The URL can be used to link to this page

Browse Search

Home My WebLink About20100326.tiff si(T,, ,sii,.. • Weld County Referral WilkMay 21, 2008 COLORADO The Weld County Department of Planning Services has received the following item for review: Applicant LaFarge West, Inc., Case Number USR-1657 do Jennifer Vecchi Please Reply By June 20, 2008 Planner Kim Ogle Project A Site Specific Development Plan and a Special Review Permit for Mineral Resource Development Facility including Open Pit Gravel Mining and materials processing in the A(Agricultural)Zone District. Legal E2 SE4 Section 25; NE4 Section 36, T6N, R67W; and W2 SW4 Section 30; NW4 Section 31, T6N, R66W of the 6th P.M., Weld County, Colorado. For precise legal see application. Location South of and adjacent to CR 64.5 and East and West of, and adjacent to CR 25. • Parcel Number 0807 25 000048; 0807 36 000037; 0805 30 000069; 0805 30 000082; 0805 31 000004 The application is submitted to you for review and recommendation. Any comments or recommendation you consider relevant to this request would be appreciated. Please reply by the above listed date so that we may give full consideration to your recommendation. Any response not received before or on this date may be deemed to be a positive response to the Department of Planning Services. If you have any further questions regarding the application, please call the Planner associated with the request. Please note that new information may be added to applications under review during the review process. If you desire to examine or obtain this additional information, please call the Department of Planning Services. You will be notified in writing of the Planning Commission date once the date is determined. ❑ We have reviewed the request and find that it does/does not comply with our Comprehensive Plan /because V We have reviewed the request and find no conflicts with our interests. ❑ See attached letter. Comments: ( .( 4] A [ V L t L1 0-/ Mt (lain /.lIc4 ani (?u o no tike /-7 -A-4/2 we-Li nGk c/ Signature l� 11 _� , Date 6., 29 _67 / , All Agency / - EXHIBIT 4Weld County Planning Dept. ❖918 10th Street, Greeley,CO.80631 4•( I 4430 2010-0326 use- , tit;),• e jc4C p yaty Referral QRULEY OFFICE ' .,AY 29 MIR May 21, 2008 C. a6 N ED COLORADO The Weld County Department of Planning Services has received the following item for review: Applicant LaFarge West, Inc., Case Number USR-1657 do Jennifer Vecchi Please Reply By June 20, 2008 Planner Kim Ogle Project A Site Specific Development Plan and a Special Review Permit for Mineral Resource Development Facility including Open Pit Gravel Mining and materials processing in the A(Agricultural)Zone District. Legal E2 SE4 Section 25; NE4 Section 36, T6N, R67W; and W2 SW4 Section 30; NW4 Section 31, T6N, R66W of the 6th P.M., Weld County, Colorado. For precise legal see application. Location South of and adjacent to CR 64.5 and East and West of, and adjacent to CR 25. • Parcel Number 0807 25 000048; 0807 36 000037; 0805 30 000069; 0805 30 000082; 0805 31 000004 The application is submitted to you for review and recommendation. Any comments or recommendation you consider relevant to this request would be appreciated. Please reply by the above listed date so that we may give full consideration to your recommendation. Any response not received before or on this date may be deemed to be a positive response to the Department of Planning Services. If you have any further questions regarding the application, please call the Planner associated with the request. Please note that new information may be added to applications under review during the review process. If you desire to examine or obtain this additional information, please call the Department of Planning Services. You will be notified in writing of the Planning Commission date once the date is determined. U We have reviewed the request and find that it does/does not comply with our Comprehensive Plan cause We have reviewed the request and find no conflicts with our interests. ❑ See attached letter. Comments: 1, Signature- ! � Date /c? g/0/ SAgency 2“66,a CePW . �rl/.�.7/u&I +weld County Planning Dept. ❖918 10th Street, Greeley,CO.80631 +(970)353-6100 ext.3540 ❖(970)304-6498 fax • ! ■ o a i3 E ) & � k E b 2 w 15 T., 9 c J f n § Q § o E 73 � k � / o@ o§ D t 2 c @ 2 c;El .0 o 5- > < kOc 2 � co § .0 27 ■ 000 E a 2 > > a ZZ2 \ Z >-ZZ C tii > 0• k / e o aS U e - e e ' E E § o % • CU .c \ j Q. @ < @ g e e e = @i t ca 1 <t IC _ 7 _ o.2 t-g co E E Ft r, e o / § 6 co E 5 % k c § p 0 0 .C 0 � $ $ / % / (3 .1.-. 0 2 � ligC• / � § 2 Ex. (6 _ 2 _3 t e @ § 2 >, _c S © 2 > $ § c) 2 � C.) 0 » -O 6.- a) % � o @ 0 m5wiiu 2 � m ■ u) 2a b c 5 0 co t ow e t'..) ac W32 oem522 g% C � § $ • \ •. .o win 5 in5 fJ m � § / t 1.3 V k > e e CO 0 U as u B 6 6 co• $ x / j E > o - 2 U 5 7 co n in co E . C k k (0 a CO / � k @ >, CD I- o E § & • \ 0 & a 0 § 2 - co .& _u) o o o c' § 2 2 o a 2 2 ,D - � QUQ -1@u0 § 2 a) L E 0 o B U & 2 � 0 � $ � � 0 E - 2 k E 2 $ 76 k ' zcaz 91 a) CD <km20kaa �▪ O & § � � c 22 ® 2 � � � 7R � 0 � \ IC co � co 2k � � � U Q co I-- LI i . Applicant:LaFarge West, Inc. do Jennifer Vecchi Planner: Kim Ogle Case #: USR-1657 71 r 1 I r I 1 !.I , ; it—Zalhistrdirre-----1 /04 c ,it 4* "/ Highway /\s/ Roads N / v ' Railroad w \ E /\/ Streams s 0 411.0 Floodplains • Weld County Referral 111kMay 21, 2008 COLORADO The Weld County Department of Planning Services has received the following item for review: Applicant LaFarge West, Inc., Case Number USR-1657 do Jennifer Vecchi Please Reply By June 20, 2008 Planner Kim Ogle Project A Site Specific Development Plan and a Special Review Permit for Mineral Resource Development Facility including Open Pit Gravel Mining and materials processing in the A(Agricultural)Zone District. Legal E2 SE4 Section 25; NE4 Section 36, T6N, R67W; and W2 SW4 Section 30; NW4 Section 31, T6N, R66W of the 6th P.M., Weld County, Colorado. For precise legal see application. Location South of and adjacent to CR 64.5 and East and West of, and adjacent to CR 25. • Parcel Number 0807 25 000048; 0807 36 000037; 0805 30 000069; 0805 30 000082; 0805 31 000004 The application is submitted to you for review and recommendation. Any comments or recommendation you consider relevant to this request would be appreciated. Please reply by the above listed date so that we may give full consideration to your recommendation. Any response not received before or on this date may be deemed to be a positive response to the Department of Planning Services. If you have any further questions regarding the application, please call the Planner associated with the request. Please note that new information may be added to applications under review during the review process. If you desire to examine or obtain this additional information, please call the Department of Planning Services. You will be notified in writing of the Planning Commission date once the date is determined. ❑ We have reviewed the request and find that it does/does not comply with our Comprehensive Plan because ❑ We have reviewed the request and find no conflicts with our interests. gSee attached letter. Comments: Signature / � Date ( • Agency �jrdt hi K -71i?56pGG A',, +weld County Planning Dept. ❖918 10"Street, Greeley,CO.80631 +(970)353-6100 ext.3540 ❖(970)304-6498 fax Q DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING SERVICES • #0, Weld County Administrative Offices 4209 CR CO Longmont CO 80504 Phone (720) 652-4210 Ext 8736 WEBSITE: www.co.weld.co.us C. COLORADO Applicant: Lafarge West, Inc., do Jennifer Vecchi 06 June 2008 Case Number: USR-1657 Project: Site Specific Development Plan and a Special Review Permit for a Mineral Resource Development Facility including Open Pit Gravel Mining and materials processing in the A (Agricultural) Zone District. Location: South of and adjacent to CR 64.5 and East and West of, and adjacent to CR 25. Parcel Numbers: 0807 25 000048, 0807 36 000037, 0805 30 000069, 0805 30 000082, 0805 31 000004 . There are 4 permits on record for these parcels. (0807 25 000048) ELN-021181, (0807 36 000037) OGN-062001, OGN-062017, (0805 30 000069) BCR07-01654 are all Final. No permits on record for parcels 0805 30 000082 and 0805 31 000004. Prior to the start of any construction, alterations, or change of occupancy; 1 A building permit application must be completed and two complete sets of plans including engineered foundation plans bearing the wet stamp of a Colorado registered architect or engineer must be submitted for review. A geotechnical engineering report preformed by a registered State of Colorado engineer shall be required. 2 A plan review must be approved and a permit must be issued prior to the start of construction 3 Setback and offset distances shall be determined bythe 2006 International Building Code (Offset and setback distances are measured from the farthest projection from the structur0.. 4 At this time the 2006 International Building, Residential, Plumbing, Mechanical and Fuel Gas Codes, the 2005 National Electrical Code (adopting 2008 NEC, July 2008 ?), and Chapter 23 of the Weld County Code are being enforced. 5 Buildings located within a 100 year flood plane require a Flood Hazard Development Plan. 6 A letter from the Fire District to ascertain if a FPD permit is required. Please contact me for any further information regarding this project. • Sin re Robert Powe I Building Plans Examiner Service,Teamwork, Integrity, Quality Weld County Planning Department GREELEY OFFICE INN 2 0 9(NlR • MEMORANDUMRECEIVED tirca wio TO: KIM OGLE, PLANNING SERVICES FROM: LAUREN LIGHT, ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH `ate* W ip SUBJECT: USR-1657 LAFARGE WEST, INC. (GRAVEL C MINE) COLORADO DATE: 06/18/2008 Environmental Health Services has reviewed this proposal for a Mineral Resource Development facility including open pit gravel mining and materials processing. An office trailer, crushing plant and washing plant will be associated with this site. Portable toilets and bottled water will be utilized at the working face of the mine. An individual sewage disposal system and a tap from North Weld County Water District will be installed in conjunction with the operation of the office trailer. Noise will be restricted to the level allowed in the industrial zone district. In addition, berms, conveyors and shroud covers will be installed to limit noise impacts. Dust will be controlled through the application of water (Whitney ditch shares), revegetation, conveyors, reducing vehicle speeds, compaction of road surfaces, berms and covering or watering loaded haul • trucks. All of the items identified in the Air Quality section of the application are sufficient for a dust abatement plan. A 10,000 gallon diesel storage tank will be located on the site and is subject to the rules and regulations of the Colorado Department of Labor and Employment (CDL&E), Oil Inspection Section. We have no objections to the proposal; however, we do recommend that the following conditions be part of any approval: We recommend that the following requirements be met prior to allowing the plat to be recorded: 1. The applicant shall submit evidence of an Air Pollution Emission Notice (A.P.E.N.) and Emissions Permit application from the Air Pollution Control Division, Colorado Department of Health and Environment, if applicable. 2. The applicant shall submit evidence of an Underground Injection Control (UIC) Class V Injection Well permit from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for any vehicle maintenance facility located on the site that is equipped with a floor drain. Alternately, the applicant can provide evidence from the EPA that they are not subject to the EPA Class V requirements. (New EPA rule effective 4/5/2000). • 3. The applicant shall submit evidence of an Aboveground Storage Tank permit • from the Colorado Department of Labor and Employment (CDL&E), Oil Inspection Section for any aboveground storage tanks located on the site. Alternately, the applicant can provide evidence from the (CDL&E), Oil Inspection Section that they are not subject to these requirements. 4. In the event that 1 or more acres are disturbed during the construction and development of this site, the applicant shall obtain a stormwater discharge permit from the Water Quality Control Division of the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment. 5. The applicant shall submit a waste handling plan, for approval, to the Environmental Health Services Division of the Weld County Department of Public Health & Environment. The plan shall include at a minimum, the following: 1) A list of wastes which are expected to be generated on site (this should include expected volumes and types of waste generated). 2) A list of the type and volume of chemicals expected to be stored on site. 3) The waste handler and facility where the waste will be disposed (including the facility name, address, and phone number). • We recommend that the following requirement be incorporated into the permit as conditions that must be met prior to the issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy: 1. An individual sewage disposal system is required for the proposed office and shall be installed according to the Weld County Individual Sewage Disposal Regulations. We recommend that the following requirements be incorporated into the permit as development standards: 1. All liquid and solid wastes (as defined in the Solid Wastes Disposal Sites and Facilities Act, 30-20-100.5, C.R.S., as amended) shall be stored and removed for final disposal in a manner that protects against surface and groundwater contamination. 2. No permanent disposal of wastes shall be permitted at this site. This is not meant to include those wastes specifically excluded from the definition of a solid waste in the Solid Wastes Disposal Sites and Facilities Act, 30-20-100.5, C.R.S., as amended. • 2 3. Waste materials shall be handled, stored, and disposed in a manner that controls • fugitive dust, fugitive particulate emissions, blowing debris, and other potential nuisance conditions. 4. The applicant shall operate in accordance with the approved "waste handling plan". 5. Fugitive dust and fugitive particulate emissions shall be controlled on this site. The facility shall be operated in accordance with the approved dust abatement plan at all times. 6. This facility shall adhere to the maximum permissible noise levels allowed in the Industrial Zone as delineated in 25-12-103 C.R.S., as amended. 7. A permanent, adequate water supply shall be provided for drinking and sanitary purposes for the office and plant site area. 8. Adequate handwashing and toilet facilities shall be provided for employees service people and company vendors 9. Any septic system located on the property must comply with all provisions of the Weld County Code, pertaining to Individual Sewage Disposal Systems. • 10.Portable toilets may be utilized on sites that are temporary locations of the working face and portable processing equipment, etc. for up to six months at each location. 11.Bottled water shall be provided to employees at the temporary locations of the working face at all times. 12.The applicant shall comply with all provisions of the Underground and Above Ground Storage Tank Regulations (7 CCR 1101-14). 13.Any vehicle washing area(s) shall capture all effluent and prevent discharges from drum washing and the washing of vehicles in accordance with the Rules and Regulations of the Water Quality Control Commission, and the Environmental Protection Agency. 14.The applicant shall remove, handle, and stockpile overburden, soil, sand and gravel from the facility area in a manner that will prevent nuisance conditions. 15.All pesticides, fertilizer, and other potentially hazardous chemicals must be stored and handled in a safe manner in accordance with product labeling and in a manner that minimizes the release of hazardous air pollutants (HAP's) and volatile organic compounds (VOC's). • 3 • 16.The applicant shall obtain a stormwater discharge permit from the Colorado Department of Public Health & Environment, Water Quality Control Division, as applicable. 17.The operation shall comply with all applicable rules and regulations of the Colorado Division of Minerals and Geology. 18.The operation shall comply with all applicable rules and regulations of the State and Federal agencies and the Weld County Code. • • 4 WINDSOR Weld County Planning Department ' GREELEY OFFICE �. Town of Windsor IUN 2 7 trtR 301 Wabuut Street • Windsor ('nlornrfo 80550 • .970-686-7476 • Fax: 970-686-7180• www.wfndsorgou.rom COLO RECEIVED June 20,2008 Mr. Kim Ogle,Planner Weld County Dept. of Planning Services 918- 10th Street Greeley,Colorado 80631 Subject: Weld County referral—Usc by Special Review(USR-1657)for mining—LaFarge West,LLC Dear Kim: The Town of Windsor Planning Commission reviewed this referral at its regular meeting of June 18, 2008. The subject property is located outside of the Town's growth management area and corporate limits but within the Town's community influence area. Portions of the subject property are depicted as Low Density Estate Single Family Residential; Community Separator;and Parks, Open Space,Mineral Extraction, and Floodplains. Relative to the current proposal,the subject property is also within close proximity to several existing and planned heavy industrial land uses, and the proposed gravel mining use is temporary in nature and the property will eventually be reclaimed for reservoirs, wetlands and wildlife habitats. • Therefore, based upon the aforementioned information,the Windsor Planning Commission recommends that Weld County approve this proposed Use by Special Review subject to both of the following conditions: (1) Prior to receiving a building permit for the first structure on the plant site,the applicant shall dedicate all necessary rights-of-way for all arterial or major collector roads adjacent to the subject property to bring them to Weld County standards for each of the respective major roadway classifications;and (2) The preferred route which has been identified for the location of the future Crossroads Boulevard/O Street corridor is planned to go through the subject property. Prior to receiving a building permit for the first structure on the plant site, it is recommended that the applicant confer with Mr. Wayne Howard of the Weld County Engineering Department regarding any dedication requirements that may be required for the necessary right-of-way for the Crossroads Boulevard/O Street corridor through the subject property. Thank you for the opportunity to review this proposal. Regards, Joseph P. Plummer, AICP Director of Planning jplummergwindsorgov.com • pc: Gale Schick,Chairman,Windsor Planning Commission Planning department staff Jennifer E. Vecchi,AICP, Vecchi &Associates,applicant's representative W' \ Item No. 6 MEMORANDUM COLORADO DATE: June 12,2008 TO: Windsor Planning Commission FROM: Joseph P. Plummer, AICP, Director of Planning SUBJECT: Weld County Referral — Use by Special Review (USR-1657) for Gravel Mining LOCATION: South of and adjacent to WCR 64.5 along both sides of WCR 25 ITEM# : 6 Background: The applicant, LaFarge West, LLC, represented by Ms. Jennifer E. Vecchi, Vecchi & Associates, LLC, is requesting approval of a Use by Special Review application for gravel mining and materials processing. The raw materials will be transported on conveyors to a plant site area which will contain the crushing, screening and washing equipment used to process the raw materials. The processed materials will be stockpiled for delivery to off-site concrete and asphalt plants or for commercial and government projects. Berming and vegetation will be used to screen the plant site from view from WCR 64.5, WCR 25 and existing adjacent residences. • The subject property (a) is approximately 381acres in size, (b) is comprised of six (6) parcels owned, leased or under contract by the applicant, (c) is located within the Town's community influence area but outside of the Town's growth management area, (d) is located east of and adjacent to the Hall-Irwin gravel mining operation and batch plant which the Planning Commission reviewed and made a favorable recommendation for at the March 6, 2008 planning commission meeting, and (e) is depicted as Community Separator and Low Density Estate Single-family Residential on the Town's Land Use Plan Map. Conformance with Comprehensive Plan: The gravel mining use is temporary in nature and the property will eventually be reclaimed to create a diverse, stable and sustainable environment for wildlife habitat and wetlands, and this future use will be consistent with the Community Separator and Low Density Estate Single-family Residential land use depictions of the Town's Land Use Plan Map. Conformance with Vision 2025: N/A — The Vision 2025 document does not address referrals from other jurisdictions. • June 18,2008 LaFarge Use by Special Review memorandum Item No. 6 • Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission forward to the Weld County Department of Planning Services a recommendation of approval of the proposed Use by Special Review, subject to both of the following conditions: (1) Prior to receiving a building permit for the first structure on the plant site, the applicant shall dedicate all necessary rights-of-way for all arterial or major collector roads adjacent to the subject property to bring them to Weld County standards for each of the respective major roadway classifications; and (2) The preferred route which has been identified for the location of the future Crossroads Boulevard/O Street corridor is planned to go through the subject property. Prior to receiving a building permit for the first structure on the plant site, it is recommended that the applicant confer with Mr. Wayne Howard of the Weld County Engineering Department regarding any dedication requirements that may be required for the necessary right-of-way for the Crossroads Boulevard/O Street corridor through the subject property. Enclosures: Application materials and applicant notification letter • pc: Jennifer E. Vecchi, AICP, Vecchi & Associates, LLC applicant's representative • Kim Ogle, Weld County Planner Wayne Howard, P.E., Weld County Engineer June 18,2008 LaFarge Use by Special Review memorandum 2 Uor mr mee 119: 1b 106 68088 WELD0NTYRE4 PAGE 01/©1 4 EDUCATION FOR LIFE ND S O R Stephanie R.Watson �/ Assistant Superintendent Business Services June 23,2008 Ms.Kim Ogle Weld CotntyPlanning Department 918 10th Street Greeley,CO 80631 RE: Site Specific Development Plan&Special Review Permit USR.1657 Dear Ms. Ogle: The above referenced project is for property located near Weld County Road 64 rh and WCR 25. The School District understands that this project proposes a gravel mine site. Given the stated use of the land,Weld Re-4 does not object to approval of this Plan. The only concern at this point may be of heavy traffic as it could affect safety for school buses utilizing the same roads. District Re-4 encourages the County to ensure that any potential conflicts be addressed in this process. If the land use should change, • however, the School District respectfully requests the opportunity to respond with comments regarding the impact of any re-zoning or land use changes. Your continuing cooperation is sincerely appreciated,as is the opportunityto comment upon issues of interest to the Town,the School District and our mutual constituents. Should you have questions or desire further infonnation,please contact me at your convenience. Sincerely, S-19-141-4--'9R . Mlairs-vv\ Stephanie R.Watson Assistant Superintendent of Business Services • WELD COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT RE-4 Business Services 1020 Main Street - P.O. Box 609 • Windsor. CO 80550 • (970) 686-8000 • Fax (970) 686-5280 Weld County Planning Department —......"44\ � GREELEY OFFICE �City of \ 4\ Colorado IUN 2 7RI1R • Greele RECEIVED Great.From the Ground Up. June 19, 2008 Kim Ogle Weld County Planning Department 918 10th Street Greeley, Colorado 80631 Subject: USR-1657 Dear Mr. Ogle, Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this Use by Special Review. The City of Greeley has reviewed the application from LaFarge West, Inc. and wish to forward the attached review comments from City staff. The City can recommend approval to the proposed Use by Special Review with the enclosed recommendations. If any questions should arise please feel free to contact me at(970) 350-9824. likcerely, ran n ossard Pla I cc: Ryan Hollinshead, Staff Engineer Attachment • Community Development-Planning Division • 1100 10th Street,Ste.202,Greeley,CO 80631 • (970)350-9780 Fax(970) 350-9800 We promise to preserve and improve the quality of life for Greeley through timely,courteous and cost-effective service. Project Review Comments Date: 6/19/2008 Project Name: WCR 14:08 City of Location: S. of& adj to WCR 64.5 & E. & W. of CR 25 Greeley Reviewed By: Brandon Gossard Phone: ( ) 350-9824 Submittal Date 6/10/2008 Department Planning City ID# 1528 Submittal #: 1 Ecological Significance Page ❑ Recommen The subject property is located within both the moderate and high impact area on the City of Greeley's Areas of Ecological Significance Map. High impact areas are those which contain significant natural features which would be severely and negatively compromised by development. Special attention should be given to address the impact of the development on the wildlife and vegetation of the area and measures should be taken to appropriately mitigate the impact of the extraction and satisfy the applicable requirements within chapter§18.48 Areas of Ecological Significance of the Greeley Development Code. Growth Page ❑ Advisory The subject site is located within the City of Greeley's Long Range Expected • Growth Area (LREGA). Any development should comply with applicable policies from the City's Building and Development Codes and Comprehensive Plan Policies. The LREGA is the area within which the community is expected to grow over the next 20 years and which encompasses all other growth and service areas for the City of Greeley. Mineral Extraction Page ❑ Recommen The City of Greeley'ss Comprehensive Plan encourages the extraction of recoverable resources such as sub-surface aggregate material prior to surface development. Such extraction should be followed by appropriate reclamation techniques which provide a secondary purpose such as water storage or recreation and create an overall appealing facility . • Thursday,June 19,2008 Page 1 oft *_ Project Review Comments Date: 6/19/2008 Project Name: WCR 14:08 City of Location: S. of& adj to WCR 64.5 & E. & W. of CR 25 Greeley Reviewed By: Ryan Hollinshead Phone: (970) 336-4145 Submittal Date 6/10/2008 Department Eng Development Review City ID# 1528 Submittal #: 1 General Page O New There are three locations along Weld County Road 25 where existing tank batteries were previously set closer to the right of way then what would be acceptable today. Per the City of Greeley's Transportation Master Plan, Weld County Road 25 is planned to be 95th Avenue and is called out as being a minor arterial. The current City standard requires 110' of right of way for a minor arterial roadway. But in order to construct this future road, the tanks will need to be moved at least 150'from the outer boundary of the right of way, which means the tanks must be at least 205'from the centerline of the road. Therefore, the City needs the outer boundary of the gravel mines, labeled as being Phase 1A, 2 and 4B, adjusted slightly. These slight adjustments will make it possible to move the tanks far enough from the right of way to allow for the full • master planned expansion of this roadway and maintain the 200'setback from the tanks to the edge of the outer boundary of the gravel mines as shown on the submitted plan. • Thursday,June 19,2008 Page 2 of 2 l UIU LanLy I lalunne VGVal LIII OI GREELEY Gri-ICE JUN ! F; ,_ - 4 c*.COCO,P DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES RECEIVED • EW ® IS DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES * * 14 - * Bill Ritter,Jr. �1g�6 June 10, 2008 Governor Harris D.Sherman Executive Director Dick Wolfe,P.E. Kim Ogle Director Weld County Planning Department 1555 N 17th Avenue Greeley, CO 80631 Re: Parsons Mine Site Development Plan and a Special Review Permit Case No. USR-1657 Sec. 25 & 36, T6N, R67 and Sec. 30 & 31, T6N, R66, 6th P.M. Water Division 1, Water District 3 Dear Mr. Ogle: We have reviewed the above referenced proposal for a mineral resource development facility including open pit gravel mining and materials processing. Since the submitted material does not appear to qualify as a "subdivision" as defined in §30- • 28-101(10)(a), C.R.S., pursuant to the State Engineer's March 4, 2005 memorandum to county planning directors, this office will only perform a cursory review of the referral information and provide comments. The comments will not address the adequacy of the water supply plan for this development or the ability of the water supply plan to satisfy any County regulations or requirements. The applicant indicated in the submittal materials that water for drinking and sanitary purposes will be obtained from a tap from the North Weld County Water District (District). However a letter of commitment for service from the District was not included. We recommend that the County obtain a signed copy of the water service agreement from the District prior to the final approval of the proposal. In