HomeMy WebLinkAbout15-055 1lr14!;?'/1;
'/1'foo 4 "I' g/Z2`10' er,01z01/v ',z/vezok zor ///z/ P V,^6'%;%/p/A1Vifi/g11"qr0 ,/(Ver ,/'00)/r/er'/OAINI*W0f/gF,,,,lp//#yg,
v,%44/07,, f4/ <;"'?"‘ )7)/44%zOlg9ifitr%iii/(4%,/4304404tP
rility#11044
,r;0; /C,4:#10, Ittp i/r1/4 S)41W16,/://V/11;7;iP 4441,Kg4001,01004 Af,,,, %:/44 g,
1,11***/,./ -1,2,0*01x1",(41,441,;/r4;744:rio,,,41e/,;164.Ali:7 f;:Ai
e'1'64WPitehle e, #.1* ,04//140#„4/"Ax ,if/,,//b/A,1,,zy v/toworpiregolifyproo ./st. e:ofroy,144,014,1
;(,(/nU/ /40n1,4', ,*I1 6ff Ni4(4/fil/Ae/'An/.///P/og,w/;44///,g, ,/odo^/(4groe,A9004'zigA,,,,Yzd,g,g4t4z,,`, Ukdi,/gediA aha ae,/,6A 44;,,dkidA &//,),
Resolution No. 15-055
01/1P'?tirMY4,0
,fl
A 1"ESOLUTION OF THE BUTTE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
MAKING FINDINGS RELATIVE TO AN ORDINANCE TO PROHI UT THE STORAGE OR
DISPOSAL OF WELL STIMULATION I YPRODUCTS (ZONING CODE AMENDMENT ZCA14-
0002) AND FINDING THE 1:'ROJECT CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT PURSUANT TO CEQA
WHEREAS, on February 5, 2014, the Butte County Water Commission passed a motion recommending
that the Board of Supervisors direct the Department of Development Services to develop an amendment to the
Zoning Ordinance specifically requiring a conditional use permit for hydraulic fracking oil and gas extraction
practices "to safeguard local groundwater resources;" and
WHEREAS, on April 8, 2014, the Board of Supervisors directed staff to prepare a proposed amendment
to the current Zoning Ordinance to ban fracking in Butte County, which was presented to the Planning
Commission as Zoning Code Amendment ZCA14-0002; and
WHEREAS, on October 23, 2014 the Planning Commission considered Zoning Code Amendment
ZCA14-0002 to prohibit well stimulation treatment and to specify that "no well stimulation by products of any
form or of any nature may be stored in, or disposed of, in the boundaries of Butte County;" and
WHEREAS, on October 23, 2014 the Planning Commission directed staff to prepare an alternative
ordinance prohibiting the storage or disposal of well stimulation byproducts within the county as a preferred
method of addressing environmental concerns related to hydraulic fracturing; and
WHEREAS, on December 11, 2014, the Butte County Planning Commission forwarded no
recommendation to the Board of Supervisors relative to the ordinance to ban the storage or disposal of fracking
byproducts; and
WHEREAS, on February 10, 2015, the Board of Supervisors directed staff to return with the ordinance
to ban the storage of disposal of fracking byproducts in Butte County; and
WHEREAS, based on available evidence, injection wells may cause environmental harm to land, air,
water, and agricultural resources; and
WHEREAS, injection wells may result in water contamination, and people who utilize contaminated
water may experience illness; and
WHEREAS, duly noticed public hearings were held on February 10, 2015 and April 21, 2015; and
WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors has considered public comments, the "no recommendation" from
the Planning Commission, and a report from the Planning Division.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Board of Supervisors:
I. Finds the project is exempt from environmental review pursuant to California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA) Guidelines sections 15378, because it will have no potential for physical change to the
environment either directly or indirectly, and CEQA Guidelines sections 15307 and 15308 because it is a
regulatory action taken by Butte County to assure the maintenance, restoration, enhancement and
protection of its natural resources and the environment.
II. Makes the following findings in regards to Zoning Code Amendment ZCA14-0002 such that "no well
stimulation by products of any form or of any nature may be stored in, or disposed of, in the boundaries
of Butte County":
A. The proposed Zoning Code Amendment to ban injection wells for fracking byproducts is
consistent with goals and policies of the Butte County General Plan, including but not limited to:
1. Goal LU-1 Continue to uphold and respect the planning principles on which the
County's land use map is based.
2. Policy LU-P 1.6 The County shall conserve important habitat and watershed areas,while
protecting the public safety of County residents.
3. Goal W-1 Maintain and enhance water quality.
4. Policy W-P 1.2 The County shall cooperate with State and local agencies in efforts to
identify and eliminate or minimize all sources of existing and potential point and non-point
sources of pollution to ground and surface waters, including leaking fuel tanks, discharges
from storm drains, auto dismantling, dump sites, sanitary waste systems, parking lots,
roadways and logging and mining operations.
5. Goal W-2 Ensure abundant and sustainable water supply to support all uses in Butte
County.
6. W-P2.8 The County supports Area of Origin water rights, the existing water right priority
system and the authority to make water management decisions locally to meet the county's
current and future needs, thereby protecting Butte County's communities, economy and
environment.
