The URL can be used to link to this page

Browse Search

Home My WebLink About20121791.tiff • Quanah Cattle Company, LLC Weld County, CO Preliminary Waste System Design Prepared by: AG • PRO 4350 Highway 66 Longmont, CO 80504 970-535-9318 2/27/2012 r 2012-1791 • Summary This analysis covers the preliminary design recommendations for a waste management system for the Quanah Cattle Company(Quanah) in Weld County, Colorado. The proposed facility will raise calves from 0-400#and is considered a Confined Animal Feeding Operation(CAFO). Therefore, the facility is subject to the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment (CDPH&E) regulations. This preliminary design meets the requirements set forth in those regulations. Project Description The site is located in Weld County approximately 1 mile south of the town of Kersey, CO. The facility is located in the East 'A of the Southeast '/ of Section 28, Township 5 North, Range 64 West of the 6`h Principle meridian. The calf facility will have a total capacity of approximately 15,000 head. The site, which is approximately 80 acres of production area, will include approximately 20 acres of runoff containment area. Design Objectives The waste management plan for Quanah will consist of constructing a waste storage pond • on the west edge of the property in an existing low spot. This pond will be constructed to contain runoff from the open lot area, including the lot area, commodity storage area, and calf area. The new pond will be dewatered to adjacent property owners as needed. Water will be applied to cropped fields at agronomic rates as a fertilizer according to a nutrient management plan that will meet State requirements. Hydrology and Hydraulics This waste management system is designed to contain the l0yr-10day storm event as determined from the TAPS weather data. The required capacity was determined using the spreadsheet 313Pond.XLS "RECTANGULAR WASTE STORAGE POND DESIGN COMPUTATIONS" developed by John Andrews, NRCS State Conservation Engineer for Colorado. The spreadsheet uses a monthly balance approach accounting for precipitation inputs, as well as evaporation and pumped draw-downs during the summer irrigation season for the outputs. All waste water will be generated from the lot area, feed and commodity area and the calf area. All precipitation that does not fall directly on these areas will be diverted away from the containment area and will flow into the natural depressions. The design storm is determined to be the l0yr-10day event for the Greeley, CO weather • station and corresponds to a depth of 4.21 inches and a design storm runoff volume of AgProfessionals, LLC Page 2 of 5 Quanah Cattle Company 6.09 acre feet. Using an earthen lot area of 20 acres, and a NRCS curve number of 90, • the earth lot runoff yield is 3.87 acre feet. This corresponds to a total design storm volume from the lot area of 4.67 acre-feet. An additional 169,023 sq. ft. of contributing roof area will flow to the proposed pond. The roof area will yield an average runoff of 3.8 acre-feet annually and 1.36 acre feet for the design storm. Precipitation falling directly onto the pond surface on average accumulates 2.92 acre-feet annually and for the design storm contributes an additional 0.86 acre-feet. Additional storage volume is accounted for to contain runoff from normal precipitation events and process water from the milk kitchen and cleaning operations. It is estimated that the milk kitchen produces approximately 3,000 gallons when feeding approximately 5,000 bottle-fed calves. Accumulation of precipitation and process water during 6 winter months is estimated to be 2.53 acre-feet. Storage Pond The storage pond is rectangular in shape and will be lined with a compacted clay liner. An emergency spillway will be installed to comply with Regulation 5 CCR 1002- 61.17(5)(c)(ix)(C). Spill protection will be installed in all pond inlets to ensure that the flow of water into the pond does not erode and compromise the integrity of the pond liner. The system is designed to be dewatered frequently during the summer of each year and dewatered as low as possible prior to each winter. The pond has been designed to handle the normal runoff and process water and still maintain capacity for the design storm. The water level must be kept below the working depth marked on the staff gauge • to ensure adequate storage capacity for runoff from the design storm. Diversions and Conveyances