addition, the applicant indicated that during active mining, the mine cell would be dewatered by dewatering trenches and the final reclamation plan includes open water ponds. Pursuant to §37-90-137(11), C.R.S., exposed ground water due to gravel mining operations is considered to be a well and a well permit must be obtained prior to the commencement of mining activity. Since this proposed gravel pit "well" appropriates water tributary to the over-appropriated South Platte River basin, an approved SWSP or a Division 1 Water Court approved plan for augmentation that includes depletions associated with all uses of ground water during the active mining and reclamation phases, including evaporation, would be required before a well permit could be issued. • Office of the State Engineer 1313 Sherman Street,Suite 818•Denver,CO 80203•Phone:303-866-3581 •Fax:303-866-3589 www.water.state.co.us Weld County Planning Department Page 2 Parsons Mine USR-1657 June 10, 2008 • Finally, in the submittal materials, the applicant also indicated that shares in the Whitney Ditch would be used on-site for dewatering, washing the material, and dust control. In order for these shares to be used in such a manner, the use of the Whitney Ditch shares must be first approved for these purposes, which may entail obtaining approval of a change in water right from the Division 1 Water Court. If you have any questions in this matter, please contact Megan Sullivan of this office. Sincerely, Jeff Deatherage, P.E. Water Resource Engineer Cc: Jim Hall, Division Engineer George Varra, Water Commissioner, Water District 3 JD/MAS/Parsons Mine Special Use (Weld) • • Weld County Planning Departmenl GREELEY OFFICE JUN 05 7008 ENT - • O DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY ��'��® '._\Z CORPS OF ENGINEERS,OMAHA DISTRICT s- h DENVER REGULATORY OFFICE,9307 SOUTH WADSWORTH BOULEV LITTLETON,COLORADO 80128-6901 June 2, 2008 Kim Ogle Weld County Planning Department 918 10th Street Greeley, CO 80631 RE: Lafarge West,Inc., Case No. USR-1657 Corps File No. NWO-2007-3489-DEN Reference is made to the above-mentioned project located in and near the SE '/4 of Section 36; SW '/4 Section 30,NW '/ Section 31,T6N, R66W, Weld County, Colorado. If any work associated with this project requires the placement of dredged or fill material, and any excavation associated with a dredged or fill project, either temporary or permanent, in an aquatic site, which may include ephemeral and perennial streams,wetlands, lakes, ponds, drainage ditches and irrigation ditches, this office should be notified by a proponent of the project for Department of the Army permits or changes in permit requirements pursuant to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. Work in an aquatic site should be shown on a map identifying the Quarter Section, Township, • Range and County of the work and the dimensions of work in each area. Any loss of an aquatic site may require mitigation. Mitigation requirements will be determined during the Department of the Army permitting review. If there are any questions call Mr. Terry McKee of my office at 303-979-4120 and reference Corps File No. NWO-2007-3489-DEN. Sincerely, imothy T. 1 arey f, Deny:r Re_ulatory O ice tm • • £Ni 0F\ p ;tt DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY 4; t� CORPS OF ENGINEERS,OMAHA DISTRICT DENVER REGULATORY OFFICE,9307 SOUTH WADSWORTH BOULEVARD) utrutroN,COLORADO 80128-6901 „> March 6, 2008 Ms.Brenda Mitchell Queen of the River 13810 N. 115" Street Longmont, CO 80504 RE: Parsons Property Gravel Mine Project,Jurisdictional Determination Corps File No.NWO-2007-3489-DEN Dear Ms. Mitchell: My office has reviewed your December 5,2007 report for this project located in Sections 30 and 31 of T6N, R66W,and Sections 25, 26 of T6N,R67W, Weld,Colorado. The streams and wetland delineations for this project are considered accurate and acceptable by this office. The Corps has also performed an approved jurisdictional determination (JD) of the aquatic resources in the project review area, per your request which was received on December 12, 2007. It has been determined that the below listed areas are jurisdictional: Cache la Poudre River • WI: 0.25 acre fringe wetland around WI pond W2: 13.7 acres abutting the Cache la Poudre River W3: 1.4 acres abutting the Cache la Poudre River W4: 0,9 acre W6: 1.3 acres abutting the Cache la Poudre River W7: 0.7 acre W8: 3.1 acres W9: 1.2 acres W 10: man-made irrigation ditch It has been determined that the below listed areas are non-jurisdictional: WI (open water),W3A,W4A (upland swale)and W5 Details of the approved 3D are included on the JD forms attached to this letter. These forms are also available on our website at https://www.nwo.usace.army.mil/html/od-d/jur/jur.lum These JD's are valid for a period of five years from the date of this letter,unless new information warrants revisions of the JDs before the expiration date,or unless the Corps has identified that specific geographic areas with rapidly changing environmental conditions merit re-verification on a more frequent basis. If you arc not in agreement with the JD decisions,you may request an administrative appeal under regulation 33 CFR 331, by using the attached appeal form. The request for appeal must be received within 60 days from the date of this letter. If you would like more information concerning the appeal of a decision, contact the Corps Denver Regulatory Office. It is not necessary to submit a request for appeal if you do not object to the JD. • • Those aquatic resources that were determined to be jurisdictional are known as "Waters of the United States"and are regulated under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. Any placement of fill material into those resources would require a 404 permit prior to impacts. The resources found to be non jurisdictional would not require a permit. Work in an aquatic site should be shown on a map identifying the Quarter Section, Township, Range and County of the work and the dimensions of work in each area. Any loss of an aquatic site may require mitigation. Mitigation requirements will be determined during the Department of the Army permitting review. If there are any questions call Mr.Terry McKee of my office at 303-979-4120 and reference Corps File No.NWO-2007-3489-DEN. Sincerely, Tim ry T. Ca Chic• Denver R-g latory Oft.ye tin • • APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION FORM U.S.Army Corps of Engineers This form should be completed by following the instructions provided in Section IV of the JD Form Instructional Guidebook. SECTION I: BACKGROUND INFORMATION A. REPORT COMPLETION DATE FOR APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION(JD): \?:::s:':':(t. 'ill:N B. DISTRICT OFFICE,FILE NAME,AND NUMBER: I l mgr l t;l:ttul� t title•: i'::',=a.i'••la rr •r.\\•t I-'IMt'-t i'')-I lI C. PROJECT LOCATION AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION: I? ,!t';! I tt; .t State:(•() County/parish/borough: \\d i City: Center coordinates of site(lat/long in degree decimal format): Lat. N; Long. W Universal Transverse Mercator: (l.;l I It1I .-4417{0i\ Name of nearest waterbody:(ache la I'.nul:c Name of nearest Traditional Navigable Water(TNW)into which the aquatic resource flows:( .tdr;I,:1'titaire Name of watershed or Hydrologic Unit Code(HUC): tt I I'n 11111'' ® Check if map/diagram of review area and/or potential jurisdictional areas is/arc available upon request. el Check if other sites(e.g.,offsite mitigation sites,disposal sites,etc...)are associated with this action and arc recorded on a different JD form. D. REVIEW PERFORMED FOR SITE EVALUATION(CHECK ALL THAT APPLY): D Office(Desk)Determination. Date: i.bru:;ry I I.201' 0 Field Determination. Date(s): •`;t't.;:ham. :-.?t;a':, SECTION II: SUMMARY OF FINDINGS A. RHA SECTION 10 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION. There Art no "navigable waters of the U.S."within Rivers and Harbors Act(RHA)jurisdiction(as defined by 33 CFR part 329)in the review area.[Required] ❑ Waters subject to the ebb and flow of the tide. ❑ Waters are presently used,or have been used in the past,or may be susceptible for use to transport interstate or foreign commerce. Explain: B. CWA SECTION 404 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION. There are and are not"waters of the U.S'."within Clean Water Act(CWA)jurisdiction(as defined by 33 CFR part 328)in the review area.[Required] 1, Waters of the U.S. a. Indicate presence of waters of U.S.in review area(check all that apply):t D 7'NWs,including territorial seas Wetlands adjacent to TNWs ❑ Relatively permanent waters'-(RPWs)that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs ❑ Non-RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs ❑ Wetlands directly abutting RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TN Ws ❑ Wetlands adjacent to but not directly abutting RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs ❑ Wetlands adjacent to non-RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs ❑ Impoundments of jurisdictional waters ❑ Isolated(interstate or intrastate)waters,including isolated wetlands b. Identify(estimate)size of waters of the U.S.in the review area: Non-wetland waters: .' 7 linear feet: width(ft)and/or acres. Wetlands: c,t;, acres. NA I t! ....:i"'n'_. . I,,;:.t:H':tt';;,! \: ; t i•.ol.:i:.! :I'' n I .I: ..t l'. . \. I • ,t.r.: .tl'ta• I'.;i'.t:' I:;I'o:;.t : 16,. \t?. l 1.tc';.,;ti'I1: ' .t;l:;!ti I'a,tyii.l<t: t \1 It I itte t ,, h:; is t',tuih'u I;; ct c. Limits(boundaries)of jurisdiction based on: 1987 Delineation Alanual I,levation of established OHWM(if known): 2.Non-regulated waters/wetiands(check if applicable):" • !Boxes checked below shall be supported by completing the appropriate sections in Section III below. For purposes of this form,an RPW is defined as a tributary that is not a TNW and that typically flows year-round or has continuous flow at least-seasonally- (e.g.,typically 3 months). 'Supporting documentation is presented in Section lI1.F. Potentially jurisdictional waters and/or wetlands were assessed within the review area and determined to be not jurisdictional. • Explain: V. !: i i,.r,.•rout i:l ,: r.:nrr i•.I+lr•.IL:I?;: k t+l,llra all,/it t rlu'i>fitiioli'1i. rim,i...,;nt'fa<..itnalli;lion tlitii titc t :rh;111 I`,tl.lri tl, i'u.::\ :i_!•ii'lli:,f i....;a.•.t:L:;.;a a•+li:. .Ll.:!ii ut•....I:I.,I',11 i,h;al tll tt:.'i::'il I.l.!liltii I:AIi;,,ti,;!!:if. �t'. i•tI:;II,:I t'tlnit{t 1i'�Sti•.i�•.:,Lp::"•n`ti, .1 :li Il,it!;,I�C'i: `l:!!ir.111..1 ti,tii.,,.. �!! 1'..:f.,!!�l.I.fi:ll','1•!1,•:::1!:1e.,>t 71 ::C::,li::: ‘,.i111 Ii,',_O11WI:1i<511 10 Ih.- I l:l, SECTION III: CWA ANALYSIS A. TNWs AND WETLANDS ADJACENT TO TNWs The agencies will assert jurisdiction over TNWs and wetlands adjacent to TNWs. If the aquatic resource is a TNW,complete Section IILA.1 and Section 111.111.only;if the aquatic resource is a wetland adjacent to a TNW,complete Sections III.A.I and 2 and Section M.D.I.;otherwise,see Section iI1.B below. 1. TNW Identify•INW: cache to Pa dre Iti%er. Summarize rationale supporting determination: II:t ;rih:hII'L'ulfi;It .. ..i..;:hiIn:.iil rrlll_al•1. ..k. riiti? a:s,tl::•;oruall; `i14 !iii',I_ni'. Prl t:.ar,l h1ua:.f SP:ia;r, t ,\CI . . 2. Wetland adjacent to TNW Summarize rationale supporting conclusion that wetland is"adjacent": `site 1 .:1;up..1.IL'y!>;itu;ir l'al•..,;1[I:I: roptlrt icl:tlti':; t! isi l; ,..Cv; ....,:Vii/.,'Iia!:.!t',tut i i±. ;a s . 1;.7 ;MK.;a f'ul:,ir.It is i r 1t `. I t:ll i,'::it!s:il• i .1:`:ti i.,!','.slurs it iit:r i`: 1.. q:.'r.„ .01!.i :h:i'l'Ill 1'Oi:dri it!;,.1 • D. DETERMINATIONS OF JURISDICTIONAL FINDINGS.THE SUBJECT WATERS/WETLANDS ARE(CHECK Al.t. THAT APPLY): 1. TNWs and Adjacent Wetlands. Check all that apply and provide size estimates in review area: TNWs: III linear feet 'u width(ft),Or, acres. Wetlands adjacent to TNWs: 1 r'i,;acres. 2. RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs. O Tributaries of TNWs where tributaries typically flow year-round arc jurisdictional.Provide data and rationale indicating that tributary is perennial: ❑ Tributaries of TNW where tributaries have continuous flow"seasonally"(e.g.,typically three months each year)arc jurisdictional. Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section 111.13. Provide rationale indicating that tributary flows seasonally: Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters in the review area(check all that apply): ❑ Tributary waters: linear feet width(R). ❑ Other non-wetland waters: acres. identify type(s)of waters: 3. Non-RPWs4 that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs. 0 Waterbody that is not a TNW or an RPW,but flows directly or indirectly into a TNW,and it has a significant nexus with a TNW is jurisdictional.Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section I11.C. Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters within the review area(check all that apply): ❑ "Tributary waters: linear feet width(fl). O Other non-wetland waters: acres. identify type(s)of waters: 4. Wetlands directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs. • 'Sec Footnote#3. 2 ❑ Wetlands directly abut RPW and thus are jurisdictional as adjacent wetlands. ❑ Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow year-round. Provide data and rationale indicating that tributary is perennial in Section lI1.D.2,above.Provide rationale indicating that wetland is directly abutting an RPW: 0 Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow"seasonally." Provide data indicating that tributary is seasonal in Section 111.13 and rationale in Section ll1.D.2,above.Provide rationale indicating that wetland is directly abutting an RPW: Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review arca: acres. 5. Wetlands adjacent to but not directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs. ❑ Wetlands that do not directly abut an RPW,but when considered in combination with the tributary to which they are adjacent and with similarly situated adjacent wetlands,have a significant nexus with a TN W are jurisidictional.Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section 111.O. Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres. 6. Wetlands adjacent to non-RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs. ❑ Wetlands adjacent to such waters,and have when considered in combination with the tributary to which they arc adjacent and with similarly situated adjacent wetlands,have a significant nexus with a TNW are jurisdictional.Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section 111.O. Provide estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review arca: acres. 7. Impoundments of jurisdictional waters.` As a general rule,the impoundment of a jurisdictional tributary remains jurisdictional. ❑ Demonstrate that impoundment was created from"waters of the U.S.,"or ❑ Demonstrate that water meets the criteria for one of the categories presented above(1-6),or ❑ Demonstrate that water is isolated with a nexus to commerce(see E below). . F. NON-JURISDICTIONAL WATERS,INCLUDING WETLANDS(CHECK ALL THAT APPLY): ❑ If potential wetlands were assessed within the review arca,these areas did not meet the criteria in the 1987 Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual and/or appropriate Regional Supplements. ❑ Review area included isolated waters with no substantial nexus to interstate(or foreign)commerce. QQ Prior to the Jan 2001 Supreme Court decision in'SWANCC,"the review area would have been regulated based solely on the "Migratory Bird Rule"(MBR). ❑ Waters do not meet the"Significant Nexus"standard,where such a finding is required for jurisdiction. Explain: D Other:(explain,if not covered above): W i s 1.5;m i';'i.•. rt., ii.. .....'i:,nute•!i:'i':.'.ii ,.•:( .. .£ hit ti !•+U i:tti•.i it Jtl.t'v.°li;l t;li.::£L .l: :.,... .i.£i:}!:•,l•.'1 ili,'!r'1't:'.:l'1't•'ti,:aii,t.t!!a!1 lil illi:tltir. t.1?.iaahri:•£pt,ltt!t:\•.t::±:ti W '!i••.,lot; .:!!lo u.I i1.,1.;n:.:.t,•i :I:1.,t.'?.a:.:n. .: ..:t`.a.:'u ,::cnl ! >.r.i : :rr til,:„t:!'u'•t ;t(,n it•. t i'tomeetit,tt 1.'! i.'it it. !1Lz Ir±k,liar,:"tl:,'±a+l:ai:::i:.tti:'itl ,I.:H\ 'lY.:n:1'•i " I it' J.\\ 7 \tit V,: I!£ a i Cl"tiil t iii It'• '1.r•£,il:.. I„i:•d ..., i.' .t. r,.riatiitanf,r.nth.r p krpust;'..'t tsii',tticc li:.h,tr :iat li•.h c'.'s i•ii;u u1 could tie taken:!:!\I-."id it't:!a••i-.!.t::• ri:r+.it,,,.,.•,: ..!r 3)1. " • 'oL he ltse.i i.;r!£itifonf,lf p':!r.1':' 1,• i4a. One-±il Ib, „'.t:.:'e:,illli:,!'.i. Provide acreage estimates for non-jurisdictional waters in the review area,where the sole potential basis of jurisdiction is the MBR factors(i.e.,presence of migratory birds,presence of endangered species.use of water for irrigated agriculture),using best professional judgment(check all that apply): ❑ Non-wetland waters(i.e.,rivers,streams): linear feet width(ft). ❑ Lakes/ponds: I.r.acres. ❑ Other non-wetland waters: acres.I.ist type of aquatic resource: 23 Wetlands:E! I I acres. Provide acreage estimates for non-jurisdictional waters in the review area that do not meet the"Significant Nexus"standard,where such a finding is required for jurisdiction(check all that apply): ❑ Non-wetland waters(i.e.,rivers,streams): linear feet, width(11). 'I'o complete the analysis refer to the key in Section 111.1).6 of the Instructional Guidebook. 3 ❑ Lakes/ponds: acres. • ❑ Other non-wetland waters: acres. List type of aquatic resource: O Wetlands: acres. SECTION IV: DATA SOURCES. A. SUPPORTING DATA. Data reviewed for JD(check all that apply-checked items shall be included in case file and,where checked and requested,appropriately reference sources below): • Maps,plans,plots or plat submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant:t.r ••• f�! ❑ Data sheets prepared/submitted by or on behalf of the applicandconsultant. rA Office concurs with data sheets/delineation report. ❑Office does not concur with data sheets/delineation report. ❑ Data sheets prepared by the Corps: ❑ Corps navigable waters'study: E] U.S.Geological Survey I lydrologic Atlas: ❑USGS NHD data. USGS 8 and 12 digit HOC maps. ❑ U.S.Geological Survey map(s).Cite scale&quad name: :2400(i i;!;;cow :1+t.i.a \t;!l•. ❑ USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey.Citation: ❑ National wetlands inventory map(s). Cite name: ❑ State/Local wetland inventory map(s): ❑ l:EMA/FIRM maps: ❑ 100-year Floodplain Elevation is: (National Geodectic Vertical Datum of 1929) © Photographs:r3.1 Aerial(Name&Date): t,:;,ut,- ;urc ! •!1!sic i.t r, ,;r,:, :.?t;u or Fi Other(Name&Date):•'u:t,i:.,!.:, hg:.,' Mt\ :;:r:i ,..tn.: ❑ Previous dctermination(s). File no.and date of response letter: ® Applicable/supporting case law: ;:;1,;;:: :!+. :,;:;i�l;.:,•;•, ❑ Applicablelsupporting scientific literature: ❑ Other information(please specify): • • 4 B. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS TO SUPPORT JD: rrud Bird's eye Traffic << wQ Wit* .E a W4A w b' A (-4 S�, ,'9 .:' ... '4 +�. tom', r x ,. :..... x .. i "" - : 7F WS '` r ,N ... . WI a _�}* s 1 . r f A. "11r ilir r e3 oef tta�i k xt. p 4 Ara NEB\ s ti 1' ' ' 1 3 i. . ) ®�. 3 I • 5 APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION FORM U.S.Army Corps of Engineers This form should be completed by following the instructions provided in Section IV of the JD Fonn Instructional Guidebook. SECTION I: BACKGROUND INFORMATION A. REPORT COMPLETION DATE FOR APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION(JD): :3. 'tit�t+ B. DISTRICT OFFICE,FILE NAME.AND NUMBER: I t.., ;r i:.,n:aa: . ()11:,.... '.11 ;.2:n.'v It tl \ C. PROJECT LOCATION AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION: tt;,,di State:III County/parish/borough: \t City: Center coordinates of site(lat/long in degree decimal format): Lat. N; Long. W Universal Transverse Mercator: 0s i =I ttti . I Name of nearest waterbody:`•1 tt.,::..1 I r,nia:n V.'.WS Name of nearest Traditional Navigable Water(1NW)into which the aquatic resource flows:< !:: Name of watershed or Hydrologic Unit Code(IIUC): 101`i,'t, 0 Check if map/diagram of review area and/or potential jurisdictional areas is/are available upon request. ® Check if other sites(e.g.,offsite mitigation sites,disposal sites,etc...)arc associated with this action and are recorded on a different JD form. D. REVIEW PERFORMED FOR SITE EVALUATION(CHECK ALL THAT APPLY): O Office(Desk)Determination. Date: I I':. 'fns ® Field Determination. Date(s): ',•I,,;:r!cf ' . .'.i;l' , it%: ;:,: eh:tot SECTION il: SUMMARY OF FINDINGS A. RHA SECTION 10 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION. There Are no "navigable wafers of the U.S."within Rivers and Harbors Act(RHA)jurisdiction(as defined by 33 CFR part 329)in the review area.[Required] ❑ Waters subject to the ebb and flow of the tide. ❑ Waters are presently used,or have been used in the past,or may be susceptible for use to transport interstate or foreign commerce. • Explain: B. CWA SECTION 404 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION. There are and are not"waters of the U.S."within Clean Water Act(CWA)jurisdiction(as defined by 33 CFR part 328)in the review area.IRequiredI 1. Waters of the U.S. a. Indicate presence of waters of U.S.in review area(check all that apply): El 'IN Ws,including territorial seas ❑ Wetlands adjacent to TNWs ❑ Relatively permanent waters2(RPWs)that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs ❑ Non-RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into•INWs ❑X Wetlands directly abutting RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs ❑ Wetlands adjacent to but not directly abutting RI'Ws that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs ❑ Wetlands adjacent to non-RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs ❑ Impoundments of jurisdictional waters ❑ isolated(interstate or intrastate)waters,including isolated wetlands b. Identify(estimate)size of waters of the U.S.in the review area: Non-wetland waters: ;.' linear feet: ,t:width(11)and/or acres. Wetlands: -7.0 acres. 1t•1.t;,1:Cr: Its' :I. :ter.; WS. 1,1 .left" 1i'1 c.Limits(boundaries)of jurisdiction based on: 1937 Delineation Manual Elevation of established OHWM(if known): 2. Non-regulated waters/wetlands(check if applicable):3 41, Boxes checked below shall be supported by completing the appropriate sections in Section III below. For purposes of this form,an RPW is defined as a tributary that is not a TNW and that typically flows year-round or has continuous flow at least"seasonally" (e.g.,typically 3 months). Supporting documentation is presented in Section 111.F. E Potentially jurisdictional waters and/or wetlands were assessed within the review area and determined to he not jurisdictional. • Explain: 4:\t an i pi iil:l l:(s.'•I il,iil!th:il cL.'S tlUl tih 1 ilL it itCrta!Ii It!:I+!ti ii+;flab;;I)tiir:i':I:yni,�tiilia:l SECTION Iii: CWA ANALYSIS A. TNWs AND WETLANDS ADJACENT TO TNWs The agencies will assert jurisdiction over TNWs and wetlands adjacent to TNWs. If the aquatic resource is a TNW,complete Section II1.A.1 and Section III.D.1.only;if the aquatic resource is a wetland adjacent to a TNW,complete Sections III.A.1 and 2 and Section III.D.I.;otherwise,see Section iiI.B below. 1. TNW Identify TNW: Cache Ia Poudre Nicer. Summarize rationale supporting determination: Ih.Coclic 1:1 l't);i:IlC ICI.er %a iialliiit Inilil\ 1i:i+It'ai,l�:::;9.•! ;'s;;it�i'$• Ilt;:::!l.i;t; ccvtua.it.. in Ito. Ii)'I ns>, Ik+ttald Srriticr. I \\t.1 . , 2. Wetland adjacent to TNW Summarize rationale supporting conclusion that wetland is"adjacent": D. DETERMINATIONS OF JURISDICTIONAL FINDINGS.THE SUBJECT WATERS/WETLANDS ARE(CHECK ALL THAT APPLY): 1. TNWs and Adjacent Wetlands. Check all that apply and provide size estimates in review area: Qj TNWs: t. ' '!linear feet'ii width(ft),Or, acres. ❑Wetlands adjacent to TNWs:acres. 2. RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs. ❑ Tributaries of TNWs where tributaries typically flow year-round are jurisdictional.Provide data and rationale indicating that • tributary is perennial: t\cttait(I i:o.ohiit:!!:I+,r,l !!I.IIc m.: lh:A i\:lianti i i ibut a't tt 7.\' 41t r ,e:r il,lilitl in the,Iln\siQi1:ii i ('•t,rii,,n.Nllil•.i i'•1!:1laltri'd...and!lull:;i!; le t.1 monde,.nldi. :.c;;; Itr iltr!i(:.it':nri Itl,l'l;.HI ,:i'ii Ai!,,.ii!l::,l„I I I•, ❑ Tributaries of TNW where tributaries have continuous flow"seasonally"(e.g.,typically three months each year)are jurisdictional. Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section Iii.B. Provide rationale indicating that tributary flows seasonally: Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters in the review area(check all that apply): ❑ Tributary waters: linear feet width(1t). ❑ Other non-wetland waters: acres. Identify type(s)of waters: 3. Non-RPWs4 that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs. ❑ Waterbody that is not a TNW or an RPW,but flows directly or indirectly into a TNW,and it has a significant nexus with a TNW is jurisdictional.Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section IiI.C. Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters within the review area(check all that apply): ❑ Tributary waters: linear feet width(11). ❑ Other non-wetland waters: acres. identify type(s)of waters: 4. Wetlands directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs. O Wetlands directly abut RPW and thus are jurisdictional as adjacent wetlands. • Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow year-round. Provide data and rationale indicating that tributary is perennial in Section i11.1).2,above.Provide rationale indicating that wetland is directly abutting an RPW: \\ !:it,.? V. t,is.:,ii...>. • ,l'1:i+, ,::,ilil: t..E a.:IL:\\_i .J l \i \\N, ❑ Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow"seasonally." Provide data indicating that tributary is seasonal in Section LIEN and rationale in Section 111.O.2,above.Provide rationale indicating that wetland is directly abutting an RPW: Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area:f'.i)acres. • 'See Footnote#3. 2 • S. Wetlands adjacent to but not directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs. ❑ Wetlands that do not directly abut an RPW,but when considered in combination with the tributary to which they arc adjacent and with similarly situated adjacent wetlands,have a significant nexus with a TNW are jurisidictional.Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section IILC. Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres. 6. Wetlands adjacent to non-RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs. ❑ Wetlands adjacent to such waters,and have when considered in combination with the tributary to which they arc adjacent and with similarly situated adjacent wetlands,have a significant nexus with a TNW are jurisdictional.Data supporting this conclusion is providtxl at Section III.C. Provide estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres. 7. Impoundments of jurisdictional waters.s As a general rule,the impoundment of a jurisdictional tributary remains jurisdictional. O Demonstrate that impoundment was created from"waters of the U.S.,"or O Demonstrate that water meets the criteria for one of the categories presented above(1-6),or ❑ Demonstrate that water is isolated with a nexus to commerce(see E below). F. NON-JURISDICTIONAL WATERS,INCLUDING WETLANDS(CHECK ALL THAT APPLY): Z If potential wetlands were assessed within the review area,these areas did not meet the criteria in the 1987 Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual and/or appropriate Regional Supplements. ❑ Review area included isolated waters with no substantial nexus to interstate(or foreign)commerce. O Prior to the Jan 2001 Supreme Court decision in"SWANCC,"the review area would have been regulated based solely on the "Migratory Bird Rule"(MBR). ❑ Waters do not meet the"Significant Nexus"standard,where such a finding is required for jurisdiction. Explain: ❑ Other:(explain,if not covered above): V. 4.1 .!:1 k:pl.it,i i:,Fii,il,t;ti!l:!::+t:I.:.,.not me:<t till;i'lu:i... 't;1;�'i`35. a to :'I i f it...., 1l,l1,U1::iii l.i'•. ,'I: lt!.,c,,a. • Provide acreage estimates for non jurisdictional waters in the review area,where the sole potential basis of jurisdiction is the MRR factors(i.e.,presence of migratory birds,presence of endangered species,use of water for irrigated agriculture),using best professional judgment(check all that apply): O Non-wetland waters(i.e.,rivers,streams): linear feet width(ft). ❑ Lakes/ponds:acres. O Other non-wetland waters: acres.List type of aquatic resource: ❑ Wetlands:acres. Provide acreage estimates for non jurisdictional waters in the review area that do not meet the"Significant Nexus"standard,where such a finding is required for jurisdiction(check all that apply): ❑ Non-wetland waters(i.c.,rivers,streams): linear feet, width(It). ❑ Lakes/ponds: acres. ❑ Other non-wetland waters: acres. List type of aquatic resource: O Wetlands: acres. SECTION IV: DATA SOURCES. A. SUPPORTING DATA. Data reviewed for JD(check all that apply-checked items shall be included in case file and,where checked and requested,appropriately reference sources below): ® Maps,plans,plots or plat submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant:()Iwo!„!';llr i ivot Q Data sheets prepared/submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant. NI Office concurs with data shects/delineation report. ❑Office does not concur with data sheets/delineation report. ❑ Data sheets prepared by the Corps: ❑ Corps navigable waters'study: 20 U.S.Geological Survey I lydrologic Atlas: ❑USGS NHD data. USGS 8 and 12 digit HUC maps. • U.S.Geological Survey map(s).Cite scale&quad name: I:2 it;, !;;.s;: + !!t'.:.