HomeMy WebLinkAbout962406.tiff mEmoRAnDum
in'De Weld County Board of County Commission December 12, 1996
To
COLORADO Trevor Jiricek, Health Departmen`' �)
From
Subject: Hirsch Dairy Update
We received a copy of the attached letter, dated December 2, 1996, on December 11, 1996. The
letter is a notice of"significant noncompliance" addressed to Mr. Jacob Hirsch from the
Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment. The letter cites Mr. Hirsch for
operating a Concentrated Animal Feeding Operation without adequate run-off and process
wastewater containment facilities and includes information I recall being presented by Mr.
Hellerich at the hearing. In addition, the letter requires that action be taken to mitigate the
violation. This includes re-lining the retention pond or installing a groundwater monitoring
system. I think it is important to note that the State is requesting a plan of correction and not
requiring that the facility shutdown
It should be noted that this item of"significant noncompliance" is addressed in the proposed
U.S.R. as condition of approval #2. This condition requires that the facility demonstrate that the
retention facility be constructed with a lining material which does not allow seepage in excess of
the allowed rate.
Our Division has also conducted a preliminary review of the facility's Manure and Wastewater
Plan, dated November 13, 1996. We have numerous concerns and comments regarding the plan.
However, we believe that all of our concerns can be addressed and the plan amended so that the
facility can comply with the Confined Animal Feeding Operation Regulation ("CAFO
Regulations").
Our concerns and comments regarding the plan are as follows:
1) Page 3, Section 1.3, estimates the distance between the pond bottom and the surface of
groundwater. The estimate was made assuming that "the elevation of the corn field to the
north of the pond is approximately the same as the original surface elevation before the
pond was constructed." The elevation can vary. Due to the depth to groundwater (5.8 to
9 feet below existing grade) observed in borings 25 through 29 further data is required to
demonstrate that there is adequate separation between the pond and the groundwater
surface.
2) Page 3, Section 2.1, discusses grading and drainage on the site. However, a detailed
drainage map is not provided. A detailed drainage map indicating elevations, flow
patterns, surface grades, conveyance structure, must be provided.
3) Page 4, Section 2.1, discusses the drainage from the east side of the site. It states that
962406
Weld County Board of County Commissioners
Hirsch Dairy
December 12, 1996
Page 2
water will be directed through a pipe across the irrigation canal to the retention basin.
The permeability of conveyance structures is not specified in the CAFO Regulations,
however, we would recommend that it does not exceed 1 X 10-6 cm/sec. In addition, the
facility may need to enter into an agreement with the ditch company prior to crossing the
ditch.
4) Page 5, Section 2.3, discusses manure production at the site. The plan estimates that cow
manure is 80 % moisture (based on conversations with Dr. Jerry Olsen, D.V.M.) and
based on this assumption that 5,580 tons of dry manure per year will be produced. The
plan states that this is in general accordance with Appendix E of the CAFO regulations.
However, the CAFO regulations state that cow manure is 48 %moisture. This calculates
to a total dry manure production of 14,508 tons per year. The amount of manure
production is considerably different depending upon the method used. The facility
should provide a specific source or study which supports Dr. Olsen's figures. In lieu of
this, the facility must amend the plan to address the disposal practices and procedures for
the additional manure.
In addition, this section estimates that waste water per cow generated at the site. Part of
the facility's assumption is based on a 7.44 gallon/day per cow loss due to evaporation.
The facility should provide justification as the process in determining this loss to
evaporation and subsequent sizing of the retention pond.
5) Page 6 and 7, Section 2.4, discusses the existing retention basin and its storage
capabilities. The facility estimated that it required a 180-day process-water storage
volume of 7,761,600 gallons, but since evaporation will occur only 1\2 of the 180-day
volume is used. The facility cut the storage volume in half. However, the purpose of the
regulations is to store process water over the winter months in which significantly less
evaporation would occur. The 50%reduction in required storage should be reviewed.
Based on estimated retention capacity, the facility can have approximately 1,774 cows
on-site before it is required to expand the retention facility. This number may need to be
reviewed in light of our previous comments and concern about the storage capacity.
