAM IN THE STATE OF COLORADO
Summary nf Aetion: The following are the final Regional Conditions to the Nationwide Permits within the
State of Colorado. This action is in accordance with the authority of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act
and Title 33, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 330.5(c).
Nationwide Permits (NWPs) are general permits issued on a nationwide basis to authorize minor activities
with little or no paperwork and which would typically have minimal adverse effects on the aquatic
environment. Regionalconditioning is a methodto protect regionally high-valuewaters of the United
States, and other regional situations to ensure that the NWPs will not authorize activities that result in
rnore than minimal adverse effects on the aquatic environment. Regional conditional ideally result in
significant added protection to the aquatic environment without substantially increasing the Corps'
workload.
Raekgrorrnd' On March 18,2002, the reissued Nationwide Permits became effective. A public notice was
issued on February 11,2002, proposing modifications to the Regional Conditions to the Nationwide
Permits within the State of Colorado. This represents the final Regional Conditions for Colorado.
Enclosed with this public notice are the Regionil Conditions for NWPs activities within the boundaries of
the state of Colorado.
Comment: ln orderto minimize impacts to the aquatic environment, the Corps has made modifications to
the Regional Conditions for NWPs in the Stite of Colorado. These Regional Conditions are now in effect
until such time the Nationwide Permits are modified, revoked, or expire.
Raymond G. Midkitf
Lieutenant Colonel, EN
District Engineer
Enclosure
FINAL REGIONAL CONDITIONS FOR NATIONWIDE PERMITS
WITHIN THE STATE OF COLORADO
Regional Conditions Applicable to Specific Nationwide Permits Within Colorado
1. The following are statewide regional conditions (a. through f')
a. Natinnwide permit No 't3 Ftank Stahili-ation ln Colorado, bank stabilization activities
necessary for erosion prevention in streams that average less than 20 feet in width (measured between the
ordinary high water marks) are limited to the placement of no more than 1/4 cubic yard of material per
running foot below the plane of the ordinary high water mark. Activities greater than 1/4 cubic yard may be
authorized if the permittee notifies the District Engineer in accordance with General Condition No' 13
(Notification) and the Corps determines the adverse environmental effects are minimal.
b. Nationwide permit No 27 Stream anc{ Wetland Restoration Activities. (1) For activities which
include a fishery enhancement component, notification will include a letter from the Colorado Division of
Wildlife concurring that the project will benefit the fishery; and (2) for projects in streams classified as
,.Gold Metal Waters',, Nationwide Permit No. 27.may not be used. For such projects, the applicant can
apply foi the o<isting Colorado Regional General Permit No. CO-00-16900 (Stream Habitat lmprovement
Structures) or a standard individual permit.
Regionat Conditions Applicable to All Nationwide Permits Within Colorado.
c. Removat of Temporary trills. General Condition f.to. Z+ (Removal of Temporary Fills) is
amended by adding the following: When temporary fills are placed in wetlands in Colorado, a horizontal
marker (i.e. fabric, certifies weed-free straw, etc.) must.be used to delineate the existing ground elevation
of wetlands that will be temporarily filled during construction'
d. tmporrant Spawning Areas. Ggnerai Condition No. 20 (Spawning Areas) is amended by adding
the following: tn Colorado, activities which; (1) would destroy important spawning areas; (2) would be
conducted in these waters durinil spawning seasons for trout and Kokanee salmon (spawning season for
rainbowand cutthroattroutis March l5through July 15, and forbrown and brooktroutand Kokanee
satmon is pqptember ,15 through March 15); or (3) would have greater than minimal release of sediments
du6ng these spawning seasons are not authorized by any nationwide p"rniit- Bio-engineering techniques,
such as native riparian shrub plantings are r'equired for all bank protection activities that exceed 50 linear
feet in important spawning areas. lmportant spawning areas are identified in the attached list of critical
resource waters in Colorado'
Regionat Conditions for Revocations Specific to Certain Geographic Areas
e. EeOs: ln Colorado, nationwidepermits No' 1,2,4,6-11, 13-19,2'l-25,28-31,33'36, and 39-44
are revoked for activities in these regionally important aquatic resources. Fens are defined as wetlands
which are characterized by water logged spongy ground and contain (in all
or part) soils classified as histosols'or mineral soils with a histic epipedon'. To determine whether this
provision applies, the entire wetland must be examined for the presence of histosols or histic epipedons.
