The URL can be used to link to this page

Browse Search

Home My WebLink About20082452.tiff SITE SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND USE BY SPECIAL REVIEW (USR) APPLICATION • FOR PLANNING DEPARTMENT USE DATE RECEIVED: RECEIPT#/AMOUNT# /$ CASE#ASSIGNED: APPLICATION RECEIVED BY PLANNER ASSIGNED: Parcel Number: 055122000019, 055122300025 Legal Description: Lot B of RE-620 being part of the Southeast 1/4 of Section 22 Township 8N Range 65 West of the 6th P.M. Weld County, CO. Flood Plain:None Zone District:A(Agricultural) Total Acreage: 152 Acreage for USR: 152 Overlay District None Geological Hazard: None FEE OWNER(S)OF THE PROPERTY: Name: Hasbrouck Holdings, LLC Phone: (970)834-1583 Address: 39646 WCR 39 City/State/Zip Code: Ault, CO 80610 APPLICANT: Name: Hasbrouck Holdings, LLC AUTHORIZED AGENT (See Below:Authorization must accompany applications signed by Authorized Agent) • Name: Cody Hollingsworth, AGPROfessionals, LLC Address: 4350 Highway 66, Longmont, CO 80504 Phone: (970) 535-9318. Email: chollingsworth@agpros.com PROPOSED USE: To apply for a Use By Special Review Permit for a feeding operation consisting of 24,000hd of feeder cattle or 15,000hd of buffalo, pens,office, scale house,working areas,commodity area,feed storage area and associated storm water retention ponds. I(We)hereby depose and state under penalties of perjury that all statements, proposals,and/or plans submitted with or contained within the application are true and correct to the best of my(our)knowledge. Signatures of all fee owners of property must sign this application. If an Authorized Agent signs, a letter of authorization from all fee owners must be included with the application. If a corporation is the fee owner,notarized evidence must be included indicating that the signatory has to legal authority to sign for the corporation. n , /- .Signs re: caner r Authorized Agent Date • EXHIBIT 2008-2452 2, I I I I 0 /I1SR gOLINUARY . ICI II -i • • • • • 1 . 100 LEY 200 LEY A i 300 A EY 400 ' LEY 23 I) 38 D t• I m no ENS 100HI NS 1380 VIM 380• /HD 380 D 380 2/HD RRll rt25MD RACK' 025/IID Y RACK 025410 Y RACK • 0.25'MDYRACK I No • C4 u • r V O F I / o z / z • a • SR BOUNDARY •• i, I -mss . N PROPOSED ACCESS 311 RIGHT OF WAS W E S ° • IIIIMIIM W IIMI I_ SCALE- DATE: MIAGPRO Hasbrouck Holdings osizlzoos SHEET NO. COYII7.ETE LAND&RESOURCE SOLUFIONS Bison Feedlot COMPLETE LAND&RESOURCE SOLUTIONS 1 OF 1 1 • SITE SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND USE BY SPECIAL REVIEW (USR) QUESTIONNAIRE The following questions are to be answered and submitted as part of the USR application. If a question does not pertain to your use, please respond with "not applicable", with an explanation as to why the question is not applicable. 1 . Explain, in detail, the proposed use of the property. The existing use of this property is vacant land. This proposal is to request a use-by- special review permit for a total of 15,000hd of buffalo or 24,000hd of beef cattle. The feeding facility will be located on one parcel totaling approximately 160 acres. The applicant also owns an additional contiguous parcel consisting of approximately 50 acres. Activities will include feeding and housing buffalo and or beef cattle, storing and processing feed, storing manure, storing and maintaining feeding equipment, and farming. Supporting infrastructure includes buildings and corrals for livestock husbandry, office, scale, equipment storage, maintenance facilities, and waste management control structures. The facility will be operated under applicable local, state and federal regulations. The facility will also use standard and traditional operating procedures and best IImanagement practices consistent for feeding operations. 2. Explain how this proposal is consistent with the intent of the Weld County Code, Chapter 22 (Comprehensive Plan). Section 22-2-60 A.Goal.1 states "Conserve agricultural land for agricultural purposes which foster the economic health and continuance of agriculture". 1.A.Policy 1.1 states "Agricultural zoning will be established and maintained and promote the County's agricultural industry. Agricultural zoning is intended to provide areas for agricultural activities and other uses interdependent upon agriculture." The proposed use is consistent with the Weld County Comprehensive plan through the preservation, enhancement and growth of agriculture. The facility supports commercial and industrial uses directly related to or dependent upon agriculture. The proposed site is not located within a flood hazard zone, a geologic hazard zone or airport overlay zone. The property use is necessary in Weld County to preserve the agricultural economic base historically attributed to the area. The proposed request is consistent with the Weld County Comprehensive Plans support of agricultural activities. 3. Explain how this proposal is consistent with the intent of the Weld County Code, Chapter 23 (Zoning) and the zone district in which it is located. 0 • This proposal meets the intent of the agricultural zone district where the site is located. A livestock confinement operation exceeding four (4) animal units per acre are permitted in the A (Agricultural) zone district as a Use-by-Special Review. Currently there are four (4) similar uses in the area. Public health, safety and welfare are protected through adherence to applicable county, state and federal regulations and requirements and conditions of this permit. 4. What types of uses surround the site? Explain how the proposed use is consistent and compatible with surrounding land uses. Agricultural uses that surround this site are primarily crop farming and rural residential. There are other confined animal feeding operations that surround this site. They are as follows: • Three dairies - the first located approximately 3 miles northwest, the second located .75 miles east, and the third located 2.5 miles southwest. • Numerous feedlots - the first located 3 miles west, a second located 3.5 miles northwest, a third located 2.5 miles east, a fourth located 1.75 miles northwest, and many other small feedlots in the area. • One poultry operation approximately 4 miles west of this facility. This proposal is compatible with the surrounding agricultural uses and the Weld • County Comprehensive Plan. 5. Describe, in detail, the following: a. How many people will use this site? It is estimated at full build out there will be 6-10 full time employees, the owners, owners' family, sales representatives, and supply delivery people. b. How many employees are proposed to be employed at this site? At full build-out there will be approximately 6-10 employees. c. What are the hours of operation? The facility will operate approximately 12 hours per day. Equipment operations, trucks, farming activities and maintenance activities, other than emergencies, will occur primarily during daylight hours. d. What type and how many structures will be erected (built) on this site? Structures needed for this operation will include new corrals for cattle housing, a processing and working facility, commodity sheds, an office, and a scale. Please refer to the site plan maps for proposed structures. • • e. What type and how many animals, if any, will be on this site? The facility will have a capacity of 15000hd of buffalo or 24000hd of beef cattle. f. What kind (type, size, weight) of vehicles will access this site and how often? Typical vehicles accessing this site include feed and hay delivery trucks, semi- tractor/trailer, employee and owner vehicles, animal product vendors, and ag- related equipment. Operating equipment includes typical farming equipment, tractors, loaders and attachments. The following numbers are anticipated upon the renovation of the site. Commodity Trucks: 10/day Manure: trucks will travel on internal roads to compost site Livestock transportation — 6/day Rendering Truck— when needed. Employees— Daily Services, Venders, and Visitors g. Who will provide fire protection to the site? Ault Pierce Fire Department h. What is the water source on the property? (Both domestic and irrigation). Water for the buffalo or and domestic water is proposed to be provided by North Weld County water district. See attached letter for proposal details. There is currently 2 '/4 shares of Water Supply and Storage irrigation water and 1 irrigation well (well # 11262) on the subject property. What is the sewage disposal system on the property? (Existing and proposed). Sewage disposal will be septic systems. j. If storage or warehousing is proposed, what type of items will be stored? Storage and warehousing are not proposed as the primary use of this site. Feed, livestock bedding, manure, equipment parts, and supplies typical of farming activities will be stored on site. 6. Explain the proposed landscaping for the site. The landscaping shall be separately submitted as a landscape plan map as part of the application submittal. There is no further landscaping planned at this time. • t w 7. Explain any proposed reclamation procedures when termination of the Use by Special Review activity occurs. Reclamation procedures include compliance with applicable state regulations to manage solid manure and stormwater runoff until all relative material is adequately removed. Should the facility be permanently discontinued for use as a feeding operation, it would be marketed under applicable county planning and zoning regulations to its greatest and best use. 8. Explain how the storm water drainage will be handled on the site. Storm water drainage will be handled by the current wastewater retention structures, and berms, which are designed to meet all required regulations. Specific details regarding storm water management are outlined in the Nutrient Management Plan. 9. Explain how long it will take to construct this site and when construction and landscaping is scheduled to begin. Construction of the facility will begin immediately upon approval of the Use by Special Review permit; it will take approximately 2 years to complete the plan. i10. Explain where storage and/or stockpile of wastes will occur on this site. The manure produced at the facility will be composted or hauled off and provided to local farmers. The existing compost area is in the center of the property to help