The URL can be used to link to this page

Browse Search

Home My WebLink About962403.tiff JOHN H. CHILSON Attorney At Law 6610 Chokecherry Drive MAR 9 1961 Loveland, Colorado 80537 303-667-3214 March 6, 1996 Mr. Todd Hodges Weld County Planning Department 1400 N. 17th Avenue Greeley, CO 80631 RE: Jake Hirsch Special Review Application Dear Todd: Enclosed are Mr. Hirsch' s "Answers to Special Review Questionnaire" for your review and comment . If you find that any question has been inadequately addressed, please advise me as to what additional information is necessary and we will do our best to provide it . Also enclosed is the report of Terracon Environmental, Inc. regarding the drainage/wastewater plan and facilities . I believe you may already have a copy of this, but I am sending it in case you do not . It is my understanding that Mr. Hirsch has now provided all items required for submittal in this special review, but if this understanding is incorrect, will you please advise me as to any additional items which are required. We are ready to proceed with this matter to the planning commission and would appreciate your assistance in scheduling that public hearing. Would you kindly provide notice of the date and time of that hearing to both myself and Mr. Hirsch. Truly yours, John H. Chilson Copy: Hirsch Dairy EXHIBIT 962403 cii4any n rim IvTY PLAN" !G USE BY SPECIAL REVIEW APPLICATION D J U L 2 4 1995 Department of Planning Services, 1400 N. 17th Avenue, Gree ey, o o dL 'i0641 Phone - 353-6100 - Ext. 3540, Fax 0 (303) 351-0978 TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT: (please print or type, except for necessary signature) LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF SPECIAL REVIEW PERMIT AREA: ,StW2 c..2Zh.s2' Section 41 T7 N, R 67 W TOTAL ACREAGE ; 4/6' PRESENT ZONE /�6 j( a1LrtiRAJ L OVERLAY ZONE PROPOSED USE all/ex /-ARM SURFACE FEE (PROPERTY OWNERS) OF AREA PROPOSED FOR THE USE BY SPECIAL REVIEW PERMIT: Name: // A1CCi,/ ,22.11 / Address: /i&fR lc' ° City/State/Zip: CA1 6ti' G-.f et-1S Home Telephone: 99C - J�f6 - ,QQ% Business Telephone: zj7(. - k,kZ - e SfJ Name: Address: City/State/Zip: Home Telephone: Business Telephone: APPLICANT OR AUTHORIZED AGENT (if different than above) : Name: Address: City/State/Zip: Home Telephone: Business Telephone: I hereby state that all statements and plans submitted with the application are true and correct to the best of my knowledge. 1 Via/ Sign re: 0 er or Authorized Agent 962403 SPECIAL REVIEW REQUEST OF HIRSCH DAIRY ANSWERS TO SPECIAL REVIEW QUESTIONNAIRE 1 . HOW IS THIS PROPOSAL CONSISTENT WITH THE WELD COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN? Applicant ' s property is zoned A-Agriculture. This zoning invokes those sections of the Weld County Comprehensive Plan setting forth the intent for the future protection and fostering of -agricultural-business -in Veld-County. --A stat-ed—on-page 1 -of the plan: "The basic documents used by Weld County to carry out the goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan are the Zoning Ordinance and Subdivision Regulations . " As stated on page 14 of the Plan: "From the beginning of settlement in the County, economical activities have centered on agriculture . . .although the County' s economy continues to diversify, it is still strictly oriented toward agricultural products sold and to goods sold for agricultural production. " The Comprehensive Plan further specifically promotes the future production of agricultural products in Weld County. See page 19-29 . This proposal is consistent with the broad mandate for the promotion and protection of agricultural business in the agricultural zones as contained in the Comprehensive Plan. The officials of Weld County must recognize that the continued success of agriculture in the coming years, as has been demonstrated in the past, depends upon achieving an economy of scale. That is to say, agricultural operations which have been unable to expand in size and produce capacity have been the main source of financial failure in agri-business . Competition in the marketplace requires continued expansion if any business is to survive. This is certainly true in the milk production business in which Applicant is engaged. That is why Applicant, when he sited his dairy operation originally, chose a location with adequate acreage to expand and sized the drainage plan, waste treatment facility and utility services to be adequate to accommodate major expansion. He did so in reliance on the Zoning Ordinance, but more so on the provisions of the Comprehensive Plan. The Plan specifically recognizes the importance of economic growth (p. 88) as represented by expanded export of agricultural products and one of the stated ECONOMIC GOALS (p. 92) : "The County shall provide land-use goals and policies which foster the economic health and continuance of agriculture . " 2 . HOW DOES THIS PROPOSAL MEET THE INTENT OF THE ZONE DISTRICT IT IS LOCATED IN? It is stated in the "Purpose and Intent of the Zoning Ordinance, Section 4, that the Ordinance is designed to promote health, safety and welfare through the following: 4 . 1.5 protecting the tax base of the County; 4 . 1 .7 Fostering the County' s agricultural,business, mining and other economic bases; 1 962413 4 . 1 . 9 Conserving the value of property; 4 . 1. 10 Encouraging the most appropriate use of land. " Further, a legal lot in the Agricultural District must have a minimum size of 80 acres which, clearly expresses an intent to foster agricultural business within the agricultural zone. Section 31 of the Ordinance deals with the Agricultural District and states that agriculture is considered a valuable resource to be protected from adverse impacts and is to be protected as an "essential feature" of Weld County. It further states : "The A District is intended to provide areas for the conduct of agricultural_activ.:i ties.mand_activities....related _to-..agriculture and agricultural production without interference of other incompatible land uses. The A District is also intended to provide areas for the conduct of Uses by Special Review which have been determined to be more intense or to have a potentially greater impact than Uses Allowed by Right . " By this specific intent, the Zoning Ordinance recognizes the rightfulness of Applicant ' s dairy in the A zone and its expansion under the special review process . Under Section 24, Uses by Special Review, the County must engage in a lengthy and detailed process to determine that the proposed use is compatible with the neighborhood, minimizes the conversion of farmland and complies with a variety of specific standards . Applicant ' s dairy went through this process when it was originally permitted and was found to conform to, and comply with, all of the criteria and standards set forth in Section 24 . Thus, it has previously been determined that a sizable dairy operation in this location is consistent with the Zoning Ordinance and the Comprehensive Plan. Applicant ' s request for an expansion in size and number of animals, now under consideration, benefits from a presumption that the type of use sought is permitted in this location. 3 . HOW IS THIS USE COMPATIBLE WITH FUTURE DEVELOPMENT AS STATED IN THE WELD COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN? IF YES, HOW? This proposal is compatible with the provision of the Comprehensive Plan related to Economic Growth (p. 88) , Open Space (p. 82) , preservation of farm land and existing land use (p. 14) and the provisions of Future Land Use (p. 16) which describe a policy of allocating urban development patterns to existing expansion areas which contain adequate infrastructures therefor. Also, see paragraph 1 above. 4 . WHAT TYPE OF USES SURROUND THIS SITE? IS THIS REQUEST COMPATIBLE WITH SURROUNDING USES? This proposal is situated in an agricultural area of irrigated farming, coupled with large feedlot operations . Immediately east is a very large sheep feeding operation. Approximately 4 tenths of a mile northwest is a sizable cattle feeding setup. Applicant ' s site is substantially devoted to irrigated cropland. The dairy, as expanded, by the permit being sought, will not expand into county productive fields, but rather will involve land which has already been taken out of production. 2 962403 Therefore, the site will remain as compatible with existing land uses in the area as it is today. While there are two smaller parcels to the south, the predominant acreage of these parcels is also agriculture. Since no current farmland will be converted under this request and since the area occupied by the expansion of the diary is already a part of the dairy site, there will be no impact on the compatibility of this site with the surrounding areas . 5 . IS THIS PROPERTY LOCATED WITH A - FLOOD HAZARD ZONE, GEOLOGIC HAZARD ZONE, OR AIRPORT OVERLAY ZONE - AND DOES IT MEET THESE SPECTAT..RBQ ThREMENTS? It is not located in any of these zones. 6 . WHAT EFFORTS HAVE BEEN MADE TO CONSERVE PRODUCTIVE AGRICULTURAL LAND? As stated above, no additional productive agricultural land will be taken out of production. 7 . HOW WILL PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY AND WELFARE BE PROTECTED? Health, safety and welfare is already protected by the requirements for the original special use permit which this dairy was originally established. These conditions will continue to apply, together with all requirements of the county health department. The expanded use will have no more impact on public health, safety and welfare than the existing permitted use. 8 . WHAT WILL THE SITE BE USED FOR? Irrigated farm and a dairy. 9 . HOW CLOSE IS THIS SITE TO OTHER RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURES? The closest residential structure is situated approximately 200 yards from the dairy improvements and approximately 100 yards from the boundary line of this site . 10 . HOW MANY PEOPLE WILL BE EMPLOYED AT THIS SITE AND WHAT HOURS WILL THEY WORK? Twelve people will be employed fulltime on rotating hours, which averages one employee per 50 cows . Milking is done in shifts and continues 24 hours per day at the present time, and this will continue when the dairy is expanded. 11 . HOW MANY PEOPLE WILL USE THIS SITE? This is not a commercial enterprise which the public will access for goods or services . The only people using the site will be employees, management, feed deliveries, and milk transport trucks . 12 . WHAT TYPE AND HOW MANY ANIMALS, IF ANY, WILL BE ON THIS SITE? This is a dairy operation for feeder?? Holsteins . The expansion applied for will take place gradually over the next 10 years as we improve our genetics and work new cows into our operation. Calves are maintained on the property until weaned and marketable. The number of calves will vary from time to time . Bulls are not maintained on the premises . 3 962403 13 . WHAT TYPE AND HOW MUCH, IF ANY, OPERATING AND PROCESSING EQUIPMENT WILL BE UTILIZED ON SITE? 14 . WHAT TYPE AND HOW MANY STRUCTURES WILL BE ERECTED (BUILT) ON THIS SITE? Two free-stall metal barns will be constructed for the expansion, plus additional corral fencing. 15 . WHAT KIND (TYPE, SIZE, WEIGHT) OF VEHICLES WILL ACCESS THIS SITE -AND .HOW .OFTEN? Other than employee vehicls, the site is accessed once a day by a milk tanker transport 50 feet in length and approximately 70, 000 pounds in weight when full . Feed commodities are delivered to the site once or twice a week by semi-load, the size and weight of which will vary, but possibly average 50, 000-70, 000 pounds in weight and 40-60 feet in length. 16 . WILL THIS SITE USE A SEPTIC SYSTEM OR PUBLIC SEWER FACILITIES? This site uses a septic system with a retention pond and settling system with manure separator. 17 . ARE YOU PROPOSING STORAGE OR STOCK PILE OF WASTES ON THIS SITE? IF SO, WHAT IS THE SIZE AND TYPE PROPOSED? Manure is stockpiled awaiting delivery to area farmers . We also utilize manure on our fields . Approximately 1 acre used for storage . 18 . HOW OFTEN WILL DEBRIS, JUNK, OR WASTE BE DISPOSED OF? BY WHAT MEANS? A weekly trash-hauling service is used. We do not accumulate debris or junk. 19 . HOW LONG WILL IT TAKE TO CONSTRUCT THIS SITE AND WHEN WILL CONSTRUCTION BEGIN? The construction of the facilities necessary to expand the dairy to a 2, 000 head operation will occur over approximately 10 years . Initially, one additional free-stall housing unit for cows will be constructed within one year after the special use permit is approved. Five additional free-stall housing units will be constructed one at a time as the milking herd grows and as necessary to accommodate them. There will be no expansion to the existing milking barn, hospital pen, calf sheds, loafing barns, commodity sheds or other fixtures . 20 . EXPLAIN THE PROPOSED LANDSCAPING PLANS AND EROSION CONTROL MEASURES ASSOCIATED WITH THIS SITE . The landscaping and erosion control measures already established under the existing special use permit will be adequate to accommodate this proposed expansion. The expansion consists only of adding free-stall housing units for cows and will occur on land already set aside for this purpose. These additional units will not extend into agricultural land nor will they expand the site-line dimensions of the dairy as seen from the county roads . 4 962413 The land for these additions has already been leveled and incorporated into the design of the dairy facility. Similarity of architecture will be maintained. No expansion into erodible areas or site views will occur. 21 . EXPLAIN ANY PROPOSED RECLAMATION PROCEDURES WHEN TERMINATION OF THE SPECIAL REVIEW USE BEGINS . Because this special use request involves an already constructed dairy operation amounting to a very substantial investment in super structure and infrastructure, it is not contemplated that the special use permit therefor will be terminated. 22 . EXPLAIN THE NEED FOR THE PROPOSED USE (ACTIVITY) IN WELD COUNTY. The Comprehensive Plan and the Zoning Ordinance fully express an intent to preserve agricultural business in Weld County. Milk is an agricultural product, the export of which directly benefits the county. The dairy business is highly competitive and, as with all agricultural business today, it must be capable of expanding its operations to meet the necessary economy of scale which the future will require as a condition to profitability. Agricultural operations which cannot make a profit ordinarily fail, which costs the county in its social budget and in the return to the county from exported products . A failure costs jobs, which are an important component of the county' s economy. The existing dairy, while adequate in size to compete with the market when it was established, is not adequate to meet the economic exigencies of future competition. A critical element of business planning is to provide for the ability to expand that business as needed. While this expansion from 1000 cows to 2000 cows will not be fully needed for several years, it will be needed. Another major element of success in agricultural business is the capacity of that business to obtain the capital necessary for the operation. Applicant ' s business as is most agricultural business in Weld County, is financed by borrowing the necessary capital for expansion and operation. Applicant ' s lenders have made it clear that his future financing is contingent upon the establishing at this time the ability to expand his operation to 2, 000 milking cows in the future . Therefore, the financial ability of this agricultural business to continue is dependent upon obtaining this permit . It is probable that denial of this permit will result in the withdrawal of future capital funding of this business for agricultural lenders, simply because the applicant will be unable to demonstrate to lenders that he has the capacity to grow and to maintain profitability in the years ahead. Withdrawal of financing will ultimately lead to business failure, which is certainly not in the interests of Weld County or its citizens . 23 . WHO WILL PROVIDE FIRE PROTECTION FOR THIS SITE? The Windsor-Severance Fire District 24 . WHAT OR WHO WILL PROVIDE WATER TO THIS SITE? The North Weld County Water District 5 9624"13 25 . HOW ILL STORM WATER DRAINAGE BE HANDLED ON THIS SITE? On-site drainage is directed into a lagoon designed to handle a 25-year rain. Water from this lagoon is then pumped onto the fields for irrigation. Storm water drainage will not be accelerated or increased as a result of the permit applied for. The drainage system was designed and constructed in the manner approved by the County Commissioners under the original Construction permit. 6 962423 6 rr v•, ,�� AGGEGS INF �rt SI3$EI_ I Weld County Public Works Department ( 933 North 11th Av s., P.O. Box 758, Greeley, CO 8063«(303)356-4000 Ext 3750 it 352-2868 1. Applicant Name "�� Phdne Jai-538-0- Ci FATAA f -_State Zip t06/S Address.,,,,// 2� cu e,/� ?,{� tY 2. Addressor location of access iv s Section a 1/ T!wnship_2_____Range lock Lot Weld Csioa Side of Road I4 S E or W Weld Courts Road# z c.Distance fipm.&number of intersecting road access to the property? Yes X No 4 of accesses 3. Is there an existing 4 4. Site Sketet _H yy '"`'fit 023 5. Proposed use: Residcnti= 'cultural _ Industrial N. Temporary _ Temporary on —ommercial ; _ Su..'vision _ Other _ m C OFFICE USE ONLY ; 1 Accidents Date �T . Road ADT_-----• Date... • Date Accidents JDater_ Road � • Drainage Requirement: Culvert Size • Lengths—• . Other Comments: - Installation authorized I Inform"on Insufficient - I Sped: Conditions . - Tits c t —�' :access.tor T00® 280m 0I'ltld Clam 9992 ZcC 0L6IXVI 00:tT Se-0Z-L0 96Z4O3 ) ` I / , ) i i "j APPROXMATE CROPLAN ''si I LOCATION OF AREA _J 1, `� PROPERTY OUJDARY ,, , I DRT ROAD ‘• I I AND RRIGATION COMMODITES CANAL I STORAGE \ AREA I DARY CONFINEMENT 1 j AND OPERATIONAL ;+il�it ' AREA( • • , et I • • • •:•j Cso3o N j PIUNDER ;�. : :'I DITCH . ¢ '.' I r•Q CI\c, cc ! APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF . I : 'V MANURE/WATER hO SEPARATOR ft ---'^;`, _ BARN •` ••• TRAILERS • I Ii! . . CORRALS.'.'. 1' O I 250' X 300' V j LAGOON : IRRIGATION DITCH BURIED PIPING •• i j \ROM BARN\ : • •; CORRALS ' I R 711�Ul of A DAIRY CONFINEMENT •• i _p p AND OPERATIONAL ••• . ••• •I, • I AREA � _- I COUNTY ROAD 78 IF o co \\Sir s2oo�co�Op10 �i9� i9`90 0____600 APPROXIMATE SOU lin = 800ft FIGURE 3 SITE LOCATION AND TOPOGRAPHIC DIAGRAM HIRSCH DAIRY, SEVERANCE, COLORADO PROJECT NUMBER 43935049 DRAWN:DECEMBER.1993 DRAWN BY:PIN(49SLD) 1lerracon 962403 �-�Tp ,W Qii, M1 . y 1 ,/ N , 33 33 -.,1 , 34 48, n 48 32 ., < -4 • 1).e. t1< 34 53 { / 52 13 \ / 14 4 � ��.s t n . 47 7 e r' 34 a4 32 jm r Y; a 32 A.., 3348 53 �kr a • t��, ✓+ pp r 4 ,Q:`'v , irj c � G 1 33 tt ,_?..t 7.4‘;',,r.,:- 38 'J 38 Ati _ : 2 -s N- ,. 53 ' a�" 4`.....e63-1".,;:i.&1.: 37 , ��' '5 -r 52 \ 53 38 \ 47 47 \ 0.24- 7-4 747 53 W 32 52 51 48 ay • 32 \ 1, 37 J ; .: � .'rt \ . ,� ^ ' 38 38 47 At 53 . I s 33 t; ��a• ,: x.'y } ' .. 52 Tx -4. ' 3 ,„,-,t„-,,..,-,,,, 48 - ry Y -_ 1 II11 ��ti.lF �Z' ' �a 48 L+ 32 u- 32 ...: a y,_ 'r _ 47 "� 39 53 T'v 3 5 5 - 3 yy .W 4,, .-. • >. f m 47 4. A' a )� 53 47 u i ' va 3 ai" 38 " • • 51`. 33 �a4�, t, j,_; 52 • a,. 4r ° '`` Yw 53 * E 53 ;y 4.� -.--,sr;..-_.'44%.1k..'-', . 52 51 44.w S Yr 'Nil,. r+ �.,n i7' I� 5 2 �. .. 9.RT. ^, :- u„ 4 ;crfi , Q 32 r U.S. Department of Agricuisure Page - 1 Soil Conservation Service 7/20/95 NONTECHNICAL SOILS DESCRIPTION REPORT FOR DESCRIPTION CATEGORY - SOI Survey Area- WELD COUNTY, SOUTHERN PART, COLORADO Map Symbol Description 32 KIN LOAM, 1 TO 3 PERCENT SLOPES This is St deep well drained soil on smooth plains and alluvial fans. It formed in mixed wind deposits and parent sediment. Typically the surface layer is brown and pale brown loam about 12 in. thick. Permeability is moderate. Available water holding capacity is high. The effective rooting depth is 60 in. The hazard of water erosion is low, while that due to wind is high. 38 NELSON FINE SANDY LOAN, 3 TO 9 PERCENT SLOPES The Nelson soil is a moderately deep, well drained soil. It is formed on plains in residuum from sandstone. The surface is a fine sandy loam. The underlying material is a fine sandy loam. The soils have moderately rapid permeability. Their available water holding capacity is moderate. Roots penetrate to the depth of soft sandstone which is at about 30 inches. Runoff is slow to medium and the erosion hazard due to wind is severe. 39 NUNN LOAN, 0 TO 1 PERCENT SLOPES The Nunn soil is a deep, well drained soil. It is formed on terraces from 'alien material. The surface is a loam. The subsoil is clay loam. The underlying material is clay loam and sandy loam. The soils have moderately slow permeability. Their available water holding capacity is high. Roots penetrate to 60 inches or more. Runoff is slow and the erosion hazard due to wind is moderate. 67 OLNEY FINE SANDY LOAN, 1 TO 3 PERCENT SLOPES The Olney soil is a deep, well drained soil. It is formed on smooth plains in mixed outwasb deposits. The surface is a fine sandy loam. The subsoil is sandy clay loam. The underlying material is a calcareous fine sandy loam. The soils have moderate permeability. Their available water holding capacity is moderate. Roots penetrate to 60 inches or more. Runoff is slow and the erosion hazard due to wind is severe. 52 OTERO SANDY LOAM, 3 TO 5 PERCENT SLOPES This is a deep well drained soil on high plains. It formed in mixed outwash and wind deposits. Typically the surface layer is brown sandy loam about 10 in. thick. Permeability is rapid. Available water holding capacity is moderate. The effective rooting depth is 60 in. The hazard of water erosion is low, while that due to wind is high. 962492 W* TCTAL it 12. 15. 199♦ F1 P. 1 FROM FLOOD INSURANCE SERVICES, LTD 1685 E. 160th Avenue Broomfield, Co 80020 Phone (303) 452-1716 FAX (303) 452-1208 December 15, 1994 Terracon 475 W. 115Th Avenue Northglenn, CO 80234 ATTN: Brick Smith FLOOD ZONE CERTIFICATION Your request for tone information has been received and noted. This is to certify that on the date this Flood Zone Certification is printed, the property location listed below has been identified and following is the information from the most current Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA Flood insurance rate map: STATE: Colorado COUNTY: Weld CITY: Unincorporated COMMUNITY: 080266 PANEL I: 0475 SUFFIX: C FIRM DATE: 09/28/82 FIRM ZONE: C (Minimal flooding) Y PARTICIPATING COMMUNITY Address of property given by you: 11283 Weld County Road / 78 Eaton, CO CUSTOMER NAME: Hirsch Dairy REF / 43935049 Please see copy of the attached map. The X with the circle around it marks the approximate location of the property. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call . S cerely, 1vn.cd#.a Diane Oestman ,�1! Secretary W/ WE WRITE FLOOD INSURANCE POLICIES - PLEASE CALL FOR A QUOTE _ trans 139539 962493 FROM 12. 15. 1. 12u12 'determine If flood Insurance 4 available M this lomnluntty, tact your Insurance slant.Or all ths National Flood Insuring', prim it(boo)2214620. • 11 4i APPROXIMATE SCALE 2000 0 11000 FEET I 1.•-+ — ® NATIONAL FLOOD INSURANCE PROGRAM FIRM FLOOD INSURANCE RATE MAP WELD COUNTY, COLORADO UNINCORPORATED AREA PANEL 475 OF 1075 IBEE MAP Min POI%PANELS NOT►NINTIOI • . � 1 COMMUNITY-PANEL NUMBER 080266 0475 C • MAP REVISED: SEPTEMBER 28, 1982 962423 I I'' fVb•pI •rr1 n. Mp.IPw...•..• �\1�o,vr ' �� `� 9Y1"r • _iE nos JO umoj. (\\ , N y7u(9NNJS } sii .11 , J ,W o 112 it oUflfl06r 1 0 IS'"Nr %......1 I 1. \ 1 . — _ � a` I ri) o¢ I CZ i K , I , . ... L.__- __. ... \ _____ 1 , 1. ! - - ___ .. I t3NO2N. k) K, ISI \ DI cf./ . " \`\ \ Nee\r\s ‘‘ y 3 \________ II II : ' I —I1 II 1 C ( Nu\ si,,,,C--Nr\ II (----- I 1 il.. ,..._ . 