HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOUNCIL - AGENDA ITEM - 03/22/2022 - OIL AND GAS REGULATIONSDATE:
STAFF:
March 22, 2022
Kelly Smith, Senior City Planner
Cassie Archuleta, Environmental Sustainability Manager
Caryn Champine, Director of PDT
Brad Yatabe, Legal
WORK SESSION ITEM
City Council
SUBJECT FOR DISCUSSION
Oil and Gas Regulations.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The purpose of this item is to discuss draft regulations for oil and gas development within City limits. Per State
statute, local regulations must match or exceed Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation Commission (COGCC)
requirements to ensure the protection of public health, safety, welfare, the environment, and wildlife resources.
The discussion will focus on proposed draft regulations; key policy questions related to the City’s existing reverse
setback standards for land development adjacent to existing wells; potential resources needed for
implementation; and potential options for operators to plug and abandon wells; and next steps in the process.
GENERAL DIRECTION SOUGHT AND SPECIFIC QUESTIONS TO BE ANSWERED
1. Do Councilmembers have feedback about the current approach to draft regulations?
2. Are existing reverse setbacks adequate to protect public health?
3. Would Councilmembers like staff to return for another Work Session to discuss public engagement feedback,
draft regulations, and opportunities for code refinement?
BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION
During a Council work session held on September 16, 2019, Councilmembers directed staff to begin deve loping
local regulations for oil and gas development. The next Council work session on this topic occurred on January
26, 2021 where Councilmembers provided feedback on preferred location requirements for new oil and gas
development. Several Councilmembers expressed support for restricting new oil and gas development to the
Industrial Zone District and imposing a 2,000 foot setback from existing residential and high occupancy buildings
(schools, hospitals, nursing homes, correctional facility, childcare center, multi-family). Councilmembers’ feedback
aligns with general input received by the public and several boards and commissions.
Since the January 26, 2021 work session, staff has been drafting a comprehensive set of regulations for oil and
gas development for new and existing facilities. This work session will provide an overview of draft regulations;
discuss existing reverse setback regulations and whether they should be amended; provide a preview of resource
considerations for implementation; and oppor tunities to plug and abandon existing wells. Depending on
discussion outcomes, staff will continue refining code and engage the broader community after draft regulations
are completed. Staff is prepared to return in Q3 2022 during a work session to discuss public input, answer
questions and solicit feedback for further code refinement.
Senate Bill 19-181
On April 16, 2019, the State adopted Senate Bill 19-181 (“SB181” or “Bill”), which amended several sections of
Colorado statutes related to oil and gas development. The Bill prioritizes the protection of public health, safety and
environmental concerns in the regulation of oil and gas development, which was a shift in mission for the
Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation Commission (COGCC).
March 22, 2022 Page 2
SB181 also granted new land use authority to local governments to regulate the siting of new oil and gas well
locations, and to regulate land use and surface impacts, including the ability to inspect oil and gas facilities;
impose fines for leaks, spills, and emissions; and impose fees to cover costs of permitting, regulation, monitoring
and inspection. Importantly, SB181 established that local government land use regulations would not be
preempted by overlapping state regulations, and that state regulations would serve as baseline requirements,
thus allowing local governments to adopt more protective regulations than the state. However, this authority is
limited to surface impacts; the COGCC maintains authority over subsurface and other technical aspects of oil and
gas development.
FORT COLLINS DRAFT REGULATIONS
The City’s draft regulations are comprehensive in scope and regulate all phases of development, from operator
registration, financial assurances and site design to ongoing monitoring, operational standards, and fi nal
reclamation. To address the entire lifecycle of oil and gas development into the City’s existing regulatory structure,
standards are spread across the following four locations:
1. Land Use Code
2. Application Submittal Checklist
3. Municipal Code
4. Operational Standards Manual
More explanation about requirements in each location is provided below.
Land Use Code
The Land Use Code (LUC) contains standards that regulate the design, density, and approval procedures of
development projects. It also includes provisions related to enforcement and penalties for failure to comply with
the terms and conditions of approved development plans. Regulations in the LUC are interconnected to create a
comprehensive regulatory framework for all permitted land uses. This means a change to one provision often
cascades into changes in other provisions.
Prior to SB181, the City was preempted from regulating oil and gas development; therefore oil and gas has never
been included as an approved land use within the LUC. As suc h, the City’s draft oil and gas regulations include a
new section dedicated to oil and gas development, along with amendments to several existing code sections to
fully integrate oil and gas uses into the code. While several existing code sections will be amended, many will
remain untouched but still apply, such as lighting, transportation, electric, stormwater and tree protection
requirements.
The new section dedicated to oil and gas is proposed to include the following components:
• Procedural requirements that differ from other development projects (alternative location analysis and
approval of site location prior to a formal application submittal)
• Siting regulations (zoning, setbacks)
• Design standards (landscaping, visual mitigation, fencing, pipeline)
• Prohibitions on certain equipment
• Baseline monitoring requirements (air quality, noise, water)
• Reclamation requirements (restoration, testing, monitoring)
Application Submittal Checklist
The LUC authorizes the Director of Community Development and Neighborhood Services to develop an
application submittal checklist for all development projects based on the proposed project. As such, the
application submittal checklist is not a codified document, rather it is administered by staff and revised when
necessary. An application submittal checklist template specific to oil and gas will be prepared as a baseline but
March 22, 2022 Page 3
can be amended by the Director to include additional reports or documents as needed. The template will be
available for review and comment when draft regulations are released for public review/comment.