All diversions will be sized and constructed to handle flows from the design storm event. Conveyances will be in place to the pond to allow for transfer of water from the kitchen. All conveyance structures will be sized to handle the projected flows. Geotechnical Recommendations The soil survey indicated that the site is underlain predominantly by sandy soils. The soil survey also indicates that the soils are an Aquolls and Aquepts, Valent sand and Vona loamy sand where the proposed pond site will be located. Subsurface explorations have been conducted. The pond design allows for a 4 feet setback from ground water to the bottom of the liner to comply with Regulation 5 CCR 1002-81.8(6)(a)(i)(b). The bores have been made into piezometers and the groundwater levels will continue to be monitored over time. This subsurface exploration indicated that the soils in the proposed pond area consisted of coarse soils over top of a heavier soil. This heavier soil has been analyzed for its • suitability as a compacted clay liner and found adequate. AgProfessionals, LLC Page 3 of 5 Quanah Cattle Company • Land Application The proposed waste storage pond will be dewatered to 3'd party application sites. All wastewater will be applied at agronomic rates as defined in the facility's Nutrient Management Plan. Using estimates generated from the spreadsheet 313Pond.XLS "RECTANGULAR WASTE STORAGE POND DESIGN COMPUTATIONS", 8.50 acre-feet of wastewater will be generated in an average year. The amount of alfalfa needed to utilize this wastewater in a conservative manner is 15 acres of sprinkler irrigated ground. In order to utilize the almost 6.09 acre-feet of runoff generated in a 10 day Chronic Storm event, 12 acres of sprinkler irrigated alfalfa is needed. Waste water will be dewatered to adjacent landowners as needed. Approximately 12,775 tons (54% DM as applied) of manure will be generated annually. This manure will be given away to local farmers for use in their cropping operations. • • AgProfessionals, LLC Page 4 of 5 Quanah Cattle Company • Appendices • Pond Sizing Spreadsheet • Proposed Drawing • Aerial View • USGS Topographic map • Soils map • Soil survey engineering properties • Hydrologic Soils • Manure generation table • Land application requirements • Subsurface exploration trip reports • • AgProfessionals, LLC Page 5 of 5 Quanah Cattle Company W ¢) ^ O S QQ 377 0 V OLC) OCC) O C ) W NCrj O _ �, j O V v v c� I-'i v Ln v v N I�`J c� V' `g O Q2 U U 0 el CO U `� J S f r ,n ¢ ¢ < (n < '' ' N O CO 0, Ln C") 0 �•^ 00 N CO C7) Z T .-74 cr N <f co Y - ':J n O O t� O N o m 0 C' o r C :T) N C` N O O' C") ("7 •tt c-7.)- ") )I O ' U. O O O `- O r o 0 7 0 0 0 .tee" .. — -- O P G] L :C .C Ca aJ o CU a) cd op ,D fa n. °' E E E , , O E a 0 c N Q O 3 O l 8 "- �-n CO OO Ln 0 01 CO CO 0 Ln 0 Ln v 7 J O O O O O c r r N C- CO f_ N CO O C") N r O -. Q m > > _> ,�`'- c t) o O O M N O N O N 0 0 0 N O o F- O o 't p) O CO O Q u_ > U r ~ = et m o CU C!) O _8 1- O o cn a Q) w • . o = - ----L O C ,n I7) (n a 72. o co k ^ c 473E 888888S88888 S 0 Ico Q Z 0 0 0 0 C'') N O r O N 0 0 0 O 0 G J L ce rr 4-. Z O d0. d -J 0Cn — c�-L : 0 0 0 O co O o 0 0 0 0 0 E O CI W - - ,9 y 0 0 0 O O O O O O o 0 0 0 ' 0 0Q > W 2 J o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 O c) cJ MO < 000000000000 > .a = w = y .S W CO Z > ON o 0 Co v 0 0 0 CC C CV r N r C`4 CO ^ N 10O a CO CD CP, = N CO f- O O N co r Cr) N- N O C r CO N- CO LC) r CO o 4 N r r d• a 1.2- --) O 5 I o CO CNI a C km- n N- N st CO f- In CO CO 00 CO NO in 0 (0 N - w '2 < 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 j C-1 73 (..f-1•, • 00 W e 2 W t S > O m Q a) n CO` O. is Q a > () •. 'i?) , . �: e 0 N CO F- o 0 L . • .) i �- a 0 aci °' � � ¢ � ¢ O WL ,� '� � Lir) � GI o szu W r _J O 0 C O CU r •.= ti .4 U') O Cr;J (O �Y ('7 ..- �- to E — o ,n WQ. 'LTD C aci t7 S o o CU CJ Z y U CO > CO Y 55 3 "- r Ln CO CO f— v J. co o cn o) C) v - O W = O C d 0 V: C) IN- co t\ N O CD N- CO v . , � i . , , � i , , i . , , , . , , , � . . . . , O ,_ ,- 0 0 0 0 r N r r r r CD CD O - ¢ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 M 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 c m co z co co o co co co co co co co co 0 co (o V N O c) (0 N o Ln Ln Ln In Ln Ln Ln Ln CC) in in Ln f` r r r r r it .