1 \ ., % .., I _____i, 1 Lilt; P66i 'ST 'LI •_ __^ -- i 962C13 1 WINDSOR FIRE DEPARTMENT 728 Main Street • P.O. Box 671 • Windsor, Colorado 80550 -n- 96 1 ( I t"I 1 2ScL `Gila Lev. is A collouo up ;Om auk conuecJQ ,'on 1\A•e o4i etz cll. AY Re&G4Rdln6 -Me, e>PAnS1on 0-c (y^^ou& GIRIRY OPERA.... ;on . We_ will conTtnue To seive Ysou% tiRf_ pgoIecfion A3 ION, tom RE31be WdJ' ir otAA tsRe claslRic,+, We. \'tAue no PRo b)em W i#k You R. EXPAns;on LLbu+ tuoLA I c.I s+, l0 need 40 ReiireuJ ANY mnJoR buiIiin& oc £ J ucfuRes in ^DVn3txnChon 03 -3/41ne- QY9Ah,sion. IY11s is T6 PSI c4Re ACGe:.sibiIIhe d-C cup_ &QUIPmevA lh CASe- O-c A fries_. L rRe beer. 962413 1lerracon March 22, 1996 ENVIRONMENTAL,INC. 475 West 115th Avenue-Suite F Northglenn,Colorado 80234 Mr. Jake Hirsch (303)452-0880 Fax:(303)452-3401 Hirsch Dairy John F Hartwell,P.E. 11283 Weld County Road 78 Tho m Thom s Rau,P.E. as A.Harp Eaton, Colorado 80615 Brick Smith,P.E. Garry V.Woodman,Arch. RE: Hirsch Dairy 11283 Weld County Road 78 Eaton, Colorado Project Number 43935049 Dear Mr. Hirsch: The purpose of this letter is to supplement our recent letter dated February 20, 1996 relative to pond capacity at the above-referenced site. Based on our conversations with you and your attorney we understand that as a condition of your special-use permit through Weld County, that the holding pond will be required to store a 100-year storm event Since no duration was given for this storm we have assumed that Weld County requires storage capacity for a 100-year/24-hour storm. Terracon Environmental, Inc. (Terracon) did not receive a copy of Weld County's specific regulatory requirement from your attorney. As discussed in our previous letter, Terracon visited the site after the initial construction of the dairy on December 8, 1994. During the site visit, the retention pond appeared to be approximately 14 feet deep vertically from the crest of the berm to the bottom of the pond, with approximate 3:1 (horizontal:vertical) side slopes. The pond was triangular in shape with legs of approximately 525 feet and 755 feet along the crest. Based on these approximate measurements, the maximum capacity of the pond was estimated to be approximately 62 acre-feet without free-board and approximately 46 acre-feet assuming approximately 25% free-board. This would be equivalent to approximately 3.8 vertical feet of free-board if the pond were filled to 46 acre-feet.. Based on the state of Colorado regulatory requirements, retention ponds should be designed to contain the runoff volume for the open lot areas of the dairy and should also include the additional capacity to store up to six (6) months of process wastewater from the milking parlor. This retention- pond storage requirement remains at approximately 17 acre-feet when utilizing the 100-year/24- hour storm as a basis for run-off calculation. (When utilizing the 25-year/24-hour storm curve the required volume was 16.7 acre-feet and when utilizing the 100-year/24-hour storm curve the required volume was 16.9 acre-feet.) This calculation is based on the following: • The runoff area, including the pond area, was estimated to be approximately 42 acres based on a site map provided by Hirsch Dairy. The hydrologic design used was the SCS method utilizing curve number 90 for open lots as described in the CAFOC regulation. Runoff was based on the 100-year/24-hour storm per the Weld County requirements. Total precipitation for this storm was 3.8 inches as observed on the 100-year/24-hour storm curve map for the area closest to Offices of The Terracon Companies,Inc. Environmental Engineers and Scientists Arizona • Arkansas • Colorado • Idaho • Illinois • Iowa • Kansas • Minnesota Missouri ■ Montana • Nebraska ■ Nevada • Oklahoma ■ Texas • Utah • Wyoming QUALITY ENGINEERING SINCE 1965 962403 Mr. Jake Hirsch/Hirsch Dairy Terracon Project Number 43935049 March 22, 1996 Page 2 the dairy. This information was provided by Mr. Glenn Newton of the Soil Conservation Service office in Greeley, Colorado (phone 970-330-0380). The runoff volume for these parameters was estimated to be approximately 10.2 acre-feet • Terracon also estimated the storage volume required for six months storage from a 2,000-cow dairy assuming that process water would be tripled to 6,000 gallons per day (the original estimate was 2,000 gallons per day for an 850-cow dairy based on conversations with Mr. Hirsch; a linear assumption would have yielded approximately 4,700 gallons per day). The estimated additional storage volume required for process water at 6,000 gallons per day was approximately 3.3 acre-feet (The estimated storage volume for process water at 4,700 gallons per day was 2.6 acre-feet) • The sum of the runoff volume and the process water volume was approximately 13.5 acre-feet It was assumed that an additional 25 percent of the 13.5 acre-feet capacity would be required for free-board,which yields a total volume capacity of approximately 17 acre-feet The estimated size of the pond as built, approximately 46 acre-feet with free-board, appears to be nearly triple the required volume of 17 acre-feet with free-board. Therefore, it does not appear that additional storage capacity will be required to meet the requirements of the special-use permit If you have any questions or if you need assistance with the special-use permit, please do not hesitate to contact us. It has been a pleasure to be of service to the Hirsch Dairy on this project Sincerely , TERRACON� ENVIRONMENTAL, INC. �I)Eta Brick Smith, P.E. Colorado Number 29894 3/22/9` BS/bs1 copies to addressee (3) (NG)N:WROJECTSW. %WPtaszzJH.LTR 962403 1 rerrecon February 20, 1996 ENVIRONMENTAL,INC. 475 West 115th Avenue-Suite F Mr. Jake Hirsch \13' Northglenn,Colorado 80234 (303)452-0880 Fax:(303)452-3401 Hirsch Dairy P(t John R Hartwell,RE. 11283 Weld County Road 78 David M.Rau,P.E. Thomas A.Harp Eaton, Colorado 80615 Brick Smith,RE. Garry V.Woodman,Arch. RE: Hirsch Dairy 11283 Weld County Road 78 Eaton, Colorado Project Number 43935049 Dear Mr. Hirsch: The purpose of this letter is to respond to your recent request to Terracon Environmental, Inc. (Terracon) to review the pond storage capacity at the above-referenced site. We understand that the Hirsch Dairy is in the process of obtaining a special-use permit such that the dairy can increase the total number of dairy cows on site. Prior to construction, the original capacity of the dairy was 850 cows, which did not require a special-use permit under Weld County regulations. In January 1995, Terracon reviewed pond capacity based on the as-built pond and increasing the dairy capacity to 1,500 cows. We understand that now the dairy may expand up to 2,000 cows. Terracon's review is based on the assumption that the Hirsch Dairy may at some point expand to 2,000 cows and on Terracon's interpretation of the Confined Animal Feeding Operations and Control (CAFOC) regulation in 5 Code of Colorado Regulations 1002-19 effective August 30, 1992. On December 8, 1994, Terracon visited the site after the initial construction of the dairy. During the site visit, the retention pond appeared to be approximately 14 feet deep vertically from the crest of the berm to the bottom of the pond, with approximate 3:1 (horizontal:vertical) side slopes. The pond was triangular in shape with legs of approximately 525 feet and 755 feet along the crest. Based on these approximate measurements, the maximum capacity of the pond was estimated to be approximately 62 acre-feet without free-board and approximately 46 acre-feet assuming approximately 25% free-board. This would be equivalent to approximately 3.8 vertical feet of free- board if the pond were filled to 46 acre-feet.. Based on Terracon's review of the CAFOC regulations and the proposed operation of the dairy, retention ponds should be designed to contain the runoff volume for the open lot areas of the dairy and should also include the additional capacity to store up to six (6) months of process wastewater from the milking parlor. This retention-pond storage requirement was estimated to be approximately 17 acre-feet based on the following: • The runoff area, including the pond area, was estimated to be approximately 42 acres based on a site map provided by Hirsch Dairy. The hydrologic design used was the SCS method utilizing curve number 90 for open lots as described in the CAFOC regulation. Runoff was based on the 25-year, 24-hour storm per the CAFOC regulation. Total precipitation for this storm was 3.4 Offices of The Terracon Companies,Inc. Environmental Engineers and Scientists Arizona • Arkansas • Colorado • Idaho ■ Illinois ■ Iowa • Kansas ■ Minnesota Missouri ■ Montana ■ Nebraska ■ Nevada • Oklahoma ■ Texas ■ Utah ■ Wyoming QUALITY ENGINEERING SINCE 1965 962403 Mr. Jake Hirsch/Hirsch Dairy Terracon Project Number 43935049 February 20, 1996 Page 2 inches as observed on the 25-year, 24-hour storm curve map for the area closest to the dairy as published in the hydrologic atlas. The runoff volume for these parameters was estimated to be approximately 10 acre-feet. • Terracon also estimated the storage volume required for six months storage from a 2,000-cow dairy assuming that process water would be tripled to 6,000 gallons per day (the original estimate was 2,000 gallons per day for an 850-cow dairy based on conversations with Mr. Hirsch; a linear assumption would have yielded approximately 4,700 gallons per day). The estimated additional storage volume required for process water at 6,000 gallons per day was approximately 3.3 acre-feet. (The estimated storage volume for process water at 4,700 gallons per day was 2.6 acre-feet.) • The sum of the runoff volume and the process water volume was approximately 13.3 acre-feet. The depth of the water in the as-built pond for 13.3 acre-feet would be approximately 2.9 vertical feet, allowing over 11 feet of free-board. It was assumed that an additional 25 percent of the 13.3 acre-feet capacity would be required for free-board; which yields a total volume capacity of approximately 17 acre-feet. The estimated size of the pond as built, approximately 46 acre-feet with free-board, appears to be nearly triple the required volume of 17 acre-feet with free-board. Therefore, it does not appear that additional storage capacity will be required if the dairy expands operations to accommodate 2,000 cows. If you have any questions or if you need assistance with the special-use permit, please do not hesitate to contact us. It has been a pleasure to be of service to the Hirsch Dairy on this project. Very truly yours, TES/R,`R7�AACON, ENVIRONMENTAL, INC. iTt Brick Smith, P.E. David M. Rau, P.E. Colorado Number 29894 Principal Engineer BS/DMR:bsl:ka2 r copies to addressee (3) 't ' (NG)NAPRGJECTS143935049AWP60220JH.LTR -' 962403 1lerracon ENVIRONMENTAL,INC. 475 west 115th Avenue-Suite F 1•..-i I} r,r.,l 1, ,.. Northglenn,Colorado 80234 (303)452-0880 Fax:(30" -a2-3401 S EP 1 4 1995 John F Hartwell,P.E. David M.Rau,P.E. Thomas A.Harp Brick Smith,P.E. UGarry V.Woodman,Arch. January 12, 1995 Mr. Jake Hirsch Hirsch Dairy 11283 Weld County Road 78 Eaton, Colorado 80615 RE: Response to Colorado Department of Health Comments Manure and Wastewater Management Plan Hirsch Dairy 11283 Weld County Road 78 Eaton, Colorado Project Number 43935049 Dear Mr. Hirsch: The purpose of this letter is to respond to comments and recommendations made by the Colorado Department of Health (CDH) in a letter dated March 10, 1994 relative to the above-referenced plan. The CDH is now known as the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment (CDPHE) . A copy of the CDPHE letter is included as an attachment to this letter. For financing purposes, the Hirsch Dairy is in the process of obtaining a special use permit such that the dairy could potentially operate with 1, 200 to 1, 500 cows; however, we understand that it is not the ultimate intent of the Hirsch Dairy to actually expand the operation. The original capacity of the dairy was 850 cows, which did not require a special use permit under Weld County regulations. Terracon Environmental, Inc. (Terracon) personnel visited the site on December 8, 1994 to observe current site conditions and performed a brief interview with Mr. Hirsch. At the time of the site visit, the dairy had been operational for approximately five (5) weeks and 470 dairy cows were on site. Terracon's responses to the CDPHE comments are based on the assumption that the Hirsch Dairy may at some point expand to 1, 500 cows and on Terracon's interpretation of the Confined Animal Feeding Operations and Control (CAFOC) regulation in 5 Code of Colorado Regulations 1002- 19 effective August 30, 1992 . The CPDHE comments and recommendations are repeated herein and are followed by Terracon's response. Offices of The Terracon Companies,Inc. Environmental Engineers and Scientists Arizona • Arkansas ■ Colorado • Idaho ■ Illinois ■ Iowa • Kansas • Minnesota Missouri • Montana • Nebraska • Nevada • Oklahoma ■ Texas ■ Utah • Wyoming QUALITY ENGINEERING SINCE 1965 9624'?a Mr. Jake Hirsch/Hirsch Dairy Project Number 43935049 Terracon January 12 , 1995 Page 2 Comment 1: "On page 1, your plan states that you will have trailers for your employees. However, the plan does not indicate how many trailers and how many employees your are going to house. Any human wastewater will have to be disposed of in an approved septic system; however, if the septic system is greater than 2, 000 gallons per day, you will need to apply for and obtain a site approval for this system. " Response: There are four (4) trailers on site. Mr. Hirsch indicated that there are 10 employees living on site. Mr. Hirsch indicated that the septic system was inspected and approved for use by Weld County officials. The system reportedly exceeded the county requirements. Comment 2: "On page 2, last paragraph, the study reads: "The depth to water is described as being (5) to 20 feet below the surface and may disappear seasonally" . The study does not provide any information as to the depth of the containment pond. Based on your own location map, it appears that the containment pond will be built in the lowest part of your property. Is this location going to be in a portion of your property that has high ground water? We would like you to clarify this item. " Response: Based on the Geotechnical Engineering Report prepared by Empire Laboratories, Inc. of Fort Collins, Colorado dated December 3 , 1994 , groundwater was encountered in five (5) borings at the western portion of the site at depths ranging from 10 to 12 . 5 feet below the surface at the time of drilling. Groundwater was observed in three (3) of these borings at depths ranging from 7 to 9 feet below ground surface 22 days after drilling. The containment pond was built in the western portion of the site but further south and west and topographically higher than the borings. It is possible that the north-western portion of the pond may be above relatively high groundwater. The elevation of the bottom of the pond was apparently raised when soft conditions were discovered during construction. Mr. Hirsch explained that during construction, the excavators were not able to dig deep enough at the original location because the subsurface became "mushy" . For this reason the pond was apparently cut less than five (5) feet into the land surface and taller side embankments were constructed to contain water. The area of the pond was increased to maintain adequate storage capacity. 962493 . Mr. Jake Hirsch/Hirsch Dairy Terracon Project Number 43935049 January 12, 1995 Page 3 During the site visit, the pond appeared to be approximately 14 feet deep vertically from the crest of the berm to the bottom of the pond, with approximate 3 : 1 (horizontal:vertical) side slopes. The pond is approximately triangular in shape with legs of approximately 525 feet and 755 feet along the crest. Based on these approximate measurements, the capacity of the pond was estimated to be approximately 46 acre-feet. Terracon's original recommendation for capacity was approximately 10. 1 acre-feet. At the time of the site visit the pond was mostly dry. Comment 3 : "The second paragraph, on page 3 , says that "The proposed dairy does not appear to be located in the 100 year flood plain " Section 4 .8. 6 (4) (d) , of the CAFOC Regulations, clearly states that "Process wastewater retention structures shall not be located within a mapped 100 year flood plain as designated and approved by the Colorado Water Conservation Board (CWCB) . . . . " If you have not been able to obtain any information from the CWCB regarding this item, instruct your consultant to make a more clear determination as to whether or not any of your process wastewater containment structures are going to be situated in the 100 year flood plain. " Response: In December 1994, the CWCB was contacted regarding a designation for the subject site. For an immediate response, the CWCB referred Terracon to Flood Insurance Services (FIS) of Adams County. Based on the FIS response, the Hirsch Dairy is not within a 100 year flood plain. A copy of the FIS response is attached to this letter. Comment 4 : "In the same paragraph, the study says: "The proposed dairy does not appear to be overlaying a designated aquifer as described in Classification and Water Quality Standards for Groundwater 3 . 12 .0, 5 CCR 1002-8" . The referenced ground water regulations were amended on December 27, 1993 . The amended ground water regulations do include all state aquifers; therefore, there are groundwater classifications and numerical standards, that you cannot adversely impact, for the underlying aquifer upon which you are building your dairy operation. " Response: The dairy appears to be operating in general accordance with the Manure and Wastewater Management Plan, it is not anticipated that the dairy will significantly impact the underlying aquifer. 962403 Mr. Jake Hirsch/Hirsch Dairy Terracon Project Number 43935049 January 12, 1995 Page 4 Comment 5: "Page 3 , the paragraph regarding Grading and Drainage, state that "Water from the corrals on the east side of the site will be directed through a pipe under the irrigation canal to the retention basin. " It is our understanding that, just previous to directing the wastewater into the pipe and under the canal, this wastewater will be conveyed through an earthen canal to the pipe. The exfiltration in this canal "shall be limited to the maximum extent practicable through the use of very low permeability earthen materials and proper compaction or through the use of synthetic conveyance materials" as stated in the CAFO regulations. Also, the inverted siphon (pipe under the canal) should be designated to carry peak flows expected at times when the applicable design storm event occurs. " Response: Based on the recent site visit, it appears runoff water from the eastern corral is directed to the adjoining alfalfa field, south of the corrals by sheetflow. Mr. Hirsch indicated that if this is not acceptable, then the flow could be redirected via a pipe under the concrete irrigation canal to the main pond. The pipe would be designed for the maximum design storm event and the upgradient area of runoff. The runoff would be conveyed by natural grading through the corrals, and by compacted earth or concrete ditches, if applicable, outside of the corrals. Comment 6: "Third paragraph, page 4 , Section 2 . 2 Process Wastewater Conveyance System. This paragraph does not provide information regarding estimated runoff and process wastewater flows. The regulation requires you to have this information available any time we perform a site inspection. Also, the study states that wastewater will flow by gravity to the manure separator, and subsequently to the retention pond. We would like to have information regarding performance efficiencies, and treatment capacity for the manure separator. We believe that you will have some solids accumulation in your wastewater retention pond. Therefore, we recommend that additional capacity be provided in the containment pond for solids accumulation. " Response: In Section 4.8 .5 (A) (5) (b) of the CAFOC regulations, it is stated that "The operator shall maintain copies of the agronomic analyses which are being relied upon for the purpose of limiting land application rates of manure and process wastewater. Copies of such analyses shall be available for inspection at the facility and records shall be maintained for a minimum of three years. " 9624/13 Mr. Jake Hirsch/Hirsch Dairy Terracon Project Number 43935049 January 12, 1995 Page 5 This portion of the regulation appears to be in effect when operators apply manure and process wastewater on a year-to-year basis which exceed rates allowed under Section 4 .8.5 (A) (5) (a) . Under Section 4 .8 . 5 (A) (5) (a) , an agronomic analyses is not required if supplemental commercial fertilizers are not used. Application rates in this case, are based on tabulated values included in the appendices of the regulation. This was interpreted to mean that if Hirsch Dairy not does intend to use supplemental commercial fertilizer, then application rates may be estimated using tables in the regulation and therefore an agronomic analyses and associated record keeping will not be required. However, if supplemental fertilizer is used, Terracon recommends an agronomic analyses be performed prior to initial application. With regard to estimated runoff and process wastewater flow, the CAFOC regulation does not appear to specifically ask for the flow rates except as they may be in relation to land application. In the Manure and Wastewater Management Plan (MWMP) , Section 2 . 3 , pages 4-6, it was stated that the retention basin was designed to contain the runoff volume for the western and eastern portions of the dairy plus the additional capacity to store up to six (6) months of process wastewater from the milking parlor. The upgradient runoff area was approximately 42 acres which was noted in Section 2 . 1 on page 4 of the MWMP. As stated, the hydrologic design used was the SCS method utilizing curve number 90 for open lots as described in the CAFOC regulation. The basin was sized for the 25-year, 24-hour storm. The storm was based on total precipitation of 3 .4 inches as observed on the 25-year, 24-hour storm curve map for the area closest to the dairy as published in the hydrologic atlas. Based on these parameters approximately 3 . 1 million gallons of precipitation would be generated in a 24 hour period which was equivalent to approximately 9.7 acre-feet. Process water was estimated to be 2 , 000 gallons per day based on conversations with Mr. Hirsch. It should be noted that the original retention pond was sized based on the above-mentioned parameters which included operation of an 850-cow dairy. The total required storage volume for the storm event plus six (6) months of process wastewater was approximately 10. 1 acre-feet including two (2) feet of free board. Terracon estimated the storage volume required for a 1,500-cow dairy assuming that process water would be doubled to 4, 000 gallons per day. The new storage requirement is approximately 15 acre-feet. The size of the pond as built appears to be triple the required volume. Due to this excess capacity, the Hirsh Dairy should be able to easily maintain the required pond capacity by removing accumulated solids from the settling basins on an annual basis. 9624'93 Mr. Jake Hirsch/Hirsch Dairy Terracon Project Number 43935049 January 12, 1995 Page 6 The efficiency of the separator is not known, but appears to separate relatively large solids effectively. Mr. Hirsch indicated that a small pile of manure solids, of approximately two (2) to three (3) cubic yards, had taken three (3) weeks to accumulate. A small settling basin was built at the inlet of the new pond to accumulate finer solids. A ramp was built along side of the settling basin to accommodate removal of small solids with a backhoe. Comment 7: "In the same paragraph the study says: "Solids collected from the separator will be stockpiled with the semi-dry solids near the retention basin . " The study does not mention if these wet solids are going to be placed on an impervious pad. We recommend that you provide one with additional drainage in the event of liquid waste running off outside from the pad. This waste should be directed back to the containment pond. " Response: The manure solids are stored on a concrete pad topographically upgradient of the settling basin and pond. The pad is sloped such that free liquids drain into the pond. The CAFOC regulation does not appear to require concrete pads. Other manure stockpiles will be placed in areas such that runoff will be directed into the containment pond. Comment 8 : "Second paragraph, page 5 says: "the waste retention basin will be an earthen structure intended to meet WQCC requirements . . . . " Also, the study mentions that: "Three (3) permeability tests were performed on recompacted soil samples collected from the proposed area. " We would like to know what method, to test permeability, was used. A description of the method used will help us make a better assessment if your containment facilities will meet the 1 x 10 cm/sec seepage rate specified in the above referenced regulations. " Response: The method used to test permeability was described in the Geotechnical Engineering Report. The falling head permeability test method was performed using on-site soil samples compacted to 95 percent of standard proctor density (ASTM D-698) . As explained on page 5 of the MWMP, the permeability of these soils ranged from 2 .7 X 10-8 to 3 . 0 X 10'7 cm/sec which exceeded the requirement of 1 X 104 cm/sec. An undisturbed soil sample also tested by the falling head method has a permeability rate of 3 . 0 X 10'7 cm/sec 962413 Mr. Jake Hirsch/Hirsch Dairy Terracon Project Number 43935049 January 12 , 1995 Page 7 which exceeded the requirement. As a safety factor, it was recommended that soil in the pond be compacted to 95 percent standard proctor. Mr. Hirsch indicated that the soils were compacted during construction. In situ-compaction tests were apparently not performed during construction. Comment 9 : "Page 6, Section 2 .4 Liquid and Solid Waste Disposal, states that the liquid and solids wastes generated by your operation will be disposed of by land application. Paragraph two, same page, gives you two alternatives for land application. The first one references "Manure Spreadsheets, " from Texas Agricultural Extension Service. However, the regulations are very specific about the disposal options available to animal feeding operators. Thus, you have three land application disposal alternatives, and they are explained in detail in Sections 4 . 8 . 5 (A) (5) (a) , (b) and (c) , of the above referenced regulations. If you decide to land apply, liquid and/or solid wastewater over land, abased on a site- specific agronomic analysis. As specified in Section 4 . 8 . 5 (A) (5) (b) , you shall maintain records for a minimum of three years. " Response: As discussed in the response to Comment 6, the CAFOC regulations state that a site specific agronomic analyses is required when additional commercial fertilizers are used. If additional fertilizers are not used, then an agronomic analyses is not required. The alternatives given in the MWMP were intended as suggestions for application rates to compare available acreage with the amount of plant available nitrogen (PAN) produced during the operation of the dairy. These rates were intended to be used in lieu of the addition of commercial fertilizer. It was believed that utilizing the manure spreadsheets would be equivalent to using the CAFOC appendices to estimate application rates. As discussed in the response to Comment 6, if supplemental commercial fertilizer is applied, Terracon recommends a site-specific agronomic analyses be performed at the site. Comment 10 : "The study does not specify the use of flow metering devices. We would like to know how you intend to determine quantities of liquid wastewater generated by your operation?" Response: The quantities of process wastewater were originally estimated to be approximately 2 , 000 gallons per day based on discussions with Mr. Hirsch as described in the response to Comment 6 . This amount plus the amount generated by the design storm event were the basis 9624 Mr. Jake Hirsch/Hirsch Dairy Project Number 43935049 Terracon January 12 , 1995 Page 8 for the initial size of the retention pond. The regulations do not appear to require that flow metering devices be used. Process wastewater is generated in the milking barn and is supplied from the municipal water system. Copies of water bills will be available if more exact quantities are required. For land application, the quantities will be estimated based on the irrigation pump capacity and the time of its operation. Comment 11: "A back flow preventative device is required by the regulations in the event that you will use additional well water during land application of wastewater. " Response: Additional irrigation water will be obtained from an irrigation ditch. Additional irrigation water from the ditch will not share a common pipe with process wastewater. Neither domestic or irrigation wells exist at the site. Comment 12 : "Your plan does not have any information about groundwater depth, flow direction and quality. We suggest you obtain this information to evaluate the need for a groundwater monitoring system. " Response: Information regarding groundwater depth is presented in the Geotechnical Engineering Report and in the response to Comment 2 . Based on topographic conditions, groundwater is estimated to flow in a westerly direction across the site. As discussed in the MWMP, groundwater may seasonally disappear. Section 4 . 8 . 8 of the CAFOC regulation states that: "Existing concentrated animal feeding operations which are in compliance with the provisions of Sections 4 . 8 . 3 , 4 .8 .4, and 4 . 8 .5 shall not be required to conduct water quality monitoring except as provided under Subsection 4 . 8 . 5 (A) (5) (c) . " The Hirsch dairy does not appear to need groundwater monitoring based on the following reasons: • Based on the site visit, the Hirsch Dairy appears to be in general compliance with the provisions of 4 .8 . 3 - SURFACE WATER PROTECTION REQUIREMENTS - Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations: • The dairy appears to be operated as a no-discharge facility, which includes manure and process wastewater 962403 Mr. Jake Hirsch/Hirsch Dairy Terracon Project Number 43935049 January 12, 1995 Page 9 collection, storage and land application facilities under the general performance requirements of Section 4.8. 3 (A) . • The Dairy appears to meet the design criteria for new facilities within the constraints of Section 4.8. 