HomeMy WebLinkAbout2.0 Staff Report 03.09.92REQUEST:
APPLICANT:
LOCATION:
SITE DATA:
WATER:
SEWER:
ACCESS:
EXISTING ZONING:
ADJACENT ZONING:
PROJECT INFORMATION AND STAFF COMMENTS
BOCC 3t9t92
An exemption from the deflrnition
from subdivision.
Norman OverackerA.I. S. K. F. Corp.
A parcel of land situated in Lot 15,
Section T,Township TSouth, Range
88 West of the 6th P.M.; located on
Highway 82 just north of Cattle
Creek.
The site consists of 5.84 acres
Cattle Creek Water Association
Existing State approved
proposed ISDS
Existing driveway off Hwy
c.R. I l0
C/L (Commercial Limited)
O/S and A/R/RD
system
82 and
L
[.
RFLATIONSHIP TO THF' COMPRFHFNSIVF PI N
The subject property is located in District D - Rural Areas/Moderate Environmental
Constraints and District E - Rural Areas - Severe/IVloderate Environmental Constraints
as identified on the Comprehensive Plan Management Districts Map.
r\FSCRIPTION OF THF PROPOSAI
A. Site lrescrintion: The subject property is located on the northeast side of
Highway 82. The north boundary of the property is formed by the C.R. 110
right of way. The property consists oftwo (2) separate and distinct topographic
divisions. The lower bench is located at or slightly above the Hwy 82 gnde.
This areawasoriginally carvedout ofthehillside whichdominatestheproperty.
This area is developed with two (2) commercial buildings and a piopane storage
yard. A near vertical slope of natural cobbleVsoils divides the lower and upper
benches. At the northeast corner of the property is a second bench cut out ofthe
cobbled material which is currently used as a storage area formasonry-quality
rock.
-G1 -
III.
Adjacent lands to the north are vacant and owned by Garflreld County and the' BLM. To the south is a truck storage area.
B. Project Descrintion: The applicant is requesting an exemption from the
definition of subdivision to split a 5.84 acre parcel into three (3) parcels of 1, 1.8
and 3.1 acres in size. The purpose of the exemption is to allow the sale of the
proposed lots to be used for commercial purposes.
C. Rackground: The subject property was created by Resolution 79-72 (se
enclosed) by the BOCC lrn1979. This resolution authorized the creation of two
(2) parcels of 5.84 and 2 acres. The resolution of approval stated "that no
further exemptions be allowed on the 2 exemption properties."
In 1976, the BOCC approved a zone district amendment for the subject property
from A/R/RD to C/L. AIso included were parcels to the south on both sides of
C.R. 110 and north of C.R. l13 (Cattle Creek Road).
In 1982, the Board of County Commissioners approved a Special Use Permit for
a commercial park with eight (8) uses on the subject property. Included in the
approval were twenty-one (21) specific conditions. Authorized in this permit
were the existing uses, namely the commercial buildings and the propane
storage.
MAJOR ISSUES AND CONCERNS
As previously stated, the subject property was authorized by exemption
resolution lul.1979. Approval of this application would require the rescission of
that portion of Resolution No. 79-T2resticting further exemptions. Absent the
restriction contained in the Resolution 79-20, the property would appear to
qualify for the proposed three (3) parcels
Section 8:10 (Applicability - Exemptions) statesthattheBoardhasdiscretionary
authority to except a division of land from the definition of subdivision.
Following a review of the facts of each application, the Board may approve
conditionally or deny an exernption request. The Board may not grant an
exemption unless the applicant can demonstrate compliance with zoning, legal
access, adequate water and sewer, state environmental health standards,
necessary road and drainage improvements, fire protection, adequate easements
and school impact fe.es.
I
Water service is supplied to the subject property by the Cattle Creek Water
Association. The applicants have three (3) shares of water. The applicants have
represented that the three (3) shares are adequate to service the existing
development and the two (2) new lots. Some documentation supporting this
claim should be provided from the water users association.
The subject property has steeply sloped (near vertical) banks on each ofthe three
(3) lots. Staff has concerns about the stability of these banks. Geotechnical
evaluations should be a condition of approval for any further development.
Sewer needs on the new lots will handled by ISDS. The commercial buildings
are currently serviced by a Colorado Deparment of Health approved system.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
b8
rv.
The subject property may not be in compliance with the Zontng Resolution,
both the zone district regulation and the conditions of approval of the Special
Use Permit.
According to the map submitted with the application, the existing large propane
talk does not meet setback requirements of the C/L zone and in fact, may
actually encroach on the Garheld County property. This problem could
possibly be remedied through a boundary line adjustment with the County.
Compliance with Building Code and fire department requirements would also
need to be satished
A number of conditions of approval of the original Special Use Pennit have
never been satisfied. These include requirements for such things as water
storage, engineeringevaluation andfencing. Completion oftheserequirements
would still be required unless the use permit were to be modified to reflect
current conditions.
7. Due to the relationship of Lot #3 and the Garfield County parcel preventing
direct access onto Highway 82, some provision for access onto the lot should be
provided. This could be accomplished either through an easement through Lot
#l or a new access from Hwy 82 through an easement on County land.
SUGGFSTEN FINDTNGS
The proposal is in general compliance with the Garfield County Comprehensive
Plan and the Garheld County Zomng Regulations
The proposed land use would be consistent and compatible with the existing
surrounding land uses.
3. If the noted ac@ss concerrui can be adequately addressed, the proposal is in best
interest ofthe health, safety, morals, convenience, order, prosperity and welfare
of the citizens of Garflreld County.
RFCOMMENDATTON
APPROVAL, subject to the following conditions:
1. AII representations of the applicant shall be considered conditions of approval
unless otherwise stated by the applicant.
2. The applicant shall have 120 days to complete the required conditions of
approval. Extensions of 120 days may be granted by the Board for a period of
up to one (l) year. . \#
3. The applicant shall submit @oOl,r"hool tmpact Fees.
4. The following notes shall be included on the exemption plat:
a. AII requirements of Resolution No. 82-l 14 shall be complied with.
b. All lots may be subject to the requirement of engineered foundations and
wastewater systems.
l.
V.
d.
A geotechnical study to determine slope stability shall be a prerequisite
to any construction on Lots #2 and #3.
No further exernptions shall be allowed.
AII development shall be subject to the pre-approval of the Carbondale
Fire District.
An access easement from Hwy 82 to Lot #3 shall be provided.
Thatportion of Resolution No.79-72, prohibiting furtherexemptions, shall be
repealed.
All development shall be in compliance with applicable state regulations.
If the existing driveway on Lot #l is utilized to access Lot #3, then any new
development shall be subject to a determination by the Department of
Transportation to determine the adequacy of the existing Highway Access
Permit.
Prior to the approval of the exemption plat, the applicants shall provide
documentation of the adequacy of the water shares to serve the proposed three
(3) lot development.
The subject property shall be brought into compliance with the setback
requirements of the Zoning Resolution, and with the conditions of approval of
Resolution No. 82-l 14 prior to the approval of the exerrption plat.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
--l o
I
Iw i \-/
Yz'ttt "...
of the evl-dence produced at the aforementloned t"irlor,
of fact:
STATE OF COLORADO
County ol Garllcld
1..
I
. et.--..Le-S*3.I....................-..........--....EcctIng ol thc Boud ol County Commtrdonorr lor Guftold Countyr Cotorrdo,
hcld rr tho Cout Hour. tn Olonwood Sprlngr on.......MO.nf4y.... ....., thc......I9.tb...................day ol
.Qg.Hg.h'..9.f .......4-D.t9....9.L...., ihacw.nrprc'ont:
.....I+.e.r-ry-...Y.e.Ln.s.9ue.4...................................... ,
.....P.L4ven...il.,....9.e.r.*.s..e...................................,
.....8-u.ge.n.-e-...::.fl tm.::....Pri.nI<..h.p.u.qe.............,
Commbdonc Chalrman
Comnlrdonet
Commlrdoncr
County Attorncy
Clcrk ol thc Eorrd
u,'hcn thc tollowlng prodlngr, emong othcrr wcrc had end donc. to+rltl
REsoLItrTrsI No' 81-324 92 ' t/4
A RESOTUTION CONCERtlgD I.IINI TIIE APPROVAL OF A SffiPERMIT APPLICATION BY
PAt Groou
I{IIEBEAS, the Board of Cotrnty Conrmtsstoners of Garfleld Cor:nty has recelved an appllcatlor
a commerclal park. wlth 8 uses on the ifroo Pat Groom for a speclal use permtt for.
following described tract of land:
A portlon of 1ot 15, Sectlon 7, T7S, R88I{ of the 6th P}t ln Garfleld County, Colorado
I,IIIBRBAS, pursuant to requlred publlc notlce, the Board conducted a publlc hearlng;on
the 13 day of October , 19_tL , upon the questlon of whether the above descrlbed speetal
use perurlt should be granted or denled, at whlch heartng the publlc and lnterested peraons
were glven the opporttrnlty to
use perurit; and
e:(press thelr oplnlons regardlng the lssuance of sald special
I.IHERBA.S, the Board on the basls
has urade the follorrlpg:determln66l6us
I. The proposed use ls courpatlble wlth the uses exlstlng and permttted 1n the dletrlct
ln whtch lt ls to be located, provlded that certaln herelnafter contalned condltlons be
complled wlth.
volume and eafety or on utllltles, or any other
to the establlshed neighborhood or zone dlstrlct
NOI{, flIEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the.Comrlssloners of Garfleld County, Colorado, that a
speelal use permlt be and hereby ls authorlzed perutttlng the use of the above descrlbed trac
of land for 8 congrerq,lal par\-, upon the followtng epeclflc condltlons:
iiI. That the use of the tract of land courply lrlth all present and future regulatlone,l.ofGarf1e1d,re1at1nBto@1rrthezoned1str1ct1nwh1chthepropert
1s now or may .later be located.