Municipal Code
The Municipal Code regulates a broad range of operational standards that are not specific to the site design, land
use or approval of development projects. It includes but is not limited to nuisance standards, contractor licensing
requirements, ongoing stormwater management standards, building standards, and administrative and capital
expansion fees. Penalties and enforcement provisions are also included in the Municipal Code for failure to
comply with certain requirements (i.e., noise violations or contractor license revocation).
A new section for oil and gas is being proposed in the Municipal Code that includes provisions related to annual
operator registration requirements and the City’s ongoing authority to inspect oil and gas facilities and pipelines.
The section also formally codifies a separate document (Oil and Gas Operational Standards Manual) that
contains all ongoing operational requirements for new and existing facilit ies, which is described in greater detail
below.
Oil and Gas Operational Standards Manual
Operational standards are layered with Federal and State requirements, and the landscape of regulations at the
State level has been rapidly changing. For the City’s one existing operator, operational standards are covered by
an Operator’s Agreement (OA) that was adopted in 2013 and set to expire in 2023. While the OA has several
provisions that remain applicable, it is outdated and was adopted under a drastically dif ferent regulatory
landscape. The proposed Operational Standards Manual will include revised standards that differentiate
provisions that apply to new and existing development.
A list of operational standards that are under consideration per new local reg ulatory authority, along with a
comparison to applicable State regulations is included as an attachment. This list includes considerations of
nuisance-type impacts such as air quality; vibration, noise, odor, light, and dust, and other surface impacts such
as water quality; reclamation; and emergency preparedness. (Attachment 1)
SITING REGULATIONS
During the January 2021 Council work session, staff requested direction from Councilmembers on local siting
regulations for new oil and gas development from existing buildings. Below is an overview of state and proposed
local siting regulations for new oil and gas development as a follow -up to the last discussion. Also included is a
description of the City’s current reverse setback regulations for new land devel opment from existing oil and gas
wells. Staff is seeking direction on whether current reverse setback regulations should be amended and if so, to
what degree.
COGCC Setbacks
The COGCC regulates the siting of new oil and gas facilities through setbacks, or buffers, from existing land
development. Prior to SB181, COGCC setbacks were 500 feet from Residential Building Units and 1000 feet from
High Occupancy Buildings (i.e., schools, hospitals, assisted living facilities). At the time these setbacks were
adopted, the COGCC acknowledged the setbacks “do not address potential human health impacts associated
with air emissions...and there are numerous data gaps...that warrant further study.”
A requirement of SB181 was for COGCC to update setbacks to address potential human health impacts
associated with oil and gas development. New COGCC setbacks (adopted November 2021) start with a 2,000 -
foot setback for schools (no variance), and a “presumptive” 2,000-foot setback for Residential Building Units and
High Occupancy Buildings with specific exceptions that would allow working pads to be located up to 500 feet
away if protective measures could be employed that mitigate impacts. Additionally, a 2,000 -foot setback may
prohibit operators from accessing mineral rights in certain scenarios.
March 22, 2022 Page 4
A core justification for a 2,000-foot setback is based on a study published by the Colorado Department of Public
Health and Environment (CDPHE) that modeled potential exposures and health risks of hypothetical worst -case
scenarios, using 2013-2016 emissions data from Colorado State University. The study found:
1. The risk of short-term health effects was highest during pre-production activities at distances of up to 2,000
feet.
2. The risk of negative long-term health effects was slightly elevated at 500 feet but not at 2,000 feet; however,
the study did not assess the cumulative long-term health effects in areas with multiple well pads.
3. Acute exposure and chronic exposure of certain chemicals were experienced at 500 feet from th e well pad.
Draft City Siting Regulations: Setbacks and Zoning
During Council’s last work session on this topic, Councilmembers generally favored strong siting regulations by
restricting oil and gas development to the Industrial Zone District and imposi ng a 2,000-foot setback from existing
residential and High Occupancy Buildings with no opportunities for variance. Draft regulations align with this
feedback however the 2,000-foot setback expands beyond residential and High Occupancy Buildings to include
all buildings designed as “Occupiable Space,” as defined in the City’s Building Code. This will ensure that people
are protected from potential health impacts while at home, work, school, or play.
Definition of Occupiable Space:
“A room or enclosed space designed for human occupancy in which individuals congregate for
amusement, education or similar purposes or in which occupants are engaged at labor, and which is
equipped with means of egress and light and ventilation facilities.”
While the 2,000 foot setback and zoning regulations result in limited land available for new oil and gas
development within City limits, staff expanded setbacks to include other areas where people may congregate
outdoors, such as parks, trails, and natural areas. Below are the p roposed setbacks in the draft regulations, all of
which cannot be reduced through variances. More information on how other communities regulate the siting of
new oil and gas development can be found in the January 26, 2021 AIS (Attachment 4):
• 2,000 foot setback from all buildings designed as Occupiable Space
• 2,000 foot setback from current and planned City parks and natural areas, recreation trails, trailheads, and
outdoor gathering areas
City Reverse Setbacks
While the City’s draft oil and gas regulations contain setback requirements for new oil and gas wells near existing
buildings, the City’s LUC regulates setbacks for new buildings near existing wells through reverse setbacks.