3 (B) and will reportedly meet the operation and maintenance requirements of Section 4. 8 . 3 (C) • The Hirsch Dairy appears to be in general compliance with the provision of 4 . 8.4 - GROUNDWATER PROTECTION REQUIREMENTS - CONCENTRATED ANIMAL FEEDING OPERATIONS: • The dairy appears to meet the requirements for manure and process waste water retention and conveyance structures as evidenced by the observed permeability of both non- compacted and compacted soil samples collected from the site and through the use of concrete materials and impermeable PVC piping materials. • The Hirsch Dairy appears to be in general compliance with the provisions of 4.8.5 - BENEFICIAL USE AND DISPOSAL OF MANURE AND PROCESS WASTEWATER - CONCENTRATED ANIMAL FEEDING OPERATIONS: • The dairy will reportedly land apply manure and process wastewater. If commercial fertilizer will also be used Terracon recommends that the dairy perform an agronomic analyses to comply with 4 . 8 . 5 (5) and revise the land application plan in accordance with 4 .8 . 5 (5) . Recommendation 1: "If a compacted clay liner is used for the lagoon system. The Division requires that a soil test be performed to determine the thickness of the liner (12 inches minimum) and the clay content in the soil-clay mixture. We recommend that the compaction of the liner mixture be at 95 percent standard proctor as specified by the American Society of Testing and Materials, D 698091 standards. Also, that a permeability test be performed using the method(s) described in the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers, E. M. 1110-2-1906, November 30, 1970. " "If a synthetic liner is going to be used, manufacturer recommendations and specifications should be followed during its installation. Also, before filling the containment facility with wastewater, a leaking test should be performed to insure that the liner was not punctured during installation. " 962403 Mr. Jake Hirsch/Hirsch Dairy Terracon Project Number 43935049 January 12, 1995 Page 10 Response: Neither a compacted clay liner or a synthetic liner are utilized at the site. Normal undisturbed soil and compacted soils exceeded the permeability requirement. If required for the special use permit, Terracon recommends that compaction and permeability testing be performed on the bottom and sidewalls of the retention pond to confirm that the permeability requirements are met. Recommendation 2: "When sludge removal is taking place, a safe, proven method should be used to avoid puncturing the liner. " Response: Since a small settling basing is located at the inlet of the pond which can be cleaned with a backhoe, it is not anticipated that significant sludge will be generated in the main portion of the pond. Terracon recommends that the settling basin be recompacted after cleaning operations. Recommendation 3 : "To avoid bank erosion of the pond embankments due to wind action, rip-rap should be provided. " Response: If bank erosion becomes a problem in the future, Terracon recommends that revegetation of the embankments be performed or that rip-rap be provided to protect the pond embankments. It is not anticipated that wind erosion of the embankments will be a significant problem. Recommendation 4 : "When pipes directing flow into the lagoon are used, a concrete pad should be constructed to minimize the potential of eroding soil if a clay liner is used. We recommend you use concrete pads, in any case, whether a clay or plastic liner is used to protect the integrity of the containment structures. " Response: Surface runoff from corrals is directed into the lagoon via natural grading. Process water from the milking parlor must first pass through the manure water separator and then through a rip-rapped settling basin, which both reduce the potential for eroding soil. Therefore, erosion protection at this inlet does not appear warranted at this time. If required, rip-rap would be a more effective energy dissipation/erosion control technique. 962403 Mr. Jake Hirsch/Hirsch Dairy Terracon Project Number 43935049 January 12, 1995 Page 11 Recommendation 5: "A monthly water mass balance should be calculated for the lagoon system. The water mass balance should include: influent flow, rainfall, snowfall evaporation and land application rates. If possible, local values should be used for the calculations. If local values are not available, regional values can be used. The calculation and logging of a water mass balance will help you control, if the integrity of your impoundment structure has been compromised. Response: It does not appear that a water mass balance is required under the provisions of the CAFOC regulation. This recommendation is likely beyond the scope of operation for the dairy. If you have any questions regarding the responses or recommendations in this letter or if you need assistance with the special use permit, please do not hesitate to contact us. In general, the dairy appears to be a well managed, state-of-the-art operation. It has been a pleasure to be of service to the Hirsch Dairy on this project. Very truly yours, TERRACON ENVIRONMENTAL, INC. Brick Smith, P.E. Colorado Number 29894 Cv- AZc a pet David M. Rau, P.E. Colorado Number 26138 BS/DMR: lsbl enc. CDPHE letter Flood Insurance Service Certification 962493 STATE OF COLORADO COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH v.of cotor� Dedicated to protecting and improving the health and fir/ ��g environment of the people of Colorado r 4300 Cherry Creek Dr.S. Laboratory Building RECEIVED ECEIVE "+te 76 •+ Denver,Colorado 80222-1530 4210 E.11th Avenue 'K` ,�! Phone(303)692-2000 Denver,Colorado 80220-3716 (303)691-4700 C' 1o1�1} Roy Romer Governor March 10, 1994 Patricia A.Nolan,MD,MPH ZERRACON ENVIRONMENTAEec°" "`ti eD '°` James Hirsch, Owner/Operator 2817 East County Road 30 Fort Collins, Colorado 80525 RE: Hirsch Dairy, Confined Animal Feeding Operations Control Regulations, Manure and Wastewater Management Plan, Weld County Dear Mr. Hirsch: This letter is to inform you that we, the Field Services Section, have finished reviewing your Land Application Plan, in accordance with the Confined Animal Feedinct Operations Control Regulations 4 . 8 . 0 (5 CCR 100219) as amended. We have the following comments: 1. On page 1, your plan states that you will have trailers for your employees. However, the plan does not indicate how many trailers and how many employees your are going to house. Any human wastewater will have to be disposed of in an approved septic system; however, if the septic system is greater than 2, 000 gallons per day, you will need to apply for and obtain a site approval for this system. 2 . On page 2 , last paragraph, the study reads: "The depth to water is described as being (5) to 20 feet below the surface and may disappear seasonally" . The study does not provide any information as to the depth of the containment pond. Based on your own location map, it appears that the containment pond will be built in the lowest part of your property. Is this location going to be in a portion of your property that has high ground water? We would like you to clarify this item. 3 . The second paragraph, on page 3 , says that "The proposed dairy does not appear to be located in the 100 year flood plain Section 4 . 8 . 6 (4) (d) , of the CAFOC Regulations, clearly states that "Process wastewater retention structures shall not be located within a mapped 100 year flood plain as designated and approved by the Colorado Water Conservation Board (CWCB) . . . . " If you have not been able to obtain any information from the CWCB regarding this item, instruct your consultant to make a more clear determination as to whether or not any of your process wastewater containment structures are going to be situated in the 100 year flood plain. 1 962403 4. In the same paragraph, the study says: "The proposed dairy does not appear to be overlaying a designated aquifer as described in Classification and Water Quality Standards for Groundwater 3 .12 . 0, 5 CCR 1002-8" . The referenced ground water regulations were amended on December 27, 1993 . The amended ground water regulations do include all state aquifers; therefore, there are groundwater classifications and numerical standards, that you cannot adversely impact, for the underlying aquifer upon which you are building your dairy operation. 5. Page 3 , the paragraph regarding Grading and Drainage, state that "Water from the corrals on the east side of the site will be directed through a pipe under the irrigation canal to the retention basin. " It is our understanding that, just previous to directing the wastewater into the pipe and under the canal, this wastewater will be conveyed through an earthen canal to the pipe. The exfiltration in this canal "shall be limited to the maximum extent practicable through the use of very low permeability earthen materials and proper compaction or through the use of synthetic conveyance materials" as stated in the CAFO regulations. Also, the inverted siphon (pipe under the canal) should be designated to carry peak flows expected at times when the applicable design storm event occurs. 6. Third paragraph, page 4, Section 2 .2 Process Wastewater Conveyance System. This paragraph does not provide information regarding estimated runoff and process wastewater flows. The regulation requires you to have this information available any time we perform a site inspection. Also, the study states that wastewater will flow by gravity to the manure separator, and subsequently to the retention pond. We would like to have information regarding performance efficiencies, and treatment capacity for the manure separator. We believe that you will have some solids accumulation in your wastewater retention pond. Therefore, we recommend that additional capacity be provided in the containment pond for solids accumulation. 7. In the same paragraph the study says: "Solids collected from the separator will be stockpiled with the semi-dry solids near the retention basin. " The study does not mention if these wet solids are going to be placed on an impervious pad. We recommend that you provide one with additional drainage in the event of liquid waste running off outside from the pad. This waste should be directed back to the containment pond. 8. Second paragraph, page 5 says: "the waste retention basin will be an earthen structure intended to meet WQCC requirements. . . . " Also, the study mentions that: "Three (3) permeability tests were performed on recompacted soil samples collected from the proposed area. " We would like to know what method, to test permeability, was used. A description of the method used will help us make a better assessment if your containment facilities will meet the 1 x 10 cm/sec seepage rate specified in the above referenced - - regulations. 2 962493 9. Page 6, Section 2 .4 Liquid and Solid Waste Disposal, states that the liquid and solids wastes generated by your operation will be disposed of by land application. Paragraph two, same page, gives you two alternatives for land application. The first one references "Manure Spreadsheets, " from Texas Agricultural Extension Service. However, the regulations are very specific about the disposal options available to animal feeding operators. Thus, you have three land application disposal alternatives, and they are explained in detail in Sections 4 . 8.5 (A) (5) (a) , (b) and (c) , of the above referenced regulations. If you decide to land apply, liquid and/or solid wastewater over land, abased on a site-specific agronomic analysis. As specified in Section 4 . 8 . 5 (A) (5) (b) , you shall maintain records for a minimum of three years. 10. The study does not specify the use of flow metering devices. We would like to know how you intend to determine quantities of liquid wastewater generated by your operation? 11. A back flow preventative device is required by the regulations in the event that you will use additional well water during land application of wastewater. 12 . Your plan does not have any information about groundwater depth, flow direction and quality. We suggest you obtain this information to evaluate the need for a groundwater monitoring system. These are the comments we have regarding your Manure and Wastewater Management Plan. However, these comments, in any way expressed or implied, can be or should be taken as an approval of your Operation and Maintenance practices. The amended Confined Animal Feeding Operations Control Regulations 4 . 8 . 0 (5 CCR 100219) , are a set of self implementing regulations. Therefore, the comments made here are to help you operate, maintain, and manage your facilities within the regulations. Furthermore, I would like to add the following items as part of our recommendations. 1. If a compacted clay liner is used for the lagoon system. The Division requires that a soil test be performed to determine the thickness of the liner (12 inches minimum) and the clay content in the soil-clay mixture. We recommend that the compaction of the liner mixture be at 95 percent standard proctor as specified by the American Society for Testing and Materials, D 698-91 standards. Also, that a permeability test be performed using the method(s) described in the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers, E. M. 1110-2-1906, November 30, 1970. If a synthetic liner is going to be used, manufacturer recommendations and specifications should be followed during its installation. Also, before filling the containment facility- with wastewater, a leaking test should be performed to insure that the liner was not punctured during installation. 3 9624" 3 2 . When sludge removal is taking place, a safe, proven method should be used to avoid puncturing the liner. 3 . To avoid bank erosion of the pond embankments due to wind action, rip-rap should be provided. 4. When pipes directing flow into the lagoon are used, a concrete pad should be constructed to minimize the potential of eroding soil if a clay liner is used. We recommend you use concrete pads, in any case, whether a clay or plastic liner is used to protect the integrity of the containment structures. 5. A monthly water mass balance should be calculated for the lagoon system. The water mass balance should include: influent flow, rainfall, snowfall evaporation and land application rates. If possible, local values should be used for the calculations. If local values are not available, regional values can be used. The calculation and logging of a water mass balance will help you control, if the integrity of your impoundment structure has been compromised. Finally, I would like to add that Derald Lang and myself are available to meet with you and/or your representatives to discuss any concerns you have. If you have questions, please call me at (303) 692-3564 . Sincerely, FOR THE DIRECTOR, WATER QUALITY CONTROL DIVISION L1/Zvems` Victor H. Sainz, P.E. District Engineer Field Support Section VHS: elj cc:N.Brick Smith, Terracon Environmental, Inc. Patricia Nelson, Permits and Enforcement Section Derald Lang, Unit Leader, Northeast Field Support Unit George Moravec, Unit Leader, Groundwater Unit Raymond R. Rabe, Director, Northeast Colorado Health Dept. Eric Dunker, Environmental Eng. , Northeast Co Health Dept. U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region VIII MS-3 File 4 962403 1 12. 15. 1994 12: 11 F. FROM FLOOD INSURANCE SERVICES, LTD 1685 E. 160th Avenue Broomfield, Co 80020 n® (303) FAX (303) 452-1208 December 15 , 1994 Terracon 475 W. 115Th Avenue Northglenn, CO 80234 ATTN: Brick Smith FLOOD ZONE CERTIFICATION Your reesteen ceived and certifyquthatfoon the dater this oFlood n has bZone Ye noted. rCertificationisprinted, the wing the information fromotheimost current hFederal Emergency Management oAgen s cy (FEMA Flood insurance rate map: STATE: Colorado COUNTY: Weld CITY: Unincorporated COMMUNITY: 080266 PANEL #: 0475 SUFFIX: C FIRM DATE: 09/28/82 FIRM ZONE: C (Minimal flooding) Y PARTICIPATING COMMUNITY Address of property given by you: 11283 Weld County Road # 78 Eaton, CO CUSTOMER NAME: Hirsch Dairy REF # 43935049 Please see copy of the attached map. The X with the circle around it marks the approximate location of the property. If you have any questions, p do not hesitate to call . Sncerely, &Q.r+ . - Diane Oestman Secretary WE WRITE FLOOD INSURANCE POLICIES - PLEASE CALL FOR A QUOTE trans 139539 9624? FROM 12. 15. 1994 12: 12 'determine If flood Insurance Is available In this community, tact your Insurance agent,or call the National Flood IMurgnes Tram at(600)014620. cif.1fli APPROXIMATE SCALE • 2000 0 2000PEET f"• w-r NATIONAL FLOOD INSURANCE PROGRAM FIRM FLOOD INSURANCE RATE MAP WELD COUNTY, COLORADO UNINCORPORATED AREA • PANEL 475 OF 1075 IMEE MAP INOaX VOA►ANES NOT PAINTED) • COMMUNITY•PANEL NUMBER • 080266 0475 C MAP REVISED: SEPTEMBER 28, 1982 federal emergency management agency - --_.. 12. 15, 1994 12: 12 1 _, __.. 7 ,....\ \1: .....Acx I , --I 1, I\ I ,.....— ..-,,,, I IA RAK \ \-,,LAXF, 13� 18 \\_Th.....\NC,,,N \\\R:c\ • --......,----- II Imo__- -_ -=.___ ________\ ,\\ ... \ L_______ ----), \\‘. kk , N , .,. \. z3 J (( I 19 1` ZONE C — � I ic. \ et I it I I RD i 26 25 ii -_ 30 1 N '''' r--- r-. I -I\ 1---- ..\__ N.S.. I C I ROULARD � \ LAKE 35 9 36 62°i. \ BALDR/DCF.{/�\ L lam / LAKE \ )SCNNE DER II ✓ ` (( ‘. TA AREA NOT INCLUDED I LAKE LA AFL \� lierracon ENVIRONMENTAL,INC. 475 West 115th Avenur -Suite F Nonhglenn.Colorado &^,234 (303)452-0880 Fax (333)4523401 John F.Hartwell,P.E David M Rau,P.E. Suzanne K Wohlgemuth.RE. Thomas A.Harp Brick Smith,P.E. Garry V.Woodman.Arch December 10, 1993 Mr. Derald Lang, Unit Leader Colorado Department of Health Water Quality Control Division Mail Code WQCD-DO-B2 4300 Cherry Creek Drive South Denver, Colorado 80222-1530 RE: Manure and Wastewater Management Plan Hirsch Dairy Weld County, Colorado Project Number 43935049 Dear Mr. Lang: Enclosed are two (2) copies of the Manure and Wastewater Management Plan (MWMP) prepared for the above-referenced project, as required under the "Confined Animal Feeding Operations Control Regulation" 4 .8 . 0 in 5 Code of Colorado Regulations 1002-19. If you have any questions or require additional information, please do not hesitate to contact us. Very truly yours, TERRACON� ��--CO� �� ENVIRONMENTAL, INC. Brick Smith, E.I.T. Project Engine r • ig Suzabie K. Wohlgemu , P.E. Colorado Number 25930 BS/SKW/DMR: lsb2 • Enc: Manure and Wastewater Management Plan cc: Mr. Jacob Hirsch/Hirsch Dairy Offices of The Terracon Companies.Inc. Environmental Engl ^`JJr`l7 Arizona at Arkansas • Colorado fa Idaho ■ Illinois • Iowa fa Kansas • in soa Missouri • Montana • Nebraska • Nevada • Oklahoma • Texas at Utaf. a Wyom.r .l 1 MANURE AND WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN PROPOSED HIRSCH DAIRY WELD COUNTY, COLORADO 1 PROJECT NUMBER 43935049 1 J 1 1 Prepared by Terracon Environmental, Inc. December 10, 1993 • 9624' 3 1rPrr,e-^ ma Terracon TABLE OF CONTENTS paae 1. INTRODUCTION 1 1. 1 Purpose 1 1.2 Site Description 1 1. 3 Site Geology and Hydrology 2 2. STORMWATER AND PROCESS WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT 3 2. 1 .Grading and Drainage . . . 3 • 2 .2 Process Wastewater Conveyance System 4 2 . 3 Retention Basin 4 2 .4 Liquid and Solid Waste Disposal 6 3 . DRY MANURE MANAGEMENT 7 3 .1 Open Lots 7 3 .2 Dairy Buildings 8 3 .3 Dry Manure Disposal 8 4 . BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES 8 5. GENERAL COMMENTS 9 APPENDIX A - FIGURES J :12403 3 Teriacon MANURE AND WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN PROPOSED HIRSCH DAIRY WELD COUNTY, COLORADO Project: Number 43935049 Date: December 10, 1993 3. INTRODUCTION J This Manure and Wastewater Management Plan (MWMP) was prepared to assist Hirsch Dairy in complying with the State of Colorado Water Quality Control Commission (WQCC) Regulation, "Confined Animal Feeding Operations Control Regulation" 4 .8 .0, 5 Code of Colorado 1 Regulations (CCR) 1002-19. The intent of this regulation is to prevent the discharge of manure or process wastewater from concentrated animal feeding operations into waters of the State and Jto encourage beneficial use on agricultural land. 1 1. 1 Purpose The purpose of this MWMP is the following: 1. To describe stormwater and process water management practices for the subject site. 1 2 . To describe solid waste manure (manure) management practices. 1 1.2 Bite Description The proposed dairy is owned by Mr. Jacob Hirsch. The general location of the subject property is shown on Figures 1 and 2 in Appendix A. The property is located in the west 35 of Section 24 , Township 7 North, Range 67 West of the Sixth Principal Meridian in Weld County, Colorado and is approximately two (2) miles north of Severance, Colorado. Figure 3 is a site location diagram. As seen from Figure 3 , the proposed dairy property will encompass approximately 240 acres, 42 of which will consist of an open lot configuration with concrete feed-bunk areas, fenced corrals and shade shelters, care-taker and staff trailers, a commodities 9624o3 1 1 Mr. Jacob Hirsch/Manure and Wastewater Management Plan Terracon Project Number 43935049 December 10, 1993 1 Page 2 storage area, milking parlor, manure separator and wastewater 1 retention pond. The Hirsch Dairy anticipates that the proposed facility will eventually confine approximately 850 milking cows and heifers. 1.3 Sit. Geoloav and Hydrology The following geologic and hydrologic description is based on Terracon's review of U.S. Soil Conservation Service (SCS) soil survey maps, U.S. Geological Survey Maps and soil boring 1 information from a geotechnical exploration performed by Terracon's affiliate company, Empire Laboratories, Inc. (Empire) . A total of 29 borings were drilled to depths of three (3) to 15 feet at the site. Details and soil test results from the geotechnical exploration are included in a separate report prepared by Empire dated December 3 , 1993 . Information from that report has been used for developing this MWMP. The proposed dairy lies within an area containing shallow surface j deposits of sand, silt and loess. The Fox Hills Sandstone Formation underlies the surface soil at the site. The Fox Hills Sandstone consists of cross bedded, tan sandstone which grades downward to brown, fine-grained, silty sandstone interbedded with gray shale. The Fox Hills Sandstone ranges from approximately 300 to 500 feet thick and is underlain by the Pierre shale. . The water table in the vicinity of the site is described as being within either surface colluvium, windblown deposits or consolidated surface rock deposits when it is fractured or weathered. The depth Jto water is described as being five (5) to 20 feet below surface and may disappear seasonally. Observations made during completion of the geotechnical exploration were consistent with geological survey maps and SCS maps. Near surface soil was predominantly sandy clay and clayey sand. Weathered bedrock, sandstone and siltstone was encountered at depths ranging from 1.5 to 7.0 feet j 962403 Mr. Jacob Hirsch/Manure and Wastewater Management Plan Terracon Project Number 43935049 December 10, 1993 Page 3 below the existing ground surface. It is underlain by what appeared to be unweathered Foxhills Sandstone which extended to the bottom of the borings at approximately 15 feet below ground surface. Groundwater was not observed in the soil borings while drilling. However, groundwater was observed in the borings at depths ranging from seven (7) to 12 feet below ground surface four (4) to 22 days after drilling. Surface water generally flows to the west toward Loop Lake and the Eaton Canal. The proposed dairy does not appear to be located in the 100-year flood plains for the local creeks and streams. The proposed dairy does not appear to be overlying a designated aquifer as described in "Classification and Water Quality Standards for groundwater" 3 .12 .0, 5 CCR 1002-8 . 2. STORMWATER AND PROCESS WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT The stormwater and process wastewater management plan for the dairy includes provisions for a drainage system, conveyance facilities and a retention basin. It also incorporates methods of managing liquid and solid wastes. Land application of liquid wastes and solid manure is an important aspect of the waste disposal process. The following subsections contain descriptions of the proposed grading and drainage; process wastewater conveyance systems; a retention basin; and the liquid waste disposal method. • 2.1 Gradina and Drainage As shown on Figure 3, the site is divided into two (2) sections for livestock confinement. The westernportion of the� property will consist of livestock corrals surrounding the milking parlor. The eastern portion of the property will contain commodities, corrals and care-taker staff trailers. The western and eastern portions of the property are separated by a concrete irrigation canal. • 962493 Mr. Jacob Hirsch/Manure and Wastewater Management Plan Terracon Project Number 43935049 December 10, 1993 Page 4 The total area of the east and west sections is approximately 42 acres. Precipitation, spilled water, urine and other drainage from the proposed corrals will be directed to the retention basin on the west side of the site by surface grading. Water from the corrals on the east side of the site will be directed through a pipe under the irrigation canal to the retention basin. The corrals will be graded such that the ground surface slopes downward to the west to a slope of approximately three (3) percent. Ditches will be designed to transport the estimated stormwater runoff volume from a 25-year, 24-hour storm event. 2.2 Process Wastewater Conveyance System The milking parlor and holding pen floor will be cleaned at least three (3) times per day at shift changes. Cleaning will consist of scraping and washing with clean or recycled water. The semi-dry solids will be removed from the milking parlor and stockpiled in designated areas near the wastewater basin. Clean or recycled water will be used to wash walls, fences, curbs and floors. Wastewater containing cattle manure, urine or milk from the dairy center will be collected at a common point at the barn. The wastewater will flow by gravity via buried 10 to 12 inch PVC piping _ to the manure separator. The liquid fraction or supernatant will flow by gravity from the separator to the wastewater retention basin located on the western side of the site. Solids collected • from the separator will be stockpiled with the semi-dry solids near • the retention basin. 2.3 Retention Resin As seen from Figure 3, a retention-basin system will be required for collection of liquid wastes when the dairy begins production. The retention basin has been designed to contain the estimated runoff volume from both the western and eastern portions of the site. The hydrologic design method used was the SCS method 962413 Mr. Jacob Hirsch/Manure and Wastewater Management Plan Project Number 43935049 7eriacon December 10, 1993 Page 5 utilizing curve number 90 for open lots as described in the CDH regulation. The basin has been designed to store the estimated run-off volume from a 25-year, 24-hour storm based on the production and confinement area of the site. The basin has the additional capacity to store up to six (6) months volume of process wastewater from the new milking parlor. -Berms will be-constructed around the boundary of the site to redirect runoff which has not been in contact with dairy wastes away from the basin. The waste retention basin will be an earthen structure intended to meet WQCC requirements in Section 4 . 