HomeMy WebLinkAbout20183363.tiffSignature: Owner or Authorized Agent v ate
CHANGE OF ZONE (COZ) APPLICATION
FOR PLANNING DEPARTMENT USE
RECEIPT/AMOUNT # 1$ - -- APPLICATION RECEIVED BY
DATE RECEIVED:
CASE # ASSIGNED:
PLANNER ASSIGNED:
Parcel Number 1 4 7 1 3 0 1 o 0- 1
0 4
(12 digit number - found on Tax I .D. information, obtainable at the Weld County Assessor's Office, or w rw.+ .weld .co. us)
(Include all lots being included in the application area. If additional space is required, attach an additional sheet)
Legal Description Lot B, Part NE/4 Section 30 , Township ' North, Range 66 West
Property Address Of Applicable)
Existing Zone District: A
Average Lot Size: 54.1 Minimum Lot Size: 54.1
Proposed Zone District 1-3
Total Acreage: 54.1+/a Proposed #/Lots: 1
Proposed Subdivision Name: NIA
FEE OWNER(S) OF THE PROPERTY Of additional space is required, attach an additional sheet)
Name: NGL Water Solutions DJ, LLC
Work Phone # 303-518-1010 Home Phone # Email Address
Address: 3773 Cherry Creek N Drive; STE 1000 -
City/State/Zip Code Denver* CO 80209
APPLICANT OR AUTHORIZED AGENT (See Below: Authorization must accompany applications signed by Authorized Agent)
t4, Name:�� �
Work Phone # ' C'' � glom a Phone # _ Email Address. P a≥ J *Coin
Address: Cbsem.gy Ac fiesadat
City/State/Zip Code
UTILITIES Water:
Sewer:
Gas:
Electric:
Phone:
NIA
N/A
United
N/A
DISTRICTS: School: RE8 - Ft Lupton
Fire:
Post Office:
Greater Brighton Fire
I (We), the undersigned, hereby request hearings before the Weld County Planning Commission and the Weld County Board
of County Commissioners concerning the proposed Change of Zone for the following described unincorporated area of Weld
County, Colorado:
I (We) here y depose and state under penalties of perjury that all statements, p
contained it y in the application are true and correct to the best of my (ourpcnowled,
must s _ n Is; pplicationa If an Authorized Agent signs, a letter of author'
a pprl i' do If * rpo ration is the fee owner, notarized evidence must be I
oration*
als, and/or plans submitted with or
gnatures of all fee owners of property
f owners must be included with the
he signatory has the lega aut ority
r �
hoU
y
er or Authorized Agent Dal
p rearlitr7r)
APB 17 2018
Weld Co. , � , , ; i Latent
CREEL. Y Ur-i- ICE
CHANGE OF ZONE/REZONING QUESTIONNAIRE:
1. How is the proposed rezoning consistent with the policies of the Weld County Code, Chapter 22? lithe proposed rezoning is
not consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, explain how the proposed rezoning will correct what the applicant perceives as
faulty zoning, or how the proposed rezoning will fit with what the applicant perceives as the changing conditions in the area.
The proposed zoning would further Goal 6 stated in Section 22-2-80 (E) of the Weld County Code of minimizing the
incompatibilities that occur between industrial uses and surrounding properties.
The subject property is within an existing industrial corridor and is located entirely between US -8S and CR-27. In fact, the
eastern 18.9 acres of the subject property was zoned as f-3 In 1963, but the remainder is zoned as Agricultural, The goal of this
application is to have the entire parcel within the 1-3 area.
2. How will the uses allowed by the proposed rezoning be compatible with the surrounding land uses? Include a description of
existing land uses for all properties adjacent to the subject property.
y.
Similar properties to the North, West, and South of the subject property are already zoned as 1-3. To the south, bordering
properties are currently used as a construction yard, a junkyard, and a mini -storage /RV storage. To the east, there is a pipe
yard, a manufacturing plant, and a wind turbine manufacturer, To the north is a stone yard and quarries. To the west is a quarry
and ready -mix plant. Interspersed are a couple of private homes, but the majority of the land use in this area is industrial.
3. Will the property use a septic system, or public sever facilities?
The property will use a septic system, but a minimal number of employees are anticipated,
4. Who will provide adequate water, including fire protection, to the property?
The property has existing irrigation wells, but falls within an existing fire protection district.
5. Does the property have soils with moderate or severe limitations for construction? if yes, the applicant shall submit
information which demonstrates that the limitations can be overcome.
No,
6. Is the road and/or highway facility providing access to the propertytries) adequate to meet the requirements of the proposed
zone district? If not, the applicant shall supply information demonstrating the willingness and financial capability to upgrade the
road and highway facilities.
Yes. CR 271 US -85 Business will be adequate for our needs,
I, is the change of zone area located in a Flood Hazard Overlay District?
No.
8. Is the change of zone area located in a Geologic Hazard Overlay District?
No,
9. is the change of zone area located in the AP (Airport) Overlay District?
No.
WERNSMAN
ENGINEERING AND
LAND
DEVELOPMENT
ERIC WERNSMAN
16493 ESSEX RD
PLC ILLS CO 80651
March 28, 2018
Hayley Balzana
Weld County Public Works
P.O. Box 758
Greeley CO 80632
RE: Drainage report and plan for NGL Water Solutions Di Basin South Weld Facility
Site on CR 27
Dear Hayley
Attached is the Drainage Report and Plan for the Ntt's South Weld Facility
proposed injection well facility. This report addresses both the on -site and off -site
hydrology that affects or is affected by the proposed development.
If you have any further questions or comments regarding this matter,
please contact this office.
Sincerely,
Eric Wernsman P.E.
" I hereby certify that this report for the drainage design for the Nil's
South Weld injection well facility was prepared by me (or under my
direct supervision) in accordance with the provisions of the Weld
County Storm Drainage Criteria for the owners thereof"
Registered Professional Engineer
State of Colorado No. 33371
Index
Page
1-6
7-10
11
12-14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22-23
24
25-28
29
30
31
DRAINAGE REPORT
NOAH POINT PRECIPITATION FREQUENCY ESTIMATES
BASIN AND SUB -BASIN IMPERVIOUSNESS CALLS
100 -YR PEAK RUNOFF ALL BASINS
SWALE CALCULAI1ONS SECTION A -A
SWALE CALCULATIONS SECTION B -B
5 YR HISTORIC RUNOFF CALL (DETENTION RELEASE RATE)
DETENTION VOLUME REQUIRED FAA METHOD
DETENTION VOLUME PROVIDED
WQCV ORIFICE AND REQUIRED VOLUME
5-YR HISTORIC RELEASE RATE ORIFICE
DETENTION POND PUMP CAPACITY
EMERGENCY OVERFLOW CALCULATIONS
NRCS SOIL MAP AND INFORMATION
FEMA MAP
VICINITY MAP
REFERENCES
General Description:
The proposed site is located on the west side of County Road 27 which is a
paved road. Mainly undeveloped agricultural property forms the north side of
the property. The eastern boundary is partially formed by CR 27. There is a
residential property next to the northern half of the eastern border. The south
side of the property borders a commercial facility that has on -site detention. The
west property line is adjacent to State HW 85. The north property line is
approximately 650 ft south of CR S. (Please see vicinity map included in the
report) The proposed site is located within the North East 114 of Section 30,
Township 1 North, Range 6 West of the 6th Prime Meridian. The actual legal
description is Lot "B" REC EXEMPTION 3362 Weld County Colorado. There are
irrigation ditches along the east and west side of the property.. The South Platte
River is about 4000' west of the property. There are no major waterways, water
holding areas or water resources on or adjacent to the property
The entire parcel contains approximately 54.9 acres. The south eastern 14.3
acres of the property will be developed and will be the subject of this report. The
site is proposed to be an injection well facility with gravel and concrete drives,
concrete surfaced truck unloading area, concrete tank containment area, a steel
building used for the injection well pump enclosure and office and native grass
swabs. There is no current ground cover on the existing site because it is
currently being farmed. The soil type present is Altvan Loam. See NRCS soil report
in the appendix for location of soil types. NRCS classifies the soil in hydrologic
group "B" for runoff purposes. In the current and proposed condition, offsite
flows entering the site will be negligible. The general topography of the site slopes
to the north-west from the south-east. It appears as though the property to the
south has on site retention. There are irrigation ditches along the east side that
will divert offsite flows from the east south along CR 27. in the proposed
condition most of the runoff generated by the proposed development will be
collected via sheet flows, swales, and directed toward the on -site detention pond.
The remainder of the un-developed on -site flows will sheet flow unadetained to
the south-west. This area does not contain proposed improvements. The
detention pond is located in the north western portion of the developed property
and releases developed runoff through a staged outlet. A water quality capture
outlet will release minor storm flows over a 40 -hour time period and a major
storm orifice opening will release flows at a five-year historic rate. The detention
pond will be pumped due the existing site topography. The released flow will be
directed to the west. The flow will travel approximately 880' west across the
property before it leaves the site at the 5- yr historic rate as it has historically.
Drainage Basins and Sub -Basins;
There is no Weld County Master Drainage Plan for this site at the current
time. There are existing irrigation ditches along the east and west sides of the
property. The closest major basin is the South Platte River Basin, which lies
approximately 4000 feet to the west. This project site is not located within the
South Platte River 100 -year floodplain1 The site lies on FEMA map panel
08123C2115E which a portion of is included in this report.
There are no offsite drainage basins that will affect this site. As previously
mentioned, the property to the south has on side retention facilities. The existing
irrigation ditches to along the east side of the property will channel offsite flow to
the south around the development.
There are 2 on site basins that direct flow to the detention pond in the
north-west corner. Sub -basin $Z contains 8.1 acres, his an imperviousness of 21
Z
and represents the flows along the northern portion of the project site. The 100 -
year runoff rate is approximately 16.52 cfs. dub -basin S2 is Located in the
southern portion of the site and contains 6.21 acres. 52 has an imperviousness of
12 and generates a 100 -year runoff rate of approximately 10.43 cfs. The entire
developed portion of the site contains 14.31 acres. The entire developed portion
of the site has an imperviousness of 17 and generates a 100-yr runoff rate of
25.42 cfs.
Drainage Design Criteria:
Using the NOAA Atlas 14 Volume 8 Version 2 an IDF table was generated. A
one hour rainfall depth of 1.11 inches and 2.61 inches was determined fora five-
year and 100 -year event, respectively. The rational method was used to calculate
runoff and release rates. . The rational method was used to calculate runoff and
release rates. The detention pond was sized using a 5 -year historic release rate. A
water quality capture volume is designed within the pond to release minor storms
over a 40 -hour period to maintain water duality. The on -site swales were sized to
pass the 100 -year events. The runoff for specific design points was calculated by
inputting the area, imperviousness, soil type, one hour precipitation values, slope,
length of travel and conveyance into the peak runoff spreadsheet. Please see the
corresponding peak runoff and feature design for each point. The release rate and
developed runoff amounts were calculated using the rational method. The
detention pond volume was determined using the Modified FAA Method with one
exception. The discharge rate did not use the soil type value. The discharge rate
was determined by finding the 5-yr historic runoff rate for the site and then
dividing by the site area per Weld County recommendations. The pumps that are
planned for use have the capability of pumping slightly more than the allowed
3
runoff rate but the controlled detention pond outlet structure will limit the
release rate to the allowed 5-yr historic runoff rate.
Drainage Facility Design:
The 100-yr storm volume required by using the Modified FAA method was
determined to be 80,341 cubic feet. With a pond outlet invert of 4947.50, the
100 -year high-water elevation is 4952.0. The available volume provided is
approximately 166,059 cubic feet. The additional volume may be used if future
development occurs on the site. The water quality capture volume (WQCV) can be
included in this volume per the Weld County Addendum to the Urban Drainage
Manual. The minimum WQCV allowed for the site is 0.123 arts -feet. (5358 cubic
feet) The proposed detention outlet has an initial orifice plate to provide water
quality capture volume with one 1" diameter orifice to release the water quality
capture volume runoff. The top of the orifice plate is set at elevation 4948.62 to
ensure that once the water quality volume is captured the storm water spills into
the next stage of the inlet. The second orifice plate with a 2-xJ2" high opening
releases flow to a 12 -inch diameter corrugated metal pipe RCMP) that directs flow
Into a manhole. Two Dayton 4LE22 submersible pumps carry flow to a 4' x 4' rip
rap pad. The released flow then travels approximate 880' east on the property
where it will leave the site as it has historically.
An emergency spillway is designed in the detention pond berm to allow on -
site flows to leave the detention pond in the event that the pond outlet is
clogged. The emergency overflow is provided at elevation 4952. The spillway
base shall be a minimum of 25 feet wide and will limit the flow depth to 5-3/4"
inches at a discharge rate of 25.42 cubic feet per second. Please refer to the
appendix for the calculations regarding the spillway.
LI
Swale Sec A -A is located in SB1 collects all of the developed flows from SB1
and directs them to the detention pond. Sec A -A has a minimum slope of 0.5%.
The manning's "n" is 0.040, which creates a 100 -year water depth of 1.43 feet and
a Froude Number of 0.43.
Swale Sec B=B is located in SB2 collects all of the developed flows from SB2
and directs them to the detention pond. Sec B -B has a minimum slope of 0.4%.
The manning's "n" is 0.040, which creates a 100 -year water depth of 1.25 feet and
a Froude Number of 0.38.
The spreadsheets included in the report detail the physical requirements to
provide adequate drainage ways. Please refer to the spreadsheets for the specific
design.
Once the site vegetation has been re -seeded very little maintenance should
be required for site operation. Care should betaken to keep trash and debris out
of islets and pipes to prevent excess water from building up on the site. If
complete blockage would occur in the detention pond outlet the water would
release through the emergency spillway, if blockages occur they should be
immediately cleaned. All storm water pipes shall be kept clean to maintain full
capacity.
sPf
Conclusions:
The proposed site will control developed storm water flows to an on -site
detention pond. These storm water flows are eventually conveyed to the west.
This report and design will meet the Weld County Code without any
variances. This design should be more than adequate to prevent either on -site or
off -site runoff flows from creating damage. The site is not part of any Weld
County Master Drainage Plan. Please see the reference sheet for a complete list
of references used for this design and report.
6
NOAA Atlas 14, Volume 8, Version 2
Location name: Brighton, Colorado, USA*
Latitude: 40.0268', Longitude: 0104.8138°
Elevation: 4951487 ft**
• source: E$Rt Maps
a''' source: USGS
POINT PRECIPITATION FREQUENCY ESTIMATES
Sonja Perks, Deborah Martin, Sandra Paviovic, Ishsnl Roy. Michael St Laurent Cad Trypeiuk, Ode
Unruh, Michael Veleta, Geoffery Bonin
NOAA, National Weet1ter SINVIeae, Silver Spring, Maryland
PF abulfr I gg Maps & ajri s
PF tabular
PD -based point precipitation frequency estimates with 90% confidence Intervals (In Inches)1
-
- Average recurrence Interval (yearn
1
Duration
-
1
2 5 j
il'.1(0.016.2.19)
10j26
1160
100
208 j[600It_1000j
IS-min0.228
�.�t�'�-D.
0.279
�.�11$-+a. I
19.378
t�.2�1~-t1.�+�G
0..+1
� t�.��-0.+�13'
1 , 61
�' �+.�'M-+tM.Q
0.740
t}.�'I 1.+t�+i
ten
G.�22-1.2S i
1.04
. D.�'GJ 1.�►�
1.2B
D,i��-�1.�►
'1.48
10-min
0,333
19,41'8
(0421-0.7
0450
t7)
0.898
(o.e74-1.25)
1.08
10.7`#12-1,52)
1.29
(0.911-1.55►)
1.82
(1.03-2,23)
ll
1.85
(1.21-2.79)
2.12
(1.34-3.21)
1 6-raen
0.4090.+98
105.314-0.5 31)
0.383-0.848)
0.670
(0.513-0.875)
0138
(0.1138-1.10)
1,10
(0.824-1.53)
1.32
1}.988.1.86)
1,57
(1,11.2.28)
1.816
I
2.25
(1,47-3.40)
2.58
(i,84-3.81)
a
0.8810
0.431.0.' 9)
0.878
{D.i '-0.384)
0,+ 8
(0.696-I.19
j
1 ►48
(1.11-4.07)
1 �'
(1.31-2.51)
2;.13
(1.50-3.05)
2� ►
(1.7Q-3,69)
3.05 1
(2, 4,81
c.22 232.55131)
.°4111r1
0184
4.526.0.881)
I 0.121
', -1101)
1.11
(O.64$•1.45
t.35
III
(1,35.2.53
2.1�9
2.81
3.108
(2.09-4.53)
3J$
(2.483.87)
4.32
I (1734.54)
24w
0.807 r
(0,t -1.04)
0178
(0,759-1.26)
1.31
I (1.01-1.8Q)
214
(1.5342.95)
2t+
(142-3.60)
8.09
(2.21.4.39)
3,55
(2.51-5.31)
4.
t (2.954,85) J
1.13
(3.28-7.86)
i!ji,-In
0.273
(0.882-112)
�1.1t
(0.823.1.35)
141
('1.09.1.81)
1. / 5
(1,35.2,25)
210
(1.75-3.15)
2.711
(2,07-3.83)
3.31
(2.38.4.61)
3,51
.20-5,84)
p 4.75
(3,18-7.03)
d 5.48
(3.54414)
8- '1r
143
(0.816-1,31)
1.23
(11.1111-1. )
1.8'1
0.21-2.05)
188
(1.415-2.13)
2.68
(1.09-3.50)
3,18
(2.33-4.22)
3.88
(217.1.12)
4.32
(3.024.16)
818
(314-7.88)
614
(3.93.8.83)
12-111'
128
(1.02-1.80)
1
81
2.30
(1.82.2.9C)
213
(2.28-3.91)
3.48
(2.84.4.87)
418
(2.99-5.69)
3.T1�
(3.35-187)
6.72
(s.88 -e.23)
6.53
(4.29-9.40)
-I^tf
1+52
(1.23.4.89)
1.50
(1.45-2.23)
2.3
(114-22.85
3.T#
(2114.41)
8.
