HomeMy WebLinkAbout20180005.tiffDEPARTMENT OF PLANNING SERVICES
1555 N 17thAve, Greeley, CO 80631
Phone (970) 353-6100 x3540 Fax (970) 304-6498
USE BY SPECIAL REVIEW (MINING OPERATION) APPLICATION
FOR PLIANNING DEPARTMENT USE DATE RECEIVED;
RECEIPT # /AMOUNT # /s CASE # ASSIGNED:
APPLICATION RECEIVED BY - - ` PLANNER ASSIGNED:
To be completed by APPLICANT is accordance with procedural guide requirements:
. I (we), the unde signed, hereby request a hearing before the Weld County Planning Commission comerer mug a
d� (gravel, coal, borrow 'k, etc.) mining operation for the following described
proposed Fx
unincorpoalted area of Weld County:
Legal Description 1 _ _ I!r , Section 1'! , Township el North, Range id,West
Flood Plaln Q 1 Zone Distrtd:
Total Acreage: - is. 1._ - - , overlay District:
Geological Hazard: _ , Airport Overlay District:
2. Surface owner(s) of area of land described
Name*
Name:
60,14041
Address; clam ha wl Phony:
Address: Phone:
3.Owner(s) of mineral rights or substance to be nlrnad t o
Name: Ad Address: M.,3S + 4 262-4 Phone:
E
Name Address: Phone:
4. Applicants newm. [ Emil Address IA J. 1.: W 4--%- a .I .t44t . elm-
Address:13Di (,,on4 .y 4 n ‘ A. .iL *543 Phone:
5. Identify any prior permits for ruining held by applicant or affiliated person;
Del% 94•y4$ 5W5e ?&r 1
ftqlvti'
Pe
I (We) hereby depose and state under penalties of perjury that all statements, proposals, andfor plans eubcnit#ed with
or contained within the application are true and correct to the best of my (our)knowledgel. Signatures of alt fee
owners of pr a paw must sign this application. It an Authorized Agent signs, a letter of authorization ell fee
owners must included with the application. V a corporation is the fee owner, notarized evidence must be included
indicating tha he signatory hes to legal authority to sign for the corporation.
Signature, tier or Authorized Agent ,ate
14
Signature: Owner or Authorized Agent Date
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING E VICE
1555 N 17th AVE
GREELEY, CO 80631
PHONE (970) 353-6100, Ext. 3540
FAX (970) 304.6438
AUTHORIZATION FORM
s.Te743i1-44,_ e
(Agent/Applicant)
located at Iti oriel Wort1/40
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: SEC _ 19 TWN R G 6kst
ifi oiens tge4-r"+C'soc
SUBDIVISION NAME: Zapit �"t atUvro.1 LOT r &!LI O v to 2r Oc� , .
I can contacted at the following ors- cp,'' y Is"id Oieft° 11 -NO •• erre
represent "` i itorpor the property
(Owner)
Work
Email:. e 45; c. * (eeZtom
LI
The property owner can be contacted at the following
ter( 4,
Work
'No - jtt-ic6
Email; it eS Cat, antieel at I • eon
J %.41
Correaponcfence emaited to• ■ Agent/Applicant
(Check one)
DATE 27 1 ' e
Jo Property Owner
OWNER'S SIGNATURE! ` r
CIVIL RES`;U ROES, L LC
ENGINEERS & PLANNERS
MEMORANDUM
TO! Department of Planning, Weld County
File — Lee Amendment -N. La Poudre Mine
FROM: Civil Resources, LLC
DATE: August 1, 2017
RE: Use By Special Review Questionnaire
This memorandum serves as an extension to the Pre Application Review Request form.
The following questions are to be answered and submitted as part of the USR application. If a question does not pertain to your
use, please respond with "not applicable", with an explanation as to why the question is not applicable. The application
requirements are outlined in Section 23-2-260 and Chapter 23, Article IV, Division 4, of the Weld County Code. The application
shall contain the following information.
el, A detailed description of the method of mining operation, The description shall include:
a. The types and numbers of structures that will be erected (built) on site including operation and processing equipment to be
employed, - There will be no structures erected on the Lee Parcel.
b. The number of shifts to be worked and the maximum number of employees. - One shift, approximately 5 -10 employees
working 6 days a week and 10 —12 hours per day (6am to 6pm).
c. Whether the operation will involve a wet or dry pit, —The pit will be dewatered and dry mined (there will be no slurry wall
installed).
d, County roads and bridges to be utilized, along with site entrancelexit points. (Coordinate with
County Engineer), - The same entrance along Weld County Road 13 as the current gravel operation (La Poudre and N.
La Poudre Gravel Mine(s)).
e. The size of the area and stages to be worked at any one time. - The entire parcel will be excavated as one cell
(approximately 20 acres),
f. A time table giving the periods of time and number of phases to be worked, which will be required for the various phases of
the operation. - One to two years to mine depending on market conditions and one year to reclaim.
g. The depth and thickness of the mineral deposit to be mined and the thickness of overburden to be removed, - The mineral
deposit is 15 to 20 feet deep with approximately 2 to 4 feet of overburden.
h. The proposed use of reclaimed lands and an explanation of the reclamation process. - The proposed use of the reclaimed
land will be dryland crops, The remaining overburden and fines that are not sold or used in production will used to
backfill the Lee Parcel.
i. The source of technical advice in that type of reclamation for open cut mining land, - Bestway has been mining for over 20
years and has adequate experience in reclaiming sites throughout the northern Front Range.
323 FIF-fk STREET • FREDERICK, COL❑RAD❑ B❑53❑ • PH❑NE: 3O3.933.1415 • FAX: 3❑3.833.285❑
Lee Amendment to N. La Poudre Gravel Mine
August 1, 2017
Page 2 of 3
I I'VII PI S crL5W( I S
2. A statement which explains how the proposal is consistent with the Weld County Comprehensive Plan. — The area is zoned
Agricultural. The surrounding area, located in Windsor is zoned Mineral Extraction and General Commercial, The
proposed use is in line with the surrounding areas zoning and Weld County's zoning.
3, A statement which explains how the proposal is consistent with the intent of the district in which the use is located. — This is
not applicable and question "2" covers this question.
4. If applicable, a statement which explains what efforts have been made, in the location decision for the proposed use, to
conserve productive agricultural land in the agricultural zone district, — The area will be reclaimed to agricultural use in line
with the surrounding area.
5, A statement which explains there is adequate provision for the protection of the health, safety and welfare of the inhabitants
of the neighborhood and the County, — The area will be permitted through the State and the County. The required Mining
Safety and Hazard Association requirements will be followed.
6. A statement describing the existing surrounding land uses and explaining how the proposal will be compatible. — See
response to question"2" and ,
7. A statement describing the existing land use. — The existing use is fallow ground.
8. Describe, in detail, the following:
a. How many people (employees) visitors, buyers, etc.) will use this site? — Employees; 5 -10, Visitors; 0.5, Buyers: 0.
b. What are the hours of operation? Gam-Gpm in summer, 6am to 5pm during other seasons. Monday through Saturday.
c. What type and how many animals, if any, will be on this site? — None.
d. What kind (type, size, weight) of vehicles will access this site and how often? — Daily visits are to be expected, pickups,
tandems and semi -trucks typically visit the site.
e. Who will provide fire protection to the site? — Local fire districts, Windsor- Severance Fire District.
f. What is the water source on the property? (Commercial well or water district). — Mining water from state approved substitute
water supply plan (SWSP). The SWSP has been approved.
g, What is the sewage disposal system on the property? (Existing and proposed). — N/A, there will be portable toilets,
h. If storage or warehousing is proposed, what type of items will be stored? — WA, there is storage located in the La Poudre
Mine that is currently in use.
x. Explain where storage and/or stockpile of wastes will occur on this site. — The stockpile will be by the fresh water pond as
shown on the attached figures. The gravel resource will be stockpiled by the current crusher.
j. Explain the proposed landscaping/screening for the site. The landscaping shall be separately submitted as a landscape plan
map as part of the application submittal. — The area will be reclaimed to dryland with no further landscape treatment.
k. Explain how long it will take to construct this site and when construction and landscaping is scheduled to begin. Timetable
23-2-260.C.12. — Approximately 2 years to mine. Approximately 1 year to reclaim.
Lee Amendment to N. La Poudre Gravel Mine
August 1, 2017
Page 3of3
{. IYll R'I S''UR(_1
I. Explain any proposed reclamation procedures when termination of the Use by Special Review activity occurs. - Further weed
mitigation will be ongoing should the mine still be active.
m. Explain how the storm water drainage will be handled on the site. - The storm water drainage will be reduced as the pit
is being mined and flows will collect in the pit. The natural drainage will drain to the river.
n. Method and time schedule of removal or disposal of debris, junk and other wastes associated with the proposed use. - All
debris and waste has been removed from the site.
a A statement delineating the need for the proposed use. -The miner currently owns the N. La Poudre Mine and the La
Poudre Mine to the east and south of the proposed Lee Parcel, As market conditions have put a large demand on
gravel resources in the area, the miner is trying to acquire more gravel mine reserves to meet demands.
9. A statement which explains the Use by Special Review area is not located in a flood plain, geologic hazard and Weld County
Airport overlay district area; or that the application complies with Chapter 23, Article V, Overlay District Regulations as outlined
in the Weld County Code. - The Site is not located in a geologic hazard area, the Site is located in the flood plain. See
attached memo discussing the floodplain impacts and the lack thereof as the mine will be excavated below grade and
reclaimed to at grade (existing) conditions.
J,\Bestway-213\WinsdorLEE AMENDMENT\Weld County4Memo-USR - WELD County .docx
HIGHWAY 392 / CR 32
CROSSROADS BLVD.
I!
a
salSes
EXISTING NORTH LA
POUDRE MINE
Of.14
s
EXISTING LA POUDRE
MINE
l
4
li\tte
CIVIL RESeURCES. LLC
FIGURE:
a
Avery
-.W
HIGHWAY 392 / WCR 68 Mill
der
r
1,500
IN Fi Vii`i
BEST AY CONCRETE
WINDSOR PIT
GENERAL LOCATION MAP
CIVIL RES'IJRCES1 LLC
ENGINEERS Si PLANNERS
September 12, 2017
Weld County Department of Planning
Planning Division
'1555 N. 17th Ave
Greeley, CO 80631
RE: 7 -Day Completeness Review for Bestway Concrete Lee Property Mine (Site), Comment Response (16-
0287 Bestway) - Bestway Windsor Gravel Mine
Dear Kim:
Civil Resources, LLC is presenting the following comment response to the 7 -Day Completeness Review.
Noise Control Plan:
Material will be excavated and hauled to a conveyor to the adjacent La Poudre Mine as there will be no crusher on
the Lee Parcel. The adjacent La Poudre Mine has a crusher and processing area onsite. The entire site and any
haul roads will be watered to maintain dust control. No loads will be placed in haul truck as the material will be
placed in a conveyor. The mine is a dry mine and will be dewatered, the material will be excavated once water
levels have been drawn down to manageable mining levels. There will no fuel storage, washing or secondary
operations on the proposed Lee Property.
Drainage:
The general drainage of the Site is south to the Cache La Poudre River. The topo surrounding the site shows a
gradient of 0.8 percent from elevation 4794.13 to 4785.62 to the southeast for approximately 1083 feet. The
majority of overflow drainage would flow off Highway 392 and WCR 13. The roadside borrow for WCR 13 flows to
the south. The roadside borrow for Highway 392 flows east. In the event higher rainfalls result in greater flows and
overtop the borrow ditch, flow would migrate across the Site towards the river via the gradients discussed above.
The flows leave the Site at the south end onto the existing La Poudre Gravel Mine.
The site will be developed into a below grade mining area for two years and reclaimed back to native grade. No
changes to surrounding topography will occur. During mining a large percentage of flows will enter the below grade
portion of the gravel mine. This water will then be discharged via pumping toward the rivers. Therefore the site
falls under exception, Sec. 23-12-30.F1 a-6.
There are no reported drainage problems related to this Site. The applicant has spoken to property owners and the
Town of Windsor cornering drainage surrounding the Site. See attached email(s) from the Town of Windsor
concerning onsite meetings at the Site. Please see attached maps as well as they provide information.
an,ningq D artment comments:
1. Please submit a Letter of Authorization stating Mr. Mark Johnson may act on behalf of the Beswtay
Company and provide evidence that the person who is appointing him to do so has that authority.
323 FIFTH STREET FREDERICK, COLORADO 80530 • PHONE: 303.833.1416 + FAX: 303.833.2650
C IV S t;RCI '
See attached Authorization Letter.
. USR (Mining Operation) Application cover sheet. Please modify the Legal description to accurately define
the property in review.
The legal description is attached along with an ALTA survey performed by a PLS and title work
showing the same legal description.
3. USR (Mining Operation) Application cover sheet. Please identify that the property is within the 100 -year
Ploodplaire/Floodway.
As shown on the mining plan the floodplain information and Floodplain Insurance Rate Map (FIRM)
are displayed. The miningfextraction plan has been redlined to more clearly show the Site ad its
relation to the floodplain.
4. Please submit one original Certificate of Conveyances form and attachments for each parcel of land to be
included in this application. The Conveyances must be dates to be within 30 -days of the final submittal.
The Certificate of Conveyances were attached in the original submittal.
5. Please submit a copy of any oil and gas agreement for the three (3) properties, if applicable.
There are no oil and gas agreements. The mineral lease owners have been notified via certified
mail. There were no oil and gas mineral owners listed during the search.
6. Please submit a copy of any irrigation or ditch agreements for the three (3) properties, if applicable.
There are no irrigation or ditch agreements.
7. Please submit one copy of affidavit and certified list of names, addresses and corresponding parcel
identification number assigned by the Weld County and Larimer County Assessor of the owners' properly
(surface estate) within 500 feet of the property being considered.
A copy of the affidavit and list are attached and are included in the drawings as well.
8. Please submit a Notice of inquiry Form from the Town of Windsor that Bestway Concrete, Inc, has spoken
to Town representative for this project. !f the form is not available, an electronic mall from the director of
Planning is acceptable stating their position.
Bestway has met multiple times with the Town of Windsor concerning the Lee Site (as recent as
August 30, 2017 at the Town of Windsor) and the gravel operations in general. Attached are a few
email correspondences concerning the Lee Site.
9. Please provide evidence of an access permit from a publicly maintain road onto, at a minimum, one of the
three parcels.
The proposed Site will not be accessed from existing road access points, no mining traffic or
maintenance vehicle swill enter the Site at these locations. The Lee Parcel has had access to the
(; I 4f 4 I R! ! 19 l: r k L I
existing homes since at least 1999 per aerial photography. All mining traffic will enter from the
current La Poudre Gravel Mine access which has been ongoing since 1983.
10. Please comment, are there area lights on premises for twilight operations? Will cut sheets be provided?
There will be no area lights on the premises.
11. Please resubmit the USR (Mining Operation) Application in the following segments;,
Application - contained in original submittal
Deed(s) - attached current title work
Maps - resubmitted, including AL TA Survey
Soil Survey documents, if applicable - contained in original submittal
Surrounding Property Owners - Surface Estate - resubmitted
Easements of Agreements with Utility Service Providers - NIA
The updated submittal conforms to the above list.
12 Please identify all documents as being part of the application for the Bestway Windsor Gravel Mine.
All documents have been identified as the Bestway Windsor Gravel Mine.
A $5000.00 check was submitted to planning when the application was delivered at the end of August
2017.
Sincerely,
CIVIL RESOURCES, LL,C-
.3
Andy Rodriguez, RE.
Civil Engineer / Principal
J:\Bestway-213\Winsdor\LEE AMENDMENT\Weld County\USR-Response-Lee-7day doc
And Rodri ' uez
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Ian McCargar <imccargar@windsorgov.com>
Tuesday, August 1, 2017 2:17 PM
Andy Rodriguez (andy@cirrilresources.com)
'mjohnson@bestwayconcrete.com'; Kim Emil; Dennis Wagner; Doug Roth; Scott
Ballstadt
Bestway Concrete Lee Property Permit Amendment
Andy, I have had a chance to talk with my colleagues at Town Hall about the structure owner
agreement you have tendered in association with the above -referenced permit application. We
are prepared to accept its terms, but it only goes so far. The structure owner agreement says
that Bestway will compensate the Town for any damage to existing Town facilities in the
immediate vicinity of the proposed excavation. Right now, they consist of a roadway, a small -
diameter water line along WCR 13 and a 241" water main along State Highway 392.
The Town has other concerns, which have been expressed to the Division. In particular, we are
concerned about the proximity of the proposed excavation to what we expect will be an
expanded roadway on WCR 13. Although the right of way has not been dedicated or acquired
by the Town or the County, WCR 13 has long been planned for a four -lane corridor (65 feet on
either side of the Section line), with utility easements reaching another 20 feet beyond. The
designed slope of the proposed excavation reaches into this future roadway corridor.
Does Bestway intend to re -fill the pit following completion of materials removal? If so, will
Bestway restore the soil to a condition that will bear the roadway? If not, the Town would like
to discuss arrangements to protect the future roadway corridor, if feasible. I have copied Mark
Johnson with this email, to let him know we are fine with the structure owner agreement, but
would like to discuss other matters of concern to the Town.
Thank you for your consideration. I will mail the structure owner agreement to you in a day or
two.
Ian D. McCargar
Office of the Town Attorney
Town of Windsor
301 Walnut Street I Windsor, CO 60550
oir; 970-674-2492 I Off: 970-874-2400 I Fax: 970-674-2456
nuccaigal(i tiw'llidsOI9'O ".GO1i]
vintvw_w1 ndsui goy. cOrfl
Follow Us wwwMinds orgov.caniJsocIaI r el1e:_
i _
Virus -free. www.avg.com
1
Andy Rodriguez
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
Mark Johnson < mjohnson @BestayConcrete,com>
Thursday, June 29, 2017 9:09 AM
'Andy Rodriguez'
FW: BestWay drainage ditch
BestWay.pdf
From: Dennis Wagner [mailto:dwagner@windsorgov1com]
Sent: Thursday, June 29, 2017 8:59 AM
To: Mark Johnson
Subject: BestWay drainage ditch
Mark, I recently observed water drainage in the ditch from State Highway 392 south to your property as highlighted by
the red line on the attached map. Water was flowing as it should be.
Let me know if you have any questions.
Dennis L. Wagner, P.E.
Director
Town of Windsor I Engineering
ineering
301 Walnut Street I Windsor, CO 80550
air: 970-674-2406 I Off: 970-674-2400 I Fax: 970-686-2456
dwaoner.. win is�ov_cw ii
wwytwindsc mav'_ darn
Follow Us www_windsargov.ccn/sodialrne+ as
Virus -free. wt r +.ay.00m
1
March 6, 2017
Mark Johnson, Vice President Aggregates
Bestway Concrete & Aggregates
301 Centennial Drive
Milliken, CO 80543
RE: Legal Right to Enter
Dear Mr. Johnson n
In exchange for good and valuable consideration, in hand paid, l r .Lee hereby grants to Bestway
Concrete & Aggregates the right to enter into the real property situated in the northwest 1/4 of Section
19, Township 6 North, Range 67 West of the 8th P.M , County of Weld, State of Colorado, Refer to
attached exhibit for full legal description_
You and your officers, employees, contractors, and agents have permission to enter upon the Property
for all purposes, including the exploration for gravel, sand and aggregate. We hereby confirm that you
have authority and right to execute ail documents required toapply for and obtain permits and the lake to
mine gravel, sand and aggregate on the Property. Following permitting, Bestway Sand & Gravel
Aggregates agrees to enter into a Sand, Gravel, and Aggregate Mining Lease to remain in effect until
mining activity ceases. The permission granted by this letter shall be effective immediately, and shall
remain in effect until superseded by a Sand, Gravel and Aggregate Mining Lease or until 2022,
whichever comes first.
By
STATE OF COLORADO )
)ss.
COUNTY OF titter
pree-Avver
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me on
representative Witness my hand and seal.
My commission expires:
FARIED SAFEYEDDINE
NOTARY PIJOUC
STATE OF COLORADO
NOTARY ID 20164033996
MY COMMISSION FIRES SEPTEMBER 02, 2020
rotary Pubhh
C.SS J'c et
��" � , by jers, , as
COLORADO
Division of 'Reclamation,.
Mining and Safety
•
1313 She' iIt n Suect. R'm)fr 215
Oe'n-set i Ci) .tra"'G' 8O-1.1)3
July 11, 2017
Mr Mark Johnson
Bestway Concrete Company
301 Centennial Dr.
Milliken, CO 80543
Re: Nor h LaPoudre Pit, Permit M2000-144, Amendment Approval, Revision AMOL
Mr. Johnson:
On July 11, 2017 the Division of Reclamation, Mining and Safety approved the Amendment application submitted to
the Division on March h 20, 2017, addressing the following:
Addition o, f ' ' 9.7 acres (Lee property) to west end of existing permit
The terms of the Amendment . MO1 approved by the Division are hereby incorporated into Permit N42000-144, All
other conditions and requirements of Permit M2000-144 remain in full force and effect.
The revised liability amount exceeds the performance bond currently held by $635,230.00. Please submit additional the
required additional bond. The revision will not be final until the bond is approved by the Division and a new
performance warranty is provided.
If you have any questions, please contact me.
Sincerely,
/
�'
Eric C. Scott
Environmental Protection Specialist
Enclosure
1313 Sherman Stieet Room 215, Denver, CO 80203 P 303 866.3567 F 303.832..8106 http: I tmtning.state.co us
John '�Ni Hickentooper, , Governor J Robert W. Randa[!. Executive Director I Virginia Brannon, Director
r
�,. . ;,4
\r.
P
'Sn'
CIVIL RES1OURCESJIC
ENGINEERS Es PLANNERS
June 28th, 2017
Mr. Eric Scott
Division of Reclamation, Mines, and Safety
1313 Sherman Street, Room 215
Denver, Colorado 80203
RE North La Poudre Pit, Permit M2000-144, Receipt of Incomplete 112 Construction Materials
Reclamation Permit Amendment Application Package; Response to Preliminary Review
Dear Mr. Scott:
This letter is being generated to satisfy the preliminary review dated May 24, 2017 for the AMO1 - North La
Poudre Pit, Permit M2000-144. The italicized items are the current comment and the bold text are the
responses:
Rute — General Requirements of Exhibits;
6.2.1(2) Maps and Exhibits Maps, except the index map, must conform to the following criteria;
(b) must be prepared and signed by a registered land surveyor, professional engineer, or other
qualified person; DRS notes the certification/signatures on the index map provided, however if
each map has a signature/date area provided it should be signed and not left blank.
The maps have been updated and signed.