.Histosols have 40 centimeters (16 inches) or rnore of the upper 80 centimeters (32 inches) an organic soil
material (or less over bedrock). Organic soil material has an organic carbon content (by weight) of 12 to
18 percent, or more, depending on the clay content of the soil. Histic epipedons have a 20 to 60
centimeter-thick (g-24 inches) organic soil horizon that is at or near the surface of a mineral soil- Histosols
and histic epipedons are widely recognized as organic soils formed by slow accumulation of plant debris in
waterlogged situations where it cannot decompose. (More information on histosols can be obtained from
the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service publications on KeysloS-cil
Tavonomy and Fipld lndieators of Hydrie Soils in the [Jnitert Statps
f. s.orings: Within the state of colorado, all nationwide permits are revoked within 100 feet of the
water source of natural springs. A spring source is defined as any location where ground water emanates
Nationwide
U S fumy Corps of
Engineers
Sacramenlo Distric{
Permit Summary
33 CFR Part 330; lssuance of Nationwide
Permits - January 15, 2002, including
Conection - February 13, 2002
f 2. Utility Line Activities. Activities required for the
constuction, maintenance and repair of utility lines and
associated facilities in waters of the US as follows:
(D Utility lines: The construction, maintenance, or repair
of utility lines, including outfall and intake structures and
the associated excavation, backfill, or bedding for the utility
lines, in all waters of the US, provided there is no change in
preconstruction contours. A "utility line,'is defined as any
pipe or pipeline for the tansportation of any gaseous, liquid,
liquescent, or slurqr substance, for any pupose, and any
cable, line, or wire for the transmission for any purpose of
electrical energy, telephone, and telegraph messages, and
radio and television communication (see Note l, below).
Material resulting from hench excavation may be
temporarily sidecast (up to three months) into waters of the
US, provided that the material is not placed in such a
manner that it is dispersed by currents or other forces. The
Distict Engineer may extend the period of temporary side
casting not to exceed a total of I 80 days, where appropriate.
In wetlands, the top 6" to 12" of the trench should normally
be backfllled with topsoil from the trench. Furthermore, the
tench cannot be constructed in such a manner as to drain
waters of the US (e.g", backfilling with extensive gravel
layers, creating a Aench drain effect). For example, utility
line trenches can be backfilled with clay blocks to ensure
that the trench does not drain the waters of the US through
which the utility line is installed. Any exposed slopes and
stream banks must be stabilized immediately upon
completion of the utility line crossing of each waterbody.
(ii) Utility line substations: The construction,
maintenance, or expansion of a substation facility associated
with a power line or utility line in non-tidal waters of the
US, excluding non-tidal wetlands adjacent to tidal waiers,
provided the activity does not result in the loss of greater
than t/z-acre of non-tidal waters of the US.
(iii) Foundations for overhead utility line towers, poles,
and anchors: The construction or maintenance of
foundations for overhead utility Line towers, poles, and
anchors in all waters of the US, provided the foundations are
the minimum size necessary and separate footings for each
tower leg (rather than a larger single pad) are used where
feasible-
(iv) Access roads: The construction of access roads for the
conshuction and maintenance of utility lines, including
overhead power lines and utility line substations, in
non-tidal waters of the US, excluding non-tidal wetlands
adjacent to tidal waters, provided the discharges do not
cause the loss of greater than t/z-acre ofnon-tidal waters of
the US. Access roads shall be the rninimum width
necessary (see Note 2, below). Access roads must be
constructed so that the length of the road minimizes the
adverse efflects on waters of the US and as near as possible
to preconstuction contours and elevations (e.g., at grade
corduroy roads or geotextile/gravel roads). Access roads
constructed above preconstruction contours and elevations
in waters of the US must be properly bridged or culverted to
maintain surface flows.