,,
2, That, prlor to the lssuance of the authorlzed special use pe::urlt, the above discrlbc
tract of land shall be severed'fron any other tract of land upon whlch there'inay
exlst a prlnclpal use, unless such other such prlnclpal use has been terminated at
the tfune of the lssuance of the speclal use per:nlt.
2. Ttrat nelther the lnpact on trafflc
lnpact of the speclal use w111 be lnJurlous
ln whlch the speclal use ls to be located.
3. The
A.
B.
c.
That a four(4) fooE earthen reEaLnLng
addltlonal rockfall protection.
uses be llulted to the fdllowlqg:
Offlce for conduct of bustness or professlon;
Wtrolesale-autoxnotlve and vehlcular equLpment, hardware, bullding matertals
GeneraL senrice-repatr and servlce of vehlcular equlpment, radtos, offlce
rnachlnes, apfllancea; shop for cablnetry, glazlng, maehlnlng, plunblng,
electrlcalr, lnsulatlon, sheet metal, and contractors yard.
4. No retall or personal service establlshments sha1l be allowed.
That the Plannlng
stateuent on the r
Department and County Board of CosrnLeslonere recelve an e.ri
stablllty of the rock face behlnd the properEy.
5.
6.wall be bullt out fron the rock face t
7. That the parklng area be paved.
8. That there. be adequate landscaplng of the slte, as lndlcated by the slte plbh.
9. that the existing apartnent w111 not be an allowable use.
-1t-
ngert,
...i1,'
- -----: ,-:1.Irj.i
J\I
10. That the exlstlng appearance of the parklng area be cleaned up and inproved.
11. That the grease and o11 ptt be cleaned up and flIled ln.
l
L2, Ttrat the earthen berm protecting the propane storage area be extended to the
edge of the new access onto Htghway 82. '
13. That the Plannlng Staff recelve a copy of an approved access permtt for the
islte frou the State Department of Hlghways.
14.Thatcrashpostsbep1acedonther,e8ternandsoutherna1desofthe30'000
gallon propln" storage tank. i
,l
15. That the appllcant meet. all recosunendattons of the Natlonal Flre Protectlon
Assoclatlon- (fffpe), Sectton 58, as follows:
A. That the entlre tank, plplng, loaillng faclllty and snaIl tank storage are
be enclosetl wlth a alx (6) foot chaln llnk fence. i ,B. That a 10 lb. ABS type flre extlngulsher wlth an HA 60 BC ratlng be spunted
D.
E.
F.
and labelled near the fllIlng statlon area.
C. The lower half of ghe propane storage tank shall
tank teuperature to not over 800oF for a mlnlmum
flux of 701000 BTUS per hour per sguare foot.
as lndlcated on the slte p1an.
That the new access polnt onto Hlghway 82 be
trafflc, and that adequate slgns to lndlcate
be placed accordingly.
Ttrat all slgne be tton bulldlngrr slgns.
l,
be lnsulated so as to llnlt
of 50 mlnutes wlth a heat
,
A11 electrical wlrln!, flxturls, and motors shall be "e:rploslve proof". i .
A 15'OOO gallon water storage tank for flre protectlon be.estaEllshed oni slte.
Ttrat ttie propane storage tank be placed a ,rnl.ntmum bf 50 febB fron Bulldlhg B,
15.
17.
18.
19.
llnlted to north-bound exltlng
the trafflc flow pattern shaIl
Department on the placenientThat the appllcant confer wlth Ehe County Sherlffr s
of exterlor security llghtlng and landscaplng.
That the appllcant shol evldence of an aasured 1egal
the appllcant provlde an englneerr s statement on the
supply for the proposed usea' both to be recelvecl by
eupply of water, andi.Jai
sufficiency of the water
the Plannlng Departneilt':
prlor to lseuance of the Bpeclal Use Pernlt.
That the appllcant propvlde a slx (6) foot chaln llne fence between
southern boundary of hls Property antl the adJacent land owner.
That the Planntng Department recetve a copy of the ?roof of Publlcatlon
publlc notlce of the hearlng date, prlor to issuance of the speclal use
iithe I20,
2L.rnaJcatroe
p"rTll.
'l:illi,:
ATTEST:BOARD 0F CoINTY ColIMrss4oNERs
GARFIBLD COT'NTY, COLORAM
iiii.
il
Comnlrdonar
UpoD Eodon uado end rocondod thr torcgolng Rorolutlon wrr rdopted by thc lollowlng vot!!
,v.
STATE OF COLORADO
county ot Gullcld l"
! Courty Ctcrk and cxoffldo Clck of thc Board ol County Cornrnlssloncrr
ln rnd tor thr County ud Stetc etorcrald do hcoby cctlfy that thc anncrcd end forcgotng Order k truly coplcd from thr Rccordr ol i
thc Procccdlngr ol thr Boud of County Com.m&doncrr lor rald Garflcld County, now ln my olflcc.
IN WII1IESS I/ITHEREOF, t havc hacunto let Ery hurd and rfflxcd thc rcd ol rald County, at Gtcnrnood Sprtngr,
I A. D. 19..............
i
County Clcrk and cx-otllclo Clcrk of thr Board ol County Comrnlgloncr.
thls.................... dey ol
I
rl
,I
tl
I.t
PROJECT INFORMATION AND STAFF COMMENTS
REQUEST:
APPLICANTS:
LOCATION:
SITE DATA:
WATER:
SEWER:
ACCESS:
EXISTING ZONING:
ADJACENT ZONING:
Special Use Perrrit for industrial
support facilities, specifically for the
production of liquid hydrocarbons
from natural gas.
Colorado Clean Fuels
Aparcel of land located in portions
of Sections 34 &35,T65, R96W and
Section 2 & 3, T7S, R96W; more
practically described as a parcel
located approximately two (2) miles
northwest of Parachute, offof C.R.
2t5.
241.23 acre site
Bottled drinking water and existing
wells
Sealed vaults pumped by licensed
commercial sewage haulers.
County Road 215
R/L - Lower Valley Floor
R/L - Lower Valley Floor
L
II.
RELATIONSHIP TO THE COMPREHENSTVE PLAN
The subject property is located in District D - Rural Areas, Moderate Environmental
Constraints.
NFSCRIFTIION OF' THE PROPOS AL
Site Description: The site is a relatively flat valley floor area, located between
the County Road and Parachute Creek. Presently the site has industrial support
facilities used for the upgrade, storage and transport of crude shale oil. A
railroad spur comes into the site from the south and extends along the west side
of the site and the eastern boundary is C.R. 215.
Project Descrintion: The applicants are requesting the issuance of special use
permits for industrial Support facilities for industrial operations for the
production of liquid hydrocarbons from natural gas, in addition to the existing
A.
B.
7Z-
BOCC 4n3t92
perrrits issued to Unocal for the shale oil upgrade facility. It is proposed by the
applicant to use the existing Unocal upgrade facility, with some minor
modifications to manufacture methyl alcohol (methanol), srnokeless diesel fuel,
premium grade naphtha and Fischer-Tropsch (F-T) wax from natural gas. It is
proposed to produce 4500 barrels per day @PD) of all of the products noted
previously, with 4200 BPD of the production being methanol.
The proposed process will utilize the existing upgrade facility, truck loading
facility, railroad spur, natural gas pipeline and power line. At the upgrade site,
the Unocal dearsenator, Unicracker, [Jnifiner, dewatering equipment,
pretreatment facilities, sulfur and ammonia removal equipment will not be used
as a part of this process. The applicant will add an F-T vessel, methanol
synthesis loop, POX vessels and a waste heat recovery system to the existing
facility without removing any of the existing equipment. While these portions
ofthe existing facility will not be utilized, it should be noted that they will remain
on site for future shale oil upgrading. This application will only allow one of the
proposed production processes to occur at one time. Should Unocal or a new
owner of the property reinitiate shale oil production, the applicant's processing
of natural gas will discontinue.
The principal means of transporting the methanol will tre by rail. It is projected
that two to three times a month, a 100 car (30,000 gallonVcar) unit train will go
out of the area to the proposed markets. If for some reason the train transport
is unavailable, the methanol can be shipped by truck out of the existing truck
loading facility. If this alternative is used, it would result in approximately Vl
truck trips daily. All other products will be shipped by truck, atarateof less
than one truck per day for each product.
During construction, it is estimated that 110 workers will be employed at the
peak of the 10-12 months it will take to add the new equipment and modify the
existing facilities. During operation, there will be an estimated 2l full time
employees.
C. Rackground: Unocal received a number of pennits in 1981 and 1982 for the
upgrade plant and various associated facilities. While Unocal has suspended
their shale oil production, the facilities are not being removed, thus, all of the
permits issued previously are still valid.
III. MAJOR TSSUES AND CONCFRNS
l. zoningt The requested land uses are proposed to be added to the existing and
uses already permitted. Because the zoning resolution does not have a provision
formodifying or amending a special use permit, the requested perrrits have be
considered new pennits to be added to the existing permitted uses.
The applicant has submitted an impact statement to supplement the previously
accepted impact statements submitted by Unocal in support of their existing
land use permits (see application pages l5-20) and the zupporting documentation
noted further on in this report.
In summary, the impact statement says that the proposed new process will
comply with the existing state and federal permits and that the impacts will be
less than the present facilities due to a smallerlevel ofproduction and less toxic
byproducts.
-ltl -
Any approval of the proposed project strould require compliance with previously
approved resolutions of approval, as well as any new conditions of approval.
