HomeMy WebLinkAbout20090899.tiffWeld County Planning Department
GREELEY OFFICE
IAN 219nnq
January 19, 2009 RECEIVED
Subject;
Case # USR-1687
Name: Journey Ventures, LLC
I Proposed Project: USR for open pit mining & materials processing & asphalt and
concrete batch plants.
Location: West of and adjacent to county road 51 and north of county road 58
To: Weld County Department of Planning Services and County Commissioners
We are opposed to this open pit operation because:
1. Possible pollution to South Platte River
2. Opening up the under ground aquifer to pollution and evaporation, therefore
compromising our irrigation wells
3. Damage to our farming operations
4. Damage to the wild game along South Platte River by drying up the sloughs
5. Disturbing a wet land area
6. There has been no environmental impact study done on it.
We respectfully request that you do not give this proposed mining
operation the right to become operational. Thank you.
Francis & Helen Puype
24566 County Road 58
Greeley, CO. 80631
Jp0/L'.:4_,
EXHIBIT
C.A
2009-0899
• •
•
•
February 12, 2009
Weld County Department of Planning Services
918 10th Street
Greeley, Colorado 80631
RE: Journey Ventures LLC
Journey Ventures Pit
Case # USR-1687
Legal: SESE Section 7, 5N, 64W
To whom it may concern:
The purpose of this letter is to state my comments and objections concerning the
proposed Journey Ventures Pit which would be located at or near Section 7, Township 5
North, Range 64 West, 6th Prime Meridian in Weld County, Colorado. I own the property
adjacent to the North boundary of the property in the mining application.
My first concern is the need for this gravel operation. Several years ago, Hall -Irwin
Construction was granted a permit for a much larger gravel mine, concrete batch plant,
and asphalt batch plant on a location less than 1.5 miles from this proposed site. A 15
year completion time frame was granted by Weld County. To date, no mining has taken
place. It is my understanding that if the gravel is not mined in the next 10 years, any
remaining material will belong to the water district that has an agreement with Hall -Irwin
for water storage. I would think that if there is truly a demand for this material, Hall-Irwin's
operation would be underway. If demand increases, the Hall -Irwin site should be able to
meet demand for some time to come. I also know of several ditch companies that have
gravel available from cleaning of ditch canals downstream of river head gates, and they
can not give this material away.
In the application, it is stated a bentonite wall may be constructed from phase 3 to phase
11 in order to dry mine this site. This seems vague and the targeted time frame to do this
is certainly spread out. If a bentonite wall is constructed, I am concerned with the
"shadow" effect of such a wall in regards to ground water changes on my property. My
agricultural field is directly North of this property and ground water flows North toward the
South Platte River, which borders my property on the North. Will part of my agricultural
field have less underground water available behind this wall, and conversely, will parts
of my field have bog areas near the East and West edges of the wall due to the high
water table currently in this area? Two water table monitoring wells were placed this
past summer near the North/East and North/West corners of the proposed site. I do not
believe this is sufficient to truly understand historic water flows in this area. There are no
monitoring wells near the North center of the site which might demonstrate a
downstream "shadow" affect. When I mentioned my concern of "shadow" affect to JC
York, he said IF a bentonite wall is constructed a perforated drain pipe would be installed
on the downstream side of the mine site. The last I knew, water will take the path of least
resistance which would mean water would always flow at the entrance point or points of
the pipe and may not flow near the center depending on current ground water
EXHIBIT
•
•
•
fluctuations. This would mean more water concentration just downstream of the
entrance points, and a reduction of historical ground water near the center portion
directly behind the proposed pit.. I also have the same concerns even if a bentonite wall
is not constructed. A lined pit will essentially have the same effect it seems to me. If
Journey Ventures dewaters this site while mining, I have been told this will have
significant effect on ground water under my property. If I incur damages, will there be
compensation and for how long? Journey Ventures has not approached me with any
type of compensation agreement. I believe part of the conditions Journey Ventures
should be required to meet would be a study by a water engineering firm agreed to by
both Journey Ventures and myself to determine future changes to historic ground water
patterns, and the amount of damage that I may have based on what they are proposing.
Any damage that I may have will not be short term. It will be forever.
Another concern is weed control. In their application, Journey Ventures state there will
be no livestock on this property. They do not own any of the water that historically
irrigated this property. They do have a reclamation plan, but this does not address weed
control prior to mining. JC York told me they would control weeds either mechanically or
by spraying. The property directly East of this proposed mining site was dried up several
years ago, and the water is being used for augmentation. The owners have tried both
methods of weed control, and still there is an abundance of weeds yearly. The same is
true for the Hall Irwin site. They have tried to control weeds by mowing, but the Plumb
Ditch adjacent to the site has been full of tumble weeds since fall, more than have ever
been in this ditch.
I believe a 25+ year plan to mine this site is way too much. This site will adversely affect
surrounding neighbors in many ways. If there is truly a demand for the material, it should
be mined out more expediently.
If an asphalt plant is approved, what odor control will be required?
The gravel and overburden stockpiles are a concern. Dust blowing from these during
wind storms is an issue as well as the material being blown to adjacent properties and
across roadways.
I have concerns with the increase in traffic on County Road 58, and County Road 53. In
the questionnaire responses it stated "All traffic to and from the site will use Weld County
Road 53 and Weld County Road 58". Also stated "All commercial traffic exiting the site
will travel east on Weld County Road 58 to Weld County Road 53" then North or South
from there. How will this be controlled so that County Roads 47.5, 49.5 or 51 will not be
used? The increase in traffic at the intersection of County Roads 51 and 58 I believe is a
safety concern. When traveling North on County Road 51 from my home there is a steep
hill and stop sign. Due to the hill, this becomes a blind intersection while ascending the
sloped area and vision is limited in all direction until right at the intersection. If a truck
has to come to a complete stop at this intersection going South, they can not get started
again and must back down the hill. I also believe upgrades to County Road 53 should
be required due to the increase in traffic. Currently there are no acceleration or
deceleration lanes either North or South bound on County Road 53.
•
•
•
Thank y u for considering my concerns. If you would like to contact me my telephone
number (970) 352-0877. My address us 28806 County Road 51, Greeley, Co.
80631.
f
Ron Ba
„17,04-
er
• •
•
•
PLUMB IRRIGATION COMPANY
28806 COUNTY ROAD 51
GREELEY, CO 80631
February 12, 2009
Weld County Department of Planning Services
918 10th Street
Greeley, Co 80631
RE: JourJney Ventures LLC
Journey Ventures Pit
Case # USR-1687
Legal: SESE Section 7, 5N, 64W
To Whom It May Concern:
The Plumb Irrigation Company is hereby submitting an official opposition to the application made
by Journey Ventures, LLC for the pit referenced above. The Plumb Ditch is located on the northern
end of the proposed gravel pit and is going to be affected with the operation as proposed. Below is a
list of concerns the Board of Directors from the Plumb Ditch have.
2.
3.
4.
5.
The bank stability analysis performed by Terracon is insufficient to satisfy the concerns of
the ditch company. The analysis was completed from only one bore sample collected
on the NE corner of the proposed mine. The ditch company feels the integrity of the
canal will be in jeopardy if the application is approved.
Also a concern of the ditch company is the proposed 25' mining set -back from the Plumb
Ditch. The increased seepage will injure shareholders of the company as flows will be
reduced if not mitigated.
In reading the regulation, it appears that the Plumb Irrigation Company should have an
agreement with the gravel operator before submittal of the application. There is no
contract signed or any contract in progress to date.
The company has very strong concerns regarding the seep canal on the southern end of
the proposed mine. Mining activities and potentially the installation of the slurry wall could
cause this seep canal to experience diminished flows, thus causing injury to the
shareholders. A majority of the shares in the Plumb Irrigation Company are delivered to
the seep canal for carriage to the South Platte River for augmentation use. If the seep
canal does not flow during the irrigation season, there will be enormous carriage losses to
the South Platte River potentially resulting in a loss of water to Plumb Ditch
shareholders.
The application is very vague when describing the timing of the slurry wall construction.
Given the proximity of the Plumb Ditch and the obvious interaction of seepage from the
canal and dewatering of an adjacent gravel pit (25' away), there needs to be a firm
deadline or definition of when the wall will be installed.
The proposed reclamation plan includes planting trees in sections along the Plumb Ditch.
Tree planting on the ditch bank and easement is not allowed. Tree roots will cause bank
stability issues and take water from the canal and hamper the ability to access the ditch for
maintenance purposes. These tree roots will also penetrate the slurry wall.
EXHIBIT
US{Z- %6`67
�. C
Co, Vc
• •
•
•
•
7.
8.
9.