In 2013, the City adopted reverse setbacks to help protect public health and safety for land development
encroaching near existing oil and gas wells. Existing reverse setback regulations require a minimum of 500’ for
residential and 1000’ for High Occupancy Buildings, or they must match state setbacks, whichever greater. Now
that the COGCC adopted stricter setbacks than the minimum, the City’s reverse setbacks are 2,000 feet from
residential and High Occupancy Buildings.
It is important to note the current reverse setback requirements do not apply to properties separated b y a major
collector street, arterial street, or highway. They also do not apply to land uses other than residential and High
Occupancy Buildings. No parks, playgrounds, recreational fields, or community gathering spaces can be located
within the buffer.
Staff conducted research on how other communities are regulating reverse setbacks considering the updated
COGCC regulations and CDPHE Health Assessment. In summary, several communities across the Front Range
have recently adopted new or updated reverse setb ack requirements. Some have created a tiered setback
approach that imposes a 2,000-foot setback for all new buildings from wells that have been approved but not yet
drilled, and a smaller 500-foot setback on new development from existing producing wells. The tiered approach
March 22, 2022 Page 5
accounts for CDPHE’s findings where pre-production activities pose the greatest risk to human health up to 2,000
feet away, and lower levels of chemical exposure at 500 feet when wells are in production. Other communities
either impose smaller or larger setbacks without a tiered approach.
Most communities expand reverse setbacks to include other land uses such as commercial or industrial, and all
provide shorter distances for plugged and abandoned wells. No communities explicitly match COGCC setbacks or
provide exemptions to properties separated by a major collector, arterial or highway like Fort Collins.
(Attachment 2)
Considerations for Reverse Setbacks
The City could expand reverse setback requirements in several ways. For example, reverse setbacks could
match City (not COGCC) setbacks for oil and gas development which would expand to include other land uses.
Likewise, existing reverse setbacks could be restructured into a tiered system or exemptions for properties
separated by a road could be lifted.
Depending on the scale of increased reverse setbacks and whether existing exemptions are lifted, there could be
impacts to future land use patterns in areas with producing wells. More specifically, one undeveloped 46 -acre
parcel just south of Douglas Road and east of Turnberry Road could be impacted. (Attachment 3) For existing
and platted development within expanded reverse setback boundaries, landowners would be restricted from
subdividing or adding more dwelling units to their properties.
RESOURCE CONSIDERATIONS FOR IMPLEMENTATION
For new development proposals, new resources may be required to support a careful review of potential impacts
of proposed oil and gas development, including air emissions, water use, potential contami nation, noise, odor,
light, dust, and traffic. Provisions will be added that require the operator to pay development fees and that the
operator pay for the use of third-party experts to review technical information.
For ongoing operations of existing and new facilities, implementation resources will depend on the details of the
code updates and operational standards that are ultimately approved. As recommendations are developed, staff
is also exploring staffing, professional services, or other resources to support compliance, considering aspects
such as:
• Alignment with existing processes and programs to the extent possible, such as existing permitting and
environmental compliance programs.
• Exploration of shared resources with Larimer County for require ments that may align with new County
regulations, such as ongoing notification and reporting processes, inspections, leak detection monitoring and
application of odor threshold requirements.
Staff will not have a clear understanding of resources needed un til after the upcoming 2023-2024 BFO cycle
deadline, which may require an off-cycle appropriation request at the time of implementation.
OPTIONS FOR PLUGGING AND ABANDONMENT OF WELLS
As of March 1, 2022, the COGCC finalized new regulations that will allo w a local government to file an application
to Plug and Abandon a well if:
• The local government has conferred in good faith with the Operator;
• The well has been low producing for three (3) consecutive years; and
• The well is no longer used or useful.
These are important considerations for wells within the Fort Collins field, as some of the wells have not been
operational or have been low producing for a long period of time, and in some cases up to 20 years. As soon as
practicable, staff will confer with the operator to explore application of this new rule.
March 22, 2022 Page 6
Plugging and abandonment of existing wells could reduce reverse setbacks to 150 feet, which would lessen
potential impact on future land development. For the operator, plugging and abandonment along with reclamation
can cost the operator approximately $100K per well (COGCC estimate), in addition to potential lost revenue from
production activities. While these options have not yet been explored for existing wells, the recent COGCC
rulemaking in part aims to ensure that operators have the financial capability to meet COGCC plugging,
abandoning and reclamation requirements for wells that are no longer used or useful, through individual operator -
specific financial assurance plans.
NEXT STEPS
Staff will engage boards, commissions and the broader community once draft regulations have been completed.
Staff is prepared to return to Council for a work session to discuss public engagement input, opportunities for
code refinement, draft reverse setback regulations, and resources needed for code implementation. Below is the
anticipated project schedule through project adoption:
• June: Draft Released for Review
• July/Aug: Public Engagement
• Sept: City Council Work Session (if desired)
• Oct/Nov: Refine Draft
• Nov/Dec: Code Adoption/Implementation
ATTACHMENTS
1. Operational Standards Overview (PDF)
2. Reverse Setbacks in Other Communities (PDF)
3. Maps of Reverse Setbacks (PDF)
4. January 26, 2021 Work Session (PDF)
5. Powerpoint Presentation (PDF)
OPERATIONAL STANDARDS OVERVIEW TABLE
Item State Requirements Proposed City Requirements
AIR QUALITY
Air Quality
Monitoring
(New
Development)
AQCC has requirements for ambient air
quality monitoring but does not state what is
being monitored and the frequency of
monitoring. Only requires monitoring during
drilling and completions and first 6 months
of production.