buffer it from the road and potential neighbors. Storm water and process wastewater will be collected into wastewater retention structures. All storm water structures are designed to meet all required regulations. No hazardous material storage is proposed for this site. Stormwater and wastewater will be periodically land applied at agronomic rates. Details of the manure management system are outlined in the Nutrient Management Plan. Debris and refuse will be collected and removed by a local trash service, such as Waste Management or BFI. i Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment Nutrient Management Plan Form • GENERAL INFORMATION: Name of Facility:_Double J Bison Feedlot Facility Physical Location:_RE 620,SE'4 Section 22,Township 8N,Ranee 65 West PRODUCTION AREA SECTION: A. STORAGE OF MANURE AND PROCESS WASTEWATER -61.17(8Xc)(i) The CAFO will ensure adequate storage of manure and process wastewater,including procedures to ensure proper operation and maintenance of the impoundments and tanks. The following procedures will be followed by the facility: (A) Except during the designed storm event,manure and process wastewater stored in impoundments and terminal tanks will be removed as necessary to maintain a minimum of two feet of freeboard,or Department-approved alternative freeboard. (B) Whenever the design capacity of impoundments and tanks is less than the volume required to store runoff from the'_;25-Year,24- Hour Storm,H Chronic Storm or❑ 100-Year,24-Hour Storm the structures will be dewatered to a level that restores the required capacity once soils on a land application site have the water holding capacity to receive process wastewater. Process Wastewater Storage Information: 2. Total Capacity Required to 3. Total Capacity Required to I. Impoundment/Tank/Drainage Hold all Wastes Accumulated Contain Storm Event Runoff 4.Total Capacity Available(acre-feet) Basin ID During the Storage Period and Direct Precipitation (acre-feet) (acre-feet) Pond 1 8.3 31.19 39.49 • Manure Storage Information: I. Manure Storage Area ID 2. Amount of Manure Produced 3. Total Amount of Non-pen Area Manure Storage (tons/year) Available(tons) In Pen Storage 34295 @ 32%moisture 0 Check here C'if excess manure is transferred to a third party. Check here X if manure is stockpiled in pen area. (Manure will be transferred to adjacent compost facility.) RECORDKEEPING REQUIREMENT: 1)Documentation that except during the designed storm event,manure and process wastewater stored in impoundments and terminal tanks is removed as necessary in maintain a minimum of two(2)feet of freeboard,except where the operator has requested and the Ag Program has approved an alternative freeboard level 2)Documentation that whenever the available capacity of impoundments and tanks is less than the volume required to store rumoff from the designed storm event,the structures shall be dewatered to a level that restores the required capacity once soils on a land application site have the water holding capacity to receive process wastewater. B. MORTALITY MANAGEMENT—61.17(8)(c)(ii) The CAFO will ensure proper management of animal mortalities to ensure that they are not disposed of in a liquid manure,storm water,or process wastewater storage system that is not specifically designed to treat animal mortalities. Method of Animal Mortalities Handling(check all that are applicable): X Composting Rendering Burial • !i Other: REC'ORDK'EEP/:1'G REOI'IREMEA T: 1)Documentation that ensures the proper management of animal mortalities to ensure that they are not disposed of in a liquid manure,storm water, or process wastewater storage system that is not specifically designed to treat animal mortalities. NMP for Double J Bison Feedlot Page 1 of 7 C. CLEAN WATER DIVERSION-61.17(8)(c)(iii) The CAFO will ensure that clean water resulting from the X 25-Year,24-Hour Storm,I ,Chronic Storm or I 1100-Year,24-Hour Storm is diverted from the production area. • Clean water diversions used(check all that are applicable): Location Used: X Berms West,North,East I Channels X Natural Topography _South f I Other RECORDKEEPING REOUIREMENR 1)Documentation that clean water is diverted from the designed storm event from the production area D. PREVENTION OF DIRECT CONTACT OF ANIMALS WITH WATERS OF THE UNITED STATES-61.17(S)(c)(iv) The CAFO will prevent direct contact of confined animals with surface waters. Waters of the U.S.means,in part: a) All waters... susceptible to use in interstate or foreign commerce...; b) All interstate waters._; c) All other waters such as intrastate lakes,rivers,streams(including intermittent streams),mudflats,sandflats,wetlands](including wetlands adjacent to waters identified in(a)through(e)of this definition),sloughs,prairie potholes,wet meadows,playa lakes,or natural ponds the use,degradation,or destruction of which would affect or could affect interstate or foreign commerce including any such waters: 1) Which are or could be used by interstate or foreign travelers for recreational or other purposes; 2) From which fish or shellfish are or could be taken and sold in interstate or foreign commerce;or 3) Which are used or could be used for industrial purposes...; d) All impoundments of waters otherwise defined as waters of the United States under this definition;and e) Tributaries of waters identified in paragraphs(a)through(d)of this definition. Wetlands means those areas that are inundated or saturated by surface or groundwater at a frequency and duration sufficient to support,and that under normal circumstances do support,a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions. 2 Waste treatment systems,including treatment ponds or lagoons designed to meet the requirements of CWA(other than cooling ponds as defined in 40 CFR 423.11(m)which also meet the criteria of this definition)are not waters of the United States. This exclusion applies only to manmade bodies of water which neither were originally created in waters of the United States(such as disposal area in wetlands)nor resulted from the impoundment of waters of the United States. • 1 Do waters of the U.S.flow throw h the.reduction area? C Yes X No v- n< 2. Do the animals have access to waters of the United States? I_I Yes X No 3. If yes,list the measures used to prevent direct contact(e.g.fencing)of animals with waters of the United States: RECORDKEEPING REOUIREMENT: I)Documentation that there is prevention of direct contact of confined animals with waters of the United States. E. CHEMICAL AND OTHER CONTAMINANT HANDLING—61.17(8)(c)(v) The CAFO will ensure chemicals and other contaminants handled on-site are not disposed of in any manure,stonn water,or process wastewater storage system unless specifically designed to treat such chemicals and other contaminants. Check all that are applicable: X Chemicals are used and empty containers are disposed of in accordance with manufacturer's guidelines X Chemicals are not stored in a room with a floor drain that discharges outside Ll Where are chemicals stored: X Storage is covered X Storage has secondary containment X Chemicals are stored in proper containers 0 Where are chemicals disposed: No chemicals are used at the facility Other: RECORDKEEPING REOL'/REd1ENT: 1)Documentation that chemicals and other contaminants handled on-site am not disposed of in any manure,storm water,or process wastewater storage system unless specifically designed to treat such chemicals and other contaminants. • NMP for Double J Bison Feedlot Page 2 of 7 LAND APPLICATION SECTION: If manure or process wastewater will be applied to a land application site,check the box here and go to Part(F):X • If neither manure nor process wastewater will be applied to a land application site or be transferred to a third party,check the box here and go to Part(M): If neither manure nor process wastewater will be applied to a land application site,but one or both will be transferred to a third party,check the box here and go to Part(G)then to Part(M): F. CONSERVATION PRACTICES—61.17(8)(c)(vi) The CAFO will identify and implement site-specific conservation practices to control runoff of pollutants to surface water. I. Conservation Practices for Land Application Sites Please indicate where any of the following best management practices are being implemented to control runoff of pollutants to surface water: Conservation Practice: Land Application Site ID Where Practice is Implemented(for land application sites where surface water is located in or down-gradient of the site): Buffer 35 ft Grass Buffer Setback Conservation Tillage Constructed Wetland Infiltration Field Grass Filter Terrace Tail Water Pit Process wastewater is not allowed to reach end of field Other(describe): 2. The facility will also implement the following conservation practices: (A) Solid manure will be incorporated as soon as possible after application,unless the application site has perennial vegetation or is no-tilled cropped,or except where the nutrient management plan adequately demonstrates that surface water quality will be protected where manure is not so incorporated. (B) Process wastewater to furrow-or flood-irrigated land application sites will be applied in a manner that prevents any process wastewater runoff into surface waters. (C) When process wastewater is sprinkler-applied,the soil water holding capacity of the soil will not be exceeded. (D) Process wastewater will not be applied to either frozen or flooded(i.e.,saturated)land application sites. (E) Manure or process wastewater will not be land-applied within 150 feet of domestic water supply wells,and within 300 feet of community domestic water supply wells. RECORDXEEP/,NG REOU!REMENT: 1)Documentation that situ-epecifc conservation practices have been identified and implemented to control runoff of pollutants to surface water. G. SAMPLING&TESTING OF MANURE,PROCESS WASTEWATER,AND SOIL—61.17(8)(c)(vii)land associated parts of a CAFO permit( The CAFO will identify protocols for appropriate sampling and testing of manure,process wastewater,and soil. Manure Process Wastewater Soil Frequency of X Annually X Annually For nitrate-As often as necessary to meet the Sampling: (If analyses are conducted (If analyses are conducted application rate calculation requirements: more frequently than more frequently than (indicate frequency) annually,the analyses must annually,the analyses must For phosphorus-minimum of once every 5 years or as be kept on-site for 5 years.) be kept on-site for 5 years.) necessary to meet the transport risk assessment requirements Analyzed for: Total Nitrogen,Ammonia(as Total Nitrogen,Ammonia Nitrate-to necessary depth zone(s); N),Nitrate(as N),and Total (as N),Nitrate(as N),and Phosphorus-top one-foot Phosphorus Total Phosphorus Sampling X CSU Cooperative X CSUCE 568 A X CSUCE 568 A Protocol Used: Extension(CE)568 A rI Other CSUCE Publication (please cite): :7 Adjacent State CE Publication (please cite): Testing Protocol X CSUCE X USEPA Method X "Methods of Soil Analysis,Part 3,Chemical Used: '' Adjacent State CE Department-approved Methods" (please cite): Method(requested in r, Department-approved Method(requested in • writing) writing) NMP for Double J Bison Feedlot Page 3 of 7 H. NUTRIENT BUDGET INFORMATION—61.17(8)(c)(x)(A)(VI) Nutrient Budget Information: • Crop: Manure and Process Wastewater Application Rate Description of Method(calculation/table)to be Used: Calculated: X CSUCE Published Fertilizer Suggestions I Adjacent State CE-Published Fertilizer Suggestions Corn I CNMP Method that meets USDA-N RCS standards 35+(7.5*YG)(8*ppm NO3(ave 2ft)-(0.85*YG*%OM)- CO NRCS NMP guidelines previous manure application credits-plow down legume Department-approved Method credit Tables 7A-8 CSU Bulletin#568A X CSUCE Published Fertilizer Suggestions I Adjacent State CE-Published Fertilizer Suggestions (aYG*2000)*(%Protein/6.5)*(0.6))/0.66)-(3.6*ppm NO3 Alfalfa CNMP Method that meets USDA-NRCS standards (2ft)-(30*%OM)-previous manure application credits I : CO NRCS NMP guidelines -I Department-approved Method CSU Soil Publication#0.565 X CSUCE Published Fertilizer Suggestions H Adjacent State CE-Published Fertilizer Suggestions Grass I CNMP Method that meets USDA-NRCS standards Tables 7e CSU Bulletin#568A I I CO NRCS NMP guidelines (See Attached) Department-approved Method CSUCE Published Fertilizer Suggestions 1 Adjacent State CE-Published Fertilizer Suggestions I I CNMP Method that meets USDA-NRCS standards CO NRCS NMP guidelines Department-approved Method • L CSUCE Published Fertilizer Suggestions LI Adjacent State CE-Published Fertilizer Suggestions CNMP Method that meets USDA-NRCS standards I7 CO NRCS NMP guidelines n Department-approved Method I CSUCE Published Fertilizer Suggestions Adjacent State CE-Published Fertilizer Suggestions _!. CNMP Method that meets USDA-NRCS standards Ll CO NRCS NMP guidelines I Department-approved Method Describe how realistic yield goals will be determined: Last 5 years+5%unless year was affected by severe drought,pest invasion,or under fertilization.. RECOROKEEPING REQUIREMENT: 1)Documentation of the identification of protocols for appropriate sampling and testing of manure,process wastewater,and soil. • NMP for Double J Bison Feedlot Page 4 of 7 I. LAND APPLICATION—61.17(8)(c)(viii) • The CAFO will establish protocols to land apply manure or process wastewater in accordance with site specific nutrient management practices that ensure appropriate agricultural utilization of the nutrients in the manure or process wastewater. The facility will implement the following protocols: • (A) No application of manure or process wastewater will be made to a land application site at a rate that will exceed the capacity of the soil and the planned crops to assimilate nitrate-nitrogen within 12 months of the manure or process wastewater being applied. (B) Manure and process wastewater shall be applied as uniformly as possible with properly calibrated equipment. I) Method(s)of manure application? No Solid Manure Application 2) Method(s)of process wastewater application? Sprinkler 3) Is nutrient application equipment calibrated at least annually? X Yes - No RECORDKEEPING REQUIREMENT: I)Documentation that protocols have been established for land application of manure or process wastewater in accordance with site- specific nutrient management practices that ensue appropriate agricultural utilization of the nutrients in the manure or process wastewater. J. PHOSPHORUS AND NITROGEN TRANSPORT—61.17(8)(c)(x)(A) Application rates for manure and process wastewater applied to land application sites will minimize phosphorus and nitrogen transport from the sites to surface waters and will be in accordance with the following standards: (I) An initial assessment of the potential for phosphorus and nitrogen transport risk to surface water will be made prior to manure or process wastewater being applied to an application site. There is currently no published tool suitable for assessing nitrogen transport risk. Phosphorus and nitrogen transport risk assessment will be made using the Colorado Phosphorus Index Risk Assessment. The following flow chart will be used to determine whether or not a phosphorus risk assessment must be completed for a land application sites: Will animal manure or other organic nutrients be applied to this site? A Colorado Phosphorus Index NO Risk Assessment is not required for this site. YES • Is soil test P greater than: A Colorado Phosphorus Risk 10 ppm AB-DTPA;30 ppm Bray PI;40 NO —► Assessment is not required for ppm Mehlich 3,or;20 ppm Olsen this site. Base organic nutrient (NaHCO3) application rates on crop nitrogen requirements. YES • Can storm water runoff or irrigation A Colorado Phosphorus Risk tailwater reach a surface water body? NO Assessment is not required for (Continuous or intermittent stream, this site. Base organic nutrient irrigation ditch,lake,or wetland,etc.) application rates on crop nitrogen requirements. YES • Complete a Colorado Phosphorus Index Risk Assessment for this site. • NMP for Double J Bison Feedlot Page 5 of 7 J. PHOSPHORUS AND NITROGEN TRANSPORT—61.17(8)(c)(x)(A)(continued) IP On sites for which the facility must complete a Colorado Phosphorus Index Risk Assessment,the following best management practices will be incorporated,if applicable: (A) Phosphorus-based manure and process wastewater application rates will be made to an application site where the risk of off-site phosphorus transport is scored as high. (B) No application of manure or process wastewater will be made to a land application site where the risk of off-site phosphorus transport is rated as very high. (Where the initial assessment of a land application site is scored as very high, the facility has a three-year period within which to manage the site for the purpose of lowering the phosphorus transport risk assessment rating to high or less. During this period,manure or process wastewater may be applied to the site at either nitrogen-or phosphorus-based rates.) (C) No application of manure or process wastewater will be made to a land application site where the risk of off-site nitrogen transport to surface water is not minimized. (D) Where a multi-year phosphorus application was made to a land application site,no additional manure or process wastewater will be applied to the same site in subsequent years until the applied phosphorus has been removed from the site via harvest and crop removal. After an initial assessment is made of potential for phosphorus and/or nitrogen transport from a land application site to surface water, additional assessments will be made at the following frequency,whichever is sooner: Both phosphorus and nitrogen transport risk Every 5 years Where a crop management change has occurred For phosphorus-Assess within 1 year after such a change would reasonably result in an increase in the transport risk assessment score. For nitrogen-Assess within 1 year after such a change would reasonably result in the nitrogen transport to surface water not being minimized. Where a phosphorus transport risk assessment score was very Assess phosphorus transport risk within 6 months of intending to high apply manure or process wastewater,except where the initial assessment is scored as very high,then there shall be a three-year period within which to manage the site for the purpose of lowering the phosphorus transport risk assessment rating to high or less. During this period,manure or process wastewater may be applied to the site at either nitrogen-or phosphorus-based rates. Where a nitrogen transport risk assessment reveals that nitrogen Assess nitrogen transport risk within 6 months of intending to • transport to surface water is not minimized apply manure or process wastewater. K. INSPECT LAND APPLICATION EQUIPMENT—61.17(8)(c)(x)(C) The CAFO will periodically inspect equipment used for land application of manure or process wastewater for leaks. The facility will inspect land application equipment at the following frequencies: (1) Annually(within the six month period prior to the first application of manure or process wastewater);and (2) At least once daily when process wastewater is being applied L. SETBACK REQUIREMENTS—61.17(8)(c)(x)(D) The CAFO will not apply manure and process wastewater: (I) Closer than 100 feet to any down-gradient surface waters,open tile line intake structures,sinkholes,agricultural wellheads,or other conduits to surface waters unless one of the following is implemented: (II) 35-foot vegetated buffer to any down-gradient water of the U.S.,open tile intake structures,sinkholes, agricultural wellheads,or other conduits to waters of the U.S.where applications of manure,litter,or process wastewater are prohibited. (III) Alternative compliance practices to the 100-foot setback with prior approval of the Department. Please describe: Compliance Practice Implemented Land Application Site ID Where ](1), (II)or(III)above]: Practice is Implemented: Down-gradient Surface Waters 11 Field I Open Tile Line Intake Structure Sinkholes Agricultural Wellheads Other Conduits to Surface Waters • NMP for Double J Bison Feedlot Page 6 of 7 M. CERTIFICATION STATEMENT I certify under penalty of law that this document and all attachments were prepared under my direction or supervision in accordance with a system designed to assure that qualified personnel properly gather and evaluate the information submitted. Based on my • inquiry of the person or persons who manage the system,or those persons directly responsible for gathering the information,the information submitted is to the best of my knowledge and belief