10
Also, related to the reclamation plan, the ditch company requests an access road to be
available on the south side of the South Lateral of the Plumb Ditch.
Concerning the future water storage, the applicant has not approached the ditch
company for a carriage agreement to fill the reservoir. The applicant is also not a
shareholder of the company, so therefore no water will be delivered to this facility. Any
application for water rights would be speculative since there is no end user.
The Plumb Irrigation Company has concerns regarding the control of vegetation and
noxious weeds on the property. Current land use is cattle -horse grazing which keeps the
vegetation controlled. Removal of the grass will promote annual vegetative growth that
without control will become a problem for the ditch company. The application mentions
periodic mowing, however, the Ditch Company would like to have the ability to require the
permit holder to control the vegetation when they see them being a problem. Mature
vegetation eventually will blow into the ditch in the fall and spring and be an additional
operating expense if not properly cared for during the vegetative growth season.
Stockpiles of mined material should not be placed near the Plumb Ditch to prevent wind
and or water erosion to deposit the material into the Plumb Ditch.
If there ate any questions related to this opposition please feel free to contact myself, Ron Baker,
phone # 970)352-0877, with any questions.
Sincerely,
An MA'
Ron Baker
President
Plumb Irrigation Company
•
J&T Consulting, Inc.
February 17, 2009
Helen and Francis Puype
24566 County Road 58
Greeley, Colorado 80631
EXHIBIT
as-I£`s7
RE: Objection to the Journey Ventures, LLC Use by Special Review Permit
Application Case No. USR 1687
Dear Mr. and Mrs. Puype:
Journey Ventures, LLC owns the property adjacent to a portion of your north property
line formerly owned by Plumb Ridge, LLC. We have applied for a Use by Special
Review Permit through Weld County and received your objection letter from Chris
Gathman at Weld County.
We would like to meet with you to discuss our proposed operation and address the
concerns you have with our proposed operation. Please let us know when we could
schedule a meeting with you to discuss your concerns.
I have also attached a property/structure owner agreement letter that the Division of
Reclamation, Mining, and Safety requires us to send out to adjacent property/structure
owner's that are within 200 feet of our proposed permit boundary. The attached letter
references the slope stability analysis that was performed to determine our mining limit
setback from the proposed permit boundary.
Feel free to call me with any questions you may have. I can be contacted at (970) 222-
9530 (mobile) or at (303) 457-0735 (office).
Sincerely,
e
v
J.C. York, P.E.
Principal
Jiff Consulting, Inc.
LI 1400 W 122nd Avenue — Suite 120 • Westminster CO 80234 • Ph: 303-457-0735 • Fax: 303-920-0343
•
•
•
7007 2560 0000
U.S. Postal Service r..
CERTIFIED MAIL . RECEIPT
(Domesfrc Marl Only; Na Insurance Coverage Provrded)
Postage
Certified Fee
Astern Receipt Fee
(Endixsernent Required)
Resux:telf Delivery Pee
itodoniernenl Required;
tom rostaae & Fees
• Complete Items 1, 2, and 3. Also complete
item 4 if Restricted Delivery is desired.
■ Print your name and address on the reverse
so that we can return the card to you.
• Attach this card to the back of the mailplece,
or on the front if space permits.
Helen and Francis Puype
24566 County Road 58
Greeley, CO 80631
7007 2560 0000 7034 9965
COMPLETE TN(S SEC Tian ON Oft !VERY
t���.
D. Is delivery address
If YES, enter delivery address below:
horn Item 1?
❑ Agent
0/Addressee
Date of Deltvery
21)
O Yes
ON
3. Seryice Type
O Certified Mail O Express Matt
❑ Registered ..O Return Receipt for Merchandise
❑ Insured Mail 0 C.O.D.
4. Restricted ()slivery? (Extra Kee) O Yea
PS Form 3811, February 2004
Domestic Return Reoeipt
102505-02 441540
1111 JO' Consulting, Inc.
February 18, 2009
Plumb Irrigation Company
Attn: Mr. Ron Baker
28806 County Road 51
Greeley, Colorado 80631
RE: Journey Ventures Pit — Responses to Comments from Objectors
DRMS Permit Application No. M-2008-080
Mr. Baker:
We are responding to the concerns that have been voiced by the following adjacent structure
and land owners in regard to our proposed Journey Ventures Pit aggregate mining operation:
Jim Klein
Ron Baker
Plumb Irrigation Company (Represented by Ron Baker and Central Colorado Water
Conservancy District's Operations Manager, Randy Ray, and Carl Hergenreder)
Lower Latham Reservoir Company (Represented by Dennis Hoshiko, Ted Buderus, and Cad
Hergenreder)
To address the concerns with the proposed Journey Ventures Pit mining operation we are
proposing the following items that we discussed at our meeting with the above mentioned
structure and land owners, except for Jim Klein who was not in attendance, on February 13,
2009 at the Central Colorado Water Conservancy District's Office in Greeley, Colorado.
Slurry Wall Liner and Ground Water Level Concerns
1. Journey Ventures, LLC is currently monitoring the ground water levels monthly in five
piezometers on the property owned by Joumey Ventures, LLC as well as recording the
water surface of the wetland, on the southern portion of the property, at the culvert
crossing Weld County Road 51. We agree to install two more piezometers to a depth of
30 feet as shown on the attached piezometer location map. The new piezometers will be
numbered JT-MW6 and JT-MW7.
2. Mr. Baker indicated he would like additional piezometers on his property but did not
indicate a location or number. We would suggest installing two additional piezometers to
a depth of 30 feet at locations provided by Mr. Baker and that access is allowed so
Journey Ventures, LLC can install the piezometers.
3. We discussed the frequency of monitoring and Journey Ventures, LLC agrees to install
monitoring equipment such that data can be logged on the water level measurements
more frequently (readings every hour) and the data can be downloaded. Journey
Ventures, LLC will be installing the monitoring equipment and downloading the data. We
agree to share the data. The monitoring wells will give us a baseline of data for
determining the gradient of the groundwater flow across the property. We are already
recording data monthly in six locations. This data will be used for designing a drain
iJ l
1400 W 122nd Avenue — Suite 120 • Westminster CO 80234 • Ph: 303-457-0735 • Fax: 303-92
EXHIBIT
Mr. Ron Baker
RE: Journey Ventures Pit — Responses to Comments from Objectors DRMS Permit Application
No. M-2008-080
February 17, 2009
around the perimeter of the proposed slurry wall if it is needed to keep groundwater from
mounding on the upstream gradient side of the slurry wall as well as keeping a
groundwater shadow from occurring on the downstream gradient side of the slurry wall.
The size of the drain, if required, will be designed using this data.
4. We discussed the differences, if they occur, in ground water levels once the proposed
slurry wall is constructed. Based on the consensus of the meeting attendees, Journey
Ventures, LLC agrees that if differences of 12 inches or greater occur from the seasonal
groundwater data gathered prior to dewatering operations during mining, the perimeter
drain will be installed after the slurry wall is installed. The data will be analyzed to ensure
that it is necessary to install the drain by Joumey Ventures, LLC. If groundwater
mounding were to occur the drain would lower the water table down to historic seasonal
levels and the same can be said if a shadow were to occur on the downstream side of
the slurry wall that the drain would equalize the groundwater levels back to the historic
seasonal levels.
5. The seasonal flow from the existing wetland that discharges into the culvert at Weld
County Road 51 was discussed. Journey Ventures, LLC is agreeable to monitoring flow
at the upstream side of the culvert with the assistance of the Plumb Irrigation Company
and the Central Colorado Water Conservancy District to develop a stage discharge
curve and using the culvert as a rated section. Journey Ventures, LLC would install a
piezometer/stilling well at this location to correspond to the depth of flow entering the
culvert. These flows would be monitored after the slurry wall is constructed and an outlet
on the drain will be designed if it is needed to keep the flows consistent with the
seasonal fluctuations that will be determined from the baseline data collected over the
next couple years prior to groundwater being exposed.
Mine Dewatering and Ground Water Level Concerns
1. Mining activities will be designed such that they will not affect the wetland discharge.
The main dewatering discharge point will be at the culvert crossing on CR 51 on Joumey
Ventures property. The location of recharge ditches around the outside of the perimeter
of the phase being mined will be installed to dewater into and then discharge to the
culvert at CR 51. The recharge ditch will be designed to pond and overflow such that the
aquifer is being recharged as much as possible with the overflow discharging to the
culvert at CR 51.
2. Journey Ventures, LLC will be required to obtain a substitute water supply plan and well
permit for the gravel mine prior to exposing ground water. This will occur in year two or
three of the mining as phases one and two of the mine do not expose groundwater so
nothing will be affected from the existing conditions during these phases.