The term "utility line" does not include activities which
drain a water of the US, such as drainage tile, or french drains;
however, it does apply to pipes conveying drainage from another
area. For the purposes of this NWP, the loss of waters of the US
includes the filled area plus waters of the US that are adversely
affected by flooding, excavation, or drainage as a result ofthe
project. Activities authorized by paragraph (i) through (iv) may
not exceed a total of %-acre loss of waters of the US. Waters of
the US temporarily affected by filling, flooding, excavation, or
drainage, where the project area is restored to preconshuction
contours and elevation, is not included in the calculation of
permanent loss of waters of the US. This includes temporary
conshuction mats (e.g., timber, steel, geotextile) used during
construction and removed upon completion of the work. Where
certain functions and values of waters of the US are permanently
adversely affected, such as the conversion ofa forested wetland
to a herbaceous wetland in the permanently maintained utility
line right-of-way, mitigation will be required to reduce the
adverse effects of the project to the minimal level.
Mechanized land clearing necessary for the construction,
maintenance, or repair of utility lines and the conskuction,
maintenance and expansion of utility line substations,
foundations for overhead utility lines, and access roads is
authorized, provided the cleared area is kept to the minimum
necessary and preconstruction contours are maintained as near as
possible. The area of waters of the US that is filled, excavated,
or flooded must be limited to the minimum necessary to
construct the utility line, substations, foundations, and access
roads. Excess material must be removed to upland areas
immediately upon completion of construction. This NWp may
authorize utility lines in or aflecting navigable waters of the US
even ifthere is no associated discharge ofdredged or fill
material (See 33 CFR Part 322).
Notification: The permittee must notify the District
Engineer in accordance with General Condition 13, if any of the
following criteria are met:
(a) Mechanized land clearing in a forested wetland for the
utility line right-of-way;
Nationwide 12 Permit Summary
including water quality (refer to General Condition 2l for
stormwater management requirements). Another important
component of water quality management is the
establishment and maintenance of vegetated buffers next to
open waters, including streams (refer to General Condition
l9 for vegetated buffer requirements for the NWps).
This condition is only applicable to projects that have
the potential to affect water quality. While appropriate
measures must be taken, in most cases it is not
necessary to conduct detailed studies to identifu such
measures or to require monitoring.
tr 10. Coastal Zone Management. Ia certain states, an
individual state coastal zone management consistency
concurence must be obtained or waived (see 33 CFR 330.4(d)).
tr ll. Endangered Species.
tr (a) No activity is atithorized under any NWp which is
likely to jeopardize the continued existence ofa tlreatened
or endangered species or a species proposed for such
designation, as identified under the Federal Endangered
Species Act (ESA), or which will destroy or adversely
modifo the critical habitat of such species. Non-federal
permittees shall notif, the District Engineer if any listed
species or designated critical habitat might be affected or is
in the vicinity of the project, or is located in the designated
critical habitat and shall not begin work on the activity until
notified by the District Engineer that the requirements of the
ESA have been satisfied and that the activity is authorized.
For activities that may affect Federally-listed endangered or
threatened species or designated critical habitat, the
notification must include the name(s) of the endangered or
threatened species that may be affected by the proposed
work or that utilize the designated critical habitat that may
be affected by the proposed work. As a result of formal or
informal consultation with the FWS oTNMFS the Distict
Engineer may add species-specific regional endangered
species conditions to the NWPs.
tr (b) Authorization of an activity by a NWp does not
authorize the "take" of a threatened or endangered species
as defined under the ESA. In the absence of separate
authorization (e.9., an ESA Section l0 Permit, a Biological
Opinion with "incidental take" provisions, etc.) from the
USFWS or the NMFS, both lethal and non-lethal "takes,'of
protected species are in violation of the ESA. Information
on the location ofthreatened and endangered species and
their critical habitat can be obtained directly from the offices
of the USFWS and NMFS or their world wide web pages at
http ://www. fw s. so v/r9 end spp/endspp. htrnl and
http://www.nfrns.noaa. go v/prot_res/overview/es. html
respectively.
Pagc 3
tr 12. Ilistoric Properties. No activity which may affect
historic properties listed, or eligible for listing, in the National
Register of Historic Places is authorized, until the District
Engineer has complied with the provisions of 33 CFR p^rt3l5,
Appendix C. The prospective permittee must notify the District
Engineer if the authorized activity may affect any historic
properties listed, determined to be eligible, or which the
prospective permittee has reason to believe may be eligible for
listing on the National Register of Historic places, and shall not
begin the activity until notified by the District Engineer that the
requirernents of the National Historic preservation Act have
been satisfied and thatthe activity is authorized. lnformation on
the location and existence ofhistoric resources can be obtained
from the State Historic Preservation Office and the National
Register of Historic Places (see 33 CFR 330.a(g)). For activities
that may affect historic properties listed in, or eligible for listing
in, the National Register of Historic Places, the notification muit
state which historic property may be affected by the proposed
work or include a vicinity map indicating the location of the
historic property.