true,accurate and complete. lam aware that there are significant penalties for submitting false information, including the possibility offine and imprisonment for knowing violations. A. NAME AND OFFICIAL TITLE(PRINT OR TYPE) B. PHONE NUMBER ( ) C. SIGNATURE D. DATE SIGNED • • NMP for Double J Bison Feedlot Page 7 of 7 Double J Bison Feedlot • Estimated Land Application for USR Land Application Requirements for 25-year, 24-hour Storm Event 25-year,24-hour storm volume( 31.2 A.F.),gallons 10,165,859 Total Nitrogen contained in liquid, lbs. 71,161 `Total-N= 7.0 lbs./1,000 gal Ammonium-Nitrogen contained in liquid, lbs. 40,663 `NH3-N= 4.0 lbs./1,000 gal Organic-Nitrogen contained in liquid, lbs. 30,498 Organic-N= 3.0 lbs./1,000 gal Ammonium-Nitrogen available after irrigation, lbs. 22,365 45.0% sprinkler-Irrigation loss` Organic-Nitrogen available 3rd year, lbs. 14,334 47% Equilibrium mineralization rate for organic-N* Nitrogen available to plants(PAN)yr. after yr., lbs. 36,699 Soil Organic Matter, % 1.0 Irrigation Water NO3 content, ppm - Residual NO3 in soil, ppm 10.0 Alfalfa Corn Silage Expected Yield(grain, Bu/acre; silage,tons/acre) 6 30 Based on CSU Extension N req.w/listed O.M., soil N,& Irr.Water NO3, (lb./acre) 283 155 Bulletin#538 Acres req. if effluent applied via sprinkler irrigation 130 238 1.5-3.5 A.F./Acre Irrigation water assumed 'Taken from CSU's Bulletin No. 568A Best Management Practices for Manure Utilization Land Application Requirements for 10-year, 10-day Storm Event Maximum pumping requirement( A.F.), gallons - Total Nitrogen contained in liquid, lbs. - 'Total-N= lbs./1,000 gal Ammonium-Nitrogen contained in liquid, lbs. - *NH3-N= lbs./1,000 gal Organic-Nitrogen contained in liquid, lbs. - Organic-N= - lbs./1,000 gal Ammonium-Nitrogen available after irrigation, lbs. - 45.0% Flood-Irrigation loss* Organic-Nitrogen available 3rd year, lbs. - 42% Equilibrium mineralization rate for organic-N* itrogen available to plants(PAN)yr. after yr., lbs. - oil Organic Matter, % 1.0 Irrigation Water NO3 content, ppm 20.0 Residual NO3 in soil, ppm 10.0 Alfalfa Corn Silage Expected Yield(grain, Bu/acre; silage, tons/acre) 6 25 Based on CSU Extension N req.w/listed O.M., soil N, & Irr. Water NO3, (lb./acre) 152 40 Bulletin#538 Acres req. if effluent applied via sprinkler irrigation - - 1.5 A.F./Acre Irrigation water assumed *Taken from CSU's Bulletin No. 568A Best Management Practices for Manure Utilization Land Application Requirement for Average Year's Stormwater I Maximum pumping requirement( 17.3 A.F.),gallons 5,636,838 Total Nitrogen contained in liquid, lbs. 39,458 *Total-N= 7.0 lbs./1,000 gal Ammonium-Nitrogen contained in liquid, lbs. 22,547 "NH3-N= 4.0 lbs./1,000 gal Organic-Nitrogen contained in liquid, lbs. 16,911 Organic-N= 3.0 lbs./1,000 gal Ammonium-Nitrogen available after irrigation, lbs. 12,401 45.0% Sprinkler-Irrigation loss" Organic-Nitrogen available 3rd year, lbs. 7,948 47% Equilibrium mineralization rate for organic-N* Nitrogen available to plants(PAN)yr. after yr., lbs. 20,349 Soil Organic Matter, % 1.0 Irrigation Water NO3 content, ppm - Residual NO3 in soil, ppm 10.0 Alfalfa Corn Silage Expected Yield(grain, Bu/acre; silage or grass,tons/acre) 6 30 Based on CSU Extension N req. w/listed O.M.,soil N, & lrr.Water NO3,(lb./acre) 283 155 Bulletin#538 Acres req. if effluent applied via sprinkler irrigation 72 132 1.5-3.5 A.F./Acre Irrigation water assumed *Taken from CSU's Bulletin No. 568A Best Management Practices for Manure Utilization • A C =PRO in LA N I)PRO 1 of 1 • Manazement Plan For Nuisance Control A Supplement to the Manure & Process Wastewater Management Plan For • Double JBison Feeders Inc. 39646 Weld County Rd 39 Ault, Co 80610 Developed in accordance with Generally Accepted Agricultural Best Management Practices Prepared By AgPro Environmental Services, LLC 4350 Hwy 66 Longmont, CO 80504 • May 2008 Double J Bison Feeders Inc. AgPro Environmental Services, LLC • Introduction This supplemental Management Plan for Nuisance Control has been developed and implemented to identify methods Double J Bison Feeders Inc., will use to minimize the inherent conditions that exist in confinement feeding operations. This supplement outlines management practices generally acceptable and proven effective at minimizing nuisance conditions. Neither nuisance management nor this supplemental plan is required by Colorado State statute or specifically outlined in the Colorado Confined Animal Feeding Operations Control Regulations. This is a proactive measure to assist integration into local communities. These management and control practices, to their best and practical extent, will be used by Double J Bison Feeders Inc. Legal Owner, Contacts and Authorized Persons Correspondence and Contacts should be made to: Double.1 Bison Feeders Inc. Jay Hasbrouck 39646 Weld County Rd 39 Ault, Co 80610, The individual(s) at this facility who is (are) responsible for developing the implementation, • maintenance and revision of this supplemental plan are listed below. Jay Hasbrouck Facility Operator (Name) (Title) Legal Description The confined animal feeding facility described in this NMP is located in: SE ''A and the E %2 of the SW ' of Section 22,Township 8 North, Range 65 West • 2 Double J Bison Feeders Inc. AgPro Environmental Services, LLC Air Quality • Air quality at and around confined animal feeding operations are affected primarily from the relationship of soil/manure and available moisture. The two primary air quality concerns at dairies are dust and odor. However, the management practices for dust or odor control are not inherently compatible. Wet pens and manure produce odor. Dry pens are dusty. The two paragraphs below outline the best management practices for the control of dust and odors that Double J Bison Feeders Inc. will use. The manager shall closely observe pen conditions and attempt to achieve a balance between proper dust and odor control. Dust Dust from pen surfaces is usually controlled by intensive management of the pen surface by routine cleaning and harrowing of the pen surface. The purpose of intensive surface management is twofold; to keep cattle clean and to reduce pest habitat. The best management systems for dust control involve moisture management. Management methods Double J Bison Feeders Inc. shall use to control dust are: 1. Pen density Moisture can be managed by varying stocking rates and pen densities. The animals' wet manure and urine keep the surface moist and control dust emissions. • 2. Regular manure removal Double J Bison Feeders Inc. will continue to conduct regular manure removal. Typically, pens are cleaned, conditioned and maintained as needed manure is removed at least annually. 3. Pen Sprinkling Should nuisance dust conditions arise, pen sprinkling will be used for moisture control on pens and internal roadways to minimize nuisance dust conditions. Odor Odors result from the natural decomposition processes that start as soon as the manure is excreted and continue as long as any usable material remains as food for microorganisms. Odor strength depends on the kind of manure, and the conditions under which it decomposes. Although occasionally unpleasant, the odors are not dangerous to health in the quantities customarily noticed around animal feeding operations and fields where manure is spread for fertilizer. Key practices Double J Bison Feeders Inc. may use to control odor are: • 3 Double J Bison Feeders Inc. AgPro Environmental Services, LLC • 1. Establish good pen drainage Dry manure is less odorous than moist manure. Maintaining good pen drainage can be achieved by regular cleaning in pens and under fences. The dairy will conduct routine pen cleaning to reduce standing water and remove wet manure. 2. Regular manure removal Reduce the overall quantity of odor producing sources. The dairy will conduct routine pen cleaning and conditioning as needed. 3. Reduce standing water Standing water can increase microbial digestion and odor producing by-products. Proper pen maintenance and surface grading will be conducted by the dairy to reduce standing water. The wastewater ponds will be dewatered regularly in accordance with the Manure and Wastewater Management Plan for Double J Bison Feeders Inc. No chemical additives or treatments of the stormwater ponds for odor control are planned. Research to date indicates these products have little, if any, effectiveness. 4. Composting Proper composting turns manure into a nearly odorless, pathogen-free product that is valuable for soil conditioning. Double J Bison Feeders Inc. may practice manure • composting if land area is available for this purpose. 5. Land application timing Typically air rises in the morning and sinks in the evening. Double J Bison Feeders Inc. will consider weather conditions and prevailing wind direction to minimize odors from land application. Typically, land applications will be timed for early mornings. Pest Control Insects and Rodents Insects and rodents inhabit areas that 1) have an adequate to good food supply and 2) foster habitat prime for breeding and living. Key practices Double J Bison Feeders Inc. may use to manage insects and rodents are to first eliminate possible habitat, and then reduce the available food supply. The dairy will work to control flies by applying one or more of the following practices as needed: 1. Regular manure removal Manure management removes both food sources and habitat • 2. Reduce standing water 4 Double J Bison Feeders Inc. AgPro Environmental Services,LLC Standing water is a primary breeding ground for insects 3. Minimize fly habitat Standing water, weeds and grass, manure stockpiles, etc., are all prime habitat for reproduction and protection. Reduce or eliminate these areas where practical. 4. Manage weeds and grass Keep weeds and grassy areas to a minimum. These provide both protection and breeding areas. 5. Minimize stockpiles or storage of manure Stockpiles of manure provide both breeding and protective habitat. Keep stockpile use to a minimum. 6. Biological treatments Parasitic wasps are excellent biological fly control and are widely used. The wasps lay their eggs in fly larvae hindering fly reproduction. 