8.4 of the Confined Animal Feeding Operation Control Regulation. Three (3) permeability tests were performed on recompacted soil samples collected from the proposed pond area. The permeability of the samples that were compacted to 95 percent of ASTM D698 Standard Proctor ranged from approximately 2 .7 x 10-" to 3 . 0 x 10 ' cm/sec which exceeds the CDH requirement of 1 x 10-6 cm/sec. Based on this information a synthetic lining system does not appear to be required at the site. When constructed, the upper 1-foot of the wetted perimeter of the basin cut sections, the bottom and side slopes of the pond will also be compacted to 95 percent of Standard Proctor. As discussed previously, the basin has been sized to contain six (6) months normal flush water and will have the additional capacity to contain the stormwater runoff volume from a 25-year, 24-hour storm event. The basin will be managed to maintain a 2-foot free-board capacity. The basin will be pumped periodically to supply water and nutrients for irrigation of cropland. In the event of a 25-year, 24-hour storm, the basin will be drained within 15 days to regain its original holding capacity. As seen from Figure 3, the basin will be a rectangular-shaped structure measuring 300 feet by 250 feet at the top of the berm. The side slopes of the basin will be 3 : 1 horizontal to vertical. An alternative basin design utilizing berms on the north, west and 962403 ii IMr. Jacob Hirsch/Manure and Wastewater Management Plan Terracon Project Number 43935049 December 10, 1993 I Page 6 south with natural grading on the east may be utilized at the 1 dairy. 1 2.4 Liquid and Solid lasts Disposal The liquid portion of the wastes which accumulates in the waste retention basin will be land applied to -cultivated fields to 1 supplement irrigation water and to provide nutrients to the soil to enhance crop production. Solid manure waste from the dairy will Ialso be land applied. The Hirsch Dairy will irrigate and incorporate solid manure into the remaining approximately 198 acres of the dairy property. The primary irrigated crop will be corn for Isilage. 1 Two (2) alternatives for land application are possible for the dairy. The first alternative assumes that both wastewater and solid manure will be applied to cropland for plant nutrients and 3 additional commercial fertilizer is not required. For this case, application rates are based on pre-established conditions and 1 recommendations developed in "Manure Spreadsheets, " Texas Agricultural Extension Service, October 1989 at Texas ASM for cattle feedlots in the Great Plains area. Potential application 1 rates are provided in Table 1. - TABLE1 j APPLICATION RATE BASED ON PLANT AVAILABLE NITROGEN (PAN) IiPAN Application Rate Wastewater Solid Manure Total Acres pounds/acre/year Acres Required Acres Required Required -I 100 106 281 387 1 150 70 188 258 i 0 200 53 141 194 300 35 94 129 r` 400 26 71 97 _I 962403 Mr. Jacob Hirsch/Manure and Wastewater Management Plan Terracon Project Number 43935049 December 10, 1993 Page 7 It should be noted that the application rates and acreages shown in Table 1 are based on 850 adult cattle. Per the Confined Animal Feeding Regulation, a factor of 1.4 animal units per dairy cow was applied to calculate plant available nitrogen (PAN) . The total acreage requirements are intended to be conservative since the dairy will actually have 850 cows in various life stages which will not be equivalent to adult cattle. Based on Table 1, the dairy has adequate acreage to utilize bot' wastewater and solid manure produced during production with an overall application rate of approximately 200 pounds PAN per acre per year. The second alternative is based on the assumption that the dairy will not generate sufficient amounts of wastewater and manure to supply the necessary nutrients to all the cultivated cropland for the growing season, and therefore commercial fertilizer would be required. If this is the case after the dairy becomes operable, an agronomic analysis can be initiated according to Colorado State University Extension Bulletin 552A "Utilization of Animal Manure as Fertilizer" and will use commonly accepted mineralization rates, yield goals, soil analysis and other pertinent waste handling considerations. Alternatively, a selected portion of the acreage will be utilized for land application at a rate such that the addition of commercial fertilizer will not be necessary. 3. DRY MANURE MANAGEMENT The dairy manure, waste feed and waste bedding from normal daily operations will be managed as described in the following subsections. 3.1 Cron Lots Dry manure will be removed periodically from the lots, concrete feed bunk areas, concrete lanes and drainage ditches and stored in specified areas near the wastewater basin for the eastern and 9624113 Mr. Jacob Hirsch/Manure and Wastewater Management Plan Terracon Project Number 43935049 December 10, 1993 Page 8 western lots. Drainage from the dry manure storage sites will be directed toward the basin. Excess runoff from areas upgradient of the manure piles will be diverted away from the manure piles. 3.2 Dairy Buildings Manure which collects in the milking parlor and cattle holding pens will be removed after each milking shift and transported to the designated storage areas near the basin. Washdown water containing manure solids will be directed to the manure separator. The liquid fraction of the waste will enter the basin leaving the solids to be stockpiled in the storage areas. 3.3 Dry Manure Disposal Dry manure which accumulates in the designated storage areas will be incorporated into the on-site agricultural lands owned by Hirsch Dairy. The manure will generally be distributed during the spring and fall months to coincide with planting seasons. 4. BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES As has been generally described in the previous portions of this plan, the proposed Hirsch dairy operation will utilize best management practices (BMPs) for its site specific conditions. BMPs will include but not be limited to: • Construction of ditches and grading to divert stormwater from uncontaminated areas away from confinement, manure storage and process wastewater areas. • Installation of buried conduit for process wastewater. • Installation of concrete walkways and feeding areas to facilitate manure collection from feeding areas. • Periodic manure collection. • Utilize process-water recycling to flush walkways. 962403 Mr. Jacob Hirsch/Manure and Wastewater Management Plan Terracon Project Number 43935049 December 10, 1993 Page 9 • Land application of wastewater and manure as described in Chapter 3. • Dry manure stockpiles will be located to decrease potential for stormwater contact. • Installation of a manure/solids separator. • Elimination of discharge to the groundwater or surface water courses. 5. GENERAL COMMENTS This MWMP was prepared in general accordance with the Terracon proposal dated August 19, 1993 . This report was prepared based on Terracon's interpretation of the Confined Animal Feeding Regulations and in accordance with generally accepted geo- environmental engineering practices. This report was prepared for the exclusive use of the Hirsch Dairy for specific application to the subject project. This report does not reflect any variations in subsurface stratigraphy or geohydrology which may occur between boring locations across the site. Local geohydrologic conditions may change due to variations in precipitation and recharge or other conditions not evident at the time of the field exploration. No warranties, either express or implied, are intended or made. 962403 1 WYO. I ISA I roar e or °D o.'. la..e...y° lire o 51 Red feather° Walden Lao °koala le es li n• Pose race Paiee•uea I.torte Pia.• Pvir Inoneciale C) Ault FORT ut New Marv. c..a COLLINS len n5; 16 Eaton aulemn ° Ran tr aoMReoes °arm d+ G •EELErAt Ile• Project Site • . -MOS Pk �°^ LOVELAND ASV* WNW Geeerrw W.me Is ,;en. -loan -r 'LOSCRe cs NES 6eao e e p In Gen V Bertro,n . v' �-Peet', �' L•`eeP 3. »p- 0Lh• Y •Cent Ib We •.. �.• Y LPaesL p rhea gees Lyons ° LONGMONT tt:' Hot Sa�.. ( Firestone0 _Fart Roger Ctrty . Mr Gan Antler N.`r. _ rrev�eL? )Lupton• R.vwn•a Wa' Got NI /� Ere; Due Perini .i• Perini ` Cei rmo :OULD R° I e•eea Prospect fnc.Mil Rat,• - iI BRIOH ON Ter IYawlon L°A.11lep :•Leask. °Hoyt 1eaveecdoa%- �� T ORN Gran Winer [Din Womb Soso pa1 MLI Y° Pve . '� I, •� er D�a eta ARVADA +� COMMERCE CITY °tyre GOLDEN. URORA WOU e®, a c.0,17'...._,.• 'Oahe � o b Sup:Our Sp'ngs �Fl �-aen, ••,� ` "'r &mi.p LAKEWOOD, _ D NVER �Y.• p b Frisco / ® Evergreen .'a,a, a, E GLEW DOD Dew na • 99 Nl. �I. Wes E eea.nVrq rat° TfI270N ' Rae MI• - Pvev •Wee.a.<]e Oat! Cans, • b Learners P. 41n Situ rmten SeMc Ap11e Ohm 9earae Pee° o °Smn Fraa loon alleean es., taw 1e nemetn n o Cottle y,n fcnn Sb•nee „ Rock Mono Avg v.° _ Leadvm. SUnato.n Foepoy Gecere -� Met !my ilethea tvin Earn.' Rees a o b 11aW pc a wvran,o- r F� Z, 12%l KI Woo0lpnp oreet Caen- NS e• rL e. •\ Pork ° _ Peyton Drrice •Gyetm Buena a, wmen wens .�, . Viola CowieM •\ pnitou rin s S Men veer Sian �� N u.ek owlet CriODe %COLORADO SPRINGS rare a creek 0 ?SECURITY a Plaid., wneeta, o°Gaeltea oIIfDEFIELD — re Vkta rte« Not to Scale FIGURE 1 GENERAL LOCATION MAP Hirsch Dairy Severance, Colorado 9624" 3 Job s 43935049 Date Dec . 1933 Drawn PJH ) i rerracon _/ r ! I \ ' I I e 14 N k .i .'\ 141 r\.\\ h5 �� J�> \�" \.� r"-N___) ill of • iu \\\ 1 ��-� f0,5a_s+s�s3�o -•J i� H ( \\ l ..tial .:.' .) • ! . . Project Site I .1°°p Lake I 4, . . 'II 'J . N apf, 1 p11 �• i •N] ,,,, I t, � ; ;, v • , ; ti i (r --mss - � . .. ' ----- - - - - - -' I ; `' .7:.. / 26 ,1 -- : 25 :25 r !yWindsor - (\. rN ! Field," ., ii �/ • �{ ' ' aua 4944 SCALE 1:24 000 1 •- - 0 1 MILE„ 1000 ET 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 FE r, .. } 1 .5 0 1--, .5 1 KILOMETER CONTOUR INTERVAL 10 FEET NATIONAL GEODETIC VERTICAL DATUM OF 1929 r - •FIGURE 2 VICINITY MAP Hirsch Dairy Severance, Colorado 962403 `Job r 43935049 Date Dec . 1953 Drawn Pill ) 1 rerraron j 4 1 • I iiI I I :: APPROXMATE CROPLAND /� �� LPOCATKDN ROP PROPERTY AREA I� ',, BOUNDARY I DIRT ROAD ,. I AND RRIGATION COMMODITIES CANAL �' I STORAGE \ ' AREA I DARY CONFINEMENT /' ' • ' ' I AND OPERATIONAL �0��•�i•• AREA . . M : C s°moo N I PIUNDERPE E '•:•': N:•.• •• :•I � DITCH '.'.'.:.I 1 o I \ :.:...:I c. I APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF �, (11O I MANURE/WATER '•'I h0 h {�- SEPARATOR �- / '� • I. ` CORRALS •••.•• •: : �`. •.— .•' TRAILERS I O I 250' X 300' ' V i LAGOON • • • • • • • • • ' IRRIGATION I I� DITCH 14 I� BURIED PIPING • • •�',/ I FROM B\ •' • • • • • C•ORR•AL•S :• • I it�l OI DAIRY CONFINEMENT 1.9. AND OPERATIONAL • • • • •�' . \ AREA \ , _.-, COUNTY ROAD 78 tot, _ . . !----\........._ir - \ S°Op 0 1'`oao >9O sp. �0 0 600 \ \ \ r ISSZi APPROXIMATE 51032 tin = 600ft FIGURE 3 SITE LOCATION AND TOPOGRAPHIC DIAGRAM HIRSCH DAIRY, SEVERANCE, COLORADO PROJECT NUMBER 43935049 DRAWN:DECEMBER.1993 DRAWN BY:PJH(49SLD) 962403 1 rerracon J STATE OF COLORADO COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH A,'o1 CO40 Dedicated to protecting and improving the health and •�'S environment of the people of alorado 4300 Cherry Creek Dr.S. Laboratory Building ••6' Denver,Colorado 80222.,530 42,0 E.11th Avenue RECEIVED •,a,c • Phone(303)692.2000 Denver,Colorado 80220-3716 003)691.47Q0 11fi+R f; Mt! Ray Ufa„„" March 10, 1994 1 t( J ra,;d,tir ,n.MD,MPIl TERRACON ENVIRONMENTAL James Hirsch, Owner/Operator 2817 East County Road 30 Fort Collins, Colorado 80525 RE: Hirsch Dairy, Confined Animal Feeding Operations Control Regulations, Manure and Wastewater Management Plan, Weld County Dear Mr. Hirsch: This letter is to inform you that we, the Field Services Section, have finished reviewing your Land Application Plan, in accordance with the Confined Animal Feedina Operations Control Regulations 4 . 8 . 0 (5 CCR 100219) as amended. We have the following comments: 1. On page 1, your plan states that you will have trailers for your employees. However, the plan does not indicate how many trailers and how many employees your are going to house. Any human wastewater will have to be disposed of in an approved septic system; however, if the septic system is greater than 2, 000 gallons per day, you will need to apply for and obtain a site approval for this system. 2 . On page 2, last paragraph, the study reads: "The depth to water is described as being (5) to 20 feet below the surface and may disappear seasonally" . The study does not provide any information as to the depth of the containment pond. Based on your own location map, it appears that the containment pond will be built in the lowest part of your property. Is this location going to be in a portion of your property that has high ground water? We would like you to clarify this item. 3 . The second paragraph, on page 3 , says that "The proposed dairy does not appear to be located in the 100 year flood plain Section 4 . 8. 6 (4) (d) , of the CAFOC Regulations, clearly states that "Process wastewater retention structures shall not be located within a mapped 100 year flood plain as designated and approved by the Colorado Water Conservation Board (CWCB) . . . . " If you have not been able to obtain any information from the CWCB regarding this item, instruct your consultant to make a more clear determination as to whether or not any of your process wastewater containment structures are going to be situated in the 100 year flcnA 962403 4. In the same paragraph, the study says: •The proposed dairy does not appear to be overlaying a designated aquifer as described in Classification and Water Quality Standards for Groundwater 3 .12 .0, 5 CCR 1002-8" . The referenced ground water regulations were amended on December 27, 1993. The amended ground water regulations do include all state aquifers; therefore, there are groundwater classifications and numerical standards, that you cannot adversely impact, for the underlying aquifer upon which you are building your dairy operation. 5. Page 3, the paragraph regarding Grading and Drainage, state that "water from the corrals on the east side of the site will be directed through a pipe under the irrigation canal to the retention basin. " It is our understanding that, just previous to directing the wastewater into the pipe and under the canal, this wastewater will be conveyed through an earthen canal to the pipe. The exfiltration in this canal "shall be limited to the maximum extent practicable through the use of very low permeability earthen materials and proper compaction or through the use of synthetic conveyance materials" as stated in the CAFO regulations. Also, the inverted siphon (pipe under the canal) should be designated to carry peak flows expected at times when the applicable design storm event occurs. 6. Third paragraph, page 4, Section 2 .2 Process Wastewater Conveyance System. This paragraph does not provide information regarding estimated runoff and process wastewater flows. The regulation requires you to have this information available any time we perform a site inspection. Also, the study states that wastewater will flow by gravity to the manure separator, and subsequently to the retention pond. We would like to have information regarding performance efficiencies, and treatment capacity for the manure separator. We believe that you will have some solids accumulation in your wastewater retention pond. Therefore, we recommend that additional capacity be provided in the containment pond for solids accumulation. 7. In the same paragraph the study says: "Solids collected from the separator will be stockpiled with the semi-dry solids near the retention basin. " The study does not mention if these wet solids are going to be placed on an impervious pad. We recommend that you provide one with additional drainage in the event of liquid waste running off outside from the pad. This waste should be directed back to the containment pond. 8 . Second paragraph, page 5 says: "the waste retention basin will be an earthen structure intended to meet WQCC requirements. . . ." Also, the study mentions that: "Three (3) permeability tests were performed on recompacted soil samples collected from the proposed area." We would like to know what method, to test permeability, was used. A description of the method used will help us make a better assessment if your containment facilities will meet the 1 x 10 cm/sec seepage rate specified in the above referenced - - regulations. • 9. Page 6, Section 2.4 Liquid and Solid Waste Disposal, states that the liquid and solids wastes generated by your operation will be disposed of by land application. Paragraph two, same page, gives you two alternatives for land application. The first one references "Manure Spreadsheets, " from Texas Agricultural Extension Service. However, the regulations are very specific about the disposal options available to animal feeding operators. Thus, you have three land application disposal alternatives, and they are explained in detail in Sections 4 .8.5 (A) (5) (a) , (b) and (c) , of the above referenced regulations. If you decide to land apply, liquid and/or solid-wastewater -over land, abased on a site-specific agronomic analysis. As specified in Section 4 . 8 . 5 (A) (5) (b) , you shall maintain records for a minimum of three years. 10. The study does not specify the use of flow metering devices. We would like to know how you intend to determine quantities of liquid wastewater generated by your operation? 11. A back flow preventative device is required by the regulations in the event that you will use additional well water during land application of wastewater. 12 . Your plan does not have any information about groundwater depth, flow direction and quality. We suggest you obtain this information to evaluate the need for a groundwater monitoring system. These are the comments we have regarding your Manure and Wastewater Management Plan. However, these comments, in any way expressed or implied, can be or should be taken as an approval of your Operation and Maintenance practices. The amended Confined Animal Feeding Operations Control Regulations 4 .8. 0 (5 CCR 100219) , are a set of self implementing regulations. Therefore, the comments made here are to help you operate, maintain, and manage your facilities within the regulations. Furthermore, I would like to add the following items as part of our recommendations. 1. If a compacted clay liner is used for the lagoon system. The Division requires that a soil test be performed to determine the thickness of the liner (12 inches minimum) and the clay content in the soil-clay mixture. We recommend that the compaction of the liner mixture be at 95 percent standard proctor as specified by the American Society for Testing and Materials, D 698-91 standards. Also, that a permeability test be performed using the method(s) described in the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers, E. M. 1110-2-1906, November 30, 1970. If a synthetic liner is going to be used, manufacturer recommendations and specifications should be followed during its installation. Also, before filling the containment facility- with wastewater, a leaking test should be performed to insure that the liner was not punctured during installation. 962413 2. When sludge removal is taking place, a safe, proven method should be used to avoid puncturing the liner. 3. To avoid bank erosion of the pond embankments due to wind action, rip-rap should be provided. 4. When pipes directing flow into the lagoon are used, a concrete pad should be constructed to minimize the potential of eroding soil if a clay liner is used. We recommend you use concrete pads, in any case, whether a clay or plastic liner is used to protect the integrity of the containment structures. 5. A monthly water mass balance should be calculated for the lagoon system. The water mass balance should include: influent flow, rainfall, snowfall evaporation and land application rates. If possible, local values should be used for the calculations . If local values are not available, regional values can be used . The calculation and logging of a water mass balance will help you control, if the integrity of your impoundment structure has been compromised. Finally, I would like to add that Derald Lang and myself are available to meet with you and/or your representatives to discuss any concerns you have. If you have questions, please call me at (303) 692-3564 . Sincerely, FOR THE DIRECTOR, WATER QUALITY CONTROL DIVISION Victor H. Sainz, P.E. District Engineer Field Support Section VHS:elj cc:N,9rick Smith, Terracon Environmental, Inc. Patricia Nelson, Permits and Enforcement Section Derald Lang, Unit Leader, Northeast Field Support Unit George Moravec, Unit Leader, Groundwater Unit Raymond R. Rabe, Director, Northeast Colorado Health Dept. Eric Dunker, Environmental Eng. , Northeast Co Health Dept. U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region VIII MS-3 File 4 962493 1lerracon ENVIRONMENTAL. INC. Da..0 M Re.. i'1 Sr,..A Rut 3 rt January 12, 1995 Mr. Jake Hirsch Hirsch Dairy 11283 Weld County Road 78 Eaton, Colorado 80615 RE: Response to Colorado Department of Health Comments Manure and Wastewater Management Plan Hirsch Dairy 11283 Weld County Road 78 Eaton, Colorado Project Number 43935049 Dear Mr. Hirsch: The purpose of this letter is to respond to comments and recommendations made by the Colorado Department of Health (CDH) in a letter dated March 10, 1994 relative to the above-referenced plan. The CDH is now known as the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment (CDPHE) . A copy of the CDPHE letter is included as an attachment to this letter. For financing purposes, the Hirsch Dairy is in the process of obtaining a special use permit such that the dairy could potentially operate with 1, 200 to 1, 500 cows; however, we understand that it is not the ultimate intent of the Hirsch Dairy to actually expand the operation. The original capacity of the dairy was 850 cows, which did not require a special use permit under Weld County regulations. Terracon Environmental, Inc. (Terracon) personnel visited the site on December 8, 1994 to observe current site conditions and performed a brief interview with Mr. Hirsch. At the time of the site visit, the dairy had been operational for approximately five (5) weeks and 470 dairy cows were on site. Terracon 's responses to the CDPHE comments are based on the assumption that the Hirsch Dairy may at some point expand to 1,500 cows and on Terracon's interpretation of the Confined Animal Feeding Operations and Control (CAFOC) regulation in 5 Code of Colorado Regulations 1002- 19 effective August 30, 1992 . The CPDHE comments and recommendations are repeated herein and are followed by Terracon's response. Offices of The Terracon Companies,Inc.: Environmental Engineers and Scientists A•izont Tucson • Coio'aco Co:o•a 7: S.i gt De^.e' Ft Cot-n≤ G'etner. Lonomoi' • ica': ED ■ II : Eor .... Rote 15'Lancl ■ lona CettE' Fee Ceaa' RC7C: Dater; De: I::it. Si: ^i LaiP • Ka^:.a: Lc-T.,: To: Vl.°Ma Mrnes.fa S' Pa.' ■ M!:;ou' Kanma: Cs, ■ Ner'.tee I -o'r O- • N':a La. V+;; ■ O .r rya Ora•._'n. C . .a • Te.a_ Da'.a- Go' V:c.'. ■ D'a' ' Lan- C'.(]■ 0!14! ITV cr;air:rralr" SRN^F lorr 962403 Mr. Jake Hirsch/Hirsch Dairy Teuacon Project Number 43935049 January 12, 1995 Page 2 Comment 1: "On page 1, your plan states that you will have trailers for your employees. However, the plan does not indicate how many trailers and how many employees your are going to house. Any human wastewater will have to be disposed of in an approved septic system; however, if the septic system is greater than 2 ,000 gallons per day, you will need to apply for and -obtain a site approval for this system. " Response: There are four (4) trailers on site. Mr. Hirsch indicated that there are 10 employees living on site. Mr. Hirsch indicated that the septic system was inspected and approved for use by Weld County officials. The system reportedly exceeded the county requirements. Comment 2 : "On page 2, last paragraph, the study reads: "The depth to water is described as being (5) to 20 feet below the surface and may disappear seasonally" . The study does not provide any information as to the depth of the containment pond. Based on your own location map, it appears that the containment pond will be built in the lowest part of your property. Is this location going to be in a portion of your property that has high ground water? We would like you to clarify this item. " Response: Based on the Geotechnical Engineering Report prepared by Empire Laboratories, Inc. of Fort Collins, Colorado dated December 3, 1994 , groundwater was encountered in five (5) borings at the western portion of the site at depths ranging from 10 to 12 .5 feet below the surface at the time of drilling. Groundwater was observed in three (3) of these borings at depths ranging from 7 to 9 feet below ground surface 22 days after drilling. The containment pond was built in the western portion of the site but further south and west and topographically higher than the borings. It is possible that the north-western portion of the pond may be above relatively high groundwater. The elevation of the bottom of the pond was apparently raised when soft conditions were discovered during construction. Mr. Hirsch explained that during construction, the excavators were not able to dig deep enough at the original location because the subsurface became "mushy". For this reason the pond was apparently cut less than five (5) feet into the land surface and taller side embankments were constructed to contain water. The area of the pond was increased to maintain adequate storage capacity. 9624':2,3 Mr. Jake Hirsch/Hirsch Dairy Terracon Project Number 43935049 January 12 , 1995 Page 3 During the site visit, the pond appeared to be approximately 14 feet deep vertically from the crest of the berm to the bottom of the pond, with approximate 3 : 1 (horizontal:vertical) side slopes. The pond is approximately triangular in shape with legs of approximately 525 feet and 755 feet along the crest. Based on these approximate measurements, the capacity of the pond was estimated to be approximately 46 acre-feet. Terracon's original recommendation for capacity was approximately 10. 1 acre-feet. At the time of the site visit the pond was mostly dry. Comment 3: "The second paragraph, on page 3, says that "The proposed dairy does not appear to be located in the 100 year flood plain Section 4 . 8. 