City standards can define the type of
monitoring (continuous or high frequency),
the pollutants monitored, requiring use of
triggered canister sampling, and extend
the monitoring requirement (e.g., first
three years of production). Would not
apply to existing operations; City air
quality monitoring resources could be
used to monitor for leaks at existing
facilities.
Electric Equipment
(New
Development)
CDPHE and COGCC encourage use of
electric equipment at well sites, but there is
no mandate.
Use of electric equipment can be required
to extent possible, as it could be easily
achieved for most development within City
limits and reduce noise and air pollution.
Leak Detection and
Repair
(New and Existing
Development)
Requires a leak detection and repair (LDAR)
program, reporting requirements, and
prompt repair of any discovered leaks.
In some cases, the AQCC allows
operators up to two years to repair a leak.
The City can require repairs completed
ASAP but no later than 72 hours after
discovery.
Odor Complaint
Response
(New and Existing
Development)
The CDPHE has odor thresholds, and odor
complaints are navigated by both the
CDPHE and COGCC.
City regulations can include stricter odor
testing standards as well as complaint
protocols for the Operator, including a
requirement for monitoring and testing
with FLIR camera if necessary.
WATER QUALITY
Water Quality
Protection
(New and Existing)
The COGCC has strong water quality
protection requirements that address down-
hole well bore integrity. Spill and public
water supply protection must be coordinated
with local governments and public water
suppliers.
For new and existing development, the
City can require the operator to outline
coordination needed to respond to a spill
and when public water supplies may be
threatened. For new development, the
City can also adopt water quality testing
and prohibitions on certain chemicals
(such as PFCs) that go beyond COGCC
requirements.
Groundwater
Testing
(New Development)
The COGCC requires baseline and follow-
up testing of four water wells within ½ mile
of new oil and gas wells
The City can require testing of all water
wells within ½ mile of new oil and gas
wells
Open Pits and
Storage
(New Development)
State prohibits storage of equipment,
chemicals, etc., not necessary for
production prohibited.
The City can prohibit open drilling and
completion pits and storage of fracking
chemicals within City limits.
Oil and Gas
Pipelines
(New Development)
Off-location pipelines must be mapped and
location given to local governments if
requested.
City can add location requirements (e.g.,
50 ft from residential or non-residential
buildings and within existing easements)
to extent possible.
Wastewater
injection wells
(New Development)
COGCC treats these like other oil and gas
wells
City can prohibit wastewater injection
wells for production and new injection
wells.
NUISANCE
Noise Mitigation
(New and Existing
Development)
COGCC gets more complaints about noise
than any other issue. Current regulations
permit increased noise during drilling and
completion; Continuous monitoring during
drilling and completion within 2,000 feet of
building unit
City can propose lower noise limits than
COGCC during drilling and completion.
SAFETY
Emergency
Preparedness and
COGCC requires an emergency response
plan but defers entirely to local government
This is the area where coordination from
the city and emergency responders is
ATTACHMENT 1
Item State Requirements Proposed City Requirements
Response
(New and Existing
Development)
agencies and emergency responders essential, and the City is currently working
with PFA and OEM to draft requirements.
RECLAMATION
Financial
Assurances
(New and Existing
Development)
COGCC adopted new financial assurance
requirements, including bond requirements
to ensure appropriate plugging and
abandonment, increased bonds for low
producing wells, and the ability for local
governments to request wells to be plugged
that are no longer used or useful.
Currently evaluating whether City should
require additional bonding for new wells
above state requirements.
Reverse Setbacks in Other Communities Table
*PA means Plugged and Abandoned Wells
COMMUNITY ORIGINAL SETBACK UPDATED SETBACK NOTES
Fort Collins •2000’ for all well types
•150’ PA*
TBD •Min. 500’ for residential and 1000’
High Occupancy Buildings, or
matches COGCC, whichever
greater
•Buffers cannot contain
playgrounds, parks, rec fields,
community gathering spaces
•Properties separated by a major
road are not subject to setbacks.
