Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout20210245.tiffWJ Whiteadankowski LLC Alan E. Curtis January 15, 2020 VIA ENTAIL Chris Gathman, Planner III Bob Choate, Esq., Assistant County Attorney Weld County Department of Planning Services 1555 North 17th Avenue Greeley, CO 80631 cgathmanAweldgov.com bchoate@weldgov.com Re: Additional Information an Water Supply for Black Mountain Lost Creek Mine Project Dear Chris and Bob: Thank you very much for your time and consideration yesterday in discussing Weld County's water supply requirements for the Last Creek Mine Project ("Project") proposed by Black Mountain Sand Weld LLC ("Black Mountain"). Based an our discussion, Black Mountain is providing this letter and the attached materials to demonstrate that Black Mountain will be able to obtain the water supply necessary to operate the Project. As discussed in the letter from Leonard Rice Engineers, Inc. ("LRE Letter") (EXHIBIT A), Black Mountain is currently seeking approval of a change of use from the Colorado Ground Water Commission ("GWC") under the GWC's Rules and Regulations for the _Management and Control of Designated Ground Water, 2 CCR 410-1 ("GWC Rules"). LRE Letter at 1. Under GWC Rule 7.1 0, in applying for the change of use, Black Mountain is required to submit the following information for at least ten years preceding the date of the change application: (1) irrigation system and pump efficiency tests; (2) well meter readings; (3) and water consumption records. LRE Letter at 2. This information is then used by either the applicant or the GWC staff to determine the amount of historical consumptive use of the water ("HCU"). The HCU water can then be used for the changed purposes. LRE Letter at 2. In this case, both Black Mountain and GWC staff performed these analyses, and Black Mountain agreed to accept the amount of HCU water determined by GWC staff (the "GWC Staffs Determination") . LRE Letter at 1. Equus Farms, Inc. ("Equus") has objected to Black Mountain's GWC change application based on the GWC Staff's Determination. The November 26, 2019 letter from Adaptive Resources, Inc, on behalf of Equus (the "Equus Letter") (EXHIBIT B) confirms Equus' understanding that: (1) the GWC Staff's Determination is the basis for the HCU water that is to be used to supply the Project; and (2) "the GWC examines each application using the same technique." Equus Letter at 2, 3. The Equus 303.595.9441 1333 blest 120th Avenue, Suite 302 I Westminster, Colorado 80234 www.white jankowski.com Chris Gathman, Planner III Bob Choate, Esq., Assistant County Attorney Weld County Department of Planning Services January 15, 2020 Page 2 oft Letter then objects to GWC Staff's Determination, based on analyses that "used other assumptions that differed from the standard practice of the GWC." Equus Letter at 4. The results of these analyses, which are not consistent with the requirements of the GWC Mules or the standard practice of the GWC, "were that the application of the monthly records along with the change in the consumptive use determination and the application efficiency decreased the claimed HCU from the GWC determined total amount of 1,843 acre-feet to 1,575 acre-feet." Equus Letter at 6. The Equus Letter concludes that "[i]f the new per well HCU values and limitations on historical acres and combined operations are accepted, it's our opinion that the change of use can be granted." Equus Letter at 7 (emphasis added). Based on the foregoing, it is not Equus' position that Black Mountain's GWC application should be denied. Equus is only requesting the amount of HCU water for the Project be reduced from 1,843 acre-feet to 1,575 acre-feet. Even in a worst -case scenario where the GWC elects to ignore bath: (1) the GWC Rules; and (2) GWC Staff's Determination made in accordance with the GWC Rules, Black Mountain would still have 1,575 acre-feet of HCU water, which will provide an adequate water supply for the Project Thanks again for your time and consideration. Please let us know if you need any additional information to complete your review. Sincerely, Alan. E. Curtis Weld County Dept. of Planning Services 1555 N 17th Ave Greeley, co 80631 RE: CHANGE of USE APPLICATIONS WITHIN THE DESIGNATED BASINS Gear Chris, On behalf of our client Black Mountain Land Company, LP ("BM"), Leonard Rice Engineers ("LRE") has been involved in the engineering and consumptive use analyses on 6 wells in which BM has requested a change of use on. LRE is also continuing to support BM to see the change of use permits through approval with the Colorado Ground Water commission ("commission"). Beth LRE and the commission have run models to determine the consumptive use numbers and BM has agreed to the consumptive use the Commission calculated. The below information explains some background on the change of use requirements and how the consumptive use numbers are put together by the Commission, General change of Water Right Requirements • change of use of designed basin well permits or other water rights are authorized under CRS § 37-90 (Groundwater Management Act or MA) and CCR 410-1 (Designated Basin Rules). Specifically, change of use is authorized under CRS § 37-90-111 and Rule of the Designated Basin Mules. • To accomplish this the Colorado Ground Water commission requires that the applicant submit an application for change of use. Consistent with Designated Basin Rule 7.7, the change in use shall not result in an increase over the historic depletion of the aquifer by the well. Moreover, under Designated Basin Rule 7.7.1, the future average annual withdrawal shall not exceed the average annual legal historic withdrawal. Historic withdrawal is defined as the average annual volumetric amount of ground water withdrawn by a well during the life of the well permit. This is different than historic depletion because historic depletion equals the historic withdrawal minus the amount and percolates back to the aquifer (return flows) or runs off the Meld. See Designated Basin Rule 4.2.17, • Designated Basin Rule 7.10 governs how an applicant computes the historic withdrawal and depletion. Information required to compute the historic withdrawal is: O Irrigation system and pump efficiency tests EXHIBIT A O Meter readings O 'dater consumption records determined by the amount of historical irrigated acres tires the crop irrigation requirement (crop consumptive use minus precipitation). The commission provides values for crop consumptive use, O Minimum of 10 years of historical record. * The commission does not allow credit towards historic use for irrigation on unauthorized acres or if the diversion was greater than the permitted amount. Moreover, the commission accounts for return flogs based upon the irrigation method, More return flows for flood irrigation versus sprinkler irrigation. • The applicant or the commission can compute the historic withdrawal and depletion based upon the submitted information, Black Mountain Land Company, LIB information • Black Mountain Land Company, LP (BM) is in the process of changing six (6) designated basin wells with nine (g) designated basin final permits - Permit Nos. 9596-FPR, 9595-FPR, 31607-FP/50753-FP. 31608-FP/50754-FP, 31609- FR/50755-FP and 1635 -FP — from irrigation to irrigation, industrial mining, industrial oil and gas, fire protection and stock watering. The Commission has evaluated the applications, considered the applications complete and noticed the publications in the county paper (Greeley Tribune). The Commission, with approval of BM, computed the allowed average annual withdrawal for each well and permit • BM conducted irrigation system and pump efficiency tests on each well, provided meter readings on the wells that had a flow meter, provided the last 10 years US, Farm Service Agency crop records, and provided the last 10 years electrical