6 (4) (d) , of the CAFOC Regulations, clearly states that "Process wastewater retention structures shall not be located within a mapped 100 year flood plain as designated and approved by the Colorado Water Conservation Board (CWCB) . . . ." If you have not been able to obtain any information from the CWCB regarding this item, instruct your consultant to make a more clear determination as to whether or not any of your process wastewater containment structures are going to be situated in the 100 year flood plain. " Response: In December 1994 , the CWCB was contacted regarding a designation for the subject site. For an immediate response, the CWCB referred Terracon to Flood Insurance Services (FIS) of Adams County. Based on the FIS response,• the Hirsch Dairy is not within a 100 year flood plain. A copy of the FIS response is attached to this letter. Comment 4 : "In the same paragraph, the study says: "The proposed dairy does not appear to be overlaying a designated aquifer as described in Classification and Water Quality Standards for Groundwater 3 . 12.0, 5 CCR 1002-8". The referenced ground water regulations were amended on December 27, 1993 . The amended ground water regulations do include all state aquifers; therefore, there are groundwater classifications and numerical standards, that you cannot adversely impact, for the underlying aquifer upon which you are building your dairy operation. " Response: The dairy appears to be operating in general accordance with the Manure and Wastewater Management Plan, it is not anticipated that the dairy will significantly impact the underlying aquifer. 9624')3 Mr. Jake Hirsch/Hirsch Dairy Terracon Project Number 43935049 January 12, 1995 Page 4 Comment 5: "Page 3, the paragraph regarding Grading and Drainage, state that "Water from the corrals on the east side of the site will be directed through a pipe under the irrigation canal to the retention basin ." It is our understanding that, just previous to directing the wastewater into the pipe and under the canal, this wastewater will be conveyed through an earthen canal to -the pipe. The exfiltration in this canal "shall be limited to the maximum extent practicable through the use of very low permeability earthen materials and proper compaction or through the use of synthetic conveyance materials" as stated in the CAFO regulations. Also, the inverted siphon (pipe under the canal) should be designated to carry peak flows expected at times when the applicable design storm event occurs. " Response: Based on the recent site visit, it appears runoff water from the eastern corral is directed to the adjoining alfalfa field, south of the corrals by sheetflow. Mr. Hirsch indicated that if this is not acceptable, then the flow could be redirected via a pipe under the concrete irrigation canal to the main pond. The pipe would be designed for the maximum design storm event and the upgradient area of runoff. The runoff would be conveyed by natural grading through the corrals, and by compacted earth or concrete ditches, if applicable, outside of the corrals. Comment 6: "Third paragraph, page 4 , Section 2. 2 Process Wastewater Conveyance System. This paragraph does not provide information regarding estimated runoff and process wastewater flows. The regulation requires you to have this information available any time we perform a site inspection. Also, the study states that wastewater will flow by gravity to the manure separator, and subsequently to the retention pond. We would like to have information regarding performance efficiencies, and treatment capacity for the manure separator. We believe that you will have some solids accumulation in your wastewater retention pond. Therefore, we recommend that additional capacity be provided in the containment pond for solids accumulation. " Response: In Section 4. 8.5 (A) (5) (b) of the CAFOC regulations, it is stated that "The operator shall maintain copies of the agronomic analyses which are being relied upon for the purpose of limiting land application rates of manure and process wastewater. Copies of such analyses shall be available for inspection at the facility and records, shall be maintained for a minimum of three years." 962C01 Mr. Jake Hirsch/Hirsch Dairy Terracon Project Number 43935049 January 12, 1995 Page 5 This portion of the regulation appears to be in effect when operators apply manure and process wastewater on a year-to-year basis which exceed rates allowed under Section 4 .8 . 5 (A) (5) (a) . Under Section 4 .8.5 (A) (5) (a) , an agronomic analyses is not required if supplemental commercial fertilizers are not used. Application rates in this case, are based on tabulated values included in the appendices of the regulation. This was interpreted to mean that if Hirsch Dairy not does intend to use supplemental commercial fertilizer, then application rates may be estimated using tables in the regulation and therefore an agronomic analyses and associated record keeping will not be required. However, if supplemental fertilizer is used, Terracon recommends an agronomic analyses be performed prior to initial application. With regard to estimated runoff and process wastewater flow, the CAFOC regulation does not appear to specifically ask for the flow rates except as they may be in relation to land application. In the Manure and Wastewater Management Plan (MWMP) , Section 2 .3, pages 4-6, it was stated that the retention basin was designed to contain the runoff volume for the western and eastern portions of the dairy plus the additional capacity to store up to six (6) months of process wastewater from the milking parlor. The upgradient runoff area was approximately 42 acres which was noted in Section 2. 1 on page 4 of the MWMP. As stated, the hydrologic design used was the SCS method utilizing curve number 90 for open lots as described in the CAFOC regulation. The basin was sized for the 25-year, 24-hour storm. The storm was based on total precipitation of 3 .4 inches as observed on the 25-year, 24-hour storm curve map for the area closest to the dairy as published in the hydrologic atlas. Based on these parameters approximately 3 . 1 million gallons of precipitation would be generated in a 24 hour period which was equivalent to approximately 9.7 acre-feet. Process water was estimated to be 2 , 000 gallons per day based on conversations with Mr. Hirsch. It should be noted that the original retention pond was sized based on the above-mentioned parameters which included operation of an 850-cow dairy. The total required storage volume for the storm event plus six (6) months of process wastewater was approximately 10. 1 acre-feet including two (2) feet of free board. Terracon estimated the storage volume required for a 1,500-cow dairy assuming that process water would be doubled to 4,000 gallons per day. The new storage requirement is approximately 15 acre-feet. The size of the pond as built appears to be triple the required volume. Due to this excess capacity, the Hirsh Dairy should be able to easily maintain the required pond capacity by removing accumulated solids from the settling basins on an annual basis. 962403 Mr. Jake Hirsch/Hirsch Dairy Terracon Project Number 43935049 January 12, 1995 Page 6 The efficiency of the separator is not known, but appears to separate relatively large solids effectively. Mr. Hirsch indicated that a small pile of manure solids, of approximately two (2) to three (3) cubic yards, had taken three (3) weeks to accumulate. A small settling basin was built at the inlet of the new pond to accumulate finer solids. A ramp was built along side of the settling basin to accommodate removal of _small solids with a backhoe. Comment 7 : "In the same paragraph the study says: "Solids collected from the separator will be stockpiled with the semi-dry solids near the retention basin. " The study does not mention if these wet solids are going to be placed on an impervious pad. We recommend that you provide one with additional drainage in the event of liquid waste running off outside from the pad. This waste should be directed back to the containment pond. " Response: The manure solids are stored on a concrete pad topographically upgradient of the settling basin and pond. The pad is sloped such that free liquids drain into the pond. The CAFOC regulation does not appear to require concrete pads. Other manure stockpiles will be placed in areas such that runoff will be directed into the containment pond. Comment 8 : "Second paragraph, page 5 says: "the waste retention basin will be an earthen structure intended to meet WQCC requirements . . . . " Also, the study mentions that: "Three (3) permeability tests were performed on recompacted soil samples collected from the proposed area . " We would like to know what method, to test permeability, was used. A description of the method used will help us make a better assessment if your containment facilities will meet the 1 x 10 cm/sec seepage rate specified in the above referenced regulations. " Response: The method used to test permeability was described in the Geotechnical Engineering Report. The falling head permeability test method was performed using on-site soil samples compacted to 95 percent of standard proctor density (ASTM D-698) . As explained on page 5 of the MWMP, the permeability of these soils ranged from 2 .7 X 10'° to 3 .0 X 10'7 cm/sec which exceeded the requirement of 1 X 10'6 cm/sec. An undisturbed soil sample also tested by the falling head method has a permeability rate of 3 .0 X 104 cm/sec 962403 Mr. Jake Hirsch/Hirsch Dairy Terracon Project Number 43935049 January 12 , 1995 Page 7 which exceeded the requirement. As a safety factor, it was recommended that soil in the pond be compacted to 95 percent standard proctor. Mr. Hirsch indicated that the soils were compacted during construction. In situ-compaction tests were apparently not performed during construction. Comment 9: "Page 6, Section 2 .4 Liquid and Solid Waste Disposal, states that the liquid and solids wastes generated by your operation will be disposed of by land application. Paragraph two, same page, gives you two alternatives for land application. The first one references "Manure Spreadsheets, " from Texas Agricultural Extension Service. However, the regulations are very specific about the disposal options available to animal feeding operators. Thus, you have three land application disposal alternatives, and they are explained in detail in Sections 4 .8 . 5 (A) (5) (a) , (b) and (c) , of the above referenced regulations. If you decide to land apply, liquid and/or solid wastewater over land, abased on a site- specific agronomic analysis. As specified in Section 4 . 8 .5 (A) (5) (b) , you shall maintain records for a minimum of three years. " Response: As discussed in the response to Comment 6, the CAFOC regulations state that a site specific agronomic analyses is required when additional commercial fertilizers are used. If additional fertilizers are not used, then an agronomic analyses is not required. The alternatives given in the MWMP were intended as suggestions for application rates to compare available acreage with the amount of plant available nitrogen (PAN) produced during the operation of the dairy. These rates were intended to be used in lieu of the addition of commercial fertilizer. It was believed that utilizing the manure spreadsheets would be equivalent to using the CAFOC appendices to estimate application rates. As discussed in the response to Comment 6, if supplemental commercial fertilizer is applied, Terracon recommends a site-specific agronomic analyses be performed at the site. Comment 10: "The study does not specify the use of flow metering devices. We would like to know how you intend to determine quantities of liquid wastewater generated by your operation?" Response: The quantities of process wastewater were originally estimated to be approximately 2 , 000 gallons per day based on discussions with Mr. Hirsch as described in the response to Comment 6. This amount plus the amount generated by the design storm event were the basis 96249 Mr. Jake Hirsch/Hirsch Dairy Terracon Project Number 43935049 January 12, 1995 Page 8 for the initial size of the retention pond. The regulations do not appear to require that flow metering devices be used. Process wastewater is generated in the milking barn and is supplied from the municipal water system. Copies of water bills will be available if more exact quantities are required. For land application, the quantities will be estimated based on the irrigation pump capacity and the time of its operation. Comment 11: "A back flow preventative device is required by the regulations in the event that you will use additional well water during land application of wastewater. " Response: Additional irrigation water will be obtained from an irrigation ditch. Additional irrigation water from the ditch will not share a common pipe with process wastewater. Neither domestic or irrigation wells exist at the site. Comment 12 : "Your plan does not have any information about groundwater depth, flow direction and quality. We suggest you obtain this information to evaluate the need for a groundwater monitoring system. " Response: Information regarding groundwater depth is presented in the Geotechnical Engineering Report and in the response to Comment 2 . Based on topographic conditions, groundwater is estimated to flow in a westerly direction across the site. As discussed in the MWMP, groundwater may seasonally disappear. Section 4 .8 .8 of the CAFOC regulation states that: "Existing concentrated animal feeding operations which are in compliance with the provisions of Sections 4 .8. 3, 4 .8.4, and 4 .8 .5 shall not be required to conduct water quality monitoring except as provided under Subsection 4 .8.5 (A) (5) (c) . " The Hirsch dairy does not appear to need groundwater monitoring based on the following reasons: • Based on the site visit, the Hirsch Dairy appears to be in general compliance with the provisions of 4 . 8.3 - SURFACE WATER PROTECTION REQUIREMENTS - Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations: • The dairy appears to be operated as a no-discharge . facility, which includes manure and process wastewater 962403 Mr. Jake Hirsch/Hirsch Dairy Terracon Project Number 43935049 January 12, 1995 Page 9 collection, storage and land application facilities under the general performance requirements of Section 4 .8. 3 (A) . • The Dairy appears to meet the design criteria for new facilities within the constraints of Section 4 .8 . 3 (B) and will reportedly meet the operation and maintenance requirements of Section 4.8.3 (C) • The Hirsch Dairy appears to be in general compliance with the provision of 4. 8 .4 - GROUNDWATER PROTECTION REQUIREMENTS - CONCENTRATED ANIMAL FEEDING OPERATIONS: • The dairy appears to meet the requirements for manure and process waste water retention and conveyance structures as evidenced by the observed permeability of both non- compacted and compacted soil samples collected from the site and through the use of concrete materials and impermeable PVC piping materials. • The Hirsch Dairy appears to be in general compliance with the provisions of 4 .8.5 - BENEFICIAL USE AND DISPOSAL OF MANURE AND PROCESS WASTEWATER - CONCENTRATED ANIMAL FEEDING OPERATIONS: • The dairy will reportedly land apply manure and process wastewater. If commercial fertilizer will also be used Terracon recommends that the dairy perform an agronomic analyses to comply with 4.8.5 (5) and revise the land application plan in accordance with 4 .8. 5 (5) . Recommendation 1: "If a compacted clay liner is used for the lagoon system. The Division requires that a soil test be performed to determine the thickness of the liner (12 inches minimum) and the clay content in the soil-clay mixture. We recommend that the compaction of the liner mixture be at 95 percent standard proctor as specified by the American Society of Testing and Materials, D 698091 standards. Also, that a permeability test be performed using the method(s) described in the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers, E. M. 1110-2-1906, November 30, 1970." "If a synthetic liner is going to be used, manufacturer recommendations and specifications should be followed during its installation. Also, before filling the containment facility with wastewater, a leaking test should be performed to insure that the liner was not punctured during installation. " Mr. Jake Hirsch/Hirsch Dairy Terracon Project Number 43935049 January 12 , 1995 Page 10 Response: Neither a compacted clay liner or a synthetic liner are utilized at the site. Normal undisturbed soil and compacted soils exceeded the permeability requirement. If required for the special use permit, Terracon recommends that compaction and permeability testing be performed on the bottom and sidewalls of the retention pond to confirm that the permeability requirements are met. Recommendation 2 : "When sludge removal is taking place, a safe, proven method should be used to avoid puncturing the liner. " Response: Since a small settling basing is located at the inlet of the pond which can be cleaned with a backhoe, it is not anticipated that significant sludge will be generated in the main portion of the pond. Terracon recommends that the settling basin be recompacted after cleaning operations. Recommendation 3: "To avoid bank erosion of the pond embankments due to wind action, rip-rap should be provided. " Response: If bank erosion becomes a problem in the future, Terracon recommends that revegetation of the embankments be performed or that rip-rap be provided to protect the pond embankments. It is not anticipated that wind erosion of the embankments will be a significant problem. Recommendation 4: "When pipes directing flow into the lagoon are used, a concrete pad should be constructed to minimize the potential of eroding soil if a clay liner is used. We recommend you use concrete pads, in any case, whether a clay or plastic liner is used to protect the integrity of the containment structures. " Response: Surface runoff from corrals is directed into the lagoon via natural grading. Process water from the milking parlor must first pass through the manure water separator and then through a rip-rapped settling basin, which both reduce the potential for eroding soil. Therefore, erosion protection at this inlet does not appear warranted at this time. If required, rip-rap would be a more effective energy dissipation/erosion control technique. 962403 Mr. Jake Hirsch/Hirsch Dairy Terracon Project Number 43935049 January 12, 1995 Page 11 Recommendation 5: "A monthly water mass balance should be calculated for the lagoon system. The water mass balance should include: influent flow, rainfall, snowfall evaporation and land application rates. If possible, local values should be used for the calculations. If local values are not available, regional values can be used. The calculation and logging of a water mass -balance will help you control, if the integrity of your impoundment structure has been compromised. Response: It does not appear that a water mass balance is required under the provisions of the CAFOC regulation. This recommendation is likely beyond the scope of operation for the dairy. If you have any questions regarding the responses or recommendations in this letter or if you need assistance with the special use permit, please do not hesitate to contact us. In general, the dairy appears to be a well managed, state-of-the-art operation. It has been a pleasure to be of service to the Hirsch Dairy on this project. Very truly yours, TERRACON ENVIRONMENTAL, INC. fa% /4-1" Brick Smith, P.E. Colored Number 29894 David M. 'Rau, P.E. Colorado Number 26138 BS/DMR: lsbl enc. CDPHE letter I/P Flood Insurance Service Certification 962493 GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT PROPOSED HIRSCH DAIRY WELD COUNTY ROADS 23 AND 78 SEVERANCE, COLORADO ELI PROJECT NO. 20935228 Prepared for: MR. JACOB HIRSCH 2817 EAST COUNTY ROAD 30 FORT COLLINS, COLORADO 80525 Empire Laboratories, Inc. A Division of The Terracon Companies, Inc. 962403 December 3, 1993 Mr. Jacob Hirsch 2817 East County Road 30 Fort Collins, Colorado 80525 Re: Geotechnical Engineering Report, Proposed Hirsch Dairy Weld County Roads 23 and 78 Severance, Colorado ELI Project No. 20935228 Empire Laboratories, Inc. (ELI) has completed a geotechnical engineering exploration for the proposed Hirsch Dairy located on Weld County Road 78 and County Road 23 two miles north of Severance, Colorado. This study was performed in general accordance with our proposal dated August 20, 1993. The results of our engineering study, including the boring location diagram, laboratory test results, test boring records, and the geotechnical recommendations needed to aid in the design and construction of foundations and other earth connected phases of this project are attached. The subsurface exploration indicated soil conditions which are typical of soils commonly found in the Severance area. The subsurface soils at the site consisted of well-graded sands with gravels, clayey -sand, silty sand and sandy lean clay underlain by sandstone-siltstone bedrock. The information obtained by the results of field exploration and laboratory testing completed for this study indicates that the soils and bedrock at the site have low expansive potential. Based on the geotechnical engineering analyses, subsurface exploration and laboratory test results and our understanding of the proposed construction, we recommend that the proposed barn be supported on a pier foundation system. Slab-on-grade may be utilized for the interior floor system provided that care is taken in the placement and compaction of the subgrade soil. The on-site soils are suitable to construct the proposed waste retention basin provided they are properly compacted. The subsoil conditions are suitable in the area tested for construction of standard- type septic systems. Other design and construction details, based upon geotechnical conditions, are presented in the report. 962403 Mr. Jacob Hirsch ELI Project No. 20935228 We have appreciated being of service to you in the geotechnical engineering phase of this project, and are prepared to assist you during the construction phases as well. If you have any questions concerning this report or any of our testing, inspection, design and consulting services, please do not hesitate to contact us. f rhOFEyyN Sincerely, •,'`'••,, c. ,� EMPIRE LABORATORIES, INC. p_ A 2r *%. b . A Division of The Terracon ompanies, Inc.Aar,IR. S r •d ' • i� Senior Engineering Geologist Reviewed by: Chester C. Smith, P.E. Division Manager r NRS/CCS/cic Copies to: Addressee (2) Terracon Environmental Consultants - Mr. Brick Smith (1) White Trucking - Mr. Ken White (1) 9624.93 Mr. Jacob Hirsch • ELI Project No. 20935228 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page No. Letter of Transmittal INTRODUCTION 1 PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION 1 SITE EXPLORATION 2 Field Exploration 2 Laboratory Testing 3 SITE CONDITIONS 3 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS 3 Geology 3 Soil and Bedrock Conditions 4 Laboratory Test Results 5 Groundwater Conditions 5 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 5 Site Development Considerations 5 Foundation Systems - Pole Barn 6 Conventional Foundation Systems 6 Lateral Earth Pressures 7 Seismic Considerations 8 . Floor Slab Design and Construction 8 -Septic Systems 9 Waste Retention Basin - 10 Earthwork 10 General Considerations 10 Site Clearing 11 Excavation 11 Slab Subgrade Preparation • 12 Pavement Subgrade Preparation 12 Fill Materials 12 Placement and Compaction 13 Slopes 14 Compliance 14 Utility Construction 14 Drainage 15 Surface Drainage 15 Subsurface Drainage 15 Additional Design and Construction Considerations 16 Exterior Slab Design and Construction 16 Corrosion Protection -" 962403 Mr. Jacob Hirsch ELI Project No. 20935228 TABLE OF CONTENTS (Cont'd) Page No. GENERAL COMMENTS 16 APPENDIX A Figure No. SITE PLAN 1 Logs of Borings Al thru A29 APPENDIX B Laboratory Test Data: Swell-Consolidation Tests 61 thru B3 Direct Shear Test B4 Permeability Tests B5 thru 67 Summary of Test Results B8 thru 613 APPENDIX C: GENERAL NOTES Drilling & Exploration Cl Unified Soil Classification C2 Bedrock Classification, Sedimentary Bedrock C3 Laboratory Testing, Significance and Purpose C4 Report Terminology C5 V 962403 GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT PROPOSED HIRSCH DAIRY WELD COUNTY ROADS 23 AND 78 SEVERANCE, COLORADO ELI PROJECT NO. 20935228 DECEMBER 3, 1993 INTRODUCTION This report contains the results of our geotechnical engineering exploration for the proposed Hirsch Dairy to be located two miles north of Severance, Colorado on Weld County Roads 78 and 23. The site is located in the West 1/2 of Section 24, Township 7 North, Range 67 West of the 6th Principal Meridian. The purpose of these services is to provide information and geotechnical engineering recommendations relative to: • subsurface soil and bedrock conditions • groundwater conditions • foundation design and construction • floor slab design and construction • lateral earth pressures • water retention basin design and construction • septic system • earthwork • drainage The conclusions and recommendations contained in this report are based upon the results of field and laboratory testing, engineering analyses, and experience with similar soil and structural conditions. PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION The proposed construction as we understand it will consist of an approximately 150'x90' in plan pole barn. A waste retention basin is to be constructed to the west of the barn and will be approximately 250'x300' in plan. The basin will have a depth of approximately 10 feet. Three to four mobile homes will be placed east of the barn, and the mobile homes will be served by on- site sewage disposal systems. A 10 to 12 inch diameter PVC pipeline will carry sewage from the barn area to the basin for treatment. 962403 4 Mr. Jacob Hirsch ELI Project No. 20935228 Although final site grading plans were not available prior to preparation of this report, ground floor level for the barn is anticipated to be at, or near existing site grade. The basin will be constructed with maximum cuts of approximately 5 feet and a maximum berm height of approximately 5 feet. SITE EXPLORATION The scope of the services performed for this project included site reconnaissance by an engineering geologist, a subsurface exploration program, laboratory testing and engineering analyses. Field Exploration: A total of 29 test borings were drilled to depths of 3 to 15 feet at the locations shown on the Site Plan, Figure 1. Ten borings were drilled within the area of the proposed barn and alternate barn site. Five borings were drilled in the area of proposed waste retention basin, two borings in the area of the proposed pipeline and twelve borings were drilled in the proposed soil absorption bed areas. All borings were advanced with a truck-mounted drilling rig, utilizing 4-inch diameter solid stem auger. Twelve soil percolation tests were performed in the 3-foot deep borings. The location of borings were positioned in the field by measurements from property lines and existing site features. Elevations were taken of the ground surface at each boring location by measurements with an engineer's level from a temporary bench mark (TBM) shown on the Site Plan. The accuracy of boring locations and elevations should only be assumed to the level implied by the methods used to determine each. Continuous lithologic logs of each boring were recorded by the engineering geologist during the drilling operations. At selected intervals, samples of the subsurface materials were taken by means of pushing thin-walled Shelby tubes, or by driving split-spoon samplers. Representative bulk samples of subsurface materials were obtained from selected borings. Penetration resistance measurements were taken with each sampling with the split-spoon by driving the sampler with a 140 pound hammer falling 30 inches. When properly interpreted, the penetration resistance is a useful index to the consistency, relative density or hardness of the materials encountered. Groundwater conditions were evaluated in each boring at the time of site exploration, and 4 to 22 days after drilling. 