7. Baits and chemical treatments Due to environmental and worker's safety concerns, chemical treatments are a last line of defense for insect control. However, they are very effective. Baits and treatments must be applied routinely. • Dead Animals Mortality is an unfortunate and unavoidable part of animal husbandry. Dead animals can produce offensive odors, attract scavengers, and create deleterious conditions. Property and timely disposal of dead animals prevents nuisance conditions from occurring. Key practices Double J Bison Feeders Inc. may use to handle and dispose of dead animals are: 1. Expedient removal from pens Dead animals will be removed from pens daily and relocated to an area(s) away from the pens. 2. Commercial Rendering Company removal Dead animals will be removed by a commercial rendering company when possible and economically feasible. 3. Burying Animals will be buried at least two feet underground in accordance with state requirements. These practices represent the latest and most modern management and scientific information to date for control of nuisance conditions for the livestock feeding industry. • 5 WELD COUNTY ROAD ACCESS INFORMATION SHEET Weld County Public Works Department Date: May 14,2008 P.O. Box 758, Greeley, CO 80632 *hone: (970)356-4000, Ext. 3750 Fax: (970)304-6497 1. Applicant Name: Hasbrouck Holdings, LLC 2. Address or location of access: Lot B of RE-620 being part of the Southeast Y., of Section 22,TBN, R65W of the 6th P.M., Weld County, Colorado. Subdivision Block Lot Weld County Road 90 Side of Road North Distance from nearest intersection approximately.65 of a mile west of WCR 43 and WCR 90. 3. Is there an existing access to the property? Yes #accesses 3 4. Proposed Use: Feedlot 5. Site Sketch Legend for Access Description:AGR =Agricultural, RES=Residential, O&G = Oil&Gas, D.R. = Ditch Road CR 92 • to sn kr cr U N PCPOSED FLEDLCT "S WLOP,c, C.:: 9€' _ _..._._. COLOR OFFICE USE ONLY: Road ADT Date Accidents Date Road ADT Date Accidents Date Drainage Requirement Culvert Size Length Special Conditions Installation authorized Information Insufficient Reviewed By: Title: • • Double J Bison Feeders Preliminary Design Report Prepared by Travis Hertneky With • Au III PRO 4350 Highway 66 Longmont, CO 80504 970-535-9318 Hasbrouk Holdings Double J Bison Feeders • Contents Project Summary 3 Project Description 3 Design Objectives 3 Basis for Design 4 Basic Data and Location 5 Location Map 6 Aerial View 7 Topographic Map 8 Soils Map 9 Soil Survey Engineering Properties 12 Well Data 18 Hydrology and Hydraulics 19 Storage Pond 19 Sediment Settling 19 Diversions 20 Waste Storage Pond Sizing 21 Geotechnical Design 22 Geotechnical Trip Report 23 Facility Design 30 • Lot Layout 30 Water System 30 • AgPro Enviromental Services.LLC Page 2 of 30 5/22/2008 Preliminary Design Report Hasbrouk Holdings Double J Bison Feeders • Project Summary Double J Bison Feeders is a new facility planned for construction in Weld County,Colorado near the town of Pierce. The site consists of approximately 150 acres of sprinkler irrigated farm ground that the feedyard will be built on. The feedyard will be built in conjunction with a new composting facility located directly North West of the feedyard site. The feedyard and composting operation will be independent facilities however will compliment each other. This preliminary design has been prepared to obtain a Use by Special Review permit(USR)from Weld County. This design addresses many of the issues encountered in the planning stages of a project including generalized layout,physical and social constraints,operation plans such as the nutrient management planning and Federal, State, and County compliance. Project Description This proposed facility is designed as a complete self contained bison feedyard with provisions made to ensure that the feedyard can be used for typical cattle feeding in the future. The project site is located in the South East ''/ of Section 22 of Township 8 North, Range 65 West,off the sixth prime meridian. The project site's primary access will be located off of WCR 90 approximately 1/2 mile east of the intersection of WCR 90 and WCR 43. • The proposed facility will be constructed in Phases and allow for the continued use of the pivot irrigated farmland for as long a possible. The facility will be constructed with double row or head to head configuration. This places feed bunks directly across from each while utilizing the same road and drovers alleys. All storm water will run naturally to sediment basins and the waste storage pond. Planned capacity for this feedyard will be approximately 16,000 head of Bison and 24,000 head of feeder cattle. Design Objectives The facility was designed to accommodate the greatest number of animals possible with the existing physical and social constraints. The constraints taken into account include but are not limited to; physical animal space,existing site topography, site location and proximity to feed sources, livestock harvesting facilities,proximity to neighboring residences, financial constraints, and neighboring land availability for purchase. • AgPro Enviromental Services,LLC Page 3 of 30 5/22/2008 Preliminary Design Report Hasbrouk Holdings Double J Bison Feeders • Basis for Design This facility was designed in accordance with various universities' research and extension publications,the Natural Resources Conservation Service(NRCS)recommendations and generally accepted best management practices. Publications directly referenced are from Colorado State University, Kansas State University,Texas A&M University,American Society of Agricultural Engineers(ASAE). The facility was also designed in accordance with the current Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment(CDPH&E)regulations for Confined Animal Feeding Operations. • • AgPro Enviromental Services,LLC Page 4 of 30 5/22/2008 Preliminary Design Report Hasbrouk Holdings Double J Bison Feeders • Basic Data and Location • Location map • Aerial view • Topographic map • Soils map • Soil survey engineering properties • Well Data • AgPro Enviromental Services,LLC Page 5 of 30 5/22/2008 Preliminary Design Report I _ 1 i__ I1 ,_ i ,_ , , ,1 r.. ___ , hi , _ , , mow ._1 i_i ' p. i __ I_IL_iIII .\ ,t•Jsiaii1 RUM ■t , r ... . . . �:.: ii 11111 IIIIM MIt i t:___ .i :IEr a. t� SI I�: E..::•„„,:.,,....,••ti: .sr; ., •:‘,;.:;01":•:.:,,.,...:••:.1.;:��`_t �� ■■■IMMEINEMIIII i "i 1JW [ :• sE ::;-•-:,i-'1 iii WI • Iellik,VisaliMi nal ' -:..,-..,,..!-:;,,,,,.„,, . .. • ml l' gigi 4 gill...1 ,r,;',:i,,,l'.1::::..il!Ve.!::;:.: •/M. ■ �I■ `i ,... .T:xy sEfElium tri,,g.,.4.. ,. ,.. .,:, 14.45 ..;1 .O...i:::;:: . ,..: !..a,„ ,f,.::fi.:.:t.... ...„;:....,,:a.,,;4. 4 :. :. .. .. _ ,..,_ _ .. i . .{ ' I .. d T 5,`r*u.. I1)A.. t.:PRO j HASBRO[ k HOLI)1' CiS. LLC'. !qtr,i'°E os 2t."0081 � (i.om I L1 .I. \I)&RESOURCESOLt'II NSt I I L()CA [lO1 h7AP ((E\IPI [Tr r..1tir)&RESOURCE r- scx.1 I r ioNs O1: 1 s ...:i`'!''•r?`.::(; • ::.'-';'.:'!-K 'u ,. .y �y� F}�+i•.s :4 t'E...'i� •'5'" ...).;().;•-!i;.' _ ,ti• it t ,,.,,.k P r { .. 5:ar 4 r ! R.la • �IKi Ate... • •.‘'."I. . • r..:;-:, :.....-'-.'t....1,,,,''':IT;P1-!':-.7.:'..,- I.?J • .P i� A Y • sl; _ a:tt j }:CS t �. f p g L r Pa b� .r '4}4414 na;r .. u..a c !E h r - = '}fir•^ �pF , . L, SITE �}a � • r . �,- ...!-:2'..{. ..:4:?t.:!;1..i.a.).:'4'.':,,,-, '-''‘1\'':—,,, : -*.':I'''•'',';,.1.;I:::,,i.I-,';t:.'':,fi:.!!1::::!:-.-.;;.;i.li "r` ivii•,•.1.;•'. - - if �•r 'S ( t•r s' to L! J 1 y t.1` ri4 Std"al At.... :... • I.•ati I;.., .`5:e•_ �'3; tr. 4 • q E..,° l.red' .71.0t4.,„•:,•,, • t� • EE f�ti N • n.J•7 k n r !: E • • ,, , •a fi .l •!3.+ _ ! 4 Y E• s �+i'3,i�GE Lci :` -:,k-. • t ! o ' ' t I '-_. !v'� fJ! " L! rk! z'T'3! (•• lE ,, f + �! ,,,,�'.'• ".`' ,.;R" .);%l, !w F. �•,;64.4.,..,t,„:,,,:,-,1� i �f Uk4:.:",,:..,,,,,, r 4 .E..,t,tJ. l47 II;S.• 't t. .E E• :��:,t .t,'''',!e+' ,y ,y •, J S:._:: ..•,.. .t't,.. s'}e. ?.iVl� :: �: •Y i N • s • ! ::i'' ur: .i:S Y7!Tx 5t+3 F Y. .i... .S»J.t ;� `S'F I �I a M liu�r r ? r'l • °4 E J� : �: "fin '. r... .... .. , ..1.x ' RtE 4� .JJ....... .. ! n� s a nI sa `z..�, , :1. ii RfF�"" 9 y�, :,, J Y � +� • �E.it � .' } ` 'E � • i ! ••,z.."‘'.., R ! 71 • • 3' xMlrL ".,.i.• • 't E wv va @!�r }' .i y • 4 tlL.r F yt �,l 1 JE •� FEED ARD : x ' tir L � SITE ;t ,eii, F .R! 4 it as 1,-?,;,,7.,f11,-,,,i1-.-•1•".:';',, •3 s. IN ai t'::.;:iilt:7:,,.,1".„ 4:r ! y tlN({ s f .y` 4 . ]• t`b1tl4IM• w!'r..'•rty'.:..q {L. t 4 ~ • t MiPRO DOliBI..E J BISO .. 05.21: :stil-I'T NO cu�u•i..E.1 E.LAND RESu1:k1:e.u,1.(:1•tOXS :FERIA[_ VIEW ta:>\ir r.KT F[.:\ D .R!?SO1_RC•.L SOI. :TtU\' I OF 1 4976 X- ; —\\X4968 • .c.0 .. 4.4.7.; .01... a t . .i \t f lik' ..._ ! ))(7141 \ =R% _.:. .: i 1 .. •.. .\ fil ' \ 46444 ( ``. { i ._... '''." A4-4 i •.... ....„- i"may 1 I i 1 * f , r Y...-. r 1 I , I. ' ` ` \ Ii r1 ` ,I ,V\7 ti ,j'�`' S s f j LF'' 22 { a ..• 1 `w. . .. ...._. \ . _ _- 1, ,,,, . i .. 4 \ \ is . Y,. ....- i I I N U • 495' .3 • • C .-- • • •ti .. -- - ''r.. SCALL:I-..000' III_ IL .....„-------- n>ATF. ®AGPR'O DOUBLE J BISON cis 2. /2008 isiii,Er NO CU11P(.1_Fk LAND&RE.X)I%R(X,SOI.UIIONS TOP() MAP • i'OMPE FTTi LAND&RESOURCE SOLUTIONS 1 OF I I Soil Map-Weld County,Colorado,Northern Part;and Weld County,Colorado,Southern Part (Double J) • 529200 529400 529600 529800 530000 530200 530400 530600 $ - r I { k i ° • • $ tI IIIIIIIIt 41 y. )1111-412 3 a • •• • 1 $W . «. .: a t a ' • JitOti —° r � . 9a $ 1 s a • a . , ,fx, ,. ,.# i§ r / 4 -•f �. { .2:: , $ • ::tw.t• ,41i x� yti'. 