records. All this information was provided to the Commission as a part of the application process and was used by the Commission in calculating the allowed average annual historic consumptive use. The end result is the Commission computes the amount of water that was actually consumed by the crop and therefore lost to the water system (Lost creep in this case), No credit is given for overpumping, return flows to the aquifer, or runoff from the field. This water must remain in the system to prevent injury and to balance the water system. An equation is provided below. Annual Withdrawal = crop Deeds (consumption plus evaporation) + Return flaws + Runoff off the field Consumption = Annual ''withdrawal — Return flows — Runoff off the field Annual Withdraw cannot exceed permitted amounts and consumption or crop Needs cannot exceed the authorized irrigation requirements. BM is currently in the process of going through hearings at the Commission to receive final approval of such water applications. The objections received were specific to the location of where the water is to be used, the specific uses, and how much water is to be transferred to the new multi- ,Ise permits. The objections are not against the overall change of use approval on such water wells but merely on the specific details of the new permits. Regards, William H. Francaak, R.E., Esq. Director - Industrial iiVater Leonard Rice Engineers, Inc. : Alan Curtis, white & Jankowski LLC Brittany Schamaun, Black Mountain Kira Cuff, Millcreek Engineering ADAPTIVE RESOURCES' WATER — GE_O LO GYiric — MAPPING November 6, 2019 John Finegan Mike Johnson Eq uus Farms, Inc. 37138 HWY 34 KERSEY, CO 80644 This letter serves as our comments on the Black Mountain Land Company, LP application to change the type and place of use of Well Permit nos. 9595 -FP, 9596 -FP, 31607 -FP, 31608 -FP, 31609 -FIB, 31635 -FP, 50753 -FP, 50754 -FP and 50755 -FP before the Colorado Ground Water commission in the Lost Creek Designated Ground 'mater Basin and Lost Creek GWIVI L in Weld County Colorado. BACKGROUND Black Mountain Land Company, LP (Black Mountain) made a filing published in the Greeley Tribune on October 18, 2019 regarding the change of use of 9 well permits and six physical wells located within the Lost Creek [designated Ground '''mater Basin. The six wells consist all of irrigation wells and are all generally in the middle of Lost Creek [designated Ground Water Basin adjacent to 1-76 and County Road 386 in Weld County, Colorado. A map of this area can be seen in IVlap 1 below. Map - General Location Map Black Mountain Land Co. Fields and 1Nel Is 229 East Kiowa Ave. Fort Morgan, CO 80701-3109 9 x 0.370.2481 416 Valley View Dr. STE 30'1 Scottsbluff, NIE 69361-1X120 308.833.289+0 vvyvvv_ ri -tea to r_ corn EXHIBIT B 2 IRRIGATION WELLS AND LANDS The Wells that are part of the application and limits are described as follows: • 9595 -FP -R located in the SE's of the SW "% of Section 32, Township 3N, Range 62Wf of the Sixth P.M. permitted with a capacity of 1,200 GPM, and a volumetric limit of 350 acre-feet per year irrigating 140 acres. • 9590 -FP -R located in the SW X of the ICE 14 of Section 32, Township 3N, Range 62W of the Sixth P.M. permitted with a capacity of 1,x.0'0 GPM, and a volumetric limit of 350 acre-feet per year irrigating 140 acres. • 31608 -FP -R / 50754 -FP in the NE X of the ICE % of Section 32, Township 3N, Range 62W of the Sixth P.M. permitted with a capacity of 1,000 CPIM, and a volumetric limit of 335 acre-feet per year irrigating 166 acres. • 31609 -FP -R/50755 -FP in the SE % of the SE X, of Section 32, Township 3N, Range 62W of the sixth P.M. permitted with a capacity of 1,000 GPM, and a volumetric limit of 320 acre-feet per year irrigating 170 acres. • 31607 -FP -R/50753 -FP in the NE X. of the S'U'1l % of Section 28, Township 3N, Range 62W of the sixth P.M. permitted with a capacity of 1,000 GPM, and a volumetric limit of 345 acre-feet per year irrigating 170 acres. • 31635 -FP -R in the NW % of the NE % of Section 20, Township 3N, Range 62W of the sixth P.M. permitted with a capacity of 2,000 GPIM, and a volumetric limit of 910 acre-feet per year irrigating 363 acres. Each of these wells and corresponding historically irrigated parcels can be found on Map 1 above. INFORNIATIQN SOURCES A request was made for further information about the application to Black Mountain and we received a list of files that were an analysis of each well along with a proposed change of use. Upon review of those files, we found several irregularities. We requested further information and was referred to IMr. Rill Fronczak of Leonard Rice Engineers Who is the consultant for Black Mountain. Mr. Fronczak provided the monthly power readings from the power company as well as the FSA records, but didn't have the final analysis spreadsheets. We contacted Mr. Rick Neilson at the State of Colorado Division of Water Resources Ground Water Commission (GWC) who provided the final version of the analysis and stated that Black Mountain chose to allow hire to conduct the final analysis of the historical consumptive use (HCU) of the wells. We received that information and reviewed those final analysis spreadsheets along with the background information received from Mr. Fronczak to inform our opinion. FIELD VISIT AND INFORMATION GATHERING To gather information on the irrigated parcels and to ensure that there was accurate information regarding the selection of assumptions, a field visit was made to the parcels on October 23, 2019. Pictures Were taken of many of the parcels that were accessible by public road and all parcels were observed. Below is a sampling of those pictures that show the irrigation implements and general field conditions. www_ari-viator_cam 3 CATTLE COMPANY --1112.111 GROUND WATER COMMISSION ASSUMPTIONS It's our understand through communication with GWC, experience doing changes of use for other wells subject to the GWC, and this case that the GWC used several assumptions in their analysis of the parcels. rvlany of these assumptions were used by us in its analysis of the wells, and several were modified and described below. It's our and if the applicant's conclusions are not within an acceptable margin, additional information is sought on the causes and a final decision is made based upon the information. understand that the GWC examines each application using the same technique The general assumptions are that the well's flowmeters will be used to determine the annual amount of pumping that has occurred within the last ten years (2008 to 2018) and if those records are unavailable, the power records along with a Power Conversion Coefficient (PCC) test will be utilized to determine annual volume of water pumped. In addition, the United States Department of Agriculture Farm Service Agency (ESA) cropping records are required for all applications to determine the crops grown on the parcels that were irrigated and some related aerial photographs if there is ambiguity in the data. A Colorado Decision support system (CDSS) StateCU model run is made using climate data within the CDSS databases for annual consumptive use of the crops to compare www_ari-viator_cam 4 pumping information. In addition, the metered pumping uses a application efficiency for "standard sprinklers" of 60% to determine water available for crop consumption. The annual consumptive use of the Lost Creek Designated Basin is made as the minimum of the water available from pumping or power records and StateCU crop consumptive use. Several of the wells had PCC tests performed on them as part of this proposed change of use, and Mr. Fronczak provided those as part of the power records. The GWC relied on those tests and associated Form 3.2 as part of their determination of the power to volume conversion. PROPOSED USES The proposal seeks to change the use