EXHIBIT C - Pre -raining and Mining Plan Map(s) of Affected Lands (Rule 6,4 3): One or more maps may be
necessary to legibly portray the following information:
(a) all immediately adjacent surface owners of record,.
This must include all surface owners within 200' of the entire original and amended permit
area. This information appears to be incomplete or incorrect. The owner of the property
immediately SE of the existing permit boundary is not identified (OHO LLC), and the
property ownership for the parcel immediately south of the amended area appears to be
incorrect according to information shown on the assessor's office website (Tricycle Lane
Texas LL C). These owners will need to be properly identified and noticed, and an access
agreement/legal right to enter will need to be obtained from Tricycle Lane Texas LLC.
All immediately adjacent property owners have been notified. Attached are the
certified mail return receipts. The property owners are shown on the maps.
(b) the name and location of all creeks, roads, buildings, oil and gas wells and lines, and
power and communication lines on the area of affected land and within two hundred (200)
feet of all boundaries of such area;
The information provided is incomplete. There is (at least) a gas/oil facility on the east end
of this permit that has not been identified in any way on any of the provided figures or text.
The information shown on the attached updated maps is the most current,
323 FIFTH STREET • P.O. cox ciao • FREDERICKI COLORADO 805309 PHONE: 303.833.1416 i FAX: 3 ❑ 3.133 3.2B 5D
Page 2
Mr. Eric Scott
June 28th, 2017
(c) the total area to be involved in the operation, including the area to be mined and the area
of affected /ands (see definition of 'Affected Land);
No distinction was made in the original permit application between affected land (as
defined by rule) and permit area, therefore DBMS must consider the entire original permit
area and the area to be amended as "affected land" for the purposes of this permit
amendment.
The total area including the amended area and the original permit boundary is 38
acres in the North La Poudre Original Permit boundary and 19.7 acres in the
proposed Lee Parcel Boundary'
(g)
Show the owner's name, type of structures, and location of all permanent or man-made
structures contained on the area of affected land and within two hundred (200) feet of the
affected land.
This must include all structures within 200' of the entire original and amended permit area,
when listing structures, please include some type of key that will allow correlation of
structure owners to the proper structures shown on the map. This also relates to
comments for Exhibit S.
The structures are shown on the attached maps.
EXHIBIT 6 - Reclamation Plan (Pule 64.5):
(1) In preparing the Reclamation Plan, you should be specific in terms of addressing such items as
final grading (including drainage), seeding, fertilising, revegetation (trees, shrubs, etc.), and
topsolling. You are encouraged to allow flexibility in your plans by committing to ranges of numbers
(e.g., 6"-12" of topsoil) rather than specific figures.
The reclamation plan shows the proposed reclamation for the final mine configuration. A
minimum of 6" of top soil and the seed schedule presented on the reclamation plan map will
be used in all areas.
The Lee Parcel (Amended Parcel) will be backfilled to native grade with inert fill and top -
soiled with 6" of stockpiled topsoil. The seeding type and rate will be as shown on the
reclamation plan.
(2) The Reclamation Plan shah include provisions for, or satisfactory explanation of all general
requirements for the type of reclamation proposed to be implemented by you. Reclamation shall be
required on all the affected land. The Reclamation Plans shall include:
(a)
A description of the type(s) of reclamation you propose to achieve in the reclamation of
the affected land, why each was chosen, the amount of acreage accorded to each, and a
genera/ discussion of methods of reclamation as related to the mechanics of earthmoving;
The original mine permit boundary has been reclaimed as exposed groundwater
ponds. The surrounding area has been seeded and reclaimed per the original
approved reclamation plan. The material was spread with graders and scrapers
and seed was disked in. The mined out area were cleaned and allowed to fill with
groundwater. The ponds area encompasses 14.28 acres (7,10, 6.1 & 1.01) and the
upland area includes 23.7 acres. The reason for reclaiming the site as exposed
Page 3
Mr. Eric Scott
June 28th, 2017
groundwater was historically this was standard practice 17 years ago. The ponds
area is also fairly small to be reclaimed as lined ponds which decreases the cost
benefit ratio to eth lined water storage.
Please provide more detailed information about the final reclamation for the currently
permitted area containing the reservoir/silt ponds. DAMS will need to know the proposed
configurations and acreages for all exposed water bodies at final reclamation, if these
water bodies will be lined, and if so - how, and what if any structures will be present on
site when reclamation is complete for the entire permitted area (gas/oil structures,
pipelines, roads, etc.)
The reclaimed site will look very similar to the current state as shown on Google
Earth 2016 Aerial Photography. The attached reclamation plan show the proposed
layout the entire site. The DCP gasline will remain on the southern portion of the
site. The Synergy oil and gas facility will remain on the east side of the site along
with the Sinclair Petroleum line bisecting the N. La Poudre Site. The ponds are
proposes to be left exposed and the Lee Parcel will be backfilled to native grade
and seeded.
Currently the approved reclamation plan cads for two 10-12 acre unlined ponds in the
existing permit area. Not only will unlined exposed groundwater have a significant impact
on the required bond amount, a permanent augmentation plan will need to be approved
for any exposed groundwater in unlined ponds before DRS can approve a final release
of the permit.
The miner/permit holder understands that exposed water will require a permanent
augmentation plan and has plans to generate a plan once the mining has been
completed.
EXHIBIT F - Reclamation Plan Map (Rule 6.4,6): The rnap(s) of the proposed affected land, by all phases of
the total scope of the mining operation, shall indicate the following,
(a)
The expected physical appearance of the area of the affected land, correlated to the
proposed mining and reclamation timetables, The map must show proposed topography
of the area with contour lines of sufficient detail to portray the direction and rate of slope of
all reclaimed lands}. and
The attached maps shows the contours of the affected lands, the maps show the
proposed reclamation plan.
(b) Portrayal of the proposed final land use for each portion of the affected lands.
The reclamation map must provide the above required information for the entire permitted
area, not just the amended area. This should include the final size and configuration of
any exposed groundwater areas intended to remain at final reclamation.
The attached maps and response above clarify the final reclamation of the entire
permit boundary.
EXHIBIT L - Reclamation Costs (Rule 5.4.12;: (1) All information necessary to calculate the costs of
reclamation must be submitted and broken down into the various major phases of reclamation. You must
provide sufficient information to calculate the cost of reclamation that would be incurred by the state,
Page 4
Mr. Ede Scott
June 28th, 2017
DBMS will calculate the required reclamation bond when all information required during the adequacy
process has been provided. At this time, to calculate the bond for the entire permit will require more
information regarding the final configuration and acreage of exposed groundwater to remain at the end of
mining activity within the existing permit area.
Exhibit L shows the bonding cost estimate.
EXHIBIT S - Permanent Man -Made Structures Rule 6.4.19 : Please note that roadways and above -ground
or underground utilities (if present) within 200 feet of the proposed affected area are considered permanent
man-made structures. In accordance with Rule 6.4.19, when mining operations will adversely affect the
stability of any significant, valuable and permanent man-made structure located within 200 feet of the
affected area, the applicant may either:
a.) Provide a notarized agreement between the applicant and the person(s) having an interest in the
structure, that the applicant is to provide compensation for any damage to the structure; or
Notarized agreements were sent out for the all surrounding easements, utilities and structures
within 200' of the mine permit boundary.
b.) Where such an agreement cannot be reached, the applicant shall provide an appropriate engineering
evaluation that demonstrates that such structure shall not be damaged by activities occurring at the mining
operation.
See attached letters, return receipts and any signed agreements.
Please provide evidence (certified letter to structure owners) that a notarized agreement between the
structure owners and the applicant was pursued. If an agreement is unable to be reached a geotechnical
assessment may be provided to demonstrate that the structures shall not be damaged.
See attached return receipt certs,
You must provide information sufficient to demonstrate that the stability of any structures located within two
hundred (200) feet of the operation or affected land will not be adversely affected.
See updated attached slope stability report(s).
As previously stated in the comment for part (g) of Exhibit C, Exhibit S must also include all structures within
20Q of the entire original and amended permit area. When listing structures, please include some type of
key that will allow correlation of structure owners to the proper structures shown on the map.
See attached slope stability figure showing all utilities a n d a matrix of utilities surrounding the
Site(s).
All structure owners within 200' of the original and amended permit area must be provided with a damage
waiver agreement if this has not already been done. (A listing of structures at the time of the original
permitting is contained in the RMC geotechnical stability analysis dated November 13a 2000.) Any new
structures put in place since the original permit was approved (such as the gaoil facility located on the
eastern area of the existing permit) must also be included.
All identified structures and owners have been notified along with a letter that was sent to all owners
stating the intent of the mine and the reclamation.
Page 5
Mr. Eric Scott
June 28th, 2017
It is also noted that the proposed offsets in the previous RMC report were 50 and 60 feet with a safety factor
of 1.5 and 1.6 respectively. This is considerably greater than the currently proposed minimum setback of 15
feet, The data table provided in the current geotechnical report indicates safety factors for four different
cross sections in the amendment area between approximately 4.3 and 1.41 however, the distance between
the structures and excavation is not listed. Please elaborate how the minimum offset of 15 feet was arrived
at from the data provided.
The original design for the N. La Poudre mine was 1/4 to 1 horizontal to vertical, relating to almost
vertical mining. In turn this resulted in a larger required setback. The amended Lee Parcel is
proposed to be mined at 2.5:1 horizontal to vertical (updated after review of original analysis). The
setback from the permit boundary is 15 -feet whereas the setback from utilities as shown the stability
report is a minimum 30 -feet to a drainage easement, on the east end of the amended area.
Additional information: You will also need to provide the Division with proof of notice publication (once a
week for 4 consecutive weeks beginning after the application was called complete) and notice to all property
owners within 200 feet of the affected area (entire permit). Any letters from other commenting
agencies/entities received by the Division to date have been imaged and are available to view via the
Imaged Documents link on the DRMS websrte.
See attached certifications. Once the publication has been delivered to Civil Resources a copy will
be forwarded to the DRMS.
This concludes the Division's preliminary adequacy review of this application. This letter shall not be
construed to mean that there are no other technical deficiencies in your application. Other issues may arise
as additional information is supplied. Please remember that the decision date for this amendment
application is August 7, 2017. As previously mentioned, if you are unable to provide satisfactory responses
to any inadequacies prior to this date, it will be your responsibility to request an extension of time to allow for
continued review of this application. If there are still unresolved issues when the decision date arrives and
no extension has been requested, the application will be denied. If you have any questions, please contact
me at (3O3) 865-3567 x8140.
Sincerely,
CIVIL RESOURCES, LLC
f
a'
(41., •
Andy Rodriguez, RE.
End:
Plans (Existing, mining, Reclamation, Structures)
Stability Analysis (Lee)
Stability Letter & Original Analysis (N. La Poudre)
Structure Agreements & Return Receipts
Notifications — Return Receipts (Lee & N. La Poudre)
Advertisements
Windsor Email
J:\Beslway-213\Winsdor\LEE AMEN DMENTIDRMS\Adequacy\Adq-2-A l -00-144-5-24-17.doc
STATE OF COLORADO
COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENT
AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DIVISION
TELEPHONE: (303) 692-3150
CONSTRUCTION PERMIT
PERMIT NO: 94WE407F
DATE ISSUED: March 17, 2015
ISSUED TO;
ISSUANCE 4
Haft -Irwin Aggregates LLC dba Bestway Concrete
THE SOURCE TO WHICH THIS PERMIT APPLIES IS DESCRIBED AND LOCATED AS FOLLOWS:
Facility for sand and gravel pit, known as LaPoudue Sand and Gravel, located at 32744 Weld
County Road 13, Windsor in part of Section 19, T6N, R67W, Weld County, Colorado.
THE SPECIFIC EQUIPMENT OR ACTIVITY SUBJECT TO THIS PERMIT INCLUDES THE FOLLOWING:
AIRS
1 Point
ti+ n
Description
Facility
Equipment ID
NIA
001
Material extraction, handling, stockpiling,
tran fe r points
associated conveyor and
THIS PERMIT IS GRANTED SUBJECT TO ALL RULES AND REGULATIONS OF THE COLORADO AIR
QUALITY CONTROL COMMISSION AND THE COLORADO AIR POLLUTION PREVENTION AND
CONTROL ACT C.R.S. (26-7-101 et seq), TO THOSE GENERAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS INCLUDED
IN THIS DOCUMENT AND THE FOLLOWING SPECIFIC TERMS AND CONDITIONS:
REQUIREMENTS TO SELF -CERTIFY FOR FINAL APPROVAL
1. This construction permit represents final permit approval to operate this emissions source. Therefore,
it is not necessary to self -certify. (Regulation 3, Part B, Section
EMISSION LIMITATIONS AND RECORDS
2. Emissions of air pollutants shall not exceed the following limitations (as calculated using the emission
factors included in the Notes to Permit Holder section of this permit* (Reference: Regulation No. 3,
Part B, Section Ii.A..4)
Annual Emission Limits:
Emission Type
Facility
Equipment ID
AIRS
Point
Tons per Year
-
TSP
PMt0
PM 2,6
NOx
CO
N/A
001
6.1
2.0
0.3
Fugitive
Transfer Points
0.6
0.2
Point
s
Note: Compliance with the emission limits shall be demonstrated by not exceeding the production
limits listed below and by following the attached particulate emissions control plan.
AIRS ID: 123/0452/001
Page 1 of 7
Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment
Air Pollution Control Division
Hall -Irwin Aggregates LLC dba Bestway Concrete
Permit No. 94WE407F
ISSUANCE 4
PROCESS LIMITATIONS ND RECORDS
3. This source shall be limited to the following maximum consumption, processing and/or operational
rates as listed below. Daily and annual records of the actual process rate shall be maintained by the
applicant and made available to the Division for inspection upon request. (Reference: Regulation 3,
Part B, II.A.4)
Production Limits
Facility
Equipment ID
AIRS
Point
Production Rate
Daily Limit
(tons/day)
Annual Limit
(tons/year)
NIA
001
Sand and gravel production I 5,000
600,000
STATE AND FEDERAL REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS
4. Visible emissions from conveyors and transfer points shall not exceed twenty percent (20%) opacity
during normal operation of the source. During periods of startup, process modification, or adjustment
of control equipment visible emissions shall not exceed 30% opacity for more than six minutes in any
sixty consecutive minutes. (Reference: Regulation No. Al, Section ll.A.1. & 44)
5. All conveyors and transfer points will be subject to the New Source Performance Standards
requirements of Regulation number 6, Subpart 000 whenever there is primary crushing capacity
greater than 150 tons per hour (portable equipment) or 25 tons per hour (fixed equipment) at this
location as follows:
[The requirements below reflect the rule language of 40 CFR Part 60 Subpart 000 published in the
Federal Register on 4/28/2009. However, if revisions to this Subpart are published at a later date, the
owner or operator is subject to the requirements contained in the revised version of 40 CFR Part 60,
Subpart 000.1
a. Visible emissions from each screen and transfer point shall not exceed ten percent (10%) opacity.
b. The following requirements of Regulation No. 6, Part A, Subpart A, General Provisions, apply.
a. At all times, including periods of start-up, shutdown, and malfunction, the facility and control
equipment shall, to the extent practicable, be maintained and operated in a manner consistent
with good air pollution control practices for minimizing emissions. Determination of whether or
not acceptable operating and maintenance procedures are being used will be based on
information available to the Division, which may include, but is not limited to, monitoring results,
opacity observations, review of operating and maintenance procedures, and inspection of the
source. (Reference: Regulation 6, Part A. General Provisions from 40CFR60.11)
b. No article, machine, equipment or process shall be used to conceal an emission which would
otherwise constitute a violation of an applicable standard. Such concealment includes, but is not
limited to, the use of gaseous diluents to achieve compliance with an opacity standard or with a
standard which is based on the concentration of a pollutant in the gases discharged to the
atmosphere. (§ 60.12)
c, written notification of construction and initial startup dates shall be submitted to the Division as
required under § 60.7.
d. Records of startups, shutdowns, and malfunctions shall be maintained, as required under § 60.7,
e, Written notification of opacity observation or monitor demonstrations shall be submitted to the
Division as required under § 60.7.
AIRS ID: 123/0452/001
Page 2 of 7
Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment
Air Pollution Control Division
Hall -Irwin Aggregates LLC dba Bestway Concrete
Permit No, 94WE407F
ISSUANCE 4
f. Compliance with opacity standards shall be demonstrated according to § 60.11.
OPERATING & MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENTS
7. This source is riot required to follow a Division -approved operating and maintenance plan.
COMPLIANCE TESTING AND SAMPLING
Initial Testing Requirements
8. initial testing is not required for this source,
Periodic Testing Requirements
9. Periodic testing is not required for this source.
ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS
10. All previous versions of this permit are cancelled upon issuance of this permit.
11. The AIRS ID number shall be posted in an easily visible location for ease of identification, (Reference:
Regulation No, 3, Part B, TILE.) (State only enforceable)
12. The particulate emission control measures listed on the attached page (as approved by the
Division) shall be applied to the particulate emission producing sources as required by
Regulation No, 1, Section Il l,D.1.b.
13. This permit is for the activities specified above; any additional process equipment
crushers, screens, etc.) to be located at this site must have a separate permit from the
Divisions (Reference: Reg. 3, Part B, III.E. )
14. A revised Air Pollutant Emission Notice (APEN) shall be fled: (Reference: Regulation No. 3,
Part A, lit)
a. iiikrinually whenever a significant increase in emissions occurs as follows:
For any criteria pollutant:
For sources emitting less than 100 tons per year of a criteria pollutant, a change
in annual actual emissions of five (5) tons per year or more, above the level reported
on the last APEN; or
For volatile organic compounds (VOC) and nitrogen oxides sources (lox) in ozone
nonattainritent areas emitting less than one hundred tons of VOC or NOx per
year, a change in annual actual emissions of one 0'l) ton per year or more or five
percent, whichever is greater, above the level reported on the last APEN; or
For sources emitting 100 tons per year or more of a criteria pollutant, a change in
annual actual emissions of five percent or fifty (50) tons per year or more, whichever
is less, above the level reported on the last APEN submitted; or
For sources emitting any amount of lead, a change in actual emissions of fifty (50)
pounds of lead above the level reported on the last APEN submitted.
AIRS ID: 123/0452/001 Page 3 of 7
Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment
Air Pollution Control Division
Hall -Irwin Aggregates LLC dba Bestway Concrete
Permit No. 94WE407F
ISSUANCE 4
For any non criteria reportable pollutant:
If the emissions increase by 50% or five (5) tons per year, whichever is less, above
the level reported on the last APEN submitted to the Division.
b. Whenever there is a change in the owner or operator of any facility, process, or
activity; or
c. Whenever new control equipment is installed, or whenever a different type of control
equipment replaces an existing type of control equipment; or
d. Whenever a permit limitation must be modified; or
e. No later than 30 days before the existing APEN expires.
GENERAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS:
15. This perm ft and any attachments must be retained and made available for inspection upon request.
The permit may be reissued to a new owner by the Division as provided in Regulation No. 3, Part B,
Section I I .S upon a request for transfer of ownership and the submittal of a revised APEN and the
required fee.
16. If this permit specifically states that final approval has been granted, then the remainder of this
condition is not applicable. Otherwise, the issuance of this construction permit is considered initial
approval and does not provide "final" approval for this activity or operation of this source. Final
approval of the permit must be secured from the APCD in writing in accordance with the provisions of
25-7-114.5(12)(a) CI R. . and AQOC Regulation No. 3, Part B, Section III .G. Final approval cannot
be granted until the operation or activity commences and has been verified by the APCD as
conforming in all respects with the conditions of the permit. Once self -certification of all points has
been reviewed and approved by the Division, it will provide written documentation of such final
approval. Details for obtaining final approval to operate are located in the Requirements to
Self -Certify for Final Approval section of this permit, The operator shall retain the permit final
approval letter issued by the Division after completion of self -certification with the most current
construction permit.
17. This permit is issued in reliance upon the accuracy and completeness of information supplied by the
applicant and is conditioned upon conduct of the activity, or construction, installation and operation of
the source, in accordance with this information and with representations made by the applicant or
applicants agents. It is valid only for the equipment and operations or activity specifically identified
on the permit.
By:
ransli
Sunday A. Fade,i, P.E.
Permit Engineer
By;
FOR
K Hancock Ill P.E.
Construction Permits Unit Supervisor
Date
issuance
Description
M
Fina • ..roval
Febtoa
9 1998
March 28. 2001
increasing
throughput
from 400,000 tons
pear a
Modification
Issuance 4 '
1
This issuance
Co mpanjs name change from Hall -Irwin
Irwin Aggregates LLC dba Bestwaj
Corporation to Hall
►ncrete
-
AIRS ID: 12310452/001
Page 4 of 7
Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment
Air Pollution Control Division
Hall -Irwin Aggregates LLC dba Bestway Concrete
Permit No. 94WE407F
ISSUANCE 4
Notes to Permit Holder (as of permit issuance):
1) The production or raw material processing limits and emission limits contained in this permit are
based on the production/processing rate requested in the permit application. These limits may be
revised upon request of the permittee providing there is no exceedence of any specific emission
control regulation or any ambient air quality standard. A revised air pollutant emission notice (APEN)
and application form must be submitted with a request for a permit revision.
2) This source is subject to the Common Provisions Regulation Part II, Subpart E, Affirmative Defense
Provision for Excess Emissions During Malfunctions. The perrnittee shall notify the Division of any
malfunction condition which causes a violation of any emission limit or limits stated in this permit as
soon as possible, but no later than noon of the next working day, followed by written notice to the
Division addressing all of the criteria set forth in Part 111E.1. of the Common Provisions Regulation.
See: https:/ vw.cotorado.gov/pacifi ''+ phe/agc c-regs.
3) The point source emission levels contained in this permit are based on the following emission factors
(any change in operations may change these factors):
!point Emissions:
o
- O
Pollutant
Emission Factors
-
IS!
r
0.045 lbs per ton of sand and gravel production 96.6% control applies
1 Pal10
r lbs ton of sand and gravel production 96.6% control applies
o,pe
PM2 5
0.005 lbs per ton
of sand and gravel production 96,6 control applies
4
I
In accordance with . R .E , 5-7-114.1, each Air Pollutant Emission Notice (APEN) associated with
this permit is valid for a term of five years from the date ft was received by the Division. A revised
APEN shall be submitted no later than 30 days before the five-year term expires. Please refer to the
most recent annual fee invoice to determine the APEN expiration date for each emissions point
associated with this permit. For any questions regarding a specific expiration date call the Division at
(303)-692-3150.
5) This facility is classified as follows:
Applicable Requirement I
Status
Operating Permit
Minor: PM
PSD/NANSR I R.
