The URL can be used to link to this page

Browse Search

Home My WebLink About20100324.tiff STATE OF COLORADO DIVISION OF RECLAMATION,MINING AND SAFETY i•epartment of Natural Resources 1313 Sherman St.,Room 215 Denver,Colorado 80203 COLORADO DIVISION OF Phone:(303)866-3567 RECLAMATION FAX;(303)832-8106 MINING bc— SAFETY January 29th, 2010 Bill Rifler,Jr. Governor Jennifer Vecchi Harris D.Sherman Executive Director Vecchi&Associates, LLC Ronald W.Canany P.O. Box 1175 Division Director Longmont,Colorado 80502-1175 Natural Resource Trustee RE: Parsons Mine,DRMS File#M-2009-082; 112c Permit Application, Financial Warranty Amount and Approval Stipulation. Dear Mrs.Vecchi, The Division received your response to the adequacy reviews on January 21`t, 2010 and Scott Palmers e- mail response from Deer and Ault in regards to Adequacy Review#4 on January 28th, 2010. The information submitted satisfies the Division concerns. In regards to the financial warranty,the Division has several points we would like to clarify. • Rule 6.4.12 Exhibit I.—Reclamation Cost Estimate Item#24 in your response to the Division's Adequacy Reviews proposes a plan to update the financial warranty annually. In order to ensure the proper amount of financial warranty is held for the operation, the Division would approve the application with a stipulation that the financial warranty must be reviewed every year and increased if necessary for the life of the mine. This stipulation is listed below under the heading"Stipulation". This stipulation will become a requirement for the entire life of the permit and failure to comply with the stipulation will result in a possible violation, cease and desist order and civil penalties. Pursuant to C.R.S.34-32.5-117 (1)a permit shall not be issued under this article until the board receives the performance and financial warranty. Lafarge has indicated they do not intend on disturbing the mine site in 2010; however, in order to issue a permit a financial warranty must be submitted. Initially, the Financial Warranty will be set at$15,300.00 which would cover the Division's indirect cost of permit revocation,financial warranty forfeiture and several site maintenance costs such as weed control. Stipulation: Prior to affecting any land within the permit area, the Operator shall submit and receive approval from the Division of a financial warranty that will cover the cost to reclaim one year's worth of disturbance. The Operator will not be allowed to expose ground water until enough financial warranty has been submitted and approved by the Division to account for the exposure of ground water for a year's worth • EXHIBIT 2010-0324 5 Office of Office of Mined Land Reclamation Denver • Grand Junction • Durango L-M ..1651 live and Inactive Mines • of mining. Every year for the life of the permit, within the annual report the operator must submit information necessary to determine the financial warranty. This information shall include but will not be limited to: 1.) The Operator's estimate of the financial warranty. 2.) Amount of current affected land. 3.) An estimate of the amount of land to be affected in the next year. 4.) Dimensions of pit excavation(s)currently and projected for the next year(to be lined if below ground water level): a. Acreage b. Depth c. Length of highwall d. Slope ratio of all pit slopes 5.) Acres of land to be topsoiled currently and projected. 6.) Updated map depicting the mining disturbance, plant site, pit excavation, and the location and amount(volume in cubic yards)of topsoil and overburden piles stockpiled on the site. 7.) Any other information the Division may request to determine the financial warranty. Upon receiving the information,the Division will verify the Operators a financial warranty calculation and initiate a Surety Increase revision if necessary and the Operator will have 60 days to post the additional financial warranty. • Conclusion: These are the terms of approval for the Parsons Mine permit application. Unless there are objections, the Division will proceed with the applications approval. Sincerely, Jared Ebert Environmental Protection Specialist DRMS CC: Tony Waldron, DRMS Anne Best Johnson, Lafarge West, Inc. • Kim Ogle soom: Bruce Barker nt: Thursday, January 28, 2010 4:05 PM : Jennifer Vecchi Cc: Trevor Jiricek; Kim Ogle Subject: Paragraph 12.D. Jennifer: It appears to me that the last sentence in Paragraph 12.D. reserves unto Lafarge vis-a-vis the Lessor the sole discretion to do what it deems necessary to modify the mine permit and reclamation plan to accommodate "future oil and gas well installations located on the surface of the Property." That sentence says to me that the surface negotiations are Lafarge's, not the Lessor's. So, I agree with your assessment that Lafarge does not need the Lessor's sign- off on the surface use agreement. Hope this helps. Bruce. • 1 rI • 0 VECCHI & ASSOCIATES, LLC URBAN PLANNING & DESIGN P O.Box 1175 Longmont,CO 80502-1175 Phone 303-774-0173 Fax 303-774-0173 VecchiAssociates@comcast.net January 20, 2010 Mr. Jared Ebert Environmental Protection Specialist Division of Reclamation, Mining and Safety Department of Natural Resources 1313 Sherman Street, Room 215 Denver, CO 80203 RE: Response to Adequacy Review #1 Comments for Lafarge West, Inc's Parsons Mine, BRIMS File# M-2009-082 Dear Jared: • This letter is in response to your Adequacy Review#1 and #2 Comments for Lafarge West, Inc's Parsons Mine, DRMS File # M-2009-082. Below is a listing of each of your comments followed by our responses in italics. Adequacy Review#1 Comments and Responses: 6.4.3 EXHIBIT C—Pre-mining and Mining Plan Map(s) of Affected Lands 1. Please describe what"typical berm planting" means? Why do only certain berms have "typical berm plantings"while others do not? The only berms indicated on the mining plan that will remain in place after mining is completed are located on the northern and eastern perimeters of Phase 2. A detail illustrating the plantings has been added to Exhibit C. The remaining berms consist of material stockpiles and will be used for reclamation. They will be seeded to the specified dryland grass mix. 6.4.4 EXHIBIT D—Mining Plan 2. Please specify the depth that topsoil will be stripped. Bore logs for the site indicate 6" to 24" of topsoil are present on various portions of the site. Lafarge will determine the depth of topsoil during initial stripping for each phase and isolate topsoil for use during reclamation of each phase. A minimum of 6" of topsoil will be stripped and stockpiled for each phase. Sufficient topsoil will be • stockpiled to reclaim all disturbed areas for each phase. i7$ Page2ofll Mr. Jared Ebert January 20, 2010 • 3. On Page D-4 of the Exhibit, it states mining and reclamation activities will take approximately 20 years. Please provide a more detailed schedule for the mining activities. Please estimate the periods of time which will be required for each phase (1-5) of the operation. The Division understands this schedule will be an estimate and will vary depending on economic activities. An estimated schedule by phase has been added to page 4 of Exhibit D. 4. What will be the maximum depth of the pit excavation for each phase? The maximum depth of mining for each phase will be to the shale floor and will vary by phase. The shale generally slopes from north to south through the mining area and is generally shallower within the flood plain. Average depth to shale for each phase is as follows: Phase IA: 28' Phase IB: 16' Phase IC:: 13%2' Phase 2: 24' Phase 3: 14' Phase 4A: 14' Phase 4B: 14%2' Phase 4C: I3'A' Phase 5A - 5C: 14' Shale floor contours are indicated on Exhibit C. • 5. What seed mix will be used to stabilize the topsoil and overburden piles if they are left in place for longer than 180 days as described on page D3 of the mining plan? The Seed Mix for Upland Areas will be used on these piles. Exhibit D,page D3 has been revised to clarify this. 6. The structures to be built in the plant site are depicted on the mining plan map with their respective length and widths labeled. Please provide an estimate for the height and composition of each of those structures (i.e. office, scale house, MCC building, maintenance shop, etc...). Also, if these structures will be built on concrete pads, what will be the thickness of the pads? The Division needs this information to calculate a cost for removing these structures for the Financial Warranty. Most structures at the plant site will be portable and not be constructed on a concrete pad. The maintenance shop will be on a 12" thick concrete pad and be 25'tall. The MCC building will be a portable van trailer that is about 12'tall (no concrete pad). The office and scale house will also both be about 12'tall and each building will probably sit on approximately ten 12"x12"x8'concrete piers. 7. Please provide an estimate of the thickness of the asphalt road constructed in the plant area. The asphalt road in the plant site area will be approximately 4"- 6" thick. • �7$ Page 3 of 11 Mr. Jared Ebert 0 January 20, 2010 • 8. According to Page D2 of the mining plan, it states dewatering water will be discharged either into the Cache la Poudre River, the cottonwood gallery adjacent to the river, and or wetlands adjacent to active mining areas. However, on the mining plan map (4), there are several dewatering discharge points along Weld County Road 25; it is unclear what the water will be discharging into. Please clarify. These discharge points show that the water will be discharged into an existing irrigation lateral; during mining this lateral will not be used for irrigation, it will just be used for dewatering. Therefore, we have updated page D2 to clarify that water may also be discharged into existing irrigation laterals. 6.4.5 EXHIBIT E—Reclamation Plan 9. According to E-5, the Operator will spread 6-12" of topsoil where it is required. Given the reclamation plan calls for the creation of eight open water ponds and sediment basin wetlands, there should be excess topsoil available for reclamation. Please commit to spreading at least 10-12"of topsoil over the designated areas. The operator will spread a minimum of 10" to 12" of topsoil during reclamation of the designated areas. 10. Please commit to re-spreading all the topsoil over the required areas salvaged during the mining operation. All topsoil available at the site must be salvaged and re-spread • for reclamation. The operator will commit to reserving sufficient topsoil for each phase to spread a minimum depth of 10"to 12" of topsoil on all disturbed areas during reclamation of designated areas. No topsoil will be placed within silt-basin wetland areas except in sloped areas above the finished elevation of the silts. 11. Page E-3 of the reclamation plan indicates how the mine slopes around the ground water ponds will be graded, however it does not indicate what the horizontal to vertical ratio will be for the reclaimed pit slopes for the "upland" and "wetland" areas. Please indicate how the side slopes will be graded for the "upland" areas and the "wetland" areas. Side slopes in upland areas vary by phase to accomplish the specific goals of the reclamation plan, however the maximum slope in these areas will be 3:1. Wetland slopes will also vary by phase and location within the properties. Specific grading for each area is illustrated on Exhibit F. Maximum slopes within wetland areas will be 3:1. 12. The mining plan indicates the existing groundwater level is 5-15 feet below the natural ground level. Many of the reclaimed "upland"pit floors are about 20-25 feet below the pre-mining elevation. Given the bottom of these upland basins will be below the reported groundwater level, it would appear these excavations would become groundwater ponds, not upland areas. Please clarify. "Overflow" culverts and channels will be installed within each phase to set the maximum depth of water within each reclaimed area. See Exhibit Ffor the locations • of the pipes. The current specification calls for 18" culverts. The culverts have been sized based on ease of maintenance, ground water data gathered to date, and our 17$ Page 4 of 11 Mr. Jared Ebert January 20, 2010 • general knowledge of this area. Pipe sizing will be reevaluated as each phase is opened for mining. Updated groundwater monitoring results and dewatering operations in the current and adjacent phase will be evaluated to determine if the size of the culverts will need to be adjusted If this information results in a change to the size of the culverts, the operator will update the Division with the annual report. The culverts will be maintained in operating condition as long as Lafarge owns the property. In addition, the location, invert elevation, and sizing of pipes will be included in the augmentation plan for the property. These culverts will provide an overflow to set the high water elevation in the reclaimed cells. This will assure that this commitment runs with the property and that additional water will not be impounded on the property. 13. It states on Page E-3 of the reclamation plan Lafarge will concurrently reclaim mine walls where mining has been completed according to the phases outlined in the Mining Plan. Please provide more detail as to when reclamation will begin for each phase of the operation, prior to initiating mining in the next phase. For example, will the Operator completely mine Phase 1B and IC with nearly vertical highwalls without initiation reclamation until both phases are mined completely? Or, will re- grading, topsoiling, and seeding be initiated once the disturbed area reaches a certain size and the highwall a certain length? If so, please indicate those amounts. The first half of Phase IA will be sloped and seeded during mining of the second half The second half of Phase IA will be sloped and seeded concurrent with mining of • Phase I B. Phase 1B will be sloped and seeded during mining of IC. Phase 2 will be mined in two phases—sloping and seeding in the first half of the mining area will take place during mining of the second. Sloping and seeding of Phase 3 will take place during mining of Phase 4A. The remaining mining and reclamation will proceed in sequence with reclamation of the previous phase occurring during mining of each subsequent phase. 14. In order to calculate the Financial Warranty, what will be the maximum length of the highwall at any given time during the mining operation? The maximum length of highwall at any given time during the mining operation would be 4,195 feet (the total length of highwall for Phase 1B). 15. For the upland areas, will mulch be applied to the graded and topsoiled surfaces? If so, how many tons per acre will be applied and will the mulch be secured to the soil through crimping or other methods? Weed free straw mulch crimped into the soil helps stabilize the soils from wind and water erosion, and also provides cover for the newly planted seeds. A note has been added to Exhibit E which states that all seeded areas, with the exception of the silt-basin wetlands, will be mulched with weed free straw mulch at a rate of one ton per acre and crimped to prevent erosion. • Page 5 of 11 Mr. Jared Ebert 0 January 20, 2010 • 6.4.6 EXHIBIT F—Reclamation Plan Map 16. On the Reclamation Plan Maps,there are several berms left in place. One is adjacent to the Phase 2 open water pond, and another is located north of the Phase 2 pond adjacent to the location of Overburden Stockpile A as depicted on the mining plan map. It appears these stockpiles will be constructed with topsoil. According to the Mining Plan(Page D3), no permanent stockpiles will be located at the site. Also, all the topsoil salvaged during the mining process must be re-spread over designated disturbed areas for reclamation. These "berms" should not exist at the end of reclamation,please remove them from the reclamation plan map. These berms are being provided as shown at the request of Mr. Livingston, the landowner. To be consistent with DRMS requirements, we have noted on Exhibit F that the berms will be constructed of overburden and then topped with 10"-12" of topsoil. We have also modified Exhibit D (Page D3) to clarify that these berms will be the only permanent stockpiles located on the site. 6.4.7 EXHIBIT G— Water Information 17. Page 5 of Attachment G-1, the Groundwater Monitoring and Mitigation Plan states once mining begins, monitoring will be conducted on a monthly to bi-monthly basis • until a quasi-steady state condition is reached. Please commit to monitoring the wells on a monthly basis. Attachment G-1 has been modified to commit to a monthly monitoring schedule. 18. In order to reduce the frequency of groundwater monitoring, Lafarge will need to submit a Technical Revision to request this change with evidence to substantiate this quasi steady-state condition is reached. Noted 19. Please commit to obtaining an approved Substitute Water Supply Plan and a Well Permit from the Office of the State Engineer prior to exposing groundwater at the site. Lafarge commits to this as stated on page G-3 of Exhibit G. 20. Please commit to submitting a copy of the Jones Ditch agreement prior to mining and dewatering south of the Cache la Poudre River. Or if such an agreement cannot be reached, Lafarge must submit and receive approval of a Technical Revision proving that the mining/dewatering operation south of the Cache la Poudre River will not impact the Jones Ditch. As stated on page 7 of Attachment G-1, an agreement with the Jones Ditch will be in place prior to dewatering and mining south of the Cache la Poudre River. We have added language to this section that goes on to state that if an agreement cannot be reached, Lafarge will first submit and receive approval of a Technical Revision proving that the mining/dewatering operation south of the Cache la Poudre River will not impact the Jones Ditch. • Page 6 of 11 1 Mr. Jared Ebert January 20, 2010 • 21. On page 8 of the Groundwater Modeling and Mitigation Plan(Attachment G-1), it states "Lafarge has no responsibility to provide mitigation for wells that are constructed after the permit is approved." This is not correct, in accordance with rule 3.1.6 (1)the operator is required to minimize disturbances to the prevailing hydrologic balance of the affected land and of the surrounding area and to the quantity or quality of water in surface and groundwater systems both during and after mining operations and during reclamation. Given this, if the mining and reclamation operation impacts the ability of surrounding land owners to legally use groundwater, Lafarge will be responsible for mitigating these disturbances. Please remove this statement for the Groundwater Modeling and Mitigation Plan (Attachment G-1) and submit a new copy. This language was removed, attached is a revised copy. 22. It states on page 1 of the "Groundwater Modeling Evaluation—Potential Effects Due to Mining" document that"...water levels outside the Parsons Mine area within approximately 700 feet of the north permit boundary may increase 1 to 2 feet due to post-mining reclamation activities. Simulated heads generally increased by 4 to 5 feet within areas where mine excavation are to be filed with overburden spoils." An increase in groundwater level such as this may negatively impact the surrounding land. Please explain how Lafarge will maintain the prevailing hydrologic balance for the areas surrounding the permit boundary after the site has been reclaimed. The ultimate effects on groundwater levels beneath surrounding lands are not known • with certainty and will depend on both the hydraulic conductivity of backfill and ground elevations in the reclaimed areas. Potential effects will be monitored and addressed as part of the Monitoring and Mitigation Plan requirements. Lafarge believes that given the most recent reclamation plans, significant increases in groundwater levels are unlikely. If such adverse impacts did occur, they could likely be mitigated by placing drains through the compacted backfill along the reclamation slopes and channelizing flow to existing drainage swales and/or other hydrologic features. 6.4.12 EXHIBIT L—Reclamation Costs 23. In order to review this section further and estimate a financial warranty, the Division will need several pieces of information discussed in the sections above. This section is still under review. Please refer to above responses for answers to your requests for additional information. 24. Since 60 acres of open groundwater will remain after the site is reclaimed, Lafarge must obtain a court approved augmentation plan from the Office of the State Engineer. The Division is required to set the financial warranty at a level which reflects the actual current cost of fulfilling the conditions of the Reclamation Plan per Rule 4.2.1(1). Therefore, without an augmentation plan in place the financial warranty must be set at an amount which accounts for the exposed groundwater. The • Division has identified several options for determining the amount of the financial �7$ Page 7of11 Mr. Jared Ebert 0 January 20, 2010 • warranty. The Applicant must choose one of the following options to be included in the financial warranty calculation: 1) Backfill all of the pits to two feet above the groundwater level. 2) Install a slurry wall or clay liner. 3) Provide the Division with documentation from SEO, which demonstrates that the Application owns a sufficient amount of shares of water to cover the evaporative losses from the exposed groundwater and the said shares have been committed to the SEO should the financial warranty forfeited and the permit revoked. 4) Obtain a court approved augmentation plan for the exposed groundwater. If the applicant obtains an approved augmentation plan prior to final release,then the financial warranty will be adjusted accordingly. At this time, Lafarge agrees to obtain a bond in an amount sufficient to cover the cost of lining any pit with exposed groundwater. Lafarge proposes an annual evaluation be completed prior to the bond renewal date to adjust the bond amount for changes in exposed groundwater due to mining activities from the previous year and a forecast for the upcoming year. Information regarding bonding calculations will be provided with our annual report. However, as no groundwater is exposed at this time, bonding for exposed • groundwater is not necessary. A bond will be obtained prior to exposing groundwater. Lafarge reserves the right to alter this agreement in the future should the SEO or DRMS change policy or procedure regarding exposed groundwater bonding. 6.4.19 EXHIBITS S—Permanent Man-Made Structures 25. The Division is still in the process of reviewing the provided Stability Analysis submitted as well as the information provided about the in-flow and out-flow structures. Please see below for responses to Adequacy Review #2 and#3 comments which pertain to these items. In addition, an updated summary of the status of the Parsons Mine Structures Agreements is enclosed, as well as copies of the following three additional signed agreements: Petro Canada Resources, Inc., Noble Energy Production, Inc., and Weld County for the Poudre River Trail. Other Issues: 26. Enclosed are three letters from the Division of Water Resources, Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation, and the Army Corps of Engineers. Please respond to their concerns. Attached are response letters to the Division of Water Resources, the Office of • Archaeology and Historic Preservation, and the Army Corps of Engineers. �71 Page 8 of 11 Mr. Jared Ebert 0 January 20, 2010 • Adequacy Review#2 Comments and Responses: 1. The Division has several concerns about the berms of unexcavated native material ground between several of the mining cells. These berms may erode and down cut during a flood. The potential for berms around gravel pits to be damaged during flooding is discussed in detail in the 1987 Urban Drainage and Flood Control District (UDFCD) Publication"Technical Review Guidelines for Gravel Mining Activities within or Adjacent to 100-year Floodplains." Strips of native ground or constructed fill between the stream and the gravel pit, and generally aligned with the flow direction of the stream are referred to in the UDFCD document as riverside berms. Strips of native ground or constructed fill between adjacent pits and generally perpendicular to the stream are referred to as lateral berms. Both riverside berms and lateral berms are proposed in the Parsons Mine application; both these berms may be prone to erosion during a flood event. The proposed inflow/outflow structures are intended to mitigate possible slope failure during flood events for these berms. The Parsons Mine is outside of the political boundaries of the UDFCD, but the technical floodplain factors that led to the formation of the UDFCD guidance still apply and were used to review the adequacy of the flood mitigation structures proposed for the site. There are lateral berms between mining cells 5A and 5B, 4C and 4B, 4C and 4A, and • 4A and 4B. The minimum top widths between these berms is 130 feet according to the proposed mining and reclamation plan maps. UDFCD states that these berms can be left in a reclaimed but unimproved condition if the top widths for lateral berms is 250 feet. The current proposed plan calls for several inflow/outflow structures and culverts to be installed to mitigate erosion damage of these lateral berms. Please demonstrate how the proposed mitigation structures will limit the differential head between each of the above mentioned mine cells, to ensure the lateral berms will not erode. Inflow/outflow structures have been sized in accordance with the 1987 UDFCD Publication "Technical Review Guidelines for Gravel Mining Activities within or Adjacent to 100 year Floodplains. " Although this publication was intended to be applicable to the floodplain of the South Platte River within UDFCD boundaries, the use of these methodologies for sizing inflow/outflow structures is considered to be conservative for the Parsons Mine. Mining cell 4A is not close enough to the river for an inflow/outflow structure to be required However, to equalize water surface elevations between 4A and 4B, an inflow/outflow structure connecting these two cells will be provided During major storm events, the inflow/outflow structures will allow the water surface in the cells to rise as the river stage rises so that the cells are filled when overbank flooding begins. 2. Page SE8 of the Stability Analysis states a HECRAS model was used to analyze the rate of flow for the various inflow/outflow structures during different stages of a flood event. In order to verify the adequacy of the design of the inflow/outflow • �VI Page 9 of 11 Mr. Jared Ebert 0 January 20, 2010 • structures please submit the results of the HECRAS model as well as the inputs used for the model with an explanation how the inputs were derived. Sizing of the inflow/outflow structures is in accordance with methodologies presented in the UDFCD guidelines. As previously discussed, this methodology is expected to be conservative for the Parsons Mine. Therefore, detailed verification of the adequacy of the design is not necessary. A summary of the design parameters for each of the inflow/outflow structures is provided on the attached table titled "Design Parameters for Inflow/Outflow Structures. " 3. According to the plan, the inflow/outflow channel's will be excavated to a depth of two feet. Please clarify where the two foot excavation will be keyed off? For example, the channel should be excavated two feet below the top of the pit bank and then excavated at the same elevation from the top of the pit bank to the river. It should not be excavated just two feet uniformly across the land surface between the pits and the river. Inflow/outflow channels will be constructed at a horizontal longitudinal with an invert elevation as specified on the attached table titled "Design Parameters for Inflow/Outflow Structures. " 4. For each of the inflow/outflow structure for each mining cell using the unit hydrograph for a 100-year flood event, please submit tables that compare the river water elevation and the pit water elevation. Please time the tables so the water level . for the river and the pit are displayed for every 15 minutes during the flood event. If this exercise does not demonstrate that the cells are filled with flood water prior to overtopping of the riverbank, the inflow/outflow structures must be re-designed to achieve that goal. As previously discussed with DRMS Staff, detailed verification of the adequacy of the design is not required if the inflow/outflow structures are designed in accordance with UDFCD guidelines. 5. Please commit to grading and armoring the pit-side embankment at the inflow point of the mining cells as soon as possible after mining is complete. A grouted riprap rundown will be constructed along the pit side of the reclaimed embankment at the inflow point of each of the inflow/outflow structures. These rundowns will be constructed as soon as possible after mining is completed 6. Please provide the seed mix that will be planted in the inflow/outflow channel. This should include the names of the native species and the pounds of live seed per acre that will be used. Also,this channel will be prone to erosion until native grass has begun to establish. Please commit to planting a fast growing cover crop in the channel and specify the species of grass that will be utilized. A seed mix for the inflow/outflow spill structures has been added to Exhibits E and F. • Page 10 of 11 Mr. Jared Ebert 0 January 20, 2010 • Adequacy Review #3 Comments and Responses: 1. The Division did not receive copies of the PA04 series of borings. Please submit copies of the boring for Division review. The site plan showing boring information for the PA04 series borings is the best available information. 2. The screening berm and stockpiles are indicated as 7.5 feet in height in the stability analysis models. The applicant must not construct the stockpile above the indicated height used in the stability analysis during mining activities. The Division will include the stockpile height as a permit condition. We understand that this comment refers to the perimeter screening berms above the mining highwall analyzed in the stability analysis. These screening berms do stockpile soil but they are for screening purposes. We understand that the applicant will need to commit to a maximum height of 71%feet for these perimeter screening berms. However, the applicant cannot commit to this limitation for internal stockpiles. 3. The Division does not consider the use of conglomerated data adequate to provide a critical cross section and to determine the setback from critical structures. The applicant must provide stability analysis for each individual boring(s) associated with a critical structure. The Applicant must provide a proposal for a single general setback or multiple setbacks, if applicable for a structure, based on the analysis • results. The Division recommends the applicant use the greatest setback distance from a structure if multiple setbacks are indicated by the individual boring analysis. Attached is a revised slope stability exhibit which addresses the setbacks. We have also attached a revised Exhibit S to reflect the setback information contained in the revised slope stability exhibit. Whitney Ditch and WCR 64.5 —Phase lA Example The applicant states a worst case cross section was used to evaluate the set back distances for each phase during mining. In the individual cross sections for each phases of mining, the applicant indicates the location of the worst case scenario for each phase, however the soil profile analyzed for each phase is based on a conglomeration of soil information from various borings not the actual worst case scenario. The applicant states the worst case scenario for Phase lA is represented by the north mining highwall of the phase. The applicant used conglomerated data from ET02- BH06, ET02-TP03, ET02-PH05,No. 1,No. 2 and MW-3 to determine the offset for the Whitney Ditch and WCR 64.5. The Division agrees the north highwall is the worst case scenario for Phase 1 A; however the applicant must perform individual analysis for each boring and propose a setback from the critical structures based on the individual results instead of the conglomerated data results. • �VI Page 11of11 Mr. Jared Ebert 0 January 20, 2010 • The Division will conduct further analysis of the critical cross sections for the Parsons Mine after the required information is provided by the applicant using Clover Technology's Galena v5.01 slope stability software. Noted Please call me if you have any questions or additional comments regarding these responses. Sincerely, VEC HI & ASSOCIATE , L J nnifer Vecchi,AICP rincipal Attachments cc: Anne Johnson, Lafarge . Pam Hora, Tetra Tech Weld County R\413] 029\Documents\DRMS 2nd Application\Adequacy Review\Response PacknVlesponse to Adq Row I 2 3 comments doc • • EXHIBIT D Mining Plan General The Parsons Mine property is located in the East 1/2 of the Southeast '/ of Section 25, Township 6 North, Range 67 West of the 6th PM; in the West 1/2 of the Southwest % of Section 30, Township 6 North, Range 66 West of the 6th PM; in the Northeast '/o of Section 36, Township 6 North, Range 67 West of the 6th PM; and in a portion of the Northwest '/ of Section 31, Township 6 North, Range 66 West, of the 6th PM. The site is directly south of Weld County Road 64%z and Weld County Road 25 bisects the property. The property contains a significant commercial deposit of sand and gravel located near the Cache La Poudre River. The permit boundary will encompass approximately 381 acres, with mining activities anticipated to disturb approximately 189 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. 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 • testing has been performed to verify the sand and gravel deposits are commercially marketable. Based on test results, it is estimated that the overburden will amount to approximately 1,865,000 cubic yards. 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 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. The site is owned by Lafarge West Inc.; Livingston Leigh Livestock of Weld County, LLC; and Sally A. Parsons. Lafarge has a lease to mine the Livingston Leigh Livestock of Weld County, LLC property and both a lease to mine and an option to purchase Sally A. Parson's property. The site will be mined in five phases. These phases are neither representative of the maximum area of disturbance nor do they limit disturbance to a particular phase. 