of the well from irrigation to irrigation of the originally permitted lands, stock watering, fire protection and industrial use for oil and gas development on 17,400 acres generally described as all or part of sections 2, 3, 4, 0, 10, 11, 14, 16, 17, 18, 10, 30 in Township 3 North, Range 61 west, and all or part of sections 4, 8, 0, 10, 11, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 20, 32, 33, 34 and 35, Township 3 Forth, flange 62 West, 6th P.M., and industrial use for mining operations on 2,215 of the 17,400 acres, generally described as all or parts of Sections 2, 3, 10, 11 and 14, Township 3 North, Range 61 west, 6th P.M. ANALYSIS To review and determine if the final amounts of HCU proposed in the notice and determined by the GwC's analysis of the wells was protective of Epuus' wells that are also within the Lost Creek Designated Basin, we preformed our own analysis of each of the well. ANALYSIS ASSUMPTIONS Our assumptions of the data and analysis can be found in our spreadsheet attached to this letter and are generally explained here. We utilized the volumetric and acreage limits set forth in the permits and used by the GWC without modification. We also used the GwC's distribution assumptions of the three wells with shared permits and used those within our analysis. In addition, we verified the cropping information with the FSA records and then used the cropping pattern used by the GWC for each parcel. We also relied upon the Form 3.2 values for the PCC conversion result and the power records presented from Morgan County Rural Electrical Association. We used other assumptions that differed from the standard practice of the GWC to perform the remainder of the analysis that rely upon localized data and the information available. We use the daily ASCE Standardized IVIodel to gather reference ET and then aggregated those values monthly to determine HCU instead of the annual method used by the GWC. We also utilized the monthly values of the power records to provide with monthly volumes of pumping for each of the wells to reflect management operations made in the HCU analysis. In addition, we used an application efficiency of 804 for sprinkler irrigation methods. It's our opinion that each of these assumptions resulted in a more accurate estimation of HCU then the GWC methodology. www_ari-viator_com 5 Daily Crop ET Method To determine the amount of crop consumptive use for each of the parcels, we used the ASCE Standardized methodology found in The ASCE Standardized Reference Evapotranspriation (ET) Equation published by the American Society of Civil Engineers, Environmental Water Resources Institute in 2005 edited by Richard Allen, and includes committee members of Ivan Walter (et al). This method provides a daily reference ET determination using local climate data and then we applied crop coefficients to the reference ET to determine the final HCU of each crop. The ASCE Manuals and Reports on Engineering Practice No 70, Evaporation, Evapotranspiration, and Irrigation Water Requirements Second Edition by Ivlarvin Jensen and Richard Allen published by the American Society of Civil Engineers, Environmental Water Resources Institute in 2016 provided the Crop Coefficients. This methodology provides for an accurate and effective measure of full crop consumptive use demand in the region and should be used when the climate data is available. The CDSS database as well as the CoAg let databases both contain adequate data to fully operate this daily model during the entire ten-year study period. We utilized the CoAgMet Kersey (KSy01) daily CsC'd climate data for the study period. The annual methodology used by the GWC should not be used for the determination of the HCU from the Lost Creep Designated Basin. The application of the annual procedure does not provide monthly timesteps for irrigation that can better capture management decisions. Further the use of the StateCU model on the monthly or annual time step uses methods that have recommended by ASCE EWRI to be replaced by the ASCE Standardized method for various reasons outlined in Chapter 8 in ASCE Manuals and Reports on Engineering Practice No 70, Evaporation, Evapotranspiration, and Irrigation Water Requirements Second Edition. Monthly Power Records To better represent pumping during the study, the monthly power records were used for both the wells that didn't have an installed flow meter and for wells that had regarded annual flow meter values but no monthly distribution. These records allowed for the total volume of pumping to be accurately matched on a monthly time step with the estimated full consumptive use of the parcels calculated by the ASCE Standardized method. When no flow meter was present at the well, the monthly power records were used along with the PCC adjusted to Total Dynamic Head in Kilo Watt Hours / acre-feet (KWHia-f) and the assumed reduction factor to determine the volume of water that the well pumped during that month. When wells had an annual flow meter measurement, the total flow meter measurement (adjusted for annual volumetric maximums) was distributed by the ratio of the monthly KWH to the annual KWHs recorded for the well. This provided an accurate methodology to distribute all the pumping by month to ensure that the management decisions of the producer were sufficiently captured for the HCU determination. Application Efficiency The final required assumption that was used is the application efficiency of the irrigation water to the parcels. [wring the field visit, every parcel was visited, and each had a similar setup of a center pivot sprinkler irrigation system with drop nozzles that are approximately 5 feet from the ground. This is a very typical setup within the South Platte Basin in Northeastern Colorado. www_ari- water_ cam 6 We assumed that his irrigation system has an 80 application efficiency. This is determined using the Colorado High Plains Irrigation Practices Guide Special Report No. 14 (Colorado Irrigation Guide) of the Colorado Water Resources Research institute published in the Spring of 2004. Table 1 of the Colorado Irrigation Guide fists a Center Pivot Irrigation System with Spray heads {like the field observation) to have an efficiency range of 75 to 90 percent. The 80% assumption has also been decreed in several surrounding water court cases in Division 1 and less than 20 miles array as the acceptable percentage to use for this type of operation where the State and Division 1 Engineer have been an active participant and support the use of those efficiencies. Spreadsheet Model Operation A spreadsheet was built to analyze each of the parcels, wells, and associated information and determine the monthly HCU credit. The spreadsheet used the assumptions of the GWC as well as the assumptions discussed above to determine the total monthly and annual amount of HCU each well is entitled. The monthly HCU amount was determined as the minimum of the HCU required from the operation of the ASCE Standardized Model versus the amount of water that was pumped from either power records or a combination of power records and pumping amounts from flow meter records multiplied by efficiency. The monthly values were then summed to determine the annual total then those values were used to calculate the average HCU for each well over the study period. RESULTS The results of the analysis were that the application of the monthly records along with the change in the consumptive use determination and the application efficiency decreased the claimed HCU from the GWC determined total amount of 1,843 acre-feet to 1,575 acre-feet. It's our opinion that the revised value per well is the appropriate HCU that should be assigned for the Black Mountain change of use. Below is a summary of each of these wells. ARI Analysis Well No. Average Pumping Average CU Demand Average HCU C°�"1issior1 