529200 529400 529600 529800 530000 530200 530400 530600 N Meters A0 100 200 400 600 • Feet 3 0 500 1000 2,000 ,000 USDA Natural Resources Web Soil Survey 2.0 5/1/2008 it Conservation Service National Cooperative Soil Survey Page 1 of 3 • o- ryd d o 652 -0 y _0 N U00 O N o 3 > 0 m d h OI cz 8 o U 0 L. d a C y 3 c 0 a ry- E P N N 2 U d L' J N J c g0 o 2 N a a a cm N d N d O c amt w a "= E c c6 o''o c 6 J co C J rNN d L .o 20 d N Mt d Z D. > 0 O 8 U C J d m 'Q m a " a o N T E N C m O O 0 'O O 0 Q 01 d d 0 O_ V N L 2 T 0 Z O0 N m cg € -=, � m m 02 Z aa) 0 CC o0 voN « m End 0Ed a d > d o f ¢ m - m m o-� E M d L o C 4 C 00 '- O — O N C T Ea c T N i d U .o Z d _N 0. O E N ce Eod 8n - Uo 00 . c do aj o of - o J3c 0 �LL i.0 avtJd o Aaao LL o3 `^ m ¢N Eo CC oc ca ca UWoEE a a o 0 En Z 0 '0 0 f o� U y 02 `- mdc E d mow '^ N c« m H a g a �' or a 0 E m Q. acc c D v 3> 3> < m E5c 3 `da« N a Q E O N J 0 To E c m o N L N C d C d>`w". Z� d N N a d ry O C E G Ta 28 D E C N .. .. d al d T.. OI m t d C d T.d.. d`-' m ... N m N a N V to m o m d c m T d N m d 0 N L d�pp an d m 2 to W D Q m Q0 _ T C N co c O a m ° U n z O O o c T 2 T y c d N L CO N c L 0 N d aC N N N O= m e2 < a< y J c . m C m O a a o n0 e o m d p� O C O N d - o m t d E C C C E `m a 0.d O N N v MO d a N o a.O F o e m.P N 'o d o L d o '2J o 0 'O c'°r° d 0 m W 22 E 0 0 > `o E 030 H « w w b y > H m o E a 0 f- 8 o 0 C 2 J = U OW a N N >2 0/1 d c to m • m 3 a o d O a a0 0o d — 3C tt 0 N 0 z a o 3 N z my N O N N N 0 N a o 0 o y 8 41 < N E ! s 2 d' K 0 d v q L L d C e N t� C 'm d m 0 L= T > 3 0 2 3 m o «m' a 5 ^ o rr _ J u', 9 C Z 0 J Q LL 6 A a w w o f o ❑ m s i E F e G 3 0 a 3 I W N J n o a N d & 2 g v a 3 8 D p c n y .. E a oo a y. g O c c 5 to m T u w a 2 a < 5 LL o o w v v = LL o` O c a 2 ° < >, m Z Z u 'o c a o m o 2 'm ' N> m = 0 8 — c ≥ c a 8 .a o 8 y 2 < to am m o o 0 0 - ' 2 E a cc m 0 m in 0 w m N Q e m N Wm q " ® x ♦ x • o - 1xo © > + . . gio ,c, wino 0 < m Co 2U El 0 Soil Map—Weld County,Colorado,Northern Part;and Weld County,Colorado, Double J Southern Part • Map Unit Legend Weld County,Colorado,Northern Part(CO617) Map Unit Symbol Map Unit Name Acres In AOI Percent of AOI 1 Altvan fine sandy loam,0 to 6 200.9 65.9% percent slopes 4 Ascalon fine sandy loam,0 to 6 28.3 9.3% percent slopes 23 Dacono clay loam,0 to 6 38.4 12.6% percent slopes 29 Haverson loam,0 to 3 percent 32.0 10.5% slopes Weld County,Colorado,Southern Part(CO818) Map Unit Symbol Map,Unit Name Acres in A01: .. Percent of AO1 1 Altvan loam,0 to 1 percent 1.5 0.5% slopes 8 Ascalon loam,0 to 1 percent 3.0 1.0% slopes 26 Haverson loam,1 to 3 percent 0.2 0.1% slopes 55 Paoli loam.1 to 3 percent 0.4 0.1% • — — — slopes Totals for Area of Interest(AOI) 304.7 100.0%• tam Natural Resources Web Soil Survey 2.0 5/1/2008 Conservation Service National Cooperative Soil Survey Page 3 of 3 Engineering Properties—Weld County,Colorado,Northern Part;and Weld Double J County,Colorado,Southern Part • Engineering Properties This table gives the engineering classifications and the range of engineering properties for the layers of each soil in the survey area. Depth to the upper and lower boundaries of each layer is indicated. Texture is given in the standard terms used by the U.S. Department of Agriculture. These terms are defined according to percentages of sand, silt, and clay in the fraction of the soil that is less than 2 millimeters in diameter. "Loam,"for example, is soil that is 7 to 27 percent clay, 28 to 50 percent silt, and less than 52 percent sand. If the content of particles coarser than sand is 15 percent or more, an appropriate modifier is added, for example, "gravelly." Classification of the soils is determined according to the Unified soil classification system (ASTM, 2005) and the system adopted by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO, 2004). The Unified system classifies soils according to properties that affect their use as construction material. Soils are classified according to particle-size distribution of the fraction less than 3 inches in diameter and according to plasticity index, liquid limit, and organic matter content. Sandy and gravelly soils are identified as GW, GP, GM, GC, SW, SP, SM, and SC; silty and clayey soils as ML, CL, OL, MH, CH, and OH; and highly organic soils as PT. Soils exhibiting engineering properties of two groups can have a dual classification, for example, CL-ML. The AASHTO system classifies soils according to those properties that affect • roadway construction and maintenance.In this system,the fraction of a mineral soil that is less than 3 inches in diameter is classified in one of seven groups from A-1 through A-7 on the basis of particle-size distribution,liquid limit,and plasticity index. Soils in group A-1 are coarse grained and low in content of fines (silt and clay).At the other extreme, soils in group A-7 are fine grained. Highly organic soils are classified in group A-8 on the basis of visual inspection. If laboratory data are available, the A-1,A-2, and A-7 groups are further classified as A-1-a, A-1-b,A-2-4, A-2-5, A-2-6, A-2-7, A-7-5, or A-7-6.As an additional refinement,the suitability of a soil as subgrade material can be indicated by a group index number. Group index numbers range from 0 for the best subgrade material to 20 or higher for the poorest. Rock fragments larger than 10 inches in diameter and 3 to 10 inches in diameter are indicated as a percentage of the total soil on a dry-weight basis. The percentages are estimates determined mainly by converting volume percentage in the field to weight percentage. Percentage (of soil particles)passing designated sieves is the percentage of the soil fraction less than 3 inches in diameter based on an ovendry weight.The sieves, numbers 4, 10,40, and 200 (USA Standard Series), have openings of 4.76, 2.00, 0.420, and 0.074 millimeters, respectively.Estimates are based on laboratory tests of soils sampled in the survey area and in nearby areas and on estimates made in the field. Liquid limit and plasticity index(Atterberg limits) indicate the plasticity characteristics of a soil.The estimates are based on test data from the survey area or from nearby areas and on field examination. • Ism Natural Resources Web Soil Survey 2.0 5/1/2008 Conservation Service National Cooperative Soil Survey Page 1 of 6 Engineering Properties—Weld County,Colorado,Northern Part;and Weld Double J County.Colorado,Southern Part • References: American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials(AASHTO). 2004.Standard specifications for transportation materials and methods of sampling and testing. 24th edition. American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM). 2005. Standard classification of soils for engineering purposes.ASTM Standard D2487-00. • • ii, Natural Resources Web Soil Survey 2.0 5/1/2008 Conservation Service National Cooperative Soil Survey Page 2 of 6 cc • o o Gm 1< • NO O 3yJ o N = o h o a a N a 1n 0 a z Z z a a I JE t c_ d O to O a o J— N N N N I I O N 1 8 O a I) O a a m tV N co a O 8.n a CJ O O a h E p en0 co O coN N O N C S 8 mac N n co N N C CO0 co M q 6 0 0 O M r a - - a 0 O a a S a la a § o O 0 E 0 ,p , 00 O o O o Z I o t o o 0 at m m ' o - >` Z e« Z O 0 E n " C 13 11 u Cl. - N .5 O O 0 o O O a O O Ty m o cc o2 D LL L r • E O O O 1O 0 O , O O O o m m £ m ° a Y 3To c 3 C 4 Q o 4 ¢ Q S Q a a Q Q z et CO 2 2 2 Io , S _ u) I3Um , a U U Q7 a 0C co U J O O co _l J (/J on w = ci° _Mwco QUM , a co I j 2 tL U U N to co U Co o Q1 U c T T E Q c E m 0 111 co t q ric 0 2 T p a C c E E E m a m m m e t° O1 o co CO pra cm o O 2 ° CO C O T T T U_ >1 N V �' ` to c -3 CO T— c t3 c m E 0 > m TE T y > m TE 2 y ") QJ 6 o c > 2 am me L C coI C C O C a a = It CO up CD it U) It m z •� — ____.---. Y a6 O)C m2 C m0 m _ o Wa N N CO O co CO p CO U Tz I O CD N N O CON "m _ _ _ _ o t o E i mm p 'n T.. w C o wo O. C Ta c 8 zU m C N N cc m 2m C ill m m « m 6 tu to c m , f .Y. C co. 2 O m o m O J < ° > Qmo `3 a m2 I o < 4 o m a • m 2 i C a c W 76 E' • 0 x 0 0 o Vv CO 1 AO N1 N N O_ _O N CO r O u!f t3 0.Z Z 100 —_ a M o m o 0 in — g c'1 N I N N i g n O ENN 8 v an d Co It m " = 8 0 8 i t 8N. 8 : ' 8 o co r . O O O O O O N o C LL O m _ , ,, r t 0 m • E • /1 � NO C : O 0 0 O a a O L Jo U J 3 0 a O (n a a Q O n m _ la1a a a a a z � ° -a. 0 I ` 0 cal a 0_I a z _ 1 — . .o >, V '° T E >, co 1a E Eo co m _c ,. IV '0 o m E 1s d w 2 � 0. . J m o C 8 N N f0 N O C 0 - O N co O - 'O ce 10 c O T20 o -c. E O 7 C w s E zO id a 0mo p al 3' C C c)0 o 0 O. C. 7 O a C 2 ? • c c w 0 o a = o • ❑ co 0 `y�� K O O Y 0 N in W r.t O O a O N O_ N N m 0..� d a' m 6 h a Z a H N z t) N a e a E T ' o•_ 0. N n CO n n o q J N N N N N O N co N N 1 I N N N N N ! 8 N 0 N N o N a r r m o r N ro N r r 0 0 0 0 0 t E 0 N) o -__ 0 coi 0 0 ro CO 5 _ _--- _--- ----- c o 1 g m o n m m9 so of : ! II ,_ 0 i w O >. v O. : 2 q 8 O! Y a h o(0 5 e a C O O 6 o o o o o o aN i' It L U co N • _ 0 n a 0 ''o n. a E o 0 0 0 o 0 0 0 o .0 o aU 5 m 0 3 To 0 3 C ¢ a a a Q 0 N N 0 a 6 ¢ ¢ _ Q_-T_ ¢ a ¢ Q ¢ ¢ z A o & I M sU O 2 " J J N J U t0 J N M i J U N U 0. V Z UJ UJUU - yd 0J t0 V 0JU a 0) ! UJ CAJJ T.• W = J M J M 0)CO a 0) J rG s u) J M V)U) J -M ' 02 c C O 0 CO 0 0 0 2 0 CO O 0 U a. o a a E to co 0 0 m c rt E va E Ec E c To r Q o 0 y o o f o _ 0 O d N co >,- co 3 >. m 0 0 c 2 2 E , E n c �' E E a m ac ry tom p)14 E E L co c O V. m q co co O d a al m o o J co U' J (n to LL ca J e) 0 d 4 43 O O 0 N CO W CO N O C O O N m co O N N O U O N O '0 co0 a 5 q .5o. �__. Z - K o a O A 0 o 'O — o — 3 C U a o to' o a w 0 E 2 U aZ 2 o m E d _ y m cb Ec mo go 0o a� o 61C2 7 C c C E c r t Y. c C q2 Cry C C O 00_as 3 r N 0 ._ N = , s ¢ ¢ 43 cm C ' N • 0 c CC W m a __T....._ CO 40 O O O NcO 1- m a a "' C Z Z a _ C7 N N N 810 0 N N vI to • N N . Z C I. 40 ill 1 $ 00 U) A a N .0 $ S • 00 I . C . E:', . 8 8 m r o wy Aa a • � O g15 b O O N o C O i r u. r t5, co R m O A C a o a E O I O o o d v mU I fl v t t 5Ta 3 c o a 03 c y a d o -o 3gco —a— m E a) z U 2 'O 3 3 O O CL V , cA M Z C!1 co C C i -o C3 ci c3 O O o Z N O N U - . - - C O r O `- FE c O O ' O W a c U -O UM R >LL 0z.,LL a o f . co . O, • ro L O c O c O O a_ 13:3 Q U . U E :..= vmi g y.. -0 i -0 O • I " o• E � ? � ≥ H o 0 .. .. m 2 0 S. N = N N d u c "N Q Q O U ei e� 03 >., 0 >, O g ' - -- CO M Q „ Q ar Z 2 Li o O 9 cn CO 7 >. 7 >, C U C .• U O U O a o o w CO — 2 — Z zC1 °i ,p .—• m C3 U) U) co (n i E ao 81 O w c a 5 q c a)a ` `° 8 — 2 c a o Q_ a a igt a In — d c c • , B.0N 65.t]W SRC , -�mr- �,d:ON 6$. Sec 15 W Sec 14, !Aver,-- 49T6 �r,r;IIS1 1 X968 ,sue ' ' 0 ) ,i if �m E N'' 1 i til l� I it ``''`lll Gib kv I ,1, eh , • • ....i ravc: I- t r : �`,' ,, ♦ I 1; I 1 i/ ,� • cla II 4,= 1 T40.044 65.0W Sec 21 ! .1 X} „ d.oN 65.oW SSC,,a2 � .ON 65.OW c$3 i rI., .../C).4 /r : 7 .-_7--.___ I . ImmiT95.3I' 8.01165 .Ot t 65 0Vl . 31. ., c,`fL� 5.0N 65.010 Sec 27 •�-.2,,-,...:,•-.....,,--.^":-=F4.,........ .,,,47, � . 