HomeMy WebLinkAbout20110971.tiff Varna Companies, Inc.
Office of Special Projects
8120 Gage Street Frederick, Colorado 80516 Telephone(970)353-8310 Fax(970)353-4047 •
Wednesday 13 April 2011
To: Michael Cunningham, E.P.S.
Colorado Division of Reclamation Mining and Safety
Office of Mined Land Reclamation
1313 Sherman St., #215
Denver, CO 80203
From: Varra Companies, Inc.
Office of Special Projects Cozy
Bradford Janes, Forester to t.- I4 r/
Subject: M-2010-049 Western Sugar Reclamation Land Development Project -
Reply to the Colorado Office of Mined Land Reclamation (OMLR) Preliminary
Adequacy Review correspondence of 14 March 2011.
Dear Michael:
For greater continuity and ease of reference, we have iterated your comments
necessitating a reply according to its respective item, iterated in a graphical
box, with our comments in blue following:
6.3.4 Exhibit C - Pre-Mining and Mining Plan Map(s) of Affected Lands
1. The list of adjoining surface/structure owners provided in Exhibit C of the
original Application submittal shows, Matrix Energy, DCP Midstream and
North Weld County Water Conservancy District own structures or easements
within 200 ft. of the affected land. The revised Exhibit C-1: Existing
Conditions Map does not identify the structures or easements owned by these
entities. Any permanent man-made structure which the Applicant has
identified as being within 200 feet of the affected land must be located on the
Exhibit C-1 Map. In other words, if you identify a permanent man made
structure within 200 feet of the affected land, then you must locate that
structure on the Pre-Mining or Mining Plan Maps. The Exhibit C-1: Existing
Conditions Map, which the Applicant has submitted twice, does not list or
locate structures owned by Matrix Energy, DCP Midstream or North Weld
County Water Conservancy District. Please locate these structures on the
Pre-Mining Plan Map. If the structures are not located within 200 ft. of the
R a\oU ��1,�i e C : }p up, Pb
_ au-\ \ 2011-0971
affected land, then revise the list of permanent man-made structures. If you
need further clarification, please contact the Division before submitting a
response.
As stated in #14 of our last adequacy reply:
'All flow lines shown are DCP Midstream; or otherwise as
associated with the called out facilities. The oil and gas wells and
related facilities are owned by Merit Energy and Noble Energy
[name corrected - see **Note, below] as shown in the Revised
Exhibit C-1: Existing Conditions Map. City of Greeley structures
are identified on the previous maps. The other entities referenced
are not within 200 feet of the permit area and merely included in the
notifications as a precaution. Any agreement from an adjacent
landowner is for a shared fence or any permanent man-made
object, well, or structure visible in the aerial image. To our
knowledge, all wells within 200 feet of the location are identified, as
are any attending shared fences, or other relevant structures or
objects. Exhibit C-1: Existing Conditions Map previously submitted
should have a legend identifying the relevant structures on the
upper right. Regardless, a revised Exhibit C-1: Existing Conditions
Map is included with the referenced Legend, to be certain.'
The North Weld County Water Conservancy District has lines in the area, but not
within 200 feet of the boundary, but was included in the notification as a
precaution. This entity has been redacted in the List, below.
Matrix Energy was notified as a precaution, but does not appear to have
facilities within 200 feet of the location, and was subsequently redacted in the
List, below.
As stated previously, the DCP Midstream flow lines are shown as a line with the
symbol G for oil and gas, but were not identified in the legend. The item now
appears on the legend
All water wells within 200 feet of the boundary were identified, and their permit
numbers associated shown. A list is provided in response to Item #3, below.
The Alta survey is a very thorough survey that even shows manhole cover
locations on the Greeley sewer line.
Varra Companies, Inc. correspondence of 14 April 2011 to the Colorado Office of Mined Land Reclamation 2
(OMLR) in reply to OMLR correspondence of 14 March 2011 —Western Sugar Reclamation Land
Development Project—M-2010-049.
I Iere is the former list with the redacted entities, meaning if a line is through it,
the entity was notified, but could not be identified within 200 feet of the
proposed boundary:
Other (Utilities, Roads, Name and Address
etc)
City of Greeley City of Greeley
ATTN: City Clerk
1100 10'h Street
Greeley, Colorado 80631
Merit Energy Merit Energy
ATTN: Clay Munger, Operations Manager
1313 North Denver Avenue, Building#3
Fort Lupton, Colorado 80621
Matrix Energy Matrix Energy, LLC
ATTN: David M. Blandford
201 Linden Street, Suite 301
Fort Collins, Colorado 80524
Noble Energy Production, ATTN: Right of Way Department
Inc. 804 Grand Avenue
Platteville, Colorado 80651-7560
DCP Midstream ATTN: Right of Way Department
1324 North 7'h Avenue
Greeley, Colorado 80631
North Weld County Water North Weld County Water District
Conservancy District ATTN: Alan Overton
33247 U.S. Highway 85
Lucerne, Colorado 80646
We remain confident that all owners of structures within 200 feet of the permit
boundary have been identified on the Exhibit C-1 Map, and notified accordingly.
All other structures shown and not otherwise identified are to the best of our
understanding the property of Varra Companies, Inc.
**Please Note: Reference to Patina Oil and Gas in the 23 February Adequacy
reply letter was made in error and should have read Noble Energy. Regrets for
any confusion resulting from this misstatement.
Varra Companies,Inc.correspondence of 14 April 2011 to the Colorado Office of Mined Land Reclamation 3
(OMLR)in reply to OMLR correspondence of 14 March 2011 —Western Sugar Reclamation Land
Development Projcct—M-2010-049.
6.4.7 Exhibit G - Water Information
2. In the Division's Adequacy Review — 02 letter dated January 2, 2011, the
Applicant was asked to provide a flood analysis and flood control plan. In lieu
of the requested information, the applicant has submitted a statement
explaining their position on the matter and has indicated that such information
will not be provided. The Division's authority to review information pertaining
to flood analysis stems from C.R.S. 34-32.5-116(4)(h) which states,
disturbances to the prevailing hydrologic balance of the affected land and of
the surrounding area and to the quality and quantity of water in surface and
groundwater systems, both during and after the mining operation and during
reclamation, shall be minimized.
The Urban Drainage and Flood Control District (UDFCD) Publication "Technical
Review Guidelines for Gravel Mining Activities within or Adjacent to 100-
year Floodplains" is utilized by the Division as a guidance document for mine
sites located within a 100-year plain. The UDFCD guidelines are designed for
gravel operations along the South Platte River and its tributaries and have
been used to review flood impacts of other sand and gravel operations
located on this particular reach of the Cache la Poudre River. The Division
utilizes the UDFCD document to provide initial guidance when reviewing
potential flood impacts. However, modifications to the guidelines are made on
a case-by-case basis to account for site specific conditions.
In order for the Division to evaluate the nature of the floodplain at the Western
Sugar Land Development Project site and determine if there are any site
specific reasons to relax the minimum berm width requirements, the
Applicant must submit a flood analysis and flood control plan. The Applicant's
proposal to rely on anecdotal evidence as a justification for ignoring the
potential flood hazards at the site is not acceptable. Please submit a flood
analysis and flood control plan for Division review. Failure to submit the
requested information will result in denial of the permit application.
The specifics of the flood analysis study and attending flood control plan are
being developed by C.G.R.S., and will be submitted to the OMLR under separate
cover. As such, the applicant requests that the permit be stipulated for approval
to wit:
Varra Companies, Inc. correspondence of 14 April 2011 to the Colorado Office of Mined Land Reclamation 4
(OMLR) in reply to OMLR correspondence of 14 March 2011 —Western Sugar Reclamation Land
Development Project—M-2010-049.
The applicant will not extract lands within 400 feet of the center
line of the present channel of the Cache La Poudre River until such
a time as the pending study is submitted and approved by the
OMLR, along with attending plans for flood mitigation to the extent
warranted by the said study, either within the timeframe of this
application; or subsequent to the approval of this application, as a
stipulation of approval that the same shall occur by Technical
Revision of the approved permit application.
For the record: The applicant maintains that detention is greater than any
planned diversion at this location, and as a result creates a net benefit to the
floodplain/floodway; and that no compelling evidence to the contrary has been
advanced by any party respective of the planned area of activities. We further
maintain that the UDFCD guidelines should not apply to stable stream segments,
which we maintain is the case at this location. To contend further with the
matter at this juncture, however, exceeds the scope and needs of this permit and
the capacities of the OMLR. The considerations of extraction and reclamation in
the floodplain/floodway have simply broadened to include diverse local, state
and federal entities for which imminent resolution cannot be gained within the
present confines of the Colorado Mined Land Reclamation Board or the OMLR.
To he clear, the applicant is not opposed to performing mutually
determined and agreed upon studies that are justified on merit, well
defined both as to the components and as to the objectives, and with
reasonable measures to provide necessary but coequal and cost effective
stabilities and protections for all affected interests. Well stated
parameters, assumptions, and reasonably assured cost benefits that
complement all interests are unopposed. We believe the necessary
dialogue to properly define these parameters has been complicated
beyond the scope of this singular permit application, and remains a work
in need of progress. Our pursuit of the requested study is an
acknowledgement of these limitations and in respect to the burdens the
OMI.R must satisfy in the absence of such resolution.