GW HCU .. Difference Percent Diff 9595 -'PP 210 337 184 207 -23 11 9595 -FP 2 21.9 413 195 219 -24 110 31607 -FP 244 455 204 244 -40 1 17 31508 -FP 2 235 457 205 235 -30 13% 31509 -PP 219 483 199 219 -20 31635 -PP 7 700 828 562 5 537 -125 18% 50753 -FP 7 10 5 4.99 0 0 .5 50754 -PP 1 11 14 3 10 -2 23% 50755 -FP 17 26 14 17 -3 15% Total 1803 3033 157'5 183 -268 15% In addition to the reduction in HCU, all the proposed uses besides that of irrigation of original lands must be limited to the HCU of each individual well and not allowed to exceed those amounts. The operation under then www_ari-viator_cam 7 new uses must also be considered when allowing irrigation: of the original parcels to occur simultaneously. It's also required that new permits be issued for each of these wells to include the actual acres that have been historically irrigated. The HCU analysis is not based upon the original maximum acres and without this restriction would allow an expansion of the HCU withdraw from the Lost Creek Designated Basin. If the new per well HCU values and limitations on historical acres and combined operations are accepted, it's our opinion that the change of use can be granted and it will not injure the Equus Farm's wells within the Lost Creek Designated Basin. SINCERELY, Please contact me if you have any further questions or additional information is requested. HEATH KU NTZ ADAPTIVE RESOURCES/ INC Attachments: Analysis Files: https:// www.d ropbox.comish/h55 mvkm1 n hvsllpiAACAHrn I7R1A5Uavi Received Files: https: /,/wwvv.d ropbox.comish f li 30fxyii4dvggs/AABHdBc3 Ni kq FyD If_kHd hZha?d1-0 www_ari-viator_com From: Brittany Schamaun To: Chris Gathman Cc: "Kira Coff" Subject: Black Mountain Support on Water Lost Creek Project Date: Thursday, January 09, 2020 4:25:04 PM Attachments: Potable Water Map.pdf Fig D3 Site Plan v2.0 (Backfill Stockpile Moved 2019-11-04, JP) Potable ....pdf Application for Water Service 1.9.2020.pdf 19GW Front Range Resources - Statement of objection - signed.pdf 20191119 Objection-MCQWD.PDF GWC Black Mountain EQUUS Objection.pdf CHANGE OF USE APPLICATIONS WITHIN THE DESIGNATED BASINS Letter Form Fina....pdf Caution: This email originated from outside of Weld County Government. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Hi Chris, appreciate your time this morning. As we discussed, here is further documentation on our water permits and the process that is taken to change these wells to an industrial/multi-use purpose. We had our engineer put together a letter. I think this will help provide insight on our ability to successfully obtain the permits necessary for this project and some further information regarding the objections. We think getting these water permits in place as a "condition of approval" is more appropriate than the staff not recommending our permit based on the fact we don't have them approved today. As I mentioned on the phone, we applied for these change of use applications in May 2019 and its typical for change of use applications to take a year to be approved, and even sometimes longer. The timing is out of our hands but the Ground Water Commission is intimately familiar with hove this works. BM or our attorney has had communication with all 3 objectors and we will continue throughout the time until the hearing. The objections from the 3 parties are objections based on place of use, use type, and the specific amount of water parties believe should be transferred over to the new multi -use permits. These objections are not objections on the overall permits themselves but specifically to the details of each permit. Regarding MCQWD, they have requested we submit a water service application vs putting a letter together stating they plan to provide us the potable water. I have sent in the applications via email and talked with Dent Pflager today regarding the project. Please see attached applications. Let me know if there is anything else we can provide you. Look forward to hearing back. Regards, Brittany Schamaun Black Mountain m. 830.708.0288 bl a ckmtn. com Applicant Name Owner Nam/1K citrirekAte 01/40\1.-- MORGAN COUNTY QUALITY WATER DISTRICT APPLICATION FOR WATER SERVICE iamen Jana (Axis I -LC/ Applicant Mailing Address � J �'� �.�L�Y'1 Sk. Sit, (2,00 Phone \61'7-(oqicer Piot Who Will Pays for Tap PROPOSED TAIL LOCATION Parcel # Section Subdivision game lei: 0 (TY 7 ('e 10 Z, eliCfr. Wit&len 1 Township.3 _ Range Address (if known) etEr Property is adjacent to District Main Line ■ Property is ft. from District Main ,ton airagAn .. D Property is in M Q D ❑ Property is in None ATTACH: Tax Notice ! Plat with Tap location marked in red SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIALSERVICE: Eater the nurnber of taps requested 5f8" _ T.E. _ T.E. COMMERCIAL, MULTI -FAMILY RESIDENTIAL, INDUSTRIAL OR OTHER (requires Board approval) Commercial Industrial Multi -Family Fees. - Other Projected Water Use (If known) Peak rate gpm Annual Use 2'2-$ _ acre feet Livestock Operation (Number of Animals) Dairy Cattle Feeder Cattle Horses Sheep : Hogs Chickens (IE. calculated fused on annual water use of 0.7 afiyea r) Tap Application Fee: First Tam Equivalent costs 400.00 each additional is X50,00 erboard a PD royal 417/15) /� Total TiE.. s Total Clue 550 Total Paid s Applicant Signature pfa#, For Office Use; Processed by: _ Sent by Fax in Email El_ Other Adopted 3/15/18 Morgan County Quality Water District Cross-Connection/Backflow Prevention Questionnaire Name on Accountf l�C-1\--- ROLY\bskaikiri -SG�f'ta °L)ilGt CC(' pate 012-0 Service Address Owner _ Contact Person trk, OtMCLUYI sip au Can E it #pct m� �ho��� Type of facility: Business Activity y (Example: Multi -family, mobile home park, manufactArfg, retail, office, restaurant, Elf& Commercial ndustrial s i ofact.' t 'Residential Account Number 1, Occupancy: nOwn_Rent 2. Meter serves: Homes Hoar many? 44. Tap Number Buildings (garage: outbuildings} barns) How many' 3 Do you have (or intend to have) outside hose bibs 8/or yard hydrants at your building(s)? 'Ea How many? 4. Do you have (or intend to have)? (Please check all that apply): Swimming Pool Darkroom Equipment Ghost pipes (unidentified) Insecticide Sprayers Chemical Feed System Water is used for: A_ Domestic Consumption B. Lawn Irrigation a 1 L Elle Hat Tub jig Jacuzzi Portable Dialysis Machine Onsite Water Storage Chemical Irrigation System Yes No Yes i Underground Sprinkler System DripiSoa ke r/l rrig ati on System Page 1of3 No t n t _ PoritoCiAst_ dfF,z� itiortscr_ cioarj '� C. Solar System D. Cooling (Chillers) Yes Yes =1 i NCI I If yes, is the water chemically conditioned? Yes No El Unknown E. Heating {Boilers} Yes Q No II If yes, is the grater chemically conditioned? Yes F. Fire Suppression System Yes If ryes, type of fare system Dry Are there any antifreeze legs" Yes Is there a fire pump? Yes G. Food Preparation 'des H. Manufacturing 'des I . Processing Yes J. Industrial Uses Yes Wet No No No No No No No No Unknown i _ Unknown Unknown Unknown i _ i If you answered YES on GI H, I or J, please describe the grater use. 6. Are there other water sources available on this property? If yes, what source? (well, etc_) stir rrc.v,+.t'it" Yes No poi- 6Y7 ciu 7. Do you have a water softener, Reverse Osmoses or other treatment system? Yesn Non_ Yes Noi� 8. Do you have livestock and use a water trough? 9. Cho you have a booster pump, well pump, or any other tripe water pump? Yes _ Igo _ 10. ae you receive irrigation grater from a different source? 