10/29/2015
Thornton, CO - - - Drilling for oil and gas development in residential backyards is becoming an increasingly common practice – even in large cities, like Thornton, Colorado. Neighborhoods affected are organizing politically against the mining. One of these organizations is the Adams County Communities for Drilling Accountability NOW (ACCDAN).
Organized to protect the suburb of Wadley Farms and the middle school that is situated near to the proposed oil and gas development, the group has become frustrated by the lack of response from their efforts to have implemented the Governor’s Oil and Gas Task Force Recommendation Nos. 17 and 20 issued by the Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation Commission (COGCC) late on October 6. “We are extremely disappointed. After working with the county and the operator to postpone siting negotiations until after the new COGCC rules were implemented, we now discover the draft rules offer those of us in Wadley Farms no protection whatsoever,” ACCDAN Board President Jacky Kowalsky said. “These rules contain no additional minimum setback for oil and gas wells drilled within neighborhoods, they contain no additional required mitigations for wells in neighborhoods and they provide no voice in the process for the people who will have to live with large oil and gas facilities in their backyard.”
In addition, ACCDAN is concerned that the draft rules appear to intentionally exclude counties (such as Adams County) from the new rules that require oil and gas operators to inform cities, but not counties, of their five-year plans for the area. “We are amazed that the COGCC appears to be working to deny counties the ability to do comprehensive planning with the oil and gas industry.” ACCDAN is particularly concerned that Synergy’s 20-well industrial oil and gas well facility proposed for a site at 140th Avenue and Franklin Street in the middle of a residential neighborhood surrounded by Thornton has just been given “the green light” with the new state rulemaking, Kowalsky said. “This site is one of the most egregious examples of a huge oil and gas facility in a neighborhood in Colorado, and these draft rules do nothing to protect us. The potential precedent this location sets for Colorado has long-term ramifications for not only our community, but the entire state.”
“ACCDAN firmly believes that large scale oil and gas facilities such as the one being proposed by Synergy for Wadley Farms do not belong in any neighborhood,” Kowalsky said. “The intention of the Task Force recommendation was to require operators to look for locations away from homes and neighborhoods. These draft rules would essentially allow them to drill anywhere they want – without regard for the needs of the community.”
ACCDAN says that their goal is to prevent the location of oil and gas developments near homes and neighborhoods in Adams County while still allowing for responsible extraction of oil and gas. ACCDAN was established on August 15, 2015, in response to Synergy’s proposal to drill 20 oil and gas wells at 140th Avenue and Franklin Street in the middle of a developed residential neighborhood known as Wadley Farms. In approximately six weeks, ACCDAN grew from a handful of members to more than 400 supporters. Synergy’s proposed 20- well site is located just 15 miles from downtown Denver and is surrounded on all four sides by the City of Thornton and the numerous suburbs, including Hunters Glenn, Quail Valley, Fallbrook Farms, Cherrywood Park, Signal Creek, and York Crossing.
Also, ACCDAN seeks to establish a minimum setback of 1,500 feet between any occupied residential structure and the boundary of large scale oil and gas facilities located within or adjacent to a neighborhood, a requirement for structured public involvement and comment periods and formal comment resolution for all siting and permitting aspects associated with large scale oil and gas facilities within or adjacent to a neighborhood – including the ability to request a hearing before the COGCC on the proposed facility, a clear definition of “large scale oil and gas facility” as any site where 3 or more oil and gas wells or other oil and gas site-related structures are located on one site, and a clear definition of the COGCC’s term “urban mitigation area” as any neighborhood comprised of multiple homes.
I had the opportunity to talk to ACCDAN’s spokeswoman, Jennifer Gamble, a resident of the area.
BRACHFELD - - - Why would you object to oil and gas development in a residential neighborhood?
ACCDAN - - - First to clarify, we are not against oil and gas development and there are currently a handful of wells spread across our communities, but what is being contemplated for this site is a 20-well large scale oil and gas facility with the character more like a major industrial plant. We object to large-scale oil and gas development in a residential neighborhood due to incompatibility of use and public safety aspects. ACCDAN strongly believes that placing a large scale oil and gas facility in a neighborhood is changing the character of that neighborhood and making it a de facto industrial area. For most homeowners, their home is their most important asset - both emotionally and financially. We are also concerned about the increased industrial traffic on residential roads with school bus stops on them. We understand there will be tens of thousands of large truck trips associated with the project coming in and out of the neighborhood right past the bus stop. We believe that siting of large scale facility within an residential area simply should not even be contemplated. There are other alternative site locations and with technological advances there will come a time when these mineral rights will be accessible from even greater distances. We do not believe the safety and quality of life of Colorado's citizens should be compromised when viable alternatives exist today and continue to improve with time.
BRACHFELD - - - Why do you believe that the oil and gas development is dangerous when our government indicates that it is safe?
ACCDAN - - - We are not pretending to be experts in the safety of oil and gas development. I, for one, do not believe its impacts have been adequately studied and are unknown at this time so do not think someone could say with confidence one way or another. What we do know is that industrial truck traffic in a residential neighborhood is hazardous to our children and the drivers. We do know that industrial accidents can occur, even if the occurrence is considered a rarity by some, but within a community the impact to human health is higher. The government requires emergency response plans, Material Safety Data Sheets, arrangements with emergency responders and monitoring. If oil and gas was safe these things would not be required so there is some risk involved otherwise we would not have these aspects. There is risk of explosion, fire, and other industrial accident. The very sign on the fence says "DANGER" High Pressure Gas so Synergy is not telling you this is safe - they know there is a chance of explosion and telling you to stay away. We do know that the drilling and construction will create air pollution and particulates that are of danger to children and adults in our community that have asthma such as my son. What we do know is that the drilling creates noise pollution 24/7 for months and that is not the type of activity that should occur in a residential neighborhood. I cannot have a party with loud music after 10 p.m. because it disturbs the peace of the neighborhood or have a dog that barks, but they can drill 24/7 and keep our kids awake on school nights and somehow that is safe and acceptable. Risk is a relative and often involves an element of choice. We will have no choice in this matter. For those that are not impacted it is far to easy to say there is no risk and that it is safe.