3. The Applicant submitted a response from CGRS which states up to four wells
may require water augmentation as a result of dewatering activities. The
attached map depicting registered wells in the vicinity of the mine does not
sufficiently address the requested information.
Van-a Companies,Inc.correspondence of 14 April 2011 to the Colorado Office of Mined Land Reclamation 5
(OMLR)in reply to OMLR correspondence of 14 March 2011 —Western Sugar Reclamation Land
Development Project—M-2010-049.
The Division requested the Applicant submit a list of wells located within the
cone of depression, a report indicating potential impacts to these wells and a
groundwater monitoring plan to verify the presence or absence of impacts to
the groundwater system. At a minimum, the monitoring plan should include
the following:
a) The location of monitoring stations.
b) The frequency of water table elevation to be collected.
c) Commitments for reporting measurements to the Division.
d) Water level criteria that will be used to determine when an adverse affect to
groundwater has occurred.
e) Commitments for mitigation in the event the adverse impact criteria are
exceeded.
Please refer to the included Water Well Map, showing the well locations and
associated identity, summary List of wells shown. Even though impacts are
expected to be minimal, at the request of the OMLR, quarterly monitoring is
proposed with sampling to occur at the piezometer wells identified on the Water
Well Map (see legend). The results of all measurements will be included in the
required Annual Report to the OMLR. Parts d and e are addressed in
correspondence from C.G.R.S. of 14 April 2011, as included with this reply.
4. The Applicant has stated a Technical Revision may be submitted to allow for
the lining of the pits. As noted in the Division's previous Adequacy Review
Letter, the Division considers lined pits to be a developed water resource,
which would constitute a significant change from the proposed post-mining
land use of industrial/commercial and would require an Amendment rather
than a Technical Revision. The Division understands mine sites may be
reclaimed to multiple land uses. Ilowever, if the Applicant does not identify
`developed water resource' as one of the post-mining land uses, then the
Applicant will be required to amend the Reclamation Permit should they
decide to line the pits in the future. It is common practice to identify multiple
post-mining land uses on the permit application. The Applicant should be
familiar with this practice as they have identified multiple post-mining land
uses on previously submitted permit applications (copy enclosed). The
Applicant may revise page four of the permit application to include multiple
post-mining land uses.
Varra Companies, Inc. correspondence of 14 April 2011 to the Colorado Office of Mined Land Reclamation 6
(OMLR) in reply to OMLR correspondence of 14 March 2011 —Western Sugar Reclamation Land
Development Project— M-2010-049.
We understand now that even though the 112 form states primary use `check
one.' that more than one may be checked. The OMLR on-line pdf form only
allows for one check. Previously, we've attempted to use text in the body of the
permit to clarify multiple use matters, only to discover the OMLR relies upon
this page. I listorically. a primary use did not exclude other uses detailed by text
and reason; it was simply the `primary' use and did not exclude secondary or
multiple uses if stated in later application exhibits. As extracted from Exhibit E
- Reclamation Plan:
Mixed use(s), other than general agriculture will occur and may include,
but are not limited to: the retention of existing structures as desired (e.g.,
processing facilities and plant(s), concrete batch plant, asphalt batch
plants, recycling facilities and related operations, shop, scale-house/office,
and supporting facilities (fuel depots, parking areas, oil and gas facilities
access, etc.) for continued industrial - commercial use (as validated by
any co-related and required Weld County Building Permits); the creation
of unforeseen future structures, and for the use and development of on-
site water resources. Since the area of surrounding lands is a mix of
these uses, the site end use will retain these potentials.
Attached is a revised 112 form, page 4, which replaces page 4 of the 112 form
originally submitted, which also includes general agriculture as clarification of
the above statement. There was an active pivot and former cattle yard within
the industrial zoned land as a component of the present land use. Further, since
the lands are zoned industrial by Weld County, Colorado, this may he perceived
by some as comprising the primary future use as well but it is simply the
current zoned use.
The predominant, or primary, future use by area as a result of reclamation of the
basins is `Developed Water Resources.' The above ground portions would
constitute the other potential end uses, yet all will he contained within the
standing zoned industrial use. At its simplest, the reclamation of the above
ground portions for release aims at establishing the approved seed mixture to
stabilize the above water portions of the affected lands.
5. The Applicant has stated they would like to retain the option to discharge
groundwater into the adjacent Durham Sand and Gravel Pit (M-1978-056).
Prior to approving this option, the Applicant will have to describe the
dewatering setup in detail. In addition, a Technical Revision will need to be
Varra Companies,Inc.correspondence of 14 April 2011 to the Colorado Office of Mined Land Reclamation 7
(OMLR)in reply to OMLR correspondence of 14 March 2011 —Western Sugar Reclamation Land
Development Project—M-2010-049.
filed for the Durham Sand and Gravel Pit to allow groundwater to be
discharged to this location. If the Applicant does not address this matter
during the review period, then Technical Revisions will need to be filed for
both mine sites at a later date.
The applicant withdraws this consideration at this time. If needed, we will apply
for the necessary Technical Revisions at a later time.
6.4.19Exhibit S - Permanent Man-made Structures
6. The Applicant has provided the Division with four signed damage waiver
• agreements. Please clarify if there are any other permanent man-made
structures within 200 feet of the affected land which the Applicant will be
submitting damage waiver agreements for.
All owners of structures within 200 feet of the permit boundary were properly
notified and given opportunity to either sign or ignore the documents received
by the OMLR. No other signed documents were received by the applicant other
than what has already been provided to the O1\JLR. We are unaware of any
objections to the application, for which all who received notices of the public
notice and structure statements had opportunity. Copies of the certificates of
mailing and return receipts were previously provided to the ()MLR and should
satisfy this requirement.
Please Note: Reference to Patina Oil and Gas in the 23 February Adequacy
reply letter was made in error and should have read Noble Energy. Regrets for
any confusion resulting from this misstatement.
6.5 Geotechnical Stability Exhibit
7. In the Division's Adequacy Review— 02 letter dated January 2, 2011, the
Applicant was asked to submit a revised Slope Stability Analysis. Please
indicate if this information will be forthcoming.
Varra Companies, Inc. correspondence of 14 April 2011 to the Colorado Office of Mined Land Reclamation 8
(OMLR)in reply to OMLR correspondence of 14 March 2011 —Western Sugar Reclamation Land
Development Project—M-2010-049.
Included with this submittal is the revised Slope Stability Analysis, performed by
C.G.R.S. and dated 28 February 2011. The results of the analysis will cause the
applicant to modify its cut slopes to 311:1V below 30± feet in depth, until and
unless further analysis justifies a return to 1.2511:1V slopes. At no time will cut
slopes exceed 1.2511:1V.
ADDENDUM: A modified Legal Description and map is also included in this
reply. Upon review, our ALTA survey included a parcel (#096104302034),
which the City of Greeley claims is within their city limits. To remove conflict
with another jurisdiction, this parcel comprising apx. 0.69± acres has been
removed from the permit boundary according to the revised Exhibit A - Legal
Description and attending map. The new permit area is reduced to 102.18±
acres. All relational aspects of planned extraction and reclamation are minimally
changed but will be applied in the field accordingly.
Attachments:
1 Proof of Placement of this material with the Weld
County Clerk to the Board.
2 Revised Exhibit C-1 Map.
3 C.G.R.S. Slope Stability Analysis of 28 February 2011
and attending Terracon Report of 17 January 2011.
4 Correspondence from C.G.R.S. of 14 April 2011.
5 Revised page 4 — 112 application form.
6 Well Map.
7 Modified Legal Description — Exhibit A & Map + related
Weld County GIS.
Varna Companies, Inc. correspondence of 14 April 2011 to the Colorado Office of Mined Land Reclamation 9
(OMLR)in reply to OMLR correspondence of 14 March 2011 —Western Sugar Reclamation Land
Development Project—M-2010-049.
Varra Companies, Inc.
Office of Special Projects
1431 East 16th Street Greeley, Colorado 80631 Telephone(970)353-8310 Fax(970) 353-4047
Friday 15 April 2011
Weld County Clerk to the Board
915 10th Street,3rd Floor
Greeley,Colorado 80632
Subject: Varra Companies, Inc. -Western Sugar Reclamation Land Development Permit-
Regular Impact(112) Technical Revision Application - Permit M-2010-049
Materials submitted to the Colorado Division of Reclamation Mining and Safety (CRMS) - Office
of Mined Land Reclamation (OMLR):
• Correspondence of 13 April 2011 from Varra Companies, Inc. to the Colorado Office of
Mined Land Reclamation,with attending maps and attachments.
Attachments:
1 Proof of Placement of this material with the Weld County
Clerk to the Board.