11 Do you have any water -using equipment on not mentioned above? If yes, please describe; Iii‘ssaLtit vyt ct COMAQ "A. Mulb Page 2 of 3 Yes_ Na�< I j. YesQ, Nol ry6afifwe di Signature 12 . Do you have a backflow protection device at your service connection? Yes Unknown If yes, please provide Manufacturer: Model # Serial # Type of device: Reduced Pressure Atmospheric Vacuum Breaker Double Check Pressure Vacuum Breaker Date of last backflow prevention device test: 13. Do you have any backflow prevention devices on any equipment at your site? Yes 7 Unknown If yes, please provide. Manufacturer Model # Type of device: Reduced Pressure Double Check Serial # Atmospheric Vacuum Breaker Pressure Vacuum Breaker f Date of last backflow prevention device test: By signing this document I certify that to the best of my knowledge and belief the information provided is true, accurate and complete. 2-0 Date Name (Please Print) Title _ etle0 Phone (p9de--99ot Email \P6kkQ,Vl •.SCYI amau P.P lacistritithat •��o'V\. Please notify this office if any of the above conditions change. Page 3 of 3 Mine Plan Area Black Mountain 5 33 4 - aa- al al a al_ al a al nysms- _az I 1 -1 t v. 3 _ I a I a — I � I a- t a E 1 A a S. Water Taps APProx Location 40.246620, -104.195079 - 3 003 061 10 N W E 0 0.076.15 0.3 Miles LSi a -.1 a 16 -21 C� a= LSI -aNlis.� MC, QWD Water Tanks I� b a - at al 11 ,_. I � arm _WS -ara a_ _�� ' a a rase �-eala _suer ara 14 �.a Arralor arse _ - aAS 7 Ca a I Win- ➢ Ian 3 -me a _a 7 A I aPla - —a arMara aI�F_ a � 2a �r afS L SIMESSICealliiE _ IC- Laramie Weld I Kimball Morgan Adams nv .1. y ., re, :a c RECEIVED Transaction #. Date 11125/ O19 Transactson Total CREDIT CARD 369580" 3 18 8 PM $90 00 90 GO Before the Colorado Ground Water Commission 1313 Sherman St.. Rrn 821 Denver. CO 80203 NOV 2 5 2019 MIER RESOURCES STATE ENGINEER COLO CONCERNING THE APP1_,IC ATION of BLACK MOUNT _AINi LAND COMPANY. LP TO CHANGE THE TYPE AND PLACE of USE of WELL PERMIT NOS. 9595 -FP, 9596 -FP, 31607 -FP, 31608-F11, 31609 -FP, 31635 -FP, 50753 -FP, 50754 -FP AND 50755 -FP PURSUANT To SECTION 37 90 111(1)(G), C.R.S. T H O r I A S W. KO R V ER, No. 36924 PETROS WHITE, LL1C 1999 BROAIv7WAN% SUITE 3200 DENVER, CO 80?02 TELEPHo E• (303)825-1980 FAX: (30 )825-1983 E-MAIL: korver c�petros-white.eom COMMISSION USE ONLY CaseNumber: I G1W -- EQU U S FARMS, INC. STATEMENT OF OBJEC'T'ION Eq us Farms, Inc. "E uus„ , by and through its undersigned attorneys, hereby states its obi P' objection t the above referenced application filed by Black Mountain Land Company, LP ("Black untain"), and states as follows in support thereof: 1. Eq uus is the owner of irrigable land in the vicinity of the property an which Black Mountain proposes to change. 1� _ -, the place and type of use for the subject wells. Eq nus awns water rights and wells permitted to withdraw water from. the Lost Creek Designated g Desid Basin, including Under Well Permit Numbers 12505 -FP, 31617 -FP, 31618 -FP, �. 31641 -FP, and 31603 -FP. 3. Upon information and belief, the subject change in place and type of use may injure or u.easonably impair & us existing water rights. 4. Any approval roval of the subject application must be pursuant to terms and conditions to prevent injury to, or unreasonaDis impairment of, &pus, water rights. 5. Black iviountain in u si be held to strict proof as to all elements of the application including, without application hout limitation, that the a lication complies with all applicable requirements of 1 the Water Rit hts Determination and Administration Act of 1969, and that the proposed ehanue in place and type of use does not impair existing. eater rights. 6. The subject application and the notice of it provides insufficient information to determine the effect the proposed change in place and type of use would have on Equus' water rights. 7. Pursuant to Colo. Rev. Stat. § 37-90-112 and the notice of the subject application, this statement briefly states the nature of Equus' objections. Equus reserves the right to state more d jan detailed bases for its objection in further proceedings before the Commission. �' Dated this day of November, 2019. FETROS WHITE, LLC Thomas W. Korver, No. 36924 Attorneys ys for quus Farms; Inc. Before the 1313 Sherman Ground Water Commission, St., Rm 821, Colorado Denver, CO 8O2O3 COMMISSION USE ONLY IN LAND AND DESIGNATED THE PLACE COMPANY, MATTER OF GROUND USE OF LP AN OF FOR APPLICATION WELL WATER A REQUEST PERMITS BASIN BY TO (WELL IN BLACK CHANGE THE PERMIT LOST MOUNTAIN THE CREEK NOS. TYPE 9595 -FP, 9596 -FP, 316O7 -FP, 316O8 -FP, 318O -FP, 31635 -FP, 50753 -FP, 5O754 -FP and 50755 -FP) Matthew Machado - No. 31233 Case No. Attorneys for Lyons G a d d is 363 Centennial Morgan Kahn Parkway County Hall Quality Jeffers suite 110 Dwora Water k & Grant, District PC Louisville, CO 80027 Telephone: mm a cha ddo@lyo (720) 720-3672 nsga ddi . com OBJECTION OF MCRGAN COUNTY QUALITY WATER DISTRICT The Morgan County Quality Water District ("District"), by and through its attorneys, Lyons Gadd is Kahn Jeffers Dworak & Grant, PC, submits the following objections to the application for conditional well permits submitted by Black Mountain Land Company, LP ("Black Mountain") pursuant to § 37-0O-111 (1)(g) C.R.S. and hereby requests party status in any proceedings regarding this application: 1. The District's contact information is: Morgan County Quality Water District Attn: Ken Pflager, General Manager P.C. Box 1218 17586 Road 20 Fort Morgan, CO 80701 (070) 867-3054 all pleadings, communications and other documents related to this rulemaking should be sent to: Matthew Machado Lyons G a d d is Kahn Jeffers Dwo ra k& Grant, PC 363 Centennial Pkwy, Suite 110 Page 2 Louisville, CO 80027 (720) 726-3672 mmachado@iyonsgaddis.com 2. The District is a special district organized pursuant to Title 32 of the Colorado Revised Statutes. The District was formed in 1976 to provide potable water primarily to rural residents in Morgan county and portions of held and Washington counties. Currently, the District serves approximately 3200 taps in said counties. The communities served by the District depend on the District to provide potable water. 3. The primary source of potable water used by the District is the alluvial aquifer of the Hay Gulch Subbasin ("Hay Gulch alluvium") of the Lost Creek Designated Ground Water Basin. A map of the basin Hay Gulch Su bbasin is attached as EXHIBIT A. Since approximately 1978, the District has provided water from the Hay Gulch alluvium to its customers pursuant to five final permits issued by the commission. These final permits allow the District to withdraw 2130 acre feet per year. 4. According to the Application, Black Mountain proposes to change the use of wells from irrigation to irrigation, stock watering, industrial use for ail and gas development and mining operations on its land in Hay Gulch. 5. The commission is required to protect vested rights for the withdrawal of designated ground water. § 37-90-102(1), -1037, -109, and -111, C.R.S.; Thompson v. Colorado Ground Water Commission, 575 P.2d 372, 377 (Colo. 1978). The Commission is required to deny permits if the proposed appropriation would cause material injury to vested water rights or increase the depletion to the Lost Creek Designated Ground Water Basin. C.R.S. 37 -9G -111(1)(g). Before the change can be approved, Applicant must demonstrate compliance with the standards set forth in C.R.S. 37-9G-111 and Rule 7 of the Rules of Procedure for All Adjudicatory Hearings before the Colorado Ground water Commission, 2CCR 410-2 §7. 6. Hay Gulch is a relatively small drainage basin with very limited natural underground flow and recharge. Any contaminants entering the aquifer as a result of the changed uses have a high probability of impacting the District's wells. The Commission should not approve any use requiring infiltration in Hay Gulch of the changed water, including use in a replacement plan or artificial storage and recovery plan. 7. The claims in the Application lack specificity and definition, and the District reserves the right to raise additional objections as it obtains further facts regarding the Application and claims. 