(3.Q5•5.28)
081
(3404.20)
621
(4.28-877)
4.14
(4.54-9,91)
1+73
I 210
(1.71-2.58)
2,73
2.28
(2.83.4,01)
3.01
(3,14-5.11)
441'1
(3.53-5.04)
61.81
f4.19-7.91)
8+73
{4'.64-8.31)
7.41
(4.911-'1+0.4)
ay
.88
141103°)
3.2�'
(1.18.2.76)
(2.374.64)
'III
3 i
(2.81-4.21)
4.21
(3.32-5.32)
4.82
(3.714.16)
6.44
(4.07-7.11)
6 01
(4.38-5.14)
8.11118
(4.83-9.55)
7.84
(5.18-10.8)
-
2.02
(1.66-2.44)
2.3'9
(1.97.2.90)
312
(2.4-8-310)
3.
(2.90433)
4,33
X4.94
(3.83-6.28)
5.87
(4,18.7.24)
622
(4.50-5.29)
7.12
(4.97-9.71)
7.82
I (5.32-10.8)
T
2.31
(1.92.2.77)
230
(2.24.3.23)
2.34
(2.78.4.01)
2.8+x►
(3.20-4.70)
4.168
5.31
(4.15-6.68)
8.88
8. 82
7 83
(5.30.10.1)
•
8 23
(5.86.11.2) ,.
�/ ��11��,,
1 �l Il
2.
(2.14-3.05)
(2.4''•3.£3)
.
4x21
8.02
_
5.31
(4.61-6.1}4)
ae
$.a9
(5.124.12)
+�
j.
(5.69-10.6)
�i �y
e.4V
(5.94.11,7) .
20. -day
,(2.77-318)
3.28
3.74
(3.15.4.44)
460
(8.70-5.51)
8.13
(4.28-8.08)
8,911
(4.58.7.3►1)
8.78
(5.32.8.24)
; 7.38
(5.894.27)
$.
(8.00-10.4)
8.83
9.74
30 -day
3,1114
(3.27-#.49)
4.37
(3,71.5.11)
5.23
(4.43413)
d�'84
$.8'1
(5.64432)
'.
(6.12-9.33)
8.48
08.50-10.4)
8.14
(612-1f.S)
10.1
(7.29-13.2)
10,8
(7.04-14A)
+4 81 �
4.63
-
(3.87' 5.2'5)
8.'16
(4 _4�1-8.
LID
'5. -1'.1$
( $7 )
7. 1
8,43
5.817`-9.89
I ( )'
8,# 7
.21.1G.#i
� }
010
7'.84-12.1
( )
10.16
1. +� -13,4
{ )
113
8.48.15.1
{ )
1218
8,83 '113.3
( )
810�day
LOB
(4.35.51.56)
I 612
(5.004.73) 1
7.01
(5.00-6.11)
ll MS
(5.78-9.25)
9.23 - -
(7.59-10.9)
119.2 il 11.1
(8.21-12.2) (a 87-13,5)
12.19
(9.03-15.0)
13.1
(9.54-161)
1440
(9.94-18.2)
1 Precipitation frequency (PF) ids in this table are bad on frequoncy analysis of partial duralon series (POS),
Numbers in parenthesis are PP astnates at qtr and upper bounds of IS 50% confidence interval. The probability that precipitation uency
estimates (#x a pen duration and awe recurrence interval) wai be greeter then the upper
upper bounds are not chocked against probable rraxirnurn preclpitabon (PMP) estimates end
Please refer to NOAA Atlas 14 document for more Information.
bound (or lass then ilte lower b0und) is 5%. Estimates et
msyr be higher then curter valid PIPS values.
pac&to T9p
-
PP graphical
P D S -based depth -duration -frequency (DOE) curves
Latitude: 4O.O268'. Longitude: -104.8138°
ram
C
let
V le
I
c
0
co.
mil
F4ii 4
lik
E
5 10 25 50 100 200
NOAA Atlas 14, Volume 8, Version 2
I
NCnit
h.
4
Duration
6.
N
N
i If 1
Average recurrence intern& (years)
>64 ,iiii
a, 12
500 1000
Created (GMT): Sat Mar 24 16:36:36 2018
Back to Top
Maps & aerials
Small scale terrain
Average recurrence
interval
(Yaws)
1
2
5
10
26
50
100
200
-- - 500
-- 1000
Duration
ali
6w1
10 —men
16 -mirk
30 -mirk
6
2 -hr
3 -hr
— 6.4)1
12-ni
244u
2"day
3-41 ay
4-d ay
7-d ay
---- 10 -day
20 -day
-- -P 30 -day
45 -day
sip §0 -day
9
Watt b e r
-- - - r :mss
t
- i I
-fist
wl
3 KM
1
2 mml
i
9
E Bane Si
Large scale twain
•
lammitih often rs e
bar tccrll ins
•
Li °nbPe'
Fir: In
Lvt aanooint
tulle. •
•
J
pi 91
Lace scale aerial
Greeley
•denver
-100km
Ctai I
�viui euv Lorna
Large scale map
cheyome
9
Back to Top
US Depar trneni of Commerce
N3IIncal Oceanic and Atrnospher c Aclminiskrati
National_Weather Service
National Water Center
1325 East West Highway
Silver Spring, MD 20910
Questions?: FIDSC.Ouestionis@noatiegily
Dss iaimer
10
Sub -basin imperviousness
Na South Weld 3/26/2018
SB1
Land Use
Area
(ft2)
I (%)
Impervious Area, Grass
236238
8800
90
Roofs
Concrete Surfaces
- - 2 158
100
40
21
Driveways, Gravel
78540.
352738
Wghtd Avg & Total
Area
Acres
8.10
ENTIRE SITE
Land Use
Area (ft)
1 I (%)0
Impervious Areal Grass
447536!
Roofs
WOO
90
Concrete Surfaces
370Oa
100
Driveways, Gravel
130000;
40
623336
j---_
\Ajhtd Avg & Total Area
Acres
1431
B2
I I (%)
Land Use
Area (ft2)
2
Impervious
Area, Grass
2112981
90
Roofs
0
Concrete Surfaces
7842
100
Driveways, Gravel
51460 _
4O
12
ghtd Avg & Total Area
270600
Acres 6.21
11
---
Designer: Version
2.00
May
2017
released
Company:
_ 0.395(lai s)
ti
_
Date: 3f2812018f2018
Cells
o1 this color
are for
= *
aired
userain.
ut
��''jj i
1R
Project South Weld
w,
::
NOS.
:
..
'.
,. .lat
It
.t`.Li.
tt
Location: Brighton
Coils
of
this
color
dry
for calculatedresults
based
an overrides
—
60
60Iqc
Overland
(Initial) Mono
Runoff
Coefficient,
C
Subcatdiment
Name
Area
NRCS
dr+alo+gl�c
Percent
Overland
Flow Length
(ft)
U! Elevadon
(ft)
(Optional)
WS Elevation
(ft)
(Optional)
(ac)
Steil Group
Imperviousness
2-yr
5-yr
10-yr
25-yr
50-yr
100-yr
500-yr
Historic
14.31
B
2.0
0.01
! 0.01
0.07
0.26
0.34
0.44
0.54
a
B1
8.10
1.
0.13
! 016
023
0.38
0.45
0.52
0.61
65.00
6.21SB2
i B1
0.07
O.O9
0.15 .
0.32
0.39
0.48
0)
85.00
.0
ENTIRE E SITE
14.31
17.0
0.11
; 0,12
0.19
0.
0.42
0.51
0.60
85.00
I
y
I
-
-
-
siessiqs
N
Calculation of Peak Runoff using Rational Method
Computed tic — ti `i- tt
Regional tc = (26 —171 +
60(14i+9)St
;immune- 5 (urban)
tmtimu i- 10 (non -urban)
Selected tc = maxitmintmum , m!n(Computed tt , RegionaI ta)
Select
'-hour rainfall t
Rainfall intensity Equation
0 Time
s
Channel
iTr
l
Fri+
Time
Time oof Concentra
Overland
Flow Slope
Si (fit)
Overland
Flow
t1 (rain)
Time
Channelized
Flow Length I
i.1(ft)
WS Elevation
(ft)
(Optional)
Channelized
Flow Slope
t (
)
NRCS
Conveyance
Factor K
Channelized
Flow Velocity
Vt (ftlaec)
Channelized
Flow Time
tt (min)
Computed
rain
Regional
(min)
WS Elevation
On
(Optional)
' 1 229
0.003
15
0.75
€� 6
32.64
.
0.014
916.00
L
14.1 ?
1314.E
15
0.90 I
24.
,'I'i
58.14
0.004
0 015
_-
24.33
38.84
15
0.90
55.18
0.004
1314.00
0a015
14,.0-
— _
i
Is
UDFCD location for NOAA Atlas 14 Rainfall Depths from the culldown list OR enter vow own depths obtained from the NOAA website (dick this link)
2,yr _Satyr tee 257yr _50tyr 100•yr 5000yr
Iepth* P1 (in) =
Coefficients
0.83 I
1.11
138
1.81
1
219
I
261
3/6
1
a
b
C
0.786
28a50 _
10.00
tion
Selected
t (min)
e" .,T�?':v,, Ik L.f..;c . -16r$ vf' r w.' 144
•if f :♦ L.la ` H
�^ •('�4 Y,
32.54
. M1I R
\
'
tai,-tI_${#J n4 �,L 1 ".i
A f'' Iuy
J'•LL L
,M1. wl�irh• h�14'R •' W vJY—.4
-refEirb....i
38.54
b
L
1.66
1,45
2.06
1.54
atP,
I(in/hr) =
+ tic
2/0
2.42
3.27
2.92
x_69
3.49
5.61
5.02
1.50
1.86
2.44
2.95
1111111.11S
332
M1 i
4 •
.1 I...,1L the- 4: - . L F 3
1' I I;
•
' IL n
w
r
MOM
[F1t ' h ..
•
N
5.07
1.34
0A8
SEE
2.10
0/9
Q(cfs) _ CIA
3.78
1.76
8.33
4.87
EMS
Ind L 4 5
n f
•,4d.'..•L.p4 rij. �.—. •w, to . 1.E _in
4•
Y
S13 /
SQLae
s zre
Normal Flow Analysis - Trapezoidal Channel
1
Project:
Channel ID:
R L SOUTH WELD
Sew A -A read to pan 16.42 cirs
_
•
....
7
_ a+ a a _ IS a a _
Sa _aaa _.
11\
Z1 <__
S
jvo
in i
S. a
a>
-
Design
Informat
n �"In,a
it}
Channel
Invert Slope So = 0.0050 Mt
Manning's
n n = 0.040
Bottom
.' • ldth B = OMMO ft
Left Side
Slope ZI = 4400 f
Right
Side Slope Z2 = 4,00 Mt
Freeboard
Height F = 1.00 ft
Design
Water Depth V = 1.43 ft
Normal
Flow ndflon
Wei
la d)
Discharge
CI = 416.88 cis
Frauds
Number Fr = 0.43
Flow
Velocity V a 2.06 fps
Flow
Area A = 8.18 stiff
op
Width'
T = 11.44 ft
stied
Perimeter P = 11.79 ft
Hydraulic
Radius R = 0.69 ft
Hydraulic
t
Depth D = 022 ft
Specific
Energy Es = 1.50 ft
ntroId
of Flow Area 'to = 0A7 ft
Specific
Force Fs = 0.31 kip
SEA-A.xls., Basics
3/28/2018, 9:04 AM
15
Normal Flaw Analysis - Trapezoidal Channel
Project:
Channel ID:
NM- SOUTH WELD
Y
1
<a
Zi
Sec B -B reqd to pass 10.43 cis
T
a a seen a s a• a a a a r r. a t�
ca.
Ii a
B
a a.
a a a
Z2
es n n orma ` on
HMI
Channel Invert Slope
Manning's n
Bottom Width
Left Side Slope
Right Side Slope
Freeboard Height
Design Water Depth
So = 0.0040 eft
n _ 0.040
IJ r F.00 ft
1 = 4.00 It}ft
Z2 = 4.00 ftlft
F= 1.00 ft
Y_ 1.25 ft
r ii oo
Discharge
Froude Number
Flow Velocity
Flow Area
Top Width
Wetted Perimeter
Hydraulic Radius
Hydraulic Depth
Specific Energy
Cenrtroid of Flow Area
Specific Force
aloe a.
"4 air
Fr=
V=
A=
F't
Es=
Yot
Fs=
10.55 cfs
0,30
1.69 fps
6.25 sq ft
10.00 ft
10.31 ft
0.61 ft
0.63 ft
1.29 ft
0.41 ft
0.20 kip
SECS -E. Is r Basics 3/28/201819:06 AM
I�
CALCULATION OF A PEAK RUNOFF USING RATIONAL METHOD
Project Title:
Catchment ID:
C13
Historic
I. Catchment Hydrologic Oath
Catchment ID = Historic
Area 14,30 Acres
Percent Imperviousness = 2.00 %
NRCS Soil Type = BA, B,C,orC
II. Rainfall Information I (inchfhr) c Cl * P1 !(C2 # Td)*C3
Design Storm Return Period, Tr =
C2=
C3=
P1=
28.60
10.00
0.786
years
1.11 Inches
(input return period for design storm)
(input the value of C1)
(input the value of C2)
(input the value of C3)
(input one -hr prec1ipltationns Sheet "Design Info")
Ill. Analysis of Flow Time (Time of Concentration) for a Catchment
Runoff Coeffiicient, C i. C_
Overide Runoff Coefficient C =
5-yr. Runoff Coefficient, C-5 = 0.08
Overida 5-yr. Runoff Coefficient, C =
(enter an overide C value if desired, or leave blank to accept calculated C,)
(enter an ovarida C-5 value If desired, or leave blank to accept calculated C-5.)
Illustration
NRCS Land
Type
Shorn
Pasture/
lawns
Nearly
Bare
Ground
Gra ed
j Swedes/
Waiervwa s
I Paved Areas &
Shallow Paved Swales
(Sheer Flow)
Heavy
Meadow
Tillage/
Field
�!
20 I
7
10
15
Conve nee
2.5
5
Calculations:
IV. Peak Runoff Prediction
Rainfall Intensity at Computed To, I = _ _ 1_ inch hr
Rainfall Intensity at Regional Tel I 2.57 inchihr
Rainfall intensity at User -Defined Teo 1= 2457 Inchihr
omputed To
Regional Tc
User -Entered Tc
Peak Flowrate, Op =
Peak Flowrate, OpdaCP
Peak Flowrate, Op =
1,30 cfs
3.00 cfs
100 cfs
5yhIstoricc13.xls, To and Peak+ 28/2015, 9:52 AM
/7
DETENTION VOLUME BY TIME MODIFIED FAA METHOD
Project: UTi I WELD
Nash It
Of CA M41'nti Wa
(NOTE: for catchments larger than 90 acres, CIMP hydragraph arid r=ling are recommended}
ease oh er g n t : Ms. vie y roq rig M4
De!•m lrkstkt-n of MINOR Daluitiert Volute Using Modified FAA Method
CatermlnatIors of MAJOR Deta4rtlon Volume Using Modified FM Method
C ithme1 CrSM494 Imperti iaist.n lb. 170 0 percent
Cadre* Oreiner lmpsrthou u I, •111
S N
weal
Catchment Drainage Meta A - 14 310 ion
Catchment Drainage Ain A •
.1# i !
nee
Pasdtva46prntnl NIRCS,Sa i Om u9 Tyra ■ aka C, of C
PrefiamakkpieartNRCS Soil Group Typs e
,
`
A. 0,, C, or 0
Ran) Period fra E?atomion Commit 7 -
IlI t
11 (2, 6, 10. 25, 50, Apr 104)
Return Palrtci kr Delen14on CCrttt'bl T *
_- -
1 n,L - •
pis (2, 5, 10, 26, 54, or 100)
Tim* of Ora mall an of Wei reed Tc ■
_
15 pi -Irwin
i -nine al Lance ntt+M+a n of Welensibtil It i
i ► . ,
mama.
JNiawst71s Uet RelearnRase e e
,- _, '
chaos
Nbwabit UM Reeess a Rai! Ii ■
-
sae
O11.41OO(PMCipitalllaati Pi '
t
i t4
enerhour Frst'Ipisedien P, Y4
i -
i
design *ainf ll FOF Female 1 • Ct• Prt('3,+TJ'Cs
fi,04driiarti O11C• Cif 2850
5ir.ign Ndrtlal 1W Formula la Cr Pd(C3tT,}"C,
crGesnt or. C1 t
lit, t3'1S1
C8amticlanl Two CI a 10
Caslflrilarot Two CI •
Coefficient Three C3 - - 0 7154
Coefficient Prue Ca '
0
.z tomiimninT
--
.n! Ylriilu' !4 ".Y urr i Tj'yi11I •Jt, n11�.-maw
t n
Rumen OvIaliicanl C a 043
f�itflitfl €'aaerFrciattt C = 026
in0gw Past Pun* sarrki : 33 02 els
la�tk}w Peak 1�tJrtafl +r tin s 2218 cda
JAIIrp'Jrabb Pwak tkttl}t�atr Fab dui - ti# ala
,r licit ab * Pull. Dud le* Rat* Co -out - 4.31 de
Nod. 88A S4anfres Velltrrrra s 80,341 talc fat
01110+4. F t,iletlisr > aft Ya4r11rr4+F * 36,0+47 1trlrt
Mdi. FAJ1 dinar l4tora4s 4t+elrarrs ■ 012$ asriMll
Nod, failiafor •tarot•. Velinm • 1144 area-
.
e into
Omni
minutae
rinr,;r1
Rainfall
tntenslty
inches( hr
Lam- I.