2 Revised Exhibit C-1 Map.
3 C.G.R.S. Slope Stability Analysis of 28 February 2011 and
attending Terracon Report of 17 January 2011.
4 Correspondence from C.G.R.S. of 14 April 2011.
5 Revised page 4 - 112 application form.
6 Well Map.
7 Modified Legal Description - Exhibit A & Map + related
Weld County GIS.
Your signature below acknowledges receipt of the above referenced material,as attached. The
material should be added to the above referenced Application, as originally submitted to the Weld
County Clerk to the Board, and made accessible for public review.
Received On \ ,2011
By: ‘—\`'V
Office of the Weld County Clerk to the Board of County Commissioners
Varra Companies, Inc. WESTERN SUGAR RECLAMATION LAND DEVELOPMENT PROJECT 1
OMLR Permit—M-2010-049 13 December 2010
-4-
12. Prima future(Post-mining)land use(check one):
Cropland(CR) n Pastureland(PL) General Agriculture(GA)
t3 R• angeland(RL) El F• orestry(FR) WildlifeHabitat(WL)
11 R• esidential(RS) rl R• ecreation(RC) ✓Industrial/Commercial(IC)
Developed Water Resources(WR) . Solid Waste Disposal(WD)
13. Primary present land use(check on1
fl C• ropland(CR) -ESN Pastureland(PL) General Agriculture(GA)
fl R• angeland(RL) Forestry(FR) 7�';;77 Wildlife Habitat(WL)
BResidential(RS) jj Recreation(RC) 1:33 Industrial/Commercial(IC)
Developed Water Resources(W R)
14. Method of Mining: Briefly explain mining method(e.g.truck/shovel):
Surface extraction and processing of aggregate using heavy equipment such as dozers,front-end-loaders, scrapers, haul trucks,etc.
15. On Site Processing: IN Crushing/Screening
13.1 Briefly explain mining method(e.g.truck/shovel):
Materials are extracted and removed to screens and crushers fro processing into product to be sold for urban infrastructure needs.
List any designated chemicals or acid-producing materials to be used or stored within permit area:
None. All fuels and lubricants will be brought to the location as needed on mobile equipment and vehicles.
16. Description of Amendment or Conversion:
If you are amending or converting an existing operation,provide a brief narrative describing the proposed change(s).
N/A
CGENVIRONMENTAL @ WIDIN
S
April 14, 2011
Mr. Michael Cunningham
Division of Reclamation, Mining and Safety
1313 Sherman St., Room 215
Denver, Colorado 80203
RE: Varra Great Western Sugar Project
Response to Division Letter
DRMS File No. M-2010-049
CGRS No. 1-135-12539aa
Dear Mr. Cunningham:
This letter addresses your comments regarding what water level criteria will be used to
when an adverse affect to groundwater has occurred.
We propose that the trigger point be a measured water level of 4 feet below the
predicted drawdown midway between the mine face and the effective radius of influence
(-400 feet) based on two pit pumping simulations. This level provides accommodation
for typical seasonal fluctuations which has been measured to be on the order of four
feet. At a point were the predicted drawdown is 6 feet if a drawdown of 10 feet is
measured the Division will be contacted and an appropriate action plan generated based
on available data.
If you have any questions regarding this letter, please contact me at 970-493-7780.
Sincerely,
CGRS, Inc. �
�� D
Joby L. Adams, P.G.
Principal/Hydrogeologist
P.O. Box 1489 Fort Collins,CO 80522 T 800-288-2657 F 970-493-7986 www.cgrs.com
SLOPE STABILITY ANALYSIS
VARRA GRAVEL OPERATION-GREAT WESTERN SUGAR
GREELEY, COLORADO
CGRS No. 1-1 35-1 1 2 539ab
Prepared by:
Joby L. Adams
CGRS, INC.
1301 Academy Court
Fort Collins, Colorado 80524
800-288-2657
February 28, 2011
Introduction
The following report presents the results of a slope stability analysis for a proposed
open cut gravel extraction operations at the Varra Great Western Sugar site near
Greeley, Colorado. This analysis was performed at the request of Varra Companies.
Background Information
The proposed Great Western Sugar Property gravel quarry occupies the North half of
Section 9, Township 5 North, Range 65 West of the 6th Principal Meridian. The
surrounding land use consists of agricultural, rural residential, commercial and open-cut
gravel quarry operations. The proposed mine area occupies an estimated 130 acres. The
water table at the site is located in unconsolidated alluvial deposits associated with the
Cache La Poudre River.
Information provided by current mining operations document soil conditions generally
consisting of two to 12 feet of fill, silty sand and lean clay, which are underlain by sand and
gravel deposits, which in turn are underlain by Pierre Shale. Over the entire area the
range of saturated thickness of the sand and gravel deposits (prior to mining) is estimated
at 25 to 70 feet. It is our understanding that the sand and gravel will be dewatered during
aggregate extraction at a maximum depth of 45 feet. Any extraction beneath 45 feet will
be wet mining.
The water table in the vicinity of the four proposed quarry locations will be drawn down to
35 feet below ground surface or to the Pierre Shale, whichever occurs first. The mine will
be dewatered by allowing groundwater to flow from the side walls of the excavation into
ditches. It is our understanding that the water will be pumped into unlined ponds east of
the mine and will eventually make its way into the Cache La Poudre River. Site Conditions
are depicted in Appendix A.
Slope Stability Analysis
Van-a Gravel Operation—Great Western Sugar
Greeley,Colorado
Page 2
Overview of Stability Analyses
The assumptions used in the bank stability analysis include the following:
• The static depth to groundwater is between 6 and 7 feet below grade and the water
table will intersect the pit bank approximately ten feet above the mine floor (seepage
face).
• The maximum bank height is 45 feet.
• A cohesion of 0 is assumed for all unconsolidated deposits.
• A cohesion of 731 psf is assumed for underlying shale deposits.
• The internal friction angles of the overlying soil and sand and gravel deposits vary
between 26 and 45 degrees.
• The analysis does not account for load surcharges.
• During extraction activities the pit bank is sloped at 1.25:1 to 34 feet below grade
and 3:1 to the mine floor.
The author used the software package PC-STABL to evaluate slope stability. Simulations
using Spencer, Modified Bishop and Modified Janbu methods were run to determine the
most conservative safety factor. The soil characteristics as presented earlier were used in
the analysis. Computer generated data sheets are presented in Attachment A. Terracon
of Greeley, Colorado was contracted to conduct a geotechnical investigation to determine
soil strength properties in the area of the mine. There report is provided as Attachment B.
A review of Attachment A shows proposed bank profiles are stable with a calculated safety
factor of between 1.27 and 1.30 during mine side dewatered conditions. Simulations for pit
side flood conditions (static water surface) indicate a safety factor of 1.69.
Discussion
Slope failure analyses for proposed open cut gravel operations at the Great Western
Sugar site indicate that the modeled slope cuts will be stable for dewatered or static
water table conditions. Using a consistent slope of 1.25:1 a Safety Factor of
Slope Stability Analysis
Varra Gravel Operation—Great Western Sugar
Greeley,Colorado
Page 3
approximately 0.86 was calculated. Trial and error was used to determine the
appropriate slope beneath the well graded gravel deposits (assumed to be the most
valuable commodity). A slope of 3:1 is recommended at a depth of 30 feet below grade
based on soil conditions encountered in the Terracon investigation. Steeper cut slopes
of less than 3:1 may be implemented if the apparent cohesion is greater than those
reported by Terracon.
The high permeability of the bank material reduces the potential for excessive pore
pressures within the bank during rapid drawdown events such as dewatering. If any
significant modifications to proposed slopes occur this analysis should be considered
invalid.
Comments
The discussions and recommendations in this report represent our professional opinions.
Our conclusions, opinions and recommendations are based from information available at
this time and we do not guarantee that undiscovered conditions will not become evident in
the future. CGRS' report was prepared in accordance with currently accepted engineering
practices at this time and location and no other warranties, representations or certifications
are implied or intended.
This report was prepared by CGRS, INC.
Date: February 28, 2011
Joby L. Adams, P.G.
Principal/Hydrogeologist
REFERENCES
Schneider, P.A., 1983,Shallow groundwater in the Boulder—Fort Collins—Greeley area,
Colorado, 1975-77: U.S. Geological Survey Water Resources Investigation Report
83-4058.
FIGURES
J I '\\ f / P !L- E A It•. \((��E}r..-' N T
1% :. E E - s •( _.691.7 rtiM vim_ oe. o irlCtlpn VaJIev J/ '=r _
• •1 L. rid 4 �‘ a=p(\...+4e■
.,• it o, ( -. �/ - rs _ i_.
1e` w
A L L V
•,' `` 1 „v.,-_ r .6.>
(� 1/ `'' V O E
'^I .Imo: .` • _• P:An..• X04U
;.. ��• 'f. e4-7- .4Yeaef - „ I ..(0/
4662 eJ 6 ..
is �'— ;• ' ` `Y"••■ `'�"!¢et %lc fl!1 t •�,N f-�
- N ,"=' )) j_)\- 'r-/-----
-4,1r&,_...,-- i,..),1,-) 2"'-',-zi - -.