3. Journey Ventures, LLC will have to obtain an individual permit from the Army Corps of
Engineers to disturb the wetland or slough in the southern portion of the property. The
individual 404 permit will have to be obtained and approved prior to mining Phase 8 of
the mining plan. Mitigation will be required to replace or provide wetland bank credits.
Slope Stability and Seepage Concerns with the South Branch of the Plumb Ditch
1. The slope stability analysis was performed to determine the setbacks from the South
Branch of the Plumb Ditch. The strength parameters used in the analysis were
4,, 1400 W 122n° Avenue — Suite 120 • Westminster CO 80234 • Ph: 303-457-0735 • Fax: 303-920-0343
Mr. Ron Baker
RE: Journey Ventures Pit — Responses to Comments from Objectors DRMS Permit Application
No. M-2008-080
February 17, 2009
conservative such that we could create a worst case scenario for a potential failure.
Based on the slope stability analysis performed previously we used an offset of 25 feet
from the toe of the south bank slope (bank mounded up on the south side of the ditch —
see attached detail in Mining Plan), a mining slope of a 3H (Horizontal):1V (Vertical) for
the top 10 to 13 feet and then a 2H:1V slope to the bottom of the pit. We are going to
change the mining slope to be more conservative to a 3H:1V to the bottom of the pit and
match the proposed reclaimed slope.
2. The mine phasing has been changed to include a width of 75 feet in addition to the 25
foot setback along the South Branch of the Plumb Ditch in the previous Phase 3 and
include it in Phase 10 as depicted on the revised Mining Plan attached. We are also
including in the permit narrative that the slurry wall will be installed prior to Phase 8 of
the mining operation. We have revised the phasing to delay mining near the South
Branch of the Plumb Ditch as discussed at our meeting on February 13, 2009.
3. We ask that the Plumb Irrigation Company and/or Central Colorado Water Conservancy
District share their measurements of flows in the South Branch of the Plumb Ditch to
determine a baseline on existing losses they currently experience during the irrigation
season. By establishing this baseline (the current baseline established may not be
indicative of our property not being irrigated as it has been in the past) we would be able
to determine what seepage increases may be caused during the mining when Journey
Ventures, LLC is dewatering. We would suggest being able to dewater directly to the
South Branch an amount of flow that is equal to the seepage that is being experienced
during the mining.
4. As discussed we would like to explore the option for re -aligning the South Branch of the
Plumb Ditch (by excavating an open channel ditch and lining with clay) on the property
owned by Journey Ventures, LLC to shift it north, run it parallel to the North Branch of
the Plumb Ditch across the property to the east side of County Road 51, and tie it back
into the existing South Branch of the Plumb Ditch. We understand that additional design
and calculations are needed to confirm that relocating the ditch does not affect the
capacity but we believe this is an option that should be pursued in regard to helping
eliminate seepage which benefits the ditch company while allowing Journey Ventures,
LLC to mine further away from the ditch. We would like to pursue the relocation of the
ditch prior to the installation of the slurry wall.
Weed Control and Dust Concerns
1. Journey Ventures, LLC will have a weed control plan in place to help prevent noxious
weeds as well as controlling vegetation on the property such that the ditch will be
protected. We understand the effects of weeds and mature plant material being blown
into the ditch where the ditch company has to remove trash during the irrigation season.
We are committed to working with you while maintaining our property by mechanical
means and by spraying to prevent the spread of noxious weeds and plant material being
transported to the ditch. We are meeting with Weld County this week to discuss our
proposed weed control plan.
2. Journey Ventures, LLC is required to have a dust abatement plan in place as required by
Weld County and the State of Colorado. The State requires an Air Pollution Emission
Notice (APEN) to be applied for and approved by the State based on the treatments that
so V tt 1400 W 122nd Avenue — Suite 120 • Westminster CO 80234 • Ph: 303-457-0735 • Fax: 303-920-0343
Mr. Ron Baker
RE: Journey Ventures Pit — Responses to Comments from Objectors DRMS Permit Application
No. M-2008-080
February 17, 2009
will be applied to suppress dust. We will be suppressing dust on haul roads,
topsoil/overburden stockpiles (seeded after placement), and product stockpiles using a
water truck and sprinklers. The trucks leaving the site loaded will be required to be
tarped/covered and the haul road speeds will be reduced to aid in keeping dust
suppressed. The stockpiles for products and topsoil/overburden have been moved south
of the ditch to prevent wind or water erosion from depositing material into the ditch (See
revised Mining Plan for locations of stockpiles).
Trees
1. Journey Ventures, LLC has revised the plan where trees will not be located near the
ditch or slurry wall. These were for screening purposes at the northeast corner of the pit
but they have been removed.
Asphalt Plant
1. Journey Ventures, LLC will have to obtain an APEN for the plant. The APEN governs all
emission levels that are produced from the plant as regulated by the Colorado
Department of Public Health and Environment (CDPHE) and the Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA). The control of emissions and odor are performed by a filter
commonly known as a "baghouse" on asphalt plants.
It is our intent to work with you to address your concerns. We ask that you review these items
and promptly respond with any questions you may have. We have requested the hearings be
extended 30 days to the next available pre -hearing date for the DRMS and formal hearing date
for the Colorado Mined Land Reclamation Board in order to have additional time to work
through these issues with you. We would like to schedule a follow-up meeting with you and/or
your engineer to work through any outstanding issues. Assuming these issues are addressed to
your satisfaction, we will incorporate these into our permit with the DRMS and we ask that you
formally remove your objection.
Feel free to call me with any questions you may have or if there are items that I did not include.
Sincerely,
J.C. York, P.E.
Principal
AT Consulttng, Inc.
cc: Randy Ray, Central Colorado Water Conservancy District
Dennis Hoshiko, The Lower Latham Reservoir Company
Ted Buderus, The Lower Latham Reservoir Company
Carl Hergenreder, Plumb Irrigation Company and The Lower Latham Reservoir Company
Jim Klein
It' 1400 W 122nd Avenue — Suite 120 • Westminster CO 80234 • Ph: 303-457-0735 • Fax: 303-920-0343
• EXHIBIT
• b OSP" (E,L3
Chris Gathman 9 ' F
From: JC York [JCYork@j-tconsulting.com]
nt: Thursday, February26, 2009 9:12 AM
o; Chris Gathman
Subject: Journey Ventures, LLC USR 1687 - Neighborhood/Adjacent Land Owner Meetings
Attachments: Francis & Helen Puype Letter Requesting Meeting to Address Concerns 2.17.09.pdf; Puype
Certified Receipt.pdf
Francis & Helen
Puype Letter R...
Puype Certified
Receipt.pdf (2...
Chris —
We have met with or spoke to the following adjacent land owners:
Meeting on February 13, 2009 with The Lower Latham Reservoir Company, Plumb Irrigation
Company, and Ron Baker. - I sent you the letter response back to the meeting attendees and
their issues. Since that time Ron Baker sent objection letters to you with basically the
same issues other than the traffic. The traffic I believe we have addressed with our
traffic study. We also assume there will be something in the staff comments regarding the
traffic.
hone call to Mr. Jim Klein on February 16, 2009 - I spoke to Jim about our meeting on
February 13, 2009 that he did not attend and also sent him our response letter that
included addressing his concerns. He thanked me for the information but I don't know if he
will still object. He had told another partner of Journey Ventures, LLC (Todd Bean) that
he would work with us.
Meeting on February 17, 2009 with Jerry Lemons - I discussed his concerns with dust that
we have a dust abatement plan (water truck to water roads and stockpiles) and basically he
doesn't like the pit being there. We discussed the screening that we have shown on the USR
map and he requested that a screening fence be put up if we were going to work at night
and he believes the fence would help with dust. Mr. Lemons concern was that lights would
shine into his property if operations occurred at night and trucks were driving in and
out. I told him I would speak to the partners at Journey Ventures to see what they would
consider. After speaking to the partners they would consider installing screening fence on
Mr. Lemons north property line if there was a request to the County to have any night time
operations, if Journey Ventures or whom ever operated the pit requested a night time
operation. Currently night time operations are not a part of our permit application. The
partners would like to stay with planting the trees adjacent to Mr. Lemons east property
line as shown on the USR maps and understand there may be more trees that need to be
planted in that location. We did not show trees being planted on the north property line
due to the existing tank battery being in place already. Those tank batteries are not
currently screened. I will be sending a letter to Mr. Lemons from Journey Ventures, LLC
stating the intentions for screening and a screening fence if night time operations are
ever requested by the pit operator to the county.