4949 . r.SAM 5.0W Sac 26 , N NV di W__ [ S SCAa I ='Of, IIII j IDAI L DOUBLE T BISON -'1/2008 AGPRO siiirri 95:NO (xr%,IPL,EXE..LANI)&R SOURtl:S>Lr1IONS : WELL DATA COMPL I'.TE LAND&RESOURCE SOLUTIONS I OF 1 Hasbrouk Holdings Double J Bison Feeders • Hydrology and Hydraulics Current best management practices advise animal feeding operations to intercept any stormwater runoff that comes in contact with feed or manure. In Colorado this is typically done with a waste storage pond. The accumulated water is typically evaporated or land applied at agronomic rates to provide only the amount of nutrients that the crop can utilize. In Colorado it is required that animal feeding operations over 1,000 head, such as this facility, have a liner installed in the pond. These liners can be made of either earthen or man-made materials and must meet a seepage requirement of 1.0 x I0-6 cm/sec. The designed waste management system for this facility utilizes a single earthen lined waste storage pond with solid settling basins. This waste management system is designed to contain the 25year-24hour storm event as determined from the TAPS weather data. The required capacity was determined using the spreadsheet 3l3Pond.XLS"RECTANGULAR WASTE STORAGE POND DESIGN COMPUTATIONS"developed by NRCS State Conservation Engineer for Colorado, John Andrews. The spreadsheet uses a monthly balance approach accounting for precipitation inputs as well as evaporation and pumped draw-downs during the summer irrigation season for the outputs. All storm water from the lot area will be contained in the proposed storage pond. All precipitation that does not fall directly on these areas will be diverted away from the containment area and will flow into the natural drainages. • The design storm is determined to be the 25year-24hour event from the Greeley weather station and is a precipitation event of 3.4 in. Using a NRCS Hydrology curve number of 90,the unit runoff yield is 2.35 in. This corresponds to a total design storm volume for the 150 acre containment area of 29.4 acre-feet. Additionally,the precipitation on the top of the pond is accounted for, requiring an additional 1.75 acre feet of storage totaling 31.2 acre-feet total storage required to contain the design storm. Additional storage volume is accounted for to contain runoff from daily precipitation events and snow melt. The system is designed to evaporate most water with the option to pump to the existing pivot, neighboring pivot, used for dust abatement, or applied to the compost windrows. The system must be dewatered after significant storm events to below the working depth marked on the staff gauge to ensure adequate storage capacity for runoff from the design storm. Storage Pond The storage pond is rectangular in shape to fit into the existing site constraints and will be lined to meet the requirements outlined in CCR 81. In the event of storm runoff exceeding the capacity of the pond,an emergency spillway will be installed to control and monitor any potential discharge. This pond will have a dewatering system to transfer water to one of the locations listed above. This facility will not have any process generated wastewater to manage. All wastewater will be direct storm water runoff and will be minimized by the relatively flat topography. Sediment Settling Sediment cleaning from lined waste storage ponds can be difficult and expensive. Sediment settling basins will be created to remove the solids that wash from the lot to ensure that solids • accumulation in the pond is minimal. This solids settling area will essentially be diversions and AgPrn F.nviromental Services,LLC Page 19 of 30 5/22/2008 Preliminary Design Report Hasbrouk Holdings Double J Bison Feeders • consist of a control structure at the inlet that will back water up into the basin and drain down within a few hours after a storm event. In the event of a large storm the maximum water elevation will back water back up into these basins. This is the only time these basins will retain water for a period greater than 48 hrs. These basins will be lined with clay to meet the seepage rate requirements and provide for an easily cleanable basin. Diversions The site itself and adjacent properties slope very gradually from the North West to the South East. All waste water will flow naturally to the waste storage pond located in the South East corner. Pens will slope from the bunkline to the back of the pen and drain via a constructed swale from pen to pen. The sediment basins will be constructed as diversions that parallel either the pond or WCR 90. These basins will be designed to carry the peak expected flow from the 25yr-24hr storm event when the basins are full or the inlet is plugged. No other waste water diversions are anticipated on this site. Clean water from adjacent farmland flows in the same general direction and can easily be diverted by proposed fill along the north and west edges. The western most edge will be a bunkline and will be built up a few feet above existing grade. The northern edge will also be built up for wastewater drainage and the diversion of clean water. This northern edge will be further analyzed to ensure its adequacy prior to construction. • • AgPro Enviromental Services,LLC Page 20 of 30 5/22/2008 Preliminary Design Report • 2 S vA c _ El'' &$ $$.rn Pn'o'2'S 8 ` 8 C d y O 2 e 0 m V d d d d e d o o C a a o rR d G a w 6 t 8 $e'8ic ias— egaRGREa m " g ' 4 4 d m a?0 4 g o 4 o 4 0 o Who z4P- g § m E g gm t . 2, "0 N oo m 8 Q �Rt30 30d > 222 !Beh c LL opLL 8 88$5odd ,$8$."3,888$ `A m „mm. p Q O R O— p lJ.' 2 d a 6 J _g g g g g g g g g g g g CI S � , u `z gi8$_8888$88$58 8 � Em C'is'c i o a e 'eococcdo o > Z548 0 r c'.e c 2 N a g C m 9 x cE 5: N4 c:- -a Cr � 'QSm $m F' 8 a cr ti 4 S 2 p a,e co4 'NNEJ 4.-dc v y w o 3 p Q gg a wet to O $8n' t°n wa c w' " �$ SL3,�o*n-.- $ N 5p ' c $$ 8ao �Nvumarim+f ni.= W. 3 '8'8 0 _... ,_W, OO_¢i� 'N.J4o 0 0 0 0 0 0 pa 0 8 8 8 0 0 0 t=S000000c WS 'ewnioft N W b a '3 • G 'm5 -.1.- V 5 $g " F 3 100000' 000000 ! I lest fiyc Cyyp zq 000 . •e . .o •oo =N x 6a x x ` SG o gE g zLL K Lg o�,aEina3mv,N n NO 8r1an. 844"2 $ 2o y s m o 8X0oo �-eo 'eeo . oa _^ �a 2 i $ gg gg gg gg gS gg gB gS gg$S gg gS y op a g a = 8888$$$8$888 8 o. gire 88 8 $ 0 g Elc m m 5 cc oo .ee11 0 8$Ps 8__`. $P$$ � y $j O _ . C V i3f== c o,TM umi RSimbgM 0 m08C 44gK G a-'. 2 zO ¢d ddd N.= 'dodod ym e5 c l d a $? gE� y §$$4$gyp$fig$�s$ 5�$$ g i.W= ��p��p````` cyy W � .ky= V ►_I Oa�i BI' Ca000000 $ Q � W CYi '� Z o W - Mey2. d0d oo O 3 a241 g- ze a Hg' N c „ 2 2 Q F i a W m +q q8 l C g 4 M i g g 5'v W .E o > 00 r2i. iswef'$ mn 8 n$ a z ' mry m8� c g O '� docd E" $ �7 Q a&t00 �000a00 N RLL o 9 G � . O a I. a 0e gWl S Q F g 2 g e g 4 t &' .. Uw a' m yI ; tic p g 00�4de 'N =O0oo ,"„ _ 0 1. 41a i g 5 tO aai2 a0 a 2Eum 2"S'g' joo'o818 8 E on $�`No eel, .I rC y 08 w ' L 0- s`g893 m who 0Fd •cf l00•o,o ojc N re g m N� W m e C m .- ' -- Cog .. .. . .� m a Q c y y E e�ga2 = m 5o,.-- $^mmoo. f a a� i¢. i�z a4 3 m -' a se8a - _ .� a' Egg§ ax U g LLLXa'E.2--:°a'r9'i 2M o ory v 44 ' 8cc a 2 a • ~W C Hasbrouk}hidings Double J Bison Feeders • Geotechnical Design An in-depth soils investigation was conducted on April 24,2008 by coring several locations near the pond and general excavation borrow areas. The trip report detailing the investigation is included in this section. The soil cores located near the pond did show signs of a potential liner material however quantities were limited. Two clay soil samples were analyzed by Earth Engineering Consultants,to determine if the material was suitable to construct a compacted clay liner that meets Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment regulations. The detailed results of this analysis will be used to determine the final construction specifications. Local wells on the site indicate that Groundwater is located from 12ft— 1811. Any waste storage pond will be designed with appropriate setbacks from existing water table at the proposed pond location. All earth material used on this project will come from the excavation of the storage pond. Soils containing organic matter shall not be used to construct any structures and will be used as general fill in the lot area. A qualified geotechnical engineer will certify that the installed liner meets the density and moisture requirements outlined for this soil in the final design construction specifications. • • AgPro Enviromental Services,LLC Page 22 of 30 5/22/2008 Preliminary Design Report • AGPRO COMPLETE LAND & RESOURCE SOLUTIONS SUBJECT: Trip Report DATE: April 24,2008 Double J Feeders Pierce,CO TO: Whom it may concern JOB NUMBER: 1816-01 PARTICIPANTS: David Fisher and Travis Hertneky(AgPro) PURPOSE: Perform Geotechnical investigation for excavation at proposed feedyard,and locate potential liner material for waste storage ponds. BACKGROUND: The Double J Feedyard is a new feedyard planned for a site near Pierce,CO. The site appears gravely with spots of clay and the owners would prefer a clay lined pond if possible. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS: Several cores were taken throughout the proposed excavation area to determine the type of soil that will need to be excavated for construction of the lot and to determine whether any hidden shale or groundwater is present that would pose a problem to excavation. Due to the gravelly nature of the site and the equipment available, it was only possible to bore to a maximum depth of 7.5 ft. Groundwater was not encountered within this range however existing open wells located adjacent to the west portion of the site indicated groundwater at approximately 13 ft. It is recommended an open-pit subsurface exploration be preformed before the excavation of the east ponds. • Although no cores encountered any subsurface shale or groundwater,this does not guarantee that these features do not exist and may not be encountered during excavation. Cores were taken throughout the entire proposed lot area to a maximum depth of 7.5ft. Most all of these cores showed a lean clay topsoil with a clayey gravel subsoil. The cores in the southwest corner of the site appeared to contain a heavier,sandy clay surface soil to a depth of approximately 2ft. The preference would be to use the native soil from the pond excavation for a compacted clay liner,however this is unlikely due to it's gravely nature. The soil located in this southwest corner is a likely borrow soil if needed. Two samples will be analyzed for suitability as a compacted clay liner,the subsoil from the pond excavation and the heavy clay from the potential borrow area. PENDING ACTIONS: Samples will be dropped off at Earth Engineering Consultants for potential liner material analysis. Sincerely, Travis Hertneky David Fisher Agricultural Engineer Field Technician ENGINEERING, SURVEYING, PLANNING & CONSULTING . 