Minor: PM
6) Full text of the Title 40, Protection of Environment Electronic Code of Federal Regulations can be
found at the website listed below:
htto:/ ecfr..Qooaccess.govI
Part 60: Standards of Performance for New Stationary Sources
NSPS
§60.670 - §60.576
Subpart 000
7) The permit holder is required to pay fees for the processing time for this permit. An invoice for these
fees will be issued after the permit is issued. The permit holder shall pay the invoice within 30 days of
receipt of the invoice, Failure to pay the invoice will result in revocation of this permit (Reference:
Regulation No. 3, Part A, Section VI.B.)
E. )
AIRS ID: 123104521001
Page 5 of 7
Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment
Air Pollution Control Division
Hail -Irwin Aggregates LLC dba Bestway Concrete
Permit No. 94WE407F
ISSUANCE 4
8) Unless specifically stated otherwise, the general and specific conditions contained in this permit have
been determined by the Division to be necessary to assure compliance with the provisions of Section
25-7-114.5(7)(a), C.R.S.
9) Each and every condition of this permit is a material part hereof and is not severable. Any challenge
to or appeal of a condition hereof shall constitute a rejection of the entire permit and upon such
occurrence, this permit shall be deemed denied ab init o. This permit may be revoked at any time
prior to self -certification and final authorization by the Division on grounds set forth in the Colorado Air
Pollution Prevention and Control Act and regulations of the AQCC including failure to meet any
express term or condition of the permit_ if the Division denies a permit, conditions imposed upon a
permit are contested by the applicant, or the Division revokes a permit, the applicant or owner or
operator of a source may request a hearing before the AQCC for review of the Division's action.
10) Section 25-7-114.7(2)(a), C.R.S. requires that all sources required to file an Air Pollutant Emission
N otim (APEN) must pay an annual fee to cover the costs of inspections and administration. If a
source or activity is to be discontinued, the owner must notify the Division in writing requesting a
cancellation of the permit. Upon notification, annual fee billing will terminate.
11) Violation of the terms of a permit or of the provisions of the Colorado Air Pollution Prevention and
Control Act or the regulations of the AQCC may result in administrative, civil or criminal enforcement
actions under Sections 25-7-115 (enforcement), -121 (injunctions), -122 (civil penalties), -122.1
(criminal penalties), CRS.
.
AIRS ID: 123/04521001
Page 6 of 7
Colorado Department of Public Heakkh and Environment
Air Pollution Control Division
HaIIirwin Aggregates LLB dba Bestway Concrete
Permit No. 94WE407F
ISSUANCE 4
PARTICULATE EMISSIONS CONTROL PLAN FOR MINING AND PROCESSING ACTIVITIES
THE FOLLOWING PARTICULATE EMISSIONS ONTROL MEASURES SHALL BE USED FOR
COMPLIANCE PURPOSES ON THE ACTIVITIES COVERED BY THIS PERMIT, AS REQUIRED BY THE
AIR QUALITY CONTROL COMMISSION ION REGULATION NO], SECTION III.D.1.b. THIS SOURCE IS
SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING EMISSION GUIDELINES:
a. Mining and Processing Activities in Visible emissions not to exceed 20%, no off -property transport of
visible emissions.
b. Haul Roads - No off -property transport of visible emissions shall apply to on -site haul roads, the
nuisance guidelines shall apply to off -site haul roads.
c. Haul Trucks -F There shall be no off -property transport of visible emissions from haul trucks when
operating on the property of the owner or operator. There shall be no oft -vehicle transport of visible
emissions from the material in the haul trucks when operating off of the property of the owner or
operator.
Control Measures
1. Adequate soil moisture must be maintained in topsoil and overburden to control emissions during
removal. Watering shall be implemented if necessary.
2. Topsoil and overburden stockpiles shall be compacted and revegetated within one year.
3. Emissions from material handling (i,e. removal, loading, and hauling) shall be controlled by watering at
all times unless natural moisture is sufficient to control emissions.
4. Reclamation works and sequential extraction of material shall be initiated to keep the total disturbed
areas at any one time to a minimum.
5. Unpaved haul roads shall bie graveled, treated with a chemical stabilizer, and watered as often as
needed tocontrol fugitive particulate emissions such that the above guidelines are met.
6. Material stockpiles shall be watered as necessary to control fugitive particulate emissions. Aggregate
materials shall be sprayed with water during material loading into the storage bins or stockpiles.
AIRS 10: 123/0452/001
Page 7 of 7
.,.
.4_ ,_
..
C O L O R A D
V V
.
'",h, •
Department
Health
Dedicated
Et
DISCHARGES
Environment
to
of Public
protecting
This
and improving
CERTIFICATION
ASSOCIATED
(and
Certification
to discharge
CDPS
other
Certification
Bestway
GENERAL
Nonmetallic
the
WITH
to
Cache
Concrete
from
Windsor
health
Discharge
SAND
Number:
TO
PERMIT
the
to:
La
and
DISCHARGE
a
Minerals
and
facility
Plant
Poudre
environment
GRAVEL
specifically
COG
COG500000
Aggregates
501
�f�
identified
MINING
except
UNDER
546
of
authorizes:
out
the
fuel)
people
AND
�
as
PROCESSING
es.
of Colorado
Facility
Located
32744
CR 13,
Windsor,
Larimer
County, CO 80550
at:
Center
Point
Latitude
40.476270,
Longitude -104.936455
Outfall(s)
Defined
Water
Discharge
to Surface
Outfall(
Lat,
Long
s'
Discharge
Outfall(s)
Description
Receiving
Stream
MGD
Outfalt
001-A
Number
40.472674,
-104.939944
Mine dewatering
and commingled
storrnwater
Cache
La Poudre
1.5
Alt
drainage
other
Permit
I. C.1,
Crushed
Permitted
Permitted
Limit
discharges
water
I.
Set:
Limitations
D,
Stone
districts
courses
and
Feature
Feature
2
must
and
LE.
and
I
comply
under
and
Construction
D :
Type:
other
001A
Monitoring
their
External
with
local
jurisdiction.
the
Sand
agencies
Requirements
Outfa
lawful
and
ll
requirements
regarding
Graver
apply
Facilities
any
of
discharges
to
federal
outfa
(SIC
Codes
r
agencies,
to
l 001A
storm
1442)
A
drain
as outlined
municipalities,
systems,
in the
counties,
conveyances,
Permit
or
in Parts
Parameter
Units
Maximum
Discharge
Concentrations
Limitations
Monitoring
Sample
30
Average
-Day
7 -Day
Average
]�
Daily
Max.
Frequency
Type
yR
Flow',
50050
MGD
I
1.5
NA
Report
p
Conti n uous1
Recorder'
pH,
(Minimum -
Maximum)
00400
s. u .
NA
NA
6.5-9.0
2x/month
Grab
Solids,
Total
D0530
Suspended
mg/l.
30
45
NA
2x/month
I
Grab
Oil
84066
and Grease Visual
NA
NA
NA
2x/month
Visual2
Page Iof2
John
4300 Cherry Creek Drive S.7 Denver,
W. Hicken laoper, Governor I
CO 80246-1530
Larry Volk,
P 303-692-2000
MD, MS PH,
www.colcrado.gov/cdphe/wgcd*
Executive Director and Chief
Medical. Officer
CO
coli_.
Oil and Grease,
03582
mg/i
NA
NA
10
Contingent2
Grab
Site Specific Limitations
Electrical
Conductivity (EC),
00094
d5lm Report
NA
NA
Quarterly
Grab
1: F - The chronic flow limit is equal to the flow rate provided in the permit application, and will be
stated on the certification. If power is not available, flow may be measured on an instantaneous basis.
2: Oil and Grease: - A visual observation of the discharge for each permitted outfall must be made
2 times per month. In the event an oil sheen or floating oil is observed, a grab sample shall be
collected, analyzed, and reported on the D R. In addition, corrective action shall be taken
immediately to mitigate the discharge of oil.
3: Total Flow - Total flow is the cumulative flow of the discharge for the quarter in million gallons. If
continuous flow monitoring is not conducted, the permittee must calculate the total flow for the
month or quarter using the 30 -day average flow (measured) and the number of days the facility
discharged within the month or quarter,
Certification issued: 12/14/2016 Effective: 1/1/2017 Expiration Date: 12/31/2021
This certification under the permit requires that specific actions be performed at designated times. The
certification holder is legally obligated to comply with all terms and conditions of the permit.
Approved by
Kathleen Rosow
Permits Unit 3 Work Group Leader
Water Quality Control Division
Page 2 of 2
4300 Cherry Creek Drive S Denver, CO 80246-1530 P 303-692-2000 www.colorado gov/cdphelwgcd
John W , Hickenlooper, Governor I Larry Wolk, MD, MSPH, Executive Director and Chief Medical Officer
-kai
... rarw.weldgov,com GREELEY, CO 80631 * 97045 4100 EXT 3540 * FAX 970304-498
FLOOD HAZARD DEVELOPMENT PERMIT (FHDP) APPLICATION
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING SERVICES * 1556 N.17T AVENUE
FOR PLANNING DEPARTMENT USE_
AMOUNT $
APPLICATION RECEIVED BY
DATE RECEIVED:
CASE # ASSIGNED:
PLANNER ASSIGNED.
Parcel Number: 0 8 0 7+ 1 9 .. 0 0. 0 5
(12 digit number - found on Tax I.D. information, obtainable at the Weld County Assessor's Office www. r gQy. a.
Legal Description NORTHWEST 114
, Section Township 6 N. Range '
Waterway Name: CACHE LA POLJDRE RIVER Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) Panel it 08123C-08123C-
Floodzont A fa AE AEI 9. AO U
Project located in designated floodway? Yes
FEE 0 NER ) OF T --I PI ► ERT :
Name: LEE JESSICA 2014 SEPARATE PROPERTY TRUST
Company:
Phone #: - Email:
Street Address : 1690 GASCONY RD
City/State/Zip Code: ENCINITAS, CA 92024-1223
Parcel size: 19.70 acres
No,, If yes, a 'No Rise" certificate is required.
s_ /mss. fe ei., v4.0rt. i
APPLICANT QR AUTI�I' PC ZE[ ! A EI T. (See Below': Authorization must accompany all applications signed by Aufhcpzod Agent)
Name: ANDY RODRIGUEZ
Company: CIVIL RESOURCES, t...ke
Phone #: 303-833-1418
Street Address ; 323 FIFTH ST
E ir: ANDYCCIVrLREsouRcE .COM
City/State/Zip Code: FREDERICK, CO 80630
Type of Proposed Development: (Please check all that apply)
Residential Home
New Construction
0 Addition or Improvements
lIn Subdivision
0 Fill Material Subdivision
Other
•
Non -Residential
D New Construction
❑ Addition or Improvements
O Fill Material
ID Watercourse Alteration
Manufactured of Mobile
On Single Lot
El In Mobile Home Park
1 1 Fill Material
In Mobile Home
■
■
Description of Proposed Development*': NEW GRAVEL MINE CONSTRUCTION
**Attach a detail �L. narrative of the project to this application.
+c ' 20
Date
Signature: Own r or Authorized Agent
Tess:ea Lee
Print: Owner or Authorized Agent
Signature: Owner or Authorized Agent Date
Print: Owner or Authorized Agent Rev 112016
if art Authorized Agent signs, a letter of authorization from all fee owners must be included with the application, If a corporation
is the fee owner, notarized evidence must be included showing the signatory has to legal authority to sign Earths corporation.
CIVIL RESURCESJLLC
ENGINEERE z5c PLANNERS
MEMORANDUM
TO: File - Lee Amendment - N. La Poudre Gravel Mine
FROM: Civil Resources, LLC
DATE: August 9, 2017
RE: Flood Hazard Development Permit - Lee Amendment - N. La Poudre Gravel Mine
This memorandum discusses how the proposed mining activities at the Lee Amendment - N. La Poudre Gravel Mine north of
the Cache La Poudre River meets the floodplain management standards set by Weld County Colorado and the City of Windsor.
Specifically, the site is located north of the Cache La Poudre River, east of WKR 13 and south of Highway 392. The site is
within the Northwest IA of Section 19, Township 6 North, Range 67 West of the 6th Principal Meridian. Three parcels make up
the Lee Amendment. The parcel numbers are # 0807-19-2-00-056, # 0807-19-2-00-058, and # 0807-19-2-0O-054. Refer Figure
1.
Below is a discussion of the Floodplain Management Standards and how the construction of the Lee Amendment— N. La Poudre
Gravel Mine meets the standards:
1. The existing FEMA floodplain is Zone AE. The base flood elevation across the property ranges from 4789 in the
southwest corner to 4792 in the northeast corner. The FIRM (Panels # 08123C -1480E & # 08123C -1481E) (detailed
study, floodway defined) is attached to this report.
2. There are no proposed structures for this site.
3. The proposed gravel mine complies with Section 23-11 of the Weld County Code.
4. The Lee Amendment to the N. La Poudre Gravel Mine consists of three parcels that total 19.70 acres. The land will
be excavated and mined. After mining is completed, the excavation will be returned to existing/pre-mining grades.
Since, pre -mining and post -mining grades will be equal and the same, there will be no rise in base flood elevations.
5. Attached are the approved mining and reclamation plans.
6. The signed flood certification form, property owner authorization form and Article XI form are attached
Conclusion
The proposed below grade gravel mine meets the Floodplain Management Standards for Weld County, Colorado.
J:\Bestvuay-213\Winsdar\LEE AMENDMENTIFIoodplainkMemo-Flood Hazard Dev Permit docx
323 FIFTH STREET 0 FREDERICK* COLORADO 8DS3❑ * PHONE: 3O3.833.1416 • FAX: 3D3.833.285❑
June 6, 2017
Mr. Mark Johnson, Compliance Manager
Bestway Concrete & Aggregates
301 Centennial Drive
Milliken, Colorado 80543
Re: Stability Analysis Summary for the Existing N. La Poudre Gravel Mine (M -2000a144)
Dear Mr. Johnson:
This letter has been prepared to address the Mined Land Reclamation Board (MLRB) Construction Materials Rule
6, Section 4, Subsection 19, Exhibit S - Permanent Man -Made Structures (6.4.19, Exhibit S) for the proposed the
existing N. La Poudre Gravel Mine.
Per the Division of Reclamation, Mining and Safety (DIEMS) when an amendment to an existing permit is filed the
applicant is required to discuss prior operations and mining limits with respect to surrounding structures located
around the existing permit boundary. This letter describes the existing North La Poudre Mine boundary and existing
activities related to slope stability.
The site is located north of the Cache La Poudre River, east of WCR 13 and south of Highway 392. The site is
within the northeast 1/4 of Section 19, Township 6 North, Range 67 West of the 6th Principal Meridian. The project is
located in Weld County, Colorado, as shown on Figure 1.
Bestway Concrete & Aggregates has completed mining the original North La Poudre mine as shown on the
attached Figure 1. No further mining or excavation will occur in the current North La Poudre Mine Limit.
STRUCTURES WITH 200 FEET OF ORIGINAL MINE BOUNDARY
The known, permanent, man-made structures within 200 feet of the proposed mine areas that are not owned by
Bestway Concrete & Aggregates are listed below:
• Highway 392 / WCR 68 (Weld County Public Works)
• Overhead Power Line (Western & Eastern Boundary)(PVREA)
• Drainage Easements (CDOTIWindsor)
• Gas Line (Middle of the Pit)(Sinclair)
• Gas Line (Northam Boundary)(XCEI. Energy)
• Gas Facility (Eastern Boundary) (George Hall)
• Telephone (North)(Century Link)
• Cable (North)(Comcast)
• Cable (North)(Dark Corn)
• Cable (West)(AT&T)
• Water Line (Northern Boundary)(Town of Windsor)
Mr, Mark Johnson
June 6, 2017
Page 2
CONCLUSIONS
The original North La Poudre Mine has been mined out and no further dewatering or mining will occur. The east
area has been mined out for approximately ten years and the west area for approximately four years. The
proposed amendment to mine the Lee Property will be towards the west end of the mine permit boundary in the
southwest corner of Highway 392 and Weld County Road 13 and a significant distance away from utilities located
next to the original permit boundary. A stability analysis and structure agreement letter was already mailed out to
the structure owners concerning the slope stability of the proposed mining area (Lee Property).
LIMITA T/ONS
Our review is based on regional geologic mapping, present mining plans, public well construction data, and stability
analyses using typical strength parameters for the various strata in the critical sections. Should the mining plans
change or subsurface conditions vary from those portrayed in this letter, we should be contacted in order to re-
evaluate the potential effects on permanent man-made structures. Stability analyses were run at the structure in
question and were not run on failure surfaces closer to the highwall. Note also that surcharge loads due to
temporary material stockpiles and overburden berms were not considered in the analysis as there are no plans to
have berms or stockpiles around the perimeter of the mine.
Please call with any questions or comments.
Sincerely,
Civil Resources, LLC
C
V
Andy Rodriguez, P.E.
Civil Engineer
Attachments: Figure 1 — General Location
Figure 1a — Structure Location Plan
Original Slope Stability Analysis (Tetra Tech — October 23, 2000)
J:\Bestway-213\Winsdor\t_EE AMEN DMENTlDRMS\Exhibits\Stability Analysis\Stability analysis existing N La Poudre mine doc
2
a_
'Q
8
der
LL
0
Ns.,
aft geme‘r.
le!
tr
Aramtbar
post!, "1/2"aal
r
fr
HIGHWAY 392 / CR 32
'575
4
a
z
1 re
CROSSROADS BLVD
a
i
1 lia
EXISTING NORTH LA
POUDRE MINE
ei LEE PROPERTY
ti
EXISTING LA POUDRE
MINE
I
r
1
COUNTY LINE ROAD I COLORADO BLVD.
CIVIL RES URCES, LLC
DATE:
ML a rrh '7 m N T
EXHIBIT:
R
\e'1Rc.; No
tee
A
a'
I
HIGHWAY 392 / WCR 68
BESTWAY WA's CONCRETE
WINDSOR PIT
GENERAL LOCATION MAP
Ca r
Cr
LIJ1 A g
al as
—I Cr riN
w ra
..CIa
1 J
'C LI C
in -4n.
I
1-4
ati
t
I
la
rki;
to copA coltt'
r -t
a
Cry O ELI
U
CIA
fr
C)
2
3
z FA
e)
615 "g
Pc
ttl c Q
r^i
u
z
n.
Li i
Lel
C
c
I1
N
0.
W
U
airm
9
8C's.
III
44 2 0
CBtit.- ez
-r d5 an
N. o CUw
IC
z
5
a
rant* erirratihis‘i
i tf3/4 I
Yf
J 9
'I
I
I
I
40.
Lb
IN r
CC
tea K
r_
sos
II
_
•-c-
. �u - Y
Y
,r 41 e tiAi
• ' L'
—
on
fbi;l'1/ �
U'M.f t9°
IS 3
Lk k
ue
ue
• -
•
a
PERMI7 NO, .5t
J
J
CIS g
LU
W
w4
L7 a.
6 Ni
U
ifs
4!
cd
Ai
4
Li
r
N
a
o.�
s
•
Vid WeR alWilog Da N I' cta1W 331T Qpsa{M1B4i• las* ay r
•
ROCKY MOUNTAIN CONSULTANTS, INC
4 G
1111111111111111111
iIuC
November 13, 2000
Mr. Jeff Gregg
Hall -Irwin Corporation
P.O. Box 319
Greeley, Colorado 80632
Premiere Building
325 Delaware Aves Suite 500
Longmont, 00 80501
(303) 772-5282
Metro (303) 665-6253
FAX (303) 665-6959
(first initial, lost nome)@lorigirmccoco n
Re: Hall -Irwin Corporation, La Poudre North Aggregate Mine, MLRB 112
RMC Job No. 80-0636.056.00
Dear Mr, Gregg:
This letter has been prepared to address Construction Materials Rule 6, Section 4, Subsection 19,
Exhibit S - Permanent Man -Made Structures (6.4i 9, Exhibit S) for the above -referenced proposed
aggregate mine.
The proposed mine will occupy approximately 37.5 acres (Lot B) of the Roth property located in
parts of the northeast quarter of the northwest quarter and the northwest quarter of the northeast
quarter of Section 19, Township 6 North,. Range 67 West of the 6th Principal Meridian in Weld
County, Colorado. The site is immediately south of State Highway 392 and approximately 1,170
feet east of Weld County Road 13. The Cache la Poudre River is approximately one -quarter mile
south of the site. Land use in the area is mostly agricultural and rural residential with newer
encroaching residential and commercial developments. Several sand and gravel mines are also
present in the alluvium along the Cache la Poudre River.
Plans are to mine the site in two pods. The first pod will encompass 17 acres on the east part of the
property, and the second pod will consist of 16 acres on the west part of the property. Mining g in
each pod will progress in three steps. In Step 1, topsoil and overburden will be stripped and
stockpiled in separate piles approximately 10 and 20 feet wide, respectively, around the perimeter
of the mine disturbed area. In Step 2, an approximately 75 -loot wide zone of aggregate will be
rained }ust inside the perimeter of the mine excavation area. Step 2 mining will consist of
progressively dewatering (with a perimeter trench and pump) and mining the aggregate in
progressively deeper layers, resulting in a near vertical face on the perimeter of the mine
excavation. In Step 3, the dewatering trench will be relocated more toward the pod interior
allowing room for the excavation perimeter to be recl az m ed at 3:1 slopes (horizontal to vertical)
utilizing the stockpiled overburden and topsoil. Mining of the pod interior would then progress.
Upon completion of the mining, each pod will be reclaimed as a pond.
GEOLQGIC STRATA
The mine site is located on a terrace of the Cache la Poudre River. Review of regional geologic
mapping (Colton, 1978) indicates the site subsurface materials consist of Post -Piney Creek Alluvium
CIVIL AND ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING • PLANNING
Mr, Jeff Gregg
October 23, 2000
Page 2
JP
most likely overly n g sandstone and claystone bedrock of the Upper Transition Member of the
Pierre Shale. Exploratory borings drilled along the south property line of the site CRMC, 1999)
encountered approximately five to eight feet of overburden topsoil and clay soils overlying
approximately 10.5 to 15 feet of sand and gravel on top of sandstone and claystone bedrock. The
bedrock depths ranged from approximately 16.5 to 20 feet below the ground surface. These
bedrock depths are consistent with our experience drilling at mines south and west of the site.
Based on our experience, the depth to bedrock at the proposed mine should remain fairly
consistent in the 15 to 20 -foot range, though local deeper areas may be encountered.
From a geotechnicati standpoint, the sand and gravel will form most of the mine slopes. These soils
are generally strong and stable, particularly when dewatered.