Airemissions fromtheproposed project areprojected to belessthan theexisting
permitted levels. Concerns have been expressed about the applicants ability to
transferthe existing permits to the new operation. Enclosed are letters from the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and Colorado State Department of
Health, Air Pollution Control Division (see page ). The EPA letter notes
the transfer process to another owner is "quite simple." The EPA letter also
notes the PSD @revention of Siguificant Deterioration) pennits previously
issued by them is new the responsibility of the Colorado Air Pollution Control
Division. The CDH Air Pollution Control Division set out a procedure that
does not appear to present any major obstacles. Prior to receiving these letters,
staff had conferred with the Grand Junction Air Pollution Control Division
representative, who indicated that the transfer procedure was relatively simple
and ministerial in nature.
Enclosed aresupplemental statements fromthe applicant furtherclarifying the
type of reclamation that would occur and that there will not be any unacceptable
impacts due to sound and vibration (see pages
Enclosed is a letter from Joyce Risley, expressing conceflrs about the emission
of nitrogen oxide and carbon monoxide (see pages-).
w.STTGGESTED FINDINGS
That proper publication and public notice was provided as required by law for
the hearing before the Board of County Commissioners.
That the hearing before the Board of County Commissioneni was extensive and
complete, that all pertinent facts, matters and issues weresubmitted and that all
interested parties were heard at the hearing.
3. That the application is in compliance with the Garfield County Zonng
Resolution of 1978, as amended.
4. For the above stated and other reasons, the proposed use is in the best interest
of the health, safety, morals, convenience, order, prosperity and welfare ofthe
citizens of Garfield County.
RFCOMMENDATION
APPROVAL, subject to the following conditions
l. All proposals of the applicant shall beconsidered conditions of approval unless
stated otherwise by the Board of County Commissioners.
2. That copies of all transferred state and federal permits shall be submitted prior
to issuance of any special use permit.
3. That all conditions of approval contained in Garfield County Resolutions No.
8l-l l, 8l-12, 8l-281, 82-158, 82-186, 82-145 and 86-30 shall becomplied withby
the applicant.
3.
4.
l.
V.
-ls-
I'rr
,ii,r,
il,,lliir',ti',',:...ii.i
l.ill
,) ir
tl'
!i
.l-
4Lv UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
REGION VIII
999 18th STREET - SUITE 5OO
DENVER, COLORADO 80202-2405
Ref: SART-AP APril 2, 1992
Garf leld County Commlssioners
1 09 8th Street
Glenwood Sprlngs, Colorado 81601
Dear Commissioners:
Unocal has requested that EPA provide you with informatlon
about the procedures required to transfer the existlng Unoca1
Prevention of Slgnifj.cant Deterloration (PSD) permits to the
Clean FueIs Development Corporatlon. The procedure for
transferrlng the PSD permit of an operating source from one owner
to another owner is qulte slmple. It is done by notlfying the
issulng agency of the name, address and contact of the new owner
and acknowledging that the new owner r+ilI operate the plant in
accordance wlth the PSD Permlt.
However, there is a problem 1n transferring a PSD permit for
a source that has'been shut down. If the source was temporarily
shut down,, the PSD permit is valid only if the source will be
operated in the same way that j.t was operated before the
temporary shut dor+n. Any changes j.n the method of operatlon
would require that the new owner obtain a new or modified permlt
from the permitting authori-ty. The federal PSD regulations 1n 40
C.F.R. 52.21(rl state, "Any owner or operator who constructs or
operates a^source or modlflcation not in accordance with the
appllcatlon submitted pursuant to this sect.d-on or with the terms
of any approvaL to construct ..., shall be subject to appropriate
enforcement action. I' It is our understanding that Clean Fuels
Development Corporatlon does not plan to operate the Unoca1 plant
in the same way that lt was previously operated before the
.temporary shut down 1n June 1991. Therefore, a new or modifled
permit must be obtained to allow Clean Fuels Development
Corporation to operate as planned. The permittlng authority for
any new or modifled permit ls the Colorado Air Pollutlon ControL
Oivislon. The Dlvlsion nor+ has the authority to issue PSD
permlts, ES well as all other construction permits for sources ln
Colorado.
-1b-
i
lril1l,ti
l'
i
,1, I I l
!lr: i !
.li':
.,,,:,i.,r'l' '
i,!
:i:. t r. '
i']i;:.:l,,ii
t, I i i
:,t.,
t'
r'l'l 't
I
If you would like to
transferring PSD PermltsDale at (303) zgq-tstt or
dlscuss any questlons related toto another owner, please contact John
caroL smith at (303) 293-1768.
Y,
'-"akl.O' lhL\P".'Johry'O. Hi-dinger, Ac{.1n9 Dlrector
Air, Radlatlon, and Toxlcs Divj-sion
cc: Jlm Geier (CAPCD)
Leon F. PahLer (Unocal)
Slncer
T1-
it
il
s 122.63
1982, a^nd the permtttee applies for the
modification no later than January 24'
1985. tf the permittee shows good
cause ln its request and that it quali'
fies for the modification. to conformto changes respectlng the following
regulations issued rrnder that Settle'
ment Agreement:
{0 cr'R 122.{5(b)
{0 Crn, 122.{5(c)
40 cFR, 122.50
$81 Lonil oppllcation Ptozs. When
required by a permit condition to in'
corporate a la,nd application plan for
beneficial reuse of sewage sludge. to
revise an existing land application
plan, or to add a land application plan.
(b) Corses lor filodi.ficotion or reDo'
cotion ond telssuonce The following
are causes to modify or, alternatively.
revoke and reissue a Permit:(1) Cause exists for termlnation
under ! 122.64, and the Dlrector deter-
mlnes that modification or revocation
and reissuance is appropriate.
(2) The Dlrector has received notifl-
catlon (as requiied tn the permit. see
! 122.{1(lXA)) of a proposed transfer
of the permlt. A Permit also may be
modtfted to reflect a transfer after the
effectlve dste of an automatic transfer
(S 122.61(b)) but will not be revoked
and reissued after the effective date of
the transfer except upon the request
of the new perurittee. ,
(In oEratton collectlon requirements ln
parag-aph (a) were appioved by the Offlce
of Management and Budget under control
Dumber 20{0-0068)
40 CFR.Ch. I (7-l-89 Edition)
mlnor modlflcatlon under this section
must be made for cause and with Part
124 draft permit and public notice as
requlred in 5 122.62. Minor modifica-
tions may only:
(a) Correct typographlcal errors;
(b) Require more frequent monitor-
ing or reportine by the Permittee;(c) Change an interim comPliancs
date in a schedule of compliance. pro-
vided the new date is not more than
120 days after the date specified ln the
existing permit and does not interfere
with attainment of the final compli-
a,nce date requirement: or
(d) Allow for a change in ownershiP
or operational control of a facility
where the Director determines that no
other change ln the permit is neces.
sary, provided that a wrltten agree'
Eent containlnc a specific date for
trarrsfer of permit responsibillty. cov'
erage. and ltability between the cur'
rent and new permiltees has been sub'
mitted to the Director.(e)(1) Chance the construction
schedule for a discharger which is a
new source' No such change shall
affect a discharger's obligation to have
all pollution control equipmenI in'
stalled and in operation prior to dis'
charge under $ L22.29.(2) Delete a Point source outfall
when the discharge from that outfall
is terminated and does noL result i:l
discharge of pollutants from other
outfalls except in accordance witit
permit limits.(f) When the Permit becomes final
and effectlve on or after March 9,
1982, conJorm to changes respec[ing
gE 122.41(e),122.4 1( I ),
122.41(m)(4)(i)(B), 122.41(nX3Xi) anc
122.42(a) issued September 26' 1984.(c) Incorporate conditions of ^POTW pretreatment Program thar
has been approved in accordance with
the procedures in 40 CFB.403.11 (or a
modUication thereto that has been ap'
proved ln accordance with the proce'
dures in 40 CFTI, 403.18) as enforceable
conditlons of the POTlJl/'s Permlts.
t{8 FR 1tll53, Apr. 1. 1983. ss amended at 49
FR,38051, Sept.26, 1984:51 E,x, 20431' June
{, 1986; 53 FR 40618. Oct. 1?, 19881' . ,- ..:, ,. .,
rl
r.: i,
Environm.nlol Proleclion Agcn,
g122.6l Terminstlon of pcrmitr (
ble to Statc progTams. acc 0 t23.
(a) The following are causes I
minating a Permit during its te
lor denying a Permit renewal a
tlon:(l) Noncompllance bY the per
with any conditlon of the Permlt
(2) The permlttee's fallure ln t
ollcation or during the Permlt ls:
orocess to disclose fully all re
iacts. or the Permlttee's mlsref
btion of anY relevant facts n
ttme:(3) A determlnatlon th8t the p
ted activity endangers human i
or the environment and can ol
regulated to acceptable leve
permit modlficatlon or termlnatr
(4) A chance in eny condltiol
requires either a tempot?ry or f
nent reduction or elimina0lon (
discharBe or sludge use or di
practice controlled by the perm
example. plant closure or termlrof discharge by connection
POTW).(b) The Director shall follow t
plicable procedures in Pari I
state procedures in terminatln
NPDES permit under this secllol
t{8 FR l{153, Apr. l. 1983:50 FR 69.1
19, 1985, as amended 81 5{ FR, l8?8{,
t9891
AfPENDIX A_NPDES hiuer
INDusrRy Crreconlus
Any permll issued after June 30, j
dischargers in the fotlowing cacegori(
lnclude elfluent limllalioDs 8nd a (
ance schedule to meet the requirem,
sedion 301(b)(2XA). (C), (D). (E) andCIVA. whether or no! appllcable e
llmltatlons grldellnes have been pror
ed. See !! 122.{{ and 122.{6.