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. Methods of Mining The typical mining procedure for all phases will be as follows. Any areas slated for protection will Parsons Mine DRMS 112 Reclamation Permit Application Page D1 of D5 be identified in the field to assure that mining operations will be set back as appropriate. Initially, . the topsoil (6"-24") and overburden will be stripped with scrapers and stockpiled in the designated stockpile areas identified in Exhibit C. Overburden will also be used to construct berms and as fill in the reclamation slopes. Overburden and stockpiled topsoil will be seeded as appropriate to prevent erosion. Prior to mining, a dewatering trench will be constructed around the perimeter of each phase. A sump hole will be created at the lowest point of each dewatering trench. The sump holes and dewatering trenches will allow sediment to settle before the water is pumped to the Cache La Poudre River using a groundwater discharge pump in accordance with Colorado/NPDES discharge permit regulations. Pipes transporting the water from the mine will discharge the dewatering water directly into the river, the cottonwood gallery adjacent to the river, an irrigation lateral adjacent to Phase 1 A (that will not be used for irrigation during mining) and/or the wetlands adjacent to active mining areas to maintain appropriate soil moisture during the growing season. Water may also be pumped into adjoining cells. Drainage swales will be designed when the Final Drainage Report is prepared for Weld County. Water may also be pumped into adjoining cells. When the alluvium is sufficiently dry, front-end loaders will excavate the material and deposit it on conveyors. The mining face will be nearly vertical to 0.5:1 slope. The conveyors will transport the material to be processed at the plant site which is located in the northeast corner of the Parsons Mine site. The plant site contains the crushing, screening, and washing equipment used for the processing of the raw materials. The processed materials will be transported to other sites to be used in concrete and asphalt plants and delivered offsite for commercial and government projects. • All surface water within the mine areas will drain internally. The Preliminary Drainage Report prepared for Weld County (see Exhibit G, Attachment G-4)provides details of the conveyance of both off-site and on-site surface water through the site. Direct precipitation falling on a mine cell is collected in the perimeter dewatering trench and pumped out. There will not be any uncontrolled releases of surface water and sediment from mining areas. Storm water collected in the open mine will be managed in accordance with Colorado/NPDES discharge permit requirements. Sediment generated from localized storm water runoff and surface drainage will be managed according to the Stormwater Management Plan, enclosed in Exhibit G (Attachment G-3). Water rights at the site will be used for dust control operations along the roads, stockpiles and berms. The water balance discussed in Exhibit G estimates the gallons per week necessary to limit dust emissions. The water will be supplied using a 2,500 gallon water truck. No explosives are planned to be used. Overburden Topsoil and overburden will be stripped with scrapers or a dozer and placed separately in temporary stockpiles within the permit area limits. The topsoil will be segregated and stored separately from the overburden material as required by Rule 3.1.9(1). The topsoil will be placed in berms around the perimeter of the mine cells and will also serve as visual bathers where appropriate (see Exhibit C). The berms along the plant site and north perimeter will have an average height of 6 to 8 feet tall and are not expected to exceed 15 feet in height; they will have maximum 3:1 (horizontal:vertical) • Parsons Mine DRMS 112 Reclamation Permit Application Page D2 of D5 • side slopes. The berms along the west side of County Road 25 will have an average height of 4 feet. The topsoil stockpiles will be protected from wind and water erosion by vegetative cover(see the Seed Mix for Upland Areas found on page E6 of Exhibit E). The stockpiles will be broadcast seeded and incorporated into the weed control program. Weed control consists of monthly inspections and, if necessary, chemical treatments in the applicable fall and spring seasons. Topsoil stockpiles that will be in place for more than 180 days will be vegetated depending on the seeding "window" parameters for dryland grass, which are typically between September and April. The overburden stockpiles will be continuously rotating. Initially, a portion of a phase will be stripped and the overburden stockpiled temporarily within the permit boundaries. Once the deposit has been mined from the stripped portion, the temporary stockpile will be removed and used for reclamation. The remaining portion of the cell will then be stripped and the overburden will be stockpiled on the mine floor or placed immediately in the reclamation slope. With the exception of the landscape berms shown north and east of Phase 2, there will be no permanent stockpiles at this site; all extra overburden will be used to create undulating shorelines. Commodities to be Mined The primary commodity to be mined will be aggregate and a secondary commodity will be gold. Lafarge will supply local, county, and state governments, as well as private industry with aggregate from this facility. If gold is to be mined it will be used for commercial purposes. Offsets Lafarge will maintain mining offsets from sensitive areas designated for protection and all • structures according to the Geotechnical Slope Analysis included in the Stability Exhibit. Setbacks were determined for each boundary and vary from 25 feet to 46 feet from structures. See Exhibit S and the Stability Exhibit for specifics. The Whitney Ditch, which traverses the north edge of the property boundary, will need to be relocated to accommodate additional right-of-way required for road improvements. Lafarge will relocate the ditch prior to the mining process and is working with the Ditch Company to obtain a formal agreement. There are some individual property lateral ditches will be eliminated. Some of the laterals are on the property owned by Lafarge so no consent agreement to mine through these laterals will be necessary. For the laterals on the property owned by Sally Parsons and Livingston Leigh Livestock of Weld County, the lease agreements that Lafarge has with both of these property owners address the right to mine through lateral ditches (please see lease agreements provided in Exhibit N). Roads and Conveyors Preparation for mining for each phase will include a 15' wide gravel access road around the perimeter of the cell. Any additional short-term haul access will be constructed with 6" of native sand and gravel from the floor of the mine. These gravel roads will be removed and reclaimed as mining and reclamation is completed for each phase. These areas have been included in the permitted acreage. The majority of the material will be transported from the mining face to the processing area via conveyors. There are two proposed conveyor crossings of County Road 25. The northern most crossing (between Phases lA and 2) will be utilized during the mining of Phase 2 and the southern- • most crossing(between Phases 4A/4B and 3) will be utilized during the mining of Phases 4A Parsons Mine DRMS 112 Reclamation Permit Application Page D3 of D5 through 5C. Each conveyor crossing will be enclosed in 100-foot spans, approximately 17 feet in • height over the county roads. A conveyor will also cross the Cache La Poudre River. The conveyor bridges are composed of steel; the footings are anchored in concrete. Details for the conveyor bridges can be found in Exhibit C. Upon completion of mining operations, the conveyors will be removed and all areas affected by the conveyors will be restored to their original condition. There is also the potential for a conveyor tunnel to be constructed under"O" Street if"O" Street is constructed prior to the completion of mining of Phase 5C. All existing on-site roads are shown on Exhibit C, Pre-Mining Plan. Any existing gravel access roads shared with ongoing oil and gas production or farming activities will remain in place once mining and reclamation are complete. The roads will be maintained by the operator to provide required access to the various activities on the property. Existing roads are typically 12' to 15' wide, gravel access lanes. Some of the roads may be relocated to accommodate mining activities. Relocated access lanes will be constructed with 6" of native sand and gravel from the floor of the mine and remain in place once mining and reclamation are complete. The main access to the site will be off of County Road 25 on the west side of Phase 1A. There will be a paved loop lane into the site as shown and dimensioned on page 4 of Exhibit C. Mine Schedule The Parsons Mine operation will process approximately 750,000- 1,000,000 tons of aggregate per year. At this rate, Lafarge anticipates mining and reclaiming the site in approximately 20 years. The table on the following page outlines the anticipated mine schedule by phase. As previously • stated, this schedule is just an estimate due to the fact that the rate of mining and overall life of the mine is dependent upon demand and market conditions. Phase Mine Area (in acres) Projected Time to Mine (in years) Phase lA 37.5 Duration of the Mine' Phase 1B 22.6 Duration of the Mine' Phase 1C 12.7 Duration of the Mine' Phase 2 36.9 6± Phase 3 6.6 1± Phase 4A 5.7 1± Phase 4B 13.7 2f Phase 4C 33.7 _ 4± Phase 5A 3.7 1+ Phase 5B 10.6 2f Phase 5C 4.8 1± TOTALS 188.5 20± Phases IA and I B are projected to be active for the duration of the mine because the overburden in these phases will be stripped starting in the first year of the mining operation and then the plant site(crushing and washing facilities)will be constructed in this area. Therefore,the sand and gravel in Phases IA and 1B won't be mined until the end of the • mining operation. Parsons Mine DRMS 112 Reclamation Penn it Application Page D4 of D5 • Phase Overview Phase IA will be stripped of overburden to the sand and gravel layer below. The processing plant will be set up at this elevation. Phase 1 A will also be the location of the fresh water pond (approximately 5 acres) and temporary silt storage pond (approximately 2 acres)until the permanent silt storage ponds (in Phases 1B and 1C) are completed. Phase lA will actually be mined last as the processing plant will be used through the mining of Phase 5C. Phases 1B and 1C will be the first Phases to be mined as they will be the location of the silt storage ponds needed for the duration of the mine. Due to the location of an active Bald Eagle's nest within mile of a portion of Phase 1C and within %2 mile of a portion of Phase 1C and all of Phase 1B, mining will be restricted per discussions with the Colorado Division of Wildlife and US Fish and Wildlife, as outlined in Exhibit H in the section titled "General Effect on Wildlife Due to Mining Operations." Phase 2 will then be mined followed by Phase 3 and so on until Phase 5C and then Lafarge will return to mine Phase I A. Each Phase will be reclaimed following mining. Equipment The following equipment and facilities are anticipated to be utilized in this operation: Loaders (3) Diesel Powered Generator Set as needed (2) Dozer(1) Scrapers (6) • Grader(1) Backhoe (1) Water Truck (1) Pumps as needed (2) Structures Conveyors and Feeders Office (1) Portable Toilet (2)2 Crushing Plant Wash Plant MCC Building Fuel Storage Tank Maintenance Shop Trash Dumpster Scale House Scale 2 These portable toilets are not shown on Exhibit C because they will move around the site depending on where they are needed during the various phases of the mining operation. Per the Weld County USR-1657 for the Parsons Mine, • portable toilets may be utilized on sites that are temporary locations of the working face and portable processing equipment for up to six months at each location. Parsons Mine DRMS 112 Reclamation Permit Application Page D5 of D5 • EXHIBIT E Reclamation Plan Design intent 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 and protected throughout mining and reclamation. Mining activities will be set back an appropriate distance from all areas designated for preservation. All mining activities will be set back a minimum of 200' from each side of the river. The only activities within the riparian corridor will include: controlled dewatering discharge consistent with a CDPHE permit; appropriately managed grazing of livestock; weed management; ongoing oil and gas production and maintenance activities; and a conveyor. The conveyor over the Cache la Poudre River will be installed in the location indicated on Exhibit C. Support structures for the conveyor will be placed outside the banks of the river and jurisdictional wetlands along the bank. The conveyor will include containment to assure that material does not spill into the river or adjacent wetlands during transport. Any additional conveyors that cross identified wetlands will be supported outside the delineated areas and include • containment to limit spill into the wetlands. All other surface activities will take place outside the protected areas. Excavation associated with mining activities will be set back a minimum of 25' from existing wetlands. Wetlands will be clearly delineated with silt fencing and access from roads, stockpiles and maintenance activities will be set back a minimum of 10' from silt fencing. 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 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. This reclamation plan was developed based on: • A thorough evaluation of the environmental resources and existing conditions on and adjacent to the property; • The context of the property relative to existing and planned land uses in the area; • The volume, depth and configuration of the mineral resource; • The landowners' plans for the property; and • The rules and policies of Weld County, the Colorado Division of Minerals and Geology and other applicable local, State and Federal agencies. • Parsons Mine DRMS 112 Reclamation Permit Application Page El of E9 Key considerations include the following: • • The Cache la Poudre riparian corridor passes through the property. In addition, all wetlands on the site have been located and are identified on the pre-mining map. All efforts will be made to preserve and enhance the resources. • All areas designated for preservation will be clearly identified during the mining and reclamation activities for each phase. Isolated wetlands will be delineated with perimeter silt fencing. The 200' setback from the river will be clearly marked in the field and silt fencing will be installed as necessary to implement the CDPHE Storm Water Management Plan for the site. • Fourteen monitoring wells have been installed on the site to establish pre-mining groundwater levels. These wells and selected nearby private water wells will be used to monitor effects from mining and provide information for mitigation of potential impacts on groundwater levels and riparian vegetation, as necessary. Details of the monitoring and mitigation plans are provided in Exhibit G, Attachment G-1. • Maintenance activities on the site will also include a comprehensive Weed Management Plan (see attached) to limit the spread of invasive species into the riparian areas and wetlands. In addition, managed grazing will also help to control invasive species and promote regeneration of native cottonwoods and willows within the riparian corridor. Concurrent reclamation will also widen, buffer and enhance the riparian corridor as each phase is mined and reclaimed. • There is an existing bald eagle nest on an adjacent reclaimed gravel mine located south and east of the site. There are also raptor nests located on site along the Cache la Poudre River. • The sequence and timing of mining and reclamation activities will be managed to limit impacts to the eagles and other raptors, during the nesting season. • • There is an opportunity to enhance wildlife habitat through the creation of a combination of open water ponds, silt basin wetlands, river corridor enhancement and shoreline plantings. • Silts generated by the mining process can be utilized to create diverse wetlands and add diversity to the habitat along this portion of the river corridor. • There are existing and planned oil and gas facilities on the site. Mining and reclamation activities will be managed to allow for continued operation and development of mineral resources. New drilling activities will be encouraged to utilize existing, disturbed areas at the maximum extent possible. • There is significant overburden on this site. Excess material will be used as much as possible to create wetland benches adjacent to the river corridor, vary the slope and configuration of the open water ponds, create shorelines that are more irregular and limit the surface area of the ponds to minimize evaporative losses from the groundwater. • Groundwater monitoring wells will be installed to establish pre-mining baseline water levels. Groundwater levels in the area of existing vegetation will be monitored. If levels drop below seasonal levels, dewatering water will be diverted to the areas to sustain existing vegetation to limits impacts during mining. • We anticipate a slight modification to the Phase 2 pond upon review by the landowner's landscape designer. Post-Mining Land Use The post-mining land use, as proposed in this Reclamation Plan, consists of wetlands, enhanced riparian vegetation, unlined ponds and reclaimed upland areas. • Parsons Mine DRMS 112 Reclamation Permit Application Page E2 of E9 • All disturbed areas will be vegetated as appropriate with a native seed mix, as recommended by the Soil Conservation Service (recommended seed mixes below). These uses are compatible with the surrounding land uses and with the Weld County planning goals. Lafarge will concurrently reclaim mine walls where mining has been completed according to the phases outlined in the Mine Plan. Reclamation, including regrading and seeding, will be completed within two to five years following the completion of mining or filling operations for each phase. The mining and reclamation will leave no high walls on the property. No acid forming or toxic materials will be used or encountered in the mining. There will be no auger holes, adits, or shafts left on the site. Reclamation Measures—Material Handling Site reclamation measures are illustrated in Exhibit F. Reclamation of the site will include 8 unlined open water ponds (60.0 acres), approximately 48.4 acres of wetlands and enhanced riparian areas and approximately 187.3 acres of upland (approximately 78.1 of these acres are within the mining limits and the remaining 109.2 acres are other disturbed areas within the permit boundary). The ponds will be reclaimed as un-sealed groundwater ponds. All mine walls will be re-graded with overburden material. Slopes above the post-mine high water level will be 4H:1V and slopes below the post-mine high water level will not exceed 3H:1 V. Topsoil will be spread to a minimum depth of 10" to 12" over the surface of the regraded slopes in all areas (except silt basin wetland) above the post-mining lake levels; all topsoil-covered surfaces will be revegetated with the • appropriate seed mix. Scrapers will be used to place the backfilled overburden and topsoil. Using scrapers to layer the lifts at a maximum 3:1 slope ensures a stable configuration. Disturbed areas associated with site access and the conveyor will be scarified, covered with topsoil, and revegetated. Topsoil will be replaced, where required, in reclaimed areas at a depth of approximately six to twelve inches. Site grading will be performed to create stable topography and will be consistent with post-closure land uses. Reclamation quantities and costs are summarized in Exhibit L. Water Overburden and mine materials will be inert and impacts to local surface water or groundwater quality are not anticipated to occur as a result of mining activities. Lafarge West, Inc. will comply with all applicable Colorado water laws and all applicable Federal and State water quality laws and regulations and appropriate storm water management and erosion control to protect the river and existing riparian vegetation. Wildlife Presently, the area is used for farming and livestock grazing. There is significant habitat for many wildlife species along the river corridor. There is an existing bald eagle nest situated in an unstable • dead cottonwood tree located on the south side of the river(on the adjacent property next to a Parsons Mine DRMS 112 Reclamation Permit Application Page E3 of E9 reclaimed gravel pond). Phasing, configuration and timing of mining and reclamation activities • have been designed to limit impacts to eagle habitat based on the current location of the nest. Several protection and enhancement measures will be incorporated into the operation and reclamation plans to protect the current active bald eagle nest: • No mining activity will be conducted within %2 mile of the nest from November 15 through July 31. • No mining activity will be conducted within Y mile of the nest throughout the year with the exception of development of an 18± acre wetland silt pond created just north of the river. The work to create this pond will be conducted over a 2 year period and will be limited to August 15 to October 15 to protect the occupied nest site. A wetland basin will be created through management of water and planting of native wetland plant species. The purpose of this silt basin is not only to dispose of smaller materials but also to develop a wetland adjacent to the river that will attract waterfowl and other wildlife species used as a food source for the eagles. • The river corridor will be protected from all mining activity by a 200 foot buffer. • Existing wetlands identified in 2007 will not be impacted by mining operations under the current Reclamation Plan. Any future changes to the Reclamation Plan that require an unavoidable impact to jurisdictional wetlands (such as a road crossing) would require coordination with the US Army Corp of Engineers and may involve obtaining the necessary permits under the Clean Water Act. • Coordination will be conducted annually with the Colorado Division of Wildlife to monitor the eagle nesting location and activity. Protection measures will be reviewed and coordinated with the Colorado Division of Wildlife should the eagles relocate their nest. • • Coordination will be conducted annually with the Colorado Division of Wildlife to monitor the locations and activities of existing and new raptor nests. Additional wildlife enhancement measures include: • In consultation with the US Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) or other qualified grazing specialists, develop and implement a suitable grazing plan for the riparian corridor that will promote restoration of a quality riparian pasture while discouraging colonization of the site by invasive plant species. This plan may involve limitations on the season of use and possibly a temporary rest. • A weed management program will be undertaken to control noxious and invasive plant species and to replace those species with native and naturalized vegetation. Canada thistle (Cirsium arvense) and leafy spurge(Euphorbia esula) will be treated by a combination of mowing at regular intervals and herbicides used at the appropriate times and applications levels. Please see the attached Weed Management Plan. • Riparian areas are one of the most important wildlife habitats in Eastern Colorado. This reclamation plan is being designed to maximize the upland riparian habitats by returning the mined areas to native upland habitats, native riparian habitats, and created wetlands. The plan will provide the most favorable habitats for wildlife through creation of edge by providing gentle slope transitions between riparian and wetland habitats and by limiting open water adjacent to the riparian zone. Restoring these areas from upland cultivated fields to wetlands and native wetland and riparian species will allow restoration of important • Parsons Mine DRMS 112 Reclamation Permit Application Page E4 of E9 J • floodplain functions. This plan is in harmony with the goals of the 1998 Greeley Open Space System Plan associated with wetlands, riparian areas and floodplains. • Wetlands created may become part of a wetland bank for the property to offset wetland impacts on other LaFarge projects. • Wetlands created for nesting waterfowl will contain shallow open water (6-9") and gentle slopes (8:1). Shorelines will be irregular and gently sloping to maximize wetland growth and maintenance and provide suitable habitat for shorebirds and waterfowl. • Mining operations will be phased with reclamation occurring concurrently. However, some indigenous species may be temporarily displaced by the proposed mining activities. Please see Exhibit H for additional wildlife information. Topsoiling Topsoils in the proposed mine areas are predominantly Aquoll and Aquents, Colombo clay loam, Bankard sandy loam, Kim loam, Nunn clay loam, Otero sandy loam and Olney fine sandy loam. All suitable soil material will be salvaged for topsoil replacement. Topsoil will be replaced, where required, in reclaimed areas at a depth of a minimum of ten to twelve inches. The topsoil will be segregated and stored separately from the overburden material as required by Rule 3.1.9(1). Sufficient topsoil will be stockpiled within each phase to reclaim all disturbed areas. The mine plan map depicts the location and configuration of the topsoil berms. The berms will be protected from wind and water erosion by vegetative cover if in place more than one year. The • stockpiles will be broadcast seeded (please see the Seed Mix for Upland Areas) and will be incorporated into a weed control program. Weed control consists of monthly inspections and, if necessary, chemical treatments in the applicable fall and spring seasons. Soil amendments are not expected to be required due to the nature of the soils. However, topsoil samples will be subjected to agricultural testing prior to reclamation to assess fertilizer requirements. The Soil Conservation Services (SCS) will be contacted periodically throughout reclamation for soil tests. SCS soil fertilizer recommendations, if any, will be followed. Revegetation Following topsoil replacement, reseeding will be performed according to SCS recommended practices. Based on SCS guidance for other local projects having similar surficial soils, the following revegetation procedures are anticipated • Grass seed will typically be planted in unfrozen soil between October 1 and April 30. • Grass seed will be planted with a grass drill, or where necessary, with a broadcast seeder. • The proposed seed mix and application rates in pounds of pure live seed per acre are described on the following pages. • Weed control practices will be implemented as required. • All seeded areas with the exception of silt-basin wetlands will be mulched with weed free straw mulch at a rate of 1 ton per acre and crimped to prevent erosion. • The seed mix for overflow channels will also include a fast growing cover crop to stabilize • these areas until the dryland grasses can be established. Parsons Mine DRMS 112 Reclamation Permit Application Page ES of E9 The above procedures may be modified as conditions dictate. If a significant invasion of noxious •weeds occurs, the area will be mowed periodically for control. Weeds will be mowed before they • go to seed during the first growing season. Mechanical control will be used as a first priority. Chemical methods will be used only if no other alternative produces acceptable results. In areas that are peripheral to the post-mining lake, marsh and aquatic plants are expected to establish themselves. The species of plants anticipated to occur naturally along the lake shoreline include cattails, willows, cottonwoods, and bulrushes. These plants should minimize shore erosion potential. The following are the proposed seed mixtures to be used on site where appropriate. However, availability may dictate the need for variety substitution. Seed Mix for Upland Areas D 04of �' Common Name Scientific Name Variety ': • A plica on : Rate(lbs1'a;) Western Wheatgrass Agropyron smithii Arriba 17.0% 1.74 Sideoats Grama Bouteloua curtipendia Butte 17.5% 1.80 Mountain Brome Bromus marginatus Bromar 17.0 % 1.74 Prairie Sandreed Calamovilfa longifolia Goshen 1.0% 0.48 Switchgrass Panicum virgatum Pathfinder 7.0% 0.67 Alkali Sacaton Sporobolus airoides 1.0% 0.10 Needle and Thread Stipa comata 13.0% 1.29 Northern Sweetvetch Hedysarum boreale Timp. 10.0% 1.02 • Rocky Mountain Penstemon Penstemon strictus Bandera 5.0% 0.46 Scarlet Globemallow Sphaeralcea coccinea ARS2936 3.0% 0.26 Prairie Wildrose Rosa Arkansans 8.5% 0.87 Total lbs/ac 100% 10.43 Notes: 1. Pure Live Seed pounds per acre; rates shown are for drill seeding; double rates for broadcast seeding. 2. All upland areas will be mulched with 1 ton of certified weed free straw per acre. Mulch shall be applied within 24 hours of seeding and crimped in place. • Parsons Mine DRMS 112 Reclamation Permit Application Page E6 of E9 • Seed Mix for Transitional Zone/Water's Edge . .. . of PLS' Common Name Scientific Name Variety . Application Rate(lbs/ao) Western Wheatgrass Agropyron smithii Arriba ~10.6% 1.45 Side Oats Grama Bouteloua curtipendia Butte 9.2% 1.24 Canada wildrye Elymus canadensis Mandan 18.1% 2.47 Basin wildrye Elymus cinereus Magnar 9.8% 1.34 Switchgrass Panicum virgatum Pathfinder 5.7% 0.78 Sand dropseed Sporobolus cryptandrus 0.2% 0.03 Scarlet Globemallow Sphaeralcea coccinea ARS2936 3.8% 0.52 American vetch Vica americana 42.6% 5.81 Total lbs/ac 100% 13.64 Notes: 1. Pure Live Seed pounds per acre; rates shown are for drill seeding; double rates for broadcast seeding. 2. All transitional zone/water's edge areas will be mulched with 1 ton of certified weed free straw per acre. Mulch shall be applied within 24 hours of seeding and crimped in place. Seed Mix for Wetland Areas • PLS . Common name Scientific Name % of Application Mix Bate(lbs/ac) American Sloughgrass Beckmannia syzigachne 12 % 0.96 Nebraska Sedge Carex nebraskensis 10 % 0.80 Saw Beak Sedge Carex stipata 2 % 0.16 Saltgrass Disticillis stricta 5 % 0.40 Spike Rush Eleocharis palustris 5 % 0.40 Canada Wildrye Elymus canadensis 10 % 0.80 Baltic Rush Juncus balticus 2 % 0.16 Torry's Rush Juncus torrei 2 % 0.16 Alkali Muhly Muhlenbergia asperifolia 8 % 0.64 Switchgrass Panicum virgatum 12 % 0.96 Hardstem Bulrush Scirpus acutus 2 % 0.16 Three-Square Scirpus americanus 10 % 0.80 Pale Bulrush Scirpus pallidus 10 % 0.80 Prairie Cordgrass Spartina pectinata 8 % 0.64 Arrowgrass Triglochin maritima 2 % 0.16 Total lbs/acre 100% 8.00 • Parsons Mine DRMS 112 Reclamation Permit Application Page E7 of E9 Notes: • 1. Pure Live Seed pounds per acre; rates shown are for drill seeding; double rates for broadcast seeding. 2. Silt basin wetlands will establish without seed/plantings. 3. Areas reclaimed as wetlands, with the exception of silt basin wetlands which will establish without seed/plantings, will be mulched with 1 ton of certified weed free straw per acre. Mulch shall be applied within 24 hours of seeding and crimped in place. Seed Mix for Inflow/Outflow Spill Structures PLS . +Common dame Scientiific lame :. ariet Mix ; Apph iion Rate" Ib's/ac) Western Wheatgrass Agropyron smithii Arriba 8.5% 1.74 Sideoats Grama Bouteloua curtipendia Butte 8.8% 1.80 Mountain Brome Bromus marginatus Bromar 8.5% 1.74 Prairie Sandreed Calamovilfa longifolia Goshen 0.5% 0.48 Switchgrass Panicum virgatum Pathfinder 3.5% 0.67 Alkali Sacaton Sporobolus airoides 0.5% 0.10 Needle and Thread Stipa comata 6.5% 1.29 Northern Sweetvetch Hedysarum boreale Timp. 5.0% 1.02 Rocky Mountain Penstemon Penstemon strictus Bandera 2.5% 0.46 Scarlet Globemallow Sphaeralcea coccinea ARS2936 1.5% 0.26 • Prairie Wildrose Rosa Arkansana 4.2% 0.87 Regreen Triticum aestivum X Elytrigia 50.0% 10.0 elongate Total lbs/ac 100% 20.43 Notes: 1. Pure Live Seed pounds per acre; rates shown are for drill seeding; double rates for broadcast seeding. 2. All inflow/outflow spill structures will be mulched with 1 ton of certified weed free straw per acre. Mulch shall be applied within 24 hours of seeding and crimped in place. • Parsons Mine DRMS 112 Reclamation Permit Application Page E8 of P9 • Typical Shoreline Tree and Shrub Plant List Common Botanical Mature Size' '`Size at Quantity %of lit./ %of Name' Name (Height/ Planting Caliper Total Spread) Standard Peachleaf Willow Salix 30'-40' 1'/2" 15 100% 40% Amygdaloides 25'-60' Cottonless Populus Sargentii 70'-80' 2" 27 100% 60% Cottonwood 50'-60' Chokecherry Prunus Virginiana 15'-25' 5 gal. 15 100% 18.5 15'-20' American Plum Prunus 6-15' 5 gal Americanus Common Snowberry Symphoricarpus 3-4' 5 gal albus Golden Current Ribes aureum 3-6' 5 gal Wild Rose Rosa woodsii 3-6' 5 gal Coyote Willow Salix Exigua 6'-12' 5 gal. 18 100% 22% 4'-8' Willow Staking - - - 150 To add thicket/habitat at water's edge Redtwig Dogwood Corms 6'-10' 5 gal. 15 100% 18.5 Stolonifera 6'-10' % ill Western Prunus Besseyi 4'-5' 5 gal. 33 100% 41% Sandcherry 5'-7' III Parsons Mine DRMS 112 Reclamation Permit Application Page E9 of E9 • Response from Vecci and Associates, dated 1/20/2010, contains oversized maps USR-1657 Parsons Mine Plat Maps - Sheets 1 thru 9 • Parsons Mine Exhibit C Maps - Sheets 1 thru 5 Parsons Mine Exhibit F Maps - Sheets 1 thru 4 Please see originals in file • • STATUS OF PARSONS MINE STRUCTURE AGREEMENTS Structure Owner Status as of January 20, 2010 In-Process - Proof of Notice Previously 1. Whitney Irrigation Company Submitted 2. Petro Canada Resources, Inc. Completed - See Attached 3. Tigges Oil LLC Completed (Previously Submitted) 4. Noble Energy Production, Inc. Completed - See Attached 5. Weld County (for the Poudre Trail) Completed- See Attached 6. Blue Chip Oil, Inc. Completed (Previously Submitted) Unsigned (Proof of Notice Previously 7. Dana L. Christiansen Submitted) 8. Kenneth Eugene Tigges I Completed (Previously Submitted) 9. Sally A. Parsons Completed (Previously Submitted) 10. Vernon J. and Patricia Etter Completed (Previously Submitted) 11. Livingston Leigh Livestock of Weld County, LLC Completed (Previously Submitted) • 12. Ed and Susie Ann Orr In-Process —Proof of Notice Previously Submitted 13. Broe Land Acquisitions II, LLC In-Process— Proof of Notice Previously Submitted 14. Lot Holding Investments, LLC In-Process—Proof of Notice Previously Submitted 15. City of Greeley In-Process— Proof of Notice Previously Submitted 16. North Weld County Water District Completed (Previously Submitted) 17. Qwest Communications, Inc. Completed (Previously Submitted) 18. Xcel Energy Completed (Previously Submitted) 19. DCP Midstream (formerly Duke Energy) Completed(Previously Submitted) The agreement lists the structure owner as Mary M. Tigges. When the agreement was signed, Mrs.Tigges had recently passed away and Kenneth Eugene Tigges signed the agreement as the executor of Mrs.Tigges' estate. The property is now on record as being owned by Kenneth Eugene Tigges. E:V&ALafargeParsonsDRMSCorrespondenec 12/16/2009 17:59 FAX BRATTON.S lI 002/003 • AGREEMENT TO MINE WITHIN 200 FEET OF PERMANENT MANMADE STRUCTURES THIS AGREEMENT,entered into by and between Lafarge West, Inc_,hereinafter called"Lafarge",whose address is 10170 Church Ranch Way,Suite 200,Westminster,CO 80021,and: Weld County,Colorado, P.O. Box 758,915 10"Street,Greeley,CO 80632 Hereinafter referred to as the"Structure Owner". The Colorado Mined Land Reclamation Act requires that landowners adjacent to a proposed mining operation be informed about the mine and the reclamation. Further,the Act provides protection for structures that are within 200 feet of a mining operation. Lafarge submitted an application to the State of Colorado Division of Reclamation, Mining and Safety for a 112 Reclamation Operation Permit and an application to Weld County for a Use by Special Review Permit for sand and gravel mining located within the east/of the southeast '/.of Section 25,T6N,11.67W;the west Y:of the southwest V.of Section 30,T6N, R66W;the northeast ''of Section 36,T6N,R67W;and the NW'A of Section 31,T6N,R66W of the 6th P.M.,Weld County,Colorado. The Structure Owner owns a permanent manmade structure or structures within 200 feet of the land affected by the mining and reclamation operations. The description of the structure(s) • is as follows: Concrete bike path(Poudre River Trail) Lafarge must attempt to obtain permission from Structure Owner in order to conduct operations closer than 200 feet to the structures owned by the Structure Owner. In addition, Lafarge must commit to repairing,replacing or compensating Structure Owner for any damage that might be caused to its structure(s)by the mining operation of Lafarge at this site. By this agreement,Structure Owner consents to Lafarge conducting mining operations up to a 50 foot setback from Structure Owner's structure(s). Lafarge commits that,if its operation causes damages to Structure Owner's structure(s)within 200 feet of said operations,Lafarge will repair or replace such structure(s)or compensate Structure Owner for the value of said structure(s). • Pare I of 7 2009-3064 12/16/2009 17:59 FAX BRATTON.S O003/003 The parties hereto acknowledge and agree to the above-stated items. • AGREED: Lafarge West,Inc. n By: /yn✓�r � Date: 1 f _01 Ann Jti' ohnson Land Manager State of Colorado ) )ss. County of. . )2 The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this 13ki-,,day of iv a- a ,-, ,20 O 9,by Anne Johnson as Land Manager for Lafarge West,Inc. My Co .ssion Expires: C )ti aO' / QO 1 0,2)\ \ r_;C:i l h, OT y'5 �� , ,;; Notary Public i4, +r,C/LLA° ' k Structure Owner ` ' ,, F0rL�:- • le . Date: II/23/2009 Structure Owner Signature State of Colorado ) )ss. County of Weld ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this 23rd day of November ,20 09 ,by Willman F. Carer* . as' Chair Of B. • .f Weld County Commissioners My Commission Expires: - .0 _ i 'tP". %•\4 \� //,/�/,///��J � s I •-.-• 1 Notary Public(J i,7 C PPg. A'4 IT 2tN[q, as p /1jsa.�tlYYmsO.vQAVA��dJiemr itimmlNiiflY�ir • • KIM Page 2 of 2 Agreement to Mine Within 200 Feet of Permanent Manmade Structures Lafarge West,Inc./Poudre River Trail Corridor,Inc. ate-aoaf 0 • AGREEMENT TO MINE WITHIN 200 FEET OF PERMANENT MANMADE STRUCTURES THIS AGREEMENT, entered into by and between Lafarge West, Inc., hereinafter called"Lafarge", whose address is 10170 Church Ranch Way, Suite 200, Westminster, CO 80021, and: Petro Canada Resources, Inc. Suite 600, 999 18th Street, Denver, CO 80202-2499 Hereinafter referred to as the"Structure Owner". The Colorado Mined Land Reclamation Act requires that landowners adjacent to a proposed mining operation be informed about the mine and the reclamation. Further, the Act provides protection for structures that are within 200 feet of a mining operation. Lafarge submitted an application to the State of Colorado Division of Reclamation, Mining and Safety for a 112 Reclamation Operation Permit and an application to Weld County for a Use by Special Review Permit for sand and gravel mining located within the east 1/2 of the southeast 1/2 of Section 25, T6N, R67W; the west ''A of the southwest 1/2 of Section 30, T6N, R66W; the northeast '/+ of Section 36,T6N, R67W; and the NW Y of Section 31, T6N, R66W of the 6th P.M., Weld County, Colorado. • The Structure Owner owns a permanent manmade structure or structures within 200 feet of the land affected by the mining and reclamation operations. The description of the structure(s) is as follows: Road, oil/gas pipelines, oil/gas wells, fenced tank batteries, and gas treater and meter Lafarge must attempt to obtain permission from Structure Owner in order to conduct operations closer than 200 feet to the structures owned by the Structure Owner. In addition, Lafarge must commit to repairing,replacing, or compensating Structure Owner for any damage that might be caused to its structure(s)by the mining operation of Lafarge at this site. By this agreement, Structure Owner consents to Lafarge conducting mining operations up to a 35-46 foot setback from Structure Owner's structure(s)depending on the recommended setback outlined in the Stability Analysis dated April 2008 by Deere&Ault Consultants, Inc. Lafarge commits that, if its operation causes damages to Structure Owner's structure(s)within 200 feet of said operations, Lafarge will repair or replace such structure(s)or compensate Structure Owner for the value of said structure(s). • Page 1 of2 The parties hereto acknowledge and agree to the above-stated items. • AGREED: Lafarge West, Inc. By: Date: , I ' i3` V 7 Anne Johnson Land Manager State of Colorado ) ((�� ) ss. County of D o. .0 cSj — The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this l -s day of P) 0 v e.1,6,e,& , 20 O 9 ,by Anne Johnson as Land Manager for Lafarge West, Inc. My Commission Expires: (9CJo1-j-ei . ,9-0 / O : Notary Public , pUMP01.,oo Structure Owner 4-Or C0t0.F� • Date: II-d a-oat Struc e Owner Signature 12.1A--,13. Pe—Tu.-no Ln QOM n� State of Colorado ) ) ss. County of rer„,e ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of OFss 1�6�a_ , 20 en ,by P,'tIw, P . NL<e 9.O as L of P—p-u.,-...._R n��n cus,,' r,.,c, y11M1 11 y My Commission Expires: q- -201 cN '^ '• NOTg9Y iQ kk,?. rte, S �' AU$LIC Nablic c< ayeFCOLOPPO RN 137_02910ocumatstAdjaom$truaurcatugmc°wwwer AgreementdPetro Canada Agamt4oc E I ^N.fB3 • Page 2 of 2 Agreement to Mine Within 200 Feet of Permanent Manmade Structures Lafarge West, Inc./Petro Canada Resources, Inc. AGREEMENT TO MINE WITHIN 200 FEET OF PERMANENT MANMADE STRUCTURES THIS AGREEMENT,entered into by and between Lafarge West,Inc.,hereinafter called"Lafarge",whose address is 10170 Church Ranch Way,Suite 200,Westminster, CO 80021,and: Noble Energy Production,Inc. 1625 Broadway,Suite 2000,Denver, CO 80004 Hereinafter referred to as the"Structure Owner". The Colorado Mined.Land Reclamation Act requires that landowners adjacent to a proposed mining operation be informed about the mine and the reclamation. Further,the Act providesprotection fir structures that are within 200 feet of a mining operation. lafargc submitted an application to the State of Colorado Division of Reclamation, Mining and Safety for a 112 Reclamation Operation Permit and an application to Weld County for a Use by Special Review Permit for sand and gravel mining located within the east'A of the southeast'A of Section 25,T6N,R67W;the west 1/2 of the southwest'A of Section 30,T6N, R66W;the northeast+ti of Section 36,T6N,R67W; and the NW'4 of Section 31,T6N,R66W of • the 6P.M.,Weld County, Colorado. The Structure Owner owns a permanent manmade structure or structures within 200 feet of the land affected by the mining and reclamation operations. The description ofthe structure(s) is as follows: Fenced petroleum tanks,gas wells,gas pipelines,roads Lafarge must attempt to obtain permission from Structure Owner in order to conduct operations closer than 200 feet to the structures owned by the Structure Owner. In addition, Lafarge Must commit to repairing,replacing,or compensating Structu re Owner for any damage that might be caused to its structure(s)by the mining operation of Lafarge at this Site. By this agreement,Structure Owner consents to Lafarge conducting mining operations, including setbacks,in conformance with the executed Compatible Develo ent arid Surface Use Agreement between Lafarge West,Inc and Noble Energy,Inc.dated g229 . Lafarge commits that,if its operation causes damages to Structure Owner's structure() within 200 feet of said operations,Lafarge will repair or replace such structure(s)or compensate Structure Owner for the value of said structure(s). • Page 1 of 2 • The parties hereto acknowledge and agree to the above-stated items. AGREED: Lafarge West, Inc. BY: L �.I -ii Date: I 3- DI A °Johnson Land Manager State of Colorado ) /(�2 i _ )ss. County of[DoLiL ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this (341)--..day of N Oy.La... ,-„ _!t. ,20O1 ,by Anne Johnson as Land Manager for Lafarge West, Inc. vv>aaao�. . My C 'ssion Expires: O �R 'D.0l\ r a 3 '% 'bite D War- me f II ' t fi ro Notary Public iii p 4. 