6) Page 7, Section 2.4.1, discusses the retention basin density and permeability testing. This
section indicates that the pond currently does not meet the permeability specification
provided in the CAFO regulation. This must be addressed if the facility operates as a
concentrated animal feeding operation as defined in the CAFO regulations.
7) Page 9, Section 2.5, discusses liquid waste disposal. According to the plan, the facility
has enough land (165 acres) to manage effluent from 1,572 cows. The plan indicates that
962496
Weld County Board of County Commissioners
Hirsch Dairy
December 12, 1996
Page 3
the current retention structure can contain the effluent from 1,744 cows. The application
is for a 2,000 cow operation. The alternatives proposed in the plan include increasing on-
site storage or hauling the water off-site for treatment or land application. In either case
an amendment to the plan must be submitted. However, if the facility chooses to haul off
the waste, the facility should provide the location of the proposed disposal and any
agreements securing the availability of the site for disposal and maintain records of off
site disposal .
8) Page 10, Section 2.6, discusses solid waste disposal. This section indicates that all of the
manure generated on the site will be hauled off. The facility should provide any
agreements with landowners who accept the manure and maintain records of where the
manure has been hauled.
9) Page 11, Section 3.1, discusses the dry manure storage. It states that "drainage from the
manure storage sites will be directed to the basin via ditches." It does not state to which
specification the ditch or conveyance structure will be built. The ditch or conveyance
structure which handles water which has come into contact with manure must be
constructed to handle a 25-year, 24-hour storm event as stated in Section 2.1 of the plan.
Also, we would recommend that the ditch or conveyance structure be constructed with a
permeability less than or equal to 1 X 10-6 cm/sec.
In summary, the facility is currently operating in "significant noncompliance" with the Confined
Animal Feeding Operation Regulation. The Division believes that if the above concerns, and any
additional concerns found upon further review of the plan, are adequately addressed, and the
operation complies with the plan, the facility can operate in accordance with the requirements of
the Regulations.
tj\520
cc: Lee Morrison
Todd Hodges
John Pickle
952406
STATE OF COLORADO
Roy Romer,Governor
Patti Shwayder,Executive Director
Dedicated to protecting and improving the health and environment of the people of Colorado
4300 Cherry Creek Dr.S. Laboratory Building .R:lbJ+i
Denver,Colorado 80222-1530 4210 E.11th Avenue •re'16'
Phone(303)692-2000 Denver,Colorado 802 20-3 71 6
(303)691-4700 Colorado Department
of Public Health
December 2, 1996 and Environment
Jacob Hirsch. Owner/Operator
11283 Weld County Road 78
Eaton, Colorado 80615 CERTIFIED: i? C2 q o9' 2 cc
REF: Hirsch Dairy, Weld County.
Dear Mr. Hirsch:
This letter is to notify you that upon further review of the evidence submitted by Terracon
Environmental, Inc., to the Weld County Health Department, in relation to your application for
a special use permit, the Water Quality Control Division (the Division) finds the Hirsch Dairy
in violation of the Confined Animal Feeding Operations Control Regulation (the regulation)
4.8.0 (5 CCR 100219) as amended.
Also, during Victor Sainz's site inspection on September 26, 1996 you misrepresented
information related to the number of animal units being housed in your dairy. According to the
information submitted to the Weld County Health Department, by Terracon, you have been
operating a Concentrated Animal Feeding Operation since September of 1995, without the
provision of adequate run-off and process wastewater containment facilities, this constitutes a
flagrant violation of the regulation.
In addition, we bring to your attention that Section 4.8.4 (A) (1) of the regulations requires that
"Compacted or in-situ earthen materials shall consist of suitable soils which meet the seepage
rate of this section and shall have a minimum compacted thickness of 12";" The Manure and
Wastewater Management Plan (the plan), dated November 13, 1996, you submitted for our
review; does not provide suitable evidence that your containment pond was built to meet the
1x104 cm/sec seepage rate specified in Section 4.8.4 (A) of the regulation. Or, that during
construction in-situ materials were compacted to the minimum thickness of 12 inches.