•.` ;i:.;. ❑ USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey.Citation: • `To complete the analysis refer to the key in Section Ilt.D.6 of the lnstnictional Guidebook. 3 ❑ National wetlands inventory map(s). Cite name: . IIQ State/Local wetland inventory map(s): . ❑ FEMA/FIRM maps: ❑ I 00-year Floodplain Elevation is: (National Geodectic Vertical Datum of 1929) . Photographs:[1 Aerial(Name&Date): I r.',;,•.tss.,, I mil Ii+:hit,,. I. 4).a,hs I.'uts?. or I.1 Other(Name&Date):ru ia,,,t„>. Jut:;-.Juh aE id:\L,-,e.i'U!.s', ❑ Previous determination(s). File no.and date of response letter: . r II Applicable/supporting case law: It.gpsni ,md c.:.m h:lI;.s•;; ❑ Applicable/supporting scientific literature: . ❑ Other information(please specify): B. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS TO SUPPORT JD: `7,::, Z.1 , PI t ,•t irid Birds ?'rr¢ Traffic � a W4 F It _ rs + 1 -ti _ j� r`. f t•,•4 t wizr i _'_ ''�4. `--�. f , Iy, h h-1',°.,-L. _ . . _k W4a r . --t:-...-,„ t ill ',t ittl' . -'•''141.4 4 -t., .`..'-'i.-*-7 ,‘. '-- `,.- - , - 4'., )1, '„,,* / i j , i, pip Ilk .7 """7".'4'. W7 C wv 1, c ,. 14,..40 WS L i� 0 i WiA fix` .. 11 W3 -,-,.. ..•Tom. ' 44 ' ' 'i. `~'i.\' 4 S +I/ «'I we L LS x ''ate s'' i AO . 5! :f t j y r` I i 40' f,',I. * 1 \,,, : - et-- ---- -NPl ..-.- ; .-*. ,.. .O4P' t\tik 4._- k T r � t e ,.i W2 NFL' I iii‘ ` 3 t s • 4 APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION FORM U.S.Army Corps of Engineers This form should be completed by following the instructions provided in Section IV of the JD Form Instructional Guidebook.• SECTION I: BACKGROUND INFORMATION A. REPORT COMPLETION DATE FOR APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION(JD): B. DISTRICT OFFICE,FILE NAME,AND NUMBER: I)c n'.or it:aalator t)time.i'ar'•c'u•l'roi+-r,:.Ntt s)-'tk;'-;W.)-,t_}l_`.. C. PROJECT LOCATION AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION: State:t.'t? County/parish/borough. 11.:ici City. • Center coordinates of site(lat/long in degree decimal format): Lat. N; Long. W Universal Transverse Mercator:iiiI.1i'$O1..t t:•;2tt\ Name of nearest waterbody:c.\ I.t. nt:rt-nta,I.•irri,':tti;m J:eh Name of nearest Traditional Navigable Water(TNW)into which the aquatic resource flows:ruche 1:l•.ut,l•;'ace: Name of watershed or Hydrologic Unit Codc(HUC): ❑ Check if map/diagram of review area and/or potential jurisdictional areas is/are available upon request. O Check if other sites(e.g.,offsite mitigation sites,disposal sites,etc...)are associated with this action and are recorded on a different JD form. D. REVIEW PERFORMED FOR SITE EVALUATION(CHECK ALL THAT APPLY): ® Office(Desk)Determination. Date: I)co;oil'.1r I:.?tut" lEi Field Determination. Date(s):�.:I'tetnivr I'.20t17 It id:t:!:cnn ukant SECTION II: SUMMARY OF FINDINGS • A. RHA SECTION 10 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION. There.toe no "navigable waters of she U.S."within Rivers and Harbors Act(RHA)jurisdiction(as defined by 33 CFR part 329)in the review area.[Required] ❑ Waters subject to the ebb and flow of the tide. ❑ Waters are presently used,or have been used in the past,or may be susceptible for use to transport interstate or foreign commerce. Explain: . . B. CWA SECTION 404 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION. 'there N.re"wagers of ilre U.S."within Clean Water Act(CWA)jurisdiction(as defined by 33 CPR part 328)in the review area.[Required' 1. Waters of the U.S. a. Indicate presence of waters of U.S.in review area(check all that apply): t ❑ TN Ws,including territorial seas ❑ Wetlands adjacent to TN Ws ❑ Relatively permanent waters'(RPWs)that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs O Non-RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs ❑ Wetlands directly abutting RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs ❑ Wetlands adjacent to but not directly abutting RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs ❑ Wetlands adjacent to non-RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs O Impoundments of jurisdictional waters ❑ Isolated(interstate or intrastate)waters,including isolated wetlands b. Identify(estimate)size of waters of the U.S.in the review area: Non-wetland waters:,,tt:t linear feet: III width(it)and/or acres. Wetlands: acres. c. Limits(boundaries)of jurisdiction based on: I9$7 Delineation Manual Elevation of established OI I WM(it-known): . 2. Non-regulated waters/wetlands(check if applicable):3 O Potentially jurisdictional waters and/or wetlands were assessed within the review area and determined to he not jurisdictional. Explain: . III t Boxes checked below shall be supported by completing the appropriate sections in Section III below. r For purposes of this form,an RPW is defined as a tributary that is not a 114W and that typically flows year-round or has continuous flow at least"seasonally" (e.g.,typically 3 months). Supporting documentation is presented in Section II1.F. SECTION III: CWA ANALYSIS • D. DETERMINATIONS Of JURISDICTIONAL FINDINGS.THE SUBJECT WATERS/WETLANDS ARE(CHECK ALL THAT APPLY): I. TNWs and Adjacent Wetlands. Check all that apply and provide size estimates in review area: ❑TNWs: linear feet width(II),Or, acres. ❑Wetlands adjacent to TNWs: acres. 2. RPWs� that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs. LJ Tributaries of TNWs where tributaries typically flow year-round are jurisdictional.Provide data and rationale indicating that tributary is perennial I.', ,ii. r isik Ila\.i:l,rniiiii.;l ibis n:an-lit. L irripr;iii,1u dcrinc;u..iiIt'll :1()`...'. krill.r'n:unt, El Tributaries of TNW where tributaries have continuous flow"seasonally"(e.g.,typically three months each year)arc jurisdictional. Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section III.B. Provide rationale indicating that tributary flows seasonally: Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters in the review arca(check all that apply): ❑ Tributary waters: linear feet width(Ii). O Other non-wetland waters: acres. Identify type(s)of waters: . 3. Non-RPWs'that flow directly or indirectly into'I'NWs. O Waterbody that is not a'l'NW or an RPW,but flows directly or indirectly into a TNW,and it has a significant nexus with a TNW is jurisdictional. Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section III.C. Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters within the review area(check all that apply): ❑ Tributary waters: linear feet width(ft). • Other non-wetland waters: acres. Identify type(s)of waters: . 4. Wetlands directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs. ❑ Wetlands directly abut RPW and thus are jurisdictional as adjacent wetlands. O Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow year-round. Provide data and rationale • indicating that tributary is perennial in Section 111.1.2,above.Provide rationale indicating that wetland is directly abutting an RPW: ❑ Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow"seasonally." Provide data indicating that tributary is seasonal in Section II1.1.3 and rationale in Section 111.1.2,above.Provide rationale indicating that wetland is directly abutting an RPW: . Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres. S. Wetlands adjacent to but not directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs. • Wetlands that do not directly abut an RPW,but when considered in combination with the tributary to which they are adjacent and with similarly situated adjacent wetlands,have a significant nexus with a'I'NW are jurisidictional.Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section 111.0. Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres. 6. Wetlands adjacent to non-RPWs that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs. ❑ Wetlands adjacent to such waters,and have when considered in combination with the tributary to which they arc adjacent and with similarly situated adjacent wetlands,have a significant nexus with a TNW arc jurisdictional.Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section 111.0. Provide estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres. 7. Impoundments of jurisdictional waters.5 As a general rule,the impoundment ofa jurisdictional tributary remains jurisdictional. ❑ Demonstrate that impoundment was created from"waters of the U.S.,"or ❑ Demonstrate that water meets the criteria for one of the categories presented above(1.6),or O Demonstrate that water is isolated with a nexus to commerce(see E below). • `Sec Footnote it 3. 'To complete the analysis refer ro the key in Section III.D.6 of the instructional Guidebook. 2 SECTION IV: DATA SOURCES. 0 A. SUPPORTING DATA. Data reviewed for JD(check all that apply-checked items shall be included in case file and,where checked and requested,appropriately reference sources below): I i Maps,plans,plots or plat submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant:Queen of the River. O Data sheets prepared/submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant. ❑Office concurs with data sheets/delineation report. ❑Office does not concur with data sheets/delineation report. O Data sheets prepared by the Corps: . O Corps navigable waters'study: . U.S.Geological Survey Hydrologic Atlas: . E USGS NHD data. USGS 8 and l2 digit I lUC maps. ❑ U.S.Geological Survey map(s).Cite scale&quad name: I �li;tul t iusil Ptah. ❑ USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey.Citation: . ❑ National wetlands inventory map(s). Cite name: . ❑ State/Local wetland inventory map(s): . O FEMA/FIRM maps: . ❑ 100-year Floodplain Elevation is: (National Geodectic Vertical Datum of 1929) ❑ Photographs:❑Aerial(Name&Date):. or O Other(Name&Date):. O Previous determination(s). File no.and date of response letter: . 0 Applicable/supporting case law: l:ap:ui+,:nt,I t•:u;i1;I I ❑ Applicable/supporting scientific literature: . ❑ Other information(please specify): . R. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS TO SUPPORT JD: III III NOTIFICATION OP ADININISTRATIVF AP.P AL;OPTIONS AND PROCESS AND R QUES'1 FO t APPEAL Applicant: I File Number: Date: Attached is: See Section below INITIAL PROFFERED PERMIT(Standard Permit or Letter of permission) A _Y PROFFERED PERMIT(Standard Permit or Letter of permission) __ B PERMIT DENIAL C APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION D ..�. PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION E SECTION I -The following identifies your rights and'options regarding:an administrative appeal of the above decision. 'Additional information May found at.http://usace.army.rail/inet/functions/cw/cecwo/reg or Corps regulations at 33 CFR Part 331, • A: INITIAL PROFFERED PERMIT: You may accept or object to the permit. • ACCEPT: If you received a Standard Permit, you may sign the permit document and return it to the district engineer for final authorization. If you received a Letter of Permission(LOP),you may accept the 1.,01'and your work is authorized. Your signature on the Standard Permit or acceptance of the LOP means that you accept the permit in its entirety,and waive all rights to appeal the permit,including its terms and conditions, and approved jurisdictional determinations associated with the permit. • OBJECT: If you object to the permit(Standard or LOP)because of certain terms and conditions therein,you may request that the permit be modified accordingly.You must complete Section II of this form and return the form to the district engineer. Your objections must be received by the district engineer within 60 days of the date of this notice,or you will forfeit your right to appeal the permit in the future. Upon receipt of your letter,the district engineer will evaluate your objections and may: (a) modify the permit to address all of your concerns,(b)modify the permit to address some of your objections, or(c)not modify the permit having determined that the permit should be issued as previously written. After evaluating your objections,the district engineer will send you a proffered permit for your reconsideration,as indicated in Section B below. fb: PROFFERED PERMIT: You may accept or appeal the permit • ACCEPT: If you received a Standard Permit,you may sign the permit document and return it to the district engineer for final authorization. If you received a Letter of Permission(LOP),you may accept the LOP and your work is authorized. Your signature on the Standard Permit or acceptance of the LOP means that you accept the permit in its entirety,and waive all rights to appeal the permit,including its terms and conditions, and approved jurisdictional determinations associated with the permit. • APPEAL; If you choose to decline the proffered permit(Standard or LOP)because of certain terms and conditions therein,you may appeal the declined permit under the Corps of Engineers Administrative Appeal Process by completing Section II of this form and sending the form to the division engineer. This form must be received by the division engineer within 60 days of the date of this notice. C: PERMIT DENIAL: You may appeal the denial of a permit under the Corps of Engineers Administrative Appeal Process by completing Section II of this form and sending the form to the division engineer. This form must be received by the division engineer within 60 days of the date of this notice. D: APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION: You may accept or appeal the approved JD or provide new information. • ACCEPT: You do not need to notify the Corps to accept an approved JD. Failure to notify the Corps within 60 clays of the date of this notice, means that you accept the approved JD in its entirety,and waive all rights to appeal the approved JD. • APPEAL: If you disagree with the approved JD,you may appeal the approved JD under the Corps of Engineers Administrative Appeal Process by completing Section II of this form and sending the form to the division engineer. This form must be received by the division engineer within 60 days of the date of this notice. E: PRELIMINARY JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION: You do not need to respond to the Corps regarding the preliminary JD. The Preliminary JD is not appealable. If you wish, you may request an proved JD (which may be appealed),by contacting the Corps district for further instruction. Also you may ovide new information for further consideration by the Corps to reevaluate the JD. SECTION II REQUEST FOR.API'EAL-or OBJECTIONS TO.AN INITIALPRO.FFERED PERMIT REASONS FOR APPEAL OR OBJECTIONS: (Describe your reasons for appealing the decision or your objections to an itial proffered permit in clear concise statements. You may attach additional information to this form to clarify where your reasons • •objections are addressed in the administrative record.) Ill ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:The appeal is limited to a review of the administrative record,the Corps memorandum for the record of the appeal conference or meeting,and any supplemental information that the review officer has determined is needed to clarify the administrative record. Neither the appellant nor the Corps may add new information or analyses to the record. However, you may provide additional information to clarify the location of information that is already in the administrative record. POINT OF CONTACT FOR QUESTIONS OR INFORMATION: If you have questions regarding this decision and/or the appeal If you only have questions regarding the appeal process you may process you may contact: also contact: 'timothy T.Carey US Army Corps of Engineers,Northwestern Division Chief,Denver Regulatory Office Attn:David Gesl,Appeal Review Officer 9307 South Wadsworth Boulevard 1125 NW Couch St. Littleton,CO 80128 Portland,OR 97209-4141 (303)979-4120 Telephone(503)808-3825 RIGHT OF ENTRY: Your signature below grants the right of entry to Corps of Engineers personnel,and any government consultants,to conduct investigations of the project site during the course of the appeal process. You will be provided a 15 day notice of any site investigation,and will have the opportunity to participate in all site investigations. ID 0 Administrative Appeal Process for Approved Jurisdictional Determinations polDistrict issues approved Jurisdictional Determination(JD) to applicant/landowner with NAP. Approved JD valid Does applicantnandowner for 5 years Yes accept approved JO? No Max.60 days District makes new approved JD. 4 Applicant/landowner Yes provides new information? No Applicant decides to appeal approved JO. Applicant submits RFA to division engineer within 60 days of date of NAP. 4 Corps reviews RFA end notifies Max.30 • appellant within 30 days of receipt. days To continue with appeal process,appellant must revise RFA 4 Is RFA acceptable? No See Appendix D. Yes FOptional JD Appeals Meeting and/or site investigation. RO reviews record and the division engineer Max.90 (or designee)renders a decision on the merits days of the appeal within 90 days of receipt of an acceptable RFA. Division engineer or designee remands decision to district, with specific instructions,for ♦ Does the appeal have merit? reconsideration;appeal Yes process completed. No District's decision is upheld; appeal process completed. Appendix C Weld County Planning Department / Z GREELEY OFFICE \Vti L.� JUN 05 7008ts � ✓Co • WeIcP SbFW*iR4eferral May 21, 2008 Crier esi MAY 2 7 2000 COLORADO Section The Weld County Department of Planning Services has received the following item for review: Applicant LaFarge West, Inc., Case Number USR-1657 do Jennifer Vecchi Please Reply By June 20, 2008 Planner Kim Ogle Project A Site Specific Development Plan and a Special Review Permit for Mineral Resource Development Facility including Open Pit Gravel Mining and materials processing in the A(Agricultural)Zone District. Legal E2 SE4 Section 25; NE4 Section 36,T6N, R67W; and W2 SW4 Section 30; NW4 Section 31, T6N, R66W of the 6th P.M., Weld County, Colorado. For precise legal see application. Location South of and adjacent to CR 64.5 and East and West of, and adjacent to CR 25. • Parcel Number 0807 25 000048; 0807 36 000037; 0805 30 000069; 0805 30 000082; 0805 31 000004 The application is submitted to you for review and recommendation. Any comments or recommendation you consider relevant to this request would be appreciated. Please reply by the above listed date so that we may give full consideration to your recommendation. Any response not received before or on this date may be deemed to be a positive response to the Department of Planning Services. If you have any further questions regarding the application, please call the Planner associated with the request. Please note that new information may be added to applications under review during the review process. If you desire to examine or obtain this additional information, please call the Department of Planning Services. You will be notified in writing of the Planning Commission date once the date is determined. ❑ We have reviewed the request and find that it does/does not comply with our Comprehensive Plan because ❑ We have reviewed the request and find no conflicts with our interests. O See attached letter.Comments: —r( 4 Pro' Cc.+ is toc 1 Orr .5ss4c v {x,,-+ MaMa-Libi_ IJWD4t G+3 4 it-Ce`_)0 nci 5-hak trl utiay.p Pc treAc_ „v pot+ sh vcL Lajas to+ inc<uc With tk t StR.(0Ong Ha I. COOT ,. O --(G� It Ill. a-✓t rapper t`-t to cults ui Signature D1,Aii4 \ �,� -.1.ci Date (,?/3/0 S� • Agency CDo I rtit ►M t +I/Veld County Planning Dept. •5918 10th Street,Greeley, CO.80631 :•(970)353-6100 ext.3540 ❖(970)304-6498 fax LaFarge West - USR-1657 Page 1 of 1 Kim Ogle • From: Hice-Idler, Gloria [Gloria.Nice-Idler@DOT.STATE.CO.US] Sent: Monday, June 09, 2008 8:39 AM To: Kim Ogle Subject: LaFarge West- USR-1657 Kim, Thanks for providing the traffic impact study! The study doesn't really address where the traffic will end up, but since the volumes don't appear exceptionally high, I doubt that it would impact the obvious CDOT intersections. The thing I was concerned about was if traffic would find its way to SH 392. None of those intersections have turn lanes and as we now see with CR 23 and SH 392, increasing lefts at any of those intersections could be a safety issue. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. Gloria Hice-Idler Permit Supervisor CDOT Region 4 1420 2nd Street Greeley CO 80631 x (970) 350-2148 • 06/09/2008 1625 Broadway yk noble Edo 0202 energy Denver,Colorado 80202 Weld County Planning Department Tel: 303.228.4000 GREELEY OFFICE •Fax: 303.228.4280 AUG 107nn9 August 6, 2°09 RECEIVED Department of Planning Services North Office 918 10th Street Greeley, CO 80631 Re: Lafarge Mining Operations(Parsons Property) Township 6 North, Range 67 West, 6th P.M. Section 36: NE/4 Weld County, CO Ladies and Gentlemen: Under a Development Application Referral received August 3, 2009, Weld County Department of Planning Services contacted Noble Energy, Inc. ("NEI"), regarding permit application from LaFarge West, Inc. ("Applicant"), for a site specific development plan and use by special review permit for mineral resource development facility, including open pit gravel mining and materials processing on the captioned property ("Property"). NEI operates several oil and gas wells (the "Wells") and associated pipelines and facilities located on the Property. NEI is very concerned about the impact the proposed development will have on its ability to continue to develop, produce, operate and maintain the Wells, pipelines and access roads on the Property. NEI has not had recent contact with the Applicant relative to • this proposal. To date, no agreement has been finalized and NEI has received no written confirmation from the Applicant that NEI's real property rights to use a reasonable portion of the surface for oil and gas operations and development are being preserved. NEI requests assurance from Weld County that the proposed development will not preclude NEI from developing, producing, operating, drilling and maintaining its Wells, related pipelines and access roads. Until this matter is resolved by agreement with the Applicants,NEI is not waiving its rights as a leasehold owner. Any approval of the proposed development should be conditioned upon the preservation of NEI's real property rights that allow it to make reasonable use of the surface of the lands for oil and gas development and operations. The proposed development must take into account and provide adequate setbacks from NEI's current well sites, production facilities and pipelines as well as continuous access to these assets. NEI requests that these comments be entered into the record for the proposed development and that we continue to be provided with advance notice of all other hearings affecting the Property. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact the undersigned at(303)228-4020. Sincerely, NOBLE GY,INC. end "Barry" Myhr • Special Projects Coordinator cc: P. David Padgett MEMORANDUM TO: Parson Mine- Case File USR-1657 �. DATE June 16, 2008 COLORADO FROM: Kim Ogle, Planning Manager SUBJECT: LaFarge West, Inc. c/o Eric Rickenstein, applicant c/o Jennifer Vecchi, Vecchi &Associates, Consultant The Department of Planning Services reviewed the above referenced Use by Special Review application materials and offers the following comments: Per the application materials, the applicant is proposing a Site Specific Development Plan and a Special Use Permit for Mineral Resource Development Facility including gravel mining in the A (Agricultural) Zone District.. Staff reviewed the text associated with the application. The period of mineral extraction landscape treatment consists of overburden berms and top soil berms placed at the perimeter of the property to screen the internal activities from adjacent properties. From the discussion in the application it appears that a dryland seed mix will be drilled in place thereby covering the ground plane. Staff did not identify any clumps of deciduous and evergreen trees, woody plant material or other"soft materials" proposed for twenty year mine period. Staff strongly suggests that the applicant create visual interest on the berms utilized for long term screening of the facility. Later, with reclamation, a mechanical spade or hand digging of plant material by others will effectively and efficiently move this material to its final location. • The proposed Landscape Plan as delineated on Sheet 7 of 10 and subsequent Landscape drawings dated May 6, 2008 and prepared by Tetra Tech, 1900 South Sunset Street, Suite 1-F, Longmont Colorado is acceptable in principle. Planning Services requests the applicant consider an informal plant material spacing of one, two, three, four and five plantings per group, and not utilize the requisite three plants of one species or similar per clump approach. The planted material shall be sited in a triangulation pattern for effective screening. Existing trees and ground cover along public road frontage and drainage ways shall be preserved, maintained, and supplemented, if necessary, for the depth of the setback in order to protect against and/or reduce noise, dust, and erosion. The applicant proposes to substitute plant material based on availability or lack thereof. The Department of Planning Services requests that the applicant prepare a list of plant material to be considered for substitution prior to this event. The applicant has proposed ponds and wetlands adjacent to the future alignment of"O" Street and Crossroads Boulevard. Given the close proximity to these areas, the issue of slope stability may be an issue. The applicant shall be prepared to address this issue through establishing a strong plant material presence enabling the slope to be held and the prevent sloughing of soils and erosionary processes to gain a foothold, alternatively, the applicant may redesign these two features, i.e., ponds and wetlands to provide a greater setback from the future right-of-way thereby ensuring slope stability. It is requested of the Department of Planning Services, that the applicant shall submit an Improvements Agreement for Public and/or Private Road Maintenance for review and approval by this office and the Department of Public Works. End Memorandum. • Weld County Planning Department GREELEY OFFICE a •(i, lir' MEMORANDUM .R ,� ,lV 11 11. C. 11 TO: Kim Ogle, Planning Services DATE: January 11, 2010 FROM: Clay Kimmi, P.E., CFM, Public Work 7P- COLORADO SUBJECT: USR-1657, LaFarge West, Inc— Parsons Mine COMMENTS: A Final Drainage Report for the Parsons Pit was received by Public Works on December 28, 2009. The report was stamped and signed by Mark Severin, P.E. #28907. The Weld County Public Works has reviewed this proposal; this project falls primarily under the purview of the Use by Special Review Standards; Weld County Code, Chapter 23, Article 2, Division 4, Section 23. Comments and requirements for other items of concern are left in this memo for consistency and tracking purposes. Our comments and requirements are as follows: Comments made during this stage of the review process will not be all inclusive, as revised materials are submitted other concerns or issues may arise. All issues of concern and critical issues during further review must be resolved with the Public Works Department. Roads: WCR 64.5 is paved collector road and requires an 80-foot right-of-way at full build out. Portions of this road are maintained by Weld County and the City of Greeley. Currently, there is 60' of ROW. likCR 25 is a local gravel road and requires a 60-foot right-of-way at full build out. This road is maintained by the City of Greeley. Currently, there is 60' of ROW. Traffic Data: A traffic count performed by Weld County Public Works on April 4, 2008 shows that the AADT for WCR 64.5 is 2794, the ADT is 2540, and the 85th percentile speed is 58 MPH. REQUIREMENTS: Drainage Report: Please address the following comments regarding the final drainage report: 1. The ownership map in Appendix C needs to be updated to reflect the fact that Greeley now owns WCR 25 and portions of WCR 64.5. Weld County owns a small portion of WCR 64.5 along the Parsons Pit frontage. 2. In the 5th paragraph on page 4, the drainage report states that the water captured by the mining area will be pumped from the pit into the Whitney Ditch or one of several other places. In previous discussions with the applicant, it has been stated that the Whitney Ditch will not be used to convey pumped water from the pit. If the Whitney Ditch is to be used then an agreement with the Ditch Company has to be provided. Please review and revise the text as necessary. 3. The calculations in Appendix B appear to be acceptable. However, the title on all of the worksheets states that the calculations are preliminary. The worksheets need to indicate that the calculations have been finalized. 4. The location of the access point shown on Sheets 2 and 4 needs to be shown in the correct location. Please review as revise as necessary. 