5 • Structure Owner A 'g°°‘;®�U®a . "efac0 i / ' Date: 11"/ 91 0 Structure Owner Signature + R. David Padgett Sta Colorado ) Attorney-in-Fast g orss. iyawy, ) The foregoing insftntnent;was aclmow edged,, fore me this Igr day of ,$01_,by PP, e a. d as; eij in of 'It °.z �„buy,,, . My Commission Expires: 12/16/14/x"?.: �*``.y> -""k rj ' ' 'f' NplARy y w`•, PUg4tG p 'atNotary ubl y�lF fNt� ft sam�nsi.rmo»� �yfy1/011( C ,�\t``�� fo? „w,ur �y m.ao . Page 2 of 2 Agreement to Mine Within 200 Feet of Permanent Manmade Structures Lafarge West, Inc./Noble Energy Production, Inc. • rt VECCHI &ASSOCIATES, LLC URBAN PLANNING & DESIGN P o.Box 1 175 Longmont,co 80502-1 175 Phone 303-774-0173 Fax 303-774-0173 VecchiAssocates@comcast.net January 20,2010 Mr. Clay Kimmi,P.E.,C.F.M. Weld County Public Works Department 1111 H Street P.O.Box 758 Greeley,CO 80632-0758 RE: Responses to USR-1657,Lafarge West,Inc.—Parsons Mine Public Works Comments dated January 11,2010 Dear Clay: We received a copy of your memorandum dated January 11,2010 with comments pertaining to the USR- 1657, Lafarge West, Inc.—Parsons Mine. Following is a summary of your comments followed by our response in italics. • 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 captures by the mining area will be pumped from the pit into the Whitney Ditch or one of several other places. In previous discussion 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 BMP's to be utilized, installation and maintenance notes, and seed mix to be used. We acknowledge receipt of these five Drainage Report comments. Mark Severin with Deere and Ault will be working on responding to these comments and will submit a revised report when the updates are complete. However, it is our understanding that these issues do not need to be resolved until prior to recording the plat. • �71 Page 2 of 3 Mr. Clay Kimmi January 20, 2010 • 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. The study was reviewed by the DRMS and was updated again per their comments. A copy of the most recent version of the study is attached to the DRMS application response packet which we have forwarded to you for your reference. 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. Attached is a letter from the City of Greeley. 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. Please see sheet 6 of Parsons Mine USR-1657 which shows a Plant Site Detail. As you will see, the • access to and all around the scale house and office area is paved. Construction drawings for on-site improvements will be provided to the County prior to approval of the building permit. Construction drawings for the off-site (County Road 64% improvements) are required by the City of Greeley prior to construction of the improvements; therefore, a copy of the construction plans for these improvements can be provided to the County at that time. 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. Noted Flood Hazard Development Permit: An updated flood hazard development permit must be submitted and conditionally approved prior to recording to be acceptable. Noted 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. Noted Grading Permit: Prior to the issuance of building permits; the applicant must be submit a grading permit application which contains a grading plan, sediment and erosion and 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. Noted • Page 3 of 3 Mr. Clay Kimmi January 20, 2010 • Drawings: The following pieces of information need to be added to the drawings prior to recording of the plat: I. A note needs to be added to sheet I under the development conditions that stated "Weld County shall not be responsible for the maintenance of onsite drainage related features." Note 39 of the County's Development Standards has been changed to use this requested wording. 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 conversation factor needs to be added showing how the BFEs were adjusted to match the NAVD-88 data used for the ground surface elevations. This information was already provided Please look on sheets 2-5 and 7-9 in the "Notes"section to find this information. 3. Structural details for the steel and concrete footings need to be shown. The conveyor details included on the USR-1657 are not meant to be construction drawings. Therefore, rather than add structural detail information to the USR plat, we have added a note to the conveyor details on sheet 6 which states that the details are "Not for Construction". Structural details for the steel and concrete footings will be provided on the construction drawings for the river conveyor crossing and the street conveyor crossing. Thank you for your consideration. Please contact me if you have any questions. Sincerely, • VECCIjI & ASSOCIATES, L , fifer E. V chi,AICP rincipal Attachments cc: Kim Ogle, Weld County Planning Anne Johnson, Lafarge Pam Hora, Tetra Tech R:\4137 029\Documents\USR\Review Comments and Responses\Fonnal Applicationkresponses\01-1 1-20I0 Response to Public Works Memorandums doc • Kim Ogle om: Ebert, Jared [Jared.Ebert@state.co.us] nt: Tuesday, January 19, 2010 11:23 AM o: Kim Ogle Subject: Parsons Mine, M-2009-082 Mr. Ogle, Per our telephone conversation today regarding the reclamation permit application for the Parsons Mine; DRMS File# M-2009-082, here is an update of the current status of the application. Once the Division received the complete application, we reviewed the application and the exhibits to ensure they meet the standards of our rules and regulations. At this time, there are technical issues regarding several portions of their overall mining and reclamation plan, as well as technical issues regarding mining setbacks to permanent man-made structures. Also,the Division reviewed their 100-year flood control structures planned for the site and are working with Lafarge to ensure these structures are designed appropriately. At this time, the issues the Division has with the Parsons Mine application are not considered out of the ordinary and it is likely Lafarge will address our concerns. However, this is not a guarantee Lafarge will receive a permit from our Office. If I can be of further assistance, please feel free to contact me. Thank you, Jared L. Ebert Department of Natural Resources ision of Reclamation, Mining and Safety 3 Sherman Street, Room 215 Denver, Colorado 80203 (303)-866-3567 ext. 8120 • 1 Kim Ogle iiiom: Clayton D. Kimmi t: Thursday, January 14, 2010 7:03 AM • Kim Ogle; David Bauer; Janet Carter Subject: FW: Parsons Mine-WCR 64.5 Improvements Attachments: WCR 64.5 Letter to Weld County.pdf; EXHIBIT- EXH A-010610.pdf Here is the letter from the City of Greeley regarding the improvements that they are requiring on WCR 64.5 for Parsons Pit. From: Derek L. Glosson [mailto:Derek.Glosson@Greeleygov.com] Sent: Wednesday, January 13, 2010 4:46 PM To: Clayton D. Kimmi Cc: Sciscione, Steve; Anne.Johnson@lafarge-na.com Subject: RE: Parsons Mine - WCR 64.5 Improvements Clay, Attached is a letter and the referenced attachment stating what the City of Greeley is requiring for improvements on WCR 64.5 in regard to the proposed Parsons mine. I simply stated what roadway improvements the City is requiring to serve the proposed development. I don't feel the City has waived any required improvements. A hard copy of the letter will be mailed out tomorrow. Thanks. Derek rek Glosson, P.E., CFM 'trek Development Manager City of Greeley 1100 10th Street, Suite 402 Phone: 970-350-9798 Fax: 970-336-4170 Derek.GlossonC@oreelevoov.com It's free! Subscribe now so you won't miss the next edition of City Scoop, the City's monthly E-newsletter. From: Clayton D. Kimmi [mailto:CKimmi@co.weld.co.us] Sent: Wednesday, January 13, 2010 3:36 PM To: Derek L. Glosson Subject: RE: Parsons Mine - WCR 64.5 Improvements We would like something on your letter head that states what improvements you are requiring and what improvements you are waiving. From: Derek L. Glosson [mailto:Derek.Glosson@Greeleygov.com] Sent: Wednesday, January 13, 2010 3:34 PM To: Clayton D. Kimmi Subject: FW: Parsons Mine - WCR 64.5 Improvements IlY, o you need me to send you an actual letter, or was my email sufficient? 1 Thanks. Derek 'trek Glosson, P.E., CFM Engineering Development Manager City of Greeley 1100 10th Street, Suite 402 Phone: 970-350-9798 Fax: 970-336-4170 Derek.Glosson@greeleygov.com It's free! Subscribe now so you won't miss the next edition of City Scoop, the City's monthly E-newsletter. From: Sciscione, Steve [mailto:steve.sciscione@tetratech.com] Sent: Wednesday, January 13, 2010 12:20 PM To: Derek L. Glosson Cc: Hora, Pam; Jennifer Vecchi Subject: RE: Parsons Mine - WCR 64.5 Improvements Derek: Thanks for the approval of the conceptual exhibit. I wanted to make sure that you guys can still draft an actual letter to Weld County Public Works by Jan. 15th like we discussed in our meeting. On our most recent round of gbments from Clay Kimmi stated the following regarding the offsite roadway improvements: "Please provide lic 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." Thanks again, Steve E. Sciscione, E.I.T., LEED® AP I Design Engineer Main: 303.772.5282 I Direct: 720.864.4525 I Fax: 303.485.6705 leorot., it Tetra Tech I Engineering and Architecture Services (EAS) 1900 South Sunset Street, Suite 1-F I Longmont, CO 80501 I .t,� , ,� PLEASE NOTE: This message, including any attachments, may include privileged, confidential and/or inside information. Any distribution or use of this communication by anyone other than the intended recipient is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender by replying to this message and then delete it from your system. From: Derek L. Glosson [mailto:Derek.Glosson@Greeleygov.com] Sent: Monday, January 11, 2010 1:45 PM To: Clayton D. Kimmi Cc: Steve Bagley; Ryan Hollinshead; Eric Bracke; Sciscione, Steve; Anne.Johnson@lafarge-na.com Object: Parsons Mine - WCR 64.5 Improvements Clay, 2 Attached is a conceptual exhibit showing the location of the access and the related improvements for the Parson's mine. City staff has reviewed the exhibit and finds it acceptable at a conceptual level. Detailed construction drawings will be reviewed prior to construction of the proposed improvements. Please let me Ow if you have any questions or need any additional information from the City of Greeley. Thanks. Derek Derek Glosson, P.E., CFM Engineering Development Manager City of Greeley 1100 10th Street, Suite 402 Phone: 970-350-9798 Fax: 970-336-4170 DerekGlosson@greeleygov.com It's free! Subscribe now so you won't miss the next edition of City Scoop, the City's monthly E-newsletter. • • 3 •City of G reele�ra]/dTo Great. From the Ground Up. January 14, 2010 Clay Kimmi, P.E. Weld County Public Works 1111 "H"Street Post Office Box 758 Greeley, CO 80632-0758 Re: Parsons Mine/WCR 64.5 Improvements Dear Clay: Attached with this letter is a conceptual exhibit showing the location of the access and the City required WCR 64.5 improvements for the proposed Parson's mine. City of Greeley staff has reviewed the exhibit • and finds it acceptable at a conceptual level. Detailed construction drawings will be reviewed prior to construction of the proposed improvements. The City of Greeley will send Weld County a referral once final construction plans have been submitted for review. As shown on the attached exhibit, the City of Greeley is requiring a westbound left turn lane into the site. A 50' turning radius will also be required for eastbound traffic entering the site. Acceleration/deceleration lanes and 60' turning radii previously required by Weld County are not being required as it is the professional opinion of both the City and the applicant's traffic engineer that these improvements are not necessary. Please let me know if you have any questions or need any additional information from the City of Greeley. Sincerely, Derek Glosson,P.E. Engineering Development Manager cc: Eric Bracke, City of Greeley Traffic Engineer Steve Sciscione,Tetra Tech Anne Best Johnson, Lafarge Attachment • Community Development-Engineering Development Review • 1100 10th Street,Ste.402,Creeky,CO 80631 • Fax(970)336-4170 We promise to preserve and improve the quality of life for Greeley through timely,courteous and cost-effective service. .�..� d...�,,,�. e a a a Q 1,919X3 lV01d30N00 H73 fix{ 1 W131 mm O F 4� -- - Kn [a[ .. �,.�o.o .,w .�.� a.wnsmvp4 d d w M0139 33S-lR 3NIl901VW �ta A .i 11 1 X t • • 3AOBV 336 l%3NIlHO1VW • City of/ G reele rado Great.From the Ground Up. January 13, 2010 Clay Kimmi,P.E. Weld County Public Works 1111 "H"Street Post Office Box 758 Greeley, CO 80632-0758 Re: Parsons Mine/WCR 64.5 Improvements Dear Clay: • Attached with this letter is a conceptual exhibit showing the location of the access and the related WCR 64.5 improvements for the proposed Parson's mine. City of Greeley staff has reviewed the exhibit and finds it acceptable at a conceptual level. Detailed construction drawings will be reviewed prior to construction of the proposed improvements. The City of Greeley will send Weld County,a referral once final construction plans have been submitted for review. Please let me know if you have any questions or need any additional information from the City of Greeley. Sin cadDerek Glosson,P.E. Engineering Development Manager cc: Steve Sciscione,Tetra Tech Anne Best Johnson, Lafarge Attachment Community Development-Engineering Development Review • 1100 10th Street,Ste.402,Greeley,CO 80631 . Fax(970)336-4170 We promise to preserve and improve the quality of life for Greeley through timely,courteous and cost-effective service. a . aft A.ar.,.Mammy a.21110.2]C.w UNA WIC 41,41J1,0294•50-0•111T SOU*Cfl a-*CR O.txR BIT.Lp►µ.r Al.OublU JNO un7Ji: ALT'A.!UM UStH NM*.MCRYRJEA1 JEREMY a n a - a x - . a MATCHLINE #1 - SEE ABOVE _ It G Z D lI i' III l ,� � 1 ii ' 2o I 2 1 IIIII 1 1 1 \ . co J ` i1 z v.i M 1 % � 1 Q — ' . __ Z 'Ill ft N l lb } f5 n - k ' • Q n. Q 1'' ' I I I e 13 Al '.\ 0 Q It:5-. z \ r., 23 g Z I �1 WCR 25 ,X I I mi— _ i . t. i sI g �. III m • am/O• . 'j 1 I'' 1 .. a ryp a I I 1 I 1 I i ! I I .. .• I ..in.; _ 11 II" D , i \ it'', '1‘1, ' I • z -'r 4 \'\. ' 11 O g .. J • ' Z H • P�r4� I" . Z '• I ' • :411 4 II, ..............-- Ca 0 i , .\ \ I . 2'4 • • tl.:1 1 si • • ` D t 7 `I`i 3 Sil I • 1--- a1 A 11 R^ \ :$ •G Y � M,1* GI < jI 4 . -4 n i X •" �i ' 'T'- • I Z 1 —T- 1 -I D y� .1 �' l NIA. ' I ._— : .;...J...... girt) ' m --In r f , z 1'' P s * P \1 ! - . ' $ o xi : \t i ' • T1 ,zw na._u+t 44 aaa BBc Vo lil: �I pa! ` 1 i J�I• • I ! g II t y t\ 1 I 1 . \ Ii' 11 I‘; 1 11 1 • I ' ilOwilivrawf \ x I,` l \ y _ \ 1 i • Q , p . i y, • Lil I(,Zr> MATCHLINE #1 - SEE BELOW aim LATAAtie MIT,IIt SW; ant caOB ice ' /T - - mTR/,ac Sao C oIMTY.CO I X +l'; : LANE PARSONS — ,_ 0e1•�r•pwwwwxnoB +�► 1% E:Iii TETRA TECH } = CONCEPTUAL EXHIBIT i i— I (Ns\ wa....B A 4 D 3 (WCR 64.5) i ; Ma I-IT ,. ,am .eaaar.oaw 4 T _ w x o,.OM TIM sAs t>o31 na1w. ElTETRA TECH January 7, 2010 Mr. Edward C. Nichols State Historic Preservation Officer Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation 1300 Broadway Denver, CO 80203 RE: Response to letter regarding Lafarge West, Inc.'s Parsons Mine Application to the DRMS (Permit No. M-2009-082) Dear Mr. Nichols: We received a copy of your letter dated November 2, 2009 regarding Lafarge West, Inc.'s Parsons Mine application under review by the DRMS. If any human remains are discovered while Lafarge West, Inc. is mining the Parsons Mine site, they will immediately notify the • County Coroner and Sherriff's Office as is required by CRS 24-80 part 13. Sincerely, TETRA TECH Pamela Franch Hora, AICP Senior Planner cc: Jared Ebert, DRMS Anne Johnson, Lafarge West, Inc. Jennifer Vecchi, Vecchi &Associates, LLC R:\4137 029\DpunlentstDRMS 2nd Application tAdequacy Review\Response letters\Arch and Hint Resp duc • 1900 S.Sunset Street.Suite I-F Longmont,CO 80501 Tel 303.7725282 Fax 303.772.7039 wwwtetratech.com • Design Parameters for Inflow/Outflow Structures Approx. Approx. Area (Ar) Channel Invert Ground Channel Depth, Pond acres sq ft Ap/12,000 Ls,ft' Elev.2 Elev. ft SC 4.8 210,000 18 100 4720.5 4725 4.5 4C 33.7 1,470,000 123 123 4720.5 4724 3.5 5A 3.7 160,000 13 100 4719.0 4723 4.0 46 13.7 600,000 50 100 4718.0 4722 4.0 4A3 5.7 250,000 21 100 4720.0 4722 2.0 5B 10.6 460,000 38 100 4717.5 4722 4.5 3 6.6 290,000 24 100 4716.0 4722 6.0 1C 12.7 550,000 46 100 4716.5 4720 3.5 Notes: 1 The channel connecting each of the inflow/outflow structures to the Cache La Poudre River is to be trapezoidal with a bottom width of L,and side slopes of 4H:1V. L,is based on methodologies presented in the UDFCD guidelines. 2 The channels are to be constructed at a horizontal longitudinal grade. 3 The inflow/outflow structure to Pond 4A connects with Pond 4B • Channel Invert Cache La Channel Invert 10-yr Depth of 10-yr Channel Above Pond Poudre Above River Flood Flood in Pond Invert Elev. HWL HWL,ft Invert Invert,ft Elev. Channel,ft SC 4720.5 4718.0 2.5 4715.4 5.1 4724.7 4.2 4C 4720.5 4718.0 2.5 4715.4 5.1 4724.2 3.7 SA 4719.0 4716.0 3.0 4713.9 5.1 4723.5 4.5 48 4718.0 4717.0 1.0 4712.4 5.6 4722.4 4.4 5B 4717.5 4716.0 1.5 4712.4 5.1 4722.4 4.9 3 4716.0 4716.0 0.0 4710.4 5.6 4720.3 4.3 1C 4716.5 4716.5 0.0 4709.1 7.4 4719.4 2.9 • Queen of the River Consultants , Inc . Am= 13810 N. 115'"Street, Longmont, CO 80504 • Phone (303) 651-2514 • F ax (303) 651-2224 a January 6, 2010 RE: LaFarge West, Inc., Parsons Mine, File No. M-2009-082 COE file no.NWO-2007-3489-DEN Terry McKee US Army Corp of Engineers Denver Regulatory Office 9307 South Wadsworth Blvd Littleton, CO 80128-6901 Dear Terry, Thank you for your letter dated November 2,2009 commenting on the Lafarge West, Parsons Mine DRMS application dated October 16, 2009. As per your comment regarding the necessity for permitting under Section 404 for any work utilizing placement of dredged or fill material in any aquatic site, we are fully aware of that requirement. We specifically designed the mining operation and reclamation plan to avoid mining, filling or other impacts to all jurisdictional wetlands. • We have attached your March 6, 2008 Jurisdictional Determination letter for the project accepting our wetland delineation report and identifying those areas considered to be jurisdictional by your office and the wetlands map as submitted in the application(Drawing 1, Exhibit J). As you can see by the attached map, mining operations provide for protection for those areas. Sincerely, o 4/ ,/ AU i Brenda Mitchell Attachments • Providing professional fishery and wildlife services on over 1.5 million acres of privately owned land throughout the U: I i o o • 0 mr o w g l 8$ U Z w o I F a w w thl K Q w F I CO cc 04 0 J N z gW g CO F I- Hg I- CCZ Z a UJ < 0 - b - Sz > am M w z \ I o �� w \ I O I QQy O Q W F r O Q) nu) in o ti E-tc-4 in z ^ Fca zo.o OH . ]Z o OD W CO .., O o rzl z CO 0C) 7 O - 0 0 I 1� i — — 0_0. e l_ ` o : 4 . t 1Ill 13 I CON ,I � $ I J ' L I -.J J I _ may' / Mi'11�C IyM ..� . _ _ A . , z L _) au � .11( � �i! ir %/ell--;pril � / 1 1 1 W< . '. �A ,"�' �•k— I1,- m 1 o \ L / ;` a:v vim\, , • - - _ .J �ts • R%T.o\oe DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS,OMAHA DISTRICT DENVER REGULATORY OFFICE,9307 SOUTH WADSWORTH BOULEVARD LITTLETON,COLORADO 80128-6901 �4* March 6, 2008 Ms.Brenda Mitchell Queen of the River 13810 N. 1156 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 W I: 0.25 acre fringe wetland around W1 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 W10: 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 JD are included on the JD forms attached to this letter. These forms are also available on our website at https://www.nwo.nsace.anny.mil/htmUod-tUjur/jur.htm. 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 are 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 y T. Car Chic Denver R latory Of ce tm • • • • B. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS TO SUPPORT JD: • !Il irnd Bird's eye Traffic << _ -- - • SS P • 40W • 1 ` - WR 4 .74st tb- k . . .... .., ,c,%.4 . da. -"j:-iti:ii:71......111: ; :. i -•iiiiii i viii W4 _ sf = ., fr vn . Ilit,t, .L , e , . I n n "'w I 4:, -. a C\IIII: ... • , � ` Win II 4:-.4 ler a� � ; M litt X e • Wt • rte• . - _-.4,..-._,• - ' r' . - . ` ,� ., _ �� s • ► r 11 r ••-, .. 'o rs. • y .. e 1 !f : (140/ 1 a w" .r. I. , s, . �. 41 _ k s , ii . gr., . . kix.fr I "--• - e . .ID ‘. VI : „A.. : . I s::.-*lit .lat :v Sort so it 6 _ fit \ • 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 Form Instructional Guidebook. SECTION I: BACKGROUND INFORMATION A. REPORT COMPLETION DATE FOR APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION(JD): \larch 6. 10111( B. DISTRICT OFFICE, FILE NAME,AND NUMBER: I)cm cr Raculatorn ()Illce_I'anon.I'roperiy_ AA(1-1007-3489-1 HA C. PROJECT LOCATION AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Reach I of 3 State:( t I County/parish/borough: 11,chi City: Center coordinates of site(lat/long in degree decimal format): Lat. N; Long. W Universal Transverse Mercator: (15134101.-14771L;UA Name of nearest waterbody:(ache 111 I'ondre Name of nearest Traditional Navigable Water(TN W)into which the aquatic resource flows: t he Ia Pawire Name of watershed or Hydrologic Unit Code(HUC): I019(100 O 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 ehrmnn I I. ?1108 ® Field Determination. Date(s): Scplcnther 17. 2200?o ilh the am'.Moon SECTION II: SUMMARY OF FINDINGS A. RHA SECTION 10 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION. There Are 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] • 0 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. [Require I. Waters of the U.S. a. Indicate presence of waters of U.S.in review area(check all that apply): 1 ® TNWs,including territorial seas ® Wetlands adjacent to TNWs ❑ Relatively permanent waters(RPWs)that flow directly or indirectly into TN Ws ❑ 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 TN Ws ❑ 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: 3.750 linear feet: 30 width(ft)and/or acres. Wetlands: 16.65 acres. \\-I:0?5 acre fringe a ciLmd:ntnutd WI pond(isolated(.adjacent Iu Cache la I'oedre Riter \\_': 13.7 acres ahnls(ache la I'nudr,: Rit cr VA 3: I.4 acre>:thun.(.ache h1 ['make Rker \\6: 1.3 acres(lhutn C ache Id 1'oudre Rig er c. Limits(boundaries)of jurisdiction based on: 1987 Delineation Manual • Elevation of established OHWM(if known): . 2.Non-regulated waters/wetlands(check if applicable):' 'Boxes checked below shall be supported by completing the appropriate sections in Section III below. 2 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). ® Potentially jurisdictional waters and/or wetlands were assessed within the review area and determined to be not jurisdictional. Explain: K I: 1.5 acre pond of open ss aIcr is phi ucalN isolated and not jurisdictional_ I here is no surlaee anmretion e ith the Cache to Pouchy ILK cr. V11-A: O.US acre isolated wetland adjacent to adjacent ttellands tt jilt no In drolueic connection to the riser. \15: isolated pond le cos tiled depression)'sith 0.10 open vtoter and(1.11.3 acre of stelland ndPtccnl to adjacent \\3 aelland ''lilt no connection to the rit el. 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 III.A.1 and Section 111.0.1.only; if the aquatic resource is a wetland adjacent to a TNW,complete Sections III.A.I and 2 and Section II1.D.1.;otherwise,see Section III.B below. 1. TNW Identify TNW: Cache In Paudre River. Summarize rationale supporting determination: the t. ache la Poudre Riser i.a iraditionalls n,s ie thle 's:uer that 't:I>historlcall' used for commerce.:is cited in the i()7.11111‘ieahilits surds prepared ht Donald A( I . 2. Wetland adjacent to TNW Summarize rationale supporting conclusion that wetland is"adjacent": Site s isit and ,ai,eyuenl couvilnun report ideut V1 I:((.25 acre fringe stciland_adjacent to k ache la Paudre ILitcr VA 2: 13.7 acres ahuts Cache la Paudre Iiiv er \\-3: 1.4 acres abut:,Cache la l'oudre Riser N 6: 1.3 acre,aha t:C. ache la Poudre Riser • 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: ®TNWs: 3.750 linear feet 40 width all,Or, acres. ® Wetlands adjacent to TNWs: 16.65 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: ❑ 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(ft). O 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 111.C. Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters within the review area(check all that apply): O Tributary waters: linear feet width(ft). O Other non-wetland waters: acres. Identify type(s)of waters: 4. Wetlands directly abutting an RPW that flow directly or indirectly into TNWs. • 'See Footnote N 3. ❑ 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 1I1.B and rationale in Section I11.D.2,above. Provide rationale indicating that wetland is directly abutting an RPW: . Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: 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 III.C. 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 are adjacent and with similarly situated adjacent wetlands,have a significant nexus with a TN W are jurisdictional. Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section III.C. Provide estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres. 7. Impoundments of jurisdictional waters.` 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 ❑ 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 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. Q 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). O Waters do not meet the"Significant Nexus"standard,where such a finding is required for jurisdiction. Explain: ® Other:(explain,if not covered above): N I: 1.5 acre pond olopen u titer is plbsicallY isolated and not jurisdictional. I here is no surfuee connect loll a ith the t .Idle In I'uudre Riker W.I.A. II.0X aere isolated betlund adjacent to adjacent w ellnnds with nu hydrulo_ic connection to the ri'Cr. VA 5: Isal;nal pond lese:n'lied depression)with IL Iii Open haler and()-ll.; acre of"etland adiaccnl to:nIl:teem AC7 wetland ""III no connection to the rll cr. I here is nu information nt tillable n,show that the AA I pond.\\:IA or AA s I I is or could be used hy interstate or furei:en tray l❑s Gar recreational or other purposes. 21 produces li>h or shellfish tt hich ore or could he I:Ikeu and sold in interstate or foreign eon.nuercc. „r ?I is it'.could he used lift industrial purposes by industries in the interaae cannwerce. Provide acreage estimates for non jurisdictional waters in the review area,where the sole potential basis ofjurisdiction 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): O Non-wetland waters(i.e.,rivers,streams): linear feet width(ft). Z Lakes/ponds: I.6 acres. O Other non-wetland waters: acres.List type of aquatic resource: . ® Wetlands: lull 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(ft). 'To complete the analysis refer to the key in Section III.D.6 of the Instructional Guidebook. 3 ❑ Lakes/ponds: acres. O Other non-wetland waters: acres. List type of aquatic resource: ❑ 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:Uuacn(if the IG ® Data sheets prepared/submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant. Z 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: ® U.S.Geological Survey Hydrologic Atlas: ❑USGS NHD data. El USGS 8 and 12 digit HUC maps. ® U.S.Geological Survey map(s).Cite scale&quad name: I Mon Quad y ❑ USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey.Citation: ❑ National wetlands inventory map(s). Cite name: ❑ State/Local wetland inventory map(s): ❑ FEMA/FIRM maps: ❑ 100-year Floodplain Elevation is: (National Geodectic Vertical Datum of 1929) Z Photographs:® Aerial(Name&Date): I)raeinp I and l(\hibii I. l__i w,. or❑Other(Name&Date):site photo.. .lung. luh and Auuua 210r. ❑ Previous determination(s). File no.and date of response letter: ® Applicable/supporting case law: Rapanos and tlmibrlI ca.c,. ❑ Applicable/supporting scientific literature: ❑ Other information(please specify): • • 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): 1 chruan 13. 2_1)08 B. DISTRICT OFFICE,FILE NAME,AND NUMBER: RIJN CrRe_,duwn O1114e.lice. I'11 -4,n3 l'ioperl:_ ANI)-3007-3489_DIN C. PROJECT LOCATION AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Redd] 2 ui5 State:('(1 County/parish/borough: \\eld City: Center coordinates of site(lat/long in degree decimal format): Lat. N; Long. W Universal Transverse Mercator: 07-,1 4 1101 1.177(130(', Name of nearest waterbody: N eiland I ribulun \\7 \CS Name of nearest Traditional Navigable Water(TNW)into which the aquatic resource flows: ( .ic6; 1,1 ',.1]d r: Name of watershed or Hydrologic Unit Code(HUC): 101')000' ® 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...)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: 1 chruun 11. 2008 Z Field Determination. Date(s): 'gnemher I? _21107 \\idl the COIL,1111,111] SECTION II: SUMMARY OF FINDINGS A. RHA SECTION I0 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION. There Are 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] • 0 Waters subject to the ebb and flow of the tide. O 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. [Require 1. Waters of the U.S. a. Indicate presence of waters of U.S.in review area(check all that apply): ' ® TNWs,including territorial seas O 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 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 ❑ Impoundments ofjurisdictional waters O 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: 3.750 linear feet: 3t1 width(ft)and/or acres. Wetlands: 5.9 acres. W4:0.9;i1,re \\7:11.7❑cre . \\8: 3.1 acre-. \A 9: 1,2 acre, c. Limits(boundaries)of jurisdiction based on: 1987 Delineation Manual • Elevation of established OHWM(if known): . 2. Non-regulated waters/wetlands(check if applicable):' 'Boxes checked below shall be supported by completing the appropriate sections in Section III below. 1 For purposes of this form,an RPW is defined as a tributary that is not a TN W and that typically flows year-round or has continuous flow at least`seasonally" (e.g.,typically 3 months). ® Potentially jurisdictional waters and/or wetlands were assessed within the review area and determined to be not jurisdictional. Explain: N-LA is an upland lateral ditch that dot's not meet the criteria in Ihc1987 Corps of i-n_ineer AA ctland I).:lineation Maraud. • 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 III.A.I and Section HI.D.1.only;if the aquatic resource is a wetland adjacent to a TNW,complete Sections III.A.I and 2 and Section III.D.I.; otherwise,see Section III.B below. 1. TNW Identify TNW: Cache la Poudre River. Summarize rationale supporting determination: Hie ',relic lu Poudre Rueri-.,i trulLIJH wirer that t'as lustorieall‘ used for commerce.Its cited in the 1974 na'iuuhilin >Ind> prepared hr u l 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): I. TNWs and Adjacent Wetlands. Check all that apply and provide size estimates in review area: ®TNWs: 3.75)linear feet lit 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: 11 et land curoultant report indicates that Welland I rihulvr. \\7 VA x tl u- seer round in the dim Ti Hre:uu portion_ %\id,a estimated 2❑'s.and 11(„s at least 5 months of the tear in tlx upstream purr lot „ith ail e.tinuued I cr.. ❑ 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 111.8. Provide rationale indicating that tributary flows seasonally: Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters in the review area(check all that apply): O Tributary waters: linear feet width(ft). O 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 I I l.C. Provide estimates for jurisdictional waters within the review area(check all that apply): O Tributary waters: linear feet width(ft). O 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. Z Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow year-round. Provide data and rationale indicating that tributary is perennial in Section III.D.2,above.Provide rationale indicating that wetland is directly abutting an RPW: AA 9 and \\4 are dircctl ,arlaee connected to ih; Al eiland I rihalan Ali \\S. O Wetlands directly abutting an RPW where tributaries typically flow"seasonally." Provide data indicating that tributary is seasonal in Section 111.8 and rationale in Section III.D.2,above.Provide rationale indicating that wetland is directly abutting an RPW: . Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: 5.9 acres. • 'See Footnote p 3. I 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 TNW are jurisidictional.Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section III.C. 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 are adjacent and with similarly situated adjacent wetlands,have a significant nexus with a TN W are jurisdictional. Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section III.C. Provide estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres. 7. Impoundments of jurisdictional waters.' 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 ❑ 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). F. NON-JURISDICTIONAL WATERS,INCLUDING WETLANDS(CHECK ALL THAT APPLY): ® 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. ❑ 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): VA'-IA i<an upland lateral dill duo doe.not mccl the criteria In Ihc1987 Corp,.of I.nuineer, \\ei land I)elinrei ion Vlnnuul. • 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:acres. ❑ 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.e.,rivers,streams): linear feet, width(ft). ❑ 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: Vuern to Ilia RP..., ® 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. ❑ Data sheets prepared by the Corps: . ❑ Corps navigable waters'study: . Z U.S.Geological Survey Hydrologic Atlas: . ❑USGS NHD data. f USGS 8 and 12 digit HUC maps. • ® U.S.Geological Survey map(s).Cite scale&quad name: I:2-1000 ftrucc\,cll 11ua1 \Hip. ❑ USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey.Citation: 'To complete the analysis refer to the key in Section III.D.6 of the Instructional Guidebook. 3 O National wetlands inventory map(s). Cite name: . O State/Local wetland inventory map(s): . O FEMA/FIRM maps: • 0 IOU-year Floodplain Elevation is: (National Geodectic Vertical Datum of 1929) ® Photographs: ®Aerial(Name&Date): )ra��hie I and I[�hihil I (>ahcr I. 'uu . or®Other(Name&Date):nile photos lone..luh and.-1uen,i '0u? O Previous determination(s). File no.and date oif response letter: ® Applicable/supporting case law: Itupano,anJ. ar shell cue.. • 0 Applicable/supporting scientific literature: O Other information(please specify): . B. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS TO SUPPORT JD: rid Bird's. . r Tra'ri� « � . -+ ., • , WR L+ 9 P .y, In `` \ t o-t rr �. a .ii i A' � 1t _ C . a , ) x�_T' 1, 4 '� W4 a "v L, W7A. tt I Fr. 'iy fi aJX1 1 • y ,df WS 2v . Was A r ame $ t " _ 04 ja, �r v J$t P t 1 ,. fi ` • "44 s / 1___ a.( - - „.. �.t .ELI:: ,.F W2 } • f I, e� CALS Ifi 1,, .. " 4,, , + # a ...3 ,,''\,. ac • 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. IIPPSECTION I: BACKGROUND INFORMATION A. REPORT COMPLETION DATE FOR APPROVED JURISDICTIONAL DETERMINATION(JD): B. DISTRICT OFFICE,FILE NAME,AND NUMBER: Ucmcr Regulator) (1111cc. I'ar'.un. I'; pert'. \ O-2(1u7-:.189-I)I \ C. PROJECT LOCATION AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION: State:('1) County/parish/borough: \1 eld City. Center coordinates of site(lat/long in degree decimal format): Lat. N; Long. W Universal Transverse Mercator:115 I a6RUF.4-1773211N Name of nearest waterbody: \\ I0. man-made irri tatiun ditch Name of nearest Traditional Navigable Water(TNW)into which the aquatic resource flows: cliche fi Po dre RI'cr Name of watershed or Hydrologic Unit Code(HUC): ® 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...)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: Ucccmbcr 15. 2211(1? Field Determination. Date(s): 'cpt:miler 17. _21107 „Lh the con.nlr,u❑ SECTION II: SUMMARY OF FINDINGS A. RHA SECTION 10 DETERMINATION OF JURISDICTION. There Are 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] 0 Waters subject to the ebb and flow of the tide. 0 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"waters of the U.S."within Clean Water Act(CWA)jurisdiction(as defined by 33 CFR part 328)in the review area. [Required] I. Waters of the U.S. a. Indicate presence of waters of U.S.in review area(check all that apply): ❑ TNWs,including territorial seas ❑ Wetlands adjacent to TNWs ❑ Relatively permanent waters°(RP Ws)that flow directly or indirectly into TN Ws ❑ 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 TN Ws ❑ 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: no()linear feet: I0 width(ft)and/or acres. Wetlands: acres. c. Limits(boundaries)of jurisdiction based on: 1987 Delineation Manual Elevation of established OHWM(if known): 2. Non-regulated waters/wetlands(check if applicable):} ❑ Potentially jurisdictional waters and/or wetlands were assessed within the review area and determined to be not jurisdictional. Explain: • '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). • 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(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:Rcccm site 'i,it hams identified ihi,man-nude irrisolion Jrain:rs diirh 11 n„,car round. ❑ Tributaries of TN W where tributaries have continuous flow"seasonally"(e.g.,typically three months each year)are jurisdictional. Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section 111.6. 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(ft). ❑ 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 TN W 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): El 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 III.D.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 III.B and rationale in Section III.D.2,above.Provide rationale indicating that wetland is directly abutting an RPW: Provide acreage estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: 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 TNW are jurisidictional. Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section III.C. 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 are adjacent and with similarly situated adjacent wetlands,have a significant nexus with a TNW are jurisdictional.Data supporting this conclusion is provided at Section III.C. Provide estimates for jurisdictional wetlands in the review area: acres. 