Ind.nstry Cotegory
Adheslves and sealants
Aluminuu lorming
Auto and other laundrles
Battery manufacturing
Coal mining
Coll coating
Copper forurtngl
Electrical and electronlc componentsElectroplating
Explosives Eanuf acturlng
Foundries
Gum and wood chemicals
Inorganic chemlcals manufscturlng
/
I
i
(Clearr Water Act (33 il.S.c. fzsr et seq,t,
Safe Drlnking Wster Act ({2 U.S.C. 300f e,
seq.). Clesn Atr Act ({2 U.S.C. ?{01 e, seq.),
Resource Conservatlon and Recovery Act
({2 U.S.C. 6901 er seq.))
t48 FR, 1.1153, Apr. 1. 1983. as amended at'19
ER 25981. Junc 25. 198'l; '19 IB, 37009' Sept.
29, 198{; {S tr:R,38050, Sept.26. 1984;50 FR
{51{, Js,n. 31. 1985; 6l IIB 20{31. June'l'
1986:51 FR, 26903, July 28. 1986;5{ F8,256,
258, Js,n- {.1989;5{ FR 1878{' Mav 2. 1989I
0 f 22.63 Minor modllications of permita.
Upon the corutent of the Permlttee'
the Dlrector may modify a Permlt to
male the correctlons or allowances for
changes ln the . permitted actlvlty
llsted tn this section, wtthout follow'
tng the procedures of Part 124. AnY
permtt modlllcation not processed as a
F{d
, . ,:_,,rr i:
-.lB-
6 twa
.rr&"fu$$;,, ..-.---e
Lii
. ,f,:
I
,ll
,
:.i i 'l
i.i i
., lil::i, li l:
.. irl
:ii,li': J',i] rl'l:
ii
,,irr;
.jii,i
,'1,
.:.,llr'
r,l ,
-ir 1. ,,di .r
' . t:1,;. il,:'-..:i il
-li il'
't;iii i
' : -:,il':
i i,iii i
' ; i.!,iiqi I'l t!, ,ii,,1 ,
!.it,' 'i[
i,,:'
I
,1
irii'l,i
lilr
i
,t
I
*'.1 :.-,. l. I
.-;; j 4,.",rrosrro
'., -t 3 f,h '.1tYj
(
.4.
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
(
AGENCY
, REGION VIII
I860 LINCOLN STREET
DENVER. COLORADO 80295
htAY 2 7 1S8lREF: 8AH-A
CERTIFIED I.IAIL . PO
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
Al len C. Randle, Vice Presirlent
Un i on 0i I Company of Ca I i f orn.ia,0il Shale 0perations
Va'lley Federal Pl aza, Sui te 505
Grancl Junction, C0 Bl5Dl
Dear l,lr. Randle:
l'le trave conlpletecl f inal rev'ier,, of your appl ication to construct andoperate a shale oil upgrading plant and hereby issue conditional approvalpursuant to U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Regulations for thePreventjon of significant 0eteriorat'ion (psD) qb irn bz.zi (;; imenoed43 FR 26388).
The conditional permit shal I become ef f ective in accordance l.,ith ArticleIV of the enclosed permit. Construction and operation may noL take ptace ii-this perrnit or any part thereof is rejected.
If you have any questions, please contact Mr.John T. Dale of my staff at,(303) 837-3763
Sincerely yours,
A'ir and Haz ardous ision
Enc I osures
cc: James M. Lents
)
(
JUl, 0 ;l ,9BI
Sii,,.t, ii O.)L'jtATJor..I-s
-1 q-
,i
t:
I
t'
,,i
'I
.i
/
tor
, {r.,
1i-
,i
ii,. i
';1,
.itil
lll
I
.:.'
a
I ..1
Union 0il Company of Californ'ia, 0il _Applicant") proposes to construct andplant in Garfield County three miles
.t'
CONDITIONAL PERI'IIT TO
COI,IMENCE CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATE
(40 CFR 52.21(i)), Sign'ificant Deterioration of Air Quality
Union 0il Company of California,0il Shale 0perations
Val)ey Federal Plaza, Suite 505
Grand Junction, C0 81501
I. INTRODUCTION
(
Shale 0perations (hereinafter "theoperate a 10,000 BPD shale oil upgrading
north of Parachute, Colorado.
0n september 29, 1980, the Appljcant requested permission from the U.s.
Environmental Protection Agency, Region vl I I (hereinaf ter ,,the EpA',) to
construct the proposed comp'lex pursuant to 40 CFR 5?.?L (Review of l"lajor
Sources and Major I'lod'if ications).
Tne EPA issued a public notice in-Bifle Ielegram, a newspaper of generallne ErA lssueo a puDllc notlce ]n R'tfle Ielegram, a newspaper of general
circulation in the area on March 11;Tt8'I. T[e not'ice proposed approval of anair qual'ity permit for the source and gave opportunity for public comnentsduring the ensuing 30 calendar days. The permit application, and the proposedpermit and its supporting analysis were made available for public inspectionat the Office of the Garfield Coun[y Clerk'in Glenr.rood Springs, Colorado. Tlrepublic conrnent period was extended to l'lay 11, 1981. 0n l4ay 6, 1991, theApplicant submitted proposed changes to the plant des'ign. A summary ofwritten conunents appears 'in appendix I I .
II. FINDINGS
0n the basis of information in the admin'istrative record (see appendix I forpartial list'ing), EPA has determined that:
1. I!9 upplicant rvill meet all of the applicable requirements of the
PSD regulations
2. No applicable emission or ambient air quality standard will beviolatecl by the emiss'ions from th'is source.
-8c -
...,
-2-
EPA lras goocl reason to bel i eve that the C6ttrpany carl comp ly 'rri tn tite
ionclitior]s of tilis pernrit. l'lor'tever, itt Llre issttarrce of this
permi t , EPA cloes not assume any r i sk of I oss vllr i cit rnay oCCJF tlS <1
result of the connlencement of construct'ion ancl operation by the
nppficant'if conclitjons of tlris permit are not met bv the Applicant'
The stack pararneters used for mocleling are containcd jn Table lV'
III. COiiDITIONAL PER14IT TO COi.ISTRUCT Ai'ID OPERATE
C(
.,
4.
0n the basis of the fin'Jings set forth in II above, and pursuant.to the
irl.,oriiV-(ir rleiegatecr by-the Arlministrator) of 40 CFR 52.21(r)(2)' EPA
liereLry grants conOitional approval for tlre.Union 0i'l Cornpanv of California'
0il shale 0peratiorrs to comnlence construction and operation of shale oi'l
upgraOing piant. This approval is expresslv conclitioned as fol lor'ts:
Tlre or'rner or operator sltall aLride by
.s.teterrren.lsilEil$-gpt', and agrecmen t s
f rom Urt'iclrr 0i 1 Conrpany of Ca I i f orn i a '
al l acld it ions and amendntertts thercto.
Tlrwpp lt cant=sha-.1.1'-=l-irni tuemi ss-i o0s.ti.rorttstlter:source:tonlhosephovm
-i rr=ri'a b 1 g -'l'.iltrTa h I e.:l' L,-:rn o d .:-I a b -I e, :i-l'h .
u lf ur-=recovery p I ant'-stitl I -5f1 i-rti fefito=O;'d30
'.' s u I f u r -c r-lmp o u n d s ; a n d " 0 ; 00 l 0 :p arce rl L r-bl/r
,-votlu,ne,,,Of- l,ryrl:ggerl,,suiricle ,CblCul aled-:as ,Su I fun'-dioil-de:at=zcro
-perccnt-,oxygen -on'a' -clry'IJa-sisr. I i th-ion'-1imit
sha't}-be-based-on da itor='
nf,o-_n+it-i on-S-nci 'i atrsou rce-Ee s ttmetftgd s
A corrt.inuous nron'itoring systern for measuring sulfur diox'ide sltal I
be installed, calibrated, ntairrtairred artrl operated by the oltner or
operator. Tlris systent shall be located in the el1$ry 9f.
tire sulfur recoveiy qqlJ. The ntonitoring systeTiiSIETItlm![r'rith
ilre ffirents jn 40 cFR 60.7c. Quantenly"excEs
gritrioo.,r^gports''and.,li€coq-d.keening,requirementsisF6iffiE?iliTiiT..40''CFR
SO:f O S-Sf ,A 11 -U (l*f d']]Tt d :" Peri od srf - xc e Ss"trffii$mifs-tre-d ef i neC
...0S--dny'-rohn1ng-tvle I ve=hotrrpCt^'l6tt -dur ing- wlt i ch -the-average i
c-onceirtrati on:of , hydrogen-su'l f.i de',or=reduced rsu I f ulr::compounds-i n
hliS;;;;juii'.n u"gict-i nto-ttre-atmosphere'exceed -the-emiisi on-Iirnj t
a I I .cepr.'esenLat.tons'
corrtairrerl in the aPPlicat'ion
0i 1 Sira le Opcrations ano in
\',hJ L prtoPq Z.
of (l +\
/o
P
(tr
(n.r taul
4 - HTS-toncentrlatiOris:-i'fif0d1-'36-ses-sha1 I not'. xceed'-0l10:z
"SiaIns/dscfr" Comp1iance-shalI-be-based-on'-data.-from-.the-CEi'l-as--
iegU i f:-ld.,,i n.' cJrrrd 'it i on-'6' and - appropr i ate ' Sou rce 'te st-method s :"'
5.
i n"'Cond i t,i on 3.
-gl
il
.,1.' t r
li 'r ,l
liii':il
-Jl'
:rlr :'-il
:..i' ; ,
:,1 ii
ji i[t' i.,i1..:.