�<
x , T ! SL. 10 ( I its0yd T•• __,.... .1./
A
,.x . €: / �SITE LOCATION ( ':, � _: �;I 11'
+ ar I In ; .T� ) ,lin7 I- �6q. ...—. .....• ---.3____,.,,_1 -.,:• 3. i L.
I� `�I \ • �'fP ---.i 1 El(T(1n _ 'f' �S+
.t1 f • .�• a•, ,i•• . rI: —, �.I • ,5triw - ,' • •e
�' 7 F E �' `� _i
boa" ■ ,. J,7 - F ,. • 4 _- I' `•
1 ._ - _---b— . .44:....-: _ _ ;4, „,,,wr,—,
al
Iiiii n J 16.• L\ .6m a�i_-`3h¢nwi t+1i5 I� -.4625.
as I.' I Iii, '�1`".E:
r I.�7 , I C t /
, :`% / :• D 1 i
rMy ..- a _ .YS - 1 MIFC.
9'R• a " I000 FEET , .-. ___ ._. .._1000 METERS
Mop anted uilh TOPOh9 02(U12 Netimul O.oggephi.(.vww.neton.1geog,.pI, comEopO)
N FIGURE 1
GREAT WESTERN SUGAR PROPERTY
SITE LOCATION MAP
VARRA COMPANIES GREELEY,COLORADO
PROJECT NO. PREPARED BY
ENVIRONMENTAL.
12539AA KJW CONSTRUCTION
WELD COUNTY,COLORADO COMPLIANCE
SEE SCALE ABOVE DATE REVIEWED BY
10/25/2010 JLA
ATTACHMENT A
PCSTABL MODEL RESULTS
I I till I IIIIII I I I I I I I I I I I . C?
__ _ __ _ __ ____ _-__ ____
1 I I I I I 1 1 / 1 1 1 I I I 1 I I I 1 1 I I ,t,
I I 1 1 1 1 I IIIIII I I I I I I I I I I I
I I 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 I IIIIII 1 III
I I I I I I I IIIIII I IIIIII I I t 1 aU
I I 1 1 I 1 I I I I I I I II
IIIIII I III
I I I I 1 1 I I I I I I I . I I I I I . 1 I I I 1
•
I I I I I 1 I I
I I I I II 1 I - e}
TTLYr1rrH
C7
I 1 1 1 1 1 I 1
I 1 1 1 1 1 1 I
CCD I 1 1 I 1 I I I c.:.
1 I 1 I I I I I
yI 1 1 1 1 1 1 i
S'V 1 I I 1 1 I I 1
1 I I I I 1 1 I Q
CI
1 1 1 I 1 1 1 I PI
I I
O.. --;----;--,--;--.-I -4--;----;---- 1 C
co
O1 I IIII 1 I h
1 1 II 1 1 1 CD 1 1 1 1 1 I 1
1 1 1 I 1 1 1
1 1 1 1 I I U 1
O G_ — 1 1
1 1 e 1 O 1 1 I - 5-4
1 I 1 1 1 I 1
1 1 1 1 C 1 1 i •
1 1 1 1 •� 1 1 1
LL I 1 1 C 1 I
I 1 1 •- 1 I .
1 I I C` I 1
I I I I (u I Ii - C2
CA 1 CNI a+
1 1`
I C
CO: L"t
tiV 1
l
1 , PI C7
1 F
1 1 ,A
1 N.
1 =
I 1
TS 1 a
I I I I I . 4'-
I I I I I
1 1 1
CDI 1 1 1
E ____J__l_J__L_J__L___-L__-_J
1 1 1 1 1
I 1 1 1
1 1 1 1
13) 1 1 1 1 [-�
fVR/ 1 1_. II 4ll 'i ,
. � 1 I 1 w
: 1 1 1 1 1
nl. -I g ' A M - 1 1 1 1 1 1
l;'IMI� I` FYI
I 1 1 1 I II
O I . 1 1 1 1 1
E I- ,Li) CD
I I I 1 I 1 1
W O 1; I ,_ 1 1
6 I cli ci Q 1 1 (' 1 1
ar. • r 1 + I II
t a
I N J•1 5'Iti_ -CI _; o I 1 1 1
1 t 1 1 1 •
' -g c ttl
I 4 V r- Y C 0 1 1 1 1 1 I I 1 1 I. 1 I I 1 1 I
+ E I 1 1 1 1 Q 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 t 1 1 I
j
II I I lYO11I1111111iI ' --! i1i1IiiiTi ! i"i
---- -- - 'm 1 ,
•.'?;...;...;•••;•• ^.;•.•;...;..t ...I... ...I..•I...I.-.I... ...I--• ...I... ...I-..I...I•••I••-I ..I. .I... . .I...I...I.
CD
O
9
1D
——I--1--T--T--r--r--r----1--1--1--T--T--r--r--r----1--1--1--T--r--r--r-------1--1--1--T--r—-r— .co_
1 1 t t I I I 1 1 0-7
1 1 1 1
a III I I
If III I 0
A
1 1 1 1
II II I I I
O
— --l--T--T--f--r--f'-----I--7n-9--T— A
1 1 1 1 I 1 1
II III 1 I
II III 1 I
1 1 1 1 1 I 1 lh-�1
N. I 1 1 I I II [`7
rci I 1 1 1 I 1 1
II III II O
1O
.fie 1 1 1 1 1 I r�y
1 1 1 1 II
I 1 1 1 i 1
I) 1 1 1 1 I I 0
CL co
O
.= o
to A
o
I 0
M I'
I 1 1 1 I I /
Ldm 1 I I I t 1 I
fl III II = o
E
I I I di
. . . . I I 1 I 1 1 ALL
' till I 1 e-
C N
1 1 I t I 1 ''
1 1 I 1 1 1 1 II U
__L__L__L__nn .r
1 1 1 If 1 1 r'• 4..�'
1 I 1 1 I 1 1
1 1 I I 1 I
I 1 1 1 1 1 O�y
'.d`
1 1 1 1 t 1 1 It-
1 1 1 1 1 I ti
COO 1 1 I I I I 1
t�f'� 1 1 II 1
C N
i
0 t • O
1
CD
1 ,--
co 0 O
O szi N o o 6 0
6. Q t7 V
U N-
' ONO V In +r1 I- tO O1 --L- 0
u1
qp uJ ~J 4-
1 O 1J O al m at
43
„ v- I- v- 4- It- `` ----- I
.Q L. 7 7 5 rJ' 7 ""J I
v7 C7t� r c [y.Vitot6U7 (t) VI000r} (/7
i
NI.
c ti h 0 $ 2 , 8 2 2 0 0 0 L~ Lra n L0 LLfi Cs) a# l•-• d� d' w,
V' s! 11t V. V' V V 'p V V 'p V V ' '. '�' q. V V' V' V ' ' ' r'1' 't 'p Ni- '°
pC.�
-----'1--r--r--r--r--r----1--1--1--r--r--r--r--r----1--1--1--r--r--r--r-------1--1--1--r--r--r N
I I 1 I I I I 1 I 1 I 1 I ice]
1 1 1
1 1 I I _ �y
I I 1 I :`•:
1 1 I 1
I I I 1
1 1 1
I 1 1 I
1 1 I I
1 1 I I
I 1 1 0
_�--1--+--+- L 1 ---- --�--+- +- - CNI
CO I I I I I D7
I I I I 1 c,
0
1 1 1 1
1 1 1 1
I' 1 1 1 1
1 1 / 1 ci
--J--J--1--1--L--�--L-----I--J__J__1-" 0:gi CV
CA L
a
1 -
2 0
- il
I I I 1 I I
I 1 I1 1
1I 1 1 1
�p 1 i 1 1 I I 4....4VJ I 1 1 1
FIS
'gip 1 1 1 I 05
1 I I I 1 1 d (L
00 1 I .-
,
N-
I I I , 1
I I I 1 1 C:) Vy
1 1 1
Le 1 I 1
1 1 1 1
II I - 4
I 1 I 1
1 1 I
1 I I • 0
E .I
T
r
-Y-Y-1--T-- 0¢
g - d0' ,
I Ch e b I
: I
rte _ tom. A --'--,--,--,-
el
/yj1am� h - -- , m.
do
y - .G' � C O �
LLI '""' 1 ',
�j CY iy
1 P7 op;
0 0C_1rag- 0 ,0
I
"iI
if
46 0 0 0 0 00000 .:3000000000000. 000000000
grpPS2t $ 2 2g 222 21 n2 �d' 4r44; 4
.r ,r 4 4- 4 .4' . �d° .h 4 ,4. 114. 4. ,m. d. 4 4 4 4 4' b' V '0' me •r
ATTACHMENT B
GEOTECHNICAL REPORT
Geotechnical EngineeringReport
Great Western Sugar
Ash Avenue
Greeley, Colorado
January 17 , 2011
Terracon Project No . 21105019
Prepared for:
CGRS , Inc.