= t .m �_ > 'S m of� 0N- 0N- 00 op c-) , p• U N N N N N N N N N N CV N C'7 24' V awnIOA O' O J ' < , O O O O O O o 0 0 0 0 0 W < < ¢ o 2 = I - - - QS 0 LO N Q V y Z 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ' V L = t &,. id CO r 0 Z 000000000000 0 ) o r r y 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Cr 0 o 0 en ,n W O CO Cn 0 Cn (n > F-- o 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 1 `t N o U U o 0 U U I O U Q (/� 0 0 0 0 0 (� 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 U U ¢ Q • U U ¢ Q U U o o .C .C o C C o .C .C O • z CD N 1-- I Z 0 0 0 0 o r r CO o c� o d �" C O O CO C .� :J CO CD CO C' CX) tT f- O !') r C') 0 O V` v O N N CO O N r ill CO 2 a CL) c`a W m• ' o � c~-) � cNv � rnvvallorN� o) rn SA C chrior- vvo9 • r v O O �. O O U r- O N CO Ill CO N N N r r 0 N W d In co M1 z N N >, m O a < . 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o . a. c o _0 (Q m W a .•,. hi 4. € co cc m C/) '. 0 O Ln r C n on f . Ln 4 CO V O) O Z Cn ti;. = E ? E C' CO CO N 0 CJ) CO N In r Ln f— 0 W _ . CO y 0 C C C) C) 3 Z N r CO O r u, CD CD r r N O O) OJ Q CO y y 3 y y _ .C '- ¢ Ca Q 0 U r O C") Ln f� Ln 0, 00 C) N N O C.5 a m .• L L o O ' 0 L U O e co L Z a s Q Q o Q o � Q 0000000 0 0 0 0 0 0 o c c < > j o c c ¢ > , .c c o up 0 00 c.O C)' i CO V Q ., r- co co 0 }k, r N r 0 C j o $ � co 'V) y .r 4 C' O .Q. N > CO , „ O F- Co yy „n 8 a) XI Ln a) N co o f� m m 'c O N C C-i c i 0 v CO a) Q Q Q G C") N C7 IC') C`7 Ln N Q) S CO co C'7 r C") C .- t3/4. CIO O O r N r r 0 0 0 0 co O r '- `- ` CO -.J (.L a' > v o a) a - Q Z L W ` _ W � , - - - JW = C O p� .= 060 O0 O O0 O0 CD0 O0 O O O0 OI— C .� m R 1-6 O '2 , CA co Q 0 ,`O a ° co a O O O co co co co O O O 0 a CJ w L L O ` CAL a) CL) V r a) U7 O J < O O O O 0 o 0 0 O 0 0 0 L a L L ct L Z WJin = a ` 1 C ¢ rt No cc ¢ o>� � E . (� C1 0 O Q O O CO @ 0, N V .- .b CO ... O N _ U II ff Q - C J Q) .Q. O E Ln 0) L V. Ln J cti a•. Z Z W O `O 0 o N co c0 N O r CO CO Ln N O) CO Z >la- CU a c' c i co y c'�j c) 15 Cj c0 - r� W ca U U >, > = r o Ln r co r Ln M O v C4 N co Cl) o t E Q C -- t N 0 d a) Qo O O O r r r 0 0 0 0 0 0 f� Q a ` O IJ O C C L .cL 1... �, `c 7 7 (o Cr. Q U U I.) U c Q N o CC y . C) a cJ as 07 ¢ 5 .. .5_ . o -t >�, o " O o o o o O N N i) , 076 U T 0 O -' ._ C CO In 0 r C) O CO N- C' C7 r 0 r. fA .� L C 7 (`7 —• O CD --D a r O 01 Ln C) r r o O O v Cn Cn o CO Cl) a) oa. y co U E CD W� _� 1� S j ¢U O O O r 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C7 W y k ' t 0 Q L L < o c t ,^ @ Q ," W • I 0 C C C c") 00 V ( hz T I �3.. Q O r oil f� a) o _c = U 3 af°i d aC°it � o cL v1 Z .- )' rnvC7 0 (Na)CD Ln c' ^ co o c CC cts W >- ¢ Q ¢ ani "`a L o 0 o Cfl Cln CO 0 0 0 0 0 0 c-) c�i 00 ni () Q �O m L O O 0 0 0W C� O O O O o 6 O O O O CV Z w 4 (n a - z o cc -0 L .a .o a 1 . , I Z '--7 . W ai • D - Z C `. co— o '- CO w •:n .01 W t CO COW a co J • Q I Y o o f it Li o o . n T c c c c I-- E o j od a n- a 8 m (D Lc, 6 N oo n o) N J c a c E E .c cE .c o a) � CC IX CC t. O ` a .= .0 d T ? C N r r .- c� C i'` Z .C t Z >•cp Z v., O Cn O U LC Q C Z_ CU ,� o CV Ca 0 o m - C CO c o V J b' L `. C N C • i . C'V C a C C a. O ro a o U `> ¢ Q mac` > � O — o C ¢ y 0 e'lJ = aS- O c c _D •- >` co ?. ao Ci: -� > iye •.,7_• al CO rr r CO' C`7(7) co c U :a V o. 2 - ct -) < Z 0 O 0 0 ¢ F , ? r Q Z a _ , a C - — . U tt . : ill i , I , / I I . / / . j:.. / .. ,,. .. ,,. , , , , / .. , / , ., " , ENCLOSED ___-------- ii / ' .17/ '..-/.. ' . / , , 7 / / /I * . '... . - - - -- - - - -- . \ .. :__ , / \ --------------,___,N, / .--, H . f) i : 11 '�� USR BOUNDARY / / /\2 4630 e2 l_ // ,g ; //%4 / 1 �‘ . i t / / x I II r7- // / j / / / / 7 .- - i aii t / /7 4341 /- // / 4'� II.,. 7.7;1,----------tj / / / -t - ii.Y ! I " /,/ RELO�'.E+rmy STO ' ou/rrD / //////// < f7) - ) 2fi / ( 41 /f1 / �j w 1 y r ' /,� 0 0 / {i R ,n C I I J / li / / ,i f �e , �VV Al . . I. ' ' / /- PO / I I . L ./ / )' - 1 / / 1 i II - . f 0 i 1 , i 1 i li( i j i I ( / /'i / i 111/ / / A/ O I r ) / si 111 / / , i 1 , ,2 / is ; COMPOST is ' s AREA ' I )y \ \ i ) ,.4...A,. . \ ? \ lilY \ ; i , \\ i \ \ 1 \ \ ' \ , / 1 \ ) - •N \‘,, \\---... i\; , , , I/ , I \ , ii , - ,„ - �� . . , i i \\ i . \ c.\ \„. 1 I = /, \III , \ , , ei i ‘--- ,,, ) , \ I N \ Is 1 - / '4 f sr Le: I^ tau l i - . • / i I DATE: AGPROfessionals, LLC QU ANAH CATTLE COMPANY, LLC. SHEET o2�28/ DEVELOPERS OF AGRICULTURE 1 O• sue./--I__ J -- !I I . • , i. J /•) . -et-- IS -I' . , • - -..........••• I (EIf• .t 4 i n ": • • - r y ' v I � ; 1• I r PIN j. ' .7 i i,/••• I ' 1 P g 0. ..J,l 1 " _, , t/� � 1 I 'i' i•• ''/ ri I.1 . , / r I I I ,, , f i'iff < : :Y -7r II s. I ! I i - ' .41% °.111 ...)--..rt_ - s. 1 ii(r.