Therefore, the Division finds the Hirsch Dairy to be in significant noncompliance of the
regulation, and has determined that you take the following action:
1. Reline the containment pond to meet the requirements of Section 4.8.4 (A), and provide
written evidence by your consultant or contractor that an appropriate liner is in place.
3624%
2. In lieu of relining the containment pond you can install a groundwater monitoring system.
This groundwater monitoring system, should be designed by a Colorado registered
professional engineer, will provide information on groundwater quality impacts from
your containment pond.
Finally, Section 4.8.5 (A) (2) reads: "... When irrigation disposal of process wastewater is
employed, the irrigation application rate should not exceed the estimated soil infiltration rate.
For flood irrigation, tailwater facilities shall be provided. Irrigation application rates shall be
adjusted to avoid significant ponding of concentrated runoff in surface depressions or seasonal
drainage ways. " However, on August 28, 1995 Ms. Charlotte Davis, from the Weld County
Health Department, observed wastewater flowing from your property under WCR 23 unto your
westerly neighbor's property. Also, future land application of wastewater, similar to the
conditions observed on 8/28/95, will constitute a violation of the Clean Water Act (discharging
to state waters without a permit), and will be subject to enforcement action by the Division.
You have 15 days from the date of this letter to respond to the Division as to what action you
are going to take to bring your facility into compliance with the regulation.
If you have any questions or comments, please contact Victor Sainz at (303) 692-3564
Sincerely,
J. David Holm, Director
Water Quality Control Division
Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment
4300 Cherry Creek Drive South
Denver, Colorado.80222
JDH/VHS
cc, Trevor Jiricek,Supervisor,Weld County Health Department,Greeley,CO 80632
Robert Shukle,Section Chief.Permits and Enforcement,CHPH&E
Derald Lang. Unit Leader. Field Services,CDPH&E
Victor H. Saint, District Engineer,CDPH&E
\ I
Environmental Protection Agency.Region VI
Kenneth Lind, Lind, Lawrence&Ottenhoff
MS-3 File
:_'7"y
LIND FARMS, INC.
38241 WCR 32
Eaton, CO 80615
December 10, 1996
Board of County Commissioners of Weld County
915 Tenth Street
Greeley, CO 80631
Re: USR 1091 (Hirsch Dairy)
Dear Ladies & Gentlemen:
We have been provided copies of two USR maps, the first of which is dated January
10, 1995 and the second dated September 28, 1995. Both of these maps have been
submitted as part of the above referenced USR application.
Both plans identify the locations of four corrals identified as "future corral". These
four corrals are proposed to be constructed over an existing irrigation pipeline which is
identified on both maps as "buried pipeline". Please be advised that this buried pipeline
is used for purposes of delivery of irrigation water from the Smith Lateral (located East of
the future corrals) to a structure identified on the maps as a "standpipe" along County
Road 23.
The buried pipeline and the land both above and on either side of the pipeline
needed for necessary use, maintenance and/or repairs constitutes an easement owned
by Lind Farms, Inc. upon the subject property. The applicant has not requested
permission from Lind Farms, Inc. to place structures upon this easement. Lind Farms, Inc.
expressly denies any permission to the applicant to construct any type of structures over
and above this pipeline. The construction of fences and corrals above the pipeline
substantially interferes with maintenance, repair and/or replacement of this pipeline. Due
to this substantial interference, Lind Farms, Inc. does not consent to place such structures
above the pipeline. Due to the substantial interference it is my opinion that the Board of
County Commissioners cannot approve a plan which causes unreasonable interference
to an easement without the permission or consent of the easement holder.
Very truly yours,
Lind Farms, Inc.