5. Please provide a grading and erosion control plan for the office and scale house areas. The erosion control plan must include details for all BMPs to be utilized, installation and maintenance notes, and • seed mix to be used. Page 1 of 2 M:\PLANNING - DEVELOPMENT REVIEW\USR-Use by Special Review\USR-1657 Parsons Mine\Review Comments\USR-1657 LaFarge West Parsons Mine Comments 01-11-10.docx Slope Stability Study: The applicant has submitted a revised slope stability study that addresses the County's ncerns. The study is currently under review by the DRMS. Access: The City of Greeley has recently annexed WCR 64.5. Public Works understands that the City of Greeley is allowing the applicant to access the Parsons Pit off of WCR 64.5 instead of WCR 25. When WCR 64.5 was under the jurisdiction of Weld County, the applicant was requested to provide east and westbound lanes deceleration lanes designed for 55 mph, east and westbound acceleration lanes designed for 55 mph, adequate turning radiuses, and a minimum of a 30 foot driveway to accommodate two-way traffic. These improvements met the warrants for a rural highway. Please provide Public Works with a letter from the City of Greeley which states what which improvements the City will waive or require on WCR 64.5 since it is now their road. Additionally, Public Works is requesting onsite improvements that include: paving the access to the scale house/office area or 300 feet whichever is less, paving the small parking lot located near the scale house/office, providing adequate gravel or equivalent surface throughout the approach and loading areas, and providing adequate dust control throughout the approach and loading areas. Please provide Public Works with a construction drawing showing the onsite and offsite improvements. Traffic Study: On September 24, 2009 an updated traffic study was submitted it was prepared and stamped by Eugene Coppola and appears to be acceptable. Flood Hazard Development Permit: An updated flood hazard development permit must be submitted and conditionally approved prior to recording of the plat. Improvements Agreement: An improvements agreement must be finalized and signed prior to recording of the eat. Collateral must be posted for all improvements prior to recording of the plat. Grading Permit: Prior to the issuance of building permits; the applicant must submit a grading permit application which contains a grading plan, sediment and erosion control plan, installation and maintenance notes, seed mix, and a copy of the SWMP. The permit application must be accepted and released by Public Works. Drawings: The following pieces of information need to be added to the drawings prior to recording of the plat: 1. A note needs to be added to sheet 1 under the development conditions that states "Weld County shall not be responsible for the maintenance of onsite drainage related features. 2. A note needs to be added to all sheets stating that the vertical datum for floodplain elevations was converted from NGVD-29 to NAVD-88. A conversion factor needs to be added showing how the BFEs were adjusted to match the NAVD-88 data used for the ground surface elevations. 3. Structural details for the steel and concrete footings need to be shown. Original: Kim Ogle,Planning Services PC: USR-1657 • Page 2 of 2 M:\PLANNING — DEVELOPMENT REVIEW\USR-Use by Special Review\USR-1657 Parsons Mine\Review Comments\USR-1657 LaFarge West Parsons Mine Comments 01-11-10.docx 0 Weld County Planning Department A GREELEY OFFICE •it t '4ID '1.1 MEMORANDUM Weld 111 rrc, IO TO: Kim Ogle, Planning Services DATE: Octob ��® • FROM: Clay Kimmi, P.E. C.F.M. Public Works C44 Cu c COLORADO Janet Carter, El., Public Works e SUBJECT: USR-1657, LaFarge West, Inc— Parsons Mine COMMENTS: Between September 22 and September 29, 2009, Public Works received several pieces of updated information from LaFarge West to review. The information received from LaFarge included: an updated traffic study, plans for 5 different road improvements scenarios, an updated drainage report, and responses to Public Works comments dated August 7 and September 15, 2009. On October 16, 2009, Public Works received the DRMS submittal which contained the updated Slope Stability Study. Please note that future submittals must be complete and cannot be piecemeal. An entire submittal containing all requested information needs to be submitted to the Planning Department so they can send out the appropriate referrals. Please allow adequate review time (up to 30 days) for Public Works to review the submittal. omments made during this stage of the review process will not be all inclusive, as revised materials re submitted other concerns or issues may arise. All issues of concern and critical issues during further review must be resolved with the Public Works Department. REQUIREMENTS: Preliminary Drainage Report: The applicant provided an updated preliminary drainage report that was stamped, signed, and dated by Mark Severin, P.E. # 28907. The report was stamped on September 21, 2009.The updated preliminary drainage report appears to be adequate. Please provide a final drainage report prior to recording of the plat. All drawings in the drainage report need to indicate the datum for the floodplain modeling. Since the floodplain modeling information was converted to NAVD-88, a correction factor must be included in the note. This comment can be addressed in the final drainage report. Slope Stability Study: The applicant has submitted a revised slope stability study that addresses the County's concerns. The study is currently under review by the DRMS. Access: The applicant's representative submitted five alternatives regarding the acceleration and deceleration lanes at WCR 25. After reviewing the alternatives Public Works recommends that Alternative 2 be implemented. In a previous meeting the applicant mentioned that they would like to relocate/realign WCR 25 to the east. If this is still being considered, please submit a conceptual drawing showing the proposed relocation/realignment. affic Stud : On September 24, 2009 an updated traffic study was submitted it was prepared and stamped by ugene Coppola and appears to be acceptable. Page 1 of 2 M:\PLANNING - DEVELOPMENT REVIEW\USR-Use by Special Review\USR-1657 Parsons Mine\USR-1657 LaFarge West Parsons Mine Comments 11-02-09.doc f Sood Hazard Development Permit: An updated flood hazard development permit must be submitted and conditionally approved prior to recording of the plat. Improvements Agreement: An improvements agreement must be finalized and signed prior to recording of the plat. Collateral must be posted for all improvements prior to recording of the plat. Rich Hastings has already been contacted and will provide the applicant with a rough draft of the improvements agreement. Grading Permit: Prior to the issuance of building permits; the applicant must submit a grading permit which contains a grading plan, sediment and erosion control plan, and a copy of the SWMP. The permit must be accepted and released by Public Works. Drawings: The following pieces of information need to be added to the drawings prior to recording of the plat: 1. A note needs to be added to sheet 1 under the development conditions that states "Weld County shall not be responsible for the maintenance of drainage related features. 2. A note needs to be added to all sheets stating that the vertical datum for floodplain elevations was converted from NGVD-29 to NAVD-88. A conversion factor needs to be added showing how the BFEs were adjusted to match the NAVD-88 data used for the ground surface elevations. 3. Structural details for the steel and concrete footings need to be shown. iginal: Kim Ogle,Planning Services USR-1657 CC: Jennifer Vecchi,Planner Anne Johnson,Lafarge • Page 2 of 2 M:\PLANNING- DEVELOPMENT REVIEW\USR-Use by Special Review\USR-1657 Parsons Mine\USR-1657 LaFarge West Parsons Mine Comments 11-02-09.doc • (---scr-f;i MEMORANDUM TO: Kim Ogle, Planning Services DATE: September 15, 2009 FROM: Janet Carter , Public Works Q Clay P.E., C.F.M., Public Works COLORADO SUBJECT: USR-1657, La Farge West, Inc— Parsons Mine Public Works requests that the following comments be addressed and the appropriate submittals be made prior to the Planning Commission hearing. Please note that Public Works needs adequate time to review the submittals prior to the Planning Commission hearing. A. A corrected traffic study has not been submitted to Public Works for review. 1. The traffic study prepared by Eugene Coppola on January 11, 2008 states that a speed limit of 40 MPH in the east bound direction and a speed limit of 55 MPH in the west bound direction was used. This assumption is incorrect the traffic study should be using a speed limit of 55 MPH in both directions. 2. All work in the County Right-Of-Way will need a County ROW permit; and a traffic control plan if traffic will be impacted. • B. Public Works requests that the applicant provided plans for the proposed roadway improvements to WCR 64.5& 25 prior to the recording of the Plat. 1. Applicant shall provide calculations for deceleration length, transition taper, and storage based on a speed limit of 55 MPH for both eastbound and westbound lanes. The applicant shall also include acceleration lanes for trucks exiting the mine site. 2. Access to WCR 64.5 or WCR 25 shall be paved with adequate turning radiuses a minimum of 60 feet in a width of not less than 30 feet to accommodate two-way traffic, match existing grade. La Farge West, Inc. has committed to extend the pavement through to the scale house/office area. 3. Areas including the access to the scale house from the pit area shall be surfaced with adequate gravel or the equivalent and shall have adequate dust control throughout the approach and loading areas. 4. County Road 25 is designated on the Weld County Road Classification Plan as a local road, which requires 60 feet of right-of-way at full build out. County Road 25 will be realigned by Weld County when 'O' Street is constructed to address the existing offset intersection. The proposed 60 foot alignment shall be delineated on the plat as future County Road 25 right-of-way. All setbacks shall be measured from the edge of future right-of-way. La Farge West, Inc. agrees to dedicate 60 feet of right of way for the realignment of County Road 25 once the alignment has been finalized. 5. County Road 64.5 is designated on the Weld County Road Classification Plan as a Collector road, which requires 80 feet of right-of-way at full build out; however, County Roads 64.5 is designated as an Arterial in Windsor's Comprehensive Plan, which requires one-hundred thirty (130) feet of right- • of-way at full build out. The proposed 130 foot alignment shall be delineated on the plat as future County Road 64.5 right-of-way. All setbacks shall be measured from the edge of future right-of-way. Page- 1 -of 3 September 15,2009 C:\Documents and Settings\kogle\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\Content.Outlook\NUIE6KGO\Parsons memo 091509 docx 6. County Road 64 "O" Street west of County Road 27 is designated on the Weld County Road Classification Plan as an Arterial road, which requires 140 feet of right-of-way at full build out. There • is presently 0 (zero) feet of right-of-way. An additional 140 feet shall be delineated on the plat as future County Road 64 right-of-way. All setbacks shall be measured from the edge of future right-of- way. 7. The improvements to either WCR 64.5 or WCR 25 include by not limited to turn lanes, acceleration lanes, deceleration lanes, and associated right-of-way to be obtained shall be delineated on the plat as future right-of-way. C. The applicant has not coordinated with Rich Hastings regarding the required Maintenance Agreements. 1. The applicant shall enter into a Long-Term Road Maintenance and Improvements Agreement with the Weld County Public Works Department on the designated haul route described in the Agreement accepted by Weld County Public Works. 2. The applicant shall be responsible for any damage to County Roads that occurs as a result of slope failures. 3. The applicant shall enter into a Long-Term Road Maintenance and Improvements Agreement with the Weld County Public Works Department on the designated haul route described in the Agreement accepted by Weld County Public Works. The agreement and form of collateral shall be reviewed by the Department of Public Works and accepted by the Board of County Commissioners prior to recording to the USR plat. • 4. No USR activities will be allowed until collateral is posted and or the improvements are completed and accepted. D. An updated slope stability study has not been submitted to Public Works for review. 1. The applicant shall address all redlined comments in the Slope Stability Study. It should be noted that the County has not accepted the Slope Stability Study that was presented in the August 18, 2009 meeting because it has not yet been approved by the Division of Reclamation, Mining and Safety. The Structures Agreement is based in part on the Slope Stability Study so it will not be reviewed until such time as the finalized Slope Stability Study has been submitted for Public Works' review. 2. Public Works has not reviewed the Structures Agreement that was presented at the August 18, 2009 because the Slope Stability Study has not been finalized with the State. When the State finalizes the Slope Stability Study, please submit a revised Structures Agreement for review and comment. E. An updated FHDP has not been submitted. 1. No tanks will be allowed in the floodway and tanks placed in the flood fringe will have to be anchored and permitted under a Weld County Flood Hazard Development Plan (FHDP). 2. Portable toilets will not be allowed in the floodway and will only be permitted in the flood fringe if they are anchored and permitted under a Weld County Flood Hazard Development Plan. 3. No stockpiles will be allowed in the floodway and will only be allowed in the flood fringe if they are • permitted under a Weld County FHDP and are oriented parallel to the direction of flow in the floodplain. The historical flow patterns and run-off amounts will be maintained on site in such a manner that it will reasonably preserve the natural character of the area and prevent property damage Page-2-of 3 September 15,2009 Q\Documents and Settings\kogle\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\Content.Outlook\NUIE6KGOU'arsons memo 091509.docx of the type generally attributed to run-off rate and velocity increases, diversions, concentration and/or • unplanned ponding of storm run-off. 4. No structures or buildings will be allowed in the floodway. 5. The proposal is located within the Flood Hazard Overlay District area as delineated on Preliminary FIRM Community Panel Map 080266 1529E and 1529E dated June 10, 2005. A Flood Hazard Development Permit will be required prior to operation. Building Permits issued will be required to adhere to the following fees. No structures will be allowed in the floodway without an approved FHDP. F. Public Works requests that the following comments be addressed and the appropriate submittals be made prior to the recording of the Plat. I. Applicant shall address all redlined comments shown in the Preliminary Drainage Report. 2. A final drainage report has not been submitted. 3. A note stating "Weld County shall not be responsible for the maintenance of drainage related features." shall be added to the plat. 4. The site must take into consideration storm water capture/quantity and provide accordingly for best management practices. 5. Prior to granting a grading permit the applicant shall provide a Grading Plan and an Erosion and Sediment Control Plan, accepted by Public Works. As part of the grading permit application, the • applicant needs to show that they have obtained a stormwater construction permit from the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment. Page-3 -of 3 September 15, 2009 C:\Documents and Settings\kogle\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\Content.Outlook\NUIE6KGO\Parsons memo 091509.docx k a • 6i MEMORANDUM TO: Kim Ogle, Planning Services DATE: August 7, 2009 O •WIlD FROM: Cla Kimmi, M., Public Works tC Y COLORADO Janet Carter, E.I., Public Works •3<-- SUBJECT: USR-1657, LaFarge West, Inc— Parsons Mine COMMENTS: On August 3, 2009, Public Works received the applicant's response to comments dated June 10, 2008 and June 20, 2008. The applicant's response included a set of drawings showing the extraction plan and landscape details. The drawing redline comments provided with the June 10, 2008 memo were not addressed. Other comments from the June 10, 2008 memo have not been sufficiently addressed. Drawing Comments 1. The floodplain boundaries shown on all of the drawings appear to be incorrect. The floodplain boundaries should be from the 2003 Army Corps of Engineers mapping. The 2003 Corps mapping is considered the best available information and is currently being reviewed by FEMA. 2. Show the floodway boundary from the 2003 Corps study on all drawings. 3. Show the base flood elevations from the 2003 Corps study on all drawings. 4. The vertical and horizontal datums used for elevations need to be provided on every drawing. The • 2003 Corps study is in NGVD-29. All elevation information needs to be in the same datum. 5. On Page 3 (Overall Extraction Plan) and Page 6 the symbol identifying the roadway material needs to be identified in the legend. 6. On Page 3 (Overall Extraction Plan) and Page 6 the WCR 64.5 improvements need to be shown. 7. A note for all conveyor crossings needs to be added to the drawings. The note should state that conveyor crossings located in the 100-year floodplain will obtain FHDPs prior to their construction and that conveyor crossings located in the floodway will be elevated above the entire width of the floodway. 8. The detail for the proposed Poudre River Crossing shows that the conveyor will be elevated a minimum of 24 feet above the water surface. In previous discussions, the applicant indicated that they did not want to elevate the conveyor 24 feet. The detail on page six needs to be modified. 9. Structural details for the steel and concrete footings need to be shown. 10. Page 6 needs a legend for the plant site detail. 11. Add a note to the extraction notes on page 6 that states "Temporary stockpiles will not be located in the floodway or the 100-year floodplain. Temporary stockpiles/berms will not be placed along the river to protect the pit from flooding." 12. Add a note to each page of the landscape plan that states "During the reclamation phase, berms will not be placed in the floodplain and/or floodway without first obtaining an approved Letter of Map Revision from FEMA. An amended flood hazard development permit will be obtained from Weld County." 13. The turning radii for the entrance need to be shown on the drawings. Other Comments Public Works requests that the following comments be addressed and the appropriate submittals be made prior to the Planning Commission hearing. Please note that Public Works needs adequate time to review the •bmittals prior to the Planning Commission hearing. 1. An updated traffic study has not been submitted to Public Works for review. Page 1 of 2 M:\PLANNING— DEVELOPMENT REVIEW\USR-Use by Special Review\USR-1657 Parsons Mine\USR-1657-LaFarge West-Parsons Mine Comments 08-04-09.doc • 2. An updated slope stability study has not been submitted to Public Works for review. The applicant has not coordinated with Rich Hastings regarding the required Maintenance Agreements. 3. Public Works has not received a copy of the Structures Agreement that the applicant indicates is being reviewed by the County. 4. An updated drainage report has not been submitted. 5. The applicant has not coordinated with the County regarding the finalization of the realignment of WCR 25. 6. The applicant has not provided plans for the roadway improvements to WCR 64.5. 7. An updated FHDP has not been submitted. Original: Kim Ogle,Planning Services PC: USR-1657 CC: Jennifer Vecchi,Planner Anne Johnson,Lafarge Pam Nora, Tetra Tech • • Page 2 of 2 M:\PLANNING—DEVELOPMENT REVIEW\USR-Use by Special Review\USR-1657 Parsons Mine\USR-1657-LaFarge West-Parsons Mine Comments 08-04-09.doc � ' it 1�lfe , MEMORANDUM ITO: Kim Ogle, Planning Services DATE: August 4, 2009 WI00 FROM: Cla Kimmi P.E C.F.M Public Works Y COLORADO Janet Carter, El., Public Works SUBJECT: USR-1657, LaFarge West, Inc— Parsons Mine COMMENTS: On August 3, 2009, Public Works received the applicant's response to comments dated June 10, 2008 and June 20, 2008. The applicant's response included a set of drawings showing the extraction plan and landscape details. Redline comments provided with the June 10, 2008 memo were not addressed. Other comments from the June 10, 2008 memo have not been sufficiently addressed. Drawing Comments 1. The floodplain boundaries shown on all of the drawings appear to be incorrect. The floodplain boundaries should be from the 2003 Army Corps of Engineers mapping. The 2003 Corps mapping is considered the best available information and is currently being reviewed by FEMA. 2. Show the floodway boundary from the 2003 Corps study on all drawings. 3. Show the base flood elevations from the 2003 Corps study on all drawings. 4. The vertical and horizontal datums used for elevations need to be provided on every drawing. The 2003 Corps study is in NGVD-29. All elevation information needs to be in the same datum. • 5. On Page 3 (Overall Extraction Plan) and Page 6 the symbol identifying the roadway material needs to be identified in the legend. 6. On Page 3 (Overall Extraction Plan) and Page 6 the WCR 64.5 improvements need to be shown. 7. A note for all conveyor crossings needs to be added to the drawings. The note should state that conveyor crossings located in the 100-year floodplain will obtain FHDPs prior to their construction and that conveyor crossings located in the floodway will be elevated above the entire width of the floodway. 8. The detail for the proposed Poudre River Crossing shows that the conveyor will be elevated a minimum of 24 feet above the water surface. In previous discussions, the applicant indicated that they did not want to elevate the conveyor 24 feet. The detail on page six needs to be modified. 9. Structural details for the steel and concrete footings need to be shown. 10. Page 6 needs a legend for the plant site detail. 11. Add a note to the extraction notes on page 6 that states "Temporary stockpiles will not be located in the floodway or the 100-year floodplain. Temporary stockpiles/berms will not be placed along the river to protect the pit from flooding." 12. The turning radii for the entrance need to be shown on the drawings. Other Comments Public Works requests that the following comments be addressed and the appropriate submittals be made prior to the Planning Commission hearing. Please note that Public Works needs adequate time to review the submittals prior to the Planning Commission hearing. 1. An updated traffic study has not been submitted to Public Works for review. 2. An updated slope stability study has not been submitted to Public Works for review. The applicant has not coordinated with Rich Hastings regarding the required Maintenance Agreements. • 3. Public Works has not received a copy of the Structures Agreement that the applicant indicates is being reviewed by the County. Page 1 of 2 C:\Documents and Settings\kogle\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\Content.Outlook\NUIE6KGO\USR-1657-LaFarge West-Parsons Mine Comments 08-04-09(2).doc 4. An updated drainage report has not been submitted. • 5. The applicant has not coordinated with the County regarding the finalization of the realignment of WCR 25. 6. The applicant has not provided plans for the roadway improvements to WCR 64.5. 7. An updated FHDP has not been submitted. Original: Kim Ogle,Planning Services PC: USR-1657 CC: Jennifer Vecchi,Planner Anne Johnson, Lafarge Pam Mora, Tetra Tech I Page 2 of 2 C:\Documents and Settings'cogle\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\Content.Outlook\NUIE6KGO\USR-1657-LaFarge West-Parsons Mine Comments 08-04-09(2).doc Weld County Planning Departmetlf GREELEY OFFICE ern; ` 1•; MEMORANDUMRECEIVED ID TO: Kim Ogle, Planning Services DATE: May 26, 2009 O � • FROM: Cla Kimmi P.E. C.F.M. Public Works ��< COLORADO Janet Carter, E.I., Public Works Z C SUBJECT: USR-1657, LaFarge West, Inc— Parsons Mine Response to Questions Posed During May 6, 2009 Meeting The modification of curves on WCR 23.75 between WCR 64.5 and WCR 64.75 are not included in any current Weld County road improvements plans. It is anticipated that the modification of the curves will be in conjunction with future development of the adjacent properties and will be largely funded by the area developers. However, Lafarge's long term improvements agreement will be written such that Lafarge will be responsible for paying for their proportional share of the safety improvement warranted by truck traffic on the road at the time. In the fall of 2008, the applicant agreed to pay $85,846 which is 50% of the cost estimate put together at that time for safety improvements to the proposed curves. It should be noted that the cost estimate did not include the cost of right of way acquisition or utility relocates. If the applicant wishes the County to recalculate the cost estimate based on current numbers, the Wst estimate will likely increase because more current data and recent cost evaluations are available r estimating the cost and the cost of right of way acquisition and utility relocates will be factored into the estimate. The improvements agreement can be written such that Lafarge will pay the $85,846 as their proportional share or it can be left open ended saying that Lafarge will pay their proportional share of 50% of the actual cost of the project. During the May 6, 2009 meeting, the applicant's representatives felt that their access location was dependent upon the location of the proposed curves. It appears that there would be minimal impacts to the Lafarge site due to the design and construction of the WCR 23.75 curves as the Lafarge site is approximately 1500 feet away from the curves. This distance should allow enough space for the applicant to adjust their access point. The applicants have the option of relocating their proposed access so that they can use their property for the roadway improvements including the acceleration and deceleration turn lanes. Or the applicant can keep their access at the current proposed location and negotiate the purchase of the Right-of-Way with the neighboring parcels. If you have any questions or if you need further information please feel free to contact Clay Kimmi or Janet Carter. • Page 1 of 1 May 26,2009 M:\PLANNING-DEVELOPMENT REVIEIMUSR-Use by Special Review\USR-1657 Parsons Mine\Followup Memo to 5-6-09 Meeting Revised.doc • Kik Weld County Referral • May 21,12008ounty Planning Department D GREELEY OFFICE C • :MAY 2 7 2008 JUN 1 1 ?ti0 8 COLORADO ji RECEIVED The Weld County Department of Planning Services has received the following item for review: Applicant LaFarge West, Inc., Case Number USR-1657 do Jennifer Vecchi Please Reply By June 20, 2008 Planner Kim Ogle Project A Site Specific Development Plan and a Special Review Permit for Mineral Resource Development Facility including Open Pit Gravel Mining and materials processing in the A(Agricultural) Zone District. Legal E2 SE4 Section 25; NE4 Section 36, T6N, R67W; and W2 SW4 Section 30; NW4 Section 31, T6N, R66W of the 6th P.M., Weld County, Colorado. For precise legal see application. Location South of and adjacent to CR 64.5 and East and West of, and adjacent to CR 25. • Parcel Number 0807 25 000048; 0807 36 000037; 0805 30 000069; 0805 30 000082; 0805 31 000004 The application is submitted to you for review and recommendation. Any comments or recommendation you consider relevant to this request would be appreciated. Please reply by the above listed date so that we may give full consideration to your recommendation. Any response not received before or on this date may be deemed to be a positive response to the Department of Planning Services. If you have any further questions regarding the application, please call the Planner associated with the request. Please note that new information may be added to applications under review during the review process. If you desire to examine or obtain this additional information, please call the Department of Planning Services. You will be notified in writing of the Planning Commission date once the date is determined. ❑ We have reviewed the request and find that it does/does not comply with our Comprehensive Plan because ❑ We have reviewed the request and find no conflicts with our interests. A See attached letter. Comments: • 00,1 Signature Date o/ip/Ob Agency Pw u 1IL.