•Only applies to residential and
High Occupancy Buildings
Larimer County NA •1000’ Pre-production
•200’-500’ Producing
•50’-200’ PA
•Setbacks range from producing
wells based on number of wells
on well pad
•Setbacks can be reduced from
200’ to 50’ for PA
•Applies to residential, commercial
and mixed-use
•Does not apply to agricultural,
industrial or open space uses
Arapahoe County NA •250’ All OG phases and well
types
•150’ PA
•Applies to all occupied structures
Broomfield •200’ Residential
•500’ Schools
•50’-100’ PA
•2000’ Horizontal wells (any
phase)
•2000’ Pre-production (Vertical
wells)
•500’ Producing (Vertical
wells)
•150’-250’ PA
•Applies to residential and schools
•Differentiates horizontal and
vertical wells because of scale of
operations and duration to
drill/complete
Commerce City NA •1000’
•150’ PA
•Applies to residential only
Erie •350’ residential, parks •2000’ Pre-production
•500’ Producing
•50’-150’ PA
•Applies to all buildings approved
for human occupation
Longmont •750’ for occupied
buildings, sports fields,
playgrounds
•150’ PA
No change
Westminster •350’ from all buildings •2000’ for all well types and
buildings
•200’ PA
•Applies to all buildings approved
for human occupation
•95% built out so no impact to
future land use/development
ATTACHMENT 2
He
a
rth
f
ir
e
WayHearthfire
No.8Outlet
S erramont e
D
rHearthf
ireDrE Douglas Rd
Turnberry RdE Doug las Rd
Brightwater
Crossing
N
o.8
O
ut
l
e
t
Longboat
WayW
a
x
wi
n
g
Ln
W
ater
si
de
W
ay T
h
o
rea
u
D
r
Water's Edge
2000
Well
Esri Community Maps Contributors, City of Fort Collins, Esri,
HERE, Garmin, SafeGraph, GeoTechnologies, Inc., METI/NASA,
USGS, EPA, NPS, US Census Bureau, USDA, Maxar
0 0.25 0.50.13 Miles
ATTACHMENT 3
Hearthfir
e
WayHe a r t h f i r e
No.8Outlet
S e r r a m o n t e D rHeart
hfireDrE D o u g la s R d
TurnberryRdE D o u g l a s R d
B r i g h t w a t e r
C r o s s i n g
N
o.8
O
utlet
Longboat
WayW
ax
wing
Ln
W
aterside Way T
h
orea
u
D
r
W a t e r 's E d g e
500
1 000
2000
Well
Esri Community Maps Contributors, City of Fort Collins, Esri,
HERE, Garmin, SafeGraph, GeoTechnologies, Inc., METI/NASA,
USGS, EPA, NPS, US Census Bureau, USDA, Maxar
0 0.25 0.50.13 Miles
DATE:
STAFF:
January 26, 2021
Kelly Smith, Senior City Planner
Caryn Champine, Director of PDT
WORK SESSION ITEM
City Council
SUBJECT FOR DISCUSSION
Oil and Gas Regulatory Siting Options.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The purpose of this item is to discuss regulatory options for siting new oil and gas development within City limits.
Per State statute, local regulations must match or exceed Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation Commission
(COGCC) requirements to ensure the protection of public health, safety, welfare, the environment, and wildlife
resources. The discussion will focus on various ways the City could adopt more protective standards through
different setback distances, zoning regulations, and a combination thereof, and demonstrate how each scenario
would influence where new development could occur within the community. To help frame the discussion, a
summary will be provided of recently adopted COGCC setback rules, and feedback received through broad
community engagement.
GENERAL DIRECTION SOUGHT AND SPECIFIC QUESTIONS TO BE ANSWERED
What feedback does Council have regarding setback and zoning regulations for new oil and gas development?
BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION
During a Council work session held on September 16, 2019, staff was directed to begin developing local
regulations for oil and gas development. A work session was scheduled on April 28, 2020, to discuss regulatory
options for siting new oil and gas development within City limits. The work session was moved multiple times to
accommodate more time sensitive topics related to COVID-19 and other priorities.
The work session delay has impacted the project schedule; however, new oil and gas development within City
limits is unlikely and not imminent. To keep Council apprised of project progress, staff provided a workplan and
public engagement summary (Attachment 1). Staff also maximized the use of time provided by the delay to
actively participate in the COGCC rulemakings, an ambitious process that sought to align state requirements with
the goals of Senate Bill 19-181. Rulemakings concluded on November 23, 2020 and resulted in broad changes to
state permitting, reporting, operational and setback requirements. The regulations also defined roles and
authorities of local and state governments, as well as improved interagency coordination during the permit review
process.
The purpose of developing local regulations is to create requirements that are contextually appropriate to Fort
Collins. For this discussion, staff is seeking feedback on location requirements that are equal to or more restrictive
than the State for new oil and gas development. Accessing mineral resources within the City is already limited
and will become increasingly so as the City continues to grow.
SENATE BILL 19-181
On April 16, 2019, the State adopted Senate Bill 19-181 (“SB181” or “Bill”), which amended several sections of
the Colorado statutes. The Bill prioritizes the protection of public health, safety and environmental concerns in the
regulation of oil and gas development, over fostering development through balancing impacts with mineral
extraction.
ATTACHMENT 4
COPY
January 26, 2021 Page 2
SB181 also granted new land use authority to local governments to regulate the siting of new oil and gas well
locations, and to regulate land use and surface impacts, including the ability to inspect oil and gas facilities;
impose fines for leaks, spills and emissions; and impose fees to cover costs of permitting, regulation, monitoring
and inspection. Importantly, SB181 established that local government land use regulations would not be
preempted by overlapping state regulations, and that state regulations would serve as baseline requirements,
thus allowing local governments to adopt more protective regulations than the state. However, this authority is
limited to surface impacts; the COGCC retains the authority over subsurface and other technical aspects.