1 �
By:
H. F. Lin , Pre i t
12/12/96 12:09 FAX 970 352 2868 WELD PUBLIC WORK Ej 002
viti mEmORAnDUm
WIiVcTodd Hodges,Current Planner II Date December 12, 1996
To
COaARADO Don Carroll,Project Coordinator
From
seniec USR-1091,Hirsch Dairy
There are two existing culverts immediately east of the dairy entrance that convey the irrigation ditch
under Road 78 is not long enough and narrows Road 78. The culverts should be replaced or
extended and the road widened to match the roadway width to the west. The details of construction
should be determined after consultation with the County, ditch owners, and adjacent property
owners. Because of the increased traffic generated by the dairy,the applicant should be responsible
for the improvements.
cc: Commissioner Hall
USR-1091 file
hi,st
962496
12/12/96 11 : 10 TX/RX N0.5754 P.002
bbl .
GO
� M
emorandum
To: Todd Hodges, W.C. Planning Department
CC: Lee Morrison, W.C. Attorneys Office
From: Trevor Jiricek, W.C. Health Department
Date: July 24, 1996
Subject: USR-1091, Hirsch Dairy
The Environmental Protection Division (the Division) has reviewed the
application materials for USR-1091, submitted by Hirsch Dairy. The Division
recommends that this case be continued until the facility has demonstrated that
it can comply with the Confined Animal Feeding Operation Regulations (the
Regulations ). The request is based upon the fact the Division is not convinced
that the Dairy can dispose of all manure and waste water generated on the site.
The Division has found that the submitted materials are inadequate and are in
need of supplementation. The primary deficiency lies in the facility's manure
and waste water management plan. The Division has the following concerns:
1) The plan was written for a dairy of 850 head of cattle. Mr. Hirsch is
proposing to increase the capacity to 2,000 head. An increase in the
total number of cattle results in an increase in the amount of manure
and waste water which the facility must be able to dispose. According to
the submitted materials Mr. Hirsch has 198 acres. The facility's manure
and waste water management plan also states that all manure and waste
water will be applied to this same 198 acres. Using the Regulations we
have computed application rates, which indicate that Mr. Hirsch does
not have adequate area for land application of all of the manure which
the facility will generate. These calculations are attached. Keep in mind
that these calculations do not account for nutrients available in waste
water application.
2) The current manure and waste water management plan uses incorrect
values to determine land application rates. Application rates must be
determined in accordance with Section 4.8.5(A)(5) of the Regulations.
3) The current manure and waste water management plan does not
adequately demonstrate that the on-site waste water retention structure
962406
Todd Hodges
Hirsch Dairy
July 22, 1996
Page 2
was constructed to a permeability not to exceed 1/32"/day. In
accordance with Section 4.8.4 of the Regulations, "the operator shall
have available suitable evidence that a completed lining meeting the
requirements...was constructed".
4) The manure and waste water management plan does not indicate the
amount of acreage available for liquid waste disposal. Mr. Hirsch
informed me on July 11, 1996, that land application of liquid waste
occurs on only 3 to 4 acres of corn and on only 10 acres of wheat,
because the facility did not have the means to pump a farther distance.
The manure and waste water management plan must demonstrate that
adequate acreage is available for this application. A demonstration of
the conveyance structures should be a part of this.
The manure and waste water management plan must be revised to address
these items, among others. We believe that this demonstration is pertinent in
order to continue with this hearing.
If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call me at extension 2232.
tj\407
962406
Todd Hodges
Hirsch Dairy
July 22, 1996
Page 3
Hirsch Dairy Land Application Calculations
Estimated manure production (Appendix E):
2,000 head X 15.0 ton/year = 30,000 ton/year of manure
Proposed land application rate per acre, Hirsch Dairy:
30,000 ton/year/ 198 acres = 151 ton/acre/year
Minimum acreage need for disposal using table values in the Regulations:
We are assuming that crop yield for Hirsch Dairy is 200 bushels/acre/yr of corn.