-d :•Weld County Planning Dept. •'x918 109'Street, Greeley,CO.80631 +(970)353-6100 ext.3540 ❖(970)304-6498 fax 7441tig MEMORANDUM TO: Kim Ogle, Planning Services DATE: June 10, 2008 ea. O FROM: Clay Kimmi, P.E., Public Works • COLORADO SUBJECT: USR-1657, LaFarge West, Inc— Parsons Mine The Weld County Public Works has reviewed this proposal; this project falls primarily under the purview of the Use by Special Review Standards; Weld County Code, Chapter 23, Article 2, Division 4, Section 23. Our comments and requirements are as follows: COMMENTS: Roads: WCR 64.5 is paved collector road and requires an 80-foot right-of-way at full build out. This road is maintained by Weld County. Currently, there is 60' of ROW. WCR 25 is a local gravel road and requires a 60- foot right-of-way at full build out. This road is maintained by Weld County. Currently, there is 60' of ROW. Traffic Study: A traffic count performed by Weld County Public Works on April 4, 2008 shows that the AADT is 2794, the ADT is 2540, and the 85th percentile speed is 58 MPH. The traffic study performed by Eugene Coppola on January 11, 2008 states that a speed limit of 40 MPH in the east bound direction and a speed limit a 55 MPH in the west bound direction was used. Based on the County's traffic count, it would appear that Mr. ppola's traffic study should be using a speed limit of 55 MPH in both directions. REQUIREMENTS: Slope Stability Study: The applicant shall address all redlined comments in the Slope Stability Study. Pursuant to the definition of SETBACK in the Weld County Zoning Ordinance (23-1-90), the required setback is measured from the future right-of-way line. It appears as if the setback distances are taken from the centerline of the ROW. It also appears as if the setbacks were not observed for the proposed "O" Street alignment. The applicant shall determine setback distances for WCR 25, 64.5, and the proposed "O" street alignment from the edge of ROW. Access: Access to WCR 64.5 shall be paved with adequate turning radiuses a minimum of 30 feet in width to accommodate two-way traffic, match existing grade. The pavement shall extend through the scale house/office area or 300 feet minimum which ever is less and a small paved parking lot accompanying the facility. Long-Term Road Maintenance and Improvements Agreement: The applicant shall enter into a Long-Term Road Maintenance and Improvements Agreement with the Weld County Public Works Department on the designated haul route described in the Agreement accepted by Weld County Public Works. The applicant shall be responsible for any damage to County Roads that occurs as a result of slope failures. • Page 1 of 2 6/10/08 M:\PLANNING - DEVELOPMENT REVIEW\USR-Use by Special Review\USR-1657 Parsons Mine\USR-1657-LaFarge West-Parsons Mine Draft Comments 6-4-08.doc affic Study: Applicant shall provide calculations for deceleration length, transition taper, and storage based n a speed limit of 55 MPH for both eastbound and westbound lanes. The applicant shall also include acceleration lanes for trucks exiting the mine site. The applicant shall address all redlined comments shown in the Traffic Study Report. Storm Water Drainage: Applicant shall address all redlined comments shown in the Preliminary Drainage Report. The applicant shall show proof of an agreement between LaFarge West, Inc and the owners of the Whitney Ditch allowing the Whitney Ditch to be used for storm water runoff. The agreement shall show how much water the ditch owners will allow to be discharged into the ditch. Given the proximity of the site to Greeley, the applicant shall use Greeley's Design Storm Rainfall amounts. Grading Permit: Prior to granting a grading permit the applicant shall provide a Grading Plan and an Erosion and Sediment Control Plan, accepted by Public Works. Off-Street Parking/Loading Areas: These areas including the access to the scale house from the pit area shall be surfaced with adequate gravel or the equivalent and shall have adequate dust control throughout the approach and loading areas. Off-site Roadway Improvements — Public Maintenance Agreement: The applicant shall provide the land for the right-of-way, design, and construct a paved two lane roadway, acceleration lanes, and decelaration lanes qpth adequate shoulder for a speed limit of 55 mph. Public Works shall review and accept all designs and ans for this construction. • Page 2 of 2 6/10/08 M:\PLANNING — DEVELOPMENT REVIEW\USR-Use by Special Review\USR-1657 Parsons Mine\USR-1657-LaFarge West-Parsons Mine Draft Comments 6-4-08.doc Page 1 of 2 Kim Ogle • From: Clayton D. Kimmi Sent: Monday, June 16, 2008 3:52 PM To: Kim Ogle Cc: Don Dunker Subject: RE: Referral for LaFarge USR-1657 Kim, I hope this will clarify some of your questions. CR 25 is being realigned. The new alignment ROW will have to be dedicated to the County. The old ROW will need to be vacated by the County and deeded back to the applicant. The future "O" Street alignment is shown on the maps. The 140 ft ROW will have to be dedicated to the County. There were some problems with the slope stability study regarding the future alignment of"O" Street. The applicant did not appear to consider the setbacks that were determined in the slope stability study for the future "O" Street alignment. The setbacks in the slope stability study also appear to have been taken from the center of the existing ROW instead of the edge of the future ROW for WCR 25, WCR 64.5, and the future "O" Street alignment. The conveyor must be covered. Pavement requirement is for both the entrance and the exit. It applies to both because if one is shut down for some reason, the other could conceivably be used as both an entrance and an exit. The traffic study does not provide enough information to adequately describe the acceleration and deceleration lanes. I concur with your comment regarding keeping the conveyor system free of gravel, spillage, vandalism, etc. Please let me know if you need more clarification on anything. Thanks Clay From: Kim Ogle Sent: Monday, June 16, 2008 1:31 PM To: Clayton D. Kimmi Cc: Don Dunker Subject: Referral for LaFarge USR-1657 Clay Additional information is requested for the above referenced USR County road 23 bisects the proposed mining area and appears to have a new proposed alignment to address the offset of road. Planning staff requests comments on the rights-of-way and the proposed alignment. The proposed "O" Street extension from CR 27 vicinity to Windsor Town Limits. Granted this is a proposed alignment, however, acknowledgement of it and reference to the FHU study may be important •The conveyor over CR 23 is presently delineated as an open structure without a cover. If a cover is required should this be noted, if not,please explain why not. 06/16/2008 Page 2 of 2 A good note to include may be: • The applicant shall be responsible for keeping the crossing area of the conveyor system free of gravel, spillage, vandalism etc. (Department of Public Works) Will the pavement requirement hold for the entire circular drive or only the area to the scale house? Has PW provided the applicant with the redlines for the Slope Stability Study?, the Traffic Study Report? Flood Hazard Development Permit is acceptable? Early thoughts, more to come Kim Ogle I Plunni on Manager I `170356.+0ur, i.819 P.970364 6403 Weld Counix Homily Service`s-Greclec(11'11cc 9,L 1 emh 1)1km Crueler CU 80x31 ko_leaco wtield.eo us • • 06/16/2008 I I . I Traffic Impact Study LAFARGE WEST PARSONS MINE SITE Weld County, Colorado I I 1 • Prepared For: Lafarge West, Inc. 1800 N. Taft Hill Road Fort Collins, CO 80521 I I I Prepared By: Eugene G. Coppola, P.E., PTOE ;;a°;F,GEORG... Co c). P. O. Box 630027 c,�,QG��s q- Littleton, CO 80163 .' 303-792-2450 wuttel April 21, 2008 I I a B. Existing Traffic Conditions Traffic counts were collected as pad of this study and extracted from other sources and agency publications. The CR 641/2— CR 25 intersection was counted during the morning highway peak hour (6:30 -8:30 A.M.) and the afternoon highway peak hour (3:30 - 5:30 P.M.). Current peak hour traffic is shown on Figure 2 with count sheets provided in Appendix A. i r 4,c. coA...4 data It Lucia ?,....61c.t ks e". 4-y-orc st o.,1 AST-a5glo, AA-DT= al9c1, 4 85'a'-pa.res,1r C:+ seed = Ss mpN. C. Surrounding Land Uses Various industrial developments currently exist or are under construction to the west of the site. Other development is generally limited to rural land uses including mining, processing and batching operations. I • IV. FUTURE TRAFFIC CONDITIONS A. Site Assumptions Parsons Mine is expected to commence operations in approximately 2009 -2010. Mining, processing, reclamation and possibly recycling will occur on site. It is antici- I pated that the site will be operational for 20 years; however, the rate of mining and overall life of the mine is dependent on demand and market conditions. Most opera- tions will be conducted during daylight hours with some administrative and mainte- nance activities possible at other times. Emergencies will be addressed whenever they arise. Up to 10 employees might be on site at the same time during the peak season. Site access will be provided by two one-way driveways to CR 641/2. The west driveway will accommodate exiting site traffic with the east driveway serving traffic entering the site. The site exit is planned some 415 feet east of CR 25 with the site entrance about 550 feet further to the east. Material needing to be transported • across CR 25 will be moved by conveyor. A concept plan is provided on Figure 3. 4 I • D. Background Traffic I Background traffic was developed for the opening year of Parsons Mine (2010) and the year 2030. This represents the short-term and long-term time frames, respec- tively. I Annual traffic growth of 3% was used to estimate future background traffic. Short- term background traffic is shown on Figure 5 with long-term background traffic shown on Figure 6. I E. Future Total Traffic Total traffic is the combination of site traffic and background traffic. It represents conditions with Parsons Mine fully operational during the high season. Peak hours N • were evaluated since these times represent the most severe traffic conditions. Site traffic was added to background traffic resulting in the short- and long-term total traffic shown on Figures 7 and 8, respectively. F. Future Roadway System Roadway improvements are planned by the County with focus on re-constructing the curves along CR 64% to permit a 40 MPH speed limit. For evaluation purposes, a 40 MPH speed limit was assumed on CR 64% approaching the site from the west with a 55 MPH speed limit approaching the site from the east. The 40 MPH speed limit is �1� S N reasonable given the proximity of the curve. Windsor extends the 40 MPH speed limit w about one-half mile each side of the curve and retains the 40 MPH speed limit through the new industrial area along CR 64%. A 40 MPH speed limit seems more prudent than the 55 MPH speed limit proposed by the County adjacent to the Lafarge site; however, determination of the appropriate speed limit and subsequent posting is the a• responsibility of the County. l bz c . -�oo oC ss m?N bob.d��ec) ions. P 9 • V. TRAFFIC IMPACTS 1 To assess operating conditions with the site fully functional, capacity analysis proce- dures were utilized at the site access intersections. Analyses were undertaken for short- and long-term conditions during peak hours. At the onset of these undertak- ings, traffic volumes were reviewed at each location to identify if auxiliary lanes will be warranted. Findings are indicated below. A. Auxiliary Lanes and Traffic Controls A review of future total traffic found that an eastbound right turn deceleration lane and a westbound left turn deceleration lane will be warranted on CR 64% at the site entrance. This determination is based upon CDOT Access Code criteria for RA 1i . roadways having approach speeds of 40 MPH from the west and 55 MPH from the ( east. Truck traffic was fully considered in these investigations. No other auxiliary 4 lanes will be warranted with Parsons Mine fully operational. Future roadway geome- U1/4-yz cexo- verb 0655 rrPu rn 641,_a oc)crar. . try is shown on Figure 9. "�'� 4 ovc % 4 b.grc ccorn, ' /�N12t5, a.ccel&a lir. law will be n.zdeJ in.ac),4m.. }o c kaI u.. tr.\o-^.e. 4 B. Future Operating Conditions (with Parsons Mine) 4 Capacity analyses were conducted using short- and long-term total traffic and the roadway geometry shown on Figure 9. For definition purposes, acceptable conditions 4 are defined as overall level of service 'D'. Critical traffic movements may operate as low as level of service `E/F' for critical side street left turns at stop sign controlled intersections. Resultant levels-of-service are indicated in the following table. g• 1I 14 I 1 a • OPERATING CONDITIONS WITH PROJECT Short-Term Level of Service Long-Term Level of Service I Movement/ Intersection Control AM Pk Hr PM Pk Hr AM Pk Hr PM Pk Hr Direction ICR 64%— Entrance Stop WB L A A A A CR64'%—Exit Stop NBL B B B B Ii NB R A B B B IAs indicated, all intersections will operate acceptably with peak season activity at the Parsons Mine site. This is verified by the finding that level-of-service 'B' or better is Iexpected for all traffic movements during both peak hours. Capacity worksheets are available in Appendix B. Improved operations are expected at other times. I I • � II. DESIGN ISSUES $ 4,6 Preliminary au diary lane designs were developed for 12 foot auxiliary lanes on CR .y n5 a _5 1 64% at the sit entrance intersection. This effort used CDOT design criteria for RA 4)e N roadways, a 0 MPH approach speed limit from the west, a 55 MPH approach speed S'A Iilimit from the east, and significant truck usage. The eastbound right turn lane should 4 have 370 feet of deceleration length plus 145 feet of transition taper. The westbound WL 40b } S c e crzlu.Fir. N left turn lane should have 25 feet of storage, 220 feet of transition taper, and 600 feet j ,74e1 LA `tof deceleration distance. Re-direct tap s should be consistent with the posted speed °'�F limits on CR 64 1/2. These design param ters are preliminary and subject to confirma- waa n. $' tion or modification as part of the design p ss. � 25&A- oc ,y 1s nO1- si,ccluc...t' 'r a 4 ?3 Zy 5,4,„,„„...c., ?rw'ow 4_,-,4,,.,,,,,. s " -;h area u 5oV 4 fix a4ar. arge radii should be provided on the site driveways to 'acilitate easy truck turns lfnto 4 and out of the site and the northbound site egress approach to CR 64% should be wide enough to accommodate two trucks. + II 11 16 I 0 VII. CONCLUSIONS Based on the above documented analyses and investigations, the following can be concluded: • Current traffic using CR 64% is modest in the area of Parsons Mine. • During the peak season, Parsons Mine will generate up to 28 morning highway Itl' peak hour trips, 48 afternoon highway peak hour trips, and 400 trips per day. At off-peak season times, site traffic will be significantly less. Overall, some 200 site trips are expected on an average annual daily traffic basis. I, • An eastbound right turn lane and a westbound left turn lane will be warranted at the site entrance on CR 64%. These lanes should be built as indicated in 0 this report provided the assumed speed limits are realized and no limiting is- sues arise during the design process. Additionally, the egress driveway should •,• be wide enough to accommodate two outbound trucks and truck radii should I be provided at both driveways. • Acceptable operating conditions will be achieved and maintained through the long term at all intersections with the recommended improvements. In summary, it is concluded that Lafarge's Parsons Mine will not adversely impact the area street system. This is verified by the finding that the identified roadway geometry will facilitate acceptable operating conditions for the foreseeable future. ---Pkera.szauuk o o e"?emavek s1aa5e e4lca1aAl.rs re9o.sdhat +le acc,44W o,.)IP deceltretv,-1a,e.b -- lecse fxae all ewle \J1e,n o, 41e?aalc . 004 A1. twewaaa. 17 • G ► PRELIMINARY DRAINAGE REPORT FOR ► PARSONS MINE ► ► Prepared for: LAFARGE WEST, INC. ► 1800 North Taft Hill Road Fort Collins, Colorado 80521 • D&A Job No: CG-0138.013.00 ► May 2008 ^ � ent2f� Cormag-�.-J1'' ► l3 }lease ce-Lret. 2 co?fez �Re Fn4/ taiga_y &ere 10 fit\nciC Dor icy DEERE & AULT CONSULTANTS, 1NC. • 600 South Airport Road, Suite A-205 Longmont,CO 80503 (303)651-1468 • Fax (303)651-1469 1 I • INTRODUCTION The Parsons Mine property is located in the East '/ of the Southeast '/ of Section 25, Township 6 1 North, Range 67 West of the 6th PM; in the West 1/2 of the Southwest '/ of Section 30,Township 6 1 North, Range 66 West of the 6th PM; in the Northeast % of Section 36, Township 6 North, Range 67 West of the 6th PM; and in a portion of the Northwest 'A of Section 31, Township 6 North, Range 66 West, of the 6th PM. The site is directly south of Weld County Road 64'1 and Weld County Road 25 bisects the property. The property contains a significant commercial deposit of 1 sand and gravel located near the Cache La Poudre River. The majority of the site lies to the north of 1 the Cache la Poudre River with a small portion to the south of the river in Section 36. There are 1 several existing gravel mine operations in the project area. -h leash. tae. c terns e,.A -# I\ dro..wnot(WA 1 Purpose and Sc pe of Study 1 This report has been prepared to document the results of a hydrologic analysis of existing, mining, and reclamation conditions of the project. 1 Site Conditions Figure 1 is a vicinity map showing the site and surrounding area. The permit boundary will encompass approximately 381 acres, with mining activities anticipated to disturb approximately 203 1 acres of the site. The remaining unmined acres will be used for overburden and topsoil stockpiles, • offsets from existing structures, property lines and waterways, and internal road and conveyor access. The irregularly shaped parcel is relatively flat and low lying in the greater floodplain of the Cache la Poudre River. The portion of the site to the south of the Cache la Poudre River is entirely within the jurisdictional 100-year floodplain. Approximately half of the site to the north of the Cache la Poudre River is within the 100-year floodplain. Agricultural uses surround the property with the exception of some reclaimed gravel mining ponds that are southeast of the property. The site has been drilled during sampling episodes from March of 2002 to April of 2007, and 0 testing has been performed to verify the sand and gravel deposits are commercially marketable. Overburden exists to an average depth of approximately 7 feet over the entire site. All overburden needed for the construction of the final reclamation slopes will remain on-site. The average depth of sand and gravel is 13 feet across the site and mining at the site is intended to progress down to 1 bedrock. • The groundwater level lies approximately 5 to 15 feet below natural ground level, on average. The deposit is therefore classified as a wet alluvial deposit. However, mining operations will be carried out following dewatering. I The site is owned by Lafarge West Inc.; Livingston Leigh Livestock of Weld County, LLC; and Sally A. Parsons. Lafarge has an option to purchase Sally A. Parsons' property and they have a lease to mine the Livingston Leigh Livestock of Weld County, LLC property. The mineral rights in the portions of the site that fall in Section 36 are owned by the Colorado State Board of Land Commissioners. This affects portions of the land owned Sally A. Parsons and Livingston Leigh • Livestock of Weld County, LLC. coo,J4 4 a.�l c°v ht 4t !arn�a 4.3‘4".\ r ,n Zoo q- eb yews lre uri-v iOnwrao-ry. - I - P:\0136 Lafarge\013S 013 Parsons PenniiPreliminary Drainage Repnit`Reperetlor I I 1 ' . ' The site has historically been used as irrigated agricultural land and rangeland with approximately 98 percent pervious cover. On-site soils are 14 percent, 53 percent, 7 percent, and 26 percent Hydrologic Soil Groups A, B, C, and D, respectively according to the Soil Survey for Weld County, Colorado, Southern Part by the Soil Conservation Service (Appendix A). Portions of the site are within a Zone A floodplain according to the Federal Emergency Management Agency(FEMA) Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) Community-Panel No. 080266- 0608-D, dated September 27, 1991 (Appendix A). The Corps of Engineers completed a Flood Insurance Study in October 2006 for the Cache la Poudre River in the vicinity of the Parsons site. This study is currently under review by FEMA but has not yet become the effective study. For the purposes of this Flood Hazard Development Permit, the 100-year floodplain and floodway boundaries of this pending study will be adopted as the best available information. The 100-year floodplain, floodway, and Base Flood Elevations (BFEs) are shown on the Firmette presented in Appendix A. -- FEb b}wwr. on 'l3,n mak, oat ern 1,X)u -29 -Re --t FE- one_ skown below*L e,,,.cct,,,,� sr,.r4cce_ ecwAc� s (A3hICk is Incorroti �le�a vl.&ICt µp .mac\& su-c 4o.[e_ aka,on‘v, U6u17-2, oc cou.de 41/44-Cxd[xlwilvra } } sivhz 4L DRAINAGE BASIN AND SUBBASINS be r, et/wutea it km)&,rC,u ckiiu, I ' Major Basin Description 0 The Parsons Mine site is located in the lower portion of the Bracewell Basin. The Bracewell Basin is an unstudied basin that is located east of the Law Basin and west of the Coal Bank Creek Basin. Subbasin Description The existing drainage conditions at the Parsons Mine site are presented in Figure 1 and Exhibit 1. The existing historical drainage conditions were modeled as nine subbasins, H1 through H9. All the subbasins, with the exception of Subbasin H9, return storm water directly to the Cache la Poudre River once leaving the Parsons Mine site. Subbasin H9 passes storm water onto an adjacent • property to the east. Portions of the site have historically been irrigated from the Whitney Ditch. All laterals on the site will be abandoned for both mining and reclamation phases of this project. 4 Each existing drainage subbasin is described in more detail below. Subbasin HI contains approximately 194 acres. The boundary extends from the north bank of the Cache la Poudre River in the southwest corner of the property north to the slough that runs through 4 the property then northwestwards to the Whitney Ditch near its intersection with WCR 23 and from +1 the intersection of the property with the Cache la Poudre River northwestwards to the Whitney Ditch near its intersection with WCR 23. The divide for drainage entering the slough provided the eastern boundary of this subbasin. The subbasin encompasses most of the Northwest One-Quarter of the Northeast One-Quarter of Section 36, and the Southeast One-Quarter of Section 25. The slope is generally between 0.5 percent and 2.0 percent with a subbasin average of 0.8 percent. Storm water drains from northwest to southeast as overland flow and returns to the Cache la Poudre River as such. The subbasin has historically been used as cropland and contains two farmsteads. 0 Subbasin H2 contains approximately 159 acres. The boundary begins at the culvert under WCR 25 • • and follows the slough along its southern extent to the boundary with Subbasin Hl. The centerline of WCR 25 forms the eastern boundary and the Whitney Ditch forms the northern boundary. The 0 0 —2 — P.'0138 Lafarge 0118 013 Parsons PerminPreliminaiy Dratnape Repod\Repose doc 0 I e The constraints related to mining and reclamation of the Parsons Mine site deal primarily with • mining setbacks from property boundaries, wetlands, floodway boundaries, critical wildlife habitats, and existing gas/oil wells. During mining phases, temporary topsoil and overburden stockpiles will be constructed adjacent to the mined areas. These temporary stockpiles will be located outside of the floodway boundaries and oriented parallel to the direction of overbank flow. Upon completion of the reclamation phase of the project, all temporary stockpiles will be removed and final grading within the limits of the 100-year floodplain will be to an elevation at or below pre-mining grades. e Hydrologic Criteria The rational method has been used to estimate peak stormwater runoff for the 100-year storm return 4 period for subbasins with drainage areas of 160 acres or less. Runoff from subbasins with drainage areas greater than 160 acres was estimated using the Colorado Urban Hydrograph Procedure (CUHP). Supporting calculations are provided in Appendix B. Rainfall intensity-duration- frequency data is based on information provided in the Precipitation-Frequency Atlas of the Western United States, Volume III—Colorado, published by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). tut ,, no o11tCL to 4 wL.rk Jdt loop- -Ikr de..r vaiue MaftelaithasionelS6 n,u cox,Maly 1e G reeaey \3e..1.tt A-kq \0o yr 1L.r nN • ti.6.& be Hydraulic Criteria a.7gcrte.Les . �Ileae ctido 4 ealck4til-.ors i-vs+na 2 Df5jnckes. During the mining phases of this project, temporary minor conveyance channels will be constructed to keep runoff from frequent storm events from entering the mining areas. In many places, these 40 minor channels will be constructed alongside temporary topsoil and overburden stockpiles. The design of these temporary conveyance channels will be presented in the Erosion Control Plan of the Final Drainage Report. Direct precipitation on the mined areas and runoff from major storm events will be captured in the mining areas. A dewatering trench and dewatering pump will be utilized to remove this captured runoff from the mining areas. Discharge permits will be obtained for each of these dewatering discharge points to allow discharge to the Whitney Ditch or to the natural drainageways. -> no a e1�..ten.. es...k ku�1ni,scl atr� ,.,41 irLe avk-o„.7 t W.I.�Outce 0,.1 0.9 0 The runoff from the site is dramatically reduced after reclamation is completed as compared with J 3 og. CO the existing conditions. The unlined reclaimed ponds will capture and attenuate surface runoff that d historically flowed across the parcels. Existing natural drainageways will remain undisturbed. For. 671 reclamation, there are no proposed hydraulic components such as conveyance channels, rundown 4,5, cia S channels, culverts, grade control structures, or detention outlets. Each of the unlined ponds will be °Amoco ), -` constructed with an outlet pipe installed to maintain the normal pool elevation. be �/,5C)" e HYDROLOGIC RESULTS 4 Existing Conditions — (ZOO �\� �`ts ..\t cs stmt^^ GSM a_ IOo yr thr 6e-sir sum ei0a.7hs The CUHP2005 computer program was used to model subbasins H1 and H3. These basins exceed the 160-acre limitation of the rational method. Design storm 1-hour depths of 0.94, 1.35, 1.61, 1.95, 5 2.26 and 2.56 inches were entered for the 2, 5, 10, 25, 50 and 100-year storm events, respectively. Maximum depression storage depths and infiltration rates were based on SCS soil type and land use. These values are available in the Urban Storm Drainage Criteria Manuals, Volumes 1, 2 and 3 - 5 - P All 38 Lafmge10118 013 Parsons PenniAPreliminery Drainage RepmlvRcporl.doc S • Subbasin H8 is entirely cropland and grassland and has an area of 85 acres and an imperviousness of 0 percent. The runoff coefficient was calculated to be 0.365 for the 100-year storm. A time of concentration of 114 minutes would result in a 100-year rainfall intensity of 1.65 inches per hour. Applying the rational method produced a peak runoff of 51.1 cfs. Subbasin H8 returns to the Cache la Poudre River as overland flow. Subbasin H9 is entirely cropland and grassland with an area of 25 acres and an imperviousness of 0 percent. The runoff coefficient was calculated to be 0.416 for the 100-year storm. A time of concentration of 51 minutes would result in a 100-year rainfall intensity of 2.89 inches per hour. Applying the rational method produced a peak runoff of 30.0 cfs. Subbasin H9 passes overland flow drainage to the neighboring property to the east. Phase 1 Mining Conditions Phase 1 of the mining plan represents the initial phase of five planned phases. The processing plant and the silt storage pond created in Phase 1 will remain for all later phases of mining. The use of 4.eP temporary topsoil and overburden stockpiles around the perimeter of the mining area in Phase 1 is\fte ut typical of the procedure used in later phases. Mined regions are reclaimed using the temporary M� topsoil and overburden stockpiles at the end of each phase.I-Conveyors across WCR 25 and the 6w, Na Cache la Poudre River will be used to move mined materials to the processing plant.)Lafarge c,1I my b‘°` anticipates mining and reclaiming the site in approximately 20 years; however, the rate of mining tlr°�`"" and overall life of the mine is dependent upon.demand and market condi ions. leas. 56.14 4 twit em'e'"!.; • rr H v 4 l¢ ? . Shor.� a err r.� Lra kips Curifi r Pier o-1\ way actors A4 Clooelaio 1. Subbasin P1-1 has an area of 11 acres. The imperviousness of the subbasin is 15 percent since the subbasin will be under mining operations. Based on the runoff equation in the USDCM, the runoff coefficient was calculated to be 0.435 for the 100-year storm. A time of concentration of 212 minutes would result in a 100-year rainfall intensity of 1.05 inches per hour. Applying the rational method produced a peak runoff of 5.2 cfs. Subbasin P1-1 collects in the borrow ditch along WCR 25 and discharges to the Cache la Poudre River via the drainage channel on the southern end of the property and contributes flow to DP8. Subbasin P1-2 has an area of 3 acres. The imperviousness of the subbasin is 15 percent since the subbasin will be under mining operations. The runoff coefficient was calculated to be 0.435 for the 100-year storm. A time of concentration of 51 minutes would result in a 100-year rainfall intensity of 2.89 inches per hour. Applying the rational method produced a peak runoff of 3.4 cfs. Subbasin P1-2 collects in a dewatering trench and is routed east to discharge off the property near where historical basin H9 had overland flow discharges and contributes flow to DP9. Subbasin P1-3 has an area of 37 acres and is completely captured within the gravel mine and thus ry) \- the peak flow was not calculated. Water collected in the mine will be pumped into the Whitney osSet Ditch and to the Cache la Poudre River. The storm water capture reduces flow at DP8. J� �' a if ur Subbasin P1-4 has an area of 13 acres and is completely captured within the gravel mine and thus r,4 the peak flow was not calculated. Water collected in the mine will be pumped into the Cache la • Poudre River. The storm water capture reduces flow at DP8. - 7 - P 10118 Lafarpe.01}8 011 Parsons PenniAPmliminary Drainage kepod Repon.doc s have an insignificant affect on the imperviousness. The runoff coefficient was calculated to be 0.400 for the 100-year storm. A time of concentration of 162 minutes would result in a 100-year rainfall intensity of 1.28 inches per hour. Applying the rational method produced a peak runoff of 81.0 cfs. Subbasin P1-14 collects in a slough and returns to the Cache la Poudre River via a deep cut channel. 