Slow
Volume
na-chat
lis a ._
J djeatrrst
Fader
`wr
.,
6tl'a t@.
Aweraga
Callow
do
t•.
°until,
VOIWm
-last
,�
Storage
Volume
eau -fist
_1
ROW I
Dalian
minutes
'L�:�:
'1705th
Him
kt• 144 1 hr
rte•=...
Ink*
Volume
acn-tai
''—
Adjustment
Fader
sel,
.�a.:
I4 a spe
Outflow
cis
,,_•
alike,
Volume
.0 .4n1
:�"'
Aga
Volume
4hti
:�_'stf
0 -
+ 00
0 000
0 00
000
0 000
00
0154 7
0213 1pp
0 272 R
0 741
0 3
0 449
0 309
6.6+1S
0127
0 446 I
0 745 M
0 504
0.663
0122
D.062 I
1 141
1.100
1. t-59
1218
1.277
1336
1 396
1 465
1 514
1 573
1642
1481
1 760
160+D
1 Ma
I 1928
1 9187
2040
2105
2.184
22'233
0.000
O11
0 735 I
0 7814
0 420
0 426
0924
0 512
0.746
0773
0 746
0 720
0 440
0.854
0,624
0.54$
0.4642
0 414
0416
0 435
0394
I 4 353
0311
0.265
0 224
D.1131
13.136
0091
0044
0 001
410411
.0 092
X0134
40186
-0233
-0141
-0 328
-037?
30
60
SO
120
150 u
100
OM
403
2 GO
197
140
1 3t!
1 18
p_C+Dd
1030 I
1 324
1 44410
1 025
1 725
1 807
r 800
osa
065
r 060
0 58
064 [
05S
090
1.04
066
07* I
0 75
0,73
072
0190 i
0043 !
0 010 I
0.097 ,
0_124
0 t51
0 078
*:ice
0967
1254
i 402
1 801
l 0574
1629
$0
60
90
120
1111
1M
210
240
270
300
330
360
$00
420
*10
440
die
640
570
400
430
660
4.50
21114 I
2.1 d
1 76 j
1 61
1 312
117
106
007
0 4S 1
043
0 71 1
0 73 1
009 I
044
0 62
0.60
057
086
052
0 5o
049
0142.
01800
1.007
1002
1 1 SO
1.214
1.242
1304 I
1.341
1 376
1.4100
1 4.3$ i
1 462
1 467
1.511
1 533
1554
1176
1 694
1412 II
1 ISO
1-647 A
0.40
0.56
0,40
0 tie
0 60
056
064 !'
054 I
0$3
0.63
053
0 53
0£1 H
062
062
062 i
052
052
0 52
052
0 51
061
220
1 00
1 72
165
1 60
t.57
1 66 !
114 I
15.3
% 52
161
150
1 f4
1,49
1.49
1 014
1.48
14•
146
14?
1 47
147
210 !
240 4
27'0
1 05
0 96
067
i •7'B
1 940
1.900
0.64
054
053
10.71
0 70 I
OTO
0 205
0 232
0259
1473
F 700
1 i3?
300
0.84
2 047
0 53
0.04
0 266
1.761
334 1
350
300
420
450
480
510
540
670
600
8301
OKI
D 78
0 70
066
0,112
0 49
086
054
051
0.44
0.47
045
044
21393
2,130
2'%76
2.214
2 240
2 202 •
2 314
2.344
2 372
2A00]
2 424
2451
0.53
055
0 52
0 62
052
0 52
0 52
062
0 52
052
0 51 I
091
0 59
0.80
0 ash
0 0
0 46
17 613
066
0 6
0 67
067
0 67
067
0 313
0 340
0 307
0 394
0.421
0.440
0 475
I 0502
0 424
0556
0.682
ii 0408
1761
1706
1809
1 ti2O
1 US
1 834
1 630
1842
11144
1844
I 1 5414
1442
6918
720
0,42
0 41
2.416 i
2 494
0 51 i
0/1
4 87
0 MT
0 434
0 0043
1 439
1 136
720
760
780
010
640
0 47
G 4e
044
043
0 42
040
1063
1174 j
i •24
1 109
4 7231
1.737
0 61
0 61
0 61
0 51
0 61
0 51
1 47
147
1 47
1,46
146
1 O
750
TIC
810
840
040
0 5a
0 57
436
2.822
2 644
2 3136
2 586
0.51
0.51
0.61 "
4.54
0167
0 67
0 e?
0 67
0 500
0 717
$ 0 744
0 iT i
1 en
1,24
1521
1.616
e7(}
000
4.'+4d
960
036
034
034
033
2 Ka
it e2.e
2 644
24113
0 Si
0 Si
0 51
0551
ti 61
067
057
0 6
j 0 714
0 426
I 0 862
0679
t BOS
1800
1 702
1784
470
900
030
960
034
034
0 37
036
1 751
1,744
1 177
1.746
0 81
0 51
0 61
051
i .46
140
i +lie
146
900
1020
0 32
0.31
2 6514
2 O
061
061
068
4M
0 006
0433
1775
'Jae
000 I
1420
1050
1060
1110
1140
1170
1200
1230
1260
1290
1320
1360
4 no
1440
1470
1400
18
1660
1640
14120
0640
1650
4710
1740
1770
UM
0 36
035
034
033
032
032
001
0 31
0 30
0 20
0 20
0 28
0-24
0.27
02?
0 211
0 28
0.26
0 25
0
025
0 24
024
0 23
023
0 23
023
0'22
F i ,eo1
1113
1 624
1 630
11147
1 658
1 se
1 678
1 486
1S*
$ 1 O08
1916
I 1 927
1,436
1.945
1.494
s 1.053
1 4n
rim m
1.964
1 446
3 00'5
I 2 013
2 020
{ 24318
2 494
2 0443
I 2051
0 61
061
0 51
051
051
041
051
051
051
0 S,
061
0 Si
0 51
0 51
051
0 51
" 0 31
0 61
0 81
051
0 51
0 51
0 51
0 51
061
0 51
0 51
`•i
140
1.48
1.46
145
145
1.46
146
146
i 1 45
14+6
i 1,45
i 1 46
i 1 46
1.46
I1410 145
1 45
145
1 45
1 'S
1.44
145
i 45
i 45
1 45
145
146
1 45
14
1060
1060
031
0.30
2 716
2132
0.51
0 St
000
0 se
j 0.060
. O DST
1-760
1.76
1110
1140
1170
1200
1230
1240
1290
1320
1360
029
01.29
025
0 27
027
026
026
020
0.26
2744
2.25
2781
2 790
2 411
2 S28
2 840
2 654
21MS
051
0 61
0.61
0 54
0 61
0,61
0 51
13.61
0 51
066
0.116
Os
006
066
066
0sale
0.46
P 016
1014
1 1 041
1.008
1.095
1,122
1 149
1.170
1203
1 230
' 1,736
1 724
1 713
1.701
1.6"80
1.677
166
1.462
1 530
2 253
2342
2 401
2-440
2 619
2 676
2.447
2 65
2 754
2515
2.674
0 42$
71474
-0 622
-0 671
.0 621
-0 670
-0 no
-0 759
-04113
-0PlIa
'O 9120
1140
026
2 682
0 51
0.66
1 267
1 026
1410
024
2SS
051
04a
1284
1612
1440
i 470
1500
0 24
0.23
1 0 23
2 909
2 923
2 036
0 51
0 51
0 51
i 065
I 010
I 046
1 .310
1.337
1 ,30+4
1 5G
1664
1570
2 233
2 902
3,061-
2110
3.189
3.229
3 246
3 347
34+04
3 4166
•13 870
-1 021
-1 071
-1122
-1 11'3
-1.2+'0'4
-1 275
-1 327
el 376
-1 420
1530
15430
0 23
022
2 047
20069
I 051
051
400
Dee
r .391
1 41
1566
11544
1540
1020
1550
4661
I 1710
1740
17T0
i-'
022
Om
021
0 21
I 021
021
0.20
2 07'2
a
2 9496
3 007
3014
3 030
3 041
051
0 61
0.51
0 51
051
0.51
0 51
'411
4 60
066
0.66
464
0139
0.16
0.65
144,5
4 412
1:4tst
i 626
1,553
1 560
1607
i,.
1 526
1 511
1 496
t 481
1465
1450
1434
I 1.41$
3 $24
_ j
-14.81
-'4•s.
0 -.
4.
-
PM' itMe VMsane 4 -
M4d. PM $nurart.Yrap Were 00;•0+0-N J a •.4376 Nora. MA Maier Iltante Veptunls Dacte-14
UDFCD DETENTION BASIN VOLUME ESTIMATING WORKBOOK Version 2.35, Re4,.3ed January 2015
'I
11444
c13dt4en4*i" acb, Itiodford FM
3/25.1018, 927 AM
l�
STAG E+STORAGE SIZING FOR DETENTION BASINS
Project SOUTH WELD
Basin ID:
lit gas SlapZ
sc-
Roston Information Ono u is
Width of Basin Bottorn, W c in
Length of 8astn Bottom, L t ' ft
Dam Side -slope (H: , Z4 = ft/ft
Sisqe-Stocaug Relaflionshin:
Right Triangle
Isosceles Triangle
Rectangle
Circle I Ellipse
Irregular
OR.. r
OR...
(Use Overicia values In cells 632:G52)
MINOR MAJOR
Storage Requirement from Sheet 'Modified FAA': C.83 _ 1,214 acre -ft.
Storage Requirement from Sheet ltdrograph': acre -fl.
Storage Requirement from Sheet 'Full -Spectrum': acv `t.
Labels
for WOCV, Minor,
& Major Storage
Stages
i
Water
Surface
Elevation
ft
irr•ut
Side
Slope
(H:V)
Wit
Below El.
(Input
Basin
Width at
Stage
ft
f
Basin
Length at
Stage
ft
Q I •ut
Surface
Area at
Stage
ftt
(.3 I•gut
Surface '
Area at
Stage
ft2 User
Overtde
Volume
Below
Stage
it''
o
•A
Surface
Area at
Stage
acres
(o lauti
Volume
Below
Stage
acre -ft
a I ,ut
Target Volumes
for WQCV, Minor,
& Major Storage
Volumes
for •oat k
U.
OtI
47,550
48.0(1
si
�j�
OA)0
jam
.00
.0yy/y
6 320
_
I $8O
j+�
0. 54
0.154
WOCV
48.62
0.00
0.00
19,076
9,925
0.456{x.228
42L00
_ 0.00
37,082
2L747
0.851
0.476
0.00
T 0.00
50.00
0.0
42,823
, 50,699
0,983
11393
51.00
OA)O
0.00
51.8
108J032
1,190
2.480
64,211
166.050
#N/A
1.474
&.812
ANA I
WS 100 YR
52.00
0.00
0.00
MIA
OINIA
I N/A
NI4/A
OVA
#NJA
I #.4A
#tUA
A
#A
#N/A
#NIA
#NIA
i A
I
##N/A
#t /A
#N/A
$iN/A
t$N/A
#N/A
-
j
#NIA.
#N/A
![/A
*NIA
#1
_
MIA
MIA
-
#A
NN/A
#MfA,
!N/A
SN/A
•
1'#N/A
A
#NIA
M
MA
MN/A
At
;NIA
IA
aNtA
#
#NIA
MA
IA
MA
MNIA
-RWA
#N1A
'
#N/A
#NEAz
#N/A
_
AAA
I
# 1A
AlIA
e13deterrtton.xis, Basin
9/28/2018,10:11 AM
ST
STAGE -DISCHARGE SIZING OF THE 11%
Project: NGL SOUTH WELD
Basin ID:
cl
W CV Des Volume In :- utl;
Catchment Imperviousness, l , =
Catchment Area, A
Depth at WOV outlet above lowest perforation, H =
Vertical distance between rows, h
Number of rows, NL
Orifice discharge coefficient, 0 =
Slope of Basin Trickle Channel, S =
Time to Drain the Pond =
Watershed Desi
n Information °m_uft
Percent Soil Type A
Percent Soil Type B =
Percent Soil Type C/D
Outlet Design Information (Output):
3
1 17.0 s
14.31
1
8.00
1.00
0.65
0.004
40
100
percent
acres Diameter of holes, D
feet Number of holes per row, N
inches
ft, /ft
hours
tok
Height of slot, H =
Width of slot, W =
1.028
1
OR
Water Quality Capture Volume, WQCV _
Water Quality Capture Volume (WOCV) = _
Design Volume (WQCVJ 12 * Area * 1.2) Vol It _
Outlet area per row, A0 = _
Total opening area at each row based on user -input above, A0 _
Total opening area at each may based on user -input above, A0 =
inches
inches
inches
0.086 watershed
0.102 acre-feet
0.123 acre-feet
0.83 square inch
0.83 square inch
0.006 square feet
Central ER
Row 1
Row 2 Row
Row 4 Flow 5 Row 6 Flow 7 Flow 8 Row 9 Row 10 Row 11
I 47.
I
I
I 1
r 1
Collection
CE
4827
0.0264
48637
0.0281
0.0296
48.47
48.57
0.0311
48.67
0.0325
l
312812018, 10:12 ANI
RESTRICTOR PLATE SIZING FOR CIRCULAR VERTICAL ORIFICES
Project:
Basin ID:
X
Q_ _
fe/
O
izin the Restrictor Plate for Circular Vertical Orifices or Pipes (intuit)
Water Surface Elevation at Design Depth
Pipe erticat Orifice Entrance Invert Elevation
Required Peak Flow through Orifice at Design Depth
PipeNertical Orifice Diameter (Inches)
Orifice Coefficient
Fu Capacity (Calculated)
Full -flow area
Half Central Angle in Radians
Full -flow capacity
Calculation of Orifice Flow Condition
Half Central Angle (O<Theta .1416)
Flow area
Top width of Orifice (inches)
Height from Invert of Orifice to Bottom of Plate (feet)
Elevation of Bottom of Plate
Resultant Peak Flow Through Orifice at Design Depth
Width of Equivalent Rectangular Vertical Orifice
Elev: WS =
Elev; Invert
-
Dia -
co
f -
Theta ma
Of
Percent of Design Flow
Theta =
T=
Yo=
Elev Plate Bottom Edge
Equivalent Width
#1 Vertical
Office
i
#2 Vertical
Orifice
52.00
47.50 ,
128j'�
1243
0.65
r
l _
019
3.14
82
640%
05
012
9.72
0.21
4.7.71
1.3
i _
057
i
saus c13detention.xls, Restrictor Plate
3/28/2018810:12 A
Pumps I Sump, Effluent and Sewage Pumps I Submersible Sewage Pumps
I
1-1/2 HP Automatic Submersible Sewage Pump, 230 Voltage, 295 GPM of Water @ 15 Ft. of
Head
DAYTON
1-1/2 HP Automatic Submersible Sewage
Pump, 230 Voltage, 295 GPM of Water
15 Ft. of Head
Item # 4LE22 Mfr. Model # 41122 Catalog Page # 2615 UNSPSC PSC # 40151517
•
a
1M How can we improve our
Product Images?
Li Compare
PRODUCT DETAILS
View More
Web Price
$1,249OO / each
This item requires
spacial shipping,
additional charges may
app.
Jump to:
One Time Delivery
O Auto Reorder
+ Add to List
Replacement Parts
Be the first to write a review
Shipping Weight 127.0
lbi
• Email d Print
O
Pickup
Shipping
Available for pickup
Mon. Apr 02
estimated after 4:50
PM.
FORT COLLINS
Branch #218
Branch Info
I Change
Country of Origin China I Country of Origin is subject to change.
Note: Ptoduct availability is real-time updated end adjusted +continuously, The product will
be reserved for you when you complete your order. More
sae
TECHNICAL SPECS
Item
Pump HP
Voltage -
Pumps
Submersible Sewage Pump
1-112
240VAC
Input Phase AC I
Dls+harge N PT 3"
Max. Head - 39 ft
Pumps
Pump Body Cast. Iron
Material
Base Material 303 Stainless Steel
Impeller Cast iron
Pumps
-
umps
Shaft Seal Carbon Ceramic
Material -
Pumps
Cord Length a 25 ft
Pumps
Switch Type - Tether
Pumps
Max. Diameter 3-'112"
Solids
Pump Type Automatic
Amps - Pumps 16.00
Height
Diameter
GPM of Water
5 Ft. of Head
21-1/4"
16-231321
370
GPM of Water 335
10 Ft, of
Head
GPM of Water 295
15 Ft. of
Head
GPM of Water 240
ead
24 Ft, of
GPM of Water 785
25 Ft of
ead
FPM of Water 725
ff 3� Ft, of
Read
Thermal
Protection
Auto
Motor Type P C
Bearing Type Ball
Agency
Compliance
Max. Liquid
Temp.