tl 13. Notification.
tr (a) Timing; where required by the terms of the NWp,
the prospective permittee must notifu the District Engineer
with a preconstruction notification (PCN) as early as
possible. The District Engineer must determine if the
notification is complete within 30 days of the date ofreceipt
and can request additional information necessary to make
the PCN complete only once. However, ifthe prospective
permittee does not provide all of the requested information,
then the District Engineer will notitr the prospective
permittee that the notification is still incomplete and the
PCN review process will not commence until all of the
requested information has been received by the Distict
Engineer. The prospective permittee shall not begin the
activity:
tr (l) Until notified in writing by the District
Engineer that the activity may proceed under the NWp
with any special conditions imposed by the District or
Division Engineer; or
tr (2) If notified in writing by the District or
Division Engineer that an Individual Permit is required;
or
tr (3) Unless 45 days have passed from the District
Engineer's receipt of the complete notification and the
prospective permittee has not received written notice
from the District or Division Engineer. Subsequently,
the permittee's right to proceed under the NWp may be
modified, suspended, orrevoked only in accordance
with the procedure set forth in 33 CFR 330.5(d)(2).
Nationwide 12 Pcrmit Surnmary
El (13)ForNWP 39 and NWP 42, the PCN must
include a cornpensatory mitigation proposal to offset
losses of waters ofthe US or justification explaining
why compensatory mitigation should not be required.
For discharges that cause the loss of greater than 300
linear feet of an intermittent steam bed, to be
authorized, the District Engineer must determine that
the activity complies with the other terms and
conditions of the N'WP, determine adverse
environmental effects are minimal both individually
and cumulatively, and waive the limitation on sEeam
impacts in writing before the permittee may proceed;
tr (I4)ForNWP 40 (Agricultural Activities), the
PCN must include a compensatory mitigation proposal
to offset losses of waters of the US. This NWP does
not authorize the relocation ofgreater than 300
linear-feet of existing serviceable drainage ditches
constructed in non-tidal steams unless, for drainage
dirches constructed in intermittent non-tidal steams,
the District Engineer waives this criterion in writing,
and the District Engineer has determined that the
project complies with all terms and conditions of this
NWP, and that any adverse impacts of the project on
the aquatic environment are minimal, both individually
and cumulatively;
tr (15)ForNWP 43 (Stormwater Management
Facilities), the PCN must include, for the construction
of new stormwater management facilities, a
maintenance plan (in accordance with state and local
requirements, if applicable) and a compensatory
mitigation proposal to offset losses of waters of the US.
For discharges that cause the loss of greater than 300
linear feet of an intermittent steam bed, to be
authorized, the District Engineer must determine that
the activity complies with the other terms and
conditions of the NWP, determine adverse
environmental effects are minimal both individually
and cumulatively, and waive the limitation on stream
impacts in writing before the permittee may proceed;
tr (16)ForNWP 44 (MiningActivities), the PCN
must include a description of all waters of the US
adversely affected by the project, a description of
measures take,tr to minimize adverse effects to waters of
the US, a description ofmeasures taken to comply with
the criteria of the NWP, and a reclamation plan (for all
aggregate mining activities in isolated waters and
non-tidal wetlands adjacent to headwaters and any hard
rock/mineral rnining activities);
tr (17) For activities that may adversely affect
Federally-listed endangered or threatened species, the
PCN must include the name(s) of those endangered or
threatened species that may be affected by the proposed
work or utilize the designated critical habitat that may
be affected by the proposed work; and
Pagc 5
tr (18) For activities that may affect historic
properties listed in, or eligible for listing in, the
National Register of Historic Places, the PCN must
state which historic property rnay be affected by the
proposed work or include a vicinity map indicating the
location ofthe historio property.
tr (c) Form ofNotification: The standard lndividual
Permit application form (Form ENG 4345) may be used as
the notification but must clearly indicate that it is a PCN and
must include all of the inforrnation required in (b) (l)-(18)
of Ge,neral Condition 13. A letter containing the requisite
information may also be used.