8. This objection is continuing in nature and shall apply to any and all further amendments to the original Application. Dated: November 19 , 2019. Page 3 LYONS CADDIS KAHN HALL JEFFERS DWORAK +& GRANT, Pc Matthew Machado mmachado@fronsgaddis.com ATTORNEYS FOR OPPOSER, MORGAN COUNTY QUALITY WATER DISTRICT Page 4 CERTIFICATE of SERVICE hereby certify that on this 19th day of November 2019, I served a true and correct copy of the foregoing OBJECTION OF MORGAN COUNTY QUALITY WATER DISTRICT pia email to the following: Black Mountain Land Company, LP Attn: Brittany Schamaun Brittany.schamaun@blackmtn.com Joseph (Jody) Grantham Jody.grantham@state.co.us Colorado Ground Water Commission Kevin Rein P.E. Devi n. reinstate.co.us its/ .Jennifer Kaufman EXHIBIT A ,PLATE itti2 WAVE" Mitt Am' '€.Mfr'ritTIP ,7''A liCaleA tc$ a 40u4+P i Topographic Boundary I Ai* /vi1 rOA/ - NAL f Y - P4 7Ihre4'5 0/1 AlAla Qra,•/RA1 earns 1NJeu,,sucTioam, E`dd� t�rPJA�t� War J Y!' Y .t s ".V te - Peas:. aroma tar iv a.u.s0 weii bitt r M Iii ?MAZY d'1 Saar' .00er raMPiltea sou -moan r t dcdatlii AWE t, r!,/dAitr r rim EAS1 B0U NDARY HAS' GULCH SUB B IN WEST BOUNDARY HAY GULCH SUB IN T .r nr dirt eri T { J ToPQgraphic Boundary t iT a MR= r a 4.41eND Atiea•l•+sc pang Wag ,ersnv CAIW~Irge ,w rrxrtwaref &MOM rr mete Why aetovafrsr tar�fiav ar nag IP C align Sat reef d.aT.laidsetts e .mcasittrniad reetiS PRVR oIii'` D 1Ox57 CRIER GROUND 4 F7ER BASIN i �l l DAiFl 5-4A'AP HOE CO'Yi�f NT/E5 -i WATER Mel. en MO .51701P4 TAO rac1 cicA t s ArbaP .••••• m CaivrOgArl. l,.�' [iKafiAT,kl Rl ,ryl►a .Cat, adt?oliji, dViAT- RP' %wen wait a lFFR1,: ir. Xhaa' taµv83 two d®>ms or- rratxot rst a,Itrss car 4r47.07.47.11,0 Ott aterfsiAt /2E4 J E I �I Figure 1: Hay Gulch June 4, 2018 Pao -e 2 BEFORE THE GROUND WATER COMMISSION, ION, STATE OF COLORADO CASE NO. 19-Gw- STATEMENT OF OBJECTION OF FRONT RANGE RESOURCES, LLC IN THE MATTER OF APPLICATIONS FOR CHANGES OF USE OF WELL PERMIT NOS. 9595 -FP, 9596 -FP, 31607 -FP, 31608 -FP, 31609 -FP, 31635 -FP, 50753 -FP, 50754 -FP and 50755 -FP WITHIN THE LOST CREEK DESIGNATED GROUND WATER BASIN IN WELD COM\ T, . APPLICANTS: BLACK MOUNTAIN LAND COMPANY, LP 1. Name, mailing address, and telephone number of Objector: Front Range Resources, LLC ("Front Range") cio FRR Management, LLC -Manager 1001 Bannock Street, Suite 226 Denver, Colorado 80204 (303) 37+6-9705 Copies of all pleadings, communications and other documents related to this matter should be sent to: John D. Buchanan Buchanan Sperling & Holleman PC 1525 Spruce St, Suite 200 Boulder, Colorado 80302 jbuchanan@tbvs.net 2. Brief Statement of the Nature of Objection: a. Front lunge is the owner of vested water rights located in the Lost Creek Designated Ground Water Basin that may be adversely affected by the granting of the applications herein. b. Front Range cannot determine from the published applications whether the changes of water rights sought by the applications herein will be subject to and operated pursuant to such terms and conditions as are necessary to prevent injury to the water rights owned by Front Range. c. Applicants must prove each element of their claims for changes of water rights including, but not limited to, the following: Front Range Resources, LLC Case No. 19G Page 2 The historical use of the water rights proposed to be changed, subject to all restrictions in the subject well permits; ii. The non -speculative future uses of the structures andior water rights sought to be changed.; iii. The protective terms and conditions which must be imposed on applicant to prevent injury to Front Mange's water rights; and iv. The measurement, recording, and other obligations which must be assumed by Applicants in order to assure proper compliance with all terms and conditions in any order ultimately entered herein. d. This Statement of Objection is continuing in nature and shall apply to any amendments to the applications without the need to file additional statements of objection. Front Lange reserves the right to raise additional objections upon further investigation. Dated this 20th day of November, 2019. B UC HANAN SPERLING & HOLLEMAN PC John Buchanan #45191 1 ATTORNEYS FOR OBJECTOR., FRONT RANGE RESOURCES, LLC CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that on the 20th day of November, 2019, a true ,and correct copy of the foregoing STATEMENT of OBJECTION OF FRONT RANGE RESOURCES, LLC was delivered to the following parties via. e-mail: Colorado Ground 'mater Commission Staff' 1313 Sherman Street Suite 821 Denver, Colorado 80203 Alan Curtis, Esq. Attorneys for Applicants, Black Mountain Land Company, LL alanc@white-jankowski.com Weld County Dept. of Planning Services 1555 N 17th Ave Greeley, CO 80631 RE: CHANGE OF USE APPLICATIONS WITHIN THE DESIGNATED BASINS Gear Chris, On behalf of our client Black Mountain Land Company, LP ("BM"), Leonard Rice Engineers ("LRE") has been involved in the engineering and consumptive use analyses on 6 wells in which BM has requested a change of use on. LRE is also continuing to support BM to see the change of use permits through approval with the Colorado Ground Water commission ("commission"). Beth LRE and the commission have run models to determine the consumptive use numbers and BM has agreed to the consumptive use the Commission calculated. The below information explains some background on the change of use requirements and how the consumptive use numbers are put together by the Commission. General change of Water Right Requirements • change of use of designed basin well permits or other water rights are authorized under CRS § 37-9g (Groundwater Management Act or MA) and CCR 410-1 (Designated Basin Rules). Specifically, change of use is authorized under CRS § 37-90-111 and Ru le of the Designated Basin Mules. • To accomplish this the Colorado Ground Water commission requires that the applicant submit an application for change of use. Consistent with Designated Basin Rule 7.7, the change in use shall not result in an increase over the historic depletion of the aquifer by the well. Moreover, under Designated Basin Rule 7.7.1, the future average annual withdrawal shall not exceed the average annual legal historic withdrawal. Historic withdrawal is defined as the average annual volumetric amount of ground water withdrawn by a well during the life of the well permit. This is different than historic depletion because historic depletion equals the historic withdrawal minus the amount and percolates back to the aquifer (return flows) or runs off the field. See Designated Basin Rule 4.2.17. • Designated Basin Rule 7.19 governs how an applicant computes the historic withdrawal and depletion. Information required to compute the historic withdrawal is: O Irrigation system and pump efficiency tests O Meter readings O 'dater consumption records determined by the amount of historical irrigated acres tires the crop irrigation requirement (crop consumptive use minus precipitation). The commission provides values for crop consumptive use, O Minimum of 10 years of historical record. * The commission does not allow credit towards historic use for irrigation on unauthorized acres or if the diversion was greater than the permitted amount. Moreover, the commission accounts for return flogs based upon the irrigation method, More return flows for flood irrigation versus sprinkler irrigation. • The applicant or the commission can compute the historic withdrawal and depletion based upon the submitted information, Black Mountain Land Company, LIB information • Black Mountain Land Company, LP (BM) is in the process of changing six (6) designated basin wells with nine (g) designated basin final permits - Permit Nos. 9596-FPR, 9595-FPR, 31607-FP/50753-FP. 31608-FP/50754-FP, 31609- FR/50755-FP and 1635 -FP — from irrigation to irrigation, industrial mining, industrial oil and gas, fire protection and stock watering. The