7. Impoundments of jurisdictional waters.5 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). • 'See Footnote I/3. 5 To complete the analysis refer to the key in Section III.D.6 of the Instructional Guidebook. • 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: Queen of the River. ❑ Data sheets prepared/submitted by or on behalf of the applicant/consultant. 0 Office concurs with data sheets/delineation report. ❑Office does not concur with data sheets/delineation report. ❑ Data sheets prepared by the Corps: . O Corps navigable waters'study: . ® u.s.Geological Survey Hydrologic Atlas: . ❑ USGS NHD data. ® USGS 8 and 12 digit HUC maps. ® U.S.Geological Survey map(s).Cite scale&quad name: 1:?lwlu Quad \hrp. O USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Survey.Citation: ❑ National wetlands inventory map(s). Cite name: . ❑ State/Local wetland inventory map(s): . ❑ FEMA/FIRM maps: . ❑ 100-year Floodplain Elevation is: (National Geodectic Vertical Datum of 1929) 0 Photographs:0 Aerial(Name&Date): . or 0 Other(Name&Date): . ❑ Previous determination(s). File no.and date of response letter: . ❑ Applicable/supporting case law: Rapnno,and (wnrabclI caw,. ❑ Applicable/supporting scientific literature: . ❑ Other information(please specify): . B. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS TO SUPPORT JD: • • 3 NOTIFICATION OF ADMINSTIt 4E APP,.MAIiOPTIONS AND PROCESS AND REQUEST FOR APPEAL Applicant: I File Number: Date: Attached is: See Section below INITIAL PROFFERED PERMIT (Standard Permit or Letter of permission) A 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 be found at http://usace.army.mil/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 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. • 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 13 below. • B: 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 days 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 • approved JD (which may be appealed), by contacting the Corps district for further instruction. Also you may provide new information for further consideration by the Corps to reevaluate the JD. SECTION II - REQUEST FOR APPEAL or OBJECTIONS TO AN INITIAL PROFFERED PERMIT REASONS FOR APPEAL OR OBJECTIONS: (Describe your reasons for appealing the decision or your objections to an initial proffered permit in clear concise statements. You may attach additional information to this form to clarify where your reasons bjections are addressed in the administrative record.)• • 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 'e of any site investigation,and will have the opportunity to participate in all site investigations. • Administrative Appeal Process for Approved Jurisdictional Determinations District issues approved 0 Jurisdictional Determination(JD) to applicant/landowner with NAP. Approved JD valid Does applicantlandowner for 5 years. Yes accept approved JD? No Max.60 days District makes new approved JD. PpplicanlAantlawner Yes provides new information? No Applicant decides to appeal approved JD. Applicant submits RFA to division engineer within 60 days of date of NAP. 1 Caps reviews RFA and notifies Max.30 • appellant within 30 days of receipt. days To continue with appeal process,appellant must + revise RFA No See Appendix D. Yes Optional JD Appeals Meeting and/or NI site investigation. l 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, z with specific instnictions,for 4 Does the appeal have merit? reconsideration;appeal • 'Yes process completed. No District's decision is upheld; appeal process completed. Appendix C • DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS, OMAHA DISTRICT • DENVER REGULATORY OFFICE, 9307 S. Wadsworth Boulevard LITTL%TON, COLORADO E0128-6901 s,q;«,,;/ C January 11,2010 Ms.Brenda Mitchell Queen of the River Consultants, Inc. 13810 N. Street Longmont, CO 805©4 RE: LaFarge West,Inc.,Parso Mine,Minerals and Geology File M-2009-082 Corps File No.NWO-2007- 489-DEN-DEN Dear Ms. Mitchell: Reference is made to your J uary 6,2010 letter to my office concerning the above-mentioned project located in and near Section 3 ,T6N,R66W,Weld County,Colorado. This project has been review by Mr. Terry McKee of my office in accordance with Section 404 of the Clean Water Act under w "ch the U.S.Army Corps of Engineers regulates the discharge of dredged and fill material,and any ex avation activity associated with a dredge and fill project in waters of the United States. Based on the information pr ided,a Department of the Army(DA)Permit will not be required • for work at this site: Although a DA ermit will not be required for the project,this does not eliminate the requirement that other applicable federal, state,and local permits be obtained as needed. Please see the enclosed exce t from 33 CFR parts 328 of the Federal Register regarding excavation activities. My office req •res that the description outlined in this excerpt be strictly adhered to. Also,if my office receives info tion regarding any action or work that resulted in the placement of dredged or fill material,either tempo ary of permanent,below the ordinary high water mark of the pond or in the wetlands or the excavation oes not follow the description of the 33 CFR excerpt,the activity will be considered a violation of Sec o 404 of the Clean Water Act and you will be ordered to cease and desist the work At that time the elation will be referred to the Environmental Protection Agency for possible enforcement action that ay result in restoration of waters of the U.S.,which includes wetlands. Also,the landowner and y other person associated with the violation may be subject to enforcement action. If there are any questions cal Mr.Terry McKee of my office at(303)9794120 and reference Corps File No.NWO-2007-3489-D N. Sincerely, 47 Timothy T.Carey Chief,Denver Regulatory Office tm • Sec. 323.2 Definitions. S For the purpose of this part, ie following terms are defined: (a)The term waters of the nited States and all other terms relating to the geographic scope of jurisdiction are defin d at 33 CFR part 328. (b) The term lake means a tanding body of open water that occurs in a natural depression fed by one or more streams from which a stream may flow, that occurs due to the widening or natural block e or cutoff of a river or stream,or that occurs in an isolated natural depression tha is not a part of a surface river or stream. The term also includes a standing body of o water created by artificially blocking or restricting the flow of a river,stream, or ti area. As used in this regulation, the tcr,n does not include artificial lakes or ponds create by excavating and/or diking dry land to collect and retain water for such purposes as sto k watering, irrigation, settling basins, cooling,or rice growing. (c)The term dredged mate al means material that is excavated or dredged from waters of the United States. (d)(1)Except as provided b low in paragraph(d)(2), the term discharge of dredged material means any addition o dredged material into,including redeposit of dredged material other than incidental llback within, the waters of the United States. The term includes,but is not limited to, e following: (i)The addition of dre ed material to a specified discharge site located in waters of the United States; (ii) The runoff or over ow from a contained land or water disposal area; and (iii) Any addition, incl ding redeposit other than incidental fallback, of dredged material, including excavated aterial,into waters of the United States which is • incidental to any activity, incl ing mechanized landc]earing,ditching, channelization, or other excavation. (2)The term discharge f dredged material does not include the following: (i)Discharges of pollut is into waters of the United States resulting from the onshore subsequent processing of dredged material that is extracted for any commercial use(other than fill). These disc arges are subject to section 402 of the Clean Water Act even though the extraction and eposit of such material may require a permit from the Corps or applicable State secti n 404 program. (ii)Activities that invol e only the cutting or removing of vegetation above the ground(e.g., mowing, rotary c sting, and chainsawing) where the activity neither substantially disturbs the root s tem nor involves mechanized pushing, dragging,or other similar activities that red osit excavated soil material. (iii)Incidental fallback. (3) Section 404 authori ation is not required for the following: (i) Any incidental addit n including redeposit, of dredged material associated with any activity that does not ave or would not have the effect of destroying or degrading an area of waters of e United States as defined in paragraphs (d)(4)and • ,y1 ti (d)(5) of this section; howeve , this exception does not apply to any person preparing to undertake mechanized landcl 'ng,ditching, channelization and other excavation activity in a water of the Unit d States,which would result in a redeposit of dredged material, unless the person de onstrates to the satisfaction of the Corps, or EPA as appropriate,prior to coalmen ng the activity involving the discharge, that the activity would not have the effect of d troying or degrading any area of waters of the United States, as defined in paragrap (d)(4)and(d)(5)of this section. The person proposing to undertake mechanized landcle g,ditching, channelization or other excavation activity bears the burden of demonstra ing that such activity would not destroy or degrade any area of waters of the United St tes. (ii)Incidental moveme t of dredged material occurring during normal dredging operations, defined as dredgin for navigation in navigable waters of the United States, as that term is defined in part 329 of this chapter, with proper authorization from the Congress and/or the Corps pur want to part 322 of this Chapter;however,this exception is not applicable to dredging a tivities in wetlands, as that term is defined at section 328.3 of this Chapter. (iii)Certain discharges, such as those associated with normal farming, silviculture, and ranching activ ties, are not prohibited by or otherwise subject to regulation under section 404. S e 33 CFR 323.4 for discharges that do not require permits. (4)For purposes of this ection,an activity associated with a discharge of dredged material destroys an area of wa ers of the United States if it alters the area in such a way that it would no longer be a wa r of the United States. Note: Unauthorized discharges • into waters of the United States do not eliminate Clean Water Act jurisdiction, even where such unauthorized disch ges have the effect of destroying waters of the United States. (5)For purposes of this ection,an activity associated with a discharge of dredged material degrades an area of wa ers of the United States if it has more than a de minimis (i.e.,inconsequential) effect on he area by causing an identifiable individual or cumulative adverse effect on an aquatic function. • w I rhi-mt Applegate • Group, Inc. January 6,2010 Ms. Sarah Reinsel,E.I.T. Division of Water Resources Office of the State Engineer 1313 Sherman Street, Suite 818 Denver,CO 80203 RE: Response to Comments regarding Lafarge West,Inc.'s Parsons Mine, DBMS File No.M-2009-082 located in Sections 25 and 36,T6N,R67W and Sections 30 and 31,T6N,R66W,6i"PM in Weld County Dear Sarah: This letter is in response to your conditions and comments to Lafarge West, Inc.'s Division of • Reclamation, Mining and Safety (DRMS) Permit Application for the Parsons Mine submitted in a letter dated November 9, 2009 to Jared Ebert of the DRMS. The conditions and comments outlined in your November 9,2009 letter are addressed below. Conditions for Approval Condition 1: The proposed operation will consume ground water by: evaporation,dust control, reclamation,and water removed in the mining product. Prior to initiation of these uses of ground water, the applicant will need to obtain a well permit, an approved substitute water supply plan(SWSP)or decreed plan for augmentation. Response 1: A SWSP providing adequate replacements for depletions will be submitted to the SEO approximately nine months prior to the initiation of mining. Lafarge will obtain an approved SWSP by the SRO before consuming water within the permit boundary. Lafarge will also obtain an approved gravel pit well permit by the SEO prior to exposing groundwater. Condition 2: Prior to approving a well permit,the applicant must conduct a field inspection of the site and document the locations of all wells within 600 feet of the permit area. The applicant must then obtain a waiver of objection from all well owners within 600 feet of the permit area or request a hearing before the State Engineer. • Response 2: A 600 foot spacing analysis and field inspection will be completed to identify wells within 600 feet of the exposed surface area at the Parsons Mine. The 600- 1499 West 120th Avenue,Suite 200 (303)452-6611 • Fax(303) 452-2759 Denver, Colorado 80234-2759 www.apptegategroup.com Mr.Sarah Reinsel Re:Parsons Mine DRMS Permit Comments January 6, 2010 Page2of3 • foot spacing analysis and field inspection will be submitted to the SEO with the well permit application. Lafarge will obtain well waivers for any well owner within 600 feet or will request a hearing if required. Condition 3: If storm water is contained on-site, it must infiltrate into the ground or be released to the natural stream system within 72 hours, or all work must cease until a SWSP or augmentation plan approved by water court is obtained. Response 3: Storm water collected in the mine cells will be pumped to the Cache la Poudre River via the dewatering system with 72 hours. Comments: The applicant has estimated annual water consumption at the site to be 7 acre-feet (AF) for evaporative losses, 22.1 AF for water retained in the mined product, and 24.1 AF for dust control. The total estimated consumptive use for the site is 28.5 AF per year during mining operations. After mining, the site will be reclaimed with 8 unlined ponds totaling 60 acres. The consumptive use associated with these ponds is estimated to be 177.2 AF per year. The applicant has indicated plans to obtain a SWSP prior to the start of mining, and a plan for augmentation three years prior to the completion of mining. No groundwater shall be exposed • by this operation until such a SWSP has been approved by the SEO or plan for augmentation has been approved by water court. Please note that the creation of wetlands causes depletions to the stream system through evaporation from the water surface and the consumptive use of water by plant life. If wetlands mitigation exceeds a ratio of 1:1, the steam system must be compensated for these depletions in time,place and amount through a court approved augmentation plan or a SEO approved SWSP. Note to Comments: The SWSP for Parsons Mine will outline the operation of the plan to replace all out-of-priority depletions associated with mining. Lafarge will obtain an approved SWSP and well permit through the SEO before the commencement of mining. Please note the dust control will be 20 AF per year for a total operational loss of 24.1 AF as submitted in the DRMS Application Exhibit G. Lafarge owns 12 Whitney Ditch shares historically used on the property and 8.5 Box Elder Ditch shares in this reach of the Cache la Poudre River. These could be used as future sources of augmentation water during mining or reclamation. The replacement source and schedule will be summarized in the SWSP and will be stcient to replace depletions created at the site. An augmentation plan will be filed in water court three years prior to the end of mining to replace long-term depletions from the unlined lakes. • I Ms.Sarah Reinsel Re:Parsons Mine DRMS Permit Comments January 6, 2010 Page 3 of 3 • Lafarge acknowledges the requirement to replace wetland depletions and will include this in the SWSP if required. This completes the responses to your conditions and concerns for the Parsons Mine DRMS Application. If you have any questions regarding these responses or would like additional information,please contact me at(303)452-6611 ext. 8599 or sirasartori@applegategroup.com. Cordially, Applegate Group, Inc. Sira Sartori Water Resource Specialist • SWS/ta cc: Anne Johnson,Lafarge West,Inc. • Pam Hora,Tetra Tech Jennifer Vecchi,Vecchi&Associates,LLC Jared Ebert,Division of Reclamation,Mining and Safety AG File No. 05-105 N:\05105 Lafarge Water Planning\Disciplines(Teehnieal)\Water Rights\Parsons Propert)\DRMS Adequacy Revicw\Div of Wat Res Response to DRMS 01.06.10.doc S • Attachment G-1 Lafarge West, Inc.— Parsons Mine Groundwater Monitoring and Mitigation Plan PURPOSE This Groundwater Monitoring and Mitigation Plan is prepared as part of Lafarge's application to the Colorado Division of Reclamation, Mining and Safety (DRMS) for a permit for the"Parsons Mine" in Weld County, Colorado. This plan presents the methods and locations for monitoring of groundwater during gravel mining and site reclamation activities. Although adverse impacts to groundwater are not anticipated as a result of Lafarge's activities at the Parsons Mine, this plan also addresses how any adverse effects to groundwater would be mitigated, should they occur. Lafarge will submit a Temporary Substitute Water Supply Plan to the State Engineer's Office for approval. The temporary substitute supply plan is designed to protect senior vested water rights and mitigate potential depletions of flows in adjacent waterways. BACKGROUND • The proposed Parsons Mine is located in Weld County, Colorado, near the Town of Windsor. The site occupies approximately 381 acres, which includes portions of Sections 30 and 31, Township 6 North, Range 66 West, and portions of Sections 25 and 36, Township 6 North, Range 67 west (Figure 1). The Cache la Poudre River flows through the southern portion of the site in a west to east direction. Several small ponds exist in the middle portion of the site. On the adjacent property to the east and southeast of the site, Hall Irwin Construction Company mines sand and gravel from their"Firestein Pit." Dewatering flows are discharged to the Cache la Poudre River. Several mine reclamation ponds also exist to the east and southeast of the site, with the largest being the Siebring Reservoir. These ponds help mitigate potential impacts to groundwater users to the east and southeast of their property. Sand and gravel will be extracted by the "dry" mining method. That is, mine cells will be dewatered using a perimeter drain to facilitate extraction of the gravel. The actual mining limits are anticipated to cover approximately 189 acres and the available gravel resource is anticipated to be mined for approximately 20 years; however, the rate of mining and overall life of the mine is dependent upon demand and market conditions. A processing plant will be built on-site to process resource materials from the mine. The reclamation plan for the mine includes several unlined ponds that will be sourced with groundwater inflow. • Lafarge West,Inc.—Parsons Mine 1 Groundwater Monitoring and Mitigation Plan The dewatering system would discharge to the Cache la Poudre River. Dewatering of the • mine would lower the groundwater levels to a limited extent in the surrounding alluvial aquifer. Effects on groundwater levels are projected to be limited in extent due to natural and manmade hydrologic and hydrogeologic characteristics and boundaries, principally including the transmissive nature of the alluvial aquifer, the Cache la Poudre River system, and the mining operation and reclamation ponds on the adjacent property. Results of groundwater flow modeling(described below) indicate that the Parson Mine should not have any significant adverse effects on groundwater uses in the adjacent areas (Attachment G-2). Note that the groundwater modeling evaluation in Attachment G-2 was prepared as part of an earlier submittal to the DRMS that was subsequently withdrawn. It remains presented in its original form but additional interpretations of the modeling results, in response to questions and feedback from the DRMS, are included below as part of this document. Historic Use The site has been managed for agricultural uses (i.e., farming and grazing) and oil and gas production. There are irrigated alfalfa and corn fields and non-irrigated hay and wheat fields within the area of the site and surroundings. There is an adjacent active sand and gravel mine located to the east of the site that has been operated by Hall-Irwin Construction Company since 1996 (Firestein Pit; DMG Permit#M-1996-060). Sand and gravel have also been extracted southeast of the site, where reclamation has included several ponds/reservoirs. • Monitoring Well Installation In April 2007, twelve (12)monitoring wells were installed around the perimeter of the site as shown in Figure 2. In September 2009 and in response to feedback from the DRMS, two additional monitoring wells (MW-13 and MW-14) were installed further enhance the ability to monitor potential effects on riparian vegetation along the Cache la Poudre River. The monitoring wells were installed outside the limits of contemplated mining, but within the proposed permit boundary, so that groundwater levels can be monitored during and after mining. The monitoring wells were constructed of 2-inch Schedule 40 PVC casing and screen. Silica sand was placed from approximately two feet above the top of the screen to the bottom of the borehole (bedrock). Above the silica sand, a bentonite seal was placed in the borehole annulus to restrict infiltration of surface water. Each of the monitoring wells was finished at the surface with a locking, aboveground, steel protective casing set in concrete. Additional details of the monitoring well installations are provided in Table 1. Monitoring well permits from the Office of the State Engineer, Colorado Division of Water Resources, are included in this attachment along with the borehole logs and well completion information. The objectives of the well installation and monitoring program are to monitor the current groundwater conditions and to provide a basis for assessing potential effects to groundwater levels during and after the proposed mining. Some of the wells are located to also monitor • Lafarge West, Inc.—Parsons Mine 2 Groundwater Monitoring and Mitigation Plan • for potential effects on cottonwood trees and other riparian vegetation along the Cache la Poudre River corridor. Through the well monitoring program, pre-mining groundwater elevations, flow patterns across the property, and seasonal fluctuations will be documented. Well Inventory A well inventory for the site and adjacent areas was conducted to identify wells near the project. The inventory included a review of the following records: a) Well records (Registered Wells) on file with the Colorado Department of Natural Resources, Office of the State Engineer(SEO); and b) Reported well records from Environmental Data Resources Inc. (EDR)— (EnviroGroup, 2007). Based on groundwater modeling results (Attachment G-2), the primary focus area for well records encompassed a radius of 0.5 miles (2,640 feet) from the property boundary. This radius was selected due the fact that simulated drawdowns from mine dewatering were less than about 1.5 feet outside this radius. The records search indicated that there are five permitted wells within 0.5 miles of the mine property (Table 2 and Figure 2). Lafarge has completed a survey of these wells and well owners to confirm the well locations and provide well owners the opportunity to have their • well(s) included in the monitoring program. SEO requires a 600-foot well spacing agreement statement from the well owners who have wells within 600 feet, at least six months prior to the commencement of mining of a relevant phase. The records search indicated only one permitted well within 600 feet of the proposed permit boundary. This well, identified below, is approximately 1000 feet from the closest proposed mine excavation. Permit: 51859 Owner: Ed Orr 826 9'h Street Greeley, CO 80631 Use: Irrigation (currently not in use) Location: NW% SW'% Sec 31, 6N 66W The Parsons Mine is not expected to have any significant effects on this well due to the following: a) Primary mining/dewatering activities near the well are located north of the Cache la Poudre River and the well is located south of the river. b) Mining activities south of Cache la Poudre River are principally isolated from this well by existing water storage reservoirs and the river itself due to its meander • pattern. Lafarge West,Inc.—Parsons Mine 3 Groundwater Monitoring and Mitigation Plan c) Due to recharges from the Cache la Poudre River and nearby reservoirs groundwater • modeling indicates drawdowns at the well location would be less than 2 feet. Four residences were identified adjacent to the proposed Parsons Mine. However, these homes receive municipal drinking water from the North Weld County Water District and do not have wells registered for other uses. Modeling A numerical groundwater flow model was constructed of the site and surrounding areas to assess the potential impacts that the mine operation may have on groundwater levels (Attachment G-2). The U.S. Geological Survey's groundwater simulation code MODFLOW (McDonald and Harbaugh, 1988) was used for the modeling. The thickness of saturated alluvial sediments within the proposed mine site ranges from approximately 10 to 30 feet. The typical groundwater flow direction is to the east-southeast toward the Cache la Poudre River system. The groundwater flow directions and gradients can be expected to vary locally and seasonally due to changing irrigation patterns and other mining operations. The water table generally represents a subdued replica of the ground surface. The natural terrace that runs generally east-west through the northern portion of the site has a significant effect on groundwater flow gradients. Gradients are relatively low north of the crest of the terrace and in the river valley below the terrace, but are steep across the terrace, consistent with the ground surface. • As shown in Table 2 and Figure 2, the records search indicated that five permitted wells are located within 0.5 miles of the mine property. Results of the groundwater flow model indicate that the Parsons mining operation would not significantly affect (i.e., create a drawdown of more than 2 feet) any of the identified well locations. Groundwater modeling indicates that several feet of drawdown could occur in the vicinity of the Jones Ditch. However, based on groundwater measurements in nearby monitoring well MW-11, groundwater levels are well below the ditch and it does not appear that the ditch is in direct contact with the groundwater table. If direct hydraulic connection does occur due to leakage, calculations indicate that ditch losses induced by dewatering may be in range of approximately 0.1 cfs. Mitigation of any such losses is addressed in the mitigation section below. The modeling also indicates that minor drawdowns could occur beneath adjacent agricultural lands. Due to the depths to water, the only areas of potential concern for sub- irrigated lands include those within the Cache la Poudre River floodplain or bottom lands. Typical depths to water below ground surface (bgs) in groundwater monitoring wells located adjacent to the river(MW-07, MW-08 and MW-10) range from approximately 5 to 7 feet. Typical depths to water bgs in wells located in the river bottom but at greater distance from the river(MW-09, MW-11, and MW-12 range from 4 to 9 feet. All farmlands located adjacent to the mine and within the river bottom lands are currently • Lafarge West,Inc.—Parsons Mine 4 Groundwater Monitoring and Mitigation Plan sprinkler or ditch irrigated. The only adjacent land where alfalfa crops are located is south of the mine property. Typical depths to water bgs in wells located adjacent to this area (MW-09 and MW-11) range from 7 to 9 feet. Due to the combination of depth to water and reliance on ditch irrigation, there appears to be little if any reliance on sub-irrigation. Lafarge believes that the proposed monitoring and mitigation plans will allow for identification and avoidance of impacts. MONITORING AND MANAGEMENT Groundwater Monitoring Fourteen monitoring wells were installed around the perimeter of the site as shown in Figure 2. Groundwater level monitoring began in April 2007. Monitoring was conducted bi-monthly for the first year. Since then, monitoring has been and will continue to be conducted on a quarterly basis to establish a site-wide baseline prior to mining. Table 3 and Figure 3 provide the existing groundwater level measurement data for the site monitoring wells, which likely captures the majority of the annual range in water level fluctuations. Once mining begins, monitoring will be conducted on a monthly basis until a quasi-steady state condition is reached (during initial dewatering), and on a quarterly basis thereafter until one year after reclamation is complete. In addition, wells near river corridor areas • adjacent to active mining phases will be monitored monthly during the growing season. Owners of wells within 0.5 miles have been contacted to obtain and document relevant well information and provide an opportunity for including their well(s) in the monitoring program. The following summarizes the results of the survey: Permit No. Status 114611 Owner uses only for minimal livestock watering. Active mining by others directly adjacent to property without adverse effects, so owner not concerned or interested in having well monitored. Permit No. Status 4189 Well used for periodic irrigation of 5 acres and trees. Owner requests monitoring, to be initiated when well is made accessible (pending). 4446 Well used for crop irrigation and located approx. 3/8 mile from proposed mine excavations. Owner requests inclusion in routine monitoring, which was initiated in October 2007 (Table 3). 10847 Same as above • Lafarge West, Inc.—Parsons Mine 5 Groundwater Monitoring and Mitigation Plan 51859 Owner states that well has not been in service for at least • several years, but may be used in the future for irrigation. Owner agrees that well would not likely be impacted, but requests baseline monitoring. Monitoring was initiated in February 2008 (Table 3). Prior to mining, to establish a baseline, Lafarge will measure water levels in the applicable private wells bi-monthly to quarterly, or as access is provided. After mining begins, and as access is provided, Lafarge will attempt to measure water levels in the applicable wells quarterly, until one year after mining. Measurements may not be recorded for wells that are actively pumping for irrigation or that have been significantly affected by recent irrigation. Reporting Prior to mining, Lafarge will prepare and submit a report on baseline groundwater levels, utilizing data from the 14 existing monitoring wells and any other private wells included in the monitoring program. Thereafter, groundwater monitoring data will be submitted quarterly to the DRMS as well as with the annual progress report submitted to the DRMS and copied to the Weld County Department of Planning Services. If Lafarge receives a complaint from a well owner, Lafarge will submit their groundwater monitoring data to the DRMS in accordance with the mitigation plan below. A copy will also be provided to the Weld County Department of Planning Services. Wells Within 600 Feet • As discussed above, there is one permitted irrigation well within 600 feet of the proposed permit boundary. Lafarge will attempt to obtain a 600-foot well spacing agreement statement from the well owner at least six months prior to the commencement of the relevant mining phase. MITIGATION Monitoring data will be used to help identify potential changes in alluvial groundwater flows or elevations associated with mining and reclamation activities. Baseline data collected from the monitoring program will provide a range of water levels associated with pre-mining groundwater conditions. Experience at other sand and gravel mine sites in similar geologic settings, and baseline monitoring conducted to date, indicates that groundwater levels tend to fluctuate up to several feet per year, being highest in the summer and lowest in the winter and early spring. Due to normal seasonal fluctuations, Lafarge proposes to define the trigger point for potential mitigation procedures as 2 feet of drawdown relative to historic conditions. The amount of drawdown relative to the mitigation trigger point would be calculated and • Lafarge West, Inc.—Parsons Mine 6 Groundwater Monitoring and Mitigation Plan • assessed relative to one standard deviation from the mean of measurements collected during the applicable season. In addition, wells in river corridor areas adjacent to active mining phases will be monitored monthly during the growing season. If monitoring indicates a drop of 1 foot below the historic baseline or if abnormal vegetation stress is otherwise noticed, dewatering flows or a portion thereof will be directed into established wetland areas and the riparian corridor to maintain the vegetation. In addition to the river corridor, a pond and associated wetlands are located just south of the Phase 2 mining area and immediately south of MW-4. MW-4 will be monitored monthly during Phase 2 mining operations. If monitoring indicates a drop of 1 foot below the historic baseline or if abnormal vegetation stress or pond levels are otherwise noticed, dewatering flows or a portion thereof will be directed into established wetland areas and/or the pond. Groundwater monitoring and modeling indicate that dewatering operations would not have a significant effect on flows in the Jones Ditch. However, Lafarge will enter into an agreement with the Jones Ditch Company that allows for dewatering water to be returned to the ditch to make up losses. This agreement will be in place prior to dewatering and mining south of the Cache la Poudre River. If such an agreement cannot be reached, Lafarge will first submit and obtain approval of a Technical Revision proving that the mining and • dewatering operation south of the Cache la Poudre River will not adversely impact the Jones Ditch. Groundwater modeling (Attachment G-2) indicates that there should be no significant effect on surrounding groundwater wells due to the Parsons mining operation. If Lafarge receives a complaint from a well owner, Lafarge will initiate an evaluation of the cause and notify the DRMS immediately (within 24 hours). After the DRMS has been notified, Lafarge will review the available data and information and submit a report to the DRMS within 30 days. To the extent practicable, the report will identify the extent of potential or actual impacts associated with the changes. The evaluation will include discussions with any well owner who has contacted Lafarge regarding a concern and review of available data from the well and vicinity to evaluate the cause of any changes (e.g., seasonal variations, climate, mining by Lafarge, mining by others, or other factors). Lafarge would also enlist the service of a contract professional hydrogeologic consultant to provide an opinion and meet with the Division to discuss the findings. If the claim cannot be resolved with this information, Lafarge would fund the service of a 3rd party consultant agreeable to the Division to render a separate opinion. If Lafarge's mining or reclamation activities are determined to be a significant contributing factor that has or may create adverse impacts, the mining-associated impacts will be addressed to the satisfaction of the DRMS. • Lafarge West, Inc.—Parsons Mine 7 Groundwater Monitoring and Mitigation Plan An initial temporary mitigation measure (for cases in which Lafarge's operation is a suspected cause) may entail providing an alternative water supply that meets the documented historic well production, or need, until further investigation can be conducted to determine if the well condition is due to Lafarge's mining operation. If, after review, the DRMS determines that the impact on a well, for which temporary mitigation has been initiated, is not a result of Lafarge's activities, or is not solely a result of Lafarge's activities, then Lafarge shall reduce or cease mitigation accordingly with the approval of the DRMS. Mitigation measures, divided into temporary and long term, may include, but are not limited to: Temporary: • Compensation for well owner to use their existing treated water system to replace the well production loss; • Provide a water tank and deliver water as necessary to meet documented historic well production or need; • Other means acceptable to both the well owner and Lafarge. Long-Term: • Cleaning a well to improve efficiency. • Providing an alternative source of water or purchasing additional water to support historic well use in terms of water quantity and quality. If needed, water quality • parameters will be checked in affected wells to ensure alternative sources support the historic use. • Modifying a well to operate under lower groundwater conditions. This could include deepening existing wells or lowering the pumps. All work would be done at Lafarge's expense with the exception of replacing equipment that was nonfunctional prior to the impact. • If existing wells cannot be retrofitted or repaired, replacing the impacted well with a new well. • Providing groundwater injection/recharge to eliminate or reduce offsite impacts. If mining near the Cache la Poudre River results in stress to cottonwood or other riparian trees, Lafarge will mitigate the effect by using dewatering discharges or other water sources from decreed rights to irrigate the trees. Along with review of groundwater level monitoring data, trees in the vicinity of active mining and/or dewatering will be observed visually once a month to monitor for vegetative stress. Stress conditions will be gauged relative to other trees along the river in areas not subject to potential effects on groundwater levels due to mining. If a groundwater mitigation action is required, Lafarge will notify Weld County and the DRMS of the condition, action taken, and result. • Lafarge West,Inc.—Parsons Mine 8 Groundwater Monitoring and Mitigation Plan • REFERENCES EnviroGroup Limited, 2007. "Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Report, Parsons Mine Site, Colorado",prepared for Lafarge North America, August 2007. McDonald, M.G., and A.W. Harbaugh, 1988. "A Modular Three-Dimensional Finite- Difference Ground-Water Flow Model," Book 6, Chapter Al, Techniques of Water- Resources Investigations of the United States Geological Survey. 41 I Lafarge West,Inc.