•: , ::44,. . 'CI r. , --. :. . it ..... c,„ ...i I I • ; , "MI=Waal • = Z ._ J.44 II. j_ _ _ 1 rrtie� Il CCUk CXD '2 Zg Plmimil CII C./J 'N • `emu.. - i ,� • . � �� ow. OS �, ,.� ri j �'. (4-m4 I4mli akeNt t f • • .tea Y.i. �- }.t p CL) CD li CC �* U r a • is ca c . CO C ✓r CI) I'm Ct ......r, I{;J r , j af r 0 filliiii.:41 Pi Vawl , f p h itl CC t.-, LI) •••Ps1 CE Z. mICC cv ms( `y v i J G ' 'i w O M 11.'.Lon o WZil Coe a. i CC c , ) r , sr op cv ote J 'r,., t , - Ill<1 L J.j? • .-.a, - -_-- t • _ _ '!�: ' •; • • • '' , I • i • • -_ rye • •' 1 1 . C Q el ,. • • i • a C • .L ,�0 n r...r._ _ . _ ti Dannol ea\ 0-1 .4 VI r \Nsis\co,4•,%qt., 1. • • Cn IFEMINIIMII = ..4 O T . re Cn Ct (V O �' .� Li 0 . ,Qi) U S it . . _C-1-4 O .• CD Lai vm, toS , CC v E._ , 4 _ ri • , U • \,c� (t. te',,,„....„.„ , _I:4 . . , ,..., , , g:::,. ...., a „,,,,,>:. i . i c 1...\./7.----------" LID Lama —_407 I I. 46,x,0 -'- _ gillitCC Oin't l'sr. al 0 • / .I re.17:: tea. �`� �_ __ ! t _ Soil Map—Weld County, Colorado, Southern Part (Hillman Calf Ranch) a, Ci CI c7 co O O 538100 538200 538300 538400 538500 538600 538700 • 40° 22' 14" 40° 22' 14" -----.......„..i o O 0 0 cn C) co Nr - r� ; '1 ' I '4„ -1 v tti • ._r1. ' ., ` C - • ...::lam I« , `�'- . . t ._1.4.'; ,}:~ ,a.,.J -�.a..1'.• ,.A.;f� - • O m r1- `t O l_ m D f03 CD ! •4 `F_-' y = . r O .. - 0 - N a . - - m Q 'Q `ry r ..6 i O I O D O 7 Q igil 1wa64cr O 0 0 , 0 ,..n - u-, • 101 O C 1 r-. Q 7 V f 8 _ 0 0 v m CO v v o g:-.. C cn m - to to .7 v 1. MENyy. o 2`"fzA ,i1. _ ejtrtl�t'C , O ( fD v t v 1 I - _ - . - - _ - - .__ - __ - __ __.. _r- .�._-_. -_ -. - . .- p 7 � ITSO O - O W 33 40° 21' 45" v v 40" 21 44" v 538100 538200 538300 5384G0 538500 538800 538/00 tr.o el Map Scale 1:4,290 if printed on A size (8.5•" x 11") sheet. iN el en °v N Meters ° A 0 40 80 160 240 0 • V Feet 0 150 300 600 900 USDA Natural Resources Web Soil Survey 2/22/2012 2.+• Conservation Service National Cooperative Soil Survey Page 1 of 3 N P- 0 a) Q) N So on a ° C_ O — c �p CO « N co a) o rt cn p O Q) > fp N N O C U O C ` U op 7 ca N O C a 0.) (0 C U O U = act a a in a O -o mC u) c.) a) -0 w C O c a) E N O U ? 0 .O co U7 J f O _ U Q) ac\J co to O C O L O c6 E a C U c9 — O o tra U U 7 N co L O Z r E Q) •aact `) ct C C) O Q) a) O N x O U Q (fl a) T U UJ O CD L L — O in a) co E t0 3 a) N N ? Q Z Q U Q ca 3 p a) E O a C a Q ' CO 'D .c O` 2 O O 'paw E U .N Z U O N L Ncc; c �� N < N al a cc n co y N M (I) O 0) ct OC I- u' a) LL Co ` p O al �' U N n r U L Q •O U Q Q7 a '— Q o to a) O C Q) O O OC - O cu 15 a a) LL O O Q) — N O O 0 O L L L cn n m .. Lo o a N E o O c a a) E Z ac o cn a) CC ° o c o cn _a o >, a O O W C L cG Q O cd o c4 C E c > a O N U -.L. 10 ,D a) L % O E o > n000 N D � o 0a) 3 Gip -...---r Q y 7 � > o � c E Q w ti ca . . clv L o o • < a) G ° a Q) L li Z a) — O N if, v >. co cc) ._ .- aa)i L - cu w a� a a) cococ co `oo '6 T � _ o •nL -a c o >, co c6 L 0 -- m o Zo c m ~ o ° aci 2 c 1....— -0 Q ca •c--° n a Q- ai = CO a) ` c c) aE ,4- -ti 0 o c ' CU o Ct n c cn y E ` C a) - up y 'fl a c (n a) O .Q m co a o c`n m r O .cn m cv ° L o N — a 0. a) E ca E c4 03 a) a) o 0 O .E a) O r O L co 2 H 5 W E a ° o f cn5U H = COO) 0 F-• ° ._ o C- c 0 L J > Z? V/ H • • O Q' ° (/) O `- O CO - o -- C • o c Ec 0 N° c U) U = a 0 c ca 2 o o a ct U t - a :c C co co IL C ._e a) 0 0 co ° co a cci co H m cn ro oCC tY 2 u) ( y v >. r a� ' c v) rn u) co 0 — O L 'Lw 7 O c.c — " J c9 J N `) am N U) ma) O 0 > > O c O cn O a U a_ cc a. L. u) ,0 D 2 J ri d 3 m } j u. co a) 'to c. Ill U a 1 (U 16 fl ti n C9 a W 0- a C o a L. N N VI N _ E a` r a •0 a) _ 4) O CO t yc9 at) d _ a a 3to O 7 O O O` .a O. «- i O C a a d a C a. > 0 O O ca 0 v) cn a� a N a ! '45 ca m o 3 cn — — o — C O > o o u) Q y I Q 2 O O� T y > > t co ` a) ow 47 Y C pc O Y d V C a i H co O c) O ca o f6 (U C f> co c_ h N 0 cu (6 N C _ 7-5° Q O c 12 Q w •o m m U U 0 0 J J 2 . 