Commission has evaluated the applications, considered the applications complete and noticed the publications in the county paper (Greeley Tribune). The Commission, with approval of BM, computed the allowed average annual withdrawal for each well and permit • BM conducted irrigation system and pump efficiency tests on each well, provided meter readings on the wells that had a flow meter, provided the last 10 years US, Farm Service Agency crop records, and provided the last 10 years electrical records. All this information was provided to the Commission as a part of the application process and was used by the Commission in calculating the allowed average annual historic consumptive use. The end result is the Commission computes the amount of water that was actually consumed by the crop and therefore lost to the water system (Lost creep in this case), No credit is given for overpumping, return flows to the aquifer, or runoff from the field. This water must remain in the system to prevent injury and to balance the water system. An equation is provided below. Annual Withdrawal = crop Deeds (consumption plus evaporation) + Return flaws + Runoff off the field Consumption = Annual ''withdrawal — Return flows — Runoff off the field Annual Withdraw cannot exceed permitted amounts and consumption or crop Needs cannot exceed the authorized irrigation requirements. BM is currently in the process of going through hearings at the Commission to receive final approval of such water applications. The objections received were specific to the location of where the water is to be used, the specific uses, and how much water is to be transferred to the new multi- ,Ise permits. The objections are not against the overall change of use approval on such water wells but merely on the specific details of the new permits. Regards, William H. Francaak, R.E., Esq. Director - Industrial iiVater Leonard Rice Engineers, Inc. : Alan Curtis, white & Jankowski LLC Brittany Schamaun, Black Mountain Kira Cuff, Millcreek Engineering BLACK MOUNTAIN ATTACHMENT F: WATER SUPPLY NARRATIVE AND MAPS Black Mountain Sand Weld LFC (Black Mountain) plans to construct and operate the Lost Creek Mine (Facility), a 2,4 million ton per year (Mtpy) industrial proppant sand production facility located in weld County, Colorado. It will consist of an open pit raining operation, sand wash processing plant, and associated Ioadout facility located on 2,215.59 acres of private land. Utilities, including gas, water, and electric, will be brought to the area. See Figures 1, General Location Flap, and 2, Facility Flap, for location details. Operational Water Requirements The Facility will produce industrial proppant sands over approximately a 35 -year period. All mined material (plant feed) will report to the sand gash processing plant for separation and beneficiation Plant feed material is wet screened as it enters the process area. Specialized containment areas (decant) designed to facilitate efficient draining of wet nand at the processing plant are proposed for use. Drained water will be captured and recycled in the closed loop system. Screened material will go through a series of processes to remove clay and feldspar materials. An inert surfactant will be used to assist in the removal the clay and feldspar materials. A thickener will allow solids to concentrate to a mud which is then pumped through a filter press membrane to remove solids and the water is then captured in the closed loop system and recycled. Filtered solids will be stored in the backfill stockpile or may be directly backfilled into the pit. These processes are designed to minimize evaporation and reduce the energy required to dry the sand product. Water from the closed loop system will not be discharged to the surface or groundwater systems. Two lined ponds will be available to support the plant and ensure water is maintained within the processing system and not discharged. One pond will contain process water from the plant and will be used to feed the process water tank. The second pored will be used for temporary storage of slurry from the plant, as necessary. The ponds will be located adjacent to each other within the sand wash processing plant area, lined with HDPE liners, and will be constructed at grade. Both ponds will be approximately 0.5 acres in area, with a depth of no more than 10 feet. They will be capable of handling approximately 1.6 million gallons each. Safety berms will surround each pond. The sand wash processing plant will use an estimated 600-800 gpm of fresh water for the separation and beneficiation process. Recovery methods at the plant have been designed to maximize water recycle and reuse as much water as possible within the Facility's closed loop system. Additional water requirements will include dust suppression on haul roads and at the plant, and equipment washing needs. It is estimated that dust suppression activities will require approximately 58 gpm of fresh water. The equipment wash bay, located at the maintenance/warehouse building will have a 5,000 -gallon fresh water tank that will be used to wash the equipment for maintenance activities. This wash bay will have a low flow pump and washing the equipment will take approximately 3,000 gallons of water 2-3 times per week. Water needed for the Facility's operation will be provided by existing water wells on adjacent property owned) by Mack iviountain land LP, located ;approximately 8.0 miles southwest of the plant. Water storage tanks and a process water pipeline with booster pumps will be constructed to transport water from these wells to be stored in a small tank for use at the sand wash processing plant. The pipeline BLACK MOUNTAIN SAND ATTACHMENT F: WATER SUPPLY NARRATIVE AND MAPS would be built entirely on land owned by Black Mountain Land Company LP within Weld County. See Figure 3, Process Water Pipeline, for the location of the existing wells and the proposed pipeline route. Black Fountain is in the process of applying for sic of the existing wells to be changed from agricultural use to multiple use for the purpose of supplying the Facility with water. Black Mountain understands that a Use by Special Review (USR) from Weld County will not be required for the construction and installation of the water storage tanks or the pipeline and booster pumps as the planned line will be less than 15'1 in diameter and will net extend outside the Weld County limits. See Figure 3, Process Water Pipeline, for the permit numbers of the existing wells proposed for use. No additional water use is anticipated as part of the reclamation activities at the site. As part of the planned concurrent reclamation process outlined its Attachment K, affected areas will be filled with backfill materials, regraded, and contoured to match the surrounding natural landscape at a 5:1(H:V) ,slope. Topsoil will be placed over the backfill and seeded with a Weld County approved mix. Once seeding has occurred, the reclamation area will not be irrigated. Since eater from these wells is already being withdrawn from the aquifer for agricultural use, and since Mack Mountain is in the process of transferring these water rights to multiple use, there are no new groundwater impacts from water withdrawals anticipated as a result of the proposed Facility operations. Potable Water Requirements Potable water for use in the office building and warehouse/maintenance building for drinking water and for the sanitary systems will be purchased from Morgan County QualityWater District. It is anticipated that less than 3.6 gpm of water will be required for drinking water and sanitary systems at the Facility. Water purchased Morgan County Quality Water District's is not anticipated to need any treatment prior to use at the site. REV -- DESCRIPTION C DATE ARR'VD NiirzicEREn. SO P E WIT aA .4..t*tiro .I SOP M 5711 two COIL UT M1 17 Phone. 