STRUCTURES WITHIN 200 FEET OF DISTURBED A REA S
The mine plan provides a buffer of at least 200 feet between the mined area and most area
structures. The outer edge of the "mined disturbed area" allows room for the stockpiling of the site
overburden outside of the mine excavation. The actual perimeter of the mine excavation is
approximately 50 feet to the interior of the "limit of disturbed area." The mine plan shows setbacks
between the mine excavation perimeter and various property lines and above -ground and buried
structures near the mine. These setbacks are 143 feet from the west property line, 70 feet from the
proposed right-of-way reservation of Highway 392 on the north part of the site, 50 feet from the
buried Sinclair gas pipeline passing between the two mine pods, and 55 feet from the east property
Ire. The "limit of disturbed area" on the south part of the site is on the south property line. The
property south of the site is the La Poudre gravel mine also owned by Hail -Irwin.
All known man-made structures within 200 feet of the "disturbed area" are listed below:
ii
State Highway 392 approximately 75 feet to the north of the disturbed area or 125 feet
north of the mine excavation;
Buried gas, water and phone utilities on the south side of Highway 392 approximately 35
feet to the north of the disturbed area or 85 feet north of the mine excavation;
The buried Sinclair gas pipeline between the mine pods 50 feet from the mine excavation;
A concrete building located approximately 35 feet north of the disturbed area or 85 feet
from the excavation of the west mine pod;
Overhead utility Ines approximately 80 feet west of the disturbed area or 143 feet west of
the excavation of the west mine pod;
overhead utility lines along Highway 392 approximately 40 feet north of the disturbed area
or 90 feet north of the excavation;
•
Mr. Jeff Gregg
October 23, 2000
Page 3
• An AT&T buried cable iocated on the west side of the side approximately 60 feet from the
mire excavation.
The closest known structure to the actual mine excavation is the buried Sinclair gas pipeline which
will be 50 feet from the actual mine excavation.
ST 8 JJ ANAL Y IS
We performed stability analyses in order to evaluate the potential for damage to structures. The
most critical mining situation potentially affecting structures will be the near vertical perimeter lace
of the mine excavation. Two different stability scenarios occur at the perimeter of the mine
excavation. In the first scenario, no stockpiles or overburden/topsoil are present. In the second
scenario, such stockpiles are present. We performed stability analyses for both scenarios using the
XSTABL computer program. For both stability analyses, we analyzed the worst case potential sod
l
profile based on the borings and slurry wall construction details immediately south of the site. The
sci; profile analyzed consisted of eight feet of clay overburden overlying 17 feet of sand and gravel
on top of claysstone bedrock. The lace of the excavation was drawn at 1/4:1 (horizontal to vertical).
No laboratory tests were performed on soils at the site. The soil strength parameters used were
based on typical va ues for the anticipated soils and our experience at other sites in the area, and
are summarized as follows;
Materiai
Total
weight
Unit
(pci)
Saturated
Weight
Oct
Unit
Effective
Cohesion
Effective
Angle
Friction
(degrees)
(pci)
Overburden Clay
114
126
28
200
Sand
and Gravel
130
137
0
35
Claystone
124
134
100
28
The stability analyses were initially run on 100 randomly generated circles generated at the subject
structure and mine excavation utilizing the simplified Bishop method. The most critical surface was
then analyzed using the Spencer Method.
• •
Mr. Jeff Gregg
October 23, 2000
Page 4
Inc
The nearest structure to the mine is the buried Sinclair gas line located 50 feet from the mine
excavation in an area with no stockpiles. Out stability analyses of the gas line scenario resulted in a
factor of safety of 1.5.
The nearest structure to the mine in an area with stockpiles is the buried AT&T cable located 60
feet west of the mine excavation. For this scenario, we imposed a surcharge load of 1,200 psf in
the stockpile area. The resulting factor of safety was 1.6. Copies of the Spencer stability analysis
cross -sections and input files are attached to this letter.
Based on our analyses, the aggregate mining, mine related disturbances, and subsequent
reclamation activities should not compromise structures in the area.
LIMITATIONS
Our review is based on regional geologic mapping, present mining plans, bore hole data and skim/
wall construction details immediately south of the site, and stability analyses using typical soil
strength parameters. No exploratory borings have been drilled on the site itself. Should the mining
plans change or subsurface conditions vary from those portrayed in this letter, we should be
contacted in order to re-evaluate the potential affects on man-made structures.
Please call with questions or comments.
Sincerely,
ROC Y tvlOcaNTAIN CONSULTANTS, INC.
lip
ar
07 .4e,
Gary Linden, R.G.
Engineering Geologist
CL!sp
HR0636 Q56 L Po e.1ir wit
REFEREE
•
•
Inc
Colton, R C., 1978, "Geologic Map of the Boulder -Ft. Calms Greeley Area, Colorado," USGS Map
I -655-G.
Rocky Mountain Consultants, trnc1, 1999, "Construction Observation Report, La Poudre Pit Slurry
Wail," prepared for Hall -Irwin Construction, July, RMC Job No. 19-0636.024.00.
U
•
POUDAE I t—Ydst1 9i31
di 80
lap
Ner
cc
40
•
LA POUDRE PIT NORTH
SPENCER'S MIETII-IOO, FOS for Specified Surface 1.501
t� 20 40 60 �fl
F31JORC Ma 1034
UK,
X—AXIS (feet)
12O
140
L4 POUDRE PIT NORTH
SPENCER'S METHOD, FOS for Specified Surface = 1.612
a
20 40 6O 80 ma
X" -AXIS (feet)
29
t:\O636_O56 STABLE\report figure ,wpd November 8, 2000 (10.23AM)
1 4
100
• •
PROFIT..
LA POUDRE PIT NORTH
10 8
.0
40.0
40.1
410
43.1
53.0
55.0
57.0
55-0
SOH
Int
l 14.0
30.0
124.0
40.0
40.0
38.0
38.0
40.0
40.0
57.0
65.0
57.0
40.0
1 26.0
134,0
WATER
1 62.40
8 45C ov, Dtta4 Suwartifit
43,0 39.0
53.0 40.0
54.0 41.0
63,0 49.0
73.0 56.0
84.0 60,0
240.0 61.0
LOADS
] suk( ,x.(4)
77.0 107.0
SURF2
56.46 109.83
40.0
40.1
43.0
43.1
53.0
55.0
57.0
140.0
140.0
140.0
FILE; POUR R EO 10-24-** 10:54 ft
671/2i;
ea khawAy2el gag
40.0 3
38.0 3
38.0 3
40.0 3
40.0 3
57.0 2
65.0 1
65.0 1
57.0 2
40.0 3
Cee
200.0 28,00 .000
.0 35.00 .000
100.0 28.00 .000
� 5k oc.k.ck\e)
1200.0 0
20.56 5.00
10 1 'u 1 a en
.0 1 1(,1 3Ato (\ it
• •
PROFIL FILE: POUDf E 11-01-** 17:10 ft
LA POUR E PIT NORTH
10 8 Spa 1- 1 rer
.0 40.0 40.0 40.0 3 "ere nakr6th 1741"..)
40.0 40.0 40.1 38.0 3
40.1 38.0 43.0 38.0 3
410 38.0 43.1 40.0 3
43.1 40.0 53.0 40.0 3
510 40.0 55.0 57.0 2
55.0 57.0 57.0 65.0 1
57.0 65.0 140.0 65.0 1
55.0 57.0 140.0 57.0 2
510 40.0 140.0 40.0 3
SOIL
11TO 1 6.0
137.0
134.0
130.0
124.0
WATER
1 62.40
8 ID( Li wir Mt(
Ci)
200.0 28.00 .000 .0 1 y
.0 35.00 .000 .0 ] Solna n 3ccc{
100.0 28.00 .000 .0 1 Co 141 STO rt e
ova
.0 39.0
43.0 39.0
53.0 40.0
54.0 41.0
610 49.0
710 56.0
84.0 60.0
140.0 61.0
SURE2
56.08 86.80 31.11 5.00
•
You must post sufficient Notices at the location of the proposed mine site to clearly identify the site as the location of
a proposal mining oration. The following is a sample of the Notice required for Rule 1.6.2(1)(b) b) that you may wish
to use.
NOTICE
This site is the location of a proposed construction materials operation. (Name of the Applicant/Operator)
whose a s and hone number is (Address and Phone Number of the
43'1 if -6057
Applicant/Opera ) , has applied for a Reclamation Permit with the Cola -ado Mined Lard
Reclamation Board. Anyone wishing to comment on the application may view the application at the (County Name)
County Clerk or Recorder's Office, (Clerk or Recorder's Office Address) Ski i 5')
and should send comments prior to the end of the public comment period to the Division of
Minerals and Geology? 1313 Sherman St, Room 215, fiver, Colorado 80203.
Certification:
/
,Jr _ j red _
for the proposed permit area known as the (Name of Operation) ; k IL A�-
on (Date Posted)
DATE
hereby certify that I posted a sign containing the above notice
1
August 2, 2017
VIA CERTIFIED MAIL —
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
Extraction Oil and Gas LLC
870171 th St, Ste 5300
Denver, CO 80202
Re: Mineral Deed Notice - Weld County, Colorado
To Whom It May Concern,
This letter is being prepared on behalf of Bestway Concrete the proposed operator of a 20 acre +1- parcel of land
This parcel is situated in a portion of W1/2 NW1/4, Section 19, Township 6 North, Range 67 Wa 6th P.M,, Weld, CO
and is referred to as the "Property," An application for Use by Special Review entitled the Lee Amendment is going
to be submitted to Weld County for approval.
Through title research, your name was listed as apparent holders of mineral rights on the aforementioned Property.
According to Colorado State Law, notice of public hearings related to this application must be provided to owners of
minerals and oil and gas leases, You are hereby notified of the future hearings:
• Planning Commission Hearing; TBD
• Board of County Commissioners Hearing TBD
Enclosed with this notice is a list of mineral owners and mineral lessees prepared by Zeren Land Services and a Figure
of the Site.
If you have any questions regarding this matter, please do not hesitate to contact Andy Rodriguez (303 833 1416x202)
or Mark Johnson (970 587 7277).
Sincerely.
Andy Rodriguez RE.
Civil Resources, LLC
Enclosures:
Figure
Mineral Owner List
F
y
HIGHWAY 392 / CR 32
S15
CROSSROADS BLVD.
4
Ur
1
EXISTING NORTH LA
POUDRE MINE
LEE PROPERTY
I
EXISTING LA POUDRE
MINE
•
1
1
Ok
f{f
1578
11'R- Na
Avery
HIGHWAY 392 / WCR 68
_ samarlis
1,500 3.00 e
FT KT)
CIVIL RESIIPURCES, LLCL
DATE:
FIGURE:
A
BESTWAY CONCRETE
WINDSOR PIT
GENERAL LOCATION MAP
Jury 31, 2017
Mr, Mark Johnson, Compliance Manager
Bestway Concrete & Aggregates
301 Centennial Drive
Milliken, Colorado 80543
Re: Stability Analysis for the Lee Amendment — N. La Poudre Gravel Mine (M -2000-144)
Dear Mr.Johnson:
This letter has been prepared to address the Mined Land Reclamation Board (MLRB) Construction Materials Rule
6, Section 4, Subsection 19, Exhibit S - Permanent Man -Made Structures (6.4.19, Exhibit S) for the proposed Lee
Property Amendment for the N. La Poudre Gravel Mine. This letter describes the project and slope stability
calculations carried out to evaluate the minimum distance between the edge of mining and adjacent structures to
avoid damage to the structure.
The site is located north of the Cache La Poudre River, east of WCR 13 and south of Highway 392. The site is
within the northwest 1/4 of Section 19, Township 6 North, Range 67 West of the 51h Principal Meridian. The project is
located in Weld County, Colorado, as shown on Figure 1.
Bestway Concrete & Aggregates plans to wet mine the entire mining area on the Lee Amendment Property with a
mining slope of 1:1 (horizontal to vertical), as indicated in the DRMS permit application.
This report lists proposed safe setbacks for mining from structures within 200 feet of the permitted mining boundary
based on stability calculations. Actual setbacks may be greater due to permit limitations, zoning requirements,
construction issues, agreements with owners, and extent of economically mineable aggregate or other issues,
GEOLOGY
The site is located approximately twenty (15) miles east of the foothills of the Colorado Front Range on the western
flank of the Denver Structural Basin. The basin is a down warp of sedimentary strata that trends north-northwest,
parallel to the mountain front. Based on regional geologic mapping (Colton, 1978), the near surface material in the
project area is the Piney Creek Alluvium (Qp)+ The Piney Creek Alluvium consists of dark -yellowish brown or
grayish -orange, clayey to fine sand, and well -stratified silt. The bedrock unit consists mainly of claystone and may
contain lenses of siltstone and sandstone.
GEOTECHNICA f, CONDITIONS
The mine site is located on a terrace of the Cache La Poudre River, The Piney Creek Alluvium most likely overlies
sandstone and claystone bedrock of the Denver Formation, Well construction data obtained for the area
encountered approximately four feet of overburden topsoil overlying sand and gravel ranging in depth from 16 feet
to 19 feet. As a conservative approach based on experience and information gathered from existing mines in the
area, it was assumed that the top four feet of bedrock is weathered claystone overlying non -weathered claystone.
Mr. Mark Johnson
July 31, 2017
Page 2
From a geotechnical standpoint, the sand and gravel will form the majority of the mine slopes. These soils are
generally strong and stable, particularly when dewatered.
SITE GROUNDWATER
Civil Resources conservatively modeled the groundwater at five feet below the ground surface, based on the
geotechnical exploration completed by Drilling Engineers in 2017 and data from Bestway Concrete.
STRUCTURES WITH 200 FEET OF DISTURBED AREAS
The known, permanent, man-made structures within 200 feet of the proposed mine areas that are not owned by
Bestway Concrete & Aggregates are listed below:
• WCR 13 I N. County Road 1 (Weld County Public Works)(Larimer County Public Works)
• Highway 392 / WCR 68 (CDOT)
a Traffic Light (Intersection)(Weld County Public Works)
Overhead Power Line (Western & Eastern Boundary)(PVREA)
• Drainage Easements (CDOTIWindsor)
• Gas Line (Southern Boundary)(DCP)
• Gas Line (Western & Northern Boundary)(XCEL Energy)
• Gas Facility (XCEL)
Telephone (West & North)(Century Link)
• Pond (West of site)(United Water & Sanitation District)
• Cable (West & North)(Comcast Link)
• Cable (West & North)(Dark Corn)
• Water Line (Western & Northern Boundary)(Town of Windsor)
MATERIAL PROPERTIES
Overburden
The index properties for the insitu clay overburden were based on field testing data and on our engineering
judgment; the following parameters have been used to model the overburden,
Dry Unit
Weight
(pet)
Moist
Weight
Unit
(pcl)
Cohesion
Cr psf
Friction
Angie
01'
Saturated
Weight
(pet)
Unit
103
114
126
50
29
Alluvial Sand and Gravel
The sand and gravel is generally medium -grained sand, medium dense, poorly to well graded, and generally clean.
The deposit ranges from fine to coarse sand with some silt and occasional rounded to well rounded gravels less
than two inches in diameter. The alluvial sand and gravel has been modeled as follows:
Dry
Unit
Oct)Weight
Weight
Moist
Unit
(pcf)
Saturated
Weight
Unit
(pet)
a esin C' f
Friction Angie '
119
129
130
0
35
Mr. Mark Johnson
July 31, 2017
Page 3
Claystone Bedrock
The proposed mine area is generally underlain by claystone bedrock. Claystone is generally a weak bedrock and is
often prone to slope instability and the bedrock foundation strength is critical for the highwall stability. For the
claystone bedrock, two potential strength conditions were considered. These strength conditions are referred to as:
1) peak strength, and 2) residual strength.
Peak strength is the maximum shear strength the claystone bedrock exhibits. The shear strength is made up of
both cohesion (diagenetic bonding) and internal friction. Under short-term conditions for unsheared claystone, peak
strength governs behavior. If a sheared surface or sheared zone is present within claystone as a result of faulting,
slippage between beds due to folding, past shrink -swell behavior, stress relief, or from a landslide, the cohesion
along the sheared surface is reduced to zero, and the angle of internal friction is decreased, due to alignment of
clay minerals parallel to the shear plane. Under these conditions a claystone exhibits its lowest strength known as
residual strength. Residual strength bedrock occurs in discrete zones, parallel with the sheared surface or zone,
whereas fully softened strength occurs over a broader area (not used in this modeling) . Based on data from other
recent jobs and engineering judgment, the residual strength claystone was modeled in a four -foot thick layer
(conservative) overlying the peak strength bedrock as follows:
Saturated
Weight
UnitFriction
(pet)
Cohesion C' psi
thy Unit
(pcf)
Weight
Moist Unit
(pct)
Weight
Angie
f
116
Residual
Peak=126
=
110
Peak
Residual
=135
=133
Peak=100
Residual
= 0
Residual
Peak
=25
= 15
STABILITY ANALYSES
The stability of the proposed mining limits was evaluated at four sections under anticipated loading conditions
around the perimeter of the site and is discussed below. The computer program XSTABL was used for the
analysis. The method for selecting the critical failure surface for each analyzed loading condition is the following.
The Modified Bishop's Method of Analysis is used to find the critical failure surface by randomly searching with a
minimum of 12 termination points and 12 initiation points (144 failure circles) with 7 foot line segments over a broad
range of the slope surface. This procedure is repeated over different initiation and termination locations until the
most critical factor of safety failure surface is identified. The range is narrowed and 12 initiation points and 12
termination points (144 failure circles) with 7 foot line segments for the final run of 144 circles to determine the
lowest factor of safety.
The four cross-section locations were selected to analyze proposed minimum setbacks for stability of structures
using appropriate surcharge loads for the mining limits. The cross sections are modeled with a 2.5:1 (H:V)
highwall. All mining slopes are modeled to be no steeper than 2.5:1 (H:V). The locations are shown on Figure 1
The majority of the mine is surrounded by paved roads on the north and west and utilities on the north, west and
east. In order to analyze both the utilities and the road two runs were performed per section by varying the initiation
and termination points, this is conservative as the structures closer to the mine highwall will have a lower factor of
safety.
Using XSTABL the first set of runs was performed to model the failure at roads and power poles.
Using XSTABL the second set of runs was performed to model the failure at the gas facilities, underground
utilities and drainage easements.
Mr. Mark Johnson
July 31, 2017
Page 4
Once final analysis is complete the two runs will have analyzed 144 circles per section and a total of 1,152
failure surfaces.
A discussion of the actual section is presented below.
0 Section A -A': This section considers WCR 13 148 feet to the west of the mine highwall and a surcharge of
400 psf. This section also considers the Xcel Gas Facility 100 -feet to the west of the mine highwall. A
high phreatic surface was used to model the maximum water surface.
► Section B -B': This section considers WCR 13 33 feet to the west of the mine highwall and a surcharge of
400 psf. This section also considers underground utilities 27 feet west of the mine highwall. A high
phreatic surface was used to model the maximum water surface.
► Section C -C': This section considers WCR 392 37.5 feet to the north of the mine highwall and a surcharge
of 400 psf. This section also considers underground utilities 37.5 feet north of the mine highwall A high
phreatic surface was used to model the maximum water surface.
► Section D -D': This section considers the overhead power line 60 feet east of the mine highwall and a
drainage easement 30 feet east of the mine highwall. A surcharge of 200 psf was included to model the
live load from the access road and dead load from the overhead power line. A high phreatic surface was
included to model the maximum water surface.
The material index and engineering strengths assumed in this slope stability re po rt are discussed below_
STABILITY ANALYSES RESULTS
Stability analysis included one condition:
1. Proposed dry mining slopes (dewatered).
The permit boundary setback will be 15 -feet minimum from the high wall and the setbacks to the structures are
listed in the Tables below. The factor of safety shown below is the minimum factor of safety for the condition. The
setback distance can be increased as needed to address other restrictions.
TABLE la - SLOPE STABILITY RESULTS — RUN 1
Critical
Structure
Setback
.
Highwall
from
Surcharge
Modeled
tpsf)
Factor of
Safety
Section
Location
Western
Boundary
WCR 13
148'
V
400
2.762
AA'
46'
400
1.486
BB'
Western
Boundary
WCR 13
Hwv 392
1.665
CC'
Northern
Boundary
98'
400
DD
a
Eastern Boundary
200
1. 1
' Overhead
Line
Power
80'
Mr. Mark Johnson
July 31, 2017
Page 5
TABLE l b - SLOPE STABILITY RESULTS -RUN 2
Section
Location
Critical
Structure
Setback
Hi
from
hall
Surcharge
Modeled
s
Factor of
safe
AK
Western
Bounds
Xcel
Gas
Facili
100'
N/A
2, 095
BB'
Western
Boundary
Underground
1 atert
Gas
Utilities
Finer,
36
N/A
1.403
CC'
Northern
Boundary
Underground
Dater,
Gas
Utilities
Fiber,
36"
N/A
1.62
DP'
Eastern
Bounds
rains*
N/A
1.271
CONCLUSIONS
The minimum distances proposed in this report will protect the subject structures, however, the actual setbacks
may be increased for constructability ity and maintenance considerations.
LIMITATIONS
Our review is based on regional geologic mapping, present mining plans, public well construction data, and stability
analyses using typical strength parameters for the various strata in the critical sections. Should the mining plans
change or subsurface conditions vary from those portrayed in this letter, we should be contacted in order to re-
evaluate the potential effects on permanent man-made structures, Stability analyses were run at the structure in
question and were not run on failure surfaces closer to the highwall. Note also that surcharge loads due to
temporary material stockpiles and overburden berms were not considered in the analysis as there are no plans to
have berms or stockpiles around the perimeter of the mine.
Please call with any questions or comments.
Sincerely,
Civil Resources, LLC
Andy Rodriguez, P.E.
Civil Engineer
Attachments: Figure 1-- Slope Stability Cross Sections Locations PLAN
Figure 2 — Slope Stability Cross Sections
Boring Locations
Boring Logs
XSTABL Model Output: AA, BB, CC, and DD
J:'Bestway-213\VVinsdor\LEE AMEN DMENTIDRMS1Exhibits\Stability Analysis\Stability analysis report- LeeGravelMine,doa
was Ma
qt 9;
EAU Ee
Fz
pi,
f 41'ix
p
I
I
deldill)hh_00 0' O.() 0 I
aim
•r
611
rc
Z fig
111
rib Cs w
r Cu
I
Cl
Ch
Ir
rr
et re;
;'
0 Litt
w
c)
,111
p • �I i
f
• Li is
t -''
Irt BCLaNDA Y
as a:,,. as 1,
I -
'a Faits g
r-
t4...
6 Quest
rt a
z10
"n5
UJ CZ tr
Ir
JK1J
_.
i
xi
Wat PERMIT Ar't .