BRACHFELD - - - How do you fairly argue that the owners of the petroleum cannot access their minerals?
ACCDAN - - - I think you have been misinformed about our organization. We fully support their right to access their minerals responsibly. They simply do not have to access this from a site within a neighborhood by drilling 20 wells on one spot. There are other locations that might be more suitable that area adjacent existing industrial areas, etc. where the minerals can be accessed from, it would just cost Synergy more money to do so. Although with the amount of public disruption these sites may begin looking more attractive to Synergy every day. There right is not the right to the cheapest option so they cannot be denied access and we do not want to deny them access, we just want them to identify an alternative site. Synergy is conducting an alternate site analysis right now and has a couple months left to go, but has already stated publicly there are no alternative sites. Not sure how you conclude that when your study is not done yet. Makes one question the study methodology which is why we are requesting independent assessment of the alternative site analysis.
BRACHFELD - - - Besides sound (which is planned to be mitigated) what deleterious effects from the wells are you anticipating?,
ACCDAN - - - Mitigation does not equate to elimination. Rest assured there will be noise pollution as a result of their 24/7 drilling which will impact the surrounding neighbors. While they will put in place a sound barrier wall, experience has shown that the walls are not effective and do not eliminate the vibration and sound impacts. So while it is very good that they will attempt to mitigate, these mitigations can only go so far to protect the health and quality of life of the citizens of Colorado. Other negative effects are: dust and particulates, huge volumes of industrial traffic, fumes from equipment and vehicles, impact to pets, animals and wildlife, increased industrial risk to our children and families, lack of sleep during 24/7 drilling operations, bright lights 24/7, basic and utter disruption to the peace of our community. If your neighbor was doing any of these things you would call the police on them and they would be sited. This is not acceptable activity within a developed residential neighborhood.
BRACHFELD - - - What legal recourse do homeowners have for the damage to their property values, health and quality of life from the new wells?
ACCDAN - - - You would need to check with an attorney on that. From what we can tell we have no recourse for damage to property values or quality of life. We would love for someone to tell us otherwise though. If one of our children gets hit by a Synergy truck then we will have recourse. Other than that, health impacts from environmental hazards are extremely difficult to show causation so the likelihood of any compensation is next to none. However we do have the recourse of free speech, right to assembly, right to petition the government, and we can hold them to each and every minutia of requirement and technicality to make sure that the project proceeds in absolute 100% compliance with all applicable laws, etc.
BRACHFELD - - - Will any of the residents benefit from the new jobs these wells create?
ACCDAN - - - They would have the potential to benefit from new jobs whether they are created at 140th Avenue and Franklin or one mile from here at a site adjacent to a current industrial area not in the middle of a neighborhood so I think that is a moot point.
BRACHFELD - - - How responsive has Adams County Commissioners been?
ACCDAN - - - I think many of the commissioners have been responsive. We requested an Alternative Site Analysis and they asked Synergy to do one. We requested they postpone further action on the project until after Colorado concludes its rulemaking for large oil and gas facilities and they have announced publicly that they will do so. They have met with us on every request, attended and spoke at our meetings, answered our phone calls. Is it responsive enough, the future holds the answer to that question.
BRACHFELD - - - Why did the residents not expect oil and gas development in their residential neighborhood when the oil and gas rights did not belong to them?
ACCDAN - - - This is an interesting question. Perhaps you are not familiar with our neighborhood. We have oil and gas in our neighborhood and did not object when it came, but it is a few wells like what you see all over the place. This is not a few wells. This is different. We are not anti oil and gas, but we are pro common sense. Common sense would tell you that you do not put 20 oil and gas wells in the middle of a neighborhood. It is just absurd. If it was not so sad it would be funny.
BRACHFELD - - - Is oil and gas development permitted by zoning regulations?
ACCDAN - - - Zoning regulations cannot prevent oil and gas. As you indicated before and we agree, mineral right owners have the right to responsibly access their mineral rights. We do not seek to deny them access, we just want the access to be done responsibly in a way that does not endanger Colorado neighborhoods.
BRACHFELD - - - How will this disrupt the middle school it is so near to?
ACCDAN - - - The increased industrial traffic will pose an increased risk to school children. The increased dust and particulates will pose a respiratory risk to the school children in our neighborhood and at the bus stop on Franklin Street less than 1 block from the site. The increased light and noise will disrupt their sleep and study patterns.
BRACHFELD - - - What else should I have asked but didn't?
ACCDAN - - - I think you should be asking the Colorado Oil and Gas Commission why the proposed rules for large oil and gas facilities do not provide a minimum setback for those facilities, why the proposed rules contain no specific mitigations, why the proposed rules deny Counties a voice in the process, why the proposed rules are not protective of the citizens of Colorado.
My interview with COGCC will follow in this series.
http://meadowlarkherald.blogspot.com/2015/10/bad-gas-suburban-drilling-in-thornton.html
the Meadowlark Herald is a subscriber-supported newspaper that encourages the community to explore their world through citizen journalism. To submit a story or tip, use our contact form, email [email protected], or call (720) 515-NEWS