11 Reclaimed Conditions - F_splw.�. hou 4L d1srlw%e. Crum er.cl. \Da i. cc .k). F1°( ase-mete 1 4 if Mal I bas data..% Cols)9.014.4.. \oo Ai dtskos r . s ra.is l<`ra&4.. s basw.et LOO �okic. t c.'Ilent 'c), This site will be mined and reclaimed to create a diverse, stable, and sustainable environment. There are significant opportunities to enhance wildlife habitat and the natural aesthetics of the Cache la Poudre River riparian corridor. The reclamation plan is designed to accommodate these opportunities. Existing riparian vegetation and wetlands have been identified and will be monitored 4 and protected through mining and reclamation. Mining activities will be set back an appropriate 1 distance from all areas designated for preservation. 1 A combination of open water ponds, wetlands, and upland pastures will be created by the mining ® and reclamation process. Creative use of materials generated by mining and processing operations 1 will enhance and compliment the existing riparian corridor. Silts will be used to form diverse silt basin wetlands. Excess overburden will be used to vary the shape and slopes of the finished unlined ponds. Native and adaptive plantings and ground covers will be used to restore and enhance all areas disturbed by mining activities. • Subbasin RB 1 will be predominately grassland with an area of 134 acres. The imperviousness of the subbasin is 2 percent. Based on the runoff equation in the USDCM, the runoff coefficient was calculated to be 0.358 for the 100-year storm. A time of concentration of 153 minutes would result in a 100-year rainfall intensity of 1.33 inches per hour. Applying the rational method produced a peak runoff of 64.1 cfs. Subbasin RB1 returns to the Cache la Poudre River as overland flow at DPI. 4 Subbasin RB2 will be predominately grassland with an area of 45 acres. The imperviousness of the 4 subbasin is 2 percent. The runoff coefficient was calculated to be 0.401 for the 100-year storm. A 4 time of concentration of 95 minutes would result in a 100-year rainfall intensity of 1.88 inches per hour. Applying the rational method produced a peak runoff of 34.0 cfs. Subbasin RB2 would be captured by Pond 4C and would no longer contribute runoff to DPI. 1 Subbasin RB3 will be predominately grassland with an area of 107 acres. The imperviousness of the subbasin is 2 percent. The runoff coefficient was calculated to be 0.418 for the 100-year storm. A time of concentration of 156 minutes would result in a 100-year rainfall intensity of 1.31 inches per hour. Applying the rational method produced a peak runoff of 58.6 cfs. Subbasin RB3 collects 1 in a slough and returns to the Cache la Poudre River via a deep cut channel at DP2. Subbasin RB4 will be predominately grassland with an area of 38 acres. The imperviousness of the subbasin is 2 percent. The runoff coefficient was calculated to be 0.362 for the 100-year storm. A 4 time of concentration of 105 minutes would result in a 100-year rainfall intensity of 1.75 inches per 4 • hour. Applying the rational method produced a peak runoff of 24.0 cfs. Subbasin RB4 would be captured by Pond 2A and would no longer contribute runoff to DP2. 4 - 9 - P'0135 lafaruc0]38.013 Parsons Permit\Preliminary Drainage Repon\Repon doc 4 1 , • APPENDIX B CALCULATIONS deJr-(on,C 4' ks, c Th2Se Cajct.Ir.'lMz 5LaI\ be ,nchuked. FT) le7 -6 ,v C4CIL ak.AN y erec,ds s ac motels .see {v ne c),scL o., • • li .(c72.6D Qnt -) .)° IL' Div\l'R `,4' [71S�4.6.o bL�l!I f,4 i Do yr, a A, el2'Silt(Am 5717(A\ "`J a.7`sIt at m • 3 lb a y LL y y .c v y r d v c a a a a ° a a a a a s ° 0o C c a 3 2 > a d m m m p m v LL d m LL LL II . > ._ mac, o. ° m a m a a m a a a a_ a a a a i .a c ' c a c o yr.) 0 U U N U U `m m m m m m m CO m sa CO CO �° a a m m lb LL O O U U U U O cm 000 000 O U U O c m O E. c 3 m t- 0 * tp 0 tp O p O t0 6 N U LL - 4 m 0 h N 4• 0 N ^ N N 7 0 Gci C 7 o o al: p N H .at O p p p RI an d c.'",- N CO CO E a m el ) m m m CC m u N Q N it, N 7 L , N N ^ r r r ' W O Q mtn fD Of Q < N N t") N co !n N '- b N N N N an 6 h co N N 11 C a- N N c- N r N ' ,- N T- N _ w R m m m m V V O N 1[) O _D . (O W OI p to co '' '7 N CO r M co R' K maim cc O m toce ix m m m Ill K m m m m m CC CC CC X Xm m m m m m CO I cc ce al C E M LL o o + r 3 r 3 3 3 3 G co wa c Is LL LL a LL W d yLL IL ❑ ll aaLL a c o a a is K m o o m m 3 a ❑ > ≥ > a a ca > 2 92 > a v oyd CO rn z - o m _ anm m .v _`maa_m` a > m v = cars m m m m m U V u -' O p m ID m`o U U U > 3 (tom U O O O 0 O O NI c O o 1p N C s'K IO j coil! 6= 9 3 O O O p• 0 O CO b y Y U LL Y '— CO CO. N h (O Pi N N Q ' N to ' O r co O O 14 0) C° m 02 C4. N N '- � • N N N 4a: t7 � 'P ? q m a N w ,. ca 3 O F , � m m m Q m °y � � rn ^ vwi Hrn errm for r N N r r CO• .` m ' �. O W N N LO N N N .- in ,_ ? ^ co y_ 7 CD W N N 0 co m a m. co li 0• C c ` U in x = < N_ to r 7 M V h tp N M a O r N M m m a x x aaa as a � a - - - I CO a aaaa a. E 0 3 3 r 3 3 mE u w a rn r U uo. % o 0 0 IS E o' a C C a s c c y e d v O N m m o mr. m m LL p O' p m a) > > O O 0 c P! o m K C O m W O o 0 0 o tp b r �. �..� Y. U ' N. [O ' N y ‘_Pi ...Pi co b n- r 6 6 ,- , p p Y N N .- N N O p w m N .fl h to h m N a W en Q q m r ac co � m 4) Q CO CO i[ h N N Ill CO to N N CO N N II,I C co _ 7at 6 m x I I cm m 03 o Q E y E a E g E a E a a r E ca , o CO ❑ N ❑ rn ❑ ° ❑ y aya EC .,E C N ❑ ❑ y w N m o •a fl'1 % 11 . . &y % � ■ \t I y ,r - - - 0 , - - I % ^ ] } \� ® „ ; - m ® /} \ ) \ \ ■. / , � � . I / \ ; _ _ _ ; : ® ■ I - - 2 , „ , 2 , ' Iz -/ { 15 0 . 004. 0 / _ < n _ ; % ® a \ �II ) y . . . . � . � \ ! t , ir 222222 .2 , 66666 ! ! ce; a '01 . - - - - - - 0 n2 ! 2 ,40. - ! ! - : , , , , \ ; § \, re # « / : : $i .il: - - - / g { ° ) ; § & 0 05 ` | \; ; � ° � w - - _L. ! ) „7 ! ! - - co g t\ 4 9 w \ } , Z : 000a . \ ] ) _ M• e - / ! ! ! ! }CO \ / ; \_ g g• 6 btOWLOW \ / ii ; - \ -CO a § a - _ ° 7 is 9 co \ % t II U N i8 9 } ) II _ _ = § \ 4 N 1 Parsons Mine - Lafarge West, Inc 1 Preliminary Drainage Report 1 • Peak Runoff Calculations Using the Rational Method 1 Basin: H2 Condition: Existing Storm Return Period: 1 1 Basin Chracteristics I 1 Area,A 159 acres Basin Imperviousness'(in percent),is 2.0% 1 Distance of Overland Flow, Lo: 3,028 ft Hydrologic Soils Group A Percent of Basin: 0.0% Distance of Channelized Flow,Lc: 3,090 ft Hydrologic Soils Group B Percent of Basin: 74.2% 1 Average Basin Slope,S: 0.01174 fUft Hydrologic Soils Groups C&D Percent of Basin: 25.8% 1 Slope of Channelized Flow,Se: 0.00258 ft/ft Conveyance Coefficient2,Co: 15 1 1 Runoff Coefficient 1 Runoff Coefficient Equations For 100-yr Storm Return Period: KA =-0.25i +0.32 CA=KA for CA?0else CA=0 K00 =-0.39i +0.46 (0.858i3-0.786i2+0.774i+0.04) For 10-yr Storm Return Period: KA =-0.141 +0.17 Cco=Kco+ iK 0.18i +0.21 Ce=(Qn+C00)/2 co =_ For 5-yr Storm Return Period: K N =-0.08i +0.09 K00 =-0.101 +0.11 A Return Period' Ccompostie I CA I CB I gip I KA I Kco 4, 5-Year 0.103 0.000 0.082 0.163 0.088 0.108 10-Year 0.190 0.069 0.165 0.262 0.167 0.206 100-Year 0.400 0.217 0.362 0.507 0.315 0.452 4 Time of Concentration Rainfall Intensity Total time of concentration equation: Rainfall Intensity Equation: Lesser of3: to=t,+t, k(28.5`Puy)/(10+To)°'8G where P,h(is the 1 hr point rainfall depth or tc=L/180+10(if in urban area) Overland flow travel time equation: to= 162 min Prhr I i.,..\ 11O$1 t=(0.395"(1.1 -Cs)*sgrt(L0))/53-33 ti= 94 min Return Period in in/hr (. ) 0.StA Channelized flow travel time equation: t,= 68 min 5-Year 1,36•)4 .6 ft ;till—Is kdf'fr if t=Lo/(V*60)where V=(C„"Sm°s) V= 0.762 ft/s 10-Year L6'-It 75- 0. use `tr 100-Year 246 2. 71 1. ll�'p I Peak Flow Rate Rational Method Equation: Q=Composite"I`A Return Coomposne I A Q 7 Period in/hr acres cfs \. 5-Year 0.103 '0.6 159 r• 5. 10-Year 0.190 0 159 2 100-Year 0.400 1 28 159 8 .0 Notes: , 1: Basin imperviousness determined from guidelines in UDFCD Drainage Criteria Manual Table RO-3 liiiiiii 2: Conveyance coefficient determined from guidelines in UDFCD Drainage Criteria Manual Table RO-2 3: Minimum to is 10 min.for non-urban areas and 5 min.for urban areas Date: 4/16/2008 �,7 5 m (—D-L a. - - o :en 2 _ ■ ■ - } 7: El : = ~ I ! I I / } ! # : » ; I I . \ - oo _ o i ; ■ : - /; § B : § n - { \ � { 2 co GO co co on - - - - - a % ` : : ` _ ) , , , nn . _ : k ( � Ili 2 / --15 ) § 7§ i§ � � g1 « 0. } ' / ; •-:-. ' I. - - - - - # » i I. r Ple co a)` n — E , eri en en en , , enen % . ) g . , e rf� ° - ! . \ { } \ od , o . - ■ ; ! % gril ®o i - }LT LT / / o _ oo _ § i 0. 4 . - O & { ( 0 _ C ilk 0 CC - : ii4 cm O. ) 0 E um co k i - 5 \ / itf H (}Glzz { = 2222 o : \, , , , , � ! \ ; § 7222// i , I Parsons Mine - Lafarge West, Inc • Preliminary Drainage Report i • Peak Runoff Calculations Using the Rational Method ll II Basin: H4 Condition: Existing Storm Return Period: b Basin Chracteristics I Area,A: 97 acres Basin Imperviousness (in percent),is 2.0% I Distance of Overland Flow, Le: 2,784 ft Hydrologic Soils Group A Percent of Basin: 4.5% I Distance of Channelized Flow,Lc: 1,930 ft Hydrologic Soils Group B Percent of Basin: 24.6% ll Average Basin Slope,S: 0.04965 ft/ft Hydrologic Soils Groups C&D Percent of Basin: 70.9% Slope of Channelized Flow,S„,: 0.06408 ft/ft Conveyance Coefficient,C,: 15 Runoff Coefficient I Runoff Coefficient Equations For 100-yr Storm Return Period: KA =-0.251+0.32 1 CA=KA+(1.31i3-1.44i2+1.135i-0.12) for CA 20 else CA=0 Kco =-0.391+0.46 ll Cc0=Kc0+(0.858i3-0.78612+0.774i+0.04) For 10-yr Storm Return Period: KA =-0.14i +0.17 lbCe=(CA+C00)/2 ' K00 =-0.181 +0.21 For 5-yr Storm Return Period: KA =-0.08i +0.09 i K00 =-0.10i +0.11 II Return PeriodI Composite I CA ' L CB I Cc0. . I KA I Kco . I 5-Year 0.136 0.000 0.082 0.163 0.088 0.108 'S • 10-Year 0.229 0.069 0.165 0.262 0.167 0.206 bi 100-Year 0.459 0.217 0.362 0.507 0.315 0.452 Time of Concentration Rainfall Intensity 4 Total time of concentration equation: Rainfall Intensity Equation: A Lesser of3: te=t;+t1 1=(28.5'P.,er)/(10+-Ulm where Plhr is the 1 hr point rainfall depth ITS or L=L/180+10(if in urban area) wx Gt3 + Overland flow travel time equation: to= 62 min Pier I 417"I‘417"I‘y� t;=(0.395'(1.1 -C5)'sgrt(L0))/S033 q= 54 min Return Period in in/hr T1 a'•`'N Vaa) Channelized flow travel time equation: tr= a min 5-Year 135" tar li t,L,/(V'60)where V=(C,'S,;15) V= 3.797 fUs 10-Year 131• f..69' ,. 100-Year 266 2,68 Ili Peak Flow Rate 41) Rational Method Equation: 0=Ccompoene*I*A Return CeAmeasee I A Q Illi Period in/hr acres cfs 5-Year 0.136 fl 97 7,Q „4:, at 4 10-Year 0.229 j 97 3 L� Illi 100-Year 0.459 .53 97 1 2. •gt in r 7 I S • Notes: 1: Basin imperviousness determined from guidelines in UDFCD Drainage Criteria Manual Table RO-3 II 2: Conveyance coefficient determined from guidelines in UDFCD Drainage Criteria Manual Table RO-2 3: Minimum t, is 10 min.for non-urban areas and 5 min.for urban areas Date: 4/16/2008 I Ile LAS2 G 0`251 - 4U-(f al ;11.-Xla d tei Parsons Mine - Lafarge West, Inc '* Preliminary Drainage Report • Peak Runoff Calculations Using the Rational Method li 04 Basin: H5 Condition: Existing Storm Return Period: lii Basin Chracteristics Ili Area,A: 28 acres Basin Imperviousness'(in percent), is 0.0% 4 Distance of Overland Flow,Lo: 1,061 ft Hydrologic Soils Group A Percent of Basin: 12.3% 5 Distance of Channelized Flow,Lc: 0 ft Hydrologic Soils Group B Percent of Basin: 0.0% OS Average Basin Slope,S: 0.00067 ft/ft Hydrologic Soils Groups C&D Percent of Basin: 87.7% IR Slope of Channelized Flow, Sw: ft/ft Conveyance Coefficient2,C,: 5 04 Runoff Coefficient 44 Runoff Coefficient Equations For 100-yr Storm Return Period: KA =-0.251 +0.32 4 Ca=KA+(1.31i3-1.44i2+ 1.135i-0.12) for CA?0 else CA=0 Kco =-0.39i +0.46 Ill Cco=Kco+(0.858i3-0.786i2+0.774i+0.04) For 10-yr Storm Return Period: K Y a =-0.141+0.17 Ce=(CA+Cco)/2 Kw =-0.181 +0.21 For 5-yr Storm Return Period: KA =-0.08i+0.09 lia Kee =-0.101+0.11 S Return Period! Ccomposite I CA . I Ca I .CCD J KA I Kco fis 5-Year 0.132 0.000 0.075 0.150 0.090 0.110 4 • 10-Year 0.225 0.050 0.150 0.250 0.170 0.210 III 100-Year 0.463 0.200 0.350 0.500 0.320 0.460 4 I Time of Concentration Rainfall Intensity 4.1 Total time of concentration equation: Rainfall Intensity Equation: 4- Lesser of3: tc=t;+tt la(28.5'Pity)/(10+Tp)°286 where Plhr is the 1hr point rainfall depth 'l or to=L/180+10(if in urban area) l Overland flow travel time equation: to= 139 min piny I 4SQ- C(14%4.9� t,=(0.395'(1.1 -C5)'sgrt(Lj))/S°33 ti= 139 min Return Period in in/hr S � ~i:..., Channelized flow travel time equation: t1= 0 min 5-Year tt.3S 7 ti=L,/(V'60)where V=(C,*Sw°5) V= 0.000 ft/s 10-Year 1.�r1 0 0 i. 100-Year 2 4 7r Peak Flow Rate Rational Method Equation: O=Ccomposite'I*A Return Ccomposite I A Q Period in/hr acres cfs. 4. 5-Year 0.132p�.7 28 Z,A.71 d 631. 10-Year 0.225 0/�0 1 28 • A/ 100-Year 0.463 43\ 28 A .tih:. r. .,.90• I Notes: \ 1: Basin imperviousness determined from guidelines in UDFCD Drainage Criteria Manual Table RO-3 2: Conveyance coefficient determined from guidelines in UDFCD Drainage Criteria Manual Table RO-2 3: Minimum tc is 10 min.for non-urban areas and 5 min.for urban areas Date: 4/16/2008 Use-G Destr 4-eYv.. 4, a,-)8 7i r Parsons Mine - Lafarge West, Inc Preliminary Drainage Report t • Peak Runoff Calculations Using the Rational Method t 1 Basin: 1-16 Condition: Existing Storm Return Period: 1 Basin Chracteristics Area,A: 57 acres Basin Imperviousness'(in percent),is 0.0% li Distance of Overland Flow,Lo: 1,764 ft Hydrologic Soils Group A Percent of Basin: 24.8% it Distance of Channelized Flow,Lo: 1,055 ft Hydrologic Soils Group B Percent of Basin: 64.7% 11 Average Basin Slope,S: 0.00496 ft/ft Hydrologic Soils Groups C&D Percent of Basin: 10.5% Slope of Channelized Flow,Sw: 0.00025 ff/ft Conveyance Coefficient,Cv: 15 1 Runoff Coefficient Runoff Coefficient Equations ' For 100-yr Storm Return Period: KA =-0.251 +0.32 CA=KA+(1.31i3-1.44i3+1.135i-0.12) for CA a 0 else CA=0 KCo =-0.39i +0.46 Cco=Kco+(0.858i3-0.786i2+0.774i+0.04) For 10-yr Storm Return Period: KA =-0.14i +0.17 !. Cs-(QA+CCo)/2 ' Kco --0.18/ +0.21 For 5-yr Storm Return Period: KA =-0.08i +0.09 S • Kco.=-0.10i +0.11 Return Period' Cmmaesite I CA I C8 I COD I KA I Ka) . S 5-Year 0.064 0.000 0.075 0.150 0.090 0.110 • 10-Year 0.136 0.050 0.150 0.250 0.170 0.210 S 100-Year 0.329 0.200 0.350 0.500 0.320 0.460 Time of Concentration Rainfall Intensity 4 Total time of concentration equation: Rainfall Intensity Equation: 4 Lesser of3: to=t,+tt 1=(28.5'Plhr)/(10+To)°'7s's where Prnr is the 1hr point rainfall depth 7 or tc=L/180+10(if in urban area) i `5 Overland flow travel time equation: to= 173 min Plhr I U^� �('U_�SR, 7 V(0.395'(1.1 -C5)*sqrt(L0))/Sa33 t;= 99 min Return Period in in/hr 'lei ill e/Al-ng- Channelized flow travel time equation: -V 74 min 5-Year .35/ tr=Lo/(V*60)where V=(C„*5w°•3) V= 0.237 ft/s 10-Year 1. \ 100-Year 2 6 .2 I Peak Flow Rate Rational Method Equation: Q=Coomposae'I"A Return Coom,,,s;re I A Q Period in/hr acres cfs 5-Year 0.064 57 l/.�a' ' ilk! 10-Year 0.136 0. 57 1100-Year 0.329 .22 57 2. Notes: 1: Basin imperviousness determined from guidelines in UDFCD Drainage Criteria Manual Table RO-3 2: Conveyance coefficient determined from guidelines in UDFCD Drainage Criteria Manual Table RO-2 3: Minimum to is 10 min.for non-urban areas and 5 min.for urban areas Date: 4/16/2008 s Parsons Mine - Lafarge West, Inc Preliminary Drainage Report Peak Runoff Calculations Using the Rational Method 4 • Basin: H7 Condition: Existing Storm Return Period: 4 Basin Chracteristics Area,A: 22 acres Basin Imperviousness'(in percent),is 0.0% I Distance of Overland Flow, Lo: 1,300 ft Hydrologic Soils Group A Percent of Basin: 65.1% Distance of Channelized Flow, L,: 0 ft Hydrologic Soils Group B Percent of Basin: 34.4% 4 Average Basin Slope, S: 0.00421 ft/ft Hydrologic Soils Groups C 8 0 Percent of Basin: 0.6% 4 Slope of Channelized Flow,SW: ft/ft Conveyance Coefficient2,C,: 5 4 Runoff Coefficient Runoff Coefficient Equations • For 100-yr Storm Return Period: KA =-0.25i+0.32 4 CA=KA+(1.31i3-1.44i2+ 1.135i-0.12) for CA≥0else CA=0 K00 - 0.391 +0.46 Ccc=Kco+(0.85813-0.786i2+0.774i+0.04) For 10-yr Storm Return Period: KA =-0.141 +0.17 I, CB=(CA+C00)/2 Kco =-0.181+0.21 For 5-yr Storm Return Period: r KA =-0.08i +0.09 IS • K00 =-0.10i +0.11 A Return Period' Ccomposne I CA I CB I Cq0 I KA I Kco 5-Year 0.027 0.000 0.075 0.150 0.090 0.110 10-Year 0.086 0.050 0.150 0.250 0.170 0.210 100-Year 0.254 0.200 0.350 0.500 0.320 0.460 Time of Concentration Rainfall Intensity 14 Total time of concentration equation: Rainfall Intensity Equation: Lesser of: to=t;+t, l=(28.5*Puy)/(10+T,)3•? where Plhr is the 1 hr point rainfall depth or to=L/180+10(if in urban area) Overland flow travel time equation: t,= 93 min Pity I \Jet G4tAs t,=(0.395'(1.1 -C3)'sgrt(Lo))/SO.33 S= 93 min Return Period in in/hr ''A tit Channelized flow travel time equation: t,= 0 min 5-Year .3 0 t,=L,/(V'60)where V=(C„*S„,°•s) V= 0.000 f/s 10-Year 1. 1 1. 0 100-Year 2 56 1.91 Peak Flow Rate t Rational Method Equation: O=Ccompos,e'I'A Return Cw,ep,e;te I A Q Period in/hr acres cfs 1 y I 5-Year 0.027 22 i • 10-Year 0.086 1. 22 2 100-Year 0.254 1 1 22 1 Notes: Via • 1: Basin imperviousness determined from guidelines in UDFCD Drainage Criteria Manual Table RO-3 2: Conveyance coefficient determined from guidelines in UDFCD Drainage Criteria Manual Table RO-2 3: Minimum t, is 10 min.for non-urban areas and 5 min.for urban areas Date: 4/16/2008 iii 4 Parsons Mine - Lafarge West, Inc r Preliminary Drainage Report • Peak Runoff Calculations Using the Rational Method 11 4 Basin: H8 Condition: Existing Storm Return Period: I Basin Chracteristics Area,A: 85 acres Basin Imperviousness' (in percent),is 0.0% IN Distance of Overland Flow, Lo: 3,944 ft Hydrologic Soils Group A Percent of Basin: 2.9% 4 Distance of Channelized Flow, Lc: 0 ft Hydrologic Soils Group B Percent of Basin: 84.5% ill Average Basin Slope,S: 0.01028 ft/ft Hydrologic Soils Groups C&0 Percent of Basin: 12.6% 4 Slope of Channelized Flow, Sw: fUft Conveyance Coefficient,Co: 5 A Runoff Coefficient 4 Runoff Coefficient Equations + For 100-yr Storm Return Period: KA =-0.251 +0.32 4 CA=KA+(1.31i3-1.44i2+ 1.135i-0.12) for CA≥0 else CA=0 Kcp =-0.39i +0.46 4 Cco=Kco+(0.858i3-0.786i2+0.774i+0.04) For 10-yr Storm Return Period: KA =-0.14i +0.17 4 Ce=(Cn+Cco)/2 Kco =-0.181 +0.21 For 5-yr Storm Return Period: KA =-0.08i +0.09 4 Kco =-0.10i +0.11 Return Period( cc—posit. CA I ' Cs. I Cco I KA I Kco 4 5-Year 0.082 0.000 0.075 0.150 0.090 0.110 4 • 10-Year 0.160 0.050 0.150 0.250 0.170 0.210 4 100-Year 0.365 0.200 0.350 0.500 0.320 0.460 Time of Concentration Rainfall Intensity Total time of concentration equation: Rainfall Intensity Equation: Lesser of3: t0 t,+tt 1=(28.5'Puy)/(10+Tof786 where Pin,is the 1 hr point rainfall depth or to=L/180+10(if in urban area) Overland flow travel time equation: T<= 114 min Pty, I CKSQ.-‘Cet1�3 t,=(0.395'(1.1 -C5)'sgrt(Lo))/S°33 t,= 114 min Return Period in in/hr deun S nv I) Ch to Channelized flow travel time equation: tt= 0 min 5-Year .35 87 j t�Lc/(V'60)where V=(Co'Sw°'5) V= 0.000 ft/s 10-Year 1. 1. 100-Year .5 .6 b1 a 7'e I, , Peak Flow Rate Rational Method Equation: ' Q=Ccompos,te*I*A Return Cwmposite I A Q Period in/hr acres cfs 9 'Q *t 1 V -1tii 5-Year 0.082 .8 85 10-Year 0.160 1.11k4 85 13(1 1 1 100-Year 0.365 1165\ 85 5113 9 • Notes: l 1: Basin imperviousness determined from guidelines in UDFCD Drainage Criteria Manual Table RO-3 2: Conveyance coefficient determined from guidelines in UDFCD Drainage Criteria Manual Table RO-2 3: Minimum to is 10 min.for non-urban areas and 5 min.for urban areas Date: 4/16/2008 I I . . 1 Parsons Mine - Lafarge West, Inc 1 Preliminary Drainage Report 1 •1 Peak Runoff Calculations Using the Rational Method 1 Basin: H9 Condition: Existing Storm Return Period: 1 1 I Basin Chracteristics 1 Area,A: 25 acres Basin Imperviousness' (in percent),is 0.0% Distance of Overland Flow,Lo: 1,136 ft Hydrologic Soils Group A Percent of Basin: 0.0% 1 Distance of Channelized Flow,Lc: 0 ft Hydrologic Soils Group B Percent of Basin: 56.3% 1 Average Basin Slope,S: 0.01650 ft/ft Hydrologic Soils Groups C&D Percent of Basin: 43.7% 1 Slope of Channelized Flow,S,,: ft/ft Conveyance Coefficient2,C,: 5 1 1 I Runoff Coefficient Runoff Coefficient Equations For 100-yr Storm Return Period: KA =-0.25i +0.32 1 CA=KA+(1.3113-1.441'+ 1.135i-0.12) for CA t 0 else CA=0 Kco =-0.391 +0.46 Cco=1<co +(0.858i3-0.786i2+0.774i+0.04) For 10-yr Storm Return Period: KA =-0.14i +0.17 Kco =-0.18i +0.21 Ce-(QA+c.)/2 For 5-yr Storm Return Period: KA =-0.081 +0.09 1 Kco =-0.101 +0.11 Return Period' Coompos;re I CA I CB I CCD I KA I Kco 5-Year 0.108 0.000 0.075 0.150 0.090 0.110 10-Year 0.194 0.050 0.150 0.250 0.170 0.210 4 • 100-Year 0.416 0.200 0.350 0.500 0.320 0.460 A 3 I Time of Concentration Rainfall Intensity Total time of concentration equation: Rainfall Intensity Equation: Lesser of°: te=t,+t, l=(28.5*Pwr)/(10+Tc)°.7e6 where Prm is the 1hr point rainfall depth 1 or to=L/180+10(if in urban area) II r t� 51 min I ( & Gr�l�3 Overland flow travel time equation: Puy 1 Return Period in in/hr darin Stwvr. 4 t=(0.395`(1.1 -Cg)`sgrt(Lp))/Sa as ti= 51 min e-t 'iy Channelized flow travel time equation: t,= 0 mm 5-Year 35 ttLc/(V*60)where V=(C,*s„°•5) V= 0.000 ft/s 10-Year 1. )51' 0 100-Year 2/56 89 Peak Flow Rate I (I Rational Method Equation: / Q=Coo *I*A Return C,,,,,,,„„, I A I Q mppsne + Period in/hr acres CfS �•I r� 5-Year 0.108 \5a 25 Y Wi" ^ 10-Year 0.194 1. P5 1 100-Year 0.416 249\ 25 io-d • e Notes: 1 1: Basin imperviousness determined from guidelines in UDFCD Drainage Criteria Manual Table RO-3 1 2: Conveyance coefficient determined from guidelines in UDFCD Drainage Criteria Manual Table RO-2 3: Minimum to is 10 min.for non-urban areas and 5 min.for urban areas Date: 4/16/2008 1. 0 lk Parsons Mine - Lafarge West, Inc A Preliminary Drainage Report ii 0 Peak Runoff Calculations Using the Rational Method lik Ilk Basin: P1-1 (H8) Condition: Developing Storm Return Period: 14 Basin Chracteristics 34 Area,A: 11 acres Basin Imperviousness(in percent), is 15.0% I Distance of Overland Flow, Lo: 0 ft Hydrologic Soils Group A Percent of Basin: 2.9% I1 Distance of Channelized Flow,Lc: 3,710 ft Hydrologic Soils Group B Percent of Basin: 84.5% 4 Average Basin Slope,S: 0.01028 ft/ft Hydrologic Soils Groups C&D Percent of Basin: 12.6% Slope of Channelized Flow, S-: 0.00085 ft/ft Conveyance Coefficient2,C,: 10 14 Runoff Coefficient Ilk Runoff Coefficient Equations ' For 100-yr Storm Return Period: KA =-0.251 +0.32 CA=KA+(1.31i3-1.44i2+1.135i-0.12) for CA 0 else CA=0 Kw =-0.391+0.46 IN Ccq=Kco+(0.858i3-0.78612+0.774i+0.04) For 10-yr Storm Return Period: KA =-0.14i +0.17 1, CB=(CA+Cab)/2 ' Kco =-0.18i +0.21 For 5-yr Storm Return Period: KA =-0.08i+0.09 Ka) =-0.10i +0.11 A Return Period' Cwmposne I CA , CB I CCD I KA I Kco 5-Year 0.175 0.100 0,168 0.236 0.078 0.095 . 10-Year 0.255 0.171 0.246 0.324 0.149 0.183 100-Year 0.435 0.305 0.424 0.543 0.283 0.402 41 I Time of Concentration Rainfall Intensity Total time of concentration equation: Rainfall Intensity Equation: Lesser of3: tort,+t1 l=(28.5"Pin,)/(10+To)°7 where Pie,is the 1 hr point rainfall depth or tort_/180+10(if in urban area) G �lt,. , �l `V.SE r Overland flow travel time equation: to= 212 min P1hr I Ueyrc'n SAW m t;=(0.395'(1.1 -Cs)'sgrt(L0))/Sa33 t,= 0 min Return Period in in 1 hr Channelized flow travel time equation: 4= 212 min 5-Year 35 X.5C=1..,/(V'60)where V=(C,,'S-05) V= 0.292 ft/s 10-Year 1. 100-Year .56 1.05 p) Peak Flow Rate I J I) Rational Method Equation: I, 0=Ccomposle'I'A Return Cwmposne I A Q Period in/hr acres cfs ,{� 5-Year 0.175 11II, �./ . 10-Year 0.255 0. 6 11 Jny 100-Year 0.435 .0 11 Notes: 15 1: Basin imperviousness determined from guidelines in UDFCD Drainage Criteria Manual Table RO-3 2: Conveyance coefficient determined from guidelines in UDFCD Drainage Criteria Manual Table RO-2 3: Minimum tc is 10 min.for non-urban areas and 5 min.for urban areas Date: 4/16/2008 t I,, I "< , A Parsons Mine - Lafarge West, Inc 14 Preliminary Drainage Report • • Peak Runoff Calculations Using the Rational Method 4 l Basin: P1-2 (H8) Condition: Developing Storm Return Period: 1 Basin Chracteristics Area,A: 3 acres Basin Imperviousness' (in percent),i: 15.0% i Distance of Overland Flow, Lo: 0 ft Hydrologic Soils Group A Percent of Basin: 2.9% ' Distance of Channelized Flow, L0: 1,395 ft Hydrologic Soils Group B Percent of Basin: 84.5% N1 Average Basin Slope,S: 0.01028 ft/ft Hydrologic Soils Groups C&D Percent of Basin: 12.6% IA Slope of Channelized Flow,S„,: 0.00212 ft/ft Conveyance Coefficient, C,: 10 li Runoff Coefficient 24 Runoff Coefficient Equations • For 100-yr Storm Return Period: KA =-0.25i +0.32 ih CA=KA+(1.31i3-1.44i2+1.135i-0.12) for CA i 0 else CA=0 Km =-0.39i +0.46 Cco=Kco+(0.858i3-0.786i2+0.774i+0.04) For 10-yr Storm Return Period: KA =-0.14i+0.17 Cs=(CA+Cco)/2 ' Ka) =-0.18i +0.21 For 5-yr Storm Return Period: KA =-0.08i+0.09 Kco =-0.10i +0.11 I, Return Period' Composite I CA I Cs I Cco I KA I Kco 5-Year 0.175 0.100 0.168 0.236 0.078 0.095 • 10-Year 0.255 0.171 0.248 0.324 0.149 0.183 11. 100-Year 0.435 0.305 0.424 0.543 0.283 0.402 Time of Concentration Rainfall Intensity , Total time of concentration equation: Rainfall Intensity Equation: 7 Lesser of3: tc=ti+t 1=(28.5'Pmr)/(10+Tp)°r%where Plhr is the thr point rainfall depth IS or t,=L/180+10(if in urban area) ' IS tAC 6024A CT Overland flow travel time equation: f<= 51 min PIN- I I6, C1 t=(0.395'(1.1 -C5)'sgrt(Lo))/5°33 t= 0 min Return Period in in/hr • SI !S Wed,r r` Channelized flow travel time equation: tt= 51 min 5-Year .35 ..5/y tt=Le/(V'60)where V=(C,'S„a5) V= 0.460 ft/s 10-Year 1. 1 �I A2 100-Year .5 .89 Peak Flow Rate I Rational Method Equation: Q=C„,„0„to*I'A Return Cwmpo ite I A Q J Period in/hr acres Cfs 5-Year 0.175 5 3 �a 10-Year 0.255 1. 3 ' 100-Year 0.435 2. 3 ,• Notes: , ;. / . 1 I1: Basin imperviousness determined from guidelines in UDFCD Drainage Criteria Manual Table RO-3 2: Conveyance coefficient determined from guidelines in UDFCD Drainage Criteria Manual Table RO-2 3: Minimum t. is 10 min.for non-urban areas and 5 min.for urban areas Date: 4/16/2008 llli II I, . 1 Parsons Mine - Lafarge West, Inc 1 Preliminary Drainage Report 1 , Peak Runoff Calculations Using the Rational Method II Basin: P1-6 (H8) Condition: Developing Storm Return Period: Basin Chracteristics iArea,A: 4 acres Basin Imperviousness' (in percent),i: 0.0% iDistance of Overland Flow,Lo: 265 ft Hydrologic Soils Group A Percent of Basin: 2.9% 11) Distance of Channelized Flow,Lc: 0 ft Hydrologic Soils Group B Percent of Basin: 84.5% li Average Basin Slope,S: 0.00730 ft/ft Hydrologic Soils Groups C&D Percent of Basin: 12.6% gli Slope of Channelized Flow, Sw: ft/ft Conveyance Coefficient,Co: 5 I Runoff Coefficient I Runoff Coefficient Equations ' For 100-yr Storm Return Period: KA =-0.25i +0.32 le CA=KA+(1.31i3-1.44i2+1.135i-0.12) for CA?0 else CA=0 Kap =-0.39i +0.46 ill Cco Kcc+(0.858i3-0.786i2+0.774i+0.04) For 10-yr Storm Return Period: KA =-0.14i +0.17 1111 CB=(CA+Cco)/2 ' K00 =-0.181 +0.21 For 5-yr Storm Return Period: KA =-0.08i +0.09 � Kco I -0.10i +0.11 Return Period' Cmmpotle I CA I C9 I CCDCcD I KA I KCD I 5-Year 0.082 0.000 0.075 0.150 0.090 0.110 'ID 10-Year 0.160 0.050 0.150 0.250 0.170 0.210 15.. 100-Year 0.365 0.200 0.350 0.500 0.320 0.460 I Time of Concentration Rainfall Intensity Total time of concentration equation: Rainfall Intensity Equation: 1=28.5'Roy)/(10+T)o.rss where P is the 1 hrpoint rainfall depth Lesser of3: t�q+t, ( mr r mr P or tp=L/180+10(if in urban area) Overland flow travel time equation: to= 33 min Pmr I bestir. *(1.1 -Cs)'sgrt(LD))/Sa33 t;= 33 min Return Period in in/hr or, sh Channelized flow travel time equation: ti= 0 mm 5-Year .35 1.99 t1 L,/(V'60)where V=(C,'5,1 5) V= 0.000 ft/s 10-Year 1. 