Motor RPM
CSA
77 Degrees F
1750
Item - Sewage Submersible Sewage Pump
Pumps
Size Overflow Wier FOR SITE Ft = (O/CdtWy.667
H = (O/Cd1N)'t.667
a
25.42 cis
25 II
Height 0.47560809 ft
4r1V34"a
40° 1' 25" N
tie
515831
t
515670
'ale rise la tab II1<
altoil Map may not be valid t this scale.:
515790
1
51880
Hydrologic Soil Group —Weld County, Colorado, Southern Part
51P10
_ •
51
1
map :1:1,9&50 f pond to A landscape (11" x 8.5"} sheet
it` -7
q -lit, u
I I
I
25 1110
Feet
o 50 100 .200 X0
Map ip: Web Mercat r Cornercutsdixs: vossa4 Edge tics: UM Zone 131~1 WG584
USDA Natural Resources
ala Conservation Service
515120
s
51
I
51107[3
II
I I I
51ST+ 516073 51823 51611a
Web Soil Survey
National Cooperative Soil Survey
5151E0
516150
3
A
texo
imt
H
ii
5181'90
219/20'18
Page 1 of 4
400 1'34"N
4m 1'25-N
Hydrologic Grow —Weld Oriurityi Colorado, Southern Part
MAP LEGEND MAP INFORMATION
Arse of Interest (ACM)
Anse of Interest (AI)
Solis
Soil Rating Polygons
A
a
ini
ND
B
C
CFO
a
Not ram or not available
Sal Rating Linos
A
as. ND
— B
~ SID
rat/ C
4ieli CID
amit
Q
Nat red or not avail
Sal Rake Points
A
ND
• B
a Bin
0
0
cm
CI Not Weil or nol a'aWate
Water Features
Streams and Cana
Transmutation
t r i Rails
Interstate illgirmars
US Routes
Maw Roads
Loral Roads
Backgvound
FiciA Aerial
Photography
The soil surveys that comprise your AO! +tee mapped at
124p000.
Warning: Sc Map may riot be valid at this scale.
Enlargement of maps beyond the scale of mapping can cause
misunderstanding of the detail of mapping and accuracy of soil
line placement. The maps do not show the snail areas of
contrasting soils that could have been shown at a more detailed
" scale.
Please rely on the bar scale on each map sheet for map
measurements.
Soiree of Map: Natural Resotrces Conservation Service
'Mb Sol &rimy tJRL:
C to System: Web Mercator (EPSG:3857)
Maps from the Web Sal Strvey are based on the VV b Mercator
projection, stitch preserves direction and shape but distorts
distance and area. A projection that preserves area,. such as the
Albers equal-area conic projection, should be used If more
actuate calculations of distance or area are rimed.
This prodixt is generated from the LI -NRCS certified data as
of the lion date(s) listed beltrw.
Soll Survey Area: d County, Colorado, Southern Part
Survey Nee Data: Version 16, Oct 10, 2017
Sol map units are labeled (as space allows) for map moles
1:50,000 or larger.
Date(s) aerial images were photographed: Sep 20, 2015 —Oct
15, 2016
The orthophoto or other base map on Which the soli lines were
c rlpiled and digitized probably differs from the background
imagery displayed on these maps. As a result, some minor
shifting of map writ boundaries may be evident.
Hydrologic Soil Group —Weld County, Colorado, Southern Part
Hydrologic Soil group
Map unit symbol
R �
Map unit
name
A ores in
,AEI
Percent of AOl
Rating
Altvan loam,
percent slopes
0 to 1
B
18.2
100.0%
100.8% 1
Totals for Area of Interest
18.2
Description
Hydrologic soil groups are based on estimates of runoff potential Soils are
assigned to one of four groups according to the rate of water infiltration when the
soils are not protected by vegetation, are thoroughly wet, and receive
precipitation from long -duration storms,
The soils in the United States are assigned to four groups (Al B, C, and D) and
three dual classes (A/DI B/D, and CID). The groups are defined as follows;
Group A. Soils having a high infiltration rate (low runoff potential) when
thoroughly wet. These consist mainly of deep, well drained to excessively
drained sands or gravelly sands. These soils have a high rate of water
transmission.
Group B. Soils having a moderate infiltration rate when thoroughly wet. These
consist chiefly of moderately deep or deep, moderately well drained or well
drained soils that have moderately fine texture to moderately coarse texture,
These soils have a moderate rate of water transmission.
Group C. Soils having a slow infiltration rate when thoroughly wet. These consist
chiefly of soils having a layer that impedes the downward movement of water or
soils of moderately fine texture or fine texture. These soils have a slow rate of
water transmission,
Group D. Soils having a very slow infiltration rate (high runoff potential) when
thoroughly wet. These consist chiefly of clays that have a high shrink -swell
potential, soils that have a high water table, soils that have a claypan or clay
layer at or near the surface, and soils that are shallow over nearly impervious
material. These soils have a very slow rate of water transmission,
If a soil is assigned to a dual hydrologic group <ND, MI , or DAD), the first letter is
for drained areas and the second is for undrained areas. Only the soils that in
their natural condition are in group D are assigned to dual classes,
Rating Options
Aggregation Method: Dominant Condition
Component Percent Cutoff* None Specified
galNatural Resources Web Soil Survey
Conservation Service National Cooperative Soil Survey
2/912018
Page 3 of 4
2.
Hydrologic Soil Group Weld County, Colorado, Southern part
77e -break Ruse: Higher
Natural Resources Web Soil Survey
Conservation Service National Cooperative Soil Survey
x+'2018
Page 4 of 4
243
National Flood Hazard Layer FiRMette
F ` FEMA
x
�n*r. I`1
401 "N
Feet 1:6,000
2,000
Legend
SEE F6 REPORT FOE arm= LEGEND AND INDEX MAP FOR FIRM PANEL avot T
SPECIAL FLOOD
HAZARD AREAS
OTHER AREAS OF
FLOOD HAZARD
OTHER AREAS
GENERAL
STRUCTURES
OTHER
FEATURES
MAP PANELS
i
Without Bea99 Flood Elevation (BFE)
With BFE or Depth
Regulatory Floodway zone At. W. ow, VE AF
0.2% Annual Chance Flood Hazard, Area
of 1% annual chance flood with average
depth is than one foot or with drainage
areas of less than one square mite 2 a
-, Future Conditions 1% Annual
Chance Flood Hazard Zone x
Area with Reduced Flood Risk due to
Levee. See Note& zone x
INO SCREEN'
-MI-
IIa11r11Ntlrr
Area with Hood Risk due to Leveezznc o
Area of Minima? Flood Hazard zone x
Effective UD11r!'Rs
Area of Undetermined Rid Hazard ,a„(
Channel, Culvert, or Storm Sewer
Levee, Dike, or Floodwall
Crass Sections with 1% Annual Chance
Water S to dare Elevation
Coastal Transect
Base Flood Elation Line (BFE)
Limit of Study
Jurisdiction Boundary
y
Coastal Transect Baseline
Profile Baseline
Hydrographlc Feature
Digital Data Available
No Digital Data Available
Unmapped
'this map complies with FEMA's standards for the use of
digital flood maps if it is not void as described below.
The base mop shown compiles with FEMA's base map
accuracy standards
The flood hazard Information Is derived directly from the
authoritative NFHt. web services provided by FEMA. This map
was exported on 3/24/2018 at 2:04.41 PM and does not
reflect changes or amendments subsequent to this date and
time. The NFI IL and effective information may change or
become superseded by new data over time.
This map image Is void If the one or mote of the following map
elements do not appear: base map imagery, flood zone labels.
legend. scale bar, map creation date. community identifiers,
FIRM panel number, and FIRM effective date. Map images for
unsnapped and unmodernized areas cannot be used for
regulatory purpose&
0
250
500
1,000
1,500
G
a-0 t^
C
arri
> r
(C
1 n
cc
Shi
r
est
• r�
IP i •_0 1
b ft. ? . gums
r:
l
'S
e
•
t„h a
I's 4# r r-sL 1"'i t ®. 4 a 1
4. �S F v o J •.
• V / ti . PI < n4 a- an
Vicin it
r s ,
r r+
it•r 4 Li
SITE
• q f .t•-•• 4 AS
se
• +ow
` 1
R •
✓ ie
s'F air
S
P .
r • I'
• leas.
• s
1 i
S
t L
f g6`
f 4
Sr and
It ID
▪ 7
REFERENCES
1. URBAN STORM DRAINAGE CRITERIA MANUAL VOLl1ME51,2,3
REVISED MARCH 2017
2. NflAA ATLAS 14 VOLUME 8 VERSION 2
3. PEAK RUNOFF PREDICTION BY THE RATIONAL METHOD
VERSION 2 DATED MAY 2017
4. CULVERT DESIGN-UD —CULVERT SPREADSHEET v2.(}Oc DATED FEB
2010 FROM URBAN DRAINAGE CRITERIA MANUAL VOLUME 1
5. CHANNEL DfSlGN-UD-CHANNELS SPREADSHEET v1.04 DATED OCT
2006
6. UD-DETENTION VERSION 2.35 DATED JANUARY 2015
31
lierracon
GeoR.eport
Geotechnical Engineering Report
South Weld Facility
Brighton, Colorado
April 5, 2018
Terracon Project No. 21185026
Prepared for:
NGL Energy Partners, LP
Denver, Colorado
Prepared by:
Terracon Consultants, Inc.
Fort Collins, Colorado
turf acor1.coiii
i rerracon
Environmental
Facilities Geoteehn ica I
materincils
April 5, 2018
NGL Energy Partners, LP
3773 Cheny Creek North Drive, Suite 1000
Denver, Colorado 80209
Attn: Mr. Spence Moallie
P: (303) 815-1010
Et SoencesMcCallieanaleizzom
Re: Geotechnical Engineering Report
South Weld Facility
Southwest of US* Highway 85 and WCR 6
Brighton, Colorado
Terracon Project No, 21185026
Dear Mr. McCallie:
lierracon
io Re&tT
We have completed the geotechnical engineering services for the project referenced above, This
study was performed in general accordance with Terracon Proposal No. P21185026 dated March
6, 2018 This report presents the findings of the subsurface exploration and provides geotechnical
recommendations concerning earthwork and the design and construction of foundations, floor
systems and pavements for the proposed project.
We appreciate the opportunity to be of service to you on this praject Materials testing and
construction observation services are provided by Terracon as well. We would be please to
discuss these services with you, If you have any questions concerning this report, or if we may
be of further service, please contact us.
Sincerely.
Terracon Consultants, Inc
Kurt P. Stauder, P.G.
Project Geologist
Eric D. Bernhardt, P.
Geotechnical Department anager
Terracon Consultants, Inc. 1289 1 1t Avenue Greeley, Colorado 60631
P (970) 351 0460 F (970) 353 8639 terracon.corn
Environmental Facilities
Gectechnical Materials
libriacon
Geokeport
REPORT TOPICS
REPORTSUMMARY aaaarir......f.f■f..•..11.a..a..11•■•a•11.11■a..,11.■■■41x•.,.41x4111MOWS ..aaa.aaaaiiaa.i.fii..fi11■11.■.f•a•a•
i
INTRODUCTION •s.s.........a.ss.■ m.■ Ile Yift.ifif#iBmi.m.Y.saiiaaaaaiisisi
SITECONDITIONS..itia.tiiftf. s...aa...■.■••••••••1100•••••••••••••11.114111411141111•••• aaaaaa a■i.af/aii/faai...•.i.•.aa■a...■ I
PROJECT DESCRIPTION ■■ flan afa.■a•.■.■x4111•a•.•■aa■a•a•■....•.••a.■■••a.ar41s/■a41.■i•.aaa,i/•••ax••u irrii■if•..■
GEOTECHNICAL H I TER1ZATION ■.............■a•...s..f.... s.afaii.a.......s.....................■
GEOTEHNI AL OVERVIEW.i........................................a...■.•.,.*1111....■.rat■.i■t.ifa.aa...■
EARTHORK................................a........./ *x1141., •ssssaa.41x41.41u.•.•.a.................................s.. 5
SHALLOW FOUNDATIONS mom s.ais.inn .ss.u,... s... ..a....naa.s.a.siai saitsiIYi*sitiiiiiift*iit•E,it 10
SEISMIC CONSIDERATIONS Fein gniiN.!•lu•*i1sa,'!,i■ site■ifs.aai.tune.i■.aatuasss.■..■a miss.■.■., 12
FLOORSYSTEMS.. a...i.1ta..■■a..•■ ■■ MN ■1141■■■ ■•.xTh.a.41. ■■41Mi1/s•a.il.es•s• aaaaaaaar.■iii■if•f•f.f■s■ ■•fa.i... 11...41 13
AGGREGATE I RFA EI ROADWAY■.i..•.i..■x.ffJ•...•..........x....•■■..aa...■.■..f■.■f.f•f•f■.•al. 14
RROI ITY.........six.■.n.!l........+...aa.aa...■..■,.u....a■■...a...■■..a■.■r.■ianiiitafiitffaii■#ti..faiffatffitfila•ffat4s 16
GENERAL I iI EI aTY .,!.•lidaa.i.i i414.aanie•sa.,,ii.■41ia*iaa*.n.,i...ii..a..............al.....,....i..a...a.a...a. li 17
Note: This report was originally delivered in a web -based format. Orange Bold text in the report indicates a referenced
section heading. The PDF version also includes hyperli nka which direct the reader to that section and clicking on the
logo will bring you back to this page. For more interactive features, please view your project online at
ciient.tearracion,con.
ATTACHMENTS
EXPLORATION AND TESTING PROCEDURES
SITE LOCATION AND EXPLORATION PLANS
EXPLORATION RESULTS (Boring Logs and Laboratory Data)
SUPPORTING INFORMATION (General Notes and Unified Soil Classification System)
Responsive • Resourceful Reliable
Geotechnical Engineering Report
South Weld Facility Brighton, Colorado
April 5, 2018 • Terracon Project No. 211850 26
REPORT SUMMARY
lierracan
GeoReport
1
Overview statement
2
Topic
A geotechnical
to be constructed
Three (3)
site grades.
exploration has
southwest
borings were performed
perfomied for the proposed South Weld Facility
Highway 85 and CR 6 in Brighton, Colorado.
to depths of approximately 30% feet below existing
Project
Overview
_
been
of U.S.
subsurface
Conditions
Subsurface
about
was
Exploration
conditions encountered
2 to 3 feet of sandy lean
not encountered in our
Results section
in
clay over
exploratory
of this report.
our
well
exploratory
-graded
borings.
borings
sand with silt
Boring logs
generally consisted of
and gravel. Bedrock
are presented in the
Groundwater
Conditions
Groundwater
below
response
irrigation
existing
was
site
to site
on or adjacent
encountered in our test
grades at the time
development and to
to the site and fluctuations
of drilling.
varying
borings at
Groundwater
seasonal
in
depths
nearby
feet
in
of about 20.6 to 21.E
levels can fluctuate
and weather conditions,
water features.
eotechni+oal
concerns
Lean clay
borings completed
beneath
under repeated
could develop.
and pavements
construction
these conditions
guidance
tank
soils
foundations
equipment
re rdin0
were
construction
Ground
wi l l
are
encountered
at this
be required
encountered
stabilization
site.
(settlement)
modification
and
traffic
proposed
These
at
<if
to
within
materials
loads
of soft
some
observe
needed)`
structures.
as
locations
the
well
(access
soils
upper approximately
can be susceptible
as disturbance
drives)
beneath
to provide
Terracon
the conditions
tank
and
foundations,
should
exposed
and
adequate
to
unstable
3
volume
loss
be contacted
and
feet of
change
of strength
conditions
buildings,
support
to provide
_ _
the
for
if
Earthwork
on -site soils typically
backfill on the site provided
in this report. import
Terracon prior to delivery
the Earthwork sedan
suitable
are
(if
site.
report.
for
moisture
needed)
Earthwork
use as general engineered
conditioned and compacted
should be evaluated
recommendations
fill and
as described
and approved
are presented
appear
materials
of
they
to the
this
building
by
in
Grading and
r inage
As discussed in the Grading and
should be designed, constructed
water runoff away from the proposed
allowed to pond adjacent to foundations
practices should be followed to
subgrade. Excessive wetting
movement and distress to foundations,
of
and
avoid
Drainage
maintained
building
foundations/slab
floor
or on
wetting
slabs,
section
to
and
pavements
foundation/slab
concrete
of this report, surface
provide rapid removal
pavements. Water should
and conservative
soils and
soils and subgrade
flatwork and
can
pavements.
drainage
of surface
not
irrigation
pavement
cause
be
Foundations
Clay soils were encountered at
recommend complete over -excavation
and replacing with moisture conditioned
the Colorado Department of Transportation
Site improvements such as the
foundations placed on native soils
are moisture conditioned and
anticipated
properly
proposed
provided
of the
and
compacted.
shallow foundation bearing depths.
clay soils beneath the tank pad
properly compacted materials
(CDOT) Class 6 aggregate base
office building can be constructed
the upper clay soils over -excavated
We
areas
meeting
course.
on
and
Flooryrstems
A slab
the
floor
On
upper
Department
upper
-site
-on
slab
soils
12
-grade
clay
and
inches
soils
replaced
are
Floor
are
suitable
of over
-excavated
as
is
moisture
over
(CDOT)
recommended
-excavation
backfill
to
conditioned,
Class
for the proposed
a depth of at least 3
properly compacted
backfill below
directly beneath the
I structure backfill.
building provided
feet below the proposed
engineered
floor slabs provided
slab consist of Colorado
fill.
the
System
over
with
-excavation
of Transportation
Responsive • Resourceful a Reliable
i
Geotechnical ica l Engineering Report
South Weld Facility a Brighton, Colorado
April 5, 2018 • Terracon Project No. 21185026
lierracon
&eo Rep�W
Topic 1
overview Statement 2
Pavements
Recommended
range
anticipated
presented
from 12
traffic.
in the
Aggregate
inches
rep
Surfaced Roadways thicknesses for this project include
to 15 inches of aggregate base course depending on the
Additional pavement section alternatives and discussion are
ort.
seismic
Considerations
As
International
classification
presented
in
Building
for this
the seismic considerations section of this report, the 2015
Code, which refers to ASCE 7-10, indicates the seismic site
site is D.