200 bushel corn/acre X 1.35 lb nitrogen/bushel = 270 lb nitrogen/acre
Total N in manure = 9 lb nitrogen/ton (appendix E)
270 lb nitrogen/acre/9 lb nitrogen/ton = 30 ton manure/acre/year
30,000 ton/year of manure/30 to manure/acre/year = 1,000 acres minimum
needed
Maximum loading rate using appendices D and E:
Crop nitrogen uptake rate for 200 busheVacre of corn
200 bushel/acre X 56 lb/bushel = 11,200 lb of grain/acre
11,200 lb X 1.61% nitrogen = 180 lb. nitrogen/acre required
dairy manure contains 9 lb nitrogen/ton
180 lb nitrogen/acre/ 9 lb nitrogen/ton = 20 ton manure/acre
30,000 ton/year of manure/20 ton manure/acre = 1,500 acres
962406
rsDEPARTMENT OF HEALTH
151716 AVENUE COURT
GREELEY, COLORADO 80631
WI I D C. ADMINISTRATION (970) 353-0586
HEALTH PROTECTION (970) 353-0635
COLORADOCOMMUNITY HEALTH (970) 353-0639
October 13, 1995 FAX (970) 356-4966
Y e t_! `a!iit�i
OCT 1 6 �gg� DHire hiDaih
Hirsch Dairy rfl f,
11283 WCR 78
Eaton, Colorado 80615
Dear Mr. Hirsch:
The Environmental Protection Division (the Division) of the Weld County Health
Department has reviewed your Manure and Wastewater Management Plan (project
number 43935049) . As you recall, this plan was submitted at the request of the
Division after our staff observed a discharge of manure and process wastewater
from your facility. This wastewater had been land applied on your property and
then flowed off to adjacent property. This violated the Confined Animal Feeding
Operation Regulations (5 CCR 1002-19) , Section 4.8.3 (A) and (B) .
Review of your Manure and Wastewater Management Plan (the Plan) revealed that the
plan does not directly address control of runoff from the land application of
manure and process wastewater. Your plan does state that the facility will
operate as a No-Discharge facility. A discharge of this type indicates that you
are not complying with the Regulations nor the Plan. Therefore, the Division
requests that within ten (10) days you submit an update to the Plan which
includes provisions for containing runoff from the land application of manure and
process wastewater.
Please be advised that future similar violations may result in enforcement action
in accordance with the Regulations. If you have any questions, please call me
at (970) 353-0635.
Sincerely,
0,O
Trevor iricek
Supervisor
Environmental Protection Services
tj\245
cc: Victor Sainz, Colorado Department of Public Health & Environment
Todd Hodges, W.G. Planning Department
962406
4ititi‘v mEmoRAnDum
I Todd Hodges
Weld County Planning October 14, 1995 )i
O . To Trevor Jiricek, Supervisor, Envidhamental Protection Servic �Jy
COLORADO
From Case Number: USR-1091 Name: Hirsch Dairy
Subje t:
SE4 of Section 03, Township 05 North, Range 64 West
Environmental Protection Services has reviewed this proposal; the following
conditions are recommended to be part of any approval:
1. The existing Manure and Wastewater Management Plan demonstrates the
ability to land apply manure and process waste water from an 850 head
dairy. This Plan must be updated to demonstrate that the applicant has
adequate acreage to apply manure and wastewater generated at a 2,000 head
dairy at agronomic rates. In addition, the on-site retention ponds appear
to have the storage volume required for a 1,500 cow dairy. The ponds must
be enlarged to handle all process and wastewater from a 2,000 head dairy,
including a 25 year, 24 hour storm event.
Prior to increasing the number of animal units to above what is considered
a Use by Right, the applicant shall submit an updated Manure and
Wastewater Management Plan to the Weld County Health Department for review
and approval. This plan shall include, but not be limited to the
following:
A. Demonstration that the waste water collection, storage, and land
application facilities are adequately constructed, and sized to
handle a twenty-five year twenty-four hour storm. These include
construction as-builts, engineered drawings, etc.
B. The schedule in which manure will be removed and applied to land.
C. The method in which waste water will be applied to land, including
the procedure which will be used to insure that agronomic rates are
not exceeded.
D. Demonstration that the permeability of the liner does not exceed 1
X 10-6 cm/sec.
E. Other measures which are in place to insure that the facility is
operating as a "No-discharge" facility.
2. The existing Manure and Wastewater Management Plan does not address
methods or structures which will prevent process and wastewater runoff
from the property during land application. The applicant shall submit an
amendment to this plan to the Weld County Health Department for review and
approval.