1 / 9 100-Year .5 .8 .2, "Is- .., Peak Flow Rate v Rational Method Equation: o=Ccomposne*I'A Return Ccomposae I A Q Period in/hr acres cfs \\ 5-Year 0.082 .94 tl 10-Year 0.160 2,:J9 4 V 100-Year 0.365 3.80\ 4 Notes: • 1: Basin imperviousness determined from guidelines in UDFCD Drainage Criteria Manual Table RO-3 2: Conveyance coefficient determined from guidelines in UDFCD Drainage Criteria Manual Table RO-2 I.: 3: Minimum t. is 10 min.for non-urban areas and 5 min.for urban areas Date: 4/16/2008 it 11, a Parsons Mine - Lafarge West, Inc a Preliminary Drainage Report a 0 Peak Runoff Calculations Using the Rational Method a a Basin: P1-7 (H8) & P1-8 (1-19) Condition: Developing Storm Return Period: a Basin Chracteristics Area,A: 10 acres Basin Imperviousness1(in percent),is 15.0% A Distance of Overland Flow, L°: 0 ft Hydrologic Soils Group A Percent of Basin: 1.7% l Distance of Channelized Flow, Lc: 1,851 ft Hydrologic Soils Group B Percent of Basin: 72.6% i\ Average Basin Slope,S: 0.01028 ft/ft Hydrologic Soils Groups C&D Percent of Basin: 25.7% ‘ Slope of Channelized Flow,Sw: 0.01162 ft/ft Conveyance Coefficient2,C„: 10 lh Runoff Coefficient IIII1 Runoff Coefficient Equations ' For 100-yr Storm Return Period: KA =-0.251 +0.32 11,11 CA=KA+(1.3113-1.44i2+ 1.135i-0.12) for CA≥Oelse CA=O K00 =-0.39i +0.46 Cco=Kco+(0.858i3-0.786i2+0.774i+0.04) For 10-yr Storm Return Period: KA =-0.141 +0.17 Cs=(CA+Cco)/2 Kco =-0.181 +0.21 For 5-yr Storm Return Period: KA =-0.08i +0.09 1, K00 =-0.101 +0.11 1 Return Period' Ccomposite I CA I Cs I Cco I KA I Kco ®7 5-Year 0.185 0.100 0.168 0.236 0.078 0.095 10-Year 0.266 0.171 0.248 0.324 0.149 0.183 ® 100-Year 0.452 0.305 0.424 0.543 0.283 0.402 Time of Concentration Rainfall Intensity 21) Total time of concentration equation: Rainfall Intensity Equation: Lesser of3: k=t;+t, 1=(26.5`P,nr)/(10+Tc)°'0G where•P,pr is the 1 hr point rainfall depth 1) or ter-L/180+10(if in urban area) We ceCl� 11) Overland flow travel time equation: tc= 29 min P,hr I 11 f,=(0.395*(1.1 -C5)"sgrt(L°))/Sa33 t,= 0 min Return Period in in/hr 12sI4J q 5 G C'cr Channelized flow travel time equation: y= 29 min 5-Year .3 .1 r� t,=Lc/(V*60)60)where V=(C„`8w°s) V= 1.078 ft/s 10-Year 1 1 X.1 I, 100-Year .56 4.1 it Peak Flow Rate Rational Method Equation: I, Q=Ccompoene`I"A Return Ccomposae I A Q Period in/hr acres cfs 5-Year 0.185 )1;5 10 � I) 10-Year 0.266 8 10 100-Year 0.452 1 10 7. ��'Q." _ 20.1 • Ill Notes: -lb I, 1: Basin imperviousness determined from guidelines in UDFCD Drainage Criteria Manual Table RO-3 2: Conveyance coefficient determined from guidelines in UDFCD Drainage Criteria Manual Table RO-2 3: Minimum to is 10 min.for non-urban areas and 5 min.for urban areas Date: 4/16/2008 l, I I . . I Parsons Mine - Lafarge West, Inc I Preliminary Drainage Report 1 • Peak Runoff Calculations Using the Rational Method 1 . 4 Basin: P1-9 (1-19) Condition: Developing Storm Return Period: 1 Basin Chracteristics 1 Area,A: 1 acres Basin Imperviousness'(in percent),is 0.0% 1 Distance of Overland Flow, Lo: 36 ft Hydrologic Soils Group A Percent of Basin: 0.0% $ Distance of Channelized Flow, Lc: 0 ft Hydrologic Soils Group B Percent of Basin: 56.3% Average Basin Slope,S: 0.01650 ft/ft Hydrologic Soils Groups C&D Percent of Basin: 43.7% $ Slope of Channelized Flow,Sw: ft/ft Conveyance Coefficient,C,: 10 4 Runoff Coefficient ll Runoff Coefficient Equations For 100-yr Storm Return Period: KA =-0.251 +0.32 ll CA=KA+(1.31i3-1.44i2+ 1.135i-0.12) for CA?0 else CA=0 Kco =-0.39i +0.46 4 Cco=Kco+(0.858i3-0.786i2+0.774i+0.04) For 10-yr Storm Return Period: KA =-0.14i +0.17 i CB=(CA+Cm)/2 ' K00 =-0.18i +0.21 For 5-yr Storm Return Period: KA =-0.08i +0.09 lb Kco =-0.101+0.11 I Return Period' Ccomposne I CA I CB I Ca) I KA I Kco % 5-Year 0.108 0.000 0.075 0.150 0.090 0.110 lii • 10-Year 0.194 0.050 0.150 0.250 0.170 0.210 ' 100-Year 0.416 0.200 0.350 0.500 0.320 0.460 ID Time of Concentration Rainfall Intensity li Total time of concentration equation: Rainfall Intensity Equation: gl Lesser of3: tc=ti+t, 1=(28.5"Pip,)/(10+Te r8°where Ports is the 1 hr point rainfall depth or tc=L/180+10(if in urban area) }}��,,,ww`11,I al Overland flow travel time equation: tc= 9 min P1nr I 'i - yr ill t,=(0.395*(1.1 -C5)*sgrt(Lo))/S0-33 1i= 9 min Return Period in in/hr �5& Channelized flow travel time equation: tr= 0 min 5-Year 1.3 79 7 G=Lc/(V*60)60)where V=(C,*Sw°s) V= 0.000 f/s 10-Year 1. 1 4. 4 ill 100-Year .56 .22 I I Peak Flow Rate lill Rational Method Equation: ill O=Ccomposte"I"A Return Ccompos;re I A Q Period in/hr acres cfs I� r, 5-Year 0.108 4$.7 1 % pok ca LLlr,}C 7 l�,�10-Year 0.194 4. 1 /, `r't toCt`l.SIO -- 3.o I� 100-Year 0.416 .22\ 1 4.3 ill 41(e ;, {;;+41 I 7 • Notes: "k IS 1: Basin imperviousness determined from guidelines in UDFCD Drainage Criteria Manual Table RO-3 2: Conveyance coefficient determined from guidelines in UDFCD Drainage Criteria Manual Table RO-2 Ilir 3: Minimum tp is 10 min.for non-urban areas and 5 min.for urban areas Date: 4/16/2008 I 1 • . 1 Parsons Mine - Lafarge West, Inc 1 Preliminary Drainage Report I • Peak Runoff Calculations Using the Rational Method le ® Basin: P1-12 (H9) Condition: Developing Storm Return Period: I I Basin Chracteristics I Area,A: 2 acres Basin Imperviousness' (in percent),is 5.0% IIIII Distance of Overland Flow,Lo: 339 ft Hydrologic Soils Group A Percent of Basin: 0.0% I Distance of Channelized Flow, Le 0 ft Hydrologic Soils Group B Percent of Basin: 56.3% lii Average Basin Slope,5: 0.01650 ft/ft Hydrologic Soils Groups C&D Percent of Basin: 43.7% 11 Slope of Channelized Flow,Sw: ft/ft Conveyance Coefficient,C,: 7 Runoff Coefficient I b Runoff Coefficient Equations A For 100-yr Storm Return Period: KA =-0.25i +0.32' - I Cp KA+(1.3113-1.44iZ+ 1.1351-0.12) for CA?0else CA=0 K00 =-0.391+0.46 le 0.858i3-0.786i2+0.774i+0.04) For 10-yr Storm Return Period: KA =-0.14i +0.17 Cco=Kco+( Kp° =-0.18i +0.21 Ce=(CA+COB)/2 For 5-yr Storm Return Period: Ka =-0.081 +0.09 le Km =-0.10! +0.11 lb Return Period' Dcomposlle I CA I CB I Cco I. KA I Ka) 1 5-Year 0.136 0.019 0.101 0.182 0.086 0.105 • 10-Year 0.227 0.096 0.187 0.278 0.163 0.201 lik 100-Year 0.439/ 0.241✓ 0.379✓ 0.517 1 0.308 ,. 0.441 IISI I Time of Concentration Rainfall Intensity I Total time of concentration equation: Rainfall Intensity Equation: St Lesser of3: tc=1,+tt 1=(28.5"Pisr)/(10+1-0)13186 where Pin,is the 1 hr point rainfall depth Ilk or tc=L/180+10(if in urban area) / LA5t �fr.A. °I4I Overland flow travel time equation: 1c= 27 min Pin, I s,q n Skis, °" min Return Period in in/hr �., J,‘r,,. IS t,=(0.395"(1.1 -Cs)"scirt(Lo))/S ti= 27 Channelized flow travel time equation: ti= 0 / min 5-Year 1. tB=Lo/(V"60)where V=(C,"5,„3-5) V= 0.000 t/ Ws 10-Year . 1 100-Year 2.5 4)t.i9 8 w la Peak Flow Rate Rational Method Equation: Illi Q=Dwmposte"I'A Return Ccomposite I A Q Period in/hr acres cfs a 5-Year 0.136 -2,24! 2 99 ,7,,' 10-Year 0.227 2. 2 JA..•�` 0 100-Year 0.439 448\ 2 14.6\ Illk• X Notes: •. . - I ,•-•-• - \ 1: Basin imperviousness determined from guidelines in UDFCD Drainage Criteria Manual Table RO-3 2: Conveyance coefficient determined from guidelines in UDFCD Drainage Criteria Manual Table RO-2 S3: Minimum t s is 10 min.for non-urban areas and 5 min.for urban areas Date: 4/16/2008 le a I I • - I Parsons Mine - Lafarge West, Inc I Preliminary Drainage Report Illi • Peak Runoff Calculations Using the Rational Method ID Basin: P1-14 (H2) Condition: Developing Storm Return Period: il Basin Chracteristics Ilh Area,A 159 acres Basin Imperviousness (in percent),is 2.0% a Distance of Overland Flow,Lo: .3,028 ft Hydrologic Soils Group A Percent of Basin: 0.0% Distance of Channelized Flow,Lo: 3,090 ft Hydrologic Soils Group B Percent of Basin: 74.2% Average Basin Slope,S: 0.01174 fUft Hydrologic Soils Groups C&D Percent of Basin: 25.8% Slope of Channelized Flow,S.„: 0.00258 ft/ft Conveyance Coefficient,C,: 15 A ili Runoff Coefficient 4 Runoff Coefficient Equations For 100-yr Storm Return Period: KA =-0.25i +0.32 % CA=KA+(1.31i3-1.44i2+1.135i-0.12) for CA?0 else CA=0 Kco =-0.391 +0.46 • C K 0.858i3-0.786i2+0.774i+0.04) For 10-yr Storm Return Period: KA =-0.141 +0.17 co= co+( • C =(C +Cco)/2 , Kco =-0.181 +0.21 9 \ A For 5-yr Storm Return Period: KA =-0.081 +0.09 Kco =-0.10i +0.11 % Return Period' Cmmposae I CA I Ca I CCD I KA I Kco % 5-Year 0.103 0.000 0.082 0.163 0.088 0.108 3 • 10-Year 0.190 0.069 0.165 0.262 0.167 0.206 % 100-Year 0.400 0.217 0.362 0.507 0.315 0.452 RI Time of Concentration Rainfall Intensity 1 Total time of concentration equation: Rainfall Intensity Equation: % Lesser of3: to=t;+t, l=(28.5*P,,)/(10+Te)°79fi where Roo is the 1 hr point rainfall depth % or tc=L/180+10(if in urban area) 'ASQ G«e Ili Overland flow travel time equation: to= 162 min Pthr I ,�� t,=(0.395*(1.1 -C5)*sgrt(Lo))/S0.33 t� 94 min Return Period in in/hr Cri r 311N•'3Channelized flow travel time equation: t, 68 min 5-Year 1. 5 0.6 ti Lo/(V*60)where V=(C,*S-°5) V= 0.762 ft/s 10-Year 1.6 0 0 5 100-Year .56 .28 1 a. ,z �v I Peak Flow Rate so Rational Method Equation: O=Ccomposue*I*A Return Ccomposne I A Q Period in/hr acres cfs 5-Year 0.103 0. 159 '2Q4 ttl 10-Year 0.190 0 159 2 3 II 100-Year 0.400 .2 159 S1. arJa I �� Notes: 1: Basin imperviousness determined from guidelines in UDFCD Drainage Criteria Manual Table RO-3 2: Conveyance coefficient determined from guidelines in UDFCD Drainage Criteria Manual Table RO-2 3: Minimum fo is 10 min.for non-urban areas and 5 min.for urban areas Date: 4/16/2008 i a p , . . i Parsons Mine - Lafarge West, Inc 1 Preliminary Drainage Report . 0 Peak Runoff Calculations Using the Rational Method b I1 Basin: RB1 (H1) Condition: Reclaimed Storm Return Period: I Basin Chracteristics I Area,A: 134 acres Basin Imperviousness'(in percent),is 2.0% I Distance of Overland Flow, Lo: 5,532 ft Hydrologic Soils Group A Percent of Basin: 10.1% I Distance of Channelized Flow,L0: 0 ft Hydrologic Soils Group B Percent of Basin: 82.9% I Average Basin Slope,S: 0.00720 ft/ft Hydrologic Soils Groups C&D Percent of Basin: 7.1% IIII Slope of Channelized Flow,S,,: ft/ft Conveyance Coefficient2,C,: 5 11 Runoff Coefficient Runoff Coefficient Equations ' For 100-yr Storm Return Period: KA =-0.25i +0.32 h CA=KA+(1.31i3-1.4412+1.135i-0.12) for CA?0 else CA=0 Ken =-0.391 +0.46 111 CeD=Kco+(0.8081-0.78612+0.774i+0.04) For 10-yr Storm Return Period: KA =-0.14i +0.17 ih Ce=(CA+CCD)/2 ' Kco =-0.18i +0.21 A For Syr Storm Return Period: KA =-0.08i +0.09 ii,k Kco =-0.10i +0.11 ll Return Period' Cmmcostte I CA I CB I Ca) I KA I KcD A 5-Year 0.079 0.000 0.082 0.163 0.088 0.108 A • 10-Year 0.163 0.069 0.165 0.262 0.167 0.206 100-Year 0.358 0.217 0.362 0.507 0.315 0.452 5 Time of Concentration Rainfall Intensity I 5 Total time of concentration equation: Rainfall Intensity Equation: 5 Lesser of3: t5=t, 1=(28.5'Pler)/(10+Tc)(12136 where Pier is the l hr point rainfall depth 5- or tc=L/180+10(if in urban area) 5 Overland flow travel time equation: te 153 min Pm- I (,- Creel e4.5 5 t=(0.395'(1.1 -C5)'sgrt(L,,))/e33 t= 153 min Return Period in in/hr J2c lgn 5 l _ `' Channelized flow travel time equation: t1= 0 min 5-Year 3 0.7 'ty'�m tr=L./(V'60)where V=(C,'S„o.3) V= 0.000 ft/s 10-Year 1 4 5 100-Year .56 .3 7. as?'e 1.916 . Peak Flow Rate Rational Method Equation: 7:; 0=Ccomaoe;re'I*A Return Ccompos;re I A Q --:. Period in/hr acres cfs 5-Year 0.079 'Q\.79. 134 r.lJ 4." 10-Year 0.163 0,$4 134 le; �-11 4: 100-Year 0.358 33 134 .� / �3v ,, `� • Notes: 44 ..„. Jw/.' 1: Basin imperviousness determined from guidelines in UDFCD Drainage Criteria Manual Table RO-3 2: Conveyance coefficient determined from guidelines in UDFCD Drainage Criteria Manual Table RO-2 3: Minimum t, is 10 min.for non-urban areas and 5 min.for urban areas Date: 4/16/2008 I! IP Parsons Mine - Lafarge West, Inc P Preliminary Drainage Report p • Peak Runoff Calculations Using the Rational Method O Basin: RB2-1 (H1) Condition: Reclaimed Storm Return Period: I► Basin Chracteristics Area,A: 45 acres Basin Imperviousness' (in percent),is 2.0% IA Distance of Overland Flow, La: 2,793 ft Hydrologic Soils Group A Percent of Basin: 1.0% O Distance of Channelized Flow, La: 0 ft Hydrologic Soils Group B Percent of Basin: 71.5% Average Basin Slope,S: 0.00994 ft/ft Hydrologic Soils Groups C&D Percent of Basin: 27.6% * Slope of Channelized Flow, S-: ft/ft Conveyance Coefficient,C5: 5 Runoff Coefficient Runoff Coefficient Equations For 100-yr Storm Return Period: KA =-0.25i +0.32 CA=KA+(1.31i3-1.44i2+1.135i-0.12) for CA?0 else CA=0 Ka) =-0.391 +0.46 lb Cco=Kco+(0.858i3-0.786i2+0.774i+0.04) For 10-yr Storm Return Period: , KA =-0.14i +0.17 • CB=(CA+Co)/2 Kco =-0.18i +0.21 M s - For 5-yr Storm Return Period: KA =-0.08i +0.09 Kco =-0.10i +0.11 Ill Return Period' Ccomposue I CA I CB I CCD I KA I Kco It 5-Year 0.103 0.000 0.082 0.163 0.068 0.108 • 10-Year 0.191 0.069 0.165 0.262 0.167 0.206 71 100-Year 0.401 0.217 0.362 0.507 0.315 0.452 ak Time of Concentration Rainfall Intensity Total time of concentration equation: Rainfall Intensity Equation: N Lesser of3: to=t1+tr 1=(28.5'Puhr)/(10+Ta)°1Bs where Pihr is the 1 hr point rainfall depth 1 or to=L/180+10(if in urban area) ID _ r Overland flow travel time equation: 10= 95 min Pm( I L L 6eaI � : t;=(0.395'(1.1 -Cs)'sgrt(La))/5033 t,= 95 min Return Period in in/hr L�r.�5wrr'�'^ i Channelized flow travel time equation: ft= 0 min 5-Year 1.3 00..99$ t,La/(V*60)where V=(Cs,*S-°°) V= 0.000 ft/s 10-Year 1 1 y.. 8 100-Year .5 1.8 . I.I ,a,0t/ ‘ Peak Flow Rate Rational Method Equation: C=Coomposite*I*A Return Ccompo5 e I A Q Period in/hr acres cfs 5-Year 0.103 .Q.9y 45 10-Year 0.191 1/1$ 45 1 100-Year 0.401 1.88 45 4. • lac "_ I dJv Notes: 1 1: Basin imperviousness determined from guidelines in UDFCD Drainage Criteria Manual Table RO-3 2: Conveyance coefficient determined from guidelines in UDFCD Drainage Criteria Manual Table RO-2 7 3: Minimum f5 is 10 min.for non-urban areas and 5 min.for urban areas Date: 4/16/2008 I - . I Parsons Mine - Lafarge West, Inc I Preliminary Drainage Report I • Peak Runoff Calculations Using the Rational Method 1 Basin: RB3 (H2) Condition: E7 g Storm Return Period: 1 Qer.1a"of Basin Chracteristics Area,A: 107 acres Basin Imperviousness' (in percent),is 2.0% 1 Distance of Overland Flow, Le: 3,028 ft Hydrologic Soils Group A Percent of Basin: 0.0% 1 Distance of Channelized Flow,Lc: 3,090 ft Hydrologic Soils Group B Percent of Basin: 61.6% i Average Basin Slope,S: 0.01467 ft/ft Hydrologic Soils Groups C&D Percent of Basin: 38.4% 1 Slope of Channelized Flow,S„: 0.00241 ft/ft Conveyance Coefficient2,C,: 15 ‘ Runoff Coefficient I, r Runoff Coefficient Equations For 100-yr Storm Return Period: KA =-0.25i +0.32 0 CA=KA+(1.31i3-1.44i2+1.135i-0.12) for CA a 0 else CA=0 Kco =-0.39i +0.46 4 Cco=Kco+(0.858i3-0.786i2+0.774i+0.04) For 10-yr Storm Return Period: K A =-0.14i +0.17 A Cg-'(C +Cco)/2 Kco =-0.18i +0.21 A For 5-yr Storm Return Period: KA =-0.08i +0.09 Kco =-0.10i +0.11 A Return Per odi Ccomposne I CA I Cs I C00 I KA I I<C° A 5-Year 0.113 0.000 0.082 0.163 0.088 0.108 �! • 10-Year 0.202 0.069 0.165 0.262 0.167 0.206 IA 100-Year 0.418 0.217 0.362 0.507 0.315 0.452 W Time of Concentration Rainfall Intensity 10 Total time of concentration equation: Rainfall Intensity Equation: A Lesser of3: t fi+t, I=(28.5*P,hr)/(10+T5)°J8 where P1hr is the 1 hr point rainfall depth 01 or te=L/180+10(if in urban area) Overland flow travel time equation: tp= 156 min P1hr I i t;=(0.395'(1.1 -C5)'sgrt(L0))/5a33 t,= 86 min Return Period in in/hr use Gm�c1le Channelized flow travel time equation: L= 70 min 5-Year 1. 5 _te,s, gte t•n rr, t,=Lc/(V'60)where V=(C,'S„.05) V= 0.736 ft/s 10-Year 1. 0 3 9�- 100-Year .56 .3 1 I Peak Flow Rate 14: Rational Method Equation: i 0=Ccomoosrte'I*A Return Ccomoosite I A Q Period in/hr acres cfs 4 5-Year 0.113 0 107 10- 10-Year 0.202 o.A 107 1 \ _L i 100-Year 0.418 /31 107 513.6 �.;,:, lob �rp jq, l • Notes: 1/4136°3 `^'1 kt it 1: Basin imperviousness determined from guidelines in UDFCD Drainage Criteria Manual Table RO-3 2: Conveyance coefficient determined from guidelines in UDFCD Drainage Criteria Manual Table RO-2 It 3: Minimum to is 10 min.for non-urban areas and 5 min.for urban areas Date: 4/16/2008 T r • • I Parsons Mine - Lafarge West, Inc Ili Preliminary Drainage Report 1 III Peak Runoff Calculations Using the Rational Method it Basin: RB4-1 (li2) Condition: /r 1 Storm Return Period: Basin Chracteristics 1. Area,A: 38 acres Basin Imperviousness' (in percent),is 2.0% Distance of Overland Flow,Lc: 2,253 ft Hydrologic Soils Group A Percent of Basin: 0.0% it Distance of Channelized Flow,Lc: 0 ft Hydrologic Soils Group B Percent of Basin: 100.0% Average Basin Slope,S: 0.00575 ft/ft Hydrologic Soils Groups C&D Percent of Basin: 0.0% Slope of Channelized Flow,SW: ft/ft Conveyance Coefficient2,Co: 5 Runoff Coefficient Runoff Coefficient Equations For 100-yr Storm Return Period: KA =-0.251 +0.32 It CA=KA+(1.31i3-1.44i2+1.135i-0.12) for CA a'0else CA=0 Kco =-0.39i +0.46 : Cco=Kco+(0.858i3-0.786i2+0.774i+0.04) For 10-yr Storm Return Period: KA =-0.141 +0.17 * Ce=(CA+Cc))/2 Kai =-0.18/ +0.21 - For 5-yr Storm Return Period: KA =-0.081 +0.09 rr K00 =-0.10i +0.11 4 Return Period' Coomposne I CA I C0 I Cco I KA I K00 1 5-Year 0.082 0.000 0.082 0.163 0.088 0.108 • 10-Year 0.165 0.069 0.165 0.262 0.167 0.206 100-Year 0.362 0.217 0.362 0.507 0.315 0.452 Time of Concentration Rainfall Intensity t Total time of concentration equation: Rainfall Intensity Equation: t. Lesser of3: to=t,+to 1=(28.5*Pti,)/(10+Ti)a7 where Pier is the 1hr point rainfall depth T or tc=L/180+10(if in urban area) Overland flow travel time equation: to= 105 min Pmr I of � of t;=(0.395'(1.1 -C5)"sgrt(Lo))/8°33 t;= 105 min Return Period in in/hr 45Q GreetL 7 3 t Siuv w.. Channelized flow travel time equation: ti= 0 min 5-Year .3 0.9 ■` tt=Lo/(V"60)where V=(C,*S,„°5) V= 0.000 ft/s 10-Year 1 1 1 0 7%. 100-Year .5 .7 10 I Peak Flow Rate I r Rational Method Equation: ili Q=Ccmnposite*I"A Return Composite I A Q Period in/hr acres cfs 5-Year 0.082 .9 38 It 10-Year 0.165 1. 38 100-Year 0.362 .75 38 ZZZ///4. 1 1W , t Ld4�; Notes: 1,. 1: Basin imperviousness determined from guidelines in UDFCD Drainage Criteria Manual Table RO-3 1 2: Conveyance coefficient determined from guidelines in UDFCD Drainage Criteria Manual Table RO-2 3: Minimum to is 10 mm.for non-urban areas and 5 min.for urban areas Date: 4/16/2008 1 Ir 1 Parsons Mine - Lafarge West, Inc 1 Preliminary Drainage Report 1 • Peak Runoff Calculations Using the Rational Method 1 1 Basin: RB5-1 (H8) Condition: EiiitEz. . Storm Return Period: Basin Chracteristics 1 Area,A: 52 acres Basin Imperviousness'(in percent),is 0.0% $ Distance of Overland Flow, Lo: 2,286 ft Hydrologic Soils Group A Percent of Basin: 0.0% 1 Distance of Channelized Flow, Lo: 0 ft HydrologicSoils Group B Percent of Basin: 91.8% Average Basin Slope,S: 0.00965 ft/ft Hydrologic Soils Groups C&D Percent of Basin: 8.2% p Slope of Channelized Flow, Sw: ft/ft Conveyance Coefficient2,C,,: 5 1 Runoff Coefficient I Runoff Coefficient Equations For 100-yr Storm Return Period: KA =-0.251 +0.32 CA=KA+(1.31i3-1.44i2+1.135i-0.12) for CA≥0 else CA=0 K00 =-0.391 +0.46 $ Cco=Kco+(0.85813-0.78612+0.774i+0.04) For 10-yr Storm Return Period: KA =-0.141 +0.17 Ce=(CA+Cat)/2 K00 =-0.181 +0.21 1 For 5-yr Storm Return Period: KA =-0.081 +0.09 Ka) =-0.10/ +0.11 It Return Period' Composite I CA I CB I CCD I KA I Kco I. 5-Year 0.081 0.000 0.075 0.150 0.090 0.110 It fli 10-Year 0.158 0.050 0.150 0.250 0.170 0.210 1 100-Year 0.362 0.200 0.350 0.500 0.320 0.460 1.. Time of Concentration Rainfall Intensity ••k Total time of concentration equation: Rainfall Intensity Equation: ?I Lesser of: to=t;+y 1=(28.5'Pm)/(10+Tree where P1hr is the 1 hr point rainfall depth k or ter-L/180+10(if in urban area) 1. Overland flow travel time equation: to= 89 min Purr I tAM GCBB lei J i t;=(0.395'(1.1 -C5)'sgrt(L0))/S°33 ti= 89 min Return Period in in/hr / 7 119vk, k Channelized flow travel time equation: tr= 0 min 5-Year 35 0 S 47re AN. T' t1=L0/(V'60)where V=(C„'Seas) V= 0.000 ft/s 10-Year 1. 1 4 100-Year .56 1.9 , ,i it Peak Flow Rate 4: ( . Rational Method Equation: 4" O=Composite'I'A Retum Commits I A Q �` Period in/hr acres cfs\5-Year 0.081 q.04' 52 \4.¢r' 10-Year 0.158 1Y4 52 1$3 100-Year 0.362 /1x.97\ 52 X37.4 3 Notes: �� J • 1: Basin imperviousness determined from guidelines in UDFCD Drainage Criteria Manual Table RO-3 2: Conveyance coefficient determined from guidelines in UDFCD Drainage Criteria Manual Table RO-2 • 3: Minimum t,, is 10 min.for non-urban areas and 5 min.for urban areas Date: 4/16/2008 a a. . Parsons Mine - Lafarge West, Inc 3 Preliminary Drainage Report Peak Runoff Calculations Using the Rational Method a m Basin: RB6(1-18) Condition: Storm Return Period: C1Gsm3 Basin Chracteristics Area,A: 28 acres Basin Imperviousness' (in percent),is 0.0% 11 Distance of Overland Flow, Lo: 2,370 ft Hydrologic Soils Group A Percent of Basin: 8.9% a Distance of Channelized Flow, Lc: 0 ft Hydrologic Soils Group B Percent of Basin: 69.5% $ Average Basin Slope,S: 0.01156 ft/ft Hydrologic Soils Groups C&D Percent of Basin: 21.5% Ili Slope of Channelized Flow,Sw: ft/ft Conveyance Coefficient,C,,: 5 $ Runoff Coefficient a Runoff Coefficient Equations ' For 100-yr Storm Return Period: KA =-0.25i +0.32 alk Cq KA+(1.31i3-1.44i2+1.135i-0.12) for CA≥0 else CA=0 K00 =-0.39i +0.46 CcD=KcD+(0.858i3-0.78612+0.774i+0.04) For 10-yr Storm Return Period: KA =-0.14i+0.17 It Cs-(CA+Cop)/2 ' K00 =-0.18i+0.21 For 5-yr Storm Return Period: KA =-0.08i+0.09 le K00 =-0.101+0.11 ifis Return Period' Ccomposrte ' CA I C8 I CCD I KA - I KCD I 5-Year 0.084 0.000 0.075 0.150 0.090 0.110 10-Year 0.162 0.050 0.150 0.250 0.170 0.210 MI 100-Year 0.369 0.200 0.350 0.500 0.320 0.460 It Time of Concentration • Rainfall Intensity II Total time of concentration equation: Rainfall Intensity Equation: Lesser of3: tc t +tt 1=(28.5'Prpr)/(10+Tc)0J86 where Prpr is the 1 hr point rainfall depth III or tc=L/180+10(if in urban area) Ill Overland flow travel time equation: tc= 85 min Pity I t,=(0.395'(1.1 -Cs)'sgrt(L,,))/5°.33 t= 85 min Return Period in in/hr isse 6jltelt 1. 1, flow travel time equation: t= 0 min 5-Year 35 0 dt1Str,n re t,L,1(V'60)where V=(C,'Swas) V= 0.000 ft/s 10-Year 1. 1 / d I, 100-Year .5 1 ��/2.0 Peak Flow Rate Rational Method Equation: Q=Ccompos,te`I'A Return Ccc,npone I A Q . Period in/hr acres cfs 5-Year 0.084 0 28 12.5/ 10-Year 0.162 1 28 MN, 13 100-Year 0.369 .04 28 71. to tlth 'if dal 0, Notes: 15 1: Basin imperviousness determined from guidelines in UDFCD Drainage Criteria Manual Table RO-3 2: Conveyance coefficient determined from guidelines in UDFCD Drainage Criteria Manual Table RO-2 it 3: Minimum it is 10 min.for non-urban areas and 5 min.for urban areas - Date: 4/1612008 S a a Parsons Mine - Lafarge West, Inc a Preliminary Drainage Report • • Peak Runoff Calculations Using the Rational Method a a Basin: RB7(1-19) Condition: afit<2 Storm Return Period: s geslottiftli Basin Chracteristics Area,A: 25 acres Basin Imperviousness'(in percent),is 0.0% a Distance of Overland Flow, Lo: 1,136 ft Hydrologic Soils Group A Percent of Basin: 0.0% a Distance of Channelized Flow, 0 ft Hydrologic Soils Group B Percent of Basin: 56.3% Average Basin Slope, S: 0.01650 ft/ft Hydrologic Soils Groups C 8 D Percent of Basin: 43.7% IS Slope of Channelized Flow,S,„: ft/ft Conveyance Coefficient2,C,,: 5 s Runoff Coefficient • Runoff Coefficient Equations ' For 100-yr Storm Return Period: KA =-0.25i +0.32 ▪ Cq KA+(1.31i3-1.44i2+ 1.135i-0.12) for CA 0 else CA=0 K00 =-0.391 +0.46 ▪ Ccc=Kco+(0.858i3-0.786i2+0.774i+0.04) For 10-yr Storm Return Period: KA =-0.14i +0.17 • CB-(CA+C00)/2 Kai =-0.181 +0.21 For 5-yr Storm Return Period: KA =-0.08i +0.09 ill K00 =-0.10i +0.11 Return Period) Cwmposne I CA I CB 1 Cco I NA I Kco .` 5-Year 0.108 0.000 0.075 0.150 0.090 0.110 5;• 10-Year 0.194 0.050 0.150 0.250 0.170 0.210 5 100-Year 0.416 0.200 0.350 0.500 0.320 0.460 Time of Concentration Rainfall Intensity 9- Total time of concentration equation: Rainfall Intensity Equation: is Lesser of3: to=t +tt l=(26.5'Plhr)/(10+To)°'e where P1hr is the 1 hr point rainfall depth or to=l_/180+10(if in urban area) • It Overland flow travel time equation: to= 51 min Prhr I U?4 [k G ley t,=(0.395'(1.1 -Cs)'sgrt(Lo))/50.33 t;= 51 min Return Period in in/hr Channelized flow travel time equation: tl= 0 min 5-Year 1. 5 1.5 St t ANNt,Le/(V'60)where V=(C„'Swas) V= 0.000 Ws 10-Year 1. 82 100-Year .56 2. l" Peak Flow Rate . Rational Method Equation: 0=Composite'I'A Return Composite I A Q Period in/hr acres cfs 5-Year 0.108 1.5 25 It- 10-Year 0.194 1 2 25 \ 100-Year 0.416 2.8 25 O.Q` • t,cr)u:�i Ltd°. Notes: 1: Basin imperviousness determined from guidelines in UDFCD Drainage Criteria Manual Table RO-3 2: Conveyance coefficient determined from guidelines in UDFCD Drainage Criteria Manual Table RO-2 i. 3: Minimum to is 10 min.for non-urban areas and 5 min.for urban areas Date: 4/16/2008 r D. . I Parsons Mine - Lafarge West, Inc I Preliminary Drainage Report II • Peak Runoff Calculations Using the Rational Method P Basin: R86-1 (H6) Condition: Exieting - Storm Return Period: I -RA.c\come.r) Basin Chracteristics Area,A: 3 acres Basin Imperviousness'(in percent),is 0.00/0 ID Distance of Overland Flow, Lo: 492 ft Hydrologic Soils Group A Percent of Basin: 0.0% 1 Distance of Channelized Flow, Lp: 0 ft Hydrologic Soils Group B Percent of Basin: 62.0% Average Basin Slope,5: 0.00496 ft/ft Hydrologic Soils Groups C&D Percent of Basin: 38.0% • Slope of Channelized Flow,S,„: ft/ft Conveyance Coefficient2,C,,: 5 I Runoff Coefficient Runoff Coefficient Equations ' For 100-yr Storm Return Period: KA =-0.25i +0.32 IIII CA=KA+(1.31i3-1.44i2+1.135i-0.12) for CA?0 else CA=0 Kco =-0.391 +0.46 ' C (0.858i30.78612 For 10-yr Storm Return Period: KA =-0.14i +0.17 co=Kco+ - +0.774i+0.04) ,( Cs=(CA+Cco)/2 ' Kco =-0.18i +0.21 IP For 5-yr Storm Return Period: Ka =-0.08i +0.09 Ka) =-0.10i +0.11 ill Return Period' Cmmposne I CA I Co I Cco I KA I Kco 7 5-Year 0.104 0.000 0.075 0.150 0.090 0.110 9.• 10-Year 0.188 0.050 0.150 0.250 0.170 0.210 S. 100-Year 0.407 0.200 0.350 0.500 0.320 0.460 Time of Concentration Rainfall Intensity Total time of concentration equation: Rainfall Intensity Equation: Lesser De: t0=t,+tr 1=(28.5'Pm)/(10+Tc)°788 where P1hr is the 1 hr point rainfall depth or tp=L/180+10(if in urban area) Overland flow travel time equation: 4= 50 min PI, I u c GCaal' t1 (0.395'(1.1 -C5)'sgrt(L0))/Saa3 tr= 50 min Return Period ��,innnn in/hr •,E St* 5I Channelized flow travel time equation: t,= 0 min 5-Year 1. • t,=Lp/(V*60)where V=(C„'Sw°s) V= 0.000 Ws 10-Year 1. 100-Year 56 2.9 Peak Flow Rate Rational Method Equation: Q=Ccomposne'I'A Return Ccomppsao I A Q Period in/hr acres cfs 5-Year 0.104 1.5 3 "er.., 4- 10-Year 0.188 3 100-Year 0.407 /9 3 Notes: 1: Basin imperviousness determined from guidelines in UDFCD Drainage Criteria Manual Table RO-3 2: Conveyance coefficient determined from guidelines in UDFCD Drainage Criteria Manual Table RO-2 3: Minimum to is 10 min.for non-urban areas and 5 min.for urban areas Date: 4/16/2008 w 0 00 Parsons Mine - Lafarge West, Inc ie Preliminary Drainage Report iis, Peak Runoff Calculations Using the Rational Method ill Basin: RB9-1 (H6) Condition: nE�1micting Storm Return Period: Basin Chracteristics Area,A: 9 acres Basin Imperviousness(in percent), is 0.0% Distance of Overland Flow, Le: 585 ft Hydrologic Soils Group A Percent of Basin: 0.0% Distance of Channelized Flow, Lo: 0 ft Hydrologic Soils Group B Percent of Basin: 98.0% Average Basin Slope,S: O.00496 ft/ft Hydrologic Soils Groups C&D Percent of Basin: 2.0% Slope of Channelized Flow,S,„: ft/ft Conveyance Coefficient',C,: 5 Runoff'Coefficient Runoff Coefficient Equations For 100-yr Storm Return Period: KA =-0.251+0.32 CA=KA+(1.31i'-1.4412+1.135i-0.12) for CA 20 else CA=0 Kco =-0.391 +0.46 Cco=Kco+(0 85813-0.78612+0.774i+0.04) For 10-yr Storm Return Period: KA =-0.141+0.17 C0=(CA+Cm)/2 Kco =-0.181 +0.21 For 5-yr Storm Return Period: KA =-0.08/+0.09 Kco =-0.10i +0.11 W. Return Period' Coo,„ ite I CA I C8 I Cco I KA I Kco 5-Year 0.077 0.000 0.075 0.150 0.090 0.110 '. 10-Year 0.152 0.050 0.150 0.250 0.170 0.210 -Year 0.353 0.200 0.350 0.500 0.320 0.460 Time of Concentration Total time of concentration equati100on: Rainfall Intensity Equation:Rainfall Intensity Lesser of': t�i;+ti 1=(28.5'Prer)/(10+T/286 where Pit,is the 1hr point rainfall depth or to=L/180+10(if in urban area) Overland flow travel time equation: to= 56 min Rev I f=(0.395'(1.1 -C5)*sgrt(Le))/S°.33 1,= 56 min Return Period in in/hr tA.x. Greg t Channelized flow travel time equation: te= 0 min 5-Year 3 V.4 �- I�SI6( tivv* tt=Lo/(V*60)60)where V=(C,'Sw°.$) V= 0.000 ft/s 10-Year 1. 1.7A J 100-Year 2i 6 2 1 4 I Peak Flow Rate ig;- Rational Method Equation: it Q=Ccemeosne'1*A Return Cmmposne I A Q Period in/hr acres ii cfs 0. I5-Year 0.077 2 9 10-Year 0.152 1. 1 9Ilk 100-Year 0.353 .A\ 9 t, Notes: 1: Basin imperviousness determined from guidelines in UDFCD Drainage Criteria Manual Table RO-3 -.1.,...:T. 2: Conveyance coefficient determined from guidelines in UDFCD Drainage Criteria Manual Table RO-2 3: Minimum f, is 10 min.for non-urban areas and 5 min.for urban areas Date: 4/16/2008 1 0. . Parsons Mine - Lafarge West, Inc # Preliminary Drainage Report 1 • Peak Runoff Calculations Using the Rational Method I Basin: R810(1-16) Condition: �, Storm Return Period: Basin Chracteristics IArea,A: 30 acres Basin Imperviousness' (in percent), is 0.0% Distance of Overland Flow, Lo: 528 ft Hydrologic Soils Group A Percent of Basin: 48.1% I Distance of Channelized Flow,Lo: 2,127 ft Hydrologic Soils Group B Percent of Basin: 48.2% I; Average Basin Slope, S: 0.00496 ft/ft Hydrologic Soils Groups C&D Percent of Basin: 3.6% or Slope of Channelized Flow,Sw: 0.00025 ft/ft Conveyance Coefficient2,C . 15 it Runoff Coefficient Runoff Coefficient Equations For 100-yr Storm Return Period: KA =-0.25i +0.32 l't CA=KA+(1.31i3-1.4412+1.135i-0.12) for CA?0 else CA=0 Kco =-0.39i +0.46 1' Cco=Kco+(0.858i3-0.786i2+0.774i+0.04) For 10-yr Storm Return Period: K A =-0.14i +0.17 (0.858i Cs=(CA+Cco)/2 ' Kco =-0.18i +0.21 ' For 5-yr Storm Return Period: KA =-0.08i +0.09 K00 =-0.10i+0.11 41, Return Period' Coompoane I CA I CB I CCD I KA I Kco II 5-Year 0.042 0.000 0.075 0.150 0.090 0.110 ,.• 10-Year 0.105 0.050 0.150 0.250 0.170 0.210 IL 100-Year 0.283 0.200 0.350 0.500 0.320 0.460 Time of Concentration Rainfall Intensity t' Total time of concentration equation: Rainfall Intensity Equation: Lesser of3: te=t +t, 1=(28.5*Popr)/(10+To)°.r86 where Pr„r is the 1 hr point rainfall depth or tc=L/180+10(if in urban area) Ill) Overland flow travel time equation: 1<= 205 min Prhr I 1,152 r'tG � 5 4. t,=(0.395*(1.1 -C5)*sgrt(L0))/5°33 t,= 55 min Return Period in in/hr � on S Sr v-n 4.. Channelized flow travel time equation: t,= 150 min 5-Year 35 5 J t,=Lo/(V'60)where V=(C„'S,°'5) V= 0.237 Ws 10-Year1 0 7 / 100-Year RR.56 1.07 9 r . I Peak Flow Rate I Rational Method Equation: 5. O=Ccomposne'I'A Return Cmmposre I A Q Period in/hr acres cfs µ 4. 