SHOP BUILDING
N
!IMP +�
0 al 11,6n
CA
Z
zr Chi
0kLJ
I— 4.1
< 8C
i
I
I
I
J
I
I
I ,,yy1'
a iu__ nw a a a a al ara a r Ijr, . II..I V u iW . a I
rr
,primairsarews f-
�g
a
t o
rn
r-i°
cc 2
c3
u.h J
� w
LL!• t
3W
_Z
82
� W
cd;
00
N
4h
tA
h
46.
J
W
46 0
G
g
AP
I114 ta
F L11 Cis la
4011
tn
r.
z O
4 c
19 't K
11! A.
LU
PA._0PERTv 1RUST
ii
b b a
N
� a' N N. N
1 it a b' 8
COO
cic
IN 4 a)
ONcry it
TN it
m
Al
I
I
I
I
I
N e e-i
u I
to U
I
▪ Y•
Q3VI Lc:
MI
® 8•
! d eta
R,
cri
r
go -
C
tun
001
•
i
07,
c
I / >
4
C
1r
0'
O7O
-.8 LFirstr9.91_
W •• it
ri La Ilk
w
r
s
ri 0 t'a'i 03 N
CO CO N N
1 es V. St it
a.— Q
b
al N
a3N N N
E
T•
1
FOS-1.403
N
0
O
0
O
N
ubgi
g
�r
c, U
Oki ITI
ears
•
LLa
—o
Ma 3
hrt
4 vis
74,
• (�4J W
c
scre tri61Y-•
4
45°
+
Pri
IW
d
W
a
r
/
II
i
-a
rr
Cu
4
ts
ri
4
re, a al
sit vt it
CC CO rs.
N N P'.
it it t 0
N
tel
0
j
1
C
GL0 0
ca
•.4
ht':i
LIILii
1
b
iD
eq J
17 <5 U
r IS anti
�+ r, ri
,• sE. •
O
C
0 ••
O n
0
CC
_ 4 4- _ t _
iJ b b ill M� ? b b O b '4' b
O a' co No ,-1 O tit as N 'aI
mI h r'. N N. CC DO N N 1 r**, a)
,t It it d' St' , • it '4f' 'it qt. It It
1
I
I'
1
A
1
rc
/lir, L.' W VI
Celt
IIW
25
1-
Lu
6
Lam~
▪ N
2
i
LL
O
CI La
Ire
0-44
C
O
b be
ON CO N
N N iN
e It y
rt
II
0to
i
S
Ut
0
COk
mb I
kni
II
IN. II
i) II
co
Ler
13
LL
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I cw
I t el
I
I
I
I
I
fl
v r
tO
ct-
c
5 a,kak4'.'
ch
afti
w4_Lu
'x.11
2
rr
Mir
O
a
a '
P
i
CIVIL RESURCE5, LLC
t7
ti
r
�y O
r N
r
tirw
flat
a
0
NNNN
1- 1- it b"
Kid ialC LL 4.I ell nt0142 M 37' ,11 L"•(+■ r
LEE-AASH. OPT
XSTABL File: LEE-AASH
6-28-17 9:17
* ****-************************************
*
XSTABL
A B L
Slope Stability Analysis
using the
Method of Slices
* Copyright (C) 1992 - 2002
* Interactive Software Designs, Inc.
* Moscow, ID 83843, U.S.A.
*
*
*
*
* All Rights Reserved
Ver. 5.206 96 - 1952 *
* *****************************************
Problem Description : LEE AMENDMENT
SEGMENT BOUNDARY COORDINATES
11 SURFACE
Segment
No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
boundary segments
-left
(ft)
.0
22.1
32.7
44,5
58.5
84.2
121,8
238.6
311.1
315.1
328.2
10 SUBSURFACE
Segment
Xo .
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
x -left
(ft)
.0
22.1
32.7
44.5
58.5
84.2
121.8
238.6
. 0
. 0
y -left
(ft)
4790.0
4790.0
4789.9
4789.8
4789.5
4789.2
4789.0
4789.0
4789.1
4785.1
4772.0
x -right
(ft)
22.1
32.7
44.5
58.5
84.2
121.8
238.6
311.1
315.1
328.2
400.0
boundary segments
y --left
(ft)
4786.0
4786.0
4785.9
4785.8
4785.5
4785.2
4785.0
4785.0
4772.0
4768.0
1
x -right
(ft)
22.1
32.7
44.5
58.5
84.2
121.8
238.6
315+{ . 1
328.2
.2
400.0
6/28/2017
y -right Soil Unit
(ft)
4790.0
4789.9
4789.8
4789.5
4789.2
4789.0
4789.0
4789.1
4785.1
4772.0
4772.0
y -right
(ft)
4786.0
4785.9
4765.8
4785.5
4785.2
4785.0
4785.0
4785.1
4772.0
4768.0
Below Segment
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
3
Soil Unit
Below Segment
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
3
4
LEE -RASH . OPT
ISOTROPIC Soil Parameters
4 Soil unit (s) specified
Soil Unit Weight Cohesion Friction
Unit Moist Sat. Intercept Angle
No. (pcf) (pcf) (psf) (deg)
1 114.0 126.0 50.0 29.00
2 129.0 130.0 .0 3.5.00
3 110.0 133.0 .0 15.00
4 126.0 135,0 100.0 25.00
1 Water surface(s) have been specified
Unit weight of water = 62.40 (pcf)
Pore Pressure
Parameter Constant
Ru
. 000
. 000
. 000
. 000
(psf)
Water Surface No, 1 specified by 4 coordinate points
* *********************************
PHREATIC SURFACE,
* *************************:*******
Point
No.
1
2
3
4
x -water
(ft)
BOUNDARY LOADS
*00
300.00
328.00
400.00
1 lead (s) specified
Load x -left
No. (ft)
1 92.5
y -water
(ft)
4785.00
4785.00
4772,00
4772.00
x -right
(ft)
141.5
Intensity
(psf)
400.0
.0
. 0
. 0
. 0
Direction
(deg)
90.0
NOTE - Intensity is specified as a uniformly distributed
force acting on a HORIZONTALLY projected surface,
6/28/2017
Water
Surface
No.
A critical failure surface searching method, using a random
technique for generating CIRCULAR surfaces has been specified.
144 trial surfaces will be generated and analyzed.
12 Surfaces initiate from each of 12 points equally spaced
2
1
1
1
1
LEE-AASH . O?'T 6/28/2017
along the ground surface between x
and x
Each surface terminates between
x
and x
SNP
325.0 ft
360.0 ft
205.0 ft
225.0 ft
Unless further limitations were imposed, the minimum elevation
at which a surface extends is y = .0 ft
7.0 ft line segments define each trial failure surface.
a:--.— dmefl a —a as as a--a..aa
ANGULAR RESTRICTIONS
The first segment of each failure surface will be inclined
within the angular range defined by :
Lower angular limit :
Upper angular limit :
-45.0 degrees
(slope angle - 5.0) degrees
Factors of safety have been calculated by the
SIMPLIFIED BISHOP METHOD
* * * * *
The most critical circular failure surface
is specified by 22 coordinate points
Point
No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
B
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
x -surf
(ft)
360.00
353.89
346.16
339.19
332.21
325.22
318.22
311.22
304.23
297.25
290.28
283.34
276.43
269.56
262.73
255.94
249.21
242.54
235.94
229.41
222.95
y -surf
(ft)
4772.00
4770.86
4769.93
4769.20
4768.68
4768 .36
4768.25
4768.34
4768.65
4769.15
4769.86
4770.78
4771.90
4773.23
4774.75
4776.48
4778.40
4780.53
4782.84
4785.36
4788.06
3
LEE-AASH.OPT
22
220.87
* * * * Simplified BISHOP FOS
4789.00
2.095 ****
The following is a summary of the TEN
Problem Description : LEE AMENDMENT
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
F0S Circle
(BISHOP) x-coord
(ft)
2.095
2.148
2.256
2.347
2.425
.501
2.574
2.614
2.616
2.622
317.98
316.11
310.17
301.95
305.97
310.88
301.37
310.67
301.86
301.36
Center
y-coord
(ft)
5005.69
5003.28
4974.29
4941+79
5013.20
4971.13
4956.41
4952.99
4979.56
4963.13
most
Radius
(ft)
237.44
234.49
205.11
172.89
244.71
203.66
186.84
187.59
210.12
193.47
critical
Initial
x-coord
(ft)
* * * ETD OF FILE * *
4
360.00
356.82
344.09
334.55
347.27
353.64
331.36
360.00
334.55
331.36
6/28/2017
surfaces
s
Terminal
x-coordl.
(ft)
220.87
222.98
222.13
221.09
208.02
219.90
218.54
219.70
213.36
217.14
Resisting
Moment
(ft -lb)
1.244E+07
1.204E+07
1.042E+07
8.675E+06
1.406E+07
1.326E+07
9.675E+06
1.470E+07
1.144E+07
1.017E+07
LEE-AA.L*OPT 6/27/2017
XSTABL File: LEE-AAL 6-27-17 16:14
******************************************
XSTABL
L
Slope Stability Analysis
using the
Method of Slices
* Copyright (0) 1992 - 2002
* Interactive Software Designs, Inc.
* Moscow, ID 83843, U.S.A.
*
All Rights Reserved
* er. 5.206
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
96 - 1952 *
* *****************************************
Problem Description : LEE AMENDMENT
SEGMENT BOUNDARY COORDINATES
11 SURFACE boundary segments
Segment
No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
x -left
(It)
.0
22.1
32.7
44.5
58.5
84.2
121.8
238.6
311.1
315.1
328.2
10 SUBSURFACE
Segment x -left
No. (ft)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
9
10
-left
(ft)
4790.0
4790.0
4789.9
4789.8
4789,5
4789.2
4789.0
4789.0
4789.1
4785.1
4772.0
x
right
(ft)
22.1
32.7
44.5
58.5
84.2
121.8
238.6
311.1
315.1
328.2
400.0
boundary segments
.0
22.1
32.7
44.5
58,5
84.2
121.8
238.6
S c
. 0
y -left
(ft)
4786.0
4786.0
4785.9
4785.8
4785.5
4785*2
4785.0
4785.0
4772.0
4768.0
1
x -right
(ft)
22,1
32.7
44.5
58.5
84.2
121.8
238.6
315.1
328.2
400.0
-right Soil Unit
(ft) Below Segment
4790.0
4789.9
4789.8
4789,5
4789.2
4789.0
4789.0
4789.1
4785.1
4772.0
4772,0
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
3
y -right Soil Unit
(ft) Below Segthent
4786.0
4785.9
4785.8
4785.5
4785.2
4785.0
4785.0
4785.1
4772.0
4768.0
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
3
4
LEE-AAL . QPT
ISOTROPIC Soil Parameters
4 Soil unit (s) specified
Soil Unit Weight Cohesion
Unit Moist Sat. Intercept
No. (pcf) (pcf) (psf)
1 114.0 12E.0 50.0
2 129+0 130.0 .0
3 110.0 133.0 .0
4 126.0 135.0 100.0
Friction
Angle
(deg)
29.00
35;00
15.00
25.00
1 Water surface(s) have been specified
Unit weight of water = 62.40 (pcf)
Pore Pressure
Parameter Constant
Ru (Psf)
. 000
. 000
. 000
; 000
Water Surface No. 1 specified by 4 coordinate points
* ********************,*-**-********
PHP.EAT I C SURFACE,
* *********************************
Point
No.
1
2
3
4
x -water
(ft)
.00
300.00
328.00
400.00
BOUNDARY LOADS
Load
No.
1 load (s) specified
x -left
(ft)
1 92.5
y -water
(ft)
4785.00
4785.00
4772.00
4772.00
x -right
(ft)
141.5
Intensity
(psf)
400.0
. 0
. 0
t 0
TO
Direction
(deg)
90.0
NOTE - Intensity is specified as a uniformly distributed
force acting on a HORIZONTALLY projected surface.
6/27/2017
Water
Surface
No.
A critical failure surface searching method, using a random
technique for generating CIRCULAR surfaces has been specified.
144 trial surfaces will be generated and analyzed.
12 Surfaces initiate from each of 12 points equally spaced
2
1
1
1
LEE -t L.OPT 6/27/2017
along the ground surface between x = 328.2 ft
and x = 388.2 ft
Each surface terminates between x
and x
92.5 ft
125.0 ft
Unless further limitations were imposed, the minimum elevation
at which a surface extends is y = .0 ft
7.0 ft line segments define each trial failure surface.
ANGULAR RESTRICTIONS
The first segment of each failure surface will be inclined
within the angular range defined by
Lower angular limit :
Upper angular limit :
-45.0 degrees
(slope angle - 5.0) degrees
Factors of safety have been calculated by the
* * * * * SIMPLIFIED BISHOP METHOD * * * * *
The most critical circular failure surface
is specified by 39 coordinate points
Point
No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
x -surf
(ft)
360.93
353.96
346.99
540,01
333.03
326.04
319.05
312.05
305.06
298.06
291.06
284.06
277.06
270.06
263.06
256.07 249.07
242.08
235.09
228.11
221.13
y -surf
(ft)
4772.00
4771.32
4770.71
4770.16
4769.67
4769.25
4768.89
4768.59
4768.35
4768.18
4768.07
4768.03
4768.04
4768.12
4768.27
4768.47
4768.74
4769.08
4769.47
4769.93
4770.45
3
LEE --L . OPT
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
214.15
207.18
200,22
193.26
186.31
179.37
172.43
165.51
158.59
151.69
144.79
137.91
131.04.
124,18
117.33
110.50
103.68
102.81
**** Simplified BISHOP FOS =
4771.04
4771.68
4772.39
4773.17
4774.00
4774.90
4775.86
j
4776.88
4777.97
4779.12
4780.33
4781.60
4782.94
4784.33
4785.79
4787.31
4788.89
4789.10
2.762 ****
The following is a summary of the TEN
Problem Description : LEE AMENDMENT
FOS Circle
(BISHOP) x-coord
(ft)
1, 2,762
2, 3.709
3. 3.721
4. 3.722
5, 3.770
6, 3.920
7. 3.943
8. 3.964
9. 3.965
10. 3.989
282.61
263,90
271.83
279.03
268.79
263.81
3
289.46
264.36
266.84
289.91
Center
y-coord
(ft)
5542.66
5318.41
5330.75
5393.19
5372.84
5321.75
5350.15
5230.41
5249.80
5359.31
most
Radius
(ft)
774.63
550.84
561.58
630.71
608.71
555.65
586.52
473.45
490.40
594.60
critical
Initial
x-coord
(ft)
* * * END OF FILE * *
4
360.93
333.65
328.20
388.20
366.38
344.56
388.20
382.75
377.29
382.75
6/27/2017
surfaces
Terminal
x-aoord
(ft)
102.81
110.91
124.12
97,94
97.16
105.68
118.07
92,53
99.06
121.58
Resisting
Moment
(ft -lb)
8.392E+07
8,655E+07
5.402E+07
1.209E+08
1.069E+08
8.204E+07
9.825E+07
1.128E+08
1.04.2E+08
9.242E+07
LEE-BBSH. OPT
XSTABL File: LEE-BBSH 6-27-17 16:53
******************************************
*
*
*
*
XSTABL
A B L
Slope Stability Analysis
using the
Method of Slices
* Copyright (0) 1992 - 2002
Interactive Software Designs, Inc.
* Moscow, ID 83843, J.S.A.
* All Rights Reserved
*
* filer. 5.206 96 - 1952
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
* *****************************************
Problem Description : LEE ANENDMENT
SEGMENT BOUNDARY COORDINATES
9 SURFACE boundary segments
Segment
No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
x -left
(ft)
. 0
13.6
34.0
59.7
219.6
245.4
255.0
269.0
308.4
8 SUBSURFACE
Segment
No.
1
2
3
4
5
y�
6
7
8
x -left
(ft)
y -left
(ft)
4790.4
4790.1
4790.1
4790.0
4790.0
4790.0
4790.1
4786.1
4772.0
x -right
(ft)
13.6
34.0
59.7
219.6
245.4
255.0
269.0
308.4
400.0
boundary segments
. 0
13.6
3919.6
4.0
5 9.7
2 1 9 . ,6�
2 4 5 . i
+ 0
. 8
y -left
(ft)
4786.4
4786.1
4^77 6.1
4786.0
4786.0
4786.0
4772.0
4768.0
a-:---- _.. a -
ISOTROPIC Soil Parameters
1
x' -right
(ft)
18.6
34.0
59.7
219.6 2jy
45.4
269.0
308.4
400.0
y -right
(ft)
4790.1
4790.1
4790.0
4790,0
4790.0
4790.1
4786.1
4772.0
4772.0
y -right
(ft)
4786.1
4786.1
4786.0
4786.0
4786.0
4786.1
4772.0
4768.0
6/27/2017
Soil Unit
Below Segment
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
3
Soil Unit
Below Segment
2
2
2
2
2
2
3
4
LEE-BBSH.OPT 6/27/2017
4 Soil unit (s) specified
Soil Unit Weight Cohesion Friction
Unit Moist Sat. Intercept Angle
No. (pcf) (pcf) (psf) (deg)
1 129.0
114.0
2 1 2 9. 0
3 110.0
4 126.0
126.0
130.0
133.0
135.0
50.0
, 0
. 0
100.0
29.00
35.00
15.00
25.00
1 Water surface (s) have been specified
Unit weight of water = 62.40 (pcf)
Pore Pressure
Parameter Constant
Ru
. 000
. 000
. 000
. 000
(psf)
Water Surface No. 1 specified by 4 coordinate points
* *******************************-*
PHREATIC C SURFACE,
* *********************************
Point
1
2
3
4
aa- --
x-water
(ft)
.00
240.00
308,40
400.00
BOUNDARY LOADS
1 load (s) specified
Load x -left
No. (ft)
y -water
r
(ft)
4785.00
4785,00
4772.00
.
4772.00
x -right
(ft)
217.1
Intensity
(psf)
400.0
ro
n o
. 0
. 0
Direction
(deg)
90.0
NOTE - Intensity is specified as a uniformly distributed
force acting on a HORIZONTALLY projected surface.
Water
Surface
No.
A critical failure surface searching method, using a random
technique for generating CIRCULAR surfaces has been specified.
144 trial surfaces will be generated and analyzed.
12 Surfaces initiate from each of 12 points equally spaced
along the ground surface between x = 300.0 ft
and x = 325.0 ft
2
1
1
1
1
LEE-BBSH;OPT 6/27/2017
Each surface terminates between
x
and x
omit
mini
215.0 ft
235.0 ft
Unless further limitations were imposed, the minimum elevation
at which a surface extends is y = .0 ft
7.0 ft line segments define each trial failure surface.
ANGULAR RESTRICTIONS
The first segment of each failure surface will be inclined
within the angular range defined by :
Lower angular limit :
Upper angular limit :
-45.0 degrees
= (slope angle -- 5.0) degrees
Factors of safety have been calculated by the
* * * * *
SIMPLIFIED BISHOP METHOD
* * * *
The most critical circular failure surface
is specified by 13 coordinate points
Point
No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
x -surf
(ft)
309.09
302.35
29.5.47
288.50
281.50
274,52
267.64
260.90
254.36
248.07
242.09
236.47
231+30
* * * * Simplified BISHOP FOS
-
y -surf
(ft)
4772.00
4770.11
4768.84
4768.20
4768.20
4768.84
4770.11
4772.00
4774.49
4777+57
4781.21
4785.38
4790.00
1.403 ****
The following is a summary of the TEN most critical surfaces
Problem Description : LEE AMENDMENT
3
LEE -BBSH .OPT 6/27/2017
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
J8 .
9.
10.
F0S Circle
(BISHOP) x-coord
(ft)
1.403
1.502
1.572
1.587
1.595
1.604
1.606
1.623
1.628
1.653
285.00
280.74
280.22
295.32
282.42
289.41
289.83
275.45
295.33
289.18
Center
y-ccord
(ft)
4844.98
4831.58
4837.72
4875.21
4875.72
4878.71
4892.87
4833.11
4881.55
1.55
4844.21
Radius Initial
x-coord
(ft) (ft)
76.85
62.88
68.78
1[}07 .39
107.69
109.95
124.69
64.74
112.39
77.82
* * * END OF FILE
4
309.09
304.55
304.55
325.00
311.36
315.91
320.45
302.27
320.45
318.18
Terminal
x-coord
(ft)
231.30
233.61
230.79
230.02
217.27
224.51
219.44
227.26
230.25
233.41
Resisting
Moment
(ft -lb)
2.446E+06
1.931E+06
2.224E+06
4.023E+06
4.232E+06
4.042E+06
4.923E+06
2.171E+06
3.868E+06
3.289E+06
LEE-BBL+OPT 6/27/2017
XSTABL File: LEE -BBL 6-27-17 16:46
* *************************************-***
*
X S TAB L
Slope Stability Analysis
using the
Method of Slices
* Copyright (C) 1992 - 2002
* Interactive Software Designs, Inc.
* Moscow, ID 83843, U.S.A..
*
*
*
*
*
*
* All Rights Reserved
*
* Ver. 5.206 96 - 1952 *
* *****************************************
Problem Description : LEE AMENDMENT
SEGMENT BOUNDARY COORDINATES
9 SURFACE boundary segments
Segment
No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
x -left
(ft)
.0
13.6
34.0
59.7
245.4
219.6
255.0
269.0
308.4
8 SUBSURFACE
Segment
No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
x -left
(ft)
: 0
13.6
34.0
59.7
219.6
245.4
. 0
. 0
y --left
(ft)
4790.4
4790.1
4790.1
4790.0
4790.0
4790.0
4790.1
4786.1
4772*0
x -right
(ft)
13.6
34.0
59.7
219.6
245.4
�/
255.0
269.0
308.4
400.0
boundary segments
y -left
(ft)
4786.4
4706.1
4786.1
4786.0
4786.0
4786.0
4772.0
4768.0
ISOTROPIC Soil Parameters
1
x -right
(ft)
13.6
34.0
59.7 219.6
245.4
269.0
308.4
400.0
y -right
(ft)
4790.1
4790.1
4790.0
4790.0
4790.0
4790.1
4786.1
4772.0
4772.0
y -right
(ft)
4786.1
4786.1
4786.0
4786.0
4786.0
4786.1
4772.0
(� (
4 7 L: 8 . 0
Soil Unit
Below Segment
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
3
Soil Unit
Below Segment
2
2
2
2
2
2
3
4
LEE-BBL.OPT 6/27/2017
4 Soil unit (s) specified
Soil Unit Weight Cohesion Friction
Unit Moist Sat. Intercept Angle
No. (pcf) (pcf) (Psf) (deg)
1 114.0
2 129.0
3 110,0
4 126.0
126.0
(
130.0
133.0
135.0
50.0
. 0
. 0
100.0
29,00
35.00
15.00
25.00
1 Water surface(s) have been specified
Unit weight of water = 62.40 (pcf)
Pore Pressure
Parameter Constant
Ru
. 000
. 000
. 000
. 000
(psf )
Water Surface No. 1 specified by 4 coordinate points
**********************************
PHREATIC SURFACE,
**********************************
Point
No.