1bJtltb7 21M Fax: 153071 104`2«E I BLACK MOUNTAIN LOST GREEK WELD COUNTY, CO Empire Reslervar NI 81. IL *MI MIN7AIra Htn..101 WOW fOh011$111IIMI11!rfra :.r Wa +h rerraScex_ wNN;C4R iT.u6` "tit ' fit +!7rCA P•+G OEM p IR v �Y;QpM*:F. YI1SH AM. a:Agat.'TAM %Mk h;.L'lart*ar+m a,Ki en:ntliNnd4a rfolir f;it•w -N{ Oaf t rsinttsiat @F•Nlll�FTI .-_+.InZ5lar.can roftNN Iie!7.V[A.WNBloafOEIT.€. - . r TT virciaA^ Mw re oil! CfiFiAt TIC MICK NNW OR WWI CRPAPM gC1 41/4MC NI FOR Tile OnKre v neR.L11 W41 THEA177WCAVAeChOff. ANC* II *Ant tt9Pkr EfiIFllftWattiPMacOONar 18152- 3a82 I Legend 3€178+ ( --6T 806 I y' !Ards & 1-6D Afi�y a EaVn; l' ORYLR 1-: Tap50il flesh! ;SCREEN 1 T':nitil.r (::Mil e. usPAIRING f -- T Raars ccvSTRLC:TIGNI &SI 1 a l r :� • IJ •id iii J E,ih:iht$ 1p,kir+c, Flan' Haer 5 cckplla iii";. Laa au' Silas :PA;1 •E,nQD-::1uc: L I^. Proceas BeiICin• �'wGk"III Gv.p�'711C �.: a I.IA4;J 1C+C-2.010nsi . - Cr? SUrQzniht Dag,ha,'sz, -yJ S'.s=k.=merganr? Ei•.fiker C Rein _' I iht ... • Anglin', al.; ii1N R A1rsvy � • °irk .. 1. ro, he N.cra s Trarlk �1 r ~- 9 o• F°sricirrg - ,� y J SIW": -"- - r=- F'r+aCsea JJfslar ; 8. 5hcp. 1PJarrnac�e ti°, pYh= r, Ghac: in es ,:i.1 8starecs 8-.E=ien ' 1PJa" 3 1� 5' e S r E', ilsint I;"'+R,$0•r.l+rs: .. gr . yl• Hrluav r--- pllwtinz Vllr-:- :11 - 3r T:ch11;:A 71y Trrl ES;xciN —ank Cram~ Constr'.:Ocm tr3I Thic.rnee &el in& F'ca- 1,�, Dyer D.al Collec'.ara. '<<+ EI waling a'.alien 3tscke• Emsrgenc., B.nker fJ -, "1. 'u+ - 0-:-.., fir• J {, —/ _ 1 ‘0.; ,1 \d. �.,y, } /� {1 Q Topsoil I Stockpile .a LI ltll �1 G 7 J 9rnnn + . a (Si - , — •' Facilities — ^EN —� �- Li -i8: f 3 O r at,42.0'' 'co o Rhine Entrance T ; r a�.l 111 1 Y �� /f /F in C � Q w " 104'° 12' 24.511 W �I -I ° i } Backflll Stockpile Estimated Location Initial Haul Road of VI VUPORT EXTENTS I , \\ , � : ,, f`ff� f I 1 s 000 ft N ,RSV DESCRIPTION DATE A?RVD l If. I r.4:'.r. r:1 i'.r. T.: S.re: : T 31 Art:1 l'i1"LI1 lAIN .i+�14 D �:5r c:�'. ti I,iIN� '.a.. '.I.r. ie CC inn- c .11:1.1 I:XSTd.I r��E tat caNanze tlpN..: _: II1-:.1?I..: d',t.:-.':1.1. !1::11.7.4%.•-r IZ1 al!: ,•;71. :-I:.hr JdM :;T•I.I • ..:: 'N Jill 1r'1li ;4' -T;T- At '_1:.0.1:1 :74.1r. t:X1:1=+:1:1 if.-/`�..Mil1 r cirri`1 ,'.7.1 1 ii de itrt'•1`C.-1.1..:F29.: 4.-ii.!1 N h-;4 ..- -. ,' 111 !l -...1i1. 1illef. N4ti<I .:- ,i. 1.1:•71 _:-� .11 • ;:►Ill 14....1, is h s 1::,, 1.- a. Ls, 61T ..:: nil J!'- I air'- id.z. • la, .i .::•1 ro •I •.•:1!•;:::?: .:$ ::r: J1:1.1 r::lob r 4.t. 4 �I qJaI -... r -AA? :::•_•:• I .i a1.I,i='f I tl Il�ti iltir't .:I%Yr .11 : ..C'Et..;4:c£°11.C'.:V .+:r :� -TI_+_ Fiyurr Z. Faciliy Map - .. `_2..11E. ' _ s.F..'; ::: JI:;::::.'. ? ..A".: :r•"•1 •i: Iri,T r. ;_ h►ri I L L E I R E E E E F� I , :.f-!1 1.1 V I f s 1.�1.e.:::,,,,,C N �.-.:•.i.f • =. 3:4-�..: r . 'r:: iL ti 7L.£:i ' 5 1_cl 7 i- .:Sla', tr..r../:-.. �.I�.' III t: k. tlM cT0.1a1 t LC Well 3 (31636 -FP -R) LG Wall 14 (9596 -FP -R) I 1 I LC Well 13 I (959 -FP-R) LC VUsll 18 (31607 -FP -R) ' LC Wall 15 (3160& 60s -FP -R) LC Well 17 (3150• -FP -R) \Y e 1 Faci lilies 1 _ - EMPIRE RESERVOIR Legend Perrnit Boundary Affected Land Boundary Process Water Pipeline Punch Dells. n;:v DC5cfiIP oti OAK APRVD I�I'iM I LIC E�IAI h�LCREEEEi� I r- ?r :a: 3}i. 3J., -CE* ::� •I t EL:1-d:' - saki ,';4K ft'1O TA..11 I SAN.) "I .7U IT?. -18KC)7.1C; IrNO-SVrtIBLE FOR{C+ST7JGnnyJJ.Z:• 11 dt ..i r..•." 4: U -S rN/I.:.'L{d1 I-aI lit: Trill N•1:1'•1 •rT;.' N•:.1:1!N: pi .4;:i :•r r.1i-I: 11. a1..l4{r..: It! c :•.a'•.ii!tf.!n.il'.al'.:Y5..7re':,1>r.:.-. k cr:?rZE9eG : •H'11to tFn;'E U._ •.''t1:.'.L'.1: "1:,3; :t. •r PI ih: 44 :rl:*1:. 1l1I e. iht? . lA r-1 t Ilr, r:- • m; G;•1: -.p.S- ^L'J':1 ! .N .1. •1 1•„•r7:hi-,-i.;l�T�:A4,Krt..•:�4�:•: Fi(artr3PuMistWithal PSNEliirtr �u�' :5 Il1isC E F'a•- M1:9rL r� X515.''_ BLACK MOUNTAIN Attachment G Evidence of Adequate Sewage Disposal Weld County: Use by Special Review for Mining Operations BLACK . U ` AI ' a t TiTACHMESIT Gs EVIDENCE of ADEQUATE SEWAGE DISPOSAL Approximately 145 people will be employed at the Black Mountain Sand Weld LLC (Black Mountain's Lost Creek Mine (Facility). The Facility will operate 24 hours a day, 7days a week, 365 days a year. Sanitary lavatories have been included in the design for both the office building and the maintenance/warehouse building. The Facility is not within the boundaries of a municipality or special district that provides public surer services and there is no existing sewage disposal system at the site. A new onsite septic system and leach field will be installed during the construction of the Facility and will receive only biodegradable wastes. The proposed location of the sanitary system is shown on the attached Site Plan Map and was chosen due to its distance from Facility features, minimal potential for soil compaction from equipment, lack of site development activity, and good availability for maintenance. The sanitary system will use water purchased from Morgan County Quality Water District and will be located: > 100 feet from all wells • > 10 feet from any potable water supply line • > 5 feet from all structures • > 10 feet from all property lines > 10 feet from all stormwater structures at the Facility > 200 feet from the closest mining pit slopes. There are no springs, ditches, wetlands, or other water courses located within the affected lands boundary and the sanitary system will not be located within a 100 -year floodplain. A Commercial Onsite Water Treatment System (O 1 Ts ) Permit will be obtained from Weld County prior to the sanitary system installation. Wage Weld County: Use by Special Review for Mining Operations 3a82 I Legend 3€178+ ( - 806 I y' ,:ans -6T 3. 1-6D Ana "Y= 6aUn; mil' ORYLR 1-: T=sail flesh! --z;' SCREEN 1 .r (m T.:Nitil:Mile. usPdIAING f T Raars ccvSTk'LGTlov &SI I a l r 1 :� .'J •id •iii J E,il7iniu 1p,kihr, Flan' Haer S ackDllari,f Laa au' Silas L I^. Procaas 3uilcin• 1.1.14:2 1C<C•;.O 1ohsi ,.. Cr? $6rSZniht Dar, ha,,37., C Rey 2 I int a`"yJ S'.a=k.=merganr? Ei•.fiker Ftl:elini, j!.; ifin R A1rsvy (lift Orr" [.re ne '�.cra s Tank �, r "_ go• F'$ricirrs - nc y J SIW": -"- - !=- F'MC98aJJ&l8r ;�'• 5hcp.1Nerand[�e ti°, pYn= r, Ghac: in es ' Satarecs &a=im ' 1Na. Send 5'*esa •1• E',-ilsint I;"+R,80•", t:ris: 1gr c..+yl. Hrluav r--- phwtigim%es - 3r T:ch11;:A 71y Srrl Es.xcih L., —ark i8: -paint, Constr'.:Ocm 1J I Thictirnel � Sallin5 F'ci— . ., Dtpar D.al Collec'.ara. 'cr ' al I -veiling o'.alion 31ecke• Emsrgsnc} B.nker fJ -, 'u+ - - fir• {, —• . _ k ? J) ,' 23) Topsoil Stockpile a ' 7 , JnFnnn s 4',J - _: - •' Facilities — ^EN —� �- 4— f 3 O r at, co o Rhine Entrancew Tr 111 1 Y ; -12' �� /f /F a C co Q " 104'° 24.5" W �I ›-. -I ° O i } Backflll Stockpile Estimated Location Initial Haul Road of VI VUPORT EXTENTS I , , \\ •e.n � : , • f`ff�f I 15 000 ft N RZV DESCRIPTION DATE A?RVD l Ir. I : r.4:'.n r:1 r.r...: S.re: ::1 31 : IC P., I', 1, 5 , SAND 1 LI T SIN 1N ' �5rc:� : iIN a ,. P1 ue 1 '.cL:-':i.r. ie CC �, inn- c .Lcii ili re.IrnsE Fat caNalkezil N, .:-: II5-:.ICI..:d'.e.:-.':1.1! !1::1.7.4%•.eIar al!: ,•;71. :.r.tf Jail :iT:1.1 a _- !N , il.I�� v :A' lir :IL 8.1.."..0.1:1.:e:74 .11=.:.:Fr.li+:1:I if.-sr : c65I`1 r(e.1 1 ii:O: itit'•1`C.-11...:F29.: ".1•. :1:�1.1:•7A_:_.,'''- ;►:.::Il..;,:rl.urih;i�::,, .,. '�r!1 or hp;4�.... ,.,.' 111 i4-•..lil. {. t1'A.N4tiel .:- I.- a. ii;• ta.T%..:: nil .O- I:fir '- at.. • la's.; .•ar.,'i •. ::,!.:•:+` .:M:P:A.:1.i r: :lab 4.1. gggJ•�I �•. Cr :::�_.:. I ,l al.hi==f'.I r1 -<-P llti :,,11.5_ c , -.. rillulri..,Ik-Pk3�Mai <•t•,L� •- •:•••. -.., •.I .r-:' :[ IT.YFr.Y� .--Y`y'f. f-1.:Trr..—..—. :::lr;::::.'• ? ..A".": :r•„•) •i: Iri,1 r. ;_ h�l I L L ENGINEER" R E E , :.f-�� 1.1 V Ir l,�i.e. _::f:4-nsc �..'" f . -�=.?. 3:e -C:.; •..u:;rtir; •.:.r. .r- ..p. .. 't::Vi[. . -.7L.£: i;.' 51_cl7 i- - . "SI"t',r".. - "}r....r.. �. ,' �Jl III!.:IF.,tai vri.b4 Hello