COGCC SETBACK REGULATIONS
Historically, the COGCC has regulated the siting of new oil and gas facilities through the use of setbacks, or
buffers, from existing developments. Setbacks have incrementally grown over the years, with the last increase
occurring in August of 2013. Prior to SB181, COGCC setbacks were 500 feet from Residential Building Units, and
1000 feet from High Occupancy Building (i.e., schools, hospitals, assisted living facilities). The justification used
for the setbacks was to “provide strong protective measures without imposing undue costs or restrictions on oil
and gas exploration and production.” At the time, the COGCC acknowledged the setbacks “do not address
potential human health impacts associated with air emissions...and believes there are numerous data gaps...that
warrant further study.” (Statement of Basis, Specific Statutory Authority, and Purpose New Rules and
Amendments to Current Rules, COGCC 2 CCR 404-1. Cause No. 1R Docket No. 1211-RM-04 Setbacks).
In November 2020, COGCC adopted more stringent setbacks in an attempt to better address potential human
health impacts associated with oil and gas development, a requirement of SB181. A core justification (and not the
only justification) was a study published by the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment (CDPHE)
that implicates potential acute health impacts (e.g., headaches; dizziness; respiratory, skin, and eye irritation)
could result from pre-production activities as far away as 2,000 feet under worst-case weather conditions and
peak emissions. The anticipated health impacts listed in the CDPHE study also mirror recent complaints received
by the COGCC from people living in proximity to oil and gas locations.
New COGCC setbacks were developed with these findings in mind and start with a presumptive 2,000-foot
setback for Residential Building Units and High Occupancy Buildings, with specific exceptions that would allow
working pads to be located less than 500 feet from Residential Building Units, and between 500 feet and 2,000
feet from Residential Building Units and High Occupancy Buildings. The COGCC justified a variance because
other protective measures could be employed that could potentially mitigate impacts equal to or greater than
distance alone. Additionally, a 2,000 foot setback may prohibit operators from accessing minerals in certain
scenarios. Please note the COGCC does not allow exceptions for the 2,000 foot setback from schools and
childcare centers.
Other relevant setbacks in COGCC rules include:
• 200 feet from buildings, public roads, above ground utility lines and railroads;
• 150 feet from a surface property line;
• 1000 feet from Public Water System (surface water supply areas, groundwater wells, aquifer wells); and
• Environmental setbacks for specific resources.
ANALYSIS OF SITING REGULATIONS WITHIN CITY LIMITS
Setbacks
The COGCC’s regulations set the floor for oil and gas development. Therefore, local regulations must be equal to
or greater than the state. To better understand the implications of siting requirements, staff evaluated alternative
regulatory scenarios through a mapping exercise to identify areas within the Growth Management Area that would
be open to new oil and gas development. These maps are intended to offer high-level visual overviews of
projected outcomes and do not depict the full complexity of regulations. For example, many existing buildings are
not differentiated by land use, therefore setbacks are applied somewhat uniformly. Setbacks from existing
buildings were completed in 500-foot increments and ranged between 500 feet to 2000 feet. Staff used 2000 feet COPY
January 26, 2021 Page 3
as the maximum setback distance because it results in no land available for development. All scenarios
accounted for buffer requirements for roads, railroads, FEMA and City regulated 100-year floodplains.
Opportunities for increasing state standards through local setback regulations include:
• Increasing setbacks from 2,000 feet;
• Adopting setbacks without variances;
• Applying setbacks to workplaces, commercial buildings and other land uses; and
• Applying setbacks to visitor use amenities at parks and natural areas, such as athletic fields, playgrounds,
recreation trails and parking lots.
Zoning
Zoning is a land use tool that the City employs to ensure compatibility between development sites. In the context
of oil and gas, zoning could be used as a starting point to determine appropriate locations for new development. A
range of setback distances with zoning requirements were applied to demonstrate the incremental effects of
zoning with more protective setbacks. By nature, Oil and gas development is an industrial use and has the
potential to impact public health, safety, welfare, the environment and wildlife resources. Therefore, staff restricted
oil and gas to the Industrial Zone District in the mapping exercise as it is the only zone district to allow heavy
industrial uses and prohibit residential uses. Because zoning adds another layer to COGCC setbacks, it is more
restrictive than State standards.
KEY FINDINGS OF SCENARIOS
Mapping scenarios revealed that development opportunity is limited and predominantly concentrated in outlying
locations of the City. The exercise also suggested that if the City adopts more protective siting regulations than
the State, it may preclude new oil and gas development from occurring in the future. Areas where oil and gas
could occur in City limits include:
• Foothills Natural Areas (no immediate access)
• Fossil Creek Reservoir area (no immediate access)
• Montava development area and surrounding area (accessible in northwest corner and pockets surrounding
FTC Oil Field)
• Planned future PSD high school near Montava (no immediate access)
• I-25 corridor (no immediate access)
TABLE 1: COMPARISON OF REGULATORY SCENARIOS FOR SITING IN CITY LIMITS
SETBACK ZONING LAND
AVAILABLE
NOTES
1000’ All Buildings No 7.2% One pocket of land around FTC Oil Field with
access to mineral resources. Remainder of land
with no access to mineral resources*
1500’ All Buildings No 3.3% No land with access to mineral resources*
2000’ All Buildings No 1.3% No land with access to mineral resources*
1000’ All Buildings Yes .2% No land with access to mineral resources*
1500’ All Buildings Yes 0% No land with access to mineral resources*
2000’ All Buildings Yes 0% No land with access to mineral resources*
*Assessments are based on current horizontal drilling technology and the location of known mineral resources.