3. The applicant shall remove, handle, and stockpile manure from the
livestock area in a manner that will prevent nuisance conditions. The
manure piles shall not be allowed to exist or deteriorate to a condition
that facilitates excessive odors, flies, insect pests, or pollutant
runoff. The manure storage site shall have a water-tight surface which
does not permit seepage or percolation of manure pollutants into the
ground.
4. The facility shall maintain compliance with the Confined Animal Feeding
Operations Control Regulations (5 CCR 1002-19) and Weld County Zoning
Ordinance, Section 47. 1
0CT 1 7 1996
9624916
Hirsch Dairy Referral
Page 2
5. All liquid and solid wastes shall be stored and removed for final disposal
in a manner that protects against surface and groundwater contamination.
6. The facility shall not discharge to surface or groundwater with exception
to what is allowed by the Confined Animal Feeding Operations Control
Regulations.
7. An Air Pollution Emission Notice (A.P.E.N.) and Emissions Permit may be
required for this facility. The applicant shall submit an application to
the Air Pollution Control Division, Colorado Department of Health.
8. No permanent disposal of wastes shall be permitted at this site.
9. Waste materials shall be handled, stored, and disposed in a manner that
controls fugitive dust, blowing debris, and other potential nuisance
conditions.
10. Fugitive dust shall be controlled on this site.
11. Any existing septic system(s) which is not currently permitted through the
Weld County Health Department will require an I.S.D.S. Evaluation prior to
the issuance of the required septic permit(s) . In the event the system(s)
is found to be inadequate, the system(s) must be brought into compliance
with current I.S.D.S. regulations.
12. A NPDES Permit shall be obtained from the Water Quality Control Division
of the Colorado Department of Health for any proposed discharge into State
Waterways.
13. A dust abatement plan shall be submitted to the Health Department for
approval prior to operation. The facility shall have sufficient equipment
available to implement the dust control as required by the Health
Department.
14. The facility shall be operated in a manner to control flies. A fly
control plan shall be submitted to the Weld County Health Department for
review and approval. The plan shall be implemented at the request of the
Weld County Health Department in the event that flies (which can be
determined to be associated with the facility) are in such a number to be
considered a nuisance condition. This plan shall also be implemented in
the event the Weld County Health Department receives a significant number
of fly (associated with the facility) complaints and, in the judgement of
the Health Officer, there exists a fly condition requiring abatement.
TJ/cs-1537
Weld County Planning Dept.
a JUL 24 1996
Jr, ' R EC EWE D
/ DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING SERVICES
LT PHONE (970) 353-6100, EXT.3540
(' FAX (970) 352-6312
rr.) 1 o\�61� WELD COUNTY ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICES
1400 N. 17TH AVENUE
GREELEY, COLORADO 80631
COLORADO v1.
July 3, 1996
CASE NUMBER: USR-1091
TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN:
This case was continued by the Weld County Planning Commission indefinitely on October 17, 1995. This
case was continued until the applicant provided additional information concerning this proposal. Enclosed
is a copy of the complete application for your review.
Enclosed is an application from Hirsch Dairy for a Site Specific Development Plan and a Special Review
Permit for a 2,000 Head Dairy in the A(Agricultural)zone district. The parcel of land is described as located •
in Section 24,T7N, R67W of the 6th P.M.,Weld County, Colorado. The location of the parcel of land for which
this application has been submitted is north and adjacent to Weld County Road 78; approximately 1/4 mile
east of Weld County Road 23. For a more precise location, see legal.
The application is submitted to your for review and recommendation. Any comments or recommendation you
consider relevant to this request would be appreciated. Your prompt reply will help to facilitate the processing
of the application. Please reply by July 24,1996, so that we may give full consideration to your
recommendation. The failure of any agency to respond within 21 days may be deemed to be a favorable
response to the County. Please call Todd A. Hodges, Lead Planner, if you have any questions.
Check the appropriate boxes below and return to our address listed above.