Construction
Observation n
and Testing
close monitoring of the
recommendations discussed
foundation, slab and pavement
be retained to monitor this
construction
portion
operations and implementing drainage
herein will be critical in achieving the intended
performance. We therefore recommend that Terracon
of the work.
GeneralThis
comments
engineering
section
contains
report.
important
information about the limitations of
this geotechnical
1. If the reader is reviewing this report as a pdf, the topics (bold orange font) above can be used to access the
appropriate section of the report by simply clicking on the topic itself.
2. This summary is for convenience only. It should be used in conjunction with the entire report for design
purposes. It should be recognized that specific details were not included or fully developed in this section,
and the report must be read in its entirety for a comprehensive understanding of the items contained herein.
Responsive I Resourceful . Reliable ii
Geotechnical Engineering Report
South Weld Facility
Southwest of U.S. Highway 85 and WCR t
Brighton, Colorado
Terracon Project No. 21185026
April 5, 2018
INTRODUCTION
This report presents the results of our subsurface exploration and geotechnical engineering
services performed for the proposed South Weld Facility to be located southwest of U.S. Highway
85 and WCR 6 in Brighton, Colorado. The purpose of these services is to provide information and
geotechnical engineering recommendations relative to:
I
■
•
Subsurface soil and rock conditions
Groundwater conditions
Site preparation and earthwork
Gravel surfaced roadways
Excavation considerations
• Foundation design and construction
• Floor system design and construction
• Seismic considerations
• Lateral earth pressures
The geotechnical engineering scope of services for this project included the advancement of
test borings to depths of approximately 251A feet below existing site grades.
Maps showing the site and boring locations are shown in the Site Location and Exploration
Plan sections, respectively. The results of the laboratory testing performed on soil and bedrock
samples obtained from the site during the field exploration are included on the boring logs and as
separate graphs in the Exploration Results section of this report.
SITE CONDITIONS
The following description of site conditions is derived from our site visit in association with the
field exploration and our review of publicly available geologic and topographic maps.
Parcel information
The approximately 50 -acre parcel is located southwest of the intersection
between U.S. Highway 85 and \CR 6 in Brighton, Colorado. The
approximate Latitude/Longitude of the center of the site is 40.02504° N
104.81336° W (Please refer to Site Location),
Responsive • Resourceful • Reliable
I
Geotechnical Engineering Report
South Weld Facility w Brighton, Colorado
April 5, 2018 • Terracon Project No. 21185026
Existing
Improvements
lierracon
to ieprt
The site is bounded on the north, east, and west by vacant agricultural land.
Commercial/industrial properties are located to the south of the proposed
project.
Current Ground Cover
The site appears to be covered with agricultural crops (seasonally) as well as
native grasses and shrubs.
Existing Topography
Based on our review of existing topographic maps, the site appears relatively
flat.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Our initial understanding of the project was provided in our proposal and was discussed in the
project planning stage. A period of collaboration has transpired since the project was initiated,
and our final understanding of the project conditions is as follows:
Item
Description
Information Provided
NO
proposed
L provided a legal
site development.
plat description
as well conceptual depiction of the
Pro +ect L + sori tion
p
We understand a deep disposal
parcel. In addition, a tank
tanks, an office facility, and
project. We have assumed
site; we estimate the contact
psf.
well will be constructed on a portion
battery consisting of 400 to 1,000 bbl
truck unloading area are planned as
the tanks will be shopebuilt and delivered
stress beneath tanks is approximately
of the
capacity
part of the
to the
2,000
red i n Oslo es
Gp
We
required
anticipate
minor
to achieve
cuts
proposed
and fills
grades.
on the order of 5 feet or less will be
Pavements
assume site roadways
loads to assist with developing
loads
will
be gravel surfaced.
our recommended c
We
ravel
estimated traffic
thicknesses.
GEOTECHNICAL CHARACTERIZATION
Subsurface Profile
Specific conditions encountered at each boring location are indicated on the individual boring logs.
Stratification boundaries on the boring logs represent the approximate location of changes in soil
types; in situ, the transition between materials may be gradual. Details for each of the borings can
be found in Exploration Results. A discussion of field sampling and laboratory testing procedures
and test results are presented in Exploration and Testing Procedures. Based on the results of
the borings, subsurface conditions on the project site can be generalized as follows:
Responsive • Resourceful • Reliable 2
Geotechnical h n i c a l Engineering Re p o rt
South Weld Facility ■ Brighton, Colorado
April 5, 2018 a Terracon Project Now 21185026
Lean clay with sand and gravel
Sand with silt and gravel
Groundwater Conditions
ApproximateO pth to
Bottom of Stratum
About 2 to 3 feet below
existing site grades.
To the maximum depth of
exploration of about 25 feet.
lierracon
GeoReport
CencyfiDensityiHardness
Medium stiff
Medium dense to very dense
The boreholes were observed while drilling and after completion for the presence and level of
groundwater. The water levels observed in the boreholes are noted on the attached boring logs,
and are summarized below:
pe
tip
to
•
rc undwater
while
cirilling
E
ft.
Boring
Numbs.
1
21.4
2
21.0
3
20.6
These observations represent groundwater conditions at the time of the field exploration, and may
not be indicative of other times or at other locations. Groundwater levels can be expected to
fluctuate with varying seasonal and weather conditions, and other factors.
Groundwater level fluctuations occur due to seasonal variations in the water levels present in the
Platte River and other nearby water features, amount of rainfall, runoff and other factors not
evident at the time the borings were performed. Therefore, groundwater levels during
construction or at other times in the life of the facility may be higher or lower than the levels
indicated on the boring logs. The possibility of groundwater level fluctuations should be
considered when developing the design and construction plans for the project. However, it is our
opinion groundwater will not significantly impact the project.
Fluctuations in groundwater levels can best be determined by implementation of a groundwater
monitoring plan. Such a plan would include installation of groundwater piezometers, and periodic
measurement of g roundwate r levels over a sufficient period of time,
Laboratory Testing
A representative soil sample was selected for swell -consolidation testing and exhibited 1.9
percent compression when wetted, Samples of site soils selected for plasticity testing exhibited
low to moderate plasticity with liquid limits ranging from non -plastic to 26 and plasticity indices
Responsive s Resourceful . Reliable 3
Geo►technlcat Engineering Report
South Weld Facility ■ Brighton, Colorado
April 51 2018 s Terracon Project No. 2/185026
ilerracon
GeoReport
ranging from non -plastic to 12, Laboratory test results are presented in the Exploration Results
section of this report.
GEOTECHNICAL OVERVIEW
Based on subsurface conditions encountered in the borings, the site appears suitable for the
proposed construction from a geotechnical point of view provided certain precautions and design
and construction recommendations described in this report are followed. We have identified
potentially soft, low strength clay soils within the upper 3 feet below existing site grades that could
impact design, construction and performance of the proposed structures, pavements, and other
site improvements. This condition will require particular attention in project planning, design and
during construction and are discussed in greater detail in the following sections.
Low Strength Soils
Lean clay soils were encountered within the upper approximately 3 feet of the borings completed
at this site. These materials can be susceptible to volume change beneath tank foundations
(settlement) as well as disturbance and loss of strength under repeated construction traffic loads
(access drives) and unstable conditions could develop. Ground modification beneath tank
foundations, buildings, and pavements of soft soils will be required at some locations to provide
adequate support for construction equipment and proposed structures. Terracon should be
contacted if these conditions areencountered to observe the conditions exposed and to provide
guidance regarding stabilization (if needed).
Foundation and Floor System Recommendations
Clay soils were encountered at anticipated shallow foundation bearing depths. We recommend
complete over -excavation of the clay soils beneath the tank pad areas and replacing with moisture
conditioned and properly compacted materials meeting the Colorado Department of
Transportation (CDOT) Class 6 aggregate base course. Site improvements such as the proposed
office building can be constructed on a foundation placed on nave soils provided the upper clay
soils over -excavated and are moisture conditioned and properly compacted,
We believe a concrete slab -on -grade floor system can be used for the proposed building provided
the soils are over -excavated to a depth of at least 3 feet below the proposed floor slab and replaced
with moisture conditioned, properly compacted engineered fill. On -site soils are suitable as over -
excavation backfill below floor slabs, however, we recommend the upper 12 inches of backfill
beneath the slab consist of Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) Class I structure backfill.
The General comments section provides an understanding of the report limitations.
Responsive r Resourceful a Reliable 4
Geotechnical Engineering Report
South Weld Facility • Brighton, Colorado
April 5, 201 ■ Terracon Project No. 21/85026
EARTHWORK
lie, racon
GeoRepori
The following presents recommendations for site preparation, excavation, subgrade preparation,
fill materials, compaction requirements, utility trench backfill, and grading and drainage.
Earthwork on the project should be observed and evaluated by Terracon. Evaluation of earthwork
should include observation and/or testing of over -excavation beneath the building area, removal
of clay soils beneath tank pads, subgrade preparation, placement of engineered fills, subgrade
stabilization and other geotechnical conditions exposed during the construction of the project.
Site Preparation
Prior to placing any fill, strip and remove existing vegetation, topsoil, and any other deleterious
materials from the proposed construction areas. In addition, clay soils beneath the proposed tank
pad should be completely removed. Stripped organic materials should be wasted from the site or
used to re -vegetate landscaped areas after completion of grading operations. Prior to the
placement of fills, the site should be graded to create a relatively level surface to receive fill, and to
provide for a relatively uniform thickness of fill beneath proposed structures.
Excavation
It is anticipated that excavations for the proposed construction can be accomplished with
conventional earth moving equipment. The soils to be excavated can vary significantly across the
site as their classifications are based solely on the materials encountered in widely -spaced
exploratory test borings. The contractor should verify that similar conditions exist throughout the
proposed area of excavation. if different subsurface conditions are encountered at the time of
construction, the actual conditions should be evaluated to determine any excavation modifications
necessary to maintain safe conditions.
Although evidence of fills or underground facilities such as septic tanks, vaults, basements, and
utilities was not observed during the site reconnaissance, such features co u l d be encountered
during construction. If unexpected underground facilities are encountered, such features should be
removed and the excavation thoroughly cleaned prior to backf ill placement and/or construction.
Any over -excavation that extends below the bottom of foundation elevation and tank pad over -
excavation should extend laterally beyond all edges of the foundations at least 8 inches per foot of
over -excavation depth below the foundation base elevation. The over -excavation should be
backfi l l ed to the foundation/tank base elevation in accordance with the recommendations presented
in this report.
Depending upondepth of excavation and seasonal conditions, surface water infiltration may be
encountered in excavations on the site. It is anticipated that pumping from sumps may be utilized
to control water within excavations.
Responsive • Resourceful • Reliable 5
Geotechnical Engineering Report
South Weld Facility • Brighton, Colorado
April 5, 2018 • Terracon Project No. 21/85026
lIPrracon
tioRejdW
The subgrade soil conditions should be evaluated during the excavation process and the stability
of the soils determined at that time by the contractors' Competent Person. Slope inclinations flatter
than the OSHA maximum values may have to be used. The individual contractor(s) should be
made responsible for designing and constructing stable, temporary excavations as required to
maintain stability of both the excavation sides and bottom. All excavations should be sloped or
shored in the interest of safety following local, and federal regulations, including current OSHA
excavation and trench safety standards.
As a safety measure, it is recommended that all vehicles and soil piles be kept a minimum lateral
distance from the crest of the slope equal to the slope height. The exposed slope face should be
protected against the elements
Subgrade Preparation
After the clay soils have been removed from the beneath the tank pad area and building area, the
top 10 inches of the exposed ground surface should be scarified, moisture conditioned, and
recompacted to at least 95 percent of the maximum dry unit weight as determined by ASTASTM D698
before any new fill or foundation or pavement is placed.
If pockets of soft, loose, or otherwise unsuitable materials are encountered at the bottom of the
foundation excavations and it is inconvenient to lower the foundations, the proposed foundation
elevations may be reestablished by over -excavating the unsuitable soils and backfilling with
compacted engineered fill or lean concrete.
D
Fooling Level
Recommended
CONCRETC
`
Excavationw Level �. ,�........ Excavation feel
Ath-7.71
Lean Concrete Backfill Overexcavation ! Backfill
Design
Footing Level
Recommended
NOTE: Excavations in sketches shown vertical fly convenience. Excavatkas should be sloped as necessary for safety.
After the bottom of the excavation has been compacted, engineered fill can be placed to bring the
tank pad, building pad and pavement subgrade to the desired grade. Engineered fill should be
placed in accordance with the recommendations presented in subsequent sections of this report.
On -site soils can be used as over -excavation backfill beneath the building provided the materials
are moisture conditioned and compacted per the recommendations in this report.
Responsive • Resourceful ■ Reliable
6
Geotechnical Engineering Report
South Weld Facility s Brighton, Colorado
April 5, 2018 so Terracon Project No. 21185026
ilerracon
- GeoRepo`rt
The stability of the subgrade may be affected by precipitation, repetitive construction traffic or
other factors. If unstable conditions develop, workability may be improved by scarifying and
drying. Alternatively, over -excavation of wet zones and replacement with granular materials may
be used, or crushed gravel and/or rock can be tracked or "crowded" into the unstable surface soil
until a stable working surface is attained. Lightweight excavation equipment may also be used to
reduce subgrade pumping.
Fill Materials
The on -site soils or approved granular and low plasticity cohesive imported materials may be used
as fill material beneath the building areas. On -site soils are suitable as over -excavation backfill
below floor slabs provided the upper 12 inches of over -excavation backfill directly beneath the slab
consist of Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) Class I structure backfill. On -site soils
are not suitable for use as compacted fill beneath tank pads.
CDOT Class 7 structure backfill should meet the following material property requirements:
Gradation
er'co,nt
fi
°
er
`a
l: It eight
' _ASTM
C13614`'
2 )
7
100
No. 4 Sieve
30-100
10-60
No. 50 Sieve
No. 200 Sieve
5-20
Soil Properties
Liquid Limit
116.-
Values
35 (max.)
Plastic Limit
6 (max,)
On -site soils are not suitable for use as compacted fill beneath tank. pads. Over -excavation backfill
beneath tank pads should consist of materials meeting CDOT Class 6 aggregate base course, listed
in the following table:
Gradatio
"er cent
finer byawe..
100
3/4"
No. 4 Sieve
30-55
No. 3 Sieve
25-55
No. 200 Sieve
3-12
soil
P'ropertie
hillie-
at
_Values , e, _
Liquid Limit
35 (max.)
Plastic Limit
6 (max.)
Responsive a Resourceful • Reliable
7
Geotechnical Engineering Report
South Weld Facility • Brighton, Colorado
April 5, 2018 • Terracon Project No, 21185026
lierracon
GeoReport
Other import fill materials types may be suitable for use on the site depending upon proposed
application and location on the sites and could be tested and approved for use on a case -by -case
basis.
Compaction Requirements
Engineered fill should be placed and compacted in horizontal lifts, using equipment and procedures
that will produce recommended moisture contents and densities throughout the Uf#.
Fill lift thickness
9 inches or less in loose thickness when heavy, self-
propelled compaction equipment is used
4 to 6 inches in loose thickness when hand -guided
equipment (Ie. jumping jack or plate compactor) is used
Minimum compaction requirements
95 percent of the maximum dry unit weight as determined by
ASTM O698
Moisture content cohesive soil (clay)
-'I to + % of the optimum moisture content
Moisture content cohesionless soil
(sand)
03 to + % of the optimum moisture content
1. We recommend engineered fill be tested for moisture content and compaction during placement.
Should the results of the in -place density tests indicate the specified moisture or compaction limits
have not been met, the area represented by the test should be reworked and retested as required
until the specified moisture and compaction requirements are achieved.
2. Specifically, moisture levels should be maintained low enough to allow for satisfactory compaction to
be achieved without the fill material pumping when proofrolled.
3. Moisture conditioned clay materials should not be allowed to dry out. A loss of moisture within these
materials could result in an increase in the material's expansive potential. Subsequent wetting of these
materials could result in undesirable movement.
tility Trench Backfill
All trench excavations should be made with sufficient working space to permit construction including
backfill placement and compaction.
All underground piping within or near the proposed structures should be designed with flexible
couplings, so minor deviations in alignment do not result in breakage or distress. Utility knockouts
in foundation walls should be oversized to accommodate differential movements. It is imperative
that utility trenches be properly backfilled with relatively clean materials. If utility trenches are
backfilled with relatively clean granular material, they should be capped with at least 18 inches of
cohesive fill in non -pavement areas to reduce the infiltration and conveyance of surface water
through the trench backfill.
Responsive . Resourceful Reliable 8
Geotechnical Engineering Report
South Weld Facility • Brighton, Colorado
April 5, 2018 a Terracon Project No. 21185026
llerracofl
teo Rep t
Utility trenches are a common source of water infiltration and migration. All utility trenches that
penetrate beneath the buildings should be effectively sealed to restrict water intrusion and flow
through the trenches that could migrate below the buildings. We recommend constructing an
effective clay "trench plug" that extends at least 5 feet out from the face of the building exteriors.
The plug material should consist of clay compacted at a water content at or above the soil's optimum
water content. The clay fill should be placed to completely surround the utility line and be compacted
in accordance with recommendations in this report.