Fort Collins, Colorado
Prepared by:
Terracon Consultants , Inc.
1289 1st Avenue
Greeley , Colorado 80631
Phone: 970-351 -0460
Fax: 970-353-8639
Offices Nationwide Established in 1965
Employee - Owned terracon . com llèrracon
Geoteclinical Environmental Construction Materials Facilities
January 17, 2011 1lerracon
CGRS, Inc.
1301 Academy Court
Fort Collins, Colorado 80524
Attn: Mr. Kyle Campbell
Re: Geotechnical Engineering Report
Great Western Sugar
Ash Avenue, Greeley, Colorado
Terracon Project No. 21105019
Dear Mr. Campbell:
Terracon Consultants, Inc. (Terracon) has completed the geotechnical engineering services for
the above referenced project. These services were performed in general accordance with our
proposal number P20100220 dated November 29, 2010. This report presents the findings of
the subsurface exploration, laboratory test results, and our opinions regarding soil properties for
this phase of the proposed project.
We appreciate the opportunity to be of service to you on this project. If you have any questions
concerning this report, or if we may be of further service, please contact us.
Sincerely,
Terracon Consultants, Inc.
Jason Mapes, P.E. Eric D. Bernhardt,` ,5.
Geotechnical Engineer Geotechnical Department,Manager
Reviewed By: John Graves,P.G.—Senior AssociatelFort Collins Office Manager
Copies To: Addressee(1 via email)
Reliable r Responsive•Convenient•Innovative
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
Executive Summary
1.0 INTRODUCTION 1
2.0 PROJECT INFORMATION 1
2.1 Site Location and Description 1
3.0 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS 2
3.1 Typical Subsurface Profile 2
3.2 Groundwater 2
4.0 LABORATORY TEST RESULTS 3
APPENDIX A— FIELD EXPLORATION
Exhibit A-1 Boring Location Diagram
Exhibit A-2 Field Exploration Description
Exhibits A-3 to A-4 Boring Logs
APPENDIX B - LABORATORY TESTING
Exhibit B-1 Laboratory Testing
Exhibit B-2 to B-4 Laboratory Testing Results
Appendix C—SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS
Exhibit C-1 General Notes
Exhibit C-2 Unified Soil Classification Properties
Exhibit C-3 General Notes— Description of Rock
Reliable• Responsive■ Convenient• Innovative
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT
Great Western Sugar
Ash Avenue
Greeley, Colorado
Terracon Project No. 21105019
January 17, 2011
1.0 INTRODUCTION
A subsurface exploration report has been completed for the project to be located at 1200 Ash
Avenue in Greeley, Colorado.
As part of our subsurface exploration for this phase of the project, a total of two (2) borings were
drilled at the site. The borings were drilled at locations selected by the client to depths of about
28 to 47 feet below existing grades.
The Logs of Borings, Boring Location Diagram, and a description of our field exploration of the
current study are included in Appendix A of this report.
The purpose of these services is to provide information relative to:
• Subsurface soil and bedrock conditions • Groundwater conditions
■ Soil engineering properties
2.0 PROJECT INFORMATION
2.1 Site Location and Description
Item Description
Location 1200 Ash Avenue in Greeley, Colorado
Existing site features Several Noble Energy tank batteries and access roads
North: Cache La Poudre River
East: Birch Avenue
Surrounding developments
West:Ash Avenue
South: East 16th Street
Current ground cover Sparse native weeds and grasses
Relatively flat with several abandoned sugar beet waste storage
Existing topography
ponds throughout the site.
Reliable• Responsive• Convenient• Innovative
1
Geotechnical Engineering Report lierracon
Great Western Sugar• Greeley, Colorado
January 17, 2011 •Terracon Project No. 21105019
3.0 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS
3.1 Typical Subsurface Profile
Specific conditions encountered at each boring location are indicated on the individual boring
logs included in Appendix A of this report. Stratification boundaries on the boring logs represent
the approximate location of changes in soil types; in-situ, the transition between materials may
be gradual. Based on the results of the borings, subsurface conditions on the project site can
be generalized for each boring as follows:
Boring No. 1
Material Description Approximate Depth Interval of Consistency/Density/Hardness
Stratum(feet)
Topsoil—silty clay with sand 0 to 1.5 -
Silty sand to silty gravel 1.5 to 10 -
Poorly graded gravel with
10 to 30 Medium dense
cobbles
Well graded sand with silt and 30 to 47 Medium dense
gravel
Boring No. 2
Material Description Approximate Depth Interval of Consistency/Density/Hardness
Stratum(feet)
Fill—silty and clayey sand 0 to 4
Lean clay 4 to 10.5 -
Poorly graded gravel with silt 12 to 26.5 Medium dense
and sand
Claystone bedrock 26.5 to 27.9 Hard to very hard
3.2 Groundwater
Groundwater was encountered at a depth of about 11 feet below existing grade in Boring No. 1
and about 18 feet below existing grade in Boring No. 2 during drilling operations. The borings
were backfilled upon the completion of drilling.
These observations represent groundwater conditions at the time of the field exploration, and
may not be indicative of other times or at other locations. Groundwater levels can be expected
to fluctuate with varying seasonal and weather conditions, and other factors.
Reliable• Responsive• Convenient• Innovative
2
Geotechnical Engineering Report l��rracon
Great Western Sugar• Greeley, Colorado
January 17, 2011 • Terracon Project No. 21105019
4.0 LABORATORY TEST RESULTS & ENGINEERING PROPERTIES
As requested by the client, samples were obtained from Boring No. 1 at depths of approximately
20 feet and 45 feet below existing grade, and from Boring No. 2 at a depth of approximately 25
feet below existing grade. Moisture, density, and strength testing was requested on each
sample. As shown on the grain size distribution data presented ion Exhibit B-2, we encountered
soils with significant amounts of %-inch to 2-inch or larger diameter gravel particles at the
requested sampling depths in Boring No. 1. Typical soil strength laboratory testing including
direct shear, triaxial, or unconfined compressive strength testing is not appropriate for these
types of soils. We elected to perform soil classification testing of these soils and correlate the
soil classification information with typical soil strength parameters. We performed direct shear
testing of the sample collected from Boring No. 2. The table below summarizes our test results
as well as ranges of recommended shear strength parameters for the soils encountered.
Sample Soil Classification Moisture Dry Density Internal Angle Cohesion(psf)
I.D. (USCS,AASHTO) Content(%) (pcf) of Friction(deg)
1 @ 20' GP,A 1-a 20-25 115-120T 4045c OT
1 @ 45' SW-SM,A-1-b 20-25 115-120T 32-36' 01-
2 @ 25' GP,A-1-a 27 118 28 731
1. Estimated values based on soil classification, relative density, and our experience with similar soil
types.
Direct shear testing was performed for the sample collected from Boring No. 2 at a depth of
about 25 feet in general accordance with ASTM D 3080. For direct shear testing, we remolded
the sample at approximately 3 percent greater than optimum moisture content at a density of
about 95 percent of the maximum dry density as determined by ASTM D 698. Based on our
experience with similar soil types, cohesion values are typically zero (0) pounds per square foot
(psf) for gravels with less than 20 percent passing the No. 200 sieve. Additionally, the internal
angle of friction is typically between 40 and 45 degrees for medium dense gravels with less than
20 percent passing the No. 200 sieve. Therefore, we believe the direct shear test results for the
sample collected from Boring No. 2 (Sample I.D. 2 @ 25' shown in the table above) are not
typical for this type of material and we recommend using the ranges of soil parameters shown
for site soils presented in the table above (Sample I.D.'s 1 @ 20' and 1 @ 45').
Consideration should be given to the shear strength parameters used for design on the project.
Actual test values should be used in conjunction with published ranges of values based on soil
classifications, relative densities, and experience. We believe the shear strength parameters
listed in the table above are appropriate for the soils encountered in our borings at this site.
Reliable• Responsive• Convenient• Innovative
3
APPENDIX A
FIELD EXPLORATION
C;
Z
LE
R. W
ySi.litlif s5fil r >
r ,A Iti ft .\ ' i ...4" • ir
_t/j:
} a•
,wr'
i . Ali
: till C.9
it ' 1 ,.!. i s 1. . , e 0 D
3
r sic,
,j , Z I w OJ o
i\\\\4‘ - •ft
_
W Q p
1(• i t,4 , Q ` C Q y o
_ :le,' Wo N w
�— C7 0
• ` \ Z Q o
+ n W
I ..
'• s. t 1 i ' :: -\1/4` 3I :IL -3 • i Z
f. 1 - t Wg k '
.. !F. ` • 1 ilk cy
. ... Fib
r4 : gib, , , / , :, iv_ ,
e
\ ID ei c
"it
` 13
I C
• d w
m
• \ I C
I ;� ‘ill'
; ` C a A 01
1 i li . . CV r
I ..4fi 4 k , e; '2 ;-ct
4 A . , Ln
It i ii c
Shill >
•' .! 0 om it
_
S. } w w
Pil
, En
N
m le
I C ti O U j
• 5 ilk i
77
y �1
rt C
• 't 1 ' E
k . * °
` MS C C
..� . r a Via:. °
. i titritst 4— 1 _ . ' .. 4:.1 1O: ..-obw CI It
• t' ,r' . V f
�... �� ~ c O in W
c.