:,.1 ll-..'t,
1,
Tlii
, l'J ,'
i{' j i' iri,'l : '
i,t"! I',i Fl
,li]i r
,L i'.
li.i
l' rl
I
", il.
i..
rii::.
fi
,:iil
rl!rll:
I 4,,
itilr
,!
(
-3-
6.A continuous ,ronitoring system for.measuring and recording::":::::ili9. :l,hydrosen sutfide i^ i;;i sir.;'t"-[.'ir.X.o sha.n::^jl:l: I 1 ed,
. 9aI i61ar6o, Tli ntiineJ ;;;'.;;;;i.j"ui=tt;' ;il.;";;
_A aciurate ty
burned and shall have a span of 300 L Periods of excesss,,rr>) rurs dr-e uerrneur5--anlz-Tunning three_hour period during whichth e . av er a g e co nc e n t ra t i o n ol nyo ro g en :,r-tir6'e x i e e d s 0 . I 0
ng three-hour period durgen:ulr-idFexceeos0.I0.."\h. Ht#:#j, : : fi i i ; !! i l. t. ! i
e
t,: ; : : i ? HmF: * ;
; : :, : ; t:...procedurei must be approved 5y firn prior-i; ;r;;;.[;.
operator.
repre s en t
7.
B.
Properly DErfor:med'pertormance test results which exceed theemission limits in Tabre I unress specified ersevrhere shar Iconstitute orimaJac'ie evidence in iny proi.uoing to enforce theterms or tniroffiii?;i'i;;-;rissions from the source exceed rheI imi ts
At alI times, including periods of start-up, sltutdoln, andequipment ma lfunction, -ovrners
and operators, io-tf,a extentpracticable, shal I maintain an<l operate the faci I ity in a mannerconsistent r'rith goocr air pol rution contror practice for minrmiiingemiss'ions. Determination of whether acceptauie-operating andmaintenarrce procedy.gs.are be.ing used vri ri be baseo on informationavailable to the.Administrator, rvhich may incrrie, but not belimited to, rnonitoring resurts, rev.iew oi opu.iting and maintenanceprocedures, and inspection of ihe sou.ce.
9.T:3fl,l:::l|.'i:i,l;T:lll:lll:itlhin 48 hours,of discovely (or asiiltoli,l'il J ?J;l.f;:ff :::;il: i:i:l:":::i:g-i:iid ;;ri iliril;, IIi,iil::;.:1,IBT.:: Tllr::?ll:ii^.rl. proces s iubi.,i"'wil; i;*i6 :.:li,
::,f]scoverv an or rhe roriowine-inli;';;'p;5;ii.o IJ',di[ i;writing:
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
t.
Ihe identity of the stack or other emission point vrhereexcess emissions occurred
The magnitude of excess emissions expressed in terms ofpernrit conditions
Pertinent operat.ing data during the time of upset
The time and duration of excess emissions
The identity of the equ.ipment or processand the suspected reasons for the upset
!!:er.and procedures taken rturing the upset period tominimize excess emissions
causing the upset
or anticipated to be taken toupset condi tions
,-construction is delayed fors2.zt(r)(z).
9.
This
the
the
Steps and procedures takenprevent reoccurrence of the
permi t s_!.g.I! eip i re
time specm;Aj=-T ru is not cornrnenced withinif
Ee'
cFlFR
8
Secti on
d
10.
time specified in 40
il''
,1,
i)"r'
,: ii
. i'l
i:
i:-,:l'::i
'li.ii.;i,:l
l.l:.':
,ri,,i:ii'
|,-::|,,
r ,'j,r '
t.i:., i ,
,'I ,tl. ir i::,r,t',t I
I
I
,l
t'ill
fl
(
-4-
in accordance \,rith 40 CFR l?2.
,liia,,l
\,
._t 1
l,r I
,,t:i
i'r'
( r i:i
,.t
ir'
11
ti,,
.,.
',1i1,it
.ti'l
,ll'
ri.
t2.
13.
14.
EPA and its authorized representatives nray.inspect the permitteclfacil ity rJuringlnormal :business--hours, for- purposes of ascertainingcompliance wjth all conditions of tfris permit.
A'l),pqrfgrrr!.ance:.testing required pursuant to this permit shall beconducted in accordance rvith the time schedules and proceduresconta'ined in 40 cFR Section 60.8 and in appendix--l-lJ'or inis--permit. The permittee shal I demonstrate tompl iance with al Iemission ljmitations of this perrnit not later than 45 days afterthe first day of the requirecl performance test.
The Applicant shall prepare an ambient air quality monitoring planthat will determine the impact of source emission! on air quititv.The pollutants to be measured are sulfur dioxide, ozoner andnitrogen oxides. EPA shal I approve the site locations,'instrumentation, durat.ion of clata collection, unO Out.rmine r.rhenthe plan should be implemented. All monitoring must conform to therequirements of 40 cFR part 58. The monitorin{ system must be inplace and operating prior to the plant,s operaiion.
Nothing 'in this approva) shall excuse the Applicant, the ownertand/or the operator from-complying with alt"otner applicableFederal, State, and local reguiations
Tl.^l]09!'ilg roof tanks shar I comprv rv'irh the standards in40 CFR 60.112a.
.3
Permit transfers shall be
REGION VI I I
t-U
I
15.
.lA,"h{,3.
IV. GENERAL
Tltis permit is issuecl in peliance^up9n the completeness and accurateness ofthe information set forth in the Applicant's applicat.ion to ipn-ro.permission to construct and operate a shale oii'upgraoing plant. 0n theeffective date of this permit, the cond'itions herein bec5me eniorceable byEPA pursuant to any remedies it nol.has or may have in the future, under theClean Air Act. Each and every condition of t[is permit is a mater.ial parthereof and js not severable. This permit'is inrnediaieiy ofi.fiir., unlessyou notify this Regional Office, in.writing (Attent'ion: l,lr. lorman A. Huey,ch'ief, Technical support Section, BAH-A), [nit tnis permii o, i term orcondition of it is rejected. Such notice should be made wlinln ten (ib) Ouy,after receipt of the permit and should include the.uiron(ii i;r rejection.
UNITED STATES ENVIRONI,IENTAL PRO
rlvve. e L. uuAir and Hazardous
CTION AGENCY
r
t rec
,:]iil:
((
I .r. -5-
Table I
MAXIMUM UPGRADING FACILITY ETIISSiONS
Process and Combustion Eqissions
Ref orrner
Furnace
Dears en i ter
Charge Htr.
0earsen i ter
Purge Htr.
llydrogen Charge
llea ter
Frac t i onator
reboi Ier htr.
5u lfur Recovery
Unit
Stearrr Boi ler
ai Fuqitive Emissions
Tank Car Loading
Storage Tanks
14i sce'l I aneous
(pumps, valves)
Locomoti ve
Vetricle Travel
Facility Total
53.1 P
z3z.sI.0
0.4
0.5
0.1
0.7
0.6
1.3
0.1
0.1
0.2
1.8
2.8
q.4
2.3
2.5
0.i
12.0
r.s
76.2
- 10.1
8.0
12.4
11.1
0.5
52.5
0.1
0.6
0.8
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.3
0.4
1.5
5.8 3.3
0.3
0.2 0.3
0.5
4.5
0.10.7 ?.9
0.5 2.?
0.8 3.5
0.7 3. 1
1.9 8.3
2.6 11.3
, 9.4 1.0
L7 .6 36.7
2.6
0.5
?.t
ola
9.1
7.r
334.2
Neg'l'igible
0.4
2.8
t.7
t2.3
0.0 0.02.0 7.7
19.1 83.4
0. I 0.6
22.7 97.8
lntermittent Emissions
Dearseniter Cata)yst Replacenrent
ilax inrum f I ari ng
due to upset*
or shutdown 480 81
13
rsslons occur dur i ng emeigerrcy shut-downs or upsets, foi-a-maffiGmore than once per year.Such occurrances are expected no
8Lf
ration o mi nu te:
lr,'l
(
HYDROCARBON EI,II SS ION
TABLE I I
ESTII"IATES FOR FLOATII'iG-ROOF TANKS
(
-6-
Tank
Serv i cet Fue
Syncrude
Number
Tank s
an
Cap ac i ty
BBL ) eaclr
uo
lloo
Total
ota
or Losses
34 .08
,17 .7 6
tons / yeai
6.22
8.7 2
*,1
8s-
bs/da
'iii" :
::rl.
.i.
.'.i ,
:j-; :i .j,
,illll"..,ll
l,!,,
..ii, i. .' l
,ii i tt: l
;1,1,i,:
'rr'1,
,il !
'li'',
:.ill:: . .
r::-,,
r! ii :t
;:1t.,
-7-
TABLE IV
STACK PARAFIETERS FOR THE PROPOSED SHALE OIL UPGRADING PLANT
================================================================================
Stack Parameters
((
Emission Rates
( s/sec )
soz N0i
Height Temperature Volume
(m) (or ) Flow
(m3/sec )
Velocity
(m/sec )Source
Reformer
Fu rn ace
[)ears en i ter
Charge Heater
Dears en i ter
Purge Heater
Hydrogen Charge
Heater
Stean Boi ler
Fr ac t i ona tor
Reboi ler Heater
Sulfur Recovery
Unit
0.726 6.69
0.082 .0.34
0.064 0.27
0.101 0.42
0.3?4 1.51
0.089 0.38
0.239 0.01
30
46
30
46
11
30
34
442
578
578
6I6
4t7
616
311
39. 3
4.6
4.6
6.4
t2.6
5.4
0.54
9. 14
6.46
6. 10
7 .77
24.3I
7 .62
1 .45
N0, was modelerl with higherprovide a more conservative
emission rates than wi I Iest'imate.actual'ly occur, to
8b-
!*
MIS CELLA!{EOUS IIYDROCARBON
TABLE III
EHISSIONS FROM TIIE PROPOSED SHALE OIL UPGMDING PLANT
Source Emlsslon Factorea Eull sslonsffi
:::.,:. .: " .. -.. ": :,,:.!'i. ,.!. ,,:,-,,.,t,--,.,,.,. ..:
Puqp Seals
Coopressor Seals
Valves and Flanges
ReLlef Valves
A?I SeparaEor and
Plant Ef f ltrenc Baslnc
Coollng Towerd
TOTAL
10 1b/1000 bbl feed
1002 recovery of non-ueEhane
l4 lb/IOOO bbl feedb
(Closed sysEen; refcr to EexE
See footnote c
I'I
6 lb/l0l gallons of coollng warer
HC throuih vapor recovery
for flare 6yst,ecr emlssions)
t00
0
140
0
187
I8
0
26
0
34
I
I
6
t
*"sout"" for all ecdsslon facEors excepE, for comprcssor seaIs, ApI ScparaEor and planr
.EPA pr:blicaElon ,\P-42, Table 9.1-2 (U. S. Epr\ l97S) .DBased on scudy conducred by ICUB, Inc. (KVl IgTl).