Horizontal drilling can access mineral resources up to nearly 3,000 feet away.
COPY
January 26, 2021 Page 4
TABLE 2: CROSS-COMPARISON OF REGULATIONS IN OTHER COMMUNITIES
While one of the primary objectives of local regulations is to develop requirements that are contextually
appropriate to Fort Collins, it is helpful to highlight how other local jurisdictions have approached regulating the
siting of new oil and gas development within their communities. Below is a cross-comparison of siting regulations
communities across the Front Range are considering or have adopted.
COMMUNITY SETBACK ZONING NOTES
Larimer County
Adopted Feb 2020
1000’ No Setbacks from Residential Building Units (RBU)
and High Occupancy Buildings (HOBs)
Broomfield Draft 2000’ Yes • Zoned to Industrial Zone District
• Setbacks from lot line of athletic fields,
recreational facilities, HOBs, RBUs,
undeveloped residential lots
• DRAFT regs to be released soon
Boulder County
Adopted Dec 2020
2500’ No • Setbacks from RBUs and HOBs
• Included setbacks from recreation trails and
parking lots at Open Spaces
• Included setbacks from workplace buildings in
specific zone districts
• Setbacks are 2500’ but not less than 2,000’
Adams County
Adopted Oct 2020
1000’ Yes • Restricted to non-residential zone districts
Setback measured from property line of
existing or platted development and boundary
of environmentally sensitive areas (wetlands,
wildlife corridors, etc.)
• Updating standards to potentially exceed State
Lafayette Draft in
progress
No Extended Moratorium on new OG development or
exploration to May 31, 2021 until conclusion of
COGCC rulemakings and adoption of Boulder
County regulations
Longmont 750’; 1000’
HOB
Yes • Setbacks from RBU, platted residential lots,
parks, sports fields, playgrounds or
designated outside activity areas
• Development must occur outside residential
zone districts, including mixed-use districts
with a residential component
• Considering new regulations
Windsor COGCC No No new regulations
Greeley COGCC No No new regulations
PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT
To help understand siting preferences and big-picture concerns about oil and gas development in Fort Collins,
staff engaged in numerous meetings and conversations with various City Departments, City Boards, industry
representatives, and environmental and neighborhood groups. Input was gathered through the following outreach
activities:
• Direct mailing to property owners within 2000 feet of existing active oil and gas wells, with information on the
project, public open houses, city website, and CDPHE’s health study (500 letters mailed)
• Interactive presentation at a Super Board Meeting held in February 2020 (over 50 attended with 14 boards
represented)
• Online questionnaire to collect feedback on concerns and thoughts, as advertised through direct mailing,
social media, news release, and Nextdoor website (163 completed responses)
• Two interactive public open houses with Larimer County, CDPHE and operator available to answer questions COPY
January 26, 2021 Page 5
• Presentations to the Planning & Zoning Board, Natural Resources Advisory Board, Land Conservation and
Stewardship Board, and Air Quality Advisory Board work sessions
• Presentations to City departments
• Individual phone calls and emails to discuss questions and concerns, as needed
In addition to broad community outreach, staff also consulted with the following targeted groups:
• Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation Commission
• Colorado Oil and Gas Association
• Prospect Energy (local oil and gas operator)
• Country Club Reserve land owner
• Local Government Roundtable: a group of 14 local jurisdictions. Attended biweekly meetings to discuss
COGCC rulemakings and local regulations under consideration
• Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment staff
• Larimer County staff
A general summary of public input and potential regulations are presented in Table 3. (Attachments 3-6)
TABLE 3. SUMMARY OF PUBLIC INPUT
Public Input Siting Regulations that Align w/ Public Input
Majority support not allowing oil and
gas development within City limits
• Zoning that restricts development to Industrial Zone District
• 2,000 foot setbacks with no exceptions
• Setbacks from other building types (office, commercial,
industrial, etc)
Majority support restricting oil and gas
within City conserved Natural Areas
and Parks
• Zoning that restricts development to Industrial Zone District
Other Considerations • Setbacks from amenities in Natural Areas and Parks (trails,
parking lots, recreation fields and recreational trails)
• Setbacks from buildings of other land uses, including
commercial, institutional, industrial.
Oil and Gas Industry Input
Adopt regulations that do not result in
prohibiting new development
• COGCC setback standards with opportunities for reduced
setback through variance
NEXT STEPS
Staff will begin drafting local regulations based on feedback received by Council and through community
engagement with the goal of protecting public health, safety, welfare, the environment and wildlife. An additional
work session is recommended in Fall or Winter of 2021 to focus on developing regulations. This will require multi-
agency coordination between Larimer County, CDPHE and the COGCC, as well as analysis of State rulemakings
and additional community outreach. Potential elements to be explored include, but are not limited to:
• Registration and permitting requirements;
• Impact and maintenance fines and fees;
• Requirements for existing facilities;
• Reclamation requirements;
• Financial securities and insurance;
• Development review and approval process;
• Environmental protection standards above state requirements;
• Emergency Preparedness Plan requirements; and
• Additional monitoring, testing and reporting requirements for air, water, odor.