7. Policy W-P3.1 The County shall continue to ensure the sustainability of groundwater
resources, including groundwater levels, groundwater quality and avoidance of land
subsidence, through a basin management objective program that relies on management at
the local level, utilizes sound scientific data and assures compliance.
8. Policy W-P3.3 The County shall protect groundwater recharge and groundwater quality
when considering new development projects.*
9. Goal HS-6 Reduce risks form earthquakes
10. Policy HS-P6.1 Appropriate detailed seismic investigations shall be completed for all
public and private development projects in accordance with the Alquist-Priolo Earthquake
Fault Zoning Act.
B. The proposed Ordinance to Ban the Storage or Disposal of Well Stimulation Treatment Byproducts
is in the best interest of Butte County and the vast water resources located within the County.
1. Based on available evidence, injection wells can cause and have caused environmental
harm to water resources.
a. The prosperity, health, safe, and general well-being of Butte County residents all
depend on the availability of clean water, clean air, and land free from contamination.
b. The storage or disposal of fracturing fluid is a type of land use that is incompatible with
other land uses in Butte County, namely existing residential, agricultural, and
commercial land uses.
2. State and federal regulatory agencies have not implemented regulatory measures adequate
to ensure surface and groundwater safety in Butte County.
3. Local conditions warrant protection of surface water and groundwater resources.
a. Lake Oroville has a maximum operating storage of 3,537,580 acre-feet. In addition to
water-storage capacity, Lake Oroville also provides 750,000 acre-feet of flood control
storage, recreation, and freshwater releases to control salinity intrusion in the
Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta and for fish and wildlife protection.
b. Any potential for the contamination of aquifers or geologic formations associated with
State Water Project at Lake Oroville, its forebay or afterbay, would be an unacceptable
risk to the State's water supply.
c. Wells provide 75% of Butte County's domestic water supply; therefore, the potential
for contaminating the Tuscan Aquifer, a vast source of groundwater recharge in the
northern Central Valley, could threaten the quality of drinking water for the majority
of residents in unincorporated Butte County, as well as residents of surrounding
counties who also depend on the Tuscan aquifer for groundwater.
d. Any potential for the contamination of the Tuscan Aquifer is an unacceptable risk to
the region's water supply
4. Injection Wells can potentially result in adverse environmental impacts including:
a. Water Contamination.
(Evidence: According to cafrackfacts.org, water contamination associated with
fracking has been reported in more than 1,000 locations across the country
(www.cafrackfacts.org/water). The 2012 Pacific Institute Report Hydraulic
Fracturing and Water Resources: Separating the Frack from the Fiction,found that
groundwater contamination from fracking can occur through a variety of mechanisms
including but not limited to well casing failures, abandoned well leaks, and natural
underground fractures that leak into groundwater sources.
A 2012 study by the National Groundwater Association found that "natural faults and
fractures in the Marcellus Shale, exacerbated by the effects of fracking itself could
allow frackingfluids and its chemicals to reach the surface in as little as "tens ofyears"
—challenging the argument that impermeable layers of rock would keep fracking fluid,
which contains benzene and other dangerous chemicals, safely locked nearly a mile
below water supplies. ")
b. Seismic Activity
(Evidence: The injection of large volumes of water into the earth at high pressures —
such as in hydraulic fracking — has been directly linked to induced seismic events.
Experts believe that added pressure of injected water lubricates existing faults, which
can separate them enough to release the energy that causes tremors
(hup://www.nytimes.com/video/science/100000002590094/ __ _ man-made-
quakes.html?src-vidm) The vast majority of earthquakes caused by human activity are
too small to be felt, but there have been instances of large earthquakes being triggered
by water injection. It is estimated that half of all 4.5 magnitude or above earthquakes
in the past decade may have been induced by injection of water into the earth
(Cfrackfactg_q . Multiple studies have concluded that injection increases the
likelihood that large earthquakes elsewhere will set off earthquakes near the injection
site. Instances of remote triggering happen when faults are "critically loaded" with
high pressures offluid A 2012 study by the National Academy of Sciences, recommends
the development of best practices to prevent seismic-induced events.
Because of insufficient seismic monitoring data, geologists do not know how close
wastewater injection can occur to an existing fault without presenting a hazard, and
there is currently no regulation about the distance wells must be from a fault line in
California.
In Butte County, the Cleveland fault runs near the Oroville Dam, theoretically exposing
this pubic improvement to potential seismic-induced events under current conditions.
Earthquakes induced by injection of fracking fluids into deep geologic formations
could increase the potential for seismic activity. No site-specific information is
available detailing how the State Water Project at Lake Oroville might respond to
injection-induced earthquakes. Injection wells represents an uncertain risk to Oroville
Dam. While risk is uncertain, the consequences of an earthquake involving the Oroville
Dam could be dire. Protection of the State Water Project at Lake Oroville is
accomplished by multiple state and local efforts, which have not yet evaluated the
potential effect of injection wells on the State Water Project at Lake Oroville.)
DULY PASSED AND ADOPTED this 21' day of April, 2015, by the following vote:
AYES: Supervisors Connelly, Wahl, Kirk, Lambert and Chair Teeter
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None mw
Doug Teeter - Chair
Board of Supervisors
7
2 / County of Butte, State of California
k
ATTESTS " a
F
P; ;/,/,,7,;k
( /
Pa , , Board Clerk
Couty of Butte, State of California