tr (d) District Engineer's Decision: In reviewingthe pCN
for the proposed activity, the District Engineer will
determine whether the activity authorized by the NWP will
result in more than minimal individual or cumulative
adverse environmental ef[ects or may be contary to the
public interest. The prospective permittee may submit a
proposed mitigation plan with the PCN to expedite the
process. The Disrict Engineer will consider any proposed
compensatory mitigation the applicant has included in the
proposal in determining whether the net adverse
environmental effects to the aquatic environment of the
proposed work axe minimal. If the District Engineer
determines that the activity complies with the terms and
conditions of the NWP and that the adverse effects on the
aquatic environment are minimal, after considering
mitigation, the District Engineer will notif, the permittee
and include any conditions the District Engineer deems
necessary. The District Engineer rnust approve any
compensatory mitigation proposal before the perrnittee
commences work. If the prospective perrnittee is required
to submit a compensatory mitigation proposal with the
PCN, the proposal may be either conceptual or detailed. If
the prospective permittee elects to submit a comp€nsatory
mitigation plan with the PCN, the District Engineer will
expeditio usly review the proposed compensatory mitigation
plan. The District Engineer must review the plan within 45
days of receiving a complete PCN and determine whether
the conceptual or specific proposed mitigation would ensure
no more than minimal advorse effects on the aquatic
environment. Ifthe net adverse effects ofthe project on the
aquatic environment (after consideration of the
compensatory mitigation proposal) are determined by the
District Engineer to be minimal, the District Engineer will
provide a timely written response to the applicant. The
response will state that the project can proceed under the
terms and conditions of the NWP.
tr If the District Engineer determines that the adverse
effects of the proposed work are more than minimal, then
the Diskict Engineer will notif, the applicant either:
tr (l) thatthe projectdoesnot qualifu for
authorization under the NWP and instruct the applicant
on the procedures to seek authorization under an
krdividual Permit;
Nationwide 12 Pemit Summary
EI 19. Mitigation. The District Engineer will consider the
factors discussed below when determining the acceptability of
appropriate and practicable mitigation necessary to offset
adverse effects on the aquatic environment that are more than
minimal.
tr (a) The project must be desigred and constructed to
avoid and minimize adverse effects to waters of the US to
the maximum extent practicable at the project site (i.e., on
site).
n @) Mitigation in all its forms (avoiding, minimizing,
rectifuing, reducing or compensating) will be required to the
extent necessary to ensure that the adverse effects to the
aquatic environment are minimal.
tr (c) Compensatoi mitigation at a minimum
one-for-one ratio will be required for all wetland impacts
requiring a PCN, Lrnless the Diskict Engineer determines in
writing that some other form of mitigation would be more
environmentally appropriate and provides a project-specific
waiver of this requirement. Consistent with National policy,
the District Engineer will establish a preference for
restoration of wetlands as compensatory mitigation, with
preservation used only in exceptional circumstances.
tr (d) Compensatory mitigation (i-e., replacement or' substitution of aquatic resources for those impacted) will not
be used to increase the acreage losses allowed by the .
acreage limits of some of the NWPs. For example, Y4-acre
of wetlands cannot be created to change a3A-acre loss of
wetlands to a t/2-acre loss associated with NWP 39
verification. However, t/z-dcte of created wetlands can be
used to reduce the impacts of at/z-acre loss of wetlands to
the minimum impact level in order to meet the minimal
impact requirement associated with NWPs.
tr (e) To be practicable, the mitigation must be available
and capable of being done considering costs, existing
technology, and logistics in light ofthe overall project
purposes. Examples of mitigation that may be appropriate
and practicable include, but are not timited to: reducing the
size of the project; establishing and maintaining wetland or
upland vegetated buffers to protect open waters such as
sfreams; and replacing losses ofaquatic resource functions
and values by creating, restoring, enhancing, or preserving
similar functions and values, preferably in the same
watershed.
tr (f) Compensatory mitigation plans for projects in or
near streams or other open waters will normally include a
requirernent for the establishment, maintenance, and legal
protection (e.g., easements, deed restrictions) of vegetated
buffers to open waters. In many cases, vegetated buffers
will be the only compensatory mitigation required.
Vegetated buffers should consist ofnative species. The
width of the vegetated buffers required will address
documented water quality or aquatic habitat loss concerns.