2 962403 Mr. Jacob Hirsch ELI Project No. 20935228 Laboratory Testing: All samples retrieved during the field exploration were returned to the laboratory for evaluation by the project geotechnical engineer, and were classified in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification system described in Appendix C. Samples of bedrock were classified in accordance with the general notes for Bedrock Classification. At that time, the field descriptions were confirmed or modified as necessary,final boring logs prepared, and an applicable laboratory testing program was formulated to determine engineering properties of the subsurface materials. Boring Logs for the project are presented in Appendix A. Selected soil and bedrock samples were tested for the following engineering properties: • Water content • Consolidation • Dry density • Plasticity • Unconfined compression • Soluble sulphate content • Expansion • Permeability • Shear Strength The significance and purpose of each laboratory test is described in Appendix C. Laboratory test results are presented in Appendix B, and were used for the geotechnical engineering analyses, and the development of foundation and earthwork recommendations. All laboratory test were performed in general accordance with applicable ASTM, local or other accepted standards. SITE CONDITIONS The site consists of cultivated farm land. A dirt road traverses the eastern portion of the site. A concrete-lined irrigation ditch is located on the east side of the dirt road in the northern portion of the site. The property slopes from a high point at the northeast corner to the west and south and has positive drainage in these directions. The majority of the site is planted in corn and sorghum. The northeast portion of the site is vegetated with native grasses and weeds. The property is bordered on the south by County Road 78, on the west by Weld County Road 23, on the north by existing corn fields and open land, on the east by a sheep farm and pasture land and to the southeast by an existing residence. SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS Geology: The proposed area is located within the Colorado Piedmont section of the Great Plains physiographic province. The Colorado Piedmont, formed during Late Tertiary and Early quaternary time (approximately 2,000,000 years ago), is a broad, erosional trench which separates the 3 962403 Mr. Jacob Hirsch ELI Project No. 20935228 Southern Rock Mountains from the High Plains. Structurally, the site lies along the western flank of the Denver Basin. During the Late Mesozoic and Early Cenozoic Periods (approximately 70,000,000 years ago), intense tectonic activity occurred, causing the uplifting of the Front Range and the associated downwarping of the Denver Basin to the east. Relatively flat uplands and broad valleys characterize the present-day topography of the Colorado Piedmont in this region. The siteis underlain by the.Cretaceous Pierre.Formation at_its_transition.with the Cretaceous Foxhills Formation. The sandstone-siltstone bedrock is overlain by residual and wind blown sands and clays of Pleistocene and/or Recent Age. Mapping completed by the Colorado Geological Survey ('Hart, 1972), indicates the site in an area of "Windblown Sand or Silt". This material has been described as having low swell potential and may be subject to severe settlement or hydro-compaction when water is allowed to saturate the deposits. Bedrock with higher swell potential may be locally less than 10 feet below the ground surface. Soil and Bedrock Conditions: As presented on Logs of Borings, the subsurface soils encountered at the site are described in order of increasing depths: • Silty Topsoil: The majority of the area tested is overlain by a 6-inch layer of silty topsoil. The topsoil has been penetrated by root growth and organic matter. • Well-Graded Sand With Gravel: This stratum was encountered at the surface of Borings 1 through 3 and extends beyond the depths explored. The well-graded sand contains varying amounts of fine gravel and is moist to medium dense in situ. • Clayey Sand: This stratum was encountered in Borings 4 through 15 and 17 through 26 and 29 below the topsoil and extends to the bedrock and/or depths explored. The clayey sand varies to a silty sand, is slightly plastic, contains varying amounts of fine gravel, is moist and generally medium dense. • Sandy Lean Clay: This stratum was encountered in Borings 27 and 28 below the topsoil and extends to the bedrock below. The lean clay contains a large percentage of fine sand, is slightly plastic and has a soft to medium consistency. • Sandstone-Siltstone Bedrock: The bedrock was encountered in Borings 2, 5 and 13 through 29 at depths 1A to 8'r4 feet below the surface and extends to greater, depths. 'Hart, Stephen 5., 1972, FotenOaty Swan,Sal and Rock h the Front Range Urban Corridor, Colorado, Colorado Geological Survey, Environmental Geology No. 7. 4 962403 Mr. Jacob Hirsch ELI Project No. 20935228 The upper 1 'h to 41 feet of the bedrock is highly weathered; however, the underlying interbedded sandstone and siltstone is firm to very hard. Laboratory Test Results: Laboratory test results indicate that the sand and clay subsoils at the site have non to low swell potential, and the bedrock has low swell potential and high bearing characteristics. The clayey sand and sandy lean clay when properly compacted are relatively impervious and are suitable for use in constructing the proposed waste retention basin. Groundwater Conditions: Groundwater was not encountered in Borings 1 through 23 at the time of field exploration, nor when checked 4 to 22 days after drilling. Groundwater was encountered in Borings 24 through 29 at the time of drilling at depths of 10 to 12'% feet below the surface. When checked 22 days after drilling, groundwater was encountered in Borings 25, 26 and 27 at depths of 7 to 9 feet below the surface. Borings 24, 28 and 29 were caved at depths of 6 to 10 feet when checked 22 days after drilling. These observations represent only current groundwater conditions, and may not be indicative of other times, or at other locations. Groundwater levels can be expected to fluctuate with varying seasonal and weather conditions and irrigation demands on or adjacent to the site. Based upon review of U.S. Geological Survey maps (2Hillier, et al, 1979), regional groundwater beneath the project area predominates in colluvial, landslide or windblown materials,or in fractured weathered consolidated sedimentary bedrock located at a depth near ground surface. Seasonal variations in groundwater conditions are expected since the aquifer materials may not be perennially saturated. Groundwater is generally encountered at depths ranging from 5 to 20 feet below,groundsurface; depth to seasonal groundwater is generally 10 feet or less. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Site Development Considerations: The site appears suitable for the proposed construction. The shallow bedrock and moderate bearing subsoils may require special attention in the design and construction. Because of variations in the engineering properties of the on-site soils, foundation bearing levels, structural loads, and possible final grades, the following foundation systems were evaluated for use on the site: 'Hillier, Donald E.; Schneider, Paul A., Jr.; and Hutchinson, E. Carter, 1983, Depth to Watts Table (19791 In the Boulder-Fort Co/Uns-Greeley An Front Range Urban Candor, Colondo,United States Geological Survey, Map l-855-IK 5 9624°3 Mr. Jacob Hirsch ELI Project No. 20935228 • drilled piers bearing on the bedrock stratum; • spread footings bearing on undisturbed soils; and, • spread footings bearing on engineered fills. Design criteria for alternate foundation systems is subsequently outlined. Use of the alternative foundation systems outlined in this report should be determined prior to construction. Slab-on-grade construction is considered acceptable for use when subgrade soils consist of the on-site sands, provided that design and construction recommendations are followed. Foundation Systems - Pole Barn: Due to the presence of non to low swelling soils and/or bedrock on the site, a pier foundation bearing upon undisturbed, weathered bedrock is recommended for support of the proposed pole barn structure. The piers may be designed for a maximum bearing pressure of 5,000 psf. Pies should be placed a minimum of 30 inches below finished grade for frost protection. Piers extended to the firm or hard bedrock should be designed for a maximum allowable bearing pressure of 15,000 psf. All piers require sufficient dead load to resist the portential uplift of the expansive materials. All piers should be designed for a minimum dead load pressure of 500 psf based upon pier end area. Finished grade is the lowest adjacent grade for perimeter piers and floor level for interior pads. The design bearing capacities apply to dead loads plus design live load conditions. The design bearing capacity may be increased by one-third when considering total loads that include wind or seismic conditions. Piers should be proportioned to minimize differential foundation movement. Proportioning on the basis of equal total settlement is recommended; however, proportioning to a relatively constant dead load pressure will also reduce differential settlement between adjacent piers. Total or differential settlements resulting from the assumed structural loads are estimated to be negligible, provided that foundations are constructed as we recommend. The depth of the piers may need to be increased to resist lateral loads, and the poles may need to be encased in concrete to provide the required lateral resistance. The pole barn should be designed to resist all induced lateral forces. The ultimate passive resistance of the overburden sand materials may be computed using the equation Pp = 3252 + 1000 psf, where Z is the depth below the top of the bedrock stratum. A factor of safety of 3 should be used in conjunction with the above equation. Conventional Foundation Systems: Due to the presence of non to low swelling soils and/or bedrock on the site, spread footing foundations bearing upon undisturbed subsoils and/or 6 962403 Mr. Jacob Hirsch ELI Project No. 20935228 engineered fill is recommended for support of the manure separator and/or other related structures at the site. The footings may be designed for a maximum bearing pressure of 1,500 psf. Footings extended to the bedrock stratum may be designed for a maximum end bearing pressure of 5,000 psf. In addition, footings extended to the bedrock should be designed to maintain a minimum dead-load pressure of 500 psf. Footings should be placed a minimum of 30 inches below finished grade for frost protection. Existing fill on the site should not be used for support of foundations without removal and recompaction. Finished grade is the lowest adjacent grade for perimeter footings and floor level for interior footings. The design bearing capacities apply to dead loads plus design live load conditions. The design bearing capacity may be increased by one-third when considering total loads that include wind or seismic conditions. Footings should be proportioned to minimize differential foundation movement. Proportioning on the basis of equal total settlement is recommended; however, proportioning to relative constant dead-load pressure will also reduce differential settlement between adjacent footings. Total or differential settlements resulting from the assumed structural loads are estimated to be on the order of 3/4-inch or less provided that foundations are constructed as recommended. Additional foundation movements could occur if water from any source infiltrates the foundation soils; therefore, proper drainage should be provided in the final design and during construction. All foundation walls and masonry walls should be reinforced to reduce the potential for distress caused by differential foundation movements. The use of joints at openings or other discontinuities in masonry walls is recommended. Foundation excavations should be observed by the geotechnical engineer. If the soil conditions encountered differ significantly from those presented in this report,supplemental recommendations will be required. Lateral Earth Pressures: For soils above any free water surface, recommended equivalent fluid pressures for unrestrained elements are: • Active: Cohesionless soil backfill Ion-site sand) 35 psf/ft 7 9624(13 • Mr. Jacob Hirsch ELI Project No. 20935228 • Passive: Cohesionless soli backfill (on-site sand) 300 psf/ft • Coefficient of base friction 0.35 Where the design includes restrained elements, the following equivalent fluid pressures are recommended: • At-rest: Cohesionless soil backfill (on-site sand) 50 psf/ft The lateral earth pressures herein are not applicable for submerged soils. We should be consulted for additional recommendations if such conditions are to be included in the design. Fill against grade beams and retaining walls should be compacted to densities specified in "Earthwork." Compaction of each lift adjacent to walls should be accomplished with hand-operated tampers or other lightweight compactors. Overcompaction may cause excessive lateral earth pressures which could result in wall movements. Seismic Considerations: The project site is located in Seismic Risk Zone I, of the Seismic Zone Map of the United States as indicated by the Uniform Building Code. Based upon the nature of the subsurface materials, a seismic site coefficient, "s" of 1.0 should be used for the design of structures for the proposed project (Uniform Building Code, Table No. 23-J). Floor Slab Design and Construction: Non-expansive, or only low expansive soils, natural soils or engineered fill will support the floor slab. Some differential movement of a slab-on-grade floor system is possible should the subgrade soils become elevated in moisture content. Such movements are considered within general tolerance for normal slab-on-grade movements. To reduce any potential slab movements, the subgrade soils should be prepared as outlined in the earthwork section of this report. For structural design of concrete slabs-on-grade, a modulus of subgrade reaction of 150 pounds per cubic inch (pci) may be used for floors supported on existing or engineered fill consisting of on-site soils. Additional floor slab design and construction recommendations are as follows: • Positive separations and/or isolation joints should be provided between slabs and all foundations, columns or utility lines to allow independent movement. 8 9624^,' Mr. Jacob Hirsch ELI Project No. 20935228 • Contraction joints should be provided in slabs to control the location and extent of cracking. Maximum joint spacing of 15 to 20 feet in each direction is recommended. • Adequate drainage should be provided in the slab for wash water. Adequate water - stops should be provided in alLtroughs in.2he slab.to.minimize.the potential.of water reaching the underslab and/or foundation area. • Interior trench backfill placed beneath slabs should be compacted in accordance with recommended specifications outlined below. • In areas subjected to normal loading, a minimum 4-inch layer of clean, graded gravel or crushed rock devoid of fines should be placed beneath interior slabs. For heavy loading, the slab should be underlain by a minimum of 6 inches of crushed aggregate base course. • Floor slabs should not be constructed on frozen subgrade. • Other design and construction considerations, as outlined in the ACI Design Manual, Section 302.1R are recommended. Septic Systems: Laboratory test results indicate that standard-type septic systems and soil absorption beds are feasible at the site at the location of the percolation test holes 1 through 12. The systems should be designed in accordance with applicable State and Weld County requirements and should be located the minimum distances from all pertinent ground features as described in the Weld County regulations. Groundwater and bedrock was encountered below the upper 7i4 feet below the proposed soils absorption beds. Accordingly, the leach fields may be constructed at normal depths of approximately 3 feet below existing grade. It is our understanding that each of the four mobile homes will have three bedrooms. Using a percolation rate of 30 minutes per inch, minimum 975 square feet of absorption bed area is recommended for each system. Minimum 1,000 gallon septic tanks should be used in the construction of the septic systems. The soil absorption beds and/or trenches constructed at the site should consist of 3-inch diameter perforated plastic pipe. The pipe should be laid on as flat a grade as possible running the full length of the beds and/or trenches. The beds and/or trenches should be covered by clean, graded gravel extending from at least 2 inches above the top of the pipe to at least 6 inches below the bottom of the pipe the full width of the beds and/or trenches. It is further recommended the pipe 9 962423 Mr. Jacob Hirsch ELI Project No. 20935228 be a minimum of 14 inches and a maximum of 26 inches below finished grade. The beds and/or trenches should be covered with an untreated building paper to help minimize clogging of the gravel with earth backfill. Positive drainage should also be provided to reduce the potential for surface water to enter the system. The systems should be designed in accordance with State and County regulations using the data provided in this report. The systems should also be placed the required minimum distance from all pertinent-ground features,-as described in-the Weld County regulations. Waste Retention Basin: Laboratory tests were run on selected composite samples from the test borings to determine the physical properties of the embankment and foundation materials for the proposed waste retention basin. Permeability, shear characteristics and unconfined compressive strengths were determined on the embankment material. The on-site soil when compacted to 95 percent of Standard Proctor Density has an angle of internal friction of 25.6 degrees and a cohesion of 340 psf. The on-site soil when compacted to 95 percent of Standard Proctor Density has a permeability rate of approximately 0:03 x 10.6 centimeters per second. The interbedded sandstone and siltstone bedrock when compacted to 95 percent of Standard Proctor Density has a permeability rate of approximately 0.08 x 10° centimeters per second. The in-situ sandy lean clay in its undisturbed condition has a permeability rate of approximately 0.30 x 10.6 centimeters per second. In view of the permeability rates of the on-site materials in their in situ and compacted condition, it is our opinion the proposed waste retention basin may be built with the on-site clayey sands, sandy lean clays or siltstone-sandstone bedrock. It is recommended the upper 1-foot of the wetted—perimeter of the basin in cut sections be scarified and recompacted to form the relatively impervious liner material. The compacted subgrade in cut areas and the compacted embankment material should meet a permeability rate specification of 1 x 10.°centimeters per second. Samples of the compacted materials should be obtained during construction and tested in the laboratory to evaluate permeability rates. Embankments constructed to form the proposed basin should be constructed with the on-site clayey sand, sandy lean clay or sandstone-siltstone bedrock. The bottom of the basin should be placed a minimum of 3 feet above existing groundwater. Earthwork: • General Considerations: The conclusions contained in this report for the proposed construction are contingent upon compliance with recommendations presented in this section. 5162403 Mr. Jacob Hirsch ELI Project No. 20935228 Although fills or underground facilities, such as septic tanks, cesspools, basements, or utilities,were not observed during site reconnaissance,such features might be encountered during construction. • Site Clearing: 1. Strip and remove existing vegetation, debris, and other deleterious materials from proposed building and pavement areas. All exposed surfaces should be free of mounds and depressions which could prevent uniform compaction. 2. If unexpected fills or underground facilities are encountered during site clearing, such features should be removed,the excavation thoroughly cleaned and backfilled. All excavations should be observed by the geotechnical engineer prior to backfill placement. 3. Stripped materials consisting of organic materials should be wasted from the site, or used to revegetate exposed slopes after completion of grading operations. If it is necessary to dispose of organic materials on-site, they should be placed in non- structural areas, and in fill sections not exceeding 5 feet in height. 4. Sloping areas steeper than 3:1 (horizontal:vertical) should be benched to reduce the potential for slippage between existing slopes and fills. Benches should be level and wide enough to accommodate compaction and earth moving equipment. -3. The site should be initially graded to create a relatively level surface to receive fill, and to provide for a relatively uniform thickness of fill beneath proposed building structures. 6. All exposed areas which will receive fill, once properly cleared and benched where necessary, should be scarified to a minimum depth of twelve inches, conditioned to near optimum moisture content, and compacted. • Excavation: 1. It is anticipated that excavations for the proposed construction can be accomplished with conventional earthmoving equipment. 11 9624.23 Mr. Jacob Hirsch EU Project No. 20935228 2. Excavations penetrating the hard bedrock may require the use of a large track mounted backhoe or a track mounted tractor or ripper tooth. 3. Depending upon depth of excavation and seasonal conditions, groundwater may be encountered in excavations on the site. Pumping from sumps may be utilized to - control water.within excavations. Well-.points.may..be-required for significant groundwater flow, or where excavations penetrate groundwater to a significant depth. 4. On-site clay and sand soils may pump or become unstable or unworkable at high water contents. Workability may be improved by scarifying and drying. Overexcavation of wet zones and replacement with granular materials may be necessary. Use of lime, fly ash kiln dust, cement or geotextiles could also be considered as a stabilization technique. Adequate laboratory testing should be performed to evaluate the effectiveness of each chosen method of stabilization. Lightweight excavation equipment may be required to reduce subgrade pumping. • Slab Subarade Preparation: 1. Where existing sand and clay soils will support floor slab, the soils should be scarified, moisture conditioned and compacted to a minimum depth of 8 inches. .2. A minimum 4-inch layer of clean, graded gravel or crushed rock devoid of fines should be placed beneath slabs. Slab exhibiting heavy floor loads should be underlain by a minimum of 6 inches of aggregate base course. • Pavement Subarade Preparation: The subgrade should be scarified, moistened as required, and recompacted for a minimum depth of 8 inches prior to placement of fill and pavement materials. • Fill Materials: 1. Clean on-site soils or approved imported materials may be used as fill material for the following: 12 9624°?3 Mr. Jacob Hirsch ELI Project No. 20935228 • general site grading • exterior slab areas • foundation areas • pavement areas • interior floor slab areas • foundation backfill • basin berms 2. Select granular materials should be used as backfill behind walls which retain earth. 3. Frozen soils should not be used as fill or backfill. 4. Imported soils (if required) should conform to the following: • Gradation (ASTM C136): percent finer by weight 6" 100 3" 70-100 No. 4 Sieve 50-100 No. 200 Sieve 25 (max) • Liquid Limit 35 (max) • Plasticity Index 15 (max) • .Placement and Compaction: 1. Place and compact fill in horizontal lifts, using equipment and procedures that will produce recommended moisture contents and densities throughout the lift. 2. Uncompacted fill lifts should not exceed 10 inches loose thickness. 3. No fill should be placed over frozen ground. 4. Materials should be compacted to the following: Minimum Percent Material Compaction (ASTM D6981 On-site soils: Beneath foundations 95 13 9624(23 Mr. Jacob Hirsch EU Project No. 20935228 Beneath and around inlet pipe in basin 98 Beneath slabs 95 Beneath pavements 95 Imported fill: Beneath foundations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... 95 Beneath slabs 95 Beneath pavements 95 Miscellaneous backfill 90 5. On-site clay and sand soils should be compacted within a moisture content range of 2 percent below to 2 percent above optimum. Imported granular soils should be compacted within a moisture range of 2 percent below to 2 percent above optimum. • Slopes: 1. For permanent slopes in compacted cut and fill and basin areas, recommended maximum configurations for on-site materials are as follows: Maximum Slope WaiteHorizontal:Vertical Cohesive soils (clays and silts) 2:1 Cohesionless soils 3:1 Bedrock 2:1 If steeper slopes are required for site development, stability analyses should be completed to design the grading plan. 2. The face of all slopes should be compacted to the minimum specification for fill embankments. Alternately, fill slopes can be over-built and trimmed to compacted material. Compliance: Recommendations for slabs-on-grade, foundations and pavement elements supported on compacted fills or prepared subgrade depend upon compliance with 14 9624\93 Mr. Jacob Hirsch ELI Project No. 20935228 "Earthwork" recommendations. To assess compliance, observation and testing should be performed under the direction of the geotechnical engineer. • Utility Construction: Excavations into the on-site soils will encounter a variety of --conditions.-Excavations into the clays and-bedrock-can be-expected.to-stand on-relatively steep temporary slopes during construction. However, caving soils may also be encountered. The individual contractor(s) should be made responsible for designing and constructing stable, temporary excavations as required to maintain stability of both the excavation sides and bottom. All excavations should be sloped or shored in the interest of safety following local, and federal regulations, including current OSHA excavation and trench safety standards. Drainaae: • Surface Drainaae: 1 . Positive drainage should be provided during construction and maintained throughout the life of the proposed facility. Infiltration of water into utility or foundation excavations must be prevented during construction. Surface features which could retain water in areas adjacent to the building or pavements should be sealed or eliminated. 