]Based on.ca1culaEl-ons nade by FIuor Englneers and Const,rucEora, Inc., 19g0a.'The coollng Eower wll1 process appro(lnacely 2.BB rnlll!.on gallone of waEer daily (3.
Eff1uenE Basln 1s U.S. n
I 7 IO! gal lono / day uax irrr:rl ) .
30
457
5 .S
83. 5
'.ll'
.l
ilo.
1. Union 0il Company
?.. Un'ion 0il Cornpanyto appl icat.ion
rr l'i
lit
'.t' : : il
C(
PSI)
(.'l .
5.
DESCR I PTION
-
appl icatjon
Cl oninger) corrcctiorrs
EPA (N. Huey) Rcquest for adclitiorral inforrnation
Union 0il Company (J. Cloninger) supplerientalapplicat jon data to EpA (R. Orrmt--rr'
e"rsrr!q '
lrloodrvard-Clyde Corrsultants (U. Steiner) a,jrti tionalinfor;nat.ion about modr,ls to'EpA iR. Firr.,Jrj'''"'
l'roodward-c'ryde consurtants (U. steiner) rcevaruationof rnode I i ng resu lts to EpA iR. ii,r.,*. ) ! q
'|
u(
EPA (J. Dale) technjcal merno
EPA (R. Fisher) technical rnemc
Appl icatiorl Analysis (EpA)
Publ'ic Notjce in the Rifle Teleqrarn
Holland & Hart letter
Exxon Company and ARCO Coal Company Letters
EPA (R. Duprey) extencljng corrunent period
Publ ic flotice .in the Denver post
Publii Notice in ilre Rifle Teleqram
union 0il company (A. Rancile) nrodificationsapplication.
Exxon Company, U. S . A. cornnent s
ARC0 Coal Company comments
Clrcvron Shale 0il Conrpany cormtents
Colorado Department of Health Conlnents
Application Analysis (Een1
-9-
APPEIID I X I
to the perrnit
DATE
9/29/80
)0/23/50
10/30/s0
tL /lB/e0
1\/?a/s0
t /26 /Bt
3/4lBr
3/e/3t
3/4 /3t
.3/rl lal
4/:g/gt
4/el8t
4 /14 /st
4 /'14 /Bt
5/6/Bt
s/6/Bt
s/el8t
s/rr/Br
5/LT/8L
s/12/80
s/?.0l8t
7.
8.
9.
i0.
11.
12,
13.
'14.
1Fl).
iu.
t7.
18.
19.
20.
2t.
BE-
,ll.'
. .'"
.t,
r:-'-
. : '..
l,ri':
.l;
ltl
:l:'
,tl:l
il
.i'
i.ilr.
t, t:
I.
,i,ir.lr1
i,'
,:],:
.:'u,l
t,ll
:!ti
: i:l;.
,,,,.i','
'i'iillr.
I :lr.:
. ,.,' i
:..i'
!ir'll
,I:: i'.iil
.:1 ,,,
'iri '
'. .lril '
'ril ' .
.t il: .:l
,':;..':
(\
Comment 1:
Re s ponse
Corrrnrent 2 :
Response 2
Corninent 3
Response 3
Comment 4'
.:. -10-
APPIt,IDI X I I
Union 0il Conrpany of California
Sutrnrary of public Coirrrents
Our greatest concern \.Ji th ilre pernri t as proposed r.,as thevirtual ly cornplete-consurirpt'ion of s02 intreiiuni in theParaclrute creek valley by the emissions ilrat r{ould have beenpernritted. This coulri have affccted ol)erations of ilre coronyShalc 0il Project under its e:iist.ing iriO-purrit.
The. rnooeling technique used to predict ilre irnpact is consirteredto be ver.y conservative and ilrereby predicat;l-an incrementconsumption greater than r,rhat vrou'lcl actual Iy occur. union 0i Icornpany submitted design mocJif ications on Hiv-0, 1981 ,rrlriit.,-''resultcd in a large decrease in s02 emissions. Trrisrnodif icat'ion has alleviated the cofi;nentort .ou.urnr.
['Je t.rere f trrther conccrned tirat thc consurirot ion of sOzincremerrt l'rhich r.rou lrl have been al loir:tl t v ti.lo p.opoi.o pcrrnit
'.:oulc have placecl an unreasonahle hurdcn ipun-nir,ur operator.sr'rlro rlay i n the f uturc vri sh to corrstruct anir operate slra I e o.i Iprocessing facilities in ttre vicinity,
As rvas noted in rcsponse 1A, the preiJ.ictecr incrcrnent consumed
',,as on tlre higlr side. Tlre l:urden placecl on ruture operators isone of cteterrni n i ng ilre max imurn accumu I ated impiit f rbnr the ii -
source conrbincd r.rith the existing incrcment consumirg roui.ur.Thc' design tttottification has allr:viatecl ilre commentors concerns.
[,le har] sullstant i a I concc.rns about ilre crclequacy o I' ilre psD
qerry]t appl ication_in regarcrs to ilre app r i'cation of BestAvailalrle contro,r rechnoiogy for the cbhtror oi surfur dioxicreernissions from ilre,upgraoing racllity. Tlrese-ioncerns have nor.rbeen nritigated by the des.igi modjficition
Specific concerns tiere not expressecl.
The perrrrit application indicated that control options otherthan .a four'-stage.claus p)ant r.,ere available to'union r,,trictrwoulrl rrrore effectively and econonrical ly controi surfur ,rioxraeemissions frorn the proposect upgracting iaciiit;:
seven s02 contro'l strategies rvere evaruaterr in the controltechnology reviet'r to determ'irre r.rhat snouiJ ue"requireJ ai bestavai I abte contro,l technotogy (BACi,. - uAii i,Ir' inu emissionlirnit baserr on the rnaxjrnum"-rreriiee-6r so2-r:e,riition, takingirrto account enersy, environm6niirl'.il..;;;;;;; impacts anclother costs, determined to be achievit iu-iJ."iri. source. l,loreefficient corrtro) options than ih*-p;;p;rii' rolir_stage clausplant were evalrgt:l. Hovrever, tnev rrLre-noi-ror. economic,rlin tlre control of s02 emissioni. ir,u';;;iiiialion nasalleviated the corruneitors concerns.
Response 4
8e-
i,rr,l,
.; ll.
ii'
|I l
:':ir,i
i', i' ,'t'
I . 'r.. li'
i':,,,,i;
i ''i, l
,tl'
ti
:i:,i
't' 't
-
;t I l
lri'.v'
tl
':, ill
:
-11_
The rnorlel'ing approach'is unctul3,conscrvative in th,rt itover-predicts the degrcc of increr:rcrrt consunrption ancl impact onambient air quality stanrJar<Js likely to occLri fiorn constructionand operat i on of the upgr.rct i ng f ac I i I ty.
(See Response 1A)
I'Je agree r,rith the corrrnentor r,rlrictr supports our originaldeternrination that the S02 irrcrement r.ri I I be protectecl.
((
Conrnerri' 5:
Response 5:
An applicartts burden uncler 52.21(k) is to r!:nronstrate tirat theapplicable incrcments ivil I not be violate,J. For convenience, an applicantcan use conservative rnocle'ling. Future- agO.licnts, in the impict area, mustrnake.an indepenclent strol',ing uncler 52.21 ii.l unJ are not 5orrnd 5y previouslypredicted 'impacts.
Conmentors
Gerald D.Ortloff
Exxon Cornp.rn-y, U. S . A.
J. 1,,. Lerevr
ARC0 Coal Company
Douglas S. Moore
Chevron Shal e 0'i I Company
Co I or ado De p.l. trnent of Hea I th
0ate
s /9 /sL
s/ It/ar
s /tl/31
s /!?/81
-qD-
I
i:l. r,
,!l.r ; '.|li. iilr : r,.: :,,:,lri,i,,,r
, , :i,/::i:,...' ,ri Ii'. :ri
tL,:
ii,,,:
,l.r' .
i.
'',li'.::i,.
\ ii
!:l' I
.lti.r
(,\
-l?-
APPEIIDIX I I I
1. The permittee shall provide EPA with the fol'lowing:
a) Notification v,ithin seven (7) days of the date of conrnencement ofconstruction of a major new source or modification.
b) Notification within seven (7) days of rhe date of the completionof construction of a major nev, source or modification.
c) Notif icat'ion within seven (7) days of : l) startup and Z) tne oateupon which full operational status is attained.
d) No later than thirty (30) days after the end of each six monthperiod beginning from the date of permit issuance, submittal of aprogress report for the iource or rnodification subject to thispermit. Once compl iance rvith any I imitation in this permit hasbeen achieved and reported, further reporting of that fact is notrequired. The data and other information from which the progressreport is drawn shall be retained for EPA inspection for at ieastone year following the date of submittal of the progress repor[.
e) Notification with'in forty-eight hours by te)ephone and registeredmail of any breakdown in pollution contiol equipment or otherupset which may cause violation of any condition of this permit.
f) Notifications associated with the conducting of any performancetests required by or provided for under thii permii: inall be madein accordance with 40 CFR 60.8.