•I have sent two e -mails to Francis and Helen Puype. The first was requesting a meeting to
see if we could discuss their concerns. The second was a response to their questions of
who I was and how I was involved with the project. I have also sent them a letter by
1
•
certified mail which is attached and I did receive the receipt Wk that they got the
letter. I have not been contacted back by them to meet with them.
sien you have staff comments compiled please e-mail them to me.
Regards,
J.C.
Mr. J.C. York, P.E.
J&T Consulting, Inc.
970-222-9530 (Cell)
303-457-0735 (Office)
303-920-0343 (FAX)
•
•
I
•
S
DEERE & AULT
MEMORANDUM
TO: Randy Ray
FROM: Scott Palmer, P.E., Colby J. Hayden, P.E.
DATE: March 18, 2009
RE: Plumb Ditch / Journey Ventures Pit Review;
D&A Job No. 0356.001.00
We have completed our review of the information that you have provided to us and the
information provided to us from J and T Consulting (JTC). We have reviewed the information in
light of how the proposed mining activities will impact the existing Plumb Ditch. We were
provided a copy of the Ditch Company's letter to the Division of Reclamation, Mining and
Safety (DRMS), dated January 21, 2009. We have provided the individual concerns mentioned
in that letter for reference, in italics.
I. The bank stability analysis performed by Terracon is insufficient to satisfy the concerns of
the Ditch Company. The analysis was completed from only one bore sample collected on the
NE corner of the proposed mine. The ditch company feels the integrity of the canal will be in
jeopardy if the application is approved.
'l'he slope stability analysis submitted to us for review was prepared by JTC, dated November
2008. The analysis used boring information from Terracon Consultants (Terracon) and J.A.
Cesare & Associates Gravel (JAC).
file slope stability study analyzed various cases around the site. The worst -case -scenario
involved a section including the south branch of the Plumb Ditch near boring JT-8 (Case 7). We
understand that the mining slope configuration has changed since the analysis was performed.
The slope will no longer be mined at a compound 3:1 (horizontal to vertical) and 2:1, like the
analysis shows. The proposed slope is now planned to be mined at a 3:1 all the way to the
bottom of the mining operations. The mine slope will match the reclamation slope.
The stability analysis had strength parameters that are different than what DRMS normally
requires, but we understand that the applicant has received approval from DRMS regarding the
stability analysis. Our opinion of the strength parameters is that they are typical of the materials
that will be encountered on the site except for the effective friction angle of 60 degrees for a soil-
bentonite slurry wall backfill. We generally model a soil-bentonite slurry wall with near zero
strength. If a post consolidation analysis is necessary, we will model the slurry wall with an
600 S. Airport Road, Building A, Suite 205
Longmont, CO 8050.3
Phony 303-65l446t • Tar 303.651.1469
•
•
effective cohesion of 200 and an effective friction angle of 15 degrees after the wall has been in
place at least one year.
However, the slurry wall is a small percentage of the failure surface and if the strength
parameters were changed we do not believe that a significant impact would be noted in the
analysis. Also because the 2:i (horizontal to vertical) portion of the slope will be changed to 3:1,
we do not believe that the slope stability analysis is inadequate.
The 25 -foot setback distance between the mining high wall and the ditch is inadequate for the
installation of a slurry wall and deep perimeter drain pipe. JTC's February 18, 2009 response
letter mentions that a 75 -foot distance has been added to the previous 25 -foot setback, but in the
mine plan that was submitted for our review (dated September 15, 2008) it was not shown. We
typically recommend a minimum 25 -foot separation from the slurry wall and property lines and a
15 to 75 -foot separation from the slurry wall and high wall depending on geometry. In the case
of ditches and other constraints, we typically recommend that the slurry wall working platform is
widened to 65 to 100 feet, depending on site geometry, to allow for backfill mixing operations.
We recommend that a cross-section drawing defining the distance between the ditch, perimeter
drain, slurry wall, and top of the 3:1 (horizontal to vertical) mine high wall be provided for
review. Once the setback distances are agreed upon, we recommend that an agreement between
the Ditch Company and the applicant be drafted to include a provision that if any significant
negative impact occurs to the ditch as the result of mining or construction of the slurry wall or
perimeter drain that the applicant will pay to repair the impact and any damages incurred if an
interruption of flow occurs.
2. Also a concern of the ditch company is the proposed 25' mining set -back from the Plumb
Ditch. The increased seepage will injure shareholders of the company as flows will be
reduced if not mitigated
In their response letter, dated February 18, 2009, JTC recommends that baseline flows be
established in the ditch and that if necessary the mining operations could dewater into the ditch.
With the plans provided, it was difficult to determine what the plan for the perimeter is. A
perimeter drain appears to be proposed to bring water to the seep canal southeast of the proposed
mining after the installation of the slurry wall. Another purpose of this perimeter drain is to
eliminate the groundwater mound/shadow effect of the slurry wall. The dewatering operations
internal to the pit will be separated from the hydrogeologic functions of this perimeter drain by
the slurry wall. The strategy of dewatering from inside the pit and discharging this water into the
ditch will likely not work once the slurry wall is in place. Dewatering to the ditch may also raise
water rights issues related to timing of the discharges and the Plumb Ditch's availability to
accept diversions. It appears that the drain will be located very near the Plumb Ditch and could
take water from the ditch. The possibility exists for the perimeter drain to take seepage away
from the ditch faster than it can be replaced by dewatering a lined pit. We recommend that
piezometers be installed outside the drain alignment to establish a baseline of groundwater data.
Additionally, we recommend that a system of valves be installed on the underdrain to better
control the water transmission in the drain and groundwater levels outside the slurry wall.
•
-2-
•
•
3. In reading the regulation, it appears that the Plumb Ditch Company should have an
agreement with the gravel operator before submittal of the application. There is no contract
signed or any contract in progress to date.
It is our understanding of Rule 6.4.19 of the MINERAL RULES AND REGULATIONS OF THE
COLORADO MINED LAND RECLAMATION BOARD FOR THE EXTRACTION OF
CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS that an agreement needs to be attempted. We recommend that
the agreement be similar to that mentioned above.
4. The company has very strong concerns regarding the seep canal on the southern end of the
proposed mine. Mining activities and potentially the installation of the slurry wall could
cause this seep canal to experience diminished flows, thus causing injury to the shareholders.
A majority of the shares in the Plumb Ditch Company are delivered to the seep canal for
carriage to the South Platte River for augmentation use. If the seep canal does not flow
during the irrigation season, there will be enormous carriage losses to the South Platte River
and potentially resulting in a loss of water to Plumb Ditch share holders.
In their response letter JTC proposes discharging water from the bottom of the mine to a culvert
that flows underneath Weld County Road (WCR) 51 approximately in the middle of the eastern
side of the site. JTC proposes using historic flows to establish a baseline and monitor during
mining, and if necessary JTC will design an outlet for the perimeter drain. Additionally, the
mining plan shows nearly the entire seep ditch west of WCR 51 being removed. Historically,
this seep ditch is fed from the area west of WCR 51 with both surface and subsurface return
flows. At this point, it is uncertain that this water could be properly transmitted to the
appropriate point if the seep ditch is mined out and the slurry wall is constructed as planned. We
recommend that a 3-dimentional groundwater model such as MODFLOW be developed and
analyzed for the historic condition, during mining and post -mining.
5. The application is very vague when describing the timing of the slurry wall construction.
Given the proximity of the Plumb Ditch and the obvious interaction of seepage from the
canal and dewatering of an adjacent gravel pit (25' away), there needs to be a firm deadline
or definition or delineation of when the wall is installed.
No response was provided.
6. The proposed reclamation plan includes planting trees in sections along Plumb Ditch...
In their response letter, JTC says that the reclamation plan has been revised to remove the trees
from this location. The reclamation plan and mining plan provided did not show trees in this
location.
7. Also, related to the reclamation plan, the ditch company requests an access mad to be
available on the south side of the South Lateral of the Plumb Ditch.
Because it is required for the maintenance of the ditch, we recommend that room for a ditch
room for a ditch access road be added to distances agreed upon in items 1 and 2.
•
-3-
•
•
•
8. Concerning the future water storage, the applicant has not approached the ditch company
for a carriage agreement to fill the reservoir. The applicant is also not a shareholder of the
company, so therefore no water will be delivered to this facility. Any application for water
rights would be speculative since there is no end user.
No response was provided.
9. The Plumb Ditch Company has concerns regarding the control of vegetation and noxious
weeds on the property...
This issue appears to be addressed in the JTC response letter. We recommend adding language
in the agreement addressing weed control and long-term maintenance. Such maintenance
requirements will need to be tied to the property so that they stay in force should the property be
sold.