' .: Mir i`ai r
a> CP
O --
z °
Z
Field Exploration
The scope of the services performed for this project included site reconnaissance by a
geotechnical engineer, subsurface exploration program and laboratory testing.
Two test borings were performed on December 17, 2010. The borings were advanced to
approximate depths of 28 to 47 feet at the approximate locations shown on the Boring Location
Diagram, Exhibit A-1. The borings were advanced with a truck-mounted drilling rig, utilizing 4-
inch-diameter hollow-stem augers.
The borings were located in the field by referencing existing site features. Approximate ground
surface elevations at the boring locations were not obtained. The accuracy of boring locations
and elevations should only be assumed to the level implied by the methods used to determine
each.
A lithologic log of each boring was recorded by the geotechnical engineer during the drilling
operation. The logs of borings are presented in Appendix A. Relatively undisturbed samples
were obtained at selected intervals utilizing a standard split-spoon, ring barrel, and California
barrel samplers. Penetration resistance values were recorded in general accordance with the
standard penetration test (SPT) or similar manner with the California barrel. This test consists of
driving the sampler into the ground with a 140-pound hammer free-falling through a distance of 30
inches. The number of blows required to advance the sampler the final 12 inches, or the interval
indicated on the boring log, is recorded as the penetration resistance value which is recorded or
correlated to a standard penetration resistance value (N-value). The blow count values are
indicated on the boring logs at the respective sample depths. California barrel sample blow counts
are not considered N-values.
A CME automatic SPT hammer was used to advance the samplers in the borings performed on
this site. A greater efficiency is typically achieved with the automatic hammer compared to the
conventional safety hammer operated with a cathead and rope. Published correlations between
the SPT values and soil properties are based on the lower efficiency cathead and rope method.
This higher efficiency affects the standard penetration resistance blow count value by increasing
the penetration per hammer blow over what would be obtained using the cathead and rope
method. The effect of the automatic hammer's efficiency has been considered in the interpretation
and analysis of the subsurface information for this report.
The penetration test provides a reasonable indication of the in-place density of sandy type
materials, but only provides an indication of the relative stiffness of cohesive materials since the
blow count in these soils may be affected by the soils moisture content. In addition, considerable
care should be exercised in interpreting the blow counts in bedrock and gravelly soils, particularly
where the size of the gravel particle exceeds the inside diameter of the sampler.
Reliable• Responsive• Convenient• Innovative Exhibit A-2
LOG OF BORING NO. 1 Page 1 of 1
CLIENT
CGRS, Inc.
SITE 1200 Ash Avenue PROJECT
Greeley,Colorado Great Western Sugar
SAMPLES TESTS
o
o c
DESCRIPTION w z H z i
t = CO w > CO ww z zz
m w 0 3 wH D O
Hz
L9 a o 3 H m `OO 0 0. ELT,
L9 0 CO z
TOPSOIL
.'1.5 —
\silty clay with sand, dark brown / _
SILTY SAND —
C4.5 \dark brown, slightly moist / 5 _
°1•< SILTY GRAVEL =
p with sand and cobbles, increasing =
,O C coarseness with depth
i°v 0110 70 -
POORLY GRADED GRAVEL V -
o3D< with cobbles, brown to black with odor =
,O C =
o °< 15
o p =
aC -
3°< - 1AJGER 12
,O C 20 _ 2 RS- 0 24
o�• <
>O C —
o�C 25-
_
>OC _
b,• b<
C C 30 30
WELL GRADED SAND with SILT and
GRAVEL =
medium dense,wet —
35
40 _
: : : : _
_
45 = 3 SS 16 24 12
°:• :•47 _
BOTTOM OF BORING
0
U
H
K
0
The stratification lines represent the approximate boundary lines
m between soil and rock types: in-situ,the transition may be gradual.
WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS,ft BORING STARTED 12-17-10
Eg WL o WL I 11 WD Y Backfilled lierracon RIG CME-55 FOREMAN
BORING COMPLETED 1EDB
o WL ExhibitA-3 LOGGED EDB JOB# 21105019
m
LOG OF BORING NO. 2 Page 1 of 1
CLIENT
CGRS, Inc.
SITE 1200 Ash Avenue PROJECT
Greeley, Colorado Great Western Sugar
SAMPLES TESTS
U DESCRIPTION 2 w z
= W c H z~
x m > m ¢w Z Zz
m OW
O HZ 0 CC
w fU z m >0 Co. ?1,7)
L7 w z
FILL
silty sand/clayey sand,dry to slightly moist,
a light brown
CLAYEY SAND 5-
brown to dark brown, moist
10.5 10
12 LEAN CLAY
\dark brown to black, very moist
POORLY GRADED GRAVEL with SILT
and SAND 15
trace cobbles, brown =_
o Q
20—
)O
= 1AJGER
o
25 _ 2 SS 18 27
26.5
2Zs BEDROCK 3 MC 9 88/O n 15 118_
\claystone, hard to very hard, olive/rust/gray
BOTTOM OF BORING
0
0
c9
OD
z
0
U
L
0
0
0 The stratification lines represent the approximate boundary lines
°' between soil and rock types: in-situ,the transition may be gradual.
o
WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS,ft BORING STARTED 12-17-10
7-10
o WLWL 18 WD Backfilled lierracon
R GBORING COMPLETED CM FOREMAN I2 1EDB
o WL Exhibit A-4 LOGGED EDB JOB# 21105019
m
APPENDIX B
LABORATORY TESTING
Laboratory Testing
The soil samples retrieved during the field exploration were returned to the laboratory for
observation by the project geotechnical engineer. At that time, the field descriptions were
reviewed and an applicable laboratory testing program was formulated to determine engineering
properties of the subsurface materials.
Laboratory tests were conducted on selected soil samples. The results of these tests are
presented in Appendix B. The laboratory tests were performed in general accordance with
applicable locally accepted standards. Soil samples were classified in general accordance with
the Unified Soil Classification System described in Appendix C. Rock samples were visually
classified in general accordance with the General Notes in Appendix C.
• Water Content • Plasticity Index
■ Grain Size Distribution • Dry Density
• Maximum Dry Unit Weight ■ Shear Strength
Reliable• Responsive• Convenient• Innovative Exhibit B-1
U.S.SIEVE OPENING IN INCHES I U.S.SIEVE NUMBERS I HYDROMETER
4 2 1 1/2 3 6 10 16 30 50 100 200
6 3 15 3/4 3/8 4 8 14 20 40 60 140
100 I t . 1 ]I I I III I I I
95 1 m
90
85
1\
80
75
70 -
i-•
65
2 1
T• 60
A\ \
m55
tt
z50
LL
-• 45
w
cc 40 •
w \o_
35
30 -
25 . .
20
15 . :Nein
10
5 � _
0 •
100 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001
GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS
COBBLES GRAVEL SAND SILT OR CLAY
coarse I fine coarse I medium I fine
Specimen Identification Classification LL PL PI Cc Cu
• 1 18.0ft POORLY GRADED GRAVEL(GP) NP NP NP 8.33 21.24
m 1 45.0ft WELL-GRADED SAND with SILT and GRAVEL(SW-SM) NP NP NP 1.09 10.69
♦ 2 22.0ft POORLY GRADED GRAVEL with SILT and SAND(GP-G ) NP NP NP 0.64 120.79
i-
0
0
oi
Specimen Identification D100 D60 D30 D10 %Gravel %Sand %Silt %Clay
2 • 1 18.0ft 50 24.97 15.641 1.176 88.6 7.3 4.1
o m 1 45.0ft 25 1.767 0.565 0.165 15.2 78.9 5.9
p ♦ 2 22.0ft 37.5 7.872 0.574 46.9 42.2 10.9
0
2
0
GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION
H Project: Great Western Sugar
1 ierracon Site: 1200 Ash Avenue Greeley, Colorado
Job#: 21105019
0 Exhibit B-2
lierracon
4172 Center Park Drive
Colorado Springs,Colorado 80917
Ph(719)597-2116 Fax(719)597-2117
• DIRECT SHEAR
ASTM D 3080
CLIENT: CGRS, Inc. DATE OF TEST: 12/29/10
PROJECT: Great Western Sugar
LOCATION: Boring No. 2 at 25 feet
TERRACON NO. 21105019 CLASSIFICATION: GP
SAMPLE DATA TEST RESULTS
TEST SPECIMEN NO. 1 2 3 4 5
NORMAL PRESSURE(psf) 1401 2579 5152 4844 2349
SHEAR STRESS(psf) 1313 2243 3408 3342 2094
ULTIMATE FRICTION ANGLE 28
EFFECTIVE COHESION(psf) 731
y= 0.5355x+731.64
Direct Shear Test R2= 0.98
6000 - -.
5000 -.