5-Year 0.042 N.5 30 10-Year 0.105 0. 30 I` 100-Year 0.283 1/07\ 30 -o ill i `"Pad upd t 3• Notes: 1: Basin imperviousness determined from guidelines in UDFCD Drainage Criteria Manual Table RO-3 ipt 2: Conveyance coefficient determined from guidelines in UDFCD Drainage Criteria Manual Table RO-2 3: Minimum t, is 10 mm.for non-urban areas and 5 min.for urban areas Date: 4/16/2008 0 • Parsons Mine - Lafarge West, Inc Preliminary Drainage Report * • Peak Runoff Calculations Using the Rational Method O Basin: R811 (H7) Condition: -fisting. Storm Return Period: • QeC tAkr ei Basin Chracteristics Area,A: 22 acres Basin Imperviousness'(in percent),is 0.0% O Distance of Overland Flow, Lo: 1,300 ft Hydrologic Soils Group A Percent of Basin: 65.1% 0 Distance of Channelized Flow, Le: 0 ft Hydrologic Soils Group B Percent of Basin: 34.4% • Average Basin Slope,S: 0.00421 ft/ft Hydrologic Soils Groups C&D Percent of Basin: 0.6% O Slope of Channelized Flow, S„.: ft/ft Conveyance Coefficient,Cy,: 5 S Runoff Coefficient 1 Runoff Coefficient Equations For 100-yr Storm Return Period: KA =-0.25i+0.32 • CA=KA+(1.31i3-1.44i2+ 1.135i-0.12) for CA z 0 else CA=0 Kco =-0.39i+0.46 O Cco=Kco+(0.858i3-0.786i2+0.774i+0.04) For 10-yr Storm Return Period: KA =-0.14i+0.17 O Ce=(CA+CCD)/2 • ' Kco =-0.18i+0.21 For 5-yr Storm Return Period: KA =-0.08i+0.09 • Ken =-0.101+0.11 O Return Period) Composite I CA I C8 I CCD I KA I Kco •. 5-Year 0.027 0.000 0.075 0.150 0.090 0.110 • • 10-Year 0.086 0.050 0.150 0.250 0.170 0.210 0. 100-Year 0.254 0.200 0.350 0.500 0.320 0.460 • Time of Concentration Rainfall Intensity Total time of concentration equation: Rainfall Intensity Equation: • Lesser of3: to=t;+tt 1=(28.5'Pthr)/(10+Tp)°r138 where Pthr is the 1 hr point rainfall depth l or L=L/180+10(if in urban area) 011 Overland flow travel time equation: V. 93 min Prhr I I. t,=(0.395'(1.1 -C5)'sgrt(Lo))/So_33 t;= 93 min Return Period in in/hr U.SC GrC le il Channelized flow travel time equation: 4= 0 min 5-Year 35/' .00 I�n S+rrr° ti=Lc/(V*60)where V=(C„*S„,°5) V= 0.000 f/s 10-Year i.p�t 1 0 • 100-Year .56 1.91 I! l Peak Flow Rate is Rational Method Equation: 7• 0=Ccompostle*I'A Return Ccomposite I A Q Period in/hr acres cfs 5-Year 0.027 S..o/ 22 .' 10-Year 0.086 1 22 , 5 100-Year 0.254 .91 22 0. \. ill•• Notes: ' 0 1: Basin imperviousness determined from guidelines in UDFCD Drainage Criteria Manual Table RO-3 S 2: Conveyance coefficient determined from guidelines in UDFCD Drainage Criteria Manual Table RO-2 3: Minimum t, is 10 min.for non-urban areas and 5 min.for urban areas Date: 4/16/2008 9 p. $ Parsons Mine - Lafarge West, Inc 9 Preliminary Drainage Report i • Peak Runoff Calculations Using the Rational Method 9 Basin: RB12 (H4) Condition: Existing Storm Return Period: Basin Chracteristics ' Area,A: 97 acres Basin Imperviousness' (in percent),is 2.0% 9 Distance of Overland Flow, Lo: 2,784 ft Hydrologic Soils Group A Percent of Basin: 4.5% 9 Distance of Channelized Flow, Lo: 1,930 ft Hydrologic Soils Group B Percent of Basin: 24.6% $ Average Basin Slope, S: 0.04965 ft/ft Hydrologic Soils Groups C&D Percent of Basin: 70.9% ID Slope of Channelized Flow, S„.: 0.06408 ft/ft Conveyance Coefficient2,Co: 15 Runoff Coefficient II Runoff Coefficient Equations ' For 100-yr Storm Return Period: KA =-0.25i +0.32 I CA=KA+(1.31i3-1.44i2+ 1.135i-0.12) for CA 20 else CA=0 Kco =-0.39i +0.46 Ill Cco=Kco+(0.858i3-0.786i2+0.774i+0.04) For 10-yr Storm Return Period: KA =-0.141 +0.17 5. CB=(CA+Cco)/2 ' Kcc =-0.18i +0.21 For 5-yr Storm Return Period: KA =-0.08i +0.09 Ken =-0.10i +0.11 O Return Period' Ccompoeite I CA I Ce I Cco I KA I Kco O 5-Year 0.136 0.000 0.082 0.163 0.088 0.108 • • 10-Year 0.229 0.069 0.165 0.262 0.167 0.206 O 100-Year 0.459 0.217 0.362 0.507 0.315 0.452 III Time of Concentration Rainfall Intensity Total time of concentration equation: Rainfall Intensity Equation: O Lesser of: tc=t;+to 1=(28.5'Pin,)/(10+To)ama where Pinr is the 1hr point rainfall depth 5 or tc=L/180+10(if in urban area)0 Overland flow travel time equation: to= 62 min Piny I tt,S2. Ere. ▪ 1;=(0.395'(1.1 -CB)'sgrt(Lj))/S°:33 ti= 54 min Return Period in in/hr "Nast Gn s& 9 Channelized flow travel time equation: ti= 8 min 5-Year 1. 5 .333 J t1=L,/(V'60)where V=(C,,'S,75) V= 3.797 ft/s 10-Year 1. ,09 100-Year .56 2.53 ▪ I Peak Flow Rate I 9 Rational Method Equation: O CI=Coompoene`I*A Return Composite I A Q Period in/hr acres cfs 5-Year 0.136 3,2' 97 1W 10-Year 0.229 A9 97 O 100-Year 0.459 /2.53 97 ' 12.6 Ill lir Notes: O 1: Basin imperviousness determined from guidelines in UDFCD Drainage Criteria Manual Table RO-3 O 2: Conveyance coefficient determined from guidelines in UDFCD Drainage Criteria Manual Table RO-2 3: Minimum to is 10 min.for non-urban areas and 5 min.for urban areas Date: 4/16/2008 0 IP 1 Parsons Mine - Lafarge West, Inc i Preliminary Drainage Report 6 • Peak Runoff Calculations Using the Rational Method $ Basin: RB13 (h!3) Condition: Storm Return Period: er Basin Chracteristtics) ® Area,A: 131 acres Basin Imperviousness' (in percent), is 2.0% 9 Distance of Overland Flow, Lo: 2,572 ft Hydrologic Soils Group A Percent of Basin: 29.8% 9 Distance of Channelized Flow, L0: 4,031 ft Hydrologic Soils Group B Percent of Basin: 18.3% $ Average Basin Slope,S: 0.07733 ft/ft Hydrologic Soils Groups C&D Percent of Basin: 51.9% 9 Slope of Channelized Flow, S-: 0.02720 ft/ft Conveyance Coefficient2,C,: 15 i Runoff Coefficient Runoff Coefficient Equations For 100-yr Storm Return Period: KA =-0.25i +0.32 O CA=KA+(1.31ie-1.44i2+1.135i-0.12) for CA a 0 else CA=0 Koo =-0.39i +0.46 0 Cco=Kco+(0.858i3-0.78612+0.774i+0.04) For 10-yr Storm Return Period: KA =-0.14i +0.17 • Ce=(CA+Cco)/2 ' Ka) =-0.18i +0.21 • For 5-yr Storm Return Period: KA =-0.08i +0.09 Kco =-0.101 +0.11 9 Return Period' Ccomposfte I CA I C0 I Cc' I KA I Kco 5-Year 0.100 0.000 0.082 0.163 0.088 0.108 +.• 10-Year 0.187 0.069 0.165 0.262 0.167 0.206 le 100-Year 0.394 0.217 0.362 0.507 0.315 0.452 II Time of Concentration Rainfall Intensity Total time of concentration equation: Rainfall Intensity Equation: 0 Lesser of3: t0 t;+t, 1=(28.5*Pier)/(10+Te)°'66 where Pm,is the 1 hr point rainfall depth or tc=L/180+10(if in urban area) • Overland flow travel time equation: t0= 74 min P,„r I /� • t;=(0.395'(1.1 -C5)'sgrt(L0))/S°.3e t;= 47 min Return Period in in/hr use Lirteats • Channelized flow travel time equation: t,= 27 min 5-Year 1 35 1.18 -sir 54v?n . t.=1.,/(V'60)where V=(C,'S.„e s) V= 2.474 fUs 10-Year 1. 1 1. 1 100-Year .5 .2 it 9 I Peak Flow Rate II Rational Method Equation: • O=Ccempes;,e*I'A Return C,e,,,,ssie I A Q Period in/hr acres cfs 411 5-Year 0.100 '1\1 131 1�Yk III 10-Year 0.187 `1, 131 3fL.'p O 100-Year 0.394 24" 131 3/46. 0 Notes: 0._ 1: Basin imperviousness determined from guidelines in UDFCD Drainage Criteria Manual Table RO-3 2: Conveyance coefficient determined from guidelines in UDFCD Drainage Criteria Manual Table RO-2 3: Minimum to is 10 min.for non-urban areas and 5 min.for urban areas Date: 4/16/2008 IV . . Parsons Mine - Lafarge West, Inc 0 Preliminary Drainage Report 1 Peak Runoff Calculations Using the Rational Method IP Basin: RB14-1 (H3) Condition: ieting- Storm Return Period: * QtaA, Basin Chracteristics . Area,A: 63 acres Basin Imperviousness' (in percent),is 0.0% S! Distance of Overland Flow, Lo: 998 ft Hydrologic Soils Group A Percent of Basin: 39.8% } Distance of Channelized Flow, Lo: 2,627 ft Hydrologic Soils Group B Percent of Basin: 11.5% 5 Average Basin Slope,S: 0.07844 ft/ft Hydrologic Soils Groups C&D Percent of Basin: 48.8% O Slope of Channelized Flow,Gs: 0.05881 ft/ft Conveyance Coefficient',C,,: 15 0 Runoff Coefficient O Runoff Coefficient Equations For 100-yr Storm Return Period: KA =-0.25i+0.32 II Ce=Ks+(1.31i3-1.44i2+ 1.1351-0.12) for CA≥0 else CA=0 r Kco =-0.39i+0.46 5 Cco=Kco+(0.858i3-0.786i2+0.774i+0.04) For 10-yr Storm Return Period: KA =-0.14i+0.17 O C°=(CA+Cco)/2 K00 =-0.181+0.21 0 For 5-yr Storm Return Period: KA =-0.08i +0.09 Kco =-0.101+0.11 O Return Period' Composite J CA I Ca I Ccq I KA I Km O 5-Year 0.082 0.000 0.075 0.150 0.090 0.110 0' 10-Year 0.159 0.050 0.150 0.250 0.170 0.210 5 • 100-Year 0.364 0.200 0.350 0.500 0.320 0.460 9 Time of Concentration Rainfall Intensity Total time of concentration equation: Rainfall Intensity Equation: 4. Lesser of3: tp=t;+tr 1=(28.5'P1k)/(10+Tors6 where Potio is the 1hr point rainfall depth ' or te=L/180+10(if in urban area) t l* Overland flow travel time equation: tp= 41 min PINI U.St Gra.\44/ , t;=(0.395'(1.1 -Cs)'.sqrt(L0))/53-33 t;= 29 min Return Period in in/hr —TN is".SN+"^ Channelized flow travel time equation: tt= 12 min 5-Year .35 7 I` q=Lp/(V'60)where V=(Cu*S,.°"51 V= 3.638 ft/s 10-Year 1 1 2 9 100-Year 2.5 3.3 Peak Flow Rate I 4: Rational Method Equation: 4. O=Ccomposde*I'A Return Ccomposue I A Q -- Period in/hr acres cfs 5-Year 0.082 7Q/ 63 .� 10-Year 0.159 2.�- 63 8 100-Year 0.364 ,/.32 63 5. '44)• ;• Notes: 1: Basin imperviousness determined from guidelines in UDFCD Drainage Criteria Manual Table RO-3 2: Conveyance coefficient determined from guidelines in UDFCD Drainage Criteria Manual Table RO-2 3: Minimum tp is 10 min.for non-urban areas and 5 min.for urban areas Date: 4/16/2008 F • . IP Parsons Mine - Lafarge West, Inc P Preliminary Drainage Report IP • Peak Runoff Calculations Using the Rational Method IP 5 Basin: RB15-1 (H5) Condition: FiS1in 'I Storm Return Period: *. QtCIG„^'red Basin Chracteristics Area,A: 3 acres Basin Imperviousness' (in percent),is 0.0% Distance of Overland Flow, Lo: 271 ft Hydrologic Soils Group A Percent of Basin: 6.8% Ill Distance of Channelized Flow, Lc: 0 ft Hydrologic Soils Group B Percent of Basin: 0.0% ,, Average Basin Slope,S: 0.00067 ft/ft Hydrologic Soils Groups C&D Percent of Basin: 93.2% 0 Slope of Channelized Flow, Se,: ft/ft Conveyance Coefficient2,C,,: 5 IP Runoff Coefficient ' For 100. r Storm Return Period: KA 0.25i +0.32 Runoff •Coefficient Equations y =" ,- CA=KA+(1.31i3-1.44i2+1.135i-0.12) for CA a 0 else CA=0 KcD =-0.39i +046 +: CcD=Kco+(0.858i3-0.786i2+0.774i+0.04) For 10-yr Storm Return Period: KA =-0.141 +0.17 5' C5=(CA+Cco)/2 Kco =-0.181 +0.21 0 For 5-yr Storm Return Period: KA =-0.08i +0.09 Kco =-0.10/ +0.11 Return Period) Ccomporde I CA I Ca I CcD I KA I Kco il 5-Year 0.140 0.000 0.075 0.150 0.090 0.110 • 5 4. 10-Year 0.236 0.050 0.150 0.250 0.170 0.210 0 100-Year 0.480 0.200 0.350 0.500 0.320 0.460 ,r. t Time of Concentration Rainfall Intensity I Total time of concentration equation: Rainfall Intensity Equation: Lesser of3: l=(28.5*PI0/(10+Tc)°]36 where Pin,is the t hr point rainfall depth 0 or tc=L/180+10(if in urban area) 0 Overland flow travel time equation: tc= 70 min Pity I t�(0.395`(1.1 -C3)*sgrt(L0))/S°'33 4= 70 min Return Period in in/hr Lbe nur,14 Channelized flow travel time equation: i1= 0 min 5-Year 35 .2 17ea,tn S hcn' t,=1„,/(V*60)60)where V=(C,*S-°•3) V= 0.000 ft/s 10-Year 1. X.2 7 100-Year .56 .3 I Peak Flow Rate Rational Method Equation: `. ,tA Q=Ccompos,te'I`A Return C.,50.O,e I A Q Period in/hr acres cfs 5-Year 0.140 1.2 3 .rj' 10-Year 0.236 1 7 3 100-Year 0.480 .3 3 3. ,�,d Kati Notes: r 1: Basin imperviousness determined from guidelines in UDFCD Drainage Criteria Manual Table RO-3 2: Conveyance coefficient determined from guidelines in UDFCD Drainage Criteria Manual Table RO-2 3: Minimum tc is 10 min.for non-urban areas and 5 min.for urban areas Date: 4/16/2008 i Parsons Mine - Lafarge West, Inc 1 Preliminary Drainage Report II • Peak Runoff Calculations Using the Rational Method Ill i Basin: RB16-1(1-15) Condition: Extstrar Storm Return Period: Basin Chracteristics Area,k 4 •acres Basin Imperviousness' (in percent),is 0.0% • Distance of Overland Flow, Lo: 338 ft Hydrologic Soils Group A Percent of Basin: 6.7% 0' Distance of Channelized Flow,Lc: 0 ft Hydrologic Soils Group B Percent of Basin: 0.0% ' Average Basin Slope,5: 0.00067 fUft Hydrologic Soils Groups C&D Percent of Basin: 93.3% `. Slope of Channelized Flow,S,,: ft/ft Conveyance Coefficient2,C,: 5 Runoff Coefficient I.: For 100- r Storm Return Period: K = 0.25i +0.32 EH Runoff Coefficient Equations y A - CA=KA+(1.3113-1.4412+ 1.1351-0.12) for 0Aa0else CA=0 Cco=Kco+(0.858i3-0.786i2+0.774i+0.04) Kco=-0.391 +0.46 For 10-yr Storm Return Period: KA =-0.14i +0.17 Ca=(CA+Coo)/2 Km=-0.18i +0.21 For 5-yr Storm Return Period: KA =-0.08i +0.09 r£.. Kco =-0.101 +0.11 Return Period) Ccomnosae I CA I Cs I CCD I KA I Kco „; 5-Year 0.140 0.000 0.075 0.150 0.090 0.110 `.:• 10-Year 0.237 0.050 0.150 0.250 0.170 0.210 100-Year 0.480 0.200 0.350 0.500 0.320 0.460 J. x Time of Concentration Rainfall Intensity t. Total time of concentration equation: Rainfall Intensity Equation: Lesser of3: tc=t;+t. 1=(28.5*PIS,)/(10+To)°r%where Pts,is the t hr point rainfall depth . or to=L/180+10(if in urban area) 'It Overland flow travel time equation: to= 78 min Pmm I _ t,=(0.395*(1.1 -C5)*sgrt(Lj))/S°•33 tp 78 min Return Period in in/hr t s e Gatti, Channelized flow travel time equation: ti= 0 min 5-Year '''III ��555 1.14 7M1gn •S4y, ti=Lc/(V'60)where V=(C,*5„.0.5) V= 0.000 ft/s 10-Year 1. 1 6 100-Year .56 2.1 Peak Flow Rate Rational Method Equation: 0=Coomps;ie`I*A Retum Ccomaosne 1 A Q Period in/hr acres cfs • 5-Year 0.140 .1 4 7 • 10-Year 0.237 1 6 4 100-Year 0.480 .1 4 4.3 Notes: 1: Basin imperviousness determined from guidelines in UDFCD Drainage Criteria Manual Table RO-3 2: Conveyance coefficient determined from guidelines in UDFCD Drainage Criteria Manual Table RO-2 • • 3: Minimum t, is 10 min.for non-urban areas and 5 min.for urban areas Date: 4/16/2008 Parsons Mine - Lafarge West, Inc Preliminary Drainage Report • Peak Runoff Calculations Using the Rational Method Basin: R817(H5) Condition: Existing- Storm Return Period: liledAl,ne Basin Chracteristics I Area,A: 12 acres Basin Imperviousness' (in percent), is 0.0% Distance of Overland Flow, Le: 411 ft Hydrologic Soils Group A Percent of Basin: 19.9% Distance of Channelized Flow, Lo: 0 ft Hydrologic Soils Group B Percent of Basin: 0.0% Average Basin Slope, S: 0.00067 ft/ft Hydrologic Soils Groups C&D Percent of Basin: 80.1% Slope of Channelized Flow,Sw: ft/ft Conveyance Coefficient2,G,: 5 r'= Runoff Coefficient I , Runoff Coefficient Equations For 100-yr Storm Return Period: KA =-0.25i+0.32 CA=KA+(1.31i3-1.44i2+ 1.135i-0.12) for CA?0 else CA=O K00 =-0.39i+0.46 _ Cco=Kco+(0.858i3-0.786i2+0.774i+0.04) For 10-yr Storm Return Period: KA =-0.14i+0.17 Cs=(CA+Cco)/2 ' Kco =-0.18) +0.21 For 5-yr Storm Return Period: KA =-0.08i+0.09 Kco =-0.10i+0.11 Return Period' Ccwnposae I CA I Cs I Cco I KA I Kco 5-Year 0.120 0.000 0.075 0.150 0.090 0.110 .6 10-Year 0.210 0.050 0.150 0.250 0.170 0.210 100-Year 0.440 0.200 0.350 0.500 0.320 0.460 Time of Concentration Rainfall Intensity Total time of concentration equation: Rainfall Intensity Equation: Lesser of3: tc=t,+t, 1=(28.5'P,nr)/(10+;1°186 where Pjhr is the 1 hr point rainfall depth or tp=L/180+10(if in urban area) Overland flow travel time equation: tp= 88 min Pin, I 1;=(0.395'(1.1 -C5)'sgrt(L0))/S°33 t;= 88 min Return Period in in/hr Channelized flow travel time equation: t,= 0 min 5-Year �(.35 T t,=Lp/(V*60)where V=(C„*5;5) V= 0.000 ft/s 10-Year 1. ( 1 5 .1J-5`'n S--q.0rrk 100-Year .56 .9 Peak Flow Rate Rational Method Equation: 0=Cco,oposne'I'A Return C<omposne I A Q Period in/hr acres CfS 5-Year 0.120 \1.Op 12 1. 10-Year 0.210 1 12 100-Year 0.440 1.93 12 0. ti U.?()1.. apdcb Notes: 1: Basin imperviousness determined from guidelines in UDFCD Drainage Criteria Manual Table RO-3 y 2: Conveyance coefficient determined from guidelines in UDFCD Drainage Catena Manual Table RO-2 3: Minimum to is 10 min.for non-urban areas and 5 min.for urban areas Date: 4/16/2008 Parsons Mine - Lafarge West, Inc Preliminary Drainage Report 2 S Peak Runoff Calculations Using the Rational Method Basin: RB18-1 (H6) Condition: Existing Storm Return Period: Basin Chracteristics Area,A: 1 acres Basin Imperviousness'(in percent),is 0.0% r Distance of Overland Flow, Lo: 147 ft Hydrologic Soils Group A Percent of Basin: 0.0% Distance of Channelized Flow, Lo: 0 ft Hydrologic Soils Group B Percent of Basin: 0.0% •; Average Basin Slope,S: 0,00496 ft/ft Hydrologic Soils Groups C&D Percent of Basin: 100.0% Slope of Channelized Flow,S„,: ft/ft Conveyance Coefficient,Cy: 5 Runoff Coefficient ' Runoff Coefficient Equations For 100-yr Storm Return Period: KA =-0.25i+0.32 CA=KA+(1.31i -1.44i2+ 1.135i-0.12) for CA z 0 else CA=0 K c° _-0.39i+0.46 T. Cco=Kco+(0.858i3-0.786i2+0.774i+0.04) For 10-yr Storm Return Period: KA =-0.14i+0.17 Cs=(CA+Coo)/2 ' Kco =-0.181+0.21 , For 5-yr Storm Return Period: KA =-0.08i+0.09 Kco =-0.10/+0.11 Return Period) Ccomposite I CA I CB I CCD I KA I Kco 5-Year 0.150 0.000 0.075 0.150 0.090 0.110 ,.. 10-Year 0.250 0.050 0.150 0.250 0.170 0.210 100-Year 0.500 0.200 0.350 0.500 0.320 0.460 `3 Time of Concentration Rainfall Intensity Total time of concentration equation: Rainfall Intensity Equation: Lesser of: ty t,+t, I=(28.5*Prhr)/(10+To)o]88 where P,hr is the 1 hr point rainfall depth or to=L/180+10(if in urban area) Overland flow travel time equation: to= 26 min Pihr I t,=(0.395*(1.1 -C5)*sgrt(L0))/Sa33 t,= 26 min Return Period in in/hr -yc��1 • Channelized flow travel time equation: t,= 0 min 5-Year .3 k u'� — 4=Lo/(V*60)60)where V=(C,*Sw°'5) V= 0.000 ft/s 10-Year 1 1 -bo3tr. S -11r1 iv 100-Year 5 Peak Flow Rate Rational Method Equation: • Q=Coomposite*I`A Return Cwmw&,e I A Q Period in/hr acres cfs ' 5-Year 0.150 12.2/ 1 .4,1- ; 10-Year 0.250 2' 5 1 Doc 100-Year 0.500 A.3�, 1 �2.4' Notes: 1: Basin imperviousness determined from guidelines in UDFCD Drainage Criteria Manual Table RO-3 2: Conveyance coefficient determined from guidelines in UDFCD Drainage Criteria Manual Table RO-2 4:: 3: Minimum to is 10 min.for non-urban areas and 5 min.for urban areas Date: 4/16/2008 POINT AREA (acres) RATE (cfs) DPI 114 11S.0 DP2 151 131.0 DP3 116 250.0 DP4 11 112.6 DP5 28 18.'7 DP6 51 22.1 DP1 22 105 DP5 85 51.1 DP1 25 30.0 • JOB N( t) ' Lafarge West, ,Inc . 11 \ � Cfi." PARSONS MINE at:14w Cp\o( EXISTING DRAINAGE CONDIT DEERE & AULT EX CONSULTANTS , INC _ Date: 5 _ 7 _ 08 Scale: AS N • O O tai H N r d O O o z M 5 +J H -j i o •- O � /� O .�O 1E z w � W - • o V u 0 Q 3- C � a.--i U I—I Ul- H r . (1)in z � ° w0 Szv < s = w H � � Q CO z ea zz CO a o • cco lam( rrl r ' COPY • STABILITY ANALYSIS PARSONS MINE Prepared for: LAFARGE WEST, INC. 1800 North Taft Hill Road Fort Collins, Colorado 80521 April 2008 • DEERE & AULT CONSULTANTS, INC. 600 South Airport Road, Suite A-205 Longmont,CO 80503 \ (303) 651-1468 • Fax (303) 651-1469 CpmMo kw. 6 Z4 cues (to air AU. seVoacks taut to.ti ec)te o£'QOu). 'Ct.e s4 e)cs oWec ‘cia ..4c 4t4 (Z.OL). - 1ease u?da..4c "at 4•.ble en A< EXIS11+9 cce a-tats TAcAp !c bt 'cam Qdy c &bc.3. a) Se-AAA2es Cronr, AA.,2 c,u.tt „o„ a.\tcro tir do nt>l, aWsc 6e. . Please that sat � alonet kt ``c,"shed u.4tgmnw.4 &rt sterbotk (ct t, o edge er4aZow ltt o` yroeetwle c ce. � "�� 3) FC t.\„NS eh' Ce t iD Solecttic.1 t"c"`s act noIr atw.feAc. -Mew ceTtcl FS 40 e • carter t0 tnv,.\-e\o.tes. 1) rArmy epees^4 Emma' S tr.5►.ltlt1/4 sUe3 a-05 e6 LS sist,Id be e.tW tot evo,\Do kin s w\ma% so-44y lowed. 1l,e cbs. oaloo...V.en.e..,ls s4,ot,W WAS(*) In Ix Cully\o°-JeJ. Teo-se ,c+wtdt ealc ciaion,, *a It sleow e k t1`“0ls aloYt5 do t. ctw.Js kg-m- ays STABILITY EXHIBIT • General A slope stability analysis was performed for the Parsons Mine located in Weld County, Colorado. The purpose of this analysis was to investigate appropriate mining-highwall setback distances from man made structures. Below we present a brief background and the results of our findings. Background The site is located east of the city limits of Windsor, Colorado. Weld County Road (WCR) 64'/2 forms the northern boundary. WCR 25 bisects the site. The Cache La Poudre River flows through and Qum) adjacent to the southern portion of the site. v yecv.\ `3.A x« Qua�b�"rr "` The proposed gravel mine is to be mined with a highwall slope inclination of pproximately 0.5:1 (horizontal to vertical). After mining, a final reclamation slope of 4:1 or flat er will be constructed using on-site overburden soils. -11,.,ra tt a.chsesnpw,c.y Ibc.Asoac.. Akts�r'epocs,4 .k.e tpec�41 2,24A64) Ques}lwvna �l2ht nu� 5V.cc ol nat , itkrntwy� s-re. Cansi,L4 t4 11 OMl, a'/Lsr. Analysis Our stability analysis involved generating a computer model of limit equilibrium analysis using the Slope/W computer program. In addition to the mining highwall, long-term stability of the reclaimed slope was also evaluated. The stratigraphy, encountered during the March 2002 to April 2007, site investigations was used to • develop the model. Sandy clay layers are typically encountered in the alluvial sand and gravel stratum. These layers are colloquially known as"mud lenses." No significant mud lenses were encountered during the investigation of this site. Therefore, mud lenses were not incorporated in the slope stability model. A worst case cross section was used to evaluate the set back distances for each phase during mining. The worst case of these was used for the long term reclaimed slope. The soil profile analyzed consisted of 4-12 feet of overburden clays overlying approximately 10-25 of sand and gravel on top of claystone bedrock. DBMS Analysis,Highwall Setback to Property Line The Division of Reclamation Mining and Safety(DRMS) requires that gravel pit highwalls within 200 feet of significant manmade permanent structures (such as utilities) be investigated for slope stability. Furthermore, the DRMS requires that the gravel mine highwalls be modeled as vertical unless it can be demonstrated that the slope angle of the highwall will be controlled during mining. Additionally, the DRMS requires that the analysis be performed using the DRMS parameters for sites where laboratory testing is absent. These parameters are given below on Table 1: • - Parsons Mine DRMS 112 Permit Page SEI of SE2 Table 1: DRMS Model Parameters Effective Effective Saturated Unit • Soil Type Friction Angle Cohesion Weight 0'(degrees) c'(P{l) nu(pcf) Overburden 28 50 114 Gravel 35 0 130 Weathered Bedrock 14 0 124 Bedrock 28 100 124 The parameters for weathered bedrock are much more conservative than those typically encountered in the project area and, it is our opinion, that they are not representative of conditions at the site. o�Q,1„2ru rci ce 45kas ��N.1.LL t� y We analyzed a vertical highwall section for each phase. The depth to bedrock varied from 14 to 30 feet's t"`1 i �, across the project site. The vertical section corresponds to a steep highwall mining scenario where the 4 took' highwall inclination is approximately 0.5:1. Woc'gf GAS Me.,k\o 30I1f� ?4T IF Table 2 below summarizes the results of our analysis. The analysis was performed using the DRMS parameters shown in Table 1. The factor of safety required by the DRMS for temporary mine slopes Tk x r"n1 and reservoir embankments are provided for comparison. Output graphics for each of the analyses are attached. wt towoitazi Table 2: Highwall Setback DBMS Analysis Results Gal. , Setback Calculated Required Factor Model Distance(feet) Factor fe�°f of Safely Safe• Phase IA 46 1.069 1.0 Phase lB 35 1.004 1.0 Phase IC 35 1.115 1.0 Phase 2 35 1.046 1.0 Phase 3 25 1.292 1.0 Phase 4A 25 1.222 1.0 Phase 4B 25 1.054 1.0 Phase 4C 25 1.681 1.0 Phase 5A 25 1.264 1.0 Phase 5B 25 1.209 1.0 Phase 5C 25 1.228 1.0 Longterm Case 25 1.551 N/A The setback distance in Table 2 is calculated from the crest of the mine highwall to the potential failure surface intersection with the existing ground. ba k NOM Lafarge\0138.013 Parsons Permit\DRMS Exhibits\Parsons Stability Exhibit.doc • Parsons Mine DRMS 112 Permit Page SE2 of SE2 0 - o o » o o &\ ki }co \§ \} - o / ,- k ci - / ! y \ / - \} }_ - , •t� ' 3 ?2a _ » , ic \ ) \ � _ « • _ . - 0 § 0 - . { O co min 0 ± «_amort ^ ii ii ii z- b � r — CC - .0 q § a - § / ( ) - ; \ — o a CD — P o o \ 2� \ : II VIII L- i - 01 CD CO „0 DI 0 } ( ( e-CI ( ( ( ( ( ( , n . ( ooa WU_e 0 co 1 0 • v 0 0 O N U N CL O o 0 ra II II II 00 t U 9 0 0 0 0 0 n 0 0 13 Q.w 0. u) 0 N j 1 � 0 � 3f2 II II II ao t U9 0 1 cn 0 w N Iv 02 U • 1 0 0 °a _ t 0 I.O alr^i a0 a� b. ._ O M C`' ~ II II ,II ELS II t U6 �� m Obi i' q z , 0 . i€i M1 O h.CaeQ0 F., O U 0 .C N a 4441 'V 0_171 - ra IT a 0 ^ 0 t co CO ANC) CO z,.,, L Li II II II I O a. t b a I °' Yi'i• y 0 1p; 0 ''z 0 N n rz?;" 0 T ,, . IIIIIIIIIIIIIIII O O In o N O to 0 N O co O N O IID O n r-to n n n In n N N l- n on o^ CD CD CD w co • Q P V V V O O O V P P P V V O Y (000 14 x) uollenal3 O J N O a 0 - m - N U CO O o o M O N • N II II II _ 2- U 9 0 m 0 — m III o N -J 0 U N o CO▪ °-a � Oi- ll 0 in m a o in — N N d O -r ' R o N__ - N I o 5 0 O CO II II _II II ?. U 0- m el efia ~ R COI 1 0 Cs) o ti f. 0 04 z °4 CO, Wit & [ 0 N 214 " d N m • 0 NON — m U 1- tf N L II II II o 1 U 9 m ?- 0 0 o 0 N C i g • iI 0 to 0 O N 0 h 0 U) O in O u] O a a CO Cl N N ,- i- O O m m m © !-- n a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a (000 1- x) UOIIRA013 0 m O — N O — y • m O N O W d O ° i o II• II II o ?- U9 — o — m — m — n _ O 0 U M e{ II• II ,II _ oa ? 09 — 4I M 0 • N U C A — o CZ N T — O Q • 5' ,.4 o CO II II II ^ A x O) CI O — N N O L. _ o c) n. r-3 It Ca — o N V a N en a CL CO 0 N — P N II II II _ op_ ? U 9 m °$. o 0 N 0 — to IIIIIII HIIl l 0 LO 0 CD O N 0 CO 0 CO 0 N 0 N 0 Lo 0 ' • CO CO cl,N- N- N N N- N- N N N O T T I-- n n n n n n n n n n n N- 0 CO CO V V V V V O < V C < V V V V < C (000 L x) uoilena13 0 m 0 — _ o • 0 O U - N as M _ OOD � N II II II o U 0 m — — m a� m c N C) as II _II a of c9) c.) o �5 1 4j • — O D O o _ ^ mo 1'4 CO alfl O CO II II _II !� < U 0' — cn s tl < ty t2 04 � O O — O co) 'a O 0. �L — nN G.N N 0) OD a° — Din Ckl ° . N N II II _II cCL a,' - 0 ax O 11 - N O r co • L U 0 ! a O ID O LLD O m 0 m 0 ID O N O N O N Yl V O CD CI N N O O O 01 DI m m n n m (D m n n n n n n n n m 4 4 v 4 v v a o a v v e v v a v v a e (0001. x) uollanal3 0 — Co 0 • — i_n o — a 0 — 0 0 N O N 2 C1 V O ° p CO 0 CO N II II II _ o 2 C1$ — Si O O — n O CO .3 0. E N ° n CO ° a •- o •- II II _II -- a ? U� n/ NI C 7 N X• — N U C Y — o rd. — o 0 _ O 3 N CO Cam — N 0 CO II II II — n II 2- s s-"p 8! —I v v] 0 O en p Ol C "ti�-l?. — (o cl V o ki 40 O C7) N CO 0'° _ 0 O) • N CO CO II 11 II sii: � _ oa. 0,": - 0 0 0 N N o O O O O O N O in o N O O O O O Yl' O V O CI CU N N O O 01 0 CO CO 1D I, n n N- N.n N n n n N. n CO CO CO CD CD Q V V V a a a a a a a V P O O (OOO I x) uoIlena13 o — Co 0 — 0 - • o - N — dta o_ C7 0 co • N II - o ? 0 8 O_ m — o I ^ CL En 0 0'd • O i— ll II _II tr ?- U AS- Jo � N• N y ^ — U cal7 _� ain ° CL •-• oai '" II II II II r �e- — 5.3 o es Y. 0 con — N Lit O f0 C V t - N Cto r V Qin O p o O N 0 CO LO m� u L II II II m tL ? U 9 0 4 — O — O N �S r q_yn O sY'ysY.. — II II C O 0 0 N o N O o O n O Ifl O 1n O LO O Q Q [7 n N N 0 0 01 01 CO 0 1- • ft n n n n n r n n r r CO 0 0 m CO Q Q d d 4444 d d Q Q d d Q Q (000 4 x) uoileAel3 o — m Z 0 — N O — V • O - C) 0 N U N a a d. 0 ° _o CO 0 CO II II II o � o m _Ii m — I� 0 U CO▪ CI-d' 1- O II II _II _ a - o 0 ® n N CD r1 -3- U a C — o 03 ill _ O p • o U O co ._ 0 C-O 2x:4 — a : II hra' —1 o N 0_m m II II _II G.€. oEL ?-U g —1 m ci 0 —Iv l IIIIIIH a IIIIII• O U) 0 U) 0 tfl O N 0 U) 0 U) 0 U) 0 U) U) O C CO C) N N e ,- 0 0 O) W CO CO I".• C-- n n n n n n n n n n co co UJ b U) v v 4 a a a a e v v v v < c v v (0001 x) uo!IOnal3 O -S O - • � O O N U N Qa V a o J m 0 co N N 11 II II o U — rn O — m o co ° — M 0-d O 1- II 11 _II — vo U6 — 07) 0I M • - N U 5n - O^ • — o U - , dw o CO IC)O CO - N 11 II II O- - m ?. y O — e c o v - 1.9 a o o 4.4 nm a O N 0 N - m U II II _II o a - ba O - o O O N O — III IIIII III a 1.0 O ON O IS) O O m O ID O LO LC) e O LC) m C O N N O o O CD T m CO r nD. nn r-nn r Co Ti mm 6 v 6 v v o v a o < v Ti a v (OOO x) uolleneI3 O 0 I o 1 i 0 — a_ • 0 0 U N as v O ° .c o CO O CO N II II II I o —I o 0 — co 0 - m 0 — r 0 — o i U = o — in V N 1- O o p II II — <I- r- ire - N-4 a � N 4 — O al � N_ 0 U HIa,� b � a� — N N 1- OCr) ~ II II II II r- b� — 0 y • ; - a CS VI o Qa H t Cd I o 'Y N en a N IT CO Q ° — mQ t� CO 1 in II II II _ o n. ?-• U 6 — o 0 0 — N Y. _ C, V • I 1 in o 0 1 1 1 l in o O in O ID O in O in 0 in in O in 0 O in 01 a s l7 O N N O O T D) 9 m r n n n n n N n n N n IN CD CO N ID a v a a a' v a v v a v v a v a a (0001. X) uollenol3 0 — 0 _ • _ 0 N O in O_ O_ CO ON ▪ N II II II — o ? U $ m O O — (D U N O N Qd. ▪ OI- II II _II — ov ?- U9 — - N N � U • - Ill O — w ° co Q to — N � O C) II II II II o Can 0 h o y — v? H C Vat CI o al Cr, IT O Q° o • � 0 OD N I 'up u1 II 9 U 4 0 0 0 0 — N O • LO 0 0 LC1 0 N 0 iD o iD 0 1A 0 LO 0 LO N n IN n n n r n n co C O D O1 CO C0 a a e v v v a v v a a a v a a a (000 4 x) uoijena13 0 — o — o0Uw 7O ° — o ▪ II OO — rn- 0- 0 '40 ▪ O1- — e J9 0 c) IoMII roa - O Ire oe —IDN —_ 5,P- ?-U 6 0 — o 0 0 — N O M • 1 I l I 1 1 1 i l o coon O In n o O NO N 0 Y) 0 LO O N O Y1 O O M N C) N N O O °1 Ol N W r r r r r r r r r r r r o 0 CO m !o a ? C V O 4 4 V V V C V V 4 V WOOL x) uollenala 0 N \ } 0 0 0 }\° : — § \ § 27. hi / O 11112i K - . 2 — e c\ } - , /� _ • \ / , 1 ° 3 £ « - \\ - ! I \ ° § k ` ° . co in -it II II .II 5. R \ — . cil ! U m . B \ � 0 iii cm o co � � ? , � C O II II _II — � � + ; - x • « . III I , I � II I I I I I ! r -D. rrNN NN- r § ■ ■ § , , , , , � , 4 , , , - , 4 „ Ua w ea Hello