—Parsons Mine 9 Groundwater Monitoring and Mitigation Plan TETRA TECH November 16, 2009 Ms. Janet Carter Traffic Engineer Weld County Public Works 111 1 H Street Greeley, CO 80632-0758 Re: WCR 25 Realignment Exhibit for Parsons Mine Offyite Road Improvements; Tetra Tech Job No. 133-4137-029 Dear Ms. Carter: As part of the Parsons Mine roadway improvement project, Tetra Tech, on behalf of Lafarge West, Inc., is submitting the attached conceptual exhibit of the proposed realignment of WCR 25 for your approval. After a meeting with the adjacent property owner(Lisa Loos) on October I, 2009, it was decided that the following realignment would help to alleviate the sight of truck traffic as well as the associated sound pollution. • The realignment has an assumed design speed of 35 mph for the proposed paved section of road. Stockpile berms have been placed on the west side of the road, and have been sized according to the required sight distances provided in the AASIITO Geometric Design of Highwtry and Streets. Additionally, the warranted traffic lanes have been provided, including a right turn deceleration lane onto east-bound WCR 64.5. The proposed design for WCR 64.5 has not been shown on this drawing, but will conform to the design of"Alternative#2,"per Weld County's recommendation in their October 26th memo. Please feel free to contact me with any questions regarding this application at 303.772.5282 or at stevc.seiscione0?tetratcch.com. Sincerely, TETRA TECH Steve E. Sciseione, ELT., LEED® AP Design Engineer Attachment cc: Anne Johnson, Lafarge • • . • • • .. . . . . 11:11:sthcrll.cttersCoveri.etter-Welt2>Rea lignnxnt•I3NOV2009.4 • .,.mil...eo,..wo.O.. ••.— III IIi .—R� ... * f11(1Vd3ON0O)1N3WNOI1V38 iI r _ 4Z MOM A21V I0d1131 X =_ M' N.rruaeWmxo ow.. / walV'll NO3RI d WOE rY X r H331 V11131 I Tg1. m.•" er..,r�wo...a . dj 4IIII A k . ., , , 1 ill . 3 .Y i il I . ,n.2.. i {. I Oz Es U '1 , ' y1! _ ; L.o0 a . - avers) `.t , A ! ',, 8 y ia '\ 1 h1 1 i/ If Y• illi� 40: '• f U lif 1 / r It/.:fl: .:.1 ...... .... - E i 1' • '1 J i �M ='L gz> w .i:, 0 O �Zy a �6� en Z 1 ;f i5 I a� ii f , .,.e. I ter..- - .---�--- __..-'-___`_- _- A ! / LLU co • w I1I I- 0 z : • o maw awww wow maw.otre.,...ow,o.o..w...ow ow.,......o ra.....:....,,.....o,,,.,.01..4.+.0 e,...,.....a, MN R.OW...,a.„....yo,. I 1111 1 m s"rwic I1,6............“4. @�₹ (1vnLd3o NOD)1N3WN�JI1V II .1 p�E $Z 80M AZJp2JOdW31 { �a nt wrr�,r�,o�w,e,. , na VIS11OmMo7 a+Fn KO. Oil i HJ31 Yf11131 © ... .o.�..s..e;.,o�i . •rrV pi.App}y•I,vq�- "7,......'"4.7",....'"..:' it III 4 A 1 • i Id I 1 yyyp ./.1.0111.21/7. 1 13— .4..Y1I } ; ! t ! 6 1 i 1 I Y CC ! '1 ,�.L` as I I • _ , ` `11v1nrela :I.i , ttl •I • _ 11 it y I. • • I / Irm, �~ I A�.. CC / .‘"/ ,ice Q Z U Y t I'7 1 W L I1 ,I li •• l` •-• • I I j i Si ' / ..._.) 1 , • 1 I I '. 1 1 - ci i r' I t.I - 1 ii 1 - F § ' I g6 I t BEN Is.,.. 7 {Z • 1.1 I a IP co w H O Z Kim Ogle oon)m: Jennifer Vecchi [vecchiassociates@comcast.netj t: Tuesday, November 03, 2009 9:27 AM : Kim Ogle Cc: Anne.Johnson@lafarge-na.com; David Bauer; Clayton D. Kimmi; Janet Carter Subject: RE: Lafarge - Parsons Mine Hi Kim, The response to your questions is outlined below: 1. We are currently working on a conceptual sketch for the road re-alignment to accommodate the Loos's concerns. We anticipate submitting a sketch for County review shortly. We will copy you on all correspondence with Public Works. 2. The discussion points brought forth by Public Works have been addressed in the DRMS submittal and also in the alternative access designs that were previously submitted to Public Works. Once the additional sketch showing the re-alignment of CR 25 is submitted,County staff will have all of the information that they requested. 3. Yes, Lafarge is on a timeline to move forward on February 2, 2010. The DRMS permit was submitted on October 16th to the State and a copy was delivered to Weld County Public Works the same day. We have received notice from Jared Ebert at the DRMS that our application was deemed complete and is proceeding through the review process. Please contact me if further clarification is needed. Thank you. Ast regards, nifer From: Kim Ogle[mailto:kogle@co.weld.co.usj Sent:Tuesday, November 03, 2009 6:38 AM To:'Anne.Johnson@lafarge-na.com' Cc: David Bauer; Clayton D. Kimmi;Janet Carter;vecchiassociates@comcast.net Subject: Lafarge-Parsons Mine Anne Attached is the staff Memorandum requesting a continuance until February 2,2010 for the Planning Commission hearing. As a follow-up to the more recent discussions,what is the current status of the road alignment issue—CR 25 and CR 64.5? I have not been copied on correspondence and/or discussions. Have drawings been submitted to PW for review and comment? Also, have the discussion points brought forth by Public Works(slope stability,access, accel- decel lanes and tapers, expansion of right-of-way) been addressed?And, in your opinion is Lafarge on a timeline to be able to move forward on February 2, 2010? Thanks, Kim KIM OGLE WELD COUNTY PLANNING SERVICES - GREELEY OFFICE 918 TENTH STREET I GREELEY CO 80631 I KOGLE@CO,WELD.CO.US T. 970.356.4000 x 3549 I F 970 304 6498 I C: 970.302.2875 • 1 MATCHLINE#1-SEE ABOVE I O Z I X1 '5- A.. • SI ti m 11 y�.. ry ! h 'I I II b5 � 7� z I I ,I - � EQ. 4 '1 o v 4, _ _ O \` • mz i� `� WGR 26 A F H. g�II 1 mo- ..Y 1 sN- q I� 1 1 III 1 4 I� ++�'r*'ArMf r i I ., a v �\ iMt I 3 II , a r�4ir.� . tg..: A I F 4I OS ;10 p,� 1 _�.' .M �'i� � •... . R11 1 ai Ne' s � m I z I'aft I II >• _ — z H A o w ? I n I I1 l i g xi R. m . , II Ii nomawie iHI Iii II,I i l$mI11' 1 D I �-(?» MATCHLINE#1-SEE BELOW • ip m wP.r. 'a �4 0 TETRA TECH a X NECONFOLEXH - - VI, a I CONCEPTUAL EXHIBITt an�� 5 (WCR 64.6) - -- - _ W'd's.er.'nun OIL m,a 1'LOOdA'W MASAI ILv,N_ AlAzltunabM, CAlat AMCM•6AAMTAt 02S 20 AO.O•ANo DWG tArout;Alt 0.7LL)! µ3ZRMM&ANONI•AUAKAA &*IIY a MATCHLINE #1 - SEE ABOVE I' I o D : i I' i z T I '_I • 0 1 ' 3 I ' n i 1 i ;i4 I zl n t I !n XJ .z I' I, it li Li Z ls a U7 I 14 1 NJ'1 m - C li : I M 11 .+�I Z Q i I II�t `` I m I. sai Ili N le O c4 i - 11 c� Q° `' I in II I �i K ' :}'+JO 'Eli DO n III 1 ..3) { fir 25 •1 1 r r 4. • r� s -. g I I I . C T I Ia . 4,,446c h II ,` ' • q I I fl:e I { t- rbillmb -ill % 1 A r II r • % I . I € III Z \ 1 \ :: -"tl i II Q g II 1 • S< 1 l al 1 o I 1 4. I asira 0 O . I ' 1 Z :l I 1 Z 1 r i Ql "Go_ .d ' • n 1 1 le 11 n i \ Ia • sm. D I� II Iip _ , a Ea I I :A + � ♦ �I`A pg ,I� I Sat - or O x •, 11 1 f 1 • l 1 --. ^ ,�' 0 • • m I W la Ili M I I I , z I I >: , P it, n. 1 1 I 73 II I i 'i • I I 1 I 'tZ a to-2.i..''' I' A0 ani . r uOA DAN*Oa '1. _ - • pj9A�!I/I644Y 301i•ML unit Il: 1 �� 1 I 4IIt ` I 1 I I 14 1 t s) I T I Ii 1 1 1I I 1 U , I Q 11 L_i 1 . w t �� 1 G 1 Y Ii ,_.... Ir .mil. ... a I If • W '' q tRNFWA. 4C 11 ,I r 1 II 1I I �s II1 I $ n-K, - MATCHLINE #1 - SEE • Men I N'AAAAWK'.PC us DATE Ow`ACM►NON A` m ? III 44 tic WALOCtltMt't CO • 063401 WIN. NISSAA CII 1N TETRA TECH Xaf PARSONS MINI ICIO i; N� I ANE CON"IGIRtAiIUN 9 .....n+lrw:n':rn CONCEPTUAL EXHIBIT boA � > ,I (WCR 64.5) .. , g os N.. ' tt.,tID 14 I: ffi Ftnf:t304 fr...,..- . rI • 0 VECCHI & ASSOCIATES, LLC uaanN aLnNNINc s oesieN Po Box 1 175 Longmont,Co 80502-1175 Phone 303-774-0173 Lax 303-774-0173 VecchiAssociates©comcast.net September 28, 2009 Mr. Kim Ogle, Planning Manager Weld County Department of Planning Services 918 10`h Street Greeley, CO 80631 RE: Responses to USR-1657 Conditions of Approval as Listed in the Special Review Permit,Administrative Review dated September 1, 2009 Dear Kim: This response letter addresses the September 1, 2009 Preliminary Special Review Permit Administrative Review for USR-1657 also referred to as Lafarge West Inc.'s Parsons Mine. • There are several items listed as Conditions of Approval prior to recording the plat that have been completed and could be removed from the list of conditions. In order to update your recommendation to the current status, please modify your recommendations as noted below. 1. Item I.B. - Completed and submitted to the County; please delete condition. 2. Item 1.C. - Completed and submitted to the County; please delete condition. 3. Item 1.D. - Remove all but the first two sentences. The items listed in the remaining sentences have been addressed and shown on the plans. 4. Item 1.F. —The 140 feet of right-of-way for O Street has been shown on the plans as conceptual alignment. Please modify this condition to only include the statements regarding setbacks and maintenance. 5. Item I.G. —Responses to the Public Works Memorandum's are attached. We are requesting that the Final Construction Plans for County Roads 25 and 64 ''A be required prior to commencement of operation due to the uncertainty of the timing of the County Road 64 'A curve improvements. 6. Item 1.J. - Completed and submitted to County; please delete condition. 7. Item 1.K. —Please modify the language in this condition to reflect the fact that the agreement with the Whitney Ditch Company may be for relocation of the ditch rather than a ditch crossing. 8. Item 1.M. 1. —Completed; please delete this item from Condition 1.M. 9. Item 1.M. 3. —Completed; please delete this item from Condition 1.M. 10. Item 1.M. 4. — Completed; please delete this item from Condition 1.M. 11. Item 1. M.5. —Completed; please delete this item from Condition 1.M. • 12. Item 1. M.6.—Completed; please delete this item from Condition I.M. 1VI Page2of2 1, September 28, 2009 Mr. Kim Ogle • 13. Item 1. M.7. —We addressed this item in the July 30, 2009 re-submittal cover letter; please delete this item from Condition 1.M. 14. Item 1. M.8 - Item addressed and a copy of correspondence to Windsor was submitted to the County with the July 30, 2009 re-submittal cover letter; please delete this item from Condition I.M. 15. Item 1.M.9.—Please modify this condition to reflect the fact that we are not proposing to take access off of CR 25 rather than 64%2. In addition, per Public Works' request, the turning radii we are using is 60' rather than the 24' you refer to in this condition. 16. Item 1.M.10. - Consistent with the previous item, this condition needs to change to reflect that the access will be onto County Road 25 instead of County Road 64 %2. 17. Item 1.M.12. —We are still working with Public Works, the Whitney Ditch Company, and impacted land owners regarding the road improvements along CR 25 and 64 %2 which will affect the Whitney Ditch Company. Therefore, we would ask that you modify this Condition to indicate that we need to work with the Whitney Ditch Company to provide an appropriately sized and located easement to accommodate their ditch. We are enclosing three copies of the revised USR-1657 plan set for your review. If you have any additional questions or comments, please feel free to contact me. Thank you. Sincerely, • VECCHI & ASSOCIATES, LLC --kL---- J7nmf r E. Vecchi, AICP Principal Attachments cc: Anne Johnson, Lafarge Pam Hora, Tetra Tech R:4137 029 Documents USR Review Comments and Responses Formal Application responses 9-28-09 response to Preliminary StaffRecommendation.doc V&A Lafarge Parsons USR_correspondence 9-25-09 Response to Preliminary Staff Recommendation JV 9-25-09 • rt• VECCHI &ASSOCIATES, LLC PBAN PI ANNINs a DES GN P O..Box 1175 Longmont,Co 80502-1175 Phone 303-774-0173 Fax 303-774-0173 VecchiAssociatesgcomcast.net September 28, 2009 Mr. Clay Kimmi, P.E., C.F.M., and Janet Carter, E.I., Weld County Public Works Department 1111 H Street P.O. Box 758 Greeley, CO 80632-0758 RE: Responses to USR-1657,Lafarge West, Inc.—Parsons Mine Public Works Comments dated August 7,2009 and September 15, 2009 Dear Clay and Janet: We received a copy of your memorandums dated August 7, 2009 and September 15, 2009 with comments pertaining to the USR-1657, Lafarge West, Inc.—Parsons Mine. Following is a summary of your comments followed by our response in italics. • AUGUST 7,2009 MEMORANDUM 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. This has been done consistent with your direction. 2. Show the floodway boundary from the 2003 Corps study on all drawings. This has been done consistent with your direction. 3. Show the base flood elevations from the 2003 Corps study on all drawings. Due to overlapping information, the base flood elevations have been shown only on sheet 2, 3, and 7. 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. The base flood elevations have been raised three feet from NGVD-29 to NA VD-88. 5. On Page 3 (Overall Extraction Plan) and Page 6 the symbol identifying the roadway material needs to be identified in the legend. This has been done consistent with your direction. 6. On Page 3 (Overall Extraction Plan) and Page 6 the WCR 64.5 improvements need to be shown. • This has been done consistent with your direction for the new access point at County Road 25 and added to page 4 as well. �7$ Page2of7 Mr. Clay Kimmi I. September 28, 2009 • 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. This has been done consistent with your direction. 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. This has been done consistent with your direction. 9. Structural details for the steel and concrete footings need to be shown. These will be added to the plans per your direction prior to recording the plat. 10. Page 6 needs a legend for the plant site detail. This has been done consistent with your direction. 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." • We modified this note to state: "Temporary stockpiles placed within the floodplain will be designed to withstand erosional forces associated with the 100-year flood. " 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." This has been done consistent with your direction. 13. The turning radii for the entrance need to be shown on the drawings. A 60'turn radius has been 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. The updated traffic study was submitted on September 24, 2009. 2. An updated slope stability study has not been submitted to Public Works for review. The updated slope stability study will be submitted in conjunction with the Division of Reclamation, Mining and Safety (DRMS) application to be submitted mid-October. A conference call with Allen Sorenson of the DRMS will be initiated to discuss. • ,I Page3of7 Mr. Clay Kimmi I. September 28, 2009 • 3. The applicant has not coordinated with Rich Hastings regarding the required Maintenance Agreements. Rich Hastings has been contacted to draft the initial agreement. 4. Public Works has not received a copy of the Structures Agreement that the applicant indicates is being reviewed by the County. A copy of the Structures Agreement was submitted on August 18, 2009 to the County. 5. An updated drainage report has not been submitted. A revised Preliminary Drainage Report was submitted on September 24, 2009 to the County. 6. The applicant has not coordinated with the County regarding the finalization of the realignment of WCR 25. Realignment of County Road 25 is shown on the map per County direction. 7. The applicant has not provided plans for the roadway improvements to WCR 64.5. We are proposing to move the site access to County Road 25. Plans for roadway improvements to County Road 25 and County Road 64 1/2 have been submitted to the County for review. They will be finalized prior to recording the plat. 8. An updated FHDP has not been submitted. • Per County staff, the FHDP does not need to be submitted until prior to recording the plat. SEPTEMBER 15,2009 MEMORANDUM 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. The speed limits have been adjusted in the Traffic Study per your direction. All work in the County Right-Of-Way will need a County ROW permit; and a traffic control plan if traffic will be impacted. Noted. 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. • Page 4 of 7 I Mr. Clay Kimmi I. September 28, 2009 • 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. Calculations have been provided; however, it should be noted that a 40 mph eastbound speed limit is proposed in the preferred alternative. 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. Lafarge West, Inc. has committed to extend the pavement through to the scale house/office area. This has been done consistent with your direction. 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. This has been done consistent with your direction. 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 Fargo West, Inc. agrees to dedicate 60 feet of right of way for the realignment of County Road 25 once the alignment has been finalized. These items have been addressed and incorporated into the preliminary design. 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. These items have been addressed and incorporated into the preliminary design. 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. The "O"Street alignment is identified on the maps. • 1 1 Page5of7 Mr. Clay Kimmi 0 September 28, 2009 • 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. We have shown the proposed improvements associated with our preferred alternative #1 on the plat map. C. The applicant has not coordinated with Rich Hastings regarding the required Maintenance Agreements. Rich Hastings has been contacted and it is our understanding that he is in the process of drafting an Agreement. 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. Noted. 2. The applicant shall be responsible for any damage to County Roads that occurs as a result of slope failures. Noted. 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. Noted. 4. No USR activities will be allowed until collateral is posted and or the improvements are completed and accepted. Noted. D. An updated slope stability study has not been submitted to Public Works for review. The updated slope stability study will be submitted to the DRMS as part the application submittal in mid- October 2009. A conference with Allen Sorenson of the DRMS staff is scheduled to discuss the status. 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. Noted. • 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 Page 6 of 7 Mr. Clay Kimmi I. September 28, 2009 S State. When the State finalizes the Slope Stability Study, please submit a revised Structures Agreement for review and comment. Noted. E. An updated FHDP has not been submitted. County Staff agreed at the August 18, 2009 meeting that the FHDP would not need to be submitted until prior to recording the plat. 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). Noted. 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. Noted. 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 of the type generally attributed to run-off rate and velocity increases, diversions, concentration and/or unplanned ponding of storm run-off. Noted. 4. No structures or buildings will be allowed in the floodway. Noted. 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. Noted. F. Public Works requests that the following comments be addressed and the appropriate submittals be made prior to the recording of the Plat. 1. Applicant shall address all redlined comments shown in the Preliminary Drainage Report. A revised Preliminary Drainage Report has been submitted to the County per the August 18°i meeting. • 1',I Page 7 of 7 Mr. Clay Kimmi September 28, 2009 • 2. A final drainage report has not been submitted. The Final Drainage Report will be submitted prior to the County Commissioner's Hearing. 3. A note stating"Weld County shall not be responsible for the maintenance of drainage related features."shall be added to the plat. This note has been added to the plat. 4. The site must take into consideration storm water capture/quantity and provide accordingly or best management practices. Noted. S. 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. Noted. Thank you for your consideration. Please contact me if you have any questions. Sincerely, VECC I& ASSOCIATES, L J fifer E. Vecchi,AICP Principal Attachments cc: Kim Ogle, Weld County Planning Anne Johnson, Lafarge Pam Hora, Tetra Tech R.4137.029 Documents USR.Resit,Comments and Responses Formal Application responses Public Works doc E V&A Lafarge_Parsons_Cotrapondence_9-29-09Reaponse to Public Works Memo ndums • C 1 Traffic Impact Study LAFARGE WEST PARSONS MINE Weld County, Colorado • Eugene G.Coppola, P.E. Nbor P.O.Box 630027 Littleton,CO 80163 303-792-2450 • Traffic Impact Study LAFARGE WEST PARSONS MINE SITE Weld County, Colorado Prepared For: • Lafarge North America 11409 Business Park Circle, # 200 Longmont, CO 80504 Prepared By: a,,"wirsulf Eugene G. Coppola, P.E., PTOE t• GEORGE 7,44. P. O. Box 630027 7�J�:P4&S ,°o�3. Littleton, CO 80163 ``?D 303-792-2450 *:D 15945 tilt* € -•N:� 2:O c. September 21, 2009 4:7,IHF Oot a,�a • . Table of Contents I. INTRODUCTION 1 II. AGENCY DISCUSSIONS 3 III. EXISTING CONDITIONS 3 A. Existing Road Network 3 B. Existing Traffic Conditions 4 C. Surrounding Land Uses 4 IV. FUTURE TRAFFIC CONDITIONS 4 A. Site Assumptions 4 B. Site Traffic 7 C. Trip Distribution 7 D. Background Traffic 9 E. Future Total Traffic 9 F. Future Roadway System 9 V. TRAFFIC IMPACTS 14 . A. Auxiliary Lanes and Traffic Controls 14 B. Future Operating Conditions (with Parsons Mine) 15 VI. DESIGN ISSUES 16 VII.CONCLUSIONS 17 • • List of Figures Figure 1 Vicinity Map 2 Figure 2 Current Traffic 5 Figure 3 Concept Plan 6 Figure 4 Site Traffic 8 Figure 5 Short-Term Background Traffic 10 Figure 6 Long-Term Background Traffic 11 Figure 7 Short-Term Total Traffic 12 Figure 8 Long-Term Total Traffic 13 Figure 9 Future Roadway Geometry 15 • • • I. INTRODUCTION Lafarge West, Inc. (Lafarge) is proposing a mining, processing, and recycling opera- tion in Weld County, Colorado. The site is located near County Road 25 (CR 25) along the south side of County Road 641/2 (CR 64'%) and is referred to as Parsons Mine. A vicinity map is presented in Figure 1. This report updates an earlier study for this site. It addresses staff comments on the earlier study and evaluates the currently proposed access and site trip distributions. This study contains the investigations and analyses typically contained in a full traffic study. Key steps undertaken as part of this study are defined below. • Obtain current traffic and roadway data in the immediate area of the site. • Define current traffic conditions to establish baselines. • • Determine site generated traffic and distribute this traffic to the nearby street system. • Estimate future traffic conditions. • Evaluate traffic operations with the proposed operation fully functional in the short- and long-term future. • Identify areas of potential deficiencies. • Recommend measures to mitigate the impact of site generated traffic as appropriate. • • 3 i 2 1 Cy " b y '' } • — -- _\.c.,,rty Rc N ,� 10 1i• 12 7 �_. 9 1 i 0 3000' 6000' II'' L 9. 1 $ —� 10 r J 11 t12 7 KO 8 N T County Rd 70 _ i _...1/ \ n RC 7 __._ cr 1/4.. O SCALE:1'=6000' -1 ' ,: _ h ° Y l:la_._ , 14 13 x 18 17 ' 16 1 I _ aP - . i t fir' �� ` Q ,• f. .. O .. - �St81e Fi 392 5` a �r♦*wsew�rtr.. .., : 23 PARSONS 9. �2• 20 21 ._., 2 ..2 . ( 1 1 i 21 , P".%. MINE , -, �: ( t oun Rd 66 ? iL._.�.�_ t' Eastman Paric�r C +� i T a _ I- N t i 4, IR ` •r� 28 27! 6 .,. ,i ;'64 1,2 St 29 28 _._1 2 1 f WINDSOR ,g w I ryRo --- a _4___.,..._... , 1 I t. ' QC. oun - ____ O \ ( RIVER rN t•w-``� {d f . 32 33 • 34 ' 135 0UO� ' 31 ! R u 32 .i 33 3 c, i Cu _f\ 36 i County Rz'',•. , CO \, , I g �. >l ._......_.1 ^ .. fir—•— iii. w I L ��\ t J n t • 'N 9th St 4 5 i J4 Zi v 1 6 --7:1,-,____...._ .4„,__..ti. _- •'', 11 u�-� . . . . ._ -.a r 25 vs Hw�34 feud YY_t �s ... .. 6 { L._l i : -;�0°� { GREELEY `L•—i • _ `�J- � I I ' ^ I 1 .`\ 41 i oo,, t US r. 34 / aun 5E `N 2otii St csi }_-. ..... t - x- yy a 'et CC 1 I 1 17 16 15 I 114 1; ' !,,713 �.I' 18 17 l r L—s.-.16 cc 8 3 itr� ,'---T.._._._---_j r._._.. _._._._._._' N zoo s r......-.....1 - 1 I i 1 I a 0 21 __ 2 i3 4 19 1._._._._._.?7 11 I i a g Project No.: 80-4137.029.00 0 tv N CI TETRA TECH PARSONS MINE Date: 8/31/07 E SITE VICINITY MAP ^Designed By: MAM/KJW www.tetratech.wm FIGURE 0 1900 S.SUNSET ST..SUITE 1•F. LONGMONT,CO 80501 PHONE:(303)772-7039 FAX:(303)772-5282 I / Copyright: Tetra Tech 2 Figure 1 • II. AGENCY DISCUSSIONS This update was discussed with Weld County. Discussions focused on the identifica- tion of critical assumptions used in the earlier study. Key items are noted below: • The County no longer plans to improve the curves on CR 64'/2 a short distance to the west of CR 25. • The County plans on maintaining the posted 55 MPH speed limit on CR 641/2 in this area, and required that the 55 MPH speed limit be used in this study. • Lafarge has modified site access to use CR 25 leading to CR 64% instead of accessing CR 64% directly. • Site traffic distribution has changed given Lafarge's current thinking on future conditions. The above items are used in this study. Other assumptions are consistent with the earlier study. • III. EXISTING CONDITIONS A. Existing Road Network The Parsons Mine site is bordered on the north by CR 641/2. This two lane east-west roadway serves the rural area east of Windsor. It is slightly more than one mile long and connects to north-south streets on each end. CR 64% is continuous at these intersections with a number of 90 degree turns. The nearest 90 degree turn is located about 1000 feet west of the site at CR 23%. The posted speed limit on CR 64'% is 55 MPH adjacent to the site with most turns having an advisory speed of 25 MPH. A concrete channel exists along the south side of CR 64'%. Power lines also exist along the south side of CR 64'% west of CR 25. • 3 B. Existing Traffic Conditions Traffic counts were collected as part of this study and extracted from other sources and agency publications. The CR 64%— 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.). Peak hour traffic is shown on Figure 2 with count sheets provided in Appendix A. Given that CR 25 serves a negligible amount of traffic, it is logical that current operating conditions are at level of service 'A' at all times. 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. • IV. FUTURE TRAFFIC CONDITIONS A. Site Assumptions Parsons Mine is expected to commence operations when needed to meet future demand. Mining, processing, reclamation and possibly recycling will occur on site. It is anticipated that the site will be operational for a 10 — 15 year period within the next 20 years; however, the rate of mining and overall life of the mine is dependent on market conditions. Most operations will be conducted during daylight hours with some administrative and maintenance 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 a driveway to CR 25 some 500 feet or more south of CR 64'%. Material needing to be transported across CR 25 will be moved by conveyor. A concept plan is provided on Figure 3. S 4 2 I- 153/114 0/0 CR 641/2 112/137 —► s, rP 0/0 0 0 o r SITE in N C U • • LEGEND: AM/PM Peak Hour Figure 2 CURRENT TRAFFIC 5 • . , WCR 64 -2_ -- - I C- 1 w I I I vy 2I o \ c, �` - O 1 1' ` `!61\ l L LL__LL --1 Q / CC / I Ul H SITE ACCESS Dg — — a I / \ PLANT Il llli o { I o� I I l g \ \ h 11 O `a`e1 o „ CONVEYOR 5 CROSSING I I t • a 1I I l O I w ' I zI c I Icc — t - - , o I \ W I nr(A A °o Qo 7 i z � , e3 P1 0. \ —' rr w — — _ , / a, " D ad 300' 150' 0' 300' z o I (kr) o SCALE IN FEET s a " Project No.: 80-4137.029.00 © TETRA TECH CONCEPT PLAN Date: 9-21-09 " PLANT SITE ENTRANCE/EXIT Designed By: LOCATION • E www.tetratech.com Page v y soos.sansetsieet,ste.1-F LAFARGE WEST, INC. Longmont,Colorado 80501 t/ PHONE:(303)772-5282 FAX:(303)772-7039 6 Copyright: Tetra Tech • B. Site Traffic Parsons Mine will operate during daylight hours with administrative, maintenance and emergency functions possibly occurring outside these hours. Virtually all activity will be related to mining, processing, and recycling operations. The facility might operate at full production 6 - 7 months per year depending on weather and product demands. Site traffic for Parsons Mine was developed based on operator estimates. Peak hour and daily site traffic is presented below for the peak season. Since peak hour esti- mates assume, among other things, that all employees and trucks arrive or depart within the same hour, the estimates are considered very conservative (high). PEAK SEASON SITE TRAFFIC AM Pk Hr PM Pk Hr Total In Out In Out Daily Trucks -- 18 18 18 375 • Cars/Pickups 10 - 2 10 25 TOTAL 10 18 20 28 400 As indicated, during the peak season Parsons Mine is expected to generate 28 morning peak hour trips and 48 afternoon peak hour trips. During the peak season, an estimated 400 daily site trips are expected; however, off peak season site trips will be much lower. The number of average annual daily trips will be about 200. C. Trip Distribution Trip distribution is a function of the origin and destination of site users and the availa- ble roadway system. The distribution of material from this site is based upon historic trends, anticipated market areas and competing facilities. It is expected that 60% of site traffic will be to/from the west with the remaining 40% being to/from the east. Resultant peak hour site traffic is shown on Figure 4. • 7 • 0-- 4/8 - CR 64 1/2 6/12 1) it SITE 0 N 0 0 Or IC 18/28 1' • 0/0 • Site Driveway 1 00 O O in N re U • LEGEND: AM/PM Peak Hour Figure 4 N =Nominal 8 SITE TRAFFIC • D. Background Traffic Since the opening year for Parsons Mine will be based on market demand, the actual date is uncertain. While a 2010 opening is not planned for this site, it represents the timeframe when site traffic will be the largest percentage of traffic on the area street system. Accordingly, it was selected for evaluation as was the traditional 20 year planning horizon. Consequently, the years 2010 and 2030 represent the short-term and long-term time frames, respectively. 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. 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 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 no longer planned at the CR 64% curves some 1,000 feet west of CR 25. Consequently, no roadway improvements were assumed in this study. • 9 • I- 165/125 N/N CR 64 1/2 120/150 -0. r. N/N zz z z SITE U, N CC U • • LEGEND: AM/PM Peak Hour N=Nominal Figure 5 NOTE: Rounded to nearest 5 vehicles. 10 SHORT-TERM BACKGROUND TRAFFIC 0 4-- 300/225 I- N/N CR 64 1/2 220/270 -I I) r N/N zz z z SITE in N re 0 i • LEGEND: AM/PM Peak Hour N=Nominal Figure 6 NOTE: Rounded to nearest 5 vehicles. 11 LONG-TERM BACKGROUND TRAFFIC • I— 165/125 tc 4/8 CR 641/2 120/150 ---► 6/12 n N- SITE O N 23 Z y 18/28 c0/0 • Site Driveway 1 � Z zo n N re U • LEGEND: AM/PM Peak Hour Figure 7 N=Nominal 12 SHORT-TERM TOTAL TRAFFIC • 4- 300/225 lc 4/8 CR 64 1/2 220/270 -I. .) I" 6/12 r r- SITE 0 zry Z 18/28 C , -i- 0/0 • Site Driveway 1 Ir z z23 in N I U • LEGEND: AM/PM Peak Hour Figure 8 N=Nominal 13 LONG-TERM TOTAL TRAFFIC • V. TRAFFIC IMPACTS 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 CR 25 with full site production. This determination is based on CDOT Access Code criteria for RA roadways having approach speeds of 55 MPH. Truck traffic was fully considered. • No other auxiliary lanes will be warranted with Parsons Mine fully operational. A warrant analysis is presented below. High Pk Hr Traffic Warrant Warranted? Road Lane Vehicles/PCEs Threshold Yes No CR 641/2 at CR 25 WB LT Decel 8/22 10 X EB RT Decel 12/34 25 X NB to WB LT Accel 17/33 X NB to EB RT Accel 11/25 50 X CR 25 at Drive SB LT Decel 20/56 ** X * Generally not required. ** Not required when opposing traffic is less than 100 vph. The westbound left turn deceleration lane will be warranted at about 45% of full production with the right turn deceleration lane warranted at about 75% of full produc- tion. Future roadway geometry is shown on Figure 9. • 14 • 4- Ir- nCR 64 1/2 MI SITE • STOP Site Driveway t�Y in ry re a • 1 Figure 9 15 FUTURE ROADWAY GEOMETRY • B. Future Operating Conditions (with Parsons Mine) Capacity analyses were conducted using short- and long-term total traffic and the roadway geometry shown on Figure 9. For definition purposes, acceptable conditions 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. OPERATING CONDITIONS WITH PROJECT Short-Term Level of Service Long-Term Level of Service Movement/ Intersection Control AM Pk Hr PM Pk Hr AM Pk Hr PM Pk Hr Direction CR 25—Driveway Stop SB L A A A A WBR A A A A CR25-CR64'% Stop WBL A A A A NBL B B B B • NBR B B B B As 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 expected for all traffic movements during both peak hours. Capacity worksheets are available in Appendix B. Improved operations are expected at other times. VI. DESIGN ISSUES Preliminary auxiliary lane designs were developed for 12 foot auxiliary lanes on CR 64'/ at the CR 25 intersection. This effort used CDOT design criteria for RA road- ways, a 55 MPH speed limit, and routine truck usage. The eastbound right turn deceleration lane should have 600 feet of deceleration length plus 220 feet of transi- tion taper. This design is considered excessive since eastbound traffic will be exiting • 16 a 25 MPH curve about 1000 feet west of CR 25. Given this condition, it is not practic- al to think that turning vehicles will accelerate to 55 MPH prior to slowing down to turn right onto CR 25. In actuality, a 30 -40 MPH approach speed is more realistic on eastbound CR 64 '/2 approaching CR 25. This would allow a lesser design for the eastbound right turn deceleration lane. The westbound left turn lane should have 25 feet of storage, 220 feet of transition taper, and 600 feet of deceleration distance. Re-direct tapers should be consistent with the posted speed limits on CR 64'/z. Large radii should be provided to facilitate easy truck turns. All design parameters are preliminary and subject to confirmation or modification as part of the design process. • VII. CONCLUSIONS Based on the above documented analyses and investigations, the following can be concluded: • Current traffic using CR 641/2 is modest in the area of Parsons Mine. • During the peak season, Parsons Mine will generate up to 28 morning highway 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. • On an average annual daily traffic basis some 200 site trips are expected. • 17 • • An eastbound right turn lane and a westbound left turn lane will be warranted on CR 64% at the CR 25 intersection when the Parsons site is in full peak sea- son operation. No other auxiliary lanes will be warranted. • 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. • • 18 APPENDIX A �p q cm O V h ,YR III Mf m ea in ty. N (p b b Yf Q vOf in U c w O .5 N N N N 0 N (O 3 b O O A b of n N on N b 1` N N N N N 1O IC N C N N D N es c d 3 C .. z .41 d U MMb crow 01q MM VN {yA TOO < y FM!'! M ra M me- 01 fV an Q NNNNQNNM • O an CO 01 j Y. O O O O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 I N C V O y ("I N CA) M C') R C'O) (V m- N (NV N N O N N O? >-. m RI O♦� O ` d ; J V CO a I- C LLI o E daR. ' pawn (+� q cot, 1- m N T (q M A w 0 T ' ymp t U M N N N N M N a M M MM N N N N Q .C L0 CI T 11 = C O ea O K LLI y K 0 000000 0 0 0000 -- o o 0 C Um 0imm 0 a w 1,....44 co N N N CM) N N OP M r (0 N m el w • (7 (7 (V N N N W • O/ ... . . . . . . . . 0 . 0 0 . 0 0 . 0 5 y O L 5 0 : 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 �v�// C co ci 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0. 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ : CO QF.I. C 0 0 0 0 0 O O 0 CO 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 S co a O E .c pt t y J O O O O O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O in O O O O 0 ' 0 O O N O O O co co co co O O F 0 W Q' N. 0 0 0 0 '- O O O r 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C _ • M J P� O e W A a CO 0 0 a — — 0 3n O o U O U Pa 4 z J O O O O O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0• OD 0 L' 1(� p 1� p 1(� W n t w o n ' O a (.+! '! O V' 4Me' .Wj. (roi V O .N- pi, Q o 0 ' x O a F= 4c(� i� 0 CC0 d y s (.igaaa viii rif a • 0 - (E o es o e o o en e o 0 0 0 0 0 W n M . APPENDIX B • Page 1 of 1 TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information rlyst GC Intersection 64 1/2- 25 cy/Co. Jurisdiction Date Performed 9 9/2009 Analysis Year ST TOTAL nalysis Time Period PM Project Description East/West Street: CR 64 1/2 (North/South Street: CR 25 Intersection Orientation: East-West tudy Period (hrs): 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Eastbound Westbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume (veh/h) 0 120 6 4 165 0 Peak-hour factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly Flow Rate (veh/h) 0 120 6 4 165 0 Proportion of heavy vehicles, PHv 0 -- - 0 -- -- Median type Two Way Left Turn Lane RT Channelized? 0 0 Lanes 0 1 1 1 1 0 Configuration T R L T Upstream Signal 0 0 Minor Street Northbound Southbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R glite (veh/h) 11 0 7 0 0 0 hour factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly Flow Rate(veh/h) 11 0 7 0 0 0 Proportion of heavy vehicles, PHv 100 0 100 0 0 0 Percent grade(%) 0 0 Flared approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized? 0 0 Lanes 1 0 1 0 0 0 Configuration L R Control Delay, Queue Length, Level of Service Approach EB WB Northbound Southbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration L L R Volume, v (vph) 4 11 7 Capacity, cm (vph) 1473 532 723 v/c ratio 0.00 0.02 0.01 Queue length (95%) 0.01 0.06 0.03 Control Delay (s/veh) 7.5 11.9 10.0 LOS A B B roach delay (s/veh) — -- 11.2 oach LOS - -- B HCS2000TM Copyright O2003 University of Florida,All Rights Reserved Version 4.1( 9/19/2009 Page 1 of 1 TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information Iist GC Intersection 64 1/2-25 cy/Co. Jurisdiction Date Performed 9/19[ZQ09 Analysis Year ST TOTAL nalysis Time Period M Project Description East/West Street: CR 64 1/2 North/South Street: CR 25 Intersection Orientation: East-West Study Period (hrs): 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Eastbound Westbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume (veh/h) 0 150 12 8 125 0 Peak-hour factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly Flow Rate (veh/h) 0 150 12 8 125 0 Proportion of heavy vehicles, PHv 0 - - 100 Median type Two Way Left Turn Lane RT Channelized? 0 0 Lanes 0 1 1 1 1 0 Configuration T R L T Upstream Signal 0 _ 0 Minor Street Northbound Southbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R e (veh/h) 17 0 11 0 0 0 P hour factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly Flow Rate(veh/h) 17 0 11 0 0 0 Proportion of heavy vehicles, PHv 100 0 100 0 0 0 Percent grade(%) 0 0 Flared approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized? 0 0 Lanes 1 0 1 0 0 0 Configuration L R Control Delay,Queue Length, Level of Service Approach EB WB Northbound Southbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration L L R Volume, v (vph) 8 17 11 Capacity, cm(vph) 989 531 692 v/c ratio 0.01 0.03 0.02 Queue length (95%) 0.02 0.10 0.05 Control Delay (s/veh) 8.7 12.0 10.3 LOS A B a oach delay (s/veh) -- -- 11.3 leach LOS -- -- B HCS2000"^ Copyright C 2003 University of Florida,All Rights Reserved Version 4 I f 9/20/2009 Page 1 of 1 TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information st GC Intersection 64 1/2- 25 Ilkcy/Co. Jurisdiction Date Performed 09/2009 Analysis Year LT TOTAL nalysis Time Period PM Project Description East/West Street: CR 64 12 North/South Street: CR 25 Intersection Orientation: East-West 'Study Period (hrs): 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Eastbound Westbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume(veh/h) 0 220 6 4 300 0 Peak-hour factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly Flow Rate (veh/h) 0 220 6 4 300 0 Proportion of heavy vehicles, PH 0 -PH,/ Median type Two Way Left Turn Lane RT Channelized? 