1
2
3
4
x -water
(ft)
.00 ((�
240.00
308.40
400.00
eflasSflflinflOW
BOUNDARY LOADS
Load
No,
1 load(s) specified
x -left
(ft)
y -water
(ft)
4785.00
4785.00
4772.00
4772.00
x -right
(ft)
1 161.1 217.1
NOTE
Intensity
(psf)
400.0
. 0
* 0
60
Direction
(deg)
90.0
- Intensity is specified as a uniformly distributed
force acting on a HORIZONTALLY projected surface.
Water
Surface
No.
A critical failure surface searching method, using a random
technique for generating CIRCULAR surfaces has been specified.
144 trial surfaces will be generated and analyzed
12 Surfaces initiate from each of 12 points equally spaced
along the ground surface between x = 300.0 ft
and x = 325.0 ft
2
1
1
1
1
LEE -BEL .OPT 6/27/2017
Each surface terminates between
x
and x
.110
175.0 ft
19.E.0 ft
Unless further limitations were imposed, the minimum elevation
at which a surface extends is y_ .0 ft
7.0 ft line segments define each trial failure surface.
ANGULAR RESTRICTIONS
The first segment of each failure surface will be inclined
within the angular range defined by :
Lower angular limit :
Upper angular limit :
-45.0 degrees
(slope angle - 5.0) degrees
Factors of safety have been calculated by the
* * * * *
SIMPLIFIED BISHOP METHOD
The most critical circular failure surface
is specified, by 22 coordinate points
Point
No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
2C
.2 1
it 2
x -surf
(ft)
315.91
308.99
302.45
295.08
288.10
281.10
274.10
267.10
260.11
253.14
246.18
239.25
232.35
225.50
218.68
211.92
205.21
198.57
191.99
185.49
179.07
178.00
**** Simplified BISHOP FOS =
y -surf
(ft)
4772.00
4770.92
4770.04
4769.37
4768.91
4768.65
4768.61
4768.77
4769.14
4769.72
4770.50
4771.49
4772.69
4774.09
4775469
4777.50
4779.51
4781.71
4784.11
4786.71
4 4789.50
479O.00
3
1,486 ****
10.
LEE -BBL, OPT
6/27/2017
The following is a summary of the TEN most critical surfaces
Problem Description : LEE AMENDMENT
FOS Circle
(BISHOP) x -curd.
(ft)
1. 1.486
2. 1.518
3. 1.541
4. 1.581
5. 14596
6. 1.609
7. 1.631
8. 1.631
9. 1.662
1.726
276.04
285.79
280.31
286.42
280.63
265.95
266.80
258.77
279.84
283.61
Center
y-coord
(ft)
5004.06
4988.58
5013.96
4987.51
4968.22
4934.95
4939.29
4933.33
4960.25
5045,08
Radius
(ft)
235.46
220.10
246.06
218.55
198.98
166.11
170.15
164.98
192459
274.72
Initial
x-coord
(ft)
315.91
325.00
325.00
322.73
313.64
304.55
304.55
302.27
320.45
313.64
* * * END OF FILE * * *
4
Terminal
x-ccerd
(ft)
178.00
190.90
178.51
192.93
192.14
184.81
185.25
177.22
189.90
181.56
Resisting
Moment
(ft -lb)
1.391E+07
1.182E+07
1.570E+07
1.161E+O7
1.047E+07
9.057E+06
9.285E+06
9.608E+06
1.181E+07
1.682E+07
LEE-CCSH.OPT
XSTABL File: LEE -COSH
6-28-17 10:26
* *****************************************
* S TAB L
* Slope Stability Analysis *
* using the *
* Method of Slices *
* *
* Copyright (0) 1992 - 2002 *
* Interactive Software Designs, Inc. *
* Moscow, ID 83843, U.S.A. *
* All Rights Reserved
* *
* Ver. 5.206 96 - 1952 *
* *****************************************
Problem Description : LEE AMENDMENT
SEGMENT BOUNDARY COORDINATES
7 SURFACE boundary segments
Segment
No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
-left
(ft)
.0
23.7
31,0
57.5
220.8
230.8
268.8
y -left
(ft)
4791.5
4791.1
4791.1
4791.0
4791.0
4787.0
4772.0
x -right
(ft)
23.7
31.0
57.5
220.8
230,8
268.8
400.0
6 SUBSURFACE boundary segments
Segment
No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
x -left
(ft)
23.7
31,0
57.5
. 0
. 0
y -left
(ft)
4787.5
4787..E
4787.1
4787.0
4772.0
4768.0
ISOTROPIC Soil Parameters
4 Soil unit (s) specified
Soil
Unit
Unit Weight
Moist Sat.
Cohesion
Intercept
1
x --right
(ft)
23.7
31,0
57.5
230.8
268.8
400.0
Friction
Angle
6/28/2017
y -right Soil Unit
(ft) Below Segment
4791.1
4791,1
4791.
0
4791.0
4787.0
4772.0
4772.0
1
1
1
1
1
9
3
y -right Soil Unit
(ft) Below Segment
4787.1
4787.1
4787.0
4787,0
4772.0
476840
Pore Pressure
2
2
2
2
3
4
Water
Parameter Constant Surface
LEE -COSH . OPT
No. (pcf) (pcf) (psf)
1 114.0 126.0
2 129.0 130.0
3 110.0 133.0
4 126.0 135.0
50.0
. 0
. 0
100.0
(deg)
29.00
35.00
15.00
25.00
1 Water surface(s) have been specified
Unit weight of water = 62.40 (pcf)
Ru
. 000
. 000
. 000
. 000
(psf}
Water Surface No. 1 specified by 4 coordinate points
PHREATIC SURFACE,
**********************************
Point
N o .
1
2
3
4
x --water
(ft)
BOUNDARY LOADS
.00
200.00
253.30
400.00
1 load (s) specified
Load x - left
e f t
No. (ft)
1 93.0
y -water
(ft)
4785.00
4785.00
4772.00
4772.00
x -right
(ft)
168.0
Intensity
(psf)
. 0
. 0
. 0
.. 0
Direction
(deg)
400.0 90.0
NOTE - Intensity is specified as a uniformly distributed
force acting on a HORIZONTALLY projected surface.
6/28/2017
A critical failure surface searching method, using a random
technique for generating CIRCULAR surfaces has been specified.
400 trial surfaces will be generated and analyzed.
20 Surfaces initiate from each of 20 points equally spaced
along the ground surface between x = 268.0 ft
and x = 284.8 ft
Each surface terminates between x
and x
2
•
•
_
175.0 ft
195.0 ft
No.
1
1
1
LEE- CSH.OPT 6/28/2017
Unless further limitations were imposed, the minimum elevation
at which a surface extends is y = .0 ft
7.0 ft line segments define each trial failure surface.
ANGULAR RESTRICT IONS
The first segment of each failure surface will be inclined
within the angular range defined by :
Lower angular limit := -45.0 degrees
Upper angular limit :_ (slope angle - 5.0) degrees
Factors of safety have been calculated by the :
* * * * *
SIMPLIFIED BISHOP METHOD
* * * * *
The most critical circular failure surface
is specified by 14 coordinate points
Point
No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
-surf
(ft)
268.88
262.11
255.22
248.25
241.25 ^y (
234.26
227.33
220.51
213.82
207.32
201.05
195.04
189.33
184.12
**** Simplified BISHOP FOS
y -surf
(ft)
4772.00
4770.24
4769.02
4768.35
4768.23
4768.67
4769.67
4771.20
4773.28
/
4775,88
4778.98
(
4782.57
4786.63
4791.00
1.620 ****
The following is a surrtmary of the TEN most critical surfaces
Problem Description
: LEE AMENDMENT
FOS Circle Center
(BISHOP) x-coord y-coord
(ft) (ft)
3
Radius Initial Terminal Resisting
x-coord x-coord Moment
(ft) (ft) (ft -lb)
(ft)
LEE-COSH.O2T
OPT
It
2
34
4,
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
1.620
1.645
1.657
1.670
1.700
1.703
1.720
1.724
1.724
1.729
243430
248.57
255.68
251.38
252685
252.52
254.35
250.29
250.67
250.89
4856.46
4853.57
4872.99
4858.19
4860.39
4896.34
4888.88
4886.13
4862.34
4859.59
88.25
84.51
105.10
88.94
92.84
128.25
120.35
117.60
92,92
92.14
268.88
270.65
284.80
273.31
281.26
283.92
283.03
278.61
272.42
279.49
* * * END OF FILE * * *
4
184.12
191.79
190,02
193,21
191.27
179.45
184.39
181.27
191.24
189.42
6/28/2017
3.714E+06
3.318E+06
4.580E+06
3.472E+06
4.243E+06
5.99.5E+06
5.387E+06
5.352E+06
3.747E+06
4.362E+06
LEE-CCL . OPT
XSTABL File: LEE -COL 6-28-17 10:30
* *****************************************
XSTABL
Slope Stability Analysis
using the
Method of Slices
* Copyright (C) 1992 - 2002
* Interactive Software Designs, Inc.
* Moscow, ID 83843, U.S.A.
* All Rights Reserved
* Ver. 5,206
96 - 1952
*
*
*
*
*
* ********* -*, ******** :**********, *, ******
Problem Description : LEE AMENDMENT
SEGMENT BOUNDARY COORDINATES
7 SURFACE boundary segments
Segment
No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
x -left
(ft)
. 0
23.7
31.0
57.5
220.8
230,8
268.8
6 SUBSURFACE
Segment x -left
No. (ft)
1
2
3
4
5
6
. 0
2347
31.0
57.5
. 0
. 0
y -left
(ft)
4791.5
4791.1
4791.1
4791.0
4791.0
4787,0
4772.0
x -right
(ft)
23.7
31.0
57,5
220.8
230.8
268.8
401.0
boundary segments
y -left
(ft)
4787.5
4787.1
4787.1
4787.0
4772.0
47668.0
ISOTROPIC Soil Parameters
4 Soil unit (s) specified
Soil
Unit
Unit Weight Cohesion
Moist Sat. Intercept
1
x -right
(ft)
23.7
31.0
57.5
230.8
268,8
400.0
Friction
Angle
y -right
(ft)
4791.1
4791.1
4791,0
4791.0
4787.0
4772.0
477240
6/28/2017
Soil Unit
Below Segment
1
1
1
1
1
2
3
y -right Soil Unit
(ft) Below Segment
4787.1
4787.1
4787.8
4787,0
4772.0
4768.0
Pore Pressure
2
2
2
2
3
4
Water
Parameter Constant Surface
LEE-CCL.OP'T 6/28/2017
No. (pcf) (pcf) (Psf)
)
1 114.0 126.0
2 129.0 130.0
3 110.0 133.0
4 126.0 135.0
50.0
. 0
. 0
1O0.0
(deg)
29.00
35.00
( (
1 5.0 0
25.00
1 Water surface(s) have been specified
Unit weight of water = 62.40 (pcf)
Ru
. 000
. 000
�
. 010
. 000
(psf )
Dater Surface Nov 1 specified by 4 coordinate points
* *********************************
PHREATIC I C SURFACE,
* *********************************
Point
No.
1
2
3
4
x -water
(ft)
.00
200.00
253.30
400.00
BOUNDARY LOADS
Load
No.
1 load(s) specified
x -left
(ft)
1 93.0
y -water
(ft)
4785.00
4785.00
4772.00
4772.00
x -right
(ft)
168.0
Intensity
(psf)
400.0
}0
. 0
. 0
. 0
Direction
(deg)
90.0
NOTE - Intensity is specified as a uniformly distributed
force acting on a HORIZONTALLY projected surface.
A critical failure surface searching method, using a random
technique for generating CIRCULAR surfaces has been specified.
400 trial surfaces will be generated and analyzed.
20 Surfaces initiate from each of 20 points equally spaced
along the ground surface between x = 268.0 ft
and x = 290.0 ft
Each surface terminates between _ 93.0 ft
and x = 168.0 ft
2
No.
1
1
1
1
LEE-CCL ,OPT 6/28/2017
Unless further limitations were imposed, the minimum elevation
at which a surface extends is y = .0 ft
7.0 ft line segments define each trial failure surface.
ANGULAR RESTRICTIONS
The first segment of each failure surface will be inclined
within the angular range defined by :
Lower angular limit :
Upper angular limit :
-45,0 degrees
= (slope angle - 5.0) degrees
Factors of safety have been calculated by the :.
* * * * *
SIMPLIFIED BISHOP METHOD
* * * * *
The most critical circular failure surface
is specified by 28 coordinate points
Point
No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
x -surf
(ft)
278,42
271.47
264.50
257.53
250.54
243.55
236.55
229.55
222.55
215.56
/
208.56
201,57
194.59
187.62
180.66
173,71
166.78
159.87
152.98
146.11
139.27
132.45
125.66
118.90
112.17
105.48
96.62
95.31
y -surf
(ft)
4772.00
4771.1B
4770.49
4769.91
4769.45
4769.12
4768.90
4768.81
4768.83
` ]f/.'{� ]
i 7 L 8 . l�,r�i7 8
4769.25
4769.64
4770.15
4770.78
4771.53
4772.40
4773.39
4774.50
4775.72
���
4711j} .0j}
4778.54
4780.12
4781.82
4763.64
4765.57
4787.62
4789+79
4791.00
3
LEE-CCL.OPT 6/28/2017
* * * * Simplified BISHOP FOS
1.665 ****
The following is a summary of the TEN most critical surfaces
Problem Description
: LEE AMENDMENT
FOS Circle
(BISHOP) x -word
(ft)
1. 1.665
2. 1*696
3. 1.715
4. 1.720
5. 1.722
6. 1.738
7. 1,777
8. 1.778
9. 1.781
10. 1.782
227.59
227.58
231.23
223.48
233.16
241.75
244.55
239.27
237.63
231.28
Center
y-coord
(ft)
5174.35
5196.05
4982.76
5172.17
5004.40
5049.17
4983.85
4925 .74
5098.90
5071.84
Radius
(ft)
405.54
426.82
214.56
402.77
235.93
280.40
215.32
157.57
329.44
382.38
Initial
x-coord
(ft)
278.42
276.11
271.47
269.16
273.79
284.21
283.85
273.79
278.42
270.32
* * * END OF FILE * * *
4
Terminal
x-coard
(ft)
95.31
93.13
134.96
93.41
132.49
132.32
148.96
157.66
128.4►
119.00
Resisting
Moment
(ft -lb)
3.745E+07
4.019E+07
1.472E+07
3.764E+07
1.663E+07
2.026E+07
1.351E+07
8.901E+Q6
2.620E+87
2.395E+07
LEE-DDSH.OPT 6/28/2017
XSTABL File: LEE-]J]JSH 6-28-17 9:41
* * *:********* ***************************
* XSTABL
A. B L *
*
Slope Stability Analysis
using the
Method of Slices
*
* Copyright (0) 1992 --- 2002
* Interactive Software Designs, Inc.
* Moscow, ID 83843, U.S.A.
* *
* All Rights Reserved
* *
* Ver. 5.206 96 - 1952
*
* ********************;**;*****************
Problem Description : LEE AMENDMENT
SEGMENT BOUNDARY COORDINATES
4 SURFACE boundary segments
Segment x -left
No (ft)
1
2
3
4
.0
209.8
219.8
252.3
y -left
(ft)
4789.0
4789.0
4785.0
4772.0
x -right
(ft)
209.8
219.8
252.3
400.0
3 SUBSURFACE boundary segments
Segment x -left
No. (ft)
*0
to
+0
1
2
3
y -left
(ft)
4785.0
4772.0
4768.0
ISOTROPIC Soil Parameters
4 Soil unit (s) specified
Soil Unit Weight
Unit Moist Sat.
No. (pcf) (pcf)
1 114.0
2 129.0
3 118.8
4 126.0
126.0
130.0
133.0
135.0
Cohesion
Intercept
(psf)
58+0
. 0
. 0
100.0
1
x -right
(ft)
219.8
252.3
400.0
Friction
Angle
(deg)
29.00
35.00
15.00
25.00
y -right
(ft)
4789.0
4785.0
4772.0
4772.0
y -right
(ft)
4785.0
4772.0
4768.0
Soil Unit
Below Segment
1
1
2
3
Soil Unit
Below Segment
2
3
4
Pore Pressure
Parameter Constant
Ru (psf)
. 000
. 000
* 888
. 000
t o
✓ o
t o
. 0
Water
Surface
No.
1
1
1
a
LEE-"DDSH.OPT 6/28/2017
1 Water surface (s) have been specified
Unit weight of water
62.40 (pcf )
Water Surface No. 1 specified by 4 coordinate points
**********************************
PHREATIC SURFACE,
*** ****************************-*
Point
No.
1
2
3
4
x -water
(ft)
.00
200.00
252.30
400.00
BOUNDARY LOADS
1 load(s) specified
Load x -left
No. (ft)
1 150,0
y -water
(ft)
4784.00
4784.00
4771.70
4772.00
x -right
(ft)
170*0
Intensity
(psf)
200.0
Direction
(deg)
90.0
NOTE - Intensity is specified as a uniformly distributed
force acting on a HORIZONTALLY projected surface.
critical failure surface searching method, using a random
technique for generating CIRCULAR surfaces has been specified.
144 trial surfaces will be generated and analyzed.
12 Surfaces initiate from each of 12 points equally spaced
along the ground surface between x = 252,0 ft
and x = 280*0 ft
Each surface terminates between x
and x
160,0 (jft
190.0 ft
Unless further limitations were imposed, the minimum elevation
at which a surface extends is y = .0 ft
7.0 ft line segments define each trial failure surface.
2
LEE -DDSH .OPT 6/28/2017
aeee•n.ee-- --
ANGULAR RESTRICTIONS
The first segment of each failure surface will be inclined
within the angular range defined by
Lower angular limit :
Upper angular limit :
-45.0 degrees
(slope angle - 5.0) degrees
Factors of safety have been calculated by the :
* * * * *
SIMPLIFIED BISHOP METHOD
* * * *
The mostcritical circular failure surface
is specified by 13 coordinate points
Point
No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
x- surf
(ft)
262.18
255.44
248.56
241.59
234.59
227.62
220.73
213.98
207.43
201.13
195.13
189.40
185.11
**** Simplified BISHOP FOS
y -surf
(ft)
4772.00
4770.11
4760.84
4760.19
4768.18
4768.80
4770.04
4771.91
4774.37
4777.42
4781.03
4785.16
4789.00
1.271 ****
The following is a summary of the TEN most critical surfaces
Problem Description : LEE AMENDMENT
FOS Circle
(BISHOP) x-coord
(ft)
1. 1.271
2. 1.317
3, 1.535
4. 1.539
5. 1.548
6. 1.548
237.94
232.17
235.39
226.71
241.59
243.07
Center
y-coord
(ft)
4845.50
4837.73
4821.37
4869.86
4886.78
4845.05
3
Radius
(ft)
77.39
69.44
56,17
101.74
118.20
78.70
Initial
x-coord
(ft)
262.18
254.55
262.18
254.55
269.82
272.36
Terminal
x-coord.
(ft)
185.11
182.76
189.61
165.06
175.17
187.83
Resisting
Moment
(ft -lb)
2.071E+06
1.097E+06
2.098E+06
3.638E+06
5.911E+06
2.808E+06
LEE -DO H . OPT
7.
8.
9,
10.
1.549
1.581
1.592
1.592
233.64
240.81
248.81
249.03
4835,90
4861.31
4886.49
4880.32
68.99
91.28
117.43
112.66
259.64
259,64
274.91
280.00
* * * END OF FIDE * * *
4
183.08
185.20
183.46
183.12
6/28/2017
2.466E+06
2.548E+06
3.474E+06
5.765E+06
LEE-DUL.OPT 6/28/2017
XSTABL File: LEE-DDL 6-28-17 10:21
* ;**-*************************************
* XSTABL
A B L
*
Slope Stability Analysis
using the
Method of Slices
Copyright (C) 1992 - 2002
* Interactive Software Designs, Inc,
*
* Moscow, ID 83843, U.S.A. *
All Rights Reserved
* V'er, , 5.206
*
9 6 - 1952 *
* *****************************************
Problem Description : LEE AMENDMENT
SEGMENT BOUNDARY COORDINATES
4 SURFACE boundary segments
Segment
No.
1
2
3
4
x -left
(ft)
.8
209.8
219.8
252.3
y -left
(ft)
4789.0
4789.0
4785.0
4772.0
x -right
(ft)
209.8
219.8
25243
400.0
3 SUBSURFACE boundary segments
Segment
N o .
1
2
3
x -left
(ft)
40
s0
so
y -left
(ft)
4785.0
4772.0
4768.0
ISOTROPIC Soil Parameters
4 Soil unit (s) specified
Soil Unit Weight
Unit Moist Sat.
No, (pcf) (pcf)
1 114.0 126.0
2 129.0 130.0
3 110.0 133.0
4 126.0 135.0
Cohesion
Intercept
(psf)
50.0
. 0
. 0
100.0
1
x -right
(ft)
219.8
252.3
400.0
Friction
Angle
(deg)
29.00
35.00
15.00
25.00
y -right
(ft)
478940
4785.8
4772.0
4772.0
y -right
4ft)
4785.0
4772.0
4768.0
Soil Unit
Below Segment
1
1
2
3
Soil Unit
Below Segment
2
3
4
Pore Pressure
Parameter Constant
Ru
. 000
. 000
. 000
. 000
(psf)
so
. o
. o
. a
Water
Surface
N o .
1
1
1
1
LEE-DDL.OPT 6/28/2017
1 Water surface (s) have been specified
Unit weight of water = 62.40 (pcf)
Water Surface No. 1 specified by 4 coordinate points
**********************************
FHREATIC SURFACE,
**********************************
Point
No.
1
2
3
4
x -water
(ft)
.00
200.00
252.30
400.00
BOUNDARY LOADS
- -.- ---.a ala al a S
1 load(s) specified
Load x -left
No. (ft)
1 150,0
y --water
(ft)
4j� 784 R 00
4784.00
4771.70
4772.00
.-right
(ft)
170.0
Intensity
(psf)
200.0
Direction
(deg)
90.0
NOTE Intensity is specified as a uniformly distributed
force acting on a HORIZONTALLY projected surface,
A critical failure surface searching method, using a random
technique for generating CIRCULAR surfaces has been specified.