2 a cc cn u) u) in v) cn cn u) o 1 a) a N cu •'• c R ! w J •® w + >e • O 4 - x © ® > + :•: III o 41 RI o _v o 03 0 a �- _ 0 — w t Q U) c0 ' Z C, 0 Soil Map—Weld County,Colorado,Southern Part Hillman Calf Ranch • Map Unit Legend Weld County,Colorado,Southern Part(CO618) Map Unit Symbol I_ Map Unit Name I Acres in AOl I Percent of AOI 4 Aquolls and Aquepts,flooded 25.1 27.6% 70 Valent sand,3 to 9 percent slopes 59.9 66.0% 72 Vona loamy sand,0 to 3 percent slopes 5.7 6.3% Totals for Area of Interest 90.6 100.0% • • USDA Natural Resources Web Soil Survey 2/22/2012 Conservation Service National Cooperative Soil Survey Page 3 of 3 Engineering Properties—Weld County,Colorado,Southern Part Hillman Calf Ranch • Engineering Properties This table gives the engineering classifications and the range of engineering properties for the layers of each soil in the survey area. Depth to the upper and lower boundaries of each layer is indicated. Texture is given in the standard terms used by the U.S. Department of Agriculture. These terms are defined according to percentages of sand, silt, and clay in the fraction of the soil that is less than 2 millimeters in diameter. "Loam,"for example, is soil that is 7 to 27 percent clay, 28 to 50 percent silt, and less than 52 percent sand. If the content of particles coarser than sand is 15 percent or more, an appropriate modifier is added, for example, "gravelly." Classification of the soils is determined according to the Unified soil classification system (ASTM, 2005)and the system adopted by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO, 2004). The Unified system classifies soils according to properties that affect their use as construction material. Soils are classified according to particle-size distribution of the fraction less than 3 inches in diameter and according to plasticity index, liquid limit, and organic matter content. Sandy and gravelly soils are identified as GW, GP, GM, GC, SW, SP, SM, and SC; silty and clayey soils as ML, CL, OL, MH, CH, and OH; and highly organic soils as PT. Soils exhibiting engineering properties of two groups can have a dual classification, for example, CL-ML. The AASHTO system classifies soils according to those properties that affect roadway construction and maintenance. In this system,the fraction of a mineral soil that is less than 3 inches in diameter is classified in one of seven groups from A-1 • through A-7 on the basis of particle-size distribution,liquid limit,and plasticity index. Soils in group A-1 are coarse grained and low in content of fines (silt and clay).At the other extreme, soils in group A-7 are fine grained. Highly organic soils are classified in group A-8 on the basis of visual inspection. If laboratory data are available, the A-1,A-2, and A-7 groups are further classified as A-1-a, A-1-b,A-2-4, A-2-5, A-2-6, A-2-7, A-7-5, or A-7-6.As an additional refinement,the suitability of a soil as subgrade material can be indicated by a group index number. Group index numbers range from 0 for the best subgrade material to 20 or higher for the poorest. Rock fragments larger than 10 inches in diameter and 3 to 10 inches in diameter are indicated as a percentage of the total soil on a dry-weight basis. The percentages are estimates determined mainly by converting volume percentage in the field to weight percentage. Percentage(of soil particles)passing designated sieves is the percentage of the soil fraction less than 3 inches in diameter based on an ovendry weight.The sieves, numbers 4, 10, 40, and 200 (USA Standard Series), have openings of 4.76, 2.00, 0.420, and 0.074 millimeters, respectively. Estimates are based on laboratory tests of soils sampled in the survey area and in nearby areas and on estimates made in the field. Liquid limit and plasticity index(Atterberg limits) indicate the plasticity characteristics of a soil.The estimates are based on test data from the survey area or from nearby areas and on field examination. • Natural Resources Web Soil Survey 2/22/2012 Conservation Service National Cooperative Soil Survey Page 1 of 4 Engineering Properties—Weld County,Colorado, Southern Part Hillman Calf Ranch References: • American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO). 2004.Standard specifications for transportation materials and methods of sampling and testing. 24th edition. American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM). 2005. Standard classification of soils for engineering purposes.ASTM Standard D2487-00. • • Natural Resources Web Soil Survey 2/22/2012 Conservation Service National Cooperative Soil Survey Page 2 of 4 r U C Ca CC To C ..- c9 *U o 1; O O • O N M N = O ,� O to N Q) d I co — .41 _ Z Z Z Z Z N co o y +, 5 r o t o 0 in ^L. Q' .- -t MN W I — 1 I I 1 cp I N -•I N I I I ON N O I0 O O . II) O LC) O . m N M. M O M �f `� x a O O - -1---. O r to O U', -p N 1 N N O r M �- c i ' >• - O �': O O Co O to m > O m O •r- ' CO N- ti O CO C N O ' in O O O O cn C cn CO O '• r` O O O 11) Q O ;r .b. 0 O O O 4) oon to * .