C-
o. 4000
N
°rte, 3000 - -
N
N
2000 - -- -- -
W
•
1000 - - --- -- _
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000
Normal Stress(psf)
Exhibit B-3
APPENDIX C
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS
GENERAL NOTES
DRILLING&SAMPLING SYMBOLS:
SS: Split Spoon-1-'/8"I.D., 2"O.D., unless otherwise noted HS: Hollow Stem Auger
ST: Thin-Walled Tube—2"O.D., 3"O.D., unless otherwise noted PA: Power Auger(Solid Stem)
RS: Ring Sampler-2.42"I.D., 3"O.D.,unless otherwise noted HA: Hand Auger
DB: Diamond Bit Coring-4", N, B RB: Rock Bit
BS: Bulk Sample or Auger Sample WB Wash Boring or Mud Rotary
The number of blows required to advance a standard 2-inch O.D. split-spoon sampler (SS) the last 12 inches of the total 18-inch
penetration with a 140-pound hammer falling 30 inches is considered the"Standard Penetration"or"N-value".
WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENT SYMBOLS:
WL: Water Level WS: While Sampling BCR: Before Casing Removal
WCI: Wet Cave in WD: While Drilling ACR: After Casing Removal
DCI: Dry Cave in AB: After Boring N/E: Not Encountered
Water levels indicated on the boring logs are the levels measured in the borings at the times indicated. Groundwater levels at other
times and other locations across the site could vary. In pervious soils,the indicated levels may reflect the location of groundwater. In low
permeability soils,the accurate determination of groundwater levels may not be possible with only short-term observations.
DESCRIPTIVE SOIL CLASSIFICATION: Soil classification is based on the Unified Soil Classification System. Coarse Grained Soils
have more than 50%of their dry weight retained on a#200 sieve; their principal descriptors are: boulders, cobbles,gravel or sand. Fine
Grained Soils have less than 50%of their dry weight retained on a#200 sieve;they are principally described as clays if they are plastic,
and silts if they are slightly plastic or non-plastic. Major constituents may be added as modifiers and minor constituents may be added
according to the relative proportions based on grain size. In addition to gradation, coarse-grained soils are defined on the basis of their
in-place relative density and fine-grained soils on the basis of their consistency.
CONSISTENCY OF FINE-GRAINED SOILS RELATIVE DENSITY OF COARSE-GRAINED SOILS
Unconfined Standard Penetration Standard Penetration
Compressive or N-value(SS) Consistency or N-value(SSI Relative Density
Strength,Qu, psf Blows/Ft. Blows/Ft.
<500 0-1 Very Soft 0—3 Ven/Loose
500-1,000 2-4 Soft 4—9 Loose
1,000-2,000 4-8 Medium Stiff 10-29 Medium Dense
2,000-4,000 8-15 Stiff 30-50 Dense
4,000-8,000 15-30 Very Stiff >50 Very Dense
8,000+ >30 Hard
RELATIVE PROPORTIONS OF SAND AND GRAVEL GRAIN SIZE TERMINOLOGY
Descriptive Term(sj Percent of Major Component Particle Size
of other constituents Dry Weight of Sample
Trace < 15 Boulders Over 12 in. (300mm)
With 15—29 Cobbles 12 in.to 3 in. (300mm to 75mm)
Modifier ≥30 Gravel 3 in.to#4 sieve(75mm to 4.75mm)
Sand #4 to#200 sieve(4.75 to 0.075mm)
Silt or Clay Passing#200 Sieve(0.075mm)
RELATIVE PROPORTIONS OF FINES PLASTICITY DESCRIPTION
Descriptive Term(s) Percent of Term Plastici
of other constituents Dry Weight Index
Trace <5 Non-plastic 0
With 5-12 Low 1-10
Modifier > 12 Medium 11-30
High >30
Exhibit C-1
UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM
Criteria for Assigning Group Symbols and Group Names Using Laboratory Tests" Soil Classification
Group
Symbol Group Name°
Coarse Grained Soils Gravels Clean Gravels Cu≥4 and 1 ≤Cc≤3` GW Well-graded gravel`
More than 50%retained More than 50%of coarse Less than 5%fines` Cu<4 and/or 1 >Cc>3` GP Poorly graded gravel`
fraction retained on
on No.200 sieve No.4 sieve Gravels with Fines Fines classify as ML or MH GM Silty gravel`°"
More than 12%foes` Fines classify as CL or CH GC Clayey gravel`QH
Sands Clean Sands Cu≥6 and 1 ≤Cc≤3` SW Well-graded sand'
50%or more of coarse Less than 5%foes° Cu<6 and/or 1>Cc>3` SP Poorly graded sand'
fraction passes
No.4 sieve Sands with Fines Fines classify as ML or MH SM Silty sand`"
More than 12%fines° Fines Classify as CL or CH SC Clayey sand`"
Fine-Grained Soils Silts and Clays inorganic PI>7 and plots on or above"A°line' CL Lean clay"`M
50%or more passes the Liquid limit less than 50 PI<4 or plots below"A"Tine' ML Silt"LLM
No.200 sieve
organic Liquid limit-oven dried Organic clay"`
<0.75 OL ""Liquid limit-not dried Organic silt"L N°
Silts and Clays inorganic PI plots on or above"A"line CH Fat clay"LM
Liquid limit 50 or more PI lots below"A"line MH Elastic Silt."
organic Liquid limit-oven dried Organic clay"'<0.75 OH
Liquid limit-not dried Organic silt"L M°
Highly organic soils Primarily organic matter,dark in color,and organic odor PT Peat
"Based on the material passing the 3-in. (75-mm)sieve "If fines are organic,add"with organic fines"to group name.
°If field sample contained cobbles or boulders,or both,add"with cobbles ' If soil contains≥15%gravel,add"with gravel"to group name.
or boulders,or both"to group name. J If Atterberg limits plot in shaded area,soil is a CL-ML,silty clay.
cGravels with 5 to 12%fines require dual symbols: GW-GM well-graded "If soil contains 15 to 29%plus No.200,add"with sand"or"with
gravel with silt,GW-GC well-graded gravel with clay,GP-GM poorly gravel,"whichever is predominant.
graded gravel with silt,GP-GC poorly graded gravel with clay. L If soil contains≥30%plus No.200 predominantly sand,add
°Sands with 5 to 12%fines require dual symbols: SW-SM well-graded "sandy"to group name.
sand with silt,SW-SC well-graded sand with clay,SP-SM poorly graded M °
sand with silt,SP-SC poorly graded sand with clay If soil contains≥30/plus No.200,predominantly gravel,
add"gravelly"to group name.
(D30)2 "PI≥4 and plots on or above"A"line.
°Cu=Deo/Dio Cc=
Du x Deo ° PI<4 or plots below"A"line.
F If soil contains≥15%sand,add"with sand"to group name. °PI plots on or above"A"line.
elf fines classify as CL-ML,use dual symbol GC-GM,or SC-SM. ° PI plots below"A"line.
7
For classification of fine-grained '
soils and fins-grained traction
I
50 F-of coarse-grained soils -- __.. __..-;•>c,/%t--- t Jpo '.,
Equation of'W-Ilne J, +P
tl Horizontal at PI=4 to LL-25.5.
W 40 I- then PI�73(LL-20) __ _-_...._7"' 0`Oo- __ __.1____._,-----
o Equation of'tl"-line G+
? Vertical at LL--16 to PI=7,
a 30 I- them 'Pl�.9(LL-8) i ;--/I O‘' - IL ....
20. •
- . MHorOH
ai ,'
10 ._ -- - --)-
4 - I MLorOL
0 10 16 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110
LIQUID LIMIT(LL1
Exhibit C-2
Form 111-6/98
GENERAL NOTES
Description of Rock Properties
WEATHERING
Fresh Rock fresh, crystals bright,few joints may show slight staining. Rock rings under hammer if crystalline.
Very slight Rock generally fresh,joints stained,some joints may show thin clay coatings, crystals in broken face show
bright. Rock rings under hammer if crystalline.
Slight Rock generally fresh,joints stained,and discoloration extends into rock up to 1 in. Joints may contain clay.
In granitoid rocks some occasional feldspar crystals are dull and discolored. Crystalline rocks ring under
hammer.
Moderate Significant portions of rock show discoloration and weathering effects. In granitoid rocks, most feldspars are
dull and discolored; some show clayey. Rock has dull sound under hammer and shows significant loss of
strength as compared with fresh rock.
Moderately severe All rock except quartz discolored or stained. In granitoid rocks, all feldspars dull and discolored and majority
show kaolinization. Rock shows severe loss of strength and can be excavated with geologist's pick.
Severe All rock except quartz discolored or stained. Rock"fabric"clear and evident,but reduced in strength to
strong soil. In granitoid rocks,all feldspars kaolinized to some extent. Some fragments of strong rock
usually left.
Very severe All rock except quartz discolored or stained. Rock"fabric"discernible, but mass effectively reduced to"soil"
with only fragments of strong rock remaining.