Normally, the vegetated buffer will be 25 tn 50 feet wide on
each side of the stream, but the District Engineers may
require slightly wider vegetated buffers to address
documented water quality or habitat loss concerns. Where
Pagc 7
both wetlands and open waters exist on the project site, the
Corps will determine the appropriate compensatory
mitigation (e.g., stream buffers or wetlands compensation)
based on what is best for the aquatic environment on a
watershed basis. In cases where vegetated buffers are
determined to be the most appropriate form of
compensatory mitigation, the District Engineer may waive
or reduce the requirement to provide wetland compensatory
mitigation for wetland impacts.
tr (g) Compensatory mitigation proposals submitted with
the "notification" may be either conceptual or detailed. If
conceptual plans are approved under the verification, then
the Corps will condition the verification to require detailed
plans be submiued and approved by the Corps prior to
consfruction of the authorized activity in waters of the US.
tr (h) Perrnittees may propose the use of mitigation
banks, in-lieu fee arrangements or separate activity-specific
compensatory mitigation. In all cases that require
compensatory mitigation, the mitigation provisions will
specifu the party responsible for accornplishing and/or
complying with the mitigation plan.
tr 20. Spawning Areas. Activities, including skuctures and
work in navigable waters of the US or discharges of dredged or
fill material, in spawning areas during spawning seasons must be
avoided to the maximum extent practicable. Activities that
result in the physical destruction (e.g., excavate, fill, or smother
downsffeam by substantial turbidity) of an important spawning
area are not authorized.
tr 21. Management of Water Flows. To the maximum
extent practicable, the activity must be designed to maintain
preconstruction downstream flow conditions (e.g., location,
capacity, and flow rates). Furthermore, the activity must not
permanently resfrict or impede the passage of normal or
expected high flows (unless the primary purpose of the fill is to
impourd waters) and the structure or discharge of dredged or fill
material must withstand expected high flows. The activity must,
to the maximum extent practicable, provide for retaining excess
flows from the site, provide for maintaining surface flow rates
frorn the site similar to preconstruction conditions, and provide
for not increasing water flows from the project site, relocating
water, or redirecting water flow beyond preconstruction
conditions. Stream channelizing will be reduced to the minimal
amount necessary, and the activity must, to the maximurn extent
practicable, reduce adverse effects such as flooding or erosion
downsfeam and upsteam ofthe project site, unless the activity
is part of a larger system designed to manage water flows. In
most cases, it will not be a requirement to conduct detailed
studies and monitoring of water flow.
This condition is only applicable to projects that have the
potential to affect waterflows. While appropriate measures must
be taken, it is not necessary to conduct detailed studies to
identifo such measures or require monitoring to ensure their
effectiveness. Normally, the Corps will defer to state and local
authorities regarding rnanagement of water flow.
Nationwide 12 Permit Summary
tr 3. For all nationwide permits requiring notification,
except27, the applicant must provide a written statement to
the district engineer explaining how avoidance and
minimization of loses of waters of the United States were
achieved on the project site.
U. Regional conditions to be applied in Califomia and Ndvada.
tr All existing and proposed nationwide permits are
suspended in the Lake Tahoe basin in favor of using
General Permit 16.
III. Regional conditions to be applied in Utah
tr For use of any nationwide perrnit with the following
attributes, notification of the Corps of Engineers' Utah
Regulatory Office, using the "I.Iotifi cation,, procedures of
the Nationwide Permit Program (General Condition l3), is
required, except where certain nationwide permits are
restricted and can not be used as indicated in each category.
This will be a "Corps only" notification.
tr 1. All activities that will affect waters of the U.S.
below the elevation 4217 feetmsl adjacent to the Great
Salt Lake and below 4500 feet msl adjacent to Utah
Lake.
tr 2. Bank stabilization in a perennial stream that
would aflect more than 100 feet of stream length as
measured from the upsteam portion of the affected
bank to the downsheam section, narrow the
cross-section ofthe stream, substantially reduce the
riparian vegetation, or increase velocities.
O 3. All activities that will affect springs. A spring
is an aquatic feature caused by ground water being
discharged to the surface, creating wetland and/or
stream characteristics. Nationwide permits 14, 16, lg,
29,33,36, 40,42, 43, and 44 can not be used in spring
areas.
Page 9