0 0 Lanes 0 1 1 1 1 0 Configuration T R L T Upstream Signal 0 0 Minor Street Northbound Southbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R e (veh/h) 11 0 7 0 0 0 hour factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly Flow Rate (veh/h) 11 0 7 0 0 0 Proportion of heavy vehicles, PHv 100 0 100 0 0 0 Percent grade C/0) 0 0 Flared approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized? 0 0 Lanes 1 0 1 0 0 0 Configuration L R Control Delay,Queue Length, Level of Service Approach EB WB Northbound Southbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration L L R Volume, v (vph) 4 11 7 Capacity, cm (vph) 1354 374 626 v/c ratio 0.00 0.03 0.01 Queue length (95%) 0.01 0.09 0.03 Control Delay (s/veh) 7.7 14.9 10.8 LOS A B B roach delay (s/veh) — -- 13.3 oach LOS B HCS2000TM Copyright O 2003 University of Florida,All Rights Reserved Version 4 I f 9/19/2009 Page 1 of 1 TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information yst GC Intersection 64 1/2-25 cy/Co. Jurisdiction Date Performed 9/1909 Analysis Year LT TOTAL nalysis Time Period M Project Description East/West Street: CR 64 1/2 North/South Street: CR 25 Intersection Orientation: East-West Study Period (hrs): 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Eastbound Westbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume (veh/h) 0 270 12 8 225 0 Peak-hour factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly Flow Rate (veh/h) 0 270 12 8 225 0 Proportion of heavy vehicles, PHv 0 100 Median type Two Way Left Turn Lane RT Channelized? 0 0 Lanes 0 1 1 1 1 0 Configuration T R L T Upstream Signal 0 0 Minor Street Northbound Southbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R fite (veh/h) 17 0 11 0 0 0 hour factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly Flow Rate(veh/h) 17 0 11 0 0 0 Proportion of heavy vehicles, ['Hy100 0 100 0 0 0 Percent grade(%) 0 0 Flared approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized? 0 0 Lanes 1 0 1 0 0 0 Configuration L R Control Delay, Queue Length, Level of Service Approach EB WB Northbound Southbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration L L R Volume, v (vph) 8 17 11 Capacity, cm(vph) 877 381 582 v/c ratio 0.01 0.04 0.02 — Queue length (95%) 0.03 0.14 0.06 Control Delay (s/veh) 9.1 14.9 11.3 LOS A B B roach delay (s/veh) — -- 13.5 oath LOS B HCS2000TM Copyright C 2003 University of Florida,All Rights Reserved Version 4.I f 9/20/2009 • LLAFARGE AGGREGATES & CONCRETE Neighborhood Meeting Notification for Lafarge West, Inc. - Parsons Mine You are invited to attend a Neighborhood Meeting to discuss the Parsons Mine Use by Special Review Application which is currently under review by Weld County and is scheduled for a Planning Commission Public Hearing on September l51 at 1:30. The Neighborhood Meeting is scheduled for: Date: Thursday, August 20,2009 Time: 7:00 p.m.—8:30 p.m. Place: Poudre Learning Center(Northwest corner of F Street and 83`d Avenue) Attached you will find a brief description of the project and a vicinity map showing the location of the Parsons Mine property. • At the meeting we will explain the project and answer any questions. Please call Jennifer Vecchi (Vecchi and Associates) at 303-774-0173 or Pam Hora(Tetra Tech) at 303-772-5282 if you have any questions prior to the meeting. Thank you. RN137 0M3Mcummalicighborhood Moning1M¢ting NohccJrc • PROJECT DESCRIPTION • for Parsons Mine The Parsons Mine site is located east of Windsor just south of County Road 64'/ and on both sides of County Road 25. This 381±acre site is owned, leased, or under contract for purchase by Lafarge West,Inc. The other two land owners are Sally Parsons and Livingston Leigh Livestock of Weld County, LLC. Lafarge is proposing a sand and gravel extraction operation on the Parsons Mine property. The property will be mined and reclaimed in phases. A processing plant is also proposed to be set up on the property south of CR 64% and east of CR 25. The plant will contain the crushing, screening and washing equipment used for the processing of the raw materials. The processed materials will then 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 County Road 64%:, County Road 25 and existing adjacent residences. /Lafarge anticipates mining and reclaiming the site in approximately 20 years;however,the rate of mining and overall life of the mine is dependent upon demand and market conditions. Reclamation will be done concurrently, as well as subsequent to mining. 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 and protected throughout mining and reclamation. Mining activities will be set back an appropriate distance from all areas designated for preservation. 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 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. K W m COUNTY RD bb I I 4-- g H CO' NTY RD 64 3/4 A I 6 ,• ii � -I GO NTY RD 64 1/2 (l// J _ _ W_ _ � 3O 2 ....• AFARGE 2 LEIGH 4-IEST._O.L' . PARSON��Iz IC 'CCZZ��! LEIGH OZ OF 1^ELD K j R j .cwHTr,w MINE w Y A \. . .. ... Ct _ ' ul kJ o.I .PALLY A UJ PAR50N5-,, F - SALLY A Z '- PAR5O115 3 CACHE LA N I f _. POUDRE R ._. tI 3 • 31 m r_r o 36 5 COUNTY RD 62 ,, T6N T5N P Ir ra �7nrS r 9 VICINITY MAP a C20001 N MC 4000 111=2OOO1 2 6 g Drawing Description Project No.: 1334137.029.000 te © TETRA TECH Date: 8-11-08 $ VICINITY MAP Designed By — vmv.tetratech.com Drawing No. • ,:c 1800 S.Sunset Sheet,Ste.1-F PARSONS MINE ,o Longmont,Colorado 80501 fr PHONE:(303)772.5282 FAX:(303)772-7039 2 Copyright: Tetra Tech rt VECCHI &ASSOCIATES, LLC FFaN °_ANN BC & oxicn PO.Box 1175 Longmont,co 80502-1175 Phone 303-774-0173 Fax 303-774-0173 VecchlAssonates@comcast.net July 30, 2009 Mr. Kim Ogle, Planning Manager Weld County Department of Planning Services 918 10th Street Greeley, CO 80631 RE: Responses to USR-1657 Comments and Conditions of Approval as Listed in the Administrative Review dated June 16, 2008 Dear Kim: This response letter specifically addresses all of the comments and Conditions of Approval found in your preliminary report for USR-1657 also referred to as Lafarge West Inc.'s Parsons Mine. Below is a list of each of the comments and conditions (in bold) followed by our responses. • 1. The West Greeley Soil Conservation District has provided information regarding the soils on the site. The applicant shall review the information and use it to positively manage on site soils. Lafarge will use the information provided to positively manage the soils. The Department of Planning Services recommends that the following conditions of approval and development standards be attached: 1. Prior to recording the plat A. Section 22-5-100.A of the Weld County Code states "oil and gas exploration and production should occur in a manner which minimizes the impact to agricultural uses and the environment and reduces the conflicts between mineral development and current and future surface uses." Section 22-5-100.B of the Weld County Code states "...encourage cooperation, coordination and communication between the surface owner and the mineral owner/operators of either the surface or the mineral estate." Section 22-5-100.B.1 of the Weld County Code also states "new development should be planned to take into account current and future oil and gas drilling activity to the extent oil and gas development can reasonably be anticipated." The applicant shall either submit a copy of an agreement with the property's mineral owner/operators stipulating that the oil and gas activities have been adequately incorporated into the design • of the site or show evidence that an adequate attempt has been made to mitigate III Page 2of14 July 30, 2009 Mr. Kim Ogle • the concerns of the mineral owner/operators. Drill envelopes can be delineated on the plat in accordance with the State requirements as an attempt to mitigate concerns. (Department of Planning Services) Lafarge is currently negotiating surface use agreements with each mineral leasehold owner associated with the property. The mineral leasehold owners include Petro Canada Resources, Inc.; Tigges Oil LLC, Noble Energy Production, Inc.; and Blue Chip Oil, Inc. Prior to the Public Hearings, finalized Agreements or evidence that an adequate attempt has been made to mitigate the concerns of the mineral leasehold owners will be submitted to the County. Attached please find executed copies of the Surface Use Agreements between Lafarge and Blue Chip Oil, Inc., as well as Tigges Oil, LLC. Finalization of the Petro Canada Resources, Inc. and Noble Energy Production, Inc. Surface Use Agreements are pending. Agreement has been reached with both companies on the location of additional facilities, setbacks and access for pipelines and vehicles. The attached maps identify these items and will be incorporated into the Surface Use Agreements. B. The applicant shall attempt to address the conditions of the City of Greeley as stated in their referral response dated June 19, 2008. Written evidence of such shall be provided to the Department of Planning Services. (City of Greeley) • Attached is a copy of the letter that we sent to the City of Greeley in response to their comments. C. The applicant shall address the request of the Department of Planning Services (Landscape Referral) dated June 16, 2008. Written evidence of such shall be provided to the Department of Planning Services. (Department of Planning Services) Attached is a copy of the letter that we sent to the Department of Planning Services in response to their comments. D. 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 to address the existing offset, the new alignment and the right-of-way associated with this alignment will require dedication to the county. The current alignment and the right-of-way associated with this alignment will be vacated by the County and deeded back to the adjacent property owners. The applicant shall verify the existing right-of-way and the documents creating the right-of-way. The applicant shall verify the proposed right-of-way and the documents creating the right-of-way. All setbacks shall be measured from the edge of future right-of-way. If the right-of-way cannot be verified, it shall be dedicated. County Road 25 is maintained by Weld County. References to the documents which granted the existing right-of-way (ROW) for • CR 25 north of where CR 64 would go through the property have been added to the plans as verification of this existing right-of-way. Based on this documentation, less Pa e 3 30, f 14 1, July 30, 2009 Mr. Kim Ogle • than 60' of ROW exists for this portion of CR 25. Once the re-alignment of CR 25 has been determined, Lafarge will cooperate with the County in dedicating the necessary ROW for the portion of County Road 25 that traverses their property. Additional ROW may need to be obtained from the other landowners within the Parsons Mine: Livingston Leigh Livestock of Weld County, LLC and Dr. Sally Parsons. Assuming the new alignment for CR 25 follows the conceptual alignment shown on the USR plan set, there will be no issues with measuring setbacks from the future right-of-way. E. Item E was omitted from your Staff report. F. 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 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. The applicant shall verify the existing right-of-way and the documents creating the right-of-way. If the right-of-way cannot be verified, it shall be dedicated. This road is maintained by Weld County. • We researched the existence of CR 64 right-of-way through the Parsons Mine Site at the Weld County GIS Department and Leon Sievers and it was determined that there is no existing right-of-way for CR 64; therefore, there is no existing right-of-way documentation to provide. A total of 140' of potential future right-of-way for County Road 64"O" Street has been designated on the USR-1657 plan set as "Conceptual Alignment of the "O" Street Right-of-Way". Once final routing and design plans for "O" Street have been completed, Lafarge will coordinate with the County regarding acquisition of the necessary right-of-way on the property owned by Lafarge. However, Lafarge does not own the entire property within the Parsons Mine and the County will need to work with the other individual landowners for acquisition of ROW; Livingston Leigh Livestock of Weld County, LLC and Dr. Sally Parsons. G. The applicant shall address the requirements (concerns) of the Department of Public Works, as stated in their referral responses dated June 10, 2008 and later email of June 16, 2008. Evidence of approval shall be submitted in writing to the Department of Planning Services. (Department of Planning Services) Attached is a copy of a letter sent to Public Works in response to their comments. H. The applicant shall complete all proposed improvements including those regarding landscaping, screening, access improvements, acceleration and deceleration lanes and parking lot requirements or enter into an Improvements Agreement according to policy regarding collateral for improvements and post adequate collateral for all required materials. The agreement and form of • collateral shall be reviewed by County Staff and accepted by the Board of 1VI Page 4ofl4 July 30, 2009 Mr. Kim Ogle • County Commissioners prior to recording the USR plat. (Departments of Public Works and Planning Services) Lafarge will enter into an Improvements Agreement to satisfy this Condition. It is our understanding that Rich Hastings is preparing a draft of this agreement. I. 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. (Department of Public Works) Lafarge will enter into a Long-Term Road Maintenance and Improvements Agreement on the designated haul route. It is our understanding that Rich Hastings is preparing a draft of this agreement. J. The applicant shall address the requirements (concerns) of the Department of Natural Resources, Division of Water Resources, Office of the State Engineer, as stated in their referral response dated June 16,2008. Evidence of approval shall be submitted in writing to the Department of Planning Services. (Department of Planning Services) • Attached is a response letter from the Applegate Group, Inc. dated July 7, 2008 that addresses the comments received from the Department of Natural Resources, Division of Water Resources, Office of the State Engineer. K. The applicant shall provide a written and recorded ditch crossing agreement with the Whitney Ditch Company. (Department of Planning Services) Lafarge is working on a ditch crossing agreement with the Whitney Ditch Company. One culvert will need to be installed so that the plant site entrance/exit can cross over the ditch and connect to WCR 6412. A recorded agreement will be submitted prior to recording the plat. L. 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). Evidence of Department of Public Health and Environment approval shall be • provided to the Department of Planning Services. (Department of Public Health & Environment) Page 5 of 14 July 30, 2009 Mr. Kim Ogle • A draft Waste Handling Plan was submitted to the Environmental Health Department. It is in draft form because Lafarge has not yet identified the waste handler and facility. Therefore, prior to recording the plat, Lafarge will update the Plan to provide this information and get approval from the Environmental Health Department. Evidence of their approval will then be provided to the Department of Planning Services. M. The plat shall be amended to delineate the following: 1. All sheets of the plat shall be labeled USR-1657. (Department of Planning Services) USR-1657 has been added to the title on sheet one and to the title block of all sheets in the plan set. 2. The on site parking, circulation, entrance and exit lanes, turn lanes and County Road 64.5 roadway curve improvements, as approved by the Department of Public Works and Department of Planning Services. (Department of Planning Services) The on-site features (parking, circulation, entrance and exit lanes) and turn lanes along WCR 64%have been added to the plan set. However, the WCR 64'1 roadway curve improvements are proposed on the property to the north • and the design of the curve is the responsibility of the County so this information has not been shown on the plans at this time. 3. The location of any on-site signs. (Department of Planning Services) The location of all on-site signs have been indicated on the plans. 4. The approved Landscape and Screening Plan. (Department of Planning Services) See sheets 7-10 of the plan set for all landscaping and screening. Also, please refer to the attached letter responding to the Department of Planning Services comments. 5. If exterior lighting is a part of this facility, all light standards shall be delineated in accordance with Section 23-3-250.B.6 of the Weld County Code. (Department of Planning Services) A note has been added to sheet 6 of the plan set stating that the site lighting will conform to the County's lighting standards. 6. Oil and Gas encumbrances including gathering lines with appropriate setbacks shall be delineated on the plat. (Department of Planning Services) Oil and gas encumbrances including the general locations of gathering lines • are shown on the plat. The appropriate setbacks from the wells and tanks are �VI Page6of14 July 30, 2009 Mr. Kim Ogle • also shown on the plat. Prior to construction, the gathering lines and flowlines will be field located. 7. Section 23-3-250.A.6 of the Weld County Code addresses the issue of trash collection areas. Areas used for storage or trash collection shall be screened from adjacent public rights-of-way and all adjacent properties. These areas shall be designed and used in a manner that will prevent wind or animal scattered trash. (Department of Planning Services) A trash collection area has been designated in the plant site area on the plan set just north of the maintenance shop. The plant site area is screened from view from the adjacent public rights-of-way and adjacent properties so screening specific to the trash collection area will not be necessary. 8. 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. There is presently sixty-five (65) feet of right-of-way. A total of sixty-five (65) feet from the centerline of County Road 64.75 shall be dedicated as right-of-way. (Town of Windsor) We have addressed the comments that were made by Windsor in their June 20, 2008 letter. A copy of our response to their comments is attached. • 9. Access to WCR 64.5 shall be paved with adequate turning radiuses a minimum of 24 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. (Department of Public Works) The access to WCR 64.5 will have adequate turning radiuses onto and off of WCR 64Y/ to accommodate the large gravel trucks. The access drive will be designed to match existing grade. The pavement will extend through the scale house/office area, into the parking lot and approximately 700 feet into the site. 10. Off-street parking/loading 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. (Department of Planning Services) The parking area and access to the scales will be paved. The loading areas around the plant will be a gravel surface and so adequate dust control techniques will be used (see attached Dust Abatement Plan for a detailed description of the techniques to be used). 11. A Sixty (60) foot easement(30-foot on both sides of the centerline of the ditch) for the Whitney Irrigation Company ditch shall be indicated on the plat. (Whitney Irrigation Company) • The Whitney Ditch is located just south of the existing right-of-way for CR 64/. As indicated on our map, a 30' strip of land has been reserved for a 1 1 Page 7of14 1`\ July 30, 2009 Mr. Kim Ogle • Whitney Ditch Easement just south of CR 64'/ ROW, all along the northern edge of the Parsons Mine site. The Whitney Ditch will need to coordinate directly with Weld County if they need another 30' of easement on the north side of their ditch because this area is in the CR 6412 right-of-way. Therefore, via separate instrument, Lafarge will grant a thirty foot easement through their property(the property east of CR 25). Livingston Leigh Livestock of Weld County, LLC owns the property west of CR 25. They will be responsible for granting the 30' easement to the Whitney Ditch Company through their property. 2. One Month Prior to Construction Activities: A. A stormwater discharge permit may be required for a development/ redevelopment/construction site where a contiguous or non-contiguous land disturbance is greater than or equal to one acre in area. Contact the Water Quality Control Division of the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment at www.cdphe.state.co.us/wq/PermitsUnit for more information. (Department of Planning Services) A stormwater discharge permit will be acquired at least one month prior to construction activities and a copy will be provided to the Department of Planning Services and Department of Public Health and Environment. • 3. Prior to construction: A. A building permit shall be obtained prior to the construction or placement of any structure such as a scale, office, and any other structures placed on the parcels. An electrical permit will be required for any electrical service to equipment. A plot plan shall be submitted when applying for building permits showing all structures with accurate distances between structures, and from structures to all property lines. (Department of Building Inspection) The appropriate building permits will be obtained prior to the construction of any structure and electrical permits will be obtained for equipment requiring electrical service. B. The applicant shall install a stop sign at the exit of the pit approach onto County Road 64.5. (Department of Planning Services) A stop sign will be installed at the exit once the access drives into and out of the site are constructed. This information has been added to the Plant Site Detail found on sheet 6 of the plan set. C. The applicant shall submit plans for the office/scalehouse to the Windsor- Severance Fire Protection District for review and approval. (Windsor- Severance Fire Protection District) The Windsor-Severance Fire Protection District reviewed the application and • indicated that they have no conflicts. Upon request by the Fire District, Lafarge will forward plans. Page 8 ,II 30, f 14 1 , July 30, 2009 I. Mr. Kim Ogle s D. The applicant shall provide the Department of Planning Services with an approved Colorado Division of Water Resources Substitute Water Supply Plan or court-approved Augmentation Plan. (Department of Planning Services) A Substitute Water Supply Plan will be obtained prior to construction and a copy of the plan will be provided to the Department of Planning Services. E. The applicant shall submit evidence of a Colorado Discharge Permit System (CDPS) from the Water Quality Control Division of the Colorado Department of Health and Environment for any proposed discharge into State Waterways, if applicable. Evidence of approval shall be submitted to the Department of Planning Services and Department of Public Health and Environment. (Department of Public Health and Environment) A CDPS permit for a gravel mining operation will be obtained and submitted to the Departments of Planning Services and Public Health and Environment prior to construction. F. 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). (Department of Public Health and Environment) The appropriate documentation will be submitted to the Department of Public Health and Environment prior to construction. 4. Prior to Operations: A. 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, to the Weld County Departments of Public Health and Environment and Planning Services. (Department of Public Health & Environment) Lafarge will acquire an A.P.E.N. permit prior to operations. B. 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. (Department of Public Health & Environment) Lafarge will obtain an Aboveground Storage Tank permit prior to operations. • C. 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 �VI Page9of14 July 30, 2009 10. Mr. Kim Ogle • permit from the Water Quality Control Division of the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment. (Department of Public Health & Environment) A stormwater discharge permit will be obtained and a copy will be submitted to the Department of Public Health and Environment prior to operation of the mine. 5. Prior to issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy: A. An individual sewage disposal system is required for the proposed office/scale house and shall be installed according to the Weld County Individual Sewage Disposal Regulations. (Department of Public Health and Environment) An ISDS will be designed, permitted and installed prior to the Certificate of Occupancy. B. The septic system is required to be designed by a Colorado Registered Professional Engineer according to the Weld County Individual Sewage Disposal Regulations. (Department of Planning Services) The septic system will be designed by a Colorado Registered Professional Engineer and permitted through the Department of Public Health and Environment. C. The applicant shall provide evidence of a North Weld County Water District • Commercial Tap for the office, scale house and associated on site uses Evidence of approval shall be submitted in writing to the Department of Planning Services. (Department of Planning Services) Lafarge has a letter of commitment for a 50% tap from the North Weld County Water District (see attached). Lafarge will purchase this 50% water tap from the Water District prior to Certificate of Occupancy and evidence will then be submitted to the Department of Planning Services. 6. The Special Review activity shall not occur nor shall any building or electrical permits be issued on the property until the Special Review plat is ready to be recorded in the office of the Weld County Clerk and Recorder. (Department of Planning Services) Noted. 7. Upon completion of 1 and 2 above, the applicant shall submit a Mylar plat along with all other documentation required as Conditions of Approval. The Mylar plat shall be recorded in the office of the Weld County Clerk and Recorder by Department of Planning Services' Staff. The plat shall be prepared in accordance with the requirements of Section 23-2-260.D of the Weld County Code. The Mylar plat and additional requirements shall be submitted within thirty (30) days from the date of the Board of County Commissioners resolution. The applicant shall be responsible for paying the recording fee. (Department of Planning Services) It is understood that a mylar plat will need to be prepared and submitted for recording following approval by the Board of County Commissioners. However, we would request that the deadline to provide the mylars be changed to within one-hundred eighty(180) days • �VI Page 10 of 14 July 30, 2009 Mr. Kim Ogle • from the date of the Board of County Commissioners resolution to give us more time to satisfy this requirement. 8. The attached Development Standards for the Special Review Permit shall be adopted and placed on the Special Review Plat prior to recording. The completed plat shall be delivered to the Weld County Department of Planning Services and be ready for recording in the Weld County Clerk and Recorder's Office within 60 days of approval by the Board of County Commissioners. (Department of Planning Services) The Development Standards (with some edits as described below) have been added to sheet 1 of the plan set. For consistency, we would ask that the due date for this requirement also be changed to be within one-hundred eighty(180) days of approval by the Board of County Commissioners. 9. In accordance with Weld County Code Ordinance 2005-7 approved June 1, 2005, should the plat not be recorded within the required thirty (30) days from the date the Board of County Commissioners resolution a $50.00 recording continuance charge shall added for each additional 3 month period. (Department of Planning Services) We would ask that the board amend this requirement to require the plat be submitted for recording within one-hundred eighty(180) days rather than thirty(30) days to give Lafarge adequate time to meet the conditions of approval and submit the plat. • The following development standard notes have been added to the USR-1657 plan set. In some cases we made changes to the notes and so where changes were made we inserted a note in italics to explain why the change was made. For your reference, the development standards are restated below and all text that we eliminated we have stricken and all text that we have added we have underlined. A clean version of these notes was added to sheet 1 of the plan set. Site Specific Development Plan Special Review Permit Development Standards Parsons Mine—Lafarge West, Inc. USR— 1657 1. 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 subject to the Development Standards stated hereon. (Department of Planning Services) 2. Approval of this plan may create a vested property right pursuant to Section 23-8-10 of the Weld County Code. (Department of Planning Services) 3. 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. (Department of Public Health and Environment) 4. 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. (Department of Public Health and Environment) Page 11 of 14 July 30, 2009 • Mr. Kim Ogle • 5. 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. (Department of Public Health and Environment) 6. The applicant shall operate in accordance with the approved "waste handling plan". (Department of Public Health and Environment) 7. The applicant shall comply with all provisions of the Underground and Above Ground Storage Tank Regulations (7 CCR 1101-14). (Department of Public Health and Environment) 8. 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. (Department of Public Health and Environment) 9. 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. (Department of Public Health and Environment) 10. 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. (Department of Public Health and Environment) 11. A permanent, adequate water supply shall be provided for drinking and sanitary purposes for the office and plant site area. (Department of Public Health and Environment) 12. Adequate handwashing and toilet facilities shall be provided for employees, service people, and company vendors. (Department of Public Health and Environment) • 13. Any septic system located on the property must comply with all provisions of the Weld County Code, pertaining to Individual Sewage Disposal Systems. (Department of Public Health and Environment) 14. 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. (Department of Public Health and Environment) 15. 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. (Department of Public Health and Environment)Note stricken and not added to the plan set because it is a repeat of note 8. 15. Bottled water shall be provided to employees at the temporary locations of the working face at all times. (Department of Public Health and Environment) 16. The applicant shall remove, handle, and stockpile overburden, soil, sand and gravel from the facility area in a manner that will prevent nuisance conditions. (Department of Public Health and Environment) 17. 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). (Department of Public Health and Environment) 18. The applicant shall obtain a stormwater discharge permit from the Colorado Department of Public Health & Environment, Water Quality Control Division. (Department of Public Health and Environment) 19. The operation shall comply with all applicable rules and regulations of the Colorado Division • of Mining Reclamation and Safety. (Department of Public Health and Environment) 'VI Page 12of14 July 30, 2009 • Mr. Kim Ogle • 20. The operation shall comply with all applicable rules and regulations of the State and Federal agencies and the Weld County Code. (Department of Public Health and Environment) 21. Sources of light shall be shielded so that light rays will not shine directly onto adjacent properties where such would cause a nuisance or interfere with the use on the adjacent properties in accordance with the plan. Neither the direct nor reflected light from any light source may create a traffic hazard to operators of motor vehicles on public or private streets. No colored lights may be used which may be confused with or constructed as traffic control devices. (Department of Planning Services) 22. Section 23-4-290.B of the Weld County Code limits the hours of operation for sand and gravel operations to the hours of day light except in the case of public or private emergency or to make necessary repairs to equipment. Hours of operation may be extended with specific permission from the Weld County Board of County Commissioners. This restriction shall not apply to operation of administrative and executive offices or repair and maintenance facilities located on the property. (Department of Planning Services) 23. The number of employees on-site at one time shall not exceed twenty-three (23). (Department of Planning Services) 24. 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. (Department of Planning Services) 25. Where topsoil is removed, sufficient arable soil shall be set aside for re-spreading over the reclaimed areas. (Department of Planning Services) • 26. Should noxious weeds exist on the property or become established as a result of the proposed development, the applicant/landowner shall be responsible for controlling the noxious weeds, pursuant to Section 15-1-180. (Department of Planning Services) 27. applicant shall submit plans for the office - scale house to Windsor/Severance Fire Protection District for review and approval. (Windsor/Severance Fire Protection District) We deleted this note because the Windsor/Severence Fire Protection District did not make this request in their referral comments regarding this application. In addition, note 38 indicates that a letter of approval from Windsor Severance Fire Protection District is required prior to the issuing of building permits. 27. 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 of the type generally attributed to run-off rate and velocity increases, diversions, concentration and/or unplanned ponding of storm run-off. (Department of Public Works) 28. The site must take into consideration storm water capture/quantity and provide accordingly for best management practices. (Department of Public Works) 29. Access to County Road 64.75 64.5 shall be paved with adequate turning radiuses a minimum of 24 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. (Department of Public Works) We changed the County Road number because the site will access CR 64.5 not 64.75. 30. Off-street parking/loading 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. (Department of Public Works) 31. Lafarge West, Inc. agrees to dedicate 60 feet of right-of-way for the realignment of County • Road 25 for the portion of County Road 25 that traverses itsproperty once the alignment has been finalized. Additional right-of way for County Road 25 will need to be obtained from �VI Page13of14 July 30, 2009 I. Mr. Kim Ogle • other landowners within the Parsons Mine area. (Department of Planning Services and Department of Public Works) Lafarge West, Inc. does not own all of the land included in the application; therefore, they do not have the right to dedicate land they do not own. 32. The landscaping and screening on-site shall be maintained in accordance with the approved Landscape and Screening Plan. (Department of Planning Services) 33. Building permits will be required for all new structures prior to construction. A demolition permit will be required for each of the buildings that are to be demolished. Each demolition permit application will need to include an asbestos certification letter as required by the State of Colorado. There are no buildings on-site that will be demolished as part of this project. 34. A plan review is required for each building. Plans will require the wet stamp of a Colorado registered architect or engineer. 35. Buildings shall conform to the requirements of the codes adopted by Weld County at the time of permit application. 36. Fire resistance of walls and openings, construction requirements, maximum building height and allowable areas as well as occupancy classification will be reviewed at the plan review stage. 37. A letter of approval from Windsor Severance Fire Protection District is required prior to the issuing of building permits. 38. A Flood Hazard Development Permit shall be submitted for buildings constructed or moved, and stockpiles in the 100-year flood plain. (Departments of Building Inspection and Planning Services) 39. Effective January 1, 2003, Building Permits issued on the proposed lots will be required to • adhere to the fee structure of the County Road Impact Program. (Ordinance 2002-11) (Department of Planning Services) 40. Effective August 1, 2005, Building Permits issued on the subject site will be required to adhere to the fee structure of the Capital Expansion Impact Fee and the Stormwater/Drainage Impact Fee. (Ordinance 2005-8 Section 5-8-40) (Department of Planning Services) 41. The property owner or operator shall be responsible for complying with the Design Standards of Section 23-2-240 of the Weld County Code. 42. The property owner or operator shall be responsible for complying with the Operation Standards of Section 23-2-250 of the Weld County Code. 43. The property owner or operator shall be responsible for complying with the Open-mining Standards of Section 23-4-250, Weld County Code. 44. Personnel from the Weld County Government shall be granted access onto the property at any reasonable time in order to ensure the activities carried out on the property comply with the Development Standards stated herein and all applicable Weld County regulations. 45. The Special Review area shall be limited to the plans shown hereon and governed by the foregoing standards and all applicable Weld County regulations. Substantial changes from the plans or Development Standards as shown or stated shall require the approval of an amendment of the Permit by the Weld County Board of County Commissioners before such changes from the plans or Development Standards are permitted. Any other changes shall be filed in the office of the Department of Planning Services. 