9) Notification within fifteen (15) days in advance of any planneclbypassing of control equipment for maintenance or other purposes.
Any recordl required to be kept by the perm'ittee under th.is permit shallbe available during normal business hours for inspection and'copylng byEPA and EPA's authorized representatjves for at least one (l)-y['ar fromthe date of their recording.
Al] 1eoo1t1, notj.9t, control plans, and other information that must besubm'itted in satisfaction of a requirement of this permit shaii u.submitted through certified mail to:
Director, Enforcement Division
EPA, Region VIII
1860 Lincoln Street
Oenver, Colorado 80295
Attention: General Enforcement Branch
Notices shall be in writ'ing unless provided otherwise in this permit.
?.
3.
-q r-
((
-i 3-
Un'ion 0i'l Company of Cal if orn'ia
Shale 0il Upgrading Facility
APPLICATI0N ANALYSIS (Statement of Easis)
llay 20 , 198I
A. Applicability Determ'inat'ion
Maximum potential emissions for the proposed 10,000 barrel per day sizeplant to upgrade and fractionate raw shale oil in the original application
were as follows:
Potential emissions (tons/yi:ar)
soz il0x Particulates HC
?01.7 3?0.7
c0
Process and combustion
Storage tanks, pumps, loading
Locomot i ves
Vehicle travel
i.0 7.1
5.0 29.7
90.9
0.6 3.4
8.7
1.7
Totals ?0?.7 327.8 10.4 96.5 33.1
Union submitted a number of design changes on I'lay 6, 1981 which
resulted jn a signficant decrease in the sulfur dioxide emissions and minor
net increases in the other pollutants. The rev'ised maximum potential
emiss'ions for the plant area are as follows:
Process and combustion
Storage tanks, pumps, loading
Locomotives
Vehicle travel
soz NOx Part i cu I ates HC c0
1.0 7.1
L,7
35.7 327 .l 10.6 6.1 36.3
9I. 1
0.6 3.4
Tota I s 36.7 334 .2 12 .3 97. B 39.7
The shale oi'l upgrad'ing operation is considered to be a majorstationary source. Emissions of nitrogen dioxide, and volatile organic
compounds exceed the significant emission limits. The net emission
increases of each pol'lutant are below the significant emission limits so the
97'
'r,i,
it.
.t: i i
-14-
B. Apdl ication 0verview
Ihe PSD permit application was received by EPA on September 29,
Additional'information was requested on 0ctober 30, 1980 and rece'ived
:i
l,rir,Ili
,t:
., . l (a
1980.
0n
November 24, 1980. Supplemental modeling information was received on
Oecember 1, 1980 and January 26, 1981. A mortificatjon to the design was
received on May 6, 1981.
C. Stack Hei qhts
Good eng'ineering
sulfur recovery unit
feet (46 meters) in
recovery unit stack
F. Air Quality Analysis
The ambient concentrations were determined
located at Tracts C-a and C-b as well as earlier0il. A surnmary of the maximum concentration is
app I icati on.
G. Anbient Air Increments
practice (GEP) stack heights for the reformer furnace,
and hydrogen charge heater were determined to be 150
chapter 6 of the application. The revised sulfurheight will be 34 meters. All other stacks are 30 metersor less which meet the requ'irements of GEP.
D. Contro'l Technoloqy Revierv
A control technology review was done for sulfur dioxide, nitrogendioxide and volat'i Ie organic compound emissions. The rationale for the
technology to be used is contained in Chapter 5 of the appjication. The bestavailable control technology (BACT) analysis js described in a technical memodated I'larch 4, i98i. It was determined that Union will utilize BACTcontrols. The des'ign modifications rece'ived on I'lay 6, 198I decreased thepotential SQ2 emissions from 202.7 tons/year to 36.7 tons/year which isbelow the_significant emission l'imit. Therefore a BACT anilysis is no longerrequired for S02 emissions.
E. Air Quality Models
The short term maximum concentrat'ions were modeled using Hoodward-CIydeConsultants, (HCC) version of the EPA PAL model. Annual Conientrations wL.edetermined using the WCC version of the EPA Valley Model. A description of
how the models were modified and used are discussed in chapter 6 of theapplication. An ev.aluation of the models used is contained in a technical
memo dated March 9, 1981.
from the monitoring stations
monitoring done by Union
shown on Table 6-3 in the
Maximum concentrations of sulfur dioxjde emiss'ions from the Unionoperations were calculated to be 78.8 uglm3 over an 24-houi perioO when theemissions were 202.7 _tons per year. l.lith the design change submitted onMay 6' 1981, the sulfur dioxide emissions decreasei to 36.7 ions per yea,which would significantly decrease the maximum concentrations. Hbwevir,since the potential S02 emissions are below the significant emission iirit,an air quality ana'lysii is not required.
9a-
-:it!
.l ril l.i
;.1. ;;!.:..'t.
j. ii,,i,
, ,|
ri'ii.i | ...
.t Ii , .:
'l { .'
iii,. rll
iil,,
i lli ,
.l ,.
i,i.,1,
((
-15 -
_,_.,Th;.total plqdicted N0* concentrat.ions were estimated to be 19.6ug/m'and when added to the background amounted to 57.0 ut763 *r'i.r' i,below the national standard or 100 u9/m3. Tne-val!4ity of modeling resultsis discussed 'in a technicar memo dat6d lrarch g,'iggi. 'N; ,l;r;dions ofincrements or ambient standards were pred.icted.
Pred'icted Faci ljty Impacts
(uglm3)
aging TractTime C-aa
Increment
Co'lonyb
Union
Upgrad'ing
Facility
Tract
c-ba
Union
Re tor t Total (nnnQS)
Noz
Annua I 0 4.I 1.2 i4 .3 19.6 57 .6
a
b
Source: U.S. EPA, l979.
Based on rnode'ling colony's emissions using the vALLEy model
H. Source Information
. Ihe original applicatjon dated September 29, 19g0 contains most ofthe informatjon needed to make the requiruJ Jutl.minations in the pSDregulations. Additional information regaroing-union, r piopoi.i' emissionmonitoring program, emissions from. locoriotivei, emissioi-,s-anj-operation ofthe emergency flglu, and suppremental sulfur iontro.r ,trit.gi.i'n.r.provided in a letter dated November IB, lgBO.--Addit.ionai *oO.itngdescriptions and.results were provided in letters dated November 26, 1gg0and January ?6' 1981. A modificarion to tr,e Jesign nir;;;;;; May 6, 1981.
[. Additional Impact $nalyses
visibi'lity impacts were discussed on page 6-37 of the application andwere determ'ined tg !: insignifjcant ar rhe Ftit fops pifJur.ull'Rr.u.starting on page 6-19,.an analys]: of the impacts on sojls and vegetationis presented. Conclusions from the-ana'lys'is' u.. that impacts wi ll be fromslight to negligibte. tJith the addit.ionil reducti;;-ri il."ioz'emissions, impacts would be reduced.
J. Public Participation
The application, analysis and proposed permit were made available forpublic inspection at the EPA offices in'Denver, uno the Gt;iieio countyclerk's office in Glenwood springs. The colorido Department of Healthissued a public notice in thb Riire Teresru, on J.;;;;i"za,"riar. EpA gaveopportunitv to request public f'earilng,arnt-a-3o dg.y puuiii-io*unt period bya public notice in the Rifle Teleqrim on Mu.ir,-tt, 1981. The publiccomment perjod was exteiddilE-Malllll 1981 and priri.-..ti;;; Iere issuedin the Rifre Teleqram qr,g tlg ognve! ioil.- inruu written comments wererec e i veii--EffiiffiIed i n ilreTJnillEFt'i t .' itr e se corrnen t s are sumrnar i z edin the surrmarv of pubt ic con'ne^ii (ipp.;;i;'tt'or the permit).Qu*lL
l:.
i, i i
,.1
r-iir. '
''lil, l
'til
:i
1i., I
'.i.1;,
. I l.:I ,.i..,
'
"::
i:'
,l;
I'i:
i.r, '-
t._
' ,: ,ir,
.!.t i :.:
irli,,r','l. t..li :
llir..
,,l.,lll,
:il
:..i'tl
I i'i.
'.1 ii
'rL
. i--
: .li;,'r ,ll.
, |i ,r ,r.
rl:.
rilr,
.i t,
',tj
r!lii
4210 Eagt llth Avenue
Denver, Colorado 80220'3716
Phone(303) 320'8333
April 2, 1992
(brfield brntY
109 9th St'reet
Glenwood SPrinEs, @ 81601
Sincerely,
Or,/ fr,L
/
James S. Geier, P.8., Chief
New Source Review Section
Air Pollution Control Division
JSG/de
John fule, EPA
Telefar Numbore:
Main Building/Denver
(303) 322-90?6
Ptarmigan Place/Denver
(303) 32G1629
First National Bank Building/Denver
(303) 35S6569
Grand Junction Offico
(303) 248-7198
Pueblo Offico
(?r9) 64&844r
APR I 1992
ROY ROMER
Governor
JOEL KOHN
Interim Executive Director
Ctrtt'llrn
ry-
pR 6 t992
tirrniir:LD
tltlNIYc0rrM6st0[Ens
Dear Sir: j
I,lr, Leon h.hLer requested we send a letter re#ardinl a--trartsfer orf
ownership of air pllution prmits from tht@7 to cTant FUeIs
kveloyment Corpnrati on,
I .have attached a copy of the letter sent llnmJ jn t}js regald'
you have ory qu"ition" ,=ga,,3,i..C tljs information please a7l n'e
331-8582.