- O O O O ..C CC I N 1 ' N r G) r— G) Q) C4 C Cn a ' ? a) n. ' • • L a is c O a m .4. O r J CDt I o a o O O O OAle��Y r r' r r T tO 0:.1 L p r L4i V • ea - fl _'4 CL Ct O O O O O O O O c (0 N o co N > ` 0 > l- - L1. OT . U C Cn a) d OQ co O • O O O O O 0 cll C p ea - OC‘l � � • E C = N +• Q co Q N Q N M N N I. Si o 76 �• _m v Q I Q Q Q Q Q ¢ Q z o - t C C.) U g N o ca m � U � 6 U U (n 2 a v wJ -S " (ng Jam. 0d " U (n2 . 3 C) = oC) 2 ;; �jcnO2 o U ° i m I (n , i' (n (n Cl) Cl) Cl) Cl) C) m4Q. c o 0 .. >, Q c) E c cv L E C a) co ` `n Q. W o • Ct a� .. •.a p c p- � , d ".' 1 .x_ 1O Ca _j �_ a) can[/ .. s C 2 •- ca W lJ O L a) N < . _ m i C N c O — a) «) cq c U _ = _ w T N o rn E D Co • co 3 : c0 cfl O C Ct Qum C co co ." U ; ' n . C as p CO c6 cn o C O a r .. > Cl) LL U) J LL 0 41 O (n a O =. I N •> 1 0 3s1. L N O ■ • C �- m O O CO CO O C I o CO CO co CO CD N O p U .� X O 1 O U) O CO N d - }r O ) ; i CL MI C L O ; . o m O^ o N r rn N p ice. C •_ -p a cu O - N Y c U Cn C a) as O -o CC (n co: G V M co a Z o o LL O O Q C2 Q ti� N 0ui cn >+ _ = to ow co C a) cn C m _ O C a O C O •O co U C O O aO Q O O ,j > N > M C c it I a I Q I rC n I O d CT 2 4 I • I r. - N. r--- c a) a) Ill C C7) C W L 0 C co CC CuU N V C • Cu O O E tr' v N N N N Cu a T 0 2 Co cn y o 2 m J m (/) E O y c.) a a o y o • C co C 0 C Cu Z N L J O m co O O ID -O N N r O N p O oO, r+ U Q (a T _ C t L. C C E w v co m `m 5 > 0 a Co C, o d V d to 2 L y m . O y 0 C U O Co N CO in 2 c Z ¢ m m z (a ) a m N V b+ CO N m o v_ !0 — Z z c) 3 a Ca CO I N I t W a O a` rn c • v c w` Hydrologic Soil Group—Weld County, Colorado, Southern Part (Quanah Calf Ranch) cn Cc tY O 53'' CC 538200 538300 538400 538500 538600 538700 C� �2' i.:" o 0 40° 22' 14" • c l 0 I tO .„. 7 O t t — - O _ pi • III o in o oo co co Tr t Tr . Y E o {, o o <: _ o co co m o v f -r Q 1� t - ° { . 1 ° • o ` o o co ro o c v v •• . • 0 pin O no fp --2- 'I — l I O 0 O 0 Q 7 CC '33 TT 'cr 1 7 � . i v o f i o o ! =z_ : O (") I P{ co y . _ ...� , .. co { 7 1 1 1 _ yj in 7 R♦ M L 1 O ` ` .. o % o O N % - I - - lel . ~,; , Q t _- it - ice. _-cj:- 4..a.iiy/ 4. 40° 21' 45" • 40° 21' 45" 538100 538200 538300 538400 53850G 538600 538700 I-- in Map Scale 1:4,340 if printed on A see (8.5" x 11") sheet. N en "' N Meters A 0 40 80 160 240 0 ,1 Feet • N 0 150 300 600 900 USDA Natural Resources Web Soil Survey 2/24/2012 � Conservation Service National Cooperative Soil Survey Page 1 of 4 N r • O O C aE p CO CA N O cco CA ,7 Tr- O 'O N c9 cn N CV N c`4 «_. N 'o c0 4-- C a) U Q7 -Op R N C Cti ra >, O co V fd a) O kV U Q) L..-= c c c N C) U ? .D c9 c 7 N O _ a) _^ a Q1 U N Q) p c a) — cm E Z C U cp — .O U U o N o o r a) Q c0C0 C O N Q) a) N x a) CO c c9 ? >+ el U w O ca _c - - c — c d' OO L c in a) �' ca �o v) v°', Z 0 Z t N U a) Q p = C *a- ) U .`� z oNO3 - .2 3 0 CI 5 _ _ c9 • N Q CO CO Q L CO y O Z Cl) O m Q C cn o) CC N �. -p U CO c..)CU a) rJD a O C Q O Q 0 .� O w 0 c a) 0 3 c r ° o a a) LL o a) a)a) � _ No c N � o '" § c `- E >.- co Z rn •° 'ca .. 0 o a) Q N E o o c a a) mCC E c .) p cn N n. p a) c C CO , w U 0- 2 (9 p a.) ca c o c E c o a) c..) m H 10 p P " a) n " a) E Q. a O T Q t a a) N a) a) j — a) cn c< o c0 N N `.co J 16 N > to L c ,a) C E O a aJ Z • co — o N O O c0 >m a) E ^ ` c w co E Q) E L _c T O Q) � ca CO c9 O C) 0 Dc C V T 0 c vi a a) co c9 .- O T o �6 o 9 ' co O U) O ` C cm oO N ° Dc o 2 N o an" C a) cu ^ CO U — Q) a Q) _ Q) O c `O 7 T r Q (n a , C E N Uu) 12 Qa) Cn a) o 'Q a) co c Q E (Prow N m c9 r Q `o 0 > — C a) a) E ca E L f9 L c9 C ,_ co .O a) a) p O o ELI) 5 cO ..c p E ,_ H 5 W E cn d E o) 5 U H wz co on O H U ._ O 0 O 0 (5 ( - T co • a) ( _O ^ a O -co U c (n_ • o c „ 0 o c9 0 O O s.0 c9 • „ c c9 a J O ,L V O Cr) 0_ 76 a) R O O to V7 in E. a Q > Co co v co T Z In Y c U .c I W d _�' N N V N O O N co Co C a V N OO W Q N N Co VI cc x i � O (0 J co N N o H O O ~O y c .R L7 O a Q Cl) a) < a co Si U U O Z U E co Iti ,0 .E D 2 —J N C< to NU— Irri — vs 0 U L O• 1 O i ., aL H CD 1 L ' H 1 M 1 Z C C' In.; �C • Hydrologic Soil Group—Weld County,Colorado,Southern Part Quanah Calf Ranch • Hydrologic Soil Group aplunitsyrrttro4 tvrfLnam , -trl tae J1 101 icitadfylyt 4 Aquolls and Aquepts,flooded D 17.3 20.4% 70 Valenl sand,3 to 9 percent A 62.5 73.6% slopes 72 Vona loamy sand,0 to 3 percent 8 5.1 6.0% slopes Totals for Area of Interest 84.8 100.0% Description Hydrologic soil groups are based on estimates of runoff potential. Soils are assigned to one of four groups according to the rate of water infiltration when the soils are not protected by vegetation, are