46. In accordance with Section 23-2-200.E of the Weld County Code, if the Use by Special Review has not commenced from the date of approval or is discontinued for a period of three (3) consecutive years, it shall be presumed inactive. The county shall initiate an • administrative hearing to consider whether to grant an extension of time to commence the use or revoke the Use by Special Review. If the Use by Special Review is revoked, it shall be Page 14 of 14 July 30, 2009 Mr. Kim Ogle • necessary to follow the procedures and requirements of Division 4 of the Weld County Code in order to reestablish any Use by Special Review. (Department of Planning Services) 47. The property owner or operator shall be responsible for complying with all of the foregoing Development Standards. Noncompliance with any of the foregoing Development Standards may be reason for revocation of the Permit by the Board of County Commissioners. (Department of Planning Services) We are enclosing four copies of the revised USR-1657 plan set for your review. The plan set was amended to delineate the appropriate items requested in section 1.M and the Development Standards have been added as described above. If you have any additional questions or comments, please feel free to contact me. Thank you for your time and input on this project. Sincerely, VECCHI & ASSOCIATES, LLC • • ennifer E. Vecchi, AICP Principal Attachments cc: Anne Johnson, Lafarge Julie Mikulas, Lafarge Sean Frisch, Lafarge Pam Hora, Lafarge R:4137 029 Documents USR Reviex Comments and Responses Fomial Application responses Response to USR Referral Comments doe V&A Lafarge_Parsons_USR_correspondenee Overall Response FINAL(merit)IV 7-29-09 I rI • i VECCHI &ASSOCIATES, LLC uRBAIN PLANN nC a oCs PG Box 1175 Longmont,cc 80502-I 175 Phone 303-774-0173 Fax 303-774-0173 VeccHAssociates©comcast.net July 28, 2009 Mr. Kim Ogle, Planning Manager Weld County Department of Planning Services 918 10th Street Greeley, CO 80631 RE: Responses to USR-1657 Planning Comments Dear Kim: We received your memorandum dated June 16, 2008 with comments pertaining to the Parsons Mine—Case File USR-1657. Following is a summary of your comments requiring a response followed by our response in italics. • 1. 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 applicant will create visual interest on the berms by varying the slope and top elevations and establishing a ground cover of native grasses. Mowing and weed maintenance will be more efficient if the berms have the appropriate slope and limited obstructions for maintenance equipment. The long-term goal for the reclamation is to enhance the habitat and add cover and food for wildlife in the newly created wetlands and along the shoreline of the newly created ponds. It is very difficult to transplant mature vegetation. Mature plantings, relocated at the end of the mining and reclamation process will not have the same chance for success as plantings that are installed and maintained while other phases of the mining are in process. The health and viability of the plantings is enhanced by planting smaller trees and shrubs in their permanent location on the site. This will also allow continued maintenance of plantings as phased mining and reclamation is completed. 2. Planning Services requests the applicant consider an informal plant material spacing of one, two, three, four and five plantings per group, and not utilitize 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. Page 2 of 3 r„,I Page2of3July 28, 2009. Mr. Kim Ogle • The most effective noise and visual barrier is a seeded berm. The applicant will create visual interest on the berms by varying the slope and top elevations. Erosion will be managed consistent with a storm water management and erosion control plan as required by the Colorado Department of Public Health and the Environment (CDPHE). Dust will also be managed as required by an Air Pollution Emission Notice to be obtained from CDPHE. Proposed plantings have been designed to enhance the habitat and add food and cover for area wildlife. Many of the plantings will expand and multiply over time. In addition, native plantings will establish along the shore lines and within the wetland areas. The end result will be the irregular informal plantings as requested above. 3. The applicant should prepare a list of plant material to be considered acceptable for substitution if the plant materials proposed are unavailable. Plant material availability varies from season to season and year to year. New cultivars and information relative to pests and diseases will influence plant availability during any specific growing season. If the listed plantings are not available, alternate plantings will be selected to further the stated goal of enhancing the habitat and providing food and cover for area wildlife. The applicant will provide an updated list at the time the plantings are installed. • 4. Slope stability may be an issue along the proposed "O" Street alignment due to the proximity of reclaimed ponds and wetlands. Address this issue through establishing a strong plant material presence to enable the slope to be held and prevent sloughing of soils and erosionary processes to gain a foothold. Alternatively, the applicant may provide a greater setback from the future right-of-way thereby ensuring slope stability. The recommended mining setbacks to structures were established based on a vertical mining face,per DRMS requirements and are outlined in the slope stability analysis report. In addition to the required vertical face analysis, the proposed reclaimed maximum slopes of 3H:1 V below the high water line where open water is proposed and 4H:1 V in all other areas were also evaluated using conventional factors of safety. The 3H:1 V and 4H.:1 V analysis indicates that the long-term reclaimed condition will not require as large of a setback as the mining condition. Reclaimed areas immediately adjacent to the future alignment of O Street consist of wetlands (IC), upland slopes leading to wetlands (Phases 1B and 3); upland slope areas leading to open water ponds (Phases 1B and 4C); and an open water pond(Phase 4A). The grass covered upland slopes and the silt basin wetlands will provide stable, vegetated areas that will not be any more subject to erosion than a standard roadside borrow ditch. The open water pond in Phase 4A is proposed to have a 10:1 slope into the shoreline to effectively dissipate any wave action. In addition, this gentle slope will create the appropriate hydrology for native willows, sedges and cattails to establish in the shallows and add additional stability to the area. • rI Page 3 of 3 July 28, 2009 Mr. Kim Ogle • 5. Submit an Improvements Agreement for Public and/or Private Road Maintenance for review and approval by the Departments of Planning and Public Works. Per our previous meeting, Rich Hastings of the Weld County Public Works Department will prepare the initial draft documents. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, VECCHI & ASSOCIATES, L ifer E. ecchi, AICP Principal Attachment cc: Anne Johnson, Lafarge Julie Mikulas, Lafarge • Sean Frisch, Lafarge Pam Hora, Tetra Tech IC 4177 029 Documents USR Review Comments and Responses Formal Application responses planning comment response doc • • 0 VECCHI &ASSOCIATES, LLC URBAN PLANNING & DESIGN P o Box 1175 Longmont,Co 80502-1175 Phone 303-774-0173 Fax 303-774-0173 VecchiAssociates©comcast.net July 28, 2009 Mr. Clay Kimmi, P.E. and Mr. Don Dunker, P.E. Weld County Public Works Department 1111 H Street P.O. Box 758 Greeley, CO 80632-0758 RE: Responses to USR-1657, Lafarge West, Inc.—Parsons Mine Public Works Comments Dear Clay and Don: We received a copy of your memorandum dated June 10, 2008 and email dated June 20, 2008 with comments pertaining to the USR-1657, Lafarge West, Inc. —Parsons Mine. Following is a summary of your comments followed by our response in italics. • COMMENTS: Roads: WCR 64.5 is a 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. The existing 60'ROW for WCR 64.5 is shown and an additional 10'of future ROW is called out on the Parsons Mine property to accommodate half of the needed ROW for future full build out needs. The width of the existing ROW for WCR 25 varies from 45' to 60'as indicated on our plans. We have added a note indicating that 60'of ROW is needed with the future realignment of WCR 25. 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 85`h 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 of 55 MPH in the west bound direction was used. Based on the County's traffic count, it would appear that Mr. Coppola's traffic study should be using a speed limit of 55 MPH in both directions. The traffic study will be updated to reflect the most current traffic counts and recommended speed limit. In addition, Lafarge's Traffic Engineer will work with County Staff to address the road design issues prior to recording the plat. • Page 2 of 4 w ' g Mr. Clay Kimmi July 28, 2009 • REQUIREMENTS: Slope Stability Study: The applicant shall address all redlined comments in the Slope Stability Study. The study will be updated, as appropriate, to respond to the redlined comments and submitted prior to recordation of the plat. 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. The setbacks that you refer to from the Weld County Zoning Ordinance are setbacks from road right-of-way to a structure. As directed by the Division of Reclamation, Mining and Safety, the setbacks referred to in the Slope Stability Analysis report address setbacks from the mining high wall to existing structures. The structure setback recommendations found in the Slope Stability Analysis report will be followed for mining near WCR 25 and WCR 64.5 because both of these are existing structures. Slope stability setbacks to "O"Street were not shown because "O" Street is not currently a structure. If mining and reclamation occur prior to construction of"O" Street, there will be no stability issues. If"O"Street is constructed prior to mining, Lafarge • will adjust their mining plans to maintain the setback distance recommended by the Slope Stability Analysis report. 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. The parking lot and access drive into and out of the facility will be paved(700'into the site). The access drive is proposed to be 30'wide to accommodate two-way traffic and curve radii will meet County standards. 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. Noted The applicant shall be responsible for any damage to County Roads that occurs as a result of slope failures. Lafarge agrees with this; therefore, we have been working with David Bauer on a Structures Agreement regarding this issue. Iffor some reason an agreement can not be reached, Lafarge will inform the DRMS of this situation and then defer to the setback recommendations made in the Slope Stability Analysis report to make sure all mining is far enough away from the County Page 3 of 4 Mr. Clay Kimmi July 28, 2009 • Roads to prevent slope failure. This is the procedure required by the DRMS according to DRMS Rule 6.4.19. Traffic Study: 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. Lafarge's Traffic Engineer will work with County Staff to address the road design issues prior to recording the plat. The applicant shall address all redlined comments shown in the Traffic Study Report. A revised version of the Traffic Study Report will be submitted prior to recording the plat. Storm Water Drainage: Applicant shall address all redlined comments shown in the Preliminary Drainage Report. All redlined comments will be addressed in the Final Drainage Report and submitted prior to recording the plat. 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. Plans have changed so that there will now be no discharge into the Whitney Ditch; therefore, an agreement to discharge will not be necessary. Given the proximity of the site to Greeley, the applicant shall use Greeley's Design Storm Rainfall amounts. Noted; Greeley's Design Storm Rainfall amounts will be used in the revised report. 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. A Grading Plan and Erosion and Sediment Control Plan will be submitted in conjunction with the Final Drainage Report prior to recording the plat. Evidence of a Storm Water Discharge permit will be provided one month prior to construction activities. 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. The parking area and access to the scale house shall be paved as requested in the above comment pertaining to access. The material will be transported by conveyor belt from the mining areas to the plant site for processing to minimize dust impacts. 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, Page 4 of 4 I' Mr. Clay Kimmi 0 July 28, 2009 S acceleration lanes, and deceleration lanes with adequate shoulder for a speed limit of 55 MPH. Public Works shall review and accept all designs and plans for this construction. Construction plans for the necessary improvements will be submitted to the County for review and approval prior to recording the plat. The applicant for the Parsons Mining USR-1657 shall be required to pay 50% of the cost to upgrade the curve in front of their site. This curve will be designed for a 45 MPH and posted at 40 MPH which will be similar to the curves built by the Owens Bottling Plant to the west of this site. This will be included as part of the Public Road Maintenance Agreement the applicants total cost will be$84,546. Public Works used the current 2008 cost of building a two lane paved roadway at$650,000 per mile to calculate the applicant's total cost. This amount would be reserved for 10-years if not used to build the two-lane roadway curve with approximately a 700- foot radius and a 137-foot of runoff lengths on each end of the curve the $84,546 would be refunded to the applicant. The County will need to purchase right of way from the north side of CR 64.5 and have utilities relocated these costs were not included in the $650,000 per mile used to assess the applicant's total cost. Noted. Thank you for your consideration. Please contact me if you have any questions. Sincerely, VECCHI & ASSOCIATES, LL? /Ink J ifer E. Vecchi, AICP Principal Attachments cc: Kim Ogle, Weld County Planning Anne Johnson, Lafarge Julie Mikulas, Lafarge Sean Frisch, Lafarge Pam Hora, Tetra Tech R:\4 137 0298Documents\USR\Review Comments and ResponscsFonnal ApplicationIresponse\Public Works.doc E V&A Lafarge Parsons Cortepondcnce Public Works FINAL 7-28-09 eq • VECCHI &ASSOCIATES, LLC URBAN PLANNING & DESIGN P 0.Box 1175 Longmont,CO 80502-1175 Phone 303-774-0173 Fax 303-774-0173 VecchiAssociates@comcast.net July 28, 2009 Ms. Lauren Light Environmental Health Weld County 155 N. 17th Avenue Greeley, CO 80631 RE: USR-1657 (Parsons Mine- Lafarge West, Inc.) Comment Responses Dear Lauren: We received your comments dated June 19, 2008 regarding USR-1657. Following is a listing of each of your recommended conditions of approval followed by notes in italics indicating either our agreement with the condition (indicated with the word `Noted') or our comments regarding the condition. You 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. Per our request, thank you for making this a requirement prior to operations. 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). Per our request, thank you for making this a requirement prior to construction. 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. Per our request, thank you for making this a requirement prior to operations. 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. Per our request, thank you for making this a requirement prior to operations. • r ` 1►l� Page 2 of 4 July 28, 2009 0 Ms. Lauren Light • 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). A draft Waste Handling Plan is attached. It is in draft form because Lafarge has not yet identified the waste handler and facility. Therefore,prior to recording the plat, Lafarge will update the Plan to provide this information. You recommended that the following requirement be incorporated into the permit as a condition 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. Noted You recommended 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. Noted 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. Noted 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. Noted 4. The applicant shall operate in accordance with the approved "waste handling plan". Noted 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. Noted—for the record, we have retitled the air quality report as a "Dust Abatement Plan" (see attached). 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. • Noted Page 3 of 4 1,0 July 28, 2009 Ms. Lauren Light • 7. A permanent, adequate water supply shall be provided for drinking and sanitary purposes for the office and plant site area. Noted 8. Adequate handwashing and toilet facilities shall be provided for employees, service people and company vendors. Noted 9. Any septic system located on the property must comply with all provisions of the Weld County Code, pertaining to Individual Sewage Disposal Systems. Noted 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. Noted 11. Bottled water shall be provided to employees at the temporary locations of the working face at all times. Noted 12. The applicant shall comply with all provisions of the Underground and Above Ground Storage Tank Regulations (7 CCR 1101-14). Noted 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. Noted 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. Noted 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). Noted 16. The applicant shall obtain a stormwater discharge permit from the Colorado Department of Public Health & Environment, Water Quality Control Division, as applicable. Noted 17. The operation shall comply with all applicable rules and regulations of the Colorado Division of Minerals and Geology. Noted; however, we will change the note to reference the Division of Reclamation Mining and Safety (the Division's new name). 18. The operation shall comply with all applicable rules and regulations of the State and Federal agencies and the Weld County Code. Noted • Page 4 of 4 July 28, 2009 0 Ms. Lauren Light • Thank you for your consideration. Please contact Pam Hora with Tetra Tech or me if you have any questions. Sincerely, VECCHI &ASSOCIATES C. ennifer E. ecchi, AICP Principal Attachment cc: Kim Ogle, Weld County Planning Anne Johnson, Lafarge Julie Mikulas, Lafarge Sean Frisch, Lafarge Pam Hora, Tetra Tech • \4137_029\Documcnts\USR\Rcvicw Comments and Renponscs\Formal Applicmion'rsponsn\Enviromnrnlal Health responsc.doc • • 1. S fLAFARGE AGGREGATES & CONCRETE Environmental DRAFT Waste Handling Plan Lafarge Parsons Property July 2009 • WASTE OIL We anticipate generating approximately 1000 gallons of waste oil annually from the mobile equipment. It will be stored in a small tank or drum with secondary containment and will be hauled off regularly by a local vendor. If the capacity of the fuel and oil storage exceeds 1,320 gallons, or if a single tank is kept on site with a capacity of 660 gallons or more, a Spill Prevention, Control, and Countermeasure(SPCC)plan will be developed and implemented. A copy of which can be made available upon request. SCRAP METAL Scrap metal generated on site from repairs to the plant and screens will be stored on site in a 20 yard dumpster which will be removed approximately 3 times per year by the supplier. INERT FILL Approximately 100,000 tons of waste concrete will be generated annually once the concrete plant is installed. The concrete will be stored on the property. All of the material will be re-crushed,recycled and sold as a product. TRASH A 2 yard trash dumpster will be picked up regularly by a local supplier. CHEMICALS Small quantities of chemicals may be stored on site. They will be stored in adequate containment and handled in conjunction with any and all applicable regulations. • • DUST ABATEMENT PLAN for USR 1657: Parsons Mine— Lafarge West, Inc. Lafarge will employ industry best practices at the Parsons Mine in order to minimize offsite fugitive dust impacts. Even though the local area around the Parsons Mine site typically experiences seasonally elevated particulate impacts as a result of existing fugitive dust sources(i.e., agricultural activities, dirt road use and oil and gas development), Lafarge acknowledges the potential exists for an increase in particulate concentrations in the area due to the proposed Parsons Mine operation. Therefore, to increase project compatibility, several mitigating measures will be used to reduce the impacts of the proposed operations to levels at or below those currently experienced due to existing sources. The following measures are planned to be used at the Parsons Mine site: • To control fugitive dust from exposed areas, inactive, exposed areas will be vegetated or stabilized so that they will not be a significant source of fugitive dust. • Fugitive dust from removal activities and the movement of removed material will be inherently controlled by the high moisture content of the material. • A conveyor system will be used to transport material from the extraction area to the material processing and storage area. Use of a conveyor system results in a significant reduction in emissions over transporting the material by trucks. Fugitive dust associated with loading the conveyor will be controlled by the high moisture content of the material. • Fugitive dust from the crushing and screening plant will be controlled through the use of water spray bars. • Fugitive dust from vehicle traffic (haul trucks, front-end loader, etc.) in and around the processing area will be reduced by restricting vehicle speeds and ensuring that high traffic areas are frequently watered or treated with stabilizers. • Unpaved roads and disturbed areas associated with the mining operation will be watered down as often as necessary to minimize re-entrainment of fugitive particulate matter from the road surface. • Dust-forming debris will be promptly removed from paved roads and on-site unpaved roads will be scraped and compacted to stabilize the road surface as often as necessary to minimize re- entrainment of fugitive particulate matter from the road surface. • Loaded haul trucks will be enclosed, covered,watered, or otherwise treated to minimize loss of material due to wind and spillage. • The site will be mined and reclaimed in relatively small (30-40 acre)phases to minimize the area of disturbance at any one time. In addition, concurrent reclamation practices will be used. As mining is completed in a phase, reclamation will be initiated and a new mining cell will be opened. • The proposed berms and mine walls will serve as wind breaks. • • VECCHI & ASSOCIATES, LLC URBAN PLANNING R DESIGN P O.Box 1 175 Longmont,CO 80502-1175 Phone 303-774-0173 Fax 303-774-0173 VecchiAssociates©comcast.net July 28, 2009 Mr.Joseph P. Plummer, AICP Director of Planning Town of Windsor 301 Walnut Street Windsor, CO 80550 RE: Response to Windsor's Referral Comments Regarding Weld County USR-1657 (Parsons Mine—Lafarge West,Inc.) Dear Mr. Plummer: We received a copy of your letter dated June 20, 2008 regarding the Windsor Planning Commission's recommended conditions of approval for Weld County USR-1657 (Parsons Mine—Lafarge West, Inc.). Below we have listed the conditions Windsor is recommending followed by our responses as discussed with the Planning Commission at their meeting on June 18, 2008. 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. • Lafarge will work with the County to grant or encourage the other landowners within the Parsons Mine boundary to grant the necessary right-of-way for County Roads 64.5 and 25. 2. The preferred route which as been identified for the location of the future Crossroads Boulevard/0 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. The potential right-of-way for the proposed 0 Street alignment has been shown on the plans as directed by Weld County Public Works. Once the alignment has been finalized, Lafarge will confer with Mr. Wayne Howard per your request. Sincerely, V CHI&ASSOCIATES, C. J ifer E. V cchi, AICP rincipal cc: Kim Ogle,Weld County Planning Anne Johnson, Lafarge Julie Mikulas, Lafarge Sean Frisch, Lafarge • Pam Hora, Tetra Tech R:\4139 029\Documents\USR\Review Comments and Responses\Submatalaoponses\W indsor response doc • DUST ABATEMENT PLAN for USR 1657: Parsons Mine— Lafarge West, Inc. Lafarge will employ industry best practices at the Parsons Mine in order to minimize offsite fugitive dust impacts. Even though the local area around the Parsons Mine site typically experiences seasonally elevated particulate impacts as a result of existing fugitive dust sources (i.e., agricultural activities, dirt road use and oil and gas development), Lafarge acknowledges the potential exists for an increase in particulate concentrations in the area due to the proposed Parsons Mine operation. Therefore, to increase project compatibility, several mitigating measures will be used to reduce the impacts of the proposed operations to levels at or below those currently experienced due to existing sources. The following measures are planned to be used at the Parsons Mine site: • To control fugitive dust from exposed areas, inactive, exposed areas will be vegetated or stabilized so that they will not be a significant source of fugitive dust. • Fugitive dust from removal activities and the movement of removed material will be inherently controlled by the high moisture content of the material. • A conveyor system will be used to transport material from the extraction area to the material processing and storage area. Use of a conveyor system results in a significant reduction in emissions over transporting the material by trucks. Fugitive dust associated with loading the conveyor will be controlled by the high moisture content of the material. • • Fugitive dust from the crushing and screening plant will be controlled through the use of water spray bars. • Fugitive dust from vehicle traffic (haul trucks, front-end loader, etc.) in and around the processing area will be reduced by restricting vehicle speeds and ensuring that high traffic areas are frequently watered or treated with stabilizers. • Unpaved roads and disturbed areas associated with the mining operation will be watered down as often as necessary to minimize re-entrainment of fugitive particulate matter from the road surface. • Dust-forming debris will be promptly removed from paved roads and on-site unpaved roads will be scraped and compacted to stabilize the road surface as often as necessary to minimize re- entrainment of fugitive particulate matter from the road surface. • Loaded haul trucks will be enclosed, covered, watered, or otherwise treated to minimize loss of material due to wind and spillage. • The site will be mined and reclaimed in relatively small (30-40 acre) phases to minimize the area of disturbance at any one time. In addition, concurrent reclamation practices will be used. As mining is completed in a phase, reclamation will be initiated and a new mining cell will be opened. • The proposed berms and mine walls will serve as wind breaks. • 4 tI • ref VECCHI &ASSOCIATES, LLC URBAN PLANNING & DESIGN P o Box 1175 Longmont,cO 80502-1175 Phone 303-774-0173 Fax 303-774-0173 VecchiAssociates@comcast.net July 29, 2009 Mr.Robert Powell Building Plans Examiner Department of Planning Services Weld County Administrative Offices 4209 CR 24.5 Longmont,CO 80504 RE: Responses to USR-1657 Planning Comments Dear Robert: We received a copy of your memorandum dated June 6, 2008 with comments pertaining to the Parsons Mine—Case File USR-1657. Following is a summary of your comments requiring a response followed by our response in italics. • 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 performed by a registered State of Colorado engineer shall be required. Noted 2. A plan review must be approved and a permit must be issued prior to the state of construction. Noted 3. Setback and offset distances shall be determined by the 2006 International Building Code(Offset and setback distances are measured from the farthest projection from the structure.) Noted 4. At this time the 2006 International Building,Residential,Plumbing,Mechanical and Fuel Gas Codes, the 2005 National Electric Code(adopting 2008 NEC,July 2008 ?), and Chapter 23 of the Weld County Code are being enforced. Noted 5. Buildings located within a 100 year flood plane require a Flood Hazard Development Plan. There are no buildings proposed within the 100 year floodplain. 6. A letter from the Fire District to ascertain if a FPD permit is required. There are no conflicts with the Fire District per the attached referral response letter from the Windsor-Severance Fire Protection District. • 1I$ Page 2 of 2 July 28, 2009 0 Mr. Robert Powell • Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, CHI&ASSOCIATES, ifer E. Vecchi,AICP Principal Attachment cc: Kim Ogle, Weld County Planning Anne Johnson, Lafarge Julie Mikulas, Lafarge Sean Frisch, Lafarge Pam flora, Tetra Tech • R:\41Il 039\Documents\USR\Review Comments and Responses\Submitmf oponses\building plans inspector response.doc V&A lafarge_Parsons_USR Correspondence Building Plans Examiner response FINAL • Weld County Planning Department GREELEY OFFICE • 6 JUL 24 7808 Weld County Re& ,�VED ikJuly 10, 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 e have reviewed the request and find no conflicts with our interests. ❑ See attached letter. Comments: /al' CC3 S \` s CZ 1-7,1-1/4-.t.— Signature �v v Date 7.7//e9 Agency t,i_dror---CCU cw-c- • +Weld County Planning Dept. +91810"Street,Greeley,CO.80631 8(970)353-6100 exL3540 +1970)304-6498 fax rt• VECCHI & ASSOCIATES, LLC URBAN PLANNING & DESIGN PO Box 1175 Longmont,Co 80502-1175 Phone 303-774-0173 Fax 303-774-0173 VecchiAssociates@comcast.net July 28, 2009 Mr. Brandon Gossard City of Greeley Community Development-Planning Division 1100 10`h Street, Suite 202 Greeley, CO 80631 RE: Response to USR-1657 Comments Dear Mr. Gossard: We have received a copy of the City of Greeley's review comments regarding USR-1657 and would like to respond to each of your comments. Below is a listing of your comments followed by our response to each comment. Ecological Significance • 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. Please see the attached Exhibits H and Jfrom the Division of Reclamation Mining and Safety (DRMS)application that were previously submitted for the Parsons Mine. Both of these exhibits address how the mining and reclamation plans for the Parsons Mine have taken into consideration the ecological significance of the area. Growth 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. No development is planned for the site at this time. The site is proposed to be mined and reclaimed. To help accommodate potential future growth, we have shown the potential location for the extension of'O'Street through the property. • Page 2 of 2 July 28, 2009 Mr. Brandon Gossard • Mineral Extraction The City of Greeley's 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. The site will be appropriately reclaimed following mining. See attached Exhibit Efrom the DRMS application for a detailed description of the reclamation plan. The reclamation plan was illustrated on the plan set(see sheets 7-10) that you should received with your referral packet. If you did not receive a copy of the USR plan set that shows this information, we would be happy to send you a copy if requested. General 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 IA, 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. This is an issue that the City will need to resolve with the oil and gas companies in the future. In reviewing both the mining and reclamation plans for the property, there is already adequate space to move the tanks farther away from the road without adjusting the mining boundary. Therefore, no changes to the mining plan are proposed in response to this comment. Thank you for your consideration. Please contact me if you have any questions. Sincerely, CHI & ASSOFIAT C nnifer E. ecchi, AICP Principal Attachments cc: Kim Ogle, Weld County Planning Anne Johnson, Julie Mikulas, Sean Frisch: Lafarge • Pam Hora, Tetra Tech RW I3]029\Documents\USRUteview Comments and RaponsalSubmina smponsa\WiMsor response.doc f b • EXHIBIT H Wildlife Information General Queen of the River Consultants was retained by Lafarge North America to evaluate potential wildlife habitat impacts including determination of T&E species habitat for the Parsons Property in Weld County, near Greeley, Colorado. This 381 acre parcel is located in the Bracewell, Colorado Quandrangle(Sections 30 and 31 of T6N, R66W and Sections 25 and 36 of T6N,R67W) on CR25 along the Cache La Poudre River (Attachment H-1). This site has historically been used for agriculture and livestock grazing. Livestock grazing(cattle) and hay production are currently the primary land uses on the property. The site encompasses several jurisdictional wetlands, a number of irrigation laterals, 2 ponds and approximately 6320 feet of the Cache La Poudre River. Significant Wildlife Resources The property is dominated by pasture grasses and agricultural fields with many areas populated by invasive and exotic plant species. Over one mile (6320')of the Cache La Poudre River flows through the southern portion of the property providing important wildlife habitat to many species especially raptors (birds of prey), song birds, and waterfowl. Red tailed hawks and great homed owls utilize the large cottonwood trees along the river corridor for nesting. Many species of • waterfowl utilize the river for nesting, feeding and resting. Wood ducks utilize the cottonwood trees and some artificial nest boxes along the river for nesting. Eleven wetlands associated with the river channel,manmade ponds and irrigation ditches also provide important wildlife habitat especially wading and shorebirds. The presence of invasive and exotic plant species throughout the property and along the river channel somewhat diminishes the quality of habitat. According to Colorado Division of Wildlife's Natural Diversity Information Source for Weld County and range maps of wildlife species utilizing Colorado Division of Wildlife's GAP Analysis, potential large mammal species utilizing the property include: mule deer, Virginia opossum, American beaver, red fox, raccoon, mink, and white-tailed deer. Small mammals that likely inhabit the property include: Common muskrat, coyote, raccoon, red fox, big brown bat, hoary bat, red bat, silver-haired bat, Eastern and desert cottontail, white-tailed jackrabbit, black-tailed prairie dog, bushy-tailed woodrat, deer mouse,white-footed mouse, Hispid pocket mouse, house mouse, Northern grasshopper mouse, Ord's kangaroo rat, meadow vole, prairie vole,rock squirrel,thirteen- lined ground squirrel, Plains harvest mouse, Plains pocket gopher, Western harvest mouse, and stripped skunk. Waterfowl and wading birds species include: pied billed grebe, Western grebe, white-fronted goose, Canada Goose, wood duck, mallard,Northern pintail,blue-winged teal, cinnamon teal, common merganser, American white pelican, double-crested cormorant,black-crowned night heron, American coot, American avocet, common snipe, killdeer, and white-faced ibis. Raptors likely to inhabit the site include turkey vulture, bald eagle, Northern harrier, Swainson's hawk, red-tailed • hawk, American kestrel, great-horned owl, and Western burrowing owl. Other likely bird species Parsons Mine DRMS 112 Reclamation Permit Application Page HI of H5 • include mourning dove,ring-necked pheasant, common nighthawk,Northern rough-winged swallow,bank swallow,barn swallow, cliff swallow,belted kingfisher, downy woodpecker, Northern flicker, homed lark, blue jay,black-billed magpie, American crow,red-winged blackbird, yellow-headed blackbird, Brewer's sparrow, Cassin's sparrow,brown thrasher, California gull, black-capped chickadee,white breasted nuthatch, house wren,house finch,marsh wren, American robin, chimney swift, common grackle, Eastern kingbird, Western meadowlark, European starling, house sparrow, mourning dove and wild turkey. Amphibians likely to occur in the area include bullfrog, Great Plains toad,Plains spadefoot, tiger salamander,Western chorus frog, and Woodhouse's toad. Reptiles include: fence lizard, lesser carless lizard, many-lined skink, ornate box turtle, painted turtle, short-homed lizard, six-lined racerunner, snapping turtle, spiny softshell, variable skink, Western rattlesnake,Plains garter snake, and gopher snake. Wildlife species observed on the property include: black-tailed prairie dog, common muskrat, raccoon, red fox, eastern cottontail, fox squirrel, great homed owl, red-tailed hawk,bald eagle, great blue heron, Canada goose, mallard, wood duck, Northern pintail,blue-winged teal,white faced ibis, red-winged blackbird,belted kingfisher, killdeer,American robin,Northern flicker,blue jay, black- billed magpie,broad-tailed hummingbird, Common nighthawk, Eastern meadowlark, European starling,house wren, house finch, house sparrow, bank swallow,black-capped chickadee, Western meadowlark,mourning dove and killdeer. • Seasonal Use of the Area Most of the wildlife species inhabiting the area are year round residents utilizing the entire corridor along the Poudre River. Migratory bird species utilize the river, irrigation ditches,ponds and the fields near these water features in both spring and fall. Presence and Estimated Population of Threatened or Endangered Species Sensitive species were assessed utilizing Colorado Division of Wildlife's Natural Diversity Information Source, Colorado Gap Analysis, and the Colorado Natural Heritage Program's Biodiversity Tracking and Conservation System (Attachment H-2). No federally listed threatened or endangered(T&E) species currently occurs on the property and no other sensitive species currently using the property were identified by the Colorado Natural Heritage Program's Biodiversity Tracking and Conservation System. T&E species that potentially occur or historically occurred near the site include: Preble's Meadow Jumping Mouse,Bald Eagle, whooping crane, burrowing owl,brassy minnow and Northern redbelly dace. A pair of bald eagles (Haliaeetus leucocephalus)nest on the adjacent property to the east and utilize the Parson's property for hunting and the river corridor for perching and roosting. The bald eagle was officially removed from the federal threatened list on July 9, 2007. Their populations will continue to be closely monitored and managed by the Colorado Division of Wildlife. The US Fish and Wildlife will also monitor their populations under their authority through the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act and Migratory Bird Treaty Act. The eagle's main source of food is the gravel pond on the adjacent property. They also utilize a large black-tailed prairie dog (Cynomys • ludovicianus) colony to the southeast of the property. A prairie dog colony did exist on the Parsons Mine DRMS 112 Reclamation Permit Application Page H2 of 115 r • Parson's property approximate 1/2 mile to the west of the nest but is no longer occupied by prairie dogs. This pair of Bald eagles began to establish a nest in an abandoned heron nest adjacent to a newly created gravel pond in 2002 after the completion of the Hall-Irwin gravel operation. The eagles did not raise any eaglets until their second year, when they had one eaglet which was banded by the Colorado Division of Wildlife. In 2004, they successfully raised another eaglet. In September 2006,strong winds blew down the dead cottonwood tree on which they nested. The Colorado Division of Wildlife and volunteers built a new nest structure in a nearby live cottonwood tree. The eagles returned in 2007 but built a new nest on another dead tree near the gravel pond. The pair has fledged 3 eaglets this year. Preble's meadow jumping mouse (Zapus hudsonius preblei), is a Federal and state threatened species that potentially inhabit the project area. Field assessment was made to determine whether suitable habitat exists according to requirements specified by US Fish &Wildlife Service(USFWS, 1998). Suitable habitat does not exist on the site for Preble's Meadow Jumping Mouse. Suitable Preble's habitat is described as "well-developed plains riparian vegetation with relatively undisturbed grassland and a water source in close proximity" (Armstrong, 1997). The Poudre River is deeply entrenched,heavily rip-rapped and sparsely vegetated. Disturbances have also been caused by farming practices and heavy grazing practices on this site. The shrub component that could provide cover and hibemaculum for PMJM is very sparse along the river. Due to channelization,past and current grazing management, the riparian zone is narrow and is dominated by upland grasses and a narrow band of Plains Cottonwood (Populus deltoides) and Russian Olive (Elaeagnus angustifolia). Presence/absence surveys have been conducted in the vicinity of this property with no captures of PMJM. (Colorado Natural Heritage Program,Biodiversity Tracking • and Conservation System, 3/24/07, Attachment H-2). A disqualification report was submitted to the US Fish and Wildlife Service on May 11, 2007 (Attachment H-3). A clearance letter was received from the US Fish and Wildlife Service on June 21, 2007 concluding that"the proposed project on this site should not have direct adverse affects to Prebles' or Preble's habitat" (Attachment H-4). Burrowing owls(Athena cunicularia) are listed as a state threatened species and known to occur in the area. Burrowing owls are found primarily in eastern Colorado as a summer resident and as casual winter resident on the eastern plains. They are fairly common on the eastern plains. A survey was conducted on April 12, May 1 and June 1, 2007 to determine the presence of burrowing owl nests. No nests were found or burrowing owl observed. The brassy minnow (Hybognathus hankinsoni), listed as a state threatened species,potentially could be found in the Poudre River. However, no impacts to the Poudre are anticipated as a 200'buffer from mining activity will protect the river. Whooping cranes(Grus americana), a federal and state endangered species, are known as a casual migrants on the Eastern Plains and have been observed near the Parson's property historically. The Colorado Natural Heritage Program's Biodiversity Tracking and Conservation System identified one occurrence record near the property in 1982 east of Severence. Whooping cranes have not been observed in the area recently. One historic record occurs in the CNHP's system for the Northern • redbelly dace (Phoxinus eos), a state endangered species. It was found approximately 1 mile downstream in 1914. Northern redbelly dace no longer inhabit the Cache La Poudre River. In Parsons Mine DRMS 112 Reclamation Permit Application Page H3 of H5 recent years only five specimens of the northern redbelly dace have been collected in Colorado. Propst(1980)collected two specimens from the Plum Creek drainage in the foothills south of Denver. Three others came from a pond adjacent to a Plum Creek tributary(Colorado Division of Wildlife,2007). General Effect on Wildlife Due to Mining Operation The proposed project will not adversely affect wildlife or wetlands. Some of the resident wildlife species utilizing the pasture such as Canada geese, foxes, and rabbits may be temporarily displaced by proposed mining activity. The final reclamation will provide more diverse and higher quality habitat for wildlife currently utilizing the site and will likely draw many other species. Several protection measures will be incorporated into the operation plan to protect the active nesting bald eagles. No mining activity will be conducted within %2 mile of the nest from November 15 through July 31. No mining activity will be conducted within '/mile of the nest throughout the year with the exception of development of a 12.7 acre wetland silt pond created just north of the river. The work for this pond will be conducted over a 2 year period and limited to August 15 to October 15. The river corridor will be protected from all mining activity by a 200 buffer. All existing wetlands identified in 2007 will not be impacted by mining operations. Colorado Division of Wildlife Recommendations Larry Rogstad,District Wildlife Manager for the Colorado Division of Wildlife was contacted on March 7, 2007. A site visit was conducted on June 1, 2007 and a coordination meeting was . conducted on June 19, 2007. Mr. Rogstad provided recommendations to protect the eagles and to maximize wildlife habitat during the reclamation phase of the gravel mining operation. His response will be forwarded to the DRMS when we receive it. Literature Cited Armstrong, D.M.,M.E., Bakeman, A.Deans, C.A., Meaney, and T.R. Ryan. 1997. Report on habitat findings of the Preble's meadow jumping mouse,Boulder, CO; Report to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and Colorado Division of Wildlife. 