10. Stockpiles of mined material should not be placed near the Plumb Ditch to prevent wind and
or water erosion to deposit the material into the Plumb Ditch.
This issue appears to be addressed in the JTC response letter. We recommend that some erosion
protection such as a silt fence be installed prior to construction of the slurry wall and be
maintained throughout the mining until revegetation is established.
P 1D356 Plumb DitON035b.001 00 kum y Velum Revic JV-Plemb 3- l i.O9 Mrm, Doc
_Q_
L All 1 J&T Consulting, Inc,
NIS
March 20, 2009
Plumb Irrigation Company
Attn: Mr. Ron Baker
28806 County Road 51
Greeley, Colorado 80631
RE: Journey Ventures Pit — Responses to Comments from Deere & Ault Consultants, Inc.
DRMS Permit Application No. M-2008-080
Mr. Baker:
We are responding to the concerns that Mr. Scott Palmer and Mr. Colby Hayden with Deere &
Ault Consultants, Inc. provided to the Plumb Irrigation Company based on their review of the
Plumb Irrigation Company's concerns, J&T Consulting, Inc.'s response letter to the concerns
dated February 18, 2009, and the Joumey Ventures Pit DRMS application materials. We
reviewed the memo provided by Deere and Ault Consultants, Inc. yesterday with Mr. Scott
Palmer, Mr. Randy Ray, Mr. Carl Hergenreder, and yourself and wanted to follow up with a
letter to provide the responses we discussed that will become part of the permit with the DRMS
and in return we expect that objections will be withdrawn by all parties who previously objected.
1. The slope stability analysis has been accepted by the DRMS and staff did not have any
issues with the 25 -foot setback from the toe of slope of the ditch bank. J&T Consulting,
Inc. did evaluate different strength parameters (used friction angles from zero to ninety
degrees) for the slurry wall and ultimately these parameters do not change the outcome
of the analysis because the slurry wall is such a small percentage of the failure surface.
Journey Ventures, LLC will agree to changing the setback to the slurry wall from the toe
of slope of the ditch bank (outside or south side — see attached Detail No. 1) to 25 feet.
A drain (if needed) is also shown at a distance of 12.5 feet between the slurry wall and
the toe of slope of the ditch bank. The distance to the top of the slope of the reclaimed or
mining slope shall be 10 feet from the slurry wall or greater depending on the slurry wall
final design which the Plumb Irrigation Company shall have the opportunity to review
prior to any slurry wall construction. Journey Ventures, LLC agrees to provide the Plumb
Irrigation Ditch Company slurry wall design and construction drawings for review 6
months prior to installation of the slurry wall. Journey Ventures, LLC agrees to maintain
100 feet of separation between the toe of slope of the ditch bank and the mining slope
(see attached Detail No. 2 for mining prior to installation of the slurry wall along the
Plumb Irrigation Ditch). Journey Ventures, LLC agrees that a drain (if required) will have
to be designed based on the conditions that exist after the slurry wall is installed in order
to ensure that the drain will function correctly to restore groundwater conditions.
Journey Ventures, LLC did provide a draft agreement in regard to the DRMS
requirement for having or attempting to get a structure owner agreement for potential
damages to the ditch that are a result of the mining or reclamation activities. We are
agreeable to revising this agreement if the Plumb Irrigation Company can provide us
PM 1400 W 122nd Avenue — Suite 120 • Westminster CO 80234 • Ph: 303-457-0735 • Fax: 303-92
EXHIBIT
Mr. Ron Baker
RE: Journey Ventures Pit — Responses to Comments from Deere & Ault Consultants, Inc. DRMS Permit
Application No. M-2008-080
March 20, 2009
with some changes they would like to see, however that is also why we are agreeing to
revise the setbacks as shown in the attached details.
2. The plan for the perimeter drain is to install the drain if it is required to mitigate for
groundwater mounding or shadowing effects. At this point it is not known if the drain will
be required once the slurry wall is installed but Journey Ventures, LLC intends to monitor
the groundwater conditions prior to and after the installation of the slurry wall. Journey
Ventures, LLC has already agreed to share data from the existing piezometers and the
proposed piezometers that will be installed after the mining permit is obtained and
recording devices are installed. This data will provide a baseline which is required by the
DRMS for five (5) quarters prior to exposing groundwater during the mining. Once the
slurry wall is installed prior to mining Phase 8 of the mining plan additional piezometers
will have to be installed inside and outside the slurry wall alignment in order for the slurry
wall to meet/pass the State Engineer's performance requirements.
The dewatering that will occur once the slurry wall is installed is not expected to be
discharged into the South Branch of the Plumb Irrigation Ditch. We don't expect this to
be the case after the slurry wall is installed and reiterate that Journey Ventures, LLC only
intends to dewater back to the South Branch of the Plumb Ditch if seepage is being
caused by the mining prior to the installation of the slurry wall in which the seepage
could be captured by our dewatering during mining and placed back in the ditch and the
amount discharged back into the ditch matches the seepage loss.
The perimeter drain will be designed if it is required and the alignment of the drain may
be different than what is shown in the attached details. Currently the drain is shown to be
12.5 feet outside of the slurry wall around the entire perimeter. We understand that the
alignment and location of the drain may need adjustment (i.e. the drain line may need to
be located on the north side of the South Branch of the Plumb Ditch) in order to mitigate
for a mounding or shadowing effect from the slurry wall. The drain design would be
based off of the baseline data generated prior to mining and after the slurry wall is
installed. The drain will have to be sized such that it can function to restore groundwater
conditions and mitigate for mounding or shadowing that occurs. Journey Ventures, LLC
agrees to provide drain design and construction documents to the Plumb Irrigation
Company for review prior to installation to ensure that all parties agree the drain will
function adequately if it is required. The documents will be provided such that the ditch
company has adequate time to review and comment. The ditch company will also be
receiving the piezometer data from Journey Ventures, LLC on a monthly basis so they
will be aware of any changes in the groundwater elevations as Joumey Ventures, LLC
collects the data.
3. Please refer to the third paragraph in our response to item 1.
4. As discussed in our responses to item 1 and item 2 Journey Ventures, LLC has
committed to monitoring ground water levels in the existing and proposed piezometers
prior to mining, during mining, and after the slurry wall is constructed to determine if
installation of a drain will be required to mitigate for groundwater mounding or shadowing
effects. This would include historic flows that currently discharge to the culvert under
WCR 51 that are attributable to groundwater. All surface water runoff that enters the
property will be conveyed around the perimeter of the mining limit back to the culvert at
g l� 1400 W 122nd Avenue — Suite 120 • Westminster CO 80234 • Ph: 303-457-0735 • Fax: 303-920-0343
Mr. Ron Baker
RE: Journey Ventures Pit — Responses to Comments from Deere & Ault Consultants, Inc. DRMS Permit
Application No. M-2008-080
March 20, 2009
WCR 51 as they are currently and have historically been discharged. At this point we
don't agree that a groundwater model is necessary as the model will assume what
mining and post mining conditions are and we have agreed to monitor these conditions
with our existing and proposed piezometers. We will also be installing additional
piezometers at locations inside and outside the slurry wall once it is installed in order to
complete performance test requirements such that the slurry wall can be approved by
the State Engineer's Office. These piezometers will be monitored and data will be
collected such that the actual conditions can be accounted for and thus accurate data is
used in designing a perimeter drain if it is required to mitigate for groundwater
mounding/shadowing effects.
5. Journey Ventures, LLC has indicated to the DRMS that the slurry wall will be constructed
prior to mining Phase 8 of the mining plan and this is a part of the DRMS permit.
6. There are no longer plans to plant screening trees adjacent to or near the South Branch
of the Plumb Ditch.
7. Journey Ventures, LLC has provided revised setbacks to the slurry wall and
mining/reclamation slope along the South Branch of the Plumb Ditch which will address
the access road requirements. Please refer to the responses for items 1 and 2.
8. Journey Ventures, LLC has not approached the ditch company about a carriage
agreement to fill the reservoir at this point because an end user has not been finalized.
Getting a carriage agreement with the ditch company is an option that will be explored
once an end user has been finalized as we agree that this is definitely a viable option for
any end user especially if the user owns rights in the ditch. We believe the best and
highest use for the reclamation of the mine would be water storage and will continue to
pursue parties that could benefit from the proposed reclaimed reservoir.
9. Journey Ventures, LLC has met with the Weld County to discuss options for
implementing management practices to control vegetation and noxious weeds. We
received recommendations from the County and will be implementing them into a
management plan which we will be turning into the County as part of our Use by Special
Review Permit. The plan is being drafted and Journey Ventures, LLC has committed to
reviewing and evaluating the plan each year with the County to ensure management
practices are working effectively. Since this management plan is part of the Use by
Special Review permit it will remain tied to the property and in effect even if the property
is sold.