COPY
January 26, 2021 Page 6
Given the current uncertainty around public health guidelines and regulations related to COVID-19, staff will
evaluate how to adapt to ensure meaningful community engagement. This may potentially affect the project
schedule. Delays will be communicated to Council via memorandum.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Workplan and Public Engagement Summary (PDF)
2. Maps of Regulatory Scenarios (PDF)
3. Public Input (PDF)
4. Our City Questionnaire Results (PDF)
5. Public Comments (PDF)
6. Superboard Meeting Questionnaire Results (PDF)
7. Powerpoint Presentation (PDF) COPY
Oil and Gas Regulations
03-22-2022
Kelly Smith
Senior Environmental Planner
ATTACHMENT 5
2019 2020 2021 2022
2Background Information
CC Memos
2/2022
WS –AQ Program
1/2021
WS –Zoning and
Setbacks
10/2019
WS –Initial
direction
4/2019
Senate Bill 19-
181 Adopted
11 /2020
COGCC Mission
Change Rules Adopted
3/2022
COGCC -Financial
assurances rulemaking
3/2022
WS –Reverse Setbacks
and Draft Regs
3Strategic Alignment
COUNCIL
PRIORITY
Oil and Gas
•Mitigate Surface
Impacts and
Encroachment in GMA
STRATEGIC
ALIGNMENT
Neighborhood Livability
•1.7 Guide
Development
BUDGET
•Planning and
Environmental
Services Ongoing
Offers
4Questions for Council
1.Do Councilmembers have feedback about the current approach to draft
regulations?
2.Are existing reverse setback adequate to protect public health?
3.Wo uld Councilmembers like staff to return for another Wo rk Session to
discuss public engagement feedback,draft regulations and opportunities for
code refinement?
•Decision Maker
•Review Process
•Submittal Requirements
Approval
Procedures
•Lighting
•Landscaping
•Fencing
Design
Standards
•Setbacks
•Zoning
Siting
Requirements
•Reclamation
•Restoration
Plugging and
Abandoning
•Non-Compliance with PlansPenalties &
Fines
Scope of Draft City Code Changes
Development Standards 5
•Air quality monitoring
•Leak Detection and RepairAir Quality
•Water sources
•Groundwater testing
•Spill Detection and Response
Wa ter Quality
•E.g., noise, odor, dust
•Complaint responseNuisance
•Emergency Preparedness and
ResponseSafety
•Financial AssurancesReclamation
Scope of Draft City Code Changes
Operational Standards 6
New COGCC Setbacks 7
BUILDING SETBACK JUSTIFICATION
SCHOOLS/
CHILDCARE CENTERS
2000’•CDPHE’s Health Impact Assessment
•Preproduction = highest risk up to 2,000’
•Production = lower risk at 500’
•Children are more vulnerable
•Noise and other nuisances (truck traffic) would
impact learning and safety
HOBs& RBUs Presumptive 2000'
Va riance down to 500’
•CDPHE study, other studies, complaints
“A L ocal Government's regulations may be more protective or stricter than
state requirements.”
Public Engagement & City Council Support 8
ZONING SETBACK
Public/Boards and Council Support
•No new Oil and Gas in City
•No new Oil and Gas in NAs
•Industrial Zone
District
•2,000’+
no exceptions
Industry Support
•No ban of new development •Zoning not applied •Align with COGCC
•Industrial Zone District
•2000’Buildings Approved
for Human Occupation
•2000’City Parks, Trails,
Outdoor Gathering Areas,
Natural Areas
•0% Land Av ailable
Draft City Code Changes
Setbacks and Zoning 9
Current City Reverse Setbacks
•Minimum
•500’Residential
•1000’HOB
•OR Matches State
Setbacks, whichever
greater
•150’buffer for PA
•Does not apply to properties
separated by roads
10
2013
2018
2013
2018
20182000'
1000'
500'
150'
350'
Current City Reverse Setbacks 11
2013
2018
2013
2018
2018 Setback 2000’
•Residential
•HOB
Does not apply to
properties separated by
roads
Impacts from Expanded City Reverse Setbacks 12
2013
2018
2013
2018
2018 Setbacks
•500’
•1000’
•2000’
Could apply to properties
separated by roads
Could apply to different
land uses (commercial,
light industrial)
Could be tiered based on
production phase
Resource Considerations 13
•Te chnical Expertise
State Resources
•Enforcement and Inspections
•Te chnical Equipment (odor)
County Resources
•Development Review Team
•Building Permitting
•Environmental Compliance
•Air Quality Monitoring Support
Existing City Resources
•Te chnical Reviews
•Inspector Positions
•Annual Registration
New City Resources
14Next Steps
•Continue development of draft code
•Engage public and City Council
•Explore resource needs for implementation
•Discuss PA o pportunities with operator and state
•Continue local and regional air quality monitoring discussions
15Estimated Project Timeline
DECJANFEBMARAPRMAYJUNJULYAUGSEPTOCTNOVDECCODE DEVELOPMENT
ENGAGEMENT
DRAFT CODE
COMPLETED
COUNCIL WORK
SESSION
CODE ADOPTION
IMPLEMENTAT ION
?
16Questions for Council
1.Do Councilmembers have feedback about the current approach to draft
regulations?
2.Are existing reverse setback adequate to protect public health?
3.Wo uld Councilmembers like staff to return for another Work Session to
discuss public engagement feedback, draft regulations and opportunities for
code refinement?
For More Information, Visit
THANK YOU!
fcgov.com/oilandgas