400 trial surfaces will be generated and analyzed.
20 Surfaces initiate from each of 20 points equally spaced
along the ground surface between x = 252.0 ft
and x = 28200 ft
Each surface terminates between
and
x
x
145.0 ft
175.0 ft
Unless further limitations were imposed, the minimum elevation
at which a surface extends is y = .0 ft
7.0 ft line segments define each trial failure surface.
2
LEE-DDL . OPT
ANGULAR RESTRICTIONS
6/28/2017
The first segment of each failure surface will be inclined
within the angular range defined by :
Lower angular limit := -45.0 degrees
Upper angular limit := (slope angle - 5.0) degrees
Factors of safety have been calculated by the
* * * * *
SIMPLIFIED BISHOP METHOD
* * * * *
The most critical circular failure surface
is specified by 14 coordinate points
Point
No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
x- surf
(ft)
256.74
249.91
242.99
236.02
229.02
222.03
215.08
208.22
201.46
194.85
188.41
182.19
176.20
170.57
**** Simplified BISHOP FOS =
y -surf
(ft)
4772,00
4770.45
4769.38
4768.80
4768.70
4769,09
4769.97
4771.33
4773.16
4775.46
4778.22
4781.42
4785.04
4789.00
1.561 ****
The following is a summary of the TEN
Problem Description : LEE AMENDMENT
1
2
3
4
5
.
I
FOS Circle
(BISHOP) x-coord
(ft)
1.561
1.570
1.622
1.631
1.638
231.14
235.47
235.28
235.01
234.03
Center
y-coord
(ft)
4869.07
4877.39
4911.78
4934,76
4882.74
3
most
Radius
(ft)
100.39
108.55
143.16
166.34
113.72
critical
Initial
x-coord
(ft)
256.74
261.47
266.21
269.37
259.89
surfaces
Terminal
x-coord
(ft)
170.57
172.54
161.74
154.87
169.77
Resisting
Moment
(ft -lb)
3.382E+06
3.643E+06
5.578E+06
7.063E+06
3.966E+06
LEE-DDL.OPT
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
1.646
1.683
1.691
1.715
1.723
237.17
236.37
246.35
242.64
226.31
4902.92
4937.96
4926.99
4982,60
4938.96
134.11
169,20
158.69
214.24
170.62
* * * END OF FILE
4
266.21
269.37
280.42
282.00
261.47
166.50
156.18
168.10
150.86
145.02
6/28/2017
4.965E+06
7.145E+06
6,015E+06
�
9.877E+06 i �J
! • 93 ! E+06
STRUCTURE AGREEMENTS (LEE)
CERTIFICATION
The Applicant, Beltway Concrete Company (print applicant/company name),
by Mark Johnson (print representative's name), as VP Aggregates(print
representative's title), does hereby certify that Larimer County P lie Works (structure owner) shall
be compensated for any damage from the proposed mining operation to the above listed structure(s)
located on or within 200 feet of the proposed affected area described within Exhibit A, of the Reclamation
Permit Application for Lee Amendment - N. La Poudre Gravel Mine (operation name),
File Number M-2000- 1
This form has been approved by the Colorado Mined Land Reclamation Board pursuant to its
authority under the Colorado Land Reclamation Actor the Extraction of Construction Materials and
the Colorado Mined Land Reclamation Adler Hard Rock, Metal, and Designated Mining Operations.
Any alteration or modification to this form shall result in voiding this form.
N T Y FOR PERMIT APPLICANT
ACKNOWLEGED ED BY:
Applicant Bestway Concrete Co
Date March l , 2017
m
an
STATE OF Waft&
COUNTY OF 1JPt4
) ss.
Representative Name Mark. Johnson
Title VP Aggregates
Theforego i rt was acknowledged before me this 11-- day of Alit k 20A, by
; y- as e of
My Commission Expires: 'j /12 j
ee-eeae##eraa ##-#
ANDY RODRIGUEZ
NOTARY PUBLIC
STATE OF COLORADO
aeact #ee#reaaaee i #
My Commission Expires on, I. 1 -_ J l
The foregnin
dei 0,4 , ;
NOTARY FOR STRUCTURE OWNER.
A K OWL,E ED BY:
Structure Owner 1-4444$444- Cost. " * ' Name
Date ear 03 /7 Title ejdei I) nu Lett
STATE OF 1M≤ 4,1 . de
ss.
COUNTY OF 42.tpite )
was acknowledged before me this,j4 day of 1-1? —, 20/ 7, by
ros incy
(Lary Public. -'
as
Cali sr: trite . _.-- of/m. d r: L
"CHARLES W. JOHNSON ---s
NOTARY PUBLIC
STATE OF COLORADO
NOTARY ID 20004024359
MY COMMISSION EXPIRES OCT, 15.2020
My Commission Expires: 41/15/0PZ f/2 6r
CERTIFICATION
The Applicant, Bests_ _ Concrete Company (print applicant/company name),
by Iarl j hnsnn(print representative's name), as VPAggregates(print.
�` � ____._ �_ _ p
representative's title), does hereby certify that Public Service Co of CO (structure owner) shall
be compensated for any damage from the proposed mining operation to the above listed structure(s)
located on or within 200 feet of the proposed affected area described within Exhibit A, of the Reclamation
Permit Application for Lee Amendment a N. La Poudre Gravel Mine
File Number M-42000- 144
(operation name),
This form has been approved by the Colorado Mined Land Reclamation Board pursuant to its
authority under the Colorado Land Reclamation Act the Extraction of Construction Materials and
the Colorado Mined Land Reclamation Act Hard Rock, Metal, and Designated Mining Operations.
Any alteration or modification to this forshall result in voiding this for
NOTARY FOR PERMIT APPLICANT
ACKNOWLEGED 1OWL'E\JEiJ' BY:
Applicant Beltway Concrete Company Representative Name
Date March n-- , 2017
STATE OF L 1g4411,,—
CtaUNTY OF (MW
ss.
Title VP Aggregates
The lire guir1g was acknowledged burn me this n_ day of ItAlevriv‘ 5 20 Ili by
Plick h.%) win, as Li 4 of a fr Imo,
` } My Commission Expires: 1
7
No ary Pubic
ANDY RODRIGUEZ
I UEZ
NOTARY PUBLIC
STATE OF COLORADO
eae a e.* eee
My Commission Expires on
ACKNOWLEC EIS BY:
Structure Owner
Date 30
.at
STATE OF
COUNTY O11
K: )I`ego
i
NOT
it FOR STRUCTURE OWNER
Name
Title
SS.
enYel)
ckncwI `dgc:. 1, "lore me lii
I as ar
(Parole
my Publi4
r
Sit
day cx
Maniger. Siting and Land Rights,
Right of Way & Permits Department
Public Service Company of o Ei dio
ly Commission Expires:
NICOLE EBERHARO
NOTARY PUBLIC
STATE OF COLORADO
NOTARY ID 20104040355
I IIY COMMISSION EXPIRES acrimaRt#J 20.2018
STRUCTURE AGREEMENTS (N. LA POUDRE)
CERTIFICATION
The Applicant, Bestway Concrete Com an. (print applicant/company name),
by Mark Johnson (print representative's name), as VP Aggregates (print
representative's title), does hereby certify that DCP Midstream (structure owner) shall
be compensated for any damage from the proposed mining operation to the above listed structure(s)
located on or within 200 feet of the proposed affected area described within Exhibit A, of the Reclamation
Permit Application for Lee Amendment - N. La Poudre Gravel Mine (operation name),
File Number M-2000- 144 ,
This forhas been approved by the Colorado Mined Land Reclamation Board pursuant to its
authority under the Colorado Land Reclamation Act for the Extraction of onstruction Materials and
the Colorado Mined Land Reclamation Act for Hard Rock, Metal, and Designated Mining Operation&
Any alteration or modification to this forskill result in voiding this f`orm.
NOTARY FOR PERMIT APPLICANT
AC NO LE ED BY.
Applicant Bestway Concrete Company Representative Name Mark ,Johns aAjj
Date March 1)-- , 2017 Title VP Aggregates
STATE OF t4uTMtr
)ss1
COUNTY OF Wilk( )
The liwegoing was acknowledged before m e th is f day of (ON f p 20 ! ) , by
Pfil It as VP of JOJ:trividiw
I mast
My Commission Expires: t /1
ale aair a e1, , a►arth
ANDY RODRIGUEZ
NOTARY PUBLIC
STATE OF COLORADO
a# #e'er'`
CamrisStarn ;ifris or' 1
NOTARY FOR STRUCTURE OWNER
ACKNOWLEGED BY:
Structure Owner dePentaciaaem... Name
Date a-, 7 Title .,,.e
STATE OF CO
COUNTY OF `Aka
ss.
The foregoing was acknowledged before me this nit ay of X4004 , 0 /-7, by
botiCte Vfirei j as yThitipereyv he . of Pet dvat emat
iii
Notary Public
My Commission iax.pirc:s
l
NICOLAS D. HAGEr 1 LccK
NOTARY PUBLIC
STATE OF COLORADO
NOTARY ID 20094004084
MY COMMISSION EXPIRES FEB. IL 2021
CERTIFICATION
The Applicant, Bes a n r ompar r (print applicant/company name),
by Mark Johnson (print representative's name), as VP Aggregates (print
representative's title), does hereby certify that PubjT _t<gner any(structure owner) shall
be compensated for any damage from the proposed mining operation to the above listed structure(s)
located on or within 200 feet of the proposed affected area described within Exhibit A, of the Reclamation
Permit Application for Lee Amendment - N. La Poudre Gravel Mine (operation name),
File Number 1402000 a 144 .
This form has been approved by the Colorado Mined Land Reclamation Board pursuant to its
authority under the Colorado Land Reclamation Actor the Extraction of Construction Materials and
the Colorado Mined Land Reclamation Act ffor Hard Rock, Metal, and Designated Mining Operations.
Any alteration or modification to this form shall result in voiding this for
NOTARY FOR PERMIT APPLICANT
ACKNOWLEGED BY:
Applicant Bes ra Concrete Com ar r Representative Name Mark Johnson
Date June , 2017
Title VP Aggregates
STATE OF Lo — )
) ss.
COUNTY OF talk )
The foregoing was acknowledged before me this day of „Lit
t 1 as Alen A +^�/�+�. of got
AyL.
r �
Notary Public
, 20 i , by
My Commission Expires: lb Le r
nip - e ,.r t# . a mee4, r a s
ANDY RODRICUEZ
NOTARY PUBLIC
STATE OF COLORADO
eeee#tee #
My Commission Expires on
NOTARY FOR STRUCTURE OWNER
ACKNOWLEGED LEGED BY:
Structure Owner Public service co of co. Name(;)
r "
Date
STATE OF
asap:Lit.
COUNTY C��11��� ss.
�}
h7regoi.
ary Public
gas 'kno viedge
as
Title
a
Richard J. Grad
Manager, Siting and Lrr m! Rig (S,
Right of Wav Permits Deoartment
Public Sentice Company of Colorado
411
fore me this/ day t4
L
wL
1
y Commission Expires 9- 49 gi,c20 I 8'
NICOLE EBERHARD
NOTARY PUBLIC
STATE OF COLORADO
NOTARY PD 0 20104040355
MY COMMISSION EXPIRES $EPTEM$ER 29 2018
n
GEORGE AND BETTY HALL
4274 W 14th Street Road
Greeley, Colorado 80534
Phone (970) 587-7200
June 16, 2017
Andy Rodriguez, P.C.
Civil Resources, LLC
323 Fifth Street
Frederick, CO 80530
Re: N La Poudre Gravel Mine M2000-144
Structure Agreements for George and Betty Hall, R0186689, R4193106
and R4962908, 6N67W Section 19
Dear Andy:
We are in receipt of your request for a Structure Agreement with regard to the
amended mining plan. Your letter indicates that we are the owners of a gas facility
located in the eastern boundary. White we do own the minerat rights on these
parcels, we do not own the "facility" itself. Those "facilities" would be owned by the
oil/gas company doing the extraction.
Further, to the best of my knowledge, there are no other permanent, man-made
structures within 200 ft. of the mine site on these parcels.
NOTARY FOR STRUCTURE OWNER
STATE OF COLORADO
COUNTY OF WELD
DO S NA`Ni KRAFT
Notary Public
State of Colorado
Noterslpitt 19984021059
My Comr ssir Expires 12-05-2020
My Copiirruls'sk rt--
i before me this 16th day of June, 2017, by George Hall.
_ Oruita_ IChrmt
Notary Public
CERTIFICATION
The Applicant, Bestway Concrete ComEant (print applicant company name),
by Mark Johnson (print representative's name), ' '`Aggregates(print
representative's title), does hereby certify that DCP Midstream _ (structure owner) shall
be compensated for any damage from the proposed mining operation to the above listed structure(s)
located on or within 200 feet of the proposed affected area described within Exhibit A, of the Reclamation
Permit Application for Lee Amendment - N. La Poudre ri a raver Mire (operation name),
File Number NI -2000 144 ,
This form has been approved by the Colorado Mined Land Reclamation Board pursuant to its
authority under the Colorado Land Reclamation Act for the Extraction of Construction Materials and
the Colorado Mined Land Reclamation Act for Hard Rock, Metal, and Designated Mining Operations.
Any alteration or modification to this form shall result in voiding this form.
NOTARY FOR PERMIT APPLICANT
ACKNOWLEGED BY:
Applicant Bestway Concrete Company Representative Name Mark Johnson \
Date June €5 , 2017
Title VP Aggregates
STATE OF C0LQ r~
ss.
COLNTY OF tic) elk ck
The foregoing was acknowledged before me this t day of \olaiv, , 20 I` by
11\as ( rei :,1 y'` l ; ' ItA r ! e.",` of s'1
Notary Public
My Commission Expires:
ei-eilig-crienteatt-S-4146141-efret e##a
ANDY RODRIGUEZ
NOTARY PUBLIC
STATE OF COLORADO
# �r # -# ai►#-•f#
My Commission Expires on
i
NOTARY FOR STRUCTURE OWNER
ACKNOWLEGED BY:
Structure {)weer ,+tr 4.04,,A
Date
a,,
STATE OF Cc )
ss.
}
COUNTY OF 1�c%��
Name ailictoso...17-2:4--
Tittle Sens dr, ataie
The foregoing was acknowledged before me this®, day of rigid
iffaePt ears_ as /4•46 Acat.th
dell if is aria,
Notary Public
ripe
of
2017, by
.aiE'_a fi `2"terat
My Commission Expires: n/ at
NICOLAS O. HAGENLOCK
NOTARY PUBLIC
STATE OF COLORADO
NOTARY JO 20094004084
MY COMMISSION EXPIRES FEB. 11, 2021
Affidavit of Publication
STA.1E OF COLORADO
as.
County of Weld,
I Kelly Ash
of said County of Weld, being duly sworn, say
that I am an advertising clerk of
THE GREELEY TRIBUNE,
PUBLIC NOME
yGamuts &A '301al ;Win.
CO 3.070.58 - dells tean arneMmerill to theis Noah
Roudr-e Pik M (!ALPS 112) for ConsbuCtion Mallenais'Opera-
tion Reclamation Permit VMS Poolitaxle sof Use 0:404ada Land
Reclamation Act tor the Extraction a1 Construction Matedalas The
silo is located north of the cocche La Poudto River_ Trio 41e is
twin the ne rltnYettl tri, S Section 19, Tom 6. North, Range
67 West al the 8111 Principal Meriden. TM ≥ T�..
bounded on the west by WCR 13„ me north by Higinvy and
the oast aritt $040 loy the existptgN. La Noire Mine: The
t is mimed In'l Ward County, Cio4Oced. The pu rpoao Of MIS
10 Mine
the Site for air and fern II as pasture to
edging z. grades,
1 roned dam of cerrnnenceman1 is early Surinnar 012017,
and the proposed /�d+at_s el cc np lonyqi� Winter 2022. The pro -
pulsed
fume use S land Is it
Amt intOttnallit and ten t atrYO data may, be obi,
'lined front the Diviskyrt ci Reclaisnalien Mining and o 1344
nie mum Swam, Room 215. Deityet, C ..�.,. .�,.
-35 . or at' W County Vita 10 the Board d +I
Con l ner u. 915 10th Stet � Imo, t o' 970`304-65 .Or
the above named applicant
Comments raw be tie vatting acd must be received by the Divi-
sion ot t e Minwgand Safety by 4°00 Pain, on July 6th,
2017 (20th day alter the 401pu n)
P ene oontact Andy Rodriguez z with CM Rawson at 0031
31334 4 'I 6 ails. 202 d yrob MVO any questions Of COn is err-
Iltdo titIpicabort Scheduted to be published in the
Taw. 24 9, 1 d„ 20 ►7,
Me Tribune
May 26t June 2, 9,119, 0317
that the same is a daily newspaper of general
circulation and printed and published in the City of
Greeley, in said county and state; that the notice or
advertisement, of which the annexed is a true copy,
has been published in said daily newspaper for
consecutive (days) : that the notice was published in
the regular and entire issue of every number of said
newspaper during the period and time of
publication of said notice, and in the newspaper
proper and not in a supplement thereof; that the
first publication of said notice was contained in the
Twenty:Sjxth_day of May A.D.,2017 and the last
publication thereof: in the issue of said newspaper
bearing the date of the
Sixteenth day of June A.D. 2017 that said The
Greeley Tribune has been published continuously
and uninterruptedly during the period of at least six
months next prior to the first issue thereof
contained said notice or advertisement above
referred to; that said newspaper has been admitted
to the United States mails as second-class matter
under the provisions of the Act of March 3,18 79, or
any amendments thereof; and that said newspaper
is a daily newspaper duly qualified for publishing
legal notices and advertisements within the
meaning of the laws of the State of Colorado.
iay O.*TIN Z.9. 16 ,017
'l'otal Charges: 521S.28
U.-11/4+1‘42)
16thof June2017
My Commission Expires 02/06/2021
Oka
Notary Public
Diane it cnkey
NOTARY PUei.IC
STATE. .CIF COLORADO
NOTARY :D. 20174 crti5sao
MY COWSSION ! fRES FERLARY84l
January 24, 2017
Mr. Andy Rodriguez, F.E.
Civil Resources, LLC
323 Fifth Street
F.O. Box 680
Frederick, CO 80530
Re: Poudre Pits Aggregate Mine Substitute Water Supply Plan (WDID 0302519)
Firestein/Tigges Aggregate Mine, DRMS Permit M-1996-060 (WDID 0303009)
N Section 31 and S Section 30, T6N, 1166W, 6th P.M,
La Poudre Aggregate Mine, DRMS Permit M-1983-090 (WDID 0303010)
Section 19, T6N, R67W, 6th P.M.
North La Poudre Aggregate Mine, DRMS Permit M-2000-144 (WDID 0303011)
Section 19, TON, R67W, 6th P.M.
Water Division 1, Water District 3, Weld County
Approval Period: January 1, 2017 through December 31, 2017
Contact Phone Number for Mr. Andy Rodriguez: 303-833-1416; gr1d clvr'lresources. corn
Dear Mr. Rodriguez:
We have reviewed your letter dated November 7, 2016 requesting renewal of the above
referenced substitute water supply plan ("SWSP") in accordance with § 37-90-137(11), C.R.S. This
SWSP is requested to cover depletions caused by sand and gravel ruining operations at three sites along
the Cache La Poudre River operated by Bestway Concrete a Aggregates ("Bestway" or "Applicant").
The required fee of $771 (3 x $257) has been submitted (receipt no. 3677142).
Plan Operation
The following table lists the sites that are included in this combined replacement plan:
Table A - Combined Replacement Plan Sites
Site Name
Permit
DRMS
No.
WDID
WellLocationExposed
Permit
No.
(post
-12/31/80)
Surface Area
(acres)
62773-F
30
ft 31-T6N-R66W
45.50
Firestein/Tigges
Aggregate
Mine
M-96-060
0303009
Aggregate
La
Poudre I
Mine
M-83-090
0303010
19-T6N-R67W
16.86
61571-F
62037-F
19-T6N-R67W
15.16
North
Aggregate
La Poudre
Mine
-00-144
0303011
The site permitted under DRMS permit no. M-1996-060 is comprised of three adjacent parcels
known as the Firestei n, Tigges and Roberts parcels Mining on the Roberts parcel was completed in
May of 2006. The Roberts pit has been reclaimed and a plan for augmentation approved in case no.
2002CW331. Depletions from current operations at the Roberts portion of the site wilt be covered
under the decreed plan for augmentation, while depletions from past dewatering at the Roberts
Poudre Pits Combined SWSP Page 2 of 10
January 24, 2017
portion of the site and all depletions from the Firestein n and Tigges parcels will be covered under this
SWSP.
The La Poudre site consists of three separate cells designated as the West Lake, Middle Lake,
and East Lake. Some additional aggregate has been discovered below the West Lake and is proposed
to be mined during this plan period. Mining in this area is anticipated to be completed by mid -2017.
An additional parcel in the northwest corner of Section 19, known as the Lee Parcel, is being
amended into the mining permit boundary and is anticipated to begin being mined in June 2017;
however, mining of the Lee Parcel may not commence until the Applicant receives approval from the
Division of Reclamation, Mining and Safety. The area is proposed to be wet mined and will have
approximately 1 acre of ground water exposed in dewatering trenching, which is included in the La
Poudre site depletions. Dewatering water will be delivered to recharge in the West Lake/Wildlife
Lake located in the western portion of the La Poudre site. It is assumed that 50% of the water
pumped into the lake wilt recharge into the West Lake and 50% will be discharged from the lake
directly to the river. No mining is proposed to occur at the La Poudre North site during this plan
period.
Depletions
Evaporation and Operational Losses
During this SWSP period, depletions wilt consist of evaporation losses and production depletions
at the Firestein/Tigges, n /Tigges, La Poudre, and North La Poudre Pits, The depletions for each site are shown in
the following table:
Table B - 2015 Site Depletions (acre-feet)*
Site
Name
Evaporation
Losses
Water
in Mined
Product
Lost
Water
in
Consumed
concrete
Batching
Control
Dust
Total
Depletions
Total
Depletions
Lagged
Fi restei o f Tigges
107.82
0
0
0.96
108.78
109.63
La
Poudre
42.03
12.50
17.50
2.20
110.53
98.03
North
La
Poudre
36.30
Total
186.15
12.50
17.50
3.16
219.31
207.66
'Depletions shown do not include those from past or projected dewatering operations at the sites.
For the purposes of this SWSP, depletions are assumed to impact the Cache la Poudre River
perpendicular to the point of depletions, which is considered to be the centroid of the exposed
surface area at each site. Evaporative depletions for each site were calculated using a gross annual
evaporation of 38.5 inches, with a credit of 9.78 inches for effective precipitation (based on an
average annual precipitation of 1197 inches for the Windsor weather station) .