10. Journey Ventures, LLC agrees to provide erosion control protection around areas that
are disturbed during the installation of the slurry wall and construction of the topsoil and
overburden stock piles. The erosion protection will be removed after the vegetation is re-
established on the temporary stockpiles and around the perimeter of the slurry wall. The
outside perimeter of the slurry wall will likely be an access road around the site and will
be graveled.
We ask that you review these items and promptly respond with any questions you may have.
We will incorporate these into our permit with the DRMS in exchange for formal written objection
V 1400 W 122nd Avenue — Suite 120 • Westminster CO 80234 • Ph: 303-457-0735 • Fax: 303-920-0343
• •
Mr. Ron Baker
RE: Journey Ventures Pit — Responses to Comments from Deere & Ault Consultants, Inc. DRMS Permit
Application No. M-2008-080
March 20, 2009
withdrawal letters from all objectors to the DRMS and Weld County at or before the Pre -Hearing
Conference on March 27, 2009.
Feel free to call me with any questions you may have or if there are items that I did not include.
Sincerely,
J.C. York, P.E.
Principal
J&T Consulting, Inc.
cc: Randy Ray, Central Colorado Water Conservancy District
Carl Hergenreder, Plumb Irrigation Company and The Lower Latham Reservoir Company
Jim Klein
Scott Palmer, Deere & Ault Consultants, Inc.
IIIIbill 1400 W 122nd Avenue — Suite 120 • Westminster CO 80234 • Ph: 303-457-0735 • Fax: 303-920-0343
SOUTH BRANCH
PLUMB DITCH 25' 10'
/ X12.5' HI j 3' SHOP
3 E -
PERIMETER DRAIN j
IF REQUIRED
DETAIL NO. 1
MINING / RECLAIMED SECTION
(SLURRY WALL INSTALLED)
ALONG SOUTH BRANCH OF PLUMB DITCH
N.T.S.
P:\07113 Kersey Gravel Pit\drawings\Details\Plumb ditch Det 2.dwg, Layout/, 3/19/2009 3:32:21 PM
SOUTH BRANCH
PLUMB DITCH r 100' 1
/ \"" ff
S
DETAIL NO. 2
MINING SECTION
(PRIOR TO INSTALLING SLURRY WALL)
ALONG SOUTH BRANCH OF PLUMB DITCH
N.T.S.
VJ&T Consulting, Inc.
1400 W 122nd Avenue - Suite 120
Westminster, CO 80234
303-457-0735
JOURNEY VENTURES, LLC
JOURNEY VENTURES PIT
Date: 3/19/09
Job No: 07113
Drawn: WSS
Scale: N.T.S.
Sheet: 1 Of: 1
Chris Gathman
4t:
Cc:
Subject:
Chris,
Esther Gesick
Wednesday, April 01, 2009 10:53 AM
Chris Gathman
ELMO; Dave Long; Douglas Rademacher; Barbara Kirkmeyer; Sean Conway; William Garcia
RE: Proposed Project Case# USR-1687
Please add the following correspondence to the file for USR #1687 (Journey Ventures, LLC)
as a PC Exhibit for the 4/7/09 hearing.
Thanks!
Esther E. Gesick
Deputy Clerk to the Board
915 10th Street
Greeley, CO 80631
(970)356-4000 X4226
970)352-0242 (fax)
From: ELMO [mailto:lawilliamsjr@what-wire.com]
Sent: Tuesday, March 31, 2009 7:11 PM
To: Esther Gesick; Dave Long; Douglas Rademacher; bkirkmirer@co.weld.co.us; Sean Conway;
William Garcia
Subject: Proposed Project Case# USR-1687
January 19,2009
Subject:
Case # USR-1687
Name: Journey ventures, LLC
Proposed Project: USR for open pit mining & materials processing & asphalt And concrete
batch plants.
Location: West of and adjacent to county road 51 and North of county road 58
•To: Weld County Department of Planning Services and County Commissioners.
We are opposed to this open pit operation because:
1. Possible pollution to the South Platte river.
1
EXHIBIT
U≤ - fe„&7
a la._
2. Opening up the under ground aquifer to pollution and evaporation, therefore
compromising our irrigation wells
•. Damage to our farming operations
4. Damage to the wild game along South Platte River by drying up the sloughs
5 Disturbing a wet land area
6 There has been no environmental impact study done on it
We respectfully request that you do not give this proposed mining
operation the right to become operational.
Thank You
LeRoy A Williams
•
•
•
April 1, 2009
Plumb Irrigation Company
Attn: Mr. Ron Baker
28806 County Road 51
Greeley, Colorado 80631
RE: Journey Ventures, LLC. — Journey Ventures Pit
DRMS File No. M-2008-080
•
•
Mr. Baker.
Please accept this letter as a statement and agreement that the following items listed below will
be included in a Technical Revision to the permit. The items cannot be implemented into the
DRMS permit until the DRMS approves the application and financial warranty is posted with the
DRMS. Journey Ventures, LLC has one (1) year to post financial warranty after the permit is
approved at which time a Technical Revision would be submitted to the DRMS. Journey
Ventures. LLC would submit the Technical Revision after the financial warranty is posted and
approved by the DRMS.
We will incorporate the items below into our permit in exchange for formal written objection
withdrawal letters from all objectors (yourself and the Plumb Irrigation Company) to the DRMS
and Weld County before the Planning Commission Hearing on April 7, 2009 and the Mined
Land Reclamation Board Hearing on April 8, 2009.
Slurry Wall Liner and Ground Water Level Concerns
1. Journey Ventures, LLC will agree to install the two additional piezometers on your
property as well as the two additional piezometers on the Journey Ventures, LLC
property. The monitoring frequency will be modified to be weekly using a well logger as
we are currently measuring the depth to the groundwater in the existing piezometers
Journey Ventures. LLC will also agree to contacting you or whomever you designate to
come out with J&T Consulting, Inc when measuring the groundwater levels in the
piezometers; however once the mine is in operation the piezometers inside the permit
boundary must be monitored by persons having Mining Safety and Health Administration
training as well as taking the mine operator's safety training. The piezometers on the
north side of the South Branch of the Plumb Ditch are not located within the permit
boundary. The data will be shared with the ditch company as well as being submitted to
the DRMS.
2 Journey Ventures, LLC will agree to continue to monitor the level of the water surface at
the culvert crossing WCR 51 from the existing slough/wetland on the southeast corner of
the Journey Ventures, LLC property. The monitoring will be slightly modified as a culvert
calculation will be made based on the water surface elevation to estimate the flows from
the slough rather than rating the culvert. The data will be shared with the ditch company
as well as being submitted to the DRMS. The ditch company is welcome to rate the
Journey Ventures, LLC
P.O. Box 129 Greeley, Colorado 80632
EXHIBIT
-,7
(.�
Mr. Ron Baker
RE: Journey Ventures, LLC - Journey Ventures Pit - DRMS Permit File No. M-2008-080
2
culvert on the downstream end which is not located on the Journey Ventures, LLC
property.
3 We discussed the differences, if they occur, in ground water levels once the proposed
slurry wall is constructed. Based on the consensus of the meeting attendees, Journey
Ventures, LLC agrees that if differences of 12 inches or greater occur from the seasonal
groundwater data gathered prior to dewatering operations during mining, the perimeter
drain will be installed after the slurry wall is installed. The data will be analyzed to ensure
that it is necessary to install the drain by Journey Ventures, LLC. if groundwater
mounding were to occur the drain would lower the water table down to historic seasonal
levels and the same can be said if a shadow were to occur on the downstream side of
the slurry wall that the drain would equalize the groundwater levels back to the historic
seasonal levels.
4. Journey Ventures, LLC has indicated to the DRMS that the slurry wall will be constructed
prior to mining Phase 8 of the mining plan and this is a part of the DRMS permit.
5. The plan for the perimeter drain is to install the drain if it is required to mitigate for
groundwater mounding or shadowing effects. At this point it is not known if the drain will
be required once the slurry wall is installed but Journey Ventures, LLC intends to monitor
the groundwater conditions prior to and after the installation of the slurry wall. Journey
Ventures, LLC has already agreed to share data from the existing piezometers and the
proposed piezometers that will be installed after the mining permit is obtained and
recording devices are installed. This data will provide a baseline which is required by the
DRMS for five (5) quarters prior to exposing groundwater during the mining. Once the
slurry wall is installed prior to mining Phase 8 of the mining plan additional piezometers
will have to be installed inside and outside the slurry wall alignment in order for the slurry
wall to meet/pass the State Engineer's performance requirements.