2. In areas where sidewalks or paving do not immediately adjoin the structure, we recommend that protective slopes be provided with a minimum grade of approximately ten percent for at least 10 feet from perimeter walls. Backfill against footings, exterior walls, and in utility and sprinkler line trenches should be well compacted and free of all construction debris to reduce the possibility of moisture infiltration. 3. Downspouts, roof drains or scuppers should discharge into splash blocks or extensions when the ground surface beneath such features is not protected by exterior slabs or paving. 4. Sprinkler systems should not be installed within five feet of foundation walls. Landscape irrigation adjacent to the foundation system should be minimized or eliminated. 15 962493 Mr. Jacob Hirsch ELI Project No. 20935228 • Subsurface Drainage: Free-draining, granular soils containing less than five percent fines (by weight) passing a No. 200 sieve should be placed adjacent to walls which retain earth. A drainage system consisting of either weep holes or perforated drain lines (placed near the base of the wall) should be used to intercept and discharge water which would tend to saturate the backfill. Where used, drain lines should be embedded in a uniformly graded filter_material and__provided_with_.adequate._clean-outs_for_periodic_maintenance. An impervious soil should be used in the upper layer of backfill to reduce the potential for water infiltration. Additional Design and Construction Considerations: • Exterior Slab Design and Construction: Exterior slabs-on-grade, exterior architectural features, and utilities founded on, or in backfill may experience some movement due to the volume change of the backfill. Potential movement could be reduced by: • minimizing moisture increases in the backfill • controlling moisture-density during placement of backfill • using designs which allow vertical movement between the exterior features and adjoining structural elements • placing effective control joints on relatively close centers • allowing vertical movements in utility connections • Corrosion Protection: Results of soluble sulfate testing indicate that ASTM Type I Portland cement is suitable for all concrete on and below grade. However, if there is no, or minimal cost differential, use of ASTM Type II Portland cement is recommended for additional sulfate resistance of construction concrete. Foundation concrete should be designed in accordance with the provisions of the ACI Design Manual, Section 318-121. GENERAL COMMENTS It is recommended that the Geotechnical Engineer be retained to provide a general review of final design plans and specifications in order that grading and foundation recommendations may be interpreted and implemented. In the event that any changes of the proposed project are planned, the conclusions and recommendations contained in this report should be reviewed and the report modified or supplemented as necessary. 16 9624`?3 Mr. Jacob Hirsch ELI Project No. 20935228 The Geotechnical Engineer should also be retained to provide services during excavation, grading, foundation and construction phases of the work. Observation of footing excavations should be performed prior to placement of reinforcing and concrete to confirm that satisfactory bearing materials are present and is considered a necessary part of continuing geotechnical engineering services for the project. Construction testing of fill placed on the site is considered part of continuing geotechnical engineering service_for_the-project._-Field-and_laboratory testing of concrete and steel should be performed to determine whether applicable requirements have been met. It would be logical for Empire Laboratories, Inc. to provide these services since we are most qualified to determine consistency of field conditions with those data used in our analyses. The analyses and recommendations in this report are based in part upon data obtained from the field exploration. The nature and extent of variations beyond the location of test borings may not become evident until construction. If variations then appear evident, it may be necessary to reevaluate the recommendations of this report. Our professional services were performed using that degree of care and skill ordinarily exercised, under similar circumstances, by reputable geotechnical engineers practicing in this or similar localities. No warranty, express or implied, is made. We prepared the report as an aid in design of the proposed project. This report is not a bidding document. Any contractor reviewing this report must draw his own conclusions regarding site conditions and specific construction techniques to be used on this project. This report is for the exclusive purpose of providing geotechnical engineering and/or testing information and recommendations. The scope of services for this project does not include, either specifically or by implication, any environmental assessment of the site or identification of contaminated or hazardous materials or conditions. If the owner is concerned about the potential for such contamination, other studies should be undertaken. We are available to discuss the scope of such studies with you. 17 9624)3 ,. . 0_. St-i-- Ai-- , ilitw � 60-Vre�NIQo, ool P+01C D / 4r -n.-r vt IL 1--0132--7--Si I i 1 ptekurr --o- _ - �.- 3oo_ ,_::_: ear "Do 5vR L I'. 3001 I 1 gga,o• o- Flu• FJe fJe �¢o�sE'.p \ 3 969-9119 fizoore,,E-7 la fLg. 1 295989119 �R{{ii STE. I-l0M6S ff I S4S+79I°9 i.1n!8 _ 402, • - FJe. 18-. _ .Fe.lq \ 5_____ _ __, .s _ __s _. t_q_ja. 'lea 024 IJo.Q3 .21 00. 21.- - \ L -- ---f 1-40.2 Jots oil rI. I .Iris, : I�,o 1 0,13 a. 14 I $A411J �e-', ♦Jo.17 �/ T4 • //t / 4s / / - �� / ►J I1.P oJiJTY 5°AD 7s 962403 Empire Laboratories, Inc. I A Division of The Truman Companies. Inc. i LOG OF BORING NO. 1 Page I of 1 ARCHITECT/ENGINEER 4 CLIENT Jacob Hirsch SITE PROJECT Severance, Colorado Proposed Hirsch Dairy — SAMPLES TESTS 8 .. _I ~ I- o U DESCRIPTION m CC Z\ % Z LLI- a Approx. Surface Elev.: 102.5 ft. cc 8 .. .8. - -?-----8-18- .g oa EM. 0.5 6" TOPSOIL 102.0 SW PA 0.'• -,WELL GRADED '• SAND WITH GRAVET — '• Tan, moist, medium dense — '�• 3.0 99.5 BOTTOM OF,BORING �u IOXIMATE Y INES dEE11EENATIFICATION SOIL AND ROCK NTYPES: IN-SITU, THE ES REPRESENT THE RTRANSITION MAY RBE`GRADUAL. 962403 WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS BORING STARTED 1v-s�-» None W.D. None A.B. Empire Laboratories BORING COMPUTED 10-12-93 art Incorporated RIG CME-55 FOREMAN DL‘AitDivision of Temcon APPROVED JOBS 2 Checked 4 days A.B. NRS 09352_8 / LOG OF BORING NO. 2 Page 1 of 1 CLIENTARCHITECT/ENGINEER Jacob Hirsch SITE PROJECT Severance, Colorado Proposed Flinch Dairy _ SAMPLES TESTS 8 s I- o o DESCRIPTION � � w z\ cc CO H I- a. = N W W 8 3 N C O W L^ Approx.-Surface Elev.: 103.0 ft. - _ '7 -- - -sr- 'no .i3 - SR g�a 0.5 6" TOPSOIL 102.5 PA - '• WELL GRADED - •• SAND WITH GRAVEL - • • Tan, moist, medium dense - •• — • • • • - • ' • • - • M. • 9 - e-..•= ♦ 5— • • • ♦ - • _a a - • ♦ - • • •/ •� _SW 1 SS 12" 16 3.3 • 4. • sr- 8.5 94.5 - PA 9.0 WEATHERED SANDSTONE/ 94.o $11 TSTONE a. Brown, moist, hard BOTTOM OF BORING INES dETWEENS0IL ANDGR0CKN NTYPES:ES IN-SITU, THE SENT THE RTRA TRANSITION NA0XIMATE Y BERY L GRADUAL.Jpk,4 WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS BORING STARTED ,�_-_ -_ None q D• ; None As. Empire Laboratories BORING COMPLETED 10-12-93 I n Incorporated RIG cnff.55 FOREMAN DL Division of Temcoo APPROVED JOB I Y Checked 4 days A.B. _ NRS 209352_8 7 LOG OF BORING NO. 3 pace 1 0[1 ARCHITECT/EIGINEER :LENT Jacob Hirsch SITE PROJECT Severance, Colorado Proposed Hirsch Dairy SAMPLES TESTS X > 0 I- 1- 0 H DESCRIPTION vs y it as. W Cl) LLI- aQr pi Cc zz LO D. W d. 0 WU ZI--CO CD Approx.SurfaceElev.: 103.6 ft. -3 - =' ' --r -cc- -toes -_ on. wla 0 . SW PA .5 6" TOPSOIL 1031 _mr r. 4, WELL GRADED — ~o SANT) WITH GRAVEL — o. Tan, moist, medium dense -• .,,,,, — 'o' 3.0 100.6 BOTTOM OF BORING E STRATIFICATION LINES REPRESENT TIE APPROXIMATE BOUNDARY LINES t'6i,4.Jn.;J .4TNEEN SOIL AND ROCK TYPES: IN-SITU, THE TRANSITION MAY BE GRADUAL. _ 1 WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS BORING STARTED 10-12-93 wi. g None W.D. ; None A.B. Empire Laboratories BORING COMPLETED 10-12-93 WL Incorporated RIG CME-55 FOREMAN DL Division of Temcon APPROVED JOB/ Checked 4 days A.B. NRS 20935228 • LOG OF BORING NO. 4 Pa e 1 of 1 VAT ARCHITECT/ENGINEER Jacob Hirsch SITE PROJECT Severance, Colorado Proposed Hirsch Dairy SAMPLES TESTS .. r - o M DESCRIPTION - WCfl m c.)— z� Z L4 co Hi- E F=- 0 m W O co o O W Y__W.. _1J _ ~_ KO ZP-U)A a Approx. Surface Elev.: 102.4 ft. o 'is oo Imo 0.5 6' TOPSOIL 101.9 SC PA /// — rI AYFY SAND — Tan, moist, medium dense _ /A 3.0 99.4 BOTTOM OF BORING E STRATIFICATION LINES REPRESENT THE APPROXIMATE BOUNDARY LINES ,ETWEEN SOIL AND ROCK TYPES: IN-SITU, THE TRANSITION MAY BE GRADUAL. 44R24n3 WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS BORING STAR lV-I4 -Y3 I iL None W.D. None A.B. Empire Laboratories BORING COMPLETED 10-12-93 w< Incorporated RIG CME-SS FOREMAN DL Division or Temcoe APPROVED JOB wt. Checked 4 days A.B. NRS 209352..8 a° LOG OF BORING NO. 5 Pa e 1 of 1 ARCHITECT/ENGINEER wen Jacob Hirsch SITE PROJECT Severance, Colorado Proposed Hirsch Dairy SAMPLES - TESTS 0 " 0 r= I-- 0 J N DESCRIPTION ) z z� s CM HI- CA CC = X- N W W O , N I- o O W % 0. 0 0. V I-� H YIL UO=U. 0 Approx.-Surface Elev.:103.1 ft. W H Z > u as o cc. zwc. o z - +- - --mm - z ZO Zvlo- "' " 0.5 6" TOPSOIL 102.6 _ SC PA rST.AYFY SAND Tan, moist, medium dense — 5— 7.5 95.6 — 1 SS 12" 18 11.4 8.0 WEATHERFD SANDSTONE/ 95.1 `- t$J1 TE / Tan, moistSTON, medium dense BOTTOM OF BORING -ia HE STRATIFICATION LINES REPRESENT THE APPROXIMATE BOUNDARY LINES BETWEEN SOIL AND ROCK TYPES: IN-SITU, THE TRANSITION MY BE GRADUAL. 96^ f1 WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS �r BORAIG STARTED 1U-11-Y.1 WI None W.D. ; None A.B. Empire Laboratories BORING COMPLETED 10-12-93 I ,,� Incorporated RIG cn>E-55 FOREMAN DL Division of Temwo WI_ Checked 4 days A.B. APPRovED NRS JOB a 20935228 • / LOG OF BORING NO. 6 Page 1 or 1 CLIENT ARCHITECT/ENGINEER Jacob Hirsch SITE PROJECT Severance, Colorado Proposed Hirsch Dairy SAMPLES TESTS cd r- 0 J N DESCRIPTION ' > ce U. Ws. z =a r N CC g IN I- 0 !Ilia ce W NW g > LU d.J 0 KU ZFU7 FALL Ca Approx.Surface Elev.: 103.6 ft. G z r irk' -PA x oo nano "• 0.5 6' TOPSOIL 103.1 - SC PA - - rT AYFY SAND Tan, moist, medium dense - 3.0 100.6 , BOTTOM OF BORING NE STRATIFICATION LINES REPRESENT THE APPROXIMATE BOUNDARY LINES BETWEEN SOIL AND ROCK TYPES: IN-SITU, THE TRANSITION MAY BE GRADUAL. then „ _ ii, WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS sv1OR1rG STARNone R D None AB. Empire Laboratories ORING coM PLETED 10.12.93Incorporated e CME-SS FOREMAN — DL ;wt. DivisionofTemcon PPROVED JOB R 20935228 Checked 4 days A.B. NRS /r LOG OF BORING NO. 7 Page l of l CLIENT ARCHITECT/E`IGINEER Jacob Hirsch SITE PROJECT Severance, Colorado Proposed Hirsch Dairy SAMPLES TESTS • 0 F k- 0 U � }My++ z� z CO 2 Q 0. U W. U ii M )-U peril. ce -Approx.-Surface-Elev.: 102.4 ft. a D -_- ----- -24 E - SW. wlo. -i 0.5 6' TOPSOIL 101.9 SC PA Vfl LYFY SAND Tan, moist, medium dense 3.0 99.4 BOTTOM OF BORING ��as HE STRATIFICATION LINES REPRESENT THE APPROXIMATE BOUNDARY LINES 62473 BETWEEN SOIL AND ROCK TYPES: IN-SITU, THE TRANSITION MAY BE GRADUAL. WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS BORING STARTED 10-12-93 None W D $ None A.B. Empire Laboratories BORING COMPLETED 10-12-93 ,� Incorporated RIG cME-55 FOREMAN DL WI. Division of Tentcoo APPROVED JOB J 20935228 Checked 4 days A.B. NRS / ..rLOG OF BORING NO. 8 Page 1 or 1 -CLIENT ARCHITECT/ENGINEER Jacob Hirsch _ SITE PROJECT Severance, Colorado Proposed Hirsch Dairy SAMPLES TESTS - ..• o I- x r}- 0 U DESCRIPTION ' y m r. _� w Zr W 1 (0 I- 0 22 cc tr. N ) W dJ ~ }LL Z�N cgi - Approx. Surface Elev.: 103.4 ft. -_ -D- i-- -n: ---wm - 2---SR mina 0.5 6' TOPSOIL 102.9 _ PA c'i AYFY SAND �/ Tan, moist, medium dense 5- SC 1 SS 12" 17 7.5 10.0ft 93.4 10 BOTTOM OF BORING NE STRATIFICATION LINES REPRESENT THE APPROXIMATE BOUNDARY LINES 962423 BETWEEN SOIL AND ROCK TYPES: IN-SITU, THE TRANSITION NAY BE GRADUAL. WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS BORING START__ None W D None A.B. Empire Laboratories BORING COMPLETED 10-12.93 WI. Incorporated RIG c�>E-55 NRS FOREMAN DL Division of Terncoo APPROVED JOBS 20935225 Checked 4 days A.B. LOG OF BORING NO. 9 Page 1 of 1 CLIENT ARCHITECT/ENGINEER Jacob Hirsch SITE - PROJECT Severance, Colorado Proposed Hirsch Dairy SAMPLES TESTS Lo0 S � 0 CC DESCRIPTION W Z W H I I CO W 0 333 N 0 55 Q rL U 0. U HO M >-U.. 00:4. GC CD Approx.Surface Elev.: 104.1 ft. 2i .... .. �- �il� �a =tto& ^ " " 0.5 6" TOPSOIL 103.6 Sc PA SAND Tan, moist, medium dense J/ 3.0 101.1 BOTTOM OF BORING SE STRATIFICATION LINES REPRESENT THE APPROXIMATE BOJNDARY LINES 3624 93 oETNEEN SOIL AND ROCK TYPES: tN-SITU, THE TRANSITION MAY BE GRADUAL. WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS BORING STARTED 10-12-93 g None W.D. None A.B. Empire Laboratories BORING COMPLETED 10 12-93 w< Incorporated Ric ca(E-ss FOREMAN DL cvL Checked 4 days A.B. Division of Temcoa APPROVED Nits JOB 410-12-93 / LOG OF BORING NO. 10 Page 1 of 1 CLIENT ARCHITECT/ENGINEER Jacob Hinds SITE PROJECT Severance, Colorado Proposed Hirsch Dairy SAMPLES TESTS '� o o N DESCRIPTION co o iY n ! y IZ� a 1=- N O W 3 co OW 0. 0. L I H H p }LL f.I I. CK _WQ .. 317. ._.F__�__CJJm L 00. 7Nd LD Approx. Surface Elev.: 102.4 ft. 7 ZZ 0.5 6" TOPSOIL 101.9 SC PA r CLAYEY SAND Tan, moist, medium dense — 3.0 99.4 BOTTOM OF BORING --�a ME ES REPRESENT THE OXIMATE BOUNDARY INES dETWEEN SOIL CAAND 0R0CK NTYPES: IN-SITU, THE RTRA TRANSITION MAY SELGRADUAL. �� • • WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS BORLNG STARTED 10-12-93 Wt • None W.D. T None Al. Empire Laboratories BORDIG COMPLETED 10-12.93 WL Incorporated RIG CM1E-55 FOREMAN DL Division of Tenacon wt. Checked 4 days A.B. APPROVED Nits JOB/ 20935228 / LOG OF BORING NO. 11 Pape 1 of 1 /WI ARCHITECT/ENGINEER Jacob Hirsch _ . PROJECT Severance, Colorado Proposed Hirsch Dairy SAMPLES TESTS 8 d r 0 H W N DESCRIPTIONCSI ZLL ZZ LL I- _a. _ Iyat U1 N o W d t�1f > Si' C ~ D:0 leg u. Cr CD -Approx. Surface Elev.:103.2 ft. 8 - D 222--i--- ---u - 2 - -Cc. E ti)112 0.5 6" TOPSOIL 102.7 PA - 7 S'T AYEY SAND - Tan, moist, medium dense _ 5 _ SC 1 SS 12" 14 9.6 — _ PA A 10.0• 93.2 10 BOTTOM OF BORING 'HE STRATIFICATION LINES REPRESENT THE APPROXIMATE BOUNDARY LINES ��9C2 4ETYEEN SOIL AND ROCK TYPES: IN-SITU, THE TRANSITION MAY BE GRADUAL. 962 WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS BORING STAxtw None W.D. ; None A.D. Empire Laboratories BORING COMPLETED 10.12-93 w< Incorporated RIG CME-55 FOREMAN DL Alt Division of Temcoo APPROVED JOB/ 22 Checked 4 days A.B. MRS 20935._8 /.• LOG OF BORING NO. 12 page t of 1 0o1• ARCHITECT/ENGINEER Jacob Hirsch '� PROJECT . Severance, Colorado Proposed Hirsch Dairy SAMPLES TESTS .. .O • x > o H W H DESCRIPTION y cc y Z . % Z H 1 Z a ccs I-0 H >Ia. OOOCKI en cD Approx:Surface Elev.: 104.3 ft. g - O . . —r---I-•-t1AiO Z - 82 3tso- " "^A4 0.5 6' TOPSOIL 103.8 SC PA — S'T AYFY SAND Tan, moist, medium dense -- /.43.0 101.3 BOTTOM OF BORING • 'HE STRATIFICATION LINES REPRESENT THE APPROXIMATE BOUNDARY LINES 962493 BETWEEN SOIL AND ROCK TYPES: IN-SITU, THE TRANSITION MAY BE GRADUAL. WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS None BORING STARTED 10-12-93 W.D None A.B. Empire Laboratories Incorporated BORING COMPLETED 10-12-93 RIG CNtE-s5 FO APPROVED DL wl Checked 4 days A.B. Division of Temcoo APPROVED 1�q SOB E 20935228 LOG OF BORING NO. 13 Page 1 of 1 / ce J ARCHITECT/ENGINEER Jacob Hirsch 'sin PROJECT Severance, Colorado Proposed Hirsch Dairy SAMPLES TESTS .• P o H DESCRIPTION ) C z zLL w CO H2 = H Ul W W O N OW a- U a. U F-5 YU. UCIL ce o _ .9-. . �_ _c -84- .2 ca Swo. Approx. Surface Elev.: 86.3 ft. 0.5 6" TOPSOIL 85,8 _ 1 SS 12" 12 11.5 0 ci AYFY SAND WITH GRAVEL — Tan/brown, moist, medium dense SC PA _ - 4 rl 2 ST 12" 6.9 4.5 81.8 - 3 SS 12" 25 6.0 _" 5 PA WEATHERED SANDSTONE/ - SIT TSTONE — Tan/gray, moist, hard — 7.0 79.3 4 SS 12" 48 14.3 SANDST(INF/SII TSTONE PA Tan/gray, moist, very hard — , 10— 5 SS 11" 50/11 21.3 - 15.0 71.3 . 15 BOTTOM OF BORING Q�v NE STRATIFICATION LINES REPRESENT THE APPROXIMATE BOUNDARY LINES 9624 3 BETWEEN SOIL AND ROCK TYPES: IN-SITU, THE TRANSITION MAY BE GRADUAL. WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS BORING STARTED 10-12-93 NRS pI None W.D. None A.B. Empire Laboratories BORING COMPLETED 10-12-93 w< Incorporated RIG c�>E-55 FOREMAN DL WI. Division of Temcon APPROVED JOBS 20935228 • Checked 4 days A.B. / LOG OF BORING NO. 14 Page 1 or 1 /man ARCHITECT/ENGINEER Jacob Hirsch STrE PROJECT Severance, Colorado Proposed Hirsch Dairy SAMPLES TESTS 8 I- I'- L] J LsI-I DESCRIPTION U. > )- z• z z rzis- a H N W O Z> ItaN OW U I-C Y H U. UOCLL Approx:Sltrrace Elev.: 87.2 rt.IX 't -"n` - - - -v m-- .2 - sa nyd " " 0.5 6' TOPSOIL 86.7 - 1 SS 12' 10 13.4 S"T AYFY SAND WITH GRAVEL — Tan/brown, moist PA Loose to medium dense — SC 2 ST 12" 8.9 110 3 SS 12" 5 9.6 5 PA 7.0 80.2 WEATHERED SANDSTONE/ 4 ST 12' 12.2 114 - SIT TSTONF 8 5 Tan/gray, moist, hard 78.7 5 SS 12" 41 13.5 - PA SANDSTONE/SIT.TSTONE Tan/gray, moist, very hard 10- - 6 SS 9' 50/9 21.5 -. 14.8 72.4 - BOTTOM OF BORING • THE STRATIFICATION LINES REPRESENT THE APPROXIMATE ROUNDART LINES 962 BETWEEN SOIL AND ROCK TYPES: IN-SITU, THE TRANSITION MAY RE GRADUAL. J �,w WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS BORING STARTc„ sr.. -_ A None W.D. iNone A.B. Empire Laboratories BORING COMPLETED 1042-93 WL Incorporated RIG cm�-55 FOREMAN DL wt. Checked 4 days A.B. Division of Temcoo APPROVED pas JOB R 20935228 Y T LOG OF BORING NO. 15 Page 1 of 1 SIT ARCHITECT/ENGINEER Jacob Hirsch SITS PROJECT Severance, Colorado Proposed Hirsch Dairy SAMPLES TESTS _ I— I- 0 J W In 22 CC H Li DESCRIPTION LL. 0 IX cc z• cc W HLi.I- W N O a= H N w W O I N O W WHO C. U C. U I-5 M YlL UCU. I--E\ Ca -Approx.Surface Elev.:86.8 ft. 9 ._9 • _ _ > w - _ SLY. wQ)& +— h AAA/ 0.5 6' TOPSOIL 86.3 1 SS 12' 10 11.1 27/25/12 S T.AYFY SAND — Tan/brown, moist, medium dense PA — — SC 2 ST 12' 7.3 W 91 2990 4.5 82.3 — 3 SS 12' 20 9.4 WEATHERED SANDSTONE/ 5 PA CI1 TSTONE Tan/gray, moist, hard — 7.0 79.8 4 ST 2' 12.9 100 2990 5 SS 12' 50 11.7 SANDSTONF/SILTSTONE - Tan/gray, moist, very hard PA 10— 6 SS 10.5-:0/10.5 24.2 - 14.9 71.9 BOTTOM OF BORING , IE STRATIFICATION LINES REPRESENT THE APPROXIMATE BGUNDARY LINES 4•,,•,^ : 9523 TWEEN SOIL AND ROCK TYPES: IN-SITU, THE TRANSITION MAY BE GRADUAL. J 1 WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS BORING STARTED wl- U None W.D. T None A.B. Empire Laboratories BORING COMPLETED 10.12.93 w< Incorporated RIG cME-55 FOREMAN DL Division of Terrscoa APPROVED JOB I Checked 4 days A.B. isms 20935228 / LOG OF BORING NO. 16 Page 1 of 1 CLgyI•r ARCHITECT/ENGLNEER Jacob Hirsch SITE PROJECT Severance, Colorado Proposed Hirsch Dairy SAMPLES TESTS oo 1-. •0 I- I- o M DESCRIPTI0NC N CC W zLL CC z H I- N 0 m W 0 = CO O W C I:. 0 I-C M }(L On re 0 Approx. Surface Elev.: 85.7 ft. . .o .. o z �-►}- z -win - E ?rt.) �u~ia 0.5 6" TOPSOIL 85.2 SC 1 SS 12" 14 8.9 — ri, S'1 AYFY SAND 1.5 Tan/brown, moist, medium dense 84.2 - WFATHEREDSANDSTONE/ PA SU TSTONE Tan/gray, moist, hard — 2 ST 12" 9.3 105 4.5 81.2 _ 3 SS 12" 32 9.6 5 PA =• SANDSTONE/SILTSTONE — Tan/gray, moist, very hard — 4 SS 12" 50 21.0 PA - -=- _...> 10- 5 SS 10" 50/10 21.0 14.8 70.9 BOTTOM OF BORING STRATIFICATI0NLINES APPROXIMATE BETWEEN S0ILANDR0CKTYPES: IN-SITU, TRANSITI0NTHEB0UNDARYLINES MAYBEGRADUAL. 4.162403 WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS BORING STARTED 10-12-93 WI None W.D. T None A.B. Empire Laboratories BORING COMPLETED 10-12.9393 WI. Incorporated RIG c�tE-5S POREINAN DL WL Checked 4 days A.B. Division of Temtoe APPROVED Np3 JOB/ 205228 it, is,' LOG OF BORING NO. 17 Page 1 of 1 CIilaT ARCHITECT/ENGINEER Jacob Hirsch - sire PROJECT Severance, Colorado Proposed Hirsch Dairy SAMPLES TESTS '� r I- o La O DESCRIPTION - - w zLL w w m am re _ = Wa. D I W I- C ZZ :II d U a. OCj I- H "-Li. LJ=LL WWLL ce L7 -Approx.-Surface Ela:: 88.3 ft. - LLol - f'!1 - - }- --ym , g .ca- ENO. visa 0.5 6' TOPSOIL 87.8 — 1 SS 12" 12 12.7 LAYFY SAND — IJ3.5 Tan/brown, moist, medium dense SC PA 84.8 — 2 ST 12' 10.0 106 5930 WEATHERED SANDSTONE/ STLTSTONE 3 SS 12' 20 9.3 255 Tan/gray, moist, hard — 5.5 82.8 5 — PA SANDSTONF/SILTSTONE — Tan/gray, moist, very hard 4 SS 10' 50/10 13.3 _ PA 10 14.0 74.3 AUGER REFUSAL 5 SS NR 50/0 HE STRATIFICATION LINES REPRESENT THE APPROXIMATE BOUNDARY LINES ✓62403 .,ETMEER SOIL AND ROCK TYPES: IN-SITU, THE TRANSITION MAY BE GRADUAL. WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS BORLVG STARTED 10-12-93 WI- g None W.D. None A.B. Empire Laboratories BORING COMPLETED 10-12-93 M Incorporated RIG CME-55 FOREMAN DL V.1. Checked 4 days A.B. Division oFTerncoa APPROVED MRS JOBS 20935228 LOG OF BORING NO. 18 Page 1 of l anDir ARCHITECT/ENGINEER Jacob Hirsch SrrE PROJECT Severance, Colorado Proposed Hirsch Dairy SAMPLES TESTS 0 0 1- I- 0 N DESCRIPTION y w z' ccI USU. OK gi > > W _gird O ICJ ZFfA 0 Approx. Surfacetlev.: 79.9.ft. .. _.8_._g--z_. .r__ _kg _gird L-- rd. Eina 0.5 6' TOPSOIL 79.4 SC PA p)/�� S"T AYEY SAND — ///� 1.5 Brown/tan, moist, loose 78.4 - 1 ST 12" 8.4 95 WEATHERED SANDSTONE/ 2 SS 12'. 18 10.7 SIT.TSTONE — Gray/tan, moist, hard _ PA 4.0 75.9 5— SANDSTONE/SILTSTONE - Gray/tan, moist, very bard - 3 SS 12" 50 9.3 PA 10— 4 SS 10' 50/10 25.3 - 14.9 65.0 BOTTOM OF BORING -THE STRATIFICATION LINES REPRESENT THE APPROXIMATE BOUNDARY LINES ,ETVEEN SOIL AND ROCK TYPES: IN-SITU, THE TRANSITION MAY BE GRADUAL. 9624'2 WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS BORING STARTED V/Cr`^2_ WI- ? None W.D. ; None A.B. Empire Laboratories BORING COMPLETED 11-13-93 w< Incorporated RIG CME-Ss FOREMAN DL vit. Checked 22 days A.B. Division of Temc°n APPROVED .IOB I Y NRS 20935228 4. LOG OF BORING NO. 19 Page 1 of 1 "cUENT ARCHITECVENGLYEER 4"°"....."m-m". ..."..... ...n.—simmillSJacob Hirsch SITE PROJECT Severance, Colorado Proposed Hirsch Dairy SAMPLES TESTS o .-. J • x I-I o H DESCRIPTION U. > tx • DC z\ o w LLi o I I W 1�1l ii) I- O ZZ JW C 0, 0 E a 0 I-C co Ds On WWII W N > cc dJ O KO ZI-W 3IN Lw Approx.-Surface Elev.: 82.2 ft. - - +- -cc- inm -fl 00. =CALL U)O.O. A AA " 0.5 6" TOPSOIL 81.7 SC PA S"J AYFY SAND 1.5 Brown/tan, moist, loose 80.7 _ 1 ST 12" 7.8 94 WEATHERED SANDSTONE/ 2 SS 12". 25 9.3 S11 TSTONF — Gray/tan, moist, hard PA 4.5 77.7 _ 5- - = SANT)STONF/SII TSTONE Gray/tan, moist, very hard — 3 SS 12" 49 19.1 85 PA 10 4 sslo.s"so/1o.5 26.1 14.9 67.3 BOTTOM OF BORING I -HE STRATIFICATION LINES REPRESENT THE APPROXIMATE BOUNDARY LINES 9624112' JETNEEN SOIL AND ROCK TYPES: IN-SITU, THE TRANSITION MAY BE GRADUAL. v WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS BORING STARItn 11-13-93 "L None W.D. None A.B. Empire Laboratories BORING COMPLETED 11.13-93 WI. Incorporated RIG catE-5S FORE AN DL Divuioo of Temcoo APPROVED JOB I WI_ Checked 22 days AS. NRS 20935228 # LOG OF BORING NO. 20 Page 1 of 1 CLIENT ARCHITECT/ENGINEER Jacob Hirsch SITE PROJECT Severance, Colorado Proposed Hirsch Dairy SAMPLES TESTS 8 ..17: x Y ►- r- o cJ DESCRIPTION Y z zLL LU = HL I W zz It o F� M YLL O % Approx. Surface Elev.:82.1 ft. ' ►}' `� v�i� $ oa wtno 0.5 6" TOPSOIL 81.6 SC . 1 SS 12" 10 8.0 — CLAYEY SAND — /l 1.5 Tan, moist, medium dense 80.6 PA WEATHERED SANDSTONE/ 2 ST 12" 12.6 98 7520 SIT TSTONE — Gray/tan, moist, hard 3 SS l2" 27 18.8 4.5 77.6 _ PA 5— CANDSTONE/SILTSTONE Gray/tan, moist, very hard — 4 SS 12' 47 13.3 _ PA 10— 5 SS 10" 50/10 24.7 14.9 67.2 BOTTOM OF BORING HE STRATIFICATION LINES REPRESENT THE APPROXIMATE BOUNDARY LINES o dETWEEN SOIL AND ROCK TYPES: IN-SITU, THE TRANSITION MAY BE GRADUAL. jJls,'�j� 3 —IWATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS BORING START_ -_ __ WI- I None W.D. None A.B. Empire Laboratories BORING COMPLETED 11_13_93 W, Incorporated R G CME-55 FOREMAN DL - Checked 22 days A.B. Division of'remainAPPROVED IBS )OBI 20935228 • • LOG OF BORING NO. 21 Patelof 1 CLIENT ARCHITECT/ENGINEER Jacob Hirsch _ SITE PROJECT Severance, Colorado Proposed Hirsch Dairy SAMPLES TESTS 8 .+ 8 x > h 0 N DESCRIPTION z� 1LU z 22 cc pr S W a 1 N 1- 0 22 _Jo d 8 a. 8 1-20 M ni. On WWIL re m -Approx.-Surface Elev.: 82.4 ft. -o - o - - ---i----L •-cnc- $-- cc. ca~ia a�aa �,�� 0.5 6' TOPSOIL 81.9 -SC 1 SS 12" 6 14.7 !i/ SJAYFYSAND j Tan, moist, loo 2.0 n 80.4 PA _ WEATHERED SANDSTONE/ — SII.TSTONE 2 ST 12" 12.4 70 Gray/tan, moist, hard _ 4.5 77.9 3 SS 12" 47 12.6 _ 5 PA - SANPSTONFLSTI TSTONF Gray/tan, moist, very hard — — 4 SS 11" 50/11 12.7 PA 10- 5 SS 9" 50/9 22.8 14.8 67.6 BOTTOM OF BORING YE STRATIFICATION LINES REPRESENT THE APPROXIMATE BOUNDARY LINES ^^ y I cTN 96EEN SOIL AND ROCK TYPES: IN-SITU, THE TRANSITION MAY SE GRADUAL. 4O„ WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONSBORING STARTED 11-13-93 Wt $ NoneWI,. NoneA•B. Empire Laboratories BORING CO LErED 11-1393 WLIncorporatedRIG ch1E-SS EG�M N D 0.t Checked 22 days A.B. Division of Temcon APPROVED NR-S JOB I233 fp LOG OF BORING NO. 22 Page 1 of 1 ARCHITECT/ENGINEER A' amnia Jacob Hirsch - 'SITE PROJECT Severance, Colorado Proposed Hirsch Dairy SAMPLES TESTS - 8 - 0 M DESCRIPTION 2 Z\ g _ co cc = = fll W W g . 3 N OW n. LJ n. LJ I.3 c44 >li °CCU. CK j._ -.F.._a ._NJ� - ._ .Oa, 7Na cD Approx. Surface Elev.: 85.3 h. 0.5 6" TOPSOIL 84,8 ' SC 1 SS 12" 7 10.5 /lS I.AYFY SAND Tan, moist, loose _ PA 2.5 82.8 — WEATHERFD SANDSTONE/ SIJ.TSTONF _ 2 ST 12" 10.7 100 Gray/tan, moist, hard 4.5 80.8 3 SS 12" 38 10.5 - 5 _ PA - SANDSTONF/SILTSTONE — Gray/tan, moist, very hard — 4 SS 12" 49 13.4 PA 10- 5 SS 11"-50/11 19.3 15.0 70.3 IS BOTTOM OF BORING IE STRATIFICATION LINES REPRESENT THE APPROXIMATE BOUNDARY LINES SETYEEN SOIL AND ROCK TYPES: IN-SITU, THE TRANSITION MAY BE GRADUAL. 9624103 WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS BORING STARTED 11-13-93 �� g None WD ; None AS. Empire Laboratories BORING COMPLETED 11-13-93 ,yl, Incorporated RIG CM1�ss FOREMAN DL wl. Division of Temcoo APPROVED JOB Checked 22 days A.B. NRS 20935228 • LOG OF BORING NO. 23 Page 1 of 1 ,/ CLIENT ARCHITECT/ENGINEER Jacob Hirsch srTE PROJECT Severance, Colorado Proposed Hirsch Dairy SAMPLES TESTS _ 01 Z2 H DESCRIPTION z W w in o z z d V WO H YLL owLL L�3 Approx.Surface Elev.: 77.4 ft. - -0 0- z- t -tnm - L oa wran. 0.5 6" TOPSOIL 76.9 PA I.AVFY SAND _ Sc 1 ST 12" 13.4 91 3950 1.5 Tan, moist, loose 75.9 2 SS 12" 13 11.4 WEATHERED SANDSTONE/ — S[I TSTONE PA Gray/tan, moist, hard — 4.5 72.9 3 SS 12" 37 13.2 -p 5 PA $ANDSTONF/SILTSTONE — Gray/tan, moist, very hard — _ 4 SS 10" 50/10 17.4 10 PA 5 SS 12" 50 25.5 15.0 62.4 15 BOTTOM OF BORING THE STRATIFICATION LINES REPRESENT THE APPROXIMATE BOUNDARY LINES ,i BETWEEN SOIL AND ROCK TYPES: IN-SITU, THE TRANSITION NAY BE GRADUAL. 9621tf"3 WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS BORING STARTED 11-13-93 wt. None W.D. ; None A.B. Empire Laboratories BORING COMPETED 11-13.93 WL Incorporated RIG CME-55 FOREMAN DL wL Div ism of Ttnacon APPROVED JOB/ Checked 22 days A.B. Nits 20935228 A LOG OF BORING NO. 24 Pa e 1 of 1 ARCHITECT/ENGINEER 'Jacob Hirsch stTB PROJECT Severance, Colorado Proposed Hirsch Dairy SAMPLES TESTS -i • N r o I M W N DESCRIPTION > Z W Z Hr 2 to re W 9 W VG Q 1U) I- O 22 d w a. GU i-O H }LL LI CC Ls. 0 Approx. Surface Elev.: 72.8 ft. 9__ _ _ 1}-.. C.