1. We have reviewed this request and find that it does/does not comply with our
Comprehensive Plan for the following reasons.
2. We do not have a Comprehensive Plan, but we feel this request is/is not compatible with the
interest of our town for the following reasons.
3. We have reviewed the request and find no conflicts with our interests.
4. A formal recommendation is under consideration and will be submitted to you prior to
\5. x _ Please r fer to the enclosed letter. •
Signed: ( .. Mc Agency: C`O S A E1"g_c� �QS
Date: CIO t IA) t R b
962406 • D(HIsff
'IT Op
I � DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
/ye�/
y CORPS OF ENGINEERS, OMAHA DISTRICT
w '^ TRI-LAKES PROJECT OFFICE, 9307 STATE HWY 121
LITTLETON, COLORADO 80123-6901
�_`rn`e`P REPLV TO
ATTENTION OF July 22, 1996
Mr. Todd A. Hodges
Weld County Adminstrative Offices
Department of Planning Services
1400 N. 17th Avenue
Greeley, Colorado 80631
Dear Mr. Hodges:
This letter is in regard to the Hirsch Dairy Project (your case #USR-1091) Located in
Section 24, Township 7 North, Range 67 West, Weld County, Colorado.
Your project has been reviewed in accordance with Section 404 of the Clean Water
Act under which the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers regulates the excavation and discharge
of dredged and fill material into waters of the United States including wetlands.
Reference is made to a July 12, 1996 wetlands determination conducted by Mr. Terry
McKee of this office. During Mr. McKee's site visit, it was found that no wetlands exist at
this site.
This letter is to inform you that the proposed activity, assigned number 199680741,
will not require a Department of the Army (DA) Permit.
Although a DA Permit will not be required for the project, this does not eliminate the
requirement that other applicable federal, state, tribal, and local permits be obtained as
required.
If there are any further questions concerning this matter, please feel free to contact
Mr. Terry McKee of this office at 303-979-4120.
Sincerely,
. Ca
Project Manager
9624"6
Printed on 1e') Recycled Paper
0, , ,„,
we,Ifi n"nnty Planning Dept.
JUL 16 1996 DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING SERVICES
PHONE (970) 353-6100, EXT.3540
iglipeREC FAX (970) 352-6312
IV�® WELD COUNTY ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICES
Y 1400 N. 17TH AVENUE
GREELEY, COLORADO 80631
COLORADO
July 3, 1996
CASE NUMBER: USR-1091
TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN:
This case was continued by the Weld County Planning Commission indefinitely on October 17, 1995. This
case was continued until the applicant provided additional information concerning this proposal. Enclosed
is a copy of the complete application for your review.
Enclosed is an application from Hirsch Dairy for a Site Specific Development Plan and a Special Review
Permit for a 2,000 Head Dairy in the A(Agricultural)zone district. The parcel of land is described as located
in Section 24, T7N, R67W of the 6th P.M.,Weld County,Colorado. The location of the parcel of land for which
this application has been submitted is north and adjacent to Weld County Road 78; approximately 1/4 mile
east of Weld County Road 23. Fora more precise location, see legal.
The application is submitted to your for review and recommendation. Any comments or recommendation you
consider relevant to this request would be appreciated. Your prompt reply will help to facilitate the processing
of the application. Please reply by July 24,1996, so that we may give full consideration to your
recommendation. The failure of any agency to respond within 21 days may be deemed to be a favorable
response to the County. Please call Todd A. Hodges, Lead Planner, if you have any questions.
Check the appropriate boxes below and return to our address listed above.
1. We have reviewed this request and find that it does/does not comply with our
Comprehensive Plan for the following reasons.
2. We do not have a Comprehensive Plan, but we feel this request is/is not compatible with the
interest of our own for the following reasons.
3. We have reviewed the request and find no conflicts with our interests.
4. A formal recommendation is under consideration and will be submitted to you prior to
5. Plea refer to the enclosed letter. P Of A
Signed: . .t/ Agency: 0 QY 122
Date: Vey 9-4, COLORADO 80546
962406 EXHIBIT
I
Hello