The dewatering that will occur once the slurry wall is installed is not expected to be
discharged into the South Branch of the Plumb Irrigation Ditch. We don't expect this to
be the case after the slurry wall is installed and reiterate that Journey Ventures,
Ls LC only
born
intends to dewater back to the South Branch of the Plumb Ditch if seepage g
caused by the mining prior to the installation of the slurry wall in which the seepage
could be captured by our dewatering during mining and placed back in the ditch and the
amount discharged back into the ditch matches the seepage loss.
The perimeter drain will be designed if it is required and the alignment of the drain may
be different than what is shown in the attached details. Currently the drain is shown to be
12.5 feet outside of the slurry wall around the entire perimeter. We understand that the
alignment and location of the drain may need adjustment (i.e. the drain line may need to
be located on the north side of the South Branch of the Plumb Ditch) in order to mitigate
for a mounding or shadowing effect from the slurry wall. The drain design would be
based off of the baseline data generated prior to mining and after the slurry wall is
installed. The drain will have to be sized such that it can function to restore groundwater
conditions and mitigate for mounding or shadowing that occurs. Journey Ventures, LLC
agrees to provide drain design and construction documents to the Plumb Irrigation
Company for review prior to installation to ensure that all parties agree the drain will
function adequately if it is required. The documents will be provided such that the ditch
company has adequate time to review and comment. The ditch company will also be
receiving the piezometer data from Journey Ventures, LLC on a monthly basis so they
•
Journey Ventures, LLC
P.O. Box 129 Greeley, Colorado 80632
Mr. Ron Baker
RE: Journey Ventures, LLC -Journey Ventures Pd - DRMS Permit File No. M-2008-080
-3-
•
will be aware of any changes in the groundwater elevations as Journey Ventures, LLC
collects the data.
6 Journey Ventures. LLC has committed to monitoring ground water levels in the existing
and proposed piezometers prior to mining, during mining, and after the slurry wall is
constructed to determine if installation of a drain will be required to mitigate for
groundwater mounding or shadowing effects. This would include historic flows that
currently discharge to the culvert under WCR 51 that are attributable to groundwater. All
surface water runoff that enters the property will be conveyed around the perimeter of
the mining limit back to the culvert at WCR 51 as they are currently and have historically
been discharged. At this point we don't agree that a groundwater model is necessary as
the model will assume what mining and post mining conditions are and we have agreed
to monitor these conditions with our existing and proposed piezometers. We will also be
installing additional piezometers at locations inside and outside the slurry wall once it is
installed in order to complete performance test requirements such that the slurry wall
can be approved by the State Engineer's Office. These piezometers will be monitored
and data will be collected such that the actual conditions can be accounted for and thus
accurate data is used in designing a perimeter drain if it is required to mitigate for
groundwater mounding/shadowing effects.
7. Journey Ventures, LLC agrees to provide erosion control protection around areas that
are disturbed during the installation of the slurry wall and construction of the topsoil and
overburden stock piles. The erosion protection will be removed after the vegetation is re-
established on the temporary stockpiles and around the perimeter of the slurry wall. The
outside perimeter of the slurry wall will likely be an access road around the site and will
be graveled.
Mine Dewatering and Ground Water Level Concerns
8. Mining activities will be designed such that they will not affect the wetland discharge.
The main dewatering discharge point will be at the culvert crossing on CR 51 on Journey
Ventures property. The location of recharge ditches around the outside of the perimeter
of the phase being mined will be installed to dewater into and then discharge to the
culvert at CR 51. The recharge ditch will be designed to pond and overflow such that the
aquifer is being recharged as much as possible with the overflow discharging to the
culvert at CR 51.
9. Journey Ventures, LLC will be required to obtain a substitute water supply plan and well
permit for the gravel mine prior to exposing ground water. This will occur in year two or
three of the mining as phases one and two of the mine do not expose groundwater so
nothing will be affected from the existing conditions during these phases
10 Journey Ventures, LLC will have to obtain an individual permit from the Army Corps of
Engineers to disturb the wetland or slough in the southern portion of the property. The
individual 404 permit will have to be obtained and approved prior to mining Phase 8 of
the mining plan. Mitigation will be required to replace or provide wetland bank credits.
Slope Stability and Seepage Concerns with the South Branch of the Plumb Ditch
11 The slope stability analysis has been accepted by the DRMS and staff did not have any
issues with the 25 -foot setback from the toe of slope of the ditch bank. J&T Consulting,
Inc. did evaluate different strength parameters (used friction angles from zero to ninety
•
Journey Ventures, LLC
P.O. Box 129 Greeley, Colorado 80632
Mr. Ron Baker
RE: Journey Ventures, LLC - Journey Ventures Pit - DRMS Permit Fite No. M-2008-080
-4-
•
degrees) for the slurry wall and ultimately these parameters do not change the outcome
of the analysis because the slurry wall is such a small percentage of the failure surface.
Journey Ventures, LLC will agree to changing the setback to the slurry wall from the toe
of slope of the ditch bank (outside or south side — see attached Detail No. 1) to 25 feet.
A drain (if needed) is also shown at a distance of 12.5 feet between the slurry wall and
the toe of slope of the ditch bank. The distance to the top of the slope of the reclaimed or
mining slope shall be 10 feet from the slurry wall or greater depending on the slurry wall
final design which the Plumb Irrigation Company shall have the opportunity to review
prior to any slurry wall construction. Journey Ventures, LLC agrees to provide the Plumb
Irrigation Ditch Company slurry wall design and construction drawings for review 6
months prior to installation of the slurry wail. Journey Ventures, LLC agrees to maintain
100 feet of separation between the toe of slope of the ditch bank and the mining slope
(see attached Detail No. 2 for mining prior to installation of the slurry wall along the
Plumb Irrigation Ditch). Journey Ventures, LLC agrees that a drain (if required) will have
to be designed based on the conditions that exist after the slurry wall is installed in order
to ensure that the drain will function correctly to restore groundwater conditions.
12. The mine phasing has been changed to include a width of 75 feet in addition to the 25
foot setback along the South Branch of the Plumb Ditch in the previous Phase 3 and
include it in Phase 10 as depicted on the revised Mining Plan attached. We are also
including in the permit narrative that the slurry wall will be installed prior to Phase 8 of
the mining operation. We have revised the phasing to delay mining near the South
Branch of the Plumb Ditch.
13. Journey Ventures, LLC has provided revised setbacks to the slurry wall and
mining/reclamation slope along the South Branch of the Plumb Ditch which will address
the access road requirements.
14 The Plumb Irrigation Company and/or Central Colorado Water Conservancy District will
share their measurements of flows in the South Branch of the Plumb Ditch to determine
a baseline on existing losses they currently experience during the irrigation season. By
establishing this baseline (the current baseline established may not be indicative of our
property not being irrigated as it has been in the past) we would be able to determine
what seepage increases may be caused during the mining when Journey Ventures, LLC
is dewatering. We would suggest being able to dewater directly to the South Branch an
amount of flow that is equal to the seepage that is being experienced during the mining.
15. As discussed we would like to explore the option for re -aligning the South Branch of the
Plumb Ditch (by excavating an open channel ditch and lining with clay) on the property
owned by Journey Ventures, LLC to shift it north, run it parallel to the North Branch of
the Plumb Ditch across the property to the east side of County Road 51, and tie it back
into the existing South Branch of the Plumb Ditch. We understand that additional design
and calculations are needed to confirm that relocating the ditch does not affect the
capacity but we believe this is an option that should be pursued in regard to helping
eliminate seepage which benefits the ditch company while allowing Journey Ventures,
LLC to mine further away from the ditch. We would like to pursue the relocation of the
ditch prior to the installation of the slurry wall.
•
Journey Ventures, LLC
P.O. Box 129 Greeley, Colorado 80632
Mr Ron Baker
RE: Journey Ventures, LLC Journey Ventures Pit — DRMS Pemiit File No. M-2008-080
-5-
•
Weed Control and Dust Concerns
16. Journey Ventures, LLC will have a weed control plan in place
o p pre
envnoxious
{ be
weeds as well as controlling vegetation on the property such that the
protected We understand the effects of weeds and mature plant material being blown
into the ditch where the ditch company has to remove trash during the irrigation season.
We are committed to working with you while maintaining our property by mechanical
means and by spraying to prevent the spread of noxious weeds and plant material being
transported to the ditch. We are meeting with Weld County this week to discuss our
proposed weed control plan.