Operational losses at the Fi restei n l Tigges site will consist of 0,96 acre-feet of water for dust
control. Depletions from the Fi restein ! Tigges site will impact the Cache la Poudre River upstream of
the Greeley No. 3 Ditch (WDID 0300934).
Operational losses at the La Poudre and North La Poudre sites will consist of 2.20 acre-feet of
water for dust control, 12.50 acre-feet of water lost with 425,000 tons of aggregate, and 17.50 acre-
feet of water for the production of 140,405 cubic yards of concrete (assumes 40 gallons of water per
Poudre Pits Combined SWSP
January 24, 2017
Page 3 of 10
cubic yard of concrete). The aggregate is mined below the water table and is washed; therefore the
water retained in the mined product is considered to be 4.0% of the mined material by weight.
Water for dust control and concrete batching n purposes wilt be pumped from the West Lake in the La
Poudre site. Depletions from the La Poudre and North La Poudre Pits will impact the Cache La
Poudre River upstream of the Whitney Irrigation Ditch (WDID 0300930).
The Alluvial Water Accounting System (AWAS), which uses the Glover method, was used to
determine the lagged depletions to the Cache La Poudre River from past (since 1990) and projected
evaporation and operational losses at each site. The following parameters were used in the model
with the alluvial aquifer boundary condition: the distance (X) from the centroid of the exposed
ground water surface to the river; the width (W) of the aquifer on the side of the river where the pit
is located; the transmissivity (T); and the specific yield (S). The Glover parameters used for each pit
site are shown in the table below.
Table C - Glover Parameters (Evaporative/Operational Losses)
Site
Name
X (ft)
W (ft)
r
T (gpolft)
S
Firestein /Tigges
1,112
8 000
120,000
,
0.20
La
Poudre
4 800
a
50,000
'
.
0.20
West
Lee
Parcel
Lake/
i 512
50,000
0.20
Middle
Lake
399
4,
800
East
Lake
626
4 800
a.
50,000
0.20
North
La
Poudre
.
2,500
4, 800
50,000
0.20
Dewatering
Dewatering has occurred at each pit over varying intervals from 1996 through 2015. The Lee
Parcel is the only site that is proposed to be actively dewatered during this SW5P period. In the
past, it was assumed that the pits were dewatered at a rate of 500 gpm with all water released
directly to the river. These assumptions have been revised to reflect the historic average dewatering
rate of 100 gpm where the majority (75%) of the water was recharged in the adjacent pits with only
25% discharged directly to the river. This is based on a reevaluation of historic operations by the
operator's consultant and a December 20, 2012 letter from Mark Johnson, Compliance Manager with
Bestway Concrete and Aggregates as well as submitted pump specifications and data showing the 100
gpm is a more accurate estimate than the previously accepted 500 gpm. Mark Johnson described the
recharge operation as occurring simultaneously with dewatering in that the operator would discharge
the water into an adjacent, previously mined, cell. Once the cell being recharged exceeded its
hydraulic capacity the water would then be diverted directly to the river.
Dewatering operations at the Firestein n Pit occurred from January 1996 through June 2001.
With the stated recharge that occurred, the lagged depletions to be replaced in 2017 equal 0.12
acre-feet. Dewatering operations at the Tigges Pit occurred from June 2005 through March 2012.
With the stated recharge that occurred, the lagged depletions to be replaced in 2017 equal 3.98
acre-feet. Dewatering operations at the Roberts Pit occurred from July 2001 until June 2006. With
the stated recharge that occurred, the lagged depletions to be replaced in 2017 equal 0.74 acre-
feet. Combined, the dewatering operations at the Firestein/Tigges/Roberts n /Tigges /Roberts Pit have resulted in a
tagged depletion of 4.84 acre-feet that must be replaced in 2017.
Poudre Pits Combined SWSP Page 4 of 10
January 24, 2017
Dewatering operations at the La Poudre Pit occurred from January 1995 through December
2002, and during October and November of 2014. The Lee Parcel is projected to be dewatered at
rate of 13.5 acre-feet per month beginning in June 2017, with 50% of the dewatering water delivered
to recharge in the West Lake and 50% delivered directly to the river. Combining the lagged
depletions and net accretions from the stated recharge with projected dewatering depletions and
accretions, dewatering activities at the La Poudre Pit site will create a net accretion of 18.68 acre-
feet during 2017. At the North La Poudre site, dewatering operations occurred from September 2002
through March 2003 and recommenced from April 2012 through July 2014. The 2012 dewatering was
not metered therefore no recharge credit was given. Instead, alt 2012 dewatering was assumed to
be discharged directly to the river creating no lagged accretions. The operator installed meters at
this site by January 2013 and starting January 2013 the actual meter readings are used in the
dewatering analysis. Dewatering that occurred throughout 2013 was returned directly to the river
through an unnamed slough located above the Whitney Ditch. With the stated recharge that
occurred in the past, the lagged depletions to be replaced in 2017 equal 7.58 acre-feet. Combined,
the dewatering/recharge operations at the La Poudre and North La Poudre pits will result in a net
accretion of 11A acre-feet.
For this SWSP and any future approvals, actual monthly meter readings must be used to
determine the true dewatering rate, and to determine how much water was delivered to recharge
versus being directly returned to the river.
Table D below summarizes the impacts past and projected dewatering operations at each pit
wilt have on the stream system during this SWSP period.
Table D - Summary of Dewatering Impacts (acre-feet)
2017
Accretions
Direct
'
2017
Accretions
Lagged
2017
Depletions
Lagged
B
Balance
Site Name
Firestein n
-
0.48
-0.60
-0.12
Tigges
6.70
-10.68
-3.98
z
Roberts
213
-2.97
-0.74
-
6482*
-14.4
-7.58
North
La
Poudre
La
Poudre
47.25
25.73
-54.30
18.68
Total
47.25
41.96
-82.95
6.26
Excludes accretions from any dewatering recharge that may have occurred in 2012
AWAS was used to determine the lagged depletions to the Cache La Poudre River from past
and projected dewatering operations at each site. The following parameters were used in the model
with the infinite aquifer boundary condition: the distance (X) from the centroid of the exposed
ground water surface to the river; the transmissivity (T); and the specific yield (S). The Glover
parameters used for each pit are shown in the table below.
Poudre Pits Combined SWSP
January 24, 2017
Table E - Glover Parameters (Dewatering)
Page 5 of 10
Site
Name
X (ft)
T (gpd/ft)
S
Fi restei
n
1,035
120,000
0.20
Tigges
3,600
120,000
0.20
3,435 j
120,000
0,20
Roberts
La Poudre
i 1,500
50,000
0.10
North
La Poudre
2,500
50,000
0.20
The lagged combined evaporative and operational depletions in 2017 will be 207.66 acre-feet.
The lagged combined post dewatering depletions and accretion from the stated recharge creates a
net accretion in the amount of 6.26 acre-feet. Therefore the total depletions owed to the river for
this SWSP approval period are 201.40 acre-feet. See Table 9 column 3 for the monthly distribution of
the total Losses.
Replacements
The proposed sources of replacement water under this SWSP is historical consumptive use
credits available from 8 shares of the Whitney Ditch used at the Tigges farm, and water leased from
the Central Colorado Water Conservancy District.
Historically 10 Whitney Ditch shares were used to irrigate 120 acres on the Tigges farm. The
Tigges farm owner (Kenny Tigges), through the mining lease, has allowed the operator to use all
necessary Whitney Ditch water that was currently being used on the property. For this SWSP period
the operator will be using 7 of the 10 Tigges Whitney Ditch Shares, requiring a dry -up of 84 acres.
The historic consumptive use of the subject Whitney Ditch shares was determined based on
the results of a ditch -wide analysis developed for the Whitney Ditch in case no. 2008CW65 and
utilized in case no. 1990CW23. Based on a study period of 1950 through 1995, the Court found that
the average annual gross river diversion was 10, 600.2 acre-feet per year or 33.13 acre-feet per
share. Total average annual farm headgate deliveries were found to be 9,010.2 acre-feet per year,
or 28.16 acre-feet per share, based on a transit loss of 15% under the Whitney Ditch system. The
ditch -wide analysis determined that the overall average consumptive use was 4,400.9 acre-feet per
year or 13.75 acre-feet per share for the 320 total shares, assuming a system loss of 15% and a farm
efficiency of 60%. However, in case no. 2002CW331, 8 shares historically used on 74 acres were
decreed a river headgate diversion of 3142 acre-feet per share and a consumptive use of 16.32 acre-
feet per share (130.5 acre-feet total), based on a parcel -specific analysis. Because of this larger
historic consumptive use amount decreed in 2002CW331, the ditch -wide amount decreed in
2008CW65 was reduced by removing the consumptive use decreed for the 8 shares in case no.
2002CW331 from the total amount and applying the reduced historical consumptive use of 4,270.4
acre-feet to the remaining 312 shares, which resulted in a historical consumptive use of 13.69 acre-
feet per share.
For the 7 Whitney Ditch shares dedicated to this SWSP, total average annual farm headgate
deliveries would equal 197.10 acre-feet. The ditch -wide analysis utilized a return flow split of 50%
surface and 50% subsurface return flows. The return flows during the irrigation season will be
calculated based upon a percentage of the actual monthly deliveries and winter return flows will be
calculated based upon the total deliveries from the previous irrigation season as decreed in case no.
2008CW65. Of the 84 acre to be dried up under this SWSP, 58.2 acres (693%, equivalent to 4.85
Poudre Pits Combined SWSP Page 6 of 10
January 24, 2017
shares) are located within Zone 2-A of the 2008CW65 decree and the remaining 25.8 acres (30.7%,
equivalent to 2.15 shares) are located within Zone 2-B of 2008CW65 decree (see Figure 1). The
decreed monthly return flow percentages for Zones 2-A and 2-B are shown on attached Table 7,
columns 4 through 7. For this plan period, the total consumptive use attributable to the 7 shares
equals 97.96 acre-feet.
The 7 Whitney Ditch shares will be diverted at the Tigges farm headgate, delivered to the
mine site, measured, and returned directly to the Poudre River. The water will be measured through
a turnout in the Whitney Ditch equipped with a Pa rshall flume that is located above Lake Shiloh (aka
the Roberts Pit) . The water delivered to the waste ditch (WDID 0302904) will flow south directly to
the river without passing through any ponds. All measurements must be made and recorded to the
satisfaction of the water commissioner. During months where the projected diversions will exceed
the mining and operational depletions and the monthly return flow attributed to these shares, the
excess water will be diverted into the unlined middle ponds on the Tigges site where it will recharge
the ground water and create tagged accretions. It is projected that this wilt occur in June, July and
August of this plan period with a net amount of 17.80 acre-feet being recharged. Recharge is lagged
to the river using the same parameters as the Tigges depletions and will result in a lagged accretion
of 21.42 acre-feet during this approval period (note that this amount includes accretions from past
deliveries to recharge).
The 7 Whitney Ditch shares are insufficient to provide replacement during the months of
January through May, and again from September through December. To cover these months the
Applicant has obtained a lease with the Ground Water Management Subdistrict of the Central
Colorado Water Conservancy District ("Central") for 105.58 acre-feet of Central's fully consumable
storage and direct flow water rights in the Cache la Poudre basin. Central has water in storage in
Siebring Reservoir (WDID 0303803), 83rd Avenue Reservoir (WDID 0303408), and La Poudre Reservoir}.
(V/DID 0303 77). Siebring. Reservoir and 83rd Avenue Reservoir are located in Section 31, Township 6
North, Range 66 West of the 6th P. ., across the Cache la Poudre River from the Firestein/Tigges pit
(M-1996-060). La Poudre Reservoir is located within the boundaries of La Poudre Aggregate Mine (M-
1983-090) in Section 19, Township 6 North, Range 67 West of the 6th P.M. The term of the lease is
January 1, 2017 through December 31, 2017. A copy of the signed lease is attached. if the Whitney
Ditch or B.H. Eaton Ditch are sweeping the river, Central lease water from La Poudre Reservoir can
only be used to cover the depletions from the La Poudre and North La Poudre Pits and the Central
lease water from Siebring Reservoir and 83rd Avenue Reservoir can only be used to replace depletions
from the Fi restei n /Tigges site
Conveyance loss for delivery of the augmentation water referenced above is subject to
assessment and modification as determined by the division engineer.
Long -Term Augmentation
In accordance with the letter dated April 30, 2010 (copy attached) from the Colorado Division
of Reclamation, Mining, and Safety ("DRMS"), all sand and gravel mining operators must comply with
the requirements of the Colorado Reclamation Act and the Mineral Rules and Regulations for the
protection of water resources. The April 30, 2010 letter from DRMS requires that you provide
information to DRMS to demonstrate you can replace tong term injurious stream depletions that
result from mining related exposure of ground water.
For any gravel pit whose reclamation includes unlined ponds, a plan of augmentation
approved by the water court must be obtained to cover the long term evaporative depletions. Until
Poudre Pits Combined SWSP
January 24, 2017
Page 7 of 10
an augmentation plan is obtained the operator may post a sufficient bond to backf i ll or line the site
thereby eliminating any long term augmentation requirements, or permanently dedicate shares that
will be used in an augmentation plan to the pit. For any gravel pit whose reclamation includes lining
or backf i ll i ng of the pit, bonds must be posted that can be used to complete the reclamation plan
should the operator walk away from the site. The North La Poudre and La Poudre pits have been
bonded through DRMS and are in compliance with the April 2010 DRMS letter (approach #1 and #3).
The Roberts phase within the Firestein/Tigges/Roberts pit is augmented under the plan for
augmentation approved in case no. 2002CW331 and is in compliance with the April 2010 DRMS letter
(approach #2). An inspection by the DRMS on January 10, 2013 found the bond for the Firestein and
Tigges phase within the Firestein/Tigges/Roberts pit to be inadequate. The operator has since
obtained a new bond and is in compliance with the April 2010 DRMS letter (approach #1 and #3). A
summary of each pit's status regarding their long term augmentation and bonding held through DRMS
is shown on the following table:
Table F - Final Reclamation Summary
Site
DRMS
Proposed
Reclamation
Final
Bond
Amount
Comments
Name
Permit #
Unlined
Ponds
$1,917,925
Operator
6/17/2014
exposed
increased
groundwater
to comply
reclamation
with
on
site.
DRMS
liability
requirements
bond on
for
Firestein
Unlined
Ponds
Tigges
M-1996-060
Roberts
Unlined
Pond
Augmented
D3
through
03790)
02CW331
(Lake
Shiloh,
WD
ID
D
North
Poudre
la
M-2000.144
Unlined
Ponds
$523,200
Operator
412212013
exposed
increased
groundwater
to comply
reclamation
with
on
site.
DRMS
liability
requirements
bond on
for
Lined
and
Ponds
Unlined
$915,820
La
Poudre
M-1983-090
Operator
5/3/2013
exposed
increased
to comply
groundwater
reclamation
with
on
site.
DRMS
requirements
liability
bond
on
for
Conditions of Approval
I hereby approve the proposed substitute water supply plan in accordance with § 37-90-
137(11), C.R.S. a subject to the following conditions:
1. This plan shall be valid for the period of January 1, 2017 through December 31, 2017 unless
otherwise revoked or modified. If this plan wilt not be made absolute by a water court
action by the plan's expiration date, a renewal request must be submitted to this office
with the statutory fee of $257 for each DRMS site, and with all necessary leases and other
supporting documentation, no later than November 1, 2017.
2. Well permit no. 61571-F was obtained for the La Poudre Pit in accordance with S 37-90-
137(2) and (11), C.R.S. This permit allows for up to 33.3 acres of exposed ground water and
allows for operational losses from the mining of aggregate, production of concrete, and dust
control. The water use projected in this SWSP remains within the permit's limits.
3. Well permit no. 62773-F was obtained for the Firestein/Tigges/Roberts Pit in accordance
with § 37-90-137(2) and (11), C.R.S. This permit. allows for up to 72.31 acres of exposed
ground water and allows for operational tosses from the mining of aggregate, production of
concrete, and dust control. The water use projected in this SWSP remains within the
permit's Limits.
Poudre Pits Combined SWSP Page 8 of 10
January 24, 2017
4. Well permit no. 78235-F was obtained for the North La Poudre Pit in accordance with 5 37
90 137(2) and (11), C.R.S. This permit allows for evaporation, dewatering, and operational
losses from the mining of aggregate, production of concrete, and dust control. The water
use projected in this SWSP is within the permit's limits.
5a The total area of pond surface exposed acres for each of the pits shall not exceed those
values listed in Table A of this approval. Should the total surface area exposed exceed
those amounts, the Applicant is required to immediately file an amendment with this
office.
6. The total amount of ground water to be appropriated from each of the pits shall not exceed
the values listed in Table B of this approval.
7. Alt pumping for dust control shall be measured in a manner acceptable to the division
engineer.
8. Approval of this plan is for the purposes stated herein. Any additional uses of this water
must first be approved by this office. Any future additional historical consumptive use
credit given (e.g., agricultural water transfer) for this site must consider all previous
credits given.
9. The Division of Water Resources will not acknowledge any recharge activity conducted
without the knowledge of the water commissioner. The flow into the recharge site(s) must
be metered with a totalizer. Water may be delivered to recharge only if the net impact of
this plan is not negative. Water must be first delivered or exchanged to offset negative
impacts of this plan before it may be diverted for recharge.
10. All releases of replacement water must be sufficient to cover all out -of -priority depletions
in time, place, and amount and must be made under the direction and/or the approval of
the water commissioner. The attached Table 9 provides a proposed schedule of
replacement. The release of replacement water may be aggregated to maximize beneficial
use. The water commissioner and/or the division engineer shall determine the rate and
timing of an aggregated release.
11. The replacement water, which is the subject of this plan cannot be sold or leased to any other
entity. As a condition of subsequent renewals of this substitute water supply plan, the
replacement water must be appurtenant to this site until a plan for augmentation is obtained.
A copy of this approval letter should be recorded with the county clerk and recorder. All
replacement water must be concurrent with depletions in quantity, timing, and location.
12a The name, address, and phone number of the contact person who will be responsible for the
operation and accounting of this plan must be provided on the accounting forms submitted to
the division engineer and the water commissioner.
13. Conveyance loss for delivery of augmentation water is subject to assessment and
modification as determined by the division engineer.
14. Adequate accounting of depletions and replacement must be provided to the division
engineer in Greeley (DivlAccounting®state.cofus) and the water commissioner (Mark
Simpson, ark.Simps�on@state.co.us) on a monthly basis. Submitted accounting shalt
conform to the Administration Protocol "Augmentation Plan Accounting, Division One -
South Platte River" (attached) .
15. The Applicant shall perform an inspection and provide verification for all parcels of dried
up land used to generate augmentation credits during the term of this SWSP. The final
verification of dry up will be in the form of an affidavit signed by an individual having
Poudre Pits Combined SWSP Page 9 of 10
January 24, 2017
personal knowledge of the dry up for the entire irrigation season for each parcel of land
used in this SWSP. In accordance with the attached protocol for dry -up of irrigated land,
the Applicant shall provide a written notification to the water commissioner and division
engineer by April 1, 2017 identifying the lands to be dried up for the 2016 irrigation
season. By October 31, 2017 the Applicant shalt provide an affidavit to the water
commissioner and division engineer that identifies and confirms the lands that were dried
up during the 2017 irrigation season in order that the final determination of augmentation
credits for the irrigation season can be made along with mapping showing any revisions to
the dried-up acreage. A GIS shapefile must be emailed to D1v1Accounting@state.co. Lis for
each dry -up notification and affidavit. The shapefile shall include the WDID of the plan,
the acreage of dry -up, and any accompanying metadata. In addition, the datum must be
NAD83 and the UTM projection must be Zone 13 North.
16. If reclamation of the mine site produces a permanent water surface exposing groundwater
to evaporation, an application for a plan for augmentation must be filed with the Division 1
Water Court at least three years prior to the completion of mining to include, but not be
limited to, long-term evaporation tosses. If a lined pond results after reclamation,
replacement of lagged depletions shall continue until there is no longer an effect on stream
flow. Granting of this plan does not imply approval by this office of any such court
application(s).
17. Dewatering operations produce delayed depletions to the stream system. This SWSP
includes these lagged depletions associated with the Roberts Pit, Firestein n Pit, Tigges Pit,
and La Poudre Pit. These lagged depletions are partially offset with dewatering accretions
from active dewatering at the North La Poudre Pit. Once dewatering at the North La
Poudre Pit ceases, the delayed depletions must be addressed. A totalizing flow meter is
required on all dewatering discharge in order for the operator to claim any accretion
credits.
18. In accordance with amendments to 5 25-8-202(7), C.R.S., and "Senate Bill 89-181 Rules and
Regulations" adopted on February 4, 1992, the State Engineer shall determine whether the
substitute supply is of a quality to meet requirements of use to which the senior
appropriation receiving the substitute supply has normally been put. As such, water quality
data or analyses may be requested at any time to determine if the requirement of use of
the senior appropriator is met.
19. This substitute water supply plan may be revoked or modified at any time should it be
determined that injury to other water rights has or will occur as a result of this plan.
Should this substitute water supply plan expire without renewal or be revoked prior to
adjudication of a permanent plan for augmentation, all excavation of product from below
the water table, and all other use of water at the pit, must cease immediately.
20. The decision of the state engineer shall have no precedential or evidentiary force, shall not
create any presumptions, shift the burden of proof, or serve as a defense in any pending
water court case or any other legal action that may be initiated concerning this plan. This
decision shall not bind the state engineer to act in a similar manner in any other
applications involving other plans, or in any proposed renewal of this plan, and shall not
imply concurrence with any findings of fact or conclusions of law contained herein, or with
the engineering methodologies used by the Applicant.
If you have any questions concerning this approval, please contact Sarah Brucker in Denver at
(303) 866-3581 or Michael Hein in Greeley at (970) 352-8712.
Poudre Pits Combined SWSP Page 10 of 10
January 24, 2017
Sincerely,
for
f
7
Jeff Deatherage, P.E.
Chief of Water Su ppky
Attachments: Figures 1 a 2
Tables 7 Et 9
Central Lease
April 2010 DRMS Letter
Augmentation Plan Accounting, Division One - South Platte River
Dry -up of Irrigated Land, Division One - South Platte River
cc: Michael Hein, Assistant Division Engineer, Michael. Hein®state. co. us
810 Stn Street, Suite 200, Greeley CO 80631, (970) 352-8712
Mark Simpson, Water Commissioner, Water District 3, Mari.Sim.pson@stato.co.us
Division of Reclamation, Mining and Safety
JD/TLKfsrb: Poudre Pits 2017
Hello