4350 Highway 66•Longmont, CO 80504 970.535.9318/office• 303.485.7838 /metro.970.535.9854/fax• www.agpros.com M2<v.xwb,I.I.(' • Double J Bison Feeders,General Excavation and Potential Liner Material Soil Coring on April 24th 2008 Hole#1 Eastern Pond Location Sample Depth (in) Description of Material USCS* Number Depth (in) 0-12 Heavy Dark Clay with small amounts of Gravel CL 12-24 Sandy Clay SC 24-36 Sandy Clay w/Gravel SC w/G 36-60 Clayey gravel GC 60-78 Lean, sandy clay CL-SC Hole#2 Eastern Pond Location Sample Depth (in) Description of Material USCS* Number Depth (in) 0-12 Heavy Dark Clay with small amounts of Gravel CL 12-24 Sandy Clay SC 24-36 Clayey Gravel GC Hole#3 Western Pond Location Sample Depth (in) Description of Material USCS* Number Depth (in) 0-8 Light Lean clay CL 8-40 Poorly Graded sand to Sandy Clay SP-SC 40-88 Poorly Graded sand to Sandy Clay w/Gravel SP-SC w/G JJ-1 40-88 Hole#4 General Excavation Area Sample Depth (in) Description of Material USCS* Number Depth (in) • 0-18 Dark Lean Clay CL 18-24 Clayey Gravel GC Hole#5 General Excavation Area Sample Depth (in) Description of Material USCS* Number Depth (in) 0-24 Dark Lean Clay CL JJ-2 6-24 24-36 Clayey Gravel GC Hole#6 General Excavation Area Sample Depth (in) Description of Material USCS* Number Depth (in) 0-12 Dark Lean Clay CL 12-36 Clayey Gravel to Sandy Clay GC-SC Hole#7 General Excavation Area Sample Depth (in) Description of Material USCS* Number Depth (in) 0-18 Dark Lean Clay CL 18-24 Clayey Gravel to Sandy Clay GC-SC Hole#8 General Excavation Area Sample Depth (in) Description of Material USCS* Number Depth (in) 0-6 Dark Lean Clay CL 6-24 Clayey Gravel to Sandy Clay GC-SC Hole#9 General Excavation Area Sample Depth (in) Description of Material USCS* Number Depth (in) • 0-12 Dark Lean Clay CL 12-36 Clayey Gravel to Sandy Clay GC-SC Page 1 of 3 • Hole#10-13 General Excavation Area Sample Depth (in) Description of Material USCS* Number Depth (in) 0-18 Dark Lean Clay CL 18-24 Clayey Gravel to Sandy Clay GC-SC Hole#14 General Excavation Area Sample Depth (in) Description of Material USCS* Number Depth (in) 0-12 Dark Lean Clay CL 12-18 Sandy Clay SC 18-24 Clayey Gravel GC Hole#15 General Excavation Area Sample Depth (in) Description of Material USCS* Number Depth (in) 0-12 Dark Lean Clay CL 12-24 Sandy Clay SC Hole#16 General Excavation Area Sample Depth (in) Description of Material USCS* Number Depth (in) 0-12 Dark Lean Clay CL 12-18 Clayey Gravel GC Hole#17 General Excavation Area Sample Depth (in) Description of Material USCS* Number Depth (in) • 0-12 Dark Lean Clay CL 12-24 Sandy Clay SC 24-36 Clayey Gravel GC Hole#18 General Excavation Area Sample Depth (in) Description of Material USCS* Number Depth (in) 0-12 Sandy Clay SC Hole#19 General Excavation Area Sample Depth (in) Description of Material USCS* Number Depth (in) 0-8 Dark Lean Clay CL 8-24 Sandy Clay SC Hole#20 General Excavation Area Sample Depth (in) Description of Material USCS* Number Depth (in) 0-12 Dark Lean Clay CL 12-24 Sandy Clay SC Hole#21-22 General Excavation Area Sample Depth (in) Description of Material USCS* Number Depth (in) 0-18 Dark Lean Clay CL 18-24 Sandy Clay SC Hole#23 General Excavation Area Sample Depth (in) Description of Material USCS* Number Depth (in) 0-12 Dark Lean Clay CL • 12-24 Sandy Clay SC Page 2 of 3 • Hole#24 General Excavation Area Sample Depth (in) Description of Material USCS* Number Depth (in) 0-18 Dark Lean Clay CL 18-24 Sandy Clay SC Hole#1 East of Proposed Excavation Sample Depth (in) Description of Material USCS* Number Depth (in) 0-12 Heavy Dark Clay with small amounts of Gravel CL 12-24 Sandy Clay SC 24-36 Sandy Clay w/Gravel SC w/G *USCS classification is from in field classification by T E H,subject to change with lab analysis • • Page 3 of 3 54 t i 1} t �, t ,. t .,�I;r w 4-:k L i it i !1:,:',,-...r'}� R, _,. :,,..,,,,... .,.:__,...,., .._. „. ,,;., . ., ,..,..,,,.. . ... ,,,..,,,:,",,...F � •-n '..4_'Y :Fe- t} •,:,..14.„:::::-,,,4t.: �. �4 I.. 4 ,,, , i. .gyp.�y� ��p�4�� E.tY.t'�"L Y fi i 'R'.� 1 ' a `11 •.r 7.7 • ZI. t ,i� ...T.C"6"YT�,f15S�v0+.r3o, Y ��ttfi'11.ia {. `�VF7.a�i�r ?,. �n' !sw.. 7?S: f � � ,. fii,' 3, rep., . r} x.:,1 '-,'17'.7:4' ;ps`t°"ti y. ' il(E f}S�4, f t. '''.• 1 ,, � 4 ��,f+13L t,f '.i. • r.3�r��@a��E as .. .,. » ...! .:e :':': 4., '4 A e,4 r( ;S•• • • • • :.,E,s:a .E n:E!�i iii. JI it','::n':•...:7...:.'. .:t•.'::..,.•. .. :1..i..,-:".-. . i` '<' .. :�'' 3f:� .. • a !_ !:!s"::a!::°Y{. •r • • •eft:',. ••:.:....:.' .. ' .' _. '??. ;; Ip9i+';ic".r : .f3.� } 't .i4 .a:,; Ill',H...:.:'. .. t. .... '.'' "E0.Vii:?L:ry:;.F.!i'!0:4i`,4..'pil: :r. ,} ;E . .tRSi • F t Fi ? € _ i;E,„t': 3� ,.., yN,,._.... 1""^* ••i:1S.A':::':. " :x�P 'Sf€ tp.'Ett. ... s ' • •• :.•„.,,,,,•, A ...!{'.f}_;.Nr.»»or' i V ? • "3'1}!!x...i'ax;;�.,{{`•.'.{::••: pt 5:;,. .. S`i :oC i.ilsk' ii.. -1. S i i ', ' E ySF gH ikH 'St EE,i1( YE�' :Srci!i'<S'�io wE C .,j • • 11 ` Jy' • 1 V .. f < 0 • .r 3` t ,rt 1 1 .) lJ E I{i�.•• �� ti �: a) co w x S•'t s'k Y A x d ' 1 r tam {ajy_ y'j4 mat' .r, .es .• y Y. 'F`A ,r s K', .je:•a t.rz.a , �y f"s „ :1xai R,. a .._ ,vM It. ,,. t„ -r ..c' .,; r:. ., .1t I I• A(_'PRO • DOUBLE J BISON FEEI)E.RS ::=3LU6 7 1-IL I:I"'a 1. II1<x►tutI ET t_� �c aF.ux k1a u».(:news SOIL. I.,O(1 LOCATIONS 1 OF 1 (.0MPLETF I.ANT)&RFSi)1'RCT'S(11..1:•I'I0 4S • AGPRO COMPLETE LAND & RESOURCE SOLUTIONS May 2,2008 Ethan Wiechert Earth Engineering Consultants 4396 Greenfield Drive Windsor, CO 80550 Subject: Request for Soil Mechanics Testing&Analysis Double J Feeders, Pierce CO, 1816-01 Please analyze the soil samples included for their suitability as a compacted clay liner for an ag waste storage pond for proposed Double J Feedyard near Pierce,Colorado. The samples are described on the attached list. The liner will be designed to satisfy the following requirements: Facility Side Slope: 4 : 1 (H:V) Maximum Liquid Storage Depth: 10 feet Thickness of protective soil cover: 12 inches • Maximum Specific Discharge: 1 x 10-6 cm/sec Please perform the tests necessary to determine if the soil will make a suitable liner material. The preferable material will be from pond excavation are labeled JJ-1. This is a subsurface sample taken form the proposed excavation. As per our phone discussion please discontinue any further testing on JJ-1.and only report the index properties, The other sample from a borrow area labeled JJ-2 was taken but is not the desired material. Based on your analysis of the samples,please recommend: • The type and amount of soil amendments,if needed,to meet the design requirements; • The moisture content range,and density of compacted liner material needed to achieve the design requirements; • The as received moisture content of the sample. Please report all the analysis in a final report once the permeability analysis is complete. Feel free to contact me 970-535-9318 x 119 or thertneky@agpros.com if you need any more information regarding this project. Sincerely, Travis Hertneky, EIT Agricultural Engineer ENGINEERING, SURVEYING, PLANNING & CONSULTING • 4350 Highway 66■Longmont,CO 80504 970.535.9318/office• 303.485.7838/metro■970.535.9854/fax• www.agpros.com AGI Rnlc..,.rtul,.I I l Soil Analysis Letter 5-2-08 Double J.doc May 2,2008 Page-2-oft SAMPLE LIST FOR SOIL MECHANICS LABORATORY STATE: Colorado COUNTY: Weld PROJECT/SITE NAME: Double J Feeders PROJECT TYPE: Waste Storage Pond Liner CONTACT PERSON: Travis Hertneky TELEPHONE NO: 970-535-9318 x119 ADDRESS: 4350 Hwy 66 FAX NO.: 970-535-9854 Longmont, CO 80504 E-MAIL: thertneky@agpros.com • Laboratory Field Sample Sample Sample Sample Depth Number Number Sample Description & Location Size (Inches) (pounds) Composite Subsoil sample taken from a single bore within the proposed pond Sample JJ-1 excavation 36"-66" =401b NO PERM AS OF 5/2/2008 Sample JJ-2 Sample taken from potential borrow area 6"-24" =40lb Tests to Perform: Grain Size Analysis& Index Properties As-Received Moisture Content; Standard Proctor Moisture Density; and • Permeability @ 95% of maximum Standard Proctor density. Hasbrouk Holdings Double J Bison Feeders • Facility Design Lot Layout This facility will have a double row or head to head layout. This configuration is best suited to the extremely flat existing site. Substantial earthwork will be required to provide desirable slope and provide good drainage. The bunklines will be built up and slope to the rear of the pen where a drainage swale will carry storm water along the length of the pens to the sediment basins and waste storage ponds. Fencing shall be constructed of welded pipe, cable and sucker rod. The facility will use standard feedyard style feed bunks and large concrete aprons. The bunkline at this facility will also include a hay rack to provide free access to roughage. Constructed buildings will be limited to a scale house, office, processing barn and commodity barn. Most of these buildings will be typical agricultural buildings without heat other finishes. All buildings will be designed,constructed, and maintained to meet current Weld county requirements. Minimal feed will be stockpiled on- site and likely delivered on an as-needed basis. A feed mill will not be installed and grains will be processed prior to arrival on-site. The facility design is based on the owner's request of nearly 400 ft2 per head, which is nearly double the typical stocking rate for feeder cattle. This stocking density provides for a maximum bison capacity of 16,000 head. Typical feeder cattle stocking rates would allow for a maximum capacity of approximately 24,000 head. • Water System This facility will provide livestock water via a domestic tap provided by North Weld Water District. Additional storage capacity will be added to meet the peak needs of the livestock and provide emergency storage. In pen heated waterers will be used and provide freeze protection. A sprinkler system will be installed to minimize dust generation and will use either existing surface water, properly apportioned groundwater wells,or storm water. • AgPro Enviromental Services,LLC Page 30 of 30 5/22/2008 Preliminary Design Report Hello