It is strongly recommended that a representative of Terracon provide full-time observation and
compaction testing of trench backfi l l within building and pavement areas.
Grading and Drainage
Grades must be adjusted to provide effective drainage away from the proposed buildings and
tank pads during construction and maintained throughout the life of the proposed project.
Infiltration of water into foundation excavations must be prevented during construction. irrigation
or wash facilities adjacent to foundations should be minimized or eliminated. Water permitted to
pond near or adjacent to the perimeter of the structures (either during or post -construction) can
result in significantly higher soil movements than those discussed in this report. As a result, any
estimations of potential movement described in this report cannot be relied upon if positive
drainage is not obtained and maintained, and water is allowed to infiltrate the fill and/or subgrade.
Exposed ground of any) should be sloped at a minimum of 10 percent grade for at least 10 feet
beyond the perimeter of the proposed facilities where possible. Locally, flatter grades may be
necessary to transition ACA access requirements for flatwork. The use of soles, chases and/or
area drains may be required to facilitate drainage in unpaved areas around the perimeter of the
building and tank pads. Backfill against foundations and exterior walls should be properly
compacted and free of all construction debris to reduce the possibility of moisture infiltration. After
construction of the proposed building and prior to project completion, we recommend verification
of final grading be performed to document positive drainage, as described above, has been
achieved.
Flatwork and pavements will be subject to post -construction movement. Maximum grades
practical should be used for paving and flatwork to prevent areas where water can pond. In
addition, allowances in final grades should take into consideration post -construction movement
of flatwork, particularly if such movement would be critical. Where paving or flatwork abuts the
building, care should be taken that joints are properly sealed and maintained to prevent the
infiltration of surface water.
Planters located adjacent to structures (if any) should preferably be self-contained. Sprinkler
mains and spray heads should be located a minimum of 5 feet away from the building line(s).
Low -volume, drip style landscaped irrigation should be used sparingly near the building. Roof
Responsive • Resourceful • Reliable 9
Geotechnical Engineering Report
South Weld Facility • Brighton, Colorado
April 5, 2018 • Terracon Project No. 21185026
ilerracon
G'eoReport
drains should discharge into collection receptacles or be extended away from facilities a minimum
of 10 feet through the use of splash blocks or downspout extensions. A preferred alternative is
to have the roof drains discharge by solid pipe to storm sewers or to a detention pond or other
appropriate outfall,
SHALLOW FOUNDATIONS
If the site has been prepared in accordance with the requirements noted in Earthwork, the
following deign parameters are applicable for shallow foundations.
Tank Pad Foundations - Design Recommendations
Vale
r.
Description
Bearing n material
Properly
placed
engineered fill (CDOT Class 6
aggregate base course)*
Maximum net allowable bearing pressure I
2,000
psf
Sliding coefficient
p = 0.56
y = 120
Moist soil unit weight
Total estimated settlement
Up to 2 inches
Estimated differential settlement
About % to of total settlement
1. The recommended maximum net allowable bearing pressure assumes any unsuitable fill or soft soils, if
encountered, will be over -excavated and replaced with properly compacted engineered fill. The design
bearing pressure applies to a dead load plus design live load condition. The design bearing pressure may
be increased by one-third when considering total loads that Include wind or seismic conditions.
2. We have assumed the tanks will be placed directly on the ground surface and footing will be constructed.
3. The estimated movements presented above are based on the assumption that the effective area of all tanks
is aporo imately 60 feet by 100 feet.
The over -excavation backfill should extend laterally an additional distance of 8 inches for each foot
of over -excavation. The soils should be replaced as engineered fill, conditioned to near optimum
moisture content and compacted, Tank pad excavations should be observed by Terracon. If the
soil conditions encountered differ significantly from those presented in this report, supplemental
recommendations will be required.
Spread Footings for Buildings - Design Recommendations
Bearing material
At least three feet of over -excavation backfill
consisting of property prepared on -site soil, or
new, properly placed engineered fill.
Maximum net allowable bearing preure1
2,000 psf
Responsive • Resourceful • Reliable
10
Geotechnical 1 Engineering Report
South Weld Facility • Brighton, Colorado
April 5, 2018 ■ Terracon Project No. 21185026
lierracon
�`ieoRepo`rt
I
w ,
-.>„.
e ,
; ;Mari
,, imai
l
Columns: 30 inches
Continuous: 18 inches
Minimum foundation dimensions
Active, Ka = 0.33
Passive, Kp = 3.0
At -rest, K0 = 04.50
Lateral earth pressure coefficients2
µ = 0.46
Sliding coefficients2
Moist soil unit weight
y =120 p
Minimum embedment depth below finished
grade
30 inches
Estimated total movement 4
About I inch
Estimated differential movement 4
About % to % of total movement
1. The recommended maximum net allowable bearing pressure assumes any unsuitable fill or softlloose soils,
if encountered, will be over -excavated and replaced with properly compacted engineered fill. The design
bearing pressure applies to a dead load plus design live load condition. The design bearing pressure may
be increased by one-third when considering total loads that include wind or seismic conditions,
2. The lateral earth pressure coefficients and sliding coefficients are ultimate values and do not Include a factor
of safety. The foundation designer should include the appropriate factors of safety.
3. For frost protection and to reduce the effects of seasonal moisture variations in the subgrade soils. The
minimum embedment depth is for perimeter footings beneath unheated areas and Is relative to lowest
adjacent finished grade, typically exterior grade. Interior column pads in heated areas should bear at least
12 inches below the adjacent grade (or top of the floor slab) for confinement of the bearing materials and to
develop the recommended bearing pressure.
The estimated movements presented above are based on the assumption that the maximum footing size is
5 feet for column n footings and 3 feet for continuous footings. Larger foundation footprints will likely require
reduced net allowable soil bearing pressures to reduce risk for potential settlement.
Footings should be proportioned to reduce differential foundation movement. As discussed, total
movement resulting from the assumed structural loads is estimated to be on the order of about I
inch. Additional foundation movements could occur if water from any source infiltrates the
foundation soils; therefore, proper drainage should be provided in the final design and during
construction and throughout the life of the structure. Failure to maintain the proper drainage as
recommended in the Grading and Drainage section of this report will nullify the movement
estimates provided above.
Spread Footings - Construction Considerations
Spread footing construction should only be considered if the estimated foundation movement can
be tolerated. Footings and foundation walls should be reinforced as necessary to reduce the
potential for distress caused by differential foundation movement. Subgrade soils beneath footings
should be moisture conditioned and compacted as described in the Earthwork section of this
Responsive • Resourceful ■ Reliable 1 1
Geotechnical Engineering Report
South Weld Facility • Brighton, Colorado
April 5, 2018 • Terracon Project No. 21185026
lierracon
ioRepi�7tT
report. The moisture content and compaction of subgrade soils should be maintained until
foundation construction.
Unstable surfaces will need to be stabilized prior to ba ckfi I I ing excavations and/or constructing
the building foundation, floor slab and/or project pavements. The use of angular rock, recycled
concrete and/or gravel pushed or "crowded" into the yielding subgrade is considered suitable
means of stabilizing the subgrade. The use of geogrid materials in conjunction with gravel could
also be considered and could be more cost effective.
Unstable subgrade conditions should be observed by Terracon to assess the subgrade and
provide suitable alternatives for stabilization. Stabilized areas should be p roofsro l led prior to
continuing construction to assess the stability of the subgrade.
Foundation excavations should be observed by Terracon, if the soil conditions encountered differ
significantly from those presented in this report, supplemental recommendations will be required,
SEISMIC CONSIDERATIONS
The seismic design requirements for buildings and other structures are based on Seismic Design
Category. Site Classification is required to determine the Seismic Design Category for a structure.
The Site Classification is based on the upper 100 feet of the site profile defined by a weighted
average value of either shear wave velocity, standard penetration resistance, or undrained shear
strength in accordance with Section 20.4 of ASCE 741
fir'' '_;'
_
tor
intio
2015 International Building Code Site Classification
2
ID
40.02504°N
Site
Latitude
Site
Longitude
104.81336°W
Sas s +ectral Acceleration
for a short
period 3
0.177g
Sal
Spectral
Acceleration
for a 1
-second
-
Period 3
o.o85g
I . Seismic site classification in general accordance with the 2015 International Building Code, which refers to
ASCE 7-10.
2. The 2015 International Building Code (IBC) uses a site profile extending to a depth of 100 feet for seismic
site classification. Borings at this site were extended to a m ci m um depth of 30 Va feet. The site properties
below the boring depth to 100 feet were estimated based on our experience and knowledge of geologic
conditions of the general area. Additional deeper borings or geophysical testing may be performed to confirm
the conditions below the current boring depth.
3. These values were obtained using online seismic design maps and tools provided by the USGS
(htt.e://earthcual e,uscs_cov/hazerdsidesi nma.os/).
Responsive . Resourceful • Reliable
12
Geotechriical Engineering Report
South Weld Facility • Brighton, Colorado
April 5, 2018 Terracon Project No. 21185026
FLOOR SYSTEMS
Ilerracon
GeoRepo.rtT
A slab -on -grade may be utilized for the interior floor system for the proposed building provided
the native clay soils are over -excavated to the native sand soil (estimated between 2 and 3 feet),
moisture conditioned, and compacted. In addition, we recommend the upper 12 inches of backfill
beneath the slab consist of Colorado Department of Transportation (DOT) Class 1 structure backfill.
If the estimated movement cannot be tolerated, a structurally -supported floor system, supported
independent of the subgrade materials, is recommended.
Subgrade soils beneath interior and exterior slabs and at the base of the over -excavation should
be scarified to a depth of at least 8 inches, moisture conditioned and compacted. The moisture
content and compaction of subgrade soils should be maintained until slab construction.
Floor System - Design Recommendations
Even when bearing on properly prepared soils, movement of the slab -on -grade floor system is
possible should the subgrade soils undergo an increase in moisture content. We estimate
movement of about 1 inch is possible. If the owner cannot accept the risk of slab movement, a
structural floor should be used. If conventional slab -on -grade is utilized, the subgrade soils should
be over -excavated and prepared as presented in the Site Preparation section of this report.
For structural design of concrete slabs-onirade subjected to point loadings, a modulus of
subgrade reaction of 200 pounds per cubic inch (pal) may be used for floors supported on re -
compacted existing soils at the site.
Additional floor slab desigq and construction recommendations are as follows:
• Positive separations and/or isolation joints should be provided between slabs and all
foundations, columns, or utility lines to allow independent movement.
■ Control joints should be saw -cut in slabs in accordance with ACI Design Manual, Section
302.1R-37 8. .1 (tooled control joints ere not recommended) to control the location and
extent of cracking,
Interior utility trench backfill placed beneath slabs should be compacted in accordance
with the recommendations presented in the Site Preparation section of this report.
Floor slabs should not be constructed on frozen subgrade.
■ The use of a vapor retarder should be considered beneath concrete slabs that will be
covered with wood, tile, carpet or other moisture sensitive or impervious floor coverings,
or when the slab will support equipment sensitive to moisture. When conditions warrant
Responsive • Resourceful . Reliable 13
Geotechnical Engineering Report
South Weld Facility • Brighton, Colorado
April 5, 2018 • Terracon Project No. 21185026
lierracon
'GeoRepait
the use of a vapor retarder, the slab designer and slab contractor should refer to AGI
302 for procedures and cautions regarding the use and placement of a vapor retarder.
Other design and construction considerations, as outlined in the ACI Design Manual,
Section 302.1R are recommended.
Floor Systems - Construction considerations
Movements of slabs -on -grade using the recommendations discussed in previous sections of this
report will likely be reduced and tend to be more uniform. The estimates discussed above assume
that the other recommendations in this report are followed. Additional movement could occur
should the subsurface soils become wetted to significant depths, which could result in potential
excessive movement causing uneven floor slabs and severe cracking. This could be due to over
watering of landscaping, poor drainage, improperly functioning drain systems, and/or broken utility
lines, Therefore, it is imperative that the recommendations presented in this report be followed.
AGGREGATE SURFACED ROADWAYS
Aggregate Surfaced Roadways subgrade Preparation
The access roadways within the project will likely be constructed on properly prepared surficial
soils. However, as the project proceeds, the subgrade may be disturbed due to construction
traffic, desiccation, or rainfall/snow melt. As a result, the aggregate -surfaced roadway subgrade
may not be suitable for construction and corrective action will be required, The subgrade should
be carefully evaluated at the time of construction for signs of disturbance or instability. We
recommend the subgrade be thoroughly proofrolied with a loaded tandem -axle dump truck prior
to final grading. All aggregate -surfaced roadway areas should be moisture conditioned and
properly compacted to the recommendations in this report immediately prior to placement of the
aggregate surfacing.
Aggregate -Surfaced Roadways — Design Recommendations
Design of aggregate -surfaced roadways for the project has been based in general accordance
with the "Aggregate -Surfaced Road Design Catalog" subsection of the 1993 AASHTO "Guide for
the Design of Pavement Structures" and based on subsurface conditions encountered at the site
and laboratory test results.
We assumed an allowable 18 -kip equivalent single -axle load equivalent ranging from 30,000 to
60,000 (ESALS). We should be contacted to confirm and/or modify the recommendations
contained herein if actual traffic volumes differ from the assumed values shown above.
Responsive a Resourceful ■ Reliable 14
Geotechnical Engineering Report
South Weld Facility i Brighton, Colorado
April 5, 2018 . Terracon Project No. 21185026
The recommended pavement section is presented below:
lEerracon
�eoRep &f
Relative
Quality
Roadway
SubgradeAM
of
!
Traffic
Level
Material
,
re.
ate-
Thickness,
�urfacing
in
DP Traffic
4
Area
U. �. Climate
Region
Access
Roadways
Poor to Fair'
Low
Medium
VI
VI
12
15
•
INTO low volume subgrade support characteristics for fine-grained soils.
Quality roadway surfacing materials should consistof a blend of gravel, sand, and fines (clay and
silt). We believe the maximum size particle should not exceed 1 inch in diameter and the gravel
should be crushed with angular edges (not rounded) . The blend of materials should be selected
to allow for easy compaction resulting in a firm, low permeable surface promoting surface
drainage off of the roadway surface. Aggregate base course should be placed in lifts not
exceeding 6 inches and compacted to a minimum of 95 percent of the maximum dry unit weight
as determined by AASHTO T99.
A quality roadway surfacing material should also contain approximately 10 to 26 percent fines (silt
and clay -sized particles passing the No. 200 sieve). The fines should exhibit low to moderate
plasticity (plastic index less than 15) and will act as a binder to help reduce risk for wash boarding.
If the fines content of a roadway surfacing material is comprised mostly of silt, the fines will be
non -plastic and the surfacing materials will not have the benefit of the binder or cohesive aspects.
In order to reduce dust, reclaimed asphalt pavement (RAP) may be used as the upper 2 to 4
inches of the aggregate -surfacing. The RAP should be graded to the specified limits for CDOT
Class b or 6 aggregate base course but modified to contain 10 to 25 percent fines and properly
compacted. Periodic (1 to 2 times a year following maintenance grading) spraying of the surface
with magnesium chloride or other dust suppressant may also be considered to reduce dust and
wash boarding.
Aggregate -surfaced roadways performance is affected by its surroundings. In addition to
providing preventive maintenance, the civil engineer should consider the following
recommendations in the design and layout of aggregate -surfaced roadways:
• Site grades should slope a minimum of 10 percent away from the roadways;
• The subgrade and the aggregate -surfaced roadways have a minimum 10 percent slope to
promote proper surface drainage;
Consider appropriate edge drainage; and
• Install pavement drainage surrounding areas anticipated for frequent wetting
Responsive • Resourceful ■ Reliable 15
Geotechnical Engineering Report
South Weld Facility . Brighton, Colorado
April 5, 2018 . Terracon Project No. 21185026
Aggregate -Surfaced Roadways — Maintenance
ilerracon
aGeoRepo`n
Preventative maintenance should be planned and provided for an ongoing aggregate -surfaced
roadways management program in order to enhance future roadway performance. Preventative
maintenance is usually the first priority when implementing a planned maintenance program and
provides the highest return on investment for aggregate -surfaced roadways.
Periodic maintenance extends the service life of the aggregate -surfaced roadways and should
include re -grading and replacement of aggregate base course in any deteriorated areas. Also,
thicker aggregated base course sections could be used to reduce the required maintenance and
extend the service life of the aggregate -surfaced roadways. Design alternatives which could
reduce the risk of subgrade saturation and improve long-term performance include installing
surface drains next to any areas where surface water could pond. Properly designed and
constructed subsurface drainage will reduce the time subgrade soils are saturated and can also
improve subgrade strength and performance.
CORROSIVITY
Results of water-soluble sulfate testing indicate that ASTM Type I cement should be specified for
all project concrete on and below grade. Foundation concrete should be designed for low sulfate
exposure in accordance with the provisions of the A l Design Manual, Section 318, Chapter 4.
Responsive • Resourceful • Reliable 16
Geotechnical Engineering Report
South Weld Facility • Brighton, Colorado
April 5, 2018 • Terracon Project No4 21185026
GENERAL COMMENTS
lierracon
G oRep rt
As the project progresses, we address assumptions by incorporating information provided by the
design team, if any. Revised project information that reflects actual conditions important to our
services is reflected in the final report. The design team should collaborate with Terracon to
confirm these assumptions and to prepare the final design plans and specifications. This facilitates
the incorporation of our opinions related to implementation of our geotechnical recommendations.
Any information conveyed prior to the final report is for informational purposes only and should
not be considered or used for decision -making purposes.