If
at
enclosures: Note to Applicant for Air Bnission Permits' ExcerPt from ReguLation No' 3
Revisd APEN's
COI,OMDO
DEPARTMENT
OFAHBALTH
il'
U,
cc:
@ wiatcd on ncwlcdPnlar
I
I
fi;.t,=t, couNrY
,l
.. :t. 'iii I.. 1L ,:itL:'.,i.ir' '. {,!,
,]l:i .:.l.i,i', : itt i,.
I .r!it i
I txl.
iql. :lilil: :ir.t, ll
;f;t.i.,:il,
lr
,1,
ii
''.lri
4:1,:
i-'i-iii ,
.! ii ''
'lt'Iii,
:i
'i l .,
.1,,i1.,
,i irr
.,i;il
ilt,
l
.iiil
r:,1 ,
.,,,:! i
,,:j-.', i
il,.l,
I I :ji:'t'
4210 East llth Avenue
Denver, Colorado 80220'3716
Phone(303) 320-8333
t
Telefur Nuurbere:
Main Building/Denver
(303) 322-90?6
Ptarmigan Place/Denver
(303) 320.1529
Firet National Bank Building/Denver
(303) 35t6559
Grand Junction Office
(303) 2{&?198
ROY ROMER .
Governor
JOEL KOHN
Interim Executive Director
COLORADO
DEPARTMENT
OFAHEALTH
l,$lt,o#ff,
April 2, LggZ
W. Peter D. Nichols
UI,rcAL
'r9i{*?rT,"*Y#"'u*uru ,
;
I
Mr. Leon hhler requestd we send a Letter regal1jling a transfer'of
owrcrship of air sllrtion prmits fram thto,cE'7 to cTant Ftrefs
ltr,velo],]F|rtt &,4ntation. Transfer of ownership of ,state jssued P-tmits
requires the foLlowirug:
l) Suhmj ttal of revised Air Pol,Lution hnission Notjces (,APENs) for
each 'ernission point with the requird $60,00 Filing Fee for each
notice. These Apns must note the nethod of opration of each
emission Point,
2) Sutvni ttal of an appJication form'
3) A statement notirt€ that the source wiLL be opratd is such a
,ur-", that it wil-L not be conlidered a ndified source.
I)ynn receipt of t:ltis infortation tlte Division wil.L review the Apens and
rdraft the wrmits. A fee letter witT then b sent to couer ll.re
Division's coit of pracessirg the tequest. &tce the fees are .rE,.id the
Ier:nits are issued.
,tr
The lh665.l situation does require that, Prevention of Sienificant
Deterioration (ND) issues b addrissed' Cw'rently the II'S' EPA reteiiis
authority for llnocaTts HD qrcrmits, Since the HD pg}I7nits were issued'
however, the Colorado Air Pollution Control Division has taken ove! l'!e
HD Program. consequently HD jssues must b addressd rtith the
Division prior to isiuance of new pezmits, It js likeiy that an
,,emission netting" proc6,/jlure can be enployd to sinplify the HD review;
I
!
l
@ rri,t r rt on rr"rt I Por u-?tn
i. l,
,,1
,I,'l;,ril
it;'
!1 "'t tl.:::
U.
-Page two-
IwouldstlggestthatCteanItrelslruveTo9rent<plation.neetl.tiththe
Division to discuss these jssues ptior to ntattinc an application'
Please caLL me at (303) 331-8582 to schdufe a neeti\g or if J'ou have
arry questions regarding this letter'
SincerelY,
O"J&tu
/,l.n t s. kier, P'E', Chief
New Source Review Section
Air Pollution Control Division
.ISG/dC
encTosures: Note to
kcerPt
Revised
John Dale, EPA
Applicant for Air frnission Pernits
iion ReeuLation No' 3
APEN's
-ql
, '11
t:
lli
'l
, t.t: .| ,.1"1t
r il Iii '
:1i:4l
!r.
cc:
i'i, i '
GAi-.;' ,.
COLORADO CTEAN IUELS
April6, 1992
Garfield County Board of County Commissioners
Garflreld County Courthouse
109 Sttr Street
Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601
RE: Special Use Permit Rehabilitation Plan
Dear Commissioners:
Per a request by Mr. Don Deford, this letter is to confirm and further elaborate on the
rehabilitation program anticipated by Colorado Clean Fuels in the event the facility is
decommissioned and abandoned.
In the event Colorado Clean Fuels does not exercise its option to purchase the facility
at some point during or at the end of the l5-year lease term with Unocal, the terms of its lease
ugr..r.ot with Unocal specifrcally provide that "upon the termination of this lease, lessee shall
sJrrender the premises to lessor; provided, however, lessee shall have a period of up to one
year from the date of termination of the lease to remove all buildings, improvements,
Lquipment and personal property owned by lessee on the premises and return the premises to
leisor in the same condition as when received, ordinary wear and tear excepted. Lessee shall
repair any damage to the premises occasioned by the removal of lessee's buildings,
im^provements, Jquipmeniand personal property." Colorado Clean Fuels' rehabilitation plan
foi tle duration of the lease is to return the facility to Unocal in its existing condition.
Therefore, in the event Colorado Clean Fuels returns the facility to Unocal, any obligations for
site rehabilitation that Unocal currently has will remain with Unocal, after Colorado Clean
Fuels completes its obligations to remove its buildings, improvements, equipment and personal
property.
9085 East Mineral Circle, Suite 350
Englewood, Colorado 80112
Phone: (303) 792-3037
Fax: (303) 792-5603
27405 Puerta Real, Suite 340
Mission Viejo, California 92691
Phone: (714) 582'0371
Fax: (714) 582-0842-qg -
i I r,
.:
APR 9 1992v
, .:r.
"':llirl. 'i,,"
jri::l
' , i..il i
'i ll :i
,tili;
'..:ti.
" ilit.
;.iri::r:.
!'1,.!.
.rlr:. t: t:
.:,il:
irr r! l;l
,!'i;
,ll[:' 'r
, li'
,,,lrllir,lii
:lt,
'lril!
,,i,ti
Garfield County Board of County Commissioners
4t6192
Page2
In the event Colorado Clean Fuels exercises its option to purchase the facility at some
point during or at the end of the ls-year lease term with Unocal, it will become obligated to
iehabilitate the site if the facility is decommissioned and abandoned. Colorado Clean Fuels
expects that a one-year period in which full rehabilitation would be accomplished is a
reisonable time peiiod, consistent with the rehabilitation timing provided for in its lease
agreement with Unocal. Rehabilitation is construed by Colorado Clean Fuels to mean the
rJmoval of all equipment, buildings, fixtures and other structures and the restoration of topsoil
to excavated areas, along general iopographic contours that were present prior to the initial
construction of the facilitY.
I trust that the above clarifies our intentions, expectations and obligations
understanding in the event the facility is decommissioned and abandoned. If additional
information is required, please contact me at 303-792-3037.
Sincerely,
\2",U ,a 'D=-X
Robert A. Downey
Executive Director
cc: L. Elliott
P. Nichols
D. Stranger
.1. ..,..
,lil,,,i,,
'.li:i':iil'.
.ill;r'.
;lli,i.iIlr-
.,,i1,
rlt\
,ir,.
:,:: l:,
i r1:'
+r:1,
,'ilrll
':1 i !l
't"il I
..ir,lii; I
.il rl! 'iti;' !
-qq-
rrir.:
,.:,ir,
.:il.
'lirrl''',11'. :.:.,j:i" ,
,
':i. l-. l.
. 1rI.''
il,
TO ?1449 t 3hr3?9e5643
P-!3=
PrrGE .A@?/aaz
RPR 1 'g? 13: E4 FR0l'1 JE.HOUSTON H3
Aprll 07' 1992
RDC/gnr
cc: D. ShePPard
lil. Islam.
File: 2.1
JohnBrovYnE&C
7909 Parkwood Clrcle Drlve r 7/036
fif,,r.ff #whr*
TelePhone (71 3) gBS2002
ffiil'rl?'1E'Jt'J8,' u*
lixii:1,i',El1'iii,1
e,,su'|'ie 3so
COLOMOO CLEAN FUEL
Parachute, C0
.rghlc iiu' No. .]B-192H499
Letter No. 003
iruiittl-ioioradg Clean Fuels- I'lethanol Conversion
Nolse Lavel Deslgn
Dear Hr. DowneY;
Thr s r s to answer suesu ors^ oi,*,IiJJr.nT ;tJ.,...[r- lil}?I:H Xlii! llr rHE
iiiE.ieo -from the l4ethanol . Cor[i[ili.'r;;iiltv in Parachute, Go]orado'
rt is rohn Brown,s pr,acilcJ Ig-d"T,rnlfJJ,HiJ: -'#.',1 ,ililrl:J'i,lf;ffili.lqi
:?it:'ffiril|JoTiillro|r fnt',I,i,r. sir* irrl uhii'i; 1irse ma-crrinli'r,iit'iii
be in excess of 200 feet-from.lib p;ib..fti-li;;itrd-ndise levels would be
IiniiaEii[ii iisi-it in-ds'iiCi Ue]s' at'the-propertv I I ne '
EF{EE:t=
GAI1FIELD COUN'ry
Very truly Yours'
. Cooper
ProJect M
-) oc-
,l
. , .,1 -l! l-. l'
APR- 9-9= trEl
APR 9 1992