thoroughly wet, and receive precipitation from long-duration storms. The soils in the United States are assigned to four groups (A, B, C, and D) and three dual classes(ND, B/D, and C/D). The groups are defined as follows: Group A. Soils having a high infiltration rate (low runoff potential)when thoroughly • wet. These consist mainly of deep, well drained to excessively drained sands or gravelly sands. These soils have a high rate of water transmission. Group B. Soils having a moderate infiltration rate when thoroughly wet. These consist chiefly of moderately deep or deep, moderately well drained or well drained soils that have moderately fine texture to moderately coarse texture. These soils have a moderate rate of water transmission. Group C. Soils having a slow infiltration rate when thoroughly wet. These consist chiefly of soils having a layer that impedes the downward movement of water or soils of moderately fine texture or fine texture.These soils have a slow rate of water transmission. Group D. Soils having a very slow infiltration rate (high runoff potential) when thoroughly wet. These consist chiefly of clays that have a high shrink-swell potential, soils that have a high water table, soils that have a claypan or clay layer at or near the surface, and soils that are shallow over nearly impervious material. These soils have a very slow rate of water transmission. If a soil is assigned to a dual hydrologic group (ND, B/D, or C/D), the first letter is for drained areas and the second is for undrained areas. Only the soils that in their natural condition are in group D are assigned to dual classes. Rating Options Aggregation Method: Dominant Condition • USDA - Natural Resources Web Soil Survey 2/24/2012 aili Conservation Service National Cooperative Soil Survey Page 3 of 4 Hydrologic Soil Group—Weld County,Colorado,Southern Part Quanah Calf Ranch Component Percent Cutoff'' None Specified • Tie-break Rule: Higher all • Natural Resources Web Soil Survey 2/24/2012 Conservation Service National Cooperative Soil Survey Page 4 of 4 • Table 2: Solid Manure Produced and Associated Nutrients MWPS-16 Section 1,2000 Moisture Manure Manure TS VS Nitrogen Phosphorus Potassium Number of Wt./hd, (lbs./day/ (ft'/day/ (Ibs./day/ (lbs./day/ (lbs./day/ (lbs./day/ (lbs./day/ Animal Type Hd lbs. Total Wt.,lbs. (%) 1000#) 1000# 1000#) 1000#) 1000#) 1000#) 1000#) 88.0 84.0 1.28 9.2 7.6 0.32 0.080 0.28 unweaned 15000 250 3,750,000 88.0 84.0 1.28 9.2 7.6 0.32 0.080 0.28 - 85.3 58.0 0.92 8.5 7.2 0.34 0.092 0.21 Totals 15,000 3,750,000 Total Daily Production 315,000 4,800 34,500 28,500 1,200 300 1,050 Total Annual Production 114,975,000 1,752,000 12,592,500 10,402,500 438,000 109,500 383,250 Tons produced w/moisture content of 88.0% 57,488 Tons to apply w/moisture content of 46.0% 12,775 Tons of compost produced w/moisture content of 40.0% 11,498 • AGPROfessionals,LLC Land Application Requirements for 10-year, 10-day Storm Event 25-year,24-hour storm volume( 6.5 A.F.),gallons 2,101,596 Total Nitrogen contained in liquid,lbs. 5,674 'Total-N= 2.7 lbs./1,000 gal Ammonium-Nitrogen contained in liquid,lbs. 1,093 'NH3-N= 0.5 lbs/1,000 gal • Organic-Nitrogen contained in liquid,lbs. 4,581 Organic-N= 2.2 lbs./1,000 gal Ammonium-Nitrogen available after irrigation,lbs. 601 45.0% Sprinkler-Irrigation loss' Organic-Nitrogen available 3rd year,lbs. 2,153 47% Equilibrium mineralization rate for organic-N' Nitrogen available to plants(PAN)yr.after yr.,lbs. 2,754 Soil Organic Matter,% 1.0 Irrigation Water NO3 content,ppm 5.0 Total Residual NO3 in soil,ppm 10.0 Alfalfa Corn Silage Expected Yield(grain,Bu/acre;silage,tons/acre) 6 25 Based on CSU Extension N req.w/listed O.M.,soil N, &hr.Water NO3,(lb./acre) 234 141 Bulletin#538&#0.565 Acres req.if effluent applied via sprinkler irrigation 12 20 'Taken from CSU's Bulletin No.568A Best Management Practices for Manure Utilization Land Application Requirements for Average Years'Stormwater&Process Water-Sprinkler Applied Maximum pumping requirement( 8.3 A.F.),gallons 2,688,088 Total Nitrogen contained in liquid,lbs. 7,258 'Total-N= 2.7 lbs./1,000 gal Ammonium-Nitrogen contained in liquid,lbs. 1,398 'NH3-N= 0.5 lbs./1,000 gal Organic-Nitrogen contained in liquid,lbs. 5,860 Organic-N= 2.2 lbs./1,000 gal Ammonium-Nitrogen available after irrigation,lbs. 769 45.0%Sprinkler-Irrigation loss* Organic-Nitrogen available 3rd year,lbs. 2,754 47% Equilibrium mineralization rate for organic-N' Nitrogen available to plants(PAN)yr.after yr.,lbs. 3,523 Soil Organic Matter,% 1.0 Irrigation Water NO3 content,ppm 5.0 Total Residual NO3 in soil,ppm 10.0 Alfalfa Corn Silage Expected Yield(grain, Bu/acre;silage,tons/acre) 6 25 Based on CSU Extension N req.w/listed O.M.,soil N,&In..Water NO3,(lb./acre) 234 141 Bulletin#538&#0.565 Acres req.if effluent applied via sprinkler irrigation 15 25 'Taken from CSU's Bulletin No.568A Best Management Practices for Manure Utilization Land Application Requirements for Average Years'Stormwater&Process Water-Flood Applied • Maximum pumping requirement( A.F.),gallons - Total Nitrogen contained in liquid,lbs. 