Our analysis and opinions are based upon our understanding of the project, the geotechnical
conditions in the area, and the data obtained from our site exploration. Natural variations will occur
between exploration point locations or due to the modifying effects of construction or weather.
The nature and extent of such variations may not become evident until during or after construction,
Terracon should be retained as the Geotechnical Engineer, where noted in the final report, to
provide observation and testing services during pertinent construction phases. If variations
appear, we can provide further evaluation and supplemental recommendations. If variations are
noted in the absence of our observation and testing services on -site, we should be immediately
notified so that we can provide evaluation and supplemental recommendations.
Our scope of services does not include either specifically or by implication any environmental or
biological (e.g., mold, fungi, bacteria) assessment of the site or identification or prevention of
pollutants, hazardous materials or conditions. If the owner is concerned about the potential for
such contamination or pollution, other studies should be undertaken.
Our services and any correspondence or collaboration through this system are intended for the
sole benefit and exclusive use of our client for specific application to the project discussed and
are accomplished in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical engineering practices with
no third party beneficiaries intended. Any third party access to services or correspondence is
solely for information purposes to support the services provided by Terracon to our client. Reliance
upon the services and any work product is limited to our client, and is not intended for third parties.
Any use or reliance of the provided information by third parties is done solely at their own risk. No
warranties, either express or implied, are intended or made.
Site characteristics as provided are for design purposes and not to estimate excavation cost, Any
use of our report in that regard is done at the sole risk of the excavating cost estimator as there
may be variations on the site that are not apparent in the data that could significantly impact
excavation cost. Any parties charged with estimating excavation costs should seek their own site
characterization for specific purposes to obtain the specific level of detail necessary for costing.
Site safety, and cost estimating including, excavation support, and dewatering
requirements/design are the responsibility of others. If changes in the nature, design, or location
of the project are planned, our conclusions and recommendations shall not be considered valid
unless we review the changes and eitherverify or modify our conclusions in writing.
Responsive II Resourceful • Reliable 17
ATTACHMENTS
Geotechnical Engineering Report
South Weld Facility a Brighton, Colorado
April 5, 2018 a Terracon Project No. 21185026
EXPLORATION AND TESTING PROCEDURES
The field exploration program consisted of the following;
3
lierracon
2•eoReporr
See Exploration Plan
1. Proposed borings will be completed to the planned depths below existing site grades or practical auger
refusal, if shallower,
Boring Layout and Elevations: We used handheld GPS equipment to locate borings with an
estimated horizontal accuracy of +1-20 feet. A ground surface elevation at each boring location
was estimated by Terracon using publically ica l ly available topographic maps.
Subsurface Exploration Procedures: We advanced soil borings with a track -mounted drill rig
using continuous hollow -stem flight -augers, Three samples were obtained in the upper 10 feet of
each boring and at intervals of 5 feet thereafter. Soil sampling was performed using ring -lined
split -barrel and standard split -barrel sampling procedures. For the standard split -barrel sampling
procedure, a standard 2 -inch outer diameter split -barrel sampling spoon is driven into the ground
by a 140 -pound automatic hammer falling a distance of 30 inches. The number of blows required
to advance the sampling spoon the last 12 inches of a normal 18 -inch penetration is recorded as
the Standard Penetration Test (SPT) resistance value. The SPT resistance values, also referred
to as N -values, are indicated on the boring logs at the test depths. For the ring -lined split -barrel
sampling procedure, a 3 -inch outer diameter split -barrel sampling spoon is used for sampling.
Ring -lined, split -barrel sampling procedures are similar to standard split -barrel sampling
procedures; however, blow counts are typically recorded for 6 -inch intervals for a total of 12 inches
of penetration. The samples were placed in appropriate containers, taken to our soil laboratory for
testing, and classified by a geotechnical engineer. In addition, we observed and recorded
groundwater levels during drilling observations
Our exploration team prepared field boring logs as part of standard drilling operations including
sampling depths, penetration distances, and other relevant sampling information. Field logs
included visual classifications of materials encountered during drilling, and our interpretation of
subsurface conditions between samples. Final boring logs, prepared from field logs, represent
the geotechnical engineer's interpretation, and include modifications based on observations and
laboratory test results.
Property Disturbance: We backfilled borings with auger cuttings after completion. Our services
did not include repair of the site beyond backfilling our boreholes. Excess auger cuttings were
dispersed in the general vicinity of the boreholes. Because backfill material often settles below
the surface after a period, we recommend checking boreholes periodically and backfilling, if
necessary.
Responsive a Resourceful • Reliable
Geotechnical Engineering Report
South Weld Facility a Brighton, Colorado
April 5, 2018 • Terracon Project No. 21185026
Laboratory Testing
1.lerra COfl
�G JRep�v
The project engineer reviewed field data and assigns various laboratory tests to better understand
the engineering properties of various soil strata. Exact types and number of tests cannot be
defined until completion of field work. Laboratory testing was conducted in general accordance
with applicable or other locally recognized standards. Testing was performed under the direction
of a geotechnical engineer and may include the following:
U
■
a
p
Visual classification
Dry density
Grain -size analysis
Shear strength, as appropriate
Water-soluble sulfates
• Moisture content
• Atterberg limits
• One-dimensional swell
• Unconfined compressive strength
Our laboratory testing program often includes examination of soil samples by an engineer. Based
on the material's texture and plasticity, we describe and classify soil samples in accordance with
the Unified Soil Classification System <USCS). Soil and bedrock samples obtained during our
field work will be disposed of after laboratory testing is complete unless a specific request is made
to temporarily store the samples for a longer period of time.
Responsive a Resourceful • Reliable
SITE LOCATION AND EXPLORATION PLANS
SITE LOCATION
South Weld Facility a Brighton, Colorado
April 5, 2018 al Terracon Project No. 21185026
DIAGRAM IS FOR GENERAL LOCATION ONLY, AND IS NOT INTENDED FOR CONSTRUCTION PURPOSES MAP PROVIDED BY MICROSOFT BIND MAPS
4.10 dis5
•
c'n
,�f
7.
ti ,Ittcoi:e-e—
r
lierracon
GeoRevort
Cla-
EXPLORATION PLAN
South Weld Facility • Brighton, Colorado
April 5 2018 is Terracon Project No. 2/185026
>,_ .
17, _.
ea —
.2, a,
a
i
H
ies IL -
in
la
4
_ 3
-
-
z
_
SO) fee:
LEGEND
ii
Bel Approximate boring location
• f 1,�:. ,.,.: �{rrr�srr., .-- r*+ ` H ERE
21; W Ntcl�'.��c:' C1 irds.4in7J' : : : : w':s d �I . -n..; .vdL aDIE H_-�_
DIAGRAM IS FOR GENERAL LOCATION ONLY, AND Is NOT INTENDED FOR CONSTRUCTION PURPOSES
MAP PROVIDED BY MICROSOFT BIND MAPS
EXPLORATION RESULTS
to
p —
W
2
r
0
ice
6.5
..J
t�J
0
E
J
ce
0
0
Ui
cc
i
C
ci
cc
LL
0
s
CD
co
CORING LOG NO. B -I Pa9e 1 of 1
PROJECT: NOL South Weld Facility
CLIENT: NGL Energy Partners, LP
Denver, CO
SITE: Southeast of WCR 6 and Highway 85
Brighton, CO
PERCENT FINES
o
LOCATION EVoratibn Plan
,.,�
t
1S
W
a_ I
RG
J4�TT� ITS
LIMITS
GRAPHIC L
Latitude: 40.025255 Longib : -104-8139G
Approximate Surface Eler: 4.950 (Ft.) +/-
DEPTH ELEVATI_MI Ft_
.
w
WATER LEVI
OBSERVATI0
SAMPLE TY
FIELD TES1
RESULTS
0
LL-PL-PI
--
SANDY
LEAN
CLAY Sow
to medium plasticity
brawn to dark brown,
medium stiff
2.0 3 i
;• ,
WELL
GRADED SAND
WITH SILT
AND GRAVEL(
-SM
tfine to
coarse grainedt noriplactic,
yellow brown, medium donse to dense
1
4-4-6
2
NP'
8
-
i
�
I
6-14-18
};
10
N
32
e43,
I
.
i
e_
•
15-20-25
IMP
•
•
1
N=
et
wl
•)J+'
f
44 I
la
••
2'0�
21-23-1r7
7
•• Pi
D
r
*
la
s
I
F !�
li
2
10-12-14
13
i:
253 -20.5+/-
N=26
Boring Terminated at 2&5 Fee
I
i
'Hammer
tstratilication II
nes are rir$)r<<w:uriv)tir ri.: u, ma 1r insition may ba gradual
Advancement Method:
a 25t1 ID Hollow -stern auger
Ere eabOn S egirroted from
juj J Il -•
pcbished topographic.
irri 1 gnv)
fig:
Abandonment Method:
Boring baoklilled with augerctAttirxgs upon completion.
WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS
Boning Started: 03-19-2O18
Boxing Completed: 03-19-2018
21.4 foot at the completion of drilling
I
I
erre
12891$#
Ave
Greeley, CO
-T
Drill Rig: cME I
Driller. A Charters
Project No,: 211 026
- -
5
rS
a'
8
q
ci
F
a
Ca
2
!ca
Uf
r
F
J
cc
Ui
re
2
a
u.
a
W
0
U.
ci
0
2
?.1
F
BORiNG LOG NO. B-2 Page 1 of 1
PROJECT: H L South Weld Facility
CLIENT: N L Energy Partners, LP
Denver, CO
SITE Southeast of WCR 6 and Highway 85
Brighton, CO
e-
l
WATER LEVEL
OBSERVATIONS
SAMPLE TYPE
ATTERBERG
LIMITS
LL -PL -PI
IPERCENT FINES
GRAPHIC LOG
LOCATION N See Exploration Plan
Latitude: 40.02506a Longitude: -104.8'1419
Approadrnate Surface Elev 4 950 (FL) +/-
DEPTH ELEVATION (FL)
FIELD TEST
RESULTS
WATER
CONTENT (°,4
DRY UNIT
WEIGHT (pd
rir;
SANDY
Lpkist
CLAY; low
to medium plasticity, brown to dark
bmitn,
3-4
16
1 107
26-114A-12
51
or0
medium
2:5
stiff
2 50 -
N=13
WELL
GRADED SAND
WITHSILT
ILT_
D GRAVEL
t<SW-SM),
fine to
ttrAtt l+ 'r / :'i 474:+i ei:+ ' ilee1 71 I:+ tt rA';+'&*
Si. r --a �. a r _�_ t -a .r Elsa -a r a _ a a . r . J. -a.. s
M
F
coarse gr'aine'd:,
255
nonplastic,
yellow
brown4 medium dense to dense
r2�
4-5-6
N=11
�
7-14.-15
N=29
NP
7
10—'
15-25-28
N=53
15--
20—'
_
�4
12-17-10
N=27
-_
8-1
}-13
P4=23
,� 1
Boring Terminated at 254 feet
Stratification lines are approximate. Inrsitu, Cie transition may be grachial.
arrater Tom: Automatic
Advisement Metal:
3.25" ID Hollow -stem auger
Elevations
1i..:§4
I I
-
estimated from published topognphlo
Cs'. ;14. tt;- $ 4 4 4 4 i11
Notes:
-
I
Abandonment Method:
Boring backfilled with auger cuttings upon carnplelior,.
WATER
LEVEL OBSERVATIONS
&ring Started: 03-19-2018
Boring Completed: 03-19.2018
SI 21 feet at the completion of drillingle
1289161
Greeley,
raco
Ave
CO
Celli Rig: ChM -550
Diller A. Chambers
Project It 21165028
to
c�a
1
O
O
0
tO
UJ
cc
k.1
O
O
cc
u.
litcW
w
c3
J
0
2
2
Cy
BORING LOG N. B-3 Pace el of 1
PROJECT: NGL South Weld Facility
CLIENT: NOL Energy Partners, LP
Denver, CO
SITE:
Southeast of WCR 6 and Highway 85
Brighton, CO
GRAPHIC LO►G
LOCATION
Latitude:
DEPTH
See evioration Flans
4+.0247'1° Longitude: -104.'81377'
Approximate Surface Bev: 4. (Ft) +f-
ELEVATION Pt.
r-,
�.
8
WATER LEVEL
OBSERVATIONS
SAMPLE TYPE
FIELD TEST
RESULTS
WATER
CONTENT (%)
DRY UNIT
WEIGHT (poi)
BERG
TTEf TS
LIMITS
PERCENT FINES
LL -PL -PI
_
_
7
SANDY LEAN
CLAY. low to medium plasticity,
brown
to dark
brown!,
3. I
medium stiff I
2-2-4
Ni_s
"
WELL GRADED
SAD!
H
_ SILT
AND
GRAVEL
(SW-SM),
fine to i
-
n
;1MI''.
i
•
31
i
:iii
i
r
�.:
g
`
la-.-
,
.
t/
5
_
coarse grained, nonplastic, yellow brown,
medium dense
to dense-.
A
3-5-6
N=11
-
T
_
1�
10
4,-5-9
N=14
1
Illik
_._
i
15-
20--
-.
15-23-28
N=51 -
113-25-22
=47
6
NP
7
19-15-18
11=33
14
255` -
Boring Terminated at 25.5 Feet
-
Etratilicaum lines approximate, ina, Ihe transition maybe gradual, Kammer
Tye: Advilvita;
Advancement Method:
3,25" ID H€ flow tem auger
Wes:
Abandonment Method:
Boring bac fllied with auger cuttings upon completion.
Elevations
I IP
etimated from published topographic
I ! 4n ar fl to 1 11 i I 4 4i
■ ,. I.
Boiing Started:
03-19-2018
Ming Corrpleted: 03-19-2018
WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS
V' 2a6 feet at the completion of drilling
Drill Rig: CME 0
Drifter: A. Charm
error°
Project No.: 21185026
1289 1st Ave
Greeley, CO
ATTERBERG LIMITS RESULTS
ASTM D4318
r
v-4
�I
re
0
Fol
r
AlERBERO L!WETS
reI
z
15
cc
<40
E
u_
c
60
50
P
-
40
s
I
C
se
N
.1111r
olv
20
E
X
alippir
MH
or OH
10
Mr
Frr
W CL -ML
ML
O1
r
or
i
20
40
LIQUID
60 80 100.
LIMIT
RI
Flues
besckitn
-
ll
Boring
ID Depth
'd
1P
6
W- I' II
SELL-
I
E�
v
v
t SILT
EL
0
B -I
4 - 5.5
NP
NF
!P
SW-SM
SELL-
I
ED
to
tLT
NP
N
P
7
12
51
CL
SANL1L
+L
B-2 +-1
26
14
*
2 1
}.
NP
N
P
NP
7
S -SI' I
SELL-
I
t
ED
�D
V�%th
1LT
n� I '4+'EL
NP
7
SP - I '1
P L ►DEL?
B
+ID
with
SILT
end
R ►'�!'EL
0
B-3 19 - 20.5
NP
NP
PROJECT: NGL South Weld Facility
PROJECT NUMBER, 21/85026
erraco
1289 1et Ave
Greeley, Co
SITE: Southeast
Brighton,
of WCR 6 and Highway 85
CO
CLIENT: NGL Energy Partners, LP
Denver, CO
GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION
AS'TM D422I ATM C136
w
LL
0
a
cn
w
I
IX
0
2
U.S. SIEVE OPENING IN INCHES
4 2 1
6 3 1.5
34 1
I U.S.
3 10.
'� 4 14
SIEVE NUMBERS
16 30 50 100
2t? ? 6 1
I HYDROMETER
200
100
#
I
�,
.
I
I
i
A
aCP
1,..
t
,y
I
,
••
•
■
••Is
a
I
_a
-
—o
•
•
1
85
lith.,
,
•
J
1
I
Inn
:
80
a
■
VIII
•
75
I
tiii
I
IllI:1
65
•
•
MIMI
ill
-
i
RBY
ci
C
-
-
a
H
I
i
Pit
Ik
•
__
_
_
•
'
a
•
T
,4
•
•
M
{
S
h
■
i
i
a
•
■
40
•
•a
•
•
•
,___�
a
•
re
•
•
1
#
I
_
T
-
y
35
i
_
■I
•
;
a
a
1
11
Y
a
I
•
•
#
a
;
a
iL'.5
I
•
25
i
L
I
#
1�
i
I■
20e
t•
i
•
;
■
a
#
r
#Y
y
k
a
15•
.
t
•
10
-.
a
1
a
•
#1
•
;
a
i
■
•
•
a:-.
Jr
.
. 1
a
I
•
t
•
•
1
dUi
■
1
I I
LI
dSi
I
100
10
1
GRAIN SIZE
041
IN MILLIMETERS
0.01
0.001
COBBLES
GRAVEL
SAND
SILT OR CLAY
coarse
fine
coarse
medium
fine
toy tD 111Depth';alls_USCS
Classification
-
I _C
(%
ICI,.
Or"
c
,
•
B4'1
4 - 5►,5
WELL -GRADED
SAND
with SILT and GRAVEL (W-SM)
2
NP
NP
NP
£ . .
15.29
MI
B-1 14 -15.5
WELL
-GRADED
SAND with SILT
(SW-SM)
2
NP
NP
NP
I
r .i .