91 pp. Colorado Division of Wildlife. 2007. Natural Diversity Information Source. Wildlife Northern Redbelly Dace page. http://ndis.nrel.colostate.edu/wildlifespx.asp?SpCode=010036. Colorado Division of Wildlife. 2007. Colorado GAP Analysis. Species modules. http://ndisl.nrel.colostate.edu/cogap/gapframe.html. Menefee, Michael. 2006. Parsons Pit Site Review utilizing Colorado Natural Heritage Program (CNHP)Biodiversity Tracking and Conservation System. CNHP. 3/6/06. US Fish & Wildlife Service. 1998. "Interim Survey Guidelines for Preble's Meadow Jumping Mouse", May, 1998. US Fish & Wildlife Service. 1992. "Interim Survey Requirements for Spiranthes diluvialis" . November, 1992. Parsons Mine DRMS 112 Reclamation Permit Application Page H4 of H5 A i • Attachments H-1: Site Vicinity Map H-2: Colorado Natural Heritage Program Report H-3: Preble's Jumping Mouse Disqualification Report H-4: US Fish and Wildlife Service Preble's Jumping Mouse Clearance • • Parsons Mine DRMS 112 Reclamation Permit Application Page 115 of 115 , r • EXHIBIT J Vegetation Information General The Parson's Property is located in Colorado's Eastern Plains, within the Central Shortgrass Prairie Physiographic Region. The northern portion of the property is occupied by irrigated agricultural land. The Cache La Poudre River and its floodplain flows through the southern portion of the property. Elevation ranges between 4750 to 4710 feet. Habitat types include grasslands(including irrigated cropland and non-irrigated grazing pastures),wetlands and lowland riparian(along the river). Present Vegetation Types The majority of the property is occupied by irrigated cropland used to grow hay, corn and other row crops. Much of the property is maintained in irrigated and dryland pastures and is used for grazing. These areas are dominated by natural and introduced pasture grasses and are occupied by a significant number of invasive and noxious weed species. The Cache La Poudre River and its 100 year floodplain occupy the southern portion of the property. The property contains several wetlands which are under the jurisdiction of US Army Corp of Engineers (COE) through section 404 of the Clean Water Act. Wetland determinations were completed in accordance with standards specified by US Army Corp of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual. An on-site inspection was conducted on June 12, 2007 and August 2, 2007. Terry McKee, US Army COE)visited the site on September 17, 2007 to confirm the wetland boundaries. Eleven wetland sites were identified on the property(Attachment J-3). The Poudre River(wetland site#2)is considered waters of the US and a portion of its adjacent banks and floodplains have been identified as jurisdictional wetlands (wetland sites 3 and 3A). A natural drainage that flows in the Poudre River from the south (wetland site 6) and a manmade drainage that flows into the river from the north(wetland site 7) are also jurisdictional wetlands. A large manmade pond(wetland site 9) and a cattail dominated wetland which has developed in a stock watering area (wetland 4) are all connected by manmade wetland channel (wetland sites 4A and 8) flowing into wetland site 7. Two excavated ponds (wetland sites #1 and 5) are present just north of the river. Wetland Site 5 is not considered jurisdictional because there is no surface connectivity to the river. Wetland Site#1 has not surface water connectivity but is adjacent and has ground water connectivity to the river. All wetland sites including those considered non jurisdictional will not be mined or impacted by the project. Relationship of Present Vegetation to Soil Types The Soil Survey of Weld County Area, Colorado published in 1980 by the USDA, Soil Conservation Service was used to identify soils at the site. The soil series types and their relationship with the vegetation types within the project area include: Irrigated Croplands -Northern portion of the Property: Olney Fine Sandy Loam, 0- 1 percent(map unit 46) - This soil type occurs on the northern portion of the property. Olney Fine Sandy Loams consists of deep,well drained • soils that are formed in mixed outwash deposits. A typical surface layer is grayish brown Parsons Mine DRMS 112 Reclamation Permit Application Page J1 of J3 fine sandy loam about 15 inches thick underlain by very pale brown, calcareous fine sandy • loam to 60 inches. Olney soils have moderate permeability and moderate available water capacity. Surface runoff is slow and erosion hazard is low. Otero Sandy Loam, 0- 1 percent(map unit 50) - This soil type occurs on the northeast side of the property. Otero Sandy Loam soils consist of deep,well drained soils and are formed in mixed outwash and eolian deposits. Typical surface layer is brown sandy loam about 12 inches thick underlain by pale brown calcareous fine sandy loam to 60 inches. Otero Sandy Loam soils have rapid permeability and moderate available water capacity. Surface runoff is slow. The hazard of erosion by wind and water is low. Kim Loam, 1 -3 percent (map unit 32) -A small strip of Kim Loam soils occurs through the center of property above the Poudre River floodplain. These are deep,well drained soils on smooth plains and alluvial fans formed in mixed eolian deposits. A typical surface layer is brown and pale brown loam about 12 inches thick underlain by pale brown loam and pale brown fine sandy loam to 60 inches. Kim loam soils have moderate permeability and high available water capacity. Surface runoff is medium and erosion hazard is low. Otero Sandy Loam,3 - 5 percent(map unit 52) - A small strip of Otero Sandy Loam soils occurs through the center of the eastern above the Poudre River floodplain. These are deep, well drained soils on plains formed in mixed outwash and eolian deposits. A typical surface layer is brown sandy loam about 10 inches thick underlain by pale brown calcareous fine sandy loam to 60 inches. Otero Sandy Loam soils have rapid permeability and moderate • available water capacity. Surface runoff is medium. The hazard of erosion by wind and water is low Poudre River Floodplain - Lowland Riparian Habitat Aquolls and Aquents, gravelly substratum(Map unit 3) - These are nearly level soils on bottomlands and floodplains that occur across the center of the property. Aquolls and Aquents are deep,poorly drained soils that are formed in recent alluvium. No one pedon is typical. Soils typically have a mottled,mildly alkaline to moderately alkaline loamy or clayey surface layer and are layer of sand and gravel to 48 inches. The water table is at or near the surface in spring and during peak irrigation season. Thus these soils are subjected to excessive runoff. Wetlands 4, 7, 8 and 9 occur in this soil type. Bankard Sandy Loam, 0- 3 percent (map unit 10) - are deep, somewhat excessively drained soils on flood plains that occur along the Cache La Poudre River. They are formed in stratified recent alluvium along streams and rivers. A representative profile includes a surface layer of brown sandy loam about 4 inches thick underlain with pale brown, calcareous sand stratified with sandy loam, loam and fine gravel to 60". Bankard Sandy Loam soils have moderately rapid permeability and low available water capacity. Surface runoff is slow and erosion hazard by wind and water is low. Wetland 1, 2, 3, 6 and 7 occur in this soil type. • Parsons Mine DRMS 112 Reclamation Permit Application Page J2 of J3 • Colombo Clay Loam, 0- 1 percent (map unit 19) - and are located on the upper terrace of the Poudre River floodplain. Colombo Clay Loam soils are deep,well drained soils on flood plains formed in stratified calcareous alluvium. Typical surface layers consist of dark grayish brown clay loam about 14"underlain by a layer of very pale brown loam stratified with lenses of fine sand, medium sand and clay loam to 60". Colombo clay loam soils have moderately permeability and the high available water capacity. Surface runoff is slow. The hazard of erosion by wind and water is low. Wetland#7 occurs in this soil type. Southern Portion of the Property-Irrigated pasture: Nunn Clay Loam, 0- 1 percent(map unit 41) -This soil type occurs on the south side of the Poudre River. These are deep,well drained soils on smooth plains and terraces formed in mixed alluvium and eolian deposits. A typical surface layer is grayish brown clay loam about 14 inches thick underlain by clay loam and sandy loam to 60 inches. Kim loam soils have moderately slow permeability and high available water capacity. Surface runoff is slow and erosion hazard is low. Estimate of Average Annual Production This section is not applicable because reclaimed areas will not be used as range of agriculture. Literature Cited Armstrong,D.M., M.E., Bakeman, A.Deans, C.A., Meaney, and T.R. Ryan. 1997. Report on • habitat findings of the Preble's meadow jumping mouse, Boulder, CO; Report to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and Colorado Division of Wildlife. 91 pp. Cooper,Dr.David. 1996. Weld County Partnership Land Use System(PLUS)Proposed Wetland Classification and Protection Program. Menefee,Michael. 2006. Parsons Pit Site Review utilizing Colorado Natural Heritage Program(CNHP) Biodiversity Tracking and Conservation System. CNHP. 3/6/06. US Fish& Wildlife Service. 1998. "Interim Survey Guidelines for Preble's Meadow Jumping Mouse", May, 1998 Attachments J-1: Site Vicinity Map J-2: Wetland Delineation Report J-3: US Army Corps of Engineers Jurisdictional Wetland Determination • Parsons Mine DRMS 112 Reclamation Permit Application Page.13 of J3 n • • EXHIBIT E Reclamation Plan Design intent 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 and protected throughout mining and reclamation. Mining activities will be set back an appropriate distance from all areas designated for preservation. 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 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. This reclamation plan was developed based on: • • A thorough evaluation of the environmental resources and existing conditions on and adjacent to the property; • The context of the property relative to existing and planned land uses in the area; • The volume, depth and configuration of the mineral resource; • The landowners' plans for the property; and • The rules and policies of Weld County, the Colorado Division of Minerals and Geology and other applicable local, State and Federal agencies. Key considerations include the following: • The Cache La Poudre riparian corridor passes through the property. In addition, all wetlands on the site have been located and are identified on the pre-mining map. All efforts will be made to preserve and enhance the resources. • There is an existing bald eagle nest on an adjacent reclaimed gravel mine located south and east of the site. There are also raptor nests located on site along the Cache la Poudre River. • The sequence and timing of mining and reclamation activities will be managed to limit impacts to the eagles and other raptors, during the nesting season. • There is an opportunity to enhance wildlife habitat through the creation of a combination of open water ponds, silt basin wetlands, river corridor enhancement and shoreline plantings. • Silts generated by the mining process can be utilized to create diverse wetlands and add diversity to the habitat along this portion of the river corridor. • There are existing and planned oil and gas facilities on the site. Mining and reclamation activities will be managed to allow for continued operation and development of mineral • Parsons Mine DRMS 112 Reclamation Permit Application Page E1 of E7 • resources. New drilling activities will be encouraged to utilize existing, disturbed areas at the maximum extent possible. • There is significant overburden on this site. Excess material will be used as much as possible to create wetland benches adjacent to the river corridor,vary the slope and configuration of the open water ponds, create shorelines that are more irregular and limit the surface area of the ponds to minimize evaporative losses from the groundwater. • Groundwater monitoring wells will be installed to establish pre-mining baseline water levels. Groundwater levels in the area of existing vegetation will be monitored. If levels drop below seasonal levels, dewatering water will be diverted to the areas to sustain existing vegetation to limits impacts during mining. Post-Mining Land Use The post-mining land use, as proposed in this Reclamation Plan, consists of wetlands, enhanced riparian vegetation,unlined ponds and reclaimed upland areas. All disturbed areas will be vegetated as appropriate with a native seed mix, as recommended by the Soil Conservation Service (recommended seed mixes below). These uses are compatible with the surrounding land uses and with the Weld County planning goals. Lafarge will concurrently reclaim mine walls where mining has been completed according to the phases outlined in the Mine Plan. Reclamation, including re-grading and seeding, will be completed within two to five years following the completion of mining or filling operations for each phase. The mining and reclamation will leave no high walls on the property. No acid forming or • toxic materials will be used or encountered in the mining. There will be no auger holes, adits, or shafts left on the site. Reclamation Measures—Material Handling Site reclamation measures are illustrated in Exhibit F. Reclamation of the site will include 8 unlined open water ponds(60.4 acres), approximately 48.4 acres of wetlands and enhanced riparian areas and approximately 186.9 acres of upland (approximately 79.7 of these acres are within the mining limits and the remaining 107.2 acres are other disturbed areas within the permit boundary). The ponds will be reclaimed as un-sealed groundwater ponds. All mine walls will be re-graded with overburden material. Slopes above the post-mine high water level will be 4H:1V and slopes below the post-mine high water level will not exceed 3H:1 V. Topsoil will be spread over the surface of the re-graded slopes in all areas (except silt basin wetland) above the post-mining lake levels; all topsoil-covered surfaces will be revegetated with the appropriate seed mix. Scrapers will be used to place the backfilled overburden and topsoil. Using scrapers to layer the lifts at a maximum 3:1 slope ensures a stable configuration. Disturbed areas associated with site access and the conveyor will be scarified, covered with topsoil, and revegetated. Topsoil will be replaced, where required, in reclaimed areas at a depth of approximately six to twelve inches. • Parsons Mine DRMS 112 Reclamation Permit Application Page E2 of E7 • Site grading will be performed to create stable topography and will be consistent with post-closure • land uses. Reclamation quantities and costs are summarized in Exhibit L. Water Overburden and mine materials will be inert and impacts to local surface water or groundwater quality are not anticipated to occur as a result of mining activities. Lafarge West Inc. will comply with all applicable Colorado water laws and all applicable Federal and State water quality laws and regulations and appropriate storm water management and erosion control to protect the river and existing riparian vegetation. Wildlife Presently, the area is used for farming and livestock grazing. There is significant habitat for many wildlife species along the river corridor. There is an existing bald eagle nest situated in an unstable dead cottonwood tree located on the south side of the river(on the adjacent property next to a reclaimed gravel pond). Phasing, configuration and timing of mining and reclamation activities have been designed to limit impacts to eagle habitat based on the current location of the nest. Several protection and enhancement measures will be incorporated into the operation and reclamation plans to protect the current active bald eagle nest: • No mining activity will be conducted within %1 mile of the nest from November 15 through July 31. • No mining activity will be conducted within '/4 mile of the nest throughout the year with the exception of development of an 18± acre wetland silt pond created just north of the river. The work to create this pond will be conducted over a 2 year period and will be limited to • August 15 to October 15 to protect the occupied nest site. A wetland basin will be created through management of water and planting of native wetland plant species. The purpose of this silt basin is not only to dispose of smaller materials but also to develop a wetland adjacent to the river that will attract waterfowl and other wildlife species used as a food source for the eagles. • The river corridor will be protected from all mining activity by a 200 foot buffer. • Existing wetlands identified in 2007 will not be impacted by mining operations under the current Reclamation Plan. Any future changes to the Reclamation Plan that require an unavoidable impact to jurisdictional wetlands (such as a road crossing) would require coordination with the US Army Corp of Engineers and may involve obtaining the necessary permits under the Clean Water Act. • Coordination will be conducted annually with the Colorado Division of Wildlife to monitor the eagle nesting location and activity. Protection measures will be reviewed and coordinated with the Colorado Division of Wildlife should the eagles relocate their nest. • Coordination will be conducted annually with the Colorado Division of Wildlife to monitor the locations and activities of existing and new raptor nests. Additional wildlife enhancement measures include: • In consultation with the US Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) or other qualified grazing specialists, develop and implement a suitable grazing plan for the riparian corridor that will promote restoration of a quality riparian pasture while discouraging • Parsons Mine DRMS 112 Reclamation Permit Application Page E3 of E7 colonization of the site by invasive plant species. This plan may involve limitations on the • season of use and possibly a temporary rest. • A weed management program will be undertaken to control noxious and invasive plant species and to replace those species with native and naturalized vegetation. Canada thistle (Cirsium arvense) and leafy spurge(Euphorbia esula)will be treated by a combination of mowing at regular intervals and herbicides used at the appropriate times and applications levels. A weed management plan will be developed in cooperation with the Weld County Weed Division. • Riparian areas are one of the most important wildlife habitats in Eastern Colorado. This reclamation plan is being designed to maximize the upland riparian habitats by returning the mined areas to native upland habitats,native riparian habitats, and created wetlands. The plan will provide the most favorable habitats for wildlife through creation of edge by providing gentle slope transitions between riparian and wetland habitats and by limiting open water adjacent to the riparian zone. Restoring these areas from upland cultivated fields to wetlands and native wetland and riparian species will allow restoration of important floodplain functions. This plan is in harmony with the goals of the 1998 Greeley Open Space System Plan associated with wetlands,riparian areas and floodplains. • Wetlands created may become part of a wetland bank for the property to offset wetland impacts on other LaFarge projects. • Wetlands created for nesting waterfowl will contain shallow open water(6-9")and gentle slopes (8:1). Shorelines will be irregular and gently sloping to maximize wetland growth and maintenance and provide suitable habitat for shorebirds and waterfowl. • • Mining operations will be phased with reclamation occurring concurrently. However, some indigenous species may be temporarily displaced by the proposed mining activities. Please see Exhibit H for additional wildlife information. Topsoiling Topsoils in the proposed mine areas are predominantly Aquoll and Aquents, Colombo clay loam, Bankard sandy loam, Kim loam, Nunn clay loam, Otero sandy loam and Olney fine sandy loam. All suitable soil material will be salvaged for topsoil replacement. Topsoil will be replaced, where required, in reclaimed areas at a depth of approximately six to twelve inches. The topsoil will be segregated and stored separately from the overburden material as required by Rule 3.1.9(1). The mine plan map depicts the location and configuration of the topsoil berms. The berms will be protected from wind and water erosion by vegetative cover if in place more than one year. The stockpiles will be broadcast seeded (please see the Seed Mix for Upland Areas) and will be incorporated into a weed control program. Weed control consists of monthly inspections and, if necessary, chemical treatments in the applicable fall and spring seasons. Soil amendments are not expected to be required due to the nature of the soils. However, topsoil samples will be subjected to agricultural testing prior to reclamation to assess fertilizer requirements. The Soil Conservation Services (SCS)will be contacted periodically throughout reclamation for soil tests. SCS soil fertilizer recommendations, if any, will be followed. • Parsons Mine DRMS 112 Reclamation Permit Application Page E4 of E7 Revegetation • Following topsoil replacement,reseeding will be performed according to SCS recommended practices. Based on SCS guidance for other local projects having similar surficial soils, the following revegetation procedures are anticipated • Grass seed will typically be planted in unfrozen soil between October 1 and April 30. • Grass seed will be planted with a grass drill, or where necessary,with a broadcast seeder. • The proposed seed mix and application rates in pounds of pure live seed per acre are described on the following pages. • Weed control practices will be implemented as required. The above procedures may be modified as conditions dictate. If a significant invasion of noxious weeds occurs, the area will be mowed periodically for control. Weeds will be mowed before they go to seed during the first growing season. Mechanical control will be used as a first priority. Chemical methods will be used only if no other alternative produces acceptable results. In areas that are peripheral to the post-mining lake, marsh and aquatic plants are expected to establish themselves. The species of plants anticipated to occur naturally along the lake shoreline include cattails,willows, cottonwoods, and bulrushes. These plants should minimize shore erosion potential. The following are the proposed seed mixtures to be used on site where appropriate. However, availability may dictate the need for variety substitution. • Seed Mix for Upland Areas 1 S 2. d1�€i�11{„E 3\ alli � ^�9��, ��4 �� 1(. � ,( Western Wheata ass A. o. on smithii Arriba 17.0% 1.74 Sideoats Grama Bouteloua curtipendia Butte 17.5% 1.80 Mountain Brome Bromus marginatus Bromar 17.0 % 1.74 Prairie Sandreed Calamovilfa longifolia Goshen 1.0% 0.48 Switchgrass Panicum vir:atum Pathfinder 7.0% 0.67 Alkali Sacaton Sporobolus airoides 1.0% 0.10 Needle and Thread Sti.a comata 13.0% 1.29 Northern Sweetvetch Hedysarum boreale MN= 10.0% 1.02 Rock Mountain Penstemon Penstemon strictus Bandera 5:0% 0.46 Scarlet Globemallow Sphaeralcea coccinea ARS2936 3.0% 0.26 Prairie Wildrose Rosa Arkansana 8.5% 0.87 Total lbs/ac 100% 10.43 Pure Live Seed pounds per acre; rates shown are for drill seeding; double rates for broadcast seeding. • Parsons Mine DRMS 112 Reclamation Permit Application Page E5 of E7 • • Seed Mix for Transitional Zone/Water's Edge - _ - ... m ;gym - - ., a Western Wheat:. ass Ay of on smithii Arriba 10.6% 1.45 Side Oats Grama Bouteloua curd.endia Butte 9.2% 1.24 Canada wildrye El us canadensis Mandan 18.1% 2.47 Basin wildrye Elymus cinereus Magnar 9.8% 1.34 Switch a ass Panicum vir:atum Pathfinder 5.7% 0.78 Sand dro.seed S•orobolus c ptandrus 0.2% 0.03 Scarlet Globemallow S.haeralceacoccinea ARS2936 3.8% 0.52 American vetch Vica americana 42.6% 5.81 Total lbs/ac - 100% 13.64 Seed Mix for Wetland Areas2 .-rr xt. i?i €tii�i� 3iti� , ',...‘,a C.4i f.iliM*%:,-P {r raj�; ,mjt�s { C0� 'd 33 �E d�I QL C �t lh ""3"33 33 � �...� American Slou: y ass Beckmannia s zi:achne Nebraska Sed:e Carex nebraskensis 10 % 0.80 • Saw Beak Sedge Carex sti.ata 2 % 0.16 Saltgrass Disticillis stricta 5 % 0.40 S.ike Rush Eleocharis .alustris 5 % 0.40 Canada Wild e El us canadensis 10 % 0.80 Baltic Rush Juncus balticus 2 % 0.16 Tony's Rush Juncus torrei 2 % 0.16 Alkali Muhly Muhlenbergia asperifolia 8 % 0.64 Switchgrass Panicum virgatum 12 % 0.96 Hardstem Bulrush Sci .us acutus 2 % 0.16 Three-S.uare Sci .us americanus 10 % 0.80 Pale Bulrush Sci .us pallidus 10 % 0.80 Prairie Cord&i ass S.artina •ectinata 8 % 0.64 Arrow a ass Tri aochin maritima 2 % 0.16 Total lbs/acre 100% 8.00 t Pure Live Seed pounds per acre; rates shown are for drill seeding; double rates for broadcast seeding. 2 Silt basin wetlands will establish without seed/plantings. • Parsons Mine DRMS 112 Reclamation Permit Application Page E6 of E7 Typical Shoreline Tree and Shrub Plant List r tl i,tti.:�� ,ri,.iil' ₹ sa liii'x i;.7> �kt, � t�fi✓ t�i�i j1:^, t)r,.�.: � err.rE� tis ut'C:- n9r t? ft (i ?1j7af iv+,>a- -t1=t Peachleaf Willow Salix 30'-40' 1'S' 15 100% 40% Am :daloides 25'-60' Cottonless Populus Sargentii 70'-80' 2" 27 100% 60% Cottonwood 50'-60' Chokecherry Prunus Virginiana 15'-25' 5 gal. 15 100% 18.5 15'-20' American Plum Prunus 6-15' 5 gal Americanus Americanus Common Snowberry Symphoricarpus 3-4' 5 gal albus Golden Current Ribes aureum 3-6' n Wild Rose Rosa woodsii 3-6' 5 gal --_ Coyote Willow Salix Exigua 6'-12' 5 gal. 18 100% 22% 4'-8' Willow Staking - - - 150 To add thicket/habitat at water's eke Redtwig Dogwood Comus 6'-10' 5 gal. 15 100% 18.5 Stolonifera 6'-10' Western Prunus Besseyi 4'-5' 5 gal. 33 100% 41% Sandcherry 5'-7' • Parsons Mine DRMS 112 Reclamation Permit Application Page E7 of E7 Weld County Planning Department GREELEY OFFICE 1111 277nnq • PUBLIC NOTICE RECEIVED Lafarge West, Inc. (applicant),whose address is 10170 Church Ranch Way, Suite 200; Westminster, CO 80021 has filed an application for a Regular (112) Construction and Materials Operation Reclamation Permit Amendment with the Colorado Mined Land Reclamation Board under provisions of the Colorado Land Reclamation Act for the Extraction of Construction Materials. The application will amend permit M-1977-036 to add the 12.38 acre"Lafarge Brown Property" located in the NE '/a of Section 34, Township 6 North, Range 66 West of the 6th PM, Weld County, Colorado to the proposed 369 acre Greeley 35`h Avenue Mine located in the NE 'A of Section 34 and in a portion of Section 35, Township 6 North, Range 66 West of the 6th PM, Weld County, Colorado. The proposed date of commencement of mining on the Lafarge Brown Property is approximately the spring of 2010. The proposed date of completion is approximately 2015, but it depends on market conditions. The proposed future use of the land is an open water pond. Additional information and a tentative decision date may be obtained from the Division of Reclamation,Mining and Safety(1313 Sherman Street, Room 215, Denver, Colorado 80203, (303) 866-3567), from the Clerk to the Board of Weld County Commissioners' office(915 10th Street, Greeley, CO 80631), or from the above named applicant. A complete copy of the application is available at the Clerk to the Board of Weld County • Commissioners' office and at the Division's office. Comments concerning the application and exhibits must be in writing and must be received by the Division of Reclamation, Mining and Safety by 4:00 pm on September 3, 2009. Please note that under the provisions of C.R.S. 34-32.5-101 et seq., comments related to noise, truck traffic, hours of operation, visual impacts, effects on property values and other social or economic concerns are issues not subject to this Office's jurisdiction. These subjects, and similar ones, are typically addressed by your local governments, rather than the Division of Minerals and Geology or the Mined Land Reclamation Board. Please call Pam Hora at Tetra Tech at 303-772-5282 if you have questions regarding this application. • Queen of the River Consultants , Inc . 13810 N. 115-Street, Longmont,CO 80504 • Phone(303) 651-2514 • Fax(303) 651-2224 September 2, 2008 RE: Parsons Property Gravel Mine, Corp file#NWO-2007-3489-Den Terry McKee US Army Corp of Engineers Tri Lakes Project Office 9307 So. Wadsworth Blvd Littleton,CO 80128.6901 Dear Terry. Thank you for completing the jurisdictional determination on wetlands present on the Parsons Mine property located five miles west of Greeley,Colorado in Weld County. I am writing this letter to request a correction of the property size. Our letter dated October 3,2007 indicated the property as 387 acres. However,some of the property was removed from the mining project. The correct size of the property is 381 acres as shown on the enclosed map. This does not affect the wetland delineation or sites on which you provided determination. No response is needed from you. Please include this letter and map in our file. • Sincerely, gc.,... ki—..-1, Brenda Mitchell IlDProridiNg professional fishery and wildlife services on over 2.3 million acres of privately owned land throaghort the VS 1 B 'e 3 • o g o r co i m § 8 O ry to E a ' a o z 7 w d w w L n w a a Lutz W n y C I a M O Z9 Q y Q Z F �0 n w a d W ; b ' w w 0 LL 0 0 ? i I p° 41 w 4 J ; a U I I CC o oCC 41 V) � � � Fc " N z -• EE� ' oF z0z "' ita a 0 � t, 0j w 0 Z c, 0 co 0 0 a, •. .a OJ C' A u -t5tF X „ WCR ;; 1, yarirc \:41 ,y+ SRv 1 s;.±. 3F 'Vi x•r w __. al' � Y. �z gp �.x *h \ � a ' • a On fi @w. \„2 aY r t 7-- F !L. tlF. ....s-as'• i' ✓' `\ "� e t: Set- �..i."a5:- mk L r.r¢z^° i& —sue ,.�.ies.. uu^ #to- { a 1 m `� !d�Y., 'r dry.,'+ ale` e �� mn t � A��v"',v t1gwp'+�j • i ka + xs1 'le ,•• A Itiltg S if , ` --e",„ e j, ..... 'u+k9'"v5S.'. ',` ,d a, { G` 2fi :i•.+''1 'Via,WW. t' . xJaPIbY 3)00.3YK11Q.!„'JMW'N'4 NOAYl VM ttCOAL3MscO bOd alaNvuyn 4lgKIJLI Por a[,M1Y'9xVnVm MKKJICJE N.wpuwgZ'ZsinH 0 !WI( Applegate Group,Inc. July 7,2008 Ms. Pam Hora Senior Planner TetraTech,Inc. 1900 S. Sunset Street, Suite 1-F Longmont,CO 80501 Re: Parsons Mine Site Augmentation Obligation Dear Pam: Per your request, Applegate Group, Inc. has provided a summary of Lafarge West, Inc.'s (Lafarge) augmentation obligation and mine plans for the Parsons Mine in the Poudre River • Basin. Mr. Kim Ogle of the Weld County Planning Department requested additional information regarding the letter from Jeff Deatherage of the State Engineer's Office (SEO) dated June 10, 2008. Overall,the following three steps will be taken by Lafarge to comply with SEO: 1._ Obtain Substitute Water Supply Plan approval by the SEO during mining. 2. Obtain approval of a gravel pit well permit by the SEO. 3. Submit a water court application for a long-term augmentation plan for any unlined lakes three years prior to the completion of mining. Lafarge will submit a temporary substitute water supply plan (SWSP) to the SEO pursuant to Section 37-80-120 (2) C.R.S. These types of plans are known as SB-120 SWSPs. This statue was created in 1990 specifically to address the augmentation and water rights compliance issues for the sand and gravel mining industry. Lafarge presently has 12 mining sites in the Poudre River basin which operate under approved SWSPs and approved gravel pit well permits from the SEO. The SWSP for Parsons Mine will outline the operation of the plan to replace all out-of-priority depletions associated with mining. Consumptive uses, including water loss in mined material, dust control of haul roads and stockpiles, dewatering, washing material, and evaporative losses will be augmented by water rights currently owned by Lafarge. Lafarge has sufficient water rights to provide augmentation for the Parsons Mine during mining and after the site is reclaimed. The gravel pit well permit application will include all mining uses to be augmented in the SWSP. 1499 West 120th Avenue,Suite 200 • (303)452-6611 •Fax(303)452-2759 Denver,Colorado 80234-2759 www.applegategroup.com Ms. Pam Hora Re:Parsons Mine Augmentation • July 7, 2008 Page 2 of 2 Lafarge owns 12 Whitney Ditch shares, 8.5 Box Elder Ditch shares, and 550 Boyd and Freeman Ditch shares, which could provide augmentation water in this reach of the Poudre River. The SEO's SB-120 SWSP process allows a change of water right from irrigation to augmentation of out-of-priority industrial depletions. For example, the historic consumptive use credit from the Whitney Ditch shares owned by Lafarge would augment onsite water uses at Parsons Mine, such as dust control and aggregate washing. The Whitney Ditch shares are senior surface water rights, which would be diverted and returned to the Poudre River for augmentation. The Whitney Ditch shares would not be used as a direct water supply for mining operations as described in the Deatherage letter of June 10,2008. Lafarge will not expose groundwater at the Parsons Mine until the SWSP and gravel pit well permit are approved by the SEO. The process to obtain these approvals takes six to nine months. Lafarge will submit these applications prior to the anticipated start of mining. If you have any questions or require additional information,please contact me at(303) 452-6611 ext. 214 or richardraines@applegategroup.com. Cordially, • Applegate,Gfoup, Inc. Richard T. Raines,P.H. Senior Water Resource Specialist RTR/ta cc: Eric Reckentine, Lafarge West, Inc. AG File No. 05-105 N105105 Lafarge Water Planning\Discipllnes(Technical)\Water Rights\Panom PropertyV.tr-PHora-Parsons Mine-Weld County Comments 7.7.08.doc • Hello