Complete Rock reduced to"soil". Rock"fabric"not discernible or discernible only in small, scattered locations. Quartz
may be present as dikes or stringers.
HARDNESS(for engineering description of rock—not to be confused with Moh's scale for minerals)
Very hard Cannot be scratched with knife or sharp pick. Breaking of hand specimens requires several hard blows of
geologist's pick.
Hard Can be scratched with knife or pick only with difficulty. Hard blow of hammer required to detach hand
specimen.
Moderately hard Can be scratched with knife or pick. Gouges or grooves to 1/1 in.deep can be excavated by hard blow of
point of a geologist's pick. Hand specimens can be detached by moderate blow.
Medium Can be grooved or gouged 1/16 in.deep by firm pressure on knife or pick point. Can be excavated in small
chips to pieces about 1-in. maximum size by hard blows of the point of a geologist's pick.
Soft Can be gouged or grooved readily with knife or pick point. Can be excavated in chips to pieces several
inches in size by moderate blows of a pick point. Small thin pieces can be broken by finger pressure.
Very soft Can be carved with knife. Can be excavated readily with point of pick. Pieces 1-in. or more in thickness can
be broken with finger pressure.Can be scratched readily by fingernail.
Joint,Bedding and Foliation Spacing in Rock'
Spacing Joints Bedding/Foliation
Less than 2 in. Very close Very thin
2 in.—1 ft. Close Thin
1 ft.—3 ft. Moderately close Medium
3 ft.—10 ft. Wide Thick
More than 10 ft. Very wide Very thick
Rock Quality Designator(RQD)° Joint Openness Descriptors
ROD, as a percentage Diagnostic description Openness Descriptor
Exceeding 90 Excellent No Visible Separation Tight
90-75 Good Less than 1/32 in. Slightly Open
75—50 Fair 1/32 to 1/8 in. Moderately Open
50-25 Poor 1/8 to 3/8 in. Open
Less than 25 Very poor 3/8 in.to 0.1 ft. Moderately Wide
Greater than 0.1 ft. Wide
a. Spacing refers to the distance normal to the planes,of the described feature,which are parallel to each other or nearly so.
b. RQD(given as a percentage)=length of core in pieces 4 in.and longer/length of run.
References: American Society of Civil Engineers.Manuals and Reports on Engineering Practice-No.56.Subsurface Investigation for Design
and Construction of Foundations of Buildings.New York:American Society of Civil Engineers, 1976.
U.S.Department of the Interior,Bureau of Reclamation,Engineering Geology Field Manual.
Exhibit C-3
Exhibit A — Legal Description
6.4.1 EXHIBIT A— Legal Description
(1) The legal description must identify the affected land, specify affected areas and
be adequate to field locate the property. Description shall be by (a), township,
range, and section , to at least the nearest quarter-quarter section and (b),
location of the main entrance to the site reported as latitude and longitude, or the
Universal Transverse Mercator (UTM) Grid as determined from a USGS
topographic map. A metes and bounds survey description is acceptable in lieu of
township, range, and section. Where available, the street address or lot
number(s) shall be given. This information may be available from the County
Assessor's Office or U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) maps.
(2) The main entrance to the mine site shall be located based on a USGS
topographic map showing latitude and longitude or Universal Transverse
Mercator (UTM). The operator will need to specify coordinates of latitude and
longitude in degrees, minutes and seconds or in decimal degrees to an accuracy
of at least five (5) decimal places (e.g., latitude 37.12345 N, longitude 104.45678
W). For UTM, the operator will need to specify North American Datum (NAD)
1927, NAD1983, or WGS 84, and the applicable zone, measured in meters.
Legal Description modified on 14 April 2011:
A parcel of land located in part of the NW/4,NE/4 and NE/4,NW/4; Section 9; and a
portion of the S/2,S/2; Section 4; all in Township 5 North; Range 65 West; 6th P.M.;
Weld County, Colorado; more specifically beginning from the Northeast corner of
Section 9; thence 1,317.97 feet 585°0326"W to the true point of beginning at the
Northeast corner of the Parcel and Permit Boundary; then:
1258.71 feet S00°20'17"E
427.81 feet 581°14'30'W
187.76 feet S21°15'32'W
645.75 feet 562°39'37"W
254.98 feet 565°08'23"W
670.46 feet S89°30'06"W, leaving the parcel boundary and forming the West boundary
of the permit area on a line running 1652.92 feet N00°57'02'W (note: this line
separates the permit boundary from the remainder of the parcel boundary to the East
of this line); and continuing the permit boundary until it reaches the south point of
parcel 096104302034 (containing 0.69 vs. stated 0.66 acres) where Weld County parcel
information is contradicted by the geometry slightly, therefore the line is modified in
order to close said parcel along the east boundary of the same (noting that the north
and west boundary of the parcel are unchanged by the stated Weld County GIS parcel
information) hence 567.12 feet N10°01'00"E, then continuing,301
109.08 feet N89°59'36"E
314.01 feet N00°39'29"1
68.47 feet S77°53'39"E
Varra Companies,Inc. Western Sugar Reclamation Land Development Project 1
OMLR 112 Permit Application 2010
Exhibit A — Legal Description
725.94 feet N75°07'41"E
337.80 feet S88°23'21"E
19.88 feet S01°00'30"E
342.79 feet $60°42'25"E
349.71 feet S29°02'36"E
352.91 feet S35°53'24"E, to the true point of beginning, and comprising 102.18±
acres, more or less.
The mine entrance is identified on Exhibit C-2: Extraction Plan Map, and located as
identified under NAD 83 Colorado State Plane North Zone — (UTM ZONE 13):
Easting 2231009.40, Northing 396631.67.
Varra Companies, Inc. Western Sugar Reclamation Land Development Project 2
OMLR 112 Permit Application 2010
Identify Results Page 1 of 1
WELD COUNTY ASSESSOR
PROPERTY PROFILE
Account#: R0123289 Parcel#: 096104302034
Tax Area: 0683 Bordering County:
Acres: 0.66
Township Range Section Quart. Sec. Subdivison Name Block# Lot#
05 - 65 - 04 - 3 UNION COLONY LANDS - - 1
Owners Name&Address: Property Address:
VARRA COMPANIES INC Street:
8120 GAGE ST City:
FREDERICK, CO 80516-9349
Business/Complex:
Sales Summary
Sale Date Sale Price Deed Type Reception #
8/1/2007 $1,000,000 SWD 3495123
Legal Description
GR 12110-D A PARCEL OF LAND LYING PARTLY IN L4 OF SE4SW4 SEC 4& PARTLY IN Ll NE4NW4 SEC 9 5 65 (OGILVY ANNX)
BEG AT PT 270'N FROM SW COR OF L4 SE4SW4 SEC 4 THENCE SODO1'W ALONG W LN OF SAID L4&Ll 558.55' N1ODO1'E 568.3'
M/L W98.5' M/L TO POB
Land Valuation Summary
Land Type Abst Code Unit of Number of Actual Value Assessed
Measure Units Value
Industrial 0300 Acres 0.66
Land Subtotal: 0.66 $5,280 $1,530
No Buildings on Parcel
http://maps2.merrick.com/Website/W eld/setSgl.asp?cmd=QUERY&DET=PP&pin=09610... 4/14/2011
ArcIMS Viewer Page 1 of 2
5r' ti :; •� �' .. ♦� � r�
., rI I
rI•. i1 �, f 5 a. Ice �: ' { - I.''
Ty I tt I
•t 1 �, - t .:s.^ - ti 7 ^ z '—ti" ..• `
-- t.
•
71
1•
:\ `\
it I I E t ,
I !' ii. I ,r..
dir
I I rr` I
4
II1 .
i
a Il
rah ;
klr ft's: ' ' '
I y . V * I I ,
fl
+ I r'
I
t
i I .11 r
A i.K-r 0 ler ...
a 441,110,A
1/4\u _ •
11444 • •ir i
--. !1!1!1
i l. f ' w�• `a . mow+ ,
•
/I L t p}M^a s • -y`t�l 4 e to l ' '94►'.04$41gltx*ebter g 14Yuf'f
i e . 4,,.„ % ,ity��• �' tF �al• .♦<s ,f jr�g4ii�'�^� �l-�",t-- i
.7. s" e..•• ' ' ter6.�+1 ef.' - a� 't � y�y1.- .. • y`,•. cr. fM�.3. t__. 1. � _�.` �
r•R•�wrR.r.4 , 1!•
I 7`f
I ( V . •-
I Ytl yF• I
• � jt
T •'..
IMMII :44
4a,41 10444.
C JAL
I I
L 1r • .2
-
x •
IT - r- `._,•, i , a.'Ili f, wcr _ •e a lita f I � ,-_. 4. -64.- r ill
I I I
It
I _
I I ,. -
{
111 III In
http://maps2.merrick.com/website/weld/MapFrame.htm 4/14/2011
LARGE MAPS AVAILABLE
FOR VIEWING
AT
THE CLERK TO THE
BOARD 'S OFFICE ,
IN THE
PUBLIC REVIEW FILE .
Hello