17 Journey Ventures, LLC has met with the Weld County to discuss options for
implementing management practices to control vegetation and noxious weeds. We
received recommendations from the County and will be implementing them into a
management plan which we will be turning into the County as part of our Use by Special
Review Permit. The plan is being drafted and Journey Ventures, LLC has committed to
reviewing and evaluating the plan each year with the County to ensure management
practices are working effectively. Since this management plan is part of the Use by
Special Review permit it will remain tied to the property and in effect even if the property
is sold.
18. Journey Ventures, LLC is required to have a dust abatement plan in place as required by
Weld County and the State of Colorado. The State requires an Air Pollution Emission
Notice (APEN) to be applied for and approved by the State based on the treatments that
will be applied to suppress dust. We will be suppressing dust on haul roads,
topsoil/overburden stockpiles (seeded after placement), and product stockpiles using a
water truck and sprinklers. The trucks leaving the site loaded will be required to be
tarped/covered and the haul road speeds will be reduced to aid in keeping dust
suppressed. The stockpiles for products and topsoil/overburden have been moved south
of the ditch to prevent wind or water erosion from depositing material into the ditch (See
revised Mining Plan for locations of stockpiles).
Trees
19. Journey Ventures, LLC has revised the plan where trees will not be located near the
ditch or slurry wall. These were for screening purposes at the northeast corner of the pit
but they have been removed.
20. There are no longer plans to plant screening trees adjacent to or near the South Branch
of the Plumb Ditch.
Asphalt Plant
21. Journey Ventures, LLC will have to obtain an APEN for the plant. The APEN governs all
emission levels that are produced from the plant as regulated by the Colorado
Department of Public Health and Environment (CDPHE) and the Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA). The control of emissions and odor are performed by a filter
commonly known as a "baghouse" on asphalt plants.
•
Journey Ventures, LLC
P.O. Box 129 Greeley, Colorado 80632
• •
Mr. Ron Baker
RE: Journey Ventures, LLC - Journey Ventures Pit - DRMS Permit File No. M-2008-080
6
Plumb Ditch Carriage Agreement
22. Journey Ventures, LLG has not approached the ditch company about a carnage
agreement to fill the reservoir at this point because an end user has not been finalized.
Getting a carriage agreement with the ditch company is an option that will be explored
once an end user has been finalized as we agree that this is definitely a viable option for
any end user especially if the user owns rights in the ditch. We believe the best and
highest use for the reclamation of the mine would be water storage and will continue to
pursue parties that could benefit from the proposed reclaimed reservoir.
Sincerely,
OMR R
Mitt :R
r ;
S
is Leone, Managing Member Date
Journey Ventures, LLC
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this 3 day of POI' by,
vncU'a 1 as NE:y cV l c ,A k t( MO( c- C CAI/ 4tar.
`Plumb Irrigation Company
Notary Public
My Commission Expires:
1o• -2z -2o i 1
Q /O .S'/1.20 D
Date
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of V� 1 by,
as
Notary Public
M--22-ZQt 1
My Commission Expires:
Journey Ventures, LLC
P.O. Box 129 Greeley, Colorado 80632
STATE OF COLORADO
MINED LAND RECLAMATION BOARD
PARTY STATUS WITHDRAWAL FORM
•
I
In the matter of File No. M -,2b 02 - 6BC;G Permit/Permit Amendment Application.
Name of Operator/Applicant and Site: -3`o ct,i Ai t/ V G A TZ,Pt= L L C .
-` Q "-PJy7 VeniTKizEt Pi T
tr
1 hereby withdraw as a party to this matter.
I hereby withdraw as a party to this matter and, if the Board holds a hearing. I
wish to address the Board at the formal hearing. if held, as a non -part) .
(Please note that if all objecting parties withdraw prior to the date set for the Board's
consideration of the application, the application may be approved by the Office without the
Board holding a hearing. In that event, there will be no opportunity to address the Board on any
issues related to the application. Also, the Board is not obligated to consider any issues raised by
a person or an entity that has withdrawn as a party.)
Regardless of a party status, the Division thoughtfully considers each issue submitted in writing
to the Division and provides a response to those issues within its jurisdiction in the Division's
"Rationale for Recommendation." The Rationale is available to any person by contacting the
Division. For persons who do not wish to become a party or withdraw as a party in this matter,
please contact the Division for information on application status.
R o SAA'E.
Printed Name
b -Az: 6 (i.: N Ty PFD /1h CI
Address
�k e Ley e. x3 Y bG_11
City. State f Lip Code
rm b W, ke e tnir-f47-1J11i" _. c � •n
E -Mail ddress ,1
1,12
Signature
12
( 9)0) .'s -v )7
Home Phone #
( ) Sr4m
Work Phone #
( )
FAX
c, y`O3/-zvu y
Date
EXHIBIT
• •
•
STATE OF COLORADO
MINED LAND RECLAMATION BOARD
PARTY STATUS WITHDRAWAL FORM
In the matter of File No. M-.260 - u . Permit/Permit Amendment Application.
Name of Operator/Applicant and Site: TOLL PA/0y�/ twNY.4. s" L (--C
,-ry Ltl?N ey t% a: /►/ ?u d e r Pi T
I hereby withdraw as a party to this matter.
I hereby withdraw as a party to this matter and, if the Board holds a hearing, I
wish to address the Board at the formal hearing, if held, as a non-party.
•
•
(Please note that if all objecting parties withdraw prior to the date set for the Board's
consideration of the application, the application may be approved by the Office without the
Board holding a hearing. In that event, there will be no opportunity to address the Board on any
issues related to the application. Also. the Board is not obligated to consider any issues raised by
a person or an entity that has withdrawn as a party.)
Regardless of a party status. the Division thoughtfully considers each issue submitted in writing
to the Division and provides a response to those issues within its jurisdiction in the Division's
"Rationale for Recommendation." The Rationale is available to any person by contacting the
Division. For persons who do not wish to become a party or withdraw as a party in this matter.
please contact the Division for information on application status.
PL fr nt )5 / Qa CA T/ v A/ d J . ( 9 7a ) 3 r ..t. - o Jr 7 '7
Printed Name Home Phone #
;2kdt` 7y Ro&¢ 1- / ( ) 5 /4 m c
Address Work Phone #
64 e64‘....-7 , C),_.) P.:42/ ( )
City, Stats. Zip Code FAX #
,1Y �4 o v f o sue'/fi t✓ ./>
E -M} l Address J Date
1t' GO P — P,Q 6s/ h c -7,4/ -2 --
Signature
12
EXHIBIT
• •
Chris Gathman
nt:
o:
o:
Subject:
Attachments:
David Snyder
Tuesday, April 07, 2009 11:00 AM
Chris Gathman
New Conditions for USR 1687
image001.jpg; image002.gif
Chris,
Here are 2 new conditions of approval that need to be added to the Journey Ventures USR.
1. Applicant shall install a Trucks Turning sign east of the proposed entrance for west
bound traffic complying with MUTCD Standards. Contact the Weld County Public Works
Traffic Engineer for proper placement of the sign.
2. Applicant shall construct a left turn slot on WCR 53 for North bound traffic turning
West onto WCR 58. The left turn slot shall be 400' in length including the beginning
taper, the redirect taper will be additional. Applicant shall provide construction
drawings stamped by a Registered Professional Engineer licensed to practice in the State
of Colorado.
If you have any questions, feel free to call or email.
David Snyder, E.I., CFM
ilingineer
Weld County Public Works Department
P. O. Box 758
Greeley, CO 80632
(970)304-6496, Extenstion 3745
dsnyder@co.weld.co.us <mailto:dsnyder@co.weld.co.us>
•
MEMORANDUM
TO: Planning Commissioners FROM: Chris Gathman — Planner III l..//� .� .
SUBJECT: Proposed Amendment to USR-1687
The Department of Public Works is requesting that the following language be added to the USR-
1687 staff recommendation:
Condition of Approval 1.L shall be modified to read: "The applicant shall enter into a (Public)
Long -Term Maintenance and Improvements Agreement according to policy regarding collateral
for improvements and post adequate collateral for all required materials. The Long -Term
Maintenance Agreement shall include all required off -site improvements including the
following:
1. Applicant shall install a Trucks Turning sign east of the proposed entrance for west
bound traffic complying with MUTCD Standards. Contact the Weld County Public Works
Traffic Engineer for proper placement of the sign.
2.Applicant shall construct a left turn slot on WCR 53 for North bound traffic turning West
onto WCR 58. The left turn slot shall be 400' in length including the beginning taper, the
redirect taper will be additional. Applicant shall provide construction drawings stamped
by a Registered Professional Engineer licensed to practice in the State of Colorado.
The agreement and form of collateral shall be reviewed by County Staff and accepted by the
Board of County Commissioners prior to recording the USR plat.
EXHIBIT
(9.0
Hello