'Total-N= 2.7 lbs./1,000 gal Ammonium-Nitrogen contained in liquid,lbs. - 'NH3-N= 0.5 lbs./1,000 gal Organic-Nitrogen contained in liquid,lbs. - Organic-N= 2.2 lbs./1,000 gal Ammonium-Nitrogen available after irrigation,lbs. - 22.0% Flood-Irrigation loss' Organic-Nitrogen available 3rd year,lbs. - 42% Equilibrium mineralization rate for organic-N' Nitrogen available to plants(PAN)yr.after yr.,lbs. - Soil Organic Matter,% 1.0 Irrigation Water NO3 content,ppm 5.0 Total Residual NO3 in soil,ppm 24.0 Alfalfa Corn Silage Expected Yield(grain,Bu/acre;silage or grass,tons/acre) 6 25 Based on CSU Extension N req.w/listed O.M.,soil N,&In.Water NO3,(lb./acre) 206 85 Bulletin#538&#0.565 Acres req.if effluent applied via flood irrigation - - 'Taken from CSU's Bulletin No.568A Best Management Practices for Manure Utilization Land Application Requirements-Solid Manure Nitrogen produced annually, 100% used.rest giver 438,000 Nitrogen loss during storage&handling,lbs. 175,200 40% lost as ammonia Total Nitrogen in manure before application,lbs. 262,800 Ammonium-Nitrogen contained in manure,lbs. 101,178 'NH,-N= 38.5%of total N in solid manure Organic-Nitrogen contained in manure,lbs. 161,622 'Organic-N= 61.5% of total N in solid manure NH,-N available after spreading(no incorporation), lbs. 78,413 'NH,-N loss= 22.5%within 4 days of application Organic-Nitrogen available 3rd year,lbs. 88,892 55% Equilibrium mineralization rate for organic-N' Nitrogen available to plants(PAN)yr.after yr.,lbs. 167,305 Soil Organic Matter,°/. 1.0 Irrigation Water NO3 content,ppm 5.0 Total Residual NO3 in soil,ppm 10.0 Corn Silage Expected Yield(tons) 25 Based on CSU Extension N req.w/listed O.M.&residual soil N,lb./acre 141 Bulletin#538 • Acres req. 1,187 'Taken from CSU's Bulletin No. 568A Best Management Practices for Manure Utilization AGPROfessionals, LLC AGPROfessionals, LLC • ■■ DEVELOPERS OF AGRICULTURE SUBJECT: Trip Report DATE: DATE OF TRIP: JD Heiskell Holdings 02/01/12 02/01/12 Weld County, CO TO: Whom it may concern JOB NUMBER: 2003-02 PARTICIPANTS: Marcy Kappen(AGPRO). PURPOSE: The purpose of the trip to J.D. Heiskell Property Wells was to measure the depth to ground water in the three(3)test wells. BACKGROUND: The three test holes are drilled around the proposed location for a calf feeding facility waste water lagoon. This data is to determine if ground water is at an adequate depth suitable for the required setback for the proposed depth of the lagoon. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS: • The ground water measurements were taken from the top of the pipe and the depths recorded. • Bore Hole#1 (N end of field) o 9.2' from ground level to ground water • 9.8' from top of pipe to ground water • 0.6' from top of pipe to ground level • Bore Hole#2 (Center in field) o 8.4' from ground level to ground water • 9.1' from top of pipe to ground water • 0.7' from top of pipe to ground level ENGINEERING, SURVEYING, PLANNING & CONSULTING • • 4350 Highway 66 1. Longmont, CO 80504 970.535.9318 /offer 970.535.9854/ fax www.agpros.com February 24,2012 Page-2-oft • • Bore Hole#3 ( South well) o 11.3' from ground level to ground water • 12.0' from top of pipe to ground water • 0.7' from top of pipe to ground level PENDING ACTIONS: Sincerely, Marcy Kappen Planning Consultant • e • fessionals LLC DEVELOPERS OF AGRICULTURE BH .#1 .BH ,#2 . _ ,BH :#3 Ground Elevation (ft; !(.;>( /11: I !(614:.8;; I !(,,.i; .t :[ Pipe above ground (ft) 0.(;0 I 0.0 I 0. 70 Top of Pipe (TOP) Elevation (ft) 4631 .04 4630.53 4635.57 Depth to GW from ground (ft) 9.20 8.40 11 .30 Readings Date: 2/1 /2012 Depth to GW from TOP (ft) Groundwater Elevation (ft) 4621 .24 4621 .43 4623.57 • • ENGINEERING, SURVEYING, PLANNING CONSULTING 4350 Highway 66 Longmont, CO 80504 970.535.9318/office 970.535.9854/fax www.agpros.com Hello