—85 01- Z - -C a =H a. 0.5 6" TOPSOIL 72.3 _ 1 SS 12" 6 16.9 CI AYEY SAND — Tan, moist, loose SC PA 7„ 3.0 69.8 2 ST 12" 16.0 96 1890 WFATHEREDSANDSTONE/ - SILTSTONE 5 3 SS l2" 16 18.5 Gray/tan, moist, hard _ PA —" 7.5 65.3 SANDSTONF/SII TSTONE 4 SS 12" 50 24.7 • Gray/tan, moist, very hard — 10 PA 14.5 58.3 5 SS 6' 50/6 25.6 BOTTOM OF BORING THE STRATIFICATION LINES REPRESENT THE APPROXIMATE BOUNDARY LINES 96241:3 BETWEEN SOIL AND ROCK TYPES: IN-SITU, THE TRANSITION MAY BE GRADUAL. WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS BORAIG STARTED 11-13-Y3 12.6 W.D. ; 10.0 D.C.I. Empire Laboratories BORING COMPLETED 11.13-93 WL Incorporated RIG CME-SS FOREMAN DL ♦WL Checked 22 days A.B. Dir sioo of Temcoo APPROVED NgS JOB I 20935228 i LOG OF BORING NO. 25 Page 1 of 1 • CLIENT ARCHITECT/ENGINEER Jacob Hirsch SITE PROJECT Severance, Colorado Proposed Hirsch Dairy SAMPLES TESTS .. Sr i- I- o UJ CD Z2 ts DESCRIPTION CA m z z'. cc Z HI- pS, Z w 13W 1- O zz d fUJ d L8 1-O M >4. OW a. IX CD - Approx.-Surface Elev.:62.3 R. o -m- - I-- s -mm -r ca 700- " 0.5 6' TOPSOIL 61.8 1 SS 12" 4 16.2 T'T,AYFY SAND — Tan, moist, loose PA SC 2 ST 12" 19.7 102 1750 — 3 SS 12" 5 19.9 / 4.5 57.8 — PA 5— WEATHERED SANDSTONE/ - - SIT TSTONF — Gray/tan, moist, hard — 4 ST 6" 22.4 93 5 SS 12" 42 23.0 8.5 53.8 I - PA _- SANT)STONFLSII TSTONE — ` Gray/tan, moist, very hard 10— — 6 SS 10' 50/10 20.0 — 14.9 47.4 — BOTTOM OF BORING !E STRATIFICATION LINES REPRESENT THE APPROXIMATE BOUNDARY LINES 962123 .ETNEEN SOIL AND ROCK TYPES: IN-SITU, THE TRANSITION MAY BE GRADUAL. WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS BORING STARTED 11-13-93 VII- 12.0 W.D. T; 9.0 A.B. Empire Laboratories BORLNG COMPLETED 11-13-93 w< Incorporated RIG C�tE-55 FOREMAN DL wi. Checked 22 days A.B. Division of Temcoe APPROVED JOB f NRS 20935228 • SWELL - CONSOLIDATION TEST PRO. 2©835228 .760 BORING NO. : 14 740 DEPTH: 3 .0 DRY DENSITY: 39 .8 PCF ▪700 MOISTURE: 9.2 'c .660 O o .sea Hi o .590 .540 .500 - .460 _ .420 0. 1 8. 25 0.5 1. 0 5 10 RPPLIED PRESSURE - TSF 8 .0 X 4 .0 ; 0 .0 C I 6 -4 .0 'WATER ADDED $ 1 -12 .0 o ! -16 .0 - - 0. 1 0.25 0. 5 1 . 0 5 10 APPLIED PRESSURE - TSF 962493 EMPIRE LABORATORIES INC . . i DIRECT SHEAR TEST CLIENT: JACOB HIRSCH PROJECT: HIRSCH DAIRY BORING NO . : 27 DEPTH : 0. 5' — 4 . 0 ' 'Sample Normal Shear I Moist I Dry No . Stress Stress Content Density (TSF) ( TSF ) (:) ( PCF) 1 . 25 . 20 18.4 1OE . 5 2 . 50 . 43 19. 8 107 . 2 3 1 . 00 . 69 19.2 106 . 4 TAN 0 = 0 . 48 0 = 25 . 6° C = 0 . 17 TSF . t=. 1 1 L Ls. N N .75 I— .75 IV1 re------------ (A N Ill •5 N 5 i t. • -- 4J ta M W 0L L A •25 y .25 OJ t z m N 0 . 1 .2 . 3 .4 0 .25 .5 .75 t Shear Displacement ( in) Normal Load TSF aS 24,2,3 EMPIRE LABORATORIES INC . 1 i PERMEABILITY PROTECT: TACOS HIRSCH HIRSCH DAIRY SAMPLE LOCATION : COMP .SAMPLE TB .-NO . 27 6 0. 5'-4 . 0' TEST PROCEDURE: FALLING, HEAD METHOD DENSITY: 106. 5 PCF © 94 . 9 STANDARD PROCTOR PERMEABILITY : . 025 FT/YR = . 025 X 10 - G CM-'SEC 20 ^ 16 • N N _ - 12 ciria H J 8 H W , _ . , W CI- 4 , _ 0 20 40 60 80 100 TIME ( Hours) EMPIRE LAEORATORIES INC . 96243 F PERMERBILITY PROJECT: JACOB HIRSCH HIRSCH DAIRY SAMPLE LOCATION : COMP SAMPLE TB NO. 27 S 5 . 0'-10. 0' TEST PROCEDURE : FALLING HERD METHOD DENSITY: 103 . 0 PCF @ 94 . 9 % STANDARD PROCTOR PERMEABILITY : . 086 FT/YR • .033 X 10 _ p CM/SEC 20 ^ 16 ro y . . ♦ N 12 Q E LJ 4 0 0 20 40 60 60 1gg0 TIME ( Hours ) EMPIRE LABORATORIES INC . 962403 PERMEABILITY PROJECT : JACOB HIRSCH -- HIRSCH DAIRY SAMPLE LOCATION: BORING *29 A 3.0 ' TEST PROCEDURE : FALLING HEAD METHOD DENSITY : 106 . 4 PCF _ PERMEABILITY : . 31 FT/YR = .30 X 10 CM/SEC 10 ., g b 0 • y 6 L - _ _ H 4 , i2 _ 0 0 40 30 120 160 200 TIME (Hours ) EMPIRE LABORATQRI ES INC . 962a9:11. NN NN tri N N N + A a r N .. r N pr N N tz N N NN NN v• s h r N N ` N f g !V h a. P$ I x 4o O 0 I en 4 � 14 ao O 4 N pwr CA b K r 5 i�3 � N I S r� 6 1r1 o 3 y" n No• .^. K 8 y _ Y IU E N }Cit - Y a. Its age V• % I tea. a ao a pr, en C & O _ ai _ Y w a enY r ,O � O, O ,n Pt f O. `O N r h -' n • O, c-:o be m n a, — .6 ,o H m ea a Li r ei r n a r r 2 r� r O: Y1 as Vf N • w m ao m ... I r a r 1 r ao : 4 .. Y r n m �+ r- r n r ,A n 1r ao 4 r', m * N ae ^ n n N n . 96241c 3 aa ▪ • m N r CO I 0e- 1 = S N N NN 0 N N oa g N eN oo_ N 'C iS Ho O e5n N .N. N N g � V1 N f p r. m en v1 ti 1 1 `x N L r go w k en h U g x O - D r. W — O 2 a oe 4-I K N y Y u • i n N m cc n a. = Y Eba d z.te g � a o a jeaJ 3g bit N eT en A O O PI co. en en ma: e+ en en ao en .. .. O cc O .N��... eA, coOe eT N N ^ a O. .fir O. N ^ eT Q eo . y •.• Y r Oe ≤ t en e? en Ii?2 eea : N en m e a �e Y., en en 4 ne 4 eei en 1 ee --4 — N e; y N r- r, E — 962493 eo O Z � b r- cc er NIIU `. LOG OF BORING NO. 26 Page lofl -CLSEN'C ARCHITECT/ENGINEER Jacob Hirsch SITE PROJECT Severance, Colorado Proposed Hirsch Dairy SAMPLES TESTS I ZO I- 0 N DESCRIPTION m z\ z i Ica 5 § LA IT W OW z I- N . LI d0 H )-U Zn cS -Approx.Surface-Elev.: 58.3ft. . -a _ .L_. _- _ 1--_ . IA _ _t _.ca Id Erna 0.5 6" TOPSOIL 57.8 1 SS 12" 5 19.1 ri AYFY SAND SC PA -Tan, moist, loose - - 2 ST 12" 22.0 96 1230 S - 3 SS 12" 12 26.1 6.0 52.3 - PA WFATHFRFDSANDSTONE! I - SIT ?STONE — Gray/tan, moist, hard 4 SS IT 48 26.4 9.5 48.8 _ PA SANDSTONF/SILTSTONE U 10— Gray/tan, moist, very hard 5 9' 50/9 28.4 14.8 43.5 — BOTTOM OF BORING THE STRATIFICATIDN LINES REPRESENT THE APPROXIMATE BOUNDARY LINES 96242 BETWEEN SOIL AND ROCK TYPES: IN-SITU, THE TRANSITION MAY BE GRADUAL. _ WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS BORING STARTED 11-13-93 Arl- 10.0 W.D.BSI7.0 ON A.B. Empire Laboratories BORING COMPLETED 11-13-93 wL Incorporated RIG CISIE-55 JOB R11 FOREMAN 11-13-93 wt. Division of Torment APPROVED JOB/ Checked 22 days A.B. IN-Rs 20935228 4 LOG OF BORING NO. 27 Page 1 of 1 /CLIENT ARCHITECT/ENGPIEER Jacob Hirsch SITE PROJECT Severance, Colorado Proposed Hirsch Dairy . r- SAMPLES - TESTS in J t r } u. W N W 0 M N DESCRIPTION " yw Z\ CrZ J H -E\ IT. (0 W. CJ 1-CJ H }u. ZrrLL H-E\ C a } W d D:O. HO. H-MJ La -Approx.Surface Elev.: 60.1 ft. +- o lot- g -CO. ma ¢JJ " 0.5 6" TOPSOIL 59.6 1 SS 12" 4 17.0 i . SANDY LEAN CLAY — Tan, moist, medium• —CL PA 25/15/10 • !/ — 2 ST 12' 22.5 96 1370 4.5 • 55.6 — 3 SS 12" 5 17.7 5 PA 30/19/11 WEATHERED SANDSTONE/ _ SIT TSTONE — Gray/tan, moist, bard — 1 _ 8.5 ; 51.6 — 4 ST 3" 20.5 5 SS 12" 47 28.7 10— S ANT)STONFJSIT.TSTONE PA Gray/tan, moist, very hard - - 6 SS 11" 50/11 28.1 — 14.9 45.2 BOTTOM OF BORING a THE STRATIFICATION LINES REPRESENT THE APPROXIMATE BOUNDARY LINES n BETWEEN SOIL AND ROCK TYPES: IN-SITU, THE TRANSITION MAY BE GRADUAL. JVICJ`JV��3 WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS BORING STARTED 11-13-93 WI- 12.1 W.D. ; 8.3 A.B. Empire Laboratories BORING COMPLETED 11-13-93 WL Incorporated RIG CME-55 FORF�tArr DL Division of Tenacoo APPROVED JOB/ Checked 22 days A.B. MIS 20935228 LOG OF BORING NO. 28 Page 1 or 1 CST ARCHITECT/ENGINEER Jacob Finch VIE PROJECT Severance, Colorado Proposed Hirsch Dairy SAMPLES TESTS o i� I— r o J u{ DESCRIPTION z Z\ 5 z IZ-IF C. F~ ((0� W W O 3 N OW W Ul } Biel .J O Dyed`) ZI-CCD U. Approx. Surface Eta.: 60.4 ft. o it. ill I o a o to O. 0.5 6" TOPSOIL 59.9 _ 1 SS 12' 5 15.7 7%% _ PA CANDY I FAN CLAY — Tan/buff, moist, soft to medium —CL 2 ST 12" 17.4 106 _ 3 SS 12" 2 29.5 5 _ PA • 7.5 52.9 _ 4 ST 12" 26.4 97 WEATHERED SANDSTONE/ 5 SS 12" 34 26.0 SIT TSTONF — Gray/tan, moist, hard PA 10.0. 50.4 IO SANDSTONF/SILTSTONE — _. Gray/tan, moist, very hard t. 6 SS 9" 50/9 28.3 — 14.8 45.6 BOTTOM OF BORING -HE STRATIFICATION LINES REPRESENT THE APPROXIMATE BOUNDARY LINES 962493 cTWEEN SOIL AND ROCK TYPES: IN-SITU, THE TRANSITION MAY BE GRADUAL. WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS BORING STARTED 11-13-93 • g 12.0 W.D. 5.8 WC.l. Empire Laboratories BORING COMPLETED 11-13-93 W, Incorporated we c��-55 FOREMAN DL Division or Tcmcoo APPROVED JOB I 2 i Checked 22 days A.B. NRS 09352_8 ' 44 J/ LOG OF BORING NO. 29 • page 1 of i CLIENT ARCHITECTIFIGNEER Jacob Hirsch SITE PROJECT Severance, Colorado Proposed Hirsch Dairy SAMPLES TESTS _ ., 8 I- o J H DESCRIPTION )- z.. CO VG w o. _ I to w 3, I CO H O 22 CHJ n_ H CO W O 3 in O W W H O- S 0. U D_ U HO H YW UMW HE\ W S } W aJ g gO RA! HHJ CD ApproLSur[ace Elev.: 62.Ott. L6' ..S_ _ _.H. .m __mm.. _ a. 7Na ¢JJ • 0.5 6" TOPSOIL 61.5 — 1 SS 12" 5 16.9 SIT TY SAND SM PA 23/19/4 Tan/brown, moist, loose / 4J7 57.8 2 ST 12" 22.1 99 1130 5 3 SS 12" 16 22.5 . WEATHERED SANDSTONE/ _ SIT TSTONF PA Gray/tats, moist, hard — — 8.0 54.0 4 SS 12" 50 26.8 — PA a ,SANDSTONE/SILTSTONE 10— Gray/tan, moist, very hard 5 SS 11" 50/11 27.8 T — . 14.9 47.1 , BOTTOM OF BORING THE STRATIFICATION LINES REPRESENT THE APPROXIMATE BOUNDARY LINES BETWEEN SOIL AND ROCK TYPES: IN-SITU, THE TRANSITION MAY BE GRADUAL. 6.7).:32.(n3<- WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS BORING STARTED 11-13-Y.7 WI- g 11.7 W.D. 7.3 w.c.l. Empire Laboratories BORING COMPLETED 11-13-93 ,� Incorporated RIG c`>E-55 FOREMAN DL Division or Tcmcoo APPROVED JOBS 2 K W'I- Checked 22 days A.B. NRS 093_2_8 SUMMARY OF PERCOLATION TEST RESULTS a Hole No. Depth to Depth to Percolation Rate Bedrock (ft) Groundwater (ft) (Time required for water to fall one (1) inch in Min.) 1 — — 27 2 8.5 — 23 3 — — 20 4 — — 23 5 7.5 — 20 6 — — 20 7 -- — 23 8 — — 27 9 — — 32 10 — — 23 11 — — 20 12 — — 20 9624 ' ' 1 a ° ~ = e 2 Is ; ( ( k & k k ■ ■ 2 k k ■ ) s a, QI ) E VXU 1 $ 0 u F.2 o - En 2 - 2 4• .5 2 ,• = bt . „ . % -a , w . - o .2..4 2" C4 2a , § . kkfo Cl) et — � , § f /IL . iA[ § 2 ; IA- - 6 la ICS In k * - -N -N N o 0N. 6 mCP. , en •-• - N _ _ o ® - ' ; J ■ } •\ J 2 § } •\ 7 2 ; } / ( 4 ) ) 964403 I {i ea . en e. ` N C N N `ppe N N N � N N N oe N N N gg m gj N Vf f h - f Vf O h f 0. n > t,`' ST O lb c.) w e C6 b K Ey � se C/1 r1 S rat - p" ' wee AA.! u_ S uy co a cn IDpp oo OO O T N R N U O a a a * Lpjj O in e- VO N e` 0 ♦ O O -I O -1 Y ♦ O N e`. Vf P: .'J ^ ca f N CI 0 0 N N1 O N 'C 'G IA N 1:44 O m 0 N N NNN !V it.e4 N N N X a b O h V1 in '^• m• h n r ,r- 0. r' h T ^' Af Y e` 0° it. .7 ',re r et a Y r 0 `. . h a ^ "' N en r- � = ri e en . a 96 g2491 pO Z N N N N 9 • s = — N N = N = = i . o , V▪ 3 9, v, N ea„, '^ "A 9i m x x a U H 0 U 0. rig o �0 0 of C C v — Ca b yu K N — •O A C o ..U, a r F My 7 O 0 N a EDQ r o en el 0. -1 O N. ; a N y Y u .. 'i. N CC a u u �� eg V V z U— — 0 U „tic + o v, v _ A r v, .r o n a -1' v, cc! m '^ K m in ^ P ,O ,C 00 ,D N N •O 1i O N N N N N N N N N 1 . a C a ei CO tw f�V N U N • DRILLING AND EXPLORATION DRILLING & SAMPLING SYMBOLS: SS : Split Spoon - 14S' 1.0., 2" 0.D., unless otherwise noted PS : Piston Sample T :Thin-Walled Tube - 2" O.D., unless otherwise noted WS : Wash Sample R : Ring Barrel Sampler - 2.42" I.D., 3' 0.0. unless otherwise noted. PA : Power Auger FT : Fish Tail Bit HA : Hand Auger RB : Rock Bit DB : Diamond Bit a 4", N, B BS : Bulk Sample AS : Auger Sample PM : Pressure Meter HS : Hollow Stem Auger DC : Dutch Cone WB : Wash Bore Penetration Test: Blows per foot of a 140 pound hammer falling 30 inches on a 2-inch 0.0. split spoon, except where noted. WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENT SYMBOLS: WL : Water Level WS : While Sampling WCI : Wet Cave in WD : While Drilling DCI : Dry Cave in BCR : Before Casing Removal AB : After Boring ACR : After Casting Removal Water levels indicated on the boring fogs are the levels measured in the borings at the time indicated. In pervious soils, the indicated levels may reflect the location of groundwater. In low permeability soils, the accurate determination of groundwater levels is not possible with only short term observations. DESCRIPTIVE SOIL CLASSIFICATION PHYSICAL PROPERTIES OF BEDROCK Soil Classification is based on the Unified Soil Classification DEGREE OF WEATHERING: system and the ASTM Designations D-2487 and D-2488. Coarse Grained Soils have more than 50% of their dry Slight Slight decomposition of parent material on weight retained on a #200 sieve; they are described as: joints. May be color change. boulders, cobbles, gravel or sand. Fine Grained Soils have less than 50%of their dry weight retained on a#200 sieve; Moderate Some decomposition and color change y are described as: clays, if they are plastic, and silts if throughout. ...ey are slightly plastic or non-plastic. Major constituents may be added as modifiers and minor constituents may be High Rock highly decomposed, may be extremely added according to the relative proportions based on grain broken. size. In addition to gradation, coarse grained soils are defined on the basis of their relative in-place density and HARDNESS AND DEGREE OF CEMENTATION: fine grained soils on the basis of their consistency. Limestone and Dolomite: Example: Lean clay with sand, trace gravel, stiff (CU; silty Hard Difficult to scratch with knife. sand, trace gravel, medium dense ISM). Moderately Can be scratched easily with knife, CONSISTENCY OF FINE-GRAINED SOILS Hard Cannot be scratched with fingernail. Unconfined Compressive Soft Can be scratched with fingernail. Strength, Ou, pat Consistency Shale, Siltstone and Claystone: < 500 Very Soft Hard Can be scratched easily with knife, cannot 500 - 1,000 Soft be scratched with fingernail. 1,001 - 2,000 Medium 2,001 - 4,000 Stiff Moderately Can be scratched with fingernail. 4,001 - 8,000 Very Stiff Hard 8,001 - 16,000 Very Hard Soft Can be easily dented but not molded with RELATIVE DENSITY OF COARSE-GRAINED SOILS: fingers. N-Blows/ft Relative Density 0-3 Very Loose Sandstone and Conolomerete: 4-9 Loose Well Capable of scratching a knife blade. 10-29 Medium Dense Cemented 30-49 Dense 50.80 Very Dense Cemented Can be scratched with knife. 80 + Extremely Dense Poorly Can be broken apart easel -- --- Cemented 362403 Empire Laboratories, Inc. I A Division of The Terracon Companies, Inc. / UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM Sol Classification Criteria for Assigning Group Symbols and Group Names Using Laboratory Tests Group a Symbol Group Name Coarse-Grained Gravels more than Clean Gravels Less Cu≥4 and 1 ≤Ce≤3' GW Well-graded graverSoils more than 50%of coarse than 5% fines 50%retained on fraction retained on No. 200 sieve No.4 sieve Cu < 4 and/or 1 > Cc > 3' GP Poorly graded grave( Gravels with Fines c Fines classify as ML or MH GM Silty gravel.G.H more t more than 12%lines Fines classify as CL or CH GC Clayey grave(°" Sands 50%or more Clean Sands Lass Cu≥6 and 1 ≤Cc<3' 'SW Well-graded sand' of coarse fraction than 5% fines' passes No. 4 sieve Cu < a and/or 1 > Cc > 3' SP Poorly graded sand' Sands with Fines Fines classify as ML or MH SM Silty sand'-'' more than 12%fines° • Fines Classify as CL or CH SC Clayey sand°"' Fine-Grained Soils Silts and Clays inorganic PI > 7 end plots on or above 'A lined CL Lean clay"[" 50% or more Liquid limit less passes the than 50 PI < 4 or plots below 'A' line ML Silt's." No. 200 sieve " organic Liquid limit •oven dried Organic clays` + < 0.75 OL Liquid limit-not dried Organic silt'1Y° Silts and Clays inorganic PI plots on or above 'A°line CH Fat clay«" Liquid limit 50 or more PI lots below 'A' line MN Elastic Silt's" organic Liquid limit -oven dried Organic clay's"). < 0.75 OH Liquid limit •not dried Organic silt.."•° "-hly organic soils Primarily organic matter,dark in color, and organic odor PT Peat .-.eased on the material passing the 3-in. 4f soil contains 15 to 29% plus No. 200, add (75-mml sieve ,'c -o /D Cc Olds 'with sand' or'with gravel', whichever is 'If field sample contained cobbles or 10 1° D„ Z Da predominant. boulders, or both, add 'with cobbles or 4f soil contains>30% plus No. 200 boulders, or both' to group name. predominantly sand, add 'sandy' to group `Gravels with 5 to 12%fines require dual 'If soil contains≥15% sand, add 'with name. symbols: sand' to group name. "If soil contains>30% plus No. 200, GW-GM well-graded gravel with silt °If fines classify as CL-ML. use dual symbol predominantly gravel, add 'gravelly' to group GW-GC well-graded gravel with clay GC-GM, or SC-SM. name. GP-GM poorly graded gravel with silt "If fines are organic, add 'with organic fines' "PI>4 and plots on or above 'A' line. GP-CC poody faded gravel with clay to group name. °Pl < 4 or plots below 'A' line. °Sands with 5 to 12%fines require dual 7f soil contains 15%gravel, add 'with 'PI plots on or above 'A' line. • symbols: gravel' to group name. °PI plots below'A' lino. SW-SM well-graded sand with silt If Atterbarg limits plot in shaded area, soil is SWSC well-graded sand with clay a CL-ML, silty clay. SP-SM poorly graded sand with silt SP-SC poorly graded sand with clay of i I I for satil llr,, A._4.F�dal ,7,Iw M rw• �'. ICI - X11 s>,'j' 05,35 .' wnsau w- n .1. • Off- a ' N oa a, C� MH ON OH 'e [, MLOROL ° / I i I m [ 9524"'3 LIQUID UNIT (IL) Empire Laboratories, Inc. I A Division of The Terracon Companies, Inc. ROCK CLASSIFICATION (Based on ASTM C-294) Sedimentary Rocks Sedimentary rocks are stratified materials laid down by water or wind. The sediments may be composed of particles of pre-existing rocks derived by mechanical weathering, evaporation or by chemical or organic origin. The sediments are usually indurated by cementation or compaction. Cheri Very fine-grained siliceous rock composed of micro-crystalline or crypto- crystalline quartz, chalcedony or opal. Cheri is various colored, porous to dense, hard and has a conchoidal to splintery fracture. Claystone Fine-grained rock composed of or derived by erosion of silts and clays or any rock containing clay. Soft massive; gray, black, brown, reddish or green and may contain carbonate minerals. Conglomerate Rock consisting of a considerable amount of rounded gravel, sand and cobbles with or without interstitial or cementing material. The cementing or interstitial material may be quartz, opal, calcite, dolomite, clay, iron oxides or other materials. Dolomite A fine-grained carbonate rock consisting of the mineral dolomite [CaMg (CO3)21. May contain noncarbonate impurities such as quartz, chert, clay minerals, organic matter, gypsum and sulfides. Reacts with hydrochloric acid (HCL). Limestone A fine-grained carbonate rock consisting of the mineral calcite (CaCo3). May contain noncarbonate impurities such as quartz, chert, clay minerals, organic matter, gypsum and sulfides. Reacts with hydrochloric acid (HCL). Sandstone Rock consisting of particles of sand with or without interstitial and cementing materials. The cementing or interstitial material may be quartz, opal, calcite, dolomite, clay, iron oxides or other material. Shale Fine-grained rock composed of, or derived by erosion of silts and clays or any rock containing clay. Shale is hard, platy, or fissile may be gray, black, reddish or green and may contain some carbonate minerals (calcareous shale). Siltstone Fine grained rock composed of, or derived by erosion of silts or rock containing silt. Siltstones consist predominantly of silt sized particles (0.0625 to 0.002 mm in diameter) and are intermediate rocks between claystones and sandstones, may be gray, black, brown, reddish or green and may contain carbonate minerals. 9624^3 Empire Laboratories, Inc. A Division of The Terracon Companies, Inc. LABORATORY TESTS SIGNIFICANCE AND PURPOSE TEST SIGNIFICANCE PURPOSE _ California Used to evaluate the potential strength of subgrade soil, subbase, Pavement Bearing and base course material, including recycled materials for use in Thickness Ratio road and airfield pavements. Design Conso/idadon Used to develop an estimate of both the rate and amount of both Foundation differential and total settlement of a structure. Design Direct Used to determine the consolidated drained shear strength of soil Bearing Capacity, Shear or rock. -Foundation Design & Slope Stability Dry Used to determine the in-place density of natural, inorganic, fine- Index Property Density grained soils. Soil Behavior Expansion Used to measure the expansive potential of fine-grained soil and to Foundation & Slab provide a basis for swell potential classification. Design Gradation Used for the quantitative determination of the distribution of Soil particle sizes in soil. Classification Liquid& Used as an integral part of engineering classification systems to Soil Plastic Limit characterize the fine-grained fraction of soils, and to specify the Classification Plasticity Index fine-grained fraction of construction materials. Oxidadon- Used to determine the tendency of the soil to donate or accept Corrosion Reduction electrons through a change of the oxidation state within the soil. Potential Potential Permeability Used to determine the capacity of soil or rock to conduct a liquid Groundwater or gas. Flow Analysis PH Used to determine the degree of acidity or alkalinity of a soil. Corrosion Potential Resistivity Used to indicate the relative ability of a soil medium to carry Corrosion electrical currents. Potential Used to evaluate the potential strength of subgrade soil, subbase, Pavement R-Value and base course material, including recycled materials for use in Thickness road and airfield pavements. Design Soluble Used to determine the quantitative amount of soluble sulfates Corrosion Sulphate within a soil mass. Potential Sulfide Content Used to determine the quantitative amounts of sulfides within a Corrosion soil mass. Potential Unconfined To obtain the approximate compressive strength of soils that Bearing Capacity Compression possess sufficient cohesion to permit testing in the unconfined Analysis for state. Foundations Water Used to determine the quantitative amount of water in a soil mass. Index Property Content Soil Behavior 9624nfl Empire Laboratories, Inc. I A Division of The Terracon Companies, Inc. - ' REPORT TERMINOLOGY (Based on ASTM D653) Allowable Sol The recommended maximum contact stress developed at the interface of the Bearing Capacity foundation element and the supporting material. Alluvium Soil, the constituents of which have been transported in suspension by flowing water and subsequently deposited by sedimentation. Aggregate Base A layer of specified material placed on a subgrade or subbase usually beneath Course slabs or pavements. Sackfl A specified material placed and compacted in a confined area. Bedrock A natural aggregate of mineral grains connected by strong and permanent cohesive forces. Usually requires drilling, wedging, blasting or other methods of extraordinary force for excavation. Bench A horizontal surface in a sloped deposit. Caisson (Drilled pier A concrete foundation element cast in a circular excavation which may have an or Shaft) enlarged base. Sometimes referred to as a cast-in-place pier or drilled shaft. Coefficient of A constant proportionality factor relating normal stress and the corresponding Friction shear stress at which sliding starts between the two surfaces. Colluvium Soil, the constituents of which have been deposited chiefly by gravity such as at the foot of a slope or cliff. Compaction The densification of a soil by means of mechanical manipulation. Concrete Slab-on- A concrete surface layer cast directly upon a base, subbase or subgrade, and Grade typically used as a floor system. Differential Unequal settlement or heave between, or within foundation elements of a Movement structure. Earth Pressure The pressure or force exerted by soil on any boundary such as a foundation wall. ESAL Equivalent Single Axle Load, a criteria used to convert traffic to a uniform standard, (18,000 pound axle loads). Engineered Fill Specified material placed and compacted to specified density and/or moisture conditions under observations of a representative of a geotechnical engineer. Equivalent Fluid A hypothetical fluid having a unit weight such that it will produce a pressure against a lateral support presumed to be equivalent to that produced by the actual soil. This simplified approach is valid only when deformation conditions are such that the pressure increases linearly with depth and the wall friction is neglected. Existing Fill(or Materials deposited through the action of man prior to exploration of the site. man-made fill) Existing Grade The ground surface at the time of field exploration. 3624.?3 Empire Laboratories, Inc. I A Division of The Terracon Companies, Inc. REPORT TERMINOLOGY (Based on ASTM D653) Expansive Potential The potential of a soil to expand (increase in volume) due to absorption of moisture. Finished Grade The final grade created as a part of the project. Footing A portion of the foundation of a structure that transmits loads directly to the soil. Foundation The lower part of a structure that transmits the loads to the soil or bedrock. Frost Depth The depth of which the ground becomes frozen during the winter season. Grade Beam A foundation element or wall, typically constructed of reinforced concrete, used to span between other foundation elements such as drilled piers. Groundwater Subsurface water found in the zone of saturation of soils, or within fractures in bedrock. Heave Upward movement. Lithologic The characteristics which describe the composition and texture of soil and rock by observation. Native Grade The naturally occuring ground surface. Native Soil Naturally occurring on-site soil, sometimes referred to as natural soil. Optimum Moisture The water content at which a soil can be compacted to a maximum dry unit Content weight by a given compactive effort. • Perched Water Groundwater, usually of limited area maintained above a normal water elevation by the presence of an intervening relatively impervious continuing stratum. Scarify To mechanically loosen soil or break down existing soil structure. Settlement Downward movement. Skin Friction (Side The frictional resistance developed between soil and an element of structure •Shear) such as a drilled pier or shaft. Soil(earth) Sediments or other unconsolidated accumulations of solid particles produced by the physical and chemical disintegration of rocks, and which may or may not contain organic matter. Strain The change in length per unit of length in a given direction. Stress The force per unit area acting within a soil mass. Strip To remove from present location. Subbase A layer of specified material in a pavement system between the subgrade and base course. Subgrade The soil prepared and compacted to support a structure, slab or pavement system. 9624n3 Empire Laboratories, Inc. I A Division of The Terracon Companies, Inc. CONSOLIDATION TEST FRO. 20935228 .71e BORING NO. : 16 ▪7by DEPTH: 3 .0 DRY DENSITY: 93 . 1 PCF ▪6:30 MOISTURE: 11 .9 % .680 O 2 .670 • .660 .650 .640 .630 .620 0. 1 0. 25 0. 5 1 .0 5 10 APPLIED PRESSURE - TSF 4 .e " 2 .0 1 1 w...4 > -4 .0 • M i 1 -6 .0 O . ✓ ; . -8 .0 0. 1 0.25 0. 5 1 .0 5 10 APPLIED PRESSURE - TSF 962413 EMPIRE LABORATORIES INC . _ - . ., re . CONSOLIDATION TEST PRO. 20935226 1 .080 BORING NO. : 19 1 .040 DEPTH: 1 .0 DRY DENSITY: 87 .5 PCF MOISTURE: 9.7 % 1 .000 .960 O H .920 - G u.0 Ca........ T.N .840 .800 .760 - .720 0. 1 0. 25 0. 5 1 .0 5 10 APPLIED PRESSURE - TSF -16 .0 yr-a J X 8 .0 • I i I { 6 -8 .0 H H E -16 .0 ! - Z -24 .0 0 U -32 .0 - 0. 1 0.25 0.5 1 . 0 5 10 APPLIED PRESSURE - TSF 962491 EMPIRE LABORATORIES INC . Hello