1176
SANDY
LEAN CLAY (CL)
16
26
14
12
A
B-2 0 -1
*
B-2 0 -10.5
WELL -GRADED
SAND
with SILT and GRAVEL (W-SM)
3
NP
NP
NP
1.17
15.02
0
B-3 19 - 20.5
POORLY GRADED
SAND
with SILT and GRAVEL (SP M)
8
NP
NP
NP
0.89
25.34
I
1
lag
ID
De
1
'
:-�I
e41
°, areal
i %Silr
holFilies
%Cia
r�_,
��
%GraveIl
•
1
B41 4 i 5,5
i
25
2.792
0.728
68.1
k
5.6
0.183
28.2
12.5
1.301
0293
0.111
10.1
82.6
7.3
B,1 14 -15.5
B-2 0 -1
25
0.175
7.3
42.1
5O6
*
B-2 9 -10.5
2.251
0.629
0.18
17.7
75.3
7.0
19
25
3.016
0.119
31.8
B-3 19 - 20.8
0.566
60.8
7.5
PROJECT: NGL South Weld Facility
PROJECT NUMBER: 21/85026
erracon
1
SITE: Southeast of WCR 6 and Highway 85
Brighton, CO
12891st Ave
Greeley, CO
CLIENT: NGL Energy Partiners, LP
Denver, CO
SWELL CONSOLIDATION TEST
nsnnoasas
2
100
1,000
,
10,000
110
%
pe
ll
imen (i nt fic on
1 aat$ificatibri-_pcWC0
SANDY LEAN CLAY( L)
14
B-2 Q i 1 ft
NOTES: Sample exhibited 1.9 percent compression when inundated at an applied load of 250 psf.
CHEMICAL LABORATORY TEST REPORT
Project Number: 2118 5026
Service Date: 03/28/18
Report Date: 04/03/18
Task:
ilErraco -
750 Pilot Road, Suite F
Las Vegas, Nevada 89119
(702) 597-9393
Client Project
N L Energy Partners, LP N L South Weld Facility
Sample Submitted By: Terracon (21)
Date Received: 3/22/2018 Lab No.: 184J326
Results of Corrosion Analysis
Sample Number
Sample Location
Sample Depth (ft)
Water Soluble Sulfate (SO4), ASTM C 1580
(mg/kg)
B-1
2
76
Solubility, AWWA 2540, (m.g/kg) 990
Analyzed By:
Gt.
Trisha Carnpo
Chemist
The tests were performed In general accordance with applicable ASTIR, AASHTO, or DOT test methods. This report is exclusively for the use of the client
indicated above and shall not be reproduced except in full without the written consent of our company. Test results transmitted herein are only applicable to
the actual samples tested at the location(s) referenced and are not necessarily indicative of the properties of other apparently similar or identical materials.
SUPPORTING INFORMATION
GENERAL NOTES
DESCRIPTION TION OF SYMBOLS AND ABBREVIATIONS
NGL South Weld Facility ■ Brighton, CO
4151208 ■ Terracon Project No. 21185026
lierrecon
1eoRejifl
SL Water
Encountered
Water
Initially
Level After a
(PID)
(OVA)
F�
(HP)
(T)
LAC
Standard Penetration Test
Resistance (Blows/Ft.)
Hand Penetrometer
Torvane
D P t ynamic one Penetrometer
Unconfined Compressive
Strength
Photo -Ionization Detector
Organic Vapor Analyzer
Modified
Dames
Moore Ring
standard
Penetration
Test
Specified Period oaf Time
ir Water Level After
Sampler
a Specified Period
Water levels indicated on
the levels measured in the
indicated. Groundwater level
over time. In low permeability
determination of groundwater
with short term water level
of
the
borehole
observations,
Time
soil
variations
soils,
levels
boring logs
at the times
will
accurate
is not
are
occur
possible
Soil classification is based on the Unified Soil Classification System, Coarse Grained Soils have more than 50% of their dry
weight retained on a #200 sieve; their principal descriptors are: boulders, cobbles, gravel or sand. Fine Grained Soils have less
than 50% of their dry weightretained on a #200 sieve; they are principally described as clays if they are plastic, and silts if they
are slightly plastic or non -plastic. Majorconstituents may be added as modifiers and minor constituents may be added
according to the relative proportions based on grain size. In addition to gradation, coarse -grained soils are defined on the basis
of their in -place relative density and fine-grained soils on the basis of their consistency.
Unless otherwise noted, Latitude and Longitude are approximately determined using a hand-held GPS device. The accuracy of
such devices is variable. Surface elevation data annotated with -I- indicates that no actual topographical survey was conducted
to confirm the surface elevation. Instead, the surface elevation was approximately determined from topographic maps of the
area.
-
4' — STRENGTH
H
TEWS
I.
RELATIVE
��RwJll
(More
d
II
rein
DENSI
r
nail
t"
,its
�1
r CF
r. -tgatt �ltitr1
by :Standard
COARSE
i
tin
`�r
-GRAINED
ti��,
No, 200
�leca
ian
SOILS
f.li_vaj
R S
i
.r�
CONSISTENCY
iffQ%
or
more
pi
OF
sin
FINE
-.GRAINED
the lca
21X1
SOILS
slot'e
L!a szt= a determined
, aced
by
(4,_
I ruor'Ioty
-r -
-t_
s?e r sLren9
dar, •enelratl�'{
h testing.
�•
fi
`.c
t los
pant)
Ring Sampler
Blows/Ft.
Descriptive Term
(Density)
Standard Penetration
or N -Value
Blows/Ft.
descriptive Term
onsisten+cyr
Unconfined Compressive Strength
0u, (psf)
Standard Penetration or
1N 4falue
Blows/Pt.
0- 6 I
Very Loose
0 - 3
Very Soft
less than 600
0 -1
Loose
4-9
T-18
Soft
500 to 1,000
2-4
19 - 58
Medium Stiff
1,000 to 2,000
4 - 8
Medium Dense
1 10 - 29
Dense
30 - 50
59-98
Stiff
2,000to4,0010
8-15
Very Dense
>50
>99
Very Stiff
4,000to81000
15-30
Hants
> 8,000
> 30
_
RELATIVE
PROPORTIONS
OP
SAND
ANO
GRAVEL j RELATIVE
PROPORTIONS
OF
FINES
T
Oescrip'Mv'1
o loran
Term{)
constituents
of
Pp rele+t
Dryr'WefgN
Q!t
Descriptive
Terms)
of
Percent
Dry Wit'€-
of
Ighhi
other
constituent's
Trace
Trace
<15
With
15-29
With
5-12
Modifier
Modifier
>12
>30
GRAIN
SIZE TERMINOLOGY
PLASTICITY
DESCRIPTION
Oa
—�
Major
Component t Sim �C I
� �• a _ .�,
.-• Part.i*l:ss S
� ��
11
.
��
- •, ='�:
_
Non -flask
0
Boulders
Omer 12 in. (300 mm)
1-10
Cobbles
12 In.1143 31n. (30rtrn to 75frm)
Low I'
Gravel
3 in. to #4 sieve (75rnm to 4.75 rnm)
Medkni
11 •30
Sand
*Ito #200 sieve (4.75mm to 0.U75awi
High
>30
Silt or an
Passing #203 sieve (3.075rnm)
UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM
South Weld Facility a Brighton, Colorado
April 5, 2018 Is Terracon Project No. 2/185026
Criteria for AsAning
Coarseralned Soils:
More than 50% retained
on No. 200 sieve
Fine -Grained Soils:
50% or more passes the
No. 200 sieve
p Symbols and Group *MS' Using Laboratory Tests a
Gravels:
More than 50% of
coarse fraction
retained on No. 4 sieve
Sands:
50% or more of coarse
fraction passes No. 4
sieve
Silts and Clays:
Liquid limit less than 50
Silts and Clays:
Liquid limit 50 or more
Clean Gravels:
Less than 5% fines c
Gravels with Fines:
More than 12% fines c
Clean Sands:
Less than 5% fines a'
Organic:
Gnu a 4 and 1≤ Gc ≤ 3E
Gu<4and/or 1>Cc>3E
Fines classify as ML or MH
Fines classify as CL or CH
Gua6and 1 C. 3E
Gu<6andfor1>Cc>3E
Liquid limit - oven dried
Liquid limit - not dried
A Based on the material passing the 3 -Inch (75 -mm) sieve
B If field sample contained cobbles or boulders, or both, add "with cobbles
or boulders, or both" to group name.
o Gravels with 5 to 12% fines require dual symbols: OW -GM well -graded
gravel with silt, GW-GC well -graded gravel with clay, GP -GM poorly
graded gravel with sift, GP -GC poorly graded gravel with clay.
°Sands with 5 to 12% fines require dual symbols: SW-SM well -graded
sand with silt, SW -SC well -graded sand with clay, SP-SM poorly graded
sand with silt, SP -SC poorly graded sand with clay
( )2
e CU = DedDID CO =
D� x Cis
F If soil contains ≥ 15% sand, add pwith sand" to group name.
G If fines classify as GL -ML, use dual symbol GG-G M, or SC-SM.
a
g
a.
60
60
40
30
20
10
7
0
Highly organic soils: Primarily organic matter, dark Incolor, and organic odor
herr con
�Ge�vRepvr#
Soil �a � ffcabou
Group
Symbol
GP
GM
GC
SW
SP
G
Poorly graded gravel
Silty gravel F1 0, H
Clayey gravel FT G, H
Weil -graded sand
Pood !rad ed _ sand
Silty sand C, H,
Clays sand GP H,
Lean da . Ms, Lr M
Silt Hr L, M
Organic Clay L, ft N
G aisle Silt k, L, hip 0
Fat Clay K, L, M
Elastic Sill K, L, M
Organic clay Ks L, M, P
H If fines are organic, add "with organic fines" to group name.
I If soil contains a 15% gravel, add °with gravel" to group name.
if Atterberg limits plot in shaded area, soil is a CL -ML, silty clay.
H If soil contains 15 to 29% plus No. 200, add "with sand" or °with
gravel," whichever is predominant
L If soil contains a 30% plus No. 200 predominantly sand, add
°sandy" to group name.
M If soil contains a 30% plus No. 200, predominantly gravel, add
°gravelly- to group name.
H PI ≥ 4 and plots on or above "A" line.
0 PI < 4 or plots below "A" line.
P PI plots on or above IA° line.
ol PI plots below "A" line.
For
soils
of
classification
and
coarse
fine-grained
-grained
of
soils
fine-grainedor
fraction
�e
' }}
se
e
_av:„....
AL,
e,
#0+
o'k
Equation of "W" • line
Horizontal at PI=4 to
then Promo. - 20)
LL=25,5.
Ir
O4
' '
AdVertical
(LL
Equation of �' One
at LLa16 to
P1=7,
� �
f.
then
Pi=.9 (LL.•S)
iir
/if
cfr
es
•
Pi
e/s° ,
,'
ill
MH or
OH
a ,_ _ti'l
• ..-
ML or
OL.
0 10 16 23 30
40 60 60 70
LIQUID I LIMIT ILL)
BO
90 100
110
DESCRIPTION OF ROCK PROPERTIES
South Weld Facility is Brighton, Colorado
April 5, 2018 a Terracon Project No. 21/65026
lie rracon
GeoRep ott
WEATHERING
Fresh
Very slight
Slight
Moderate
Moderately severe
Severe
Very severe
Complete
Rock fresh, crystals bright, few joints may show slight staining. Rock rings under hammer if crystalline.
Rock generally fresh, joints stained, some joints may show thin clay coatings, crystals in broken face show bright.
Rock rings under hammer if crystalline.
Rock generally fresh, joints stained, and discoloration extends into rock up to 1 ink Joints may contain day. in
granitoid rocks some occasional feldspar crystals are dull and discolored. Crystalline rocks ring under hammer.
Significant portions of rock show discoloration and weathering effects. In granitoid rocks, most feldspars are dull
and discolored; some show clayey. Rock has dull sound under hammer and shows significant loss of strength
as compared with fresh rock.
All rock except quartz discolored or stained. In granitoid rocks, all feldspars dull and discolored and majority
show kaolinization. Rock shows severe loss of strength and can be excavated with geologist's pick.
All rock except quartz discolored or stained. Rock "fabric clear and evident, but reduced in strength to strong
soil. to granitoid rocks, all feldspars kaoiinized to some extent. Some fragments of strong rock usually left.
All rock except quartz discolored or stained. Rock "fabric" discernible, but mass effectively reduced to 'soil" with
only fragments of strong rock remaining.
Rock reduced to "soil". Rock "fabric" no discernible or discernible only in small, scattered locations. Quartz may
be p resent as dikes or stria:. ers.
1. RDNEq or ,ng1n; iig desc 'ptloi; :oY roc ...not to be Cal used with-TAO:Ws
stale for
Very hard
Hard
Moderately hard
Medium
Soft
Very soft
Cannot be scratched with knife or sharp pick.
geologist's pick,
Can be scratched with knife or pick only with difficulty. Hard blow of hammer required to detach hand specimen.
Can be scratched with knife or pick. Gouges or grooves to 1/4' in. deep can be excavated by hard blow of point of
a geologist's pick. Hand specimens can be detached by moderate blow.
Can be grooved or gouged 1/16 in. dew by firm pressure on knife or pick point. Can be excavated in small chips
to pieces about 1 -in. maximum size by hard blows of the point of a geologist's pick.
Can be gouged or grooved readily with knife or pick point, Can be excavated in chips to pieces several inches
in size by moderate blows of a pith point. Srin all thin pieces can be broken by finger pressure.
Can be carved with knife, Can be excavated readily with point of pick. Pieces twiny or more in thickness can be
broken with fin er pressure. Can be scratched readil b fn ernail.
Breaking of hand specimens requires several hard blows of
edding,
arid Foliation
Spacing
in
Rock
p_acin
.mints
eddT _► fii.
Less than
2 in.
Very dose
Very thin
2 in. — 1 ft.
Close
Thin
1 ft. — 3 ft.
Moderately close
Medium
- - -
-
Wide
Thick
3 ft. --10 ft.
More than 10 ft.
Very wide
Very thick
1, spacing refers to the distance normal to the
Rock Quality Designator (ROD)
RQD as_ a pe,rgentage Diagnostic description
lanes a of the described feature, which are parallel to oar ri other or ocean
Exceeding 90 Excellent
90 75
Good
7b-50
Fair
50 — 25
Poor
Less than 25
Very poor
1. ROD (given as a percentage) = length of core in pieces 4
inches and longer I length of run
Sc,
Joint Openness Descriptors
enness
Des r'
t
.
_0
No Visible Separation
Tight
Less than 1/32 ins
Slightly
Open
1/32 to 1/8 in.
Moderately
Open
Open
1/8 to 3/8 in.
3/8 ins to 0.1 ft.
Moderately Wide
Greater than 0.1 ft.
Wide
References: American Society of Civil Engineers. Manuals and Reports on Engineering Practice - No. 56. Subsurface investioation for
Giesler) and Construction of Foundations of B u lcinas. New York: American Society of Civil Engineers, 1976. U.S.
Department of the Interior, Bureau of Reclamation, En neerCn4 eolacrY t ld; Manual.
Hayley Balzano
From: Kim Ogle
Sent Monday, June 4, 2018 2:45 PM
To: Hayley Balzano
Subject FW: NGL Commercial water disposal facility. (The legal description Lot B 2nd corrected RE -3362
being part of the NE4 of Section 30 Ti N, R66W of the 6th P.M.; Situs Address is 1821 County Road
27
Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Flagged
Hayley
Does this address your concerns?
Please advise.
Thanks
From: Spence McCallie [mailto: Spence. McCa ll ie@nglep.com]
Sent: Monday, June 4, 2018 2:32 PM
To: Kim Ogle <kogle@weldgov.com>
Subject: RE: NGL Commercial water disposal facility. (The legal description Lot B 2nd corrected RE -3362 being part of the
NE4 of Section 30 T1N, RGGW of the 6th P.M.; Situs Address is 1821 County Road 27
Kim,
I sent the following on May 4th:
"The anticipated traffic in and out will be 150-200 truck trips per day and approximately 10-15 passenger vehicles per
day. The planned route is to use Crown Prince Blvd and Main St (Both City of Brighton roads) to access the site from US
85. It is not anticipated that any Weld County Roads will be used for access to the site including Denver Ave north of
Crown Prince Blvd or WCR 4 between US 85 and Main. NGL will apply fora Brighton ROW permit to install the driveway
into the site."
Spence
From: Kim Ogle [mailto:kogleweldgov.com]
Sent: Monday, June 04, 2018 2:28 PM
To: Hayley Balzano
Cc: Spence McCallie
Subject: NGL Commercial water disposal facility. (The legal description Lot B 2nd corrected RE -3362 being part of the
NE4 of Section 30 T1 N, R66W of the 6th P.M.; Situs Address is 1821 County Road 27
Hayley
Did you receive the required documents for traffic entering onto CR 27 for the NGL South Change of Zone and Site Plan
Review applications?
Previously, you stated: No traffic narrative or study included. Required information: total number of trucks that will be
accessing the site in a
24 hour period and the routes to be used - including impacts on Denver Ave north of Crown Prince Blvd, and WCR 4
between Hwy 85 and Main Street.
1
Your initial review stated there was no traffic narrative or study included. Required information: total number of trucks
that will be accessing the site
in a 24 hour period and the routes to be used - including impacts on Denver Avenue north of Crown Prince Blvd,. and
County Road 4 between Hwy 85 and Main Street (CR 27)..
In any conversation with Spence, much of the brinewater will be piped to the facility generating little traffic.
What type of information is required? Will a statement address this concern or something in addition to this statement.
Also, during the pre -app we discussed the closing of CR 4 at Hwy 85 and in concept NGL stated that the trucks would go
north then west to the Highway.
Please let me know at your convenience.
Thanks
Kim
Kim Ogle
Planner
Weld County Planning Services
1555 North 17th Avenue
Greeley, Colorado 80631
970.4 00.3 549 Direct
970.353.6100 x 3540 Office
kogle@weldgov.com
2
Hello